4.8 Article

Holocene variations in Lake Titicaca water level and their implications for sociopolitical developments in the central Andes

出版社

NATL ACAD SCIENCES
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2215882120

关键词

central Andes; Lake Titicaca sediment; biomarkers; carbon isotopes; societies

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A reevaluation of the middle-to-late Holocene water levels in Lake Titicaca reveals a prolonged low stand during the middle Holocene, followed by a rapid rise starting around 1800 BCE and reaching its highest levels after 1600 CE. These lake-level increases coincide with major sociopolitical changes reported by archaeologists, particularly the emergence of the Tiwanaku culture after a significant rise in water levels at the end of the Formative Period in 500 CE.
Holocene climate in the high tropical Andes was characterized by both gradual and abrupt changes, which disrupted the hydrological cycle and impacted landscapes and societies. High-resolution paleoenvironmental records are essential to contextualize archaeological data and to evaluate the sociopolitical response of ancient societies to environmental variability. Middle-to-Late Holocene water levels in Lake Titicaca were reevaluated through a transfer function model based on measurements of organic carbon stable isotopes, combined with high-resolution profiles of other geochemical variables and paleoshoreline indicators. Our reconstruction indicates that following a prolonged low stand during the Middle Holocene (4000 to 2400 BCE), lake level rose rapidly similar to 15 m by 1800 BCE, and then increased another 3 to 6 m in a series of steps, attain-ing the highest values after similar to 1600 CE. The largest lake-level increases coincided with major sociopolitical changes reported by archaeologists. In particular, at the end of the Formative Period (500 CE), a major lake-level rise inundated large shoreline areas and forced populations to migrate to higher elevation, likely contributing to the emergence of the Tiwanaku culture.

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

4.8
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