A Reconsideration of Purported Holocene Bison Bones from Northern Alaska
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While bison were the most abundant large mammals in Eastern Beringia for most of the last 100 000 years, their range declined drastically at the end of the Pleistocene and through the Holocene. Research into the nature of Holocene human interactions with bison suffers from scarcity of faunal remains from most archaeological sites and poor chronological control of paleontological specimens over broad areas of Eastern Beringia. We examined the dating, context, and identification of purported bison bones spatially associated with two late prehistoric archaeological sites in northern Alaska to contribute to a better understanding of bison biogeography and the possible role of these large mammals in prehistoric economies. We confirmed the presence of two bison bones from the 17th century Kangiguksuk archaeological site (49-XBM-012) in northwestern Alaska, but radiocarbon dates older than 30 000 14C years BP for both bones demonstrate that those bison were not hunted by the site occupants. From the Lakeside site (49-KIR-275) in the central Brooks Range, a bone reported to be bison and dated to about 2400 14C years BP was shown through DNA sequencing to be moose (Alces alces). We point to a large set of dated bison specimens from Alaska’s Arctic Slope that suggests bison were locally extinct in north-central and northwestern Alaska by the beginning of the Holocene and were subsequently unavailable to human hunters in that region.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".