Prey Body Size and Ranking in Zooarchaeology: Theory, Empirical Evidence, and Applications from the Northern Great Basin

By J. Broughton, M. Cannon, F. Bayham, David A. Byers. American Antiquity, 2011

137 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Anthropology, Ecology, Paleontology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/8a9b372e21271adcd40a1dada6655b569e8b9a8c

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Anthropology

1. Christopher T. Morgan
2. M. Cannon
3. J. Broughton
4. E. Bartelink
5. K. Lupo
6. M. Zeder

In Ecology

1. J. Broughton
2. M. Cannon
3. E. Bartelink
4. Christopher T. Morgan
5. S. Price
6. S. Hopkins
7. K. Lupo
8. Douglas W. Bird

In Paleontology

1. Christopher T. Morgan
2. J. Broughton
3. M. Cannon
4. E. Bartelink

Citations in the corpus

• Evolutionary Ecology, Resource Depression, and Niche Construction Theory: Applications to Central California Hunter-Gatherers and Mimbres-Mogollon Agriculturalists (2010, background): “…direction of the relationship between return rate and body size is positive, and in eight of them, the correlations are significant despite differences in prey mobility (see Bird et al. 2009; Broughton et al. 2010 for detailed discussion on the issue of prey mobility in relation to return rates).”
• Is it Intensification Yet? Current Archaeological Perspectives on the Evolution of Hunter-Gatherer Economies (2015, methodology): “…erroneous indications of declining foraging efficiency and that social rather than subsistence goals might affect zooarchaeological signatures, Broughton et al. (2011) evaluate the correspondence between the small quantity (n = 10) of published datasets on experimental resource return rates,…”
• NISP, Bone Fragmentation, and the Measurement of Taxonomic Abundance (2013, background): “…human population growth and attendant depression of artiodactyl resources (Broughton et al. 2010; Cannon 2001, 2003; Nelson and LeBlanc 1986; for a recent overview of the use of relative abundance measures like the artiodactyl index in resource depression studies, also see Broughton et al. 2011).”
• The macroevolutionary relationship between diet and body mass across mammals (2015, background): “, 2006; Alroy, 2012), this allometric relationship is exploited such that size can serve as a proxy for the more difficult-to-obtain traits (Peters, 1986; Rodriguez, 1999; Broughton et al., 2011).”