Articles | Volume 18, issue 10
Research article
 | Highlight paper
25 Oct 2022
Research article | Highlight paper |  | 25 Oct 2022

Dynamics of the Great Oxidation Event from a 3D photochemical–climate model

Adam Yassin Jaziri, Benjamin Charnay, Franck Selsis, Jérémy Leconte, and Franck Lefèvre


Interactive discussion

Status: closed

Comment types: AC – author | RC – referee | CC – community | EC – editor | CEC – chief editor | : Report abuse
  • RC1: 'Comment on cp-2021-150', Jim Kasting, 03 Dec 2021
    • AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Adam Jaziri, 12 Jan 2022
  • RC2: 'Comment on cp-2021-150', Colin Goldblatt, 28 Feb 2022
    • AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Adam Jaziri, 22 Jun 2022

Peer review completion

AR: Author's response | RR: Referee report | ED: Editor decision
ED: Reconsider after major revisions (30 Jun 2022) by Ran Feng
AR by Adam Jaziri on behalf of the Authors (07 Jul 2022)  Author's response    Author's tracked changes    Manuscript
ED: Referee Nomination & Report Request started (16 Jul 2022) by Ran Feng
RR by Jim Kasting (01 Aug 2022)
ED: Publish subject to technical corrections (03 Aug 2022) by Ran Feng
Causes for the Great Oxidation Event (GOE) has long been an outstanding question in Earth sciences. Yet, the exploration of this question has been limited to the 1D photochemical models. Here, the authors presented new insights to solve this question with a 3D photochemical-climate model. This model allows the investigation of influences of the atmospheric circulation on the GOE and the coupling between the climate and the dynamics of the oxidation. The results are highly interesting, and would be of wide interest in Earth science community.
Short summary
In the context of understanding the 3D photochemical effect on the Earth's oxygenation that happened around 2.4 Ga, we developed a 3D photochemical–climate model to investigate the possible impact of atmospheric circulation and the coupling between the climate and the dynamics of oxidation. We show that the diurnal, seasonal and transport variations do not bring significant changes compared to 1D models. Nevertheless, we highlight a temperature dependence for atmospheric photochemical losses.