The terrestrial sediment archives of northern Germany provide important insights into Late Pleistocene climate variability, but continuous and well‐dated records remain rare. In particular, the age and stratigraphic position of the Oerel and Glinde interstadials within the Early Weichselian to pleniglacial transition remain poorly constrained. These interstadials are commonly attributed to MIS 3, but this assignment is uncertain due to limited numerical dating, reliance on biostratigraphic correlation and the limitations of radiocarbon dating near its upper range. This study presents a new, high‐resolution multi‐proxy record (sedimentology, geochemistry, palynology) from two sediment cores at Lichtenberg, Lower Saxony, positioned directly next to a multi‐phased Middle Palaeolithic archaeological site and supported by a robust chronology based on new optically stimulated luminescence (OSL) ages. The record documents the vegetation and landscape dynamics from the late Eemian interglacial into the Weichselian pleniglacial, capturing major climatic transitions and the onset of cold, periglacial conditions. Within this sequence, we identify two previously unresolved climatic oscillations (Dangenstorf I and II), characterised by expansions of Betula nana ‐shrub tundra and increased organic accumulation. Based on pollen assemblages and OSL dating, these oscillations are correlated with the Oerel and Glinde interstadials, which are themselves stratigraphically positioned between the Odderade interstadial and the onset of the Weichselian pleniglacial. Furthermore, our OSL chronology places them firmly within the MIS 5a/4 transition. We assign them to the Greenland interstadials (GI) 20 and 19.2, respectively, rather than to MIS 3 as previously assumed. The Lichtenberg record thus provides a continuous, well‐dated archive that redefines the chronostratigraphy of the Early Weichselian to pleniglacial transition in northern Germany and strengthens its correlation with North Atlantic climate variability.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Samudra et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: