Table 1.
Number of unifacial stone tool specimens (total, unbroken, and broken) recorded for this study relative to the actual or estimated number of specimens per assemblage.
Figure 1.
Two examples of how the presence of spurs was determined quantitatively.
A box of 3(a). A spur was any projection no wider than 3 mm, but at least 1 mm long (b) (compare with c).
Figure 5.
Box plots of TSA vs. spur presence/absence.
Figure 2.
Box plots of tool mass vs. spur count.
Table 2.
Comparison of tool mass and spur count.
Table 3.
As unifacial stone tool size gets smaller (reduction proceeds) the spurs-per-uniface value significantly increases (ρ = 0.644, p = 0.044).
Table 4.
As unifacial stone tool size gets smaller (reduction proceeds) the spurs-per-uniface value significantly increases (ρ = 0.943, p = 0.005).
Figure 3.
Box plots of tool mass vs. spur presence/absence.
Table 5.
Comparison of tool mass and spur presence/absence.
Table 6.
As unifacial stone tool size gets smaller (reduction proceeds) the % of unifaces with a spur does not significantly increase (ρ = 0.542, p = 0.106).
Table 7.
As unifacial stone tool size gets smaller (reduction proceeds) the the % of unifaces with a spur significantly increases (ρ = 0.829, p = 0.042).
Figure 4.
Box plots of TSA vs. spur count.
Table 8.
Comparison of TSA and spur count.
Table 9.
As unifacial stone tools get thicker and rounder (size-adjusted thickness, Tsa, increases) the spurs-per-uniface value does not significantly increase (ρ = 0.394, p = 0.260).
Table 10.
As unifacial stone tools get thicker and rounder (size-adjusted thickness, Tsa, increases) the spurs-per-uniface value does not significantly increase (ρ = .257, p = 0.623).
Table 11.
Comparison of TSA and spur presence.
Table 12.
As unifacial stone tools get thicker and rounder (size-adjusted thickness, Tsa, increases) the % of unifaces with a spur does not significantly increase (ρ = 0.470, p = 0.171).
Table 13.
As unifacial stone tools get thicker and rounder (size-adjusted thickness, Tsa, increases) the % of unifaces with a spur does not significantly increase (ρ = 0.600, p = 0.208).
Table 14.
There is no significant correlation between % of broken unifacial stone tools and spurs-per-uniface value (ρ = 0.0336, p = 0.939) nor % of unifaces with a spur (ρ = 0.143, p = 0.760).