4.4 Article

Late Holocene vegetation dynamics and human impact in the catchment basin of the Upper Oka River (Mid-Russian Uplands): A case study from the Orlovskoye Polesye National Park

Journal

QUATERNARY INTERNATIONAL
Volume 504, Issue -, Pages 118-127

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.quaint.2018.01.019

Keywords

Pollen; Plant macrofossils; Testate amoebae; Tree cover; Upper Oka River catchment; Holocene

Funding

  1. Russian Foundation for Basic Research [N 16-55-00015, N 17-04-00320]
  2. Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation [1506]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Using the territory of the Orlovskoye Polesye National Park as a case study within the catchment basin of the Oka River (Mid-Russian Uplands, Oryol Region, Russia), we obtained palaeoecological data for studying response of forest landscapes within the forest-steppe ecotone to climate change and human impact through the Late Holocene. The paper presents reconstruction of environmental change on a local to regional scales based on plant macrofossil, spore-pollen and testate amoeba records from a peat core along with reconstruction of woodland coverage inferred from pollen data. Over the past 4000 years, the total woodland coverage has fluctuated insignificantly, ranging from 38 to 52%, while the structure of the forest has changed radically. Prior to 1500 cal. yr BP, both birch-pine and mixed temperate deciduous forests of oak, elm, ash and lime with Scots pine and well-developed shrub understory of hazel and alder grew in the region. The subsequent agricultural colonization of the territory led to a reduction of a broadleaved trees in forest stands since 1500 cal. yr BP. During the last few centuries, human activity largely associated with cutting/burning trees and farming favored the expansion of secondary forests dominated by birch. (C) 2018 Elsevier Ltd and INQUA. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available