Back

Redefining accessible food resources for paleodietary reconstruction in Britain: baseline recommendations based on isotopic data synthesis

Chen, Z.; Millard, A.; Fernandez Dominguez, E.

2026-06-26 ecology
10.64898/2026.06.25.734399 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Paleodietary reconstruction requires isotopic data from both humans and their accessible food resources. However, ideally defined accessible food resources, namely those from the same sites and periods as the target human individuals, are not always available for all ancient individuals. The number of sites with human C/N isotopic data far exceeds that with food-resource isotopic data. Consequently, many individuals cannot be linked to corresponding accessible food resources, a limitation that becomes more pronounced in large-scale quantitative dietary reconstructions incorporating a wide range of food-resource categories. Therefore, this study aims to broaden the definition of accessible food resources. To achieve this aim, we compiled food-resource and soil isotopic data ({delta}13C and {delta}15N) from Britain, including 4,012 ancient faunal and plant remains, 394 modern plant samples, and 260 modern soil samples. Region-period combined groups were established for the five major food-resource categories and served as the basic analytical units for detailed isotopic comparisons. Based on these comparisons, we propose broader criteria for defining accessible food resources. No significant intra-group variation was observed in the isotopic values of terrestrial herbivores and omnivores, suggesting that animals within each region-period combined group can serve as accessible food resources for humans from the same group. C3 plants showed substantial spatial variation but limited temporal variation. Accordingly, accessible food resources for C3 plants should be defined by region, namely England, Wales, and Scotland, regardless of chronological period, with humans from each region assigned plant data from their respective region. Marine and freshwater fish showed no clear temporal or spatial variation, and therefore unified datasets can be applied across all human individuals. Our findings enable each ancient human individual to be assigned appropriate accessible food resources, and therefore appropriate food-resource isotope baselines. We further demonstrate that such assignments can effectively reduce sampling bias arising from the use of traditionally defined accessible food resources, which are often limited by small sample sizes.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 12%
15.3%
2
Scientific Data
209 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
13.0%
3
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 5%
9.8%
4
eLife
5828 papers in training set
Top 12%
8.0%
5
Ecology and Evolution
267 papers in training set
Top 1%
4.9%
50% of probability mass above
6
Royal Society Open Science
214 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
4.1%
7
Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution
69 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
3.2%
8
Nature Communications
5641 papers in training set
Top 36%
3.2%
9
Communications Biology
993 papers in training set
Top 5%
3.2%
10
Science
477 papers in training set
Top 6%
1.5%
11
Methods in Ecology and Evolution
176 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.5%
12
Nature
645 papers in training set
Top 7%
1.5%
13
Global Change Biology
78 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.4%
14
Frontiers in Marine Science
62 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.3%
15
Molecular Ecology Resources
171 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.3%
16
Ecography
54 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
1.1%
17
Science Advances
1243 papers in training set
Top 24%
1.1%
18
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
72 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
1.1%
19
Communications Earth & Environment
14 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.1%
20
Ecosphere
57 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.1%
21
GigaScience
212 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.0%
22
Global Ecology and Biogeography
47 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.0%
23
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
393 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.9%
24
PNAS Nexus
159 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.9%
25
BMC Ecology and Evolution
51 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.9%
26
PeerJ
308 papers in training set
Top 11%
0.9%
27
New Phytologist
346 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.6%
28
BMC Biology
265 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.6%
29
Limnology and Oceanography: Methods
11 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.6%
30
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2444 papers in training set
Top 44%
0.6%