Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T09:41:58.988Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Paired AMS 14C Dates on Planktic Foraminifera from a Gulf of Mexico Sediment Core: An Assessment of Stratigraphic Continuity

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 July 2016

B P Flower ,
D W Hastings  and
N J Randle
B P Flower*
Affiliation:
College of Marine Science, University of South Florida, 140 7th Avenue South, St. Petersburg, Florida 33701, USA.
D W Hastings
Affiliation:
Collegium of Natural Sciences, Eckerd College, 4200 54th Avenue South, St. Petersburg, Florida 33711, USA.
N J Randle
Affiliation:
Collegium of Natural Sciences, Eckerd College, 4200 54th Avenue South, St. Petersburg, Florida 33711, USA.
*
Corresponding author. Email: [email protected].
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

A series of recent papers has called for multiple radiocarbon dates on planktic foraminifera to assess stratigraphic continuity in deep-sea sediment cores. This recommendation comes from observations of anomalous 14C dates in planktic foraminifera from the same stratigraphic level. Potential reasons include bioturbation, downslope transport, secondary calcification, carbonate dissolution, and differential preservation. In this study, paired 14C dates on dissolution-susceptible Globigerinoides ruber and dissolution-resistant Neogloboquadrina dutertrei are used to evaluate a Gulf of Mexico sediment core. Fourteen of 15 pairs (between 8815 and 12,995 uncorrected 14C yr BP) yield concordant uncorrected 14C ages (mean difference −2 ± 75 yr), attesting to continuous deposition at high accumulation rates (>35 cm/kyr). For 1 pair, N. dutertrei is nearly 1000 yr younger, which is difficult to explain by any combination of dissolution and bioturbation or downslope transport, given the excellent carbonate preservation and persistent laminations. The concordant ages underscore the utility of paired 14C dates in planktic foraminifera as a means of assessing stratigraphic continuity in deep-sea sediment sequences.

Type
Soils and Sediments
Information
Radiocarbon , Volume 53 , Issue 2 , 2011 , pp. 337 - 344
Copyright
Copyright © The American Journal of Science 

References

Barker, S, Broecker, WS, Clark, E, Hadjas, I. 2007. Radiocarbon age offsets of foraminifera resulting from differential dissolution and fragmentation within the sedimentary bioturbated zone. Paleoceanography 22:PA2205, doi:10.1029/2006PA001354.Google Scholar
Bé, AWH. 1982. The biology of planktonic foraminifera. In: Broadhead, TW, editor. Foraminifera: Notes for a Short Course. Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press. p 51–92.Google Scholar
Berger, WH. 1970. Planktonic foraminifera: selective solution and the lysocline. Marine Geology 8(2):111–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broecker, WS, Clark, E. 2001. An evaluation of Lohmann's foraminifera weight dissolution index. Paleoceanography 16(5):531–4.Google Scholar
Broecker, WS, Andree, M, Bonani, G, Mix, A, Klas, M, Wolfli, W, Oeschger, H. 1988a. Comparison between the radiocarbon ages of coexisting planktonic foraminifera. Paleoceanography 3(6):647–58.Google Scholar
Broecker, WS, Andree, M, Wolfli, W, Oeschger, H, Bonani, G, Kennett, JP, Peteet, D. 1988b. The chronology of the last deglaciation: implications to the cause of the Younger Dryas event. Paleoceanography 3(1):1–19.Google Scholar
Broecker, WS, Klas, M, Clark, E, Trumbore, S, Bonani, G, Wölfli, W, Ivy, S. 1990. Accelerator mass spectrometric radiocarbon measurements on foraminifera shells from deep-sea cores. Radiocarbon 32(2):119–33.Google Scholar
Broecker, WS, Matsumoto, K, Clark, E, Hajdas, I, Bonani, G. 1999. Radiocarbon age differences between coexisting foraminiferal species. Paleoceanography 14(4):431–6.Google Scholar
Broecker, WS, Barker, S, Clark, E, Hajdas, I, Bonani, G. 2006. Anomalous radiocarbon ages for foraminifera shells. Paleoceanography 21, PA2008, doi:10.1029/2005PA001212.Google Scholar
Flower, BP, Kennett, JP. 1990. The Younger Dryas cool episode in the Gulf of Mexico. Paleoceanography 5(6):949–61.Google Scholar
Guilderson, TP, Southon, JR, Brown, TA. 2003. High-precision AMS 14C results on TIRI/FIRI turbidite. Radiocarbon 45(1):75–80.Google Scholar
Guilderson, TP, Reimer, PJ, Brown, TA. 2005. The boon and bane of radiocarbon dating. Science 307(5708):362–4.Google Scholar
Hughen, KA, Lehman, S, Southon, J, Overpeck, JT, Marchal, O, Herrin, C, Turnbull, J. 2004. 14C activity and global carbon cycle changes over the past 50,000 years. Science 303(5655):202–7.Google Scholar
Hughen, KA, Southon, J, Lehman, S, Bertrand, C, Turnbull, J. 2006. Marine-derived 14C calibration and activity record for the past 50,000 years updated from the Cariaco Basin. Quaternary Science Reviews 25(23–24):3216–27.Google Scholar
Kennett, JP, Elmstrom, K, Penrose, N. 1985. The last deglacial in Orca Basin, Gulf of Mexico: high-resolution planktonic foraminiferal changes. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 50(1):189–216.Google Scholar
Labeyrie L, Shipboard Scientific Party. 2005. MD127/IMAGES-IX PAGE Cruise Report 2002, in preparation, IPEV.Google Scholar
Le, JN, Thunell, RC. 1996. Modelling planktic foraminiferal assemblage changes and application to sea surface temperature estimation in the western equatorial Pacific Ocean. Marine Micropaleontology 28(3–4):211–29.Google Scholar
Leventer, A, Williams, DF, Kennett, JP. 1982. Dynamics of the Laurentide ice sheet during the last deglaciation: Evidence from the Gulf of Mexico. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 59(1):11–7.Google Scholar
LoDico, JM, Flower, BP, Quinn, TM. 2006. Subcentennialscale climatic and hydrologic variability in the Gulf of Mexico during the early Holocene. Paleoceanography 21, PA3015, doi:10.1029/2005PA00124.Google Scholar
Manighetti, B, McCave, IN, Maslin, M, Shackleton, NJ. 1995. Chronology for climate change: developing age models for the Biogeochemical Ocean Flux Study cores. Paleoceanography 10(3):513–25.Google Scholar
McKee, TR, Sidner, BR. 1976. An anoxic high salinity intraslope basin in the northwest Gulf of Mexico. In: Bouma, AH, editor. Beyond the Shelf Break. AAPG Marine Geology Community Short Course, 2. p 125.Google Scholar
Meckler, AN, Schubert, CJ, Hochuli, PA, Plessen, B, Birgel, D, Flower, BP, Hinrichs, K-U, Haug, GH. 2008. Glacial to Holocene terrigenous organic matter input to sediments from Orca Basin, Gulf of Mexico—a combined optical and biomarker approach. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 272(1–2):251–63.Google Scholar
Pilcher, RS, Blumstein, RD. 2007. Brine volume and salt dissolution rates in Orca Basin, northeast Gulf of Mexico. AAPG Bulletin 91(6):823–33.Google Scholar
Shokes, RF, Trabant, PK, Presley, BJ, Reid, DF. 1977. Anoxic hypersaline basin in the northern Gulf of Mexico. Science 196(4297):1443–6.Google Scholar
Skinner, LC, Shackleton, NJ. 2004. Rapid transient changes in northeast Atlantic deep water ventilation age across Termination I. Paleoceanography 19:PA2005, doi:10.1029/2003PA000983.Google Scholar
Stuiver, M, Polach, HA. 1977. Discussion: reporting of 14C data. Radiocarbon 19(3):355–63.Google Scholar
Stuiver, M, Reimer, PJ, Bard, E, Beck, JW, Burr, GS, Hughen, KA, Kromer, B, McCormac, G, van der Plicht, J, Spurk, M. 1998. INTCAL98 radiocarbon age calibration, 24,000–0 cal BP. Radiocarbon 40(3):1041–83.Google Scholar
Vogel, JS, Southon, JR, Nelson, DE. 1987. Catalyst and binder effects in the use of filamentous graphite for AMS. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research B 29(1–2):50–6.Google Scholar
Williams, C, Flower, BP, Hastings, DW, Guilderson, TP, Quinn, KA, Goddard, EA. 2010. Deglacial abrupt climate change in the Atlantic Warm Pool: a Gulf of Mexico perspective. Paleoceanography 25, PA4221, doi:10.1029/2010PA001928.Google Scholar