4.6 Article

Geoelectric investigations into sandstone moisture regimes: Implications for rock weathering and the deterioration of San Rock Art in the Golden Gate Reserve, South Africa

期刊

GEOMORPHOLOGY
卷 118, 期 3-4, 页码 280-287

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.geomorph.2010.01.008

关键词

Sandstone; Weathering; South Africa; Rock Art; Resistivity; Moisture

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The Clarens sandstone in the Golden Gate Reserve, South Africa, is the canvas for a collection of San (Bushmen) Rock Art, dating from Neolithic times until as recently as 150 years ago. This Rock Art is under threat from human interference but also, to a greater degree, from weathering processes on the rock surface. The dominant weathering processes occurring in the rock shelters which host the Rock Art are flaking and honeycombing. Two rock shelter sites in the Reserve have been investigated using electric resistivity tomography (ERT) and supportive methods for measuring surface moisture (Protimeter) and surface hardness (Equotip). These non-destructive techniques can be used in situ to assess the extent of weathering within a rock outcrop and are especially suited for investigations in sensitive areas such as Rock Art sites. Moisture movement has been mapped and related to the weathering processes observed on the surface. The aim of the study is to aid Rock Art conservation in the Golden Gate Reserve through a better understanding of the driving processes of surface weathering. The evidence shows that the extensive flaking and honeycombing found in the rock shelters is most likely caused by water pockets in the near-surface zone, which are replenished through internal moisture transport, driving the superficial weathering processes. These weathering processes pose a significant problem: Rock Art in the Golden Gate Reserve shows severe deterioration due to flaking. Conservation strategies should therefore take internal processes into account as much as their superficial expression. (C) 2010 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

4.6
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