Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorKöseoğlu, Den
dc.contributor.authorBelt, STen
dc.contributor.authorHusum, Ken
dc.contributor.authorKnies, Jen
dc.date.accessioned2018-10-04T10:45:59Z
dc.date.issued2018-11-01en
dc.identifier.issn0146-6380en
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10026.1/12451
dc.description.abstract

© 2018 Elsevier Ltd The development of various combinative methods for Arctic sea ice reconstruction using the sympagic highly branched isoprenoid (HBI) IP25in conjunction with pelagic biomarkers has often facilitated more detailed descriptions of sea ice conditions than using IP25alone. Here, we investigated the application of the Phytoplankton-IP25index (PIP25) and a recently proposed Classification Tree (CT) model for describing temporal shifts in sea ice conditions to assess the consistency of both methods. Based on biomarker data from three downcore records from the Barents Sea spanning millennial timescales, we showcase apparent and potential limitations in both approaches, and provide recommendations for their identification or prevention. Both methods provided generally consistent outcomes and, within the studied cores, captured abrupt shifts in sea ice regimes, such as those evident during the Younger Dryas, as well as more gradual trends in sea ice conditions during the Holocene. The most significant discrepancies occurred during periods of highly unstable climate change, such as those characteristic of the Younger Dryas–Holocene transition. Such intervals of increased discrepancy were identifiable by significant changes of HBI distributions and correlations to values not observed in proximal surface sediments. We suggest that periods of highly fluctuating climate that are not represented in modern settings may hinder the performance and complementary application of PIP25and CT-based methods, and that data visualisation techniques should be employed to identify such occurrences in downcore records. Additionally, due to the reliance of both methods on biomarker distributions, we emphasise the importance of accurate and consistent biomarker quantification.

en
dc.format.extent82 - 94en
dc.language.isoenen
dc.titleAn assessment of biomarker-based multivariate classification methods versus the PIP<inf>25</inf>index for paleo Arctic sea ice reconstructionen
dc.typeJournal Article
plymouth.volume125en
plymouth.journalOrganic Geochemistryen
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.orggeochem.2018.08.014en
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/00 Groups by role
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/00 Groups by role/Academics
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Faculty of Science and Engineering
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Faculty of Science and Engineering/School of Geography, Earth and Environmental Sciences
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/REF 2021 Researchers by UoA
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/REF 2021 Researchers by UoA/UoA07 Earth Systems and Environmental Sciences
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Research Groups
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Research Groups/Marine Institute
dcterms.dateAccepted2018-08-29en
dc.rights.embargodate2019-08-30en
dc.rights.embargoperiodNot knownen
rioxxterms.versionofrecord10.1016/j.orggeochem.2018.08.014en
rioxxterms.licenseref.urihttp://www.rioxx.net/licenses/all-rights-reserveden
rioxxterms.licenseref.startdate2018-11-01en
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Reviewen


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record


All items in PEARL are protected by copyright law.
Author manuscripts deposited to comply with open access mandates are made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the details provided on the item record or document. In the absence of an open licence (e.g. Creative Commons), permissions for further reuse of content should be sought from the publisher or author.
Theme by 
@mire NV