Dear Peta,

You could find a answer in the paper of Kwiecien et al. (2008) entitled: ``ESTIMATED RESERVOIR AGES OF THE BLACK SEA SINCE THE LAST GLACIAL`` RADIOCARBON, Vol 50, Nr 1, 2008, p 99–118.

Dear Petra, 

The link is http://www.climategeology.ethz.ch/publications/2008_Kwiecien_et_al.pdf

Best!

Hello David and Preslav. Thanks for your answers - but the Kwiecien paper applies to mid-depth/or deep water, not to shelf water above e.g.200 m water depth. In my paper (Open Journal Marine Science Open Journal of Marine Science, 2014, 4, 1-7(http://www.scirp.org/journal/ojms), I obtained a similar correction value of 1125 yr for peat samples on the Ukrainian shelf, and in Marmara sea , we have a Y-2 wood-tephra age correction of about 1145 yr for the LGM "lacustrine " phase at a water depth ca. 100m. So why do many authors use a correction of only ca. 400 - 415 years?

May be less old carbon is remove from the watershed during low soil erosional phase ??

Dear Peta,

I guess if people use a correction of ca 400 years it is only because they follow a practical way. But during periods disconnected from open ocean, that value does correspond to nothing realistic. For Marmara and Black seas I tried to compare synchronous events dated both on surrounding lands and offshore by 14C, but original data were not enough accurate to provide significative results. What a pity!

Thanks for all your answers. In Marmara Sea we have new cores with lacustrine sediment containing shells next to tephra layers dated by wood. These may provide a more accurate reservoir correction value for the late Pleistocene interval.