4.7 Article

Millennial to orbital-scale variations of drought intensity in the Eastern Mediterranean

期刊

QUATERNARY SCIENCE REVIEWS
卷 133, 期 -, 页码 77-95

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.quascirev.2015.12.016

关键词

Dansgaard-Oeschger variability; Mediterranean droughts; Milankovitch cycles; Lake Van; ICDP PALEOVAN

资金

  1. Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) [200021_124981, 200020_143330]
  2. PALEOVAN drilling campaign by the International Continental Scientific Drilling Program (ICDP)
  3. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) [LI 582/20-1]
  4. Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (Tubitak)
  5. US NSF [ANT-1341311, 1010869]
  6. Australian Research Council [DE150100107]
  7. Directorate For Geosciences
  8. Div Atmospheric & Geospace Sciences [1010869] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  9. Directorate For Geosciences
  10. Office of Polar Programs (OPP) [1341311] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Millennial to orbital-scale rainfall changes in the Mediterranean region and corresponding variations in vegetation patterns were the result of large-scale atmospheric reorganizations. In spite of recent efforts to reconstruct this variability using a range of proxy archives, the underlying physical mechanisms have remained elusive. Through the analysis of a new high-resolution sedimentary section from Lake Van (Turkey) along with climate modeling experiments, we identify massive droughts in the Eastern Mediterranean for the past four glacial cycles, which have a pervasive link with known intervals of enhanced North Atlantic glacial iceberg calving, weaker Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation and Dansgaard-Oeschger cold conditions. On orbital timescales, the topographic effect of large Northern Hemisphere ice sheets and periods with minimum insolation seasonality further exacerbated drought intensities by suppressing both summer and winter precipitation. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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