Original multidisciplinary research hereby clarifies the complex geodomestication pathways that generated the vast range of banana cultivars (cvs). Genetic analyses identify the wild ancestors of modern-day cvs and elucidate several key stages of domestication for different cv groups. Archaeology and linguistics shed light on the historical roles of people in the movement and cultivation of bananas from New Guinea to West Africa during the Holocene. The historical reconstruction of domestication processes is essential for breeding programs seeking to diversify and improve banana cvs for the future.plant genetics | historical linguistics | archaeobotany | diploid banana cultivars | triploid banana cultivars N ew multidisciplinary findings from archaeology, genetics, and linguistics clarify the complex geodomestication pathways-the geographical configurations of hybridization and dispersalthat generated the range of modern banana cultivars (cvs). Although recent molecular research, combined with the outcomes of previous genetic studies, elucidates major stages of banana domestication, such as the generation of edible diploids and triploids, it sheds only partial light on the historical and sociospatial contexts of domestication. The geographic distributions of genotypes involved in banana domestication require human translocations of plants, most likely under vegetative forms of cultivation, across vast regions. Linguistic analyses of (traditional) local terms for bananas reveal several striking regional-scale correspondences between genetic and linguistic patterns. These multidisciplinary findings enable the relative dating of the principal events in banana geodomestication and situate banana cultivation within broader sociospatial contexts. Archaeological findings provide a timeline to anchor and calibrate the relative chronology.

No abstract

Background Opal phytoliths (microscopic silica bodies produced in and between the cells of many plants) are a very resilient, often preserved type of plant microfossil. With the exponentially growing number of phytolith studies, standardization of phytolith morphotype names and description is essential. As a first effort in standardization, the International Code for Phytolith Nomenclature 1.0 was published by the ICPN Working Group in Annals of Botany in 2005. A decade of use of the code has prompted the need to revise, update, expand and improve it. Scope ICPN 2.0 formulates the principles recommended for naming and describing phytolith morphotypes. According to these principles, it presents the revised names, diagnosis, images and drawings of the morphotypes that were included in ICPN 1.0, plus three others. These 19 morphotypes are those most commonly encountered in phytolith assemblages from modern and fossil soils, sediments and archaeological deposits. An illustrated glossary of common terms for description is also provided.

28Agricultural origins and dispersals are subjects of fundamental importance to archaeology as 29 well as many other scholarly disciplines. These investigations are world-wide in scope and 30 require significant amounts of paleobotanical data attesting to the exploitation of wild 31 progenitors of crop plants and subsequent domestication and spread. Accordingly, for the past 32 few decades the development of methods for identifying the remains of wild and domesticated 33 plant species has been a focus of paleo-ethnobotany. Phytolith analysis has increasingly taken its 34 place as an important independent contributor of data in all areas of the globe, and the volume of 35 literature on the subject is now both very substantial and disseminated in a range of international 36 journals. In this paper, experts who have carried out the hands-on work review the utility and 37 importance of phytolith analysis in documenting the domestication and dispersals of crop plants 38 around the world. It will serve as an important resource both to paleo-ethnobotanists and other 39 scholars interested in the development and spread of agriculture. 40

No abstract