4.7 Article

Late Quaternary mega-lakes fed by the northern and southern river systems of central Australia: Varying moisture sources and increased continental aridity

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.palaeo.2011.06.023

关键词

Mega-lake; Megafauna; OSL; Palaeoshoreline; Lake Frome; Lake Eyre

资金

  1. ARC Discovery funding [DP0667182]
  2. University of Wollongong GeoQuest funding
  3. UK NERC fellowship [NE/EO14143/1]
  4. Australian Research Council [DP0667182] Funding Source: Australian Research Council

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Optically stimulated and thermoluminescence ages from relict shorelines, along with accelerator mass spectrometer C-14 ages from freshwater molluscs reveal a record of variable moisture sources supplied by northern and southern river systems to Lake Mega-frome in southern central Australia during the late Quaternary. Additional lacustrine, palynological and terrestrial proxies are used to reconstruct a record that extends back to 105 ka, confirming that Lakes Mega-frome and Mega-Eyre were joined to create the largest system of palaeolakes on the Australian continent as recently as 50-47 ka. The palaeohydrological record indicates a progressive shift to more arid conditions, with marked drying after 45 ka. Subsequently, lake Mega-Frome has filled independently at 33-31 ka and at the termination of the Last Glacial Maximum to volumes some 40 times those of today. Further sequentially declining filling episodes (to volumes 25-10 those of today) occurred immediately prior to the Younger Dryas stadial, in the mid Holocene and during the medieval climatic anomaly. Southern hemisphere summer insolation maxima are a poor predictor of palaeolake-filling episodes. An examination of multiple active moisture sources suggests that palaeolake phases were driven independently of insolation and at times by some combination of enhanced Southern Ocean circulation and strengthened tropical moisture sources. (c) 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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