ArticlePloS one2024
Examining the effect of post-depositional processes on the preservation and identification of stone tool residues from temperate environments: An experimental approach.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Towards robust identification of Pleistocene adhesives: a critical review of current analytical approaches.Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry · 2026Review
- When the hammer drops: Identification of knapping techniques in blade production based on a multi-scale study of knapping traces.PloS one · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Studying taphonomy is crucial for understanding how post-depositional processes impact archaeological remains. This knowledge is pivotal for accurately interpreting the archaeological record. Although taphonomy has a long tradition in archaeology, it is less developed in the analysis of stone tool residues compared to other subdisciplines. To address this gap, our study aims to further develop our understanding of the preservation potential of stone tool residues in temperate environments through actualist experiments. To achieve this, we develop a multidimensional experimental program that features the first biweekly monitoring of weathering processes on residues over a one-year cycle, aiming to understand the short-term effects of weathering immediately after tool discard. Additionally, the program involves the study of longer-term burial and weathering visual effects on different residue types within various previously unexplored depositional environments. This approach allows us to observe the visual effects of both weathering and burial processes and to improve our understanding of the different mechanisms involved in the diagenesis of stone tool residues. While known factors such as microbial activity and soil acidity play a primary role in residue decay, specific stone tool-related factors also prove important, underscoring the need to develop further a specific branch of taphonomy related to stone tool residues. Moreover, our results show that certain residue types may survive within these environments that are often considered as being hostile. A residue analysis of stone tools from temperate contexts may thus contribute unique data that can improve our understanding of past human behaviour. Future research with more diverse residue types and depositional conditions will permit further refinement of our understanding of how taphonomy affects residue preservation and enhance the reliability of residue identifications. As such, stone tool residue analysis will become firmly rooted within broader functional approaches to address how humans use stone tools and how this affects stone tool variability.
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.