Fig 1.
Map indicating the geographical location of archaeological sites with evidence of humans and extinct fauna across South America mentioned in the text corresponding to late Pleistocene and early Holocene occupations (dates calibrated at 2σ).
1) Taima Taima (14,200 ± 300–12,980 ± 85 14C YBP [18,105–16,405–15,742–15,226 cal YBP]); 2) Tibitó (11,740 ± 420 14C YBP [14,909–12,784 cal YBP]); 3) Toca da Janela da Barra do Antonião (9670 ± 140 14C YBP [11,225–10,564 cal YBP]); 4) Santa Elina (23,120 ± 260–10,120 ± 60 14C YBP [27814–26,617–11,870–11,137 cal YBP]); 5) Abismo Ponta da Flecha (11,380 ± 40–11,090 ± 40 14C YBP [13,310–13,168 cal YBP]); 6) Río Reconquista I (17,397 ± 52 14C YBP [21,090–20,811 cal YBP]); 7) Arroyo Seco 2 (12,240 ± 110–11,190 ± 110 14C YBP [14,822–13,799–13,252–12,793 cal YBP]); 8) Paso Otero 5 (10,440 ± 100–10,210 ± 50 14C YBP [12,617–11,889–11,973–11,525 cal YBP]); 9) Cerro La China (10,804 ± 75–10,525 ± 74 14C YBP [12,892–12,520–12,689–12,091 cal YBP]); 10) Tixi cave (10,375 ± 90–10,045 ± 95 14C YBP [12,587–11,845–11,836–11,241 cal YBP]); 11) Los Pinos 10,465 ± 65–8750 ± 160 14C YBP [12,610–12,018–10,197–9469 cal YBP]); 12) Amalia site 2 (10,425 ± 75 14C YBP [12,597–11,955 cal YBP]); 13) Burucuyá cave (10,000 ± 120 14C YBP [11,869–11,190 cal YBP]); 14) Paso Otero 4 (9283 ± 83–7314 ± 73 14C YBP [10,651–10,237–8309–7941 cal YBP]); 15) Campo Laborde (8090 ± 190–7750 ± 250 14C YBP [9438–8465–9254–8013 cal YBP]); 16) Lobería 1 Sitio 1 (9878 ± 81 14C YBP [11,628–10,896 cal YBP]); 17) Los Helechos (9640 ± 40 14C YBP [11,166–10,763 cal YBP]); 18) La Moderna 8356 ± 65–7448 ± 109 14C YBP [9482–9036–8407–8013 cal YBP]); 19) Huenul cave (13,840 ± 56–11,841 ± 56 14C YBP [16,984–16,535–13,788–13,512 cal YBP]); 20) Milodón cave (13,630 ± 50–12,000 ± 50 14C YBP [16,605–16,241–14,034–13,614 cal YBP)]; 21) Lago Sofía 4 cave (13,400 ± 90–11,590 ± 100 14C YBP [16,343–15,789–13,600–13,190 cal YBP]); 22) Las Guanacas rockshelter (13,275 ± 50 14C YBP [16,077–15,713 cal YBP]); 23) Lago Sofía 1 cave (12,290 ± 490 14C YBP [15,788–13,195 cal YBP]); 24) Monte Verde (12,980 ± 40–11,959 ± 33 14C YBP [15,639–15,295–14,010–13,608 cal YBP]); 25) Los Toldos cave 3 layer 11 (12,600 ± 650 14C YBP [16,656–13,243 cal YBP]); 26) Piedra Museo-AEP-1 layer 6 (12,890 ± 60–11,000 ± 50 14C YBP [15,580–15,162–13,065–12,764 cal YBP]); 27) Tres Arroyos rockshelter (11,880 ± 250–11,280 ± 110 14C YBP [14,793–13,175–13,352–12,916 cal YBP]); 28) Casa del Minero 1 cave (11,000 ± 55–10,970 ± 55 14C YBP [13,067–12,763–13,000–12,746 cal YBP]); 29 Fell cave (11,000 ± 160–10,720 ± 300 14C YBP [13,178–12,637–13,230–11,521 cal YBP]); 30) Cerro Casa de Piedra 7 (10,530 ± 620 14C YBP [13,505–10,511 cal YBP]); 31) El Trébol rockshelter (10,600 ± 100–10,570 ± 130 14C YBP [12,741–12,091–12,736–12,000 cal YBP]); 32) La María Túnel cave (10,400 ± 100 14C YBP [12,608–11,847 cal YBP]); 33) Marifilo Rockshelter 1 (10,410 ± 70–8420 ± 40 14C YBP [12,582–11,942–9524–9284 cal YBP]); 34) Epullán Grande cave (9970 ± 100–7550 ± 70 14C YBP [11,760–11,193–8445–8175 cal YBP]); 35) Chorrillo Malo 2 (9740 ± 50–9690 ± 80 14C YBP [11,235–10,798–11,211–10,744 cal YBP]); 36) Marazzi rockshelter (9590 ± 210 14C YBP [11,246–10,239 cal YBP]).
Fig 2.
Map showing the location of the site investigated. A litho-stratigraphic profile of the site where the CRS-10 specimen was found (banks of the Reconquista River), including the calibrated radiocarbon dates obtained.
Base map: MDE-Ar v2.1 hillshade and 1:250000 vector layers from the IGN (Instituto Geográfico Nacional, República Argentina).
Fig 3.
A) Reconstruction of the 3D scanned skeletal elements found and the carapace of the CRS-10 specimen in anatomical position. B) detail of the in situ articulated vertebrae. A: caudal vertebra 4; B: caudal vertebra 5; C: caudal vertebra 6; D: caudal vertebra 7; E: fractured ring from caudal vertebra 4; F: fractured ring from caudal vertebra 5 and G: fractured ring from caudal vertebra 6.
Fig 4.
Sediment arrangement; A: First laminar structure; B: Second laminar structure; C: Third laminar structure; D: First massive structure; E: Second massive structure.
Table 1.
Linear mark characterization through distinct morphological attributes.
Fig 5.
Left: osteoderms of the lateral dorsal portion of the carapace with the typical figure in “rosette”. CF Central figure, PF peripheral figurine, RG ring groove. Right: caudal tube in lateral and ventral views.
Fig 6.
Marks with shoulder and hertzian cones in the pelvis of the CRS-10 specimen.
Fig 7.
Distribution of marks found in caudal vertebrae of the CRS-10 specimen: a CV4 (1 short, deep, and V-shaped wide linear mark, 2 and 4 chop marks, 3 scraping mark [black arrow], 5 and 6 elongated V-shaped cut marks); b CV5 (7 cut marks in neural process [white arrows] and hertzian cones [black arrows], 7.1 detail of a cut mark with an asymmetrical cross-section and raised shoulder due to bone accumulation hertzian cones [white arrows]; micro-striations [black arrows] and supine line [grey arrow], 8 linear mark in vertebra body); c CV6 (lineal marks identified on the distal portion of the left transverse process of CV6. 9 detail of the main mark obtained by scanning electron microscopy exhibiting hertzian cones [white arrows] and microstriations; 10 cut marks with internal microstriations [black arrows].
Fig 8.
Lineal marks (white arrows) identified on the inner portion of the caudal rings.
Fig 9.
Drawing of a Neosclerocalyptus skeleton highlighting cut-marked skeletal elements in light blue found at the CRS-10 specimen.
Fig 10.
Three dimensional reconstructions of cut marks found in the Neosclerocalyptus sp CRS-10 specimen.
Fig 11.
Results of the PCAs obtained from the investigation of morphometric and 2D geometric morphometric data derived from cut mark cross-sections from the CRS-10 specimen.
Scatterplot of the first two PCs (93.6% of the total variance) for the morphometric analysis of seven linear measurements obtained from 16 cut mark cross-sections from the CRS-10 specimen discriminated by anatomical part (rings/pelvis and vertebrae) (a). Scatterplot of the first two PCs (84.8% of the total variance) for the morphometric analysis of seven linear measurements obtained from 16 cut mark cross-sections from the CRS-10 specimen and experimentally by Courtenay and colleagues [60] at two different cutting angles 45° (N = 60) and 90° (N = 60) (b). Scatterplot of the first two PCs (87.4% of the total variance) for the cut mark cross-section shape variation by type (N = 19) (rings/pelvis and vertebrae) (c). Shape changes are represented as TPS-grids showing deformations for the PC positive/negative scores and color-coded Jacobian expansion/contraction factors which measure the degree of local expansion or contraction of the grid. Yellow to red factors indicate expansions and light to dark-blue factors indicate contractions. The green color indicates areas with few or no changes. Scale factor of the grid 0.1 units.
Table 2.
Descriptive statistics of seven linear measurements obtained from 2D pictures of cut marks cross-sections from the CRS-10 specimen compared to two datasets obtained at two different cutting angles 45° and 90°from Courtenay and colleagues [60].
Table 3.
PC loadings of seven measurements from 16cut marks of the CRS-10 specimen.
Table 4.
PC loadings of seven measurements from 16 cut marks of the CRS-10 specimen and those derived from the experimental datasets published by Courtenay and colleagues [60].
Table 5.
MANOVA results for the comparison between CRS-10 and experimental slicing (45°) and cutting (90°) marks.
Table 6.
LDA confusion matrix results and average % of correctly classified cut marks combining the CRS-10 and experimental cutting marks.