FIG. 12. — Comparison of wear produced by the fluvial transport experiment (A and C) and the wear present in the archaeological record from artifacts in channel lag deposits (B and D). Scale bars: 100 µm. Credits: Aline Galland. TABLE 2. — Synthesis of taphonomic microwear types and their relative abundance,comparing experiments and the depositional environments in the archaeological record. The scale indicates the degree of development of each microwear category: (-) not observed or only present as highly localized traces, and relative abundance (+, present; ++, abundant; +++, very abundant).
| Context |
Striation |
Microwear Scarring Rounding Microfracturing |
Polish |
| Fluvial transport_Sand |
- |
+ |
+++ |
+++ |
- |
| Fluvial transport_Silt |
- |
- |
+++ |
+++ |
- |
| Fluvial transport_Clay |
- |
- |
+++ |
+ |
+++ |
| Aeolian abrasion (1min) |
- |
+ |
- |
- |
- |
| Aeolian abrasion (5min) |
- |
++ |
- |
+++ |
- |
| Channel lags |
- |
++ |
++ |
+++ |
- |
| Point bar |
- |
+ |
+ |
++ |
- |
| Floodplain |
- |
++ |
++ |
+++ |
++ |