Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 816

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Evaluation of the Plio‐Pleistocene astronomical timescale

Open access
Lourens, L. J., Antonarakou, A., Hilgen, F. J., Van Hoof, A. A. M., Vergnaud‐Grazzini, C., Zachariasse, W. J.·1996·Paleoceanography

Abstract

An astronomically calibrated timescale has recently been established [Hilgen, 1991a, b] for the Pliocene and earliest Pleistocene based on the correlation of dominantly precession controlled sedimentary cycles (sapropels and carbonate cycles) in Mediterranean marine sequences to the precession time series of the astronomical solution of Berger and Loutre [1991] (hereinafter referred to as Ber90). Here we evaluate the accuracy of this timescale by (1) comparing the sedimentary cycle patterns with 65°N summer insolation time series of different astronomical solutions and (2) a cross‐spectral comparison between the obliquity‐related components in the 65°N summer insolation curves and high‐resolution paleoclimatic records derived from the same sections used to construct the timescale. Our results show that the carbonate cycles older than 3.5 m.y. should be calibrated to one precession cycle older than previously proposed. Application of the astronomical solution of Laskar [1990] (hereinafter referred to as La90) with present‐day values for the dynamical ellipticity of the Earth and tidal dissipation by the Sun and Moon results in the best fit with the geological record, indicating that this solution is the most accurate from a geological point of view. Application of Ber90, or La90 solutions with dynamical ellipticity values smaller or larger than the present‐day value, results in a less obvious fit with the geological record. This implies that the change in the planetary shape of the Earth associated with ice loading and unloading near the poles during the last 5.3 million years was too small to drive the precession into resonance with the perturbation term, s 6−g 6+g 5, of Jupiter and Saturn. Our new timescale results in a slight but significant modification of all ages of the sedimentary cycles, bioevents, reversal boundaries, chronostratigraphic boundaries, and glacial cycles. Moreover, a comparison of this timescale with the astronomical timescales of ODP site 846 [Shackleton et al., 1995a, b] and ODP site 659 [Tiedemann et al., 1994] indicates that all obliquity‐related glacial cycles prior to ∼4.7 Ma in ODP sites 659 and 846 should be correlated with one obliquity cycle older than previously proposed.

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 · 10.1029/96pa01125

Cites

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

Cited by

See all 816

Metadata

Authors
Lourens, L. J., Antonarakou, A., Hilgen, F. J., Van Hoof, A. A. M., Vergnaud‐Grazzini, C., & Zachariasse, W. J.
Venue
Paleoceanography
Published
1996-08
Volume
11
Issue
4
Pages
391-413
ISSN
  • 0883-8305 (ISSN-L)
  • 1944-9186
OpenAlex
W2138477425
Cited by
816
References
0
FWCI
23.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

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: Evaluation of the Plio‐Pleistocene astronomical timescale. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1029/96pa01125
The paper
Lourens, L. J., Antonarakou, A., Hilgen, F. J., Van Hoof, A. A. M., Vergnaud‐Grazzini, C., & Zachariasse, W. J. (1996). Evaluation of the Plio‐Pleistocene astronomical timescale. Paleoceanography. https://doi.org/10.1029/96pa01125

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.