No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Borrowed Concepts: A Comment on Rhoades
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 20 January 2017
Abstract
Rhoades’ critique of the ecotone and edge effect concepts is discussed. While his conclusions about archaeological misuse of these terms are insightful, the assessment of their status in ecology and wildlife management is challenged. These constructs can be put to better use if substantive limits of their definitions are clear. More importantly, archaeologists should decide which aspects of environmental variability are meaningful to human adaptation before using them.
- Type
- Comments
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Society for American Archaeology 1980
References
References Cited
Curtis, J. T.
1959
The vegetation of Wisconsin: an ordination of plant communities.
University of Wisconsin Press, Madison.Google Scholar
Davison, V.
1946
False principles delay advancement in wildlife techniques. Journal of Wildlife Management
10:296–299.Google Scholar
Klimstra, W. D., and Roseberry, J. L.
1975 Nesting ecology of the bobwhite in Southern Illinois. Wildlife Monographs 41.Google Scholar
MacArthur, R. C.
1972
Geographical ecology: patterns in the distribution of species.
Harper and Row, New York.Google Scholar
Naumov, N. P.
1972
The ecology of animals, edited by Levine, N. D., translated by Pious, F.K. Jr., University of Illinois Press, Urbana.Google Scholar
Pielou, E. C.
1974
Population and community ecology: principles and methods.
Gordon and Breach, New York.Google Scholar
Rhoades, R. E.
1978
Archaeological use and abuse of ecological concepts and studies: the ecotone example. American Antiquity
43:608–614.Google Scholar
Short, H. L., Evans, W., and Boerer, E. L.
1977
The use of natural and modified pinyon-juniper woodlands by deer and elk. Journal of Wildlife Management
41:543–559.Google Scholar
Voigt, J., and Mohlenbrock, R.
1964
Plant communities of southern Illinois.
Southern Illinois University Press, Carbondale.Google Scholar
Whittaker, R. H.
1967
Gradient analysis of vegetation. Cambridge Philosophical Society Biological Reviews
42:207–264.Google Scholar