Pre-Clovis Lithic Technology at the Debra L. Friedkin Site, Texas: Comparisons to Clovis through Site-Level Behavior, Technological Trait-List, and Cladistic Analyses

Jennings, Thomas A.; Waters, Michael R.

doi:10.7183/0002-7316.79.1.25

Cited by 52 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 45 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our analyses of the archaeological equivalent of laboratory generated lineages of "model artifacts," thus support the use of phylogenetic methods in obtaining important evolutionary information in the case of archaeological data where such historical information would be totally unknown a priori (e.g., Harmon et al, 2006;Buchanan and Collard, 2008;Cochrane, 2008Cochrane, , 2013Riede, 2008;Jordan and O'Neill, 2010;Tehrani, 2011;Jennings and Waters, 2014;O'Brien et al, 2014;Jordan, 2015;Prentiss et al, 2015).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 63%

“…Several accessible introductions to cladistic methodology are now available that explain specific aspects of the method in greater detail (e.g., Kitching et al, 1998;Lipscomb, 1998;McLennan and Brooks, 2001), including some written specifically with archaeologists in mind (e.g., O'Brien et al, 2001;O'Brien and Lyman, 2003). Such methods have been used in a range of artifact-focused studies within the last few years (e.g., Harmon et al, 2006;Lycett, 2007;Buchanan and Collard, 2008;Cochrane, 2008Cochrane, , 2013Jordan and O'Neill, 2010;Tehrani et al, 2010;Tehrani, 2011;Jennings and Waters, 2014;O'Brien et al, 2014;Jordan, 2015;Prentiss et al, 2015).…”

Section: Phylogenetic Reconstruction Via Parsimonymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As we have noted, in recent years a range of techniques and methods drawn from evolutionary biology, including phylogenetic methods and population genetic models, have been applied to artifactual datasets to examine evolutionary questions. Phylogenetic analyses are one means of examining potential genealogical relationships between artifacts and assemblages based on their observable (i.e., physical) properties and attributes (e.g., O'Brien et al, 2001;Jordan and Shennan, 2003;Harmon et al, 2006;Lycett, 2007;Buchanan and Collard, 2008;Cochrane, 2008Cochrane, , 2013Riede, 2008;Jordan and O'Neill, 2010;Tehrani, 2011;Jennings and Waters, 2014;Jordan, 2015;Prentiss et al, 2015;Mendoza-Straffon, 2016). …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Copying error, evolution, and phylogenetic signal in artifactual traditions: An experimental approach using “model artifacts”

Schillinger

Mesoudi

Lycett

2016

Journal of Archaeological Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Spatio-temporal patterns of artifactual variation are increasingly being studied via the explicit application of cultural evolutionary theory and methods. Such broad-scale (macroevolutionary) patterns are mediated, however, by a series of small-scale (microevolutionary) processes that occur at the level of individual artifacts, and individual artifact users and producers. Within experimental biology, "model organisms" have played a crucial role in understanding the role of fundamental microevolutionary processes, such as mutation and the inheritance of variation, in respect to macroevolutionary patterns. There has, however, been little equivalent laboratory work to better understand how microevolutionary processes influence macroevolutionary patterns in artifacts and their analysis. Here, we adopt a "model artifact" approach to experimentally study the issues of copy error (mutation) and resultant phylogenetic signal in artifact traditions. We used morphometric procedures to examine shape copying error rates in our "model artifacts." We first established experimentally that statistically different rates of copying error (mutation) could be induced when participants used two different types of shaping tool to produce copies of foam "artifacts." Using this as a baseline, we then tested whether these differing mutation rates led to differing phylogenetic signal and accuracy in two separate experimental transmission chains (lineages), involving participants copying the previous participant's artifact. The analysis demonstrated that phylogenetic reconstruction is more accurate in artifactual lineages where copying error is demonstrably lower. Such results demonstrate how fidelity of transmission impacts directly on the evolution of technological traditions and their empirical analysis. In particular, these results highlight that differing contexts of cultural transmission relating to fidelity might lead to differing patterns of resolution within reconstructed evolutionary sequences. Overall, these analyses demonstrate the importance of a "model artifact" approach in discussions of cultural evolution, equivalent in importance to the use of model organisms in evolutionary biology in order to better understand fundamental microevolutionary processes of direct relevance to macroevolutionary archaeological patterns.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 63%

Section: Phylogenetic Reconstruction Via Parsimonymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Copying error, evolution, and phylogenetic signal in artifactual traditions: An experimental approach using “model artifacts”

Schillinger

Mesoudi

Lycett

2016

Journal of Archaeological Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The Aubrey Clovis site in north Texas yielded two similar dates: 11,540 ± 110 and 11,590 ± 90 14 C yBP, averaging ∼11,565 14 C yBP (17). The Gault-Friedkin complex in central Texas may also be about the same age but the dating there has less precision (4,18,19).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…The fundamental characteristics of this earliest well-defined foraging group to occupy North America south of the glaciers remain unclear, however. The timing of their appearance, the geographical origins of their distinctive Clovis projectile points, and their subsistence base, are the subject of continued debate (1)(2)(3)(4)(5). Archaeological excavations at El Fin del Mundo in northwestern Mexico ( Fig.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Human (Clovis)–gomphothere (Cuvieroniussp.) association ∼13,390 calibrated yBP in Sonora, Mexico

Sánchez

Holliday

Gaines³

et al. 2014

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

131

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Significance Archaeological evidence from Sonora, Mexico, indicates that the earliest widespread and recognizable group of hunter-gatherers (“Clovis”) were in place ∼13,390 y ago in southwestern North America. This is the earliest well-documented population on the continent and suggests that the unique Clovis artifact style originated in the southwest or south central part of the continent, well south of the Arctic gateways into the continent. These hunters targeted gomphotheres, an elephant common in south and central North America, but unknown in association with humans or at this late age in North America.

show abstract

Cultural learning and the Clovis colonization of North America

O’Brien¹,

Buchanan

2017

Evolutionary Anthropology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The timing of the earliest colonization of North America is debatable, but what is not at issue is the point of origin of the early colonists: Humans entered the continent from Beringia and then made their way south along or near the Pacific Coast and/or through a corridor that ran between the Cordilleran and Laurentide ice sheets in western North America. At some point, they abandoned their Arctic-based tool complex for one more adapted to an entirely different environment. That new techno-complex is termed "Clovis"; its dispersal allows us to examine, at a fine scale, how colonization processes played out across a vast continent that at the time had, at best, a very small resident population. Clovis has figured prominently in American archeology since the first Clovis points were identified in eastern New Mexico in the 1930s. However, the successful marriage of learning models grounded in evolutionary theory and modern analytical methods that began roughly a decade ago has begun to pay significant dividends in terms of what we know about the rapid spread of human groups across the last sizable landmass to witness human occupation.

show abstract

Pre-Clovis Lithic Technology at the Debra L. Friedkin Site, Texas: Comparisons to Clovis through Site-Level Behavior, Technological Trait-List, and Cladistic Analyses

Cited by 52 publications

References 45 publications

Copying error, evolution, and phylogenetic signal in artifactual traditions: An experimental approach using “model artifacts”

Copying error, evolution, and phylogenetic signal in artifactual traditions: An experimental approach using “model artifacts”

Human (Clovis)–gomphothere (Cuvieroniussp.) association ∼13,390 calibrated yBP in Sonora, Mexico

Cultural learning and the Clovis colonization of North America

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About