Age data for about 660 speleothems and about 140 spring-deposited travertines were collected, including many unpublished results. These data were plotted as histograms and also as error-weighted frequency curves on a 350,000-yr scale. These plots clearly show periods of increased speleothem/travertine growth as well as times of cessation. The periods of most frequent speleothem growth were between approximately 130,000 and 90,000 yr ago and since about 15,000 yr ago. Such periods before 150,000 yr ago, however, cannot be yet recognized because of a lack of sufficient data and the associated uncertainties of dates in this age range. A comparison with the oxygen-isotope record of deep-sea core V28–:238 shows a clear relationship, indicating that terrestrial calcite formation is controlled by paleoclimatic fluctuations. The evident climatic stimulation of Quaternary calcite formation is readily explained geochemically and is substantiated by the obvious difference in speleothem/travertine growth as a function of geographic position.

No abstract

No abstract

Dense speleothem samples are considered as closed systems and are, therefore, possibilities for any dating method. Four dating methods (14C, U/Th, paleomagnetism, and electron spin resonance = ESR) were used for samples up to 1,000,000 yr old and taken along a vertical flowstone profile in the Heggen cave in West Germany. Also δ18O and δ13C analyses were carried out.The reliability of the results of each method is dependent on the diagenetic processes that took place during the complex growth history of the flowstone. Speleothem growth was interrupted during glacial periods. During interglacial periods, at least the stalagmite growth rate was greater by one order of magnitude than during interstadial periods. During the periods of low interstadial growth rate various processes might have changed the 14C, 18O, and 13C concentrations, leaching might have removed uranium, recrystallization might have moved thorium several centimeters, and increased content of radon in the cave might have exaggerated the accumulated dose (AD) at the speleothem surface. As a result, 14C ages may be too small and U/Th as well as ESR data may be too large.

No abstract