4.8 Article

Identification of Younger Dryas outburst flood path from Lake Agassiz to the Arctic Ocean

期刊

NATURE
卷 464, 期 7289, 页码 740-743

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/nature08954

关键词

-

资金

  1. Royal Society
  2. Quaternary Research Association
  3. British Society for Geomorphology
  4. Geological Survey of Canada
  5. Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The melting Laurentide Ice Sheet discharged thousands of cubic kilometres of freshwater each year into surrounding oceans, at times suppressing the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation and triggering abrupt climate change(1-4). Understanding the physical mechanisms leading to events such as the Younger Dryas cold interval requires identification of the paths and timing of the freshwater discharges. Although Broecker et al. hypothesized in 1989 that an outburst from glacial Lake Agassiz triggered the Younger Dryas(1), specific evidence has so far proved elusive, leading Broecker to conclude in 2006 that our inability to identify the path taken by the flood is disconcerting''(2). Here we identify the missing flood path-evident from gravels and a regional erosion surface-running through the Mackenzie River system in the Canadian Arctic Coastal Plain. Our modelling of the isostatically adjusted surface in the upstream Fort McMurray region, and a slight revision of the ice margin at this time, allows Lake Agassiz to spill into the Mackenzie drainage basin. From optically stimulated luminescence dating we have determined the approximate age of this Mackenzie River flood into the Arctic Ocean to be shortly after 13,000 years ago, near the start of the Younger Dryas. We attribute to this flood a boulder terrace near Fort McMurray with calibrated radiocarbon dates of over 11,500 years ago. A large flood into the Arctic Ocean at the start of the Younger Dryas leads us to reject the widespread view that Agassiz overflow at this time was solely eastward into the North Atlantic Ocean.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据