4.7 Article

The spatial and temporal reconstruction of a medieval moat ecosystem

期刊

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
卷 12, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-24762-w

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Science Centre, Poland [DEC-2013/11/B/HS3/03785, 533-D000-GF09-22]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study reconstructs the operational history of a medieval stronghold's moat through palaeoecological research, and describes the ecological states of the moat. Analysis of organic deposits reveals that the spatio-temporal distribution of midge assemblages mainly depends on depth differences and freshwater supply.
Moats and other historical water features had great importance for past societies. The functioning of these ecosystems can now only be retrieved through palaeoecological studies. Here we aimed to reconstruct the history of a stronghold's moat during its period of operation. Our spatio-temporal approach allowed mapping of the habitat changes within a medieval moat for the first time. Using data from four cores of organic deposits taken within the moat system, we describe ecological states of the moat based on subfossil Chironomidae and Ceratopogonidae assemblages. We found that over half (57%) of the identified dipteran taxa were indicative of one of the following ecological states: limnetic conditions with or without periodic water inflow, or marshy conditions. Samples representing conditions unfavourable for aquatic insects were grouped in a separate cluster. Analyses revealed that the spatio-temporal distribution of midge assemblages depended mostly on depth differences and freshwater supply from an artificial channel. Paludification and terrestrialization did not happen simultaneously across the moat system, being greatly influenced by human activity. The results presented here demonstrate the importance of a multi-aspect approach in environmental archaeology, focusing not only on the human environment, but also on the complex ecology of the past ecosystems.

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

4.7
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