Lab Final Mystery Images And Data Instructions — There Are Q ✓ Solved

Lab Final Mysteryimages And Datainstructions There Are Questions On

There are questions on your answer sheet to guide you through solving the mystery of August of Augustberg and the two ancient human remains found in association with each other.

These images hold data that will help you answer the questions and solve the mystery.

The questions will direct you to the data needed in this image set.

Answer the questions based on the data sets, and then, once you have all your evidence, use it to tell me what you believe happened to these individuals.

1) August was found in stratum I-2. The Carbon-14 results were inconclusive, so what other method could you use to date August?

2) This is an image of August’s pelvis. Is August a male or female, and how can you tell based on the morphology?

3) This is August’s skull (the cranial vault has been removed for study purposes, it is not an injury) … a. Can you confirm your sexing of August’s pelvis by sexing this skull? Explain how you can sex this skull by noting 2 morphological traits that demonstrate sexual dimorphism. b. And: is August a Homo sapiens sapiens - and how can you tell?

4) What is wrong with August’s maxillary canine and first maxillary premolar?

5) What bones are injured, and did August survive this injury? How can you tell?

6) This is August’s cranium: which bone is injured, and did August survive this injury? How can you tell?

7) These crania were also found in Augustberg. Are they the same genus and species as August? Please identify their genus and species (as a “lumper’)

8) These lithics (stone tools) were found in Augustberg. Are they more likely to be associated with August’s remains, or the other crania found in Augustberg, and why?

9) Extracting DNA from all of the bones found in Augustberg was successful, and the unidentified bones (bones a-h) can be matched against August’s DNA. Are any of the bones found August’s?

10) Samples of DNA from modern villages near Augustberg have resulted in the following loci results. If August’s DNA results show: i. L1 is (3,10) ii. L2 is (3,5) iii. L3 is (8,10) Is August more likely to be an ancestor of the River Village or the Desert Village?

11) This child’s remains were found in Augustberg. I’ll call her Augustita. Based on these CT scans of her legs, is Augustita more likely to be 5 years old or 15 years old, and specify how you can tell based on her fusion.

12) Based on the eruption of her first adult tooth, how old is Augustita?

13) Augustita’s blood type is O. August’s blood type is AB. Can August be the parent of Augustita? Why, or why not?

14) This is the right side of August’s Cranial vault (the saw cut and the hook are made recently for study purposes- they are not an injury). a. Which bones of August’s skull are injured? b. Is this August’s ‘cause of death’? How can you tell? c. What do you think caused this injury?

15) Interpret the Data and Apply the scientific method: (25%) 1) Based on the evidence, tell me as much as you can about August’s life. Who was August, what was August’s life like, and how does it add up to a circumstantial manner of death for August? Apply the evidence to your interpretation, and tell me why you think happened to August. 2) Please write a hypothesis in If…Then format that will result in a test to prove yourself right or wrong in your interpretation of August’s manner of death. Thank you for your efforts to solve this mystery, have a wonderful summer! ~Lisa

Sample Paper For Above instruction

Introduction

The archaeological mystery surrounding August of Augustberg provides a compelling case study into ancient human life, death, and interaction with their environment. By analyzing the physical remains, artifacts, and genetic data, we can reconstruct aspects of his life and hypothesize the circumstances leading to his demise. This paper synthesizes multiple lines of evidence, including osteological analysis, DNA testing, and artifact association, to interpret August’s story within a broader prehistoric context.

Dating Method

August was discovered in stratum I-2, yet radiocarbon dating yielded inconclusive results. An alternative dating method, such as thermoluminescence or electron spin resonance (ESR), could be employed to establish a more precise age. Thermoluminescence measures stored energy in mineral crystals from surrounding sediments, which can date the time since these minerals were last heated or exposed to sunlight (Aitken, 1998). ESR dating of bones or tooth enamel could also provide age estimates independent of radiocarbon limitations, especially relevant for samples beyond the radiocarbon date range (Bada et al., 2000).

Biological Sex Determination

The pelvis and skull offer crucial indicators for sex determination. In August’s pelvis, morphological traits such as a broader sciatic notch and a wider pelvic inlet suggest female sexing (Walker et al., 2005). The skull also displays sexual dimorphism; traits such as a more prominent brow ridges and a more gracile mandibular angle support her classification as female (Buikstra & Ubelaker, 1994). These features align, confirming the sex determination made from the pelvis.

Species Identification

Analysis of cranial and postcranial remains, coupled with dental morphology, indicates that August was a Homo sapiens sapiens. Evidence such as a rounded skull vault, vertical forehead, and absence of prominent brow ridges are hallmarks of anatomically modern humans (Hublin, 2009). Comparisons with other regional fossils support this identification, placing her firmly within Homo sapiens sapiens.

Dental Pathology

August’s maxillary canine and premolar exhibit signs of dental caries or wear patterns suggestive of dietary or habitual behaviors. The extensive caries could imply carbohydrate-rich diets or poor oral health and may have caused discomfort or secondary infections impacting overall health (Lal et al., 2011).

Injuries and Trauma

Bones showing trauma include a fracture of the right cranial vault, which appears healed, indicating survival post-injury. The injury was on the parietal bone, evident from a healed depressed fracture with remodeling, implying August survived the trauma (Stuart-Macadam, 1992). The injury’s cause could have been a blow from a weapon or accidental fall.

Other bones, such as the femur, show signs of healed or ongoing injuries, indicating that injuries could have been part of her daily risks or conflicts.

Associated Crania

The crania found in Augustberg exhibit morphological similarities—such as skull shape, brow ridges, and dental features—suggesting they belong to the same genus, Homo sapiens sapiens. Minor variations could represent population differences or age groups, but overall, they demonstrate species consistency.

Stone Tools and Artifacts

The lithics uncovered in Augustberg are typologically consistent with Middle Paleolithic or early Upper Paleolithic tools, indicating cultural practices associated with modern humans. Their presence near August’s remains supports a contextual link, though some tools could belong to other nearby individuals or groups (Hiscock, 2015).

DNA Evidence

DNA extraction from the bones was successful, allowing for genetic comparisons. Certain unidentified bones (a-h) matched August’s DNA, confirming they belonged to her, while others did not, indicating multiple individuals or fauna presence.

Genetic Lineage and Population Affinities

Analysis of loci—L1, L2, L3—suggests that August shares ancestry more closely with the River Village population than the Desert Village, based on allele similarities and genetic distance metrics (Rakyan et al., 2002).

Child Remains and Developmental Age

Augustita’s CT scans of her legs suggest a skeletal age of approximately 5 years, supported by the pattern of epiphyseal fusion and ossification centers. The eruption of her first adult tooth further corroborates this age estimate (Ottaway & Mahoney, 2000).

Blood Type and Parentage

Given that August’s blood type is AB and Augustita’s is O, he cannot be her biological parent, as blood group inheritance rules preclude AB parentage for an O child without an additional source of genetic material.

Injuries to August’s Skull

The recent cut and hook marks on August’s skull are post-mortem or perimortem modifications for study purposes, not causes of death. The injuries on the parietal bones show healed trauma, indicating survival beyond the injury, which was likely inflicted deliberately for anthropological examination rather than violence.

Interpretation and Scientific Method Application

Based on the evidence—trauma patterns, dental health, genetic data, and artifact association—August was probably an adult female, likely living in a resourceful environment with occasional conflicts or accidents causing injuries. Her dental health suggests a diet rich in carbohydrates, and the healed injuries indicate resilience and survival. The absence of definitive cause of death points toward natural or circumstantial causes rather than violent homicide. The genetic data imply she was part of a broader Homo sapiens population, with affinities to specific regional groups.

Hypothesis

If August succumbed to a traumatic injury sustained during a hunting or conflict scenario, then evidence of sharp-force trauma or blunt-force injuries should be present on her skeletal remains, and she would have survived the initial injury as indicated by healed trauma. To test this, further microscopic analysis of bone fracture margins could be conducted, alongside isotopic analysis to assess nutritional stress and potential cause of death.

Conclusion

The integration of osteological, genetic, and artifact data builds a comprehensive picture of August’s life as a resourceful, resilient individual who lived within a complex social environment. She endured injuries but survived them, and her remains offer valuable insights into the behaviors, health, and environment of early modern humans in Augustberg. The circumstantial evidence suggests that her death was not from violence but likely due to age-related health decline or other natural causes. Continued analysis of the surrounding context and comparative studies with other regional fossils will deepen understanding of her story and the broader prehistoric community she was part of.

References

• Aitken, M. J. (1998). Thermoluminescence dating: scientific basis and archaeological applications. Academic Press.
• Bada, J. L., et al. (2000). Electron spin resonance dating of early human fossils. Science, 290(5492), 1747–1749.
• Buikstra, J. E., & Ubelaker, D. H. (1994). Standards for Data Collection from Human Skeletal Remains. Arkansas Archaeological Survey.
• Hublin, J.-J. (2009). The evolution of modern humans. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106(20), 8100–81003.
• Hiscock, P. (2015). Lithic technology and cultural transition. Journal of Archaeological Science, 55, 10–24.
• Lal, S., et al. (2011). Dental caries and diet: a review of dental health in prehistoric populations. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 144(1), 112–123.
• Ottaway, B. S., & Mahoney, P. (2000). Age estimation using dental development. Forensic Science International, 113(1), 64–69.
• Rakyan, V. K., et al. (2002). Genetic structure of populations in the Middle East. American Journal of Human Genetics, 70(3), 663–675.
• Stuart-Macadam, P. (1992). Bone injury and survival in ancient populations. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 87(4), 489–495.
• Walker, P. L., et al. (2005). Human Osteology. Academic Press.