- •Preface
- •Contents
- •Contributors
- •1 Introduction: Azokh Cave and the Transcaucasian Corridor
- •Abstract
- •Introduction
- •History of Excavations at Azokh Caves
- •Excavations 1960–1988
- •Excavations 2002–2009
- •Field Seasons
- •2002 (23rd August–19th September)
- •2003 (4th–31st August)
- •2004 (28th July–6th August)
- •2005 (26th July–12th August)
- •2006 (30th July–23rd August)
- •2007 (9th July–4th August)
- •2008 (8th July–14th August)
- •2009 (17th July–12th August)
- •Correlating Huseinov’s Layers to Our Units
- •Chapters of This Book
- •Acknowledgments
- •References
- •Abstract
- •Introduction
- •Azokh 1
- •Sediment Sequence 1
- •Sediment Sequence 2
- •Discussion on the Stratigraphy of Azokh 1
- •Azokh 2
- •Azokh 5
- •Discussion on the Stratigraphy of Azokh 5
- •Conclusions
- •Acknowledgments
- •References
- •3 Geology and Geomorphology of Azokh Caves
- •Abstract
- •Introduction
- •Geological Background
- •Geomorphology of Azokh Cave
- •Results of the Topographic Survey
- •Azokh 1: Main Entrance Passageway
- •Azokh 2, 3 and 4: Blind Passages
- •Azokh 5: A Recently Discovered Connection to the Inner Chambers
- •Azokh 6: Vacas Passageway
- •Azokh I: The Stalagmite Gallery
- •Azokh II: The Sugar-Mound Gallery
- •Azokh III: The Apron Gallery
- •Azokh IV: The Hall Gallery
- •Results of the Geophysical Survey
- •Discussion
- •Conclusions
- •Acknowledgments
- •References
- •4 Lithic Assemblages Recovered from Azokh 1
- •Abstract
- •Introduction
- •Methods of Analysis
- •Results
- •Unit Vm: Lithic Assemblage
- •Unit III: Lithic Assemblage
- •Unit II: Lithic Assemblage
- •Post-Depositional Evidence
- •Discussion of the Lithic Assemblages
- •Comparison of Assemblages from the Earlier and Current Excavations
- •Chronology
- •Conclusions
- •Acknowledgements
- •References
- •5 Azokh Cave Hominin Remains
- •Abstract
- •Introduction
- •Hominin Mandibular Fragment from Azokh 1
- •Discussion of Early Work on the Azokh Mandible
- •New Assessment of the Azokh Mandibular Remains Based on a Replica of the Specimen
- •Discussion, Azokh Mandible
- •Neanderthal Remains from Azokh 1
- •Description of the Isolated Tooth from Azokh Cave (E52-no. 69)
- •Hominin Remains from Azokh 2
- •Human Remains from Azokh 5
- •Conclusions
- •Acknowledgements
- •References
- •6 The New Material of Large Mammals from Azokh and Comments on the Older Collections
- •Abstract
- •Introduction
- •Materials and Methods
- •General Discussion and Conclusions
- •Acknowledgements
- •References
- •7 Rodents, Lagomorphs and Insectivores from Azokh Cave
- •Abstract
- •Introduction
- •Materials and Methods
- •Results
- •Unit Vm
- •Unit Vu
- •Unit III
- •Unit II
- •Unit I
- •Discussion
- •Conclusions
- •Acknowledgments
- •8 Bats from Azokh Caves
- •Abstract
- •Introduction
- •Materials and Methods
- •Results
- •Discussion
- •Conclusions
- •Acknowledgements
- •References
- •9 Amphibians and Squamate Reptiles from Azokh 1
- •Abstract
- •Introduction
- •Materials and Methods
- •Systematic Descriptions
- •Paleobiogeographical Data
- •Conclusions
- •Acknowledgements
- •References
- •10 Taphonomy and Site Formation of Azokh 1
- •Abstract
- •Introduction
- •Taphonomic Agents
- •Materials and Methods
- •Shape, Size and Fracture
- •Surface Modification Related to Breakage
- •Tool-Induced Surface Modifications
- •Tooth Marks
- •Other Surface Modifications
- •Histology
- •Results
- •Skeletal Element Representation
- •Fossil Size, Shape and Density
- •Surface Modifications
- •Discussion
- •Presence of Humans in Azokh 1 Cave
- •Carnivore Damage
- •Post-Depositional Damage
- •Acknowledgements
- •Supplementary Information
- •References
- •11 Bone Diagenesis at Azokh Caves
- •Abstract
- •Introduction
- •Porosity as a Diagenetic Indicator
- •Bone Diagenesis at Azokh Caves
- •Materials Analyzed
- •Methods
- •Diagenetic Parameters
- •% ‘Collagen’
- •Results and Discussion
- •Azokh 1 Units II–III
- •Azokh 1 Unit Vm
- •Azokh 2
- •Prospects for Molecular Preservation
- •Conclusions
- •Acknowledgements
- •References
- •12 Coprolites, Paleogenomics and Bone Content Analysis
- •Abstract
- •Introduction
- •Materials and Methods
- •Coprolite/Scat Morphometry
- •Bone Observations
- •Chemical Analysis of the Coprolites
- •Paleogenetics and Paleogenomics
- •Results
- •Bone and Coprolite Morphometry
- •Paleogenetic Analysis of the Coprolite
- •Discussion
- •Bone and Coprolite Morphometry
- •Chemical Analyses of the Coprolites
- •Conclusions
- •Acknowledgements
- •References
- •13 Palaeoenvironmental Context of Coprolites and Plant Microfossils from Unit II. Azokh 1
- •Abstract
- •Introduction
- •Environment Around the Cave
- •Materials and Methods
- •Pollen, Phytolith and Diatom Extraction
- •Criteria for the Identification of Phytolith Types
- •Results
- •Diatoms
- •Phytoliths
- •Pollen and Other Microfossils
- •Discussion
- •Conclusions
- •Acknowledgments
- •References
- •14 Charcoal Remains from Azokh 1 Cave: Preliminary Results
- •Abstract
- •Introduction
- •Materials and Methods
- •Results
- •Conclusions
- •Acknowledgments
- •References
- •15 Paleoecology of Azokh 1
- •Abstract
- •Introduction
- •Materials and Methods
- •Habitat Weightings
- •Calculation of Taxonomic Habitat Index (THI)
- •Faunal Bias
- •Results
- •Taphonomy
- •Paleoecology
- •Discussion
- •Evidence for Woodland
- •Evidence for Steppe
- •Conclusions
- •Acknowledgments
- •Species List Tables
- •References
- •16 Appendix: Dating Methods Applied to Azokh Cave Sites
- •Abstract
- •Radiocarbon
- •Uranium Series
- •Amino-acid Racemization
- •Radiocarbon Dating of Samples from the Azokh Cave Complex (Peter Ditchfield)
- •Pretreatment and Measurement
- •Calibration
- •Results and Discussion
- •Introduction
- •Material and Methods
- •Results
- •Conclusions
- •Introduction
- •Laser-ablation Pre-screening
- •Sample Preparation and Measurement
- •Results
- •Conclusions
- •References
- •Index
Chapter 10
Taphonomy and Site Formation of Azokh 1
M. Dolores Marin-Monfort, Isabel Cáceres, Peter Andrews, Ana C. Pinto-Llona, and Yolanda Fernández-Jalvo
Abstract This chapter aims to describe the complete scenario that existed during the Middle Pleistocene in Azokh Caves and the Lesser Caucasus area from the evidence provided by the fossil assemblages recovered from excavations between 2002 and 2009. In the case of Azokh 1, taphonomic studies are particularly relevant since there is no such information from the early phase of excavations (1960–1980), during which much of the sediment was removed. This study, based on the taphonomy of large mammals, has allowed us to distinguish two sources of the large mammal fauna. Cave bear remains accumulated as a result of hibernation, and some of the carcasses were butchered by hominins in situ. The other faunal remains, mainly herbivores, were brought by hominins, but butchering took place somewhere else, not at the rear of the cave where they have been found. There is no evidence for simultaneous occupation of the cave by bears and hominins. There is also no evidence of human occupation at the rear of
M.D. Marin-Monfort Y. Fernández-Jalvo (&)
Museo Nacional de Ciencias Naturales (CSIC), José Gutiérrez Abascal, 2, 28006 Madrid, Spain
e-mail: yfj@mncn.csic.es
M.D. Marin-Monfort e-mail: dores@mncn.csic.es
I. Cáceres
Àrea de Prehistòria, Universitat Rovira I Virgili (URV), Avinguda de Catalunya 35, 43002 Tarragona, Spain
e-mail: icaceres@iphes.cat
and
IPHES, Institut Català de Paleoecologia Humana I Evolució Social, Zona Educacional 4, Campus Sescelades URV (Edifici W3), 43007 Tarragona, Spain
P. Andrews
Natural History Museum, Cromwell Road, London SW7 5BD, UK
e-mail: pjandrews@uwclub.net
A.C. Pinto-Llona
Instituto de Historia (CCHS-CSIC), Albasanz 26-28, 28037 Madrid, Spain
e-mail: acpinto@ih.csic.es
the cave, and they may have occupied the mouth of the cave during summer time. Cave bears could enter in winter-spring and occupied the rear of the cave. When the cave sediments reached close to the cave roof, bats occupied areas previously inhabited by bears and visited by hominins. Minerals neo-formed in fossils and sediments indicate seasonal changes in humidity and temperature inside the cave during the Pleistocene. Bat guano and corrosive fluid percolation caused strong corrosion on fossils after burial, damaging bones to such an extent that some of them could not be recovered. Bat guano was especially harmful to collagen, which is not preserved in most bones. Finally, during the Holocene, the top of the sequence was eroded by high energy water that removed the upper part of the sediments and opened the cave again to humans and animals.
Резюме Тафономия представляет собой исследование процессов фоссилизации и “истории жизни” окаменелостей. Она изучает, вчастности, причины смерти житвотных, каким образом их останки сохранились до наших дней и как расшифровать информацию, находящуюся на поверхности костей, в тканях, гео- и биохимическом составе. Расшифрованная информация рассказывает нам об экологических условиях прошлого, о вымерших животных и растениях и, в целом, о природе и изменениях в древних экосистемах и климате. Таким образом, тафономия является наукой, которая использует закодированную информацию и сохранившиеся следы деятельности человека для описания естественной “жизни” окаменелостей и восстановления объективной палеобиолого-палеоэкологической и другой палеонтологической информации с целью детальной реконструкции прошлого.
Целью данной главы является, в частности, описание максимально полного сценария событий, имевших место в течение среднего плейстоцена в Азохской пещере. Тафономические исследования на данной стоянке направлены на восстановление исходной информации с ранних фаз раскопок (1960–1980 гг.), в течение которых бóльшая часть седиментов была перемещена из пещеры.
© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016 |
211 |
Yolanda Fernández-Jalvo et al. (eds.), Azokh Cave and the Transcaucasian Corridor,
Vertebrate Paleobiology and Paleoanthropology, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-24924-7_10