Open Access

Quartz OSL and K-feldspar post-IR IRSL dating of sand accumulation in the Lower Liao Plain (Liaoning, NE China)


Cite

Fig. 1

(A) The location of the study area in NE China. (B) Map showing the geological setting (Lower Liao River plain, local drainage streams and adjacent mountain areas) and coastline changes (sea level in Holocene, coastlines in 1905 AD, 1932 AD, 1950 AD and present, Fu, 1988; Chen et al., 2010). The location of the sampling site is also shown. (C)–(E) Typical sand deposits in the LLP. (C) is a photo of studied PJ sand dune.
(A) The location of the study area in NE China. (B) Map showing the geological setting (Lower Liao River plain, local drainage streams and adjacent mountain areas) and coastline changes (sea level in Holocene, coastlines in 1905 AD, 1932 AD, 1950 AD and present, Fu, 1988; Chen et al., 2010). The location of the sampling site is also shown. (C)–(E) Typical sand deposits in the LLP. (C) is a photo of studied PJ sand dune.

Fig. 2

(A) Investigated profile and its description. The positions of OSL samples are shown in the profile. (B) Stratigraphy of the PJ dune showing the positions of four investigated sections and sampling depths.
(A) Investigated profile and its description. The positions of OSL samples are shown in the profile. (B) Stratigraphy of the PJ dune showing the positions of four investigated sections and sampling depths.

Fig. 3

Results of quartz OSL pre-tests. (A) Measured/given ratio (dose recovery test), (B) equivalent dose and (C) thermal transfer at different preheat temperatures for sample LUM3192. (D)–(F) show the results of the same set of tests for sample LUM3196.
Results of quartz OSL pre-tests. (A) Measured/given ratio (dose recovery test), (B) equivalent dose and (C) thermal transfer at different preheat temperatures for sample LUM3192. (D)–(F) show the results of the same set of tests for sample LUM3196.

Fig. 4

Quartz decay curve, dose response curve and De distribution for sample LUM3191–(A) and (B); for sample LUM3196–(C) and (D). De distributions are presented using abanico plots (Dietze et al., 2016).
Quartz decay curve, dose response curve and De distribution for sample LUM3191–(A) and (B); for sample LUM3196–(C) and (D). De distributions are presented using abanico plots (Dietze et al., 2016).

Fig. 5

K-feldspar IR50 and pIRIR150 decay curve, growth curve and De distribution for sample LUM3191–(A) and (B), for sample LUM3196–(C) and (D).
K-feldspar IR50 and pIRIR150 decay curve, growth curve and De distribution for sample LUM3191–(A) and (B), for sample LUM3196–(C) and (D).

Fig. 6

Dose recovery ratio and residual dose for IR50 and pIRIR150 for each sample.
Dose recovery ratio and residual dose for IR50 and pIRIR150 for each sample.

Fig. 7

Fading rate (g2ays-value) of IR50 and pIRIR150 signals for one representative sample LUM3191.
Fading rate (g2ays-value) of IR50 and pIRIR150 signals for one representative sample LUM3191.

Fig. 8

Ages from different luminescence signals and the comparison of the predicted and measured residual doses. A shows the comparison for the sand samples, B shows the comparison for two sandy soil samples. C demonstrates the comparison of the predicted residual dose and measured dose for all samples (See details in text).
Ages from different luminescence signals and the comparison of the predicted and measured residual doses. A shows the comparison for the sand samples, B shows the comparison for two sandy soil samples. C demonstrates the comparison of the predicted residual dose and measured dose for all samples (See details in text).

Fig. 9

Depth-age relationship of the PJ sand dune and sandy soil layer with a graphic log and all sample codes.
Depth-age relationship of the PJ sand dune and sandy soil layer with a graphic log and all sample codes.

Fig. 10

Comparison of different proxies. (A) The precipitation variations in northern China revealed by the δ18O data from the Shihua Cave stalagmites record (Li et al., 1998; orange solid line). (B) Temperature change in Liaoning Province (Sun and Zhao, 2002; green solid line). (C) Population change in Northeastern China from 1812 to 1911 AD (blue solid line) summarized by Zhao (2004). (D) Quartz OSL ages for the sand deposits.
Comparison of different proxies. (A) The precipitation variations in northern China revealed by the δ18O data from the Shihua Cave stalagmites record (Li et al., 1998; orange solid line). (B) Temperature change in Liaoning Province (Sun and Zhao, 2002; green solid line). (C) Population change in Northeastern China from 1812 to 1911 AD (blue solid line) summarized by Zhao (2004). (D) Quartz OSL ages for the sand deposits.

SAR protocol applied for equivalent dose determination.

StepQuartz OSLK-feldspar post-IR IRSL150
TreatmentObservedStepTreatmentObserved
1Give dose

For a natural sample, i=0 and D0 is the natural dose.

, Di
1Give dose
2Preheat for 60 s at 180°C2Preheat for 60 s at 180°C
3IR stimulation

Additional recycling step with IR stimulation was added to calculate OSL IR depletion ratio.

for 40 s at 0°C
3IR stimulation for 100 s at 50°C
4Stimulation for 40 s at 125°CLn, Li4IR stimulation for 200 s at 150°CLn, Li
5Give test dose, Dt5Test dose, Dt
6Heat to 160°C6Preheat for 60 s at 180°C
7Stimulate for 40 s at 125°CTn, Ti7IR stimulation for 100 s at 50°C
8Return to 18IR stimulation for 200 s at 150°C Return to 1Tn, Ti
9Return to 1

Dose rate determination

SampleIDDepth (cm)Grain size Interval (μm)U (ppm)Th (ppm)K (%)Water content (%)

The water contents are presented as “Estimated water content with uncertainty (Observed water content)”.

Dose rate(Gy/ka)
K-feldsparquartz
LUM319780100–1500.96 ± 0.062.63 ± 0.142.85 ± 0.146 ± 4 (1.7)4.02 ± 0.173.24 ± 0.24
LUM3198149100–1501.06 ± 0.062.82 ± 0.152.91 ± 0.156 ± 4 (2.1)4.10 ± 0.173.31 ± 0.24
LUM3191380100–1501.00 ± 0.052.66 ± 0.142.79 ± 0.146 ± 4 (2.6)3.96 ± 0.173.13 ± 0.23
LUM3192434100–1500.91 ± 0.052.72 ± 0.142.83 ± 0.146 ± 4 (4.2)3.92 ± 0.163.15 ± 0.24
LUM3193462100–1501.13 ± 0.063.27 ± 0.172.87 ± 0.146 ± 4 (6.6)4.05 ± 0.173.26 ± 0.24
LUM3194480100–1501.31 ± 0.074.30 ± 0.222.82 ± 0146 ± 4 (9.5)4.12 ± 0.173.32 ± 0.24
LUM319551163–1001.88 ± 0.106.95 ± 0.352.61 ± 0.1313 ± 3 (14)4.14 ± 0.173.20 ± 0.22
LUM319653263–1002.24 ± 0.128.01 ± 0.412.34 ± 0.1213 ± 3 (15)4.07 ± 0.173.10 ± 0.20

Summary of predicted residual dose and measured residual dose (4 h SOL2 bleaching).

SamplepIRIR150IR50
PredictedMeasuredPredictedMeasured
residualresidualresidualresidual
31970.48 ± 0.070.13 ± 0.020.00 ± 0.060.03 ± 0.00
31980.57 ± 0.080.16 ± 0.020.14 ± 0.060.04 ± 0.01
31910.26 ± 0.060.09 ± 0.010.12 ± 0.050.03 ± 0.01
31920.32 ± 0.060.11 ± 0.010.12 ± 0.040.04 ± 0.00
31930.21 ± 0.060.07 ± 0.010.11 ± 0.050.04 ± 0.02
31940.09 ± 0.090.05 ± 0.010.12 ± 0.070.02 ± 0.00
3195-0.19 ± 0.060.11 ± 0.01-0.18 ± 0.060.03 ± 0.00
31962.91 ± 0.090.34 ± 0.020.87 ± 0.050.08 ± 0.01

Result of OSL dating

Feldspar
LumNo.Depth (cm)QuartzpIRIR150IR50
(cm) Dose rate (Gy/ka)De (Gy)Age (a)σOD (%)

σOD values were calculated according to Galbraith et al. (1999).

Dose rate (Gy/ka)De (Gy)g2days (%/decade)Age (a)Corrected age (a)De (Gy)g2days (%/decade)Age (a)Corrected age (a)
3197803.24±0.230.28±0.0187±76.34.02±0.170.81±0.050.99±0.38202±15214±210.34±0.018.38±0.5985±4145±13
31981493.31±0.240.28±0.0185±74.44.10±0.170.88±0.061.96±0.41215±18243±260.35±0.019.23±0.6486±5159±18
31913803.13±0.230.34±0.01110±96.63.96±0.170.68±0.030.38±0.28173±10177±140.38±0.019.18±0.5296±5178±17
31924343.15±0.230.36±0.01115±95.93.92±0.160.74±0.031.11±0.39189±12203±170.39±0.019.30±0.54100±4187±17
31934623.26±0.240.37±0.01114±912.54.05±0.170.66±0.030.44±0.31164±9168±130.39±0.019.36±0.7496±5181±21
31944803.31±0.240.42±0.01128±106.74.12±0.170.60±0.050.62±0.42145±13151±170.46±0.037.80±0.74111±8186±25
31955113.19±0.224.69±0.141470±11012.34.14±0.175.77±0.240.25±0.411390±801430±1204.28±0.184.99±0.261040±601500±120
31965323.08±0.2115.3±0.34970±35010.14.07±0.1722.1±1.70.80±0.285420±4705760±62014.1±0.44.45±0.193480±1804950±350
eISSN:
1897-1695
Language:
English
Publication timeframe:
Volume Open
Journal Subjects:
Geosciences, other