Paolo Stocchi

Antarctic Ice Sheet variability across the Eocene-Oligocene boundary climate transition.

Sensitive ice sheets Why did the Antarctic Ice Sheet begin to grow 34 million years ago, and what does that have to do with us? Galeotti et al. studied a marine sediment core recovered from just off the coast of Antarctica (see the Perspective by Lear and Lunt). The ice sheet did not begin to grow until atmospheric CO2 concentrations had dropped to below around 600 parts per million. Indeed, the ice sheet was unstable when CO2 was higher. As modern atmospheric CO2 concentrations continue their rise, a shift back to an unstable Antarctic Ice Sheet could increase harmful rises in sea level. Science, this issue p. 76; see also p. 34 The growth of the Antarctic Ice Sheet began only when atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide dropped low enough. [Also see Perspective by Lear and Lunt] About 34 million years ago, Earth’s climate cooled and an ice sheet formed on Antarctica as atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) fell below ~750 parts per million (ppm). Sedimentary cycles from a drillcore in the western Ross Sea provide direct evidence of orbitally controlled glacial cycles between 34 million and 31 million years ago. Initially, under atmospheric CO2 levels of ≥600 ppm, a smaller Antarctic Ice Sheet (AIS), restricted to the terrestrial continent, was highly responsive to local insolation forcing. A more stable, continental-scale ice sheet calving at the coastline did not form until ~32.8 million years ago, coincident with the earliest time that atmospheric CO2 levels fell below ~600 ppm. Our results provide insight into the potential of the AIS for threshold behavior and have implications for its sensitivity to atmospheric CO2 concentrations above present-day levels.

Eustatic and Relative Sea Level Changes

Sea level changes can be driven by either variations in the masses or volume of the oceans, or by changes of the land with respect to the sea surface. In the first case, a sea level change is defined ‘eustatic’; otherwise, it is defined ‘relative’. Several techniques can be used to observe changes in sea level, from satellite data to tide gauges to geological or archeological proxies. Regardless of the technique used, ‘eustasy’ cannot be measured directly, but only calculated after perturbing factors of different origins are taken into account. In this paper, we review the meaning and main processes that contribute to eustatic and relative sea level changes, and we give an overview of the different techniques used to observe them.

Antarctic glacio-eustatic contributions to late Miocene Mediterranean desiccation and reflooding

The Messinian Salinity Crisis (MSC) was a marked late Neogene oceanographic event during which the Mediterranean Sea evaporated. Its causes remain unresolved, with tectonic restrictions to the Atlantic Ocean or glacio-eustatic restriction of flow during sea-level lowstands, or a mixture of the two mechanisms, being proposed. Here we present the first direct geological evidence of Antarctic ice-sheet (AIS) expansion at the MSC onset and use a δ18O record to model relative sea-level changes. Antarctic sedimentary successions indicate AIS expansion at 6 Ma coincident with major MSC desiccation; relative sea-level modelling indicates a prolonged ∼50 m lowstand at the Strait of Gibraltar, which resulted from AIS expansion and local evaporation of sea water in concert with evaporite precipitation that caused lithospheric deformation. Our results reconcile MSC events and demonstrate that desiccation and refilling were timed by the interplay between glacio-eustatic sea-level variations, glacial isostatic adjustment and mantle deformation in response to changing water and evaporite loads.

Giant boulders and Last Interglacial storm intensity in the North Atlantic

Significance The Last Interglacial was the last period of the Earth’s history when climate was warmer than preindustrial, with higher polar temperatures and higher sea levels. Based on geologic evidence in Bermuda and the Bahamas, studies suggest that during this period the North Atlantic was characterized by “superstorms” more intense than any observed historically. Here we present data and models showing that, under conditions of higher sea level, historically observed hurricanes can explain geologic features previously interpreted as evidence for more intense Last Interglacial storm activity. Our results suggest that, even without an increase in the intensity of extreme storms, cliffs and coastal barriers will be subject to significantly higher wave-induced energies under even modestly higher sea levels. As global climate warms and sea level rises, coastal areas will be subject to more frequent extreme flooding and hurricanes. Geologic evidence for extreme coastal storms during past warm periods has the potential to provide fundamental insights into their future intensity. Recent studies argue that during the Last Interglacial (MIS 5e, ∼128–116 ka) tropical and extratropical North Atlantic cyclones may have been more intense than at present, and may have produced waves larger than those observed historically. Such strong swells are inferred to have created a number of geologic features that can be observed today along the coastlines of Bermuda and the Bahamas. In this paper, we investigate the most iconic among these features: massive boulders atop a cliff in North Eleuthera, Bahamas. We combine geologic field surveys, wave models, and boulder transport equations to test the hypothesis that such boulders must have been emplaced by storms of greater-than-historical intensity. By contrast, our results suggest that with the higher relative sea level (RSL) estimated for the Bahamas during MIS 5e, boulders of this size could have been transported by waves generated by storms of historical intensity. Thus, while the megaboulders of Eleuthera cannot be used as geologic proof for past “superstorms,” they do show that with rising sea levels, cliffs and coastal barriers will be subject to significantly greater erosional energy, even without changes in storm intensity.

Tides in the Last Interglacial: insights from notch geometry and palaeo tidal models in Bonaire, Netherland Antilles

The study of past sea levels relies largely on the interpretation of sea-level indicators. Palaeo tidal notches are considered as one of the most precise sea-level indicators as their formation is closely tied to the local tidal range. We present geometric measurements of modern and palaeo (Marine Isotope Stage (MIS) 5e) tidal notches on Bonaire (southern Caribbean Sea) and results from two tidal simulations, using the present-day bathymetry and a palaeo-bathymetry. We use these two tools to investigate changes in the tidal range since MIS 5e. Our models show that the tidal range changes most significantly in shallow areas, whereas both, notch geometry and models results, suggest that steeper continental shelves, such as the ones bordering the island of Bonaire, are less affected to changes in tidal range in conditions of MIS 5e sea levels. We use our data and results to discuss the importance of considering changes in tidal range while reconstructing MIS 5e sea level histories, and we remark that it is possible to use hydrodynamic modelling and notch geometry as first-order proxies to assess whether, in a particular area, tidal range might have been different in MIS 5e with respect to today.

Reply to Hearty and Tormey: Use the scientific method to test geologic hypotheses, because rocks do not whisper

Hearty and Tormey (1) challenge our conclusions (2), incorrectly arguing that the megaboulders we discuss were shown to originate from the cliff bottom. A number of mischaracterizations are made by Hearty and Tormey (1) in their letter. First, we do not use a “tsunami wave model.” Second, we do not address the two other Bahamian landforms Hearty and Tormey (1) mention: their “superstorm” genesis interpretation [for which alternative hypotheses have been proposed (3, 4)] has no bearing on our (2) conclusions. Hearty and Tormey’s (1) claim that the boulders have “fingerprints” based on “several physical criteria” and “data from multiple disciplines” is false. Only two mega-boulder “physical properties” were reported by Hearty … [↵][1]1To whom correspondence should be addressed. Email: arovere{at}marum.de. [1]: #xref-corresp-1-1