Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 677

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 189 of the 189 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Elemental proxies for paleosalinity analysis of ancient shales and mudrocks

Wei, Wei, Algeo, Thomas J.·2020·Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta

Abstract

Abstract Salinity is a fundamental property of watermasses that is useful in paleoenvironmental and paleoecological studies, yet the theory of application of geochemical proxies to paleosalinity reconstruction is underdeveloped. Here, we explore the use of three elemental ratios for paleosalinity reconstruction: boron/gallium (B/Ga), strontium/barium (Sr/Ba), and sulfur/total organic carbon (S/TOC) ratios. We compiled a large set of modern aqueous and sedimentary chemical data representing a range of salinity facies (i.e., freshwater, brackish, marine) in order to test the relationships of these proxies to ambient watermass salinity and to determine their viability for paleosalinity analysis. Sediment data were limited to fine-grained siliciclastic units (muds/shales/mudstones) without significant carbonate content, in which the elements of interest were mainly acquired through adsorption of dissolved species, forging a connection between elemental proxy values and watermass chemistry. In modern systems, watermass salinity is correlated with these proxies, yielding r of +0.99 and +0.76 for aqueous and sediment B/Ga, +0.66 and +0.54 for aqueous and sediment Sr/Ba, and +0.98 for aqueous sulfate and +0.66 for sediment S/TOC (all significant at p(α) 6 in marine facies; (2) Sr/Ba is 0.5 in marine facies; and (3) S/TOC is 0.1 in brackish and marine facies. S/TOC did not discriminate effectively between brackish and marine facies, probably because microbial sulfate reduction (MSR) is generally Corg-limited rather than sulfate-limited in both facies. The accuracies of these thresholds for prediction of the salinity facies of sediments are ∼88% for B/Ga, ∼66% for Sr/Ba, and ∼91% for S/TOC. Although the Sr/Ba proxy is slightly less robust owing to difficulty in removing all carbonate Sr influence and/or to greater mobility of Sr and Ba in the burial environment, we strongly advocate use of multiple proxies in order to support paleosalinity interpretations. Finally, we illustrate the application of these proxies with case studies of (1) the Ordos Basin in North China, which contains Ordovician marine shales and Triassic terrestrial mudstones, and (2) the mid-Eocene Bohai Bay Basin in NE China, which accumulated brackish to marine mudstones.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.gca.2019.06.034

Cites

189 of 189 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 189 references

Metadata

Authors
Wei, W., & Algeo, T. J.
Venue
Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-10
Volume
287
Pages
341-366
ISSN
0016-7037 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2955035850
Cited by
677
References
189
FWCI
32.35
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Elemental proxies for paleosalinity analysis of ancient shales and mudrocks. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.gca.2019.06.034
The paper
Wei, W., & Algeo, T. J. (2020). Elemental proxies for paleosalinity analysis of ancient shales and mudrocks. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gca.2019.06.034

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.