Jump to: Page Content, Section Navigation, Site Navigation, Site Search, Account Information, or Site Tools.
|
|
Technical CommentsComment on "Absence of Cooling in New Zealand and the Adjacent Ocean During the Younger Dryas Chronozone"Barrows et al. (Reports, 5 October 2007, p. 86) presented cosmogenic exposure dates and data from an ocean sediment core that challenge evidence for glacier advance in New Zealand during the Younger Dryas event. We use modeling of geomorphic processes to argue that their cosmogenic exposure dates are inconclusive.
1 Department of Geosciences, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802, USA. * To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: papplega{at}geosc.psu.edu
Barrows et al. (1) recently argued that the Waiho Loop moraine in New Zealand was deposited after the end of the Younger Dryas event, We applaud Barrows et al. (1) for their investigation of the age of this moraine. As they note, the age of the Waiho Loop moraine is a critical test of various hypotheses explaining the climatic changes at the end of the last glaciation. Their use of multiple cosmogenic nuclides and multiple samples from each boulder enables assessment of their analytical work. However, the age assignment for the Waiho Loop moraine given by Barrows et al. (1) is potentially biased. Barrows et al. noted that the scatter in their exposure dates is greater than can be explained by measurement error alone. This additional scatter is common in sets of exposure dates from moraines (5, 6) and is usually attributed to geomorphic processes (5–7). To address this scatter, many researchers remove a subset of the data and then take an average, as Barrows et al. did. However, application of the error-weighted mean assumes that the differences between the exposure dates and the true age of the moraine are normally distributed (8) and have a mean of zero. The known geomorphic processes that affect cosmogenic exposure dates change the mean of these differences, as well as their standard deviation (7). Consequently, the error-weighted mean may return a misleading estimate of the moraine's age if the dates have been affected by geomorphic processes. Barrows et al. (1) acknowledged the effects that "former shielding...or earlier exposure" may have had on their dates; here, we consider these effects more explicitly. If the boulders sampled by Barrows et al. (1) were shielded from cosmic rays by a till cover, their exposure dates would tend to underestimate the moraine's age. Barrows et al. noted that one of their boulders had "...smaller blocks resting on top of it, perhaps indicating a former till cover." Moreover, the Waiho Loop receives over 2 m of precipitation yearly (9). These observations suggest that till has been removed from the crest of the moraine, exposing fresh boulders to cosmic rays. We present output from a simple numerical model that shows the impact of till shielding on the distribution of cosmogenic exposure dates. We updated the moraine degradation model of Hallet and Putkonen (5, 10, 11) to predict the distributions of 10Be exposure dates on moraines, including production at depth by muons (12). This model predicts that the distribution of 10Be exposure dates from a degrading moraine should have a peak close to the true age of the moraine and a long, heavy tail toward the young side of the distribution (Fig. 1). This result is robust over a range of initial moraine heights, initial moraine slopes, and topographic diffusivities. For this exercise, we considered only the 10Be dates, because the relationship between 36Cl dates and the true age of an eroding surface is complex (13). Although further modeling work may change the shape of this distribution somewhat, the conclusions we draw from this exercise are sound.
For an assumed moraine age of 11,600 yr B.P., at the end of the Younger Dryas, the model produces a distribution that resembles the 10Be exposure dates reported in (1) (Fig. 1). If the 10Be exposure dates of Barrows et al. are drawn from a parent distribution like that produced by the model, their error-weighted mean underestimates the age of the moraine. Instead, we suggest that the age of the moraine lies somewhere close to their oldest 10Be dates, possibly at the end of the Younger Dryas chronozone. Our preferred age assignment is thus We also considered the possibility that the dates observed by Barrows et al. (1) are biased by earlier exposure rather than till shielding. Glaciers sometimes incorporate boulders with preexisting concentrations of cosmogenic nuclides in their moraines (7). Dates from these preexposed boulders tend to overestimate the ages of the moraines they rest upon. Modeling of this process produces distributions with a peak near the true age of the moraine and a long, heavy tail toward the old side of the distribution (11, 14). These distributions do not resemble the distribution of dates reported by Barrows et al. We conclude that earlier exposure is not primarily responsible for the spread in their dates, although their measured concentrations may include a small inherited component. We do not intend to reinterpret the cosmogenic exposure dates presented by Barrows et al. (1) as requiring a Younger Dryas age for the Waiho Loop moraine. Other geologic processes not treated by our modeling may have influenced the observed exposure dates, and further calibrations of nuclide production rates may require reassessment of these data. Instead, we use this example to argue that geomorphic processes must be carefully considered before making age assignments for moraines from cosmogenic exposure dates. In particular, discarding some observations and taking an average of the rest can lead to biased age estimates.
The editors suggest the following Related Resources on Science sites:In Science Magazine
THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES:
|
Science. ISSN 0036-8075 (print), 1095-9203 (online)