Search results

While geological models traditionally focus on the natural status of the underground, the shallow subsurface has been significantly altered by human activities over centuries. Particularly in urban contexts, ground has been raised, reworked, filled-in or disturbed in other ways. The rationale behind these alterations is as varied as the characteristics of the associated anthropogenic deposits: large-scale structures such as residential and industrial areas built on extensive sheets of filling materials or reclaimed lands are intertwined with smaller-scale features related, for example, to road and railway infrastructures, dikes or landfills. Their composition is equally diverse, ranging from displaced natural materials, such as crushed rocks, gravel, sand or clay, to artificial substances like recycled steel slags, concrete or rubble, or mixtures of these. Gaining knowledge on the presence and characteristics of such deposits is highly relevant, as their physical and chemical behaviour may differ significantly from those of natural deposits. The significance of anthropogenic deposits is increasingly recognized in urban geology. Resolving the geometry and properties of the urban shallow subsurface is essential for anticipating associated risks, for example dealing with pollution, ground stability or distorted water infiltration patterns. Anthropogenic deposits are, however, often scantily archived in permit documentation or represented on (geological) maps. Within the GSEU (Geological Service for Europe) project, the GSB is contributing to the task to develop a common, international vocabulary to describe all aspects of anthropogenic deposits, allowing standardised representation and characterisation in geological models. In parallel, VITO is developing shallow subsurface urban models for the Flemish government (VPO) within the VLAKO-framework, such as the published model of the Antwerp harbour and city. As the anthropogene inherently is part of these models, we are always aiming to better incorporate these deposits into the models. However, modelling the anthropogene presents unique challenges due to its high-resolution variability, scarcity of input data, and dynamic nature. It requires an approach that differs radically from traditional geological modelling techniques, in which depositional concepts related to the sedimentational or structural environment can be incorporated. In this presentation we will outline how we integrate various 1D, 2D and 3D sources to identify and characterize anthropogenic deposits and incorporate these insights in a 3D geological model of the anthropogene. This methodology is applied to the urban periphery of Brussels, where a new 3D geological model is being developed to support infrastructure projects and urban planning with special focus on the ring road (R0) of Brussels. Secondly, we will evaluate current lithological standards, vocabulary and stratigraphic approaches to characterize anthropogenic deposits. We will discuss their applicability in Flanders with practical examples from the periphery of Brussels. Ultimately, improving the representation of the anthropogene in geological models will significantly enhance their utility for urban planning, environmental management, and the sustainable utilization of the subsurface in urban areas.

Nearly every geological subdiscipline relies to some degree on regional geological knowledge. In the introductory section of most geological papers it is standard practice to provide regional geological background information. Stratigraphic terminology is often well defined while other disciplinary concepts rely, at least to some degree, on generally agreed definitions or hierarchical schemes, such as paleontological, structural or magmatic terminology. This, however, is much less the case for the regional geological building blocks. Their names are usually composed of a combination of a geographical locality and a geological term. A few examples from Belgium are Brabant Massif, Campine Basin, Stavelot-Venn Inlier, and Malmedy Graben. Most of these have in common that, although their importance is well recognised, their definitions are vague and sometimes even conflicting, in that their meaning may differ between contexts and authors. Even if their meaning has drifted or become less exact, as a result of their frequent historical use, they commonly remain in use today. This issue is not exclusive to Belgium, but seems to be an altogether historic and worldwide phenomenon. Recently within Europe there is a growing awareness of this issue, resulting in important but rather isolated efforts to better structure and define regional information (Hintersberger et al. 2017; Németh 2021; Le Bayon et al. 2022) which have been brought together through pan-European cooperation (GSEU – Horizon Europe 101075609). The central element that seems to encompass most geologic features, is the lithotectonic unit (a distinct unit based on its partly separate geological history; URI: http://inspire.ec.europa.eu/codelist/GeologicUnitTypeValue/lithotectonicUnit). Grabens, basins and inliers are examples of lithotectonic units. In order to define and describe these units more accurately, lithotectonic limits are introduced. These are planar features, such as faults and unconformities, that correspond to the geologic events that formed the lithotectonic unit (Piessens et al. 2024). All information is organised and linked in vocabularies (thesauri) that together not only adequately define each concept, but also determine the relations between them, placing them in space and geological time (Plašienka 1999). This outlines the core methodology, around which 2D and 3D multi-scale visualisations are built, annotations can be added, existing ontologies can be linked (such as the ICS Geological Time Scale Ontology; Cox and Richard, 2005) and newly developed extensions such as the Modified Wilson Cycle (Németh 2021). As such, the work at Belgian level is closely linked to the ongoing international developments. Making use of the ongoing developments at European level, Belgium was the first country to set up a lithotectonic working group that became operational in 2023. Its first goal is to provide a lithotectonic framework that describes a starting set of main geological units and limits in Belgium, according to emerging European standards (the work at European level is linked to the implementation of INSPIRE and 195 is in communication with the GeoSciML community), by the end of 2024. The working group meets approximately every 2 months, and organisationally resides under the National Commission for Stratigraphy in Belgium. The working group will soon be looking for additional experts (junior and senior) in its continuing effort to identify and define broad superstructures, detail the regional geology to the more local level, to tackle new types of lithotectonic elements, or better address parts of geological history. Potential candidates are encouraged to contact one of the authors or the NCS secretariat. Cox SJD, Richard SM (2005) A formal model for the geologic time scale and global stratotype section and point, compatible with geospatial information transfer standards. Geosphere 1:119. https://doi.org/10.1130/GES00022.1 Hintersberger E, Iglseder C, Schuster R, Huet B (2017) The new database “Tectonic Boundaries” at the Geological Survey of Austria. Jahrbuch der geologischen Bundesanstalt 157:195–207 Le Bayon B, Padel M, Baudin T, et al (2022) The geological-event reference system, a step towards geological data harmonization. BSGF - Earth Sci Bull 193:18. https://doi.org/10.1051/bsgf/2022017 Németh Z (2021) Lithotectonic units of the Western Carpathians: Suggestion of simple methodology for lithotectonic units defining, applicable for orogenic belts world-wide. Mineralia Slovaca 2:81–90 Piessens K, Walstra J, Willems A, Barros R (2024) Old concepts in a new semantic perspective: introducing a geotemporal approach to conceptual definitions in geology. Life Sciences Plašienka D (1999) Definition and correlation of tectonic units with a special reference to some Central Western Carpathian examples. Mineralia Slovaca 31:3–16

Geological units are the fundamental building blocks that help understand regional geological history and architecture. Classifying these correctly is therefore crucial, as is acknowledging how they relate to each other. This is where traditional definitions fall short, which is increasingly becoming evident with the ongoing effort of setting up advanced knowledge systems that rely on semantic grounding. In exploring the way forward for fundamental improvements, we use the foreland basin and related concepts to introduce a geotemporal conceptual approach of defining geological units with relative limits in time and space. This approach closes the semantic gap between definitions in thesauri and formal instantiation in ontologies.

The frontal sinuses are cavities inside the frontal bone located at the junction between the face and the cranial vault and close to the brain. Despite a long history of study, understanding of their origin and variation through evolution is limited. This work compares most hominin species’ holotypes and other key individuals with extant hominids. It provides a unique and valuable perspective of the variation in sinuses position, shape, and dimensions based on a simple and reproducible methodology. We also observed a covariation between the size and shape of the sinuses and the underlying frontal lobes in hominin species from at least the appearance of Homo erectus. Our results additionally undermine hypotheses stating that hominin frontal sinuses were directly affected by biomechanical constraints resulting from either chewing or adaptation to climate. Last, we demonstrate their substantial potential for discussions of the evolutionary relationships between hominin species. Variation in frontal sinus shape and dimensions has high potential for phylogenetic discussion when studying human evolution.

In recent years, research into the occurrence of bats at the Dutch North Sea has shown that there is regular seasonal migration over sea. However, so far, little is known about their migration ecology, the fatality risks at offshore wind turbines, and the number of individuals migrating over sea. Since the Dutch government wants to boost the further development of wind energy production in the southern North Sea, the Ministry of Economic Affairs commissioned to Rijkswaterstaat a Wind at Sea Ecological Programme (in Dutch: Wozep). This study, as part of the Wozep-project Behaviour and Collision Risk of Bats (Bats_2), investigates how telemetry can be applied to gain insight into migratory movements of bats over land and over sea and individual bat behaviour near and in offshore wind farms. To find out whether it is wise to continue and further develop telemetry research in the context of the Wozep programme, we first identified potential telemetry methods for small bats based on a desk study and selected the most promising method for the application of telemetry. Members of the team attended an international workshop on telemetry in Lund (Sweden) to gather practical technical knowledge, gain insight in data-management standards, and increase their international network. Several field tests were conducted to test the equipment and explore the possibilities of tracking. Finally, suitable locations for bat trapping in bat boxes and for the use of a Heligoland trap were identified. There are several options to track bats with radio telemetry during their migration at the coast and over sea. However, for long-term monitoring of multiple individuals, establishing a grid of stationary receivers is the only feasible option. Eight field tests were carried out to test the performance of the technical infrastructure. Each of the tests was unique and set up to test the signal strength/detection range for a certain type of antenna or a certain transmitter/receiver constellation. We showed that detections over at least 6 km are possible, and likely more than 10 km can be achieved. Precondition is that the receiving stations must be installed at high structures (lighthouses, buildings, masts) or hills, installing them a few meters off ground level will lead to detection ranges just over one km. Furthermore we explored the possibilities of calculating movement tracks with a setup of several receivers using different estimation methods. These experiments indicated that a relatively high accuracy (of c. 100 m) can be reached estimating the location when signals of different receiving stations are combined. It is likely that the accuracy can be improved by estimating the bearings of the received signals based on the signal strength of different antennas. Even further improvement seems possible by assessing the (likely) flight route with a state-space model. There are plenty of locations with bat boxes, especially in the province of Noord-Holland, where potentially hundreds of bats can be captured during migration stopovers, though it is not known how many of these are likely to be migrants. In addition, we identified four locations where actively migrating bats can potentially be captured with an Heligoland trap. In conclusion, we are confident that telemetry can be successfully applied to study migratory movements of bats over land and over sea and individual bat behaviour near and in offshore wind farms. Joining a wildlife tracking system like Motus (Canada) in order to enlarge the data collection, is highly recommended. Motus-members can get detections from both