A Debreceni Déri Múzeum Évkönyve 1986 (Debrecen, 1987)

Természettudomány - Juhász, Lajos–Bozsko, Szvetlana: The Ornithofauna of Debrecen II. Synecological Analysis

from two viewpoints. One point is the inner affinity of the three components (the Lepenski Vir culture from the Mesolithic, the Körös-Cris culture and the Starcevo culture from the Early Neolithic), the other is the determination of the interaffinity between the samplecomponents of different civilizations. Let us see first the analysis of the connections coming about at level 0.25. The inner affinity within each civilization is stronger if considering the weighted measurements except for the Körös-Cris sample (Table 3). With the same exception the interconnections between the civilizations are also stronger if calculating by the weighted measurements (Table 4). Table 3. The inner affinity of the female skull finds of the examined civilizations under the distance level 0.25 by the measurements both unweighted and weighted by heritability Civilization n (Total) Unweighted Weighted Difference Civilization n (Total) n °/ /o n % °/o Lepenski Vir (Mesolithic) 21 6 29 13 62 33 Körös-Cris (Early Neolithic) 9 2 22 2 22 0 Starcevo (Early Neolithic) 13 4 31 6 46 15 Table 4. The interaffinity of the female skull finds of the examined civilizations under the distance level 0.25 by the measurements both unweighted and weighted by heritability Civilizations n (Total) Unweighted Weighted Difference Civilizations n (Total) n % n % °/o Lepenski Vir + Körös-Cris 30 3 + 3-6 20 7 + 4=11 37 17 Lepenski Vir + Starcevo 34 5 + 6=11 32 5 + 6=11 32 0 Körös-Cris + Starcevo 22 2 + 2 = 4 18 4 + 3 = 7 32 14 However, it is striking that the interaffinity between the civilizations does not grow to such an extent by the weighting as it can be experienced in the case of inner affinity within each civilization (Table 4, cp. Table 3). Consequently, through inner affinity it can be detected that the segregation of the different components of this complex sample is less ambiguous by the variables weighted by heritability. The same phenomenon seems much more expressed and convincing at level 0.5. The inner affinity within the sample is remarkably stronger in the case of all the three civilizational components if the cluster tree is made by the measurements weighted by heritability. For example we can experience that each find of the Early Neolithic Starcevo culture (also) joins another Starcevo find. The Mesolithic finds, in spite of the significant distinctions within the sample (90%), also join one another (Table 5). In the present attempt the distinction of the morphological variants within each civilization is not a primary question. Instead, through the evaluation of the inner affinity within the civilizations and of the segregation between the different civilizations the author tries to form an oppinion of the consequences of taking heritability into consideration during the examinations. 80