4.5 Article

The PRISM4 (mid-Piacenzian) paleoenvironmental reconstruction

期刊

CLIMATE OF THE PAST
卷 12, 期 7, 页码 1519-1538

出版社

COPERNICUS GESELLSCHAFT MBH
DOI: 10.5194/cp-12-1519-2016

关键词

-

资金

  1. US Geological Survey Climate and Land Use Change Research and Development Program
  2. European Research Council under the European Union [278636]
  3. Natural Environment Research Council (NERC) [NE/I016287/1]
  4. Canadian Institute for Advanced Research's Earth System Evolution Program
  5. NASA Modeling, Analysis, and Prediction program (NASA grant) [NNX14AB99A]
  6. NASA High-End Computing (HEC) Program through the NASA Center for Climate Simulation (NCCS) at Goddard Space Flight Center
  7. EPSRC
  8. Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council [EP/M008363/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  9. Natural Environment Research Council [NE/I016287/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  10. EPSRC [EP/M008363/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  11. NERC [NE/I016287/1] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The mid-Piacenzian is known as a period of relative warmth when compared to the present day. A comprehensive understanding of conditions during the Piacenzian serves as both a conceptual model and a source for boundary conditions as well as means of verification of global climate model experiments. In this paper we present the PRISM4 reconstruction, a paleoenvironmental reconstruction of the mid-Piacenzian (similar to 3 Ma) containing data for paleogeography, land and sea ice, sea-surface temperature, vegetation, soils, and lakes. Our retrodicted paleogeography takes into account glacial isostatic adjustments and changes in dynamic topography. Soils and lakes, both significant as land surface features, are introduced to the PRISM reconstruction for the first time. Sea-surface temperature and vegetation reconstructions are unchanged but now have confidence assessments. The PRISM4 reconstruction is being used as boundary condition data for the Pliocene Model Intercomparison Project Phase 2 (PlioMIP2) experiments.

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