Abstract
Dental and artifact microwear analyses have a lot in common regarding the questions they address, their developmental history and their issues. However, few paleontologists and archeologists are aware of this, and even those who are, do not take into account most of the methodological insights from the other field.In this focus article, we briefly review the main developmental steps of both methods, highlight how similar their histories are and how combining methodological developments can improve both research fields. In both cases, the traditional analyses have been strongly criticized mainly because of their subjectivity and their lack of repeatability and reproducibility. Quantitative surface texture analyses have been proposed in response, resulting in dental microwear texture analysis (DMTA) and quantitative artifact microwear analysis (QAMA). DMTA is however a more mature method than QAMA and is well supported within the paleontological community.In this paper, focused on the methodological framework of both fields, we address this topic by arguing that traceologists could borrow a lot from DMTA; this would allow QAMA to become an established method much more quickly. Dental microwear analysts can also learn from traceology, especially regarding sample preparation, experimentation and residue analysis.We hope that this focus article will stimulate more awareness, exchange and collaboration between paleontologists and archeologists, and especially between dental and artifact microwear analysts. Paleontology, archeology and the field of surface analysis as a whole would all benefit from such cooperation.
Highlights
Dental microwear analysis refers to the study of microscopic marks present on tooth surfaces that result from the wear of food particles and external abrasives (Green and Croft, 2018)
We will first briefly review the methodological developments of dental and artifact microwear analyses that led to quantitative surface texture analyses (QSTA)
Some recent reviews have been published on Artifact Microwear Analysis (AMA; Adams, 2014; Dubreuil and Savage, 2014; Marreiros et al, 2015; Stemp et al, 2016)
Summary
Dental microwear analysis refers to the study of microscopic marks present on tooth surfaces that result from the wear of food particles and external abrasives (Green and Croft, 2018). Surface modifications can be analyzed at different scales; we will focus here on the microscopic scale, and refer to it as artifact microwear analysis Traceology, in this sense, is a sub-discipline of archeology and is included in functional analyses (Marreiros et al, in prep.). It aims at identifying the function of artifacts in terms of action and worked material, i.e. use, to infer past human behavior Both dental and artifact microwear analyses try to address similar questions: what have the objects (teeth/artifacts) been used for (food items/worked material) and how (chewing mechanics/tool kinematics)? 3–4) write that “The papers in this volume demonstrate the value of partnerships between paleontologists or archeologists on the one hand, and surface metrologists on the other ...” (our italics) In this focus article, we will first briefly review the methodological developments of dental and artifact microwear analyses that led to quantitative surface texture analyses (QSTA). We hope that this article will help both fields move forward so that QSTA can be performed with the same approach and quality standards
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 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 callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
