4.7 Article

Stable strontium isotopes (δ88/86Sr) in cold-water corals -: A new proxy for reconstruction of intermediate ocean water temperatures

期刊

EARTH AND PLANETARY SCIENCE LETTERS
卷 269, 期 3-4, 页码 569-574

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.epsl.2008.03.002

关键词

stable strontium isotopes; cold-water coral; Lophelia pertusa; temperature reconstruction; temperature proxy; intermediate waters; MC-ICP-MS

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Zooxanthellate scleractinian corals are known as archives for temporal variations of climate variables, such as sea surface temperature, salinity or productivity. The use of azooxanthellate cold-water corals as potential archives for intermediate water mass properties and climate variability was tested recently. However, the correlation of established proxies such as delta O-18 and delta C-13 with temperature is difficult since there is no direct temperature equation applicable as in shallow-water corals. Other temperature proxies such as Sr/Ca, Mg/Ca and U/Ca are influenced by the complex microstructure of the aragonite skeleton, the rate of calcification, and other vital effects observed for coral species. For the first time we show that the stable strontium isotope ratio delta Sr-88/86 incorporated in the skeletons of the cold-water coral species Lophelia pertusa portrays the ambient seawater temperature. The temperature sensitivity from live samples collected along the European continental margin covering a temperature range from 6 degrees to 10 degrees C is 0.026 +/- 0.003%omicron/degrees C (2 sigma standard error) which is a sensitivity similar to the tropical shallow-water coral record of Pavona clavata. This indicates a similar fractionation process of strontium for both, zooxanthellate and azooxanthellate corals. For coral aragonite the delta Sr-88/86 ratio may serve as a new paleo-temperature proxy and introduces new perspectives in paleoceanography with respect to intermediate water dynamics. (C) 2008 Elsevier 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