2010
DOI: 10.1016/j.quageo.2009.01.004
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Optical luminescence dating of a loess section containing a critical tephra marker horizon, SW North Island of New Zealand

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
5

Citation Types

0
17
2

Year Published

2010
2010
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
4
2

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(19 citation statements)
references
References 30 publications
0
17
2
Order By: Relevance
“…26-28 ka (95% probability) for the KOT derived from the calibration of four optimum radiocarbon ( 14 C) ages which are consistent with, and supported by, independent tephrostratigraphic and palaeoenvironmental data (e.g., Lowe et al, 2008a). We do not agree that there is an "unresolved discrepancy between the two dating systems" as concluded by Grapes et al (2010) -available data suggest that the luminescence age is much more likely to be erroneous than the 14 C age. In our criticisms we firstly comment on the presentation and analysis of the luminescence ages.…”
Section: Introductioncontrasting
confidence: 39%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…26-28 ka (95% probability) for the KOT derived from the calibration of four optimum radiocarbon ( 14 C) ages which are consistent with, and supported by, independent tephrostratigraphic and palaeoenvironmental data (e.g., Lowe et al, 2008a). We do not agree that there is an "unresolved discrepancy between the two dating systems" as concluded by Grapes et al (2010) -available data suggest that the luminescence age is much more likely to be erroneous than the 14 C age. In our criticisms we firstly comment on the presentation and analysis of the luminescence ages.…”
Section: Introductioncontrasting
confidence: 39%
“…19 ka for the KOT. Secondly, we suggest some possible reasons (additional to those of Grapes et al, 2010) as to why the IRSL ages for the KOT, and possibly loess samples more generally, could be underestimated. Thirdly, we outline tephrostratigraphic and palaeoenvironmental considerations relating to the age of the KOT and show that an age of ca.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 79%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Growing suspicion about whether the adopted age of KOT is accurate has arisen from (i) detailed radiocarbon chronologies from LGM lake sediments (e.g. Newnham et al, 2007a;Vandergoes et al, in this issue), and (ii) OSL ages of KOT in loess Grapes et al, 2010aGrapes et al, , 2010b. Here we present results from recent sampling and dating of carbonised wood within the ignimbrite, intact and in situ plant remains overwhelmed by distal tephra-fall deposits, and organic material from undisturbed lake sediment enclosing the tephra layer.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%