MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405283588 · doi:10.1016/j.qeh.2024.100049

Ancient biomolecular analysis of 39 mammoth individuals from Kostenki 11-Ia elucidates Upper Palaeolithic human resource use

2024· article· en· W4405283588 on OpenAlexafffund
Alba Rey‐Iglesia, Alexander J.E. Pryor, Deon de Jager, Tess Wilson, Mathew A. Teeter, Ashot Margaryan, Ruslan Khaskhanov, Louise Le Meillour, Gaudry Troché, Frido Welker, Paul Szpak, Eline D. Lorenzen

Bibliographic record

VenueQuaternary Environments and Humans · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicForensic Anthropology and Bioarchaeology Studies
Canadian institutionsTrent University
FundersHorizon 2020European Research CouncilEuropean CommissionNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaHorizon 2020 Framework ProgrammeH2020 Marie Skłodowska-Curie ActionsVillum Fonden
KeywordsMammothArchaeologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Circular structures made from woolly mammoth bones are found across Ukraine and west Russia, yet the origin of the bones remains uncertain. We present ten new mammoth radiocarbon dates from the largest circular structure at Kostenki 11-Ia, identifying two mammoth mandibles ∼200–1200 years older than the other dated materials from the site, suggesting skeletal material from long-dead individuals was scavenged and used in the site construction. Biomolecular sexing of 30 individuals showed a predominance of females, suggesting the Kostenki mammoths are primarily from herds. We identify seven mitochondrial lineages across 16 samples, and thus the mammoths are not all from the same matriline. Integrating biomolecular sexing with stable δ 13 C and δ 15 N isotope analysis, we find no isotopically-differentiated resource use by females and males, providing the first analysis of foraging differences between sexes in any Late Pleistocene megafauna. Our study highlights the significance of integrating ancient biomolecular approaches in archaeological inference.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.383
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.008
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.236 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQuaternary Environments and HumansSame topicForensic Anthropology and Bioarchaeology StudiesFrench-language works237,207