|
|
 |
|||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||
 |
|||||||||||||||||
| JOURNAL HOME | HELP | CONTACT PUBLISHER | SUBSCRIBE | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
1 Department of Earth Sciences, Dartmouth College, Hanover, New Hampshire 03755, USA
2 Research School of Earth Sciences, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT 0200, Australia
Soil creep is the most widespread and perhaps the least understood process of erosion on soil-mantled hillslopes. Soil is slowly "stirred" by burrowing creatures, and particles are displaced in wetting-drying cycles. These actions can cause downslope creep by processes analogous to particle diffusion. Other possible transport mechanisms include shear and viscous-like creep, such that precise characterization of the entire process appears to require the tracing of labeled soil grains. Here we use natural quartz grains in a mature soil to determine grain movements from the time elapsed since each grain last visited the ground surface, measured by single-grain optical dating. Downslope flux is calculated from soil production by rock weathering at the soil base, measured with in situ–produced cosmogenic nuclide concentrations (10Be and 26Al). Results show that grains throughout the soil profile repeatedly visit the surface, and give the first quantitative characterization of grain-scale transport processes within creeping soil. These unique field data are interpreted with a Monte Carlo simulation to suggest that soil creep involves independent movements of mineral grains throughout the soil body and that grains are reburied or eroded by overland flow upon reaching the surface.
Key Words: erosion • optically stimulated luminescence • cosmogenic nuclides • southeastern Australia
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  J. J. Roering How well can hillslope evolution models "explain" topography? Simulating soil transport and production with high-resolution topographic data Geological Society of America Bulletin, September 1, 2008; 120(9-10): 1248 - 1262. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 F. E. Rhoton, W. E. Emmerich, D. A. DiCarlo, D. S. McChesney, M. A. Nearing, and J. C. Ritchie Identification of Suspended Sediment Sources Using Soil Characteristics in a Semiarid Watershed Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., June 18, 2008; 72(4): 1102 - 1112. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. M. Kaste, A. M. Heimsath, and B. C. Bostick Short-term soil mixing quantified with fallout radionuclides Geology, March 1, 2007; 35(3): 243 - 246. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 F. Herman and J. Braun A parametric study of soil transport mechanisms Geological Society of America Special Papers, January 1, 2006; 398(0): 191 - 200. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
RECENT PAPERS Geological Society of America Special Papers, January 1, 2006; 415(0): vii - xii. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. M. Heimsath, D. J. Furbish, and W. E. Dietrich The illusion of diffusion: Field evidence for depth-dependent sediment transport Geology, December 1, 2005; 33(12): 949 - 952. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 H. A.P. Cockburn and M. A. Summerfield Geomorphological applications of cosmogenic isotope analysis Progress in Physical Geography, March 1, 2004; 28(1): 1 - 42. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A. Matmon, P. R. Bierman, J. Larsen, S. Southworth, M. Pavich, R. Finkel, and M. Caffee Erosion of an Ancient Mountain Range, The Great Smoky Mountains, North Carolina and Tennessee Am J Sci, November 1, 2003; 303(9): 817 - 855. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. J. Roering, P. Almond, P. Tonkin, and J. McKean Soil transport driven by biological processes over millennial time scales Geology, December 1, 2002; 30(12): 1115 - 1118. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| JOURNAL HOME | HELP | CONTACT PUBLISHER | SUBSCRIBE | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
