泥河湾盆地马圈沟遗址哺乳动物破碎长骨反映的古人类行为

doi:10.16359/j.1000-3193/AAS.2023.0042

人类学学报 ›› 2024, Vol. 43 ›› Issue (01): 91-105.doi: 10.16359/j.1000-3193/AAS.2023.0042

泥河湾盆地马圈沟遗址哺乳动物破碎长骨反映的古人类行为

王晓敏¹(), 刘连强²(), 陈国鹏³, 李锋⁴, 谢飞², 高星⁵^,⁶

1.中国社会科学院考古研究所，北京 100710
2.河北省文物考古研究院，石家庄 050031
3.牛津大学考古学系，英国，牛津 OX13LZ
4.北京大学考古文博学院，北京 100871
5.中国科学院脊椎动物演化与人类起源重点实验室，中国科学院古脊椎动物与古人类研究所，北京 100044
6.中国科学院大学，北京 100049

收稿日期:2023-05-31 出版日期:2024-02-15 发布日期:2024-02-06
通讯作者: 刘连强，研究馆员，主要从事史前考古研究。E-mail: 2504998900@qq.com
作者简介:王晓敏，副研究员，主要从事旧石器时代考古遗址的埋藏学和动物考古学研究。E-mail: paleowangxm@foxmail.com
基金资助:
国家重点研发计划(2020YFC1521500);国家自然科学基金青年项目(41802022)

Behavior of the ancient humans as reflected by the broken long bones of mammals from the Majuangou site, Nihewan Basin

WANG Xiaomin¹(), LIU Lianqiang²(), CHEN Guopeng³, LI Feng⁴, XIE Fei², GAO Xing⁵^,⁶

1. Institute of Archaeology, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, Beijing 100710
2. Hebei Provincial Institute of Cultural Relics, Shijiazhuang 050031
3. Institute of Archaeology, University of Oxford, Oxford UK OX1 3LZ
4. The School of Archaeology and Museology, Peking University, Beijing 100871
5. Institute of Archaeology, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, Beijing 100710
6. University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049

Received:2023-05-31 Online:2024-02-15 Published:2024-02-06

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

马圈沟遗址是东北亚地区年代最古老的旧石器时代遗址之一，出土了大量石制品及动物化石，现已发现并确认距今1.76~1.26 Ma之间的17个不同阶段的文化层，为探讨早更新世东北亚地区最早人类的扩散与生存适应方式提供了关键材料。本文以距今1.66 Ma的马圈沟遗址第3文化层2001~2003年出土的大、中型哺乳动物长骨为研究材料，开展骨骼破碎方式的分析。研究表明，这批长骨化石以残段及残片为主，通过对它们的断口形态和质地，特别是破裂断口的角度进行测量、统计以及分析，发现大多数长骨是在新鲜状况下破裂的，而古人类很可能是敲碎骨骼和取食骨髓的主体；食肉类动物也造成了一些骨骼的破裂，但应该发生在古人类的行为之后。本文是首次对中国北方早更新世遗址出土动物骨骼的破碎方式进行的系统分析，为讨论早更新世古人类与食肉类的互动关系提供了新的线索。

关键词: 早更新世, 泥河湾盆地, 埋藏学, 破碎长骨, 人类行为

Abstract:

The Early Pleistocene site of Majuangou, one of the earliest hominin sites in northeast Asia is dated to 1.76-1.26 Ma BP. Excavations revealed 17 stratigraphic layers showing evidence of hominin activities including lithic artefacts and animal fossils, offering compelling evidence of the earliest human subsistence in high latitude regions of northeast Asia. Among them, Layer 3 (MJG-3) was estimated to be 1.66 Ma BP. The present study focuses on long bone fragments of large and medium-sized mammals recovered from MJG-3 between 2001-2003, with the goal of understanding taphonomic process of faunal assemblages. Breakage analysis, including fragmentation, weathering stages, long bone breakage patterns are reported. It shows that most long bones have green fractures. The recorded fracture angles provide data about initial consumption of bone marrow. We argue that hominins had primary access to carcasses by means of marrow extraction, while carnivores scavenged the leftovers. The systematic analysis of breaking patterns of long bones are applied here, offering evidence of hominin-carnivore interaction in Early Pleistocene in northeast Asia.

Key words: Early Pleistocene, Nihewan Basin, Taphonomy, Broken long bones, Human behaviour

中图分类号:

K871.11Q915.2

王晓敏, 刘连强, 陈国鹏, 李锋, 谢飞, 高星. 泥河湾盆地马圈沟遗址哺乳动物破碎长骨反映的古人类行为[J]. 人类学学报, 2024, 43(01): 91-105.

WANG Xiaomin, LIU Lianqiang, CHEN Guopeng, LI Feng, XIE Fei, GAO Xing. Behavior of the ancient humans as reflected by the broken long bones of mammals from the Majuangou site, Nihewan Basin[J]. Acta Anthropologica Sinica, 2024, 43(01): 91-105.

图/表 7

图1 马圈沟遗址位置示意图

Fig.1 The location of Majuangou site

图2 长骨断口边缘质地、断口轮廓及断口角度的含义图示（修改自[44]）

Fig.2 Measurement of fracture edge texture, fracture outline and fracture angle (modified after [44])

图3 马圈沟遗址第3文化层出土长骨残段/片的尺寸

Fig.3 The counts of long bone fragments from Majuangou 3 by range of their size

图4 马圈沟遗址第3文化层出土长骨的风化状况

Fig.4 The counts of long bone fragments from Majuangou 3 by weathering stages

图5 马圈沟遗址第3文化层出土长骨残段的断口特征 A.大型动物长骨骨干中段，上部断口为较光滑的近倾斜状，断口角度为65°，下部断口为粗糙的平直状，断口角度为90°。Diaphysis of large mammal. The upper fracture is oblique and smooth. The fracture angle is 65°. The lower fracture is transverse and jagged. The fracture angle is 90°；B.大型动物肱骨远端残段，断口为光滑的倾斜状，断口角度为35°。Distal humerus of large mammal. The fracture is oblique and smooth. The fracture angle is 35°；C.中型动物长骨的骨干，上部断口为光滑的倾斜状，断口角度为58°。Diaphysis of middle mammal. The fracture is oblique and smooth. The fracture angle is 58°；D.中型动物的肱骨远端残段，断口为光滑的倾斜状，断口角度为55°。Distal humerus of middle mammal. The fracture is oblique and smooth. The fracture angle is 55°；E为中型动物胫骨的远端残段段，断口为较粗糙的平直状，断口角度为102°。Distal tibia of middle mammal. The fracture is transvers and jagged. The fracture angle is 102°

Fig.5 Breakage pattern of long bone from Layer 3 of the Majuangou site

表1 马圈沟遗址第3文化层出土的在新鲜状况下断裂长骨的断口角度统计

Tab.1 The statistical results of fracture angles of green bones from Majuangou 3

角度Fracture angle→		中型动物Middle size		大型动物Large size
类型Fracture type↓		<90°	>90°	<90°	>90°
倾斜状断口Oblique fracture	数量n	187	13	221	9
	平均值Mean	69.11°	106.38°	66.34°	113.78°
	标准差SD	10.63	9.38	10.88	9.48
	95%置信范围CI	65.62°~72.6°	101.75°~111.02°	63.71°~68.98°	107.9°~119.66°
横向断口Transverse fracture	数量n	12	2	14	3
	平均值Mean	69.31°	106.5°	76.25°	99.33°
	标准差SD	14.05	12.02	7.5	0.58
	95%置信范围CI	62.02°~76.59°	52.83°~160.17°	67.42°~85.08°	98.36°~100.31°
纵向断口Longitudinal fracture	数量n	81	8	29	9
	平均值Mean	77.2°	114.38°	69.95°	108.67°
	标准差SD	2.59	22.6	9.51	9.19
	95%置信范围CI	74.73°~79.67°	99.24°~129.51°	66.94°~72.95°	102.97°~114.36°

图6 马圈沟遗址第3文化层长骨残段/片的断口角度的置信范围与实验考古及斯瓦特科兰斯(Swartkrans)遗址测量数据置信范围的对比实验考古的数据分为石锤砸击(HP, hammerstone percussion)和食肉类啃咬(CC, carnivore chewing)两类[53]，斯瓦特科兰斯(SWK, Swartkrans)数据来自[32]，MJG代表马圈沟遗址第3文化层; 空心圆表示小于90度，实心圆大于90度。Experiment data HP and CC are from [53], SWK data are from [32], MJG is short for Majuangou 3; A. 中型动物横向断口数据The data of transverse fracture of middle size animal; B. 大型动物横向断口数据The data of transverse facture of large size animal; C. 中型动物纵向断口数据The data of longitudinal fracture of middle size animal; D. 大型动物纵向断口数据The data of longitudinal fracture of large size animal; E. 中型动物倾斜状断口数据The data of oblique fracture of middle size animal; F. 大型动物倾斜状断口数据The data of oblique fracture of large size animal

Fig.6 Comparison of mean percentages and 95%confidence intervals for fracture angles of data from experiments, Swartkrans and Majuangou 3

参考文献 58

[1]	Ardrey R. The Hunting Hypothesis[M]. New York: Bantam, 1976
[2]	Binford LR. Bones, Ancient Men and Modern Myths[M]. Orlando: Academic Press, 1981
[3]	Blumenschine RJ. An experimental model of the timing of hominid and carnivore influence on archaeological bone assemblages[J]. Journal of Archaeological Science, 1988, 15(5): 483-502 doi: 10.1016/0305-4403(88)90078-7 URL
[4]	Bunn HT. Archaeological evidence for meat-eating by Plio-Pleistocene hominids from Koobi Fora and Olduvai Gorge[J]. Nature, 1981, 291(5816): 574-577 doi: 10.1038/291574a0
[5]	Domínguez-Rodrigo M, Barba R. New estimates of tooth mark and percussion mark frequencies at the FLK Zinj site: the carnivore-hominid-carnivore hypothesis falsified[J]. Journal of Human Evolution, 2006, 50(2): 170-194 pmid: 16413934
[6]	Zhu RX, Potts R, Xie F, et al. New evidence on the earliest human presence at high northern latitudes in northeast Asia[J]. Nature, 2004, 431(7008): 559-562 doi: 10.1038/nature02829
[7]	Zhu Z, Dennell R, Huang W, et al. Hominin occupation of the Chinese Loess Plateau since about 2.1 million years ago[J]. Nature, 2018, 559(7715): 608-612 doi: 10.1038/s41586-018-0299-4
[8]	Shen G, Wang Y, Tu H, et al. Isochron ²⁶Al/¹⁰Be burial dating of Xihoudu: Evidence for the earliest human settlement in northern China[J]. L'anthropologie, 2020, 124(5): 102790 doi: 10.1016/j.anthro.2020.102790 URL
[9]	Ferring R, Oms O, Agustí J, et al. Earliest human occupations at Dmanisi (Georgian Caucasus) dated to 1.85-1.78 Ma[J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2011, 108(26): 10432-10436 doi: 10.1073/pnas.1106638108 URL
[10]	Gabunia L, Vekua A, Lordkipanidze D. The environmental contexts of early human occupation of Georgia (Transcaucasia)[J]. Journal of Human Evolution, 2000, 38(6): 785-802 pmid: 10835262
[11]	Zhu RX, Hoffman KA, Potts R, et al. Earliest presence of humans in northeast Asia[J]. Nature, 2001, 413(6854): 413-417 doi: 10.1038/35096551
[12]	Deng C, Wei Q, Zhu R, et al. Magnetostratigraphic age of the Xiantai Paleolithic site in the Nihewan Basin and implications for early human colonization of Northeast Asia[J]. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 2006, 244(1-2): 336-348 doi: 10.1016/j.epsl.2006.02.001 URL
[13]	Ao H, Deng C, Dekkers MJ, et al. Magnetic mineral dissolution in Pleistocene fluvio-lacustrine sediments, Nihewan Basin (North China)[J]. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 2010, 292(1-2): 191-200 doi: 10.1016/j.epsl.2010.01.035 URL
[14]	Wei G, Hu S, Yu K, et al. New materials of the steppe mammoth, Mammuthus trogontherii, with discussion on the origin and evolutionary patterns of mammoths[J]. Science China Earth Sciences, 2010, 53(7): 956-963 doi: 10.1007/s11430-010-4001-4 URL
[15]	谢飞, 李珺, 刘连强. 泥河湾旧石器文化[M]. 石家庄: 花山文艺出版社, 2006
[16]	Dennell RW. The Nihewan Basin of North China in the Early Pleistocene: continuous and flourishing, or discontinuous, infrequent and ephemeral occupation?[J]. Quaternary International, 2013, 295: 223-236 doi: 10.1016/j.quaint.2012.02.012 URL
[17]	Schick K, Toth N, Qi W, et al. Archaeological perspectives in the Nihewan basin, China[J]. Journal of Human Evolution, 1991, 21(1): 13-26 doi: 10.1016/0047-2484(91)90033-R URL
[18]	Peterson CE, Shen C, Chen C, et al. Taphonomy of an early Pleistocene archaeofauna from Xiaochangliang, Nihewan Basin, Northern China[A]. In: Shen C, Keates S(Eds). Current Research in Chinese Pleistocene Archaeology[C]. Oxford: Archaeopress, 2003: 83-98
[19]	Keates SG. Evidence for the earliest Pleistocene hominid activity in the Nihewan Basin of northern China[J]. Quaternary International, 2010, 223: 408-417
[20]	蔡保全, 李强, 郑绍华. 泥河湾盆地马圈沟遗址化石哺乳动物及年代讨论[J]. 人类学学报, 2008, 27(2): 129-142
[21]	Liu C, Yin G, Deng C, et al. ESR dating of the Majuangou and Banshan Paleolithic sites in the Nihewan Basin, North China[J]. Journal of Human Evolution, 2014, 73: 58-63 doi: 10.1016/j.jhevol.2014.05.012 URL
[22]	Duval M. Comments on “ESR dating of the Majuangou and Banshan Paleolithic sites in the Nihewan Basin, North China” by Liu et al. (2014)[J]. Journal of Human Evolution, 2016, 90: 198-202 doi: 10.1016/j.jhevol.2015.04.010 URL
[23]	Yang SX, Deng CL, Zhu RX, et al. The Paleolithic in the Nihewan Basin, China: Evolutionary history of an Early to Late Pleistocene record in Eastern Asia[J]. Evolutionary Anthropology: Issues, News, and Reviews, 2020, 29(3): 125-142
[24]	汤英俊, 李毅, 陈万勇. 河北阳原小长梁遗址哺乳类化石及其时代[J]. 古脊椎动物学报, 1995, 1: 74-83
[25]	Costamagno S, Rigaud JP. L’exploitation de la graisse au Paléolithique[A]. In: Costamagno S(Ed). Histoire de l’alimentation humaine: entre choix et contraintes (édition électronique)[C]. París: CTHS, 2014, 134-152
[26]	Dominguez-Rodrigo M, Raynepickering T, Semaw S, et al. Cutmarked bones from Pliocene archaeological sites at Gona, Afar, Ethiopia: implications for the function of the world's oldest stone tools[J]. Journal of Human Evolution, 2005, 48(2): 109-121 doi: 10.1016/j.jhevol.2004.09.004 URL
[27]	Gifford-Gonzalez D. An Introduction to Zooarchaeology[M]. Springer Switzerland, 2018
[28]	Norton CJ, 张双权, 张乐, 等. 上/更新世动物群中人类与食肉动物“印记”的识别[J]. 人类学学报, 2007, 26(2): 183-192
[29]	Domínguez-Rodrigo M, Yravedra J. Why are cut mark frequencies in archaeofaunal assemblages so variable? A multivariate analysis[J]. Journal of Archaeological Science, 2009, 36(3): 884-894 doi: 10.1016/j.jas.2008.11.007 URL
[30]	Domínguez-Rodrigo M, Saladié P, Cáceres I, et al. Use and abuse of cut mark analyses: The Rorschach effect[J]. Journal of Archaeological Science, 2017, 86: 14-23 doi: 10.1016/j.jas.2017.08.001 URL
[31]	Galán AB, Rodríguez M, De Juana S, et al. A new experimental study on percussion marks and notches and their bearing on the interpretation of hammerstone-broken faunal assemblages[J]. Journal of Archaeological Science, 2009, 36(3): 776-784 doi: 10.1016/j.jas.2008.11.003 URL
[32]	Pickering TR, Domínguez Rodrigo M, Egeland CP, et al. The contribution of limb bone fracture patterns to reconstructing early hominid behaviour at Swartkrans Cave (South Africa): archaeological application of a new analytical method[J]. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology, 2005, 15(4): 247-260 doi: 10.1002/(ISSN)1099-1212 URL
[33]	Coil R, Tappen M, Yezzi-Woodley K. New analytical methods for comparing bone fracture angles: A controlled study of hammerstone and hyena (Crocuta crocuta) long bone breakage[J]. Archaeometry, 2017, 59(5): 900-917 doi: 10.1111/arcm.v59.5 URL
[34]	张双权. 河南许昌灵井动物群的埋藏学研究[D]. 北京: 中国科学院研究生院, 2009
[35]	张乐. 马鞍山遗址古人类行为的动物考古学研究[D]. 北京: 中国科学院研究生院, 2008
[36]	张双权, 彭菲, 张乐, 等. 宁夏鸽子山遗址第10地点出土动物骨骼的埋藏学初步观察[J]. 人类学学报, 2019, 38(2): 232-244
[37]	Wang XM, Xie F, Mei HJ, et al. Intensive exploitation of animal resources during Deglacial times in North China: a case study from the Yujiagou site[J]. Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences, 2019, 11: 4983-5000 doi: 10.1007/s12520-019-00852-1
[38]	Lyman RL. Vertebrate Taphonomy[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994
[39]	Shipman P. Life history of a fossil: an introduction to taphonomy and paleoecology[M]. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1981
[40]	Villa P, Mahieu E. Breakage patterns of human long bones[J]. Journal of Human Evolution, 1991, 21(1): 27-48 doi: 10.1016/0047-2484(91)90034-S URL
[41]	White TD. Prehistoric cannibalism at Mancos 5MTUMR-2346[M]. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1992
[42]	Outram AK. The identification and palaeoeconomic context of prehistoric bone marrow and grease exploitation[D]. Durham: University of Durham, 1998
[43]	Outram AK. A new approach to identifying bone marrow and grease exploitation: why the “indeterminate” fragments should not be ignored[J]. Journal of Archaeological Science, 2001, 28(4): 401-410 doi: 10.1006/jasc.2000.0619 URL
[44]	Sala M, Arsuaga JL, Martínez I, Gracia-Tellez A. Breakage patterns in Sima de los Huesos (Atapuerca, Spain) hominin sample[J]. Journal of Archaeological Science, 2015, 55: 113-121 doi: 10.1016/j.jas.2015.01.002 URL
[45]	Gifford-Gonzalez DP. Ethnographic analogues for interpreting modified bones: some cases from East Africa[A]. In: Bonnichsen R, Sorg M(Eds). Bone Modification, Center for the Study of the First Americans[C]. Orono: Maine, 1989, 179-246
[46]	Haynes G. Frequencies of spiral and green-bone fractures on ungulate limb bones in modern surface assemblages[J]. American Antiquity, 1983, 48(1): 102-114 doi: 10.2307/279822 URL
[47]	Dart RA. The Osteodontokeratic culture of Australopithecus Promethius: The primary and persistent role of the Osteodontokeratic element in lithic cultures[J]. Transvaal Museum Memoirs, 1957, 10(1): 10-20
[48]	Dart RA. Further light on australopithecine humeral and femoral weapons[J]. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 1959, 17(2): 87-93 pmid: 13814156
[49]	Bonnichsen R. Bone modification, Center for the Study of the First Americans[M]. Orono: University of Maine, 1989
[50]	Haynes G. Frequencies of spiral and green-bone fractures on ungulate limb bones in modern surface assemblages[J]. American Antiquity, 1983, 48(1): 102-114 doi: 10.2307/279822 URL
[51]	Johnson E. Current developments in bone technology[A]. In: Schiffer MB(Ed). Advances in archaeological method and theory[C]. New York: Elsevier, 1985: 157-235
[52]	Capaldo SD, Blumenschine RJ. A quantitative diagnosis of notches made by hammerstone percussion and carnivore gnawing on bovid long bones[J]. American Antiquity, 1994, 59(4): 724-748 doi: 10.2307/282345 URL
[53]	Alcántara-García V, Barba Egido R, Barral Del Pino JM, et al. Determinación de procesos de fractura sobre huesos: un sistema de análisis de los ángulos de los planos de fracturación como discriminador de agentes bióticos[J]. Trabajos De Prehistoria, 2006, 61(1): 25-38
[54]	De Juana S, Domínguez Rodrigo M. Testing analogical taphonomic signatures in bone breaking: a comparison between hammerstone-broken equid and bovid bones[J]. Archaeometry, 2011, 53(5): 996-1011 doi: 10.1111/arcm.2011.53.issue-5 URL
[55]	Brain CK. The Hunters or the Hunted: An Introduction to African Cave Taphonomy[M]. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1981
[56]	Behrensmeyer AK. Taphonomic and ecologic information from bone weathering[J]. Paleobiology, 1978, 4(2): 150-162 doi: 10.1017/S0094837300005820 URL
[57]	Domínguez-Rodrigo M, Yravedra J, Organista E, et al. A new methodological approach to the taphonomic study of paleontological and archaeological faunal assemblages: a preliminary case study from Olduvai Gorge (Tanzania)[J]. Journal of Archaeological Science, 2015, 59: 35-53 doi: 10.1016/j.jas.2015.04.007 URL
[58]	Moclán A, Domínguez-Rodrigo M, Yravedra J. Classifying agency in bone breakage: an experimental analysis of fracture planes to differentiate between hominin and carnivore dynamic and static loading using machine learning (ML) algorithms[J]. Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences, 2019, 11(9): 4663-4680 doi: 10.1007/s12520-019-00815-6

泥河湾盆地马圈沟遗址哺乳动物破碎长骨反映的古人类行为

Behavior of the ancient humans as reflected by the broken long bones of mammals from the Majuangou site, Nihewan Basin

在线阅读

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 7

参考文献 58

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	陈育芝, 武仙竹. 长江三峡及周边地区早期人类的生存环境与生存行为[J]. 人类学学报, 2024, 43(02): 287-297.
[2]	高星, 张月书, 李锋, 陈福友, 王晓敏, 仪明洁. 泥河湾盆地东谷坨遗址2016-2019年发掘简报[J]. 人类学学报, 2024, 43(01): 106-121.
[3]	赵云啸, 仝广, 涂华, 赵海龙. 河北省泥河湾盆地石沟遗址C区发掘简报[J]. 人类学学报, 2024, 43(01): 122-131.
[4]	王法岗, 杨石霞, 葛俊逸, 岳健平, 赵克良, Andreu Ollé, 李文艳, 杨海勇, 刘连强, 关莹, 谢飞, Francesco d’Errico, Michael Petraglia, 邓成龙. 泥河湾盆地下马碑遗址2013年发掘简报[J]. 人类学学报, 2024, 43(01): 143-156.
[5]	张振, 王莹, 李月丛. 泥河湾盆地旧石器时代人类活动与环境关系的研究进展[J]. 人类学学报, 2024, 43(01): 184-198.
[6]	裴树文, 徐哲, 叶芷, 马东东, 贾真秀. 泥河湾盆地中更新世气候转型期人类的适应行为[J]. 人类学学报, 2024, 43(01): 19-39.
[7]	刘连强, 蒲昱晓, 侯佳岐, 王法岗. 泥河湾盆地马圈沟遗址鱼咀沟1号地点2017-2018年发掘出土的石制品[J]. 人类学学报, 2024, 43(01): 40-54.
[8]	周振宇, 王法岗, 关莹. 河北泥河湾盆地西白马营遗址1985-1986年出土的石制品[J]. 人类学学报, 2024, 43(01): 55-66.
[9]	仝广, 李锋, 赵海龙, 闫晓蒙, 高星. 泥河湾盆地火山角砾岩原料的热处理实验[J]. 人类学学报, 2024, 43(01): 81-90.
[10]	杜雨薇, 张乐, 叶芷, 裴树文. 蔚县盆地吉家庄旧石器遗址动物骨骼的埋藏学分析[J]. 人类学学报, 2023, 42(03): 359-372.
[11]	范文田, 杨晓冬. 泥河湾盆地南山根地点发掘简报[J]. 人类学学报, 2023, 42(02): 260-271.
[12]	张月书, 李锋, 陈福友, 仪明洁, 高星. 泥河湾盆地东谷坨遗址6A2层的形成过程[J]. 人类学学报, 2023, 42(01): 61-74.
[13]	王晓敏, 王法岗, 陈福友, 李锋, 高星. 泥河湾盆地板井子晚更新世遗址古人类对动物资源的消费策略[J]. 人类学学报, 2022, 41(06): 1005-1016.
[14]	杜雨薇, 丁馨, 裴树文. 浅议古人类活动遗址的动物埋藏学研究方法[J]. 人类学学报, 2022, 41(03): 523-534.
[15]	关莹, 周振宇. 数据科学在旧石器考古学中的应用[J]. 人类学学报, 2022, 41(01): 169-179.