Systematic Baikal seal hunting and exploitation at a single site since the Neolithic

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-8146110/v1

Download PDF

Research Article

Systematic Baikal seal hunting and exploitation at a single site since the Neolithic

https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-8146110/v1

This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License

You are reading this latest preprint version

Lake Baikal’s strictly seasonal, mostly frozen basin features prominently in the social structures of Siberian indigenous communities, which consider it sacred. The lake’s complex occupation history, mainly from its western shore (Cis-Baikal), has been shaped by changing human-animal-environment interaction dynamics, including relation with the world’s only freshwater pinniped species, Pusa sibirica. However, the timing and nature of these processes elsewhere on the basin (Trans-Baikal) remain poorly understood. Taphonomic, palaeontological, zooarchaeological and archaeological (pottery, metal, conifer charcoals) evidence from the Tonkij Ushkany (Dead-seal) island reveals the earliest known recurring close-range hunting of mature seals within haul-outs, with frequent pathologies, burning marks and cutmarks, even on the smallest bone elements, suggesting comprehensive morphological knowledge and carcass exploitation, dating back to ca. 5,100ya. Dentine annuli (isotopically analysed) and epiphyseal fusion suggest a winter and summer slaughter, in contrast to Cis-Baikal patterns. Additionally, our findings highlight the importance of dogs in Neolithic hunting strategies, and document the sporadic exploitation of bear, deer, horse, duck and cattle in Iron Age and later periods. A deep understanding of animal ecology, culture, and spiritual connections have formed local ethnic-changing communities, seals, and Lake Baikal.

Lake Baikal

seal hunting

zooarchaeology

Neolithic Siberia

taphonomy

dog-human interaction

The archaeological record showcases the behavioral flexibility of modern humans through their ability to engage in specialized subsistence strategies and technological solutions across a wide range of familiar and novel ecological niches¹, including circumpolar environments. After their arrival in eastern Siberia at c. 45 − 35 ka BP² behaviourally modern humans began close interactions with animals, notably the wolf, as a part of a wider community pattern in northern latitudes³. Marine mammals have long been indispensable food sources for multiple circumpolar populations from Alaska to Greenland and Tierra del Fuego in the Americas to Scandinavia and Siberia in Eurasia^4–6. Addressing seal exploitation patterns in the isolated Lake Baikal basin is paramount for understanding the dynamics of human adaptation to coastal circumpolar environments in northern Asian prehistory.

Archaeological evidence suggests that exploitation of seals (Nerpa) in Asia began in Lake Baikal c.9000 years ago, becoming increasingly prominent throughout the region during the Early Holocene, with a continuity in practice but a decrease in intensity as the Middle Holocene progressed⁷. After a hiatus period in the late Middle Holocene archaeological sequence, the dominant subsistence strategies gradually shifted in Cis-Baikal from the exploitation of seals towards fishing and pastoralism, as a consequence of the introduction of domesticated ungulates in the region during the Late Bronze and Iron Ages^7–9.

Despite its sparseness, the archaeological record reveals that circumpolar hunter-gatherers in the Lake Baikal basin developed a deep ecological and ethological understanding of the life history, spatial distribution and seasonal adaptations of seal populations (see Supplemental Note 2 and ref. ¹⁰). Coastal Cis-Baikal sites exhibit a subsistence economy based on a protein-rich diet consisting of various fish species and Baikal seal (Pusa sibirica)^10,11. However, due to the lack of detailed faunal analyses, it is still unknown what hunting strategies were used in specific settings and how the centrality of seal haul-outs (occasionally referred as rookeries) impacts acquisition strategies – a knowledge that is essential for characterizing the seasonality, spatial behaviors, and technological requirements of circumpolar seal hunters. Furthermore, there has been a traditional regional archaeological research focus on coastal Cis-Baikal⁷ and inland Trans-Baikal sites^12–14, partly as a consequence of National Park restrictions. We held first permits to work in the protected areas of Zabaikalski National Park within a UNESCO project (these sites were reasonably protected by Russian authorities even during WWII). This site provides evidence of single spot being used for targeted hunting of seals since the Neolithic as surprisingly revealed here, and possibly back further. Despite numerous population turnovers in the Lake Baikal basin (Buryats, Evenks, Slavs, Golden horde, Mongols etc.), its seal and its conifer tree forests persisted. By expanding the scope of archaeological research to other areas of the Baikal region we aim to develop a framework with which to extrapolate findings across the basin.

To expand our current understanding of subsistence practices in ancient Lake Baikal, we apply an interdisciplinary approach, combining behavioural ecology, zooarchaeology, palaeontology, archaeology, dentine annuli analysis, taphonomy and for burning FTIR and ash reflectance analysis on the first herein radiocarbon-dated site on Tonkij Ushkany Island (herein declared as a “Dead-seal island”), previously dated through ceramic typology seriation to the Late Neolithic^15,16. The site has also yielded some lithics and copper remains consistent with this chrono-cultural attribution.

Archaeology

Tonkij Island, a part of the Ushkany archipelago, is situated in the central part of Lake Baikal, in the Republic of Buriatia, Russia (Fig. 1). Our archaeological investigations on the island (Figs. 2–6), which aim to shed light on Neolithic to Bronze Age occupation of the region, specifically looking at subsistence economies, ceramic manufacture, and material culture, were conducted from (1997–2007) under the AMBA UNESCO project. The 1997 work yielded direct radiocarbon dates of two seal specimens GD-17386 (3711–2342 calBCE, 95.4%) and GD-17387 (2031–836 calBCE, 93.8%) from Feature no. 1 and 2, respectively (see Supplemental Fig. 8 and Supplemental Table 15). Overall, the findings show that the island has been a seasonal base utilized for seal hunting.

The archaeological record also documents a series of events and activities in subsequent periods during the Neolithic to the Late Bronze/Early Iron Age. Settlement activities related to cooking in vessels, hunting and cutting of hunted animals. The diagnostic sherds from Feature no. 1. are typologically and chronologically heterogenous. These sherds represents the ceramic production of the neolithic hunters and farmers from the Transbaikal region. A well-reconstructable part of the vessel comes from Feature no. 2. It has analogies on the northern and western shores of Lake Baikal in the late Bronze Age and Early Iron Age^17,18. Accompanying metal artefact consists of pure metallic copper, corresponding with knowledge about the developing metallurgy in the Baikal region, when pure copper and simple copper-arsenic alloys appeared¹⁹.

Zooarchaeology

Baikal seal bones dominate the faunal assemblage (n = 945), representing 84.80% of the total number of identified specimens (NISP; n = 759). Other recovered mammals include carnivores such as ursids and canids, accounting for 2.01% of NISP (n = 18), and ungulates, including bovid, equid, and cervid, each represented by a single specimen (for each %NISP = 0.11). For birds, the identified specimens were from a cormorant (Phalacrocorax spp.) and duck (Aythya sp.). Due to the absence of sieving, only a dearth of small faunal fragments was recovered (Supplemental Table 1).

We estimated the minimum number of individuals for seals (MNI = 17), and calculated the percentage of minimal animal units bilaterally (%MAU; Fig. 4; Supplemental Fig. 5, Supplemental Table 7). All other identified animals were assigned an MNI value of 1 (Supplemental Table 1).

Ancient seal population dynamics

Results of our population structure analyses suggest the predominance of young-adult (c.6 years-old) and old-adult (> 8-years-old) seals²⁰ in terms of NISP and MNI values (84% and 88%, respectively; see Supplemental Fig. 4). These proportions stand in stark contrast with the demographic structure of wild seal populations, where pups/young individuals generally represent c. >60%¹. Dentine annuli analyses of two seal canines yielded age estimates of 9 and 21 years, with summer as the most likely season of death for both individuals (see Fig. 6, last annual circle), although recently winter adult poaching in these places also occur with advanced white camouflage. While some seals, including the endemic Baikal species, display little osteological sexual dimorphism^20,21, a combined assessment integrating analysis of dental growth layers, epiphyseal fusion and dimorphic traits suggests a preferential targeting of sub- and prime-adult females. This is supported by the scarce representation of the male-exclusive baculum bone (n = 1; see Supplemental Table 4). While bacula exhibit a lower degree of bone density than other parts of the skeleton²², which may account to some extent for their underrepresentation, the preferential selection of female Baikal seals is ethnographically documented, with contemporary hunters expressing a bias against male seals on the basis of meat taste¹⁰. Nonetheless, given the potential bias associated with relying on bacula counts for seal assemblage-level demographic characterisation, future proteomics analyses will help determine with greater certainty the proportion of males to females in Baikal seal assemblages.

Pathologies

The presence of osteoarthritis/myelitis was documented on a number of seal long bones (NISP = 68; %NISP = 7.597; Supplemental Table 13), i.e. bone regrowth around joints and/or on shafts. Some specimens showed extreme levels (see Fig. 5e) suggestive of old-adult individuals. These seals would have experienced a variable decrease in agile mobility, which may have facilitated their capture by Ushkany hunter-gatherers.

Taphonomy

Anthropogenic bone surface modifications were observed on a significant number of the specimens examined (see Supplemental Table 9). Cut marks were recorded on a total of 144 fragments (15.09%), 103 of them belonging to seal specimens (see Supplemental Note 1). Most other animal species represented at the site (cormorant, canid, ursid, equid and cervid specimens) also exhibit evidence of butchery (Supplemental Table 10). Anatomically, the distribution of butchery marks on shafts, distal and proximal ends of limb bones, and other landmarks within the axial skeleton supports the skinning, dismemberment, disarticulation, and defleshing of carcasses (see Supplemental Note 1, Fig. 3 and Supplemental Tables 8–10). In particular, metatarsals exhibit a high frequency of cut-marks (see Fig. 4 and Supplemental Table 8), potentially as a result of the combined influence of carcass disarticulation requirements with the taste preferences of Baikal communities for the meat from this part of the carcass¹⁰. Ethnographically, seal metatarsals are also employed in other Arctic regions for the preparation of seal scratchers that lure seals under the ice to the surface⁴. It evidences a comprehensive morphological knowledge and utilisation of even the smallest parts of seal carcasses – a behaviour aiming to maximise the utility of otherwise low-quality meat that is also frequently documented among Arctic Inuit groups.

Burning

Evidence of burning is ubiquitous, documented on 91% of bone specimens. Mild to severe charring is present on 424 fragments (45,11%), while calcination was found on 395 fragments (42,02%; see Supplemental Figs. 6–7 and Supplemental Table 9). Most burnt bones belong to the predominantly frequent seals, but some correspond to the remains of other species, i.e. ursids, canids, other large mammals and the cormorant (see Supplemental Note 1).

Burning temperatures between 380–422°C were identified based on the reflectance of burnt plant tissues (charcoal) extracted from the medullary cavities of examined animal bones (n = 7). The reflectance of charcoal ranges from 0.66–1.03%Rr, corresponding to an estimated combustion temperature of 380 to 422°C (Supplemental Note 3). The temperatures fall within the lower range of typical campfire temperatures and closely align with temperatures used for cooking over an open fire, which generally reaches a maximum of 350 to 400°C²³ (Fig. 3). Charcoal formation temperatures also fall within the range associated with typical natural grassland fires (Fig. 3). Although these fires can generate intense heat, their short duration makes it unlikely that they caused the significant thermal alterations observed in some bones, as confirmed by FTIR analysis. Alternative is that it represents a hot embers, where bones were thrown after consumption. The fire also affected the examined bones, some of which have previously experienced varying thermal events during cooking. The charcoal represents a conifer, possibly a larch, dominant species in these harsh conditions, although a spruce or pine cannot be excluded from these small fragments.

Likewise, FTIR analysis supports the assessment that most bones experienced sustained low-temperature burning (c.350–550 ºC), although some potentially reached temperatures of up to 900 ºC. Different temperatures on surface and inside of larger bones along with identical temperature (surface, inner core) of minute bones extracted from differing FTIR bonds (more CO3 bonds; Figs. 3de) suggest a short baking/grilling instead of boiling. A pattern consistent with average coal and flame temperatures reached by fuel-air mixtures typical of campfire hearths, particularly those relying on wood, animal fat products²⁴ and supplied with bones²⁵.

Stable isotopes

The stable isotope profile in growth direction shows heavy initial composition in both carbon and oxygen (-11.5‰ and − 11.2‰, respectively) in earliest increments, followed by a decrease to ca -12.0 to -14.5‰ and − 12.4 to -14.5‰, respectively. Such early juvenile enrichment is widely observed in mammals and is explained as lactation effect²⁶. It has been as well observed in seals, where an offspring may appear one full trophic degree above its nursing mother²⁷.

Human adaptation to life in circumpolar environments requires a thorough understanding of the seasonal transformations that the landscapes experience, particularly in relation to the life history, spatial distribution, and behaviour of prey species²⁸. In the Lake Baikal region, there is a partial population structure separation among seals on the basis of sex and age as the lake begins to freeze in early winter: adult males in the deep northern part, females in the deeper waters of central Baikal, where they give birth, and juveniles mainly on the southern shores. The melting of ice in spring (mid-May) leads to significant seal regrouping, with haulouts achieving maximum size levels during the summer on rocky portions or islands in Central Baikal, where the last seal resting place, Ushkany Islands are located^28–30. At peak densities, it is relevant to note that the eastern shores of Lake Baikal tend to support twice the numbers of seals than its western shores³⁰. These large summer concentrations decrease again as groups splinter at the onset of autumn. Based on this present-day Baikal seal biogeography, the area around the Ushkany Islands hosts predominantly adult females and neonates during winter-early spring, and a wider population structure spectrum of adults and juveniles throughout the summer months. The assessment of taphonomically-informed seal mortality profiles, coupled with dentine annuli data, can therefore enable us to discern the seasonality of site occupation.

The archaeological sites of the Ushkany Islands provide direct evidence of seal exploitation. Given that these islands host Baikal’s largest summer congregation of seals^28,29, these months (June to September) would have provided ample opportunities for close-range seal hunting at the haulouts, a method that requires low levels of technological specialization⁴. Indeed, ethnographic evidence of seal exploitation in the sacred Ushkany Islands occurs during these summer months¹⁶, a process enhanced through ritualistic mimetic transformations and spiritual interconnection with the seals³⁰. While recent hunting practices make use of ‘secluded passages’ creating paths of seasonally rearranged boulders¹⁶, it is likely that in prehistory access to the islands at this time of the year would have been only possible following the advent of watercraft technology documented for the regional Glaskovo culture. In contrast, access to the Ushkany Islands during the winter-early spring months would have required the use of sledges to move over the ice, while the acquisition of seals would have demanded hunters to target breathing holes and cub-rearing dens (rodilka), potentially through the use of dogs (without them it is extremely demanding process – in 1998 P.V. walked over 200 km to find recent newborn seals). It cannot be excluded that the seals were killed by breaking the fragile head with a woodstick, as recorded in recent history on the island¹⁶, and around the world⁴ but such damage is more likely caused by preservation.

Evidence consistent with summer exploitation comes from several lines of evidence in the seal assemblage such as (1) the targeting of less mobile seals onshore on the basis of recorded osteo-pathologies. (2) The presence of at least one adult male in the assemblage. (3) The representation of both adult and juvenile individuals, albeit with a predominance of the former in absolute numbers, and number of specimens with cut-marks and burning traces. (4) The dentine annuli assessment of two adult canines.

At the same time, the emphasis on females and the presence of some neonate individuals in the assemblage suggest either that there are also some instances of winter-early spring exploitation and/or that summer haul-out hunting was selective, unlike examples in similar contexts in other circumpolar environments, including Tierra del Fuego, where faunal assemblages reflected entire population structures^31–33. Another factor to consider is that a small number of seal remains might have entered the site as a result of natural accumulation processes at different points of the year; if this were the case, such outliers could blur the accuracy of seasonality estimates for human activity.

Alongside fur provisioning, meat acquisition was a fundamental dimension of seal hunting, as documented by the abundance and anatomical distribution of cut-marks and the high burnt bone frequencies. A high degree of prey selectivity in this context may have thus been mediated by taste. Ethnographic accounts highlight local preferences for the meat of female Baikal seals over that of males¹⁰—which could help explain the prevalence of females over males at Tonkij Ushkany—as well as the “delicacy” status for kumutkan (2 month old pups) meat, while bilak (newborns) yield little utility beyond the sour milk content of their stomach³⁴. This latter set of preferences is clearly observed in the record of Cis-Baikal, where many sites show evidence of spring hunting of juvenile seals⁷. This pattern of exploitation was enabled by the combined use of watercraft and harpoons, as well as dog-human cooperation. While commercial-scale hunting of adult females and pups can prove catastrophic for local seal population stability, small-scale and sporadic hunting is unlikely to have had significant effects on seal population survival.

Only two Cis-Baikal sites exhibit a predominance of adult seal hunting, and in both cases the pattern differs from the Tonkij Ushkany Island record. The first instance is Baikalskoe III, a game-seal hunting site located on the northern part of Lake Baikal: here, prolonged winter freezing led to higher frequencies of adult males^7,28, which, as mentioned above, tend to cluster in the northern deep waters. The second site is Ulan Khada, a fishing site on the south-western end of Priol’khon’e region, although small seal sample sizes may put into question the behavioral significance of the higher adult frequencies documented here⁷. Therefore, the assemblage from Tonkij Ushkany Island stands alone in the Baikal basin as the only site with preferential and extensive exploitation of female adult seals, even if juveniles and to a lesser extent adult males and neonates were also targeted in smaller proportions.

Evidence of seal bone burning can be very informative. Burnt seal bones at Baikal sites are often the result of a combination of factors: a) dietary practices, such as the cooking of meat; b) waste management practices (burning of discarded remains - potentially as fuel); c) as well as potentially alongside cultural beliefs and practices like those recorded ethnographically, such as fortune enhancement¹⁰ or the humanizing of animal smell³⁰, or simpler candle production. A detailed assessment of burnt remains may also offer glimpses into the settlement patterns of hunter-gatherer communities in the Baikal region. For example, the existence of burnt weathered fractures suggests the use of camp fire over a period longer than 3 months³⁵ suggesting multi-season camping. Nonetheless, assemblage sizes at Tonkij Ushkany Island are still relatively small in comparison with the largest Cis-Baikal sites (e.g. Sagan-Zaba II, which has an assemblage size of over 74,000 see ref. ⁷). Such disparity suggests that the occupation of Tonkij Ushkany must have been restricted to a single year or very sporadic inter-annually; therefore, the hunter-gatherer community that inhabited the site must have also employed other camps elsewhere in the archipelago or in the wider Baikal basin. Such a regional “multi-camp” seasonal settlement model for at least parts of the population during the Late Neolithic and Bronze Age has been put forward by Losey and Nomokonova⁷, comprising fishing sites in the south-west during periods of open-water availability in the lake, spring-hunting of juvenile seals in middle Cis-Baikal, as well as winter hunting of adult seals and summer hunting of terrestrial game in some northern areas. In contrast, while sample sizes are small, Early Neolithic Baikal communities appear to have engaged in more localized mobility patterns, with the exception of the southern part of the Basin, where rivers, such as the Angara, may have facilitated wider foraging ranges⁷.

In addition to sealing, people on the Ushkany Islands engaged with other forms of subsistence, as documented by the presence of other mammalian and avian taxa. Although the lack of sieving that excludes microfauna at the site might preclude a thorough assessment of subsistence strategies, its open water location and analogous evidence from other Middle Holocene Baikal on-shore sites would suggest a mixed hunting-fishing and gathering lifestyle^7,36,37. These inferences are supported by taphonomic evidence on wild taxa, such as cut-marks on bear remains—ethnographically linked to short-term winter occupations or ritual use—on a cervid scapula, either due to spot hunting (cf. Olkhon Island, see ref. ⁷) or carcass transport from the mainland¹⁰; as well as on a cormorant remain, which may be suggestive of open-water hunting of migratory birds⁴. Additionally, even though the archipelago would not have been able to sustain a pastoral population year-round, there is scarce but definitive evidence of domestic ungulates, such as a cutmarked equid mandible and a bovid molar. These remains may be associated either with the initial presence of pastoral communities in Trans-Baikal during the period 3000 − 1500 BCE or with a subsequent shift by around 1200 BCE in the intensity of human-horse relationships, which led to increased ritualism, meat consumption, and transportation demands⁹. Lastly, human-dog interactions represent a fruitful avenue of inquiry in Siberian prehistory. In the inner Trans-Baikal region, dog remains appear non-existent for the period between the Early Neolithic until the Iron Agea³⁸. Ethnographically, dogs proved essential partners to Baikal populations, both in terms of mobility through the use of sledges as well as in hunting, as they excelled in the identification of seal breathing holes in the ice, the targeting of juvenile seals and bear dens during the spring, and potentially chasing deer³⁴. In exchange for their invaluable service, dogs were fed hunting scraps, such as meat and bones from limbs, flippers, and the back of seals, as documented among other seal hunting populations. Evidence of tooth marks on seal and bear specimens (see Fig. 5) from the Ushkany Island site may be a taphonomic signature of this mutualistic relationship, although the action of wild carnivores, particularly wolves, cannot yet be ruled out. The ethnographic record shows that in conditions of necessity, humans would have also consumed dogs. At the site, there is extensive burning and some cut-marks documented on canid remains. Further research into species-level identification of canid remains represents a priority across Baikal sites and would help us further understand human-animal interactions in prehistoric Baikal societies.

The findings from Tonkij Ushkany Island provide critical insights into the human-animal-environment dynamics of Neolithic Trans-Baikal. The evidence of close-range hunting of mature seals in haul-outs, dating back 5,100 years, highlights the sophisticated subsistence strategies and ecological and morphological knowledge of these early communities. Unlike the spring-focused hunting patterns in Cis-Baikal, the winter and summer-based seal hunting in Trans-Baikal shows a distinct and adaptive approach to resource use, emphasizing how Neolithic hunters managed their environment for both cultural and subsistence needs. The finest parts of meats were utilised, like in frontier polar Inuit communities.

Compared to other circumpolar seal hunting sites, where entire populations were often targeted (cf. ref. ⁴), Tonkij Ushkany Island is notable for its preferential hunting of adult seals, particularly females. This pattern demonstrates a refined understanding of seal ecology, adaptation to the exploitation of Baikal seals reveals an advanced cultural understanding of animal behavior and the seasonality of the water-ice cycle. The use of tools, dogs, and communal hunting practices underscores the multi-dimensional facets of these strategies, which allowed these communities to thrive in demanding environmental conditions. Prehistoric seal hunting even involved trade networks reaching as far as the Chukotka Peninsula¹⁶—19th -century technological advances and population pressures led to severe overexploitation until National Park legal restrictions were enforced. According to elderly (A. Budeev, personal communication 1999), even during the worst year with long-lasting ice cover (1944), they were able to capture 5 seals per summer.

Seals still hold deep cultural and spiritual importance for indigenous groups like the Buriats, Evenks, and local Slavs influencing their identity, rituals, and shamanistic traditions³⁰. Ushkany Islands, a sacred site for offerings and healing, may have played a similar role at certain points in time during the Neolithic and Bronze Ages, indicating long-standing connections between local communities, seals, and Lake Baikal¹⁰. The study enriches our understanding of human adaptive strategies in Neolithic Siberia and provides insights for contemporary conservation efforts, adding the value of traditional ecological knowledge in human-animal-environment relationships. These places in the centre of the world deepest lake, were spots for specialised seal hunters for at least 5,000 years, and were protected by Russian authorities even during the WWII famine – an unparallel treasure of global biodiversity.

Archaeological Excavations

Tonkij Island (108° 42’ 44” E, 53° 51’ 22” N; 159 m²), a part of Ushkany archipelago, is situated in the centre of Lake Baikal with pebbly and rocky beaches, and taiga environment. Khlobystin documented the archaeological record from the island by 1963. Other surveys and excavations were conducted only on the Large Ushkany island from 1950s and recently by 2022^15,16. Our AMBA expedition in 1997 individually recovered remains from layers of dark, humus-rich soil with one identified cultural layer, likely consisting of multiple periods on the western shore of the Tonkij Island.

Investigated material was identified in two concentrations situated close to each other. Archaeological findings present the ceramic sherds, a piece of metal and faunal remains. Feature 1 represents the group of sherds in the vicinity of the fossil seal skeleton in anatomic position, feature 2 was a concentration of ceramics, animal bones and a piece of metal of pure copper. We applied the method of ceramics morphology (shape, size, decoration) and the metal chemical analysis.

The research also included the chronometric analyses of animal bones from the multi-period layer using the 14C measurements (2 samples by AMS method, without stable isotope delta 13C, delta 15N). Two seal radiocarbon samples were calibrated using OxCal v4.4.4³⁹. Considering factors like water residence time in Lake Baikal of 300–400 years, 14C-free carbon from eroded carbonate bedrock, detrital carbon from terrestrial sources, and the impact of the reservoirs of the Angara River, this calibration date is modified by subtraction of freshwater reservoir effect of Lake Baikal estimated to 700 years and propagates error of standard deviation (198 years) following Nomokonova et al.⁴⁰.

Zooarchaeology

We affirm that subfossil samples were collected and exported in a responsible manner and in accordance with relevant permits and local laws (UNESCO project AMBA in cooperation with the Zabaikalski National Park, Buryat Republic, 1997–2007; permission issued by administration; 01,08,1997; this flagship project was a part of the enviro-minister-level EU(Germany)-Russia cooperation signed personally by President Yeltsyn – NNA Schneeverdingen. The main result of the project was total ban of killing pups and decrease in annual huntig quota, saving over 200,000 in the period 1997–2025. They are deposited in Slovak National Museum under number SNM - PM, Mammalia, C1844. Collected animal bones were analysed, sorted, counted and photographed using Nikon D7000. Preserved seal skull was CT scanned in Nikon XTEK H 225 ST MicroCT scanner. The measurements on non-fractured and eroded elements were taken following von den Driesch⁴¹ and Eriscon and Stora⁴², e.g. length, width, thickness, utilising caliper (Somet-Inox). Quantitative allometric, or geomorphometric study was not conducted because of high degree of burning that shrinks bones and thus skews results⁴³. Anatomic zones were adapted from Reitz & Wing⁴⁴ and recorded using numbers (see Supplemental Fig. 1) allowing for fragmentation description and further calculations. Skeletal elements were identified to the highest possible taxonomic level. The identification relied mainly on Harbor seal (Phoca vitulina) and Gray seals (Halichoerus grypus)^45,46. Because Hodgetts⁴⁷ points out extremely high seal intraspecies variability disallowing seal determination but allows distinction of non-seal specimens. Nomenclature of identified taxa followed Reitz & Wing⁴⁴ and Jefferson⁴⁸.

The calculation of the Number of identified specimens (NISP) excluded non-taxonomically identifiable specimens, two recent bones, and recognised post-depositional fragments. The minimal number of elements (MNE) and minimal number of individuals (MNI) were determined by adopting anatomic zonation system of Reitz & Wing⁴⁴, and Albarella & Davis⁴⁹. This approach compares presence of distinct anatomic zones on each specimens of same taxon. The MNE was calculated as the total count of zones of each skeletal element exhibiting > 50% preservation. The MNI determined the maximum MNE number, considering age and side⁵⁰, for seals the indicator bone was tibio-fibula. The minimum animal units (MAU) were estimated as a ratio of MNE and natural count of elements in skeleton.

Degree of Phocidae epiphyseal fusion assessed age categories on the larger sample based on Stora²⁰ as others on phocids and P. sibirica (e.g. refs. ⁵¹). The only nonintrusive sex determination method is presence and absence of bacula, since cranium is archaeologically unreliable in seals²⁸.

This comprehensive taphonomic and zooarchaeological analysis of animal remains retrieved from the Ushkany Islands. Assemblage comprised a total of 954 bone fragments, which were recovered from the site by individual collecting without sieving. Of these, 93,82% were identifiable to taxon, representing a number of identified specimens (NISP = 895). The full dataset is included as Supplemental Data.

Taphonomy

All fragments (n = 954) were recorded for natural and anthropic modifications, such as fragmentation patterns, erosion, bone tissue integrity (see Supplemental Figs. 1–2), weathering (adapted from Behrensmeyer⁵²), rodent gnawing, acidification, abrasion, staining, burning and butchery marks following Reitz & Wing⁴⁴. Modifications on the surface of bones were recorded using Leica M205 C binocular stereomicroscope, multifocal microscope Hirox KH-8700 and Scanning electron microscope (SEM) ZEISS EVO LS 15. For cutmark calculation, highly weathered specimens were discarded⁵³. Burn Mark Analysis followed bone color differentiating between unburned, brownish, black (charred), greyish mottled and white (calcined) (e.g. ref. ⁵⁴). Burned specimens were quantified as a fraction of total bone fragments.

Reflectance of charcoal analysis

Samples of ash and charcoal found in seven broken bones of seals and a bear were mixed with epoxy. After curing, the polished sections were prepared according to ISO 7404 − 2⁵⁵. Organic particles were examined using a Leitz microscope (50x objective, oil immersion) and identified based on their petrographic properties. They were classified according to the nomenclature approved by the International Committee for Coal and Organic Petrology⁵⁶ for inertinites and charcoal. Subsequently, light reflectance measurements (%Rr – random reflectance) were conducted on the micro-surfaces of the charcoal macerals following ISO 7404-5 using an MPV-Compact-2 microphotometer with a 50x oil immersion objective⁵⁷. The photometer was calibrated using yttrium-aluminum-garnet standards (0.905%) and a glass prism (1.24%).

Incremental growth layer analysis

All analysed teeth were 3D scanned using a microCT scanner and a cast was prepared for isotopic analyses. Teeth were embedded in epoxy and a thin section performed. The polarized light microscope allowed observations were conducted in ImageJ following Lieberman⁵⁸ and Weber⁵⁹.

Isotope analysis

Stable C and O isotopes in tooth samples were analyzed on isotope-ratio mass spectrometer (IRMS) MAT253 coupled with semi-automated carbonate preparation device Kiel IV (Thermo). The dentin was subsampled from longitudinal sections of seal tooth on MicroMill drilling microscope (New Wave Research) in series of trenches along optically visible growth lines. Ca. 50–100 micrograms of milled powder of was loaded into borosilicate glass vials, evacuated and acid-digested in anhydrous phosphoric acid at 70°C⁶⁰. Yielded CO₂ gas was cryogenically purified at temperature of liquid nitrogen and lead into the IRMS via dual-inlet interface. Isotope composition was measured against CO₂ reference gas and raw values were calibrated using international reference material NBS18 and two working standards with δ¹³C = 5.014‰, + 2.48‰, -9.30‰ and δ¹⁸O = -23.2‰, -2.40‰, -15.30‰, respectively. All the values are reported as permil vs. PDB, typical precision of measurement is 0.02‰ for carbon and 0.04‰ for oxygen. Changes in isotopes over time recorded in ancient seal await comparison with living seals.

The infrared (IR) spectra of the samples

Measured by a Nicolet™ IS50 Fourier transform infrared spectrometer from Thermo Scientific equipped with an embedded single-reflection Attenuated Total Reflection (ATR) accessory with a diamond crystal. Spectra were collected in the spectral region of 4000 − 400 cm^− 1 using OMNIC software with a resolution of 4 cm^− 1.

Comparative living material

Compared skull of extant 3–4 year old seal is deposited in the Limnological Institute, Russian Academy of Sciences, Irkutsk.

Artefact analysis

We applied the method of ceramics morphology (shape, size, decoration). The content of elements in metallic artefacts was analysed using EDS and BSE with an acceleration voltage of 20 kV and a 5 nA current.

Acknowledgments and Funding

We dedicate this work to the memory of Ded Anton (Anton Budeev), a wise Buryat eldery. We thank administration of the Transbaikalian National Park and especially Evgenyi Ovdin for participation and enabling the conservation and research of the area. We thank Yuri Budeev for logistical support in the remote wild. We thank Andrej Šutek and Petra Ihringová (both Bratislava) for co-collecting the specimens and over 100 participants (particularly long-term participants Róbert Oružinský, Silvia Alexyová, Alexandra Zahradníková, Natália Jurdíková, Peter Puchala, Ján Šeminský and son) of the conservation project in difficult, but admiring conditions protected by Russian authorities even during WWII famine. Lýdia Richnavská (Spišská Nová Ves) pre-catalogised specimens. Andrey Panteleev (Petersburg), determined the associated bone of fossil Aythya (of uncertain age – this duck does not inhabit our islands today). We also thank Juraj Gullár (in memoriam, Bratislava) for providing illustration of the Baikal seal reference skull provided by the Limnological Institute RAS, Irkutsk (M. Pastukhov) and Martin Česanek (Bratislava) for its digitalisation. We thank Natalya Tsydenova (Ulan-Ude, Republic of Buryatia) for cooperation in analysis of archaeological material, Mathew Lowe and Jack Ashby for identifying faunal remains, and Keturah Smithson for CT of reference and sub-fossilised crania. We would also like to thank Emanuel P. Oravec for photography, Matej Golej for preparation of teeth in epoxy and Corrie Hyland for assistance with the calibration of radio-carbon dating. Dating was performed in Gliwice Radiocarbon Laboratory (Prof. A. Pazdur), Gadam Centre, Silesian University of Technology, Institute of Physics, Gliwice, Poland).

Funding declaration

This research is supported by UNESCO project AMBA, the Max Planck Society, BARS1-4 (Minister of Education, Research and Youth of the Slovak Republic), Tatrabanka Grant (Education for High Schools 2022—No.10) and by Comenius University in Bratislava, Slovakia (Grant UK No. 98/2005).

Author contributions

B.M., P.V. (PI), and N.A. designed the research; B.M. (main systematic research), P.V. (collection and the site documentation), J.K. (burning), J.M.Š. (archaeology), R.M. (isotope analyses), H.P. (FTIR), M.H. (CTs), D.K. (SEM), and N.A. (zooarchaeology) collected the data; B.M., N.A., J.K., R.M., P.V. and H.P. analyzed the data, and B.M., G.L.M., P.V., J.K., J.M.Š., and N.A. wrote the paper. Six authors contributed equally.

Declaration of interests

Ethics declaration

The research is dedicated to the memory of a local authority and elderly (Ded Anton), and otherwise did not include local researchers, but is considering their participation (local refs. ^{7,8,10,12–19,21,28–30,34,37,38,40,59}), it is locally relevant and it has been determined in collaboration with local partners in Buryatia including National Park administration and local hunters. Locals (from Buryat Institute and Zabaikalski National Park respectively) were given support and responsibilities and they are equal coauthors of the parallelly prepared monographs (J. Mellnerová Šuteková, N. Tsydenova et al., Tonkij Ushkany island archaeology; P. Vršanský, Y. Budeev et al., Baikal seal behaviour). Otherwise, this research would not be possible. We were the first allowed to work at these sacred places (11 field seasons and over 39 months). This study has been also approved by the National Park administration. Our international team provided personal physical protection of the islands for 11 years, so we significantly contributed to the protection, which is highly commented on among locals as well as abroad (Best international conservation project, NABU Germany - total ban of killing newborn seals and official quota decline - 3.500 seal saved annually and additional decline in poaching). The risk was high from the side of poachers, which nevertheless, did not conduct personal confrontation during our presence. UNESCO and Russian Academy supported management planning in limit risk, which was also supported from local legal hunters. Benefit-sharing measures discussed with locals include wider popularisation of Lake Baikal, a sacred place, and important international research (in prepared mutual monographs) within UNESCO projects, and conservation.

Competing interests

Multiple affiliation of P.V. is within one governmental academic body within EU (Slovak Academy of Sciences); multiple affiliation of B.M. is in his Alma mater and in Slovak Academy of Sciences where part of experiments was conducted. Multiple affiliation of J.Š. is in her previous (where most of the analyses were performed) and actual locations. The other authors declare no potential competing interests.

Material availability

Animal bones are deposited in Slovak National Museum under number SNM - PM, Mammalia, C1844.

Data availability

All the data reported in the paper are presented in the main text or in the Supplemental Notes, Tables and Figures. CTs are deposited in https://app.box.com/s/cd1m0aivr8gabbbu1n5nlpay7yenigmt.

Code availability

The R code associated with this work is publicly available through OSF at https://osf.io/9fy2a/?view_only=814276d2b61444e5bbff69cd312eb8f1

Supplemental Information

Supplemental Information is available for this paper.

Supplemental Figs. 1–14 and accompanying notes on zooarchaeology, seal behaviour and bone-associated charcoal.

Supplemental Data1

All Supplemental tables and data.

Roberts, P. & Stewart, B. A. Defining the ‘generalist specialist’ niche for Pleistocene Homo sapiens. Nat. Hum. Behav. 2, 542–550 (2018).
Sikora, M. et al. The population history of northeastern Siberia since the Pleistocene. Nature 570, 182–188 (2019).
Irving-Pease, E. K. et al. Paleogenomics of Animal Domestication. in Paleogenomics: Genome-Scale Analysis of Ancient DNA (eds. Lindqvist, C. & Rajora, O. P.) 225–272 (Springer International Publishing, Cham, 2019).
Linares Matás, G. J. & Lim, J. S. “This is the way”: Knowledge networks and toolkit specialization in the circumpolar coastal landscapes of western Alaska and Tierra del Fuego. J. Isl. Coast. Archaeol. 19, 1–29 (2024).
Fog Jensen, J. et al. Aasivissuit – Nipisat: Inuit Hunting Ground between Ice and Sea. (København, 2017).
Storå, J. Reading Bones. Stone Age Hunters and Seals in the Baltic. (Stockholm Studies in Archaeology 21. Stockholm, 2001).
Losey, R. J. & Nomokonova, T. Holocene Zooarchaeology of Cis-Baikal. (Nünnerich-Asmus Verlag & Media, Mainz, 2017).
Nomokonova, T. et al. Holocene Fishing in the Big Sea Region of Lake Baikal (Based on Materials from Multilayered Habitation Sites). Archaeol. Ethnol. Anthropol. Eurasia 45, 13–23 (2017).
Taylor, W. T. T. et al. Early Pastoral Economies and Herding Transitions in Eastern Eurasia. Sci. Rep. 10, 1001 (2020).
Nomokonova, T. et al. People and Seals at Siberia’s Lake Baikal. J. Ethnobiol. 33, 259–280 (2013).
Vršanský, P. et al. The Nerpa. Amba Proj. B20991ABNC 12 (1998).
Tsydenova, N. et al. Chemical and spectroscopic study of nephrite artifacts from Transbaikalia, Russia: Geological sources and possible transportation routes. Quat. Int. 355, 114–125 (2015).
Tsydenova, N., Andreeva, D. & Zech, W. Early pottery in Transbaikal Siberia: New data from Krasnaya Gorka. Quat. Int. 441, 81–90 (2017).
Tsydenova, N. et al. Environmental conditions and the emergence of ceramics in the Late Pleistocene-Early Holocene at the Krasnaya Gorka site in the Transbaikal region, Southern Siberia. Quat. Int. 608–609, 112–119 (2022).
Filippov, A., Klementiev, A., Volkova, N. & Morozov, O. N. Голоценовые абразионные гроты Большого Ушканьего острова на Байкале [Holocene abrasion grottoes of Bol. Ushkany Island on Lake Baikal]. 7–20 (2022).
Khlobystin, L. P. K istorii nerpich’ego promysla na Baykale [On the history of seal fishing on Baikal]. in Sovetskaya arkheologiya 12–19 (1963).
Nomokonova, T. & Goriunova, O. I. Neolitichiskije kompleksy mnogoslojnogo poselenija Katun I (Chivyrkuiskyj zaljiv, oz. Baikal). Irkutsk IGTU 117–123 (2004).
Goriunova, O. I. & Novikov, A. G. Kompleksy zheleznogo veka i ranne mongol’skogo vremeni poberezh’ia oz. Baikal (po materialam mnogosloinykh poselenii). in Drevnie Kul’tury Mongolii i Baikal’skoi Sibiri 241–244 (Izd-vo BGU, Ulan-Ude, 2010).
Sergeeva, N. F. Drevneyshaya metallurgiya medi yuga Vostochnoy Sibiri. Novosib. Nauka (1981).
Stora, J. Skeletal development in the Grey seal Halichoerus grypus, the Ringed seal Phoca hispida botnica, the Harbour seal Phoca vitulina vitulina and the Harp seal Phoca groenlandica. Epiphyseal fusion and life history. Archaeozoologia (2000).
Losey, R. J. et al. A body size approach to understanding Holocene seal hunting at Lake Baikal in Siberia. Archaeol. Anthropol. Sci. 15, 49 (2023).
Hande, S. S., Andronowski, J. M. & Miller, E. H. Microarchitecture of the penis bone (baculum) of a seal: A 3D morphometric examination using synchrotron and laboratory micro-computed tomography. Anat. Rec. 307, 2858–2874 (2024).
Schmidt, C. W. & Symes, S. A. The Analysis of Burned Human Remains. vol. Second edition (Academic Press, Amsterdam, 2015).
Yravedra, J. & Uzquiano, P. Burnt bone assemblages from El Esquilleu cave (Cantabria, Northern Spain): deliberate use for fuel or systematic disposal of organic waste? Quat. Sci. Rev. 68, 175–190 (2013).
Yravedra, J. et al. New evidence of bones used as fuel in the Gravettian level at Coímbre cave, northern Iberian Peninsula. Archaeol. Anthropol. Sci. 9, 1153–1168 (2017).
Jenkins, S. G., Partridge, S. T., Stephenson, T. R., Farley, S. D. & Robbins, C. T. Nitrogen and carbon isotope fractionation between mothers, neonates, and nursing offspring. Oecologia 129, 336–341 (2001).
Cherel, Y., Hobson, K. A. & Guinet, C. Milk isotopic values demonstrate that nursing fur seal pups are a full trophic level higher than their mothers. Rapid Commun. Mass Spectrom. RCM 29, 1485–1490 (2015).
Pastukhov, V. D. & Evsikov, V. I. Nerpa Baĭkala: Biologicheskie Osnovy Rat︠s︡ionalʹnogo Ispolʹzovanii︠a︡ i Okhrany Resursov. (VO ‘Nauka’, Novosibirsk, 1993).
Petrov, E. A., Kupchinsky, A. B. & Fialkov, V. A. Summer coastal rookeries and perspectives of the Baikal seal (Pusa sibirica) population in the conditions of the global warming. Biosyst. Divers. 29, 387–392 (2021).
Ivanov et al. Experience in application of UAV in ecological studies of the Baikal seal (Pusa sibirica GM.) population at the beginning of shore rookeries formation. Международный Научно-Исследовательский Журнал 5 (2022).
Martinoli, M. Modalidades de explotación, procesamiento y consumo de pinnípedos en la margen meridional de Tierra del Fuego. Arqueología 25, 287–290 (2019).
Schiavini, A. C. M. Estudio de la relación entre el hombre y los pinnípedos en el proceso adaptativo humano al Canal de Beagle, Tierra del Fuego, Argentina. (Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales, 1990).
Orquera, L. A. & Piana, E. L. Sea Nomads of the Beagle Channel in Southernmost South America: Over Six Thousand Years of Coastal Adaptation and Stability. J. Isl. Coast. Archaeol. 4, 61–81 (2009).
Afanas’eva-Medvedeva, G. V. Slovar’ Govorov Russkikh Starozhilov Baikal’skoi Sibiri. Inst. Lingvisticheskikh Issled. RAN 3, (2009).
Lyman, R. L. Bone density and differential survivorship of fossil classes. J. Anthropol. Archaeol. 3, 259–299 (1984).
Weber, A. The Neolithic and early Bronze Age of the Lake Baikal region: a review of recent research. J. World Prehistory 9, 99–165 (1995).
Losey, R. J., Nomokonova, T. & White, D. Fish and Fishing in Holocene Cis-Baikal, Siberia: A Review. J. Isl. Coast. Archaeol. 7, 126–145 (2012).
Losey, R. J. et al. Buried, eaten, sacrificed: Archaeological dog remains from Trans-Baikal, Siberia. Archaeol. Res. Asia 16, 58–65 (2018).
Reimer, P. J. et al. The IntCal20 Northern Hemisphere Radiocarbon Age Calibration Curve (0–55 cal kBP). Radiocarbon 62, 725–757 (2020).
Nomokonova, T., Losey, R. J., Goriunova, O. I. & Weber, A. W. A freshwater old carbon offset in Lake Baikal, Siberia and problems with the radiocarbon dating of archaeological sediments: Evidence from the Sagan-Zaba II site. Quat. Int. 290–291, 110–125 (2013).
von den Driesch, A. A Guide to the Measurement of Animal Bones from Archaeological Sites. (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1976).
Ericson, P. G. P. & Storå, J. A manual to the skeletal measurements of the seal genera Halichoerus and Phoca (Mammalia: Pinnipedia). Dep. Vertebr. Zool. Swed. Mus. Nat. Hist. (1999).
Shipman, P., Foster, G. & Schoeninger, M. Burnt bones and teeth: an experimental study of color, morphology, crystal structure and shrinkage. J. Archaeol. Sci. 11, 307–325 (1984).
Reitz, E. J. & Wing, E. S. Zooarchaeology. Cambridge Manuals in Archaelogy. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007).
Rochester, J. Common Seal Skeleton. Flickr (2014).
Dobney, K. & Reilly, K. A method for recording archaeological animal bones: the use of diagnostic zones. Circaea 5, 79–96 (1988).
Hodgetts, L. M. Y. Animal bones and human society in the late younger Stone Age of arctic Norway. (Durham University, Durham, 1999).
Jefferson, T. A., Webber, M. A., Pitman, R. L. & Gorter, U. Marine Mammals of the World: A Comprehensive Guide to Their Identification. (Elsevier/AP, Academic Press is an imprint of Elsevier, London, UK ; San Diego, CA, USA, 2015).
Albarella, U. & Davis, S. J. M. Mammals and Birds from Launceston Castle, Cornwall: Decline in Status and the Rise of Agriculture. Circaea 12, (1996).
Chaplin, R. E. The Study of Animal Bones from Archaeological Sites. (Seminar Press Ltd, London, New York, 1971).
Storå, J. Neolithic seal exploitation on the Åland Islands in the Baltic Sea on the basis of epiphyseal fusion data and metric studies. Int. J. Osteoarchaeol. 12, 49–64 (2002).
Behrensmeyer, A. K. Taphonomic and ecologic information from bone weathering. Paleobiology 4, 150–162 (1978).
Lyman, R. L. Vertebrate Taphonomy. (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1994).
Fernandez-Jalvo, Y. & Andrews, P. Atlas of Taphonomic Identifications: 1001+ Images of Fossil and Recent Mammal Bone Modification. (Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, 2016).
ISO 7404-2. Methods for the Petrographic Analysis of Coals - Part 2: Methods of Preparing Coal Samples. (International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland, 2009).
International Committee for Coal and Organic Petrology. New inertinite classification (ICCP system 1994). Fuel 80 459–471 (2001).
ISO 7404-5. Methods for the Petrographic Analysis of Coal - Part 5: Methods of Determining Microscopically the Reflectance of Vitrinite. (International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland, 2009).
Lieberman, D. E., Deacon, T. W. & Meadow, R. H. Computer image enhancement and analysis of cementum increments as applied to teeth of Gazella gazella. J. Archaeol. Sci. 17, 519–533 (1990).
Weber, A. W., Link, D. W., Goriunova, O. I. & Konopatskii, A. K. Patterns of Prehistoric Procurement of Seal at Lake Baikal: A Zooarchaeological Contribution to the Study of Past Foraging Economies in Siberia. J. Archaeol. Sci. 25, 215–227 (1998).
McCrea, J. M. On the isotopic chemistry of carbonates and a paleotemperature scale. J. Chem. Phys. 849–857 (1950).
McParland, L. C., Collinson, M. E., Scott, A. C., Campbell, G. & Veal, R. Is vitrification in charcoal a result of high temperature burning of wood? J. Archaeol. Sci. 37, 2679–2687 (2010).
McParland, L. C., Collinson, M. E., Scott, A. C. & Campbell, G. The use of reflectance values for the interpretation of natural and anthropogenic charcoal assemblages. Archaeol. Anthropol. Sci. 1, 249 (2009).
Gowlett, J. A. J. & Wrangham, R. W. Earliest fire in Africa: towards the convergence of archaeological evidence and the cooking hypothesis. Azania Archaeol. Res. Afr. 48, 5–30 (2013).
Pérez, L. et al. Hearths and bones: An experimental study to explore temporality in archaeological contexts based on taphonomical changes in burnt bones. J. Archaeol. Sci. Rep. 11, 287–309 (2017).
Clements, C., Zhong, S., Heilman, W. & Bian, X. Thermodynamic Structure of a Grass Fire Plume. AGU Fall Meet. Abstr. (2010).
Kotulová, J., Starek, D., Havelcová, M. & Pálková, H. Amber and organic matter from the late Oligocene deep-water deposits of the Central Western Carpathians (Orava–Podhale Basin). Int. J. Coal Geol. 207, 96–109 (2019).

Competing interest reported. Multiple affiliation of P.V. is within one governmental academic body within EU (Slovak Academy of Sciences); multiple affiliation of B.M. is in his Alma mater and in Slovak Academy of Sciences where part of experiments was conducted. Multiple affiliation of J.Š. is in her previous (where most of the analyses were performed) and actual locations. The other authors declare no potential competing interests.

Download PDF

Reviews received at journal
05 Jan, 2026
Reviewers agreed at journal
15 Dec, 2025
Reviewers invited by journal
15 Dec, 2025
Editor assigned by journal
20 Nov, 2025
Submission checks completed at journal
20 Nov, 2025
First submitted to journal
18 Nov, 2025

You are reading this latest preprint version

Systematic Baikal seal hunting and exploitation at a single site since the Neolithic

Status:

Version 1

Abstract

Figures

Introduction

Results

Archaeology

Zooarchaeology

Ancient seal population dynamics

Pathologies

Taphonomy

Burning

Stable isotopes

Discussion

Materials and Methods

Archaeological Excavations

Zooarchaeology

Taphonomy

Reflectance of charcoal analysis

Incremental growth layer analysis

Isotope analysis

The infrared (IR) spectra of the samples

Comparative living material

Artefact analysis

Declarations

References

Additional Declarations

Supplementary Files

Status:

Version 1