Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-05T03:58:35.118Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Accurate Lacustrine and Wetland Sediment Accumulation Rates Determined from 14C Activity of Bulk Sediment Fractions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 July 2016

W G Walker ,
Gregg R Davidson ,
Todd Lange  and
Daniel Wren
W G Walker
Affiliation:
University of Mississippi, Geology and Geological Engineering Dept., Oxford, Mississippi 38677, USA
Gregg R Davidson*
Affiliation:
University of Mississippi, Geology and Geological Engineering Dept., Oxford, Mississippi 38677, USA
Todd Lange
Affiliation:
NSF-Arizona AMS facility, University of Arizona, Physics Dept., Tucson, Arizona 85721, USA
Daniel Wren
Affiliation:
USDA-ARS National Sedimentation Laboratory, Oxford, Mississippi 38655, USA
*
Corresponding author. Email: davidson@olemiss.edu
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

In the absence of identifiable macrofossils in lacustrine sediments, radiocarbon dating must rely on pollen or bulk sediment fractions. Bulk sediment fractions are not generally preferred because they contain an unknown mixture of organic material of variable age, they may contain dead carbon such as lignite that is difficult to eliminate, and material of aquatic origin may be subject to reservoir effects. If the various processes that contribute carbon to the system are relatively constant over time, however, changes in 14C activity with depth may be used to accurately estimate sediment accumulation rates even if the absolute ages are erroneous. In this study, fine-grained fractions (250–710 μm organic material, humic acids extracted from <250-μm fraction, and untreated <250-μm fraction combusted at low temperature) were analyzed and compared with terrestrial plant stems (twigs), charcoal, and wood fragments in sediments from an oxbow lake in Mississippi, USA. The 14C activities of the bulk fractions were highly linear with depth and produced consistent calculated sediment accumulation rates similar to, and perhaps more reliable than, rates determined using twigs or charcoal.

Type
Articles
Information
Radiocarbon , Volume 49 , Issue 2 , 2007 , pp. 983 - 992
Copyright
Copyright © 2007 by the Arizona Board of Regents on behalf of the University of Arizona 

References

Abbott, MB, Stafford, TW Jr. 1996. Radiocarbon geochemistry of modern and ancient Arctic lake systems, Baffin Island, Canada. Quaternary Research 45(3):300–11.Google Scholar
Åkerlund, A, Risberg, J, Miller, U, Gustafsson, P. 1995. On the applicability of the 14C method to interdisciplinary studies on shore displacement and settlement location. In: Hackens, T, Possnert, G, Köningsson, L-K, editors, 14C Methods and Applications Actually and Retrospectively. Journal of the European Network of Scientific and Technical Cooperation for the Cultural Heritage. PACT 49:53–84.Google Scholar
Arthur, JK. 2001. Hydrogeology, model description, and flow analysis of the Mississippi River alluvial aquifer in northwestern Mississippi [report]. USGS Water-Resources Investigations Report 01–4035.Google Scholar
Arthur, JK, Strom, EW. 1997. Thickness of the Mississippi River alluvium and thickness of the coarse sand and gravel in the Mississippi River alluvium in northwestern Mississippi [map]. USGS Water-Resources Investigations Report 96–4305.Google Scholar
Barnekow, L, Possnert, G, Sandgren, P. 1998. AMS 14C chronologies of Holocene lake sediments in the Abisko area, northern Sweden – a comparison between dated bulk sediment and macrofossil samples. GFF 120(1):59–67.Google Scholar
Becker-Heidmann, P, Liang-wu, L, Scharpenseel, H-W. 1988. Radiocarbon dating of organic matter fractions of a Chinese mollisol. Zeitschrift für Pflanzenernährung und Bodenkunde 151 (1):37–9.Google Scholar
Bennett, KD, Willis, KJ. 2001. Pollen. In: Smol, JP, Birks, HJB, Last, WM, editors. Tracking Environmental Change Using Lake Sediments. Volume 3: Terrestrial, Algal, and Siliceous Indicators. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic. p 5–32.Google Scholar
Björck, S, Wohlfarth, B. 2001. 14C chronostratigraphic techniques in paleolimnology. In: Last, WM, Smol, JP, editors. Tracking Environmental Change Using Lake Sediments. Volume 1: Basin Analysis, Coring, and Chronological Techniques. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic. p 205–45.Google Scholar
Björck, S, Bennike, O, Ingólfsson, Ó, Barnekow, L, Penney, DN. 1994. Lake Boksehandsken's earliest postglacial sediments and their palaeoenvironmental implications, Jameson Land, East Greenland. Boreas 23:459–72.Google Scholar
Björck, S, Bennike, O, Possnert, G, Wohlfarth, B, Digerfeldt, G. 1998. A high-resolution 14C dated sediment sequence from southwest Sweden: age comparisons between different components of the sediment. Journal of Quaternary Science 13(1):85–9.Google Scholar
Bronk Ramsey, C. Forthcoming. Deposition models for chronological records. INTIMATE special issue. Quaternary Science Reviews. Google Scholar
Brown, GF. 1947. Geology and Artesian Water of the Alluvial Plain in Northwestern Mississippi. Mississippi State: Mississippi Geological Survey Bulletin 65. 424 p.Google Scholar
Brown, TA, Farwell, GW, Grootes, PM, Schmidt, FH. 1992. Radiocarbon AMS dating of pollen extracted from peat samples. Radiocarbon 34(3):550–6.Google Scholar
Davidson, GR, Carnley, M, Lange, T, Galicki, SJ, Douglas, A. 2004. Changes in sediment accumulation rate in an oxbow lake following late 19th century clearing of land for agricultural use: a 210Pb, 137Cs and 14C study in Mississippi, USA. Radiocarbon 46(2):755–64.Google Scholar
Delqué Kolić, E. 1995. Direct radiocarbon dating of pottery: selective heat treatment to retrieve smoke-derived carbon. Radiocarbon 37(2):275–84.Google Scholar
Fisk, HN. 1944. Geological Investigation of the Alluvial Valley of the Lower Mississippi River. Vicksburg: United States Department of Army, Mississippi River Commission.Google Scholar
Fowler, AJ, Gillespie, R, Hedges, REM. 1986. Radiocarbon dating of sediments. Radiocarbon 28(2A):441–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hedenström, A, Risberg, J. 1999. Early Holocene shore-displacement in southern central Sweden as recorded in elevated isolated basins. Boreas 28(4):490–504.Google Scholar
Hoper, ST, McCormac, FG, Hogg, AG, Higham, TFG, Head, MJ. 1998. Evaluation of wood pretreatments on oak and cedar. Radiocarbon 40(1):45–50.Google Scholar
McGeehin, J, Burr, GS, Jull, AJT, Reines, D, Gosse, J, Davis, PT, Muhs, D, Southon, JR. 2001. Stepped-combustion 14C dating of sediment: a comparison with established techniques. Radiocarbon 43(2A):255–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olsson, IU. 1991. Accuracy and precision in sediment chronology. Hydrobiologia 214(1):25–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pessenda, LCR, Gouveia, SEM, Aravena, R. 2001. Radiocarbon dating of total soil organic matter and humin fraction and its comparison with 14C ages of fossil charcoal. Radiocarbon 43(2B):595–601.Google Scholar
Reimer, RW, Reimer, PJ. 2006. An age-depth model in CALIB [poster]. 19th International Radiocarbon Conference, Oxford, United Kingdom, 3–7 April 2006.Google Scholar
Saucier, RT. 1994. Geomorphology and Quaternary Geologic History of the Lower Mississippi Valley. Volume II. Vicksburg: United States Army Corps of Engineers.Google Scholar
Scharpenseel, H-W, Becker-Heidmann, P. 1992. Twenty-five years of radiocarbon dating soils: paradigm of erring and learning. Radiocarbon 34(3):541–9.Google Scholar
Slota, PJ Jr, Jull, AJT, Linick, TW, Toolin, LJ. 1987. Preparation of small samples for 14C accelerator targets by catalytic reduction of CO. Radiocarbon 29(2):303–6.Google Scholar
Vandergoes, MJ, Prior, CA. 2003. AMS dating of pollen concentrates—a methodological study of late Quaternary sediments from south Westland, New Zealand. Radiocarbon 45(3):479–91.Google Scholar
Walker, MJC, Harkness, DD. 1990. Radiocarbon dating the Devensian Lateglacial in Britain: new evidence from Llanilid, South Wales. Journal of Quaternary Science 5(2):135–44.Google Scholar