
There’s a new article at Nature News where they report on an amazing new paleoclimatology breakthrough with temperature reconstructions using clamshells. The Nature article reports on a new paper in PNAS from William Patterson at the University of Saskachewan. Here’s a short excerpt:
The study used 26 shells obtained from sediment cores taken from an Icelandic bay. Because clams typically live from two to nine years, isotope ratios in each of these shells provided a two-to-nine-year window onto the environmental conditions in which they lived.
Patterson’s team used a robotic sampling device to shave thin slices from each layer of the shells’ growth bands. These were then fed into a mass spectrometer, which measured the isotopes in each layer. From those, the scientists could calculate the conditions under which each layer formed.
Unlike counting tree rings which have varying widths due to all sorts of external influences such as rainfall, sunlight, temperatures, available nutrients, and available CO2, this method looks at the levels of different oxygen isotopes in their shells that vary with the temperature of the water in which they live. One simple linear relationship.
The data resolution from isotope counts is incredible.
“What we’re getting to here is palaeoweather,” Patterson says. “We can reconstruct temperatures on a sub-weekly resolution, using these techniques. For larger clams we could do daily.”
The reconstruction is shown below. We see familiar features the little ice age, the medieval warm period and the downturn which led to the extinction of Norse settlements on Greenland.
And the feature of this reconstruction to surely stick in the craw of many who think we are living in unprecedented times of warmth is the “Roman Warm Period”. Have a look:

From Nature: Shellfish could supplant tree-ring climate data
Temperature records gleaned from clamshells reveal accuracy of Norse sagas.
Richard A. Lovett
Oxygen isotopes in clamshells may provide the most detailed record yet of global climate change, according to a team of scientists who studied a haul of ancient Icelandic molluscs.
Most measures of palaeoclimate provide data on only average annual temperatures, says William Patterson, an isotope chemist at the University of Saskatchewan in Saskatoon, Canada, and lead author of the study1. But molluscs grow continually, and the levels of different oxygen isotopes in their shells vary with the temperature of the water in which they live. The colder the water, the higher the proportion of the heavy oxygen isotope, oxygen-18.
The study used 26 shells obtained from sediment cores taken from an Icelandic bay. Because clams typically live from two to nine years, isotope ratios in each of these shells provided a two-to-nine-year window onto the environmental conditions in which they lived.
Patterson’s team used a robotic sampling device to shave thin slices from each layer of the shells’ growth bands. These were then fed into a mass spectrometer, which measured the isotopes in each layer. From those, the scientists could calculate the conditions under which each layer formed.
“What we’re getting to here is palaeoweather,” Patterson says. “We can reconstruct temperatures on a sub-weekly resolution, using these techniques. For larger clams we could do daily.”
It’s an important step in palaeoclimatic studies, he says, because it allows scientists to determine not only changes in average annual temperatures, but also how these changes affected individual summers and winters.
“We often make the mistake of saying that mean annual temperature is higher or lower at some period of time,” Patterson says. “But that is relatively meaningless in terms of the changes in seasonality.”
For example, in early Norse Iceland — part of the 2,000-year era spanned by the study — farmers were dependent on dairy farming and agriculture. “For a dairy culture, summer is by far the most important,” he says. “A one-degree decrease in summer temperatures in Iceland results in a 15% decrease in agricultural yield. If that happens two years in a row, your family’s wiped out.”
Technically, the molluscs record water temperatures, not air temperatures. But the two are closely linked — specially close to the shore, where most people lived. “So, when the water temperatures are up, air temperatures are up. When water temperatures are down, air temperatures are down,” Patterson says.
Read the complete article at Nature News
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
OT – Paul – This is a piece of seminal work!
Maybe Anthony can give you another thread to present your work to the wider community? Better still, would be a paper submitted to PNAS.
Well Done!
There has been, maybe, relevant work done for some 20-odd years plus involving mid-Jurassic bivalve molluscs (and palynomorphs) of the Bathonian ‘Great Estuarine Series’ of Raasay, western Scotland. The premise is similar-determination of palaeo-environments using isotopic O16/O18 ratios in conjunction with 13C/12C. The inferences suggest that salinity plays a major role in biogenic assimilation and the isotopic signature of the waters evident within the mineralisation.
It would be useful to know more about the depositional setting of the
acquired material used here eg. possible groundwater flow/ tidal regime/diagenetic influence
Ninderthana (18:29:48) :
OT – Paul – This is a piece of seminal work!
I think it is junk as it stands. Paul, extend the analysis to 1500 using the Dust Veil Index.
Also Sun spots show the in/de crease of T. The lower the cooler
Mike Jonas (12:16:52) :
RockyRoad (07:53:38) : “Not to be overly critical and take this as a friendly suggestion, but why are there a lot of people commenting before they’ve read the paper? That seems a bit strange to me. C’mon, folks… READ!”
Fair enough, but … as soon as I saw sample size 26 and short lifespans, I lost interest in reading the whole paper. I did read enough to confirm those stats, and yes the paper could be showing the way to greater things, but of itself it surely cannot deliver much of relevance to global climate.
————–
Reply:
Remember, the masthead for WUWT is: “Commentary on puzzling things in life, nature, science, weather, climate change, technology, and recent news by Anthony Watts”. If you’re looking for the Holy Grail for/against global climate, I don’t think clams will do it and shouldn’t be expected to do it. However, it IS an interesting piece of the puzzle and deserves respectful consideration.
Still, my recommendation that people READ before they comment shouldn’t come as a surprise since it reduces SWAGs and therefore wasted time and embarrassment.
PS. How many trees did Mann use in his Yamal population?
Maybe these pearls of wisdom will get Al to clam up.
“Keep clam!”
(Motto of Ivar’s House of Clams here in Seattle.)
RockyRoad (06:33:46) : “If you’re looking for the Holy Grail for/against global climate, I don’t think clams will do it and shouldn’t be expected to do it. However, it IS an interesting piece of the puzzle and deserves respectful consideration.
Still, my recommendation that people READ before they comment shouldn’t come as a surprise since it reduces SWAGs and therefore wasted time and embarrassment.”
Yes to all of that. I thought that too much was being made of the clams.
“PS. How many trees did Mann use in his Yamal population?”
From memory : Keith Briffa, twelve, one (“YAD006”???).
The relationship of LAC&LNC with stratosphere class volcanic eruptions extends to DVI going back to 1500, but going back further the envelope is neither defined by SLAM nor the 90 year beat of 2LAC with 4LNC (frequencies here, not periods). I will explore the following possibility: a complex 63.8 year envelope arising from symmetry of LAC & LNC on the year, which appears to beat with LAC to drive the timing of the extreme proxigean tides. We know with absolute certainty that the nature of the tides changes in a complex manner over time; figuring out the beat envelopes isn’t necessarily going to be accomplished during a single contemplative walk in the park. Interestingly (as an aside), harmonics of LAC & LNC show 206 & 229 year envelopes with subharmonics of beats of the draconic month with the nearest harmonic of the year (which relate to terrestrial polar motion).
Paul Vaughan (14:40:39) :
The relationship of LAC&LNC with stratosphere class volcanic eruptions extends to DVI going back to 1500, but going back further the envelope is neither defined by SLAM nor the 90 year beat
Clarify what further means? before 1500 when we have no data or before 1850?
Ninderthana (18:29:48)
OT – Paul – This is a piece of seminal work!
Leif Svalgaard (19:37:44) :
I think it is junk as it stands. Paul, extend the analysis to 1500 using the Dust Veil Index
Reply: The big problem for gate-keepers like yourself Leif, is that no matter
how hard you try, you cannot hold back the march of science.
It just so happens that their is overwhelming evidence from at least four
other areas of science which back up Paul’s result. The only way that Paul could be wrong is if these four other areas were to conspire together to give the same (“wrong”) result. Possible, but to a good scientist, highly unlikely.
Occasionally DVI & SAOT go with the contrast rather than the blend:
http://www.sfu.ca/~plv/100313.png
For the earlier (SAOT) plot, I applied a switch (“indicator variable” interaction in the language of statistics) mid-20th century to flip from blend to contrast:
http://www.sfu.ca/~plv/100312.png
I will need to take a late evening walk in the hills to think about which combinations of extremes (special alignments) can be involved in defining the contrasts (versus the blends).
The longer-term envelopes (like mid-20th century SAOT & 16th century DVI) are another (probably more difficult to figure out) matter.
It is all very well and good that some sound science properly done exposes AGW as the nonsense it is by revealing a hot Roman period, as well as the warm Medieval period.
But could you not have simply consulted hstorical records writen by eye witnesses who were there?
This is, I am afraid to say, all part of the arrogance of science in general. You will not believe anything unless you can peer into your microscopes or what have you and figure it out for yourselves, and reliable eye witness testimony, ie historical records, be damned. The myopia which refuses to read those who said, for example, the Thames froze repeatedly in the 17th century, is still myopia, and this kind of tunnel vision afflicts scientists altogether too much
Well at least you are not of that class of liars the IPCC who tweak data to remove those historical phenomena, the LIA and the MWP because of their precommitment to an ideology
I knew AGW was a crock from my reading of history. That is how simple this case is. There is no need for arcane experiments from priests in white coats, namely the new religious superclass, the High Priesthood, of the scientist.
Ninderthana (16:49:40) :
Reply: The big problem for gate-keepers like yourself Leif, is that no matter how hard you try, you cannot hold back the march of pseudo-science.
That is indeed hard.
<i.It just so happens that there is overwhelming evidence from at least four…
So the science is settled on this, if the evidence is ‘overwhelming’?
Faced with overwhelming evidence, scientists are quick to accept results, plate tectonics took only a few years, dark energy took only a few years, Babcock’s sunspot theory took only a few years, etc. So I expect that you can show me links to the review articles that express that quick general acceptance. I have wandered too long in the dessert I’m afraid, so must have missed them.
Paul Vaughan (17:00:38) :
Occasionally DVI & SAOT go with the contrast rather than the blend: http://www.sfu.ca/~plv/100313.png
There are standard statistical methods for assessing the significance of a correlation, perhaps employ some of those too. As it stands it looks rather unconvincing.
With flips between LAC&LNC blend & contrast permitted (something requiring a physical interpretation/explanation), it appears that the phase-correlation will be considerable-to-substantial, particularly considering that SAOT & DVI are threshold variables.
The problem with statistical inference applied to phenomena of this nature is that it rests upon untenable assumptions, to which I [generally] object in principle (even though my role for years was to indoctrinate scores of students in the tradition of the paradigm). Nonetheless, I will consider calculating some statistical measures of association.
Designing & studying summaries of VEI (Volcanic Explosivity Index) will probably be a more informative pursuit; the issue of volcanic eruptions vs. atmospheric/stratospheric circulation needs exploration, particularly since we have an interesting lull in stratospheric attenuation in the relatively-recent rear-view mirror (mid-20th c), despite eruptions.
Paul Vaughan (19:14:06) :
Nonetheless, I will consider calculating some statistical measures of association.
If you don’t, I think most people would consider the association to be spurious.
Now, it goes without saying that there is a close physical connection between volcanism and stratospheric transparency and whatever changes in circulation might result from that, including volcanic winters http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volcanic_winter
Ninderthana (16:49:40) “The big problem for gate-keepers like yourself Leif, is that no matter how hard you try, you cannot hold back the march of science.”
I don’t think Leif will try to block a lunar/SAOT/DVI link (this is the moon, not JSUN & solar cycle “voodoo” [as some call it] – and the lunisolar tides [including earth & atmospheric tides] and the importance of threshold effects in earthquakes & volcanoes are accepted), but I do expect that Leif may be somewhat insistent upon presenting findings in a generally mainstream/conventional manner.
Also, I do not expect Leif to (necessarily) appreciate that Corbyn’s notes & SLAM inspired the volcano/stratosphere investigation (regardless of whether it is SLAM or something else that sets the ~62 year AMO/PDO/ACI/fish cycle).
Practical & sensible compromise can (at times) help avoid (sometimes-lengthy) delays arising from inopportune framing (& otherwise nasty administrative politics more generally).
I regret neither the very recent switch of focus to the moon, nor the transferable skills developed pursuing other investigations over the past 2 years.
Paul Vaughan (20:00:35) :
Also, I do not expect Leif to (necessarily) appreciate that Corbyn’s notes & SLAM inspired the volcano/stratosphere investigation (regardless of whether it is SLAM or something else that sets the ~62 year AMO/PDO/ACI/fish cycle).
With insufficient detail, one cannot evaluate Corbyn’s method. He can, of course, inspire all kinds of people to all kinds of things without the need for my appreciation.
Paul, to what ‘fish cycle’ do you allude?
So, now, will Michael Mann clam up?
crossopter (17:13:57) “Paul, to what ‘fish cycle’ do you allude?”
Klyashtorin, L.B.; & Lyubushin, A.A. (2007). Cyclic Climate Changes and Fish Productivity. Government of The Russian Federation, State Committee For Fisheries of The Russian Federation, Federal State Unitary Enterprise (FSUE), Russian Federal Research Institute of Fisheries and Oceanography (VNIRO). Moscow, VNIRO Publishing.
http://alexeylyubushin.narod.ru/Climate_Changes_and_Fish_Productivity.pdf
Klyashtorin, L.B. (2001). Climate change and long term fluctuations of commercial catches: the possibility of forecasting. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper No. 410, 98p., FAO (Food Agriculture Organization) of the United Nations, Rome.
html – main index:
http://www.fao.org/docrep/005/Y2787E/Y2787E00.HTM
pdf – directory of chapter-pdf-files:
ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/005/y2787e/
Of particular interest:
Chapter 2. Dynamics of Climatic and Geophysical Indices
html:
http://www.fao.org/docrep/005/Y2787E/Y2787E03.HTM
pdf:
ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/005/y2787e/y2787e01.pdf
Paul Vaughan (03:47:23)
Thanks for the links-some good reading ahead.