MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4392758949 · doi:10.5194/egusphere-egu24-13494

First evidence and dating of Glacial Lake Yukon using paleomagnetic dating and cosmogenic nuclides

2024· preprint· en· W4392758949 on OpenAlexaffabout
Raphael Gromig, Brent Ward, Jeff Bond, René W. Barendregt, Tibor J. Dunai

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeology and Paleoclimatology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of LethbridgeSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCosmogenic nuclidePaleomagnetismGeologyGlacial periodSurface exposure datingRadiometric datingAbsolute datingPaleontologyRadiocarbon datingEarth scienceArchaeologyMoraineGeographyCosmic rayNuclear physicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Yukon Territory has been repeatedly affected by the northern Cordilleran Ice Sheet during the last 2.6 million years, which has significantly affected the landscape. Yukon is unique in Canada in that it has three broad mappable chrono-geomorphic regions representing regionally coherent advances of the northern Cordilleran Ice Sheet and, unlike all other parts of Canada, a large unglaciated area. The oldest surface is a composite of several glaciations that are so old individual limits cannot be resolved. The oldest of these glaciations has occurred 2.6 million years ago and is believed to be responsible for shifting the route of the Yukon River.Geological evidence suggests that the Yukon River, which now flows in northern/western direction into the Bering Sea, was initially flowing south into southwest Yukon and west into the Tanana River basin. Reversal of the Yukon River is believed to be a consequence of the onset of Northern Cordillera glaciations at the beginning of the Quaternary period. Glaciation of the St. Elias Mountains blocked the passage of the paleo-Yukon River and formed a glacially dammed lake. This lake covered an extensive area in central Yukon and then catastrophically drained after overtopping a threshold north of Dawson City. This formed the present route of the Yukon River flowing to the Bering Sea. The presence and timing of the formation of Glacial Lake Yukon has been subject of debate for several decades. However, this hypothesis was widely accepted despite the absence of physical evidence for the glacial lake.The first physical evidence of Glacial Lake Yukon was discovered in 2022 when a succession of lake sediments was exposed in a placer mining operation in the Bonanza Creek Valley (tributary of the Klondike River) at the Lovett Hill site. The sampled section comprises more than 8 m of clays, silts and sands. This section is underlain by the Pliocene ‘White Channel gravel’, and the Quaternary Klondike outwash, with the latter representing first evidence of Quaternary glaciation in the Yukon. The lake sediment succession is overtopped by an erosive gravel unit, which likely marks the drainage of the lake.In order to refine the regional glacial stratigraphy, we utilize a multidisciplinary approach to provide chronological control on the formation of Glacial Lake Yukon. This allows us to test the hypothesis that the reversal of the Yukon River and the formation of Glacial Lake Yukon are associated with the first large Cordilleran Ice Sheet. We combine paleomagnetic measurements and cosmogenic 26Al–10Be isochron dating. In addition, we test the utility of cosmogenic krypton on zircon grains in this setting. Initial paleomagnetic data indicate the lake sequence is reversely magnetized; this combined with a previous burial age of ca. 2.6 Ma for the initiation of Klondike outwash deposition, suggests deposition of the lake sediments during the Matuyama Chron (0.78 to 2.6 Ma). Cosmogenic nuclide data will further refine this age.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.080
Threshold uncertainty score0.158

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.070
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeology and Paleoclimatology Research→French-language works237,207→