Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T19:05:03.717Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Stereological Identification of Opal Phytolith Populations from Wild and Cultivated Zea

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

John C. Russ  and
Irwin Rovner
John C. Russ
Affiliation:
Materials Science and Engineering Department, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695
Irwin Rovner
Affiliation:
Materials Science and Engineering Department, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Reported criteria for distinguishing wild Zea varieties (teosinte) from cultivated primative maize using plant opal phytolith morphology were tested using computer-assisted image analysis. Results showed current criteria to be effective but inconsistent. A straightforward stereological algorithm was derived from image analysis data providing high-confidence statistical assignment of the Zea phytolith populations in this study to wild or cultivated categories.

Résumé

Résumé

Analisis estereológico y estadístico fue ejecutado por computadora para evaluar los métodos de análisis morfológico defitolitos opalinos Sugeridos en la literatura y utilizados para diferenciar las variedades de Zea silvestres (teosinte) de las cultivadasjmaiz). Dicho análisis produjó un algoritmo estereológico que indica que el método estereológico computadorizado propuesto en este estudio es más efectivo como los métodos analizados, es más simple y consistente, y ofrece mayor certeza estadística.

Type
Reports
Information
American Antiquity , Volume 54 , Issue 4 , October 1989 , pp. 784 - 792
Copyright
Copyright © Society for American Archaeology 1989

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

Brown, D. A. 1986 Taxonomy of A Midcontinent Grasslands Phytolith Key. In Plant Opal Phytolith Analysis in Archaeology and Paleoecology. Proceedings of the 1984 Phytolith Research Workshop, edited by Rovner, I., pp. 67–85. Occasional Papers No. 1. The Phytolitharien, North Carolina State University, Raleigh.Google Scholar
Doebley, J. F. 1983 The Maize and Teosinte Male Inflorescence : A Numerical Taxonomic Study. Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden 70 : 32–70. Google Scholar
Doebley, J. F. Litis, H. H., and Doebley, J. F. 1984 Zea—A Biosystematic Odyssey. In Plant Biosystematics, edited by Grant, W. F., pp. 587–616. Academic Press, Toronto.Google Scholar
Metcalfe, C. R. 1960 Anatomy of the Monocotyledons I : Gramineae. Oxford University Press, New York.Google Scholar
Pearsall, D. M. 1978 Phytolith Analysis of Archaeological Soils : Evidence for Maize Cultivation in Formative Ecuador. Science 199 : 177–178.Google Scholar
Piperno, D. R. 1984 A Comparison and Differentiation of Phytoliths from Maize (Zea mays L.) and Wild Grasses : Use of Morphological Criteria. American Antiquity 49 : 361–383.Google Scholar
Prat, H. 1932 L'epiderme des Graminees, etude anatomique et systematique. Annates des Sciences Naturelle Botanique (serie X) 14 : 117–324.Google Scholar
Prat, H. 1948 General Features of the Epidermis in Zea mays. Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden 35 : 341–351.Google Scholar
Rovner, I. 1971 Potential of Opal Phytoliths for Use in Paleoecological Reconstruction. Quaternary Research 1 : 345–359.Google Scholar
Rovner, I. 1972 Note on a Safer Procedure for Opal Phytolith Extraction. Quaternary Research 2 : 591.Google Scholar
Russ, J. C. 1986 Practical Stereology. Plenum Press, London.Google Scholar
Twiss, P. C, Suess, E., and Smith, R. M. 1969 Morphological Classification of Grass Phytoliths. Soil Science Society of America Proceedings 33(1) : 109–115.Google Scholar