Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-shngb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-08T14:21:00.073Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Implications of the geochemistry of L1LL1 (MIS2) loess in Poland for paleoenvironment and new normalizing values for loess-focused multi-elemental analyses

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 January 2024

Jacek Skurzyński*
Affiliation:
Institute of Geography and Regional Development, University of Wrocław, 1 Uniwersytecki Sqr., 50-137 Wrocław, Poland
Zdzisław Jary
Affiliation:
Institute of Geography and Regional Development, University of Wrocław, 1 Uniwersytecki Sqr., 50-137 Wrocław, Poland
Kaja Fenn
Affiliation:
Department of Geography and Planning, University of Liverpool, Liverpool L69 7ZT, UK
Frank Lehmkuhl
Affiliation:
Department of Geography, Wüllnerstr. 5b, RWTH Aachen University, 52062 Aachen, Germany
Jerzy Raczyk
Affiliation:
Institute of Geography and Regional Development, University of Wrocław, 1 Uniwersytecki Sqr., 50-137 Wrocław, Poland
Thomas Stevens
Affiliation:
Department of Earth Sciences, Uppsala University, Villavägen 16, Uppsala, 75236, Sweden
Małgorzata Wieczorek
Affiliation:
Institute of Geography and Regional Development, University of Wrocław, 1 Uniwersytecki Sqr., 50-137 Wrocław, Poland
*
Corresponding author: Jacek Skurzyński; Email: jacek.skurzynski@uwr.edu.pl
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Loess paleoenvironmental reconstructions on regional to supra-regional scales have recently gained much attention. Geochemistry comparisons in relation to reference datasets, such as the Upper Continental Crust (UCC) data, have furthered our understanding of the climatic and geomorphological conditions under which terrestrial sites have developed. However, UCC data differs from loess, thereby obscuring important features, and the existing “average loess” datasets also are not sufficient for modern investigations.

In this study, we examine the youngest Polish loess (L1LL1 = MIS 2, ca. 26–15 ka) for its suitability as a new, loess-focused reference dataset. Eighty-nine samples from seven sites were analyzed, using inductively coupled plasma spectrometry. The loess had assumedly been homogenized during transportation and/or sedimentary recycling (LaN/SmN = 3.34–4.06, median 3.78; Eu/Eu* = 0.46–0.66, median 0.55; GdN/YbN = 1.08–1.49, median 1.26), and weakly affected by pre- or post-depositional weathering (CIA = 53.64–69.12, median 57.69). The statistically significant differences between sites in elemental medians were mostly conditioned by variations in grain size and in the “fresh” to “re-deposited” sediment ratio. Nonetheless, the overall geochemical composition homogeneity provided a basis for the estimation of Polish Median Loess (PML) data, as determined for 41 chemical elements. When used, PML data highlight differences between loess regions in Europe, thereby providing a tool for cross-continental comparisons.

Information

Type
Research Article
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution and reproduction, provided the original article is properly cited.
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Quaternary Research Center
Figure 0

Figure 1. (A) Location of the research sites on a map of loess distribution in Poland and (B) Europe. Loess distribution after Lehmkuhl et al. (2021).

Figure 1

Figure 2. Schemes of the main research sites. Abbreviations: STR = stratigraphy; L+S = lithology + samples; A = ages (expressed as ka); S0 = recent soil; L1LL1 = loess correlated to MIS 2; L1SS1 = paleosol correlated to MIS 3; L1LL2 = loess correlated to MIS 4; S1 = paleosol complex correlated to MIS 5; U.M.* = underlying material. Stratigraphical labeling system after Kukla and An (1989), modified by Marković et al. (2008, 2015). Dark gray rectangles = soil units; pale gray rectangles = horizons with signs of gley processes or deformation; pale grey rectangle with black squiggles = loess with gley and humic intercalations; black spots = geochemical samples. Ages after Moska et al. (2017, 2018, 2019a) – Post-IR IRSL polymineral fraction (4–11 μm).

Figure 2

Figure 3. The variability of the main elements (100 wt. % without the volatile components) at the research sites. Vertical gray dashed lines represent GAL values (Újvári et al., 2008) for individual oxides. The main pedo- and lithostratigraphic units are also indicated. See Figure 2 for lithologic legend.

Figure 3

Figure 4. Variability of trace elements (ppm) at the research sites. The main pedo- and lithostratigraphic units are also indicated. See Figure 2 for lithologic legend.

Figure 4

Figure 5. Variability of the rare earth elements (ppm) at the research sites. The main pedo- and lithostratigraphic units are also indicated. See Figure 2 for lithologic legend.

Figure 5

Figure 6. A–CN–K ternary diagram (Nesbitt and Young, 1984) of the Polish loess samples. CaO* (Ca in silicates) was calculated according to McLennan (1993). Dashed lines = CIA values of 65 and 85. Stratigraphical labeling system after Kukla and An (1989), modified by Marković et al. (2008, 2015).

Figure 6

Figure 7. UCC-normalized multielement spidergrams for Polish loess. Each curve represents one sample. Ni is not shown because of its presence only in some samples. The UCC values used are from Rudnick and Gao (2003).

Figure 7

Figure 8. Th/Sc vs Zr/Sc discrimination diagram of sedimentary recycling (McLennan et al., 1993) for Polish loess. Explanations: A = BK 3.8–5.3; ZŁ 6.05–6.9; TY 10.45–11.35, 12.95, and 13.9–14.6; OD 2.5 m. B = BK 1.36–3.6 (except 2.06 and 2.25); ZŁ 2.6 and 5.25; OD 3.3 m. C = BK 2.06 and 2.25; ZŁ 1.75 and 4.65; TY 6–6.65 m, 8.8, 9.55–10, 12.25–12.55, 13.35; ST = 5; ZA = 1.2 m, D = ZŁ 0.55–1.4, 2.2, 3.3–4, 5.05, 5.45–5.6; OD 0.9–1.8; ST 3.2–3.8; ZA–1.5 m. E = TY 1–5.35, 7.15 8.15, 9.1, 11.75–11.95; ST 4.4, 7.3–9.3; ZA = 1.65 m. Zoomed area is not in the scale.

Figure 8

Figure 9. Box plots of GdN/YbN values of Polish and European loess; red squares = medians; whiskers = ranges of values; frames = 25–75% of values. Explanations of data from literature (colored polygons): red rectangle (data from Bosq et al., 2020) shows samples from Rhine (Achenheim, Nussloch) and Rhône (Baix, Bouzil, Brillanne, Collias, Cuges les Pins, Donnat, Lautagne, Mauves, Pact, Serezin du Rhône, Saint Julien de Peyrolas, Saint Paul les Durance, Vaise); yellow rectangle (data from Bosq et al., 2020) shows samples from northern France (Quesnoy, Hauteville), Germany–Saxony (Rottewitz), Rhine (Schaffhouse), Serbia (Surduk), Rhône (Feyzin, Garons, Lautagne, Ledenon, Montanay, Saint-Péray, Sathonay, Saint Cyr au Mont d'Or, Saint-Désirat, Saint Georges les Bains, Soyons, Tain l'Hermitage); green rectangle (data from Bosq et al., 2020) shows samples from northern France (Beutin, Glos, Nisy le Comte, Sourdon, Verlinghem, Chaudon, Havrincourt, Renancourt, Villers Carbonnel), Aquitaine (Pomarez, Romentères), Belgium (Harmignies), Ukraine (Korshiv), eastern Germany (Ostrau), Poland (Tyszowce, Złota); blue rectangle (data from Rousseau et al., 2014) shows samples from western Germany (Nussloch; samples from following depths: 5, 6, 7.9, 9.5, 10.3, 12, 14.1, 17.8 m), western Europe (Pleneuf Val Andre, Languevoisin), Serbia (Surduk); gray rectangle (data from Rousseau et al., 2014) shows samples from western Europe (English Channel, Villers Carbonel, Harmignies), eastern Germany (Gleina, Leippen, Ostrau, Seilitz, Zehren, Zeuchfeld), Ukraine (Stayky).

Figure 9

Table 1. Polish median loess (PML; this study) versus UCC (Rudnick and Gao, 2003), AVL1 (Schnetger, 1992; Újvári et al., 2008), however the AVL1 presented by Újvári et al., 2008, lacks the values for Co, Cs, Hf, Ta, U, W, Pr, Nd, Sm, Eu, Gd, Tb, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm, Yb, and Lu, so these elements are cited after original average loess presented by Schnetger (1992), and GAL (Újvári et al., 2008). Major elements (wt.%) are recalculated on a volatile-free basis. Total iron is expressed as Fe2O3 (Fe2O3 value of AVL1 in this study was recalculated from FeO(tot) = 2.78% as presented by Újvári et al., 2008). Schnetger (1992) reported FeO (= 0.8%) and Fe2O3 (= 2.2%) separately. Trace elements and REE are in ppm. The color scale was developed using the conditional formatting function of MS Excel: the red–yellow–green color scale indicates the position of a given value in the entire range of values in a given column (red = high values; yellow = medium values; green = low values). N/D means no data.

Figure 10

Figure 10. UCC-normalized and PML-normalized multielement spidergrams for loess samples from Korshiv (Ukraine) and Surduk (Serbia) (geochemical data used for normalization after Bosq et al., 2020). Each curve represents one sample. Ni is not shown because of its presence only in some samples. The UCC values used are from Rudnick and Gao (2003), PML values are from this study.

Supplementary material: File

Skurzyński et al. supplementary material 1

Skurzyński et al. supplementary material
Download Skurzyński et al. supplementary material 1(File)
File 1.2 MB
Supplementary material: File

Skurzyński et al. supplementary material 2

Skurzyński et al. supplementary material
Download Skurzyński et al. supplementary material 2(File)
File 108.2 KB