Abstract Details
(2020) Factors Regulating the CO2 Storage and Emission in the Northwest Pacific: An Example of the post-Lgm Shatsky Rise
Bang S, Huh Y & Kang JO
https://doi.org/10.46427/gold2020.125
The author has requested that this abstract is not discussed on social media.
The author has not provided any additional details.
14b: Plenary Hall, Monday 22nd June 22:45 - 22:48
Sunhwa Bang
View abstracts at 2 conferences in series
Youngsook Huh View all 2 abstracts at Goldschmidt2020 View abstracts at 12 conferences in series
Jung Ok Kang View abstracts at 2 conferences in series
Youngsook Huh View all 2 abstracts at Goldschmidt2020 View abstracts at 12 conferences in series
Jung Ok Kang View abstracts at 2 conferences in series
Listed below are questions that have been submitted by the community that the author will try and cover in their presentation. To submit a question, ensure you are signed in to the website. Authors or session conveners approve questions before they are displayed here.
Submitted by Kimberly Lau on Monday 22nd June 19:37
Thanks for an interesting talk. Do the studied planktonic forams represent different water column depths, and what is known about the potential for difference in their growth habits (e.g., seasonality with respect to test growth) that would affect the ability to compare inter-species results? In other words, if one sample contained all 4 planktonic foram species, how variable would you expect the results/interpretation to be?
Hello, thanks for asking. I'm sorry I got late because I had a severe food poisoning last week. The effects of growing depth and seasonality vary by species. The presentation slide showed only the converted value of borate boron isotope of seawater. Actually, the range of Boron isotope analysis differed greatly by species (e.g., G. ruber = 19-21‰, N. pachyderma = 14-16.5‰). As previously summarized in core-top studies and culture studies, this is thought to be the result of each species' growing depth and vital effects. However, the equation we use now is to correct this vital effect and replace it with the borate isotope value of the seawater at the time.Considering the value of the borate boron isotope we converted, approximate pH was similar, and the fluctuation pattern was similar in all planktonic species. Although their environmental reactivity is different, in the end, due to the nature of the planktonic foram, they probably inhabited around the photic zone, the top of the water column. Therefore, it was assumed in our time scale that all 4 planktonic foram species would similarly indicate the pH of the surface waters that were inhabited at the time. We chose 4 species because of the feature of the studied area, we needed multi-species to obtain a continuous record. However, if the pH points of specific species appear different from others in further analysis, I will check some proxies for seawater stratification at the time.
Thanks for an interesting talk. Do the studied planktonic forams represent different water column depths, and what is known about the potential for difference in their growth habits (e.g., seasonality with respect to test growth) that would affect the ability to compare inter-species results? In other words, if one sample contained all 4 planktonic foram species, how variable would you expect the results/interpretation to be?
Hello, thanks for asking. I'm sorry I got late because I had a severe food poisoning last week. The effects of growing depth and seasonality vary by species. The presentation slide showed only the converted value of borate boron isotope of seawater. Actually, the range of Boron isotope analysis differed greatly by species (e.g., G. ruber = 19-21‰, N. pachyderma = 14-16.5‰). As previously summarized in core-top studies and culture studies, this is thought to be the result of each species' growing depth and vital effects. However, the equation we use now is to correct this vital effect and replace it with the borate isotope value of the seawater at the time.Considering the value of the borate boron isotope we converted, approximate pH was similar, and the fluctuation pattern was similar in all planktonic species. Although their environmental reactivity is different, in the end, due to the nature of the planktonic foram, they probably inhabited around the photic zone, the top of the water column. Therefore, it was assumed in our time scale that all 4 planktonic foram species would similarly indicate the pH of the surface waters that were inhabited at the time. We chose 4 species because of the feature of the studied area, we needed multi-species to obtain a continuous record. However, if the pH points of specific species appear different from others in further analysis, I will check some proxies for seawater stratification at the time.
Sign in to ask a question.