Anthropologist challenges Lucy’s butchery tool use

November 16, 2010 by Lin Edwards report
These two cutmarks were made about 3.4 million years ago. Credit: Dikika Research Project, California Academy of Sciences

(PhysOrg.com) -- An anthropologist in Spain has challenged recent evidence the ancient hominin species Australopithecus afarensis, represented by "Lucy," used sharp stones to butcher animals for meat some 800,000 years before the earliest known use of such tools.

Manuel Dominguez-Rodrigo from Complutense University of Madrid and colleagues, say the marks found on two fossilized animal bones that were presented as evidence of butchery tool use were more probably caused by the being trampled by other animals.

The , approximately 3.4 million years old, were found in the Dikika area of the Lower Awash Valley in Ethiopia, and had several incisions. The scientists who found the fossils concluded the marks were made by sharp stones like those found locally, which were used to slice the meat off the carcass. Their paper was published in Nature in August this year and reported in PhysOrg.

This conclusion has been challenged by Dominguez-Rodrigo’s group, who say the marks resemble damage produced by experimental trampling, and the evidence that Australopithecus, a creature with similar-sized brains to modern chimpanzees, was using to butcher animals 3.4 million years ago is “currently unsupported.”

The damage on the bones was compared to damage produced by a trampling experiment in 2009 in which three men of varying sizes trampled across deer bones placed in a sand bed of a similar sand mix to that existing in the fossil find location. The men wore shoes with soles covered by coarse grass and trampled the bones for two minutes. The trampling produced long, thin incisions with a flat-based V, or _/-shaped cross-section, which Dominguez-Rodrigo said were rarely found in animal butchery using stone tools. The trampling marks were also curved, like the marks on the Dikika fossils, whereas butchery marks might be expected to be straight.

One of the scientists involved in the original research, Curtis Marean, an archaeologist from the Arizona State University, rejected Dominguez-Rodrigo’s assertions, saying the trampling experiment assumed Australopithecus was using stone tools rather than sharp stones found locally. He also said that while some of the marks resemble those on the experimentally trampled bones, there were two deep incisions known as A1 and A2 on one of the fossils, and they closely resemble butchery marks rather than trampling marks. Dominguez-Rodrigo agreed these marks were similar to cut marks made by stone tools, but rejected the conclusion because of the doubts raised by the trampling experiment.

Leader of the original team, Paleolithic archaeologist Shannon McPherron from the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology at Leipzig in Germany, added Dominguez-Rodrigo’s criticisms were based only on an examination of the photographs of the fossils and he had not examined the actual specimens.

Dominguez-Rodrigo also said the fossils found in Dikika were discovered on the surface and could have been damaged by abrasive soil. If they had originated in a sand bed, as Marean’s group argued, animal trampling could have occurred and produced many of the cuts attributed to stone tools.

The new paper is published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS).

Explore further: Early human hunters had fewer meat-sharing rituals

More information: Configurational approach to identifying the earliest hominin butchers, Manuel Domínguez-Rodrigo et al., PNAS, Published online before print November 15, 2010, doi:10.1073/pnas.1013711107

Related Stories

Early human hunters had fewer meat-sharing rituals

August 13, 2009

A University of Arizona anthropologist has discovered that humans living at a Paleolithic cave site in central Israel between 400,000 and 250,000 years ago were as successful at big-game hunting as were later stone-age hunters ...

Fossil feces point to a shark attack 15 million years ago

March 26, 2010

(PhysOrg.com) -- Paleontologists Stephen Godfrey and Joshua Smith have been studying marine fossils in the Maryland area of Calvert Cliffs for many years, and Godfrey has catalogued over 26,000 items found on the local beaches. ...

What did T. rex eat? Each other

October 15, 2010

It turns out that the undisputed king of the dinosaurs, Tyrannosaurus rex, didn't just eat other dinosaurs but also each other. Paleontologists from the United States and Canada have found bite marks on the giants' bones ...

Recommended for you

The couple who Facebooks together, stays together

July 27, 2015

Becoming "Facebook official" is a milestone in modern romance, and new research suggests that activities on the popular social networking site are connected to whether those relationships last.

Oldest known Koran text fragments discovered

July 23, 2015

Two pages of text written on parchment that are believed to be sections of the Koran (Chapters 18 and 20) have been discovered by a PhD student in a British university library and are believed to be the oldest ever found. ...

First evidence of farming in Mideast

July 22, 2015

Until now, researchers believed farming was "invented" some 12,000 years ago in the Cradle of Civilization—Iraq, the Levant, parts of Turkey and Iran—an area that was home to some of the earliest known human civilizations. ...

4 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

gmurphy
not rated yet Nov 16, 2010
What is it about anthropology that provokes such heated debate amongst its practitioners?
epsi00
not rated yet Nov 16, 2010
it's a science where everyone is entitled to his/her opinions.
DavidMerchant
not rated yet Nov 16, 2010
So why couldn't the animal have been trampled on, and Lucy being an opportunist, took advantage of this dying or dead creature to butcher it?
Briantllb
not rated yet Nov 17, 2010
Paleoanthropology is purely subjective, Everyone has their own opinion some of which or none of which may be correct all there are are assumptions based on the perceptions and predisposition of the individual. A researcher looking for toolmarks will find toolmarks and vice versa.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.