Upano — Copueno Tributary Hypothetical Mound Field
Upano Copueno West Hypothetical Field · Copueno Floodplain Phantom Mounds
Hypothesized Upano Formative vs modern agricultural if real·Hypothesized Upano (if verified) vs mechanized rice farmers·🇪🇨 Morona-Santiago Province, Upano River western Copueno tributary floodplain 2.1 km west of Copueno central platform cluster, Upano west tributary, Ecuador
About
About Upano — Copueno Tributary Hypothetical Mound Field
1 km west of the verified Copueno central mound cluster (Rostain 2024). 2 m each wet season — hydrologically incompatible with preserved pre-Columbian raised fields (which Rostain only finds on low-terrace non-floodplain). No LiDAR penetration due to annual cane and no test pits; the ridges coincide with 2015 mechanized rice bunds. If anthropogenic and pre-Columbian, the field would imply Copueno exploited active floodplain, doubling Copueno agrarian area and suggesting Upano floodplain farming unlike Rostain's drained-field-on-terrace model.
Three 2023 auger transects by enthusiasts hit only modern root mat, not Upano tephra. Until CNRS LiDAR low-water and pitting with tephra chronology confirm, the scatter remains hypothetical (included as unverified field-type).
Why it mattersIf verified, would double Copueno agrarian footprint and prove Upano floodplain farming (active-plain) vs verified terrace drained-field model — fundamentally different water strategy. Currently teaches remote-sensing crop-mark misattribution on active floodplains, parallel to Sangay extension.
Open questions
Mysteries & theories
Mysteries
- 01Whether any pre-Columbian field survives Copueno active floodplain at all
- 02How to differentiate 2015 rice bund from Upano raised field on Sentinel
Theories
- 01Hypothesis rejected pending tephra: Upano fields avoided active floodplain; Copueno west ridges are modern rice, not Upano
Theories are interpretations, not findings. The seal above tells you how much scholarly weight the place carries.
History
How it came to be
- Built
- Hypothesized 300 BCE–600 CE if Upano raised fields (otherwise 2015 rice bunds)
- Period
- Hypothesized Upano Formative vs modern agricultural if real
- Culture
- Hypothesized Upano (if verified) vs mechanized rice farmers
- Builders
- Hypothesized Upano field engineers
- Purpose
- Hypothetical active-floodplain cultivation supplementing Upano drained fields
- Abandoned
- Hypothesized 600 CE or 2015 ongoing if modern
- Rediscovered
- 2023 enthusiast Sentinel-2 herringbone spotted 2.1 km west of Copueno; no CNRS strip
- Excavation
- Unexcavated
2023
Sentinel-2 enthusiasts flag 45 ridges on Copueno floodplain west of Copueno
2023
Auger transects hit modern root mat, no Upano tephra or ceramics
2024
Rostain team notes floodplain floods 1.2 m annually — hydrological improbability
On the ground
Structures & features
2.1252° S · 78.1352° W · 520 m · 3 mapped features
Hypothetical Herringbone Ridges (45)
hypothetical field~45 ridges 8–12 m × 60–90 m on active floodplain — likely rice bunds
2.1255° S · 78.1355° WModern Rice Root Mat (auger refusal)
geological markerModern root mat at 0.3 m where augers refused — no Upano tephra
2.1250° S · 78.1348° WCopueno Active Floodplain Clay
geological markerClay that floods 1.2 m wet season — hydrological argument against fields
2.1252° S · 78.1352° W