Table 1.
General information regarding volunteers and bone elements.
Fig 1.
Superposition of GIS layers drawn over the photographic template.
Table 2.
Definition of categories separating shaft fragments by size according to Villa and Mahieu (1991) [38].
Table 3.
Definition of categories separating shaft fragments by circumference size according to Villa and Mahieu (1991) [38].
Fig 2.
GIS stages for percussion mark analysis.
Table 4.
Presentation of the studied faunal series and number of percussion marks.
Fig 3.
Distribution of NISP according to shaft length and circumference.
Left column diagrams show relative frequencies of shaft length (L) and circumference (C) of all identified specimens; Right column diagrams show frequencies of percussion mark distribution according to relative frequencies of shaft length(L) and circumference (C) for specimens bearing percussion marks.
Fig 4.
Bone survivorship composite of ten bone elements in a series for each bone element: Humerus, radius-ulna, femur and tibia represented in each side in the following order: Anterior, posterior, medial and lateral.
Cortical preservation is indicated by shades of the colour red accompanied by a number from 1–10, darker shades and high numbers represent high cortical preservation.
Table 5.
Series 1 humerus.
Table 6.
Series 2 radius.
Table 7.
Series 3 femur.
Table 8.
Series 4 tibia.
Fig 5.
Distribution of percussion marks along the long bone elements (humerus, radius-ulna, tibia and femur), divided by type of percussion mark (each percussion mark is indicated with a specific symbol).
Table 9.
Distribution of percussion marks by type of mark and element aspect.
Fig 6.
Distribution of percussion marks along the long bone elements, with different colours representing the marks made by different experimental attempts.
Fig 7.
GIS Kernel density analysis results of percussion mark distribution on the four aspects for each humerus.
Dark red areas indicate the highest concentrations of percussion marks.
Fig 8.
GIS Kernel density analysis results of percussion mark distribution on the four aspects for each radius.
Dark red areas indicate the highest concentrations of percussion marks.
Fig 9.
GIS Kernel density analysis results of percussion mark distribution on the four aspects for each femur.
Dark red areas indicate the highest concentrations of percussion marks.
Fig 10.
GIS Kernel density analysis results of percussion mark distribution on the four aspects for each tibia.
Dark red areas indicate the highest concentrations of percussion marks.
Fig 11.
Summary of Kernel density cluster distribution according to side and shaft portion.
Fig 12.
Optimized Hot spot analysis of combined percussion marks from the ten bone elements in each series.
Fig 13.
GIS Kernel density analysis results for notch distribution on the four aspects for each bone element series.
Dark red areas indicate highest concentrations of notches.
Fig 14.
GIS Kernel density analysis results of pit distribution on the four aspects for each bone element series.
Dark red areas indicate highest concentrations of pits.
Fig 15.
GIS Kernel density analysis results for adhering flake distribution on the four aspects for each bone element series.
Dark red areas indicate highest concentrations of adhering flakes.