ArticleNature2017
A 130,000-year-old archaeological site in southern California, USA.
Article in Nature, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
18 citing papers in PubMed, 204 citations in OpenAlex.
- Hemisphere-wide evidence of Early Paleoindian megaherbivore specialization.Science advances · 2026Article
- An update onPeerJ · 2025Article
- Taguatagua 3: A new late Pleistocene settlement in a highly suitable lacustrine habitat in central Chile (34°S).PloS one · 2024Article
- Evidence of artefacts made of giant sloth bones in central Brazil around the last glacial maximum.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2023Article
- Article
- Article
- Deep classification of cut-marks on bones from Arroyo del Vizcaíno (Uruguay).Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2021Article
- Review
- Rapid radiation of humans in South America after the last glacial maximum: A radiocarbon-based study.PloS one · 2020Article
- Article
- Article
- A new terrestrial palaeoenvironmental record from the Bering Land Bridge and context for human dispersal.Royal Society open science · 2018Article
- Holen et al. reply.Nature · 2018Article
- Contesting early archaeology in California.Nature · 2018Article
- Article
- Hominid butchers and biting crocodiles in the African Plio-Pleistocene.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2017Article
- Archaeology: Unexpectedly early signs of Americans.Nature · 2017Article
- Natural Uranium Radioactivity Solution Standard: SRM 4321d.Journal of research of the National Institute of Standards and Technology · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
11 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The earliest dispersal of humans into North America is a contentious subject, and proposed early sites are required to meet the following criteria for acceptance: (1) archaeological evidence is found in a clearly defined and undisturbed geologic context; (2) age is determined by reliable radiometric dating; (3) multiple lines of evidence from interdisciplinary studies provide consistent results; and (4) unquestionable artefacts are found in primary context. Here we describe the Cerutti Mastodon (CM) site, an archaeological site from the early late Pleistocene epoch, where in situ hammerstones and stone anvils occur in spatio-temporal association with fragmentary remains of a single mastodon (Mammut americanum). The CM site contains spiral-fractured bone and molar fragments, indicating that breakage occured while fresh. Several of these fragments also preserve evidence of percussion. The occurrence and distribution of bone, molar and stone refits suggest that breakage occurred at the site of burial. Five large cobbles (hammerstones and anvils) in the CM bone bed display use-wear and impact marks, and are hydraulically anomalous relative to the low-energy context of the enclosing sandy silt stratum.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.