Post on 03-Apr-2018
transcript
7/29/2019 104564131 the Role of Biogenic Silica in Archaeology
1/29
The Role of Biogenic Silica in Archaeology
Chapter 1
Introduction
Phytoliths, plant opals or silica cells are all names for concretions of biogenetic silica
produced by living plants that are readily released into the environment isolated
following the destruction of there parent material (Piperno 2006). There value to
archaeology lies in there recurring taxonomically patterns of production. As a part of
structural plant tissue they are deposited quite distinctly from pollen or seeds, resulting in
applications unique to the discipline. Phytoliths robustly survive in soils, sediments, on
the surfaces of interred artefacts and the teeth of humans and other animals (Pearsall
2000).
Over the last 180 years they have been discovered, classified and crept into the study of
past human societies, now forming a promising discipline of environmental archaeology.
Once erroneous labelled as the Second palynology (Rovner 1974) for its similarities topollen analysis, phytolith data has proven more remarkably more useful and replicable
then earlier commentators anticipated.
Despite several decades of dedicated research the full extent of phytoliths in plant taxa
and their value has yet to be unravelled. (Pearsall 2000) as more as more taxa are studied
more distinctive phytoliths are identified. Phytoliths from a single species appear in
variable shapes and sizes unlike pollen, there is not necessarily a single phytolith
morphotype that is characteristic of a particular plant taxon; rather, some plant species
produce numerous phytolith morphotypes whereas others produce none. However we
now know that morphotypes unique to a certain species phytoliths are longer necessary to
infer archaeological data. Much information can now be gleaned from absolute quantities
and morphotype combinations or suites.
1
7/29/2019 104564131 the Role of Biogenic Silica in Archaeology
2/29
Phytolith from varied contexts have been used for a myriad of purposes spanning crop
identification in deposits, direct evidence of diet and vegetation change yet the discipline
remains poorly understood or even unknown by non-specialists
This synthesis aims to establish the scientific basis for archaeological phytolith research,
the salient successes of its integration into archaeology and its current limitations.
A history of phytolith studies
The first recorded incidence of bio-genetic silica being observed in plants can be
attributed to G.A. Struve; a botanist who published his findings in 1835 (Piperno 2006,
2). However it was pioneering microbiologist Christian Ehrenburg, who laid the
foundations of a phytolith analysis relevant to archaeology. He recorded their presence in
pre-quaternary sediments and termed them phytolithariaGreek for plant stones (Ibid,
2). He developed the first classification system. The most famous early observation of
phytoliths was by Charles Darwin while sailing on the HMSBeagle off Cape Verde in
1833 (Ibid). Upon observing a fine dust falling from theBeagles sails, which scratched
the ships instruments while many miles out to sea he became curious and collected
samples sending them to Ehrenburg who recognised them as phytoliths.
In the initial decades of the 20th there was number of sporadic archaeological applications
of phytolith assemblages, for instance in Europe they were used to identify cultivated
cereals in ceramic and ash heaps. This coincided with a great expansion of awareness and
knowledge of the presence of phytolith in plants. The bulk of research during this period
occurred in Germany. This florescence came to an end with the changing political
landscape of 1930s Germany (Piperno 2006, 395). Other schools continued to examine
biogenetic silica in soils such as in the Soviet Union. Soviet soil scholarship helped to
initiate to important work in University College of North Wales beginning in the mid
1950s by a number of scholars particular Smithson (Powers 1992). Their comprehensive
work on phytolith formation was essential for later work. The potential of phytoliths of
2
7/29/2019 104564131 the Role of Biogenic Silica in Archaeology
3/29
the grass family was realised and followed by much progress particularly by Smithson
(Powers 1992).
A refreshed interest in phytolith developed in the late 1970s as a means to fulfil a need
for a proxy to examine vegetation histories in the American tropics. Most importantly
research grew beyond grass species to many other plant species (Pearsall 1993, 10).
Prehistoric plant use, crop domestication in particular the domestication of maize and
associated crops in the Neotropics were key research foci (Piperno 1988). In the 1990s
phytolith research broadened as new archaeological questions were posed during this
time such phytoliths as a tracer of clay procurement, pottery manufacture and diet
through phytolith survival on dental calculus. Their discovery in human dental calculus
remains provided a rare instance of direct evidence of dietary information (Fox et al. 1994).
Within Europe, applications have been slow to develop; rare examples in the 1990s
include the identification of animal dung and peat phytolith signatures and also
differentiation between roof and floor deposits in Hebridean houses (Powers 2003) and to
examine cropping surfaces in the Hebrides (Smith 1996). More recently vegetal resource
exploitation in Scotland (Madella 2007) and residue analysis of quernstones from
Caherconnell fort, Co. Clare has been studied (Hardy 2007). This quern stone analysis
was indeed hindered by a lack of a reference collection. Worldwide since the late 1990s
as employment of phytoliths have burgeoned, as superior diagnostic techniques were
developed (refer to chapter 4).
Chapter 2
The nature of phytoliths and assemblage formation
The properties of phytoliths
Phytoliths can form in the stems, leaves, roots, inflorescence and infructescence of
plants. They are typically 20-50m in diameter. Phytoliths are composed of an
amorphous mix of silicon dioxide with trace amounts of other elements such as
aluminium, iron, magnesium copper, nitrogen as well as proteins, monosaccharides and
3
7/29/2019 104564131 the Role of Biogenic Silica in Archaeology
4/29
lipids (Piperno 2006; Elbaum 2009). Phytolith contain material sufficient for direct
carbon dating, stable carbon, hydrogen and oxygen isotope study. Although resistant to
domestic fires, burning does change their discernible optical properties but can also lead
to colour change (Elbaum et al. 2003).
Formation
Phytoliths are formed when monosilicic acid is carried into the plant via the xylem from
groundwater (Piperno 2006, 5). This can only occur when silica is a feature in the
growing medium; which is the case in the vast majority of soils (Wilkinson & Stevens
2003). This silica is transported into aerial structures where it is impregnated in to plant
structures. This may occur in specialised silica accumulating cells: idioblasts or cellular
and intercellular spaces of plants. In idioblasts accumulating silica does not take on the
shape of the parent cells unlike when it accumulates in cellular or intercellular spaces
(Pearsall 2000). The pattern of phytolith formation is often specific to a plant part e.g.
incidence and types fond in wood, bark, stem, inflorescence or leaves is usually unique to
that part (Tsartsidou 2007). Most fruit and flowers are not discernible, this was apparent
in Tsartsidou and colleagues Greek study (ibid). One notable exception are grass species,
varying ratio of grass floral parts may potentially suggest seasonality of a sites strata
(Rosen 2001, 184).
The process of phytolith formation is largely a genetic controlled mechanism but
production is also under the sway of local climate and growing conditions. This may
result in increased production in high producer taxa, greater variety of phytolith types or
even the occurrence of phytoliths in taxa (usually low amounts) that dont usually
accumulate silica. One factor that prompts increased variety is magnified levels of
dissolved silica in the plants growth medium. Excess silica absorbed by the plant may be
deposited in places not targeted for silica production when the primary depositional siteshave mostly been silicified (Piperno 2006, 8). This is linked with the presence of multi-
cellular phytoliths, known as silica skeletons (see fig 2.3). It now understood that climate
influences variation in phytolith production (Harvey et al. 2005, 742). High
evapotranspiration, such as in arid climes rates can induce high phytolith production. This
is true in certain aerial structures such as leaf tips and inflorescence bracts especially in
4
7/29/2019 104564131 the Role of Biogenic Silica in Archaeology
5/29
grasses. However there are examples where phytoliths are most frequent in plant cells not
associated with water loss such as the idioblasts (Piperno 2006, 10). Rosen and Weiner
observed that German bread wheat produced much lower yields of phytoliths then
samples grown in the Near East (1994). Multi-cellular types also occur in much reduced
numbers in northern latitudes (Rosen pers. commun.). Phytoliths are not waste products
of transpiration but fulfil several functions within the plant. These relate to plant
structure, stability, reducing herbivory and possibly as an adaptation to cope with soil
toxicity (Piperno 2006).
To sum phytoliths are a normal product of plant growth and thus they occur in all
environments (Piperno 2006). There is regional production variation, especially in high
latitudes where less research has been carried out. This needs to be defined and
documented.
Are phytoliths taxonomically diagnostic?
Some have expressed doubt on the usefulness of phytoliths. OConnor & Evans (2005,
163) prematurely dismissed their taxonomic resolution as inadequate for study of floristic
and environmental change in European archaeology but in truth resolution is not yet
fully understood and neither are the implications of new methods discussed later. Despite
being functional they are absent in many plant families e.g. Fabaceae and aroids. In a
study of medieval English crops most crops outside the grass family were found to be
non-diagnostic although this study did not examine distinctive suits (Hart 2007). Many
other species produce low numbers that are only limited diagnostic identifiable e.g. some
legumes and strawberries (Hart 2007). On occasion these can only be classified as fruity
or rooty (Ibid, 80). Low phytolith producer species create problems in interpretation of
the phytolith record as certain species will be chronically underrepresented and thus
are not chronically underrepresented and thus are not practically measurable to absolute
levels. Woody species are one major group of low phytolith producers. Tsartsidou et al.
(2007, 1268) found in a study of Greek flora that no wood types sampled contained more
then 400 phytoliths per a gram of dry material, quite a contrast to the 1,500,000 produced
per gram contained in bread wheat. Wood of some tree species produces none. A high
5
7/29/2019 104564131 the Role of Biogenic Silica in Archaeology
6/29
portion of wood phytoliths of are a typically variable morphology (Tsartsidou et al.
2007). Leaves of dicotyledons trees and shrubs produce moderate numbers of phytoliths
ranging from hundreds of millions per a dry gram of plant material. However some low
phytolith producers can still be identified when other factors are accommodated. For
instance the paucity of wood in the phytolith record is partly compensated by woods
characteristic production of siliceous aggregates; biogenic aggregates of soil minerals
which often persist intact in the archaeological record.
Figure 2-2 Diagnostic Oat (A. Sativa) wavy long cells.
From Hart 2007, 62
These particles do appear to be less stable in sediment then phytoliths (Albert et al.
2001). Silica deposition in underground plant organs is poorly understood. Up till
Chandler-Ezell et al. described (2006) diagnostic phytoliths of South American crops
little success had been reported on characterizing root phytoliths types or suites.
Fig 2-1 Diagnostic Spelt wheat (T.Spelta) zta) wavy long cells. From Hart 2007, 67.
6
7/29/2019 104564131 the Role of Biogenic Silica in Archaeology
7/29
Many major ecosystems in the United States have well documented phytolith signatures.
Others such as European temperate forests are less well documented. It could be
hypothesized that temperate deciduous dicot woodland is not usually discernable as
Piperno (2006, 19) found in the Eastern United States, however this will require further
research to clarify. Even when phytolith suites cannot be precisely matched to ecosystem
types grassland can still be broadly distinguished from woodland, a distinction very
relevant to archaeology. Key species economic identifiable phytoliths to species through
phytoliths are outlined on table 1.
Table 1. Select list of economic plants with taxonomically diagnostically phytolith
assemblages (collated data from Ball et al. 1999; Piperno 2006; Portillo et al. 2006)
Species Identifiable plant part
Triticum monococcum(Einkorn wheat) Glume morphometricsTriticum dicoccoides (Wild Emmer Wheat) Glume
Triticum dicoccoides (Emmer Wheat) Glume
Triticum durum (Durum wheat) Glume
Triticum aestivum (Bread wheat) Glumes
Avena sativa (Common Oat) inflorescence
Avena strigosa (Pointed Bristle Oat) inflorescence
Hordeum vulgare* (Two-rowed & six-rowed Barley) Glumes
Hordeum spontaneum (Wild barley) Glume
Secale cereal* (Rye) Glume
Zea mays (maize) Glume/cupulate, Leaf and
husk
Curcurbita spp. (squashes & gourds) Leaf, fruit rind
Helinthus annus (sunflower) Achene
7
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Einkornhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Einkorn7/29/2019 104564131 the Role of Biogenic Silica in Archaeology
8/29
Oryza sativa (rice) Leaf, glume
Musa spp. (bananas) Leaf, seed
*complete silica skeletons are needed to distinguish these species (Tsartsidou 2007).
Deposition
Phytoliths are deposited through a number of human and natural processes. Principally
phytoliths enter sediment when they are liberated into the uppermost horizons of the soil
profile through the decay of their parent vegetation. This process creates a local record of
vegetation unlike regional informative pollen record. Phytoliths ubiquitous survival in the
soil horizon contrasts greatly with pollen or plant macrobotanical remains. These are
often only preserved on archaeological sites through selective processes waterlogging or
charring, therefore are questionably representative.
It is reasonable to assume much of the phytolith record in many areas was deposited from
vegetation in-situ. This is particular true on sites were other processes of deposition can
be ruled out such as caves. Ideally archaeological sites phytoliths survive in proportions
representative of the frequency of their parent plant material. In many sites the majority
of an assemblage entered the deposit simply through the continuous process of
anthropogenically discarded plants (Piperno 2006).
Figure 2-3 Silica skeleton from a grass culm.
From Madella et al. 2002, 710.
8
7/29/2019 104564131 the Role of Biogenic Silica in Archaeology
9/29
It is understood that several factors allow significant movement of phytoliths from their
point of origin. They can be transported and deposited through herbivory via
dung, wind and alluvial processes (Fredlund & Tieszen 1994).
Phytoliths entering rivers or streams may travel some distance in suspension with other
silt particles. Alluvial transport has been cited to explain substantial numbers of
characteristic upland types identified in lake sediments (Zhao & Piperno 2000).
Airborne transport can be significant depositor of phytoliths in some terrains especially
when dry condition prevail, high velocity winds and few obstructions may allow
phytoliths to be carried airborne over long distances. Phytoliths have been observed to be
transported as far as 2000 km downwind but generally rest within 500 km of their origin
(Piperno 2006, 106). This is associated with arid climates with little consolidating surface
vegetation particularly after bush fires. Thus aeolian deposition can result in significant
contamination of a plants phytolith assemblage.
Although these processes complicate interpretation they are do allow phytolith record
from certain contexts to be used as proxy data for the reconstructions of regional
vegetation (Piperno 2006, 103). In certain contexts such as lakes with significant fluvial
inflow the phytoliths record can represent greater regional area rather than just the
immediate local vegetation. These factors are primarily a concern for palaeoecological
studies rather then Archaeology. Although these processes represent significant
contamination of the phytolith record. Clearly any natural process effecting a studied site
whether alluvial, aeolian or others must be rigorously scrutinized before the phytolith
record is interpreted (Piperno 2006).
Phytolith taphonomy
Once deposited complex taphonomic processes effect biogenetic silica which remain not
entirely explained (Albert et al. 2005). It is critical that that the taphonomic processes that
effect depositional bio-genetic silica are foreseen to allow the correct interpretation of
9
7/29/2019 104564131 the Role of Biogenic Silica in Archaeology
10/29
assemblages from archaeological or palaeoecological contexts. As phytoliths are
inorganic they are not subject to the decay that destroys other plant remains. They
tolerate burning, wet and dry soils and even alternating wet and dry conditions. In
environments with surrounding sediment pH 9 or above silica solubility increases; but
only in a minority of sites will this be a concern. Fluctuating ground water and
bioturbation also play a role in their breakdown (Albert et al. 2005). Albert et al. (Ibid)
note due to age or climatic factors some phytoliths form solidly in plant cells and are
robust while others form poorly as fragile encrustations. In an East African study
wood/bark phytoliths were found to be more resistant then more numerous types such as
sedges and grasses (Albert et al. 2005). X-ray microanalysis has also highlighted that the
level of weathering may be linked to levels of impurities. It is understood that the
presence of aluminium, co-deposited in phytoliths reduces their susceptibility to solution.
Aluminium content is associated with tree species (Carnelli et al. 2002, 351). Albert and
Weiner (2000, 945) noted in Kebara cave in Israel that variable phytoliths show greater
tendency for solution. Paradoxically X-ray microanalysis of phytolith from loess soils has
shown that the impurity of silica plays a role in there breakdown as those with calcium,
iron and sodium suffered greater deterioration (Osterrieth et al. 2009, 74-75).
10
7/29/2019 104564131 the Role of Biogenic Silica in Archaeology
11/29
Fig 2.4 Assemblage formation
From Madella & Zurro 2010.
Chapter 3
Classification and interpretation
Constraints of classification
To interpret an archaeological phytolith collection it is first necessary to investigate
which local plants are relevant to the archaeological record, which produce identifiable
phytoliths and in what absolute quantities (Tsartsidou 2007, 1263). Undoubtedly a lack of
comprehensive comparable reference collections has hindered research hitherto (Hardy
2008).
There two different basic types of phytoliths (Albert & Weiner 2001, 151-154); those
with highly irregular morphologies. These are termed variable morphology phytoliths
and those with unique forms, which are identifiable either by their characteristic shape or
Contexts where
phytoliths
can be recovered
Possible inferences
Residues in Food vessels Food processing, diet and dating of vessel usePottery clay Refine geological fingerprint of clay source
Coprolites DietHuman & animal teeth Diet
Skeletal abdominal
sediment
Diet
Working edges of tools Tool function, plant processing and dating of use
Hearth ash Fuel preferences , burnt food and discernment of
non-visible ash
Archaeological sediment Spatial organization, microscale ecology and
irrigation
Natural Soils Micro to macroscale vegetation reconstruction
11
7/29/2019 104564131 the Role of Biogenic Silica in Archaeology
12/29
by their cellular origin in the plant. The latter two groups are known as consistent
morphology phytoliths.
Using consistent morphology phytoliths there are two fundamental approaches to
phytolith identification. The first is the morphological approach which relies on the
characteristic features and seize of individual disarticulated phytoliths to establish their
parent body (Pearsall 2000, 375). However variable morphology phytoliths cannot be
connected to any particular species. Phytoliths may survive in deposits as articulated
silica skeletons or epidermal sheets preserving the original orientation of the plant. In
these cases it may be possible to examine the position, orientation and shape of phytoliths
comparing them to their original anatomical position within a plant to define the parent
species; this is known as the botanical approach (Pearsall 2000).
Ideally a species could be distinguished by the presence of morphotype unique to that
species, a typological approach. It is most effective when the taxa being considered
produce individual or suites of phytoliths unique to those taxa. In such a case, the
occurrence of a characteristic phytolith indicates the taxon. However this is not possible
among many species furthermore diagnostic silica skeletons may be not present in
appreciable quantities in a sample. Redundancy and multicity of phytolith types is
persistent across many species and families (Pearsall 2000). For instance it cannot
distinguish the phytoliths produced by the inflorescence bracts of Emmer and bread
wheat, because no significantly different types are produced by any of these species
(Terry et al. 1996). It is more common to infer parent plant by comparing diagnostic
broad groups of morphotypes then by identification of a single type (Rovner 1983, 229).
Several other approaches exist reflecting the complex set of questions asked of phytolith
analysis.
Keys and discriminate analyses
Morphometrics is a technique of taxonomic analysis using measurements of the size and
shape. Since its induction to phytolith analysis it has allowed greater taxonomic
12
7/29/2019 104564131 the Role of Biogenic Silica in Archaeology
13/29
resolution of phytoliths when used in conjunction with typologies. Consistent
morphology phytoliths of certain species can only be differentiated on the basis of length,
width, and trough diameter, for instance those of the inflorescence glumes of wheat (Ball
et al. 1996). Morphometric parameters can be directly measured by an eyepiece
micrometer in the microscope or by more advanced technologies. These variables can be
discerned through the use of a classification key or discriminant functions. Both have
now being determined by researchers using computer-assisted image analysis to establish
and rapidly measure the morphometric parameters (Pearsall 2000; Wu 2009).
Discriminant analysis is a increasingly preeminent quantitative statistical method of
identification. It was applied to the discipline to determine and classify the morphometric
variables that vary between morphotype groups. A discriminant analysis method for
cross-body phytoliths proved to be important for identifying for maize phytoliths in the
American tropics, outside the range of wild maize species (Pearsall 2000, 384). Other
instances of its use included the measurements of glume hair phytoliths permitting
separation of wild and domesticated rice species (Zhao et al. 1998). Increasingly
computer-assisted image technology is being used to assist identification and to rapidly
measure of the morphotype parameters particularly in discriminant analyses.
Tests have indicated that, at the genus level, both the selective use of a classificationkey
and discriminate analysis of certain morphotypes of phytoliths can be reliable tools but
vary hugely in accuracy according to species. In Ball and colleagues (1999) study,
emmer wheat was classified only 40% successfully with discriminant analysis using the
average morphometries of four morphotypes yet a relatively simple key achieved 80%
correct classification.
13
7/29/2019 104564131 the Role of Biogenic Silica in Archaeology
14/29
Figure 3-1 Maize cross bodies (oblique and side view) (Ball 2010)
Quantitative methods
By knowing the phytolith production per gram of dry plant material of each species it is
possible to infer relative quantities of each plant on site. Quantities of phytolithsproduced is often distinctive of certain plant families. Initially this only allowed very
broad groups to be distinguished such as grassland or woodland by taking into account
(Bonnett 1972; Verma & Rust 1969). Using this method, identification to the genus level
may be possible if assemblage is homogenous.
The phytolith difference index is a quantitative identification method. It contrasts
assemblages from areas of archaeological interest with controls taken from natural
control areas least likely to be affected by human activity. This methodology has been
used to identify domestic animal dung to a species level but this depended on the local
diet of livestock. This method can also allow efficient initial assessments: defining areas
of human activity. However as different species may have similar PDI values, it is
14
7/29/2019 104564131 the Role of Biogenic Silica in Archaeology
15/29
7/29/2019 104564131 the Role of Biogenic Silica in Archaeology
16/29
questions which correspond to clearance dynamics such as the local appearance of
agriculture (Pearsall 2000).
Other studies have grouped recognisable species into suites which indicate specific social
actions such grain storage or animal enclosure. Recognition of specific human actions
can allow reconstruction of the spatial organisation of a site. Due to the reoccurring
feeding patterns of domestic herbivores animal dung can be recognisable down to a
species level (Tsartsidou et al. 2008).
The recovery of specific parts can indicate different agricultural practices and the stages
of processing practised in site. This specialised agricultural data is important for
archaeological interpretation as it allows the economic role of an archaeological site to be
accessed (Fig 3-3). Preservation of plant macrofossil remains relies on specific and often
exceptional conditions such as charring of spilt grain followed by rapid deposition or
waterlogging. Frequently only plants exposed to fire during processing are visible in the
archaeobotanical record (McClatchie 2008) creating misleading imbalances in the
archaeobotanical record. Some may only be charred during rare catastrophes e.g. during
conflagration. Crop processing waste such as light cereal chaff and delicate arable weed
seeds may not be preserved, thus masking the evidence of the crop processing stage.
Phytoliths from specific plants and anatomical parts often those subject to poor
preservation of their macroremains e.g. stems, husks can frequently be distinguished. The
glumes of oats, rye, wheat and barley are all readily identifiable, generally down to a
species level (see Table 1). Less attention has been focused on the actual grain of cereals;
most produce phytoliths with the notable exception of wheat (Tsartsidou et al. 2007). The
glume can be indentified accurately with statistical methods such as discriminate analysis
(Ball et al. 1999)but this is not possible with some species of cereal stems. Their
identification would depend on more ambiguous Quantitative methods (Tsartsidou et al.
2008). As an inorganic structure, largely resistant to digenesis phytoliths offer a new line
of evidence rivalling macrofossils
Phytoliths typically can survive combustion of their parent material.
16
7/29/2019 104564131 the Role of Biogenic Silica in Archaeology
17/29
7/29/2019 104564131 the Role of Biogenic Silica in Archaeology
18/29
myriad of reasons, such as natural sediment being redeposited in house, thorough
sweeping of house floors during occupation or varied use of a site during its occupation
(Zurro et al. 2009) Furthermore a phytolith assemblage found on a habitation floor may
be equally derived from a decayed roof as actual habitation furniture or deposited in-situ
food waste. The natural process effecting the sampling site whether it be alluvial
deposition or wind deposition must also be thoroughly taken into account before the
phytolith record is examined.
Even with these limitations phytolith analyses has the potential to help resolve or
contribute to many archaeological problems where organic preservation is low or where
remains werent charred. The possible livestock stockade function of the Irish ring fort
could be tested through examination for dung phytolith suites. Investigation for dung
spherulites would be an ideal complementary discipline in non-acid areas for such a
research question. Efforts to develop morphometric identification parameters have been
restricted to a handful of key economic species such as wheats. It is very probable that
many other important species may be identifiable using this means. Morphometric
research is only beginning on a number of important species such as the progenitor of
Common Oats (Ball 2010, pers. comm). This wild species is frequently undistinguishable
from its domesticated cousin Common Oat using conventional macrobotanical remains.
Regardless to question posed, secure sampling contexts are key (Piperno 2006; Wilkinson
& Stevens 2003). Like all approaches within archaeology interference of sites once
deposited will always be a concern. On areas of modern agriculture survival can be
surprisingly poor. High mechanical disturbance such as modern ploughing is most
destructive (Hart 2007). Regardless of preservation both case studies demonstrate that
phytolith analysis is best used as part of a multifaceted research approach. Starch analysis
is particularly complementary to phytoliths but pollen, macrobotanical and dung
spherulites study are also both indispensible. Unfortunately many underground root
tubers appear to leave no trace in the phytoliths or pollen record but are visible
archaeologically through the survival of starch granules (Piperno 2006, 149). In the
Andes this problem has culminated in most of the major indigenous crops leaving no
18
7/29/2019 104564131 the Role of Biogenic Silica in Archaeology
19/29
7/29/2019 104564131 the Role of Biogenic Silica in Archaeology
20/29
Fig 4.1 interdisciplinary value of phytoliths
Chapter 5
Conclusions
It has been established phytoliths now have many and broad applications (refer to table
1). There are now well tested methods to analysis assemblages to answer questions
pertaining to diet, material culture, archaeobotany and palaeoecology. The disciplinesgreatest asset is its ability to circumvent fickle preservation of biological remains
(Pearsall 2000). In particular phytoliths offer unparalleled opportunity to examine in-situ
vegetation on a microscale (Rovner 2001) along with artefact use. It remains to be seen to
what extent this approach is feasible on already archived artefacts; if possible it would
afford a vast avenue of data. The main limitations to reconstructing a site through plant
Site Economic
Strategies
Palaeodiet
Material cultureStudies
Artefact
Function & Use
Palaeoecology
Phytoliths
20
7/29/2019 104564131 the Role of Biogenic Silica in Archaeology
21/29
remains are now determined by how a site is used during its active life, archaeological
deposit disturbance and the local patterns of silica deposition. The reluctance of uptake in
northern latitudes of the world and the regional reduced production of certain types such
as multi-cellular silica skeletons are only weakly correlated. The dominance of
established archaeobotanical methodology has been more relevant. Methodologys
complexity is also factor. Balls (1999) work has shown that achieving classification to a
species level may require several methods. However phytoliths in addition to starch
granules open a world of novel archaeobotanical evidence, scaling beyond traditional
limits of archaeobotany, that is fostering a trend towards microscopic archaeology. It is
only in the last 15 years with the publication of authoritative texts such as (Piperno 2006;
Pearsall 2000; Meunier & Colin 2001) which built on the initial seminal phytolith
monograph (Piperno 1988) have phytoliths begun to receive deserved comprehensive
attention. It is reasonable to foresee that the acceleration in research seen will continue as
new analytical methods allow even greater uptake.
21
7/29/2019 104564131 the Role of Biogenic Silica in Archaeology
22/29
Bibliography
Albert, R. M., and Weiner, S. 2001. Study of phytoliths in Prehistoric ash layers from
Kebara and Tabun caves using a quantitative approach. (Eds) Meunier, J.D., Colin, F. andFaure-Denard, L.Phytoliths: Applications in Earth Science and Human History, Aix en
Provence: Cerege fix. 251-267.
Albert, R. M., Bamford M. K., Cabanes, D. 2005. Taphonomy of phytoliths and
macroplants in different soils from Olduvai Gorge (Tanzania) and the application to Plio-
Pleistocene palaeoanthropological samples. Quaternary International
148, 78-94.
Albert, R. M., Shahack-Gross, R., Cabanes, D., Gilboa, A., Lev-Yadun, S., Portillo, M.,
Sharon, I., Boaretto, E.,Weiner, S. 2008. Phytolith-rich layers from the Late Bronze and
Iron Ages at Tel Dor (Israel): mode of formation and archaeological significance.
Journal of Archaeological Science 35, 57-75.
Ball, T. B., Gardner, J. S., and Anderson, N. 1999. Identifying Inflorescence phytoliths
from selected species of Wheat (Triticum Monoccum, T. Dicoccon, T. Dicoccoides, and
T. Aestivum) and Barley (Hordeum Vulgare andH. Spontaneum) (Gramineae).American
Journal of Botany 86, 16151623.
Ball, T. B. 2010. 43...Gramineae...Zea...mays...laminae...SEM of crossbody, and bilobate;
50...Gramineae...Zea...mays...laminae...SEM of crossbody, side view, Terry Ball's
Phytolith Page. http://home.byu.net/tbb/ (16th February 2010).
Bonnett, O. T. 1972. Silicified cells of grasses: A major source of plant opal in Illinois
soil.Agricultural experiment station bulletin 742. University of Illinois press, Urbana.
22
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/10406182http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=PublicationURL&_tockey=%23TOC%236046%232006%23998519998%23618604%23FLA%23&_cdi=6046&_pubType=J&view=c&_auth=y&_acct=C000006258&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=77869&md5=2e182f283c509560569381a4b050bc31http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/03054403http://home.byu.net/tbb/43.jpghttp://home.byu.net/tbb/50.jpghttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/10406182http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=PublicationURL&_tockey=%23TOC%236046%232006%23998519998%23618604%23FLA%23&_cdi=6046&_pubType=J&view=c&_auth=y&_acct=C000006258&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=77869&md5=2e182f283c509560569381a4b050bc31http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/03054403http://home.byu.net/tbb/43.jpghttp://home.byu.net/tbb/50.jpg7/29/2019 104564131 the Role of Biogenic Silica in Archaeology
23/29
Carnelli. A. L., Madella, M., Theurillat, J.P., and Ammann, B. 2002. Aluminium In The
Opal Silica Reticule of Phytoliths: A New tool in Palaeoecological Studies. American
Journal of Botany 89, 346-351.
Chandler-Ezell, K., Pearsall, D. M., and Zeidler, J. A. 2006. Root and Tuber Phytoliths
and starch grains document manioc (Manihot Esculeivta), Arrowroot (Maranta
Arundinacea)~ andLler~N (Calathea sp.) At the Real Alto Site, Ecuador.Economic
Botany 60, 103-120.
Elbaum, R., Weiner. S., Albert, R. M., Elbaum, M. 2003. Detection of Burning of Plant
Materials in the Archaeological Record by Changes in the Refractive Indices of Siliceous
Phytoliths.Journal of Archaeological Science 30, 217-226.
Elbaum, R., Melamed-Bessudo, C., Tuross, N., Levy. A. A., and Weiner, S. 2009. New
methods to isolate organic materials from silicified phytoliths reveal fragmented
glycoproteins but no DNA. Quaternary International193, 11-19.
Fox, C. L., Perez- Perez, A., and Juan, J. 1994. Dietary Information through the
Examination of Plant Phytoliths on the Enamel Surface of Human Dentition.Journal of
Archaeological Science 2, 299-34.
Fox, C. L., Juan, J. and Albert, R. M. 1996. Phytolith Analysis on Dental Calculus,
Enamel Surface, and Burial Soil: information About Diet and Paleoenvironment.
American Journal of Physical Anthropology 101, l0l-113.
Fredlund, G. G., and Tieszen, L. T. 1994. Modern phytolith assemblages from the North
American Great Plains.Journal of Biogeography 21, 321-335.
Hart, T. C. 2007. A Stroll Through The Park: Evaluating The Usefulness Of Phytolith
And Starch Remains Found On Medieval Sherds From Wicken, Northamptonshire,
England. Unpublicised MA Thesis. University of Missouri: Columbia.
23
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/10406182http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=PublicationURL&_tockey=%23TOC%236046%232009%23998069998%23751073%23FLA%23&_cdi=6046&_pubType=J&view=c&_auth=y&_acct=C000006258&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=77869&md5=eb87bfc074dd9586cdd84ffd7572f52chttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/03054403http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/03054403http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/10406182http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=PublicationURL&_tockey=%23TOC%236046%232009%23998069998%23751073%23FLA%23&_cdi=6046&_pubType=J&view=c&_auth=y&_acct=C000006258&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=77869&md5=eb87bfc074dd9586cdd84ffd7572f52chttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/03054403http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/030544037/29/2019 104564131 the Role of Biogenic Silica in Archaeology
24/29
Hart, J. P., and Matson, R.G. 2009. The use of multiple discriminate analysis in
classifying prehistoric phytolith assemblages recovered from cooking residues.Journal
of Archaeological Science 36, 74-83.
Hardy, K. 2008. Residue analysis of surface material from two quernstones.
Caherconnell Cashel, Caherconnell, Carron, Co. Clare Final Archaeological Excavation
Report
By Hull, G. and Comber, M. Dig results.
http://archaeology.burrenforts.ie/Caherconnell%2007E0820%20final%20report.pdf(19th
February 2010)
Harvey, E. L., and Fuller, D. Q. 2005. Investigating crop processing using phytolith
analysis: the example of rice and millets.Journal of Archaeological Science
32,739-752.
Henry, M. G., and Piperno, D. R. 2008. Using plant microfossils from dental calculus to
recover human diet: a case study from Tell al-Raq_ai, Syria. Journalof Archaeological
Science 35, 1943-1950.
Lentfer, C. J., Boyd W.E. and Torrence. R. 2001. Phtolith Research Relating to the
Archaeology of West New Britain, Papua New Guinea. (Eds) Meunier, J.D., Colin, F.
and Faure-Denard, L.Phytoliths: Applications in Earth Science and Human History, Aix
en Provence: Cerege fix. 83-198.
Madella, M., Power-Jones, A., Jones, M., 1998. A simple method of extraction of opal
phytoliths from sediments using a non-toxic heavy liquid.Journal of Archaeological
Science 25, 801803.
24
http://www.caherconnell.com/dig-resultshttp://archaeology.burrenforts.ie/Caherconnell%2007E0820%20final%20report.pdfhttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/03054403http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=PublicationURL&_tockey=%23TOC%236844%232005%23999679994%23586397%23FLA%23&_cdi=6844&_pubType=J&view=c&_auth=y&_acct=C000006258&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=77869&md5=68f4ac3a36979ab1b2f7bb59c3aeb1aahttp://www.caherconnell.com/dig-resultshttp://archaeology.burrenforts.ie/Caherconnell%2007E0820%20final%20report.pdfhttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/03054403http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=PublicationURL&_tockey=%23TOC%236844%232005%23999679994%23586397%23FLA%23&_cdi=6844&_pubType=J&view=c&_auth=y&_acct=C000006258&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=77869&md5=68f4ac3a36979ab1b2f7bb59c3aeb1aa7/29/2019 104564131 the Role of Biogenic Silica in Archaeology
25/29
Madella, M., Jones, M. K., Golberg, P., Goren, Y., Hovers, E. 2002. The Exploitation of
Plant Resources by Neanderthals in Amud Cave (Israel); The evidence from Phytolith
Studies.Journal of Archaeological Science 29, 703-719.
Madella, M. 2007. The analysis of phytolith from Braehead archaeological site. In M
Madella & D Zurro (eds) Plant People and Place - Recent Studies in Phytolith Analysis,
Oxbow Books, 101-10.
Madella, M. & Zurro, D. Integrated Archaeobotanical Research Project. Accessed
18/4/10 http://archaeobotany.dept.shef.ac.uk/wiki/index.php/Phytoliths_-_Interpretation
McClatchie, M. 2007.The study of non-wood plant macro-remains: Investigating past
societies and landscapes. InEnvironmental archaeology in Ireland
(Ed) Murphy, E. M. and Whitehouse, N. J. Oxford books: Oxford.
OConnor, T. and Evans, J. 2005.Environmental Archaeology: Principles and Methods.
Stroud, Glos: Sutton.
Osterrieth, M.,Madella, M., Zurro, D., and Alvarez, M. F. 2009.Taphonomical aspects of
silica phytoliths in the loess sediments of the Argentinean Pampas.Quaternary
International193. 70-79.
Pearsall, D. M., Dinian, E.H. 1992. Developing a phytolith classification system. In
Rapp, G. R., Mullholland, S. C., (eds)Phytolith Systematics: emerging issues (Advances
in Archaeological and Museum Science). Society for Archaeological Sciences. USA, 37-64.
Pearsall, P. M. 1993. The nature and Status of Phytolith Analysis in Pearsall, P. M. and
Piperno, D. R. (Eds) MASCA: Current Research in Phytolith Analysis: Applications in
archaeology and paleoecology 10. University of Pennsylvania Press. 9-18.
25
http://archaeobotany.dept.shef.ac.uk/wiki/index.php/Phytoliths_-_Interpretationhttp://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Environmental+archaeologyhttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/10406182http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/10406182http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/10406182http://www.upenn.edu/pennpress/series/UPM.htmlhttp://archaeobotany.dept.shef.ac.uk/wiki/index.php/Phytoliths_-_Interpretationhttp://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Environmental+archaeologyhttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/10406182http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/10406182http://www.upenn.edu/pennpress/series/UPM.html7/29/2019 104564131 the Role of Biogenic Silica in Archaeology
26/29
Pearsall, P. M. 2000.Paleoethnobotany: A Handbook of Procedures. Academic Press
355-494.
Pearsall, P. M., Andres, T.A., Stothert, K. E. 2000. Phytoliths in Cucurbita and
other Neotropical Cucurbitaceae and their Occurrence in Early Archaeological Sites from
the Lowland American Tropics.Journal of Archaeological Science 27, 193208
Piperno, D. P. 1988.Phytoliths Analysis: An Archaeological and Geological Perspective.
Academic Press. San Diego.
Piperno, D. P. 2003. A few kernels short of a cob: on the Staller and Thompson late entry
scenario for the introduction of maize into northern South America.Journal of
Archaeological ScienceVolume 30, Issue 7, 831-836.
Piperno, D. P. 2006.Phytoliths: A Comprehensive Guide for Archaeologists and
Paleoecologists. AltaMira press. Lanham, Maryland. 1-229.
Portillo, M., Ball, T., Manwaring, J. 2006. Morphometric Analysis of Inflorescence
Phytoliths Produced by Avena sativa L. and Avena strigosa Schreb.EconomicBotany60,121-9
Powers, A. H. 1992. Great Expectations: A Short Historical Review of Phytolith
Systematics in Rapp, G. R., Mullholland, S. C., (eds)Phytolith Systematics: emerging
issues (Advances in Archaeological and Museum Science). Society for Archaeological
Sciences. USA, 15-36.
Powers, A. H. 2003. Chapter 15: The Phytolith Assemblage. (ed) Barber, J.Bronze Age
Farms and Iron age Farm Mounds of the Outer Hebrides. Scottish Archaeological
Internet Report 3, http://www.sair.org.uk/sair3/sair3-contents.pdf, 178-189
26
http://www.librarything.com/author/pipernodoloresrhttp://www.librarything.com/author/pipernodoloresrhttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/03054403http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/03054403http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/03054403http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=PublicationURL&_tockey=%23TOC%236844%232003%23999699992%23432483%23FLA%23&_cdi=6844&_pubType=J&view=c&_auth=y&_acct=C000006258&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=77869&md5=53888e5a228ca4063f817f9b6379993dhttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=PublicationURL&_tockey=%23TOC%236844%232003%23999699992%23432483%23FLA%23&_cdi=6844&_pubType=J&view=c&_auth=y&_acct=C000006258&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=77869&md5=53888e5a228ca4063f817f9b6379993dhttp://www.librarything.com/author/pipernodoloresrhttp://%20void%200/http://%20void%200/http://%20void%200/http://%20void%200/http://%20void%200/http://%20void%200/http://%20void%200/http://%20void%200/http://www.sair.org.uk/sair3/sair3-contents.pdfhttp://www.librarything.com/author/pipernodoloresrhttp://www.librarything.com/author/pipernodoloresrhttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/03054403http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/03054403http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=PublicationURL&_tockey=%23TOC%236844%232003%23999699992%23432483%23FLA%23&_cdi=6844&_pubType=J&view=c&_auth=y&_acct=C000006258&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=77869&md5=53888e5a228ca4063f817f9b6379993dhttp://www.librarything.com/author/pipernodoloresrhttp://%20void%200/http://%20void%200/http://%20void%200/http://%20void%200/http://www.sair.org.uk/sair3/sair3-contents.pdf7/29/2019 104564131 the Role of Biogenic Silica in Archaeology
27/29
Rosen A.M. and Weiner, S. 1994. Identifying ancient irrigation: a new method usingopaline phytoliths from emmer wheat,Journal of Archaeological Science21, 132135.
Rosen, A. 2001. Phytolith evidence for agro-pastoral economies in the Scythian period of
southern Kazakhstan. (Eds) Meunier, J.D., Colin, F. and Faure-Denard, L.Phytoliths:
Applications in Earth Science and Human History, Aix en Provence: Cerege fix. 83-198.
Rovner, I. 1974 cited by Rovner, I. 2001. Cultural Behaviour and Botanical History:
Phytolith Analysis in Small Places and Narrow Intervals. (Eds) Meunier, J. D., Colin, F.
and Faure-Denard, L. The Phytoliths: Applications in Earth Science and Human History.
Aix en Provence: Cerege fix, 83-198.
Rovner, I. 1983. Plant Opal Phytolith Analysis: Major Advances in Archaeobotanical
Research.Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory 6, 225-266.
Rovner, I. 2001. Cultural Behaviour and Botanical History: Phytolith Analysis in Small
Places and Narrow Intervals. Eds) Meunier, J.D., Colin, F. and Faure-Denard, L. The
Phytoliths: Applications in Earth Science and Human History. Aix en Provence: Cerege
fix, 83-198
Rovner, I. 2004. On transparent blindfolds: Comments on identifying maize in
neotropical sediments and soils using cob phytoliths.Journal of Archaeological Science
Volume 31, Issue 6, 815-819.
Strmberg, C. A. E. 2009. Methodological concerns for analysis of phytolithassemblages: Does count size matter? Quaternary International193, 124-140
Terry, B., Gardner, J. S., Brotherson, J. D. 1996. Identifying Phytoliths Produced by the
Inflorescence Bracts of Three Species of Wheat (Triticum monococcum.,T. dicoccon
27
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublication?journalCode=advarchmeththeohttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/03054403http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=PublicationURL&_tockey=%23TOC%236844%232004%23999689993%23487954%23FLA%23&_cdi=6844&_pubType=J&view=c&_auth=y&_acct=C000006258&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=77869&md5=eb913a95820d724013e73a8a59557ff7http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/10406182http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=PublicationURL&_tockey=%23TOC%236046%232009%23998069998%23751073%23FLA%23&_cdi=6046&_pubType=J&view=c&_auth=y&_acct=C000006258&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=77869&md5=eb87bfc074dd9586cdd84ffd7572f52chttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublication?journalCode=advarchmeththeohttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/03054403http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=PublicationURL&_tockey=%23TOC%236844%232004%23999689993%23487954%23FLA%23&_cdi=6844&_pubType=J&view=c&_auth=y&_acct=C000006258&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=77869&md5=eb913a95820d724013e73a8a59557ff7http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/10406182http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=PublicationURL&_tockey=%23TOC%236046%232009%23998069998%23751073%23FLA%23&_cdi=6046&_pubType=J&view=c&_auth=y&_acct=C000006258&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=77869&md5=eb87bfc074dd9586cdd84ffd7572f52c7/29/2019 104564131 the Role of Biogenic Silica in Archaeology
28/29
Schrank., and T. aestivum.) Using Computer-Assisted Image and Statistical Analyses.
Journal of Archaeological Science 23, 619632.
Tsartsidou, G., Lev-Yadun, S., Albert, R., Rosen, A., Efstratiou, N., Weiner S. 2007. The
phytolith archaeological record: strengths and weaknesses evaluated based on a
quantitative modern reference collection from Greece.Journal of Archaeological Science
34, 1262-1275.
Tsartsidou, G., Lev-Yadun, S., Efstratiou, N., Weiner, S. 2008. Ethnoarchaeological
study of phytolith assemblages from an agro-pastoral village in Northern Greece
(Saakini): development and application of a Phytolith Difference Index.Journal of
Archaeological Science 35, 600-613.
Tsartsidou, G., Lev-Yadun, S., Efstratiou, N., Weiner, S. 2009. Use of space in a
Neolithic village in Greece (Makri): phytolith analysis and comparison of phytolith
assemblages from an ethnographic setting in the same area. Journal of Archaeological
Science36, 2342-2352.
Wilkinson, K., and Stevens, C. 2003.Environmental Archaeology:Approaches,
Techniques & Applications. Tempus Publishing Ltd.
Verma, S.D. and Rust, R. H. 1969 cited by Piperno, D. P. 2006.Phytoliths: A
Comprehensive Guide for Archaeologists and Paleoecologists. AltaMira press:Lanham,
Maryland.
Verma, S.D. and Rust, R. H. 1969 cited by D. P. 2006.Phytoliths: A Comprehensive
Guide for Archaeologists and Paleoecologists. AltaMira press:Lanham, Maryland.
Zhao, Z., and Piperno, D. R. 2000. Late Pleistocene/Holocene Environments in the
middleYangtze River Valley, China and rice (oryza sativa L.) domestication: Thephytolith evidence. Geoarchaeology15, 203-222.
28
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/03054403http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/03054403http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=PublicationURL&_tockey=%23TOC%236844%232009%23999639989%231420092%23FLA%23&_cdi=6844&_pubType=J&view=c&_auth=y&_acct=C000006258&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=77869&md5=0734c009cd07e83b4d1ba6b80a301fd9http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/search-handle-url?_encoding=UTF8&search-type=ss&index=books-uk&field-author=Keith%20Wilkinsonhttp://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/search-handle-url?_encoding=UTF8&search-type=ss&index=books-uk&field-author=Christopher%20Stevenshttp://www.librarything.com/author/pipernodoloresrhttp://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/36011/homehttp://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/69502641/issuehttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/03054403http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/03054403http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=PublicationURL&_tockey=%23TOC%236844%232009%23999639989%231420092%23FLA%23&_cdi=6844&_pubType=J&view=c&_auth=y&_acct=C000006258&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=77869&md5=0734c009cd07e83b4d1ba6b80a301fd9http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/search-handle-url?_encoding=UTF8&search-type=ss&index=books-uk&field-author=Keith%20Wilkinsonhttp://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/search-handle-url?_encoding=UTF8&search-type=ss&index=books-uk&field-author=Christopher%20Stevenshttp://www.librarything.com/author/pipernodoloresrhttp://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/36011/homehttp://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/69502641/issue7/29/2019 104564131 the Role of Biogenic Silica in Archaeology
29/29
Zurro, D., Madella, M., Assumpcio, I. B. 2009. Variability of the phytolith record in
fisherhuntergatherer sites: An example from the Yamana society (Beagle Channel,
Tierra del Fuego, Argentina). Quaternary International193, 184-191.