東華大學圖書館 |

Language: English

Help

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

Back to Search results for [ null ]

Switch To: Labeled | MARC Mode | ISBD

Differentiation of fragmented bone f...

Benedix, Derek Christiaan.

Linked to FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

Differentiation of fragmented bone from Southeast Asia: The histological evidence (Cambodia, Laos, Vietnam).

Record Type:	Electronic resources : Monograph/item
Title/Author:	Differentiation of fragmented bone from Southeast Asia: The histological evidence (Cambodia, Laos, Vietnam)./
Author:	Benedix, Derek Christiaan.
Description:	142 p.
Notes:	Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 65-07, Section: A, page: 2656.
Contained By:	Dissertation Abstracts International65-07A.
Subject:	Anthropology, Physical. -
Online resource:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3141800
ISBN:	0496888803

Differentiation of fragmented bone from Southeast Asia: The histological evidence (Cambodia, Laos, Vietnam).
Benedix, Derek Christiaan.

Differentiation of fragmented bone from Southeast Asia: The histological evidence (Cambodia, Laos, Vietnam). - 142 p.

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 65-07, Section: A, page: 2656.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--The University of Tennessee, 2004.

Archaeological sites yield evidence that may be culturally modified items such as lithic tools, pottery, beads, buttons, watches, wedding rings, to items in nature classified by Dart (1957) as osteodontokeratic. Bones of human and non-human origin can comprise significant assemblage portions. Deciphering spatial context is important to anthropologists when reconstructing human behavior. In archaeological sites with bones and fragments of bones, the ability to categorize whole bones and fragments into species is especially important when attempting to determine such parameters as Minimum Number of Individuals or Number of Species Present.

ISBN: 0496888803Subjects--Topical Terms:

877524
Anthropology, Physical.

Differentiation of fragmented bone from Southeast Asia: The histological evidence (Cambodia, Laos, Vietnam).
LDR:03355nmm 2200289 4500 001 1843475
005 20051010101002.5
008 130614s2004 eng d
020 $a 0496888803
035 $a (UnM)AAI3141800
035 $a AAI3141800
040 $a UnM $c UnM
100 1 $a Benedix, Derek Christiaan. $3 1931707
245 1 0 $a Differentiation of fragmented bone from Southeast Asia: The histological evidence (Cambodia, Laos, Vietnam).
300 $a 142 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 65-07, Section: A, page: 2656.
500 $a Major Professor: Murray K. Marks.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--The University of Tennessee, 2004.
520 $a Archaeological sites yield evidence that may be culturally modified items such as lithic tools, pottery, beads, buttons, watches, wedding rings, to items in nature classified by Dart (1957) as osteodontokeratic. Bones of human and non-human origin can comprise significant assemblage portions. Deciphering spatial context is important to anthropologists when reconstructing human behavior. In archaeological sites with bones and fragments of bones, the ability to categorize whole bones and fragments into species is especially important when attempting to determine such parameters as Minimum Number of Individuals or Number of Species Present.
520 $a One goal is to figure out bone assemblage patterns. Some questions relevant to this endeavor include: Are the bones human or non-human? Under what context are the bones recovered? That is, are the bones part of a culturally modified set (i.e., human and non-human bone tools or burial practices) or do they result from natural processes (i.e., accidental death and subsequent burial including normal processes of taphonomic factors)? To this end, small osseous fragments are recovered frequently in archaeological contexts. These osseous fragments are defined as those readily identified macroscopically as bone but without systematic assignment as human or non-human origin.
520 $a Many small bone fragments possess no diagnostic features that permit anthropologists to ascertain species. They may, however, possess certain morphologies that allow Linnaean assignment by class nomenclature. When this problem is encountered, an apparent question is: Does a reliable methodology exist to differentiate fragmented human from non-human bone? This is particularly critical in situations where identifying human from non-human bone at recovery scenes where the remains of US military casualties are suspected. This study will examine models and methods to easily and readily attempt differentiation of bone fragments and allow them to be assigned into a human versus non-human categorical nomenclature. This research focuses on a select group of large Southeast Asian mammals primarily from Cambodia, Laos, and Vietnam. This study is designed specifically to alleviate situations encountered at the Central Identification Laboratory of the Joint POW/MIA Accounting Command when small, non-diagnostic bone fragments are recovered during excavation of US military casualty sites.
590 $a School code: 0226.
650 4 $a Anthropology, Physical. $3 877524
690 $a 0327
710 2 0 $a The University of Tennessee. $3 1022026
773 0 $t Dissertation Abstracts International $g 65-07A.
790 1 0 $a Marks, Murray K., $e advisor
790 $a 0226
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2004
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3141800