Late Pleistocene glacial terminations accelerated by proglacial lakes
-
Published:2024-08-12
Issue:8
Volume:20
Page:1761-1784
-
ISSN:1814-9332
-
Container-title:Climate of the Past
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:Clim. Past
Author:
Scherrenberg Meike D. W.ORCID, Berends Constantijn J.ORCID, van de Wal Roderik S. W.
Abstract
Abstract. During the glacial cycles of the past 800 000 years, Eurasia and North America were periodically covered by large ice sheets, causing up to 100 m of sea-level change. While Late Pleistocene glacial cycles typically lasted 80 000–120 000 years, the termination phases were completed in only 10 000 years. During these glacial terminations, the North American and Eurasian ice sheets retreated, which created large proglacial lakes in front of the ice-sheet margin. Proglacial lakes accelerate deglaciation as they facilitate the formation of ice shelves at the southern margins of the North American and Eurasian ice sheets. These ice shelves are characterized by basal melting, low surface elevations, and negligible friction at the base. Here, we use an ice-sheet model to quantify the (combined) effects of proglacial lakes on Late Pleistocene glacial terminations by examining their interplay with glacial isostatic adjustment (GIA) and basal sliding. We find that proglacial lakes accelerate the deglaciation of ice sheets mainly because there is an absence of basal friction underneath ice shelves. If friction underneath grounded ice is applied to floating ice, full deglaciation is postponed by a few millennia, resulting in more ice remaining during interglacial periods and no extensive ice shelves forming. Additionally, the large uncertainty in melt rates underneath lacustrine ice shelves translates to an uncertainty in the timing of the termination of up to a millennium. Proglacial lakes are created by depressions in the landscape that remain after an ice sheet has retreated. The depth, size, and timing of proglacial lakes depend on the rate of bedrock rebound. We find that if bedrock rebounds within a few centuries (rather than a few millennia), the mass loss rate of the ice sheet is substantially reduced. This is because fast bedrock rebound prevents the formation of extensive proglacial lakes. Additionally, a decrease in ice thickness is partly compensated for by faster bedrock rebound, resulting in a higher surface elevation; lower temperatures; and a higher surface mass balance, which delays deglaciation. We find that a very long bedrock relaxation time does not substantially affect terminations, but it may lead to a delayed onset of the next glacial period. This is because inception regions, such as northwestern Canada, remain below sea level throughout the preceding interglacial period.
Funder
Netherlands Earth System Science Centre European Commission
Publisher
Copernicus GmbH
Reference115 articles.
1. Abe-Ouchi, A., Saito, F., Kawamura, K., Raymo, M. E., Okuno, J., Takahashi, K., and Blatter, H.: Insolation-driven 100,000-year glacial cycles and hysteresis of ice-sheet volume, Nature, 500, 190–193, https://doi.org/10.1038/nature12374, 2013. 2. Abe-Ouchi, A., Saito, F., Kageyama, M., Braconnot, P., Harrison, S. P., Lambeck, K., Otto-Bliesner, B. L., Peltier, W. R., Tarasov, L., Peterschmitt, J.-Y., and Takahashi, K.: Ice-sheet configuration in the CMIP5/PMIP3 Last Glacial Maximum experiments, Geosci. Model Dev., 8, 3621–3637, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-3621-2015, 2015. 3. Ahn, S., Khider, D., Lisiecki, L. E., and Lawrence, C. E.: A probabilistic Pliocene–Pleistocene stack of benthic δ18O using a profile hidden Markov model, Dynam. Stat. Clim. Syst., 2, dzx002, https://doi.org/10.1093/climsys/dzx002, 2017. 4. Alder, J. R. and Hostetler, S. W.: Applying the Community Ice Sheet Model to evaluate PMIP3 LGM climatologies over the North American ice sheets, Clim. Dynam., 53, 2807–2824, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-019-04663-x, 2019. 5. Amante, C. and Eakins, B. W.: ETOPO1 1 Arc-Minute Global Relief Model: Procedures, Data Sources and Analysis. NOAA Technical Memorandum NESDIS NGDC-24, National Geophysical Data Center, NOAA [data set], https://doi.org/10.7289/V5C8276M, 2009.
|
|