Micromammal remains from Areni-1 Cave, Armenia

Abstract

The cave site Areni-1, located in south-eastern Armenia, which has been excavated during 2007-
2013, yielded rich assemblages of micromammal remains from the Late Chalcolithic and Medieval sequences.
In this research the tooth remains of found micromammals are reported.The tooth remains belong to (3) orders
including; 1) Order Rodentia: fam. Muridae, fam. Cricetidae, fam. Gerbillidae, fam. Arvicolidae, fam.
Dipodidae, fam. Soricidae and fam. Sciuridae. 2) Order Lagomorpha: fam. Ochotonidae 3) Order
Chiroptera.Presented research in based on morphologic and morphometric methods using modern comparative
neontological specimens of the osteological collection in NAS RA Institute of Zoology.Based on this study,
paleoenvironmental aspects in Areni have been discussed, showing that the environmental interpretations drawn
from the Areni-1 cave rodents are based on the use of modern analogues and the assumption that ecological
requirements and/or behaviour have remained constant for both the rodents and the accumulating agency.

Full text

IOSR Journal of Humanities And Social Science (IOSR-JHSS)
Volume 21, Issue 10, Ver. 4 (October.2016) PP 20-25
e-ISSN: 2279-0837, p-ISSN: 2279-0845.
www.iosrjournals.org
DOI: 10.9790/0837-2110042025 www.iosrjournals.org 20 | Page
Micromammal remains from Areni-1 Cave, Armenia
N. Zarikian1, B. Gasparyan2
1 Institute of Archaeology and Ethnography, National Academy science of Republic of Armenia.
2 Institute of Archaeology and Ethnography, National Academy science of Republic of Armenia.
Abstract:- The cave site Areni-1, located in south-eastern Armenia, which has been excavated during 2007-
2013, yielded rich assemblages of micromammal remains from the Late Chalcolithic and Medieval sequences.
In this research the tooth remains of found micromammals are reported.The tooth remains belong to (3) orders
including; 1) Order Rodentia: fam. Muridae, fam. Cricetidae, fam. Gerbillidae, fam. Arvicolidae, fam.
Dipodidae, fam. Soricidae and fam. Sciuridae. 2) Order Lagomorpha: fam. Ochotonidae 3) Order
Chiroptera.Presented research in based on morphologic and morphometric methods using modern comparative
neontological specimens of the osteological collection in NAS RA Institute of Zoology.Based on this study,
paleoenvironmental aspects in Areni have been discussed, showing that the environmental interpretations drawn
from the Areni-1 cave rodents are based on the use of modern analogues and the assumption that ecological
requirements and/or behavior have remained constant for both the rodents and the accumulating agency.
Key words: Areni, Chiroptera, Lagomorpha, micromammals, paleoenvironment, Rodentia, tooth remains.
I. INTRODUCTION
In this study, rodent and lagomorph assemblages from Areni-1 cave located in south-eastern Armenia
were studied. Since caves and rock shelters are used as shelters by animals including predators and scavengers,
they often contain the remains of these animals and their food and hence fossil and remains evidence of past
animal populations (Burke and Cinq-Mars, 1996; Heaton et al., 1996). The main aspects of the archaeological
records of pellets from micromammals in archeological studies are that it can represent the linkage between
zoology and archaeology (Chaline1972, Andrews1990, Darvish, 1992, Darvish et al., 2000). The results of
taxonomic identification and quantification and distribution of these remains prove that the rodent remains, are
useful in paleontology and archaeology, because of their abundance in fossil remains also for data preparing in
continental remains by rodents biostratigraphy. Also, the rodent remains hold the greatest potential for
archaeologists for monitoring palaeoenviroments because they are more sensitive to changes in the local
environments of an archaeological site than are larger mammals (Redding, 1978). An abundant literature is now
available about the ecology (Gårding, 2000; Lindström et al., 2001), development (Salazar-Ciudad & Jernvall,
2001) and biogeography and identification of palaeoenviroment of each taxon.We carried out a detailed
taphonomic analysis of the Rodent, Lagomorha and Chiroptera remains in order to understand the taphonomic
imprints in this assemblage. A taphonomic analysis permits us to discover the recorded digestion, breakage and
burnt of specimens and also the age of this assemblage. Our taphonomic study by scanning microscope confirms
also that the rodent remains displayed generally the fractures and corrosion marks which are the typical signs of
predation (Andrews, 1990). In addition, this research was performed on the basis of morphologic and
morphometric methods and comparison with modern osteological collections. The key of determination of
rodents species are from (Corbet, 1978, Harrison et al., 1991, Shidlovski, 1976), which is a faunal adjusted key
of Caucasia rodents and the classification of Rodentia (Wilson and Reeder, 2005).
II. MATERIALS AND METHODS
Areni Cave-1 is located in Vayots Dzor region, near the tributary of the Arpa River Gnishik: at 30 m
height. 110km far from Yerevan, stablished in IV mil. BC (Fig.1,2). It is situated just behind the riverside
restaurant, in the rock (on the right, when turning to the gorge). The cave comprises a range of spaces, hewn in
the rock, linked with narrow aisles. In the upper parts of the cliff it has several holes of fewer diameters. The
exit is partially covered with large stones. This cave belongs to clastocarstic caves, because it originated in
limestone conglomerates. Since 2007 archaeological researches have been held here. As a result, materials
dating back to 4200-3500 BC were found: plant residues, crockery, grape and apricot kernels, pieces of cloth,
knitted of reed, women jewelry, part of the mummified goat body and many animal bones.

Micromammal remains from Areni-1 Cave, Armenia
DOI: 10.9790/0837-2110042025 www.iosrjournals.org 21 | Page
Figure 1 Areni location Figure 2 Areni-1 cave
The picked remains were belonging to four trenches in Areni-1 cave (Fig. 3). A great number of remains were
collected after the systematic dry sieving of the sediments from the Cave. The remains mainly belong to the
different families of rodents and a small part of specimens belong to Lagomorphs and Chiropteras. The
zooarchaeological material contained cranial and post cranial parts were sorted anatomically and then washed
with HCL (5%).The preservation conditions are unequal according to different localities. Measurements of the
material were made with the aid of measuring microscope with accuracy 0.001 mm. In addition, their
morphological features were investigated by stereomicroscope. All recovered fragments were measured when
possible. . The identification of Rodentia was based on the teeth and sometimes on all elements.
Figure 3. Areni-1 cave topoplan
III. RESULT AND DISCUSSION
The density of the remains was different in each trench. Approximately 13 species remains have been
recovered so far, mainly belonging to the order Rodentia but also including remains of order Lagomorpha and
Chiroptera. The list of the identified specimens is reported in Table1. The species belong to different ecological
niches which can provide a picture of the past landscapes around the site.
Factors such as physiological tolerance, food resources, competition, predation and sheltering conditions
seriously affected the local distribution of rodent species and feed us important information paleoenviroment of
the site.

Micromammal remains from Areni-1 Cave, Armenia
DOI: 10.9790/0837-2110042025 www.iosrjournals.org 22 | Page
Table.1. Species composition of the micromammals from Areni-1 Cave
Taxa
Common
name
T1
T2
T3
T4
MNI
NISP
NISP%
Density
/m2
Order
Rodentia
fam.
Arvicolidae
Ellobius
lutescens
Mole-vole
-
+
+
+
5
9
7.25
0.04
fam.
Cricetidae
Cricetulus
migratorius
Migratory
hamester
+
+
+
-
10
14
11.29
0.06
Cricetus
cricetus
Common
hamster
-
-
+
-
2
3
2.41
0.01
Mesocricetus
auratus
Golden
hamster
-
+
+
-
9
15
12.09
0.06
fam.
Dipodidae
Allactaga
elater
Small
five-toed
jerboa
-
+
+
-
12
20
16.12
0.08
fam.
Gerbillidae
Microtus
sp.
vole
+
+
+
-
15
20
16.12
0.078
Meriones
tristrami
Tristram’s
jird
-
+
+
-
3
8
6.45
0.03
fam. Muridae
Mus
musculus
House
mouse
-
+
+
-
3
4
3.22
0.01
Apodemus
sylvaticus
Common
field
mouse
-
+
-
-
1
4
3.22
0.01
fam.
Sciuridae
Spermophilus
citellus
European
souslik
-
-
+
-
2
5
4.03
0.02
Order
Soricomorpha
fam.
Soricidae
Crocidura
suaveolens
White-
teeth
shrew
-
-
+
-
1
2
1.61
0.008
Order
Lagomorpha
fam.
Ochotonidae
Ochotona
rufescens
Rufescent
Pika
-
+
+
-
7
10
8.06
0.04
Order
Chiroptera
-
+
+
-
3
10
8.06
0.04
Total
73
124

Micromammal remains from Areni-1 Cave, Armenia
DOI: 10.9790/0837-2110042025 www.iosrjournals.org 23 | Page
The occurrence of micromammals in fossil deposits owes mainly to birds of prey or mammalian
carnivores (Canidae, Mus- telidae). Particularly, nocturnal birds of prey (owls) regurgitate rather well-preserved
bone and teeth. The dietary spectrum of these animals consists of up to 90% of micromammals. Although owls
(especialy Eurasian eagle-owl) and presumably other predators are capable of bearing prey some 20km from
their source the evidence was the owl bones remains in Areni-1 also confirmed by the fractures and corrosion
marks on some bones. The Armenia’s animal biodiversity determined that most faunal remains discovered in
Areni Cave originated within a radius of about 5-10 km from the cave entrance. Thus, one might reasonably
assume that most small animals preserved at Areni were taken close to the cave.The paleoecological analysis
referred rodents remains recorded in Armenia to particular living spaces (rock, grassland, moist steppe,
woodland, sand dunes). Of the species recorded at Areni the following can be referred to as grassland dwellers:
C. migratorius, Meriones tristrami (fig.12), Microtus sp. (M. arvalis) (fig6), Ellobius lutescens (fig.10) (also
refers to a height700-2500m) and Spermophilus citellus (fig.13). Woodland dwellers is Apodemus sylvaticus
(fig. 9) and meadow dweller is Mus musculus (fig.11), while Crocidura suaveolens (fig.7) preferred habitat
is scrub and gardens and Ochotona rufescens (fig.8) occurs in mountainous regions. This suggests the
existence of a mosaic of habitats in the vicinity of Areni Cave.The species Allactaga elater has the biggest value
of MNI (12) and NISP (20) (Fig. 4) A. elater lives in areas with sparse and dense vegetation which consist of
various kinds of halophytes, such as Alhagi camelorum, Artemisetum, Halocmemum, Halostachys, Halidium and
Salsoletum verrucosae. Also fed on wheat and sunflower seeds, green parts of various plants (trifolium,
graminae), apple, carrot and drunken water. Which is matches the archaeobotanical remains of Areni-1 cave
(Smith, et al.2014).A. elater shares its environment with another rodent species (ÇOLAK, et al. 1997); Meriones
tristrami, Mus musculus, Cricetulus migratorius and Mesocricetus auratus (fig.5). M. auratus is the most
abundant species co-occurring with A. elater.The density of rodent’s taxa in Areni-1 cave (table 1.) suggests that
this population of rodents probably found food on this site on a regular basis, as would be the case with an
agricultural community.
0 5 10 15 20 25
Ellobius lutescens
Cricetulus migratorius
Cricetus cricetus
Mesocricetus auratus
Allactaga elater
Microtus sp.
Meriones tristrami
Mus musculus
Apodemus sylvaticus
Spermophilus citellus
Crocidura suaveolens
Ochotona rufescens
Chiroptera
NISP
MNI
Figure 4 MNI of Areni-1 cave species remains.
Thus, the environmental interpretations drawn from the Areni-1 cave rodents are based on the use of
modern analogues and the assumption that ecological requirements and/or behavior have remained constant for
both the rodents and the accumulating agency. The Areni’s rodent fauna comprises taxa that prefer different but
often overlapping microhabitats. These include riverine thickets, woodlands, and grasslands. Because
Gerbillinae as a group is an indicator of open conditions, while Murinae are typically considered to be more
abundant in closed environments (Dauphin et al., 1994; Denys et al., 1996), the higher representation of taxa
allied to the latter group at Areni-1cave suggest, that forested and mesic micro-environments dominated over
open grassland/woodland habitats. By and large, all the rodent genera from Areni are extant and these provide
some of the earliest appearances of the genera in Armenia and Caucasia.

Micromammal remains from Areni-1 Cave, Armenia
DOI: 10.9790/0837-2110042025 www.iosrjournals.org 24 | Page
Figure 5 Mesocricetus auratus
teeth
Figure 6 Microtus sp. teeth
Figure 7 Crocidura suaveolens
teeth
Figure 8 Ochotona rufescens
teeth
Figure 9 Apodemus sylvaticus
teeth
Figure 10 Ellobius lutescens
teeth
Figure 11 Mus musculus
Figure 12 Meriones tristrami
Figure 13 Spermophilus
citellus
REFERENCES
[1] Adamian M. S., Klem D. Jr. Field guide to the birds of Armenia. Oakland, 1997, AUA Press.
[2] Adamian M. S., Klem D. Jr.Handbook of the birds of Armenia. Oakland, 1999, AUA Press.
[3] Andrews P. Owls, Caves and Fossils .University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1990.
[4] Burke A., Cinq-Mars J. Dental characteristics of Late Pleistocene Equus lambei from the Bluefish Caves,
Yukon Territory, and their comparison with Eurasian horses, 1996. Géographie physique et Quaternaries
50:81 – 93.

Micromammal remains from Areni-1 Cave, Armenia
DOI: 10.9790/0837-2110042025 www.iosrjournals.org 25 | Page
[5] Chaline J. Les rongeurs du Pleistocene moyen et superieur de France.- Cahiers de Paleontologie du
CNRS, 1972. Paris, 410 pp.
[6] Çolak E., Kıvanç E., Yiğit, N. Taxonomic Status and Karyology of Allactaga elater aralychensis
Satunin, 1901 (Rodentia: Dipodidae) in Turkey, (1997b). Turkish Journal of Zoology. 21: 355-360. [In
Turkish]
[7] Corbet, G.B. The mammals of the Palaearctic region. A taxonomic review. British Museum of Natural
History London, 1978, pp.314.
[8] Dahl S.K. Fauna of the Armenian SSR. vol. I. Vertebrates. Yerevan, Publishing House of the Academy of
Sciences of the Armenian SSR, 1954. 415 p. [in Russian]
[9] Darvish J., Ghieasi A., Khosravi M. Identification of rodents remaines in Robat sharaf of Sarakhs
(Khorassan) by the aid of morphological and neontological study, Journal of Science, Alzahra University,
2000, Vol.12, No.1, p.31-44.
[10] Darvish,J. Preliminary study of the fauna of rodents in the Northern Khorassn with the aid of pellets from
the prey birds, Pests and plant diseases magazine, 1992,Vol.59, No.1,2, P.33-43.
[11] Denys C., Williams C.T., Dauphin Y., Andrews P., Ferndandez-Jalvo Y. Diagenetical changes in
Pleistocene small mammal bones from Olduvai Bed I. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology,
Palaeoecology, 1996.
[12] Dubois-Dauphin M., Frankowski H., Tsujimoto Y., Huarte J., Martinou J.C. Neonatal motoneurons
overexpressing the Bcl-2 protooncogene in transgenic mice are protected from axotomy-induced cell
death, 1994. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 91:2459 –2463.
[13] Garding L. A simple model for interplay of predators, rodents and foot. Journal of Theoretical Biology,
2000, 206: 73–80.
[14] Gromov I.M., Erbaeva M.A. 1995. Mammals of Russia and adjacent territories. Lagomorphs and rodents
(ed. A. Aristov and GI Baranova). St. Petersburg, Zool. Institute of Russian Academy of Sciences, 1995.
552. [in Russian]
[15] Harrison D.L., Bates P.J.J. The mammals of Arabia. Harrison Zoological Museum Publ. Sevenoaks
1991.
[16] Heaton T.H., Talbot S.L., Shields G. An ice age refugium for large mammals in the Alexander
Archipelago, southeastern Alaska, 1996. Quaternary Research 46:186 – 192.
[17] Kalantaryan M.A. 1952. New data about porcupine in Armenia, Academy of Sciences of the Armenian
SSR, vol. 5, №4, 1952. [in Russian]
[18] Lindstrom J., Ranta E., Kkko H., Lundberg P., Kaitala V. From arctic lemmings to adaptive dynamics:
Charles Elton’s legacy in population ecology, 2001. Biological Reviews 76: 129–158.
[19] Pavlinov I.J. Systematics of modern mammals.Studies on the fauna. M., 2003. 293. [in Russian]
[20] Redding W. R. Rodents and the archaeological palaeoenvironment: Considerations, problems and future.
Approaches to faunal analysis in the Middle East. R. H. Meadow and M. A. Zeder Harvard, Peabody
Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, 1978. Peabody Museum Bulletin 2:63-68.
[21] Sahakyan L.V. Some of the environmental issues and the current state of the populations of Asia Minor
ground squirrel Spermophilus xanthoprymnus (Bennett, 1835) in Armenia. 2006. Bull. Moscow Society
of Naturalists, Dep. biol, t 3, number 5:.. 65-68. [in Russian]
[22] Salazar-Ciudad I., Jernvall J. A gene network model accounting for development and evolution of
mammalian teeth. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 2002, 99:8116–8120.
[23] Sidlovskij M.V. Opredelitel gryzunov zakavkazja. Akademij a nauk Gruzinkoj SSR, 1976, Tbilisi.
[24] Smith A., Bagoyan T., Gabrielyan I., Pinhasi R., Gasparyan B. Late Chalcolithic and Medieval
Archaeobotanical Remains from Areni-1 (Birds’ Cave), Armenia, in B. Gasparyan and M. Arimura
(Eds.), Stone Age of Armenia, A Guide-book to the Stone Age Archaeology in the Republic of Armenia,
2014.
[25] Wilson D. E. & Reeder D. M. (editors) Mammal Species of the World. A Taxonomic and Geographic
Reference (3rd ed), 2005. Johns Hopkins University Press, 2,142 pp. (Available from Johns Hopkins
University Press, 1-800-537-5487 or (410) 516-6900, or at http://www.press.jhu.edu).