Ancient Shells Harden Link Between Climate Change and Greenhouse Gases

A new method for analyzing fossilized shells confirms link between carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere and warmer oceans

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Domatoceras, a precursor of the squid with a hard shell, thrived 443 million years ago during the early Silurian period. More than 100 million years later during the Carboniferous period, Pentamerus, a clamlike, two-shelled invertebrate, clustered on ocean floors. Both stored rare isotopes of carbon and oxygen in their calcium carbonate shells that then fossilized. By examining the percentage of such bonded rare isotopes, scientists have now confirmed the link between carbon dioxide levels and warmer ancient climates.

Certain isotopes of carbon and oxygen have extra neutrons, specifically 13C and 18O, which find each other more easily at cooler temperatures. Because scientists know the favorable bonding conditions, the number of such pairings in ancient shells provides a thermometer for different periods.

Geochemists Rosemarie Came and John Eiler of the California Institute of Technology and their colleagues counted these couplings in fossilized shells from the Silurian and Carboniferous eras and discovered, contrary to earlier findings, that the higher carbon dioxide concentrations of the Silurian were indeed linked to higher ocean temperatures.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


"Attempts to quantitatively reconstruct surface temperatures at this time suggested that the two periods were similar to one another in mean global temperature," Eiler says. "Our results demonstrate that the Silurian tropical oceans were far warmer than the Carboniferous, consistent with common expectations regarding the importance of greenhouse gases for global climate."

Most previous reconstructions relied on Nobel prize winner Harold Urey's measurement of relative concentrations of 18O in calcium carbonate and seawater depending on temperature. But that method is based upon the original concentration of 18O in the oceans, which is extremely difficult to accurately reconstruct from the fossil record.

Eiler argues that the new measurements are more accurate because they do not rely on such seawater data. The team plans to refine the new method, which they describe in Nature, and use it to assess temperatures during other periods, such as the Paleocene-Eocene thermal maximum that occurred approximately 55 million years ago when there was a sudden shift from a relatively cool to an extremely hot climate as well as temperatures that prevailed during Earth's periodic mass extinctions.

The finding adds yet more weight to the contention that greenhouse gases drive climate change, and bode ill for the present increases in atmospheric concentrations of such gases. "It supports the notion," Eiler says, "that you can use simple radiative balance arguments—that is, the greenhouse effect to relate atmospheric chemistry to global temperature."

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe