MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2991347625 · doi:10.1017/s0033822200048517

Simulated Last Glacial Maximum Δ<sup>14</sup>C<sub>atm</sub> and the Deep Glacial Ocean Carbon Reservoir

2013· article· en· W2991347625 on OpenAlexaff
V. Mariotti, Didier Paillard, Didier M. Roche, Nathaëlle Bouttes, Laurent Bopp

Bibliographic record

VenueRadiocarbon · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeology and Paleoclimatology Research
Canadian institutionsInnovation Cluster (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLast Glacial MaximumDeglaciationGeologyGlacial periodInterglacialDeep seaOceanographyCarbon cycleDissolved organic carbonStratification (seeds)Radiocarbon datingPaleontologyEcosystem

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Δ 14 C atm has been estimated as 420 ± 80% (IntCal09) during the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM) compared to preindustrial times (0%), but mechanisms explaining this difference are not yet resolved. Δ 14 C atm is a function of both cosmogenic production in the high atmosphere and of carbon cycling and partitioning in the Earth system. 10 Be-based reconstructions show a contribution of the cosmogenic production term of only 200 ± 200% in the LGM. The remaining 220% have thus to be explained by changes in the carbon cycle. Recently, Bouttes et al. (2010, 2011) proposed to explain most of the difference in pCO 2atm and Δ 13 C between glacial and interglacial times as a result of brine-induced ocean stratification in the Southern Ocean. This mechanism involves the formation of very saline water masses that contribute to high carbon storage in the deep ocean. During glacial times, the sinking of brines is enhanced and more carbon is stored in the deep ocean, lowering pCO 2atm . Moreover, the sinking of brines induces increased stratification in the Southern Ocean, which keeps the deep ocean well isolated from the surface. Such an isolated ocean reservoir would be characterized by a low Δ 14 C signature. Evidence of such 14 C-depleted deep waters during the LGM has recently been found in the Southern Ocean (Skinner et al. 2010). The degassing of this carbon with low Δ 14 C would then reduce Δ 14 C atm throughout the deglaciation. We have further developed the CLIMBER-2 model to include a cosmogenic production of 14 C as well as an interactive atmospheric 14 C reservoir. We investigate the role of both the sinking of brine and cosmogenic production, alongside iron fertilization mechanisms, to explain changes in Δ 14 C atm during the last deglaciation. In our simulations, not only is the sinking of brine mechanism consistent with past Δ 14 C data, but it also explains most of the differences in pCO 2atm and Δ 14 C atm between the LGM and preindustrial times. Finally, this study represents the first time to our knowledge that a model experiment explains glacial-interglacial differences in pCO 2atm , Δ 13 C, and Δ 14 C together with a coherent LGM climate.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.079

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations8
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRadiocarbonSame topicGeology and Paleoclimatology ResearchFrench-language works237,207