CORRESPONDENCE Early Holocene Survival of Megafauna in South America
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Journal of Biogeography (J. Biogeogr.) (2007) 34, 1642–1646 CORRESPONDENCE Early Holocene survival of World was concomitant with, and a megafauna, albeit two of these ages are megafauna in South America consequence of, the human occupation of potentially unreliable, and four were the Americas. Their argument is two- obtained from one single specimen (indeed, fold. First, the radiocarbon dates (14C) one of the unreliable dates comes from this Comments on Steadman, D.W., Martin, P.S., accepted by them for the last appearance specimen; Table 1). Other reports not MacPhee, R.D.E., Jull, A.J.T., McDonald, dates (LADs) of these animals roughly cor- included in Barnosky et al. (2004) provide H.G., Woods, C.A., Iturralde-Vinent, M. & respond to megafaunal extinction dates in two direct radiocarbon ages of megafa- Hodgins, G.W.L. (2005) Asynchronous ex- South and North America and the West unal bone remains from central Brazil at tinction of late Quaternary sloths on con- Indies. These dates coincide with the human the Pleistocene⁄Holocene boundary tinents and islands. Proceedings of the colonization of these regions and they argue (Table 1; Neves & Pilo´ , 2003; Araujo National Academy of Sciences USA, 102, that this supports the thesis that human et al., 2004). Politis et al. (2004; also not 11763–11768. arrival caused extinction of the ground included in Barnosky et al., 2004) presen- sloth. Second, according to Steadman et al., ted two additional Holocene direct The debate over the causes of the Pleisto- extinctions caused by climatic fluctuation radiocarbon ages of Megatherium ameri- cene megafaunal extinction dates back to would result in concomitant LADs across canum (Blumenbach) specimens (Table 1) the early 19th century (Grayson, 1984), the entire continent and associated islands, and a third one from the Holocene⁄Pleis- 14 and continues to generate considerable as they viewed these fluctuations as being tocene boundary (10,190 Æ 120 CyrBP; controversy (e.g. Grayson & Meltzer, widespread and uniform, whilst they found c. 11,820–12,020 cal. BP; Table 1), all in 2003; Araujo et al., 2004; De Vivo & that the LADs for the West Indies, around Argentina; and Marshall et al. (1984; also 14 Carmignotto, 2004; Fiedel & Haynes, 4400 CyrBP [c. 4800–5050 calibrated not included in Barnosky et al., 2004) 2004; Burney & Flannery, 2005; Wroe years before present (cal. BP); dates calib- reported a single Holocene age of 14 et al., 2006). Typically, protagonists in rated with CALIB 5.0, Stuiver et al., 2005], 8910 Æ 200 CyrBP (c. 9780–10,150 cal. this debate can be classified into two are much younger than those found in the BP; GIF-4116) of a Scelidodon chiliensis 14 groups. One group argues that Late continent (c. 11,000 CyrBP; c. 12,880– (Lydekker) in Peru (Marshall et al., 1984; Pleistocene megafaunal extinctions were 12,950 cal. BP for North America and Pujos & Salas, 2004). 14 primarily caused by direct and indirect c. 10,500 CyrBP; c. 12,390–12,640 cal. BP Four of the sites where these dates were human action through hunting, habitat for South America). obtained are located in Argentina, while two modification or introduction of new We contend that the chronological data are located in central Brazil and the last in predators (Burney & Flannery, 2005, presented by Steadman et al. (2005) are Peru (Fig. 1). All the Argentinean sites 2006; Barnosky et al., 2004; Fiedel & incomplete, especially when considering (Arroyo Seco 2, La Moderna, Campo Haynes, 2004). The other interpretation South America. While Steadman et al. Laborde and Paso Otero 5) are open-air is that humans had at most a minor role (2005) suggest that there are no accept- archaeological sites, i.e. the megafaunal in the megafaunal extinction, and that the able Holocene LADs for ground sloths, a remains are associated with prehistoric loss was attributable principally to a cli- large number of Holocene dates gener- human occupations (see Borrero et al., matic cause (Ficcarelli et al., 2003; Gray- ated through direct dating of bone and 1998; Politis et al., 2004 for detailed son & Meltzer, 2003, 2004; Barnosky dung remains are indeed available in the descriptions). Arroyo Seco 2 is inter- et al., 2004; De Vivo & Carmignotto, literature. Barnosky et al. (2004; sup- preted as a base camp where a large 2004; Boeskorov, 2006; Guthrie, 2006; porting material) revised the radiocarbon variety of activities were undertaken Wroe et al., 2006; Wroe & Field, 2006). dates available for megafaunal remains (Politis et al., 2004), including the Here we contest the position of Stead- throughout the world. In South America, exploitation of ground sloths and other man et al. (2005), who favour the overkill they listed four articles with remains of megafauna by humans. However, Borr- hypothesis to explain the ground sloth megafauna dated within the Holocene, ero et al. (1998) and Politis et al. (2004) extinction in the Americas. Although based both on direct and indirect dates. do not state clearly if the two specimens making an important contribution to the Even when considering only the results (M. americanum and Equus neogeus Lund) debate on extinction of the New World based on direct dates of bone remains, that dated to the Holocene (Table 1) megafauna, Steadman et al. (2005) make sufficient evidence still supports Holocene showed marks of human manipulation. some important assumptions in their LADs for subequatorial ground sloths. The remaining open-air sites are believed analysis. For instance, from Argentina, Borrero to be sites used for specific activities Steadman et al. (2005) argue that the et al. (1998) presented a total of seven 14C (Politis et al., 2004): La Moderna is extinction of ground sloths in the New dates consistent with a Holocene survival of interpreted as an occasional megafaunal 1642 www.blackwellpublishing.com/jbi ª 2007 The Authors doi:10.1111/j.1365-2699.2007.01744.x Journal compilation ª 2007 Blackwell Publishing Ltd ª Journal of Biogeography 2007 The Authors. Journal compilation Table 1 Late Pleistocene⁄Early Holocene radiocarbon dates obtained for South American megafaunal specimens. Two sigma Laboratory calibration Taxa Sample Site Country number Age (yr BP) (cal. BP) Technique References 34 Scelidodon chiliensis Bone Pampa de los Fo´ siles Peru GIF-4116 8910 Æ 200 c. 9780–10,150 ? Marshall et al. (1984) , 1642–1646 Smilodon populator (Lund) Bone Escrivaˆnia 5 Brazil BETA-174722 9260 Æ 150 c. 10,260–10,480 AMS Neves & Pilo´ (2003) Catonyx cuvieri Bone Gruta Cuvieri Brazil BETA-165398 9990 Æ 40 c. 11,320–11,600 AMS Neves & Pilo´ (2003) Equus neogeus Bone Arroyo Seco 2 Argentina TO-1504 8890 Æ 90 c. 9740–10,150 AMS Borrero et al. (1998) Megatherium americanum Bone Arroyo Seco 2 Argentina LP-53 8390 Æ 240 c. 9290–9440 Standart Borrero et al. (1998) Megatherium americanum Bone Arroyo Seco 2 Argentina TO-1506 7320 Æ 50* c. 8020–8160 AMS Borrero et al. (1998) ª 2007 Blackwell Publishing Ltd Megatherium americanum Bone Arroyo Seco 2 Argentina CAMS-58182 12,200 Æ 170* c. 13,980–14,140 AMS Politis et al. (2004) Doedicurus clavicaudatus Bone La Moderna Argentina BETA-7824 6555 Æ 160 à c. 7330–7470 Standart Borrero et al. (1998) Doedicurus clavicaudatus Bone La Moderna Argentina TO-1507-1 7010 Æ 100 c. 7700–7840 AMS Borrero et al. (1998) Doedicurus clavicaudatus Bone La Moderna Argentina TO-1507-2 7510 Æ 370 c. 8200–8340 AMS Borrero et al. (1998) Doedicurus clavicaudatus Bone La Moderna Argentina TO-2610 7460 Æ 80 c. 8180–8320 AMS Borrero et al. (1998) Megatherium americanum Bone Campo Laborde Argentina AA-55118 8080 Æ 200 c. 8780–9010 AMS Politis et al. (2004) Megatherium americanum Bone Campo Laborde Argentina AA-55117 7750 Æ 250 c. 8420–8540 AMS Politis et al. (2004) Sloth Dung Gruta del Indio Argentina LP-925 8990 Æ 90 c. 9920–10,190 ? Garcia (2003) Sloth Bone Gruta del Indio Argentina GrN-5772 9560 Æ 90 c. 10,680–10,860 Standart Long et al. (1998) Megafauna Bone Paso Otero 5 Argentina AA-19291 10,190 Æ 120 c. 11,820–12,020 AMS Politis et al. (2004) *Dates obtained from one single specimen. Considered problematic by Politis et al. (2004) due to the difference observed between the dates obtained. Dates obtained from one single specimen. àConsidered problematic by Borrero et al. (1998). reject the datescribed here, of there 8990 radiocarbon is dates no for further megafauna reason are to des- material] the accepted LADs] [Supplementary1000 online years younger thansion means and of they anydates [of found in theirerror). bibliographical revi- These weredate, but the it onlyas has unreliable Holocene a (they veryial) also disqualified large two rejected other margin Holocene a dates of third cuvieri megafauna species found somegafauna far is and othertioned as animals. natural traps Thecave for where only the now threeregion extinct vertical of chambers Lagoalocated Santa. func- in Gruta Cuvieri limestoneassociated is with caves human a occupations, in andexclusively are palaeontological, the i.e. they karstic are not and processing site forOtero local 5, megafauna. was also identified as a hunting ered, datedhuman to skeleton was 7650 alsobers recently (Escriva recov- animal fossil bones, inat one Lagoa of the Santa.aeontological cham- Together limestone with outcrops known nia, tons representing of onecaves, of generically the referred richest toEscriva pal- as Escriva of the chambers. The otherground Brazilian sloths, site, found at theTable surface of 1 one was obtainedsloth. from one The of these Holocene date presented in This site is aGarcia, rockshelter, and 2003 although it fordel detailed Indio descriptions). (Fig.dates 1; are from see an Argentinean Long 1998 site, Gruta Steadman the region ( of human interaction with the megafaunasites in in the region haveCupisnique revealed no evidence Desert.