Cited by 50Geology and Paleoclimatology ResearchArchaeology and ancient environmental studiesTree-ring climate responses

Updated Cariaco Basin14C Calibration Dataset from 0–60 cal kyr BP

Open access
Hughen, Konrad A, Heaton, Timothy J·2020·Radiocarbon

Abstract

We present new updates to the calendar and radiocarbon (14 C) chronologies for the Cariaco Basin, Venezuela. Calendar ages were generated by tuning abrupt climate shifts in Cariaco Basin sediments to those in speleothems from Hulu Cave. After the original Cariaco-Hulu calendar age model was published, Hulu Cave δ 18 O records have been augmented with increased temporal resolution and a greater number of U/Th dates. These updated Hulu Cave records provide increased accuracy as well as precision in the final Cariaco calendar age model. The depth scale for the Ocean Drilling Program Site 1002D sediment core, the primary source of samples for 14 C dating, has been corrected to account for missing sediment from a core break, eliminating age-depth anomalies that afflicted the earlier calendar age models. Individual 14 C dates for the Cariaco Basin remain unchanged from previous papers, although detailed comparisons of the Cariaco calibration dataset to those from Hulu Cave and Lake Suigetsu suggest that the Cariaco marine reservoir age may have shifted systematically during the past. We describe these recent changes to the Cariaco datasets and provide the data in a comprehensive format that will facilitate use by the community.

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 · 10.1017/rdc.2020.53

Cites

37 of 38 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The estimated MRA using the LSG OGCM based approach was too high for Cariaco Basin data during the Younger Dryas (ca. 12.9-11.7 cal kBP, GS-1) and during Heinrich Stadial 1 (ca. 23-12.9 cal kBP, GS-2).

    “The estimated MRA using the above LSG OGCM based approach was, however, seen to be too high for Cariaco Basin data during the Younger Dryas (ca. 12.9 -11.7 cal kBP) which corresponds to Greenland Stadial (GS-1), where it is known to be close to zero from the overlap with the tree rings”

    From The IntCal20 Northern Hemisphere Radiocarbon Age Calibration Curve (0–55 cal kBP) (2020) · cites this paper as Hughen and Heaton 2020 in this issue

    The Marine Reservoir Age section reports that comparison with tree rings shows Cariaco MRA dropping to near zero at the Younger Dryas onset, while the Incorporating Cariaco Basin section says the LSG OGCM cannot reproduce that reduction and overestimates MRA magnitude and variability. The paper also reports an MRA decrease around Heinrich Event 1, but places it around 17,148–16,150 cal yr BP; it does not establish that the model estimate was too high throughout the claimed 23–12.9 cal kBP interval. The verbatim citing sentence itself makes only the Younger Dryas claim. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • A revision of the Cariaco Basin record tie-pointing and age-depth model has resulted in changes to the timescale used in IntCal13; the depth scale has been corrected and the timescale recalculated.

    “A revision of the Cariaco Basin record tie-pointing and age-depth model has resulted in changes to the timescale used in IntCal13. The depth scale has been corrected as described in Hughen and Heaton (2020 in this issue) and the timescale recalculated.”

    From The IntCal20 Northern Hemisphere Radiocarbon Age Calibration Curve (0–55 cal kBP) (2020) · cites this paper as Hughen and Heaton 2020 in this issue

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hughen, K. A., & Heaton, T. J.
Affiliations
  • Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (US)
  • University of Sheffield (GB)
Corresponding author
Hughen, Konrad A
Venue
Radiocarbon
Published
2020-08
Volume
62
Issue
4
Pages
1001-1043
ISSN
  • 0033-8222 (ISSN-L)
  • 1945-5755
OpenAlex
W3081307666
Cited by
50
References
37
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 6
FWCI
3.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Radiocarbon (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) (acceptedVersion)
  • Open Access Server of the Woods Hole Scientific Community (Woods Hole Scientific Community) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (1657191)
  • Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution
  • Leverhulme Trust (RF-2019-140\9)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Atmospheric Science › Geology and Paleoclimatology Research
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Paleontology › Archaeology and ancient environmental studies
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Atmospheric Science › Tree-ring climate responses
Keywords
Cariaco Basin, radiocarbon calibration, Hulu Cave, speleothems, abrupt climate change, marine reservoir age, age-depth model, Lake Suigetsu, Holocene, Last Glacial Maximum, paleoclimate

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