4.7 Article

Tracing Papua New Guinea imprint on the central Equatorial Pacific Ocean using neodymium isotopic compositions and Rare Earth Element patterns

期刊

EARTH AND PLANETARY SCIENCE LETTERS
卷 186, 期 3-4, 页码 497-512

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/S0012-821X(01)00263-1

关键词

neodymium; isotopic composition; rare earths; sea water; geochemical indicators; Papua New Guinea

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The Nd isotopic composition (IC) and Rare Earth patterns of hydrodynamic structures of the Equatorial Pacific Ocean were characterized along 140 degreesW. The Nd IC of Antarctic Intermediate Water (AAIW) and of the lower layer of the Equatorial Undercurrent (EUC) at 140 degreesW (13 degreesC Water) are much more radiogenic at the equator than at their origin in the South Equatorial Current (12 degreesS), revealing that these water masses have been in contact with the highly radiogenic Papua New Guinea (PNS) slope. In both cases, only a small fraction (less than 9%) of the sediment deposited on the PNG slope is required to be exchanged or dissolved to explain these Nd TC variations, whereas the hydrographic properties of the same water masses remain unchanged. This confirms the usefulness of this tracer to identify pathways of water masses. These results emphasize the importance of jets in transporting lithogenic material into the subsurface layers of remote areas, where aeolian inputs are particularly weak and corroborate the previous results on Fe and Al maximum in this area [M.L. Wells, G.K. Vallis, E.A. Silver, Nature 398 (1999) 601-604]. The Nd IC of the upper layer of the EUC contrasts strongly to that of the subpycnocline layer, indicating that the equatorial upwelling only affects the surface waters and is not effective between 120 and 150 m. We calculate that the Nd imprint of the PNG input is likely to vanish from this surface layer as it traverses the basin, due to the replacement of upwelled waters by non-radiogenic ones, (C) 2001 Elsevier Science B.V. 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