I am preparing a work about Archaeobotany and I woul like the opinion of specialists in the area and archaeologs about certain perishable plant materials, which did not reach us any information at present can change drastically the final results and interpertation in archaeobotanical studies.
The short answer is: it affects the results enormously and the type of preservation must be taken into account for any kind of interpretation.
I suggest reading:
Wright, P. J.VanDerwarker, A. M. & Peres, T. M., ed., (2010), Integrating Zooarchaeology and Paleoethnobotany, Springer, New York, chapter Methodological Issues in Paleoethnobotany: A consideration of Issues, Methods, and Cases, pp. 37-64.
van der Veen, M. (2007), 'Formation processes of desiccated and carbonized plant remains - the identification of routine practice', Journal of Archaeological Science 34, 968-990.
Thank you for the answer, I will take into account the bibliography suggested.
Dr. Lopez-Doriga is quite right. This can be terribly important and one must always consider such issues in coming to conclusions. One way to approach this problem is to analyze multiple forms of plant remains -- for example, our excavations in an Iron Age site in southern India, the charred seeds did not include (no surprise here) evidence that people were using Dioscoria (tubers/yams). Analysis of starch grains, however, confirmed that Dioscoria was important. We also look at wood, phytoliths, and pollen. Each one provides somewhat different evidence -- even all together, though, there are probably pieces missing. (these data are described in an article I have posted, coauthored with Kashyap and Reddy)
Thank you for your answer the example given is very interesting, I'll read the article.
Ofcourse everything that is consumed in forms of leaves or other easily degradable plant tissue is not or at least less present in the archaeobotanical record. It can be of great help to combine different scientific approaches, for example plant macrofossils, pollen and charcoal to have a more complete spectrum of recorded taxa.
Most carbonized assemblages will show a dominance of taxa being more frequently in contact with fire, for example during food preparation. Considering and discussing the different taphonomical effects has always been part of a serious archaeobotanical study.
Most difficult seems to be to evaluate Palaeolithic and Msolithic diet, where consumption of wild plants remains may have been based to a huge part on tubers, leaves and other easily perishable plant remains.
Thank you for the answer, it's a huge help for the development of my work.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Biological Science
- Biota
- Eukaryota
- Viridiplantae
- Streptophyta
- Plants