↓ Skip to main content

Abrupt reversal in ocean overturning during the Palaeocene/Eocene warm period

Overview of attention for article published in Nature, January 2006
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
wikipedia
7 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
136 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
272 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
connotea
1 Connotea
Title
Abrupt reversal in ocean overturning during the Palaeocene/Eocene warm period
Published in
Nature, January 2006
DOI 10.1038/nature04386
Pubmed ID
Authors

Flavia Nunes, Richard D. Norris

Abstract

An exceptional analogue for the study of the causes and consequences of global warming occurs at the Palaeocene/Eocene Thermal Maximum, 55 million years ago. A rapid rise of global temperatures during this event accompanied turnovers in both marine and terrestrial biota, as well as significant changes in ocean chemistry and circulation. Here we present evidence for an abrupt shift in deep-ocean circulation using carbon isotope records from fourteen sites. These records indicate that deep-ocean circulation patterns changed from Southern Hemisphere overturning to Northern Hemisphere overturning at the start of the Palaeocene/Eocene Thermal Maximum. This shift in the location of deep-water formation persisted for at least 40,000 years, but eventually recovered to original circulation patterns. These results corroborate climate model inferences that a shift in deep-ocean circulation would deliver relatively warmer waters to the deep sea, thus producing further warming. Greenhouse conditions can thus initiate abrupt deep-ocean circulation changes in less than a few thousand years, but may have lasting effects; in this case taking 100,000 years to revert to background conditions.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 272 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 4 1%
Canada 4 1%
France 3 1%
Belgium 3 1%
United Kingdom 2 <1%
South Africa 2 <1%
United States 2 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Norway 1 <1%
Other 3 1%
Unknown 247 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 65 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 51 19%
Student > Bachelor 32 12%
Professor > Associate Professor 24 9%
Professor 22 8%
Other 56 21%
Unknown 22 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Earth and Planetary Sciences 155 57%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 38 14%
Environmental Science 18 7%
Physics and Astronomy 7 3%
Social Sciences 6 2%
Other 18 7%
Unknown 30 11%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 August 2021.
All research outputs
#1,922,275
of 19,695,594 outputs
Outputs from Nature
#39,109
of 84,396 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#31,425
of 310,066 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature
#702
of 908 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 19,695,594 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 84,396 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 94.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 310,066 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 908 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.