Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T15:33:47.405Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Taphonomy of owl pellet deposition

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 July 2015

Karla D. Kusmer
Karla D. Kusmer*
Affiliation:
3872 Levitt St., Bellingham, Washington 98226
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Remains derived from owl pellets are a major source of small-animal remains in paleontological and archaeological sites. Pellet remains are examined here to further develop workable strategies for extracting taphonomic information from microvertebrate assemblages. Study of the remains of three wild owl species yielded characteristic patterns of bone fragmentation and skeletal element representation. At the assemblage level, owl-derived assemblages are shown to differ quantitatively from other assemblages. The possible variability to be expected in owl-derived assemblages is examined and the patterns are contrasted with those produced by other depositional agents. The patterns can be useful in the identification of owl-deposited remains in some assemblages; however, overlap with patterns produced by other mechanisms may complicate analysis.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Paleontology , Volume 64 , Issue 4 , July 1990 , pp. 629 - 637
Copyright
Copyright © The Paleontological Society 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Akande, M. 1972. The food of the feral mink (Mustela vison) in Scotland. Journal of Zoology, London, 167:475–479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andrews, P. 1983. Small mammal faunal diversity of Olduvai Gorge, Tanzania, p. 77–85. In Clutton-Brock, J. and Grigson, C. (eds.), Animals and Archaeology. British Archaeological Reports, London.Google Scholar
Andrews, P., and Evans, E. M. N. 1983. Small mammal bone accumulations produced by mammalian carnivores. Paleobiology, 9:289–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bent, A. 1938. Life Histories. North American Birds of Prey. Part 2. Bulletin of the U.S. National Museum 170, 482 p.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boonstra, R. 1977. Predation on Microtus townsendii populations: impact and vulnerability. Canadian Journal of Zoology, 55:1631–1643.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boxall, P., and Lein, M. 1982. Are owls regular? An analysis of pellet regurgitation times of snowy owls in the wild. Raptor Research, 16:79–82.Google Scholar
Brain, C. 1981. The Hunters or the Hunted? An Introduction to African Cave Taphonomy. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Illinois, 365 p.Google Scholar
Casteel, R. 1977a. Characterization of faunal assemblages and the minimum number of individuals determined from paired elements: continuing problems in archaeology. Journal of Archaeological Science, 4:125–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Casteel, R. 1977b. A consideration of the behavior of the minimum number of individuals index: a problem in faunal characteristics. Ossa, 3/4:141–151.Google Scholar
Clark, R. 1972. Pellets of the short-eared owl and march hawk compared. Journal of Wildlife Management, 36:962–964.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Craighead, J. and Craighead, F. Jr. 1969. Hawks, Owls, and Wildlife. Dover Publishing, Inc., New York, 443 p.Google Scholar
Day, M. 1966. Identification of hair and feather remains in the gut and faeces of stoats and weasels. Journal of Zoology, 148:201–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dodson, P. 1973. The significance of small bone in paleoecological interpretations. University of Wyoming Contributions in Geology, 12:15–19.Google Scholar
Dodson, P., and Wexlar, D. 1979. Taphonomic investigations of owl pellets. Paleobiology, 5:275–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duke, G., Jegers, A., Leff, G., and Evanson, O. 1975. Gastric digestion in some raptors. Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology, 50A:649–656.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duke, G., Evanson, O., and Jegers, A. 1976. Meal to pellet intervals in 14 species of captive raptors. Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology, 53A:1–6.Google Scholar
Duke, G., and Rhoades, D. 1977. Factors affecting meal to pellet intervals in great horned owls (Bubo virginianus). Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology, 56A:283–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Einarsen, A. 1956. Determination of some predator species by field signs. Oregon State Monographs, Studies in Zoology, 10:1–34.Google Scholar
Errington, P. 1933. Food habits of southern Wisconsin raptors. Part II—hawks. Condor, 35:19–29.Google Scholar
Errington, P. 1935. Food habits of midwest foxes. Journal of Mammalogy, 16:192–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Errington, P. 1938. The great horned owl as an indicator of vulnerability in prey populations. Journal of Wildlife Management, 2:190–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Floyd, T., Mech, L., and Jordan, P. 1978. Relating wolf scat content to prey consumed. Journal of Wildlife Management, 42:528–532.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glading, B. 1943. Raptor pellets as indicators of food habits. California Fish and Game, 29:92–121.Google Scholar
Grayson, D. 1978a. Reconstructing mammalian communities: a discussion of Shotwell's method of paleoecological analysis. Paleobiology, 4:77–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grayson, D. 1978b. Minimum numbers and sample size in vertebrate faunal analysis. American Antiquity, 43:53–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grayson, D. 1981. The effects of sample size on some derived measures in vertebrate faunal analysis. Journal of Archaeological Science, 8:77–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grayson, D. 1984. Quantitative Zooarchaeology: Topics in the Analysis of Archaeological Faunas. Academic Press, New York, 202 p.Google Scholar
Guerin, G. 1928. La vie des Chouettes. Regime et Croissance de l'Effrage Commune Tyto alba en Vendée. P. Lechevalier, Paris, France, 157 p.Google Scholar
Hoffman, R. 1988. The contribution of raptorial birds to patterning in small mammal assemblages. Paleobiology, 14:81–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, E. 1985. Current developments in bone technology. Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory, 8:157–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, M., and Hansen, R. 1979. Estimating coyote food intake from undigested residues in scats. American Midland Naturalist, 102:363–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Korth, W. 1979. Taphonomy of microvertebrate fossil assemblages. Annals of the Carnegie Museum, 48:235–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kusmer, K. 1986. Microvertebrate taphonomy in archaeological sites: an examination of owl deposition and the taphonomy of small mammals from Sentinel Cave, Oregon. Unpubl. M.A. dissertation, Department of Archaeology, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia, 156 p.Google Scholar
Levinson, M. 1982. Taphonomy of microvertebrates from owl pellets to cave breccia. Annals of the Transvaal Museum, 33:115–121.Google Scholar
Lockie, J. 1959. The estimation of the food of foxes. Journal of Wildlife Management, 23:224–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lowe, V. 1980. Variation in digestion of prey by the tawny owl (Strix aluco). Journal of Zoology, 192:282–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marti, C. 1974. Feeding ecology of four sympatric owls. Condor, 76:45–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayhew, D. 1977. Avian predators as accumulators of fossil mammal material. Boreas, 6:25–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mellet, J. 1974. Scatological origins of microvertebrate fossil accumulations. Science, 185:349–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mikkola, H. 1983. Owls of Europe. Waterhouse, Staffordshire, England, 397 p.Google Scholar
Moon, E. 1940. Notes on hawk and owl pellet formation and identification. Transactions of the Kansas Academy of Science, 43:457–466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raczynski, J., and Ruprecht, A. 1974. The effect of digestion on the osteological composition of owl pellets. Acta Ornithologica, 14:25–38.Google Scholar
Shipman, P. 1981a. Applications of scanning electron microscopy to taphonomic problems. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 376:357–386.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shipman, P. 1981b. Life History of a Fossil: An Introduction to Taphonomy and Paleoecology. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 22 p.Google Scholar
Shipman, P., and Walker, A. 1980. Bone-collecting by harvesting ants. Paleobiology, 6:496–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Short, H., and Drew, L. 1962. Observations concerning behavior, feeding, and pellets of short-eared owls. American Midland Naturalist, 67:424–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shortwell, J. 1955. An approach to the paleoecology of mammals. Ecology, 36:327–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shortwell, J. 1958. Inter-community relationships in Hemphillian (mid-Pliocene) mammals. Ecology, 39:271–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, C., and Richmond, M. 1972. Factors influencing pellet egestion and gastric pH in the barn owl. Wilson Bulletin, 84:179–186.Google Scholar
Sutcliffe, A. 1970. Spotted hyaena: crusher, gnawer, digester, and collector of bones. Nature, 227:1110–1113.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Voorhies, M. 1969. Taphonomy and population dynamics of an early Pliocene vertebrate fauna, Knox County, Nebraska. Contributions to Geology, Special Paper 1, University of Wyoming, 69 p.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watson, A. 1957. The behavior, breeding, and food-ecology of the snowy owl (Nyctea scandiaca). Ibis, 99:419–462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolff, R. 1973. Hydrodynamic sorting and ecology of a Pleistocene mammalian assemblage from California (U.S.A.). Paleogeography, Paleoclimatology, Paleoecology, 13:91–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar