The Relationship Between the Global Mean Deep-Sea and Surface Temperature During the Early Eocene
Goudsmit-Harzevoort, Barbara; Lansu, Angelique; Baatsen, Michiel L.J.; von der Heydt, Anna S.; de Winter, Niels J.; Zhang, Yurui; Abe-Ouchi, Ayako; de Boer, Agatha; Chan, Wing Le; Donnadieu, Yannick; Hutchinson, David K.; Knorr, Gregor; Ladant, Jean Baptiste; Morozova, Polina; Niezgodzki, Igor; Steinig, Sebastian; Tripati, Aradhna; Zhang, Zhongshi; Zhu, Jiang; Ziegler, Martin
(2023) Paleoceanography and Paleoclimatology, volume 38, issue 3
(Article)
Abstract
Estimates of global mean near-surface air temperature (global SAT) for the Cenozoic era rely largely on paleo-proxy data of deep-sea temperature (DST), with the assumption that changes in global SAT covary with changes in the global mean deep-sea temperature (global DST) and global mean sea-surface temperature (global SST). We tested
... read more
the validity of this assumption by analyzing the relationship between global SST, SAT, and DST using 25 different model simulations from the Deep-Time Model Intercomparison Project simulating the early Eocene Climatic Optimum (EECO) with varying CO2 levels. Similar to the modern situation, we find limited spatial variability in DST, indicating that local DST estimates can be regarded as a first order representative of global DST. In line with previously assumed relationships, linear regression analysis indicates that both global DST and SAT respond stronger to changes in atmospheric CO2 than global SST by a similar factor. Consequently, this model-based analysis validates the assumption that changes in global DST can be used to estimate changes in global SAT during the early Cenozoic. Paleo-proxy estimates of global DST, SST, and SAT during EECO show the best fit with model simulations with a 1,680 ppm atmospheric CO2 level. This matches paleo-proxies of EECO atmospheric CO2, indicating a good fit between models and proxy-data.
show less
Download/Full Text
Keywords: climate sensitivity, deep-sea temperature, DeepMIP, early Eocene, model-data comparison, Oceanography, Atmospheric Science, Palaeontology
ISSN: 2572-4517
Publisher: Wiley Online Library
Note: Funding Information: The authors would like to thank two anonymous reviewers and the associate editor for their insightful review of the manuscript. This study has been conducted using E.U. Copernicus Marine Service Information: https://doi.org/10.48670/moi-00165 ; https://doi.org/10.48670/moi-00021 ; https://doi.org/10.48670/moi-00052 . The study contains modified Copernicus Climate Change Service information 2022. Neither the European Commission nor ECMWF is responsible for any use that may be made of the Copernicus information or data it contains. The research was performed using model data output from the Deep‐Time Model Intercomparison Project (DeepMIP). The DeepMIP model simulations were carried out by Jiang Zhu with support from Christopher J. Poulsen and Jessica E. Tierney (CESM), Igor Niezgodzki with support from Gregor Knorr and Gerrit Lohmann (COSMOS), David K. Hutchinson with support from Agatha M. de Boer and Helen K. Coxall (GFDL), Fran Bragg and Sebastian Steinig with support from Paul J. Valdes (HadCM3), Polina Morozova and Evgeny M. Volodin (INMCM), Jean‐Baptiste Ladant, Pierre Sepulchre and Yannick Donnadieu (IPSL), Wing‐Le Chan with support from Ayako Abe‐Ouchi (MIROC), Zhongshi Zhang with support from Petra M. Langebroek (NorESM). Christopher J. Hollis and Tom Dunkley Jones led the compilation of the DeepMIP database. Daniel J. Lunt, Matthew Huber, and Bette L. Otto‐Bliesner coordinated the study. Barbara Goudsmit‐Harzevoort acknowledges support from the Royal Netherlands Institute for Sea Research (NIOZ). Martin Ziegler acknowledges the NWO (Netherlands Science Foundation) for support of the VIDI Grant 016.161.365. Michiel Baatsen and Anna von der Heydt acknowledge support of the program of the Netherlands Earth System Science Centre (NESSC), financially supported by the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science (OCW). Yurai Zhang was supported by the Fundamental Research for the Central University (Grant 20720210079). Agatha de Boer acknowledges support from Swedish Research Council Grant 2020‐04791. David K. Hutchinson acknowledges support from Swedish Research Council Grant 2016‐03912 and Australian Research Council Grant DE220100279. Polina Morozova (INMCM simulations) was supported by the state assignment project no. FMGE‐2019‐0009, Megagrant Project (agreement no. 075‐2021‐599,8.06.2021). Sebastian Steinig acknowledges funding from the NERC SWEET Grant NE/P01903X/1. The CESM project is supported primarily by the National Science Foundation (NSF). This material is based upon work supported by the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR), which is a major facility sponsored by the NSF under Cooperative Agreement 1852977. The GFDL simulations were performed using resources from the Swedish National Infrastructure for Computing (SNIC) at the National Supercomputer Centre (NSC), partially funded by the Swedish Research Council Grant 2018‐05973. MIROC4m simulations were performed on the Earth Simulator supercomputer and funded by JSPS KAKENHI Grant 17H06104 and MEXT KAKENHI Grant 17H06. Publisher Copyright: © 2023. The Authors.
(Peer reviewed)
