4.5 Article

Satellite-based remote sensing rapidly reveals extensive record of Holocene coastal settlement on Madagascar

期刊

JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL SCIENCE
卷 115, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jas.2020.105097

关键词

Settlement patterns; Remote sensing; Predictive modeling; GIS; Human behavioral ecology; Madagascar; Ideal free distribution

资金

  1. Institute for Computational and Data Sciences at Penn State
  2. Hill Fellowship Award through Penn State
  3. National Aeronautics and Space Administration through the PA Space Grant Consortium [NNX15AKO6H]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Despite decades of archaeological research, roughly 75% of Madagascar's land area remains archaeologically unexplored and the oldest sites on the island are difficult to locate, as they contain the ephemeral remains of mobile hunter/forager campsites. The known archaeological record is therefore biased toward later sites, especially sites dating to the second millennium AD, following the expansion of Indian Ocean trading networks. Systematic archaeological investigations are required to address these biases in the known archaeological record and clarify the island's early human history, but funding limitations, logistical and time constraints in surveying large areas and a relatively small number of active field archaeologists present substantial barriers to expansive areal survey coverage. Using theoretical models derived from human behavioral ecology (i.e., ideal free distribution, optimal foraging theory) in conjunction with freely available remote sensing data, we illustrate how archaeological survey of Madagascar's landscapes can be rapidly expanded, more effectively target early archaeological deposits, and address questions about the island's settlement. This study illustrates the potential for theoretically-driven satellite-based remote sensing analysis to improve our understanding of the archaeological record of the world's fourth largest island.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据