the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
| 30 Jan 2026
Peat core research in Western Siberia: methods applied, regions studied, and future prospects
Abstract. Peatlands are natural archives that preserve information not only about their own development but also about past environmental conditions in surrounding landscapes. This study presents a comprehensive review of palaeoecological research based on peat cores from the Western Siberian Lowland (WSL). We compiled and georeferenced 654 peat cores and documented the application of 26 palaeoecological proxies, including chronological, physical, chemical, and biological indicators, resulting in the creation of the Western Siberian Peat Core Database (WSPC). The database synthesizes information from 156 publications spanning 1953–2025 and captures both the temporal and methodological evolution of peatland studies in the region, highlighting a clear shift from early single-proxy, low resolution investigations to modern multi-proxy high-resolution studies. Spatial analysis reveals high peat core density along major rivers and in the Great Vasyugan Mire, while remote northern continuous permafrost regions remain underrepresented. Temporal coverage indicates that most cores capture Holocene peatland dynamics, with the longest records in non-permafrost and isolated permafrost zones, extending into the Late Glacial (~15,600 cal. yr BP). The database underscores the dominant role of fundamental physical and chemical proxies, while highlighting the selective application of biological proxies and the limited use of specialized chemical analyses. In addition, the study identifies key research challenges in Western Siberia, including narrow seasonal windows for fieldwork, permafrost, limited transport infrastructure, permit requirements, and geopolitical barriers, which collectively constrain peatland sampling. The WSPC database represents the most extensive compilation of peat-core-based palaeoecological data for this region, offering critical guidance for targeted sampling and future research to address spatial, temporal, and proxy-specific gaps in the study of Western Siberian peatlands.
- Preprint
(10268 KB) - Metadata XML
-
Supplement
(9733 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: open (extended)
-
RC1: 'Comment on essd-2025-756', Anonymous Referee #1, 20 Apr 2026
reply
-
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Agnieszka Halaś, 22 Apr 2026
reply
Review ‘Peat core research in Western Siberia: methods applied, regions studied, and future prospects’, Agnieszka Halaś and Michał Słowiński
Halaś and Słowiński present a comprehensive review on peat cores from the Western Siberian Lowland, Russia, derived from 156 publications, spanning the years 1953 to 2025. The authors compiled 654 peat cores, providing an overview on 26 palaeoecological proxies. The authors also undertook the considerable task of geo-correcting peat core positions and standardizing the basal age of the peat cores if required. The authors provide with the Western Siberian Peat Core Database (WSPC) an interesting and timely overview of available data on peat cores spanning a wide range of literature sources, historical and recent, as well as in-depth analyses of the abundance, number and complexity of the different palaeoecological proxies and of the spatial and temporal evolution of peatland studies, based on the studied peat cores and proxies. They found a clear shift from early single-proxy, low-resolution investigations to modern multi-proxy, high-resolution studies.
Overall, the manuscript is well written and the figures, particularly the maps, are well produced.
We sincerely thank the reviewer for the positive evaluation of our manuscript. We are particularly grateful for the constructive comments regarding database structuring and formatting, which have significantly helped us improve the clarity, consistency, and overall presentation of the dataset. We appreciate the reviewer’s acknowledgment of the scope and effort involved in compiling and harmonizing the Western Siberian Peat Core Database (WSPC). Responses to the specific comments are provided below.
Comment
The discussion chapter on 'challenges and future directions in Western Siberian paleoenvironmental research' provides an interesting discussion. Given the insight of the authors into the topic, how do the peat cores sampled in the densely sampled Great Vasyugan Mire or densely sampled other regions are representative of the Western Siberian peatlands?
We thank the reviewer for this insightful comment, which addresses the important issue of the representativeness of individual peat cores for larger peatland areas. This is particularly relevant in the context of Western Siberia, where peatlands form a dominant landscape type, in contrast to many regions (e.g., much of Europe) where peatlands occur as more isolated systems. In such extensive peatland complexes, it is inherently challenging to infer the characteristics of the entire ecosystem from a single core.
The degree of representativeness strongly depends on the type of proxy considered. For example, pollen data generally reflect broader, regional-scale vegetation patterns, whereas proxies such as testate amoebae primarily capture local hydrological conditions. For locally sensitive proxies, interpretation requires comparison across multiple sites to distinguish between site-specific signals and broader regional trends.
In our study, we explicitly address spatial representativeness by introducing a simplified scoring approach, in which we assume a nominal radius of 30 km for each core. We acknowledge that this is a generalized and somewhat subjective assumption, and that representativeness varies depending on both proxy type and local environmental conditions. However, this approach provides a useful framework to illustrate the current spatial coverage of available data. Even under this relatively generous assumption, substantial gaps remain across the Western Siberian Lowland.
This is also evident in well-studied regions such as the Great Vasyugan Mire, where sampling is concentrated primarily along the margins and more accessible areas, while large central parts remain poorly investigated. Furthermore, we note that the spatial accuracy of older core locations is sometimes limited. In some cases, multiple cores collected along transects (as indicated by the source publication) are assigned identical coordinates in published datasets, which may influence spatial analyses. We address this limitation in Chapter 6 (Variable spatial precision of reported core locations).
Therefore, to address the reviewer’s question, the Great Vasyugan Mire is one of the best-studied peatland regions in Western Siberia, and this extensive body of research provides a strong understanding of this vast and internally heterogeneous complex. Importantly, it should not be treated as a single uniform peatland, but rather as a mosaic of interconnected peatland units that differ in structure, developmental pathways, and likely also in their timing of initiation. This complexity underpins its value as a reference area, as it captures a wide range of peatland types and histories within one region. At present, the Great Vasyugan Mire lies within the transition zone between the temperate broadleaf and mixed forest biome and the boreal forest (taiga), and it is located in a region without permafrost. It can therefore be regarded as a well-characterized example of peatlands developing under these modern bioclimatic conditions.
However, caution is required when extrapolating findings from this region to all Western Siberian peatlands. Both biome distributions and climatic regimes differed during the Holocene compared to today, and Western Siberian peatlands as a whole exhibit substantial spatial heterogeneity. Consequently, peat cores from the Great Vasyugan Mire, or from other densely sampled regions, should not be considered fully representative of the entire region in a uniform sense. Rather, they provide regionally informative records that reflect specific peatland types, environmental settings, and developmental trajectories at local to subregional scales. This highlights the importance of broader spatial coverage to adequately capture the environmental variability of Western Siberian peatlands, which we consider a key takeaway of our study.
We will revise Chapter 5 to more clearly emphasize these aspects of spatial representativeness and associated uncertainties.
Comment
There is the Skye et al. (2025) DB Peat Base: https://essd.copernicus.org/articles/17/7313/2025/ on global peatland depths that can be also integrated into the discussion
We thank the reviewer for this suggestion. The article referred to was published after the initial submission of our manuscript, and after May 2025, which was the cut-off date for literature included in this study; therefore, it was not included in the original draft. We are aware of this database; however, it is difficult to incorporate it into the discussion, as it was not included in our compiled dataset and falls outside the defined literature scope of this study.
Additionally, for Western Siberia, our dataset is largely comparable. The biggest difference is that we did not include data from the World Soil Information Service (WoSIS) (Batjes et al., 2019), as this database is based on soil profiles, whereas our study focuses only on peat profiles, and it was not possible to reliably distinguish complete peat profiles within this dataset. Therefore, including these data would introduce inconsistencies in the dataset structure and methodological scope.
Batjes, N. H., Ribeiro, E., and Van Oostrum, A.: Standardised soil profile data for the world (WoSIS SnapshotSeptember 2019), ISRIC – World Soil Information [data set], https://doi.org/10.17027/isric-wdcsoils.20190901, 2019.
Comment
The WSPC data base in Zenodo is well described in the Zenodo abstract, it is of high value that the WSPC provides the original core name related to the different literature sources and all linked literature sources are provided, locations and basal ages of the peat cores are error-corrected and standardized. However, while the manuscript would only require minor edits, I suggest a major revision related to some formats of the WSPC database and their metadata presentation – less related to the content.
We thank the reviewer for the very detailed suggestions to improve our database. We will implement them and upload the updated version of the WSPC database to Zenodo. Responses to the detailed comments are provided below.
Comment
i) Could the authors optimize their data base internal codes for the Core_ID: Instead in the form of WS_1, WS_2,..WS_10, WS_11, ..WS_100, WS_101 - the code can be changed into a data code format that is better for sorting: e,g., WS_001, WS_002,..WS_010, WS_011, .. WS_100, WS_101
The format of internal codes will be revised according to the reviewer’s suggestion.
Comment
ii) O_names – this relevant data column should directly follow the Core_ID column, the column name O_names could be sharpened to include Core in the column name
We agree with this comment. We will move the “O_names” column right after “Core_ID” and rename it to “Original_Core_Name”.
Comment
iii) references in the DB, the authors should separate the references that are currently set in one column and add additional data columns containing the references separatly followed by their URL link, DOI or other handle forms, (see comment below) - if available, (example PANGAEA data publication Li et al. (2025) https://doi.pangaea.de/10.1594/PANGAEA.971802?format=html#download ) to enable the peat cores to be directly linked in the DB to the literature source.
We are very grateful for this suggestion. We agree that it would improve access to the original publications. We will add each reference in a separate column with full bibliographic information, so that readers do not need to consult the reference list to find the core they are interested in.
Comment
iv) in addition, the authors also should change the format of the literature list from pdf to a file format in table format, e.g. csv with separate columns for the reference and the links and add it to the updated version of the Zenodo data publication. In case there is no DOI, the authors should add other URL/handle link if they exist, e.g. to conference papers
We will change the literature list from PDF to CSV format.
Comment
v) DATABASE description: the authors should change the description related to ‘x– data available’ (this reads misleading as the data values are not provided or in digital format) to a simpler expression, e.g. ‘x = yes’
We will revise the description related to palaeoecological proxy availability in the database description file and in the main text.
Comment
vii) the authors could also consider adding the georeferenced and digitized map that they prepared for their study displaying the digital spatial extent of peatland zones in the updated version of the Zenodo data publication as this also represents a useful tool.
We will add a shapefile of major peatland zones that we digitized for our study from Kremenetski et al. 2003.
Comment
viii) important - the authors should include a table of variables (similar to the table of variables in the DATABASE description) also in the manuscript text, preferably with further information / grouping on the chronological, physical, chemical, and biological content.
We will include the table of variables titled “The column headers within Western Siberian Peat Core database and their meaning”, similar to the table included in the database description, in the Method section of the main text.
Comment
Details manuscript
Supplement / appendix: suggestion supplement to appendix: the authors could merge the figures and tables from the supplement directly into the main manuscript file by adding this content inf the form of an appendix, thereby also merging the two reference lists together.
We agree with the reviewer. We will convert the supplementary materials into two appendices and include them in the main text. The first appendix will contain tables referenced in the Methods section ("Appendix A: Additional methodological information”), and the second will present a figure consisting of 26 maps showing the spatial distribution of palaeoecological proxies applied in Western Siberia (“Appendix B: Spatial distribution of palaeoecological proxies in the WSPC database").
For this purpose, we will rename all tables and the figure from Table S1, Table S2, etc. to Table A1, Table A2, etc. We will also adjust the current Figure S1 (Now Figure B1) so that the maps can be presented in a vertical orientation, consistent with the layout of the main article. In addition, we will merge all references into a single reference list.
Comment
Title: suggestion: the authors could sharpen the title of the manuscript - Instead of ‘methods applied’, a term containing ‘palaeoecological proxies’ in the title
We agree with the reviewer, and we propose to change the initial title to “Peat core research in Western Siberia: applications of palaeoecological proxies, regions studied, and future directions".
Comment
Abstract: The description of the content of the data base is very clearly set in the 2nd sentence of the abstract. However, there is a sentence on the content of the data base at the end of the abstract that is less clear and could be misleading: ‘The WSPC database represents the most extensive compilation of peat-core-based palaeoecological data for this region", - readers may misunderstand that the database contains the variable datasets. The authors could repeat the information content of the data in the WSPC, on the abundance of proxies and related literature sources. A very useful data content of the data base is the provision of the original core name, an information that could be also part of the abstract.
We agree with the reviewer that the last sentence of the abstract can be misleading for readers. We propose to revise it to clarify that the database contains metadata rather than raw datasets, and we will add information on the database content as suggested by the reviewer.
Proposed change:
"The WSPC database represents the most extensive compilation of metadata on peat cores in the region, integrating georeferenced core locations, original core identifiers, applied palaeoecological proxies, and associated literature, offering critical guidance for targeted sampling and future research to address spatial, temporal, and proxy-specific gaps in the study of Western Siberian peatlands.”Comment
Introduction: p.1 L40 one/two sentences introducing and explaining palaeoecological proxies are needed
We agree with the reviewer that an introduction to “palaeoecological proxies” is needed. In the Introduction section, at the point indicated by the reviewer, we will include few sentences explaining what palaeoecological proxies are and briefly classify them to introduce the classification used later in the manuscript (biological, physical, and chemical).
Comment
Chapter 4.1.2 title: ‘Evolution of proxy use in Western Siberian studies’ -> this title seems not so clear
We agree that the chapter title is too vague; we propose to change it to "Trends in palaeoecological proxy use in Western Siberia”.
Comment
Figures and numbering: In chapter 4.2. Fig 3 a,b,c do not exist, do they refer to Fig 4 a,b,c,d? Fig. 4b, 4c is Fig. 5? Fig 5 a,b is Fig 6a,b?
Thank you for pointing this out. There is indeed a clear mistake in the figure references in Chapter 4.2, where they incorrectly refer to Fig. 3 instead of Fig. 4, as noted by the reviewer. We will carefully check all figure references throughout the manuscript and correct any inconsistencies.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2025-756-AC1
-
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Agnieszka Halaś, 22 Apr 2026
reply
Data sets
Western Siberian Peat Core Database (WSPC) Agnieszka Halaś and Michał Słowiński https://zenodo.org/records/17866098
Viewed
| HTML | XML | Total | Supplement | BibTeX | EndNote | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 230 | 184 | 24 | 438 | 88 | 31 | 27 |
- HTML: 230
- PDF: 184
- XML: 24
- Total: 438
- Supplement: 88
- BibTeX: 31
- EndNote: 27
Viewed (geographical distribution)
| Country | # | Views | % |
|---|
| Total: | 0 |
| HTML: | 0 |
| PDF: | 0 |
| XML: | 0 |
- 1
Review ‘Peat core research in Western Siberia: methods applied, regions studied, and future prospects’, Agnieszka Halaś and Michał Słowiński
Halaś and Słowiński present a comprehensive review on peat cores from the Western Siberian Lowland, Russia, derived from 156 publications, spanning the years 1953 to 2025. The authors compiled 654 peat cores, providing an overview on 26 palaeoecological proxies. The authors also undertook the considerable task of geo-correcting peat core positions and standardizing the basal age of the peat cores if required. The authors provide with the Western Siberian Peat Core Database (WSPC) an interesting and timely overview of available data on peat cores spanning a wide range of literature sources, historical and recent, as well as in-depth analyses of the abundance, number and complexity of the different palaeoecological proxies and of the spatial and temporal evolution of peatland studies, based on the studied peat cores and proxies. They found a clear shift from early single-proxy, low-resolution investigations to modern multi-proxy, high-resolution studies.
Overall, the manuscript is well written and the figures, particularly the maps, are well produced.
The discussion chapter on 'challenges and future directions in Western Siberian paleoenvironmental research' provides an interesting discussion. Given the insight of the authors into the topic, how do the peat cores sampled in the densely sampled Great Vasyugan Mire or densely sampled other regions are representative of the Western Siberian peatlands?
There is the Skye et al. (2025) DB Peat Base: https://essd.copernicus.org/articles/17/7313/2025/ on global peatland depths that can be also integrated into the discussion
The WSPC data base in Zenodo is well described in the Zenodo abstract, it is of high value that the WSPC provides the original core name related to the different literature sources and all linked literature sources are provided, locations and basal ages of the peat cores are error-corrected and standardized. However, while the manuscript would only require minor edits, I suggest a major revision related to some formats of the WSPC database and their metadata presentation – less related to the content.
i) Could the authors optimize their data base internal codes for the Core_ID: Instead in the form of WS_1, WS_2,..WS_10, WS_11, ..WS_100, WS_101 - the code can be changed into a data code format that is better for sorting: e,g., WS_001, WS_002,..WS_010, WS_011, .. WS_100, WS_101
ii) O_names – this relevant data column should directly follow the Core_ID column, the column name O_names could be sharpened to include Core in the column name
iii) references in the DB, the authors should separate the references that are currently set in one column and add additional data columns containing the references separatly followed by their URL link, DOI or other handle forms, (see comment below) - if available, (example PANGAEA data publication Li et al. (2025) https://doi.pangaea.de/10.1594/PANGAEA.971802?format=html#download ) to enable the peat cores to be directly linked in the DB to the literature source.
iv) in addition, the authors also should change the format of the literature list from pdf to a file format in table format, e.g. csv with separate columns for the reference and the links and add it to the updated version of the Zenodo data publication. In case there is no DOI, the authors should add other URL/handle link if they exist, e.g. to conference papers
v) DATABASE description: the authors should change the description related to ‘x – data available’ (this reads misleading as the data values are not provided or in digital format) to a simpler expression, e.g. ‘x = yes’
vii) the authors could also consider adding the georeferenced and digitized map that they prepared for their study displaying the digital spatial extent of peatland zones in the updated version of the Zenodo data publication as this also represents a useful tool.
viii) important - the authors should include a table of variables (similar to the table of variables in the DATABASE description) also in the manuscript text, preferably with further information / grouping on the chronological, physical, chemical, and biological content.
Details manuscript
Supplement / appendix: suggestion supplement to appendix: the authors could merge the figures and tables from the supplement directly into the main manuscript file by adding this content inf the form of an appendix, thereby also merging the two reference lists together.
Title: suggestion: the authors could sharpen the title of the manuscript - Instead of ‘methods applied’, a term containing ‘palaeoecological proxies’ in the title
Abstract: The description of the content of the data base is very clearly set in the 2nd sentence of the abstract. However, there is a sentence on the content of the data base at the end of the abstract that is less clear and could be misleading: ‘The WSPC database represents the most extensive compilation of peat-core-based palaeoecological data for this region", - readers may misunderstand that the database contains the variable datasets. The authors could repeat the information content of the data in the WSPC, on the abundance of proxies and related literature sources. A very useful data content of the data base is the provision of the original core name, an information that could be also part of the abstract.
Introduction: p.1 L40 one/two sentences introducing and explaining palaeoecological proxies are needed
Chapter 4.1.2 title: ‘Evolution of proxy use in Western Siberian studies’ -> this title seems not so clear
Figures and numbering: In chapter 4.2. Fig 3 a,b,c do not exist, do they refer to Fig 4 a,b,c,d? Fig. 4b, 4c is Fig. 5? Fig 5 a,b is Fig 6a,b?