Search

The grey wolf (Canis lupus) was the first species to give rise to a domestic population, and they remained widespread throughout the last Ice Age when many other large mammal species went extinct. Little is known, however, about the history and possible extinction of past wolf populations or when and where the wolf progenitors of the present-day dog lineage (Canis familiaris) lived1–8. Here we analysed 72 ancient wolf genomes spanning the last 100,000 years from Europe, Siberia and North America. We found that wolf populations were highly connected throughout the Late Pleistocene, with levels of differentiation an order of magnitude lower than they are today. This population connectivity allowed us to detect natural selection across the time series, including rapid fixation of mutations in the gene IFT88 40,000–30,000 years ago. We show that dogs are overall more closely related to ancient wolves from eastern Eurasia than to those from western Eurasia, suggesting a domestication process in the east. However, we also found that dogs in the Near East and Africa derive up to half of their ancestry from a distinct population related to modern southwest Eurasian wolves, reflecting either an independent domestication process or admixture from local wolves. None of the analysed ancient wolf genomes is a direct match for either of these dog ancestries, meaning that the exact progenitor populations remain to be located. © 2022, The Author(s). 8028-00005B; IP DKRVO 2019-2023, MK000094862; 220457/Z/20/Z, ERC-2013-StG-337574-UNDEAD, ERC-2019-StG-853272-PALAEOFARM; 075-15-2021-1069; European Molecular Biology Organization, EMBO: 217223/Z/19/Z; Vallee Foundation; Velux Fonden; Wellcome Trust, WT; Francis Crick Institute, FCI: FC001595; Horizon 2020 Framework Programme, H2020: 796877; Medical Research Council, MRC; Natural Environment Research Council, NERC: 210119/Z/18/Z, NE/K003259/1, NE/K005243/1, NE/S00078X/1, NE/S007067/1; Cancer Research UK, CRUK; European Research Council, ERC: 852558; Grantová Agentura České Republiky, GA ČR: 15-06446S; Svenska Forskningsrådet Formas: 2018-01640; Knut och Alice Wallenbergs Stiftelse; Vetenskapsrådet, VR: 681396, BELSPO B2/191/P2/ICHIE; Russian Science Foundation, RSF: 16-18-10265-RNF, 20-17-00033, 21-18-00457-RNF, 310763; Science for Life Laboratory, SciLifeLab; Narodowa Agencja Wymiany Akademickiej, NAWA: PPN/PPO/2018/1/00037 This work was supported by grants to P. Skoglund from the European Research Council (grant no. 852558), the Erik Philip Sörensen Foundation and the Science for Life Laboratory, Swedish Biodiversity Program, made available by support from the Knut and Alice Wallenberg Foundation. A.B., L.S., P. Swali and P. Skoglund were supported by Francis Crick Institute core funding (FC001595) from Cancer Research UK, the UK Medical Research Council and the Wellcome Trust. P. Skoglund was also supported by the Vallee Foundation, the European Molecular Biology Organisation and the Wellcome Trust (217223/Z/19/Z). Computations were supported by SNIC-UPPMAX. We also acknowledge support from Science for Life Laboratory, the Knut and Alice Wallenberg Foundation, the National Genomics Infrastructure funded by the Swedish Research Council and the Uppsala Multidisciplinary Center for Advanced Computational Science for assistance with massively parallel sequencing and access to the UPPMAX computational infrastructure. We thank the Yukon gold mining community and First Nations, including the Tr’ondëk Hwëch’in, for continued support of our palaeontology research in the Yukon Territories, Canada. We thank the Danish National High-Throughput Sequencing Centre and BGI-Europe for assistance in sequencing data generation and the Danish National Supercomputer for Life Sciences–Computerome ( https://computerome.dtu.dk ) for computational resources. We thank National Museum Wales for continued sampling support. M. Germonpré acknowledges support from the Brain.be 2.0 ICHIE project (BELSPO B2/191/P2/ICHIE). M.T.P.G. was supported by the European Research Council (grant no. 681396). M.-H.S.S. was supported by the Velux Foundations through the Qimmeq Project, the Aage og Johanne Louis-Hansens Fond and the Independent Research Fund Denmark (8028-00005B). L.D. acknowledges support from FORMAS (2018-01640). D.W.G.S. received funding for this project from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under Marie Skłodowska-Curie grant agreement no. 796877. M.P. was supported by the Polish National Agency for Academic Exchange–NAWA (grant no. PPN/PPO/2018/1/00037). V.J.S. was supported by the University of Zurich’s University Research Priority Program ‘Evolution in Action: From Genomes to Ecosystems’. This research was done with the participation of ZIN RAS (grant no. 075-15-2021-1069). We are grateful to the museum of the Institute of Plant and Animal Ecology UB RAS (Ekaterinburg, Russia) for provision of samples. R.P.J. and C.O’D. were supported by the Standing Committee for Archaeology of the Royal Irish Academy through the Archaeological Excavation Research Grant Scheme. E.Y.P., P.N. and V.V.P. are supported by the Russian Science Foundation (grant no. 16-18-10265-RNF and 21-18-00457-RNF). Y.V.K. was supported by the Russian Science Foundation (grant no. 20-17-00033). M.H. was supported by the European Research Council (consolidator grant GeneFlow no. 310763). M.L.-G. was supported by the Czech Science Foundation GAČR (grant no. 15-06446S) and institutional financing of the Moravian Museum from the Czech Ministry of Culture (IP DKRVO 2019-2023, MK000094862). L.S. is supported by the Sir Henry Wellcome fellowship (220457/Z/20/Z). We thank Staatliches Museum für Naturkunde Stuttgart for sample access. L.F. and G.L. were supported by European Research Council grants (ERC-2013-StG-337574-UNDEAD and ERC-2019-StG-853272-PALAEOFARM) and Natural Environmental Research Council grants (NE/K005243/1, NE/K003259/1, NE/S007067/1 and NE/S00078X/1). L.F. was also supported by the Wellcome Trust (210119/Z/18/Z). This research was funded in whole, or in part, by the Wellcome Trust (FC001595). For the purpose of open access, the author has applied a CC-BY public copyright licence to any author accepted manuscript version arising from this submission.

Janssens et al. (2021, doi: 10.1002/ar.24624) recently commented on our article (Galeta et al., 2021, doi: 10.1002/ar.24500) regarding the morphological differences between putative Paleolithic dog and Pleistocene wolf crania. The authors argued that these differences reflect the normal population variation of wolves, that some of the cranial measurements used do not reflect morphological changes during domestication, and that our canid dataset was small because we inexplicably omitted several specimens we analyzed in our previous publications. In this commentary, we briefly address the issue of within and between morpho-population variability. The results based on our canid sample suggest that the magnitude of morphological differences between distinct morpho-populations (i.e., recent northern dogs and wolves) is at least twice as large as that observed within morpho-populations (between two groups of recent northern wolves segregated by cluster analysis). The morphological differences between putative Paleolithic dogs and Pleistocene wolves are relatively large, which may indicate that they did not likely represent a single Late Pleistocene morpho-population. Finally, we clarified the rationale behind the composition of our 2021 dataset to show that we did not adjust the list of the analyzed specimens. Although the sample size was small, the randomization analysis published in 2021 confirmed that the unbalanced composition of the reference sample did not affect the reliability of the morphological segregation of putative Paleolithic dogs and Pleistocene wolves.

The antiquity of the wolf/dog domestication has been recently pushed back in time from the Late Upper Paleolithic (similar to 14,000 years ago) to the Early Upper Paleolithic (EUP; similar to 36,000 years ago). Some authors questioned this early dog domestication claiming that the putative (EUP) Paleolithic dogs fall within the morphological range of recent wolves. In this study, we reanalyzed a data set of large canid skulls using unbalanced- and balanced-randomized discriminant analyses to assess whether the putative Paleolithic dogs are morphologically unique or whether they represent a subsample of the wolf morpho-population. We evaluated morphological differences between 96 specimens of the 4 a priori reference groups (8 putative Paleolithic dogs, 41 recent northern dogs, 7 Pleistocene wolves, and 40 recent northern wolves) using discriminant analysis based on 5 ln-transformed raw and allometrically size-adjusted cranial measurements. Putative Paleolithic dogs are classified with high accuracies (87.5 and 100.0%, cross-validated) and randomization experiment suggests that these classification rates cannot be exclusively explained by the small and uneven sample sizes of reference groups. It indicates that putative Upper Paleolithic dogs may represent a discrete canid group with morphological signs of domestication (a relatively shorter skull and wider palate and braincase) that distinguish them from sympatric Pleistocene wolves. The present results add evidence to the view that these specimens could represent incipient Paleolithic dogs that were involved in daily activities of European Upper Paleolithic forager groups.

Eight breast-shaped beads were found variously scattered among differing layers of the Gravettian site, Dolni Věstonice I. Typologically, it is a set of morphologically similar beads of varying sizes made from mammoth ivory with holes for stringing them; one of the pieces was decorated with engraving. Various parts of human body were also found with the artefacts, in a manner typical for this site. The artefacts, however, have no analogies within the Gravettian. The main focus of this will paper will be the manufacturing technology, decoration and possible integration of these variously interpreted artefacts into the Gravettian symbolic system.

Morphological and genetic evidence put dog domestication during the Paleolithic, sometime between 40,000 and 15,000 years ago, with identification of the earliest dogs debated. We predict that these earliest dogs (referred to herein as protodogs), while potentially difficult to distinguish morphologically from wolves, experienced behavioral shifts, including changes in diet. Specifically, protodogs may have consumed more bone and other less desirable scraps within human settlement areas. Here we apply Dental Microwear Texture Analysis (DMTA) to canids from the Gravettian site of Předmosti (approx. 28,500 BP), which were previously assigned to the Paleolithic dog or Pleistocene wolf morphotypes. We test whether these groups separate out significantly by diet-related variation in microwear patterning. Results are consistent with differences in dietary breadth, with the Paleolithic dog morphotype showing evidence of greater durophagy than those assigned to the wolf morphotype. This supports the presence of two morphologically and behaviorally distinct canid types at this middle Upper Paleolithic site. Our primary goal here was to test whether these two morphotypes expressed notable differences in dietary behavior. However, in the context of a major Gravettian settlement, this may also support evidence of early stage dog domestication. Dental microwear is a behavioral signal that may appear generations before morphological changes are established in a population. It shows promise for distinguishing protodogs from wolves in the Pleistocene and domesticated dogs from wolves elsewhere in the archaeological record.

Two canid morphotypes have been proposed for the middle Upper Palaeolithic site of Předmosti (Moravia, Czech Republic): Pleistocene wolf and Palaeolithic dog (Germonpre et al., 2012, 2015; Galeta et al., 2020). In Wilczynski et al. (2020), faunal assemblages from other Upper Palaeolithic Moravian sites were analyzed and those results used to project a similar, which we interpret as flawed, result for Předmosti: that only wild canids were present. We address issues with their methodology and argue that their conclusion, that dogs were not present at any of those studied sites, is based on cursory taphonomic analysis. Further, their projection of these results to Předmosti, an assemblage they did not study, is unsubstantiated, but does highlight the current dearth of taphonomic information that could aid the study of dog domestication. We also point out an important error in their Fig. 1, where the hemimandibles intended to show the natural variability in large canids from Dolni Vĕstonice II and Pavlov I SE, are in fact canid specimens from Předmosti. Since several of these canid specimens have been published by Germonpre et al. (2015), we find it imperative to address this error to ensure these data are correctly referenced in future works.

In the sense of the gravettian technocomplex of Central Europe in Moravia it is mammoth ivory which was mainly used to manufacture and create personal ornaments. The hunters and gatherers selected and stored mammoth tusks as the raw material for the manufacture of tools, weapons, furniture and ornaments. In Moravia, personal ornaments were found in a great variability of forms and sizes – mostly beads like breast-shaped beads, bilobated beads, bilobated flat beads, tear drop shaped beads and round ornaments – rings, bracelets, discs as well as flat elements – diadems and other pendants (zoomorphs, antropomorphs, geometric forms). Some types of personal ornaments show equivalent forms at other gravettian sites and some are unique in Moravia. This article illustrates the variability of these personal ornaments in the context of the Gravettian in Moravia.

Canids from the Upper Paleolithic site of Předmosti are central to debates concerning the domestication of dogs as two morphotypes were identified: Pleistocene wolf and Paleolithic dog (Germonpre et al., 2015a). In Prassack et al. (2020), we set out to determine whether specimens previously parsed into these two groups differed significantly in dental microwear textures, a proxy for diet. We did not assume that one group was comprised of dogs, but hypothesized that if they were, they would likely have consumed more bone, leading to microwear surface textures dominated by pitting. We indeed found significantly higher scales of maximum complexity on second lower molar crushing surfaces of the sample identified as Paleolithic dogs by Germonpre et al. (2015a), consistent with larger pits on average and more bone consumption. These results suggest that the two morphotypes identified by Germonpre et al. (2015a) represent ecologically distinct populations. This is in accord with the interpretation of domestication, but, as we noted, the groups could also represent two distinct wild canid populations with differing diets. Janssens et al. (2021) recently criticized our study, questioning our methods of analysis and claiming bias in our interpretation of results. We reply to their issues here, focusing only on those relevant to Prassack et al. (2020).

When, how, and following which paths hominins created the innovations that allowed them to colonize regions of the planet that were not suited to their thermal physiology is still a matter of inquiry. In this paper, we elaborate a theoretical framework to investigate the origin and diversification of bone needles, summarize the evidence for their emergence, create a large database of their morphometric and stylistic characters, and present results of the study of an exceptionally well-preserved collection of needles from Shuidonggou Locality 12 (SDG12), a site located in the Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region, Northern China, dated to ca. 11.2 ka BP. Bone needles are reported from 271 sites and 355 archaeological layers. Revision of the evidence shows they represent an original cultural innovation that emerged in Eurasia between 45–40 ka BP. Size differences between the earliest known specimens, found in Siberia and China, indicate needles may have been invented independently in these two regions. Needles from Eastern Europe may represent either an independent invention or a geographic extension of earlier Siberian and Caucasian sewing traditions. In Western Europe, needles appear during the Solutrean. The wider size range characteristic of Magdalenian specimens supports the idea that needles of different sizes were used in a variety of tasks. In China, the robust sub-circular needles found at sites dated between 35–25 ka BP are followed, between 26–23 ka BP, by small flat needles, which may represent an innovation associated with the microblades/microcores toolkit. At SDG12, technological, functional, and morphometric analyses of finished needles and manufacturing by-products identify two previously undetected reduction sequences for the production of needles of different size and, probably, function. The bone needles found at Paleoindian sites are the smallest and reflect a never previously achieved mastery in the production of such tools.

This paper discusses the phenomenon of mammoth ivory necklaces from Dolni Věstonice I (Moravia, Czech Republic). The ivory artefacts were described by the excavator K. Absolon in 1937 as necklaces, and this primary interpretation is still in use today. In this case, mammoth ivory was worked into repeating standardised forms of various size, which are almost absent elsewhere in the Upper Palaeolithic. The seven artefacts were here examined for their state of conservation, manufacturing technology, decorating style and supposed functional purpose. Partial reconstruction of the chaine operatoire can enable integration of these artefacts into the style of mammoth ivory processing at this Gravettian site, and help to define the status of this raw material.

Efforts to identify Paleolithic dogs or incipient dogs have been based mainly on examination of complete or nearly complete crania. Complete skulls are, however, very rare in the archaeological record. Because canid mandible are far more frequently found in Pleistocene assemblages, the objective of this study is to investigate whether it is possible to differentiate these jaws by metric and osteomorphological methods in two morphotypes: Paleolithic dogs and Pleistocene wolves. This paper is mainly based on the very rich canid assemblage from the Gravettian Předmosti site in the Czech Republic, but also includes a few mandible from several other European Paleolithic sites. This study provides additional evidence of the existence at Předmosti of the two canid morphotypes. The metric data indicate that the mandible of the Paleolithic dogs are shorter than those from Pleistocene wolves in all tested measurements of length, and the carnassial crown length is shorter in Paleolithic dogs compared with the length of this tooth in Pleistocene wolves. Furthermore, in eight of nine indexes, the Paleolithic dogs differ significantly from the Pleistocene wolves. The mandible of Paleolithic dogs differ also in non-metric features from the Pleistocene wolves: they present a high frequency of crowded premolars and backwards-oriented apex of the coronoid. This paper furthermore confirms that Paleolithic dogs occur at two late Upper Paleolithic sites (Eliseevichi, Verholenskaya) where previous studies had indicated their presence. In addition, we document the presence of Paleolithic dogs at another Gravettian site, Kostenki-8.

The Gravettian site of Předmosti I in the central Moravian Plain has yielded a rich and diverse large mammal fauna dated around 25–27,000 14 C years BP (ca. 29,500–31,500 cal BP). This fauna includes numerous carnivores (cave lion, wolf, brown bear, polar fox, wolverine) and herbivores (reindeer, large bovine, red deer, muskox, horse, woolly rhinoceros, woolly mammoth) whose trophic position could be reconstructed using stable isotopic tracking (δ 13 C, δ 15 N, δ 34 S) of bone collagen ( n = 63). Among large canids, two morphotypes, “Pleistocene wolves” and “Palaeolithic dogs”, were considered, and two human bones attributed to the Gravettian assemblage of Předmosti I were also sampled. The trophic system around the Gravettian settlement of Předmosti I showed the typical niche partitioning among herbivores and carnivores seen in other mammoth-steppe contexts. The contribution of the analyzed prey species to the diet of the predators, including humans, was evaluated using a Bayesian mixing model (SIAR). Lions included great amounts of reindeer/muskox and possibly bison in their diet, while Pleistocene wolves were more focused on horse and possibly mammoth. Strong reliance on mammoth meat was found for the human of the site, similarly to previously analyzed individuals from other Gravettian sites in Moravia. Interestingly, the large canids interpreted as “Palaeolithic dogs” had a high proportion of reindeer/muskox in their diet, while consumption of mammoth would be expected from the availability of this prey especially in case of close interaction with humans. The peculiar isotopic composition of the Palaeolithic dogs of Předmosti I may indicate some control of their dietary intake by Gravettian people, who could have use them more for transportation than hunting purpose.

This is a reply to the comments of Morey (2014) on our identification of Palaeolithic dogs from several European Palaeolithic sites. In his comments Morey (2014) presents some misrepresentations and misunderstandings that we remedy here. In contrast to what Morey (2014) propounds, our results suggest that the domestication of the wolf was a long process that started early in the Upper Palaeolithic and that since that time two sympatric canid morphotypes can be seen in Eurasian sites: Pleistocene wolves and Palaeolithic dogs. Contrary to Morey (2014), we are convinced that the study of this domestication process should be multidisciplinary.

Předmostí is one of the most famous Gravettian sites in Central Europe. Its fame is based on a unique human assemblage, sadly largely destroyed during the Second World War, a huge mammoth assemblage and a very rich large canid assemblage. It has been shown previously that mammoth played an important role in the subsistence practices of the Gravettian inhabitants of Předmostí. Detailed analyses of the large canid postcranial material were carried out to investigate whether these canid remains can be assigned to different size groups and whether these remains show evidence of being butchered and consumed by humans. Based on defleshing marks and impact traces on the long bones, it is proposed here that large canids were consumed by the Gravettian inhabitants of Předmostí, thus further elucidating the specific human-large canid relationships that existed during the Upper Palaeolithic.

The population dynamics of the Pleistocene woolly mammoth (Mammuthus primigenius) has been the subject of intensive palaeogenetic research. Although a large number of mitochondrial genomes across Eurasia have been reconstructed, the available data remains geographically sparse and mostly focused on eastern Eurasia. Thus, population dynamics in other regions have not been extensively investigated. Here, we use a multi-method approach utilising proteomic, stable isotope and genetic techniques to identify and generate twenty woolly mammoth mitochondrial genomes, and associated dietary stable isotopic data, from highly fragmentary Late Pleistocene material from central Europe. We begin to address region-specific questions regarding central European woolly mammoth populations, highlighting parallels with a previous replacement event in eastern Eurasia ten thousand years earlier. A high number of shared derived mutations between woolly mammoth mitochondrial clades are identified, questioning previous phylogenetic analysis and thus emphasizing the need for nuclear DNA studies to explicate the increasingly complex genetic history of the woolly mammoth.

Estimation the sex of the creators of rock art scenes from handprints left in prehistoric caves has been of growing interest in archaeology in recent years. It has been suggested that both males and females were involved in symbolic activities, which has shaped the view of gender roles in prehistory. The experience from biological and forensic anthropology suggests, however, that using recent standards for the sex estimation of prehistoric handprints may be prone to errors. The aim of this study is to document the accuracy and reliability of sex estimation from handprints in a recent European sample and to assess the applicability of recent standards to the sex prediction of prehistoric artists. Our sample consists from 100 handprints of recent males and females from southern France. The sex of handprints is estimated by two discriminant functions using five direct measurements (DFdirect) and two indices (DFindex). The results showed that DFdirect correctly predicts sex in 92% of recent handprints but only about half the handprints can be classified with a certainty higher than 95%. The accuracy of DFindex is only 63% and cannot be successfully applied to sex estimation. We further suggest that the accuracy of both functions is overestimated due to the correct classification of handprints by chance and that especially DFindex is able to predict sex even in randomised datasets with no sexual differences. Finally, we demonstrate that both DFdirect and DFindex perform poorly when they are applied to population with hand size different from that used to derive them, i.e. that functions do not generalise across different populations and time periods. We argue that, given the lack of information about hand size in the population of prehistoric artists, recent attempts to estimate sex from handprints depicted in Palaeolithic cave art using morphometric data from recent populations is inevitably associated with unpredictable bias.

This is a response to the comments of Crockford and Kuzmin (2012) on our identification of Palaeolithic dogs from different European Palaeolithic sites. In their comments Crockford and Kuzmin (2012) present some errors, misunderstandings and misrepresentations that we remedy here. In our opinion, the early wolf domestication must be regarded as an intimate relationship between humans and canids including the breeding of the latter by prehistoric people, resulting in the European Palaeolithic dogs.

Whether or not the wolf was domesticated during the early Upper Palaeolithic remains a controversial issue. We carried out detailed analyses of the skull material from the Gravettian Předmosti site, Czech Republic, to investigate the issue. Three complete skulls from Předmosti were identified as Palaeolithic dogs, characterized by short skull lengths, short snouts, and wide palates and braincases relative to wolves. One complete skull could be assigned to the group of Pleistocene wolves. Three other skulls could not be assigned to a reference group; these might be remains from hybrids or captive wolves. Modifications by humans of the skull and canine remains from the large canids of Předmosti indicate a specific relationship between humans and large canids.

One Gravettian feminine representation – the schematic Venus of Předmosti – is so different from all the others that it has always been regarded as unique. The engraving, which was closely examined for the purpose of comparison in this study, represents a woman composed of geometric shapes, including a triangular head with interior lattice-work, concentric ellipses for the breasts, belly and pelvis, a double ladder for the remaining arm, hatch marks, and a thigh made up of parallel vertical lines. This article presents the discovery and discusses the authenticity of a second, feminine anthropomorph engraved on a bone shaft fragment, which is labelled as coming from the same site and is highly similar to the one described at the end of the nineteenth century. The modern history of Předmosti reveals that the site was used as a quarry for the extraction of loess and limestone, and that tons of mammoth bones were extracted to produce spodium. Remarkable objects that were found both during early archaeological excavations and the site’s commercial exploitation went towards private collections. The history of the piece under study traces it back through a succession of owners to the collection of Rene de Poilloue de Saint-Perier (b.1877–d.1950) and Raymonde-Suzanne de Saint-Perier (b.1890–d.1978). The engraving is on the periosteal surface of a limb bone from a very large mammal, probably a proboscidian. Microscopic analysis of the bone surface and engravings identify the chronology of the grooves and their relations to the stages of the bone’s alteration and fracturing, starting with: 1) heavy weathering of the bone surface that produced longitudinal cracks, which probably led to its breakage, 2) engraving of the feminine representation, 3) intense mechanical and chemical attacks that smoothed all of the bone’s surfaces and wore down the engravings, 4) covering with a consolidation agent, and, most recently, 5) some abrasion, which resulted in the creation of a few straight lines. Since no evidence is found to suggest that the highly worn appearance of the engravings composing the feminine representation resulted from modifications that were meant to artificially age the periosteal surface of the bone, we conclude that the engraving can be plausibly attributed to the Gravettian and that further analyses are warranted.

Resume Les aiguilles a chas fabriquees en matieres dures animales sont un artefact stereotype. Elles ont ete trouvees dans six grottes du Karst Morave / Republique tcheque (Pekarna, Žitneho, Kůlna, Býci skala, Veruncina, Křižova) presentant des couches magdaleniennes. La technologie de la production de ces objets est discutee sur l’exemple de la grotte Pekarna qui en a livre une grande quantite presentant un degre varie d’usure, beaucoup de fragments, de matrices d’extraction et d’aiguilles inachevees. A l’aide de l’analyse spatiale, nous reconstruisons le contexte d’origine a l’interieur de la grotte et tâchons d’inserer l’artefact en question dans le cadre de l’exploitation, du traitement et de l’utilisation des matieres dures animales par les chasseurs du Magdalenien Morave.

This paper aims to point out some common techniques and methods used in the debitage of horse metapodials, from Western to Central Europe during the Upper Magdalenian. Observations suggest that these skeletal elements follow regular operational sequences in spite of the existing distance between regional groups. This survey allows us to draw many lessons from the study of these skeletal elements that are presumed to be of low significance. It identifies two operational sequences of debitage, extraction and bipartition. Descriptions of techniques, procedures, and methods used by Magdalenians are provided in a synthetic way. The variability of productions is also discussed here. Moreover, the technical and subsistence operational sequences have been interlinked for animal exploitation.

Spondylosis deformans is a common degenerative condition of the spinal column, especially in modern domestic dogs. The presence and severity of lesions are related to age and physical activity, but they can be influenced by genetics, with some modern breeds being particularly predisposed. Spondylosis deformans also has been reported in prehistoric dogs. Here, we describe three affected vertebrae, likely from three individuals, in a large canid assemblage from the Gravettian Předmosti site, Czech Republic. We compare the proportion of affected individuals from the Předmosti assemblage with that of affected individuals among recent wild Northern wolves, inbred wolves, captive wolves, and recent Northern dogs. The proportion of affected individuals among the captive wolves differs significantly from the other wolf groups. The proportion in the Předmosti assemblage does not differ significantly from that of the wild wolf groups.

The woolly mammoth (Mammuthus primigenius) was an emblematic and key species of the so-called mammoth steppe ecosystem between ca. 110,000 and 12,000 years ago. Its contribution to human subsistence during the Gravettian period as source of raw material was documented in southwestern France and southwestern Germany, with some evidence of active hunting in the latter region. However, decreasing genetic diversity and increasing indications of nutritional stress point to a likely decline of this megaherbivore. The specificity of the ecological niche occupied by the woolly mammoth is clearly reflected by their collagen 13C and 15N abundances (δ13Ccoll and δ15Ncoll), measured on skeletal remains of the typical mammoth steppe. The abundances of carbon-13 in mammoth collagen are comparable to those of other grazers like horse (Equus sp.), while the nitrogen-15 abundances are significantly higher (about 3‰) than in the other herbivores, either horse or reindeer (Rangifer tarandus). During the Aurignacian and Gravettian occupation at Geißenklösterle in the Ach Valley (Germany), the mammoths had the expected stable isotope signature, but the nitrogen-15 of horses showed an unexpected overlap with those of the mammoth. This unusual pattern was already occurring during the Aurignacian, while the oxygen-18 abundances in bone phosphate (δ18Obp) of horse and reindeer were unchanged between Aurignacian and Gravettian periods, which rules out significant change in environmental and climatic conditions. Thus, we hypothesize that during the Aurignacian and Gravettian, the ecological niche of mammoth was intact but not occupied intensively by mammoths due to a decline in their population. This decline could be tentatively explained by human pressure through hunting. In Dordogne (France), decreasing horse and reindeer δ15Ncoll values coeval to decreasing horse δ18Obp values between the Aurignacian and the Early Gravettian periods reflected a clear change in the environment, while no contrast in δ15Ncoll values was observed between the Early and Final Gravettian at the Abri Pataud. The mammoth of Dordogne yielded slightly higher δ15Ncoll values than expected, probably as a consequence of the nursing effect since all the analyzed samples were ivory instead of bone. The direct dating and sulphur-34 measurement on the ivory of the Early Gravettian at Pataud showed that almost all of them were of contemporaneous and local origin. Significant contrasts in δ34Scoll values were found between the Dordogne and the Ach Valley for the same herbivores species, which confirms the potential of sulphur-34 in collagen as a mobility tracker.

Resume L’abri-sous-roche de Buran-Kaya III (Crimee), decouvert en 1990 par A. Yanevich, presente une sequence stratigraphique exceptionnelle allant du Paleolithique Moyen au Neolithique. Les differentes couches archeologiques ont livre des assemblages abondants d’industries lithique et osseuse, de restes fauniques, d’elements de parure et d’art mobilier, dont certains en ivoire de Mammouth. Nous presentons ici les resultats d’analyses archeozoologiques des ossements de grands mammiferes provenant des trois couches 6-2, 6-1 et 5-2, attribuees au Gravettien sensu lato , et leur interpretation en termes de comportements de subsistance, en comparant les trois assemblages. La composition faunique des trois couches est relativement homogene. Les occupations du site semblent etre liees principalement a des activites d’acquisition et de traitement de mammiferes de petite et moyenne taille, surtout l’antilope saiga durant l’ete, et de mammiferes de grande taille, durant l’hiver en 6-1 et peut-etre egalement en 5-2. Au Gravettien, Buran-Kaya III a ete utilise comme site de boucherie ou d’habitat de courte duree, de maniere recurrente, probablement durant la periode estivale a l’occasion de chasses a l’antilope saiga.

International audience; Background: Anatomically Modern Humans (AMHs) are known to have spread across Europe during the period coinciding with the Middle to Upper Paleolithic transition. Whereas their dispersal into Western Europe is relatively well established, evidence of an early settlement of Eastern Europe by modern humans are comparatively scarce.Methodology/Principal Finding: Based on a multidisciplinary approach for the study of human and faunal remains, we describe here the oldest AMH remains from the extreme southeast Europe, in conjunction with their associated cultural and paleoecological background. We applied taxonomy, paleoecology, and taphonomy combined with geomorphology, stratigraphy, archeology and radiocarbon dating. More than 160 human bone remains have been discovered. They originate from a well documented Upper Paleolithic archeological layer (Gravettian cultural tradition) from the site of Buran-Kaya III located in Crimea (Ukraine). The combination of non-metric dental traits and the morphology of the occipital bones allow us to attribute the human remains to Anatomically Modern Humans. A set of human and faunal remains from this layer has been radiocarbon dated by Accelerator Mass Spectrometry. The direct-dating results of human bone establish a secure presence of AMHs at 31,900+240/−220 BP in this region. They are the oldest direct evidence of the presence of AMHs in a well documented archeological context. Based on taphonomical observations (cut marks and distribution of skeletal elements), they represent the oldest Upper Paleolithic modern humans from Eastern Europe, showing post-mortem treatment of the dead as well.Conclusion/Significance: These findings are essential for the debate on the spread of modern humans in Europe during the Upper Paleolithic, as well as their cultural behaviors.