Archaeologists in the Canary Islands have gathered substantial quantitative data from radiocarbon measurements and aDNA analyses. While undeniably helpful and necessary for apprehending past human activity, their interpretation, based on theories underpinning models developed for island chains, has lagged, leaving a gap in our understanding of processes of occupation and social network systems. The decontextualized nature of the archaeological landscape of the Canaries and a lack of consensus about proper radiocarbon methodologies are some of the factors contributing to heated scholarly debate. Here, for the Canary Islands, the author reviews the current literature on aDNA and discusses settlement theories, the chronological evidence used for occupation models, and how such perspectives align with current thinking on island colonization.

While some species of parasites can be identified to species level from archaeological remains using microscopy (i.e. Enterobius vermicularis, Clonorchis sinensis), others can only be identified to family or genus level as different species produce eggs with similar morphology (i.e. Tænia sp. and Echinococcus sp.). Molecular and immunological approaches offer the possibility to provide more precise determination at the species level. They can also identify taxa when classic parasite markers such as eggs or cysts have been destroyed over time. However, biomolecules can be poorly preserved and modern reference DNA is available only for a limited number of species of parasites, leading to the conclusion that classic microscopic observation should be combined with molecular analyses. Here we present a review of the molecular approaches used over the past two decades to identify human pathogenic helminths (Ascaris sp., Trichuris sp., E. vermicularis, Fasciola sp. etc.) or protists (Giardia sp., Trypanosoma sp., Leishmania sp. etc.). We also discuss the prospects for studying the evolution of parasites with genetics and genomics.