We first categorized all radiocarbon-dated materials into one of six sample material types: short-lived plant, long-lived plant, unidentified charcoal, terrestrial bird eggshell, bone, and marine shell (Fig. Dates on these materials were then sorted into reliability classes, according to whether there was potential for any disparity between the age of the radiocarbon event (i.e., Fig. Calibration probabilities were then calculated for the subset of reliable dates to derive the most precise (within radiocarbon calibration error) estimate for the age of initial colonization on all East Polynesian island groups (.
Boxes show minimum and maximum calibrated ages for dates within each class.
Intact hearths and remobilized combustion debris, possibly hearth rake-out, are close to the graves suggesting repeated burning activities as part of the ritual behavior of early Holocene South Americans.
Despite this, the overall preservation of the sediments is good and most human burials can be considered to be in primary context.
By applying cladistic methods to a morphological character matrix, we resolve the phylogenetic position of M.
caribea within the extant subtribe Goodyerinae (subfamily Orchidoideae). caribea to calibrate a molecular phylogenetic tree of the Orchidaceae.
On many islands, irreconcilable long and short settlement chronologies coexist that vary by more than 400–1,000 y (4). 600–950 in the central, northern, and eastern archipelagos, and no earlier than A. Subsequent studies using precise AMS dating of short-lived materials alone have generally supported short chronologies (4, 6–8).
These conflicting chronologies preclude establishment of a regional pattern of settlement and hinder our understanding of cultural change and ecological impacts on these island ecosystems. The last systematic analysis of radiocarbon dates from archaeological and paleoecological sites throughout East Polynesia, published 17 y ago, was based on 147 radiocarbon dates (5). However, these chronologies continue to be dismissed by some scholars (9, 10) on hypothetical grounds of missing evidence or archaeological invisibility, and in favor of radiocarbon dates on materials (typically unidentified charcoal with high inbuilt age potential) incapable of providing a precise age for the event being dated.
Models of human colonization, ecological change and historical linguistics for the region now require substantial revision.