4.1 Article

Carbonate sediments of Elizabeth and Middleton Reefs close to the southern limits of reef growth in the southwest Pacific

Journal

AUSTRALIAN JOURNAL OF EARTH SCIENCES
Volume 51, Issue 6, Pages 847-857

Publisher

BLACKWELL PUBLISHING ASIA
DOI: 10.1111/j.1400-0952.2004.01089.x

Keywords

carbonate sediments; coral reefs; southwest Pacific; Tasman Sea

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Elizabeth and Middleton Reefs are atoll-like structures that have developed on top of volcanic edifices and are close to the southern environmental limit of reef development in the southwest Pacific. Reef morphology and vertical accretion rates during the Holocene appear similar to those on other more tropical reefs. Sediment samples were collected from the lagoon of both reefs and around the flanks of Middleton Reef. A distinctly chlorozoan assemblage was observed with coral, molluscs, Holimeda, coralline algae and foraminifers being the dominant sediment constituents. Lagoon sediment samples show little variation within or between reefs, lacking the concentric zonation characteristic of larger atolls. Samples collected from the flanks of Middleton Reef, and subsurface material from vibrocores, differ compositionally from the surficial lagoon sand and were typically more tropical in character. A comparison of the sediment constituents from these reefs with those of samples from within a fringing reef and from the shelf around Lord Howe Island,further south, indicated regional patterns in sediment composition. Holimeda rapidly decreased in abundance with increased latitude, and appeared confined to deeper water, whereas coralline red algae increased significantly. The rapid change in these major sediment contributors is coincident with the general decrease in coral growth rates with latitude. This reinforces the notion that the latitudinal limit of reef development is constrained by factors other than coral growth alone.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available