<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><xml><records><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>47</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Ruggieri, G.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Spada, G.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Evelpidou, N.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Pirazzoli, P.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Vassilopoulos, A.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Tomasin, A.</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">GIA contribution to sea level rise detected with archaeological indicators along the coast of central Italy.</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">SLALOM International Conference</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2012</style></year></dates><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;div&gt;We reassess the importance of archaeological sea level indicators along the coast of central Italy (Figure 1),&amp;nbsp;recently revisited within the European COST Action ES0701. It appears that the local sea-level rise since 2000&amp;nbsp;years ago can be estimated of the order of about half a meter, that agrees with the classical literature about this&amp;nbsp;topic, rather than ~1.35 m, as recently proposed. In order to analyze the contribution of glacio-isostatic adjustment&amp;nbsp;(GIA) effect to sea level rise detected with observations on field, we employ different viscosity&amp;nbsp;of 0.5 x 10^21 Pa.s for upper mantle and 2.7 x 10^21Pa.s for lower mantle and several late-Pleistocene ice sheets&amp;nbsp;chronologies. Neglecting the tectonic contributions to sea level variations and supposing a laterally uniform&amp;nbsp;rheology, in these regions, RSL curves depart from eustasy mainly because of the effects of melt water loading,&amp;nbsp;responsible for a widespread subsidence reaching its largest amplitude in the bulk of the basin. The mismatch&amp;nbsp;between observations from field data and model predictions can be partly attributed to the poor knowledge of the&amp;nbsp;visco-elastic property of the mantle and to uncertainties of the details of the melting history. The residual between&amp;nbsp;the observations and the predictions of RSL leaves some room for a contribution of recent sea level variations&amp;nbsp;driven by climate change, which according to IPCC estimates amount to 30 cm&amp;nbsp;globally averaged (IPCC, 2007).&lt;/div&gt;</style></abstract></record></records></xml>