1. Morphometric Variation in Ancient and Modern Sus scrofa Joseph Owen

2. This talk Is about pigs… Is about pigs… Specifically how we tell wild pigs from domestic pigs Specifically how we tell wild pigs from domestic pigs

3. What's being covered? Why we study pigs Why we study pigs The inadequacies of Biometry The inadequacies of Biometry Geometric morphometrics Geometric morphometrics - The Basics – What it is - The Basics – What it is - The Advantages - The Advantages - How is it being used - How is it being used

4. Pigs One of the major domesticates One of the major domesticates Used for fast meat production Used for fast meat production First Domesticated somewhere in south- eastern Turkey 10,500- 10,000 years ago First Domesticated somewhere in south- eastern Turkey 10,500- 10,000 years ago

5. Pigs and the European Advance Pigs have been used as proxies to chart the spread of the Neolithic Revolution Pigs have been used as proxies to chart the spread of the Neolithic Revolution Larson et al 2007 used aDNA to distinguish between wild and Domestic Larson et al 2007 used aDNA to distinguish between wild and Domestic What about those areas where there is no aDNA information? What about those areas where there is no aDNA information? Utilise all forms of information Utilise all forms of information Taken from Larson et al 2007.

6. Wild vs. Domestic Traditionally wild and domestic pigs have been told apart with size Traditionally wild and domestic pigs have been told apart with size Rutimeyer (1860) first did this with molars from Swiss lake dwellings Rutimeyer (1860) first did this with molars from Swiss lake dwellings Also applied to post-cranial skeletal material e.g. von den Driesch 1976 Also applied to post-cranial skeletal material e.g. von den Driesch 1976 Further methods include co-efficents of variation (Payne and Bull 1988) and Log Ratios (e.g. Albarella et al 2009) Further methods include co-efficents of variation (Payne and Bull 1988) and Log Ratios (e.g. Albarella et al 2009)

7. Biometrical Issues Measuring size and not shape Measuring size and not shape Wild pigs are not always bigger than domestic pigs (e.g. Island populations and insular dwarfism) Wild pigs are not always bigger than domestic pigs (e.g. Island populations and insular dwarfism) Measurements represent an order of magnitude, e.g. greatest/shortest breath, depth or length Measurements represent an order of magnitude, e.g. greatest/shortest breath, depth or length No information of the geometry between points of measurements No information of the geometry between points of measurements Size is only a rough guide to wild/domestic – its is hard to separate small wild from large domestic (see Albarella et al 2009)

8. Shape – Not Size It has been noted empirically that animal shape changes as a result of domestication (see Arbuckle 2005) It has been noted empirically that animal shape changes as a result of domestication (see Arbuckle 2005) But do we know how? But do we know how? This project is attempting to quantify how the skull (chosen for its lower plasticity than the post cranial skeleton) changes with domestication This project is attempting to quantify how the skull (chosen for its lower plasticity than the post cranial skeleton) changes with domestication It will investigate genetic and epigenetic causes of intraspecific variation It will investigate genetic and epigenetic causes of intraspecific variation

9. Geometric Morphometrics (GMM) Is a statistical technique that has been developed mainly over the last 10-20 years Is a statistical technique that has been developed mainly over the last 10-20 years Landmark GMM is based around the creation of a configuration of landmarks, each configuration representing a single skull Landmark GMM is based around the creation of a configuration of landmarks, each configuration representing a single skull Each landmark is Biologically and Mathematically Homologus Each landmark is Biologically and Mathematically Homologus

10. GMM The Basics Generalised Procrustes Analysis Generalised Procrustes Analysis This scales, locates and translates the configurations of landmarks relative to the average (or a set reference) configuration This scales, locates and translates the configurations of landmarks relative to the average (or a set reference) configuration As a result the only difference between each configuration of landmarks will be shape As a result the only difference between each configuration of landmarks will be shape Size can be re-introduced (and correlated with shape variables through uni-variant and multi-variant regressions) Size can be re-introduced (and correlated with shape variables through uni-variant and multi-variant regressions)

11. GMM – The Advantages Deals with shape Deals with shape Results in data that may be used for multivariate statistics Results in data that may be used for multivariate statistics Visualisation Visualisation The geometry of the shape is preserved, and the space between landmarks is represented by the ‘bending energy’ of the thin plate spline The geometry of the shape is preserved, and the space between landmarks is represented by the ‘bending energy’ of the thin plate spline This is based on the difference between configurations of shapes and This is based on the difference between configurations of shapes and

12. Methodology 69 unilateral homologus landmarks have been chosen 69 unilateral homologus landmarks have been chosen 44 on the cranium and 25 on the mandible 44 on the cranium and 25 on the mandible Teeth although included are being investigated elsewhere Teeth although included are being investigated elsewhere Projected sample set size is 400 – all ‘modern’ from museum collections, attempting to avoid products of intensive breeding Projected sample set size is 400 – all ‘modern’ from museum collections, attempting to avoid products of intensive breeding

13. Principle Components Analysis Is used to simplify results and reduce the degrees of freedom Is used to simplify results and reduce the degrees of freedom It ranks co-variance factors according to how much variance each one describes It ranks co-variance factors according to how much variance each one describes So the first principle component will describe the most variance, and the last the least variance So the first principle component will describe the most variance, and the last the least variance Each principle component is given an eigenvalue to show how much variance they describe Each principle component is given an eigenvalue to show how much variance they describe

14. Error? Based on O’Higgins Based on O’Higgins and Jones 1998 and Jones 1998

15. Wild vs. Domestic PCA of right mandible

16. Wild vs. Domestic PCA of right cranium

17. Other Questions What questions are being asked of the data? What questions are being asked of the data? How does the skull co-vary between wild and domestic and what areas of he skull co-vary most How does the skull co-vary between wild and domestic and what areas of he skull co-vary most Albarella et al 2009 notice a size change across Europe – can this be replicated? Also does climate affect shape? Albarella et al 2009 notice a size change across Europe – can this be replicated? Also does climate affect shape? Allometric (shape change related to size) and Ontogentic (shape change related to age) trajectories – a usefull study as it may reveal at what age shape differences between wild and domestic pigs emerge Allometric (shape change related to size) and Ontogentic (shape change related to age) trajectories – a usefull study as it may reveal at what age shape differences between wild and domestic pigs emerge Other questions include sexual dimorphism, Asymmetry, and links to the aDNA studies as being carried out by Greger Larson and Linus Girdland Flink et al Other questions include sexual dimorphism, Asymmetry, and links to the aDNA studies as being carried out by Greger Larson and Linus Girdland Flink et al

18. The Purpose By working out exactly what is happening we may come to understand exactly why it is happening By working out exactly what is happening we may come to understand exactly why it is happening May show which areas of the skull show most covariance May show which areas of the skull show most covariance Highlight which factors affect shape the most Highlight which factors affect shape the most Will provide a baseline from which future analysis may draw upon Will provide a baseline from which future analysis may draw upon

19. Visualisation EVAN (European Visual Network in Anthropology) new software (due in the spring) EVAN (European Visual Network in Anthropology) new software (due in the spring)

20. Bibliography Albarella, U., Dobney, K., and Rowley Conwy, P., 2009 Size and Shape of the Eurasian wild boar (Sus scrofa), with a view to the reconstruction of its Holocene history. Environmental Archaeology 14 (2) 103-136. Albarella, U., Dobney, K., and Rowley Conwy, P., 2009 Size and Shape of the Eurasian wild boar (Sus scrofa), with a view to the reconstruction of its Holocene history. Environmental Archaeology 14 (2) 103-136. Arbuckle, S. Experimental animal domestication and its application to the study of animal exploitation in pre history. In Vigne, J-D, Peters, J. and Helmer, D. (eds.) 2005. The First Steps of Animal Domestication: New Archaeological Approaches. Proceedings of the 9th ICAZ Conference Durham. Oxbow Books. Oxford. 18-34. Arbuckle, S. Experimental animal domestication and its application to the study of animal exploitation in pre history. In Vigne, J-D, Peters, J. and Helmer, D. (eds.) 2005. The First Steps of Animal Domestication: New Archaeological Approaches. Proceedings of the 9th ICAZ Conference Durham. Oxbow Books. Oxford. 18-34. Larson, G et al 2007 Ancient DNA, pig domestication, and the spread of the Neolithic into Europe. PNAS.15276-15281 Larson, G et al 2007 Ancient DNA, pig domestication, and the spread of the Neolithic into Europe. PNAS.15276-15281 O’Higgins, P., and Jones, N., 1998. Facial growth in Cercocebus torquatus: an application of three dimensional geometric morphometric techniques to the study of morphological variation. J.Anat 193: 251-272. O’Higgins, P., and Jones, N., 1998. Facial growth in Cercocebus torquatus: an application of three dimensional geometric morphometric techniques to the study of morphological variation. J.Anat 193: 251-272.  Payne, S., and Bull, G., 1988. Components of variation in measurements of pig bones and teeth, and the use of measurements to distinguish wild from domestic remains. ArchaeoZoologia 2: 27-65. Zelditch et al 2004 Geometric Morphometrics for Biologists: A Primer Zelditch et al 2004 Geometric Morphometrics for Biologists: A Primer With thanks to NERC, The Leverhume Trust, My Supervisors - Keith Dobney, Una Strand Vidarsdottir and Peter Rowley Conwy and also to the organisers of PZAF With thanks to NERC, The Leverhume Trust, My Supervisors - Keith Dobney, Una Strand Vidarsdottir and Peter Rowley Conwy and also to the organisers of PZAF