Hyena scavenging behavior and its implications for the interpretation of faunal assemblages from FLK 22 (the zinj floor) at olduvai gorge

Bone tools, carnivore chewing and heavy percussion: assessing conflicting interpretations of Lower and Upper Palaeolithic bone assemblages

“…Hyaena scavenging would also explain one of the anomalous features of the assemblage composition, namely the low representation of fragments of spongy bone relative to cortical fragments. This pattern is consistent with experimental butchery sites where marrow-fractured bones have been left overnight in an area visited by spotted hyaenas [ 121 ]. In these situations, the hyaenas ate the spongy bone fragments, but the shaft fragments were largely ignored, and none were tooth-marked.…”

Bone tools, carnivore chewing and heavy percussion: assessing conflicting interpretations of Lower and Upper Palaeolithic bone assemblages

“…Hyaena scavenging would also explain one of the anomalous features of the assemblage composition, namely the low representation of fragments of spongy bone relative to cortical fragments. This pattern is consistent with experimental butchery sites where marrow-fractured bones have been left overnight in an area visited by spotted hyaenas [ 121 ]. In these situations, the hyaenas ate the spongy bone fragments, but the shaft fragments were largely ignored, and none were tooth-marked.…”

Intrasite Spatial Analysis of Bone: Subtracting the Effect of Secondary Carnivore Consumers

“…The analysis shows that the effect of hyena disturbance varies between classes of bone fragments defined by bone fragment position on a bone and type of modification. Ends of limb bones, as expected and documented by others (Binford et al 1988;Blumenschine 1988), are moved significant distances from the original resting place. These fragments were, in all cases, fragments produced by carnivore consumption of the original piece, and the dispersion was clearly the result of transport.…”

“…The data we presented above have relevance for this pattern. As we have shown, tooth-marked shaft fragments are often produced at the site of hominid discard by hyenas, contrary to the suggestions of Binford et al (1988). This results most typically from a low competition context where one hyena discovers the site and consumes the materials at the point of encounter.…”

“…Bunn et al (1980; see also Bunn 1986; Bunn and Kroll 1986Kroll , 1988, following observations by Sutclifte (1970) and Klein (1975), noted that shaft fragments were less susceptible to carnivore ravaging than limb-bone ends. Binford et al (1988) and Blumenschine (1988) demonstrated this experimentally, and both noted that shaft fragments were rarely moved from their original positions. Bartram et al (1991) have noted that hyenas removed limb-bone ends from Kalahari hunter-gatherer camps, while shafts resulting from marrow cracking were still clustered at the point of discard.…”

Skeletal element abundances in archaeofaunal assemblages: economic utility, sample size, and assessment of carcass transport strategies

“…However, this pattern in which appendicular elements are present at higher frequencies than axial elements is consistent with documented patterns of carnivore destruction [14,15,18,29,37,57]. This highlights the need to consider only those high-survival elements that accurately reflect their original abundances when interpreting behavioral patterns.…”

Bone tools, carnivore chewing and heavy percussion: assessing conflicting interpretations of Lower and Upper Palaeolithic bone assemblages

“…Hyaena scavenging would also explain one of the anomalous features of the assemblage composition, namely the low representation of fragments of spongy bone relative to cortical fragments. This pattern is consistent with experimental butchery sites where marrow-fractured bones have been left overnight in an area visited by spotted hyaenas [ 121 ]. In these situations, the hyaenas ate the spongy bone fragments, but the shaft fragments were largely ignored, and none were tooth-marked.…”

Intrasite Spatial Analysis of Bone: Subtracting the Effect of Secondary Carnivore Consumers

“…The analysis shows that the effect of hyena disturbance varies between classes of bone fragments defined by bone fragment position on a bone and type of modification. Ends of limb bones, as expected and documented by others (Binford et al 1988;Blumenschine 1988), are moved significant distances from the original resting place. These fragments were, in all cases, fragments produced by carnivore consumption of the original piece, and the dispersion was clearly the result of transport.…”

“…The data we presented above have relevance for this pattern. As we have shown, tooth-marked shaft fragments are often produced at the site of hominid discard by hyenas, contrary to the suggestions of Binford et al (1988). This results most typically from a low competition context where one hyena discovers the site and consumes the materials at the point of encounter.…”

“…Bunn et al (1980; see also Bunn 1986; Bunn and Kroll 1986Kroll , 1988, following observations by Sutclifte (1970) and Klein (1975), noted that shaft fragments were less susceptible to carnivore ravaging than limb-bone ends. Binford et al (1988) and Blumenschine (1988) demonstrated this experimentally, and both noted that shaft fragments were rarely moved from their original positions. Bartram et al (1991) have noted that hyenas removed limb-bone ends from Kalahari hunter-gatherer camps, while shafts resulting from marrow cracking were still clustered at the point of discard.…”

Skeletal element abundances in archaeofaunal assemblages: economic utility, sample size, and assessment of carcass transport strategies

“…However, this pattern in which appendicular elements are present at higher frequencies than axial elements is consistent with documented patterns of carnivore destruction [14,15,18,29,37,57]. This highlights the need to consider only those high-survival elements that accurately reflect their original abundances when interpreting behavioral patterns.…”

Bone tools, carnivore chewing and heavy percussion: assessing conflicting interpretations of Lower and Upper Palaeolithic bone assemblages

“…Hyaena scavenging would also explain one of the anomalous features of the assemblage composition, namely the low representation of fragments of spongy bone relative to cortical fragments. This pattern is consistent with experimental butchery sites where marrow-fractured bones have been left overnight in an area visited by spotted hyaenas [ 121 ]. In these situations, the hyaenas ate the spongy bone fragments, but the shaft fragments were largely ignored, and none were tooth-marked.…”

Intrasite Spatial Analysis of Bone: Subtracting the Effect of Secondary Carnivore Consumers

“…The analysis shows that the effect of hyena disturbance varies between classes of bone fragments defined by bone fragment position on a bone and type of modification. Ends of limb bones, as expected and documented by others (Binford et al 1988;Blumenschine 1988), are moved significant distances from the original resting place. These fragments were, in all cases, fragments produced by carnivore consumption of the original piece, and the dispersion was clearly the result of transport.…”

“…The data we presented above have relevance for this pattern. As we have shown, tooth-marked shaft fragments are often produced at the site of hominid discard by hyenas, contrary to the suggestions of Binford et al (1988). This results most typically from a low competition context where one hyena discovers the site and consumes the materials at the point of encounter.…”

“…Bunn et al (1980; see also Bunn 1986; Bunn and Kroll 1986Kroll , 1988, following observations by Sutclifte (1970) and Klein (1975), noted that shaft fragments were less susceptible to carnivore ravaging than limb-bone ends. Binford et al (1988) and Blumenschine (1988) demonstrated this experimentally, and both noted that shaft fragments were rarely moved from their original positions. Bartram et al (1991) have noted that hyenas removed limb-bone ends from Kalahari hunter-gatherer camps, while shafts resulting from marrow cracking were still clustered at the point of discard.…”

Skeletal element abundances in archaeofaunal assemblages: economic utility, sample size, and assessment of carcass transport strategies

“…However, this pattern in which appendicular elements are present at higher frequencies than axial elements is consistent with documented patterns of carnivore destruction [14,15,18,29,37,57]. This highlights the need to consider only those high-survival elements that accurately reflect their original abundances when interpreting behavioral patterns.…”