Barbara Goudsmit‐Harzevoort, A. Lansu, M. Baatsen, A. S. von der Heydt, N. D. de Winter, Yurui Zhang, A. Abe‐Ouchi, A. D. de Boer, W. Chan, Y. Donnadieu, D. Hutchinson, G. Knorr, J. Ladant, P. Morozova, I. Niezgodzki, S. Steinig, A. Tripati, Zhongshi Zhang, Jiang Zhu, M. Ziegler
{"title":"The Relationship Between the Global Mean Deep‐Sea and Surface Temperature During the Early Eocene","authors":"Barbara Goudsmit‐Harzevoort, A. Lansu, M. Baatsen, A. S. von der Heydt, N. D. de Winter, Yurui Zhang, A. Abe‐Ouchi, A. D. de Boer, W. Chan, Y. Donnadieu, D. Hutchinson, G. Knorr, J. Ladant, P. Morozova, I. Niezgodzki, S. Steinig, A. Tripati, Zhongshi Zhang, Jiang Zhu, M. Ziegler","doi":"10.1029/2022PA004532","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Estimates of global mean near‐surface air temperature (global SAT) for the Cenozoic era rely largely on paleo‐proxy data of deep‐sea temperature (DST), with the assumption that changes in global SAT covary with changes in the global mean deep‐sea temperature (global DST) and global mean sea‐surface temperature (global SST). We tested the validity of this assumption by analyzing the relationship between global SST, SAT, and DST using 25 different model simulations from the Deep‐Time Model Intercomparison Project simulating the early Eocene Climatic Optimum (EECO) with varying CO2 levels. Similar to the modern situation, we find limited spatial variability in DST, indicating that local DST estimates can be regarded as a first order representative of global DST. In line with previously assumed relationships, linear regression analysis indicates that both global DST and SAT respond stronger to changes in atmospheric CO2 than global SST by a similar factor. Consequently, this model‐based analysis validates the assumption that changes in global DST can be used to estimate changes in global SAT during the early Cenozoic. Paleo‐proxy estimates of global DST, SST, and SAT during EECO show the best fit with model simulations with a 1,680 ppm atmospheric CO2 level. This matches paleo‐proxies of EECO atmospheric CO2, indicating a good fit between models and proxy‐data.","PeriodicalId":54239,"journal":{"name":"Paleoceanography and Paleoclimatology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Paleoceanography and Paleoclimatology","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1029/2022PA004532","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GEOSCIENCES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Estimates of global mean near‐surface air temperature (global SAT) for the Cenozoic era rely largely on paleo‐proxy data of deep‐sea temperature (DST), with the assumption that changes in global SAT covary with changes in the global mean deep‐sea temperature (global DST) and global mean sea‐surface temperature (global SST). We tested the validity of this assumption by analyzing the relationship between global SST, SAT, and DST using 25 different model simulations from the Deep‐Time Model Intercomparison Project simulating the early Eocene Climatic Optimum (EECO) with varying CO2 levels. Similar to the modern situation, we find limited spatial variability in DST, indicating that local DST estimates can be regarded as a first order representative of global DST. In line with previously assumed relationships, linear regression analysis indicates that both global DST and SAT respond stronger to changes in atmospheric CO2 than global SST by a similar factor. Consequently, this model‐based analysis validates the assumption that changes in global DST can be used to estimate changes in global SAT during the early Cenozoic. Paleo‐proxy estimates of global DST, SST, and SAT during EECO show the best fit with model simulations with a 1,680 ppm atmospheric CO2 level. This matches paleo‐proxies of EECO atmospheric CO2, indicating a good fit between models and proxy‐data.
期刊介绍:
Paleoceanography and Paleoclimatology (PALO) publishes papers dealing with records of past environments, biota and climate. Understanding of the Earth system as it was in the past requires the employment of a wide range of approaches including marine and lacustrine sedimentology and speleothems; ice sheet formation and flow; stable isotope, trace element, and organic geochemistry; paleontology and molecular paleontology; evolutionary processes; mineralization in organisms; understanding tree-ring formation; seismic stratigraphy; physical, chemical, and biological oceanography; geochemical, climate and earth system modeling, and many others. The scope of this journal is regional to global, rather than local, and includes studies of any geologic age (Precambrian to Quaternary, including modern analogs). Within this framework, papers on the following topics are to be included: chronology, stratigraphy (where relevant to correlation of paleoceanographic events), paleoreconstructions, paleoceanographic modeling, paleocirculation (deep, intermediate, and shallow), paleoclimatology (e.g., paleowinds and cryosphere history), global sediment and geochemical cycles, anoxia, sea level changes and effects, relations between biotic evolution and paleoceanography, biotic crises, paleobiology (e.g., ecology of “microfossils” used in paleoceanography), techniques and approaches in paleoceanographic inferences, and modern paleoceanographic analogs, and quantitative and integrative analysis of coupled ocean-atmosphere-biosphere processes. Paleoceanographic and Paleoclimate studies enable us to use the past in order to gain information on possible future climatic and biotic developments: the past is the key to the future, just as much and maybe more than the present is the key to the past.