Skip to main content
PLOS ONE logoLink to PLOS ONE
. 2020 Aug 5;15(8):e0235421. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0235421

Geochemical studies on rock varnish and petroglyphs in the Owens and Rose Valleys, California

Meinrat O Andreae 1,2,3,*, Abdullah Al-Amri 2, Tracey W Andreae 1, Alan Garfinkel 4, Gerald Haug 1, Klaus Peter Jochum 1, Brigitte Stoll 1, Ulrike Weis 1
Editor: Andrea Zerboni5
PMCID: PMC7405993  PMID: 32756552

Abstract

We investigated rock varnish, a thin, manganese- and iron-rich, dark surface crust, on basaltic lava flows and petroglyphs in the Owens and Rose Valleys (California) by portable X-ray fluorescence (pXRF) and femtosecond laser-ablation inductively-coupled-plasma mass spectrometry (fs-LA-ICPMS). The major element composition of the varnish was consistent with a mixture of Mn-Fe oxyhydroxides and clay minerals. As expected, it contained elevated concentrations of elements that are typically enriched in rock varnish, e.g., Mn, Pb, Ba, Ce, and Co, but also showed unusually high enrichments in U, Cu, and Th. The rare earth and yttrium (REY) enrichment pattern revealed a very strong positive cerium (Ce) anomaly and distinct negative europium (Eu) and Y anomalies. The light rare earth elements (REE) were much more strongly enriched than the heavy REY. These enrichment patterns are consistent with a formation mechanism by leaching of Mn and trace elements from aeolian dust, reprecipitation of Mn and Fe as oxyhydroxides, and scavenging of trace elements by these oxyhydroxides. We inferred accumulation rates of Mn and Fe in the varnish from their areal densities measured by pXRF and the known ages of some of the lava flow surfaces. The areal densities of Mn and Fe, as well as their accumulation rates, were comparable to our previous results from the desert of Saudi Arabia. There was a moderate dependence of the Mn areal density on the inclination of the rock surfaces, but no relationship to its cardinal orientation. We attempted to use the degree of varnish regrowth on the rock art surfaces as an estimate of their age. While an absolute dating of the petroglyphs was not possible because of the lack of suitable calibration surfaces and a considerable amount of variability, the measured degree of varnish regrowth on the various petroglyphs was consistent with chronologies based on archeological and other archaeometric techniques. In particular, our results suggest that rock art creation in the study area continued over an extended period of time, possibly starting around the Pleistocene/Holocene transition and extending into the last few centuries.

Introduction

Rock varnish, first scientifically described by Alexander von Humboldt from the Orinoco River in Venezuela [1], is a thin, dark, manganese-rich coating that is found in a variety of environments across the earth and even on Mars [26, 7; and references therein]. It consists of a matrix of poorly crystallized manganese (Mn) and iron (Fe) oxides and hydroxides (oxyhydroxides), in which clay and other detrital minerals are embedded [3, 811]. In a previous publication [7], we have proposed a classification of rock varnish into five types based on its growth environment, microstructure, and chemical composition, ranging from “desert varnish” (Type I), commonly found in arid regions, to the “river varnish” (Type V) that forms on rocks in the splash zones of many rivers and represents the varnish described by von Humboldt.

This paper focuses on Type I varnish, which is generally characterized by a layered structure, high rare earth element (REE) and barium (Ba) enrichments, and birnessite as the dominant Mn mineral [7]. The details of the processes by which rock varnish is formed are still the subject of ongoing scientific debate, but there is a developing consensus that the Mn and other enriched elements in the varnish matrix, as well as the embedded detrital minerals, are derived from dust deposition and are transformed into the varnish coating by a sequence of dissolution and re-precipitation events, which may involve abiotic reactions, microbial catalysis, and/or photo-oxidation [e.g., 12, 1316]. Further detail and references on this issue can be found in our previous papers [7, 17, 18].

In arid environments, varnish is found on rock surfaces that have been exposed over a wide range of ages, from centuries to hundreds of thousands of years. Its thickness is typically in the range of tens to a hundred μm, and even on the oldest surfaces it rarely exceeds 200 μm [19]. Somewhat surprisingly, the varnish thicknesses in Liu and Broecker’s [19] data set do not show a general relationship with age, with varnishes that are only ~10,000 years old being just as thick as those ten to twenty times older. In part, this may be due to Liu and Broecker’s sampling strategy, as they were measuring the varnish thickness in the deepest part of microbasins, millimeter-sized depressions in the rock surface where varnish has accumulated relatively undisturbed. It may also reflect the possibility that once a certain varnish thickness has been reached, loss by processes like cracking and spalling prevents further thickness growth [2022]. This is supported by the fact that the oldest varnishes in Liu and Broecker’s [19] data set (>50 ka) show the lowest apparent growth rates (0.6–2.0 μm ka-1), whereas the Holocene varnishes all appear to have much higher rates (12–40 μm ka-1).

Our studies on the growth of rock varnish have been motivated in part by an interest in using the growth rate of varnish on rock surfaces to obtain age estimates for rock art (petroglyphs) and inscriptions. Petroglyphs are produced by removing the dark varnish by abrasion, scratching, or pecking, thereby exposing the lighter surface of the underlying rock. Such images are found worldwide and have been created from the pre-Neolithic period up to today [e.g., 23, 2431]. Once the petroglyph has been created, varnish begins to deposit again on the exposed fresh rock surface and, if the rate of accumulation were known, the amount of the regrown varnish could be used to date the rock art. Such a technique would be highly desirable, given the archeological importance of rock art as an expression of ancient cultures and the difficulties encountered in attempts to date petroglyphs by other means [summarized in 17, and refernces therein].

Using varnish regrowth as an indicator of age has been applied frequently in a qualitative and relative way by visual comparison of the darkness of varnish on alluvial fans of different age or on superimposed petroglyphs [25, 3236]. A quantitative version of this approach using colorimetric measurements was developed by Bednarik [32], who found “fairly good consistency” between color measurements and age. A similar technique was used to achieve a relative chronological ordering of rock art elements at Little Lake, California, by Bretney [37]. The amount of Mn deposited on the rock surface or the Mn/Fe ratios in the varnish have been explored by other authors as potential age indicators [34, 38, 39]. However, all of these approaches have to be viewed with great caution, because the growth rate of varnish is highly variable and depends on a large number of parameters other than age, including the exposure of the rock surface to dust, erosion by wind and water, the orientation and slope of the rock surface, the hardness, roughness, and texture of the rock underneath, and its initial iron content [3, 19, 22, 34, 40, 41], as summarized in [17] and in S1 Table.

In two previous studies, we demonstrated the potential of measuring the amount of Mn in rock varnish on petroglyphs and adjacent intact rock surfaces by portable X-ray fluorescence (pXRF) as a tool to determine the growth rate of varnish and to estimate the age of rock art in Saudi Arabia [17, 42]. That work benefitted from the existence of distinct time markers in the Arabian rock art in the form of particular types of scripts, which had been used during specific time periods, and of dated paleoclimatic transitions that were reflected in the animal species depicted in the rock art [4347]. Using these time markers, we found average Mn accumulation rates (i.e., the rate at which Mn accumulates in the form of varnish per unit area and time) of 17 and 13.4 ng cm-2 a-1 for our sites in the Ha’il (northwestern Arabia) and Hima (southwestern Arabia) regions, respectively, with confidence intervals of about a factor of two. We also derived a quantitative metric for the degree of varnish regrowth since the creation of the rock art by calculating the ratio of the Mn areal density (i.e., the mass of Mn in the varnish per unit area) within a petroglyph to the Mn density on the adjacent intact varnish, expressed as a percentage, which we refer to as the normalized Mn accumulation rate, NMn. We obtained NMn values of 12±3 and 10.4±3% ka-1 for the Ha’il and Hima regions, respectively, thus narrowing the variance significantly by this normalization approach. From these studies, we estimated the statistical uncertainty of an age estimate based on the NMn measurements to be about 33%, but cautioned that numerous additional assumptions went into converting NMn into an age estimate, and that for the time being, this approach must be considered experimental. The observed rates of regrowth of the varnish, on the order of 10% ka-1, also imply that after about 10 ka, the areal density of the regrown varnish is indistinguishable from intact varnish, and therefore any potential dating application would be limited to the Holocene. We could show, however, that the age estimates so obtained were consistent with ages based on the cultural and ecological content of the rock art, and allowed a meaningful ordering of rock images into an age sequence.

Given the relative success of our approach in Saudi Arabia, we intended to examine the possibility of extending it to other regions. We chose the southern Owens Valley and the adjacent Rose Valley, both parts of the Mojave Desert in southern California, as an initial test site because of its prominent role in the scientific study of rock varnish [e.g., 2, 19], the existence of radiometrically dated rock surfaces [e.g., 19, 28, 4850], and the presence of well-documented rock art [e.g., 24, 51], including a large corpus of dated petroglyphs in this and nearby regions [36, and references therein, 52]. The rock art in this area has been the subject of vigorous–and sometimes acerbic–debate over decades, both with regards to its meaning and function [e.g., 24, 51, 5359] and its time of creation [e.g., 24, 28, 36, 52, 54, 55, 60, 6163].

In this study, we conducted in-situ measurements by pXRF on lava flow surfaces of known age in the study region to determine the areal density, DMn and DFe, of Mn and Fe on the surface of the rocks and to estimate the rate of accumulation of these elements in the form of rock varnish. We also examined the dependence of DMn and DFe on the cardinal orientation and slope of the rock surfaces. We analyzed selected varnish samples by femtosecond laser-ablation inductively-coupled-plasma mass-spectrometry (fs-LA-ICPMS) in order to characterize the geochemical signature of the varnish, determine its type according to the classification of Macholdt et al. [7], and look for clues on its environment of formation. Finally, we measured the Mn and Fe areal densities on a number of petroglyphs to explore the potential for deriving age estimates.

Material and methods

Study region, climate, and history

Our study area is in the northwestern margin of the Mojave Desert, California, and includes sites in the southern part of the Owens Valley and in its southern continuation, Rose Valley. It lies NNW of Ridgecrest, CA, between the latitudes of 37°N (Aberdeen part of the Big Pine volcanic field) and 36°N (Little Lake and Fossil Falls sites), at a longitude of about 118°W (overview map in S1 Fig). The region is in the rain shadow of the Sierra Nevada mountain range and has an arid to semiarid climate. Annual rainfall is 125 to 175 mm, mostly in the form of winter rains, and temperatures span a wide range, from -19 to 43°C, with annual averages around 15–18°C [64]. The dominant vegetation is dryland scrub and the soils are mostly relatively saline and alkaline. During most of the Pleistocene, the region was much wetter and cooler than today, with the transition to arid and semiarid conditions similar to the present climate taking place from about 12 to 6 ka BP (BP: before present, referring to the year 2000 CE), involving highly variable conditions [6567]. An extensive drought period occurred between about 5000 and 4000 BP [68, and references therein]. In the late Holocene, megadroughts occurred in the Medieval Warm Period (MWP) around 1200–1350 CE, with subsequent wetter periods in the late MWP and the Little Ice Age around 1650 CE [66].

Human occupation in the region began around the Pleistocene-Holocene transition, ca. 13,000 BP, by a sparse population of hunter-gatherers utilizing mostly small mammals, dryland seeds, and marshland plants as their food source [69, 70; and references therein]. Seasonal migratory hunting-gathering prevailed as the dominant economic pattern in the region into the ethnographic period, supplemented by some small-scale agriculture beginning around 2000 BP [51, 55, 68, and references therein]. Human populations declined to a minimum during an extended hot and dry period between ca. 5000 to 4000 BP [68], followed by wetter and cooler conditions in the Middle Archaic period (ca. 4000 to 1000 BP) during which the hunting of larger game (bighorn sheep and deer) intensified [55, 62, 63, 71, 72]. Subsequently, droughts during the Medieval Climatic Anomaly (MCA, ca. 1200 to 650 BP) were a likely cause of declining populations during the last millennium BP, coincident with a shift to smaller prey [62, and references therein]. The atlatl was the dominant hunting weapon in the Great Basin region from about 8000 BP to about 1500 BP, and was subsequently replaced by the bow and arrow, which arrived in the region around 1600 BP and may have led to a depletion of bighorn populations [37, 53, 63, 73, 74].

Little is known about the ethnic and linguistic affiliation of the earliest pre-Numic residents of the region. The arrival of Northern Uto-Aztecan speakers from northern Mexico in the Great Basin region took place around 5000 BP, with Numic languages firmly established by 3000 BP [68]. Numic-speaking Shoshone and Paiute tribes occupied the area from around 600 BP through the Historic period [75]. The first contact with Euro-Americans in the Owens Valley is thought to have occurred in the 1830s, although indirect contact through trading had already begun in the 18th century [76]. The Owens Valley Natives were forcibly removed from their territory to Fort Tejon in 1863. A number of remaining Natives and returnees from Fort Tejon formed the basis of the present-day Native population (ca. 3000 persons) centered on the Lone Pine, Fort Independence, Big Pine, and Bishop reservations [77]. The archeological chronology of the Little Lake area has been summarized by Van Tilburg and Bretney [76] as follows: Lake Mojave (11,000–6000 BP), Little Lake (6000–3150 BP), Newberry (3150–1350 BP), Haiwee (1350–650 BP), Marana (650 BP– 1700 CE), and Historic periods (1700 CE–present).

Geology

The study sites are on basaltic lava rocks, which overly a bedrock of Jurassic and Cretaceous granitic rocks that are about 165 and 100 million years old, respectively. The Big Pine volcanic field is of Quaternary age, with the youngest flows occurring near Aberdeen. Here, six distinct flow units have been dated to the late Pleistocene by 3He and 36Cl techniques [48, 50]. We measured the areal density of Mn and Fe on the flow surfaces and sampled varnish from four of these flow units at the same locations sampled by Vazquez and Woolford [50]: Units Qba (sample CLS-03, 40 ka), Qbbs (CLS-06, 27 ka), Qbac (CLS-04, 17 ka), and Qbtc (CLS-05, 17 ka). The precise locations of all measurement sites are given in Table 1. The complex surfaces of these lava flows provided the opportunity to make measurements on surfaces exposed to all cardinal directions and with inclinations from 0 to 90 degrees.

Table 1. Rock varnish sampling and measurement locations and substrate rock characteristics.

Locality Sample/Site Code Latitude [°N] Longitude [°W] Elevation [m asl] Rock unit Age [ka]
Big Pine Volcanic Field CLS-03 36.978 118.272 1230 Qba 40
Big Pine Volcanic Field CLS-04 36.962 118.258 1187 Qbac 17
Big Pine Volcanic Field CLS-05 36.984 118.235 1180 Qbtc 17
Big Pine Volcanic Field CLS-06 36.945 118.241 1177 Qbbs 27
Fossil Falls FF 35.970 117.906 1010 Qbr 60
Fossil Falls, flood-scoured FFS 35.970 117.909 1010 Qbr 16
Little Lake Hotel LLH 35.934 117.909 942 Qbr 60
Little Lake, Atlatl Cliff LLA 35.958 117.904 973 Qbe 140
Little Lake, Locus 4 LL4 35.949 117.905 967 Qbr 60
Little Lake, Locus 7 LL7 35.942 117.905 964 Qbe 140
Little Lake, Locus 8 LL8 35.953 117.905 966 Qbr 60

The measurements at Fossil Falls were made on Late Pleistocene vesicular basalts of the Red Hill flow of the Coso volcanic field [unit Qbr in reference 49]. This flow belongs to the most recent phases of activity of the Coso volcanic field and has been dated to about 60 ka [48]. The surface of this flow has been scoured by a late Pleistocene flood event of the Owens River, creating a fresh surface that has been dated to 16 ka by the 3He technique [48]. This event represents the last time that Owens Lake discharged by way of the Owens River over Fossil Falls [78]. Here, pXRF measurements were made on un-scoured older surfaces, flood-scoured surfaces, and petroglyphs cut into both un-scoured and flood-scoured surfaces.

The Little Lake site (CA-INY-182) contains outcrops of both the Red Hill flow, which forms the ridge on the west side of Little Lake, and the Little Lake flow, which makes up the high and steep cliffs along the east side of the lake [78]. The latter flow originates from the Little Lake vent, located about 5 km east of the lake. It corresponds to unit Qbe in Duffield, Bacon [49] and has been K/Ar-dated to 140 ka BP. The pXRF measurements were made on intact varnish and petroglyphs of Red Hill basalt (Locus 4 and 8, see below) and Little Lake basalt (Atlatl Cliff and Locus 7). In addition, we made pXRF measurements at the site of the former Little Lake Hotel (LLH), 2 km S of the entrance to Little Lake Ranch, on outcrops of Red Hill basalt.

Methods

Portable X-Ray fluorescence spectrometry

Our pXRF measurement technique has been described in detail in previous publications [17, 42] and will only be outlined briefly here. Measurements were conducted using a Niton XL3 pXRF (Thermo Fisher Scientific) in the “mining” mode. The filter steps and integration periods were: “standard” 25 s, “low” 15 s, “high” 20 s, and “light” 25 s. The instrument is equipped with an X-ray source with an energy of 50 keV and a silver anode, and has a spot size of 8 mm in diameter. For quality control, the reference materials TILL-4 and FeMnOx-1 [GeoReM database, version 25; http://georem.mpch-mainz.gwdg.de; 79] were measured before and after each XRF measurement sequence. The measurement depth of the pXRF is dependent on the energy of the excitation and fluorescence photons, as well as on the composition (atomic number) of the analyte. The software in the instrument takes these factors into account when calculating the results. For the elements considered here, the measurement depth is of the order of a few tens to hundreds of microns. A total of 300 measurements were made, 158 on intact varnish surfaces, 120 on petroglyphs, and the rest for ancillary purposes, e.g., on freshly exposed bare basalt substrate. The measurements were typically made on several spots inside and adjacent to petroglyphs. For each spot, three to five replicate measurements were made by moving the pXRF a few mm or cm (depending on the size of the feature) within or near the petroglyph. Depending on the size and complexity of a given rock art element, one to five such spots were measured on each element. The locations of the spots are marked by arrows in S2 Fig. The measurement points on the adjacent intact varnish were chosen to be as close as possible to the petroglyph measurement spots, and to be as similar as possible in surface characteristics.

On the lava flows, close attention was paid to making measurements on original flow surfaces and avoiding surfaces formed by later fracturing and erosion. Six to 18 measurements were made on each lava flow by moving across the flow in more or less the same direction, and finding surfaces every few meters that were smooth enough to allow use of the pXRF, while also sampling a range of directions and inclinations. Since it is impossible to visually estimate varnish density on the black basalt, a selection bias is precluded.

While the measurement results from the bare basalt are valid as provided by the instrument in mass concentration units, the measurements on the rock varnishes were converted into areal density values, DMn, in units of μg cm-2 using the calibration curve from Macholdt, Herrmann [80]. To correct for the underlying basalt element contribution, the Mn concentration of the unvarnished basalt was determined by conducting a measurement on a nearby freshly exposed rock surface and this value was subtracted from that measured on the varnished surface. The areal density of Fe (DFe) was calculated using the Mn calibration values and the Mn/Fe sensitivity ratio, and is thus subject to a greater uncertainty (estimated at about 20%). Since DMn and DFe vary substantially due to different growth and erosion conditions even within each rock art panel location, we also calculated the ratio of the measurements on the petroglyph surfaces to that on immediately adjacent intact varnish. This provides a normalized measure, called NMn and NFe (in %), which basically expresses the degree of re-varnishing on the petroglyph surface relative to the surrounding intact varnish. The measurement and data reduction techniques used were identical to those in Macholdt et al. [42] and are described in more detail there. Photographs of all petroglyph measurement locations are shown in the (S2 Fig).

Permission for the measurements at Little Lake was obtained from the owners (Little Lake Duck Club, Inc.). No permit was required for the collection of small rock samples and non-invasive measurements by pXRF on public lands. No samples of cultural heritage material were taken.

Femtosecond LA-ICPMS

The fs-LA-ICPMS measurements were carried out using a ThermoFisher Element 2 single-collector sector-field ICP-mass spectrometer combined with an ESI 200-nm femtosecond laser ablation system, NWRFemto. Laser ablation was conducted in a New Wave Large Format Cell using a He atmosphere. Subsequent to the ablation, the He carrier gas was mixed with an Ar gas flow to transport the aerosols generated by ablation to the ICPMS. All measurements were conducted in medium mass resolution mode (2000) with flat-top peaks. The rock varnish measurements were executed, after pre-ablation with 80 μm s-1 scan speed and a spot size of 65 μm, as in-situ line scans on the surfaces of unpolished slices cut perpendicular to the varnished rock surface. The operating parameters of the laser system during the measurements were: spot size: 40 μm, pulse repetition rate: 50 Hz, energy density: ca. 0.5 J cm-2, scan speed: 1 μm s-1, blank measurement 15 s, and washout time: 30 s. In addition to the line scan measurements, we also made spot measurements, where the laser was shot repeatedly onto the same spot on the varnish surface, thereby successively ablating deeper layers. Each shot (pulse repetition rate = 1 Hz) ablates ca. 50–100 nm, so that after 200–300 shots a depth of about 10–30 μm is reached. While this technique requires only minimal sample preparation (cutting a piece of the sample to fit into the ablation cell), it can be difficult to separate varnish and host rock on thinly and unevenly varnished surfaces. It also has lower sensitivity, so that only the main elements can be detected. The analytical error of the measurements is of the order of 2–6% for the elements measured.

Measurements with MnO2 mass fractions of <2% were rejected as contamination from the underlying rock material. The reference glass GSE-1G (GeoReM database) was used for calibration. To normalize the data, the oxides of the major elements (Na2O, MgO, Al2O3, SiO2, P2O5, K2O, CaO, TiO2, MnO2, and Fe2O3) were assumed to add up to 98 mass-%.

Data analysis

Regression calculations were made using bivariate regression, which takes into account error in both the x and the y variables, using the Williamson-York Iterative bivariate fit algorithm [81].

Results and discussion

Rock varnish chemical composition

The chemical composition of the varnish was investigated in detail by fs-LA-ICPMS. The concentrations of major and trace elements in the CLS varnish samples are presented in Table 2. The dominant elements in all samples are Mn, Fe, Si, and Al, consistent with a composition dominated by Mn-Fe oxyhydroxides and clay minerals, as is typical of Type I rock varnishes [3, 7, 10]. The overall mean mass percentages of Mn and Fe in the varnishes are 4.9% and 12.9%, respectively, giving an average Mn/Fe mass ratio of 0.38. This ratio is considerably lower than the Mn/Fe ratios measured by pXRF (average 1.62) and may reflect the influence of signal from the basalt host rock, some of which may have been present in the relatively large laser spot (40 μm), and which has a much lower Mn/Fe ratio of 0.01 to 0.02. This is supported by the spot measurements, which showed much higher ratios (0.5 to 2.5) in the varnish layer (S3 Fig). Another factor is the great variability of the Mn oxyhydroxide concentration at the microscale, which makes the absolute concentrations measured by this technique subject to a considerable amount of random chance, depending on just where the line scan ends up on the varnish sample. The LA-ICPMS data are therefore more meaningfully interpreted in the form of the enrichment patterns discussed below.

Table 2. Elemental composition of the rock varnish on the Big Pine volcanic field basalts at Aberdeen, CA, as measured by fs-LA-ICPMS (in μg g-1).

The standard deviations reflect mostly the variability of trace elements in the varnish and not the analytical error, which is of the order of 2–6% for the elements measured.

Element CLS-04 (n = 35) CLS-05 (n = 30) CLS-06 (n = 112)
Average Std. Dev. Average Std. Dev. Average Std. Dev.
B 52 84 78 38 87 130
Na 17900 5800 19100 11100 10000 3400
Mg 30100 14100 20800 10900 24600 9600
Al 88300 19900 72900 11100 92500 11800
Si 182000 22000 163000 30000 171000 18000
P 3600 1500 2900 800 4600 2000
K 7300 4900 21700 9700 8900 8500
Ca 83400 20400 43400 19900 52900 19400
Ti 11000 2300 14100 5700 13300 2700
Mn 31100 7900 79300 51200 47200 17700
Fe 104000 32000 133000 33000 135000 31000
Co 271 103 506 311 305 125
Ni 40 60 119 55 71 73
Rb 18.8 15.2 88 37 44 26
Sr 1300 500 1100 400 800 300
Y 47 20 97 42 71 18
Cs 2.2 2.3 8.1 5.3 6.0 4.9
Ba 3100 800 10200 6800 4200 2300
La 100 34 250 158 146 48
Ce 570 156 2593 2112 1251 485
Pr 25 8 56 30 35 11
Nd 93 40 190 98 129 45
Sm 20 13 33 19 26 10
Eu 5.6 6.7 7.1 2.8 5.1 2.3
Gd 14.4 13.6 24.2 11.7 20.3 9.5
Tb 2.3 2.2 3.6 1.7 3.0 1.4
Dy 12.5 9.8 18.8 10.7 17.2 7.3
Ho 2.1 1.5 3.6 1.6 3.0 1.3
Er 6.6 6.4 11.1 5.9 11.4 6.0
Tm 1.2 1.3 1.2 0.9 1.3 0.8
Yb 6.1 5.4 11.8 6.8 9.3 5.6
Lu 1.4 2.6 1.7 0.8 1.3 0.8
Pb 1500 1200 1100 1000 3300 2600
Th 78 62 148 76 154 73
U 38 17 66 39 92 34
Zr 362 135 501 185 407 113
Cu 230 139 249 122 1096 2711
Cr 72 72 56 59 164 237
Zn 138 215 391 253 455 388
V 214 72 470 108 334 90

The average Mn concentration of 4.9% corresponds to a MnO concentration of 6.6% in the varnish material. The highest observed Mn concentration, in CLS05, was 11.3%, corresponding to 15.2% MnO. These values fall at the low end of the range reported by Broecker and Liu [82] and are typical of varnish formed under arid conditions at annual precipitation rates around 50–150 mm, which suggests that varnish formation in the study region took place predominantly under arid conditions. Further discussion of the Mn/Fe ratios, including the pXRF results from the other sites in this study, is presented in the section on the areal densities of Mn and Fe below.

For further discussion, the elemental composition data are presented in Fig 1A in the form of enrichment factors against the average upper continental crust (UCC) composition [83]. In this figure, the results of our previous measurements on Type I varnish are shown for comparison. Generally, the enrichment factors against UCC composition are in good agreement with published values for the elements typically enriched in varnish, e.g., Mn, Pb, Ba, Ce, and Co [3, 10, 12, 16, 18, 84, 85].

Fig 1. Chemical composition of the rock varnish on the lava flows at Aberdeen, CA.

Fig 1

(a) Elemental composition expressed as enrichment factors vs. average upper continental crust. (b) Rare earth element and yttrium enrichment factors vs. carbonaceous chondrite C1 composition. The black line represents the average of our previous data from Type I varnish; the color bars show the range of our previous measurements, with the darker color indicating the interquartile range. (RE stands for the sum of rare earth elements and yttrium).

The main varnish elements, Mn and Fe, are both strongly enriched in the CLS varnish samples. The Fe enrichment factors are slightly above average, and consequently the Mn/Fe ratios are relatively low, in the range typical for varnish formed under arid conditions. Silica is more depleted than the Type 1 average, possibly because detrital quartz grains are less abundant in this area, which is dominated by basaltic host rocks, than in most of our other locations, which had sandstone and gneiss as host rocks. The above-average Ca content may be due to the presence of some Ca carbonate or Ca-containing clay minerals of the smectite group, which are common basalt weathering products [8688].

Some unusually high enrichments stand out in this plot, particularly for Pb, Ce, Cu, U, and Th. In contrast, the P and Ni enrichments are unusually low. Cobalt is highly enriched, but still within the typical range for Type I. We have previously observed a similar enrichment pattern, characterized by very high Pb, Ce, Th and U enrichments, but low Ni and Co enrichments relative to the Type I average, in samples from other locations in the Mojave Desert [7, 18]. This consistency among sites in the same region is likely related to a regional similarity of dust composition and enrichment processes. In particular, the high Th and U enrichments may be related to the presence in the region of a high proportion of felsic intrusive and extrusive igneous rocks (e.g., the Long Valley rhyolites, and the Southern California and Sierra Nevada batholiths) with strongly elevated U and Th concentrations [8991].

The most extreme Pb enrichment is observed in CLS-06. This may be related to the fact that this sample was collected very close (ca. 100 m) to a highway with a high traffic density, and may have accumulated automotive Pb. The lead enrichment is highest at the surface, but reaches well into the varnish, indicating the lead absorption to the varnish occurs not only at the immediate surface but also throughout a layer of significant thickness. Lead may also have been mobilized and redistributed during diagenetic processes within the varnish [5, 13, 92].

The rare earth element enrichment pattern is shown in Fig 1B in the form of enrichment ratios vs. the composition of carbonaceous chondrites [93] (for this discussion, we include yttrium [Y] with the REE, using the abbreviation REY). We find the light REE (LREE) up to one order of magnitude more strongly enriched than the heavy REY (HREY), with a gradual decrease of the EFs from La to Lu. Three anomalies are present in this series: A strong positive Ce anomaly, a distinct negative Eu anomaly, and a slight negative Y anomaly. These trends and anomalies are in overall agreement with previous studies [7, 12, 14, 16, 18, 9496]. The REY enrichments in varnish have been attributed to preferential absorption of the REY to Mn oxyhydroxides in the course of the leaching and absorption processes that lead to varnish formation [1618].

The Ce anomaly results from the fact that in the oxidizing environment, which exists on the surface of the Mn oxyhydroxides, Ce is in the highly insoluble and sorption-prone Ce4+ oxidation state, whereas the other REE are in the more soluble 3+ oxidation state (Eu and Y may be partially also in the 2+ oxidation state). Cerium thus accumulates irreversibly over time and a strong Ce anomaly suggests slow growth [7, 96]. Fig 1B shows that, whereas all other EFs in our samples are below average, the Ce EFs are clustered around the Type I varnish average. The Ce anomaly (defined as the ratio between the enrichment factor of Ce and the average of the enrichment factors of La and Pr) in the Aberdeen lava flows varnishes ranges between 2.7 and 5.1, with the latter being the highest value we have found anywhere in rock varnishes. Similar high Ce enrichments (3–4) have been found in the Mojave Desert and Death Valley by Thiagarajan and Lee [16].

In contrast to Ce, Eu typically shows a negative anomaly in rock varnish (Fig 1B). This is likely related to the fact that Eu can also exist in the Eu2+ oxidation state, which is soluble and less prone to adsorption. Any Eu2+ released during the leaching stage would thus have to be first oxidized to Eu3+ before it can be absorbed to the oxyhydroxides. A similar explanation might apply to the slight negative Y anomaly, as this element can also exist in the Y3+ and Y2+ oxidation states [18]. Bau, Schmidt [96] proposed a classification of marine Fe-Mn oxyhydroxide deposits based on plots of the Ce anomaly vs. Nd concentration and Ce anomaly vs. Y anomaly, and related the resulting classification to the proposed REY scavenging mechanism. The results from our measurements plot in the field of hydrogenetic Fe-Mn crusts, suggesting that the same scavenging mechanism, i.e., scavenging from aqueous solution onto Mn/Fe oxyhydroxides also applies to our rock varnish samples.

The general decrease of enrichment from the LREE to the HREY has been suggested to result from the differential behavior of the distribution coefficients of these elements between oxyhydroxides and clay minerals [18]. While the distribution coefficients between solution and solid phase are similar between heavy and light REY for the oxyhydroxides, they increase by about one order of magnitude from La to Lu for the clay minerals, so that the heavy REY are less prone to leaching from the clay minerals and reprecipitation in the oxyhydroxides than the LEE. In addition, the HREY form stronger complexes with carbonate and organic ligands and are thus more likely to remain in solution.

In conclusion, the enrichment pattern of trace elements and REY in the varnish is consistent with a formation mechanism, in which they are leached under initially slightly acidic conditions typical of hydrometeors (rain or dew), followed by precipitation of Mn-oxyhydroxides and scavenging of trace elements by these Mn-oxyhydroxides when the pH increases as the moisture on rock surfaces reacts with carbonate and silicate minerals, consuming H+ ions and releasing mineral cations [14, 16, 18, 97].

Areal density of manganese and iron in the rock varnish

The results of our pXRF measurements on rock varnish are shown as a scatter plot of surface densities, DMn vs. DFe, in Fig 2A, and the normalized surface densities, NMn and NFe, are presented in Fig 2B. The corresponding summary statistics are given in Table 3, and the more detailed statistics for the Aberdeen lava flows, the intact varnish surrounding the petroglyphs, and the petroglyphs are presented in Tables 46. The average DMn from all measurements is 350±310 μg cm-2, the large standard deviation reflecting the wide range of varnish coatings, from some very recent, light petroglyph surfaces to visually very dark surfaces. The average DMn value on the petroglyphs (160±170 μg cm-2) is only about 30% of that on the adjacent intact varnish (550±290 μg cm-2) and about one-half of that on the Late Quaternary Aberdeen basalts (300±150 μg cm-2). In spite of the large variability of the Mn densities, the difference between the Aberdeen values and those of intact varnish from LL and FF is statistically significant based on a t-test (p<0.0001). A more detailed analysis of the intact varnish data suggests this difference may be related to the age of the surfaces, as the mean DMn increases from 340±190 μg cm-2 on the Red Hill flow surface that had been scoured by flooding until 16 ka BP, through 560±310 μg cm-2 on the un-scoured 60 ka Red Hill basalt, to 750±280 on the 140 ka Little Lake flow (Table 3).

Fig 2. Areal density of Mn vs. areal density of Fe on the rock varnishes in the Owens/Rose Valley study area.

Fig 2

(a) Areal density of Mn (DMn) vs. areal density of Fe (DFe), (b) normalized areal densities, NMn vs. NFe, on the petroglyphs. The lines represent linear regressions; the regression parameters can be found in Table 3. Negative DFe values are a consequence of the relatively large uncertainty resulting from the subtraction of the host rock Fe contribution from the Fe signal.

Table 3. Mn and Fe areal density, normalized areal density, Fe vs. Mn correlation, and Mn/Fe ratios from pXRF measurements on rock varnish at Aberdeen volcanic area, Fossil Falls (FF), Little Lake (LL), and Little Lake Hotel (LLH).

[Avg.: arithmetic average, S.D.: standard deviation, S.E.: standard error].

Site N DMn DFe Slope Mn/Fe Intercept R2 Mn/Fe
Avg. S.D. Avg. S.D. Avg. S.E. Avg. S.E. Avg. S.D.
Aberdeen lava flows 45 300 150 180 160 1.64 0.28 12.3 52.3 0.31 1.62 0.24
Flow surfaces at Rose Valley sites FF, LL, and LLH
    Red Hill 58 560 310 620 230 --- --- --- --- --- 0.89 0.60
    Red Hill scoured 16 340 200 150 200 1.81 0.62 -138 190 0.39 1.19 0.91
    Little Lake basalt 26 750 280 890 240 1.90 0.72 -939 646 0.05 0.84 0.39
    All intact varnish 103 550 290 630 320 1.01 0.16 -47 109 0.04 0.86 0.63
    Petroglyphs 107 160 170 300 180 0.93 0.08 -114 26 0.43 0.57 0.51
    All data 262 350 310 400 310 1.00 0.07 -43 32 0.28 1.01 1.00
Normalized densities on petroglyphs
N NMn NFe Slope Mn/Fe Intercept R2
Avg. S.D. Avg. S.D. Avg. S.E. Avg. S.E.
    Individual measurements 106 26.6 28.4 41.6 26.6 1.16 0.18 -22 6.6 0.22
    Same, w/o outliersa 94 18.1 11.6 37.8 19.0 0.32 0.06 5.9 2.5 0.11
    Element averages 22 23.3 22.8 41.6 18.5 1.40 0.32 -35 14 0.34
    Same, w/o outliersa 20 17.7 10.8 38.8 16.9 0.55 0.14 -3.2 6.1 0.24

a) Data from FFS-2 and LLA-1 removed as outliers

Table 4. Mn and Fe areal density, radiometric age, and apparent accumulation rates.

Mn and Fe areal density, radiometric age, and apparent Mn and Fe accumulation rates on the different flow units of the Aberdeen lava flows of the Big Pine volcanic field, the Red Hill and Little Lake lava flows, and the 16-ka flood-scoured surface of the Red Hill flow at Fossil Falls.

Flow unit Age N DMn DFe Mn accumulation rate Fe accumulation rate
Avg. S.D. CV Avg. S.D. CV Avg. S.E. Avg. S.E.
[ka] [μg cm-2] [μg cm-2] [μg cm-2 ka-1] [μg cm-2 ka-1]
CLS-03 40 15 310 130 42% 260 170 66% 7.7 0.9 6.6 1.2
CLS-04 17 11 350 170 48% 190 160 87% 20.6 2.7 11.0 2.6
CLS-05 17 18 250 150 62% 93 59 63% 14.6 2.4 5.5 0.9
CLS-06 27 6 350 130 37% 190 103 55% 13.1 1.3 7.0 1.0
    Average 47% 68%
Red Hill, scoured 16 15 340 200 60% 150 200 136% 20.9 3.4 9.1 3.3
Red Hill flow 60 58 560 310 56% 620 230 37% 9.3 1.4 10.4 1.0
Little Lake flow 140 26 750 180 24% 890 240 27% 5.4 0.3 6.4 0.5

Table 6. Mn and Fe areal densities (DMn and DFe) and normalized densities (NMn and NFe) on the petroglyphs (rock art elements).

Element Motif N DMn DFe NMn NFe
Avg. S.D. CV Avg. S.D. CV Avg. S.D. S.E. Avg. S.D. S.E.
[μg cm-2] [μg cm-2] [%] [%]
LLH-1 Anthropomorph 5 65 16 25% 330 120 36% 19 4.9 16% 60 22 20%
LLH-2 Coso bighorn (III) 3 180 70 38% 280 63 23% 35 13 28% 84 19 26%
LLH-3 Metate 3 10 6 58% 170 110 68% 1.8 1.1 49% 23 16 52%
FFS-1 Bighorn sheep (I) 4 180 104 57% 140 45 33% 28 16 38% 32 10 28%
FFS-2 Atlatl 4 130 19 15% 29 95 325% 48 7.4 23% 67 98 ---
FF-1 Coso bighorn (III) 5 92 28 30% 260 100 39% 29 8.9 19% 35 14 21%
FF-2 Coso bighorn (III) 4 55 15 27% 300 130 43% 17 4.8 21% 41 18 27%
FF-3 “Medicine bag” 4 54 15 28% 360 81 22% 15 4.0 27% 46 10 19%
LLA-1 Curvilin. abstract 9 610 99 16% 750 87 12% 110 18 7% 73 8.4 4%
LLA-2 Atlatl 6 220 20 9% 250 79 31% 22 2.0 5% 26 8.2 14%
LLA-3 Atlatl 10 350 63 18% 330 74 23% 34 6.1 8% 33 7.4 8%
LLA-4 Atlatl (repecked) 6 26 6 24% 380 53 14% 5.5 1.3 15% 35 4.9 7%
LL8-1 Metate 3 21 15 72% 120 39 31% 5.4 3.8 54% 41 13 33%
LL8-2 Metate 3 2 2 --- 41 12 30% 0.4 0.6 --- 6.8 2.0 30%
LL8-3 Coso bighorn (III) 9 56 47 83% 93 60 64% 7.9 6.5 30% 14 7.5 24%
LL7-1A Bighorn sheep (I) 2 59 0 0% 220 10 4% 13 0.0 7% 21 0.9 6%
LL7-1B Bighorn sheep (I) 2 38 0 1% 320 26 8% 8.6 0.1 7% 31 2.5 9%
LL7-2 PB Anthropom. 10 97 44 45% 320 120 37% 13 5.8 18% 52 20 13%
LL7-3 “Bear paw” 3 65 13 20% 370 9 3% 19 3.8 15% 51 1.3 2%
LL7-4 Anthropomorph 2 33 2 5% 340 50 15% 34 1.7 10% 50 7.3 19%
LL4-1 Bighorn sheep (II) 9 140 31 22% 240 73 30% 17 4.8 11% 40 15 11%
LL4-2 Rectilinear abstract 3 190 9 5% 210 15 7% 26 1.2 7% 36 2.6 10%
Average 28% 27%a 20% 18%a

a) without FFS-2

The intact varnish densities from all our sites are much larger than the values we had measured previously in Saudi Arabia, with 105±55 μg cm-2 in the Hima region [42] and 156±94 μg cm-2 in the Ha’il region [17]. There are many potential reasons for this difference, including differences in age, rock substrate, climate, dust availability, rainfall, and others. Present-day rainfall is similar in the Owens/Rose Valley study area and our Arabian sites (125–175 mm vs. ca. 130 mm annually, respectively), and both regions have experienced lengthy periods of higher rainfall during the Holocene. This makes differences in rainfall unlikely as an explanation for the observed differences in DMn, especially in view of the weak relationship between rainfall and Mn content shown by Broecker and Liu [82]. Dust fluxes in the Owens/Rose Valley are lower than those in Arabia both in the Pleistocene and the Holocene [98100], ruling this variable out as a possible explanation. We speculate that the most likely reason for the greater DMn in the present study area is the fact that the rock substrate, basalt, is more resistant to weathering than the sandstone substrate at our petroglyph sites in Arabia and thus enables a longer period of varnish accumulation. Consistent with this hypothesis is the observation that high DMn values were also found on very resistant silica- and hematite-cemented sandstones that formed desert pavements in Saudi Arabia (410–670 μg cm-2; M. O. Andreae, unpublished data, 2015).

There are, unfortunately, only very few published values of DMn from North America to which we can compare our results. Measurements of intact varnish on sandstones in Utah by a technique similar to ours yielded much lower DMn values: 24–87 μg cm-2 [39]. In a study of rock varnish on small clasts from piedmont slopes in the Mojave Desert, Reneau [34] determined median values of 104 μg cm-2 on mid- to late-Holocene surfaces, 130 to 220 μg cm-2 on early- to mid-Holocene surfaces, and 90 to 220 μg cm-2 on Pleistocene surfaces. Interestingly, these values agree reasonably well with our results, especially with those from the petroglyphs, which are also presumed to be of Holocene age [36, 51].

The mean Fe areal densities show a similar trend, ranging from 170±200 μg cm-2 on the flood-scoured Red Hill basalt to 890±240 μg cm-2 on the Little Lake basalt (Table 3). The petroglyph surfaces have a mean DFe of 300±180 μg cm-2. The overall average DFe of the intact varnishes is 630±320 μg cm-2, about 2–3 times higher than our results from Saudi Arabia (330±80 μg cm-2 at Hima and 185±121 μg cm-2 at Ha’il). The overall mean Mn/Fe mass ratio is 1.01±1.00, with the individual surface types ranging from 0.57±0.51 on the petroglyph surfaces to 1.62±0.24 on the Aberdeen lava flows (Table 3). The observed Mn/Fe ratios of <1 in the varnish on the Holocene petroglyphs and higher ratios on the late Pleistocene lava flows are consistent with the microstratigraphic analyses of Liu and coworkers [22, 101, 102], who found that the Holocene was characterized by a yellow layer (in microscope slides) with Mn/Fe <1 formed under arid conditions, while varnish from the last glacial period contained black layers with Mn/Fe up to ~4 reflecting wetter periods. On considerably older lava flow surfaces of the Cima volcanic field (15 to 460 ka), Reneau, Raymond [103] also found high Mn/Fe ratios (averaging around 2).

The Mn/Fe ratios in the Owens/Rose Valley varnish are similar to our intact varnish Mn/Fe ratios of 0.91±0.64 at Ha’il (Saudi Arabia), and to measurements in Nevada and Utah (1.00±0.38) [95] and the Negev Desert, Israel (1.31±0.23) [94]. In contrast, they are much higher than our values from Hima (0.32±0.16) in Saudi Arabia and previous published Mn/Fe ratios from California: 0.22±0.08 in Death Valley and the Mojave Desert [16], 0.09 to 0.24 at another Mojave Desert location [104], and 0.09 to 0.71 at two other sites in the Mojave [105]. The reasons for these differences are not clear; they may be related to differences in climatic wetness during varnish formation [82, 101, 102, 106].

In our studies on Arabian varnishes, we had observed a positive iron intercept in regression analyses of DFe vs. DMn, which we suggested to be due to the presence of an Fe oxyhydroxide layer either at the base or the top of the varnish. Such an Fe oxyhydroxide layer has been suggested to act as a catalyst for the formation of the Mn oxyhydroxides [17, 20]. In contrast, regression analyses on the data in this study showed no consistent pattern (Table 3). This difference is likely due to the different characteristics of the rock substrate. In the more porous weathering rind of the sandstones studied in Arabia, a brown Fe oxyhydroxide layer is often clearly visible penetrating as much as several mm into the substrate [for images see 42]. Such a layer was not seen in the more resistant basalt substrate in this study.

In order to test whether the varnish deposition depends on the cardinal orientation or slope of the rock surface, we made measurements on the Aberdeen lava flows on surfaces facing all four cardinal directions and with slopes with inclinations from 0° to 80°. Since there were no significant differences in the DMn values between the four different flow units, we grouped all data into four cardinal orientations, which gave the following means and standard deviations (all in μg cm-2): North 2.18±0.60 (n = 14), East 2.50±0.54 (n = 14), South 1.89±0.61 (n = 9), and West 1.78±0.58 (n = 18). T-tests indicate that these differences are not statistically significant, in agreement with Lytle, Lytle [38], who had also found no difference between rock faces with different orientation on varnished boulders from Idaho. It is, however, possible that in more mesic settings, especially with rain or dew coming from a preferred direction, cardinal orientation may play a more significant role.

A plot of the DMn values against the inclination of the rock surface suggested a significant negative correlation (Panel (a) in S4 Fig), as could be expected given the generally accepted idea that the varnish is derived from the processing of deposited aeolian dust. Lytle, Lytle [38] had also observed such a relationship and proposed a correction by dividing the observed Mn areal density by the cosine of the slope inclination to obtain a normalized density. Since this implies the counterfactual result that there should be no varnish on vertical surfaces, this correction is obviously too strong. We tested several possibilities, including a linear correction, and found that the best correction could be achieved with an “attenuated” cosine correction:

DMn0=DMn*1/cos(a*I)

where DMn is the measured Mn areal density, D0Mn the value normalized to an inclination, I, of zero (horizontal), and a is an attenuation factor (<1) that prevents the correction from reaching excessive values when I approaches 90°. We found that with our data set, a value of a = 0.853 reduced the regression slope to zero and provided an adequate, although not perfect, correction (Panel (b) in S4 Fig).

Normalized areal density of manganese and iron on the petroglyph surfaces

As a metric for the degree to which varnish has regrown on a petroglyph surface after removal of the original varnish by pecking or abrasion to create the petroglyph, we developed in our previous work the concept of the normalized Mn areal density, NMn, defined as the areal density of Mn on a petroglyph surface divided by that on an adjacent intact rock varnish surface, expressed in percent [17, 42, 80]. This value can be considered as the regrowth percentage of the varnish following its creation by removal of the preexisting varnish to create the rock art. (We avoid the use of the terms “patination” or “repatination”, frequently found in the literature, as rock varnish is strictly speaking not a patina, i.e., an oxidation or weathering product of the substrate, but rather a coating derived from an external source.) This normalization adjusts for the considerable variability of varnish thickness and growth on scales comparable to the distance between the measurement points on the petroglyph and the points on the adjacent intact varnish, usually a few cm or tens of cm, depending on the size of the petroglyph. It has the advantage of eliminating the effect of the inclination of the rock surface, since the inclination of the petroglyph and that of the adjacent intact surface is essentially the same. It also ensures that the petroglyph surface has the same microclimate, substrate characteristics, etc. as the reference intact varnish. Variability on the size scale of the petroglyph itself is taken into account by making multiple measurements within and adjacent to a given petroglyph, and variability on the microscale is averaged over by the spot size (8 mm) of the pXRF measurement.

The scatter plot of NMn vs. NFe (Fig 2B) shows that, with the exception of the measurements of one petroglyph (LLA-1), the NMn values fall between 0 and 57%, while the NFe values reach from near 0 to 107% (with the exception of two very erratic measurements from Fossil Falls on the atlatl element FFS-2). The very high NMn from image LLA-1 at Atlatl Cliff and the very noisy NFe measurements on FFS-2 from Fossil Falls will be discussed in detail below. The correlations between NMn and NFe are statistically significant, but represent only a minor fraction of the variance, as indicated by their low r2 values, both when individual measurements are regressed (r2 = 0.22) and when the averages from the measurements on the same petroglyph are used (r2 = 0.34) (Table 3). When the above-mentioned outlier values are removed, the r2 values decrease further, indicating that there is no meaningful relationship between NFe and NMn, similar to what we had previously observed in our Arabian studies. This is not altogether unexpected, since Fe and Mn tend to be enriched in separate layers in the rock varnishes, which have been interpreted as representing contrasting depositional environments [4, 7, 102, 107]. Like in our previous work, we will focus our subsequent discussion of varnish growth in the petroglyphs on NMn.

Variability of the Mn and Fe areal densities

The variability of varnish deposits on a given rock surface or within a petroglyph element can be considerable, depending on many factors, such as substrate resistance to weathering, exposure, climate, etc. For a summary of these factors, see the table in the (S1 Table). This variability is often emphasized in the literature, but rarely expressed in quantitative terms. Here, to quantify this variability, we calculated the coefficients of variation (CV), i.e., the ratio of the standard deviation over the mean (expressed as percentage), of the areal density measurements on the various types of varnished surfaces. The results are presented in Tables 46 for the various lava flow surfaces, the intact varnish areas surrounding the rock art, and the individual rock art elements themselves.

On the Aberdeen lava flows (Table 4), measurements were made on rock faces within an area of about 5–10 m across on each flow unit, choosing faces in all cardinal directions and a full range of inclinations from near horizontal to near vertical. The coefficients of variation of the measurements made on the same flow unit averaged 47% (37–62%) for DMn and 68% (55–87%) for DFe. The higher CV for DFe is mostly related to the need to subtract a relatively high and somewhat variable Fe background related to the underlying basalt (5.8±0.23 mass-%) from the readings on the varnish (Range 5.5–9.2 mass-%). Since 6 to 18 measurements were made on each flow, it follows that the uncertainty of the mean areal densities (i.e., the standard error) is about 10–20% at the spatial scale of sampling, i.e., some 2–10 m.

The data on the Red Hill and Little Lake basalts in Table 4 are from measurements made on intact varnish adjacent to petroglyphs and supplemental measurements made at a number of spots on the flows. They are spatially distributed over scales of a few tens of meters in the case of the flood-scoured area on the Red Hill basalt at Fossil falls, and up to a few km for the other spots on the Red Hill and Little Lake flows. The variability is comparable to the more closely spaced data from the Aberdeen flows, with the exception of the DFe from the flood-scoured area. This unusually high scatter results from the inclusion of some near-zero measurements from a small area, which may be related to an unusually low Fe content in the underlying rock at this point. This explains in particular the extremely large error on DFe on element FFS-2.

The measurements on the intact varnish adjacent to the petroglyphs (Table 5) probe smaller spatial scales (of the order of centimeters to about a meter). Consequently, the CVs of the intact surfaces are smaller than those from the lava flows, averaging 21% (7–39%) for DMn and 19% (2–53%) for DFe. Thus, when four measurements of intact varnish are made for a given rock art element, a statistical uncertainty of about 12% can be expected for the mean.

Table 5. Mn and Fe areal densities (DMn and DFe) of the intact rock varnish surrounding the petroglyphs.

The labels in the Element column correspond to the rock art elements in Table 6.

Element N DMn DFe
Avg. S.D. CV Avg. S.D. CV
[μg cm-2] [μg cm-2]
LLH-1i 4 330 71 21% 540 97 18%
LLH-2i 4 530 59 11% 300 90 30%
LLH-3i 4 520 200 39% 720 210 29%
FFS-1i 3 660 220 33% 420 150 36%
FFS-2i 7 260 96 37% --- --- ---
FFS-F 5 240 57 24% 220 50 23%
FF-1&2i 7 320 73 23% 750 130 18%
FF-3i 5 370 140 38% 780 190 24%
FFS-L 7 910 300 33% 300 160 53%
LLA-1i 4 560 54 10% 1030 19 2%
LLA-2i 4 1000 79 8% 970 82 8%
LLA-3i 5 1030 160 16% 1000 92 9%
LLA-4i 4 480 120 24% 1100 48 4%
LL8-1i 3 380 95 25% 300 110 35%
LL8-2i 2 400 120 30% 600 180 30%
LL8-3i 4 710 130 18% 760 180 24%
LL7-1i 4 450 32 7% 1040 36 3%
LL7-2i 5 750 210 28% 620 100 16%
LL9-3i 3 340 19 6% 720 13 2%
LL7-4i 2 96 9 9% 690 80 12%
LL4-1i 7 910 210 23% 610 55 9%
LL4-2i 3 740 63 9% 570 72 13%
Average 21% 19%

The variability of the measurements within the rock art elements (Table 6) is slightly larger than that in the surrounding varnish, averaging 28% (0–83%) for DMn and 27% (3–145%) for DFe. This is likely due to the lower areal densities of the varnish on the petroglyphs and the resulting larger relative measurement error. Some of the variability could also result from residual small pockets of varnish in the pores of the basalt, which had not been removed by the artist when the petroglyphs were pecked. Care was taken during the measurements to avoid such spots with residual varnish, but sometimes very small spots may not have been visible. The normalized data have the same CVs as the absolute densities, since the measurements on each petroglyph were always normalized by dividing them by the average of the measurements on the corresponding intact varnish. Their statistical uncertainty can be estimated by error propagation from the CVs of the petroglyph and intact measurements and the corresponding number of replicates (columns S.E. in Table 5); they average 20% (5–54%) for NMn and 18% (4–52%) for NFe.

As a qualitative footnote on extreme small-scale variability, we show an image of the varnish around a large olivine phenocryst on a near-vertical rock surface at Little Lake (S5 Fig). The olivine is weathering faster than the surrounding basalt, and thus forms a depression in the surface. In the area immediately around the olivine, no varnish is present, probably because the Fe(II) dissolving from the olivine creates reducing conditions and prevents the formation of Mn(IV). Around this whitish zone is a reddish halo, where Fe(III)-oxyhydroxides are present, gradating into the blackish, Mn-rich varnish that coats most of the rock. Just below the olivine is a metallic-black streak, indicative of a thick Mn-rich varnish, which may have formed from the Mn(II) dissolved during weathering of the olivine. This example may, on a macroscale, represent the dissolution-oxidation-reprecipitation mechanism responsible for the varnish formation from deposited dust.

Another cautionary example of small-scale variability, driven by microbial activity and potentially affecting varnish areal density was provided to us during the review process by R. Dorn, and is presented in the (S1 Appendix).

Absolute Mn and Fe accumulation rates

Measurements on surfaces of known age allow the determination of an effective or apparent element accumulation rate, RE (where E is Mn or Fe), calculated by dividing the areal density by the exposure age of the surface (Table 4). This rate is the average rate of element accumulation on the rock surface over the time it has been exposed, and as such averages over potential variations of the true, instantaneous accumulation rate with time. We use the term “apparent” to reflect this potential time-dependence and the possibility that in the long run, deposition is likely to compete with removal of varnish by erosion and weathering of either the varnish itself or of the underlying rock. If the instantaneous accumulation rate, rE, were constant over time, RE would equal rE, and a plot of Mn or Fe areal density against exposure time (age) should be a straight line going through the origin, since by definition there is no varnish on a newly exposed surface. Fig 3 clearly shows that such a linear model does not match our measurements, especially since any linear fit would intersect the y-axis far above the origin. The logarithmic model shown as a curve in Fig 3 provides a fairly good fit and can even go through the origin within its uncertainty, but is not well enough constrained at ages below 10 ka to be useful for dating purposes.

Fig 3. Mn areal density versus surface age.

Fig 3

Plot of the Mn areal density, DMn, versus surface age, A, of rock varnishes on lava flow surfaces of known age. The error bars represent the standard deviation of the measurements on each lava flow surface. The solid line represents the fit equation, the dotted lines the 95% confidence interval of the fit.

In this non-linear logarithmic model, the apparent Mn deposition rate, RMn, is a function of age, A. The instantaneous accumulation rate, rMn(A), is the first derivative of the logarithmic function DMn(A) in Fig 3, i.e., a hyperbola, as is RMn(A). Since ideally, RMn(A) is the function that would be required for varnish dating, we show a plot of observed RMn vs. A in a supplemental figure (S6 Fig). Clearly, RMn(A) is not constant and can be fitted with a hyperbola, but this fit is not statistically robust (a constant DMn(A) also yields a hyperbola) and poorly constrained below 10 ka, and is only shown to highlight its non-linear character.

While these results support the hypothesis that apparent varnish growth slows down with time and eventually comes to a standstill when growth is balanced by removal, they also imply that a growth rate obtained on older surfaces cannot be used to estimate the age of a much younger varnish deposit. In particular, given the steepness of the fits at young (<20 ka) ages, it is not legitimate to extrapolate the curve in S6 Fig to younger ages. Consequently, if Mn accumulation rates are to be used to estimate the age of Holocene varnished surfaces, e.g., petroglyphs, they would have to be calibrated using surfaces of comparable ages, such as Holocene lava flows.

On the other hand, the apparent Mn accumulation rates from the relatively youngest surfaces, i.e., flows CLS-04 (17 ka), CLS-05 (17 ka), and the flood-scoured surface at FF (16 ka), group quite close together (20.6, 14.6, and 20.9 μg cm-2 ka-1, respectively) and are of the same magnitude as the averages of rates from mid- to late Holocene petroglyph surfaces from the Hima (13.4 μg cm-2 ka-1) and Ha’il regions (17 μg cm-2 ka-1) in Saudi Arabia [17, 42]. They are also comparable to the estimate of 30 μg cm-2 ka-1, which we derived from the measurements of Reneau [34] on Holocene surfaces in the Mojave Desert [17].

Using a technique similar to ours, McNeil [39] had found accumulation rates of 56–76 μg cm-2 ka-1 by pXRF measurements on 40–41 year old inscriptions on sandstone in Utah, about 3–4 times as large as our values on the 16–17 ka old basalt flow surfaces. While regional and substrate differences may play a role, this finding agrees with our previous observations of fast initial varnish growth [17, 42, 80]. It thus becomes evident, that a linear growth model is not applicable over extended periods of time, highlighting the need to find and measure dated surfaces spanning ages from decades to many millennia.

To compare our Mn accumulation rates with the thickness growth rates given by Liu and Broecker [19], we derive estimates using an average Mn concentration of 4.9% in the varnish (based on the ICPMS measurements on the Aberdeen flow varnishes) and a specific gravity of the varnish of 2.4 g cm-3. This yields a range of 0.66 to 1.8 μm ka-1, close to our values of 1.2–1.3 μm ka-1 from Saudi Arabia and at the low end of the range of values (<1–40 μm ka-1) in the compilation of Liu and Broecker [19]. It must be noted, however, that their measurements were made on the thickest spots in microbasins, typically on near-horizontal surfaces, thus representing the thickest varnish from a given site. In contrast, our growth rates represent areal averages over meters to kilometers, measured on inclined surfaces, and thus would be expected to be considerably lower.

Rock varnish on petroglyph surfaces

One of the objectives of our study was to investigate to what extent pXRF measurements on the rock art could be used to assign relative or absolute dates to the rock art elements. Examples of petroglyphs showing typical rock art motifs from our sites are presented in Fig 4 and the complete set of analyzed elements is provided in S2 Fig. As outlined above, the study region has been occupied throughout the Holocene, and thus in principle ages between about 11,000 and zero years are possible. After some early attempts to establish rock art chronologies based on stylistic arguments [e.g., 24, 53], there have been several recent attempts to assign ages to the rock art in the Coso Range and at Little Lake, based on archaeometric, ethnographic, ecological, and archaeological evidence [e.g., 36, 51, 52, 55, 63]. While these studies differ in details, they agree on a number of basic points. Rock art production likely began around the Pleistocene/Holocene transition (ca. 11 ka BP), with abstract designs and some types of bighorn sheep being the earliest motifs [28, 36, 52]. At the other end of the time scale, rock art production appears to have continued well into the Numic period, possibly into the ethnographic period [36, 63]. Bighorn sheep representations were produced during the entire time, with the classic Coso sheep motif (Rogers’ Type III) appearing around 4000 BP and becoming most frequent between about 2000 and 700 BP [52].

Fig 4. Exemplary petroglyph images.

Fig 4

(a) Curvilinear abstract (LLA-1); (b) Atlatl (LLA-4); (c) Coso bighorn sheep and “shaman’s bag” (FF-1, -2, and -3); (d) Anthropomorph (LL7-4). For photographs of all studied petroglyphs see the (S2 Fig).

The atlatl motif may have appeared around 5000–7000 BP and mostly vanished around 1500 BP, after the atlatl was replaced by the bow and arrow around 2000 BP [52]. The patterned-body anthropomorphs (PBA) have been suggested by Rogers [52] to belong mostly in the Little Lake Period (ca. 7000–4000 BP), with another group of PBAs produced later (beginning around 3500 BP with atlatls and around 1050 BP with bows and arrows).

In the following discussion, we use the terminology given by Van Tilburg, Hull [51]. An “element” is a single form or design unit, often used synonymously with “petroglyph”. A “motif” is an element that is often used within a given corpus and is related to a particular style, e.g., an atlatl or a bighorn sheep. We also follow their practice of putting conventional terms for motifs, e.g., “shaman’s bag” or “bear paw”, in quotes on initial use, then without quotes.

Most of the petroglyphs in the study area have been produced by pecking; at Little Lake, a total of 4112 pecked rock art elements have been documented, in contrast to only 662 elements that had been created by scratching [51]. Because the scratched lines are narrower than the pXRF spot size, they have not been investigated in this study.

In the following, we examine whether our Mn density measurements provide a basis for deriving absolute or relative age estimates for the Owens/Rose Valley rock art. Conceptually, this approach is based on the fact that at the moment of its creation, the Mn density on the rock art is zero (assuming all varnish has been removed), and that over time the varnish will regrow to match the surrounding rock surface. Thus, NMn is a quantitative, chemical analog to the commonly used visual or spectrophotometric method of estimating rock art ages. Visual estimates were used by Whitley [108] as rough indications of the age of various Great Basin rock art motifs. At Little Lake, Bretney [37] used a spectrophotometric approach to achieve a relative chronological ordering of rock art elements at Atlatl Cliff. Similar visual and spectrophotometric techniques have been applied elsewhere by a number of authors [32, 33, 109]. Lytle, Lytle [38] applied a pXRF technique similar to ours to petroglyphs in the Coso Range; unfortunately this work has not been fully published and important details are not available.

For the purpose of deriving absolute ages, it is necessary to have calibration surfaces of known age, similar to the age of the rock art, on which DMn or NMn can be measured to determine the absolute or normalized Mn accumulation rate. In Saudi Arabia, we had benefitted from the presence of inscriptions or specific motifs, for which approximate ages were known. Unfortunately, there are no inscriptions in our study area, and the ranges of independently estimated ages of the rock art motifs span too long periods of time to be useful for calibration. We thus first examined the potential of using the Mn accumulation rates measured on the Late Pleistocene lava flows to derive age estimates for the rock art. Above, we have discussed our findings that the apparent accumulation rate decreases with age, and that the known ages of the basalt flow surfaces we investigated were all substantially greater than those expected for the rock art. We thus checked what ages would be obtained if we used the highest measured Mn accumulation rates in our study area (ca. 21 μg cm-2 ka-1, on CLS04 and the flood-scoured surface at FF) to derive age estimates. This approach yields age values as high as 29 ka, clearly far in excess of the possible ages of the rock art in the study area. This highlights again the need of making calibration measurements on surfaces with known ages that are comparable to those of the petroglyphs of unknown age.

Given our inability to derive absolute age estimates, we examined whether our data are able to provide relative ages that are consistent with the chronologies discussed above. In Fig 5A we have plotted the NMn values of the petroglyphs grouped by motifs, with the point marker styles indicating their locations. The yellow shading in the figure indicates the ages associated with these motifs in the chronologies discussed above. The “implied” age scale on the right was chosen by making the hypothetical assumption that full revarnishing occurs in 10 ka, corresponding to a linear revarnishing rate of 10% ka-1, in analogy to the revarnishing rates of 10–12% ka-1 we had found in Arabia. In the following we examine whether the observed NMn are consistent with the ages implied under this hypothesis.

Fig 5. Mn areal density on the rock art elements.

Fig 5

(a) NMn values of the petroglyphs grouped by motifs; (b) DMn values of the petroglyphs grouped by motifs. (“Symbols” includes “shaman’s bag” and “bear paw” motifs; PBA: pattern-bodied anthropomorph). The yellow bars represent the ages of the motifs based on the chronology of Rogers (2010). Symbols: "Medicine bag" (green), "Bear paw" (red); PBA: patterned-body anthropomorphs; Anthrop.: other anthropomorphs. The error bars represent the standard deviations of replicate measurements on each rock art element.

The highest NMn value is found for LLA-1, a curvilinear abstract element from Atlatl Cliff (Fig 4A). This is consistent with a potential earliest age of about 11 ka for Great Basin rock art and the findings of Van Tilburg and Bretney [76] who consider Atlatl Cliff the oldest rock art locus at LL. The NMn values of the atlatl elements at Atlatl Cliff and FF are consistent with the period of 6 to 1.5 ka BP for the production of this motif, with the exception of one element from Atlatl Cliff where visual inspection shows clear indications of repecking. All of the Type III (Classic Coso) bighorn sheep fall within their error bars in the implied age range for this motif (4000 to 700 BP). The low degree of varnishing of the Type I and II bighorn sheep at LL (9–17%) is consistent with the florescence of bighorn sheep petroglyph production around 1300 BP proposed by Van Slyke and White [110], and the overall range of NMn on bighorn sheep in the study region (8–35%, corresponding to implied ages of 800–3500 a) agrees with the focus on bighorn sheep hunting between 3500 and 800 BP suggested by Gilreath and Hildebrandt [55]. Van Tilburg and Bretney [76] associated the rock art production along the western side of the lake (Loci 4 and 8) and at Locus 7 with the latter part of the Newberry period (with a maximum between about 2200 BP to 1350 BP), and its continuation into the Haiwee and Marana periods, possibly extending until at least 1872 CE. Consistent with this finding, all but one of the NMn measured at these loci (red diamonds in Fig 5A) are between 0.4 and 26%. This also applies to the patterned-bodied anthropomorph (PBA) from locus 7 (LL7-2), which shows a low degree of revarnishing with no visual sign of repecking, and thus probably was created near the end of the time range given by Rogers [52] for this motif (ca. 7000–1000 BP). The “shaman’s bag” symbol from Fossil Falls (FF-3; green square in Fig 5A) fits well with the date range in the Rogers chronology, which places this motif in the Haiwee period (2000–700 BP). Overall, the range and distribution of implied ages from Fig 5A agrees with the VML dates given in Whitley and Dorn [36], who found an overall age range of 11,200 to <300 a, with the oldest age represented by an abstract motif and about half of their ages being 1500 a or less.

Consequently, our assumption of a revarnishing rate of about 10% ka-1 provides estimates of implied ages roughly consistent with chronologies based on other techniques. In contrast, assuming a rate of twice this value (i.e., 20% ka-1) would imply that almost all of the rock art elements fall into an age range of 400–2000 a, in clear disagreement with the published chronologies. Similarly, a value of 5% ka-1 would imply unrealistically old ages for the rock art in this study.

In Fig 5B, we apply an analogous approach to DMn, hypothetically assigning a Mn accumulation rate, RMn, of 56 μg cm-2 to obtain an implied “age” of 11 ka for LLA-1, the petroglyph with the highest NMn, and plotting the corresponding DMn for the different elements. The overall result is qualitatively similar, albeit with a somewhat less satisfactory match with the published chronologies. This is consistent with the fact that the NMn and DMn in our data set are highly correlated, with an r2 of 0.76, indicating relatively similar RMn of the various surfaces. Notably, the DMn on the abstract element LLA-1 (750 μg cm-2) is the same as the average of the intact Little Lake basalt surfaces, which proves that its high NMn is not an artefact of a low surrounding varnish density, and suggests a very old age for this petroglyph. Several other petroglyphs with visually similar degree of re-varnishing were observed at Atlatl Cliff, but for logistical reasons no measurements could be made on these surfaces. For images and further discussion on the intensely re-varnished elements at Atlatl Cliff, see Bretney [37].

While, in the absence of suitable calibration surfaces, our measurements yield only rough age estimates, they do allow some relevant conclusions. First, the grinding surfaces or metates all show very low NMn, implying that they have been used in relatively recent times. The NMn of two of them (LLH-3 and LL8-1) are clearly greater than zero (1.8±0.9% and 5.4±2.8%, mean and standard error, S.E.), suggesting that this is not a result of contemporary vandalism, but possibly related to continued use by indigenous people in the last few centuries. Second, visual inspection of some petroglyphs, particularly the atlatl LLA-4 and the Type III bighorn LL8-3, shows signs of re-pecking. These elements have NMn distinctly lower than the other atlatls and Type III bighorns, and their implied ages are well below the range expected for these motifs. Note that the metate LL8-1 (NMn = 5.4±2.8%) and the re-pecked bighorn LL8-3 (NMn = 7.9±2.4%) are close to one another at the same locus and have statistically indistinguishable NMn, suggesting that use of the grinding surface and re-pecking of the petroglyph may be connected. Third, in agreement with previous authors [28, 36, 52, 75], our measurements indicate that rock art creation in Rose Valley continued over an extended period of time, possibly starting around the Pleistocene/Holocene transition, but certainly over several millennia and extending into the last few centuries.

Summary and conclusion

We analyzed rock varnish from the Owens and Rose Valleys in the Mojave Desert of southern California by portable in-situ X-ray fluorescence on surfaces that range in age from the Late Pleistocene to the historic period. To complement these in-situ measurements, we collected varnish samples from the lava flows of the Big Pine volcanic field in Owens Valley near Aberdeen, California and analyzed them by fs-LA-ICPMS.

The rock varnishes had a composition characteristic of Type I varnish [7], with Mn, Fe, Si, and Al as the dominant elements, consistent with a mixture of Mn-Fe oxyhydroxides and clay minerals. The Mn/Fe ratios varied between about 0.4% and 2.5%, reflecting varnish growth predominantly under arid conditions. Higher Mn concentrations and Mn/Fe ratios tended to be present in older varnish, suggesting the presence of Mn-rich layers formed during wetter periods in the Pleistocene, whereas the petroglyphs had lower Mn/Fe ratios in agreement with varnish formation during the drier Holocene.

The varnish showed typical enrichments in a series of elements: Mn, Pb, Co, Ce, REY, Ba, Y, Zn, U, Th, V, and Fe. Among them, Pb, Ce, Cu, U, and Th were particularly strongly enriched, whereas the P and Ni enrichments were unusually low. In previous studies from other sites in the Mojave Desert and Death Valley, we have observed a similar pattern, suggesting a regional similarity of dust composition and enrichment processes. The REY enrichment pattern showed an unusually high Ce enrichment, a distinct negative Eu anomaly, and a slight negative Y anomaly, as well as an enrichment of the light REE and Y over the heavy REE. These enrichment patterns are consistent with a varnish formation process starting with the mobilization of Mn and trace elements from aeolian dust under mildly acidic conditions as they exist in atmospheric moisture (dew, rain), followed by increasing pH due to evaporation and mineral weathering reactions, which results in the abiotic or microbial oxidation of Mn, precipitation of Mn/Fe oxyhydroxides, and trace metal scavenging by the oxyhydroxides [12, 14, 16, 18, 95, 96, 111].

The areal densities of Mn in the rock varnish revealed an increase with age, from an average of 160±170 μg cm-2 in the petroglyphs to 750±280 μg cm-2 on the 140 ka Little Lake lava flow. The densities in the present study area were substantially higher than at our previous sites in Arabia, in spite of similar precipitation rates between the sites and higher dust fluxes in Arabia. This may be related to a greater weathering resistance of the basalt host rock in this region compared to the sandstone substrate in Arabia. Apparent Mn accumulation rates in the varnish were calculated from the measured areal densities and the known ages of lava flow surfaces. They showed a clear dependence on surface age, with the highest rates on the youngest surfaces. This indicates that the Mn accumulation is not linear, but decreases with age, as had been previously suggested by us [17] and others [38]. This implies that if Mn accumulation is to be used for age estimation of rock art, it is essential to have calibration surfaces with known ages in the range of the ages expected for the rock art.

The normalized Mn areal densities on the petroglyphs, i.e., the density on the petroglyph divided by that on adjacent intact varnish surfaces, range from near 0% to about 100%, and show a distinct relationship with the known or inferred age of the surfaces. The highest NMn were measured on curvilinear abstract elements, considered to be the oldest rock art at Little Lake based on archaeological considerations [51, 76], whereas the lowest NMn values were on grinding surfaces (metates) that appeared to have been used recently. Given that no rigorous absolute ages could be determined for the rock art due to lack of suitable calibration surfaces, we examined whether relative ages could be estimated based on the NMn and DMn measurements. For this purpose, we made the hypothetical assumption that the oldest rock art had an age of about 10 ka based on previous archaeological and archaeometric studies [36, 52, 63, 76, 110]. Arranging the studied rock art motifs in the order of increasing NMn and DMn yielded a sequence consistent with previously proposed chronologies. Further, assuming approximately linear growth over the millennial timescales involved gave “implied ages” in rough agreement with those based on previous archaeological and archaeometric studies. We conclude that rock art creation in the Rose Valley area extended over a long time period, beginning around the Pleistocene/Holocene transition and continuing into the historical period.

In conclusion, while at this time absolute rock art dating by pXRF measurements remains elusive because of the lack of suitable calibration surfaces and uncertainties about the rate of varnish accumulation, our study does provide evidence for a potential to provide relative ages and some rough estimates of absolute ages. In view of the scarcity of alternative dating methods, especially of techniques that do not require destructive sampling, even such rough estimates are very useful. This technique also allows documenting the authenticity of ancient rock art and can provide evidence for or against recent reworking of petroglyphs. Future research should focus on acquiring measurements across a wide range of varnish on dated surfaces, especially from the Holocene period.

Supporting information

S1 Table. Factors other than time known to influence varnish growth on petroglyphs.

(PDF)

S1 Fig. Overview map of the study area in Owens and Rose Valleys.

(Map services and data available from U.S. Geological Survey, National Geospatial Program.)

(PDF)

S2 Fig. Images of the petroglyphs measured in Rose valley.

(PDF)

S3 Fig. fs-LA-ICPMS spot measurement profiles on rock varnish samples.

The x-axis represents successive laser shots on the same spot. Each laser shot corresponds to a depth increment of about 50–100 nm.

(PDF)

S4 Fig. Mn surface density versus surface inclination.

a) without inclination correction, b) with correction using the "attenuated cosine" correction equation (see text).

(PDF)

S5 Fig. Image of the varnish around a large olivine phenocryst on a near-vertical rock surface at Little Lake.

(PDF)

S6 Fig. Mn apparent accumulation rate versus surface age.

Plot of the Mn apparent accumulation rate, RMn, versus surface age, A, of rock varnishes on lava flow surfaces of known age. The error bars represent the standard deviation of the measurements on each lava flow surface. The solid line represents the fit equation, the dotted lines the 95% confidence interval of the fit.

(PDF)

S1 Appendix. Influence of microcolonial fungi on rock varnish at the Conejo Mine site, California.

(PDF)

Acknowledgments

We thank the manager and owners of Little Lake Ranch for permission to make measurements on their property, and Tom Hnatiw for providing the photograph of the pattern-bodied anthropomorph at Little Lake. Ronald Dorn provided valuable comments on the manuscript during the review process, as well as the data and image that are included in S1 Appendix.

Data Availability

All data files are available from the Edmond database (https://edmond.mpdl.mpg.de/imeji/collection/JO7ClPMzy4AkczTr).

Funding Statement

MOA received support from the German Max Planck Society (https://www.mpg.de/en) and from King Saud University (https://ksu.edu.sa/en/). No specific grant numbers were assigned. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

References

  • 1.von Humboldt A, Bonpland A. Voyage aux régions équinoxiales du nouveau continent. Vol. II, Book VII, Chapter XX. 1819. p. 299–304. [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Engel CG, Sharp RP. Chemical data on desert varnish. Geological Society of America Bulletin. 1958;69(5):487–518. 10.1130/0016-7606(1958)69[487:cdodv]2.0.co;2 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Dorn RI. Rock varnish In: Nash DJ, McLaren SJ, editors. Geochemical Sediments and Landscapes. London: Blackwell; 2007. p. 246–97. [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Liu TZ, Broecker WS. Millennial-scale varnish microlamination dating of late Pleistocene geomorphic features in the drylands of western USA. Geomorphology. 2013;187:38–60. 10.1016/j.geomorph.2012.12.034 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Krinsley D, Ditto J, Langworthy K, Dorn RI, Thompson T. Varnish microlaminations: new insights from focused ion beam preparation. Physical Geography. 2013;34:159–73. 10.1080/02723646.2013.830926 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Lanza NL, Fischer WW, Wiens RC, Grotzinger J, Ollila AM, Cousin A, et al. High manganese concentrations in rocks at Gale crater, Mars. Geophys Res Lett. 2014;41:5755–63. 10.1002/2014gl060329 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Macholdt DS, Jochum KP, Pöhlker C, Arangio A, Förster JD, Stoll B, et al. Characterization and differentiation of rock varnish types from different environments by microanalytical techniques. Chemical Geology. 2017;459:91–118. 10.1016/j.chemgeo.2017.04.009 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Bishop JL, Murchie SL, Pieters CM, Zent AP. A model for formation of dust, soil, and rock coatings on Mars: Physical and chemical processes on the Martian surface. Journal of Geophysical Research: Planets. 2002;107 10.1029/2001JE001581 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Dorn RI, Krinsley DH, Langworthy KA, Ditto J, Thompson TJ. The influence of mineral detritus on rock varnish formation. Aeolian Research. 2013;10:61–76. 10.1016/j.aeolia.2013.04.005 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Potter RM, Rossman GR. Desert varnish—Importance of clay minerals. Science. 1977;196(4297):1446–8. 10.1126/science.196.4297.1446 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Potter RM, Rossman GR. The manganese- and iron-oxide mineralogy of desert varnish. Chemical Geology. 1979;25:79–94. [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Xu X, Li Y, Li Y, Lu A, Qiao R, Liu K, et al. Characteristics of desert varnish from nanometer to micrometer scale: A photo-oxidation model on its formation. Chemical Geology. 2019;522:55–70. 10.1016/j.chemgeo.2019.05.016 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Dorn RI, Krinsley D. Spatial, temporal and geographic considerations of the problem of rock varnish diagenesis. Geomorphology. 2011;130:91–9. 10.1016/j.geomorph.2011.02.002 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Goldsmith Y, Stein M, Enzel Y. From dust to varnish: Geochemical constraints on rock varnish formation in the Negev Desert, Israel. Geochim Cosmochim Acta. 2014;126:97–111. 10.1016/j.gca.2013.10.040 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Perry RS, Kolb VM, Lynne BY, Sephton MA, McLoughlin N, Engel MH, et al. How desert varnish forms? Proceedings of the SPIE—The International Society for Optical Engineering. 2005;5906:276–87. 10.1117/12.626547 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Thiagarajan N, Lee CTA. Trace-element evidence for the origin of desert varnish by direct aqueous atmospheric deposition. Earth and Planetary Science Letters. 2004;224(1–2):131–41. 10.1016/j.espl.2004.04.038 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Macholdt DS, Jochum KP, Al-Amri A, Andreae MO. Rock varnish on petroglyphs from the Hima region, southwestern Saudi Arabia: Chemical composition, growth rates, and tentative ages. The Holocene. 2019;29:1377–95. 10.1177/0959683619846979 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Otter LM, Macholdt DS, Jochum KP, Stoll B, Weis U, Weber B, et al. The relationship of rock varnish and adjacent mineral dust in arid and semi-arid environments. Chemical Geology. 2020:submitted. [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Liu TH, Broecker WS. How fast does rock varnish grow? Geology. 2000;28(2):183–6. [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Dorn RI. Necrogeomorphology and the life expectancy of desert bedrock landforms. Progress in Physical Geography. 2018;42(5):566–87. 10.1177/0309133318795839 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Bednarik RG, Khan M. Scientific studies of Saudi Arabian rock art. Rock Art Research. 2005;22:49–81. [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Liu T, Dorn RI. Understanding the spatial variability of environmental change in drylands with rock varnish microlaminations. Annals of the Association of American Geographers. 1996;86(2):187–212. [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Francis J, Loendorf LL. Ancient Visions—Petroglyphs and Pictographs of the Wind River and Bighorn Country, Wyoming and Montana. Salt Lake City, Utah: University of Utah Press; 2004. 200 p. [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Heizer RF, Baumhoff MA. Prehistoric Rock Art of Nevada and Eastern California. Berkeley and Los Angeles, California: University of California Press; 1962. [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Khan M. The Rock Art of Saudi Arabia Across Twelve Thousand Years. Riyadh, Saudi Arabia: Deputy Ministry of Antiquities & Museums; 2007. 347 p. [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Guagnin M, Shipton C, al-Rashid M, Moussa F, El-Dossary S, Sleimah MB, et al. An illustrated prehistory of the Jubbah oasis: Reconstructing Holocene occupation patterns in north-western Saudi Arabia from rock art and inscriptions. Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy. 2017;28(2):138–52. 10.1111/aae.12089 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Olsen SL. Stories in the rocks: exploring Saudi Arabian rock art: Carnegie Museum of Natural History; 2013. [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Whitley DS. Rock art dating and the peopling of the Americas. Journal of Archaeology. 2013;2013:15 p. 10.1155/2013/713159 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Tang H, Kumar G, Liu W, Xiao B, Yang H, Zhang J, et al. The 2014 microerosion dating project in China. Rock Art Research. 2017;34(1):40–54. [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Santos Junior V, Valle R, Lavalle H, de Oliveira DL, Bednarik RG. Direct dating of petroglyphs in Rio Grande do Norte, Brazil. Rock Art Research. 2018;35(1):85–97. [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Bednarik RG, editor. Palaeoart and materiality: The scientific study of rock art. Oxford: Archaeopress Publishing Ltd; 2016. [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Bednarik RG. Experimental colorimetric analysis of petroglyphs. Rock Art Research. 2009;26(1):55–64. [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Belzoni GB, editor. Narrative of the operations and recent discoveries within the pyramids, temples, tombs, and excavations: London, J. Murray; 1820. [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Reneau SL. Manganese accumulation in rock-varnish on a desert piedmont, Mojave Desert, California, and application to evaluating varnish development. Quaternary Research. 1993;40(3):309–17. 10.1006/qres.1993.1084 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Bednarik RG. Scientific investigations into Saudi Arabian rock art: A review. Mediterranean Archaeology and Archaeometry. 2017;17:43–59. 10.5281/zenodo.893192 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Whitley DS, Dorn RI. The Coso petroglyph chronology. Pacific Coast Archaeological Society Quarterly. 2007;43:135–57. [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Bretney JC. Atlatl Cliff In: Van Tilburg JA, Hull GE, Bretney JC, editors. Rock art at Little Lake: An ancient crossroads in the California desert. Los Angeles: Cotsen Institute of Archaeoloy Press; 2012. p. 93–117. [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Lytle F, Lytle M, Rogers A, Garfinkel A, Maddock C, Wight W, et al., editors. An experimental technique for measuring age of petroglyph production: results on Coso petroglyphs (available at: https://www.academia.edu/4539728/An_Experimental_Technique_for_Measuring_Age_of_Petroglyph_Production_Results_on_Coso_Petroglyphs). Great Basin Anthropological Conference; 2008; Portland, OR2008.
  • 39.McNeil J. Making Lemonade. Using Graffiti to Date Petroglyphs. Utah Rock Art. 2010:9–21. [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Bednarik RG. Developments in petroglyph dating. Rock Art Research. 2010;27(2):217–22. [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Sowers JM. Rock varnish chronometry: Methods and Applications In: Noller JS, Sowers JM, Lettis WR, editors. Quaternary Geochronology. Washington, DC: American Geophysical Union; 2013. p. 241–60. [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Macholdt DS, Al-Amri AM, Tuffaha HT, Jochum KP, Andreae MO. Growth of desert varnish on petroglyphs from Jubbah and Shuwaymis, Ha'il region, Saudi Arabia. The Holocene. 2018;28(9):1495–511. 10.1177/0959683618777075 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Guagnin M, Jennings RP, Clark-Balzan L, Groucutt HS, Parton A, Petraglia MD. Hunters and herders: Exploring the Neolithic transition in the rock art of Shuwaymis, Saudi Arabia. Archaeological Research in Asia. 2015;4:3–16. 10.1016/j.ara.2015.08.001 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Guagnin M, Jennings R, Eager H, Parton A, Stimpson C, Stepanek C, et al. Rock art imagery as a proxy for Holocene environmental change: A view from Shuwaymis, NW Saudi Arabia. Holocene. 2016;26(11):1822–34. 10.1177/0959683616645949 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Robin CJ, Gorea M. L'alphabet de Ḥimà (Arabie séoudite) In: Israel Finkelstein CJRTR, editor. Alphabets, Texts and Artefacts in the Ancient Near East, Studies Presented to Benjamin Sass. Paris Van Dieren; 2016. p. 312–77. [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Robin C. La faune de l’arabie heureuse: Les textes et les images rupestres de Ḥimà In: Jouanna J, Robin C, Zinc M, editors. Actes, Colloque «Vie et climat d'Hésiode à Montesquieu», Cahiers de la villa « Kérylos », 29, Beaulieu-sur-mer, Alpes maritimes. Paris Diffusion de Boccard; 2018. p. 319–84. [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Stein P. Palaeography of the Ancient South Arabian script. New evidence for an absolute chronology. Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy. 2013;24(2):186–95. 10.1111/aae.12024 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Cerling TE. Dating geomorphologic surfaces using cosmogenic 3He. Quaternary Research. 1990;33(2):148–56. 10.1016/0033-5894(90)90015-D [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Duffield WA, Bacon CR, Dalrymple GB. Late Cenozoic volcanism, geochronology, and structure of the Coso Range, Inyo County, California. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth. 1980;85:2381–404. 10.1029/JB085iB05p02381 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Vazquez JA, Woolford JM. Late Pleistocene ages for the most recent volcanism and glacial-pluvial deposits at Big Pine volcanic field, California, USA, from cosmogenic 36Cl dating. Geochemistry Geophysics Geosystems. 2015;16(9):2812–28. 10.1002/2015gc005889 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Van Tilburg J, Hull GE, Bretney JC. Rock art at Little Lake: An ancient crossroads in the California desert. Los Angeles: Cotsen Institute of Archaeoloy Press; 2012. 246 p. [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Rogers AK. A chronology of six rock art motifs in the Coso Range, Eastern California. American Indian Rock Art. 2010;36:23–36. [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Grant C, Baird JW, Pringle JK. Rock Drawings of the Coso Range, Inyo County, California Ridgecrest, California: Maturango Museum Publication No. 4. Maturango Museum Press; 1968. [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Whitley DS. Meaning & Metaphor in the Coso Petroglyphs: Understanding Great Basin Rock Art In: Younkin E, editor. Coso Rock Art: A New Perspective. Ridgecrest, California: Maturango Museum Press; 1998. p. 109–74. [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Gilreath AJ, Hildebrandt WR. Coso rock art within its archaeological context. Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology. 2008;28:1–22. [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Garfinkel AP. Paradigm shifts, rock art studies, and the “coso sheep cult” of eastern California. North American Archaeologist. 2006;27:203–44. [Google Scholar]
  • 57.Hildebrandt WR, McGuire KR. Large-game hunting in the American West: A Comment on Fisher’s (2015) reassessment of the ascendance of hunting debate. American Antiquity. 2016;81(4):764–5. 10.1017/S0002731600101088 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 58.Codding BF, Jones TL. Man the showoff? Or the ascendance of a just-so-story: A comment on recent applications of costly signaling theory in American archaeology. American Antiquity. 2007;72(2):349–57. 10.2307/40035818 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 59.McGuire KR, Hildebrandt WR. Re-thinking great basin foragers: Prestige hunting and costly signaling during the Middle-Archaic period. American Antiquity. 2005;70(4):695–712. 10.2307/40035870 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 60.Steward JH. Petroglyphs of California and Adjoining States. University of California Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology. 1929;24(2):47–238. [Google Scholar]
  • 61.Whitley DS. In Suspect Terrain: Dating Rock Engravings In: McDonald J, Veth P, editors. A Companion to Rock Art: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.; 2012. p. 605–24. [Google Scholar]
  • 62.Hildebrandt WR, McGuire KR. The ascendance of hunting during the California Middle Archaic: An evolutionary perspective. American Antiquity. 2002;67(2):231–56. 10.2307/2694565 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 63.Garfinkel AP, Young DA, Yohe RM. Bighorn hunting, resource depression, and rock art in the Coso Range, eastern California: a computer simulation model. Journal of Archaeological Science. 2010;37(1):42–51. 10.1016/j.jas.2009.08.010 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 64.Danskin WR. Evaluation of the Hydrologic System and Selected Water-Management Alternatives in the Owens Valley, California. U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2370. Denver, CO: U.S. Geological Survey; 1998. 175 p.
  • 65.Thompson RS, Whitlock C, Bartlein PJ, Harrison SP, Spaulding WG. Climatic Changes in the Western United States since 18,000 yr B.P In: Wright HE, Kutzbach JE, Webb T, Ruddiman WF, Street-Perrott FA, Bartlein PJ, editors. Global Climates since the Last Glacial Maximum. NED—New edition ed: University of Minnesota Press; 1993. p. 468–513. [Google Scholar]
  • 66.Miller D, M. Schmidt K, Mahan S, P. McGeehin J, Owen L, Barron J, et al. Holocene landscape response to seasonality of storms in the Mojave Desert. Quaternary International. 2010;215:45–61. 10.1016/j.quaint.2009.10.001 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 67.Liefert DT, Shuman BN. Pervasive desiccation of North American lakes during the Late Quaternary. Geophys Res Lett. 2020;47(3). 10.1029/2019GL086412 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 68.Sutton MQ. Chasing ghosts? Rethinking the prehistory of the Late Holocene Mojave Desert. Pacific Coast Archaeological Society Quarterly. 2017;53:1–78. [Google Scholar]
  • 69.Giambastiani MA, Bullard TF. Terminal Pleistocene—Early Holocene occupations on the eastern shoreline of China Lake, California. PCAS Quarterly. 2007;43:50–70. [Google Scholar]
  • 70.Moratto MJ, Garfinkel AP, Erlandson JM, Rogers AK, Rondeau MF, Rosenthal J, et al. Fluted and basally thinned concave-base points of obsidian in the Borden Collection from Inyo County, Alta California: Age and significance. California Archaeology. 2018;10(1):27–60. 10.1080/1947461x.2017.1391476 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 71.Rosenthal JS, Fitzgerald RT. The Paleo-Archaic Transition in Western California In: Bousman CB, Vierra BJ, editors. From the Pleistocene to the Holocene: Human Organization and Cultural Transformations in Prehistoric North America. College Station, TX: Texas A&M University Press; 2012. p. 67–103. [Google Scholar]
  • 72.Byers DA, Broughton JM. Holocene environmental change, artiodactyl abundances, and human hunting strategies in the Great Basin. American Antiquity. 2004;69(2):235–55. 10.2307/4128418 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 73.Yohe RM. The introduction of the bow and arrow and lithic resource use at Rose Spring (CA-INY-372). Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology. 1998;20(1):26–52. [Google Scholar]
  • 74.Schroth AB. The Pinto point controversy in the Western United States: Ph.D. Thesis, University of California, Riverside; 1994.
  • 75.Garfinkel AP. Archaeology and Rock Art in the Eastern Sierra and Great Basin Frontier. Maturango Museum Publication Number 22: Maturango Museum, Ridgecrest, California; 2007. 185 p.
  • 76.Van Tilburg JA, Bretney JC. Little Lake environment and archaeology In: Van Tilburg JA, Hull GE, Bretney JC, editors. Rock art at Little Lake: An ancient crossroads in the California desert. Los Angeles: Cotsen Institute of Archaeoloy Press; 2012. p. 11–33. [Google Scholar]
  • 77.Van Horn LF. Native American Consultations and Ethnographic Aassessment. The Paiutes and Shoshones of Owens Vallley, California. Denver, CO: United States Department of the Interior, National Park Service, 1995.
  • 78.Glazner AF. Little Lake Geology In: Van Tilburg J, Hull GE, Bretney JC, editors. Rock art at Little Lake: An ancient crossroads in the California desert. Los Angeles: Cotsen Institute of Archaeoloy Press; 2012. p. 3–9. [Google Scholar]
  • 79.Jochum KP, Nohl L, Herwig K, Lammel E, Stoll B, Hofmann AW. GeoReM: A new geochemical database for reference materials and isotopic standards. Geostandards and Geoanalytical Research. 2005;29(3):333–8. 10.1111/j.1751-908X.2005.tb00904.x [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 80.Macholdt DS, Herrmann S, Jochum KP, Kilcoyne ALD, Laubscher T, Pfisterer JHK, et al. Black manganese-rich crusts on a Gothic cathedral. Atmospheric Environment. 2017;171:205–20. 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2017.10.022 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 81.Cantrell CA. Review of methods for linear least-squares fitting of data and application to atmospheric chemistry problems. Atmos Chem Phys. 2008;8:5477–87. [Google Scholar]
  • 82.Broecker WS, Liu T. Rock varnish: Recorder of desert wetness? GSA Today. 2001;August:4–10. [Google Scholar]
  • 83.Rudnick RL, Gao S. 3.01—Composition of the Continental Crust In: Holland HD, Turekian KK, editors. Treatise on Geochemistry. Oxford: Pergamon; 2003. p. 1–64. [Google Scholar]
  • 84.Dorn RI. Rock coatings. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 1998. 427 p. [Google Scholar]
  • 85.Macholdt DS, Jochum KP, Pohlker C, Arangio A, Forster JD, Stoll B, et al. Characterization and differentiation of rock varnish types from different environments by microanalytical techniques. Chemical Geology. 2017;459:91–118. 10.1016/j.chemgeo.2017.04.009 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 86.Prudêncio MI, Sequeira Braga MA, Paquet H, Waerenborgh JC, Pereira LCJ, Gouveia MA. Clay mineral assemblages in weathered basalt profiles from central and southern Portugal: climatic significance. Catena. 2002;49(1):77–89. 10.1016/S0341-8162(02)00018-8 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 87.Eggleton RA, Foudoulis C, Varkevisser D. Weathering of basalt—changes in rock chemistry and mineralogy. Clays and Clay Minerals. 1987;35(3):161–9. 10.1346/ccmn.1987.0350301 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 88.Singer A. Weathering products of basalt in the Galilee. I. Rock-soil interface weathering. Israel Journal of Chemistry. 1970;8(3):459–68. 10.1002/ijch.197000052 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 89.Adams JAS, Osmond JK, Rogers JJW. The geochemistry of thorium and uranium. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth. 1959;3:298–348. 10.1016/0079-1946(59)90008-4 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 90.Larsen ES, Gottfried D. Uranium and thorium in selected suites of igneous rocks. American Journal of Science. 1960;258:151–69. [Google Scholar]
  • 91.Wollenberg HA, Flexser S, Smith AR. Mobility and depositional controls of radioelements in hydrothermal systems at the Long Valley and Valles calderas. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research. 1995;67(1):171–86. 10.1016/0377-0273(94)00103-N [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 92.Krinsley DH, Dorn RI, DiGregorio BE, Langworthy KA, Ditto J. Rock varnish in New York: An accelerated snapshot of accretionary processes. Geomorphology. 2012;138:339–51. 10.1016/j.geomorph.2011.09.022 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 93.Palme H, Lodders K, Jones A. Vol. 2: 2.2 Solar System Abundances of the Elements In: Davis AM, editor. Treatise on Geochemistry 2nd Edition 1 Amsterdam: Elsevier; 2014. p. 15–36. [Google Scholar]
  • 94.Goldsmith Y. Characterizing rock varnish developed on earliest Holocene Negev flint artifacts as a potential paleoenvironmental or paleoclimatic indicator. Jerusalem: Geological Survey of Israel, 2011. [Google Scholar]
  • 95.Wayne DM, Diaz TA, Fairhurst RJ, Orndorff RL, Pete DV. Direct major- and trace-element analyses of rock varnish by high resolution laser ablation inductively-coupled plasma mass spectrometry (LA-ICPMS). Applied Geochemistry. 2006;21(8):1410–31. 10.1016/j.apgeochem.2006.04.005 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 96.Bau M, Schmidt K, Koschinsky A, Hein J, Kuhn T, Usui A. Discriminating between different genetic types of marine ferro-manganese crusts and nodules based on rare earth elements and yttrium. Chemical Geology. 2014;381:1–9. 10.1016/j.chemgeo.2014.05.004 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 97.Stumm W, Morgan JJ. Aquatic Chemistry. New York: John Wiley and Sons; 1981. 780 p. [Google Scholar]
  • 98.Bergametti G, Forêt G. Dust Deposition In: Knippertz P, Stuut J-BW, editors. Mineral Dust: A Key Player in the Earth System. Dordrecht: Springer; 2014. p. 179–200. [Google Scholar]
  • 99.Jickells TD, An ZS, Andersen KK, Baker AR, Bergametti G, Brooks N, et al. Global iron connections between desert dust, ocean biogeochemistry, and climate. Science. 2005;308(5718):67–71. 10.1126/science.1105959 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 100.Sudarchikova N, Mikolajewicz U, Timmreck C, O 'Donnell D, Schurgers G, Sein D, et al. Modelling of mineral dust for interglacial and glacial climate conditions with a focus on Antarctica. Clim Past. 2015;11:765–79. 10.5194/cp-11-765-2015 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 101.Liu TZ. Blind testing of rock varnish microstratigraphy as a chronometric indicator: results on late Quaternary lava flows in the Mojave Desert, California. Geomorphology. 2003;53(3–4):209–34. [Google Scholar]
  • 102.Liu TZ, Broecker WS, Bell JW, Mandeville CW. Terminal pleistocene wet event recorded in rock varnish from Las Vegas Valley, southern Nevada. Palaeogeography Palaeoclimatology Palaeoecology. 2000;161:423–33. 10.1016/s0031-0182(00)00097-3 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 103.Reneau SL, Raymond R, Harrington CD. Elemental relationships in rock varnish stratigraphic layers, Cima volcanic field, California—Implications for varnish development and the interpretation of varnish chemistry. American Journal of Science. 1992;292(9):684–723. 10.2475/ajs.292.9.684 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 104.Bard JC. The development of a patination dating technique for Great Basin petroglyphs utilizing neutron activation and X-ray fluorescence analyses Berkeley, California: University of California, Berkeley; 1979. [Google Scholar]
  • 105.Lebedeva MP, Golovanov DL, Shishkov VA, Ivanov AL, Abrosimov KN. Microscopic and tomographic studies for interpreting the genesis of desert varnish and the vesicular horizon of desert soils in Mongolia and the USA. Boletin de la Sociedad Geologica Mexicana. 2019;71(1):21–42. 10.18268/BSGM2019v71n1a3 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 106.Dorn RI, Oberlander TM. Rock varnish. Progress in Physical Geography. 1982;6(3):317–67. 10.1177/030913338200600301 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 107.Liu T, Broecker WS, Stein M. Rock varnish evidence for a Younger Dryas wet period in the Dead Sea basin. Geophys Res Lett. 2013;40:2229–35. 10.1002/grl.50492 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 108.Whitley DS. By the hunter, for the gatherer: Art, social relations and subsistence change in the prehistoric Great Basin. World Archaeology. 1994;25(3):356–73. 10.1080/00438243.1994.9980251 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 109.Bednarik RG, Khan M. New rock art complex in Saudi Arabia. Rock Art Research. 2017;34(2):179–88. [Google Scholar]
  • 110.Van Slyke N, White HB. The desert bighorn sheep motif In: Van Tilburg JA, Hull GE, Bretney JC, editors. Rock art at Little Lake: An ancient crossroads in the California desert. Los Angeles: Cotsen Institute of Archaeoloy Press; 2012. p. 119–31. [Google Scholar]
  • 111.Krinsley DH, DiGregorio B, Dorn RI, Razink J, Fisher R. Mn-Fe-enhancing budding bacteria in century-old rock varnish, Erie Barge Canal, New York. Journal of Geology. 2017;125(3):317–36. 10.1086/691147 [DOI] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Andrea Zerboni

19 May 2020

PONE-D-20-09500

Geochemical studies on rock varnish and petroglyphs in the Owens and Rose Valleys, California

PLOS ONE

Dear Prof. Dr. Andreae,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

I agree with most of comments from the three reviewers and I would be happy if you will consider them while revising your manuscript.In recent years, you contributed to the development of rock varnish studies and this further study will represent a further step in this direction. A number of changes are required and I hope these will help to improve the clarity of the manuscript.

Besides the scientific comments, I would invite you to clarify about sampling strategy and to explain if you have the permissions from relevant US authorities (local? State? Federal?) to perform fieldwork, to collect samples of rock varnish from rock art galleries and to export them for lab analyses. This ethical statement is crucial and it is part of the editorial policy of PLoS ONE in the case manuscripts report on scientific investigation on cultural heritage.

We would appreciate receiving your revised manuscript by Jul 03 2020 11:59PM. When you are ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter.

To enhance the reproducibility of your results, we recommend that if applicable you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io, where a protocol can be assigned its own identifier (DOI) such that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). This letter should be uploaded as separate file and labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. This file should be uploaded as separate file and labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. This file should be uploaded as separate file and labeled 'Manuscript'.

Please note while forming your response, if your article is accepted, you may have the opportunity to make the peer review history publicly available. The record will include editor decision letters (with reviews) and your responses to reviewer comments. If eligible, we will contact you to opt in or out.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Andrea Zerboni, Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. In your Methods section, please provide additional information regarding the permits you obtained for the work. Please ensure you have included the full name of the authority that approved the field site access and, if no permits were required, a brief statement explaining why.

3. We note that the Supporting Information Figures in your submission contain [map/satellite] images which may be copyrighted. All PLOS content is published under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which means that the manuscript, images, and Supporting Information files will be freely available online, and any third party is permitted to access, download, copy, distribute, and use these materials in any way, even commercially, with proper attribution. For these reasons, we cannot publish previously copyrighted maps or satellite images created using proprietary data, such as Google software (Google Maps, Street View, and Earth). For more information, see our copyright guidelines: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/licenses-and-copyright.

We require you to either (1) present written permission from the copyright holder to publish these figures specifically under the CC BY 4.0 license, or (2) remove the figures from your submission:

1.    You may seek permission from the original copyright holder of the Supporting Information Figures to publish the content specifically under the CC BY 4.0 license.

We recommend that you contact the original copyright holder with the Content Permission Form (http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=7c09/content-permission-form.pdf) and the following text:

“I request permission for the open-access journal PLOS ONE to publish XXX under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CCAL) CC BY 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Please be aware that this license allows unrestricted use and distribution, even commercially, by third parties. Please reply and provide explicit written permission to publish XXX under a CC BY license and complete the attached form.”

Please upload the completed Content Permission Form or other proof of granted permissions as an "Other" file with your submission.

In the figure caption of the copyrighted figure, please include the following text: “Reprinted from [ref] under a CC BY license, with permission from [name of publisher], original copyright [original copyright year].”

2.    If you are unable to obtain permission from the original copyright holder to publish these figures under the CC BY 4.0 license or if the copyright holder’s requirements are incompatible with the CC BY 4.0 license, please either i) remove the figure or ii) supply a replacement figure that complies with the CC BY 4.0 license. Please check copyright information on all replacement figures and update the figure caption with source information. If applicable, please specify in the figure caption text when a figure is similar but not identical to the original image and is therefore for illustrative purposes only.

The following resources for replacing copyrighted map figures may be helpful:

USGS National Map Viewer (public domain): http://viewer.nationalmap.gov/viewer/

The Gateway to Astronaut Photography of Earth (public domain): http://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/sseop/clickmap/

Maps at the CIA (public domain): https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/index.html and https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/cia-maps-publications/index.html

NASA Earth Observatory (public domain): http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/

Landsat: http://landsat.visibleearth.nasa.gov/

USGS EROS (Earth Resources Observatory and Science (EROS) Center) (public domain): http://eros.usgs.gov/#

Natural Earth (public domain): http://www.naturalearthdata.com/

4. Please include captions for your Supporting Information files at the end of your manuscript, and update any in-text citations to match accordingly. Please see our Supporting Information guidelines for more information: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/supporting-information.

Additional Editor Comments (if provided):

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Partly

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: No

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: Review comments: this paper studies rock varnish and petroglyphs in Owens and Rose Valleys, California by XRF and fs-LA-ICP-MS. Detailed geochemical features are given and the authors explained the elemental enrichment patterns. Based on previous archaeological studies, the authors tried to date the relative age of these rock art. The results are reliable and worthy of publication. I think this manuscript can be accepted after moderate revision. The paper should be modified in the two following aspects.

1. This content of this paper is too long and redundant. The language should be brief and to the point, especially for the introduction and methods part. Here I just list some examples that you need to revise. For line 96-120, you do not need to spare so much space to demonstrate what you have done in your previous work. For the geological background part, you do not need write much detail about local vegetation species, climate fluctuation history, human source and occupation history in this region, etc. Most of these information is irrelevant to your work. And please ONLY cite references which are useful to support you point of view.

2. I am not satisfied with the existing sequence of your figures. You first show the raw data, then the correlation curves and last the photograph of rock art. I think it is much better to show the satellite image of sampling site and photos of rock varnish first, and your laboratory analysis should be put last.

Reviewer #2: Rates of varnish accretion are highly dependent on microenvironment. Sometimes, the word microenvironment is misinterpreted to mean aspect or the direction an outcrop faces. Examination of south-facing versus north-facing aspects in a particularly dry environment could very well reveal no significant differences in accretion rates. In more mesic settings, however, aspect can play a major role. So can other forcing factors on microclimate such as cold-air drainage, subtle rainshadow effects, major rainshadow effects, inversions, the thermal conductivity of the host rock material, proximity to soil moisture such as along a wash that would have collected runoff. This small list only begins to account for variability in moisture availability on rock surfaces.

The impact of microenvironment has been noted in the only known method to measure both varnish thickness and varnish age, varnish microlaminations. The authors are very familiar with the papers of Tanzhou Liu and co-authors. Certainly Dr. Liu is the world’s foremost authority on the issue.

David Whitley’s seminar paper on the use of VML in the dating of petroglyphs in the southwest (Whitley, 2013) involved blind testing of Dr. Tanzhuo Liu and myself (Ron Dorn). We analyzed each other’s ultra-thin cross-sections and Dr. Whitley compiled the findings with his world-renowned expertise for rock art. The result was synthesized and condensed down. What was not apparent in the paper but was apparent to all of us (Dave, Tanzhuo and myself) was the highly variable thicknesses of varnishes with similar ages – and this is due to the effect of microclimate.

My own research on VML and its use certainly validates Dr. Liu’s findings. I used VML to estimate the ages of debris flows in metropolitan Phoenix (Dorn, 2010) and noted this problem, and yet the VML method was still able to predict a historical debris flow event that occurred four years later (Dorn, 2016). In other research project, variable rates of varnishing was also noted to be highly dependent on microenvironment (Dorn, 2014).

However, there are other papers taking different approaches to understanding varnishing that indicate the same thing: that microenvironment greatly influences varnish rates of accretion. The lead accumulation research of Spilde and colleagues was made possible because the more mesic varnishes they analyzed had rates of accretion faster than those found in more zeric settings (Spilde et al., 2013). A critique of the cation-ratio dating method notes a similar problem (Krinsley et al., 1990).

In an earlier paper on the use of XRF and Mn abundance to estimate petroglyph ages from Saudi Arabia, I recommended the authors put together a table of complications that could interfere with the use of their technique in estimating age. I was very pleased with the table they produced (Macholdt et al., 2019), and I suggest that they reproduce this table here in this paper. Some of the factors that they analyze could be in play, and the readers would benefit from their detailed analysis.

I also offer for the author’s use and give my permission for its use in this paper, an illustration that relates to the research presented by Whitley (2013). One of the petroglyphs analyzed in his Table 1 is CM15 an “X-motif”. The original publication of the cation-ratio age of 12000±600 yrs cal BP was not too dissimilar to the VML age confirmed by both myself and Tanzhul Liu of ca. 11,100 yrs cal BP — keeping in mind that both are minimum ages for the underlying engraving. What this one result in the table does not convey involved the reality that this petroglyph would not have shown much Mn-accumulation with the XRF approach.

Please examine the illustration that I attach in high resolution. One of several VML ultra-thin sections is shown on the right. To obtain these ultra-thin section was a real pain! Almost all of the tiny samples from the petroglyph were covered with microcolonial fungi that dissolve Mn and Fe and mobilize varnish. This means that the total mass of varnish in no way reflects its minimum age. The process to find VML sequences that were not disturbed by MCF was laborious and painstaking.

Note: the left images are secondary electrons (upper left) that show the microcolonial fungi, and back-scattered electrons (lower left) that show atomic number. Please note the areas with voids in the varnish that reflect another issue entirely … that even if the MCF do not dissolve the varnish completely, the organic acids (my assumption) can still leach Mn-Fe in variable amounts that are not time dependent.

Why did I highlight this particular petroglyph and these images? This petroglyph was in a location where water would accumulate in a sandy wash. The water from a tributary drained a region with relatively impermeable sediment. This meant that runoff would drain to the main wash near this petroglyph. The water would sink into the main wash, and humidity levels are much higher. The net result was an abundance of MCF growing on rock surfaces, including the sampled petroglyph.

This is but one example of a microenvironment that can cause several issues complicating the method that the authors use: (1) relatively fast rate of varnishing because of the relatively moist setting in a dry region; (2) complete removal of varnish by microcolonial fungi; (3) leaching of Mn-Fe from the varnish. The first complication works in opposition to #2 and #3, and there is no way to know what factor influences Mn-accumulation more and how to extract time from the Mn accumulation

Why was this petroglyph sampled if it would be such a pain? It was because Dr. Whitley thought it was particularly critical and asked that the effort be made to find a suitable sample.

Thus, you can see that after years of making thin sections and examining cross-sections, I am incredibly skeptical that any method of dating petroglyphs involving the accumulation of manganese can yield reliable results.

WHY DID I RECOMMEND ACCEPTANCE WITH MINOR REVISIONS IF I AM SO SKEPTICAL? The reason is that the authors did an outstanding job of presenting their research. They are clearly excellent scientists and I think the research needs to be published. The writing is excellent. The presentation of methods and results is clear. The literature analyzed is appropriate and balanced.

WHY DID I RECOMMEND MINOR REVISIONS? I would urge the authors to consider adding a table similar to the one they presented in Macholdt et al. (2019). I am sure that their thinking on potential complications with their method have evolved since they presented their outstanding table. The table could be modified to deal with the realities of

working with petroglyphs and study sites in the southwestern Great Basin of the USA.

I do not feel like it is my place to suggest that publication be conditional on the presentation of this cautionary table. I respect the authors and would trust their judgement given the perspective I am providing as a reviewer with substantial experience in this field area.

I also do not feel like it is my place even urge the authors to include the illustration I provide as an example of a petroglyph that would be highly problematic to analyze with their technique. Again, the authors fully understand the different approaches ... their approach goes for a much larger surface area. The one that I have found to be most

reliable and robust tries to find the best sampling area.

I appreciate the opportunity to provide the authors this feedback.

Dorn, R.I., 2010. Debris flows from small catchments of the Ma Ha Tuak Range, Metropolitan Phoenix, Arizona. Geomorphology 120, 339-352.

Dorn, R.I., 2014. Chronology of rock falls and slides in a desert mountain range: Case study from the Sonoran Desert in south-central Arizona. Geomorphology 223, 81-89.

Dorn, R.I., 2016. Identification of debris-flow hazards in warm deserts through analyzing past occurrences: Case study in South Mountain, Sonoran Desert, USA. Geomorphology 273, 269-279.

Krinsley, D., Dorn, R.I., Anderson, S., 1990. Factors that may interfere with the dating of rock varnish. Physical Geography 11, 97-119.

Macholdt, D.S., Jochum, K.P., Al-Amri, A., Andreae, M.O., 2019. Rock varnish on petroglyphs from the Hima region, southwestern Saudi Arabia: Chemical composition, growth rates, and tentative ages. The Holocene 29, 1377-1396 DOI: 10.1177/0959683619846979.

Spilde, M.N., Melim, L.A., Northrup, D.E., Boston, P.J., 2013. Anthropogenic lead as a tracer for rock varnish growth: implications for rates of formation. Geology 41, 263-266.

Whitley, D.S., 2013. Rock art dating and the peopling of the Americas. Journal of Archaeology 2013 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/713159, 1-15.

Reviewer #3: Meinart et al., set out to test whether they can date petroglyphs in Owens and Rose valleys in the western US based on the re-varnishing rates of the petroglyphs. They produced a calibration curve based on pXRD and IC-PMS measurements of varnish formed on basalt of known ages. In the end, they don’t use the calibration curve from the western US to derive the re-varnishing rate but one from Saudi Arabia that they previously calculated.

Firstly, I applaud the work Prof. Meinart and his students have been doing in the field of rock varnish research. However, there are a few issues in this work that must be addressed before this paper can be published.

Major

1. It took me a while to understand what exactly was done because of the terms “areal density” and “deposition rate”, which are a bit confusing. I suggest using the term “Lateral varnish growth rate”. In addition, it’s not deposition rate (1/depth or 1/m) but lateral coverage rate (1/area or 1/m^2) – how fast does varnish cover the rocks’ surface.

2. The question you are asking is how fast does varnish spread laterally. The most straight forward way to do this is by light image processing (as was previously done by Bednarik). The choice to use a pXRF complicates the ability to calculate the parameter you are looking for, because [Mn] is a function of two things: Is there varnish and what is the [Mn] concentration of the varnish (this in itself a function of vertical sedimentation rate and the climatic condition that the varnish formed in). In addition, as varnish is a sedimentary accretion, it first grows in micro-basins and once these are full it starts spreading laterally, so lateral varnish coverage should also be a function of surface roughness. So you have three unknowns and only one measurement, which makes this an underdetermined problem.

To try and illustrate my problem, it’s like using the lateral spread of quaternary sediments on a landscape to say something about the age of the sediments.

3. Your dating is based on the existence of a correlation of [Mn]/m^2/age vs. age (Fig. 4, lines 588-618). I’m not sure why you are dividing the lateral accumulation by the age and then plotting against age, this by construction would give you an exponential fit every time, with an r^2 value greater than 0.5. For example, I made a simple plot in excel, where column A is age and B is random numbers between (0-20) divided by age. You can see that you can get very high correlations generated in a random way (I chose a high r^2 value case). Because the age and 1/age have a perfect correlation with each other, and you divide this by a random number, on average you should get an r^2 value of at least 0.5. If the original data is slightly correlated with age (say r^2 =0.25) the combined r^2 value would be 0.75. This still means that the data and age are only correlated to 0.25, not 0.75..

This is why Liu and Broecker didn’t get a correlation and when you divided by age you did get one.

I suggest, plotting the lateral deposition (ng/m^2) against age, this is the metric you are interested in. How much varnish formed vs. time. Not how much varnish formed per time vs. time.

4. sampling strategy. For this method to be valid, you had to sample the basalt in a random way (otherwise your results are biased, say if you chose varnished areas over none varnished areas). From the methods it is unclear if this is the case. An example would be to draw a 3m line on the surface and measure every 10cm. Was a random method used? This needs to be clarified.

5. Do the concentrations of the major elements from pXRF correlate with major elements from the ICP-MS? Could this be used to further the ability to understand some of the scatter in the data?

6. The petroglyph age assessment. After the Owens data was rejected, the authors turn to use the Saudi data. But this data is 3-4 times slower than what is found in Owens (Lines 405-407). In addition, the age calculation used is linear (10% per 1ka). But the data (Figure 4) shows an exponential growth rate. Given the detailed description of the data, I’m not sure how the Saudi data can be used without a much more elaborate discussion.

Minor

Line 69 and 94. This processes is well described in Liu and Dorn (1996) – I recommend citing it.

Line 218. Please add how deep does the pXRF penetrate (if at all)? How does it deal with rough surfaces?

Line 229. Why are the measurements on the basalt valid and the petroglyphs need to be corrected?

Line 411. You use a very different method than Broecker and Liu’s 2001 work. They use very carefully chosen varnishes that display distinct features and then measure the average [Mn] of the downward profile of the varnish and compare that to rainfall amount. You are measuring the surface varnish in an 8mm diameter. I’m not saying Broecker and Liu are right, just that I think the difference in what you are measuring makes this statement problematic.

Line 449-458. Would differences in the amount of Fe in the dust make a difference on the Mn/Fe in the varnish?

Line 499. Please move this sentence to the methods and elaborate on what exactly was done. How many spot measurements are used to characterize one surface?

Line 531-535. These lines must be moved to the methods.

Line 550: How did you chose the surfaces adjacent to the petroglyphs for the comparison analysis? Are they of the same roughness?

Line 553-554: When measuring on a small scale you are improving the precision, but your accuracy might be off, i.e. it’s unclear if these few centimeters are representative of the larger population.

Fig 3. What do the error bars represent?

Line 612. remove comma after surfaces

Line 702. Fig. 4. What are the vertical error bars? In light of the discussion of lines 676-701 and the assignment of 33% uncertainty for the Saudi Arabia data (line 110) they seem very small to me. How did you aggregate the error?

Liu, T., Dorn, R.I., 1996. Understanding the Spatial Variability of Environmental Change in Drylands with Rock Varnish Microlaminations. Ann. Assoc. Am. Geogr. 86, 187–212. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8306.1996.tb01750.x

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

Reviewer #3: No

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files to be viewed.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email us at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

Attachment

Submitted filename: review comments.docx

Attachment

Submitted filename: rand_over_age_vs_age.pdf

Decision Letter 1

Andrea Zerboni

16 Jun 2020

Geochemical studies on rock varnish and petroglyphs in the Owens and Rose Valleys, California

PONE-D-20-09500R1

Dear Dr. Andreae,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Andrea Zerboni, Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Acceptance letter

Andrea Zerboni

18 Jun 2020

PONE-D-20-09500R1

Geochemical studies on rock varnish and petroglyphs in the Owens and Rose Valleys, California

Dear Dr. Andreae:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Prof. Andrea Zerboni

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 Table. Factors other than time known to influence varnish growth on petroglyphs.

    (PDF)

    S1 Fig. Overview map of the study area in Owens and Rose Valleys.

    (Map services and data available from U.S. Geological Survey, National Geospatial Program.)

    (PDF)

    S2 Fig. Images of the petroglyphs measured in Rose valley.

    (PDF)

    S3 Fig. fs-LA-ICPMS spot measurement profiles on rock varnish samples.

    The x-axis represents successive laser shots on the same spot. Each laser shot corresponds to a depth increment of about 50–100 nm.

    (PDF)

    S4 Fig. Mn surface density versus surface inclination.

    a) without inclination correction, b) with correction using the "attenuated cosine" correction equation (see text).

    (PDF)

    S5 Fig. Image of the varnish around a large olivine phenocryst on a near-vertical rock surface at Little Lake.

    (PDF)

    S6 Fig. Mn apparent accumulation rate versus surface age.

    Plot of the Mn apparent accumulation rate, RMn, versus surface age, A, of rock varnishes on lava flow surfaces of known age. The error bars represent the standard deviation of the measurements on each lava flow surface. The solid line represents the fit equation, the dotted lines the 95% confidence interval of the fit.

    (PDF)

    S1 Appendix. Influence of microcolonial fungi on rock varnish at the Conejo Mine site, California.

    (PDF)

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: review comments.docx

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: rand_over_age_vs_age.pdf

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response_to_Reviewers.docx

    Data Availability Statement

    All data files are available from the Edmond database (https://edmond.mpdl.mpg.de/imeji/collection/JO7ClPMzy4AkczTr).


    Articles from PLoS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES