4.7 Article

Carbonate formation by anaerobic oxidation of methane:: Evidence from lipid biomarker and fossil 16S rDNA

期刊

GEOCHIMICA ET COSMOCHIMICA ACTA
卷 72, 期 7, 页码 1824-1836

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.gca.2008.01.020

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Carbonate chimneys and other carbonate structures occur widespread in the Gulf of Cadiz and probably reflect the presence of cold seeps and associated release of methane in the geological past, possibly in the Early Pleistocene, but it is unclear under what conditions and by which processes these carbonates were formed. We studied a fossil methane-related carbonate crust collected from the Kidd mud volcano in the gulf. Concentrations of microbial lipids, their stable carbon isotope composition, sequences of fossil 16S rRNA genes of anaerobic methanotrophic archaea in combination with mineralogical and carbon and oxygen isotopic composition of carbonate were obtained for seven different horizons of the crust. This combination of organic and inorganic geochemical techniques with molecular ecological methods gave a consistent view on processes resulting in the formation of the crust and indicated that it took place in two phases and in a downward direction. Archaeal lipid biomarkers and fossil 16S rRNA gene sequence data revealed the dominance of archaeal ANME-2 group and elevated methane partial pressures during the formation of the top part of the crust. The lower part of the carbonate was likely formed in an environment with reduced methane fluxes as revealed by the dominance of fossil remains of ANME-1 archaea. The combination of these methods can be used as an effective tool to reconstruct in unprecedented detail the palaeo-biogeochemical processes resulting in the formation of carbonate fabrics. This interdisciplinary strategy may also be applied for other fossil methane-derived carbonates, generating new concepts and knowledge about past methane-related carbonate systems. (C) 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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