4.3 Article

Climatic and human impacts on mountain vegetation at Lauenensee (Bernese Alps, Switzerland) during the last 14,000 years

期刊

HOLOCENE
卷 23, 期 10, 页码 1415-1427

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/0959683613489585

关键词

Bernese Alps; cross-correlation; human impact; Picea abies expansion; treeline; vegetation history

资金

  1. Dr Alfred Bretscher Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Lake sediments from Lauenensee (1381 m a.s.l.), a small lake in the Bernese Alps, were analysed to reconstruct the vegetation and fire history. The chronology is based on 11 calibrated radiocarbon dates on terrestrial plant macrofossils suggesting a basal age of 14,200 cal. BP. Pollen and macrofossil data imply that treeline never reached the lake catchment during the BOlling-AllerOd interstadial. Treeline north of the Alps was depressed by c. 300 altitudinal meters, if compared with southern locations. We attribute this difference to colder temperatures and to unbuffered cold air excursions from the ice masses in northern Europe. Afforestation started after the Younger Dryas at 11,600 cal. BP. Early-Holocene tree-Betula and Pinus sylvestris forests were replaced by Abies alba forests around 7500 cal. BP. Continuous high-resolution pollen and macrofossil series allow quantitative assessments of vegetation dynamics at 5900-5200 cal. BP (first expansion of Picea abies, decline of Abies alba) and 4100-2900 cal. BP (first collapse of Abies alba). The first signs of human activity became noticeable during the late Neolithic c. 5700-5200 cal. BP. Cross-correlation analysis shows that the expansion of Alnus viridis and the replacement of Abies alba by Picea abies after c. 5500 cal. BP was most likely a consequence of human disturbance. Abies alba responded very sensitively to a combination of fire and grazing disturbance. Our results imply that the current dominance of Picea abies in the upper montane and subalpine belts is a consequence of anthropogenic activities through the millennia.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据