Geochemical Perspectives Letters
Geochemical
Perspectives Letters
Geochemical
Perspectives
  • Submit here
  • Track your paper
  • For authors
  • e-Alerts
  • Home
  • About
    • About the journal
    • Editorial Board
    • Publication Policy
    • Publication Ethics
  • Submission & Review
    • Copyright & Permissions
    • Information for Authors
    • Information for Reviewers
  • Current issue
  • All issues
  • Submit
Select Page Menu

by admin | Apr 30, 2019 | vol10 | 0 comments

T.W. Dahl, J.N. Connelly, A. Kouchinsky, B.C. Gill, S.F. Månsson, M. Bizzarro

10

1724cor

9

April

2019

12

April

2019

30

April

2019

40

0

Next article >><< Previous article

Corrigendum to “Reorganisation of Earth's biogeochemical cycles briefly oxygenated the oceans 520 Myr ago” by Dahl et al., 2017

T.W. Dahl1,

1Natural History Museum of Denmark, University of Copenhagen, Denmark

J.N. Connelly1,2,

1Natural History Museum of Denmark, University of Copenhagen, Denmark
2Centre for Star and Planet Formation, University of Copenhagen, Denmark

A. Kouchinsky3,

3Swedish Museum of Natural History, Stockholm, Sweden

B.C. Gill4,

4Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, USA

S.F. Månsson1,

1Natural History Museum of Denmark, University of Copenhagen, Denmark

M. Bizzarro1,2

1Natural History Museum of Denmark, University of Copenhagen, Denmark
2Centre for Star and Planet Formation, University of Copenhagen, Denmark

Affiliations  |  Corresponding Author  |  Cite as  |  Funding information

T.W. Dahl
Email: tais.dahl@snm.ku.dk

1Natural History Museum of Denmark, University of Copenhagen, Denmark
2Center for Star and Planet Formation, University of Copenhagen, Denmark
3Swedish Museum of Natural History, Stockholm, Sweden
4Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, USA

Corrigendum to “Reorganisation of Earth's biogeochemical cycles briefly oxygenated the oceans 520 Myr ago” by Dahl et al., 2017. Geochem. Persp. Let. 10, 40.

Geochemical Perspectives Letters v10  |  doi: 10.7185/geochemlet.1724cor
Received 9 April 2019  |  Accepted 12 April 2019  |  Published 30 April 2019

Copyright © The Authors

Published by the European Association of Geochemistry
under Creative Commons License CC BY-NC-ND 4.0

 
  • Share this article
               

  • Article views:
    760

    Cumulative count of HTML views and PDF downloads.

  • Download Citation
  • Rights & Permissions



top

Corrigendum

Corrigendum | Original article

Correction to: Geochemical Perspectives Letters v3, n2, 210-220, doi: 10.7185/geochemlet.1724, published on 15 June 2017.

The authors have identified an error in Figures S-8 and S-9 of the Supplementary Information accompanying the original article. Figures S-8 and S-9 have now been corrected in the online and PDF versions of the Supplementary Information and the correct figures are shown below.


Figure S-8 Modelled seawater composition (δ238U, δ98Mo) for the early Cambrian steady states before and after the Cambrian Stage 2–3 event. The left most point represents 100 % burial in anoxic settings (fU = fMo = 1). At each step point towards the right, fU decreases 10 % (i.e. 90 %, 80 %, 70 %, etc.). The estimated composition of the δ238U and δ98Mo of early Cambrian seawater in ‰ before and after the event are (-0.65, -0.70) and (1.4, 1.1), respectively, Error bars show ±0.03 ‰ and ±0.15 for δ238U and δ98Mo, respectively.


Figure S-9 The predicted composition of seawater at steady state for a = 1.15–1.38 is consistent with observations at the peak of the oxygenation event (δ238U = –0.45 ‰, δ98Mo = 2.0 ‰) with only 30 ± 10 % U removal into anoxic settings (corresponding to 25 ± 10 % and 19 ± 8 % Mo removal for a = 1.15 and 1.38, respectively).

top

Figures and Tables


Figure 1 Isotope data from three carbonate successions straddling the Cambrian Stage 2–3 boundary (Cambrian Stage 2–3) in Siberia. Carbon isotope data from carbonate (δ13CCARB) is taken from Kouchinsky et al. (2007)

Kouchinsky, A., Bengtson, S., Pavlov, V., Runnegar, B., Torssander, P., Young, E., Ziegler, K. (2007) Carbon isotope stratigraphy of the Precambrian–Cambrian Sukharikha River section, northwestern Siberian platform. Geological Magazine 144, 1–10.

. Sulphur and uranium isotope data are from carbonate-associated sulphate (δ34SCAS) and uranium (δ238UCAU), respectively. Age assignments derived from correlations to the carbon isotope stratigraphy and the age model of Maloof et al. (2010)

Maloof, A.C., Porter, S.M., Moore, J.L., Dudas, F.O., Bowring, S.A., Higgins, J.A., Fike, D.A., Eddy, M.P. (2010) The earliest Cambrian record of animals and ocean geochemical change. Geological Society of America Bulletin 122, 1731–1774.

.
Back to article | Download in Powerpoint


Figure 2 Summary of the redox proxy and carbon isotope data from latest Ediacaran to Early Cambrian (560–515 Myr). Redox proxy data includes the sedimentary contents and stable isotope compositions of molybdenum and uranium: Euxinic shales (black circles), Ferruginous shales (red circles), oxic shales (blue circles), shales from unknown redox environments (gray crosses), phosphorites (white diamonds), and carbonates (white circles). The grey field on the molybdenum isotope plot indicates values that are definitively fractionated from seawater, although values greater than these may be so as well. References for the data are listed in the Supplementary Information Extended Data, Table S-22.
Back to article | Download in Powerpoint


Figure 3 Conceptual model for the episodic expansion of the oxygenation zone in the oceans. The emergence of bilaterian animals (a-b) increased sediment mixing via bioturbation causing atmospheric pO2 to decline. The oxygenation zone contracts until (c) a rapid increase in the sinking rate of organic matter changes O2 consumption rates in the upper water column. (d) This accelerates organic carbon export to the sediments and delivers more food and O2 to the benthos over wider areas of the seafloor. Enhanced bioturbation promotes atmospheric pO2 decline, and re-stabilises the ocean in a more reducing state. Arrows and numbers illustrate organic export fluxes in one scenario (details in Table S-11). For simplicity, the organic C export increases in one step with the emergence of larger faecal pellets. Quantitative estimates for organic carbon export and remineralisation are derived from the coupled C and S isotope modelling (see Supplementary Information S5).
Back to article | Download in Powerpoint

Back to article

Supplementary Figures and Tables


Figure S-1 Location of the studied sections Sukharikha (S), Bolshaya Kuonamka (6) and Malaya Kuonamka (3) and other sections at the Siberian platform discussed in the text (L–Middle Lena, A–Aldan Rivers).
Back to article | Download in Powerpoint


Figure S-2 Carbon isotope stratigraphy of the three studied sections and composite curve from Aldan and Middle Lena Rivers (Brasier et al., 1994; Kouchinsky et al., 2007). Zones as defined in the Lena-Aldan area: Ns – Nochoroicyathus sunnaginicus; D. regularis – Dokidocyathus regularis; D. lenaicus – Dokidocyathus lenaicus–Tumuliolynthus primigenius; Pj – Profallotaspis jakutensis; R – Repinaella; Bm – Bergeroniellus micmacciformis; Bg – Bergeroniellus gurarii.
Back to article | Download in Powerpoint


Figure S-3 Photomicrographs of samples (A358, A368 and A393) from the Sukharikha River section show microstructure and cathodoluminescent (CL) characteristics. Recrystallised shell fragments are embedded in a micrite matrix. Photographs are taken from thin section using multi-composite exposure (HDR). Selected geochemical data are summarised; n.d. – no data.
Back to article | Download in Powerpoint


Figure S-4 Geochemical profiles from the Sukharikha River section showing δ13C, U/Th (note the logarithmic scale) and δ238U in stratigraphic context. The lithostratigraphy is adapted from Kouchinsky et al. (2007) and Rowland et al. (1998). The age assignment follows the model proposed by Maloof et al. (2010) assuming synchronicity worldwide in δ13C record tied to five absolute U/Pb age dates obtained from interbedded volcanic ashes in sections from Morocco (Maloof et al., 2010a). The uncertainty on δ13C is smaller than symbol size (2 SD reproducibility of samples from the same bed). The uncertainty of U/Th is <30 % measured on replicate leachates (see Extended Data 1). The uncertainty of δ238U is shown with error bars as 2 SE (replicate analyses of the same sample solution, see Table S-1).
Back to article | Download in Powerpoint


Figure S-5 Comparison of δ238U and highly reactive U to δ13C and geochemical indicators of dolomitisation (Mg/Ca, dolomite), pore water redox conditions (TOC), diagenetic alteration (Mn/Sr, δ18O), detrital input (Al/Ca, clay content), and primary carbonate mineralogy (Sr/Ca).
Back to article | Download in Powerpoint

Table S-1 Pearson's correlation coefficients and p-values calculated to test the influence of diagenetic indicators on δ238U and U/Th. Uranium content (U) is linearly correlated to U/Th, hence the significance of the correlations between U and diagenetic indicators are similar. Statistical significant relationships are in bold (confidence interval = 5 %).

Rp-value
δ238U vs. U0.120.71
δ238U vs. U/Th0.150.67
U vs. U/Th0.968.11E-07
δ238U vs. δ13C0.820.005
δ238U vs. Mg/Ca0.520.15
δ238U vs. TOC-0.310.41
δ238U vs. δ18O0.680.04
δ238U vs. Mn/Sr0.140.69
δ238U vs. Al/Ca#N/D#N/D
δ238U vs. Sr/Ca0.50.14
δ238U vs. calcite-0.660.07
δ238U vs. quartz0.690.05
δ238U vs. dolomite0.380.34
δ238U vs. ankerite-0.680.16
δ238U vs. chlorite0.140.76
δ238U vs. mica0.210.61
δ238U vs. K-feldspar0.440.27
U/Th vs. δ13C0.150.67
U/Th vs. Mg/Ca0.490.15
U/Th vs. TOC-0.10.78
U/Th vs. δ18O0.590.07
U/Th vs. Mn/Sr-0.130.71
U/Th vs. Al/Ca#N/D#N/D
U/Th vs. Sr/Ca0.160.65
U/Th vs. calcite-0.130.75
U/Th vs. quartz0.040.92
U/Th vs. dolomite0.30.44
U/Th vs. ankerite-0.240.63
U/Th vs. chlorite0.010.98
U/Th vs. mica-0.130.73
U/Th vs. K-feldspar 0.06 0.88
Back to article | Download in Excel

Table S-2 Uranium extracted from two reference materials with the sequential extraction procedure.
U (ppb)KTChalkMCPhos
(100 % CaCO3)(8.5 wt. % P2O5)
10 % acetic acid70 ± 4440 ± 5
0.5 M HCl19 ± 1872 ± 423
2 M HCl4 ± 0133 ± 49
HF + HNO314 ± 0994 ± 8
Total 107 ± 4 2439 ± 426
Back to article | Download in Excel

Table S-3 Comparison of extraction yields for acetic acid vs. hydrochloric acid of various molarity.
UKTChalkMCPhos
10 % acetic acid75 ± 4 %30 ± 0 %
0.5 M HCl20 ± 1 %60 ± 29 %
2 M HCl4 ± 0 %9 ± 3 %
Total 100 % 100 %
Back to article | Download in Excel

Table S-4 Repeated analyses of carbonate-associated U and δ238UCAU using the mild acetic acid extraction (with variable reaction time).
ReplicateReaction timeU (ppb)δ238U (‰)
SRM-1d (modern argillaceous limestone)
#116 hr70–0.09 ± 0.02
#216 hr743–0.08 ± 0.02
#316 hr639–0.11 ± 0.02
T1-13 (Cambrian limestone)
#330 min298–0.85 ± 0.02
#44 hr292–0.83 ± 0.02
#516 hr281–0.82 ± 0.03
T1-26.5 (Cambrian limestone)
#116 hr102not determined
#216 hr155–0.56 ± 0.02
#3 16 hr 154 –0.60 ± 0.03
Back to article | Download in Excel

Table S-5 Extraction yields for various mixtures of KTChalk and MCPhos.
AcidChalk 1:1† 1:2ßMCPhos 1:1† 1:2ß

measuredpredicted
10 % acetic65 %35 %24 %18 %40 %33 %
0.5 M HCl18 %37 %34 %36 %27 %30 %
2 M HCl4 %5 %12 %5 %5 %5 %
HF + HNO3 13 % 24 % 3 % 41 % 28 % 33 %

†Mixing ratio 1:1 corresponds to 1.0187 g KTChalk (108 ng U) + 0.0519 g MCPhos (127 ng U).
ßMixing ratio 1:2 corresponds to 1.0993 g KTChalk (117 ng U) + 0.1138 g MCPhos (278 ng U).

Back to article | Download in Excel

Table S-6 Five parameterisations for the modern oceanic uranium isotope budget shown in Figure S-6. The models are broadly consistent with the modern ocean state.
Case123456

Defaultlow δINhi ΔANOXhi δINlow ΔANOXhi ΔOTHER
δIN–0.27 ‰–0.34 ‰–0.27 ‰–0.30 ‰–0.27 ‰–0.27 ‰
ΔOTHER0.04 ‰0.00 ‰0.10 ‰0.10 ‰0.04 ‰0.15 ‰
ΔANOX 0.50 ‰ 0.50 ‰ 0.60 ‰ 0.60 ‰ 0.40 ‰ 0.40 ‰
Back to article | Download in Excel


Figure S-6 Relationships between δSW and anoxic U burial fraction (fU) in the ocean are shown when the system is at steady state. The fraction of total oceanic U burial in anoxic basins (fU) is a key parameter that can shift seawater δ238U significantly below the modern value (black circle). The remaining U burial occurs in various oxygenated settings with a smaller isotopic imprint on global seawater (see text for details).
Back to article | Download in Powerpoint

Table S-7 Parameter values used in the coupled Mo–U isotope mass balance models for today's ocean.

MoU
δIN0.7-0.27
ΔOX2.80.04
ΔANOX0.00.50
ΔSAD1.4-
ƒOX30 %82 %
ƒSAD58 %-
ƒEUX12 %18 %
Predicted δSW2.35-0.393
Observed δSW 2.34 ± 0.10 -0.392 ± 0.005

(Note that all Δs are here defined positive, despite Mo and U isotope fractionations have opposite signs).

Back to article | Download in Excel


Figure S-7 Modelled functional relationships between euxinic Mo and U sinks. Modern estimates for the anoxic burial fractions (white square) suggest a is slightly larger than 1, consistent with modern oceanic budgets (Noordmann et al., 2016) where a = 1.38 ± 0.34.
Back to article | Download in Powerpoint


Figure S-8 Modelled seawater composition (δ238U, δ98Mo) for the early Cambrian steady states before and after the Cambrian Stage 2–3 event. The left most point represents 100 % burial in anoxic settings (fU = fMo = 1). At each step point towards the right, fU decreases 10 % (i.e. 90 %, 80 %, 70 %, etc.). The estimated composition of the δ238U and δ98Mo of early Cambrian seawater in ‰ before and after the event are (-0.65, -0.70) and (1.4, 1.1), respectively, Error bars show ±0.03 ‰ and ±0.15 for δ238U and δ98Mo, respectively.
Back to article | Download in Powerpoint


Figure S-9 The predicted composition of seawater at steady state for a = 1.15–1.38 is consistent with observations at the peak of the oxygenation event (δ238U = –0.45 ‰, δ98Mo = 2.0 ‰) with only 30 ± 10 % U removal into anoxic settings (corresponding to 25 ± 10 % and 19 ± 8 % Mo removal for a = 1.15 and 1.38, respectively).
Back to article | Download in Powerpoint

Table S-8 Parameter values used for the C and S modelling.

Modern alueExplored rangeExplanationRef
α0.0072x (3-30)Ratio of pyrite formation to organic carbon remineralisation rateB07
JRAIN192 · 1012¥mol/yr. Modern organic rain rate
JORG26 · 1012¥mol/yr. Modern marine organic C burial rateB07
JLAND26 · 1012ßmol/yr. Modern terrestrial organic C burial rate
JEVAP2.1·1012x (0.2 - 1)mol/yr. Cenozoic sulphate burial rateCF09†
JCARB216·1012x (0.2 - 1)mol/yr. Modern carbonate burial rateBB12
δIN.C–5 ‰–5 ± 1 ‰δ13C of oceanic input
ΔC26 ‰24-30 ‰Average δ13C offset between seawater and buried organic matter
δin.S8 ‰4-16 ‰δ34S of oceanic input
ΔS35 ‰35-50 ‰Average δ34S offset between seawater and buried pyrite
SR40 · 1012
mol/yr. Modern organic burial rateB07
SO42-28 2-3mM. Modern oceanic sulphate level
JPY1.2 · 1012¥mol/yr. Modern pyrite burial rateB07

† The size of the modern oxidising C and S sinks were established from the isotope-derived f-constraints (Burdige, 2007; Saltzman and Thomas, 2012), suggesting ƒORG = 0.192 and ƒPY = 0.36 leads to steady state seawater values of δ13C = 0 ‰ and δ34S = 21 ‰, respectively. We assume that the modern terrestrial organic carbon burial equals that of marine organic carbon burial (Bergman et al., 2004), and neglect terrestrial pyrite burial.
¥ Model results are given in Tables S-9 to S-14
ß Terrestrial organic carbon burial (e.g., coal) is assumed equal to marine organic carbon (Bergman et al., 2004). Ref. B07 = Burdige (2007), Ref CF09 = Canfield and Farquhar (2009), Ref BB12 = Berner and Berner (2012).

Back to article | Download in Excel

Table S-9 Changes in the f-ratios during the Cambrian Stage 2–3 oxygenation episode. Uncertainties are propagated from the uncertainty of the isotope compositions of the inputs and the isotope fractionation associated with burial in reducing sinks (Table S-8)

Before the eventAt the peakBehaviourModern value
δC0 %3 %increase0 ‰
δS28 %40 %increase21 ‰
this leads to:
ƒORG17 ± 4 %28 ± 5 %increase20 ‰
ƒPY 40 ± 17 % 70 ± 22 % increase 36 ‰
Back to article | Download in Excel

Table S-10 Ratios between reducing and oxidising sinks for carbon and sulphur changed during the Cambrian Stage 2–3 event.

Before the eventAt the peakBehaviourModern value
δ13C0 ‰3 ‰increase0 ‰
δ34S28 ‰40 ‰increase21 ‰
ƒORG /(1-ƒORG)0.21 ± 0.060.40 ± 0.10increase0.25
ƒPY/(1-ƒPY) 0.81 ± 0.51 6.21 ± 5.29 increase 0.56
Back to article | Download in Excel

Table S-11 Consequences for absolute organic carbon and pyrite sulphur flux, assuming modern-day values for JCARB, JEVAP, and α. The other constants are δIN, C = –5 ‰, δIN, S = 8 ‰, ΔS = 35 ‰, Δbio = 26 ‰. Flux unit: mol/yr.

Before the eventAt the peakBehaviourModern value
JRAIN440·10123190·1012increase192 ·1012
JORG52·101296·1012increase26 ·1012
JPY2.8·101222·1012increase1.2 ·1012
ƒREMIN0.880.97increase0.87
Back to article | Download in Excel

Table S-12 Calculations with α = 0.070 (= 10 x modern). The higher α value leads to a solution with more modest organic load fluxes and less remineralisation, fREMIN < 0.76.

Before the eventAt the peakBehaviourModern value
JRAIN90·1012406·1012increase192 ·1012
JORG50·101293·1012increase26 ·1012
JPY2.8·101222·1012increase1.2 ·1012
ƒREMIN 0.43 0.76 increase 0.87
Back to article | Download in Excel

Table S-13 Calculations with oxidative burial fluxes (JCARB, JEVAP) set at 1/4 of modern values. α set at 0.070.

Before the eventAt the peakBehaviourModern value
JRAIN23·1012100·1012increase192 ·1012
JORG13·101224·1012increase26 ·1012
JPY0.70·10125.6·1012increase1.2 ·1012
ƒREMIN 0.43 0.76 increase 0.87
Back to article | Download in Excel

Table S-14 Calculations with ΔS set at 50 ‰ (as opposed to 35 ‰). α = 0.070.

Before the eventAt the peakBehaviourModern value
JRAIN69·1012145·1012increase192 ·1012
JORG50·101293·1012increase26 ·1012
JPY1.4·10123.7·1012increase1.2 ·1012
ƒREMIN0.270.35increase0.87
Back to article | Download in Excel

Table S-15 Calculations with δIN,S set at 16 ‰ (as opposed to 8 ‰). α = 0.070.

Before the eventAt the peakBehaviourModern value
JRAIN67·1012159 ·1012increase192 ·1012
JORG50·101293 ·1012increase26 ·1012
JPY1.1·10124.6 ·1012increase1.2 ·1012
ƒREMIN 0.23 0.40 increase 0.87
Back to article | Download in Excel

Table S-16 Calculations with δIN,C set at –4 ‰ (as opposed to –5 ‰). α = 0.070.

Before the eventAt the peakBehaviourModern value
JRAIN71·1012373·1012increase192 ·1012
JORG31·101261·1012increase26 ·1012
JPY2.8·101222·1012increase1.2 ·1012
ƒREMIN 0.55 0.83 increase 0.87
Back to article | Download in Excel

Table S-17 Calculations with ΔBIO = 30 ‰ (as opposed to 26 ‰). α = 0.070.

Before the eventAt the peakBehaviourModern value
JRAIN82·1012388·1012increase192 ·1012
JORG42 ·101276 ·1012increase26 ·1012
JPY2.8 ·101222 ·1012increase1.2 ·1012
ƒREMIN0.470.80increase0.87
Back to article | Download in Excel

Table S-18 Summary of selected solutions and the increasing organic rain rate during the Cambrian Stage 2–3 event.
CaseExampleInitial JRAINIncrease of JRAINƒREMIN

Modern oceans219·1012
87 %
1Higher α (10-fold, α = 0.072) (Table S-12)90·1012x 4.543 to >76 %
1bHigher α (3-fold, α = 0.022)181·1012x 6.371 to >91 %
1cHigher α (30-fold, α = 0.22)64·1012x 3.120 to >52 %
2Case 1 + smaller JCARB, JEVAP (1/5) (Table S-13)23·1012x 4.543 to >76 %
3Case 1 + higher ΔS (50 ‰) (Table S-14)71·1012x 2.127 to >35 %
4Case 1 + higher δIN,S (16 ‰) (Table S-15)67·1012x 2.423 to >40 %
Back to article | Download in Excel


Figure S-10 Feedback diagram showing the oxygenation dynamics of the atmosphere-ocean system in response to increasing sinking rates of particulate organic matter in the oceans by larger animals with guts. See text for details.
Back to article | Download in Powerpoint


Table S-19 Elemental and isotope data for samples from the Sukharikha River Section. Reference materials include IAPSO seawater, argillaceous limestone (SRM-1d), carbonatite (COQ-1) and Columbia River basalt (BCR-2). rpt = repeated analyses.
Sample Strat. height (m) Age* (Ma) Th (ppb) U (ppb) U/Th δ238U (‰) ± 2SE (‰) n U EFTh ƒ Mg/Ca Al/Ca Fe/Ca Mn/Sr Sr/Ca
     Sukharikha River Section (A), Krasnoporog Fm
A393624.6519.81301930.31-0.6670.03250.20000.450.0015
A388619.6519.98249830.33-0.6860.02150.30000.650.0013
A384615.6520.12408390.09-0.60.021-0.70000.820.0012
A379610.6520.29155600.39-0.4330.04350.50.0200.010.890.0014
A376607.6520.392211690.77


1.9



0.0018
- rpt607.6520.392282140.94-0.630.01552.6


0.89
A372603.6520.53449540.12-0.5170.0263-0.5



0.0014
- rpt603.6520.53333440.13


-0.50.0100.020.76
A368599.6520.663171960.62-0.4320.02751.40.0100.010.560.0016
A366597.6520.732754451.62-0.5420.02355.20.0200.010.520.0014
A364595.6520.8231900.39-0.6250.01550.50.0100.010.520.0013
A361592.6520.9352820.23-0.5690.0153-0.10.0100.010.460.0016
A358589.65214871420.29-0.6430.02550.10.0200.020.710.0014
     Malaya Kuonamka River Section (K3), Emyaksin Fm
K3-18P21.5521.42681200.45


0.70.0300.021.520.0009
K3-22P26521.132462390.97


2.70.0600.041.010.0014
K3-26P30520.89456540.12


-0.50.0300.022.120.0008
K3-28P32520.77183310.17


-0.40.0200.021.250.0011
K3-30P34520.65310540.17


-0.30.0500.031.380.0010
K3-32P36520.53276740.27


0.00.0700.231.290.0014
K3-35P39520.35418490.12


-0.60.0200.020.740.0012
K3-37P41520.23943870.09


-0.60.0200.011.180.0009
K3-39P43520.11338340.10


-0.60.0200.021.290.0009
K3-41P45519.99348390.11


-0.60.0300.021.650.0010
     Bol'shaya Kuonamka (K6), Emyaksin Fm
K6-2423521.45691510.26


0.00.0500.021.030.0012
K6-2726521.15363670.19


-0.30.0400.021.440.0012
K6-3029520.89568650.12


-0.60.060.010.021.620.0011
K6-31A30520.816151370.22


-0.10.0200.020.980.0015
K6-3433520.558151110.14


-0.50.0700.011.440.0013
K6-3534520.47475720.15


-0.40.020.010.010.970.0047
K6-3837520.21380660.17


-0.30.0100.010.760.0009
K6-3938520.13312460.15


-0.40.0100.021.350.0008
K6-4039520.042511780.71


1.70.01001.000.0009
     Reference materials
IAPSO seawater¬




-0.3420.0225





SRM-1d

777439.64-0.0830.017736.80.010.010.09

- rpt

704786.87-0.0890.024226.2000

SRM-1d †

547514750.27-0.1050.01771000.01

COQ-1 †

1127276.51-0.3370.024524.90.080.030.2

BCR-2 †




-0.2740.0175





BCR-2 †




-0.2550.0134





BCR-2 †




-0.24 0.009 5





*Age model based on δ13C chemostratigraphy after Maloof et al. (2010a).
Samples marked with † are whole-rock analysis, all others are mild acetic leaches (see methods for details).
¬) The processing of IAPSO seawater followed the procedure of Weyer et al. (2008).
ƒ) Uranium Enrichment factor is calculated as follows: U EFTh = (U/Th) /(U/Th)UCC, where the UCC stands for upper continental crust with a U/Th = 0.26

Back to article | Download in Excel

Table S-20 Mineralogical data for samples from the Sukharikha River section.
SampleCalciteQuartzDolomiteAnkeriteChlorite (Clinochlore)MicaK-FeldsparHaematitesum

wt. %wt. %wt. %wt. %wt. %wt. %wt. %wt. %
Sukharikha River Section. Igarka River. NW Siberia
A3939320
113
100
A388








A3848840
1.51.754.50.2592
A3795625.580
28.5
66
A3768511<50.510.52.5
97.5
A372








A36876742.5424.5
95.5
A3667956.51.5116
100
A3649050
10.53.5
96
A3619020.50.50.515.5
94
A3587149.59.5637.5
103
Bolshaya Kuonamka. Anabar Uplift. Section 96-6
K6-248841.5
22.52
97.5
K6-278544
2.5220.597
K6-308048
322.50.597
K6-31A9040.5121.51.5< 0.597.5
K6-31B864.50.51.522.52.50.590
K6-3476536.532.53197.5
K6-35825.53.522.522.5
89.5
K6-389130.50.5122
100
K6-39874.511.5222< 0.595.5
K6-40 84 2
0.5 1.5 1.5 0.5
86.5
Back to article | Download in Excel

Table S-21 Sulphur isotope data of carbonate associated sulphate and total organic carbon content in samples from three Siberian sections (Sukharika River (A), Bolshaya Kuonamka river (K3), and Malaya Kuonamka river (K6)). Published C and O isotope data are shown for comparison (Kouchinsky et al., 2007).
SampleAge assignedTOCδ34Sδ13Cδ18O

Mawt. %‰ (V-CDT)‰ (V-PDB)‰ (V-PDB)
Sukharikha River Section, Krasnoporog Fm
A350521.270.0430.48-1.48-6.85
A3585210.0432.58-1.27-6.9
A364520.80.0439.530.09-7.24
A366520.730.0338.270.67-6.6
A368520.660.0337.411.29-6.58
A372520.530.0339.371.56-7.12
A376520.390.02
2.63-6.79
A379520.290.0237.52.03-6.59
A384520.120.03
1.09-6.98
A388519.980.0335.020.07-6.94
A393519.810.02
-0.5-7.15
Malaya Kuonamka River Section (K3), Emyaksin Fm
K3-18P521.40.03327.93-1.29-6.24
K3-22P521.130.159
-1.1-5.78
K3-26P520.890.02527.93-0.72-5.99
K3-28P520.770.03233.270.22-5.96
K3-30P520.650.02836.160.97-5.57
K3-32P520.530.02435.21.76-5.62
K3-35P520.350.02639.032.43-5.8
K3-37P520.230.018
1.72-5.92
K3-39520.110.027
1.03-5.88
K3-41519.990.131
0.23-6.32
Bol'shaya Kuonamka (K6), Emyaksin Fm
K6-24521.40.046
-1.22-6.01
K6-27521.150.0528.03-1.02-6.26
K6-30520.890.09728.81-0.54-6.07
K6-31520.810.03532.350.21-6.18
K6-32520.720.062
0.99-5.91
K6-34520.550.04136.861.8-5.42
K6-35520.470.1
2.63-5.49
K6-38520.210.024
1.81-5.65
K6-39520.130.09534.931.27-5.84
K6-40 520.04

0.11 -5.95
Back to article | Download in Excel

Table S-22 Data sources for the marine redox proxy data (Mo, U, δ98Mo and δ238U) from Late Ediacaran and Cambrian sedimentary archives (modified after Boyle et al., 2014). All Mo isotope data were corrected from in-house reference materials to the NIST SRM 3136 scale (Goldberg et al., 2013; Nägler et al., 2014).
FormationLocalityBiozoneLithologyAge
(max)
Age
(min)
MoUMo/TOCU/TOCδ98Moδ98Mo ref ‰ offset from NIST 3136 at 0.25 ‰References
Dictyonema ShalesSweden
Shale482

√



Quinby-Hunt et al. (1989)
Alum ShaleAlbjära, SwedenCambrian Series 4Shale485
√
√
√0.08Dahl et al. (2010)
Alum ShaleGislövhammar, SwedenCambrian Series 4Shale485
√
√
√0.08Dahl et al. (2010)
Alum Shale
Cambrian Series 4Shale499

√
√

Lewan and Buchardt (1989)
Alum Shale
Cambrian Series 4Shale499

√
√

Partin et al. (2013)
Alum ShaleAndrarum-3, SwedenCambrian Series 3-4Shale500
√
√
√0.08Dahl et al. (2010)
Alum ShaleAndrarum-3, SwedenCambrian Series 3-4Shale500
√
√
√0.08Gill et al. (2011) (except δ98Mo)
Alum ShaleNärke Area, Sweden
Shale505499√√√


Leventhal (1991)
Burgess ShaleCanadaCambrian Series 3Shale505
√
√
√0.08Dahl et al. (2010)
Hay RiverGeorgina Basin, Australia
Shale505
√
√


Donnelly et al. (1988)
NiutitangZunyi, South ChinaCambrian Stage 3Shale520
√√



Jiang et al. (2006)
NiutitangZhangjiajieCambrian Stage 3Shale520520√√



Jiang et al. (2006)
NiutitangDingtaiCambrian Stage 3Shale521517√
√
√
Xu et al. (2012)
NiutitangMaluheCambrian Stage 3Shale521
√
√
√
Xu et al. (2012)
NiutitangDazhuliushuiCambrian Stage 3Shale521
√
√
√
Xu et al. (2012)
NiutitangSanchaCambrian Stage 3Shale521
√
√
√
Xu et al. (2012)
NiutitangGanzipingCambrian Stage 3Shale521520√√√
√
Lehmann et al. (2007)
NiutitangYuanlingCambrian Stage 3Shale521520√√√
√
Lehmann et al. (2007)
YuertushiXiaoerbulaki, Tarim Basin, NW ChinaCambrian Stage 2Shale521
√√√


Yu et al. (2009)
YuertushiSugaitebulaki, Tarim Basin, NW ChinaCambrian Stage 2Shale521
√√



Yu et al. (2009)
NiutitangMaluheCambrian Stage 3Shale521




√
Lehmann et al. (2007)
Yu’anshanChengjiang, South ChinaCambrian Stage 3Shale521
√
√
√0.08Dahl et al. (2010)
NiutitangGanzipingCambrian Stage 3Shale521520



√
Wille et al. (2008)
NiutitangYuanlingCambrian Stage 3Shale521520



√
Wille et al. (2008)
YuanshanXiaotan, ChinaCambrian Stage 3Shale521518√
√


Och et al. (2013)
YuanshanDapotuo, ChinaCambrian Stage 3Shale521518√
√


Och et al. (2013)
NiutitangZhongnan, ChinaCambrian Stage 3Shale521520√
√


Och et al. (2013)
NiutitangDazhuliushuiCambrian Stage 3Shale521
√
√


Och et al. (2013)
NiutitangMaluheCambrian Stage 3Shale521
√
√


Och et al. (2013)
NiutitangCiliCambrian Stage 3Shale521
√
√


Och et al. (2013)
GuojiabaSongtao section, South ChinaCambrian Stage 2-3Shale524508√√√√

Guo et al. (2007)
JiumenchongSongtao section, South ChinaCambrian Stage 2-3Shale524520√√√√

Guo et al. (2007)
ShiyantouMeischucun, ChinaCambrian Stage 2Shale524522√
√


Och et al. (2013)
ShiyantouDapotuo, ChinaCambrian Stage 2Shale524522√
√


Och et al. (2013)
ShiyantouXiaotan, ChinaCambrian Stage 2Shale529521√
√


Och et al. (2013)
ShiyantouMeischucun, SYTCambrian Stage 2Shale529521√
√
√
Wen et al. (2011)
Hetang
Cambrian Stage 3Shale531

√



Zhou and Jiang (2009)
Ara GroupALNR-1, OmanEdiacaran-CambrianShale540
√
√


Wille et al. (2008)
Ara GroupMM NW-1, OmanEdiacaran-CambrianShale540
√
√


Wille et al. (2008)
Ara GroupMM NW-1, OmanEdiacaran-CambrianShale542

√



Schröder and Grotzinger (2007)
Dengying
Ediacaran Series 2Shale545

√



Partin et al. (2013)
Dengying
Ediacaran Series 2Shale545
√
√


Guo et al. (2007)
Liuchapo
Ediacaran Series 2Shale545
√
√


Guo et al. (2007)
DengyingSongtao section, South China
Shale545

√



Guo et al. (2007)
Nama GroupNamibiaEdiacaran Series 2Shale548

√



McLennan et al. (1983)
DoushantuoSongtao section,South China
Shale551

√



Partin et al. (2013)
DoushantuoSongtao section,South China
Shale551

√



Guo et al. (2007)
IsaacCastle Creek + Cariboo Mountains, Windermere, Canada
Shale565




√0.08Dahl et al. (2010)
DrookNew Foundland, Canada
Shale565
√
√
√0.08Dahl et al. (2010)
Doushantuo, Cycle 3Jiulongwan, Zhongling, Minle, Longe Nanhua Basin, South China
Shale565555√
√


Li et al. (2010)
GaskiersNew Foundland, Canada
Shale580
√
√
√0.08Dahl et al. (2010)
Upper Kaza Windermere, Canada
Shale 580
√
√
√ 0.08 Dahl et al. (2010)
Back to article | Download in Excel

  • Contact us
  • |
  • Subscribe
Sign up for our newsletter
  • Connect with us
  • facebook
  • twitter
  • youtube

Geochemical Perspectives Letters is a registered trademark of the European Association of Geochemistry
ISSN 2410-339X (print) | ISSN 2410-3403 (online)
EAG Privacy Policy