Influence of the Laurentide Ice Sheet and relative sea‐level changes on sediment dynamics in the Estuary and Gulf of St. Lawrence since the last deglaciation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Physical properties, grain size, bulk mineralogy, elemental geochemistry and magnetic parameters of three sediment piston cores recovered in the Laurentian Channel from its head to its mouth were investigated to reconstruct changes in detrital sediment provenance and transport related to climate variability since the last deglaciation. The comparison of the detrital proxies indicates the succession of two sedimentary regimes in the Estuary and Gulf of St. Lawrence (EGSL) during the Holocene, which are associated with the melting history of the Laurentide Ice Sheet (LIS) and relative sea‐level changes. During the early Holocene (10–8.5 cal. kaBP), high sedimentation rates together with mineralogical, geochemical and magnetic signatures indicate that sedimentation in theEGSLwas mainly controlled by meltwater discharges from the local retreat of the southeastern margin of theLISon the Canadian Shield. At this time, sediment‐laden meltwater plumes caused the accumulation of fine‐grained sediments in the ice‐distal zones. Since the mid‐Holocene, postglacial movements of the continental crust, related to the withdrawal of theLIS(c. 6 cal. kaBP), have triggered significant variations in relative sea level (RSL) in theEGSL. The significant correlation between theRSLcurves and the mineralogical, geochemical, magnetic and grain‐size data suggest that theRSLwas the dominant force acting on the sedimentary dynamics of theEGSLduring the mid‐to‐late Holocene. Beyond 6 cal. kaBP, characteristic mineralogical, geochemical, magnetic signatures and diffuse spectral reflectance data suggest that the Canadian Maritime Provinces and western Newfoundland coast are the primary sources for detrital sediments in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, with the Canadian Shield acting as a secondary source. Conversely, in the lower St. Lawrence Estuary, detrital sediments are mainly supplied by the Canadian Shield province. Finally, our results suggest that the modern sedimentation regime in theEGSLwas established during the mid‐Holocene.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".