ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2021
Revisiting the sedimentary record of the rise of diatoms.
Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Carbonate burial regimes, the Meso-Cenozoic climate, and nannoplankton expansion.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025Article
- A wet chemical extraction protocol for measuring biogenic silica in sediments of marginal seas and open ocean.MethodsX · 2025Article
- Preconditioning of sediment failure by astronomically paced weak-layer deposition.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Phase Stability and Structural Reorganization of Silica in Cherts Under Thermal and Mechanochemical Stress.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Uncertainties surrounding the oldest fossil record of diatoms.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Southern Ocean biogenic blooms freezing-in Oligocene colder climates.Nature communications · 2022Article
- Deuterium in marine organic biomarkers: toward a new tool for quantifying aquatic mixotrophy.The New phytologist · 2022Article
- Impact of green clay authigenesis on element sequestration in marine settings.Nature communications · 2022Article
- Revisiting the sedimentary record of the rise of diatoms.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Diatoms are a major primary producer in the modern oceans and play a critical role in the marine silica cycle. Their rise to dominance is recognized as one of the largest shifts in Cenozoic marine ecosystems, but the timing of this transition is debated. Here, we use a diagenetic model to examine the effect of sedimentation rate and temperature on the burial efficiency of biogenic silica over the past 66 million years (i.e., the Cenozoic). We find that the changing preservation potential of siliceous microfossils during that time would have overprinted the primary signal of diatom and radiolarian abundance. We generate a taphonomic null hypothesis of the diatom fossil record by assuming a constant flux of diatoms to the sea floor and having diagenetic conditions driven by observed shifts in temperature and sedimentation rate. This null hypothesis produces a late Cenozoic (∼5 Ma to 20 Ma) increase in the relative abundance of fossilized diatoms that is comparable to current empirical records. This suggests that the observed increase in diatom abundance in the sedimentary record may be driven by changing preservation potential. A late Cenozoic rise in diatoms has been causally tied to the rise of grasslands and baleen whales and to declining atmospheric CO
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.