Archaeobotany of Brazilian Indigenous Peoples and Their Food Plants

Cassino, Mariana Franco; Shock, Myrtle P.; Furquim, Laura Pereira; Ortega, Daniela Dias; Machado, Juliana Salles; Madella, Marco; Clement, Charles R.

doi:10.1007/978-3-030-69139-4_8

Cited by 8 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 92 publications

(101 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…cited species, eight have populations with some degree of domestication (Clement, 1999); and nine have been found in archaeobotanical records of archeological sites in Amazonia (Cassino et al, 2021). The use and management of these species by pre-colonial Indigenous Peoples during thousands of years of occupation of Amazonia transformed landscapes, creating forests with high richness and abundance of species useful to humans, which persist in the present (Levis et al, 2017(Levis et al, , 2018.…”

Section: Long-term Forest Traditional Ecological Knowledgementioning

confidence: 99%

Local forest specialists maintain traditional ecological knowledge in the face of environmental threats to Brazilian Amazonian protected areas

Alves

Levis

Bertin

et al. 2022

Front. For. Glob. Change

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is a concern that environmental threats that result in local biodiversity loss compromise traditional peoples’ livelihoods and their traditional ecological knowledge (TEK). Nonetheless, studies usually only analyze how people’s characteristics influence TEK. Here, we investigated both: how the personal characteristics of local specialists (forest experience, gender, and origin) and environmental threats (deforestation, mining, and fires) influence some components of TEK associated with forests. From 2015 to 2019, we conducted free-listing interviews with 208 specialists from 27 communities in and near 10 protected areas (PAs) in Brazilian Amazonia. We recorded forest trees and palms that the specialists mentioned as used, managed, and traded. Plant knowledge was variable, since 44% of the 795 ethnospecies were mentioned only once. Using Mixed-Effects Models, we identified that people with longer forest experience and men tended to cite more used and traded ethnospecies. Women knew more about human food, while men knew more about construction and animal food. Specialists with greater forest experience knew more about protective management and planting. Specialists living in communities influenced by mining cited fewer used ethnospecies, and those in more deforested communities cited proportionally more planting. Environmental threats had smaller effects on TEK than personal characteristics. The components of TEK that we assessed highlight the forest’s great utility and the importance of management of PAs to maintain biodiversity and traditional people’s livelihoods. The communities’ stocks of TEK persisted in the face of environmental threats to PAs, highlighting the resistance of traditional peoples in the face of adversities. This quantitative approach did not show the trends that are generally imagined, i.e., loss of forest TEK, but demonstrates that if we want to change the Amazonian development model to keep the forest standing, knowledge exists and resists.

show abstract

Section: Long-term Forest Traditional Ecological Knowledgementioning

confidence: 99%

Local forest specialists maintain traditional ecological knowledge in the face of environmental threats to Brazilian Amazonian protected areas

Alves

Levis

Bertin

et al. 2022

Front. For. Glob. Change

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Orphan crops of archaeology‐based crop history research

Fuks,

Schmidt,

García‐Collado

et al. 2024

Plants People Planet

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Societal Impact StatementAgrobiodiversity is central to sustainable farming worldwide. Cultivation, conservation and reintroduction of diverse plant species, including ‘forgotten’ and ‘underutilized’ crops, contribute to global agrobiodiversity, living ecosystems and sustainable food production. Such efforts benefit from traditional and historical knowledge of crop plants' evolutionary and cultural trajectories. This review is a first attempt at systematically gauging species representativeness in studies of archaeological plant remains. Results indicate that, in addition to discipline‐specific methodological sources of bias, modern agricultural biases may replicate themselves in crop history research and influence understandings of ‘forgotten crops’. Recognizing these biases is an initial stride towards rectifying them and promoting agrobiodiversity in both research and practical applications.SummarySo‐called ‘forgotten’ or ‘orphan’ crops are an important component of strategies aimed at preserving and promoting biodiversity. Knowledge of historical cultivation, usage, and geographic and evolutionary trajectories of plants, that is, crop history research, is important for the long‐term success of such efforts. However, research biases in the crops chosen for study may present hurdles. This review attempts to systematically identify patterns in crop species representativeness within archaeology‐based crop history research. A meta‐analysis and synthesis of archaeobotanical evidence (and lack thereof) is presented for 268 species known to have been cultivated for food prior to 1492 CE from the Mediterranean region to South Asia. We identified 39 genera with known crop plants in this geographical and historical context that are currently absent from its archaeobotanical record, constituting ‘orphan’ crops of archaeobotany. In addition, a worldwide synthesis of crop species studied using geometric morphometric, archaeogenetic and stable isotope analyses of archaeological plant remains is presented, and biases in the species represented in these disciplines are discussed. Both disciplinary methodological biases and economic agenda‐based biases affecting species representativeness in crop history research are apparent. This study also highlights the limited geographic diffusion of most crops and the potential for deeper historical perspectives on how crops become marginalized and ‘forgotten’.

show abstract