Rainfall influences in mapping landscape features of an archaeological site with the application of geophysical and geostatistical methods
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5902/2179460X38230Keywords:
Apparent electrical resistivity, Soil profile, MacapáAbstract
Archaeological studies are important for understanding the historical environments and analysis of the consequences of their changes in the current period, and geophysical methods are an important tool for enabling a low-impact analysis on these. This study evaluated the influence of rainfall in mapping of landscape features of the archaeological site AP-MA-05 using geophysical and geostatistical methods. To obtain the data, the geophysical method of electroresistivity was used in an area of UNIFAP of 10 x 20 meters. The rainfall data were collected in INMET station in Macapá. Data analysis was performed with use of statistical and geostatistical methods. In rainy season, soil resistivity presented a minimum of 198.7 ohm.m and maximum values of up to 3946 ohm.m, with an average of 1188.87 ohm.m. In the less rainy season the observed values were 394 ohm.m (minimum) and 5863 ohm.m (maximum), with an averaging of 2078.31 ohm.m. This demonstrates the influence of rainfall on apparent resistivity, since the more intense the rains that occurred at the time of data were obtained, the lower the values of electrical resistivity. The best association between the research method, the survey period based on climate aspects and the application of geostatistical methods facilitated the characterization of the site as a future support for its prospection.
Downloads
References
ALLEN SJ, PORSANI JL, POLUHA B. Geofísica arqueológica no ambiente da arqueologia urbana. Revista Arqueologia. 2017;30(1):235-254.
AMANAJÁS JC, JESUS ES, CUNHA AC, OLIVEIRA LL, FAÇANHAS AT. Avaliação da precipitação pluviométrica observada nos municípios pertencentes à região dos lagos no estado do Amapá. In: Anais do 15° Congresso Brasileiro de Meteorologia [CD-ROM]; 2008, São Paulo, Brasil.
ARAGÃO R, GOUVÊA J, LOPES P. Metodologia geofísica aplicada ao estudo arqueológico dos Sítios Bittencourt e Jambuaçu, Estado do Pará. Revista Brasileira de Geofísica. 2010;28(2):249-263.
BINLEY A, WINSHIP P, WEST LJ, POKAR M, MIDDLETON R. Seasonal variation of moisture content in unsaturated sandstone inferred from borehole radar and resistivity profiles. J. Hydrol. 2002;267(3):160-172.
BONNIE R. ‘Haven’t we dug enough now?’ Excavation in the light of intergenerational equity. Archaeological Dialogues. 2011;18(1):48-58.
BRITO-SCHIMMEL P, PORSANI JL, FIGUTI L, DeBLASIS P. Aplicação de métodos geofísicos em Arqueologia: primeiros resultados obtidos no sambaqui fluvial Capelinha, Cajati-SP, Brasil. Rev. do Museu de Arqueologia e Etnologia. 2002;12:43-54.
CAVALCANTI MM. Aplicação de métodos geoelétricos no delineamento da pluma de contaminação nos limites do aterro controlado do Jokey Clube de Brasília – DF [dissertação]. Brasília-DF: Instituto de Geociências; 2013. 111p.
CLARK AJ. Seeing Beneath the Soil: prospecting methods in archaeology. London: Batsford; 1996.
CLUE JK. A new empiricism: excavating at the start of the 21st Century. Archaeological Dialogues. 2011;18(1):30-41.
COELHO ALN, FERREIRA GAC. Geotecnologias aplicadas em área inundável: o caso de Brejo Grande, Serra-ES. GeoTextos. 2011;7(1):159-183.
CORRÊA ACB, MUTZENBERG D, SANTOS JÚNIOR V. Arqueologia da paisagem: proposta geoambiental de um modelo para os padrões de assentamentos no enclave arqueológico granito flores, microrregião de Angicos (RN). Revista Clio Arqueológica. 2014;29(2):57-94.
COSTA AF, MALAGUTTI FILHO W. Caracterização estrutural e geofísica da lixeira de Porto Velho (RO). Geociências. 2008; 27(2):229-236.
FAGUNDES M, PIUZANA D. Estudo teórico sobre o uso conceito de paisagem em pesquisas arqueológicas. Revista Latinoamericana de Ciencias Sociales. 2010;8(1):205-220.
FERREIRA RCM, MENEZES CR. Levantamento florístico no sítio arqueológico no campus Marco Zero da UNIFAP. Biota Amazônica. 2011;1(1):74-80.
FRIEDMAN SP. Soil properties influencing apparent electrical conductivity: a review. Comput. Electron. Agric. 2005;46: 45-70.
FUNARI PP. Arqueologia. São Paulo: Contexto; 2003.
FUNARI PP, NOELLI FS. Pré-história do Brasil. São Paulo: Contexto; 2002.
GANDOLFO OCB, GALLAS JDF. Eletrorresistividade 3D - uma avaliação preliminar da técnica. Revista Brasileira de Geofísica. 2005;23(2):191-198.
GANDOLFO OCB, GALLAS JDF. O arranjo pólo-dipolo como alternativa ao dipolo-dipolo em levantamentos 2D de eletrorresistividade. Revista Brasileira de Geofísica. 2007;25:227-235.
GOMES D, LUIZ J. Contextos domésticos no sítio arqueológico do Porto, Santarém, Brasil, identificados com o auxílio da geofísica por meio do método GPR. Boletim Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi - Ciências Humanas. 2013;8(3):639-656.
HONORATO LC. Arqueologia da paisagem e geoarqueologia: experiências em projetos de pesquisa. Tópos. 2009;3(1):127-147.
JERVIS JRJ, PRINGLE JK. A study of the effect of seasonal climatic factors on the electrical resistivity response of three experimental graves. Journal of Applied Geophysics. 2014;108:52-60.
LEUCCI G, GRECO F. 3D ERT Survey to reconstruct archaeological features in the subsoil of the “Spirito Santo” church ruins at the site of Occhiolà (Sicily, Italy). Archaeology. 2012;1(1):1-6.
LIMA LP. Relatos de uma experiência em Arqueologia Pública. In: Domingues L, Funari PP, Carvalho AV, Rodrigues G. (edts.) Desafios da arqueologia: depoimentos. Erechim: Habilis; 2009. p. 221-223.
LINFORD N. The application of geophysical methods to archaeological prospection. Reports on Progress in Physics. 2006;69(7):2205-2257.
MACHADO ALC. Salvamento arqueológico do sítio AP-MA-5: campus Universitário. Belém-PA: Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi; 1997.
MENESES FGA, OLIVEIRA LLGS. Estudo prático sobre a geolocalização de sítios arqueológicos no Google Earth. Revista de Arqueologia Pública. 2014;9:35-46.
MOJICA A, ACOSTA L. Prospección geofísica aplicada a la arqueologia: La importancia de los procesos de modelización y simulación numérica. Canto Rodado. 2008;3:17-28.
MORAIS JL. Arqueologia da paisagem como instrumento de gestão no licenciamento ambiental de atividades portuárias. Revista Eletrônica de Gestão de Negócios. 2007;3(4):97-115.
MOURA HP, SALDANHA JDM, CABRAL MP, OLIVEIRA MJ, CAMARÃO KF, NERY JR. Eletrorresistividade aplicada no sítio arqueológico AP-MA-05, Macapá-AP: resultados preliminares. In: Proceedings of the 11th International Congress of The Brazilian Geophysical Society; 2009 Salvador, Brazil.
OLIVEIRA MJ, BAPTISTA GMM, CARNEIRO CDR, VECCHIA FAS. História geológica e Ciência do clima: Métodos e origens do estudo dos ciclos climáticos na Terra. Terræ. 2015;12(1):03-26.
PEREIRA S. Levantamento plani-altimétrico e fisiográfico para operação de salvamento do sítio arqueológico do Campus Universitário da UNIFAP-Amapá. Amapá: UNIFAP; 1997.
QUEIROZ JCB. Utilização da geoestatística na quantificação do risco de contaminação por metais pesados, na área portuária de Santana-Amapá [tese]. São Pulo: Universidade Estadual Paulista; 2003. 170p.
SENNA CSF. Geografia e arqueologia: análise espacial e contextual de sítios arqueológicos no estuário amazônico. Geousp - Espaço e Tempo. 2016;20(2):238-249.
SILVA JLA, ALMEIDA JAC. Reflexões arqueológicas: estudo dos sítios arqueológicos do município de Queimadas/PB. Revista Eletrônica do Laboratório de Arqueologia e Paleontologia da UEPB. 2011;1(2):112-125.
TAVARES JPN. Características da climatologia de Macapá-AP. Caminhos de Geografia Uberlândia. 2014;15(50):138-151.
VIEIRA TO. Utilização de modelagem geoestatística em 3D na estimação volumétrica de litologias para estudos ambientais [dissertação]. Belém: Universidade Federal do Pará; 2013. 96p.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
To access the DECLARATION AND TRANSFER OF COPYRIGHT AUTHOR’S DECLARATION AND COPYRIGHT LICENSE click here.
Ethical Guidelines for Journal Publication
The Ciência e Natura journal is committed to ensuring ethics in publication and quality of articles.
Conformance to standards of ethical behavior is therefore expected of all parties involved: Authors, Editors, Reviewers, and the Publisher.
In particular,
Authors: Authors should present an objective discussion of the significance of research work as well as sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the experiments. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review Articles should also be objective, comprehensive, and accurate accounts of the state of the art. The Authors should ensure that their work is entirely original works, and if the work and/or words of others have been used, this has been appropriately acknowledged. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Authors should not submit articles describing essentially the same research to more than one journal. The corresponding Author should ensure that there is a full consensus of all Co-authors in approving the final version of the paper and its submission for publication.
Editors: Editors should evaluate manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit. An Editor must not use unpublished information in the editor's own research without the express written consent of the Author. Editors should take reasonable responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper.
Reviewers: Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments, so that Authors can use them for improving the paper. Any selected Reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the Editor and excuse himself from the review process. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.