Cereal Grain Phytoliths of Southwest Asia and Europe

  • Lawrence Kaplan
  • Mary B. Smith
  • Lesley Ann Sneddon
Part of the Advances in Archaeological and Museum Science book series (AAMS, volume 1)


Phytoliths from cereal grains are classified into 23 types based on cellular origin and morphological details. Description of the types are illustrated by scanning electron micrographs and line drawings; both spodograms and cell-free preparations were utilized. Distribution of the 20 types recognizable by optical microscopy is given for 43 cereal species. Combinations of these types may be characteristic of specific taxa.


Line Drawing Avena Sativa Wild Wheat Phytolith Analysis Trichome Base 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Brown, D 1984 Prospects and limits of a phytolith key for grasses in the central United States. Journal of Archaeological Science 11: 221–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Helbaek, H 1961 Studying the diet of ancient man. Archaeology 14: 95–101.Google Scholar
  3. Kaplan, L 1989 Phytolith analysis at Wadi Kubbaniyah (Egypt). In Wendorf, F and Schild, R, eds, The Prehistory of Wadi Kubbaniyah. 2. Stratigraphy, Paleoeconomy and Environment. Dallas, Southern Methodist University Press: 267–269.Google Scholar
  4. Kimber, G and Feldman, M 1987 Wild wheat, an introduction. Special Report 353. College of Agriculture, Columbia, University of Missouri.Google Scholar
  5. Mabberley, DJ 1989 The Plant Book. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press: 706 P.Google Scholar
  6. Metcalfe, CR 1960 Anatomy of the Monocotyledons. I. Gramineae. Oxford, Clarendon Press: 731 p.Google Scholar
  7. Palmer, PG 1976 Grass cuticles: A new paleoecological tool for East African lake sediments. Canadian Journal of Botany 54: 1725–1734.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Piperno, DR 1985 Phytolith analysis and tropical paleo-ecology: Production and taxonomic significance of siliceous forms in New World plant domesticates and wild species. Review of Paleobotany and Palynology 45: 185–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Piperno, DR 1988 Phytolith Analysis: An Archaeological and Geological Perspective. San Diego, Academic Press: 280 p.Google Scholar
  10. Renfrew, JM 1973 Palaeoethnobotany. New York, Columbia University Press: 248 p.Google Scholar
  11. Rosen, AM 1987 Phytolith studies at Shiqmim. In Levy, TE, ed, Shiqmim I: Studies concerning Chalcolithic societies in the Northern Negev Desert, Israel (1982–1984), British Archaeological Reports, International Series 356: 243–249.Google Scholar
  12. Rovner, I 1971 Potential of opal phytoliths for use in paleoecological reconstruction. Quaternary Research 1: 343–359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Rovner, I 1972 Notes on a safer procedure for opal phytolith extraction. Quaternary Research 2: 591.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Twiss, PC, Suess, E and Smith, RM 1969 Morphological classification of grass phytoliths. Soil Science Society of America, Proceedings 33: 109–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Zohary, D and Hopf, M 1988 Domestication of Plants in the Old World. Oxford, Oxford University Press: 249 p.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lawrence Kaplan
  • Mary B. Smith
  • Lesley Ann Sneddon

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations