Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36353675›Full record

ReviewInnovation (Cambridge (Mass.))2022

Milankovitch theory and monsoon.

Hai Cheng, Hanying Li, Lijuan Sha, Ashish Sinha, Zhengguo Shi, Qiuzhen Yin, Zhengyao Lu, Debo Zhao, Yanjun Cai, Yongyun Hu and 6 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Innovation (Cambridge (Mass.)), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Innovation (Cambridge (Mass.)) · 2024
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Concurrent Asian monsoon strengthening and early modern human dispersal to East Asia during the last interglacial.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024
    Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors.

Hai ChengInstitute of Global Environmental Change, Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an 710049, China.
Hanying LiInstitute of Global Environmental Change, Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an 710049, China.
Lijuan ShaInstitute of Global Environmental Change, Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an 710049, China.
Ashish SinhaInstitute of Global Environmental Change, Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an 710049, China.
Zhengguo ShiInstitute of Global Environmental Change, Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an 710049, China.
Qiuzhen YinGeorges Lemaître Center for Earth and Climate Research, Earth and Life Institute, Université Catholique de Louvain, 1348 Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium.
Zhengyao LuDepartment of Physical Geography and Ecosystem Science, Lund University, Sölvegatan 12, 22362 Lund, Sweden.
Debo ZhaoKey Laboratory of Marine Geology and Environment, Institute of Oceanology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Qingdao 266071, China.
Yanjun CaiInstitute of Global Environmental Change, Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an 710049, China.
Yongyun HuDepartment of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences, School of Physics, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China.
Qingzhen HaoKey Laboratory of Cenozoic Geology and Environment, Institute of Geology and Geophysics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100029, China.
Jun TianState Key Laboratory of Marine Geology, Tongji University, Shanghai 200092, China.
Gayatri KathayatInstitute of Global Environmental Change, Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an 710049, China.
Xiyu DongInstitute of Global Environmental Change, Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an 710049, China.
Jingyao ZhaoInstitute of Global Environmental Change, Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an 710049, China.
Haiwei ZhangInstitute of Global Environmental Change, Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an 710049, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The widely accepted "Milankovitch theory" explains insolation-induced waxing and waning of the ice sheets and their effect on the global climate on orbital timescales. In the past half century, however, the theory has often come under scrutiny, especially regarding its "100-ka problem." Another drawback, but the one that has received less attention, is the "monsoon problem," which pertains to the exclusion of monsoon dynamics in classic Milankovitch theory even though the monsoon prevails over the vast low-latitude (∼30° N to ∼30° S) region that covers half of the Earth's surface and receives the bulk of solar radiation. In this review, we discuss the major issues with the current form of Milankovitch theory and the progress made at the research forefront. We suggest shifting the emphasis from the ultimate outcomes of the ice volume to the causal relationship between changes in northern high-latitude insolation and ice age termination events (or ice sheet melting rate) to help reconcile the classic "100-ka problem." We discuss the discrepancies associated with the characterization of monsoon dynamics, particularly the so-called "sea-land precession-phase paradox" and the "Chinese 100-ka problem." We suggest that many of these discrepancies are superficial and can be resolved by applying a holistic "monsoon system science" approach. Finally, we propose blending the conventional Kutzbach orbital monsoon hypothesis, which calls for summer insolation forcing of monsoons, with Milankovitch theory to formulate a combined "Milankovitch-Kutzbach hypothesis" that can potentially explain the dual nature of orbital hydrodynamics of the ice sheet and monsoon systems, as well as their interplays and respective relationships with the northern high-latitude insolation and inter-tropical insolation differential.

Identifiers

PMID36353675
PMCPMC9637977

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.