The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Air pressure and cosmogenic isotope production
Abstract
The cosmic ray flux increases at higher altitude as air pressure and the shielding effect of the atmosphere decrease. Altitude‐dependent scaling factors are required to compensate for this effect in calculating cosmic ray exposure ages. Scaling factors in current use assume a uniform relationship between altitude and atmospheric pressure over the Earth's surface. This masks regional differences in mean annual pressure and spatial variation in cosmogenic isotope production rates. Outside Antarctica, air pressures over land depart from the standard atmosphere by ±4.4 hPa (1σ) near sea level, corresponding to offsets of ±3–4% in isotope production rates. Greater offsets occur in regions of persistent high and low pressure such as Siberia and Iceland, where conventional scaling factors predict production rates in error by ±10%. The largest deviations occur over Antarctica where ground level pressures are 20–40 hPa lower than the standard atmosphere at all altitudes. Isotope production rates in Antarctica are therefore 25–30% higher than values calculated by scaling Northern Hemisphere production rates with conventional scaling factors. Exposure ages of old Antarctic surfaces, especially those based on cosmogenic radionuclides at levels close to saturation, may be millions of years younger than published estimates.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
A sea level high latitude spallation production rate of 4.02±0.32 at.g−1.a−1 was used and scaled using Stone's polynomials.
“A sea level high latitude spallation production rate of 4.02±0.32 at.g⁻¹.a⁻¹69 was used and scaled using Stone’s polynomials70.”
From Javanese homo erectus on the move in SE asia circa 1.8 ma (2022) · cites this paper as [70]
Citations
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 28
- 10.1029/93JD00104 · DOI
- 10.1130/0091-7613(1995)023<1063:COAEAU>2.3.CO;2 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1029/95GL00167 · DOI
- 10.1016/S0012-821X(97)00003-4 · DOI
- 10.1006/qres.1995.1081 · DOI
- 10.1103/PhysRev.79.749 · DOI
- 10.1016/S0012-821X(99)00310-6 · DOI
- 10.1016/S0168-583X(96)00714-8 · DOI
- 10.1016/S0168-583X(96)00702-1 · DOI
- 10.1130/0091-7613(1995)023<1007:MBEAOE>2.3.CO;2 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/0012-821X(91)90220-C · DOI
- 10.1007/978-3-642-46079-1_7 · DOI
- Lide D. R., 1999, CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, 14‐16
- 10.1016/0012-821X(95)00169-D · DOI
- 10.1016/0031-0182(91)90170-V · DOI
- 10.1029/JB094iB12p17907 · DOI
- 10.1016/0012-821X(91)90221-3 · DOI
- 10.1029/96JB02270 · DOI
- 10.1017/S0954102096000284 · DOI
- 10.1029/JD092iD04p04241 · DOI
- Rossi B., 1952, High Energy Particles
- 10.1016/S0012-821X(99)00029-1 · DOI
- 10.1016/S0016-7037(97)00369-4 · DOI
- 10.1130/0091-7613(1998)026<0587:EDAVOP>2.3.CO;2 · DOI
- 10.1016/0168-583X(94)96026-7 · DOI
- 10.1016/0277-3791(91)90020-U · DOI
- 10.1130/0091-7613(1984)12<287:CMSAIV>2.0.CO;2 · DOI
- 10.1016/0012-821X(91)90123-Y · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The chronology of the Last Glacial Maximum and deglacial events in central Argentine Patagonia
Hein, A. S., Hulton, N. R. J., Dunai, T. J., Sugden, D. E., Kaplan, M. R., & Xu, S. (2010) · Quaternary Science Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.quascirev.2010.01.020 · Cited by 158
Further constraints on the Chauvet cave artwork elaboration
Sadier, B., Delannoy, J.-J., Benedetti, L., Bourlès, D. L., Jaillet, S., Geneste, J.-M., Lebatard, A.-E., & Arnold, M. (2012) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1118593109 · Cited by 113
Glacier maxima in Baffin Bay during the Medieval Warm Period coeval with Norse settlement
Young, N. E., Schweinsberg, A. D., Briner, J. P., & Schaefer, J. M. (2015) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.1500806 · Cited by 62
Javanese homo erectus on the move in SE asia circa 1.8 ma
Husson, L., Salles, T., Lebatard, A.-E., Zerathe, S., Braucher, R., Noerwidi, S., Aribowo, S., Mallard, C., Carcaillet, J., Natawidjaja, D. H., et al. (2022) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-022-23206-9 · Cited by 28
Metadata
- Authors
- Stone, J. O.
- Venue
- Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth
- Publisher
- American Geophysical Union (AGU)
- Published
- 2000-10-10
- Volume
- 105
- Issue
- B10
- Pages
- 23753-23759
- ISSN
- 0148-0227
- Cited by
- 1,983
- References
- 0
- Language
- en
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