4.7 Article

A 15,800-year record of atmospheric lead deposition on the Devon Island Ice Cap, Nunavut, Canada: Natural and anthropogenic enrichments, isotopic composition, and predominant sources

期刊

GLOBAL BIOGEOCHEMICAL CYCLES
卷 21, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

AMER GEOPHYSICAL UNION
DOI: 10.1029/2006GB002897

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Using appropriate clean methods for handling and preparation, 57 ice samples from the Devon Island Ice Cap, representing the period 134 to 15,800 years before present (BP), were analyzed for Pb, Sc, and Pb isotopes (Pb-206, Pb-207, Pb-208) using ICP-SMS. The greatest Pb concentrations were found in samples dating from the Younger Dryas. Despite the large range in Pb concentrations (from 2.2 to 181 pg g(-1)), the Pb concentrations were proportional to those of Sc until 3100 BP when the Pb/Sc ratio exceeded by a factor of 2 the natural background value (Pb/Sc = 6.3 +/- 1.8) for the first time. The uniform ratio of Pb to Sc until 3100 BP is consistent with the hypothesis that soil dust particles derived from physical and chemical weathering dominate the inputs of Pb to the atmosphere, with the magnitude of these sources climate-dependent. Isotopic analyses of Pb further support this paradigm, with the average ratio of Pb-206/Pb-207 (1.230) and Pb-208/Pb-206 (2.059) well within the range given for the Upper Continental Crust (UCC). The shift to higher Pb/Sc ratios and lower Pb-206/Pb-207 values starting at 3100 BP is consistent with historical records and other archival evidence of the onset of atmospheric Pb contamination caused by Pb mining and smelting in the Iberian Peninsula. Since that time, the Devon Island ice core records several other episodes of notable atmospheric Pb contamination, including those dating from Roman and medieval times, as well as the industrial period. The Pb, Sc, and Pb isotope data presented here represent the first chemical and isotopic record of the natural, background atmospheric inputs to the Canadian Arctic, against which modern values may be compared.

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