Intrinsic qualities of primate bones as predictors of skeletal element representation in modern and fossil carnivore feeding assemblages.

Plio-Pleistocene faunal assemblages from Swartkrans Cave (South Africa) preserve large numbers of primate remains. Brain, C.K., 1981. The Hunters or the Hunted? An Introduction to African Cave Taphonomy. University of Chicago Press, Chicago suggested that these primate subassemblages might have resulted from a focus by carnivores on primate predation and bone accumulation. Brain's hypothesis prompted us to investigate, in a previous study, this taphonomic issue as it relates to density-mediated destruction of primate bones (J. Archaeol. Sci. 29, 2002, 883). Here we extend our investigation of Brain's hypothesis by examining additional intrinsic qualities of baboon bones and their role as mediators of skeletal element representation in carnivore-created assemblages. Using three modern adult baboon skeletons, we collected data on four intrinsic bone qualities (bulk bone mineral density, maximum length, volume, and cross-sectional area) for approximately 81 bones per baboon skeleton. We investigated the relationship between these intrinsic bone qualities and a measure of skeletal part representation (the percentage minimum animal unit) for baboon bones in carnivore refuse and scat assemblages. Refuse assemblages consist of baboon bones not ingested during ten separate experimental feeding episodes in which individual baboon carcasses were fed to individual captive leopards and a spotted hyena. Scat assemblages consist of those baboon bones recovered in carnivore regurgitations and feces resulting from the feeding episodes. In refuse assemblages, volume (i.e., size) was consistently the best predictor of element representation, while cross-sectional area was the poorest predictor in the leopard refuse assemblage and bulk bone mineral density (i.e., a measure of the proportion of cortical to trabecular bone) was the poorest predictor in the hyena refuse assemblage. In light of previous documentation of carnivore-induced density-mediated destruction to bone assemblages, we interpret the current findings as suggestive of the secondary importance of bulk bone mineral density to other intrinsic qualities of skeletal elements (e.g., size, maximum dimension, and average cross-sectional area). It is only when skeletal elements are too large for consumption (e.g., many long bones) that they are fragmented following intra-element patterns of density-mediated carnivore destruction. There appears to be a size threshold beneath which bulk bone mineral density contributes little to mediating carnivore destruction of carcasses. Thus, depending on body size of the predator, body size of the prey, and specific size of the element, bulk bone mineral density may play little or no role of primary importance in mediating the destruction of skeletal elements. We compare patterns in modern comparative assemblages to patterns in primate fossil assemblages from Swartkrans. One of the fossil assemblages, Swartkrans Member 1, Hanging Remnant, most closely approximates a hyena (possibly refuse) assemblage pattern, while the Swartkrans Member 2 assemblage most closely approximates a leopard (possibly scat) assemblage pattern. The Swartkrans Member 1, Lower Bank, assemblage does not closely approximate any of our modern comparative assemblage patterns.