The sunflower (Helianthus annuus) in Mexico: further evidence for a North American domestication
- From: Jack Linthicum <jacklinthicum@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 7 May 2008 11:57:35 -0700 (PDT)
On May 2, 2:57 pm, Hayabusa <peregr...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Thu, 01 May 2008 09:58:36 +0200, Peter Alaca
<p.al...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I am not familiar with the details in the case here, but (I think I
read this in Diamond's Steel, Gunsn'Germs) it is fairly easy to spread
a plant parallel to a latitude because it remains more or less in its
own climate zone to which it is adapted, whereas nort-to-south
spreading crosses climate zones which takes much longer. Take wheat:
from northern Iraq to Greece wasn't much of a jump, but from Greece to
rainy Holland is.
A source on the first find ofsunflowerin the Ohio Valley is in
Nature 430, 201, 2004.
Hayabusa
Still 2-3000 years. Many plants crossed the barriers
in the last 500 years.
I know what you mean, but such boundaries do exist. Let me extrapolate
from the world of birds (as I am not closely familiar with plants): in
the US, the Mississippi is a strong climatic, floral and faunal
divide, so strong that the birdwatcher's guides treat the
Atlantic-Mississippi region and the Gran'Ol'River-Pacific region in
two different books; and there are few overlaps.
With regard to sunflowers, I happen to think that the evidence is
still too patchy to really permit conclusions - whether this cultural
plant originated in the Ohio Valley or in Central America. Right now
it looks like the oldest traces are from the NE, but if older evidence
is found in Mexico I would not fall on my back.
Hayabusa
Pics at the cite. The seed was not a sunflower but a bottlegourd.
"As yet there is no compelling evidence that the sunflower was grown
as a food crop in Mexico prior to European contact. In addition, the
complete absence of any early historical record for the sunflower in
Mexico argues against its presence in pre-Columbian times. Although no
dates or boundaries can be set, the wild sunflower may have grown in
northernmost Mexico in early times. A southward range expansion for
the species is probably very recent, perhaps in the last few hundred
years with the development of a modern road system. The widely used
common names of the sunflower in Mexico are in Spanish or with Spanish
words in them, which suggests that the sunflower is a post-contact
arrival."
As someone who grew up with the firm knowledge that all roads with
sunflowers growing in the margins led to Kansas, I accept the implied
apology.
http://www.springerlink.com/content/8475434537757k61/fulltext.html
The sunflower (Helianthus annuus) in Mexico: further evidence for a
North American domestication
Charles B. Heiser1 Contact Information
(1) Department of Biology, Jordan Hall. Indiana University,
Bloomington, IN 47405, USA
Contact Information Charles B. Heiser
Email: chheiser@xxxxxxxxxxx
Received: 21 September 2007 Accepted: 5 December 2007 Published
online: 21 December 2007
Abstract I have concluded that my initial verification of a specimen
recovered from the San Andrés archaeological site in Mexico as
domesticated sunflower was incorrect. The specimen in question is most
likely the seed of a bottle gourd. As yet there is no compelling
evidence that the sunflower was grown as a food crop in Mexico prior
to European contact. In addition, the complete absence of any early
historical record for the sunflower in Mexico argues against its
presence in pre-Columbian times. Although no dates or boundaries can
be set, the wild sunflower may have grown in northernmost Mexico in
early times. A southward range expansion for the species is probably
very recent, perhaps in the last few hundred years with the
development of a modern road system. The widely used common names of
the sunflower in Mexico are in Spanish or with Spanish words in them,
which suggests that the sunflower is a post-contact arrival.
Keywords Bottle gourd - Domesticated sunflower - Girasol -
Helianthus annuus - Lagenaria siceraria - Maíz de teja - Mexico -
North America - Plant domestication
An achene and a seed recovered from the archaeological site of San
Andrés, Mexico and directly dated to ca. 4100 B.P. were initially
identified as domesticated sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.). On the
basis of this identification, Lentz et al. (2001) argued that this
important crop plant was initially domesticated in Mexico, not in
eastern North America. I was the first to verify the identification of
the San Andrés achene as sunflower. I would now like to rescind my
determination. As the plant parts were destroyed in the dating it may
now be impossible ever to identify the plants. The “achene,” however,
falls within the range of morphological variability of seeds of the
bottle gourd (Lagenaria siceraria (Mol.) Standl.) (Fig. 1). I would
suggest that the “achene”1 is a bottle gourd seed. I did not see the
sunflower seed until a photograph of it was published (Lentz et al.
2001), and I do not intend to say more about it at this time except
that Smith (2006) does not accept the identification of either the
achene or seed as sunflower. My choice to change my original decision
regarding the “achene” has been influenced by a molecular study
(Harter et al. 2004) and the morphological study of Smith (2006) as
well as by the lack of domesticated sunflowers in the early history of
Mexico, which I had pointed out in a brief note (Heiser 2002). I
should like particularly to expand upon this last topic here.
MediaObjects/10722_2007_9300_Fig1_HTML.gif
Fig. 1 Modern seed of bottle gourds from the Americas. Numbers 6–17
from Mexico. Seed numbers 17 and 24 are 10 mm long (from Heiser 1973)
There are, insofar as I am aware, no early historical references to
the sunflower in Mexico. Several authors, including Lentz et al.
(2001) as well as Heiser (1951), have supposed that the domesticated
sunflower was seen by Francisco Hernández in his stay in Mexico (1570–
1577). Recently, however, I have reexamined Hernández’ works (Heiser
1998), and I now think that Hernández never saw the sunflower in
Mexico. Acosta and Cobo, cited by Heiser (1951), do not give enough
information to identify their plants as sunflowers. Moreover, Cobo’s
account begins “In Peru …” Both of these writers include their
“sunflowers” under “Flowers”, rather than under “Foods”. Patiño
(1964), independently of me and more thoroughly, as well, went through
the early historical accounts of domesticated plants in equinoctial
America. For the sunflower in Mexico he adds little to what I reported
in 1951, nor does Dressler (1953). Other Mexican domesticated plants
fare well in these works.
The first account that I have found concerning a domesticated
sunflower in Mexico (True 1912) states that Edward Palmer is reported
in 1896 to have obtained sunflower achenes in Durango with black
shells which give a purplish dye that “is esteemed by some.” [The Hopi
of Arizona also valued their sunflower achenes for the same reason
(Heiser 1945.)]
Lentz et al. (2001) cite Ramírez (1991) to support a “widespread
tradition of sunflower cultivation” in Mexico. It is quite the
contrary, Ramírez gives Nahuatl names for the native plants but only
Spanish names for the introduced ones. Significantly, he identifies
sunflower only by the Spanish term “girasol”.
In 1951 when I mentioned the Soviet Union’s plant hunting expedition
in 1925 in Mexico, I had available only Bukasov’s (1930) English
summary. Today I have an English translation of the text, and I can
expand my earlier remarks.
In Mexico they traveled north to 25° latitude (San Luis Potosí,
Coahuila and Durango). They also visited the central highlands, and
Vera Cruz, Chiapas and Tabasco in the south. Bukasov writes, “We only
found now and then single plants (of sunflowers) in northern Mexico in
the maize fields. It is more often raised as a decorative plant. In
the Mexican literature it is mentioned as a weed… The Mexican samples
of sunflower, of which there was a very small amount (about 10)…
belonged predominantly to the late and very late varieties…” In
another place he states: “The sunflower seems to occur more in the
north than in the south, but always a single plant, sometimes for
decorative purposes or in maize fields.” There is no mention of seeing
wild sunflowers. The sunflower was a very important plant in the
Soviet Union at that time and wild sunflowers were used in breeding
work. Had they seen wild sunflowers I think they would have mentioned
it.
There are several things here that I cannot explain. In the last half
of the nineteenth century European varieties were being grown in the
United States, therefore, I think it is likely they were in Mexico
long before 1925. However, I would expect the ones that Bukasov
observed were Indian varieties, particularly the very late ones. But
why single plants? Why for decorative purposes?
Martínez (1959a), who accompanied the Soviet expedition, later wrote
(my translation), “This plant (sunflower) is not presently used in
popular medicine and we only know through the writings of Ximénez
(translator of a Mexican edition of Hernández) that the ancient
Indians ate the leaves and the seeds …” In his book (1959b) on the
useful plants of Mexico, he wrote about the sunflower: “To date it has
been sown more as an ornamental, without exploiting it properly.”
Martínez (1979) used the name maíz de Texas (more often given as Tejas
by others) for the sunflower; he believed it originated in North
America. Some have used maíz de tejas or teja (Spanish for tile)
probably referring to the tile-like arrangement of the achenes in the
head.
Two papers that I have not cited in earlier works (Pennington 1963,
1979) refer to the use of wild sunflower in northern Mexico.
In my 1951 paper I discuss the “Indian varieties” of sunflowers. Two
are described from Mexico, maíz de teja and maíz negro. I have little
to add to what I said at that time, but I should point out that maíz
negro is a hybrid between maíz de teja and a modern cultivar. It is
unfortunate that the name maíz de teja was used for the Indian variety
for this name may be used for any domesticated sunflower in Mexico. I
have always felt that this Indian race was most closely related to the
Hopi sunflower. Viable seeds of maíz de teja are no longer available.
My attempts since 1950 to secure more Indian races from Mexico have
been unsuccessful. I should point out that five Indian races of
sunflowers still survived in widely scattered parts of the United
States in 1950.
Thus far we do not have much of a history for the sunflower in Mexico,
in fact, no history at all for four hundred years. This was all to
change in the last half of the twentieth century when the sunflower
became an important oil crop in Mexico, with seeds imported from the
Soviet Union and later from the United States. Sunflowers are mostly
grown in northern Mexico today (J. L. Escamilla, in litt. 2001). In
1994 the FAO Production Yearbook reported a yield of 1,762,000 metric
tons for Mexico.
In their maps, Piperno (2001) and Lentz et al. (2001) show a fairly
extensive distribution of the wild sunflowers in Mexico at present.
The question should be – was the wild sunflower in Mexico 4000 years
ago? I think that it may be a much more recent introduction. Heiser et
al. (1969) show the species as being found only in northernmost Mexico
(Fig. 2). However, they had not borrowed specimens from Mexican
herbaria. Had they done so, it may have made little difference with
their mapping. Recently I obtained a list of the specimens held in the
Herbario Nacional (MEXU), the oldest (founded 1888) and largest
herbarium (555,000 specimens) in Mexico. Of the specimens with dates,
19 of them collected from 1923 through 1978 (with the exception of one
from Sinaloa from 1977) came from northern states; the remaining 35
specimens, collected more recently, have extended the range of the
sunflower southward considerably. I think this supports a recent
southward spread of the sunflower into Mexico.
MediaObjects/10722_2007_9300_Fig2_HTML.gif
Fig. 2 Weedy and wild Helianthus annuus in North America and Mexico.
(from Heiser et al. 1969)
Bison were an important dispersal agent for the sunflower, not only
did they carry achenes in their fur but they could also create the
disturbance of the soil necessary for the sunflower’s success (Asch
1993). Bison were probably most effective in dispersal in their
primary range which extended from Texas and New Mexico into Canada
(McDonald 1981; map p. 104) where the great population densities would
create more extensive disturbances. In their secondary area of
distribution, which included northern Mexico to the tropic of Cancer
and nearly all of eastern North America, bison apparently had little
or no effect in the spread of sunflowers. There is, of course, the
possibility that they introduced them to northern Mexico. The recent
spread of sunflowers there has been along roads according to my
observations.
Other than the problematic San Andrés specimens, sunflower has been
identified tentatively in only two other archaeological contexts in
Mexico. There is a single isolated report of sunflower in the
archaeological record of northern Mexico, and this identification
needs to be confirmed. If the Ocampo Caves (Tamaulipas) specimen
excavated by McNeish and identified by Callen (1969) as wild sunflower
can be located, its taxonomic assignment should be verified, as
various species of Tithonia and Viguiera, close relatives of
Helianthus, are sometimes mistaken for sunflower. The former are often
called mirasol or girasol in Mexico, as is Helianthus. I have not been
able to locate the specimens in any of the places where MacNeish-
Callen material is known to be stored.
In support of their hypothesis that “the sunflower had a long history
of cultivation in middle America” Lentz et al. (2001, p. 372) mention
a domesticated sunflower achene from the Santa Leticia site in El
Salvador (Miksicek 1986). Although Miksicek mentions both sunflower
achene and sunflower seeds in his report, from the context I believe
that only one carbonized achene which measured 3.9 × 2.4 mm (p. 41)
was found. He states that it falls into the size range for ruderal
sunflowers, or lower limit of archaic cultivated sunflower, but that
is has “the thick, sculptured pericarp” more characteristic of
cultivated varieties. Nowhere does the author definitely state that
this is a domesticated sunflower. In fact, in his final sentence on
sunflower (p. 199) he says, “a single achene is too small a sample for
any but the most tentative conclusions.” Miksicek’s admittedly
tentative identification of the specimen from El Salvador as sunflower
should be viewed with considerable skepticism until it is relocated,
described, and a clear morphological basis for its taxonomic status
established. I think this achene should be examined by a sunflower
specialist for two reasons: (1) its extreme geographical position and
(2) the “sculptured” pericarp–for in so far as I know the pericarps of
wild and cultivated sunflower do not differ except in size and color.
In summary, there is no convincing evidence for the sunflower in the
archaeological record of Mexico, and the historical record provides no
support for the domestication or pre-Columbian presence of the
sunflower anywhere south of northern Mexico. The wide use of common
names for sunflowers in Spanish, or with Spanish words in them,
(girasol, mirasol, maíz de teja and maíz de tejas) suggests that
sunflowers were a post-contact arrival.
It is of course possible that sunflowers, either wild or domesticated,
were part of the diet in pre-Columbian Mexico at some point, and then
went extinct prior to European contact. But any claims for the
independent domestication of sunflower in Mexico, or its use as a food
crop, should be based on strong supporting arguments and clear genetic
or morphological evidence.
Acknowledgements G. Anderson, M. Crouch, P. Davila, G. Fritz, A.
Ocampo, L. Rieseberg, M. Schell, and B. Smith.
References
Asch DL (1993) Common sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.): the pathway to
its domestication. Paper delivered at 58th annual meeting, Society for
American Archaeology, St. Louis, 17 May 1993
Bukasov SM (1930) The cultivated plants of Mexico, Guatemala and
Colombia. Bull Appl Bot Genet Plant Breed 47:470–553
Callen EO (1969) Diet as revealed by coprolites. In: Brothwell D,
Higgs E (eds) Science in Archaeology, Basic Books, NY, pp 186–194
Dressler RL (1953) The pre-Colombian cultivated plants of Mexico. Bot
Mus Leaf Harv Univ 16:115–172
Harter AV, Gardner E, Falush D, Lentz D, Bye R, Rieseberg L (2004)
Origin of extant domesticated sunflowers in eastern North America.
Nature 430:201–205
PubMed CrossRef ChemPort
Heiser C (1945) The Hopi sunflower. Missouri Botanical Garden Bull
33:163–166
Heiser C (1951) The sunflower among the North American Indians. Proc
Am Philos Soc 95:432–448
Heiser C (1973) Variation in the bottle gourd. In: Meggers BJ, Aynesu
ES, Duckworth WD (eds) Tropical forest ecosystems in Africa and South
America: a comparative review. Smithsonian Institution Press,
Washington
Heiser C (1998) The domesticated sunflower in old Mexico? Genet Resour
Crop Evol 45:447–449
SpringerLink
Heiser C (2002) Letter. Econ Bot 55:470–471
Heiser C, Smith DM, Clevenger SB, Martin WC (1969) The North American
sunflowers. Mem Torrey Bot Club 22:1–218
Lentz DL, Pohl MED, Pope KO, Wyatt AR (2001) Prehistoric sunflower
(Helianthus annuus L.) domestication in Mexico. Econ Bot 54:370–376
Lentz DL, Pohl MED, Pope KO, Wyatt AR (2002) Letter. Econ Bot 55:471–
472
McDonald JN (1981) North American bison: their classification and
evolution. University California Press, Berkeley
Martínez M (1959a) Las plantas medicinales de Mexico. Ediciones Botas,
Mexico
Martínez M (1959b) Plantas útilis de la flora mexicana. Ediciones
Botas, Mexico
Martínez M (1979) Catálogo de nombres vulgares y científicos de
plantas mexicanas. Fondo de Cultura Económica, Mexico
Miksicek CH (1986) Paleobotanical identifications. Appendix 2. In:
Demarest AA (ed) The archaelogy of Santa Leticia and the rise of Maya
civilization. Middle American Research Institute, Publication 52,
Tulane University, Publication, New Orleans
Patiño VM (1964) Plantas cultivadas y animales domesticos on America
Equinocial. Tomo II. Plantas Alimenticias. Imprenta Departamental,
Cali
Pennington C (1963) The Tarahumar of Mexico. University Utah Press,
Salt Lake City
Pennington C (1979) The Pima Bajo of central Sonora, Mexico.
University Utah Press, Salt Lake City
Piperno DR (2001) On maize and the sunflower. Science 292:2260–2261
PubMed CrossRef ChemPort
Ramírez Celastino C (1991) Plantas de la regíon Nahuatl del centro de
Guerrero. Centro de Investigaciones y Estudias Superiores en
Antropología Social, México
Smith BR (2006) Eastern North America as an independent center of
plant domestication. Proc Nat Acad Sci 103:12223–12228
PubMed CrossRef ChemPort
True RH (1912) Seeds and plants imported. Inventory no. 26. Entry no.
29984. US Dep Agric Bull 233, Washington, DC
Footnotes
1 Carbonized archaeological sunflower achene from San Andrés, Mexico:
not available. Various difficulties prevented securing the photograph
and permission to use it. In addition to the original source (Lentz et
al. 2001) it may be seen in Smith (2006) as well as on
http://www.pnas.org.cgi/content/full/103/33/12223. The achene as shown
in the photo is 8.2 mm long. Originally it was slightly longer; the
tip was broken off while it was at Indiana University.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- Re: SUNFLOWERS DOMESTICATED IN MEXICO 2000 YEARS AGO
- From: Hayabusa
- Re: SUNFLOWERS DOMESTICATED IN MEXICO 2000 YEARS AGO
- From: Peter Alaca
- Re: SUNFLOWERS DOMESTICATED IN MEXICO 2000 YEARS AGO
- From: Hayabusa
- Re: SUNFLOWERS DOMESTICATED IN MEXICO 2000 YEARS AGO
- Prev by Date: Re: Ice Age Atlantis? Exploring the Solutrean-Clovis ‘connection’
- Next by Date: A David special
- Previous by thread: Re: SUNFLOWERS DOMESTICATED IN MEXICO 2000 YEARS AGO
- Next by thread: Re: The sunflower (Helianthus annuus) in Mexico: further evidence for a North American domestication
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
