4.4 Article

A higher moisture level in the early Holocene in northern Mongolia as evidenced from sediment records of Lake Hovsgol and Lake Erhel

期刊

QUATERNARY INTERNATIONAL
卷 455, 期 -, 页码 70-81

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.quaint.2017.06.032

关键词

Moisture; Early Holocene; Mongolian Plateau; Lacustrine sediment; Lake Hovsgol; Lake Erhel

资金

  1. Dynamics of the Sun-Earth-Life Interactive System
  2. 21st Century COE program
  3. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Sciences, and Technology, Japan [16310012]
  4. Sumitomo Foundation [103359]
  5. Gifu University
  6. Sajiro Endo Memorial Foundation
  7. Scientific Project of IGM SB RAS [0030-2016-0018]
  8. Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation [14. Y26.31.0018]
  9. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [16H05643, 17H05128, 16310012] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Paleoclimatic/environmental changes of northern Mongolia were investigated by chemical and mineralogical analyses of sediment cores from Lake Hovsgol and Lake Erhel back to 18.9 and 34.3 cal ka BP, respectively. The climate of this region was dry in the glacial period, and wet in the Holocene. Desalination of Lake Hovsgol occurred at 13.2-11.6 cal ka BP, i. e., during the transition from the late glacial to early Holocene. At the same time, ca. 12.82 cal ka BP, deposition in the Lake Erhel area changed from fluvial to lacustrine. Climate of northern Mongolia was humid during the late glacial to the early Holocene period ( ca. 10.57-7.24 cal ka BP for the Hovsgol and from ca. 12.82 to 7-8 cal ka BP for the Erhel). This reconstruction differs from that for the more northern Lake Baikal region, which humidification continued from the last glacial period until mid-Holocene. This difference could be attributed to longer period of glacier melting and permafrost thawing around the Baikal and on its watershed, associated with increased summer insolation. (C) 2017 Elsevier Ltd and INQUA. 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

4.4
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