In-situ cosmogenic 10Be production rate at Lago Argentino, Patagonia: Implications for late-glacial climate chronology

The timing and cause of glacial advances in the southern mid-latitudes during the last glacial cycle based on a synthesis of exposure ages from Patagonia and New Zealand

“…All other parameters, including standards, were taken from the original literature or subsequent updates (e.g. Kaplan et al, 2011), and we used a standard density of 2.7 g cm -3 where none was given in the original studies. To aid the identification of cumulative peaks in exposure time we employed cumulative Probability Density Functions (PDFs; Barrows et al, 2002) using 100-year bins, and excluded any exposure ages that, within errors, fall outside the last glacial cycle between 110 and 10 ka.…”

“…We excluded bedrock and moraine cobble samples due to potential issues with re-setting and because they do not necessarily represent glacial activity in the same way. For consistency, we recalculated all exposure ages, applying the New Zealand 10 Be production rate for exposure ages in New Zealand and Patagonia, as well as the Kaplan et al (2011) Patagonian 10 Be production rate for exposure ages in Patagonia. We also calculated ages using five scaling schemes and a range of erosion rates (1 mm ka -1 intervals between 0 and 10 mm ka -1 ) to evaluate the effects of these parameters on age distributions ( Figure 5).…”

“…(B and D) For Patagonia and New Zealand, respectively: normalised cumulative relative probability density function curves, calculated from all of the exposure ages shown in (A and C). Kaplan et al (2011). (D and E) The effect on the resulting normalised probability density functions of incrementally increasing the erosion rate by 1 mm ka -1 during the calculation of all ages in Patagonia and New Zealand.…”

“…(Kaplan et al, 2004Douglass et al, 2005Douglass et al, , 2006Glasser et al, 2012) Río Bayo valley -47 -73 3 (3) (Glasser et al, 2006) Nef valley -47 -73 6 (5) (Glasser et al, 2012) Pueyrredón -47/-48 -71/-73 19 (16) (Hein et al, , 2010(Hein et al, , 2011Glasser et al, 2012) San Martín valley -49 -72/-73 10 (10) (Glasser et al, 2011) Río Guanaco -50 -73 21 (21) (Murray et al, 2012) Lago Argentino -50 -73 30 (27) (Ackert et al, 2008;Kaplan et al, 2011) Torres del Paine -51 -73/-74 54 (45) (Fogwill, 2003;Moreno et al, 2009;García et al, 2012) Río Gallegos -51/-52 -71/-72 7 (6) (Kaplan et al, 2007;Evenson et al, 2009;Sagredo et al, 2011) Magellan -52/-53 -69/-71 17 (10) Kaplan et al, 2008Kaplan et al, , 2007 BI-SSb -53/-54 -68/-70 46 (34) Kaplan et al, 2007Kaplan et al, , 2008Evenson et al, 2009;Darvill et al, 2015) Total within Last Glacial Cycle 289 (241)…”

“…The timing of culminations in glacial advances identified from relative cumulative 4 probability density functions for New Zealand and Patagonia using the New Zealand 5 production rate of , and using the Patagonian production rate (PPR) of 6 Kaplan et al (2011) for Patagonia. Values in italics indicate peaks that fail to resolve with 7 only a small change in erosion rate.…”