Skip to main content
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2020 Aug 19;15(8):e0237592. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0237592

Abundance and morphology of charcoal in sediments provide no evidence of massive slash-and-burn agriculture during the Neolithic Kuahuqiao culture, China

YuanFeng Hu 1, Bin Zhou 1,*, YueHan Lu 2, JianPing Zhang 3, SiYu Min 1, MingZhe Dai 1, SiYu Xu 1, Qing Yang 4, HongBo Zheng 4
Editor: Peter F Biehl5
PMCID: PMC7437897  PMID: 32813751

Abstract

It remains debatable whether slash-and-burn practices were adopted in rice cultivation by the Neolithic Kuahuqiao culture in the Ningshao Plain, one of the birthplaces of rice farming. Here, we established charcoal-based indices to reconstruct the history of fire and vegetation in the Ningshao Plain since the last glacial period. We collected representative modern vegetation and conducted combustion and fragmentation experiments to simulate fire and depositional processes, respectively. Charcoals from modern vegetation show clear morphological differences between herbaceous and woody plants. In particular, the length to width ratios (L/W) of herbaceous charcoals were systematically higher than those of woody charcoals, and the associated end-member values were 4.50 and 1.94, respectively. These values were then applied to sediment cores (KHQ-14/15) collected in proximity to the Kuahuqiao archaeological site. Results show that the amount of combusted herbaceous plants increased sharply after the Holocene, and the most remarkable rise occurred around 8550 yr B.P. This observation may reflect local environment (sedimentary and/or climatic) changes or small-scale early human activities. During the Kuahuqiao cultural period (8250−7450 yr B.P.), the relative abundance of woody charcoals increased, but the overall fire intensity decreased. This finding suggests that the Kuahuqiao farming was restricted to a small geographic area and large-scale slash-and-burn farming activities were not adopted.

Introduction

The Ningshao Plain located in the eastern part of China is home for advanced prehistoric civilization and one of important birthplaces of rice farming. Kuahuqiao in the Ningshao Plain has been considered as a key location to study the early Neolithic rice culture [14]. It is commonly accepted that fire was widely used in agricultural management in this early culture [5], yet it remains unclear whether the slash-and-burn agricultural model was adopted. For example, charcoal and pollen data from the Kuahuqiao site show that Neolithic settlers in the Ningshao Plain used fire to clear alder-dominated wetlands for early rice cultivation, and the first rice cultivation occurred around 7700 yr B.P. [57]. However, due to the low charcoal contents from nearby wetland sedimentary profiles, Shu et al. [7] suggested that the charcoal in the Kuahuqiao site may be produced from daily life activities (e.g., cooking), rather than large-scale fire to clear mountainous forest and prepare ground for early rice cultivation.

The inconclusive results of the reconstructed fire history of the Ningshao Plain [5, 713] can be largely attributed to the decoupling between the vegetation type indicated by pollen and vegetation combustion indicated by charcoals. It is thus critical to establish proxies that can unambiguously link the type and combustion of vegetation, i.e., identifying the type of combusted vegetation. In the present study, we established such indices based on charcoal morphology, and we applied these indices to determine whether and when massive burning of native plants occurred during the period of the Kuahuqiao culture. Our primary object was to test the hypothesis that the slash-and-burn model was used for rice cultivation during the Kuahuqiao culture.

Charcoals are the most commonly used proxy to reconstruct fire history. They are a black mixture of graphite and organic carbon compounds resulting from incomplete combustion (or pyrolysis) of plant tissues [1419]. Charcoals are widely observed in sediments, resistant to post-burial changes [2024], and thus frequently used to reconstruct paleo-fire history and associated climate and vegetation changes [13, 18, 25, 26]. The abundance of charcoals in sediments can indicate the intensity and frequency of fires [14, 17], whereas the size of charcoals reflects, to a certain extent, the distance of fire sources. Large charcoal particles (usually >125 μm) do not travel far and thus indicate local fire activities, generally within a range of 7 km [14, 17], while micro-sized charcoals (<125 μm) can indicate fire events at a regional scale [14, 17]. The form and structure of charcoals may indicate the type of plants (woody versus herbaceous) that were combusted [17, 24, 2731]. For example, the length to width ratios of charcoals (L/W) in loess were used to identify the type of vegetation over the last interglacial period, yielding results that compare favorably with those from pollen [32, 33].

The deposition and preservation of charcoals in sediments are subjected to transportation and fragmentation that can vary as a function of vegetation type and geographic variability. Therefore, we established charcoal-based paleofire indices from comparable modern vegetation and environment. We performed combustion and fragmentation experiments on representative types of modern vegetation collected in the Ningshao Plain. We further applied these indices to wetland sediment cores to establish the evolution history of ancient fire and vegetation in the Ningshao Plain since the last glacial period, including the Kuahuqiao cultural period. Results from this study offer new insight into the role of fire during the development of Neolithic agricultural activities in the context of natural environmental change.

Materials and methods

Study sites and sample collection

The Ningshao Plain is an east-west extending, long, and narrow coastal plain on the south bank of the Hangzhou Bay (Fig 1). The plain is bounded by the East China Sea to the east, the East Siming hills to the south, the Southwest Tianmushan hills and mountains to the west, and the Hangzhou Bay and Hangjiahu plain to the north. The study area is situated near the northern boundary of the central subtropical climate zone, where the climate is highly influenced by East Asian Monsoon, with high temperature and precipitation in summer and low temperature and precipitation in winter. The mean annual temperature is ca. 16°C, and the mean annual precipitation is ca. 1460 mm. The local modern vegetation is dominated by central subtropical evergreen deciduous broad-leaved mixed forest composed mainly of Quercus, Pinus, Alnus, Cyclobalanopsis, Gramineae, Artemisia Linn.

Fig 1. The study site map.

Fig 1

The Kuahuqiao area is located in the intersection of the Qiantang River, Fuchun River, and Puyang River; the Kuahuqiao archeological site (30° 08'42" N, 120°13'02″E) is situated at the northeastern part of the Kuahuqiao area. White crosses denote the vegetation sampling locations for combustion experiments; yellow triangles denote main archeological sites in this area, and red circles represent the locations of two sediment cores (KHQ14 and KHQ 1502).

To develop charcoal indices, we collected modern plant samples of representative vegetation types near the Kuahuqiao and the Hemudu archeological sites in the Ningshao Plain (Fig 1). Both sites are known for developing the earliest known rice agriculture [2, 5]. We collected grass species that included Miscanthus, Echinochloa, Setaria, Leaves of Phyllostachys, Arundo donax, Phragmites, Panicum miliaceum, Oryza, as well as tree species that included Cinnamomum, Quercus, Taxodiaceae, Ficus microcarpa, Liquidambar, Artemisia and a mixture of the trunk of arbor including Cinnamomum and Quercus (simplified as Wood), Strip of Phyllostachys. Weeds (unidentified species) included two groups collected from tidal flats and paddy fields, respectively.

The Kuahuqiao archeological site (30°08'42" N, 120°13'02" E) is located near the conjunction of the Qiantang River, Fuchun River, and Puyang River (Fig 1). Two sediment cores (KHQ-14 and KHQ-1502) were collected from a wetland (30°07'29" N, 120°11'33" E) that is around 1.5 km southwest of the Kuahuqiao site. The KHQ-14 core was drilled in March 2015, and the KHQ-1502 was drilled in August 2015. Coring was carefully carried out by a professional drilling company to minimize sediment disturbance. The studied area is a relatively closed basin with a stable sedimentary environment, and the two cores are about 10m apart. The core KHQ-14 is 34.00 m in length, and the KHQ-1502 is 20.10 m. Because the top layer (~2.5 m) of KHQ-14 was disturbed by modern human activities, KHQ-1502 was used for paleoenvironmental interpretation of the upper 18 meters of sedimentary records and the KHQ-14 core was used for the interpretation between 18.00 and 34.00 m. This approach assumed similar stratigraphic and sedimentary changes between the two cores, and our field observations confirmed this assumption.

The sediment cores are mainly composed of clay and silt with clear parallel beddings. We divided the cores into four sedimentary units. The first, bottom unit (from 34.00 to 26.30 m) is a hard clay layer likely representing paleosol deposits during the last glacial period. The second unit has a depth of 26.30−18.40 m, showing rhythmic, interactive deposition (tidal flat facies) of clay and silt. The third unit (18.40−9.50 m) is composed of clay with typical estuarine marine facies, and the fourth, uppermost unit (7.60 m to the surface) is mainly yellow brown sandy silt indicating strong dynamic flooding. For age determination of the sediment cores, seven plant residues of KHQ-1502 and two plant residues of KHQ-14 were submitted to the Beta laboratory (U.S.A.) for Accelerated Mass Spectrometer 14C dating. Age correction was performed using the INTCAL13 curve correction in OxCal online software (OxCal v4.3.2). The associated procedure and results are described in detail in Yang et al. [34] (under review).

Combustion experiment

All samples were air-dried at the room temperature (~20°C), and branches, leaves, and stems were selected for open-fire combustion experiments. Charcoal analysis followed the method described in detail by Zhang & Lv [32]. Briefly, after open-fire combustion, charcoals less than 500 μm were manually separated out under an Olympus BX51TF microscope. These smaller charcoal grains were thoroughly mixed with a glycerin and water mixture (volume: volume = 1:1) and separated by centrifugation. The upper layer was decanted, and the charcoal residues were mounted onto glass slides for observation and measurement under an Olympus BX51TF microscope at the magnification of 200 times. Length (L), L/W, and morphological characteristics (e.g., pore presence, edge shape) of charcoal grains produced by various plants were examined and recorded.

Charcoal fragmentation experiment

In order to assess the changes in the morphological characteristics of charcoals under various depositional conditions, we used a vibrator (Shanghai Luxi WH-2 micro vortex mixer) and centrifuge (Shanghai Anting DL-5-B low-speed centrifuge) to simulate charcoal fragmentation during sedimentary processes. We first determined the influence of duration of shaking and centrifugation on charcoal morphology. Charcoals from two woody plants, Quercus and Taxodiaceae, and two herbaceous plants, Weeds in paddy fields and Phragmites, were selected for this experiment. These charcoals were added to blank, organic matter-free soils that were made via high-temperature combustion (650 °C for 4 hours). Three vibration and centrifugal conditions were applied to the four charcoal-soil mixtures (Table 1): (i) shaken for 1.5 minutes and then centrifuged for 30 minutes; (ii) shaken for 3 minutes and centrifuged for 60 minutes; and (iii) shaken for 5 minutes and centrifuged for 90 minutes. The vibrator frequency was set at 50 Hz and the centrifuge speed was 2500 rpm.

Table 1. Changes in charcoal morphological indices due to vibration and centrifugation durations.

Specie name Parameter After combustion experiment After fragmentation experiments vibration (min)/centrifugation(min)*
1.5/30 3/60 5/90
Quercus L/μm* 128.0±8.2 103.2±8.1 94.3±7.3 88±7.4
L/W* 3.2±0.3 2.2±0.3 1.7±0.4 1.6±0.2
Taxodiaceae L/μm 125.1±10.5 114.5±6.5 90.7±9.5 89.5±8.3
L/W 2.8±0.2 1.8±0.2 1.7±0.3 1.5±0.3
Trees L/μm 126.5±9.35 108.9±5.6 92.5±7.2 88.8±6.3
L/W 3.00±0.3 2±0.2 1.7±0.3 1.5±0.2
Weeds from paddy fields L/μm 106.1±12.1 143.6±9.6 116.2±7.6 109.5±5.9
L/W 9.6±0.4 4.4±0.4 3.7±0.3 3.2±0.2
Phragmites L/μm 102.1±10.9 128.5±10.8 111.5±8.4 107±8.2
L/W 7.6±0.5 4.6±0.3 4.4±0.3 3.7±0.2
Herbs L/μm 104.1±11.5 136.1±8.3 113.8±7.2 108.3±5.4
L/W 8.6±0.45 4.5±0.4 4.1±0.3 3.5±0.2

*all values are presented as mean ± standard deviation; each data point was calculated from 29−50 charcoal grains.

Based on the results from the above experiments, we selected appropriate shaking and centrifugation conditions and applied these conditions to charcoals obtained from the combustion of typical plants in the study area. Selected plants included Miscanthus, Weeds from tidal flats, Weeds from paddy fields, Echinochloa, Setaria, Leaves of Phyllostachys, Arundo donax, Phragmites, Strip of Phyllostachys, Panicum miliaceum, Oryza, Cinnamomum, Quercus, Taxodiaceae, Ficus microcarpa, Liquidambar, Wood and Artemisia. After fragmentation, samples were extracted using the method described below (see charcoal extraction from sediment cores), and the extracted debris were mounted onto movable slides. The morphology of charcoal and the corresponding parameters were analyzed under a microscope. Morphological characteristics of charcoals of different vegetation types and the L/W end-member values for woody and herbaceous vegetation were determined.

Charcoal extraction from sediment cores

A total of 16 samples were selected from the four lithologically different units of the sediment cores. Three grams of sediment samples were mixed with 5 ml of 5% sodium hydroxide solution under 70 °C for 15 minutes to remove organic acids from the sample. Five milliliters of 10% HCl were added to remove carbonates, followed by three washes with deionized water. Solid residues were sieved through 125 μm, and charcoal particles larger than 125 μm were dried and mounted on glass slides for microscopic examination. The amount of charcoals was counted under a microscope, and L and L/W were recorded.

Results

Morphology of charcoals from open-fire combustion of modern plants

Results from the combustion experiments show that charcoal morphology differed across plant types (Fig 2). Charcoals produced from herbaceous plants mostly had an elongated and needle shape with clearly-defined edges, and fractures and pores were present (charts 1−10 in Fig 2). Their L was 125.1±11 μm (mean ± standard deviation) and L/W was 7.55±4.7 (n = 480). Shrub charcoals were mostly rectangular with poorly-defined edges and corners, and they showed coarse fibers on fractured surfaces (chart 13 in Fig 2). Their L and L/W were 127.4±55 μm and 5.85±0.7 (n = 49), respectively. Arbor branch-derived charcoals were rectangular or square, showing uneven edges and fiber bundles on fractured surfaces (chart 11 and 12 in Fig 2), and they had a mean L value of 169.4±45 μm, and a mean L/W of 6.09±2.1 (n = 50).Charcoals from tree leaves were elliptical or circular with uneven and relative dense edges (charts 14−20 in Fig 2), with the mean L of 131.2±14.7 μm and mean L/W of 3.06±0.6 (n = 50).

Fig 2. L/W ratios and microscopic photographs of charcoals from combustion of modern plants in the Ningshao Plain, China.

Fig 2

(A) L/W ratios (43–103 grains counted for each sample); (B) microscopic photographs of charcoal grains (1. Miscanthus; 2. Weeds from tidal flats; 3. Weeds from paddy fields; 4. Echinochloa; 5. Setaria; 6. Leaves of Phyllostachys; 7. Arundo donax; 8. Phragmites; 9. Panicum miliaceum; 10. Oryza (Oryza stem is not shown due to the similarity of Oryza stem and Oryza); 11. Strip of Phyllostachys; 12. A mixture of the trunk of arbor (including Cinnamomum and Quercus); 13. Artemisia; 14. Cinnamomum; 15. Quercus; 16. Taxodiaceae; 17. Ficus microcarpa; 18. Pine; 19.Cyclobalanopsis; 20. Liquidambar).

Effects of fragmentation on charcoal morphology

Charcoal fragmentation gradually increased as the duration of vibration and centrifugation increased (Table 1). After vibration of 5 minutes and centrifugation of 90 minutes, the mean L of herbaceous charcoals increased from 104.1±11.5 μm (n = 41) to 108.3±5.4 μm (n = 59), and the mean L of woody charcoal decreased from 126.5±9.35 μm (n = 99) to 88.8±6.3μm (n = 59). Correspondingly, the mean L/W ratio reduced by 59.3% for herbaceous charcoals and 50.0% for woody charcoals. Although the vibration and centrifugation conditions influenced L and L/W (Table 1), the differences between herbaceous versus woody vegetation were consistent among the three conditions. Thus, we applied the method of the shortest duration (vibration for 1.5 minutes and centrifugation for 30 minutes) to all charcoals to simulate fragmentation during sedimentary processes.

The fragmentation experiments altered L and L/W of both the herbaceous and woody charcoals, but the L/W ratio changed consistently and remained larger for herbaceous charcoals than for woody charcoals (Fig 3). This observation suggests that L/W retains the original source signatures and is hence useful to distinguish the type of combusted vegetation after the sedimentation process. We calculated the mean L/W of herbaceous charcoals (4.50) and woody charcoals (1.94) and used them as the end-member values to estimate the percentages of herbaceous (%herb) vs. woody (%wood) vegetation in the sediment cores.

Fig 3. Comparison of charcoal L/W ratios before and after fragmentation experiments.

Fig 3

Sixteen plant species from the Ningshao Plain were included in the experiments. Each bar represent data from 43−103 charcoal grains.

Variations in charcoal indices in the sediment cores

The charcoal grains in the sediments show varied forms: elongated, needle-shaped, rectangular, elliptical, and circular (Fig 4). Similar forms were observed after the combustion and fragmentation experiments, suggesting charcoal grains from the sediment cores originated from the combustion of a mixture of herbaceous and woody plants. Charcoal forms changed across the four sedimentary units, with typical morphological features of charcoals of different depths shown in Fig 4. Prior to the Holocene at 27.00 m, charcoals were primarily woody (arbor type), and the herbaceous count was only 7% (Fig 4A). At 18.20 m (8570 yr B.P.), round or oval woody charcoals dominated, accounting for 68% of total charcoals, and herbaceous charcoals accounted for 32% (Fig 4B). At 17.81 m (8550 yr B.P.), long, columnar herbaceous charcoals dominated, and herbaceous counts were about 88% (Fig 4C). At the depth of 4.21 m (7600 yr B.P.), long and columnar herbaceous charcoal grains were more abundant than round and oval woody charcoal grains (Fig 4D), and herbaceous charcoals accounted for about 66% of total charcoals.

Fig 4. Micrograph of typical charcoals from different depths of the sediment cores KHQ-14/15 from the Ningshao Plain, China.

Fig 4

(A) 27.00m, (B) 18.20m, (C) 17.81m and (D) 4.21m. Red circle marks herbaceous charcoal grains, and green circle marks woody charcoal grains.

Using end-member values from the fragmentation experiments, we estimated percentage contributions of combusted herbaceous versus woody vegetation upon the sedimentary sequence (Fig 5C). The results are largely consistent with those from point-counting method. According to the variation in charcoals, we identified four environmental stages (Fig 5 and Table 2). Stage I (33.00−26.00m, the last glacial period) was characterized by low charcoal concentrations (grains per gram of sediment) and low values of L and L/W, which indicates a small contribution of herbaceous charcoals varying in the range of 0−26.00%. Stage II (26.00−15.00m, 9200−8240 yr B.P.) was characterized by greater charcoal concentrations and higher values of L and L/W, and herbaceous charcoals fluctuated between 26.95−100%. Stage III (15.00−6.00m, 8240−7450 yr B.P.) included the period of the Kuahuqiao culture, and total charcoal concentrations and L and L/W of charcoal grains all decreased during this stage. Herbaceous charcoals varied from 28.90 to 65.00%, indicating reduced fire activities and a decrease in herbaceous vegetation that was combusted. During Stage IV (6.00−0m, after 7450 yr B.P.), the concentration and L of charcoals increased, yet L/W decreased further and herbaceous charcoals decreased to 1.95–46.88%. These data indicate elevated fire activities but a continuous reduction in the relative abundance of herbaceous vegetation that were combusted (Fig 5E).

Fig 5. Lithology and charcoal indices of the sediment cores (KHQ-14/15) from the Ningshao Plain, China.

Fig 5

(A) lithology; (B) mean L/W ratios of charcoal grains (each data point was calculated from 38–118 charcoal grains); (C) percent contributions of herbaceous charcoals based on end-member calculation (black line) and microscopic counting (red line); (D) mean charcoal length (each data point was calculated from 38–118 charcoal grains); (E) total charcoal concentration.

Table 2. Temporal variation in charcoal concentration and morphological indices from the sediment cores (KHQ-14/15) from the Ningshao Plain, China.

Stage Depth(m) Calibrated ages (yr B.P.) Mean charcoal concentration (grains/g) Mean L(μm) Mean L/W Herbaceous charcoals (%)
I 33.00−26.00 The last glacial period 98.70 104.69 1.68 0−26.00
II 26.00−14.01 9200−8240 277.66 141.62 4.31 28.90−100.00
III 14.01−6.00 8240−7450 187.70 97.50 2.77 11.72−65.00
IV 6.00−0 After 7450 237.48 118.43 2.60 1.95−46.88

Discussion

Charcoal morphology as an indicator of paleofire and paleovegetation

We found that the shape of charcoal grains differed systematically between herbaceous and woody plants. The anatomical structure of plants, such as the size and shape of cells and the abundance of vascular and fiber bundles, may be the primary factor determining the shape of charcoal grains [28]. Charcoals from herbaceous plants tend to break into slender fragments along the long axis under external forces, likely due to abundant vascular and fiber bundles in herbal plant tissues. In contrast, woody plants have a more uniform composition made of plant fibers and lignin, and their charcoals tend to break along a plane intersecting with the long axis, resulting in rectangular shapes with reduced L/W values. Leaves have multidirectional veins and fibers and thus do not show a preferential breakage direction, thereby producing charcoal grains with irregular shapes and complex internal structures [28, 32].

The systematic morphological differences of charcoal grains due to vegetation types substantiate the use of end-member L/W values for reconstructing the types of paleovegetation. End-member estimation and direct microscopic counting yielded consistent results on the relative abundance of herbaceous (or woody) vegetation through the sedimentary sequence (Fig 5C). However, end-member calculation produced negative values of %herbaceous vegetation for two samples (27.00m and 31.99m), which is most likely a result of L/W variability due to species or/and depositional processes, highlighting the importance of more extensive calibration of end-member L/W values using local vegetation to generate robust results. Nevertheless, measuring charcoal L/W does not require careful examinations of morphological characteristics of individual charcoal grain and meticulous counting, thereby providing a more efficient alternative to the conventional counting method.

Fire history in the Ningshao Plain and implications for the Kuahuqiao agricultural practices

Charcoal indices reveal changes in fire activities since the last glacial period in the Ningshao Plain. During the last glacial period (27.00–25.40m), fire activities were scarce and woody plants were the dominant type of combusted vegetation. Fire activities became more prevalent during the early Holocene (9200−8240 yr B.P.), when herbal plants were the dominant fuel for fire. During the period of 8240–7450 yr B.P. that enclosed the entire history of the Kuahuqiao culture, both fire activities and the abundance of combusted herbs decreased. After 7450 yr B.P., fire activities especially in situ or adjacent fires showed slight increases as evidenced by moderate increases to charcoal concentration and L values (Fig 5D), while the relative abundance of herbaceous vegetation remained relatively low. The temporal patterns in fire activities can be partially explained by the climatic and environmental context—the last glacial period was characterized by a cold climate and sparse vegetation, which are not conducive to frequent and intense wildfire, yet temperature increases during the Holocene can stimulate the growth of vegetation and associated wildfire. The dominance of herbaceous plants as the fuel source agrees well with the pollen data showing an increase in Poaceae (decrease in Quercus contemporaneously), which is a typical grass in the study region during the Early Holocene [5, 7].

The most distinct change throughout the sedimentary sequence is the rapid rise in the L/W of charcoals and a corresponding increase in percent herbaceous charcoals (from 27% to 100%) at 8550 yr B.P. This change marks a transition from arbor and shrub-dominated vegetation to herb-dominated vegetation. Meanwhile, the L of charcoals decreased rapidly at 8550 yr B.P., confirming the transition from woody to herbal vegetation. Phytolith analysis of the KHQ-14/15 cores [35] (Zhou et al., in preparation) also show that the content of woody phytoliths decreased yet herb phytoliths reached to the maximum (Fig 6B). In particular, the content of the Millet subfamily and Bluegrass subfamily exhibited changes consistent with those of herbaceous charcoals (Fig 6B and 6A). The pollen data of the sediment cores KHQ-14/15 also showed decreases to Quercus and increases to herbaceous vegetation, especially Gramineae, at 8550 yr B.P. [5] (Fig 6C). However, this observed vegetation change contradicts with the regional paleoclimatic record that shows a warm and wet climate, under which the growth of trees should be favored over that of herbs [6] (Fig 6D). For example, pollen and charcoal data of the corresponding age from lake sediments in the lower Yangtze River Basin show the flourishment of subtropical mixed forest composed of evergreen broadleaf and deciduous trees [6] and infrequent wildfire [10, 36]. The contrasting results from the present study suggest the significance of local vegetation and environment in mediating sedimentary charcoals. Specifically, the rise in herbaceous vegetation in our study area is most likely a result of sedimentary environmental changes to tidal flats that can support abundant growth of herbaceous plants. Similar changes have been recorded in Hemudu area during 6500−6200 yr B.P., with pollen indicating abundant aquatic herbs appeared when the sedimentary environments was supra-tidal flat [37]. Another observation worth noting is that rice phytoliths were found in sediments of 8550 yr B.P., along with intensive fire activities and more abundant herbaceous plants being combusted (Fig 6C). Although the common notion holds that the Kuahuqiao culture had not been developed at that time, it is possible that small-scale human activities had started earlier than previously thought [3840].

Fig 6. Comparison of multiple proxies from sedimentary profiles around the Kuahuqiao area over the past 10k years.

Fig 6

(A) the charcoal indices from the sedimentary cores (KHQ-14/15) (black line indicates results from charcoal L/W end-member value calculation; red line indicates results from microscopic counting); (B) Phytolith of the sediment cores (KHQ-14/15) (under review) [35]; (C) Pollen and micro-charcoal from the Kuahuqiao archeological site [5]; (D) Reconstructed temperature and rainfall variation of the study period based on pollen records from Pingwang, Jiangsu, which is 120 km from the Kuahuqiao archeological site [6]. Green shaded areas in panel (A) and (B) outline the Kuahuqiao culture period.

During the Kuahuqiao culture period from 8250 yr B.P. to 7450 yr B.P., a large number of charcoal grains were found at the archaeological sites (Fig 6C), yet it remains unknown whether they originated from large-scale fire due to agricultural activities or small-scale fire due to daily life activities. Our results from sedimentary sequences that are merely ~1.5 km away from the archaeological sites show reduction in charcoal concentrations and percent herbaceous charcoals during the Kuahuqiao cultural period, indicating no constantly massive burning beyond the archaeological site. This result agrees with the charcoal record from an adjacent natural sedimentary profile [9, 41] but contrasts with the charcoal evidence from the archaeological site that indicates more intensive fire during the Kuahuqiao cultural period. This seeming discrepancy can be explained by that human-induced fires were restricted to a small geographic area and did not generate large disturbance to surrounding areas that were not inhabited. Sedimentary records of facies and grain size from the Ningshao Plain suggests a rapid sea-level rise in the early stage of the Kuahuqiao culture, as shown by the transition to tidal flat facies between 18.40−26.30m in the sediment cores of the present study (Fig 5) and sedimentary evidence presented previously [42, 43]. Pollen data from the sediment cores of this study show that aquatic plant sporopollen such as Typha decreased rapidly during the cultural period [34, 41], confirming increases to both surface area and depth of water bodies. Sea-level rise can inundate agricultural fields and hinder the human effort in expanding the areas of rice cultivation. Therefore, our data do not support continuous, large-scale human fire activities beyond the archeological site, thereby providing no evidence for the use of fire to clear a large ground space to expand rice paddies during the occupation of the Kuahuqiao culture.

Conclusion

The objective of this study was to test the hypothesis that slash-and-burn agricultural practice was adopted by the Kuahuqiao culture. We conducted laboratory combustion and fragmentation experiments on representative modern vegetation from the Ningshao Plain and established charcoal-based paleofire indices. We found systematic differences in morphology between herbaceous and woody charcoals and established the corresponding L/W end-member values, which are 4.50 for herbaceous charcoals and 1.94 for woody charcoals. These indices were then applied to wetland sediment cores adjacent to the Kuahuqiao archaeological site to reconstruct the fire and vegetation history. We found that fire activities were scarce during the last glacial period but exhibited evident increases since the Holocene. The most pronounced change occurred at about 8550 yr B.P., as marked by a sharp increase in the abundance of combusted herbaceous plants, which may reflect local environmental changes or early use of fire by humans. However, during the Kuahuqiao cultural period (8250−7450 yr B.P.), we found no evidence of large-scale fire, suggesting that the Kuahuqio ancestors did not constantly carry out large-scale slash-and-burn farming activities to expand rice cultivation to areas beyond the archeological site.

Supporting information

S1 Table. Details of charcoal indices from the sediment cores (KHQ-14/15).

(XLSX)

Acknowledgments

We thank Dr. J. Shu and another anonymous reviewer for providing constructive comments that have contributed to revisions and improvement of the manuscript. We are grateful to ChunMei Ma, ZhuJun Hu for their discussions.

Data Availability

All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.

Funding Statement

The National Natural Science Foundation of China (41977378), Major Research Plan of the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grand No. 41991323), Research on the Global Change of National Major Scientific Research Project of China (2015CB953804), and Jiangsu Provincial Basic Research Program Natural Science Foundation General Project of China (BK20171340) had play an important role in our study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish.

References

  • 1.Chen ZY, Wang ZH, Jill S, Tao J, Cai YL. Holocene climate fluctuations in the Yangtze delta of eastern China and the Neolithic response. Holocene. 2005;15:915–24. [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Fuller DQ, Qin L, Zheng Y, Zhao Z, Chen X, Hosoya LA, et al. The Domestication Process and Domestication Rate in Rice: Spikelet Bases from the Lower Yangtze. Science. 2009;323(5921):1607–10. 10.1126/science.1166605 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Wang WM, Ding JL, Shu JW, Chen W. Exploration of early rice farming in China. Quaternary International. 2010;227(1):22–8. 10.1016/j.quaint.2010.06.007 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Guo XL, Zhao WW, Zhang JH, Li FR, Zhang K, Zhao Y. Advances of charcoal study for paleoenvironment in China. Journal of Glaciology and Geocryology. 2011;33(2):342–8. [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Zong Y, Chen Z, Innes JB, Chen C, Wang Z, Wang H. Fire and flood management of coastal swamp enabled first rice paddy cultivation in east China. Nature. 2007;449(7161):459–62. 10.1038/nature06135 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Innes JB, Zong Y, Wang Z, Chen Z. Climatic and palaeoecological changes during the mid- to Late Holocene transition in eastern China: high-resolution pollen and non-pollen palynomorph analysis at Pingwang, Yangtze coastal lowlands. Quaternary Science Reviews. 2014;99:164–75. 10.1016/j.quascirev.2014.06.013 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Shu JW, Wang W-M, Jiang L-P. Did alder (Alnus) fires trigger rice cultivation in the lower reaches of the Yangtze River, East China? Palaeoworld. 2012;21(1):69–73. 10.1016/j.palwor.2012.02.003 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Atahan P, Itzstein-Davey F, Taylor D, Dodson J, Qin J, Zheng H, et al. Holocene-aged sedimentary records of environmental changes and early agriculture in the lower Yangtze, China. Quaternary Science Reviews. 2007;27(5–6):556–70. 10.1016/j.quascirev.2007.11.003 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Shu WJ, Wang WM, Jiang LP, Takahara H. Early Neolithic vegetation history, fire regime and human activity at Kuahuqiao, Lower Yangtze River, East China: New and improved insight. Quaternary International. 2010;227(1):10–21. 10.1016/j.quaint.2010.04.010 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Qin JG. Palynological study of Ningshao Plain and Paleoenvironmental significance since Late Plestocene: Tongji University; 2006. [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Li CH, Tang LY, Wan HW, Wang SM, Yao SC, Zhang DF. Vegetation and human activity in Yuyao inferred from the sporo-pollen record since the Late Pleistocene. Acta Micropalaeontologica Sinica. 2009;26(1):48–56. [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Yang Q, Li XQ, Zhou XY, Zhao KL, Ji M, Sun N. Investigation of the ultrastructural characteristics of foxtail and broomcorn millet during carbonization and its application in archaeobotany. Chinese Science Bulletin. 2011;56(14):1495–502. 10.1007/s11434-011-4423-1 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Li CH, Zheng YF, Yu SY, Li YX, Shen HD. Understanding the ecological background of rice agriculture on the Ningshao Plain during the Neolithic Age: pollen evidence from a buried paddy field at the Tianluoshan cultural site. Quaternary Science Reviews. 2012;35:131–8. 10.1016/j.quascirev.2012.01.007 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Patterson WA, Edwards KJ, Maguire DJ. Microscopic charcoal as a fossil indicator of fire. Quaternary Science Reviews. 1987;6(1):3–23. 10.1016/0277-3791(87)90012-6 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Ward DE. Smoke emissions from wildland fires. 1991;17(2–3):117–34. [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Macdonald GM, Larsen CPS, Szeicz JM, Moser KA. The reconstruction of boreal forest fire history from lake sediments: A comparison of charcoal, pollen, sedimentological, and geochemical indices. Quaternary Science Reviews. 1991;10(1):53–71. 10.1016/0277-3791(91)90030-X [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Li XQ, Zhou XY, Shang X, Dodson J. Different-(kPa/°C) size method of charcoal analysis in loess and its significance in the study of fire variation. Journal of Lake Science. 2006;(5):540–4. [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Tan ZH, Huang CC, Pang JL, Zhang ZP. Charcoal records of Holocene loess-soil sequences and its palaeoenvironmental significance in Weihe River Drainage. Chinese Journal of Eco-agriculture. 2010;18(1):25–30. [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Chaloner WG. Fossil charcoal as an indicator of palaeoatmospheric oxygen level. Journal of the Geological Society. 1989;146(1):171–4. 10.1144/gsjgs.146.1.0171 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Lv J, Wang YF, Li CS. Fossil charcoal and ancient forest fire. Journal of Palaeogeography. 2002;4(02):71–6. [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Jones TP. Ultrastructural and chemical studies on Oligocene fossil wood from Bovey Tracey, Devon, UK. Review of Palaeobotany Palynology. 1994;81(2–4):279–88. 10.1016/0034-6667(94)90112-0 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Guo Y, Bustin RM. FTIR spectroscopy and reflectance of modern charcoals and fungal decayed woods: implications for studies of inertinite in coals. 1998;37(1–2):29–53. 10.1016/S0166-5162(98)00019-6 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Whitehouse NJ. Forest fires and insects: palaeoentomological research from a subfossil burnt forest. Palaeogeography Palaeoclimatology Palaeoecology. 2000;164(1–4):231–46. 10.1016/s0031-0182(00)00188-7 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Li YY, Hou SF, Zhao PF. Comparison of different quantification methods for microfossil charcoal concentration and the implication for human activities. Quaternary Science. 2010;30(2):356–63. [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Kaal J, Marco YC, Asouti E, Seijo MM, Cortizas AM, Casáis MC, et al. Long-term deforestation in NW Spain: linking the Holocene fire history to vegetation change and human activities. Quaternary Science Reviews. 2011;30(1–2):161–75. 10.1016/j.quascirev.2010.10.006 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Marlon JR, Bartlein PJ, Daniau A-L, Harrison SP, Maezumi SY, Power MJ, et al. Global biomass burning: a synthesis and review of Holocene paleofire records and their contro. Quaternary Science Reviews. 2013;65:5–25. 10.1016/j.quascirev.2012.11.029 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Cui HT, Cui YY, Hu JM, Yao XS, Li Y. The microstructure of carbon debris was used to reconstruct the Bronze Age vegetation. Chinese Science Bulletin. 2002;49(19):1504–7. [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Charles EU, Molly JM. Experimental production and analysis of microscopic charcoal from wood, leaves and grasses. The Holocene. 1998;8(3):341–6. [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Figueiral I. Charcoal analysis and the history of Pinus pinaster (cluster pine) in Portugal. Review of Palaeobotany Palynology. 1995;89(3–4):441–54. 10.1016/0034-6667(95)00013-3 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Sümegi P, Rudner ZE. In situ charcoal fragments as remains of natural wild fires in the upper Würm of the Carpathian Basin. Quaternary International. 2001;76:165–76. 10.1016/S1040-6182(00)00100-2 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Cousins WJ. Optical microscopy of charcoal. Journal of Microscopy. 2011;105(1):15–8. 10.1111/j.1365-2818.1975.tb04033.x [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Zhang JP, Lv HY. Preliminary study of charcoal morphology and its environmental significance. Quaternary Sciences. 2006;26(5):857–63. [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Li C, Li G, Li RC, Liang WY, Wen MD, Tao XY. Study on the ratio of microcharcoal particles to phytoliths derived from plant combustion. Acta Micropalaeontologica Sinica. 2019;36(01):83–90. [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Yang Q, Zheng HB, Zhou B. Devastating Qiangtangjiang tidal bores ruined the early Neolithic rice culture at Kuahuqiao, east China, 7600 years ago. Proceedings of National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.Forthcoming.
  • 35.Zhou B, Zhang JP, Hu YF. Phytolithic analysis of Kuahuqiao site since Holocene. Chinese Science Bulletin.Forthcoming.
  • 36.Wu L, Zhang MC, Ji C, Zhang ST. Charcoal recorded fire environment change during the Holocene from the sediment of the Chaohu Lake, east China. Scientia Geographica Sinica. 2016;36(12):1920–8. [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Liu Y, Sun QL, Fan DD, Lai XH, Xu LC, Finlayson B, et al. Pollen evidence to interpret the history of rice farming at the Hemudu site on the Ningshao coast, eastern China. Quat Int. 2016;426:195–203. 10.1016/j.quaint.2016.05.016 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Zheng Y, Jiang LP, Zheng JM. Study on the Remains of Ancient Rice from Kuahuqiao Site in Zhejiang Province. Chinese Journal of Rice Science. 2004;18(2):119–24. [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Yang XY, Fuller DQ, Huan XJ, Perry L, Li Q, Li Z, et al. Barnyard grasses were processed with rice around 10000 years ago. Scientific Reports. 2015;5:1–7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Zhang JP, Lv HY, Wu NQ, Yang XY, Diao XM, Michael DP. Phytolith Analysis for Differentiating between Foxtail Millet (Setaria italica) and Green Foxtail (Setaria viridis). Plos One. 2011;6(5):e19726 10.1371/journal.pone.0019726 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Shu JW, Jiang LP, Wang MW, editors. Is "Slash-and-burn" an economic model of rice cultivation in the Kuahuqiao culture of Zhejiang province, 8000 years ago?-Comparison and inspiration of the site profile and the natural borer spore records. The ninth academic conference of the Paleontology Branch of the Chinese Society of Paleontology; 2013; Guilin.
  • 42.Zheng YF, Sun GP, Chen XG. Response of rice cultivation to fluctuating sea level during the Mid-Holocene. Chinese Science Bulletin. 2012:59–67. 10.1007/s11434-011-4786-3 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Wang ZH, Zhuang CC, Saito Y, Chen J, Zhan Q, Wang XD. Early mid-Holocene sea-level change and coastal environmental response on the southern Yangtze delta plain, China: implications for the rise of Neolithic culture. Quaternary Science Reviews. 2012;35:51–62. 10.1016/j.quascirev.2012.01.005 [DOI] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Peter F Biehl

14 Apr 2020

PONE-D-20-06598

Abundance and morphology of charcoal in sediments provide no evidence of massive slash-and-burn agriculture during the Neolithic Kuahuqiao culture, China

PLOS ONE

Dear Mrs Bin,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

all comments must be addressed before re-submission.

We would appreciate receiving your revised manuscript by May 29 2020 11:59PM. When you are ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter.

To enhance the reproducibility of your results, we recommend that if applicable you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io, where a protocol can be assigned its own identifier (DOI) such that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). This letter should be uploaded as separate file and labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. This file should be uploaded as separate file and labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. This file should be uploaded as separate file and labeled 'Manuscript'.

Please note while forming your response, if your article is accepted, you may have the opportunity to make the peer review history publicly available. The record will include editor decision letters (with reviews) and your responses to reviewer comments. If eligible, we will contact you to opt in or out.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Peter F. Biehl, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (if provided):

Your manuscript has now been seen by two referees, whose comments are appended below. You will see from these comments that while the referees find your work of great interest, one reviewer has raised substantial concerns that must be addressed. In light of these comments, we cannot accept the manuscript for publication, but would be interested in considering a revised version that addresses these serious concerns.

We hope you will find the referees' comments useful as you decide how to proceed. Should presentation of further data and analysis allow you to address these criticisms, we would be happy to look at a substantially revised manuscript. However, please bear in mind that we will be reluctant to approach the referees again in the absence of major revisions.

Journal requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements:

1.    Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at http://www.plosone.org/attachments/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and http://www.plosone.org/attachments/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. In your Methods section, please provide additional information regarding the permits you obtained to collect samples for the present study. Please ensure you have included the full name of the authority that approved the field site access and, if no permits were required, a brief statement explaining why.

3. PLOS requires an ORCID iD for the corresponding author in Editorial Manager on papers submitted after December 6th, 2016. Please ensure that you have an ORCID iD and that it is validated in Editorial Manager. To do this, go to ‘Update my Information’ (in the upper left-hand corner of the main menu), and click on the Fetch/Validate link next to the ORCID field. This will take you to the ORCID site and allow you to create a new iD or authenticate a pre-existing iD in Editorial Manager. Please see the following video for instructions on linking an ORCID iD to your Editorial Manager account: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xcclfuvtxQ

4. We note that Figure 1 in your submission contains map images which may be copyrighted. All PLOS content is published under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which means that the manuscript, images, and Supporting Information files will be freely available online, and any third party is permitted to access, download, copy, distribute, and use these materials in any way, even commercially, with proper attribution. For these reasons, we cannot publish previously copyrighted maps or satellite images created using proprietary data, such as Google software (Google Maps, Street View, and Earth). For more information, see our copyright guidelines: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/licenses-and-copyright.

We require you to either (1) present written permission from the copyright holder to publish these figures specifically under the CC BY 4.0 license, or (2) remove the figures from your submission:

1.    You may seek permission from the original copyright holder of Figure 1 to publish the content specifically under the CC BY 4.0 license. 

We recommend that you contact the original copyright holder with the Content Permission Form (http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=7c09/content-permission-form.pdf) and the following text:

“I request permission for the open-access journal PLOS ONE to publish XXX under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CCAL) CC BY 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Please be aware that this license allows unrestricted use and distribution, even commercially, by third parties. Please reply and provide explicit written permission to publish XXX under a CC BY license and complete the attached form.”

Please upload the completed Content Permission Form or other proof of granted permissions as an "Other" file with your submission.

In the figure caption of the copyrighted figure, please include the following text: “Reprinted from [ref] under a CC BY license, with permission from [name of publisher], original copyright [original copyright year].”

2.    If you are unable to obtain permission from the original copyright holder to publish these figures under the CC BY 4.0 license or if the copyright holder’s requirements are incompatible with the CC BY 4.0 license, please either i) remove the figure or ii) supply a replacement figure that complies with the CC BY 4.0 license. Please check copyright information on all replacement figures and update the figure caption with source information. If applicable, please specify in the figure caption text when a figure is similar but not identical to the original image and is therefore for illustrative purposes only.

The following resources for replacing copyrighted map figures may be helpful:

USGS National Map Viewer (public domain): http://viewer.nationalmap.gov/viewer/

The Gateway to Astronaut Photography of Earth (public domain): http://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/sseop/clickmap/

Maps at the CIA (public domain): https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/index.html and https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/cia-maps-publications/index.html

NASA Earth Observatory (public domain): http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/

Landsat: http://landsat.visibleearth.nasa.gov/

USGS EROS (Earth Resources Observatory and Science (EROS) Center) (public domain): http://eros.usgs.gov/#

Natural Earth (public domain): http://www.naturalearthdata.com/

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: Zhou et al.’s paper presents an interesting macrocharcoal-based evidence to argue the previous hypothesis that whether the slash-and-burn practice was used in early rice farming in the low-lying coastal Kuahuqiao area 8-7ka. The simulation experiment using common modern plants for burning successfully established the useful criteria to morphologically discriminate charcoal between herbs and woods. Their result shows that there was no regional human-induced vegetation burning for rice agriculture at Kuahuqiao, which agrees well with pollen analysis at the archaeological site. This study offers a significant insight regarding the early rice farming in coastal plains.

Several questions should be addressed before publication.

1) The incomplete selected plant list for the burning experiment

The study site is located in the monsoonal climate under which zonal broadleaved evergreen forests flourish. Based pollen results (Zong et al., 2007; Innes et al., 2009; Shu et al., 2010, 2012) show that Pinus and Cyclobalanopsis, important trees, contribute a large proportion into pollen flora. However, these two taxa are ignored in the authors’ combustion experiment. Please tell the reason why these important trees are lack.

2) Low sampling resolution

Zhou et al. utilized only 13 sediment samples for macro-charcoal analysis collected from the combined 34m-long cores. Even worse is that merely two samples from 8240-7450 cal.aBP corresponding to the cultural layers at the archaeological site. The low resolution definitely weakens the conclusion they drew to argue against the slash-and-burn hypothesis. I strongly suggest more samples are highly necessary esp. during the 8-7ka interval.

3) Abundance herbaceous charcoal around 8550 cal.aBP.

The sedimentary charcoal shows high concentration of herbaceous charcoal near the 8550 years ago. The authors provide a reasonable explanation for the exceptional high content that the tide environment encouraged herbs to colonize the tidal flat. However, is it a common situation in coastal area? Please provide published examples to support this idea in order to convince the readers.

Minor mistakes or questions:

1) lines 95-101, “northern boundary of the subtropical climate zone” could be central subtropical zone; “dominated by north subtropical evergreen deciduous ” north corrected to central; Pinus Linn, Cyclobalanopsis oerst? Correct to Pinus, Cyclobalanopsis. Gramineae to Gramineae or Line

2) Line 114, Brassica chinensis is an important economical oil-producing plant and was introduced into China during late historical time. Thus, it is impropriate to burn it for charcoal analysis.

3) Line 117, “a mixture of Wood (simplified as Wood).” Wood here is confusing. What are included? Please detail it.

4) Line 141, “seven plant residues of KHQ-1502 and two plant residues of KHQ-14 were” nine samples was dated. However, 8 ages are indicated in Fig.6, why

5)Fig.3, only 13 taxa plant are shown. However, 18 taxa are secletd for combustion experiment. Why? Moreover, Artemisia in souther China are mainly in herb form instead of trees. Also, Bamboos are usually assigned into poaceaous woods.

Reviewer #2: As a direct product of fire and vegetation, paleocharcoal is one of the most important evidence to reconstructing the fire history and ancient human activities. However, it is still controversial whether morphological features of charcoal can be used as indicators to identifying plant species. In this manuscript, the authors innovatively conducted combustion and fragmentation conditional experiments based on modern representative reference to simulate fire and depositional processes. They established morphological criteria of charcoal from modern vegetation to distinguish herbaceous and woody plants, and further applied them to sediment cores adjacent to the archaeological site revealing local environment changes and early human activities, providing new insight about slash-and-burn farming activities in lower Yangtze region in the early Holocene. This case study provides more evidence to further illustrating the relationship between the production, deposition of charcoal and farming activity in the early stage of agriculture.

The word in line 29 "then applied to sediment cores (KQH-14/15)", "KQH" should be "KHQ"?

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: Yes: Junwu SHU

Reviewer #2: No

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files to be viewed.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email us at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2020 Aug 19;15(8):e0237592. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0237592.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 0


11 Jul 2020

Dear Dr. Biehl,

We appreciate the time that you took in addressing our manuscript. In our revision we have addressed all the main concerns of the reviewers and have made the requested specific changes based on the reviewers’ comments. Specifically, we have performed more experiments to collect additional data on plant taxa and time period of interest. Furthermore, we have made extensive edits to improve the readability of the manuscript. You will see our responses to the comments below. We appreciate these suggestions and think they significantly improve the manuscript and hope that you find that our manuscript is now appropriate for publication.

We thank you for your time and help in making this paper much clearer to readers and look forward to hearing from you. We are happy to make additional revisions if necessary.

Sincerely,

Bin Zhou

Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: Zhou et al.’s paper presents an interesting macrocharcoal-based evidence to argue the previous hypothesis that whether the slash-and-burn practice was used in early rice farming in the low-lying coastal Kuahuqiao area 8-7ka. The simulation experiment using common modern plants for burning successfully established the useful criteria to morphologically discriminate charcoal between herbs and woods. Their result shows that there was no regional human-induced vegetation burning for rice agriculture at Kuahuqiao, which agrees well with pollen analysis at the archaeological site. This study offers a significant insight regarding the early rice farming in coastal plains.

Reply: We thank the reviewer for taking the time to evaluate our manuscript and providing constructive comments, which contributed to the improvement of the manuscript.

Several questions should be addressed before publication.

1) The incomplete selected plant list for the burning experiment

The study site is located in the monsoonal climate under which zonal broadleaved evergreen forests flourish. Based pollen results (Zong et al., 2007; Innes et al., 2009; Shu et al., 2010, 2012) show that Pinus and Cyclobalanopsis, important trees, contribute a large proportion into pollen flora. However, these two taxa are ignored in the authors’ combustion experiment. Please tell the reason why these important trees are lack.

Reply: We thank the reviewer for this suggestion. We have performed additional combustion experiments and included Pine, Cyclobalanopsis, Oryza stem.

2) Low sampling resolution

Zhou et al. utilized only 13 sediment samples for macro-charcoal analysis collected from the combined 34m-long cores. Even worse is that merely two samples from 8240-7450 cal.aBP corresponding to the cultural layers at the archaeological site. The low resolution definitely weakens the conclusion they drew to argue against the slash-and-burn hypothesis. I strongly suggest more samples are highly necessary esp. during the 8-7ka interval.

Reply: We have added three additional data points during the 8-7 ka, and the result is now shown in the revised manuscript. These new results did not change our conclusion.

3) Abundance herbaceous charcoal around 8550 cal. a BP.

The sedimentary charcoal shows high concentration of herbaceous charcoal near the 8550 years ago. The authors provide a reasonable explanation for the exceptional high content that the tide environment encouraged herbs to colonize the tidal flat. However, is it a common situation in coastal area? Please provide published examples to support this idea in order to convince the readers.

Reply: We thank the reviewer for this suggestion and have now added references to support this idea. Please check lines of 367-369, and reference 37.

Minor mistakes or questions:

1) lines 95-101, “northern boundary of the subtropical climate zone” could be central subtropical zone; “dominated by north subtropical evergreen deciduous ” north corrected to central; Pinus Linn, Cyclobalanopsis oerst? Correct to Pinus, Cyclobalanopsis. Gramineae to Gramineae or Line

Reply: We have made the correction in lines 95-101.

2) Line 114, Brassica chinensis is an important economical oil-producing plant and was introduced into China during late historical time. Thus, it is impropriate to burn it for charcoal analysis.

Reply: We meant “Weeds from tidal flats”. We apologize for this error and have made the modification in lines 114.

3) Line 117, “a mixture of Wood (simplified as Wood).” Wood here is confusing. What are included? Please detail it.

Reply: We have added the details— “the trunk of arbor including Cinnamomum and Quercus”. Modification has been made in the figures and article.

4) Line 141, “seven plant residues of KHQ-1502 and two plant residues of KHQ-14 were” nine samples was dated. However, 8 ages are indicated in Fig.6, why

Reply: We apologize for the omission. We have added the age data to Fig.6.

5)Fig.3, only 13 taxa plant are shown. However, 18 taxa are selectedd for combustion experiment. Why? Moreover, Artemisia in southern China are mainly in herb form instead of trees. Also, Bamboos are usually assigned into poaceaous woods.

Reply: We have added three additional taxa for the combustion and fragmentation experiments. We performed fragmentation experiments on the majority (16 out of 21) but not all of selected taxa because fragmentation showed relatively consistent effects on all samples. We included the major and representative taxa of the study area, which should be sufficient to address the research objective.

Following this suggestion, we assigned Phyllostachys as the trunk of woods. Because the Artemisia we collected in the field were tall and their stems have become lignified, we classified it as a shrub according to botanical definition.

Reviewer #2: As a direct product of fire and vegetation, paleocharcoal is one of the most important evidence to reconstructing the fire history and ancient human activities. However, it is still controversial whether morphological features of charcoal can be used as indicators to identifying plant species. In this manuscript, the authors innovatively conducted combustion and fragmentation conditional experiments based on modern representative reference to simulate fire and depositional processes. They established morphological criteria of charcoal from modern vegetation to distinguish herbaceous and woody plants, and further applied them to sediment cores adjacent to the archaeological site revealing local environment changes and early human activities, providing new insight about slash-and-burn farming activities in lower Yangtze region in the early Holocene. This case study provides more evidence to further illustrating the relationship between the production, deposition of charcoal and farming activity in the early stage of agriculture.

The word in line 29 "then applied to sediment cores (KQH-14/15)", "KQH" should be "KHQ"?

Reply: We thank the reviewer for taking the time to evaluate our manuscript and providing constructive comments, which have helped to improve the manuscript. We have made the correction in line 29.

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

Decision Letter 1

Peter F Biehl

30 Jul 2020

Abundance and morphology of charcoal in sediments provide no evidence of massive slash-and-burn agriculture during the Neolithic Kuahuqiao culture, China

PONE-D-20-06598R1

Dear Dr. Bin,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Peter F. Biehl, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: Minor corrections:

Family names should be NOT in italics in texts, such as in L99 Gramineae; L133,L162, L175,L215 and L232 Taxodiaceae;L344 Poaceae.

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Acceptance letter

Peter F Biehl

7 Aug 2020

PONE-D-20-06598R1

Abundance and morphology of charcoal in sediments provide no evidence of massive slash-and-burn agriculture during the Neolithic Kuahuqiao culture, China

Dear Dr. Zhou:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Peter F. Biehl

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 Table. Details of charcoal indices from the sediment cores (KHQ-14/15).

    (XLSX)

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

    Data Availability Statement

    All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.


    Articles from PLoS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES