The loess deposits in Northeast China: The linkage of loess accumulation and geomorphic-climatic features at the easternmost edge of the Eurasian loess belt

Accepted Manuscript The loess deposits in Northeast China: the linkage of loess accumulation and geomorphic-climatic features at the easternmost edge of the Eurasian loess belt Yuanyun Xie, Chunguo Kang, Yunping Chi, Huirong Du, Jiaxin Wang, Lei Sun PII: DOI: Article Number: Reference:

S1367-9120(19)30266-4 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jseaes.2019.103914 103914 JAES 103914

To appear in:

Journal of Asian Earth Sciences

Received Date: Revised Date: Accepted Date:

25 November 2018 23 June 2019 1 July 2019

Please cite this article as: Xie, Y., Kang, C., Chi, Y., Du, H., Wang, J., Sun, L., The loess deposits in Northeast China: the linkage of loess accumulation and geomorphic-climatic features at the easternmost edge of the Eurasian loess belt, Journal of Asian Earth Sciences (2019), doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jseaes.2019.103914

This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

The loess deposits in Northeast China: the linkage of loess accumulation and geomorphic-climatic features at the easternmost edge of the Eurasian loess belt Yuanyun Xiea,b,*

Chunguo Kangc Yunping Chia Huirong Dua Jiaxin Wanga Lei Suna

a

College of geographic science, Harbin Normal University, Harbin 150025, China

b

Heilongjiang province key laboratory of geographical environment monitoring and spatial

information service in cold regions, Harbin Normal University, Harbin 150025, China c

Geography Department, Harbin institute, Harbin 150086, China

* Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected] (Y. Xie).

Abstract: The study of the loess deposits is the key for understanding the linkage between dust accumulation, tectonics, landform and climate change. However, little is known about loess accumulation in NE China. Loess deposits at the easternmost edge of the Eurasian loess belt are represented by those in the Xinwopu (XWP), Kulungou (KLG) and Huangshan (HS) sections of NE China. These loess deposits are much coarser than the loess in the southern Chinese Loess Plateau, with a sand (>63 μm) content of 6%-39% in the loess deposits, and show distinct grain-size distribution with a trimodal or bimodal pattern. There are markedly different geochemical compositions between the studied loess deposits: the XWP loess is characterized by the highest content of CaO (9.81%) and MgO (2.06%), and the highest 87Sr/86Sr

ratios (0.713119); the KLG loess is highlighted by the lowest content of the element

Sc (7.68 ppm), V (54.1 ppm), Cr (36.4 ppm), Co (6.32 ppm), Ni (15.6 ppm), Cu (16 ppm), Zn (38.8 ppm), Ga(12.8 ppm) and ∑REE (113 ppm); the HS loess is of the lowest content of CaO

(1.15%), and the highest content of the element Y (84.8 ppm), Zr (242 ppm), Nb (18.1 ppm), Hf (7.2 ppm), Ta (1.45 ppm), Th (12.7 ppm) and ∑REE (185 ppm); the XWP and KLG loess samples have similar εNd(0) values (-7.9), moderately higher than those (-8.9) of the HS loess. The comparison between various geochemical indicators (e.g., low values of SiO2/Al2O3, Zr/Sc and CIA, and high ICV values) shows that these loess deposits have undergone a different and low degree of chemical weathering with a low maturity and recycling history. Integrated methods including grain size, elemental and isotopic composition, multidimensional scaling as well as physical geographical elements (including the geomorphic and climatic features), clearly revealed the Onqin Daga Sandy Land, the Horqin Sandy Land and the Songnen Sandy Land as main dust provenances of the XWP, KLG and HS loess, respectively. Keywords：Loess; Northeast China; Geochemistry; Grain size; Provenance; Weathering;

1. Introduction Loess accumulation, as one of the extremely important surface process and an important part of the earth surface system, provides an excellent window to investigate the past changes of surface processes in response to tectonic–topographic–climatic oscillations (Chen and Li, 2013). One excellent characteristic of the loess deposits on the Chinese Loess Plateau (CLP), the longest, thickest and most detailed late Cenozoic wind-blown dust accumulations on land, makes them particularly valuable as geological archives of Quaternary climate records and as the closest terrestrial equivalents of deep-sea oxygen isotope records (Muhs, 2018). These advantages, inherent to the loess on the CLP, make it possible to reconstruct clear information

about Asian inland aridification, dust sources of the Northern Hemisphere, past atmospheric circulation, and past global climate change. Over the past few decades, loess deposits in the CLP have attracted much attention and been well studied. Additional significant loess deposits also mantle widely outside the CLP, such as in the northeastern area of China. This loess distribution enables us to perform interregional correlations for loess investigations. Northeast China is situated in the margin of the Asian monsoon region and in a transitional area influenced by high-latitude climate forcing and thus this region is an ideal area for examining the responses of loess accumulations to monsoon climatic changes and high-latitude temperature forcing. The loess deposits in this region are located at the easternmost edge of the Eurasian loess belt and distributed in a downwind direction to the Onqin Daga, Horqin and Songnen Sandy Lands in the semi-amid region, adjacent to the eastern boundary of the Asian continental arid zone. Thus, the investigations of the loess deposits in NE China hold the key to better understanding the linkage of geomorphology, structure, climate, and dust accumulation in this region. Although most scientific attention has been paid to the loess successions of the CLP, more recently the loess deposits in NE China have garnered increasing attention, focused dominantly on loess chronostratigraphy (e.g. Zeng et al., 2011, 2016; Yi et al., 2012, 2015, 2016), occasionally in desert evolution based on loess deposits on the periphery of deserts (e.g., Zeng et al., 2017; Sun et al., 2018a), vegetation variation (e.g., Lyu et al., 2018), loess weathering patterns (e.g., Sun et al., 2018b), as well as the linkage of fire-climate change-vegetation-human activities (e.g., Mu et al., 2016). Considerable knowledge gaps, however, remain to be closed in terms of geochemical fingerprints in the loess deposits in NE China, because geochemical

approach is the key to understanding loess origins (Muhs, 2018). The main objective of this study is to enhance understanding of the composition fingerprints (especially geochemical characteristics) of the loess deposits in NE China, thereby improving our ability to draw reasonable inferences. To this end, we presented grain-size and geochemical (including major, trace and rare earth elements (REE), and Sr-Nd isotopic ratios) characteristics for three different loess sections located in a immediately downwind direction of the Onqin Daga, Horqin and Songnen Sandy Lands. These data were employed to assess weathering, maturity and recycling undergone by these loess deposits in process of loess accumulation, and to evaluate potential sources for the loess deposits in NE China, and to further evaluate the linkage between source-to-sink loess accumulation and geomorphicclimatic features. 2. Sampling and Methods The loess deposits in NE China, the distribution of which was extremely enlarged in previous studies (e.g., Yi et al., 2012, 2015, 2016; Xiao et al., 2012; Nie et al., 2014; Bird et al., 2015; Zeng et al., 2016; Tian et al., 2017; Sun et al., 2018a; Sun et al., 2018c), are in fact sparsely distributed along the margin of sandy lands, and are exposed mainly in Chifeng and southwest of Tongliao (see Fig. 1). In other places, for example, Chaoyang in Liaoning and Siping in Jilin, located at the southeast and northeast of the Horqin Sandy Lands, respectively, loess accumulations can also sparsely outcrop. However, so far loess deposits associated with the Songnen Sandy Lands were only discovered in the Harbin area, mainly due to fluvial erosion. The research area is located in the Northeast Plain, an alluvial-lacustrine plain developed on the basis of a Cretaceous faulted basin and bound by the Great Hinggan Mts to the west, by

the Changbai Mts to the east and by the Lesser Hinggan Mts to the north; it is in the temperate monsoon climate zone, a transition zone from semi-arid and semi-humid toward semi-arid, which is equivalent to the current northern margin of the East Asian Summer monsoon; the annual prevailing wind is a northwest wind or southwest wind, with a dominant southwest wind occurring in spring and followed by northwest wind occurring in winter (Qiu, 2008). The loess deposits in the present study are taken from three sections. The Xinwopu section (XWP loess, 42°38′N, 119°16′E, 272 m a.s.l., 23 m thick), the pioneering investigation of which was conducted by Mu et al. (2016), is situated in the transition area between the eastern Onqin Daga Sandy Land and the western Horqin Sandy Land; the Kulungou section (KLG loess, 42°43′N, 121°47′E, 284 m a.s.l., 25 m thick), which was first examined by Wang (1990) and then followed by Yi et al. (2012), is located in Kulun County and on the southern margin of the Horqin Sandy Land; the Huangshan section (HS loess, 45°47′N, 126°47′E, 118 m a.s.l., thickness of c. 26 m), which was first surveyed by Sun et al. (1982), is located on the second terrace of the Songhua River, c. 35 km east of Harbin city, at an altitude of 180 m above sealevel. The 5, 5 and 15 loess samples were collected at an interval of 5-10 cm from the first loess horizon developed during the last glaciation (equivalent to Malan loess (L1) in the CLP) in the above three sections, respectively, to analyze their grain-size and geochemical compositions. More details of the sampling sections can be referred to the above corresponding investigations. To constrain provenance of the studied loess, some surface river sand and eolian sand in the Northeast Sandy Lands, which have been considered to be potential dust provenance for the studied loess, were sampled, with 18, 33, 13 and 23 samples from the Onqin Daga Sandy Land (ODSL), the Horqin Sandy Land (HQSL), the Hulun Buir Sandy Land (HLSL) and the Songnen

Sandy Land (SNSL), respectively. River sand and eolian sand are well mixed by wind and hydraulic transport and their fine-grained fractions have the ability to represent the average composition of a comparatively large area. 2.1 Grain size The grain size of the samples was determined using a laser particle analyzer (Malvern mastersizer 2000, which has a measurement range of 0.02-2000 μm with a 0.1Φ interval resolution) after removal of organic matter and carbonate using H2O2 and HCl, respectively (e.g., Chen and Li, 2013; Li et al., 2018), and dispersion by ultrasonification with 10% (NaPO3)6 solution. Replicate analyses indicate that the mean grain size has an analytical error of <2%. 2.2 Geochemistry Only the <63 μm fractions of all the samples in this study were used for geochemical analysis because most of the particles forming the loess deposits in NE China have grain sizes of less than 63 μm (see the Results section). Such a selection is designed to eliminate the influence of mineral sorting during aeolian loess transportation and deposition, and to allow geochemical comparison between the different samples in the same grain-size ranges. The <63 μm fractions were extracted by dry sieving. 2.2.1 Major, trace and rare earth elements Major elements were analyzed by a standard X-ray fluorescence (XRF) spectrometer (AL104, PW2404). The detection limit is ～ 0.01 wt% and analytical precision (relative standard deviation) is <1% for major elements. Loss on ignition (LOI) was obtained by weighing before and after 1 h of heating at 950°C. Trace elements and REE were determined using an inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometer (ICP-MS, Finnigan MAT, ElementⅠ).

The sample preparation procedure was performed following the methods proposed by Yang et al. (2007). The external calibration was carried out by using Chinese National Standard soil reference samples (GSS-8). Analytical uncertainties were less than 2%. 2.2.2 Sr and Nd isotopic ratios The Sr-Nd isotopic ratios of acid-insoluble residues of the samples were determined by thermal ionization mass spectrometry (TIMS) following the method of Chen et al. (2007). The measured Sr and Nd isotopic ratios were corrected for mass fractionation by normalizing to 86Sr/88Sr

= 0.1194 and 146Nd/144Nd = 0.7219, respectively. Reproducibility and accuracy were

checked by periodically measuring the Sr standard NBS987 and Nd standard JMC, with a mean 87Sr/86Sr

value of 0.710250 ± 7 (2σ external standard deviation, n=10) and a mean 143Nd/144Nd

value of 0.512109 ± 3 (2σ external standard deviation, n=7), respectively. The analytical blanks are <1 ng for Sr and <50 pg for Nd. 2.3 Dimension-reducing statistical analysis Each sample comprises a wealth of geochemical data (including major and trace elements and REE), making the human eye ill-suited for the elaborate comparison of so much data in only a geochemical chart form. In order to effectively compare these datasets and visualize (dis-) similarities between samples, a dimension-reducing technique such as multidimensional scaling (MDS) is employed to settle the between-sample comparison and has become widely used in provenance studies (e.g., Che and Li, 2013; Stevens et al., 2013; Nie et al., 2014; Bird et al., 2015; Du et al., 2018). MDS represents the proximity of data (e.g., measures of similarity, closeness, relatedness) as distances between points in a multidimensional (typically two-dimensions) space. The basic

principle is to assume N objects with every object possessing ‘p’ properties; then the dissimilarity between samples can be calculated by a mathematical approach, the detailed descriptions of which can be found in the works of Vermeesch (2013), and Vermeesch and Garzanti (2015). Overall, the greater similarity between two objects results in a smaller distance in MDS space. In the present study, the 25 loess samples represent the objects, and every object has 18 element compositions (Al, Ti, Sc, V, Cr, Co, Ni, Rb, Y, Nb, La, Nd, Eu, Yb, Ta, Th, Zr, Hf) as their properties. The nonmetric MDS is used in this study by using SPSS software. 3. Results The geochemical compositions for the studied loess and for the surface sands in the Northeast Sandy Land were presented in the table1 to table 6. 3.1 Grain-size characteristics Among the studied loess, the KLG loess is the coarsest in grain size, with sand (>63 μm) content of 30%～39% relative to 11%～12% of the XWP loess and 6%～11% of the HS loess. The fine sand components (125-250 μm) are absent in the XWP and HS loess, yet moderately present in the KLG loess with content of c. 6%. The contents of silt (4-63 μm) and clay (<4 μm) are 54%～60%, 76%～80%, 73%～82% and 7%～9%, 9%～12%, 12%～18% for the KLG, XWP and HS loess, respectively. The median size for the studied loess is 39～47μm, 16～19 μm and 16～18 μm for the KLG, XWP and HS loess, respectively. Pronounced discrepancies in grain-size distribution pattern can be found (Fig. 2). The KLG loess, especially XWP loess, is characterized by a prominent trimodal grain-size pattern; but the modal characteristic for the KLG loess is clearly distinguished from that for the XWP loess: the primary mode at 67-75 μm for the KLG loess is dominant relative to the secondary mode at

10-15 μm, however, the primary mode (40-50 μm) for the XWP loess is nearly equivalent to the secondary mode (10-15 μm). In contrast, the grain-size patterns for the HS loess are more complicated with trimodal or bimodal distribution (Fig. 2): for trimodal distribution, the secondary mode (8-10 μm) is either evident or inconspicuous, with the primary mode of 36-40 μm; for bimodal distribution, the primary mode is in 22-39 μm. It is interesting to note that the loess samples from three sections display a common feature characterized by a very fine component (<1 μm) with a mode of c. 0.8 μm. In comparison, the grain size of the studied loess is clearly coarser than that of the Xi’an loess in the southern CLP (Sun, 2004). 3.2 Major and trace elements The major and trace element compositions for the studied loess were graphically illustrated in Fig. 3. All of the studied loess, with the exception of Mn in the HS loess and Ca in the KLG and XWP loess, is characterized by considerably uniform major element compositions. Loss on ignition (LOI) presents variable values with an average value of 4.92% for the HS loess, 5.28% for the KLG loess and 10.32% for the XWP loess. Among the three loess sections the most significant difference in major element compositions is featured by the distinct content of CaO and MgO with the highest content of CaO and MgO in the XWP loess and the lowest content of CaO in the HS loess. By comparison, the HS loess contains the highest content of Na2O, K2O, Al2O3 and Fe2O3 but the lowest content of CaO; the KLG loess is marked by the lowest content of Fe2O3 and MgO; the XWP loess has the lowest content of Na2O and K2O but the highest content of CaO and MgO. By comparison, the KLG loess is highlighted by the lowest content of the TTE (the transition trace elements: Sc, V, Cr, Co, Ni, Cu, Zn, Ga) in the studied loess deposits (Fig. 3b);

the HS loess possesses the highest content of the HFSE (the high field strength elements: Y, Zr, Nb, Hf, Ta, Th, U), except the U element; both the KLG and XWP loess show variable depletion in the HFSE relative to UCC (Upper Continental Crust); the HS loess has the highest content of Rb and Pb and the lowest content of Sr, whereas the XWP loess has the highest content of Sr and the KLG loess shows the lowest content of Cs. 3.3 Rare earth elements (REE) The results of the REE analyses were displayed as chondrite-normalized patterns in Fig. 3c. The ∑REE in the studied loess exhibits a restricted range with the average ∑REE content of 124 ppm (113-132 ppm) for the KLG loess, 148 ppm (145-151 ppm) for the XWP loess and 172 ppm (157-185 ppm) for the HS loess, which is comparable to UCC (146 ppm) and PAAS (Post-Archern average Australian Shale, 185 ppm). It follows that the HS loess, by comparison, presents the highest content of ∑REE whereas the KLG loess has the lowest. The chondrite-normalized REE patterns of the analyzed loess are punctuated by a profile similar to UCC and PAAS (Fig. 3c), which is characterized by notable fractionated REE patterns (LaN/YbN=7.16 to 8.72, averaging 8.2 for the XWP loess; 6.42 to 7.53, averaging 7.05 for the KLG loess; 6.60 to 9.49, averaging 7.98 for the HS loess) with moderate light REE (LREE) enrichment (average LaN/SmN=3.53 for the XWP loess; 3.38 for the KLG loess; 3.7 for the HS loess), flat heavy REE (HREE) (average GdN/YbN=1.48 for the XWP loess; 1.31 for the KLG loess; 1.40 for the HS loess) and pronounced negative Eu anomalies (average Eu/Eu*=0.67 for the XWP loess; 0.68 for the KLG loess; 0.66 for the HS loess). Ce anomalies are unapparent or absent in the analyzed loess, with average of 0.92, 0.92 and 0.91 for the XWP, KLG and HS loess respectively.

3.4 Sr-Nd isotopic compositions A visual Sr-Nd isotopic composition comparison of the analyzed loess with the loess in the CLP (Rao et al., 2008; Li et al., 2009), the deserts around the northern boundary of China (NBC) as the major potential Asian dust sources (Chen et al., 2007; Li et al., 2009, 2011), and the Northeast Sandy Land, are presented in Fig. 4. The analyzed samples from three different loess sections show a restricted Sr isotopic compositional range respectively, with

87Sr/86Sr

ratios of 0.712027-0.712254 (averaging

0.712139) for the KLG loess, 0.712897-0.713119 (averaging 0.713007) for the XWP loess and 0.710655-0.712362 (averaging 0.711173) for the HS loess. Conversely, εNd(0) values exhibit a comparatively wide range from -7.20 to -8.60 (averaging -7.85) for the KLG loess, from -7.33 to -8.62 (averaging -7.89) for the XWP loess and from -7.32 to -10.07 (averaging -8.9) for the HS loess. In comparison, the 87Sr/86Sr ratios are the highest for the XWP loess and the lowest for the HS loess; the XWP and KLG loess samples have similar εNd(0) values which are moderately higher than those of the HS loess. Overall, the samples from the three loess sections are separated into three different areas marked by a distinct 87Sr/86Sr ratio. 4. Discussion The geochemical composition of sediments is extensively served for deciphering the source-rock characteristics and provenance of sediments (e.g., McLennan et al., 1993; Cox et al., 1995; Armstrong-Altrin et al., 2004; Asiedu et al., 2004; Ding et al., 2001; Jahn et al., 2001; Chen et al., 2007; Hao et al., 2010), whereas it is influenced by many complex factors including source rock, weathering in the source area, sorting and recycling during transportation and deposition, and post-sedimentary alteration (Cullers and Podkovyrov, 2000; Armstrong-Altrin

et al., 2004). It is, therefore, indispensable to firstly evaluate the possible effects of these factors on geochemical composition before drawing conclusions on the provenance of sediments by using geochemical characteristics of the sediments (e.g., McLennan et al. 1983; Feng and Kerrich 1990; Roddaz et al., 2012). 4.1 Sediment maturity and recycling The SiO2/Al2O3 ratio is a commonly used index of measuring textural maturity of sediments, where a high value denotes texturally-matured sediments (El-Bialy, 2013; Armstrong-Altrin et al., 2015). In igneous rocks, SiO2/Al2O3 ratios vary within a narrow range, from about 3 in basic rocks to around 5 in the evolved (acidic) igneous rocks, hence values >5 or 6 in clastic sediments suggest sediment maturity and recycling, and values >7 indicate strongly matured sediments (Roser et al., 1996). The SiO2/Al2O3 values vary from 5.6 to 5.8 in the KLG loess, from 4.7 to 4.9 in the XWP loess and from 4.7 to 4.9 in the HS loess, which are suggestive of low textural maturity for the KLG loess and textural immaturity for the XWP and HS loess. The

Index

of

Compositional

Variability

(ICV=

(CaO+K2O+Na2O+Fe2O3+MgO+TiO2+MnO)/Al2O3; Cox et al., 1995) has served as a measure of compositional maturity of sediments, which was successfully applied in many studies (e.g., Armstrong-Altrin et al., 2015; Wang et al., 2015; Perri et al., 2016). Compositionally immature sediments have high ICV values (>1), whereas compositionally mature sediments have low ICV values (<1) (Cox et al., 1995; Cullers and Podkovyrov, 2000). As in the case of this study, the samples have ICV values of 0.92-0.97 for the HS loess, 1.1-1.2 for the KLG loess and 1.41.7 for the XWP loess, indicating low compositional maturity for the HS loess and immaturity

for the KLG and XWP loess. The binary plot of the relatively immobile elements Ti and Ni is used for discriminating between primary (e.g., source controlled) and secondary (e.g., sedimentary recycling) controls on the composition of sediments (e.g., Floyd et al., 1989, 1991; El-Bialy, 2013). It is evident from this plot that all the studied samples fall in the compositional fields of immature sediments controlled by magmatic precursor rocks (Fig. 5a), which directly points to geochemical immaturity and consequently a lesser degree of sedimentary recycling. The tight cluster for the samples suggests that these loess sediments were derived from a homogeneous source or that source-controlled variations were homogenized during the transport and sedimentation of dust particles forming loess. The studied loess sediments present exceptionally different Zr contents (with an average of 95, 120 and 220 for the XWP, KLG and HS loess, respectively). The Zr contents of the HS loess are slightly higher than those of UCC (190) and PAAS (210), whereas those of both the XWP and KLG loess are considerably lower relative to UCC and PAAS, reflecting a greater degree of recycling for the HS loess. The higher Sr depletion of the HS loess relative to UCC (Fig. 3b), which is typical for old recycled environments/passive continental margin settings, may further support the view that the HS loess sediments are the result of a relative higher amount of sediment recycling. Sedimentary sorting and recycling commonly cause the enrichment of heavy minerals, further leading to the enrichment of specific elements such as Zr, Th and Sc (McLennan et al., 1990). These trace elements (i.e. Zr, Th and Sc) are useful for evaluating the recycling. Zr is present mainly in zircon concentrated by sedimentary recycling. Th commonly occurs in acid

rocks, whereas Sc occurs in mafic rocks. The Th/Sc ratio shows no clear variation during sedimentary recycling, and thus may be used to detect original differences in the chemical composition of source materials and is an effective indicator of the igneous chemical differentiation process (McLennan et al., 1993). In contrast, the Zr/Sc ratio tends to increase due to zircon enrichment during sedimentary sorting and recycling. Therefore, a plot of Th/Sc vs. Zr/Sc can highlight the amount of sedimentary sorting and recycling (McLennan et al., 1990, 1993) and accordingly be used to reflect the potential effect of sedimentary processes (mainly sorting and recycling) on sediments. In the case of the studied loess samples, the samples mainly follow the sediment recycling trend, which is suggestive of some degree of sediment sorting and recycling (Fig. 5b). However, all the samples plot adjacent to the PAAS and UCC, with low Zr/Sc ratios (<20), which indicates a low degree of the influences from sedimentary sorting and recycling. In comparison, the Zr/Sc ratios for the HS loess are higher than those for the KLG and XWP loess, which is indicative of a higher amount of sedimentary sorting and recycling, in good agreement with the aforementioned observations. 4.2 Source-area weathering In addition to provenance, chemical composition of sediments is strikingly affected by weathering processes (Taylor and McLennan, 1985; Fedo et al., 1995). Weathering processes would result in the depletion of mobile elements and the enrichment of non-mobile elements in clastic sediments (Nesbitt and Young, 1982, 1984). Such a modification on the concentration of elements in sediments is heavily dependent on the intensity and duration of the weathering processes. Accordingly, effects of these processes must be taken into account before the composition of sediments can be used to identify source composition (e.g., El-Bialy, 2013; Liu

et al., 2015). The CIA values (CIA=[Al2O3/(Al2O3+CaO*+Na2O+K2O)]×100, where all major element concentrations are presented as molar proportions (mol%) and CaO* is the content of CaO in silicate minerals, following Nesbitt and Young, 1982) for the studied loess samples vary within an extremely narrow range (52-54 for the KLG loess, 58-60 for the XWP loess and 58-60 for the HS loess), suggesting that these loess sediments are in the stage of incipient weathering and have undergone a low degree of weathering in the source area, with geochemistry characteristics similar to their source material. The weak chemical weathering for these loess sediments is further supported by the expression of W index (Ohta and Arai, 2007). In this study, the W index is 22-24 (23) for the KLG loess, 30-33 (31) for the XWP loess and 31-34 (32) for the HS loess, thereby indicating a poor degree of source-area weathering. It follows that the CIA and W index are identical in quantificationally evaluating the degree of chemical weathering of sediments. By comparison, the KLG loess has the lowest degree of chemical weathering, and however, the HS loess shares a similar degree of chemical weathering with the XWP loess. The ternary plots of A-CN-K (Al2O3-CaO*+Na2O-K2O, Nesbitt and Young, 1984, 1989; McLennan et al., 1993; Fedo et al., 1995) and WMF (weathering-mafic-felsic, Ohta and Arai, 2007) are a graphic presentation of the CIA and W index, respectively. In the A-CN-K compositional space (Fig. 6a), the studied loess samples plot along a linear tread parallel to the A-CN line from UCC toward PAAS which is the predicted or ideal weathering trend. By comparison, the HS and XWP loess plot closer to PAAS but the KLG loess is clustered around UCC and close to the plagioclase-potash feldspar joins (i.e. the feldspar line), suggesting that

both the HS and XWP loess encountered a higher degree of weathering than did the KLG loess. Similarly, in the WMF ternary diagram (Fig. 6b) the analyzed samples fall close to an igneous rock compositional trend, far away from the W apex, also suggestive of a low degree of chemical weathering, in conformity with that evidenced by the A-CN-K ternary diagrams. 4.3 Provenance As mentioned above, the studied loess sediments experienced only a poor degree of chemical weathering and a simple sedimentary recycling history, and accordingly, provenance signals hosted in these sediments can be retrieved from geochemical methods of the immobile elements and their ratios (Schneider et al., 2016). Although the grain size of sediments is not capable of directly constraining specific provenance, which provides only information concerning relative distance between source area and deposit site, it also has a strong power in indirectly deciphering sediment sources when the grain size of sediments expresses a certain degree of downwind trends (see examples in Muhs et al., 2016). Sedimentary sorting during transport and sedimentation inevitably triggers a downwind decrease in the grain size of aeolian dust. Spatially regular variations in grain-size distribution can be helpful for detecting whether the studied loess deposits have the same provenance as the loess deposits of the CLP. The loess deposits along a W (NW)-E (SE) transect across the CLP decrease in median grain size due to the dominant northwesterly direction of dust transport across the region. However, the median grain size of the studied loess deposits do not follow this trend, with the values much coarser than those predicted by the spatial variations of downwind decrease in the grain size for the loess deposits in the CLP. Therefore, coarser-than-predicted grain-size values (Fig. 2) suggest that dust forming the loess deposits in

NE China in this study mainly came from adjacent source regions as distinguished from the northwestern deserts of China. In addition, the lack of the spatial variations of the downwind decrease in the grain size from the XWP loess to the KLG loess then to the HS loess definitely suggests that these loess deposits were unlikely to come from identical dust source areas. The near-source characteristic of loess deposits is also further confirmed by the high percentage (65.4-73.6% for the KLG loess, 44.9-49.5% for the XWP loess and 42.4-56.5% for the HS loess) of the >20 μm grains in size in the loess deposits in NE China in this study. The 20 μm in diameter is held to be a threshold that separates two aeolian dust transport mechanisms. The >20 μm coarse dust grain, or medium and coarse silt, would be incapable of being transported by surface winds in long-term suspension over a large altitudinal range and long distances (Tsoar and Pye, 1987; Sun, 2004; Crouvi et al., 2008; Sun et al., 2008), and thus generally accumulates in the adjacent downwind areas in sufficient thickness to form loess. Accordingly, it is plausible that most of the medium- and coarse-silt grains in the loess deposits in this study were derived from local/nearby sources. More significantly, grain-size evidence from the last glacial loess in the CLP has demonstrated that a markedly high proportion of sand-sized particles (>63 μm) occur only in the loess deposits near the desert margin (Ding et al., 2005), such as the Jingbian L1 loess with sand-sized particles ranging from 19% to 85%. Therefore, the appearance of a large percentage of sand-sized particles in the KLG loess (30%-39%) indicates that the loess is located in the desert-loess transition zone near the desert margin. Although having comparatively lower content of sand-sized particles relative to the KLG loess, a clearly higher percentage of sandsized particles in the XWP (16%-19%) and HS (6%-11%) loess than those (1.1%-6.7%, Porter

and An (1995)) in the Xi’an L1 loess also indicate a short transport distance. Based on a functional model of media grain size vs. transport distance for eolian deposits (ln(Md)=0.9231×ln(D)+8.1076, where Md is media grain size (μm) and D is distance (km), Yang and Ding (2017)), the distance from dust provenance for the KLG, XWP and HS loess is 100-123 km, 268-323 km and 284-323km, respectively, further suggesting short transport distances. It has been extensively accepted that the sediment provenance can be determined using the selected immobile trace element geochemistry (Feng and Kerrich, 1990; McLennan et al., 1990; Condie, 1991; Armstrong-Altrin et al., 2004; Asiedu et al., 2004; Singh, 2009; Jorge et al., 2013). Also, most importantly, elemental ratios are more representative than individual concentrations in the discrimination between varying sources as they omit dilution effects of certain minerals due to sedimentary sorting and allow the combination of different trends in REE and trace element patterns (Ferrat et al., 2011). Taking this into account, the ratios of certain immobile trace elements are becoming a more commonly-used method for deciphering sediment provenance (see examples in Bhatia and Crook, 1986; Hao et al., 2010; Hu and Yang, 2016). As indicated above, there is geochemical difference between the studied loess sediments (Figs. 3 and 4), seemingly suggesting different provenance for these loess sediments. In binary diagrams involving ratios of immobile elements (Fig. 7), the three studied loess bodies are not well separated from each other. These loess bodies are almost indistinguishable in the ratios of La/Sc, Th/Sc and Cr/Th commonly held to be a strong indicator of provenance, slightly distinguishable in Y/Ni, Co/Th, Al/Zr, Al/Nb and Eu/Eu*, and markedly distinguishable only in the Al/Ti ratio. The correlation of elemental composition of the studied loess with that of the

Northeast Sandy Land reveals some interesting information concerning loess source. The HLSL as a loess source was first ruled out due to significant geochemical differences with the studied loess (see Fig. 7); considering both near-source characteristics of loess and the HS loess location falling in the field of the SNSL, we argued that the SNSL fed most dust particles for the HS loess; the source of both the XWP and KLG loess is insufficient to be deciphered from the elemental composition alone. The Sr-Nd isotopic ratios have long been widely served as a powerful indicator for deciphering the source areas of Asian aeolian dust (e.g., Grousset and Biscaye, 2005; Chen et al., 2007; Rao et al., 2008; Li et al., 2009, 2011; Yang et al., 2009), if grain size and chemical weathering effect can be fully evaluated (e.g., Li et al., 2015). It is evident from Fig. 4 that the studied loess bodies are separated by significantly different

87Sr/86Sr

values and to a certain

extent by εNd(0) values into three distinct clusters far away from the loess cluster in the CLP. Accordingly, several lines of clear observations can be made from these Sr–Nd isotopic data (Fig. 4), combined with the grain-size and elemental geochemical composition: (1) the studied loess sediments have a significantly different derivation from the loess bodies in the CLP, in good agreement with the conclusion revealed by the grain-size composition; (2) the HLSL is unlikely to be the dust source for the studied loess, consistent with the above observation; (3) based on the consideration of local/nearby derivation for the studied loess as revealed by grainsize composition, the HS loess well falls into the field constructed by the SNSL but at margin of the ODSL and the HQSL, which indicates the significant implication of the SNSL as the primary dust source of the HS loess; (4) if we recognized the diverse derivation for the studied three loess bodies, the HQSL and/or the ODSL, a part of the NBC, are provenance candidates

for the KLG and XWP loess, but cannot detect their exact source. The between-sample difference is generally represented by the property of a sediment sample which comprises a whole array of immobile elements, and consequently, a plot of the immobile-element-pair ratios, as stated above, is widely employed for discerning provenance. However, this method is liable to introduce some issues. For example, the selected immobile element pairs are not entirely representative of the property of sediment samples because of a neglect of the properties represented by other unselected immobile elements; so in this sense, the between-sample difference is essentially true only when the properties represented by all immobile elements are taken into account. In this regard, some mathematical approaches of dimension-reducing statistical analysis (e.g., MDS) have great advantages, relative to some binary (or ternary) provenance discrimination diagrams, in discriminating source areas. In the MDS plot constructed for the studied loess (Fig. 8), these loess bodies from different sites are clearly separated into three distinct domains, suggesting a disparate dust source for the three loess bodies. From the proximity of the studied loess data to that of the Northeast Sandy Land, the HS, KLG and XWP loess are of a close geochemical affinity with the SNSL, HQSL and ODSL, respectively, which suggests the specific provenance of the studied loess. The dust transporting route inferred from the detected loess provenance is also confirmed by the arrangement direction of modern sand dunes in the studied area and by meteorological records in this region. The arrangement direction of modern sand dunes in the western Northeast Plain, from west (north) to east (south), is northwestward, eastward and northeastward, respectively, mainly due to the prevailing wind direction change from northwest wind to west wind and then to southwest wind (Qiu, 2008) (see Fig. 1). In addition, the modern dust-storm

weather frequently occurring in the Songnen Sandy Land has been demonstrated to be dominantly caused by the southwest winds in spring and to originate from central Mongolia and mid-eastern Inner Mongolia (Xie and Chi, 2016). Accordingly, our data, integrated with physical geographical elements (including the arrangement direction of sand dunes, the prevailing wind direction, dust-storm track and spatial linkage of the studied loess to sandy land) (see Fig. 1), reasonably identified the SNSL, HQSL and ODSL as main dust source of the HS, KLG and XWP loess, respectively. From this perspective, the source-to-sink loess accumulation has a good linkage to geomorphic and climatic features in the region. Of particular note is polymodal grain-size distribution of the studied loess, especially in the case of the XWP loess with two competing modes, which is likely to be formed by a mixing of two different sources (Sun, 2004; Sun et al., 2008). In this regard, we tentatively argued that fine dust particles in the studied loess were likely to be partly fed by other sources. 5. Summary Based on the grain-size and geochemical characteristics of the loess bodies from three loess sections in NE China, combined with geochemical composition of the Northeast Sandy Land, the present study has revealed the following conclusions: (1) The loess deposits in NE China are clearly coarser than the southern loess deposits in the CLP (e.g., Xi’an loess) with sand content of 30%～39% for the KLG loess, 11%～12% of the XWP loess and 6%～11% of the HS loess. The KLG loess and XWP loess are characterized by a prominent trimodal grain-size pattern, whereas the grain-size patterns for the HS loess are represented by a more complicated trimodal and bimodal distribution.

(2) The comparison between varying geochemical indicators illustrating weathering and recycling, indicates that the loess deposits in NE China had undergone a low degree of weathering and a simple sedimentary recycling history. (3) The difference in geochemical compositions between the loess bodies in NE China can be clearly observed, suggesting varying dust derivations. However, geochemical composition alone cannot clearly detect provenance of these loess deposits. (4) An integrated approach, including grain size, elemental and isotopic composition, MDS as well as physical geographical elements, has the potential to distinguish the ODSL, HQSL and SNSL as the main dust contributors of the XWP, KLG and HS loess, respectively. The source-to-sink accumulation of the loess deposits in NE China is in response to the geomorphicclimatic regime in the region. Acknowledgments This study was financially supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant: 41871013, 41471070 and 41601200). We thank Mr. Geoffrey Pearce for detailed language polishing. The authors would like to express our appreciation to Prof. Youbin Sun and Mrs. Mu Liu for their help in grain-size, geochemical and Sr–Nd isotopic composition analysis, respectively. Two anonymous reviewers are kindly thanked for their helpful comments and suggestions. Miss Diane Chung is thanked for editorial handling of the manuscript.

References Armstrong-Altrin, J.S., Lee, Y.I., Verma, S.P., Ramasamy, S., 2004. Geochemistry of sandstones from the upper Miocene kudankulam formation, southern India: Implications

for Provenance, Weathering, and Tectonic Setting. Journal of sedimentary Research 74(2), 285-297. Armstrong-Altrin, J.S., Nagarajan, R., Balaram, V., 2015. Petrography and geochemistry of sands from the Chachalacas and Veracruz beach areas, western Gulf of Mexico, Mexico: Constraints on provenance and tectonic setting. Journal of South American Earth Scieces 64, 199-216. Asiedu, D.K., Dampare, S.B., Sakyi, P.A., Yakubo, B.B., Osae, S., Nyarko, B.J.B., Manu, J., 2004. Geochemistry of Paleoproterozoic metasedimentary rocks from the Birim diamondiferous field, southern Ghana: Implications for provenance and crustal evolution at the Archean-Proterozoic boundary. Geochemical Journal 38, 215-228. Bhatia, M.R., Crook, K. A.W., 1986. Trace element characteristics of graywackes and tectonic setting discrimination of sedimentary basins. Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology 92, 181-193. Bird, A., Stevens, T., Rittner, M., Vermeesch, P., Carter, A., Ando, S., Garzanti, E., Lu, H.Y., Nie, J.S., Zeng, L., Zhang, H.Z., Xu, Z.W., 2015. Quaternary dust source variation across the Chinese Loess Plateau. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 435, 254264. Che, X.D., Li, G.J., 2013. Binary sources of loess on the Chinese Loess Plateau revealed by UPb ages of zircon. Quaternary Research 80, 545-551. Chen, J., Li, G.J., Yang, J.D., Rao, W.B., Lu, H.Y., Balsam, W., Sun, Y.B., Ji, J.F., 2007. Nd and Sr isotopic characteristics of Chinese deserts: implications for the provenances of Asian dust. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 71, 3904-3914.

Chen, Z., Li, G.J., 2013. Evolving sources of eolian detritus on the Chinese Loess Plateau since early Miocene: Tectonic and climatic controls. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 371-372, 220-225. Condie, K.C., 1991. Another look at rare earth elements in shales. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 55, 2527-2531. Condie, K.C., 1993. Chemical composition and evolution of the upper continental crust: Contrasting results from surface samples and shales. Chemical Geology 104, 1-37. Cox, R., Lowe, D.R., Cullers, R.L., 1995. The influence of sediment recycling and basement composition on evolution of mudrock chemistry in the southwestern United States. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 59(14), 2919-2940. Crouvi, O., Amit, R., Enzel, Y., Porat, N., Sandler, A., 2008. Sand dunes as a major proximal dust source for late Pleistocene loess in the Negev Desert, Israel. Quaternary Research 70, 275-282. Cullers, R.L., Podkovyrov, V.N., 2000. Geochemistry of the Mesoproterozoic Lakhanda shales in southeastern Yakutia, Russia: implications for mineralogical and provenance control, and recycling. Precambrian Research 104, 77-93. Ding, Z.L., Sun, J.M., Yang, S.L., Liu, T.S., 2001. Geochemistry of the Pliocene red clay formation in the Chinese Loess Plateau and implications for its origin, source provenance and paleoclimate change. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 65(6), 901-913. Ding, Z.L., Derbyshire, E., Yang, S.L., Sun, J.M., Liu, T.S., 2005. Stepwise expansion of desert environment across northern China in the past 3.5 Ma and implications for monsoon evolution. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 237, 45-55.

Du, S.S., Wu, Y.Q., Tan, L.H., 2018. Geochemical evidence for the provenance of aeolian deposits in the Qaidam Basin, Tibetan Plateau. Aeolian Research 32, 60-70. El-Bialy, M.Z., 2013. Geochemistry of the Neoproterozoic metasediments of Malhaq and Um Zariq formations, Kid metamorphic complex, Sinai, Egypt: Implications for source-area weathering, provenance, recycling, and depositional tectonic setting. Lithos 175-176, 6885. Feng, R. and Kerrich, R., 1990. Geochemistry of fine-grained clastic sediments in the Archean Abitibi greenstone belt, Canada: Implications for provenance and tectonic setting. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 54, 1061-1081. Feng, J.L., Zhu, L.P., Ju, J.T., Zhou, L.P., Zhen, X.L., Zhang, W., Gao, S.P., 2008. Heavy dust fall in Beijing, on April 16-17, 2006: Geochemical properties and indications of the dust provenance. Geochemical Journal 42, 221-236. Fedo, C.M., Nesbitt, H.W., Young, G.M., 1995. Unraveling the effects of potassium metasomatism in sedimentary rocks and Paleosols, with implications for paleoweathering conditions and provenance. Geology 23, 921-924. Ferrat, M., Weiss, D.J., Strekopytov, S., Dong, S.F., Chen, H.Y., Najorka, J., Sun, Y.B., Gupta, S., Tada, R., Sinha, R., 2011. Improved provenance tracing of Asian dust sources using rare earth elements and selected trace elements for palaeomonsoon studies on the eastern Tibetan Plateau. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 75, 6374-6399. Floyd, P.A., Winchester, J.A., Park, R.G., 1989. Geochemistry and tectonic setting of Lewisian clastic metasediments from the Early Proterozoic Loch Maree Group of Gairloch, NW Scotland. Precambrian Research 45, 203-214.

Floyd, P.A., Shail, R., Leveridge, B.E., Fanke, W., 1991. Geochemistry and provenance of Rhenohercynian synorogenic sandstones: implications for tectonic environment discrimination. In: Morton, A.C., Todd, S.P., Haughton, P.D.W. (Eds.), Developments in Sedimentary Provenance Studies: Geological Society Special Publication, vol. 57, pp. 173188. Gallet, S., Jahn, B., Torii, M., 1996. Geochemical characterization of the Luochuan loesspaleosol sequence, China, and paleoclimatic implications. Chemical Geology 133, 67-88. Grousset, F.E., Biscaye, P.E., 2005. Tracing dust sources and transport patterns using Sr, Nd and Pb isotopes. Chemical Geology 222, 149-167. Hao, Q.Z., Guo Z.T., Qiao, Y.S., Xu, B., Oldfield, F., 2010. Geochemical evidence for the provenance of middle Pleistocene loess deposits in southern China. Quaternary Science Reviews 29, 3317-3326. Hu, F.G. and Yang, X.P., 2016. Geochemical and geomorphological evidence for the provenance of aeolian deposits in the Badain Jaran Desert, northwestern China. Quaternary Science Reviews 131, 179-192. Jahn, B.M., Gallet, S., Han, J.M., 2001. Geochemistry of the Xining, Xifeng and Jixian sections, Loess Plateau of China: eolian dust provenance and paleosol evolution during the last 140 ka. Chemical Geology 178, 71-94. Jorge, R.C.G.S., Fernandes, P., Rodrigues, B., Pereira, Z., Oliveira, J.T., 2013. Geochemistry and provenance of the Carboniferous Baixo Alentejo Flysch Group, South Portuguese Zone. Sedimentary Geology 284-285, 133-148. Li, G.J., Chen, J., Ji, J.F., Yang, J.D., Conway, T.M., 2009. Natural and anthropogenic sources

of East Asian dust. Geology 37(8), 727-730; doi: 10.1130/G30031A.1. Li, G.J., Pettke, T., Chen, J., 2011. Increasing Nd isotopic ratio of Asian dust indicates progressive uplift of the north Tibetan Plateau since the middle Miocene. Geology 39(3), 199-202; doi: 10.1130/G31734.1. Li, T.G., Xu, Z.K., Lim, D., Chang, F.M., Wan, S.M., Jung, H., Choi, J., 2015. Sr-Nd isotopic constraints on detrital sediment provenance and paleoenvironmental change in the northern Okinawa Trough during the late Quaternary. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 430, 74-84. Li, X.S., Han, Z.Y., Lu, H.Y., Chen, Y.Y., Li, Y., Yuan, X.K., Zhou, Y.W., Jiang, M.Y., Lv, C.J., 2018. Onset of Xiashu loess deposition in southern China by 0.9 Ma and its implications for regional aridification. Science China Earth Sciences, 61(3), 256-269. Liang, M.Y., Guo, Z.T., Kahmann, A.J., Oldfield, F., 2009. Geochemical characteristics of the Miocene eolian deposits in China: Their provenance and climate implications. Geochemistry Geophysics Geosystems 10(4), Q04004, doi:10.1029/2008GC002331. Liu, R., Liu, Z.J., Sun, P.C., Xu, Y.B., Liu, D.Q., Yang, X.H., Zhang, C., 2015. Geochemistry of the Eocene Jijuntun Formation oil shale in the Fushun Basin, northeast China: Implications for source-area weathering, provenance and tectonic setting. Chemie der Erde 75, 105-116. Lyu, A.Q., Lu, H.Y., Zeng, L., Zhang, H.Y., Zhang, E.L., Yi, S.W., 2018. Vegetation variation of loess deposits in the southeastern Inner Mongolia, NE China over the past ∼1.08 million years. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences 155, 174-179. McLennan, S.M., Taylor, S.R., Eriksson, K.A., 1983. Geochemistry of Archean shales from the

Pilbara Supergroup, Western Australia. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 47, 1211-1222. McLennan, S.M., Taylor, S.R., McCulloch, M.T., Maynard, J.B., 1990. Geochemical and NdSr isotopic composition of deep-sea turbidites: Crustal evolution and plate tectonic associations. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 54, 2015-2050. McLennan, S.M., 1993. Weathering and Global Denudation. Journal of Geology 101, 295-303. McLennan, S.M., Hemming, S., McDaniel, D.K., Hanson, G.N., 1993. Geochemical approaches to sedimentation, provenance, and tectonics. In: Johnsson, M.J., Basu, A. (Eds.), Processes Controlling the Composition of Clastic Sediments. Geological Society of America Special Paper 284, 21-40. Mu, Y., Qin, X.G., Zhang, L., Xu, B., 2016. Holocene climate change evidence from highresolution loess-paleosol records and the linkage to fire-climate change-human activities in the Horqin dunefield. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences 121, 1-8. Muhs, D.R., Budahn, J.R., Skipp, G.L., McGeehin, J.P., 2016. Geochemical evidence for seasonal controls on the transportation of Holocene loess, Matanuska Valley, southern Alaska, USA. Aeolian Research 21, 61-73. Muhs, D.R., 2018. The geochemistry of loess: Asian and North American deposits compared. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences 155, 81-115. Nesbitt, H.W., Young, G.M., 1982. Early Proterozoic climates and plate motions inferred from major element chemistry of lutites. Nature 299, 715-717. Nesbitt, H.W., Young, G.M., 1984. Prediction of some weathering trends of plutonic and volcanic rocks based on thermodynamic and kinetic considerations. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 48, 1523-1534.

Nesbitt, H.W., Young, G.M., 1989. Formation and Diagenesis of Weathering Profiles. Journal of Geology 97, 129-147. Nie, J.S., Peng, W.B., Möller, A., Song, Y.G., Stockli, D.F., Stevens, T., Horton, B.K., Liu, S.P., Bird, A., Oalmann, J., Gong, H.J., Fang, X.M., 2014. Provenance of the upper Miocene-Pliocene Red Clay deposits of the Chinese loess plateau. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 407, 35-47. Ohta, T., Arai, H., 2007. Statistical empirical index of chemical weathering in igneous rocks_A new tool for evaluating the degree of weathering. Chemical Geology 240, 280-297. Pan, B.T., Pang, H.L., Gao, H.S., Garzanti, E., Zou, Y., Liu, X.P., Li, F.Q., Jia, Y.X., 2016a. Heavy-mineral analysis and provenance of Yellow River sediments around the China Loess Plateau. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences 127, 1-11. Perri, F., Dominici, R., Pera, E.L., Chiocci, F.L., Martorelli, E., 2016. Holocene sediments of the Messina Strait (southern Italy): relationships between source area and depositional basin. Marine and Petroleum Geology 77, 553-566. Porter, S.C., An, Z.S., 1995. Correlation between climate events in the North Atlantic and China during the last glaciation. Nature 375 (6529), 305-308. Qiu, S.W., 2008. Sandy land and sandy desertification in western Northeastern China. Science Press, Beijing, 1-293 (in Chinese). Rao, W.B., Chen, J., Yang, J.D., Ji, J.F., Li, G.J., Tan, H.B., 2008. Sr-Nd isotopic characteristics of eolian deposits in the Erdos Desert and Chinese Loess Plateau: Implications for their provenances. Geochemical Journal 42, 273-282. Roddaz, M., Christophoul, F., Zambrano, J.D.B., Soula, J.C., Baby, P., 2012. Provenance of

late Oligocene to quaternary sediments of the Ecuadorian Amazonian foreland basin as inferred from major and trace element geochemistry and Nd-Sr isotopic composition. Journal of South American Earth Sciences 37, 136-153. Roser, B.P., Cooper, R.A., Nathan, S., Tulloch, A.J., 1996. Reconnaissance sandstone geochemistry, provenance, and tectonic setting of the lower Paleozoic terranes of the West Coast and Nelson, New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Geology and Geophysics 39, 116. Schneider, S., Hornung, J., Hinderer, M., Garzanti, E., 2016. Petrography and geochemistry of modern river sediments in an equatorial environment (Rwenzori Mountains an Albertine rift, Uganda) – Implications for weathering and provenance. Sedimentary Geology 336, 106-119. Singh, P., 2009. Major, trace and REE geochemistry of the Ganga River sediments: Influence of provenance and sedimentary processes. Chemical Geology 266, 242-255. Stevens, T., Carter, A., Watson, T.P., Vermeesch, P., Andò, S., Bird, A.F., Lu, H., Garzanti, E., Cottam, M.A., Sevastjanova, I., 2013. Genetic linkage between the Yellow River, the Mu Us desert, and the Chinese Loess Plateau. Quaternary Science Reviews 78, 355-368. Sun, D.H., 2004. Monsoon and westerly circulation changes recorded in the late Cenozoic aeolian sequences of Northern China. Global and Planetary Change 41, 63-80. Sun, D.H., Su, R.X., Bloemendal, J., Lu, H.Y., 2008. Grain-size and accumulation rate records from Late Cenozoic aeolian sequences in northern China: Implications for variations in the East Asian winter monsoon and westerly atmospheric circulation. Paleogeography, paleoclimatology, Palaeoecology 264, 39-53.

Sun, J.Z., Wang, Y.Z., Zhang, Q.Y., 1982. The correlation of Quaternary strata in Songliao Plain. Journal of Xi’an College of Geology 2, 79-91 (in Chinese with English abstract). Sun, M., Zhang, X.J., Tian, M.Z., Liu, R., He, Z.X., Qi, L., Qiao, Y.S., 2018a. Loess deposits since early Pleistocene in northeast China and implications for desert evolution in east China. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences 155, 164-173. Sun, Z.X., Jiang, Y.Y., Wang, Q.B., Owens, P.R., 2018b. Geochemical characterization of the loess-paleosol sequence in northeast China. Geoderma 321, 127-140. Sun, J.M., Ding, Z.L., Xia, X.P., Sun, M., Windley, B.F., 2018c. Detrital zircon evidence for the ternary sources of the Chinese Loess Plateau. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences 155, 2134. Taylor, S.R. and McLennan, S.M., 1985. The Continental Crust: Its Composition and Evolution. Oxford Blackwell, London, 312 pp. Tian, S.C., Sun, J.M., Gong, Z.J., 2017. Loess deposits in Beijing and their paleoclimatic implications during the last interglacial-glacial cycle. Quaternary Science Reviews 177, 7887. Tsoar, H. and Pye, K., 1987. Dust transport and the question of desert loess formation. Sedimentology 34, 139-153. Vermeesch, P., 2013. Multi-sample comparison of detrital age distributions. Chemical Geology 341, 140-146. Vermeesch, P., Garzanti, E., 2015. Making geological sense of 'Big Data' in sedimentary provenance. Chemical Geology 409, 20-27. Wang, P.F., 1990. Pollen analysis and paleoenvironmental significance for the Kulungou loess

deposits in Kulunqi, Inner Mongolia. In: Qiu, S.W., Sun, G.Y., Xia, Y.M., Wang, P.F. (Eds.), Formation and Evolution of Natural Environment of Quaternary in Northeast Plain of China. Harbin Map Publishing Press, Harbin, pp. 122-130. Wang, C.L., Zhang, L.C., Dai, Y.P., Lan, C.Y., 2015. Geochronological and geochemical constraints on the origin of clastic meta-sedimentary rocks associated with the Yuanjiacun BIF from the Lüliang Complex, North China. Lithos 212-215, 231-246. Xiao, G.Q., Zong, K.Q., Li, G.J., Hu, Z.C., Dupont-Nivet, G., Peng, S.Z., Zhang,K.X., 2012. Spatial and glacial-interglacial variations in provenance of the Chinese Loess Plateau. Geophysical Research Letters 39, L20715, doi:10.1029/2012GL053304. Xie, Y.Y., Chi, Y.P., 2016. Geochemical investigation of dry- and wet-deposited dust during the same dust-storm event in Harbin, China: Constraint on provenance and implications for formation of aeolian loess. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences 120, 43-61. Yang, J.D., Li, G.J., Rao, W.B., Ji, J.F., 2009. Isotopic evidences for provenance of East Asian Dust. Atmospheric Environment 43, 4481-4490. Yang, S.L. and Ding, Z.L., 2017. Spatial changes in grain size of loess deposits in the chinese loess plateau and implications for palaeoenvironment. Quaternary Sciences 37(5), 934-944 (in Chinese with English abstract). Yang, X.P., Liu, Y.S., Li, C.Z., Song, Y.L., Zhu, H.P., Jin, X.D., 2007. Rare earth elements of aeolian depositions in Northern China and their implications for determining the provenance of dust storms in Beijing. Geomorphology 87, 365-377. Yi, S.W., Lu, H.Y., Stevens, T., 2012. SAR TT-OSL dating of the loess deposits in the Horqin dunefield (northeastern China). Quaternary Geochronology 10, 56-61.

Yi, S.W., Buylaert, J., Murray, A.S, Thiel, C., Zeng, L., Lu, H.Y., 2015. High resolution OSL and post-IR IRSL dating of the last interglacialeglacial cycle at the Sanbahuo loess site (northeastern China). Quaternary Geochronology 30, 200-206. Yi, S.W., Buylaert, J.P., Murray, A.S., Lu, H.Y., Thiel, C., Zeng, L., 2016. A detailed post-IR IRSL dating study of the Niuyangzigou loess site in northeastern China. Boreas 45(4), 644657. Zeng, L., Lu, H.Y., Yi, S.W., Lv, A.Q., Zhang, W.C., Xu, Z.W., Wu, H.F., Feng, H., Cui, M.C., 2016. New magnetostratigraphic and pedostratigraphic investigations of loess deposits in north-east China and their implications for regional environmental change during the MidPleistocene climatic transition. Journal of Quaternary Science 31(1), 20-32. Zeng, L., Lu, H.Y., Yi, S.W., Xu Z.W., Qiu, Z.M., Yang, Z.Y., Li, Y.X., 2011. Magnetostratigraphy of loess in northeastern China and paleoclimatic changes. Chinese Sci Bull (Chinese Ver) 56, 2267-275 (in Chinese with English abstract). Zeng, L., Lu, H.Y., Yi, S.W., Stevens T., Xu, Z.W., Zhuo, H.X., Yu, K.F., Zhang, H.Z., 2017. Long-term Pleistocene aridification and possible linkage to high-latitude forcing: New evidence from grain size and magnetic susceptibility proxies from loess-paleosol record in northeastern China. Catena 154, 21-32.

Fig. 1 (A) Sketch map of East Asia, showing the deserts and sandy land in northern China suggested to be main sources to Asian dust; (B) Sketch map of the Northeastern Plain in China, showing location of the study area and sampling section sites. The red arrow represents the prevailing wind direction after Qiu, 2008.

Fig. 2 The grain-size distributions of the loess in NE China, in comparison with the Xi’an loess (Sun, 2004) in the CLP.

Fig. 3 The normalized patterns for elements of the loess in NE China, in comparison to that of China average loess (CAL,

Gallet et al., 1996; Ding et al., 2001; Jahn, et al., 2001; Feng et al., 2008; Liang et al., 2009). Note that the loess in NE China is characterized by the distinct elemental geochemical compositions from each other. UCC (upper continental crust) and chondrite values are after Taylor and McLennan (1985).

Fig. 4 Sr-Nd isotopic compositions of the loess deposits in NE China. Also shown are the results of the loess in the CLP (after Rao et al., 2008; Li et al., 2009), the NBC being the potential sources of Asian dust (after Chen et al. 2007; Li et al. 2009, 2011) and of the northeast Sandy Land.

Fig. 5 Plots identifying nature of maturity, sorting and/or recycling of the loess deposits in NE China. (a) Ni-TiO2 plot (after Floyd et al., 1989) of the studied loess deposits, showing that all samples fall in the compositional fields of immature sediments controlled by magmatic rocks; (b) Th/Sc vs. Zr/Sc plot (after McLennan et al., 1993), indicating low degree of the influences from sedimentary sorting and recycling. PAAS values are from Taylor and McLennan (1985); average compositions of volcanic rocks in plot are after Condie (1993).

Fig. 6 Ternary plot constructed as depicting tendency and intensity of weathering. (a) A-CN-K ternary diagram (after Nesbitt and Young, 1984, 1989; McLennan et al., 1993); (b) The WMF plots (after Ohta and Arai, 2007). In (a) plot, the data for felsic volcanic rocks and TTG is after Condie (1993); the data for gabbro, tonalite, granodiorite (Gd) and granite is after Fedo et al. (1995) and Nesbitt and Young (1984, 1989). In (b) plot, however, the igneous rocks marked by square are after Ohta and Arai (2007) and those marked by star are after Condie (1993).

Fig. 7 Plots for ratios of immobile element pairs constructed as provenance discrimination diagrams. Subscript N represents chondrite-normalized values. Eu/Eu* refers to Eu anomaly value equal to EuN/(SmN×GdN)0.5. LREE=(La+Ce+Pr+Nd+Sm+Eu); HREE=(Gd+Tb+Dy+Ho+Er+Tm+Yb+Lu); Chondrite values are after Taylor and McLennan (1985).

Fig. 8 Non-metric multi-dimensional scaling (MDS) plots, employed to discriminate dust source of the studied loess bodies.

Table 1 Concentrations (wt %) of major elements for the XWP, KLG and HS loess deposits (<63 μm fraction), in comparison to China average loess (CAL) and international references. Sample

SiO2

Al2O3

Fe2O3

MgO

CaO

Na2O

K2O

MnO

TiO2

P2O5

LOI

Total

FeO

XWP1

55.18

11.77

3.94

1.95

9.81

1.66

2.23

0.058

0.704

0.091

12.57

100

0.70

XWP2

59.34

12.37

4.07

2.06

7.05

1.82

2.47

0.059

0.7

0.104

9.95

100

0.78

XWP3

58.42

12.16

4.03

2.02

7.79

1.83

2.41

0.064

0.718

0.101

10.44

100

0.78

XWP4

61.53

12.53

4.06

1.94

5.81

1.96

2.56

0.062

0.716

0.096

8.72

100

0.81

XWP5

59.64

12.26

3.95

1.93

7.2

1.79

2.44

0.061

0.712

0.082

9.94

100

0.79

KLG1

69.86

12.19

3.1

1.07

2.73

2.46

2.95

0.056

0.755

0.048

4.69

99.9

0.65

KLG2

69.9

12.08

2.86

1.01

3.17

2.46

2.85

0.056

0.727

0.058

4.77

99.9

0.61

KLG3

69.29

11.96

2.95

1.03

3.44

2.40

2.85

0.054

0.753

0.056

5.16

99.9

0.67

KLG4

67.96

12.15

3.06

1.07

4.02

2.31

2.72

0.058

0.768

0.052

5.76

99.9

0.71

KLG5

67.58

11.98

3.14

1.09

4.13

2.32

2.74

0.055

0.781

0.052

6.00

99.9

0.68

HS9

67.71

13.9

4.21

1.34

1.46

2.55

2.99

0.085

0.772

0.113

4.72

99.9

0.9

HS10

67.26

14.05

4.38

1.38

1.45

2.46

2.97

0.064

0.764

0.108

5.04

99.9

1.02

HS11

67.67

14.04

4.27

1.33

1.43

2.48

2.96

0.069

0.752

0.106

4.82

99.9

0.63

HS12

67.32

13.96

4.30

1.35

1.48

2.54

3.02

0.076

0.768

0.107

4.87

99.8

1.11

HS13

67.95

14.00

4.13

1.33

1.44

2.51

3.02

0.063

0.748

0.099

4.63

99.9

0.91

HS14

67.75

14.04

4.17

1.35

1.43

2.45

2.94

0.067

0.75

0.107

4.93

100

1.04

HS18

67.8

13.89

4.01

1.3

1.48

2.57

3.07

0.064

0.754

0.093

4.85

99.9

1.1

HS88

67.24

14.01

4.32

1.19

1.57

2.44

2.92

0.069

0.769

0.112

5.18

99.8

0.65

HS89

67.55

13.90

4.17

1.13

1.56

2.43

2.89

0.059

0.768

0.099

5.37

99.9

0.93

HS120

68.74

13.96

4.07

1.15

1.55

2.46

2.86

0.042

0.709

0.123

4.3

100

0.7

HS131

67.65

14.12

4.19

1.15

1.6

2.51

2.99

0.054

0.748

0.109

4.82

99.9

0.75

HS180

66.94

14.33

4.46

1.26

1.51

2.31

2.93

0.069

0.779

0.117

5.28

100

0.68

HS181

66.99

14.34

4.45

1.27

1.53

2.39

3.01

0.047

0.794

0.111

4.88

99.8

0.53

HS198

67.32

14.22

4.37

1.28

1.57

2.41

2.95

0.048

0.786

0.099

4.92

100

0.95

HS199

66.88

14.35

4.47

1.31

1.55

2.36

2.93

0.044

0.783

0.094

5.15

99.9

0.52

CAL

64.86

13.18

4.98

2.59

7.67

1.71

2.54

0.09

0.69

0.16

－

－

UCC

66

15.2

5

2.2

4.2

3.9

3.4

0.06

0.5

0.5

－

－

PAAS

62.8

18.9

7.22

2.2

1.3

1.2

3.7

0.11

1

0.16

－

－

Major elements without recalculation on a volatile-free basis. Total iron expressed as Fe2O3. Empty squares with “－” represent missing data in the literatures. CAL values are after Gallet et al., 1996; Ding et al., 2001; Jahn, et al., 2001; Feng et al., 2008; Liang et al., 2009; UCC and PASS values are after Taylor and McLennan (1985).

Table 2 Concentrations (μg/g) of trace elements and REE for the XWP, KLG and HS loess deposits (<63 μm fraction), in comparison to China average loess (CAL) and international references. Elements XWP1 XWP2 XWP3 XWP4 XWP5 KLG1 KLG2 KLG3 KLG4 KLG5

HS9

HS10 HS11 HS12

HS13

HS14 HS18 HS88 HS89 HS120 HS131 HS180 HS181 HS198 HS199 CAL

UCC PASS

Sc

11.2

11.2

10.6

10.8

10.3

7.68

7.83

8.06

8.61

8.92

10.7

10.9

11.7

10.8

11.9

10.5

11.4

10.7

11.1

10.9

11.8

12.6

12.7

11.5

12.9

11.6

11

16

V

86.1

76.8

76.1

79.5

76.3

54.1

56.7

59.4

62.9

65

66.5

70

78

67.5

74.4

66.5

80.9

65.3

68.2

72.9

76.9

84.1

79.7

76

84.8

85.6

60

150

Cr

63.3

52.4

52.1

57.8

52

39.4

36.4

40

41.6

43.6

51.6

58

60

54.6

63.1

58.4

62.8

59.9

56.8

62

59.2

62.7

59.3

62.8

69.7

70.9

35

110

Co

11.1

11

11.1

10.4

10.8

6.32

7.06

6.69

7.43

7.08

8.99

9.38

10.1

9.95

10.1

9.64

11.6

10.3

9.85

7.76

9.5

12.9

9.42

9.41

8.89

14

10

23

Ni

30.2

29.4

29.8

26.4

28.2

15.6

17.7

16.2

19.3

18.8

22

22.2

22.1

22

22.3

21.1

23

21.6

20

24.8

22

24.1

22.6

21.8

23.8

38.7

20

55

Cu

26.4

26.1

27.2

25.6

25.7

16

17.3

17.5

18.7

18.9

26.6

28.2

24.8

26.9

24.4

25

25.4

23.4

27.4

23.8

24

23.9

23.7

25.6

26.5

26.3

25

50

Zn

53.9

59.8

59.7

54.4

58.1

38.8

43.5

38.5

44.2

43.1

68.3

72.9

68.4

71

66

66

65

72.7

72

67.5

66.9

72.5

71.3

67.5

72

68

71

85

Ga

14.8

15.2

15.3

15.3

14.8

12.8

13.7

13.2

14

13.8

16.9

17.3

17.5

16.8

17.4

16.5

18.7

16.6

17.8

18.1

17.7

18.6

18.5

17.9

19

17

17

20

Rb

84.3

92.7

92.2

91.3

91.9

82.9

94.6

84.5

92.6

87.3

104

108

113

108

114

105

118

104

101

102

115

117

117

109

120

97.1

112

160

Sr

328

308

312

307

292

233

254

242

253

248

215

215

211

215

215

206

228

199

207

235

240

218

222

212

226

208

350

200

Y

24

22

21.7

22.3

20.8

18.1

19.3

18.7

20

20.3

23.1

24.3

28.8

24.6

28

25.8

29.7

23.7

27.7

24.9

28.8

28.7

28.6

28.4

30.4

25.4

22

27

Nb

13.5

11.3

11

13

10.4

12.1

12.1

13.2

12.7

14.6

16.2

16.9

16.1

16.7

16.2

15.1

16.9

16.2

17.2

16.1

17

16.9

18.1

17.1

17.9

12.7

25

19

Cs

6.63

6.92

7.01

6.55

6.65

4.51

5

4.62

5.43

4.93

6.76

7.16

7.07

6.89

7.04

6.57

7.27

6.71

6.92

6.36

7.1

7.36

7.46

7.12

7.77

7.31

3.7

－

Ba

548

590

586

584

571

577

646

612

637

616

609

597

619

604

617

593

667

587

598

608

646

632

634

600

633

477

550

650

Ta

1.09

0.802

0.8

0.994 0.729 0.918 0.901

1.01

0.916

1.07

1.31

1.37

1.37

1.32

1.31

1.2

1.45

1.22

1.42

1.28

1.31

1.36

1.39

1.34

1.39

1.17

2.2

1.28

Pb

18.3

20.4

19.8

17.4

19.6

15.5

19.4

15.7

19.3

16.7

22.3

21.9

20.7

22.1

21.4

21.3

23

20.4

22.6

22.8

20.7

23.4

22.4

21.4

22.7

20.1

20

20

Th

9.71

9.95

10.3

11

9.53

8.69

7.84

7.24

9.2

8.33

11.8

10.6

11.2

11.1

11.4

10.6

12

10.2

12.3

10.7

11.3

12.7

12.5

11.1

12.5

11.96

10.7

14.6

U

2.63

2.44

2.35

1.98

1.73

1.55

1.46

1.52

1.55

1.67

2.19

2.1

2.01

2.03

2.08

2.15

2.11

2.14

2.8

2.19

2.06

2.12

2.01

2.06

2.12

2.79

2.8

3.1

Zr

136

75.9

73.2

122

68.5

135

73.8

130

79.8

164

208

227

214

227

226

242

233

242

236

238

206

198

182

194

223

205

190

210

Hf

4.14

2.51

2.48

3.82

2.3

4.24

2.48

4.13

2.72

5.01

6.25

6.76

6.17

6.77

6.37

6.99

6.31

7.14

7

7.2

5.93

5.55

5.34

5.73

6.44

5.63

5.8

5

La

30.2

30.7

31.6

31.1

30.2

25.4

25.6

22.9

26.6

25.1

37.2

34.9

37

36.3

36.6

32.9

37.3

32.7

38.2

33

37.1

38.8

39.7

35.7

37.1

32.44

30

38.2

Ce

56.6

58.8

60

59.7

57.4

50.5

48.3

44.6

50.8

50.7

71.2

64.9

66.4

66.1

67.2

60.9

68.8

64.9

73.9

60.1

69.4

75

74.8

67.5

70

67

64

79.6

Pr

7

7.29

7.43

7.22

7.11

6.07

6.32

5.52

6.7

6.17

8.74

8.15

8.6

8.39

8.37

7.87

8.63

7.89

9.11

7.88

8.52

8.88

9

8.2

8.54

7.74

7.1

8.83

Nd

27.6

28.3

29.2

28.8

28

23.8

24.9

21.5

26.6

24.2

33.8

31.9

32.8

32.8

32.6

30.8

33.7

30.2

35.3

30.5

32.7

34.4

34.6

32

32.5

28.54

26

33.9

Sm

5.44

5.4

5.68

5.55

5.35

4.56

4.76

4.21

5.13

4.79

6.35

6.16

6.11

6.46

6.02

6.05

6.23

5.78

6.79

6.06

5.99

6.44

6.22

5.91

6.08

5.56

4.5

5.55

Eu

1.08

1.12

1.18

1.06

1.1

0.902

1.02

0.9

1.11

0.987

1.27

1.22

1.24

1.24

1.22

1.18

1.28

1.17

1.3

1.21

1.27

1.27

1.25

1.21

1.3

1.13

0.88

1.08

Gd

4.56

4.62

4.9

4.5

4.61

3.67

4.04

3.62

4.29

3.85

5.01

4.91

5.57

5.09

5.6

4.91

5.58

4.65

5.61

4.89

5.74

5.95

5.85

5.27

5.55

5.14

3.8

4.66

Tb

0.799 0.801 0.811 0.805

0.78

0.641

0.71

0.65

0.74

0.711

0.888

0.867

1.06

0.896

0.972

0.9

1.02

0.893

1.01

0.883

0.984

1.05

1.01

0.979

1.02

0.771

0.64

0.77

Dy

4.35

4.06

3.47

3.84

3.5

3.99

3.78

4.79

4.71

4.8

4.73

4.86

4.88

5.02

4.73

5.06

4.76

4.76

5.12

4.59

4.59

5.2

4.53

3.5

4.68

Ho

0.865 0.803 0.816 0.821 0.785 0.638 0.727 0.682 0.769 0.749

0.855

0.9

1.04

0.877

1.01

0.922

1.06

0.898 0.977

0.9

1.01

1.04

0.971

0.954

1.08

0.931

0.8

0.99

Er

2.42

2.33

2.22

1.86

1.91

2.17

2.2

2.53

2.69

2.77

2.6

2.54

2.78

3.02

2.71

2.96

2.61

2.71

2.97

2.67

2.59

3.02

2.62

2.3

2.85

Tm

0.432 0.399 0.388 0.402

0.37

0.344 0.368 0.353

0.38

0.39

0.402

0.417 0.503 0.421

0.493

0.427 0.474 0.426 0.472

0.443

0.469

0.508 0.467

0.479

0.514 0.397

0.33

0.41

Yb

2.85

2.34

2.28

2.47

2.64

2.65

2.72

3.27

2.67

3.22

2.91

3.02

2.89

3.37

3.48

3.24

3.08

2.58

2.2

2.82

Lu

0.401 0.346 0.347 0.371 0.324 0.328 0.323 0.341 0.345 0.384

0.404

0.402 0.491

0.41

0.429

0.438 0.468 0.414 0.475

0.418

0.47

0.503 0.445

0.437

0.512 0.398

0.32

0.43

4.18

2.28

2.47

4.26

2.28

2.45

4.26

2.62

2.12

2.3

2.38

3.53

2.67

3.8

Empty squares with “－” represent missing data in the literatures. CAL values are after Gallet et al., 1996; Ding et al., 2001; Jahn, et al., 2001; Feng et al., 2008; Liang et al., 2009; UCC and PASS values are after Taylor and McLennan (1985).

Table 3 Sr and Nd isotopic compositions for the studied loess deposits (<63 μm fraction).

a

Sample

87Sr/86Sr

143Nd/144Nd

εNd(0)a

XWP1

0.712897

0.512255

-7.47

XWP2

0.713119

0.512238

-7.80

XWP3

0.713021

0.512262

-7.33

XWP4

0.713034

0.512196

-8.62

XWP5

0.712964

0.512217

-8.21

KLG1

0.712154

0.512241

-7.74

KLG2

0.712092

0.512253

-7.51

KLG3

0.712027

0.512269

-7.20

KLG4

0.712254

0.512217

-8.21

KLG5

0.712166

0.512197

-8.60

HS11

0.711295

0.512263

-7.32

HS13

0.711207

0.512173

-9.07

HS18

0.711094

0.512122

-10.07

HS131

0.710655

0.512239

-7.78

HS180

0.711312

0.512144

-9.64

HS181

0.711362

0.512201

-8.52

HS198

0.711145

0.512138

-9.75

HS199

0.711316

0.512172

-9.09

εNd(0) = [(143Nd/144Nd)sample／(143Nd/144Nd)CHUR－1]×10000; (143Nd/144Nd)CHUR = 0.512638

Table 4 Concentrations (wt %) of major elements for the <63 μm fraction in the Northeast Sandy Lands.

Sample

SiO2

Al2O3

Fe2O3

MgO

CaO

Na2O

K2O

MnO

TiO2

P2O5

LOI

Total

FeO

HL1

71.52

13.01

2.61

0.786

1.51

2.97

3.05

0.056

0.733

0.06

3.61

99.9

0.59

HL2

65.31

12.79

3.09

0.73

1.49

2.38

2.89

0.063

0.802

0.133 10.18 99.9

2.25

HL3

74.13

12.38

2.03

0.554

1.4

3.06

3.13

0.049

0.735

0.052

2.38

99.9

0.64

HL4

74.09

12.41

2.01

0.547

1.47

3.1

3.12

0.055

0.73

0.05

2.28

99.9

0.56

HL5

62.62

12.94

4.48

1.61

4.68

2.75

2.5

0.133

1.85

0.108

6.24

99.9

1.39

HL6

73.36

12.37

2.43

0.592

1.63

3.15

3.17

0.075

1.04

0.052

2.02

99.9

0.78

HL7

66.79

12.72

3.02

0.797

1.67

2.66

2.88

0.078

0.885

0.114

8.32

99.9

2.03

HL8

71.77

11.58

3.78

0.647

1.9

2.7

3.05

0.19

2.4

0.056

1.79

99.9

2.95

HL9

74.58

11.58

2.26

0.527

1.58

2.93

3.15

0.084

1.06

0.052

2.04

99.8

0.89

HL10

67.59

12.63

3.44

0.778

1.53

2.72

2.88

0.091

1.18

0.086

6.95

99.9

2.04

HL11

67.58

13.03

3.06

0.812

1.41

2.55

2.91

0.073

0.732

0.114

7.57

99.8

1.48

HL12

69.43

11.74

3.34

0.614

1.67

2.81

3

0.128

1.67

0.097

5.3

99.8

1.81

HL13

72.81

12.21

2.49

0.569

1.57

2.88

3.11

0.092

1.2

0.067

2.87

99.9

0.9

T2

72.44

11.53

2.84

0.984

2.57

2.77

2.74

0.062

0.811

0.09

3.15

100

1.63

T3

64.26

11.23

2.73

1.56

5.99

2.34

2.61

0.062

0.694

0.106

8.27

99.9

0.87

T4

74.15

11.14

1.89

0.679

2.53

2.73

2.99

0.059

0.844

0.06

2.84

99.9

0.95

T5

71.4

11.33

2.13

0.83

2.98

2.73

2.89

0.05

0.602

0.086

4.85

99.9

1.37

T7

73.89

11.78

2.11

0.573

1.29

2.67

3.08

0.051

0.656

0.063

3.7

99.9

1

T8

75.18

11.7

1.95

0.526

1.27

2.81

3.06

0.045

0.71

0.055

2.59

99.9

0.71

T12

74.86

11.71

1.98

0.561

1.3

2.84

3.03

0.046

0.596

0.058

2.94

99.9

0.68

T13

73.07

11.82

2.37

0.65

1.32

2.64

3.06

0.058

0.796

0.074

3.98

99.8

0.87

T14

71.05

11.76

2.62

0.766

2.33

2.52

2.74

0.065

0.921

0.066

5.04

99.9

1.51

T15

73.74

11.87

2.49

0.691

1.4

2.67

2.84

0.053

0.823

0.042

3.27

99.9

0.62

T16

74.06

11.46

2.09

0.592

1.85

2.76

3

0.059

0.796

0.047

3.15

99.9

0.55

HQ1

73.65

11.34

2.04

0.711

2.43

2.58

2.96

0.057

0.791

0.056

3.35

100

1.12

HQ2

76

11.6

1.96

0.567

1.35

2.81

3.08

0.048

0.673

0.042

1.82

100

0.53

HQ3

71.15

11.44

4.36

1.01

2.47

2.71

2.52

0.166

2.6

0.124

1.42

100

1.8

HQ5

73.07

11.09

3.67

0.817

2.35

2.72

2.66

0.103

1.66

0.087

1.75

100

1.65

HQ6

74.83

11.49

2.54

0.719

1.54

2.73

2.95

0.064

0.913

0.066

2.11

100

1.15

HQ7

74.58

12.06

2.41

0.738

1.42

2.82

2.9

0.045

0.701

0.053

2.24

100

1.24

HQ8

74.53

11.19

2.75

0.789

2.02

2.71

2.68

0.064

0.965

0.081

2.18

100

1.22

HQ9

74.35

11.3

3.05

0.724

1.76

2.7

2.71

0.087

1.28

0.077

1.92

100

1.54

HQ10

75.45

11.33

2.42

0.672

1.58

2.84

2.87

0.065

0.968

0.064

1.7

100

1.3

HQ12

75.51

11.56

2.04

0.622

1.38

2.84

3.03

0.046

0.635

0.056

2.24

100

1.1

HQ13

75.1

11.66

2.28

0.715

1.44

2.79

2.88

0.051

0.701

0.066

2.29

100

1.43

HQ14

75.76

11.56

2.01

0.613

1.35

2.81

3.02

0.045

0.646

0.058

2.09

100

0.95

HQ15

75.44

11.77

2.1

0.642

1.34

2.81

3.02

0.047

0.65

0.06

2.07

99.9

1.22

HQ16

76.53

11.45

1.83

0.487

1.27

2.81

3.19

0.045

0.623

0.043

1.67

99.9

1.02

HQ17

75.28

11.73

2.08

0.611

1.34

2.76

2.98

0.045

0.611

0.057

2.48

100

1.3

HQ18

75.03

11.68

2.11

0.63

1.38

2.82

2.9

0.043

0.626

0.061

2.66

99.9

1.19

HQ19

74.01

11.81

2.3

0.811

2.04

2.68

2.8

0.046

0.892

0.056

2.49

99.9

1.01

HQ20

69.92

12.02

3.02

1.07

3.49

2.46

2.77

0.055

0.744

0.068

4.35

100

1.07

HQ21

75.42

11.27

2.42

0.609

1.87

2.86

2.81

0.088

1.48

0.053

1.08

100

1.41

HQ22

77.15

11.37

1.61

0.434

1.23

2.83

3.24

0.04

0.614

0.042

1.39

100

1.09

HQ23

75.7

11.45

2.03

0.56

1.33

2.8

2.95

0.047

0.68

0.053

2.35

100

1.22

JL1

67.24

13.22

5.1

1.09

1.54

2.74

2.75

0.064

0.788

0.144

5.17

99.8

0.72

JL2

64.99

14.2

4.67

1.39

1.45

2.23

2.6

0.1

0.834

0.106

7.37

99.9

0.76

JL4

63.06

13.87

4.59

1.4

2.99

2.21

2.66

0.055

0.836

0.12

8.07

99.9

0.78

JL6

66.19

13.96

4.35

1.28

1.52

2.32

2.77

0.071

0.81

0.124

6.6

100

0.75

JL8

69.77

13.37

3.24

1.01

1.6

2.72

2.86

0.049

0.718

0.093

4.49

99.9

0.69

JL9

68.64

13.26

4.11

1.07

1.88

2.85

2.82

0.076

0.919

0.119

4.13

99.9

0.95

JL30

71.14

13.18

3.19

0.997

1.47

2.84

3.02

0.045

0.673

0.079

3.33

100

0.34

JL31

67.52

13.93

4.34

1.36

1.49

2.44

2.87

0.06

0.765

0.102

4.99

99.9

1.16

JL32

71.24

13.04

3.41

0.943

1.66

2.91

2.88

0.051

0.847

0.086

2.88

99.9

1

JL33

66.85

13.13

6.82

0.795

1.9

3.31

3.07

0.109

1.6

0.149

2.22

100

1.65

LLH10

74.57

11.89

2.23

0.625

1.61

3.19

2.93

0.086

0.676

0.075

2.05

99.9

1.03

JL41

65.48

15.11

5.02

1.07

1

1.48

2.71

0.082

0.72

0.082

7.13

99.9

0.52

JL42

67.99

14.07

4.04

1.2

1.71

2.61

2.9

0.061

0.783

0.093

4.49

99.9

1.26

JL43

67.59

13.44

5.24

1.09

1.99

3.13

3.07

0.096

0.907

0.16

3.2

99.9

1.52

JL44

68.39

13.24

4.94

1.02

1.91

3.05

2.95

0.071

0.987

0.137

3.26

100

1.53

JL45

68.68

13.14

4.51

1.06

1.77

3.06

3.11

0.085

0.806

0.128

3.5

99.8

0.68

JL46

68.49

13.44

4.7

1.02

1.86

3.06

3

0.08

0.878

0.133

3.29

100

1.49

JL47

64.83

13.31

4.14

1.3

3.53

2.53

2.89

0.068

0.699

0.15

6.31

99.8

0.79

JL48

67.83

13.48

5.03

1.11

1.99

3.1

2.99

0.096

0.885

0.167

3.28

100

0.99

JL49

66.94

13.92

4.75

1.3

1.7

2.6

2.87

0.054

0.823

0.1

4.9

100

1.23

JL21

66.52

14.5

4.73

1.42

1.46

2.32

2.89

0.077

0.788

0.129

5.13

100

0.84

JL22

65.93

15.54

4.31

1.06

2.03

3.96

3.36

0.083

0.699

0.173

2.82

100

1.69

JL26

65.42

14.73

4.45

1.26

1.37

2.01

2.92

0.034

0.81

0.062

6.78

99.8

0.43

OD1

74

11.45

3.13

0.764

1.93

2.88

2.85

0.087

1.27

0.084

1.53

100

1.56

OD2

75

11.46

2.71

0.6

1.6

2.85

2.85

0.079

1.18

0.059

1.57

100

0.94

OD3

73.98

11.62

3.37

0.731

1.77

2.81

2.81

0.099

1.45

0.07

1.23

99.9

1.37

OD4

74.85

11.45

2.81

0.689

1.6

2.87

2.88

0.088

1.17

0.082

1.44

99.9

1.2

OD6

66.42

12.15

3.51

1.46

4.71

2.31

2.67

0.067

0.716

0.121

5.82

100

1.01

OD8

71.68

11.63

3.83

0.966

2.51

2.81

2.72

0.118

1.74

0.098

1.86

100

1.22

OD9

74.4

11.86

2.94

0.776

1.54

2.87

2.9

0.066

0.882

0.08

1.64

100

0.8

OD10

73.39

12.1

3.09

0.694

1.72

3.04

2.76

0.078

1.31

0.085

1.73

100

1.35

OD11

73.02

11.9

3.11

0.843

1.53

2.66

2.76

0.075

1.05

0.095

2.91

100

1.48

OD12

75.13

11.65

2.55

0.691

1.22

2.73

2.58

0.045

0.699

0.067

2.62

100

0.88

OD13

69.07

11.33

5.38

0.963

2.34

2.54

2.56

0.219

3.14

0.088

2.34

100

2.69

OD14

70.13

11.58

3.52

1

1.68

2.67

2.34

0.072

0.983

0.108

5.88

100

1.93

OD15

68.61

11.13

6.43

1.11

2.71

2.48

2.45

0.166

2.15

0.129

2.64

100

2.43

OD16

71.21

11.9

4

1.14

1.58

2.53

2.44

0.08

0.984

0.128

3.94

99.9

1.15

OD17

68.73

11.46

5.3

1.2

2.7

2.4

2.37

0.117

1.4

0.121

4.16

100

1.54

OD18

52.61

8.91

4.26

1.35

14.38

1.91

1.81

0.151

1.12

0.104 13.37

100

1.4

OD19

69.05

10.53

2.72

1.86

4.28

2.27

2.47

0.064

0.709

0.079

5.91

99.9

0.73

OD20

64.36

10.62

4.93

1.21

6.24

2.39

2.33

0.141

1.39

0.099

6.27

100

1.51

Major elements without recalculation on a volatile-free basis. Total iron as Fe2O3. Note: The HL1 to HL13 samples are from the Hulun Buir Sandy Land; the T2 to T16 and HQ1 to HQ23 samples are from the Horqin Sandy Land; the JL1 to JL49 and LLH10 samples are from the Songnen Sandy Land; the OD1 to OD20 samples are from the Onqin Daga Sandy Land.

Table 5 Concentrations (ppm) of trace elements and REE of the <63 μm fraction in the Northeast Sandy Lands. Samples

Sc

V

Cr

Co

Ni

Cu

Zn

Ga

Rb

Sr

Y

Nb

Cs

Ba

Ta

Pb

Th

U

Zr

Hf

La

Ce

Pr

Nd

Sm

Eu

Gd

Tb

Dy

Ho

Er

Tm

Yb

Lu

HL1

5.19 52.2 41.4 6.41 12.8 9.6 33.3 16.4 92.6 254 25.7 16.2 4.6

708 1.33 17.3 11.5 1.87 260 7.66 38.5

72

8.44

32.8

6.83 1.08 5.36 0.857 4.52 0.901 2.74 0.397

HL2

6.78 72.2 51.4 6.55 16.1 13.9 36.2 16.7 97.8 270 25.6 20.5 7.21 647 1.87 20.1 16.5 2.23 263 7.69 46.1

104

11

39.9

7.78 1.17 6.84 0.981 4.81 0.913 2.83 0.426 2.81 0.466

HL3

4.53 41.4 35.7 4.11 9.39 6.64 26.6 13.7 99.1 311 21.5 17.9 4.15 652 1.56 17.9

224 6.66 37.6

76.3

7.85

28

5.33 0.937 4.74 0.808 4.05 0.701 2.28 0.355 2.29 0.354

HL4

4.24 42.1 32.2 4.61 8.28 6.66 26.7 14.6 91.1 269 20.9 19.9 3.46 687 1.58 22.3 8.13 1.71 276 8.24 31.6

60.1

7.08

27.2

5.52 0.989 4.29 0.684 3.59 0.698 2.16 0.336 2.26 0.364

HL5

9.13 113 78.9 10.1

147

16.8

63.4

12.8 1.73 10.1 1.53

HL6

4.74 52.3 43.5 5.32 8.85 7.22 30.1 15.1 91.3 280 25.5

77.3

8.25

31.3

6.75 1.05 5.35 0.861 4.27 0.851 2.71 0.411 2.75 0.473

HL7

6.15 62.1 42.7 6.84 14.2 36.5 44.3 17.1 94.3 278 27.9 17.7 4.68 717 1.48 17.9

82.3

9.47

37

7.66 1.25 6.02 0.923 4.62 0.895 2.71 0.403 2.59 0.434

HL8

7.57 88.7 41.7 6.13 8.57 12.5 37.5 14.3 75.4 263 39.8

HL9

5.33 54.7 45.6 5.07 9.31 19.7 29.7 15.3 96.3 291 28.5 27.1 3.25 680 2.76 18.6

HL10

19

16.1 60.4

19

11

2

91.7 387 42.8 35.8 4.89 645 3.01 21.1 24.4 5.36 719 21.9 71.6 22

1.8 17.2 10.6 2.32 445 13.8 34.7 11

2.32 299 8.74 43.2

92.4

17.2 1.44 13.9 2.11

9.43

36.5

7.32 1.12 5.59 0.939 4.96 0.974 2.99 0.468 3.24 0.527

6.16 69.1 53.2 7.09 14.3 36.8 46.4 15.7 88.2 247 37.1 22.5 4.36 776 2.09 20.5 17.9 3.09 404 12.1 80.5

126

17.6

69.3

HL11

6.21 62.2 45.6 7.76 15.1 19.5 48.3 16.3 93.8 241 26.8 13.9 5.41 822 1.18 20.5 11.9 2.28 209 6.19 48.2

86.7

10.7

HL12

6.22 65.4 42.1 5.52 9.4 37.4 41.7 15.2 91.5 267 30.3

2.6 18.2 17.5 3.13 461 13.4 59.7

120

HL13

5.08 52.3 39.3 4.67 6.77 23.5 33.7 13.4 88.9 261

682 1.97 16.6 10.9 2.33 352 10.5 39.5

79

3.73 668

21.9 3.2

2.79 531 15.3

T2

7.76 55.5 48.6 7.21 16.4 15.6 45.2 12.3 85.2 241 22.8 13.8 3.48 576 1.28 17.8 9.3 1.93 230

T3

4.93 54.5 39.1 6.16 15.1 16.5

T4

4.48 46.2 38.9 4.26 8.21

13

2.04 9.82 1.54

5.2

0.794 5.49 0.844

7.21

1.28

3.86 0.572 3.73 0.607

41.1

8.22 1.37 6.23 0.974 4.86

0.91

2.7

14.3

52.7

10.1 1.33 7.69 1.18

5.79

1.07

3.38 0.523 3.61 0.583

9.02

34.6

6.93 1.07 5.41 0.864

4.5

0.857 2.65 0.415

0.385 2.56 0.406

2.8 0.464

27.9

53.7

6.6

25.6

4.61 0.915 3.91 0.773 3.75 0.771 2.21 0.344 3.07 0.422

42

10.7

63

309 18.6 13.7 4.96 593 1.18 17.3 11.8 1.58 164 5.38 37.3

72.8

8.19

30.1

5.92 0.871 4.86 0.773 4.01 0.736 2.21

26.7

13

94

321 21.9 19.4 3.18 716 2.01

7.47 1.73 304 7.92 31.7

64.3

7.43

28.7

5.69 0.98 4.56 0.717 3.76 0.724 2.26 0.353 2.35 0.357

T5

4.55 38.1 38.1 5.04 11.7 8.84 26.2 11.9 82.4 258 16.3 10.6 3.05 684 1.06 15.5 7.62 1.18 165 5.29 22.5

44.8

5.22

19.5

3.9 0.818 3.06 0.525 2.82 0.549 1.68 0.265 1.84 0.293

T7

3.92 49.9 42.9 3.96 14.4 11.6 28.4 10.3 102 273 16.8 10.9 3.72 742

8.19 1.53 182 5.74 28.2

48.9

5.79

23

4.63 0.896 3.82 0.646 3.48 0.649 1.96 0.306 2.02 0.305

T8

4.29 45.3

3.8 11.1 9.71 24.2 11.4 93.7 257 15.7 10.4 3.52 656 1.04 18.6 8.36 1.59 184 4.59 29.9

57.3

7.08

26.2

5.02 0.846 3.77 0.571 2.81 0.446 1.68 0.243 1.63 0.254

T12

4.19 47.8 40.1 4.19 11.3 11.3

53

5.82

21.4

4.49 0.851 3.66 0.594 3.11 0.585 1.91 0.309 2.11 0.337

T13

5.36 51.4 40.6 5.85 13.2 13.8 35.3 13.9

47.2

5.86

22.5

4.58 1.06 3.88 0.652 3.48 0.631 1.98 0.347

T14

6.44

22.8 4.75 645 1.95 17.8 16.7 2.04 305 8.73 42.9

85.9

9.96

38.6

7.39 0.97 5.59 0.873 4.46 0.832 2.72 0.454 3.11 0.493

T15

5.49 49.8 29.6 5.63 10.6 9.64 27.1 13.7 63.7 194 21.3 15.3 4.46 564 1.15 39.7 9.12 1.65 178 4.83 35.9

67.9

7.99

30.1

5.93 0.86 4.64 0.724 3.55

0.65

1.99

0.31

2.11 0.306

T16

4.88 35.2 31.6 4.65 7.63 12.1 31.7 12.8 90.5 248 19.2 3.34 4.02 585 0.22 15.7 6.66 1.21 168 5.18 25.3

46.4

5.88

21.7

4.33 0.784 3.51 0.624

0.664 2.16

0.34

2.23 0.344

HQ1

6.32 52.8 31.4 5.05 10.6

46.9

5.94

23.3

4.61 0.949 3.66 0.656 3.73 0.732 2.08 0.381 2.52 0.342

62

46

14

26

12.9 80.2 216 16.7 94

20

3.86 762 0.902 18

6.98 1.57 165 5.92 28.7

222 21.7 14.1 3.44 687 1.42 18.4 9.72 1.54 233 7.12 23.2

43.6 7.23 14.7 11.1 30.5 16.1 73.9 225

15

10

1

16

6.5

43

1.69

0.722 5.01 0.859

22.4

14

9.85

4.8

177

29

2.85 531 4.59 18.5 23.5 3.24 513 18.6 85.2

1.55

82.3

25

42

3.08 710

7.75

2.6 0.426

29

35.1 12.7 104 202 20.3

13

3.83 614 0.909 17.5 6.69 1.79 107 3.29

24

3.4

0.34

2.32 0.363

2.4 0.391

HQ2

5.56 38.9 24.4 4.18 8.6 13.6 29.6 12.4 109 193 16.6 11.1 3.64 683 0.847 18

4.21 1.45 78.6 2.54 16.9

34.8

4.42

17.4

3.5 0.821 2.87 0.536 2.99 0.587 1.71 0.309 1.98 0.28

HQ3

12.3 104 77.3 8.33 13.6 27.9

85.2 239 52.4 35.1 2.84 594 0.701 20.9 22.2 4.64 356 10.6 78.6

155

19

72.6

13.5 1.77 10.9 1.83

9.77

1.88

5.32

HQ5

9.32 91.2 60.8 7.09

21.2 60.1 12.6 88.1 216 35.2 29.2 2.84 559 2.09 19.6 16.6 3.43 221 7.04 44.3

90.3

11.6

44.7

8.56 1.28 6.98 1.21

6.65

1.27

3.63 0.671 4.34 0.634

HQ6

7.33 56.4 38.2 5.57 11.2 16.4 42.4 13.5 107 207 24.8 16.9 3.83 671 1.22 18.9 12.3 2.17 114 3.78 33.9

68.2

8.46

33.1

6.42

HQ7

7.17 51.8 36.4 5.28

9.72 2.18 105 3.78 27.5

55.5

6.52

25.4

4.76 0.957 4.06 0.715 3.96

0.8

2.27 0.395 2.67 0.377

HQ8

8.32 72.2

3.35 626 1.23 18.4 9.77 2.45 161 4.99 33.9

65.7

8.28

32.5

6.26 1.17 5.23 0.915 5.07

0.99

2.93 0.509 3.34 0.459

HQ9

8.51 67.4 56.7 6.04 11.5 18.3 50.1 13.1 95.7 209 29.1 22.4 3.26 610 1.71 19.2 12.3 2.84 220 6.88 37.9

75

9.24

35.2

6.73 1.18 5.63 0.938 5.22

1.06

3.08

0.57

HQ10

7.52 59.9 37.9 5.24 10.5 15.9 44.1 12.8 95.4 207 25.4 20.5 3.19 636 1.67 18.3 13.1 2.39 130

39.9

78.3

9.69

36.8

6.52 1.07 5.53 0.931 4.76 0.944

2.7

0.474 3.08 0.434

HQ12

5.86 42.8 33.3 4.6 10.1

39.9 12.7 109 195 18.4 12.8 3.66 649 0.913 17.6 6.32 1.85 109 3.57 20.6

40.9

5.14

19.6

3.8 0.847 3.23 0.579

HQ13

6.72 52.3 33.6 5.44 11.5 13.4 37.5 12.8 105 203 18.9 12.5 3.78 641 0.872 18.1 6.85 1.9

108 3.58 22.7

44.1

5.43

20.8

3.93 0.846 3.36 0.599 3.41 0.687 1.93 0.358 2.29 0.336

HQ14

5.95 48.6 31.7 4.67 9.88 13.6 34.1 12.3 104 190 18.9

3.61 636 0.865 17.6 7.44 1.79 98.1 3.11 24.4

46.7

5.73

22.4

4.31 0.883 3.58 0.603 3.38 0.665 1.95 0.361 2.31 0.324

HQ15

6.62 46.5 34.2 4.93 10.3 13.8 35.9 12.8 105 198 20.1 13.8 3.79 639 1.31 17.9 8.41 1.89 103 3.28 26.2

52

6.37

24.3

4.62 0.956 4.04 0.688 3.78 0.738 2.12 0.381

HQ16

6.04 42.5 28.4 3.88 7.77 14.9 32.6 12.6 109 196 22.3 14.9 3.43 678 1.16 18.1 8.82 2.28 138 4.49 28.2

54.5

6.77

26

4.99 0.965 4.31 0.725

4.1

0.804 2.29 0.415 2.81 0.412

HQ17

6.62 47.1 37.7 4.95 16.2 14.4 36.9 13.3 108 198

21

12.8 4.06 669 0.943 18.6 8.76 2.21 133

26.7

50.4

6.36

24

4.65 0.946 3.97 0.703

3.9

0.795 2.21

HQ18

6.13 39.2

17

10.9 3.94 603 0.805 17.9

1.58 82.8 2.72 22.8

42.7

5.38

20.1

3.88 0.875 3.2 0.579 3.13 0.601 1.72 0.327 2.04 0.29

HQ19

7.8 58.7 44.3 5.38 11.9 15.8 43.2 13.6 100 215 25.5 17.5 3.88 612 1.24 18.9 12.2 2.84 183 5.77 39.8

76.9

9.46

35.7

6.71 1.17 5.28 0.876 4.65 0.918 2.66 0.491 3.24 0.481

HQ20

8.48 72.1 46.2 7.62 18.3 21.6 50.8

104 195 22.7 13.8 4.83 610 0.944 19.2 9.52 2.05 116

3.6

31.5

61.1

7.54

29

HQ21

9.28 66.4 44.5 5.21 9.53 19.9 52.8 13.8 98.5 230 37.9 31.5 2.95 646 2.15 19.3 20.5 3.62 245

7.7

59.3

115

13.9

52.2

9.49 1.38 7.69 1.27

HQ22

5.39 48.9 28.2 3.57 7.51 13.6 30.5 12.4 113 195 18.8 11.8 3.24 696 0.727 18.2 8.61 1.83 102 3.02 27.4

54.5

6.93

26.7

5.1 0.924 3.9 0.671 3.54 0.671 1.91 0.353 2.23 0.314

HQ23

6.52 48.2 33.8 4.44 10.8 22.1 35.8 12.6 103 197 20.7 13.3 3.53 646 1.01

46.9

6.2

23.9

4.76 0.985 3.84 0.659 3.77 0.748 2.13

0.37

2.57 0.339

287 8.26 42.9

101

9.3

35.3

7.1

0.41

2.66 0.408

7.23 1.29 5.67 0.934 5.05 0.964

2.8

8.01 1.33 6.48 1.06

3.23 0.474 3.07 0.476

54

27

12

12

15

79

39.2 13.4 104 202 21.2 13.6 4.29 645 1.08

6.75 13.1 17.1 47.5

16

14

13

95.5 213 27.1

4.47 9.25 12.9 33.2 12.8 95.5 192

14

18

12

19

18

7

4.2

4.1

6.99 1.94 103 3.27 25.3

1.1

0.95

6.11 0.878

5.19 0.877 4.66 0.887 2.59 0.446 2.95 0.421

3.3

0.661 1.94 0.346 2.29 0.335

5.61 1.07 4.62 0.771 4.21 0.835 2.34 6.83

3.9 0.544

1.31

0.43

0.42

2.5 0.343

2.65 0.378

2.6 0.382

3.83 0.708 4.69 0.652

JL1

6.84 110 60.9 22.4 23.1 15.9 65.4 18.7 104 243 26.7 25.1 4.85 587 2.06 22.1 12.8 1.9

JL2

9.03 93.9

70

12.3 27.9 20.2 65.8 19.7 111 199 28.6 19.5 7.28 589 1.43 19.3 13.5 1.96 244 6.43 45.5

81.9

9.4

36.1

JL4

8.95 100

78

11.5 24.3 19.9 67.1 19.8 116 257 30.7 20.2 7.28 650 1.55 18.1 14.5 2.03 272 7.84 46.7

83.7

10.5

39

JL6

7.65 89.7 67.8 10.2 22.1 19.3 60.6 17.3 99.5 213 26.2 17.5 6.42 592 1.37 18.2 12.3 1.74 248 7.22 39.2

75.1

8.38

32.1

6.46 1.21 5.18 0.867 4.65 0.898 2.62 0.384 2.59 0.417

JL8

6.63 68.9 49.8 8.53

71.9

7.86

30.9

6.09 1.11

JL9

6.48 74.1 57.6 12.3 20.1 10.1 54.4 17.5 93.3 248

1.9 16.4 12.4 1.87 339 10.1 43.5

95.2

9.05

34.1

7.02 1.04 5.91 0.914 4.64 0.925

JL30

9.31 54.6 44.8 7.98 14.9 15.9 52.4 15.9 106 241 23.1 15.2 5.35 644 1.18 18.9 10.2 1.81 243 6.85 29.6

57.4

6.83

26.3

JL31

11.3 75.6 55.6 11.2 23.1 23.9

65.8

7.82

30.5

19

13.8 46.3 16.8 100 252 23.2 15.9 5.29 675 1.23 16.9 10.4 1.68 229 6.58 36.3

68

18

24

24.7 4.14 577

113 224 27.2 17.2 7.18 608 1.33 21.9 10.3 1.86 225 5.88 33.1

1.04 5.65 0.956 4.79 0.906 2.75

5.46

1.06

0.394 2.54 0.431

4.8 0.788 4.19 0.822 2.53 0.377 2.54 0.391 2.9

0.401

4.92 0.954 4.19 0.689 3.84 0.853

2.3

0.406 2.87 0.365

5.68 1.13 5.31 0.834 4.78

2.55 0.489 3.23 0.499

1

2.6 0.427

JL32

9.21 66.3 49.5 6.88 15.2 16.3 50.4 15.6 95.7 250 26.4 16.6 4.4

JL33

9.62

LLH10

80

55.6 14.3 15.8

20

590 1.43 19.3 9.89 2.06 245 6.82

35

67.3

8.28

32

95.7

10.8

24.7

50.2

583 1.22 24.5 12.1 2.02 204 5.76 34.6

107 18.5 91.7 251 26.1 41.2 3.18 570 2.45 20.6 23.8 2.87 417 11.4 47.4

6.59 38.8 28.1 7.37 9.97 13.1 33.8 12.5 90.7 243 23.9 16.8 3.57 558 1.43 18.9 7.48 2.32 278

41.3

7.34 1.12 6.55 0.959 4.87

2.6

0.489 2.99 0.493

5.98

23.1

4.56 0.997 3.87 0.73

1.06

3.93 0.821 2.43 0.441 2.93 0.433

12.2 86.9 66.3 14.4 30.3 24.8

76.7

8.43

32.6

6.23 1.22 5.73 0.961 5.11

10.4 68.1 49.5 8.24

15.4 6.07 603 1.15 20.1 11.8 1.84 201 5.67 33.3

62

7.76

30.3

5.56 1.15 4.82 0.865 4.71 0.907 2.39 0.428 3.19 0.403

JL43

10.7 72.2 50.5 11.6 17.5 18.2 79.4 19.3 99.9 245 28.2 34.2 4.12 594 2.48 23.3 18.2 2.14 372 10.6 45.6

101

10.7

40.5

7.43 1.16 6.37 1.02

5.16

1.03

2.87 0.453 3.35 0.447

JL44

10.2 70.1 55.5 9.12 17.1 17.9 78.7

39.7

76.9

9.17

35.4

6.43 1.11 5.85 1.03

5.31

1.04

2.99 0.497 3.82 0.532

JL45

9.98 68.3 50.3 10.4

4.65 604 2.16 22.1 12.1 1.97 377 9.78 31.9

69.7

7.39

28.8

5.47 1.06 5.06 0.897 4.67 0.965 2.72 0.422 3.45 0.45

JL46

10.2

86

9.11

35.4

6.56 1.04

JL47

10.6 81.2 57.7 8.48 19.9 22.1 71.3 17.4 111 262 28.2 17.2 6.89 635

62.4

8.06

31.6

5.8

JL48

11.4 89.5 65.4 16.2 22.6 20.4 80.8

97

10.7

40.8

7.23 1.24 6.79 1.12

5.46

1.17

3.01 0.533 3.69 0.524

JL49

11.9 79.4 69.6

6.53 568 1.65 21.3 11.7 2.09 284 7.73 40.4

77.1

9.14

35.6

6.61 1.25 6.23 1.09

5.58

1.12

3.11 0.494 3.51 0.49

JL21

11.5 73.4 57.5 10.6 23.5 24.6 74.5 18.2 110 214 28.2 18.8 7.14 579 1.47 20.1 11.7 1.97 235 6.23 36.2

67.3

8.29

32.3

6.02 1.13 5.48 0.878 4.79

1.01

2.72 0.432 3.28 0.444

JL22

9.07 59.4

JL26

13.2 70.7 73.5 8.43 35.7 29.8 77.1 18.6 116 181 35.6 17.3 7.95 517

OD1

7.58 69.2 49.9 6.07 11.4 19.4 54.4 12.5 90.1 193 30.7

66

51.1

46

12

10

18

17

63.2 16.3 103 230

18

98.6 245

26

30

71.3 17.4 109 248 27.6

8

0.435 3.51 0.464

JL42

22

19.8 115 143 28.2 16.4

2.8

JL41

18

59

8.7

5.84 1.19 5.13 0.841 4.79 0.907

30.6 3.88 562 2.35 19.3 15.9 2.54 514 29

18.6 17.4 73.2 18.9 101 244 27.1 29.6 4.14 605 2.25 22.3 14.8 2.41 355

19

105 274

31

22.6 24.6 80.6 18.4 111 226 31.2

14

9.8

39.2

1.3 19.4 10.8 1.84 198 5.85 34.4

30.5 4.42 629 2.22 25.8 15.5 2.35 412 10.9 45.6 21

1.19 5.47 0.893 5.09 0.908 2.72 0.461 3.15 0.427

73

8.59

33.2

6.16 1.06 5.77 0.989 4.85 0.972

2.5

10.1

39.6

7.27 1.35 6.54 1.13

5.87

1.21

3.25 0.533 3.78 0.53

3.05 593 1.59 25.2 13.1 3.49 187 6.33 40.7

80.6

11.3

40.5

7.97 1.11 6.41

1.1

5.62

1.08

3.15 0.589 3.67 0.524

OD2

7.74 74.3 41.4 5.2 10.1 20.9 55.8 12.8 91.4 204 29.6 34.6 2.89 621 2.18 17.8 16.6 3.04 168 5.02 48.7

96.5

11.7

45.5

8.14 1.23 6.76 1.11

5.55

1.06

2.93 0.532 3.42 0.476

OD3

7.6 65.7 42.7 5.46 10.2 18.1 48.6 12.2

81

9.77

36.7

6.48 1.04 5.52 0.95

5.16

1.03

3.07 0.561 3.62 0.515

OD4

5.74 47.7 31.1 5.01 8.59 14.6

50.9

6.14

23.6

4.31 0.82 3.63 0.622 3.48

0.7

2.08

OD6

8.87 72.8 46.8 8.72

563 0.939 19.5 8.71 2.19 115 3.55 28.7

55.3

6.84

27.2

5.3

OD8

9.73 81.7 62.3 7.2 12.7 22.8 59.7 13.3 93.4 216 35.6

625 2.19 19.7 17.4 3.27 289 9.36 45.2

91.8

11.8

44.5

8.24 1.25 6.82 1.16

OD9

6.66 53.4 40.4 5.37 11.1 17.3 39.4

12

92.2 186 20.8 15.4 3.37 634 1.43 17.9 6.71 2.09 159 4.95 24.2

48.4

5.98

23.3

4.48 0.909 3.73 0.673 3.73 0.753 2.21

OD10

6.76 61.6 48.2 5.47 11.4 27.2 44.8

13

89.8 235 24.2 22.2 3.06 683 1.74 16.7 13.4 3.3

203 6.24 34.3

68.4

7.99

30.7

5.68 1.02 4.75 0.81

4.38 0.838 2.55 0.487 3.14 0.424

OD11

7.71 62.5

6.39 12.7 25.8 47.7 12.8 97.9 188 26.2 17.2 4.13 731 1.27 19.3 11.3 3.02 131 4.15 36.8

65.1

8.81

34.4

6.77 1.22 5.45 0.91

4.81 0.941 2.66 0.469 2.92 0.413

OD12

6.67 50.2 35.1 4.97 11.9 21.5 40.8 12.3 93.2 172 18.5 12.5 4.14 660 0.946 17.4 8.05 2.37 108 3.43 27.1

54.9

6.28

24

OD13

13.1 102 70.7 8.55 12.5 34.5 86.4 13.3 74.2 207 53.5 46.2 2.6

5.24 330 10.5 75.9

157

20.2

78.4

OD14

7.72 69.3 49.8 8.01 18.4 27.8 50.5

1.1 17.6 16.2 3.03 121 3.78 55.7

98.4

13.3

OD15

11.4 150 102 10.6 20.1 32.7 86.9 13.7 80.9 192 42.1 32.5 3.38 588 2.17 21.2 26.9 4.29 276 8.77 67.2

135

16.6

20

34

88

21

12

196 28.9 22.8 3.48 603 1.79 17.3 12.7 4.3

223 6.78 42.8

10.5 83.2 180 19.8 14.8 2.58 572 1.09 16.3 6.66 1.93 157 4.72

23.4 51.9 13.7 100 207 23.1 12.7 5.5

12

77

178

31

29

3.4

558 3.28 21.7

14.3 3.73 581

29

38

2.73 0.423 3.19 0.439

80.3

1.2 19.5

289 7.48

1.03

2.59 0.494 3.31 0.44

2.38 216 5.89 45.2

45

13.1 19.8 17.7 84.1 21.7 110 285 25.4 27.8 3.58 628 1.84 21.7 9.56 2.2

5.8 0.989 4.93

1.01

25

1.05

0.43

0.38

3.05 0.38

2.63 0.354

4.3 0.809 4.21 0.833 2.35 0.415 2.62 0.37 6.59

1.3

3.74 0.697 4.48 0.655 0.41

2.7 0.369

4.4 0.903 3.66 0.623 3.38 0.674 1.94

0.36

2.3 0.313

14

1.03

6.7 0.941

1.74 11.1 1.84

9.64

1.9

5.61

52.8

9.42 1.47 7.57 1.24

5.94

1.09

3.35 0.526 3.28 0.452

64.8

12.1 1.48 9.81

8.01

1.52

4.49 0.791 4.95 0.704

1.6

OD16

9.12 82.9 58.2 8.66 18.8 36.5 58.5 13.3

86

168 25.5 17.2 4.84 604

1.2

21

11.9 3.46 133 4.45 39.4

78.8

9.7

37.5

OD17

10.2 110 77.3 9.81 18.9 26.1 63.7 14.1 86.9 197 31.3 20.9 4.34 608 1.62 21.4 17.9 3.16 167 5.66 50.6

103

12.4

48

OD18

8.47 103 63.6 11.4 26.9 29.6 51.8 10.6 65.6 410 30.9 16.1 3.45 728 1.25 18.9 17.2 2.72 147

52.9

100

12.3

OD19

6.79 62.5 41.6 6.79

16

22.4 42.5

11

81.2 275 22.1 13.6 3.81 608 1.05 17.9 8.91 2.35 126 3.93 28.6

54.5

OD20

9.73 117 72.2 11.8

22

27.8 61.1

13

80.9 284 40.2 22.3 3.57 638 1.68 25.2 20.4 3.45 182

102

4.6

6

56.3

7.05 1.18 5.96 0.955 5.02 0.959 2.71 0.474 3.08 0.417 9.02

1.3

7.29

1.2

6.13

1.18

3.37 0.581 3.91 0.561

47.6

8.96 1.33 7.48

1.2

6.16

1.17

3.11 0.537 3.37 0.474

6.83

26.5

5.07 0.954 4.5 0.783 4.16 0.803 2.39 0.409 2.64 0.357

14.5

56.6

10.8

1.7

8.76 1.45

7.6

1.45

3.97 0.699 4.31 0.614

Table 6 Sr and Nd isotopic compositions of the <63 μm fraction in the Northeast Sandy Lands. Sample

87Sr/86Sr 143Nd/144Nd

εNd(0)* Sample

87Sr/86Sr

143Nd/144Nd

εNd(0) Sample

87Sr/86Sr 143Nd/144Nd

εNd(0)

HL1

0.710035

0.512384

-4.95

HQ20

0.712122

0.512236

-7.84

OD17

0.710864

0.512175

-9.03

HL4

0.709834

0.512362

-5.38

HQ21

0.710577

0.512129

-9.93

OD18

0.71059

0.512078

-10.92

HL5

0.709465

0.512346

-5.70

HQ22

0.712024

0.512239

-7.78

OD19

0.71137

0.512196

-8.62

HL6

0.709662

0.512298

-6.63

JL1

0.711132

0.512236

-7.84

OD20

0.710634

0.512092

-10.65

HL7

0.709782

0.512367

-5.29

JL2

0.71201

0.512204

-8.47

HL9

0.709967

0.512325

-6.11

JL4

0.711486

0.512294

-6.71

HL10

0.709966

0.512303

-6.53

JL6

0.711383

0.512252

-7.53

HL11

0.710348

0.512276

-7.06

JL8

0.710857

0.512262

-7.33

HL12

0.709708

0.51225

-7.57

JL9

0.710604

0.512347

-5.68

HL13

0.70987

0.512312

-6.36

JL30

0.710896

0.512076

-10.96

HL2

0.710361

0.512184

-8.86

JL31

0.711336

0.512168

-9.17

HL3

0.710182

0.512259

-7.39

JL32

0.710158

0.512175

-9.03

HL8

0.709961

0.512288

-6.83

JL33

0.710158

0.512118

-10.14

T1

0.711521

0.512194

-8.66

LLH10

0.710493

0.512198

-8.58

T3

0.710679

0.512101

-10.48

JL41

0.710541

0.512078

-10.92

T4

0.711151

0.512085

-10.79

JL42

0.713523

0.512184

-8.86

T5

0.711271

0.51218

-8.93

JL43

0.710479

0.51212

-10.10

T7

0.711835

0.512162

-9.29

JL44

0.710846

0.512211

-8.33

T8

0.711739

0.512096

-10.57

JL45

0.710574

0.512178

-8.97

T11

0.711737

0.512219

-8.17

JL46

0.71084

0.512222

-8.11

T12

0.711703

0.512156

-9.40

JL47

0.710812

0.512152

-9.48

T15

0.711487

0.512233

-7.90

JL48

0.710678

0.512169

-9.15

T14

0.711287

0.512186

-8.82

JL49

0.711243

0.512113

-10.24

T16

0.711131

0.512265

-7.28

JL21

0.71117

0.512169

-9.15

T2

0.710992

0.51211

-10.30

JL22

0.710009

0.51221

-8.35

HQ1

0.711392

0.512338

-5.85

JL26

0.712126

0.512078

-10.92

HQ2

0.711393

0.512148

-9.56

OD1

0.710915

0.512246

-7.65

HQ3

0.709898

0.512232

-7.92

OD2

0.710886

0.512119

-10.12

HQ5

0.710484

0.512036

-11.74

OD3

0.710767

0.512105

-10.4

HQ7

0.711229

0.51225

-7.57

OD4

0.710906

0.512299

-6.61

HQ8

0.711108

0.512085

-10.79

OD6

0.711683

0.512209

-8.37

HQ9

0.710858

0.512043

-11.61

OD8

0.710625

0.512177

-8.99

HQ10

0.711008

0.512114

-10.22

OD9

0.711281

0.512295

-6.69

HQ12

0.711502

0.512342

-5.77

OD10

0.709618

0.51187

-14.98

HQ13

0.711369

0.512232

-7.92

OD11

0.711394

0.512176

-9.01

HQ15

0.71148

0.512269

-7.2

OD12

0.711781

0.512217

-8.21

HQ16

0.711637

0.512148

-9.56

OD13

0.710313

0.512003

-12.39

HQ17

0.71161

0.512295

-6.69

OD14

0.712293

0.512075

-10.98

HQ18

0.711482

0.512272

-7.14

OD15

0.710861

0.512135

-9.81

HQ19

0.711016

0.512288

-6.83

OD16

0.711755

0.512057

-11.33

*

εNd(0) = [(143Nd/144Nd)sample／(143Nd/144Nd)CHUR－1]×10000; (143Nd/144Nd)CHUR = 0.512638

GA

Research highlights (1) The loess in NE China has a weak weathering and simple sedimentary recycling history. (2) The Onqin Daga Sandy Land, the Horqin Sandy Land and the Songnen Sandy Land are main dust provenances of the Xinwopu, Kulungou and Huangshan loess, respectively. (3) The loess accumulation in NE China is in response to the geomorphic-climatic regime in the region.

Declaration of Interest Statement The authors declared that they have no conflicts of interest to this work. We declare that we do not have any commercial or associative interest that represents a conflict of interest in connection with the work submitted. Thank you very much! Sincerely, On behalf of all authors Yuanyun Xie