Table 1. Results.

Sample number	Tooth sampled	Calculus sample	Age	Sex	Period	Starch granules (Sg) and other material (present/absent – P/A)	TD/Py-GCMS	C. rotundus
11	Lower right M3	Distal supragingival	Adult	Female	Pre-Mesolithic	(Sg) Six type 1. Undamaged (P)
12	Lower right M3	Lingual supragingival	36–45	Male	Pre-Mesolithic	(Sg) Seven, type 1, 2. Undamaged (P)
35	Upper right M2	Buccal supragingival	35+	Male	Pre-Mesolithic	(Sg) One type 1. Undamaged	X	X
41	Lower left M3	Distal supragingival	18–35	Female	Pre-Mesolithic	(P)	X	X
55	Lower right M3	Buccal + Distal supragingival	18–35	Male	Pre-Mesolithic	(Sg) One type 2. Undamaged
64	Upper right M3	Buccal supragingival	18–35	Male	Pre-Mesolithic	(Sg) One type 1. Undamaged (P)	X	X
77	Lower left M3	Lingual supragingival	35+	Female	Pre-Mesolithic	(Sg) One type 2. Undamaged (P)	X
88	Upper left M1	Buccal supragingival	18–35	Male	Pre-Mesolithic	(Sg) One type 1. Undamaged.
111	Lower right M1	Buccal supragingival	Adult	Male	Pre-Mesolithic		X
8	Lower left M3	Lingual supragingival	18–35	Male	Neolithic	(P)	X
9	Lower left M3	Lingual supragingival	35+	Female	Neolithic		X
10–1	Lower right M2	Lingual supragingival	18–25	Female	Neolithic	(P)	X	X
93	Lower right M1 + M3	Lingual supragingival	26–35	Female	Neolithic	Eight type 2. Seven granules cracked (P)	X
96	Upper left M3	Buccal supragingival	36–45	Female	Neolithic	17 granules. Type 2 x15 granules, type 3 x2 granules, 14 granules show diagenetic effects (P)	X
103	Lower right M3	Buccal supragingival	45+	Female	Neolithic	One type 2. Undamaged (P)	X	X
104	Lower left M3	Lingual + Mesial supragingival	45+	Female	Neolithic	Six, type 2. One cracked (P)
47	Upper right M3	Distalsupragingival	+45	Female	Meroitic		X
74	Lower right M2	Lingual supragingival	18–35	Female	Meroitic	(P)	X	X
106	Lower left M2	Buccal supragingival	36–45	Male	Meroitic	Six damaged, one type 1. Five type 2, of which one cracked. One type 3 (P)	X	X