Challenging the highstand-dormant paradigm for land-detached submarine canyons

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-1431819/v1

Download PDF

Article

Challenging the highstand-dormant paradigm for land-detached submarine canyons

https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-1431819/v1

This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License

Journal Publication

published 15 Jun, 2022

Read the published version in Nature Communications →

Version 1

posted

You are reading this latest preprint version

Sediment, nutrients, organic carbon and pollutants are funnelled down submarine canyons from continental shelves by sediment-laden flows called turbidity currents, which dominate particulate transfer to the deep sea. Post-glacial sea-level rise disconnected more than three quarters of the > 9000 submarine canyons worldwide from their former river or long-shore drift sediment inputs. Existing models therefore assume that land-detached submarine canyons are dormant in the present-day; however, monitoring has focused on land-attached canyons and this paradigm remains untested. Here we present the most detailed field measurements yet of turbidity currents within a land-detached submarine canyon, documenting a remarkably similar frequency (6 yr^− 1) and speed (up to 5–8 ms^− 1) to those in large land-attached submarine canyons. Major triggers such as storms or earthquakes are not required; instead, seasonal variations in cross-shelf sediment transport explain temporal-clustering of flows, and why the storm season is surprisingly absent of turbidity currents. As > 1000 other canyons have a similar configuration, we propose that contemporary deep-sea particulate transport via such land detached canyons may have been dramatically under-estimated.

Submarine canyons are found on all the world’s submerged continental margins, often dwarfing onshore river systems_1,2. These incised conduits provide the dominant connection for sediment, nutrients and pollutants from continental shelves to the deep sea, enhance primary productivity, and locally steer ocean currents_3 − 11. The resultant biodiversity hotspots underpin diverse and important ocean ecosystems_{12 − 14}. Turbidity currents that flow along submarine canyons can travel 1000s of km, transporting more sediment than rivers on land, and efficiently burying large quantities of organic carbon, thus contributing to regulation of climate on geological timescales_{15 − 17}. The fast and dense nature of these currents also poses a threat to the network of seafloor cables that underpins the internet and global communications_{18 − 19}. It is therefore important to understand the frequency, magnitude and controls on turbidity current activity and how this varies between submarine canyons worldwide.

The current paradigm holds that turbidity current activity should vary between different canyon types, as a function of their physiography and relative sea level_{20 − 23}. Where canyons cut sufficiently far landward into the continental shelf (‘land-attached’), they maintain direct connection with fluvial or long-shore sediment supplies on the inner shelf during both sea-level high- and lowstands₁₁. For instance, the Congo Canyon (W Africa) extends into the estuary to provide direct connection to the high-discharge Congo River across all sea-level stands_23,24. The head of Monterey Canyon (California) lies only a few metres from shore, intersecting two littoral cells that directly funnel sediment into the canyon head_25,26. In contrast, ‘land-detached’ canyons that do not, or barely, incise into the continental shelf are generally considered to be inactive during sealevel highstands, only switching on during lowstands_11,23. This issue is particularly compounded for broad continental shelves, which were extensively flooded following the Last Glacial Maximum. Examples include the eastern margin of N and S America, W Australia, the Arctic, and submarine canyons of the Celtic Margin, NE Atlantic, that are disconnected by 100s of km from previous lowstand fluvial inputs or littoral cells (which are limited to < 5 km from the shore)_{1,11,13,27−30}. Therefore, land-detached systems such as the Whittard Canyon on the Celtic Margin, whose head lies 300 km from the nearest coastline (Fig. 1), should be dormant with respect to turbidity currents in present-day highstand conditions.

Advances in technology have enabled the direct measurements of turbidity currents, providing the first field-scale observations of their triggering, down-slope evolution and internal structure (e.g. _17,19,26,31). These studies focused on submarine canyons that connect directly with major sediment supplies (either river- or littorally-fed), recording frequent (sub-annual) turbidity currents, with velocities of ~ 1–8 ms^− 1_17,19,26. This bias towards the monitoring of land-attached canyons exposes a major gap in our understanding of land-detached submarine canyons, which account for 81% of large submarine canyons worldwide₁₁, and their controls on global deep-sea particulate transport.

Here we report the most detailed direct measurements yet of turbidity currents in a land-detached submarine canyon to answer the following questions. First, how does the activity of turbidity currents in a land-detached submarine canyon compare to land-attached systems? Rather than being dormant, we show, for the first time, that powerful (up to 5–8 ms^− 1) and frequent turbidity currents operate within Whittard Canyon, which are surprisingly similar to the measured recurrence and velocities in major land-attached canyons_17,19. Second, what causes these turbidity currents and can they be predicted? Monitoring studies in land-attached submarine canyons have shown exceptional external events (e.g. earthquakes, floods, storms) are not necessarily needed to trigger powerful flows_26,32. We investigate whether this is similarly the case for land-detached systems and which processes are responsible. Finally, if powerful and frequent turbidity currents can occur within Whittard Canyon, what are the implications for the many other similar land-detached canyons worldwide and for contemporary transfer of sediment, carbon and pollutants to the deep sea?

Surprising turbidity current activity in a land-detached canyon

Acoustic Doppler Current Profilers (ADCPs) on two deep-water moorings in the eastern branch of Whittard Canyon recorded profiles of water column velocity and backscatter (a proxy for sediment concentration_17,25) from June 2019 to August 2020 (Fig 1). A down-looking high-frequency (600 kHz) ADCP positioned 30 m above the seafloor on Mooring M1 (1591m water depth; 26 km downstream of the canyon head) recorded at 1 m intervals, every 5 minutes. Mooring M2 (2259 m water depth; 47 km downstream of the canyon head) included a 75 kHz up-looking ADCP placed 14 m above seafloor that recorded at 26 m intervals, every hour. The ADCP at M2 operated with a blanking distance of 25 m, thus inhibiting detection of flows <39 m thick. A sediment trap was also located at 10 m above the seafloor on Mooring M1 to sample suspended sediment. This trap was programmed to sample for 18 days, after which point a carousel mechanism rotated a new sampling bottle into place. Two surface buoys managed by the UK MetOffice provided hourly meteorological data during the monitoring period (Fig. 1 & 2).

Six turbidity currents were detected within the 1-year monitoring window, with maximum ADCP-measured velocities of 1.1-5.0 ms^-1 (Fig. 2; Fig. 3; Table 1). All six flows were recorded at M1, three of which were also clearly identified 21 km downstream at M2. The two slowest (1.1-1.3 ms^-1) and thinnest (15-20 m) flows (Flows 3 & 4) were not detected at M2; either dissipating before reaching M2, or were too thin for detection by the lower frequency upward-looking ADCP. It is not possible to discern whether Flow 6 reached M2 as it occurred shortly after M2 stopped recording (Fig. 2). Transit velocities of the turbidity currents estimated between M1 and M2 range from 2.7-8.0 ms^-1 (Table 1). The instantaneous (ADCP-recorded) velocities recorded at M1 are similar to the transit velocities of the respective flows, albeit at the lower end; in keeping with previous results that indicate ADCPs often under-record velocities compared to transit speeds_19,33. Upon recovery of M1, the first sediment trap bottle and overlying funnel were completely filled with well-sorted sediment with an average grain size of 121 μm, and a maximum of 460 μm (Fig. S2). This significant sedimentation event occurred within the first 18 days of monitoring; a time window that included the first turbidity current, hence we interpret that this, and presumably later flows, were capable of suspending fine sand at a height of at least 10 m above the seafloor. Sediment stocks, and hence the source of the flows, likely derive from extensive sediment wave fields at the Whittard Canyon rim that dominantly comprise fine to coarse sand, for which off-shelf transport has been inferred from high-resolution seafloor surveys₃₄. Plastic fishing line was observed wrapped around the M1 mooring anchor chain (Fig. S1), supporting evidence of active transport of litter as inferred from previous studies₁₃.

A frequency and magnitude of flows equivalent to active land-attached canyons

Dating of cored deposits previously indicated that episodic turbidity currents have reached the Celtic Fan at the distal end of the Whittard Canyon within at least the last 2,000 years, and turbidity current deposits accumulated in the proximal reaches of the system_27,30,35. However, this is the first field study to document that these flows can occur on such a short recurrence (i.e. sub-annual frequency), and velocities exceed previous measurements in the Whittard Canyon by an order of magnitude. Down-canyon flows of <0.8 ms^-1 were recorded from benthic landers at 1400 and 4200 m water depth, but could not always be confidently differentiated from the background effects of internal tides in the canyon, which regularly attain near-bed velocities of ≥0.5 ms^-1_13,30. Perhaps most surprising, is that the observed frequency (6 in a year) and velocity (up to 5 – 8 ms^-1) of flows in Whittard Canyon is on a par with highly active land-attached deep-sea submarine canyons (Table 2), such as the river-connected Congo Canyon (6 flows in 4 months at 2 km water depth; 1-2.4 ms^-1₁₇) and the littoral-fed Monterey Canyon (15 flows in 18 months, of which only 3 reached 1.9 km water depth; 1-8 ms^-1₁₉). Indeed, the velocities and frequency reported here are some of the highest yet directly recorded from turbidity currents worldwide (Table 2).

A major trigger is not required for turbidity currents, nor is a consistent trigger in effect

Based on inference from NE Atlantic land-attached canyons (e.g. Nazaré Canyon), storms were inferred to be responsible for triggering previously reported turbidity currents in Whittard Canyon_13,30. While Flow 2 coincided with a storm (local minimum in air pressure and maximum in wave height and wind speed), many of the other storms during the monitoring period, including more vigorous events, did not correlate with the occurrence of turbidity currents (Fig. 2). Surprisingly, no turbidity currents were recorded during the European winter storm season, when wave heights and air pressures experience the largest excursions₃₆ (November-March; Fig. 2). Analysis of other triggers proposed for turbidity currents in submarine canyons, including earthquakes, surface tidal and internal tidal currents, and seafloor disturbance by fishing, showed no consistent finding. Five earthquakes of magnitude 2 and over occurred within 1000 km of the canyon head, but none coincided with any of the flow timings, and no larger (> M_w 6) earthquakes occurred within 2000 km during the monitoring period (Table S1). Turbidity currents occur during both spring and neap tides and are not correlated with any particular phase of the semidiurnal surface tidal cycle. Flows 1 occurs when the surface tidal flow is down-canyon, but Flow 2 and Flows 4 and 6 occur when the flow is up-canyon (Fig. 4). Near-bed, currents caused by the trapping of internal tides occur along the canyon_13,30,37,38. However, turbidity currents occur during periods of both low and high internal tide magnitude, as well as during both down-canyon and up-canyon phases of near-bed internal tidal flow (Fig. 4). Fishing occurs daily around the head of Whittard Canyon (Fig. 2f) and there is no obvious connection to turbidity current inception when considering all types of fishing. When considering only fishing activities that directly disturb the seafloor, some flows (e.g. flows 1,4,5) appear to coincide with periods of heightened dredge fishing and bottom trawling. However, this relationship is far from equivocal, as flows did not occur on other days that had much higher bottom fishing intensity.

It appears that turbidity currents in Whittard Canyon do not require a major trigger, and instead likely occur following a period of preconditioning (i.e. from sustained or sudden sediment supply); at which point a number of minor perturbations, are capable of initiating a flow. This adds to growing evidence of seasonally-clustered activity first documented in land-attached canyons, where preconditioning during and after periods of heightened sediment supply governs turbidity current timing and frequency, rather than requiring external triggers. For river-fed canyons, seasonal pulses in river discharge are the primary control on sediment supply, while for land-attached canyons fed by long-shore drift, heightened wave energy during the winter storm season explains turbidity current activity₂₆. In Whittard Canyon, however, the storm season is absent of turbidity currents and instead the more meteorologically-quiescent summer months are more active. Sediment transport on the Celtic Shelf is complex, as is the topography of the dendritic branches of the Whittard Canyon, which exerts a strong control on hydrodynamic processes such as internal tides_13,30,37,40. We suggest that the ‘switch on’ outside of the storm season may be explained by seasonal variability of cross-shelf transport on the Celtic Margin and from the adjacent Bay of Biscay (to the SE), wherein sediment transport toward the canyon head is enhanced during summer months_39-42. We conclude that the lack of consistency in a trigger, and the seasonal clustering of flows, result from this combined complexity of spatiotemporally-variable hydrodynamic processes and sediment supply, which may also be further complicated by anthropogenic disturbances such as shelf-edge and deep sea fishing.

Underestimation of contemporary particulate transport in land-detached canyons

This recognition of frequent highstand turbidity current activity in land-detached canyons is important, as more than 75% of the >9000 submarine canyons worldwide are land-detached (Fig. S3). We cannot infer that all these land-detached canyons will be similarly active. Canyons of the Antarctic margin, for instance, are formed and maintained by dense cascades of cold water₄₃. However, analysis of a global database reveals at least 10% of the world’s canyons have a very similar setting to Whittard Canyon; separated >100 km from shore by a broad shelf, where sediment stocks have accumulated since the Last Glacial Maximum, typically occurring on passive margins_1,2,11. We infer a 50% increase in the number of canyons worldwide that may potentially feature active turbidity currents in the present-day highstand, including some of the largest systems on Earth_20,44. An additional n=1162 such land-detached canyons can therefore be added as potentially-active systems, to the existing n=2104 land-attached canyons that efficiently convey particulate matter from shelf to deep sea (Fig. S3). While such canyons may not connect directly to terrestrial sources of modern organic carbon, these systems can still be effective conveyors of fresh labile organic carbon to the deep sea. In the Whittard Canyon, phytoplankton blooms can generate elevated quantities of phytodetritus that is rich in organic carbon₃₀. As these blooms occur in the spring and summer₃₀ (i.e. the same period within which we observe most frequent turbidity currents), it is conceivable that the powerful flows we observe play a role in the down-canyon transfer of fresh organic material, as well as anthropogenic material such as the discarded fishing gear found wrapped around our the anchor chain of mooring M1 (Fig. S1). To further quantify particulate fluxes, and constrain the potential for their activity, it is important to better characterise the nature and quantity of sediment transport on the continental shelf adjacent to these canyons_26,29,34, the energy and rate of cross-shelf transport relative to the canyon head₄₀, and the relative role of human activities, such as bottom fishing, that can markedly influence sediment fluxes at the shelf-scale₄₁. Future monitoring efforts should thus not focus solely on land-attached canyons and must include land-detached canyons, many of which host well-documented carbon, nutrient, pollution and biodiversity hotspots and intersect routes for new seafloor cables that are vulnerable to the impacts of turbidity currents_8,12,45,46.

In contradiction to previous models, we report that the land-detached Whittard Canyon features frequent (sub-annual) and powerful (up to 5–8 ms^− 1) turbidity currents that reach at least 2 km water depth. No consistent trigger explains these flows, with seasonal changes in off-shelf sediment transport implicated as the cause for their seasonally-variable frequency. The rate and magnitude of these flows is surprisingly similar to large active land-attached canyons, which are considered to be efficient conduits of contemporary particulate transfer to the deep sea. We conclude that the deep-sea transport of nutrients, pollutants and organic carbon via land-detached submarine canyons in the present-day may have been dramatically underestimated and propose that future monitoring efforts in land-detached submarine canyons are needed to constrain global budgets and fluxes.

We analyse new detailed monitoring data recorded over 12 months from the eastern branch of the land-detached Whittard Canyon in the NE Atlantic (Fig. 1). We deployed high frequency (75–600 kHz) Acoustic Doppler Current Profilers (ADCPs) on two deep-water moorings (1591m and 2259m water depth, at a distance of up to 47 km from the canyon head; Fig. 1) to record sediment transport events within the canyon at high temporal (5 mins) and vertical (up to 1 m) resolution. We access data from two of the UK Met Office's network of offshore buoys to provide hourly meteorological data (Fig. 1; Fig. 2).

Mooring M1

The mooring containing the main instrument to record turbidity currents (M1) was installed 26 km (measured along canyon) from the head of the canyon at 1591 m water depth at 48.626° N, 10.004° W and recorded from 19 July 2019 to 1 August 2020. This main instrument, a downward-looking 600 kHz ADCP, was positioned 30 m above the seafloor and had a blanking distance of 2 m (Fig. 1d). This ADCP was programmed to record an ensemble of 75 pings every 5 minutes and operated at 1 m bin sizes, effectively making a measurement of the average velocity every 5 minutes at 1 m intervals through the water column.

Mooring M2

A second mooring (M2) was located 21 km downstream at 2259 m water depth at 48.490° N, 9.936° W. This mooring contained an upward-looking 75 kHz ADCP at 14 m above the seafloor. The ADCP was set to record ensembles consisting of 22 pings every hour, operated in 16 m vertical bins, and had a blanking distance of 24 m, effectively making the first measurement bin span 39–57 m above seafloor, with a range of 300 m. The ADCP on this mooring recorded from 5 June 2019 to 13 June 2020. The low position and upward-facing nature of this lower frequency ADCP and bin-size precluded the identification of turbidity currents < 39 m thick.

Identification of turbidity currents and differentiating them from internal tides at M1

The downward-looking ADCP at M1 records both turbidity currents and internal tides. We can distinguish between turbidity currents and internal tides in Whittard Canyon as turbidity currents can have a short-lived (< 1hr) down-canyon velocity maximum (> 0.5 ms^− 1) just above the bed, which then rapidly decreases higher in the water column. This velocity signature is accompanied by a sudden change in acoustic backscatter, often attenuating ADCP measurements in the lowermost part of the flows. This characteristic velocity and acoustic backscatter is similar to previously recorded turbidity currents in land-attached canyons_17,19. Internal tides have well defined, known periods, and typically lower peak velocities. Coherent internal tide signals are usually observed though the majority of the water column, not just near the seafloor₄₇. Despite this, it is possible that there may be turbidity currents < 0.5 ms^− 1 that cannot be reliably distinguished from the internal tides₁₃. Therefore here, we necessarily focus on turbidity currents that are discernably higher in velocity than the internal tides.

Identifying turbidity currents at M2 and calculating transit velocities between mooring locations.

Both the spatial and temporal resolution of the ADCP at M2 are too coarse, and the first measurement bin is too high above the seafloor, that detecting turbidity currents solely based on the data from M2 is challenging. We therefore searched for increases in down-canyon flow velocity and acoustic backscatter shortly after turbidity current arrival times at M1. Transit velocities of turbidity currents were determined by dividing the along-canyon distance between M1 and M2, by the difference in arrival time of the turbidity currents at each mooring location. These transit velocities are presented here as a range, since the ADCP has ensemble intervals, and therefore a temporal resolution, of 1 hour.

Comparison of turbidity currents in Whittard Canyon with those in land-attached canyons

Several other studies have been used to compare the turbidity currents in the Whittard Canyon with those in land-attached canyons (Table 2). The search was limited to ocean-scale canyons, and hence fjord, lake, and prodelta studies have been excluded.

Meteorological monitoring from regional buoys

Additionally, meteorological data from two ocean buoys managed by the UK MetOffice were used to analyse potential triggers of the turbidity currents. These buoys were located at 47.558° N, 8.465° W (Brittany Buoy) and at 48.747° N, 12.454°W (K1 buoy). The Brittany Buoy was active throughout the entire survey period, but the K1 Buoy was only active up to 19 February 2020. These buoys recorded a range of meteorological data at one-hour intervals including wind speed and direction, wave height and period, and atmospheric pressure.

Sediment Trap Analysis

Analysis of sediment trap samples reveals that the flows were capable of transporting fine sand at a height of 10 m above the seafloor. A McLane Parflux 7 g (21 cup) sediment trap was attached to mooring M1 at 10 m above the seafloor, which includes a funnel that overlies a mechanical carousel that turns every 18 days to present a new 500 ml sampling bottle. When recovered, the funnel was observed to be mostly infilled, and only the first sampling bottle contained any material; the carousel mechanism having apparently jammed, likely as a result of sediment grains being drawn into the interface between fixed and moving mechanical components. As a result this sedimentation event must have occurred within the first 18 days and we presume that this was due to the first turbidity current. Five sediment samples were taken from within the funnel and one from the sampling bottle to determine grain size. Three aliquots of each sample were dispersed in 30 ml 0.05% sodium hexametaphosphate solution and shaken for 24 hours. The dispersed aliquots were analyzed using a Malvern Mastersizer 2000 using laser diffraction of suspended sediment grains (10,000 counts) to measure grain size distributions. Grain size distributions were measured three times per aliquot. Aliquots showed intra-sample variations of < 3%. Standard reference materials showed intra-sample variations of up to 3% and accuracy toward reference values of 1.5%. Samples of sediment from the funnel show a consistent unimodal grain size distribution with a median grain diameter (D₅₀) of 121 µm, while the underlying bottle (that represents the first accumulation of sediment; presumably at the arrival of the flow front) is coarser (D₅₀ = 154 µm), but also with a unimodal distribution.

Analysis of potential triggers

Earthquake records were obtained through the earthquake catalogue of the U.S. Geological Survey (https://earthquake.usgs.gov/). The database was searched for earthquakes of magnitudes > 2 within 1000 km of the head of Whittard Canyon, and > 6 within 2000 km. To investigate the potential influence of tides, we extracted tidal velocities at the head of the Whittard Canyon using the European Shelf solution of the TPXO global model of ocean tides₂₅. This model allows us to determine the surface tide amplitude and phase away from fixed tide gauge stations. The modelled surface tide and measured internal tide are in phase with respect to the 14-day spring-neap cycle, but on semidiurnal (12-hour) timescales there is an incoherent phase lag between along-canyon surface tide velocity and internal tide velocity (Fig. 4). This phase lag, and the fact that the measured near-bed velocities are a factor of 10 larger than the modelled surface tide velocities, indicates that the observed semidiurnal oscillations in near-bed velocity are indeed predominately an internal tide signal. The incoherent phase lag results from the slower and variable phase speed of internal tides - dependent on water depth, stratification and background flow, which can retard or advance peak internal tide velocity at the mooring site. We assess whether internal tides may play a role in triggering turbidity currents, specifically if up- or-down canyon flows are more prone to turbidity current events, by identifying along-canyon velocity at M1, from the closest measurement to the seafloor, immediately before the arrival of each event (Fig. 4). Fishing activity data were downloaded from Global Fishing Watch (https://globalfishingwatch.org/) and formatted in estimated daily fishing effort (in hours) per 0.01° x 0.01° grids. The cumulative daily fishing effort for all grid cells around the head of the eastern branch of the Whittard Canyon (48.5° – 49° N and 9.8° – 10.4° W) was first calculated (Fig. 2f). We then extracted only the fishing operations that included those that disturb the seafloor (i.e. dredge fishing and trawling; Fig. 2g; Fig. S4).

Determining comparable land-detached submarine canyons that may be similarly active

Since Whittard Canyon experiences frequent, contemporary turbidity current activity, we wish to understand whether other land-detached canyons are similar. To do this, we make use of previous geomorphological mapping of submarine canyons worldwide_1,2,44 that includes n = 9477 submarine canyons and has formed the basis of other global studies of these features₁₁. We first define land-attached canyons as canyons that are < 25 km from the shoreline (n = 2104). We then search for canyons similar to Whittard Canyon, which we define here as canyons > 100 km from the shore, and < 50 km from a major shelf (N = 1162). Major shelves are defined as shelves > 5000 km². Our analysis shows that around 10% – 12% of all canyons in the world are detached from land by a major shelf. This is a 45% – 55% increase of potentially active canyons, from just land-attached canyons. Most new potentially active canyons are located along the eastern margins of North America and South America, southern and western Australia and the Celtic Margin (Fig. S3).

Data Availability Statement

Current monitoring data recorded from the 600 kHz ADCP on the M1 mooring are available under open access from the British Oceanographic Data Centre at: https://www.bodc.ac.uk/resources/inventories/cruise_inventory/report/17695/. Further information and data pertaining to the mooring design are available in the relevant NERC cruise report (http://nora.nerc.ac.uk/id/eprint/525366). Current monitoring data from the 75 kHZ ADCP on the M2 mooring can be requested directly from the authors. Bathymetric data for the Whittard Canyon can be downloaded open access from the EMODnet bathymetry portal: https://portal.emodnet-bathymetry.eu/. Meterological monitoring data from the K1 (https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/weather/specialist-forecasts/coast-and-sea/observations/162029) and Brittany buoy (https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/weather/specialist-forecasts/coast-and-sea/observations/162163) can are available free of charge for research purposes from MetOffice DataPoint (https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/services/data/datapoint). Global Fishing Watch AIS-based fishing effort and vessel presence datasets can be requested free of charge for research purposes from https://globalfishingwatch.org/. The global mapping of submarine canyons can be downloaded open access from: https://www.bluehabitats.org/. Earthquake data are available open access from the United States Geological Survey: https://earthquake.usgs.gov/.

Acknowledgements

MSH, MAC, AG, BJB, JH, CP, VAIH and MAC acknowledge funding from Natural Environment Research Council (NERC) National Capability Programme (NE/R015953/1) “Climate Linked Atlantic Sector Science”.

Harris, P.T. and Whiteway, T., 2011. Global distribution of large submarine canyons: Geomorphic differences between active and passive continental margins. Marine Geology, 285(1–4), pp.69–86.
Harris, P.T., Macmillan-Lawler, M., Rupp, J. and Baker, E.K., 2014. Geomorphology of the oceans. Marine Geology, 352, pp.4–24.
Wåhlin, A.K., 2002. Topographic steering of dense currents with application to submarine canyons. Deep Sea Research Part I: Oceanographic Research Papers, 49(2), pp.305–320.
Canals, M., Puig, P., de Madron, X.D., Heussner, S., Palanques, A. and Fabres, J., 2006. Flushing submarine canyons. Nature, 444(7117), pp.354–357.
Galy, V., France-Lanord, C., Beyssac, O., Faure, P., Kudrass, H. and Palhol, F., 2007. Efficient organic carbon burial in the Bengal fan sustained by the Himalayan erosional system. Nature, 450(7168), pp.407–410.
Vangriesheim, A., Khripounoff, A. and Crassous, P., 2009. Turbidity events observed in situ along the Congo submarine channel. Deep Sea Research Part II: Topical Studies in Oceanography, 56(23), pp.2208–2222.
Hall, R.A. and Carter, G.S., 2011. Internal tides in Monterey submarine canyon. Journal of Physical Oceanography, 41(1), pp.186–204.
Woodall, L.C., Sanchez-Vidal, A., Canals, M., Paterson, G.L., Coppock, R., Sleight, V., Calafat, A., Rogers, A.D., Narayanaswamy, B.E. and Thompson, R.C., 2014. The deep sea is a major sink for microplastic debris. Royal Society open science, 1(4), p.140317.
Pierdomenico, M., Casalbore, D. and Chiocci, F.L., 2019. Massive benthic litter funnelled to deep sea by flash-flood generated hyperpycnal flows. Scientific reports, 9(1), pp.1–10.
Azaroff, A., Miossec, C., Lanceleur, L., Guyoneaud, R. and Monperrus, M., 2020. Priority and emerging micropollutants distribution from coastal to continental slope sediments: A case study of Capbreton Submarine Canyon (North Atlantic Ocean). Science of The Total Environment, 703, p.135057.
Bernhardt, A. and Schwanghart, W., 2021. Where and why do submarine canyons remain connected to the shore during sea-level rise? Insights from global topographic analysis and Bayesian regression. Geophysical Research Letters, 48(10), p.e2020GL092234.
De Leo, F.C., Smith, C.R., Rowden, A.A., Bowden, D.A. and Clark, M.R., 2010. Submarine canyons: hotspots of benthic biomass and productivity in the deep sea. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 277(1695), pp.2783–2792.
Amaro, T., Huvenne, V.A.I., Allcock, A.L., Aslam, T., Davies, J.S., Danovaro, R., De Stigter, H.C., Duineveld, G.C.A., Gambi, C., Gooday, A.J. and Gunton, L.M., 2016. The Whittard Canyon–A case study of submarine canyon processes. Progress in Oceanography, 146, pp.38–57.
Pearman, T.R.R., Robert, K., Callaway, A., Hall, R., Iacono, C.L. and Huvenne, V.A., 2020. Improving the predictive capability of benthic species distribution models by incorporating oceanographic data–Towards holistic ecological modelling of a submarine canyon. Progress in Oceanography, 184, p.102338.
Talling, P.J., Wynn, R.B., Masson, D.G., Frenz, M., Cronin, B.T., Schiebel, R., Akhmetzhanov, A.M., Dallmeier-Tiessen, S., Benetti, S., Weaver, P.P.E. and Georgiopoulou, A., 2007. Onset of submarine debris flow deposition far from original giant landslide. Nature, 450(7169), pp.541–544.;
Masson, D.G., Huvenne, V.A.I., De Stigter, H.C., Wolff, G.A., Kiriakoulakis, K., Arzola, R.G. and Blackbird, S., 2010. Efficient burial of carbon in a submarine canyon. Geology, 38(9), pp.831–834.
Azpiroz-Zabala, M., Cartigny, M.J., Talling, P.J., Parsons, D.R., Sumner, E.J., Clare, M.A., Simmons, S.M., Cooper, C. and Pope, E.L., 2017. Newly recognized turbidity current structure can explain prolonged flushing of submarine canyons. Science advances, 3(10), p.e1700200.
Carter, L., Gavey, R., Talling, P.J. and Liu, J.T., 2014. Insights into submarine geohazards from breaks in subsea telecommunication cables. Oceanography, 27(2), pp.58–67.
Paull, C.K., Talling, P.J., Maier, K.L., Parsons, D., Xu, J., Caress, D.W., Gwiazda, R., Lundsten, E.M., Anderson, K., Barry, J.P. and Chaffey, M., 2018. Powerful turbidity currents driven by dense basal layers. Nature communications, 9(1), pp.1–9.
Damuth, J.E., Flood, R.D., Kowsmann, R.O., Belderson, R.H. and Gorini, M.A., 1988. Anatomy and growth pattern of Amazon deep-sea fan as revealed by long-range side-scan sonar (GLORIA) and high-resolution seismic studies. AAPG bulletin, 72(8), pp.885–911.
Shanmugam, G. and Moiola, R.J., 1988. Submarine fans: characteristics, models, classification, and reservoir potential. Earth-Science Reviews, 24(6), pp.383–428.
Clift, P.D., Giosan, L., Henstock, T.J. and Tabrez, A.R., 2014. Sediment storage and reworking on the shelf and in the canyon of the Indus River-fan system since the last glacial maximum. Basin Research, 26(1), pp.183–202.
Covault, J.A. and Graham, S.A., 2010. Submarine fans at all sea-level stands: Tectono-morphologic and climatic controls on terrigenous sediment delivery to the deep sea. Geology, 38(10), pp.939–942.
Savoye, B., Babonneau, N., Dennielou, B. and Bez, M., 2009. Geological overview of the Angola–Congo margin, the Congo deep-sea fan and its submarine valleys. Deep Sea Research Part II: Topical Studies in Oceanography, 56(23), pp.2169–2182
Egbert, G.D., Erofeeva, S.Y., Ray, R.D., 2010. Assimilation of altimetry data for nonlinear shallow-water tides: quarter-diurnal tides of the Northwest European Shelf. Continental Shelf Research 30, 668–679. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.csr.2009.10.011.
Bailey, L.P., Clare, M.A., Rosenberger, K.J., Cartigny, M.J., Talling, P.J., Paull, C.K., Gwiazda, R., Parsons, D.R., Simmons, S.M., Xu, J. and Haigh, I.D., 2021. Preconditioning by sediment accumulation can produce powerful turbidity currents without major external triggers. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 562, p.116845.
Zaragosi, S., Bourillet, J.F., Eynaud, F., Toucanne, S., Denhard, B., Van Toer, A. and Lanfumey, V., 2006. The impact of the last European deglaciation on the deep-sea turbidite systems of the Celtic-Armorican margin (Bay of Biscay). Geo-Marine Letters, 26(6), pp.317–329.
Bourillet, J.F., Zaragosi, S. and Mulder, T., 2006. The French Atlantic margin and deep-sea submarine systems. Geo-Marine Letters, 26(6), pp.311–315.
Toucanne, S., Zaragosi, S., Bourillet, J.F., Naughton, F., Cremer, M., Eynaud, F. and Dennielou, B., 2008. Activity of the turbidite levees of the Celtic–Armorican margin (Bay of Biscay) during the last 30,000 years: imprints of the last European deglaciation and Heinrich events. Marine Geology, 247(1–2), pp.84–103
Amaro, T., de Stigter, H., Lavaleye, M. and Duineveld, G., 2015. Organic matter enrichment in the Whittard Channel; its origin and possible effects on benthic megafauna. Deep Sea Research Part I: Oceanographic Research Papers, 102, pp.90–100.
Xu, J.P., 2010. Normalized velocity profiles of field-measured turbidity currents. Geology, 38(6), pp.563–566.
Hage, S., Cartigny, M.J., Sumner, E.J., Clare, M.A., Hughes Clarke, J.E., Talling, P.J., Lintern, D.G., Simmons, S.M., Silva Jacinto, R., Vellinga, A.J. and Allin, J.R., 2019. Direct monitoring reveals initiation of turbidity currents from extremely dilute river plumes. Geophysical Research Letters, 46(20), pp.11310–11320.
Heerema, C.J., Talling, P.J., Cartigny, M.J., Paull, C.K., Bailey, L., Simmons, S.M., Parsons, D.R., Clare, M.A., Gwiazda, R., Lundsten, E. and Anderson, K., 2020. What determines the downstream evolution of turbidity currents?. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 532, p.116023.
Iacono, C.L., Guillén, J., Guerrero, Q., Durán, R., Wardell, C., Hall, R.A., Aslam, T., Carter, G.D., Gales, J.A. and Huvenne, V.A., 2020. Bidirectional bedform fields at the head of a submarine canyon (NE Atlantic). Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 542, p.116321
Duros, P., Fontanier, C., Metzger, E., Pusceddu, A., Cesbron, F., De Stigter, H.C., Bianchelli, S., Danovaro, R. and Jorissen, F.J., 2011. Live (stained) benthic foraminifera in the Whittard Canyon, Celtic margin (NE Atlantic). Deep Sea Research Part I: Oceanographic Research Papers, 58(2), pp.128–146.
Angus, M. and Leckebusch, G.C., 2020. On the Dependency of Atlantic Hurricane and European Windstorm Hazards. Geophysical Research Letters, 47(23), p.e2020GL090446.
Aslam, T., Hall, R.A. and Dye, S.R., 2018. Internal tides in a dendritic submarine canyon. Progress in Oceanography, 169, pp.20–32.
van Haren, H., Mienis, F. and Duineveld, G., 2022. Contrasting internal tide turbulence in a tributary of the Whittard Canyon. Continental Shelf Research, p.104679.
Huthnance, J.M., Coelho, H., Griffiths, C.R., Knight, P.J., Rees, A.P., Sinha, B., Vangriesheim, A., White, M. and Chatwin, P.G., 2001. Physical structures, advection and mixing in the region of Goban spur. Deep Sea Research Part II: Topical Studies in Oceanography, 48(14–15), pp.2979–3021.
Graham, J.A., Rosser, J.P., O'Dea, E. and Hewitt, H.T., 2018. Resolving shelf break exchange around the European northwest shelf. Geophysical Research Letters, 45(22), pp.12–386.
Mengual, B., Le Hir, P., Cayocca, F. and Garlan, T., 2019. Bottom trawling contribution to the spatio-temporal variability of sediment fluxes on the continental shelf of the Bay of Biscay (France). Marine Geology, 414, pp.77–91.
Ruiz-Castillo, E., 2019. Cross-shelf transport and exchange between a temperate shelf sea and the North Atlantic Ocean. The University of Liverpool (United Kingdom).
Gales, J., Rebesco, M., De Santis, L., Bergamasco, A., Colleoni, F., Kim, S., Accettella, D., Kovacevic, V., Liu, Y., Olivo, E. and Colizza, E., 2021. Role of dense shelf water in the development of Antarctic submarine canyon morphology. Geomorphology, 372, p.107453.
Carlson, P.R. and Karl, H.A., 1988. Development of large submarine canyons in the Bering Sea, indicated by morphologic, seismic, and sedimentologic characteristics. Geological Society of America Bulletin, 100(10), pp.1594–1615.
Zhong, G. and Peng, X., 2021. Transport and accumulation of plastic litter in submarine canyons—The role of gravity flows. Geology, 49(5), pp.581–586.
https://www.submarinecablemap.com
Maier, K.L., Rosenberger, K.J., Paull, C.K., Gwiazda, R., Gales, J., Lorenson, T., Barry, J.P., Talling, P.J., McGann, M., Xu, J. and Lundsten, E., 2019. Sediment and organic carbon transport and deposition driven by internal tides along Monterey Canyon, offshore California. Deep Sea Research Part I: Oceanographic Research Papers, 153, p.103108
Puig, P., Ogston, A.S., Mullenbach, B.L., Nittrouer, C.A., Parsons, J.D. and Sternberg, R.W., 2004. Storm-induced sediment gravity flows at the head of the Eel submarine canyon, northern California margin. Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans, 109(C3 (2004).
de Stigter, H.C., Boer, W., de Jesus Mendes, P.A., Jesus, C.C., Thomsen, L., van den Bergh, G.D. and van Weering, T.C., 2007. Recent sediment transport and deposition in the Nazaré Canyon, Portuguese continental margin. Marine Geology, 246(2–4), pp.144–164
Martín, J., Palanques, A., Vitorino, J., Oliveira, A. and De Stigter, H.C., 2011. Near-bottom particulate matter dynamics in the Nazaré submarine canyon under calm and stormy conditions. Deep Sea Research Part II: Topical Studies in Oceanography, 58(23–24), pp.2388–2400.
Hsu, S.K., Kuo, J., Chung-Liang, L., Ching-Hui, T., Doo, W.B., Ku, C.Y. and Sibuet, J.C., 2008. Turbidity currents, submarine landslides and the 2006 Pingtung earthquake off SW Taiwan. TAO: Terrestrial, Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences, 19(6), p.7.
Zhang, Y., Liu, Z., Zhao, Y., Colin, C., Zhang, X., Wang, M., Zhao, S. and Kneller, B., 2018. Long-term in situ observations on typhoon-triggered turbidity currents in the deep sea. Geology, 46(8), pp.675–678.
Khripounoff, A., Vangriesheim, A., Crassous, P. and Etoubleau, J., 2009. High frequency of sediment gravity flow events in the Var submarine canyon (Mediterranean Sea). Marine Geology, 263(1–4), pp.1–6.

Table 1: Measured arrival time, velocity, duration, thickness and calculated transit velocities for turbidity currents recorded in the Whittard Canyon during the monitoring period at moorings M1 and M2.

Flow	Date	Mooring M1 (1591 m water depth)				Mooring M2 (2259 m water depth)
Flow	Date	Arrival time (UTC)	Maximum down-canyon velocity (ms^-1)	Duration (hours)	Flow thickness (m)	Arrival time (UTC)	Transit velocity (ms^-1)
1	17/07/2019	21:45	2.8	4.2	> 30	22:44	3.0 – 5.9
2	28/07/2019	21:00	3.6	3.3	>30	21:44	3.5 – 8.0
3	31/08/2019	17:00	1.0	0.7	20	Not recognised	-
4	29/10/2019	03:35	1.3	1.1	15	Not recognised	-
5	14/03/2020	16:30	2.8	1.7	>30	17:44	2.7 – 4.7
6	08/07/2020	04:45	4.6	2.9	>30	Outside survey period	-

Table 2: Comparison of the activity of turbidity currents in land-attached submarine canyons with that in the land-detached Whittard Canyon

Canyon Type	Location	Frequency of flows	Velocity (ms^-1)	Duration (hours)	Water depths of moorings (km)
Land-detached	Whittard Canyon (this study)	6 yr^-1	1.1-8.0	0.7-4.2	1.5-2
Land-attached – long-shore drift	Monterey Canyon, California₁₉	10 yr^-1 (15 flows between Oct 15 and Apr 17)	1-8.1	0.5-6	0.2-1.9
Land-attached – long-shore drift	Eel Canyon, California₄₈	10s yr^-1	Up to 0.5	N/A	0.1
Land-attached – long-shore drift	Hueneme and Mugu Canyons, California₃₁	6 yr^-1 and 4 yr^-1 respectively (3 and 2 flows between Sep 07 and Mar 08)	~2	~12	0.2
Land-attached – long-shore drift	Nazaré Canyon_49,50	4 yr^-1 (9 flows between Oct 02 and Dec 04)	>0.5	Few hours	1.6-4.3
Land-attached river-fed	Congo Canyon, W Africa₁₇	At least 6 yr^-1 (6 flows between Dec 09 and Mar 2010)	1-2.4	125-242	2
Land-attached river-fed	Gaoping/Kaoping Canyon, Taiwan_51,52	6 yr^-1 (23 flows between May 13 and Oct 16)	3.7-20	NA	2.1
Land-attached river-fed	Var Canyon, Mediterranean₅₃	3 yr^-1 (7 flows between Oct 05 and Mar 08	0.2-0.7	8-22	1.2-2.4

There is NO Competing Interest.

Download PDF

Journal Publication

published 15 Jun, 2022

Read the published version in Nature Communications →

Version 1

posted

You are reading this latest preprint version

Challenging the highstand-dormant paradigm for land-detached submarine canyons

Status:

Journal Publication

Version 1

Abstract

Figures

Introduction

Results And Discussion

Conclusions

Methods

Mooring M1

Mooring M2

Identification of turbidity currents and differentiating them from internal tides at M1

Comparison of turbidity currents in Whittard Canyon with those in land-attached canyons

Meteorological monitoring from regional buoys

Sediment Trap Analysis

Analysis of potential triggers

Determining comparable land-detached submarine canyons that may be similarly active

Declarations

References

Tables

Additional Declarations

Supplementary Files

Status:

Journal Publication

Version 1