Reply to comment on, “Compilation of geophysical, geochronological, and geochemical evidence indicates a rapid Mediterranean-derived submergence of the Black Sea's shelf and subsequent substantial salinification in the early Holocene” by A.G. Yanchilina, W.B.F. Ryan, J.F. McManus, P. Dimitrov, D. Dimitrov, K. Slavova, M. Filipova-Marinova [Marine Geology 383 (2017) 14–34

Abstract

Soulet (2018) asserts that the calculation of the 14C reservoir age for the geochronology of the Black Sea sediments suffers from a fundamental flaw. He contends that Yanchilina et al. (2017) obtained reservoir ages by first sorting the δ18O and δ13C values of the mollusks as a function of their corresponding 14C age before aligning the mollusk isotope curves to those of the nearby Sofular Cave. Sorting by 14C age would lead to an incorrect calendar age for each δ18O and δ13C measurement because it does not take into account changing reservoir ages. We reply here that this sorting by 14C age was not the procedure taken. The radiocarbon reservoir ages were derived after tuning the δ18O and δ13C composition of the mollusks, sorted by their δ18O, δ13C, radiocarbon age and stratigraphic location in each core, to the δ18O and δ13C composition of the U/Th dated Sofular Cave stalagmites as a function of calendar age, shown to reflect Black Sea surface water δ18O and δ13C composition.After the calendar age was derived for each mollusk, it was then converted to a corresponding Northern Hemisphere atmospheric 14C age using Reimer et al. (2009). The 14C reservoir age was subsequently calculated from the difference between the measured 14C age of the mollusks and the calculated Northern Hemisphere atmospheric 14C age of the mollusks, R(t) = 14Cshell(t) − 14Catm(t) (e.g., Ryan, 2007; Kwiecien et al., 2009; Jull et al., 2013; Philippsen, 2013; Soulet, 2015; Soulet et al., 2016). The Reimer et al. (2009) calibration used in our original study differs <0.5% from the Reimer et al. (2013) calibration.