Otwarty dostęp

Testing the Applicability of Quartz and Feldspar for Luminescence Dating of Pleistocene Alluvial Sediments in the Tatra Mountain Foothills, Slovakia

Ingrid Bejarano-Arias
Ingrid Bejarano-Arias
, 
Roos M. J. Van Wees
Roos M. J. Van Wees
, 
Helena Alexanderson
Helena Alexanderson
, 
Juraj Janočko
Juraj Janočko
 oraz 
Zoran M. Perić
Zoran M. Perić
   | 22 lis 2023
Geochronometria's Cover Image
O artykule
Poprzedni artykuł
Następny artykuł
Zacytuj
Data publikacji: 22 lis 2023
Zakres stron: 50 - 80
Otrzymano: 22 gru 2022
Przyjęty: 03 lip 2023
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/geochr-2023-0002
Słowa kluczowe
© 2023 Ingrid Bejarano-Arias et al., published by Sciendo
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.

Fig 1.

Map of the High Tatras where both study areas are indicated: hashed black lines indicate the area of the Velická dolina valley that covers all the six sample sites, and the yellow square indicates the Great Yellow Wall (Fig. S1). Likewise, the location of the Bee Pit is a yellow square.
Map of the High Tatras where both study areas are indicated: hashed black lines indicate the area of the Velická dolina valley that covers all the six sample sites, and the yellow square indicates the Great Yellow Wall (Fig. S1). Likewise, the location of the Bee Pit is a yellow square.

Fig 2.

Overview of the Bee Pit outcrop with the sampling locations in the different units. The log in Fig. 3 is from the southern side of the exposure (left in photo). The two boulders in unit 4 are marked with the red dashed line.
Overview of the Bee Pit outcrop with the sampling locations in the different units. The log in Fig. 3 is from the southern side of the exposure (left in photo). The two boulders in unit 4 are marked with the red dashed line.

Fig 3.

Log combining the lower and upper exposures at the Bee Pit, including all units and uncorrected pIRIR225 luminescence ages from the site. The zero level in the log is approximately at 914 m a.s.l. Sample numbers and ages in bold are considered most reliable (for explanation, see text). Lithofacies codes are according to Krüger and Kjaer (1999).
Log combining the lower and upper exposures at the Bee Pit, including all units and uncorrected pIRIR225 luminescence ages from the site. The zero level in the log is approximately at 914 m a.s.l. Sample numbers and ages in bold are considered most reliable (for explanation, see text). Lithofacies codes are according to Krüger and Kjaer (1999).

Fig 4.

Overview of the luminescence sampling locations in the Velická dolina valley with location of luminescence samples (yellow stars). (A) Photo of Site 2 taken from Site 1 at the Great Yellow Wall. (B) Dry riverbed north of Site 3. (C) Site 4, east from the modern river. (D) Site 5, west from the modern river. (E) Site 6, the modern riverbed can be seen in the background. (F) Overview of Site 8, showing the natural outcrop from which the moraine sample was taken.
Overview of the luminescence sampling locations in the Velická dolina valley with location of luminescence samples (yellow stars). (A) Photo of Site 2 taken from Site 1 at the Great Yellow Wall. (B) Dry riverbed north of Site 3. (C) Site 4, east from the modern river. (D) Site 5, west from the modern river. (E) Site 6, the modern riverbed can be seen in the background. (F) Overview of Site 8, showing the natural outcrop from which the moraine sample was taken.

Fig 5.

Log from Sites 1 (left) and 2 (right), showing the units of the uppermost, southern side (YS) and the sampled northern part of the Great Yellow Wall (YN). It includes the uncorrected pIRIR225 luminescence ages, where the bold ages are the most reliable. The zero level of the log is at approximately 1110 m a.s.l., and the legend can be found in Fig. 3. Sample numbers and ages in bold are considered most reliable (for explanation, see text).
Log from Sites 1 (left) and 2 (right), showing the units of the uppermost, southern side (YS) and the sampled northern part of the Great Yellow Wall (YN). It includes the uncorrected pIRIR225 luminescence ages, where the bold ages are the most reliable. The zero level of the log is at approximately 1110 m a.s.l., and the legend can be found in Fig. 3. Sample numbers and ages in bold are considered most reliable (for explanation, see text).

Fig 6.

(A) Weathered boulders with a sand matrix at Site 2, Great Yellow Wall. Sample 20026 was taken from within one of the weathered boulders and used as a sample with field-saturated luminescence signal since light exposure is not expected to have occurred at any point in time for these grains. (B) Sample 20026 taken from the weathered boulders.
(A) Weathered boulders with a sand matrix at Site 2, Great Yellow Wall. Sample 20026 was taken from within one of the weathered boulders and used as a sample with field-saturated luminescence signal since light exposure is not expected to have occurred at any point in time for these grains. (B) Sample 20026 taken from the weathered boulders.

Fig 7.

Small (2-mm) aliquot with feldspar grains used for dose estimation of sample 19102. The average number of grains for the small aliquots is approximately 70.
Small (2-mm) aliquot with feldspar grains used for dose estimation of sample 19102. The average number of grains for the small aliquots is approximately 70.

Fig 8.

Representative sensitivity-corrected dose–response curves and dose estimates for sample 19088 for (A) IR50. and (B) pIRIR225. De was determined to be 325 Gy and 800 Gy, respectively. (C) Example of a g-value measurement of the IR50 signal on a single aliquot of sample 19088. The steep trend line suggests a significant fading of the IR50 signal.
Representative sensitivity-corrected dose–response curves and dose estimates for sample 19088 for (A) IR50. and (B) pIRIR225. De was determined to be 325 Gy and 800 Gy, respectively. (C) Example of a g-value measurement of the IR50 signal on a single aliquot of sample 19088. The steep trend line suggests a significant fading of the IR50 signal.

Fig 9.

Variation in equivalent dose and dose recovery ratio with temperature and signal integration intervals for sample 19082. (A) Preheat plateau (PHP) test where doses were calculated with early background subtraction (peak first 0.32 s, background next 0.32 s). All aliquots for 200° were rejected, (B) dose recovery ratios with corresponding calculation. (C) PHP test with late background subtraction for dose determination (peak first 0.8 s, background last 64 s). (D) Dose recovery ratios with corresponding calculation. The hatched line in B and D shows a dose recovery ratio of 1.0 (i.e. unity).
Variation in equivalent dose and dose recovery ratio with temperature and signal integration intervals for sample 19082. (A) Preheat plateau (PHP) test where doses were calculated with early background subtraction (peak first 0.32 s, background next 0.32 s). All aliquots for 200° were rejected, (B) dose recovery ratios with corresponding calculation. (C) PHP test with late background subtraction for dose determination (peak first 0.8 s, background last 64 s). (D) Dose recovery ratios with corresponding calculation. The hatched line in B and D shows a dose recovery ratio of 1.0 (i.e. unity).

Fig 10.

(A) Decay curve comparison between normalised OSL signals from quartz sample 19083 and Risø calibration quartz (Hansen et al., 2015) for the initial part of the stimulation. The decay curve of sample 19083 indicates a slow signal decay, which is not dominated by a fast component. (B) A similar comparison between non-normalised OSL signals shows the very dim signal of the quartz from the Biely Váh valley.
(A) Decay curve comparison between normalised OSL signals from quartz sample 19083 and Risø calibration quartz (Hansen et al., 2015) for the initial part of the stimulation. The decay curve of sample 19083 indicates a slow signal decay, which is not dominated by a fast component. (B) A similar comparison between non-normalised OSL signals shows the very dim signal of the quartz from the Biely Váh valley.

Fig 11.

LM-OSL curves for one aliquot each of samples: (A) 19082 (B) 19095 (C) 19104 and (D) Risø calibration quartz batch 123. It is notable that the presence of the fast component varies greatly between samples, but it is not dominant in any of the Tatra samples.
LM-OSL curves for one aliquot each of samples: (A) 19082 (B) 19095 (C) 19104 and (D) Risø calibration quartz batch 123. It is notable that the presence of the fast component varies greatly between samples, but it is not dominant in any of the Tatra samples.

Fig 12.

Comparison of the thermal stability between the natural quartz extracts (samples 19082, 19095 and 19104) and the Risø 180–250 μm calibration quartz (batch 123).
Comparison of the thermal stability between the natural quartz extracts (samples 19082, 19095 and 19104) and the Risø 180–250 μm calibration quartz (batch 123).

Fig 13.

(A) Dose–response curve and fading plot (inset) for the IR50 signal of sample 20026. Note that the signal does not display full saturation and fades significantly (mean g-value 5.4 ± 0.4%/decade for all aliquots). (B) Dose–response curve and fading plot (inset) for the pIRIR225 signal of sample 20026. The natural signal of this aliquot is close to saturation since the De > 2D0 (De = 765 ± 95 Gy; D0 = 289 ± 4 Gy) but not at saturation, and it still shows some fading in the laboratory (sample average g-value 0.66 ± 0.25%/decade).
(A) Dose–response curve and fading plot (inset) for the IR50 signal of sample 20026. Note that the signal does not display full saturation and fades significantly (mean g-value 5.4 ± 0.4%/decade for all aliquots). (B) Dose–response curve and fading plot (inset) for the pIRIR225 signal of sample 20026. The natural signal of this aliquot is close to saturation since the De > 2D0 (De = 765 ± 95 Gy; D0 = 289 ± 4 Gy) but not at saturation, and it still shows some fading in the laboratory (sample average g-value 0.66 ± 0.25%/decade).

Fig 14.

Examples of growth curves for IR50 and pIRIR225 measurements for samples 19091 (A,B) and 19096 (C,D). For the aliquot of sample 19091, the De is closer to saturation for the pIRIR225 signal. Sample 19096 is not close to saturation for IR50 and pIRIR225 (i.e. De < 2*D0).
Examples of growth curves for IR50 and pIRIR225 measurements for samples 19091 (A,B) and 19096 (C,D). For the aliquot of sample 19091, the De is closer to saturation for the pIRIR225 signal. Sample 19096 is not close to saturation for IR50 and pIRIR225 (i.e. De < 2*D0).

Fig 15.

Bleaching rate of sample 19087 showing the signal or dose (Gy) plotted against exposure time in a logarithmic scale for both IR50 and pIRIR225.
Bleaching rate of sample 19087 showing the signal or dose (Gy) plotted against exposure time in a logarithmic scale for both IR50 and pIRIR225.

Fig 16.

Comparison between quartz and feldspar ages. (A) Approximate quartz ages, based on 3 aliquots per sample, are all much lower than the fading corrected IR50 ages. (B) Feldspar-corrected IR50 ages are mostly of the same order as the uncorrected pIRIR225 ages, with some exceptions.
Comparison between quartz and feldspar ages. (A) Approximate quartz ages, based on 3 aliquots per sample, are all much lower than the fading corrected IR50 ages. (B) Feldspar-corrected IR50 ages are mostly of the same order as the uncorrected pIRIR225 ages, with some exceptions.

Fig 17.

Relation of uncorrected ages of the pIRIR225 (ka) on the x-axis vs. elevation of the samples in the outcrops on the y-axis. Preferred ages per site or unit are black. Note that the Velická dolina valley and the Biely Váh valley are two different areas in the southern foothills of the Tatra Mountains and are not subsequent geological strata as the figure might imply.
Relation of uncorrected ages of the pIRIR225 (ka) on the x-axis vs. elevation of the samples in the outcrops on the y-axis. Preferred ages per site or unit are black. Note that the Velická dolina valley and the Biely Váh valley are two different areas in the southern foothills of the Tatra Mountains and are not subsequent geological strata as the figure might imply.

Fig S1.

Lower part of the Velická dolina valley with the orange dots to mark the sample sites.
Lower part of the Velická dolina valley with the orange dots to mark the sample sites.

Fig S4.

Probability plots with a z-distribution (mean of 0 and the standard deviation of 1) showing the dose distributions of samples with the most aliquots: samples 19091 (n=30), 19096 (n=29) and 19102 (n=33).
Probability plots with a z-distribution (mean of 0 and the standard deviation of 1) showing the dose distributions of samples with the most aliquots: samples 19091 (n=30), 19096 (n=29) and 19102 (n=33).

Dose recovery ratios and residual doses for IR and pIRIR measured on all samples from the Bee pit and the Velická dolina valley.

Sample no. IR50 pIRIR225
Dose recovery ratio Error Residual Error Dose recovery ratio Error Residual Error
19082 0.89 0.03 2.73 0.2 0.92 0.03 16.09 0.12
19083 0.84 0.03 2.56 0.1 0.89 0.03 15 0.1
19086 0.86 0.03 3.29 0.1 0.87 0.03 17.3 0.1
19087 0.84 0.03 2.64 0.1 0.9 0.03 17.5 0.1
19091 0.84 0.03 2.73 0.1 0.92 0.03 15.6 0.5
19092 0.88 0.03 - - 0.91 0.03 - -
19094 0.92 0.03 2.89 0.3 0.94 0.03 15.5 1.6
19096 - - 2.86 0.2 - - 15.3 1.5

Results of the SOL2 bleaching experiment for sample 19087.

Bleaching time (min) IR50 De (Gy) IR50 Ln/Tn pIRIR225 De (Gy) pIRIR225 Ln/Tn
0 (Natural) 232.8 ± 2.8 6.49 ± 0.08 587.8 ± 19.4 8.88 ± 0.39
1 45.4 ± 8.7 1.55 ± 0.27 311.7 ± 31.7 7.38 ± 0.52
5 6.8 ± 0.3 0.24 ± 0.01 92.7 ± 4.4 3.04 ± 0.12
20 3.3 ± 0.2 0.12 ± 0.01 29.5 ± 0.7 1.06 ± 0.02
60 2.2 ± 0.1 0.08 ± 0.00 16.3 ± 0.7 0.60 ± 0.03
20160 0.5 ± 0.0 0.02 ± 0.00 4.8 ± 0.3 0.17 ± 0.01

Results of the IR50 and pIRIR225 measurements: g-values, feldspar dose estimates, the number aliquots with De < 2D0 compared to the total number of accepted aliquots and the uncorrected and corrected ages.

Sample No. Unit / Site No. g-value (%/decade) De (Gy) Accepted (De<2D0) / Total aliquots Uncorrected age (ka) Corrected age (ka)
IR50 pIRIR225 IR50 pIRIR225 IR50 pIRIR225 IR50 pIRIR225 IR50 pIRIR225
19082 Unit 3 6.71 ± 0.1 2.23 ± 0.3 414 ± 15 868 ± 86 12(12)/12 12(1)/12 125 ± 7.8 261 ± 29 278 ± 18 326 ± 38
19083 Unit 1B 4.82 ± 0.7 1.56 ± 0.1 351 ± 14 844 ± 116 12(12)/12 12(1)/12 109 ± 7.2 263 ± 39 185 ± 28 308 ± 51
19084 Unit 3 9.83 ± 0.2 2.84 ± 0.2 348 ± 14 741 ± 80 12(12)/12 12(2)/12 129 ± 8.7 275 ± 33 624 ± 82 368 ± 46
19085 Unit 3 6.52 ± 0.1 1.66 ± 0.6 317 ± 11 760 ± 76 12(12)/12 12(1)/12 106 ± 6.8 254 ± 29 230 ± 16 300 ± 39
19086 Unit 3 1.66 ± 0.2 0.09 ± 0.1 387 ± 16 812 ± 105 12(12)/12 12(0)/12 100 ± 7.3 210 ± 30 117 ± 8.7 212 ± 29
19087 Unit 12 5.06 ± 0.3 1.48 ± 0.1 351 ± 13 788 ± 73 12(12)/12 12(2)/12 120 ± 7.6 269 ± 29 208 ± 16 311 ± 31
19088 Unit 12 5.85 ± 0.2 0.81 ± 0.6 326 ± 11 776 ± 74 12(12)/12 12(1)/12 81 ± 4.9 193 ± 21 156 ± 12 208 ± 27
19089 Unit 12 5.05 ± 0.02 1.99 ± 0.02 372 ± 14 850 ± 91 12(12)/12 12(2)/12 109 ± 6.6 249 ± 29 188 ± 11 304 ± 36
19090 Unit 9 5.71 ± 0.4 2.16 ± 0.1 354 ± 13 763 ± 73 12(12)/12 12(1)/12 115 ± 7.8 248 ± 28 219 ± 22 308 ± 31
19091 Unit 9 8.69 ± 1.1 0.37 ± 0.4 360 ± 13 710 ± 58 30(30)/30 30(8)/30 97.3 ± 5.7 192 ± 18 318 ± 185 199 ± 19
19092 Unit 5 5.26 ± 0.3 0.70 ± 0.4 465 ± 20 949 ± 123 12(12)/12 12(2)/12 132 ± 8.6 269 ± 38 236 ± 19 287 ± 39
19093 Site 1 8.01 ± 0.6 1.05 ± 0.3 338 ± 15 636 ± 64 12(12)/12 12(5)/12 79.5 ± 5.5 150 ± 17 219 ± 50 165 ± 19
19094 Site 1 9.43 ± 0.5 3.04 ± 0.1 304 ± 14 611 ± 49 12(11)/15 12(7)/13 69.9 ± 5.2 139 ± 14 266 ± 105 188 ± 21
19095 Site 1 4.83 ± 0.3 2.06 ± 0.2 325 ± 13 709 ± 85 12(12)/12 12(5)/13 86.1 ± 5.9 188 ± 25 145 ± 12 231 ± 29
19096 Site 2 7.20 ± 0.6 1.52 ± 0.2 346 ± 14 770 ± 72 29(29)/30 29(9)/30 90.9 ± 6.1 202 ± 22 204.5 ± 34 234 ± 24
19097 Site 2 7.25 ± 1.1 −0.41 ± 0.1 330 ± 12 798 ± 88 12(12)/15 12(3)/18 96.7 ± 6.9 234 ± 30 234 ± 83 *
19098 Site 3 8.61 ± 0.8 3.31 ± 0.2 134 ± 4.2 361 ± 22 12(12)/12 12(10)/12 38.5 ± 2.9 103 ± 9.5 116 ± 35 145 ± 14
19100 Site 4 4.56 ± 0.6 1.43 ± 0.2 306 ± 15 839 ± 122 12(12)/12 12(2)/12 81.7 ± 6.1 224 ± 35 130 ± 14 257 ± 41
19101 Site 5 11.49 ± 0.3 1.65 ± 0.2 131 ± 4.1 506 ± 37 12(12)/14 12(7)/12 37.7 ± 2.8 146 ± 14 307 ± 118 172 ± 17
19102 Site 5 7.49 ± 0.9 2.60 ± 0.2 96.0 ± 3.1 387 ± 32 33(33)/33 33(22)/35 29.1 ± 2.0 117 ± 12 69 ± 15 152 ± 15
19105 Site 6 10.77 ± 1.0 2.98 ± 0.3 31.5 ± 1.5 109 ± 7.0 12(12)/15 12(9)/18 17.7 ± 1.6 61.6 ± 6.3 79 ± 37 82 ± 10
19106 Site 6 6.74 ± 0.04 1.64 ± 0.1 56.2 ± 1.9 183 ± 5.8 12(12)/15 12(9)/18 20.1 ± 1.6 65.4 ± 5.2 42 ± 3.5 77 ± 5.7
20026 Site 2 5.42 ± 0.41 0.66 ± 0.25 453 ± 10 737 ± 47 5(5)/5 5(5)/5 n/a n/a n/a n/a
20028 Site 8 4.89 ± 0.83 0.88 ± 0.41 18.4 ± 3.9 55.6 ± 5.6 12(12)/12 12(12)/12 5.0 ± 1.1 15.0 ± 1.7 7.6 ± 2.0 16.1 ± 1.9

The water content values used for the age calculation, per sample. For three samples the uncorrected pIRIR age (ka) is shown calculated with all three water contents.

Sample No. Field Water Content (%) Saturated Water Content (%) Expected Water Content (%)
19082 11 31 27
19083 15 25 24
19084 7 22 19
19085 13 25 23
19086 21 27 26
19087 24 35 29
19088 23 30 26
19089 15 27 20
19090 15 35 29
19091 17 31 27
19092 32 38 36
19093 16 25 21
19094 9 22 13
19095 18 28 21
19096 28 35 31
19097 28 35 31
19098 5 23 23
19099 5 23 23
19100 8 29 23
19101 17 31 30
19102 21 30 29
19105 19 49 49
19106 19 49 49
20028 0 18 15

OSL parameters calculated from the quartz extracts using linear modulation compared to other values from literature.

Sample OSL component Detraping probability (b) Photoionisation cross-section (ϭ) Relative Cross-section
19082 Fast 22.4 ± 4.9 1.4 × 10−16 1
Slow1 1.8 ± 0.2 1.2 × 10−17 0.09
Slow2 0.17 ± 0.003 1.1 × 10−18 0.01
Slow3 0.018 ± 0.004 1.1 × 10−19 0.001
Slow4 0.0004 ± 0.0003 2.5 × 10−20 0.0002
19095 Fast 9.6 ± 3.2 6.1 × 10−17 1
Medium 0.94 ± 0.1 6.0 × 10−18 0.1
Slow2 0.12 ± 0.008 7.8 × 10−19 0.01
Slow3 0.017 ± 0.0008 1.2 × 10−19 0.002
Slow4 0.004 ± 0.00009 2.9 × 10−20 0.0006
19104 Fast 1.6 ± 0.3 6.2 × 10−18 1
Slow1 0.08 ± 0.04 5.0 × 10−19 0.05
Slow3 0.005 ± 0.0003 3.1 × 10−20 0.003
Calib. quartz Fast 2.7 ± 0.09 1.6 × 10−17 1
Slow4 0.0007 ± 0.00003 4.5 × 10−21 0.0003
Jain et al. (2003) Fast 2.5 ± 0.2 2.3 × 10−17 1
Medium 0.62 ± 0.05 5.6 × 10−18 0.2
Slow1 0.15 ± 0.03 1.3 × 10−18 0.06
Slow2 0.023 ± 0.005 2.1 × 10−19 0.01
Slow3 0.0022 ± 0.0002 2.1 × 10−20 0.001
Slow4 0.00030 ± 0.00001 2.8 × 10−21 0.0001
Durcan and Duller (2011) Fast n.a. 2.6 × 10−17 1
Medium n.a. 4.3 × 10−18 0.16
Slow1 n.a. 1.1 × 10−18 0.04
Slow2 n.a. 3.0 × 10−19 0.01
Slow3 n.a. 3.4 × 10−20 0.001
Slow4 n.a. 9.1 × 10−21 0.0003

OSL doses, dose rates and ages for the quartz samples.

Sample No. Number of aliquots Type of OSL measurement Mean Dose ± error (Gy) Total Dose rate ± error (Gy ka−1) Age (ka)
19082 18 Differential OSL 268 ± 58 2.6 ± 0.1 104 ± 23
12 Pulsed OSL 102 ± 6 40 ± 3
19083 3 Standard SAR 143 ± 27 2.7 ± 0.1 53 ± 10
19084 6 Standard SAR 160 ± 41 2.1 ± 0.1 77 ± 20
19085 3 Standard SAR 103 ± 21 2.4 ± 0.1 42 ± 9
19090 3 Standard SAR 96 ± 11 2.6 ± 0.1 38 ± 5
19091 3 Standard SAR 186 ± 55 3.2 ± 0.1 58 ± 17
19092 3 Standard SAR 114 ± 40 3.3 ± 0.2 35 ± 12
19102 12 Pulsed OSL 30 ± 6 2.3 ± 0.2 13 ± 3

Concentration of radioactive elements in the sampled sediments (from gamma spectrometry) and the dose rate from cosmic radiation to each sample (as calculated in DRAC v1.2 (Durcan et al., 2015)).

Sample No. U (ppm) ± error Th (ppm) ± error K (%) ± error Cosmic dose rate (Gy. ka−1) Total Dose Rate (Gy. ka−1) wce(%)
19082 1.49 ± 0.58 5.87 ± 0.15 2.52 ± 0.04 0.14 ± 0.01 3.33 ± 0.17 27
19083 0.96 ± 0.45 6.55 ± 0.13 2.42 ± 0.05 0.10 ± 0.01 3.21 ± 0.16 24
19084 0.48 ± 0.17 4.98 ± 0.08 1.91 ± 0.03 0.07 ± 0.01 2.70 ± 0.15 19
19085 0.92 ± 0.54 5.11 ± 0.14 2.23 ± 0.04 0.10 ± 0.01 2.99 ± 0.16 23
19086 2.43 ± 1.24 8.48 ± 0.33 2.86 ± 0.10 0.09 ± 0.01 3.87 ± 0.23 26
19087 1.22 ± 0.42 6.96 ± 0.12 1.99 ± 0.04 0.16 ± 0.02 2.93 ± 0.15 29
19088 4.23 ± 0.84 9.35 ± 0.23 2.46 ± 0.05 0.17 ± 0.02 4.03 ± 0.20 26
19089 1.04 ± 0.21 5.60 ± 0.08 2.52 ± 0.03 0.17 ± 0.02 3.41 ± 0.16 20
19090 0.74 ± 0.71 5.97 ± 0.18 2.32 ± 0.05 0.21 ± 0.02 3.07 ± 0.17 29
19091 2.08 ± 0.39 8.79 ± 0.11 2.59 ± 0.03 0.21 ± 0.02 3.70 ± 0.17 27
19092 2.20 ± 0.79 7.27 ± 0.21 2.74 ± 0.05 0.20 ± 0.02 3.53 ± 0.18 36
19093 3.28 ± 0.34 12.0 ± 0.17 2.56 ± 0.04 0.20 ± 0.02 4.24 ± 0.23 21
19094 2.85 ± 0.64 12.3 ± 0.19 2.48 ± 0.05 0.19 ± 0.02 4.39 ± 0.26 13
19095 2.38 ± 0.45 10.6 ± 0.13 2.29 ± 0.03 0.19 ± 0.02 3.78 ± 0.21 21
19096 3.60 ± 0.44 11.6 ± 0.12 2.47 ± 0.04 0.06 ± 0.01 3.80 ± 0.20 31
19097 1.61 ± 0.86 13.5 ± 0.24 2.21 ± 0.05 0.11 ± 0.01 3.41 ± 0.21 31
19098 1.15 ± 0.49 6.80 ± 0.14 2.18 ± 0.05 0.27 ± 0.03 3.48 ± 0.23 23
19100 2.94 ± 0.58 12.1 ± 0.17 2.09 ± 0.05 0.17 ± 0.02 3.75 ± 0.21 23
19101 2.39 ± 0.60 11.8 ± 0.17 2.32 ± 0.05 0.18 ± 0.02 3.48 ± 0.23 30
19102 1.39 ± 0.72 8.57 ± 0.19 2.31 ± 0.05 0.17 ± 0.02 3.29 ± 0.20 29
19104 1.50 ± 0.25 6.53 ± 0.07 1.81 ± 0.03 0.29 ± 0.03 2.43 ± 0.20 -
19105 1.06 ± 0.30 6.68 ± 0.15 1.89 ± 0.04 0 (surface) 1.78 ± 0.14 -
19106 1.06 ± 0.30 6.68 ± 0.15 1.89 ± 0.04 0.31 ± 0.03 2.80 ± 0.20 49
20028 1.18 ± 0.27 10.16 ± 0.15 2.44 ± 0.04 0.15 ± 0.02 3.72 ± 0.17 15

Sample information acquired from the investigated study areas. Lithofacies codes are based on Krüger and Kjaer (1999).

Sample No. Site UTM 33N easting UTM 33N northing Location / Sample type Depth in m (overburden sediment) Stratigraphic unit Lithofacies Fraction (μm)
19082 Bee Pit 42829 5439202 Lower section 7.1 B3 SiSm(ng) 180–250
19083 Bee Pit 428289 5439024 Lower section 11.4 B1B SSim 180–250
19084 Bee Pit 428292 5439015 Lower section 13.8 B3 SiSm(ng) 180–250
19085 Bee Pit 428289 5439024 Lower section 11.4 B3 SiSm(ng) 180–250
19086 Bee Pit 428283 5439047 Lower section 10.8 B3 SiSm(ng) 180–250
19087 Bee Pit 428228 5438971 Upper section 5.4 B12 SiSm(ng) 180–250
19088 Bee Pit 428228 5438971 Upper section 5.4 B12 SiSm(ng) 180–250
19089 Bee Pit 428228 5438971 Upper section 5.4 B12 Sm(ng) 180–250
19090 Bee Pit 428282 5439016 Lower section 2.2 B9 SiSm 180–250
19091 Bee Pit 428282 5439016 Lower section 2.2 B9 SiSm 180–250
19092 Bee Pit 428286 5439018 Lower section 3.6 B5 Sm(ng) 180–250
19093 GYW, site 1 439489 5441932 GYW South (YS) 1.8 YS3 GSm 180–250
19094 GYW, site 1 439489 5441932 GYW South (YS) 1.7 YS3 Sm 180–250
19095 GYW, site 1 439489 5441932 GYW South (YS) 2.2 YS3 GSm 180–250
19096 GYW, site 2 439514 5442023 GYW North (YN) 15 YN1 Sm 180–250
19097 GYW, site 2 439514 5442023 GYW North (YN) 15 YN1 Sm 180–250
19098 Site 3 439737 5441549 Flood deposit 0.24 - Gm 250–355
19099* Site 4 439677 5441615 East of Velická potok 2 - Gm *
19100 Site 4 439677 5441615 East of Velická potok 2.5 - Sm 180–250
19101 Site 5 439605 5441701 West of Velická potok 2.6 - Sh 90–180
19102 Site 5 439605 5441701 West of Velická potok 2.5 - Sh 180–250
19105 Site 6 439775 5441345 Modern Analogue (MA) 0 - Sm 180–250
19106 Site 6 439775 5441345 Modern Analogue (MA) 0.03 - Sm 250–355
19103* Site 7 440614 5436964 Distant MA 0 - Sm *
19104* Site 7 440614 5436964 Distant MA 0.12 - Sm 90–180
20026 GYW, site 2 439514 5442023 Saturated sample 15 YN1 Boulder 180–250
20028 Site 8 439819 5442867 Moraine 5 - DmC 180–250

Water content test, where ages for samples 19084, 19086 and 19094 were calculated for 0% and 50% water content.

Sample No. Water Content (0%) Water Content (50%) Expected Water Content
Age (ka) Age (ka) Age (ka)
19084 236 ± 28 328 ± 40 275 ± 33
19086 169 ± 24 245 ± 35 210 ± 30
19094 123 ± 13 178 ± 17 139 ± 14
eISSN:
1897-1695
Język:
Angielski
Częstotliwość wydawania:
Volume Open
Dziedziny czasopisma:
Geosciences, other
Kanał RSS czasopisma