A Green Foxtail (Setaria viridis) Cultivation Experiment in the Middle Yellow River Valley and Some Related Issues

Abstract

CURRENT ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND ARCHAEOBOTANICAL discoveries indicate that foxtail millet (Setaria sativa) was domesticated from its wild progenitorgreen foxtail (Setaria viridis)-in the loess area of the Yellow River Valley by at least 8000 years ago. Recent genetic studies also seem to support this hypothesis (e.g., Benabdelmouna et al. 2001; d'Ennequin et al. 2000; Nakayama et al. 1999), although some geneticists argue that there might have been more than one center of indigenous domestication (Schontz and Rether 1999). Millet farming had expanded to a vast area from the middle to the lower Yellow River Valley by 7000 years B.P. (Lu 1999). Many archaeological assemblages with foxtail millet remains have been found in the Yellow and the Yangzi River valleys and Tibet, with the Yellow River Valley being the core area (Table 1). Based on the cultivation of foxtail and broomcorn millets, Chinese civilization emerged at approximately 5000 B.P. However, many questions remain with respect to the origin of millet farming in the Yellow River Valley. The progress and remaining problems on this issue, as well as scholars who have been working on the topic, have been summarized elsewhere (Lu 1999, 2001). Briefly, the questions of where, when, how, by whom, and why foxtail millet was domesticated by 8000 years ago still remain. The domestication process is not clear, nor is it known what tools and cultivation methods were used in the initial domestication of this plant. To date, research on the origin of millet farming in the Yellow River Valley is primarily based upon archaeological and archaeobotanical data, which, unfortunately, are very limited for the period prior to 8000 years ago. Therefore, the initial phase of millet farming in the Yellow River Valley has not been archaeologically recognized. Apart from an observation of the botanical characteristics of green foxtail (Setaria viridis) and a harvesting experiment on this grass in 1996 (Lu 1998), no other observations or experiments had been carried out on this topic in mainland China prior to this experiment in 1999.

New Perspectives in Southeast Asian and Pacific Prehistory

“…The productivity of green foxtail in its first year of cultivation is over 9.38, while the productivity of perennial wild rice in its first year of cultivation is negative 20 (or worse), as only four grains of wild rice were harvested in the autumn after 80 grains were broadcast in the spring of 1999, and no grains were harvested from the 24 grains cultivated in 2012 (Lu 2002(Lu , 2013). …”

“…Briefly, the following projects have been carried out: in the Yellow River Valley and South China respectively using a variety of methods to provide comparative data for the productivity of wild and domesticated plants (Lu , 2006. Tools replicating Rtools of prehistoric stone flakes, ground stone sickles, bone and shell knives (Figure 14.5) were used for the harvest in order to test the efficiency of these prehistoric implements.…”

“…For example, as the objective for perennial wild rice was to know the germination rate, time and productivity of the plant at the initiation of rice cultivation, the experiment did not use water control, fertiliser or other farming techniques. The cultivation of green foxtail also simulated an 'initial farming' process, and neither irrigation nor fertilising were applied (Lu 2002). The timing and methods of harvesting have also been determined by the research objectives (Lu 2002(Lu , 2006(Lu , 2013.…”

“…The cultivation of green foxtail also simulated an 'initial farming' process, and neither irrigation nor fertilising were applied (Lu 2002). The timing and methods of harvesting have also been determined by the research objectives (Lu 2002(Lu , 2006(Lu , 2013.…”

“…and domesticated rice (Oryza sativa) were carried out from 1999 to 2005 and in 2012 in the middle Yellow River Valley and South China respectively (Lu 2002(Lu , 2013, associated with phytolith analysis, use-wear analysis and ethnographic studies. This paper summarises the major outcome of these works and discusses outstanding questions.…”