2022
DOI: 10.1016/j.gloplacha.2022.103737
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Constraining conifer physiological parameters in leaf gas-exchange models for ancient CO2 reconstruction

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

2
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 84 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For the treatment of leaf fossils, the fossils were photographed with a Leica M165FC stereomicroscope. The cuticular analysis was performed according to the procedure described by Liang et al [ 33 ]. The fossils were moistened well in distilled water and then soaked in 20% HCl solution for 12 h to remove calcareous sediments; then, they were washed to neutrality using distilled water.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For the treatment of leaf fossils, the fossils were photographed with a Leica M165FC stereomicroscope. The cuticular analysis was performed according to the procedure described by Liang et al [ 33 ]. The fossils were moistened well in distilled water and then soaked in 20% HCl solution for 12 h to remove calcareous sediments; then, they were washed to neutrality using distilled water.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To obtain clean cuticles of the fossil leaves, we used a traditional method that was modified by Liang et al [ 48 ]. The specimens were soaked in 20% HCl for 2 h to remove carbonate sediments and washed repeatedly with distilled water until the solution was neutral.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…(d) SST estimates as in (c), but assuming Mg/Ca sensitivity to pH (Gray & Evans, 2019). (e) Our new paleo-CO 2 estimates from T. trilobus (large blue circles outlined in black), G. pseudopraebulloides (large golden circles outlined in black), and C. angulisuturalis (large purple circles outlined in black) in context of published multiproxy reconstructions from boron isotopes (small circles, with colors corresponding to species- Greenop et al, 2014Greenop et al, , 2019Sosdian et al, 2018), phytoplankton (gray squares, Rae et al, 2021;Super et al, 2018), and leaf stomata (gray triangles, Erdei et al, 2012;Liang et al, 2022;Londoño et al, 2018;Moraweck et al, 2019;Reichgelt et al, 2020;Roth-Nebelsick et al, 2014;Steinthorsdottir et al, 2021;Tesfamichael et al, 2017). All boron-based CO 2 estimates, including those derived from published data, were calculated using δ 11 B sw from Greenop et al (2017) and alkalinity from Zeebe and Tyrrell (2019).…”
Section: Co 2 and Climate In The Late Oligocene-early Miocenementioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is therefore crucial to improve data coverage from independent proxies and gain a more complete understanding of the evolution and operation (Westerhold et al, 2020), (b) estimates of deep ocean temperature using clumped isotopes (Meckler et al, 2022) and (c) published atmospheric CO 2 estimates from the mid-Eocene to mid-Miocene from different proxy methods. Estimates from boron isotopes are shown in orange (Anagnostou et al, 2020;Greenop et al, 2019;Sosdian et al, 2018), phytoplankton estimates by gray squares (Rae et al, 2021;Super et al, 2018), and leaf gas exchange by gray triangles (Erdei et al, 2012;Liang et al, 2022;Londoño et al, 2018;Moraweck et al, 2019;Reichgelt et al, 2020;Roth-Nebelsick et al, 2014;Steinthorsdottir et al, 2021;Tesfamichael et al, 2017). Published CO 2 estimates from boron isotopes for the Oligocene and Miocene were recalculated using our methods described in Methods Sections 2.5 and 2.6, and using reported δ 11 B and Mg/Ca data from the original studies.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%