2015
DOI: 10.5194/bg-12-3043-2015
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Pleistocene sediment offloading and the global sulfur cycle

Abstract: Abstract. Quaternary sea level fluctuations have greatly affected the sediment budgets of the continental shelves. Previous studies suggested that this caused a considerable increase in the net loss of shelf sediments. Since sediment accumulation and erosion are closely tied to the formation and re-oxidation of pyrite, we use a high-resolution record of sulfur isotope ratios ( 34 S / 32 S) of marine sulfate to evaluate the implications of the so-called "shelf sediment offloading" on the global sulfur cycle. Mo… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
17
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 29 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 103 publications
(158 reference statements)
0
17
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For our "Low O 2 " scenario, the posterior probability distribution for the global rate of organic carbon burial (J bur oc ) suggests a mid-Proterozoic rate of ~0.5−2.5 Tmol C year −1 , with a median of 1.10 +0.93 −0.64 Tmol C year −1 (1σ) and a 95% credible interval of 0.20−3.41 Tmol C year −1 (Figure 2a blue). These fluxes are well below estimates of marine organic carbon burial for the modern (10.5−13.3 Tmol C year −1 ) (Berner, 1982;Burdige, 2005 (Figure 2b blue), within a factor of 2 of the "near-modern" (Quaternary average) ocean value of 1.2−1.6 Tmol S year −1 (Berner & Berner, 2012;Markovic, Paytan, & Wortmann, 2015). Taken together, we estimate a combined rate of O 2 production of about 3.51 Tmol O 2 year −1 , roughly 25% of the present value (J O2 in Figure 2c).…”
Section: Limited O 2 Production In Proterozoic Oceansmentioning
confidence: 55%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…For our "Low O 2 " scenario, the posterior probability distribution for the global rate of organic carbon burial (J bur oc ) suggests a mid-Proterozoic rate of ~0.5−2.5 Tmol C year −1 , with a median of 1.10 +0.93 −0.64 Tmol C year −1 (1σ) and a 95% credible interval of 0.20−3.41 Tmol C year −1 (Figure 2a blue). These fluxes are well below estimates of marine organic carbon burial for the modern (10.5−13.3 Tmol C year −1 ) (Berner, 1982;Burdige, 2005 (Figure 2b blue), within a factor of 2 of the "near-modern" (Quaternary average) ocean value of 1.2−1.6 Tmol S year −1 (Berner & Berner, 2012;Markovic, Paytan, & Wortmann, 2015). Taken together, we estimate a combined rate of O 2 production of about 3.51 Tmol O 2 year −1 , roughly 25% of the present value (J O2 in Figure 2c).…”
Section: Limited O 2 Production In Proterozoic Oceansmentioning
confidence: 55%
“…TA B L E 1 Parameter ranges used in our Monte Carlo analysis with a 95% credible interval of 0.81−1.63 Tmol S year −1(Figure 2bblue), within a factor of 2 of the "near-modern" (Quaternary average) ocean value of 1.2−1.6 Tmol S year −1(Berner & Berner, 2012;Markovic, Paytan, & Wortmann, 2015). For our "Low O 2 " scenario, the posterior probability distribution for the global rate of organic carbon burial (J bur oc ) suggests a mid-Proterozoic rate of ~0.5−2.5 Tmol C year −1 , with a median of 1.10 +0.93 −0.64 Tmol C year −1 (1σ) and a 95% credible interval of 0.20−3.41 Tmol C year −1(Figure 2ablue).…”
mentioning
confidence: 96%
“…Multiple lines of evidence based on geochemistry, sedimentology and modelling suggest that the rate of silicate weathering, which adds alkalinity to the ocean, accelerated around 1.5 Myr ago as the North American Precambrian basement shed regolith and experienced more intense subglacial erosion 39 . At the same time the first large amplitude sea level cycles accelerated erosion of shelf sediments 40 . Estimates of alkalinity from carbon system proxies are subject to multiple uncertainties.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Sample residues were scanned using a scanning electron microscope with energy‐dispersive spectrometry, and barite typically consisted of more than 95% of the sample. Based on crystal morphology and sulfur isotope ratios, no diagenetic barite was present in this core [ Markovic et al , ]. Values of weight percent barite were determined based on the fraction of barite recovered from the initial dry sediment used (Table S1 in the supporting information).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%