Quantifying taxonomic proportions allows the individual to classify taxa in order to retain data on subsistence and paleoenvironmental reconstruction. As such, we will be discussing three different methods used for quantify taxonomic proportions are a) NISP (Number of Identified Specimens), b) MNI (Minimum Number Individuals, and c) bone weight.
NISP (Numbered of Identified Specimens) allows researchers to obtain a number (or count) for each identified specimens. In other words, it is sorting taxa into identified species. To do this (or to calculate NISP) the researcher adds up NISP by taxa. For example: out of a sample bones, I have separated them artiodactyla from rodentia by species, then obtained a numbered count for how many there were of each. Thus, the NISP.
Quantifying taxa by NISP is: simple, time effective and can be replicated in the future by researchers to obtain …show more content…
For example: if you have three left elk femurs, then the minimum amount of elks available is three. To calculate this, you quantify the occurrence of each portion of bone (the text identifies that some may use age, size, or graphic overlays) or landmark by side, and take as the MNI maximum value (L & R) equals the minimum distinction. This number occurs only in whole numbers and not fractions.
One advantage of MNI is that it takes care of the NISP negatives dealing with fragmentation differentials or interdependence. However, the MNI has a tendency to inflate importance of rare taxa (or make it looks like there more), implies completeness (in how this is calculated) and aggregation (or how it could appear to be something it is not, due to how the data all falls together. Another negative associated is the differential meat yield (how a big bone may be associated with more meat (false) or how meat yield could work to implicate subsistence
NISP (Numbered of Identified Specimens) allows researchers to obtain a number (or count) for each identified specimens. In other words, it is sorting taxa into identified species. To do this (or to calculate NISP) the researcher adds up NISP by taxa. For example: out of a sample bones, I have separated them artiodactyla from rodentia by species, then obtained a numbered count for how many there were of each. Thus, the NISP.
Quantifying taxa by NISP is: simple, time effective and can be replicated in the future by researchers to obtain …show more content…
For example: if you have three left elk femurs, then the minimum amount of elks available is three. To calculate this, you quantify the occurrence of each portion of bone (the text identifies that some may use age, size, or graphic overlays) or landmark by side, and take as the MNI maximum value (L & R) equals the minimum distinction. This number occurs only in whole numbers and not fractions.
One advantage of MNI is that it takes care of the NISP negatives dealing with fragmentation differentials or interdependence. However, the MNI has a tendency to inflate importance of rare taxa (or make it looks like there more), implies completeness (in how this is calculated) and aggregation (or how it could appear to be something it is not, due to how the data all falls together. Another negative associated is the differential meat yield (how a big bone may be associated with more meat (false) or how meat yield could work to implicate subsistence