pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2605.03994 · v1 · submitted 2026-05-05 · 🌌 astro-ph.EP

Recognition: unknown

Synergistic Effects of Ocean Salinity and Planetary Obliquity Enhance Habitability of Cold Exo-Earths

Edward Schwieterman, Kyle Batra, Stephanie Olson

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-07 04:00 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.EP
keywords exoplanet habitabilityocean salinityplanetary obliquityice-albedo feedbackclimate modelingcold exo-Earthshabitable zone
0
0 comments X

The pith

Ocean salinity and planetary obliquity together produce more varied and often more habitable climates for cold exo-Earths than either factor alone.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper examines how ocean salinity and planetary obliquity interact to shape the climates of Earth-like exoplanets. It shows that their combined influence exceeds the sum of their separate effects, primarily because both alter sea ice cover and thereby strengthen the ice-albedo feedback. Planets with the same atmosphere and stellar energy input can therefore reach ice-free, partially ice-covered, or fully glaciated states depending on the specific salinity and obliquity values. This interaction is especially pronounced for colder planets near the outer edge of the habitable zone. Readers should care because it indicates that habitability assessments cannot treat salinity and obliquity as independent variables without risking incorrect conclusions about which planets remain potentially livable.

Core claim

Salinity and obliquity have a greater combined impact on planetary climate than the sum of their effects in isolation. This synergy arises due to the ice-albedo feedback, producing distinct climate states that range from ice-free to globally glaciated while having the same initial atmospheric conditions and receiving the same instellation. Consequently, ocean salinity and planetary obliquity can together lead to divergent habitability outcomes for otherwise identical planetary scenarios and initial conditions, and they can jointly increase the planetary fractional habitability across oceans and continents, especially for cold exoplanets.

What carries the argument

The ice-albedo feedback loop, in which changes in ocean salinity (affecting freezing point and density-driven circulation) and obliquity (affecting seasonal sunlight distribution) both modify sea-ice extent, which in turn alters planetary reflectivity and temperature.

If this is right

  • Planets receiving identical instellation can occupy ice-free, partially glaciated, or fully glaciated regimes solely due to differences in salinity and obliquity.
  • Fractional habitability, measured across both ocean and land surfaces, can rise for cold planets when high salinity and high obliquity are combined.
  • Divergent habitability outcomes become possible for otherwise identical planets that differ only in these two parameters.
  • Studies of exoplanet climate and habitability must evaluate salinity and obliquity jointly rather than in isolation.
  • The outer edge of the habitable zone may support more ice-free conditions than previously modeled when both factors are considered together.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Observational constraints on one variable could be used to narrow the plausible climate states produced by the other, aiding interpretation of future direct-imaging or transit data.
  • Climate models that vary only one factor at a time risk underestimating the full range of possible surface conditions for a given instellation.
  • The synergy implies that processes controlling ocean salinity on real exoplanets (such as water loss or volcanic outgassing) could indirectly affect habitability through their interaction with obliquity.

Load-bearing premise

The climate model's treatment of how salinity changes sea-ice formation and how that change couples to the ice-albedo feedback is accurate enough to represent real exoplanet conditions across the explored parameter range.

What would settle it

Direct measurement or inference of global ice coverage or mean surface temperature on a cold exoplanet whose ocean salinity and axial obliquity can be independently constrained, to test whether the observed state matches the model's synergistic prediction rather than a simple addition of separate salinity and obliquity runs.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.03994 by Edward Schwieterman, Kyle Batra, Stephanie Olson.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Maps of annual mean sea ice and continental precipitation (A) and annual mean sea surface temperature (in ocean regions) and surface air temperature (over continents) (B) for simulations with Earth-like ocean salinity (35 g/kg) and obliquity (23.5◦ ), at Archean instellation on the left and present-day instellation on the right. Land contours mapped in the figure (in black) are more detailed than the actua… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Annual mean sea ice maps for simulations with ocean salinities from 20–100 g/kg, increasing from left to right, and planetary obliquity from 0–90◦ , increasing from top to bottom, at Archean instellation. Orange borders denote model scenarios with 1–10% ocean fractional habitability and green borders indicate scenarios with >10% ocean fractional habitability. (Figure 1A), less than present-day Earth, but c… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Top of atmosphere (TOA) instellation (W m−2 ) latitudinal distribution pattern at each obliquity for the (A) annual mean and (B) monthly mean data in June and December (encompassing the solstices) at Archean instellation. glaciated, consistent with the faint young Sun paradox that the Earth would be fully glaciated in the Archean eon if it had present-day atmospheric and surface conditions (Sagan & Mullen … view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Hovm¨oller plots of monthly mean sea ice cover (A) and sea surface temperature (B) at Archean instellation for simulations with 35 vs. 100 g/kg ocean salinity (columns) and 0–90◦ planetary obliquity (rows). The annual mean sea ice coverage differs dramatically between simulations with different ocean salinities and plane￾tary obliquities ( view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Maps of annual mean sea surface temperature for simulations with ocean salinities from 20–100 g/kg, increasing from left to right, and planetary obliquity from 0–90◦ , increasing from top to bottom, at Archean instellation. As in view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The annual mean sea ice cover (A), global mean sea surface temperature (B), global mean continental surface temperature (C), global mean continental precipitation (D), and planetary albedo (E) for Archean instellation experiments as a function of planetary obliquity (x-axis) and ocean salinity (colors). latitude regions compared to lower obliquity planets (Figure 3B), causing increased sea ice melting at t… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Hovm¨oller plots of monthly mean continental surface temperature (A) and continental precipitation (B) at Archean instellation for simulations with 35 vs. 100 g/kg ocean salinity (columns) and 0–90◦ planetary obliquity (rows). equatorial regions, but it is less concentrated than the 0 and 15◦ obliquity experiments where high salinity leads to an ice cap climate state (Figure 3A). The poles of the 30◦ obliq… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Global monthly mean continental precipitation for each month (x-axis) for simulations with Archean instellation and ocean salinities of 35 g/kg (left) vs. 100 g/kg (right). In each panel, colored lines represent simulations with different obliquities. We find that the annual mean sea surface temperature also varies with ocean salinity and planetary obliquity ( view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Annually averaged ocean and continental fractional habitability map of Archean instellation planets at 15◦ and 60◦ planetary obliquity at 35 and 100 g/kg ocean salinity. The labeled colors denote the uninhabitable regions (light blue and tan) and regions which meet our qualifications to be habitable for life (dark blue and green) on oceans and continents respectively. The four worlds depict four distinct c… view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Annually averaged ocean (A) and continental (B) fractional habitability percent (%) for a given planetary obliquity, ocean salinity, and instellation. aries around all experiments with between 1–10% ocean fractional habitability. While >10% open ocean fractional habitability is a somewhat arbitrary constraint, it is indicative of the potential for significant sea-air gas exchange, which improves the likel… view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Annual mean sea ice cover (A), global mean sea surface temperature (B), global mean continental surface temper￾ature (C), global mean continental precipitation (D), and planetary albedo (E) for both Archean and present-day instellation as a function of planetary obliquity (x-axis) and ocean salinity (colors) view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Annual mean sea ice maps for simulations with ocean salinities from 20–100 g/kg, increasing from left to right, and planetary obliquity from 0–60◦ , increasing from top to bottom, at present-day instellation view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Maps of annual mean sea surface temperature for simulations with ocean salinities from 20–100 g/kg, increasing from left to right, and planetary obliquity from 0–60◦ , increasing from top to bottom, at present-day instellation view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Globally averaged monthly mean continental precipitation for each month (x-axis) for simulations with present-day instellation and ocean salinities of 35 g/kg (left) and 100 g/kg (right). In each panel, colored lines represent simulations with different obliquities view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Past work has shown that ocean salinity and planetary obliquity both influence the climates of Earth-like exoplanets throughout the habitable zone of Sun-like stars. The effects of salinity and obliquity can be profound, with low vs. high salinity or obliquity resulting in distinct climate states in some scenarios. However, past work has considered salinity or obliquity in isolation and has not explored how each may modulate the effects of the other. We investigate how ocean salinity and planetary obliquity jointly impact climate and habitability using the ROCKE-3D coupled ocean-atmosphere general circulation model. We find that salinity and obliquity have a greater combined impact on planetary climate than the sum of their effects in isolation. This synergy between salinity and obliquity arises due to the ice-albedo feedback, producing distinct climate states that range from ice-free to globally glaciated while having same initial atmospheric conditions and receiving the same instellation. Consequently, ocean salinity and planetary obliquity can together lead to divergent habitability outcomes for otherwise identical planetary scenarios and initial conditions. Salinity and obliquity can jointly increase the planetary fractional habitability across oceans and continents, especially for cold exoplanets. Although neither ocean salinity nor planetary obliquity can be reliably predicted or observationally constrained, their synergistic effects must be considered in future studies of planetary climate and exoplanet observations, especially when characterizing planetary habitability.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

3 major / 3 minor

Summary. The manuscript uses the ROCKE-3D coupled ocean-atmosphere GCM to explore the joint effects of ocean salinity and planetary obliquity on the climates of cold Earth-like exoplanets at fixed low instellation. It reports that the two parameters interact synergistically through the ice-albedo feedback, producing a wider range of climate states (ice-free to globally glaciated) than would be expected from the sum of their isolated effects, with corresponding impacts on fractional habitability across oceans and land.

Significance. If the central result holds, the work is significant for exoplanet habitability assessments because it demonstrates non-additive, multi-parameter interactions that can shift planets between habitable and uninhabitable regimes under identical instellation. The forward-modeling approach with a physics-based GCM is a clear strength, as it avoids fitted parameters and directly simulates the mechanistic links between salinity-dependent freezing-point depression, ocean density, seasonal insolation from obliquity, and ice-albedo feedback. This provides a concrete example of how otherwise identical planets can diverge in climate outcome.

major comments (3)
  1. [Methods] Methods section: The study is based on a four-run matrix (low/high salinity × low/high obliquity) at a single cold instellation. No sensitivity tests are reported to sea-ice albedo, ocean mixing coefficients, brine-rejection parameterizations, or horizontal/vertical resolution. Because the claimed synergy is attributed entirely to the ice-albedo feedback, and because ROCKE-3D’s sea-ice and ocean closures are Earth-calibrated, the absence of these tests leaves open the possibility that the reported super-additive behavior is an artifact of the specific parameter choices rather than a robust physical outcome.
  2. [Results] Results section: The manuscript asserts that salinity and obliquity produce a 'greater combined impact' and 'distinct climate states' but does not provide quantitative measures of the synergy (e.g., the difference in global ice fraction or habitable area between the combined run and the arithmetic sum of the isolated runs) or any uncertainty estimates from the GCM integrations. Without these numbers or ensemble diagnostics, it is not possible to judge the magnitude or statistical robustness of the central claim.
  3. [Discussion] Discussion section: The attribution of the synergy exclusively to ice-albedo feedback is not isolated by diagnostic experiments (e.g., fixed-albedo runs or suppressed ocean heat transport). Other processes such as obliquity-driven changes in meridional circulation or salinity effects on atmospheric humidity could contribute; without such tests the causal mechanism remains plausible but unverified.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: The abstract summarizes the findings qualitatively but reports no numerical values for ice coverage, surface temperature, or fractional habitability, making it difficult for readers to gauge the practical size of the reported synergy.
  2. [Figures] Figure captions: The captions for the climate-state figures should explicitly state the exact salinity (psu) and obliquity (degrees) values used for the 'low' and 'high' cases, as well as the instellation value, to allow direct reproduction.
  3. [Methods] Notation: The manuscript uses 'fractional habitability' without a clear definition or reference to how it is computed from the GCM output (e.g., temperature thresholds for liquid water on land vs. ocean).

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 2 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive review and positive assessment of the work's significance. We address each major comment below with point-by-point responses. Where feasible, we will revise the manuscript to incorporate quantitative measures of synergy and clarifications on methods and mechanisms. We note limitations arising from computational constraints on additional simulations.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: Methods section: The study is based on a four-run matrix (low/high salinity × low/high obliquity) at a single cold instellation. No sensitivity tests are reported to sea-ice albedo, ocean mixing coefficients, brine-rejection parameterizations, or horizontal/vertical resolution. Because the claimed synergy is attributed entirely to the ice-albedo feedback, and because ROCKE-3D’s sea-ice and ocean closures are Earth-calibrated, the absence of these tests leaves open the possibility that the reported super-additive behavior is an artifact of the specific parameter choices rather than a robust physical outcome.

    Authors: We acknowledge the value of sensitivity tests for confirming robustness. The ROCKE-3D parameters follow standard Earth-calibrated values used in prior exoplanet applications of the model. In revision, we will add a Methods subsection explaining these choices with references to existing sensitivity literature and explicitly noting the absence of dedicated tests as a limitation. This will clarify that the reported synergy is physically driven by salinity-dependent freezing point depression and ice-albedo feedback, while acknowledging that quantitative magnitudes could vary with parameter choices. revision: partial

  2. Referee: Results section: The manuscript asserts that salinity and obliquity produce a 'greater combined impact' and 'distinct climate states' but does not provide quantitative measures of the synergy (e.g., the difference in global ice fraction or habitable area between the combined run and the arithmetic sum of the isolated runs) or any uncertainty estimates from the GCM integrations. Without these numbers or ensemble diagnostics, it is not possible to judge the magnitude or statistical robustness of the central claim.

    Authors: We agree that explicit quantification will improve clarity. From the existing four simulations, we will compute and report the synergistic increment in global ice fraction and habitable area as (high-salinity/high-obliquity outcome) minus the sum of isolated high-salinity and high-obliquity effects relative to the low/low baseline. These numbers will be added to the Results section with supporting tables or figures. However, our study used single long integrations per case; we cannot provide ensemble-derived uncertainty estimates. We will state this limitation and identify ensemble diagnostics as future work. revision: partial

  3. Referee: Discussion section: The attribution of the synergy exclusively to ice-albedo feedback is not isolated by diagnostic experiments (e.g., fixed-albedo runs or suppressed ocean heat transport). Other processes such as obliquity-driven changes in meridional circulation or salinity effects on atmospheric humidity could contribute; without such tests the causal mechanism remains plausible but unverified.

    Authors: Our attribution rests on the direct correspondence between ice coverage changes, albedo increases, and the resulting temperature/habitability divergences in the simulations. In revision, we will augment the Discussion with additional diagnostics from the existing output, including seasonal ice maps and surface energy budget breakdowns, to strengthen the ice-albedo link. We will also discuss secondary roles of meridional circulation and humidity changes, showing they do not dominate the synergy in our results. Dedicated fixed-albedo or transport-suppression experiments would require new runs and are noted as valuable future extensions. revision: partial

standing simulated objections not resolved
  • Full sensitivity tests to sea-ice albedo, ocean mixing coefficients, brine rejection, and resolution, as well as diagnostic experiments (fixed-albedo or suppressed heat transport runs) to isolate the ice-albedo feedback mechanism, because these require additional computationally expensive GCM simulations beyond the original four-run matrix.
  • Ensemble-based uncertainty estimates or statistical robustness measures for the GCM results, since only single integrations were performed for each parameter combination.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: results are direct outputs of forward GCM integrations

full rationale

The paper's central claim—that salinity and obliquity interact synergistically via ice-albedo feedback to produce distinct climate states—is obtained by executing a fixed set of ROCKE-3D simulations at one instellation value with four combinations of salinity and obliquity. No algebraic derivation, parameter fitting, or self-referential definition is present; the reported synergy is an emergent numerical outcome of the model's ocean, sea-ice, and radiation modules. No load-bearing self-citations, uniqueness theorems, or ansatzes imported from prior author work are invoked to force the result. The analysis is therefore self-contained and does not reduce any prediction to its inputs by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The findings depend on the accuracy of the chosen model parameters for salinity and obliquity and the validity of the GCM's physical assumptions for exoplanetary conditions.

free parameters (2)
  • Ocean salinity
    Specific salinity concentrations were varied in the simulations to explore effects; exact values not provided in abstract.
  • Planetary obliquity
    Different obliquity angles were tested to assess their influence on climate; exact values not provided in abstract.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption The ice-albedo feedback mechanism dominates the synergistic response in the climate model.
    Used to explain why combined effects exceed isolated ones.
  • domain assumption ROCKE-3D provides a realistic simulation of ocean-atmosphere-ice interactions under varying salinity and obliquity for Earth-like exoplanets.
    Core assumption enabling the habitability conclusions.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5558 in / 1672 out tokens · 103881 ms · 2026-05-07T04:00:23.740064+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

117 extracted references · 111 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    doi:10.1088/0004-637X/756/2/178 , eid =

    Abbot, D. S., Cowan, N. B., & Ciesla, F. J. 2012, The Astrophysical Journal, 756, 178, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/756/2/178

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/756/2/178 2012

  2. [2]

    D., Millholland, S., & Laughlin, G

    Adams, A. D., Millholland, S., & Laughlin, G. P. 2019, The Astronomical Journal, 158, 108, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ab2b35

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ab2b35 2019

  3. [3]

    2020, Chemical Geology, 548, 119625, doi: 10.1016/j.chemgeo.2020.119625

    Albarede, F., Thibon, F., Blichert-Toft, J., & Tsikos, H. 2020, Chemical Geology, 548, 119625, doi: 10.1016/j.chemgeo.2020.119625

    work page doi:10.1016/j.chemgeo.2020.119625 2020

  4. [4]

    2014, Astrobiology, 14, 277, doi: 10.1089/ast.2013.1129

    Armstrong, J., Barnes, R., Domagal-Goldman, S., et al. 2014, Astrobiology, 14, 277, doi: 10.1089/ast.2013.1129

    work page doi:10.1089/ast.2013.1129 2014

  5. [5]

    2010, Cell Cycle, 9, 1528, doi: 10.4161/cc.9.8.11196

    Gruenbaum, Y. 2010, Cell Cycle, 9, 1528, doi: 10.4161/cc.9.8.11196

    work page doi:10.4161/cc.9.8.11196 2010

  6. [6]

    Barnett, T. P. 1984, AMS Publications. https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/mwre/112/ 2/1520-0493 1984 112 0303 lttist 2 0 co 2.xml

    1984

  7. [7]

    R., Hansell, D

    Bates, N. R., Hansell, D. A., Carlson, C. A., & Gordon, L. I. 1998, Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans, 103, 2883, doi: 10.1029/97JC02473

    work page doi:10.1029/97jc02473 1998

  8. [8]

    Batra, K., & Olson, S. L. 2024, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 971, L11, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ad63a5

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad63a5 2024

  9. [9]

    2014, Climate Research, 59, 1, doi: 10.3354/cr01204

    Belda, M., Holtanov´ a, E., Halenka, T., & Kalvov´ a, J. 2014, Climate Research, 59, 1, doi: 10.3354/cr01204

    work page doi:10.3354/cr01204 2014

  10. [10]

    1978, Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences, 35

    Berger, A. 1978, Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences, 35. https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/atsc/35/12/ 1520-0469 1978 035 2362 ltvodi 2 0 co 2.xml

    1978

  11. [11]

    B., & Ferrari, R

    Cael, B. B., & Ferrari, R. 2017, Geophysical Research Letters, 44, 1886, doi: 10.1002/2016GL072223

    work page doi:10.1002/2016gl072223 2017

  12. [12]

    C., McDonald, I

    Cary, S. C., McDonald, I. R., Barrett, J. E., & Cowan, D. A. 2010, Nature Reviews Microbiology, 8, 129, doi: 10.1038/nrmicro2281

    work page doi:10.1038/nrmicro2281 2010

  13. [13]

    S., & Cornillon, P

    Casey, K. S., & Cornillon, P. 2001, AMS Publications. https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/clim/14/18/ 1520-0442 2001 014 3801 garsst 2.0.co 2.xml

    2001

  14. [14]

    C., & Zahnle, K

    Catling, D. C., & Zahnle, K. J. 2020, Science Advances, 6, eaax1420, doi: 10.1126/sciadv.aax1420

    work page doi:10.1126/sciadv.aax1420 2020

  15. [15]

    Farrell, R. L. 2013, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110, 8990, doi: 10.1073/pnas.1300643110

    work page doi:10.1073/pnas.1300643110 2013

  16. [16]

    H., Olson, S

    Checlair, J. H., Olson, S. L., Jansen, M. F., & Abbot, D. S. 2019, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 884, L46, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ab487d

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ab487d 2019

  17. [17]

    2014, International Journal of Astrobiology, 13, 141, doi: 10.1017/S1473550413000438

    Clarke, A. 2014, International Journal of Astrobiology, 13, 141, doi: 10.1017/S1473550413000438

    work page doi:10.1017/s1473550413000438 2014

  18. [18]

    2016, Astrobiology, 16, 89, doi: 10.1089/ast.2015.1295

    Cockell, C., Bush, T., Bryce, C., et al. 2016, Astrobiology, 16, 89, doi: 10.1089/ast.2015.1295

    work page doi:10.1089/ast.2015.1295 2016

  19. [19]

    M., Genio, A

    Colose, C. M., Genio, A. D. D., & Way, M. J. 2019, The Astrophysical Journal, 884, 138, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab4131

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab4131 2019

  20. [20]

    M., Haqq-Misra, J., Wolf, E

    Colose, C. M., Haqq-Misra, J., Wolf, E. T., et al. 2021, The Astrophysical Journal, 921, 25, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac135c

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac135c 2021

  21. [21]

    P., & Joshi, M

    Cullum, J., Stevens, D. P., & Joshi, M. M. 2016, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113, 4278, doi: 10.1073/pnas.1522034113

    work page doi:10.1073/pnas.1522034113 2016

  22. [22]

    Part I: Wintertime Leading Mode

    Curry, J. A., Schramm, J. L., & Ebert, E. E. 1995, Journal of Climate, 8, 240, doi: 10.1175/1520-0442(1995)008⟨0240:SIACFM⟩2.0.CO;2

    work page doi:10.1175/1520-0442(1995)008 1995

  23. [23]

    1992, in Animal Life at Low Temperature, ed

    Davenport, J. 1992, in Animal Life at Low Temperature, ed. J. Davenport (Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands), 139–153, doi: 10.1007/978-94-011-2344-0 6

    work page doi:10.1007/978-94-011-2344-0 1992

  24. [24]

    2018, The Astronomical Journal, 155, 266, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aac214 Del Genio, A

    Deitrick, R., Barnes, R., Bitz, C., et al. 2018, The Astronomical Journal, 155, 266, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aac214 Del Genio, A. D., Way, M. J., Amundsen, D. S., et al. 2019a, Astrobiology, 19, 99, doi: 10.1089/ast.2017.1760 Del Genio, A. D., Way, M. J., Kiang, N. Y., et al. 2019b, The Astrophysical Journal, 887, 197, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab57fd

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aac214 2018

  25. [25]

    R., & Ward, C

    Walter, M. R., & Ward, C. R. 2017, Nature Communications, 8, 16149, doi: 10.1038/ncomms16149

    work page doi:10.1038/ncomms16149 2017

  26. [26]

    T., Lyons, W

    Doran, P. T., Lyons, W. B., & McKnight, D. M. 2010, Life in Antarctic Deserts and other Cold Dry Environments: Astrobiological Analogs (Cambridge University Press)

    2010

  27. [27]

    Raymond, S. N. 2010, The Astrophysical Journal, 721, 1295, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/721/2/1295

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/721/2/1295 2010

  28. [28]

    Durack, P. J. 2015, Oceanography, 28, 20. https://www.jstor.org/stable/24861839

    work page arXiv 2015

  29. [29]

    Else, B. G. T., Papakyriakou, T. N., Asplin, M. G., et al. 2013, Global Biogeochemical Cycles, 27, 388, doi: 10.1002/gbc.20016

    work page doi:10.1002/gbc.20016 2013

  30. [30]

    Else, B. G. T., Papakyriakou, T. N., Galley, R. J., et al. 2011, Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans, 116, doi: 10.1029/2010JC006760 —. 2012, Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans, 117, doi: 10.1029/2011JC007346

    work page doi:10.1029/2010jc006760 2011

  31. [31]

    A., & Seager, S

    Ferreira, D., Marshall, J., O’Gorman, P. A., & Seager, S. 2014, Icarus, 243, 236, doi: 10.1016/j.icarus.2014.09.015

    work page doi:10.1016/j.icarus.2014.09.015 2014

  32. [32]

    2011, Journal of Climate, 24, 992, doi: 10.1175/2010JCLI3580.1

    Ferreira, D., Marshall, J., & Rose, B. 2011, Journal of Climate, 24, 992, doi: 10.1175/2010JCLI3580.1

    work page doi:10.1175/2010jcli3580.1 2011

  33. [33]

    K., et al

    Ferreira, D., Cessi, P., Coxall, H. K., et al. 2018, Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences, 46, 327, doi: 10.1146/annurev-earth-082517-010045 25

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev-earth-082517-010045 2018

  34. [34]

    2012, Reviews of Geophysics, 50, doi: 10.1029/2011RG000375

    Feulner, G. 2012, Reviews of Geophysics, 50, doi: 10.1029/2011RG000375

    work page doi:10.1029/2011rg000375 2012

  35. [35]

    P., & Millard Jr, R

    Fofonoff, N. P., & Millard Jr, R. C. 1983, Unesco, doi: 10.25607/OBP-1450

    work page doi:10.25607/obp-1450 1983

  36. [36]

    1996, Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans, 101, 14361, doi: 10.1029/96JC00629

    Frouin, R., Schwindling, M., & Deschamps, P.-Y. 1996, Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans, 101, 14361, doi: 10.1029/96JC00629

    work page doi:10.1029/96jc00629 1996

  37. [37]

    2018, Astrobiology, 18, 739, doi: 10.1089/ast.2017.1733

    Fujii, Y., Angerhausen, D., Deitrick, R., et al. 2018, Astrobiology, 18, 739, doi: 10.1089/ast.2017.1733

    work page doi:10.1089/ast.2017.1733 2018

  38. [38]

    2019, Earth System Dynamics, 10, 73, doi: 10.5194/esd-10-73-2019

    Giorgi, F., Raffaele, F., & Coppola, E. 2019, Earth System Dynamics, 10, 73, doi: 10.5194/esd-10-73-2019

    work page doi:10.5194/esd-10-73-2019 2019

  39. [39]

    Gough, D. O. 1981, in Sol. Phys., ed. V. Domingo (Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands), 21–34, doi: 10.1007/978-94-010-9633-1 4

    work page doi:10.1007/978-94-010-9633-1 1981

  40. [40]

    2018, Geophysical Research Letters, 45, 13,213, doi: 10.1029/2018GL080752 —

    Guendelman, I., & Kaspi, Y. 2018, Geophysical Research Letters, 45, 13,213, doi: 10.1029/2018GL080752 —. 2019, The Astrophysical Journal, 881, 67, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab2a06 —. 2022, AGU Advances, 3, e2022AV000684, doi: 10.1029/2022AV000684

    work page doi:10.1029/2018gl080752 2018

  41. [41]

    2017, Science (New York, N.Y.), 355, 1069, doi: 10.1126/science.aal4151

    Halevy, I., & Bachan, A. 2017, Science (New York, N.Y.), 355, 1069, doi: 10.1126/science.aal4151

    work page doi:10.1126/science.aal4151 2017

  42. [42]

    H., & Tiedemann, R

    Haug, G. H., & Tiedemann, R. 1998, Nature, 393, 673, doi: 10.1038/31447

    work page doi:10.1038/31447 1998

  43. [43]

    W., Migdisov, A., Balukhovsky, A

    Hay, W. W., Migdisov, A., Balukhovsky, A. N., et al. 2006,

    2006

  44. [44]

    Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, 240, 3, doi: 10.1016/j.palaeo.2006.03.044

    work page doi:10.1016/j.palaeo.2006.03.044 2006

  45. [45]

    S., & Turnbull, M

    He, F., Merrelli, A., L’Ecuyer, T. S., & Turnbull, M. C. 2022, The Astrophysical Journal, 933, 62, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac6951

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac6951 2022

  46. [46]

    Holland, H. D. 1984, The Chemical Evolution of the Atmosphere and Oceans (Princeton University Press)

    1984

  47. [47]

    2018, Nature Geoscience, 11, 665, doi: 10.1038/s41561-018-0190-9

    Homann, M., Sansjofre, P., Van Zuilen, M., et al. 2018, Nature Geoscience, 11, 665, doi: 10.1038/s41561-018-0190-9

    work page doi:10.1038/s41561-018-0190-9 2018

  48. [48]

    M., & Toggweiler, J

    Hotinski, R. M., & Toggweiler, J. R. 2003, Paleoceanography, 18, doi: 10.1029/2001PA000730 Hou´ erou, H. N. L. 1992, Journal of Arid Environments, 22, 3, doi: 10.1016/S0140-1963(18)30653-0 H¨ oning, D., & Spohn, T. 2023, Astrobiology, 23, 372, doi: 10.1089/ast.2022.0070

    work page doi:10.1029/2001pa000730 2003

  49. [49]

    Jansen, T., Scharf, C., Way, M., & Genio, A. D. 2019, The Astrophysical Journal, 875, 79, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab113d

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab113d 2019

  50. [50]

    2023, The Astrophysical Journal, 944, 205, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acb81c

    Jernigan, J., Lafleche, E., Burke, A., & Olson, S. 2023, The Astrophysical Journal, 944, 205, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/acb81c

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acb81c 2023

  51. [51]

    W., Poulton, S

    Johnson, B. W., Poulton, S. W., & Goldblatt, C. 2017, Nature Communications, 8, 1316, doi: 10.1038/s41467-017-01453-z

    work page doi:10.1038/s41467-017-01453-z 2017

  52. [52]

    2012, Astrobiology, 12, 3, doi: 10.1089/ast.2011.0668

    Joshi, M., & Haberle, R. 2012, Astrobiology, 12, 3, doi: 10.1089/ast.2011.0668

    work page doi:10.1089/ast.2011.0668 2012

  53. [53]

    2017, Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 55, 433, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-082214-122238

    Kaltenegger, L. 2017, Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 55, 433, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-082214-122238

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-082214-122238 2017

  54. [54]

    2019, The Astrophysical Journal, 876, L1, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ab18a8

    Kang, W. 2019, The Astrophysical Journal, 876, L1, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ab18a8

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ab18a8 2019

  55. [55]

    Kasting, J. F. 2010, Nature, 464, 687, doi: 10.1038/464687a

    work page doi:10.1038/464687a 2010

  56. [56]

    F., Kopparapu, R., Ramirez, R

    Kasting, J. F., Kopparapu, R., Ramirez, R. M., & Harman, C. E. 2014, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111, 12641, doi: 10.1073/pnas.1309107110

    work page doi:10.1073/pnas.1309107110 2014

  57. [57]

    F., Whitmire, D

    Kasting, J. F., Whitmire, D. P., & Reynolds, R. T. 1993, Icarus, 101, 108, doi: 10.1006/icar.1993.1010

    work page doi:10.1006/icar.1993.1010 1993

  58. [58]

    C., & Stocker, T

    Kilic, C., Raible, C. C., & Stocker, T. F. 2017, The Astrophysical Journal, 844, 147, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aa7a03

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa7a03 2017

  59. [59]

    Knauth, L. P. 1998, Nature, 395, 554, doi: 10.1038/26879 —. 2005, in Geobiology: Objectives, Concepts, Perspectives, ed. N. Noffke (Amsterdam: Elsevier), 53–69, doi: 10.1016/B978-0-444-52019-7.50007-3

    work page doi:10.1038/26879 1998

  60. [60]

    P., & Beeunas, M

    Knauth, L. P., & Beeunas, M. A. 1986, Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 50, 419, doi: 10.1016/0016-7037(86)90195-X

    work page doi:10.1016/0016-7037(86)90195-x 1986

  61. [61]

    K., Ramirez, R

    Kopparapu, R. K., Ramirez, R. M., SchottelKotte, J., et al. 2014, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 787, L29, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/787/2/L29

    work page doi:10.1088/2041-8205/787/2/l29 2014

  62. [62]

    K., Ramirez, R., Kasting, J

    Kopparapu, R. K., Ramirez, R., Kasting, J. F., et al. 2013, The Astrophysical Journal, 765, 131, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/765/2/131

    work page doi:10.1088/0004-637x/765/2/131 2013

  63. [63]

    N., & Catling, D

    Krissansen-Totton, J., Arney, G. N., & Catling, D. C. 2018, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115, 4105, doi: 10.1073/pnas.1721296115 K¨ oppen, W. 2011, Meteorologische Zeitschrift, 351, doi: 10.1127/0941-2948/2011/105

    work page doi:10.1073/pnas.1721296115 2018

  64. [64]

    2005, Water Resources Research, 41, doi: 10.1029/2005WR004084

    Gavrieli, I. 2005, Water Resources Research, 41, doi: 10.1029/2005WR004084

    work page doi:10.1029/2005wr004084 2005

  65. [65]

    2019, The Astronomical Journal, 157, 25, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aaf420

    Lingam, M., & Loeb, A. 2019, The Astronomical Journal, 157, 25, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aaf420

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aaf420 2019

  66. [66]

    2015, Planet

    Linsenmeier, M., Pascale, S., & Lucarini, V. 2015, Planetary and Space Science, 105, 43, doi: 10.1016/j.pss.2014.11.003

    work page doi:10.1016/j.pss.2014.11.003 2015

  67. [67]

    H., & Bordoni, S

    Lobo, A. H., & Bordoni, S. 2020, Icarus, 340, 113592, doi: 10.1016/j.icarus.2019.113592 —. 2022, Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 127, e2021JD036003, doi: 10.1029/2021JD036003

    work page doi:10.1016/j.icarus.2019.113592 2020

  68. [68]

    H., Shields, A

    Lobo, A. H., Shields, A. L., Palubski, I. Z., & Wolf, E. 2023, The Astrophysical Journal, 945, 161, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aca970 26

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aca970 2023

  69. [69]

    2014, Ocean Science, 10, 17, doi: 10.5194/os-10-17-2014

    Schlosser, P. 2014, Ocean Science, 10, 17, doi: 10.5194/os-10-17-2014

    work page doi:10.5194/os-10-17-2014 2014

  70. [70]

    J., Valdes, P

    Lunt, D. J., Valdes, P. J., Haywood, A., & Rutt, I. C. 2008, Climate Dynamics, 30, 1, doi: 10.1007/s00382-007-0265-6

    work page doi:10.1007/s00382-007-0265-6 2008

  71. [71]

    S., Mendoza, G

    Lustig-Yaeger, J., Meadows, V. S., Mendoza, G. T., et al. 2018, The Astronomical Journal, 156, 301, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aaed3a

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aaed3a 2018

  72. [72]

    2022, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 513, 2761, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac1040

    Macdonald, E., Paradise, A., Menou, K., & Lee, C. 2022, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 513, 2761, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stac1040

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac1040 2022

  73. [73]

    V., & Broadley, M

    Marty, B., Avice, G., Bekaert, D. V., & Broadley, M. W. 2018, Comptes Rendus Geoscience, 350, 154, doi: 10.1016/j.crte.2017.12.002

    work page doi:10.1016/j.crte.2017.12.002 2018

  74. [74]

    M., & Lensky, N

    Mor, Z., Assouline, S., Tanny, J., Lensky, I. M., & Lensky, N. G. 2018, Water Resources Research, 54, 1460, doi: 10.1002/2017WR021995

    work page doi:10.1002/2017wr021995 2018

  75. [75]

    1998, Deep Sea Research Part I: Oceanographic Research Papers, 45, 1977, doi: 10.1016/S0967-0637(98)00070-3 M´ endez, A., Rivera-Valent´ ın, E

    Munk, W., & Wunsch, C. 1998, Deep Sea Research Part I: Oceanographic Research Papers, 45, 1977, doi: 10.1016/S0967-0637(98)00070-3 M´ endez, A., Rivera-Valent´ ın, E. G., Schulze-Makuch, D., et al. 2021, Astrobiology, 21, 1017, doi: 10.1089/ast.2020.2342 National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2023, Pathways to Discovery in Astronomy an...

    work page doi:10.1016/s0967-0637(98)00070-3 1998

  76. [76]

    1973, Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 4, 25

    Noy-Meir, I. 1973, Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 4, 25. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2096803

    work page arXiv 1973

  77. [77]

    2022, Geophysical Research Letters, 49, e2021GL095748, doi: 10.1029/2021GL095748

    Goldblatt, C. 2022, Geophysical Research Letters, 49, e2021GL095748, doi: 10.1029/2021GL095748

    work page doi:10.1029/2021gl095748 2022

  78. [78]

    L., Jansen, M., & Abbot, D

    Olson, S. L., Jansen, M., & Abbot, D. S. 2020, The Astrophysical Journal, 895, 19, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab88c9

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab88c9 2020

  79. [79]

    L., Schwieterman, E

    Olson, S. L., Schwieterman, E. W., Reinhard, C. T., et al. 2018, The Astrophysical Journal, 858, L14, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aac171

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aac171 2018

  80. [80]

    2016, in Their World: A Diversity of Microbial Environments, ed

    Oren, A. 2016, in Their World: A Diversity of Microbial Environments, ed. C. J. Hurst, Advances in Environmental Microbiology (Cham: Springer International Publishing), 301–339, doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-28071-4 8

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-319-28071-4 2016

Showing first 80 references.