Por favor, use este identificador para citar o enlazar a este item: http://hdl.handle.net/10261/126179
COMPARTIR / EXPORTAR:
logo share SHARE logo core CORE BASE
Visualizar otros formatos: MARC | Dublin Core | RDF | ORE | MODS | METS | DIDL | DATACITE

Invitar a revisión por pares abierta
Título

New insights on palaeofires and savannisation in northern SouthAmerica

AutorRull, Valentí CSIC ORCID ; Montoya, Encarnación CSIC ORCID ; Vegas-Vilarrúbia, Teresa; Ballesteros, T.
Fecha de publicación2015
EditorPergamon Press
CitaciónQuarternary Science Reviews 122: 158- 165 (2015)
Resumen© 2015 Elsevier Ltd. Understanding the origin and ecological dynamics of tropical savannas in terms of natural and human drivers of change is a hot topic that may be crucial for conservation. The case of the Gran Sabana (GS), a huge savanna island within the Amazon-Orinoco rainforests, is presented as a pilot study for the Neotropics. A vivid debate exists on whether or not forests formerly covered the GS and on the potential role of anthropogenic fires in the establishment of present-day savannas. This debate has generated a conflict between conservation ecologists defending the ancient forests hypothesis and indigenous inhabitants (Pemones), for whom the use of fire is an inalienable cultural trait. Here we discuss the latest palaeoecological findings documenting past vegetation dynamics and the shaping of present GS landscapes. At the beginning of the Younger Dryas (YD), the GS was more forested than it is today but an abrupt, hitherto irreversible, shift toward savannisation, likely caused by coupled climate-fire synergies, was recorded between the mid-YD and the Early Holocene. It is suggested that fires could have been ignited by the first South American settlers in their eastward migration from the Panama Isthmus through the so called Atlantic Route. The Pemones would have established in the GS during the Late Holocene when savannas already covered the region. A simplistic debate between either forest or savanna as the >original> GS vegetation is unrealistic and should be replaced by a more dynamic approach. The term >original> vegetation itself is misleading and should not be used.
URIhttp://hdl.handle.net/10261/126179
DOI10.1016/j.quascirev.2015.05.032
Identificadoresdoi: 10.1016/j.quascirev.2015.05.032
issn: 0277-3791
Aparece en las colecciones: (Geo3Bcn) Artículos




Ficheros en este ítem:
Fichero Descripción Tamaño Formato
accesoRestringido.pdf15,38 kBAdobe PDFVista previa
Visualizar/Abrir
Mostrar el registro completo

CORE Recommender

SCOPUSTM   
Citations

22
checked on 18-abr-2024

WEB OF SCIENCETM
Citations

18
checked on 29-feb-2024

Page view(s)

333
checked on 24-abr-2024

Download(s)

98
checked on 24-abr-2024

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric

Altmetric


NOTA: Los ítems de Digital.CSIC están protegidos por copyright, con todos los derechos reservados, a menos que se indique lo contrario.