I agree with Peter that it looks like pathology. I've seen lots of
examples just like this in animals that were necropsied for skeletal
collections. Some of the infections were proximal to the bone pathology,
such as with a badly healed/healing compound fracture, and in others the
site of infection was quite distal to the site (or sites) where the
pathology manifested on the bone....
Michael A. Etnier, PhD
Department of Anthropology
University of Washington
-------- Original Message --------
> From: "Peter Popkin" <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2012 11:39 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [ZOOARCH] pathology id help required
> I wondered about that myself when I first saw the bone Richard, but on
> closer inspection I was convinced of its (pathological) bony nature.
> On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 2:28 PM, Richard Wright <[log in to unmask]>
> > Acting devil's advocate, why should we consider the bubbly, greyer
> > to be bone at all?
> > I wonder whether it is a postmortem precipitate of mineral on the
> > the bone.
> > It looks like that in the cross section.
> > Richard
> > On 9/03/2012 02:34, Peter Popkin wrote:
> >> Hi ZOOARCH,
> >> A colleague is looking for some help figuring out (as far as
> >> what might have caused an extensive pathology on a large canid ulna.
> >> Not my bag, but I'm sure someone out there knows... I've uploaded six
> >> photos onto BoneCommons that can be found here:
> >> http://alexandriaarchive.org/bonecommons/items/show/1837
> >> Replies can be sent directly to me and I'll pass on the info.
> >> Any help is greatly appreciated!
> >> many thanks,
> >> Peter Popkin