Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-4ws75 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-09T10:22:01.396Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

A multimethod dating study of ancient permafrost, Batagay megaslump, east Siberia

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 June 2021

Julian B. Murton*
Affiliation:
Permafrost Laboratory, Department of Geography, University of Sussex, Brighton BN1 9RH, UK
Thomas Opel
Affiliation:
Alfred Wegener Institute, Helmholtz Centre for Polar and Marine Research, 14473 Potsdam, Germany
Phillip Toms
Affiliation:
Luminescence Dating Laboratory, School of Natural and Social Sciences, University of Gloucestershire, Cheltenham GL50 4AZ, UK
Alexander Blinov
Affiliation:
Physics, Nanotechnology and Telecommunication Institute, Peter the Great St. Petersburg Polytechnic University, 195251 St. Petersburg, Russia
Margret Fuchs
Affiliation:
Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Helmholtz Institute Freiberg for Resource Technology, 09599 Freiberg, Germany
Jamie Wood
Affiliation:
Luminescence Dating Laboratory, School of Natural and Social Sciences, University of Gloucestershire, Cheltenham GL50 4AZ, UK
Andreas Gärtner
Affiliation:
Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, 01328 Dresden, Germany
Silke Merchel
Affiliation:
Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, 01328 Dresden, Germany
Georg Rugel
Affiliation:
Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, 01328 Dresden, Germany
Grigoriy Savvinov
Affiliation:
Science Research Institute of Applied Ecology of the North, North-East Federal University, 677007 Yakutsk, Russia
Sebastian Wetterich
Affiliation:
Alfred Wegener Institute, Helmholtz Centre for Polar and Marine Research, 14473 Potsdam, Germany
*
*Corresponding author at: Permafrost Laboratory, Department of Geography, University of Sussex, Brighton BN1 9RH, UK. E-mail address: j.b.murton@sussex.ac.uk (J.B. Murton).
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Dating of ancient permafrost is essential for understanding long-term permafrost stability and interpreting palaeoenvironmental conditions but presents substantial challenges to geochronology. Here, we apply four methods to permafrost from the megaslump at Batagay, east Siberia: (1) optically stimulated luminescence (OSL) dating of quartz, (2) post-infrared infrared-stimulated luminescence (pIRIR) dating of K-feldspar, (3) radiocarbon dating of organic material, and (4) 36Cl/Cl dating of ice wedges. All four chronometers produce stratigraphically consistent and comparable ages. However, OSL appears to date Marine Isotope Stage (MIS) 3 to MIS 2 deposits more reliably than pIRIR, whereas the latter is more consistent with 36Cl/Cl ages for older deposits. The lower ice complex developed at least 650 ka, potentially during MIS 16, and represents the oldest dated permafrost in western Beringia and the second-oldest known ice in the Northern Hemisphere. It has survived multiple interglaciations, including the super-interglaciation MIS 11c, though a thaw unconformity and erosional surface indicate at least one episode of permafrost thaw and erosion occurred sometime between MIS 16 and 6. The upper ice complex formed from at least 60 to 30 ka during late MIS 4 to 3. The sand unit above the upper ice complex is dated to MIS 3–2, whereas the sand unit below formed at some time between MIS 4 and 16.

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 in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
Copyright © University of Washington. Published by Cambridge University Press, 2021
Figure 0

Figure 1. (a) Location map of Beringia. Red dashed box shows location of panel b. (b) Location map showing the topographic setting of the Batagay megaslump within the Yana River basin, northern Yakutia. Glacial limits during the last (Sartan) glaciation, according to Glushkova (2011), are indicated. Red dashed box shows location of panel c. (c) Topographic map of the Batagay region, showing the location of the megaslump on a northeast-facing hillslope. Contours at 20 m intervals; grid spacing at 4 km.

Figure 1

Figure 2. (a) Panoramic photograph of the Batagay megaslump showing the main stratigraphic units and locations of sections 1 and 2. (b) Schematic stratigraphic section of the exposed units along the slump headwall, with approximate positions of the studied sections. Numbers 2 to 6 represent cryostratigraphic units summarised in Table 1. Modified from Opel et al. (2019).

Figure 2

Table 1. Stratigraphic units of the permafrost sequence exposed in the Batagay megaslump.a

Figure 3

Figure 3. Schematic cryostratigraphic sketch of section 1, showing age estimates. Radiocarbon ages are given as calibrated median ages where available or otherwise as uncalibrated ages (see Table 5). The post-infrared infrared-stimulated luminescence (pIRIR) and optically stimulated luminescence (OSL) ages are associated with the orange circles labelled “OSL1” and “OSL2.”

Figure 4

Figure 4. Schematic cryostratigraphic sketch of section 2, showing age estimates. Radiocarbon ages are given as calibrated median ages where available or otherwise as uncalibrated ages (see Table 5). The post-infrared infrared-stimulated luminescence (pIRIR) and optically stimulated luminescence (OSL) ages are associated with the orange circles labelled “OSL3” to “OSL7.”

Figure 5

Table 2. Dose-rate parameters from 125–180 μm quartz and K-feldspar isolates for luminescence dating.

Figure 6

Table 3. Luminescence parameters from 125–180 μm quartz and K-feldspar isolates for dating.

Figure 7

Table 4. K-feldspar IR50, pIRIR200, and pIRIR250 g values calculated for samples GL17121 and GL17171.

Figure 8

Table 5. Radiocarbon ages of organic remains in ice wedges and host sediments as well as respective sample depths.a

Figure 9

Table 6. Sample information and results from accelerator mass spectrometry for 36Cl/Cl dating.a

Figure 10

Figure 5. Dose–response curves (DRCs) and inter-aliquot age distributions for samples GL17118 (B17-S2-OSL3, left column) and GL17171 (B17-S1-OSL1, right column), representative of the sample suite; the top and bottom optically stimulated luminescence (OSL) samples from the Batagay megaslump sequence. (a and b) blue OSL and infrared-stimulated luminescence (IRSL) signal decays from quartz; (c and d) IR50, pIRIR200, and pIRIR250 signal decays from K-feldspar; insets are the associated Lx/Tx DRCs (open triangle, natural signal; closed diamonds, regenerative-dose signals; open diamonds, repeat regenerative doses). (e and f) inter-aliquot age distributions and central age models (CAM) derived from quartz blue OSL and K-feldspar pIRIR250.

Figure 11

Figure 6. Dose recovery ratios for IR50, pIRIR200, and pIRIR250 of three aliquots from sample GL17171 (B17-S1-OSL1).

Figure 12

Figure 7. Signal depletion as a function of storage time for the IR50 (blue circles), pIRIR200 (red crosses), and pIRIR250 (green triangles) signals for samples GL17121 (a) and GL17171 (b). Storage times (t) and Lx/Tx ratios were normalised to the first/prompt measurements (tc) at 38 and 39 h for panels a and b, respectively.

Figure 13

Figure 8. Schematic overview of all available chronostratigraphic data of the Batagay megaslump summarised from (1) Ashastina et al. (2017); (2) Murton et al. (2017b); (3) Opel et al. (2019); (4) Vasil'chuk and Vasil'chuk (2019); (5) Vasil'chuk et al. (2020); and (6) this study. Stratigraphy not to scale (see Table 1). Radiocarbon ages are shown as calibrated ages in ka BP. Note that this compilation is based on several sampling campaigns by different researchers working at different sections, which precludes placing the data in true vertical order. The positions of 36Cl/Cl and 14C ages above luminescence age do not have depth significance and are solely to show the single data points clearly. Glacial–interglacial cycles shown in the lower graph derive from the marine isotope stages of the LR04 stack of benthic δ18O (Lisiecki and Raymo, 2005) and a current review of past interglaciations (Past Interglacials Working Group of PAGES, 2016), which are given here for chronologic orientation. MIS numbers above the curve indicate interglacial maxima (interstades of the Late Pleistocene are given in brackets). MIS numbers below the curve indicate glacial maxima. At the bottom of the plot, “H” stands for Holocene and “E P” for Early Pleistocene.