Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-p2v8j Total loading time: 0.001 Render date: 2024-05-19T19:50:20.524Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Comparison and Differentiation of Phytoliths from Maize and Wild Grasses: Use of Morphological Criteria

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Dolores R. Piperno
Dolores R. Piperno*
Affiliation:
Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute, Box 2072, Balboa, Republic of Panama
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Phytolith analysis in archaeology suffers from a lack of taxonomic data on silicified forms in plant domesticates and related wild species. This study presents the results of a comparative analysis of phytolith size and morphology in maize (Zea mays L.) and wild grasses. Grass phytolith morphology is highly diverse. By combining the criteria of size and three-dimensional form of cross-shaped phytoliths, one can discriminate between maize phytoliths and those of wild grasses, including teosinte. This method for identifying archaeological maize was tested by analysis of samples from four sites in the Pacific watershed of central Panama. Phytolith spectra from deposits dated by radiocarbon to the early fifth millennium B.C. indicate the presence of maize. The interpretation of the phytolith data is supported by pollen studies.

Type
Reports
Information
American Antiquity , Volume 49 , Issue 2 , April 1984 , pp. 361 - 383
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for American Archaeology 1984

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References Cited

Beadle, G. 1972 The Mystery of Maize. Field Museum of Natural History Bulletin 43: 2–11.Google Scholar
Bird, J. B., and Cooke, R. G. 1978 La Cueva de los Ladrones: Datos preliminares sobre la occupation formativa. In Adas del VSimposium Nacional de Antropologia, Arqueologia y Etnohistoria de Panama. Universidad de Panama, Instituto National de Cultura, pp. 283–304.Google Scholar
Bonnett, O. T. 1972 Silicified Cells of Grasses: A Major Source of Plant Opal in Illinois Soils. Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 742. University of Illinois, Urbana.Google Scholar
Carbone, V. 1977 Phytoliths as Paleoecological Indicators. Annals of the New York Academy of Science 288: 194–205. New York.Google Scholar
Cooke, R. G. 1976 Panama: Region Central. Vinculos 2: 122–140.Google Scholar
Cooke, R. G. 1984 Archaeological Research in Central and Eastern Panama: A Review. In Recent Developments in Lower Central American Archaeology. School for American Research Seminar on the Archaeology of Lower Central America. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque, in press.Google Scholar
Cooke, R. G., and Ranere, A. J. 1984 The “Proyecto Santa Maria“: A Multidisciplinary Analysis of Prehistoric Adaptations to a Tropical Watershed in Panama. In Recent Advances in Isthmian Archaeology, edited by Lange, F.. Proceedings of the 44th International Congress of Americanists. British Archaeological Reports, Oxford, in press.Google Scholar
Doebley, J. F., and litis, H. H. 1980 Taxonomy of Zea (Gramineae) I. A Subspecific Classification with Key to Taxa. American Journal of Botany 67: 982–993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iitis, H. H., and Doebley, J. F. 1980 Taxonomy of Zea (Gramineae) II. Subspecific Categories in the Zea mays Complex and a Generic Synopsis. American Journal of Botany 67: 994–1004.Google Scholar
Jones, R. L., and Beavers, A. H. 1964a Aspects of Catenary and Depth Distribution of Opal Phytoliths in Illinois Soils. Soil Science Society of America Proceedings 28: 413–416.Google Scholar
Jones, R. L., and Beavers, A. H. 1964b Variation of Opal Phytolith Content Among Some Great Soil Groups in Illinois. Soil Science Society of America Proceedings 28: 711–712.Google Scholar
Lewis, R. O. 1981 Use of Opal Phytoliths in Paleo-Environmental Reconstructions. Journal of Ethnobiology 1: 175–181.Google Scholar
Metcalfe, C. R. 1960 Anatomy of the Monocotyledons. I. Gramineae. Oxford University Press, London.Google Scholar
Norgren, J. A. 1973 Distribution, Form and Significance of Plant Opal in Oregon Soils: Unpublished Ph. D. dissertation, Department of Soil Science, Oregon State University, Portland.Google Scholar
Pearsall, D. M. 1978 Phytolith Analysis of Archaeological Soils: Evidence for Maize Cultivation in Formative Ecuador. Science 199: 177–178.Google Scholar
Pearsall, D. M. 1979 The Application of Ethnobotanical Techniques to the Problem of Subsistence in the Ecuadorian Formative. Ph. D. dissertation, University of Illinois. University Microfilms, Ann Arbor.Google Scholar
Pearsall, D. M. 1982 Phytolith Analysis: Applications of a New Paleoethnobotanical Technique in Archaeology. American Anthropologist 84: 862–871.Google Scholar
Piperno, D. R. 1979 Phytolith Analysis of Archaeological Soils from Central Panama. Unpublished Master's thesis, Department of Anthropology, Temple University, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
Piperno, D. R. 1980 Phytolith Evidence for Maize Cultivation in Central Panama during the Early Ceramic (Monagrillo) Period. Paper presented at the 45th Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
Piperno, D. R. 1983a The Application ofPhytolith Analysis to the Reconstruction of Plant Subsistence and Environments in Prehistoric Panama. Ph. D. dissertation, Temple University. University Microfilms, Ann Arbor.Google Scholar
Piperno, D. R. 1983b Phytolith Taxonomy of Tropical Cultigens and Wild Plants: Implications for Archaeological Research. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, Detroit.Google Scholar
Piperno, D. R. 1984a The Application ofPhytolith Analysis to Paleo-Environmental Reconstruction in the Tropics: Comparison with a Pollen Sequence from the Gatun Basin, Panama. Antiquity, in press.Google Scholar
Piperno, D. R. 1984b First Report on the Phytolith Analysis of the Vegas Site OGSE-80, Ecuador. In The Vegas Culture: Early Prehistory of Southwestern Ecuador, edited by E. Stothert, Karen. Museo Antropologico de lo Banco Central del Ecuador, Guayaquil, in press.Google Scholar
Piperno, D. R., and Husum-Clary, K. 1984 Early Plant Use and Cultivation in the Santa Maria Basin, Panama: Data from Phytoliths and Pollen. In Recent Advances in Isthmian Archaeology, edited by Lange, F.. Proceedings of the 44th International Congress of Americanists. British Archaeological Reports, Oxford, in press.Google Scholar
Piperno, D. R., Husum-Clary, K., Cooke, R. G., Ranere, A. J., and Weiland, D. 1983 Preceramic Maize from Central Panama: Evidence from Phytoliths and Pollen. Ms. in possession of the author.Google Scholar
Ranere, A. J., and Hansell, P. 1978 Early Subsistence Patterns Along the Pacific Coast of Central Panama. In Prehistoric Coastal Adaptations, edited by L. Stark, Barbara and Barbara, Voorhies, pp. 43–59. Academic Press, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ranere, A. J., Cooke, R. G., and Hansell, P. 1980 Food Procurement in the Parita Bay Region of Panama: 5000 B. C. -A. D. 500. Paper presented at the 45th Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
Robinson, R. 1983 The Quaternary of Texas: The Biosilica Evidence. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, Detroit.Google Scholar
Rovner, I. 1983 Plant Opal Phytolith Analysis: Major Advances in Archaeobotanical Research. In Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory, vol. 6, edited by B. Schiffer, Michael, pp. 225–266. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
Smith, J. S. C., Goodman, M. M., and Lester, R. N. 1981 Variation with Teosinte I. Numerical Analysis of Morphological Data. Economic Botany 35: 187–203.Google Scholar
Twiss, P. C., Suess, E., and Smith, R. M. 1969 Morphological Classification of Grass Phytoliths. Soil Science Society of America Proceedings 33: 109–115.Google Scholar
Weiland, D. 1984 Prehistoric Settlement Patterns in the Santa Maria Drainage of Central Pacific Panama: A Preliminary Analysis. In Recent Advances in Isthmian Archaeology, edited by Lange, F.. Proceedings of the 44th International Congress of Americanists. British Archaeological Reports, Oxford, in press.Google Scholar
Wilkes, H. G. 1967 Teosinte: The Closest Relative to Maize. Bussey Institute, Harvard University.Google Scholar
Zevallos Menendez, C., Galinat, W. C., Lathrap, D. W., Leng, E. R., Marcos, J. G., and Klumpp, K. M. 1977 The San Pablo Com Kernel and Its Friends. Science 196: 385–389.Google Scholar