Articles | Volume 12, issue 2
https://doi.org/10.5194/cp-12-455-2016
https://doi.org/10.5194/cp-12-455-2016
Research article
 | 
25 Feb 2016
Research article |  | 25 Feb 2016

A model–model and data–model comparison for the early Eocene hydrological cycle

Matthew J. Carmichael, Daniel J. Lunt, Matthew Huber, Malte Heinemann, Jeffrey Kiehl, Allegra LeGrande, Claire A. Loptson, Chris D. Roberts, Navjit Sagoo, Christine Shields, Paul J. Valdes, Arne Winguth, Cornelia Winguth, and Richard D. Pancost

Viewed

Total article views: 6,347 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
HTML PDF XML Total Supplement BibTeX EndNote
3,050 3,012 285 6,347 696 217 261
  • HTML: 3,050
  • PDF: 3,012
  • XML: 285
  • Total: 6,347
  • Supplement: 696
  • BibTeX: 217
  • EndNote: 261
Views and downloads (calculated since 17 Jul 2015)
Cumulative views and downloads (calculated since 17 Jul 2015)

Cited

Saved (final revised paper)

Saved (preprint)

Discussed (final revised paper)

Latest update: 13 Dec 2024
Download
Short summary
In this paper, we assess how well model-simulated precipitation rates compare to those indicated by geological data for the early Eocene, a warm interval 56–49 million years ago. Our results show that a number of models struggle to produce sufficient precipitation at high latitudes, which likely relates to cool simulated temperatures in these regions. However, calculating precipitation rates from plant fossils is highly uncertain, and further data are now required.