4.4 Article Proceedings Paper

Fish otolith microchemistry: Snapshots of lake conditions during early human occupation of Lake Mungo, Australia

期刊

QUATERNARY INTERNATIONAL
卷 463, 期 -, 页码 29-43

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.quaint.2016.10.026

关键词

-

资金

  1. Australian Archaeology Association
  2. Australian Research Council [DP150100487]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The delta O-18, Strontium/Calcium and Barium/Calcium values recorded in golden perch otoliths collected from two evaporative lakes, modern Lake Hope and ancient Lake Mungo, have been used to reconstruct changes in water composition and environmental conditions during the life of the fish. Lake Hope was filled by floodwaters in 1989 and 1990, then a period of lake drying was followed by a natural fish death event in 1994. Otoliths from these fish have delta O-18 profiles reflecting the earlier floods, and the progressive evaporation of the lake. Sr/Ca ratios start to follow the delta O-18 trend only after evaporation is well advanced, probably after the fish became stressed. Otoliths from a period of early human occupation at Lake Mungo, C-14 age range ca. 37-42 cal kBP, record a different history. Most otoliths show a relatively stable delta O-18 profile throughout the life of each fish, with no evidence of significant lake flooding or drying. Sr/Ca ratios are similarly stable, indicating that over a period of ca. 5 ka evaporation and inflow remained in relative balance. All the otoliths have high Ba/Ca ratios during the early years of the fish, likely a juvenile biological effect in common. The Mungo otoliths differ, in also showing a rise in Ba/Ca ratios in the outermost layers, as yet unexplained. One Mungo otolith, C-14 dated at ca. 19.3 cal kBP, does show evaporation and stress trends in delta O-18 and Sr/Ca ratios respectively, consistent with other evidence that Lake Mungo was subject to frequent drying at that time. (c) 2016 Elsevier Ltd and INQUA. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据