Abstract
Peat humification analysis is a widely used palaeoclimate proxy. However, recent studies combining humification with other proxies of mire surface wetness have identified inconsistencies between the records. We illustrate this inconsistency by comparing humification records with plant macrofossil profiles in three ombrotrophic bogs. Peat humification is a measure for organic decay and reflects changing palaeohydrological conditions and former vegetation composition. The resulting signal is considered to be a derived response to climate. However, even minor changes in the botanical composition of the peat may have a significant influence on humification measurements. The implications of this for palaeoclimate studies are discussed. The assumption that climate has been the major influence on variations in humification rests on the botanical composition being relatively homogeneous throughout the peat profile, and is therefore questionable. Consideration should be given to developing species‐specific measures of humification and to testing the assumption that the major influence on peat humification is the surface wetness of the bog (and therefore climate).
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
