4.3 Article

Site formation processes at Zhoukoudian, China

期刊

JOURNAL OF HUMAN EVOLUTION
卷 41, 期 5, 页码 483-530

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1006/jhev.2001.0498

关键词

fire use; diagenesis; prehistory; geoarchaeology; micromorphology

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Zhoukoudian is often cited for its human remains and the early evidence of fire. Yet, since its first excavations over 70 years ago, detailed studies of processes responsible for the accumulation anthropogenic and geogenic sediments in the site have been sparse. This paper provides some details of site formation processes mainly through field observations of the extant section at Locality 1, and the use of soil micromorphology and Fourier Transform Infrared Spectrometry (FTIR) analyses of the sediments. Samples from Layers 10 through 3 show extensive water deposition of fine silt-sized material (reworked loess), including fine-grained organic matter. The dark organic-rich unit in Laver 10-often cited as one of the earliest evidence of fire-is a water-laid accumulation. Much of the fine-grained sediment was derived from outside Locality 1, implying that the site was open to varying extents throughout most of its depositional history. The 4-6 in accumulation of ashes in Layer 4 represents subaerial water-laid silt deposits derived from the loess-covered hillslopes surrounding the site. They presumably accumulated in an open depression that formed after the collapse of the brecciated roof deposits represented by Layer 6. Diagenesis is present in many of the Layers, and is exemplified by calcite precipitation and dissolution, and localized apatite (dahllite) replacement of calcite. In Layer 4 diagenesis is more advanced, including calcite/dahllite precipitation, subaerial weathering of the loess and associated precipitation of hematite, alteration of clay and the neoformation of quartz. Many of our conclusions concur with those of Teilhard de Chardin & Young published over 70 years ago. (C) 2001 Academic Press.

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