Shape as an outcome of formation history: Terrestrial Laser Scanning of shell mounds from far north Queensland, Australia

Larsen, BP; Holdaway, Simon; Fanning, Patricia; Mackrell, Timothy; Shiner, J. S.

doi:10.1016/j.quaint.2015.06.066

Cited by 23 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To date, only the Wathayn study has produced the combinations of data sets needed from mounds in Albatross Bay to understand the history of mound deposition and subsequent transformation. In this study, terrestrial LiDAR scans of mounds were used to understand shape and symmetry of mounds (Larsen et al 2017). Results were related to radiocarbon determinations from mounds together with the results of geochemical analyses (Fanning et al 2018), and shell mound sediment and shell fragmentation analyses (Allely et al submitted).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Six shell mounds in the northern extent of the Central area were selected for terrestrial LiDAR scanning in order to determine the feasibility of using this technique at Kwokkunum and to determine mound size and shape following the methods discussed by Larsen et al (2017). Data obtained from these mounds also permitted comparison with dimensions obtained from airborne LiDAR (see below).…”

Section: Terrestrial Lidarmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Further development of the method is required to determine if shallow mounds such as those identified elsewhere in Cape York Peninsula may be detected (e.g. Larsen et al 2017). The use of aerial data does, however, provide a more expedient way to calculate the metrics for mounds compared to terrestrial laser scanning.…”

Section: Characterising Mound Morphology Using Terrestrial and Airbormentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Estimates of shell mound size were previously made using measurements and mathematical equations (e.g. Bailey 1994), however, precise measurements of surface area and volume were largely lacking until the recent availability of LiDAR and photogrammetry technologies (Larsen et al 2017); therefore much research remains to document the form and extent of these archaeological features.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Preliminary archaeological survey and remote-sensing of shell mounds at Kwokkunum, Albatross Bay, Cape York Peninsula, Australia

Emmitt

Allely

Davies

et al. 2020

QAR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Shell mounds are a prominent part of the Cape York Peninsula archaeological record. A short period of fieldwork allowed initial assessment of their presence, size, and shape in the Kwokkunum region, Albatross Bay. Shell mounds found in this area vary in size with some examples amongst the largest found in the Cape York Peninsula. Comparison of terrestrial and airborne LiDAR data suggests that shell mounds in areas like Kwokkunum may be identified remotely where mound slopes exceed 5-10°. However, vegetation provides significant challenges for shell mound recording and vegetation on the mounds impacts on their form and preservation. Some of the challenges the largest mounds pose for investigation are reviewed.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Terrestrial Lidarmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Characterising Mound Morphology Using Terrestrial and Airbormentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Preliminary archaeological survey and remote-sensing of shell mounds at Kwokkunum, Albatross Bay, Cape York Peninsula, Australia

Emmitt

Allely

Davies

et al. 2020

QAR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The earliest sites are the large spectacular shell mounds for which Weipa archaeology has been justly famous since the 1960s (cf. Bailey 1975Bailey , 1999Bailey et al 1994;Fanning et al accepted;Larsen et al 2015;Morrison 2003Morrison , 2010Morrison , 2014Shiner et al 2013). Recently, however, there has been a switch to a more inclusive view of the overall archaeology found in the landscape, including surface distributions of stone artefacts, scarred trees, low-lying shell middens, earth mounds and historical remains associated with the pastoral industry and missions established since contact (Shiner & Morrison 2009).…”

Section: Weipa Archaeologymentioning

confidence: 99%

New dates for earth mounds at Weipa, North Queensland, Australia

Brockwell

Foghlú

Fenner

et al. 2016

Archaeology in Oceania

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper reports new radiocarbon determinations for late Holocene occupation in the Weipa region of Far North Queensland, Australia. Earth mounds along the margins of small wetlands and freshwater creeks developed mainly after 2200 years ago, but are concentrated within the past 500 years. Their establishment appears to be associated with changing environmental conditions and a regional increase in the availability of permanent water sources around 2200 and 500 years ago. These results have implications for earth mound chronology and possibly climate change understanding elsewhere in Northern Australia.

show abstract

Creating volume estimates for buried shell deposits: A comparative experimental case study using ground‐penetrating radar (GPR) and electrical resistivity under varying soil conditions

Kenady

Lowe

Ridd

et al. 2018

Archaeological Prospection

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sampling issues represent a persistent problem in shell matrix research, particularly for large shell deposits. When small samples are taken from large buried deposits it is almost impossible, under current research practices, to understand how representative that sample is of the overall deposit. This case study tests a novel method for creating a better understanding of the buried deposits from which excavated samples are taken, thereby allowing for improved sampling strategies and a better understanding of how representative those samples are of the overall site. The case study employs two geophysical survey methods, ground‐penetrating radar (GPR) and electrical resistivity, to investigate buried shell deposits under experimental conditions. The survey results were used to create volume estimations and three‐dimensional (3D) models of buried shell deposits. This method is novel to shell matrix research and the current case study was designed to test the viability of the method under differing conditions. As well as testing the two geophysical methods, surveys were conducted under different moisture levels, soil types and survey transect spacings. Results showed that the 3D models and volume estimates of the deposit were successful in creating a representative understanding of the nature of the buried deposit, but with varying degrees of accuracy. GPR results created more accurate volume estimates and 3D models than the electrical resistivity results. Both geophysical methods produced more accurate results under drier conditions, though the electrical resistivity produced more visually distinct results with higher moisture levels. Analysis of the volume results revealed an error margin (to a confidence level of 95%) of 9.5% ± 15.5% for the GPR, and 44.5% ± 31.5% to 56 ± 70.5% for the electrical resistivity, depending on the interpretation method used to create the models.

show abstract

Shape as an outcome of formation history: Terrestrial Laser Scanning of shell mounds from far north Queensland, Australia

Cited by 23 publications

References 17 publications

Preliminary archaeological survey and remote-sensing of shell mounds at Kwokkunum, Albatross Bay, Cape York Peninsula, Australia

Preliminary archaeological survey and remote-sensing of shell mounds at Kwokkunum, Albatross Bay, Cape York Peninsula, Australia

New dates for earth mounds at Weipa, North Queensland, Australia

Creating volume estimates for buried shell deposits: A comparative experimental case study using ground‐penetrating radar (GPR) and electrical resistivity under varying soil conditions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About