Abstract
Each predator hunts and consumes its prey in a particular way. Consequently, the traces left by predators on bones might vary according to the manner in which the prey are processed. For this reason, prey size has been proposed as a key issue that affects the damage inflicted on bones. The Eagle Owl (Bubo bubo) is one of the main potential predators of small prey found in archaeological sites. However, detailed taphonomic research describing bone accumulations produced by this nocturnal raptor is still scarce. The aim of the present work is to describe a modern accumulation of pellets originated by the Eagle Owl from this perspective, with a specific focus on birds. Particular attention is paid to prey size to evaluate the real significance of this variable when assessing bone damage. The results confirm that bone alterations reflect how prey was ingested, as the bones show greater damage with increasing prey size. This finding emphasises the complexity of characterising archaeological accumulations, as the alterations will vary according to prey size. In addition, bone architecture—or other aspects that cannot be controlled—may hinder accurate diagnosis and should be taken into account.
Highlights
Each predator hunts and consumes its prey in a particular way
The discrimination of predator activities in archaeological accumulations is a crucial issue for understanding the site formation processes and bird–human interactions
Taking general trends into account may hide other important information that could help with the characterisation of an accumulation, especially in terms of prey size
Summary
Each predator hunts and consumes its prey in a particular way. the traces left by predators on bones might vary according to the manner in which the prey are processed. The agents implicated in the formation of these assemblages can be diverse, since hominids, raptors and mammalian carnivores[1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11] could have used the same spaces to perform their activities This is a challenging context when attempting to understand the processes involved in the formation of an archaeological site, as separating the palimpsest of occupation is almost impossible during the excavation. The referential framework is still limited, and the works already published have attempted to assess possible patterns of anatomical representation and fragmentation of bones[35,36,37,38,39] They do not pay special attention to the identification of other taphonomic traits that could help to determine the alterations originated by each predator type. A limited number of studies have attempted to assess bird accumulations from a taphonomic point of view, but this approach was confirmed as the most successful way to diagnose possible accumulators[1,6,40,41,42]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
