Lyell Collection

Geological Society, London, Special Publications

Lyell Centre  |   Lyell Collection  |   Subscriptions   |   Geological Society  |   Email alerts  |   Online bookshop  |   Help


Keywords:
Author:
Advanced search>>
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Maslin, M. A.
Right arrow Articles by Ridgwell, A. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
GeoRef
Right arrow GeoRef Citation
Geological Society, London, Special Publications; 2005; v. 247; p. 19-34;
DOI: 10.1144/GSL.SP.2005.247.01.02
© 2005 Geological Society of London

Mid-Pleistocene revolution and the ‘eccentricity myth’

Mark A. Maslin1 & Andy J. Ridgwell2

1 Environmental Change Research Centre, Department of Geography, University College London, 26 Bedford Way, London WC1H 0AP, UK mmaslin{at}geog.ucl.ac.uk
2 Department of Earth and Ocean Sciences, The University of British Columbia, 6339 Stores Road, Vancouver, British Columbia V6T 1Z4, Canada

The mid-Pleistocene revolution (MPR) is the term used to describe the transition between 41 ka and 100 ka glacial-interglacial cycles which occurred about one million years ago. Despite eccentricity having by far the weakest influence on insolation received at the Earth’s surface of any of the orbital parameters, it is often assumed to be the primary driver of the post-MPR 100 ka climate cycles. The traditional solution to this is to call for a highly nonlinear response by the global climate system to eccentricity. This ‘eccentricity myth’ is a simplified view of the relationship between global climate and orbital forcing and is in part due to an artefact of spectral analysis. Our aim here is to clarify the often confused role of eccentricity and review current theories of the MPR. We suggest that the post-MPR ‘100 ka’ glacial-interglacial cycles are more closely linked to precession, with the saw-toothed climate cycles being defined by every four or five precessional cycle. Because control over the number of precessional cycles involved is determined by eccentricity, eccentricity at most paces rather than drives the system. If true, then one must also question whether the MPR, itself defined by an abrupt change in spectral characteristics, is not also somewhat misconceived.