MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A comparison of Holocene temperature reconstructions from vegetation proxies and brGDGTs in northern Fennoscandia

2025· article· en· W4416881375 on OpenAlexafffund
Liva Trasune, Lilia E. Orozco, J. Sakari Salonen, Gerard A. Otiniano, Trevor J. Porter, Jan Weckström, Michael A. Phillips, Frederik Schenk, Maija Heikkilä

Bibliographic record

VenueQuaternary Science Reviews · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeology and Paleoclimatology Research
Canadian institutionsSGS (Canada)University of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAcademy of FinlandSvenska Forskningsrådet FormasSkogs- och Jordbrukets Forskningsråd
KeywordsHoloceneMacrofossilPaleoclimatologyProxy (statistics)Vegetation (pathology)Climate changeHolocene climatic optimumStalagmite

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Studies on Holocene climate conditions commonly show discrepancies between different proxy-based reconstructions, calling for in-depth analysis of both the proxies and the derived climate reconstructions. Here, we conducted multi-proxy Holocene warm-season temperature reconstructions for a sedimentary record from Lake Tippakuru in northeastern Finland, using pollen, plant macrofossils, and the novel branched glycerol dialkyl glycerol tetraethers (brGDGTs) as climate proxies. In addition, we prepared a regional climate reconstruction by integrating pollen-based reconstructions from nearby sites. Mainly, we evaluated the potential of using brGDGTs as a climate proxy and compared the reconstructed climate shifts with those reconstructed from classical vegetation-based proxies (pollen and plant macrofossils). We see significant discrepancies between the three proxies, most notably during the early Holocene where plant macrofossils and brGDGTs indicate warm conditions while the pollen-based reconstructions are equivocal and strongly depend on the quantitative reconstruction method used. Additionally, the brGDGT records indicate an abrupt cooling at ca. 5.8 cal ka BP which is not seen in the classical proxies at the study site, but only in neighbouring localities. The results highlight the need for modern-day studies on seasonal variability and bacterial sources of brGDGTs to disentangle non-thermal biases and evaluate seasonal imprints in temperature reconstructions. In general, our results imply that not only the choice of climate proxies but also the methodological choices in the proxy-based quantitative reconstructions affect the climatic interpretation, especially during the early Holocene transitional period. We highlight the need for both multi-proxy and multi-method approaches in paleoclimate studies, as well as the need to expand the knowledge of brGDGT responses to climatic and other environmental variables. • Inconsistent early Holocene warm-season temperature conditions across proxies. • Mid-Holocene proxy-based temperature anomalies between +1 °C and +1.5 °C. • Proxies indicate long-term late Holocene cooling, but no short-term fluctuations.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.988

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQuaternary Science ReviewsSame topicGeology and Paleoclimatology ResearchFrench-language works237,207