Preprints
https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-2188
https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-2188
28 Apr 2026
 | 28 Apr 2026
Status: this preprint is open for discussion and under review for Biogeosciences (BG).

Comparison of Modified Bligh-Dyer and Ultrasonic Organic Solvent Methods for GDGT Extraction from Surface Sediments of Lakes with Different Salinities

Rui Miao, Ning Shi, Zenghao Zhao, Hu Liu, Xiangzhong Li, and Huanye Wang

Abstract. Accurately quantifying core lipid (CL) and intact polar lipid (IPL) GDGTs is essential for investigating the sources of GDGTs and their responses to climatic and environmental changes in lacustrine systems. However, systematic comparisons of the performance of different methods for extracting GDGTs (both abundance and distribution) from lake sediments remain limited. In this study, we compared two ultrasonic organic solvent extraction methods, including a stepwise gradient extraction with dichloromethane/methanol (DCM/MeOH) solvent mixtures of different polarities and a single solvent extraction with DCM:MeOH (9:1, v:v), and two modified Bligh-Dyer (BD) methods (phosphate buffer; trichloroacetic acid) for extracting CL-GDGTs and IPL-GDGTs from saline and freshwater lake sediments. The results showed that, for CL-GDGTs, stepwise gradient extraction yielded the highest recovery, whereas no significant differences were observed in the CL-derived GDGTs proxies among the different extraction methods. For IPL-GDGTs, the BD (phosphate buffer) method achieved the highest recovery for isoprenoid GDGTs (isoGDGTs), while stepwise gradient extraction was most effective for extracting branched GDGTs (brGDGTs) and archaeol from saline lake sediments. Moreover, the consistently lower relative abundance of crenarchaeol to other isoGDGTs in CLs than in IPLs for all methods suggests that crenarchaeol is primarily produced in the lake water column, whereas other isoGDGTs have a relatively greater autochthonous production within the sediments or at the water-sediment interface. In saline lake sediments, we also observed higher relatively abundance of ≥7-methyl brGDGTs and tetramethylated brGDGTs in IPLs than in CLs, indicating that their source bacteria are active at the water-sediment interface or in the sediments of saline lakes. These findings will provide insights for the quantitative analysis of GDGTs in lake sediments and for the study of their sources in lacustrine environments.

Publisher's note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims made in the text, published maps, institutional affiliations, or any other geographical representation in this paper. While Copernicus Publications makes every effort to include appropriate place names, the final responsibility lies with the authors. Views expressed in the text are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the publisher.
Share
Rui Miao, Ning Shi, Zenghao Zhao, Hu Liu, Xiangzhong Li, and Huanye Wang

Status: open (until 09 Jun 2026)

Comment types: AC – author | RC – referee | CC – community | EC – editor | CEC – chief editor | : Report abuse
Rui Miao, Ning Shi, Zenghao Zhao, Hu Liu, Xiangzhong Li, and Huanye Wang
Rui Miao, Ning Shi, Zenghao Zhao, Hu Liu, Xiangzhong Li, and Huanye Wang
Metrics will be available soon.
Latest update: 28 Apr 2026
Download
Short summary
GDGTs are powerful biomarkers for paleoclimate reconstructions, but systematic evaluations of their extraction from lake sediments remain insufficient. We found that different methods yield varying extraction efficiencies for GDGTs in sediments from saltwater and freshwater lakes, and that GDGT producers are active at the water-sediment interface. Our findings provide insights into the quantitative analysis of GDGTs in lake sediments and their sources in lacustrine environments.
Share