MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2476611825 · doi:10.1016/j.epsl.2016.06.038

Calcium isotope constraints on the marine carbon cycle and CaCO3 deposition during the late Silurian (Ludfordian) positive δ13C excursion

2016· article· en· W2476611825 on OpenAlexaff
Juraj Farkaš, Jiří Frýda, Chris Holmden

Bibliographic record

VenueEarth and Planetary Science Letters · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicPaleontology and Stratigraphy of Fossils
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersHORIZON EUROPE Marie Sklodowska-Curie ActionsGrantová Agentura České RepublikyEuropean Commission
KeywordsExcursionGeologyDeposition (geology)PaleontologyIsotopes of carbonCalciumCarbon cycleOceanographyGeochemistryIsotopeStructural basinMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigates calcium isotope variations (δ44/40Ca) in late Silurian marine carbonates deposited in the Prague Basin (Czech Republic), which records one of the largest positive carbon isotope excursion (CIE) of the entire Phanerozoic, the mid-Ludfordian CIE, which is associated with major climatic changes (abrupt cooling) and global sea-level fluctuations. Our results show that during the onset of the CIE, when δ13C increases rapidly from ∼0‰ to ∼8.5‰, δ44/40Ca remains constant at about 0.3±0.1‰ (relative to NIST 915a), while 87Sr/86Sr in well-preserved carbonates are consistent with a typical Ludfordian seawater composition (ranging from ∼0.70865 to ∼0.70875). Such decoupling between δ13C and δ44/40Ca trends during the onset of the CIE is consistent with the expected order-of-magnitude difference in the residence times of Ca (∼106yr) and C (∼105yr) in the open ocean, suggesting that the mid-Ludfordian CIE was caused by processes where the biogeochemical pathways of C and Ca in seawater were mechanistically decoupled. These processes may include: (i) near shore methanogenesis and photosynthesis, (ii) changes in oceanic circulation and stratification, and/or (iii) increased production and burial of organic C in the global ocean. The latter, however, is unlikely due to the lack of geological evidence for enhanced organic C burial, and also because of unrealistic parameterization of the ocean C cycle needed to generate the observed CIE over the relatively short time interval. In contrast, higher up in the section where δ13C shifts back to pre-excursion baseline values, there is a correlated shift to higher δ44/40Ca values. Such coupling of the records of Ca and C isotope changes in this part of the study section is inconsistent with the abovementioned differences in oceanic Ca and C residence times, indicating that the record of δ44/40Ca changes does not faithfully reflect the evolution of the oceanic Ca reservoir, but rather some local processes in the Prague Basin. These can be related to restricted elemental/sediment cycling involving mixing of isotopically distinct Ca sources and carbonate polymorphs (calcite vs. aragonite), and/or possible kinetic Ca isotope effects due to changes in the rate of marine carbonate formation. Evidence supporting the ‘kinetic’ effect in the studied mid-Ludfordian carbonates is indicated by correlated δ44/40Ca and Sr-concentration data (rs=−0.76, p<0.001, n=41) yielding a slope of −0.00097, which is indistinguishable from the ‘kinetic’ slope of abiotic calcite precipitation. Kinetic processes are integral to the model of rapid carbonate precipitation recently proposed by Kozłowski (2015), to explain the origin of the mid-Ludfordian CIE, involving intense methanogenesis/photosynthesis in near shore settings coupled with rapid CaCO3 precipitation (i.e., massive whitings events) and eustatically-controlled carbonate hypersaturation of seawater. More Ca isotope studies are needed to shed light on the question of whether kinetics or mineralogy controls the coupled variations in carbonate δ44/40Ca and δ13C records observed in this study and other large positive CIEs in geological record.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.129
Threshold uncertainty score0.747

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.180
Teacher spread0.174 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations53
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEarth and Planetary Science LettersSame topicPaleontology and Stratigraphy of FossilsFrench-language works237,207