Latest / El futuro fue ayer con Juan Guillermo Martín / Arqueozoología, el estudio de identificación y domesticación de los animales

Transcript

Arqueozoología, el estudio de identificación y domesticación de los animales · El futuro fue ayer con Juan Guillermo Martín

0:05
The future was yesterday? It' s an archaeology podcast where ghosts, conspiracy
0:14
theories and aliens have no place. I am Jua Guillermo Martín, archaeologist and
0:24
university professor and with different specialists. It would be scientifically addressing our fascinating past,
0:31
a past that offers us answers to face the future. Welcome to the
0:48
podcast The future was yesterday? I' m Jun Guillermo Martín, archaeologist.
0:52
Today we are going to talk about archeosology, in other words, the study
0:57
of animals in archaeological contexts. To talk about the subject I have a very
1:02
special guest. It' s about Maria Gutierrez. Maria, welcome, good
1:07
afternoon. Thank you very much for this invitation. For those who do not
1:11
know her, María Gutiérrez is an anthropologist and PhD in Natural Sciences from the
1:15
University of La Plata, researcher of the National Council of Scientific and Technical Research
1:23
with ISSET, Researcher of the incuapa and professor of the National University of the
1:27
Center of the Province of Buenos Aires in Olavarría. His specialty is the archaeology
1:32
of hunters, recorrectors Pampean, focusing his work on currentist taphonomy and interpretations of
1:38
wildlife records in archaeological contexts, approaches the hundred scientific publications. Mary to enter
1:48
into what archeosology is all about. Well, as the word suggests, it
1:55
' s not the study of interactions between human groups and animal species. And
2:05
when we say interactions that we are specifically thinking about, let' s say
2:13
as an example, we can say, for example, the theme of utilization
2:20
for consumption. Perhaps within archeosology or zoarchaeology, we can also find as the
2:27
two concepts according to which theoretical tradition we use and is Anglo- Saxon,
2:37
we are more likely to find the term so archaeology or the French more European
2:45
archaeology. So, one of the topics that zooarchaeology most investigates is the theme
2:57
of harnessing fame, one for the issue of consumption. But there are also
3:04
other types of interactions that we say in which human groups interacted with animal species,
3:15
which also engages in soarchaeology. Through the study of the vestiges of the
3:21
associated remains that appear in archaeological contexts, such as, for example, the
3:27
interactions that have to do with predator prey with the topic of the use of
3:38
raw materials for the construction of their bone artifacts. There are several interactions that
3:46
partner remains can tell us about their link with human groups. In the past,
3:54
well, talking about that link between humans and others and animals, let
4:02
' s say that somehow they' re going to use it for consumption,
4:10
for support to different activities. In the end, what you do is identify
4:15
species. It is true, that is to say, to specify the relationship
4:20
with these animals, how that identification is made, how you get to know
4:28
what a mouse or deer is. Yeah, let' s say as the
4:33
gateway to any faunistic analysis. Let' s say, the most basic or
4:42
elemental foundation is anatomical and taxonomic identification. Taxonomic identification is key because it will
4:50
be able to, say, refer us to the diversity of species, about
4:57
which these human groups, which these human groups consumed or interacted in different ways.
5:08
Then taxonomic identification is key and then anatomical identification is also key, to
5:15
know exactly what skeletal parts we have represented in these archaeological contexts and this anatomical
5:26
representation can inform us about different activities, for example, home strategies, processing
5:34
strategies, exploitation of these species and expectations. It is that, according to
5:43
different activities, that are carried out in these contexts, The expectation of which
5:47
skeletal parts to find is different. So, according to those profiles of skeletal
5:54
parts, I can infer activities that took place in these archaeological contexts. One
6:03
thing to emphasize is that for a long time archaeology did not take into account
6:10
the remains of fauna and in many cases, when archaeological excavations were carried out,
6:17
the fieldwork was not even used You ignored an infinite amount of data that
6:25
allowed to identify those relations of human beings of the past with their environment and
6:30
the exploitation of them. That finally changes and I would like you to explain
6:40
to me how they change the moment when you throw it and put it to
6:45
the ground the matter opens very big doors and the possibility of approaching very specific
6:50
details of the daily life of the past. Yes, let' s say
6:55
exactly for those scholars of the history of discipline and how the different themes evolved
7:01
and changed, according also to the different theoretical paradigms from which the questions that
7:09
we ask to that record emerge. Clearly, we can see that there have
7:15
been major changes in our discipline over the treatment of these partner remains. Let
7:24
' s say from those partner remains in principle they didn' t even recover
7:33
from archaeological contexts even. I am not speaking at the level of micro mammals
7:42
or very small individuals who need a special recovery methodology, such as servitors and
7:49
sifting. I' m talking about even larger wildlife remains that in principle didn
8:00
' t recover, stayed in the field, nobody took it to the labs.
8:05
Then they began to take, but they fell apart and were never a
8:11
priority for analysis and one reviews site reports. In general, ceramics, the
8:15
lithic material are always at the head and, in historical terms, the faunistic
8:24
analysis is incorporated later and at the first moment of incorporation even only these great
8:31
animals, the largest bones, appeared, because the techniques of recovery and excavation
8:37
did not allow to recover the smallest then these larger ones were recovered and,
8:43
in general, they appeared in the reports as appendices at the end of the
8:48
reports, as a taxonomic list of presence of different species, but there was
8:56
not as a incorporation of these faunic remains to the integral interpretation of the site
9:03
if there was not an integral question in the interpretation. And well, obviously,
9:09
over time, with progress, with the different theoretical and methodological changes that
9:13
our dissucipline is having over time, they already begin to integrate and increasingly occupy
9:20
more important places, because the wealth of information that they are offering, let
9:28
' s say and clearly, when the recovery methodology is being refined, not
9:35
only do we have those partner remains of larger animals, but we also recover
9:43
associate remains of very very small animals, which it is only possible to recover
9:48
through a sifting, a sifter with water, etc. Let us say then
9:56
the methodological refinement of discipline accompanies this civility position of incorporating a much greater faunatic
10:07
diversity than a few years ago. No, then, that' s something
10:11
that got rich. Let' s say, if you' re all right,
10:16
that was always the annex to fill out pages and that you would see
10:20
the thickest report, but with numbered or heavy lists, but with little detail,
10:28
even identification, because you have to mention what the issue of identification is
10:33
not that easy either. That is, for identification you need a reference collection
10:37
and a very broad reference correction, of a large number of species that you
10:43
provide after you find the bone of a curie or catfish and you have precision
10:50
in that identification, what is the role of a reference collection and how is
10:54
a reference collection made? That' s a very important question. Let'
11:01
s say and that I consider that to say that the issue of building a
11:09
reference collection is key to ensuring the success of identifications. And I can also
11:20
say from my own experience, let' s say that now our institute where
11:26
I work and so on, there is an important and diverse reference collection.
11:31
How these taxonomic lists grow significantly in those that appear associated with archaeological contexts before
11:39
possibly remained under broad taxonomic categories. When you have a chance to build reference
11:52
collections. The degree of detail that even if we say you gain your research,
12:03
your analysis, is substantial. Let' s say then the archaeologist and
12:09
the zooarcheologist in particular, must invest time in the construction of the reference collections,
12:18
which are very expensive in time, let' s say, it takes
12:24
a long time to process and how it is built, let' s say
12:33
it is built by collecting this, let' s say we, as archaeologists,
12:37
kill the animals to get married, to make the collection. The collections
12:39
are nourished in different ways. For example, in contact when you go to
12:46
the field, in contact with the owners of the field or with the neighbors
12:50
and others who say I found a dead rhea on that side, they are
12:56
interested if we go inside or saved. Let' s say obviously, in
13:00
general they always have soft tissue. So, when you get to the lab,
13:03
then you have to process it. And the processing itself of soft tissues
13:09
in an advanced state of rot makes you a not very friendly researcher and you
13:16
are not always welcome in laboratories and offices. Let' s say, in
13:24
the institutes where you work few safe friends, few safe friends or let'
13:31
s say then you have to look for alternatives and possibly stay after hour or
13:35
weekends, because the smell is the truth that is but worth it. Let
13:39
' s just say that it takes a lot of work and a lot of
13:45
time to build a reference collection, but I can guarantee that the impact of
13:52
having a good reference collection on Faunistic analysis is impressive. Let' s say
14:01
terrible really tune the obviously, taxonomic and anatomical determination clear and are processes that
14:07
take a long time. In other words, the large reference collections have taken
14:11
decades of collection of specimens, in addition to different ages, because it allows
14:16
also with the measurements of the size of the animals, since to be able
14:22
to establish the size of those animals of the past. And here yes,
14:26
I have to mention perhaps one of those most famous archeologists or archaeologists on the
14:31
continent, who was Richard Couk friend of ours that the terrible collection in an
14:39
impressive collation at the Smithsonian Institute in Panama, and who used to go out
14:46
for a walk on the road, to collect animals that had been run over
14:50
and to put them in the car and then leave the months in the freezer,
14:56
while they were then processed. It was quite a roll, but I
15:01
understood one later the importance of what I was doing in that consolidation of the
15:07
collection. That' s still being done exactly the same. Let' s
15:09
say, the issue of gathering animals run over on the road is like a
15:16
fixed one, let' s say, it' s any archeologist certainly has
15:22
those stories to tell in his possession. Let' s say, and that
15:24
' s good to come in and have a freezer, for example, willing
15:30
to leave it. Let' s say, to freeze it while you have
15:35
it or until you find the time to process it, because processing it is
15:37
slow. There are different methodologies to process it. Among the archaeologists we share
15:43
which is the best, which is the fastest, which is the least smelly.
15:48
Let' s say, there is that whole corpus of knowledge that circulates
15:56
between generations as well, but it is super necessary to advance in that line.
16:07
Yes, one of the things associated precisely with this possibility of identifying fauna
16:14
in archaeological contexts, because it is, of course, the possibility of identifying
16:21
home techniques, consumption preferences, as you mentioned it, depending on the parts
16:26
of the animals, because also preference in certain parts of the animals, as
16:33
we sometimes consume the breast or leg of the chicken or prefer the rib.
16:42
The same thing we will see reflected in the archaeological record, particularly in the
16:47
dumps, where is that information that is key. There is a part of
16:56
that animal consumption that I particularly know was, but it is not very clear
17:02
within the archaeological record, and I am not a specialist, and it is
17:07
the issue of insects. They recently asked me to eat insects. I'
17:11
m sure you do. There are insects that leave a mark on the archaeological
17:15
record. Well, let' s see how all insects actually don' t
17:21
have a lot of chances of preservation. Not then is likely to say.
17:26
I would not encourage myself to dismiss it as having been consumed in diets by
17:33
different human groups in the past. However, let' s say that to
17:40
be able to say that I need to have a record and how they need
17:45
exceptional conditions of preservation. Very little is known about the role of insects in
17:49
diets. In the diets. So, in principle, let' s say
18:00
we don' t know much, we don' t know almost anything about
18:07
the role of insects at parties, but it has to do with their chances
18:10
of preservation. Let' s just say they' re probably the first ones
18:15
to come out of the records. Let' s say they' re destroyed.
18:18
So, and like everything else, when we don' t have the
18:26
vestiges or the evidence to support our arguments, it becomes difficult as a defense.
18:32
So, in general, archaeologists in general and so archaeologists in particular.
18:37
Let' s say we talk about what we have, about the data,
18:42
about the data. So the archaeological sites where evidence of insects appears are not
18:52
abundant before, and it is also difficult to refer to them as being of
19:03
use for the diet, because other times they appear linked to vessels or but
19:15
in the archaeologists we do not yet encourage to give them a specific role in
19:22
the diet. Yes, insects, for example, have recently begun to play
19:26
a role in taphonomy among this issue of preservation, because we have learned from
19:38
experiments and experiences that have been made to see what their modifications are. So,
19:45
while we don' t have insects in our bones, we can see
19:52
the traces or modifications they leave during early decomposition. But there we are not
20:00
talking about human consumption. There we are talking that, in general, insects
20:04
are among the first scavengers to break down soft tissue, to degrade that soft
20:12
tissue And many times in that process of consumption of soft tissue, when in
20:18
general the individual or animal has already been discarded, they leave traces and thanks
20:27
to experiments we can say that these traces correspond to insects, although we do
20:36
not have them. Yeah, but let' s just say we' re
20:41
not talking about human consumption. It' s kind of different, but I
20:47
think the bugs' concern is getting into the most common questions of so-
20:53
called archaeologists and at some point. Surely we will find some technique or some
20:57
methodology that is allowing us to infer if they had any important role in the
21:03
consumption or diet of human groups. Of course and that is worth mentioning,
21:08
because archaeology does not speculate if there is no hard data, which are the
21:14
socious remains that support that interpretation, which even indicate that this animal has been
21:22
exploited. I mean, we' ve found, I don' t know,
21:26
remains of a mouse that came to the dump to take advantage of what
21:33
the insects do, and they killed him there, or he died there.
21:34
And there' s the whole skeleton. And if we don' t find
21:41
the traces of the work and processing of that mouse, because obviously that mouse
21:45
didn' t eat it. That is clear, and I believe that we
21:48
must also leave it emphatically exposed, because that is what happens in a serious
21:53
process of study or archaeological. There is another issue that, of course,
22:02
has to do with the relationship of human beings with animals and has to do
22:07
with domestication. I know that this is a complicated subject, but in terms
22:11
of these studies it is possible to identify, study processes of domestication of animals.
22:18
Yes, let' s say archaeology has contributed enormously to this In this
22:27
process of domestication there are changes at the oteometric level, at theological levels.
22:37
In general, there are changes in size. Yes, that soarchaeology, through
22:42
lines of evidence, let' s say line of research, how it can
22:48
be morphometry or is theometry can contribute enormously to this issue of the domestication process.
22:59
That would be like a direct evidence through the study of the partner remains.
23:04
But, of course, archaeologists don' t work as isolated from the
23:11
rest of the archaeologists who are studying lithic from that site or ceramics or stone
23:19
structures, let' s say the settlement system, etcetera. So let'
23:26
s say archaeology offers a line of evidence that adds up to the rest of
23:32
the lines of evidence so that we can finally interpret this process of domestication.
23:37
How it happened, when it happened where it happened. Of course, there
23:44
is also the subject of molecular DNA biology. This also provides information about the
23:52
domestication process and, as I said perhaps with many times we can talk about
23:59
domestication through the various remains of materiality, other materialities that exist on the site.
24:12
I don' t know if there are pens, so everything adds up
24:18
as usual, the more lines of research I can add to say good.
24:25
This species suffered a domestication process in the last thousand and two thousand. I
24:32
don' t know with a certain age, let' s say clearly more
24:44
solid is going to be my interpretation, but yes. So archaeology, through
24:45
soteometric studies, clearly contributes to seeing these changes in size, which is one
24:52
of the criteria perhaps most used within the overarchology to see domestication very well.
25:02
There' s another line of evidence we haven' t talked about, which,
25:06
of course, is in the partner remains. Finally, they are the
25:08
strongest, but also the representation of animals in ceramic objects, in stone sallas,
25:15
in bone carvings, in another type of factual art evidence that also tells
25:25
us about that relationship. That is a source of information for those who engage
25:30
in orcheologies. Yeah, of course, maybe I' m not the most
25:33
explored. Let' s say we as your archer, we go to the
25:37
bones, let' s say, but, as I said, let'
25:42
s say when we say we have an approximation of this nature. Let'
25:45
s say the more lines of evidence you can add clearly the stronger our argument
25:49
is going to be. Then. Yes, of course, the theme of
25:53
symbolology behind art, let' s say in expression through different animals and so
26:00
on, is also studied by zooarchaeologists. Yes, yes, let' s
26:07
say there, we don' t study bones, we study other things,
26:12
we study symbolic representations. Of course, that is another level of analysis that
26:17
complements, of course, and gives us the possibility of thinking that some animal,
26:22
in addition to a gastronomic role, also played an important symbolic role in
26:29
a society and at a certain time. And that would go within the interaction
26:32
that we are talking about in a broad sense, interaction between humans and animals.
26:37
Interaction can be on a symbolic level. Yeah, yeah, sure,
26:40
yeah. It has always been mentioned as the frog, as the symbol of
26:45
fertility such things. Not then, that, of course, is another approach
26:49
that, obviously, is made to establish those relationships of human beings and fauna
26:55
exactly. Yes, yes, there is another thing that is important, I
27:03
think to mention, related to the exploitation of fauna in an archaeological site,
27:11
and is that it also allows us to establish eventually or population movements that look
27:21
for some source of house matter in other places, in house rates that are
27:25
not exactly where you are living, or that also allows us to establish interchange
27:30
relationships between groups. If we find we do not know far from the coastline
27:33
marine molluscs that are not exploited there and that would be indicating that several things
27:41
or movement or exchange. That is another, of course, possibility also of
27:45
wildlife. Yeah, let' s clearly say it' s like it'
27:52
s, like studying one somehow knows how the natural distribution each species would have.
27:56
No. So, if there' s anything we say if I find
28:02
any rest or taxonomically identify some rest of leisure that' s somewhere that'
28:10
s far away, it' s out of that natural area. Well,
28:12
now that depends on the archaeologist' s ability to answer, let' s
28:18
say what the hypotheses would be for that species, that animal came to that
28:26
archaeological site. So there they come into play, well, exchange, mobility,
28:30
let' s say wide ranges of mobility, etcetera. So let'
28:37
s say clearly so archaeology can also offer through presence and that' s why
28:42
it' s so important to identify taxonomically to see if all the taxa I
28:52
can identify at that site have a natural distribution or at least had it in
28:56
the past. A natural distribution that we say is indicating to me that a
29:03
supply or relatively local or if they had or if they were needed to go
29:11
to other places to pick up that, say, or hunt or pick up.
29:14
In case of molluscs or say gathering or trading. We' re talking
29:22
about another level of complexity as well. But yes, wildlife is indicative.
29:27
That because there are like certain records of what is the degree or what is
29:34
the natural distribution of those species. Then good to explain those that do not
29:42
coincide requires an interesting skill on the part of archaeologists. And, moreover,
29:47
another thing you mention is that you are clear about the distribution of certain types
29:52
of animals in a specific environment at a particular time, because it has to
29:56
be said that, obviously, the current conditions are not the same as in
30:00
a thousand two, thousand or five thousand years. So that' s,
30:03
that' s the first thing to keep in mind, that you have to
30:04
move into the past to know this kind of animals that, of course,
30:10
humans weren' t eating all the animals around them. There were some who
30:14
preferred and those are the ones you find. But with that identification, eventually
30:18
you can do a broader environmental reconstruction, because you know those animals interact with
30:22
each other and in one way or another. You also propose or propose an
30:30
exact environmental reconstruction. Let' s say, that' s another interesting leg,
30:34
let' s say, it' s a super interesting thematic axis that
30:41
also archaeology soda may be contributing data that is to paleoenvironmental reconstruction allows us to
30:49
reconstruct that scenario where human groups moved, because, for example, let'
30:56
s say different animal species have a certain tolerance to humidity temperature. We know
31:02
that not all animals can live everywhere, in every kind of environment. So,
31:07
if recurrently species are appearing that do not coincide in any way with the
31:17
type of environment and the current type of climate where you are currently finding it,
31:22
clearly it is indicating you or it is warning you that surely in the
31:32
past some environmental conditions were different. And at that point let' s say
31:38
rodents, for example, micromammals are key to paleoenvironmental reconstructions because they are too
31:48
sensitive to environmental changes, changes in temperature, changes in humidity. Quickly let
31:55
' s say they change habitats or they change, they change. So,
32:00
as they are very sensitive, these paleoamental reconstructions are often performed on the basis
32:12
of these micromammals. So that' s one other huge contribution that soarchaeology can
32:24
make. And there is another thing that should also be mentioned, and that
32:30
is that, eventually, when we have a broad comparative timeline we can also
32:37
measure the impact that human beings generate in an environment. Not that in the
32:40
end, that interaction with the other living beings that we call animals, has
32:49
repercussions that are the ones that we are living in the end today. Yeah,
32:53
I think let' s say maybe I could say it' s like
33:00
one of the big challenges that sorcaeology is facing right now. It is to
33:07
try to get our faunal analyses recovered from the fauna recovered in archaeological sites,
33:17
to strive to understand the impacts that we, modern humans, say we are
33:25
currently generating in these environments. Let us say clearly the distribution of some species
33:35
have changed by impacts and anthropic modifications product of modernity. Let' s say
33:40
or from urbanization, we' re running and pulling species out of natural ecosystems
33:49
for them with our agricultural exploitation, livestock, etcetera. Let' s say
33:57
then zoarchaeology, let' s say it looks like it' s facing that
34:05
has a big challenge, because it has extremely valuable data from before that impact,
34:14
let' s say what the natural distribution of those species was and if
34:17
they' re not good today, why aren' t they. So,
34:20
today, in a world where we are traversed by this issue of the climate
34:24
changes of the entire urbanization process and the impacts on ecosystems and so on,
34:30
soarchaeology can provide valuable information as to the temporal depth that this distribution of species
34:38
would have in the past. So it seems to me that this is one
34:45
of the great challenges or challenges that we have in which we can provide valuable
34:52
data and that they add to these new models that are being posed, which
35:00
receive data from different disciplines precisely to try to visualize the exact future. That
35:07
' s why the title of this podcast is that we have to understand that
35:13
the data from the past finally gives us an idea of where we' re
35:19
going, and I would think that we' re not heading to the right
35:22
port, just as we' re going. No, it doesn' t
35:29
look like a wreck comes to doors, yeah, I think, but let
35:34
' s be negative. Now, Mary, now, to finish, tell
35:40
me in the case of archeosology, what new things are being done and what
35:47
research questions, in very general terms, of discipline are being posed towards the
35:52
future. Let' s say archaeology isn' t foreign. To all the
36:04
methodological changes or all the methodological and technological advances that archaeology undergoes in general,
36:12
this whole question of the use of geographic computer system to see interspatial or interspatial
36:21
relationships the topic of learning manshine, which is like teaching machines or computers a
36:31
pattern to allow you to identify that pattern in bones and so on. Let
36:40
us also say this, I mean, all these technological changes with the implementation
36:47
of technology in the service of science, at the service of research. Let
36:55
' s also say archaeology is not foreign. Not that. So you could
37:00
say, there' s a refinement in the way you collect the data and,
37:06
on the methodological side, this drone question, let' s say everything
37:14
we can think of in terms of technological advances that archaeology in general has as
37:20
well, let' s say it accompanies soa archaeology. Not then, on
37:21
the one hand, methodological advances and data collection and, on the other hand,
37:28
there are also advances in terms of new questions that although perhaps are not
37:35
new, for example, something that we did not talk about here, but
37:39
that so archaeologists also work quite well on the subject of the application of stable
37:47
isotopes in archaeology. So, archaeologists also have related questions. So let'
38:00
s say. The analysis of isotoposestables, especially in human leisure tissue, in
38:07
some way gives us information about diet, how they ate, if they ate
38:14
more plants, if they ate more animals, if they ate plants with a
38:21
certain path, photosynthetic, say in three, four, etcetera, etcetera.
38:24
Let' s say whether they were mixed, etcetera, or whether they ate
38:31
more seafood or land animals. Let' s say all that in so-
38:37
called archaeologies. It' s also a boom right now, let' s
38:43
say, I insist that it' s not new, because the first works
38:50
on stable isotopes appear about forty years ago, let' s say, but
38:54
yes, it' s true that it' s like generalizing now, it
38:58
' s like accessible to everyone before. Maybe just some universities or some research
39:00
groups that had some money. Now it' s like we can all do,
39:07
even if it' s a few stable isotope analysis samples. So the
39:13
sor archaeology is also, let' s say, crossed by those new questions.
39:19
The subject of the old adn, which is very useful to us to
39:23
see what we were saying, or to see the taxonomic issue. Then there
39:30
too we go with new advances. There' s always a lot of work
39:37
going on, let' s say seeing the bones have the possibility of recording
39:47
different processes that act, let' s say between them, for example,
39:53
all that is the footprints of human processing. So, cutting marks are,
39:58
say, one of the most sought- after evidences by archaeologists, because that
40:02
allows me if I can identify in an unambiguous way that those marks that I
40:09
recognize in the bones are the product of the use of that animal by humans
40:16
to consume it, whether as a product, say the meat or other products
40:22
of that animal. That' s where I' m putting it on the
40:31
list of consumed animals. So and also as it is one of the most
40:37
sought- after evidences for us, it is also one of the most difficult
40:43
evidences to certify that it really is a cutting footprint, because there are a
40:49
lot of other natural processes that produce similar marks. So there' s a
40:54
lot, a lot of experimental development, a lot of methodological development, so
41:05
that we can identify that brand as, in an unambiguous way, a cut
41:12
- off footprint, so if we could achieve, then the questions are always
41:13
there. That the status of the different marks that we can recognize in the
41:19
bones are anthropic or natural. And behind that is a lot of research that
41:25
involves many years of study and, in addition, a lot of technology and
41:34
refinement and we are increasingly completing a little more the models that we have.
41:38
And this investigation has already been carried out since the late 1970s and we have
41:45
never been able to find unambiguous identification criteria for cutting marks. Let' s
41:52
say then there is a huge production of information and data and continuous experimentation research.
42:00
Also, of course, obviously burned also the footprints of such that of
42:07
exposure to fire. Of course let' s say we talk about anthropic action
42:15
in the bones, we think so. I can quickly tell you in three
42:20
modifications, the cutting marks, the fractures yes, because by the consumption of
42:27
the tueta no yes. Then fracture is another criterion that allows us to speak.
42:34
Whether that species was consumed or not and the fire, but all three
42:39
have natural processes that mimic those same marks, then there is a development of
42:47
say, tremendous experimentation to achieve an unambiguous identification criterion and you still can'
42:55
t help that you have work, fortunately, fortunately, as you do.
43:04
And another question of that, since we talk about collections, about the importance
43:10
of collections. It' s the theme, let' s say that maybe
43:19
it' s a concern of the museums and universities that have these collections,
43:25
is to democratize knowledge and how we put these collections at the service of anyone
43:34
in whom they are located, anywhere in the world. So, the digitization
43:37
of the reference collections is also a topic that today is in the table of
43:44
good, what we do, what we can, of priorities and of investments.
43:52
Not because good costs money, that is, as much as it'
43:57
s in the air, in the cloud. All that comes out of paying
44:01
for that nub, you have to pay for it, just like that,
44:07
and it requires a lot of work for digitization. But today is what'
44:08
s coming. It is not like then that I am currently involved in a
44:19
project just to digitize parts of our reference collections, so that whoever wishes to
44:27
see the Guanacos of Argentina, from London, France or India, can say
44:34
it through a click. Of course, that' s a very important issue,
44:43
and it' s digital repositories and people who access those collections. I
44:47
believe that is key to global development and science. That is exactly what accompanies
44:54
this thing of globalization that we have in every respect. That' s good,
45:00
Mary, thank you very much, truly for your time, for sharing
45:05
all your experience, your knowledge. It' s been as usual, a
45:08
pleasure, a pleasure and an honor to talk to you. I thank an
45:12
inorte FM stereo for lending us in their recording studio. We will continue to
45:17
produce scientific content on this podcast. The future fire. Thank you very much,
45:22
Juan Guillermo. The truth is that it' s always a pleasure to
45:25
come to Colombia, come to the specialization and come in a minute. Thank
45:30
you for the invitation. Thank you very much. Good.