2013
DOI: 10.1016/j.palaeo.2012.12.025
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Atmospheric CO2 from the late Oligocene to early Miocene based on photosynthesis data and fossil leaf characteristics

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

7
44
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 46 publications
(51 citation statements)
references
References 72 publications
7
44
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This vegetation change and the climate deterioration has been predicted by Zachos et al (2001), who call it as Mi-1 glacial event at the Oligocene-Miocene transition. Grein et al (2013) noted, basing on study of stomatal density, cooling and high sesonality for Kleinsaubernitz and Bockwitz/Borna-Ost while temperatures increase towards the Oligocene/Miocene boundary (Witznitz), which corresponds to increase in number of months in the growing season (9, 7 vs 11). The fluctuation of sesonality is traceable also in our CLAMP estimates, when values of mean annual range of temperature (MART) decrease from 23°C (Kleinsaubernitz) to 20.8 °C (Witznitz) -Appendix 7.…”
Section: Discussion On Palaeoenvironmental Trendsmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…This vegetation change and the climate deterioration has been predicted by Zachos et al (2001), who call it as Mi-1 glacial event at the Oligocene-Miocene transition. Grein et al (2013) noted, basing on study of stomatal density, cooling and high sesonality for Kleinsaubernitz and Bockwitz/Borna-Ost while temperatures increase towards the Oligocene/Miocene boundary (Witznitz), which corresponds to increase in number of months in the growing season (9, 7 vs 11). The fluctuation of sesonality is traceable also in our CLAMP estimates, when values of mean annual range of temperature (MART) decrease from 23°C (Kleinsaubernitz) to 20.8 °C (Witznitz) -Appendix 7.…”
Section: Discussion On Palaeoenvironmental Trendsmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Close investigation of the environment–guard cell size–genome size relationships may allow further improvements in these predictions. Although older methods for predicting palaeo-CO 2 from stomata employed the abundance of stomata (either as stomatal index or, less frequently, as stomatal density) and may be biased by the effects of changes in stomatal size on gas exchange, more recent models incorporate stomatal size (Grein et al ., 2013; Franks et al ., 2014). The presence of strong environmental adaptation in stomatal size leads to optimism with regard to the more advanced uses of fossil stomata as proxies for past atmospheric CO 2 .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Both the size and abundance of stomata are important because together they determine the maximum capacity of leaves to absorb CO 2 . This intimate link to the uptake of CO 2 means that stomata are not only pivotal in terrestrial primary productivity, but can also be used (when fossilized) to estimate how atmospheric CO 2 has changed through time (Royer, 2001; Grein et al ., 2013). Recent work has shown that the size of stomata is important for whole-plant function because the geometry of stomata combined with constraints on how many stomata can be packed into an area of leaf means that leaves with large stomata tend to have lower maximum capacity to absorb CO 2 (Franks & Beerling, 2009; Brodribb et al ., 2013).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This has been the case for some Cenozoic pCO 2 reconstructions, where, for example, estimates for Late Eocene and Early and Late Oligocene pCO 2 , although broadly comparable quantitatively, do not always agree on pCO 2 trends through time (see Roth-Nebelsick et al, 2012;Grein et al, 2013;Steinthorsdottir et al, 2016a). Part of the issue here may be that the optimization model of Konrad et al (2008Konrad et al ( , 2017 requires calibrating pCO 2 using multiple contemporaneous (overlapping) species to derive a best estimate of pCO 2 , making it difficult to compare to singlespecies databases.…”
Section: Insights From Stomatal-pco 2 Model Cross-comparison Studiesmentioning
confidence: 97%