The Effect of Sediment Storage in Glaciated Catchments on Multimineral Detrital Geochronology: Deciphering Conflicting Zircon and Apatite U‐Pb Dates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Detrital geochronology and thermochronology are widely used to study erosion and the exhumation of rocks. In glaciated landscapes, these studies have shown exhumation to be highly heterogeneous; however, these studies have typically only applied apatite low‐temperature thermochronology, a mineral prone to mechanical and chemical breakdown, and a method with lower precision or data dispersion. As such, it is unclear if the detrital apatite signal represents derivation from the entire catchment. In this study, we present both zircon and apatite U‐Pb dates from a modern detrital sample of the Saco River, New Hampshire, USA. The river flows through a catchment that was highly modified during the last glacial maximum. The underlying geology is characterized by two contrasting groups from different eras; Palaeozoic metasediments and granites, and Mesozoic granitoids. Zircon U‐Pb dates are consistent with near‐uniform erosion of the catchment, encompassing both Proterozoic–Palaeozoic and Jurassic–Cretaceous grains consistent with the catchment's geology. However, detrital apatite U‐Pb dates are predominantly Palaeozoic. Detrital U‐Pb modeling shows that zircon grains are indeed derived from erosion of the entire catchment, while apatites likely originate from areas at high elevation. This stark contrast in ages likely indicates apatite's fragility. Dissolution resulting from acidic soils in the river's catchment is a likely cause, though mechanical breakdown during transport is also possible. As such, the detrital apatite signal appears to only record erosion from the modern fluvial system, while zircon represents a combination of uniform erosion during glaciation and the modern fluvial system. These findings imply the detrital apatite signal is prone to significant modification in areas of sediment storage and acidic soils with implications for sediment generation in other formerly glaciated landscapes worldwide.
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 | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".