The Invention of American Agriculture in Tehuacan Valley

The Tehuacà ¡n Valley, or more precisely the Tehuacà ¡n-Cuicatlà ¡n valley, is located in southeastern Puebla state and northwestern Oaxaca state in central Mexico. It is the southernmost arid area of Mexico, its aridity caused by the rain shadow of the Sierra Madre Oriental mountain range. Annual mean temperature averages 21 degrees C (70 F) and rainfall 400 millimeters (16 inches). In the 1960s, the Tehuacà ¡n Valley was the focus of a large-scale survey called the Tehuacà ¡n Project, led by American archaeologist Richard S. MacNeish. MacNeish and his team were looking for the Late Archaic origins of maize. The valley was selected because of its climate and its high level of biological diversity (more on that later). MacNeishs large, multi-discipline project identified nearly 500 cave and open-air sites, including the 10,000-year-long, occupied San Marcos, Purron, and Coxcatlà ¡n caves. Extensive excavations in the valleys caves, particularly Coxcatlà ¡n Cave, led to the discovery of the earliest appearance at the time of several important American plant domesticates: not just maize, but bottle gourd, squash, and beans. Excavations recovered over 100,000 plant remains, as well as other artifacts. Coxcatlà ¡n Cave Coxcatlà ¡n Cave is a rock shelter that was occupied by humans for nearly 10,000 years. Identified by MacNeish during his survey in the 1960s, the cave includes an area of about 240 square meters (2,600 square feet) beneath a rock overhang about 30 meters (100 feet) long by 8 m (26 ft) deep. Large-scale excavations conducted by MacNeish and colleagues included about 150 sqm (1600 sq ft) of that horizontal range and vertically down to the bedrock of the cave, some 2-3 m (6.5-10 ft) or more to bedrock. Excavations at the site identified at least 42 discrete occupation levels, within that 2-3 m of sediment. Features identified at the site include hearths, cache pits, ash scatters, and organic deposits. The documented occupations varied considerably in terms of size, seasonal duration, and number and variety of artifacts and activity areas. Most importantly, the earliest dates on domesticated forms of squash, beans and maize were identified within Coxcatlà ¡ns cultural levels. And the process of domestication was in evidence as well—especially in terms of maize cobs, which are documented here as growing larger and with an increased number of rows over time. Dating Coxcatlà ¡n Comparative analysis grouped the 42 occupations into 28 habitation zones and seven cultural phases. Unfortunately, conventional radiocarbon dates on organic materials (like carbon and wood) within the cultural phases were not consistent within the phases or zones. That was likely the result of vertical displacement by human activities such pit-digging, or by rodent or insect disturbance called bioturbation. Bioturbation is a common issue in cave deposits and indeed many archaeological sites. However, the recognized mixing led to an extensive controversy during the 1970s and 1980s, with several scholars raising doubts about the validity of the dates for the first maize, squash, and beans. By the late 1980s, AMS radiocarbon methodologies which allow for smaller samples were available and the plant remains themselves—seeds, cobs, and rinds--could be dated. The following table lists the calibrated dates for the earliest direct-dated examples recovered from Coxcatlà ¡n cave. Cucurbita argyrosperma (cushaw gourd) 115 cal BCPhaseolus vulgaris (common bean) cal 380 BCZea mays (maize) 3540 cal BCLagenaria siceraria (bottle gourd) 5250 BCCucurbita pepo (pumpkins, zucchini) 5960 BC A DNA study (Janzen and Hubbard 2016) of a cob from Tehuacan dated to 5310 cal BP found that the cob was genetically closer to modern maize than to its wild progenitor teosinte, suggesting that maize domestication was well underway before Coxcatlan was occupied. Tehuacà ¡n-Cuicatlà ¡n Valley Ethnobotany One of the reasons MacNeish selected the Tehuacà ¡n valley is because of its level of biological diversity: a high diversity is a common characteristic of places where first domestications are documented. In the 21st century, the Tehuacà ¡n-Cuicatlà ¡n valley has been the focus of extensive ethnobotanical studies—ethnobotanists are interested in how people use and manage plants. These studies reveal the valley has the highest biological diversity of all the arid zones in North America, as well as one of the richest areas in Mexico for ethnobiological knowledge. One study (Davila and colleagues 2002) recorded over 2,700 species of flowering plants within an area of approximately 10,000 square kilometers (3,800 square miles). The valley also has a high human cultural diversity, with Nahua, Popoloca, Mazatec, Chinantec, Ixcatec, Cuicatec, and Mixtec groups together accounting for 30% of the total population. Local people have amassed an immense amount of traditional knowledge including the names, uses, and ecological information on nearly 1,600 plant species. They also practice a variety of agricultural and silviculture techniques including the care, management, and preservation of nearly 120 native plant species. In Situ and Ex Situ Plant Management The ethnobotanists studies documented local practices in habitats where the plants naturally occur, called in situ management techniques: Tolerance, where useful wild plants are left standingEnhancement, activities that increase the plant population density and availability of useful plant speciesProtection, actions which favor permanence of particular plants through care Ex situ management practiced in Tehuacan involves seed sowing, planting of vegetative propagules and transplanting of entire plants from their natural habitats into managed areas such as agricultural systems or home-gardens. Sources Blancas J, Casas A, Lira R, and Caballero J. 2009. Traditional Management and Morphological Patterns of Myrtillocactus schenckii (Cactaceae) in the Tehuacà ¡n Valley, Central Mexico. Economic Botany 63(4):375-387.Blancas J, Casas A, Rangel-Landa S, Moreno-Calles A, Torres I, Pà ©rez-Negrà ³n E, Solà ­s L, Delgado-Lemus A, Parra F, Arellanes Y et al. 2010. Plant Management in the Tehuacà ¡n-Cuicatlà ¡n Valley, Mexico. Economic Botany 64(4):287-302.Dà ¡vila P, Arizmendi MDC, Valiente-Banuet A, Villaseà ±or JL, Casas A, and Lira R. 2002. Biological diversity in the Tehuacà ¡n-Cuicatlà ¡n Valley, Mexico. Biodiversity Conservation 11(3):421-442.Farnsworth P, Brady JE, DeNiro MJ, and MacNeish RS. 1985. A re-evaluation of the isotopic and archaeological reconstructions of diet in the Tehuacan Valley. American Antiquity 50(1):102-116.Flannery KV, and MacNeish RS. 1997. In defense of the Tehuacà ¡n project. Current Anthropology 38(4):660-672.Fritz GJ. 1994. Are the first American farmers getting younger? Current Anthropology 35(1):305-309.Gumerman GJ, and Neely JA. 1972. An Archaeological Survey of the Tehuacan Valley, Mexico: A Test of Color Infrared Photography. American Antiquity 37(4):520-527.Janzen GM, and Hufford MB. 2016. Crop Domestication: A Sneak-Peek into the Midpoint of Maize Evolution. Current Biology 26(23):R1240-R1242.Long A, Benz BF, Donahue DJ, Jull AJT, and Toolin LJ. 1989. First Direct AMS Dates on Early Maize From Tehuacan, Mexico. Radiocarbon 31(3):1035-1040.Long A, and Fritz GJ. 2001. Validity of AMS dates on maize from the Tehuacà ¡n Valley: A comment on MacNeish and Eubanks. Latin American Antiquity 12(1):87-90.MacNeish RS, and Eubanks MW. 2000. Comparative analysis of the Rio Balsas and Tehuacà ¡n models for the origin of maize. Latin American Antiquity 11(1):3-20.Smith BD. 2005. Reassessing Coxcatlà ¡n Cave and the early history of domesticated plants in Mesoamerica. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 102(27):9438-94 45.