(Table S2) Volcano-stratigraphic synchronisation B32 vs. EDML vs. EDC, Antarctica ...

• Main Author: Ruth, Urs
• Format: Dataset
• Language: English
• Published: PANGAEA 2007
• Subjects: ORDINAL NUMBER; Depth, reconstructed; Depth, reference; Age; Age model; Area/locality; Sample, optional label/labor no; EPICA drill; Dielectric profiling, DEP; Ion chromatography; Fast ion chromatography; Calculated; Age model, ice flow model; EPICA-Campaigns; Kohnen Station; European Project for Ice Coring in Antarctica EPICA; Antarc*; Antarctica; EPICA
• Online Access: https://dx.doi.org/10.1594/pangaea.601894; https://doi.pangaea.de/10.1594/PANGAEA.601894

Data used: B32-SO4 (Traufetter et al 2004), EDML-DEP (Wilhelms), EDC96-SO4 (Udisti).EDML-Depth assignments: Some depth assignents for the same volcanic events deviated in the the EDML data sets of DEP, IC-SO4 and FIC-SO4. To overcome this, the average depth was calculated from DEP and IC-SO4, thus omitting the FIC-SO4, which in 2002 did not yet consider missing core at breaks. All three depths are listed here for documentation.B32-Year: The date was manually chosen from Traufetter et al 2004 (see DOI:10.1594/PANGAEA.601853), H. Fischer pers com 2005-10-12, F. Fundel pers com, R. Udisti pers com; usually there was only a small discrepancy between the 3 dates given, and usually the average date was taken. The selection of events and assignments of dates to be used as primary dating information for EDML1/EDC3 was agreed upon by AWI and Florence. ...