Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 266

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 132 of the 132 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Loess landscapes of Europe – Mapping, geomorphology, and zonal differentiation

Open access
Lehmkuhl, F., Nett, J.J., Pötter, S., Schulte, P., Sprafke, T., Jary, Z., Antoine, P., Wacha, L., Wolf, D., Zerboni, A., Hošek, J., Marković, S.B., Obreht, I., Sümegi, P., Veres, D., Zeeden, C., Boemke, B., Schaubert, V., Viehweger, J., Hambach, U.·2021·Earth-Science Reviews

Abstract

Paleoenvironmental reconstructions on a (supra-)regional scale have gained attention in Quaternary sciences during the last decades. In terrestrial realms, loess deposits and especially intercalations of loess and buried soils, so called loess-paleosol sequences (LPS) are important archives to unravel the terrestrial response to e.g. climatic fluctuations and reconstruct paleoenvironments during the Pleistocene. The analysis of LPS requires the knowledge of several key factors, such as the distribution of the aeolian sediments, their location relative to (potential) source areas, the climate conditions that led to their emplacement and the topography of the sink area. These factors strongly influence the sedimentological and paleoenvironmental characteristics of LPS and show broad variations throughout Europe, leading to a distinct distribution pattern throughout the continent. We present a new map of the distribution of aeolian sediments (mainly loess) and major potential source areas for Europe. The map was compiled combining geodata of different mapping approaches. Most of the used geodata stems from accurate national maps of 27 different countries. Problematic aspects such as different nomenclatures across administrative borders were carefully investigated and revised. The result is a seamless map, which comprises pedological, geological, and geomorphological data and can be used for paleoenvironmental and archeological studies and other applications. We use the resulting map and data from key geomorphological cross-sections to discuss the various influences of geomorphology and paleoenvironment on the deposition and preservation of Late Pleistocene loess throughout Europe. We divided the loess areas into 6 main loess domains and 17 subdomains to understand and explain the factors controlling their distribution and characteristics. For the subdivision we used the following criteria: (1) influence of silt production areas, (2) affiliation to subcatchments, as rivers are very important regional silt transport agents, (3) occurrence of past periglacial activity with characteristic overprinting of the deposits. Additionally, the sediment distribution is combined with elevation data, to investigate the loess distribution statistically as well as visually. Throughout Europe, the variations, and differences of the loess domains are the results of a complex interplay of changing paleoenvironmental conditions and related geomorphologic processes, controlling dust sources, transport, accumulation, preservation, pedogenesis, alongside erosional and reworking events. Climatic, paleoclimatic, and pedoclimatic gradients are on the continental scale an additional important factor, since there are e.g. latitudinal differences of permafrost and periglacial processes, an increase in continentality from west to east and in aridity from northwest to southeast and south, strongly affecting regional sedimentary and geomorphic dynamics. We propose three main depositional regimes for loess formation in Europe: (1.) periglacial and tundra loess formation with periglacial processes and permafrost in the high latitude and mountainous regions; (2.) steppe and desert margin loess formation in the (semi-)arid regions; and (3.) loess and soil formation in temperate and subtropical regions. Loess deposits of (1.) and (2.) show coarser, sandier particle distributions towards the glacial and desert regions. In the humid areas (3.) forest vegetation limited dust production and accumulation, therefore, there is an increase in finer grain sizes due to an increase in weathering.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.earscirev.2020.103496

Cites

132 of 132 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 132 references

Metadata

Authors
Lehmkuhl, F., Nett, J. J., Pötter, S., Schulte, P., Sprafke, T., Jary, Z., Antoine, P., Wacha, L., Wolf, D., Zerboni, A., Hošek, J., Marković, S. B., Obreht, I., Sümegi, P., Veres, D., Zeeden, C., Boemke, B., Schaubert, V., Viehweger, J., & Hambach, U.
Venue
Earth-Science Reviews
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2021-04
Volume
215
Pages
103496
ISSN
0012-8252 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3114429604
Cited by
266
References
132
FWCI
19.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Loess landscapes of Europe – Mapping, geomorphology, and zonal differentiation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.earscirev.2020.103496
The paper
Lehmkuhl, F., Nett, J. J., Pötter, S., Schulte, P., Sprafke, T., Jary, Z., Antoine, P., Wacha, L., Wolf, D., Zerboni, A., Hošek, J., Marković, S. B., Obreht, I., Sümegi, P., Veres, D., Zeeden, C., Boemke, B., Schaubert, V., Viehweger, J., & Hambach, U. (2021). Loess landscapes of Europe – Mapping, geomorphology, and zonal differentiation. Earth-Science Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earscirev.2020.103496

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.