Palaeoclimatic indicators in soils buried under archaeological monuments in the Eurasian steppe: a review

Abstract

The Russian experience of the local reconstruction of the Eurasian steppe climate during the last 5000 years based on geoarchaeological approaches is reviewed. Examples of traditional palaeoclimatic reconstructions in Russia based on organic matter, highly soluble salts and gypsum content and location of salts and gypsum horizons in the profile of buried soils are given. Pedogenic carbonate as a palaeoclimatic indicator is considered. The possibilities of the quantitative reconstruction of the palaeoprecipitation based on magnetic properties of buried soils are observed. The innovative approach of palaeoclimatic reconstruction based on soil microbiology methods is reviewed. The problem of temporary transformation of palaeoclimatic indicators in buried soils is shown. A methodology for the interpretation of palaeoclimatic indicators of buried soils for a local palaeoclimatic reconstruction is given.

Chronosequencing methanogenic archaea in ancient Longji rice Terraces in China

“…It is now 40 years ago that Seaward et al [38] first suggested that it may be possible to utilize qualitative and quantitative analyses, based on the incidence/abundances of microbial taxa with specific environmental requirements, for archaeological interpretation. Nevertheless, Seaward's prognosis has still not become a reality for now, and the study of soil microorganisms has not been routinely incorporated into the archaeologist's toolkit for the reconstruction of human-environment in historical periods [13]. In the current investigation, using DNA-based high-throughput sequencing, we present here the first example of the qualitative and quantitative microbial analyses of a palaeosol for historical reconstruction.…”

“…Comprehensive historical reconstruction generally requires multiple proxies and more archaeological evidence can add illumi-nating details [13]. There is another important but generally underestimated facet of archaeological interpretation, which is the associated microbial communities.…”

“…Microorganisms are twined with soil physico-chemical properties influenced by extraneous interferences, such as changes in climate [14] and anthropogenic activities [15]. They can survive in palaeosols for thousands of years [13] due to a slow metabolism and a very sparse use of external energy sources [16], which is expected to preserve their initial properties [17]. Furthermore, their extracellular DNA can also be preserved in palaeosol for thousands of years [18].…”

Estimates of Soil Renewal Rates: Applications for Anti-Erosion Arrangement of the Agricultural Landscape

“…It should be noted that, in the advanced geoarchaeology literature, much attention has been paid to the study of buried soils (see the review by Mitusov et al [26]); while the daylight soils of archaeological sites have not been studied in depth. However, about 40 years ago, Gladfelter [27] stressed the prospects for geoarchaeological elaboration of approaches for differentiating cultural and natural features, including post-occupational disturbances by biological and pedological processes.…”

Multidisciplinary Contributions to Legume Crop History: Proceed with Caution

“…Archeobotanical evidence for pulses appears lacking in the Steppes when archeobotanical sites with recovery of pulses are mapped (Mikić, 2012, 2015a, 2016; Mikić et al, 2014). One possible explanation for archeological recovery of remains of cereals in the Steppes, but not of pulses, is that Bronze Age Steppes were semiarid, as indicated by paleoclimatic studies (Alekseeva et al, 2007; Khomutova et al, 2007; Mitusov et al, 2009). Estimates of mean annual precipitation imply climate may have been unsuitable for consistent cultivation of legumes, but typically with sufficient moisture for cereals (Dugan, 2015).…”