Directly dated starch residues document early formative maize ( <i>Zea mays</i> L.) in tropical Ecuador
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study of maize (Zea mays L.) domestication has advanced from questions of its origins to the study-and debate-of its dietary role and the timing of its dispersal from Mexico. Because the investigation of maize's spread is hampered by poor preservation of macrobotanical remains in the Neotropics, research has focused on microbotanical remains whose contexts are often dated by association, leading some to question the dates assigned. Furthermore, some scholars have argued that maize was not introduced to southwestern Ecuador until approximately 4150-3850 calendar years before the present (cal B.P.), that it was used first and foremost as a fermented beverage in ceremonial contexts, and that it was not important in everyday subsistence, challenging previous studies based on maize starch and phytoliths. To further investigate these questions, we analyzed every-day cooking vessels, food-processing implements, and sediments for starch and phytoliths from an archaeological site in southwestern Ecuador constituting a small Early Formative village. Employing a new technique to recover starch granules from charred cooking-pot residues we show that maize was present, cultivated, and consumed here in domestic contexts by at least 5300-4950 cal B.P. Directly dating the residues by accelerator mass spectrometry (AMS) radiocarbon measurement, our results represent the earliest direct dates for maize in Early Formative Ecuadorian sites and provide further support that, once domesticated approximately 9000 calendar years ago, maize spread rapidly from southwestern Mexico to northwestern South America.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".