The effect of diagenesis on carbon isotope values of fossil wood
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The carbon isotope (δ13C) value of modern and fossil wood is widely used as a proxy for environmental and climatic change. Many researchers who study stable carbon isotopes in modern and recently deceased trees chemically extract cellulose (δ13Ccell) rather than analyzing whole wood (δ13Cwood) due to concerns that molecular variability across tree rings could influence δ13Cwood values, and that diagenesis may preferentially degrade cellulose over lignin. However, the majority of deep-time researchers analyze δ13Cwood without correcting for possible diagenetic effects due to cellulose loss. We measured δ13Ccell, δ13Cwood, and cellulose content of 38 wood fossils that span ∼50 m.y. in age from early Eocene to late Miocene, using variability across such a large range of geologic ages and settings as a natural laboratory in diagenesis. For comparison with our measurements, we produced a literature compilation of 1210 paired δ13Ccell and δ13Cwood values made on fossil and modern trees. We report that, on average, the apparent enrichment factor (ε) between δ13Ccell and δ13Cwood (ε = δ13Ccell – δ13Cwood) is 1.4‰ ± 0.4‰ larger in deep-time samples than Holocene wood, and this can be explained by loss of cellulose during degradation, independent of atmospheric chemistry or climate conditions during growth. A strong linear correlation exists between δ13Cwood and δ13Ccell in both deep-time (r2 = 0.92) and Holocene (r2 = 0.87) samples, suggesting that either substrate can provide a reliable record of environmental conditions during growth. However, diagenetic effects must be corrected if δ13Cwood values are compared to extant trees or across long time scales, where cellulose content may vary.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".