Matrixdating org

Altermann and Mania, 1968; Rohdenburg and Meyer, 1968), these soils have been traditionally interpreted as relictic soils (e.g. Eckmeier et al., 2007; Gehrt et al., 2002; Schmidt et al., 1999).

cambisols, luvisols), to ascribe the genesis of Central European A – C-soils to anthropogenic fi res as a constitu- tional process. Kahle et al., 2002), very few publications exist that consider the subsequent development of the chernozemic soils (so-called degradation with formation of B w and B t horizons) in the region (e.g. There are, in general, few “ classical ” publications about bruni fi cation processes during the Holocene. Some (Blume, 1981; Jenny, 1980; Kussmaul and Niederbudde, 1979) use very conservative estimations of soil formation time.

Due to the absence of onsite numerical age information, these authors assume the time elapsed since deglacia- tion at the respective investigation sites as equal to the time when soil formation processes were in progress. Other studies were carried out at sites disadvantageous for clay mineral neoformation, i.e.

This is more or less synchronous with a fi rst strong increase of anthropogenic indicators in the pollen spectrum (Müller, 1953).

During the subsequent periods of the Holocene only the so-called migration period (ca.

Landscape development during the Holocene in the eastern foreland of the Harz Mountains was investigated by Litt (1988), Tinapp et al. Further on, he reported alluvial sediments in an exposure of the “ Elster – Luppe ” alluvial plain dating to the Neolithic, the Bronze Age and unde fi ned younger ages, which were divided by dated soil horizons (5.680 BP ± 60, 5.100 BP ± 60, 3.340 BP ± 60, 2.940 BP ± 80). (2000) found colluvial sediments at the “ Weiße Elster ” dating to prehistoric times, early (ca.

Comments