∆¹³C results for cereals grains from Tell Brak samples grouped by chronological period.

<p>Bars indicate means and standard deviations. <b>○</b> = glume wheat and <b>◇</b> = barley.</p

∆¹³C results.

<p>The ∆¹³C values for wheat grain (105 samples from 8 sites) are mostly between 16.2‰ and 17.7‰ (mean ±1σ). In terms of the water status framework based on stable isotope analysis of present-day crops [<a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0127085#pone.0127085.ref015" target="_blank">15</a>], this range encompasses moderately watered crops (>c.16‰) and well-watered crops (>c.17‰).</p><p>∆¹³C results.</p

∆¹³C results for pulse seeds.

<p>Dashed lines indicate the suggested 'boundaries' between ∆¹³C ranges indicative of lentils grown under poorly (low ∆¹³C), moderately, and well (high ∆¹³C) watered conditions, based on the analysis of present-day crops [<a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0127085#pone.0127085.ref015" target="_blank">15</a>]. ● = lentil (Lens culinaris), ◆ = pea (Pisum sativum), ▲ = bitter vetch (Vicia ervilia).</p

Difference between mean ∆¹³C for barley grain and mean ∆¹³C for wheat grain at each site.

<p>Dashed lines indicate the ∆¹³C difference predicted if two-row barley (at +1‰) or six-row barley (at +2‰) were grown with the same water availability as wheat, based on the analysis of present-day crops [<a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0127085#pone.0127085.ref015" target="_blank">15</a>].</p

Relationship between size standardised RGR (sRGR) and seed mass.

<p>Regression slope for the relationship between sRGR and seed mass (F_2,6 = 6.186, <i>P</i><.05, R² = 0.6734) for the three crop progenitors (closed symbols) and six wild species (open symbols).</p

Initial seed mass in the three crop progenitors and six wild species.

<p>The black bars show the mean seed mass of accessions used in experiment 1 and the white bars show those used in experiment 2 (+SE). Standard errors are not shown for experiment 1 because seeds were not weighed individually.</p

Impact of a defoliation treatment on plant survival, size and yield.

<p>Impact of defoliation treatment on (a) survival (%), (b) plant height, (c) number of tillers, (d) number of seeds, and (e) potential yield in crop progenitors and wild species. The defoliation treatment is shown by the white bar and the control treatment (no defoliation) is shown by the black. Data are means + SE of 8 replicates.</p

Relationship between sNAR, sSLA and sLMR and sRGR.

<p>Regression slopes for the relationships between (a) sNAR and sRGR (F_2,6 = 31.98, <i>P</i><.001, R² = 0.914); (b) sSLA and sRGR (F_1,7 = 6.781, <i>P</i><.05, R² = 0.492); and (c) sLMR and sRGR for the three crop progenitors (closed symbols) and six wild species (open symbols).</p

Relationship between seed germination, seedling mass and seed mass.

<p>Regression slopes for the relationship between (a) time to 50% of seeds germinated and seed mass (F_1,7  = 5.55, <i>P</i><.05, R² = 0.44); and (b) seedling mass and seed mass, [experiment 1: circles (F_1,7 = 120.156, <i>P</i><.001, R² = 0.9756), experiment 2: squares (F_2,6 = 75.78, <i>P</i><.001, R² 0.9619)] for the three crop progenitors (closed symbols) and six wild species (open symbols).</p

An Integrated Bioarchaeological Approach to the Medieval ‘Agricultural Revolution’: A Case Study from Stafford, England, c.ad 800–1200

In much of Europe, the advent of low-input cereal farming regimes between c.ad 800 and 1200 enabled landowners—lords—to amass wealth by greatly expanding the amount of land under cultivation and exploiting the labour of others. Scientific analysis of plant remains and animal bones from archaeological contexts is generating the first direct evidence for the development of such low-input regimes. This article outlines the methods used by the FeedSax project to resolve key questions regarding the ‘cerealization’ of the medieval countryside and presents preliminary results using the town of Stafford as a worked example. These indicate an increase in the scale of cultivation in the Mid-Saxon period, while the Late Saxon period saw a shift to a low-input cultivation regime and probably an expansion onto heavier soils. Crop rotation appears to have been practised from at least the mid-tenth century