Planavsky Noah J, Robbins Leslie J, Kamber Balz S, Schoenberg Ronny
Department of Geology and Geophysics, Yale University, New Haven, CT, USA.
School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Interface Focus. 2020 Aug 6;10(4):20190140. doi: 10.1098/rsfs.2019.0140. Epub 2020 Jun 12.
Deciphering the role-if any-that free oxygen levels played in controlling the timing and tempo of the radiation of complex life is one of the most fundamental questions in Earth and life sciences. Accurately reconstructing Earth's redox history is an essential part of tackling this question. Over the past few decades, there has been a proliferation of research employing geochemical redox proxies in an effort to tell the story of Earth's oxygenation. However, many of these studies, even those considering the same geochemical proxy systems, have led to conflicting interpretations of the timing and intensity of oxygenation events. There are two potential explanations for conflicting redox reconstructions: (i) that free oxygen levels were incredibly dynamic in both time and space or (ii) that collectively, as a community-including the authors of this article-we have frequently studied rocks affected by secondary weathering and alteration (particularly secondary oxidation) while neglecting to address the impact of this alteration on the generated data. There are now multiple case studies that have documented previously overlooked secondary alteration, resolving some of the conflicting constrains regarding redox evolution. Here, an analysis of a large shale geochemistry database reveals significant differences in cerium (Ce) anomalies, a common palaeoredox proxy, between outcrop and drill core samples. This inconsistency provides support for the idea that geochemical data from altered samples are frequently published in the peer-reviewed literature. As individuals and a geochemical community, most of us have been slow to appreciate how pervasive the problem is but there are examples of other communities that have faced and met the challenges raised by such quality control crises. Further evidence of the high potential for alteration of deep-time geochemical samples, and recognition of the manner in which this may lead to spurious results and palaeoenvironmental interpretations, indicate that sample archiving, in publicly accessible collections needs to become a prerequisite for publication of new palaeoredox data. Finally, the geochemical community need to think about ways to implement additional quality control measures to increase the fidelity of palaeoredox proxy work.
解读游离氧水平在控制复杂生命辐射的时间和节奏方面所起的作用(如果有作用的话),是地球科学和生命科学中最基本的问题之一。准确重建地球的氧化还原历史是解决这个问题的重要组成部分。在过去几十年里,大量研究采用地球化学氧化还原指标来讲述地球氧化的故事。然而,这些研究中的许多,甚至是那些考虑相同地球化学指标体系的研究,都对氧化事件的时间和强度产生了相互矛盾的解释。氧化还原重建结果相互矛盾有两种可能的解释:(i)游离氧水平在时间和空间上都极其动态变化;或者(ii)总体而言,作为一个群体——包括本文作者在内——我们经常研究受次生风化和蚀变(特别是次生氧化)影响的岩石,却忽略了这种蚀变对所生成数据的影响。现在有多个案例研究记录了以前被忽视的次生蚀变,解决了一些关于氧化还原演化的相互矛盾的限制。在这里,对一个大型页岩地球化学数据库的分析揭示了露头样品和岩芯样品之间铈(Ce)异常(一种常见的古氧化还原指标)的显著差异。这种不一致性支持了这样一种观点,即来自蚀变样品的地球化学数据经常在同行评审文献中发表。作为个体和地球化学群体,我们大多数人一直没有充分意识到这个问题有多普遍,但有其他群体已经面对并应对了这种质量控制危机带来的挑战的例子。深部地球化学样品蚀变可能性很高的进一步证据,以及对这种蚀变可能导致虚假结果和古环境解释方式的认识,表明在公开可访问的收藏中进行样品存档需要成为新的古氧化还原数据发表的先决条件。最后,地球化学群体需要思考如何实施额外的质量控制措施,以提高古氧化还原指标工作的准确性。