Ye Pleasant Mount: 1989 1990 Excavations - Open site which ...

specimens that have been studied by these institutions to produce the allometric values in
Table 1.
There are inherent problems with biomass as well. The most apparent is that
archeological bone weight is affected by a wide range of factors that can skew the biomass
calculation (i.e., alterations occurring to the bone during processing for food or other uses
and during archeological deposition). Further, just as MNI emphasizes small species,
biomass emphasizes larger species by focusing attention on weight.
Sample size biases can affect both MNI and biomass calculations. Some researchers
have suggested that a sample of at least 200 individuals (MNI) or at least 1400 identifiable
bone fragments is necessary for reliable interpretations of a faunal assemblage (Grayson
1981; Wing and Brown 1979). Smaller samples may suggest inaccurate interpretations of
the composition of taxa at a site. A certain taxon that may appear abundant in a small
sample may in actuality be less significant when a larger sample from the same site is
examined. Grayson (1984:129) showed that the apparent taxonomic abundance ofa species
in a faunal assemblage may be more a function of sample size than actual population size
and site utilization.
In recent years paleontologists, zooarcheologists, and archeologists have been paying
more attention to site formation process that affect bone as it enters the archeological or
paleontological record. Taphonomy, "the science of the laws of embedding" as first
discussed by Efremov (1940), has become an important methodology for consideration in
studying vertebrate fauna. Several researchers have written about the influence of
taphonomic process on archeological bone (Behrensmeyer and Hill 1980; Binford 1981;
Brain 1981; and Gifford 1978).
Many human and non-human influences affect pre-and post-depositional bone.
Before deposition, butchering practices and other food processing and cooking methods,
can alter the original shape and chemical composition of the bone. Bone that has been
cooked, smoked, or chemically treated may be weakened by these processes and made
more susceptible to decomposition. Disposal habits can further alter the bone assemblage
recovered from a site. Not all bones that are butchered enter the ground simultaneously
and once the bones are discarded they may be trampled by humans and other animals.
Plowing, exposure to the sun, and other weathering forces such as the pH level of the soil
continue the differential dispersal and decomposition of the bone. Gnawing by rodents and
carnivores is another factor to consider in examining bone depositional processes. For sites
containing large amounts of shell, the calcium in the shell serves as a medium that helps
to preserve bone. The density of the bone itself is also an important criterion in bone
preservation (Grayson 1984:25). Teeth, metapodials, and phalanges often preserve better
because they are small, dense bones (Lyman 1985). It is also important to recognize that
many bones that enter the archeological record do not represent food activities. Some
bone results from fur exploitation, hide tanning or bone working. Exposed garbage,
3