- •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 11
Bone Diagenesis at Azokh Caves
Colin I. Smith, Marisol Faraldos, and Yolanda Fernández-Jalvo
Abstract Bone diagenesis is a set of processes by which the organic and mineral phases and the structure of bone are transformed during fossilization. To understand how these processes have affected skeletal material recovered from Azokh Caves (particularly the organic preservation), we measured ‘diagenetic parameters’ of skeletal material from Holocene, Late Pleistocene and Middle Pleistocene deposits from Azokh Caves. Additionally, we used this study to further test the application of both nitrogen adsorption isotherm analysis and mercury intrusion porosimetry for measuring the porosity of fossil bone. The skeletal material from the Pleistocene layers of Azokh Caves can be characterized as generally poorly preserved (especially collagen preservation). Porosity values of the bones are lower than might be expected as many bones show evidence of extensive infilling of the pores with secondary minerals. The pore infilling in the Middle Pleistocene layers is most extensive and this type of preservation has not previously been described in archaeological material.
Резюме Диагенез костей – это совокупность процессов, в результате которых органические и минеральные составляющие структуры кости трансформируются благодаря распаду и фоссилизации. Чтобы понять, как эти процессы воздействовали на скелетный материал, обнаруженный в Азохской пещере (и, в частности,
C.I. Smith (&)
Department of Archaeology and History, La Trobe University,
Melbourne, VIC 3086, Australia
e-mail: Colin.Smith@latrobe.edu.au
M. Faraldos
Instituto de Catálisis Y Petroleoquímica (CSIC), Marie Curie 2, Campus de Cantoblanco, 28049 Madrid, Spain
e-mail: mfaraldos@icp.csic.es
Y. Fernández-Jalvo
Museo Nacional de Ciencias Naturales (CSIC), José Gutiérrez 2, 28006 Madrid, Spain
e-mail: yfj@mncn.csic.es
оценить степень сохранности органических веществ в костях), были измерены определенные “диагенетические параметры” скелетного материала. Тридцать три кости из трех главных участков Азохской пещеры были исследованы для выяснения степени сохранности в зависимости от места находки и возраста образца. Голоценовый материал из Азох 2 был сопоставлен с костями из Азох 1 (подразделения II–III – поздний плейстоцен и средние горизонты подразделения V – средний плейстоцен).
Мы оценили количество коллагена, оставшегося в костях после деминерализации, и степень сохранности минералов с использованием метода FTIR (инфракрасная спектроскопия на основе преобразования Фурье). Изменения на поверхности костей и гистологическая структура поперечного сечения были исследованы с помощью обычного светового и сканирующего электронного микроскопов с электронной информационной системой (EDS). Степень гистологической сохранности была оценена с использованием шкалы
Oxford Histological Index. Изменения в пористости кос-
тей были измерены с помощью изотермального анализа поглощения азота (NAIA) и ртутной интрузионной порометрии (HgIP), а результаты этих двух методов в дальнейшем были сопоставлены.
Согласно величинам “диагенетических параметров”, материал из Азох 2 представлял собой смесь из хорошо сохранившегося материала и костей, которые лишились коллагена химическим путем, а также некоторых костей, потерявших коллаген из-за микробного воздействия. Мы объясняем этот конгломерат различных типов сохранности как возможный результат смешения современного и ископаемого материала на поверхностных слоях Азох 2. Скелетный материал из плейстоценовых слоев Азох 1 в целом плохо сохранился. Содержание коллагена бедное, с большими изменениями в кристалличности структуры. Результаты гистологического исследования и анализа на пористость показывают, что во многих случаях кости лишились коллагена по причине химической деградации, хотя
© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016 |
251 |
Yolanda Fernández-Jalvo et al. (eds.), Azokh Cave and the Transcaucasian Corridor,
Vertebrate Paleobiology and Paleoanthropology, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-24924-7_11