2018
DOI: 10.1017/qua.2018.12
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Rapid age assessment of glacial landforms in the Pyrenees using Schmidt hammer exposure dating (SHED)

Abstract: Link to publication record in Manchester Research Explorer Citation for published version (APA):Tomkins, M., Dortch, J., Hughes, P., Huck, J., Stimson, A., Delmas, M., Calvet, M., & Pallas, R. (2018). Rapid age assessment of glacial landforms in the Pyrenees using Schmidt Hammer exposure dating (SHED). Quaternary Research, 90(1), 26-37. https://doi. ABSTRACT 22Schmidt Hammer (SH) sampling of 54 10 Be dated granite surfaces from the Pyrenees reveals a clear 23 relationship between exposure and weathering throug… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

2
34
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 45 publications
(36 citation statements)
references
References 51 publications
2
34
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Unfortunately, geochronological data from Lough Nahanagan are clearly conflicting and indicate moraine deposition at either 11.5–11.6 ka ( n = 2; 14 C), 17.9 ± 1.0 ka ( n = 1; 36 Cl) or between 9.7 and 21.7 ka ( n = 3; 10 Be). While the limited number of samples ( n = 6) prevents statistically robust identification and rejection of erroneous results (Tomkins et al ., ), and in turn independent verification of SHED data at this site, the observed age scatter does highlight the importance of pre‐ or post‐depositional processes at Lough Nahanagan, with uncertainty introduced by moraine stabilization (Hallet and Putkonen, ), nuclide inheritance (Putkonen and Swanson, ) or a combination of both. At Kelly's Lough, 10 Be ages ( n = 6; Barth et al ., ) are also probably influenced by geological uncertainty and are non‐normally distributed, with ages of 9.5–9.7 ka ( n = 2), 11.2–11.7 ka ( n = 3) and one outlier age of 137 ± 7 ka.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 57%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…Unfortunately, geochronological data from Lough Nahanagan are clearly conflicting and indicate moraine deposition at either 11.5–11.6 ka ( n = 2; 14 C), 17.9 ± 1.0 ka ( n = 1; 36 Cl) or between 9.7 and 21.7 ka ( n = 3; 10 Be). While the limited number of samples ( n = 6) prevents statistically robust identification and rejection of erroneous results (Tomkins et al ., ), and in turn independent verification of SHED data at this site, the observed age scatter does highlight the importance of pre‐ or post‐depositional processes at Lough Nahanagan, with uncertainty introduced by moraine stabilization (Hallet and Putkonen, ), nuclide inheritance (Putkonen and Swanson, ) or a combination of both. At Kelly's Lough, 10 Be ages ( n = 6; Barth et al ., ) are also probably influenced by geological uncertainty and are non‐normally distributed, with ages of 9.5–9.7 ka ( n = 2), 11.2–11.7 ka ( n = 3) and one outlier age of 137 ± 7 ka.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 57%
“…Moreover, given the long timescales of exposure (≥11 ka) and limited climatic variability across the relatively small mountain range (∼220 km 2 ), any differences in surface R ‐values due to lithology will probably be significantly smaller than the effect of variable exposure age. This interpretation is supported by large spatial scale 10 Be‐SH calibration curves from the British Isles (Tomkins et al , , ; n = 54; R 2 = 0.94, p < 0.01) and the Pyrenees (Tomkins et al , ; n = 52; R 2 = 0.96, p < 0.01) which indicate that the primary control on surface R ‐values is cumulative exposure to subaerial weathering. Instrument calibration (correction factor = 1.017) and age calibration (correction factor = 0.992) were performed using the SHED‐Earth online calculator (http://shed.earth) following the recommendations of Dortch et al .…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 87%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…In the Maladeta-Aneto Massif, there is a complete absence of tills between the innermost YD moraines and those of the LIA. Furthermore, some samples taken from polished areas recently deglaciated, upstream of the LIA moraines, delivered 10 Be exposure ages between 4.8 and 7.9 ka (Crest et al 2017), and Schmidt Hammer Exposure dating (SHED) between 4.1 and 5.2 (Tomkins et al 2018), demonstrating the strong heritage from the first half of the Holocene, and the relatively low erosive effect of the LIA glaciers. Nevertheless, geomorphological field work suggests the possible presence of moraines arising during the first Neoglacial pulses, for instance, the northern face of the Tendeñera Massif.…”
Section: Pre-lia Glacial Evolutionmentioning
confidence: 99%