Bone density studies and the interpretation of the faunal record
Some bones preserve better than others. For decades, researchers have attempted to quantify this observation. While many of their intrinsic qualities are known to affect how well bones preserve in the archeological record,1 the variable that has received the most attention to date is bone density.2–...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Evolutionary anthropology 2005-05, Vol.14 (3), p.99-108 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 108 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 3 |
| container_start_page | 99 |
| container_title | Evolutionary anthropology |
| container_volume | 14 |
| creator | Lam, Y. M. Pearson, O. M. |
| description | Some bones preserve better than others. For decades, researchers have attempted to quantify this observation. While many of their intrinsic qualities are known to affect how well bones preserve in the archeological record,1 the variable that has received the most attention to date is bone density.2–6 This has become the most commonly accepted proxy measure of a bone's ability to withstand destructive forces. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1002/evan.20053 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_38190232</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>38190232</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3423-d0036a8721bc312da41dfe2c84621f70c83bf0790b83f76dec4989e3fc9396e33</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kD1PwzAQQCMEEqWw8AsyMSClnO0kdjbaqrSgqjBAGS3XOQtD6hQ7Afrv6QcwMt3p9N4NL4rOCfQIAL3CD-V6FCBjB1GHZBSSPIPscLNDDgnJmDiOTkJ4BQCRc9GJrge1w7hEF2yzjkPTlhZDrFwZNy8YW9egX3lsVGNrF9dmdzWqdaqKPeral6fRkVFVwLOf2Y2ebkaPw0kyvR_fDvvTRLOUsqQEYLkSnJKFZoSWKiWlQapFmlNiOGjBFgZ4AQvBDM9L1GkhCmRGF6zIkbFudLH_u_L1e4uhkUsbNFaVcli3QTJBCqCMbsDLPah9HYJHI1feLpVfSwJyG0luI8ldpA1M9vCnrXD9DylH8_7s10n2jg0Nfv05yr_JnDOeyefZWM7vJoPBw4xLwr4BvTZ4Sw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>38190232</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Bone density studies and the interpretation of the faunal record</title><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><creator>Lam, Y. M. ; Pearson, O. M.</creator><creatorcontrib>Lam, Y. M. ; Pearson, O. M.</creatorcontrib><description>Some bones preserve better than others. For decades, researchers have attempted to quantify this observation. While many of their intrinsic qualities are known to affect how well bones preserve in the archeological record,1 the variable that has received the most attention to date is bone density.2–6 This has become the most commonly accepted proxy measure of a bone's ability to withstand destructive forces.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1060-1538</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1520-6505</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/evan.20053</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Hoboken: Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company</publisher><subject>Anthropology ; Archaeology ; Evolution ; Human behaviour ; Human remains ; hunting ; Mortality ; mortality profiles ; New technology ; Paleoanthropology ; Quantitative analysis ; scavenging ; Scientific research ; skeletal element abundance ; species representation ; taphonomy ; zooarcheology ; Zoology</subject><ispartof>Evolutionary anthropology, 2005-05, Vol.14 (3), p.99-108</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2005 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3423-d0036a8721bc312da41dfe2c84621f70c83bf0790b83f76dec4989e3fc9396e33</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3423-d0036a8721bc312da41dfe2c84621f70c83bf0790b83f76dec4989e3fc9396e33</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002%2Fevan.20053$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002%2Fevan.20053$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,1416,27923,27924,45573,45574</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Lam, Y. M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pearson, O. M.</creatorcontrib><title>Bone density studies and the interpretation of the faunal record</title><title>Evolutionary anthropology</title><addtitle>Evol. Anthropol</addtitle><description>Some bones preserve better than others. For decades, researchers have attempted to quantify this observation. While many of their intrinsic qualities are known to affect how well bones preserve in the archeological record,1 the variable that has received the most attention to date is bone density.2–6 This has become the most commonly accepted proxy measure of a bone's ability to withstand destructive forces.</description><subject>Anthropology</subject><subject>Archaeology</subject><subject>Evolution</subject><subject>Human behaviour</subject><subject>Human remains</subject><subject>hunting</subject><subject>Mortality</subject><subject>mortality profiles</subject><subject>New technology</subject><subject>Paleoanthropology</subject><subject>Quantitative analysis</subject><subject>scavenging</subject><subject>Scientific research</subject><subject>skeletal element abundance</subject><subject>species representation</subject><subject>taphonomy</subject><subject>zooarcheology</subject><subject>Zoology</subject><issn>1060-1538</issn><issn>1520-6505</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2005</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kD1PwzAQQCMEEqWw8AsyMSClnO0kdjbaqrSgqjBAGS3XOQtD6hQ7Afrv6QcwMt3p9N4NL4rOCfQIAL3CD-V6FCBjB1GHZBSSPIPscLNDDgnJmDiOTkJ4BQCRc9GJrge1w7hEF2yzjkPTlhZDrFwZNy8YW9egX3lsVGNrF9dmdzWqdaqKPeral6fRkVFVwLOf2Y2ebkaPw0kyvR_fDvvTRLOUsqQEYLkSnJKFZoSWKiWlQapFmlNiOGjBFgZ4AQvBDM9L1GkhCmRGF6zIkbFudLH_u_L1e4uhkUsbNFaVcli3QTJBCqCMbsDLPah9HYJHI1feLpVfSwJyG0luI8ldpA1M9vCnrXD9DylH8_7s10n2jg0Nfv05yr_JnDOeyefZWM7vJoPBw4xLwr4BvTZ4Sw</recordid><startdate>200505</startdate><enddate>200505</enddate><creator>Lam, Y. M.</creator><creator>Pearson, O. M.</creator><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope></search><sort><creationdate>200505</creationdate><title>Bone density studies and the interpretation of the faunal record</title><author>Lam, Y. M. ; Pearson, O. M.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3423-d0036a8721bc312da41dfe2c84621f70c83bf0790b83f76dec4989e3fc9396e33</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2005</creationdate><topic>Anthropology</topic><topic>Archaeology</topic><topic>Evolution</topic><topic>Human behaviour</topic><topic>Human remains</topic><topic>hunting</topic><topic>Mortality</topic><topic>mortality profiles</topic><topic>New technology</topic><topic>Paleoanthropology</topic><topic>Quantitative analysis</topic><topic>scavenging</topic><topic>Scientific research</topic><topic>skeletal element abundance</topic><topic>species representation</topic><topic>taphonomy</topic><topic>zooarcheology</topic><topic>Zoology</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Lam, Y. M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pearson, O. M.</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><jtitle>Evolutionary anthropology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Lam, Y. M.</au><au>Pearson, O. M.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Bone density studies and the interpretation of the faunal record</atitle><jtitle>Evolutionary anthropology</jtitle><addtitle>Evol. Anthropol</addtitle><date>2005-05</date><risdate>2005</risdate><volume>14</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>99</spage><epage>108</epage><pages>99-108</pages><issn>1060-1538</issn><eissn>1520-6505</eissn><abstract>Some bones preserve better than others. For decades, researchers have attempted to quantify this observation. While many of their intrinsic qualities are known to affect how well bones preserve in the archeological record,1 the variable that has received the most attention to date is bone density.2–6 This has become the most commonly accepted proxy measure of a bone's ability to withstand destructive forces.</abstract><cop>Hoboken</cop><pub>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company</pub><doi>10.1002/evan.20053</doi><tpages>10</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1060-1538 |
| ispartof | Evolutionary anthropology, 2005-05, Vol.14 (3), p.99-108 |
| issn | 1060-1538 1520-6505 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_38190232 |
| source | Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete |
| subjects | Anthropology Archaeology Evolution Human behaviour Human remains hunting Mortality mortality profiles New technology Paleoanthropology Quantitative analysis scavenging Scientific research skeletal element abundance species representation taphonomy zooarcheology Zoology |
| title | Bone density studies and the interpretation of the faunal record |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-12T01%3A59%3A34IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Bone%20density%20studies%20and%20the%20interpretation%20of%20the%20faunal%20record&rft.jtitle=Evolutionary%20anthropology&rft.au=Lam,%20Y.%20M.&rft.date=2005-05&rft.volume=14&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=99&rft.epage=108&rft.pages=99-108&rft.issn=1060-1538&rft.eissn=1520-6505&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/evan.20053&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E38190232%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=38190232&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |