palaeoseismic and archaeological research · osl dating to ﬂuvial deposits. technical...

Luminescence dating of fluvial deposits: applications to geomorphic,palaeoseismic and archaeological research

TAMMYM. RITTENOUR

BOREAS Rittenour, T. M. 2008 (November): Luminescence dating of fluvial deposits: applications to geomorphic, palaeo-seismic and archaeological research.Boreas, Vol. 37, pp. 613–635. 10.1111/j.1502-3885.2008.00056.x. ISSN 0300-9483.

Fluvial deposits and landforms are important archives of river response to climate, tectonics and base level changeand are commonly associated with archaeological sites. Unlike radiocarbon dating, the target material for opti-cally stimulated luminescence (OSL) dating (sands and silts) is nearly ubiquitous in fluvial deposits and the agerange for OSL spans the last glacial–interglacial cycle, a time period of interest to many Quaternary scientists.Recent advances in OSL techniques and the development of single-grain dating capabilities have now allowedfluvial deposits, and other deposits commonly afflicted with incomplete zeroing of the luminescence signal, to bedated. The application of OSL dating to fluvial deposits is discussed with respect to its potential to provide im-portant contributions to research in the fields of geomorphology, palaeoseismology and archaeology. Examplesare given from each research field.

TammyM. Rittenour (e-mail: [email protected]), Department of Geology, Utah State University, 4505 OldMain Hill, Logan UT, 84322, USA; received 25th February 2008, accepted 18th July 2008.

River systems are important geomorphic agents insculpting the Earth’s surface and are excellent monitorsof environmental change because they integrate signalsrelated to the geology, geomorphology, climate, hy-drology, vegetation and tectonics from within theircatchments (e.g. Schumm 1977). As such, fluvial depositsand landforms provide important archives of river re-sponse to changes in climate, tectonics and base level.Additionally, fluvial deposits are commonly associatedwith archaeological sites. Obtaining age control fromfluvial deposits, however, has been difficult due tolimited organic material for radiocarbon dating andproblems with reworking of old carbon in many fluvialsediments (e.g. Blong & Gillespie 1978; Gillespie et al.1992; Stanley & Hait 2000). Other techniques, such ascosmogenic nuclide dating of terrace surfaces andU-series dating of pedogenic carbonate, provide mini-mum ages on sediment deposition and landform aban-donment (e.g. Gosse & Phillips 2001; Sharp et al. 2003).Optically stimulated luminescence (OSL) dating has thebenefit of directly dating the time of sediment depositionand is a rapidly growing technique in the fields of sedi-mentology, geomorphology and archaeology (see reviewsby Stokes 1999; Feathers 2003; Lian & Roberts 2006).

This paper provides a review of new applications ofOSL dating to fluvial deposits. Technical descriptionsof OSL techniques are given elsewhere (e.g. Aitken1998; B�tter-Jensen et al. 2003). Wintle (2008a) pro-vides a general introduction to the minerals used fordating (quartz and feldspars) and dating methodolo-gies. Wallinga (2002) and Jain et al. (2004a) have pro-vided excellent reviews of the applications andproblems of OSL dating in fluvial settings. The goal ofthis article is to provide an updated review of in-novative applications of OSL dating to fluvial deposits

to solve questions related to fluvial response to climateand base level change, palaeoseismic studies and ar-chaeological applications.

Luminescence dating of fluvial sediments

OSL dating provides an age estimate for the last timesediments were exposed to sunlight, which resets theluminescence signal (Huntley et al. 1985). After burial,this signal grows with time due to exposure to ambientradiation in the surrounding sediments and from in-coming cosmic rays. The longer the sample is buried,the longer it is exposed to this low-level radiation andthe greater the intensity of the luminescence signalsubsequently measured. In the laboratory, the age of asample is calculated by dividing the amount of ionizingradiation the sample absorbed during burial (called theequivalent dose, De) by the dose rate derived from theenvironment surrounding the sample. A number oftechniques for De determination have been developed(e.g. Wintle 1997; Aitken 1998; Lian & Roberts 2006).This article focuses on applications using the most re-cent single-aliquot regenerative dose (SAR) techniquefor quartz sand (blue and green light stimulated OSL)(Murray & Wintle 2000), feldspar (infrared stimulatedluminescence, IRSL) (Wallinga et al. 2000a) and fine-grained (silt) IRSL dating (Banerjee et al. 2001). In thispaper, quartz SAR OSL ages are referred to as quartzOSL ages, while luminescence ages obtained from othermethods and minerals are identified differently.

All methods of OSL dating rely on the luminescencesignal acquired during the preceding burial history tohave been removed by light exposure prior to deposi-tion. Incomplete solar resetting of the luminescence

DOI 10.1111/j.1502-3885.2008.00056.x r 2008 The Author, Journal compilation r 2008 The Boreas Collegium

signal at deposition (partial bleaching) results in ageoverestimation and can be a problem in some fluvialsettings (e.g. Murray et al. 1995; Gemmell 1997; Olleyet al. 1999, 2004b; Stokes et al. 2001).

Partial bleaching (zeroing) of the luminescence signalprior to deposition is likely in fluvial environments for anumber of reasons. Solar resetting of water-transportedsediment is limited by the attenuation of light throughthe water column (e.g. Berger 1990). This effect is en-hanced by increased suspended sediment concentra-tions (e.g. Berger & Luternauer 1987). Water depth, themode of sediment transport (suspension, saltation orbedload) and transport distance are also importantcontrols on the bleaching of fluvial sediments. The di-rect input of non-bleached sediment from the erosion ofolder deposits and river banks is common in fluvialsystems and also contributes to scatter in results. Ad-ditionally, floods, storms and other high-dischargeevents cause rapid erosion and transport of sediments,limiting solar exposure.

A number of methods have been proposed to combatthe influence of partial bleaching on De values and re-sulting age calculations. One group of methods utilizesthe multiple components of the quartz OSL signal toisolate and date the most light-sensitive OSL traps(e.g. Tsukamoto et al. 2003; Jain et al. 2005a; Li & Li2006). A second group of methods takes advantage ofrecent advances in the OSL technique that have led tothe measurement of smaller and smaller aliquot sizes(Olley et al. 1998), culminating in the development ofsingle-grain dating techniques (Duller et al. 1999;Duller 2000, 2008) and instrumentation (B�tter-Jensenet al. 2000).

In partially bleached samples, analysis of large ali-quots of sand may produce age overestimates from thecontribution of non-bleached grains to the total signalmeasured (e.g. Jacobs et al. 2003; Thomas et al. 2005;Porat et al. 2008). Small-aliquot (o100 grains) andsingle-grain dating may allow the true burial age of asample to be isolated by allowing the population ofgrains not bleached at deposition to be identified. Single-grain results commonly show positively skewed De dis-tributions, with the youngest population representingthe grains fully bleached at deposition (Fig. 1).

Owing to the large distribution of De results in single-grain analysis, a number of statistical methods havebeen produced to isolate grains representative of thetrue burial dose. These include methods that calculatethe mean of the lowest 5% of the De values (Olley et al.1998), methods that fit a Gaussian distribution to theleading edge (youngest values) of a De distribution his-togram (Lepper et al. 2000) and the central age model(CAM), minimum age model (MAM) and finite mix-ture model (FMM) (Galbraith et al. 1999; Galbraith2005). The optimum choice of statistical methods maybe different for each sample and is dependent on thedominant mechanisms affecting De scatter (e.g. partial

bleaching, post-depositional mixing or dose-rate het-erogeneity) (Bailey & Arnold 2006).

Considerable success has been achieved using single-grain dating from some of the most challengingdepositional environments, including fluvial deposits(Olley et al. 2004b; Thomsen et al. 2007; see also reviewby Duller 2008). Single-grain dating is most importantfor, and applicable to, younger samples (less than a fewthousand years old) (Jain et al. 2004a). Collection ofmodern samples from a number of depositional en-vironments has indicated residual luminescence signalin some settings. This level of non-bleached signalwill contribute a large proportion of the measured De

in young samples and can produce large age over-estimates (e.g. Murray et al. 1995). This effect is ex-pected to be reduced in older samples that have higherburial doses. As an example, DeLong & Arnold (2007)report large overestimates (up to 50% and greater) ofsingle-aliquot measurements as compared to single-grain measurements from samples under 1000 yearsold. Negligible differences were found in late Pleisto-cene samples. Similar overestimates in age have beenseen in other analyses of large aliquots from partiallybleached samples (e.g. Thomas et al. 2005; Porat et al.2008).

Figure 1 gives examples of single-grain and large ali-quot results from young fluvial samples collected froman ephemeral stream in western Nebraska (Hanson2006). It is clear from the dose distributions of the sin-gle-grain results that these samples have high De scatterthat is skewed toward higher doses, indicative of partialbleaching. However, results from the large aliquot(5mm) analyses do not show this same skewness andhave much higher mean and minimum De values.Averaging of thousands of grains has masked signs ofpartial bleaching and the true burial age of the sample.For these reasons, single-grain and small-aliquot ana-lysis is preferred for identification and potential miti-gation of problems associated with partial bleaching inyoung fluvial samples.

Despite potential pitfalls, many studies have hadconsiderable success in dating fluvial deposits usingsingle-aliquot (multi-grain) techniques (e.g. Tornqvistet al. 2000; Cheong et al. 2003; Rittenour et al. 2005;Rodnight et al. 2005, 2006; Tooth et al. 2007). As withsingle-grain dating, samples with evidence of partialbleaching may require statistical methods to isolate thetrue burial dose (e.g. Olley et al. 1998; Galbraith et al.1999, 2005; Lepper et al. 2000; Roberts et al. 2000;Fuchs & Lang 2001), but, overall, most sediments haveproved datable by OSL with only a few exceptions(Wallinga 2002; Jain et al. 2004a).

Research by a number of groups over the last coupleof decades has identified interesting results regardingthe bleaching of sediments in fluvial environments. Thefirst is related to the observation that modern and re-cently deposited sediment in fluvial systems is

614 Tammy M. Rittenour BOREAS

commonly less well bleached than samples collectedfrom older deposits from the same river system (see Jainet al. 2004a). The large influence of small residual lu-minescence signals on ‘modern age’ deposits com-pounds this difference but does not completely explainit. Collection of modern analogue samples has beenproposed to identify the bleaching efficiency of differ-ent depositional environments (Murray et al. 1995).However, not all modern samples are good analoguesfor bleaching of older deposits. It is likely that sedi-ments in terrace deposits and older floodplain and

channel deposits have undergone considerably longerand more numerous transport and deposition cyclesprior to final deposition (allowing for greater bleach-ing) than the transient sediment found in modernchannel and bar deposits (Jain et al. 2004a).

A second unexpected result in the bleaching of fluvialsediment is related to the difference between coarserand finer grain sizes. It might be expected that fine-grained sediment (silt to very fine sand) would be betterbleached due to the greater potential for these sedi-ments to be transported in suspension in the water

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Age Results

SG = 150±20 yrMG = 1400±180 yrLowest MG De = 430±530 yr



Rocky Hollow 7–1n = 21

00 1.5 3 4.5 6 7.5 9 10.5

1

2

3

4

5

6

De (Gy)


De (Gy)


–3 0 3 6 9 12 15182124273033 363942454851

De (Gy)De (Gy)

De (Gy)



Freq

uenc

y

00 1.5 3 4.5 6 7.5 9 10.5

0 1.5 3 4.5 6 7.5 9 10.5

1

2

3

4

5

6

Freq

uenc

y

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Freq

uenc

y

Freq

uenc

yFr

eque

ncy

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Fre

quen

cy


0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

–2 0 2 4 6 8 1012 14 1618 20 22 24 26 28 3032

–3 0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39

De (Gy)

Large aliquot(multi-grain, MG) Single grain (SG)

Fig. 1. Comparison of large-aliquot and single-grain results from three young fluvial samples from an ephemeral stream in western Nebraska(Hanson 2006). Results from the large-aliquot analysis (5mm, thousands of grains) show some signs of equivalent dose (De) scatter, such asbimodal distributions (sample 7-1) and skew toward younger values (sample 14-1). Multi-grain results from sample 8-3 are normally dis-tributed, which may be interpreted to indicate a well-bleached sample. However, single-grain results show skewed distributions toward higherDe values and provide a clearer image of the partial bleaching within these samples. Averaging of thousands of grains within the large aliquotshas masked these signs of partial bleaching and the true burial age of the sample. Under the age results column: SG=single-grain results usinga minimum age model; MG=multi-grain (large-aliquot) results. Data kindly provided by P. R. Hanson, University of Nebraska.

BOREAS Luminescence dating of fluvial deposits 615

column. Coarser sediment (medium-coarse sand) ismore likely to have been transported as bedload bysaltation or tractive forces at the base of the water col-umn. However, many studies have found that thecoarser grain sizes have lower De values and are betterbleached at deposition (Olley et al. 1998; Colls et al.2001; Truelsen & Wallinga 2003; Alexanderson 2007;Vandenberghe et al. 2007).

The reasons for the difference in bleaching betweenfiner and coarser grain sizes are not fully understoodbut are probably related to the mode of transport.Coarser grained sediments are transported at a slowerrate through a fluvial system than silts and very finesand in suspension, allowing more time for sunlightexposure between initial erosion from an older depositand final deposition. Coarser sediment is also morelikely to be deposited on channel bars and exposed tolight numerous times during transport. In addition tomud coatings on fine grains, the cohesive properties ofsilts and very fine sand may cause these grains to betransported as aggregates and hinder solar bleaching.Regardless of the cause of the difference in bleachingbetween grain sizes, it is recommended that coarsergrain sizes are dated in fluvial deposits where partialbleaching is a problem.

Comparison between dating techniques

A number of studies have compared OSL ages withother dating techniques. Murray & Olley (2002) com-pared quartz OSL ages from known age deposits from a

number of depositional settings and found a good cor-relation, with accurate OSL ages obtained to at least350 kyr. Figure 2 is an updated version of the figureproduced by Murray & Olley (2002) with additionalsamples included. Note that despite potential problemswith partial bleaching in fluvial settings, there is nosystematic offset for fluvial samples as compared toother depositional environments.

Most studies have compared OSL with radiocarbondue to its wide application and acceptance in the Qua-ternary research community and have found good cor-respondence in many cases (e.g. Wallinga et al. 2001;Jain et al. 2004a; Olley et al. 2004a; Rittenour et al.2005), but not all (e.g. Folz et al. 2001; Kolstrup et al.2007; Owen et al. 2007). However, while inconsistenciesbetween these chronometers may indicate errors in theOSL chronology (e.g. due to partial bleaching or doserate uncertainty), it is also likely that they reflect pro-blems with radiocarbon ages due to contamination orreworking of organic material (e.g. Goble et al. 2004;Cupper 2006; DeLong & Arnold 2007). Additionally,there is added uncertainty when comparing OSL andradiocarbon due to problems with calibrating radio-carbon ages to calendar years beyond 15 kyr (Reimeret al. 2004).

Despite potential problems with both techniques,there is good agreement in samples collected from fluvialdeposits from throughout the radiocarbon age range(0–40kyr) (Fig. 2). Fewer comparisons are available forolder samples, but there is no evidence of systematic de-parture between OSL and independent ages over the last

0

100

200

300

4000 100 200 300 400

Independent Age (kyr)

OS

L A

ge (

kyr)

1

1.75

OS

L/In

depe

nden

t A

ge R

atio

1.9 3.1

0.25

6.4 7.1

Aeolian (n = 43)

Fluvial (n = 61)

Marine (n = 33)

Glacial (n = 6)

1:1 line

0.001

0.01

0.1

1

10

100

0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000

OS

L A

ge (

kyr)

Independent Age (kyr)

OSL age

over

estim

ate

(par

tial b

leach

ing)

Fig. 2. Comparison of quartz SAR OSL agesfrom fluvial (filled squares) and other depositionsettings to independent age control. Modifiedand updated fromMurray & Olley (2002) withmore recently published results. Age data andreferences provided in Appendix Table 1.


several hundred thousand years (e.g. Murray &Olley 2002; Murray & Funder 2003; Watanuki et al.2005; Murray et al. 2007, 2008).

Applications and examples

Fluvial deposits and environments are important ar-chives of past changes in climate, base level and tec-tonics, and commonly contain archaeological horizons.Therefore, accurate age control from fluvial deposits isimportant for a number of research fields. OSL datingof fluvial deposits has become increasingly widely usedand accepted over the past decade. Examples of theapplication of OSL dating to a number of fluvial set-tings and research questions are discussed below.

Fluvial response to glaciation and sea-level change

River channel morphology, longitudinal valley profile,sedimentary architecture and dynamic state (aggrad-ing/incising/stable) are controlled by complex interac-tions between external controls such as climate,tectonics and base level (e.g. Blum & Tornqvist 2000).Although fluvial deposits and landforms do not providea direct record of past base level and climate change,they can provide information about the response of theriver system to these external variables.

Large river systems such as the lower MississippiRiver in the United States, the Rhine–Meuse River

system in The Netherlands, and the River Thames andformer Solent River in southern England have beenextensively studied with respect to fluvial response toglaciation and sea-level change (e.g. Bridgland 1994,2000; Maddy et al. 1998; Tornqvist 1998; Blum et al.2000; Tornqvist et al. 2000, 2004; Rittenour et al. 2007).These rivers have also been extensively dated withradiocarbon, although most of these ages are limited toHolocene deposits due to the lack of organic material inthe Pleistocene strata and the upper age limit forradiocarbon dating. OSL dating has been applied tothese river systems to extend the fluvial chronologiesover the past several glacial–interglacial cycles.

Mississippi River, USA. – An OSL chronology basedon over 80 quartz OSL ages has been developed forPleistocene and Holocene fluvial deposits in the lowerMississippi valley (Rittenour et al. 2003, 2005, 2007;Holbrook et al. 2006). OSL ages were collected fromoutcrops and shallow surface cores from late Pleisto-cene braid belts and last interglacial and Holocenemeander belts and range from 0 to 85 kyr (Fig. 3) (Rit-tenour et al. 2005, 2007). These ages agree with theavailable radiocarbon chronology and relative ageconstraints from loess stratigraphy and cross-cuttingrelationships. Additionally, OSL results show onlyminimal influence of partial bleaching despite sedimenttransport under high suspended sediment load condi-tions and late Pleistocene glacial meltwater discharge.

Fig. 3. Generalized cross-section of fluvial landforms and deposits in the northern lower Mississippi valley with the OSL chronology plottedgraphically above each terrace surface. Modified from Rittenour et al. (2005) with the addition of Holocene meander belt ages.


Adequate bleaching prior to deposition was likely dueto long transport distances. Insights gained from thisnew OSL chronology and field relationships suggestthat braid belt formation and abandonment was con-trolled by fluctuations in glacial sediment and melt-water discharge, while sea level controlled the elevationto which the river was graded (Rittenour et al. 2007).

Rhine–Meuse River, The Netherlands. – OSL datinghas also been conducted on the Rhine–Meuse Riversystem in The Netherlands (Tornqvist 1998; Tornqvistet al. 2000, 2003; Wallinga 2001; Wallinga et al. 2001,2004; Busschers et al. 2005, 2007). Over 90 lumines-cence samples have been collected from a number ofdeep cores collected within the Rhine–Meuse valley(Busschers et al. 2005, 2007). A majority of the sampleswere processed to extract quartz for luminescencemeasurements, while some were processed for bothquartz and feldspar dating. Where comparisons weremade, feldspar IRSL ages consistently underestimatedboth quartz OSL ages and constraints from known-agedeposits (Wallinga et al. 2000b, 2001). This may be dueto anomalous fading of the luminescence signal in feld-spars and problems with its correction (e.g. Wintle1973; Wallinga et al. 2007). Quartz OSL ages rangefrom Holocene to over 200 kyr, and are strati-graphically consistent with the available radiocarbonand pollen biostratigraphic age control (Busschers et al.2005, 2007). OSL results and core descriptions havebeen used to reconstruct river response to sea level andhave helped to refine the subsurface fluvial stratigraphyof the Rhine–Meuse River system (Tornqvist et al.2000, 2003; Busschers et al. 2005, 2007). Additionally,hundreds of cores and stratigraphic descriptions fromthe Rhine–Meuse Delta have been used to reconstructchannel patterns and fluvial response to ice advance,sea level and climate change during the last glacial cycle(Busschers et al. 2005, 2007, 2008).

Thames and Solent River systems, southern Eng-land. – The large river systems south of the Anglian(marine oxygen isotope stage, MIS 12) and Late De-vensian (MIS 2) ice limits in southern England containextensive fluvial records that extend back to the MiddlePleistocene and roughly correlate to glacial–interglacialclimate, sea-level and isostacy changes in the region(e.g. Sandford 1924; Bridgland 1994, 2000; Maddyet al. 1998; Lewis et al. 2001; Briant et al. 2006). Fluvialdeposits and terraces of the River Thames, and to alesser extent those in the Solent basin, have been datedby pollen and mammalian biostratigraphy, aminoacidgeochronology and Palaeolithic artifact assemblages(e.g. Briggs et al. 1985; Bridgland 1994). New quartzOSL chronologies have been developed to refine thechronostratigraphies in these river systems (e.g. Maddyet al. 1998; Lewis et al. 2001; Briant et al. 2006). TheseOSL chronologies for the most part match previous age

models; however, there are some inconsistencies andscatter in age results for deposits older than 300 kyr inthe Solent basin, possibly due to samples nearing themaximum limit for OSL dating and saturation of theluminescence signal (Briant et al. 2006).

Fluvial response to climate change

River systems and climate are intimately linkedthrough the hydrological cycle and climate-mediatedchanges in sediment yield within catchments (e.g.Schumm 1977; Bull 1991). Despite potential problemswith partial bleaching, considerable success has beenobtained applying OSL dating to a number of differentfluvial settings for the reconstruction of fluvial responseto climate change (e.g. Leigh et al. 2004; Schokker et al.2005; Briant et al. 2006; Brook et al. 2006; Williamset al. 2006; Sohn et al. 2007; Thomas et al. 2007b). Stu-dies from a number of regions and climate settings arediscussed below.

Hillslope and fluvial response to climate, Australia. –Luminescence dating has played a key role in Quaternarystudies and climate reconstruction from fluvial sequencesin Australia (e.g. Page et al. 1991, 1996; Page & Nanson1996; English et al. 2001; Ogden et al. 2001; Banerjee et al.2002; Kemp & Spooner 2007). Thomas et al. (2007a)provide an excellent example of the application of OSLdating to hillslope and fluvial deposits along the north-eastern coast of Queensland, Australia to decipher fluvialresponse to climate change. Ages were obtained usingradiocarbon (n=6), thermoluminescence (TL) (n=16)and quartz OSL methods (n=36). Owing to scarcity oforganic material for radiocarbon dating, age control wasonly possible through luminescence dating techniques atmost locations. Results indicate marked differences in al-luvial/colluvial systems between coarse-grained fanglo-merate deposition in MIS 3 (64–28kyr), fine-grainedalluviation and vertical fan accretion inMIS 2 (28–24kyr)and incision at �14–15kyr. Correlation to the regionalpollen stratigraphy (Kershaw et al. 2007) suggests thatthese changes in hillslope and fluvial processes were asso-ciated with climate and vegetation shifts.

Tributary and trunk channel response to climate, GrandCanyon and southwestern USA. – Studies of arid flu-vial systems have suggested that they are sensitive in-dicators of climate-related changes in sediment supplyand discharge (e.g. Bull 1991). The Colorado River andits tributaries in the Grand Canyon and Grand WashTrough, just downstream of the Grand Canyon, havebeen the focus of research efforts to understand the re-sponse of different scale fluvial systems to local and re-gional climate (Anders et al. 2005; DeJong et al. 2006;Pederson et al. 2006; Rittenour et al. 2006; DeJong2007). Fluvial deposits and terrace landforms have beendated by a number of methods. The time of fluvial


aggradation and sediment deposition has beendetermined by quartz OSL dating of sediment andU-series dating of interbedded travertine that wasdeposited contemporaneously with fluvial deposition.Terrestrial cosmogenic nuclide (TCN) surface dating ofdesert pavements and sediment profiles provides mini-mum age estimates for river incision and terrace surfaceabandonment (Gosse & Phillips 2001).

Geochronologic and stratigraphic results from fourstudy areas within and adjoining the Grand Canyon arepresented in Fig. 4. Age results are consistent betweenthe different dating methods and are coherent withstratigraphic relationships. OSL results are roughlyequivalent to U-series ages of fluvial aggradation inTravertine Grotto in western Grand Canyon (Fig. 4C).In eastern Grand Canyon, OSL and TCN samples werecollected from a number of terraces from the ColoradoRiver and its tributaries. As expected, TCN ages ofterrace surface abandonment and landform stabiliza-tion are younger than OSL ages of fluvial aggradationof the underlying terrace fill (Fig. 4A, B). Equivalentdose distributions from samples collected from quartz-rich, long-transported deposits of the mainstem Color-ado River showed very little evidence for partialbleaching, while samples of short-transported and lo-

cally sourced sediments from tributary catchmentscontained much greater scatter and evidence for partialbleaching (DeJong et al. 2006; Rittenour et al. 2006;DeJong 2007).

OSL ages from deposits of the Colorado River andits tributaries in eastern and western Grand Canyonand Grand Wash Trough have provided important in-formation about incision rates (Pederson et al. 2006)and the timing of the response of these arid fluvial sys-tems to regional and extra-regional climate (Anderset al. 2005; DeJong et al. 2006; Rittenour et al. 2006;DeJong 2007). OSL and other chronostratigraphicresults from terrace deposits of the main stem ColoradoRiver indicate that aggradation and incision werepredominantly controlled by MIS 4 glaciation in itsheadwaters. In contrast, tributary chronologiesindicate a local response to climate-related sedimentsupply and have very few similarities with con-temporaneous dynamics in the main stem river (Anderset al. 2005; DeJong et al. 2006; DeJong 2007) (Fig. 4B,C). Terrace stratigraphies from Grand Wash indicatelower late Pleistocene incision rates and record adifferent sequence of fluvial terraces in this much largerand more arid drainage basin (Rittenour et al. 2006)(Fig. 4D).

200

170

80

60

40

20

0

Eastern Grand Canyon Tributaries

m a

bove

cre

ek

180

150

120

90

60

30

0

Colorado River - Eastern Grand Canyon

m a

bove

riv

er

A B

Travertine Grotto - Western Grand Canyon

m a

bove

cre

ek

40

50

30

20

10

0

60

C Grand Wash - Grand Wash Trough

m a

bove

was

h

0

40

20

60

80

D

Fig. 4. Schematic cross-sections and age constraints from terrace sequences from (A) the Colorado River in eastern Grand Canyon (modifiedfrom Pederson et al. 2006), (B) tributary valleys in eastern Grand Canyon (modified from Anders et al. 2005), (C) Travertine Grotto, a smalltributary in western Grand Canyon, and (D) Grand Wash in the Grand Wash Trough, just downstream of Grand Canyon. Age control hasbeen provided by OSL ages on fluvial sediment, U-series ages on travertine interbedded within fluvial and colluvial sediments and terrestrialcosmogenic nuclide (TCN) dating of terrace surfaces. As expected, OSL and U-series age from the same terrace fills provide similar ages whileTCN ages of terrace surface abandonment and landform stabilization are younger than OSL ages of fluvial aggradation of the underlyingterrace fill.


Climate and tectonic record from fluvial systems on theGangetic Plains, India. – The broad Gangetic Plains inthe Himalayan Foreland Basin of northern India con-tain a rich archive of fluvial response to climate changeand regional tectonic activity. Radiocarbon, quartzOSL and feldspar IRSL ages have been obtained fromfluvial deposits of the Ganga River and its tributaries(Srivastava et al. 2003a; Gibling et al. 2005; Williamset al. 2006; Sinha et al. 2007). Despite potential partialbleaching problems in these fluvial settings, lumines-cence ages are in close agreement with radiocarbon agecontrol where present. Gibling et al. (2005) identifieddisconformity-bounded floodplain sequences on nowdissected interfluves on the southern Gangetic Plain.Interpretations of these and other stratigraphies fromthe Gangetic Plains suggest that the Ganga River sys-tem has switched between modes of aggradation andincision several times during the last glacial cycle, mostlikely due to changes in the monsoonal precipitationregime (Gibling et al. 2005; Williams et al. 2006; Sinhaet al. 2007). Superimposed on these climate-drivenchanges in fluvial dynamics, geomorphic evidence sug-gests that some incision events were driven by tectonicactivity (Srivastava et al. 2003a, b).

Indian monsoon variability, Thar Desert, India. – Adetailed palaeoclimate record of Indian monsoonvariability is emerging from luminescence-dated fluvialdeposits from the Thar Desert in western India. Juyalet al. (2006) combined quartz OSL ages and strati-graphic descriptions from the Mahi and Orsang Riversto reveal sub-Milankovitch-scale changes in fluvial re-gime related to variations in monsoonal precipitation

over the last 130kyr (see also Tandon et al. 1997) (Fig. 5).This OSL-dated fluvial record shows similar changes inpalaeomonsoon intensity as a marine productivity re-cord from the Arabian Sea (Leuschner & Sirocko 2003)(Fig. 5). Luminescence-dated chronologies from theLuni River and other fluvial systems in the Thar Desertalso suggest a regional fluvial response to climatechange (Jain & Tandon 2003; Jain et al. 2005b).

Equivalent dose distributions from fluvial samplesdisplayed asymmetrical distributions skewed towardhigher values. In order to mitigate partial bleachingproblems and remove the contribution of aliquots con-taining non-bleached grains from the final age calcula-tion, Juyal et al. (2006) used a subset of the youngest De

values (defined as the minimum De value to the mini-mum De value1(2�error)) to calculate their OSL ages.This method is similar to other methods proposed toisolate the youngest population of De values, assumedto be representative of the true burial age.

Slackwater flood sequences from the Thar Deserthave also been analysed to reconstruct monsoon-related large flood frequency over the last millennium.Kale et al. (2000) described several slackwater flooddeposits along the Luni River and used OSL dating toprovide age control. OSL was chosen over radiocarbondating due to the ability to systematically sample de-sired flood units. Because of the possibility of partialbleaching in sediment transported during floods withhigh suspended sediment loads, multiple OSL datingtechniques and different mineral fractions were ana-lysed. The primary age control for the sections was ob-tained by OSL dating quartz using a multiple aliquot(MA) additive-dose technique. Duplicate analyses of

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

130

Age (kyr)

100 200 300

Ba/Al

Arabian Sea(Leuschner & Sirocko 2003)

increased monsoon acitivity

cl si s g

11±1

28±330±3

49±460±6

69±6

98±8

Stratigraphy

OSL ages(kyr)

Inferred environmentalprocesses

Inferred monsoonalactivity

incision, river adjustment

aeolian deposition

flood plain aggradation,pedogenesis

braided channel,soil development

flood plain aggradation,bedded calcrete

formation

braided channel

flood plain finedeposition

weak monsoon

weak monsoon

enhanced monsoon

arid/episodic monsoonactivity

enhanced monsoonwith seasonality

Southern Thar Desert Fluvial Record(Juyal et al. 2006)

enhanced monsoon

grain size

Fig. 5. Synthesis diagram from the research ofJuyal et al. (2006) on fluvial deposits in thesouthern Thar Desert, India. OSL ages werecollected from fluvial channel and floodplaindeposits, depositional environments describedand monsoonal activity interpreted. This fluvialrecord of palaeomonsoon activity correlates ni-cely with marine Ba/Al productivity records ofmonsoon strength from the Arabian Sea (right-most panel, Leuschner & Sirocko 2003).


each sample followed SAR (quartz) and MA differ-ential partial bleach (feldspar) (Singhvi & Lang 1998)techniques. SAR results indicate that the samples werefairly well bleached at deposition. Results from thestudy indicate variability in flood frequency over thelast 1000 years that match records of changes in re-gional monsoon precipitation (Bryson & Swain 1981)and other palaeoflood reconstructions from central In-dia (Ely et al. 1996; Kale 1999).

Summary. – Fluvial deposits contain valuable recordsof river response to changes in sea level, climate andglaciation. Systematic collection of OSL samples fromsilty and sandy material within fluvial sequences canprovide valuable age control on deposits that areotherwise difficult to date due to limited organic mate-rial for radiocarbon dating. Additionally, the age rangefor OSL dating is sufficiently long, up to �300 kyr insome cases (e.g. Murray & Olley 2002), to allow for thereconstruction of fluvial response to climate and sea-level change over the last glacial cycle. Moreover, re-cent statistical and technical advances in OSL datinghave reduced or mitigated partial bleaching problemsfound in some fluvial settings (e.g. Duller et al. 1999;Galbraith et al. 1999; Murray &Wintle 2000; Galbraith2005). These advances and developments allow fluvialdeposits to be accurately dated with OSL and recordsof fluvial response to climate and sea-level change to beconstructed.

Palaeoseismic reconstruction

Fluvial deposits, terraces and alluvial fans can be im-portant archives of tectonic activity (e.g. Schumm 1986;Holbrook & Schumm 1999; Pearce et al. 2004). Anumber of studies have used OSL and other datingmethods on offset fluvial deposits or landforms to de-termine the timing of fault displacement, slip rates andseismic recurrence intervals (e.g. Chen et al. 2003;Cheong et al. 2003; Caputo et al. 2004; Zuchiewicz et al.2004; Mahan et al. 2006; Mason et al. 2006; Mukulet al. 2007). OSL dating has also been directly appliedto fault-scarp colluvium to more directly date seismicevents (e.g. Lu et al. 2002; Fattahi & Walker 2007;Porat et al. 2008). Some examples of the application ofOSL dating of fluvial deposits for palaeoseismic re-constructions are given below.

Offset fluvial deposits and landforms. – One of the mostcommon uses of OSL dating for palaeoseismic studies isdating offset or deformed fluvial landforms or deposits(e.g. Thompson et al. 2002; Cheong et al. 2003; Coxet al. 2006; Amos et al. 2007). Fluvial landforms cancommonly be correlated over long distances and havefairly consistent slopes, allowing crossing faults andstructures to be identified and the displacement of fea-

tures to be calculated. Age control on displaced land-forms and deposits is necessary for the calculation ofslip rates and recurrence intervals on fault movementand earthquake activity. Age control on past seismicevents is especially important for the development ofaccurate hazard assessments of tectonically active re-gions near population centres.

Fattahi et al. (2006, 2007) have studied displaced anddeformed alluvial fans and terraces from the highlyseismically active Alborz-Kopeh Dagh ranges innortheastern Iran. For example, Fattahi et al. (2006)examined folded and faulted alluvial fan deposits asso-ciated with the Sabzevar thrust fault. Quartz OSL agesfrom deformed alluvial sediments indicate fan deposi-tion from �32 to 13 kyr, faulting and graben formationby �9 kyr and additional faulting on the Sabzevarthrust fault in the last 3 kyr (Fig. 6A). Slip rates as highas �1mm/yr and a 3000-year recurrence interval forlarge earthquakes were calculated for this active faultsegment. Reassessment of a young colluvial sample byFattahi & Walker (2007) has produced a SAR IRSLage of 1.7�0.3 kyr on pre-faulting colluvium (Fig. 6A),suggesting that the most recent faulting and displace-ment on the Sabzevar thrust likely represents theearthquake that destroyed the town of Sabzevar in AD1052.

In southern California, DeLong et al. (2007) studieda fluvial terrace that was cross-cut and offset by theeastern Big Pine oblique-reverse fault, one of a numberof faults associated with the broad San Andreastransform fault system. They used quartz OSL ages toconfirm geomorphic evidence that the deposits on ei-ther side of the fault scarp were originally part of thesame terrace surface (Fig 6B). Although there is somescatter in the data, OSL ages from the hanging wall(24.3�2.8 to 14.3�1.9 kyr) and the foot wall (22.0�2.4to 15.9�3.0 kyr) are consistent. From these OSL agesand the amount of vertical displacement on the fault(�10m), a dip-slip rate estimate of �0.9m/kyr wascalculated.

Geomorphic response to tectonic uplift, folding andfaulting. – In addition to dating offset fluvial land-forms, OSL dating has been used by a number ofresearchers to assess tectonic activity by studying thefluvial geomorphic response of rivers to deformation(e.g. Holbrook et al. 2006; Mason et al. 2006; Mathewet al. 2006; Mukul et al. 2007; Srivastava & Misra2008). Localized river incision and/or channel patternchanges near known structures are commonly used cri-teria to identify fault activity or fold deformation (e.g.Schumm, 1986; Holbrook & Schumm, 1999).

Mathew et al. (2006) used OSL to date incisedchannel deposits from a number of rivers along an ac-tive fault-related fold associated with the KachchhMainland Fault in northwestern India. Incision ages onfluvial deposits progressively decreased in age eastward.


These data, along with geomorphic evidence, were usedto suggest eastward lateral fold migration during theHolocene due to fault length extension and vertical up-lift rates of 10�1mm/yr.

Mukul et al. (2007) and Srivastava & Misra (2008)have dated fluvial deposits related to incision from ac-tive uplift and faulting along the Himalayan front innortheastern India. Mukul et al. (2007) used an in-novative approach of applying both TL ages fromfault-gouge material (see discussion below) and quartzOSL ages from unpaired strath terraces to providedevidence for the timing and response of the Tista Riverto uplift and seismic activity surrounding the SouthKalijhora Thrust and several out-of-sequence, surface-breaking faults. Srivastava & Misra (2008) combinedgeomorphic analysis of strath terraces and quartz OSLdating to examine the uplift history of the Himalayanfront along the Kameng River. Their results indicatethat the greatest river incision occurred at about 7 kyr(11.9mm/yr), with average incision rates during the14 kyr of record of 7.5mm/yr. Geomorphic analysis ofthe ratio between strath height and alluvial coverthickness (Starkel 2003) suggest that the strath terraceswere formed predominantly in response to tectonic up-lift with lesser climate influence.

Holbrook et al. (2006) used quartz OSL and radio-carbon dating to determine the timing of channelstraightening events in Mississippi River meander beltsin the New Madrid Seismic Zone, USA. They inter-preted the switch from a highly sinuous channel to astraightened channel course as a response to periodicclustering of seismic events and decreased gradient dueto fault displacement. Two and possibly three straigh-tening events were identified through mapping cross-

cutting relationships and extensive coring (Holbrooket al. 2006). Age control was provided by radiocarbonages on carefully selected macrofossils from channel filldeposits (n=12) and OSL samples from point bar de-posits (n=14) (Fig. 7). OSL and radiocarbon ageswere consistent, and where paired samples were col-lected, point bar samples were older than their asso-ciated abandoned channel-fill deposits, as expectedbased on geomorphic relationships.

Fault-scarp colluvium. – Direct dating of discrete faultrupture events can be achieved by OSL dating fault-scarp colluvium. Trenching of faults is a routine tech-nique for many palaeoseismic studies (e.g. McCalpin1998). Traditionally, colluvial wedges and fault planesare identified from these trenches, and organic materialfrom buried soils or other organics within the faultedsediments are radiocarbon dated to obtain a fault-rup-ture chronology. However, organic material is com-monly scarce in many arid settings and thereforeradiocarbon sample collection is mostly opportunisticin nature. Luminescence dating, on the other hand,allows more selective sampling and has been usedby a number of researchers (e.g. Forman et al. 1989,1991; Porat et al. 1997; Zilberman et al. 2000;Amit et al. 2002; Lu et al. 2002). Early analyses usingTL dating have been largely replaced by OSL andsingle-grain techniques to allow measurement ofthe most light-sensitive traps and most well-bleachedgrains.

Porat et al. (2008) examined colluvial wedge depositsfrom the base of a normal fault that has displaced amiddle Holocene alluvial fan in the Dead Sea Trans-form, southern Israel. They compared large aliquot

A

~9.5 m

13±0.7 kyr

24±5 kyr

32±3 kyr

9±1 kyr

3±0.3 kyr (quartz)1.71±0.29 kyr (feldspar)

hinge grabeninfilled withaeolian sand

tilted bedslow angle thrusts

horizontal strata colluvial wedge

alluvial fan surface

not to scale

24.3±2.8 – 14.3±1.9 kyr (n=3) 22.0±2.4 – 15.9±3.0 kyr (n=4)

estimated dip-slip rate: 0.9 m/kyr Big

fine

faul

t

1250

1200

1150

0 100 200 300 400 500

Distance (m)

Ele

vatio

n (m

)

10 m

deformed tread

scarp

B

Fig. 6. Examples of the applications of OSLdating to palaeoseismic research and re-construction of fault slip rates. A. Schematicdrawing of faulting and folding of an alluvialfan along the Sabzevar thrust fault in north-eastern Iran (Fattahi et al. 2006; Fattahi &Walker 2007). OSL ages indicate fan syndepo-sitional folding and faulting from 32 to 13 kyr,graben formation by 9 kyr and a SAR IRSLage from faulted colluvium suggests that themost recent faulting on the Sabzevar thrust oc-curred within the last 1.7 kyr. Modified fromFattahi et al. (2006). B. OSL age ranges col-lected from a fluvial terrace that has been offsetby the eastern Big Pine fault in southern Cali-fornia, USA. OSL ages were used to confirmthat the now displaced fluvial landforms wereonce the same terrace surface and to calculatedipslip rates on the fault. Modified from De-Long et al. (2007).


(1000’s grains), small-aliquot (100’s grains) and single-grain results from samples collected from proximal (lessthan 1m from the fault) and distal (�2m from thefault) parts of a stack of colluvial wedges (Fig. 8).Results indicate partial bleaching in all samples, withgreater partial bleaching in proximal colluvial wedgesamples (Table 1). Age reversals in SAR multi-grainanalyses were attributed to progressive exposure anderosion of older sediments with continual faultdisplacement. Large aliquot ages substantially over-estimated the time of faulting, providing additionalsupport for the use of small-aliquot or single-graindating for environments where partial bleaching maybe a problem. Single-grain results analysed using theminimum age model of Galbraith et al. (1999)produced the most reasonable ages (Table 1).

OSL dating of fault gouge and liquefaction features. –Innovative research is being developed to directly datefaulting by luminescence dating fault gouge and lique-faction features. During seismic activity and fault slip itmay be possible that sediment within the fault gouge

receives enough energy from friction, vibration, crush-ing and heat to zero the luminescence signal. Initialstudies tested the application of thermoluminescence(Fukuchi 1992) and electron-spin resonance (ESR)(Singhvi et al. 1994) to date fault-gouge materials andfound results consistent with radiocarbon ages. Morerecently, Mukul et al. (2007) applied TL dating of fault-gouge deposits in northeastern India and found TLages much younger than the source rock (42–45 kyrcompared to Z2Myr), suggesting the samples werezeroed during fault movement. Owing to uncertaintieswith partial resetting of the TL signal, the ages wereconsidered maximum ages for faulting. Research in-volving OSL analysis of fault-gouge deposits may pro-vide more sensitive indicators of fault movement andluminescence resetting (Rink et al. 1999).

Liquefaction features such as injection dikes and sandblows (deposition from the surface rupture of an injec-tion dike) are commonly produced during earthquakesin sandy fluvial deposits. New research is investigatingthe potential applications of OSL to these liquefactionfeatures in an attempt to directly date seismic events.

Channel Fill

Late Holocene Cycle

Meandering Phase Straight Phase

0 5 km

Middle Holocene Cycle


Early Holocene Cycle?


Stratigraphic data

from core

OSL and calibrated

radiocarbon (RC) age

control points (yr)

Reelfoot FaultScarp

1250±70 OSL

961–744 RC

961–720 RC

2475–2200 RC

2300±220 OSL2386–2203 RC

2833–2564 RC1030±70 OSL

2490±180 OSL

4244±269 OSL

3304±306 OSL

3620±220 OSL

3680±270 OSL

4720±300 OSL

4590±230 OSL

7250±360 OSL

7484±367 OSL

6357–6047 RC

Mississippi River

Fig. 7. OSL and radiocarbon ages collected from point bar and channel fill deposits of the Mississippi River in the NewMadrid Seismic Zone,USA. Meanderbelt abandonment and straightening of channel courses, as dated by OSL and radiocarbon, have been interpreted to haveoccurred in response to clustered seismic activity on the Reelfoot fault. Note that OSL ages from point bar deposits are older than their asso-ciated channel fill deposits, as expected from geomorphic relationships. Modified from Holbrook et al. (2006).


Porat et al. (2007) investigated the use of OSL todetermine the difference between clastic dikes (filledfrom above) and injection dikes (formed by liquefac-tion during earthquakes) in the southern Dead Sea ba-sin of Israel. It was proposed that injection dikes wouldhave the same OSL age as the late Pleistocene sourcematerial, OSL dated to 43–34 kyr. However, quartz

OSL ages from both the depositional and injectiondikes were dated to 17–15 kyr. These results imply thatthe OSL signals in the injection dikes may have beenreset during liquefaction and that OSL may be used todate earthquake-induced liquefaction features directly.However, a similar study by Thomas et al. (2007c) inNE India has produced indistinguishable quartz OSL

1

2

11

2

33II

IIIIV

V

VII VIII

IX

X

XI

4

10

12

XI

56

11

10

9

7

6

distal colluvial wedge

proximalcolluvialwedge

medialcolluvial wedge

VI

1 m

1 m

Fig. 8. Locations of OSL samples collected from fault-scarp colluvial wedges adjacent to a fault that cuts across an alluvial fan in the Dead SeaTransform, Israel (Porat et al. 2008). OSL samples were collected from proximal, medial and distal colluvial wedges to determine relationshipsbetween bleaching and distance from the fault scarp. Samples were analysed for quartz and feldspar using large aliquots, small aliquots andsingle-grain analysis. Results are presented in Table 1. Arabic numerals refer to colluvial wedges and Roman numerals to deposits in the faultedalluvial fan (numbered from oldest to youngest). Modified from Porat et al. (2008).

Table 1. OSL ages from colluvial wedges in Trench-18, Dead Sea Transform, from Porat et al. (2008).

Sample no. and location Feldspar IRSL ages (kyr) Quartz OSL ages (kyr)

Large aliquot SAAD Small aliquot SAR Large aliquot SAR Single-grain SAR

Mean Youngest Mean Youngest MAM Mean Youngest Mean MAM

Distant colluvial wedge5 Upper wedge (X) 3.6�1.3 1.5�0.2 2.6�2.0 0.57�0.04 3.2�2.6 (34) 0.83�0.206 Lower wedge (VII) 3.6�1.3 2.0�0.2 2.1�1.5 0.7�0.1 0.82�0.10 5.2�4.4 1.6�0.10 3.0�2.7 (72) 0.64�0.11

Medial colluvial wedge7 Lowest colluvium 4.2�1.4 2.4�0.3 4.8�3.25 1.4�0.1 2.8�2.3 (30) 1.3�0.2

Proximal colluvial wedge11 Upper wedge (IX) 16.7�2.3 14.2�1.2 12.8�4.4 7.9�0.3 20�25 (35) 0.83�0.2610 Middle wedge (VIII) 10.9�1.4 10.0�0.4 9.2�8.2 1.3�0.1 1.8�0.35 8.3�3.5 4.6�0.6 8.7�11.8 (26) 0.96�0.389 Lowest wedge (VII) 4.5�0.8 3.8�0.4 4.3�2.9 1.8�0.1 2.2�1.6 (23) 0.53�0.11

Mean is the age calculated from the average of all aliquots measured. Youngest is the age calculated from the lowest measured De.

MAM=minimum age model of Galbraith et al. (1999). Numbers of grains included in single-grain age estimates are given in parentheses. See

Fig. 8 for sample locations.


ages between injection dikes and their source sediment,suggesting that further research into the applicability ofOSL for dating liquefaction is needed.

Additional age constraint on the timing of liquefac-tion and seismic activity may be obtained by OSL dat-ing sand blows formed by the surface rupture ofliquefaction features and injection dikes. Thomas et al.(2007c) used thin sampling tubes to collect the upper1.5 cm of sediment from a sand blow deposit, hoping tocollect the sediment exposed to sunlight during the de-position of the sand blow, but prior to subsequentfloodplain deposition. Results were scattered suggest-ing that non-bleached sediments were collected and thepossible influence of bioturbation. Future samplingstrategies have been proposed including careful mm-scale excavation of the upper sediment from sand blows(Thomas et al. 2007c). Cox et al. (2007) applied a dif-ferent approach to dating sand blows from the lowerMississippi valley, USA. Instead of sampling the sandblow directly, they collected fine-grained samples fromburied soils and sediment layers underlying the targetsand blows. For the most part, their multiple aliquotIRSL results fit with the radiocarbon ages obtained fromthe underlying deposits and within the sand blows, withsome evidence of partial bleaching resulting from thepresence of reworked older sedimentary grains.

Summary. – OSL dating has great potential forpalaeoseismic reconstruction owing to its versatility todirectly sample targeted features and deposits. OSLsamples from offset or deformed fluvial terraces andalluvial fans provide critical age control for slip-ratecalculations. Dating proximal settings such as fault-scarp colluvium and sand blows is more challenging dueto partial bleaching, but may provide more detailed in-formation of recurrence intervals. New advances in OSLdating techniques (Murray & Wintle 2000), single-graindating (Duller et al. 1999; B�tter-Jensen et al. 2000;Duller 2000) and statistical analyses of De results (e.g.Galbraith et al. 1999; Galbraith 2005) have improvedthe accuracy of OSL dating and have allowed newapplications of OSL dating to palaeoseismic studies.

Archaeological applications

Rivers, lakes and other water sources have always beenimportant human resources and the focal points of pastcultures and occupation sites. As such, archaeologicalsites are commonly associated with, and interleavedwithin, fluvial deposits. Traditionally, archaeologicalsites and occupation horizons have been dated withradiocarbon, commonly from charcoal or wood. Whileradiocarbon ages have been instrumental in placing ar-chaeological features and artefacts in a chronologicalframework, there are several caveats that limit their use.For example, radiocarbon ages may not provide the

desired age of occupation due to reuse of materials orreworking of detrital charcoal and wood, which iscommon in fluvial settings. Radiocarbon dating is fur-ther limited by uncertainties in calibration to calendaryears and is constrained to the last �40 kyr. For thesereasons, luminescence dating may be preferable in somecases and has been increasingly applied to archae-ological settings.

There has been a long-standing connection betweenluminescence dating and archaeological research.Thermoluminescence dating has been the keystonetechnique for dating fired pottery (e.g. Zimmerman1971; Aitken, 1985), with more recent applications ofOSL dating of pottery (see reviews by Roberts 1997;Feathers 2003; Wintle 2008b). Additionally, OSL dat-ing has been applied to sediments associated witharchaeological sites for geoarchaeological and environ-mental studies (e.g. Folz et al. 2001; Sommerville et al.2001; Feathers 2003; Gibling et al. 2008).

Luminescence techniques have been particularlyuseful for dating sites older than 40 kyr (e.g. Bowleret al. 2003; Grine et al. 2007; Mercier et al. 2007), andsites associated with initial colonization of Australia(e.g. Cupper & Duncan 2006; Olley et al. 2006; Davidet al. 2007; Prescott et al. 2007) and the Americas (e.g.Feathers et al. 2006; Gonzalez et al. 2006). The focus ofthis article is on the application of OSL dating to fluvialdeposits, but it should be noted that there are manyapplications of OSL dating that are unique to archae-ological studies. These include dating fired sedimentsand rocks associated with hearths (Tribolo et al. 2003;Lamothe 2004; Lian & Brooks 2004; Fanning et al.2008), single-grain dating mud wasp nests associatedwith rock art (Roberts et al. 1997; Yoshida et al. 2003),single-grain dating grave infills to determine age of hu-man burials (Olley et al. 2006), dating sediment ce-mented within late Pleistocene human remains (Grineet al. 2007), and dating brick and mortar to determinethe timing of building construction (Bailiff & Holland2000; Jain et al. 2004b; Vieillevigne et al. 2006).

Dating Palaeolithic sites. – Palaeolithic archaeologicalsites provide important information about the evolu-tion and dispersal routes of Neanderthal and modernhumans. While late Upper Palaeolithic sites(�40–10 kyr) may be dated with radiocarbon, MiddlePalaeolithic and older Upper Palaeolithic sites are nearor beyond the applicable limit for radiocarbon datingand are associated with large calibration uncertaintiesand multiple calibration curves available for this inter-val (e.g. Kitagawa & van der Plicht 1998; Hughen et al.2004; Fairbanks et al. 2005). For these reasons, OSLdating has been increasingly used to provide age con-trol at a number of Palaeolithic sites. Many importantPalaeolithic sites in rock shelters and non-fluvial set-tings have been dated with OSL (e.g. Bowler et al. 2003;Cupper & Duncan 2006; Olley et al. 2006; Rhodes et al.


2006; David et al. 2007; Mercier et al. 2007; Prescottet al. 2007). Applications of OSL dating to Palaeolithicsites found along river terraces in Russia and India arediscussed here.

The Kostenki Palaeolithic sites, found on the lowterraces of the Don River in westernmost Russia, havebeen the focus of archaeological research since the in-itial discovery of stone artifacts and mammoth bones inthe late 1800s (see Hoffecker et al. 2002, 2004 and re-ferences therein). Initial age control was obtained fromstratigraphic relationships and radiocarbon ages frombone. More recently, Holliday et al. (2007; see also Si-nitsyn & Hoffecker 2006; Anikovich et al. 2007) havedeveloped a more detailed chronostratigraphy of thelocality from fine-grained MA IRSL ages and radio-carbon dating of charcoal (Fig. 9). Additional age con-trol was obtained from identification of the CampanianIgnimbrite Y5 tephra (�40 kyr) and palaeomagneticcorrelation to the Laschamp Excursion (39–45 kyr).Luminescence ages are consistent with the other agecontrol and provide the most reliable ages for the oldestcultural horizons and lowest part of the section.

In a similar study, Gibling et al. (2008) used quartzOSL and radiocarbon dating to provide age control forarchaeological sites from river terraces along the BelanRiver in India. Terrace deposits containing MiddlePalaeolithic artifacts were dated to between 85�11kyrand 72�8kyr and stratigraphically younger aeolian andfluvial channel fills were OSL dated to 13–8kyr. Theseyounger ages are consistent with radiocarbon results andcorrelate with strata containing Neolithic artifacts.

Irrigation canals. – In addition to providing age con-straints beyond the limit of radiocarbon, OSL datingmay, in some cases, provide improved age control inyoung sediments, where there are greater radiocarboncalibration uncertainties and reworking of older organicmaterial is common. Examples of the application of OSLdating to young canal sediments are given below.

Canal networks on the Mekong Delta in southernCambodia have been investigated to determine the uti-lity of OSL dating to date channel use and infilling(Sanderson et al. 2003, 2007; Bishop et al. 2004). Al-though underwater bleaching experiments and subaqu-eous spectral measurements suggest reduced bleachingefficiency in canal settings with high suspended sedimentloads (Sanderson et al. 2007), many quartz OSL ages areconsistent with radiocarbon ages (Sanderson et al. 2003;Bishop et al. 2004). Age overestimates from some sam-ples are interpreted to be due to incorporation of non-bleached grains in multi-grain aliquots. Smaller aliquotsizes or single-grain dating may reduce these problems.

In the American southwest, Berger et al. (2004)examined irrigation canals near Phoenix, Arizona.Samples were collected and analysed for fine-grainedMA IRSL, SAR IRSL and post-IR SAR (analysis ofquartz signal). Results indicate that some sampleswere incompletely zeroed at deposition. However,as with the samples from canals on the MekongDelta, these outliers were easily identified within thestratigraphy and the age range of canal use could bedetermined.

Summary. – OSL dating can provide important agecontrol for fluvial sediments associated with archae-ological sites. While charcoal and other material forradiocarbon dating may be common within culturalfeatures, OSL samples can be collected from horizonsthat lack suitable material for radiocarbon dating andcan provide invaluable environmental informationabout the timing and rate of deposition between cul-tural horizons. Additionally, OSL ages do not need tobe calibrated, reducing age uncertainties. The larger agerange of OSL dating makes this technique particularlyuseful for Palaeolithic sites that are older than or nearthe limit for radiocarbon dating. In addition, OSL dat-ing is important for geoarchaeological investigationsthat relate people to their environment by dating

Fig. 9. IRSL, radiocarbon and other age con-trol obtained for the Kostenki Upper Palaeo-lithic site 12, east wall, along the Don River inwestern Russia. Luminescence dating is espe-cially useful in dating Palaeolithic sites such asthis due to their antiquity (near the upper limitsfor radiocarbon) and the abundant and well-suited target material for luminescence dating inthe fluvial sediments associated with the culturalhorizons. Modified from Anikovich et al. (2007)and Holliday et al. (2007).


sediments and non-cultural features and landformsassociated with occupation sites.

Conclusions

The study of fluvial deposits and landforms is im-portant for many subdisciplines of geomorphology,palaeoseismology and geoarchaeology. While early TLand OSL applications to fluvial deposits proved diffi-cult due to the incorporation of non-bleached signalswithin the age calculations, recent advances in OSLdating techniques, such as the development of the sin-gle-aliquot regenerative-dose (SAR) method (Murray& Wintle 2000), single-grain dating capabilities (Dulleret al. 1999; Duller 2000; B�tter-Jensen et al. 2000) andstatistical methods for De analysis (e.g. Galbraith et al.1999; Galbraith 2005), have allowed reliable dating offluvial deposits. Target materials for OSL dating (sandsand silts) are nearly ubiquitous in most fluvial depositsand the age range for OSL spans the last glacial–interglacial cycle, with older ages possible in some set-tings. Moreover, fluvial deposits can provide importantarchives of past changes in climate, base level and tec-tonics and commonly contain archaeological horizons.For these reasons, the application of OSL dating tofluvial deposits can provide important contributions tothe geomorphologic, sedimentologic, palaeoseismicand archaeologic research communities.

Acknowledgements. – I thank M. Jain and J. Wallinga for theirhelpful reviews of this manuscript and P. R. Hanson for providing themulti-grain and single-grain data for Fig. 1.

References

Aagaard, T., Orford, J. & Murray, A. S. 2007: Environmental con-trols on coastal dune formation; Skallingen Spit, Denmark. Geo-morphology 83, 29–47.

Aitken, M. J. 1985: Thermoluminescence Dating. 359 pp. AcademicPress, New York.

Aitken, M. J. 1998: An Introduction to Optical Dating. 267 pp. OxfordUniversity Press, Oxford.

Alexanderson, H. 2007: Residual OSL signals from modern Green-landic river sediments. Geochronometria 26, 1–9.

Amit, R., Zilberman, E., Enzel, Y. & Porat, N. 2002: Paleoseismicevidence for time dependency of seismic response on a fault systemin the southern Arava Valley, Dead Sea rift, Israel. Geological So-ciety of America Bulletin 114, 192–206.

Amos, C. B., Burbank, D. W., Nobes, D. C. & Read, S. A. L. 2007:Geomorphic constraints on listric thrust fault faulting: Implica-tions for active deformation in the Mackenzie Basin, South Island,New Zealand. Journal of Geophysical Research 112, B03S11, doi:10.1029/2006JB004291.

Anders, M. D., Pederson, J. L., Rittenour, T. M., Sharp, W. D.,Gosse, J. C., Karlstrom, K. E., Crossey, R. C., Goble, R. J.,Stockli, L. & Guang, Y. 2005: Pleistocene geomorphology andgeochronology of eastern Grand Canyon: Linkages of landscapecomponents during climate changes. Quaternary Science Reviews24, 2428–2448.

Anikovich, M. V., Sinitsyn, A. A., Hoffecker, J. F., Holliday, V. T.,Popov, V. V., Lisitsyn, S. N., Forman, S. L., Levkovskaya, G. M.,

Pospelova, G. A., Kuz’mina, I. E., Burova, N. D., Goldberg, P.,Macphail, R. I., Giaccio, B. & Praslov, N. D. 2007: Early UpperPaleolithic in eastern Europe and implications for the dispersal ofmodern humans. Science 315, 223–226.

Bailey, R.M. &Arnold, L. J. 2006: Statistical modeling of single grainquartz De distributions and an assessment of procedures for esti-mating burial dose. Quaternary Science Reviews 25, 2475–2502.

Bailey, S. D., Wintle, A. G., Duller, G. A. T. & Bristow, C. S. 2001:Sand deposition during the last millennium at Aberffraw, Anglesey,North Wales as determined by OSL dating of quartz. QuaternaryScience Reviews 20, 701–704.

Bailiff, I. K. & Holland, N. 2000: Dating bricks of the last two mil-lennia from Newcastle upon Tyne: A preliminary study. RadiationMeasurements 32, 615–619.

Ballarini, M., Wallinga, J., Murray, A. S., van Heteren, S., Oost, A.P., Bos, A. J. J. & van Eijk, C. W. E. 2003: Optical dating of youngcoastal dunes on a decadal time scale. Quaternary Science Reviews22, 1011–1017.

Banerjee, D., Murray, A. S., B�tter-Jensen, L. & Lang, A. 2001:Equivalent dose estimation using a single aliquot of polymineralfine grains. Radiation Measurements 33, 73–93.

Banerjee, D., Page, K. & Lepper, K. 2002: Optical dating of pa-laeochannel deposits in the Riverine Plain, southeastern Australia:Testing the reliability of existing luminescence dates. RadiationProtection Dosimetry 101, 327–332.

Berger, G. W. 1990: Effectiveness of natural zeroing of the thermo-luminescence in sediments. Journal of Geophysical Research 95,12,375–12,397.

Berger, G. W. & Luternauer, J. J. 1987: Preliminary field work forthermoluminescence dating studies at the Fraser River delta, Brit-ish Columbia. Geological Survey of Canada Paper 87/IA, 901–904.

Berger, G. W., Henderson, T. K., Banerjee, D. & Nials, F. L. 2004:Photonic dating of prehistoric irrigation canals at Phoenix, Ar-izona, U.S.A. Geoarchaeology 19, 1–19.

Bishop, P., Sanderson, D. C. W. & Stark, M. T. 2004: OSL andradiocarbon dating of a pre-Angkorian canal in the Mekong delta,southern Cambodia. Journal of Archaeological Science 31, 319–336.

Blong, R. J. & Gillespie, R. 1978: Fluvially transported charcoal giveserroneous 14C ages for recent deposits. Nature 271, 739–741.

Blum, M. D. & Tornqvist, T. E. 2000: Fluvial response to climate andsea-level change: A review and a look forward. Sedimentology 47,2–48.

Blum, M. D., Guccione, M. J., Wysocki, D. A., Robnett, P. C. &Rutledge, M. 2000: Late Pleistocene evolution of the lower Mis-sissippi Valley, Southern Missouri to Arkansas. Geological Societyof America Bulletin 112, 221–235.

B�tter-Jensen, L., Duller, G. A. T. &Murray, A. S. 2000: Advances inluminescence measurement systems. Radiation Measurements 32,523–528.

B�tter-Jensen, L., McKeever, S.W. S. &Wintle, A. G. 2003:OpticallyStimulated Luminescence Dosimetry. 355 pp. Elsevier, Amsterdam.

Bowler, J. M., Johnston, H., Olley, J. M., Prescott, J. R., Roberts, R.G., Shawcross, W. & Spooner, N. A. 2003: New ages for humanoccupation and climate change at Lake Mungo, Australia. Nature421, 837–840.

Briant, R. M., Bates, M. R., Schwenninger, J.-L. & Wenban-Smith,F. 2006: An optically stimulated luminescence dated middle to latePleistocene fluvial sequence from the western Solent basin, south-ern England. Journal of Quaternary Science 21, 507–523.

Bridgland, D. R. 1994: The Quaternary of the Thames. 441 pp. Geo-logical Conservation Review Series 7. Chapman and Hall, London.

Bridgland, D. R. 2000: River terrace systems in north-west Europe:An archive of environmental change, uplift and early human occu-pation. Quaternary Science Reviews 19, 1293–1303.

Briggs, D. J., Coope, G. R. &Gilbertson, D. D. 1985: The chronologyand environmental framework of early man in the Upper Thamesvalley: A new model. British Archaeological Reports 137.

Brook, G. A., Srivastava, P. & Marais, E. 2006: Characteristics andOSL minimum ages of relict fluvial deposits near Sossus Vlei,Tsauchab River, Namibia, and regional climate record for the last30 ka. Journal of Quaternary Science 21, 347–362.

Bryson, R. A. & Swain, A. M. 1981: Holocene variations of mon-soonal rainfall in Rajasthan. Quaternary Research 16, 135–145.


Bull, W. B. 1991: Geomorphic Responses to Climate Change. 326 pp.Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Busschers, F. S., Kasse, C., van Balen, R. T., Vandenberghe, J., Co-hen, K. M., Weerts H, . J. T., Wallinga, J., Johns, C., Cleveringa, P.& Bunnick, F. P. M. 2007: Late Pleistocene evolution of the Rhine-Meuse system in the southern North Sea basin: Imprints of climatechange, sea-level oscillation and glacio-isostacy. Quaternary Sci-ence Reviews 26, 3216–3248.

Busschers, F. S., van Balen, R. T., Cohen, K. M., Kasse, C., Weerts,H. J. T., Wallinga, J. & Bunnick, F. P. M. 2008: Response of theRhine-Meuse fluvial system to Saalian ice-sheet dynamics. Boreas37, 377–398.

Busschers, F. S., Weerts, H. J. T., Wallinga, J., Cleveringa, P., Kasse,C., de Wolf, H. & Cohen, K. M. 2005: Sedimentary architectureand optical dating of Middle and late Pleistocene Rhine–Meusedeposits – fluvial response to climate change, sea–level fluctuationand glaciation. Netherlands Journal of Geosciences 84, 25–41.

Caputo, R., Helly, B., Pavlides, S. & Papadopoulos, G. 2004: Pa-laeoseismological investigation of the Tyrnavos Fault (Thessaly,Central Greece). Tectonophysics 394, 1–20.

Chen, Y. W., Chen, Y. G., Murray, A. S., Liu, T. K. & Lai, T. C. 2003:Luminescence dating of neotectonic activity on the southwesterncoastal plain, Taiwan. Quaternary Science Reviews 22, 1223–1229.

Cheong, C.S, Hong, D. G., Lee, K. S., Kim, J. W., Choi, J. H., Mur-ray, A. S., Chwae, U., Im, C. B., Chang, C. J. & Chang, H.W. 2003:Determination of slip rate by optical dating of fluvial deposits fromthe Wangsan fault, SE Korea. Quaternary Science Reviews 22,1207–1211.

Colls, A. E., Stokes, S., Blum,M. D. & Straffin, E. 2001: Age limits onthe Late Quaternary evolution of the upper Loire River. Qua-ternary Science Reviews 20, 743–750.

Cox, R. T., Cherryhomes, J., Harris, J. B., Larsen, D., Van Arsdale,R. B. & Forman, S. L. 2006: Paleoseismology of the southeasternReelfoot Rift in western Tennessee and implications for intraplatefault zone evolution. Tectonics 25, TC3019, doi: 10.1029/2005TC001829.

Cox, R. T., Hill, A. A., Larsen, D., Holzer, T., Forman, S. L., Noce,T., Gardner, C. & Morat, J. 2007: Seismotectonic implications ofsand blows in the southern Mississippi Embayment. EngineeringGeology 89, 278–299.

Cupper, M. L. 2006: Luminescence and radiocarbon chronologies ofplaya sedimentation in the Murray Basin, southeastern Australia.Quaternary Science Reviews 25, 2594–2607.

Cupper, M. L. & Duncan, J. 2006: Last glacial megafaunal death as-semblage and human occupation at Lake Menindee, southeasternAustralia. Quaternary Research 66, 332–341.

David, B., Roberts, R. G., Magee, J., Mialanes, J., Turney, C., Bird,M., White, C., Fifield, L. K. & Tibby, J. 2007: Sediment mixing atNonda Rock: Investigations of stratigraphic integrity at an earlyarchaeological site in northern Australia and implications for thehuman colonisation of the continent. Journal of Quaternary Science22, 449–479.

DeJong, B. D. 2007: Effects of Quaternary Climate Change on Tribu-tary Sedimentation and Geomorphology in Eastern Grand Canyon.Master’s thesis, Utah State University, 109 pp.

DeJong, B., Pederson, J., Rittenour, T. & Goble, R. 2006: Using OSLgeochronology to correlate stream and hillslope deposits to climatechange in eastern Grand Canyon tributaries. United States Geolo-gical Survey Open File Report 2006-1351, p. 20. Available at: http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2006/1351/pdf/of06–1351_508.pdf

DeLong, S. B. & Arnold, L. J. 2007: Dating alluvial deposits withoptically stimulated luminescence, AMS 14C and cosmogenic tech-niques, western Transverse Ranges, California, USA. QuaternaryGeochronology 2, 129–136.

DeLong, S. B., Minor, S. A. & Arnold, L. J. 2007: Late Quaternaryalluviation and offset along the eastern Big Pine fault, southernCalifornia. Geomorphology 90, 1–10.

Duller, G. A. T. 2000: Optical dating of single sand-sized grains ofquartz: Sources of variability. Radiation Measurements 32,453–457.

Duller, G. A. T. 2008: Single-grain optical dating of Quaternary se-diments: why aliquot size matters in luminescence dating. Boreas37, 589–612.

Duller, G. A. T., B�tter-Jensen, L., Murray, A. S. & Truscott, A. J.1999: Single grain laser luminescence (SGLL) measurements usinga novel automated reader. Nuclear Instruments and Methods inPhysics Research B 155, 506–514.

Ely, L. L., Enzel, Y., Baker, V. R., Kale, V. S. & Mishra, S. 1996:Changes in the magnitude and frequency of late Holocene mon-soon floods on the Narmada River, central India. Geological So-ciety of America Bulletin 108, 1134–1148.

English, P., Spooner, N. A., Chappell, J., Questiaux, D. G. & Hill, N.G. 2001: Lake Lewis basin, central Australia: Environmental evo-lution and OSL chronology. Quaternary International 83–85,81–101.

Fairbanks, R. G., Mortlock, R. A., Chiu, T.-C., Cao, L., Kaplan, A.,Guilderson, T. P., Fairbanks, T. W., Bloom, A. L., Grootes, P. M.& Nadeau, M.-J. 2005: Radiocarbon calibration curvespanning 0 to 50,000 years BP based on paired 230Th/234U/238U and14C dates on pristine corals. Quaternary Science Reviews 24,1781–1796.

Fanning, P. C., Holdaway, S. J. & Rhodes, E. J. 2008: A newgeoarchaeology of Aboriginal artifact deposits in western NSW,Australia: Establishing spatial and temporal geomorphic controlson the surface archaeological record. Geomorphology, in press, doi:10.1016/j.geomorph.2007.04.027.

Fattahi, M. & Walker, R. T. 2007: Luminescence dating of the lastearthquake of the Sabzevar thrust fault, NE Iran. Quaternary Geo-chronology 2, 284–289.

Fattahi, M., Walker, R., Hollingsworth, J., Bahroudi, A., Nazari, H.,Talebain,M., Armitage, S. & Stokes, S. 2006: Holocene slip-rate onthe Sabzevar thrust fault, NE Iran, determined using optically sti-mulated luminescence (OSL). Earth and Planetary Science Letters245, 673–684.

Fattahi,M.,Walker, R. T., Khatib,M.M., Dolati, A. & Bahroudi, A.2007: Slip-rate estimate and past earthquakes on the Doruneh fault,eastern Iran. Geophysical Journal International 168, 691–709.

Feathers, J. K. 2003: Use of luminescence dating in archaeology.Measurement Science and Technology 14, 1493–1509.

Feathers, J. K., Rhodes, E. J., Huot, S. & McAvoy, J. M. 2006: Lu-minescence dating of sand deposits related to late Pleistocene hu-man occupation at the Cactus Hill site, Virginia, USA. QuaternaryGeochronology 1, 167–187.

Folz, E., Bodu, P., Bonet, P., Joron, J.-L., Mercier, N. & Reyss, J.-L.2001: OSL dating of fluvial quartz from Le Closeau, a Late Paleo-lithic site near Paris – comparison with 14C chronology.QuaternaryScience Reviews 20, 927–933.

Forman, S. L., Machette, M. N., Jackson, M. E. &Maat, P. 1989: Anevaluation of thermoluminescence dating of paleoearthquakes ofthe American Fork segment, Wasatch Fault Zone, Utah. Journal ofGeophysical Research 94, B2, 1622–1630.

Forman, S. L., Nelson, A. R. & McCalpin, J. P. 1991: Thermo-luminescence dating of fault-scarp-derived colluvium: Decipheringthe timing of paleoearthquakes on the Weber segment of the Wa-satch Fault Zone, North Central Utah. Journal of Geophysical Re-search 96, B1, 596–605.

Forman, S. L., Spaeth, M., Marın, L., Pierson, J., Gomez, J., Bunch,F. & Valdez, A. 2006: Episodic Late Holocene dune movements onthe sand-sheet area, Great Sand Dunes National Park and Pre-serve, San Luis Valley, Colorado, USA. Quaternary Research 66,97–108.

Fuchs, M. & Lang, A. 2001: OSL dating of coarse-grain fluvial quartzusing single-aliquot protocols on sediments from NE Peloponnese,Greece. Quaternary Science Reviews 20, 783–787.

Fukuchi, T. 1992: ESR studies for absolute dating of fault move-ments. Geological Society of London Journal 149, 265–272.

Galbraith, R. F. 2005: Statistics for Fission Track Analysis. 240 pp.Chapman and Hall, London.

Galbraith, R. F., Roberts, R. G., Laslett, G.M., Yoshida, H. &Olley,J. M. 1999: Optical dating of single and multiple grains ofquartz from Jinmium rock shelter, northern Australia. Part I:Experimental design and statistical models. Archaeometry 41,339–364.

Gemmell, A. M. D. 1997: Fluctuations in the thermoluminescencesignal of suspended sediment in an alpine glacial meltwater stream.Quaternary Science Reviews 16, 281–290.


Gibling, M. R., Sinha, R., Roy, N. G., Tandon, S. K. & Jain, M.2008: Quaternary fluvial and eolian deposits on the Belan river,India: Paleoclimatic setting of Paleolithic to Neolithic archae-ological sites over the past 85,000 years. Quaternary Science Re-views 27, 391–410.

Gibling, M. R., Tandon, S. K., Sinha, R. & Jain, M. 2005:Discontinuity-bounded alluvial sequences of the southernGangetic Plains, India: Aggradation and degradation in response tomonsoonal strength. Journal of Sedimentary Research 75, 369–385.

Gillespie, R., Prosser, I. P., Dlugokencky, E., Sparks, R. J., Wallace,G. & Chappell, J. M. A. 1992: AMS dating of alluvial sediments onthe southern tablelands of New South Wales Australia. Radio-carbon 34, 29–36.

Goble, R. J., Mason, J. A., Loope, D. B. & Swinehart, J. B. 2004:Optical and radiocarbon ages of stacked paleosols and dune sandsin the Nebraska Sand Hills, USA. Quaternary Science Reviews 23,1173–1182.

Gonzalez, S., Huddart, D., Bennett, M. R. & Gonzalez-Huesca, A.2006: Human footprints in Central Mexico older than 40,000 years.Quaternary Science Reviews 25, 201–222.

Gosse, J. C. & Phillips, F. M. 2001: Terrestrial in situ cosmogenicnuclides; theory and application. Quaternary Science Reviews 29,1475–1560.

Grine, F. E., Bailey, R.M., Harvati, K., Nathan, R. P., Morris, A. G.,Henderson, G. M., Ribot, I. & Pike, A. W. G. 2007: Late Pleisto-cene human skull fromHofmeyr, South Africa, and modern humanorigins. Science 315, 226–229.

Hanson, P. R. 2006: Dating ephemeral stream and alluvial fan de-posits on the central Great Plains: Comparing multiple-grain OSL,single-grain OSL, and radiocarbon ages. United States GeologicalSurvey Open File Report 2006-1351, p. 14. Available at: http://pub-s.usgs.gov/of/2006/1351/pdf/of06–1351_508.pdf

Hilgers, A., Murray, A. S., Schlaak, N. & Radtke, U. 2001: Compar-ison of quartz OSL protocols using Late glacial and Holocene dunesands from Brandenburg, Germany. Quaternary Science Reviews20, 731–736.

Hoffecker, J. F., Anikovich, M. V. & Sinitsyn, A. A. 2004: Kostenkiand the dawn of the Upper Paleolithic in Europe. InAnikovich, M.V. & Platonova, N. I. (eds.): Kostenki and the Early Upper Paleo-lithic of Eurasia: General Trends, Local Developments, vol. VIII,23–26. Guidebook and Abstracts of the Field Seminar Dedicated tothe 125th Anniversary of the Discovery of the Paleolithic in Kos-tenki, Voronezh.

Hoffecker, J. F., Anikovich, M. V., Sinitsyn, A. A., Holliday, V. T. &Forman, S. L. 2002: Initial Upper Paleolithic in Eastern Europe: Newresearch at Kostenki. Journal of Human Evolution 42, A16–A17.

Holbrook, J. M. & Schumm, S. A. 1999: Geomorphic and sedimen-tary response of rivers to tectonic deformation: A brief review andcritique of a tool for recognizing subtle epeirogenic deformation inmodern and ancient settings. Tectonophysics 305, 287–306.

Holbrook, J. M., Autin, W. J., Rittenour, T. M., Marshak, S. & Go-ble, R. J. 2006: Stratigraphic evidence for millennial-scale temporalclustering of earthquakes on a continental-interior fault: HoloceneMississippi River floodplain deposits, New Madrid seismic zone,USA. Tectonophysics 420, 431–454.

Holliday, V. T., Hoffecker, J. F., Goldberg, P., Macphail, R. I., For-man, S. L., Anikovitch, M. & Sinitsyn, A. 2007: Geoarchaeology ofthe Kostenki–Borshchevo Sites, Don River Valley, Russia.Geoarchaeology 22, 181–228.

Hughen, K., Lehman, S., Southon, J., Overpeck, J., Marchal, O., Her-ring, C. & Turnbull, J. 2004: 14C activity and global carbon cyclechanges over the past 50,000 years. Science 303, 202–207.

Huntley, D. J., Godfrey-Smith, D. I. & Thewalt, M. L. W. 1985: Op-tical dating of sediments. Nature 313, 105–107.

Jacobs, Z., Duller, G. A. T. & Wintle, A. G. 2003: Optical dating ofdune sand from Blombos Cave, South Africa: II – single grain data.Journal of Human Evolution 44, 613–625.

Jain, M. & Tandon, S. K. 2003: Fluvial response to late Quaternaryclimate changes, western India. Quaternary Science Reviews 22,2223–2235.

Jain, M., Murray, A. S. & B�tter-Jensen, L. 2004a: Optically stimu-lated luminescence dating: How significant is incomplete light ex-posure in fluvial environments? Quaternaire 15, 143–157.

Jain, M., Murray, A. S., B�tter-Jensen, L. & Wintle, A. G. 2005a: Asingle-aliquot regenerative-dose method based on IR (1.49 eV)bleaching of the fast OSL component in quartz. Radiation Mea-surements 39, 309–318.

Jain, M., Tandon, S. K., Singhvi, A. K., Mishra, S. & Bhatt, S. C.2005b: Quaternary alluvial stratigraphical development in a desertsetting: A case study from the Luni River basin, Thar Desert ofwestern India. In Blum, M. & Marriott, S. (eds.): Fluvial Sedi-mentology VII, International Association of Sedimentologists, Spe-cial Publication 35, 349–371.

Jain, M., Thomsen, K. J., B�tter-Jensen, L. & Murray, A. S. 2004b:Thermal transfer and apparent-dose distributions in poorlybleached mortar samples: Results from single grains and small ali-quots of quartz. Radiation Measurements 38, 101–109.

Juyal, N., Chamyal, L. S., Bhandari, S., Bhushan, R. & Singhvi, A. K.2006: Continental record of the southwest monsoon during the last130 ka: Evidence from the southern margin of the Thar Desert, In-dia. Quaternary Science Reviews 25, 2632–2650.

Kale, V. S. 1999: Late Holocene temporal patterns of palaeofloodsin central and western India.Man and Environment 24, 109–115.

Kale, V. S., Singhvi, A. K., Mishra, P. K. & Banerjee, D. 2000: Sedi-mentary records and luminescence chronology of Late Holocenepalaeofloods in the Luni River, Thar Desert, northwestern India.Catena 40, 337–358.

Kemp, J. & Spooner, N. J. 2007: Evidence for regionally wet condi-tions before the LGM in southeast Australia: OSL ages from alarge palaeochannel in the Lachlan valley. Journal of QuaternaryScience 22, 423–427.

Kershaw, A. P., Bretherton, S. C. & van der Kaars, S. 2007: A com-plete pollen record of the last 230 ka from Lynch’s Crater, north-eastern Australia. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoe-cology 251, 23–45.

Kitagawa, H. & van der Plicht, J. 1998: Atmospheric radiocarboncalibration to 45,000 yr BP: Late glacial fluctuations and cosmo-genic isotope production. Science 279, 1187–1190.

Kolstrup, E., Murray, A. & Possnert, G. 2007: Luminescence andradiocarbon ages from laminated Lateglacial aeolian sediments inwestern Jutland, Denmark. Boreas 36, 314–325.

Lamothe, M. 2004: Optical dating of pottery, burnt stones, and sedi-ments from selected Quebec archaeological sites. Canadian Journalof Earth Sciences 41, 659–667.

Lang, A. &Mauz, B. 2006: Towards chronologies of gully formation:Optical dating of gully fill sediments from Central Europe. Qua-ternary Science Reviews 25, 2666–2675.

Larsen, E., Lysa, A., Demidov, I., Funder, S., Houmark-Nielsen, M.,Kjær, K. H. & Murray, A. S. 1999: Age and extent of the Scandi-navian ice sheet in northwest Russia. Boreas 28, 115–132.

Leigh, D. S., Srivastava, P. & Brook, G. A. 2004: Late Pleistocenebraided rivers of the Atlantic Coastal Plain, USA. Quaternary Sci-ence Reviews 23, 65–84.

Lepper, K., Agersnap Larsen, N. & McKeever, S. W. S. 2000:Equivalent dose distribution analysis of Holocene eolian and fluvialquartz sands from central Oklahoma. Radiation Measurements 32,603–608.

Leuschner, D. C. & Sirocko, F. 2003: Orbital insolation forcing of theIndian Monsoon – a motor for global climate changes? Palaeogeo-graphy, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 197, 83–95.

Lewis, S. G., Maddy, D. & Scaife, R. G. 2001: The fluvial system re-sponse to abrupt climate change during the last cold stage: TheUpper Pleistocene River Thames fluvial succession at Ashton Key-nes, UK. Global and Planetary Change 28, 341–359.

Li, S.-H. & Li, B. 2006: Dose measurement using fast component ofLM–OSL signals from quartz. Radiation Measurements 41,534–541.

Lian, O. B. & Brooks, G. R. 2004: Optical dating studies of mud-dominated alluvium and buried hearth-like features from RedRiver Valley, southern Manitoba, Canada. The Holocene 14,570–578.

Lian, O. B. & Roberts, R. G. 2006: Dating the Quaternary: Progressin luminescence dating of sediments. Quaternary Science Reviews25, 2449–2468.

Lu, Y., Prescott, J. R., Zhao, H., Chen, J. & Wei, L. Y. 2002: Opticaldating of colluvial deposits from Xiyangfang, China, and the


relation to palaeo-earthquake events. Quaternary Science Reviews21, 1087–1097.

Maddy, D., Lewis, S. G., Scaife, R. G., Bowen, D. Q., Coope, G. R.,Green, C. P., Hardaker, R., Keen, D. H., Rees-Jones, J., Parfitt, S.& Scott, K. 1998: The Upper Pleistocene deposits at Cassington,near Oxford, England. Journal of Quaternary Science 13,205–231.

Madsen, A. T., Murray, A. S. & Anderson, T. J. 2007a: Optical datingof young tidal sediments in the Danish Wadden Sea. QuaternaryGeochronology 2, 89–94.

Madsen, A. T., Murray, A. S., Anderson, T. J. & Pejrup, M. 2007b:Temporal changes of accretion rates on an estuarine salt marshduring the late Holocene – Reflection of local sea level changes? TheWadden Sea, Denmark.Marine Geology 242, 221–233.

Madsen, A. T., Murray, A. S., Anderson, T. J., Pejrup, M. & Meun-ing-Madsen, H. 2005: Optically stimulated luminescence dating ofyoung estuarine sediments: A comparison with 210Pb and 137Csdating.Marine Geology 214, 251–268.

Mahan, S., Sohn, M., Knott, J. & Bowman, D. 2006: Slip rates, re-currence intervals, and earthquake event magnitudes for thesouthern Black Mountains fault zone, southern Death Valley, Ca-lifornia using optically stimulated luminescence. Seismological Re-search Letters 77, p. 245.

Mangerud, J., Svendsen, J. I. & Astakhov, V. I. 1999: Age and extentof the Barents and Kara ice sheets in Northern Russia. Boreas 28,46–80.

Mason, D. P. M., Little, T. A. & Van Dissen, R. J. 2006: Rates ofactive faulting during the late Quaternary fluvial terrace formationat Saxton River, Awatere fault, New Zealand. Geological Society ofAmerica Bulletin 118, 1431–1446.

Mathew, G., Singhvi, A. K. & Karanth, R. V. 2006: Luminescencechronometry and geomorphic evidence of active fold growth alongthe Kachchh Mainland Fault (KMF), Kachchh, India: Seismotec-tonic implications. Tectonophysics 422, 71–87.

McCalpin, J. (ed.) 1998: Paleoseismology. 588 pp. Academic Press,Orlando.

Mercier, N., Wengler, L., Valladas, H., Joron, J.-L., Froget, L. &Reyss, J.-L. 2007: The Rhafas Cave (Morocco): Chronology of theMousterian and Aterian archaeological occupations and their im-plications for Quaternary geochronology based on luminescence(TL/OSL) age determinations. Quaternary Geochronology 2,309–313.

Mukul, M., Jaiswal, M. & Singhvi, A. K. 2007: Timing of recent out-of-sequence active deformation in the frontal Himalayan wedge:Insights from the Darjiling sub-Himalaya, India. Geology 35,999–1002.

Murray, A. S. & Clemmensen, L. B. 2001: Luminescence dating ofHolocene aeolian sand movement, Thy, Denmark. QuaternaryScience Reviews 20, 751–754.

Murray, A. S. & Funder, S. 2003: Optically stimulated luminescencedating of a Danish Eemian coastal marine deposit: A test of accu-racy. Quaternary Science Reviews 22, 1177–1183.

Murray, A. S. & Olley, J. M. 2002: Precision and accuracy in the op-tically stimulated luminescence dating of sedimentary quartz: Astatus review. Geochronometria 21, 1–16.

Murray, A. S. & Wintle, A. G. 2000: Luminescence dating of quartzusing an improved single-aliquot regenerative-dose protocol. Ra-diation Measurements 32, 57–73.

Murray, A. S., Buylaert, J. P., Henriksen, M., Svendsen, J. I. &Mangerud, J. 2008: Testing the reliability of quartz OSL ages be-yond the Eemian. Radiation Measurements 43, 776–780.

Murray, A. S., Olley, J. M. & Caitcheon, G. G. 1995:Measurement ofequivalent doses in quartz from contemporary water-lain sedimentsusing optically stimulated luminescence. Quaternary Science Re-views 14, 365–371.

Murray, A. S., Svendsen, J. I., Mangerud, J. & Astakhov, V. I. 2007:Testing accuracy of quartz OSL dating using a known-age Eemiansite on the River Sula, northern Russia. Quaternary Geochronology2, 102–109.

Nielsen, A., Murray, A. S., Pejrup, M. & Elberling, B. 2006: Opticallystimulated luminescence dating of a Holocene beach ridge plain inNorthern Jutland, Denmark. Quaternary Geochronology 1,305–312.

Ogden, R., Spooner, N., Reid, M. & Head, J. 2001: Sediment dateswith implications for the age of the conversion from palaeochannelto modern fluvial activity on the Murray River and tributaries.Quaternary International 83–85, 195–209.

Olley, J., Caitcheon, G. & Murray, A. 1998: The distribution of ap-parent dose as determined by optically stimulated luminescence insmall aliquots of fluvial quartz: Implications for dating young se-diments. Quaternary Science Reviews 17, 1033–1040.

Olley, J. M., Caitcheon, G. G. & Roberts, R. G. 1999: The origin ofdose distributions in fluvial sediments, and the prospect of datingsingle grains from fluvial deposits using optically stimulated lumi-nescence. Radiation Measurements 30, 207–217.

Olley, J. M., De Deckker, P., Roberts, R. G., Fifield, L. K., Yoshida,H. &Hancock, G. 2004a: Optical dating of deep-sea sediment usingsingle grains of quartz: A comparison with radiocarbon. Sedimen-tary Geology 169, 175–189.

Olley, J. M., Pietsch, T. & Roberts, R. G. 2004b: Optical dating ofHolocene sediments from a variety of geomorphic settings usingsingle grains of quartz. Geomorphology 60, 337–358.

Olley, J. M., Roberts, R. G., Yoshida, H. & Bowler, J. M. 2006: Sin-gle-grain optical dating of grave-infill associated with human bur-ials at Lake Mungo, Australia. Quaternary Science Reviews 25,2469–2474.

Owen, L. A., Bright, J., Finkel, R. C., Jaiswal, M. K., Kaufman, D.S., Mahan, S., Radtke, U., Schneider, J. S., Sharp, W., Singhvi, A.K. & Warren, C. N. 2007: Numerical dating of a late Quaternaryspit-shore complex at the northern end of Silver Lake playa, Mo-jave Desert, California: A comparison of the applicability ofradiocarbon, luminescence, terrestrial cosmogenic nuclide, electronspin resonance, U-series and amino acid racemization methods.Quaternary International 166, 87–110.

Page, K., Nanson, G. & Price, D. 1996: Chronology of Murrumbid-gee River palaeochannels on the Riverine Plain, southeastern Aus-tralia. Journal of Quaternary Science 11, 311–336.

Page, K. J. & Nanson, G. C. 1996: Stratigraphic architecture resultingfrom late Quaternary evolution of the Riverine Plain, southeasternAustralia. Sedimentology 43, 92945.

Page, K. J., Nanson, G. C. & Price, D. M. 1991: Thermoluminescencechronology of late Quaternary deposition on the Riverine Plain ofsoutheastern Australia. Australian Geographer 22, 14–23.

Pearce, S. A., Pazzagalia, F. J. & Eppes, M. C. 2004: Ephemeralstream response to growing folds. Geologic Society of AmericaBulletin 116, 1223–1239.

Pederson, J. L., Anders, M. D., Rittenour, T. M., Sharp, W. D.,Gosse, J. C. & Karlstrom, K. E. 2006: Using fill terraces to under-stand incision rates and evolution of the Colorado River in easternGrand Canyon, Arizona. Journal of Geophysical Research 111,F02003, doi: 10.1029/2004JF000201.

Porat, N., Amit, R., Zilberman, E. & Enzel, Y. 1997: Luminescencedating of fault-related alluvial fan sediments in the southern Aravavalley, Israel. Quaternary Science Reviews 16, 397–402.

Porat, N., Duller, G. A. T., Amit, R., Zilberman, E. & Enzel, Y. 2008:Recent faulting in the southern Arava, Dead Sea Transform: Evi-dence from single grain luminescence dating. Quaternary Interna-tional, doi: 10/1016/jquaint2007.08.039.

Porat, N., Levi, T. & Weinberger, R. 2007: Possible resetting ofquartz OSL signals during earthquakes – Evidence from late Pleis-tocene injection dikes, Dead Sea basin, Israel. Quaternary Geo-chronology 2, 272–277.

Prescott, J. R., Williams, F. M. & Hunt, C. D. 2007: Comparison ofTL multiple aliquot, single grain GLSL SAR and C-14 ages forPuritjarra, Australia, rock shelter. Quaternary Geochronology 2,344–349.

Radtke, U., Janotta, A., Hilgers, A. & Murray, A. S. 2001: The po-tential of OSL and TL for dating Lateglacial and Holocene dunesands with independent age control of the Laacher See tephra (12880 a) at the Section ‘Mainz–Gonsenheim’. Quaternary ScienceReviews 20, 719–724.

Reimer, P. J., Baillie, M. G. L., Bard, E., Bayliss, A., Beck, J. W.,Bertrand, C. J. H., Blackwell, P. G., Buck, C. E., Burr, G. S., Cu-tler, K. B., Damon, P. E., Edwards, R. L., Fairbanks, R. G., Frie-drich, M., Guilderson, T. P., Hogg, A. G., Hughen, K. A., Kromer,B., McCormac, F. G., Manning, S. W., Ramsey, C. B., Reimer, R.


W., Remmele, S., Southon, J. R., Stuiver, M., Talamo, S., Taylor,F. W., van der Plicht, J. & Weyhenmeyer, C. E. 2004: IntCal04terrestrial radiocarbon age calibration, 26–0 ka BP. Radiocarbon46, 1029–1058.

Rhodes, E. J., Singarayer, J. S., Raynal, J.-P., Westaway, K. E. &Sbihi-Alaoui, F. Z. 2006: New age estimates for Palaeolithic as-semblages and Pleistocene succession of Casablanca, Morocco.Quaternary Science Reviews 25, 2569–2585.

Rink, W. J., Toyoda, S., Rees-Jones, J. & Schwarcz, H. P. 1999:Thermal activation of OSL as a geothermometer for quartz grainheating during fault movements. Radiation Measurements 30,97–105.

Rittenour, T.M. & Sharp,W. 2007: New geochronologic applicationsfor alluvial fans. Abstract, Alluvial Fans 2007 meeting, Banff Alber-ta, 18–22 June.

Rittenour, T. M., Blum, M. D. & Goble, R. J. 2007: Fluvial evolutionof the lower Mississippi River valley during the last 100-kyr glacialcycle: Response to glaciation and sea-level change. Geological So-ciety of America Bulletin 119, 586–608.

Rittenour, T. M., Goble, R. J. & Blum, M. D. 2003: An optical agechronology of Late Pleistocene fluvial deposits in the NorthernLower Mississippi Valley. Quaternary Science Reviews 22,1105–1110.

Rittenour, T. M., Goble, R. J. & Blum, M. D. 2005: Development ofan OSL chronology for late Pleistocene channel belts in the lowerMississippi valley. Quaternary Science Reviews 24, 2539–2554.

Rittenour, T. M., Sharp, W., Pederson, J., O’Brien, G. & Goble, R.2006: OSL chronology from Colorado River tributaries in theWestern Grand Canyon and Grand Wash trough: Comparison toU-series ages and application to fluvial deposits Z300 ka. UnitedStates Geological Survey Open File Report 2006-1351, p. 22. Avail-able at: http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2006/1351/pdf/of06–1351_508.pdf

Roberts, R. G. 1997: Luminescence dating in archaeology: From ori-gins to optical. Radiation Measurements 27, 819–892.

Roberts, R. G., Flannery, T. F., Ayliffe, L. K., Yoshida, H., Olley, J.M., Prideaux, G. J., Laslett, G. M., Baynes, A., Smith, M. A.,Jones, R. & Smith, B. 2001: New ages for the last Australianmegafauna: Continent-wide extinction about 46,000 years ago.Science 292, 1888–1892.

Roberts, R. G., Galbraith, R. F., Yoshida, H., Laslett, G.M. &Olley,J. M. 2000: Distinguishing dose populations in sediment mixtures:A test of single-grain optical dating procedures using mixtures oflaboratory dosed quartz. Radiation Measurements 32, 459–465.

Roberts, R. G., Walsh, G., Murray, A., Olley, J., Jones, R., Mor-wood, M., Tuniz, C., Lawson, E., MacPhail, M., Bowdery, D. &Naumann, I. 1997: Luminescence dating of rock art and past en-vironments using mud-wasp nests in northern Australia. Nature387, 696–699.

Rodnight, H., Duller, G. A. T., Tooth, S. & Wintle, A. G. 2005: Op-tical dating of scroll-bar sequence on the Klip River, South Africa,to derive the lateral migration rate of a meander bend. The Holo-cene 15, 802–811.

Rodnight, H., Duller, G. A. T., Wintle, A. G. & Tooth, S. 2006: As-sessing the reproducibility and accuracy of optical dating of fluvialdeposits. Quaternary Geochronology 1, 109–120.

Sanderson, D. C. W., Bishop, P., Stark, M., Alexander, S. & Penny,D. 2007: Luminescence dating of canal sediments from AngkorBorei, Mekong Delta, southern Cambodia. Quaternary Geochro-nology 2, 322–329.

Sanderson, D. C. W., Bishop, P., Stark, M. & Spencer, J. Q. 2003:Luminescence dating of anthropogenically reset canal sedimentsfromAngkor Borei, MekongDelta, Cambodia.Quaternary ScienceReviews 22, 1111–1121.

Sandford, K. S. 1924: The river gravels of the Oxford district. Quar-terly Journal of the Geological Society 80, 113–170.

Schokker, J., Cleveringa, P. & Murray, A. S. 2004: Palaeoenviron-mental reconstruction and OSL dating of terrestrial Eemian de-posits in the southeastern Netherlands. Journal of QuaternaryScience 19, 193–202.

Schokker, J., Cleveringa, P., Murray, A. S., Wallinga, J. & Westerh-off, W. E. 2005: An OSL dated Middle and Late Quaternary sedi-mentary record in the Roer Valley Graben (southern Netherlands).Quaternary Science Reviews 24, 2243–2264.

Schumm, S. A. 1977: The Fluvial System. 338 pp. John Wiley andSons, New York.

Schumm, S. A. 1986: Alluvial River Response to Active Tectonics. InGeophysics Study Committee, Geophysics Research Forum, Na-tional Research Council (eds.): Active Tectonics: Impact on Society,80–94. National Academy Press, Washington D.C.

Sharp, W. D., Ludwig, K. R., Chadwick, O. A., Amundson, R. &Glaser, L. L. 2003: Dating fluvial terraces by 230Th/234U on pedo-genic carbonate, Wind River Basin, Wyoming. Quaternary Re-search 59, 139–150.

Singhvi, A. K. & Lang, A. 1998: Improvements in infra-red dating ofpartially bleached sediments – the differential partial bleach tech-nique. Ancient TL 16, 63–71.

Singhvi, A. K., Banerjee, D., Pande, K., Gogte, V. & Valdiya, K. S.1994: Luminescence studies on neotectonic events in south-centralKumaun Himalaya – a feasibility study. Quaternary Science Re-views 13, 595–600.

Sinha, R., Bhattacharjee, P. S., Sangode, S. J., Gibling, M. R., Tan-don, S. K., Jain, M. & Godfrey-Smith, D. 2007: Valley and inter-fluve sediments in the Southern Ganga plains, India: Exploringfacies and magnetic signatures. Sedimentary Geology 210, 386–411.

Sinitsyn, A. A. & Hoffecker, J. F. 2006: Radiocarbon dating andchronology of the early Upper Paleolithic at Kostenki. QuaternaryInternational 152–153, 164–174.

Sohn, M. F., Mahan, S. A., Knott, J. R. & Bowman, D. D. 2007:Luminescence ages for alluvial-fan deposits in Southern DeathValley: Implications for climate-driven sedimentation along a tec-tonically active mountain front. Quaternary International 166,49–60.

Sommerville, A. A., Sanderson, D. C. W., Hansom, J. D. & Housley,R. A. 2001: Luminescence dating of aeolian sands from archae-ological sites in Northern Britain: A preliminary study. QuaternaryScience Reviews 20, 913–919.

Srivastava, P. & Misra, D. K. 2008: Morpho-sedimentary records ofactive tectonics at the Kameng river exit, NE Himalaya. Geomor-phology 96, 187–198.

Srivastava, P., Sharma, M. & Singhvi, A. K. 2003a: Luminescencechronology of incision and channel pattern changes in the RiverGanga, India. Geomorphology 51, 259–268.

Srivastava, P., Singh, I. B., Sharma, M. & Singhvi, A. K. 2003b: Lu-minescence chronometry and Late Quaternary geomorphic historyof the Ganga Plain, India. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology,Palaeoecology 197, 15–41.

Stanley, D. J. & Hait, A. K. 2000: Deltas, radiocarbon dating, andmeasurement of sediment storage and subsidence. Geology 28,295–298.

Starkel, L. 2003: Climatically controlled terraces in uplifting moun-tain areas. Quaternary Science Reviews 22, 2189–2198.

Stokes, S. 1999: Luminescence dating applications in geomorpholo-gical research. Geomorphology 29, 153–171.

Stokes, S., Bray, H. E. & Blum, M. D. 2001: Optical resetting in largedrainage basins: Tests of zeroing assumptions using single-aliquotprocedures. Quaternary Science Reviews 20, 879–885.

Stokes, S., Ingram, S., Aitken, M. J., Sirocko, F., Anderson, R. &Leuschner, D. 2003: Alternative chronologies for Late Quaternary(last interglacial – Holocene) deep sea sediments via optical datingof silt-sized quartz. Quaternary Science Reviews 22, 925–941.

Strickertsson, K. & Murray, A. S. 1999: Optically stimulated lumi-nescence dates for Late Pleistocene and Holocene sediments fromN�rre Lyngby, Northern Jutland, Denmark. Quaternary ScienceReviews 18, 169–178.

Tanaka, K., Hataya, R., Spooner, N. A. & Questiaux, D. G. 2001:Optical dating of river terrace sediments from Kanto plains, Japan.Quaternary Science Reviews 20, 826–828.

Tandon, S. K., Sareen, B. K., Someshwar Rao, M. & Singhvi, A. K.1997: Aggradation history and luminescence chronology of theLate Quaternary semi-arid sequences of the Sabarmati basin, Gu-jarat, Western India. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Pa-laeoecology 128, 339–357.

Thomas, M. F., Nott, J., Murray, A. S. & Price, D. M. 2007a: Fluvialresponse to late Quaternary climate change in NE Queensland,Australia. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 251,119–136.


Thomas, P. J., Jain, M., Juyal, N. & Singhvi, A. K. 2005: Comparisonof single-grain and small-aliquot OSL dose estimates ino3000 yearold river sediments from South India. Radiation Measurements 39,457–469.

Thomas, P. J., Juyal, N., Kale, V. S. & Singhvi, A. K. 2007b: Lumi-nescence chronology of late Holocene extreme hydrological eventsin the upper Penner River basin, South India. Journal of Qua-ternary Science 22, 747–753.

Thomas, P. J., Reddy, D. V., Kumar, D., Nagabhushhanam, P., Sukhi-ja, B. S. & Sahoo, R. N. 2007c: Optical dating of liquefaction featuresto constrain prehistoric earthquakes in Upper Assam, NE India –some preliminary results. Quaternary Geochronology 2, 278–283.

Thompson, S. C., Weldon, R. J., Rubin, C. M., Abdrakhmatov, K.,Molnar, P. & Berger, G. W. 2002: Late Quaternary slip rates acrossthe central Tien Shen, Kyrgyzstan, central Asia. Journal of Geo-physical Research 107, B9, 2203, doi: 10.1029/2001JB000596.

Thomsen, K. J., Murray, A. S., B�tter-Jensen, L. & Kinahan, J. 2007:Determination of burial dose in incompletely bleached fluvial samplesusing single grains of quartz. Radiation Measurements 42, 370–379.

Tooth, S., Rodnight, H., Duller, G. A. T., McCarthy, T. S., Marren,P. M. & Brandt, D. 2007: Chronology and control of avulsionalong a mixed bedrock–alluvial river.Geological Society of AmericaBulletin 119, 452–461.

Tornqvist, T. E. 1998: Longitudinal profile evolution of the Rhine–-Meuse system during the last deglaciation: Interplay of climatechange and glacio-eustacy? Terra Nova 10, 11–15.

Tornqvist, T. E., Gonzalez, J. L., Newson, L. A., van der Borg, K., deJong, A. F. M. & Kurnik, C. W. 2004: Deciphering Holocene sea-level histories on the U.S. Gulf Coast: A high-resolution recordfrom the Mississippi Delta. Geological Society of America Bulletin116, 1026–1039.

Tornqvist, T. E., Wallinga, J. & Busschers, F. S. 2003: Timing of thelast sequence boundary in a fluvial setting near the highstandshoreline – Insights from optical dating. Geology 31, 279–282.

Tornqvist, T. E., Wallinga, J., Murray, A. S., De Wolf, H., Clever-inga, P. &DeGans,W. 2000: Response of the Rhine–Meuse system(west-central Netherlands) to the last Quaternary glacio-eustaticcycles: A first assessment. Global and Planetary Change 27, 89–111.

Tribolo, C., Mercier, N. & Valladas, H. 2003: Attempt at using thesingle-aliquot regenerative-dose procedure for the determination ofequivalent doses of Upper Palaeolithic burnt stone. QuaternaryScience Reviews 22, 1251–1256.

Truelsen, J. L. & Wallinga, J. 2003: Zeroing of the OSL signal as afunction of grain size: Investigating bleaching and thermal transferfor a young fluvial sample. Geochronometria 22, 1–8.

Tsukamoto, S., Rink, W. J. & Watanuki, T. 2003: OSL of tephric loessand volcanic quartz in Japan and an alternative procedure for estima-tion De from a fast component. Radiation Measurements 23, 593–600.

Turney, C. S. M., Bird, M. J., Fifield, L. K., Roberts, R. G., Smith,M., Dortch, C. E., Grun, R., Lawson, E., Ayliffe, L. K., Miller, G.H., Dortch, J. & Creswell, R. G. 2001: Early human occupation atDevil’s Lair, southwestern Australia 50,000 years ago. QuaternaryResearch 55, 3–13.

Vandenberghe, D., Derese, C. &Houbrechts, G. 2007: Residual dosesin recent alluvial sediments from the Ardenne (S. Belgium). Geo-chronometria 28, 1–8.

Vieillevigne, E., Guibert, P., Zuccarello, A. R. & Bechtel, F. 2006: Thepotential of optically stimulated luminescence for medieval build-ing: A case study at Termez, Ubekistan. Radiation Measurements41, 991–994.

Wallinga, J. 2001: The Rhine–Meuse system in a new light: Opticallystimulated luminescence dating and its applications to fluvial de-posits. Netherlands Geographical Studies 290, 180 pp.

Wallinga, J. 2002: Optically stimulated luminescence dating in fluvialdeposits: A review. Boreas 31, 303–322.

Wallinga, J., Bos, A. J. J., Dorenbos, P., Murray, A. S. & Schokker, J.2007: A test case for anomalous fading correction in IRSL dating.Quaternary Geochronology 2, 216–221.

Wallinga, J., Murray, A. S. & Duller, G. A. T. 2000b: Under-estimation of equivalent dose in single-aliquot optical dating offeldspars caused by preheating. Radiation Measurements 32,691–695.

Wallinga, J., Murray, A. S., Duller, G. A. T. & Tornqvist, T. E. 2001:Testing optically stimulated luminescence dating of sand-sizedquartz and feldspar from fluvial deposits. Earth and Planetary Sci-ence Letters 193, 617–630.

Wallinga, J., Murray, A. & Wintle, A. 2000a: The single-aliquot re-generative-dose (SAR) protocol applied to coarse-grained feldspar.Radiation Measurements 32, 529–533.

Wallinga, J., Tornqvist, T. E., Busschers, F. S. & Weerts, H. J. T.2004: Allogenic forcing of late-Quaternary Rhine–Meuse fluvialrecord: The interplay of climate change, sea level change, andcrustal movements. Basin Research 16, 535–547.

Watanuki, T., Murray, A. S. & Tsukamoto, S. 2005: Quartz andpolymineral luminescence dating of Japanese loess over the last0.6Ma: Comparison with an independent chronology. Earth andPlanetary Science Letters 240, 774–789.

Williams, M. A. J., Pal, J. N., Jaiswal, M. & Singhvi, A. K. 2006:River response to Quaternary climatic fluctuations: Evidence fromthe Son and Belan valleys, north–central India. Quaternary ScienceReviews 25, 2619–2631.

Wintle, A. G. 1973: Anomalous fading of thermoluminescence in mi-neral samples. Nature 245, 143–144.

Wintle, A. G. 1997: Luminescence dating: Laboratory procedures andprotocols. Radiation Measurements 27, 769–817.

Wintle, A. G. 2008a: Luminescence dating: where it has been andwhere it is going. Boreas 37, 471–482.

Wintle, A. G. 2008b: Fifty years of luminescence dating. Archaeo-metry 50, 276–312.

Yoshida, H., Roberts, R. G. & Olley, J. M. 2003: Progress towardssingle-grain optical dating of fossil mud-wasp nests and associatedrock art in northern Australia. Quaternary Science Reviews 22,1273–1278.

Zilberman, E., Amit, R., Heinmann, A. & Porat, N. 2000: Changes inHolocene paleoseismic activity in the Hula pull-apart basin, DeadSea Rift, northern Israel. Tectonophysics 321, 237–252.

Zimmerman, D. W. 1971: Thermoluminescent dating using finegrains from pottery. Archaeometry 13, 29–52.

Zuchiewicz, W., Quoc Cuong, N., Bluszcz, A. & Michalik, M. 2004:Quaternary sediments in the Dien Bien Phu fault zone, NW Viet-nam: A record of young tectonic processes in the light of OSL-SARdating results. Geomorphology 60, 269–302.


Appendix Table 1. Quartz SAR OSL and independent age data and references for Fig. 2 in text. Updated from Murray & Olley (2002).

Sediment type Aliquot and grain size OSL age (kyr)� n Independent age (kyr)� Reference

Fluvial s,c 11�5 yr 1 10 yr Jain et al. (2004a)n=61 s,c 29�15 yr 1 42 yr Murray & Olley (2002)��

sg 40�15 yr 1 55 yr Olley et al. (2004a)s,c 67�5 yr 1 70 yr Olley et al. (1998)sg 70�8 yr 1 63�8 yr Murray & Olley (2002)��

sg 70�15 yr 1 55–125 yr Olley et al. (2004a)sg 110�15 yr 1 120–160 yr Olley et al. (2004a)sg 140�20 yr 1 120–160 yr Olley et al. (2004a)l,c 164�13 yr 1 150 yr Thomas et al. (2007b)sg 170�20 yr 1 128�10 yr Murray & Olley (2002)��

l,c 197�16 yr 1 150 yr Thomas et al. (2007b)sg 290�30 yr 1 230�147 DeLong & Arnold (2007)sg 350�90 yr 1 460�92 DeLong & Arnold (2007)l,c 380�40 yr 1 360–500 yr Lang & Mauz (2006)sg 430�110 yr 1 550�98 DeLong & Arnold (2007)l,c 432�43 yr 1 507�40 yr Thomas et al. (2007b)s,c 0.66�0.03 1 0.35–0.53 Rodnight et al. (2006)l,c 0.69�0.06 1 360–500 yr Lang & Mauz (2006)sg 0.7�0.05 1 0.74�0.11 DeLong & Arnold (2007)l,c 0.74�0.07 1 0.51�0.04 Thomas et al. (2007b)s,c 0.92�0.10 1 0.3 Wallinga et al. (2001)l,c 0.99�0.07 1 0.7–0.8 Lang & Mauz (2006)sg 0.99�0.08 1 0.61�0.07 DeLong & Arnold (2007)s,c 1.07�0.06 1 1.01–1.11 Rodnight et al. (2006)sg 1.17�0.09 1 1.09�.11 DeLong & Arnold (2007)sg 1.21�0.12 1 1.64�.09 DeLong & Arnold (2007)sg 1.23�0.09 1 1.65�0.15 DeLong & Arnold (2007)s,c 1.23�0.1 1 0.7–2.4 Wallinga et al. (2001)l,c 1.29�0.17 1 0.3–0.5 Lang & Mauz (2006)l,c 1.3�0.19 1 0.84–1.0 Lang & Mauz (2006)l,c 1.31�0.06 1 0.84–1.0 Lang & Mauz (2006)l,c 1.38�0.24 1 1.0–1.3 Lang & Mauz (2006)sg 1.55�0.3 1 1.42–1.59 Olley et al. (2004a)s,c 1.75�0.1 1 0.7–2.4 Wallinga et al. (2001)l,c 2.87�0.32 1 1.0–1.3 Lang & Mauz (2006)sg 2.9�0.37 1 3.34–3.47 Olley et al. (2004a)s,c 4.6�0.27 1 3.90–4.04 Rodnight et al. (2006)l,c 4.8�0.6 1 1.0–1.3 Lang & Mauz (2006)s,c 5.1�0.4 1 5.2–6.0 Wallinga et al. (2001)s,c 6.1�0.5 1 5.2–6.0 Wallinga et al. (2001)s,c 6.9�0.4 1 7.7�0.1 Busschers et al. (2007)l,c 9.0�0.6 2 12�0.3 Strickertsson & Murray (1999)l,c 9.1�0.4 1 11.2�0.1 Chen et al. (2003)l,c 9.3�0.5 1 12.3�0.3 Chen et al. (2003)l,c 10�0.4 1 12.6�0.1 Chen et al. (2003)l,c 12.6�0.7 1 13.8�0.3 Chen et al. (2003)l,c 13.1�0.6 1 12.6�0.2 Chen et al. (2003)s,c 13.3�0.8 1 13.0–13.3 Wallinga et al. (2001)l,c 13.5�0.9 1 10.7�0.4 Chen et al. (2003)l,c 13.6�1.1 1 14.3�0.1 Strickertsson & Murray (1999)l,c 13.6�1.0 1 13.9�0.5 Murray & Olley (2002)��

l,c 13.7�1.1 1 11.1�0.3 Larsen et al. (1999)l,c 13.8�0.9 1 14�0.5 Murray & Olley (2002)��

s,c 19.7�1.0 1 19.75�0.65 Rittenour et al. (2005)l,c 22.6�3 1 21.3�2.4 Rittenour & Sharp (2007)sg 25.4�2.02 1 21.74�0.54 DeLong & Arnold (2007)s,c 41�2 1 38�1 Busschers et al. (2007)l,c 41.7�1.6 1 43.4�0.4 Chen et al. (2003)s,c 55�9 1 49.8�4 Roberts et al. (2001)l,c 55.6�1.3 1 58�2 Tanaka et al. (2001)l,c 207�14 10 198�7 Murray et al. (2008)

Aeolian l,c 7.4�1.4 yr 3 15�5 yr Nielsen et al. (2006)n=43 l,c 14�2 yr 2 20�3 yr Ballarini et al. (2003)

l,c 16�2 yr 1 32�7 yr Forman et al. (2006)l,c 17�2 yr 5 14�7 yr Madsen et al. (2007b)


Appendix Table 1 (continued)


l,c 19�1 yr 1 31�5 yr Ballarini et al. (2003)l,c 22�3 yr 6 47�9 yr Madsen et al. (2007b)l,c 25�2 yr 1 23�8 yr Ballarini et al. (2003)l,c 26.2�1.4 yr 1 70�4 yr Ballarini et al. (2003)l,c 35�9 yr 1 46�7 yr Forman et al. (2006)l,c 36�6 yr 1 51�5 yr Ballarini et al. (2003)l,c 39�2 yr 2 68�16 yr Nielsen et al. (2006)l,c 62�4 yr 1 89�9 yr Ballarini et al. (2003)l,c 70�6 yr 9 95�15 yr Madsen et al. (2007b)l,c 153�9 yr 2 143�2 yr Ballarini et al. (2003)l,c 160�21 yr 3 190�20 yr Nielsen et al. (2006)l,c 163�10 yr 1 186�11 yr Ballarini et al. (2003)l,c 220�12 yr 1 218�5 yr Ballarini et al. (2003)l,c 225�6 yr 6 259�3 yr Ballarini et al. (2003)l,c 235�10 yr 5 284�38 yr Madsen et al. (2007b)l,c 290�020 yr 1 350�30 yr Strickertsson & Murray (1999)l,c 0.5�0.025 2 0.555�0.025 Aagaard et al. (2007)l,c 0.68�0.14 1 0.669 Bailey et al. (2001)l,c 0.71�0.05 1 0.669 Bailey et al. (2001)l,c 0.92�0.04 4 0.87�0.04 Murray & Clemmensen (2001)l,c 2.0�0.2 1 2.00�0.05 Murray & Clemmensen (2001)l,c 2.7�0.3 1 2.81�0.02 Murray & Clemmensen (2001)l,c 4.23�0.1 6 4.31�0.07 Murray & Clemmensen (2001)l,c 11.2�1.3 1 13.155 Hilgers et al. (2001)l,c 12.6�0.7 1 12.0�0.3 Mangerud et al. (1999)l,c 13.00�0.7 3 13.155 Radtke et al. (2001)l,c 13.1�0.9 2 13.45�0.3 Hilgers et al. (2001)l,c 14.6�1.2 1 14.3�0.5 Mangerud et al. (1999)s,c 25.5�1.4 1 28�2 Turney et al. (2001)s,c 44.1�2.1 1 43�2 Turney et al. (2001)s,c 47.1�2.6 1 48�2 Turney et al. (2001)l,f 53�3 1 51�1 Watanuki et al. (2005)l,f 93�10 1 98�9 Watanuki et al. (2005)l,c 114�12 1 125�5 Schokker et al. (2004)l,f 145�12 1 135�15 Watanuki et al. (2005)l,f 215�22 1 170�20 Watanuki et al. (2005)l,f 296�39 1 290�30 Watanuki et al. (2005)l,f 308�36 1 290�70 Watanuki et al. (2005)l,f 311�33 1 290�60 Watanuki et al. (2005)

Marine l,c 7�2 yr 1 11.8�0.8 yr Madsen et al. (2005)n=33 l,c 15�2 yr 1 20.4�1.4 yr Madsen et al. (2005)

l,c 33�3 yr 1 34.2�2.5 yr Madsen et al. (2005)l,c 40�6 yr 1 28�10 yr Madsen et al. (2007a)l,c 49�3 yr 1 48.9�4.2 yr Madsen et al. (2005)l,c 57�3 yr 1 63�6.3 yr Madsen et al. (2005)l,c 68�6 yr 1 70 yr Madsen et al. (2007a)l,c 76�4 yr 1 17.8�7.7 yr Madsen et al. (2005)l,c 77�9 yr 1 73�25 yr Madsen et al. (2007a)l,c 96�14 yr 1 50�18 yr Madsen et al. (2007a)l,c 108�11 yr 1 118�41 yr Madsen et al. (2007a)l,c 123�6 yr 1 88.3�11 yr Madsen et al. (2005)l,c 157�19 yr 1 95�33 yr Madsen et al. (2007a)l,c 167�8 yr 1 127.9�34.8 yr Madsen et al. (2005)sg 1.78�0.29 1 0.79–1.55 Olley et al. (2004b)sg 6.49�0.73 1 4.5–5.56 Olley et al. (2004b)l,f 7.3�0.3 1 7.50�0.09 Stokes et al. (2003)sg 8.6�1.05 1 7.97–8.87 Olley et al. (2004b)l,c 14.9�0.6 3 17.2�0.4 Strickertsson & Murray (1999)l,c 17.3�1.5 1 16.2�0.7 Strickertsson & Murray (1999)sg 17.9�2.5 1 16.06–17.09 Olley et al. (2004b)sg 18.7�3.9 1 21.36–23.24 Olley et al. (2004b)l,f 22.1�0.8 1 20.0�0.12 Stokes et al. (2003)l,c 25.3�1.8 1 24�2 Strickertsson & Murray (1999)sg 31.9�4.3 1 28.2–34.0 Olley et al. (2004b)l,f 36.3�1.4 1 43�2 Stokes et al. (2003)


Appendix Table 1 (continued)


sg 51.1�6.5 1 38.4–48.0 Olley et al. (2004b)l,f 66.9�2.8 1 71�4 Stokes et al. (2003)l,c 101�4 4 122�7 Mangerud et al. (1999)l,c 112�2 16 130�2 Murray et al. (2007)l,f 117.2�4.3 1 128�6 Stokes et al. (2003)l,c 119�7 22 129�4 Murray & Funder (2003)l,c 135�8 2 122�7 Sigaard et al. (unpubl.)

Glacial l,f 26�2 1 32�2 Murray & Olley (2002)��

n=6 l,f 28�2 1 27�1 Murray & Olley (2002)��

l,f 29�2 1 32�3 Murray & Olley (2002)��

l,f 29�2 1 30�2 Murray & Olley (2002)��

l,f 30�2 1 33�2 Murray & Olley (2002)��

l,f 30�3 1 33�1 Murray & Olley (2002)��

�Ageso500 years reported in years (yr) not kyr. ��Originally unpublished data from Olley & Hancock. ��Originally unpublished data from

Houmark-Nielsen.

Aliquot size: l= large aliquot, s= small aliquot, sg=single grain.

Grain size: c=sand, f= silt.

n=number of ages making up reported OSL age.


palaeoseismic and archaeological research · osl dating to ﬂuvial deposits. technical...

Documents