Dear Aurélie,

Really interesting find. A student from my laboratory submitted me a long bone fragment  from Brazil showing exactly the same kind of modification on surface. 

In any case, these "cupules" are not dermestid pupal chambers and do not result from subterranean termites action. 

....but the problem still has not been resolved :(

Good luck,

Kindest regards,

Jean-Bernard


Dr Jean-Bernard Huchet, PhD
UMR 7209, Archéozoologie, Archéobotanique
Sociétés, pratiques et environnements 
Muséum national d'Histoire naturelle
CP 56, 55 rue Buffon 75005 Paris - France
Tel: 33(01) 40 79 32 74
[log in to unmask]

Muséum national d'Histoire naturelle,
Institut de Systématique, Evolution et Biodiversité
ISYEB, UMR 7205  CNRS MNHN UPMC EPHE
CP 50 (Entomologie), 75231 Paris Cedex 05 - France

UMR 5199 du CNRS, PACEA
Anthropologie des populations passées et présentes
Université de Bordeaux
Bât. B 8, allée Geoffroy St Hilaire, CS 50023
33615 Pessac Cedex - France
Tel: 33(05) 40 00 25 48
[log in to unmask]



========================================

Message du : 22/04/2015 11:00
De : "Aurelie Guidez " <[log in to unmask]>
A : [log in to unmask]
Copie à :
Sujet : Re: [ZOOARCH] Strange little makrs


Hi all,

First, thank you for your ideas, to everyone who took the time to take a look at my mistery.

I had already thought about insect pupation chambers but the regularity, number and size of my marks made me dismiss that idea. From what I saw in the various paper references you indicated, I think they are too small and too superficial, and so am still not convinced.

As for a chemical corrosion explanation, I agree with you Richard. As I told Christian, I didn't go that way because of the regularity of the marks but would be more than ready to explore that lead if anyone could provide an example of such a phenomenon.

Richard, I couldn't find the article you mentionned, but from the extract and the image you included, I must say I have the same objections as above. The marks on my bones are very rarely above 1mm in diameter, and when they are, it seems like the fusion of two too close pits. They are also never more than 1-1,5 mm deep. That will also answer your question. What you probably see on the bone in the right of the picture are some pits whit sharper edges. They create a shadow that make it look like it's deeper but it's not.

I'm not giving up! I hope I'll fing a suitable explanation. If anyone has an other idea, please share, I'll consider any and every lead!

Cheers,

Aurélie.

--
Aurélie Guidez

Doctorante - PhD Student
[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]
[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]
Université
            de Strasbourg
UMR 7044 - Archimède
Ostéothèque du Musée Zoologique de Strasbourg
29 boulevard de la Victoire
F - 67000 Strasbourg
http://archimede.unistra.fr/membres/doctorants/aurelie-guidez/

Le 22/04/2015 05:24, Richard Wright a écrit :
[log in to unmask]" type="cite">
Aurélie 

I have never seen anything like the marks you illustrate. They are a challenge.

Christian suggests the possibility of chemical corrosion. My problem is that I can't see what corrosive agent could produce marks, in cortical bone, that were so consistent in shape and size, and separated from each other.

So my bet is borings by some invertebrate organism. To that extent I agree with Adam's post suggesting dermestsid beetles.

However your marks are virtually all roughly circular, and so do not mimic the elongated pupal chambers of dermestids.

Interestingly, Hasiotis (Sedimentary Geology 167 (2004) 177–268) discusses borings on dinosaur bones that seem to closely resemble those you have. He describes them thus:


START QUOTE
(C) Small hemispherical borings on the surface of a femur of D4.18. Type 18—circular to elliptical borings in dinosaur bone, Fig. 13C–H

Description: Predominantly circular to slightly elliptical in plan-view, the borings are preserved as molds and casts within the bone and are shallow hemispheres typically 0.01–4.0 mm deep. Some elliptical pits appear to be incomplete borings. The borings range from 0.5–1, 2.5–3, and 4–5.0 mm in diameter. Clusters of borings are random with no particular distribution between borings. Some skeletal elements contain both small and large borings, but one size always dominates the bone surface. Borings from different quarries have similar diameters, shapes, and distributions across bone surfaces. None of the dinosaur bones examined contain deep or fully penetrating holes or trails.

Occurrence: Dinosaur bone borings were observed in quarries in the Brushy Basin Member in Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming.

Tracemaker: The morphologies suggest that these borings were most likely produced by the larvae of carrion beetles (Coleoptera: Dermestidae) and are very similar to the traces of modern dermestids(Fig. 13G–H)." 
END QUOTE


In case you can't get to Hasiotis's original article, there is an image of Fig. 13C at  https://app.box.com/s/f1r7ece5menr1rucboe8kk50x7b7ez0v

A final question. Among the pits, are there any deeper borings that turn into tunnels that are perpendicular to the surface of the cortical bone? In the image with three separate bones, I wondered whether this was the case for some of the marks on the bone on the right.

Please let us know if you solve this intriguing problem.

Richard Wright