Snapshots of Digital Scholarship in Zooarchaeology: Introduction to the Special Issue

  • Iain McKechnie Department of Anthropology, 1218 University of Oregon, Eugene, OR 97403, USA. Hakai Institute, Department of Archaeology, Simon Fraser University, 8888 University Drive, Burnaby, BC V5A 1S6 Canada. Department of Anthropology, University of Victoria, 3800 Ring Road, Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 Canada.
  • Sarah Whitcher Kansa Alexandria Archive Institute & Open Context, 125 El Verano Way, San Francisco, CA 94127, USA.
  • Steve Wolverton Department of Geography, University of North Texas, 1155 Union Circle 305279, Denton, TX 76203.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.14237/ebl.6.2.2015.556

Author Biographies

Iain McKechnie, Department of Anthropology, 1218 University of Oregon, Eugene, OR 97403, USA. Hakai Institute, Department of Archaeology, Simon Fraser University, 8888 University Drive, Burnaby, BC V5A 1S6 Canada. Department of Anthropology, University of Victoria, 3800 Ring Road, Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2 Canada.

Iain McKechnie is a SSHRC postdoctoral fellow and Hakai Institute Scholar whose zooarchaeological research focuses on the Pacific Northwest Coast. He is an incoming assistant professor in the Department of Anthropology at the University of Victoria.

Sarah Whitcher Kansa, Alexandria Archive Institute & Open Context, 125 El Verano Way, San Francisco, CA 94127, USA.

Sarah Whitcher Kansa directs the non-profit Alexandria Archive Institute, working with researchers to publish open access data with Open Context.

Steve Wolverton, Department of Geography, University of North Texas, 1155 Union Circle 305279, Denton, TX 76203.

Steve Wolverton is an archaeologist and ecologist in the Department of Geography at the University of North Texas. He is one of the founding editors of Ethnobiology Letters, and his research focuses on the intersections between zooarchaeology, ethnobiology, and conservation biology.

References

American Anthropological Association. 2015. 2015-2016 AnthroGuide: A print directory of anthropological programs and professionals. American Anthropological Association, Arlington, VA.

Arbuckle, B. S., S. W. Kansa, E. Kansa, D. Orton, C. Çakırlar, L. Gourichon, L. Atici, A. Galik, A. Marciniak, J. Mulville, H. Buitenhuis, D. Carruthers, B. D. Cupere, A. Demirergi, S. Frame, D. Helmer, L. Martin, J. Peters, N. Pöllath, K. Pawłowska, N. Russell, K. Twiss, and D. Würtenberger. 2014. Data Sharing Reveals Complexity in the Westward Spread of Domestic Animals across Neolithic Turkey. PLoS One 9:e99845.

Austin, A. 2014. Mobilizing Archaeologists: Increasing the Quantity and Quality of Data Collected in the Field with Mobile Technology. Advances in Archaeological Practice 2:13-23.

Bardolph, D. 2014. A Critical Evaluation of Recent Gendered Publishing Trends in American Archaeology. American Antiquity 79:522-540.

Berger, L. R., J. Hawks, D. J. de Ruiter, S. E. Churchill, P. Schmid, L. K. Delezene, T. L. Kivell, H. M. Garvin, S. A. Williams, J. M. DeSilva, M. M. Skinner, C. M. Musiba, N. Cameron, T. W. Holliday, W. Harcourt-Smith, R. R. Ackermann, M. Bastir, B. Bogin, D. Bolter, J. Brophy, Z. D. Cofran, K. A. Congdon, A. S. Deane, M. Dembo, M. Drapeau, M. C. Elliott, E. M. Feuerriegel, D. Garcia-Martinez, D. J. Green, A. Gurtov, J. D. Irish, A. Kruger, M. F. Laird, D. Marchi, M. R. Meyer, S. Nalla, E. W. Negash, C. M. Orr, D. Radovcic, L. Schroeder, J. E. Scott, Z. Throckmorton, M. W. Tocheri, C. VanSickle, C. S. Walker, P. Wei, and B. Zipfel. 2015. Homo naledi, a new species of the genus Homo from the Dinaledi Chamber, South Africa. eLife 4:e09560.

Boschin, F., C. Zanolli, F. Bernardini, F. Princivalle, C. Tuniz. 2015. A Look from the Inside: MicroCT Analysis of Burned Bones. Ethnobiology Letters 6:41-49. Doi: 10.14237/ebl.6.1.2015.365

Chaput, M. A., B. Kriesche, M. Betts, A. Martindale, R. Kulik, V. Schmidt, and K. Gajewski. 2015. Spatiotemporal distribution of Holocene populations in North America. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA 112:12127-12132.

David, B. 1990. How Was This Bone Burnt? In Problem Solving in Taphonomy, edited by S. Solomon, I. Davidson and D. Watson, pp. 65–79. Anthropology Museum, University of Queensland, St. Lucia, Queensland.

Dibble, F. W. 2015. Data Collection in Zooarchaeology: Incorporating Touch-Screen, Speech-Recognition, Barcodes, and GIS. Ethnobiology Letters 6:32-40. Doi: 10.14237/ebl.6.1.2015.393.

Fee, S. B., D. K. Pettegrew, and W. R. Caraher. 2013. Taking Mobile Computing to the Field. Near Eastern Archaeology 76:50-55.

Gifford-Gonzalez, D. P. 1993. Report on the Zooarchaeology Practitioner Survey. Zooarchaeology Research News 12:3-15.

Gifford-Gonzalez, D. P. 1994. Women in Zooarchaeology. Archaeological Papers of the American Anthropological Association 5:155-171.

Greenberg, J. 2014. A Feathered River Across the Sky: The Passenger Pigeon’s Flight to Extinction. Bloomsbury, New York.

Herrmann, N. P. and J. L. Bennett. 1999. The Differentiation of Traumatic and Heat-related Fractures in Burned Bone. Journal of Forensic Sciences 44:461-469.

Jones, E. L. and Caroline Gabe. 2015. The Promise and Peril of Older Collections: Meta-Analyses and the Zooarchaeology of Late Prehistoric/Early Historic New Mexico. Open Quaternary 1, p.Art. 6. Doi: http://doi.org/10.5334/oq.ag.

Kansa, S. W. 2015. Using Linked Open Data to Improve Data Reuse in Zooarchaeology. Ethnobiology Letters 6:7-14. Doi: 10.14237/ebl.6.1.2015.467.

Kittinger, J N., L. McClenachan, K. B. Gedan, and L. K. Blight, eds. 2014. Marine Historical Ecology in Conservation: Applying the Past to Manage for the Future. University of California, Berkeley.

Law, M. and C. Morgan. 2014. The Archaeology of Digital Abandonment: Online Sustainability and Archaeological Sites. Present Pasts 6, p.Art. 2. Doi: http://doi.org/10.5334/pp.58.

Lazar, I., T. Kompare, H. van Londen, and T. Schenk. 2014. The Archaeologist of the Future is Likely to be a Woman: Age and Gender Patterns in European Archaeology. Archaeologies 10:257-280.

Lyman, R. L. 1994. Vertebrate Taphonomy. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Lyman, R. L. and K. P. Cannon, eds. 2004. Zooarchaeology and Conservation Biology. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

Macheridis, S. 2015. Image-Based 3D Modeling as a Documentation Method for Zooarchaeological Remains in Waste-Related Contexts. Ethnobiology Letters 6:25-31. Doi: 10.14237/ebl.6.1.2015.342.

Manzano, B. L., B. K. Means, C. T. Begley, and M. Zechini. 2015. Using Digital 3D Scanning to Create “Artifictions” of the Passenger Pigeon and Harelip Sucker, Two Extinct Species in Eastern North America: The Future Examines the Past. Ethnobiology Letters 6:15-24. Doi: 10.14237/ebl.6.1.2015.368.

Maschner, H. D. G., M. W. Betts, and C. D. Schou. 2011. Virtual Zooarchaeology of the Arctic Project (VZAP). SAA Archaeological Record 11:41-43.

Moretti, E., S. Arrighi, F. Boschin, J. Crezzini, D. Aureli, A. Ronchitelli. Using 3D Microscopy to Analyze Experimental Cut Marks on Animal Bones Produced with Different Stone Tools. Ethnobiology Letters 6:50-58. Doi: 10.14237/ebl.6.1.2015.349.

Munro, L. E., F. J. Longstaffe, and C. D. White. 2007. Burning and Boiling of Modern Deer Bone: Effects on Crystallinity and Oxygen Isotope Composition of Bioapatite Phosphate. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 249:90-102.

Parker, A. and M. Eldridge. 2014. Archaeology in the Third and Fourth Dimensions: A Case Study of 3D Data Collection and Analysis From Prince Rupert, BC, Canada. In 21st Century Archaeology Concepts, methods and tools: Proceedings of the 42nd Annual Conference on Computer Applications and Quantitative Methods in Archaeology, edited by F. Giligny, F. Djindjian, L. Costa, P. Moscati and S. Robert, pp. 115-122. Archaeopress, Oxford.

Pilaar Birch, S. E. 2015. Diversity and Demographics of Zooarchaeologists: Results from a Digital Survery. Ethnobiology Letters 6:59-67. Doi: 10.14237/ebl.6.1.2015.469.

Richards, J., S. Jeffrey, S. Waller, F. Ciravegna, S. Chapman, and Z. Zhang. 2011. The Archaeology Data Service and the Archaeotools project: faceted classification and natural language processing. In Archaeology 2.0: New Approaches to Communication and Collaboration, edited by E. C. Kansa, S. W. Kansa, and E. Watrall, pp. 31-56. Costen Institute, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles.

Shipman, P. 1988. Actualistic Studies of Animal Resources and Hominid Activities. In Scanning Electron Microscopy in Archaeology, edited by S. L. Olsen, pp. 261-285. International Series. vol. 452. British Archaeological Reports, Oxford.

Spielmann, K. A. and K. W. Kintigh. 2011. The Digital Archaeological Record: the Potentials of Archaeozoological Data Integration Through TDAR. SAA Archaeological Record 11:22-25.

Stiner, M. C., S. Kuhn, S. Weiner, and O. Bar-Yosef. 1995. Differential Burning, Recrystallization, and Fragmentation of Archaeological Bone. Journal of Archaeological Science 22:223-237.

Wells, J. J. 2014. Keep Calm and Remain Human: How We Have Always Been Cyborgs and Theories on the Technological Present of Anthropology. Reviews in Anthropology 43:5-34.

Wells, J. J., E. C. Kansa, S. W. Kansa, S. J. Yerka, D. G. Anderson, Thaddeus G. Bissett, Kelsey Noack Myers and R. Carl DeMuth. 2014. Web-Based Discovery and Integration of Archaeological Historic Properties Inventory Data: The Digital Index of North American Archaeology (DINAA). Literary and Linguistic Computing 29:349-360.

Wolf, E. R. 1964. Anthropology. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs.

Wolverton, A., L. Nagaoka, and M. Wolverton. 2015. Breaking In: Women’s Accounts of How Choices Shape STEM Careers. Stylus Press, Sterling, VA.

Wolverton, S. and R. Lee Lyman, eds. 2012. Conservation Biology and Applied Zooarchaeology. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

Wyndham, F. S., D. Lepofsky, and S. Tiffany. 2011. Taking Stock in Ethnobiology: Where Do We Come From? What Are We? Where Are We Going? Journal of Ethnobiology 31:110-127.

Zeder, M. A. 1997. The American Archaeologist: A Profile. AltaMira Press, Walnut Creek.

Ethnobiology Letters Cover, Volume 6, Issue 2, 2015
Published
2015-12-18
How to Cite
McKechnie, I., Kansa, S. W., & Wolverton, S. (2015). Snapshots of Digital Scholarship in Zooarchaeology: Introduction to the Special Issue. Ethnobiology Letters, 6(2), 218-223. https://doi.org/10.14237/ebl.6.2.2015.556
Issue
Vol 6 No 2 (2015)
Section
Editorials

Copyright (c) 2015 Ethnobiology Letters

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

  • Authors retain ownership of the copyright for their content and grant Ethnobiology Letters (the “Journal”) and the Society of Ethnobiology right of first publication. Authors and the Journal agree that Ethnobiology Letters will publish the article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International Public License (CC BY-NC 4.0), which permits others to use, distribute, and reproduce the work non-commercially, provided the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal are properly cited.
  • Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.

For any reuse or redistribution of a work, users must make clear the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International Public License (CC BY-NC 4.0).

In publishing with Ethnobiology Letters corresponding authors certify that they are authorized by their co-authors to enter into these arrangements. They warrant, on behalf of themselves and their co-authors, that the content is original, has not been formally published, is not under consideration, and does not infringe any existing copyright or any other third party rights. They further warrant that the material contains no matter that is scandalous, obscene, libelous, or otherwise contrary to the law.

Corresponding authors will be given an opportunity to read and correct edited proofs, but if they fail to return such corrections by the date set by the editors, production and publication may proceed without the authors’ approval of the edited proofs.