4.3 Article Proceedings Paper

Foraminiferal response to an active methane seep environment: A case study from the Adriatic Sea

Journal

MARINE MICROPALEONTOLOGY
Volume 61, Issue 1-3, Pages 116-130

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.marmicro.2006.05.008

Keywords

benthic foraminifera; shallow methane seep; stable isotopes; foraminiteral taxonomic composition; Tegnue di Chioggia; northern Adriatic Sea

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

It has been analysed the taxonomic structure and isotopic composition of the cytoplasm and tests of living (Rose Bengal stained, protoplasm-full) and dead (empty tests) benthic foraminifera (> 63 mu m) in surface sediments from sites with and without methane seepage at water depths of about 25 m water in the northern Adriatic Sea, and compared these data to isotope analyses of carbonate rocks at the same locations. Foraminiferal density is higher in seep samples than in control ones, despite the low oxygen and high sulphide contents in sediments. The delta C-13 values in foraminiferal cytoplasm at the seep sites are lower than those in cytoplasm of the same species in control samples, suggesting that Beggiatoa may be a food source for the foraminifera, and explaining the higher foraminiferal density at the seep site. In contrast, the delta C-13 values of tests of living and dead benthic foraminifera at seep sites were not significantly different from those in tests of the same species collected at the control sites. Therefore, the carbon isotope values of foraminiferal tests in this area do not reflect the ones of the methane seepage, although the authigenic carbonate in calcareous sandstones of the methane seepage area is significantly negative and indicates the contribution of methane seepage. The similar carbon isotope values measured in the foraminiferal tests from shallow settings of the north-eastern Adriatic Sea seem therefore to be independent of methane seepages. (c) 2006 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

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available