Stone tips or not?

I'm a big fan of the MythBusters and have watched every single episode of the myth-busting show. Given the things they are testing all the time, I've always wondered if they ever work with those in academia to publish some of their results in peer-reviewed journals. I also subscribe to Research Blogging for blog posts that talk about papers discussing current research, as part of my effort to find stuff to include in Science Gossip, my "meta-blogging" site for science news.

Lo and behold, I have just noticed a blog post aggregated by Research Blogging that talks about the effectiveness of stone tipped arrows and simple pointy ended arrows. This is what was tested in a Viewer's Special episode of the MythBusters in 2008: why did ancient people bother to do so much more hard work to make stone tips? It turned out that penetration power and accuracy is pretty much the same between a stone-tipped arrow and an arrow whose wooden end was simply sharpened to a point. So at least penetration power and accuracy were not the reasons why people had gone to all the trouble to make stone tips, although that would not rule out other reasons such as increased killing power or stone tips being a status symbol.

In fact, the MythBusters are among the authors of the paper, so they can now claim that their television show produces peer-reviewed research. I find this pretty cool, and I would love to know if there are any other peer-reviewed publications that have been based on the show.