Santander, February 19th-22nd 2008 - Aranzadi

186
GREG CAMPBELL
Using measurements in the plane of commissure
in preference to maximum external dimensions
is recommended for oysters because they
are more precisely correlated, consistently related
to features of the shell, better preserved in
archaeological shells and the same for either left or
right valve.
Since the ‘oval’ and ‘round’ archaeological
shells also differed significantly in shell shape and
hinge shape, they were genuinely different morphotypes.
Since such differences seem to be ecophenotypic,
it also seems probable that the
archaeological morphotypes grew in different
types of bed. The growth-steps in the oval oysters,
showing they likely were moved from a range of
growth conditions to a single habitat during life,
probably indicated Roman oyster management.
7. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Thanks to Ben Ford at Oxford Archaeology, the
excavation director, for permission to discuss the
archaeological material, and to Dr. Sue Jones at
WEMS and Nick Harvey at Havant Borough
Council for supplying samples of modern oysters.
Thanks also to the referees, whose comments greatly
improved this paper.
8. BIBLIOGRAPHY
BUCHANAN, W. F.
1985 “Middens and mussels, an archaeological enquiry”, South
African Journal of Science, 81: 15–16.
CAMPBELL, G.
2008 “Beyond means to meaning: using distributions of shell
shapes to reconstruct past collecting strategies”,
Environmental Archaeology, 13: 111–121.
CARVAJAL-RODRIGUEZ, A., CONDE-PADIN, P. & ROLAN-ALVA-
REZ, E.
2005 “Decomposing shell form into size and shape by geometric
morphometric methods in two sympartic ecotypes of Littorina
saxatilis”, Journal of Molluscan Studies, 71: 313–318.
DYER, K. R.
1971 “The distribution and movement of sediment in the Solent,
southern England”. Marine Geology, 11: 175–197.
1980 “Sedimentation and sediment transport”. In The Solent
Estuarine System: An Assessment of Present Knowledge
(NERC Publications Series C, 22): 20–24.
FRANC, A.
1960 “Classe des Bivalves”. In: Grassé, P. P. (Ed.): Traité de
Zoologie V, 2: Bryozoaires, Chétognathes, Pogonophores,
Mollusques (Généralités, Aplacophores, Polyplacophores,
Monoplacophores, Bivalves). Masson, Paris: 1185–2164.
GALTSOFF, P. S.
1964 The American Oyster Crassostrea virginica Gmelin.
Fishery Bulletin of the Fish and Wildlife Service 64. Fish
and Wildlife Service, Washington, D. C.
GUNTER, G.
1938 “Comments on the shape, growth and quality of the
American oyster”. Science, 88, 546–547.
1950 “The generic status of living oysters and the scientific
name of the common American species”. American
Midland Naturalist, 43: 438–449.
HARRY, H. W.
1985 “Synopsis of the supraspecific classification of living oysters
(Bivalvia, Gryphaeidae and Ostreidae)”. Veliger, 28:
121–158.
HAUTMANN, M.
2004 “Early Mesozoic evolution of alivincular bivalve ligaments
and its implications for the timing of the ‘Mesozoic marine
revolution’”. Lethaia, 37: 65–172.
JAMES, T. B.
1997 English Heritage Book of Winchester. Batsford, London.
KENT, B. W.
1992 Making Dead Oysters Talk: Techniques for Analyzing
Oysters from Archaeological Sites. Maryland Historical
Trust, Crownsville, Maryland.
McDONALD, J. H., SEED, R. & KOEHN, R. K.
1991 “Allozymes and morphometric characters of three species
of Mytilus in the northern and southern Hemispheres”.
Marine Biology, 111: 323–333.
SEED, R.
1980 “Shell growth and form in the Bivalvia”. In: Rhoads, D. C.
& Lutz, R. A. (Eds.): Skeletal Growth of Aquatic
Organisms: Biological Records of Environmental Change.
Plenum, New York: 23–67.
SEILACHER, A., MATYJA, B. A. & WIERZBOWSKI, A.
1985 “Oyster beds: morphologic response to changing substrate
conditions”. In: Sielacher, A. & Bayer, U. (Eds.):
Lecture Notes in Earth Sciences 1: Sedimentary and
Evolutionary Cycles. Springer-Verlag, Berlin: 421–435.
SOKAL, R. R. & ROLPH, F. J.
1995 Biometry: The Principles and Practice of Statistics in
Biological Research. Freeman, New York.
STENZEL, H. B.
1971 “Oysters”. In: Moore, R. C. (Ed.), Treatise on Invertebrate
Palaeontology Part N(3): Mollusca 6 (Bivalvia). Geological
Society of America, Lawrence, Kansas: 953–1218.
TEBBLE, N.
1966 British Bivalve Seashells: A Handbook for Identification.
British Museum (Natural History), London.
TRUEMAN, E. R.
1951 “The structure, development and operation of the hinge
ligament of Ostrea edulis”. Quarterly Journal of
Microscopical Science, 92: 129–140.
MUNIBE Suplemento - Gehigarria 31, 2010
S.C. Aranzadi. Z.E. Donostia/San Sebastián