Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

“Made in Brazil”: Human Dispersal of the Brazil Nut (Bertholletia excelsa, Lecythidaceae) in Ancient Amazonia1

  • Review
  • Published:
Economic Botany Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

“Made in Brazil”: Human Dispersal of the Brazil Nut (Bertholletia excelsa, Lecythidaceae) in Ancient Amazonia. The Brazil nut, Bertholletia excelsa, is a colossal tree of terra firme forest whose seeds represent the most important non-timber forest product in Amazonia. Its peculiarly inefficient dispersal strategy and discontinuous distribution have led some to hypothesize anthropogenic origins, but evidence to date has been inconclusive. Here we present results of a multidisciplinary study addressing this question. A review of the geographic distribution of B. excelsa and comparison with that of similar Lecythis species suggest a number of anomalies that are consistent with a recent and wide colonization of Bertholletia. Published studies and field observations indicate that anthropogenic disturbance facilitates Brazil nut regeneration. Recent genetic studies showing no sequence diversity and no geographical structuring of within-population variability support a rapid and recent irradiation from an ancestral population. Historical linguistic analysis of indigenous terms for Brazil nut suggests a northern/eastern Amazonian origin for Bertholletia, with a concomitant spread of Brazil nut distribution or cultivation to the south and west. Such an expansion would have been particularly facilitated by the emergence of intensive bitter manioc cultivation and networks of interethnic trade beginning in the first millennium C.E. Together, ecological, phytogeographic, genetic, linguistic, and archeological data reinforce the hypothesis that ancient Amazonian peoples played a role in establishing this emblematic and economically important rainforest landscape.

‘Made in Brasil’: A dispersão antrópica da castanha-do-Pará (Bertholletia excelsa, Lecythidaceae) na antiga Amazônia. A castanha-do-Brasil, Bertholletia excelsa, é uma arvore enorme da terra firme cujas sementes representam o produto florestal não-madeireira mais importante da Amazônia. Alguns pesquisadores, observando sua estratégia ineficiente de dispersão e sua distribuição descontínua, propuseram a hipótese de que suas origens são antrópicas, mas as evidencias até a data são ambíguas. Aqui se apresentam resultados de um estudo multidisciplinar sobre essa questão. Uma revisão da distribuição geográfica de B. excelsa e uma comparação com as sapucaias (Lecythis spp.) sugerem várias anomalias compatíveis com uma recente colonização de Bertholletia pela Amazônia. Estudos publicados e observações em campo sugerem que a perturbação antrópica facilita a regeneração de castanhais. Estudos genéticos recentes demonstram nenhuma diversidade genética de seqüências de cpDNA e nenhuma estruturação geográfica da variabilidade intra-populacional, o qual sugere uma expansão rápida e recente. Estudos lingüísticos sugerem uma origem para Bertholletia no norte/leste da Amazônia, com uma expansão mais recente da distribuição ou cultivação para o sul e o oeste. Tal expansão teria sido facilitado pela emergência do cultivo intensivo de mandioca amarga e redes de contato inter-étnico especialmente a partir do primeiro milênio dC. Dados ecológicos, fitogeográficos, genéticos, lingüísticos, e arqueológicos reforçam a hipótese de que os povos amazônicos antigos tiveram um papel significante no estabelecimento dessa paisagem amazônica emblemática.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

Literature Cited

  • Adelaar, W. F. H. 2000. Propuesta de un nuevo vínculo genético entre dos grupos lingüísticos indígenas de la Amazonía occidental: Harakmbut y Katukina. Pages 219–236 in L. M. Esquerre, ed., Actas del I Congreso de Lenguas Indígenas de Sudamérica, Vol. 2. Universidad Ricardo Palma, Lima.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aikhenvald, A. Y. 1999. The Arawak language family. Pages 65–106 in R. M. W. Dixon and A. Y. Aikhenvald, eds., The Amazonian languages. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arroyo-Kalin, M. 2008. Steps towards an ecology of landscape: A geoarchaeological approach to the study of anthropogenic dark earths in the central Amazon region, Brazil. Ph.D. thesis, Dept. of Archeology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, U.K.

  • Balée, W. 1989. The culture of Amazonian forests. Pages 1–21 in D. A. Posey and W. Ballee, eds., Resource management in Amazonia: Indigenous and folk strategies. New York Botanical Gardens, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2000. Antiquity of traditional ethnobiological knowledge in Amazonia: The Tupi-Guarani family and time. Ethnohistory 47(2):399.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ——— and D. Moore. 1991. Similarity and variation in plant names in five Tupi-Guarani languages (Eastern Amazonia). Bulletin of the Florida Museum of Natural History: Biological Sciences 35(4):209–262.

    Google Scholar 

  • ——— and C. Erickson. 2006. Time and complexity in the Neotropical lowlands: Explorations in historical ecology. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bellwood, P. 2001. Early agriculturalist population diasporas? Farming, languages and genes. Annual Review of Anthropology 30:181–207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ——— and C. Renfrew. 2002. Examining the farming/language dispersal hypothesis. Cambridge, U.K.: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berlin, B. 1992. Ethnobiological classification: Principles of categorization of plants and animals in traditional societies. Princeton University Press, Princeton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, C. H. 2006. Glottchronology and the chronology of maize in the Americas. Pages 647–663 in J. Staller, R. Tykot, and B. Benz, eds., Histories of maize: Multidisciplinary approaches to the prehistory, linguistics, biogeography, domestication, and evolution of maize. Academic Press, Burlington.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buckley, D. P., D. M. O’Malley, V. Apsit, G. T. Prance, and K. S. Bawa. 1988. Genetics of Brazil nut (Bertholletia excelsa Humb. & Bonpl.: Lecythidaceae). Theoretical and Applied Genetics 76:923–928.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, L. 2002. What drives linguistic diversity and language spread? Pages 49–63 in P. Bellwood and C. Renfrew, eds., Examining the farming/language dispersal hypothesis. McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chambers, J. Q., N. Higuchi, and J. P. Schimel. 1998. Ancient trees in Amazonia. Nature 391:135–136.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Clay, J. W. 1997. Brazil nuts: The use of a keystone species for conservation and development. Pages 246–282 in C. H. Freese, ed., Harvesting wild species: Implications for biodiversity and conservation. John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clement, C. R. 1990. Origin, domestication and genetic conservation of Amazonian fruit tree species. Pages 249–263 in D. A. Posey and W. Overall, eds., Ethnobiology: Implications and applications. Proceedings of the First International Congress of Ethnobiology. Museu Paraense Goeldi, Idi/CNPq, Belém, Para.

    Google Scholar 

  • Comrie, B. 2002. Farming dispersal in Europe and the spread of the Indo-European language family. Pages 409–419 in P. Bellwood and C. Renfrew, eds., Examining the farming/language dispersal hypothesis. McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conklin, B. A. 1989. Images of health, illness and death among the Wari’ (Pakaas Novos) of Rondonia, Brazil. Ph.D. thesis, Medical Anthropology Program, University of California, San Francisco.

  • ———. 2001. Consuming grief: Compassionate cannibalism in an Amazonian society. Austin: University of Texas Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cotta, J. N., K. A. Kainer, L. H. O. Wadt, and C. L. Staudhammer. 2008. Shifting cultivation effects on Brazil nut (Bertholletia excelsa) regeneration. Forest Ecology and Management 256(1–2):28–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Souza, M. L. 1984. Estudos de processos tecnológicos para obtenção de produtos da Castanha-do-Brasil (Bertholletia excelsa, H. B. K.). Ph.D. thesis, Dept. Tecnologia de Alimentos, Universidade Federal do Ceará, Fortaleza.

  • Desmoulière, S. J. M. n.d. -a. Castanha da Amazônia: Inventario padronizado. Unpublished GIS product (map) summarizing special data on Bertholletia from RADAM-Brasil (1973–1981) botanical inventories. GIS Laboratory, Instituto Nacional de Pesquisa da Amazônia (INPA), Manaus.

  • ———. n.d. -b. Castanha da Amazônia: No texto descritivo da parcela. Unpublished GIS product (map) summarizing special data on Bertholletia from RADAM-Brasil (1973–1981) botanical inventories. GIS Laboratory, Instituto Nacional de Pesquisa da Amazônia (INPA), Manaus.

  • Dixon, R. M. W. 1999. Introduction. Pages 1–22 in R. M. W. Dixon and A. Y. Aikhenvald, eds., The Amazonian languages. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ducke, A. 1946. Plantas de cultura précolombiana na Amazônia brasileira. Boletin Técnico do Instituto Agronomico do Norte 8:2–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Facundes, S. D. S. 2002. Historical linguistics and its contribution to improving the knowledge of Arawak. Pages 74–96 in J. D. Hill and F. Santos-Granero, eds., Comparative Arawakan histories: Rethinking language family and culture area in Amazonia. University of Illinois Press, Urbana.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fonseca, J. S. da. 1880–81. Viagem ao redor do Brasil, 1875–1878 (2 vols. ). Oficina tipográfica de Pinheiro, Faria & Companhia, Rio de Janeiro.

  • Greenhall, A. M. 1965. Sapucaia nut dispersal by greater spear-nosed bats in Trinidad. Caribbean Journal of Science 6:167–171.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gribel, R., M. R. Lemes, L. G. Bernardes, A. E. Pinto, and G. H., Jr. Shepard. 2007. Page 281 Phylogeography of Brazil-nut tree (Bertholletia excelsa, Lecythidaceae): Evidence of human influence on the species distribution. Association for Tropical Biology and Conservation, Morelia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guix, J. C. 2005. Evidence of old anthropic effects in forests at the confluence of the Caurés and Negro Rivers–NW Amazonia: The role of Indians and Caboclos. Grupo de Estudos Ecologicos, São Paulo.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton, M. B., J. M. Braverman, and D. F. Soria-Hernanz. 2003. Patterns and relative rates of nucleotide and insertion/deletion evolution at six chloroplast intergenic regions in new world species of the Lecythidaceae. Molecular Biology and Evolution 20(10):1710–1721.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Heckenberger, M. J. 2002. Rethinking the Arawakan diaspora: Hierarchy, regionality and the Amazonian Formative. Pages 99–122 in J. D. Hill and F. Santos-Granero, eds., Comparative Arawakan histories: Rethinking language family and culture area in Amazonia. University of Illinois Press, Urbana.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2005. The ecology of power: Person, place, and culture in Southern Amazon, AD 1250–2000. New York: Routeledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———, E. G. Neves, and J. B. Petersen. 1998. De onde surgem os modelos? As origens e expansões Tupi na Amazônia Central. Revista de Antropologia 41(1):69–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———, J. C. Russell, C. Fausto, J. R. Toney, M. J. Schmidt, E. Pereira, B. Franchetto, and A. Kuikuro. 2008. Pre-Columbian urbanism, anthropogenic landscapes, and the future of the Amazon. Science 29(321):1214–1217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hill, J. D. and F. Santos-Granero. 2002. Comparative Arawakan histories: Rethinking language family and culture area in Amazonia. University of Illinois Press, Urbana.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hornborg, A. 2005. Ethnogenesis, regional integration and ecology in prehistoric Amazonia: Toward a system perspective. Current Anthropology 46(4):589–620.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • IBGE—Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística. 2004. Produção da extração vegetal e da silvicultura–2003. Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística, Rio de Janeiro.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2007. Produção da extração vegetal e da silvicultura–2006. Rio de Janeiro: Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística.

    Google Scholar 

  • Janzen, D. H. and P. S. Martin. 1982. Neotropical anachronisms: The fruits the gomphotheres ate. Science 215:19–27.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kanashiro, M., S. A. Harris, and A. Simons. 1997. RAPD diversity in Brazil nut (Bertholletia excelsa Humb. & Bonpl.: Lecythidaceae). Silvae Genetica 46(4):219–223.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kern, D., G. D’aquino, T. Rodrigues, F. Frazao, W. Sombroek, T. Myers, and E. Neves. 2004. Distribution of Amazonian dark earths in the Brazilian Amazon. Pages 51–75 in J. Lehmann, D. Kern, B. Glaser, and W. Wodos, eds., Amazonian dark earths. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Lathrap, D. W. 1970. The Upper Amazon. Praeger, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Magalhães, M. P. 2009. Evolução antropomorfa da Amazônia. Revista de História da Arte e Arqueologia 12:4–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCann, J. M., W. I. Woods, and D. W. Meyer. 2001. Organic matter and anthrosols in Amazonia: Interpreting the Amerindian legacy. in R. M. Rees, B. C. Ball, C. D. Campbell, and C. A. Watson, eds., Sustainable management of soil organic matter, pp 180–189. CAB International, Wallingford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meira, S. 2006. Cariban languages. Pages 199–204 in K. Brown, ed., Encyclopedia of language and linguistics, 2nd edition. Elsevier, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • ——— and B. Franchetto. 2005. The Southern Cariban languages and the Cariban family. International Journal of American Linguistics 71(2):127–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Métraux, A. 1928. La civilisation matérielle des tribus Tupi-Guarani. Librairie Orientaliste, Paris.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, E. (ed.). 1992. Arqueologia dos empreendimentos da Eletronorte: Resultados preliminares. Brasilia: Eletronorte.

  • Moore, D. and L. Storto. 2002. As línguas indígenas e a pré-história. Pages 73–92 in S. D. J. Pena, ed., Homo Brasilis. FUNPEC Editora, São Paulo.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morcote Ríos, G., S. Mora Camargo, and C. E. Franky Calvo. 2006. Pueblos y paisajes antiguos de la Selva Amazónica. Universidad Nacional deColombia/Instituto de Ciencias Naturales, São Paulo.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mori, S. A. (lead author) et al.; D. Swarthout (topic editor). 2007. Brazil nut family (Lecythidaceae) in the New World. In Encyclopedia of Earth, ed. C. J. Cleveland and D. Swarthout. Environmental Information Coalition, National Council for Science and the Environment, Washington, D.C.

  • ——— and G. T. Prance. 1981. The “sapucaia” group of Lecythis (Lecythidaceae). Brittonia 33(1):70–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ——— and ———. 1990a. Taxonomy, ecology and economic botany of the Brazil nut (Bertholletia excelsa Humb. & Bonpl.: Lecythidaceae). Advances in Economic Botany 8:130–150.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1990b. Lecythidaceae—Part II. The zygomorphic-flowered New World genera (Couroupita, Corythophora, Bertholletia, Couratari, Eschweilera, & Lecythis). Flora Neotropica 21(2):1–376.

  • Müller, C. H. 1981. Castanha-do-Brasil: Estudos agronômicos. EMBRAPA/Centro de Pesquisa Agropecuária do Trópico Úmido, Belém, Pará.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———, I. A. Rodrigues, A. A. Müller, and N. R. M. Müller. 1980. Castanha-do-Brasil: Resultados de pesquisas. Belém, Pará: EMBRAPA/Centro de Pesquisa Agropecuária do Trópico Úmido.

    Google Scholar 

  • Myers, G. P., A. C. Newton, and M. Melgarejo. 1996. The influence of canopy gap size on natural regeneration of Brazil nut (Bertholletia excelsa) in Bolivia. Forest Ecology and Management 127(1–3):119–128.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neves, E. G. and J. B. Petersen. 2006. The political economy of pre-Columbian Amerindians: Landscape transformations in central Amazonia. Pages 279–310 in W. Balée and C. Erickson, eds., Time and complexity in the Neotropical lowlands: Explorations in historical Eecology. Columbia University Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———, ———, R. N. Bartone, and C. A. da Silva. 2003. Historical and socio-cultural origins of Amazonian dark earths. In Amazonian dark earths: Origins, properties, management, ed. J. Lehmann, D. Kern, G. Glaser, and W. I. Woods, 29–50. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nimuendajú, C. 1925. As tribus do alto Madeira. Journal de la Société des Américanistes de Paris 17:166–172.

    Google Scholar 

  • Noble, G. K. 1965. Proto-Arawakan and its descendants. International Journal of American Linguistics 31(3):1–129.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ohl-Schacherer, J., G. H., Jr. Shepard, H. Kaplan, C. A. Peres, T. Levi, and D. W. Yu. 2007. The sustainability of subsistence hunting by Matsigenka native communities in Manu National Park, Peru. Conservation Biology 21(5):1174–1185.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Oliver, J. R. 1989. The archaeological, linguistic and ethnohistorical evidence for the expansion of Arawakan into northwest Venezuela and northeastern Colombia. Ph.D. thesis, Dept. of Anthropology, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign.

  • Pärssinen, M., D. Schaan, and A. Ranzi. 2009. Pre-Columbian geometric earthworks in the upper Purús: A complex society in western Amazonia. Antiquity 83(322):1084–1095.

    Google Scholar 

  • Payne, D. L. 1991. A classification of Maipuran (Arawakan) languages based on shared lexical retentions. Pages 355–499 in D. C. Derbyshire and G. K. Pullum, eds., Handbook of Amazonian languages. Mouton de Gruyter, The Hague.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peres, C. A. and C. Baider. 1997. Seed dispersal, spatial distribution and population structure of Brazilnut trees (Bertholettia excelsa) in southeastern Amazonia. Journal of Tropical Ecology 13:595–616.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———, L. C. Schiesari, and C. L. Dias-Leme. 1997. Vertebrate predation of Brazil-nuts, an agouti-dispersed Amazonian seed crop (Bertholletia excelsa, Lecythidaceae): A test of the escape hypothesis. Journal of Tropical Ecology 13:69–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———, C. Baider, P. A. Zuidema, L. H. O. Wadt, K. A. Kainer, D. A. P. Gomes-Silva, R. P. Salomão, L. L. Simões, E. R. N. Franciosi, F. Cornejo Valverde, R. Gribel, G. H. Shepard Jr., M. Kanashiro, P. Coventry, D. W. Yu, A. R. Watkinson, and R. P. Freckleton. 2003. Demographic threats to the sustainability of Brazil nut exploitation. Science 302:2112–2114.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Piperno, D. and D. M. Pearsall. 1998. The origins of agriculture in the lowland Neotropics. Academic Press, San Diego.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pires, J. M. 1984. The Amazonian forest. Pages 581–602 in H. Sioli, ed., The Amazon: Limnology and landscape ecology of a mighty tropical river and its basin. Dr. W. Junk Publishers, Boston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Posey, D. A. 1985. Indigenous management of tropical forest ecosystems: The case of the Kayapo Indians of the Brazilian Amazon. Agroforestry Systems 3:139–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • RADAM-Brasil. (1973–1981). Levantamento de recursos naturais: Geologia, geomorfologia, solos, vegetação, uso potencial da terra (22 volumes). Rio de Janeiro: Ministério de Minas e Energia, Departamento Nacional de Produção Mineral.

  • Ramirez, H. 2001. Línguas Arawak da Amazônia setentrional: Comparação e descrição. Universidade do Amazonas, Manaus.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ranzi, A., R. Feres, and F. Brown. 2007. Internet software programs aid in search for Amazonian geoglyphs. Eos 88(21):226–229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodrigues, A. D. 1964. A classificação do tronco lingüístico tupí. Revista de Antropologia 12(1–2):99–104.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1985. Evidence for Tupi-Cariban relationship. In South American languages: Retrospect and prospect, ed. H. Klein and L. Stark, 371–404. Austin: University of Texas Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1999. Tupí. In The Amazonian languages, ed. H. Klein and L. Stark, 107–124. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roosevelt, A. C. 1980. Parmana: Prehistoric maize and manioc subsistence along the Amazon and Orinoco. Academic Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1992. Arqueologia Amazônica. In História dos Índios no Brasil, ed. M. M. Carneiro da Cunha, 53–86. São Paulo: Companhia das Letras.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———, M. Lima da Costa, C. Lopes Machado, M. Michab, N. Mercier, H. Valladas, J. Feathers, W. Barnett, M. Imazio da Silveira, A. Henderson, J. Sliva, B. Chernoff, D. S. Reese, J. A. Homan, N. Toth, and K. Schick. 1996. Paleoindian cave dwellers in the Amazon: The peopling of the Americas. Science 272:373–384.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, M. 1917. Die Aruaken: Ein beitrag zum problem der kulturverbreitung. Universität Leipzig, Leipzig.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shepard, G. H. Jr. 2001. Relatório preliminar sobre sítio arqueológico e cemitério indígena na Reserva Amanã. Report submitted to 1ª Superintendência Regional do IPHAN (Memo nº 0308/2001). Instituto de Patrimônio Histórico e Artístico Nacional (IPHAN), Brasilia, DF, Brazil.

  • ———. 2002. Estudos sobre a biologia reprodutiva de plantas Amazônicas e suas aplicações no uso, manejo e conservação dos recursos naturais. Manaus, AM, Brazil: Conselho Nacional de Pesquisa (CNPq).

    Google Scholar 

  • ———, K. Rummenhoeller, J. Ohl, and D. W. Yu. 2010. Trouble in paradise: Indigenous populations, anthropological policies, and biodiversity conservation in Manu National Park, Peru. Journal of Sustainable Forestry 29:252–301.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steinen, K. von den. 1894. Unter den naturvölkem Zentral-Brasiliens. Berlin.

  • Stokstad, E. 2003. Too much crunching on rainforest nuts? Science 302:2049.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Tastevin, C. 1909/1920. Vocabulaires Katawishi. Unpublished vocabulary. Archives of Professor Paul Rivet, Musée de l’Homme, Paris.

  • ———. 1920. Dialecte Marawa. Unpublished vocabulary. Archives of Professor Paul Rivet, Musée de l’Homme, Paris.

  • Trivedi, M. R., F. H. Cornejo, and A. R. Watkinson. 2004. Seed predation on Brazil nuts (Bertholletia excelsa) by macaws (Psittacidae) in Madre de Dios, Peru. Biotropica 36(1):118–122.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tupiassú, A. and N. V. C. Oliveira. 1967. A castanha do Pará. Instituto de Desenvolvimento Econômico-Social do Pará, Belém, Pará.

    Google Scholar 

  • Urban, G. 1992. A história da cultura Brasileira segundo as linguas nativas. Pages 87–102 in M. M. Carneiro da Cunha, ed., Índios no Brasil. Companhia das Letras, São Paulo.

    Google Scholar 

  • Villachica, H., J. E. Urano de Carvalho, C. H. Müller, S. C. Diaz, and M. Almanza. 1996. Frutales y hortalizas promisórios de la Amazonía. Tratado de Cooperación Amazónica/Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), Lima, Peru.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wander, A. E., R. Gazzola, C. H. M. Coelho, J. Gazzola, and G. da Silva e Souza. 2008. Brazil nut almonds: Nutritional and market aspects. Tropentag 2008. Stuttgart-Hohenheim, Germany: Competition for Resources in a Changing World: New Drive for Rural Development.

  • Witkowski, S. L. and C. H. Brown. 1983. Marking-reversals and cultural importance. Language 59(3):569–582.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to acknowledge Rogerio Gribel and Maristerra Lemes for support and research collaboration in the early phases of this study. We also acknowledge Eduardo Góes Neves and the Museum of Archeology and Ethnology at University of São Paulo for support during a later phase of the research. We thank Manuel Arroyo-Kalin for many useful suggestions on a draft of the paper. We also thank Sylvain Desmoulière for kindly sharing unpublished geographical analyses of RADAM-Brasil inventory data on the Brazil nut. Thanks also to Carlos Peres for sharing data, observations, and photographs during various drafts. We thank Scott Mori and two anonymous reviewers for their careful reading of the manuscript and many helpful comments and revisions. We acknowledge Denny Moore for urging caution in our linguistic interpretations. Finally, we thank Joshua Birtchall for helpful comments on the final draft of some figures. Different phases of the research were supported by Brazil’s Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq) and Fundação de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Dept. Antropologia, Museu Paraense Emilio Goeldi, Av. Perimetral 1901—Terra Firme, Belém, PA, 66077-830, Brazil

    Glenn H. Shepard Jr

  2. Dept. de Letras e Pedagogia, Universidade Federal de Rondônia, BR 425, km 2.5—Jardim das Esmeraldas, Guajará-Mirim, RO, 78957-000, Brazil

    Henri Ramirez

Authors
  1. Glenn H. Shepard Jr
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Henri Ramirez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Glenn H. Shepard Jr.

Additional information

Received 11 February 2010; accepted 12 December 2010.

Appendix

Appendix

Regional, vernacular, and indigenous terms for Brazil nut (Bertholletia excelsa), researched and organized by H. Ramirez. All vernacular terms were collected in the field except where bibliographical sources are noted.

REGIONAL AND VERNACULAR TERMS:

  • noix du Brésil (French) < *Latin nuc(e) “fruit of a european tree (Juglans regia), or any similar kind of fruit with an almond” < *Indo-European knu(t).

  • Brasil nut (English) < *Germanic knut “hard seed” < *Indo-European knu(t).

    NOTE: The German and English words for the peanut (Arachis hypogaea) have been formed from the same linguistic root: pea + nut in English and erd + nuβnut of earth in German.

  • castanha (Portuguese), castaña (Spanish) < *Latin (nux) castanea “nut of the chestnut tree (Castanea vesca) or any similar kind of fruit < *Greek kástanon < Asiatic language (cf. English chestnut < *Old English chesten nut < *Old French chastaigne “chestnut”).

  • almendra (Spanish, cf. Portuguese amêndoa, French amande, English almond) < *Latin amygdala “almond” < *Greek amygdále “ amygdalis”.

  • to(ro)cari (Brazil of XVIIIth century) < probable Carib loan, with the non-Carib suffix -ri.

  • touca (French Guiana) < probable Carib loan: tutuka in Kari’ña.

  • yuviá, jubia (Venezuelan Spanish) < loanword from an unknown indigenous language.

Symbols, abbreviations, and orthography:

N.P.:

Brazil nut not present in locality

† :

extinct language

[<...]:

etymological meaning or loan word

--- / ---:

synonyms

(--- yrs.):

approximative time depth for the proto-language

*--- :

hypothetical reconstructed proto-form

Ï :

high central vowel

Ä :

mid central vowel

y :

high round front vowel (like u in French)

ñ :

palatal nasal

j :

palatal semivowel (like y in English)

x :

voiceless palatal fricative

tx :

voiceless palatal affricate

’ :

glottal stop

ã, ẽ,... :

nasalized vowel

INDIGENOUS TERMS:

NOTE: Terms are organized by linguistic families. Roman numbers (I, II, III, etc.) indicate the subfamilies, while letters (Ia, Ib, Ic, etc.) show further subgroupings. New internal classifications have been suggested here by H. Ramirez for Arawá, Arawak, Chapacura, Carib, and Pano families. Where ongoing lexico-statistical study permits, suggestions for language family time depth are provided in parentheses. Supplemental terms for “peanut,” “nut,” etc. are provided where relevant.

Aikana jiry (wikere / witapeanut)

Arawá (2,000 yrs.)

  1. I)

    PAUMARI moi’di (mowaflower)

  2. II)

    ZOROWAHA namï-wasazu (namïhigh?, wasazuinajá [Attalea sp.])

  3. III)

    YARAWARA-DENI

    • IIIa) YARAWARA mowe (moweflower) (cf. Arara-Aripuanã [Tupi] mowi)

    • III b ) DENI wato

Arawak (Aruak, Maipure) (4,500 yrs.) *maiña/*maina

  1. I)

    KAIXANA maíhu / maikï (sïmi / sumiseed)

  2. II)

    †BAHUANA miñi’i

  3. III)

    WAPISHANA minaï

  4. IV)

    MAWAYANA mija

  5. V)

    †MARAWÁ manazi (usiseed) (data from Tastevin 1920)

  6. VI)

    PIRO-APURINÃ (2,000 yrs.) *maï(-)kï (cf. proto-Takana *moike, Harakmbut morikke, Paumari [Arawá] moi’di)

    • VIa) PIRO mïxi / janajsi (-xiseed)

    • VIb) INAMPARI mïhï (-hïseed)

    • VIc) APURINÃ makï / make / mitjatakuru (-kïseed)

  7. VII)

    LOKONO tútuka (< Carib)

  8. VIII)

    PARECI tokali-se / tokware-se (< Carib) (wai-sepeanut)

  9. IX)

    CAMPA/MATSIGENKA inke (= peanut), kastaña (<Sp.)

Cahuapana xiwako’, monopi, tanpa’pi nuts spp.

Carib (2,500 yrs.) *tut(u)-ka (cf. Mura-Piraha tíihí)

  1. I)

    GUIANA

    • Ia) † PALMELLAS tutuko (data from Fonseca 1880–1881)

    • I b ) WAIWAI tïtko

      • HIXKARYANA tutko

      • KAXUYANA tutko

    • I c ) TRIÓ tuhka / tuuka

      • † OYARICOULÉ tura-tura

    • I d ) APALAI tutuko

      • WAYANA tutukä / tutuko

      • WAIMIRI-ATROARI tetkï

      • KARI’ÑA tutuka

  2. II)

    YEKUANA wufia (< Venezuelan Spanish ‘jubia’)

  3. III)

    ARARA toromo

  4. IV)

    KUIKURO N.P. (tigitepeanut)

Chapacura (1,300 yrs.) *toke/*tike (< seed / nut?; cf. Carib *tutka?)

  1. I)

    CHAPAKYRA

    • Ia) WARI’ tokwe (tokwi-nseed), kaji-tokwepeanut (< kajiintroduced, tokwenut)

    • Ib) MIGUELENHO tike (tokiseed)

    • Ic) ORO-WIN teke (tokiseed)

  2. II)

    CHAPAKURA (MORÉ) tokä (toki-nseed)

Harakmbut morikke (cf. Takana *moike, Piro-Apurinã *maïkï) (bogpi[h]peanut)

Iquito sahii (Lev Michael, pers. comm.) (cf. Katawixi sákodia, Asurini sa)

Jabuti (1,500 yrs.) *ore

  1. I)

    JABUTI ore

  2. II)

    ARIKAPU orä

Kanoe epy (epy-kwãpeanut, -kwãseed)

†Katawixi sákodia / sakudga (cf. Iquito sahii, Asurini sa) (data from Tastevin 1909/1920)

Kayapo pi’ï (pitree)

Kwaza kũcẽ (cẽrĩpeanut)

Leko N.P. (dihi-wopeanut, -woround, cf. Mura-Piraha tíihíBrazil nut)

Maku (nadëb) maneéh (< Arawak)

†Matanawi txipií (cf. Mura tíihí) (data from Nimuendajú 1925)

Moseten N.P. (dabahpeanut, cf. Pano tapa)

Munku tjuka-i (< Pareci)

Mura-Piraha tíihí (cf. Leko dihi-wopeanut)

Nambikwara (2,500 yrs.)

  1. I)

    SABANÊ kwaiki (cf. Pareci wai-sepeanut)

    / tokali’ (< Pareci)

  2. II)

    NAMBIKWARA

    • IIa) NORTHERN wana’ (wai-kipeanut, -kiseed < Pareci wai-se)

    • IIb) SOUTHERN wanakka (waik-kipeanut, -kiseed < Pareci wai-se)

Pano (1,500 yrs.) *tama/*tapapeanut, Brazil nut

Note: Pano is now considered genetically related to Takana

  1. I)

    KASHARARI tama Brazil nut

  2. II)

    CENTRAL PANO

    • IIa) CHACOBO tapaBrazil nut (mai-tapapeanut < maiearth, tapanut)

    • IIb) SHARANAHUA tama-wanBrazil nut (< tamapeanut, wanbig)

    • IIb) OTHERS (Brazil-Peru) N.P. (tamapeanut: Amahuaca, Yora, Kashinawa, Katukina-Pano, Shanenawa, Yawanawa, Shipibo-Conibo, Capanawa, Cashibo, Wariapano)

Rikbaktsa pitsi (pitsi-pïrïkpeanut, pïrïktrunk, stem)

Takana (1,500 yrs.) *moike (cf. Harakmbut morikke, Piro-Apurinã *maïkï)

Note: Takana is now considered genetically related to Pano

  1. I)

    CAVINEÑA moke

  2. II)

    TAKANA CENTRAL

    • II a ) TAKANA PRÓPRIO muihe

    • II b ) REYESANO muihe

    • II c ) ARAONA moje / ewi

  3. III)

    ESSE-EJJA xiwiwi (cf. Mura-Piraha tíihí)

Taruma méhe (<Arawak?)

Tikuna ñoó (< Tupi-Guarani) / torenï

Tupi (4,000 yrs.)

  1. I)

    MUNDURUKU-KURUAYÁ wenï(j) / wenã / wa(i)nai / waeraña / erai (wenã-bïnẽnẽpeanut)

  2. II)

    JURUNA (i)jã

  3. III)

    TUPI-GUARANI

    • IIIa) TUPI-GUARANI *jã / *(i)ña (mandu[w]i / mundu[w]ipeanut)

      (i)jã / ñã (Wayampi, Kawahip, Apiaká) (-a’ïñ[a]seed)

      ñï / dja (Asurini Xingu)

      sa /so (Asurini Tocantins) (-a’ïs[a]seed; cf. Iquito sahii, Katawixi sákodia)

      txu (Parakanã)

      kãtãi (Urubu) (< Portuguese ‘castanha’)

      mina-ta (Kamayurá) (cf. proto-Arawak *maiña/*maina)

      zapuka-z-a’i (Tembé) (< zapukajsapucaia [Lecythis sp.], a’iseed)

      teko-ingwer (Tembé) (< Carib?)

      muni-watsu (Kokama) (< munipeanut, watsubig)

      ï’wat / ïwa-ete (Kayabi) (< ïwatree , etetrue)

    • IIIb) MAUÉ wẽ’ẽñã (-ã’ïñ[a]seed)

  4. IV)

    TUPARI-MAKURAP

    • MAKURAP arao (arawïpeanut)

    • TUPARI

      • TUPARI aráo-’a / kãnã (hiráppeanut, kitseed)

      • WAYORO karã (aragwipeanut, kiitseed)

      • SAKIRABIAT karã (araakwipeanut, kiitseed)

  5. V)

    MONDÉ mam / mom (mam-kappeanut, kapseed)

  6. VI)

    ARARA / RONDÔNIA ijã

  7. VII)

    KARITIANA mijo (mĩ’ĩpeanut)

  8. VIII)

    ARARA / ARIPUANÃ mowi (cf. Yarawara [Arawá] mowe)

  9. IX)

    PURUBORÁ mam-ka / ham-ka ([h]e’ẽ-kap / i-kappeanut, kapseed)

Yanomami hawari

Yurakare N.P. (sebbepeanut, cf. Pano tapa, Moseten dabah)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Shepard, G.H., Ramirez, H. “Made in Brazil”: Human Dispersal of the Brazil Nut (Bertholletia excelsa, Lecythidaceae) in Ancient Amazonia1 . Econ Bot 65, 44–65 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12231-011-9151-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12231-011-9151-6

Key Words

Search

Navigation