First identification and characterization of Borrobol‐type tephra in the Greenland ice cores: new deposits and improved age estimates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Contiguous sampling of ice spanning key intervals of the deglaciation from the Greenland ice cores of NGRIP, GRIP and NEEM has revealed three new silicic cryptotephra deposits that are geochemically similar to the well‐known Borrobol Tephra (BT). The BT is complex and confounded by the younger closely timed and compositionally similar Penifiler Tephra (PT). Two of the deposits found in the ice are in Greenland Interstadial 1e (GI‐1e) and an older deposit is found in Greenland Stadial 2.1 (GS‐2.1). Until now, the BT was confined to GI‐1‐equivalent lacustrine sequences in the British Isles, Sweden and Germany, and our discovery in Greenland ice extends its distribution and geochemical composition. However, the two cryptotephras that fall within GI‐1e ice cannot be separated on the basis of geochemistry and are dated to 14358 ± 177 a b2k and 14252 ± 173 a b2k, just 106 ± 3 years apart. The older deposit is consistent with BT age estimates derived from Scottish sites, while the younger deposit overlaps with both BT and PT age estimates. We suggest that either the BT in Northern European terrestrial sequences represents an amalgamation of tephra from both of the GI‐1e events identified in the ice‐cores or that it relates to just one of the ice‐core events. A firm correlation cannot be established at present due to their strong geochemical similarities. The older tephra horizon, found within all three ice‐cores and dated to 17326 ± 319 a b2k, can be correlated to a known layer within marine sediment cores from the North Iceland Shelf (ca. 17179‐16754 cal a BP). Despite showing similarities to the BT, this deposit can be distinguished on the basis of lower CaO and TiO2 and is a valuable new tie‐point that could eventually be used in high‐resolution marine records to compare the climate signals from the ocean and atmosphere.
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".