3.9 Article

Is methane venting at the seafloor recorded by δ13C of benthic foraminifera shells? -: art. no. 1062

期刊

PALEOCEANOGRAPHY
卷 18, 期 3, 页码 -

出版社

AMER GEOPHYSICAL UNION
DOI: 10.1029/2002PA000824

关键词

methane hydrates; gas seeps; foraminifera; carbon isotopes

向作者/读者索取更多资源

[1] The isotopic composition of the dissolved inorganic carbon (DIC) collected at sites of active methane discharge on Hydrate Ridge, Oregon, reveals anaerobic methane oxidation mediated by bacteria, with delta(13)C(DIC) reaching values as low as -48parts per thousand in the upper 4 cm of the sediment. In spite of the high sulfide levels in the discharging fluids, living specimens of the benthic foraminifera Uvigerina peregrina are abundant in the vents, probably owing to the rich bacterial food source. Although pore water delta(13)C(DIC) is extremely low (-6 to -48parts per thousand), the delta(13)C values of living (Rose Bengal stained) foraminifera shells collected from active methane seeps are not significantly lower than those observed in nonventing pelagic sediments, and are within the range expected from local organic matter decomposition (0 to -4parts per thousand). The apparent delta(13)C disequilibrium between biogenic calcite and DIC suggests that at seep localities, foraminifera calcify mostly during periods when there is little methane discharge or during intermittent episodes of seawater flow into the sediments. The isotopic composition and Mg/Ca ratios of fossil (unstained) foraminifera recovered at carbonate-rich sites on the northern Hydrate Ridge reveals overprinting of the biogenic record by inorganic calcite with high Mg/Ca and anomalously low delta(13)C values. Thus overprinting of the original isotopic composition of foraminifera by overgrowths or recrystallization at or below the sediment surface, rather than primary calcification in contact with C-13 depleted DIC, can explain extreme C-13 depletion observed in fossil foraminifera recovered from sites of active methane discharge.

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

3.9
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