Identifying archaeological parenchyma in three dimensions: Diagnostic assessment of five important food plant species in the Indo‐Pacific region

Abstract

Archaeobotanical evidence for the exploitation of vegetatively propagated underground storage organs (USOs) in the tropical regions of Australia, Southeast Asia and the Pacific is currently limited. Although there have been several key studies of archaeological parenchyma published in the past two decades, systematic application of identification methods for vegetatively propagated crop species utilising charred, desiccated or waterlogged remains of parenchymatous tissue is not undertaken on a regular basis. Here, microCT imaging technology is used to compile a three‐dimensional virtual reference collection of parenchymatous tissues for five key USO species known to have been extensively cultivated by people in these regions. The five species are Dioscorea alata, Dioscorea esculenta, Colocasia esculenta, Alocasia macrorrhiza and Ipomoea batatas. These reference samples are used to illustrate the character of the virtual, microCT derived reference collection, and they also capture inter‐species differentiation and intra‐species morphological variation characteristic of many tuberous root crops.

Grand challenge: Environmental archaeology as intersectional, translational and inclusive practice

“…Root cops can be investigated using archaeological parenchyma (Hather, 2000), but limited research has been undertaken on the discrimination of wild and domestic morphotypes (see Ménard et al, 2013). Although traditionally undertaken using optical microscopy and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) (Hather, 2000;Kubiak-Martens, 2016), new and complementary applications of microcomputed tomography (microCT) have enormous potential to enable greater qualitative and quantitative investigation of archaeological parenchyma fragments (Barron et al, 2022;Barron, 2023). Here, the transfer of a technique from material science has…”

Putting the Dark Emu debate into context

“…Taro corms, like most USOs, are highly plastic; namely, the phenotype is heavily controlled by the environment of growth rather than just by genotypic inheritance (Barron et al., 2022; Denham et al., 2020). The size, shape and phytochemistry of taro corms, like many USOs, are heavily influenced by soil characteristics, rhizosphere and water balance.…”

“…Although the systematic investigation of archaeological parenchyma is at a relatively early stage of application, these types of investigation are essential to understand how Aboriginal communities used USOs in the past. As well as providing substantive information on how people used diverse plant resources in the past, the reference collections of modern specimens compiled as part of these studies will also hopefully be made freely available to other researchers in order that research capacity can be built and accumulate through time (Figure 7; see Barron & Denham, 2022; Barron et al., 2022).…”

A preservação de restos arqueobotânicos e o processo de análise por microtomografia de raios X

“…Nos últimos 10 anos, a técnica de microtomografia de raios X, juntamente com os procedimentos computacionais de análise de imagens microtomográficas, tem sido usada para o estudo de variados tipos de materiais arqueológicos e com objetivos de pesquisa também diversos. Entre eles podem-se citar, por exemplo, alguns trabalhos de identificação de inclusões em artefatos de pedra e cerâmica (Obata, Miyaura & Nakano 2020;Ward et al 2019), caracterização de pastas cerâmicas (Kahl & Ramminger 2012;Lima et al 2007), objetos e decorações metálicas (Azeredo et al 2019;Machado et al 2019), análises de material ósseo humano e de outros animais e processos de mumificação (Beck et al 2012;Bello, De Groote & Delbarre 2013;Boschin et al 2015;Johnston et al 2020;Nava et al 2017), visualização de escritos antigos sobre suportes dobrados e frágeis (Stabile et al 2021), estudos de processos tafonômicos em sedimentos e artefatos (McBride & Mercer 2012;Ngan-Tillard et al 2015;Villagran et al 2019), e identificação de materiais arqueobotânicos (Calo et al 2019;Calo et al 2020;Coubray, Zech-Matterne & Mazurier 2010;Haneca et al 2012;Mizuno, Torizu & Sugiyama 2010;Murphy & Fuller 2017;Stelzner & Million 2015;Zong et al 2017) (Barron, Pritchard & Denham 2022;Barron & Denham 2018).…”