Reconstruction of Late Pleistocene events in the periglacial area in the southern part of the East European Plain

Revisiting Late Pleistocene Loess–Paleosol Sequences in the Azov Sea Region of Russia: Chronostratigraphy and Paleoenvironmental Record

“…The previous ages obtained from the upper horizon of S 1 SS 1 may not represent the true burial time of this uppermost substratum of the S 1 complex. Given its position in the stratigraphy and soil characteristics, we tend to correlate the S 1 SS 1 with MIS 5a, which is consistent with stratigraphic correlation by Mazneva et al (2021) but different from the previous study by Velichko et al (2017) and Chen et al (2018a).…”

“…In contrast, single-proxy approaches may often provide merely fragmentary information and cause problematic interpretations (Vandenberghe et al, 2014). The stratigraphic position of L 1 SS m paleosol of the Beglitsa section determined here is different from the previous subdivision by Velichko et al (2012Velichko et al ( , 2017. The newly identified L 1 SS m paleosol FIGURE 9 | Stratigraphy of the Chumbur-Kosa section and its correlation with well-dated loess records near the Black-Azov Sea region based on the χ lf proxy, and with the benthic LR04 stack.…”

“…The uppermost subunit S 1 SS 1 of the enhanced MS interval is distinguished by a weak increase in MS and TOC, a sharp increase in the clay content for the upper horizon, and relatively low L* and CaCO 3 % values (Figure 6). A previously reported radiocarbon age of 29,340 ± 1,500 a (calibrated age of 34.07 ka) by Velichko et al (2017) and an OSL age of 55.3 ± 4.9 ka by Chen et al (2018a) were basically obtained at the same depth from this unit. These two ages made it difficult to determine the formation time of this unit, resulting in stratigraphic inconsistency.…”

“…These two ages made it difficult to determine the formation time of this unit, resulting in stratigraphic inconsistency. Velichko et al (2017) referred this unit to MIS 3 and correlated it with reference sections in the center of the East European plain (Chen et al, 2018a). However, recent stratigraphic comparison of key sections based on litho-and pedostratigraphy, MS, GS, elemental and mineral composition, and luminescence dating in western Ciscaucasia (Azov Sea region and Stavropol Upland) showed that the three phases of soil formation within the S1 pedocomplex are probably a regional pattern and approximately corresponding to the warm stages within MIS 5-5a, 5c, and 5e (Mazneva et al, 2021).…”

Late Middle—Early Late Pleistocene Mammoths from the Lower Don River Region (Russia)

“…The coastal cliff exposes up to a 15-m-thick sequence of lagoonal clays and silts overlain by thin loesspaleosol deposits that include the Mezin paleosol complex (Eemian), the Bryansk and the Trubchevsk Upper Pleistocene paleosols [28,29]. The base of the 16-18-m section exposes a loam sandy layer (apparent thickness up to two m), which is interpreted as lagoon-liman or liman-marine and alluvial-diluvial deposits [29][30][31]. The remains of freshwater mollusks small and large mammals are registered in this layer.…”