Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-7jgsp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-30T19:43:41.523Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Improved moraine age interpretations through explicit matching of geomorphic process models to cosmogenic nuclide measurements from single landforms

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Patrick J. Applegate ,
Nathan M. Urban ,
Klaus Keller ,
Thomas V. Lowell ,
Benjamin J.C. Laabs ,
Meredith A. Kelly  and
Richard B. Alley
Patrick J. Applegate*
Affiliation:
Department of Geosciences, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802, USA
Nathan M. Urban
Affiliation:
Department of Geosciences, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802, USA
Klaus Keller
Affiliation:
Department of Geosciences, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802, USA Earth and Environmental Systems Institute, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802, USA
Thomas V. Lowell
Affiliation:
Department of Geology, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH 45221, USA
Benjamin J.C. Laabs
Affiliation:
Department of Geological Sciences, State University of New York at Geneseo, Geneseo, NY 14454, USA
Meredith A. Kelly
Affiliation:
Department of Earth Sciences, Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH 03755, USA
Richard B. Alley
Affiliation:
Department of Geosciences, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802, USA
*
*Corresponding author at: Bert Bolin Climate Centre and Department of Physical Geography and Quaternary Geology, Stockholm University, S106-91 Stockholm, Sweden. E-mail address:patrick.applegate@natgeo.su.se (P.J. Applegate)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The statistical distributions of cosmogenic nuclide measurements from moraine boulders contain previously unused information on moraine ages, and they help determine whether moraine degradation or inheritance is more important on individual moraines. Here, we present a method for extracting this information by fitting geomorphic process models to observed exposure ages from single moraines. We also apply this method to 94 10Be apparent exposure ages from 11 moraines reported in four published studies. Our models represent 10Be accumulation in boulders that are exhumed over time by slope processes (moraine degradation), and the delivery of boulders with preexisting 10Be inventories to moraines (inheritance). For now, we neglect boulder erosion and snow cover, which are likely second-order processes. Given a highly scattered data set, we establish which model yields the better fit to the data, and estimate the age of the moraine from the better model fit. The process represented by the better-fitting model is probably responsible for most of the scatter among the apparent ages. Our methods should help resolve controversies in exposure dating; we reexamine the conclusions from two published studies based on our model fits.

Keywords

CosmogenicExposure datingStatistical distributionMoraineBoulderPaleoglaciologyGlacial geomorphologyHillslopeProcess geomorphology

Information

Type
Original Articles
Information
Quaternary Research , Volume 77 , Issue 2 , March 2012 , pp. 293 - 304
Copyright
University of Washington

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

1 Now in the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08544, USA.

References

Applegate, P.J. Alley, R.B. 2011, Challenges in the use of cosmogenic exposure dating of moraine boulders to trace the geographic extents of abrupt climate changes: the Younger Dryas example. Rashid, H. Polyak, L. Mosley-Thompson, E. Understanding the Causes, Mechanisms, and Extents of Abrupt Climate Changes. AGU Geophysical Monograph.Google Scholar
Applegate, P.J. Lowell, T.V. Alley, R.B. 2008, Comment on “Absence of cooling in New Zealand and the adjacent ocean during the Younger Dryas chronozone”. Science 320, 746d.Google Scholar
Applegate, P.J. Urban, N.M. Laabs, B.J.C. Keller, K. Alley, R.B. 2010, Modeling the statistical distributions of cosmogenic exposure dates from moraines. Geoscientific Model Development 3, 297–307Available online atwww.geosci-model-dev.net/3/293/2010accessed 1 June 2011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Balco, G. 2011, Contributions and unrealized potential contributions of cosmogenic-nuclide exposure dating to glacier chronology, 1990–2010. Quaternary Science Reviews 30, 3–27.Google Scholar
Balco, G. Schaefer, J.M. 2006, Cosmogenic-nuclide and varve chronologies for the deglaciation of southern New England. Quaternary Geochronology 1, 15–28.Google Scholar
Balco, G. Stone, J.O. Lifton, N.A. Dunai, T.J. 2008, A complete and easily accessible means of calculating surface ages or erosion rates from 10Be and 26Al measurements. Quaternary Geochronology 3, 174–195.Google Scholar
Barrows, T.T. Lehman, S.J. Fifield, L.K. de Deckker, P. 2007, Absence of cooling in New Zealand and the adjacent ocean during the Younger Dryas chronozone. Science 318, 86–89.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barrows, T.T. Lehman, S.J. Fifield, L.K. de Deckker, P. 2008, Response to comment on “Absence of cooling in New Zealand and the adjacent ocean during the Younger Dryas chronozone”. Science 320, 746e.Google Scholar
Benson, L. Madole, R. Phillips, W. Landis, G. Thomas, T. Kubik, P. 2004, The probable importance of snow and sediment shielding on cosmogenic ages of north-central Colorado Pinedale and pre-Pinedale moraines. Quaternary Science Reviews 23, 193–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benson, L. Madole, R. Landis, G. Gosse, J. 2005, New data for late Pleistocene Pinedale alpine glaciation from southwestern Colorado. Quaternary Science Reviews 24, 49–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bevington, P.R. Robinson, D.K. 2003, Data Reduction and Error Analysis for the Physical Sciences. McGraw-Hill 336 pp.Google Scholar
Brown, E.T. Bendick, R. Bourlés, D.L. Gaur, V. Molnar, P. Raisbeck, G.M. 2002, Slip rates of the Karakorum Fault, Ladakh, India, determined using cosmic ray exposure dating of debris flows and moraines. Journal of Geophysical Research 107, B9 2192 http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2000JB000100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, E.T. Molnar, P. Bourlés, D.L. 2005, Comment on “Slip-rate measurements on the Karakorum Fault may imply secular variations in fault motion”. Science 309, 1326b.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chamberlin, T.C. 1897, The method of multiple working hypotheses. Journal of Geology 5, 837–848.Google Scholar
Chambers, J.M. Cleveland, W.S. Tukey, P.A. Kleiner, B. 1983, Graphical Methods for Data Analysis. Duxbury 395 pp.Google Scholar
Chevalier, M.-L. Ryerson, F.J. Tapponier, P. Finkel, R.C. van der Woerd, J. Haibing, L. Qing, L. 2005a, Slip-rate measurements on the Karakorum Fault may imply secular variations in fault motion. Science 307, 411–414.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chevalier, M.-L. Ryerson, F.J. Tapponier, P. Finkel, R.C. van der Woerd, J. Haibing, L. Qing, L. 2005b, Response to comment on “Slip-rate measurements on the Karakorum Fault may imply secular variations in fault motion”. Science 309, 1326c.Google Scholar
Chevalier, M.L. Hilley, G. Tapponier, P. van der Woerd, J. Liu-Zeng, J. Finkel, R.C. Ryerson, F.J. Li, H. Liu, X. 2011, Constraints on the late Quaternary glaciations in Tibet from cosmogenic exposure ages of moraine surfaces. Quaternary Science Reviews 30, 528–554.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clauset, A. Shalizi, C.R. Newman, M.E.J. 2009, Power-law distributions in empirical data. SIAM Review 51, 4 661–703 http://dx.doi.org/10.1137/070710111 arXiv:0706.1062.Google Scholar
Colman, S.M. Pierce, K.L. Birkeland, P.W. 1987, Suggested terminology for Quaternary dating methods. Quaternary Research 28, 314–319.Google Scholar
Croarkin, C. Tobias, P. 2006, NIST/SEMATECH e1book of statistical methods. Available online athttp://www.itl.nist.gov/div898/handbook/accessed 18 September 2009.Google Scholar
Denton, G.H. Hendy, C.H. 1994, Younger Dryas age advance of Franz Josef Glacier in the Southern Alps of New Zealand. Science 264, 1434–1437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunne, J. Elmore, D. Muzikar, P. 1999, Scaling factors for the rates of production of cosmogenic nuclides for geometric shielding and attenuation at depth on sloped surfaces. Geomorphology 27, 3–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gosse, J.C. Phillips, F.M. 2001, Terrestrial in situ cosmogenic nuclides: theory and application. Quaternary Science Reviews 20, 1475–1560.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gosse, J.C. Evenson, E.B. Klein, J. Sorenson, C. 2003, Cosmogenic nuclide glacial chronology in the Wind River Range, Wyoming. Easterbrook, D. Quaternary Geology of the United States: INQUA 2003 Field Guide Volume. Desert Research Institute Reno, Nevada 438.Google Scholar
Granger, D.E. Muzikar, P.F. 2001, Dating sediment burial with in situ-produced cosmogenic nuclides: theory, techniques, and limitations. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 188, 269–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Håkansson, L. Briner, J. Alexanderson, H. Aldahan, A. Possnert, G. 2007, 10Be ages from central east Greenland constrain the extent of the Greenland ice sheet during the Last Glacial Maximum. Quaternary Science Reviews 26, 2316–2321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hallet, B. Putkonen, J. 1994, Surface dating of dynamic landforms: young boulders on aging moraines. Science 265, 937–940.Google Scholar
Hanks, T. 2000, The age of scarplike landforms from diffusion-equation analysis. Noller, J.S. Sowers, J.M. Lettis, W.R. Quaternary Geochronology: Methods and Applications. American Geophysical Union Reference Shelf 4, American Geophysical Union 582.Google Scholar
Heyman, J. Stroeven, A.P. Harbor, J.M. Caffee, M.W. 2011, Too young or too old: evaluating cosmogenic exposure dating based on an analysis of compiled boulder exposure ages. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 302, 71–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hilborn, R. Mangel, M. 1997, The Ecological Detective: Confronting Models with Data. Princeton University Press 330 pp.Google Scholar
Ivy-Ochs, S. Kerschner, H. Schlüchter, C. 2007, Cosmogenic nuclides and the dating of lateglacial and early Holocene glacier variations: the Alpine perspective. Quaternary International 164–165, 53–63.Google Scholar
Kaplan, M.R. Miller, G.H. 2003, Early Holocene delevelling and deglaciation of the Cumberland Sound region, Baffin Island, Arctic Canada. Geological Society of America Bulletin 115, 445–462.Google Scholar
Kelly, M.A. Lowell, T.V. Hall, B.L. Schaefer, J.M. Finkel, R.C. Goehring, B.M. Alley, R.B. Denton, G.H. 2008, A 10Be chronology of lateglacial and Holocene mountain glaciation in the Scoresby Sund region, east Greenland: implications for seasonality during late glacial time. Quaternary Science Reviews 27, 2273–2282.Google Scholar
Laabs, B.J.C. Refsnider, K.A. Munroe, J.S. Mickelson, D.M. Applegate, P.J. Singer, B.S. Caffee, M.W. 2009, Latest Pleistocene glacial chronology of the Uinta Mountains: support for moisture-driven asynchrony of the last deglaciation. Quaternary Science Reviews 28, 1171–1187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lal, D. 1991, Cosmic ray labeling of erosion surfaces: in situ nuclide production rates and erosion models. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 104, 424–439.Google Scholar
Munroe, J.S. Laabs, B.J.C. Shakun, J.D. Singer, B.S. Mickelson, D.M. Refsnider, K.A. Caffee, M.W. 2006, Latest Pleistocene advance of alpine glaciers in the southwest Uinta Mountains, Utah, USA: evidence for the influence of local moisture sources. Geology 34, 841–844.Google Scholar
Murphy, E.A. 1964, One cause? Many causes? The argument from the bimodal distribution. Journal of Chronic Diseases 17, 301–324.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Muzikar, P. 2009, General models for episodic surface denudation and its measurement by cosmogenic nuclides. Quaternary Geochronology 4, 50–55.Google Scholar
Muzikar, P. Elmore, D. Granger, D.E. 2003, Accelerator mass spectrometry in geological research. Geological Society of America Bulletin 115, 643–654.Google Scholar
Pelletier, J.D. DeLong, S.B. Al-Suwaidi, A.H. Cline, M. Lewis, Y. Psillas, J.L. Yanites, B. 2006, Evolution of the Bonneville shoreline scarp in west-central Utah: comparison of scarp-analysis methods and implications for the diffusion model of hillslope evolution. Geomorphology 74, 257–270.Google Scholar
Phillips, F.M. Zreda, M.G. Smith, S.S. Elmore, D. Kubik, P.W. Sharma, P. 1990, Cosmogenic chlorine-36 chronology for glacial deposits at Bloody Canyon, eastern Sierra Nevada. Science 248, 1529–1532.Google Scholar
Phillips, F.M. Ayarbe, J.P. Harrison, J.B.J. Elmore, D. 2003, Dating rupture events on alluvial fault scarps using cosmogenic nuclides and scarp morphology. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 215, 203–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Press, W.H. Teukolsky, S.A. Vetterling, W.T. Flannery, B.P. 1992, Numerical Recipes in Fortran 77. 2nd ed.Cambridge 927 pp.Google Scholar
Price, K.V. Storn, R.M. Lampinen, J.A. 2005, Differential Evolution: A Practical Approach to Global Optimization. Springer 538 pp.Google Scholar
Putkonen, J. O'Neal, M. 2006, Degradation of unconsolidated Quaternary landforms in the western North America. Geomorphology 75, 408–419.Google Scholar
Putkonen, J. Swanson, T. 2003, Accuracy of cosmogenic ages for moraines. Quaternary Research 59, 255–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Putnam, A.E. Schaefer, J.M. Barrell, D.J.A. Vandergoes, M. Denton, G.H. Kaplan, M.R. Finkel, R.C. Schwartz, R. Goehring, B.M. Kelley, S.E. 2010, In situ cosmogenic 10Be production-rate calibration from the Southern Alps, New Zealand. Quartenary Geochronology 5, 392–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saltelli, A. Ratto, M. Andres, T. Campolongo, F. Cariboni, J. Gatelli, D. Saisana, M. Tarantola, S. 2008, Global Sensitivity Analysis: The Primer. Wiley-Interscience 304 pp.Google Scholar
Schildgen, T.F. Phillips, W.M. Purves, R.S. 2005, Simulation of snow shielding corrections for cosmogenic nuclide surface exposure studies. Geomorphology 64, 67–85.Google Scholar
Shulmeister, J. Davies, T.R.H. Alexander, D.J. 2010, Comment on “Glacial advance and stagnation caused by rock avalanches” by Vacco, D. A., Alley, R. B., and Pollard, D. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 297, 700–701.Google Scholar
Smith, J.A. Finkel, R.C. Farber, D.L. Rodbell, D.T. Seltzer, G.O. 2005, Moraine preservation and boulder erosion in the tropical Andes: interpreting old surface exposure ages in glaciated valleys. Journal of Quaternary Science 20, 735–758.Google Scholar
Tovar, D.S. Shulmeister, J. Davies, T.R. 2008, Evidence for a landslide origin of New Zealand's Waiho Loop moraine. Nature Geoscience 1, 524–526.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Turney, C.S.M. Roberts, R.G. de Jonge, N. Prior, C. Wilmshurst, J.M. McGlone, M.S. Cooper, J. 2007, Redating the advance of the New Zealand Franz Josef Glacier during the Last Termination: evidence for asynchronous climate change. Quaternary Science Reviews 26, 3037–3042.Google Scholar
Urban, N.M. Fricker, T.E. 2010, A comparison of Latin hypercube and grid ensemble designs for the multivariate emulation of an Earth system model. Computers and Geosciences 36, 746–755.Google Scholar
Vacco, D.A. Alley, R.B. Pollard, D. 2010a, Glacial advance and stagnation caused by rock avalanches. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 294, 123–130.Google Scholar
Vacco, D.A. Alley, R.B. Pollard, D. 2010b, Reply to Shulmeister et al. comment on “Glacial advance and stagnation caused by rock avalanches”. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 298, 450.Google Scholar
Zech, R. Glaser, B. Sosin, P. Kubik, P.W. Zech, W. 2005, Evidence for long-lasting landform surface instability on hummocky moraines in the Pamir Mountains (Tajikistan) from 10Be surface exposure dating. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 237, 453–461.Google Scholar
Zimmerman, S.G. Evenson, E.B. Gosse, J.C. Erskine, C.P. 1994, Extensive boulder erosion resulting from a range fire on the type-Pinedale moraines, Fremont Lake, Wyoming. Quaternary Research 42, 255–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zreda, M.G. Phillips, F.M. 1994, Cosmogenic 36Cl accumulation in unstable landforms 2. Simulations and measurements on eroding moraines. Water Resources Research 30, 3127–3136.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: PDF

Applegate et al. Supplementary Material

Supplementary Material

Download Applegate et al. Supplementary Material(PDF)
PDF 1.3 MB