Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Niche Construction and Long-Term Trajectories of Food Production

Niche Construction and Long-Term Trajectories of Food Production Niche construction theory has played a prominent role in archaeology during the last decade. However, the potential of niche construction in relation to agricultural development has received less attention. To this end, we bring together literature on the forms and sources of agronomic variability and use a series of examples to highlight the importance of reciprocal causation and ecological inheritance in tra- jectories of agricultural change. We demonstrate how niche construction theory can inform on emergent mutualisms in both inceptive and established agronomic contexts, the recursive relationships between humans and their agronomic environ- ments, and bridges between the past and present. Keywords Niche construction theory · Emergent mutualisms · Archaeology of food production · Ecological inheritance · Coevolution Introduction Niche construction theory (NCT) brings attention to the ways that organisms co- create their own selective environments (Odling-Smee 1988; Odling-Smee et al. 2003), purposefully or inadvertently, and in so doing initiate or direct evolution- ary change (Odling-Smee et al. 1996). These are not new concepts in biology or archaeology (see Lewontin 1983; Spengler 2021; Waddington 1959), but NCT formalizes these ideas and has brought them to the forefront of these and other * Seth Quintus squintus@hawaii.edu Melinda S. Allen ms.allen@auckland.ac.nz Department of Anthropology, University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa, 2424 Maile Way, Saunders 346, Honolulu, HI 96822, USA Anthropology, School of Social Sciences, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand Te Pūnaha Matatini, Centre of Research Excellence for Complex Systems, Auckland, New Zealand Vol.:(0123456789) 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research disciplines (Laland and O’Brien 2010; Matthews et  al. 2014). The significant influence of NCT in archaeological discourse is illustrated by the voluminous lit- erature on the subject, especially over the last five years. Niche construction has encouraged many archaeologists to think differently about how they approach the analysis and interpretation of causation, emergent social phenomena, and the cascading effects of reciprocal human–environmental interactions. Niche con- struction theory both overlaps with but also is distinct from other recent theoret- ical developments in archaeology that privilege agency and emergent outcomes (e.g., Hodder 2012; Fitzhugh et al. 2019; Fuller et al. 2012, 2016), as the long- term entanglements of societies, organisms, and landscapes are recognized by NCT. We argue that what NCT does differently, or more effectively, is situate anthropology within the broader biosciences: it highlights the place of humans in and as part of natural systems; demonstrates the scale, scope, and importance of ecological inheritance; and transcends time, illuminating complex causal relations between past and present states. The evolutionary success of humankind stems in large part from our abil- ity to intentionally modify the world around us in strategic ways (Ellis 2015; Odling-Smee et al. 2003; Smith 2007). Among the most consequential activities are those related to food production. Plant and animal mutualisms, agricultural practices, and especially the development of intensive, large-scale agricultural systems, have dramatically altered the planet through cumulative, persistent, and often irreversible changes. It is NCT’s attention to these processes, includ- ing ecological, social, and historical contexts, that makes it a particularly useful framework from which to evaluate long-term trajectories of agricultural change. The analysis of agricultural practices as emergent, continuously unfolding, but historically situated phenomena, as NCT holds, has particular promise for new insights into the complex causal networks of past ecological relations and land use, and may contribute to addressing future challenges. Furthermore, it facili- tates investigation of the full continuum of food production practices, from early, small-scale, nonintensive behaviors to larger, more complex agricultural sys- tems deeply entangled with sociopolitical institutions. In so doing, it improves understanding of the cumulative outcomes of such processes over centuries and millennia. In this review, we bring together a growing body of literature relating to niche construction. Our aim is to consider what has been learned from NCT-driven analyses of agricultural change thus far and to identify useful directions for future study. A major theme is the importance of emergent symbioses, as mani- fested through ecological inheritance and evolutionary feedback mechanisms, and their potential to enhance or inhibit future outcomes—pivotal in the con- text of agronomic processes. We begin by situating agricultural change within NCT and introducing key concepts. We then explore the ways that humans can alter their selective environments through agricultural practices and illustrate these ideas and evolutionary scale outcomes through examples from Amazonia, island Polynesia, Mesopotamia, and northern China. We end with a discussion of issues, theoretical and substantive, that warrant further exploration. 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research Niche Construction Theory and Agriculture For social scientists, NCT is both distinctive and advantageous in drawing seri- ous attention to the role that organism agency plays in evolutionary trajectories. This agency not only produces behavioral variation that may be shaped by natu- ral selection (external environmental forces) but also, in and of itself, contributes to an organism’s selective environment and that of other species. In consider- ing NCT, an important distinction lies between (a) niche construction behaviors or activities that modify the environment (Laland et  al. 2007; Ready and Price 2021) and (b) niche construction as a macroevolutionary evolutionary process— the long-term and cascading effects of niche-constructing behaviors (Laland et al. 2019; Post and Palkovacs 2009). The former is a well-recognized phenomenon most strongly allied with the concept of ecosystem engineering (Jones et al. 1994; Odling-Smee et al. 2013; see also Lewontin 1983, 2000). With respect to the lat- ter, NCT theory recognizes that some (but not all) niche construction behaviors drive evolutionary change when the transformed or engineered ecosystem alters the selective environments of conspecifics and other organisms. As argued by Odling-Smee and Laland (2011, p. 222), “[u]nlike ecosystem engineering, niche construction must be evolutionarily as well as ecologically consequential.” A critical element of NCT is ecological inheritance (Mesoudi et  al. 2013; Odling-Smee and Laland 2011), which is the mechanism through which environ- mental consequences and ecological outcomes of prior niche-constructing activi- ties are transmitted by an organism. Ecological inheritances are passed on, con- tinuously, to multiple organisms who occupy those same environments, within and between generations (Odling-Smee and Laland 2011). Such transmission may be vertical (from one generation to another) or horizontal (between “ecologically related organisms” that share a common ecosystem) (Odling-Smee 1988; Odling- Smee and Laland 2011). It can include both inherited ecologies and inherited knowledges relating to environmental manipulation and management. The latter contribute to a given set of practices being reproduced repeatedly through time, which can strengthen ecological linkages and firmly imprint environmental mod- ifications. As the foregoing suggests, environmental transformations and atten- dant ecological impacts are often cumulative, building up over time (Ellis 2015; Odling-Smee and Laland 2011). Ecological inheritances may override natural selection processes and direct populations down alternative evolutionary trajecto- ries (Odling-Smee and Laland 2011, p. 234). Importantly for archaeological stud- ies, ecological inheritances can persist for millennia, altering the evolution of an array of organisms that successively inhabit those spaces, and affecting the struc- ture and function of ecosystems over considerable periods of time (Foster et  al. 2003; Ziter et al. 2017). By privileging the active role of organisms and highlighting another form of evolutionary inheritance, NCT challenges conventional definitions of adapta- tion (Day et al. 2003; Lewontin 2000) and evolutionary causation (Laland 2015; Laland et al. 2011, 2013). Traditionally, adaptation sees the fit between an organ- ism and its environment as the result of only natural selection. Proponents of NCT 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research argue that adaptations can also be the result of recursive relationships between the organism and organism-driven modifications of the environment (Laland et al. 2017); in other words, the recursive relationships themselves become evolu- tionary forces alongside natural selection (Odling-Smee et al. 2013, table 2). The coupling of organism and environment can lead to directed evolution, and thus a fit partially determined by the organism itself (Lewontin 2000). Understanding the causes of evolutionary change necessitates investigation of the evolution of selection pressures and focuses attention on feedback relationships (Laland and Sterelny 2006). While organisms modify their environments in response to cur- rent selective conditions, they are constrained by both prior modifications (cre- ated by previous generations) and by behavior transmission processes. Niche construction theory has appealed to social scientists because of its abil- ity to integrate diverse disciplinary questions relating to the intersection of natu- ral selection, human agency, and human/nonhuman entanglements (Fuentes 2016; Laland and O’Brien 2010). This is especially useful in the study of subsistence economies where humans intentionally modify their environments—generally with positive outcomes, at least in the short term (Smith 2015; Zeder 2016). Beginning with foraging, humans instigated processes that fundamentally changed the selec- tive environments of other organisms and themselves and increased the availability of resources. For example, the use of fire creates environmental mosaics and can concentrate preferred resources (Bliege Bird et al. 2013; Erickson 2008; Pyne 2019). Other small-scale environmental modifications can also accumulate over time. Examples include the tending and protection of favored plants leading to intensified mutualisms (Lepofsky and Lertzman 2008; Turner and Peacock 2005), or the incre- mental enhancement of “persistent places” (after Schlanger 1992) through active translocations and/or incidental dispersal of preferred plants and animals (Denham 2011; Hofman and Rick 2018; Hynes and Chase 1982). These and other practices are part of the complex history of human–biota interac- tions, cultural management, and coevolutionary relationships that ultimately led to domestication and agricultural systems (Smith 2015, 2016; Zeder 2016, 2017). A definition of agriculture that has currency within the NCT literature was originally offered by Rindos (1980, p. 752), who defined it as “a set of integrated activities which affects the environment inhabited by the domesticated plant throughout its life cycle.” Agriculture is often further characterized by landscape-scale produc- tion (Harris and Fuller 2014) and distinctive cultivation practices (tilling, tending, etc.) (Smith 2001). It is these varied practices across landscapes that foster symbi- oses with other organisms and, over time, forge agricultural trajectories. The latter are embedded in local landscape histories, involve interrelationships with different forms of production, and are shaped by long-term socioecological feedbacks, which are simultaneously both the consequences and causes of agricultural change (Mor- rison 2006). The products of ecological inheritance—modified landscapes and ecosystemic rela- tionships—are the context for the practice of agriculture at any given time (O’Brien and Laland 2012; see also Morrison 2015). While niche construction activities relating to agriculture are often learned, the inheritance of modified environments is a form of transmission that occurs independently of genetic inheritance but can, over time, induce 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research genetic responses (Laland and O’Brien 2012; Odling-Smee et al. 2003). As such, and perhaps most importantly, the inheritance of modified environments and the associated ecosystemic relationships is a process that is constituted by the activities of multiple organisms that inhabit the same location. Not only are humans and domesticates able to exert influences on the long-term evolution of agricultural systems, but other non- domesticated species (e.g., birds, bats, and rodents) also may shape the anthropogenic niche through seed dispersal, pest predation, nutrient contributions, etc. More gener- ally, biotic and abiotic modifications arising from agricultural activities may result in new kinds of environments, leading to multidimensional ecosystemic relationships that persist and become selective forces. Archaeologists around the world have documented an enormous variety of environ- mental and ecological phenomena that are the outcomes of past agricultural behaviors (e.g., Altman and Mesoudi 2019; Boivin et al. 2016; Ruddiman et al. 2014). The lega- cies of past land use and ecological relationships include but are not limited to inten- tionally constructed geomorphic features, modified soils, constructed vegetation forma- tions, and genetic changes to plants (e.g., Arroyo-Kalin 2019; Morrison 2014). Fixed landesque capital investments are a particularly enduring form of cultural modifications (Blaikie and Brookfield 1987; Håkansson and Widgren 2014). Such capital investments were often made across many generations, creating highly engineered landscapes from the bottom up (Erickson 1993; Lansing 1991). Other long-term effects of agricultural land use are often more subtle and unintentional, such as erosion or soil creep, which may both constrain or augment agricultural productivity over long time periods (e.g., Kirch 1988, 1994; Spriggs 1981). The accumulation of modified environmental char - acteristics, whether intentional or otherwise, results in agricultural practices having substantial downstream effects through time, on subsequent generations of agricultural practitioners, on other cultural activities, and on other organisms. Even subtle changes to the environment have the potential to scale up and become influential through time as they accumulate and become intertwined with other niche construction behaviors or natural processes (see Doolittle 1984; Ullah et  al. 2019). Thus, agricultural practices offer enormous opportunities for ecological inheritance, more so than almost any other kind of human activity. While other perspectives usefully organize and explain shorter sequences and more specific phenomenon (e.g., emergent political economies), NCT integrates and builds on these ideas by exploring multidimensional systems across centuries and millennia. It recognizes that the selective environments of agricultural behaviors are complex, including the place of agricultural strategies within systems of production, the influences of accretionary landscapes, and the cultural contexts under which production is practiced. These all are subject to variability and are inheritable—key ingredients of evolutionary change. Forms and Sources of Organism‑Driven Change Niche construction theory partitions behaviors into two broad forms: perturbations and relocations (Odling-Smee et al. 2003, p. 47). Perturbational niche construction is organism-driven modification of the environment; in the context of agricultural 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research activities, this might include vegetation (re)structuring, earth moving, or water manipulation. Relocational niche construction involves organisms “actively” mov- ing in space, dispersing or migrating, as for example, in response to climatic change or adaptive range expansion (Odling-Smee and Laland 2011, p. 222); in so doing, they typically encounter new selective environments. A second dimension of niche construction behaviors relates to the source or driver of change, external versus internal. Counteractive niche construction occurs when an organism responds to changing external environmental conditions (e.g., forest fires, arrival of new predators, climate change). These kinds of niche construction behaviors tend to be conservative or stabilizing, typically arising when organisms attempt to restore a match between previously evolved features and altered envi- ronmental conditions, either by relocating or through niche construction behaviors aimed at alleviating the newly generated selective conditions (Odling-Smee et  al. 2003). In contrast, inceptive niche construction involves organism-initiated change that exposes themselves, or ecologically related organisms, to novel selective condi- tions. Inceptive niche construction may take the form of either relocation or pertur- bation, the latter potentially involving novel behaviors (e.g., innovations) (Laland et al. 2017). The intersection of these two dimensions of niche construction, the form and source of change, give rise to varied selection conditions and shape long-term ecological inheritances. Below, we examine forms of perturbation and relocation in relation to agricultural practices and consider how they may arise from counterac- tive or inceptive niche construction. In the case of humans, such niche-constructing behaviors often involve conscious choices and may be facilitated or constrained by a variety of environmental, economic, social, and political conditions; we focus here on the first, while alluding to and acknowledging the importance of other conditions. Critically, to qualify as a macroevolutionary process, regardless of form or source, the environmental and/or ecological change must give rise to at least one new selec- tion condition, for at least one recipient population in an ecosystem, and have one or more evolutionary consequences (Odling-Smee and Laland 2011). Perturbation Agricultural behaviors can involve a host of environmental modifications aimed at supporting the growth, reproduction, harvesting, and storage of plants on which peo- ple rely for sustenance (O’Brien and Bentley 2015; Rindos 1984). Initially inceptive, perturbations create new selective environments for humans, the organisms they cul- tivate, and others that share a given agricultural niche. Counteractive perturbations may follow in response to the changing selective conditions. Human populations, through habitation and the generation and transmission of ecological knowledge, come to recognize local environmental possibilities and limitations, including spe- cific kinds of microhabitats that are suitable for a variety of cultigens. Purposeful perturbations frequently regulate conditions that might inhibit or slow the growth of target species, affect their productivity, or shape desired end products (see Rindos 1984; Smith 2011). Other noncultivated organisms may benefit from these environ- mental modifications or their legacies (Bogaard et  al. 2018; Eriksson and Arnell 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research 2017), though novel selective environments are deleterious for some. For humans, niche construction by perturbation is often aimed at making the targeted resource more reliable and/or exploitation more efficient. Agricultural infrastructure, in the form of landesque capital, plays an important role in the formation of novel microenvironments and ecosystems. It may be under- taken simply to expand the productive space or to enhance or ameliorate specific environmental conditions. Infrastructure not only creates novel habitats for tar- get plants and other organisms but may also have consequential impacts on local sedimentary processes, nutrient cycling, and microclimates. Agricultural terraces provide a useful example of how infrastructure both creates novel ecosystems and forges ecological inheritances, which can endure for generations and may tran- scend sociocultural boundaries (Fig.  1). Terracing has been documented across the globe, crosscutting a range of environments, and varying in size, form, construc- tion, and function (Denevan 2001; Treacy and Denevan 1994). Dryland terraces stabilize slopes, while also capturing run-off and sediments, thereby trapping nutri- ents, retaining moisture, and increasing soil volume (Beach et al. 2002; Chase and Weishampel 2016; Sandor 2006; Sandor and Homburg 2017; Varisco 1991). In these respects, terraces counteract factors that constrain plant growth, such as aridity or low soil fertility. Some terrace systems have persisted for generations as unique microenvironments that continue to support distinctive vegetation communities Fig. 1 The Mayoyao Terraces. The terraces are part of the Ifugao agro-ecocultural system, which includes swidden fields, house gardens, private and communal forests (agroforestry), complex irrigation system, and house platforms (Acabado and Martin 2022). Photograph courtesy of Stephen Acabado 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research (Hightower et  al. 2014). Terraced landscapes may also attract subsequent genera- tions of cultivators, even when the original production activities have ceased (see below), as the presence of infrastructure serves to reduce labor demands for subse- quent generations of prospective agriculturalists (Bevan et al. 2013). Other forms of infrastructure may also enhance agricultural productivity. In the Hawaiian Islands, modeling demonstrates how extensive networks of stone walls and earthen embankments, laid out across dryland slopes, would have ameliorated the effects of persistent, drying trade winds by reducing wind flow, which in turn helped retain soil moisture (Ladefoged et  al. 2003). Rock and earthen mounds in these field systems probably reduced and suppressed weeds as well. Experimental plantings in the mounds demonstrate significantly higher returns relative to plant- ings in nonmounded spaces (Marshall et  al. 2017). Other infrastructural features alter local environments even more dramatically, as for example qanats in arid North Africa and the Middle East, where novel ecosystems were created by transporting water from wells and aquifers to large areas of otherwise arid plains (Manuel et al. 2018). Some of these systems produced oasis environments and enhanced biodi- versity (Rezaei Tavabe and Azarnivand 2013). One of the most enduring kinds of agricultural infrastructure are irrigated terrace systems, particularly taro (Colocasia esculenta) pondfields and rice (Oryza sativa) paddies. These artificial wetlands not only provide novel environments for agricultural production but often expand the habitat of wetland species, including birds and fish, which may be resources them- selves, or enhance ecosystem productivity (e.g., Gee 2007; Malachowski and Dug- ger 2018). Raised bed systems can function in a similar manner. Well-known examples come from the Andes, Amazon, and Mesoamerican lowlands, where they were sometimes constructed to reclaim otherwise unproductive lands (Denevan 1970). The periodic deposition of organic-rich canal sediments onto the raised beds enhanced soil fertil- ity, while the canal waters likely acted as a heat sink, regulating temperatures across such systems in the Andean highlands (Erickson 1988, 1992). In the southwestern Amazon, raised beds effectively mitigated both flooding (by channeling water) and periods of drought (by retaining moisture) in conjunction with a diversity of other landscape modifications and management practices (Duncan et  al. 2021). As with irrigated terraces, raised bed systems can increase landscape heterogeneity and sup- port nonfood organisms (McKey et al. 2010). Some organisms that adapted to these constructed environments have come to depend on them and act to regulate ecosys- tem functioning even after their abandonment by people (Renard et al. 2013). Another important agricultural perturbation is the purposeful or incidental modification of soils. A variety of soil additives have been used in traditional food production systems to enhance productivity, particularly stone and shell. Lithic mulches improve moisture capture, reduce evapotranspiration from solar radiation and wind stress, control erosion, and improve soil nutrient content (Ladefoged et al. 2010; Lightfoot and Eddy 1994; Maxwell 1995; Wozniak 2001). In arid environ- ments, lithic mulches can also limit the formation of soil crusts (Lightfoot 1996). Experimental work shows the effectiveness of stone mulching. Alderfer and Merkle (1943), for example, demonstrated that bare plots can lose up to 60% of incoming rainfall to run-off, while rock-mulched plots lose only 3–10%. Shell mulches can 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research also moderate soil temperature (Lightfoot 1996) and in New Zealand allowed for sweet potato cultivation in otherwise marginal areas (Barber 2013). Inputs of green waste, principally manure and vegetation, also alter soil tempera- ture and moisture, but they are best known as ways to enhance soil fertility. High- intensity refuse disposal, whether intentional or otherwise, can result in the forma- tion of anthrosols—human-formed soils with distinctive chemical properties, pH, color, and clast inclusions (Pears 2012; Richter 2007; Siderius and de Bakker 2003). Purposeful mulching and soil conditioning are well documented from the European Neolithic forward (Bogaard et  al. 2013), and some anthrosol formations are even associated with foraging communities (Guttmann 2005; Turner et  al. 2011). The legacy of soil enhancement is especially well demonstrated by Amazonian brown and dark earths (ABE and ADE; also known as terra preta). These productive soils were created by multiple generations of human inhabitants and their past cultivation practices, which included mulching and burning (Arroyo-Kalin 2010, 2019; Heck- enberger and Neves 2009; Robinson et al. 2020). While the history and importance of anthropogenic soils is perhaps best documented for the Amazon, these kinds of fertile, anthropogenic soils have a broad global distribution (e.g., Frausin et al. 2014; Hejcman et al. 2013). Agroforestry practices are another form of “perturbation” often aimed at creat- ing cultivated environments that mimic the structure and ecological relations of “natural” forests. Anthropogenic forests are found in several regions of the globe (e.g., Ford and Nigh 2015; Latinis 2000; WinklerPrins and Levis 2021). The spa- tial scale and temporal persistence of anthropogenic forest modification is a mat- ter of empirical debate (e.g., Piperno et  al. 2015, 2017), but human-induced forest development wholly transformed some tropical environments on centennial to mil- lennial scales (Clement et al. 2020; Ford and Nigh 2015; Heckenberger and Neves 2009; Roberts et  al. 2017). Even after the cessation of active human management, past agroforestry practices often continue to influence the composition and structure of contemporary forests across temperate and tropical environments (Arnell et  al. 2019; Dupouey et al. 2002; Levis et al. 2018; Quintus et al. 2019; Ross 2011). In the Amazon, empirical research demonstrates that anthropogenic forests can increase the provisioning of ecological services and enhance biodiversity relative to non- domesticated bioscapes (Levis et  al. 2020; Lins et  al. 2015; Maezumi et  al. 2018; Odonne et  al. 2019). Thus, over time, these domesticated landscapes (sensu Levis et  al. 2018) become evolutionarily important via their effects on resource distribu- tions, vegetation structure, and energy flows. They can also profoundly affect the subsistence strategies of later groups, in some cases persisting to the present day (e.g., Leitão-Barboza et al. 2021) where they may be important reservoirs of famine foods (Minnis 2021). Some of the “perturbations” described above were undertaken with clear intent on the part of past human cultivators, aimed at providing larger or more predictable yields. However, intent is not a necessary condition of niche construction processes. Indeed, incidental niche construction outcomes, sometimes referred to as “byprod- ucts” (Laland and O’Brien 2012), can be equally consequential (Post and Palkovacs 2009). These unintended outcomes can alter the nature and distribution of resources available to human populations and other organisms over time (Turcotte et al. 2017). 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research As noted above, habitation and refuse disposal can produce anthrosols that mimic the effects of green manure and are utilized by subsequent generations of farmers (Guttmann 2005; Guttmann et  al. 2008; Kirch 1988). Indeed, habitation-derived anthrosols are influencing the loci and productivity of small-scale farming around the world today (Glaser 2007; Hejcman et  al. 2011, 2013; Solomon et  al. 2016). While the foregoing kinds of perturbations are often beneficial, they may increase the vulnerability of any given agricultural system (Rindos 1984, p. 274). Increased reliance on cultivated resources, for example, is often linked with demographic change and/or increasing sociopolitical complexity and may contribute to a series of self-reenforcing feedback loops known as “runaway niche construction” (Ellis 2015, 2016). These kinds of “byproducts” are common features of constructed niches gen- erally (van der Leeuw 2012). The social impacts of niche construction activities should also not be overlooked. The construction of infrastructure across a landscape often modifies the social relations of production, which in turn gives rise to new conditions for agriculture change. Agricultural outcomes may ramify through a social system and across generations, differentially enhancing wealth and affecting intergenerational prop- erty rights, as evidenced during the European and Near Eastern Neolithic periods (Bentley and O’Brien 2019; Shennan 2011). Shennan argues that these develop- ments often have cascading effects over time, even influencing human reproductive strategies (e.g., polygamy, monogamy, etc.), as for example those designed to keep wealth intact across generations. Infrastructural investments also tie farmers to spe- cific locales and render them more susceptible to taxation and sociopolitical tributes (Earle 1997; Erickson 1993; Kirch 2010; Morehart 2010). Furthermore, the allevia- tion of localized environmental selection pressures may lead to regional variability in agricultural strategies and long-term outcomes. Those that produce more regu- larly or at higher yields relative to others may foster emergent leaders or give rise to production bottlenecks, which can be capitalized on by elites (Earle 2011). Relocation Agricultural practices provide useful examples of relocational niche construction. The agricultural niche is readily transported (Shennan 2018), in that it is often focused around a relatively small number of species that are under strong controls (Rowley-Conwy and Layton 2011). Nonetheless, while relocation may alleviate challenging conditions of the prior environment, it not only exposes organisms to novel opportunities but also to constraints. This often gives rise to agricultural inno- vations, such as new planting technologies, infrastructure experimentation, and/or sometimes new coevolutionary relationships (e.g., Fuller and Lucas 2017; O’Brien and Laland 2012; Quintus and Cochrane 2018). Useful examples of some of these relocational processes come from Polynesia (Quintus and Cochrane 2018). As human settlers spread across the Pacific, they col- onized numerous archipelagoes where they encountered markedly different environ- ments, from large, high volcanic islands to low coralline atolls that are only a few meters above sea level. Despite a broadly shared set of agronomic techniques and 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research cultigens, place-based adaptations arose as populations responded to variations in island geology, soils, freshwater resources, and biota (e.g., Gumbley 2021; Kirch 1994; Ladefoged and Graves 2000; Quintus and Lincoln 2020; Weisler 1999). Research in temperate regions demonstrates other agricultural techniques aimed at counteracting cold temperature regimes, marked seasonality, and short growing seasons (Donoghue 2008; Fuller and Lucas 2017). The use of shell mulch in New Zealand is one such innovation in Polynesia that may have allowed Māori cultiva- tion to extend into colder environments (Barber 2013). Innovations also evolved at landscape scales, as for example the development of ridge-and-furrow systems in the American Midwest (Fig. 2). Simulations and experimental studies suggest these extensive furrows systems promoted “frost drainage” (Riley and Freimuth 1979). In Europe, Groenman-van Waateringe and van Geel (2017) hypothesize that Iron Age Celtic fields followed a similar design and function, counteracting lower tempera- tures in the ninth century BC. Genetic research has been particularly valuable in identifying sequences of change that arose in domesticated plants as they were carried beyond their natu- ral ranges and centers of domestication. Cockram et  al. (2007, 2011) suggest that variability in genetic controls on barley (Hordeum vulgare ssp. vulgare) flowering times preadapted it to successful relocation into higher latitudes by agricultural peo- ples. Subsequent artificial selection produced landraces and cultivars with flower - ing times that avoided the harsh winters of northern Europe and took advantage of Fig. 2 Ridge and furrow system from Kletch Park, Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Ridges, which are roughly 50–60 cm above the furrows, are visible above the snow, and the top of ridges are roughly 1 m apart. Photograph was taken in 1978 and is courtesy of Thomas Riley 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research long, cool, and often wet summers. Another well-documented example is maize (Zea mays ssp. mays). The development of flowering traits to accommodate longer day lengths also was key to its expansion, again the result of both natural and artifi- cial selection (Huang et al. 2018; Hung et al. 2012). The genetic plasticity of maize made it especially well suited for relocation to areas outside its tropical homeland (Huang et al. 2018) and led to a cascade of changes that had considerable economic, political, and social impacts (e.g., Smith 2017). Relocation, however, need not be spatially expansive to have evolutionary con- sequences. Birds, for example, routinely select nest locations in specific trees, and particular areas within forests, to decrease the risk of predation and enhance off- spring survival (Odling-Smee 2003 et  al., pp. 64–65). Similarly, human food pro- ducers adjust crop locations to increase the productivity of a given cultivated spe- cies, for example, by extending plantings into new habitats (O’Brien and Laland 2012, fig. 1). Use of different environments, even when they are not especially dis- tant, offer alternative conditions that can alleviate adverse impacts or enhance crop success, and such behaviors may become fixed over time. Spatial diversification demonstrates how populations can operationalize inceptive niche construction at multiple scales and over an annual cycle. The exploitation of multiple environments taking advantage of different environmental characteristics is well documented for several geographical regions and time periods (Drennan et al. 2020; Marston 2011). Use of diverse environmental settings, with variable selective conditions, may offset or redistribute environmental risks. In essence, these commu- nities are “hedging their bets” by diversifying the selection conditions under which they operate. The character of these niche construction activities is shaped by the nature of hazards, including their periodicity, magnitude, and duration, but it is their differential long-term evolutionary outcomes that are of critical importance (Allen 2004). In many localities, agricultural communities took advantage of seasonally or geographically contrasting environments, often with markedly different opportuni- ties and constraints (e.g., Kirch 1994; Ladefoged et  al. 2009; Morrison 1995). In the Hawaiian Islands, for example, farmers staggered planting and harvesting across dispersed locations to take advantage of seasonal and elevational variations in tem- perature and rainfall (Kagawa and Vitousek 2012; Kagawa-Viviani et al. 2018). Spa- tially dispersed fields can function in a similar manner, with different microenvi- ronments offsetting hazards and mediating interannual variability (Ladefoged and Graves 2000; Marston 2011, p. 193). The inheritance of these modified locations by subsequent generations of producers can have substantial downstream consequences (Morehart 2018). Still, relocation of the agricultural niche is a complex process with variable long- term outcomes. Increases in productivity brought about by relocation may render agricultural systems unstable (Rindos 1980, 1984; see also Ammerman and Cav- alli-Sforza 1984; Rowley-Conwy and Layton 2011). This instability arises from sev- eral factors, including the often-narrow focus of agricultural systems on a limited number of species, specialized cultivation requirements, loss of genetic diversity, and declines in soil fertility over time. The latter is an especially common deleteri- ous effect of relocated agricultural systems that populations attempt to counteract through further movement (Shennan 2018). Declines in soil fertility can be a strong 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research incentive to relocate or adapt, not only with swidden (slash-and-burn) technologies but also in fixed field contexts (Roos et al. 2016; Wood et al. 2016). These processes are perhaps best documented for Neolithic Europe, where boom-and-bust demo- graphic patterns are recorded. Populations often increased substantially following relocation (Shennan et  al. 2013). Populations decreased, however, as soil fertility declined and climate deteriorated, often accompanied by increased investments in barley and the use of less-intensive food-production techniques (Colledge et  al. 2019), including foraging and pastoralism (Bevan et  al. 2017). In these cases, the success of a relocated agricultural niche set the stage for change and produced selec- tive pressures that required subsequent adaptation. Population growth may also facilitate relocation and exportation of the agricul- tural niche by providing novel sources of labor. The japonica subspecies of Asian rice, originally a wetland grass of southern China, was domesticated between 7400 and 6500 BC (Long et  al. 2022). Although highly successful in this locality, there appears to have been a pause between rice domestication, the development of paddy-field infrastructure, and the spread of irrigated rice technologies further afield. Fuller and Qin (2009) attribute this pause to the labor requirements of paddy- field agriculture and the need for administrative oversight to coordinate the requisite labor. The inception of irrigated systems of rice agriculture in the lower Yangtze River likely led to some population growth, but it may have been the combination of rice and millet (Setaria italica and Panicum miliaceum) cultivation that facilitated the population levels necessary for the spread of paddy-field rice cultivation outside its core (see Long et al. 2022). Population growth also preceded the arrival of rice in several areas of Asia, which may have created ideal conditions for the subsequent adoption of more-intensive forms of cultivation. Although these processes remain to be fully demonstrated, the available evidence suggests that even though wetland rice cultivation was highly productive, the spread of the formal irrigated rice technolo- gies were feasible only after population growth had reached certain thresholds. This example illustrates emerging mutualisms and dynamic feedback relationships, as well as shifts between perturbational and relocational niche construction behaviors. The Process of Agricultural Niche Construction Long-term agricultural change is coevolutionary in that agricultural practices are evolving in concert with the environment, which includes abiotic and nonhuman biotic components and cultural phenomena (e.g., demography, social organization, labor and management, worldviews, etc.). Such evolutionary sequences, historically actualized through ecological inheritance, speak to the role of reciprocal causation in agricultural trajectories. The global archaeological record of agricultural change usefully illustrates how anthropogenic niches are constructed, evolve, and endure. Myriad cases show how biota, soils, and geomorphology are manipulated by human societies for the purposes of food production in myriad ways and across diverse set- tings. These records also demonstrate several key concepts of niche construction. Here we review three geographic contexts that illustrate a diversity of evolved agri- cultural behaviors: Amazonia, island Polynesia, and the floodplains of Mesopotamia 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research and northern China. These examples illustrate how NCT can provide unique insights into human symbioses with other organisms (targeted and otherwise), intergenera- tional ecological inheritance, and processes of runaway niche construction, which can sometimes lead to path dependencies, where opportunities are constrained by earlier choices. While not all the studies reviewed herein have explicitly drawn on NCT, their findings can be accommodated within a niche construction framework. Emergent Mutualisms in Amazonia In the jungles and savannas of Amazonia, a diversity of food production practices was born out of ecological and cultural inheritances that accumulated over millennia (Clement et  al. 2021; Neves and Heckenberger 2019). The multiplicity of coevo- lutionary relationships identified in this region are intriguing, reflecting ecological inheritances from both other species and human foragers, domestication practices across a range of scales (from individual to landscape), and both formal and infor- mal landscape management practices (Clement et  al. 2020). These coevolutionary relationships are not restricted to any given time or place, and their continued emer- gence alongside more formal agricultural practices extend from the ongoing process of niche construction. Human food-production practices in the Amazon have resulted in “domesticated” landscapes (sensu Clement 1999; Levis et al. 2018)—defined by and the outcome of multiple symbioses between people and organisms, as well as more general human landscape modifications at regional scales and over evolutionary time frames. This occurs as humans alter landscape components and processes, including plant propa- gation, regional hydrology, and soil formation. Such systems often change the demo- graphic characteristics of biota, resulting in environments more conducive to human populations of variable configurations. These kinds of food production systems are also found in Papua New Guinea, Southeast Asia, Mesoamerica, and indeed prob- ably many tropical ecosystems (Roberts et  al. 2017). However, the Amazon is the best-known example and potentially provide expectations for the character, func- tioning, and evolution of domesticated landscapes elsewhere (Arroyo-Kalin 2017, 2019; Erickson 2008; Levis et al. 2018). Amazonia is now well recognized as a center of plant domestication, and land- scape modifications in forested and savannah environments included vegetation restructuring and plant translocations from the early Holocene onward (Clement et  al. 2021). There are also suggestions that some of these processes are linked to pre-adaptations in trees with large fleshy fruits, which derive from earlier mutual- isms with megafauna who served as seed dispersers (Neves and Heckenberger 2019; Spengler et  al. 2021). Following early Holocene extinctions, humans began to fill ecosystem services once provided by megafauna (McKey 2019; Neves 2016; Spen- gler et al. 2021). In essence, ecosystem engineering by megafauna resulted in food- rich niches that were inherited by humans and led to new coevolutionary relation- ships between humans and former megafaunal dependents. The large fleshy fruits, however, were only part of the extensive roster of plants cultivated and domesticated in the Amazon. While some underwent significant morphological changes, many 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research were largely physically unchanged but now have broader distributions and are more abundant as the result of intensive management (Clement et al. 2021). Human cultivation and plant management continued to modify the composi- tion and structure of tropical Amazonian vegetation through the early and middle Holocene (Lombardo et  al. 2020), with extensive transformations occurring after 4000–5000 BP as farming became more widespread (Duncan et al. 2021; Roosevelt 2013). Diverse management techniques were used, most notably fire, which created forests gaps in rainforests and forest islands in savannas, along with the tending, weeding, and harvesting of useful nondomesticates, and the creation of house gar- dens (Erickson 2008). The contemporary environments of the Amazon are thus the outcome of millennia of human management that resulted in significant regional het- erogeneity (Clement et al. 2015; Levis et al. 2018; Maezumi et al. 2018), although there is ongoing debate about the intensity, persistence, and spatial extent of human impacts (e.g., Piperno et al. 2015, 2017). Perhaps the most iconic components of domesticated Amazonia landscapes are their anthropogenic soils: Amazonian dark earths (ADE). These fertile soils formed over long periods of time through both in situ occupations and concentrated deposition of refuse in areas peripheral to camps and settlements (Erickson 2008; Roosevelt 2013; Schmidt et  al. 2014). The lighter soils (terra mulatos), typically some distance from settlements, are thought to be the outcome of soil management and fertilization practices associated with cultivation (Arroyo-Kalin 2019; Fraser et al. 2011). These anthropogenic soils served to increase the amount of arable land, and economic trees are today disproportionally represented in these locations (Levis et  al. 2020). Levis et al. (2020) further argue that anthropogenic activity increased the heterogeneity of soils across local landscapes in ways that supported a diverse range of food production strategies. De Oliveira et  al. (2020) highlight how ADE and non-ADE soils in combination contributed to increased species richness, as flo- ristic compositions are somewhat dissimilar on the two soil types due to slightly dif- ferent growing conditions (i.e., pyrogenic carbon in ADE). Importantly, ADE sup- ported the cultivation of key crops that are difficult to grow in lower fertility areas, including maize (Fraser et  al. 2011). Ethnographic data further demonstrate that contemporary communities continue to target specific anthropogenic soils, includ- ing ADE, for a variety of landraces (Fraser 2010). Unsurprisingly, areas of ADE are today reservoirs of traditional forms of agro-diversity (Clement et  al. 2003). This may be because ADE relaxed certain selection pressures that otherwise prohibit the spread of some species. Some even argue that human management practices fostered and maintained plant genetic diversity in many parts of the Amazon, diversity that was greatly diminished in the aftermath of early contact period depopulation (Clem- ent 1999). Symbioses were also created through geomorphological engineering in savanna areas of the Amazon. Raised bed systems are perhaps the best-documented form of infrastructure in this region (Denevan 2001; Rostain 2013; Walker 2018) and were often used alongside other landscape modifications (e.g., ADE) (Walker 2011). These are in seasonally inundated savannas, which are themselves partially the result of anthropogenic burning that was presumably undertaken to keep the forest at bay (Erickson 2008). The raised beds effectively circumvented the risk of flood 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research inundation (Lombardo et al. 2011), and experimental studies suggest that raised bed soils were enriched by sediments from the canals (Erickson 2006). As Duncan et al. (2021) note, landscape modifications of this kind, along with fire, and other agro- nomic techniques, created productive locations in environments that have histori- cally been considered “wastelands.” Importantly, these systems created habitats for other organisms, probably expanding their natural ranges (Erickson 2008). Although no longer in production, the raised beds and canals continue to be important points of concentrated resources and are often occupied by nonhuman ecosystem engineers (i.e., ants and termites) today (Renard et al. 2013). The engineering of other organ- isms contributes to the persistence of these structures, which have become biodi- versity refugia in the contemporary landscape (McKey et al. 2010). In short, these extensive raised beds systems were both sites of human food production and novel anthropogenic environments that fostered human–animal symbioses, not only when initially constructed but over time. This regional-scale construction myriad food-producing ecosystems and large networks of symbioses produced novel selective environments that had profound effects on resident human populations. In contrast to regions of the world where intensive human–plant mutualisms centered on a limited number of plant species, many Amazonian groups managed and relied on a diversity of taxa and over time transformed whole ecosystems (Clement et  al. 2021; Denevan et  al. 1988; Levis et al. 2017). The success of this strategy in alleviating challenges of previous selec- tive conditions (low soil fertility, dense primary forest), and a material consequence of niche construction (see Odling-Smee et al. 2013), was population growth, espe- cially in the late Holocene (Arroyo-Kalin 2017; de Souza et al. 2019). Arroyo-Kalin (2017) outlines a sequence wherein initial land use created productive patches characterized by fertile anthrosols and stands of economic plants. These resulted in higher levels of food production, which in turn supported larger populations in the first millennium AD; later in time they were in some cases even defended. These examples highlight the evolutionary role domesticated landscapes and eco- logical inheritance can have on the long-term evolutionary fitness of human groups in tropical regions in the absence of formal agricultural practices. The success of communities in the Amazon is due to the development and maintenance of multiple mutualisms and low-intensity environmental management practices undertaken at a regional scale (Levis et al. 2018). The human niche construction activities and coevolutionary relationships that emerged in the Amazon continue to be important for contemporary groups, who often acknowledge their reliance on products of the past, particularly the productiv- ity of old settlement sites (Arroyo-Kalin 2019; Balée 1989, 2010; Erickson 2008). ADE and other anthropogenic soils are still regarded as agricultural capital by local populations (Schmidt et al. 2014). Walker (2011) notes the preferential use of anthropogenic soils by some farmers in the central Llanos de Mojos, where these soils are associated with nearly continuous cultivation. Further, high-value crops, such as exotic domesticated vegetables, can be grown on ADE without chemical fer- tilizers (Kawa et al. 2011). Clearly, past niche construction behaviors in the Amazon are continuing to shape modern food production, albeit conditioned by both contem- porary social and technological conditions (German 2003). 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research The process of niche construction in the Amazon led to substantial human–envi- ronment interdependencies. As noted by Allaby et  al. (2022), human management across large landscapes can result in protracted human–plant entanglements. They argue that such long-term landscape-scale relationships are important to under- standing domestication globally; the Amazon presents an excellent example of the key processes (see Clement et  al. 2021). However, the Amazon also demonstrates well how landscape-scale management created and maintained diverse mutualisms across multimillennial time frames. These included the formation of microenviron- ments that drove crop and agricultural diversity, as well as engineered ecosystems that modified the demographic characteristics of plants and animals and created new dependencies. Such processes led to human population growth as they enhanced the economic potential of the regional landscape. The persistence of mutualisms across the Amazon is an important source of con- temporary population resilience and has implications for contemporary environmen- tal management (Peters et  al. 1989). In many Amazonian environments sustained niche construction activities have not only promoted robust mutualisms but also cre- ated distinctive environmental structures (e.g., hyper-dominance patterns in trees) and shaped ecosystem functioning (e.g., Balée 2010, 2013; Neves and Heckenberger 2019). The persistence of these unique anthropogenic environments requires ongo- ing human management with Indigenous peoples, without which the long-term mutualisms, associated forest structures, and novel ecosystemic properties will be lost (see Clement et al. 2020). Ecological Inheritance in Polynesia The foregoing illustrates how food production practices can create a diversity of per- turbations with multifaceted impacts. It is the totality of the accompanying changes, including the “dramatically altered community of microorganisms, insects, plants, and animals," that constitute ecological inheritance (Odling-Smee and Laland 2011, p. 223) along with archaeologically tractable landscape modifications. Importantly, to be considered ecological inheritances, these myriad changes must be transmitted to successive generations and create novel selective environments for humans and/or other organisms. However, disentangling these kinds of evolutionary feedback rela- tionships is challenging, especially when multiple interacting agents are responding to both organism-driven environmental modifications and other selective conditions. One approach is to use “model systems,” which are often characterized by bounded- ness, small size, isolation, reduced complexity, and/or the speed of key processes (e.g., reproduction). An effective model system is “an integrated, functional, and persistent example of the larger set of systems whose functioning they are meant to illuminate” (Vitousek 2002, p. 574), such as an organism, ecosystem, lake, or island (see also Matthews et  al. 2014, p. 260). Comparative methods are another useful way to test alternative scenarios of ecological inheritance (e.g., Laland et al. 2017; O’Brien and Laland 2012). Both approaches have proven useful for understanding socioecological processes in Polynesia, where closely related human populations, sharing broadly similar agricultural practices, crop inventories, and ethnobiological 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research knowledge systems, are spread across environmentally diverse islands (e.g., Allen 2015; DiNapoli and Leppard 2018; Kirch 2007). Human settlement in Polynesia began around 2850 years ago in a process that involved the translocation of numerous species. These included dozens of economic plants (of which carbohydrates were critical), three animal domestics (Sus scrofa, Canis  lupus familiaris, Gallus gallus), the commensal Pacific rat (Rattus exulans), and anthropophilic weeds, land snails, and arthropods (e.g., Anderson 2009; Kahn et al. 2015; Prebble and Wilmshurst 2009). Yen (1973, p. 76) referred to these trans- locations as “detachable parts of former environments which became the founding endowment” on newly settled islands. As Polynesians spread across this oceanic region, they were exposed to a diversity of new environments; at the same time, they and their transported associates also changed the selective environments of newly encountered native species, in innumerable ways and with evolutionary con- sequences that continue to the present (see Odling-Smee et al. 2013, p. 8). One way was through local extinctions, of both individual native taxa (e.g., Steadman 2006) and sometimes whole plant communities, such as the endemic lowland palm for- ests of Hawai‘i, Rapa Nui (Easter Island), and elsewhere (Athens 2009; Hunt 2007; Prebble et al. 2019), presumably along with many of their microorganisms, inverte- brates, and avifauna. Polynesians generated novel ecological inheritances in many other ways as well. For example, traditional crop inventories were sometimes incompletely transferred or failed to establish (e.g., in New Zealand, Rapa Nui). This led to new mutual- isms with native species that were essential to human livelihoods (e.g., as sources of food, fiber, and timber). Their fitness, in turn, was enhanced through range expan- sions, artificial selection, and/or specialized cultivation (e.g., Funk 1982; Leach and Stowe 2005; Shepherd et  al. 2016). Translocated domesticates also underwent further selection following island settlement, with varieties developed to counteract new kinds of perturbations (drought, pests, etc.) and/or different environmental con- straints (infertile soils, low temperatures, aridity, seasonality, etc.) (see Handy and Handy 1972; Yen 1974). Polynesian colonists also affected the selective environments of their successors (and other organisms) through disruptions and realignments of long-established bio- geochemical webs (see also Odling-Smee et al. 2013, p. 8). For example, local pro- cesses were altered by biotic introductions (e.g., predatory rats), native biotic extinc- tions (e.g., guano-producing seabirds), and soil degradation (e.g., deforestation and extractive agricultural practices)—often with sustained, intergenerational effects on agricultural productivity and fitness implications for humans, their domesticates, and other co-inhabitants of the anthropogenic niche. Understanding of these impacts is nascent, but studies of soil fertility (e.g., Ladefoged et  al. 2010; Vitousek et  al. 2014) and isotopic records of humans and their faunal associates (e.g., Allen 2015; Richards et  al. 2009; Swift et  al. 2016) are providing insights into long-term vari- ability in biogeochemical webs in relation to agricultural practices. Colonists reshaped the physical landscapes of Polynesia as well, altering geo- morphic processes and through formally constructed features. An example of the former is human-aided sediment mobilization and redeposition, sometimes on a massive scale. Such processes sometimes created fertile lowland plains that became 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research the focus of intensive cultivation for generations (e.g., Kirch 1994; Lepofsky and Kahn 2011, pp. 323–326; Quintus 2018a; Spriggs 1997). Formal agricultural con- structions are also widely evidenced, varying considerably in form, size, and com- plexity (Fig. 3). The most significant engineering is seen in irrigated taro pond-field systems, designed to maximize planting areas, control water flow, and enhance pro- duction. Many such systems represent incremental investments, accumulated over time, by multiple generations of cultivators (e.g., Allen 1991; Kirch 1994; McElroy 2007). Large-scale, rain-fed, dryland field systems are another impressive form of landscape modification, best known from the leeward areas of younger Hawaiian Islands, where networks of terraces, walls, and elongate mounds extend over exten- sive areas. These speak to varied production and management strategies, as known through archaeological stratigraphic sequences, modeling, and remote-sensing stud- ies (e.g., Allen 2004; Dye 2014; Kirch 2011; Ladefoged et al. 2008, 2011). Exten- sive dryland field systems are also found in New Zealand, where cultivators posi- tioned their fields to take advantage of fertile volcanic tephras or alluvial outwash fans (e.g., Barber 2004; Leach and Leach 1979). The contribution of these kinds of highly varied and complex landscape investments to ecological inheritances is reflected in well-documented archaeological histories from across the region, albeit usually discussed through other theoretical lenses. Fig. 3 Coastal swamp cultivation of taro in raised beds with intervening reticulate drains on Aitutaki in the Cook Islands. Note the presence of palm fronds used as mulch. Photograph by Melinda Allen 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research Another example of ecological inheritance comes from the Marquesas Islands, where Polynesian colonists introduced an array of economic plants (both root and tree crops), anthropophilic arthropods, and probably weedy plants around the 11th to 12th centuries AD (Allen et al. 2022; Huebert and Allen 2020). To make way for shifting cultivation, the indigenous forest was cleared, initially from lowland regions and often assisted by firing, a common Polynesian technology. This created open areas for crop plants and weedy associates (with positive fitness outcomes for both), but it also led to geomorphic instability. As native trees declined, so did native avi- fauna, with numerous extinctions (see Steadman 2006). Given the crucial role of birds in pollination and fruit/seed dispersal in the absence of native mammals, these losses undoubtedly disrupted ecosystem functioning, with potential cascade effects across trophic levels and food webs. Extinctions in herbaceous and arborescent plant taxa would have further weakened ecological webs in ways not yet fully understood (Allen et  al. 2022). As an example, one originally widespread lowland forest spe- cies (Sideroxylon sp.) initially favored as a fuel wood was greatly reduced within the first few centuries of Polynesian arrival, eventually going extinct (Huebert and Allen 2020). Its demise required Marquesans to find alternative fuels, which were some- times more costly to acquire (i.e., distant) and less efficient. This suite of adverse feedbacks created novel selective environments for Marque- san people and native biota; within a few centuries of human arrival, counteractive niche construction was underway. Although this may have taken varied forms, the most archaeologically visible manifestation is the rapid dispersal and uptake of tree cultivation, dominated by breadfruit (Artocarpus altilis), a Polynesian introduction with a large, starchy, syncarpous fruit. These processes were repeated across mul- tiple valleys, and over time the inventory of tree crops expanded to include other arborescent Polynesian introductions (e.g., Tahitian chestnut, Inocarpus fagifer) and at least one native tree, Pacific rosewood (Thespesia populnea). This evolving arboricultural system had several advantages: structurally it mimicked the original native lowland forest, mature trees stabilized soils, and forest habitat was restored for native land birds. In time, breadfruit became the mainstay of the Marquesan sub- sistence economy. Its fruits were not only highly nutritious but could be processed into a readily storable product that was a crucial food source during the archipela- go’s sometimes crippling droughts (see Allen 2010). A related outcome was spe- cialized storage facilities that allowed for long-term preservation (up to decades), at both household and community scales. This example illustrates some of the biologi- cal components of ecological inheritance and provides a foundation for further study and modeling of behavioral, ecological, and genetic interactions over time in this locality. Two other island sequences demonstrate the interplay between agricultural niche construction and sociopolitical processes, one speaks to competitive outcomes (Mangaia, southern Cook Islands) and the other suggests community-scale coopera- tion in (Ofu, Manu‘a Islands, Sāmoa). The distinctive landscape of Mangaia (51.8 km ) features a highly weathered central volcanic cone surrounded by a massive ring of upraised karstic limestone. Polynesian settlers arrived roughly a millennium ago, cleared the interior volcanic hillslopes of native forests with fire, and initiated shifting cultivation (Kirch 1996, 2017, p. 19). However, erosional processes quickly 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research followed, stripping away the thin topsoils and further depleting the naturally infer- tile substrates; even today this area remains unsuitable for cultivation (Kirch 2017, p. 23). While the agricultural potential of the interior hillslopes was significantly diminished, sediment redeposition in valley bottoms created rich alluvial terrain. These areas were particularly well suited to irrigated taro cultivation in raised beds and inundated fields but constituted only two percent of the island’s overall usable land (Kirch 2017, pp. 22–23). Irrigated production was supplemented by shifting cultivation and tree cropping, now repositioned to the rugged karstic makatea and lower colluvial slopes. Over time, the limited fertile valley bottoms, with their accu- mulated agricultural investments, became the focus of intense, cyclical, intertribal warfare, which was marked by rituals of human sacrifice. A complex and distinctive ideology emerged, dominated by warriors and priests, diverging from the chiefly inheritance systems more commonly seen in Polynesian societies (Kirch 1994, 2017). The ecological inheritances were thus two-fold: (a) degraded and nonproduc- tive interior hillslopes and (b) considerable investments in irrigation architecture in the small, circumscribed valley bottoms. The latter were central to elite competition, with significant flow-on effects to the population at large. Elsewhere, agricultural developments resulted in rather different downstream sociopolitical effects. In Sāmoa populations initially settled on the coast of the vol- canic doublet of Ofu-Olosega (13 km ), but around the 11th century AD there was relocation into interior Ofu, where populations faced different selective environ- ments (Quintus 2018a; Quintus et al. 2016). This steep interior region is particularly vulnerable to the region’s high rainfall (more than 3,000 mm per year), torrential downpours, and periodic but severe cyclones. The high-intensity run-off associated with such events often strips away crops or buries them under sheetwash. To coun- teract these conditions, cultivators constructed simple drainage features, initially around household-scale cultivation plots. Subsequently, larger ditches and more complex ditch networks appeared, suggesting changes in the organization of labor and community-scale investments. The effectiveness of these features against known hazards has been tested through hydrological modeling, while their long-term suc- cess is suggested by increases in their size, distribution, and complexity over time. Changes in the scale of this risk management infrastructure also coincided with the appearance of other community-scale architecture. Quintus et al. (2016) argue that these innovative water control devices allowed for a stable productive system despite periodic perturbations. This in turn created conditions favorable to community inte- gration, the emergence of suprahousehold leadership, and ongoing investments in larger facilities. Such changes in labor organization and management strategies can impact on agronomic success—increasing both production efficiency and productiv - ity (Athens 1999; Brookfield 1972). As these examples suggest, heavily modified landscapes often became “attrac- tors” for successive generations of cultivators, engendering further agronomic and social investments. Archaeological excavations reveal that the surface structures visible today are often the outcome of accretional investments, sometimes built on earlier architectural investments, as is the case globally (e.g., Doolittle 1984). Transmission to successive generations is clear, but relatedness is often uncertain, and community, tribal, or cultural “boundaries” are sometimes crossed over time. 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research For example, terraces and walls in the field system of Kona, Hawai‘i were adopted (rather than dismantled) by 19th century commercial coffee farmers (Allen 2004). Elsewhere centuries-old Hawaiian taro terraces were converted to rice paddies by 20th century Asian immigrants (Jones et al. 2015). In many rural Polynesian com- munities, traditional agricultural sites are still in production, using centuries-old traditional ecological knowledge. Ethnobiological knowledge has been lost in other places, but the physical sites are being reclaimed by descendant groups who are ben- efitting from the investments of their ancestors (e.g., Lincoln et  al. 2018; see also Morrison 2014, 2015). These examples demonstrate dimensions of ecological inheritance that are com- mon to many places. Among these are the extinction of species, from habitat loss, novel predators, and sometimes new competitors. Biogeochemical webs are also frequently disrupted by the emplacement of agricultural niches, with evolutionary effects that may reverberate to the present day (see also Odling-Smee and Laland 2011, p. 227). Other outcomes of these novel niches were the rise of new co-evo- lutionary relationships and subsequent intergenerational transmission. Moreover, as earlier investments compound and congeal, there is often increasing articulation with larger-scale social, political, and demographic processes. A key distinction on islands, perhaps, in the Pacific and elsewhere, is that such ecological inheritances are not only powerful but often inescapable. Runaway Niche Construction in Mesopotamia and Northern China Runaway niche construction refers to situations where long-term cycles of environ- mental manipulation essentially lock populations into specific trajectories of change and further investments in niche construction (Ellis 2015, 2016). These trajectories are self-reinforcing, initially maintained by positive evolutionary feedbacks but ulti- mately limiting alternative trajectories and never reaching evolutionary stable solu- tions. While not using a niche construction framework, van der Leeuw (2012) dem- onstrates this phenomenon in his aptly titled article, “For every solution there are many problems.” Agricultural systems in arid and riverine environments, where the manipulation and control of water are central, provide particularly clear examples of these dynamics. The lengthy sequence of irrigated agriculture in southern Mesopotamia is one such case. While rain-fed agriculture is possible in northern Mesopotamia, irrigation is necessary in the south. The latter setting illustrates the role cumulative small-scale modifications played in the long-term development of intensive irrigation systems (Wilkinson et al. 2015). Irrigation took advantage of river levees to direct water to adjacent fields (Adams 1981). Early forms of irrigation are argued to have enhanced natural alluvial processes, taking advantage of easily worked crevasse splays that provided a fertile cultivation medium (Wilkinson et al. 2015). Over time investment in extant systems was more cost-effective than beginning elsewhere anew. Moreover, further investment was feasible because of the transgenerational transmission of the products of past labor. As Wilkinson and colleagues (2015, p. 410) observe, the ini- tial irrigation systems provided the template for what would come. The architecture 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research and engineering of such systems is place-specific, highlighting the need for farmers to understand and respond to the specific selective conditions of local microenviron- ments for successful cultivation (Hritz and Pournelle 2016). To some extent, it was these locally specific requirements that gave rise to agricultural variants, which then became the raw materials of subsequent relocation, innovation, and/or elaboration. Over time, the Mesopotamian systems were further developed, producing more complex technologies and creating extensive anthropogenic landscapes. This contin- ual adjustment of infrastructure is a pervasive feature of niche construction, a situ- ation that results from populations seeking to redress new cultural and environmen- tal selective pressures that arise, sometimes from prior states. This process is not unique to human societies and their agricultural practices and is well documented in other species (Odling-Smee et  al. 2003, pp. 79–84). In the case of Mesopota- mian agriculture, as new canals were built on lower gradient slopes, additional labor was needed to maintain these systems and to avoid sedimentation. Ultimately, even further expansion of the system was required to support the labor force necessary for its maintenance. In essence, the combination of the labor demands of these new systems and their high productivity formed feedback loops that favored population aggregations as well as the continued expansion of the irrigated agricultural com- plexes (Wilkinson et al. 2015, pp. 411–412). The irrigation systems of southern Mesopotamia were successful in mitigating the region’s arid conditions, expanding cultivatable land through the transport of water and fine sediments. However, these cultural transformations intersected with larger-scale natural processes, such as climatic variability, which brought about large-scale geomorphic changes and cascading effects (Hritz and Pournelle 2016; Jotheri et al. 2016, 2018; Walstra et al. 2010; Wilkinson 2003). Heyvaert and Wal- stra (2016) illustrate the multiple ways that local populations modified or interfered with the natural processes of river avulsion and alluvial fan development, with sub- stantial and long-lasting flow-on effects for farming and human settlement in the region. Cultural elaborations redistributed key resources, which in turn changed the opportunities and constraints of communities at local and regional scales. Con- structed canals, while providing irrigation water and flood control, at times became rivers or streams in their own right (Jotheri et  al. 2016). The development of cre- vasse splays for irrigation systems likely contributed to alluvial fan development by restricting channel avulsion (Walstra et al. 2010). Moreover, the drainage of irriga- tion canals created artificial marshes and lakes, which became ecosystems for other organisms and novel resources for human communities (Eger 2011). The extraction of irrigation water on occasion resulted in reduced transport capacity and increased sedimentation in natural river channels. Such sedimentation can, eventually, con- tribute to channel avulsion, which in turn reshapes local and regional environments, with substantial impacts on human land use. Indeed, cultural modifications to chan- nel avulsion are a major component of the ecological inheritance of contemporary Mesopotamian societies (Heyvaert and Walstra 2016, p. 2150). Runaway niche construction is also apparent in northern China, where again there is a long history of landscape modifications in dynamic riverine settings (Lee et  al. 2007). The Yellow River region is particularly well known. The river flows though the broad Loess Plateau, which is an especially fertile area but one that is 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research vulnerable to erosion (Rosen 2008), and the color of the river derives from such ero- sion (Fig. 4). Small-scale agriculture was practiced on the plateau from the Neolithic (before ca. 7000 BP) (Lee et al. 2007), with notable effects on local geomorphologi- cal processes (Rosen 2008; Rosen et al. 2015; Zhuang and Kidder 2014). During the Yangshao period (ca. 7000 to 5000 BP), for example, hillslope erosion increased alongside expanded and intensified agricultural production, concomitant with increased precipitation (Rosen et al. 2015). Increased sediment loads led to alluvial aggradation and floodplain buildup. As on some Pacific islands (e.g., Spriggs 1997), hillslope erosion seems to have been beneficial, and one consequence of these sedi- mentological changes was an opportunity for irrigated rice cultivation (Rosen 2008; Rosen et al. 2015). The effects of increased sediment loads, induced by deforestation and other agri- cultural practices, were seen throughout the Yellow River basin by the Bronze Age, in the second to first millennia BC (Cao et al. 2010; Kidder and Zhuang 2015; Rosen et  al. 2015). Neolithic populations made use of floodplain resources that were sup- ported by regular river alluviation (Zhuang et al. 2013), but it was developments in irrigation during the Bronze Age that facilitated the expansion of human populations across the region (Storozum et al. 2018). Ultimately, however, increased sedimenta- tion along the Yellow River increased the risk of flooding, first in the Bronze Age and then in later periods (Kidder and Zhuang 2015). By the early Iron Age (first millennium BC), if not before, populations began constructing flood control infrastructure (Kidder and Liu 2017). This began a feedback loop. Initially, channelization of the river took place, resulting in silta- tion, which increased the base of the river and necessitated further construction of infrastructure aimed at flood protection. This served to reduce the frequency of floods but concomitantly resulted in higher amplitude events, because of the now elevated base of the river relative to the surrounding floodplain and the amount of water that could breach levees when those levees failed (Zhuang and Kidder 2014). Imperial incentives and coercion intensified and further expanded Fig. 4 A view across the Yellow River (Huang He) at its southern bend. The photograph is taken from Henan Province looking toward the broad floodplain of Shanxi Province. The tablelands are roughly 50 m above the broad alluvial bottomlands. Note the high amount of sediment in the water. Photograph courtesy of Christian Peterson 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research production during the Dynastic period (end of the first millennium BC), when more effective tilling was made possible by iron implements; this again resulted in increased erosion and greater river sediment loads (Kidder et al. 2012b). At the same time, growing populations from the mid-Holocene and a cen- tralized, resource-consuming government sought increased production (Kidder and Zhuang 2015), often through investments in landscape modifications that reclaimed or enhanced floodplains (Zhuang and Kidder 2014). The effect was to concentrate populations in these low-lying environments: the past deposition of sediments, substantial infrastructural investments, and an increased focus on wheat made these areas especially attractive. This reclamation of land for farming exacerbated the threat of floods, while channelization required further modifica- tions to replenish alluvial sediments for cultivation (Zhuang and Kidder 2014). By the Han period, in the first century AD, floods had become catastrophic, with sediment fans covering hundreds of square kilometers (Kidder et al. 2012a, b). This sequence of agricultural change, population growth, and river avulsion continued through the last two millennia, with more substantial effects relative to those of earlier times. Erosion of the Loess Plateau seems to have been consider- able during the 11th and 12th centuries AD due to the expansion of farmers into the region from elsewhere in northern China. These conditions were exacerbated by climate change and resulted in increased sediment deposition on the North China Plain (Storozum et  al. 2018). As in the past, sedimentation combined with the continued use of fertile floodplains (themselves the result of previous floods) to increase the vulnerability of local populations to catastrophic inunda- tions. However, because populations had become dependent on production from these areas, decision makers had few options other than continued cultivation in this niche. Eventually, however, geomorphic processes left the area unusable, and farmers migrated elsewhere (see Storozum et  al. 2018, p. 1768). The long- term outcomes of niche construction, coupled with and exacerbated by natural environmental variability, created a selective environment that strongly favored relocation. The Mesopotamian and northern China sequences clearly illustrate the process of runaway niche construction. Initial environmental modifications were small— mainly involving shifting cultivation or cultivation of naturally occurring wetlands. Cleared areas were built on by succeeding generations, who also inherited increased susceptibility to flooding and soil erosion. Attempts to mediate these adverse condi- tions led to innovations, as for example, the implementation of flood controls and the expansion of irrigation systems. These, in turn, altered the selective environment anew, allowing irrigated farming to expand and populations to grow. However, this created new risks and vulnerabilities, such as salinization, susceptibility to avul- sions, and the need for additional labor. When coupled with high population densi- ties, which had promoted expansion in the first place, additional investments were required to counteract emergent and unforeseen selective conditions. In short, local agricultural practices can become increasingly intertwined with natural processes, resulting in distinctive anthromes that are driven by complex socioecological pro- cesses (see Ullah et  al. 2019) and lead to ongoing environmental transformations and a range of cultural adaptations (Ellis 2015). 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research Directions in Agricultural Niche Construction The foregoing examples illustrate how niche construction theory directs attention to our relationships with other organisms and human populations, through space and time. It manifests important evolutionary processes and focuses on complex feedback loops generated through deep time. Critically, it reframes our place in the world, building an understanding of human behavior in the past, and potentially shaping how we envision our future. Understanding the histories of the constructed environments we have inherited is fundamental to building more sustainable and resilient futures. In this final section, we highlight issues for substantive and theo- retical elaboration. Operationalizing Agricultural Niche Construction Researchers across both the biosciences and archaeology have stressed the impor- tance of separating niche construction behaviors from the evolutionary process of niche construction (Odling-Smee et  al. 2013; Ready and Price 2021; Stiner and Kuhn 2016). Niche construction theory, as a process, is concerned with long-term evolutionary outcomes and sequences of reciprocal causation; it is not a theory of short-term decision making. However, archaeologists have also asked how niche construction behaviors originated. Often intentionality is assumed, with the short- term goals of economic advantages or other positive outcomes. Building on this premise, there have recently been concerted efforts to integrate models from human behavioral ecology with niche construction theory (e.g., Haas and Kuhn 2019; Ready and Price 2021; Stiner and Kuhn 2016; Zeanah 2017). Drivers of short-term niche construction behaviors can be identified by recognizing and analyzing the eco- nomic trade-offs of different kinds of behaviors (Mohlenhoff and Codding 2017), and the use of formal models from human behavioral ecology (HBE) can identify specific kinds of environmental and social factors that affect human decision mak - ing (see Ready and Price 2021). Intentional niche construction behaviors are ben- eficial in only some circumstances, taking the form of practices that either enhance or stabilize production, and driven by a desire to increase the economic benefits of an environment relative to initial prehuman conditions. As illustrated by Mohlen- hoff and Codding (2017), niche construction behaviors are potentially predictable and quantifiable within an HBE framework. Although the data requirements of these kinds of analyses are considerable, and the models involve simplifying assumptions, they provide testable hypotheses relating to short-term niche construction behaviors that are aimed at off setting particular selective conditions. Some HBE models can account for long-term sequences of reciprocal causation, for example, ideal distribution models (Hale and Sanger 2020; Prufer et  al. 2017; Weitzel and Codding 2022). Landscape suitability is a key component of these mod- els, and for agriculturalists suitability is often defined by the presence of resources such as fertile soils and fresh water. These models typically examine how changes in settlement density, a condition that alters the selective environment, impacts the 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research suitability of a habitat. Such changes can be positive (the Allee effect), for exam- ple, increasing habitat suitability through cooperative behaviors. This could be in the form of a larger labor force or the construction of persistent infrastructure. Alter- natively, changes in settlement density may have negative outcomes, such as intensi- fied harvesting that results in resource depression. In each case, whether positive or negative, subsequent generations make decisions within a modified environment. Still, defining changes in habitat suitability is challenging in many respects (Weitzel and Codding 2022). Further consideration of ecological inheritance vis-à- vis the family of ideal free distribution models is useful in this regard (Bliege Bird et  al. 2020). For instance, agricultural infrastructure (e.g., terraces) improves habi- tat suitability by reducing labor costs for subsequent users (see Bevan et  al. 2013) and enhancing growing conditions (Sandor and Homburg 2017). The development of anthropogenic soils may have similar effects, replacing marginal substrates with fertile, productive ones. In contrast, niche construction behaviors can also be delete- rious, rendering some environments less suitable over time and driving settlement elsewhere. For example, erosion and the loss of soil fertility would increase the ben- efits of relocation (counteractive niche construction). Testable predictions of when certain niche construction behaviors (e.g., perturbation or relocation) might occur can be usefully derived from ideal distribution models (Weitzel and Codding 2022), and incorporation of niche construction processes into these could improve char- acterizations of habitat suitability and cost-benefit outcomes (see Thompson and Prufer 2021). Additional factors also affect perceptions of habitat and landscape suitability (Prufer et  al. 2017) and drive agricultural change (Morrison 2006), including food preference, land tenure, sociopolitical systems that shape ideas about where and how to engage in agricultural niche construction activities. Decisions about farm- ing are driven by how and for what purpose the product is consumed (Morrison 1994, pp. 124–125). Food preferences and cultural values determine some forms of agricultural infrastructure, as in South India, where expensive canals and reser- voirs were built to support rice cultivation in relatively arid and otherwise marginal environments (Morrison 2006, 2014). The continued maintenance of these features depended in part on the enduring social importance of rice, as well as sociopoliti- cal conditions that ensured ample labor. Moreover, the construction of water con- trol infrastructure served as displays of power, which led to their proliferation even though they regularly failed (Morrison 2015). In essence, it was the inherited social niche that drove some of the more prominent agricultural behaviors, and associ- ated environmental reconfiguration, in arid India. More generally, sociopolitical needs can be powerful drivers of agricultural investment, or what Brookfield (1972) referred to as “social production.” Such practices often have legacies with substan- tial downstream effects (Morehart 2018). Agricultural change is often facilitated by political competition, wherein the expansion of landesque capital facilitates wealth assets and surplus production that can be socially deployed (Earle and Spriggs 2015). Taxation and tribute form part of the social niche, as do different forms of land tenure. The latter may enhance (or reduce) incentives to modify the environ- ment (Netting 1993; Stone 1996), and tribute demands may change the calculus of agricultural activities (Erickson 1993; Morrison 1994), as farmers attempt to meet 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research both household and social demands. While variables such as social structure, land tenure, food preference, and the like are not frequently used in HBE analyses, recent work has shown how such variables may be included in models to provide a more nuanced and holistic understanding of human economic and settlement decision making (Prufer et al. 2017; Ready and Power 2018). Human behavioral ecology models address different scales of socioecologi- cal processes relative to NCT and thus are complementary (Ready and Price 2021; Stiner and Kuhn 2016; Zeanah 2017). The former seeks to understand short-term decision making while NCT considers how such behaviors cascade and produce emergent evolutionary trajectories across evolutionary time. Such complementary frameworks can help operationalize niche construction and provide a more compre- hensive understanding of subsistence sequences. Ready and Price (2021, p. 76) provide formal equations through which dimen- sions of NCT and HBE can be jointly evaluated, illustrating the interplay between, and different scales of, the two theoretical frameworks. A useful example of this approach comes from Australia, where Bliege Bird et  al. (2020) explore the inter- action between landscape burning, resource abundance, and variance in mobility across Aboriginal foraging communities. Their research shows how anthropogenic fires create vegetation mosaics that act to concentrate resources and improve hunt- ing returns, with positive cascade effects through time. More specifically, a positive relationship evolves between the extent of fire mosaics and habitat quality, leading to the development of persistent places. Likewise, Zeanah (2017) shows how forag- ing models can be used to explore occurrences of both resource enhancement and resource depression, providing opportunities to track processes of niche construction across the Eastern Woodlands during the emergence of agriculture. However, for links between HBE and NCT to be useful, explanations devel- oped using these approaches need to be falsifiable. O’Brien and Bentley (2015, pp. 374–575) suggest “construction chain analysis” can be a useful way forward. Causal relations in complex human eco-evolutionary systems, pathways, or networks might be progressively untangled by breaking down complicated network pathways into tractable components and subjecting each to analysis. Networks can then be recon- structed and the strength of interactions considered, as well as how they vary over time. O’Brien and Laland (2012, fig.  3) illustrate this approach with an example of Neolithic dairy framing (see Laland and O’Brien 2015). Brock and colleagues (2016) advocate the use of formal path analysis, an approach well established in other sciences. Hypotheses of causality between variables are graphically repre- sented, requiring the analyst to specify how the variables relate to one another and potentially lead to specific outcomes. Using the available data, relationships between variables can then be statistically evaluated, for example, through Granger causality testing or linear vector autoregressions. Similarly, Ready and Price (2021, p. 76) advocate for formal analytical models where model predictions can be subjected to empirical testing. They draw on the concept of inheritance tracks—“a distinct physi- cal system that transmits information through time.” These must contain heritable information that can be described and measured (e.g., genetic information or recur- ring patterns in artifacts), along with explicit specifications of how they evolve and their influences on behaviors. Computational modeling (e.g., agent-based modeling) 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research may also generate testable hypotheses by simulating systems with and without niche construction dynamics (Fogarty and Creanza 2017). These approaches build on and help formalize the cross-cultural comparisons advocated by Laland and O’Brien (2010) and have the potential to improve the rigor and quality of NCT explanations. Secondary Symbioses The recursive modification and inheritance of environmental characteristics is a powerful driver of novel coevolutionary relationships (Odling-Smee et  al. 1996). In any shared niche, there is the opportunity for the development of a wide range of symbiotic relationships. This is especially true of agricultural niches (Bogaard et  al. 2018; Fuller and Stevens 2017), which are formally constructed, intensively managed, and crucial to human health and well-being (O’Brien and Laland 2012; Rindos 1980, 1984). Many mutualisms between humans and plants were intensi- fied over time, ultimately leading to new genetic and/or morphological traits and wider distributions and greater abundances of both relative to their ancestral forms (Bogaard et al. 2021; Denham et al. 2020; Smith 2015; Zeder 2016). However, there is increasing recognition of an array of symbioses that emerged in cultivated spaces but did not lead to domestication (Sugiyama et al. 2020; Terrell et al. 2003). Agri- cultural niches may not only foster the development of such mutualisms but also extend the ranges of nondomesticated agricultural associates (e.g., commensals and parasites), especially in 21st century contexts, and provide refugia for otherwise threatened taxa (Barthel et  al. 2013). In short, agricultural niche construction has had evolutionary effects not only on the direct targets of cultivation but also on other organisms that share these ecological spaces and sometimes support cultivated spe- cies (e.g., through pollination, soil production, nutrient cycling, etc.) An example is provided by domesticated squash (Cucurbita pepo) and its special- ist pollinator, the squash bee (Peponapis pruinosa). Although this mutualism has long been recognized (Hurd et al. 1971), recent genetic work is revealing new facets of the coevolutionary relationship. Lopez-Uribe et al. (2016) used molecular mark- ers to track range expansion in the squash bee, out of central and southern Mexico, and into and across North America, via multiple routes. The bee’s massive expan- sion, well beyond its natural range, was facilitated by the human-aided spread of its Cucurbita hosts, despite multiple genetic bottleneck events. However, the strong mutualistic relationship with Cucurbita species may have come at an unexpected cost. The authors hypothesize that the low effective population sizes in this special- ist bee are related to its nearly complete reliance on cultivated cucurbits throughout most of its current distribution. They also note the vulnerability of contemporary squash bee populations to the disturbances of modern agriculture, such as deep till- age (which can disturb their nesting sites), widely spaced crop rotation patterns, and use of insecticides. Human–organism relationships are facilitated through local landscape modi- fications as well. Agricultural niches provide habitat for a variety of organisms, especially those that prefer open or mosaic environments (Bliege Bird et  al. 2013; Eriksson 2013; Johnston 2005). Contemporary agricultural systems provide several 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research examples. In Spain, the configurations of agricultural landscapes reduce travel times and mortality risk for avian species, allowing them to efficiently link functionally diverse habitats (Camacho et  al. 2014). Around the world bats both benefit from and service plantations, taking advantage of periodic insect outbreaks, while also serving as pollinators for crops like bananas, mangos, and guavas, with obvious ben- efits for farmers (e.g., Alpizar et  al. 2019). In northern Europe, both constructed and informal field boundaries act as ecotones, enhancing biodiversity by providing refugia for useful insects (Kovar 1992; Marshall 1989; Marshall and Moonen 2002). The traditional infield–outfield farming systems of Scandinavia, where crop produc- tion and animal husbandry were closely integrated, also created high biodiversity through the use of manure as a fertilizer and the maintenance of open mosaic land- scapes (Eriksson et  al. 2021). Studies elsewhere show that active human manage- ment is often key to sustaining ecosystem productivity; when fields are abandoned or active management ends, reductions of commensal or mutualistic flora and fauna may follow (Bliege Bird et al. 2013; Clement et al. 2021). However, environmental modifications can also be deleterious, driving some taxa to extinction. Anthropogenic extinctions contrast with those arising from climate change or natural catastrophes, where taxonomic turnover is generally slow or, in some cases, nonexistent (see Steadman 1986). As humans and the agricultural niche have dispersed across the globe, extinctions have greatly accelerated. Many Holo- cene extinctions are associated with habitat change and human-aided translocations of alien species that outcompete native taxa (Braje and Erlandson 2013). The effects of human niche construction activities on avian species are particularly well docu- mented, arising from both habitat alteration and competition with introduced preda- tors and competitors (Steadman 2006; Szabo et  al. 2012). In some cases, adverse effects may persist even when native forests are replaced with arborescent economic species (Young et  al. 2017), but in others new coevolutionary partnerships evolve. The variability in outcomes points to the important role played by historical con- tingencies, for example, the demographic and life history traits of the organisms involved. When extinctions occur, the effects may ramify through an ecosystem, leading to the loss of ecosystem services and disruption of ecosystem functioning, particularly in situations where functional redundancy is low. Niche construction theory provides an exemplary framework for exploring these secondary symbioses as it links ecological and evolutionary processes (Matthews et  al. 2014; Odling-Smee et  al. 2013). It is often through the byproducts of agri- cultural activities and associated landscape modifications that “many:many relation- ships” develop (after Odling-Smee et al. 2013, pp. 5–6); these are instances where the selective environment is co-constructed by a multitude of organisms, leading to ecological “spillovers” that affect numerous organisms in the process. These many:many relationships are emergent phenomena in agricultural niches, with cas- cading effects through time and space. Niche construction theory also facilitates archaeological contributions to assessments of eco-evolutionary feedbacks, recog- nizing that humans are important elements of the environment, both in the past and at present. The role of humans in environmental modifications, and the transmission of those modified environments and attendant selective environments to other non- domesticated organisms, is increasingly acknowledged (Bogaard et al. 2018; Renard 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research et al. 2013). In short, NCT serves to integrate the differing vantage points afforded by archaeology, evolutionary biology, and ecology. Long‑Term Outcomes in Constructed Niches The dynamic interactions between agricultural strategies and environmental, demo- graphic, and sociopolitical processes are of longstanding interest to social scientists. Niche construction theory has the potential to provide new perspectives on these interactions and the differential outcomes that arise from the intersection of distinc- tive practices, ecological inheritances, and other selection processes. Niche con- struction behaviors are generally assumed to be adaptive in the short term, at least when they are intentional (Scott-Phillips et  al. 2014). However, niche construction activities may alleviate or aggravate existing vulnerabilities over the long term, out- comes that often depend on the nature of the inherited environment and performance of agronomic investments. Here, we briefly consider a small number of studies that have considered these issues. Although none originate from a NCT framework, they bring into focus critical variables that might usefully be explored through a NCT lens. Scarborough (2003, 2008; Scarborough and Burnside 2010) contrasts two path- ways to sociopolitical complexity, both deeply intertwined with the management of biophysical environments: technotasking and labortasking. Technotasking socie- ties, such as those from the Tigras and Euphrates drainages, are distinguished by their considerable investments in landscape engineering and technological innova- tions. They are strongly extractive, organized around short-term goals (e.g., growth and concentration of resources), and are typically regulated by top-down manage- rial controls. Technotasking societies can, over time, become overly dependent on built landscapes, economically, ideologically, or both, which can in turn drive further large-scale investments. However, such efforts may result in “path depend- ency” (Hegmon et  al. 2008), a self-reinforcing process where initial decisions, for example, those relating to agronomic infrastructure and managerial practices, lock populations into particular trajectories. In these instances, when selective conditions change, effective agronomic responses may be constrained by prior developments, making some potentially effective solutions too costly or culturally untenable, as suggested above for northern China (Chen et al. 2012; Kidder and Liu 2017). Labortasking groups, in contrast, are associated with heterarchical societies and structured around long-term sustainability. This pathway is distinguished by inter- generational transmission of skill sets, highly organized labor management prac- tices, and close attention to ecological relationships, as exemplified by ancient Mayan and recent Balinese societies (Scarborough 2008; Scarborough and Burn- side 2010). Change is often slow and incremental, with new agricultural practices being integrated into existing social practices and political institutions. Smallholders and householders typically have more independence in such systems, allowing for greater behavioral variability and encouraging cooperative relationships (see Bruno 2014; Netting 1993). These circumstances potentially enhance economic resiliency, even when the overarching political institutions fail. Of particular note are the ways 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research that labortasking reinforces interdependency between human societies and the built environment, through gradual, incremental environmental modifications and the intergenerational transmission of agronomic knowledge (Scarborough and Burnside 2010, p. 335). Likewise, de Souza et al. (2019) distinguish two alternative models of land use, and their intersection with climate change, in late pre-Columbian Amazonia. One type of land use system was intensive, specialized, and focused on short-term goals of maximizing productive outputs (continuous high yields and surplus); the other emphasized resource diversity and long-term stability. The former was associ- ated with centralized decision making, social inequality, and high interdependency of social components, along with significant investments in large-scale landscape modifications (earthworks and agronomic architecture). This system, they argue, was more vulnerable to climate change. In contrast, the alternative land use system was linked with decentralized political structures and a greater focus on minimiz- ing risks. The latter was achieved through agronomic behaviors that sustained eco- logical services (i.e., regenerative soil practices, polyculture, forest management), therein contributing to long-term resilience. More recently, Freeman et  al. (2021) explore how variation in landscape engi- neering, dichotomized as “technological” versus “ecological” intensification, affects the stability of food production and population dynamics. Using multimillennial archaeological sequences from six regions, they model the impacts of these two strategies across evolving food production systems, from hunter-gatherers to intensi- fied agriculturalists. Summed probability distributions of C ages and PaleoView climate projections (Fordham at al. 2017) inform the model, along with inferences of political-economy complexity based on settlement size (Freeman et  al. 2021, p. 380). The outcomes suggest that the intergenerational accumulation of landscape engineering leads to more stable food production systems, supporting population growth and demographic stability. However, during rare and large-scale environ- mental perturbations, societies highly dependent on landscape engineering appeared more vulnerable, relative to those engaged in ecological intensification strategies. The modeling raises interesting questions about how differential investments in landscape engineering might affect long-term outcomes and shows the potential for testing alternative hypotheses through modeling. Environmental variability, and the nature, function, and performance of agricul- tural investments, are also important parameters affecting the stability of food pro- duction systems and population dynamics (Allen 2004). In relatively stable envi- ronments, where year-to-year variance is minimal, productive maximizing strategies may effectively support population growth and/or the generation of surpluses. How - ever, in risky and unpredictable environments these same strategies can be disadvan- tageous or even catastrophic. Here, energetic investments that spread the impacts of risk, or reduce the occurrence and costs (e.g., infrastructure designed to manage ero- sion, water, or temperature extremes), act to minimize year-to-year variance, albeit with short-term costs—a strategy known as bet hedging (Frank and Slatkin 1990). Simons (2011, fig. 1) illustrates the long-term advantages of bet hedging in unpre- dictable environments, noting that although initially characterized by lower average fitness, bet-hedging strategies reduce variance in fitness across generations (i.e., 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research geometric mean fitness). These outcomes drive home the importance of considering environmental variance alongside other parameters when we compare agricultural strategies and point to the long-term benefits of variance-minimizing investments in risky and unpredictable settings. Importantly, not only is a modified environment inherited but so too are the strategies of prior generations and the outcomes of those strategies. Although the foregoing examples stem from different theoretical perspectives, they have multiple points of overlap. Variation in the character and magnitude of landscape investments is central to each. Environmental parameters are also seen as critical. These include the diversity, abundance, and distribution of resources—all combining to shape agricultural possibilities and initiate trajectories. However, the nature of the environment, particularly the magnitude, periodicity, and predictabil- ity of risks, are also crucial and may affect the rise and transmission of behavioral strategies, as well as long-term resilience. Sociopolitical structures also play a fun- damental role in the foregoing examples, with a dichotomy drawn between extrac- tive versus stabilizing or regenerative strategies. The importance of maintaining a pool of behavioral variability and organizational flexibility in terms of access to land, resources, and technologies is also highlighted. This has been demonstrated for food security under conditions of climate change as well (Nelson et al. 2016), where social groups with flexible management structures are better positioned to quickly initiate counteractive niche construction, relative to those with large and potentially cumbersome sociopolitical social institutions. Communities inherit modified landscapes, social structures, and the outcomes of agricultural strategies implemented by prior generations (Morrison 2014). These inheritances, in turn, lead to new selective environments for subsequent generations of producers, which have different long-term outcomes. Still, and despite differing historical contingences, the foregoing examples demonstrate that large-scale pat- terns can be discerned and provide a foundation for deriving testable hypotheses. They point to ways that forms of ecological inheritance may systematically covary with environmental features and sociopolitical developments, potentially leading to shared fitness outcomes. The Past in the Contemporary World Archaeologists are increasingly calling for more cross-disciplinary engagement to inform contemporary policy and aid in the resolution of socioecological problems (Boivin and Crowther 2021; Foster et  al. 2016; Logan 2020; Turner et  al. 2020). Indeed, some have argued that such contributions should be a key goal of archae- ology as we seek to maintain relevancy (Guttmann-Bond 2019; Kintigh et  al. 2014). One impediment has been the difficulties of convincing those outside the discipline that archaeology has something to offer (Smith 2021). Building aware- ness of the temporal depth of human modifications to landscapes and the extent to which humans have influenced earth processes over thousands of years is crucial (see Clement et  al. 2020; Ellis 2015; Ellis et  al. 2021). Niche construction theory builds on research framed by historical ecology, human ecodynamics, and human 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research behavioral ecology (e.g., Balée 2006; Fitzhugh et al. 2019; Nettle et al. 2013)—but uniquely draws attention to the importance of ecological inheritances and the myr- iad impacts our behaviors have on other organisms. Many communities around the world are more intimately tied to local agricultural histories of the past than is gen- erally realized (Morrison 2015), and in many ways, our ability to survive today is fundamentally shaped by agricultural processes of the past. Most notably, the persis- tent effects of past land use alter modern agricultural potential through the produc- tion of anthropogenic microenvironments (Vining 2018). While people have long appreciated their connection to the past in a historical sense, NCT calls attention to the tangible, physical connections between food producers of the past and those of contemporary societies. Continuity and local ecological knowledge are especially respected and cel- ebrated where long-term cultural connections persist (e.g., Balée 1989; Frausin et  al. 2014). Researchers working in many areas are demonstrating the role that both physical manifestations of ecological inheritance and the knowledge produced through cultural inheritance can play in combatting the effects of climate change and issues of food security across the world (Glaser 2007; Logan 2020; Solomon et al. 2016). Connections between past and present-day environments are especially visible in islands where inherited ecologies are inescapable (Fitzpatrick and Gio- vas 2021; Quintus 2018b). Contemporary concerns over food security and food sovereignty often reflect a lack of lay appreciation for these inherited landscapes of production (see Kurashima et  al. 2019). As global supply chains have become more complex and uncertain for remote or marginal locations, interests in local food production and traditional technologies are increasing. Landscape legacies take on added importance in such places, with the potential to reinvigorate successful place- based agricultural niches of the past. Recognizing and adapting to the consequences of our contemporary anthropo- genic niche is a pressing issue. Major impacts include greenhouse gas emissions, landscape alterations on a massive scale, and precipitous declines in biodiversity (Boivin et al. 2016). The deforestation of large swaths of the globe for agricultural endeavors over the course of human history has had profound effects (Burdanowitz et  al. 2021; Ruddiman et  al. 2014). The practices that contemporary food produc- ers, from individuals to multinational corporations, develop going forward will be built on the cumulative outcomes of human niche construction activities across deep time (Altman and Mesoudi 2019). An emerging and considerable challenge is cli- mate change, as contemporary food production systems are substantially constrained by temperature (Xu et al. 2020), and novel agricultural strategies will be needed to expand the temperature envelope. Indeed, Meneganzin and colleagues (2020) char- acterize our current climate change crisis as a monumental human niche construc- tion process and a “self-endangering evolutionary trap.” The latter situation arises when organisms are constrained by their evolutionary histories to make inappropri- ate choices, even when suitable alternative pathways are available. They argue that new forms of counteractive and inceptive niche construction are needed to stabilize the current global niche and drive technological innovation for our species’ survival. Within this frame, farmers are likely to extend cultivation into new environments, perhaps assisted by novel technologies. Indeed, the extension of some cultivated 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research species into new niches is already underway (Chapman et  al. 2012; Skarbø and VanderMolen 2016). This global movement is being underwritten by governmental organizations (i.e., USDA AIM for Climate Initiative) that seek to address the lega- cies and consequences of past and future environmental change through innovation. History reminds us that these investments will undoubtedly generate vulnerabilities in time, and it may be worthwhile to model long-term outcomes, consider a diversity of options, and build in flexibility. Archaeology stands to offers unique multicentury insights into the successes and failures of a diversity of food production practices across a wide array of environmental settings (Fisher 2020). Conclusions The historical study of agriculture has been part of the collective focus of archaeol- ogy for decades. A variety of theoretical perspectives have been applied, and this work has been fruitful substantively, theoretically, and methodologically (Marcus and Stanish 2006; Marston 2021; Morehart and De Lucia 2015; Thurston and Fisher 2007). However, investigations of causation frequently privilege proximate drivers, with more limited attention paid to the cascading effects of historical choices, or the incremental accumulation of changes. Moreover, attention has frequently been placed on specific kinds of production techniques, especially those considered “intensive,” in relation to demographic processes and the centralization of political authority; less-intensive agricultural practices, such as agroforestry, informal field systems, and small-scale gardens have, until recently, been understudied. Niche construction theory offers some advantages in this respect. It has the poten- tial to serve as an overarching theoretical framework to integrate diverse but over- lapping perspectives, including human–organism entanglement, human and nonhu- man agency, natural selection, nongenetic inheritance, and reciprocal causation. We argue that the niche construction lens is providing new and sometimes unexpected insights into our understanding of historical changes in human behavioral variability and the coevolution of humans, other organisms, and the abiotic environment. This is illustrated by the burgeoning literature reviewed herein. More specifically, NCT contributes to the study of agricultural histories and processes in six interrelated ways. First, NCT places the study of agricultural trajectories into a wider body of theory derived from both the biosciences and anthropology. This, in turn, conceptu- ally integrates human societies into natural systems and facilitates investigation of humanity’s role in the evolution of ecological systems. Second, NCT places focus on emergent phenomena that are the result of the confluence of multiple causal trajecto- ries, and thus shifts inquiry toward documenting sequences of causation rather than events. Third, NCT highlights human, animal, and even plant agencies and the place of humans in reciprocal and recursive interactions. In this way, humans are decen- tered and the role of other organisms in affecting human agricultural behaviors via the shared niche is recognized (see Bogaard et al. 2021). As humans become more dependent on constructed agricultural niches, the physical and ecological impacts of other organisms increase. Fourth, NCT places focus on a host of human—organism relationships, not only those that result in domestication. Both nondomesticates and 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research domesticates are affected by agricultural behaviors, and these behaviors, intentional and otherwise, have reciprocal and dynamic effects. Fifth, NCT demonstrates the scale, scope, and importance of ecological inheritance. While persistent landscapes are archaeologically recognized, NCT places these records within a formal causal framework of inheritance. Sixth, and finally, a niche construction perspective tran- scends time and allows for the elucidation of relationships between organisms, past and present. While specific predictions can be challenging, as niche construction is historically contingent, knowledge of different forms of constructed niches and pat- terning in their associated long-term outcomes is useful. It provides an opportunity to assess, among other things, potential future states, the drivers of runaway niche construction, and the kinds of symbioses that enhance sustainability. The focus of NCT on long-term trajectories of human–organism–environment entanglements, technological developments, cultural context, and behavioral strat- egies makes it an ideal framework from which to investigate agricultural change. Agricultural trajectories are dynamic, produced within the context of changing soci- oecological structures and the result of accretionary histories. It is through the oper- ationalization of NCT that we can more fully understand both the entangled histo- ries of agriculture in particular places and the general macroevolutionary processes that create and sort agricultural behaviors over time. As we move into the future, we will continue to build on agricultural legacies of the past, but with increasingly global consequences. Acknowledgments We express our gratitude to the editors of Journal of Archaeological Research for their advice, comments, and critiques. Many of the ideas presented here have benefited from conversa- tions with colleagues, especially Ethan Cochrane, Patrick Kirch, and Thegn Ladefoged. Melinda Allen received support from the New Zealand Tertiary Education Commission, Te Pūnaha Matatini, Centre of Research Excellence for Complex Systems (https:// www. tepun ahama tatini. ac. nz) Grant no. UOA 9167- 3705716, and Seth Quintus received funding from the U.S. National Science Foundation (BCS-1732360) for components of this work. Finally, we thank five anonymous reviewers for their very generous, insight- ful, and helpful comments that improved the original manuscript. Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Com- mons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http:// creat iveco mmons. org/ licen ses/ by/4. 0/. References Cited Acabado, S., and Martin, M. (2022). Indigenous Archaeology in the Philippines: Decolonizing Ifugao History, University of Arizona Press, Tucson. Adams, R. (1981). Heartland of Cities: Surveys of Ancient Settlement and Land Use on the Central Floodplain of the Euphrates, University of Chicago Press, Chicago. 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research Alderfer, R. B., and Merkle, F. G. (1943). The comparative effects of surface application versus incorpo- ration of various mulching materials on structure, permeability, runoff, and other soil properties. Soil Science Society of America Proceedings 8: 79–86. Allaby, R. G., Stevens, C. J., Kistler, L., and Fuller, D. Q. (2022). Emerging evidence of plant domestica- tion as a landscape-level process. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 37: 26–279. Allen, J. S. (1991). The role of agriculture in the evolution of the pre-contact Hawaiian state. Asian Per- spectives 30: 117–132. Allen, M. S. (2004). Bet-hedging strategies, agricultural change, and unpredictable environments: His- torical development of dryland agriculture in Kona, Hawaii. Journal of Anthropological Archaeol- ogy 23: 196–224. Allen, M. S. (2010). Oscillating climate and socio-political process: The case of the Marquesan chief- dom, Polynesia. Antiquity 84: 86–102. Allen, M. S. (2015). Dietary opportunities and constraints on islands: A multi-proxy approach to diet in the Southern Cook Islands. In Lee-Thorp, J., and Katzenberg, M. A. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of the Archaeology of Diet, Oxford University Press, New York, DOI: https:// doi. org/ 10. 1093/ oxfor dhb/ 97801 99694 013. 013.2. Allen, M. S., Lewis, T., and Porch, N. (2022). Lost bioscapes: Floristic and arthropod diversity coinci- dent with 12th century Polynesian settlement, Nuku Hiva, Marquesas Islands. PLoS ONE 17(3): e0265224. Alpizar, P., Rodriguez-Herrera, B., and Jung, K. (2019). The effect of local land use on aerial insectivo- rous bats (Chiroptera) within the two dominating crop types in the northern-Caribbean lowlands of Costa Rica. PLoS ONE 14: e0210364. Altman, A., and Mesoudi, A. (2019). Understanding agriculture within the frameworks of cumulative cultural evolution, gene-culture co-evolution, and cultural niche construction. Human Ecology 47: 483–497. Ammerman, A. J., and Cavalli-Sforza, L. L. (1984). The Neolithic Transition and the Genetics of Popula- tions in Europe, Princeton University Press, Princeton. Anderson, A. (2009). The rat and the octopus: Initial human colonization and the prehistoric introduction of domestic animals to Remote Oceania. Biological Invasions 11: 1503–1519. Arnell, M., Cousins, S. A. O., and Eriksson, O. (2019). Does historical land use affect the regional distri- bution of fleshy-fruited woody plants? PLoS ONE 14: e0225791. Arroyo-Kalin, M. (2010). The Amazonian Formative: Crop domestication and anthropogenic soils. Diversity 2: 473–504. Arroyo-Kalin, M. (2017). Human niche construction and population growth in pre-Columbian Amazonia. Archaeology International 20: 122–136. Arroyo-Kalin, M. (2019). Landscaping, landscape legacies, and landesque capital in pre-Columbian Amazonia. In Isendahl, C., and Stump, D. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Historical Ecology and Applied Archaeology, Oxford University Press, New York, pp. 91–109. Athens, J. S. (1999). Comment on ‘Intensification in the Pacific’ by H. M. Leach. Current Anthropology 40: 321–322. Athens, J. S. (2009). Rattus exulans and the catastrophic disappearance of Hawai‘i’s native lowland for- est. Biological Invasions 11: 1489–1501. Balée, W. (1989). The culture of Amazonian forests. In Balée, W. (ed.), Advances in Economic Botany, New York Botanical Garden, New York, pp. 1–21. Balée, W. (2006). The research program of historical ecology. Annual Review of Anthropology 35: 75–98. Balée, W. (2010). Contingent diversity on anthropic landscapes. Diversity 2: 163–181. Balée, W. (2013). Cultural Forests of the Amazon: A Historical Ecology of People and Their Landscapes, University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa. Barber, I. G. (2004). Crops on the border: The growth of archaeological knowledge of Polynesian cultiva- tion in New Zealand. In Furey, L., and Holdaway, S. (eds.), Change through Time: 50 years of New Zealand Archaeology, Monograph 26, New Zealand Archaeological Association, Auckland, pp. 169–192. Barber, I. (2013). Molluscan mulching at the margins: Investigating the development of a South Island Māori variation on Polynesian hard mulch agronomy. Archaeology in Oceania 48: 40–52. Barthel, S., Crumley, C. L., and Svedin, U. (2013). Biocultural refugia: Combating the erosion of diver- sity in landscapes of food production. Ecology and Society 18: 71. 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research Beach, T., Luzzadder-Beach, S., Dunning, N., Hageman, J., and Lohse, J. (2002). Upland agriculture in the Maya Lowlands: Ancient Maya soil conservation in northwestern Belize. Geographical Review 92: 372–397. Bentley, R. A., and O’Brien, M. J. (2019). Modelling niche construction in Neolithic Europe. In Saqalli, M., and Vander Linden, M. (eds.), Integrating Qualitative and Social Science Factors in Archaeo- logical Modelling, Springer, Cham, Switzerland, pp. 91–108 Bevan, A., Colledge, S., Fuller, D., Fyfe, R., Shennan, S., and Stevens, C. (2017). Holocene fluctuations in human population demonstrate repeated links to food production and climate. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 114: E10524–E10531. Bevan, A., Conolly, J., Colledge, S., Frederick, C., Palmer, C., Siddall, R., and Stellatou, A. (2013). The long-term ecology of agricultural terraces and enclosed fields from Antikythera, Greece. Human Ecology 41: 255–272. Blaikie, P., and Brookfield, H. C. (1987). Land Degradation and Society, Methuen, London. Bliege Bird, R., Taylor, N., Codding, B. F., and Bird, D. W. (2013). Niche construction and dreaming logic: Aboriginal patch mosaic burning and varanid lizard (Varanus gouldii) in Australia. Pro- ceedings of the Royal Society B 280: 20132297. Bliege Bird, R., McGuire, C., Bird, D. W., Price, M. H., Zeanah, D., and Nimmo, D. G. (2020). Fire mosaics and habitat choice in nomadic foragers. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sci- ences 117: 12904–12914. Bogaard, A., Ater, M., and Hodgson, J. G. (2018). Arable weeds as a case study in plant-human rela- tionships beyond domestication. In Stepanoff, C., and Vigne, J.-D. (eds.), Hybrid Communi- ties: Biosocial Approaches to Domestication and Other Trans-species Relationships, Routledge, London, pp. 97–112. Bogaard, A., Fraser, R., Heaton, T. H. E., Wallace, M., Vaiglova, P., Charles, M., et al. (2013). Crop manuring and intensive land management by Europe’s first farmers. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science 110: 12589–12594. Bogaard, A., Allaby, R., Arbuckle, B. S., Bendrey, R., Crowley, S., Cucchi, T., et al. (2021). Recon- sidering domestication from a process archaeology perspective. World Archaeology 53: 56–77. Boivin, N., and Crowther, A. (2021). Mobilizing the past to shape a better Anthropocene. Nature Ecology & Evolution 5: 273–284. Boivin, N. L., Zeder, M. A., Fuller, D. Q., Crowther, A., Larson, G., Erlandson, J. M., Denham, T., and Petraglia, M. D. (2016). Ecological consequences of human niche construction: Examining long-term anthropogenic shaping of global species distributions. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 113: 6388–6396. Braje, T. J., and Erlandson, J. M. (2013). Human acceleration of animal and plant extinctions: A late Pleistocene, Holocene, and Anthropocene continuum. Anthropocene 4: 14–23. Brock, W. A., O’Brien, M. J., and Bentley, R. A. (2016). Validating niche-construction theory through path analysis. Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences 8: 918–837. Brookfield, H. C. (1972). Intensification and disintensification in Pacific agriculture: A theoretical approach. Pacific Viewpoint 13: 30–48. Bruno, M. C. (2014). Beyond raised fields: Exploring farming practices and processes of agricultural change in the ancient Titicaca Basin of the Andes. American Anthropologist 116: 130–145. Burdanowitz, N., Rixen, T., Gaye, B., and Emeis, K.-C. (2021). Signals of Holocene climate transition amplified by anthropogenic land-use changes in the westerly–Indian monsoon realm. Climate of the Past 17: 1735–1749. Camacho, C., Palacios, S., Saez, P., Sanchez, S., and Potti, J. (2014). Human-induced changes in land- scape configuration influence individual movement routines: Lessons from a versatile, highly mobile species. PLoS ONE 9: e104974. Cao, X., Xu, Q., Jing, Z., Tang, J., Li, Y., and Tian, F. (2010). Holocene climate change and human impacts implied from the pollen records in Anyang, central China. Quaternary International 227: 3–9. Chapman, S. C., Chakraborty, S., Dreccer, M. F., and Howden, S. M. (2012). Plant adaptation to cli- mate change—Opportunities and priorities in breeding. Crop and Pasture Science 63: 251–268. Chase, A. S. Z., and Weishampel, J. (2016). Using lidar and GIS to investigate water and soil manage- ment in the agricultural terracing at Caracol, Belize. Advances in Archaeological Practice 4: 357–370. Chen, Y., Syvitski, J. P. M., Gao, S., Overeem, I., and Kettner, A. J. (2012). Socio-economic impacts on flooding: A 4,000-year history of the Yellow River, China. AMBIO 41: 682–698. 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research Clement, C. R. (1999). 1492 and the loss of Amazonian crop genetic resources, I: The relation between domestication and human population decline. Economic Botany 53: 188–202. Clement, C. R., McCann, J. R., and Smith, N. J. H. (2003). Agrobiodiversity in Amazonia and its relationship with dark earths. In Lehmann, J., Kern, D. C., Glaser, B., and Woods, W. I. (eds.), Amazonian Dark Earths: Origin, Properties, Management, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, pp. 159–178 Clement, C. R., Denevan, W. M., Heckenberger, M. J., Junqueira, A. B., Neves, E. G., Teixeira, W. G., and Woods, W. I. (2015). The domestication of Amazonia before European conquest. Proceed- ings of the Royal Society B 282: 20150813. Clement, C. R., Levis, C., Franco-Moraes, J., and Junqueira, A. B. (2020). Domesticated nature: The culturally constructed niche of humanity. In Baldauf, C. (ed.), Participatory Biodiversity Con- servation: Concepts, Experiences, and Perspectives, Springer, Cham, Switzerland, pp. 35–52. Clement, C. R., Casas, A., Parra-Rondinel, F. A., Levis, C., Peroni, N., Hanazaki, N., et al. (2021). Dis- entangling domestication from food production systems in the Neotropics. Quaternary 4(1): 4, doi. org/https:// doi. org/ 10. 3390/ quat4 010004 Cockram, J., Chiapparino, W., Taylor, S. A., Stamati, K., Donini, P., Laurie, D. A., and O’Sullivan, D. M. (2007). Haplotype analysis of vernalization loci in European barley germplasm reveals novel VRN-H1 alleles and a predominant winter VRN-H1/VRN-H2 multi-locus haplotype. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 115: 993–1001. Cockram, J., Hones, H., and O’Sullivan, D. M. (2011). Genetic variation at flowering time locus in wild and cultivated barley. Plant Genetic Resources 9: 264–267. Colledge, S., Conolly, J., Crema, E., and Shennan, S. (2019). Neolithic population crash in northwest Europe associated with agricultural crisis. Quaternary Research 92: 686–707. Day, R. L., Laland, K. N., and Odling-Smee, J. (2003). Rethinking adaptation: The niche construction perspective. Perspectives in Biology and Nature 46: 80–95. de Oliveira, E. A., Marimon-Junior, B. H., Marimon, B. S., Iriarte, J., Morandi, P. S., Maezumi, S. Y., et  al. (2020). Legacy of Amazonian dark earth soils on forest structure and species composition. Global Ecology and Biogeography 29: 1458–1473. de Souza, J. G., Robinson, M., Maezumi, S. Y., Caprilles, J., Hoggarth, J. A., Lombardo, U., et al. (2019). Climate change and cultural resilience in late pre-Columbian Amazonia. Nature Ecology and Evo- lution 3: 1007–1017. Denevan, W. M. (1970). Aboriginal drained-field cultivation in the Americas. Science 169: 647–654. Denevan, W. M. (2001). Cultivated Landscapes of Native Amazonia and the Andes, Oxford University Press, New York. Denevan, W. M., Padoch, C., Prance, G. T., Treacy, J. M., Unruh, J., Alcorn, J. B., et al. (1988). Swidden- fallow agroforestry in the Peruvian Amazon. Advances in Economic Botany 5: i–107. Denham, T. (2011). Early agriculture and plant domestication in New Guinea and Island Southeast Asia. Current Anthropology 52: S379–S395. Denham, T., Barton, H., Castillo, C., Crowther, A., Dotte-Sarout, E., Florin, S. A., et  al. (2020). The domestication syndrome in vegetatively propagated field crops. Annals of Botany 125: 581–597 DiNapoli, R. J., and Leppard, T. P. (2018). Island as model environments. Journal of Island and Coastal Archaeology 13: 157–160. Donoghue, M. J. (2008). A phylogenetic perspective on the distribution of plant diversity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science 105: 11549–11555. Doolittle, W. E. (1984). Agricultural change as an incremental process. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 74: 124–137. Drennan, R. D., Peterson, C. E., and Berrey, C. A. (2020). Environmental risk buffering in Chinese Neo- lithic villages: Impacts on community structure in the Central Plains and the western Liao Valley. Archaeological Research in Asia 21: 100165. Duncan, N. A., Loughlin, N. J., Walker, J. H., Hocking, E. P., and Whitney, B. S. (2021). Pre- Dupouey, J. L., Dambrine, E., Laffite, J. D., and Moares, C. (2002). Irreversible impact of past land use on forest soils and biodiversity. Ecology 83: 2978–2984. Dye, T. S. (2014). Structure and growth of the Leeward Kohala Field System: An analysis with directed graphs. PLoS ONE 9: e102431. Earle, T. (1997). How Chiefs Come to Power: The Political Economy in Prehistory, Stanford University Press, Palo Alto. Earle, T. (2011). Chiefs, chieftaincies, chiefdoms, and chiefly confederacies: Power in the evolution of political systems. Social Evolution and History 10: 27–54. 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research Earle, T., and Spriggs, M. (2015). Political economy in prehistory: A Marxist approach to Pacific sequences. Current Anthropology 56: 515–544. Eger, A. A. (2011). The swamps of home: Marsh formation and settlement in the early medieval Near East. Journal of Near Eastern Studies 70: 55–79. Ellis, E. C. (2015). Ecology in an anthropogenic biosphere. Ecological Monographs 85: 287–331. Ellis, E. C. (2016). Why is human niche construction transforming planet earth? RCC Perspectives 5: 63–70. Ellis, E. C., Gauthier, N., Goldwijk, K. K., Bliege Bird, R., Boivin, N., Diaz, S., et al. (2021). People have shaped most of terrestrial nature for at least 12,000 years. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science 118: e2023483118. Erickson, C. L. (1988). Raised field agriculture in the Lake Titicaca basin: Putting ancient agriculture back to work. Expedition 30: 8–16. Erickson, C. L. (1992). Prehistoric landscape management in the Andean highlands: Raised field agricul- ture and its environmental impact. Population and Environment 13: 285–300. Erickson, C. L. (1993). The social organization of prehispanic raised field agriculture in the Lake Titicaca basin. In Scarborough, V., and Isaac, B. (eds.), Economic Aspects of Water Management in the Pre- hispanic New World, JAI Press, Greenwich, pp. 369–426. Erickson, C. L. (2006). The domesticated landscapes of the Bolivian Amazon. In Balée, W., and Erick- son, C. (eds.), Time and Complexity in Historical Ecology: Studies in the Neotropical Lowlands, Columbia University Press, New York, pp. 235–278. Erickson, C. L. (2008). Amazonia: The historical ecology of a domesticated landscape. In Silverman, H., and Isbell, W. H. (eds.), Handbook of South American Archaeology, Springer, New York, pp. 157–183. Eriksson, O. (2013). Species pools in cultural landscapes – niche construction, ecological opportunity and niche shifts. Ecography 36: 403–413. Eriksson, O., and Arnell, M. (2017). Niche construction, entanglement and landscape domestication in Scandinavian infield systems. Landscape Research 42: 78–88. Eriksson, O., Arnell, M., and Lindholm, K.-J. (2021). Historical ecology of Scandinavian infield systems. Sustainability 13: 817. Fisher, C. (2020). Archaeology for sustainable agriculture. Journal of Archaeological Research 28: 393–441. Fitzhugh, B., Butler, V., Bovy, K. M., and Etnier, M. A. (2019). Human ecodynamics: A perspective for the study of long–term change in socioecological systems. Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports 23: 1077–1094. Fitzpatrick, S. M., and Giovas, C. M. (2021). Tropical islands of the Anthropocene: Deep histories of anthropogenic terrestrial-marine entanglement in the Pacific and Caribbean. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science 118: e2022209118. Fogarty, L., and Creanza, N. (2017). The niche construction of cultural complexity: Interactions between innovations, population size and the environment. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 372: 20160428. Ford, A., and Nigh, R. (2015). The Maya Forest Garden: Eight Millennia of Sustainable Cultivation of the Tropical Woodlands, Left Coast Press, Walnut Creek, CA. Fordham, D. A., Saltré, F., Haythorne, S., Wigley, T. M. L., Otto-Bliesner, B. L. Ching Chan, K., and Brook, B. W. (2017). PaleoView: A tool for generating continuous climate projections spanning the last 21,000 years at regional and global scales. Ecography 40: 1348–1358. Foster, D., Swanson, F., Aber, J., Burke, I., Brokaw, N., Tilman, D., and Knapp, A. (2003). The impor- tance of land-use legacies to ecology and conservation. Bioscience 53: 77–88. Foster, H. T., Paciulli, L. M., and Goldstein, D. J. (eds.) (2016). Viewing the Future in the Past: Histori- cal Ecology Applications to Environmental Issues, University of South Carolina Press, Columbia. Frank, S. A., and Slatkin, M. (1990). Evolution in a variable environment. The American Naturalist 136: 244–260. Fraser, J. (2010). Caboclo horticulture and Amazonian dark earths along the Middle Madeira River, Bra- zil. Human Ecology 38: 651–662. Fraser, J., Teixeira, W., Falcao, N., Woods, W., Lehmann, J., and Junqueira, A. B. (2011). Anthropogenic soils in the central Amazon: From categories to a continuum. Area 43: 264–273. Frausin, V., Fraser, J. A., Narmah, W., Lahai, M. K., Winnebah, T. R. A., Fairhead, J., and Leach, M. (2014). “God made the soil, but we made it fertile”: Gender, knowledge, and practice in the forma- tion and use of African dark earths in Liberia and Sierra Leone. Human Ecology 42: 695–710. 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research Freeman, J., Anderies, J. M., Beckman, N. G., Robinson, E., Baggio, J. A., Bird, D., et al. (2021). Land- scape engineering impacts the long-term stability of agricultural populations. Human Ecology 49: 369–382. Fuentes, A. (2016). The extended evolutionary synthesis, ethnography, and the human niche: Toward an integrated anthropology. Current Anthropology 57: S13–S26. Fuller, D., and Lucas, L. (2017). Adapting crops, landscapes, and food choices: Patterns in the dispersal of domesticated plants across Eurasia. In Boivin, N., Crassard, R., and Petraglia, M. (eds.), Human Dispersal and Species Movement, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 304–331. Fuller, D., and Qin, L. (2009). Water management and labour in the origins and dispersal of Asian rice. World Archaeology 41:88–111. Fuller, D., and Stevens, C. (2017). Open for competition: Domesticates, parasitic domesticoids and the agricultural niche. Archaeology International 20: 110–121. Fuller, D. Q., Asouti, E., and Purugganan, M. D. (2012). Cultivation as slow evolutionary entanglement: Comparative data on rate and sequence of domestication. Vegetation History and Archaeobotany 21: 131–145. Fuller, D. Q., Stevens, C., Lucas, L., Murphy, C., and Qin, L. (2016). Entanglements and entrapments on the pathway toward domestication. In Der, L., and Fernandini, F. (eds.), The Archaeology of Entan- glement, Left Coast Press, Walnut Creek, CA, pp. 151–172. Funk, E. (1982). The aboriginal use and domestication of Touchardia latifolia Gaud. (Urticaceae) in Hawaii. Archaeology in Oceania 17: 16–19. Gee, H. K. W. (2007). Habitat characteristics of refuge wetlands and taro lo’i used by endangered water- birds at Hanalei National Wildlife Refuge, Hawai‘i. Unpublished M.A. thesis, Department of Wild- life Science, South Dakota State University, Brookings. German, L. A. (2003). Historical contingencies in the evolution of environment and livelihood: Contribu- tions to the debate on Amazonian Black Earth. Geoderma 111: 307–331. Glaser, B. (2007). Prehistorically modified soils of central Amazonia: A model for sustainable agriculture in the twenty-first century. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 362: 187–196. Groenman-van Waateringe, W., and van Geel, B. (2017). Raised bed agriculture in northwest Europe trig- gered by climatic change around 850 BC: A hypothesis. Environmental Archaeology 22: 166–170. Gumbley, W. (2021). The Waikato Horticultural Complex: An Archaeological Reconstruction of a Poly- nesian Horticultural System, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Archaeology and Nat- ural History, Australian National University, Canberra. Guttmann, E. B. A. (2005). Midden cultivation in prehistoric Britain: Arable crops in gardens. World Archaeology 37: 224–239. Guttmann, E. B., Simpson, I. A., Nielsen, N., and Dockrill, S. J. (2008). Anthrosols in Iron Age Shetland: Implications for arable and economic activity. Geoarchaeology 23: 799–823. Guttmann-Bond, E. (2019). Reinventing Sustainability: How Archaeology Can Save the Planet, Oxbow Books, Oxford. Haas, R., and Kuhn, S. L. (2019). Foragers mobility in constructed environments. Current Anthropology 60: 499–535. Håkansson, N. T., and Widgren, M. (eds.) (2014). Landesque Captial: The Historical Ecology of Endur- ing Landscape Modifications, Routledge, New York. Hale, J. W. C., and Sanger, M. (2020). Cultural spaces and climate change: Modelling Holocene archae- ological settlement patterns on the coastal plain of the southeastern United States. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 59: 101198. Handy, E. S. C., and Handy, E. G. (1972). Native Planters in Old Hawaii, Bulletin 233, B. P. Bishop Museum, Honolulu. Harris, D. R., and Fuller, D. Q. (2014). Agriculture: Definition and overview. In Smith, C. (ed.), Encyclo- pedia of Global Archaeology, Springer, New York, pp. 104–113 Heckenberger, M., and Neves, E. G. (2009). Amazonian archaeology. Annual Review of Anthropology 38: 251–266. Hegmon, M., Peeples, M. A., Kinzig, A. P., Kulow, S., Meegan, C. M., and Nelson, M. C. (2008). Social transformation and its human costs in the prehispanic U.S. Southwest. American Anthropologist 110: 313–324. Hejcman, M., Ondráček, J., and Smrž, Z. (2011). Ancient waste pits with wood ash irreversible increase crop production in central Europe. Plant and Soil 339: 341–350. 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research Hejcman, M., Součková, K., and Gojda, M. (2013). Prehistoric settlement activities changed soil pH, nutrient availability, and growth of contemporary crops in central Europe. Plant and Soil 369: 131–140. Heyvaert, V. M. A., and Walstra, J. (2016). The role of long-term human impact on avulsion and fan development. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms 41: 2137–2152. Hightower, J. N., Butterfield, A. C., and Weishampel, J. F. (2014). Quantifying ancient Maya land use legacy effects on contemporary rainforest canopy structure. Remote Sensing 6: 10716–10732. Hodder, I. (2012). Entangled: An Archaeology of the Relationships between Humans and Things. Wiley- Blackwell, Oxford. Hofman, C. A., and Rick, T. C. (2018). Ancient biological invasions and island ecosystems: Tracking translocations of wild plants and animals. Journal of Archaeological Research 26: 65–115. Hritz, C., and Pournelle, J. R. (2016). Feeding history: Deltaic resilience, inherited practice, and millen- nial-scale sustainability in an urbanized landscape. In Foster, H. T., Paciulli, L. M., and Goldstein, D. J. (eds.), View the Future in the Past: Historical Ecology Applications to Environmental Issues, University of South Carolina Press, Columbia, pp. 59–85. Huang, C., Sun, H., Xu, D., Checn, Q., Liang, Y., Wang, X., et  al. (2018). ZmCCT9 enhances maize adaptation to higher latitudes. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 115: E333–E341. Huebert, J. M., and Allen, M. S. (2020). Anthropogenic forests, arboriculture, and niche construction in the Marquesas Islands (Polynesia). Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 57: 101122. Hung, H.-Y., Shannon, L. M., Tian, F., Bradbury, P. J., Chen, C., Flint-Garcia, S. A., et al. (2012). ZmCCT and the genetic basis of day-length adaptation underlying the postdomestication spread of maize. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science 109: E1913–E1921. Hunt, T. L. (2007). Rethinking Easter Island’s ecological catastrophe. Journal of Archaeological Science 34: 485–502. Hurd, P. D., Linsley, E. G., and Whitaker, T. W. (1971). Squash and gourd bees (Peponapis, Xenoglossa) and the origin of the cultivated cucurbita. Evolution 25: 218–234. Hynes, R., and Chase, A. (1982). Plants, sites and domiculture: Aboriginal influence upon plant commu- nities in Cape York Peninsula. Archaeology in Oceania 17: 38–50. Johnston, R. (2005). A social archaeology of garden plots in the Bronze Age of northern and western Britain. World Archaeology 37: 211–223. Jones, B. D., Ladefoged, T. N., and Asner, G. (2015). Tracing the resilience and revitalization of historic taro production in Waipi’o Valley, Hawai‘i. Journal of the Polynesian Society 124: 83–109. Jones, C. G., Lawton, J. H., and Shachak, M. (1994). Organisms as ecosystem engineers. Oikos 69: 373–386. Jotheri, J., Allen, M. B., and Wilkinson, T. J. (2016). Holocene avulsions of the Euphrates River in the Najaf area of western Mesopotamia: Impacts on human settlement patterns. Geoarchaeology 31: 175–193. Jotheri, J., Altaweel, M., Tuji, A., Anma, R., Pennington, B., Rost, S., and Watanabe, C. (2018). Holo- cene fluvial and anthropogenic processes in the region of Uruk in southern Mesopotamia. Quater - nary International 483: 57–69. Kagawa, A. K., and Vitousek, P. M. (2012). The ahupuaʻa of Puanui: A resource for understanding Hawaiian rain-fed agriculture. Pacific Science 66: 161–172. Kagawa-Viviani, A. K., Lincoln, N. K., Quintus, S., Lucas, M. P., and Giambelluca, T. W. (2018). Spatial patterns of seasonal crop production suggest coordination within and across dryland agricultural systems of Hawai‘i Island. Ecology and Society 23: 20. Kahn, J. G., Nickelsen, C., Stevenson, J., Porch, N., Dotte-Sarout, E., Christensen, C. C., et  al. (2015). Mid- to late Holocene landscape change and anthropogenic transformations on Mo‘orea, Society Islands: A multi-proxy approach. The Holocene 25: 333–347. Kawa, N., Rodrigues, D., and Clement, C. R. (2011) Useful species richness, proportions of exotic spe- cies, and market orientation on Amazonian dark earths and oxisols. Economic Botany 65: 169–177. Kidder, T. R., and Liu, H. (2017). Bridging theoretical gaps in geoarchaeology: Archaeology, geoarchae- ology, and history in the Yellow River valley, China. Archaeological and Anthropological Science 9: 1585–1602. Kidder, T. R., and Zhuang, Y. (2015). Anthropocene archaeology of the Yellow River, China, 5000–2000 BP. The Holocene 25: 1627–1639. Kidder, T. R., Liu, H., and Li, M. (2012a). Sanyangzhuang: Early farming and a Han settlement preserved beneath Yellow River flood deposits. Antiquity 86: 30–47. 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research Kidder, T. R., Liu, H., Xu, Q., and Li, M. (2012b). The alluvial geoarchaeology of the Sanyangzhuang site on the Yellow River floodplain, Henan Province, China. Geoarchaeology 27: 324–343. Kintigh, K., Altschul, J., Beaudry, M., Drennan, R., Kinzig, A., Kohler, T., et  al. (2014). Grand chal- lenges for archaeology. American Antiquity 79: 5–24. Kirch, P. V. (1988). Niuatoputapu: The Prehistory of a Polynesian Chiefdom, Monograph No. 5, Thomas Burke Memorial Washington State Museum, Seattle. Kirch, P. V. (1994). The Wet and the Dry: Irrigation and Agricultural Intensification in Polynesia, Uni- versity of Chicago Press, Chicago. Kirch, P. V. (1996). Late Holocene human-induced modifications to a central Polynesian island ecosys- tem. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science 93: 5296–5300. Kirch, P. V. (2007). Three islands and an archipelago: Reciprocal interactions between humans and island ecosystems in Polynesia. Earth and Environmental Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh 98: 85–99. Kirch, P. V. (2010). How Chiefs Became Kings: Divine Kingship and the Rise of Archaic States in Ancient Hawai‘i, University of California Press, Berkeley. Kirch, P. V. (ed.) (2011). Roots of Conflict: Soils, Agriculture, and Sociopolitical Complexity in Ancient Hawai‘i, School for Advanced Research, Santa Fe, NM. Kirch, P. V. (ed.) (2017). Tangatatau Rockshelter: The Evolution of an Eastern Polynesian Socio-Ecosys- tem, Monumenta Archaeologica 40, Costen Institute Press, Los Angeles. Kovar, P. (1992). Ecotones in agricultural landscape. Ecology (CSFR) 11: 251–258. Kurashima, N., Fortini, L., and Ticktin, T. (2019). The potential of indigenous agricultural food produc- tion under climate change in Hawai‘i. Nature Sustainability 2: 191–199. Ladefoged, T. N., and Graves, M. W. (2000). Evolutionary theory and the historical development of dry- land agriculture in North Kohala, Hawai‘i. American Antiquity 65: 423–448. Ladefoged, T. N., Graves, M. W., and McCoy, M. D. (2003). Archaeological evidence for agricultural development in Kohala Island of Hawai‘i. Journal of Archaeological Science 30: 923–940. Ladefoged, T. N., Lee, C. T., and Graves, M. W. (2008). Modeling life expectancy and surplus production of dynamic pre-contact territories in leeward Kohala, Hawai‘i. Journal of Anthropological Archae- ology 27: 93–110. Ladefoged, T. N., Kirch, P. V., Gon, S. M., Chadwick, O. A., Hartshorn, A. S., and Vitousek, P. M. (2009). Opportunities and constraints for intensive agriculture in the Hawaiian archipelago prior to European contact. Journal of Archaeological Science 36: 2374–2383. Ladefoged, T. N., Stevenson, C. M., Haoa, S., Mulrooney, M., Puleston, C., Vitousek, P. M., and Chad- wick, O. A. (2010). Soil nutrient analysis of Rapa Nui gardening. Archaeology in Oceania 45: 80–85. Ladefoged, T. N., McCoy, M. D., Asner, G. P., Kirch, P. V., Puleston, C. O., Chadwick O. A., and Vitousek, P. M. (2011). Agricultural potential and actualized development in Hawai‘i: An airborne LIDAR survey of the leeward Kohala field system (Hawai‘i Island). Journal of Archaeological Sci- ence 38: 3605–3619. Laland, K. N. (2015). On evolutionary causes and evolutionary processes. Behavioural Processes 117: 97–104. Laland, K. N., and O’Brien, M. J. (2010). Niche construction theory and archaeology. Journal of Archae- ological Method and Theory 17: 303–322. Laland, K. N., and O’Brien, M. J. (2012). Cultural niche construction: An introduction. Biological The- ory 6: 191–202. Laland, K. N., and O’Brien, M. J. (2015). Niche construction: Implications for human societies. In Scott, R., and Kosslyn, S. (eds.), Emerging Trends in the Social and Behavioral Sciences, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., https:// doi. org/ 10. 1002/ 97811 18900 772. etrds 0242. Laland, K. N., and Sterelny, K. (2006). Seven reasons (not) to neglect niche construction. Evolution 60: 1751–1762. Laland, K. N., Kendal, J. R., and Brown, G. R. (2007). The niche construction perspective: Implications for evolution and human behavior. Journal of Evolutionary Psychology 5: 51–61. Laland, K. N., Sterelny, K., Odling-Smee, J., Hoppitt, W., and Uller, T. (2011). Cause and effect in biol- ogy revisited: Is Mayr’s proximate-ultimate dichotomy still useful? Science 334: 1512–1516. Laland, K. N., Odling-Smee, J., Hoppitt, W., and Uller, T. (2013). More on how and why: Cause and effect in biology revisited. Biology and Philosophy 28: 719–745. Laland, K., Odling-Smee, J., and Endler, J. (2017). Niche construction, sources of selection and trait evo- lution. Interface Focus 7: 20160147. 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research Laland, K. N., Odling-Smee, J., and Feldman, M. W. (2019). Understanding niche construction as an evolutionary process. In Uller, T., and Laland, K.N. (eds.), Evolutionary Causation: Biological and Philosophical Reflections, MIT Press, Cambridge, pp. 127–152. Lansing, J. S. (1991). Priests and Programmers: Technologies of Power in the Engineered Landscape of Bali, Princeton University Press, Princeton. Latinis, D. K. (2000). The development of subsistence system models for Island Southeast Asia and Near Oceania: The nature and role of arboriculture and arboreal-based economies. World Archaeology 32: 41–67. Leach, B. F., and Leach, H. M. (eds.) (1979). Prehistoric Man in Palliser Bay, Bulletin 21, National Museum of New Zealand, Wellington. Leach, H., and Stowe, C. (2005). Oceanic arboriculture at the margins—The case of the karaka (Coryno- carpus laevigatus) in Aotearoa. Journal of the Polynesian Society 114: 7–27. Lee, G.-A., Crawford, G. W., Liu, L., and Chen, X. (2007). Plants and people from the early Neo- lithic to Shang periods in North China. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science 104: 1087–1092. Leitão-Barboza, M. S., Kawa, N. C., Junqueira, A. B., and Oyuela-Caycedo, A. (2021) Open air labo- ratories: Amazonian home gardens as sites of experimentation, collaboration, and negotiation across time. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 62:101302. Lepofsky, D., and Lertzman, K. (2008). Documenting ancient plant management in the northwest of North America. Botany 86:129–145. Lepofsky, D., and Kahn, J. (2011). Cultivating an ecological and social balance: Elite demands and commoner knowledge in ancient Ma‘ohi agriculture, Society Islands. American Anthropologist 113: 319–335. Levis, C., Costa, F. R. C., Bongers, F., Peña-Claros, M., Clement, C. R., Junqueira, A. B., et  al. (2017). Persistent effects of pre-Columbian plant domestication on Amazonian forest composi- tion. Science 355: 925–931. Levis, C., Flores, B. M., Moreira, P. A, Luize, B. G., Alves, R. P., Franco-Morales, J., et al. (2018). How people domesticated Amazonian forests. Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution 5: 171. Levis, C., Peña-Claros, M., Clement, C. R., Costa, F. R. C., Alves, R. P., Ferreira, M. J., Figueiredo, C. G., and Bongers, F. (2020). Pre-Columbian soil fertilization and current management main- tain food resource availability in old-growth Amazonian forests. Plant Soil 450: 29–48. Lewontin, R. (1983). Gene, organism, and environment. In Bendall, D. S. (ed.), Evolution from Mol- ecules to Men, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 273–285. Lewontin, R. (2000). The Triple Helix: Gene, Organisms, and Environment, Harvard University Press, Cambridge. Lightfoot, D. R. (1996). The nature, history, and distribution of lithic mulch agriculture: An ancient technique of dryland agriculture. The Agricultural History Review 44: 206–222. Lightfoot, D. R., and Eddy, F. W. (1994). The agricultural utility of lithic-mulch gardens: Past and present. GeoJournal 34: 425–437. Lincoln, N. K., Rossen, J., Vitousek, P., Kahoonei, J., Shapiro, D., Kalawe, K., et al. (2018). Restora- tion of ‘Āina Malo’o on Hawai‘i Island: Expanding biocultural relationships. Sustainability 10: Lins, J., Lima, H. P., Baccaro, F. B., Kinupp, V. F., Shepard, G. H., and Clement, C. R. (2015). Pre- Columbian floristic legacies in modern homegardens of central Amazonia. PLoS ONE 10: e0127067. Logan, A. L. (2020) The Scarcity Slot: Excavating Histories of Food Security in Ghana, University of California Press, Berkeley. Lombardo, U., Cnal-Beeby, E., Fehr, S., and Veit, H. (2011). Raised fields in the Bolivian Amazonia: A prehistoric green revolution or a flood risk mitigation strategy. Journal of Archaeological Science 38: 502–512. Lombardo, U., Iriarte, J., Hilbert, L., Ruiz-Pérez, J., Capriles, J. M., and Veit, H. (2020). Early Holocene crop cultivation and landscape modification in Amazonia. Nature 581: 190–193. Long, T., Chen, H., Leipe, C., Wagner, M., and Tarasov, P. E. (2022). Modelling the chronology and dynamics of the spread of Asian rice from ca. 8000 BCE to 1000 CE. Quaternary International 623: 101–109. Lopez-Uribe, M. M., Cane, J. H., Minckley, R. L., and Danforth, B. N. (2016). Crop domestication facili- tated rapid geographical expansion of a specialist pollinator, the squash bee Peponapis pruinosa. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 283: 20160443. 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research Maezumi, S. Y., Alves, D., Robinson, M., de Souza, J. G., Levis, C., Barnett, R. L., et al. (2018). The leg- acy of 4,500 years of polyculture agroforestry in the eastern Amazon. Nature Plants 4: 540–547. Malachowski, C. P., and Dugger, B. D. (2018). Hawaiian duck behavioural patterns in seasonal wetlands and cultivated taro. Journal of Wildlife Management 82: 840–849. Manuel, M., Lightfoot, D., and Fattahi, M. (2018). The sustainability of ancient water control techniques in Iran: An overview. Water History 10: 13–30. Marcus, J., and Stanish, C. (eds.) (2006). Agricultural Strategies, Cotsen Institute of Archaeology, Uni- versity of California, Los Angeles. Marshall, E. J. P. (1989). Distribution patterns of plants associated with arable field edges. Journal of Applied Ecology 26: 247–257. Marshall, E. J. P., and Moonen, A. C. (2002). Field margins in northern Europe: Their function and inter- actions with agriculture. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 89: 5–21. Marshall, K., Koseff, C., Roberts, A. L. Lindsey, A., Kagawa-Viviani, A. K., Lincoln, N. K., and Vitousek, P. M. (2017). Restoring people and productivity to Puanui: Challenges and opportunities in the restoration of an intensive rain-fed Hawaiian field system. Ecology and Society 22(2): 23. Marston, J. M. (2011). Archaeological markers of agricultural risk management. Journal of Anthropo- logical Archaeology 30: 190–205. Marston, J. M. (2021). Archaeological approaches to agricultural economies. Journal of Archaeological Research 29: 327–385. Matthews, B., de Meester, L., Jones, C. G., Ibelings, B. W., Bouma, T. J., Nuutinen, V., van de Koppel, J., and Odling-Smee, J. (2014). Under niche construction: An operational bridge between ecology, evolution, and ecosystem science. Ecological Monographs 84: 245–263. Maxwell, T. D. (1995). The use of comparative and engineering analyses in the study of prehistoric agri- culture. In Teltser, P.A. (ed.), Evolutionary Archaeology: Methodological Issues, University of Ari- zona Press, Tucson, pp. 113–128. McElroy W. K. (2007). The Development of Irrigated Agriculture in Wailau Valley, Moloka’i Island, Hawai‘i, Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa, Honolulu. McKey, D. (2019) Pre-Columbian human occupation of Amazonia and its influence on current land- scapes and biodiversity. Anais da Academia Brasileira de Ciênc 91(sup 3): e20190087. McKey, D., Rostain, S., Iriarte, J., Glaser, B., Birk, J. J., Holst, I., and Renard, D. (2010). Pre-Columbian agricultural landscapes, ecosystem engineers, and self-organized patchiness in Amazonia. Pro- ceedings of the National Academy of Science 107: 7823–7828. Meneganzin, A., Pievani, T., and Caserini, S. (2020). Anthropogenic climate change as a monumental niche construction process: Background and philosophical aspects. Biology & Philosophy 35: 38. Mesoudi, A., Blanchet, S., Charmantier, A., Danchin, E., Fogerty, L., Jablonka, E., et al. (2013). Is non- genetic inheritance just a proximate mechanism? A corroboration of the extended evolutionary synthesis. Biological Theory 7: 189–195. Minnis, P. E. (2021). Famine Foods: Plants We Eat to Survive, University of Arizona Press, Tucson. Mohlenhoff, K. A., and Codding, B. F. (2017). When does it pay to invest in a patch? The evolution of intentional niche construction. Evolutionary Anthropology 26: 218–227. Morehart, C. T. (2010). The Archaeology of Farmscapes: Production, Power, and Place at Postclas- sic Xaltocan, Mexico, Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL. Morehart, C. T. (2018). Inherited legacies of ecological imperialism in central Mexico. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 52: 103–112. Morehart, C. T., and de Lucia, K. (eds.) (2015). Surplus: The Politics of Production and the Strategies of Everyday Life, University Press of Colorado, Boulder. Morrison, K. D. (1994). The intensification of production: Archaeological approaches. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 1: 111–159. Morrison, K. D. (1995). Fields of Victory: Vijayanagara and the Course of Intensification, Contributions No. 53, University of California Research Facility, Berkeley. Morrison, K. D. (2006). Intensification as a situated process: Landscape history and collapse. In Marcus, J., and Stanish, C. (eds.), Agricultural Strategies, Costen Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles, pp. 71–91. Morrison, K. D. (2014). Captial-esque landscapes: Long-term histories of enduring landscape modifica- tions. In Thomas-Hakansson, N., and Widgren, M. (eds.), Landesque Capital: The Historical Ecol- ogy of Enduring Landscape Modifications, Left Coast Press, Walnut Creek, CA, pp. 49–74. 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research Morrison, K. D. (2015). Archaeologies of flow: Water and the landscapes of southern India past, present, and future. Journal of Field Archaeology 40: 560–580. Nelson, M. C., Ingram, S. E., Dugmore, A. J., Streeter, R., Peeples, M. A., McGovern, T. H., et al. (2016). Climate challenges, vulnerabilities, and food security. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sci- ence 113: 298–303. Netting, R. M. (1993). Smallholders, Householders: Farm Families and the Ecology of Intensive, Sus- tainable Agriculture, Stanford University Press, Palo Alto. Nettle, D., Gibson, M. A., Lawson, D. W., and Sear, R. 2013. Human behavioural ecology: Current research and future prospects. Behavioural Ecology 24: 1031–1040. Neves E. G. (2016). A tale of three species or the ancient soul of tropical forests. In Sanz, N. (ed.), Tropi- cal Forest Conservation: Long-Term Processes of Human Evolution, Cultural Adaptations and Consumption Patterns, UNESCO, Mexico City, pp. 228–245. Neves, E. G., and Heckenberger, M. J. (2019). The call of the wild: Rethinking food production in ancient Amazonia. Annual Review of Anthropology 48: 371–388. O’Brien, M. J., and Bentley, R. A. (2015). The role of food storage in human niche construction: An example from Neolithic Europe. Environmental Archaeology 20: 364–378. O’Brien, M. J., and Laland, K. N. (2012). Genes, culture, and agriculture: An example of human niche construction. Current Anthropology 53: 434–470. Odling-Smee, F. J. (1988). Niche-constructing phenotypes. In Plotkin, H. C. (ed.), The Role of Behavior in Evolution, MIT Press, Cambridge, pp. 73–132. Odling-Smee, F. J., and Laland, K. N. (2011). Ecological inheritance and cultural inheritance: What are they and how do they differ? Biological Theory 6: 220–230. Odling-Smee, F. J., Laland, K. N., and Feldman, M. W. (1996). Niche construction. The American Natu- ralist 147: 641–648. Odling-Smee, F. J., Laland, K. N., and Feldman, M. W. (2003). Niche Construction: The Neglected Pro- cess in Evolution, Princeton University Press, Princeton. Odling-Smee, F. J., Erwin, D. H., Palkovacs, E. P., Feldman, M. W., and Laland, K. N. (2013). Niche construction theory: A practical guide for ecologists. The Quarterly Review of Biology 88: 3–28. Odonne, G., van den Bel, M., Burst, M., Brunaux, O., Bruno, M., Dambrine, E., et  al. (2019). Long- term influence of early human occupations on current forests of the Guinea Shield. Ecology 100: e02806. Pears, B. (2012). The formation of anthropogenic soils across three marginal landscapes on Fair Isle and in the Netherlands and Ireland. In Jones, R. (ed.), Manure Matters: Historical, Archaeological and Ethnographic Perspectives, Routledge, New York, pp. 109–127. Peters, C. M., Balick, M. J., Kahn, F., and Anderson, A. B. (1989). Oligarchic forests of economic plants in Amazonia: Utilization and conservation of an important tropical resource. Conservation Biology 3: 341–349. Piperno, D. R., McMichael, C., and Bush, M. B. (2015). Amazonia and the Anthropocene: What was the spatial extent and intensity of human landscape modification in the Amazon Basin at the end of prehistory? The Holocene 25: 1588–1597. Piperno, D. R., McMichael, C., and Bush, M. B. (2017). Further evidence for localized, short-term anthropogenic forest alterations across pre-Columbian Amazonia. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science 114: E4118–4119. Post, D. M., and Palkovacs, E. P. (2009). Eco-evolutionary feedbacks in community and ecosystem ecol- ogy: Interactions between the ecological theatre and the evolutionary play. Philosophical Transac- tions of the Royal Society B 364: 1629–1640. Prebble, M., and Wilmshurst, J. (2009). Detecting the initial impact of humans and introduced species on island environments in Remote Oceania using palaeoecology. Biological Invasions 11: 1529–1556. Prebble, M., Anderson, A. J., Augustinus, P., Emmitt, J., Fallon, S. J., Furey, L. L., et al. (2019). Early tropical crop production in marginal subtropical and temperate Polynesia. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science 116: 8824–8833. Prufer, K. M., Thompson, A. E., Meredith, C. R., Culleton, B. J., Jordan, J. M., Ebert, C. E., Winterhal- der, B., and Kennett, D. J. (2017). The Classic period Maya transition from an ideal free to an ideal despotic settlement system at the polity of Uxbenkãi. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 45: 53–68. Pyne, S. J. (2019). Fire: A Brief History, University of Washington Press, Seattle. Quintus, S. (2018a). Exploring the intersection of settlement, subsistence and population in Manu‘a. Journal of the Polynesian Society 127: 35–54. 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research Quintus, S. (2018b). Historicizing food production in Polynesia: A case study of 2,700 years of land use on Ofu Island, American Samoa. Journal of Field Archaeology 43: 222–235. Quintus, S., and Cochrane, E. E. (2018). The prevalence and importance of niche construction in agricul- tural development in Polynesia. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 51: 173–186. Quintus, S., and Lincoln, N. K. (2020). Integrating local and regional in pre-contact Hawaiian agriculture at Kahuku, Hawai‘i Island. Environmental Archaeology 25: 53–68. Quintus, S., Allen, M. S., and Ladefoged, T. N. (2016). In surplus and in scarcity: Agricultural develop- ment, risk management, and political economy, Ofu Island, American Samoa. American Antiquity 81: 273–293. Quintus, S., Huebert, J., Kirch, P. V., Lincoln, N. K., and Maxwell, J. (2019). Qualities and contributions of agroforestry practices and novel forests in pre-European Polynesia and the Polynesian Outliers. Human Ecology 47: 811–825. Ready, E., and Power, E. A. (2018). Why wage earners hunt: Food sharing, social structure, and influence in an Artic mixed economy. Current Anthropology 59: 74–97. Ready, E., and Price, M. H. (2021). Human behavioural ecology and niche construction. Evolutionary Anthropology 30: 71–83. Renard, D., Birk, J. J., Zangerle, A., Lavelle, P., Glaser, B., Blatrix, R., and McKey, D. (2013). Ancient human agricultural practices can promote activities of contemporary non-human soil ecosystem engineers: A case study in coastal savannas of French Guiana. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 62: 46–56. Rezaei Tavabe, K., and Azarnivand, H. (2013). Biodiversity in qanats (the case study of Kerman County, Iran). Desert 18: 99–104. Richter, D. (2007). Humanity’s transformation of earth’s soil: Pedology’s new frontier. Soil Science 172: 957–967. Richards, M. P., West, E., Rolett, B., and Dobney, K. (2009). Isotope analysis of human and animal diets from Hanamiai archaeological sites (French Polynesia). Archaeology in Oceania 44: 29–37. Riley, T. J., and Freimuth, G. (1979). Field systems and frost drainage in the prehistoric agriculture of the Upper Great Lakes. American Antiquity 44: 271–285. Rindos, D. (1980). Symbiosis, instability, and the origins and spread of agriculture: A new model. Cur- rent Anthropology 21: 751–772. Rindos, D. (1984). The Origins of Agriculture: An Evolutionary Perspective, Academic Press, San Diego. Roberts, P., Hunt, C., Arroyo-Kalin, M., Evans, D., and Boivin, N. (2017). The deep human prehistory of global tropical forests and its relevance for modern conservation. Nature Plants 3: 17093. Robinson, M., Jaimes-Betancourt, C., Elliot, S., Maezumi, S. Y., Hilbert, L., Alves, D., de Souza, J. G., and Iriarte, J. (2020). Anthropogenic soil and settlement organisation in the Bolivian Amazon. Geoarchaeology 36: 388–403. Roos, C. I., Field, J. S., and Dudgeon, J. V. (2016). Anthropogenic burning, agricultural intensification, and landscape transformation in post-Lapita Fiji. Journal of Ethnobiology 36: 535–553. Roosevelt, A. C. (2013). The Amazon and the Anthropocene: 13,000 years of human influence in a tropi- cal rainforest. Anthropocene 4: 69–87. Rosen, A. M. (2008). The impact of environmental change and human land use on alluvial valleys in the Loess Plateau of China during the Middle Holocene. Geomorphology 101: 298–307. Rosen, A. M., Lee, J., Li, M., Wright, J., Wright, H. T., and Fang, H. (2015). The Anthropocene and the landscape of Confucius: A historical ecology of landscape changes in northern and eastern China during the middle to late-Holocene. The Holocene 25: 1640–1650. Ross, N. J. (2011). Modern tree species composition reflects ancient Maya “forest gardens” in northwest Belize. Ecological Applications 21: 75–84. Rostain, S. (2013). Islands in the Rainforest: Landscape Management in Pre-Columbian Amazonia, Left Coast Press, Walnut Creek, CA. Rowley-Conwy, P., and Layton, R. (2011). Foraging and farming as niche construction: Stable and unsta- ble adaptation. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 366: 849–862. Ruddiman, W., Vavrus, S., Kutzbach, J., and He, F. (2014). Does pre-industrial warming double the anthropogenic total? The Anthropocene Review 1: 147–153. Sandor, J. A. (2006). Ancient agricultural terraces and soils. In Warkentin, B. P. (ed.), Footprints in the Soil: People and Ideas in Soil History, Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp. 505–534. Sandor, J. A., and Homburg, J. A. (2017). Anthropogenic soil change in ancient and traditional agricul- tural fields in arid to semiarid regions of the Americas. Journal of Ethnobiology 37: 196–217. 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research Scarborough, V. (2003). The Flow of Power: Ancient Water Systems and Landscapes, School of Ameri- can Research, Press, Santa Fe, NM. Scarborough, V. (2008). Rate and process of societal change in semitropical settings: The ancient Maya and the living Balinese. Quaternary International 184: 24–40. Scarborough, V., and Burnside, W. (2010). Complexity and sustainability: Perspectives from the ancient Maya and modern Balinese. American Antiquity 75: 327–363. Schmidt, M. J., Rapp Py-Daniel, A., Moraes, C. d. P., Valle, R. B. M., Caromano, C. F., Texeira, W. G., et  al. (2014). Dark earths and the human built landscape in Amazonia: A widespread pattern of anthrosol formation. Journal of Archaeological Science 42: 152–165. Schlanger, S. (1992). Recognizing persistent places in Anasazi settlement systems. In Rossignol, J., and Wandsnider, L. (eds.), Space, Time and Archaeological Landscapes, Plenum Press, New York, pp. 91–112. Scott-Phillips, T. C., Laland, K. N., Shuker, D. M., Dickins, T. E., and West, S. A. (2014). The niche construction perspective: A critical appraisal. Evolution 68: 1231–1243. Shennan, S. (2011). Property and wealth inequality as cultural niche construction. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 366: 918–926. Shennan, S. (2018). The First Farmers of Europe: An Evolutionary Perspective, Cambridge Univer- sity Press, Cambridge. Shennan, S., Downey, S. S., Timpson, A., Edinborough, K., Colledge, S., Kerig, T., Manning, K., and Thomas, M. G. (2013). Regional population collapse followed initial agriculture booms in mid- Holocene Europe. Nature Communications 4: 2486. Shepherd, L. D., de Lange, P. J., Cox, S., McLenachan, P. A., Roskruge, N. R., and Lockhart, P. J. (2016). Evidence of a strong domestication bottleneck in the recently cultivated New Zealand endemic root crop, Arthropodium cirratum (Asparagaceae). PLoS ONE 11: e0152455. Siderius, W., and de Bakker, H. (2003). Toponymy and soil nomenclature in the Netherlands. Geo- derma 111: 521–536. Simons, A. M. (2011). Modes of response to environmental change and the elusive empirical evidence for bet hedging. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 278: 1601–1609. Skarbø, K., and VanderMolen, K. (2016). Maize migration: Key crop expands to higher altitudes under climate change in the Andes. Climate and Development 8: 245–255. Smith, B. D. (2001). Low-level food production. Journal of Archaeological Research 9: 1–43. Smith, B. D. (2007). Niche construction and the behavioral context of plant and animal domestication. Evolutionary Anthropology 16: 188–199. Smith, B. D. (2011). General patterns of niche construction and the management of ‘wild’ plant and animal resources by small-scale pre-industrial societies. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 366: 836–848. Smith, B. D. (2015). A comparison of niche construction theory and diet breadth models as explana- tory frameworks for the initial domestication of plants and animals. Journal of Archaeological Research 23: 215–262. Smith, B. D. (2016). Neo-Darwinism, niche construction theory, and the initial domestication of plants and animals. Evolutionary Ecology 30: 307–324. Smith, B. D. (2017). Tracing the initial diffusion of maize in North America. In Boivin, N., Crassard, R., and Petraglia, M. (eds.), Human Dispersal and Species Movement: From Prehistory to the Present, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 332–348. Smith, M. E. (2021). Why archaeology’s relevance to global challenges has not been recognized. Antiquity 95: 1061–1069. Solomon, D., Lehmann, J., Fraser, J. A., Leach, M., Amanor, K., Frausin, V., et  al. (2016). Indig- enous African soil enrichment as a climate-smart sustainable agriculture alternative. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 14: 71–76. Spengler, R. N. (2021). Niche construction theory in archaeology: A critical review. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 28: 925–955. Spengler, R. N., Petraglia, M., Roberts, P., Ashastina, K., Kistler, L., Mueller, N. G., and Boivin, N. (2021). Exaptation traits for megafaunal mutualisms as a factor in plant domestication. Fron- tiers in Plant Science 12: 649394. Spriggs, M. (1981). Vegetable Kingdoms: Taro Irrigation and Pacific Prehistory, Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, Australia National University, Canberra. 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research Spriggs, M. (1997). Landscape catastrophe and landscape enhancement: Are either or both true in the Pacific? In Kirch, P. V., and Hunt, T. L. (eds.), Historical Ecology in the Pacific Islands, Yale University Press, New Haven, pp. 80–104. Steadman, D. W. (1986). Holocene Vertebrate Fossils from Isla Floreana, Galapagos, Contributions to Zoology No. 413, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC. Steadman, D. W. (2006). Extinction and Biogeography of Tropical Birds, University of Chicago Press, Chicago. Stiner, M. C., and Kuhn, S. L. (2016). Are we missing the “sweet spot” between optimality theory and niche construction theory in archaeology? Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 44 (Part B): 177–184. Stone, G. D. (1996). Settlement Ecology: The Social and Spatial Organization of Kofyar Agriculture, University of Arizona Press, Tucson. Storozum, M. J., Zhen, Q., Xiaolin, R., Haiming, L., Yifu, C., Kui, F., and Haiwang, L. (2018). The col- lapse of the North Song dynasty and the AD 1048–1128 Yellow River floods: Geoarchaeological evidence from the northern Henan Province, China. The Holocene 28: 1759–1770. Sugiyama, N., Martinez-Polanco, M. F., France, C. A. M, and Cooke, R. G. (2020). Domesticated land- scapes of the Neotropics: Isotope signatures of human-animal relationships in pre-Columbian Pan- ama. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 59: 101195. Swift, J. A., Miller, M. J., and Kirch, P. V. (2016). Stable isotope analysis of Pacific rat (Rattus exu- lans) from archaeological sites in Mangareva (French Polynesia): The use of commensal species for understanding human activity and ecosystem change. Environmental Archaeology 22: 283–297. Szabo, J. K., Kkwaji, N., Garnett, S. T., and Butchart, S. H. M. (2012). Global patterns and drivers of avian extinctions at the species and subspecies level. PLoS ONE 7: e47080. Terrell, J. E., Hart, J. P., Barut, S., Cellinese, N., Curet, A., Denham, T., et  al. (2003). Domesticated landscapes: The subsistence ecology of plant and animal domestication. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 10: 323–368. Thompson, A. E., and Prufer, K. M. (2021). Household inequality, community formation, and land ten- ure in Classic period lowland Maya society. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 28: 1276–1313. Thurston, T. L., and Fisher, C. T. (eds.) (2007). Seeking a Richer Harvest: An Introduction to the Archae- ology of Subsistence Intensification, Innovation, and Change, Springer, New York. Treacy, J. M., and Denevan, D. M. (1994). The creation of cultivatable land through terracing. In Miller, N. F., and Gleason, K. L. (eds.), The Archaeology of Garden and Field, University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia, pp. 91–110. Turcotte, M. M., Araki, H., Karp, D. S., Poveda, K., and Whitehead, S. R. (2017). The ecoevolutionary impacts of domestication and agricultural practices on wild species. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 372: 20160033. Turner, N. J., and Peacock, S. (2005). Solving the perennial paradox: Ethnobotanical evidence for plant resource management on the Northwest Coast. In Deur, D., and Turner, N. J. (eds.), “Keeping It Living”: Traditions of Plant Use and Cultivation on the Northwest Coast of North America, Uni- versity of Washington Press, Seattle, pp. 101–150. Turner, N. J., Luczaj, L. J., Migliorini, P., Pieroni, A., Dreon, A. L., Sacchetti, L. E., and Paoletti, M. G. (2011). Edible and tended wild plants, traditional ecological knowledge and agroecology. Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences 30: 198–225. Turner, S., Kinnaird, T., Koparal, E., Lekakis, S., and Sevara, C. (2020). Landscape archaeology, sustain- ability and the necessity of change. World Archaeology 52: 589–606. Ullah, I. I. T., Chang, C., and Tourtellotte, P. (2019). Water, dust, and agropastoralism: Modeling socio- ecological co-evolution of landscapes, farming, and human society in southeast Kazakhstan during the mid to late Holocene. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 55: 101067. van der Leeuw, S. E. (2012). For every solution there are many problems: The role and study of technical systems in socio-environmental coevolution. Geografisk Tidsskrift - Danish Journal of Geography 112: 105–116. Varisco, D. M. (1991). The future of terrace farming in Yemen: A development dilemma. Agriculture and Human Values 8: 166–172. Vining, B. R. (2018). Cultural niche construction and remote sensing of ancient anthropogenic envi- ronmental change in the north coast of Peru. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 25: 559–586. 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research Vitousek, P. M. (2002). Oceanic islands as model systems for ecological studies. Journal of Biogeogra- phy 29: 573–582. Vitousek, P. M., Chadwick, O. A., Hotchkiss, S. C., Ladefoged, T. N., and Stevenson, C. M. (2014). Farming the rock: A biogeochemical perspective on intensive agriculture in Polynesia. Journal of Pacific Archaeology 5: 51–61. Waddington, C. H. (1959). Evolutionary systems—animal and human. Nature 183: 1634–1638. Walker, J. H. (2011). Amazonian dark earth and ring ditches in the central Llanos de Mojos, Bolivia. Cul- ture, Agriculture, Food and Environment 33: 2–14. Walker, J. H. (2018). Island, River, and Field: Landscape Archaeology in the Llanos de Mojos, University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque. Walstra, J., Heyvaert, V. M. A., and Verkinderen, P. (2010). Assessing human impact on alluvial fan development: A multidisciplinary case-study from Lower Khuzestan (SW Iran). Geodinamica Acta 23: 267–285. Weisler, M. I. (1999). The antiquity of aroid pit agriculture and significance of buried A horizons on Pacific atolls. Geoarchaeology 14: 621–654. Weitzel, E. M., and Codding, B. F. (2022). The ideal free distribution model and archaeological settle- ment patterning. Environmental Archaeology 27: 349–356. Wilkinson, T. J. (2003). Archaeological Landscapes of the Near East, University of Arizona Press, Tucson. Wilkinson, T. J., Rayne, L., and Jotheri, J. (2015). Hydraulic landscapes in Mesopotamia: The role of human niche construction. Water History 7: 397–418. WinklerPrins, A. M. G. A., and Levis, C. (2021). Reframing pre-European Amazonia through an Anthropocene lens. Annals of the American Association of Geographers 111: 858–868. Wood, S. L. R., Rhemtulla, J. M., and Coomes, O. T. (2016). Cropping history trumps fallow duration in long-term soil and vegetation dynamics of shifting cultivation. Ecological Applications 27: 519–531. Wozniak, J. A. (2001). Landscapes of food production on Easter Island: Successful subsistence strate- gies. In Stevenson, C. M., Lee, G., and Morin, F. J. (eds.), Pacific 2000: Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Easter Island and the Pacific, Easter Island Foundation, Los Osos, pp. 91–102. Xu, C., Kohler, T. A., Lenton, T. M., Svenning, J.-C., and Scheffer, M. (2020). Future of the human climate niche. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science 117: 11350–11355. Yen, D. E. (1973). The origins of Oceanic agriculture. Archaeology and Physical Anthropology in Oceania 8: 68–85. Yen, D. E. (1974). The Sweet Potato and Oceania: An Essay in Ethnobotany, B. P. Bishop Museum Press, Honolulu. Young, H. S., Miller-ter Kuile, A., McCauley, D. J., and Dirzo, R. (2017). Cascading community and ecosystem consequences of introduced coconut palms (Cocos nucifera) in tropical islands. Canadian Journal of Zoology 95: 139–148. Zeanah, D. W. (2017). Foraging models, niche construction, and the eastern agricultural complex. American Antiquity 82: 3–24. Zeder, M. A. (2016). Domestication as a model system for niche construction theory. Evolutionary Ecology 30: 325–348. Zeder, M. A. (2017). Domestication as a model system for the extended evolutionary synthesis. Inter- face Focus 7: 20160133. Zhuang, Y., and Kidder, T. R. (2014). Archaeology and the Anthropocene in the Yellow River region, China, 8000–2000 cal. BP. The Holocene 24: 1602–1623. Zhuang, Y. J., Bao, W. B., and French, C. (2013). River floodplain aggradation history and cultural activities: Geoarchaeological investigations at the Yuezhuang site, Lower Yellow River. China. Quaternary International 315: 101–115. Ziter, C., Graves, R. A., and Turner, M. G. (2017). How do land-use legacies affect ecosystem ser - vices in United States cultural landscapes. Landscape Ecology 32: 2205–2218. 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research Bibliography of Recent Literature Albuquerque, U. P., Gonçalves, P. H. S., Ferreira Júnior, W. S., Chaves, L. S., Oliveira, R. C. S., Silva, T. L. L., Santos, G. C., and Araújo, E. L. (2018). Humans as niche constructors: Revisiting the concept of chronic anthropogenic disturbances in ecology. Perspectives in Ecology and Conser- vation 16: 1–11. Bishop, R. R., Church, M. J., and Rowley-Conwy, P. A. (2015). Firewood, food and human niche construction: The potential role of Mesolithic hunter-gatherers in actively structuring Scotland’s woodlands. Quaternary Science Reviews 108: 51–75. Braun, D. R., Faith, J. T., Douglass, M. J., Davies, B., Power, M. J., Aldeias, V., et al. (2021). Ecosys- tem engineering in the Quaternary of the west coast of South Africa. Evolutionary Anthropology 30: 50–62. Chase, D. Z., and Chase, A. F. (2014). Path dependency in the rise and denouement of a Classic Maya city: The case of Caracol, Belize. Archeological Papers of the American Anthropological Asso- ciation 24: 142–154. Chechushkov, I. V., Valiakhmetov, I. A., and Fitzhugh, W. W. (2021). From adaptation to niche con- struction: Weather as a winter site selection factor in northern Mongolia, the Quebec Lower North Shore, and the southern Urals. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 61: 101258. Clark, A. D., Deffner, D., Laland, K., Odling-Smee, J., and Endler, J. (2020). Niche construction affects the variability and strength of natural selection. The American Naturalist 195: 16–30. Collard, M., Buchanan, B., Ruttle, A., and O’Brien, M. J. (2011). Niche construction and the toolkits of hunter-gatherers and food producers. Biological Theory 6: 251–259. Cook-Patton, S. C., Weller, D., Rick, T. C., and Parker, J. D. (2014). Ancient experiments: Forest biodiversity and soil nutrients enhanced by Native American middens. Landscape Ecology 29: 979–987. Cuddington, K. (2011). Legacy effects: The persistent impact of ecological interactions. Biological Theory 6: 203–210. Crumley, C. L. (2021). Historical ecology: A robust bridge between archaeology and ecology. Sus- tainability 13: 8210. Douglass, K., and Rasolondrainy, T. (2021) Social memory and niche construction in a hypervariable environment. American Journal of Human Biology 33: e23557. Eriksson, O. (2014). Human niche construction and the rural environment. Rural Landscapes: Soci- ety, Environment, History 1: 1–4. Gillreath-Brown, A., and Bocinsky, R. K. (2017). A dialogue between empirical and model-based agricultural studies in archaeology. Journal of Ethnobiology 37: 167–171. Glaser, B., and Birk, J. J. (2012). State of the scientific knowledge on properties and genesis of anthropogenic dark earths in central Amazonia (terra preta de indio). Geochim Cosmochim Ac 82: 39–51. Glazko,V .I., Zybaylov, B. L., Kosovsky, Y. G., Glazko, G. V., and Glazko, T. T. (2021). Domestication and microbiome. The Holocene 31: 1635–1645. Iovita, R., Braun, D. R., Douglass, M. J., Holdaway, S. J., Lin, S. C., Olszewski, D. I., and Rezek, Z. (2021). Operationalizing niche construction theory with stone tools. Evolutionary Anthropology 30: 28–39. Isbell, F., and Loreau, M. (2014). Sustainability of human ecological niche construction. Ecology and Society 19: 45. Kealhofer, L., and Marsh, B. (2019). Agricultural impact and political economy: Niche construction in the Gordion region, central Anatolia. Quaternary International 529: 91–99. Kemp, M. E., Mychajliw, A. M., Wadman, J., and Goldberg, A. (2020). 7000 years of turnover: Historical contingency and human niche construction shape the Caribbean’s Anthropocene biota. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 287: 20200447. Kistler, L., Newsom, L. A., Ryan, T. M., Clarke, A. C., Smith, B. D., and Perry, G. H. (2015). Gourds and squashes (Cucurbita spp.) adapted to megafaunal extinction and ecological anachronism through domestication. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science 112: 15107–15112. Laland, K. N., Uller, T., Feldman, M. W., Sterelny, K., Müller, G. B., Moczek, A., Jablonka, E., and Odling-Smee, J. (2015). The extended evolutionary synthesis: Its structure, assumptions and predic- tions. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 282: 20151019. 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research Lansing, J. S., and Fox, K. M. (2011). Niche construction on Bali: The gods of the countryside. Philo- sophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 366: 927–934. Littleton, J., McFarlane, G., and Allen, M. S. (2020). Human-animal entanglements and environmen- tal change: Multi-species approaches in Remote Oceania. In Schug, G. R. (ed.), The Routledge Handbook of the Bioarchaeology of Climate and Environmental Change, Routledge, London, pp. 493–510. Liu, X., Lister, D. L., Zhao, Z., Petrie, C. A., Zeng, X., Jones, P. J., et  al. (2017). Journeys to the east: Diverse routes and variable flowering times for wheat and barley en route to prehistoric China. PLoS ONE 13: e0209518. Lullfitz, A., Dortch, J., Hopper, S. D., Pettersen, C., Reynolds, R., and Guilfoyle, D. (2017). Human niche construction: Noongar evidence in pre-colonial southwestern Australia. Conservation and Society 15: 201–216. Marston, J. M. (2017). Consequences of agriculture in Mesopotamia, Anatolia, and the Levant. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Environmental Science https:// doi. org/ 10. 1093/ acref ore/ 97801 99389 414. 013. 167 McClure, S. B. (2015). The pastoral effect: Niche construction, domestic animals, and the spread of farm- ing in Europe. Current Anthropology 56: 901–910. Palace, M. W., McMichael, C. N. H., Braswell, B. H., Hagen, S. C., Bush, M. B., Neves, E., et al. (2017). Ancient Amazonian populations left lasting impacts on forest structure. Ecosphere 8: e02035. Piperno, D. R., Ranere, A. J., Dickau, R., and Aceituno, F. (2017) Niche construction and optimal for- aging theory in Neotropical agricultural origins: A re-evaluation in consideration of the empirical evidence. Journal of Archaeological Science 78: 214–220. Sheppard, P. J. (2019). Four hundred years of niche construction in the western Solomon Islands. In Leclerc, M., and Flexner, J. (eds.), Archaeologies of Island Melanesia: Current Approaches to Landscapes, Exchange and Practice, Terra Australis 51, ANU Press, Canberra, pp. 117–133. Smejda, L., Hejcman, M., Horak, J., and Shai, I. (2017). Ancient settlement activities as important sources of nutrients (P, K, S, Zn, and Cu) in eastern Mediterranean ecosystems—The case of bibli- cal Tel Burna, Israel. Catena 156: 62–73. Smejda, L., Hejcman, M., Horak, J., and Shai, I. (2018). Multi-element mapping of anthropogenically modified soils and sediments at the Bronze to Iron Ages site of Tel Burna in the southern Levant. Quaternary International 483: 111–123. Smith, N. F., Lepofsky, D., Toniello, G., Holmes, K., Wilson, L., Neudorf, C. M., and Roberts, C. (2019). 3500 years of shellfish mariculture on the northwest coast of North America. PLoS ONE 14: e0211194. Spengler, R. N. (2020). Anthropogenic seed dispersal: Rethinking the origins of plant domestication. Trends in Plant Science 25: 340–348. Stevenson, C. M., Naranjo-Cigala, A., Ladefoged, T. N., and Díaz, F. J. (2021). Colonial rainfed farm- ing strategies in an extremely arid insular environment: Niche construction on Lanzarote, Canary Islands, Spain. The Journal of Island and Coastal Archaeology, DOI: https:// doi. org/ 10. 1080/ 15564 894. 2021. 19248 98. Swarts, K., Gutaker, R. M., Benz, B., Blake, M., Bukowski, R., Holland, J., et al. (2017). Genomic esti- mation of complex traits reveals ancient maize adaptation to temperate North America. Science 357: 512–515. Swift, J. A., Roberts, P., Boivin, N., and Kirch, P. V. (2018). Restructuring of nutrient flows in island eco- systems following human colonization evidenced by isotopic analysis of commensal rats. Proceed- ings of the National Academy of Science 115: 6392–6397. Swift, J. A., Kirch, P. V., Ilgner, J., Brown, S., Lucas, M., Marzo, S., and Roberts, P. (2021). Stable isotopic evidence for nutrient rejuvenation and long-term resilience on Tikopia Island (Southeast Solomon Islands). Sustainability 13: 8567. Thompson, J. C., Wright, D. K., and Ivory, S. J. (2021). The emergence and intensification of early hunter-gatherer niche construction. Evolutionary Anthropology 30: 17–27. Uller, T., and Helanterä, H. (2019). Niche construction and conceptual change in evolutionary biology. British Journal of the Philosophy of Science 70: 351–375. Watling, J., Mayle, F. E., and Schaan, D. (2018). Historical ecology, human niche construction and land- scape in pre-Columbian Amazonia: A case study of the geoglyph builders of Acre, Brazil. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 50: 128–139. Yu, P.-L. (2020). Modeling incipient use of Neolithic cultigens by Taiwanese foragers: Perspectives from niche variation theory, prey choice model, and the ideal free distribution. Quaternary 36: 26. 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. 1 3 http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Journal of Archaeological Research Springer Journals

Niche Construction and Long-Term Trajectories of Food Production

Journal of Archaeological Research , Volume OnlineFirst – May 23, 2023

Loading next page...
 
/lp/springer-journals/niche-construction-and-long-term-trajectories-of-food-production-Mxtm0HxarJ

References (347)

Publisher
Springer Journals
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s) 2023
ISSN
1059-0161
eISSN
1573-7756
DOI
10.1007/s10814-023-09187-x
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Niche construction theory has played a prominent role in archaeology during the last decade. However, the potential of niche construction in relation to agricultural development has received less attention. To this end, we bring together literature on the forms and sources of agronomic variability and use a series of examples to highlight the importance of reciprocal causation and ecological inheritance in tra- jectories of agricultural change. We demonstrate how niche construction theory can inform on emergent mutualisms in both inceptive and established agronomic contexts, the recursive relationships between humans and their agronomic environ- ments, and bridges between the past and present. Keywords Niche construction theory · Emergent mutualisms · Archaeology of food production · Ecological inheritance · Coevolution Introduction Niche construction theory (NCT) brings attention to the ways that organisms co- create their own selective environments (Odling-Smee 1988; Odling-Smee et al. 2003), purposefully or inadvertently, and in so doing initiate or direct evolution- ary change (Odling-Smee et al. 1996). These are not new concepts in biology or archaeology (see Lewontin 1983; Spengler 2021; Waddington 1959), but NCT formalizes these ideas and has brought them to the forefront of these and other * Seth Quintus squintus@hawaii.edu Melinda S. Allen ms.allen@auckland.ac.nz Department of Anthropology, University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa, 2424 Maile Way, Saunders 346, Honolulu, HI 96822, USA Anthropology, School of Social Sciences, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand Te Pūnaha Matatini, Centre of Research Excellence for Complex Systems, Auckland, New Zealand Vol.:(0123456789) 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research disciplines (Laland and O’Brien 2010; Matthews et  al. 2014). The significant influence of NCT in archaeological discourse is illustrated by the voluminous lit- erature on the subject, especially over the last five years. Niche construction has encouraged many archaeologists to think differently about how they approach the analysis and interpretation of causation, emergent social phenomena, and the cascading effects of reciprocal human–environmental interactions. Niche con- struction theory both overlaps with but also is distinct from other recent theoret- ical developments in archaeology that privilege agency and emergent outcomes (e.g., Hodder 2012; Fitzhugh et al. 2019; Fuller et al. 2012, 2016), as the long- term entanglements of societies, organisms, and landscapes are recognized by NCT. We argue that what NCT does differently, or more effectively, is situate anthropology within the broader biosciences: it highlights the place of humans in and as part of natural systems; demonstrates the scale, scope, and importance of ecological inheritance; and transcends time, illuminating complex causal relations between past and present states. The evolutionary success of humankind stems in large part from our abil- ity to intentionally modify the world around us in strategic ways (Ellis 2015; Odling-Smee et al. 2003; Smith 2007). Among the most consequential activities are those related to food production. Plant and animal mutualisms, agricultural practices, and especially the development of intensive, large-scale agricultural systems, have dramatically altered the planet through cumulative, persistent, and often irreversible changes. It is NCT’s attention to these processes, includ- ing ecological, social, and historical contexts, that makes it a particularly useful framework from which to evaluate long-term trajectories of agricultural change. The analysis of agricultural practices as emergent, continuously unfolding, but historically situated phenomena, as NCT holds, has particular promise for new insights into the complex causal networks of past ecological relations and land use, and may contribute to addressing future challenges. Furthermore, it facili- tates investigation of the full continuum of food production practices, from early, small-scale, nonintensive behaviors to larger, more complex agricultural sys- tems deeply entangled with sociopolitical institutions. In so doing, it improves understanding of the cumulative outcomes of such processes over centuries and millennia. In this review, we bring together a growing body of literature relating to niche construction. Our aim is to consider what has been learned from NCT-driven analyses of agricultural change thus far and to identify useful directions for future study. A major theme is the importance of emergent symbioses, as mani- fested through ecological inheritance and evolutionary feedback mechanisms, and their potential to enhance or inhibit future outcomes—pivotal in the con- text of agronomic processes. We begin by situating agricultural change within NCT and introducing key concepts. We then explore the ways that humans can alter their selective environments through agricultural practices and illustrate these ideas and evolutionary scale outcomes through examples from Amazonia, island Polynesia, Mesopotamia, and northern China. We end with a discussion of issues, theoretical and substantive, that warrant further exploration. 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research Niche Construction Theory and Agriculture For social scientists, NCT is both distinctive and advantageous in drawing seri- ous attention to the role that organism agency plays in evolutionary trajectories. This agency not only produces behavioral variation that may be shaped by natu- ral selection (external environmental forces) but also, in and of itself, contributes to an organism’s selective environment and that of other species. In consider- ing NCT, an important distinction lies between (a) niche construction behaviors or activities that modify the environment (Laland et  al. 2007; Ready and Price 2021) and (b) niche construction as a macroevolutionary evolutionary process— the long-term and cascading effects of niche-constructing behaviors (Laland et al. 2019; Post and Palkovacs 2009). The former is a well-recognized phenomenon most strongly allied with the concept of ecosystem engineering (Jones et al. 1994; Odling-Smee et al. 2013; see also Lewontin 1983, 2000). With respect to the lat- ter, NCT theory recognizes that some (but not all) niche construction behaviors drive evolutionary change when the transformed or engineered ecosystem alters the selective environments of conspecifics and other organisms. As argued by Odling-Smee and Laland (2011, p. 222), “[u]nlike ecosystem engineering, niche construction must be evolutionarily as well as ecologically consequential.” A critical element of NCT is ecological inheritance (Mesoudi et  al. 2013; Odling-Smee and Laland 2011), which is the mechanism through which environ- mental consequences and ecological outcomes of prior niche-constructing activi- ties are transmitted by an organism. Ecological inheritances are passed on, con- tinuously, to multiple organisms who occupy those same environments, within and between generations (Odling-Smee and Laland 2011). Such transmission may be vertical (from one generation to another) or horizontal (between “ecologically related organisms” that share a common ecosystem) (Odling-Smee 1988; Odling- Smee and Laland 2011). It can include both inherited ecologies and inherited knowledges relating to environmental manipulation and management. The latter contribute to a given set of practices being reproduced repeatedly through time, which can strengthen ecological linkages and firmly imprint environmental mod- ifications. As the foregoing suggests, environmental transformations and atten- dant ecological impacts are often cumulative, building up over time (Ellis 2015; Odling-Smee and Laland 2011). Ecological inheritances may override natural selection processes and direct populations down alternative evolutionary trajecto- ries (Odling-Smee and Laland 2011, p. 234). Importantly for archaeological stud- ies, ecological inheritances can persist for millennia, altering the evolution of an array of organisms that successively inhabit those spaces, and affecting the struc- ture and function of ecosystems over considerable periods of time (Foster et  al. 2003; Ziter et al. 2017). By privileging the active role of organisms and highlighting another form of evolutionary inheritance, NCT challenges conventional definitions of adapta- tion (Day et al. 2003; Lewontin 2000) and evolutionary causation (Laland 2015; Laland et al. 2011, 2013). Traditionally, adaptation sees the fit between an organ- ism and its environment as the result of only natural selection. Proponents of NCT 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research argue that adaptations can also be the result of recursive relationships between the organism and organism-driven modifications of the environment (Laland et al. 2017); in other words, the recursive relationships themselves become evolu- tionary forces alongside natural selection (Odling-Smee et al. 2013, table 2). The coupling of organism and environment can lead to directed evolution, and thus a fit partially determined by the organism itself (Lewontin 2000). Understanding the causes of evolutionary change necessitates investigation of the evolution of selection pressures and focuses attention on feedback relationships (Laland and Sterelny 2006). While organisms modify their environments in response to cur- rent selective conditions, they are constrained by both prior modifications (cre- ated by previous generations) and by behavior transmission processes. Niche construction theory has appealed to social scientists because of its abil- ity to integrate diverse disciplinary questions relating to the intersection of natu- ral selection, human agency, and human/nonhuman entanglements (Fuentes 2016; Laland and O’Brien 2010). This is especially useful in the study of subsistence economies where humans intentionally modify their environments—generally with positive outcomes, at least in the short term (Smith 2015; Zeder 2016). Beginning with foraging, humans instigated processes that fundamentally changed the selec- tive environments of other organisms and themselves and increased the availability of resources. For example, the use of fire creates environmental mosaics and can concentrate preferred resources (Bliege Bird et al. 2013; Erickson 2008; Pyne 2019). Other small-scale environmental modifications can also accumulate over time. Examples include the tending and protection of favored plants leading to intensified mutualisms (Lepofsky and Lertzman 2008; Turner and Peacock 2005), or the incre- mental enhancement of “persistent places” (after Schlanger 1992) through active translocations and/or incidental dispersal of preferred plants and animals (Denham 2011; Hofman and Rick 2018; Hynes and Chase 1982). These and other practices are part of the complex history of human–biota interac- tions, cultural management, and coevolutionary relationships that ultimately led to domestication and agricultural systems (Smith 2015, 2016; Zeder 2016, 2017). A definition of agriculture that has currency within the NCT literature was originally offered by Rindos (1980, p. 752), who defined it as “a set of integrated activities which affects the environment inhabited by the domesticated plant throughout its life cycle.” Agriculture is often further characterized by landscape-scale produc- tion (Harris and Fuller 2014) and distinctive cultivation practices (tilling, tending, etc.) (Smith 2001). It is these varied practices across landscapes that foster symbi- oses with other organisms and, over time, forge agricultural trajectories. The latter are embedded in local landscape histories, involve interrelationships with different forms of production, and are shaped by long-term socioecological feedbacks, which are simultaneously both the consequences and causes of agricultural change (Mor- rison 2006). The products of ecological inheritance—modified landscapes and ecosystemic rela- tionships—are the context for the practice of agriculture at any given time (O’Brien and Laland 2012; see also Morrison 2015). While niche construction activities relating to agriculture are often learned, the inheritance of modified environments is a form of transmission that occurs independently of genetic inheritance but can, over time, induce 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research genetic responses (Laland and O’Brien 2012; Odling-Smee et al. 2003). As such, and perhaps most importantly, the inheritance of modified environments and the associated ecosystemic relationships is a process that is constituted by the activities of multiple organisms that inhabit the same location. Not only are humans and domesticates able to exert influences on the long-term evolution of agricultural systems, but other non- domesticated species (e.g., birds, bats, and rodents) also may shape the anthropogenic niche through seed dispersal, pest predation, nutrient contributions, etc. More gener- ally, biotic and abiotic modifications arising from agricultural activities may result in new kinds of environments, leading to multidimensional ecosystemic relationships that persist and become selective forces. Archaeologists around the world have documented an enormous variety of environ- mental and ecological phenomena that are the outcomes of past agricultural behaviors (e.g., Altman and Mesoudi 2019; Boivin et al. 2016; Ruddiman et al. 2014). The lega- cies of past land use and ecological relationships include but are not limited to inten- tionally constructed geomorphic features, modified soils, constructed vegetation forma- tions, and genetic changes to plants (e.g., Arroyo-Kalin 2019; Morrison 2014). Fixed landesque capital investments are a particularly enduring form of cultural modifications (Blaikie and Brookfield 1987; Håkansson and Widgren 2014). Such capital investments were often made across many generations, creating highly engineered landscapes from the bottom up (Erickson 1993; Lansing 1991). Other long-term effects of agricultural land use are often more subtle and unintentional, such as erosion or soil creep, which may both constrain or augment agricultural productivity over long time periods (e.g., Kirch 1988, 1994; Spriggs 1981). The accumulation of modified environmental char - acteristics, whether intentional or otherwise, results in agricultural practices having substantial downstream effects through time, on subsequent generations of agricultural practitioners, on other cultural activities, and on other organisms. Even subtle changes to the environment have the potential to scale up and become influential through time as they accumulate and become intertwined with other niche construction behaviors or natural processes (see Doolittle 1984; Ullah et  al. 2019). Thus, agricultural practices offer enormous opportunities for ecological inheritance, more so than almost any other kind of human activity. While other perspectives usefully organize and explain shorter sequences and more specific phenomenon (e.g., emergent political economies), NCT integrates and builds on these ideas by exploring multidimensional systems across centuries and millennia. It recognizes that the selective environments of agricultural behaviors are complex, including the place of agricultural strategies within systems of production, the influences of accretionary landscapes, and the cultural contexts under which production is practiced. These all are subject to variability and are inheritable—key ingredients of evolutionary change. Forms and Sources of Organism‑Driven Change Niche construction theory partitions behaviors into two broad forms: perturbations and relocations (Odling-Smee et al. 2003, p. 47). Perturbational niche construction is organism-driven modification of the environment; in the context of agricultural 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research activities, this might include vegetation (re)structuring, earth moving, or water manipulation. Relocational niche construction involves organisms “actively” mov- ing in space, dispersing or migrating, as for example, in response to climatic change or adaptive range expansion (Odling-Smee and Laland 2011, p. 222); in so doing, they typically encounter new selective environments. A second dimension of niche construction behaviors relates to the source or driver of change, external versus internal. Counteractive niche construction occurs when an organism responds to changing external environmental conditions (e.g., forest fires, arrival of new predators, climate change). These kinds of niche construction behaviors tend to be conservative or stabilizing, typically arising when organisms attempt to restore a match between previously evolved features and altered envi- ronmental conditions, either by relocating or through niche construction behaviors aimed at alleviating the newly generated selective conditions (Odling-Smee et  al. 2003). In contrast, inceptive niche construction involves organism-initiated change that exposes themselves, or ecologically related organisms, to novel selective condi- tions. Inceptive niche construction may take the form of either relocation or pertur- bation, the latter potentially involving novel behaviors (e.g., innovations) (Laland et al. 2017). The intersection of these two dimensions of niche construction, the form and source of change, give rise to varied selection conditions and shape long-term ecological inheritances. Below, we examine forms of perturbation and relocation in relation to agricultural practices and consider how they may arise from counterac- tive or inceptive niche construction. In the case of humans, such niche-constructing behaviors often involve conscious choices and may be facilitated or constrained by a variety of environmental, economic, social, and political conditions; we focus here on the first, while alluding to and acknowledging the importance of other conditions. Critically, to qualify as a macroevolutionary process, regardless of form or source, the environmental and/or ecological change must give rise to at least one new selec- tion condition, for at least one recipient population in an ecosystem, and have one or more evolutionary consequences (Odling-Smee and Laland 2011). Perturbation Agricultural behaviors can involve a host of environmental modifications aimed at supporting the growth, reproduction, harvesting, and storage of plants on which peo- ple rely for sustenance (O’Brien and Bentley 2015; Rindos 1984). Initially inceptive, perturbations create new selective environments for humans, the organisms they cul- tivate, and others that share a given agricultural niche. Counteractive perturbations may follow in response to the changing selective conditions. Human populations, through habitation and the generation and transmission of ecological knowledge, come to recognize local environmental possibilities and limitations, including spe- cific kinds of microhabitats that are suitable for a variety of cultigens. Purposeful perturbations frequently regulate conditions that might inhibit or slow the growth of target species, affect their productivity, or shape desired end products (see Rindos 1984; Smith 2011). Other noncultivated organisms may benefit from these environ- mental modifications or their legacies (Bogaard et  al. 2018; Eriksson and Arnell 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research 2017), though novel selective environments are deleterious for some. For humans, niche construction by perturbation is often aimed at making the targeted resource more reliable and/or exploitation more efficient. Agricultural infrastructure, in the form of landesque capital, plays an important role in the formation of novel microenvironments and ecosystems. It may be under- taken simply to expand the productive space or to enhance or ameliorate specific environmental conditions. Infrastructure not only creates novel habitats for tar- get plants and other organisms but may also have consequential impacts on local sedimentary processes, nutrient cycling, and microclimates. Agricultural terraces provide a useful example of how infrastructure both creates novel ecosystems and forges ecological inheritances, which can endure for generations and may tran- scend sociocultural boundaries (Fig.  1). Terracing has been documented across the globe, crosscutting a range of environments, and varying in size, form, construc- tion, and function (Denevan 2001; Treacy and Denevan 1994). Dryland terraces stabilize slopes, while also capturing run-off and sediments, thereby trapping nutri- ents, retaining moisture, and increasing soil volume (Beach et al. 2002; Chase and Weishampel 2016; Sandor 2006; Sandor and Homburg 2017; Varisco 1991). In these respects, terraces counteract factors that constrain plant growth, such as aridity or low soil fertility. Some terrace systems have persisted for generations as unique microenvironments that continue to support distinctive vegetation communities Fig. 1 The Mayoyao Terraces. The terraces are part of the Ifugao agro-ecocultural system, which includes swidden fields, house gardens, private and communal forests (agroforestry), complex irrigation system, and house platforms (Acabado and Martin 2022). Photograph courtesy of Stephen Acabado 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research (Hightower et  al. 2014). Terraced landscapes may also attract subsequent genera- tions of cultivators, even when the original production activities have ceased (see below), as the presence of infrastructure serves to reduce labor demands for subse- quent generations of prospective agriculturalists (Bevan et al. 2013). Other forms of infrastructure may also enhance agricultural productivity. In the Hawaiian Islands, modeling demonstrates how extensive networks of stone walls and earthen embankments, laid out across dryland slopes, would have ameliorated the effects of persistent, drying trade winds by reducing wind flow, which in turn helped retain soil moisture (Ladefoged et  al. 2003). Rock and earthen mounds in these field systems probably reduced and suppressed weeds as well. Experimental plantings in the mounds demonstrate significantly higher returns relative to plant- ings in nonmounded spaces (Marshall et  al. 2017). Other infrastructural features alter local environments even more dramatically, as for example qanats in arid North Africa and the Middle East, where novel ecosystems were created by transporting water from wells and aquifers to large areas of otherwise arid plains (Manuel et al. 2018). Some of these systems produced oasis environments and enhanced biodi- versity (Rezaei Tavabe and Azarnivand 2013). One of the most enduring kinds of agricultural infrastructure are irrigated terrace systems, particularly taro (Colocasia esculenta) pondfields and rice (Oryza sativa) paddies. These artificial wetlands not only provide novel environments for agricultural production but often expand the habitat of wetland species, including birds and fish, which may be resources them- selves, or enhance ecosystem productivity (e.g., Gee 2007; Malachowski and Dug- ger 2018). Raised bed systems can function in a similar manner. Well-known examples come from the Andes, Amazon, and Mesoamerican lowlands, where they were sometimes constructed to reclaim otherwise unproductive lands (Denevan 1970). The periodic deposition of organic-rich canal sediments onto the raised beds enhanced soil fertil- ity, while the canal waters likely acted as a heat sink, regulating temperatures across such systems in the Andean highlands (Erickson 1988, 1992). In the southwestern Amazon, raised beds effectively mitigated both flooding (by channeling water) and periods of drought (by retaining moisture) in conjunction with a diversity of other landscape modifications and management practices (Duncan et  al. 2021). As with irrigated terraces, raised bed systems can increase landscape heterogeneity and sup- port nonfood organisms (McKey et al. 2010). Some organisms that adapted to these constructed environments have come to depend on them and act to regulate ecosys- tem functioning even after their abandonment by people (Renard et al. 2013). Another important agricultural perturbation is the purposeful or incidental modification of soils. A variety of soil additives have been used in traditional food production systems to enhance productivity, particularly stone and shell. Lithic mulches improve moisture capture, reduce evapotranspiration from solar radiation and wind stress, control erosion, and improve soil nutrient content (Ladefoged et al. 2010; Lightfoot and Eddy 1994; Maxwell 1995; Wozniak 2001). In arid environ- ments, lithic mulches can also limit the formation of soil crusts (Lightfoot 1996). Experimental work shows the effectiveness of stone mulching. Alderfer and Merkle (1943), for example, demonstrated that bare plots can lose up to 60% of incoming rainfall to run-off, while rock-mulched plots lose only 3–10%. Shell mulches can 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research also moderate soil temperature (Lightfoot 1996) and in New Zealand allowed for sweet potato cultivation in otherwise marginal areas (Barber 2013). Inputs of green waste, principally manure and vegetation, also alter soil tempera- ture and moisture, but they are best known as ways to enhance soil fertility. High- intensity refuse disposal, whether intentional or otherwise, can result in the forma- tion of anthrosols—human-formed soils with distinctive chemical properties, pH, color, and clast inclusions (Pears 2012; Richter 2007; Siderius and de Bakker 2003). Purposeful mulching and soil conditioning are well documented from the European Neolithic forward (Bogaard et  al. 2013), and some anthrosol formations are even associated with foraging communities (Guttmann 2005; Turner et  al. 2011). The legacy of soil enhancement is especially well demonstrated by Amazonian brown and dark earths (ABE and ADE; also known as terra preta). These productive soils were created by multiple generations of human inhabitants and their past cultivation practices, which included mulching and burning (Arroyo-Kalin 2010, 2019; Heck- enberger and Neves 2009; Robinson et al. 2020). While the history and importance of anthropogenic soils is perhaps best documented for the Amazon, these kinds of fertile, anthropogenic soils have a broad global distribution (e.g., Frausin et al. 2014; Hejcman et al. 2013). Agroforestry practices are another form of “perturbation” often aimed at creat- ing cultivated environments that mimic the structure and ecological relations of “natural” forests. Anthropogenic forests are found in several regions of the globe (e.g., Ford and Nigh 2015; Latinis 2000; WinklerPrins and Levis 2021). The spa- tial scale and temporal persistence of anthropogenic forest modification is a mat- ter of empirical debate (e.g., Piperno et  al. 2015, 2017), but human-induced forest development wholly transformed some tropical environments on centennial to mil- lennial scales (Clement et al. 2020; Ford and Nigh 2015; Heckenberger and Neves 2009; Roberts et  al. 2017). Even after the cessation of active human management, past agroforestry practices often continue to influence the composition and structure of contemporary forests across temperate and tropical environments (Arnell et  al. 2019; Dupouey et al. 2002; Levis et al. 2018; Quintus et al. 2019; Ross 2011). In the Amazon, empirical research demonstrates that anthropogenic forests can increase the provisioning of ecological services and enhance biodiversity relative to non- domesticated bioscapes (Levis et  al. 2020; Lins et  al. 2015; Maezumi et  al. 2018; Odonne et  al. 2019). Thus, over time, these domesticated landscapes (sensu Levis et  al. 2018) become evolutionarily important via their effects on resource distribu- tions, vegetation structure, and energy flows. They can also profoundly affect the subsistence strategies of later groups, in some cases persisting to the present day (e.g., Leitão-Barboza et al. 2021) where they may be important reservoirs of famine foods (Minnis 2021). Some of the “perturbations” described above were undertaken with clear intent on the part of past human cultivators, aimed at providing larger or more predictable yields. However, intent is not a necessary condition of niche construction processes. Indeed, incidental niche construction outcomes, sometimes referred to as “byprod- ucts” (Laland and O’Brien 2012), can be equally consequential (Post and Palkovacs 2009). These unintended outcomes can alter the nature and distribution of resources available to human populations and other organisms over time (Turcotte et al. 2017). 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research As noted above, habitation and refuse disposal can produce anthrosols that mimic the effects of green manure and are utilized by subsequent generations of farmers (Guttmann 2005; Guttmann et  al. 2008; Kirch 1988). Indeed, habitation-derived anthrosols are influencing the loci and productivity of small-scale farming around the world today (Glaser 2007; Hejcman et  al. 2011, 2013; Solomon et  al. 2016). While the foregoing kinds of perturbations are often beneficial, they may increase the vulnerability of any given agricultural system (Rindos 1984, p. 274). Increased reliance on cultivated resources, for example, is often linked with demographic change and/or increasing sociopolitical complexity and may contribute to a series of self-reenforcing feedback loops known as “runaway niche construction” (Ellis 2015, 2016). These kinds of “byproducts” are common features of constructed niches gen- erally (van der Leeuw 2012). The social impacts of niche construction activities should also not be overlooked. The construction of infrastructure across a landscape often modifies the social relations of production, which in turn gives rise to new conditions for agriculture change. Agricultural outcomes may ramify through a social system and across generations, differentially enhancing wealth and affecting intergenerational prop- erty rights, as evidenced during the European and Near Eastern Neolithic periods (Bentley and O’Brien 2019; Shennan 2011). Shennan argues that these develop- ments often have cascading effects over time, even influencing human reproductive strategies (e.g., polygamy, monogamy, etc.), as for example those designed to keep wealth intact across generations. Infrastructural investments also tie farmers to spe- cific locales and render them more susceptible to taxation and sociopolitical tributes (Earle 1997; Erickson 1993; Kirch 2010; Morehart 2010). Furthermore, the allevia- tion of localized environmental selection pressures may lead to regional variability in agricultural strategies and long-term outcomes. Those that produce more regu- larly or at higher yields relative to others may foster emergent leaders or give rise to production bottlenecks, which can be capitalized on by elites (Earle 2011). Relocation Agricultural practices provide useful examples of relocational niche construction. The agricultural niche is readily transported (Shennan 2018), in that it is often focused around a relatively small number of species that are under strong controls (Rowley-Conwy and Layton 2011). Nonetheless, while relocation may alleviate challenging conditions of the prior environment, it not only exposes organisms to novel opportunities but also to constraints. This often gives rise to agricultural inno- vations, such as new planting technologies, infrastructure experimentation, and/or sometimes new coevolutionary relationships (e.g., Fuller and Lucas 2017; O’Brien and Laland 2012; Quintus and Cochrane 2018). Useful examples of some of these relocational processes come from Polynesia (Quintus and Cochrane 2018). As human settlers spread across the Pacific, they col- onized numerous archipelagoes where they encountered markedly different environ- ments, from large, high volcanic islands to low coralline atolls that are only a few meters above sea level. Despite a broadly shared set of agronomic techniques and 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research cultigens, place-based adaptations arose as populations responded to variations in island geology, soils, freshwater resources, and biota (e.g., Gumbley 2021; Kirch 1994; Ladefoged and Graves 2000; Quintus and Lincoln 2020; Weisler 1999). Research in temperate regions demonstrates other agricultural techniques aimed at counteracting cold temperature regimes, marked seasonality, and short growing seasons (Donoghue 2008; Fuller and Lucas 2017). The use of shell mulch in New Zealand is one such innovation in Polynesia that may have allowed Māori cultiva- tion to extend into colder environments (Barber 2013). Innovations also evolved at landscape scales, as for example the development of ridge-and-furrow systems in the American Midwest (Fig. 2). Simulations and experimental studies suggest these extensive furrows systems promoted “frost drainage” (Riley and Freimuth 1979). In Europe, Groenman-van Waateringe and van Geel (2017) hypothesize that Iron Age Celtic fields followed a similar design and function, counteracting lower tempera- tures in the ninth century BC. Genetic research has been particularly valuable in identifying sequences of change that arose in domesticated plants as they were carried beyond their natu- ral ranges and centers of domestication. Cockram et  al. (2007, 2011) suggest that variability in genetic controls on barley (Hordeum vulgare ssp. vulgare) flowering times preadapted it to successful relocation into higher latitudes by agricultural peo- ples. Subsequent artificial selection produced landraces and cultivars with flower - ing times that avoided the harsh winters of northern Europe and took advantage of Fig. 2 Ridge and furrow system from Kletch Park, Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Ridges, which are roughly 50–60 cm above the furrows, are visible above the snow, and the top of ridges are roughly 1 m apart. Photograph was taken in 1978 and is courtesy of Thomas Riley 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research long, cool, and often wet summers. Another well-documented example is maize (Zea mays ssp. mays). The development of flowering traits to accommodate longer day lengths also was key to its expansion, again the result of both natural and artifi- cial selection (Huang et al. 2018; Hung et al. 2012). The genetic plasticity of maize made it especially well suited for relocation to areas outside its tropical homeland (Huang et al. 2018) and led to a cascade of changes that had considerable economic, political, and social impacts (e.g., Smith 2017). Relocation, however, need not be spatially expansive to have evolutionary con- sequences. Birds, for example, routinely select nest locations in specific trees, and particular areas within forests, to decrease the risk of predation and enhance off- spring survival (Odling-Smee 2003 et  al., pp. 64–65). Similarly, human food pro- ducers adjust crop locations to increase the productivity of a given cultivated spe- cies, for example, by extending plantings into new habitats (O’Brien and Laland 2012, fig. 1). Use of different environments, even when they are not especially dis- tant, offer alternative conditions that can alleviate adverse impacts or enhance crop success, and such behaviors may become fixed over time. Spatial diversification demonstrates how populations can operationalize inceptive niche construction at multiple scales and over an annual cycle. The exploitation of multiple environments taking advantage of different environmental characteristics is well documented for several geographical regions and time periods (Drennan et al. 2020; Marston 2011). Use of diverse environmental settings, with variable selective conditions, may offset or redistribute environmental risks. In essence, these commu- nities are “hedging their bets” by diversifying the selection conditions under which they operate. The character of these niche construction activities is shaped by the nature of hazards, including their periodicity, magnitude, and duration, but it is their differential long-term evolutionary outcomes that are of critical importance (Allen 2004). In many localities, agricultural communities took advantage of seasonally or geographically contrasting environments, often with markedly different opportuni- ties and constraints (e.g., Kirch 1994; Ladefoged et  al. 2009; Morrison 1995). In the Hawaiian Islands, for example, farmers staggered planting and harvesting across dispersed locations to take advantage of seasonal and elevational variations in tem- perature and rainfall (Kagawa and Vitousek 2012; Kagawa-Viviani et al. 2018). Spa- tially dispersed fields can function in a similar manner, with different microenvi- ronments offsetting hazards and mediating interannual variability (Ladefoged and Graves 2000; Marston 2011, p. 193). The inheritance of these modified locations by subsequent generations of producers can have substantial downstream consequences (Morehart 2018). Still, relocation of the agricultural niche is a complex process with variable long- term outcomes. Increases in productivity brought about by relocation may render agricultural systems unstable (Rindos 1980, 1984; see also Ammerman and Cav- alli-Sforza 1984; Rowley-Conwy and Layton 2011). This instability arises from sev- eral factors, including the often-narrow focus of agricultural systems on a limited number of species, specialized cultivation requirements, loss of genetic diversity, and declines in soil fertility over time. The latter is an especially common deleteri- ous effect of relocated agricultural systems that populations attempt to counteract through further movement (Shennan 2018). Declines in soil fertility can be a strong 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research incentive to relocate or adapt, not only with swidden (slash-and-burn) technologies but also in fixed field contexts (Roos et al. 2016; Wood et al. 2016). These processes are perhaps best documented for Neolithic Europe, where boom-and-bust demo- graphic patterns are recorded. Populations often increased substantially following relocation (Shennan et  al. 2013). Populations decreased, however, as soil fertility declined and climate deteriorated, often accompanied by increased investments in barley and the use of less-intensive food-production techniques (Colledge et  al. 2019), including foraging and pastoralism (Bevan et  al. 2017). In these cases, the success of a relocated agricultural niche set the stage for change and produced selec- tive pressures that required subsequent adaptation. Population growth may also facilitate relocation and exportation of the agricul- tural niche by providing novel sources of labor. The japonica subspecies of Asian rice, originally a wetland grass of southern China, was domesticated between 7400 and 6500 BC (Long et  al. 2022). Although highly successful in this locality, there appears to have been a pause between rice domestication, the development of paddy-field infrastructure, and the spread of irrigated rice technologies further afield. Fuller and Qin (2009) attribute this pause to the labor requirements of paddy- field agriculture and the need for administrative oversight to coordinate the requisite labor. The inception of irrigated systems of rice agriculture in the lower Yangtze River likely led to some population growth, but it may have been the combination of rice and millet (Setaria italica and Panicum miliaceum) cultivation that facilitated the population levels necessary for the spread of paddy-field rice cultivation outside its core (see Long et al. 2022). Population growth also preceded the arrival of rice in several areas of Asia, which may have created ideal conditions for the subsequent adoption of more-intensive forms of cultivation. Although these processes remain to be fully demonstrated, the available evidence suggests that even though wetland rice cultivation was highly productive, the spread of the formal irrigated rice technolo- gies were feasible only after population growth had reached certain thresholds. This example illustrates emerging mutualisms and dynamic feedback relationships, as well as shifts between perturbational and relocational niche construction behaviors. The Process of Agricultural Niche Construction Long-term agricultural change is coevolutionary in that agricultural practices are evolving in concert with the environment, which includes abiotic and nonhuman biotic components and cultural phenomena (e.g., demography, social organization, labor and management, worldviews, etc.). Such evolutionary sequences, historically actualized through ecological inheritance, speak to the role of reciprocal causation in agricultural trajectories. The global archaeological record of agricultural change usefully illustrates how anthropogenic niches are constructed, evolve, and endure. Myriad cases show how biota, soils, and geomorphology are manipulated by human societies for the purposes of food production in myriad ways and across diverse set- tings. These records also demonstrate several key concepts of niche construction. Here we review three geographic contexts that illustrate a diversity of evolved agri- cultural behaviors: Amazonia, island Polynesia, and the floodplains of Mesopotamia 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research and northern China. These examples illustrate how NCT can provide unique insights into human symbioses with other organisms (targeted and otherwise), intergenera- tional ecological inheritance, and processes of runaway niche construction, which can sometimes lead to path dependencies, where opportunities are constrained by earlier choices. While not all the studies reviewed herein have explicitly drawn on NCT, their findings can be accommodated within a niche construction framework. Emergent Mutualisms in Amazonia In the jungles and savannas of Amazonia, a diversity of food production practices was born out of ecological and cultural inheritances that accumulated over millennia (Clement et  al. 2021; Neves and Heckenberger 2019). The multiplicity of coevo- lutionary relationships identified in this region are intriguing, reflecting ecological inheritances from both other species and human foragers, domestication practices across a range of scales (from individual to landscape), and both formal and infor- mal landscape management practices (Clement et  al. 2020). These coevolutionary relationships are not restricted to any given time or place, and their continued emer- gence alongside more formal agricultural practices extend from the ongoing process of niche construction. Human food-production practices in the Amazon have resulted in “domesticated” landscapes (sensu Clement 1999; Levis et al. 2018)—defined by and the outcome of multiple symbioses between people and organisms, as well as more general human landscape modifications at regional scales and over evolutionary time frames. This occurs as humans alter landscape components and processes, including plant propa- gation, regional hydrology, and soil formation. Such systems often change the demo- graphic characteristics of biota, resulting in environments more conducive to human populations of variable configurations. These kinds of food production systems are also found in Papua New Guinea, Southeast Asia, Mesoamerica, and indeed prob- ably many tropical ecosystems (Roberts et  al. 2017). However, the Amazon is the best-known example and potentially provide expectations for the character, func- tioning, and evolution of domesticated landscapes elsewhere (Arroyo-Kalin 2017, 2019; Erickson 2008; Levis et al. 2018). Amazonia is now well recognized as a center of plant domestication, and land- scape modifications in forested and savannah environments included vegetation restructuring and plant translocations from the early Holocene onward (Clement et  al. 2021). There are also suggestions that some of these processes are linked to pre-adaptations in trees with large fleshy fruits, which derive from earlier mutual- isms with megafauna who served as seed dispersers (Neves and Heckenberger 2019; Spengler et  al. 2021). Following early Holocene extinctions, humans began to fill ecosystem services once provided by megafauna (McKey 2019; Neves 2016; Spen- gler et al. 2021). In essence, ecosystem engineering by megafauna resulted in food- rich niches that were inherited by humans and led to new coevolutionary relation- ships between humans and former megafaunal dependents. The large fleshy fruits, however, were only part of the extensive roster of plants cultivated and domesticated in the Amazon. While some underwent significant morphological changes, many 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research were largely physically unchanged but now have broader distributions and are more abundant as the result of intensive management (Clement et al. 2021). Human cultivation and plant management continued to modify the composi- tion and structure of tropical Amazonian vegetation through the early and middle Holocene (Lombardo et  al. 2020), with extensive transformations occurring after 4000–5000 BP as farming became more widespread (Duncan et al. 2021; Roosevelt 2013). Diverse management techniques were used, most notably fire, which created forests gaps in rainforests and forest islands in savannas, along with the tending, weeding, and harvesting of useful nondomesticates, and the creation of house gar- dens (Erickson 2008). The contemporary environments of the Amazon are thus the outcome of millennia of human management that resulted in significant regional het- erogeneity (Clement et al. 2015; Levis et al. 2018; Maezumi et al. 2018), although there is ongoing debate about the intensity, persistence, and spatial extent of human impacts (e.g., Piperno et al. 2015, 2017). Perhaps the most iconic components of domesticated Amazonia landscapes are their anthropogenic soils: Amazonian dark earths (ADE). These fertile soils formed over long periods of time through both in situ occupations and concentrated deposition of refuse in areas peripheral to camps and settlements (Erickson 2008; Roosevelt 2013; Schmidt et  al. 2014). The lighter soils (terra mulatos), typically some distance from settlements, are thought to be the outcome of soil management and fertilization practices associated with cultivation (Arroyo-Kalin 2019; Fraser et al. 2011). These anthropogenic soils served to increase the amount of arable land, and economic trees are today disproportionally represented in these locations (Levis et  al. 2020). Levis et al. (2020) further argue that anthropogenic activity increased the heterogeneity of soils across local landscapes in ways that supported a diverse range of food production strategies. De Oliveira et  al. (2020) highlight how ADE and non-ADE soils in combination contributed to increased species richness, as flo- ristic compositions are somewhat dissimilar on the two soil types due to slightly dif- ferent growing conditions (i.e., pyrogenic carbon in ADE). Importantly, ADE sup- ported the cultivation of key crops that are difficult to grow in lower fertility areas, including maize (Fraser et  al. 2011). Ethnographic data further demonstrate that contemporary communities continue to target specific anthropogenic soils, includ- ing ADE, for a variety of landraces (Fraser 2010). Unsurprisingly, areas of ADE are today reservoirs of traditional forms of agro-diversity (Clement et  al. 2003). This may be because ADE relaxed certain selection pressures that otherwise prohibit the spread of some species. Some even argue that human management practices fostered and maintained plant genetic diversity in many parts of the Amazon, diversity that was greatly diminished in the aftermath of early contact period depopulation (Clem- ent 1999). Symbioses were also created through geomorphological engineering in savanna areas of the Amazon. Raised bed systems are perhaps the best-documented form of infrastructure in this region (Denevan 2001; Rostain 2013; Walker 2018) and were often used alongside other landscape modifications (e.g., ADE) (Walker 2011). These are in seasonally inundated savannas, which are themselves partially the result of anthropogenic burning that was presumably undertaken to keep the forest at bay (Erickson 2008). The raised beds effectively circumvented the risk of flood 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research inundation (Lombardo et al. 2011), and experimental studies suggest that raised bed soils were enriched by sediments from the canals (Erickson 2006). As Duncan et al. (2021) note, landscape modifications of this kind, along with fire, and other agro- nomic techniques, created productive locations in environments that have histori- cally been considered “wastelands.” Importantly, these systems created habitats for other organisms, probably expanding their natural ranges (Erickson 2008). Although no longer in production, the raised beds and canals continue to be important points of concentrated resources and are often occupied by nonhuman ecosystem engineers (i.e., ants and termites) today (Renard et al. 2013). The engineering of other organ- isms contributes to the persistence of these structures, which have become biodi- versity refugia in the contemporary landscape (McKey et al. 2010). In short, these extensive raised beds systems were both sites of human food production and novel anthropogenic environments that fostered human–animal symbioses, not only when initially constructed but over time. This regional-scale construction myriad food-producing ecosystems and large networks of symbioses produced novel selective environments that had profound effects on resident human populations. In contrast to regions of the world where intensive human–plant mutualisms centered on a limited number of plant species, many Amazonian groups managed and relied on a diversity of taxa and over time transformed whole ecosystems (Clement et  al. 2021; Denevan et  al. 1988; Levis et al. 2017). The success of this strategy in alleviating challenges of previous selec- tive conditions (low soil fertility, dense primary forest), and a material consequence of niche construction (see Odling-Smee et al. 2013), was population growth, espe- cially in the late Holocene (Arroyo-Kalin 2017; de Souza et al. 2019). Arroyo-Kalin (2017) outlines a sequence wherein initial land use created productive patches characterized by fertile anthrosols and stands of economic plants. These resulted in higher levels of food production, which in turn supported larger populations in the first millennium AD; later in time they were in some cases even defended. These examples highlight the evolutionary role domesticated landscapes and eco- logical inheritance can have on the long-term evolutionary fitness of human groups in tropical regions in the absence of formal agricultural practices. The success of communities in the Amazon is due to the development and maintenance of multiple mutualisms and low-intensity environmental management practices undertaken at a regional scale (Levis et al. 2018). The human niche construction activities and coevolutionary relationships that emerged in the Amazon continue to be important for contemporary groups, who often acknowledge their reliance on products of the past, particularly the productiv- ity of old settlement sites (Arroyo-Kalin 2019; Balée 1989, 2010; Erickson 2008). ADE and other anthropogenic soils are still regarded as agricultural capital by local populations (Schmidt et al. 2014). Walker (2011) notes the preferential use of anthropogenic soils by some farmers in the central Llanos de Mojos, where these soils are associated with nearly continuous cultivation. Further, high-value crops, such as exotic domesticated vegetables, can be grown on ADE without chemical fer- tilizers (Kawa et al. 2011). Clearly, past niche construction behaviors in the Amazon are continuing to shape modern food production, albeit conditioned by both contem- porary social and technological conditions (German 2003). 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research The process of niche construction in the Amazon led to substantial human–envi- ronment interdependencies. As noted by Allaby et  al. (2022), human management across large landscapes can result in protracted human–plant entanglements. They argue that such long-term landscape-scale relationships are important to under- standing domestication globally; the Amazon presents an excellent example of the key processes (see Clement et  al. 2021). However, the Amazon also demonstrates well how landscape-scale management created and maintained diverse mutualisms across multimillennial time frames. These included the formation of microenviron- ments that drove crop and agricultural diversity, as well as engineered ecosystems that modified the demographic characteristics of plants and animals and created new dependencies. Such processes led to human population growth as they enhanced the economic potential of the regional landscape. The persistence of mutualisms across the Amazon is an important source of con- temporary population resilience and has implications for contemporary environmen- tal management (Peters et  al. 1989). In many Amazonian environments sustained niche construction activities have not only promoted robust mutualisms but also cre- ated distinctive environmental structures (e.g., hyper-dominance patterns in trees) and shaped ecosystem functioning (e.g., Balée 2010, 2013; Neves and Heckenberger 2019). The persistence of these unique anthropogenic environments requires ongo- ing human management with Indigenous peoples, without which the long-term mutualisms, associated forest structures, and novel ecosystemic properties will be lost (see Clement et al. 2020). Ecological Inheritance in Polynesia The foregoing illustrates how food production practices can create a diversity of per- turbations with multifaceted impacts. It is the totality of the accompanying changes, including the “dramatically altered community of microorganisms, insects, plants, and animals," that constitute ecological inheritance (Odling-Smee and Laland 2011, p. 223) along with archaeologically tractable landscape modifications. Importantly, to be considered ecological inheritances, these myriad changes must be transmitted to successive generations and create novel selective environments for humans and/or other organisms. However, disentangling these kinds of evolutionary feedback rela- tionships is challenging, especially when multiple interacting agents are responding to both organism-driven environmental modifications and other selective conditions. One approach is to use “model systems,” which are often characterized by bounded- ness, small size, isolation, reduced complexity, and/or the speed of key processes (e.g., reproduction). An effective model system is “an integrated, functional, and persistent example of the larger set of systems whose functioning they are meant to illuminate” (Vitousek 2002, p. 574), such as an organism, ecosystem, lake, or island (see also Matthews et  al. 2014, p. 260). Comparative methods are another useful way to test alternative scenarios of ecological inheritance (e.g., Laland et al. 2017; O’Brien and Laland 2012). Both approaches have proven useful for understanding socioecological processes in Polynesia, where closely related human populations, sharing broadly similar agricultural practices, crop inventories, and ethnobiological 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research knowledge systems, are spread across environmentally diverse islands (e.g., Allen 2015; DiNapoli and Leppard 2018; Kirch 2007). Human settlement in Polynesia began around 2850 years ago in a process that involved the translocation of numerous species. These included dozens of economic plants (of which carbohydrates were critical), three animal domestics (Sus scrofa, Canis  lupus familiaris, Gallus gallus), the commensal Pacific rat (Rattus exulans), and anthropophilic weeds, land snails, and arthropods (e.g., Anderson 2009; Kahn et al. 2015; Prebble and Wilmshurst 2009). Yen (1973, p. 76) referred to these trans- locations as “detachable parts of former environments which became the founding endowment” on newly settled islands. As Polynesians spread across this oceanic region, they were exposed to a diversity of new environments; at the same time, they and their transported associates also changed the selective environments of newly encountered native species, in innumerable ways and with evolutionary con- sequences that continue to the present (see Odling-Smee et al. 2013, p. 8). One way was through local extinctions, of both individual native taxa (e.g., Steadman 2006) and sometimes whole plant communities, such as the endemic lowland palm for- ests of Hawai‘i, Rapa Nui (Easter Island), and elsewhere (Athens 2009; Hunt 2007; Prebble et al. 2019), presumably along with many of their microorganisms, inverte- brates, and avifauna. Polynesians generated novel ecological inheritances in many other ways as well. For example, traditional crop inventories were sometimes incompletely transferred or failed to establish (e.g., in New Zealand, Rapa Nui). This led to new mutual- isms with native species that were essential to human livelihoods (e.g., as sources of food, fiber, and timber). Their fitness, in turn, was enhanced through range expan- sions, artificial selection, and/or specialized cultivation (e.g., Funk 1982; Leach and Stowe 2005; Shepherd et  al. 2016). Translocated domesticates also underwent further selection following island settlement, with varieties developed to counteract new kinds of perturbations (drought, pests, etc.) and/or different environmental con- straints (infertile soils, low temperatures, aridity, seasonality, etc.) (see Handy and Handy 1972; Yen 1974). Polynesian colonists also affected the selective environments of their successors (and other organisms) through disruptions and realignments of long-established bio- geochemical webs (see also Odling-Smee et al. 2013, p. 8). For example, local pro- cesses were altered by biotic introductions (e.g., predatory rats), native biotic extinc- tions (e.g., guano-producing seabirds), and soil degradation (e.g., deforestation and extractive agricultural practices)—often with sustained, intergenerational effects on agricultural productivity and fitness implications for humans, their domesticates, and other co-inhabitants of the anthropogenic niche. Understanding of these impacts is nascent, but studies of soil fertility (e.g., Ladefoged et  al. 2010; Vitousek et  al. 2014) and isotopic records of humans and their faunal associates (e.g., Allen 2015; Richards et  al. 2009; Swift et  al. 2016) are providing insights into long-term vari- ability in biogeochemical webs in relation to agricultural practices. Colonists reshaped the physical landscapes of Polynesia as well, altering geo- morphic processes and through formally constructed features. An example of the former is human-aided sediment mobilization and redeposition, sometimes on a massive scale. Such processes sometimes created fertile lowland plains that became 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research the focus of intensive cultivation for generations (e.g., Kirch 1994; Lepofsky and Kahn 2011, pp. 323–326; Quintus 2018a; Spriggs 1997). Formal agricultural con- structions are also widely evidenced, varying considerably in form, size, and com- plexity (Fig. 3). The most significant engineering is seen in irrigated taro pond-field systems, designed to maximize planting areas, control water flow, and enhance pro- duction. Many such systems represent incremental investments, accumulated over time, by multiple generations of cultivators (e.g., Allen 1991; Kirch 1994; McElroy 2007). Large-scale, rain-fed, dryland field systems are another impressive form of landscape modification, best known from the leeward areas of younger Hawaiian Islands, where networks of terraces, walls, and elongate mounds extend over exten- sive areas. These speak to varied production and management strategies, as known through archaeological stratigraphic sequences, modeling, and remote-sensing stud- ies (e.g., Allen 2004; Dye 2014; Kirch 2011; Ladefoged et al. 2008, 2011). Exten- sive dryland field systems are also found in New Zealand, where cultivators posi- tioned their fields to take advantage of fertile volcanic tephras or alluvial outwash fans (e.g., Barber 2004; Leach and Leach 1979). The contribution of these kinds of highly varied and complex landscape investments to ecological inheritances is reflected in well-documented archaeological histories from across the region, albeit usually discussed through other theoretical lenses. Fig. 3 Coastal swamp cultivation of taro in raised beds with intervening reticulate drains on Aitutaki in the Cook Islands. Note the presence of palm fronds used as mulch. Photograph by Melinda Allen 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research Another example of ecological inheritance comes from the Marquesas Islands, where Polynesian colonists introduced an array of economic plants (both root and tree crops), anthropophilic arthropods, and probably weedy plants around the 11th to 12th centuries AD (Allen et al. 2022; Huebert and Allen 2020). To make way for shifting cultivation, the indigenous forest was cleared, initially from lowland regions and often assisted by firing, a common Polynesian technology. This created open areas for crop plants and weedy associates (with positive fitness outcomes for both), but it also led to geomorphic instability. As native trees declined, so did native avi- fauna, with numerous extinctions (see Steadman 2006). Given the crucial role of birds in pollination and fruit/seed dispersal in the absence of native mammals, these losses undoubtedly disrupted ecosystem functioning, with potential cascade effects across trophic levels and food webs. Extinctions in herbaceous and arborescent plant taxa would have further weakened ecological webs in ways not yet fully understood (Allen et  al. 2022). As an example, one originally widespread lowland forest spe- cies (Sideroxylon sp.) initially favored as a fuel wood was greatly reduced within the first few centuries of Polynesian arrival, eventually going extinct (Huebert and Allen 2020). Its demise required Marquesans to find alternative fuels, which were some- times more costly to acquire (i.e., distant) and less efficient. This suite of adverse feedbacks created novel selective environments for Marque- san people and native biota; within a few centuries of human arrival, counteractive niche construction was underway. Although this may have taken varied forms, the most archaeologically visible manifestation is the rapid dispersal and uptake of tree cultivation, dominated by breadfruit (Artocarpus altilis), a Polynesian introduction with a large, starchy, syncarpous fruit. These processes were repeated across mul- tiple valleys, and over time the inventory of tree crops expanded to include other arborescent Polynesian introductions (e.g., Tahitian chestnut, Inocarpus fagifer) and at least one native tree, Pacific rosewood (Thespesia populnea). This evolving arboricultural system had several advantages: structurally it mimicked the original native lowland forest, mature trees stabilized soils, and forest habitat was restored for native land birds. In time, breadfruit became the mainstay of the Marquesan sub- sistence economy. Its fruits were not only highly nutritious but could be processed into a readily storable product that was a crucial food source during the archipela- go’s sometimes crippling droughts (see Allen 2010). A related outcome was spe- cialized storage facilities that allowed for long-term preservation (up to decades), at both household and community scales. This example illustrates some of the biologi- cal components of ecological inheritance and provides a foundation for further study and modeling of behavioral, ecological, and genetic interactions over time in this locality. Two other island sequences demonstrate the interplay between agricultural niche construction and sociopolitical processes, one speaks to competitive outcomes (Mangaia, southern Cook Islands) and the other suggests community-scale coopera- tion in (Ofu, Manu‘a Islands, Sāmoa). The distinctive landscape of Mangaia (51.8 km ) features a highly weathered central volcanic cone surrounded by a massive ring of upraised karstic limestone. Polynesian settlers arrived roughly a millennium ago, cleared the interior volcanic hillslopes of native forests with fire, and initiated shifting cultivation (Kirch 1996, 2017, p. 19). However, erosional processes quickly 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research followed, stripping away the thin topsoils and further depleting the naturally infer- tile substrates; even today this area remains unsuitable for cultivation (Kirch 2017, p. 23). While the agricultural potential of the interior hillslopes was significantly diminished, sediment redeposition in valley bottoms created rich alluvial terrain. These areas were particularly well suited to irrigated taro cultivation in raised beds and inundated fields but constituted only two percent of the island’s overall usable land (Kirch 2017, pp. 22–23). Irrigated production was supplemented by shifting cultivation and tree cropping, now repositioned to the rugged karstic makatea and lower colluvial slopes. Over time, the limited fertile valley bottoms, with their accu- mulated agricultural investments, became the focus of intense, cyclical, intertribal warfare, which was marked by rituals of human sacrifice. A complex and distinctive ideology emerged, dominated by warriors and priests, diverging from the chiefly inheritance systems more commonly seen in Polynesian societies (Kirch 1994, 2017). The ecological inheritances were thus two-fold: (a) degraded and nonproduc- tive interior hillslopes and (b) considerable investments in irrigation architecture in the small, circumscribed valley bottoms. The latter were central to elite competition, with significant flow-on effects to the population at large. Elsewhere, agricultural developments resulted in rather different downstream sociopolitical effects. In Sāmoa populations initially settled on the coast of the vol- canic doublet of Ofu-Olosega (13 km ), but around the 11th century AD there was relocation into interior Ofu, where populations faced different selective environ- ments (Quintus 2018a; Quintus et al. 2016). This steep interior region is particularly vulnerable to the region’s high rainfall (more than 3,000 mm per year), torrential downpours, and periodic but severe cyclones. The high-intensity run-off associated with such events often strips away crops or buries them under sheetwash. To coun- teract these conditions, cultivators constructed simple drainage features, initially around household-scale cultivation plots. Subsequently, larger ditches and more complex ditch networks appeared, suggesting changes in the organization of labor and community-scale investments. The effectiveness of these features against known hazards has been tested through hydrological modeling, while their long-term suc- cess is suggested by increases in their size, distribution, and complexity over time. Changes in the scale of this risk management infrastructure also coincided with the appearance of other community-scale architecture. Quintus et al. (2016) argue that these innovative water control devices allowed for a stable productive system despite periodic perturbations. This in turn created conditions favorable to community inte- gration, the emergence of suprahousehold leadership, and ongoing investments in larger facilities. Such changes in labor organization and management strategies can impact on agronomic success—increasing both production efficiency and productiv - ity (Athens 1999; Brookfield 1972). As these examples suggest, heavily modified landscapes often became “attrac- tors” for successive generations of cultivators, engendering further agronomic and social investments. Archaeological excavations reveal that the surface structures visible today are often the outcome of accretional investments, sometimes built on earlier architectural investments, as is the case globally (e.g., Doolittle 1984). Transmission to successive generations is clear, but relatedness is often uncertain, and community, tribal, or cultural “boundaries” are sometimes crossed over time. 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research For example, terraces and walls in the field system of Kona, Hawai‘i were adopted (rather than dismantled) by 19th century commercial coffee farmers (Allen 2004). Elsewhere centuries-old Hawaiian taro terraces were converted to rice paddies by 20th century Asian immigrants (Jones et al. 2015). In many rural Polynesian com- munities, traditional agricultural sites are still in production, using centuries-old traditional ecological knowledge. Ethnobiological knowledge has been lost in other places, but the physical sites are being reclaimed by descendant groups who are ben- efitting from the investments of their ancestors (e.g., Lincoln et  al. 2018; see also Morrison 2014, 2015). These examples demonstrate dimensions of ecological inheritance that are com- mon to many places. Among these are the extinction of species, from habitat loss, novel predators, and sometimes new competitors. Biogeochemical webs are also frequently disrupted by the emplacement of agricultural niches, with evolutionary effects that may reverberate to the present day (see also Odling-Smee and Laland 2011, p. 227). Other outcomes of these novel niches were the rise of new co-evo- lutionary relationships and subsequent intergenerational transmission. Moreover, as earlier investments compound and congeal, there is often increasing articulation with larger-scale social, political, and demographic processes. A key distinction on islands, perhaps, in the Pacific and elsewhere, is that such ecological inheritances are not only powerful but often inescapable. Runaway Niche Construction in Mesopotamia and Northern China Runaway niche construction refers to situations where long-term cycles of environ- mental manipulation essentially lock populations into specific trajectories of change and further investments in niche construction (Ellis 2015, 2016). These trajectories are self-reinforcing, initially maintained by positive evolutionary feedbacks but ulti- mately limiting alternative trajectories and never reaching evolutionary stable solu- tions. While not using a niche construction framework, van der Leeuw (2012) dem- onstrates this phenomenon in his aptly titled article, “For every solution there are many problems.” Agricultural systems in arid and riverine environments, where the manipulation and control of water are central, provide particularly clear examples of these dynamics. The lengthy sequence of irrigated agriculture in southern Mesopotamia is one such case. While rain-fed agriculture is possible in northern Mesopotamia, irrigation is necessary in the south. The latter setting illustrates the role cumulative small-scale modifications played in the long-term development of intensive irrigation systems (Wilkinson et al. 2015). Irrigation took advantage of river levees to direct water to adjacent fields (Adams 1981). Early forms of irrigation are argued to have enhanced natural alluvial processes, taking advantage of easily worked crevasse splays that provided a fertile cultivation medium (Wilkinson et al. 2015). Over time investment in extant systems was more cost-effective than beginning elsewhere anew. Moreover, further investment was feasible because of the transgenerational transmission of the products of past labor. As Wilkinson and colleagues (2015, p. 410) observe, the ini- tial irrigation systems provided the template for what would come. The architecture 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research and engineering of such systems is place-specific, highlighting the need for farmers to understand and respond to the specific selective conditions of local microenviron- ments for successful cultivation (Hritz and Pournelle 2016). To some extent, it was these locally specific requirements that gave rise to agricultural variants, which then became the raw materials of subsequent relocation, innovation, and/or elaboration. Over time, the Mesopotamian systems were further developed, producing more complex technologies and creating extensive anthropogenic landscapes. This contin- ual adjustment of infrastructure is a pervasive feature of niche construction, a situ- ation that results from populations seeking to redress new cultural and environmen- tal selective pressures that arise, sometimes from prior states. This process is not unique to human societies and their agricultural practices and is well documented in other species (Odling-Smee et  al. 2003, pp. 79–84). In the case of Mesopota- mian agriculture, as new canals were built on lower gradient slopes, additional labor was needed to maintain these systems and to avoid sedimentation. Ultimately, even further expansion of the system was required to support the labor force necessary for its maintenance. In essence, the combination of the labor demands of these new systems and their high productivity formed feedback loops that favored population aggregations as well as the continued expansion of the irrigated agricultural com- plexes (Wilkinson et al. 2015, pp. 411–412). The irrigation systems of southern Mesopotamia were successful in mitigating the region’s arid conditions, expanding cultivatable land through the transport of water and fine sediments. However, these cultural transformations intersected with larger-scale natural processes, such as climatic variability, which brought about large-scale geomorphic changes and cascading effects (Hritz and Pournelle 2016; Jotheri et al. 2016, 2018; Walstra et al. 2010; Wilkinson 2003). Heyvaert and Wal- stra (2016) illustrate the multiple ways that local populations modified or interfered with the natural processes of river avulsion and alluvial fan development, with sub- stantial and long-lasting flow-on effects for farming and human settlement in the region. Cultural elaborations redistributed key resources, which in turn changed the opportunities and constraints of communities at local and regional scales. Con- structed canals, while providing irrigation water and flood control, at times became rivers or streams in their own right (Jotheri et  al. 2016). The development of cre- vasse splays for irrigation systems likely contributed to alluvial fan development by restricting channel avulsion (Walstra et al. 2010). Moreover, the drainage of irriga- tion canals created artificial marshes and lakes, which became ecosystems for other organisms and novel resources for human communities (Eger 2011). The extraction of irrigation water on occasion resulted in reduced transport capacity and increased sedimentation in natural river channels. Such sedimentation can, eventually, con- tribute to channel avulsion, which in turn reshapes local and regional environments, with substantial impacts on human land use. Indeed, cultural modifications to chan- nel avulsion are a major component of the ecological inheritance of contemporary Mesopotamian societies (Heyvaert and Walstra 2016, p. 2150). Runaway niche construction is also apparent in northern China, where again there is a long history of landscape modifications in dynamic riverine settings (Lee et  al. 2007). The Yellow River region is particularly well known. The river flows though the broad Loess Plateau, which is an especially fertile area but one that is 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research vulnerable to erosion (Rosen 2008), and the color of the river derives from such ero- sion (Fig. 4). Small-scale agriculture was practiced on the plateau from the Neolithic (before ca. 7000 BP) (Lee et al. 2007), with notable effects on local geomorphologi- cal processes (Rosen 2008; Rosen et al. 2015; Zhuang and Kidder 2014). During the Yangshao period (ca. 7000 to 5000 BP), for example, hillslope erosion increased alongside expanded and intensified agricultural production, concomitant with increased precipitation (Rosen et al. 2015). Increased sediment loads led to alluvial aggradation and floodplain buildup. As on some Pacific islands (e.g., Spriggs 1997), hillslope erosion seems to have been beneficial, and one consequence of these sedi- mentological changes was an opportunity for irrigated rice cultivation (Rosen 2008; Rosen et al. 2015). The effects of increased sediment loads, induced by deforestation and other agri- cultural practices, were seen throughout the Yellow River basin by the Bronze Age, in the second to first millennia BC (Cao et al. 2010; Kidder and Zhuang 2015; Rosen et  al. 2015). Neolithic populations made use of floodplain resources that were sup- ported by regular river alluviation (Zhuang et al. 2013), but it was developments in irrigation during the Bronze Age that facilitated the expansion of human populations across the region (Storozum et al. 2018). Ultimately, however, increased sedimenta- tion along the Yellow River increased the risk of flooding, first in the Bronze Age and then in later periods (Kidder and Zhuang 2015). By the early Iron Age (first millennium BC), if not before, populations began constructing flood control infrastructure (Kidder and Liu 2017). This began a feedback loop. Initially, channelization of the river took place, resulting in silta- tion, which increased the base of the river and necessitated further construction of infrastructure aimed at flood protection. This served to reduce the frequency of floods but concomitantly resulted in higher amplitude events, because of the now elevated base of the river relative to the surrounding floodplain and the amount of water that could breach levees when those levees failed (Zhuang and Kidder 2014). Imperial incentives and coercion intensified and further expanded Fig. 4 A view across the Yellow River (Huang He) at its southern bend. The photograph is taken from Henan Province looking toward the broad floodplain of Shanxi Province. The tablelands are roughly 50 m above the broad alluvial bottomlands. Note the high amount of sediment in the water. Photograph courtesy of Christian Peterson 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research production during the Dynastic period (end of the first millennium BC), when more effective tilling was made possible by iron implements; this again resulted in increased erosion and greater river sediment loads (Kidder et al. 2012b). At the same time, growing populations from the mid-Holocene and a cen- tralized, resource-consuming government sought increased production (Kidder and Zhuang 2015), often through investments in landscape modifications that reclaimed or enhanced floodplains (Zhuang and Kidder 2014). The effect was to concentrate populations in these low-lying environments: the past deposition of sediments, substantial infrastructural investments, and an increased focus on wheat made these areas especially attractive. This reclamation of land for farming exacerbated the threat of floods, while channelization required further modifica- tions to replenish alluvial sediments for cultivation (Zhuang and Kidder 2014). By the Han period, in the first century AD, floods had become catastrophic, with sediment fans covering hundreds of square kilometers (Kidder et al. 2012a, b). This sequence of agricultural change, population growth, and river avulsion continued through the last two millennia, with more substantial effects relative to those of earlier times. Erosion of the Loess Plateau seems to have been consider- able during the 11th and 12th centuries AD due to the expansion of farmers into the region from elsewhere in northern China. These conditions were exacerbated by climate change and resulted in increased sediment deposition on the North China Plain (Storozum et  al. 2018). As in the past, sedimentation combined with the continued use of fertile floodplains (themselves the result of previous floods) to increase the vulnerability of local populations to catastrophic inunda- tions. However, because populations had become dependent on production from these areas, decision makers had few options other than continued cultivation in this niche. Eventually, however, geomorphic processes left the area unusable, and farmers migrated elsewhere (see Storozum et  al. 2018, p. 1768). The long- term outcomes of niche construction, coupled with and exacerbated by natural environmental variability, created a selective environment that strongly favored relocation. The Mesopotamian and northern China sequences clearly illustrate the process of runaway niche construction. Initial environmental modifications were small— mainly involving shifting cultivation or cultivation of naturally occurring wetlands. Cleared areas were built on by succeeding generations, who also inherited increased susceptibility to flooding and soil erosion. Attempts to mediate these adverse condi- tions led to innovations, as for example, the implementation of flood controls and the expansion of irrigation systems. These, in turn, altered the selective environment anew, allowing irrigated farming to expand and populations to grow. However, this created new risks and vulnerabilities, such as salinization, susceptibility to avul- sions, and the need for additional labor. When coupled with high population densi- ties, which had promoted expansion in the first place, additional investments were required to counteract emergent and unforeseen selective conditions. In short, local agricultural practices can become increasingly intertwined with natural processes, resulting in distinctive anthromes that are driven by complex socioecological pro- cesses (see Ullah et  al. 2019) and lead to ongoing environmental transformations and a range of cultural adaptations (Ellis 2015). 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research Directions in Agricultural Niche Construction The foregoing examples illustrate how niche construction theory directs attention to our relationships with other organisms and human populations, through space and time. It manifests important evolutionary processes and focuses on complex feedback loops generated through deep time. Critically, it reframes our place in the world, building an understanding of human behavior in the past, and potentially shaping how we envision our future. Understanding the histories of the constructed environments we have inherited is fundamental to building more sustainable and resilient futures. In this final section, we highlight issues for substantive and theo- retical elaboration. Operationalizing Agricultural Niche Construction Researchers across both the biosciences and archaeology have stressed the impor- tance of separating niche construction behaviors from the evolutionary process of niche construction (Odling-Smee et  al. 2013; Ready and Price 2021; Stiner and Kuhn 2016). Niche construction theory, as a process, is concerned with long-term evolutionary outcomes and sequences of reciprocal causation; it is not a theory of short-term decision making. However, archaeologists have also asked how niche construction behaviors originated. Often intentionality is assumed, with the short- term goals of economic advantages or other positive outcomes. Building on this premise, there have recently been concerted efforts to integrate models from human behavioral ecology with niche construction theory (e.g., Haas and Kuhn 2019; Ready and Price 2021; Stiner and Kuhn 2016; Zeanah 2017). Drivers of short-term niche construction behaviors can be identified by recognizing and analyzing the eco- nomic trade-offs of different kinds of behaviors (Mohlenhoff and Codding 2017), and the use of formal models from human behavioral ecology (HBE) can identify specific kinds of environmental and social factors that affect human decision mak - ing (see Ready and Price 2021). Intentional niche construction behaviors are ben- eficial in only some circumstances, taking the form of practices that either enhance or stabilize production, and driven by a desire to increase the economic benefits of an environment relative to initial prehuman conditions. As illustrated by Mohlen- hoff and Codding (2017), niche construction behaviors are potentially predictable and quantifiable within an HBE framework. Although the data requirements of these kinds of analyses are considerable, and the models involve simplifying assumptions, they provide testable hypotheses relating to short-term niche construction behaviors that are aimed at off setting particular selective conditions. Some HBE models can account for long-term sequences of reciprocal causation, for example, ideal distribution models (Hale and Sanger 2020; Prufer et  al. 2017; Weitzel and Codding 2022). Landscape suitability is a key component of these mod- els, and for agriculturalists suitability is often defined by the presence of resources such as fertile soils and fresh water. These models typically examine how changes in settlement density, a condition that alters the selective environment, impacts the 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research suitability of a habitat. Such changes can be positive (the Allee effect), for exam- ple, increasing habitat suitability through cooperative behaviors. This could be in the form of a larger labor force or the construction of persistent infrastructure. Alter- natively, changes in settlement density may have negative outcomes, such as intensi- fied harvesting that results in resource depression. In each case, whether positive or negative, subsequent generations make decisions within a modified environment. Still, defining changes in habitat suitability is challenging in many respects (Weitzel and Codding 2022). Further consideration of ecological inheritance vis-à- vis the family of ideal free distribution models is useful in this regard (Bliege Bird et  al. 2020). For instance, agricultural infrastructure (e.g., terraces) improves habi- tat suitability by reducing labor costs for subsequent users (see Bevan et  al. 2013) and enhancing growing conditions (Sandor and Homburg 2017). The development of anthropogenic soils may have similar effects, replacing marginal substrates with fertile, productive ones. In contrast, niche construction behaviors can also be delete- rious, rendering some environments less suitable over time and driving settlement elsewhere. For example, erosion and the loss of soil fertility would increase the ben- efits of relocation (counteractive niche construction). Testable predictions of when certain niche construction behaviors (e.g., perturbation or relocation) might occur can be usefully derived from ideal distribution models (Weitzel and Codding 2022), and incorporation of niche construction processes into these could improve char- acterizations of habitat suitability and cost-benefit outcomes (see Thompson and Prufer 2021). Additional factors also affect perceptions of habitat and landscape suitability (Prufer et  al. 2017) and drive agricultural change (Morrison 2006), including food preference, land tenure, sociopolitical systems that shape ideas about where and how to engage in agricultural niche construction activities. Decisions about farm- ing are driven by how and for what purpose the product is consumed (Morrison 1994, pp. 124–125). Food preferences and cultural values determine some forms of agricultural infrastructure, as in South India, where expensive canals and reser- voirs were built to support rice cultivation in relatively arid and otherwise marginal environments (Morrison 2006, 2014). The continued maintenance of these features depended in part on the enduring social importance of rice, as well as sociopoliti- cal conditions that ensured ample labor. Moreover, the construction of water con- trol infrastructure served as displays of power, which led to their proliferation even though they regularly failed (Morrison 2015). In essence, it was the inherited social niche that drove some of the more prominent agricultural behaviors, and associ- ated environmental reconfiguration, in arid India. More generally, sociopolitical needs can be powerful drivers of agricultural investment, or what Brookfield (1972) referred to as “social production.” Such practices often have legacies with substan- tial downstream effects (Morehart 2018). Agricultural change is often facilitated by political competition, wherein the expansion of landesque capital facilitates wealth assets and surplus production that can be socially deployed (Earle and Spriggs 2015). Taxation and tribute form part of the social niche, as do different forms of land tenure. The latter may enhance (or reduce) incentives to modify the environ- ment (Netting 1993; Stone 1996), and tribute demands may change the calculus of agricultural activities (Erickson 1993; Morrison 1994), as farmers attempt to meet 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research both household and social demands. While variables such as social structure, land tenure, food preference, and the like are not frequently used in HBE analyses, recent work has shown how such variables may be included in models to provide a more nuanced and holistic understanding of human economic and settlement decision making (Prufer et al. 2017; Ready and Power 2018). Human behavioral ecology models address different scales of socioecologi- cal processes relative to NCT and thus are complementary (Ready and Price 2021; Stiner and Kuhn 2016; Zeanah 2017). The former seeks to understand short-term decision making while NCT considers how such behaviors cascade and produce emergent evolutionary trajectories across evolutionary time. Such complementary frameworks can help operationalize niche construction and provide a more compre- hensive understanding of subsistence sequences. Ready and Price (2021, p. 76) provide formal equations through which dimen- sions of NCT and HBE can be jointly evaluated, illustrating the interplay between, and different scales of, the two theoretical frameworks. A useful example of this approach comes from Australia, where Bliege Bird et  al. (2020) explore the inter- action between landscape burning, resource abundance, and variance in mobility across Aboriginal foraging communities. Their research shows how anthropogenic fires create vegetation mosaics that act to concentrate resources and improve hunt- ing returns, with positive cascade effects through time. More specifically, a positive relationship evolves between the extent of fire mosaics and habitat quality, leading to the development of persistent places. Likewise, Zeanah (2017) shows how forag- ing models can be used to explore occurrences of both resource enhancement and resource depression, providing opportunities to track processes of niche construction across the Eastern Woodlands during the emergence of agriculture. However, for links between HBE and NCT to be useful, explanations devel- oped using these approaches need to be falsifiable. O’Brien and Bentley (2015, pp. 374–575) suggest “construction chain analysis” can be a useful way forward. Causal relations in complex human eco-evolutionary systems, pathways, or networks might be progressively untangled by breaking down complicated network pathways into tractable components and subjecting each to analysis. Networks can then be recon- structed and the strength of interactions considered, as well as how they vary over time. O’Brien and Laland (2012, fig.  3) illustrate this approach with an example of Neolithic dairy framing (see Laland and O’Brien 2015). Brock and colleagues (2016) advocate the use of formal path analysis, an approach well established in other sciences. Hypotheses of causality between variables are graphically repre- sented, requiring the analyst to specify how the variables relate to one another and potentially lead to specific outcomes. Using the available data, relationships between variables can then be statistically evaluated, for example, through Granger causality testing or linear vector autoregressions. Similarly, Ready and Price (2021, p. 76) advocate for formal analytical models where model predictions can be subjected to empirical testing. They draw on the concept of inheritance tracks—“a distinct physi- cal system that transmits information through time.” These must contain heritable information that can be described and measured (e.g., genetic information or recur- ring patterns in artifacts), along with explicit specifications of how they evolve and their influences on behaviors. Computational modeling (e.g., agent-based modeling) 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research may also generate testable hypotheses by simulating systems with and without niche construction dynamics (Fogarty and Creanza 2017). These approaches build on and help formalize the cross-cultural comparisons advocated by Laland and O’Brien (2010) and have the potential to improve the rigor and quality of NCT explanations. Secondary Symbioses The recursive modification and inheritance of environmental characteristics is a powerful driver of novel coevolutionary relationships (Odling-Smee et  al. 1996). In any shared niche, there is the opportunity for the development of a wide range of symbiotic relationships. This is especially true of agricultural niches (Bogaard et  al. 2018; Fuller and Stevens 2017), which are formally constructed, intensively managed, and crucial to human health and well-being (O’Brien and Laland 2012; Rindos 1980, 1984). Many mutualisms between humans and plants were intensi- fied over time, ultimately leading to new genetic and/or morphological traits and wider distributions and greater abundances of both relative to their ancestral forms (Bogaard et al. 2021; Denham et al. 2020; Smith 2015; Zeder 2016). However, there is increasing recognition of an array of symbioses that emerged in cultivated spaces but did not lead to domestication (Sugiyama et al. 2020; Terrell et al. 2003). Agri- cultural niches may not only foster the development of such mutualisms but also extend the ranges of nondomesticated agricultural associates (e.g., commensals and parasites), especially in 21st century contexts, and provide refugia for otherwise threatened taxa (Barthel et  al. 2013). In short, agricultural niche construction has had evolutionary effects not only on the direct targets of cultivation but also on other organisms that share these ecological spaces and sometimes support cultivated spe- cies (e.g., through pollination, soil production, nutrient cycling, etc.) An example is provided by domesticated squash (Cucurbita pepo) and its special- ist pollinator, the squash bee (Peponapis pruinosa). Although this mutualism has long been recognized (Hurd et al. 1971), recent genetic work is revealing new facets of the coevolutionary relationship. Lopez-Uribe et al. (2016) used molecular mark- ers to track range expansion in the squash bee, out of central and southern Mexico, and into and across North America, via multiple routes. The bee’s massive expan- sion, well beyond its natural range, was facilitated by the human-aided spread of its Cucurbita hosts, despite multiple genetic bottleneck events. However, the strong mutualistic relationship with Cucurbita species may have come at an unexpected cost. The authors hypothesize that the low effective population sizes in this special- ist bee are related to its nearly complete reliance on cultivated cucurbits throughout most of its current distribution. They also note the vulnerability of contemporary squash bee populations to the disturbances of modern agriculture, such as deep till- age (which can disturb their nesting sites), widely spaced crop rotation patterns, and use of insecticides. Human–organism relationships are facilitated through local landscape modi- fications as well. Agricultural niches provide habitat for a variety of organisms, especially those that prefer open or mosaic environments (Bliege Bird et  al. 2013; Eriksson 2013; Johnston 2005). Contemporary agricultural systems provide several 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research examples. In Spain, the configurations of agricultural landscapes reduce travel times and mortality risk for avian species, allowing them to efficiently link functionally diverse habitats (Camacho et  al. 2014). Around the world bats both benefit from and service plantations, taking advantage of periodic insect outbreaks, while also serving as pollinators for crops like bananas, mangos, and guavas, with obvious ben- efits for farmers (e.g., Alpizar et  al. 2019). In northern Europe, both constructed and informal field boundaries act as ecotones, enhancing biodiversity by providing refugia for useful insects (Kovar 1992; Marshall 1989; Marshall and Moonen 2002). The traditional infield–outfield farming systems of Scandinavia, where crop produc- tion and animal husbandry were closely integrated, also created high biodiversity through the use of manure as a fertilizer and the maintenance of open mosaic land- scapes (Eriksson et  al. 2021). Studies elsewhere show that active human manage- ment is often key to sustaining ecosystem productivity; when fields are abandoned or active management ends, reductions of commensal or mutualistic flora and fauna may follow (Bliege Bird et al. 2013; Clement et al. 2021). However, environmental modifications can also be deleterious, driving some taxa to extinction. Anthropogenic extinctions contrast with those arising from climate change or natural catastrophes, where taxonomic turnover is generally slow or, in some cases, nonexistent (see Steadman 1986). As humans and the agricultural niche have dispersed across the globe, extinctions have greatly accelerated. Many Holo- cene extinctions are associated with habitat change and human-aided translocations of alien species that outcompete native taxa (Braje and Erlandson 2013). The effects of human niche construction activities on avian species are particularly well docu- mented, arising from both habitat alteration and competition with introduced preda- tors and competitors (Steadman 2006; Szabo et  al. 2012). In some cases, adverse effects may persist even when native forests are replaced with arborescent economic species (Young et  al. 2017), but in others new coevolutionary partnerships evolve. The variability in outcomes points to the important role played by historical con- tingencies, for example, the demographic and life history traits of the organisms involved. When extinctions occur, the effects may ramify through an ecosystem, leading to the loss of ecosystem services and disruption of ecosystem functioning, particularly in situations where functional redundancy is low. Niche construction theory provides an exemplary framework for exploring these secondary symbioses as it links ecological and evolutionary processes (Matthews et  al. 2014; Odling-Smee et  al. 2013). It is often through the byproducts of agri- cultural activities and associated landscape modifications that “many:many relation- ships” develop (after Odling-Smee et al. 2013, pp. 5–6); these are instances where the selective environment is co-constructed by a multitude of organisms, leading to ecological “spillovers” that affect numerous organisms in the process. These many:many relationships are emergent phenomena in agricultural niches, with cas- cading effects through time and space. Niche construction theory also facilitates archaeological contributions to assessments of eco-evolutionary feedbacks, recog- nizing that humans are important elements of the environment, both in the past and at present. The role of humans in environmental modifications, and the transmission of those modified environments and attendant selective environments to other non- domesticated organisms, is increasingly acknowledged (Bogaard et al. 2018; Renard 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research et al. 2013). In short, NCT serves to integrate the differing vantage points afforded by archaeology, evolutionary biology, and ecology. Long‑Term Outcomes in Constructed Niches The dynamic interactions between agricultural strategies and environmental, demo- graphic, and sociopolitical processes are of longstanding interest to social scientists. Niche construction theory has the potential to provide new perspectives on these interactions and the differential outcomes that arise from the intersection of distinc- tive practices, ecological inheritances, and other selection processes. Niche con- struction behaviors are generally assumed to be adaptive in the short term, at least when they are intentional (Scott-Phillips et  al. 2014). However, niche construction activities may alleviate or aggravate existing vulnerabilities over the long term, out- comes that often depend on the nature of the inherited environment and performance of agronomic investments. Here, we briefly consider a small number of studies that have considered these issues. Although none originate from a NCT framework, they bring into focus critical variables that might usefully be explored through a NCT lens. Scarborough (2003, 2008; Scarborough and Burnside 2010) contrasts two path- ways to sociopolitical complexity, both deeply intertwined with the management of biophysical environments: technotasking and labortasking. Technotasking socie- ties, such as those from the Tigras and Euphrates drainages, are distinguished by their considerable investments in landscape engineering and technological innova- tions. They are strongly extractive, organized around short-term goals (e.g., growth and concentration of resources), and are typically regulated by top-down manage- rial controls. Technotasking societies can, over time, become overly dependent on built landscapes, economically, ideologically, or both, which can in turn drive further large-scale investments. However, such efforts may result in “path depend- ency” (Hegmon et  al. 2008), a self-reinforcing process where initial decisions, for example, those relating to agronomic infrastructure and managerial practices, lock populations into particular trajectories. In these instances, when selective conditions change, effective agronomic responses may be constrained by prior developments, making some potentially effective solutions too costly or culturally untenable, as suggested above for northern China (Chen et al. 2012; Kidder and Liu 2017). Labortasking groups, in contrast, are associated with heterarchical societies and structured around long-term sustainability. This pathway is distinguished by inter- generational transmission of skill sets, highly organized labor management prac- tices, and close attention to ecological relationships, as exemplified by ancient Mayan and recent Balinese societies (Scarborough 2008; Scarborough and Burn- side 2010). Change is often slow and incremental, with new agricultural practices being integrated into existing social practices and political institutions. Smallholders and householders typically have more independence in such systems, allowing for greater behavioral variability and encouraging cooperative relationships (see Bruno 2014; Netting 1993). These circumstances potentially enhance economic resiliency, even when the overarching political institutions fail. Of particular note are the ways 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research that labortasking reinforces interdependency between human societies and the built environment, through gradual, incremental environmental modifications and the intergenerational transmission of agronomic knowledge (Scarborough and Burnside 2010, p. 335). Likewise, de Souza et al. (2019) distinguish two alternative models of land use, and their intersection with climate change, in late pre-Columbian Amazonia. One type of land use system was intensive, specialized, and focused on short-term goals of maximizing productive outputs (continuous high yields and surplus); the other emphasized resource diversity and long-term stability. The former was associ- ated with centralized decision making, social inequality, and high interdependency of social components, along with significant investments in large-scale landscape modifications (earthworks and agronomic architecture). This system, they argue, was more vulnerable to climate change. In contrast, the alternative land use system was linked with decentralized political structures and a greater focus on minimiz- ing risks. The latter was achieved through agronomic behaviors that sustained eco- logical services (i.e., regenerative soil practices, polyculture, forest management), therein contributing to long-term resilience. More recently, Freeman et  al. (2021) explore how variation in landscape engi- neering, dichotomized as “technological” versus “ecological” intensification, affects the stability of food production and population dynamics. Using multimillennial archaeological sequences from six regions, they model the impacts of these two strategies across evolving food production systems, from hunter-gatherers to intensi- fied agriculturalists. Summed probability distributions of C ages and PaleoView climate projections (Fordham at al. 2017) inform the model, along with inferences of political-economy complexity based on settlement size (Freeman et  al. 2021, p. 380). The outcomes suggest that the intergenerational accumulation of landscape engineering leads to more stable food production systems, supporting population growth and demographic stability. However, during rare and large-scale environ- mental perturbations, societies highly dependent on landscape engineering appeared more vulnerable, relative to those engaged in ecological intensification strategies. The modeling raises interesting questions about how differential investments in landscape engineering might affect long-term outcomes and shows the potential for testing alternative hypotheses through modeling. Environmental variability, and the nature, function, and performance of agricul- tural investments, are also important parameters affecting the stability of food pro- duction systems and population dynamics (Allen 2004). In relatively stable envi- ronments, where year-to-year variance is minimal, productive maximizing strategies may effectively support population growth and/or the generation of surpluses. How - ever, in risky and unpredictable environments these same strategies can be disadvan- tageous or even catastrophic. Here, energetic investments that spread the impacts of risk, or reduce the occurrence and costs (e.g., infrastructure designed to manage ero- sion, water, or temperature extremes), act to minimize year-to-year variance, albeit with short-term costs—a strategy known as bet hedging (Frank and Slatkin 1990). Simons (2011, fig. 1) illustrates the long-term advantages of bet hedging in unpre- dictable environments, noting that although initially characterized by lower average fitness, bet-hedging strategies reduce variance in fitness across generations (i.e., 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research geometric mean fitness). These outcomes drive home the importance of considering environmental variance alongside other parameters when we compare agricultural strategies and point to the long-term benefits of variance-minimizing investments in risky and unpredictable settings. Importantly, not only is a modified environment inherited but so too are the strategies of prior generations and the outcomes of those strategies. Although the foregoing examples stem from different theoretical perspectives, they have multiple points of overlap. Variation in the character and magnitude of landscape investments is central to each. Environmental parameters are also seen as critical. These include the diversity, abundance, and distribution of resources—all combining to shape agricultural possibilities and initiate trajectories. However, the nature of the environment, particularly the magnitude, periodicity, and predictabil- ity of risks, are also crucial and may affect the rise and transmission of behavioral strategies, as well as long-term resilience. Sociopolitical structures also play a fun- damental role in the foregoing examples, with a dichotomy drawn between extrac- tive versus stabilizing or regenerative strategies. The importance of maintaining a pool of behavioral variability and organizational flexibility in terms of access to land, resources, and technologies is also highlighted. This has been demonstrated for food security under conditions of climate change as well (Nelson et al. 2016), where social groups with flexible management structures are better positioned to quickly initiate counteractive niche construction, relative to those with large and potentially cumbersome sociopolitical social institutions. Communities inherit modified landscapes, social structures, and the outcomes of agricultural strategies implemented by prior generations (Morrison 2014). These inheritances, in turn, lead to new selective environments for subsequent generations of producers, which have different long-term outcomes. Still, and despite differing historical contingences, the foregoing examples demonstrate that large-scale pat- terns can be discerned and provide a foundation for deriving testable hypotheses. They point to ways that forms of ecological inheritance may systematically covary with environmental features and sociopolitical developments, potentially leading to shared fitness outcomes. The Past in the Contemporary World Archaeologists are increasingly calling for more cross-disciplinary engagement to inform contemporary policy and aid in the resolution of socioecological problems (Boivin and Crowther 2021; Foster et  al. 2016; Logan 2020; Turner et  al. 2020). Indeed, some have argued that such contributions should be a key goal of archae- ology as we seek to maintain relevancy (Guttmann-Bond 2019; Kintigh et  al. 2014). One impediment has been the difficulties of convincing those outside the discipline that archaeology has something to offer (Smith 2021). Building aware- ness of the temporal depth of human modifications to landscapes and the extent to which humans have influenced earth processes over thousands of years is crucial (see Clement et  al. 2020; Ellis 2015; Ellis et  al. 2021). Niche construction theory builds on research framed by historical ecology, human ecodynamics, and human 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research behavioral ecology (e.g., Balée 2006; Fitzhugh et al. 2019; Nettle et al. 2013)—but uniquely draws attention to the importance of ecological inheritances and the myr- iad impacts our behaviors have on other organisms. Many communities around the world are more intimately tied to local agricultural histories of the past than is gen- erally realized (Morrison 2015), and in many ways, our ability to survive today is fundamentally shaped by agricultural processes of the past. Most notably, the persis- tent effects of past land use alter modern agricultural potential through the produc- tion of anthropogenic microenvironments (Vining 2018). While people have long appreciated their connection to the past in a historical sense, NCT calls attention to the tangible, physical connections between food producers of the past and those of contemporary societies. Continuity and local ecological knowledge are especially respected and cel- ebrated where long-term cultural connections persist (e.g., Balée 1989; Frausin et  al. 2014). Researchers working in many areas are demonstrating the role that both physical manifestations of ecological inheritance and the knowledge produced through cultural inheritance can play in combatting the effects of climate change and issues of food security across the world (Glaser 2007; Logan 2020; Solomon et al. 2016). Connections between past and present-day environments are especially visible in islands where inherited ecologies are inescapable (Fitzpatrick and Gio- vas 2021; Quintus 2018b). Contemporary concerns over food security and food sovereignty often reflect a lack of lay appreciation for these inherited landscapes of production (see Kurashima et  al. 2019). As global supply chains have become more complex and uncertain for remote or marginal locations, interests in local food production and traditional technologies are increasing. Landscape legacies take on added importance in such places, with the potential to reinvigorate successful place- based agricultural niches of the past. Recognizing and adapting to the consequences of our contemporary anthropo- genic niche is a pressing issue. Major impacts include greenhouse gas emissions, landscape alterations on a massive scale, and precipitous declines in biodiversity (Boivin et al. 2016). The deforestation of large swaths of the globe for agricultural endeavors over the course of human history has had profound effects (Burdanowitz et  al. 2021; Ruddiman et  al. 2014). The practices that contemporary food produc- ers, from individuals to multinational corporations, develop going forward will be built on the cumulative outcomes of human niche construction activities across deep time (Altman and Mesoudi 2019). An emerging and considerable challenge is cli- mate change, as contemporary food production systems are substantially constrained by temperature (Xu et al. 2020), and novel agricultural strategies will be needed to expand the temperature envelope. Indeed, Meneganzin and colleagues (2020) char- acterize our current climate change crisis as a monumental human niche construc- tion process and a “self-endangering evolutionary trap.” The latter situation arises when organisms are constrained by their evolutionary histories to make inappropri- ate choices, even when suitable alternative pathways are available. They argue that new forms of counteractive and inceptive niche construction are needed to stabilize the current global niche and drive technological innovation for our species’ survival. Within this frame, farmers are likely to extend cultivation into new environments, perhaps assisted by novel technologies. Indeed, the extension of some cultivated 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research species into new niches is already underway (Chapman et  al. 2012; Skarbø and VanderMolen 2016). This global movement is being underwritten by governmental organizations (i.e., USDA AIM for Climate Initiative) that seek to address the lega- cies and consequences of past and future environmental change through innovation. History reminds us that these investments will undoubtedly generate vulnerabilities in time, and it may be worthwhile to model long-term outcomes, consider a diversity of options, and build in flexibility. Archaeology stands to offers unique multicentury insights into the successes and failures of a diversity of food production practices across a wide array of environmental settings (Fisher 2020). Conclusions The historical study of agriculture has been part of the collective focus of archaeol- ogy for decades. A variety of theoretical perspectives have been applied, and this work has been fruitful substantively, theoretically, and methodologically (Marcus and Stanish 2006; Marston 2021; Morehart and De Lucia 2015; Thurston and Fisher 2007). However, investigations of causation frequently privilege proximate drivers, with more limited attention paid to the cascading effects of historical choices, or the incremental accumulation of changes. Moreover, attention has frequently been placed on specific kinds of production techniques, especially those considered “intensive,” in relation to demographic processes and the centralization of political authority; less-intensive agricultural practices, such as agroforestry, informal field systems, and small-scale gardens have, until recently, been understudied. Niche construction theory offers some advantages in this respect. It has the poten- tial to serve as an overarching theoretical framework to integrate diverse but over- lapping perspectives, including human–organism entanglement, human and nonhu- man agency, natural selection, nongenetic inheritance, and reciprocal causation. We argue that the niche construction lens is providing new and sometimes unexpected insights into our understanding of historical changes in human behavioral variability and the coevolution of humans, other organisms, and the abiotic environment. This is illustrated by the burgeoning literature reviewed herein. More specifically, NCT contributes to the study of agricultural histories and processes in six interrelated ways. First, NCT places the study of agricultural trajectories into a wider body of theory derived from both the biosciences and anthropology. This, in turn, conceptu- ally integrates human societies into natural systems and facilitates investigation of humanity’s role in the evolution of ecological systems. Second, NCT places focus on emergent phenomena that are the result of the confluence of multiple causal trajecto- ries, and thus shifts inquiry toward documenting sequences of causation rather than events. Third, NCT highlights human, animal, and even plant agencies and the place of humans in reciprocal and recursive interactions. In this way, humans are decen- tered and the role of other organisms in affecting human agricultural behaviors via the shared niche is recognized (see Bogaard et al. 2021). As humans become more dependent on constructed agricultural niches, the physical and ecological impacts of other organisms increase. Fourth, NCT places focus on a host of human—organism relationships, not only those that result in domestication. Both nondomesticates and 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research domesticates are affected by agricultural behaviors, and these behaviors, intentional and otherwise, have reciprocal and dynamic effects. Fifth, NCT demonstrates the scale, scope, and importance of ecological inheritance. While persistent landscapes are archaeologically recognized, NCT places these records within a formal causal framework of inheritance. Sixth, and finally, a niche construction perspective tran- scends time and allows for the elucidation of relationships between organisms, past and present. While specific predictions can be challenging, as niche construction is historically contingent, knowledge of different forms of constructed niches and pat- terning in their associated long-term outcomes is useful. It provides an opportunity to assess, among other things, potential future states, the drivers of runaway niche construction, and the kinds of symbioses that enhance sustainability. The focus of NCT on long-term trajectories of human–organism–environment entanglements, technological developments, cultural context, and behavioral strat- egies makes it an ideal framework from which to investigate agricultural change. Agricultural trajectories are dynamic, produced within the context of changing soci- oecological structures and the result of accretionary histories. It is through the oper- ationalization of NCT that we can more fully understand both the entangled histo- ries of agriculture in particular places and the general macroevolutionary processes that create and sort agricultural behaviors over time. As we move into the future, we will continue to build on agricultural legacies of the past, but with increasingly global consequences. Acknowledgments We express our gratitude to the editors of Journal of Archaeological Research for their advice, comments, and critiques. Many of the ideas presented here have benefited from conversa- tions with colleagues, especially Ethan Cochrane, Patrick Kirch, and Thegn Ladefoged. Melinda Allen received support from the New Zealand Tertiary Education Commission, Te Pūnaha Matatini, Centre of Research Excellence for Complex Systems (https:// www. tepun ahama tatini. ac. nz) Grant no. UOA 9167- 3705716, and Seth Quintus received funding from the U.S. National Science Foundation (BCS-1732360) for components of this work. Finally, we thank five anonymous reviewers for their very generous, insight- ful, and helpful comments that improved the original manuscript. Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Com- mons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http:// creat iveco mmons. org/ licen ses/ by/4. 0/. References Cited Acabado, S., and Martin, M. (2022). Indigenous Archaeology in the Philippines: Decolonizing Ifugao History, University of Arizona Press, Tucson. Adams, R. (1981). Heartland of Cities: Surveys of Ancient Settlement and Land Use on the Central Floodplain of the Euphrates, University of Chicago Press, Chicago. 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research Alderfer, R. B., and Merkle, F. G. (1943). The comparative effects of surface application versus incorpo- ration of various mulching materials on structure, permeability, runoff, and other soil properties. Soil Science Society of America Proceedings 8: 79–86. Allaby, R. G., Stevens, C. J., Kistler, L., and Fuller, D. Q. (2022). Emerging evidence of plant domestica- tion as a landscape-level process. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 37: 26–279. Allen, J. S. (1991). The role of agriculture in the evolution of the pre-contact Hawaiian state. Asian Per- spectives 30: 117–132. Allen, M. S. (2004). Bet-hedging strategies, agricultural change, and unpredictable environments: His- torical development of dryland agriculture in Kona, Hawaii. Journal of Anthropological Archaeol- ogy 23: 196–224. Allen, M. S. (2010). Oscillating climate and socio-political process: The case of the Marquesan chief- dom, Polynesia. Antiquity 84: 86–102. Allen, M. S. (2015). Dietary opportunities and constraints on islands: A multi-proxy approach to diet in the Southern Cook Islands. In Lee-Thorp, J., and Katzenberg, M. A. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of the Archaeology of Diet, Oxford University Press, New York, DOI: https:// doi. org/ 10. 1093/ oxfor dhb/ 97801 99694 013. 013.2. Allen, M. S., Lewis, T., and Porch, N. (2022). Lost bioscapes: Floristic and arthropod diversity coinci- dent with 12th century Polynesian settlement, Nuku Hiva, Marquesas Islands. PLoS ONE 17(3): e0265224. Alpizar, P., Rodriguez-Herrera, B., and Jung, K. (2019). The effect of local land use on aerial insectivo- rous bats (Chiroptera) within the two dominating crop types in the northern-Caribbean lowlands of Costa Rica. PLoS ONE 14: e0210364. Altman, A., and Mesoudi, A. (2019). Understanding agriculture within the frameworks of cumulative cultural evolution, gene-culture co-evolution, and cultural niche construction. Human Ecology 47: 483–497. Ammerman, A. J., and Cavalli-Sforza, L. L. (1984). The Neolithic Transition and the Genetics of Popula- tions in Europe, Princeton University Press, Princeton. Anderson, A. (2009). The rat and the octopus: Initial human colonization and the prehistoric introduction of domestic animals to Remote Oceania. Biological Invasions 11: 1503–1519. Arnell, M., Cousins, S. A. O., and Eriksson, O. (2019). Does historical land use affect the regional distri- bution of fleshy-fruited woody plants? PLoS ONE 14: e0225791. Arroyo-Kalin, M. (2010). The Amazonian Formative: Crop domestication and anthropogenic soils. Diversity 2: 473–504. Arroyo-Kalin, M. (2017). Human niche construction and population growth in pre-Columbian Amazonia. Archaeology International 20: 122–136. Arroyo-Kalin, M. (2019). Landscaping, landscape legacies, and landesque capital in pre-Columbian Amazonia. In Isendahl, C., and Stump, D. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Historical Ecology and Applied Archaeology, Oxford University Press, New York, pp. 91–109. Athens, J. S. (1999). Comment on ‘Intensification in the Pacific’ by H. M. Leach. Current Anthropology 40: 321–322. Athens, J. S. (2009). Rattus exulans and the catastrophic disappearance of Hawai‘i’s native lowland for- est. Biological Invasions 11: 1489–1501. Balée, W. (1989). The culture of Amazonian forests. In Balée, W. (ed.), Advances in Economic Botany, New York Botanical Garden, New York, pp. 1–21. Balée, W. (2006). The research program of historical ecology. Annual Review of Anthropology 35: 75–98. Balée, W. (2010). Contingent diversity on anthropic landscapes. Diversity 2: 163–181. Balée, W. (2013). Cultural Forests of the Amazon: A Historical Ecology of People and Their Landscapes, University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa. Barber, I. G. (2004). Crops on the border: The growth of archaeological knowledge of Polynesian cultiva- tion in New Zealand. In Furey, L., and Holdaway, S. (eds.), Change through Time: 50 years of New Zealand Archaeology, Monograph 26, New Zealand Archaeological Association, Auckland, pp. 169–192. Barber, I. (2013). Molluscan mulching at the margins: Investigating the development of a South Island Māori variation on Polynesian hard mulch agronomy. Archaeology in Oceania 48: 40–52. Barthel, S., Crumley, C. L., and Svedin, U. (2013). Biocultural refugia: Combating the erosion of diver- sity in landscapes of food production. Ecology and Society 18: 71. 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research Beach, T., Luzzadder-Beach, S., Dunning, N., Hageman, J., and Lohse, J. (2002). Upland agriculture in the Maya Lowlands: Ancient Maya soil conservation in northwestern Belize. Geographical Review 92: 372–397. Bentley, R. A., and O’Brien, M. J. (2019). Modelling niche construction in Neolithic Europe. In Saqalli, M., and Vander Linden, M. (eds.), Integrating Qualitative and Social Science Factors in Archaeo- logical Modelling, Springer, Cham, Switzerland, pp. 91–108 Bevan, A., Colledge, S., Fuller, D., Fyfe, R., Shennan, S., and Stevens, C. (2017). Holocene fluctuations in human population demonstrate repeated links to food production and climate. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 114: E10524–E10531. Bevan, A., Conolly, J., Colledge, S., Frederick, C., Palmer, C., Siddall, R., and Stellatou, A. (2013). The long-term ecology of agricultural terraces and enclosed fields from Antikythera, Greece. Human Ecology 41: 255–272. Blaikie, P., and Brookfield, H. C. (1987). Land Degradation and Society, Methuen, London. Bliege Bird, R., Taylor, N., Codding, B. F., and Bird, D. W. (2013). Niche construction and dreaming logic: Aboriginal patch mosaic burning and varanid lizard (Varanus gouldii) in Australia. Pro- ceedings of the Royal Society B 280: 20132297. Bliege Bird, R., McGuire, C., Bird, D. W., Price, M. H., Zeanah, D., and Nimmo, D. G. (2020). Fire mosaics and habitat choice in nomadic foragers. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sci- ences 117: 12904–12914. Bogaard, A., Ater, M., and Hodgson, J. G. (2018). Arable weeds as a case study in plant-human rela- tionships beyond domestication. In Stepanoff, C., and Vigne, J.-D. (eds.), Hybrid Communi- ties: Biosocial Approaches to Domestication and Other Trans-species Relationships, Routledge, London, pp. 97–112. Bogaard, A., Fraser, R., Heaton, T. H. E., Wallace, M., Vaiglova, P., Charles, M., et al. (2013). Crop manuring and intensive land management by Europe’s first farmers. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science 110: 12589–12594. Bogaard, A., Allaby, R., Arbuckle, B. S., Bendrey, R., Crowley, S., Cucchi, T., et al. (2021). Recon- sidering domestication from a process archaeology perspective. World Archaeology 53: 56–77. Boivin, N., and Crowther, A. (2021). Mobilizing the past to shape a better Anthropocene. Nature Ecology & Evolution 5: 273–284. Boivin, N. L., Zeder, M. A., Fuller, D. Q., Crowther, A., Larson, G., Erlandson, J. M., Denham, T., and Petraglia, M. D. (2016). Ecological consequences of human niche construction: Examining long-term anthropogenic shaping of global species distributions. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 113: 6388–6396. Braje, T. J., and Erlandson, J. M. (2013). Human acceleration of animal and plant extinctions: A late Pleistocene, Holocene, and Anthropocene continuum. Anthropocene 4: 14–23. Brock, W. A., O’Brien, M. J., and Bentley, R. A. (2016). Validating niche-construction theory through path analysis. Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences 8: 918–837. Brookfield, H. C. (1972). Intensification and disintensification in Pacific agriculture: A theoretical approach. Pacific Viewpoint 13: 30–48. Bruno, M. C. (2014). Beyond raised fields: Exploring farming practices and processes of agricultural change in the ancient Titicaca Basin of the Andes. American Anthropologist 116: 130–145. Burdanowitz, N., Rixen, T., Gaye, B., and Emeis, K.-C. (2021). Signals of Holocene climate transition amplified by anthropogenic land-use changes in the westerly–Indian monsoon realm. Climate of the Past 17: 1735–1749. Camacho, C., Palacios, S., Saez, P., Sanchez, S., and Potti, J. (2014). Human-induced changes in land- scape configuration influence individual movement routines: Lessons from a versatile, highly mobile species. PLoS ONE 9: e104974. Cao, X., Xu, Q., Jing, Z., Tang, J., Li, Y., and Tian, F. (2010). Holocene climate change and human impacts implied from the pollen records in Anyang, central China. Quaternary International 227: 3–9. Chapman, S. C., Chakraborty, S., Dreccer, M. F., and Howden, S. M. (2012). Plant adaptation to cli- mate change—Opportunities and priorities in breeding. Crop and Pasture Science 63: 251–268. Chase, A. S. Z., and Weishampel, J. (2016). Using lidar and GIS to investigate water and soil manage- ment in the agricultural terracing at Caracol, Belize. Advances in Archaeological Practice 4: 357–370. Chen, Y., Syvitski, J. P. M., Gao, S., Overeem, I., and Kettner, A. J. (2012). Socio-economic impacts on flooding: A 4,000-year history of the Yellow River, China. AMBIO 41: 682–698. 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research Clement, C. R. (1999). 1492 and the loss of Amazonian crop genetic resources, I: The relation between domestication and human population decline. Economic Botany 53: 188–202. Clement, C. R., McCann, J. R., and Smith, N. J. H. (2003). Agrobiodiversity in Amazonia and its relationship with dark earths. In Lehmann, J., Kern, D. C., Glaser, B., and Woods, W. I. (eds.), Amazonian Dark Earths: Origin, Properties, Management, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, pp. 159–178 Clement, C. R., Denevan, W. M., Heckenberger, M. J., Junqueira, A. B., Neves, E. G., Teixeira, W. G., and Woods, W. I. (2015). The domestication of Amazonia before European conquest. Proceed- ings of the Royal Society B 282: 20150813. Clement, C. R., Levis, C., Franco-Moraes, J., and Junqueira, A. B. (2020). Domesticated nature: The culturally constructed niche of humanity. In Baldauf, C. (ed.), Participatory Biodiversity Con- servation: Concepts, Experiences, and Perspectives, Springer, Cham, Switzerland, pp. 35–52. Clement, C. R., Casas, A., Parra-Rondinel, F. A., Levis, C., Peroni, N., Hanazaki, N., et al. (2021). Dis- entangling domestication from food production systems in the Neotropics. Quaternary 4(1): 4, doi. org/https:// doi. org/ 10. 3390/ quat4 010004 Cockram, J., Chiapparino, W., Taylor, S. A., Stamati, K., Donini, P., Laurie, D. A., and O’Sullivan, D. M. (2007). Haplotype analysis of vernalization loci in European barley germplasm reveals novel VRN-H1 alleles and a predominant winter VRN-H1/VRN-H2 multi-locus haplotype. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 115: 993–1001. Cockram, J., Hones, H., and O’Sullivan, D. M. (2011). Genetic variation at flowering time locus in wild and cultivated barley. Plant Genetic Resources 9: 264–267. Colledge, S., Conolly, J., Crema, E., and Shennan, S. (2019). Neolithic population crash in northwest Europe associated with agricultural crisis. Quaternary Research 92: 686–707. Day, R. L., Laland, K. N., and Odling-Smee, J. (2003). Rethinking adaptation: The niche construction perspective. Perspectives in Biology and Nature 46: 80–95. de Oliveira, E. A., Marimon-Junior, B. H., Marimon, B. S., Iriarte, J., Morandi, P. S., Maezumi, S. Y., et  al. (2020). Legacy of Amazonian dark earth soils on forest structure and species composition. Global Ecology and Biogeography 29: 1458–1473. de Souza, J. G., Robinson, M., Maezumi, S. Y., Caprilles, J., Hoggarth, J. A., Lombardo, U., et al. (2019). Climate change and cultural resilience in late pre-Columbian Amazonia. Nature Ecology and Evo- lution 3: 1007–1017. Denevan, W. M. (1970). Aboriginal drained-field cultivation in the Americas. Science 169: 647–654. Denevan, W. M. (2001). Cultivated Landscapes of Native Amazonia and the Andes, Oxford University Press, New York. Denevan, W. M., Padoch, C., Prance, G. T., Treacy, J. M., Unruh, J., Alcorn, J. B., et al. (1988). Swidden- fallow agroforestry in the Peruvian Amazon. Advances in Economic Botany 5: i–107. Denham, T. (2011). Early agriculture and plant domestication in New Guinea and Island Southeast Asia. Current Anthropology 52: S379–S395. Denham, T., Barton, H., Castillo, C., Crowther, A., Dotte-Sarout, E., Florin, S. A., et  al. (2020). The domestication syndrome in vegetatively propagated field crops. Annals of Botany 125: 581–597 DiNapoli, R. J., and Leppard, T. P. (2018). Island as model environments. Journal of Island and Coastal Archaeology 13: 157–160. Donoghue, M. J. (2008). A phylogenetic perspective on the distribution of plant diversity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science 105: 11549–11555. Doolittle, W. E. (1984). Agricultural change as an incremental process. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 74: 124–137. Drennan, R. D., Peterson, C. E., and Berrey, C. A. (2020). Environmental risk buffering in Chinese Neo- lithic villages: Impacts on community structure in the Central Plains and the western Liao Valley. Archaeological Research in Asia 21: 100165. Duncan, N. A., Loughlin, N. J., Walker, J. H., Hocking, E. P., and Whitney, B. S. (2021). Pre- Dupouey, J. L., Dambrine, E., Laffite, J. D., and Moares, C. (2002). Irreversible impact of past land use on forest soils and biodiversity. Ecology 83: 2978–2984. Dye, T. S. (2014). Structure and growth of the Leeward Kohala Field System: An analysis with directed graphs. PLoS ONE 9: e102431. Earle, T. (1997). How Chiefs Come to Power: The Political Economy in Prehistory, Stanford University Press, Palo Alto. Earle, T. (2011). Chiefs, chieftaincies, chiefdoms, and chiefly confederacies: Power in the evolution of political systems. Social Evolution and History 10: 27–54. 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research Earle, T., and Spriggs, M. (2015). Political economy in prehistory: A Marxist approach to Pacific sequences. Current Anthropology 56: 515–544. Eger, A. A. (2011). The swamps of home: Marsh formation and settlement in the early medieval Near East. Journal of Near Eastern Studies 70: 55–79. Ellis, E. C. (2015). Ecology in an anthropogenic biosphere. Ecological Monographs 85: 287–331. Ellis, E. C. (2016). Why is human niche construction transforming planet earth? RCC Perspectives 5: 63–70. Ellis, E. C., Gauthier, N., Goldwijk, K. K., Bliege Bird, R., Boivin, N., Diaz, S., et al. (2021). People have shaped most of terrestrial nature for at least 12,000 years. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science 118: e2023483118. Erickson, C. L. (1988). Raised field agriculture in the Lake Titicaca basin: Putting ancient agriculture back to work. Expedition 30: 8–16. Erickson, C. L. (1992). Prehistoric landscape management in the Andean highlands: Raised field agricul- ture and its environmental impact. Population and Environment 13: 285–300. Erickson, C. L. (1993). The social organization of prehispanic raised field agriculture in the Lake Titicaca basin. In Scarborough, V., and Isaac, B. (eds.), Economic Aspects of Water Management in the Pre- hispanic New World, JAI Press, Greenwich, pp. 369–426. Erickson, C. L. (2006). The domesticated landscapes of the Bolivian Amazon. In Balée, W., and Erick- son, C. (eds.), Time and Complexity in Historical Ecology: Studies in the Neotropical Lowlands, Columbia University Press, New York, pp. 235–278. Erickson, C. L. (2008). Amazonia: The historical ecology of a domesticated landscape. In Silverman, H., and Isbell, W. H. (eds.), Handbook of South American Archaeology, Springer, New York, pp. 157–183. Eriksson, O. (2013). Species pools in cultural landscapes – niche construction, ecological opportunity and niche shifts. Ecography 36: 403–413. Eriksson, O., and Arnell, M. (2017). Niche construction, entanglement and landscape domestication in Scandinavian infield systems. Landscape Research 42: 78–88. Eriksson, O., Arnell, M., and Lindholm, K.-J. (2021). Historical ecology of Scandinavian infield systems. Sustainability 13: 817. Fisher, C. (2020). Archaeology for sustainable agriculture. Journal of Archaeological Research 28: 393–441. Fitzhugh, B., Butler, V., Bovy, K. M., and Etnier, M. A. (2019). Human ecodynamics: A perspective for the study of long–term change in socioecological systems. Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports 23: 1077–1094. Fitzpatrick, S. M., and Giovas, C. M. (2021). Tropical islands of the Anthropocene: Deep histories of anthropogenic terrestrial-marine entanglement in the Pacific and Caribbean. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science 118: e2022209118. Fogarty, L., and Creanza, N. (2017). The niche construction of cultural complexity: Interactions between innovations, population size and the environment. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 372: 20160428. Ford, A., and Nigh, R. (2015). The Maya Forest Garden: Eight Millennia of Sustainable Cultivation of the Tropical Woodlands, Left Coast Press, Walnut Creek, CA. Fordham, D. A., Saltré, F., Haythorne, S., Wigley, T. M. L., Otto-Bliesner, B. L. Ching Chan, K., and Brook, B. W. (2017). PaleoView: A tool for generating continuous climate projections spanning the last 21,000 years at regional and global scales. Ecography 40: 1348–1358. Foster, D., Swanson, F., Aber, J., Burke, I., Brokaw, N., Tilman, D., and Knapp, A. (2003). The impor- tance of land-use legacies to ecology and conservation. Bioscience 53: 77–88. Foster, H. T., Paciulli, L. M., and Goldstein, D. J. (eds.) (2016). Viewing the Future in the Past: Histori- cal Ecology Applications to Environmental Issues, University of South Carolina Press, Columbia. Frank, S. A., and Slatkin, M. (1990). Evolution in a variable environment. The American Naturalist 136: 244–260. Fraser, J. (2010). Caboclo horticulture and Amazonian dark earths along the Middle Madeira River, Bra- zil. Human Ecology 38: 651–662. Fraser, J., Teixeira, W., Falcao, N., Woods, W., Lehmann, J., and Junqueira, A. B. (2011). Anthropogenic soils in the central Amazon: From categories to a continuum. Area 43: 264–273. Frausin, V., Fraser, J. A., Narmah, W., Lahai, M. K., Winnebah, T. R. A., Fairhead, J., and Leach, M. (2014). “God made the soil, but we made it fertile”: Gender, knowledge, and practice in the forma- tion and use of African dark earths in Liberia and Sierra Leone. Human Ecology 42: 695–710. 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research Freeman, J., Anderies, J. M., Beckman, N. G., Robinson, E., Baggio, J. A., Bird, D., et al. (2021). Land- scape engineering impacts the long-term stability of agricultural populations. Human Ecology 49: 369–382. Fuentes, A. (2016). The extended evolutionary synthesis, ethnography, and the human niche: Toward an integrated anthropology. Current Anthropology 57: S13–S26. Fuller, D., and Lucas, L. (2017). Adapting crops, landscapes, and food choices: Patterns in the dispersal of domesticated plants across Eurasia. In Boivin, N., Crassard, R., and Petraglia, M. (eds.), Human Dispersal and Species Movement, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 304–331. Fuller, D., and Qin, L. (2009). Water management and labour in the origins and dispersal of Asian rice. World Archaeology 41:88–111. Fuller, D., and Stevens, C. (2017). Open for competition: Domesticates, parasitic domesticoids and the agricultural niche. Archaeology International 20: 110–121. Fuller, D. Q., Asouti, E., and Purugganan, M. D. (2012). Cultivation as slow evolutionary entanglement: Comparative data on rate and sequence of domestication. Vegetation History and Archaeobotany 21: 131–145. Fuller, D. Q., Stevens, C., Lucas, L., Murphy, C., and Qin, L. (2016). Entanglements and entrapments on the pathway toward domestication. In Der, L., and Fernandini, F. (eds.), The Archaeology of Entan- glement, Left Coast Press, Walnut Creek, CA, pp. 151–172. Funk, E. (1982). The aboriginal use and domestication of Touchardia latifolia Gaud. (Urticaceae) in Hawaii. Archaeology in Oceania 17: 16–19. Gee, H. K. W. (2007). Habitat characteristics of refuge wetlands and taro lo’i used by endangered water- birds at Hanalei National Wildlife Refuge, Hawai‘i. Unpublished M.A. thesis, Department of Wild- life Science, South Dakota State University, Brookings. German, L. A. (2003). Historical contingencies in the evolution of environment and livelihood: Contribu- tions to the debate on Amazonian Black Earth. Geoderma 111: 307–331. Glaser, B. (2007). Prehistorically modified soils of central Amazonia: A model for sustainable agriculture in the twenty-first century. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 362: 187–196. Groenman-van Waateringe, W., and van Geel, B. (2017). Raised bed agriculture in northwest Europe trig- gered by climatic change around 850 BC: A hypothesis. Environmental Archaeology 22: 166–170. Gumbley, W. (2021). The Waikato Horticultural Complex: An Archaeological Reconstruction of a Poly- nesian Horticultural System, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Archaeology and Nat- ural History, Australian National University, Canberra. Guttmann, E. B. A. (2005). Midden cultivation in prehistoric Britain: Arable crops in gardens. World Archaeology 37: 224–239. Guttmann, E. B., Simpson, I. A., Nielsen, N., and Dockrill, S. J. (2008). Anthrosols in Iron Age Shetland: Implications for arable and economic activity. Geoarchaeology 23: 799–823. Guttmann-Bond, E. (2019). Reinventing Sustainability: How Archaeology Can Save the Planet, Oxbow Books, Oxford. Haas, R., and Kuhn, S. L. (2019). Foragers mobility in constructed environments. Current Anthropology 60: 499–535. Håkansson, N. T., and Widgren, M. (eds.) (2014). Landesque Captial: The Historical Ecology of Endur- ing Landscape Modifications, Routledge, New York. Hale, J. W. C., and Sanger, M. (2020). Cultural spaces and climate change: Modelling Holocene archae- ological settlement patterns on the coastal plain of the southeastern United States. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 59: 101198. Handy, E. S. C., and Handy, E. G. (1972). Native Planters in Old Hawaii, Bulletin 233, B. P. Bishop Museum, Honolulu. Harris, D. R., and Fuller, D. Q. (2014). Agriculture: Definition and overview. In Smith, C. (ed.), Encyclo- pedia of Global Archaeology, Springer, New York, pp. 104–113 Heckenberger, M., and Neves, E. G. (2009). Amazonian archaeology. Annual Review of Anthropology 38: 251–266. Hegmon, M., Peeples, M. A., Kinzig, A. P., Kulow, S., Meegan, C. M., and Nelson, M. C. (2008). Social transformation and its human costs in the prehispanic U.S. Southwest. American Anthropologist 110: 313–324. Hejcman, M., Ondráček, J., and Smrž, Z. (2011). Ancient waste pits with wood ash irreversible increase crop production in central Europe. Plant and Soil 339: 341–350. 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research Hejcman, M., Součková, K., and Gojda, M. (2013). Prehistoric settlement activities changed soil pH, nutrient availability, and growth of contemporary crops in central Europe. Plant and Soil 369: 131–140. Heyvaert, V. M. A., and Walstra, J. (2016). The role of long-term human impact on avulsion and fan development. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms 41: 2137–2152. Hightower, J. N., Butterfield, A. C., and Weishampel, J. F. (2014). Quantifying ancient Maya land use legacy effects on contemporary rainforest canopy structure. Remote Sensing 6: 10716–10732. Hodder, I. (2012). Entangled: An Archaeology of the Relationships between Humans and Things. Wiley- Blackwell, Oxford. Hofman, C. A., and Rick, T. C. (2018). Ancient biological invasions and island ecosystems: Tracking translocations of wild plants and animals. Journal of Archaeological Research 26: 65–115. Hritz, C., and Pournelle, J. R. (2016). Feeding history: Deltaic resilience, inherited practice, and millen- nial-scale sustainability in an urbanized landscape. In Foster, H. T., Paciulli, L. M., and Goldstein, D. J. (eds.), View the Future in the Past: Historical Ecology Applications to Environmental Issues, University of South Carolina Press, Columbia, pp. 59–85. Huang, C., Sun, H., Xu, D., Checn, Q., Liang, Y., Wang, X., et  al. (2018). ZmCCT9 enhances maize adaptation to higher latitudes. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 115: E333–E341. Huebert, J. M., and Allen, M. S. (2020). Anthropogenic forests, arboriculture, and niche construction in the Marquesas Islands (Polynesia). Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 57: 101122. Hung, H.-Y., Shannon, L. M., Tian, F., Bradbury, P. J., Chen, C., Flint-Garcia, S. A., et al. (2012). ZmCCT and the genetic basis of day-length adaptation underlying the postdomestication spread of maize. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science 109: E1913–E1921. Hunt, T. L. (2007). Rethinking Easter Island’s ecological catastrophe. Journal of Archaeological Science 34: 485–502. Hurd, P. D., Linsley, E. G., and Whitaker, T. W. (1971). Squash and gourd bees (Peponapis, Xenoglossa) and the origin of the cultivated cucurbita. Evolution 25: 218–234. Hynes, R., and Chase, A. (1982). Plants, sites and domiculture: Aboriginal influence upon plant commu- nities in Cape York Peninsula. Archaeology in Oceania 17: 38–50. Johnston, R. (2005). A social archaeology of garden plots in the Bronze Age of northern and western Britain. World Archaeology 37: 211–223. Jones, B. D., Ladefoged, T. N., and Asner, G. (2015). Tracing the resilience and revitalization of historic taro production in Waipi’o Valley, Hawai‘i. Journal of the Polynesian Society 124: 83–109. Jones, C. G., Lawton, J. H., and Shachak, M. (1994). Organisms as ecosystem engineers. Oikos 69: 373–386. Jotheri, J., Allen, M. B., and Wilkinson, T. J. (2016). Holocene avulsions of the Euphrates River in the Najaf area of western Mesopotamia: Impacts on human settlement patterns. Geoarchaeology 31: 175–193. Jotheri, J., Altaweel, M., Tuji, A., Anma, R., Pennington, B., Rost, S., and Watanabe, C. (2018). Holo- cene fluvial and anthropogenic processes in the region of Uruk in southern Mesopotamia. Quater - nary International 483: 57–69. Kagawa, A. K., and Vitousek, P. M. (2012). The ahupuaʻa of Puanui: A resource for understanding Hawaiian rain-fed agriculture. Pacific Science 66: 161–172. Kagawa-Viviani, A. K., Lincoln, N. K., Quintus, S., Lucas, M. P., and Giambelluca, T. W. (2018). Spatial patterns of seasonal crop production suggest coordination within and across dryland agricultural systems of Hawai‘i Island. Ecology and Society 23: 20. Kahn, J. G., Nickelsen, C., Stevenson, J., Porch, N., Dotte-Sarout, E., Christensen, C. C., et  al. (2015). Mid- to late Holocene landscape change and anthropogenic transformations on Mo‘orea, Society Islands: A multi-proxy approach. The Holocene 25: 333–347. Kawa, N., Rodrigues, D., and Clement, C. R. (2011) Useful species richness, proportions of exotic spe- cies, and market orientation on Amazonian dark earths and oxisols. Economic Botany 65: 169–177. Kidder, T. R., and Liu, H. (2017). Bridging theoretical gaps in geoarchaeology: Archaeology, geoarchae- ology, and history in the Yellow River valley, China. Archaeological and Anthropological Science 9: 1585–1602. Kidder, T. R., and Zhuang, Y. (2015). Anthropocene archaeology of the Yellow River, China, 5000–2000 BP. The Holocene 25: 1627–1639. Kidder, T. R., Liu, H., and Li, M. (2012a). Sanyangzhuang: Early farming and a Han settlement preserved beneath Yellow River flood deposits. Antiquity 86: 30–47. 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research Kidder, T. R., Liu, H., Xu, Q., and Li, M. (2012b). The alluvial geoarchaeology of the Sanyangzhuang site on the Yellow River floodplain, Henan Province, China. Geoarchaeology 27: 324–343. Kintigh, K., Altschul, J., Beaudry, M., Drennan, R., Kinzig, A., Kohler, T., et  al. (2014). Grand chal- lenges for archaeology. American Antiquity 79: 5–24. Kirch, P. V. (1988). Niuatoputapu: The Prehistory of a Polynesian Chiefdom, Monograph No. 5, Thomas Burke Memorial Washington State Museum, Seattle. Kirch, P. V. (1994). The Wet and the Dry: Irrigation and Agricultural Intensification in Polynesia, Uni- versity of Chicago Press, Chicago. Kirch, P. V. (1996). Late Holocene human-induced modifications to a central Polynesian island ecosys- tem. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science 93: 5296–5300. Kirch, P. V. (2007). Three islands and an archipelago: Reciprocal interactions between humans and island ecosystems in Polynesia. Earth and Environmental Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh 98: 85–99. Kirch, P. V. (2010). How Chiefs Became Kings: Divine Kingship and the Rise of Archaic States in Ancient Hawai‘i, University of California Press, Berkeley. Kirch, P. V. (ed.) (2011). Roots of Conflict: Soils, Agriculture, and Sociopolitical Complexity in Ancient Hawai‘i, School for Advanced Research, Santa Fe, NM. Kirch, P. V. (ed.) (2017). Tangatatau Rockshelter: The Evolution of an Eastern Polynesian Socio-Ecosys- tem, Monumenta Archaeologica 40, Costen Institute Press, Los Angeles. Kovar, P. (1992). Ecotones in agricultural landscape. Ecology (CSFR) 11: 251–258. Kurashima, N., Fortini, L., and Ticktin, T. (2019). The potential of indigenous agricultural food produc- tion under climate change in Hawai‘i. Nature Sustainability 2: 191–199. Ladefoged, T. N., and Graves, M. W. (2000). Evolutionary theory and the historical development of dry- land agriculture in North Kohala, Hawai‘i. American Antiquity 65: 423–448. Ladefoged, T. N., Graves, M. W., and McCoy, M. D. (2003). Archaeological evidence for agricultural development in Kohala Island of Hawai‘i. Journal of Archaeological Science 30: 923–940. Ladefoged, T. N., Lee, C. T., and Graves, M. W. (2008). Modeling life expectancy and surplus production of dynamic pre-contact territories in leeward Kohala, Hawai‘i. Journal of Anthropological Archae- ology 27: 93–110. Ladefoged, T. N., Kirch, P. V., Gon, S. M., Chadwick, O. A., Hartshorn, A. S., and Vitousek, P. M. (2009). Opportunities and constraints for intensive agriculture in the Hawaiian archipelago prior to European contact. Journal of Archaeological Science 36: 2374–2383. Ladefoged, T. N., Stevenson, C. M., Haoa, S., Mulrooney, M., Puleston, C., Vitousek, P. M., and Chad- wick, O. A. (2010). Soil nutrient analysis of Rapa Nui gardening. Archaeology in Oceania 45: 80–85. Ladefoged, T. N., McCoy, M. D., Asner, G. P., Kirch, P. V., Puleston, C. O., Chadwick O. A., and Vitousek, P. M. (2011). Agricultural potential and actualized development in Hawai‘i: An airborne LIDAR survey of the leeward Kohala field system (Hawai‘i Island). Journal of Archaeological Sci- ence 38: 3605–3619. Laland, K. N. (2015). On evolutionary causes and evolutionary processes. Behavioural Processes 117: 97–104. Laland, K. N., and O’Brien, M. J. (2010). Niche construction theory and archaeology. Journal of Archae- ological Method and Theory 17: 303–322. Laland, K. N., and O’Brien, M. J. (2012). Cultural niche construction: An introduction. Biological The- ory 6: 191–202. Laland, K. N., and O’Brien, M. J. (2015). Niche construction: Implications for human societies. In Scott, R., and Kosslyn, S. (eds.), Emerging Trends in the Social and Behavioral Sciences, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., https:// doi. org/ 10. 1002/ 97811 18900 772. etrds 0242. Laland, K. N., and Sterelny, K. (2006). Seven reasons (not) to neglect niche construction. Evolution 60: 1751–1762. Laland, K. N., Kendal, J. R., and Brown, G. R. (2007). The niche construction perspective: Implications for evolution and human behavior. Journal of Evolutionary Psychology 5: 51–61. Laland, K. N., Sterelny, K., Odling-Smee, J., Hoppitt, W., and Uller, T. (2011). Cause and effect in biol- ogy revisited: Is Mayr’s proximate-ultimate dichotomy still useful? Science 334: 1512–1516. Laland, K. N., Odling-Smee, J., Hoppitt, W., and Uller, T. (2013). More on how and why: Cause and effect in biology revisited. Biology and Philosophy 28: 719–745. Laland, K., Odling-Smee, J., and Endler, J. (2017). Niche construction, sources of selection and trait evo- lution. Interface Focus 7: 20160147. 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research Laland, K. N., Odling-Smee, J., and Feldman, M. W. (2019). Understanding niche construction as an evolutionary process. In Uller, T., and Laland, K.N. (eds.), Evolutionary Causation: Biological and Philosophical Reflections, MIT Press, Cambridge, pp. 127–152. Lansing, J. S. (1991). Priests and Programmers: Technologies of Power in the Engineered Landscape of Bali, Princeton University Press, Princeton. Latinis, D. K. (2000). The development of subsistence system models for Island Southeast Asia and Near Oceania: The nature and role of arboriculture and arboreal-based economies. World Archaeology 32: 41–67. Leach, B. F., and Leach, H. M. (eds.) (1979). Prehistoric Man in Palliser Bay, Bulletin 21, National Museum of New Zealand, Wellington. Leach, H., and Stowe, C. (2005). Oceanic arboriculture at the margins—The case of the karaka (Coryno- carpus laevigatus) in Aotearoa. Journal of the Polynesian Society 114: 7–27. Lee, G.-A., Crawford, G. W., Liu, L., and Chen, X. (2007). Plants and people from the early Neo- lithic to Shang periods in North China. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science 104: 1087–1092. Leitão-Barboza, M. S., Kawa, N. C., Junqueira, A. B., and Oyuela-Caycedo, A. (2021) Open air labo- ratories: Amazonian home gardens as sites of experimentation, collaboration, and negotiation across time. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 62:101302. Lepofsky, D., and Lertzman, K. (2008). Documenting ancient plant management in the northwest of North America. Botany 86:129–145. Lepofsky, D., and Kahn, J. (2011). Cultivating an ecological and social balance: Elite demands and commoner knowledge in ancient Ma‘ohi agriculture, Society Islands. American Anthropologist 113: 319–335. Levis, C., Costa, F. R. C., Bongers, F., Peña-Claros, M., Clement, C. R., Junqueira, A. B., et  al. (2017). Persistent effects of pre-Columbian plant domestication on Amazonian forest composi- tion. Science 355: 925–931. Levis, C., Flores, B. M., Moreira, P. A, Luize, B. G., Alves, R. P., Franco-Morales, J., et al. (2018). How people domesticated Amazonian forests. Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution 5: 171. Levis, C., Peña-Claros, M., Clement, C. R., Costa, F. R. C., Alves, R. P., Ferreira, M. J., Figueiredo, C. G., and Bongers, F. (2020). Pre-Columbian soil fertilization and current management main- tain food resource availability in old-growth Amazonian forests. Plant Soil 450: 29–48. Lewontin, R. (1983). Gene, organism, and environment. In Bendall, D. S. (ed.), Evolution from Mol- ecules to Men, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 273–285. Lewontin, R. (2000). The Triple Helix: Gene, Organisms, and Environment, Harvard University Press, Cambridge. Lightfoot, D. R. (1996). The nature, history, and distribution of lithic mulch agriculture: An ancient technique of dryland agriculture. The Agricultural History Review 44: 206–222. Lightfoot, D. R., and Eddy, F. W. (1994). The agricultural utility of lithic-mulch gardens: Past and present. GeoJournal 34: 425–437. Lincoln, N. K., Rossen, J., Vitousek, P., Kahoonei, J., Shapiro, D., Kalawe, K., et al. (2018). Restora- tion of ‘Āina Malo’o on Hawai‘i Island: Expanding biocultural relationships. Sustainability 10: Lins, J., Lima, H. P., Baccaro, F. B., Kinupp, V. F., Shepard, G. H., and Clement, C. R. (2015). Pre- Columbian floristic legacies in modern homegardens of central Amazonia. PLoS ONE 10: e0127067. Logan, A. L. (2020) The Scarcity Slot: Excavating Histories of Food Security in Ghana, University of California Press, Berkeley. Lombardo, U., Cnal-Beeby, E., Fehr, S., and Veit, H. (2011). Raised fields in the Bolivian Amazonia: A prehistoric green revolution or a flood risk mitigation strategy. Journal of Archaeological Science 38: 502–512. Lombardo, U., Iriarte, J., Hilbert, L., Ruiz-Pérez, J., Capriles, J. M., and Veit, H. (2020). Early Holocene crop cultivation and landscape modification in Amazonia. Nature 581: 190–193. Long, T., Chen, H., Leipe, C., Wagner, M., and Tarasov, P. E. (2022). Modelling the chronology and dynamics of the spread of Asian rice from ca. 8000 BCE to 1000 CE. Quaternary International 623: 101–109. Lopez-Uribe, M. M., Cane, J. H., Minckley, R. L., and Danforth, B. N. (2016). Crop domestication facili- tated rapid geographical expansion of a specialist pollinator, the squash bee Peponapis pruinosa. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 283: 20160443. 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research Maezumi, S. Y., Alves, D., Robinson, M., de Souza, J. G., Levis, C., Barnett, R. L., et al. (2018). The leg- acy of 4,500 years of polyculture agroforestry in the eastern Amazon. Nature Plants 4: 540–547. Malachowski, C. P., and Dugger, B. D. (2018). Hawaiian duck behavioural patterns in seasonal wetlands and cultivated taro. Journal of Wildlife Management 82: 840–849. Manuel, M., Lightfoot, D., and Fattahi, M. (2018). The sustainability of ancient water control techniques in Iran: An overview. Water History 10: 13–30. Marcus, J., and Stanish, C. (eds.) (2006). Agricultural Strategies, Cotsen Institute of Archaeology, Uni- versity of California, Los Angeles. Marshall, E. J. P. (1989). Distribution patterns of plants associated with arable field edges. Journal of Applied Ecology 26: 247–257. Marshall, E. J. P., and Moonen, A. C. (2002). Field margins in northern Europe: Their function and inter- actions with agriculture. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 89: 5–21. Marshall, K., Koseff, C., Roberts, A. L. Lindsey, A., Kagawa-Viviani, A. K., Lincoln, N. K., and Vitousek, P. M. (2017). Restoring people and productivity to Puanui: Challenges and opportunities in the restoration of an intensive rain-fed Hawaiian field system. Ecology and Society 22(2): 23. Marston, J. M. (2011). Archaeological markers of agricultural risk management. Journal of Anthropo- logical Archaeology 30: 190–205. Marston, J. M. (2021). Archaeological approaches to agricultural economies. Journal of Archaeological Research 29: 327–385. Matthews, B., de Meester, L., Jones, C. G., Ibelings, B. W., Bouma, T. J., Nuutinen, V., van de Koppel, J., and Odling-Smee, J. (2014). Under niche construction: An operational bridge between ecology, evolution, and ecosystem science. Ecological Monographs 84: 245–263. Maxwell, T. D. (1995). The use of comparative and engineering analyses in the study of prehistoric agri- culture. In Teltser, P.A. (ed.), Evolutionary Archaeology: Methodological Issues, University of Ari- zona Press, Tucson, pp. 113–128. McElroy W. K. (2007). The Development of Irrigated Agriculture in Wailau Valley, Moloka’i Island, Hawai‘i, Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa, Honolulu. McKey, D. (2019) Pre-Columbian human occupation of Amazonia and its influence on current land- scapes and biodiversity. Anais da Academia Brasileira de Ciênc 91(sup 3): e20190087. McKey, D., Rostain, S., Iriarte, J., Glaser, B., Birk, J. J., Holst, I., and Renard, D. (2010). Pre-Columbian agricultural landscapes, ecosystem engineers, and self-organized patchiness in Amazonia. Pro- ceedings of the National Academy of Science 107: 7823–7828. Meneganzin, A., Pievani, T., and Caserini, S. (2020). Anthropogenic climate change as a monumental niche construction process: Background and philosophical aspects. Biology & Philosophy 35: 38. Mesoudi, A., Blanchet, S., Charmantier, A., Danchin, E., Fogerty, L., Jablonka, E., et al. (2013). Is non- genetic inheritance just a proximate mechanism? A corroboration of the extended evolutionary synthesis. Biological Theory 7: 189–195. Minnis, P. E. (2021). Famine Foods: Plants We Eat to Survive, University of Arizona Press, Tucson. Mohlenhoff, K. A., and Codding, B. F. (2017). When does it pay to invest in a patch? The evolution of intentional niche construction. Evolutionary Anthropology 26: 218–227. Morehart, C. T. (2010). The Archaeology of Farmscapes: Production, Power, and Place at Postclas- sic Xaltocan, Mexico, Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL. Morehart, C. T. (2018). Inherited legacies of ecological imperialism in central Mexico. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 52: 103–112. Morehart, C. T., and de Lucia, K. (eds.) (2015). Surplus: The Politics of Production and the Strategies of Everyday Life, University Press of Colorado, Boulder. Morrison, K. D. (1994). The intensification of production: Archaeological approaches. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 1: 111–159. Morrison, K. D. (1995). Fields of Victory: Vijayanagara and the Course of Intensification, Contributions No. 53, University of California Research Facility, Berkeley. Morrison, K. D. (2006). Intensification as a situated process: Landscape history and collapse. In Marcus, J., and Stanish, C. (eds.), Agricultural Strategies, Costen Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles, pp. 71–91. Morrison, K. D. (2014). Captial-esque landscapes: Long-term histories of enduring landscape modifica- tions. In Thomas-Hakansson, N., and Widgren, M. (eds.), Landesque Capital: The Historical Ecol- ogy of Enduring Landscape Modifications, Left Coast Press, Walnut Creek, CA, pp. 49–74. 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research Morrison, K. D. (2015). Archaeologies of flow: Water and the landscapes of southern India past, present, and future. Journal of Field Archaeology 40: 560–580. Nelson, M. C., Ingram, S. E., Dugmore, A. J., Streeter, R., Peeples, M. A., McGovern, T. H., et al. (2016). Climate challenges, vulnerabilities, and food security. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sci- ence 113: 298–303. Netting, R. M. (1993). Smallholders, Householders: Farm Families and the Ecology of Intensive, Sus- tainable Agriculture, Stanford University Press, Palo Alto. Nettle, D., Gibson, M. A., Lawson, D. W., and Sear, R. 2013. Human behavioural ecology: Current research and future prospects. Behavioural Ecology 24: 1031–1040. Neves E. G. (2016). A tale of three species or the ancient soul of tropical forests. In Sanz, N. (ed.), Tropi- cal Forest Conservation: Long-Term Processes of Human Evolution, Cultural Adaptations and Consumption Patterns, UNESCO, Mexico City, pp. 228–245. Neves, E. G., and Heckenberger, M. J. (2019). The call of the wild: Rethinking food production in ancient Amazonia. Annual Review of Anthropology 48: 371–388. O’Brien, M. J., and Bentley, R. A. (2015). The role of food storage in human niche construction: An example from Neolithic Europe. Environmental Archaeology 20: 364–378. O’Brien, M. J., and Laland, K. N. (2012). Genes, culture, and agriculture: An example of human niche construction. Current Anthropology 53: 434–470. Odling-Smee, F. J. (1988). Niche-constructing phenotypes. In Plotkin, H. C. (ed.), The Role of Behavior in Evolution, MIT Press, Cambridge, pp. 73–132. Odling-Smee, F. J., and Laland, K. N. (2011). Ecological inheritance and cultural inheritance: What are they and how do they differ? Biological Theory 6: 220–230. Odling-Smee, F. J., Laland, K. N., and Feldman, M. W. (1996). Niche construction. The American Natu- ralist 147: 641–648. Odling-Smee, F. J., Laland, K. N., and Feldman, M. W. (2003). Niche Construction: The Neglected Pro- cess in Evolution, Princeton University Press, Princeton. Odling-Smee, F. J., Erwin, D. H., Palkovacs, E. P., Feldman, M. W., and Laland, K. N. (2013). Niche construction theory: A practical guide for ecologists. The Quarterly Review of Biology 88: 3–28. Odonne, G., van den Bel, M., Burst, M., Brunaux, O., Bruno, M., Dambrine, E., et  al. (2019). Long- term influence of early human occupations on current forests of the Guinea Shield. Ecology 100: e02806. Pears, B. (2012). The formation of anthropogenic soils across three marginal landscapes on Fair Isle and in the Netherlands and Ireland. In Jones, R. (ed.), Manure Matters: Historical, Archaeological and Ethnographic Perspectives, Routledge, New York, pp. 109–127. Peters, C. M., Balick, M. J., Kahn, F., and Anderson, A. B. (1989). Oligarchic forests of economic plants in Amazonia: Utilization and conservation of an important tropical resource. Conservation Biology 3: 341–349. Piperno, D. R., McMichael, C., and Bush, M. B. (2015). Amazonia and the Anthropocene: What was the spatial extent and intensity of human landscape modification in the Amazon Basin at the end of prehistory? The Holocene 25: 1588–1597. Piperno, D. R., McMichael, C., and Bush, M. B. (2017). Further evidence for localized, short-term anthropogenic forest alterations across pre-Columbian Amazonia. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science 114: E4118–4119. Post, D. M., and Palkovacs, E. P. (2009). Eco-evolutionary feedbacks in community and ecosystem ecol- ogy: Interactions between the ecological theatre and the evolutionary play. Philosophical Transac- tions of the Royal Society B 364: 1629–1640. Prebble, M., and Wilmshurst, J. (2009). Detecting the initial impact of humans and introduced species on island environments in Remote Oceania using palaeoecology. Biological Invasions 11: 1529–1556. Prebble, M., Anderson, A. J., Augustinus, P., Emmitt, J., Fallon, S. J., Furey, L. L., et al. (2019). Early tropical crop production in marginal subtropical and temperate Polynesia. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science 116: 8824–8833. Prufer, K. M., Thompson, A. E., Meredith, C. R., Culleton, B. J., Jordan, J. M., Ebert, C. E., Winterhal- der, B., and Kennett, D. J. (2017). The Classic period Maya transition from an ideal free to an ideal despotic settlement system at the polity of Uxbenkãi. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 45: 53–68. Pyne, S. J. (2019). Fire: A Brief History, University of Washington Press, Seattle. Quintus, S. (2018a). Exploring the intersection of settlement, subsistence and population in Manu‘a. Journal of the Polynesian Society 127: 35–54. 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research Quintus, S. (2018b). Historicizing food production in Polynesia: A case study of 2,700 years of land use on Ofu Island, American Samoa. Journal of Field Archaeology 43: 222–235. Quintus, S., and Cochrane, E. E. (2018). The prevalence and importance of niche construction in agricul- tural development in Polynesia. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 51: 173–186. Quintus, S., and Lincoln, N. K. (2020). Integrating local and regional in pre-contact Hawaiian agriculture at Kahuku, Hawai‘i Island. Environmental Archaeology 25: 53–68. Quintus, S., Allen, M. S., and Ladefoged, T. N. (2016). In surplus and in scarcity: Agricultural develop- ment, risk management, and political economy, Ofu Island, American Samoa. American Antiquity 81: 273–293. Quintus, S., Huebert, J., Kirch, P. V., Lincoln, N. K., and Maxwell, J. (2019). Qualities and contributions of agroforestry practices and novel forests in pre-European Polynesia and the Polynesian Outliers. Human Ecology 47: 811–825. Ready, E., and Power, E. A. (2018). Why wage earners hunt: Food sharing, social structure, and influence in an Artic mixed economy. Current Anthropology 59: 74–97. Ready, E., and Price, M. H. (2021). Human behavioural ecology and niche construction. Evolutionary Anthropology 30: 71–83. Renard, D., Birk, J. J., Zangerle, A., Lavelle, P., Glaser, B., Blatrix, R., and McKey, D. (2013). Ancient human agricultural practices can promote activities of contemporary non-human soil ecosystem engineers: A case study in coastal savannas of French Guiana. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 62: 46–56. Rezaei Tavabe, K., and Azarnivand, H. (2013). Biodiversity in qanats (the case study of Kerman County, Iran). Desert 18: 99–104. Richter, D. (2007). Humanity’s transformation of earth’s soil: Pedology’s new frontier. Soil Science 172: 957–967. Richards, M. P., West, E., Rolett, B., and Dobney, K. (2009). Isotope analysis of human and animal diets from Hanamiai archaeological sites (French Polynesia). Archaeology in Oceania 44: 29–37. Riley, T. J., and Freimuth, G. (1979). Field systems and frost drainage in the prehistoric agriculture of the Upper Great Lakes. American Antiquity 44: 271–285. Rindos, D. (1980). Symbiosis, instability, and the origins and spread of agriculture: A new model. Cur- rent Anthropology 21: 751–772. Rindos, D. (1984). The Origins of Agriculture: An Evolutionary Perspective, Academic Press, San Diego. Roberts, P., Hunt, C., Arroyo-Kalin, M., Evans, D., and Boivin, N. (2017). The deep human prehistory of global tropical forests and its relevance for modern conservation. Nature Plants 3: 17093. Robinson, M., Jaimes-Betancourt, C., Elliot, S., Maezumi, S. Y., Hilbert, L., Alves, D., de Souza, J. G., and Iriarte, J. (2020). Anthropogenic soil and settlement organisation in the Bolivian Amazon. Geoarchaeology 36: 388–403. Roos, C. I., Field, J. S., and Dudgeon, J. V. (2016). Anthropogenic burning, agricultural intensification, and landscape transformation in post-Lapita Fiji. Journal of Ethnobiology 36: 535–553. Roosevelt, A. C. (2013). The Amazon and the Anthropocene: 13,000 years of human influence in a tropi- cal rainforest. Anthropocene 4: 69–87. Rosen, A. M. (2008). The impact of environmental change and human land use on alluvial valleys in the Loess Plateau of China during the Middle Holocene. Geomorphology 101: 298–307. Rosen, A. M., Lee, J., Li, M., Wright, J., Wright, H. T., and Fang, H. (2015). The Anthropocene and the landscape of Confucius: A historical ecology of landscape changes in northern and eastern China during the middle to late-Holocene. The Holocene 25: 1640–1650. Ross, N. J. (2011). Modern tree species composition reflects ancient Maya “forest gardens” in northwest Belize. Ecological Applications 21: 75–84. Rostain, S. (2013). Islands in the Rainforest: Landscape Management in Pre-Columbian Amazonia, Left Coast Press, Walnut Creek, CA. Rowley-Conwy, P., and Layton, R. (2011). Foraging and farming as niche construction: Stable and unsta- ble adaptation. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 366: 849–862. Ruddiman, W., Vavrus, S., Kutzbach, J., and He, F. (2014). Does pre-industrial warming double the anthropogenic total? The Anthropocene Review 1: 147–153. Sandor, J. A. (2006). Ancient agricultural terraces and soils. In Warkentin, B. P. (ed.), Footprints in the Soil: People and Ideas in Soil History, Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp. 505–534. Sandor, J. A., and Homburg, J. A. (2017). Anthropogenic soil change in ancient and traditional agricul- tural fields in arid to semiarid regions of the Americas. Journal of Ethnobiology 37: 196–217. 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research Scarborough, V. (2003). The Flow of Power: Ancient Water Systems and Landscapes, School of Ameri- can Research, Press, Santa Fe, NM. Scarborough, V. (2008). Rate and process of societal change in semitropical settings: The ancient Maya and the living Balinese. Quaternary International 184: 24–40. Scarborough, V., and Burnside, W. (2010). Complexity and sustainability: Perspectives from the ancient Maya and modern Balinese. American Antiquity 75: 327–363. Schmidt, M. J., Rapp Py-Daniel, A., Moraes, C. d. P., Valle, R. B. M., Caromano, C. F., Texeira, W. G., et  al. (2014). Dark earths and the human built landscape in Amazonia: A widespread pattern of anthrosol formation. Journal of Archaeological Science 42: 152–165. Schlanger, S. (1992). Recognizing persistent places in Anasazi settlement systems. In Rossignol, J., and Wandsnider, L. (eds.), Space, Time and Archaeological Landscapes, Plenum Press, New York, pp. 91–112. Scott-Phillips, T. C., Laland, K. N., Shuker, D. M., Dickins, T. E., and West, S. A. (2014). The niche construction perspective: A critical appraisal. Evolution 68: 1231–1243. Shennan, S. (2011). Property and wealth inequality as cultural niche construction. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 366: 918–926. Shennan, S. (2018). The First Farmers of Europe: An Evolutionary Perspective, Cambridge Univer- sity Press, Cambridge. Shennan, S., Downey, S. S., Timpson, A., Edinborough, K., Colledge, S., Kerig, T., Manning, K., and Thomas, M. G. (2013). Regional population collapse followed initial agriculture booms in mid- Holocene Europe. Nature Communications 4: 2486. Shepherd, L. D., de Lange, P. J., Cox, S., McLenachan, P. A., Roskruge, N. R., and Lockhart, P. J. (2016). Evidence of a strong domestication bottleneck in the recently cultivated New Zealand endemic root crop, Arthropodium cirratum (Asparagaceae). PLoS ONE 11: e0152455. Siderius, W., and de Bakker, H. (2003). Toponymy and soil nomenclature in the Netherlands. Geo- derma 111: 521–536. Simons, A. M. (2011). Modes of response to environmental change and the elusive empirical evidence for bet hedging. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 278: 1601–1609. Skarbø, K., and VanderMolen, K. (2016). Maize migration: Key crop expands to higher altitudes under climate change in the Andes. Climate and Development 8: 245–255. Smith, B. D. (2001). Low-level food production. Journal of Archaeological Research 9: 1–43. Smith, B. D. (2007). Niche construction and the behavioral context of plant and animal domestication. Evolutionary Anthropology 16: 188–199. Smith, B. D. (2011). General patterns of niche construction and the management of ‘wild’ plant and animal resources by small-scale pre-industrial societies. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 366: 836–848. Smith, B. D. (2015). A comparison of niche construction theory and diet breadth models as explana- tory frameworks for the initial domestication of plants and animals. Journal of Archaeological Research 23: 215–262. Smith, B. D. (2016). Neo-Darwinism, niche construction theory, and the initial domestication of plants and animals. Evolutionary Ecology 30: 307–324. Smith, B. D. (2017). Tracing the initial diffusion of maize in North America. In Boivin, N., Crassard, R., and Petraglia, M. (eds.), Human Dispersal and Species Movement: From Prehistory to the Present, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 332–348. Smith, M. E. (2021). Why archaeology’s relevance to global challenges has not been recognized. Antiquity 95: 1061–1069. Solomon, D., Lehmann, J., Fraser, J. A., Leach, M., Amanor, K., Frausin, V., et  al. (2016). Indig- enous African soil enrichment as a climate-smart sustainable agriculture alternative. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 14: 71–76. Spengler, R. N. (2021). Niche construction theory in archaeology: A critical review. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 28: 925–955. Spengler, R. N., Petraglia, M., Roberts, P., Ashastina, K., Kistler, L., Mueller, N. G., and Boivin, N. (2021). Exaptation traits for megafaunal mutualisms as a factor in plant domestication. Fron- tiers in Plant Science 12: 649394. Spriggs, M. (1981). Vegetable Kingdoms: Taro Irrigation and Pacific Prehistory, Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, Australia National University, Canberra. 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research Spriggs, M. (1997). Landscape catastrophe and landscape enhancement: Are either or both true in the Pacific? In Kirch, P. V., and Hunt, T. L. (eds.), Historical Ecology in the Pacific Islands, Yale University Press, New Haven, pp. 80–104. Steadman, D. W. (1986). Holocene Vertebrate Fossils from Isla Floreana, Galapagos, Contributions to Zoology No. 413, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC. Steadman, D. W. (2006). Extinction and Biogeography of Tropical Birds, University of Chicago Press, Chicago. Stiner, M. C., and Kuhn, S. L. (2016). Are we missing the “sweet spot” between optimality theory and niche construction theory in archaeology? Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 44 (Part B): 177–184. Stone, G. D. (1996). Settlement Ecology: The Social and Spatial Organization of Kofyar Agriculture, University of Arizona Press, Tucson. Storozum, M. J., Zhen, Q., Xiaolin, R., Haiming, L., Yifu, C., Kui, F., and Haiwang, L. (2018). The col- lapse of the North Song dynasty and the AD 1048–1128 Yellow River floods: Geoarchaeological evidence from the northern Henan Province, China. The Holocene 28: 1759–1770. Sugiyama, N., Martinez-Polanco, M. F., France, C. A. M, and Cooke, R. G. (2020). Domesticated land- scapes of the Neotropics: Isotope signatures of human-animal relationships in pre-Columbian Pan- ama. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 59: 101195. Swift, J. A., Miller, M. J., and Kirch, P. V. (2016). Stable isotope analysis of Pacific rat (Rattus exu- lans) from archaeological sites in Mangareva (French Polynesia): The use of commensal species for understanding human activity and ecosystem change. Environmental Archaeology 22: 283–297. Szabo, J. K., Kkwaji, N., Garnett, S. T., and Butchart, S. H. M. (2012). Global patterns and drivers of avian extinctions at the species and subspecies level. PLoS ONE 7: e47080. Terrell, J. E., Hart, J. P., Barut, S., Cellinese, N., Curet, A., Denham, T., et  al. (2003). Domesticated landscapes: The subsistence ecology of plant and animal domestication. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 10: 323–368. Thompson, A. E., and Prufer, K. M. (2021). Household inequality, community formation, and land ten- ure in Classic period lowland Maya society. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 28: 1276–1313. Thurston, T. L., and Fisher, C. T. (eds.) (2007). Seeking a Richer Harvest: An Introduction to the Archae- ology of Subsistence Intensification, Innovation, and Change, Springer, New York. Treacy, J. M., and Denevan, D. M. (1994). The creation of cultivatable land through terracing. In Miller, N. F., and Gleason, K. L. (eds.), The Archaeology of Garden and Field, University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia, pp. 91–110. Turcotte, M. M., Araki, H., Karp, D. S., Poveda, K., and Whitehead, S. R. (2017). The ecoevolutionary impacts of domestication and agricultural practices on wild species. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 372: 20160033. Turner, N. J., and Peacock, S. (2005). Solving the perennial paradox: Ethnobotanical evidence for plant resource management on the Northwest Coast. In Deur, D., and Turner, N. J. (eds.), “Keeping It Living”: Traditions of Plant Use and Cultivation on the Northwest Coast of North America, Uni- versity of Washington Press, Seattle, pp. 101–150. Turner, N. J., Luczaj, L. J., Migliorini, P., Pieroni, A., Dreon, A. L., Sacchetti, L. E., and Paoletti, M. G. (2011). Edible and tended wild plants, traditional ecological knowledge and agroecology. Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences 30: 198–225. Turner, S., Kinnaird, T., Koparal, E., Lekakis, S., and Sevara, C. (2020). Landscape archaeology, sustain- ability and the necessity of change. World Archaeology 52: 589–606. Ullah, I. I. T., Chang, C., and Tourtellotte, P. (2019). Water, dust, and agropastoralism: Modeling socio- ecological co-evolution of landscapes, farming, and human society in southeast Kazakhstan during the mid to late Holocene. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 55: 101067. van der Leeuw, S. E. (2012). For every solution there are many problems: The role and study of technical systems in socio-environmental coevolution. Geografisk Tidsskrift - Danish Journal of Geography 112: 105–116. Varisco, D. M. (1991). The future of terrace farming in Yemen: A development dilemma. Agriculture and Human Values 8: 166–172. Vining, B. R. (2018). Cultural niche construction and remote sensing of ancient anthropogenic envi- ronmental change in the north coast of Peru. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 25: 559–586. 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research Vitousek, P. M. (2002). Oceanic islands as model systems for ecological studies. Journal of Biogeogra- phy 29: 573–582. Vitousek, P. M., Chadwick, O. A., Hotchkiss, S. C., Ladefoged, T. N., and Stevenson, C. M. (2014). Farming the rock: A biogeochemical perspective on intensive agriculture in Polynesia. Journal of Pacific Archaeology 5: 51–61. Waddington, C. H. (1959). Evolutionary systems—animal and human. Nature 183: 1634–1638. Walker, J. H. (2011). Amazonian dark earth and ring ditches in the central Llanos de Mojos, Bolivia. Cul- ture, Agriculture, Food and Environment 33: 2–14. Walker, J. H. (2018). Island, River, and Field: Landscape Archaeology in the Llanos de Mojos, University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque. Walstra, J., Heyvaert, V. M. A., and Verkinderen, P. (2010). Assessing human impact on alluvial fan development: A multidisciplinary case-study from Lower Khuzestan (SW Iran). Geodinamica Acta 23: 267–285. Weisler, M. I. (1999). The antiquity of aroid pit agriculture and significance of buried A horizons on Pacific atolls. Geoarchaeology 14: 621–654. Weitzel, E. M., and Codding, B. F. (2022). The ideal free distribution model and archaeological settle- ment patterning. Environmental Archaeology 27: 349–356. Wilkinson, T. J. (2003). Archaeological Landscapes of the Near East, University of Arizona Press, Tucson. Wilkinson, T. J., Rayne, L., and Jotheri, J. (2015). Hydraulic landscapes in Mesopotamia: The role of human niche construction. Water History 7: 397–418. WinklerPrins, A. M. G. A., and Levis, C. (2021). Reframing pre-European Amazonia through an Anthropocene lens. Annals of the American Association of Geographers 111: 858–868. Wood, S. L. R., Rhemtulla, J. M., and Coomes, O. T. (2016). Cropping history trumps fallow duration in long-term soil and vegetation dynamics of shifting cultivation. Ecological Applications 27: 519–531. Wozniak, J. A. (2001). Landscapes of food production on Easter Island: Successful subsistence strate- gies. In Stevenson, C. M., Lee, G., and Morin, F. J. (eds.), Pacific 2000: Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Easter Island and the Pacific, Easter Island Foundation, Los Osos, pp. 91–102. Xu, C., Kohler, T. A., Lenton, T. M., Svenning, J.-C., and Scheffer, M. (2020). Future of the human climate niche. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science 117: 11350–11355. Yen, D. E. (1973). The origins of Oceanic agriculture. Archaeology and Physical Anthropology in Oceania 8: 68–85. Yen, D. E. (1974). The Sweet Potato and Oceania: An Essay in Ethnobotany, B. P. Bishop Museum Press, Honolulu. Young, H. S., Miller-ter Kuile, A., McCauley, D. J., and Dirzo, R. (2017). Cascading community and ecosystem consequences of introduced coconut palms (Cocos nucifera) in tropical islands. Canadian Journal of Zoology 95: 139–148. Zeanah, D. W. (2017). Foraging models, niche construction, and the eastern agricultural complex. American Antiquity 82: 3–24. Zeder, M. A. (2016). Domestication as a model system for niche construction theory. Evolutionary Ecology 30: 325–348. Zeder, M. A. (2017). Domestication as a model system for the extended evolutionary synthesis. Inter- face Focus 7: 20160133. Zhuang, Y., and Kidder, T. R. (2014). Archaeology and the Anthropocene in the Yellow River region, China, 8000–2000 cal. BP. The Holocene 24: 1602–1623. Zhuang, Y. J., Bao, W. B., and French, C. (2013). River floodplain aggradation history and cultural activities: Geoarchaeological investigations at the Yuezhuang site, Lower Yellow River. China. Quaternary International 315: 101–115. Ziter, C., Graves, R. A., and Turner, M. G. (2017). How do land-use legacies affect ecosystem ser - vices in United States cultural landscapes. Landscape Ecology 32: 2205–2218. 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research Bibliography of Recent Literature Albuquerque, U. P., Gonçalves, P. H. S., Ferreira Júnior, W. S., Chaves, L. S., Oliveira, R. C. S., Silva, T. L. L., Santos, G. C., and Araújo, E. L. (2018). Humans as niche constructors: Revisiting the concept of chronic anthropogenic disturbances in ecology. Perspectives in Ecology and Conser- vation 16: 1–11. Bishop, R. R., Church, M. J., and Rowley-Conwy, P. A. (2015). Firewood, food and human niche construction: The potential role of Mesolithic hunter-gatherers in actively structuring Scotland’s woodlands. Quaternary Science Reviews 108: 51–75. Braun, D. R., Faith, J. T., Douglass, M. J., Davies, B., Power, M. J., Aldeias, V., et al. (2021). Ecosys- tem engineering in the Quaternary of the west coast of South Africa. Evolutionary Anthropology 30: 50–62. Chase, D. Z., and Chase, A. F. (2014). Path dependency in the rise and denouement of a Classic Maya city: The case of Caracol, Belize. Archeological Papers of the American Anthropological Asso- ciation 24: 142–154. Chechushkov, I. V., Valiakhmetov, I. A., and Fitzhugh, W. W. (2021). From adaptation to niche con- struction: Weather as a winter site selection factor in northern Mongolia, the Quebec Lower North Shore, and the southern Urals. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 61: 101258. Clark, A. D., Deffner, D., Laland, K., Odling-Smee, J., and Endler, J. (2020). Niche construction affects the variability and strength of natural selection. The American Naturalist 195: 16–30. Collard, M., Buchanan, B., Ruttle, A., and O’Brien, M. J. (2011). Niche construction and the toolkits of hunter-gatherers and food producers. Biological Theory 6: 251–259. Cook-Patton, S. C., Weller, D., Rick, T. C., and Parker, J. D. (2014). Ancient experiments: Forest biodiversity and soil nutrients enhanced by Native American middens. Landscape Ecology 29: 979–987. Cuddington, K. (2011). Legacy effects: The persistent impact of ecological interactions. Biological Theory 6: 203–210. Crumley, C. L. (2021). Historical ecology: A robust bridge between archaeology and ecology. Sus- tainability 13: 8210. Douglass, K., and Rasolondrainy, T. (2021) Social memory and niche construction in a hypervariable environment. American Journal of Human Biology 33: e23557. Eriksson, O. (2014). Human niche construction and the rural environment. Rural Landscapes: Soci- ety, Environment, History 1: 1–4. Gillreath-Brown, A., and Bocinsky, R. K. (2017). A dialogue between empirical and model-based agricultural studies in archaeology. Journal of Ethnobiology 37: 167–171. Glaser, B., and Birk, J. J. (2012). State of the scientific knowledge on properties and genesis of anthropogenic dark earths in central Amazonia (terra preta de indio). Geochim Cosmochim Ac 82: 39–51. Glazko,V .I., Zybaylov, B. L., Kosovsky, Y. G., Glazko, G. V., and Glazko, T. T. (2021). Domestication and microbiome. The Holocene 31: 1635–1645. Iovita, R., Braun, D. R., Douglass, M. J., Holdaway, S. J., Lin, S. C., Olszewski, D. I., and Rezek, Z. (2021). Operationalizing niche construction theory with stone tools. Evolutionary Anthropology 30: 28–39. Isbell, F., and Loreau, M. (2014). Sustainability of human ecological niche construction. Ecology and Society 19: 45. Kealhofer, L., and Marsh, B. (2019). Agricultural impact and political economy: Niche construction in the Gordion region, central Anatolia. Quaternary International 529: 91–99. Kemp, M. E., Mychajliw, A. M., Wadman, J., and Goldberg, A. (2020). 7000 years of turnover: Historical contingency and human niche construction shape the Caribbean’s Anthropocene biota. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 287: 20200447. Kistler, L., Newsom, L. A., Ryan, T. M., Clarke, A. C., Smith, B. D., and Perry, G. H. (2015). Gourds and squashes (Cucurbita spp.) adapted to megafaunal extinction and ecological anachronism through domestication. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science 112: 15107–15112. Laland, K. N., Uller, T., Feldman, M. W., Sterelny, K., Müller, G. B., Moczek, A., Jablonka, E., and Odling-Smee, J. (2015). The extended evolutionary synthesis: Its structure, assumptions and predic- tions. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 282: 20151019. 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research Lansing, J. S., and Fox, K. M. (2011). Niche construction on Bali: The gods of the countryside. Philo- sophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 366: 927–934. Littleton, J., McFarlane, G., and Allen, M. S. (2020). Human-animal entanglements and environmen- tal change: Multi-species approaches in Remote Oceania. In Schug, G. R. (ed.), The Routledge Handbook of the Bioarchaeology of Climate and Environmental Change, Routledge, London, pp. 493–510. Liu, X., Lister, D. L., Zhao, Z., Petrie, C. A., Zeng, X., Jones, P. J., et  al. (2017). Journeys to the east: Diverse routes and variable flowering times for wheat and barley en route to prehistoric China. PLoS ONE 13: e0209518. Lullfitz, A., Dortch, J., Hopper, S. D., Pettersen, C., Reynolds, R., and Guilfoyle, D. (2017). Human niche construction: Noongar evidence in pre-colonial southwestern Australia. Conservation and Society 15: 201–216. Marston, J. M. (2017). Consequences of agriculture in Mesopotamia, Anatolia, and the Levant. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Environmental Science https:// doi. org/ 10. 1093/ acref ore/ 97801 99389 414. 013. 167 McClure, S. B. (2015). The pastoral effect: Niche construction, domestic animals, and the spread of farm- ing in Europe. Current Anthropology 56: 901–910. Palace, M. W., McMichael, C. N. H., Braswell, B. H., Hagen, S. C., Bush, M. B., Neves, E., et al. (2017). Ancient Amazonian populations left lasting impacts on forest structure. Ecosphere 8: e02035. Piperno, D. R., Ranere, A. J., Dickau, R., and Aceituno, F. (2017) Niche construction and optimal for- aging theory in Neotropical agricultural origins: A re-evaluation in consideration of the empirical evidence. Journal of Archaeological Science 78: 214–220. Sheppard, P. J. (2019). Four hundred years of niche construction in the western Solomon Islands. In Leclerc, M., and Flexner, J. (eds.), Archaeologies of Island Melanesia: Current Approaches to Landscapes, Exchange and Practice, Terra Australis 51, ANU Press, Canberra, pp. 117–133. Smejda, L., Hejcman, M., Horak, J., and Shai, I. (2017). Ancient settlement activities as important sources of nutrients (P, K, S, Zn, and Cu) in eastern Mediterranean ecosystems—The case of bibli- cal Tel Burna, Israel. Catena 156: 62–73. Smejda, L., Hejcman, M., Horak, J., and Shai, I. (2018). Multi-element mapping of anthropogenically modified soils and sediments at the Bronze to Iron Ages site of Tel Burna in the southern Levant. Quaternary International 483: 111–123. Smith, N. F., Lepofsky, D., Toniello, G., Holmes, K., Wilson, L., Neudorf, C. M., and Roberts, C. (2019). 3500 years of shellfish mariculture on the northwest coast of North America. PLoS ONE 14: e0211194. Spengler, R. N. (2020). Anthropogenic seed dispersal: Rethinking the origins of plant domestication. Trends in Plant Science 25: 340–348. Stevenson, C. M., Naranjo-Cigala, A., Ladefoged, T. N., and Díaz, F. J. (2021). Colonial rainfed farm- ing strategies in an extremely arid insular environment: Niche construction on Lanzarote, Canary Islands, Spain. The Journal of Island and Coastal Archaeology, DOI: https:// doi. org/ 10. 1080/ 15564 894. 2021. 19248 98. Swarts, K., Gutaker, R. M., Benz, B., Blake, M., Bukowski, R., Holland, J., et al. (2017). Genomic esti- mation of complex traits reveals ancient maize adaptation to temperate North America. Science 357: 512–515. Swift, J. A., Roberts, P., Boivin, N., and Kirch, P. V. (2018). Restructuring of nutrient flows in island eco- systems following human colonization evidenced by isotopic analysis of commensal rats. Proceed- ings of the National Academy of Science 115: 6392–6397. Swift, J. A., Kirch, P. V., Ilgner, J., Brown, S., Lucas, M., Marzo, S., and Roberts, P. (2021). Stable isotopic evidence for nutrient rejuvenation and long-term resilience on Tikopia Island (Southeast Solomon Islands). Sustainability 13: 8567. Thompson, J. C., Wright, D. K., and Ivory, S. J. (2021). The emergence and intensification of early hunter-gatherer niche construction. Evolutionary Anthropology 30: 17–27. Uller, T., and Helanterä, H. (2019). Niche construction and conceptual change in evolutionary biology. British Journal of the Philosophy of Science 70: 351–375. Watling, J., Mayle, F. E., and Schaan, D. (2018). Historical ecology, human niche construction and land- scape in pre-Columbian Amazonia: A case study of the geoglyph builders of Acre, Brazil. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 50: 128–139. Yu, P.-L. (2020). Modeling incipient use of Neolithic cultigens by Taiwanese foragers: Perspectives from niche variation theory, prey choice model, and the ideal free distribution. Quaternary 36: 26. 1 3 Journal of Archaeological Research Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. 1 3

Journal

Journal of Archaeological ResearchSpringer Journals

Published: May 23, 2023

Keywords: Niche construction theory; Emergent mutualisms; Archaeology of food production; Ecological inheritance; Coevolution

There are no references for this article.