Arguments for and against a Pleistocene tundra‐steppe¹

Arguments supporting the existence of a tundra‐steppe in northern Eurasia during the Pleistocene include three components—phytogeographic, palynological, and paleozoological—which logically support one another. However, the following arguments contradict the concept of a tundra‐steppe: (1) the determination of pollen and spores in “tundra‐steppe spectra”; is usually made at the level of the genus and family (rather than species), which cannot serve as an indication of the true nature of the vegetation; (2) taxons at the level of genus and family are a priori assumed to be steppe plants; (3) the relationship between spore‐pollen spectra and vegetation is not unambiguous; (4) paleodynamic processes in landscapes (especially redeposition processes), if taken into account at all, are done so only formally; (5) there are only a few xerophytic plant species in Beringia, but these are semizonal species; (6) most of the species constituting the associations, similar to steppe species, migrated to territories surrounding Beringia in the Holocene, and their migration is continuing even now; and (7) groupings in the high latitudes, like steppe groupings, have a negligible phytomass.