Quartz flakes in lakes: Microdebitage evidence for submerged Great Lakes prehistoric (Late Paleoindian–Early Archaic) tool-making sites
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Exploration for submerged prehistoric archaeological sites in the Great Lakes (North America) is a major challenge due to difficulties in locating scant cultural artifacts in lake-bottom sediments. Stone tool microfragments (microdebitage, <1 mm) can be abundant (>106 per tool) and more dispersed around tool-making sites, but have not been identified previously in an underwater context. To evaluate their use as a submerged site indicator, microdebitage analysis was conducted on five lake sediment cores from a shallow lagoon adjacent to a long-occupied prehistoric site (McIntyre site, Rice Lake, Ontario). We identified 155 microdebitage fragments within a distinctive muddy peat horizon (2–2.5 m depth) using light microscopy and scanning electron microscopy methods. The microdebitage consisted of angular to very angular quartz fragments (400–1000 μm) with characteristic conchoidal fractures and flake scars produced by mechanical percussion. The microdebitage horizon had a distinctive bimodal particle size peak and contained a low-diversity soil thecamoebian assemblage (Phryaginella, Bullinularia sp.) indicative of a wetland environment that formed during an early Holocene shoreline transgression. Accelerator mass spectrometry 14C dating of wood fragments yielded ages of 9470–8760 ± 50 yr B.P. (11,070–9560 cal [calibrated] yr B.P.), indicating a Late Paleoindian–Early Archaic age for the deposit. Results demonstrate that coring and microdebitage analysis are effective tools in the search for underwater prehistoric sites and can be employed more broadly in exploration of submerged landscapes in the Great Lakes basins.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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 teacher head, 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".