Phase relationships between orbital forcing and the composition of air trapped in Antarctic ice cores

Orbital tuning is central for ice core chronologies beyond annual layer counting, available back to 60 ka (i.e. thousands of years before 1950) for Greenland ice cores. While several complementary orbital tuning tools have recently been developed using δ¹⁸Oatm, δO₂⁄N₂ and air content with different orbital targets, quantifying their uncertainties remains a challenge. Indeed, the exact processes linking variations of these parameters, measured in the air trapped in ice, to their orbital targets are not yet fully understood. Here, we provide new series of δO₂∕N₂ and δ¹⁸Oatm data encompassing Marine Isotopic Stage (MIS) 5 (between 100 and 160 ka) and the oldest part (340–800 ka) of the East Antarctic EPICA Dome C (EDC) ice core. For the first time, the measurements over MIS 5 allow an inter-comparison of δO₂∕N₂ and δ¹⁸Oatm records from three East Antarctic ice core sites (EDC, Vostok and Dome F). This comparison highlights some site-specific δO₂∕N₂ variations. Such an observation, the evidence of a 100 ka periodicity in the δO₂∕N₂ signal and the difficulty to identify extrema and mid-slopes in δO2∕N2 increase the uncertainty associated with the use of δO₂∕N₂ as an orbital tuning tool, now calculated to be 3–4 ka. When combining records of δ¹⁸Oatm and δO₂∕N₂ from Vostok and EDC, we find a loss of orbital signature for these two parameters during periods of minimum eccentricity (∼ 400 ka, ∼ 720–800 ka). Our data set reveals a time-varying offset between δO₂∕N₂ and δ¹⁸Oatm records over the last 800 ka that we interpret as variations in the lagged response of δ¹⁸Oatm to precession. The largest offsets are identified during Terminations II, MIS 8 and MIS 16, corresponding to periods of destabilization of the Northern polar ice sheets. We therefore suggest that the occurrence of Heinrich–like events influences the response of δ¹⁸Oatm to precession.

Definition and diagnostic criteria of sleep-related hypermotor epilepsy

The syndrome known as nocturnal frontal lobe epilepsy is recognized worldwide and has been studied in a wide range of clinical and scientific settings (epilepsy, sleep medicine, neurosurgery, pediatric neurology, epidemiology, genetics). Though uncommon, it is of considerable interest to practicing neurologists because of complexity in differential diagnosis from more common, benign sleep disorders such as parasomnias, or other disorders like psychogenic nonepileptic seizures. Moreover, misdiagnosis can have substantial adverse consequences on patients' lives. At present, there is no consensus definition of this disorder and disagreement persists about its core electroclinical features and the spectrum of etiologies involved. To improve the definition of the disorder and establish diagnostic criteria with levels of certainty, a consensus conference using formal recommended methodology was held in Bologna in September 2014. It was recommended that the name be changed to sleep-related hypermotor epilepsy (SHE), reflecting evidence that the attacks are associated with sleep rather than time of day, the seizures may arise from extrafrontal sites, and the motor aspects of the seizures are characteristic. The etiology may be genetic or due to structural pathology, but in most cases remains unknown. Diagnostic criteria were developed with 3 levels of certainty: witnessed (possible) SHE, video-documented (clinical) SHE, and video-EEG-documented (confirmed) SHE. The main research gaps involve epidemiology, pathophysiology, treatment, and prognosis.