2009
DOI: 10.2475/09.2009.01
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Quantitative uncertainty analyses of ancient atmospheric CO2 estimates from fossil leaves

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

6
78
1
1

Year Published

2011
2011
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 87 publications
(93 citation statements)
references
References 36 publications
6
78
1
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The results for the modern GPP scenario agree well with other proxy data for the time slice between 50 and 60 Ma from δ 13 C of paleosols (1,36,73), leaf stomata (36,(74)(75)(76), and δ 13 C of marine phytoplankton (77), which nearly all range between 300 and 800 ppm (Fig. 2B).…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 77%
“…The results for the modern GPP scenario agree well with other proxy data for the time slice between 50 and 60 Ma from δ 13 C of paleosols (1,36,73), leaf stomata (36,(74)(75)(76), and δ 13 C of marine phytoplankton (77), which nearly all range between 300 and 800 ppm (Fig. 2B).…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 77%
“…This means that error bars can convey different meanings, which hinders comparisons across methods. In recent years, Monte Carlo simulations for propagating uncertainty in multiple input variables have been developed for all five proxy systems11555977. So long as the reported percentile ranges are identical, these simulations facilitate better cross-method comparisons.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For uncertainties with the pedogenic carbonate method derived by varying only S (z), we adopt for the 16 and 84 percentiles the generic recommendation of +100%/−50% of the median value calculated from multifactorial Monte Carlo simulations78; these uncertainties are larger and probably more representative than the reported uncertainties. Similarly, for stomatal estimates whose uncertainties only take into account variance in the transfer function, we assume 16 and 84 percentiles equal to +100%/−40% of the median value, a range that takes into account representative uncertainty in both the transfer function and the fossil measurements77.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, there is a wide range of estimates for the Eocene (Koch et al, 1992;Sinha and Stott, 1994;Ekart et al, 1999;Greenwood et al, 2003;Royer, 2003;Pagani et al, 2005;Wing et al, 2005;Lowenstein and Demicco, 2006;Fletcher et al, 2008;Zachos et al, 2008;Beerling et al, 2009;Bijl et al, 2010;Smith et al, 2010;Doria et al, 2011;Kato et al, 2011;Maxbauer et al, 2014). Smith et al (2010) reconstructed the value of the early Eocene pCO 2 ranging from 580 ± 40 to 780 ± 50 ppmv using the stomatal ratio method (recent standardization) based on both SI and SD.…”
Section: Paleoclimate Reconstructed Historymentioning
confidence: 99%