Differential pollen preservation in a seventeenth-century refuse pit, Jamestown Island, Virginia

The decomposition of starch grains in soils: implications for archaeological residue analyses

“…As Kelso et al [121] have shown that the concept of an artefact-based 'microenvironment' may be extended from residues on an artefact's surface to those in immediately neighbouring soils, the absence of starch grains in sediments outside the protective influence of starch-bearing artefacts, so often taken as proof of residue authenticity, may therefore just as likely represent the preferential decay of unprotected starch in soil. In a study from Papua New Guinea, Fullagar et al [75] noted much higher numbers of starch grains in soil actually adhering to artefacts than in background sediment samples.…”

“…Kelso et al [121] provided one of the clearest examples in their analysis of pollen from a seventeenth-century refuse pit in Virginia, USA. In this study, pollen was found in two contexts: in the sediment filling the pit, and immediately under artefacts (including floor tiles, bricks and bottle glass) found in the pit.…”

“…Increasingly, organic residue studies have found that artefacts of different materials create a 'microenvironment' which acts to prevent decomposition through restricted access to the residue. Researchers examining artefacts for general plant remains [3:394;104:96], pollen [121], wood [93], and starch [177,181,183], as well as blood, proteins and DNA [202] have all credited a protective role played by the artefact itself as a factor in the survival of residues.…”

The Dogs of Tsenacomoco: Ancient DNA Reveals the Presence of Local Dogs at Jamestown Colony in the Early Seventeenth Century

“…The recovery of large quantities of Indigenous artifacts within the same contexts as the dogs used in this study strongly supports the inference that Tsenacomocoans resided within James Fort in the early occupation of the colony. For example, Structure 185 contained several dog specimens and numerous Tsenacomocoan-made ceramic vessels, pipes, bone needles, nutting stones, and a burned reed mat (Kelso and Straube 2012). The feature was also filled with debris from bead production, including partially made beads and shaping stones (Kelso 2006).…”

Remains of the day-preservation of organic micro-residues on stone tools

“…In soils with high bioactivity (measured through proxies including precipitation, soil moisture and pH, vegetation growth and presence of earthworms) residues decay fast. A protective microenvironment, such the microscope slide or a sediment cover, may protect residues from precipitation and ground water movement similar to the way pot sherds protect pollen (Barton, 2009;Haslam, 2004;Kelso et al, 1995Kelso et al, , 2000. It is argued elsewhere that residues, or any organic materials for that matter, decay fast unless equilibrium with the environment is established (Barton, 2009;Barton and Matthews, 2006;Barton et al, 1998;Raiswell, 2001).…”