- •Preface
- •Contents
- •Contributors
- •1 Introduction: Azokh Cave and the Transcaucasian Corridor
- •Abstract
- •Introduction
- •History of Excavations at Azokh Caves
- •Excavations 1960–1988
- •Excavations 2002–2009
- •Field Seasons
- •2002 (23rd August–19th September)
- •2003 (4th–31st August)
- •2004 (28th July–6th August)
- •2005 (26th July–12th August)
- •2006 (30th July–23rd August)
- •2007 (9th July–4th August)
- •2008 (8th July–14th August)
- •2009 (17th July–12th August)
- •Correlating Huseinov’s Layers to Our Units
- •Chapters of This Book
- •Acknowledgments
- •References
- •Abstract
- •Introduction
- •Azokh 1
- •Sediment Sequence 1
- •Sediment Sequence 2
- •Discussion on the Stratigraphy of Azokh 1
- •Azokh 2
- •Azokh 5
- •Discussion on the Stratigraphy of Azokh 5
- •Conclusions
- •Acknowledgments
- •References
- •3 Geology and Geomorphology of Azokh Caves
- •Abstract
- •Introduction
- •Geological Background
- •Geomorphology of Azokh Cave
- •Results of the Topographic Survey
- •Azokh 1: Main Entrance Passageway
- •Azokh 2, 3 and 4: Blind Passages
- •Azokh 5: A Recently Discovered Connection to the Inner Chambers
- •Azokh 6: Vacas Passageway
- •Azokh I: The Stalagmite Gallery
- •Azokh II: The Sugar-Mound Gallery
- •Azokh III: The Apron Gallery
- •Azokh IV: The Hall Gallery
- •Results of the Geophysical Survey
- •Discussion
- •Conclusions
- •Acknowledgments
- •References
- •4 Lithic Assemblages Recovered from Azokh 1
- •Abstract
- •Introduction
- •Methods of Analysis
- •Results
- •Unit Vm: Lithic Assemblage
- •Unit III: Lithic Assemblage
- •Unit II: Lithic Assemblage
- •Post-Depositional Evidence
- •Discussion of the Lithic Assemblages
- •Comparison of Assemblages from the Earlier and Current Excavations
- •Chronology
- •Conclusions
- •Acknowledgements
- •References
- •5 Azokh Cave Hominin Remains
- •Abstract
- •Introduction
- •Hominin Mandibular Fragment from Azokh 1
- •Discussion of Early Work on the Azokh Mandible
- •New Assessment of the Azokh Mandibular Remains Based on a Replica of the Specimen
- •Discussion, Azokh Mandible
- •Neanderthal Remains from Azokh 1
- •Description of the Isolated Tooth from Azokh Cave (E52-no. 69)
- •Hominin Remains from Azokh 2
- •Human Remains from Azokh 5
- •Conclusions
- •Acknowledgements
- •References
- •6 The New Material of Large Mammals from Azokh and Comments on the Older Collections
- •Abstract
- •Introduction
- •Materials and Methods
- •General Discussion and Conclusions
- •Acknowledgements
- •References
- •7 Rodents, Lagomorphs and Insectivores from Azokh Cave
- •Abstract
- •Introduction
- •Materials and Methods
- •Results
- •Unit Vm
- •Unit Vu
- •Unit III
- •Unit II
- •Unit I
- •Discussion
- •Conclusions
- •Acknowledgments
- •8 Bats from Azokh Caves
- •Abstract
- •Introduction
- •Materials and Methods
- •Results
- •Discussion
- •Conclusions
- •Acknowledgements
- •References
- •9 Amphibians and Squamate Reptiles from Azokh 1
- •Abstract
- •Introduction
- •Materials and Methods
- •Systematic Descriptions
- •Paleobiogeographical Data
- •Conclusions
- •Acknowledgements
- •References
- •10 Taphonomy and Site Formation of Azokh 1
- •Abstract
- •Introduction
- •Taphonomic Agents
- •Materials and Methods
- •Shape, Size and Fracture
- •Surface Modification Related to Breakage
- •Tool-Induced Surface Modifications
- •Tooth Marks
- •Other Surface Modifications
- •Histology
- •Results
- •Skeletal Element Representation
- •Fossil Size, Shape and Density
- •Surface Modifications
- •Discussion
- •Presence of Humans in Azokh 1 Cave
- •Carnivore Damage
- •Post-Depositional Damage
- •Acknowledgements
- •Supplementary Information
- •References
- •11 Bone Diagenesis at Azokh Caves
- •Abstract
- •Introduction
- •Porosity as a Diagenetic Indicator
- •Bone Diagenesis at Azokh Caves
- •Materials Analyzed
- •Methods
- •Diagenetic Parameters
- •% ‘Collagen’
- •Results and Discussion
- •Azokh 1 Units II–III
- •Azokh 1 Unit Vm
- •Azokh 2
- •Prospects for Molecular Preservation
- •Conclusions
- •Acknowledgements
- •References
- •12 Coprolites, Paleogenomics and Bone Content Analysis
- •Abstract
- •Introduction
- •Materials and Methods
- •Coprolite/Scat Morphometry
- •Bone Observations
- •Chemical Analysis of the Coprolites
- •Paleogenetics and Paleogenomics
- •Results
- •Bone and Coprolite Morphometry
- •Paleogenetic Analysis of the Coprolite
- •Discussion
- •Bone and Coprolite Morphometry
- •Chemical Analyses of the Coprolites
- •Conclusions
- •Acknowledgements
- •References
- •13 Palaeoenvironmental Context of Coprolites and Plant Microfossils from Unit II. Azokh 1
- •Abstract
- •Introduction
- •Environment Around the Cave
- •Materials and Methods
- •Pollen, Phytolith and Diatom Extraction
- •Criteria for the Identification of Phytolith Types
- •Results
- •Diatoms
- •Phytoliths
- •Pollen and Other Microfossils
- •Discussion
- •Conclusions
- •Acknowledgments
- •References
- •14 Charcoal Remains from Azokh 1 Cave: Preliminary Results
- •Abstract
- •Introduction
- •Materials and Methods
- •Results
- •Conclusions
- •Acknowledgments
- •References
- •15 Paleoecology of Azokh 1
- •Abstract
- •Introduction
- •Materials and Methods
- •Habitat Weightings
- •Calculation of Taxonomic Habitat Index (THI)
- •Faunal Bias
- •Results
- •Taphonomy
- •Paleoecology
- •Discussion
- •Evidence for Woodland
- •Evidence for Steppe
- •Conclusions
- •Acknowledgments
- •Species List Tables
- •References
- •16 Appendix: Dating Methods Applied to Azokh Cave Sites
- •Abstract
- •Radiocarbon
- •Uranium Series
- •Amino-acid Racemization
- •Radiocarbon Dating of Samples from the Azokh Cave Complex (Peter Ditchfield)
- •Pretreatment and Measurement
- •Calibration
- •Results and Discussion
- •Introduction
- •Material and Methods
- •Results
- •Conclusions
- •Introduction
- •Laser-ablation Pre-screening
- •Sample Preparation and Measurement
- •Results
- •Conclusions
- •References
- •Index
Chapter 12
Coprolites, Paleogenomics and Bone Content Analysis
E. Andrew Bennett, Olivier Gorgé, Thierry Grange, Yolanda Fernández-Jalvo, and Eva-Maria Geigl
Abstract Coprolites are fossil scats and provide indirect |
травоядных и плотоядных, как это наблюдается в |
|||||||||||||
witness of the activity of past animals of a given area, whether |
плио-плейстоценовой стоянке Летоли (Танзания). Наибо- |
|||||||||||||
or not fossil bones of these animals are present in the site. The |
лее часто, однако, встречаются копролиты плотоядных |
|||||||||||||
shape, size, inclusions and geoand bio-chemical composition |
(среди них, главным образом, гиен), чем травоядных. |
|||||||||||||
are criteria for identification of the animal that left the |
Первые грызут и поедают кости, включая тем самым |
|||||||||||||
coprolite. Unit II from Azokh 1 has yielded two complete |
фосфат кальция в органические остатки фекалий, в то |
|||||||||||||
undamaged coprolites one of which contained partially |
время как последние поедают растительные волокна и |
|||||||||||||
digested fossil bones. Taphonomic and taxonomic indications |
семена, которые разлагаются намного легче. Форма, |
|||||||||||||
from this coprolite could not conclusively identify the origin |
размер, включения, гео- и биохимический состав |
|||||||||||||
of the coprolites. Analysis of targeted mitochondrial DNA, |
являются основными критериями для идентификации |
|||||||||||||
performed on one of the coprolites, has provided evidence for |
животного, оставившего эти фекалии. В подразделении II |
|||||||||||||
the presence of hyena DNA, but this finding was not supported |
из Азох 1 найдены два неповрежденных копролита. |
|||||||||||||
by further investigation using next-generation high through- |
Тафономические и таксономические признаки не были |
|||||||||||||
put sequencing. The most parsimonious interpretation of the |
достаточно убедительными для надежного установления |
|||||||||||||
results of the genetic analyses is that the highly sensitive PCR |
их происхождения. При проведении сайт-специфичной |
|||||||||||||
assay reveals contamination of the coprolite with minute |
реакции полимеразной цепи (РПЦ) в одном из копролитов |
|||||||||||||
amounts of modern brown hyena DNA presumably originat- |
обнаружены |
последовательности |
митохондриальной |
|||||||||||
ing from brown hyena scats sampled recently in South Africa. |
ДНК бурой гиены (Hyaena brunnea). Последующее |
|||||||||||||
|
|
секвенирование не выявило значительного присутствия |
||||||||||||
Резюме Следы активности травоядных и плотоядных |
эндогенной ДНК хищника; в основном были найдены |
|||||||||||||
животных главным образом распознаются по отпечаткам |
бактериальные |
|
последовательности |
со |
следами |
|||||||||
конечностей и экскрементам. Стоянки с хорошей |
человеческой ДНК – возможно, по причине контами- |
|||||||||||||
сохранностью древних останков могут содержать копро- |
нации. Наибоее простым объяснением результатов генети- |
|||||||||||||
литы (окаменелые экскременты животных) и следы троп |
ческогоанализаявляется то, чточувствительный методРПЦ |
|||||||||||||
|
|
идентифицирует |
контаминацию |
копролитов |
ничтожно |
|||||||||
|
|
малым количеством ДНК бурой гиены, привнесенным, |
||||||||||||
E.A. Bennett O. Gorgé T. Grange E.-M. Geigl (&) |
возможно, из |
современных |
экскрементов |
данного вида, |
||||||||||
собранных в Южной Африке. Высокопроизводительное |
||||||||||||||
Institut Jacques Monod. Laboratoire “Epigénome et |
||||||||||||||
Paléogénome”, 15, Rue Hélène Brion, 75013 Paris, France |
секвенирование не обнаружило эндогенной ДНК хищника. |
|||||||||||||
e-mail: eva-maria.geigl@ijm.fr |
В целом, несохранность эндогенной ДНК характерна для |
|||||||||||||
E.A. Bennett |
||||||||||||||
всех биологических |
останков |
в |
Азохской |
пещере, |
||||||||||
e-mail: Andrew.BENNETT@ijm.fr |
проанализированных до настоящего времени, поскольку |
|||||||||||||
O. Gorgé |
||||||||||||||
мы не смогли найти данный субстрат и в многочисленных |
||||||||||||||
e-mail: gorge.olivier@ijm.univ-paris-diderot.fr |
костях пещерного медведя. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||
T. Grange |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
e-mail: thierry.grange@ijm.fr |
Keywords Fossil scats |
Taphonomy |
Lesser Caucasus |
|
||||||||||
Y. Fernández-Jalvo (&) |
|
|||||||||||||
Ancient DNA |
|
Paleogenetics |
Diffraction |
|
Fluorescence |
|||||||||
Museo Nacional de Ciencias Naturales (CSIC), José Gutiérrez |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
Abascal, 2, 28006 Madrid, Spain |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
e-mail: yfj@mncn.csic.es
© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016 |
271 |
Yolanda Fernández-Jalvo et al. (eds.), Azokh Cave and the Transcaucasian Corridor,
Vertebrate Paleobiology and Paleoanthropology, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-24924-7_12