the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Changes in the Red Sea Overturning Circulation during Marine Isotope Stage 3
Raphaël Hubert-Huard
Nils Andersen
Helge W. Arz
Werner Ehrmann
Gerhard Schmiedl
Abstract. The oceanography of the Red Sea is controlled by the restricted exchange of water masses with the Indian Ocean and by high evaporation rates due to the arid climate of the surrounding land areas. In the northern Red Sea, the formation of oxygen-rich subsurface waters ventilates the deeper parts of the basin, but little is known about the variability of this process in the past. The stable oxygen and carbon isotope records of epibenthic foraminifera from a sediment core of the central Red Sea allow for the reconstruction of changes in the Red Sea Overturning Circulation (ROC) during Marine Isotope Stage 3. The isotope records imply millennial-scale variations in the ROC, in phase with climate variability of the high northern latitudes. This suggests an immediate response of dense water formation to the regional climate and hydrology of the northern Red Sea. The ROC was intensified under hyper-arid conditions during Heinrich stadials and was diminished during Dansgaard-Oeschger interstadials. While these changes are reflected in both stable oxygen and carbon isotope records, the latter data also exhibit changes in phase with the African-Indian monsoon system. The decoupling of the stable carbon and oxygen isotope records at the summer monsoon maximum centred around 55–60 ka B.P. may be associated with an increased inflow of nutrient-rich intermediate waters from the Arabian Sea to the central Red Sea. This process fuelled local surface-water productivity resulting in enhanced remineralization of sinking organic matter and release of 12C at intermediate water depths.
- Preprint
(1732 KB) - Metadata XML
-
Supplement
(394 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
Raphaël Hubert-Huard et al.
Status: open (until 11 Oct 2023)
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-1677', Anonymous Referee #1, 03 Sep 2023
reply
Hubert-Huard et al presented high-resolution composite carbon and oxygen isotope records in epifaunal benthic foraminifera in the central Red Sea during the MIS3. The authors attempted to use these records to infer changes in the Red Sea Overturning Circulation (ROC). The data presented seems to be of high quality. However, the authors did not convincingly explain how their data can be used to infer ROC changes, which is fundamental to the presented discussion. For this reason, the manuscript would need to be significantly expanded and improved for further consideration. Below, I will explain the main point I raised in detail and raise a few other minor issues. I hope these can be helpful for the authors to improve the manuscript.
C-O isotopes and ROC
The authors did not explain how the oxygen isotope is linked to the ROC. I agree with the authors that oxygen isotope is linked to temperature and, with some caveat, salinity. However, the authors did not lay out how the salinity/temperature changes at Site KL11 are linked to the circulation change before they used the resemblance of their record with the Greenland ice core record to argue for the link between the NH climate and ROC changes. There are clearly alternative ways to explain the oxygen isotope data. A plausible one would be the sea-level control, mentioned in the introduction by the authors, and can be further supported by the similar oxygen isotope record at Site KL11 to the relative sea level at an upstream site (GEOB5844-2), which is also based on the benthic oxygen isotope data. Overall, it appears to me that it is difficult to use salinity/temperature changes at a single site to deduce circulation changes.
For the carbon isotope record, it is also difficult to use the single site record to infer circulation changes. Benthic carbon isotopes at Site KL11 may help reveal ROC changes, only when combined with other records from sites either shallower/deeper than KL11 or upstream/downstream of KL11.
As no strong link was established between the C and O isotopes and ROC by the author, lots of effort is made to interpret the C and O isotopes (e.g., Lines 210-230, Section 4.2), which appears to be off the topic of ROC change set by the title and introduction of the manuscript.
Minor points
Figure 2. I highly recommend the authors comprehensively show wind fields, salinity, density, dissolved oxygen concentrations, etc., during two monsoon seasons to aid readers with the seasonal circulation changes in the Red Sea. Not every reader of the journal would be familiar with the Red Sea hydrography.
Age model. Better to show the alignment between cores KL11 and GEOB5844-2, and show the age tuning points in Figures 4 and 5.
Line 157: Carbon isotope fluctuation is not linked to the carbon inventory.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-1677-RC1 -
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-1677', Anonymous Referee #2, 04 Sep 2023
reply
The study present new high-resolution benthic d13C and d18O records from the central red Sea, a region that captures several modes of palaeoclimate variability (glacial-interglacial sea-level changes, orbital monsoon variability, millennial variability). This study focusses on millennial variability in MIS 2-4. It is well written and presented and suitable for publication in Climate of the Past, in light of the following comments/suggestions.
First, the authors need to show synchronization of KL11 d18Obenthic to GeoB5844 d18Obenthic. A table of depth-age points is given, but I’d like to see the d18O tuning, and more details of the Arz et al chronology, as the timing of orbital and millennial variability in the new records presented here largely hinges on the Arz et al 2007 chronology for core GeoB5844.
What are the black lines in Fig. 4a and 4b? Looks like a moving average, but caption doesn’t state. Given the data spread and the rather large standard deviation for each species, and the fact that different species were used and corrected for their offsets, it would be nice to see an attempt to quantify these uncertainties. The box & whisker plots demonstrate the wide SD of the data. The large millennial-scale variability in d18O is appears robust however, regardless of the above, due to the high-amplitude shifts in isotopic values. For d13C, amplitude of millennial variability is within the range of the calculated standard deviations, so initially I’m a bit more cautious about the black line in Fig. 4b and its interpretation. For instance, the older part of the d13C plot (>50 ka) is very consistent among species, hence the trend appears robust, but the younger part shows quite a bit of divergence among species, despite their being corrected for inter-specific isotopic offsets. However, the younger portion of the d13C record shows strong correlation with d18O, which suggests that the described millennial variability in d13C is robust.
Is the observed synchroneity of the KL11 d18Obenthic millennial variability with NGRIP biased to some extent by tuning to the Arz et al 07 chronology? (in the same way that millennial variability in the Siddall/Rohling sea-level record -using KL11- shown in Fig. 5d may be biased by their tuning to Antarctica). I agree with the authors’ observation that the offsets in inferred relationships to sea level may relate to age model strategies and uncertainties. I also wonder if this offset is real, ie, in KL11 the planktics are recording global sea level variations (which ~ follow Antarctic temperature) while the benthics are recording millennial ROC (which ~follows Greenland millennial variability). This can be explored with same-sample d18O on benthics and planktics.
The discussion of the short-term sea-level variability from line 190 is rather brief and may benefit from further reference to Siddall et al 2008 Rev. Geophys.
In the paragraph from line 196, the inferred max ROC during HEs is attributed to restricted exchange with the Indian Ocean and consequent SSS increases. But the sea level signal is not like that of NGRIP or KL11 d18Obenthic (which are more asymmetric with a sharp stadial-interstadial transition, as the authors describe); sea level variations are more symmetrical, like Antarctic climate. So, isn’t it more likely that the strong ROC during HEs is instead related to extreme cooling of the Northern Red Sea due to an expanded Siberian High and attendant northerly winds? (line 203 in the next paragraph suggests cooling & enhanced evap in HEs, but doesn’t describe mechanisms of cooling & enhanced evap, only the SSS-Indian Ocean exchange mechanism).
Good discussion of comparison to different monsoon indices and integration with evidence from the literature.
Minor edits
Line 29: mass or masses, not masse
Line 161: do you mean ‘…and also exhibits…’?
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-1677-RC2
Raphaël Hubert-Huard et al.
Raphaël Hubert-Huard et al.
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | Supplement | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
187 | 60 | 12 | 259 | 23 | 5 | 6 |
- HTML: 187
- PDF: 60
- XML: 12
- Total: 259
- Supplement: 23
- BibTeX: 5
- EndNote: 6
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1