The Eurasian mammoth distribution during the second half of the Late Pleistocene and the Holocene: Regional aspects

Abstract

a b s t r a c tBased on geographic information (database PALEOFAUNA), in combination with 14 C and other methods of paleo dating (1584 localities, 4033 dates, including 1501 direct dates), we first examined details of changes of mammoth distribution in Eurasia on the whole and in single parts of the range over the last 50ky. The analysis of regional features in the dynamics of mammoth range and the quantity of dated localities acknowledged a leading role of the climatic (environmental) factor in these processes. The maximum size of the Eurasian range, the largest number of remains of mammoths from dated localities and, probably, the maximum total number of population were established for the range of 38.2 e8.6 cal ky BP (Denekamp interstadial ¼ Bryansk interstadial). In Western and Central Europe, the increase of population was observed during Huneborg stadial (40.8e38.2 cal ky BP). In eastern Siberia, the maximum population growth occurred in the Last Glacial Maximum (28.6e22.5 cal ky BP), and in Western Siberia e during Deglaciation (22.5e14.7 cal ky BP). The population dynamics at the periphery of the range (Islands of Japan, British Isles, Northern Europe, Southern Siberia and Northern China, and, but to lesser extent, South-Eastern Europe) differs from the dynamics of its main part. The southernmost parts of the range e Southern Siberia and southeastern Europe experienced similar changes. Population dynamics in the Iberian Peninsula was much alike the changes in Western and Central Europe. We suggested that some peripheral populations could periodically be isolated from the populations of the main part of the range. Direct calibrated radiocarbon dates fixed upper boundary of extinction of this species in different parts of range within time interval from 21 (the Iberian Peninsula) to 4 (northeastern Siberia) thousands years BP. The hypotheses about the causes of the dynamics of the area and population of the mammoth in Eurasia, including those related to the extinction of certain genetic lines of a mammoth in the Late Pleistocene, are being discussed.

Reframing the mammoth steppe: Insights from analysis of isotopic niches

“…By the start of the Holocene, many megafauna species on the mammoth steppe were extinct or had been extirpated, and the ecosystem as a whole was lost. Loss of habitat or dietary niche has been suggested as a partial or entire cause of these extinctions (Barnosky et al, 2004;Koch and Barnosky, 2006;Shapiro et al, 2004;Řičánková et al, 2018;Puzachenko et al, 2017).…”

The impact of Last Glacial climate variability in west-European loess revealed by radiocarbon dating of fossil earthworm granules

“…The only two exceptions are related to low sedimentation rates during the Middle Pleniglacial. The tundra gley Gm3, which is twice the thickness of Gm2 and Gm1, most likely stacks two successive tundra gleys formed during GI 11 and GI 10 (i.e., during the Hengelo interstadial) (36,37). Similarly, the Lohne Soil appears likely as a stack of two soil horizons developed during GI 8 and GI 7c (i.e., during the initial phase of the Denekamp interstadial complex) (36).…”

Impact of climate and humans on the range dynamics of the woolly mammoth (Mammuthus primigenius) in Europe during MIS 2

“…However, the degree of precision in reconstruction of the late Pleistocene species’ range dynamics, migrations, and extinction events is related to the number of direct dates available for analysis. Among late Pleistocene large mammals the largest number of direct dates is available for the woolly mammoth ( Mammuthus primigenius ) (more than 1500 dates, according to Puzachenko et al [2017]); moreover, every year new dates are published. In the last decades, an increase in the number of direct radiocarbon dates on mammoth remains has allowed researchers to correlate shifts in distribution with even minor climatic events (e.g., Stuart et al, 2002, 2004; Lorenzen et al, 2011; Nadachowski et al, 2011; Ukkonen et al, 2011).…”

“…For this purpose, we gathered direct radiocarbon dates of the woolly mammoth and plotted them against the latitude of sites and the short climatic intervals distinguished within MIS 2 in Europe (Rasmussen et al, 2014). The problem of defining the changes in the European distribution of the mammoth has been addressed recently by Markova et al (2013) and Puzachenko et al (2017); however, in these studies the quality of radiocarbon dates was not evaluated. What is more, they tracked changes of mammoth distribution within relatively long time intervals (e.g., the last glacial maximum [LGM] defined as the period between Greenland stadial [GS] 4 and GS-2.1).…”