Search

Author Posting. © Arizona Board of Regents on behalf of the University of Arizona, 2004. This article is posted here by permission of Dept. of Geosciences, University of Arizona for personal use, not for redistribution. The definitive version was published in Radiocarbon 46 (2004): 1225-1238., The radiocarbon calibration curve IntCal04 extends back to 26 cal kyr BP. While several high-resolution records exist beyond this limit, these data sets exhibit discrepancies of up to several millennia. As a result, no calibration curve for the time range 26–50 cal kyr BP can be recommended as yet, but in this paper the IntCal04 working group compares the available data sets and offers a discussion of the information that they hold.

Author Posting. © Arizona Board of Regents on behalf of the University of Arizona, 2004. This article is posted here by permission of Dept. of Geosciences, University of Arizona for personal use, not for redistribution. The definitive version was published in Radiocarbon 46 (2004): 1029-1058., A new calibration curve for the conversion of radiocarbon ages to calibrated (cal) ages has been constructed and internationally ratified to replace IntCal98, which extended from 0–24 cal kyr BP (Before Present, 0 cal BP = AD 1950). The new calibration data set for terrestrial samples extends from 0–26 cal kyr BP, but with much higher resolution beyond 11.4 cal kyr BP than IntCal98. Dendrochronologically-dated tree-ring samples cover the period from 0–12.4 cal kyr BP. Beyond the end of the tree rings, data from marine records (corals and foraminifera) are converted to the atmospheric equivalent with a site-specific marine reservoir correction to provide terrestrial calibration from 12.4–26.0 cal kyr BP. A substantial enhancement relative to IntCal98 is the introduction of a coherent statistical approach based on a random walk model, which takes into account the uncertainty in both the calendar age and the 14C age to calculate the underlying calibration curve (Buck and Blackwell, this issue). The tree-ring data sets, sources of uncertainty, and regional offsets are discussed here. The marine data sets and calibration curve for marine samples from the surface mixed layer (Marine04) are discussed in brief, but details are presented in Hughen et al. (this issue a). We do not make a recommendation for calibration beyond 26 cal kyr BP at this time; however, potential calibration data sets are compared in another paper (van der Plicht et al., this issue).

Author Posting. © Arizona Board of Regents on behalf of the University of Arizona, 2004. This article is posted here by permission of Dept. of Geosciences, University of Arizona for personal use, not for redistribution. The definitive version was published in Radiocarbon 46 (2004): 1059-1086., New radiocarbon calibration curves, IntCal04 and Marine04, have been constructed and internationally ratified to replace the terrestrial and marine components of IntCal98. The new calibration data sets extend an additional 2000 yr, from 0–26 cal kyr BP (Before Present, 0 cal BP = AD 1950), and provide much higher resolution, greater precision, and more detailed structure than IntCal98. For the Marine04 curve, dendrochronologically-dated tree-ring samples, converted with a box diffusion model to marine mixed-layer ages, cover the period from 0–10.5 cal kyr BP. Beyond 10.5 cal kyr BP, high-resolution marine data become available from foraminifera in varved sediments and U/Th-dated corals. The marine records are corrected with site-specific 14C reservoir age information to provide a single global marine mixed-layer calibration from 10.5–26.0 cal kyr BP. A substantial enhancement relative to IntCal98 is the introduction of a random walk model, which takes into account the uncertainty in both the calendar age and the 14C age to calculate the underlying calibration curve (Buck and Blackwell, this issue). The marine data sets and calibration curve for marine samples from the surface mixed layer (Marine04) are discussed here. The tree-ring data sets, sources of uncertainty, and regional offsets are presented in detail in a companion paper by Reimer et al. (this issue)., A portion of this work was performed under National Science Foundation grant ATM-0407554. A portion of this work was performed under the auspices of the U S Department of Energy by the University of California, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory under Contract No. W-7405-Eng-48.

Author Posting. © Elsevier B.V., 2006. This is the author's version of the work. It is posted here by permission of Elsevier B.V. for personal use, not for redistribution. The definitive version was published in Quaternary Science Reviews 25 (2006): 855-862, doi:10.1016/j.quascirev.2005.09.009., A recently published radiocarbon calibration curve extending to 50,000 cal BP (Fairbanks et al. 2005) is purportedly superior to that generated by the IntCal working group beyond the end of the tree-ring data at 12,400 cal BP (Reimer et al. 2004). This claim is based, in part, on different diagenetic screening criteria and pretreatment for coral samples (Fairbanks et al. 2005; Chiu et al. 2005) which do not stand up under careful scrutiny. Also at issue is the conversion of the coral-based calibration curve to an atmospheric curve where large inter-annual variability in the sea-surface age reservoir age has been observed in the southwest Pacific where one of two sets of corals used were sampled. In addition we comment on the seemingly ad hoc statistical methods utilized by Fairbanks et al. (2005) to construct their curve. We recognize the value of the Fairbanks et al. (2005) coral radiocarbon data set, but reassert the need for multiple, independently derived data to provide confirmation and validation to all radiocarbon calibration data. This is especially important before 26,000 cal BP when lower sea-levels of the last glacial maximum exposed most coral samples to alteration by fresh water.