Laser scanning confocal microscopy: a potential technique for the study of lithic microwear

The key problem restricting lithic microwear analysis is the lack of quantitative analysis to support qualitative assessments of different wear traces. This paper presents the reflective laser scanning confocal microscope (LSCM) as a new technique for the study of lithic microwear that has the potential to resolve this problem. Firstly, an example is presented that shows how the LSCM compares with conventional reflected light microscopy and scanning electron microscopy. This shows that images, rivalling that of the SEM, can be produced in similar timescales to conventional photomicrography and with no need for casting or sample preparation. The LSCM is also used to measure surface roughness of use-wear produced from working hide (dry, fresh and greasy), woodworking and antler working. This analysis demonstrates clear differences between the different wear polishes and the potential of the LSCM as a quantitative approach in lithic microwear research.

[1]  Peter S Ungar,et al.  Dental microwear texture analysis: technical considerations. , 2006, Journal of human evolution.

[2]  Roger Grace,et al.  A multivariate approach to the functional analysis of stone tools , 1988 .

[3]  Orin C. Shanks,et al.  Recovery of Protein and DNA Trapped in Stone Tool Microcracks , 2001 .

[4]  Thomas R. Hester,et al.  Lithic use-wear analysis , 1982, American Antiquity.

[5]  Christophe Soligo,et al.  Micromorphology of cut-marks in Palaeolithic Britain. , 2007 .

[6]  Hassan Zahouani,et al.  Wear assessments of prehistoric instruments , 2003 .

[7]  G. Ocklind,et al.  Some Preliminary Observations on Subsurface Damage on Experimental and Archaeological Quartz Tools using CLSM and Dye , 2001 .

[8]  Barbara L. Sherriff,et al.  Raspadita: a new lithic tool from the Isthmus of Rivas, Nicaragua , 2007 .

[9]  Veerle Rots,et al.  Blind tests shed light on possibilities and limitations for identifying stone tool prehension and hafting , 2006 .

[10]  Mark H Newcomer,et al.  Investigating microwear polishes with blind tests , 1986 .

[11]  P. Walter,et al.  Insight into the usewear mechanism of archaeological flints by implantation of a marker ion and PIXE analysis of experimental tools , 1998 .

[12]  Stephan Ebersbach,et al.  The investigation of the condition and faults of a spur gearbox using vibration and wear debris analysis techniques , 2006 .

[13]  L Pirnay,et al.  Microwear analysis of experimental stone tools: further test results , 1982 .

[14]  J. Shea.  On Accuracy and Revelance in Lithic Use-wear Analysis , 1987 .

[15]  H. Zahouani,et al.  Insights from a tribological analysis of the tribulum , 2006 .

[16]  Adrian A. Evans,et al.  The elemental chemistry of lithic microwear: an experiment , 2005 .

[17]  J. Shea,et al.  An Experimental Investigation of the Effects of Trampling on the Results of Lithic Microwear Analysis , 1993 .

[18]  I. Rajta,et al.  Microdistribution and composition of usewear polish on prehistoric stone tools , 1999 .

[19]  María Estela Mansur-Franchomme.  Scanning electron microscopy of dry hide working tools: The role of abrasives and humidity in microwear polish formation☆ , 1983 .

[20]  Juan José Ibáñez-Estévez,et al.  The Quantification of Use-Wear Polish Using Image Analysis. First Results , 2003 .

[21]  Christopher A. Brown,et al.  Dental microwear texture analysis shows within-species diet variability in fossil hominins , 2005, Nature.

[22]  John V. Dumont,et al.  The quantification of microwear traces: a new use for interferometry , 1982 .

[23]  N. Toth,et al.  Microwear polishes on early stone tools from Koobi Fora, Kenya , 1981, Nature.

[24]  W. James Stemp,et al.  Documenting Stages of Polish Development on Experimental Stone Tools: Surface Characterization by Fractal Geometry Using UBM Laser Profilometry , 2002 .

[25]  L. Hurcombe.  Some criticisms and suggestions in response to Newcomer et al. (1986) , 1988 .

[26]  G. Odell,et al.  Experimentation in the Formation of Edge Damage: A New Approach to Lithic Analysis , 1974 .

[27]  M. Pohl,et al.  Quantitative CLSM roughness study on early cavitation-erosion damage , 2002 .

[28]  E. H. Moss.  Some comments on edge damage as a factor in functional analysis of stone artifacts , 1983 .

[29]  W. James Stemp,et al.  UBM Laser Profilometry and Lithic Use-Wear Analysis: A Variable Length Scale Investigation of Surface Topography , 2001 .

[30]  A. M. Pollard,et al.  The surface alteration features of flint artefacts as a record of environmental processes , 2002 .

[31]  P. Katz,et al.  Stone Tools, Toolkits, and Human Behavior in Prehistory [and Comments and Reply] , 1979, Current Anthropology.

[32]  Xiangdong Du,et al.  Lithic raw material physical properties and use-wear accrual , 2007 .

[33]  J. Pawley,et al.  Handbook of Biological Confocal Microscopy , 1990, Springer US.

[34]  Douglas B. Bamforth,et al.  Ambiguous Use Traces and Blind Test Results: New Data , 1990 .

[35]  R. Donahue,et al.  Lithic Microwear Analysis of Middle Stone Age Artifacts from White Paintings Rock Shelter, Botswana , 2002 .

[36]  I. Sala.  Use wear and post-depositional surface modification: A word of caution , 1986 .

[37]  G. Macdonald,et al.  Some Aspects of Microscope Analysis and Photomicrography of Lithic Artifacts , 1968, American Antiquity.

[38]  Douglas B. Bamforth,et al.  Investigating Microwear Polishes with Blind Tests: The Institute Results in Context , 1988 .

[39]  P. Willoughby,et al.  The Human Uses of Flint and Chert , 1989 .

[40]  B. Hardy.  Neanderthal behaviour and stone tool function at the Middle Palaeolithic site of La Quina, France , 2004, Antiquity.