Dietary ecology of extant guanaco (Lama guanicoe) from Southern Patagonia: seasonal leaf browsing and its archaeological implications

Rivals, Florent; Rindel, Diego; Belardi, Juan Bautista

doi:10.1016/j.jas.2013.03.005

Cited by 34 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We question whether dental microwear patterns of ruminants are good models for the dental microwear of extinct ungulates and ungulate-like mammals such as Notoungulata (Townsend and Croft 2008; Billet et al 2009) and other clades that exhibit diminished levels of extant diversity such as Proboscidea (Green et al 2005; Palombo et al 2005; Calandra et al 2008, 2010; Todd et al 2007), Camelidae (Semprebon and Rivals 2010; Rivals et al 2013), Suina (Hunter and Fortelius 1994; Bishop et al 2006; Schmidt 2008), Hippopotamidae (Boisserie et al 2005) and Perissodactyla. Perissodactyls are one of few non-ruminant ungulate clades with sufficient numbers of extant species and a sufficient degree of dietary diversity across the browser-grazer continuum for which dental microwear can be investigated (Owen-Smith 1988; Prothero and Schooch 2002).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Most microwear studies involving ruminants sample the lingual band of enamel of the paracone (A2 in Fig. 1) (Solounias and Semprebon 2002; Rivals and Deniaux 2003; Merceron et al 2004, 2005a, 2010a,b; Semprebon et al 2004a,b; Merceron and Ungar 2005; Rivals and Solounias 2007; Rivals et al 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2013, 2014; Semprebon and Rivals 2007, 2012; Ungar et al 2007; 2012; DeMiguel et al 2008; Novello et al 2010; Solounias et al 2010; Rivals and Semprebon 2012; Scott 2012). Dental microwear studies of equine horses (subfamily Equinae) sample the same area (A2) (Hayek et al 1992; MacFadden et al 1999; Solounias and Semprebon 2002; Semprebon et al 2004a, 2011; Schultz et al 2007; Schulz and Fahlke 2009; Rivals et al 2010; Rivals et al in press; Solounias et al 2010; Wolf et al 2010; Rivals and Semprebon 2012; Fraser and Theodor 2013; Tütken et al 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparative dental microwear of ruminant and perissodactyl molars: Implications for paleodietary analysis of rare and extinct ungulate clades

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dental microwear analyses of ungulates and other large herbivores rely on correlations of diet and microwear among extant ungulates, primarily ruminants. Microwear is considered a ‘taxon-free’ method of paleodietary analysis. The properties of food are associated with causality of microwear, but the possibility that heritable properties of the consumer (tooth morphologies, masticatory dynamics, enamel mechanical properties, digestive physiologies) may introduce bias is not considered. Using an observer blind method of light microscopy, we examined the distribution of microwear features on the molars of eight species of ruminants and perissodactyls. Grazing and browsing ruminants had statistically different numbers of scratches forming discrete data clusters. Perissodactyls differ in the numbers of scratches and pits but without discrete browser and grazer clusters. Microwear features were distributed homogeneously across ruminant molars and strongly predictive of diet from the labial edge of the molar to the lingual edge. Microwear was heterogeneously distributed across perissodactyl molars with more pits on the labial edge and more scratches on the lingual edge. In perissodactyls, microwear sampled from the labial edge was strongly predictive of diet, while microwear sampled from other areas were not. Discriminant function analyses of microwear assigned individual molars to diets (browser and grazer) and clades (ruminant and perissodactyl) with similar success (70–73%) indicating that phylogeny and diet influence microwear equally. Rhino microwear was more sensitive to clade membership while other perissodactyl microwear was more sensitive to diet. Although it is not clear what heritable variables may phylogenetically bias dental microwear, extant ruminants may not be appropriate models for the microwear of other large herbivores.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative dental microwear of ruminant and perissodactyl molars: Implications for paleodietary analysis of rare and extinct ungulate clades

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Age estimation through dental development, eruption, and wear is a common ageing method in the archaeozoology of camelids and in the biology of guanacos [ 1 , 4 , 41 – 45 ]. Guanacos have heterodont and diphyodont dentition, with 4 types of teeth: incisors (I), canines (C), premolars (P), and molars (M) [ 1 , 43 , 44 ].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lama guanicoe remains from the Chaco ecoregion (Córdoba, Argentina): An osteological approach to the characterization of a relict wild population

Costa

Barri

2018

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Guanacos (Lama guanicoe) are large ungulates that have been valued by human populations in South America since the Late Pleistocene. Even though they were very abundant until the end of the 19th century (before the high deforestation rate of the last decades), guanacos have nearly disappeared in the Gran Chaco ecoregion, with relicts and isolated populations surviving in some areas, such as the shrubland area near the saline depressions of Córdoba province, Argentina. In this report, we present the first data from a locally endangered guanaco wild population, through the study of skeletal remains recovered in La Providencia ranch. Our results showed that most of the elements belonged to adults aged between 36 and 96 months; sex evaluation showed similar numbers of males and females. Statistical analysis of the body size of modern samples from Córdoba demonstrated that guanacos from the Chaco had large dimensions and presented lower size variability than the modern and archaeological specimens in our database. Moreover, they exhibited dimensions similar to those of modern guanacos from Patagonia and San Juan, and to archaeological specimens from Ongamira and Cerro Colorado, although further genetic studies are needed to corroborate a possible phylogenetic relationship. Finally, we used archaeozoological techniques to provide a first characterization of a relict guanaco population from the Chaco ecoregion, demonstrating its value to the study of modern skeletal remains and species conservation biology.

show abstract

“…Therefore, the assumption that mesowear is of sufficient resolution to track midterm diet changes such as seasonal diet switches is to be questioned, at least in ruminants. Though most studies tend to use caution when evoking the time frame represented by the mesowear signal, it is often combined with microwear to measure diet seasonality (Kaiser and Schulz, 2006;Mihlbachler and Solounias, 2006;Rivals et al, 2013). Kubo and Yamada (2014) use the standard deviation of the mesowear score for this purpose.…”

Section: Magnitude Of Mesowear Changementioning

confidence: 99%

Controlled feeding experiments with diets of different abrasiveness reveal slow development of mesowear signal in goats (Capra aegagrus hircus)

Ackermans

Winkler

Schulz‐Kornas

et al. 2018

Journal of Experimental Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dental mesowear is applied as a proxy to determine the general diet of mammalian herbivores based on tooth-cusp shape and occlusal relief. Low, blunt cusps are considered typical of grazers and high, sharp cusps typical of browsers. However, how internal or external abrasives impact mesowear, and the time frame the wear signature takes to develop, still need to be explored. Four different pelleted diets of increasing abrasiveness (lucerne, grass, grass and rice husks, and grass, rice husks and sand) were fed to four groups of a total of 28 adult goats in a controlled feeding experiment over a 6-month period. Tooth morphology was captured by medical CT scans at the beginning and end of the experiment. These scans, as well as the crania obtained post mortem, were scored using the mesowear method. Comparisons between diet groups showed few significant differences after 6 months, irrespective of whether CT scans or the real teeth were scored. Only when assessing the difference in signal between the beginning and the end of the experiment did relevant, significant diet-specific effects emerge. Diets containing lower phytolith content caused a more pronounced change in mesowear towards sharper cusps/higher reliefs, while the feed containing sand did not result in more extreme changes in mesowear when compared with the same feed without sand. Our experiment suggests that the formation of a stable and hence reliable mesowear signal requires more time to develop than 6 months.

show abstract

Dietary ecology of extant guanaco (Lama guanicoe) from Southern Patagonia: seasonal leaf browsing and its archaeological implications

Cited by 34 publications

References 41 publications

Comparative dental microwear of ruminant and perissodactyl molars: Implications for paleodietary analysis of rare and extinct ungulate clades

Comparative dental microwear of ruminant and perissodactyl molars: Implications for paleodietary analysis of rare and extinct ungulate clades

Lama guanicoe remains from the Chaco ecoregion (Córdoba, Argentina): An osteological approach to the characterization of a relict wild population

Controlled feeding experiments with diets of different abrasiveness reveal slow development of mesowear signal in goats (Capra aegagrus hircus)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About