Showing posts with label Panicum miliaceum. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Panicum miliaceum. Show all posts

Thursday, 12 February 2026

Post-Domestication regional evolution

UCL Archaeobotany
Setaria italica grain variation:
above, from Gansu;
below, from Karnataka

It is true that evolution never stops--a suitable point to reflect upon on Darwin's birthday (12 Feb 1809) Some authors, would therefore insist, that domestication processes never cease and are always unfolding (a key argument in the recent book by Robert Spengler, Nature's Greatest Success), but I think there are grounds for differentiating the initial domestication episode that separates cultivars from the their wild population and later diversification and regional adaptation that took place within geographical subsets of a crop. In a paper in 2009, "The nature of selection during plant domestication", we drew attention to some differences and different expectations between domestication and diversification [incidentally that paper was also published in February 12, the 200th birthday or Charles Darwin]. The expectations are that diversification may occur over shorter timescales, differ between regions, and may (but may not) involve some conscious selection, based on farmer preferences. As archaeobotanical datasets have become larger and from more regions it offers the potential to compare and contrast how crops were evolving and differentiating across regions-- at least in those traits we can observe on archaeobotanical material. As noted in a recent blog (Bigger Beans...) there is clear evidence for selection for larger seeded legume crops around the greater Mediterranean some time after the classical period. While Grasso et al. (2025) argue for intentional selection in southern Italian farmers of the Middle Ages for larger broadbeans, I suggested in a previous blog that this might not be so because of the striking parallels across lentil, chickpea, grasspea and broadbean for macro-seeded forms around a wider Mediterranean world. This coincidence suggests to me an unconscious process of parallel evolution/adaptation to something in the ecology of bean farming in Late Antiquity to the Middle Ages (perhaps heavier tillage and also less incidence of water stress).


Aspects of grain size and grain shape are easily measured, and indeed have been measured for many years. Last year, in a large compilation of grain metrical data from archaeological assemblages acorss Eurasia, together with Rita Dal Martello, Robert Spengler and other colleagues from the Max Planck archaeobotany lab, we considered Contrasting diachronic regional trends in cereal grain evolution across Eurasia: a metadata analysis of linear morphometrics from the ninth millennium BCE to today. This study considered barley, free-threshing wheat (presumablty predominantly hexaploid bread wheat), and the millets of Chinese origin, Panicum miliaceum and Setaria italica. All four of these crops have pan Eurasain distributions, with dispersals beyond their regions of origin beginning in the Neolithic and having largely reached their maximum distributions by the end of the Bronze Age. As these crops came into a region one can expect them to adapt to local conditions, both ecological and cultural. What we found that is most striking, however,  is parallel trends in size/shape change in different crops in the same region, and often contrasting directions of change in different regions. While one might expect this with wheat and barley, that might be grown together in the same season, to find this across these cereals and millets is striking. The image above compares regional trends in grain length and width in free-threshing wheat, while the image below compares trends in the millets. Over the past 3000 years wheat and both millets tend to get longer in Central Asia; this is also true of both millets in East Asia. By contrast in northern Europe grains of all three species are becoming shorter over the same period. In Europe, wheats on average become shorter and fatter in north, but longer and skinner around the Mediterranean. In Central Asia wheat behaves more like southern Europe and the Near East. 


This all points to different selective environments in different regions. Sometimes shared across crops. Previously smaller scale, and shorter timeline studies have suggested that as wheat moved east to China grains became shorter and plumper (Liu Xinyi's "virtue of small grain size"), perhaps to make them more millet-like for cooking in East Asian boiling traditions. It is not clear such patterns hold up. Would such an explanation also be suitable for the trends in post-Roman northern European wheat? More problematic still is that the large dataset in Dal MArtello et al. (2025) is that decreasing grain length is seen in wheat starting in central Asia around the same time as its arrival in East Asia. These regions we might expect to have different cooking traditions and different cultural selection environments? The trend reverses around 2000 years ago with grains again getting larger.

An unambiguous explanation for this is elusive. It could be that there were some environmental factors in each region acting across crops. These need not be directly on grain size either, as grain size may scale allometrically with selection on other aspects of size, like plant height. Shorter and smaller plants might be more resistent to lodging in some kinds of weather or more drought tolerant. For example the Indian shot wheat, Triticum sphaeroccum,  has particularly short grains, as well as shorter plants, which seems to evolved twice in South Asia as adaptations to extremely high temperatures and evapotranspiration, even though sphaerococcoid grains reduce grain weight and overall yield (see Cheng et al. 2020).

The more general point is that crops have always been evolving and differ across regions. The foxtail millet (Setaria italica) grains at the head of this post contrast short plump grains from China (Lixian, Gansu) and skinner grains from India (Sanganakallu, Karnataka) both from the UCL archaeobotany reference collections. Explaining these differences may be hard, but what is clear that archaeobotany and systematic measurement of more assemblages can provide a window on tracking how regional populations varied across time.


Saturday, 20 July 2019

Panicum domestication and early sedentism in Northeast China


For the past decade the Xinglongwa culture of eastern Inner Mongolia (Liao River valley) has been regarded as a likely cultural context for the domestication of common millet (Panicum miliaceum), on the basis of significant quantities of Panicum grains associated with some of the many houses excavated at the site of Xinglonggou (see, e.g. Zhao 2011). Recently, new excavations by a Chinese-Israeli collaborative team (with some London archaeobotanists) explored parts of two new small settlement sites of this period, Jiajiagou (5950-5700 BC) and Tachiyingzi (5550-5450 BC), including intensive flotation, have been published this week in PLOSone. At both sites a single dwelling was excavated and sampled, and the archaeobotanical data indicate a predominance of wild plant foods, including walnuts, apricot endocarps, hawthorns, Phellodendron, but Panicum miliaceum is also present is small quantities-- 16 in total at both sites, with more and higher ubiquity at the later site. Most of these Panicum grains are more elongate then plump, with size and L/W ratios that correspond better to Panicum miliaeceum subsp. ruderale, known today as a weedy species but probably descended from, or at least comparable to the origins wild progenitors. We take this to suggest that grain size/shape was still under going evolution over the course of the 6th millennium BC, and thus it may not have been finished evolving into its domesticated form. This fits the now recurrent pattern of protracted domestication processes in cereals (explored previously when "de-centering the fertile crescent", and demonstrated more statistically in Allaby et al "Geographic mosaics and changing rates of cereal domestication").

These data, along with those from Xinglonggou indicate that while Neolithic sedentism had been established in Northeast China by the early 6th Millennium BC, the evolution of domesticated Panicum miliaceum and the establishment of agricultural economies still took rather longer. Another conclusion of the paper is that sedentism and this domestication process took place during stable and quite conducive climatic conditions. This argues against the hypothesis that domestication in this case was driven by climatic stress, or that it should be linked to major climatic fluctuations that characterize the start of the Holocene (a hypothesis promoted by Bar-Yosef 2011, amongst others)

It is worth noting that the later site (Tachiyingzi) also has the presence of a few Setaria italica and S. viridis, and a couple more plump grains (pictured above). While none of these grains was directly dated there is some possibility that more fully domesticated grains will prove to be intrusive. Amongst the direct AMS dates, on wild foods, four proved to be 6th Millennium BC, but one date on fragments from lotus seeds turned out to be intrusive and late Bronze Age. This highlights the need for more direct dating of crop remains, a point highlighted by recent debates over the arrival of wheat in Late Longshan China, for which numerous false alarms have been dismissed via direct radiocarbon dating (see "Assessing the occurrence and status of wheat in late Neolithic central China: the importance of direct AMS radiocarbon dates from Xiazhai").      

So the case for a millet domestication in Northeast China in strengthened. This does not rule out other dometciation centres-- which there must have been for Setaria italica at least, and perhaps Panicum milieceum. Domestication can be regarded as taking place alongside and after the emergence of sedentism, but further data are needed to better document this, and to assess the extent to which initial cultivation  of wild millet was linked to the shift to sedentism or not.