{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.022781774580335732, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.325757575757576, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Weighing and Counting Shell: A Response to Glassow and Claassen

Glassow discusses several "problems" with the use of minimum number of individuals (MNI) in archaeological shellfish analysis, including the difficulty of identifying non-repetitive elements (NRE) to species level for several taxa. However, these problems, especially fragmentation, are more critical for the weight method than for MNI estimates. We have successfully identified thousands of NRE for all species common in southern California coastal archaeological sites. We also suggest that a measure, such as MNI, that provides estimates of numbers of individuals is a more reliable and valid measure with which to address most research questions. The weight method only provides a measure of the weight of some of the fragments from the shells of those individuals.