Research ArticleANTHROPOLOGY

New evidence of broader diets for archaic Homo populations in the northwestern Mediterranean

See allHide authors and affiliations

Science Advances  06 Mar 2019:
Vol. 5, no. 3, eaav9106
DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.aav9106
  • Fig. 1 MP (Acheulean/Middle Paleolithic) sites included in this study (red circles).

    White circles denote published MP sites with evidence of human exploitation of leporids.

  • Fig. 2 Comparison of leporid abundance and marked and/or altered leporid specimens in modern control assemblages (yellow symbols) and published (green symbols) and newly examined (red symbols) archaeological assemblages.

    The data include (A) the percentage of leporids, (B) leporid specimens with cutmarks, (C) burned specimens, (D) and long bone diaphysis tubes (out of the total long bone NISP, ulna excluded), (E) the length of tibia tubes in millimeters (green breaks only), and (F) the percentage of specimens with pits and/or gnawing marks, and (G) digested specimens. All percentages are based on NISP counts. Noct, nocturnal raptors; diurn, diurnal raptors; carn, small carnivores; EUP, Early Upper Paleolithic; LUP, Late Upper Paleolithic; LUP/H, Late Upper Paleolithic/early Holocene (see Supplementary Materials). Sample sizes and raw data are provided in data file S1.

  • Fig. 3 Anthropogenic marks in the newly studied assemblages.

    Examples of cutmarked leporid specimens from Terra Amata (A, C1a; B and C, C1b), la Baume des Peyrards (D and F), la Crouzade (G, layer 7b), l’Hortus (H, layer 26), les Ramandils (I and J, N21, NW26), le Salpêtre de Pompignan (K, level VII base), and tibia diaphysis tubes from la Baume des Peyrards (E). Skeletal elements: tibia (A, C to E, and H), ulna (B), calcaneus (F), humerus (G), femur (I), metatarsal II (J), and innominate (K). Scale bars, 1 mm except for (E). Photo credit: E. Morin and J. Meier, Trent University and University of North Florida (A to D and F to J); D. Drainat, Centre Européen de Recherches Préhistoriques, Tautavel (E).

  • Fig. 4 Comparisons of different attributes of leporid assemblages.

    These comparisons include scatterplots of %NISP of (A) leporids versus adults; (B) burned versus cutmarked specimens; and (C) specimens with pits and/or gnaw mark versus digestion damage. (D) Cluster analysis of five taphonomic attributes expressed in percentage (see text). Data points in the scatterplots correspond to assemblages analyzed for this study (red) and published MP (green), EUP (blue), and LUP/H sites (black). In (D), the newly studied assemblages are shown in bold red, whereas modern control assemblages are shown in gray.

  • Table 1 Taxonomic representation, age profile, and taphonomic data for the sites considered in this study.

    L.NISP, leporid NISP; U.NISP, ungulate NISP; nd, no data. Abbreviations for the assemblages are as in Fig. 1. The age profile and taphonomic data are for leporids only. Sample sizes are smaller for certain analyses (see data file S1). Percentages were calculated using number of identifiable specimens (NISP) for leporids. See Supplementary Materials for methods of calculation.

    Assemblage,
    L.NISP
    U.NISP% Leporids% Adults% Infants% Cut% Burned% Tubes% Pits/gnaw% Dig
    Terra C1b, n = 21040766.088.54.61.91.621.10.10
    Terra C1a, n = 79020550.682.62.82.43.827.000
    Laz UA27, n = 10802ndnd56.323.21.05.620.37.00.3
    Laz UA28, n = 9095220180.568.414.60.97.112.95.70.6
    Laz UA29, n = 4554ndnd47.517.10.62.312.85.81.5
    Can 2, n = 35334850.688.501.47.612.50.30
    Ram I, n = 138397.910002.24.315.45.80.7
    Ram II, n = 8765594.186.20.84.817.129.05.60.3
    Ram III, n = 24711967.588.61.32.828.319.62.00.4
    Ram IV, n = 287598.398.11.20.739.715.61.70
    Ram V, n = 169010085.701.217.214.30.60
    Pey, n = 1080ndnd91.50.20.70.654.20.70.1
    Salp V, n = 4712096.075.0nd0000.20.4
    Salp VI, n = 1732388.386.7nd0001.20.6
    Salp VII, n = 10307193.686.03.20.10.100.50.2
    Salp VIII, n = 2225580.192.900.50.511.10.50.5
    Salp IX, n = 35924259.792.5000.6000.6
    Hor 10–20, n = 1180165041.776.02.40.20.39.12.50.3
    Hor 21–26, n = 154036181.029.136.40.30.57.91.11.2
    Hor 27–33, n = 22873023.841.936.50000.41.8
    Crouz 7, n = 2563887.169.08.82.71.211.60.413.3

Supplementary Materials

  • Supplementary material for this article is available at http://advances.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/5/3/eaav9106/DC1

    Supplementary Materials and Methods

    Fig. S1. Anatomical refits for various taxa at the site of l’Hortus and definition of the three ensembles used in this study.

    Data file S1. Leporid data for the new assemblages and the comparative sample.

    References (48113)

  • Supplementary Materials

    The PDF file includes:

    • Supplementary Materials and Methods
    • Fig. S1. Anatomical refits for various taxa at the site of l'Hortus and definition of the three ensembles used in this study.
    • References (48113)

    Download PDF

    Other Supplementary Material for this manuscript includes the following:

    • Data file S1 (Microsoft Excel format). Leporid data for the new assemblages and the comparative sample.

    Files in this Data Supplement:

Navigate This Article