The Ohio Pleistocene Mammal Database (Opmdb): Creation and Preliminary
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
THE OHIO PLEISTOCENE MAMMAL DATABASE (OPMDB): CREATION AND PRELIMINARY TAPHONOMIC AND SPATIAL ANALYSES Ina M. Terry A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate College of Bowling Green State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE December 2013 Committee: Margaret M. Yacobucci, Advisor Peter V. Gorsevski Jeff Snyder © 2013 Ina M. Terry All Rights Reserved iii ABSTRACT Margaret M. Yacobucci, Advisor The Late Pleistocene-Early Holocene of Ohio was a period of dynamic changes in climate, flora, and fauna. Climate and flora studies have been greatly aided by palynology research in Ohio’s prevalent peat deposits but faunal dynamics, particularly for large (> 44 kg) mammals, are less certain. Available Pleistocene-aged fossils are limited and existing databases are largely incomplete. This study adds to the available data through the creation of the Ohio Pleistocene Mammal Database (OPMDB). The database is composed of fossil finds within Ohio of probable Pleistocene age that have been collected from historic sources, i.e., period newspapers, science journals, etc., and compiled into a geographically referenced database. Within this thesis, I describe the scope and breadth of the OPMDB and present preliminary taphonomic and geospatial analyses using the OPMDB. Initial results are consistent with those previously described in the scientific literature, supporting the view that historical reports can be reliable sources for information about fossil mammal occurrences. Clear differences in spatial distribution and preservational potential exist among Late Pleistocene-Early Holocene mammals. Analysis of the distributions of preserved species and individual skeletal elements by sedimentary context revealed that the greatest variety of taxa is preserved in peats. Mastodons dominate Ohio fossil localities, making up 56% of occurrences in the OPMDB, with sites spread throughout the state. Mastodons are found in a variety of depositional contexts, from peats and clays to gravels. In iv contrast, mammoths are relatively rare in peats and clays, and none are known from the lake plain of northwest Ohio. The peccary record is notably rich, with many complete skeletons; peccaries are most likely to be found in fluvial sands and silts. Other ungulates, including equids, cervids, and bovids, are most often represented in the OPMDB by isolated cranial material (teeth, horns/antlers, partial crania); a collecting bias against unremarkable postcranial material may be a factor for these taxa. Cluster and geospatial analyses delineate two mammal species associations in Ohio that have also been reported elsewhere, the Mastodon and Mammoth Faunas. Additional faunal associations derived from the OPMDB may be unique to the Great Lakes region. Integrating data on early human occupation sites in Ohio did not reveal a strong association between humans and any one potential prey species; rather, humans may have tracked suitable habitat space. While the OPMDB has proven to be a useful tool for investigating Late Quaternary faunal dynamics in Ohio, inclusion of additional data on depositional environments and evidence of human modification of skeletal material, as well as more radiocarbon dates, would increase its utility. In particular, future work should expand on taphofacies analysis, exploration of spatial relationships among mammal taxa and humans, and changes in faunal composition and spatial distribution throughout this interval. v No person exists in a vacuum. There are many people who have assisted me in my path. I would like to thank my children Michael, Caitlynn, and Nathan who supported me wholeheartedly, my brother Mike and his beautiful family for their encouragement, and my parents Mike and Linda Lambert who knew I would finish. To my sister and best friend Lynn, I made this. To my little granddaughter Lauren, Science is cool. To everyone else who ever assisted me in any manner possible, you know who you are, I thank you. Last, but most certainly not least, my husband Joseph who listened and believed I could complete this work even when I did not. vi ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to acknowledge the tremendous support of my advisor Dr. Peg Yacobucci. I cannot thank her enough. I would also like to thank my committee members Dr. Peter Gorsevski and Dr. Jeff Snyder for their help and constructive criticism. I would like to acknowledge and thank Bob Glotzhober, Senior Vertebrate Curator of the Ohio Historical Society, for his assistance. Many thanks go to Betsy Zunk who assisted me with GIS issues. Additionally, I thank the Department of Geology at Bowling Green State University for their support through the years. vii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES......................................................... 1 Objectives ............................................................................................................ 2 CHAPTER II. BACKGROUND ........................................................................................... 3 Glacial and Interglacial Intervals ............................................................................... 3 Beringia ............................................................................................................ 4 Refugia ............................................................................................................ 5 Dynamic Environment of the Ohio Late Pleistocene ................................................ 6 Fauna ............................................................................................................ 7 North American People.............................................................................................. 10 CHAPTER III. METHODS .................................................................................................. 12 Database ............................................................................................................ 12 Database Statistics ..................................................................................................... 15 Temporal Difficulties ..................................................................................... 15 NISP vs. MNI ................................................................................................. 16 Richness and Dominance ............................................................................... 17 Skeletal Element Analyses ......................................................................................... 19 Skeletal Element vs. Taxa .............................................................................. 19 Herding vs. Non-Herding Groups.................................................................. 20 Skeletal Element vs. Sedimentology ............................................................... 20 Geographic Information Systems .............................................................................. 20 Paleohuman Data .......................................................................................... 23 viii Raup-Crick Cluster Analyses ......................................................................... 24 Paleohuman-Mammal Associations............................................................... 26 Sedimentological Analyses ........................................................................................ 28 Sedimentology vs. Taxa .................................................................................. 28 Sedimentology vs. Skeletal Element ............................................................... 28 Taphonomy ............................................................................................................ 28 Voorhies Groups ............................................................................................ 28 Taphofacies .................................................................................................... 29 CHAPTER IV. RESULTS .................................................................................................... 32 Database Statistics ..................................................................................................... 32 Skeletal Element Analyses ......................................................................................... 33 Skeletal Elements by Taxon ........................................................................... 33 Herding vs. Non-Herding Skeletal Element Analyses.................................... 36 Sedimentological Context of Skeletal Elements ............................................. 37 GIS Analyses ............................................................................................................ 39 Spatial Distribution of Mammal Taxa ........................................................... 39 Spatial Distribution of Paleohumans ............................................................. 43 Spatial Distribution of Faunal Associations .................................................. 45 Raup-Crick Cluster Analyses ......................................................................... 46 Paleohuman-Mammal Associations............................................................... 49 Sedimentological Analyses ........................................................................................ 54 Sedimentology vs. Taxa .................................................................................. 54 Sedimentology vs. Skeletal Element ..............................................................