Early Holocene Turkey (Meleagris gallopavo) Remains from SOUTHERN Utah: Implications for the Origins of the Puebloan Domestic Turkeys

Newbold, Bradley A.; Janetski, Joel C.; Bodily, Mark L.; Yoder, David T.

doi:10.1179/kiv.2012.78.1.37

Cited by 5 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To better understand how managed or domesticated resources were integrated into ancient Maya subsistence, ritual and political economies, we must first understand the process and extent of Maya turkey husbandry and domestication. The subject is only recently gaining traction in Mesoamerica and the Maya world (Thornton et al 2012;Thornton and Emery, 2015;Lapham et al, this volume;Manin, Cornette and Lefèvre, this volume;Martinez Lira and Valadez, this volume) despite broad interest in the domestic dog in Mesoamerica (Blanco et al 2006;Götz 2008;Valadez Azúa et al 2006, 2013, and the domestic turkey in the American Southwest (e.g., Badenhorst et al 2012;Grimstead et al 2014;Lipe et al 2016;McCaffery et al 2014;McKusick 2001;Munro 2006Munro , 2011Newbold et al 2012;Rawlings and Driver 2010;Speller et al 2010). In Mesoamerica, where the timing of domestication and the possible trade of turkeys are unclear, the lack of osteological markers distinguishing domesticated from wild birds is significantly problematic.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Ancient Maya turkey husbandry: Testing theories through stable isotope analysis

Thornton

Emery

Speller

2016

Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Large gaps exist in our knowledge of ancient Maya turkey husbandry and management. Among the questions still needing to be addressed are: 1) when and where was the non-local wild turkey (Meleagris gallopavo) introduced to and adopted by the ancient Maya, and 2) did the ancient Maya also rear captive or tame populations of the indigenous ocellated turkey (Meleagris ocellata)? In this paper, we assess the potential of stable isotope analysis to address these questions. We employ stable carbon (δ 13 C) and nitrogen (δ 15 N) isotope analysis to determine whether wild and husbanded turkeys in the Maya region can be distinguished based on their diets. Strontium isotope analysis (87 Sr/ 86 Sr) is also used to distinguish between M. gallopavo individuals that were imported from central/northern Mexico, and those raised on-site in the Maya lowlands. The results indicate that stable isotope analysis is a promising and underutilized method for testing theories regarding ancient Maya turkey husbandry.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Ancient Maya turkey husbandry: Testing theories through stable isotope analysis

Thornton

Emery

Speller

2016

Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A record which seemingly contradicts what we expect for the earliest identified human-turkey relationships and the domestication process itself. Investigating these questions may also help us place and determine how late Pleistocene and early/mid-Holocene exploitation of turkeys in the SW/NW occurred (e.g., Akins 2006;Newbold et al 2012) and whether the incipient stages of turkey domestication were the result of individual turkey capture and penning/caging-or more likely tethering-that is present throughout the entire Ancestral Pueblo-era in this region. Shifting our perspectives on turkey penning may also help clarify the presumed intensification of turkeys that occurred after the Basketmaker periods in the SW/NW, and whether or not this represents a true shift in turkey exploitation strategies even while turkey penning remained unchanged during this era.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Contextualizing Ancestral Pueblo Turkey (Meleagris gallopavo spp.) Management

Conrad

2021

J Archaeol Method Theory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Penning turkeys (Meleagris gallopavo spp.) in the Ancestral Pueblo American Southwest/Mexican Northwest (SW/NW) involved the creation or use of a variety of spaces and contexts throughout AD 1–1600 and into the post-contact era. Turkey pens, or captivity, occur through simple tethering, reuse of abandoned pit houses or surface rooms, or creation of pens within villages, plazas, and elsewhere. Turkey dung, droppings, and eggshells are fundamental for determining the presence or absence of pens at archaeological sites. In this paper, I review the archaeological record for turkey pens and focus on three main questions: (1) how are turkey pens identified in the SW/NW, (2) if turkey pen construction or evidence for turkey captivity shifts through time, and (3) what the record of turkey penning informs us regarding the long-term human management of these birds and global perspectives on human–bird/human–animal management. Ancestral Pueblo peoples created an adaptive and flexible strategy for turkey penning, which successfully integrated these birds into ceremonial and socioeconomic processes for approximately 1600 years.

show abstract

The Uncertain Origins of Mesoamerican Turkey Domestication

Thornton

Emery

2015

J Archaeol Method Theory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Early Holocene Turkey (Meleagris gallopavo) Remains from SOUTHERN Utah: Implications for the Origins of the Puebloan Domestic Turkeys

Cited by 5 publications

References 5 publications

Ancient Maya turkey husbandry: Testing theories through stable isotope analysis

Ancient Maya turkey husbandry: Testing theories through stable isotope analysis

Contextualizing Ancestral Pueblo Turkey (Meleagris gallopavo spp.) Management

The Uncertain Origins of Mesoamerican Turkey Domestication

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About