Déjà vu: a reappraisal of the taphonomy of quarry VM4 of the Early Pleistocene site of Venta Micena (Baza Basin, SE Spain)

Abstract

Venta Micena, an Early Pleistocene site of the Baza Basin (SE Spain), preserves a rich and diverse assemblage of large mammals. VM3, the main excavation quarry of the site, has been interpreted as a den of the giant hyaena Pachycrocuta brevirostris in the plain that surrounded the Baza palaeolake. Taphonomic analysis of VM3 has shown that the hyaenas scavenged the prey previously hunted by the hypercarnivores, transported their remains to the communal den, and consumed the skeletal parts according to their marrow contents and mineral density. In a recent paper (Luzón et al. in Sci Rep 11:13977, 10.1038/s41598-021-93261-1, 2021), a small sample of remains unearthed from VM4, an excavation quarry ~ 350 m distant from VM3, is analysed. The authors indicate several differences in the taphonomic features of this assemblage with VM3, and even suggest that a different carnivore could have been the agent involved in the bone accumulation process. Here, we make a comparative analysis of both quarries and analyse more skeletal remains from VM4. Our results indicate that the assemblages are broadly similar in composition, except for slight differences in the frequency of megaherbivores, carnivores and equids according to NISP values (but not to MNI counts), the degree of bone weathering, and the intensity of bone processing by the hyaenas. Given that VM4 and VM3 were not coeval denning areas of P. brevirostris, these differences suggest that during the years when the skeletal remains were accumulated by the hyaenas at VM3, the rise of the water table of the Baza palaeolake that capped with limestone the bones was delayed compared to VM4, which resulted in their more in-depth consumption by the hyaenas.

Déjà vu: on the use of meat resources by sabretooth cats, hominins, and hyaenas in the Early Pleistocene site of Fuente Nueva 3 (Guadix-Baza Depression, SE Spain)

“…The fossil assemblages of BL and FN3 also preserve bones with carnivore modifications, which are less frequent than those of anthropogenic origin (Espigares et al 2019;Yravedra et al 2021). These tooth marks are similar in morphology, dimensions, and anatomical position to those recorded at quarry VM3 of Venta Micena, an Early Pleistocene site of Orce that has been definitively interpreted as a breeding den of the giant, short-faced hyaena Pachycrocuta brevirostris (Palmqvist et al 1996(Palmqvist et al , 2011(Palmqvist et al , 2022bArribas and Palmqvist 1998;Palmqvist and Arribas 2001;. For this reason, most tooth-marked bones of BL and FN3 were probably consumed by P. brevirostris, although some were apparently gnawed by porcupines (Espigares et al 2013(Espigares et al , 2019.…”

“…Additional insights on the role played by hominins and scavenging carnivores at FN3 can be retrieved from the analysis of the patterns of bone survival and their comparison with the hyaena den of VM3. Figure 3A and C show a direct relationship between the survival of skeletal remains and their mineral densities in FN3 (data from Espigares et al 2019) and VM3 (data from Palmqvist et al 2022b), respectively. While in FN3, there is considerable scatter around the regression line, which renders the relationship statistically non-significant (p = 0.137), in the case of VM3 there is a high level of statistical significance (p = 0.003).…”

“…Given that most tooth marks appear on diaphyseal bone shafts with a dense cortical surface, this suggests a large-sized carnivore like the hyaena P. brevirostris as the main biting agent (Espigares et al 2019). This is also suggested by the presence of notches on the bone edges resulting from bone crushing, a task not performed by living felids (Palmqvist et al 2022b), as well as by the resemblance between the tooth marks of FN3 and the hyaena den of VM3. However, the low frequency of tooth marks in FN3 (<3% of the remains in the upper archaeological level; Yravedra et al 2021) compared with VM3, where one-third of the remains are tooth-marked , suggests that carnivore activity at FN3 was limited compared to hominin activity (Espigares et al 2019).…”

“…It must be noted that the permanent premolar teeth of adult hyaenas are progressively blunted by bone cracking, which results in very wide tooth marks (Espigares 2010: fig. 7.117) or even in inconspicuous tooth marks if the hyaenas are very old and their premolars are heavily flattened (Arribas and Palmqvist 1998;Palmqvist et al 2022b). Moreover, the deciduous teeth of juvenile hyaenas are sharper, more feloid in shape than those of adults, so that their nibbling of bones results in abundant tooth marks, which can be unrecognized or misidentified with those left by small carnivores like jackals.…”

“…Many of the bones found at modern hyaena dens are tooth-marked (e.g., 29.0-53.5% in spotted hyaena dens, 22.1-100% in brown hyaena dens, and 6.0-56.2% in striped hyaena dens; Kuhn et al 2010). In the assemblage of VM3, tooth marks are found in 29.4% (1555/5288) of the remains (Palmqvist et al 2022b) and the original proportion of tooth-marked bones was in all probability higher because many limb bones that do not preserve tooth marks show fracture patterns that evidence their breakage in the fresh state by adult hyaenas for accessing their marrow contents (these anatomical portions were probably tooth-marked before being fractured and consumed). Moreover, although a significant portion of the tooth marks preserved in VM3 were most probably produced by the juvenile hyaenas, a minor implication of some small or medium-sized carnivore like the jackal-sized wolf Canis orcensis cannot be discarded (Martínez-Navarro et al 2021).…”