Gibbs et al. question our reconstruction of surface-and deepwater acidification around Oceanic Anoxic Event 1a. We answer their criticisms to better substantiate our arguments and original conclusions. Contrary to their suggestion, preservation cannot explain the nannofossil changes we documented, which trace perturbations in the photic zone, including a substantial increase in partial pressure of CO(2) (pCO(2)) and an inferred decreased pH as derived from geochemical proxies.
Response to Comment on “Calcareous Nannoplankton Response to Surface-Water Acidification Around Oceanic Anoxic Event 1a / E. Erba, C. Bottini, H.J. Weissert, C.E. Keller. - In: SCIENCE. - ISSN 0036-8075. - 332:6026(2011), pp. 175-176. [10.1126/science.1199608]
Response to Comment on “Calcareous Nannoplankton Response to Surface-Water Acidification Around Oceanic Anoxic Event 1a
E. Erba
;C. BottiniSecondo
;
2011
Abstract
Gibbs et al. question our reconstruction of surface-and deepwater acidification around Oceanic Anoxic Event 1a. We answer their criticisms to better substantiate our arguments and original conclusions. Contrary to their suggestion, preservation cannot explain the nannofossil changes we documented, which trace perturbations in the photic zone, including a substantial increase in partial pressure of CO(2) (pCO(2)) and an inferred decreased pH as derived from geochemical proxies.
| File | Dimensione | Formato | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Erba et al_Comment to Gibbs.pdf
accesso riservato
Tipologia:
Publisher's version/PDF
Dimensione
108.7 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
108.7 kB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri Richiedi una copia |
Pubblicazioni consigliate
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
