Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-rdgjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-07T09:02:15.575Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Phytoliths and rice: from wet to dry and back again in the Neolithic Lower Yangtze

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 October 2015

Alison Weisskopf
Affiliation:
Institute of Archaeology, University College London, 31–34 Gordon Square, London WC1H 0PY, UK (Email: d.fuller@ucl.ac.uk)
Ling Qin
Affiliation:
School of Archaeology and Museology, Peking University, 5 Yiheyuan Road, Beijing 100871, China
Jinglong Ding
Affiliation:
Suzhou Research Institute of Archaeology, Suzhou, Jiangsu, 215005, China
Pin Ding
Affiliation:
Zhejiang Province Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology, Hangzhou, Zhejiang 310014, China
Guoping Sun
Affiliation:
Zhejiang Province Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology, Hangzhou, Zhejiang 310014, China
Dorian Q Fuller
Affiliation:
Institute of Archaeology, University College London, 31–34 Gordon Square, London WC1H 0PY, UK (Email: d.fuller@ucl.ac.uk)
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The cultivation of rice has had a major impact on both societies and their environments in Asia, and in China in particular. Phytolith assemblages from three Neolithic sites in the Lower Yangtze valley reveal that in early rice fields the emphasis was on drainage to limit the amount of water and force the rice to produce seed. It was only in the later third millennium BC that the strategy changed and irrigated paddies came into use. The results demonstrate that plant remains, including weed assemblages, can reveal wetter or drier growing conditions, showing changes in rice cultivation from flooded and drained fields to large, intensively irrigated paddies.

Information

Type
Research
Copyright
Copyright © Antiquity Publications Ltd, 2015 
Figure 0

Figure 1. Map of archaeological sites in China sampled for this study and modern analogue sites in India.

Figure 1

Table 1. Phytolith morphotypes from grasses classified into fixed and sensitive morphotypes.

Figure 2

Figure 2. Example of phytolith morphotypes included in this study, from modern reference material: A) Avena leaf long sinuate; B) Chloris virgata leaf saddles; C) Setaria faberii leaf square bilobate; D) Bromus catharticus leaves long smooth and rondels; E) Oryza rufipogon leaf scooped bilobes; F) wild Setaria sp. leaf bilobate; G) Panicum miliceum leaf long cells and bilobes; H) Coix lachrymajobi leaf crosses; I) Ischaemum rugosum leaf bilobes; J) Stipa tirsa leaf round rondels; K) Bambusa sp. leaf collapsed saddles; L) Dactylis glomerata leaf long smooth.

Figure 3

Figure 3. Examples of modern rice stands in India sampled for phytoliths in this study: A) upland rain-fed rice, Penchant Ghat, Maharashtra (I2); B) lowland rain-fed rice, central Odisha (I4); C) lowland rain-fed rice, Maharashtra (I1); D) decrue field in Munda zone of northern Odisha, ranging from dry to deep water (I7); E) Oryza rufipogon, perennial wild rice, north-east Odisha (I10); F) Oryza nivara, annual wild rice, north-east Odisha (I5).

Figure 4

Table 2. Modern rice stands in India sampled for phytoliths and grouped via relative degrees of wetness (further details of sites in Weisskopf et al.2014).

Figure 5

Figure 4. The archaeological sites sampled for this study: A) Tianluoshan Site, main part of ancient river (centre) and western river bank, with posts aligned along the bank (left); B) Caoxieshan site, plan of trench T0422 plan (F1: house platform with postholes; S: paddy fields); C) Caoxieshan site trench during excavations showing paddyfield units (trench is 5m wide); D) Maoshan site, overview of whole paddy area (orange lines drawn over paths/embankments between paddy fields; archaeological trenches are 15m2; E) part of Maoshan excavations showing a view of pathway L2, the eastern-most field boundary uncovered, running north–south.

Figure 6

Figure 5. Percentage of fixed vs sensitive phytolith morphotypes in wild rice stands and modern Indian rice fields; percentages exclude all phytolith types not within the sensitive/fixed classification.

Figure 7

Figure 6. Comparison of the proportion of sensitive vs fixed phytolith morphotypes across three archaeological sites of different phases in the Lower Yangtze: A) comparison of river edge or field palaeosol assemblages; B) comparison of cultural layer/midden context assemblages.

Supplementary material: File

Weisskopf supplementary material

Table S1

Download Weisskopf supplementary material(File)
File 22.1 KB