ONLINE SPECIAL ISSUE: Prescribed burning

The Maya milpa: fire and the legacy of living e45

soil
Ronald Nigh1* and Stewart AW Diemont2

Swidden is an agroforestry system in which woody vegetation is regenerated after a period of annual cropping.
Associated with most forested areas of the tropical world, swidden is often blamed for deforestation but it also
plays a role in forest conservation. Here, we examine the contemporary milpa, a type of swidden agriculture com-
mon to Latin America and historically used by the Maya people of the lowlands of southern Mexico and north-
ern Central America; we focus on one group in particular, the Lakandon people of Chiapas. One element of
milpa agriculture that receives a considerable amount of criticism is the burning of cut vegetation after clearing.
Fire can have negative effects on ecosystems but swidden cultivators are often sophisticated managers of fire.
Among the benefits of fire use in this setting is its contribution to nutrient flow and to long-term soil fertility in
the form of biochar, charcoal produced by low-temperature pyrolysis in agriculture. When properly managed,
the milpa cycle can result in long-term carbon sequestration and an increasingly fertile anthrosol (soil that has
been greatly modified by long-term human activity) and enriched woodland vegetation.

Front Ecol Environ 2013; 11 (Online Issue 1): e45–e54, doi:10.1890/120344

S widden, also known as “shifting cultivation”, is proba-

bly the oldest form of farming in the Americas (Barker
2006) and is also perhaps the most maligned and misun-
derstood. Swidden is often blamed by conservationists for
the deforestation that affects many tropical areas.
However, because swidden is an agroforestry system that
regenerates woody vegetation after a period of annual
cropping, these systems are often associated with the most
densely forested areas of the neotropics and in many cases
play a role in their conservation as woodlands. The ele-
ment of swidden systems that receives the most criticism is
the use of fire to burn the plant debris that remains after
forest clearing.
The term “swidden” derives from the Old Norse
“svithinn”, meaning “clearing in the forest to be burned”.
We prefer this term to alternative names for this kind of
agroforestry, such as “slash-and-burn” or “shifting cultiva-
tion” that invoke an image of a primitive scorched earth
operation, carried out by shady cultivators who wander
In a nutshell:
• Swidden, an ancient form of horticulture, rotates crops and
woodlands; milpa, as practiced by ancient and modern Maya,
shapes woodland ecology
• Succession is carefully managed to contribute to soil fertility
and biodiversity
• Low-temperature burning sequesters carbon as persistent biochar
• Traditional Maya milpa management supports forest ecosystem
services
1
Centro de Investigaciones y Estudios Superiores en Antropología
Social (CIESAS), Chiapas, Mexico *(rbnigh@gmail.com);
2
Environmental Resources Engineering Department, College of
Environmental Science and Forestry, State University of New York,
Syracuse, NY
randomly through the forest. There is no doubt that swid-
den fires have a potentially negative effect on soils and on
forests – high temperatures can destroy soil ecology,
reduce organic matter, damage woody vegetation, and
select for fire-resistant species in the woodland seed bank.
Fires that escape from the swidden clearings can cause
widespread ecosystem destruction. Burning also has major
implications for regional and global climate through the
emission of a variety of greenhouse gases (Wilken 1987;
Cochrane 2003). In fact, swidden cultivators are often
careful and skilled users of fire who seek multiple objec-
tives in the burning process, among them the minimiza-
tion of some of these negative effects (Hecht and Posey
1989). Burning of newly felled vegetation in tall forest
areas is often necessary to clear the land for planting. Fire
can also make an important contribution to long-term
soil fertility through the addition of biochar that has been
produced by low-temperature burning (Glaser et al. 2002;
Xu et al. 2012). In fact, we argue that the Maya swidden
cycle, when properly managed, results in enriched
anthropogenic soil and represents a lasting expression of
agroecological skill and creativity (Wilken 1987;
Peterson et al. 2001).
n The Maya milpa: a resource management tool
We define milpa as an open-field polyculture centered on
maize (Zea mays) that rotates with woodland vegetation
in a cycle of around 10 to 25 years. Although found at
varying levels of intensity and productivity throughout
Mesoamerica, in its classic form milpa – a Spanish term
roughly meaning “maize field” – can be characterized as
successional agroforestry and, as such, is a form of horti-
culture rather than agriculture, since it involves intensive
individual plant management, embedded in a diverse for-

© The Ecological Society of America www.frontiersinecology.org

 Maya milpa: fire and soil R Nigh and SAW Diemont

e46 and Schwartz 2008) or may be situated

some kilometers from the family dwelling
(outfield; Pyburn 1998; Netting 1977), and
is capable of degrees of intensity and pro-
ductivity that respond to environmental
constraints, market demands, and the
household domestic cycle, varying accord-
ing to the number of mouths to feed and
the available family labor (Netting 1993;
Anderson and Anderson 2011). The milpa
system also harbors an enormous agrobiodi-
versity, heritage of an ancient agrarian civi-
lization, and still serves as both family gar-
den and a nursery for agroecological
experimentation (Alvarez Buylla 1989;
De Clerck and Negreros Castillo 2000).
As practiced by traditional farmers,
milpa is devoted primarily to maize, with
intercrops selected from over a hundred
species domesticated in pre-Columbian
times and complemented today by addi-
tional species from all over the world
(Terán and Rasmussen 1995). The Maya
milpa entails a rotation of annual crops
with a series of managed and enriched
intermediate stages of short-term peren-
nial shrubs and trees, culminating in the
Figure 1. Fire-stimulated regeneration: the lowland Maya milpa cycle. (Courtesy re-establishment of mature closed forest
of A Ford/ISBER/MesoAmerican Research Center, UCSB). on the once-cultivated parcels of land
(Nations and Nigh 1980; Hernández
est environment. Milpa is more than a system of cultiva- Xolocotzi et al. 1995; Nigh 2008; Terán and Rasmussen
tion. By rotating annual crops with tropical secondary 2009). The integration of the milpa cycle into neotropi-
forest in a successional cycle (Figure 1), milpa moves cal woodland ecology transformed successional processes,
beyond successful food production and becomes the cen- leading to the formation of the contemporary tropical for-
tral axis of a resource management system that upgrades est of the Maya lowlands as a garden, where more than
woodlands with species useful to humans, accelerates suc- 95% of the dominant tree species have utility for humans
cession, and constructs an anthrosol (soil that has been (Levy Tacher et al. 2002; Campbell et al. 2006).
heavily modified by human activities) of ever-increasing Early cultivators employed and expanded small, natural
fertility (Ford and Nigh 2009). The limits to milpa pro- woodland clearings, observing and eventually interven-
ductivity are not population growth or the shortening of ing in the processes of ecological succession to mold the
the fallow period, as is often assumed, but rather labor environment for their own benefit. Many agroforestry
availability and skill (Nigh 2008). practices originated with the inhabitants of the Maya
Milpa is the best known agroecological system in the lowlands during the Archaic (8000 to 2000 BCE), the
Maya culture area and has been well described in the acad- precursors of what would become elaborate forms of agro-
emic literature (Bernsten and Herdt 1977; Nations and forestry practiced by indigenous peoples throughout the
Nigh 1980; Gómez-Pompa 1987; Hernandez Xolocotzi et neotropics (see Alcorn 1990; Peters 2000; Toledo et al.
al. 1995; Steinberg 1998; Nigh 2008; Diemont and Martin 2008). These activities left their imprint on the wood-
2009; Isakson 2009; Terán and Rasmussen 2009). Milpa, in land environment long after some of these territories had
one form or another, has been practiced for millennia, in been abandoned (Campbell et al. 2006; Ross 2008).
all ecological settings within the Maya region and is still a Intensively managed woodland patches have probably
central activity in traditional Maya management of envi- been important in shaping the structure and composition
ronmental sustainability. The ingenuity of milpa lies in its of the Maya forest. An example is the pet kot, a form of
potential for adaptation to the extremely varied local forest modification practiced by the Yukatek Maya. The
ecosystems and cultures of the region. Milpa systems are pet kot is a tall, managed tree garden, created in favorable
found from sea level to highlands above 2000 m; it can be ecological niches (Gómez-Pompa et al. 1987). Pet kot were
integrated with home gardens (infield, referring to crops developed on sites of 19 000–24 000 m2, where particu-
grown around the family house site; Caballero 1992; Corzo larly useful plants were cultivated, forming a kind of nursery

www.frontiersinecology.org © The Ecological Society of America

R Nigh and SAW Diemont Maya milpa: fire and soil

within a protected forest ecosystem. Many of these e47

species were also common to local home gardens
(such as those of the genera Brosimum, Spondias,
Pithecellobium, Malmea, Bursera, Sabal, and others;
Gómez-Pompa et al. 1987, 1990).
Climate variability and especially periods of
severe drought have historically been a part of the
region’s ecology and may have been determining
factors during certain periods of Maya civilization,
for example the so-called Classic Collapse (600–
900 CE) (Gill 2000; Peterson and Haug 2005;
Kennett et al. 2012; Medina-Elizalde and Rohling
2012). During these periods, areas such as the pet
kot may have provided important refugia for useful
woodland species, allowing subsequent afforesta-
tion during wetter periods to be skewed toward
these species. Such agroforestry practices are a key
element in the Maya adaptation to long-term cli- Figure 2. A typical Lakandon milpa. Maize stalks are doubled over to allow
mate variability (Ford and Nigh in press). ripened ears to dry while sweet potato and squash provide ground cover.
These are examples of practices that probably
arose during the “long transition”, as Archaic mixed mobile stand that this is not the usual outcome and recognize
horticulturalists occupied the lowland forest in the 5000 the importance of traditional systems of cutting and
year-long “climatic optimum” (a period of warm, moist, and burning for managing local biodiversity (Gliessman et al.
stable climate before 4000 years ago; Smith 1998; Burroughs 1981; Ford 2008). The Maya forest, as with other wooded
2005). Eventually, a true agrarian society emerged from this areas of Mesoamerica, has been structured by the milpa
ecological matrix, one that showed an increasing depen- cycle, the fundamental agroforestry management tool of
dence on settled horticulture (Barker 2006). This horticul- both ancient and contemporary Maya (Finegan 2004;
tural evolution resulted in a domesticated landscape that Campbell et al. 2006).
transformed the forest into a cultural feature, cultivated by Many contemporary examples of milpa are associated
the Maya (Fedick 2010). The creation of the Maya forest with degraded ecosystems (Lawrence et al. 2007; Daniels
garden is the result of an accumulated investment in and et al. 2008; Schmook 2010). These are usually forms of
intensification of the milpa cycle, and forms part of a de-intensified milpa agriculture. As family labor is
dynamic socioecological system (Ford and Nigh 2009). diverted to off-farm wage work, the tasks required to
Having evolved within the historical ecological con- maintain the long-term sustainability of the milpa sys-
text of the tropics, the milpa forest garden cultivation tem, including intergenerational transmission of know-
cycle supplied households with food and other botanicals ledge, are increasingly neglected and labor-saving tools
at every successional stage. The stages of the milpa cycle (eg herbicides) are introduced (McGee 2002).
recapitulate the ecological stages of vegetation succession
that is characteristic of tropical forest dynamics (Kellman n The milpa forest garden cycle – Lakandon Maya
and Tackaberry 1997; Finegan 2004; Nigh 2008). The agroforestry
economically valuable plants that proliferate in the Maya
“feral” forest today (Campbell et al. 2006) owe their dom- We can gain some insight into the relationship between
inance to human selection over millennia in the context traditional Maya milpa agriculture and the tropical rain
of the milpa cycle (Atran 1993). forest by examining a recent ethnographic example of the
The evolution of the tropical woodlands under the milpa Lakandon Maya of Chiapas, Mexico (Figure 2).
system is a central aspect of the natural history of the Maya Historically, the Maya have employed a wide variety of
culture area. The Maya forest is as much a vestige of Maya farming systems, but the example of the Lakandon milpa,
civilization as are the ancient stone temples of Palenque or practiced almost universally by the Lakandon until the
Tikal and their surrounding small structures, which are the end of the past century, illustrates the skillful cultural
remains of house foundations and agricultural terraces. engagement with the neotropical woodland environment
The neotropical woodlands in which ancient Maya civi- that is characteristic of many indigenous Mesoamerican
lization developed have been greatly influenced by the adaptive management systems (Wilken 1971, 1987;
human societies it has nurtured to the present day. Alcorn 1990; Toledo et al. 2003; Nigh 2008). An under-
Archaeologists and paleoecologists have sometimes standing of Lakandon land-use management reveals the
assumed that the evidence of milpa agriculture in paleo- flexibility of the milpa forest garden system.
ecological data implies widespread deforestation (Mueller The Lakandon are one of the smallest Maya groups
et al. 2010; Kennett et al. 2012), but agroecologists under- (currently, a population of over 600 individuals, divided

© The Ecological Society of America www.frontiersinecology.org

 Maya milpa: fire and soil
e48
Figure 3. A stand of balsa (Ochroma pyramidale) deliberately
planted by Lakandon forest gardeners to aid in the control of
invasive, fire-resistant bracken (Pteridium aquilinum).
among three communities), but also the one with the
longest history of continuous occupation of the Chiapas
rain forest (Palka 2005). They possess a detailed know-
ledge of the tropical lowland environment and, until the
end of the 20th century, widely practiced a diverse and
intensive agroforestry swidden based on maize and a vari-
ety of other crops (Wilken 1971; Nations and Nigh
1980).
The Maya subsistence strategy involved multiple land
uses, in which several ecological zones were (and still are)
managed and exploited concurrently. In addition to
milpa and home gardens around the Lakandon house site,
regenerating forest derived from previous milpa cycles,
mature woodlands, and aquatic and semi-aquatic ecosys-
tems typical of the area provided various resources.
Lakandon men traditionally dedicated the greater part of
their daily effort to milpa farming, in addition to hunting
and gathering other forest resources. Women and chil-
dren helped during periods of high labor demand, such as
during harvest, as is common in other parts of
Mesoamerica. Such dedication to milpa work led to levels
of diversification and productivity rarely seen for this
agroecosystem in recent times. This provides us with a
unique contemporary example of what Wilken (1971)
called the “high-performance milpa”, a form of intensive
milpa agriculture likely to have been far more commonly
www.frontiersinecology.org
R Nigh and SAW Diemont
practiced in densely occupied ancient Mesoamerica.
Maya farmers chose cultivation sites surrounded by mature
forest to maintain a source of tree seeds for succession. The
result of this practice combined with intensive daily selec-
tion and weeding of the cropping area resulted in a careful
control of the soil seed bank, oriented toward accelerating
and directing ecological succession and achieving rapid tall
forest regeneration (Nigh 2008; Levy Tacher and Aguirre
Rivera 2005). These regenerating, reforesting parcels of land
following milpa cultivation are known as jurupche (Yukatek
Maya) or acahual (Spanish); they develop anthropogenic
vegetation formations of enormous diversity, with both the
plant and animal resources directly managed by the
Lakandon (Nations and Nigh 1980; Durán Fernández 1999;
Levy Tacher et al. 2002; Nigh 2008; Diemont and Martin
2009). Careful weed management extended the useful life of
the field for annual crop production, allowing 4–8 years of
high-yield, continuous cropping, in contrast to the less
intensive milpas that exist in this region today that, under
conventional weeding or herbicide treatment, can be
planted for a maximum of 3 consecutive years before being
overwhelmed by herb and shrub competition.
Ecologists no longer subscribe to “equilibrium” models
of succession, in which woodlands were believed to
return spontaneously to a “climax” state after a distur-
bance (eg wildfire, blow-down, clearing for cultivation).
However, the processes of tropical forest succession are
known to develop as a series of stages, usually leading to
some form of closed forest. This succession is driven by
groups of dominant woody species defined by morpholog-
ical, phenological, biochemical, or trophic responses
(functional groups) at each stage (Chazdon 2008). The
Lakandon recognized and named these stages and the
associated functional groups of tree species (Nigh 2008).
The species composition of forests derived from tradi-
tional Lakandon milpa are much more diverse than those
that derive from contemporary milpa practices. Thus, for-
est recovery is hastened under this traditional manage-
ment system (Levy Tacher and Aguirre Rivera 2005).
In one management practice, Lakandon farmers dis-
persed seeds of the balsa tree (Ochroma pyramidale) in
order to create thick stands of this early successional, fast-
growing, short-lived canopy species (Levy Tacher and
Golicher 2004). Ochroma has been used by generations of
Lakandon farmers to accelerate forest regeneration,
replenish soil organic matter, and improve weed control.
For example, common bracken (Pteridium aquilinum),
which is a pyrogenic species, has become a serious inva-
sive weed problem in the region, as traditional control
methods (such as planting Ochroma; Figure 3) have been
abandoned (Schneider 2004; Vester et al. 2007; Turner
and Sabloff 2012). At least a dozen other tree species
were also managed for their beneficial effects on soil fer-
tility and succession (Levy Tacher 2000; Diemont et al.
2006; Roman Dañobeytia 2012). In this way, the Maya
obtained a selection of species of value to humans during
the process of forest regrowth.
© The Ecological Society of America
R Nigh and SAW Diemont
The intensification of the Maya milpa has been studied
from the standpoint of shortening the fallow period,
which usually resulted in declining soil fertility and
decreased ecosystem diversity (eg Lawrence et al. 2007;
Ochoa-Gaona et al. 2007; Parsons et al. 2009). Merely
shortening the fallow period in swidden production is
actually a type of de-intensification, a shift to a less
demanding cultivation system that results in decreased
productivity. In the high-performance milpa, shortening
of the fallow period is achieved by increasing the effort
applied to management of successional stages (Johnston
2003). The practices developed by the Lakandon Maya in
times of low population density and isolation in the
remote tropical forests of Chiapas and Guatemala,
between the 16th and 19th centuries (Palka 2005), con-
tinued commonly until the end of the 20th century.
Families lived where they worked, and most of the house-
hold’s subsistence was acquired directly from the milpa
and derived woodlands. A few products, such as tobacco,
were occasionally traded for outside goods (such as steel
tools, cooking oil, and other industrial products). The 21st
century provides a very different context for the inhabi-
tants of today’s Lacandon rain forest (McGee 2002).
n Fire, nutrient cycling, and soil ecology
Over the past decade, scientists have thoroughly revised
the conventional view of the nature of soil in the neo-
tropics. The former stereotype of “tropical soils” as nutri-
ent-poor, highly weathered and leached, and inherently
limited in productive potential has been questioned from a
number of viewpoints (Sanchez and Logan 1992). First,
land in the humid tropics is far more heterogeneous than
the stereotype implies (Vitousek and Sanford 1986). For
example, in the regions that supported the ancient Maya
civilization of southern Mexico and Central America, not
only do ecological and soil conditions vary widely
(Dunning et al. 1998), but extensive areas of the Maya
tropical lowlands are dominated by mollisol, “one of the
world’s most agriculturally important and naturally produc-
tive soils, particularly under conditions of rain-fed cultiva-
tion” (Fedick 1996).
Even in those areas where soil types conform more
closely to the conventional image of tropical soils, such as
the nutrient-depleted oxisol of upland Amazonia, much
attention has focused on the pockets of nutrient-rich,
dark, anthropogenic soil, which features a stable organic
matter content; these soils, known as terra preta do indio or
Amazonian dark earths (ADE), are much sought-after by
contemporary farmers. Among the interesting properties
of this soil is that it has considerable long-term carbon
(C) sequestration potential (Sombroek et al. 2003;
German 2004). Although the pre-Columbian anthro-
pogenic origins of ADE are widely accepted (Woods and
McCann 1999; Peterson et al. 2001), the processes by
which these anomalous soil types were formed and have
maintained their fertility over centuries remain uncer-
© The Ecological Society of America
Maya milpa: fire and soil
tain, with several explanations having been suggested. e49
One of the first theories about ADE is the “midden
model”, which states that such areas are essentially pre-
historic garbage dumps, reflecting long-term human
occupation; one study concluded that all seven dark earth
sites investigated along the middle Amazon valley
derived from ancient middens and were enriched with
materials originating in the adjacent floodplain (várzea;
Lima et al. 2002). The authors of that study propose a lim-
ited distribution for ADE in the Amazon and question
whether such soil supported the dense permanent settle-
ments others have proposed (Denevan 1996). Con-
temporary examples suggest that the midden model may
explain the creation of some ADE. However, a survey of a
large number of sites in the Tapajós and Arapiuns river
basins of the lower Amazon revealed that while some
sites were middens, most were not. These authors con-
cluded that the most plausible explanation for the high
organic matter and nutrient content of ADE sites is
“long-term soil management practices (especially
mulching and burning)” (McCann et al. 2001).
Despite this evidence, however, it is generally agreed
that the most common type of agriculture in the region,
swidden, could not be a source of ADE special character-
istics. Balée (2010) summarizes this view: “Charcoal is
produced by incomplete combustion (sometimes called a
‘cool burn’) of organic material and it is what is responsi-
ble for retaining SOM [soil organic matter] at high levels
in ADE, which cannot result from slash-and-burn culti-
vation, a ‘hot burn’”. However, this reasoning does not
take into account that swidden farmers possess many
techniques for controlling burn temperature and other
factors. Our data suggest that the swidden cycle of the
Lakandon Maya contributed to black C and other charac-
teristics of ADE (cf Rumpel et al. 2006).
Regeneration of secondary vegetation following swid-
den cultivation has a positive effect on soil fertility,
increasing nutrients and organic matter. The contribu-
tion of ash to nutrient flow in swidden soil is amply docu-
mented, at least since Nye and Greenland’s (1960) classic
study. Pest control also may be favored by burning crop
residues (Cochrane 2003). In some geologies, such as the
limestone base that underlies the forest throughout most
of the Maya area, burning releases calcium – essential for
crop production – from the parent rock (Faust 1998;
Lawrence et al. 2007). In general, burning reduces weeds,
releases soil nutrients, replenishes nitrogen, and adds
phosphorus, potassium, magnesium, and manganese con-
tained in the ash of the burned woody vegetation to the
soil (Sanchez 1976; Wilken 1987; Ochoa-Gaona et al.
2007; Schmook 2010). Charcoal added to soil increases
nutrient storage, which counters nutrient removal by
leaching (Glaser et al. 2002; Lehmann et al. 2003).
If milpa is characterized as a rotation between culti-
vated fields and secondary forest, then a function of
woody vegetation is to build soil fertility after cultivation
through nutrient cycling. Deep-rooted trees retrieve
www.frontiersinecology.org
 Maya milpa: fire and soil R Nigh and SAW Diemont

e50 particular the use of fire when compared to con-

ventional milpa, as practiced by recent colonists.
In conventional milpa, the entire field is weeded in
one sustained effort, two or three times during the
cultivation cycle. After the last such clearing of the
field, weeds are allowed to proliferate, as the maize
crop is fully formed and needs only to dry in place
before harvesting. This means, however, that
annual weeds grow and reseed prolifically, requir-
ing a hot burn over the entire field to prepare for
the next planting cycle. By contrast, in traditional
Lakandon practice, small piles of weed or crop
residues are burned occasionally throughout the
year and the resulting ashes and charcoal are
Figure 4. Partially burned vegetation provides a gradual but continuous spread about; a hot burn over the entire field
input of biochar and organic matter to the milpa soil. occurs only once in the 25-year milpa forest cycle,
when the vegetation is felled to initiate cropping.
nutrients that have been leached from the upper layers. Most of the weeds are not burned at all but are left in the
Data suggest, for example, that Sapium lateriflorum, a suc- field to decompose, thereby providing a continuous sup-
cessional tree managed by the Lakandon Maya, serves as ply of organic matter.
a phosphorus pump, bringing this limiting nutrient from The low-intensity burns result in incomplete combus-
deep soil through leaf litter (Diemont et al. 2006). Leaf tion of vegetable material (Figure 4) and addition of pyro-
fall also provides raw organic matter to store nutrients genic charcoal, reminiscent of the “slash-and-char”
and contributes to high biological activity and good soil method suggested by Lehmann et al. (2003) or the
structure, while decomposition of organic matter fuels the “sweep-and-char” analogy suggested by Winklerprins
soil food web. The Maya plant and protect trees they (2003). This critical difference in fire intensity between
believe enhance and accelerate post-agricultural succes- conventional, contemporary milpa (or slash-and-burn)
sion (Levy Tacher and Golicher 2004). Another impor- systems and the traditional Maya system is not usually
tant role of woody vegetation is as a source of ligneous appreciated, which may be why some researchers believe
material that under conditions of low-temperature pyrol- that ADE are not usually formed under swidden agro-
ysis creates a form of black C known as biochar. forestry (Denevan 2006).
Biochar is a primary ingredient in all variants of ADE Preliminary results on Lakandon milpa fields show
and is also known in other agricultural contexts as an increasing black C with soil depth, suggesting accumu-
important soil additive (Lehmann et al. 2003). Biochar’s lation of black C over time, as fields are reused in
positive effect on agricultural soil appears to be in repeated cycles of fire, cultivation, and directed sec-
increasing the surface area over which biological activ- ondary succession (Table 1). Burned trunks and large
ity can take place. Charcoal positively affects cation- branches from the original clearing are distributed
exchange capacity, as well as nutrient and water storage throughout the field and shed charcoal continually
capacities (Liang et al. 2006). The hard, polycyclic aro- (Figure 4), contributing to the highly enriched anthro-
matic C particles that result from low-temperature pogenic soil observed on Lakandon fields (cf Wilken
pyrolysis (300–500˚ C) are chemically and biologically 1987). High levels of organic matter and phosphorus,
stable, persist for centuries, and confer long-term soil as well as other characteristics (Mendoza-Vega and
characteristics. Messing 2005), are similar to the terra preta of the
Indigenous weeding practices have important implica- Amazon (Woods and McCann 1999; Peterson et al.
tions for other aspects of agroecosystem management, in 2001; Glaser et al. 2001; Balée 2010). Properly managed,
milpa soils can be more fertile
Table 1. Properties of Lakandon milpa soil by sample depth after each cultivation cycle.
–1 Fire, however, can also be a
Depth (cm) n BC (%) TOC (%) OM (%) N (%) P (mg kg )
negative factor, and there is a dis-
0–20 17 4.28 (3.13) a 15.90 (5.64) a 7.65 (2.96) a 0.39 (0.16) a 8.10 (3.14) a tinct advantage to incorporating
40–60 16 7.50 (2.26) a 6.01 (2.20) b 1.95 (1.04) b 0.10 (0.06) b 5.10 (2.38) ab crop residues and other organic
80–100 16 8.10 (2.74) b 4.93 (2.99) b 1.12 (0.55) b 0.05 (0.03) b 5.95 (3.57) b matter directly into the soil rather
than as ash. The goal of fire man-
Notes: Black carbon (BC), total organic carbon (TOC), organic matter (OM), total nitrogen (N), and extractable phos-
phorus (P) at different soil depths within the Lakandon Maya swidden system. Mean values are followed by standard
agement in the milpa must be a
deviations in parentheses. Entries within the same column that do not share a letter following the standard deviation low-temperature burn that creates
are significantly different at ␣ = 0.05. Each soil sample was analyzed for black C using a thermal technique (Gustafsson charcoal and conserves as much
et al. 1996; Schmidt et al. 2001), as described in detail by Rawlins et al. (2008), based on Kuhlbusch (1995).
organic matter as possible.

www.frontiersinecology.org © The Ecological Society of America

R Nigh and SAW Diemont
n Burning a Maya milpa swidden
Opening a new swidden in woodlands involves cutting the
existing vegetation, allowing it to dry in situ, and then
burning it. In the following description of the burning
activity in Xocen, a Maya village in the Mexican State of
Yucatan (Terán and Rasmussen 2009), we consider how
Maya farmers control the burning temperature in milpa
swiddens. In practice, a great deal of knowledge and skill are
brought to bear on the implementation of these activities.
Burning ceremony
Terán and Rasmussen (2009) report that in Xocen a cere-
mony to request a good burn from the spirits of the Earth is
now only rarely observed. The ritual serves as an occasion
to plan the upcoming burning activity and to exchange
knowledge about burning techniques and safety. The Maya
farmers consider it to be a “good burn” when all the dried
leaves, small branches, and trunks – what in English we
might call brush or slash – are completely converted to ash.
Larger woody debris is only charred and becomes a source of
charcoal to further enrich the soil. Winds should be gentle
but steady and stable, and should blow only from one direc-
tion during the burn. An unanticipated shift in wind direc-
tion or an unexpected rain shower can cause the burn to
fail. If the fire temperature attained is not too hot, consider-
able charred vegetable remains are left that will gradually be
incorporated into the swidden soil (Figure 4).
Timing
An ideal burn depends on the external conditions of
wind, humidity, and temperature that facilitate or com-
plicate control of the fire. The brush must be completely
dry, yet if too much time has passed since the field was
cleared, weeds will have returned and may need to be cut
again. Thus, the Maya farmer chooses the timing of the
burn carefully. Ephemerides (calendars of ritual and other
activities) in the Classic Maya codices depict gods in the
act of using a wooden drill to make fire, associated with
certain dates in the Maya calendar; the context suggests
that fire-making was considered sacred.
Burning the milpa is usually a fairly brief event, lasting 45
minutes to an hour for a 1-ha field. Time of day influences
the quality of the burn. In the early morning, temperatures
are cool and the fallen vegetation is more humid, which
may impede the combustion of the brush. Later in the day,
the brush is dry and warm and burns easily. However, the
fire can burn out of control and jump to surrounding areas
should the wind suddenly shift or increase in strength.
Firebreaks
Firebreaks – strips of land that have been cleared free of
vegetation and debris, forming a perimeter around the
clearing – are essential for fire control. Their characteris-
© The Ecological Society of America
Maya milpa: fire and soil
tics vary greatly, according to specific local conditions; e51
these are not discussed here.
Wind tending
Using fire to remove most of the brush and litter from an
area of land while keeping the fire under control and pre-
venting it from jumping the firebreak and burning adja-
cent fields or converting the entire biomass to ash requires
considerable skill. Individuals known as “wind tenders” in
the Yucatan (yum ik’ob in Yukatek) carry out the burns.
One common practice is to burn against the wind. For
example, if the dominant and strongest winds are from the
south-to-southeast, the two or more wind tenders begin in
the northwest corner and proceed along the firebreaks on
opposite sides, spreading the fire out as much as possible.
Under ideal conditions, two teams of wind tenders work
with rustic tools fashioned from fresh branches taken from
leguminous trees to spread the fire throughout the dried
brush, keeping the fire burning in a controlled manner.
The two teams start from a single point and spread the fire
throughout the field by following opposite perimeters and
meeting again in the far corner of the field. In some cases
firing proceeds first against the wind and then back again
with the wind, resulting in two smaller fires rather than
one intense fire, thereby allowing for more moderate fire
temperatures (Terán and Rasmussen 2009). Other firing
patterns have been reported (Zizumbo and Sima 1988),
while additional practices may include keeping barrels of
water at the site and using wet branches to keep fires cool
and under control (Hernández Xolocotzi et al.1995).
n Conclusions
Much skepticism about the potential of milpa as a sus-
tainable agroecosystem stems from its minor role as a
mode of production in contemporary society (Terán and
Rasmussen 2009). In pre-Hispanic times, the milpa sys-
tem would have been the primary form of agriculture in
Mesoamerica and was supported by the aristocratic class,
who recognized it as the basis for successful subsistence.
Current milpa systems can vary greatly in form, produc-
tivity, and intensity, primarily as a result of increasing
marginalization of small-scale farmers. While the basic
milpa systems practiced today share all the characteristics
described in historical records on Maya farming (Terán
and Rasmussen 1995), there is a failure to distinguish
among different milpa strategies that have evolved since
the Spanish conquest; they are treated indiscriminately,
in part due to the tendency to focus exclusively on the
maize component of the system.
The extensive milpa production that we call marginal or
contemporary, and which is common throughout
Mesoamerica today, must be distinguished from the tradi-
tional high-performance milpa as it has been practiced in
historical settings for millennia (Wilken 1971; Nations
and Nigh 1980; Terán and Rasmussen 1995, 2009). The
www.frontiersinecology.org
 Maya milpa: fire and soil
e52 primary difference between the high-performance milpa
and de-intensified, marginal forms lies in the degree of
labor and skill the farming family dedicates to the milpa
cycle. During the phase of annual cropping of maize,
beans, squash, and associated crops, considerable labor is
required to manage the complex multi-cropped field.
Later stages in the milpa cycle also require skilled labor
inputs if the full range of milpa resources is to be mar-
shaled for household subsistence and trade. One of these
skills is the management of fire. As one Amazonia
researcher states: “Fire is a defining feature of swidden
agriculture. For a number of reasons this complex form of
land management and its key technology have been cast
as villains in the drama of tropical development, a process
that may well have obscured a more careful and perhaps
more fruitful analysis of the roles that fire and succession
might have had in the creation of soil fertility over longer
stretches of time” (Hecht 2003).
The detailed traditional ecological knowledge driving
the Maya milpa is of great value today as we face the
urgent need for ecological restoration and the renewal of
rural livelihoods. Unfortunately, the current policies of
many governments, both national and local, do not
reflect this need. Lakandon farmers, for example, receive
government subsidies under an environmental services
program to end burning activities and allow their forests
to grow unmanaged. This policy is ill-conceived. Under
traditional Lakandon practice, milpa swiddens sequester
C for long periods of time; in ADE, black C was found to
be stable over centuries (Glaser et al. 2003). Under cur-
rent C credit programs, however, C is sequestered tem-
porarily until the forest ages, degrades, and perhaps burns
spontaneously in a hot burn, with stored C then being
returned to the atmosphere. These C credit programs
should be discontinued, since they do not result in net C
sequestration and also result in the loss of valuable tradi-
tional knowledge.
In recent years, concern has been expressed about the
fitness of our current model of industrial agriculture to
meet the demands of sustainability, biodiversity conserva-
tion, and food security for all (eg Matson et al. 1997;
Altieri and Toledo 2011). Doubts are also being expressed
about the current trends in milpa practice (Lawrence et
al. 2007; Schmook 2010). The agroecological memory
developed over 10 000 years of Maya agrarian civiliza-
tion – and especially the potential role of fire in increas-
ing soil fertility – is worth some consideration.
n Acknowledgements
Fieldwork informing this article was supported in part by
the Centro de Investigaciones y Estudios Superiores en
Antropología Social (CIESAS; Mexico); the State
University of New York, College of Environmental
Science and Forestry; the Ohio Agricultural Research
and Development Center; the Fulbright Program; and
NSF Grant OISE-0431230.
www.frontiersinecology.org
R Nigh and SAW Diemont
n References
Alcorn J. 1990. Indigenous agroforestry systems in the Latin American
tropics. In: Altieri MA and Hecht SB (Eds). Agroecology and
small farm development. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
Altieri MA and Toledo VM. 2011. The agroecological revolution
in Latin America: rescuing nature, ensuring food sovereignty
and empowering peasants. J Peasant Studies 38: 587–612.
Alvarez Buylla ME, Lazos Clavero E, and García Barrios JR. 1989.
Homegardens of a humid tropical region in southeast Mexico:
an example of an agroforestry cropping system in a recently
established community. Agroforest Syst 8: 133–56.
Anderson EN and Anderson BE. 2011. Development and the
Yucatec Maya in Quintana Roo: some successes and failures. J
Political Ecol 18: 51–65.
Atran S. 1993. Itza Maya tropical agro-forestry. Curr Anthropol 34:
633–700.
Balée W. 2010. Amazonian dark earths. Tipití: Journal of the Society
for the Anthropology of Lowland South America 8: 1–18.
Barker G. 2006. The agricultural revolution in prehistory: why did
foragers become farmers? Oxford, UK and New York, NY:
Oxford University Press.
Bernsten RH and Herdt RW. 1977. Towards an understanding of
milpa agriculture: the Belize case. J Dev Areas 11: 373–92.
Burroughs WJ. 2005. Climate change in prehistory: the end of the
reign of chaos. Cambridge, UK and New York, NY: Cambridge
University Press.
Caballero J. 1992. The Maya homegardens of the Yucatan
Peninsula: past, present and future. Etnoecológica 1: 35–54.
Campbell DG, Ford A, Lowell K, et al. 2006. The feral forests of the
eastern Petén. In: Balee W and Erickson C (Eds). Time and
complexity in historical ecology. New York, NY: Columbia
University Press.
Chazdon RL. 2008. Chance and determinism in tropical forest suc-
cession. In: Carson WP and Schnitzer SA (Eds). Tropical forest
community ecology. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
Cochrane MA. 2003. Fire science for rainforests. Nature 421:
913–19.
Corzo Márquez, AR and Schwartz N. 2008. Traditional home gar-
den of Petén Guatemala: resource management, food security
and conservation. J Ethnobiol 28: 305–17.
Daniels AE, Painter K, and Southworth J. 2008. Milpa imprint on
the tropical dry forest landscape in Yucatan, Mexico: remote
sensing and field measurement of edge vegetation. Agr Ecosyst
Environ 123: 293–304.
De Clerck FAJ and Negreros-Castillo P. 2000. Plant species of tra-
ditional Mayan homegardens of Mexico as analogs for multi-
strata agroforests. Agroforestry Systems 48: 303–17.
Diemont SAW and Martin JF. 2009. Lacandon Maya ecosystem
management: sustainable design for subsistence and environ-
mental restoration. Ecol Appl 19: 254–66.
Diemont SAW, Martin JF, Levy Tacher SI, et al. 2006. Indigenous
Maya forest management: restoration of soil fertility using
native tree species. Ecol Eng 28: 205–12.
Denevan WM. 2006. Pre-European forest cultivation in Amazonia.
In: Balée W and Erickson C (Eds). Time and complexity in his-
torical ecology. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
Denevan WM. 1996. A bluff model of riverine settlement in pre-
historic Amazonia. Ann Assoc Am Geogr 86: 654–81.
Dunning NP, Beach T, Farrell P, and Luzzadder-Beach S. 1998.
Prehispanic agrosystems and adaptive regions in the Maya low-
lands. Culture and Agriculture 20: 87–101.
Durán Fernández A. 1999. Estructura y etnobotánica de la selva
alta perennifolia de Nahá, Chiapas (MSc dissertation). Mexico
City, Mexico: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.
Faust BB. 1998. Mexican rural development and the plumed ser-
pent: technology and Maya cosmology in the tropical forest of
© The Ecological Society of America
R Nigh and SAW Diemont
Campeche, Mexico. Westport, CT: Bergan & Garvey.
Fedick SL. 2010. The Maya forest: destroyed or cultivated by the
ancient Maya? P Natl Acad Sci 107: 953–54.
Fedick SL. 1996. Landscape approaches to the study of ancient
Maya agriculture and resource use. In: Fedick SL (Ed). The
managed mosaic: ancient Maya agriculture and resource use.
Salt Lake City, UT: University of Utah Press.
Finegan B. 2004. The biodiversity and conservation potentional of
shifting cultivation landscapes. In: Shroth G, da Fonseca GAB,
Harvey C, et al. (Eds). Agrofrestry and biodiversity conserva-
tion in tropical landscapes. Washington, DC: Island Press.
Ford A. 2008. Dominant plants of the Maya forest and gardens of
El Pilar: implications for paleoenvironmental reconstructions. J
Ethnobiol 28: 179–99.
Ford A, Clarke KC, and Raines G. 2009. Modeling settlement pat-
terns of the Late Classic Maya with Bayesian methods and geo-
graphic information systems. Ann Assoc Am Geogr 99: 1–25.
Ford A and Nigh R. Resilience and adaptive management: climate
change in the ancient Maya forest. In: Iannone G (Ed). The
great Maya droughts in cultural context. Boulder, CO:
University Press of Colorado. In press.
Ford A and Nigh R. 2009. Origins of the Maya forest garden: a
resource management system. J Ethnobiol 29: 213–36.
German LA. 2004. Ecological praxis and blackwater ecosystems: a
case study from the Brazilian Amazon. Human Ecol 32: 653–83.
Gill RB. 2000. The great Maya droughts: water, life, and death.
Albuquerque, NM: University of New Mexico Press.
Glaser B, Guggenberger G, Zech W, and Ruivo M. 2003. Soil
organic matter stability in Amazonian dark earths. In:
Lehmann J, Kern D, Glaser B, and Woods W (Eds).
Amazonian dark earths: origins, properties, management. New
York, NY: Springer.
Glaser B, Haumaier L, Guggenberger G, and Zech W. 2001. The
“terra preta” phenomenon: a model for sustainable agriculture
in the humid tropics. Naturwissenschaften 88: 32–41.
Glaser B, Lehmann J, and Zech W. 2002. Ameliorating physical
and chemical properties of highly weathered soils in the tropics
with charcoal – a review. Biol Fert Soils 35: 219–30.
Gliessman S, García EM, and Amador A. 1981. The ecological
basis for the applications of traditional agriculture in the man-
agement of tropical agroecosystems. Agro-ecosystems 7: 173–85.
Gómez-Pompa A. 1987. On Maya silviculture. Mex Stud 3: 1–17.
Gómez-Pompa A, Fernández MA, and Flores JS. 1990. The sacred
cacao groves of the Maya. Lat Am Antiq 1: 247–57.
Gómez-Pompa A, Flores JS, and Sosa V. 1987. The “pet kot”: a
man-made tropical forest of the Maya. Interciencia 12: 10–15.
Gustafsson O, Haghseta F, Chan C, et al. 1996. Quantification of
the dilute sedimentary soot phase: implications for PAH speci-
ation and bioavailability. Environ Sci Technol 31: 203–09.
Hecht SB. 2003. Indigenous soil management and the creation of
Amazonian dark earths: implications of Kayapó practices. In:
Lehmann J, Kern D, Glaser B, and Woods W (Eds).
Amazonian dark earths: origins, properties, management. New
York, NY: Springer.
Hecht SB and Posey DA. 1989. Preliminary results on soil manage-
ment techniques of the Kayapó Indians. Advances in Economic
Botany 7: 174–88.
Hernandez Xolocotzi E, Baltazar EB, and Tacher S. 1995. La milpa
en Yucatán: un sistema de producción agrícola tradicional.
Montecillo, Mexico: Colegio De Postgraduados.
Isakson SR. 2009. No hay ganancia en la milpa: the agrarian ques-
tion, food sovereignty, and the on-farm conservation of agro-
biodiversity in the Guatemalan highlands. J Peasant Stud 36:
725–59.
Johnston KJ. 2003. The intensification of pre-industrial cereal agri-
culture in the tropics: Boserup, cultivation lengthening, and
the Classic Maya. J Anthropol Archaeology 22: 126–61.
Kellman M and Tackaberry R. 1997. Tropical environments: the
© The Ecological Society of America
Maya milpa: fire and soil
functioning and management of tropical ecosystems. New
York, NY: Routledge.
e53
Kennett DJ, Breitenbach SFM, Aquino VV, et al. 2012.
Development and disintegration of Maya political systems in
response to climate change. Science 338: 788–91.
Kuhlbusch TAJ. 1995. Method for determining black carbon in
residues of vegetation fires. Environl Sci Technol 29: 2695–2702.
Lawrence D, D’Odorico P, Diekmann L, et al. 2007. Ecological
feedbacks following deforestation create the potential for a cat-
astrophic ecosystem shift in tropical dry forest. P Natl Acad Sci
104: 20696–20701.
Lehmann J, da Silva Jr JP, Steiner C, et al. 2003. Nutrient availabil-
ity and leaching in an archaeological anthrosol and a ferralsol
of the Central Amazon basin: fertilizer and charcoal amend-
ments. Plant and Soil 249: 343–57.
Levy Tacher SI. 2000. Sucesión causada por roza-tumba-quema en
las selvas de Lacanhá Chansayab, Chiapas (PhD dissertation).
Montecillos, Mexico: Colegio de Postgraduados.
Levy Tacher SI and Aguirre Rivera JR. 2005. Successional path-
ways derived from different vegetation use patterns by
Lacandon Maya. J Sustain Agr 26: 49–82.
Levy Tacher SI, Aguirre Rivera JR, Martínez Romero MM, and
Durán Fernández A. 2002. Caracterización del uso tradicional
de la flora espontánea en la comunidad lacandona de Lacanhá,
Chiapas, México. Interciencia 27: 512–20.
Levy Tacher SI and Golicher JD. 2004. How predictive is tradi-
tional ecological knowledge? The case of the Lacandon Maya
fallow enrichment system. Interciencia 29: 496–503.
Liang B, Lehmann J, Solomon D, et al. 2006. Black carbon
increases cation exchange capacity in soils. Soil Sci Soc Am J
70: 1719–30.
Lima HN, Schaefer CER, Mello JMV, et al. 2002. Pedogenesis and
pre-Colombian land use of ‘‘terra preta anthrosols’’ (‘‘Indian
black earth’’) of Western Amazonia. Geoderma 110: 1–17.
Matson PA, Parton WJ, Power AG, and Swift MJ. 1997.
Agricultural intensification and ecosystem properties. Science
277: 504–09.
McCann JM, Woods WI, and Meyer DW. 2001. Organic matter
and anthrosols in Amazonia: interpreting the Amerindian
legacy. In: Rees RM, Ball BC, Campbell DG, and Watson CA
(Eds). Sustainable management of soil organic matter.
Wallingford, UK: CAB International.
McGee RJ. 2002. Watching Lacandon Maya lives. Boston, MA:
Allyn and Bacon.
Medina-Elizalde M and Rohling EJ. 2012. Collapse of Classic Maya
civilization related to modest reduction in precipitation.
Science 335: 956–59.
Mendoza-Vega J and Messing I. 2005. The influence of land use
and fallow period on the properties of two calcareous soils in
the humid tropics of southern Mexico. Catena 60: 279–92.
Mueller AD, Islebe GA, Hillersheim MB, Grzesik DA, et al. 2009.
Climate drying and associated forest decline in the lowlands of
northern Guatemala during the late Holocene. Quaternary Res
71: 133–41.
Nations JD and Nigh R. 1980. The evolutionary potential of
Lacandon Maya sustained-yield tropical forest agriculture. J
Anthropol Res 36: 1–30.
Netting RM. 1993. Smallholders, householders: farm families and
the ecology of intensive, sustainable agriculture. Stanford, CA:
Stanford University Press.
Netting RM. 1977. Maya subsistence: mythologies, analogies, pos-
sibilities. In: Adams REW (Ed). The origins of Maya civiliza-
tion. Albuquerque, NM: University of New Mexico Press.
Nigh R. 2008. Trees, fire and farmers: making woods and soil in the
Maya forest. J Ethnobiol 28: 231–43.
Nye PH and Greenland DJ. 1960. The soil under shifting cultiva-
tion. London, UK: CAB.
Ochoa-Gaona S, Hernandez-Vazquez F, deLong B, and Gurri-
Garcia F. 2007. Perdida de diversidad floristica ante un gradi-
www.frontiersinecology.org
 Maya milpa: fire and soil
ente de intensificacion del sistema agrícola de roza-tumba y
e54 quema: un estudio de caso en la Selva Lacandona, Chiapas,
Mexico. Bol Soc Bot Mexico 81: 65–80.
Palka J. 2005. Unconquered Lacandon Maya: ethnohistory and
archaeology of indigenous culture change. Gainsville, FL:
University Press of Florida.
Parsons D, Ramírez-Aviles L, Cherney JH, et al. 2009. Managing
maize production in shifting cultivation milpa systems in
Yucatán, through weed control and manure application. Agr
Ecosys Env 133: 123–34.
Peters CM. 2000. Precolumbian silviculture and indigenous man-
agement of neotropical forests. In: Lentz DL (Ed). Imperfect
balance: landscape transformations in the Precolumbian
Americas. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
Peterson LC and Haug GH. 2005. Climate and the collapse of
Maya civilization. Am Sci 93: 322–29.
Peterson JB, Neves EG, and Heckenberger MJ. 2001. Gift from the
past: terra preta and prehistoric Amerindian occupation in
Amazonia. In: McEwan C, Barreto C, Neves E (Eds).
Unknown Amazon: culture in nature in ancient Brazil.
London, UK: British Museum.
Pyburn KA. 1998. Smallholder in the Maya lowlands: homage to a
garden variety ethnographer. Hum Ecol 26: 267–86.
Rawlins BG, Vane CH, Kim AW, et al. 2008. Methods for estimat-
ing types of soil organic carbon and their application to surveys
of UK urban areas. Soil Use Manage 24: 47–59.
Roman Dañobeytia FJ, Levy-Tacher SI, Aronson J et al. 2012.
Testing the performance of fourteen native tropical tree species
in two abandoned pasture of the Lacandon Rainforest region of
Chiapas, Mexico. Restor Ecol 20: 378–86.
Ross NJ. 2008. The impact of ancient Maya forest gardens on mod-
ern tree species composition in NW Belize (PhD dissertation).
Storrs-Mansfield, CT: University of Connecticut.
Rumpel C, Alexis M, Chabbi A, et al. 2006. Black carbon contri-
bution to soil organic matter composition in tropical sloping
land under slash and burn agriculture. Geoderma 130: 35–46.
Sanchez PA and Logan TJ. 1992. Myths and science about the
chemistry and fertility of soils in the tropical. In: Lal R and
Sanchez P (Eds). Myths and science of soils in the tropics.
Madison, WI: Soil Science Society of America.
Schmidt MWI, Skjemstad J, Czimczik CI, et al. 2001. Comparative
analysis of black carbon in soils. Global Biogeochem Cycles 15:
163–67.
Schmook B. 2010. Shifting maize cultivation and secondary vege-
tation in the southern Yucatan: successional forest impacts of
temporal intensification. Reg Environ Change 10: 233–46.
Schneider L. 2004. Bracken fern invasion in southern Yucatan: a
case for land-change science. Geogr Rev 94: 229–41.
www.frontiersinecology.org
R Nigh and SAW Diemont
Smith BD. 1998. Between foraging and farming. Science 279:
1651–52.
Sombroek W, Ruivo ML, Fearnside PM, et al. 2003. Amazonian
dark earths as carbon stores and sinks. In: Lehmann J, Kern D,
Glaser B, and Woods W (Eds). Amazonian dark earths: origins,
properties, management. New York, NY: Springer.
Steinberg MK. 1998. Political ecology and cultural change:
impacts on swidden–fallow agroforestry practices among the
Mopan Maya in southern Belize. Prof Geogr 50: 407–17.
Terán S and Rasmussen CH. 2009. La milpa de los mayas, 2nd edn.
Mexico City, Mexico: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de
México
Terán S and Rasmussen CH. 1995. Genetic diversity and agricul-
tural strategy in 16th century and present-day Yucatecan milpa
agriculture. Biodivers Conserv 4: 363–81.
Toledo VM, Barrera-Bassols N, Garcia-Frapolli E, and Alarcon-
Chaires P. 2008. Multiple use and biodiversity within the Mayan
communities of Yucatan, Mexico. Interciencia 33: 345–52.
Toledo VM, Ortiz-Espejel B, Cortés L, et al. 2003. The multiple use
of tropical forests by indigenous peoples in Mexico: a case of
adaptive management. Conserv Ecol 7: 9.
Turner II BL and Sabloff JA. 2012. Classic period collapse of the
central Maya lowlands: insights about human–environment
relationships for sustainability. P Natl Acad Sci 109: 13908–14.
Vester HFM, Lawrence D, Eastman JR, et al. 2007. Land change in
the southern Yucatán and Calakmul Biosphere Reserve: effects
on habitat and biodiversity. Ecol Appl 17: 989–1003.
Vitousek PM and Sanford RL. 1986. Nutrient cycling in moist
tropical forests. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 17: 137–67.
Wilken GC. 1971. Food-producing systems available to the
ancient Maya. Am Antiquity 36: 432–48.
Wilken GC. 1987. Good farmers: traditional agricultural resource
management in Mexico and Central America. Berkeley, CA:
University of California Press.
Winklerprins A. 2009. Sweep and char and the creation of
Amazonian dark earths in homegardens. In: Woods W, Teixeira
W, Lehmann J, et al (Eds). Amazonian dark earths: Wim
Sombroek’s vision. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer.
Woods WI and McCann. JM 1999. The anthropogenic origin and per-
sistence of Amazonian dark earths. Yearb Lat Am Geogr 25: 7–14.
Xu G, Lv Y, Sun J, et al. 2012. Recent advances in biochar applica-
tions in agricultural soils: benefits and environmental implica-
tions. Clean-Soil Air Water 40: 1093–98.
Zizumbo V and Sima P. 1988. Prácticas de roza-tumba-quema en la
agricultura Maya-Yucateca y su papel en la regeneración de la
selva. In: Uribe R (Ed). Medio ambiente y comunidades indíge-
nas en el sureste. Villahermosa, Mexico: Gobierno de Tabasco
and UNESCO.
© The Ecological Society of America