Palaeo-landslide dams controlled the formation of Late Quaternary terraces in Diexi, the upper Minjiang River, eastern Tibetan Plateau

Li, Jingjuan; Fan, Xuanmei; Ding, Zhiyong; Lovati, Marco

doi:https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-929

Preprints

https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-929

Preprints

26 Jun 2023

| 26 Jun 2023

Palaeo-landslide dams controlled the formation of Late Quaternary terraces in Diexi, the upper Minjiang River, eastern Tibetan Plateau

Jingjuan Li, Xuanmei Fan, Zhiyong Ding, and Marco Lovati

Abstract. Tectonic uplift and climate changes are the two critical factors controlling the evolution of river landscapes and the formation of terraces. However, little is known about the effect of river blockage events on terrace formation along valley areas. In this paper, we investigated the geomorphology, sedimentology, and chronology of Tuanjie (seven staircases) and Taiping (three staircases) Terraces in Diexi. These represent two typical fluvial terraces in the upper Minjiang River in the eastern Tibetan Plateau. These terraces are composed, from bottom to top, of lacustrine deposits, gravels, loess, and paleosol. Taiping Terrace 3 (T3) has two sets of mud-phyllite clasts sequences. Field investigation, Digital Elevation Model (DEM) data, lithofacies, and dating results confirm that terraces T1 to T3 in Taiping correspond to terraces T5 to T7 in Tuanjie. These findings suggest that two damming and four outburst events occurred in the area during the late Pleistocene. The palaeo-dam blocked the river around 32.40±1.91 ka, followed by the first outburst at 27.11±0.18 ka. Then, the palaeo-dam blocked the river again between 27 to 17 ka, and suffered a second dam-breaking event at 17 ka. The third and fourth gradual collapse events respectively occurred at ~10 ka and ~9.35 ka. Combined with the tectonic uplift rate, river incision rate, and high-resolution climate data, our analysis shows that the blockage and collapse of the palaeo-dam have been a major factor in the formation of tectonically active mountainous river terraces. Tectonic movement and climatic fluctuations, on the other end, play a minor role.

Received: 06 May 2023 – Discussion started: 26 Jun 2023

Publisher's note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims made in the text, published maps, institutional affiliations, or any other geographical representation in this preprint. The responsibility to include appropriate place names lies with the authors.

Download & links

Preprint (PDF, 10283 KB)

Notice on discussion status
The requested preprint has a corresponding peer-reviewed final revised paper. You are encouraged to refer to the final revised version.
Preprint (10283 KB)

Supplement (280 KB)

Download & links

The requested preprint has a corresponding peer-reviewed final revised paper. You are encouraged to refer to the final revised version.

Journal article(s) based on this preprint

02 Sep 2024

Terrace formation linked to outburst floods at the Diexi palaeo-landslide dam, upper Minjiang River, eastern Tibetan Plateau

Jingjuan Li, John D. Jansen, Xuanmei Fan, Zhiyong Ding, Shugang Kang, and Marco Lovati

Earth Surf. Dynam., 12, 953–971, https://doi.org/10.5194/esurf-12-953-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/esurf-12-953-2024, 2024

Short summary

Jingjuan Li, Xuanmei Fan, Zhiyong Ding, and Marco Lovati

Interactive discussion

Status: closed

RC1:
'Comment on egusphere-2023-929', Anonymous Referee #1, 28 Jul 2023

General comments:

Dear authors,

The manuscript is well-written and covers an interesting topic relevant to the scope of the journal.

The manuscript has some linguistic deficiencies, particularly translation issues, which are discussed in more detail in the technical corrections. To improve the flow of reading, it is recommended to summarize some of the many short sentences. It is advisable to have a native speaker proofread the manuscript.

The abstract provides a concise summary of the manuscript. The discussions are not well structured and difficult to follow, while the summary is more clear.

The manuscript may be accepted after major revision, based on the following comments.
Specific comments:

L15: the detail about the mud-phyllite in T3 is not of interest in the abstract.
L21: You are rounding every age in this paragraph except for 9.35ka.
L39: Please mention the studies.
L64-65: "might need to be further studied" and "should be considered" appears indecisive.
L95: Do you mean "alpine erosion landform" ?
Fig 1: The symbols on the map for the study area and county are not clear. It is difficult to understand the geological formations from the map. The villages on the map c & d might not be at their correct locations, a directional arrow can help here.
L122-123: This assumes that the terrace levels are increasingly younger the higher they are, which is not the case. I suggest not using the phrases "oldest" and "youngest".
L139: Why did you take OSL samples from different units? In my opinion, this immediately introduces a problem of water content and dose rate. It is good as an age check next to another sample from the same terrace, but I find it a bit difficult this way. And what about T6?
L156: Did you perform a density separation prior to etching to separate the quartz from the other material?
L162: What is the exact protocol you have been using?
L166: How did you measure the environmental dose rate? Did you take appropriate samples in the field?
L170: Why did you sample there? In general, your choice of sampling location (also for OSL) is not entirely clear to me.
Fig 4.: This is a very nice and vivid illustration.
L236: Is there an explanation for why T5 and T7 are missing the loess unit?
Fig 5.: The x-axis font is too small.
L272: It is not "Optional", but "Optically Stimulated Luminescence"
L281/282: Your terraces do not become younger with increasing elevation. T5 & T7 are older, but higher than T3 & T4 for example. Generally, this section is very difficult to follow (L272-286).
L307: Have you done a bleaching test to correct the residuals?
L336: Round the numbers as they suggest a level of accuracy that you don't have. It is unclear what you are referring to with Table S1. You must mention the source for these ages.
L427-433: You have large ranges for incision rates here and you claim that there are significant differences. However, the differences are mainly in one area only, rather than compared to all of them.
L510: The results now indicate the exact opposite of the previous findings (see L122 & L281)
Fig. 10: Really nice presentation of the process and absolutely necessary.

Technical corrections:

L27: Word repetition "evolution".
L46: "The upper Minjiang River is located in the eastern Tibetan Plateau, and it is characterised by a wide distribution of three-tiered terraced."
L56-58: Word repetition "sedimentary system". It can be summarised as "fluvial, lacustrine, alluvial fan [...] sedimentary system".
L61: "This indicates that" instead of "This is".
L74: Colloquial. "The Diexi area is located in the upper reaches of the Minjiang River". And please connect the first two sentences.
L78: "..and the steep slopes on both sides of the river valley have a gradient of 30-35°."
L85-86: Word repetition "about".
L97-98: "The climate of the entire region is monsoonal, being influenced by the Plateau Monsoon, the Westerlies, and the East Asian Monsoon."
L194: The heading repeats. You should either write introductory words to the following chapters under chapter 4.1. or simply omit the top chapter. Same for chapters 5.2 and 5.2.1
L199: Word repetition "extension/extends"
L200: "On a high mountain" is colloquial.
L231: "Angular phyllites occur in T3."
L332: Just write 830 ka
L334: "The terraces in the Diexi area have ages that are distributed between 550-50 ka (Table S1), with the majority observed between 32-2 ka."
L345: "It can be seen that the terrace formation mechanism downstream is different from that upstream."
L346: I would suggest not to write "publish".
Fig 6: You have the same sentence here with the age 46.40 ka to 2.81 ka.
L370-373: Rewirte the sentences. Not "Tx are...".
Fig. 7: Use different colors with each symbol.
L487-489: "The upstream and downstream effects of the blockage are a rapid rise in water level followed by potential upstream flooding."
L492: "Gravity and density caused the material to be deposited in the palaeo-dammed Diexi Lake and formed a channel."

Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-929-RC1
- AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Xuanmei Fan, 09 Sep 2023
  
  Dear Reviewer,
  We would like to express our sincere gratitude for your valuable and insightful comments on our manuscript. Your expertise and guidance have greatly contributed to the improvement of our work. We appreciate the time and effort you dedicated to reviewing our research. Your suggestions have helped enhance the clarity and quality of our study. Thank you once again for your valuable input.
  Please find the detailed response in the attached document.
  Best regards,
  Xuanmei Fan on behalf of all co-authors
  
  Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-929-AC1
RC2:
'Comment on egusphere-2023-929', Anonymous Referee #2, 04 Aug 2023
Based on geomorphology, sedimentology, and chronology, the manuscript reconstructing two damming and four outburst events occurred in the minjiang river during the late Pleistocene, which suggests that the blockage and collapse of the palaeo-dam have been a major factor in the formation of tectonically active mountainous river terraces, and tectonic movement and climatic fluctuations, on the other end, play a minor role. I think the topic of the paper is interesting. However, this manuscript mainly focuses on sediment dating and geomorphological interpretation. The content association with dynamics is much weak, thus I am wondering whether it is suitable for this journal or not. Considering that this manuscript still has a plenty of problems, we suggest a major revision.
The following are review opinions:
Language should be improved by a native English speaker, please avoid all kinds of grammar errors and please use scientific language to write the paper.

The evolution of Diexi landslide-dammed lake in eastern Tibetan Plateau has gotten special attention of a plenty of scientist. The author should introduce the details of Diexi landslide dammed lake, including the history of repeated landslide damming.

Ordinarily, uncertainties in estimating water content during burial are one of the largest sources of uncertainty in luminescence dating methods. Please give out the process of the determination of water content.

For OSL dating, the results of recycling ratios and recuperations should be presented, and aliquots with recycling ratios out of 0.9-1.1 and recuperations higher than 5% should be rejected.

The authors should select appropriate preheat and cutheat temperatures based on a preheat plateau test (Murray and Wintle, 2000) or following some case studies, and add some references.

How did the authors obtain the final De? Please illustrate.

Line 281: “T1 has the youngest paleosol unit with an age of 3.78±15 ka. Terraces grow younger amid the increase in elevation.” Obviously, this is paradoxical. Please find a better way to present the chronological results, to avoid the reader's misunderstanding.

For the lacustrine terraces, the dates can only implied that the filling up ages of the dammed lake rather formation time of terrace. Because of this misunderstanding, the comparison between climate date and terrace “formation” ages is also problematic.

“The third and fourth gradual collapse events respectively occurred at ~10 ka and ~9.35 ka.” How to divide the period of dammed lake? Is it just according to the age? How can we be sure that such a small difference in results is not due to a dating error? For the optical dating of the paper, both of the method and the internal checks of the results were not sufficiently presented. The reliability of the OSL data awaits further examination and more work is needed. My biggest concern about the OSL data comes from the bleaching extent of the OSL signals before deposition. However, the problem of bleaching extent has not been mentioned and explained in this paper, not yet anyway.

Tectonic uplift and climate changes are the two critical factors controlling the evolution of river landscapes and the formation of terraces. However, rock uplift rate is calculated from bedrock terraces, rather than lacustrine terraces.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-929-RC2
- AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Xuanmei Fan, 09 Sep 2023
  
  Dear Reviewer,
  We would like to express our heartfelt appreciation for your valuable and insightful comments on our manuscript. Your expertise and guidance have significantly contributed to the improvement of our work. We are grateful for the time and effort you dedicated to reviewing our research thoroughly. Your suggestions and constructive criticism have played a crucial role in enhancing our study's clarity, rigor, and overall quality. We sincerely appreciate your valuable input, which has undoubtedly strengthened our manuscript. Thank you once again for your invaluable contribution.
  Please find the detailed response in the attached document.
  Best regards,
  Xuanmei Fan on behalf of all co-authors
  
  Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-929-AC2

Interactive discussion

Status: closed

RC1:
'Comment on egusphere-2023-929', Anonymous Referee #1, 28 Jul 2023

General comments:

Dear authors,

The manuscript is well-written and covers an interesting topic relevant to the scope of the journal.

The manuscript has some linguistic deficiencies, particularly translation issues, which are discussed in more detail in the technical corrections. To improve the flow of reading, it is recommended to summarize some of the many short sentences. It is advisable to have a native speaker proofread the manuscript.

The abstract provides a concise summary of the manuscript. The discussions are not well structured and difficult to follow, while the summary is more clear.

The manuscript may be accepted after major revision, based on the following comments.
Specific comments:

L15: the detail about the mud-phyllite in T3 is not of interest in the abstract.
L21: You are rounding every age in this paragraph except for 9.35ka.
L39: Please mention the studies.
L64-65: "might need to be further studied" and "should be considered" appears indecisive.
L95: Do you mean "alpine erosion landform" ?
Fig 1: The symbols on the map for the study area and county are not clear. It is difficult to understand the geological formations from the map. The villages on the map c & d might not be at their correct locations, a directional arrow can help here.
L122-123: This assumes that the terrace levels are increasingly younger the higher they are, which is not the case. I suggest not using the phrases "oldest" and "youngest".
L139: Why did you take OSL samples from different units? In my opinion, this immediately introduces a problem of water content and dose rate. It is good as an age check next to another sample from the same terrace, but I find it a bit difficult this way. And what about T6?
L156: Did you perform a density separation prior to etching to separate the quartz from the other material?
L162: What is the exact protocol you have been using?
L166: How did you measure the environmental dose rate? Did you take appropriate samples in the field?
L170: Why did you sample there? In general, your choice of sampling location (also for OSL) is not entirely clear to me.
Fig 4.: This is a very nice and vivid illustration.
L236: Is there an explanation for why T5 and T7 are missing the loess unit?
Fig 5.: The x-axis font is too small.
L272: It is not "Optional", but "Optically Stimulated Luminescence"
L281/282: Your terraces do not become younger with increasing elevation. T5 & T7 are older, but higher than T3 & T4 for example. Generally, this section is very difficult to follow (L272-286).
L307: Have you done a bleaching test to correct the residuals?
L336: Round the numbers as they suggest a level of accuracy that you don't have. It is unclear what you are referring to with Table S1. You must mention the source for these ages.
L427-433: You have large ranges for incision rates here and you claim that there are significant differences. However, the differences are mainly in one area only, rather than compared to all of them.
L510: The results now indicate the exact opposite of the previous findings (see L122 & L281)
Fig. 10: Really nice presentation of the process and absolutely necessary.

Technical corrections:

L27: Word repetition "evolution".
L46: "The upper Minjiang River is located in the eastern Tibetan Plateau, and it is characterised by a wide distribution of three-tiered terraced."
L56-58: Word repetition "sedimentary system". It can be summarised as "fluvial, lacustrine, alluvial fan [...] sedimentary system".
L61: "This indicates that" instead of "This is".
L74: Colloquial. "The Diexi area is located in the upper reaches of the Minjiang River". And please connect the first two sentences.
L78: "..and the steep slopes on both sides of the river valley have a gradient of 30-35°."
L85-86: Word repetition "about".
L97-98: "The climate of the entire region is monsoonal, being influenced by the Plateau Monsoon, the Westerlies, and the East Asian Monsoon."
L194: The heading repeats. You should either write introductory words to the following chapters under chapter 4.1. or simply omit the top chapter. Same for chapters 5.2 and 5.2.1
L199: Word repetition "extension/extends"
L200: "On a high mountain" is colloquial.
L231: "Angular phyllites occur in T3."
L332: Just write 830 ka
L334: "The terraces in the Diexi area have ages that are distributed between 550-50 ka (Table S1), with the majority observed between 32-2 ka."
L345: "It can be seen that the terrace formation mechanism downstream is different from that upstream."
L346: I would suggest not to write "publish".
Fig 6: You have the same sentence here with the age 46.40 ka to 2.81 ka.
L370-373: Rewirte the sentences. Not "Tx are...".
Fig. 7: Use different colors with each symbol.
L487-489: "The upstream and downstream effects of the blockage are a rapid rise in water level followed by potential upstream flooding."
L492: "Gravity and density caused the material to be deposited in the palaeo-dammed Diexi Lake and formed a channel."

Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-929-RC1
- AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Xuanmei Fan, 09 Sep 2023
  
  Dear Reviewer,
  We would like to express our sincere gratitude for your valuable and insightful comments on our manuscript. Your expertise and guidance have greatly contributed to the improvement of our work. We appreciate the time and effort you dedicated to reviewing our research. Your suggestions have helped enhance the clarity and quality of our study. Thank you once again for your valuable input.
  Please find the detailed response in the attached document.
  Best regards,
  Xuanmei Fan on behalf of all co-authors
  
  Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-929-AC1
RC2:
'Comment on egusphere-2023-929', Anonymous Referee #2, 04 Aug 2023
Based on geomorphology, sedimentology, and chronology, the manuscript reconstructing two damming and four outburst events occurred in the minjiang river during the late Pleistocene, which suggests that the blockage and collapse of the palaeo-dam have been a major factor in the formation of tectonically active mountainous river terraces, and tectonic movement and climatic fluctuations, on the other end, play a minor role. I think the topic of the paper is interesting. However, this manuscript mainly focuses on sediment dating and geomorphological interpretation. The content association with dynamics is much weak, thus I am wondering whether it is suitable for this journal or not. Considering that this manuscript still has a plenty of problems, we suggest a major revision.
The following are review opinions:
Language should be improved by a native English speaker, please avoid all kinds of grammar errors and please use scientific language to write the paper.

The evolution of Diexi landslide-dammed lake in eastern Tibetan Plateau has gotten special attention of a plenty of scientist. The author should introduce the details of Diexi landslide dammed lake, including the history of repeated landslide damming.

Ordinarily, uncertainties in estimating water content during burial are one of the largest sources of uncertainty in luminescence dating methods. Please give out the process of the determination of water content.

For OSL dating, the results of recycling ratios and recuperations should be presented, and aliquots with recycling ratios out of 0.9-1.1 and recuperations higher than 5% should be rejected.

The authors should select appropriate preheat and cutheat temperatures based on a preheat plateau test (Murray and Wintle, 2000) or following some case studies, and add some references.

How did the authors obtain the final De? Please illustrate.

Line 281: “T1 has the youngest paleosol unit with an age of 3.78±15 ka. Terraces grow younger amid the increase in elevation.” Obviously, this is paradoxical. Please find a better way to present the chronological results, to avoid the reader's misunderstanding.

For the lacustrine terraces, the dates can only implied that the filling up ages of the dammed lake rather formation time of terrace. Because of this misunderstanding, the comparison between climate date and terrace “formation” ages is also problematic.

“The third and fourth gradual collapse events respectively occurred at ~10 ka and ~9.35 ka.” How to divide the period of dammed lake? Is it just according to the age? How can we be sure that such a small difference in results is not due to a dating error? For the optical dating of the paper, both of the method and the internal checks of the results were not sufficiently presented. The reliability of the OSL data awaits further examination and more work is needed. My biggest concern about the OSL data comes from the bleaching extent of the OSL signals before deposition. However, the problem of bleaching extent has not been mentioned and explained in this paper, not yet anyway.

Tectonic uplift and climate changes are the two critical factors controlling the evolution of river landscapes and the formation of terraces. However, rock uplift rate is calculated from bedrock terraces, rather than lacustrine terraces.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-929-RC2
- AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Xuanmei Fan, 09 Sep 2023
  
  Dear Reviewer,
  We would like to express our heartfelt appreciation for your valuable and insightful comments on our manuscript. Your expertise and guidance have significantly contributed to the improvement of our work. We are grateful for the time and effort you dedicated to reviewing our research thoroughly. Your suggestions and constructive criticism have played a crucial role in enhancing our study's clarity, rigor, and overall quality. We sincerely appreciate your valuable input, which has undoubtedly strengthened our manuscript. Thank you once again for your invaluable contribution.
  Please find the detailed response in the attached document.
  Best regards,
  Xuanmei Fan on behalf of all co-authors
  
  Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-929-AC2

Peer review completion

AR: Author's response | RR: Referee report | ED: Editor decision | EF: Editorial file upload

AR by Xuanmei Fan on behalf of the Authors (09 Sep 2023) Author's response Author's tracked changes Manuscript

ED: Referee Nomination & Report Request started (05 Dec 2023) by Wolfgang Schwanghart

RR by Weiming liu (17 Dec 2023)

RR by Anonymous Referee #3 (24 Dec 2023)

ED: Publish subject to minor revisions (review by editor) (26 Dec 2023) by Wolfgang Schwanghart

AR by Xuanmei Fan on behalf of the Authors (03 Jan 2024) Author's response Author's tracked changes Manuscript

ED: Publish subject to minor revisions (review by editor) (07 Feb 2024) by Wolfgang Schwanghart

Dear authors,

I hope this letter finds you well. I am writing to provide feedback on the manuscript. Firstly, I want to express my appreciation for your efforts to revise your manuscript and respond to the referees. After careful consideration and review of your manuscript and the previous reports from the referees, however, I must inform you that the manuscript still lacks the required rigor and clarity necessary for publication in ESURF. While your study addresses an important topic and presents intriguing findings, there are several key issues that need to be addressed before the manuscript can be considered for publication.

Specifically, the following issues need to be addressed:

Language and style: There are many instances of unclear language throughout the manuscript. I recommend a thorough proofreading and editing process to improve the clarity and coherence of the writing. This includes the use of terminology (for example, see my minor comment on the term disaster below) and the use of precise language and statements (for example, why is data incomplete and why does it make studies exploratory in Line 53). The meaning of sentences like "terraces in the Diexi area are typical fluvial terraces in the upper Minjian River") are difficult to grasp for readers that are not familiar with the study area. Also, it is unclear what "the systematic study ... is incomplete" (L61) actually means. Later, you state that "climate change can affect the topgraphy of terrace staircases" (L516). I don't know how that would work unless climate change modulates geomorphic processes that ultimately lead to incision or aggradation, both of which are processes that form terraces and which are controlled by upstream processes of sediment production and downstream changes of baselevel. These are just a few examples for many instances of unclear language that pervade the current version of the manuscript.

Research objectives: I like how you state the objectives of your study in the last paragraph of the introduction. Yet, these objectives should be described in a more concise and specific way. You write that the "purpose of this paper are". Rather, you should state the objectives of your study. Then, you write that the objective is "(1) to clarify the deposition ages and sedimentary characteristics". Here, you must be more concise in describing, what you actually do, which is offering/complementing new geochronological and sedimentological constraints/evidence. Objective 2, "to reveal the blockage and outburst of the palaeo-dam" is unclear as a study objective. It rather sounds like you are offering already here an explanation for the phenomen, which you are actually going to study. Objective 3, "to explore the influences of tectonics, climate, ..." is rather an overall aim of your study, but not an immediate objective. It will be good to make a clear distinction between research objectives and the overall aim of the study. This will also allow you to generalize the relevance of your findings to answer a broader research question.

Discussion and interpretation: The discussion of the dating results seems to me overtly optimistic concerning the precision and accuracy of the OSL ages. Moreover, the interpretation misses out processes that may affect the OSL results. For example, is it possible that OSL ages are overestimated due to incomplete bleaching which is a common problem in extreme sediment transport events (de Boer et al., 2024) and high-turbidity flows (Mey et al., 2023)? Could insufficient bleaching be an explanation why dated gravel deposits are embedded between sediments with younger ages (Fig. 5)? What about the factors contributing to the reservoir effect (L353)? Are they actually relevant in the study area (e.g. upstream carbonatic rocks, evidence for subaqueous landslides, etc.?).I have also concerns about the interpretation of beveling and backwearing of terraces by lake level variations. Can there be sufficient wave action in such a lake to suffiently erode the lake shores? What about fluvial phases during which lateral erosion dominates. Wouldn't that be much more effective in eroding the terraces? Also stating that tectonic activity is not a critical factor in the evolution of Tuanjie and Taiping terraces is highly misleading (L478). Isn't tectonic activity required to actually drive high denudation rates, landslides and the formation of landslide dams, and to lead to high erosion rates upstream? Is it possible that the three processes, extreme sediment transport events, climate, and tectonics are all important, but that they just act on different time scales and with varying stochasticity?

I understand that revising a manuscript can be a challenging and time-consuming process, but I want to assure you that addressing these issues will significantly enhance the quality and impact of your work. I encourage you to carefully consider the feedback provided and revise the manuscript accordingly.

Please feel free to reach out if you have any questions or need further clarification on any aspect of the review. I look forward to receiving the revised manuscript and potentially reconsidering it for publication in ESURF.

With best regards,

Wolfgang Schwanghart

Minor comments:

L42: The term disaster is usually used if a natural event causes wide-spread damages and loss of life. We don't know much about the impact of Quaternary extreme events on humans. Thus, instead of using the term disaster, please use the term extreme events as used in the context of magnitude-frequency relations).

Comment 3: It is unclear to what kind of deposits you are referring to here. If sediments are deposited along the (active) river bed, they are most likely very recent as the river bed is a product of erosion, transport and deposition of recent material. Terraces straddling the river can be of a specific age, e.g. Triassic or Quaternary. Also the underlying rocks can be of some specified age. As you write it, its rather unclear, what you mean.

Comment 4: Is the Diexi Valley (105) the same as Diexi area (106)? If yes, please stay consistent with geographical names.

Line 116: Please be consistent in the precision at which you report coordinates. Here, you report seconds, which are most likely not required whereas in line 113 you report only degree minutes.

In Line 117, you write "The course of the river is a deep canyon". Please rewrite, for example, that the river has carved a deep canyon. Maybe also state how deep the canyon is. Try to make quantitative statements where possible.

Comment 14: Please be more precise what you have dated here. As the reviewer said, the lake boundary (shore?) cannot be deposited, and hence it cannot be dated. What did you date here? Shoreline ridges? If not, are you actually dating sediments derived from litoral processes?

References:

Mey, J., Schwanghart, W., de Boer, A.-M., Reimann, T. (2023): Differential bleaching of quartz and feldspar luminescence signals under high turbidity conditions. Geochronology, 5, 377–389. [DOI: 10.5194/gchron-5-377-2023]

de Boer, A.-M., Schwanghart, W., Mey, J., Adhikari, B. R., and Reimann, T. (2024): Insight into the dynamics of a long run-out mass movement using single-grain feldspar luminescence in the Pokhara valley, Nepal. Geochronology, 6, 53-70. [DOI: 10.5194/gchron-6-53-2024]

Hide

AR by Xuanmei Fan on behalf of the Authors (05 Mar 2024) Author's response Author's tracked changes Manuscript

ED: Publish subject to minor revisions (review by editor) (13 May 2024) by Wolfgang Schwanghart

AR by Xuanmei Fan on behalf of the Authors (18 May 2024) Author's response Author's tracked changes Manuscript

ED: Publish as is (08 Jul 2024) by Wolfgang Schwanghart

ED: Publish as is (09 Jul 2024) by Tom Coulthard (Editor)

AR by Xuanmei Fan on behalf of the Authors (10 Jul 2024) Manuscript

Journal article(s) based on this preprint

02 Sep 2024

Terrace formation linked to outburst floods at the Diexi palaeo-landslide dam, upper Minjiang River, eastern Tibetan Plateau

Jingjuan Li, John D. Jansen, Xuanmei Fan, Zhiyong Ding, Shugang Kang, and Marco Lovati

Earth Surf. Dynam., 12, 953–971, https://doi.org/10.5194/esurf-12-953-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/esurf-12-953-2024, 2024

Short summary

Jingjuan Li, Xuanmei Fan, Zhiyong Ding, and Marco Lovati

Supplement

https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-929-supplement

Jingjuan Li, Xuanmei Fan, Zhiyong Ding, and Marco Lovati

Viewed

Total article views: 627 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)

HTML	PDF	XML	Total	Supplement	BibTeX	EndNote
453	132	42	627	60	34	34

HTML: 453
PDF: 132
XML: 42
Total: 627
Supplement: 60
BibTeX: 34
EndNote: 34

Views and downloads (calculated since 26 Jun 2023)

Month	HTML	PDF	XML	Total
Jun 2023	52	24	4	80
Jul 2023	79	18	4	101
Aug 2023	69	18	4	91
Sep 2023	42	12	6	60
Oct 2023	21	7	3	31
Nov 2023	9	1	1	11
Dec 2023	38	7	3	48
Jan 2024	15	2	0	17
Feb 2024	14	11	2	27
Mar 2024	15	4	1	20
Apr 2024	16	3	3	22
May 2024	14	8	3	25
Jun 2024	17	7	3	27
Jul 2024	32	5	3	40
Aug 2024	20	5	2	27
Sep 2024	0

Cumulative views and downloads (calculated since 26 Jun 2023)

Month	HTML	PDF	XML	Total
Jun 2023	52	24	4	80
Jul 2023	79	18	4	101
Aug 2023	69	18	4	91
Sep 2023	42	12	6	60
Oct 2023	21	7	3	31
Nov 2023	9	1	1	11
Dec 2023	38	7	3	48
Jan 2024	15	2	0	17
Feb 2024	14	11	2	27
Mar 2024	15	4	1	20
Apr 2024	16	3	3	22
May 2024	14	8	3	25
Jun 2024	17	7	3	27
Jul 2024	32	5	3	40
Aug 2024	20	5	2	27
Sep 2024	0

Viewed (geographical distribution)

Total article views: 620 (including HTML, PDF, and XML) Thereof 620 with geography defined and 0 with unknown origin.

Country	#	Views	%

Latest update: 02 Sep 2024

Download

The requested preprint has a corresponding peer-reviewed final revised paper. You are encouraged to refer to the final revised version.

Preprint (10283 KB)
Metadata XML

Short summary

In this study, we investigated the geomorphology, sedimentology, and chronology of Tuanjie (seven staircases) and Taiping (three staircases) Terraces in Diexi, the eastern Tibetan Plateau. Results highlight that two damming and four outburst events occurred in the area during the late Pleistocene, and the blockage and collapse of the palaeo-dam have been a major factor in the formation of tectonically active mountainous river terraces. Tectonic activity and climatic changes play a minor role.

Palaeo-landslide dams controlled the formation of Late Quaternary terraces in Diexi, the upper Minjiang River, eastern Tibetan Plateau

Journal article(s) based on this preprint

Interactive discussion

Interactive discussion

Peer review completion

Suggestions for revision or reasons for rejection

Suggestions for revision or reasons for rejection

Journal article(s) based on this preprint

Supplement

Viewed

Viewed (geographical distribution)


Total:	0
HTML:	0
PDF:	0
XML:	0