Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-wq2xx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-19T12:43:27.269Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Identification of Maize Pollen: Reply to Eubanks

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Miriam L. Fearn  and
Kam-Biu Liu
Miriam L. Fearn
Affiliation:
Department of Geology and Geography, University of South Alabama, Mobile, AL 36688
Kam-Biu Liu
Affiliation:
Department of Geography and Anthropology, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA 70803
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Eubanks bases her identification of the fossil pollen grain from Alabama as Tripsacum primarily on her calculated spinule density. To make those calculations, she used only our published photograph, and she assumed a grain expansion of 35 percent. She ignores the fact that the spinule density of the fossil pollen grain is actually the same as that of similarly treated Zea mays pollen. While there is always the possibility of a misidentification or of long-distance transport, the most likely interpretation remains that the 3500 B.P. pollen grain is Zea mays and that it represents limited cultivation of ancient corn in southern Alabama.

Eubanks identifica el grano fosilifero de polen de Alabama como Tripsacum principalmente en base a cálcules de la densidad de espinas. Ella realizeó los cálcules unicamente en base a nuestra fotografia publicada presumiendo una expansión de 35 por ciento. No tiene en cuenta que la densidad de espinas en el grano fosilifero de polen es en realidad igual al polen de Zea mays sujeto al mismo tratamiento. No se pueden descartar las posibilidades de identificación equivocada о el deplazamiento de larga distancia pero la interpretaciín más probable es que el grano de polen de 3500 B. P. es Zea mays y que revela el cultivo limitado del maíz antiguo en el sur de Alabama.

Type
Comments
Information
American Antiquity , Volume 62 , Issue 1 , January 1997 , pp. 146 - 148
Copyright
Copyright © Society for American Archaeology 1997

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

Andersen, S. T. 1960 Silicone Oil as a Mounting Medium for Pollen Grains. Danmarks Geol. Unders. 4: 1–24.Google Scholar
Bannerjee, U. C, and Barghoorn, E. S. 1970 Electron Microscopy of the Pollen Grains of Maize, Teosinte, and Tripsacum. Maize Genetics Cooperation Newsletter 44: 43–44.Google Scholar
Bryant, V M., and Hall, S. A. 1993 Archaeological Palynology in the United States: a Critique. American Antiquity 58: 277–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eubanks, M. 1995 Morphological Differences in Pollen Grains of Zea diploperennis, Tripsacum dactyloides, Tripsacum-diploperennis Hybrids and Maize. Maize Genetics Cooperation Newsletter 69: 55–56.Google Scholar
Faegri, K., and Iversen, J. 1989 Textbook of Pollen Analysis. John Wiley and Sons, New York.Google Scholar
Fearn, M. L., and Liu, K. 1995 Maize Pollen of 3500 B.P. from Southern Alabama. American Antiquity 60: 109–117.Google Scholar
Grant, C. A. 1972 A Scanning Electron Microscopy Survey of Some Maydeae Pollen. Grana 12: 177–184.Google Scholar
Purseglove, J. W. 1972 Tropical Crops: Monocotyledons 1. John Wiley and Sons, New York.Google Scholar
Reitsma, T. J. 1969 Size Modification of Recent Pollen Grains under Different Treatments. Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology 9: 175–202.Google Scholar
Tsukada, M., and Rowley, J. R. 1964 Identification of Modern and Fossil Maize Pollen. Grana Palynologica 5: 406–412.Google Scholar