CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 321Paleontology and Stratigraphy of FossilsOrigins and Evolution of LifeEarth Systems and Cosmic Evolution

A coupled atmosphere–ecosystem model of the early Archean Earth

KHARECHA, P., KASTING, J., SIEFERT, J.·2005·Geobiology
DOI 10.1111/j.1472-4669.2005.00049.x
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

A coupled photochemical‐ecosystem model has been developed to simulate the early Archean biosphere. The model incorporates kinetic and nutrient limitations on biological productivity, along with constraints imposed by metabolic thermodynamics. We have used this model to predict the biogenic CH 4 flux and net primary productivity (NPP) of the marine biosphere prior to the advent of oxygenic photosynthesis. Organisms considered include chemotrophic and organotrophic methanogens, H 2‐, H 2 S‐, and Fe‐using anoxygenic phototrophs, S‐reducing bacteria, CO‐using acetogens, and fermentative bacteria. CH 4 production and NPP in our model are limited by the downward flux of H 2, CO, S 8, and H 2 S through the atmosphere–ocean interface and by the upwelling rate of Fe 2+ from the deep oceans. For reasonable estimates of the supply rates of these compounds, we find that the biogenic CH 4 flux should have ranged from approximately 1/3 to 2.5 times the modern CH 4 flux. In the anoxic Archean atmosphere, this would have produced CH 4 concentrations of 100 ppmv to as much as 35 000 ppmv (3.5%), depending on the rate at which hydrogen escaped to space. Recent calculations indicating that hydrogen escape was slow favour the higher CH 4 concentrations. Calculated NPP is lower than in the modern oceans by a factor of at least 40. In our model, H 2‐based metabolism is moderately more productive than Fe 2+‐based metabolism, with S‐based metabolism being considerably less productive. Internal recycling of sulphur within the surface ocean could conceivably raise rates of sulphur metabolism by a factor of 10 higher than the values predicted by our model. Although explicit climate calculations have not been performed here, our results are consistent with the idea that the Archean climate was warm, and possibly very hot. Some or most of our ecosystem scenarios are consistent with the carbon isotope record, depending on how that record is interpreted. If the conventional view is correct and organic carbon burial accounted for approximately 20% of total carbon burial during the Archean, then only two of our phototroph‐based model ecosystems are plausible. However, if a recent alternative analysis is correct and only approximately 0–10% of total buried carbon was organic, then essentially all of our anaerobic ecosystems are plausible. A better understanding of both the geochemical and the biological records is needed to better constrain our models.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1472-4669.2005.00049.x

Cites

93 of 93 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Anoxic Archean air could hold 1000s of ppmv of CH4 if a microbial flux of CH4 was comparable to today's.

    “Anoxic Archean air could hold 1000 s of parts per million by volume of CH4 if a microbial flux of CH4 was comparable to today’s (135, 183, 184).”

    From The Archean atmosphere (2020) · cites this paper as [183]

  • With this reaction, microbes would draw CO down to 100 to 10^2 ppmv.

    “With this reaction, microbes would draw CO down to 100 to 102 ppmv (183).”

    From The Archean atmosphere (2020) · cites this paper as [183]

  • In models with methanogens and H2-based photosynthesizers, atmospheric H2 mixing ratios generally are ≤10^-4.

    “In models with methanogens and H2-based photosynthesizers, atmospheric H2 mixing ratios depend on assumed H2 outgassing and biological productivity but generally are ≤10−4 (183, 184).”

    From The Archean atmosphere (2020) · cites this paper as [183]

  • Both the modern biological methane flux and plausible biological Archean fluxes are much larger than the distribution of maximum abiotic fluxes.

    “Both the modern biological methane flux (58) and plausible biological Archean fluxes (59) are much larger than the distribution of maximum abiotic fluxes.”

    From Disequilibrium biosignatures over Earth history and implications for detecting exoplanet life (2018) · cites this paper as [59]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
KHARECHA, P., KASTING, J., & SIEFERT, J.
Affiliations
  • Goddard Institute for Space Studies (US)
  • Pennsylvania State University (US)
  • Rice University (US)
Corresponding author
KHARECHA, P.
ORCID
KASTING, J.
Venue
Geobiology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2005-04
Volume
3
Issue
2
Pages
53-76
ISSN
  • 1472-4669 (ISSN-L)
  • 1472-4677
DOI
10.1111/j.1472-4669.2005.00049.x
OpenAlex
W2104839310
Cited by
321
References
93
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 18 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 21 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 24 · 2018: 27 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 16 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 33 · 2012: 15
FWCI
10.35
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor, 215 d)
Locations
Geobiology (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Paleontology › Paleontology and Stratigraphy of Fossils
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Origins and Evolution of Life
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Atmospheric Science › Earth Systems and Cosmic Evolution
Keywords
net primary productivity, anoxic atmosphere, anoxygenic phototrophs, methanogenic archaea, hydrogen escape, carbon isotope record, organic carbon burial, atmospheric methane concentration

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