Geology topics

George T. Jefferson

Publications and source records attributed to George T. Jefferson.

5 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2025

Pleistocene porcupine (Erethizontidae) records in arid southwestern North America and comparisons with the modern distribution of Erethizon dorsatum in southern California and Arizona

he North American porcupine ( Erethizon dorsatum ) is widely distributed throughout many ecosystems on the continent from northern Mexico to the Arctic Ocean, except for the southeastern portion of the United States. Habitats include the arid Desert Southwest region where modern records are generally sparse. The paleogeographic range in the Desert Southwest is not unlike the modern distribution of Erethizon , with some exceptions. Although there are early Pleistocene records of Erethizon for southern California, no late Pleistocene records (Rancholabrean North American Land Mammal Age [NALMA]) are known for Imperial, Inyo, Riverside, or San Bernardino Counties in southern California or in Mexico. This is surprising given late-Pleistocene records in Arizona, Nevada, and New Mexico and modern records from southern California and Mexico. Pleistocene habitats for porcupines were similar to those occupied today, just at different elevations due to differing climates. Modern preferred habitats in the Desert Southwest include conifer-clad high-elevation areas and associated pinyon pine / juniper belts, and occasionally riparian corridors in desert environments. The overall rarity of porcupines today in arid parts of the Desert Southwest is likely due to the combination of increasing aridity in the region during the Holocene, past persecution by humans, and increasing predator populations.

Arizona, California↗

USGS2021

Western pond turtles in the Mojave Desert? A review of their past, present, and possible future

= The western pond turtle ( WPT ) was formerly considered a single species ( Actinemys or Emys marmorata ) that ranged from southern British Columbia, Canada to Baja California, México. More recently it was divided into a northern and a southern species. WPTs are found primarily in streams that drain into the Pacific Ocean, although scattered populations exist in endorheic drainages of the Great Basin and Mojave deserts. Populations in the Mojave Desert were long thought to be restricted to the Mojave River, but recently another population was documented in Piute Ponds, a terminal wetland complex associated with Amargosa Creek on Edwards Air Force Base. WPT fossils in the Mojave Desert are known from the Miocene to the Pleistocene. Recently, Pleistocene fossils have been found as far into the desert as Salt Springs, just south of Death Valley. The oldest fossil records suggest that WPTs were present in wetlands and drainages of the geological feature known as the Mojave block prior to the uplift of the Sierra Nevada Range about 8 Ma and prior to the ~ 3 Ma uplift of the Transverse Ranges. Archaeological records document use of turtles by Native Americans for food and cultural purposes 1,000 or more years ago at the Cronese Lakes on the lower Mojave River and Oro Grande on the upper river. The first modern publication documenting their presence in the Mojave River was 1861. Museum specimens were collected as early as 1937. These fossil and early literature records support the indigenous status of WPTs to the Mojave River. However, mtDNA -based genetic evidence shows that Mojave River turtles share an identical haplotype with turtles on the California coast. Limited nuclear data show some minor differences. Overdraft of water from the Mojave River for municipal and agricultural uses, urban development, and saltcedar expansion are threats to the continued survival of WPTs in the Mojave River.

California, Nevada↗

USGS2018

Holen et al. reply

Contrary to our hypothesis that the Cerutti Mastodon (CM) site represents a 130,000-year-old archaeological site, in the accompanying Comment Ferraro et al . argue that the site formed through ‘common’ geological and taphonomic processes. As a source for the cobbles that we interpreted as hammerstones and anvils, they postulate a previously unrecognized alluvial fan, later removed by fluvial winnowing that somehow left our five cobbles, refitting flakes, and fragments of stone, mastodon bone and teeth in place. There is no sedimentological or geomorphic evidence of an alluvial fan, and their scenario leaves unexplained a number of taphonomic features, including the two discrete concentrations in which were found cobbles, refit stones and bones, impact-fractured bones, side-by-side femoral heads and a tusk oriented vertically.

Nature↗

USGS2017

Disparate perspectives on evidence from the Cerutti Mastodon site: A reply to Braje et al.

The Perspective editorial by Braje, T., T. D. Dillehay, J. M. Erlandson, S. M. Fitzpatrick, D. K. Grayson, V. T. Holliday, R. L. Kelly, R. G. Klein, D. J. Meltzer, and T. C. Rick (2017. “Were Hominins in California ∼130,000 Years Ago?” PaleoAmerica 3 (3): 200–202) takes issue with our argument [Holen, S. R., T. A. Deméré, D. C. Fisher, R. Fullagar, J. B. Paces, G. T. Jefferson, J. M. Beeton, et al. (2017. “A 130,000-Year-Old Archaeological Site in Southern California, USA.” Nature 544 (7651): 479–483) that the assemblage of bones and stones at the Cerutti Mastodon (CM) site implicates hominin activity in site formation 130,000 years ago. Braje et al. propose instead that features of the CM site can be better explained by geological or other causes unrelated to ancient human activity. However, we contend that their conclusion reflects an incomplete assessment of our evidence. They further propose a standard of evidence at odds with current practice in the philosophy of science, and misuse a commonly quoted aphorism that “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.”

California↗

USGS2017

Broken bones and hammerstones at the Cerutti Mastodon site: A reply to Haynes

Haynes [2017 “The Cerutti Mastodon.” PaleoAmerica 3 (3): 196–199] criticizes numerous aspects of our analysis of the Cerutti Mastodon (CM) site, but central among his points is the claim that heavy equipment broke the bones and stones that we interpret as evidence of ancient human activity. This notion can be discounted primarily because most of the relevant CM fragments were found coated in thick crusts of pedogenic carbonate clearly showing that breakage occurred thousands of years ago. Haynes also raises questions about site stratigraphy, radiometric dating, and absence of other artifactual evidence. The stratigraphic context of CM bones and rocks is well-defined, and the Pleistocene site stratigraphy remained intact before excavation. Knapped stone tools are not a requirement in bone processing archaeological sites. In the absence of other plausible explanations for the multiple lines of evidence, we maintain that hominins broke the CM bones using stone hammers and anvils.

California↗