Taphonomic investigations of owl pellets

Owls are important consumers of small vertebrates, and because they regurgitate pellets rich in bone, they may be important potential contributors of the concentrated remains of small vertebrates to the fossil record. Owls of three sizes, the large great horned owl (Bubo virginianus), the medium-sized barn owl (Tyto alba), and the small screech owl (Otus asio), were fed a common diet of mice. The bony contents of the pellets were analyzed to determine the amount of bone loss by digestion, bone completeness, and sites of bone breakage. For all three species, only about half the number of bones ingested were recovered in the pellets. Mandibles and femora were most abundant, and pelves and scapulae were the least abundant. Screech owls broke 80% of the cranial and limb elements, barn owls only 30%. Skulls fared poorly in great horned and screech owl pellets, while barn owls returned 80% of the skulls intact, with only the caudal portion of the cranium damaged; barn owls also returned articulated strings of vertebrae and complete paws. These results provide a baseline for the recognition of owls as agents of accumulation of small bones in the fossil record and suggest that the actions of ancient predators may be revealed by species-specific patterns of bone destruction of an assemblage of fossil prey species.

[1]  R. Dexter.  Mammals Utilized as Food by Owls in Reference to the Local Fauna of Northeastern Ohio , 1978 .

[2]  H. Hamilton,et al.  The Clark’s Cave bone deposit and the late Pleistocene paleoecology of the central Appalachian Mountains of Virginia , 1977, Bulletin of Carnegie Museum of Natural History.

[3]  G. E. Duke,et al.  Factors affecting meal to pellet intervals in great-horned owls (Bubo virginianus)☆ , 1977 .

[4]  O. Evanson,et al.  Meal to pellet intervals in 14 species of captive raptors. , 1976, Comparative biochemistry and physiology. A, Comparative physiology.

[5]  O. Evanson,et al.  Gastric digestion in some raptors. , 1975, Comparative biochemistry and physiology. A, Comparative physiology.

[6]  J. Mellett,et al.  Scatological Origin of Microvertebrate Fossil Accumulations , 1974, Science.

[7]  J. Raczyński,et al.  The effect of digestion on the osteological composition of owl pellets , 1974 .

[8]  P. Dodson.  The significance of small bones in paleoecological interpretation , 1973 .

[9]  R. Wolff.  Hydrodynamic sorting and ecology of a Pleistocene mammalian assemblage from California (U.S.A.) , 1973 .

[10]  R. Estes,et al.  Paleoecology of a late Cretaceous vertebrate community from Montana , 1970 .

[11]  C. K. Brain.  The contribution of Namib desert Hottentots to an understanding of australopithecine bone accumulations , 1969 .

[12]  C. K. Brain.  Hottentot food remains and their meaning in the interpretation of fossil bone assemblages , 1967 .

[13]  K. Thomson.  Quaternary fish fossils from west of Lake Rudolf, Kenya , 1966 .

[14]  R. Singer,et al.  Part III: The Faunal Assemblages from the Gamtoos Valley Shelters , 1965 .

[15]  R. Estes.  Fossil vertebrates from the late Cretaceous Lance formation, eastern Wyoming , 1964 .

[16]  C. A. Long,et al.  Mammalian Remains from Owl-Pellets in Eastern Wyoming , 1963 .

[17]  D. Davis.  THE BARN OWL'S CONTRIBUTION TO ECOLOGY AND PALAEOECOLOGY , 1959 .

[18]  J. Craighead,et al.  Hawks, owls, and wildlife , 1956 .