1. Ahler, S., & Geib, P. R. (2000). Why flute? Folsom point design and adaptation. Journal of Archaeological Science, 27, 799–820.
2. Binford, L. R. (1973). Interassemblage variability: The Mousterian and the ‘functional’ argument. In C. Renfrew (Ed.), The explanation of culture change: Models in prehistory (pp. 227–254). London: Duckworth.
3. Buchanan, B. (2006). Analysis of Folsom projectile point resharpening using quantitative comparisons of form and allometry. Journal of Archaeological Science, 33, 185–199.
4. Charlin, J., & Cardillo, M. (2018). Reduction constraints and shape convergence along tool ontogenetic trajectories: An example from Late Holocene projectile points of southern Patagonia. In B. Buchanan, M. Eren, & M. O’Brien (Eds.), Convergent evolution and stone-tool technology (pp. 109–129). London: MIT Press.
5. Charlin, J., & González-José, R. (2018). Testing an ethnographic analogy through geometric morphometrics: A comparison between ethnographic arrows and archaeological projectile points from Late Holocene Fuego-Patagonia. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology, 51, 159–172.