ArticleScientific reports2022
Déjà vu: a reappraisal of the taphonomy of quarry VM4 of the Early Pleistocene site of Venta Micena (Baza Basin, SE Spain).
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Microbiota-host metabolism reprogramming in colorectal cancer: from pathogenesis to precision therapies.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Venta Micena, an Early Pleistocene site of the Baza Basin (SE Spain), preserves a rich and diverse assemblage of large mammals. VM3, the main excavation quarry of the site, has been interpreted as a den of the giant hyaena Pachycrocuta brevirostris in the plain that surrounded the Baza palaeolake. Taphonomic analysis of VM3 has shown that the hyaenas scavenged the prey previously hunted by the hypercarnivores, transported their remains to the communal den, and consumed the skeletal parts according to their marrow contents and mineral density. In a recent paper (Luzón et al. in Sci Rep 11:13977, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-93261-1 , 2021), a small sample of remains unearthed from VM4, an excavation quarry ~ 350 m distant from VM3, is analysed. The authors indicate several differences in the taphonomic features of this assemblage with VM3, and even suggest that a different carnivore could have been the agent involved in the bone accumulation process. Here, we make a comparative analysis of both quarries and analyse more skeletal remains from VM4. Our results indicate that the assemblages are broadly similar in composition, except for slight differences in the frequency of megaherbivores, carnivores and equids according to NISP values (but not to MNI counts), the degree of bone weathering, and the intensity of bone processing by the hyaenas. Given that VM4 and VM3 were not coeval denning areas of P. brevirostris, these differences suggest that during the years when the skeletal remains were accumulated by the hyaenas at VM3, the rise of the water table of the Baza palaeolake that capped with limestone the bones was delayed compared to VM4, which resulted in their more in-depth consumption by the hyaenas.
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.