Talk:Mammoth steppe

Mammoth steppe is geographical and time-based, not vegetative based

Hello all, my understanding is that the mammoth steppe was a geographical area that stretched from Spain across Eurasia and across the Bering land bridge into Alaska and the Yukon during the last ice age. It went no further into North America, as indeed the mammoth itself went no further into North America, as it was stopped by the Wisconsin glaciation. The vegetation was largely a steppe/tundra biome that supported mammoths and other megafauna, and it came to an end with the close of the ice age and the extinction of much of the megafauna. There is more than enough scientific citations to support this statement, as can be found with a search engine. Somehow, due to a merging of the Mammoth Steppe article with the Steppe/Tundra article back in 2012, this article has now gone in a direction that implies that any steppe/tundra biome is "mammoth steppe", including deep into North America that was never part of the mammoth's range. Does anyone else share my concerns, please? Regards, William Harris • talk • 12:02, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

I failed to notice the merger, but I agree. I think you could say that steppe-tundra is the general term for every semi-arid region, and its typical pattern of vegetation, under a boreal or subarctic (or more generally, subpolar) temperature regime (i. e., steppes that are colder than cold steppes), but mammoth steppe is clearly a more restricted concept; besides the presence of mammoths, it also implies seasonal light conditions more typical of present temperate regions. (At 60 degrees north, summer days are very long, and around summer solstice there is no true nightfall; at 50 degrees north, there is – apart from a faint astronomical twilight on the western horizon –, and summer days are not quite as long, though brighter and warmer as the sun rises higher. Conversely, winters are not as dark, long and cold. This would have made tundra-steppes of the glacial periods milder and more fertile compared to modern boreal steppes at sea level.) The problem is, I think, that tundra-steppe regions (i. e., boreal or subpolar steppes) seem to be almost inexistent on present-day Earth (whether at sea level or higher elevations), and not independently notable – independent of the mammoth-steppe concept, that is. (A terminological aside: Köppen-Geiger does not distinguish boreal from subarctic/subpolar temperature regimes, while Holdridge's model does. I use them as essentially synonymous here.) --Florian Blaschke (talk) 18:20, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks Florian, I have made my first edit to the lead. You are quite correct, and the biome was an interplay of geography, vegetation, temperature, climate and fluctuating weather patterns. There is probably no real comparison today, apart from the areas you mention so please include them, however the closest people can compare are the terms steppe & tundra combined into steppe-tundra. The article probably should be treated in two parts: (1) mammoth steppe at the LGM, and (2) steppe/tundra and where it might be found today. Regards, William Harris • talk • 21:09, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

During LGM steppe-tundra was stretching over northern Eurasia, see the pink area on the map named "Steppe-tundra". Only later, after LGM, starting 18000 years ago, it expanded slowly to east-north Siberia, Beringia and Alaska (on the map blue, called "Polar and alpine desert". After 16000 years ago it retreated from middle Europe and about 12000 years ago tundra and steppe-tundra were gone in Europe and tundra (with intermitted spruce and no permafrost) started through the Ice-free channel through Canada, which was closed again 10000 years ago by taiga. There was no steppe-tundra in Canada. Within this biotope mammuths and wolves and bears and humans and horses reached Northamerica. But not all was exactly the same, so woolly rhinoceros did not make it through the cooler and dryer parts of northeast Siberia and any further. The rest of the story is obvious: Wolves, humans and bears survived in North America, whereas lions and horses and mammuths did not. The habitat of mammuth was wider: it lived in steppe-tundra and enclosed cold steppe or tundra without permafrost underneath, as in Spain (given in turquois on the map).

Steppe-tundra mainly was characterized by its treeless (except for Betula nana and Salix polaris) vegetation, rich in grasses and some herbaceous plants, coldness (yearly average below 0°C) keeping permafrost under ground, low precipitation (as steppe suggests) and high sunshine (as today). There was no permafrost on the Iberian peninsula, even not during LGM. So I am really pleased no more to see the really beautiful but completely misleading picture of an Iberian steppe (kind of a tundra with some trees and no permafrost beneath, a very special cold grassy savanna) in the article. Several parts of de:Mammutsteppe have been edited by --Himbear (talk) 13:20, 2 February 2016 (UTC) Best regards.

Hello Himbear, thankyou for your comments. I have had concerns about this map since I first saw it on another Wikipedia page some time ago. It conflicts with the maps I referred you to in my Edit Summary, and other maps I have seen on the internet. The data sources of these maps are over a decade old and I do not know if they are updated with the findings of later research. However, we have 5 credible citations stating that there was steppe-tundra as far west as the Iberian Peninsula (or Spain as some put it), so we need to stay with that. I support adding a second sentence to the lead with something like: "However, other studies do not include the Iberian Peninsula" and then cite those studies. I am not aware of any myself but you have raised my concerns further, and if any editors find credible sources that meet WP:CITE and WP:RELIABLE and WP:VERIFY then I encourage posting them into the article. Regards, William Harris • talk • 09:24, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Well, the inherent problem is that the terms "steppe-tundra" or "mammoth steppe" are not defined by all authors in the same way. Theses terms do not always insist on a permafrost nor on treeless areas (not taking into account dwarf trees). It is true, however, there was no permafrost, even not during LGM in Spain except for the Pyreneens. To some, permafrost is important for the understanding of the very speciality of a mammoth steppe not existing today and this understanding is reflected in the map (which is not outdated, its just a question of definition). For Canada the case is easy: there was an ice shield and no tundra during LGM in Canada. Whoever states there was tundra may think of tiny ice free patches on coastal areas or high hill slopes exposed to the sun.

I am well aware there are testimonials for mammoth steppe on the Iberian peninsula: (1) Álvarez-Lao, Diego J., and Nuria García. "Geographical distribution of Pleistocene cold-adapted large mammal faunas in the Iberian Peninsula." Quaternary International 233.2 (2011): 159-170. (2) Stuart, Anthony J. "The extinction of woolly mammoth (Mammuthus primigenius) and straight-tusked elephant (Palaeoloxodon antiquus) in Europe." Quaternary International 126 (2005): 171-177.

To make it short: As the WP-article is now I would not insist to change it. However, I would welcome if the map is omitted (which for me was giving the leading definition) and to adopt the definition as given by Guthry [2] throughout the lemma, who is well recognized in Northamerica. (With a reputated definition I would be less confused and no more be driven to adjust to what I see first when opening the article.) Regards, --Himbear (talk) 09:31, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

Thankyou for your enlightening comments, Himbear. I note that "der Deutsche" Wikipedia carries a different map. I am going to remove the map on this article now and will read the Guthrie citation shortly. Regards, William Harris • talk • 20:07, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

Steppe-Tundra - did it ever exist?

I have some concerns with the section titled "Steppe-Tundra". This section was merged into the separate Mammoth steppe article after Steppe-Tundra was nominated for deletion - see above on this Talk page. The term was coined by Guthrie; nobody else appears to use it however it is cited by other primary sources referring back to Guthrie. The section is heavily dependent for information on one webpage from the Oakridge National Laboratory with no authorship and has been "PRESENTLY UNDER CONSTRUCTION (29th June 1997)", relies much on "E. Zelikson, pers. comm" (personal communication does not meet the requirements of WP:VERIFY), and it is not a peer-reviewed journal. Modern writers use the term steppe grassland, as it was too dry for tundra. Does anybody else share my concerns? Regards, William Harris • talk • 11:08, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

Now removed, it has been rebutted by Zimov 2012 as primary and Keith 2015 as secondary references; this was a high-productivity biome. William Harris • talk • 01:07, 26 March 2016 (UTC)

This article is now science-based, fully cited and with all uncited or contentious material removed. It should focus on the broader biome, however it could also contain snapshots of specific locations at specific times. That a research study has found evidence of a sagebush 15,000 YBP and concludes that the entire mammoth steppe was covered in sagebush for 50,000 years is of no value to us. If it can show that in a specific location at a specific time - or timespan - that sagebush was widespread in that location then that is of value. Too often, we have seen research that makes sweeping generalizations based on the smallest and most-limited piece of evidence. Regards, William Harris • talk • 07:14, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

Spain to Canada

The Atlantic's between Spain and Canada, and it wasn't ever steppe. The lede neads to use clearer language. Alfie Gandon (talk) 22:30, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

Are you seriously proposing that when a visitor reads about a steppe that one spanned from Spain to Canada and from the arctic islands to China, the first thing that comes into their mind is the North Atlantic? That would make it from Canada to China with no need to mention Spain at all, would it not? We have several cited research papers using the same terminology, all inherited from Guthrie 2001 - perhaps we should just go with what that expert said.  William Harris |talk  08:02, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

I'm not proposing that at all. I'm pointing out that the first thing that comes into people's heads when they see "from Spain to Canada" is the Atlantic, because it's not clear you mean east from Spain rather than west. The research papers may use that terminology, but they've been confusingly paraphrased here. Alfie Gandon (talk) 15:11, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

OK, I have made an amendment that should solve this issue but still leave the definition precise.  William Harris |talk  19:45, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

You mean eastward rather than westward. I still don't like it, it could be simplified easily by saying 'across Eurasia' or similar. Alfie Gandon (talk) 20:56, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

You are correct (too early in the morning for me). How does it look to you now?  William Harris |talk  04:26, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

Grand. Alfie Gandon (talk) 19:59, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks Alfie, I believe that your suggested amendment has added value to the critical first paragraph. Regards,  William Harris |talk  02:40, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

You're welcome, William. Alfie Gandon (talk) 20:39, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mammoth steppe. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120611113051/http://www.nmr.nl/nmr/pages/showPage.do?itemid=1896&instanceid=16 to http://www.nmr.nl/nmr/pages/showPage.do?itemid=1896&instanceid=16

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:00, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

Climate classification

Something that has always been unclear to me: How can the climate in which mammoth steppes occurred be described according to systems like the Köppen climate classification or the Holdridge life zones? Since Köppen only encompasses presently existing climates, not only possible climates, this system could pose a problem. (If the climate is presently limited to very few small regions like the Ukok Plateau, it is technically extant, but perhaps too rare to be described in Köppen.) Or is it encompassed by BSk, at least technically? My understanding is that this climate is boreal and semi-arid or even arid. In the Holdridge system, there is only a boreal semi-arid climate, yielding a boreal desert. Could boreal dry scrub (in a sub-humid climate) also be included?

@William Harris: As the main editor of this page, you may have an answer to this question. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 22:31, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

Greetings Florian, its good to hear from you. My main suite of edits were done here back in March 2017, and I visit irregularly. These matters are beyond my understanding, sorry. Regards, William Harris (talk) 06:43, 4 November 2020 (UTC)