Testing the Applicability of Quartz and Feldspar for Luminescence Dating of Pleistocene Alluvial Sediments in the Tatra Mountain Foothills, Slovakia

Ingrid Bejarano-Arias; Roos M. J. Van Wees; Helena Alexanderson; Juraj Janočko; Zoran M. Perić

doi:10.2478/geochr-2023-0002

Figures & Tables

Map of the High Tatras where both study areas are indicated: hashed black lines indicate the area of the Velická dolina valley that covers all the six sample sites, and the yellow square indicates the Great Yellow Wall (Fig. S1). Likewise, the location of the Bee Pit is a yellow square.

Overview of the Bee Pit outcrop with the sampling locations in the different units. The log in Fig. 3 is from the southern side of the exposure (left in photo). The two boulders in unit 4 are marked with the red dashed line.

Log combining the lower and upper exposures at the Bee Pit, including all units and uncorrected pIRIR225 luminescence ages from the site. The zero level in the log is approximately at 914 m a.s.l. Sample numbers and ages in bold are considered most reliable (for explanation, see text). Lithofacies codes are according to Krüger and Kjaer (1999).

Overview of the luminescence sampling locations in the Velická dolina valley with location of luminescence samples (yellow stars). (A) Photo of Site 2 taken from Site 1 at the Great Yellow Wall. (B) Dry riverbed north of Site 3. (C) Site 4, east from the modern river. (D) Site 5, west from the modern river. (E) Site 6, the modern riverbed can be seen in the background. (F) Overview of Site 8, showing the natural outcrop from which the moraine sample was taken.

Log from Sites 1 (left) and 2 (right), showing the units of the uppermost, southern side (YS) and the sampled northern part of the Great Yellow Wall (YN). It includes the uncorrected pIRIR225 luminescence ages, where the bold ages are the most reliable. The zero level of the log is at approximately 1110 m a.s.l., and the legend can be found in Fig. 3. Sample numbers and ages in bold are considered most reliable (for explanation, see text).

(A) Weathered boulders with a sand matrix at Site 2, Great Yellow Wall. Sample 20026 was taken from within one of the weathered boulders and used as a sample with field-saturated luminescence signal since light exposure is not expected to have occurred at any point in time for these grains. (B) Sample 20026 taken from the weathered boulders.

Small (2-mm) aliquot with feldspar grains used for dose estimation of sample 19102. The average number of grains for the small aliquots is approximately 70.

Representative sensitivity-corrected dose–response curves and dose estimates for sample 19088 for (A) IR50. and (B) pIRIR225. De was determined to be 325 Gy and 800 Gy, respectively. (C) Example of a g-value measurement of the IR50 signal on a single aliquot of sample 19088. The steep trend line suggests a significant fading of the IR50 signal.

Variation in equivalent dose and dose recovery ratio with temperature and signal integration intervals for sample 19082. (A) Preheat plateau (PHP) test where doses were calculated with early background subtraction (peak first 0.32 s, background next 0.32 s). All aliquots for 200° were rejected, (B) dose recovery ratios with corresponding calculation. (C) PHP test with late background subtraction for dose determination (peak first 0.8 s, background last 64 s). (D) Dose recovery ratios with corresponding calculation. The hatched line in B and D shows a dose recovery ratio of 1.0 (i.e. unity).

(A) Decay curve comparison between normalised OSL signals from quartz sample 19083 and Risø calibration quartz (Hansen et al., 2015) for the initial part of the stimulation. The decay curve of sample 19083 indicates a slow signal decay, which is not dominated by a fast component. (B) A similar comparison between non-normalised OSL signals shows the very dim signal of the quartz from the Biely Váh valley.

LM-OSL curves for one aliquot each of samples: (A) 19082 (B) 19095 (C) 19104 and (D) Risø calibration quartz batch 123. It is notable that the presence of the fast component varies greatly between samples, but it is not dominant in any of the Tatra samples.

Comparison of the thermal stability between the natural quartz extracts (samples 19082, 19095 and 19104) and the Risø 180–250 μm calibration quartz (batch 123).

(A) Dose–response curve and fading plot (inset) for the IR50 signal of sample 20026. Note that the signal does not display full saturation and fades significantly (mean g-value 5.4 ± 0.4%/decade for all aliquots). (B) Dose–response curve and fading plot (inset) for the pIRIR225 signal of sample 20026. The natural signal of this aliquot is close to saturation since the De > 2D0 (De = 765 ± 95 Gy; D0 = 289 ± 4 Gy) but not at saturation, and it still shows some fading in the laboratory (sample average g-value 0.66 ± 0.25%/decade).

Examples of growth curves for IR50 and pIRIR225 measurements for samples 19091 (A,B) and 19096 (C,D). For the aliquot of sample 19091, the De is closer to saturation for the pIRIR225 signal. Sample 19096 is not close to saturation for IR50 and pIRIR225 (i.e. De < 2*D0).

Bleaching rate of sample 19087 showing the signal or dose (Gy) plotted against exposure time in a logarithmic scale for both IR50 and pIRIR225.

Comparison between quartz and feldspar ages. (A) Approximate quartz ages, based on 3 aliquots per sample, are all much lower than the fading corrected IR50 ages. (B) Feldspar-corrected IR50 ages are mostly of the same order as the uncorrected pIRIR225 ages, with some exceptions.

Relation of uncorrected ages of the pIRIR225 (ka) on the x-axis vs. elevation of the samples in the outcrops on the y-axis. Preferred ages per site or unit are black. Note that the Velická dolina valley and the Biely Váh valley are two different areas in the southern foothills of the Tatra Mountains and are not subsequent geological strata as the figure might imply.

Lower part of the Velická dolina valley with the orange dots to mark the sample sites.

Probability plots with a z-distribution (mean of 0 and the standard deviation of 1) showing the dose distributions of samples with the most aliquots: samples 19091 (n=30), 19096 (n=29) and 19102 (n=33).

Dose recovery ratios and residual doses for IR and pIRIR measured on all samples from the Bee pit and the Velická dolina valley_

Sample no.	IR₅₀				pIRIR₂₂₅

	Dose recovery ratio	Error	Residual	Error	Dose recovery ratio	Error	Residual	Error
19082	0.89	0.03	2.73	0.2	0.92	0.03	16.09	0.12
19083	0.84	0.03	2.56	0.1	0.89	0.03	15	0.1
19086	0.86	0.03	3.29	0.1	0.87	0.03	17.3	0.1
19087	0.84	0.03	2.64	0.1	0.9	0.03	17.5	0.1
19091	0.84	0.03	2.73	0.1	0.92	0.03	15.6	0.5
19092	0.88	0.03	-	-	0.91	0.03	-	-
19094	0.92	0.03	2.89	0.3	0.94	0.03	15.5	1.6
19096	-	-	2.86	0.2	-	-	15.3	1.5

Results of the SOL2 bleaching experiment for sample 19087_

Bleaching time (min)	IR₅₀ De (Gy)	IR₅₀ Ln/Tn	pIRIR₂₂₅ De (Gy)	pIRIR₂₂₅ Ln/Tn
0 (Natural)	232.8 ± 2.8	6.49 ± 0.08	587.8 ± 19.4	8.88 ± 0.39
1	45.4 ± 8.7	1.55 ± 0.27	311.7 ± 31.7	7.38 ± 0.52
5	6.8 ± 0.3	0.24 ± 0.01	92.7 ± 4.4	3.04 ± 0.12
20	3.3 ± 0.2	0.12 ± 0.01	29.5 ± 0.7	1.06 ± 0.02
60	2.2 ± 0.1	0.08 ± 0.00	16.3 ± 0.7	0.60 ± 0.03
20160	0.5 ± 0.0	0.02 ± 0.00	4.8 ± 0.3	0.17 ± 0.01

Results of the IR50 and pIRIR225 measurements: g-values, feldspar dose estimates, the number aliquots with De < 2D0 compared to the total number of accepted aliquots and the uncorrected and corrected ages_

Sample No.	Unit / Site No.	g-value (%/decade)		D_e (Gy)		Accepted (D_e<2D₀) / Total aliquots		Uncorrected age (ka)		Corrected age (ka)

		IR₅₀	pIRIR₂₂₅	IR₅₀	pIRIR₂₂₅	IR₅₀	pIRIR₂₂₅	IR₅₀	pIRIR₂₂₅	IR₅₀	pIRIR₂₂₅
19082	Unit 3	6.71 ± 0.1	2.23 ± 0.3	414 ± 15	868 ± 86	12(12)/12	12(1)/12	125 ± 7.8	261 ± 29	278 ± 18	326 ± 38
19083	Unit 1B	4.82 ± 0.7	1.56 ± 0.1	351 ± 14	844 ± 116	12(12)/12	12(1)/12	109 ± 7.2	263 ± 39	185 ± 28	308 ± 51
19084	Unit 3	9.83 ± 0.2	2.84 ± 0.2	348 ± 14	741 ± 80	12(12)/12	12(2)/12	129 ± 8.7	275 ± 33	624 ± 82	368 ± 46
19085	Unit 3	6.52 ± 0.1	1.66 ± 0.6	317 ± 11	760 ± 76	12(12)/12	12(1)/12	106 ± 6.8	254 ± 29	230 ± 16	300 ± 39
19086	Unit 3	1.66 ± 0.2	0.09 ± 0.1	387 ± 16	812 ± 105	12(12)/12	12(0)/12	100 ± 7.3	210 ± 30	117 ± 8.7	212 ± 29
19087	Unit 12	5.06 ± 0.3	1.48 ± 0.1	351 ± 13	788 ± 73	12(12)/12	12(2)/12	120 ± 7.6	269 ± 29	208 ± 16	311 ± 31
19088	Unit 12	5.85 ± 0.2	0.81 ± 0.6	326 ± 11	776 ± 74	12(12)/12	12(1)/12	81 ± 4.9	193 ± 21	156 ± 12	208 ± 27
19089	Unit 12	5.05 ± 0.02	1.99 ± 0.02	372 ± 14	850 ± 91	12(12)/12	12(2)/12	109 ± 6.6	249 ± 29	188 ± 11	304 ± 36
19090	Unit 9	5.71 ± 0.4	2.16 ± 0.1	354 ± 13	763 ± 73	12(12)/12	12(1)/12	115 ± 7.8	248 ± 28	219 ± 22	308 ± 31
19091	Unit 9	8.69 ± 1.1	0.37 ± 0.4	360 ± 13	710 ± 58	30(30)/30	30(8)/30	97.3 ± 5.7	192 ± 18	318 ± 185	199 ± 19
19092	Unit 5	5.26 ± 0.3	0.70 ± 0.4	465 ± 20	949 ± 123	12(12)/12	12(2)/12	132 ± 8.6	269 ± 38	236 ± 19	287 ± 39
19093	Site 1	8.01 ± 0.6	1.05 ± 0.3	338 ± 15	636 ± 64	12(12)/12	12(5)/12	79.5 ± 5.5	150 ± 17	219 ± 50	165 ± 19
19094	Site 1	9.43 ± 0.5	3.04 ± 0.1	304 ± 14	611 ± 49	12(11)/15	12(7)/13	69.9 ± 5.2	139 ± 14	266 ± 105	188 ± 21
19095	Site 1	4.83 ± 0.3	2.06 ± 0.2	325 ± 13	709 ± 85	12(12)/12	12(5)/13	86.1 ± 5.9	188 ± 25	145 ± 12	231 ± 29
19096	Site 2	7.20 ± 0.6	1.52 ± 0.2	346 ± 14	770 ± 72	29(29)/30	29(9)/30	90.9 ± 6.1	202 ± 22	204.5 ± 34	234 ± 24
19097	Site 2	7.25 ± 1.1	−0.41 ± 0.1	330 ± 12	798 ± 88	12(12)/15	12(3)/18	96.7 ± 6.9	234 ± 30	234 ± 83	*
19098	Site 3	8.61 ± 0.8	3.31 ± 0.2	134 ± 4.2	361 ± 22	12(12)/12	12(10)/12	38.5 ± 2.9	103 ± 9.5	116 ± 35	145 ± 14
19100	Site 4	4.56 ± 0.6	1.43 ± 0.2	306 ± 15	839 ± 122	12(12)/12	12(2)/12	81.7 ± 6.1	224 ± 35	130 ± 14	257 ± 41
19101	Site 5	11.49 ± 0.3	1.65 ± 0.2	131 ± 4.1	506 ± 37	12(12)/14	12(7)/12	37.7 ± 2.8	146 ± 14	307 ± 118	172 ± 17
19102	Site 5	7.49 ± 0.9	2.60 ± 0.2	96.0 ± 3.1	387 ± 32	33(33)/33	33(22)/35	29.1 ± 2.0	117 ± 12	69 ± 15	152 ± 15
19105	Site 6	10.77 ± 1.0	2.98 ± 0.3	31.5 ± 1.5	109 ± 7.0	12(12)/15	12(9)/18	17.7 ± 1.6	61.6 ± 6.3	79 ± 37	82 ± 10
19106	Site 6	6.74 ± 0.04	1.64 ± 0.1	56.2 ± 1.9	183 ± 5.8	12(12)/15	12(9)/18	20.1 ± 1.6	65.4 ± 5.2	42 ± 3.5	77 ± 5.7
20026	Site 2	5.42 ± 0.41	0.66 ± 0.25	453 ± 10	737 ± 47	5(5)/5	5(5)/5	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a
20028	Site 8	4.89 ± 0.83	0.88 ± 0.41	18.4 ± 3.9	55.6 ± 5.6	12(12)/12	12(12)/12	5.0 ± 1.1	15.0 ± 1.7	7.6 ± 2.0	16.1 ± 1.9

The water content values used for the age calculation, per sample_ For three samples the uncorrected pIRIR age (ka) is shown calculated with all three water contents_

Sample No.	Field Water Content (%)	Saturated Water Content (%)	Expected Water Content (%)
19082	11	31	27
19083	15	25	24
19084	7	22	19
19085	13	25	23
19086	21	27	26
19087	24	35	29
19088	23	30	26
19089	15	27	20
19090	15	35	29
19091	17	31	27
19092	32	38	36
19093	16	25	21
19094	9	22	13
19095	18	28	21
19096	28	35	31
19097	28	35	31
19098	5	23	23
19099	5	23	23
19100	8	29	23
19101	17	31	30
19102	21	30	29
19105	19	49	49
19106	19	49	49
20028	0	18	15

OSL parameters calculated from the quartz extracts using linear modulation compared to other values from literature_

Sample	OSL component	Detraping probability (b)	Photoionisation cross-section (ϭ)	Relative Cross-section
19082	Fast	22.4 ± 4.9	1.4 × 10⁻¹⁶	1
	Slow1	1.8 ± 0.2	1.2 × 10⁻¹⁷	0.09
	Slow2	0.17 ± 0.003	1.1 × 10⁻¹⁸	0.01
	Slow3	0.018 ± 0.004	1.1 × 10⁻¹⁹	0.001
	Slow4	0.0004 ± 0.0003	2.5 × 10⁻²⁰	0.0002

19095	Fast	9.6 ± 3.2	6.1 × 10⁻¹⁷	1
	Medium	0.94 ± 0.1	6.0 × 10⁻¹⁸	0.1
	Slow2	0.12 ± 0.008	7.8 × 10⁻¹⁹	0.01
	Slow3	0.017 ± 0.0008	1.2 × 10⁻¹⁹	0.002
	Slow4	0.004 ± 0.00009	2.9 × 10⁻²⁰	0.0006

19104	Fast	1.6 ± 0.3	6.2 × 10⁻¹⁸	1
	Slow1	0.08 ± 0.04	5.0 × 10⁻¹⁹	0.05
	Slow3	0.005 ± 0.0003	3.1 × 10⁻²⁰	0.003

Calib. quartz	Fast	2.7 ± 0.09	1.6 × 10⁻¹⁷	1
Calib. quartz	Slow4	0.0007 ± 0.00003	4.5 × 10⁻²¹	0.0003

Jain et al. (2003)	Fast	2.5 ± 0.2	2.3 × 10⁻¹⁷	1
	Medium	0.62 ± 0.05	5.6 × 10⁻¹⁸	0.2
	Slow1	0.15 ± 0.03	1.3 × 10⁻¹⁸	0.06
	Slow2	0.023 ± 0.005	2.1 × 10⁻¹⁹	0.01
	Slow3	0.0022 ± 0.0002	2.1 × 10⁻²⁰	0.001
	Slow4	0.00030 ± 0.00001	2.8 × 10⁻²¹	0.0001

Durcan and Duller (2011)	Fast	n.a.	2.6 × 10⁻¹⁷	1
	Medium	n.a.	4.3 × 10⁻¹⁸	0.16
	Slow1	n.a.	1.1 × 10⁻¹⁸	0.04
	Slow2	n.a.	3.0 × 10⁻¹⁹	0.01
	Slow3	n.a.	3.4 × 10⁻²⁰	0.001
	Slow4	n.a.	9.1 × 10⁻²¹	0.0003

OSL doses, dose rates and ages for the quartz samples_

Sample No.	Number of aliquots	Type of OSL measurement	Mean Dose ± error (Gy)	Total Dose rate ± error (Gy ka⁻¹)	Age (ka)
19082	18	Differential OSL	268 ± 58	2.6 ± 0.1	104 ± 23
19082	12	Pulsed OSL	102 ± 6	2.6 ± 0.1	40 ± 3
19083	3	Standard SAR	143 ± 27	2.7 ± 0.1	53 ± 10
19084	6	Standard SAR	160 ± 41	2.1 ± 0.1	77 ± 20
19085	3	Standard SAR	103 ± 21	2.4 ± 0.1	42 ± 9
19090	3	Standard SAR	96 ± 11	2.6 ± 0.1	38 ± 5
19091	3	Standard SAR	186 ± 55	3.2 ± 0.1	58 ± 17
19092	3	Standard SAR	114 ± 40	3.3 ± 0.2	35 ± 12
19102	12	Pulsed OSL	30 ± 6	2.3 ± 0.2	13 ± 3

Concentration of radioactive elements in the sampled sediments (from gamma spectrometry) and the dose rate from cosmic radiation to each sample (as calculated in DRAC v1_2 (Durcan et al_, 2015))_

Sample No.	U (ppm) ± error	Th (ppm) ± error	K (%) ± error	Cosmic dose rate (Gy. ka⁻¹)	Total Dose Rate (Gy. ka⁻¹)	wc_e(%)
19082	1.49 ± 0.58	5.87 ± 0.15	2.52 ± 0.04	0.14 ± 0.01	3.33 ± 0.17	27
19083	0.96 ± 0.45	6.55 ± 0.13	2.42 ± 0.05	0.10 ± 0.01	3.21 ± 0.16	24
19084	0.48 ± 0.17	4.98 ± 0.08	1.91 ± 0.03	0.07 ± 0.01	2.70 ± 0.15	19
19085	0.92 ± 0.54	5.11 ± 0.14	2.23 ± 0.04	0.10 ± 0.01	2.99 ± 0.16	23
19086	2.43 ± 1.24	8.48 ± 0.33	2.86 ± 0.10	0.09 ± 0.01	3.87 ± 0.23	26
19087	1.22 ± 0.42	6.96 ± 0.12	1.99 ± 0.04	0.16 ± 0.02	2.93 ± 0.15	29
19088	4.23 ± 0.84	9.35 ± 0.23	2.46 ± 0.05	0.17 ± 0.02	4.03 ± 0.20	26
19089	1.04 ± 0.21	5.60 ± 0.08	2.52 ± 0.03	0.17 ± 0.02	3.41 ± 0.16	20
19090	0.74 ± 0.71	5.97 ± 0.18	2.32 ± 0.05	0.21 ± 0.02	3.07 ± 0.17	29
19091	2.08 ± 0.39	8.79 ± 0.11	2.59 ± 0.03	0.21 ± 0.02	3.70 ± 0.17	27
19092	2.20 ± 0.79	7.27 ± 0.21	2.74 ± 0.05	0.20 ± 0.02	3.53 ± 0.18	36
19093	3.28 ± 0.34	12.0 ± 0.17	2.56 ± 0.04	0.20 ± 0.02	4.24 ± 0.23	21
19094	2.85 ± 0.64	12.3 ± 0.19	2.48 ± 0.05	0.19 ± 0.02	4.39 ± 0.26	13
19095	2.38 ± 0.45	10.6 ± 0.13	2.29 ± 0.03	0.19 ± 0.02	3.78 ± 0.21	21
19096	3.60 ± 0.44	11.6 ± 0.12	2.47 ± 0.04	0.06 ± 0.01	3.80 ± 0.20	31
19097	1.61 ± 0.86	13.5 ± 0.24	2.21 ± 0.05	0.11 ± 0.01	3.41 ± 0.21	31
19098	1.15 ± 0.49	6.80 ± 0.14	2.18 ± 0.05	0.27 ± 0.03	3.48 ± 0.23	23
19100	2.94 ± 0.58	12.1 ± 0.17	2.09 ± 0.05	0.17 ± 0.02	3.75 ± 0.21	23
19101	2.39 ± 0.60	11.8 ± 0.17	2.32 ± 0.05	0.18 ± 0.02	3.48 ± 0.23	30
19102	1.39 ± 0.72	8.57 ± 0.19	2.31 ± 0.05	0.17 ± 0.02	3.29 ± 0.20	29
19104	1.50 ± 0.25	6.53 ± 0.07	1.81 ± 0.03	0.29 ± 0.03	2.43 ± 0.20	-
19105	1.06 ± 0.30	6.68 ± 0.15	1.89 ± 0.04	0 (surface)	1.78 ± 0.14	-
19106	1.06 ± 0.30	6.68 ± 0.15	1.89 ± 0.04	0.31 ± 0.03	2.80 ± 0.20	49
20028	1.18 ± 0.27	10.16 ± 0.15	2.44 ± 0.04	0.15 ± 0.02	3.72 ± 0.17	15

Sample information acquired from the investigated study areas_ Lithofacies codes are based on Krüger and Kjaer (1999)_

Sample No.	Site	UTM 33N easting	UTM 33N northing	Location / Sample type	Depth in m (overburden sediment)	Stratigraphic unit	Lithofacies	Fraction (μm)
19082	Bee Pit	42829	5439202	Lower section	7.1	B3	SiSm(ng)	180–250
19083	Bee Pit	428289	5439024	Lower section	11.4	B1B	SSim	180–250
19084	Bee Pit	428292	5439015	Lower section	13.8	B3	SiSm(ng)	180–250
19085	Bee Pit	428289	5439024	Lower section	11.4	B3	SiSm(ng)	180–250
19086	Bee Pit	428283	5439047	Lower section	10.8	B3	SiSm(ng)	180–250
19087	Bee Pit	428228	5438971	Upper section	5.4	B12	SiSm(ng)	180–250
19088	Bee Pit	428228	5438971	Upper section	5.4	B12	SiSm(ng)	180–250
19089	Bee Pit	428228	5438971	Upper section	5.4	B12	Sm(ng)	180–250
19090	Bee Pit	428282	5439016	Lower section	2.2	B9	SiSm	180–250
19091	Bee Pit	428282	5439016	Lower section	2.2	B9	SiSm	180–250
19092	Bee Pit	428286	5439018	Lower section	3.6	B5	Sm(ng)	180–250
19093	GYW, site 1	439489	5441932	GYW South (YS)	1.8	YS3	GSm	180–250
19094	GYW, site 1	439489	5441932	GYW South (YS)	1.7	YS3	Sm	180–250
19095	GYW, site 1	439489	5441932	GYW South (YS)	2.2	YS3	GSm	180–250
19096	GYW, site 2	439514	5442023	GYW North (YN)	15	YN1	Sm	180–250
19097	GYW, site 2	439514	5442023	GYW North (YN)	15	YN1	Sm	180–250
19098	Site 3	439737	5441549	Flood deposit	0.24	-	Gm	250–355
19099*	Site 4	439677	5441615	East of Velická potok	2	-	Gm	*
19100	Site 4	439677	5441615	East of Velická potok	2.5	-	Sm	180–250
19101	Site 5	439605	5441701	West of Velická potok	2.6	-	Sh	90–180
19102	Site 5	439605	5441701	West of Velická potok	2.5	-	Sh	180–250
19105	Site 6	439775	5441345	Modern Analogue (MA)	0	-	Sm	180–250
19106	Site 6	439775	5441345	Modern Analogue (MA)	0.03	-	Sm	250–355
19103*	Site 7	440614	5436964	Distant MA	0	-	Sm	*
19104*	Site 7	440614	5436964	Distant MA	0.12	-	Sm	90–180
20026	GYW, site 2	439514	5442023	Saturated sample	15	YN1	Boulder	180–250
20028	Site 8	439819	5442867	Moraine	5	-	DmC	180–250

Water content test, where ages for samples 19084, 19086 and 19094 were calculated for 0% and 50% water content_

Sample No.	Water Content (0%)	Water Content (50%)	Expected Water Content

	Age (ka)	Age (ka)	Age (ka)
19084	236 ± 28	328 ± 40	275 ± 33
19086	169 ± 24	245 ± 35	210 ± 30
19094	123 ± 13	178 ± 17	139 ± 14

Testing the Applicability of Quartz and Feldspar for Luminescence Dating of Pleistocene Alluvial Sediments in the Tatra Mountain Foothills, Slovakia

Figures & Tables

Fig 1.

Fig 2.

Fig 3.

Fig 4.

Fig 5.

Fig 6.

Fig 7.

Fig 8.

Fig 9.

Fig 10.

Fig 11.

Fig 12.

Fig 13.

Fig 14.

Fig 15.

Fig 16.

Fig 17.

Fig S1.

Fig S4.

Dose recovery ratios and residual doses for IR and pIRIR measured on all samples from the Bee pit and the Velická dolina valley_

Results of the SOL2 bleaching experiment for sample 19087_

Results of the IR50 and pIRIR225 measurements: g-values, feldspar dose estimates, the number aliquots with De < 2D0 compared to the total number of accepted aliquots and the uncorrected and corrected ages_

The water content values used for the age calculation, per sample_ For three samples the uncorrected pIRIR age (ka) is shown calculated with all three water contents_

OSL parameters calculated from the quartz extracts using linear modulation compared to other values from literature_

OSL doses, dose rates and ages for the quartz samples_

Concentration of radioactive elements in the sampled sediments (from gamma spectrometry) and the dose rate from cosmic radiation to each sample (as calculated in DRAC v1_2 (Durcan et al_, 2015))_

Sample information acquired from the investigated study areas_ Lithofacies codes are based on Krüger and Kjaer (1999)_

Water content test, where ages for samples 19084, 19086 and 19094 were calculated for 0% and 50% water content_

Paradigm

My account