4.7 Article

Efficient sequestration of terrigenous organic carbon in the New Britain Trench

期刊

CHEMICAL GEOLOGY
卷 533, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.chemgeo.2019.119446

关键词

Hadal trenches; Terrigenous OC; Grain size; Radiocarbon; Biomarker

资金

  1. China Scholarship Council
  2. Shanghai Committee of Science and Technology [15DZ1207000]
  3. National Natural Science Foundation of China [41976030, 41676058, 41606091]
  4. Swiss National Science Foundation (CAPS-LOCK2 Grant) [200021_140850]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The fate of terrigenous organic carbon (OCterr) in the ocean remains an enigma for four decades. Hadal trenches, the deepest ocean realm (6-11 km deep), were recently proposed to be OC depocenters, but whether and how much OCterr was sequestrated there remain elusive. Here we conducted comprehensive analyses for four sediment cores from the New Britain Trench (NBT) close to Papua New Guinea to assess source, translocation and burial of OC. The bulk and molecular radiocarbon data suggest that the NBT landward slope and axis sediments mainly receive young and biogenic rather than petrogenic OC. The three-endmember mixing model based on Delta C-14, delta C-13 and OC contents reveals that sediments of the NBT axis (8225 m) comprise relatively high OC contents (0.66 +/- 0.08%), of which biogenic OCterr accounts for 62 +/- 10%. The high proportion of biogenic OCterr was attributed to the selective translocation of OCterr-enriched coarse particles and rapid delivery of sediments supported by unique V-shape feature of the trench. In contrast, the sediment OC at the oceanward slope is primarily of a marine origin, suggesting that OCterr was efficiently trapped in the trench bottom. It is estimated that the burial rate is 2.75 +/- 0.32 g C m(-2) yr(-1) for OC and 1.69 +/- 0.41 g C m(-2) yr(-1) for OCterr in the NBT. Given a fact that many trenches are close to the landmasses, we propose that the hadal trenches may contribute significantly to the burial of OCterr in the ocean.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据