2004
DOI: 10.1016/j.quascirev.2004.03.006
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Absolute calibration of the Greenland time scale: implications for Antarctic time scales and for Δ14C

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

14
218
0
4

Year Published

2005
2005
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 292 publications
(238 citation statements)
references
References 28 publications
14
218
0
4
Order By: Relevance
“…Calcite content is measured using an X-ray diffraction instrument with a calibrated detection limit of 0.2% calcite in an aragonitic coral. These pristine drill core samples and rigorous quality control criteria for vadose (zone exposed to percolating rain water) exposed samples are especially essential to the accuracy of the older radiocarbon dates, where a trace amount of calcite (i.e., greater than 0.2%) can result in unacceptably large offsets in radiocarbon ages (Chiu et al, 2004(Chiu et al, , 2005. The ''less than 0.2% calcite'' is the single most important screening criterion we have adopted, and it explains many of the differences between our calibration curve and published coral data that typically use 1% calcite detection limits and measure between 1% and 5% calcite in their samples (Yokoyama et al, 2000;Paterne et al, 2004).…”
Section: :1 Linementioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Calcite content is measured using an X-ray diffraction instrument with a calibrated detection limit of 0.2% calcite in an aragonitic coral. These pristine drill core samples and rigorous quality control criteria for vadose (zone exposed to percolating rain water) exposed samples are especially essential to the accuracy of the older radiocarbon dates, where a trace amount of calcite (i.e., greater than 0.2%) can result in unacceptably large offsets in radiocarbon ages (Chiu et al, 2004(Chiu et al, , 2005. The ''less than 0.2% calcite'' is the single most important screening criterion we have adopted, and it explains many of the differences between our calibration curve and published coral data that typically use 1% calcite detection limits and measure between 1% and 5% calcite in their samples (Yokoyama et al, 2000;Paterne et al, 2004).…”
Section: :1 Linementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Ultimately, we expect our calibration curve will include mostly samples submerged in seawater since growth, where coral aragonite is thermodynamically stable. Although we choose not to amalgamate our data with other calibration data in this paper, we are actively participating in combining our radiocarbon calibration data in international calibration efforts using a subset of our samples younger than 26,000 yr BP Hughen et al, 2004b) and in ice core age model development and D 14 C reconstructions combining our older samples with data from other groups (e.g., Shackleton et al, 2004).…”
Section: Barbados Kiritimati and Araki Reservoir Age Estimatesmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…From this depth the presence of mollusc remains was continuous to the top of the profile. These data allowed for the reconstruction of the environmental change for the end of the Pleistocene, specifically for MIS 3 and MIS 2 [58][59][60] (Fig. 5).…”
Section: Unauthenticatedmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The Nd isotope records in both cores follow a broad trend towards more radiogenic compositions before and during H4 with the Blake Ridge record apparently slightly leading the Cape Basin record. Clearly the chronologies for both cores have some error but since both core sites are intercalibrated via the GISP2/GRIP age scales of Shackleton et al (2004) for Greenland DansgaardeOeschger cycles this error is most unlikely to be >1 ka. Taken at face value the data suggest that NADW (GNAIW) variability in the western North Atlantic was either contemporaneous or preceded that recorded at the outlet of NADW into the Southern Ocean by a small margin.…”
Section: North Atlanticesouth Atlantic Comparisonmentioning
confidence: 99%