4.5 Article

Abrupt hydrographic changes in the equatorial Pacific and subtropical Atlantic from foraminiferal Mg/Ca indicate greenhouse origin for the thermal maximum at the Paleocene-Eocene Boundary

期刊

出版社

AMER GEOPHYSICAL UNION
DOI: 10.1029/2003GC000631

关键词

sea surface temperatures; Mg/Ca; ODP Site 865; DSDP Site 527; Paleocene-Eocene Boundary; planktonic; foraminifera

向作者/读者索取更多资源

[1] The Paleocene-Eocene Boundary (PEB) was marked by an extraordinary climatic event, hypothesized to originate from a large perturbation to the carbon cycle which fueled global warming, the rapid dissociation of oceanic methane hydrates. The pattern of surface warming interpreted from existing sea surface temperature records is not consistent with a greenhouse origin for this event, which would have fueled sea surface warming globally. Although oxygen isotope (delta(18)O)-based reconstructions indicate polar warming, results for the tropics and subtropics are ambiguous because of uncertainties associated with interpreting planktonic foraminiferal delta(18)O. To remedy this, we have constructed high-resolution temperature records based on Mg/Ca of multiple species of both surface and thermocline-dwelling planktonic foraminifera across the PEB in the equatorial Pacific and subtropical Atlantic. During the carbon isotope excursion (CIE), surface temperatures increased by 3.5degrees-4degreesC and thermocline temperatures warmed by 3 degreesC. Estimates of surface water and thermocline salinity based on paired Mg/Ca and delta(18)O data indicate a pattern of hydrographic changes in the equatorial and subtropical oceans that is different from previously proposed, with a more vigorous hydrologic cycle during warming. The pattern of warming and salinity changes are consistent with this being a greenhouse-induced global warming event, and the timing of hydrographic changes relative to the CIE supports the hypothesis that gradual warming of intermediate/ deep waters triggered methane hydrate dissociation.

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

4.5
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