Fig. 3: Reconstructed basin area, provenance, and sediment–water discharge.
From: Late Miocene Euphrates River drained into a partially desiccated eastern Mediterranean
a, Results of the probabilistic sediment-budget model for basin areas of the Palaeo-Karasu and Palaeo-Murat rivers. S denotes catchment shape (1 = circular and 2.5 = elongate; Methods). b, P50 maps of basin areas, constrained by the locations of plate margins and Late Miocene to Early Pliocene-aged deposits. c,d, Lithology of modern landscape13 constrained by P50 basin areas for the Palaeo-Karasu (c) and Palaeo-Murat (d) rivers, and isopach maps for the Handere (c) and Nahr Menashe (d). The Handere lithology was sampled from clast counting at six outcrop sites6. Nahr Menashe is currently unsampled, although eight sites were approved to be drilled during IODP Expedition 857C36, prior to termination of the IODP program. Cross plots in c show percentages of Handere lithology versus the lithology of the Palaeo-Karasu Basin (top, six shared lithologies; bottom, six shared lithologies with sedimentary rocks removed). e, Sediment discharge versus basin area for the Palaeo-Karasu, Palaeo-Murat, modern Nile69 and modern Tigris–Euphrates69 rivers. f, Sediment discharge versus water discharge for the riverine systems in e. Elevated values for the Palaeo-Karasu and Palaeo-Murat rivers are attributed primarily to Late Miocene palaeo-precipitation and palaeo-relief. Basemap in b created in ArcGIS Pro 3.0.2. Panel c reproduced with permission from ref. 12, Elsevier.
