
Southeast Asia: ‘Rice was grown 10,000 years ago — it first linked India and Southeast Asia'
Professor of Archaeobotany at
University College London. Speaking to
Srijana Mitra Das
at Times Evoke, he discusses rice's roots:
What is the core of your research?
I am both an archaeologist and a botanist.
Tired of too many ads? go ad free now
I collaborate on archaeological excavation projects where we recover preserved plant remains, consisting of the remnants of crops, weeds and wild, gathered foods as well as the wood fuel people used for cooking and fires. From that, we study which crops existed in past cultures and different places and how agriculture, plants and the human diet have changed.
Where was the earliest evidence of cultivated rice found?
First, I should specify there are two distinct species of rice.
There's an African rice, cultivated traditionally in parts of West Africa which has a separate origin, and there's Asian rice, grown in India, China, Japan, etc. Within Asian cultivated rice, there are two subspecies —
Indica
and Japonica, the former more dominant in South Asia, the latter in East Asia.
In terms of the earliest evidence for cultivation, that seems related to the Japonica subspecies or its ancestors in China — this comes from parts of the
Yangtze River Basin
, the Middle Yangtze, like Hunan province, the lower Yangtze around Zhejiang and tributaries to the north, like the Huaihe river.
There's a good case to be made for multiple independent starts of cultivation in China going back 10,000 years.
Quite separately, you have an early use of wild rice in parts of northern India, especially in the Ganges River Basin, stretching into the Upper Ganges-Yamuna areas. When that was cultivated and domesticated is much debated — I'd say there is evidence for early cultivation in India 5,000 years ago and possibly even 9,000 years ago.
Tired of too many ads? go ad free now
Importantly, genetic evidence today shows there was ancient hybridisation between East Asian Japonicas and the ancestors of Indica. Introduced rices from East Asia mixed with local varieties in India and produced something new — Indica rice as known today. That explains our picture from modern genomes and archaeological evidence. I think the hybridisation occurred around 4,000 years ago, with an introduced variety that came to India via trade from East Asia.
Did rice cultivation change landscapes?
Yes — rice is unique among cereals in that it's a wetland species. It likes a lot of water, in contrast to wheat, barley or millets, all semi-arid dryland species. As rice needs water, its initial cultivation, whether in the Yangtze or Ganges Valley, was in naturally flooded areas. As rice agriculture spread upland and southwards through the Deccan in India, it reached dry areas requiring irrigation.
People then created bunded paddy fields that trapped rainwater — they started making artificial wetlands. That was transformative of the landscape.
Did this also change social structures?
Creating artificial wetlands and irrigation systems demands a lot of labour, alongside irrigated rice is highly productive and feeds many more people. As rice cultivation expanded in India and
Southeast Asia
, it encouraged population growth and density, early urbanisation and the rise of social hierarchy — the control of land, rice and labour to build irrigation works
fed
into more hierarchical societies.
Did rice also impact animal life?
Artificial wetlands are a challenge to plough — the water buffalo became suitable. They are native to India, where their domestication happened in the Harappan world independent of rice. As its cultivation grew, its use increased. Paddy fields also attract wetland small fauna and fish like carp. Some became sources of protein in traditional Southeast Asian systems and a comanagement of various kinds of fish in rice paddies developed.
Did rice entail interactions across these ancient societies?
Yes. With the establishment of rice-based agricultural systems and early urbanisation in north India and the Ganges plains in the Iron Age around 3,000 years ago, craft specialisation started. Fine ceramics, stonework, beads, metallurgy, etc., began — these got traded over long distances. Our earliest evidence for contact between India and Southeast Asia is from then — you see the arrival of Indian-made ceramics, beads, etc.,
in Southeast Asia, alongside other Indian crops like mung and toor lentils turning up in sites in southern Thailand. Later, ideas of Buddhism and Hinduism spread in Southeast Asia but the first interaction was about craft and agriculture, supported by rice.
What are some of the most fascinating archaeobotanical rice relics you've seen?
I've worked on the Tianluoshan site in China, discovered in 2004. It was one of the first places where we could recover the spikelet base of rice, a very small structure that attaches the grain to the plant — it undergoes a key morphological change as a result of domestication, where the plant loses the ability to disperse itself by shattering and now requires planting and harvesting by humans.
In this archaeological material, we could see the actual gradual change of the population away from the wild, shattering type towards the domesticated type.
In 2006, I also visited the Lahuradeva site managed by the
Uttar Pradesh State Department of Archaeology
. It shows how people there were consuming rice 6,000 years ago, the debate being over how domesticated or wild that food was.
What are the implications of climate change for rice — and vice versa?
There are arguments that rice contributes to climate change because its wetland environments produce methane — that's not from rice itself but the methanogenic microorganisms in the wetland waters.
Of course, most global warming is from fossil fuel use. But there is research now on ways to grow rice that reduce methane output while ensuring productivity.
Meanwhile, climate change is altering rainfall distribution in time and space — that is challenging for ricegrowing because it may increase water shortages and drought. Hence, more drought-tolerant species, like millets, are another direction for research.
How different is the rice we eat today, compared to ancient varieties?
There are continuities and changes. Interestingly, wild rice populations had red grains — now, that's relatively rare compared to white or brown rice today. Earlier, people selected varieties partly for aesthetics and because it was thought white rice cooks faster and tastes different. People also selected for fragrance, from
basmati
to jasmine.
There is no evidence that any of the wild rices were fragrant, though, so that's a mutation.
There's been selection for stickiness in Southeast Asia with glutinous rices, which also didn't exist in wild varieties. So, in its long cultural history, humans have changed rice, from a more standard wild form to very different kinds across diverse cultures.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Time of India
2 days ago
- Time of India
How higher education in the US is becoming collateral in the geopolitical power struggle
How higher education in the US is becoming collateral in the geopolitical power struggle In a world increasingly divided by geopolitical rivalries, American universities are no longer neutral spaces for learning and research. They've become unintended players in the global power struggle, facing scrutiny, sanctions, and ideological pressure from both domestic and foreign governments. From congressional probes into Chinese scholarships to Russia branding Yale University an enemy, higher education is now caught in the crosshairs of international politics. And the collateral damage is already being felt across campuses. Academic exchange or strategic threat? The latest flashpoint is the China Scholarship Council (CSC), a government-funded program that sends Chinese graduate students to study in US institutions. What was once seen as a tool of academic diplomacy is now under suspicion. This week, House Republicans sent letters to seven top US universities — including Dartmouth College, the University of Notre Dame, and several University of California campuses, demanding records on CSC-sponsored students and whether they had access to US government-funded research. According to the House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party, chaired by Rep. John Moolenaar, the CSC is a 'nefarious mechanism' designed to advance China's military-industrial goals through academic infiltration. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like An engineer reveals: One simple trick to get internet without a subscription Techno Mag Learn More Undo At Dartmouth and Temple University, CSC students reportedly receive partial tuition support and stipends: a detail now under the congressional microscope. Texas draws a red line In a parallel development, Texas Governor Greg Abbott issued an executive order in early 2025 requiring all public universities in the state to sever ties with institutions or individuals from so-called 'foreign adversaries,' including China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea. Major public institutions including UT Austin, Texas A&M, and the University of Houston, are now revising funding protocols, freezing collaborations, and reassessing international partnerships. While the state defends the move as a national security imperative, academics warn of deeper consequences: racial profiling, academic censorship, and a growing fear among international students and scholars, particularly those of Asian descent. Yale blacklisted in Russia Across the globe, Russia has intensified its pushback on Western institutions. In a highly symbolic act, the Kremlin declared Yale University an 'undesirable organisation,' accusing it of destabilising Russia and promoting opposition movements. The move effectively criminalises any association with Yale in Russia, even though the university has minimal operations in the country. Officials cited Yale's alleged links to the late Russian dissident Alexei Navalny — a sign that even indirect affiliations are enough to trigger retaliation. For US universities, it's a sobering warning: foreign partnerships can quickly turn into political liabilities. A broader academic decoupling These incidents are part of a much larger pattern — one that's reshaping the very fabric of global academia. What used to be seen as mutually beneficial research and exchange is now viewed through the lens of espionage, propaganda, and power competition. Consider the recent cases: Harvard University is under political fire for its historical ties with Chinese entities. A lawsuit erupted earlier this year when the US government sought to restrict the university's ability to admit foreign students. Confucius Institutes, once common across US and European campuses, have been shut down across Australia, Germany, and Japan over concerns of censorship and Chinese influence. Following the Russia-Ukraine war, major universities in Europe and Australia cut ties with Russian research institutions, halting decades of scientific cooperation. All these actions underscore a growing belief: academia is no longer immune to geopolitics — it is entangled in it. Why this matters for students and scholars With over 270,000 Chinese students in the US during the 2023–24 academic year — nearly a quarter of all international students — any shift in policy or visa scrutiny has massive consequences. For many, academic dreams are being shaped not by merit, but by politics. University leaders now face a tough balancing act: how to protect open inquiry and international partnerships while also addressing national security concerns. Some are tightening internal oversight, while others are reconsidering foreign-funded projects and re-evaluating longstanding collaborations. But the cost of disengagement could be steep: not just in lost funding, but in lost opportunities for global learning and progress. The new academic order The message is becoming unmistakable: universities are now battlegrounds in the global struggle for influence, ideology, and innovation. Whether it's sudden visa revocations, executive orders, blacklists, or lawsuits, the academic world is being reshaped in real time by policies crafted far from any campus. And as international tensions deepen, the risk is that universities will lose the very values they were built on: openness, collaboration, and freedom of thought. In this new landscape, higher education is no longer just a participant in global exchange: it's collateral in a power struggle that shows no signs of slowing down. TOI Education is on WhatsApp now. Follow us here . Ready to navigate global policies? Secure your overseas future. Get expert guidance now!


The Print
2 days ago
- The Print
Tejas must not meet the fate of India's first indigenous fighter jet
In the long-term, the Jaguar is to be replaced by the indigenous Light Combat Aircraft Tejas. But that project unfortunately has seen delays that could have been avoided with greater preparation. The Jaguar ground attack aircraft was in a two-seater training configuration, and the mishap unfortunately cost the lives of both pilots. This versatile aircraft has flown for five decades and is due for regular updates. The yet another tragic death of two Air Force combat pilots in Rajasthan's Churu district comes as a cruel reminder that the mastery of the air extracts a cruel price, unexpectedly. The Tejas development programme came in for much criticism on account of continued delays. Initiated in the early 1980s and finally flying in early 2000s, the Tejas has the distinction of having the best safety record during development. In all these years, there has only been one known flying accident involving a Tejas. The tragic Jaguar accident on Wednesday was preceded by a report that the inordinate delay in deliveries of the Tejas Mk1A were on account of engine supplies running behind schedule. Development of an indigenous engine has been a long–running saga of despair and frustration, but it needn't have been. India's R&D Manufacturing defence systems in India, or anywhere else, is directly proportionate to the research and development efforts into which investments are made. In India, R&D has been a government–run initiative from the earliest times. And it had to be so since a newly independent country did not have a private sector developed to that degree, while it also had an economic model which was state–directed. The Soviet Union also had a similar R&D system since it was an avowedly communist country. The state ran the show, and did remarkably well, both in defence and space. India also had a head start over Asian countries in terms of R&D in various advanced technologies in the early years. It had by far the most developed atomic energy programme in the region, and also a space effort that has continued to impress and pay dividends globally. The atomic energy programme was just a screwdriver away from progressing to the next essential step of providing a nuclear umbrella, but the anti-bomb lobby held sway until 1998. Had it progressed along the expected path of technological advancement, India could have been a nuclear power before restrictive treaties kicked in. The same twists of the screwdrivers could have given India a missile capability of intercontinental proportions long before a selective and obstructive international regime delayed India's progress. The launch capabilities, after all, only had to be tweaked so as to ensure rockets, with or without nuclear warheads, would not go into space, but return to earth on selected targets. The missile development programme subsequently came into being, and has given India a modicum of security cover. It remains a work in progress, as it must. The same should have been the case with defence R&D, but alas, not so. India flew its first jet combat aircraft in 1961, a mere five years after launching the project. The HF-24 Marut was then Asia's first modern jet combat aircraft designed and produced domestically by India, and this was years before China exploded its first atomic weapon. The head start was well and truly a good one, but along the way, something went wrong in long-term vision, a well–rounded threat perception analytical framework, and above all, an implementation process that was just as firm as it was determined. Even as Hindustan Aeronautics promised more than it could deliver, the Air Force didn't help matters. Also read: IAF needs a transformation. Bring in 5G fighters, fast-track Tejas Mk2, upgrade AMCA to 6G An endless cycle Constantly shifting the goal posts has been an allegation that can be made against the service, and it seems the charge still sticks. Defence equipment is bought on the basis of Staff Quality Requirements issued by the armed forces headquarters, after which the Ministry of Defence begins its search. Starting within, the megalithic domestic defence scientist bureaucracy doubles down to claim ownership of the project. Domestic always sounds best, and sentiment sells, so the project becomes indigenous. The Air Force, in particular, and the Army's Armoured Corps, generally, prefer equipment that is available off the shelf, which means foreign, so goalposts shift. The arguments now put out are that 'it would be foolhardy to assume that the IAF would not revise ASQRs (air staff quality requirements) as the deliveries are delayed and newer, more potent threats emerge…The threat is not static—the ASQR shouldn't be either'. So when ASQRs are revised, the project under R&D gets further delayed. And the cycle goes on and on until obsolescence, as was the case with the HF-24 Marut, when the baby and bath water were thrown out together, with its fundamental excellence lost in stored files. Similar cannot be allowed to happen with the Tejas, for lives are at stake. Manvendra Singh is a BJP leader, Editor-in-Chief of Defence & Security Alert and Chairman, Soldier Welfare Advisory Committee, Rajasthan. He tweets @ManvendraJasol. Views are personal. (Edited by Aamaan Alam Khan)


Time of India
2 days ago
- Time of India
Meet the wild dog with the highest hunting success rate in the world
When people think of top predators in the wild, lions, leopards, or wolves usually come to mind. These iconic hunters are often seen as the kings and queens of the food chain. But there's another predator, less famous yet exceptionally efficient, that outperforms them all when it comes to successful hunts. Often overshadowed by bigger or more charismatic carnivores, African wild dogs are one of nature's most effective hunters. These wild dogs are well known for their speed, strategy, and teamwork; they have evolved into exceptional predators that have the highest kill success rate among large carnivores. Despite their good hunting abilities, these animals remain one of Africa's most endangered species, struggling to survive in shrinking habitats and against fierce competition from larger carnivores. The apex predator with the most successful kills With their lean frames and oversized ears, African wild dogs may look harmless, but they are among the most lethal hunters in the wild. According to BBC Wildlife Magazine, they have a 'kill rate per chase of more than 85 percent,' which is far higher than the roughly 25% success rate seen in lions. This extraordinary efficiency is mostly due to their coordination and pack dynamics during hunts. A study conducted in Tanzania's Serengeti National Park revealed that pack size significantly affects hunting success. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Dolly Parton, 79, Takes off Her Makeup and Leaves Us Without Words The Noodle Box Undo According to the findings, 'the success of a pack... was influenced by the age of the prey and the number of dogs hunting together,' while factors like distance from prey or available cover didn't play much of a role. Solo hunters among wild dogs often brought down smaller prey like Thomson's gazelles. However, it took larger packs to tackle tougher targets. 'Groups of two did not hunt adult wildebeest successfully,' while bigger groups could even kill calves of blue wildebeests. The study also suggested that hunting in groups 'reduced interspecific competition from spotted hyenas… through improved defence of carcasses. ' Despite this efficiency, African wild dogs often lose their hard-earned meals to larger predators. 'They may lose half of their kills… to other carnivores such as hyenas and lions,' BBC Wildlife Magazine reports. Taxonomically, African wild dogs are unique. Though part of the Canidae family, they don't belong to the Canis genus like wolves and domestic dogs. As BBC explains, 'African wild dogs are now considered close to the base of the wolf-like canids,' making them evolutionary outliers. Yet, despite their remarkable hunting skills and social intelligence, African wild dogs are classified as Endangered. Their greatest challenge isn't the lack of prey, but habitat loss, human conflict, and competition from bigger carnivores.