4.5 Article

Assessing subsidence rates and paleo water-depths for Tahiti reefs using U-Th chronology of altered corals

Journal

MARINE GEOLOGY
Volume 295, Issue -, Pages 86-94

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.margeo.2011.12.006

Keywords

paleo water-depth; Tahiti; IODP Expedition 310; island subsidence; coral; U-Th; open system

Funding

  1. NERC [NE/F52330X/1, NE/H014136/1, NE/F523318/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  2. Natural Environment Research Council [NE/H014136/1, NE/F523318/1, NE/F52330X/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  3. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [22740339, 23241015, 21340152] Funding Source: KAKEN

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We present uranium-thorium chronology fora 102 m core through a Pleistocene reef at Tahiti (French Polynesia) sampled during IODP Expedition 310 Tahiti Sea Level. We employ total and partial dissolution procedures on the older coral samples to investigate the diagenetic overprint of the uranium-thorium system. Although alteration of the U-Th system cannot be robustly corrected, diagenetic trends in the U-Th data, combined with sea level and subsidence constraints for the growth of the corals enables the age of critical samples to be constrained to marine isotope stage 9. We use the ages of the corals, together with delta O-18 based sea-level histories, to provide maximum constraints on possible paleo water-depths. These depth constraints are then compared to independent depth estimates based on algal and foraminiferal assemblages, microbioerosion patterns, and sedimentary facies, confirming the accuracy of these paleo water-depth estimates. We also use the fact that corals could not have grown above sea level to place a maximum constraint on the subsidence rate of Tahiti to be 0.39 m ka(-1), with the most likely rate being close to the existing minimum estimate of 0.25 m ka(-1). (C) 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available