[Comparative methodological contribution and critical observations on the interpretation of blood group determinations of mummies and skeletal remains].

Bone samples from autopsies, recent and subfossile samples as well as skin and muscle material from non-preserved local mummies were investigated. The material was evaluated morphologically and serologically in parallel by means of the well-known absorption-test, the agglutinin-cohesion technique with deionized concentrated EDTA extracts according to Borgognini, the absorption-elution technique according to Kind with the modification proposed by Kirst & Landes, and the immunofluorescence-histology according to Lengyel. With the latter method no specific results could be obtained at all; with the absorption and the absorption-elution tests the blood-group status of autoptic compacta material could always be estimated correctly, and also with recent bone samples an acceptable phenotype distribution was found. On the contrary, with the old-historic material consisting of 39 skeletons a reverse proportionality between the morphological preservation state and the serological results was found: the more advanced the decay of the organic matrix, the more frequent was the finding of blood-group A or B; the better preserved the bony substance, the more frequent negative (= 0 ?) results were obtained. By analogy with the findings in mummy tissue, where the tracing of A and B bloodgroup substances also prevailed in cases of extensive saprophyte contamination, the postmortal infiltration of microbiological blood-group active foreign material is discussed as a possible cause of erroneous diagnoses for bones, too. The compared methods yielded different results on the same bone in some cases, and also with the, according to our experiences, most suitable absorption-elution method contradictory blood-group findings were achieved with different bones of the same skeleton occasionally. In light of these results it seems possible to detect blood-group substances of the ABO system in bone material only under protective storage conditions, as tomb funeral, ossuaries, or reliquaries after centuries and with acceptable error quote; serological findings on subfossile materials must be valued with greatest reservation, and critical restraint should be recommended especially against the method of approach.