首页> 外文期刊>Quaternary International >Reconstructing peatland water tables using transfer functions for plant macrofossils and testate amoebae: A methodological comparison
【24h】

Reconstructing peatland water tables using transfer functions for plant macrofossils and testate amoebae: A methodological comparison

机译:使用传递函数重建植物大化石和豆科植物的泥炭地地下水位:方法学比较

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

Relatively seldom is the same parameter reconstructed from the same site using different proxies, resulting in a persistent problem for palaeoecological studies whereby a reconstruction based on a single-proxy may provide an unequivocal view of the changes in past conditions. Plant macrofossils and testate amoebae are commonly used proxies to reconstruct past changes in peatland surface moisture conditions, but there are no comparisons between quantitative reconstructions based on both tech niques. This paper compares two high-resolution late-Holocene quantitative water table (WT) recon structions based on transfer functions for plant macrofossils and testate amoebae from two boreal peatland sites in Finland and Estonia. The reconstructed WT variation patterns during the last ca. 5000 years are almost identical in directions for both proxies. However, both bog records contain one inconsistent episode when the two proxies indicate different hydrological conditions. In both cases, the testate amoebae reconstruction shows wetter than the average conditions, whereas the plant-based reconstruction indicates drier than the average conditions. Several, possibly simultaneously affecting, reasons can be suggested for mismatches between proxies: 1) the proxies have different response times and sensitivities to hydrological changes, 2) the species-ecology is inadequately known, 3) the modern analogues are poor, 4) the microhabitat dynamics are unpredictable, and 5) the modern data set is too small. Divergences between the proxy records emphasize the fact that single-proxy reconstructions are subject to larger uncertainties than those based on two or more methods.
机译:相对很少有使用不同代理从同一位置重建的相同参数,这导致了古生态学研究的一个持续问题,即基于单一代理的重建可能会提供过去条件变化的明确视图。植物大型化石和睾丸变形虫是通常用来重建泥炭地表水分条件过去变化的代理,但是在基于这两种技术的定量重建之间没有比较。本文比较了两个高分辨率的晚全新世定量地下水位(WT)的重构,这些重构基于来自芬兰和爱沙尼亚两个北方泥炭地的植物大化石和睾丸变形虫的传递函数。在最后一个ca期间重建的WT变化模式。两个代理人在5000年的发展方向上几乎相同。但是,当两个代理指示不同的水文条件时,两个沼泽记录都包含一个不一致的情节。在这两种情况下,睾丸变形虫的重建都比平均条件要湿,而基于植物的重建则要比平均条件要干燥。代理之间不匹配的原因可能有几种,可能同时影响:1)代理对水文变化的响应时间和敏感性不同; 2)对物种生态的了解不足; 3)现代类似物较差; 4)微生境的动力学是不可预测的,并且5)现代数据集太小。代理记录之间的差异强调了这样一个事实,即与基于两种或多种方法的那些相比,单代理重构的不确定性更大。

著录项

  • 来源
    《Quaternary International》 |2012年第3期|p.34-43|共10页
  • 作者单位

    Department of Environmental Sciences, P.O. Box 65, Viikinkaari 1, University of Helsinki, Helsinki 00014, Finland;

    Department of Geography, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, UK;

    School of Geography, University of Exeter, Exeter EX4 4QJ, UK;

    Department of Botany, Institute of Ecology and Earth Sciences, University of Tartu, 51005 Tartu, Estonia;

    School of Geography, University of Exeter, Exeter EX4 4QJ, UK;

    Department of Landscape Ecology, Institute of Ecology, Tallinn University, 10120 Tallinn, Estonia;

    Department of Forest Sciences, P.O. Box 27, University of Helsinki, Helsinki 00014, Finland;

  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号