The California School of Midden Analysis represents a long-standing tradition of using weight, rather than minimum number of individuals (MNI), to analyze shell recovered from archaeological sites in California. This method originated at the University of California, Berkeley, in the early twentieth century and continues to the present, in spite of the advent of counting measures such as MNI and NISP (number of identified specimens) in faunal studies. We argue that MNI estimates are more reliable than weight as a measure of taxonomic abundance for most research issues being addressed with California shell data. Examples using both weight and MNI measures for shell from California coastal sites produced divergent results. This disparity shows that weight measures produce potentially misleading interpretations regarding the importance of marine habitats exploited and the diet of the site’s occupants.

No abstract

Glassow discusses several "problems" with the use of minimum number of individuals (MNI) in archaeological shellfish analysis, including the difficulty of identifying non-repetitive elements (NRE) to species level for several taxa. However, these problems, especially fragmentation, are more critical for the weight method than for MNI estimates. We have successfully identified thousands of NRE for all species common in southern California coastal archaeological sites. We also suggest that a measure, such as MNI, that provides estimates of numbers of individuals is a more reliable and valid measure with which to address most research questions. The weight method only provides a measure of the weight of some of the fragments from the shells of those individuals.

No abstract

No abstract