Cited by 28

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

The variability of Amazonian palm phytoliths

Witteveen, N.H., Hobus, C.E.M., Philip, A., Piperno, D.R., McMichael, C.N.H.·2022·Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.revpalbo.2022.104613

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Palms are prolific phytolith producers with morphologies specific to subtribe or often genus, and can thus be used to detect palm enrichment or depletion.

    “Palms are prolific phytolith producers with morphologies specific to subtribe or often genus (Witteveen et al. 2022), and can thus be used to detect palm enrichment or depletion.”
  • Socratea exorrhiza and Astrocaryum produce a similar morphotype (CON_FEW).

    “Socratea exorrhiza and Astrocaryum also produce a similar morphotype (CON_FEW) (Witteveen et al. 2022).”
  • In the Surinamese rainforests, SPH_ECH phytoliths are produced by Euterpe, Oenocarpus, Attalea, Hyospathe elegans and Cocos nucifera and Conicals are produced by Astrocaryum, Bactris and Socratea exorrhiza palms.

    “In the Surinamese rainforests, SPH_ECH phytoliths are produced by Euterpe, Oenocarpus, Attalea, Hyospathe elegans and Cocos nucifera and Conicals are produced by Astrocaryum, Bactris and Socratea exorrhiza palms”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 36

  1. Abràmoff, 2004, Image processing with imageJ, Biophotonics Int., 11, 36
  2. Åkesson, 2021, Long-term ecological legacies in western Amazonia, J. Ecol., 109, 432, 10.1111/1365-2745.13501 · DOI · Paper page
  3. Albert, 2009, Palaeoecological significance of palms at Olduvai Gorge, Tanzania, based on phytolith remains, Quat. Int., 193, 41, 10.1016/j.quaint.2007.06.008 · DOI
  4. Ball, 2016, Morphometric analysis of phytoliths: recommendations towards standardization from the International Committee for Phytolith Morphometrics, J. Archaeol. Sci., 68, 106, 10.1016/j.jas.2015.03.023 · DOI
  5. Benvenuto, 2015, Differentiation of globular phytoliths in Arecaceae and other monocotyledons: Morphological description for paleobotanical application, Turk. J. Bot., 39, 341, 10.3906/bot-1312-72 · DOI
  6. Chen, 2013, Phytolith variability in Zingiberales: a tool for the reconstruction of past tropical vegetation, Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol., 370, 1, 10.1016/j.palaeo.2012.10.026 · DOI
  7. Clement, 1988, Domestication of the Pejibaye Palm (Bactris gasipaes), Past and Present, 6, 155
  8. Collura, 2017, Wood and bark phytoliths of West African woody plants, Quat. Int., 434, 142, 10.1016/j.quaint.2015.12.070 · DOI · Paper page
  9. Eiserhardt, 2011, Geographical ecology of the palms (Arecaceae): determinants of diversity and distributions across spatial scales, Ann. Bot., 108, 1391, 10.1093/aob/mcr146 · DOI
  10. Faurby, 2016, An all-evidence species-level supertree for the palms (Arecaceae), Mol. Phylogenet. Evol., 100, 57, 10.1016/j.ympev.2016.03.002 · DOI
  11. Fauset, 2015, Hyperdominance in Amazonian forest carbon cycling, Nat. Commun., 6, 1, 10.1038/ncomms7857 · DOI
  12. Fenwick, 2011, Palm reading: a pilot study to discriminate phytoliths of four Arecaceae (Palmae) taxa, J. Archaeol. Sci., 38, 2190, 10.1016/j.jas.2011.03.016 · DOI
  13. Heijink, 2020, Holocene increases in palm abundances in north-western Amazonia, J. Biogeogr., 47, 698, 10.1111/jbi.13721 · DOI · Paper page
  14. Huisman, 2018, Palm phytoliths of mid-elevation Andean forests, Front. Ecol. Evol., 6, 1, 10.3389/fevo.2018.00193 · DOI · Paper page
  15. Kristiansen, 2009, Commonness of Amazonian palm (Arecaceae) species: Cross-scale links and potential determinants, Acta Oecol., 35, 554, 10.1016/j.actao.2009.05.001 · DOI
  16. Levis, 2017, Persistent effects of pre-Columbian plant domestication on Amazonian forest composition, Science (80-. ), 355, 925, 10.1126/science.aal0157 · DOI · Paper page
  17. Lombardo, 2020, Early Holocene crop cultivation and landscape modification in Amazonia, Nature, 581, 190, 10.1038/s41586-020-2162-7 · DOI · Paper page
  18. Macia, 2011, Palm uses in northwestern South America: a quantitative review, Bot. Rev., 77, 462, 10.1007/s12229-011-9086-8 · DOI
  19. Maezumi, 2018, The legacy of 4,500 years of polyculture agroforestry in the eastern Amazon, Nat. Plants, 4, 540, 10.1038/s41477-018-0205-y · DOI · Paper page
  20. McMichael, 2012, Sparse pre-Columbian human habitation in Western Amazonia, Science (80-.), ). 336, 1429, 10.1126/science.1219982 · DOI · Paper page
  21. McMichael, 2015, Phytolith assemblages along a gradient of ancient human disturbance in Western Amazonia, Front. Ecol. Evol., 3, 1, 10.3389/fevo.2015.00141 · DOI
  22. McMichael, 2017, Comment on “persistent effects of pre-Columbian plant domestication on Amazonian forest composition.”, Science (80-. ), 358, 1, 10.1126/science.aan8347 · DOI · Paper page
  23. McMichael, 2021, 30,000 years of landscape and vegetation dynamics in a mid-elevation Andean valley, Quat. Sci. Rev., 258, 10.1016/j.quascirev.2021.106866 · DOI
  24. Morcote-Rios, 2001, Remains of palms (Palmae) at archaeological sites in the New World: a review, Bot. Rev., 67, 309, 10.1007/BF02858098 · DOI
  25. Morcote-Ríos, 2016, Phytoliths as a tool for archaeobotanical, palaeobotanical and palaeoecological studies in Amazonian palms, Bot. J. Linn. Soc., 182, 348, 10.1111/boj.12438 · DOI
  26. Muscarella, 2020, The global abundance of tree palms, Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr., 1
  27. Neumann, 2019, International Code for Phytolith Nomenclature (ICPN) 2.0, Ann. Bot., 124, 189, 10.1093/aob/mcz064 · DOI
  28. Piperno, 2020, Phytoliths in modern plants from Amazonia and the neotropics at large: implications for vegetation history reconstruction, Quat. Int., 565, 54, 10.1016/j.quaint.2020.10.043 · DOI · Paper page
  29. Piperno, 2019, Finding forest management in prehistoric Amazonia, Anthropo., 26, 100211
  30. Piperno, 2021, A 5,000-year vegetation and fire history for tierra firme forests in the Medio Putumayo-Algodón watersheds, northeastern Peru, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci., 118, 10.1073/pnas.2022213118 · DOI · Paper page
  31. Ter Steege, 2013, Hyperdominance in the Amazonian tree flora, Science (80-. ), 342
  32. ter Steege, 2020, Biased-corrected richness estimates for the Amazonian tree flora, Sci. Rep., 10, 1, 10.1038/s41598-020-66686-3 · DOI · Paper page
  33. Thomas, 2012, Analysis of a protohistoric net from Shahi Tump, Baluchistan (Pakistan), Archaeol. Anthropol. Sci., 4, 15, 10.1007/s12520-011-0078-8 · DOI
  34. Vormisto, 2004, Diversity and dominance in palm (Arecaceae) communities in terra firme forests in the western Amazon basin, J. Ecol., 92, 577, 10.1111/j.0022-0477.2004.00904.x · DOI
  35. Watling, 2013, Phytoliths from the coastal savannas of French Guiana, Quat. Int., 287, 162, 10.1016/j.quaint.2012.10.030 · DOI
  36. Whitney, 2014, Pre-Columbian raised-field agriculture and land use in the Bolivian Amazon, Holocene, 24, 231, 10.1177/0959683613517401 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Witteveen, N. H., Hobus, C. E. M., Philip, A., Piperno, D. R., & McMichael, C. N. H.
Venue
Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2022-05
Volume
300
Pages
104613
ISSN
0034-6667
Cited by
28
References
0
Language
en

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review