If you intresting in sport Buy trenbolone and Buy testosterone enanthate you find place where you can find information about steroids

Articles by David

A guy with a thing for Ice Age sloths.

mounting2 Holmes and I spent a morning last week with Jonathan Thomas, a Ph.D. student in the UI Department of Anthropology using Geoscience’s scanning electron microscope (SEM) to check the sloth teeth for phytoliths. Jonathan is an archaeologist studying Neolithic Iberia, and is the “go-to” guy in Anthropology for SEM work. This was just the first step—a quick non-destructive screening to check the condition of the teeth and determine the feasibility of further analysis. Results exceeded all expectations and several apparent phytoliths were observed.   We were joined by Meghann Mahoney from the UI Museum of Natural History.

 

 Holmes and Meghann SEM image x55 SEM image x230 Jonathan Thomas mounting molariformSEM image x750 SEM machineSEM image x450

 

Many plants absorb silica from the ground water and redeposit it in their cell walls and intercellular spaces. Phytoliths, from the Greeek phyto (plant) and lithos (stone), are rock hard and highly abrasive.   They provide structural support for plants and also serve to discourage herbivores and other attackers.

 

 Like concrete poured into a form, phytoliths take on the shape of their surrounding cells, varying with plant species and the type of tissue–bark, stem, fruit, etc.  They can be used to help identify their host plants long after all the organic material around them has decayed. Archaeologists use phytoliths to track the domestication of corn and other crops.   Paleoecologists look for them in deposits to help reconstruct ancient ecosystems. 

 

Phytoliths become embedded in teeth by chewing, as we found aplenty (left).SEM image x700   Bacteria can also cement them into tooth crevices. Extraction and identification of the phytoliths buried in a couple of our sloth’s teeth could provide some valuable insight into their diets, or at least the plants they ingested accidentally while munching on something nearby. That will entail scraping off the top layer of the tooth, dissolving the dentine and separating the plant-stones from the sand and grit to get accurate measurements and  an all-around view.  It promises to be a fruitful area for further study.  Thanks to Jonathan for the lesson. . . . Dave

more photos from the dig

mnh crew130.JPG

photo courtesy of Thalia Sutton

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Thanks to Thalia  for sending in these photos of the September excavation.  Lots more in Flickr.

sarah104.JPG    joe and cherie106.JPG joe124.JPG joe122.JPG joe122.JPG holly107.JPG don and holmes108.JPG cherie110.JPG cherie109.JPG diggers105.JPG partner and ron132.JPG

Joe Artz  sent us the following report concerning the clay layers we observed Saturday.  A 10,000 B.C .  or early 20th century flood shortly after the stream was straightened (ca. 1917-1923) would explain why we didn’t find any bones in what appeared to be such promising ground.

joe ripples466Holmes,

We encountered three stratigraphic units (SU’s)–for convenience I’ll call these SU’s 1 through 3, in order of ascending age. All three are channel facies, meaning that they have sedimentary characteristics of having been deposited by swifter currents of water than were encountered in the blue clay where the sloth remains were found.

SU3 is a channel facies that is perhaps correlated with the sloth-bearing (slotheriferous?) blue clay. The blue clay represents a slackwater facies, where clayey sediments settled from suspension in a low energy environment with only very slight currents represented by micromorphologically visible laminations and oriented sand grains. In SU3, the blue-gray colored sediment matrix has sufficient very fine sand that it will not ribbon. There are also macroscopically-visible, discontinuous, laminations and lenses of fine to medium sand with rare pebbles. These materials were deposited near, and possibly within the stream channel.

joedonholmes445 SU2 overlies SU3. It is a grayish brown silt loam that is finely laminated. In the south half of the island, SU2 has an abrupt, unconformable boundary with SU3, and appears to fill a small (ca. 1.5 wide by 30 cm deep) trough incised into SU3. This is perhaps an overflow channel scoured by floods and filled with more oxidized sediment that was probably reworked from a nearby, better drained sedimentary facies. The abrupt SU2-SU3 contact fades to the north in the profile, and in the north part of the island, has a conformable contact with SU3. This suggests that SU2 may be contemporaneous with the upper part of SU3. The SU2-SU3 contact trended northwest across the excavated surface, and seems to have been thicker in the west part of the excavated area of the island.

SU1 was encountered along the north side of the island. It is a laminated blue gray loam or very fine sandy loam. It is similar to SU3, but sandier, less consolidated, with more distinct laminations in the lower part. It yielded finely-divided flecks of bone and small bits of wood, and Euroamerican ceramics (undecorated whiteware). The latter suggests a historic channel fill deposit, perhaps of the 1917 excavated channel, or a post 1917 channel. At the south end of where we’d excavated, SU3 did have a very abrupt contact with what looked like SU2, which clearly indicates a historic age.

Thanks again,

Joe

I’ve long pondered the  improbability of 4 ft. of clay accumulating without a break–500 years (?) without a flood?! It’s comforting to find some evidence finally that they were indeed occurring. I expected a more dramatic signature–sand and rocks–but  Joe says the small differences seen here aren’t unusual for western Iowa at this time.  Flood water transports what’s available, and several thousand years of wind-borne deposits left a thick unstable blanket of loess in the region.  The hills literally melted away with the rain and spring thaws and for a long time the Tarkio was thick with loess sludge and not much else.   Thanks Joe for a vivid new picture of the Valley. . . . Dave


downstream350   thalia and kate435 ron and holmes442 Ron and Sarah396 don and holmes459 Jaci402 kids455 cherie414 Pete381  holly and jaci369 sallie432 feather431 holly400 group from north426 group404  southhill411 

 The rain gods smiled on us all day Saturday, keeping thunderstorms west  of the site and downstream until nightfall.  No bones were found, but good fortune located the dig  in a section of the ancient Tarkio streambed unlike anything we’ve uncovered previously and the excavation produced a wealth of new information about the history of the watershed  thanks to the efforts of geoarchaeologist Joe Artz, Geospatial Program Director in the  Office of the State Archaeologist who assisted us on the dig.

A large crew of enthusiastic volunteers cleared the  target area quickly and then dug several deep trenches into our clay deposit for Joe to examine.  He used the walls like a professor with a blackboard tracing the evidence of the long and often violent history of erosion and deposition in the Tarkio Valley.

joesamples450 joe and don444 joedonholmes445 joe and don449 joeprobe428 joe409 joecloseup451  joe456

Slight color variations of the sediment and subtle differences in sand and clay content confirm a story that contrasts sharply with our long-held impression of placid water in the sloths’ valley.  The evidence points to multiple floods  cutting deeply into the  clay on many occasions.  

The Tarkio Valley has often been called  a  “hungry canyon” for its soil-devouring proclivities, but who would have guessed that history went back over 10,000 years!    More photos and Joe’s preliminary report tomorrow. . . Dave

Site prep a success

Everything is going according to plan.  The water level is about as  low as we’ve ever seen it.    Will cleared a lens shaped island in the middle of the creek Friday–approximately  30 ft. long and 15 ft. wide.  Work went fast, we’re out from behind the sand bags and didn’t have the usual 15 inches of muck to tend with.   We’ve dug up part of this area before but sections were covered by the berm and look promising.  Bob Athen is optimistic.  30% chance of rain later today.   Photos next week. . . . Dave

DNA tests update

We received an urgent inquiry from Andy last week asking if we had used shellac on the ankle bone that we sent him. . . he was having problems dissolving the sample.  Standard procedure after cleaning and grinding up the bone  is soaking the fragments in ethylene diamine tetra acetic acid (EDTA) which dissolves the calcium and frees the DNA inside.   We assured Andy we hadn’t used shellac or anything else, anticipating his tests and not wanting to introduce a  foreign chemical that could interfere.   We suggested the mystery coating might be one of the most impregnable known to man—greasy fingerprints and peanut butter and jelly.  The bone is sturdy and it has been handled by at least 50,000 children!   He went back and remixed his solutions. From the email we received at the end of the week, it looks like we’re moving forward again:

Hey Holmes,

I’m trying the calcium digestion again this coming week. I’m   concerned something might have been off. Sorry to keep you waiting, this stuff can get complicated. In addition, I need to run a + control sample to test that everything did in fact work.   I was reluctant at first, as these extractions have to be done in a clean room and you can’t use modern samples. I do however have some very good (ancient) Acratocnus ye bone that has yielded nuclear and mitochondrial  DNA in the past.  I will use this as a control. I’m going to set this up on Sunday.
 
In addition, I would like to send some of the bone powder to Beth Shapiro at Penn State. She’s one of the best ancient DNA scientists in the US.  It is standard practice in aDNA to have another lab do corroborative extractions and PCRs. If neither lab can get anything, then I’m fraid we must call that aspect of the project a bust.
 
This is getting my full attention. I want this to work as much as you guys!
 
Best,
AC
 

Acratocnus Ye was discovered in a sinkhole in Haiti in 1984, and subsequently at several other sites in the country.  “Ye,” pronounced “yeh,” is a Hatian Creole word meaning  “yesterday,” hence the common name: Yesterday’s Acratocnus. (MacPhee et al., 2000)  Radiocarbon dates show the Megalonychid sloths survived in Haiti until about 4,500 years ago when humans arrived on the island. (Steadman et al., 2005)

If Beth and Andy get DNA from the Acratocnus ye sample and fail with ours we can assume there’s probably no DNA in the ankle bone, but that doesn’t necessarily mean things are hopeless.  Conditions vary tremendously around the site and DNA preservation may have been favored in a different location.  We may have to explore trying some inexpensive bone screening tests to identify candidates for further analysis.

When you are doing a destructive test on an irreplaceable sample it’s comforting  to know  you have people like the staff at the McMaster Ancient DNA Centre  and the  Ancient DNA Lab at Penn State who are checking every step 3X before they proceed. . . . Dave

References

 MacPhee, R. D. E., White, Woods, C. A. 2000.  New Megalonychid sloths (Phyllophaga, Xenarthra) from the Quaternary of Hispaniola.  American Museum Novitates 3303:  1-32.

 Steadman, D. W., Martin, P. S., MacPhee, R. D. E., Jull, A. J. T., McDonald, H. G., Woods, C. A., Iturralde-Vinent, M., and Hodgins, G. W. L. 2005.  Asynchronous extinction of late Quaternary sloths on continents and islands.  Proceedings of the National Academy of Science 102: 11763-11768 

more dig photos

More photos from the August dig. Thanks to Holmes and Ed Peterson for sharing.

Dave final48 Meghann304  Charlie24  Bill and Holmes02  group early31 Group34 Harold37 Jan and Mary18 Mary25 Will88 Turtle12 Meghann unstuck08 Will28 Ryan and Randy20 Chuck43Jan301 Mica38

andylab1The experience Andy and his colleagues are getting with analyzing ancient bones, and using clean room facilities, body suits, facemasks, etc. to avoid contamination are the very skills that will be needed in twenty years when astronauts return from Mars  with samples to test for traces of ancient life.  [previous post: Ancient DNA Centre]

Then, as now, the challenge will be uncovering the biomolecular markers preserved inside and proving any positive findings derive from the sample and not mishandling.  So we study our sloths to better understand them and the effects of global climate change, and prepare for the future. . . and maybe to visit the stars. . . . Dave

andylab2 andylab3 andylab4

Mary Ellen and Jan28 Holmes orientation36 Holmes measuring26 Holmes orientation41 taking a break603 Partner Dave and Bob30 Pam and Monica93 Pam and Monica86 Pam42 packing bones45 Mica98  Jan68   Jan85  Lee88 Bill89 Bob and Sonia67 Dennis87 Don91 Ed92 Harold90 Holmes33

DNA tests continue

We sent a bone sample for DNA testing to the McMaster Ancient DNA Centre, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario two weeks ago.   Andy Clack, a PhD student in the Centre, sent this encouraging reply:

ankleHolmes,

I have the talus/ankle bone in the lab now… wow! That thing is like a rock.  I couldn’t ask for a better specimen!  I’m going to use a sterile dremel tool and a particular type of bit that generates less heat and produces shards of bone and not powder.

I’ll try to drill in about 1.5 inches, collect the powder, decalcify and then hit it with proK to kill any lingering proteins in there.  I’m going to make up fresh reagents this week.  I want everything to be right.  Will likely test for nuclear and mt DNA fragments next weekend.

It’s all about the specimens on your end, and you really came through with this one…. I won’t hurt it too bad, I promise.

Best,
AC

ankleCT  Andy found all kinds of  DNA in the first samples we sent–horse, pig, cow, deer, human, etc.  No sloth DNA though.  The bones were small and broken–just fragments.  They had probably been soaking up rural Iowa DNA for years.  Now Andy has the thickest, densest, unbroken bone we have. The ICLIC people did a CT scan and it looks perfect inside too.

 Cloning DNA has become routine–the stuff of 7th grade science classes, but contamination remains the biggest challenge of ancient DNA study. DNA is everywhere—people are constantly shedding it in dry skin cells, etc., not to mention what they carry around belonging to family members, pets, etc.,  and the microbes that live everywhere.  Chemical changes, water and warm temps begin breaking down DNA after death, while a host of decay organisms feed on the organic molecules and each other.  Retrieving verifiable ancient sequences from this rich DNA stew  after thousands of years is a major achievement.  Dec 2008 AndyMany an announcement of an ancient DNA discovery has been withdrawn when later analysis showed it merely to be the result of contamination.  For that reason special labs like the Ancient DNA Centre have been created with personnel trained in techniques designed to reduce the risk of errors.   No one has ever sequenced any part of the Megalonyx genome, but if anyone can do it, Andy can. . . . Dave

 

 

group_2339A foray to the site August 14-15 netted 16 more segments of bone through the heroic efforts of  20 volunteers.      Most of the elements appear to be portions of juvenile ribs.  Positive assignment to the “toddler” or “baby”  awaits cleaning and a closer look. A couple of unidentified pieces are intriguing, but time for cleaning and study was curtailed by the storms that moved through the region all day.

Holmes and I were accompanied on the trip out by Meghann Mahoney, UI Museum of Natural History and Jan Ailes, Education Facilitator, Indian Creek Nature Center, Cedar Rapids.   We were joined in preparing the site for Saturday’s dig by our long-time Bobcat operator Will Mott, Council Bluffs, Bill Wiechman from the Greater Shenadoah Historical Society,  and Mary Brenzel the co-PI’s sister, who drove up from Fayetteville, Arkansas to help.

 Jan_Mary Meghann_Jan Meghann_stuck again snapping_turtle Holmes_siteprep Bob_Athen bailing digging_start  final_bones break-time 

 14 intrepid volunteers joined the prep crew on Saturday, enduring intermittent rain and extremely mucky working conditions.  Working until nightfall, they moved a mountain of clay and cleared an area of approximately 400 sq. ft.  The bones were deposited on an undulating surface, which necessitates carefully shoveling through at least a foot of the dense clay matrix in their pursuit.

 As Holmes wrote in his letter to volunteers last week, digging at the site is rapidly approaching its conclusion.  It has taken 6 years, but we have now cleared a wide area surrounding the main deposit and only have a couple of narrow bands immediately under the berm  left to excavate.  We hope to take advantage of the seasonably low water levels and return to the site in a couple of weeks.   Until we can discover the location of the Paramylodon that we know is nearby, it looks like we have reached the final act of the excavation phase of the project.

 Thanks to the Des Moines area Central Iowa Mineral Society for organizing a large contingent of members for the dig.  As ever, thanks also to the Iowa Archaeological Society, the Shenadoah-area community, Evans Rental, Glenwood, IA, which supplied the Bobcat and Will Mott, the Rembrandt of Bobcat operators. . . . Dave

 Participant list:  

Jan Ailes, Pam Belknap, Mary Brenzel, Harold and Kandyce  Decuir, Charles Krauth, Meghann Mahoney, Lee McNair, Dennis Miller, Will Mott, Ed Peterson, Monica and Mica  Post, Don Raker, Chuck Safris, Randy, Cheryl and Ryan Shanks, Marie Tiemann, Bill Wiechman, Holmes Semken, David Brenzel.

Holmes and I showed the sloths to an enthusiastic bunch of high school students last week and talked about paleontology as part of the University of Iowa’s Secondary Student Training Program (SSTP).  The 19 students, juniors and seniors, some from as far away as Florida and Texas, were on campus for 6 weeks participating in an intense immersion in science research, with the cooperation of  labs all across campus.  Thanks to William Swain, Director SSTP and JSHS programs, Division of Continuing Education, for making the arrangements.  We’re hoping to see a few of them at our next dig. . . . Dave

Currently raining.  1/2″  last night shouldn’t pose a problem for the berm we built yesterday but it would be nice to have the ground dry out a little bit for walking around.  Scattered  lightning around us now too that has to move off before we go out. The forecast says all of this should be gone in a couple of hours and we can look forward to nice steamy afternoon of excavating.   Will cleared a large area for us yesterday–hate to see all of his work wasted.  Dave

the dig is on

Holmes and I are here in Shenandoah.  We drove over  last night  from Iowa City with long-time MNH volunteer Aaron Last.  Will be joined by dig-veterans Will Mott,   Rob MacAfee and Lee McNair  this AM.  Despite an inch of rain on Saturday, the creek is still down and the forecast is good (chance of scattered showers tomorrow).   Tuesday is scheduled to be an equipment day with most of the morning and early afternoon being spent by Will clearing the muck and moving the berm.  Most of the volunteers are coming  in Wednesday  to  excavate . . . . Dave

Using a single bone to estimate the weight of an extinct animal, like we did last month, beats consulting the Psychic Hotline, but not by much. Scientists usually start with a weight-bearing bone like the femur. Unfortunately, fossil skeletons are usually incomplete and the bones fragmentary. When nothing else is available they look to tooth dimensions, jaw length, the thickness of a bone’s cortex, even the width of a joint (Scott, 1990). . . the equations are as numerous as the techniques for measuring the bones or the pieces thereof. (photo borrowed from)

In theory, femurs are simply columns supporting a TBD weight, subject to forces of tension and compression that engineers have understood for 2,000 years. Distal limb bones share the load in uncertain ways and can mislead–cranial measurements even more. Measurements directly related to the bone’s weight-bearing capacity (e.g. cross-section) promise the best results, but how do you measure something as irregular as a sloth femur? Femur length brings a much higher margin of error (Scott, 1990).

Our formula, like many others, is based on correlations derived from ungulates, for which there is a wide sample, but is that baseline relevant to ground sloths? The standard estimating error is 42%, applied to other ungulates. In other words, if our sloth were a moose, and we knew for sure ground sloths were strictly quadrupedal, didn’t have large weight-bearing tails, and their mass was distributed like the average mammal (i.e. 60% on the forefeet and 40% on hind feet, Alexander, 1985), then we could be 95% sure our sloth weighed between 453 and 5,205 pounds.

A baseline drawn from living Xenarthrans is hopeless for narrowing the estimate. We’re trying to cross a chasm of million years of separate evolution, significant disparities in habitat and life-style, and a huge size difference. . . . We might average estimates derived from other bones, but given the scarcity of fossils, the chance of finding that same combination of bones at another site is virtually nil. Comparing different animals using different bones would only increase the expected error. For all of its flaws, Greg’s methodology is still the best option. (sloth photo borrowed from)

Why bother when the potential for error is obviously so great? Paleoecologists can draw a wide range of fundamental conclusions from an estimate of an animal’s mass including metabolic rate, food intake, foraging time, forage quality and retention time, home range size, social patterns, population density, gestation period, litter size, life span, etc. (Peters, 1983; Schmidt-Nielsen, 1984). These are especially insightful for megaherbivores (mass > 1 ton), like ground sloths, with their special challenges and opportunities (Owen-Smith, 1988).

Until we invent a time machine there’s no way of determining how accurate the 2,829 pound-estimate is for our adult. Greg’s number feels right, but its greatest value may be in comparing this specimen to other Megalonyx specimens, and not in the absolute number. The best answer to the query, “How much did it (they) weigh?” may be, “about as much as a small elephant.” Disappointingly imprecise, I know, but as clear a picture as we have . . . . Dave

References

Alexander, R. M. 1985. Mechanics of posture and gait of some large dinosaurs. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 83: 1-25.

Owen-Smith, R. N. 1988. Megaherbivores: The influence of very large body size on ecology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Peters, R.H. 1983. The ecological implications of body size. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Scott, K. 1990. Postcranial dimensions of ungulates as predictors of body mass. In Body Size in Mammalian Paleobiology: Estimation and Biological Implications. J. Damuth and B.J. McFadden (eds.). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Schmidt-Nielsen, K. 1984. Scaling: Why is animal size so important. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Carol Hornbuckle (left), Karen Beecher (middle), David Brenzel (right) at the Greater Shenandoah Historical Society

Carol Hornbuckle (left), Karen Beecher (middle) David Brenzel (right)

About 300 people came to see the toddler skeleton and  other special exhibits at the Open House  in the Greater Shenandoah Historical Society May 29-30. 

Thanks to Harold Decuir, President of the Board of Directors, Sallie Brownlee, Museum Director, and the rest of the museum board and volunteers for hosting  us.   

Greater Shenandoah Historical Society May 30, 2009

We had a mishap downloading the camera, but Tess Gruber-Nelson, Staff Writer at the Vally News/Essex Independent rescued us with these photos. 

Tess also provided the story below: 

The three giant sloths unearthed in the West Tarkio Creekbed near Northboro got to come home for a visit over the weekend.

The University of Iowa Museum of Natural History brought the sloths to the Greater Shenandoah Historical Society Friday and Saturday in order to show the public what has been found in their backyards over the past three years.

“The first thing people ask is, ‘You found that here?’” said Co-Principal Investigator of the Tarkio Valley Sloth Project David Brenzel.

Exhibit comparing corresponding adult and "toddler" bones.

In addition, a bone from a Paramylodon sloth, also found at the site, was brought.

Brenzel said the bone was found by landowner Bob Athen a couple years ago and was placed in a sloth toe bone drawer until it was recently inspected by Greg McDonald, whom Brenzel described as the No. 1 sloth expert in the world.

“His (McDonald) face just lit up when he saw it,” said Brenzel. “This is a big deal. This is the first record of this (Paramylodon sloth) found in Iowa.”

Both the Paramylodon and Megalonyx were elephant-sized Ice Age mammals that became extinct about 12,000 years ago explained Brenzel.

However, Paramylodon sloths were outfitted with broader, triangular claws for digging rather than the sharp claws of the Megalonyx, which were used for seizing at woody vegetation such as tree branches.

“They are different genus and different species living in a slightly different habitat at the same time,” said Brenzel. “We’re finding these bones where they lived.”

Finding bones of the Megalonyx and Paramylodon helps researchers answer questions about how these animals lived, where they lived, what the landscape was like and how they died.

“There’s a whole ecosystem we’re starting to put together here that nobody in the world has ever been able to do this before because nobody has found a site to where these guys were living.”

Besides the actual bones of the sloths, UI Museum of Natural History researchers also brought along samples of the technology available to them through the University, such as one of the most sophisticated CT scanners in the country.

Researchers can take a bone from the sloth and scan it using the CT scanner. The feed from the scan is then sent to a mechanical engineering student in order to convert the file for rapid prototyping at the College of Engineering, who in turn can have a replica of the bone, both inside and out, made.

“We wanted to make the (Historical) Society aware of the capabilities we have,” said Brenzel. “They need to dream big. They don’t have to settle for poster-boards. They could do a life-sized model of the sloths.”

Brenzel added the University is willing to assist the museum in any way possible.

“We’re missing the boat if we don’t capitalize on this,” said Greater Shenandoah Society President Harold Decuir. “There’s plenty of room at the museum for a sloth display.”

The problem, Decuir said, is how to get the ball rolling for such a big undertaking.

“I honestly don’t know right now,” said Decuir. “I do know we need to find a way to connect with the young people in this community; get them interested in the museum.”

This was the first public display of (all of) the Tarkio Valley Sloths. Brenzel and Decuir both said they were pleased with the number in attendance. 

Tess Gruber Nelson, Staff Writer.

Thanks also to University of Iowa Museum of Natural History staff-members Sarah Horgen and Meghann Mahoney, and museum volunteer Aaron Last for their stellar support with the event . . . Dave

An enthusiastic audience at Saylorville Saturday.  Thanks to the staff at the Visitors Center, the Iowa Academy of Science for sponsoring us, and Craig Johnson, IAS Executive Director for making the arrangements.  We made some nice contacts.  Sounds like we’ll be doing a program for the Des Moines rock club soon. . . Dave

We now have an official estimate for the weight of our adult sloth courtesy of Greg McDonald—2,829 pounds.  We had assumed it was bigger than the average Megalonyx (2,400 lbs., McDonald, 2005) from the relative size of the teeth,  but this confirms it and provides our first absolute number using a formal estimating technique based on the femur.

The folks at ICLIC who produced the CT scans that we posted last month showed us more of their amazing capabilities and produced a Quicktime video of the femur  that allows viewers to turn the bone and see it from all sides. Thanks again to Dr. Eric Hoffman, Jered Sieren, and Youbing Yin at ICLIC and Jason Bertram, UI Museum of Natural History webmaster and Informatics major, School of Library and Information Science,  who formatted and compressed this file for the blog. More bone-movies will be coming soon.   

femur movie  [file size= 2MB]  use your mouse or arrow keys to turn

This is the left femur.   The large ball at the top connects with the hip, of course, and the knee is at the bottom. Turn the bone and notice the shaft isn’t round like the bones of most other mammals.  That’s normal for sloths, not the result of burial or some mishap. The shape may be an adaptation to a tripodal stance using the muscular tail as a brace to stand upright (Fariña,  Vizcaíno and Bargo, 1998), or it may just be phylogenetic, i.e. an ancestral  hold-over (ibid.).  The rugosity or rough texture of the surface is typical for ground sloths too, greatly increasing the attachment points for the huge leg muscles.

Notice the epiphyseal ring that partially encircles the head. That’s a growth plane for this end of the bone.  The fact that it hasn’t fused completely yet indicates our sloth was still growing. If the sloth were younger this ring would be more pronounced and circle the entire head. Different bones/ends stop growing at different times.  That’s one way scientists can determine an animal’s age–it may be the only way for adult sloths given their ever-growing teeth.  Recovering an assortment of bones from three sloths of different ages is the reason Greg calls the Tarkio Valley site a Rosetta Stone for understanding Megalonyx development (pers. comm.).

The head of the femur points upward at about 35° putting the legs closer together and under the center of gravity (McDonald, 1977).    That’s an important clue for scientists trying to determine how Megalonyx moved and whether it walked on four legs, or two. The head angles forward at about 45° matching the backward-pointing direction of the hip socket (ibid.), giving sloths a wide, knees-apart stance. Don’t tell John Wayne he stood like a sloth. . . those are fighting words pardner.

For the weight estimate Greg used the formula log10 mass = 3.4855 x log10 femur length (in centimeters) -2.9112 (formula F1 in  Fariña et al., 1998 and Scott, 1990).  The length of the femur and body mass of armadillos, sloth relatives, scale reasonably close to those of the average mammal (Fariña and Vizcaino, 1997), and femurs have been recovered from a fair number of ground sloths.  Still, estimating the mass of an extinct animal from a single bone is an extreme act of faith, especially when it’s a ground sloth.   This specific formula, like many allometric equations, is derived from ungulates, and one applies it to other taxa with some peril, especially Xenarthrans which are defined by their unique bone structure.

Still scientists persist because an animal’s mass can tell us so much about how it lived.  Focusing on one element and one unambiguous measurement reduces the errors that would come from using different bones and techniques with their corresponding formulas. Greg’s approach is simple and straight-forward and provides a consistent baseline for comparing different species of sloths and identifying trends in size over time.  The formula has been adopted by sloth scientists here and in South America, and   it’s the basis for the 3,070 pound estimate that we cited for our Paramylodon (McDonald, 2005).  Next time:  Shooting in the dark:  the fine print of the weight estimate . . . . Dave

References

Fariña, R.A., Vizcaíno, S.F. 1997.  Allometry of the bones of living and extinct armadillos (Xenarthra, Dasypoda).  Zeitschrift für Saugetierekunde 62: 65-70.

Fariña, R.A., Vizcaíno, S.F. and Bargo, M. S. 1998.  Body mass estimations in Lujanian (Late Pleistocene-Early Holocene of South America) mammal megafauna.  Mastozoología Neotropical 5: 87-108.

McDonald, H. G.  1977.  Description of the osteology of the extinct gravigrade Edentate Megalonyx with observations on its ontogeny, phylogeny and functional anatomy. Unpublished M.S. thesis, University of Florida.

McDonald, H. G. 2005.  Paleoecology of extinct Xenarthrans and the Great American Biotic Interchange.  Bulletin of the Florida Museum of Natural History 45: 313-333.

Scott,  K. 1990.  Postcranial dimensions of ungulates as predictors of body mass.  In Body Size in Mammalian Paleobiology:  Estimation and Biological Implications.  J. Damuth and B.J. McFadden (eds.).  Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

The Iowa Academy of Science Speaker Series at the Saylorville Visitor Center begins this Saturday, June 20th at 2:00 p.m. This event is open to the public free of charge and children are encouraged to attend.

Title: The Tarkio Valley Iowa Giant Ground Sloths: Life and Death in the Ice Ages.

Ground sloths may be extinct but they aren’t dead. The footsteps of these recently-departed elephant-sized Ice Age giants continue to echo through Iowa’s woodlands with important implications for today and the future under global warming. Holmes A. Semken, Jr. Emeritus Professor of Geoscience , University of Iowa, and Principle Investigator on the Tarkio Valley Sloth Project and David Brenzel, Co-PI, will discuss the excavation, which has been on-going since 2003, recovering the world’s only Jefferson’s sloth-family, including the most complete adult and second-most complete juvenile of the species ever found, and research progess to-date.  Join David Brenzel and Holmes Semken as they tell the story of the Tarkio Valley Iowa excavation. The presentation will include a “show and tell” display of bones that children and adults will enjoy.

The Iowa Academy of Science is a 501 (c) (3) non-profit organization promoting science research, science education, the public understanding of science, and awards excellence in these endeavors.

We hope to see you Saturday at the Saylorville Visitor Center for this informative presentation. Bring the entire family.

For more information

Craig Johnson, Executive Director
Iowa Academy of Science
175 Baker Hall
University of Northern Iowa
Cedar Falls, IA 50614-0508

Walking on campus last month I spotted an acquaintance I had long overlooked—a Kentucky Coffee tree, Gymnocladus dioicus. It’s small and easy to miss most of the year, but one characteristic stood out—the ear-sized seedpods that had clung to its branches well into the  Spring. Early American caffeine addicts ground up its large seeds to make a coffee substitute. If they got a buzz it wasn’t from caffeine–a novel amino acid makes up 5% of the seed contents (dry weight), probably toxic to the Bruchid beetles that plague most other Leguminosae (Janzen, 1969), but a welcome winter snack  for a hungry mastodon or ground sloth. G. dioicus shows all indications of being an ice age orphan–left hanging by its normal dispersers (Barlow, 2000). Native Americans may have saved the tree from extinction by spreading the seeds for food or perhaps to use for recreation  (Van der Linden and Farrar, 1984). (tree photo borrowed from)

 

Janzen and Martin (1982) cite large wasting fruit and seeds as indications a plant may be a victim of the ice age extinctions. On that basis the Honey Locust, Osage Orange, Persimmon and Pawpaw are most often cited as other orphans (Barlow, 2000). I wonder though if this list doesn’t significantly understate the impact of the mass-extinction on plants. “Large” and “wasting” are nebulous measures, and little is  known for sure about the fate of seeds after they leave home. (seed photo borrowed from)

 

However transported, and some compelling models not withstanding, few researchers have ever had the wherewithal to track an actual seed shadow. Forgotten rotting fruit may be the least of the waste. An oak, for example,  need only see one acorn mature among the millions it produces over a lifetime to be deemed a success. The thousands eaten by squirrels and blue jays annually may be the necessary “payment in offspring” owed to dispersers for their service (Janzen, 1985), but the 90%+  lost annually to pathogens, insects and seed predators (Janzen, 1969), or simply misplaced, is a huge waste! (oak photo by Richard Packwood,  borrowed from)

 

Evolution is a sloppy business, and forces of selection assail a plant from all directions. Fruit characteristics are a compromise between defense and attraction.  Perfectly choreographed plant-disperser relationships are rare, and what passes for the dance of coevolution is usually just an animal doing an opportune solo and “fitting” in (Janzen, 1969) using a suite of morphological features and behaviors evolved eons earlier in a different habitat, and in the case of sloths, a different continent.  For G. dioicus, Megalonyx was simply “next” in a long line of big movers, possibly stretching back to dinosaurs.

 

Plants generally don’t do much adapting to the dispersers they are dealt. Like in high school, there’s strong pressure from the surrounding community to look and act like everyone else–in this case a fruit.  Invasive species wouldn’t be the problem they are if evolution put a premium on dispersee individuality.   Fossils show the basic characteristics of many fruits have persisted over very long periods of time. The arils of Taxus, for example, are virtually indistinguishable today from those of Palaeotaxus 175 million years ago (Herrera, 1986). Flowering plant species show up in the fossil record an average of 27-38 million years, while birds and mammals last for just 0.5-4.0 million years (Herrera, 1985a). Disappearing dispersers, i.e. orphaning, is a recurring event in the evolutionary lives of plants. “Smart” trees don’t put all their eggs in one basket and coevolve with just a single disperser unless they run out of options, as on an island. (Taxus photo borrowed from)

 

Like “waste,” size is relative too, and a poor measure of disperser compatibility. I’ve always been struck by the dependence of Yellowstone grizzly bears on White-bark Pine seeds (Pinus alibicaulis) (Kendall, 1983). Howsoever small, pine nuts pack a wallop of nutrition, offsetting the bears’ high handling costs.   Grizzlies eat various small fruit throughout their range, and travel some distance to get it (Willson, 1993). Size isn’t a constraint so long as a fruit returns the investment. (Bear photo borrowed from)

 

The individual fruits of many woody plants are small and seem adapted for the exclusive dispersal of birds and small mammals, but they often grow in compact bundles of multiple “berries.”  Frequently the bundles or infructescences are located on the ends of branches. This presentation may have evolved to compete better for the attention of passing birds, or to swamp insect pests (Sallabanks and Courtney, 1992); it may make the fruit harder for small rodents to steal (Denslow and Moermond, 1982), or enhance pollination chances (Schoen and Dubec, 1990); it may just be the most efficient structure for the plant (ibid.), but it also certainly reduces the handling costs of large mammals. No need to seach far and wide for large fruit when plenty of prepackaged small fruit is readily available.

 

There’s little allure however in an infructescence whose individual berries don’t ripen simultaneously, forcing foragers to waste time picking over bundles looking for ripe fruit.  Not coincidentally, synchronous ripening is characteristic of most of North America’s fruiting plants, especially in the fall when demand is greatest (Thompson and Willson, 1979).  Bundling easily accessible mouthfuls of fruit is a wise risk-hedge for a plant living in an uncertain world where dispersers both big and small drop out regularly.

 

Given the opportunity, many mammals include fruit in their diets, and most that do are legitimate dispersers on occasion (Sallabanks and Courtney, 1992).  So does it matter that North America’s small-fruited trees and shrubs lost their largest potential dispersers 12,000 years ago?  . . . There are still plenty of birds around.  Are plants suffering for lack of super-sized transport service?  Is there any reason to believe Megalonyx played any significant role in the process?

 

Fleshy fruit and dedicated fruit-eaters are relatively uncommon in North America today compared to the diversity of the neotropics (Howe, 1986).  Explanations usually include the constraints of winter and the plants’ habitat requirements.  Many are fugitive species, dependent on forest edges and clearings, a tree-fall or fire to open a gap for them to become established, and declining when the late-successioners reassert their dominance (Herrera, 1985b).  However, our deficit may simply be the fallout from an impoverished forest disturbance regime crippled by the extinction of the ice age megaherbivores.  (elephant photo borrowed from)

 

“It matters who defecates what where” (Janzen, 1986), most particularly because of what else they are doing at the time.    Whether Megalonyx served as a disperser or not, the  megaherbivores played keystone roles in the disturbance regime of Ice Age woodlands, creating the openings  fruiting plants need in particular.  If the surviving fruiting species aren’t dispersal orphans, many are certainly disturbance orphans. . . . Dave

 

 

 

References

Barlow, C. 2000. The Ghosts of Evolution: Nonsensical fruit, missing partners, and other ecological anachronisms. Basic Books. New York, NY.

 

Denslow, J. S. and Moermond, T. C. 1982.  The effect of accessibility on rates of fruit removal from tropical shrubs:  an experimental study. Oecologia 54: 170-176.

 

Herrera, C. M. 1985a. Determinants of plant-animal coevolution: the case of mutualistic dispersal of seeds by vertebrates. Oikos 44: 132-141.

 

Herrera, C. M. 1985b. Habitat-consumer interactions in frugivorous birds.  In Habitat Selection in Birds.  M. L. Cody (ed.).  Academic Press,  Orlando, FL.

 

Herrera, C. M. 1986. Vertebrate dispersed plants: why they don’t behave the way they should. In Frugivores and Seed Dispersal. A. Estada and T. H. Fleming (eds.). Dr. W. Junk Publishers, Dordrecht.

 

Howe, H. F. 1986.  Seed dispersal by fruit-eating birds and mammals.  In Seed Dispersal.  D. R. Murray (ed.). Academic Press, NY.

 

Janzen, D. H. 1969.  Seed-eaters versus seed size, number, toxicity and dispersal.  Evolution 23: 1-27.

 

Janzen, D. H. 1985.  The natural history of mutualisms.  In The Biology of Mutualism:  Ecology and Evolution.  D. H. Boucher (ed.) Croom Helm Ltd., London.

 

Janzen, D. H. 1986.  Mice, big mammals, and seeds:  it matters who defecates what where.  In Frugivores and Seed Dispersal.  A. Estrada and T. H. Fleming (eds.) Dr W. Junk, Publishers, Dordrecht.

 

Janzen, D. H. and Martin, P. S. 1982. Neotropical anachronisms: the fruits the Gomphotheres ate. Science 215: 19-27.

 

Kendall, K. C. 1983. Use of pine nuts by grizzly and black bears in the Yellowstone area. International Conference on Bear Research and Management 5: 166-173.

 

Sallabanks, R. and Courtney, S. P. 1992.  Frugivory, seed predation, and insect-vertebrate interactions.  Annual Review of Entomology 37: 377-400.

 

Schoen, D. J. and Dubec, M. 1990.  The evolution of inflorescence size and number: a gamete-packaging strategy in plants.  The American Naturalist 135: 841-857.

 

Thompson, J. N. and Willson, M. F. 1979. Evolution of temperate fruit/bird interactions: phenological strategies.  Evolution 33: 973-982. 

 

Vander Linden, P. and Farrar, D. 1984. Forest and Shade Trees of Iowa. Iowa State University Press. Ames, IA.

 

Willson, M. F. 1993. Mammals as seed dipersal mutualists in North America.  Oikos 67: 159-176.

More photos taken during Greg McDonald’s visit May 6-9, 2009. These are from his work in the lab May 7, and his special presentation to project volunteers  that evening, prior to his public lecture. 

Many thanks to Greg for his highly productive visit and exciting presentations–public and behind-the scenes.  Watch for lots of follow-up in the near future. Can hardly wait for Greg to return. . . . Dave

sternebrae78 Holmes and Greg85 Holmes and Greg86 sternal ribs92 sternal ribs97 Greg103 Greg102 Greg91 Greg93 Greg89 Greg88 Greg104 Baker105 Rapid Prototype scapula232 Rapid Prototype scapula229 Greg242 Greg235 Greg215 Greg210 Greg234 volunters243 volunteers222 Mottbunch248 Greg216 walk like a megalonyx236 Paramylodon walking241Holmes223

Some nice press about the new sloth discovery in Futurity, a new blog about breakthroughs at America’s research universities.

 ICLIC2009-71We’ll never be able to say enough about the amazing cooperation we’ve received from every University of Iowa department we’ve approached for help in analyzing the sloth fossils.  That’s especially true of the Iowa Comprehensive Lung Imaging Center (ICLIC), which has given us access to one of the most advanced x-ray computed tomography (CT) imaging machines in the county to scan some of our sloth bones.  The Siemens high speed, high resolution, multi-slice scanner is one of the few in the country devoted entirely to human and animal research.  

 

radiology2 radiology1 radiology4 radiology7 ICLIC2009-62 ICLIC2009-69 ICLIC 2009-58  youbing86 anterior_scapula, youbing83

Thanks especially to Eric Hoffman, Ph.D., Professor of Radiology, Physiology, and Biomedical Engineering (video);  Joseph Reinhardt, Ph.D., Associate Professor, Department of Biomedical Engineering; Jerred Sieren and Lisa Hudson, research assistants in the CT lab; and Youbing Yin, a graduate student in the Mechanical Engineering program for processing the CT-scan files.

ICLIC, directed by Dr. Eric Hoffman, was created in 2004 with the help of a National Institute of Health (NIH) grant.  It’s a joint venture of the UI Carver College of Medicine including the departments of Radiology, Medicine, Surgery, Pathology, and Anesthesiology; and the College of Engineering including Biomedical Enginering, Electrical and Computer Engineering, and Mechanical Engineering; along with  Siemens Medical Systems.  The research team also includes investigators at the Mayo Clinic, John Hopkins University, Marquette University and the University of Texas, as well as the University of Aukland in New Zealand and the University of Erlangen in Germany.  The partners are using CT technology to build a dynamic model of normal human lung anatomy and function to use as a basis for  understanding and diagnosing various human lung pathologies

The CT technology and software being used to analyze the inner structure of human lungs has provided us with amazing pictures of the details of the interior of various sloth bones and may help us understand the origin and impact of the serious wounds that have been found on both the “toddler” and the adult.  The pictures below, slices of various bones as indicated,  show the exceptional state of preservation.  Lots more images in Flickr. . . . . Dave

  tail_vertebrae  digit2 claw

 

 

 

 

Greg McDonald is here  cataloging Megalonyx bones from the site.  He found  a right fifth metacarpal of a Paramylodon harlani that we had misidentified as a Megalonyx metatarsal.  This is the first confirmed record of a Paramylodon in Iowa.  

The bone was found by the landowner, Bob Athen, in 2006 on a gravel bar about 200 feet downstream from where we are currently digging. We assumed it had been transported there by the 1993 flood that exposed the original deposit.  That may still be true.  The bone is in excellent condition and retains all of its muscle scars, etc.  It did not roll far.  An analysis of the rare earth elements in the bone may tell us if the animal died about the same time as our sloth family.

Harlan’s ground sloth was the second largest of North America’s four Ice Age ground sloth species, weighing in at approximately 3,070 lbs.–about  20% more than Jefferson’s sloth (McDonald, 2005).  P. harlani was a grazer, or perhaps more properly a browser-grazer (Naples, 1989) and widespread on North America’s grasslands.  M. jeffersonii is believed to have been a browser. . . . Dave

References

McDonald, H.G. 2005.  Paleoecology of extinct Xenarthrans and the Great American Biotic Interchange.  Bulletin of the Florida Museum of Natural History 45: 313-333.

Naples, V.L. 1989.  The feeding mechanism in the Pleistocene ground sloth, Glossotherium.  Contributions in Science, Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County 415: 1-23.

New dig photos

 scapula Photos of the  new “baby” scapula and ribs, plus pics of the site prep.

will_digging will_walking attaching_blade blade previousdig bob_scapula bonesinplace clearing_starthotwheels

 

 

Link to newspaper story

Dig success!

Holmes and I just got back from a quick trip out to the site this weekend  to prepare for an expedition next month.  We got rained out Saturday but found  some bones while we were moving dirt Friday including the other “baby” scapula, and a couple of large rib pieces–juvenile (probably from the “toddler” ) and something small TBD.   
 
We moved the pile we created in December about 10 ft. closer to the river into the area where we dug 2 years ago and started clearing  a new area about 10 ft. X 40 ft., north of the last dig.  Sloth-digging veteran, Will Mott, Council Bluffs, IA  operated a small tracked Bobcat that Jeff Evans, Evans Equipment Rental, delivered to the site.  Will  gave a blade he designed for the bucket a good workout. He proved he could shave off very thin (~1/2″) layers of clay with precision.  We spotted this bone pocket following behind him watching for signs of the blade uncovering anything red (like the bones).  The clay was mostly the oxidized brown color like we encountered for the first time in December, with only small thin patches of our familiar blue-gray.  We thought that might mean bad news for any bone discoveries but it fooled us.  These bones are at least as well preserved as those we found in the blue-gray.  
 
This could be a good digging model to follow in the future.  As we get further from the main bone deposit  it may allow us to use  our volunteers and budget more efficiently and cover the most ground.  There’s a lot more sloth still hiding out there!   Photos to follow in a couple of days. . . . Dave
 

Mark your calendars for Thursday, May 7. Dr. Greg McDonald, Senior Curator of Paleontology for the National Park Service, renowned giant ground sloth expert, and consultant on the Tarkio Valley Sloth Project, will offer a lecture: The Museum and the Megalonyx: A History of Great Aspirations and Sloths in Iowa, at 7:00 PM in the Macbride Hall Auditorium on the University of Iowa campus.  Meet Greg at a public reception before the lecture, from 6:00-7:00 PM, in the Iowa Hall gallery of the Museum of Natural History, Macbride Hall.  Greg is an excellent speaker and a real sloth enthusiast.  It will be an interesting and entertaining evening.

McDonald’s lecture kicks off a year-long celebration of the 150th anniversary of the Museum of Natural History, the oldest museum in Iowa.  Check  the museum’s web site http://www.uiowa.edu/~nathist/  for details of other upcoming events.   

A clam-tastic find!

The dead of winter gives us the opportunity to catch up on our lab work.  Holmes has been exploring a sample of clay we collected two years ago near the juveniles, and he found some clams inside!  These are the first fossil mollusks we’ve seen in the clay.  Jim Theler at the University of Wisconsin–La Crosse  has identified them as members of the Sphaeriidae family which has two common genera Pisidium or pill clams and Sphaerium or fingernail clams.

In this part of the world fingernail clams are found in all kinds of freshwater—ponds, lakes, rivers and creeks of all sizes; in silt, mud, sand and gravel. Sphaeriidae bury themselves in the bottom and don’t move around much, unlike snails, so they generally serve as good indicators of the habitat (Herrington and Taylor, 1958). Some are highly sensitive to their environment and make excellent environmental barometers of water quality and other environmental conditions (Kilgour and Mackie, 1991).  If we can identify the species that will establish  its habitat requirements and help define some specific conditions  at the site when they were alive (e.g.water chemistry, hydrology, sediments, etc.).  It’s a particularly difficult family to classify though–we’ll need a specialist.   There are more  fingernail clams in our sample—that could be useful too.  Funk and Reckendorfer (2008) report a correlation  between the shell variation within a population to the temporal and spatial variability of the environment, with stable homogenous environments showing less variability. Stay tuned, we could have a lot of fun with these!

 Holmes also uncovered some large mussels—Unio sized in the sample. They are highly degraded though and very fragile.  Identifying them will also be difficult.  If we can though it will help us to further delimit the water and bottom conditions when they were alive

fingernail clam 

 

There are a couple of exciting conclusions we can draw from the presence of these bivalves:  1) The clams grew here and weren’t carried in by the current. They are buried in the same silty clay we find everywhere else at the site indicating the velocity of the water was very slow—not fast enough to transport these far, even with their sail-like shapes—especially the big shells.  2) The fingernail clams are full-grow, they are not the juveniles of  fresh water mussels (naiads). They generally live 1-3 years.   Were the sloths wading through a soggy wetland or in the shallows of a lake when they met their end?   Could this area dry out every summer and the clams still survive?  How long can clams “hold their breaths?”Answers to these questions will take us a giant step toward defining another dimension of the sloths’ habitat. . . . Dave 

 

References

 

Funk, A. and Reckendorfer, W. 2008.  Environmental heterogeneity and morphological variability in Pisidium subtruncatum (Sphaeriidae, Bivalvia). International Review of Hydrobiology 93: 188-199.

 

Herrington, H.B. and Taylor, D.W. 1958.  Pliocene and Pleistocene Sphaeriidae (Pelecypoda) from the central United States.  Occasional Papers No. 596, University of Michigan Museum of Zoology,  29 pp.

 

Kilgour, B.W. amd Mackie, G.L. 1991. Relationship between demographic features of a pill clam (Pisidium casertanum) and environmental variables. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 10: 68-80.

photo by Judy Glattstein, bellewood-gardens.com

UNC Charlotte Botanical Gardens

The city of Marion is soliciting ideas from local residents and other interested parties for improving city life and strengthening its identity in a program they are calling Imagine8.  I’ve been working with a group of friends and supporters of the Eastern Iowa Paleontology Project (EIPP) to develop a statement encouraging an initiative to improve natural science education in the city.  We all agree it would be very nice if we can create a permanent home for our dinosaur in the process, but more important is encouraging science education.  You would think with the shortage of engineers, scientists, doctors and other health professionals in this country and our pressing environmental needs that there would be more support for teachers and families wanting to encourage their children in this direction but science funding always trails far behind that for culture and the arts.   Since Cedar Rapids hasn’t called me yet about redeveloping their flooded downtown area into an Ice Age Sloth Park ,  I’m planning  to dust off the idea for Marion and propose it as part of a general botanical center.

 

 

Proposed:  To promote natural science education and build a strong community identity Marion should establish a botanical center managed like the Chicago Botanic Garden and the Minnesota Landscape Arboretum in Minnneapolis (among many others).  A huge volunteer army has formed to help maintain these gardens and they have become the center of social activity in their communities.  E. Iowa garden clubs are as varied as the plant world, with different ones devoted to roses, hostas, water plants, fruit, vegetables,  herbs, heirloom plants, prairies, succulents, conifers, terrariums and bonsai, in addition to several with a general interest.  Every one would volunteer to design, plant and maintain a garden focused on their passion, and where no club currently exists one would quickly coalesce from local experts given the opportunity.  

 

A botanical center would be a distinctive jewel for Marion and a magnet for senior citizens, school teachers, tourists and families interested in nature, birding, wildlife, ecology, etc.   A botanic garden would send a powerful signal to business about the community’s commitment to children and science education. The center would become an important nexus between area colleges and universities, with Kirkwood (the local community college) offering considerable practical horticultural experience and students; Iowa State University (in nearby Ames) adding a high-tech/ag/research dimension; and the University of Iowa  bringing an impressive collection of paleobotanical fossils and expertise to the table, in addition to a world-famous environmental engineering program. 

 

Partnerships might also be explored with the many area companies involved in the agriculture, bioremediation and biofuel industries. With a small staff committed to coordinating self-governing volunteer organizations, and the research operations funded by industry and the universities, operating costs would stay low versus the benefits reaped.  Gardeners are patient, with nurturing as the objective, not immediate gratification, so unlike any other project the city will consider, a botanical center would pay dividends from its inception, expand as the budget and Marion’s vision permits, and improve with age.

 

That’s my proposal.  A Sloth Woodland and a Dinosaur Fern Garden would be terrific family attractions in a botanical center.  If you want to submit some ideas of your own supporting paleontology, natural science, or children’s science education here’s a link to the Marion Imagine8 home page. . . . Dave. 

 

Since we started excavating in 2003, Holmes has been keeping an official log he calls Megalonyx Matters documenting  our significant activites. This is publication #17, covering the preparation work leading up to our last expedition and its results. Lest anyone be concerned, the stubborn beaver discussed below is alive and well, and continuing to safeguard the site with a cover of at least a foot of water . . . .  Dave

Megalonyx Matters 17Site preparation (Aug. 27, Oct. 3, Dec. 4) and excavation (Dec. 6)

Site Preparation
On August 27, 2008 Dave Brenzel, Holmes Semken, Phil Mather (Mather and Sons) and Bob Athen (landowner) met at the site and devised a plan to extend the sloth excavation about 30 feet into the south bank to search for more juvenile remains. The first obstacle proved to be a downstream beaver dam that substantially increased the water level over the bone-bearing, blue-grey clay. Bob had experimented with removing the dam by hand. This worked but the beavers repaired it overnight. It was clear that each excavation would be initiated by attacking the dam.

On October 3, Holmes and Dave returned to oversee the Mather’s levee repair and overburden removal. Dave waded in and breached the beaver dam by the time the excavator arrived (8:00 am); the water dropped 2.5 feet at the site. We were delighted because this exposed the bone-bearing matrix. Phil (name of operator), who operated the excavator, got the machine to streamside (and back out) via some creative road repair over very mucky terrain resulting from the infamous 2008 flood. By the end of the day there was a combination dam/entrance ramp both up and downstream from the future excavation area. The ramps were about 30 feet apart. The old lateral (midstream) levee was largely removed by flooding but it was traceable and was also reinforced by the excavator. Sloth bone, predicted to be under this levee, appeared safe. At the end of the day, the south bank was pulled back about 30 feet and the dig floor appeared accessible for a crawler to enter, clear remaining overburden (approximately one foot) and build a stream side levee to protect south bank excavations. Phil noted, “We now have a big hole to play in on the next dig.”

The crawler, operated by Will Mott, arrived December 4. Dave drove to Shenandoah a day early to reopen negotiations with the resident beaver. Will started clearing overburden by 9:30 AM and worked until nightfall. Dave and Will both noted the clay was more varied in color and, except for an occasional patch, less blue than previously seen. There was also a distinct up-tilt in the clay layer upstream (East). In the afternoon, after the bulk of the overburden had been moved, Will attached a blade he had fabricated to the bucket of the crawler and began shaving off thin layers of clay to reduce the amount the weekend recruits would have to remove. Dave stood by watching for traces of bone. At the end of the day Will used the bucket to dig a sump to collect melt water and satisfy Dave’s curiosity about the depth of the clay. He dug through approximately four feet of clay, all as homogenous as the surface layers, before striking a layer of fine white sand. The sand began to seep into the hole from the sides under the pressure of a slow flow of water that eventually filled the hole (so much for the sump idea). Dave and Will left the site by 6PM.

Excavation 
The Sloth Rapid Response Team journeyed to Shenandoah on Friday, Dec. 5th and they were on site at 8:00 Saturday morning. After bailing out the hole, and starting the pumps to keep up with Dave’s spring, the volunteers formed a line facing the stream side levee and began cutting a trench toward the south bank of the cut parallel to the levee. Spoil was thrown onto the levee. By the end of the day the area, except for a snapping turtle bone, proved barren.

While disappointing in terms of sloth bone recovery, the dig did define the south boundary of the bone scatter. This boundary is now defined to the north and east as well as to the south. Bone has been probed in the partly excavated intermediate areas where the juvenile bone has been concentrated. Another positive note: Ron Vogel performed a feasibility test on the clay using ultrasonic equipment he borrowed from his department. The results were promising and Ron hopes to construct a prototype of an ultrasonic bone detector in time for our next venture to the site. The next dig will occur after the spoil that forms the south levee is pushed back into the south excavation and a new levee created between the two entrance ramps. The crawler will again be required and we are working on ways to facilitate its access and egress.

Participants on the December 6, 2008 dig:  Lynn Alex (OSA), Bob Athen (landowner), Cyril Below (grandson of Herb Dircks), David Brenzel (Co-PI, NSF grant), Andy Clack (Ancient DNA Centre, McMasters University), Herb Dircks (UI Rapid Prototyping Laboratory), Harold Decuir (President, Board of Directors, Greater Shenandoah Historical Museum, Kandyce Decuir (daughter), Pete Eyheralde (Naturalist, Mahaska County Conservation Board) , Elizabeth Fox (OSA), Cherie Haury-Artz (OSA), Sarah Horgen (UI Museum Natural History), Don Johnson UI Hospitals and Clinics, aka the Fossil Guy, and President, Eastern Iowa Paleontology Project, Meghann Mahoney (Museum of Natural History student-staff, Anthropology Major), Robert McAfee, Ph.D. (Faculty, Doane College), Holmes Semken (UI-Geoscience, Emeritus; PI, NSF grant), Austyn Slaybaugh CR High School student), Jennifer Sweet (OSA), Ron Vogel UI-Dept.of Physics and Astronomy), and Mary Weber (OSA).

Holmes A. Semken, Jr and David J. Brenzel, January 5, 2009

Ron Vogel, sloth volunteer and resident physics expert, has the theory that the remarkable uniformity of the clay that the sloth bones are resting in provides a unique opportunity to use ultrasound technology to search underground.  If so it would save us a lot of time and money digging blindly for bones, and allow us to extend our search area significantly.   Preliminary results are back from the clay samples he collected at the site last month and the results are promising.

  According to Ron, “The results are. . . the same as I found in the tests on site. That is, the acoustic loss is about 5 to 10 times that of the human body. That seems like a lot but it is actually a lot less than anyone else has reported for soil. Based on these measurements, I’m working on a device we can use on site.”   He doesn’t know if he can get it done in time to do us any good but plans to try.

Ground-penetrating radar, which uses radio wave frequencies,  is generally used for remote underground sensing,  but it won’t work at the site under our conditions–the wet clay absorbs too much of the signal.  Ultrasound works similarly, but uses sound waves instead, and doesn’t suffer from the attentuation loss-problem under wet conditions. The technology runs into problems however with sorting out the meaning of the many different signal returns that result from trying it in  mixed materials.  For that reason ultrasound is  limited to looking inside relatively uniform materials– like concrete roadways and bridges (for corrosion), or steel railroad tracks (for signs of fatigue or cracks) and of course people (for babies).  More, as Ron moves ahead. . . .   Dave

  Dec 2008 West Tarkio Creek   Dec 2008 site closeup Dec 2008 getting organized  Dec 2008 Harold Dec 2008 Lynn Dec 2008 Pete Dec 2008 Ron Vogel Dec 2008 Don Dec 2008 Cherie Dec 2008 Andy Dec 2008 Meghann, Lynn and Rob Dec 2008 Kandyce Dec 2008 whole crew Dec 2008 OSA gang2 Dec 2008 Herb and Cy Dec 2008 shovel Dec 2008 Andy & Rob

Participating in the dig:  Lynn Alex, Bob Athen, Cyril Below, David Brenzel, Andy Clack, Harold Decuir, Kandyce Decuir, Herb Dircks,  Pete Eyheralde,  Elizabeth Fox, Cherie Haury-Artz, Sarah Horgen, Don Johnson, Meghann Mahoney, Robert McAfee, Holmes Semken, Austyn Slaybaugh, Jennifer Sweet, Ron Vogel, and Mary Weber.  Thanks all for another fun and successful outing. . . . Dave

Sloth music

We’re like Goldilocks wandering around in the cottage of The 3 Sloths—the table is set, the beds are made and the TV is on—maybe the owners are out in back . . . but we’re pretending they’re gone forever and we’re in control now. Look around—sloths may be extinct, but they aren’t dead! We’re surrounded by signs of their lingering presence, and the continuing performance of many of their Ice Age co-stars. Applaud Blue Jays today for our oak trees. Admire the Osage Orange that still grows a formidable sloth defense. And grieve for the lonely Honeylocust that still cries out every fall for the sloths to return. (photo borrowed from)

The common Honeylocust (Gleditsia triacanthos), sometimes called the “False Acacia,” is reviled despite many fine qualities including light shade, fragrant flowers and adaptability. The problem? #1: its large thorns—a serious menace to tires and bare feet, and; #2: the messy piles of long curly brown seedpods produced by the females. (photo borrowed from)

 

The “honey” in “honeylocust” comes from the sweet gum that surrounds the seeds while they ripen inside the pods. “Locust” is a case of mistaken identity. Colonial settlers assumed G. triacanthos was related to the Old World Carob or Locust (Ceratonia siliqua), a Mediterranean tree with similar pods (Peattie, 1991). A chocolate substitute is ground from the seeds. The tree’s nickname, “St.-John’s Bread, ” is a biblical reference to the sweet-toothed saint who subsisted on ”locusts and wild honey“ in the desert (Matthew 3:4). Scholars believe he was eating Ceratonia seeds rather than bugs and the “locust” derives from the resemblance of the noisy insects to the rattling sound the pods make when ripe and the tree branches are shaken (Peattie, 1991). (photo borrowed from)

G. triacanthos is an aggressive colonizer of disturbed ground (e.g. farm fencerows, ravines and abandoned pastures; floodplains); once established they are hard to eradicate (Illinois Nature Preserves Commission, 2003). Saplings display imposing ever-growing clusters of thorns, some over 12 inches long (The Complete Encyclopedia of Trees and Shrubs, 2003). The multi-branched spikes can cover the trunk to a height of 20+ ft.– far beyond the reach of living browsers. Defensive overkill is good sign of an ice age ghost at work and the lingering effect of genes that know mastodons and sloths are still lurking nearby (Barlow, 2000). (photo borrowed from)

G. triacanthos is an ice age orphan–seedpods don’t pile up like they do under this tree unless its regular disperser(s) are gone (Janzen and Martin, 1982). An “aggressive colonizer” doesn’t sound like it’s suffering, but the trees’ common occurrence along river bottoms is an important clue—spring floods carry the seedpods afar but there are problems moving upstream and to high ground. For most of the Holocene, with its natural dispersers extinct, G. triacanthos was rare within its former range (Janzen 1982). It only became widely distributed again after cattle were introduced to North America. The prowess cows show in dispersing Honeylocust seeds results from evolving with very similar trees, Acacia spp., in N. Africa and the Middle East. Looking at Acacias and the relationships they co-evolved with large ungulates may reveal some important clues about Ice Age ecosystems and also sloths. (photo borrowed from)

There are 128 Acacia spp. in Africa; nearly half concentrated in the Horn of Africa and the Middle East (Coe and Coe, 1987). All mount a defense of hooks or spines against browsers; some famously offer bed and board to stinging ants for reinforcement. Acacia foliage is valuable forage for herbivores throughout Africa, and in the dry season the bark is an important item in elephants’ diets. The seedpods are avidly eaten by many large ungulates. Some pods contain a sticky aromatic secretion that is it is eagerly sought by browsers. (photo borrowed from)

Some Acacia seeds are small and papery and wind-dispersed; others are large and durable and dispersed by mammals. Traditional pastoralists harvest the latter to feed livestock, using long poles to shake the pods down from the trees. The seeds rattle inside the pods and the sound attracts animals from up to 200 meters away (Coe and Coe, 1987). Mutualistic relationships have developed from the Sahara to India between arboreal mammals feeding in Acacia trees and land-bound browsers attracted to the sound and dropped pods.

Acacia seeds won’t germinate in the shade of their parents so wind or good wheels are important for dispersal (Miller and Coe, 1993). The hard seeds are well adapted to survive the shearing forces of mammal teeth and digestive acids. They need scarification to speed germination, and the more the better. Rohner and Ward (1999) found a significant correlation between mammal size and germination success. However, the same architecture that allows the seeds to escape mammal-passage largely unscathed also leaves them vulnerable to Bruchid beetles, or “seed weevils.” The insects bore through the Acacia pods while they are still green and growing on the trees and lay their eggs on the seeds. The new generation attacks the mature seeds and can destroy up to 99% of those left on or under the trees (Southgate, 1981). (photo borrowed from)

With death by beetle infestation virtually certain, could a seed be any worse off getting eaten? Surprisingly, those seeds that go through a mammal gut have a germination rate up to 3X better than seeds that aren’t swallowed (Miller and Coe, 1993). If caught early, ingestion kills the Bruchid larvae before they kill the seed, and the tunnel the insects burrowed inside speeds water absorption and germination later on. It’s extremely beneficial for Acacias to arrange to have their seeds eaten as soon as possible after ripening, and transported far away from the site of infestation, so they evolved a dinner bell. When ripe. they start rattling, like a Flamenco dancer on caffeine, and mammals come running from all around.  And so too it worked for the Honeylocust for millennia. . . . (photo borrowed from)

Ecologists have barely begun to decipher the many ways ice age megamammals affected North American ecosystems. Species may be orphaned in many ways–the signs are often subtle, like the call to dinner that no one hears. As we survey the woodlands we’ve inherited we should remember that the sloths haven’t been gone as long as we pretend—the porridge is still hot and their music still plays. And as the quickening pace of global climate change and related “natural” disasters indicate, we aren’t in control at all. We’ll never solve some of our conservation puzzles until we acknowledge the keystone role of the Pleistocene megamammals (photo borrowed from). . . . Dave

References:

Barlow, C. 2000. The Ghosts of Evolution: Nonsensical fruit, missing partners, and other ecological anachronisms. Basic Books. New York, NY.

Coe, M. and Coe, C. 1987. Large herbivores, acacia trees and bruchid beetles. South African Journal of Science 83: 624-635.

Dirr, M.A. 1997. Dirr’s Hardy Trees and Shrubs, Timber Press, Portland, OR.

Etherington, K. and Imwold, D. (eds.) 2003. The Complete Encyclopedia of Trees and Shrubs. 2003. Thunder Bay Press. San Diego CA.

Illinois Nature Preserves Commission. 2003. Vegetation Management Guideline: Honey Locust (Gleditsia triacanthos L.).  Vol. 1, No. 30.

Janzen, D.H. 1982. Fruits for famished mammoths. Garden 6: 12-24, 32.

Janzen, D.H.and Martin, P.S. 1982. Neotropical anachronisms: the fruits the gomphotheres ate. Science 215: 19-27.

Miller, M.F. and Coe, M. 1993. Is it advantageous for Acacia seeds to be eaten by Ungulates? Oikos 66: 364-368

Peattie, D.C. 1991. Natural History of Trees of Eastern and Central North America. Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, MA

Rohner, C. and Ward, D. 1999. Large mammalian herbivores and conservation of arid Acacia stands in the Middle East. Conservation Biology 13: 1162-1171.

Southgate, B.J. 1981. Univoltine and multivoltine cycles: their significance. In The Ecology of Bruchids Attacking Legumes (Pulses). Junk, The Hague. pp.17-22.

Fussy birds get what they deserve—that’s how some ornithologists explain the demise of birds like the Ivory-billed Woodpecker (Campephillus principalis) (Shugart, 2004). Ivory-bills foraged for insects by prying up the bark of large trees, leaving it to other woodpeckers to probe the deeper reaches.  There’s a limited supply of suitably-clad trees so the birds needed large territories—at least 36 miles2 by one account (ibid.). Under this scenario agricultural land-clearing and hunting were just the final nails-in-the-coffin.  One might be skeptical of explanations of extinction that blame the victim for choosing an unreliable niche.  Trees die for many reasons–senescence, lightning, disease, over-browsing, floods, droughts, ice, wind-throw . . . all contributing to the dynamic patchwork that characterizes a healthy diverse woodland.  The birds wouldn’t have evolved their habits if they didn’t have a reliable food-supply for millions of years and the behavioral elasticity to take advantage of the opportunities that arose and overcome challenges.  Something significant altered the woodland disturbance regime.  In that gap, and missing from the list above may reside an ice age ghost–keystone mega-herbivores that played a critical role in ancient forests–as the giants do today wherever they have survived (Owen-Smith, 1987). (picky eater photo borrowed from, woodpecker photo borrowed from)

 

Central American trees with piles of wasted fruit first drew the attention of Janzen and Martin (1982).  They suggested the dispersers with whom the plants had evolved had become extinct at the end of the Pleistocene and coined the term Ice Age “orphans” to describe the plants.  Barlow (2000) identified mammoths, mastodons, ground sloths and other extinct mammals as the “ghosts” of the Ice Age that explained the surplus fruit and  extravagant defenses of certain plants and animals (Byers, 1997).

 

C. principalis may be another Ice Age orphan.  African elephants are notorious for rubbing, girdling, debarking and toppling trees (Coe and Coe, 1987). For millions of years Ivory-bills probably enjoyed a steady supply of dead and dying trees courtesy of mastodons, ground sloths, etc. .  Habitat loss to humans and hunting may have just sealed their fate—perhaps they were doomed 12,000 years ago with the extinction of their keystone partners. 

 

There is much natural history work that merits reexamination with Ice Age ghosts in mind. Hints of “missing links” abound in the accounts of extinct and endangered birds, for example, in the uncertainty about the extinction of the Carolina Parakeet (Conuropsis carolinensis). The parrots became scarce before the peak of plumage-hunting.  They were said to be the bane of fruit-growers and may have been shot as pests, but McKinley (1960) notes the birds never earned a place on any bounty lists.  He suggests honeybees were their undoing.  Introduced by early European settlers, the bees competed with the parakeets for the tree-hollows they needed for nesting and roosting.   As with the Ivory-bill, the lack of suitable tree habitat suggests a crimp in the supply chain–a disruption in the natural disturbance regime.  Snags and the dead wood on living trees provide important habitat for 25% of the species that live in eastern forests today (Pennsylvania Game Commission, 2008).  It’s vital to learn the right ecological lessons if we are to remediate the threat facing today’s woodland residents.  (photo borrowed from)

 

An erratic food supply, pesticides and lead poisoning are the oft-cited reasons for the near-extinction of the California Condor, Gymnogyps californianus, but Cowles (1967) suggests as western scrubland became overgrown with brush, condors were blocked from exploiting key habitat and food sources. The birds need a stiff breeze and a running start to overcome the weight of a meal and fly (USDA Forest Service, Index of Species, 2008).  With their runways blocked by high vegetation the birds remain airborne today over vast portions of their former range.   Cowles points to fire suppression for the brush buildup, but the real cause may be the extinction of the browsers that once kept the vegetation down e.g. mastodons, camels (Camelops spp.), Harrington’s mountain goat (Oreamnos harringtoni) and the Shasta Sloth  (Nothrotheriops shastensis). It may be no coincidence that the Condor disappeared from the Grand Canyon at about the same time the mega-browsers became extinct (Emslie (1987).  (photo borrowed from)

 

Lack of mega-carrion is often blamed for the extinction of the incredible Teratornis spp.  and the other great Ice Age condors (Wetmore, 1956), but hints from Africa point to more ghosts.  Condors need large amounts of calcium in the breeding season for their eggs and nestlings.   Meat contains very little—11 mg per 100 g (Mundy and Ledger, 1976).  Calcium shortage has been linked to the small clutch size of G. californianus–one egg usually—and the very slow growth rate of their chicks (Snyder and Snyder, 2000), plus the aforementioned lead poisoning (Pb2+ readily supplants Ca2+ in their eggshells and bones). Condors normally get their calcium by swallowing the bones of small animals or the chips of bone left by scavengers at larger carcasses–the birds can’t break large bones. Mundy and Ledger (1976) link the endangered status of the Cape Griffon Vulture (Gyps coprotheres) to the extirpation of bone-crushing scavengers, especially hyenas, over broad areas of S. Africa. 20% of the bone fragments they collected at the nests of Whitebacked Vultures (Gyps africanus) in Zimbabwe, where the carnivores are extant, showed visible carnivore tooth-damage. Without sufficient calcium the bones of the Griffon chicks are deformed and break under stress like simple pre-flight exercise; often they are malnourished, their digestive tracts clogged with the detritus they ingest seeking calcium (e.g. ceramic fragments, stones, etc.) (ibid).  The extinction of the American hyena (Chasmaporthetes ossifragus) and other carnivores may have precipitated a similar calcium-crisis in North American condors. (photo by Alistair Robertson)

 

Ecologists have long focused on human activity and the historic forces affecting the fate of wildlife, overlooking the echoing effects of the ice ages. If we are to preserve the vanishing remnants of the natural world it’s imperative that we understand the essential forces once supplied by the Pleistocene mega-mammals and arrange for substitutes where possible, or create them ourselves by artificial means. . . . Dave

 

 

References

 

 
Barlow, C. 2000. The Ghosts of Evolution:  Nonsensical fruit, missing partners, and other ecological anachronisms.  Basic Books.  New York, NY. 

 

Byers, J. 1997. American Pronghorn: Social adaptations and the ghosts of predators past.  University of Chicago Press. Chicago, IL. 

 

C

oe, M. and Coe, C. 1987. Large herbivores, acacia trees and bruchid beetles, South African Journal of Science 83: 624-635. 

 

 

Snyder, N.F.R. and Snyder, H.A 2000.  The California Condor:  a saga of natural history and conservation.

 

Cowles, R.B. 1967. Fire suppression, faunal changes and condor diets.  Tall Timber Fire Ecology Conference 7: 217-224.

 

Emslie, S.D. 1987.  Age and diet of fossil California Condor in Grand Canyon, Arizona. Science 237: 768-770. 

 

Janzen, D.H. and Martin, P.S. 1982.   Neotropical anachronisms:  the fruits the Gomphotheres ate.  Science 215: 19-27.

 

McKinley, D. 1960. The Carolina Parakeet in pioneer Missouri.  The Wilson Bulletin 72: 274-287.

 

Mundy, P.J.  and Ledger, J.A. 1976. Griffon Vultures, carnivores and bones.  South African Journal of Science 72: 106-110.

 

Owen-Smith, R.N. 1987. Pleistocene extinctions:  the pivotal role of megaherbivores.  Paleobiology 13: 351-362.

 

Pennsylvania Game Commission. 2008.

 

Shugart, H. H.  2004. How the Earthquake Bird Got Its Name and Other Tales of an Unbalanced Nature.  Yale University Press New Haven, CT

 

USDA Forest Service, Index of Species Information 2008.

 

Wetmore, A. 1956. Birds of the Pleistocene in North America.  Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections 138(4): 1-24.

 

 

 

 

 

A lot of interest in the project in southwest Iowa. Here’s another story in the local paper:

http://www.southwestiowanews.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=20217734&BRD=2703&PAG=461&dept_id=555139&rfi=6

The reporter, Tess Gruber Nelson, visited the site Saturday and called for an update Monday morning.  KMA, the local radio station, called to do an interview too.    Thanks again to everyone who participated and made it so memorable.    Dave

Cleared the entire area (approx 10m X 2m) yesterday, a half-day sooned than expected.  Unfortunately we weren’t slowed by finding any sloth bones.   Recovered a single turtle bone. It’s a nice find though–our second species of turtle.  Should aid in further defining the mysterious watery environment that left this 4 ft.-thick layer of remarkably homogenous clay.  Ron’s ultra-sound tests gave him some promising data; he collected clay samples to take back to the university for  further tests.   With both the north and south borders of the creek cleared it looks now like we have just a couple of large areas in the middle of the creek left to excavate. We’ve probed for bones there and have confirmed their presence.  We’re thinking about doing some prep work with an excavator in the next couple of weeks, before the ground freezes solid, and returning before  the spring floods to finish digging.   Photos next week. . . . Dave

After two years of delays due to high water and a couple false starts we’re back at the site this weekend with a full crew of volunteers–many veterans from previous digs.   Here’s a link to a story published this week in the local paper.  

http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=20212313&BRD=2703&PAG=461&dept_id=555139&rfi=6

Lynn Alex is back again with 4 other staff-members from the UI Office of the State Archaeologist (OSA).  Ron Vogel is back too representing the UI Department of Physics and Astronomy.  He brought  equipment to test the feasibility of using ground-penetrating ultra-sound to locate bones. Herb Dircks is here with his grandson Cyril.  Herb is a rapid protoyping consultant in the UI Engineering Design and Prototyping Center where he has been making duplicates of sloth bones to aid our research, using computed tomography (CT) scans supplied by the the Department of Radiology and Biomedical Engineering.   Dr. Rob McAfee http://www.sloth-world.org/ is driving in again from Doane College, Crete, NE; and Don Johnson is also returning representing the Eastern Iowa Paleontology Project.  Andy Clack flew in from McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, where he is studying ancient DNA under Hendrik Poinar in the Ancient DNA Centre.  

There’s no way to thank everyone here for volunteering their time, in near freezing weather, to move the project forward.  More tomorrow. . . . Dave

The Pleistocene mass-extinction left a number of plants and animals ill-adapted to modern life—trees with fruit or seeds too large to be swallowed and transported (Janzen and Martin, 1982), with outmoded defenses (Barlow, 2000), or waiting endlessly for agents of disturbance that are no more.  They are the survivors of vanished communities, still reflecting the forces under which they evolved for hundreds of thousands of years, and often in decline today.  They are the ghosts and orphans of the Ice Age.  I have seen an ice age ghost, and it’s a nightmare!  (image borrowed from)

 

The Osage Orange (Maclura pomifera) is often cited as one of North America’s more conspicuous ice age orphans for its outsized fruit (Barlow, ibid.).  About fifteen years ago I planted a small specimen and made the mistake of pruning off a couple of branches to encourage it to grow into a more open form.  I awoke a demon that had been sleeping inside for 12,000 years—its “rapid sloth-defense” genes.  The tree swiftly grew a thick barricade of stout upright, ferociously spiny branches, attempting to protect its crown—exactly what I was trying to avoid. The branches are up to 12 ft. long and straight as a fishing pole, 3/4 inches in diameter at their base, with inch-long needle-sharp thorns.  Now once a year I take my life in my hands and climb a ladder, pruning shears in hand, and try to negotiate some openness with this plant.  It’s a losing battle, and always bloody.  Its thorny stockade now stretches to the top, at least twenty feet high now–far beyond the reach of white-tailed deer.  This defense evolved with taller and tougher browsers in mind— North American camels, mastodons and sloths.  I can only imagine what the tree is thinking. . . Why won’t this stupid sloth take a hint and go away!!   My hope is that it will eventually grow tall enough and decide its apical buds are safely out of my reach and stop expending energy on this living razor-wire. Heaven help me though if it has mistaken me for an Eremotherium, North America’s biggest ground sloth.  Standing on two legs it could probably have reached at least 30 feet high.  I may be in for a long and painful battle.

 

Plants defend themselves from herbivores by many different means both chemical and physical.  The defenses may be constitutive, i.e. present whether herbivores are around or not, or induced, i.e. a direct response to herbivore damage.   Constitutive defenses can vary between different parts of the plant depending on the risk, and with the plant’s maturity.  Defenses are costly to a plant, diverting energy away from growth and reproduction (Gomez and Zamora, 2002).  That’s believed to be the force behind the evolution of induced defenses—save your energy until you need it.  A plant’s induced reactions are also affected by its physical condition, energy reserves, and the resources available from its environment (Bergelson and Purrington, 1996).  In theory plants should suffer a setback due to browsing but some respond with spurts of vigor, so-called overcompensation, and seem to benefit and even depend on browsing (McNaughton, 1983) (Paige and Whitman, 1987).

 

M. pomifera has evolved a complex multi-layered defense that is both chemical and mechanical; constitutive and induced.   As the tree grows naturally it arms its branches with a minor scattering of thorns, no more menacing than a rose’s. They force browsers to forage more slowly, to take smaller bites, and to spend more time manipulating leaves and shoots in their mouths in order to chew and swallow them comfortably.   As handling time increases, the net benefit to a browser of eating the plant decreases.  If the leaves are small, and especially if the foliage isn’t highly nutritious, and there are alternative food plants, many browsers limit their munching to levels the plant can live with (Cooper and Owen-Smith, 1986).

 

Only under severe browsing pressure (or pruning apparently) do some plants like M. pomifera call out the big guns.  The blitz of protective limbs is called adventitious branching, and the counterattack may be both physical and chemical. The prickles on Rubus species grow back longer and sharper after being browsed (Abrahamson, 1979). Browsed European holly (Ilex aquifolium) leaves grow back with extra prickles (Obeso, 1997).  Young (1987) found Acacias increased the length of their new thorns in response to browsers, but relaxed the response after their prolonged departure (Young and Okello, 1998).  Some plants use a combination of thorns and chemicals; for others, chemicals are enough.  Under severe browsing some Alaskan trees grow adventitious shoots with 2X the toxic resin concentration of their regular foliage, halting the browsing of snowshoe hares and leading to the recurring collapse of the hare population every ten years (Bryant, 1981).  

 

An anti-herbivore defense is a compromise for a plant.  There are many different kinds of browsers in the woods with many different sizes and shapes of mouths and tongues, and levels of experience.  No defense is perfect or effective against all browsers, especially insects.  Evolution leads a plant to anticipate its risks and plan its defenses appropriately—in the case of M. pomifera, a pattern of branching and arrangement of spines, combined with a biochemical arsenal, perfected through natural selection over hundreds of thousands of years.   So don’t tell me sloths are gone. . . we’re surrounded by  evidence of their presence. My Osage Orange tree knows there’s a sloth nearby (and a darn stubborn one too!) and it’s responding in every way it knows.  If I could only read its form and chemical reactions better–listen to it better–oh the stories it could tell me about sloths. . . . Dave

(photo by Phil Douglis)

 

 

References

 

Abrahamson, W.G. 1979. Patterns of resource allocation in wildflower populations of fields and woods.  American Journal of Botany 66: 71-79.

 

Barlow, C. 2000. The Ghosts of Evolution:  Nonsensical fruit, missing partners, and other ecological anachronisms.  Basic Books.  New York, NY.

 

Bergelson, J. and Purrington, C.B. 1996.  Surveying patterns in the cost of resistance in plants.  The American Naturalist 148: 536-558.

 

Bryant, J.P. 1981. Phytochemical deterrence of snowshoe hare browsing by adventitious shoots of four Alaskan trees. Science 213: 889-890

 

Cooper, S.M. and Owen-Smith, N. 1986. Effects of plant spinescence on large mammalian herbivores.  Oecologia 68: 446-455.

 

Gomez, J.M. and Zamora, R. 2002. Thorns as induced mechanical defense in a long-lived shrub (Hormathophylla spinosa, Cruciferae). Ecology 83: 885-890.

 

Janzen, D.H. and Martin, P.S. 1982. Neotropical anachronisms: the fruits the Gomphotheres ate.  Science 215:19-27.

 

McNaughton, S.J. 1983. Compensatory plant growth as a response to herbivory.  Oikos 40: 329-336.

 

Obeso, J.R. 1997. The induction of spinescence in European holly leaves by browsing ungulates.  Plant Ecology 129: 149-157.

 

Paige, K.N. and Whitman, T.G. 1987. Overcompensation in response to mammalian herbivory:  the advantage of being eaten. The American Naturalist 129: 407-416.

 

Young, T.P. 1987. Increased thorn length in Acacia drepanolobium—an induced response to browsing.  Oecologia 71: 436-438.

 

Young, T.P. and Okello, B.D. 1998.   Relaxation of an induced defense after exclusion of herbivores:  spines on Acacia drepanolobium.  Oecologia 115: 508-513.

Seeds for thought

We’ve received our preliminary reports on the fossil seeds and pollen from the site. The seeds are what you would expect to find in the backwater-areas of a river—wetland taxa and weedy types profiting from the local disturbances. The pollen report is intriguing though– oak, pine, cedar and hickory, with some more weeds and lowlanders tossed in.  A couple of things stand out—of course there are many different kinds of oaks and pines, etc., each with its own requirements, but generally they all need large doses of direct sunshine to grow.  Their seedlings don’t survive in the shade. We found the tip of one spruce needle, but this doesn’t add up to being a dense boreal spruce forest.  With oaks and hickories, etc., it feels a lot like the Iowa we know—different species possibly, but in form and type of trees, the landscape we inherited from the Native Americans 150 years ago.  (Photo borrowed from)

 

The Tarkio Valley was obviously a lot more diverse than this— most seeds and pollen don’t survive 12,000 years under ground, and plants differ markedly in the amounts they produce.  Seeds don’t travel as far as pollen so they provide a close-up picture of the site, albeit distorted by the varied dispersal mechanisms plants have evolved.  Water can carry seeds long distances, but the velocity of the water here was very low, so these seeds came from nearby.  Pollen provides a wide-angle view of the valley beyond its floor, but that brings other caveats.  A pollen count is more likely to pick up the trees that rely on the wanderings of the wind for fertilization–they have to be prolific.  Plants that use animal transporters (e.g. insects) can be more conservative, so they show up less often. Wind speed, direction and tree height all affect where and how far pollen travels.  Altogether, the reports paint a picture with some intriguing possibilities, and future opportunities. (Pollen  SEM’s borrowed from the National Pollen Aerobiology Research Unit.)

 

We can’t know for sure the exact texture of the Tarkio Valley uplands, but the pollen evidence points to the kind of open woodland that researchers say was widespread late in the Pleistocene (Wright, 1984).   Sunny open woodlands need something to keep them open though—moderate disturbances that kill swathes of mature trees on a regular basis.  There aren’t too many candidates—drought, floods, disease, high winds, lightning,/fires, and the residents themselves.  There’s a place for all of these in our Pleistocene disturbance regime, but Owen-Smith (1987) suggests the primary role was played by the megamammals in the community (i.e. weighing > 1 ton), as they do wherever they live in Africa today.   That would make Megalonyx one of the leading actors, along with mastodons and mammoths, in maintaining this woodland and making it possible for the oaks, etc., and many other species to thrive here.

 

Armed with the plant and tree lists, our knowledge about seed and pollen dispersal, and some reasonable assumptions about the missing pieces, including the Ice Age “orphans” and ”ghosts,” plus of course the omnipresence of these amazing sloths, we have the basis for developing an exciting and highly educational Ice Age park or garden.  Imagine  an interpretive trail with life-size models of the megafauna, with informative signs identifying the animals and various trees, and discussing their interrelationships.   The opportunity to address the topic of climate change at the end of the Pleistocene–humankind’s last experience with global warming–could serve as an unparalleled teaching tool for addressing our most serious contemporary environmental challenge. If such a park could be located near a river there would be the opportunity to add  a wetland  and riparian educational dimension.  It would be a compelling attraction and opportunity for commercial development . . . . But, there is a need in Iowa for more than this. We need real habitat protection, and ecological research into how best we can preserve and share our remaining natural lands with wildlife in the 21st century. An ice-age-themed zoological park combining plants and animals could help accomplish that goal and provide a venue for researching some of our current ecological problems. (photo by Bret Rogers)

 

 

Oak trees are disappearing from Iowa today.   Oak seedlings need wide sunny openings to survive, but as our forests become overgrown with maples and other shade-tolerant species, life for the tenants on the ground floor is getting increasingly difficult. The reforestation of the eastern US is widely heralded, but the new growth bears little resemblance to the oak-pine-hickory woodlands there before European settlement.   There has been almost no reproduction of White Oaks for a century in the eastern half of the continent and little recruitment of most of the other major upland oaks for 50 years (Abrams, 2003). The potential impact on our native ecosystems is devastating. A vast number of plants, fungi, insects and other animals, and uncounted micro-organisms have evolved to live on, in and around oaks, and when their hosts vanish the survival of the entire community is jeopardized. The cause of the problem is rooted in the Ice Ages and the loss of animals like the sloth. (Photo by Bo Mackison)  To be continued.  Next time—disturbing thoughts. . . . Dave 

 

References

 

Abrams, M.D.  2003. Where has all the White Oak gone? BioScience 53: 927-939.

 

Owen-Smith, R.N. 1987. Pleistocene extinctions:  the pivotal role of megaherbivores.  Paleobiology 13: 351-362.

 

Wright, HE. 1984. Late quaternary environments of the United States.  In The Late Pleistocene, SC Porter (ed.), Vol. 1. U. of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, MN. 

 

Cedar Rapids has released its plan for restoring the neighborhoods ravaged by this summer’s floods. I’m disappointed.  I was hoping for a bolder vision, something that recognized the increased likelihood of future floods and turned the riverfront in a more sustainable direction—like an Ice Age Zoological Park recreating the sloths’ habitat.  Besides serving as an important tool for education and research about Iowa’s truly natural environment (i.e. before Native American alterations to the land) and a valuable wildlife corridor, a natural environment park would bring significant commercial development opportunities, tourist revenue and jobs. A riverfront park could be designed to meet the Cedar River half way and work with its perennial floods instead of against them, like the truce Davenport, IA has forged with the Mississippi.  Restored wetlands, lakes and other containment basins could absorb water rather than speeding its way onward to create bigger problems for the communities downstream. Large urban zoological parks aren’t without precedent.  The 1,800-acre San Diego Zoo Wild Animal Park is one of the largest tourist attractions in southern California with attendance of 2 million visitors annually (Wikipedia, 2008).  Why not here? (image One Way Street by bpkelsey, borrowed from)

 

The preeminent role the extinct Pleistocene megafauna played in shaping the North American landscape has largely gone unrecognized here despite abundant corroborating evidence from across the ocean. The megamammals in Africa (i.e. animals > 1 ton, e.g. elephants, rhinos, hippos and large giraffes) play a keystone role in managing their habitats (Owen-Smith, 1988).  Elephants especially are constantly transforming the landscape.  By debarking and toppling large trees they create habitat for other animals, and open the forest floor to sunshine allowing a variety of other plants to flourish.  The flush of new growth paves the way for smaller animals to multiply.   Elephants and hippos create trails and dig wallows and water holes, providing the edges, corridors and microhabitats for fugitive species to settle in and the resources they need to survive. By transporting the fruit and seeds of select plants large mammals further encourage the diversity of the forest.  Mastodons, mammoths and ground sloths played a similar sweeping role in Ice Age North America (Soulé and Noss, 1998).

 

The loss of the Pleistocene mega-mammals has left us with a number of plants strangely ill-adapted to modern times, with seeds and fruits too large to be swallowed or transported and largely ignored by animals today (e.g. Osage Orange, right), or with profligate defenses that seem obvious over-kill with respect to contemporary threats (e.g. Honeylocust, left).  These characteristics only make sense when one considers the vanished herbivores with whom these plants evolved, and which disappeared just an evolutionary eye-blink ago. Barlow (2000) calls these dispossessed plants ice age ghosts and orphans.

 

Insects, birds and small mammals were affected as well –pronghorns, for example, have evolved to run 60 mph, but no North American predator can approach that speed.  A perplexing misallocation of biological resources by evolution until one considers the extinction of the North American cheetah, which presumably could run only 59 mph (Byers, 1997).  We are surrounded by these ice age reminders or “shadows,” and some very familiar species are facing serious challenges today now that the activities of the temporary stand-ins for the keystone megafauna, Native Americans, have been curtailed (e.g. burning). (image borrowed from)

 

The problem of disjointed ecosystems is particularly acute on the Great Plains where, bereft of native browsers and much to the consternation of its ranchers, the landscape is becoming overgrown with shrubs inedible to the favored species–cattle–non-natives, of course.  Scientists have proposed “rewilding” the region with surrogates for the missing megafauna from Africa and Asia (Donlan et al. (2006).  Proponents admit a tremendous amount of research needs to be completed before a horde of nonnative species is unleashed into the environment (Martin, 2005).

 

A rewilding experiment is progress now in Siberia.  Zimov is seeking to transform over 60 square miles of Arctic tundra to grasslands by establishing breeding populations of Alaskan musk oxen, Siberian ponies and Canadian woodland bison (Stone, 2001). He believes the grazing, trampling, and manure of the large animals will eventually result in the replacement of the tundra mosses by the short subarctic grasses, a community that vanished with the mammoths 12, 000 years ago (Guthrie, 1990).   Several less formal experiments are going on here in the United States with the protection of wild horses and burros on public lands in the West and the reintroduction of condors in the Grand Canyon, but no one has tried an experiment exploring the impact of mega-browsers on the Eastern woodlands.

 

Rewilding Iowa isn’t in the cards—the land is simply too valuable for farming.   Furthermore, the space available in the Cedar Rapids plan isn’t enough to accommodate large animals in sustainable numbers or the natural disturbance regime of the river, much less the landscape transformation power of megafauna like elephants, but a park could be expanded considerably beyond the downtown limits through a combination of  purchase, long-term leases and conservation of easements on connecting riverfront up and downstream.  In the face of an accute shortage of mastodons, Zimov plans to use bulldozers to mimic the ice age disturbance regime.  We might try black rhinos, giraffes and John Deeres. As Einstein once said, “If we knew what we were doing, it wouldn’t be called research, would it?” (Haynes, 2004).  A Cedar Rapids park would be uniquely positioned, sitting at the junction of three state universities with their considerable agricultural, biological and engineering research expertise. (photo by Phil Douglis, borrowed from)

 

Is an Ice Age Sloth Park possible?  Can we even begin to guess what Iowa’s forests looked like when the sloths were alive, or is an Ice Age Park just a fantasy like the late unlamented Coralville rainforest? Yes, it’s possible, and we don’t have to guess.  We have preliminary reports back on the seeds and pollen from the site.  They may provide a compelling picture of Iowa and the land the sloths called home.  More about the seeds and pollen next week. . . . Dave

 

 

References

 

Barlow, C. The Ghosts of Evolution:  Nonsensical fruit, missing partners, and other ecological anachronisms.  Basic Books.  New York, NY.

 

Byers, J. 1997. American Pronghorn: Social adaptations and the ghosts of predators past.  University of Chicago Press. Chicago, IL.

 

Donlan, C.J., Berger, J., Bock, C.E., Burney, D.A., Estes, J.A., Foreman, D., Martin, P.S.,, Roemer, G.W., Smith, F.A., Soule, M.E., and Greene, H.W. 2006. Pleistocene Rewilding: An optimistic agenda for twenty-first century conservation. The American Naturalist 168: 660-681.

 

Guthrie, RD. 1990. Frozen Fauna of the Mammoth Steppe:  The story of Blue Babe. The University of Chicago Press.  Chicago, IL.

 

Haynes, G. 2004. Rather odd detective stories:  a view of some actualistic and taphonomic trends in paleoindian studies.  Breathing Life into Fossils:  Taphonomic Studies in Honor of C.K. (Bob) Brain.  T. Pickering, K. Schick, and N. Toth (eds.)  Stone Age Institute Press. Gosport, IN.

 

Martin, P.S. 2005. Twilight of the Mammoths:  Ice Age extinctions and the rewilding of America.  University of California Press.  Berkley, CA.

 

Owen-Smith, R.N. 1988. Megaherbivores:  The influence of very large body size on ecology.  Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

 

Soulé, M. and Noss, R. 1998. Rewilding and biodiversity: complementary goals for continental conservation. Wild Earth Fall, 1998: 18-28.

 

Stone, R. 2001. Mammoth:  resurrection of an ice age giant. Perseus Publishing.  Cambridge, MA.

 McDonald (1977) was the first to note the similarity of Megalonyx teeth to those of  VAMPIRE BATS.  Like sloths, but unlike other bats and most other mammals, the common vampire bat, Desmodus rotundus, has teeth that are comprised entirely of dentin, with a jacket of cementum.   SEM analysis shows the thin layer of enamel that vampire bats have at birth wears away quickly (Freeman, 1998).  As in Megalonyx, the bats’ teeth are ever-growing.  They compensate for the rapid wear of the soft material by grinding upper teeth against lower in a systematic way to keep them sharp (Phillips and Steinberg, 1976). Ever-growing teeth are common in rodents but the biting surface in this case is a combination of dentin and enamel.  As the softer dentin erodes and the enamel precipice chips, the animals are left with a long-lasting but jagged edge.  A nice tool for cutting and slicing plants and seeds, but vampire bats depend on stealth to secure their meals. A  smooth razor blade works better than a serrated edge for shaving hair or feathers off a patch of skin and making a clean painless incision.  The cementum jacket of the bats’ teeth is about as hard as the dentin, eliminating the chipping problem where they meet. But the ugly rumors about sloths and vampire bats didn’t get started simply because of tooth morphology. The scandal-mongers cite several other lines of evidence for making this unsavory connection.

 

Some of the ground sloths, including Megalonyx, show a marked affinity for caves. McDonald (2003) reports that 34 out of the 152 sites from which M. jeffersonii remains have been found are caves (including sinkholes, rock shelters and fissure fills).  Nothrotheriops shastensis shows an even stronger association with caves—39 out of 52 known localities.    In contrast, of the 168 late Pleistocene sites known for Paramylodon harlani, only 4 are true caves.  The largest North American sloth, Eremotherium laurillardi, is known from just 10 late Pleistocene localities and none is a true cave.   Clearly caves figure in the natural history of some sloths—whether to provide protection from predators, or shelter while sleeping or giving birth, or to help control body temperature in extremes of hot and cold, conserve water, or another reason is still TBD.  (image borrowed from)

 

Obviously Megalonyx survived in locales without caves or natural rock shelters of any kind.  In that case they may have simply dug burrows or settled into hollow trees (like bats).  Remarkably, several apparent sloth burrows have survived to the present day in Argentina, measuring 1.8 meters in width and up to 40 meters long (Vizcaino et al. 2001). The claw marks inside are too large to have been left by the ice age armadillos, but match up well with the morphology of both the Glossotherium and Scelidotherium ground sloths. Frenguelli (1928) recovered the skeleton of a Scelidotherium within such a burrow.

 

Modern tree sloths are also nocturnal like bats, but that’s an aversion to predators not daylight.  McDonald (2003) suggests Nothrotheriops may have retreated to caves more often than other ground sloths to avoid the daytime heat of its desert habitat, waiting for the cool of the night to feed. However, the continent-wide distribution of Megalonyx suggests they had no such metabolic limitations. And an adult Megalonyx likely lost little sleep worrying about predators either, and so probably stayed in bed until the sun was up like the rest of us. (image borrowed from)

 

The scurrilous rumors have probably been reinforced by the lurid accounts of the giant vampire bats that lived here in the Ice Ages.  The Pleistocene mammals included a diverse assortment of bats including vampires.  Many accompanied their hosts into extinction.  The fabulously named Desmodes draculae, is estimated to have been about 25-30% larger than the common vampire bat of today (Freeman, 1998).   Much still needs to be learned about the natural history of this mammal, especially its range. Blood is almost all protein, and without fat reserves vampire bats are highly sensitive to cold, raising questions about the ability of D. draculae to survive in northern climates.  Uncertainty about the diet of Megalonyx, its renowned adaptability, the blood-sucking food-niche that was probably open in the North, and the aforementioned unsettling similarity of its teeth to Desmodes spp. are presumably responsible for the irresponsible speculation that Megalonyx may have been an opportunistic sanguivore. (image borrowed from)

 

Megalonyx is generally believed to be a browser, of course (McDonald and Anderson, 1983), but how they ever managed to survive north of the Arctic Circle (Stock, 1942) is a wonder.   Guthrie (1980) has proposed grasses flourished there in lieu of the moss and lichens that eke out their existence there today, supporting a broad range of grazers—the so-called mammoth steppe.   It has been suggested that perhaps Megalonyx was supplementing its diet with something besides plants. Those nightmarish claws have been an enigma from the moment they were first discovered and then there are those teeth. . . and let’s be honest, this isn’t the first ground sloth cast as a possible psycho (Farino and Blanco, 1996).  One might contemplate the thought that what was nipping at the toes of mammoths wasn’t Jack Frost, but blood-sucking sloths. . . .

 

Everyone has heard the stories of course–Dracula, the Undead, etc. . . .  Myths about supernatural creatures that consume the blood of the living have come from nearly every culture on Earth since the beginning of recorded history (McNally, 1994).   Could they originate in paleolithic folklore?  Vampires in European mythology are usually described as bloated, ruddy in color and with long fingernails, as first depicted in cinema in the 1922 German silent film Nosferatu. Is the resemblance merely a coincidence or an unconscious connection to primal and well-founded fears? (image borrowed from)  

 

Then there is the little matter of elephant garlic, Allium ameloprasum. Garlic has been a part of folk medicine for thousands of years.  Over 800 therapeutic formulas are listed in the Codex Ebers, the Egyptian medical papyrus dating to 1550 BC (Nguansangiam et al., 2003).  Data on elephant garlic, a leek actually, is less complete but it has been shown to have some of the same effects as true garlic (Morita et al., 1988), including presumably its legendary ability to ward off vampires. Personally, I don’t think I’m going to lose any sleep worrying about vampire sloths walking at night with the Undead.  But I still have one nagging question. . . so if there weren’t any vampires, what were the elephants doing with the garlic?  (image borrowed from)     Happy Halloween. . . Dave

 

 

References

 

Farina, RA and Blanco, RE. 1996. Megatherium the stabber.  Proceedings: Biological Sciences 263 (1477): 1725-1729. 

 

Freeman, PW. 1998.  Form, function, and evolution in skulls and teeth of bats.  Bat Biology and Conservation. TH Kunz and PA Racey (eds.).  Smithsonian Institution Press.  Washington, D.C., pp. 140-156. 

 

Frenguelli, J. 1928.  Observaciones geologicas en la region costanera sur de la Provincia de Buenos Aires. Universdad Nacional del Litoral, Facultad de Ciencias de la Educacion, Anales 3: 101-130.

 

Guthrie, RD. 1990. Frozen Fauna of the Mammoth Steppe:  The story of Blue Babe. The University of Chicago Press.

 

McDonald, HG. 1977. Description of the osteology of the extinxt gravigrade Edentate Megalonyx with observations on its ontongeny, phylogeny and functional anatomy. Masters thesis, University of Florida.

 

McDonald, HG and Anderson, DC. 1983.  A well-preserved ground sloth (Megalonyx) cranium from Turin, Monona County, Iowa.  Proceedings of the Iowa Academy of Science 90: 134-140.

 

McDonald, HG. 2003. Sloth remains from North American caves and associated karst features. Ice Age Cave Faunas of North America. B.W. Schubert, J.I. Mead and R.W. Graham (eds.), Denver Museum of Nature and Science, Denver, CO.

 

McNally, RT and Florescu, R. 1994. In search of Dracula: the history of Dracula and vampires. Houghton Mifflin Company. New York, NY.

Morita T, Ushiroguchi T, Hayashi N, Itakura Y, Fuwa T. 1988. Steroidal saponins from elephant garlic, Bulbs of Allium ampeloprasum L. Chemical and Pharmaceutical Bulletin 36: 3840-3846.

Nguansangiam, S, Angsubhakorn, S, Bhamarapravati, S and Suksamrarn, A. 2003.  Effects of elephant garlic volatile oil (Allium ampeloprasum) and T-2 toxin on Murine skin. Southeast Asian Journal of Tropical Medicine Public Health 34: 899-905.

 

Phillips, CJ and Steinberg, B. 1976. Histological and scanning electron microscope studies of tooth structure and thegosis in the common vampire bat, Desmodus rotundus.  Occasional Papers of the Museum of Texas Tech University 42:  1-12.

 

Stock, C. 1942.  A ground sloth in Alaska. Science 95 (2474): 552-553.

 

Vizcaino, S.F., Zarate, M.,  Bargo,  M.S.,  and Dondas, A.  2001. Pleistocene burrows in the Mar del Plarta area. Acta Palaeontologica Polonica 46: 289-301.

If you are what you eat

 It doesn’t sparkle like the Hope diamond or King Tut’s gold, but the most amazing artifact in the museum is an oblong softball-sized coprolite from a ground sloth.  It came to us from a donor who in the early 1970’s helped her father, a National Park Service ranger, collect samples from a cave near the west end of the Grand Canyon.   Kids being kids, a couple of the giant horse apples were ”forgotten” on the bottom of a knapsack—puny wages for a day of packing sloth poop down to an NPS boat 500 feet below, on a path scuffed out by very different feet 30,000 years earlier.   The donor lives in Iowa now and read about the sloth project. . . the rest you know.  

Like the ruins of a medieval cathedral,   Rampart Cave today only hints of its former glory. It once held the largest deposit of ground sloth dung known.  But in 1976 a careless hiker left a campfire smoldering inside the cave and the deposit was almost entirely consumed—a tragedy Paul Martin has likened to loss of the ancient library at Alexandria, Egypt (Martin, 2005).   Bones from the cave indicate the dung belongs to the Shasta sloth, Nothrotheriops shastensis, the smallest of the four North American late-Pleistocene ground sloths.  Like Megalonyx they became extinct at the end of the ice ages 12,000-odd years ago.  The identification was recently confirmed in a major breakthrough in DNA sequencing  (Poinar et al., 1998).  Some researchers from that same team are trying to repeat their accomplishment with our bones now.  (images below borrowed from http://www.geocities.com/shioshya/paleo/index.htm)

 

 

The dung ball smells sweet, like incense, with no lingering odor of ammonia or feces.  I had the notion of getting a scratch-and-sniff souvenir made for the museum gift shop and pursued getting the smell reproduced.   I contacted a couple of companies that offered an impressive selection of synthetic scents.  They promised to get back to me, but never did.  Too bad, they could have been a big hit with the kids.

Experts have found over 70 different species of plants in the Rampart deposits.  Many occur in just trace amounts—probably ingested accidentally while the animals browsed.  The bulk of the Shasta diet apparently consisted of desert globe mallow (Sphaeralcea laca), Mormon tea (Ephedra navadensis), saltbush (Atriplex), reed grass (Phragmites), acacia (Acacia  greggii), yucca and agave.  A UI botany student looked at that list and explained the problem reproducing the smell—the plants aren’t especially aromatic. Scratch-and-sniff works best with sharp distinctive scents, not the subtle bouquet of French wine.    

The lack of a strong smell isn’t a complete surprise.  Plants use the aromatic chemicals in their foliage as a warning signal to insects and other potential munchers–go away I’m indigestible or maybe poisonous.  Some herbivores evolve the gut microbes for detoxifying the chemicals and fill-up, but most take the hint after just a nibble.  The plants the Shasta sloth was eating are so mild in fact, most are edible by humans, or have close relatives that are.  What is more, most of them have cousins growing in Iowa today.   

 

People and sloths apparently like to eat the same kinds of things, especially around a salad bar. Admittedly, Megalonyx may have had an entirely different diet than Shasta–no one has ever found a deposit of their dung to know for sure.  But we do have a preliminary report on the pollen from the site, which allows us to describe a sloth forest generally and make some judgments about the food that would have available. It’s the kind of forest Native Americans preferred too, and long labored to maintain–and that may not be a coincidence.  One might speculate about the role sloths and other ice age megafauna had in creating this forest before people, and the degree to which they eased the way for humans to replace them and spread across the continent.   (image borrowed from http://www.artlex.com/ArtLex/Reh.html) 

Details about the pollen and the Iowa sloth forests in 2 weeks.. . . Dave 

References

Martin, P.S. 2005. Twilight of the Mammoths:  Ice Age extinctions and the rewilding of America.  University of California Press.  Berkley, CA. 

Poinar, H.N., Hofreiter, M., Spaulding, W.G., Martin, P.S., Stankiewicz, B.A., Bland, H., Evershed, R.P., Possnert, G., Paabo, S. 1998. Molecular coproscopy:  dung and diet of the extinct ground sloth.  Science 281: 402-407.

Sloth anatomy challenge

Species evolve in the most astonishing ways! That idea was reinforced for me recently when I was rereading Greg McDonald’s thesis and stumbled across a note about Megalonyx teeth that I hadn’t caught previously. I’ve written before about sloth teeth and the error of assuming differences between sloths and other mammals are evidence they were inept or stupid and maladapted.  Some remarkable mammals owe much of their success to abandoning the “normal” patterns of the so-called “higher” mammals and following the path of ground sloths. Greg cites an amazing example . . . as my generation would say, the implications are mind-blowing (image borrowed from)

 

So here’s the challenge:  There’s a living mammal with teeth that bear a remarkable functional resemblance to those of Megalonyx (excluding other Xenarthrans). That is, its teeth are made up entirely of dentin wrapped in a layer of cementum, and as in sloths they are self-sharpening and ever-growing. What animal is it and what special advantage does this adaptation give it to survive in its unique niche?  

 

No fair running out and getting Greg’s thesis.  Think about it and send in your guesses–remember to include your rationale. . . you are in for a surprise.  The answer in two weeks. . .  . Dave 

 Holmes and I  drove out to Shenandoah last week, and with Phil Mather’s help (Mather & Sons Construction) repaired the berm and opened up a new search area under the slump block on the south side of the creek.

 

 

 

 

 

 

There’s a stubborn but hard-working beaver just downstream from the site that isn’t taking the hint that it needs to move out.  Bob tore the dam out twice last week before we arrived.  The third time is a charm.

 

 

 There’s rain in the forecast  this week, but as soon as we can get in there again we plan to pump out the water and clear the muck from the floor with a crawler.  Volunteers:  With any luck we will put out a Sloth Dig Alert in the next three weeks. Keep your eyes peeled.  Dave

No left turn

One of the many mysteries we have about the sloth site is why we have so many more bones from the right side than left side of the adult.  (The photo (below) is misleading—it comes from an outreach program where we had to spread the bones out so that viewers on the “bad” side had something to look at.  The real difference isn’t absolute, but it’s striking.) There’s no intrinsic reason why the bones on one side of the sloth should have fossilized better than the other, so it must indicate something about the conditions near the time of death. (photo borrowed from)

 

Gary Haynes reports that when African elephants die, if they don’t drop in their tracks, most lie down on their left sides (Haynes, 1988).  It’s only a “strong . . . impression,” though, and he hasn’t a clue why it should be. Bones on the “down” side, have a better chance of being covered by water or sediment and protected from scavengers under some circumstances, and they may be more likely then to survive and tell the story of their early taphonomic history.  Haynes found a mammoth scattered at a site in Alaska where the transverse processes of the thoracic vertebrae were all heavily gnawed just on their right sides, indicating that the animal fell exactly as predicted (Haynes, 1980).

 

Different microenvironments that become established inside a carcass during decomposition could also be a factor. The role of the decay and putrefaction microbes in the process of fossilization is much debated, but there is no doubt that a mega-sized mammal like a sloth creates its own internal environment as it decomposes, with sufficient volume, mass and thermal inertia for the process to proceed for some time independently of external conditions.   That’s especially true in the winter without the insects to pierce the skin and interrupt the anaerobic bacteria. Lying on the ground, the “down” side of an animal as big as an adult sloth, removed from the desiccating effects of the sun and wind, or the cold, will stay warm and humid, creating a microhabitat for different microbes to thrive, selectively fostering or hindering the process of fossilization (Coe, 1978).

 

Presumably anything that put the sloth on its side, and kept it there, would produce the same effect.  But, any protection offered by dying on one side versus the other is apt to be fleeting as carnivores will usually roll a carcass over to gain access to the parts underneath.  However, large carcasses may be difficult for scavengers to turn.  Frison and Todd report it took 15 people pulling on ropes to flip the carcass of a large male African elephant they were butchering, even with the top side defleshed (Frison and Todd, 1986).  

 

Turning over a 1-ton sloth could be difficult too, depending on the scavenger, and impossible in the winter, with one side frozen to the ground.   Winter is the time of bounty for most carnivores. Hunger, stress and the snow leave prey vulnerable and relatively plentiful. Under normal circumstances predators can afford to ignore a frozen carcass and go hunting for something still warm and breathing. Consequently, winter carcasses are usually far less utilized than those of the summer dead or killed (Haynes, 1980).   Winter weather, access to only half of the adult sloth, and an abundance of other food, may go a long way toward explaining the condition of our adult’s bones and the contrast with those of the juveniles. . . but, is there any way to determine if  the sloths died in the winter? . . . Dave

 

References

 

Coe, M. 1978. The decomposition of elephant carcasses in the Tsavo (East) National Park, Kenya.  Journal of Arid Environments 1: 71-86.

 

Frison, GC and Todd, LC. 1986. The Colby mammoth site:  taphonomy and archaeology of a Clovis kill site in northern Wyoming.  University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque, 238 pp.

 

Haynes, G. 1980. Evidence of carnivore gnawing on Pleistocene and recent mammalian bones. Paleobiology 6: 341-351.

 

Haynes, G. 1988. Longitudinal Studies of African elephant death and bone deposits.  Journal of Archaeological Science 15: 131-157.

These photos came in recently from Pete Eyheralde, the Naturalist at the Mahaska County (IA) Conservation Board.   He presented a couple of fossil programs this year which highlighted the sloths. Pictured:  First graders at Moravia Elementary School.

 

 

Pete is a long-time member of our Sloth Rapid Response Team, a veteran of several digs and has also assisted with fossil prep. in the lab here.   (The sloth fossils in the photos are cast replicas we made here at the University just for this purpose.) 

 

 

This photo is from his Nature Center and a day this summer when a group of children came out to go fossil hunting in the old limestone quarry they have  there at the Russell Wildlife Area. 

 

 

 

 

Visit his web site at http://www.mahaskaconservation.com/naturecenter/index.php.  Thanks Pete. 

 

 

 

 

We drove out to see the site Tuesday. The water level in the creek has dropped considerably in recent weeks owing to record-low rainfall in August. Bob thought we could start getting ready to dig again, but advised us to see the drastic changes in the topography since the floods earlier this year.

 

Phil Mather (left), Mather & Sons,  who has come to our rescue a dozen times in the last 5 years with his excavating equipment and long experience;  Holmes (center); Bob Athen (right), the landowner and discoverer of the sloth. 

 

 

 

Looking downstream over the site. The floods straightened out all the curves in the creek.

 

 

 

 

 

Another view downstream and slightly north overlooking the dig site.

 

 

 Looking upstream toward the north bank.  The flood erased all traces of the road Mather built to access the site and the large hole we dug to reach the bones.  Good thing we were finished over there any way.

 

We came up with a plan and hoped to resume digging in just a couple of weeks but a thunderstorm hit as we were leaving Wednesday morning and dropped 1.44 inches on Shenandoah–as much as 4 inches upstream.   No telling how high the water rose. . . we may be stalled for a few more weeks. . . .  Dave

Even in the frenzy of the blood and the pain, the snarling and dying at a kill site there is a choreography that has evolved to share the spoils and reduce conflict. The patterns that predators leave behind often provide clues pointing to their identity–even if the site is 12,000 years old and absent distinctive tooth marks. Gary Hanes has spent years studying the kill sites of various predators and his research provides a general picture of their different patterns.

According to Haynes (1988) every wolf pack has its hierarchy and once the prey is dead, and often even before, the process of staking out claims on preferred cuts and dividing the carcass begins. The dominant wolf will take the choice position. The blood and internal organs inside the abdomen are a favorite first pick. Sternal elements and ribs are usually damaged in the process. Other high ranking wolves will claim the rump and upper legs where there are large masses of flesh. If there are more animals in the pack than can comfortably situate themselves around the carcass to eat without invading each other’s space, they’ll start disarticulating the limbs, causing distinctive damage on the proximal ends of the femora and humeri , and their anchoring points on the pelvis and scapulae. The prizes will be carried a short distance away to be gnawed on in relative solitude. Lower ranking wolves will tear off smaller less desirable parts (e.g. ears, tail, jaw/tongue) and carry them further away. These satellite consumption spots will be randomly distributed around the carcass and about 20 feet apart (Haynes, ibid.). Tooth marks and distance will be correlated as wolves lower in the pecking order tend to invest more time gnawing on their meager rations instead of trying to muscle in and steal another portion.

The scatter of bones at a wolf kill site rarely exceeds 100 ft. from ground zero. Within this area one can expect to find the skull, ribs and vertebrae, but rarely the sternal elements, patelae (knee bones) and caudal (tail) vertebrae. A few of the major limb bones are likely to be missing—more if scavenging has been heavy. The lower legs of hoofed animals offer more tendons and ligaments than muscle so they are often discarded uneaten and the bones are often found in anatomical sequence. If scavenging is heavy, the lower leg may represent a prized morsel and elements may be transported miles from the kill site (Haynes, 1985). The scatter is normally lower at a non-kill/scavenging site, though that will increase over time with scavenging by a host of creatures and kicking. Most, if not all of the major limb bones should be close by. Wolves will normally leave even a fresh-dead prey carcass relatively intact. Unless they are particularly hungry, wolves simply prefer to do their own “shopping” (Haynes, 1982).

Wolves follow predictable sequences in disarticulating and consuming a kill. Their pattern of utilization varies with the prey species and its particular anatomical characteristics, its size, how hungry the wolves are, how many individuals are in the pack, and the season. The chart below summarizes his findings for large prey over 300 kg (~660 lbs.–e.g. moose or bison size). According to Haynes, the patterns are so regular for a particular predator and prey species that out-of-sequence disarticulation or damage, or the absence of a normal step, are reliable indicators of scavenger activity instead of predation, or other disturbance processes such as trampling, etc. (Haynes, 1982).

Carnivore Utilization Stages

Stage I: light to moderate

Stage II: Full

Stage III: Heavy

Ribs

sternal ends consumed

Many on one side broken off below their articulating ends and scattered

further broken up

Femur

greater trochanter damaged & trochlear rim scored

disarticulated from pelvis, distal condyles gouged. Toothmarks undercut head. shaft lightly scored

head removed, distal end gone, shaft broken

Tibia

still articulated to femur

disarticulated, proximal end gone

Humerus

head and greater tuberosity furrowed and gouged

disarticulated from scapulae, greater tuberosity gone, shaft lightly scored

proximal end gnawed off, approx. 1/3 of proximal shaft gone.

Ulna

olecranon process damaged

Pelvis

edges of ilia and ischia gnawed

gnawed down to acetabula

Scapula

vertebral border damaged, still attached to humerus.

disarticulated from humerus, edge splintered

gnawed down to glenoid process

vertebrae

spines and lateral processes gnawed or broken off

Only a few badly gnawed vertebrae remain articulated

Skull

Still articulated to the body, no damage to bones.

Nasal cartilage gnawed

disarticulated

Nasal bones gnawed

Only toothrows remain from head

Mandibles

partly defleshed, articulated

defleshed.

Mandibles disarticulated

adapted from Haynes1982 and 1999

It’s probably too soon to use scatter diagrams and limb bone tallies to test the predator theory with the sloths. We still have the entire south bank of the creek to explore and map. However, we do have a large sample of bones to appraise using Haynes’s rules of carcass utilization. The ribs we have range from perfect to stage III. Our sole femur (R), the truest indicator of predation according Haynes (1982), shows signs of light scavenging by small mammals but none of the damage to the greater trochanter that he predicts from disarticulation by predators. The other femur (L) is missing entirely. Both tibiae are missing as well. Humeri heads are toothmarked and overall the bone shows Stage III damage, as do the vertebrae and the pelvis. The one ulna that survived (R) looks untouched—no signs of the disarticulation damage at the olecranon process (elbow) that he predicts in the case of a kill. One scapula (R) is almost pristine, but the other one is heavily damaged by trampling–no evidence of gnawing however. The skull is stage II while the mandibles are stage III.

Conclusion: no traces of disarticulation by predators judging from the adult bones we’ve found so far. However, most of the “baby’s” bones are still missing. All of the “toddlers” major bones are AWOL too, except for the distal half of one humerus. If we assume the baby weighed about 90# and the toddler perhaps 300# (based on scapulae, the only common bone we have), that’s about 200# of flesh–a healthy dinner for a pack of wolves. How much would a pack of wolves eat at one sitting?  Would they have turned their attention to the tender youngsters before eating a tough old adult? Would they have abandoned the adult’s carcass only half eaten? What accounts for the disparity in utilization stages of the carcass and why are the bones from the right side better preserved than those from the left? Hayne’s rules would say even if predation is confirmed, the deviations from the expected pattern indicate there are other factors at work. . .  but he also warns that the rules may be entirely different for ground sloths. As ever, we have more questions than answers, but Haynes’s research holds out the promise that with some more data maybe we can start to peel back the layers. . . . Dave

References

Haynes, G. 1982. Utilization and skeletal disturbances of North America prey carcasses. Arctic 35: 266-281.


Haynes, G. 1985. On watering holes, mineral licks, death, and predation. In Environments and Extinctions: Man in late glacial North America, Eds. J Mead and D Mettzer. Center for the Study of Early Man.


Haynes G. 1988. Prey bones and predators: potential information from analysis of bone sites. Ossa: 7: 75-97.


Haynes, G. 1999. The role of mammoths in rapid Clovis dispersal. In Mammoth and mammoth fauna: studies on an extinct ecosystem. Proceedings of the first International Mammoth Conference, St. Petersburg, Russsia. P. 9-38.

The usual suspects

If predators killed the sloths, and the site hasn’t been disturbed too much (e.g. by scavengers, trampling, weathering, transport, etc.), the killers’ fingerprints will still be present. The signs of predation versus mere scavenging, according to Haynes, are in the evidence left behind after the meal—the kind of damage to specific bones, the pattern of disarticulation, and the arrangement of the bones around the kill site (Haynes, 1980a).  Different predators have different MO’s. Those vary with the specific prey species, the season, environmental conditions, how hungry the predators are, how much meat is available, and how many individuals there are in the pack or pride (Haynes, 1983). The patterns are so regular that one can reliably look for causes other than predation when deviations from the norm are observed.


The Ice Ages offered a formidable cast of killers, but attacking a healthy adult Megalonyx, (a.k.a. “Giant Claw”) wasn’t a job for a solitary predator. Downing a giant sloth demanded teamwork. The giant short-faced bear (Arctodus simus) was once thought the greatest terror on four legs and maybe capable of going it alone, but modern studies suggest its size owed more to its herbivorous habits and bone-crushing/scavenging abilities, and at best it was only an opportunistic predator (Emslie and Czaplewski, 1985). The number of sabertooth cats (Smilodon fatalis) found at La Brea with serious wounds suggests a social structure that made it possible for them to survive even crippling injuries, but whether that cooperation extended to hunting is TBD. Evidence from Friesenhahn Cave in Texas indicates it was used as a den by the more lightly-built sabertooth, Homotherium serum, the scimitar cat. All the living Felids that den are solitary, however (Rawn-Schatzinger, 1992). The remains in the cave suggest H. serum specialized in racing in under the noses of momma mammoths and dispatching careless two year-olds with a strategic bite or two, and then dashing away apparently to wait for the youngster to bleed to death and the herd to depart, no doubt in frustrated fury. Other Homotherium species in the Old World followed similar practices with juvenile mastodons and rhinos (Lange, 2002). Bits of Harlan’s sloth (Paramylodon harlani) have been recovered from Friesenhahn Cave but there’s no evidence a cat brought it there, much less killed it (Graham, 2007). The scimitar cat’s style of hunting makes it a solid candidate for causing the wound we’ve found on our toddler’s back, but it would not have tried the same trick on an adult sloth. American lions (Panthera leo atrox) probably hunted like their African cousins, by stealth and ambush around watering holes and other locations frequented by their prey (Grayson, 1991). The absence of any fossils from eastern North America suggests, like their modern descendents, they preferred open habitat to the woodlands favored by Megalonyx (McDonald and Anderson, 1991). The lifestyle of dire wolves (Canis dirus) is still debated, but their massive teeth suggest scavenging probably played the preeminent role in their diet. If predators killed our sloths, the prime suspect has to be a social hunter like the timber wolf (Canis lupus). That’s lucky, because Gary Haynes has spent a lifetime studying wolf kill sites.

Every predator has a unique approach to eating a specific prey species and even when they leave no distinctive tooth marks (which is the rule), they often leave a telling signature in the specific areas they damage bones, the elements they ignore and the arrangement of the carcass when they leave. When wolves prey on moose and bison the most reliable indicator is the damage to the femora (Haynes, 1980b). Even with very light feeding, wolves destroy the greater trochanter. Now the greater trochanter of any prey species is hardly a tasty tidbit–wolves that attack here have one purpose—cutting the muscles that hold the bone in the acetabulum or hip socket. Predators are dangerous–to other animals and sometimes to each other. Even social predators can turn decidedly asocial in the blood lust of a kill—they demand elbow room. The first principle for recognizing the kill site of a social predator likethe timber wolf is looking for the evidence of the divvying up the spoils and creating the needed separation.

Next week—a look at our sloth femur: Dancing with wolves . . . . Dave

References

Emslie SD and Czaplewski, NJ. 1985. A new record of giant short-faced bear, Arctodus simus, from western North America with a re-evaluation of its paleobiology. Contributions to Science, Natural History Museum, Los Angeles County 371: 1-12.


Graham, RW. 2007. Stratigraphy and paleontology of Friesenhahn Cave, Bexar County, Texas. Society of Vertebrate paleontology, 67th Annual Meeting, October 15-16, 2007. Field Trip Guidebook: 27-45.


Grayson, DK. 1991. Late Pleistocene mammalian extinctions in North America: taxonomy, chronology, and explanations. Journal of World Prehistory 5: 193-231.

Haynes G. 1980a. Prey bones and predators: potential information from analysis of bone sites. Ossa: 7: 75-97.

Haynes, G. 1980b. Evidence of carnivore gnawing on Pleistocene and recent mammalian bones. Paleobiology 6: 341-351.

Haynes, G. 1983. A guide for differentiating mammalian canivore taxa responsible for gnaw damage to herbivore limb bones. Paleobiology 9: 164-172.


Lange, IM. 2002. Ice age mammals of North America: A guide to the big, the hairy, and the bizarre. Mountain Press Publishing Company. Missoula, Montana.


McDonald, HG and Anderson, DC. 1983. A well-preserved ground sloth (Megalonyx) cranium from Turin, Monona County, Iowa. Proceedings of the Iowa Academy of Science 90: 134-140.


Rawn-Schatzinger, V. 1992. The scimitar cat Homotherium serum Cope. Illinois State Museum Reports of Investigations 47: 1-80.

Did predators killed the sloths?  Last week Holmes and I were looking at a rib from the adult that’s currently  on display in the lobby when we noticed a large puncture and some adjacent gnaw marks. The wounds are partially obstructed by the case and easy to overlook.  They were obviously caused by  large sharp teeth and indicate a carnivore was present close to the time of death.  Carnivores don’t gnaw on bones to sharpen their teeth like rodents.  They may mouth an old dry bone they happen across, but nothing more.  If a carnivore bit into this bone, there was meat on it.

 

Identifying the forces that  can break and shape bones has been a concern of archaeologists for decades as intriguing assemblages of bones and bone fragments have surfaced at sites like Africa’s famous Olduvai Gorge.  The question was whether the remains indicated human hunting, and if the  bone splinters and spiral fractures were evidence of tool manufacturing.  Paleontologists like Voorhies (1969), Behrensmeyer (1975) and Hill (1976) broke many hearts showing stream transport, scavenging, weathering or trampling were responsible more often than humans. 

 

Predators don’t always leave obvious calling cards.  Haynes reports often finding  wolf kill sites with nary a scratch on the bones (Haynes, 1980).  Behrensmeyer (1975) and Voorhies (1969) showed a pattern of survival of the ends of the major limb bones was a strong indicator of carnivore activity. Predators and scavengers normally disarticulate limbs at their proximal or ball-joint ends first, damaging the bones at predictable points of muscle attachment.  The proximal ends of the humerus and femur also have very thin walls and offer an easily accessible and delectable center of marrow.   Few carnivores will pass it up unless they are overwhelmed with meat such as at the scene of a mass-drowning or other catastrophe.  Carnivores usually ignore the distal ends of humeri and femora (i.e.  elbows and knees).  Those joints are tightly wrapped in tendons and ligaments and offer little in return, so they are more likely to survive untouched and become fossilized.  Is it just a coincidence that we have three nearly identical distal ends of humeri (2-adult, 1-toddler)?

 

But fingerprints at the scene don’t prove their owner caused the deaths.  Carnivores are as likely gnaw off the end of a humerus or puncture a rib stripping the flesh from the steaming carcass of a fresh kill as cold carrion. How are we to determine if our sloths spent their last moments in a terrifying struggle against a pack  of predators, or simply died a “natural” death (e.g. from disease, malnutrition, drowning, etc.), and their remains were simply scavenged post-mortem?

 

Gary Haynes has spent a lifetime studying predator kill sites, and the patterns he has found could add an exciting new dimension to our understanding of the sloth site.   Resources, according to Haynes,  are distributed in predictable ways in the environment and to survive  animals learn the patterns all around them and across the seasons. Predators survive by mirroring that environment, especially the behavior of their prey,  and so their behavior becomes extremely patterned too, including at the site of a kill.  The location, distribution, condition, and type of bones or bone fragments  left at a kill site–sometimes even a single bone, can be distinctive enough to distinguish predator activity from scavenging and the presence  of a particular carnivore–no punctures or gnaw-marks required!  A wealth of information about an ecosystem may be revealed, such as how many wolves, for example,  were in a pack, the season of the year when they made the kill, how hungry they were, how vulnerable their prey was . . . even their favorite NFL player.  If Ice Age predators behaved like their modern-day cousins and followed the same general ecological rules–and Haynes believes  they did–relatively undisturbed bone assemblages such as ours can reveal much about predator-prey interactions, even involving extinct species (Haynes, 1982). . . . Dave  (to be continued)

  

References

 

Behrensmeyer, AK. 1975.  The Taphonomy and Paleoecology of Plio-Pleistocene Vertebrate Assemblages East of Lake Randolph, Kenya, Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology 146: 473-578.

 

Haynes G. 1980. Prey bones and predators:  potential information from analysis of bone sites.  Ossa: 7: 75-97.

 

Haynes, G. 1982. Utilization and skeletal disturbances of North America prey carcasses.  Arctic 35: 266-281.

 

Hill. AP. 1976. On carnivore and weathering damage to bone. Current Anthropology 17:335-336.

 

Voorhies, MR. 1969.  Taphonomy and population dynamic of an early Pliocene vertebrate fauna, Knox County, Nebraska, University of Wyoming, Contributions to Geology, Special Paper No. 1. 

 

Press release

This was the announcement the University released to the press this week.  We’re grateful to the NSF for their continuing support and to all the volunteers working on the project who make it possible.  Our sincere thanks.    Holmes and Dave

UI sloth excavation project awarded $20,000 NSF grant

The University of Iowa’s Tarkio Valley Sloth Project has been awarded a $20,000 grant from the National Science Foundation (NSF) to complete the excavation of the remains of three giant sloths and begin research of this unique discovery. The project is a joint effort of the UI Museum of Natural History, Department of Geoscience in the UI College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, and Office of the State Archaeologist, all teaming up with volunteers and students from across the Midwest.

A skeleton of a giant Ice Age sloth was discovered by Bob and Sonia Athen in 2001 behind their home near Shenandoah, Iowa, in the bed of the West Tarkio Creek. More bones were subsequently found on the property of the adjoining landowners, Dean and Loreta Tiemann, who, like the Athens, graciously agreed to allow the excavation and to donate the fossils to the University of Iowa.

The elephant-sized beast lived in Iowa for thousands of years before going extinct around 12,000 years ago. To date, more than 100 major elements have been recovered, making this individual the second-most-complete skeleton ever found of this rare species. In 2006, two juvenile sloths of the same species were discovered nearby.

According to project leader Holmes Semken, emeritus professor in the UI Department of Geoscience, only six semicomplete skeletons of this species have ever been found and this is the first time any juvenile, much less two, has been found directly associated with an adult. They also are buried in sediments that will provide valuable environmental data about the climate at the time.

“This could be our ‘Rosetta Stone’ for understanding the family life of these mysterious creatures,” Semken said. Over 40 bones of the older juvenile have been recovered, making it also the second most-complete juvenile of its kind ever found.

“The NSF is excited about the discovery and has indicated that we can count on their continuing support if we keep making progress like we have,” said Semken. “They see the potential here for a major contribution to our understanding of the Pleistocene extinction event in which almost 40 large mammals became extinct at the same time. They also realize they are getting a lot of bang for their buck through the tremendous support we’ve received from the university, the Page County community, the Iowa Archaeological Society, Mid-American Paleontological Society, the Boy Scouts, Iowa Academy of Science, and staff and students from educational institutions all across Iowa.”

The project has also received assistance from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the U.S. Geological Survey and the National Park Service.

“It’s a breakthrough project for the university,” said sloth project co-leader David Brenzel of the UI Museum of Natural History. “The NSF recognized that our goal to educate people about the process of doing science is as important as the research itself. They are providing specific funding to expand our educational outreach efforts through public programs and the Web.”

Last month, a blog was started about the project at http://www.slothcentral.com, which can also be found by going to http://www.uiowa.edu/~nathist.

“The blog will allow anyone interested in the project to submit questions and contribute ideas. We hope it will be fun, educational, attract some professional interest, and also inspire young paleontologists,” Brenzel said. Photos of the dig and associated lab work are available at http://www.uiowa.edu/~nathist/Site/sloth/index.html.

For further information or to volunteer for the project contact Sarah Horgen at the UI Museum of Natural History, sarah-horgen@uiowa.edu, Semken at Holmes@slothcentral.com, or Brenzel at David@slothcentral.com.

STORY SOURCE: University of Iowa News Services, 300 Plaza Centre One, Suite 371, Iowa City, Iowa 52242-2500

MEDIA CONTACTS: Sarah Horgen, UI Museum of Natural History, sarah-horgen@uiowa.edu, 319-335-0606; George McCrory, University News Service, 319-384-0012, george-mccrory@uiowa.edu

Move over Arnold

How big is our adult sloth? Greg McDonald says the average adult Megalonyx weighed 2,400 pounds (McDonald, 2005).  That’s based on a standard formula used to approximate the weight of mammals based on measurements of their femurs, and engineering principles relating the strength of a column to its cross-sectional area.  I’m a little dubious about applying the formula to sloths though. There’s nothing normal about the shape of most of their bones.  Even a simple measurement like the femur’s diameter isn’t straightforward. Add a lingering uncertainty about sloth locomotion and lifestyle (bipedal vs. quadrupedal), and any weight estimate has to taken with a grain of salt.   But, as Greg once told me, you have to start somewhere, and why not with the bone used in all the other mammals, and a bone that’s been recovered often enough to provide a reasonably-sized sample.  If you stick to femurs, at least you can compare sloth weights in relative terms. We’ve recovered an adult femur and you’ll see a weight estimate when Meghann, our resident anatomy expert, is sure we’re measuring it from the right anatomical points.

Caniniform teeth, because they are found in fair frequency, offer another way to compare Megalonyx sizes in relative terms.  Caniniforms are the front teeth, or tusks, in Megalonyx and some other sloths.  Why not just call it a canine? Sloths seem to have evolved them independently from the other mammals in a nice example of convergent evolution, so paleontologists call them a form of canine rather than a canine proper.  In the same way, they refer to sloth molars as “molariforms.”  

 

The figure at the right, taken from McDonald (1998) compares Megalonyx lower caniniforms from 25 different individuals. We added a point showing the approximate measurements of the Tarkio Valley adult. Ground sloths were evolving to grow larger over time, so the size of the tooth suggests we have a late Pleistocene specimen that weighed well over 2,400 pounds–in fact, it may be the second-largest Megalonyx ever found.  That will have to do until we get Meghann’s analysis.   The point off on the far right is the giant specimen from Darke County, OH that Greg once called the “Arnold Schwarzenegger” of Megalonyxes.   Arnold looks to be slightly bigger but we’re not through measuring.  All I can say is,  “Hasta la vista, baby. . . .” Dave

 

References

 McDonald, H.G. 1998.  The Massacre Rocks local fauna from the Pleistocene of southeastern Idaho. WA Akersten, HG McDonald, DJ Meldrum and MET Flints (eds.), In And Whereas. . . Papers on the Vertebrate Paleontology of Idaho Honoring John A. White, Vol. 1, Idaho Museum of Natural History Occasional Paper 36: 156-172.

McDonald, HG. 2005. Paleoecology of extinct Xenarthrans and the great American biotic interchange. Bulletin of the Florida Museum of Natural History 45: 313-333.

 

Popular opinion holds ground sloths are extinct because they were  too inept to survive.  Polite critics often point to sloth teeth as one example of their maladaptation, foregoing the customary jabs at their supposed beach bum lifestyle and grooming habits. This came to mind recently when we received some photos from Daniela Kalthoff, PhD, a researcher at the Swedish Museum of Natural History.  She’s studying the microstructure of sloth teeth and offered us some amazingly detailed images of a Megalonychid tooth to aid our research (left).

We sectioned a molar in the UI Department of Geoscience last year, and found possible growth lines.  A Micro-CT scan taken at the Iowa Institute for Biomedical Imaging showed some intriguing concentric circles that experts eventually determined were imaging artifacts and not real.  The teeth proved too dense for a scan to show much.  If we can prove the divisions are indeed annual growth lines, we might be able to measure Megalonyx growth rates and determine their ages.   Colleagues at Penn State are preparing to sample the layers for their isotopes which could indicate seasonal diet changes, some climate indicators, and possibly migration patterns.   Photo:Alex Bryk, student, Penn State (left), Jeff Dorale, Asst. Professor, UI Geoscience (right)

People have been looking at sloth teeth since the pioneering work of Retzius (1837) and Owen (1840, 1845) and pointing out their deficiencies. Sloth teeth lack the hard enamel of other mammals, and even people who should know better have concluded they are woefully primitive and another example of sloth ineptitude.  Not too long ago one authority hypothesized excessive tooth-wear might even be responsible for the ground sloths’ extinction (Ferigolo, 1985).  Diet changes forced upon the animals early in the Holocene presumably  tipped them into oblivion (too much arugula probably).

Instead of enamel, sloth teeth are made of dentine, the material inside your teeth.  It’s arranged in concentric layers of different kinds and degrees of hardness, surrounded by cementum.  Kalthoff is studying the microstructures of each variety.  Dentine is soft and erodes rapidly.  To compensate for this, sloth teeth grow continuously throughout their lives. The inner layer is softer than the outer layer so it wears down more rapidly as sloths chew, forming a cup in adults,  with a constantly renewing sharp crest—perfect for cutting vegetation into bite-sized pieces (Naples, 1995).

Enamel became the dental material of choice in mammals because we evolved the genes to adjust its structure to different directions of stress in different teeth, or areas of a tooth, by reorienting its crystals and changing its thickness.  Enamel has a very high mineral content–92% by volume compared to just 69% for dentine, and that makes it hard and durable–tooth cusps resist wear and stay sharp (Rensberger, 1995). 

The crystalline structure that gives enamel its strength, however, also makes it brittle when stressed in the wrong direction. Dentine is actually 20X stronger in its weakest direction (Ramussen et al., 1976).  Anyone who has ever bitten down on a wayward cherry pit or unpopped kernel of popcorn knows how quickly you can chip a tooth if you stress it in the wrong direction.  Sloths never had to slow down eating looking for old maids–maybe not so inept afterall.

Recommendation: If you take a sloth to the movies, make him buy his own box of popcorn. . . . Dave

References

Ferigolo, J. 1985. Evolutionary trends of the histological pattern in the teeth of Edentata (Xenarthra), Archives of Oral Biology: 30: 71-82.

Kalthoff, D.C. 2004. Dental microstructures in fossil and recent Xenarthra (Mammalia). Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology 24 (suppl. to 3): 77A.

Naples, VL. 1995. The artifical generation of wear patterns on tooth models as a means to infer mandibular movement during feeding in mammals.  In Functional Morphology in Vertebrate Paleontology. JJ Thomason (ed.) Cambridge UIniversity Press.

Owen, R. 1840, 1845. Odontography. London

Rasmussen, ST, Patchin, RE, Scott, and Heuer AH. 1976. Fracture properties of human enamel and dentin. Dental Research 55: 154-164.

Rensberger, JM.1995. Determination of stresses in mammalian dental enamel and their relevance to the interpretation of feeding behaiors in extinct taxa. Functional Morphology in Vertebrate Paleontology, J. Thomason (ed.) Cambridge University Press.

Retzius, A.A. 1837. Mikroskopiska undersökingar öfver Tändernes, sädeles, Tandbenets struktur.  Stockholm.

Ground sloths were first discovered by science in 1789 when a giant skeleton was found on the banks of the Rio Luyan near Buenos Aires. Their existence didn’t surprise the local natives who had long held the animals were living underground like giant moles occasionally venturing too close to the surface and dying because of exposure to sunlight (Heuvelmans, 1995).

mammoth

That’s the same legend Siberian natives evolved to explain the appearance of mammoth carcasses in the river banks after spring floods (Tolmachoff, 1929). I was reminded of that this week as I slopped through the muck inside a local museum looking for salvageable artifacts. Our first sloth was uncovered by the big 1993 flood, hopefully we don’t lose it to the Flood of 2008.

A 500-year flood fifteen years after a 100-year flood–either that’s really bad luck or we’re doing something wrong. The underground has always been a place of dark mysteries and strange animals, but there’s no mystery in what happens when you tile, pave over or compact 56,276 square miles of land (Iowa’s area) to drain the water as quickly as possible into the nearest river. The agony for the thousands of displaced people is clear, but the soil that’s currently making its way downstream to the Gulf won’t be as easily replaced as their ruined possessions.

George Washington Carver offered one of the most hopeful predictions for Iowa ever conceived, “ I believe the Creator has put ores and oil on this earth to give us a breathing spell. As we exhaust them, we must be prepared to fall back on the farms, which are God’s true storehouse and can never be exhausted. For we can learn to synthesize materials for every human need from the things that grow” (Blouin, 2005). When things calm down a bit and people feel a little more secure, maybe we can take a hard look at the way we manage our soil and water. That’s Iowa’s fortune washing away. Our future is a lot darker as a result–there’s no mystery about that. . . . Dave

References

Blouin, MT. 2005. Iowa builds on agricultural strengths to advance a bioeconomy. Industrial Biotechnology 1:92.

Heuvelmans, B. 1995. On the Track of Unknown Animals. R. Garnett (transl.) Kegan Paul International.

Ides, EY. 1706 Three Years Travels from Moscow Overland to China. London.

Tolmachoff, I. 1929. The carcasses of the mammoth and rhinoceros found in the froze ground of Siberia. American Philosophical Society 23: I-74b.

I cited Swedish explorer Erland Nordenskiold in a post last week and forgot  to mention the role he played in one of the last great natural history adventures of the 19th century. 

 

In 1895 a former merchant sea captain named Hermann Eberhardt, farming on the shores of a inlet called Ultima Esperanza (“Last Hope”) in southern Chile discovered a giant cave  on his property. Inside he found a large fresh-looking skin covered with long reddish-gray hair and embedded with bean-sized bones.  Scientists identified it as that of an extinct Mylodon ground sloth.  Further excavations uncovered bones with bits of dried tissue still attached, plus evidence  of human habitation.

 

Today we know the bones and skin were preserved by the climate inside the cave, but to Professor Florentino Ameghino of the Buenos Aires museum, the skin appeared fresh.  He remembered a story a friend had told him of seeing a strange animal while exploring in the area.  Ameghino linked the story and the skin to a legend of a large nocturnal beast local natives called iemisch, with giant claws it used to dig burrows where it slept during the day.  Ameghino concluded the iemisch  was a  living Mylodon ground sloth.  His announcement created a world-wide stir. (Ameghino, 1898)

 

Erland Nordenskiold was a voice of reason in the hullabaloo and conducted the first systematic excavation of the cave.  However, publication of his study only added fuel to the fire.  He determined the evidence of human habitation lay in a distinct horizon above and separate from the older lower horizon with its sloth bones, dung and dried grass.  (Nordenskiold, 1900). Modern radiocarbon dating of the dung indicates the cave was occupied by sloths from about 13,500 years B.P. to 10,500 B.P. (Markgraf, 1985). 

 

Others concluded from the large quantities of the dung and finely chopped “hay” that sloths had been kept captive inside the cave by natives fattening them for slaughter, behind the stone wall  Nordenskiold had reported.  Some even suggested the sloths had been domesticated (Allen, 1942). Today we know the sloth “corral” was merely fallen rock from the ceiling (Naish, 2005)

 

In 1900 the Daily Express sponsored an expedition to Patagonia to capture a living Mylodon. The venture was mismanaged however and the leader, HV Hesketh-Prichard, quit before reaching the cave.  He dismissed the idea as a hoax (Hesketh-Prichard, 1902).

 

Nordenskiold offers us a lesson on the sloth project–finding three sloths in close proximity doesn’t make them a family no matter how good it looks.   Only careful excavation, painstaking attention to stratigraphy  and detailed chemical analysis will do that. . . . Dave

 

References

 

Allen GM. 1942.  Extinct and Vanishing Mammals of the Western Hemisphere. Special Publication #11, American Committee for International Wild Life Protection.

 

Ameghino, F. 1898. An existing ground-sloth in Patagonia. Natural Science 13: 324-326.

 

Hesketh-Prichard, HV. 1902. Through the Heart of Patagonia.

 

Heuvelmans, B. 1995. On the Track of Unknown Animals.  R. Garnett (transl.) Kegan Paul International.

 

Markgraf,V. 1985.  Late Pleistocene faunal extinctions in southern Patagonia.  Science 228: 1110-1112.

 

Naish, D. 2005. Fossils explained 51: Sloths. Geology Today 21: 232-238.

 

Nordenskjold E. 1900.  La grotte de Glossotherium (Neomylodon) de Patagonia. Bulletin de la Societe Geologique de France: 29: 1216-1217.

 

Sloth Advisors, Volunteers and Friends,

 

Let’s start with the good news. The NSF has awarded the sloth project $20,000 to continue excavation, conduct a detailed osteological analysis of the remains, start exploratory DNA analysis of the adult and two juveniles and provide for an outreach intern to maintain the sloth website and  design teaching materials focused on the sloth analysis. NSF regards this award as preparatory for submittal of another proposal for comprehensive analyses of the sloths including a series of chemical analyses on the bone as well as detailed studies of associated seeds, pollen and depositional environments at the time the sloths died. We are pleased to continue our association with NSF.

 

The bad news is water. As you know the Shenandoah area has been declared a disaster area. I hesitate to hazard another guess about when we will be able to dig again. Bob tells me that water in the Tarkio was up to his picnic table, our staging and overlook area, last week. That’s 30 feet above the sloth. It has dropped to 8 feet but the current is too fast to construct new levees (we will use an excavator for this). It may be late summer or early fall before things dry up as predicted. The NSF grant runs for two years so we have time. Also, NSF tells me that a 6 month extension is easy to get. That gives us through summer 2010 to recover the critters. Hopefully, the sloth-bearing unit, which is resistant to erosion, has not been materially damaged.  Holmes

Still more rain

8.17 inches since last Wednesday.  Page County is officially a state disaster area.   The sandbagging we did in 2006 has saved us so far. . . keep your fingers crossed.  

It’s bad for sloth-digging but worse for farmers.  http://www.valleynewstoday.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=19760409&BRD=2703&PAG=461&dept_id=555139&rfi=6  

Dave

Shipman (1981) states that only 1% of the terrestrial animals that die are preserved. This average however disguises the heavy bias in the fossil record in favor of species from lowland habitats (ponds, marshes, floodplains, etc.) where sediments accumulate and provide a protective blanket for the remains.  Rapid burial is a critical factor improving the probability of preservation.  Burial reduces physical weathering and reduces the opportunity for scavengers to damage and scatter the bones. Also, the more rapidly a specimen is covered, the poorer the environment for some destructive microbes.  Most of the Earth’s continental surface is upland, but the preservation environment here is relatively poor. 

Most of what we know about upland residents, like Megalonyx, comes from their lowland visits.  The probability of their preservation is directly correlated to the frequency and duration of their lowland sojourns. Some animals visit daily to drink. Others are only present seasonally (e.g. maternity herds) or annually (during migration). We should ask what brought our sloths to water.  When we find the fossils of an upland animal here we often wind up interpreting the environment in which the animal died, not the environment in which it lived. We will certainly learn a lot about where the sloths died . . . the challenge will be figuring out how they lived.  

Holmes

 Hamburger doesn’t fight back. A ground sloth wasn’t your average prey species–it would have been a challenge bringing down a healthy adult. Greg McDonald says an average full-grown Megalonyx weighed approximately 2400 pounds (McDonald, 2005). There’s some uncertainty about their weight, as you might imagine, given the paucity of complete skeletons,  but let’s go with it.  Besides, that’s probably a conservative estimate–our adult was a lot larger than average. 

Best estimates put the weight of adult dire wolves at about 150 lbs. (Lange, 2002).  Sabertooth cats weighed in at 660 lbs. (Barton et al., 2002.   In other words, these two formidable predators weighed just 6% and 25% of the average Megalonyx.  Putting that in a human perspective, that’s a predator of 10 lbs. and 45 lbs. respectively — house cat and dalmation-sized, assuming an adult human weight of 175 pounds–nothing to lose any sleep over.

There’s some debate about whether the sabertooth was a solitary or social hunter, but one thing is sure—any predator that hunted Megalonyx needed lots of help.  That’s important because Haynes says packs of predators eat in highly predictable ways.  Next post:  Haynes’s signs of predation.   Dave

References

Barton, M., Dunleavy, S., Gray, I., White, A. 2002. Prehistoric America:  A journey through the ice age and beyond. Yale University Press, New Haven CT.

Lange, IM. 2002.  Ice Age Mammals of North America:  A guide to the big, the hairy, and the bizarre. Mountain Press Publishing Co., Missoula, MN.

McDonald, HG. 2005. Paleoecology of extinct Xenarthrans and the great American biotic interchange. Bulletin of the Florida Museum of Natural History 45: 313-333.

 

Scientists recently finished analyzing a partial sloth skeleton found in the Cupisnique Desert of Peru in 1975 (Pujos et al., 2007). They estimate its age at 15-25,000 years old. The humerus (upper arm bone) matches one recovered by Swedish explorer, Erland Nordenskiold, in 1905 from a cave in the Andes called Casa del Diablo. They named the new species Diablotherium nordenskioldi and placed it in the Megalonychidae family, making it a close relative of our own Megalonyx. Nordenskiold suspected he had something special, and now it’s confirmed– Diablotherium was fully arboreal (tree-dwelling) and apparently as well-adapted to life off the ground as modern tree sloths. The discovery, the first species of this type ever found, underscores the tremendous adaptability of the ground sloths, especially the  Megalonychidae.

It would be hard to find anywhere in this hemisphere where a Megalonychidae of one kind or another didn’t live–from the tip of South America to the Arctic Circle, from the Atlantic Ocean to the Pacific. In addition to all the familiar terrestrial (ground-dwelling) species, like our M. jeffersonii, there were subarboreal forms and even aquatic species living like sea otters off the coast of Peru, grazing on sea weed (deMuzon and McDonald, 1995). How do animals as adaptable as that, thriving for millions of years, ever go extinct? Answering that question is one reason why we keep digging. . . . Dave

References

de Muizon, C and McDonald, HG. 1995. An aquatic sloth from the Pliocene of Peru. Nature 375: 224-227.

Pujos, F, De Juliis, G, Argot, C, Werdelin, L. 2007. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 149: 179-235.

What kind of evidence of a disease would survive after 12,000 years?  As a cause of death among animals, disease is probably a much more significant factor than predation, especially if they are under stress, though given the penchant of predators to pick out the weak and infirm, it may be difficult to distinguish (Shipman, 1981).  A disease that could kill 3 sloths at once would have to have been dangerous and fast-acting, but can you prove it from fossils?

A hypervirulent disease has been suggested as a possible cause of the Pleistocene mass-extinction (MacPhee and Marx, 1997). The theory is humans or their dogs (or their fleas) brought a pathogen with them when they arrived in the New World, and while they were immune, the New World fauna was not, and large mammals died in unprecedented numbers–a dress rehearsal, if you will, for the devastation wreaked by measles, small pox, etc. when those pathogens arrived with Europeans 12,000 years later. But small pox didn’t exterminate dozens of species.

As a rule, disease-causing microbes adapt to a limited number of hosts with a life-style and genes that make them susceptible. Diseases that can infect widely disparate species are rare. MacPhee and Marx offer rabies and Leptospira as models for the plague microbe, though neither has the requisite characteristics today (e.g. aerosol transmission, range of hosts, etc.). You also need to assume some different social systems among the infected animals, i.e. more direct contact to maintain the plague. Of course, you don’t need to assume a super bug killed the Tarkio Valley Trio–a bad sloth-cold could have had the same effect if stress had left them vulnerable.

Proving the sloths died of a fast-acting acute disease is a challenge. Such diseases generally act on soft tissues, rarely do they leave an imprint on bone (Manchester, 1987). A long-term chronic disease has a better chance of leaving fossil evidence, but arthritis, or another such disease couldn’t kill three sloths at once. Does that just leave us with an interesting theory and no way to prove it? Maybe not.

The ability to detect disease directly in fossils took a giant leap forward in 2005 when Hendrik Poinar, in the Ancient DNA Center at McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario, and an international team, succeeded in sequencing 28 million base pairs (bp) of DNA from a well-preserved Siberian wooly mammoth jaw (Poinar et al., 2006).  In a field where getting a few hundred bp of DNA is viewed as a significant achievement, they recovered 13 million bp of the mammoth’s genome. The remaining sequences were traced to a wide range of internal viruses and bacteria, a number of soil organisms, and even the mammoth’s last meal. Poinar’s team used a database of DNA sequences on file at the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI), and software they developed, to identify the DNA sequences down to the species level in many cases.  

Sequencing DNA from our fossils is a long shot. The mammoth was preserved under ideal conditions. Iowa’s wet temperate climate makes finding DNA extremely unlikely. However, the NSF wants us to try and Poinar has agreed to help. Who knows what we’ll discover along the way–hopefully proof we have a sloth family, and maybe entire internal and external ecosystems in those fragile strands . . . . Dave

References

Poinar, HN, Schwarz, C, Qi J, Shapiro, B, MacPhee, RDE, Buigues, B, Tikhonov, A, Huson, DH, Tomsho, LP, Auch, A, Rampp, M, Miller, W, Schuster, SC. 2006. Metagenomics to Paleogenomics: large scale sequencing of Mammoth DNA. Science 311(5759): 392-294.
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/1123360?DC1#REF14

Rowe, B. 2005. Re disease and mass extinction The sneeze heard ’round the world: disease and the great Pleistocene extinction. Abstracts, Society for American Archaeology 70th Annual Meeting, March 30-April 3, 2005, Salt Lake City. P. 254.

MacPhee, R.D.E. and Marx, P.A. 1997. The 40,000 year plague: humans, hyperdisease and first-contact extinctions. In Natural Change and Human Impact in Madagascar. S. Goodman and B. Patterson (eds.) Smithsonian Institution Press.

Manchester, K. 1987. Skeletal evidence for health and disease. In Death, decay and reconstruction: Approaches to archaeology and forensic science. A. Boddington, AN Garland and RC Janaway (eds.) Manchester University Press.

National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/Taxonomy/taxonomyhome.html

Shipman, P. 1981. Life History of a Fossil: An Introduction to Taphonomy and Paleoecology, Harvard University Press.

More rain

It started raining last Friday and continued through Sunday.  Officially 3.33 inches.  Flash flood warnings for all of Page county.  We don’t need a photo to know there’s at least 15 feet of water over the site.   Dave

Why is it that only 6 Megalonyx skeletons of any consequence have ever been discovered  and no direct adult-juvenile association at all, but we’re lousy with sloths? What’s so unique about the site or the circumstances surrounding our sloths’ deaths?  Much progress has been made in understanding the processes of fossilization and decomposition, but the essential mystery remains–why do just a few thousandths of 1% of all bones become fossilized, absent embalming and burial? (Gill-King, 1997)  How did we beat the odds?

 

External conditions (i.e. soil chemistry, microbes, etc.) are generally believed to determine the fate of bones, but Bell et al. (1996) suggest internal factors are more important. The bodies of all animals contain a host of microorganisms in their guts ready to escape after the death of their host and use its vascular and lymphatic systems to invade the major body organs. The microbes could be getting into the bone marrow by the Haversian canals that maintain the bones in life.  The actions of predators,  and their manner of killing–specifically, disemboweling prey and disrupting the microbial escape routes may be critical for explaining bone preservation.  I love the irony–fall to predators but live forever as a fossil.  Cool.

 

If you want to become a fossil, getting eaten by wolves may be your ticket.  Avoid hyenas–they’ll eat you bones and all. Lions and tigers will do a lot of damage to your bones too. A pack of wolves is perfect.  Haynes (1988) says they view internal organs as among the choicest bits and consume them first–bye bye gut microbes.  Better yet,  wolves rarely leave any tooth marks on the bones of a kill–hello immortality.

 

 Shipman (1981) says predation is overemphasized as a contributor to the fossil record, accounting for less than10% of the mortality  of the average prey species,  but we have evidence that our toddler survived at least one attack. Maybe our sloths weren’t so lucky the last time.  Micozzi (1986) adds some intriguing support. 

 

Forensic scientists have long studied the process of decomposition to estimate the time of death.  The test carcasses are often temporarily stored in a freezer.  Micozzi wondered if freezing and thawing were affecting the results and compared the decomposition of fresh rats to ones frozen and thawed.  He  found freezing killed the gut microbes that normally started the process of putrefaction.  Decomposition proceeded from the outside in, driven mostly by aerobic decay (i.e. oxygen-using microbes).  The fresh, non-frozen rats decomposed from the inside-out, driven by the internal anaerobic bacteria (living without oxygen).  Micozzi couldn’t follow his experiment long enough to determine if the defrosted rats were more likely to be fossilized, but clearly they were on a different chemical/microbial pathway.

 

Trueman and Martill (2002) suggest gut bacteria may be the initial attackers of bone–pioneers opening virgin bone to settlement by waves of followers, and anything that disrupted them–e.g. gutting by a predator, butchering or freezing halts the process of bone decay.   Once started, they believe decay proceeds to complete destruction.  Only those bones that escape attack by internal bacteria, or have them halted in their tracks by a rapid physical or chemical change, survive to become fossils.

 

So how can we tell if predators killed our sloths?  . . .    Dave

 

References

Bell, LS, Skinner, MF, Jones, SJ . 1996. The speed of post mortem change to the human skeleton and its taphonomic significance, Forensic Science International 82: 129-140.

 

Gill-King, H. 1997. Chemical and ultrastructural aspects of decomposition.  In Forensic Taphonomy: The Postmortem fate of human remains, WD Haglund and MH Sorg eds. pp. 93-108.

 

Haynes G. 1988. Prey bones and predators:  potential information from analysis of bone sites.  Ossa: 7: 75-97.

 

Micozzi, MS. 1986.  Experimental study of postmortem change under field conditions:  effects of freezing, thawing, and mechanical injury Journal of Forensic Sciences 31: 953-961.

 

Shipman, P. 1981. Life History of a Fossil:  An Introduction to Taphonomy and Paleoecology, Harvard University Press.

 

Trueman, CN and DM Martill, DM. 2002. The long-term survival of bone:  The role of bioerosion. Archaeometry 44: 371-382.

 

These photos just arrived courtesy of sloth-digging veterans Pam and Marvin Belknap.

 

 

 

 

 

 

From the picnic area on top of the south bank. 

The water is high but not nearly as high as we expected after all the rain the area has received.  Holmes thinks we may be able to go out and dig in July.   He’ll talk to Bob this weekend and send an update to our sloth rapid response team next week. Watch for more here soon.

  Looking upstream, North.

                                                                      South bank looking downstream.

 

 

 

 

 

Can you explain the deaths of three sloths by anything other than some kind of catastrophe?  In a drought herbivores congregate around the remaining water sources, and soon exhaust all the good forage near by.  If the drought continues, eventually they die of malnutrition. Predators have plenty of meat available so they leave most of the carcasses undisturbed.  Even scavengers that normally consume bones switch to soft tissue.

Shipman (1975) identifies three levels of drought:  mild, when seasonal watering holes dry up and juveniles tend to die; severe when even permanent water sources are affected and animals in their prime die, and; extreme drought when entire lakes and rivers dry up and the environment is permanently altered.    If we had a drought, it was severe given the presence of an adult. We’ve found some turtle and frog bones, and mollusks, but there’s no evidence of an extreme die-off. The end of the Ice Age isn’t envisioned as drought prone, but we don’t have a firm radiocarbon date yet either.

Shipman offers some clues for recognizing a severe drought in a bone assemblage:  Often some of the bones are still articulated.  That’s because when the rain returns the dry soil erodes easily and covers them. The assemblage often includes a variety of animals from disparate habitats, forced together in their need for water. Also, the mineralogy of the sediments may show evidence of the arid conditions (i.e. hardpan).

Our bones show few signs of scavenging but they are disarticulated  (How do you explain the bone arrangement?). There’s no evidence of a pulse of sediments covering the bones (no layers evident anywhere in the clay).   Mineralogical analysis is awaiting the next NSF grant.  We haven’t found a single bone from another herbivore–strange if water was scarce, but would the presence of two juvenile sloths  make  “Mom” aggressive enough to drive other animals away?  The jury is still out on the question of drought—we need more data.

Haynes (1985) has studied elephant bone assemblages in Africa and notes that bones tend to accumulate near water for reasons other than catastrophic droughts: 1) animals spend more time there so they will die there more often simply from natural causes; 2) predators know that’s often the easiest place to make a kill; 3)  catastrophic floods may be more frequent there, and;  4) bones are more apt to be buried and preserved there.  We know there wasn’t a flood, but his other points merit some thought.

Conybeare and Haynes (1984) studied an assemblage of elephant bones after a severe drought at a place called Shabi Shabi in Zimbabwe. The assemblage  seemed to have a natural age distribution reflective of one catastrophic event, but they concluded it had actually accumulated over several years and that trampling, kicking and digging by the elephants, combined with compaction and drying had preserved  the assemblage as a single homogeneous bone bed.    The lesson is clear—don’t jump to any conclusions that our sloths died in a single event.  We have to prove it. . . . Dave

References:

Conybeare A. and Haynes, G.1984. Observations on elephant mortality and bones in water holes.  Quaternary Research 22: 189-200.

Haynes G. 1985   On watering holes, mineral licks, death, and predation.  In Environments and Extinctions:  Man in late glacial North America,  Eds.  J Mead and D Mettzer.  Center for the Study of Early Man. pp. 53-71.

Shipman, P. 1975. Implications of drought for vertebrate fossil assemblages, Nature 257:667-668. 

Heaven knows we’ve almost lost some students and one Bobcat operator to the muck at the site, but how reasonable is it to think a giant sloth could die that way? How about three sloths? Haynes (1988) has studied hundreds of elephant deaths and reports it’s actually not an uncommon event.   Healthy adult elephants never have a problem even in the deepest thickest mud but very young animals and those who are ill or weak some times get stuck.  He has also observed impala, Cape buffalo and black rhinos dying in this manner. 

So death by mud isn’t out of the question (Meghann take note).   But trapped animals leave some evidence behind after they are dead.  We would expect to find foot and leg bones locked in the sediments, articulated in a vertical or standing position.  We haven’t found anything like that.  Of course, the sediment could have become saturated with water again and then been disturbed by trampling and other activities at the water hole.  But that’s a lot of churning and the toddler, at least what we have found, is fairly localized.  A current strong enough to stir up the muck and clear it away would have moved a lot of bone too and left heavy sediment behind.   No, all the evidence says little or no current. . . . Dave

References

Haynes G. 1988. Longitudinal studies of African elephant death and bone deposits.  Journal of Archaeological Science 15: 131-157.

 

If we knew the season in which the sloths died could that help tell us how they died?  Does dying in the winter leave traces in fossils that dying in the summer doesn’t?  The Iceman Murder case offers an intriguing idea for detecting freezing in fresh tissue. In 1983 Pennsylvania police found a corpse tightly wrapped in plastic bags dumped along a mountain road.  Medical examiners performing the autopsy noticed an unusual pattern of decomposition and odor, and suggested to skeptical police that the victim had been kept frozen somewhere since he had disappeared over two years earlier. The examiners had spotted cavities in the victim’s tissues where the doctors hypothesized ice crystals had grow, distorting the surrounding tissue and leaving holes they called “ice crystal artifacts.” Their discovery eventually helped convict a New Jersey contract killer.

I’m wondering: 1) Do ice crystal artifacts form in bone?  2) If so, what do the holes look like and can they be distinguished from the post-mortem recrystallization of apatite that also enlarges the cavities? 3) Is the warping of the bone by the ice different in fresh bone versus weathered bone? 4) Can we distinguish immediate post-mortem freezing from ice artifacts that form in subsequent winters?   5) Would ice crystal artifacts be more likely in one particular bone?  6) Will a thin-section of the bone show them?   7) What other clues does dying in winter leave?

References

Zugibe, FT and Costello, JT. 1993. The Iceman Murder:  One of a series of contract murders. Journal of Forensic Science 38: 1404-1408.

 

How do three sloths die all at the same time? One of my crazier ideas is maybe by falling through ice and drowning.   I read a lot of forensic science literature hoping for an “Aah ha” moment when I find a technique that might give us a clue.  We obviously can’t look for fluid in the sloths’ lungs, but forensic scientists have come up with an intriguing alternative–diatoms. 

Drowning victims often inhale diatoms as they fight for breath.  They enter the bloodstream when the alveoli in the lungs rupture and then disperse throughout the body as the heart keeps beating, winding up in well-vascularized organs and tissues, including bone marrow (Peabody, 1999).  Medical examiners find them inside the femur about 1/3 of the time (Polanen, 1998).   We do have an adult sloth femur, and diatoms fossilize just fine, but even if we found some inside, there’s the problem of proving they didn’t enter through small cracks as the bone sat exposed or during excavation.   The femur was sealed in clay for 10,000 years but weathering and/or frost fractured it into almost 50 pieces and that’s a lot of cracks in the bone and holes in my theory.  Could we sacrifice another bone that isn’t so broken. . . a rib of the toddler perhaps?  Are ribs as well-vascularized as femurs?   There’s another problem–it’s not that unusual to find diatoms even in the absence of drowning.  Swimmers inhale them all the time.  If our sloth was like Mark Spitz, he/she was loaded with them. . . .    Dave   

References

Peabody, AJ.  1999. Forensic Science and Diatoms.  In The Diatoms:  Applications for the Environmental and Earth Sciences, EF Stoermer and JP Smol eds. Ch. 20,  pp. 413-418.

Polanen, MS. 1998. Diatoms and homicide, Forensic Science International 91: 29-34.

 

 

 

Why was it that only certain bones, and not others, got separated from the main concentration, and how did these end up here?  If we understood that, would it help us find the missing bones?

Under normal conditions bones don’t start moving until they are completely disarticulated (Hill, 1975).  A lot of researchers have tracked the decomposition of individual carcasses over time, but Hill picked out a large area in East Africa to study and recorded the status of disarticulation for every Topi, Damaliscus korrigum, a common medium-sized antelope, in his 475,000 square mile study area.  He found a surprisingly consistent pattern.

Under normal conditions, a mammal will follow the same sequence of disarticulation, regardless of how it dies. All vertebrates share the same general body form, so the sequence is basically the same way you carve a Thanksgiving turkey–head and tail, arms and legs, and finally the trunk.   Mobility demands a certain amount of loose attachment and after you’re dead everyone looking for a meal, be they a cannibal or carrion beetle; lion or wolf; maggot or mite; bacterium or fungus, follows the path of least resistance when they start dismantling you.  That’s determined by the architecture of your joints (i.e. tendons, ligaments, etc.).  Juveniles are different–their bones generally come apart at the epiphyses, where they are still growing and unfused, before they detach at the actual joints. The loosest (adult) connections are where your jaw attaches to your skull, your head attaches to your neck and where your tail (if you have one) and limbs attach to your trunk.  Hill, by observing thousands of skeletons learned the disarticulation sequence of each major unit or appendage.

Topi disarticulate: 1. scapula 2. caudal vertebrae 3. arm (from the scapula), 4. mandible (lower jaw) 5. hand and wrist (from the arm–the order of arm bones is somewhat variable) 6. skull and atlas 7. wrist (from the hand) 8. fingers, also leg 9-12. femur, tibia, tarsus, ankle, etc. 13. atlas (from skull–may go with axis in some animals) 14. toes 15. ribs (this is an average, some will go sooner, others later) 16-18. pelvis 19-21. vertebrae (Hill, 1979)  The details may vary for different mammals, but the general pattern probably applies to all, including ground sloths. 

The pattern of disarticulation may reveal some important information about a bone assemblage:

1) Significant variations may indicate the influence of an important environmental factor.  Water, for example, accelerates disarticulation and may change the sequence.  On land, animals tend to disarticulate from the trunk out (proximal to distal).  In the water the extremities of animals disarticulate more quickly (i.e. distal to proximal), though jaw and head are still in first place (Schafer, 1972).    Extremely arid conditions may dry tendons and ligaments around the ankle and wrist assemblies of smaller animals and inhibit disarticulation.  But that’s not likely to be an issue in our case, even if there was a drought.  Large animals, with their smaller surface area: volume ratio retain a lot of body water and bacterial putrefaction is likely to disarticulate the bones before a carcass mummifies.

2) Flowing water only transports individual bones, unless there’s a flood, so the disarticulation sequence determines what gets transported and scattered, and in what order.  Predators may move a group of bones initially but for the most part bones are dispersed individually.  Shouldn’t this be true of kicking as well?  

3) Disarticulation means some bones will be covered and protected by sediments sooner, and preserved. The survival of a fragile bone (like our scapulae?), among others less well preserved, may be explained by this.  Is it significant that most of the missing sloth bones come from the right side?

4) Disarticulation provides an estimate of the interval between death and burial by observing the degree of weathering on various bones.   The closest we’ve come to finding anything that might have still been articulated when it was buried is the string of 3 thoracic vertebra next to the pelvis.  Since they are among the last bones to disarticulate, the implication is the sloth had plenty of time to disarticulate and scatter before burial.

5) Disarticulation provides clues about which bones should be associated.  That can be important when they start being scattered.

Scattering

The scattering stopwatch starts with disarticulation of the first bone.  Hill observed that the largest concentration of bone is generally where the animal died.  If scattering is random and operates continuously, then the distance from the center, or “ground zero,” will correspond to a bone’s order of release as a single element–i.e. all other things being equal, the bones farthest from the center disarticulated the soonest.

Kicking can cause a significant amount of movement over time.  Bones are more likely to be kicked further apart than closer together, but the curve flattens over time.  At some point of dispersion, it’s almost as likely that a kick will propel a bone back closer to the center, as away, i.e. the dispersion field isn’t infinite and eventually stabilizes. 

 Illustration of differences in probability of dispersion at different distances of separation.  Bone B and bone B’ both move K units in a random direction in a single event.  B and D are K units apart, and B’ is 2K units from D’. The probabilities of B moving nearer to D, and B’ moving nearer to D’ are proportional to angle ABC and angle A’B'C’.  The general formula for this probability P=1-(arc cos (1/2r)/180) where rK is the distance separating the bones. (Hill, 1979)  

This means we don’t have an infinite area to search and maybe we can find a mathematics/statistics student who can make some assumptions about the average distance bones are kicked based on where we’ve found certain bones and calculate some probabilities for finding our missing bones within specific circles=r.  

There are still some unknowns:  1) The scapulae may disarticulate first but they don’t offer much vertical area for kicking.  Are they really likely to have been kicked the furthest? 2) Will animals avoid trampling and/or kicking especially large bones? Heavy bones?  Does it depend on the trampler/kicker (i.e. bison vs. mastodon)?   The mandible, atlas and caudal vertebrae seem the logical bones to focus on–everyone agrees they disarticulate early, regardless of conditions and they aren’t so large that most animals would avoid them.   But it still seems like a problem someone could model on a computer. . . .  Dave

References

Hill, AP. 1975. Taphonomy of contemporary and late Cenozoic east African vertebrates.  Ph.D. thesis, University of London, 331 pp.

Hill, AP. 1979.  Disarticulation and scattering of mammal skeletons. Paleontology 5:261-274.

Schafer, W. 1972. Ecology and Palaeoecology of Marine Environments. GY Craig ed. I Oertel translator. The University of Chicago Press

Voorhies, MR. 1969. Taphonomy and population dynamics of an early Pliocene vertebrate fauna, Knox County, Nebraska. University of Wyoming Contributions to Geology, Special Paper1: 1-69.

 

 

I’ve been studying an old photo Bob Athen took in 2002 of the bones he and Sonya had collected, spread out in their upstairs hallway and arranged as they originally found them. Like a fortuneteller staring at   the leaves on the bottom of  a teacup, I’m trying to figure out what, if anything, it means about the conditions at the time of death and where we should dig next. 

The large femur (thigh bone) at the bottom of the photo sits furthest downstream, caudal (tail) vertebrae lie upstream, at the top. “Up” and “downstream” are references to today, not necessarily then.  The mix of large and small bones in the photo tells me they haven’t been sorted by flowing water, i.e. the West Tarkio Creek wasn’t flowing over the site in sloth-time.    A platter-sized scapula (shoulder blade) rests on the right and an atlas (the first cervical vertebra or neck bone) on the left–the only bone Bob says he didn’t have to glue back together.  Between them I see many elements from the chest–ribs, sternabrae, sternal ribs (sloths have separate interlocking breast bones instead of a single sternum of cartilage), a collarbone and vertebrae.     It’s no wonder we thought we could recover the whole skeleton in just a couple of weekends. From these bones it looked like the animal was lying in a relatively small area and we only had to dig a little deeper.   Of course, we know now that the main concentration of bones was 8-10 ft. to the north, if you count the adult pelvis as “ground zero,” off the left edge of the photo.    The sliver of bone sitting below and to the right of the scapula is a piece of the toddler’s rib.  We wondered where such a fragile bone could fit in the adult but confirmation of the juvenile had to wait until we finished digging the north side of the creek and discovered the main concentration of juvenile bones about 6-8 ft. to the right (south) of the scapula.  More about that another day.  The bones in the photo must have been moved, but how?  And if we knew how they were moved, could we calculate where the missing bones are?

Water didn’t transport the bones here. Besides the lack of sorting, the bones are sitting in clay with some very fine-grained sand. Any current that could move these bones would have left them buried in sand and gravel.  There was little if any current if this clay settled all around them (Voorhies, 1969).  Obviously the wind didn’t move them either, or gravity. There are only a few possibilities left:  1) they floated here–that is, maybe the sloths died in the water, they bloated and floated, and after the different limbs disarticulated, they were pushed around by the wind and waves and eventually, after the flesh decayed, the bones fell here; 2) predators and/or scavengers dragged the bones here, or; 3) they were accidentally kicked here–underwater or while they sat exposed for a while on the surface of the ground (at the edge of a watering hole?)  Some show more signs of weathering than others.

It’s hard to imagine how three sloths could have died in the water all at the same time, with a flood out of the question (remember, no current).  Could they have fallen through ice and drowned? Starved in a drought?  There are probably clues in the blue-gray clay that surrounds the bones.  Maybe the geochemistry or microfossils hold the answer.  Was this a lake?  The closed oxbow of a river?  We’ve never observed any layers in the clay and there’s no sign that the bones are sitting on a surface that the sloths actually lived on.

Maybe we can define the extent of our deposit with some drilling and coring. If there was a body of water here, how far did it extend? Bob says he’s seen exposures of our blue-gray clay all over the county.  How far would pieces of a sloth float before the bones dropped off?  If the bones floated to these locations, something moved them again.  The packages aren’t anatomically correct–for example, we’re finding ribs, teeth, jaws and arm bones piled together.  Experts would say the bones are “associated but dispersed,” that is they are scattered over an area much larger than an articulated skeleton but can largely be linked to individual animals by anatomical characteristics (Behrensmeyer, 1991).

We’re still wondering about the role of predators here–both as a cause of death and movement.  There are only minor signs of scavenging (unless you count the absence of entire limbs!).  That implies the lack of predator competition at the kill (if it was a kill) and little reason for a wolf, for example, to drag a limb very far, or to gnaw all the missing bones to splinters, but evidence of predators is a topic for another day. Floating away could also account for our missing limbs. In any case, you still need a force like random kicking to explain the skeletal hodgepodge.  But how are you supposed to figure out where a bone could have randomly floated or been kicked?   Maybe we can with the help of some mathematics. . . . Dave    

(to be continued)

References

Behrensmeyer AK. 1991. Terrestrial vertebrate accumulations. In PA Allison and DEG Briggs eds., Taphonomy:  Releasing the Data Locked in the Fossil Record, Ch. 6, Plenum Press, pp. 291-335.

Voorhies, MR. 1969. Taphonomy and population dynamics of an early Pliocene vertebrate fauna, Knox County, Nebraska. University of Wyoming Contributions to Geology, Special Paper 1: 1-69.

 

 

welcome

Excavation in the West Tarkio Valley of southwest Iowa has revealed the second most complete skeleton of an adult Megalonyx jeffersonii ever recovered, lying in situ, and partially intermingled, with the remains of two juveniles.  The specimens are buried in primary deposits, offering unprecedented opportunities for research into paleoenvironments during the Pleistocene/Holocene transition and insights into the behavior, habitat, resource partitioning and family associations of this keystone species.  See the Project Summary for more information.