Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Two pedogenic models for paleoclimatic records of magnetic susceptibility from Chinese and Siberian loess

  • Published:
Science in China Series D: Earth Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The magnetic susceptibility (MS) of Chinese loess showing a general proportional relationship to pedogenic grade has been widely recognized and used for reconstruction of paleoclimate by Quaternary scientists. The in-situ pedogenic enhancement of ferrimagnetic content is normally believed to be the main reason for the increase of susceptibility in soil units. However, this pattern of high magnetic susceptibility in palaeosols, and low values in loess, are not replicated in some loess deposits. Siberian loess deposits display a completely opposite susceptibility behavior: high values in loess and low values in palaeosols. This inverse relationship has been explained by the idea that magnetic susceptibility is reflecting the magnitude of an aeolian ferrimagnetic component of consistent mineralogy, the grain size of which is related to average wind velocity. Our magnetic study of Siberian samples in this paper suggests that there are notable differences in magnetic properties between Siberian loess and developed palaeosols, not only in magnetic grain-size and concentration but also in magnetic mineralogy. This evidence is difficult to explain fully through variation in wind strength alone, but implies that the low magnetic susceptibility values in the Siberian paleosol units are a reflection, at least in part, of the alteration of the ferrimagnetic content by post-depositional processes. The Loess Plateau is a very arid area where potential evaporation is always higher than precipitation; pedogenesis occurs under dry oxidising conditions. The Siberian Kurtak region is located on the edge of the tundra where it is always wet and saturation during interglacials will lead to a reducing pedogenic environment. Ferrimagnetic minerals under this condition will be destroyed, resulting in lower magnetic susceptibility. Therefore, great care should be taken when using susceptibility values for paleoclimatic reconstruction.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Heller F, Liu T S. Magnetostratigraphical dating of loess deposits in China. Nature, 1982, 300: 431–433

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Hovan S A, Rea D K, Pisias NG, et al. A direct link between the loess and marine 18O records: eolian flux to the north Pacific. Nature, 1989, 340: 296–298

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Petit J R, Mounier L, Jouzel J, et al. Paleoclimatological and chronological implications of the Vostok core dust record. Nature, 1990, 343: 56–58

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Heller F, Chen C D, Beer J, et al. Quantitative estimates of pedogenic ferromagnetic mineral formation in Chinese loess and palaeoclimatic implications. Earth Planet Sci Lett, 1993, 114: 385–390

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Maher B A, Thompson R, Zhou L P. Spatial and temporal reconstructions of changes in the Asian palaeomonsoon—A new mineral magnetic approach. Earth Planet Sci Lett, 1990, 125: 461–471

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Liu X M, Rolph T, Bloemendal J, et al. Quantitative estimates of paleoprecipitation at Xifeng in the loess plateau of China. Palaeogeogr Palaeoclimatol Palaeoecol, 1995, 113: 243–248

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Han J M, Lü H Y, Wu N Q, et al. Magnetic susceptibility of modern soils in China and climate conditions. Stud Geophys Geodetica, 1996, 40: 262–275

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Hao Q Z, Guo Z T. Spatial variations of magnetic susceptibility of Chinese loess for the last 600 ka: Implications for monsoon evolution. J Geophy Res, 2005, 110: B12101

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Evans M E, Heller F. Magnetism of loess palaeosol sequences: recent developments. Earth-Science Rev, 2001, 54: 129–144

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Kukla J G, An Z S. Loess stratigraphy in central China. Palaeogeogr Palaeoclimatol Palaeoecol, 1989, 72: 203–225

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Heller F, Liu T S. Magnetism of Chinese loess deposits. Geophys J R astr Soc, 1984, 77: 125–141

    Google Scholar 

  12. Zhou L P, Oldfield F, Wintle A G, et al. Partly pedogenic origin of magnetic variations in Chinese loess. Nature, 1990, 346: 737–739

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Liu X M., Liu T S., Heller F. Xu T C, Frequency-dependent susceptibility of loess and Quaternary paleoclimate. Quat Sci, 1990, 1: 41–50

    Google Scholar 

  14. Liu X M, Shaw J, Liu T S, et al. Magnetic mineralogy of Chinese loess and its significance. Geophys J Inter, 1992, 108: 301–308

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Maher B A, Thompson R. Paleoclimatic significance of the mineral magnetic record of the Chinese loess and paleosols. Quat Res, 1992, 37: 155–170

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Chlachula J, Evans M E, Rutter N W. A magnetic investigation of a late Quaternary loess/palaeosol record in Siberia. Geophys J Int, 1998, 132: 128–132

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Chlachula J. The Siberian loess record and its significance for reconstruction of Pleistocene climate change in north-central Asia. Quat Sci Rev, 2003, 22: 1879–1906

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Matasova G, Petrovsky E, Jordanova N, et al. Magnetic study of Late Pleistocene loess/palaeosol sections from Siberia: palaeoenvironmental implications. Geophys J Int, 2001, 147: 367–380

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Zhu R X, Kazansky A, Matasova G, et al. Rock-magnetic investigation of Siberia loess and its implication. Chin Sci Bull, 2000, 45: 2192–2198

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Zhu R X, Matasova G, Kazansky A, et al. Rock magnetic record of the last glacial-interglacial cycle from the Kurtak loess section, southern Siberia. Geophys J Int, 2003, 152: 335–343

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Begét J, Hawkins D. Influence of orbital parameters on Pleistocene loess deposition in central Alaska. Nature, 1989, 337: 151–153

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Begét J, Stone D, Hawkins D. Paleoclimate forcing of magnetic susceptibility variations in Alaskan loess. Geology, 1990, 18: 40–43

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Liu X M, Hesse P, Rolph T, et al. Properties of magnetic mineralogy of Alaskan loess: evidence for pedogenesis. Quat Int, 1999, 62: 92–102

    Google Scholar 

  24. Liu X M, Hesse P, Begét J, et al. Pedogenic destruction of ferrimagnetics in Alaskan loess deposits. Australian J Soil Res, 2001, 39: 99–115

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Liu X M, Hesse P, Rolph T. Origin of maghaemite in Chinese loess deposits: aeolian or pedogenic? Phys Earth Planet Int, 1999, 112: 191–201

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Rowan C J, Roberts A P. Magnetite dissolution, diachronous greigite formation, and secondary magnetization from pyrite oxidation: Unravelling complex magnetizations in Neogene marine sediments from New Zealand. Earth Planet Sci Lett, 2006, 241: 119–137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Emiroglu S, Rey D, Peterson N. Magnetic properties of sediment in the Ria de Arousa (Spain): dissolution of iron oxides and formation of iron sulphides. Physics Chem Earth, 2004, 29: 947–959

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Hu S, Appel E, Hoffmann V, et al. Gyromagnetic remanence acquired by greigite (Fe3S4) during static three-axis alternating field demagnetization. Geophys J Int, 1998, 152: 831–842

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Geiss C E, Banerjee S K. A multi-parameter rock magnetic record of the last glacial-interglacial paleoclimate from south-central Illinois, USA. Earth Planet Sci Lett, 1997, 152: 203–216

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Bina M, Daly L. Mineralogical change and self-reversed magnetizations in pyrrhotite resulting from partial oxidation; geophysical implications. Phys Earth Planet Int, 1994, 85: 83–99

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Zhu R X, Shi C D, Suchy V, et al. The magnetic properties of Czech loess and its paleoclimatic significances. Sci China Ser D-Earth Sci, 2001, 31(2): 146–154.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Shi C D, Zhu R X, Suchy V, et al. Identification and origins of sulfides in Czech loess. Geophysical Res Lett, 2001, 28(20): 3903–3906

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Lagroix F, Banerjee S K. Paleowind directions from the magnetic fabric of loess pro¢les in central Alaska. Earth Planet Sci Lett, 2002, 195: 99–112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Yang S L, Ding Z L. Winter-spring precipitation as the principal control on predominance of C3 plants in Central Asia over the past 1.77 Ma: Evidence from δ 13C of loess organic matter in Tajikistan. Palaeogeogr Palaeoclimatol Palaeoecol, 2003, 235: 330–339

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Vlag P. The magnetic signal in loess-sequences in Alaska. The Institute for Rock Magnetism Quarterly. 1998, 8: 1–7

    Google Scholar 

  36. Rosenbaum J G, Reynolds R L, Muhs D R, et al. Geochemical constraint on the interpretation of magnetic property variations in loess/paleosol sequences from central Alaska. EOS, Transactions, AGU Fall Meeting, 1997, 78: F170–F171

    Google Scholar 

  37. Sun J M, Liu T S. Multiple origins and interpretations of the magnetic susceptibility signal in Chinese wind-blown sediments. Earth Planet Sci Lett, 2000, 180: 287–296

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Key Laboratory of Western China’s Environmental Systems, Ministry of Education, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, 730000, China

    Liu XiuMing, Xia DunSheng & Wang Guan

  2. Department of Physical Geography, Macquarie University, NSW, 2109, Australia

    Liu XiuMing & Paul Hesse

  3. Institute of Geology and Geophysics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100029, China

    Liu TungSheng

  4. Key Laboratory of Desert and Desertification, Institute of Cold and Arid Regions Environmental and Engineering, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Lanzhou, 730000, China

    Xia DunSheng & Jiri Chlachula

Authors
  1. Liu XiuMing
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Liu TungSheng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Paul Hesse
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Xia DunSheng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Jiri Chlachula
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Wang Guan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Liu XiuMing.

Additional information

Supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 40421101 and 40772109) and Macquarie University, Australia

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Liu, X., Liu, T., Paul, H. et al. Two pedogenic models for paleoclimatic records of magnetic susceptibility from Chinese and Siberian loess. Sci. China Ser. D-Earth Sci. 51, 284–293 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11430-007-0145-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11430-007-0145-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation