4.5 Article

Expanding ecomorphological methods: geometric morphometric analysis of Cervidae post-crania

期刊

JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL SCIENCE
卷 39, 期 4, 页码 1172-1182

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jas.2011.12.028

关键词

Ecomorphology; Cervidae; Geometric morphometrics; Habitat reconstruction; Post-crania

资金

  1. University of Minnesota
  2. Department of Anthropology Block

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study presents ecomorphological methods for reconstructing paleohabitats using three-dimensional geometric morphometric analyses of Cervidae (deer and relatives) post-cranial elements. Cervids are often the most abundant taxon in Eurasian Plio-Pleistocene sites, yet their post-cranial remains are rarely utilized in paleoecological reconstructions. Cervids are found in a wide variety of habitats, and thus their ecomorphology spans an appropriate range to serve as a proxy for paleohabitat. Four morphological features are examined in this study; the calcaneus as a whole (n = 122), the medial margin of the patellar surface of the femur (n = 133), the lateral margin of the tibial plateau (n = 136), and the plantar margin of the third phalanx (n = 62). These features were chosen because they represent various aspects of cervid locomotion important for power generation, stability, and substrate interaction. For each feature, canonical variates analyses with cross-validations were used to assess how well landmark configurations distinguish among specimens from different habitat types. Cross-validations returned correct reclassifications rates ranging from 38.9% to 66.3% in a four-habitat system, with resubstitution rates of 55.4% to 79.1% correct. Most habitat groups were found to be significantly different at p < 0.0001 using permutations tests. Variation in these ecomorphological adaptations are explored via visualizations depicting open and closed habitat types, and hypotheses are presented for cervid functional morphology. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据