SEDIMENTOLOGICAL ADVANCES CONCERNING THE ELOCCULATIQN
AND ZOOPLANKTON PELLETIZATION OF SUSPENDED SEDIMENT
IN HOWE SOUND, BRITISH COLUMBIA;
A FJORD RECEIVING GLACIAL MELTWATER
by
JAMES PATRICK MICHAEL SYVITSKI
B.Sc. Lakehead University, 1974
H.B.Sc. Lakehead University, 1975
A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF
THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
in
THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES
Department of Geological Sciences and the Institute of Oceanography
We accept this thesis as conforming to the
required standard
THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA
September, 1978
copyright J.P.M. Syvitski, 1978 In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study.
I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or by his representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission.
Department of q(CJ&-@
The University of British Columbia 2075 Wesbrook Place Vancouver, Canada V6T 1WS
Date ii
Foolish consistency is the hobgoblin
of little minds
-R.W. Emerson iii
ABSTRACT
The study of suspended sediment provides insights into the transport and accumulation of sediment in depositional basins. Past investigations have suffered, however, from a lack of methodology that can deal with the low concentrations of suspended sediment. The theory and method of three techniques to be used in the analysis of suspended sediment have been out• lined. 1) VSA, provides a rapid, accurate and precise method of determining grain size distributions of low weight samples. The method is based on the solution to a set of equations that discretely define the increasing volume of a homogeneous sediment sample settling in an enclosed volume of water.
The results are in terms of sedimentation diameters, a hydrodynamically sensitive property. 2) The Ag filter mount provides a fast technique for
a low sample weight random oriented mount to be used in quantitative XRD
analysis. The method has excellent precision and does not fractionate the mineral component due to their settling velocity. 3) Suspended sediment
collectors have been used to measure the downward flux of sediment in the
fjord environment. The traps have also provided a means to calculate the
natural settling velocity of flocculated or otherwise enhanced particle
settlement.
Laboratory and field studies have dealt with the interaction of
zooplankton with suspended sediment. Marine zooplankton ingest suspended
sediment at a rate dependent on sediment concentration and mineralogy.
Ingested mineral particles undergo chemical and mineral transformations
which are functions of mineralogy, cation exchange capacity and residence iv
time in the digestive tract. Zooplankton fecal pellets have a much larger settling velocity than their component particles. This increased settling rate allows clay to be deposited where the hydrodynamic nature of the environment would only allow coarse silt to fine sand deposition.
Glacial flour (feldspar, quartz, trioctahedral mica, chlorite, amphibole, tourmaline, and vermiculite) enters the surface-layer of the
Howe Sound fjord as a sediment plume which moves quickly down inlet while slowly mixing with the marine water. Although flocculation occurs in the lower brackish water of the surface-layer, mixing and diffusion are the dominant means for sediment to enter the lower-marine-water. Once in the lower-marine-water, zooplankton pelletization and biologic agglomeration of inorganic floccules takes place. These processes that enhance the individual particle settlement, generate a fast response time between the surface-layer and the lower-marine-layer in terms of sedimentation of particulate matter. Settling velocities of particles less than 1 ym have been enhanced over 1400 times.
Size distributions of sediment deposited on the sea-bed are a func•
tion of variable multimodal and/or non log-normal size distributions from
sub-laminae falling through the water column. The increase in deviation
away from log-normality down inlet, for size distributions of both suspen•
ded and deposited sediment, is an artifact of the size analytical method. V
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
ABSTRACT iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS v
LIST OF TABLES x
LIST OF FIGURES xii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS xv
INTRODUCTION 1
PAPER #1: A DISCUSSION OF GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION USING LOG-PROBABILITY 4 PLOTS
Abstract 4
Introduction 5
Problem of Definitions 5
Hydromechanical Processes 7
Sediment Flocculation Problem 17
Competency Problem 17
Graphic Display of Log-probability Frequency Plots 18
True diameter curve effects 18
The probability distribution assumption 19
Population probabilities 20
Truncated distribution VS Mixed distributions 23
Resolution of mixed frequency distributions into 25 normal (or log-normal) components
Concluding Remarks 25
Acknowledgement 27
References 28 vi
PAGE
PAPER #2: VSA; A NEW FAST SIZE ANALYSIS TECHNIQUE FOR LOW SAMPLE 30 WEIGHT BASED ON STOKES' SETTLING VELOCITY
Abstract 30
Introduction 31
Theory of Method 33
Check of Theory 35
Theoretical Example of a Four-Component System 37
Relation of Volume to Weight 40
Fulfillment of the Assumptions of Stokes' Law (1851) 41
Methodology 42
Calculation of the Input for the Computer Analysis 46
Calculation of Sediment Density 47
VSA Accuracy 48
Conclusion 51
Acknowledgement 56
References 57
PAPER //3: A FAST TECHNIQUE FOR A LOW SAMPLE WEIGHT RANDOM ORIENTED 60 MOUNT TO BE USED IN QUANTITATIVE XRD ANALYSIS
Abstract 60
Introduction 61
Methods 61
The Ag filter mounting technique 61
Materials 63
Testing scheme 63
Diffractogram interpretation 64
Results 64
Discussion and Summary 67
Acknowledgements 72
References 73 vii
PAGE
PAPER #4: THEORY, UTILIZATION AND RELIABILITY OF SUSPENDED SEDIMENT 74 COLLECTORS IN LAKES AND OCEANS
Abstract 74
Introduction and Acknowledgement 75
Sediment Trap Utility 76
Theory of Sedimentation Rates 77
Design and Testing of Traps 81
Accuracy of Trap Collection 96
Geologic Implications from Sediment Trap Results 99
Conclusion 103
References 106
PAPER #5: INTERACTION OF ZOOPLANKTON WITH SUSPENDED SEDIMENT HO
Abstract 110
Introduction 111
Materials and Methods 113
Results 117
Discussion 127
Clay mineral transformations 127
Inorganic particle uptake 136
Pellet settling rate 137
Conclusion and Acknowledgement 138
References 140
PAPER #6: FLOCCULATION, AGGLOMERATION, AND ZOOPLANKTON PELLETIZATION 144 OF SUSPENDED SEDIMENT IN A FJORD RECEIVING GLACIAL MELT- WATER
Abstract 144
Introduction 145 viii
PAGE
Methods 147
Field procedure 147
Preliminary testing of sediment trap 149
Laboratory procedure 149
Size analytical procedure 150
Scanning electron microscopic analysis 151
X-radiation procedure 151
Results 152
Some physical oceanographic observations 152
Particulate matter in Howe Sound water 155
Preliminary testing of sediment trap 165
Sedimentation rates 165
Sediment size distributions 169
Description of marine particles 174
Analysis of suspended load discharge data 192
Discussion 192
Sediment-plume and oceanography 192
Sedimentation rates 194
Deep water sand flow 195
Size distribution characteristics 196
In situ settling velocity of fjord suspensates . 197
Enhancement processes of particle settling 200
Clay mineralogy 206
Summary and Conclusion 208
Acknowledgements 213
References 214
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION 220 ix
PAGE
APPENDIX #1: COMPUTER PROGRAM (FORTRAN) FOR VSA METHOD 223
OUTPUT EXAMPLE 228
APPENDIX #2: FIELD DATA BASE ON HOWE SOUND SEDIMENTS 230
Sediment trap data 231
Suspended sediment data 246
Size analytical data 266
XRD data ' 287
Current data 288 X
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE 1: Data from Glaister and Nelson's curves
1: Example of a data sheet of VSA method
2: Ax2 evaluation between before and after density corrected size distributions
3: The x2 test for acceptance between size distributions produced from the VSA and Sedigraph methods
4: The x2 test for acceptance between two runs of the same sample
1: Results from precision testing of mount methods
1: Table of precision of past research
2: Quantitative values in the calculation of in situ settling velocity of marine particles
1: Variation in the egestion rate of Tigriopus for various mineral suspensions
2: Elemental ratios indicating chemical increases or decreases of the pellet residues compared to the clay standards
3: Comparison of mineral-bearing pellet settling rates and mean particle settling rates and their equivalent spherical sedimentation diameter
4: Pellet flux, pellet and total sedimentation rate deduced from suspended sediment traps positioned in Howe Sound
1: Mean daily temperature of Om, htm and bottom water
2: Summary statistics on particulate concentrations in Howe Sound water
3: Sedimentation rates and grain size measures
4: Mineralogy of suspended and sea-bed sediments
5: Quantitative values in the calculation of in situ settling velocity of marine particles xi
PAGE
6: Summary of enhancement calculations on particle settling 203 velocity
7: Summary of the linear relationships between field parameters 211 disclosed in this study
Appendix #2: Sediment trap data tables (14) 231
Precision of trap data table (1) 245
Suspended sediment data tables (20) 246
Size analytical data tables (12) 266
XRD data table (1) 287
Current data table (4) 288 xii
LIST OF FIGURES PAGE
PAPER # FIGURE
1 1: Characteristic path of a salting grain 9
2: Size distribution interpretation 21
3: Venn diagram 22
2 1: Log-probability plot of a theoretical sample showing data 36
points used in the analysis of the theory
2: A VSA accuracy plot 38
3: The VSA experimental set-up 43
4: The effect of density correction on two samples 50
5: Sample comparison between VSA and Sedigraph methods 53
6: The replicability of two samples 55
7: VSA computer plot for one sample 39
3 21:: DiffractogramSchematic of sA g offilte muscovitr mountine frogm apparatuboth powdes r and Ag filter 662 mount
3: Diffractograms of a 0.2-2 ym size fraction using both pipette 68 and Ag filter mount
4: The 0.701 nm to 1.00 nm peak area ratio vs. the percent chlo- 69 rite-muscovite matrix for powder mount and Ag filter mount
5: Diffractograms of a 2-63 ym size fraction using both pipette 70 and Ag filter mount
4 1: Effect of trap tilt with no current present 80
2: Percent error in apparent sedimentation rate vs:. horizontal 82 velocity at various tilt angles
3: Percent error in apparent sedimentation rate vs. horizontal 83 velocity at various particle sizes
4: Effect of trap tilt with a horizontal current present 84 xiii
PAGE
5: Trap arrays to eliminate tilt angle 86
6: Effect of a closing lid above the trap orifice 89
7: Family of curves of sediment trap catch deficiency vs. hori- 92 zontal velocity at various particle sizes
8: Schematic of dye-gun experiment with shielded and unshielded 93 traps
9: Observed and expected size distributions from water and trap 101 sediment
10: Sub-laminae size frequency distributions from sediment trap 104 data
5 1: Schematic of one of 16 aquariums built to collect inorganic 115 pellets for chemical and mineral analysis
2: Variation in the egestion rate of Tigriopus for changing 120 mineral suspension concentrations
. 3: XRD of montmorillonite standard and pellet residue 121
4: XRD of tremolite standard and pellet residue 122
5: XRD of muscovite standard and pellet residue 123
6: SEM micrographs of mineral-bearing fecal pellets 129
6 1: Location of study area and sampling sites 146
2: Temperature variations during 1977 field season:for 154 stations (1) and (2)
3: Linear regressions of IWC, S%», and T°C with distance out 157 from the river mouth
4: Dilution lines, i.e., IWC vs. S%0 158
5: Plot of b VS m where b is the Y-ordinate and m is the slope 159 of the linear regression of IWCvs-. S%o
6: Station (1) surface layer, April 26, 1977 160
7: Vertical daily variation of IWC and OWC at station (1) 161 surface layer, April 26, 1977
8: IWC variations with time at station (1) 163 xiv
PAGE
9: Vertical variations of IWC and OWC with time at 164 station (1)
10: ISR variations with time at station (1) 168
11: Log-probability plots of size distributions between 170 sediment collected from traps at 4 levels, October 31, 1977, station (1)
12: Log-probability plot of size distributions collected 171 from the 55 m trap at station (1) with time
13: Log-probability plot of size distributions from 172 suspended sediment samples collected along transect A-K
14: Log-probability plot of size distributions from 173 deposited sea-bed samples collected along transect A-K
15: Log-probability plot of size distributions from 175 suspended sediment samples collected on November 1, 1977
16: Cummulative number percent curves of particle diameter 176 through the surface layer
17: SEM of silt grains carrying aggregates of clay and 178 organic detritus, and clay clasts
18: SEM of mineral-bearing fecal pellets 180
19: SEM of progressive growth of inorganic large grain 182 floccules
20: SEM of colloidal floccules 185
21: SEM of inorganic-biogenic agglomerates 187
22: Observed and expected size distribution of.deposited 198 sea-bed sediment
23: Observed and expected size distributions from water 201 and trap samples
24: Schematic of sediment concentration in upper Howe Sound 212 during a typical summer freshet day
APPENDIX #2 Log-probability plots of sediment collected from traps at 267 various levels and stations (9) XV
Acknowledgements
I would like to sincerely thank Dr. J.W. Murray, in his capacity as thesis supervisor, for continuous moral and financial support. I am also grateful for the intellectual stimulus of my research committee:
Dr. W.C. Barnes, Dr. A.G. Lewis, Dr. CD. Levings, Dr. L.M. Lavkulitch,
Dr. R.L. Chase, and Dr. J.W. Murray. In this respect, Dr. M. Barnes,
Dr. J. Milliman and D. Swinbanks are rightfully included. The following
scientists have honourable mention: Dr. J. Luternauer, Dr. A. Sinclair,
Dr. C. Pharo, R. Macdonald, A. Hay, M. Bus tin, L. Smith, and C. Thomas.
The following is an order of merit list: H. Heckle (trap construc•
tion), I. Solomon (optical size analyst), L. Veto (SEM scientist), S.
Matheson (skipper of the Active Lass), and E. Montgomery (photography).
Special thanks go to two beautiful people: my wife Kathryn and
Gordon Hodge. Gordon provided field assistance in five cruises, ably
aided in lab procedures, and skilfully provided much of the final drafting
in this thesis.
Kathryn, a remarkable lady, provided field assistance on six
cruises, joined in much of the lab work, performed much of the rough
graphing, and typed and re-re-typed the thesis. Ya tebe lublu.
(In addition to the above acknowledgements, each paper includes
its own acknowledgement). 1
INTRODUCTION
This thesis describes the sedimentation of suspended sediments in a
glacial run-off fjord, Howe Sound, British Columbia. The thesis format
is a series of papers that have addressed themselves to aspects of the main investigation.
The problems of size frequency distributions are discussed on the
basis of empirical and theoretical considerations in paper #1. This
discussion provides the foundation for grain size interpretation in the
following papers. One problem described, that of sediment flocculation,
is specifically dealt with in papers #4 and #6.
Three experimental methods used in the last two papers are described
in papers #2, #3 and #4. One of the problems in past studies of suspended
sediment was a lack of methodology that could deal with the low concentra•
tions of particulate matter in coastal environments.
The need to determine the size frequency distributions in terms of
equivalent spherical sedimentation diameters from various low-weight
[R}
suspended sediment samples precludes the use of standard Sedigraph—,
sedimentation balance, Coulter Counter , optical size analyzer, pipette
and hydrometer methods. VSA, a rapid method of determining grain size
distributions of low weight samples is outlined both theoretically and
experimentally in paper #2. The method is based on the solution to a set
of equations that discretely define the increasing volume of a homogeneous
sediment sample settling in an enclosed volume of water. The results are
in terms of sedimentation diameters, a hydrodynamically sensitive property.
The accuracy of the method was determined with statistical comparison to
results obtained on the Sedigraph Model 5000D.
The need for accurate information on the mineralogy of marine suspended
sediment has led to the use of Ag filters in the mounting of clay minerals 2
for X-ray diffraction analysis. Paper #3, describes a method using Ag filters and determines its use in quantitative clay mineral analysis of
low sample weights.
The aim of paper #4 is to: 1) provide a review of the present use of
suspended collectors, 2) present some of the theory behind sedimentation
rates as measured by such collectors, 3) outline some theoretical consid•
erations in trap design, emphasizing proposals to test future trap designs,
4) advance a method for quantitative and qualitative evaluation of trap
efficiency, based on grain size frequency distributions, and 5) propose
future use of sediment collectors in the study of suspended sediment pop•
ulations .
Laboratory and field studies dealing with the interaction of zooplankton
with suspended sediment are described in paper #5. Specifically this
study was designed to evaluate 1) the ability of zooplankton to ingest
autoclaved sediment, 2) the effect of suspension concentration on the rate
of pellet egestion, 3) whether chemical or mineral transformation would
occur after particles were ingested, 4) the settling velocity of mineral-
bearing fecal pellets and its relation to pellet volume, 5) the effect of
pellicle removal on mineral-bearing fecal pellet break-up, and 6) the
sedimentation rate of mineral-bearing fecal pellets naturally produced
from pelagic zooplankton collected from Howe Sound.
The last paper (#6), relying in part on the theory, methods, and labor•
atory experiments of the preceding five papers, details the sedimentation
of suspended sediments in the fjord, Howe Sound. In particular, insights
into the following unresolved problems were evaluated. 1) How does the
suspended sediment load behave upon entry into a fjord? 2) How does the
sedimentation rate change throughout the river freshet? 3) What is the
relationship between the size distribution in the water compared to that 3
collected by sediment traps? 4) Does the size distribution of the suspended load change from the river mouth outwards or downwards in the fjord? 5) By what mechanism do the suspended particles settle out - as single particles, by inorganic flocculation, by biological interaction or by other processes?
6) What are the in situ settling velocities of these particles? 7) Do agents that enhance the settling particles, if present, influence clay mineral pat• terns along the fjord bottom? 8) What is the clay mineralogy of "glacial flour"? 4
A DISCUSSION OF GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION USING
LOG-PROBABILITY PLOTS
ABSTRACT
Separation of sediment process population is not possible using log-probability plots of grain size concentrations, either by sieving or direct measurement. Sedimentation diameters with other measurable grain parameters should be used. The significance of log-probability plots to illustrate grain size distribution is still unverified. The distribution tails of such plots, though they are more visually accen• tuated, have a proportionally inherent error. 5
INTRODUCTION
Glaister and Nelson (1974) in an important contribution to sedimen- tology, have suggested that log-probability plots are a valuable aid in
facies identification. The significant points in their analysis.are as
follows:
1) the relative importance and the sorting of traction, saltation and
suspension populations;
2) the place and nature of the junction between the line segments
representing the above populations; and
3) the position of the 1-percentile value reflecting stream competency.
They suggest that side wall cores and cuttings can be used to determine
grain size distributions representative of specific environmental facies.
Their conclusions reinforce the earlier work of Visher (1969). We re•
spectively suggest that these plots do not show any more meaning than
previous plots of grain size distributions, except to accentuate the
tails. In addition, we hope to demonstrate, on the basis of empirical
and theoretical considerations, that process populations cannot be
simply separated.
PROBLEM OF DEFINITIONS
Grounds for difference of opinion may lie in the exact definition
of sediment populations (i.e., suspended load, total load) and process
populations (i.e., saltation, suspension, traction and surface creep). 6
Briggs and Middleton (1965) use the term wash load to represent the fine suspended material that tends to remain in suspension through the course of stream flow. They define bed-material load as sediment parti• cles large enough to occur on the bed of the stream. Bed load was de• fined by Briggs & Middleton (1965), as the coarse end of the bed-material load, transported by "rolling, skipping and sliding". The bed load has also been defined by Graf (1971), as traction (including saltation) pro• cesses acting on sediment material, and when in motion it is supported by the non-moving material. Bagnold (1973) thought that bed load trans• port may be distinguished by no upward impulses imparted to the particles other than those attributable to successive contact between the particles and the bed. That portion of the bed-material load which is not the bed load "diffuses" into the suspended sediment and is termed the suspended load (Briggs and Middleton, 1965).
The use of suspended load interchangeably and synonymously with wash load should be avoided. The wash load is usually caused by bank erosion whereas the suspended load is derived by channel erosion (Graf, 1971).
In his defining equations Graf equated total load with bed-material load.
He Is careful to distinguish that total load is not the bed-material load when wash load is included. The wash load (Graf, 1971) is composed of grain sizes finer than the bulk of the bed material and is thus rarely found in the bed. Einstein (1950) suggested that the limiting size of the wash load and bed material load may be chosen quite arbitrarily as the grain diameter of which 10% of the bed mixture is finer.
Suspended load particles are continuously supported by the fluid turbulence. The division between the suspended load and the bed load is not clear, if it exists (Einstein et al., 1940). The distinction between 7
them is largely statistical (Bagnold, 1973). Suspended bed load particles are ultimately part of the bed load. Graf (1971) notes•(from field observa• tions) that the quantity of suspended material (plus wash load) generally is larger than that of the bed load. The ratio of bed load to total load is lower in lowland streams than in mountain streams.
HYDROMECHANICAL PROCESSES
We propose to define some of the hydraulic processes in order to clarify the role of physical sediment parameters.
Traction is a process of rolling and sliding. In some instances it includes the saltation process in the form of jumps so small that a dis• persive stress is "not" set up to any extent. The term surface creep implies that saltation is negligible, therefore surface creep is synonymous with traction. Visher (1969; after Moss, 1963) used the phrase "a traction carpet of saltating grains". This compound terminology may be understood in relationship to the hydrous environment as the bed load where grains roll and slide in microtrajectories or jumps. The saltation here, could not be that which produces dispersive stress due to parabolic trajectory collisions as will be defined later. Visher (1969) also used the term surface creep to mean a process related to coarse grains, this being separate from the "traction carpet...". The description of this mechanism is vague and should be avoided or redefined.
If the grain shape is constant, a large grain with less density than a smaller grain might saltate first. This is due to the greater hydraulic lift forces acting on it. Also, a tabular or angular grain may saltate sooner than a spherical grain which is more able to roll. Bagnold (1973) 8
observed that contemporaneous to saltation, grains of identical diameter were found to use traction transport (rolling and sliding), It was not indicated whether this was due to grain shape, grain density, or statis• tical equilibrium in such an environment. He noted, however, that rolling over a rough bed may be regarded merely as incipient saltation. Thus, a strict grain size boundary between the traction population and the salta• tion population, as suggested by Glaister and Nelson (1974) is not war• ranted .
Gilbert (1914) described the bounding motion of grains as saltation.
Bagnold (1941) visualized the grains in saltation moving like colliding ping-pong balls. "Initially, the grain has a very large upward velocity, w^, and a small forward velocity u^; however, during the subsequent flight, its forward motion is increased owing to a supply of energy from the fluid, the upward velocity diminishes and is in balance with the gravity forces at a certain level from the ground, and eventually the latter take over
entirely" (Fig. 1). Thus, a parabolic trajectory path was postulated.
Bagnold (1968) redefined saltation as successive collisions resulting in a dispersive stress. The dispersive stress depends on the rate of shear, the grain size, the mass and concentration of the solids, and the visco• sity of the fluid. The stress supports the bed load, against gravity, as a dispersed cloud and maintains the dispersion in a state of statistical equilibrium. His experiments showed the dispersive stress to increase as the square of the grain size. Einstein and El-Samni (1949) and Bisal and
Nielsen (1962) showed that the instantaneous force, rather than the average lift force, should be applied when establishing a motion criterion for saltating grains. After the particle has experienced the initial upward force, its motion in water and air appears to be basically the same, and Figure 1. Characteristic path of a salting grain (after Bagnold, 1941). 10
differs only in degree. In air, the height of vertical rise is up to
1000 grain diameters and the downstream range is correspondingly large.
In aqueous environments, the vertical path rise rarely exceeds a few grain diameters and the whole characteristic path is extremely short.
Kalinski (1942) held both shear stress and particle size constant in his experiment and showed the height of jump, j, to be given by:
_ k ^Specific gravity of the particle J i I Specific gravity of the fluid where is an empirical constant. Taking buoyancy into account, the geometric values of the characteristic path will be 1:1,200 for water to air. The fluid drag being greatly increased for saltation in water ex• plains why the chain reaction is absent (Bagnold, 1973). Hydraulic engi• neers and dynamic sedimentologists thus safely conclude that saltation, as a separate mode of sediment transport in water, is unimportant. They still include its effect, however minor, in the equation of bed load motion.
Bagnold (1941) found the total sand transport in air was ^ 75% by saltation and the remainder was by surface creep (traction). The total
sand movement, gst> under these conditions is given by:
3/2 K 1/2 , K(5)r/2!AK A (2) g where is an empirical constant,
g is the acceleration due to gravity,
D is mean grain diameter,
Tq is the shear stress, and
is the air density.
Bagnold (1968) describes wind-blown sand, as opposed to dust, to be wholly 11
transported as bed load. The fines had already been carried away in sus• pension by winds of normal strength and dispersed over wide areas downwind, leaving the unsuspendable material behind. The relatively massive salta- ting grains in motion disturb the sand bed by their impacts and cause the bed to behave as a moving boundary at the threshold of movement. This only occurs in water at extremely high flow velocities.
Suspension transport occurs when the turbulence intensity is equal or greater than the settling velocity. Briggs and Middleton (1965) give the diffusion equation the form:
dC C W = -e -r^- (3) s s dy where C is the sediment concentration, s W is the settling velocity of the particles of size D, and
E is the sediment diffusion coefficient, s
The right-hand side of the equation represents the rate of vertical sedi• ment diffusion due to turbulence, while the left-hand side represents the rate of settling.
The bed load movement as defined by White (1940) has the form:
tc = Cpp' g D tan
0^ is the constant of grain packing,
p' is the difference in density between fluid and particle,
D is the grain diameter or median diameter of particles in a
mixture, and
<|> is the angle of repose of the grains. 12
The grain is enclosed in turbulent flow, with the fluid acting through the centre of gravity of the particle.
Einstein (1942, 1950) notes that the beginning and the end of the particle motion has to be expressed with the concept of probability.
This concept relates instantaneous hydrodynamic lift forces to the parti• cle weight. His analyses for bed load equations excludes all particles finer than 10% of the bed material, which fill the pores between larger ones, plus all of the bed material moving in suspension.
Deposition Rate is given by:
a lf (5)(Einstein, 1950) (AjD) (5 k2D ) ALk2D 6 where A^D is the. length of the individual step of each grain of diameter D,
gg is the bed load rate,
i is the.bed load fraction in a given grain size,
g i is the rate, .at which, the .given size moves through the unit width s s
per unit time,
3 6pk2D is the weight of a single particle,
A^ is a constant of the bed load unit step,
k2 is the constant of particle volume, and
6p is the particles specific gravity.
Erosion Rate is given by:
V2 — (6)(Einstein, 1942) kp't e where i^ is the fraction of the bed material in a given grain size,
k^ is the constant of the grain area, 13
i^/k^D2 is the number of particles D in a unit area of bed surface,
p/tg is the probability of removal, and
t is the exchange time.
Dp, 1/2
t . « — = kd 3 (7)(Einstein, 1942) e W 8(pp-pf)
where k3 is a time scale constant,
p^ is the fluid density, and
Pp is the particle density.
The probability of erosion (pe) depends upon hydrodynamic lift and particle weight:
effective weight of particle pe = fct (8)(Einstein, 1942) hydrodynamic lift or
: 2k2(p -pf) g D
PP = fct CL klp f °2 Ub
where CT is the lift coefficient,
U^jis the effective velocity (at the edge of the laminar sub
layer if the wall is smooth),
Ub^11.6 UA % 11.6 /gR^S therefore
; 2K2(p -Pf) 8 D Pe = fct (9)(Einstein, 1942)
2 CL Pf k1D (135 gR'hS) J
2K2(p -pf) D Pe = fct (135) k:CL pfR'hS 14 where R'^ is the hydraulic radius with respect to the grains, and
S is the channel slope.
The results of our study of definitions and hydromechanical processes are as follows:
a) total load = bed material load + wash load (Graf, 1971)
b) bed material load = bed load + suspended load
c) wash load - 10% total load (Einstein, 1950)
d) suspended load > bed load (in stream transport)
e) traction (aqueous environment) = surface creep (air environment)
f) since saltation is negligible in stream transport (equation (1))
then traction load = bed load (aqueous environment)
g) in air 75% of bed material load (total load) - saltation load
and 25% of the bed material load - surface creep (traction) load
h) saltation should be defined as the formation of dispersive stress
due to parabolic trajectories and their accompanying collisions
of particles
i) grain size decrease does not reflect the gradation of traction
to saltation to suspension due to overlapping of these process
populations
The following points (j to o) relate the equations of mechanical processes in terms of direct or indirect measureable parameters from a given sediment sample.
j) from equation (2) total sand movement in the air varies directly
with the square root of the mean grain diameter and inversely with i
the square root of the air density
k) from equation (3) the diffusion of sediment suspension varies 15
directly with the sediment settling velocity
1) from equation (4) the critical bottom shear stress varies directly
with density difference between fluid and particle times the grain
diameter
m) from equation (5) the stream deposition rate varies inversely with
the particle specific gravity times the grain diameter to the
fourth power
n) from equations (6 & 7) stream erosion rate varies inversely with
the particle size to the 5/2 power times the square root of the
fluid density over the fluid density difference
o) from equations (8 & 9) the probability of erosion varies directly
with the particle-fluid density difference times the grain size and
inversely with the fluid density
Thus, grain size reflects hydraulic and aeolian processes only in
relationship to other physical parameters and in a non-linear form. This
complicates the task of relating grain size (curve shapes) to the natural
environment.
From Table I, compiled from Glaister and Nelson (1974), we should see
for stream environments A, B, C and D that the saltation load would be negligible and the suspended load would be greater than the traction load.
Not one sample satisfied both conditions. Dune deposits should show strictly a bed load, comprising a saltation load with a magnitude about three times that of the traction load. Again, this condition is not satis• fied. We have not considered mature beach, interdistributary beach, and tidal flat deposits due to conflicting reports on the water transport of sediments in these environments. We assume that the saltation population would be low and the suspension population high, as is shown by the work of 16
Z of Saaple Environment Sample # Traction Saltation Suspension
A Braided Stream N 966 70 4 26 Deposits N 962 97 3 N 974 94.5 5.5 G 1044 72 1 25 G 1146 51 4 40 BPP 878 50 20 24 BPP 879B 11 7e 8 N 962B 30 21 48 G 754 9 86 2 B Foint Bar G 1217 1.5 94.5 2 Deposits G 1218 97 3 G 1219 86 11 G 1057 96 3.5 G 1059 95 4 G 1061 85 6 G 1009 80 17 G 1010 80 12 C Stream-Houth G 1149 93 5 Deposits G 1150 3 89 3 G 1148 1 85 9 G 1025 98 1 G 1026 80 15 G 1024 70 20
D Distributary M 30 50 23 25 Channel Deposits M 29 91 7 M 31 24 59 14 E Interdistributary G 1042 93 5 Beach Deposit G 1144 93 6 ? Mature Beach G 1033 94 5 Deposits G 1030 92 7 G 1051 83 7 G 1048 79 13 G 1049 60 30
G Tidal Flat G 1064 76 22 Deposits G 1062 50 40 K Dune Deposits G 1034 3 95 1 G 1328 94 2
Table 1. Data from Glaister and Nelson's curves. 17
Inman and Bagnold (1966).
Two other areas which warrant discussion are as follows:
1. Sediment Flocculation Problem
Some suspended particles may not settle for a long time.
Flocculation occurs in the finer grade sizes under certain physico-
chemical conditions, producing more rapid sedimentation (Einstein
and Krone, 1961). The reduction of repulsive forces between particles
may take place by an increase in ionic strength such as occurs when
a fresh water source meets a saline environment (i.e., in an estuary).
Attractive forces take over if the residual charges on the clay
minerals are satisfied. Brownian motion, internal shear motion, and
differential settling are all causes of particle collision. Once the
floes have formed they settle out at their new, higher velocity.
Smaller floes usually join the large floes. The result of flocculation
would be to increase the size of the fine portion of the suspended
load and probably cause a non-log normal population that could be bi•
modal. This is particularly important for marine silt and clay size
analysis.
2. Competency Problem
This problem is particularly important for low energy environments
where silt and clay are the major constituents. Competency of a flow
path refers to the maximum size of particles of a given specific
gravity which will move at a given stream velocity. Sundborg (1936)
noted that below grain diameters of 0.10 mm, greater velocity is needed
to erode increasingly finer consolidated silt and clay. When the
bottom sediment is finally eroded, the fragments are not commonly
transported as individual grains. Instead clumps of this cohesive 18
sediment are given up to the bed load in the form of stable mud clasts.
In consolidated sediment many clasts are hard to recognize. Through mechanical analysis the sample is generally broken down to its initial size components. Thus the larger clasts which could reflect competency of the stream would be discounted and a false value using Glaister and
Nelson's (1974) one-percentile system would result.
Another danger in using this value to reflect stream competency is found when studying coastal environments. Often the available particles are finer than particles that would reflect the local available energy.
Here the largest of the tiny particles would have an implied competency value many times lower than the real value of competency.
GRAPHIC DISPLAY OF LOG-PROBABILITY FREQUENCY PLOTS
True Diameter Curve Effects
The expression of size in terms of sedimentation (fall) diameters, is necessary, rather than diameters measured directly or by sieving.
This step was not taken by Glaister and Nelson (1974) when their grain size distributions were used to demonstrate hydromechanical processes.
The sedimentation diameter is the diameter of a sphere of similar den•
sity and fall velocity to that of a sediment particle in the same fluid.
Briggs and Middleton (1965) point out that the fall diameter of parti•
cles is more directly related to their hydraulic behaviour. Fall diame•
ters tend to be log normally distributed. Deviations from log normality
obtained by sieving (or thin section grain size evaluation) may be
largely the difference between sieve-sizing and hydraulic sizing. Fluid
properties, grain size, specific gravity and grain shape all affect the
fall velocity by displacing the equilibrium condition between the weight 19
of the grain and the coefficient of drag.
Particle shape is usually underplayed by geologists in its role
in the hydrodynamic processes. It is usually only crudely estimated by
techniques approximating the particle's triaxial grain dimensions. Graf and Acaroglu (1966) note that there is no universally accepted defini•
tion of grain shape. Lane and Carlson (1954) note that in suspensions,
smaller more spherical particles can settle out at the same rate as
larger, less spherical particles. In traction transport, the converse
occurs where larger, more spherical particles are moved along with
smaller, less spherical particles. Both cause an intermixing of popu•
lations.
The Probability Distribution Assumption
Bagnold (1968) states the problem as "the question of what form of
size distribution would a deposit tend to take under conditions which
remain constant with time has not yet been answered". He further stated
that the natural distribution is commonly assumed to be an error or probability distribution, and a whole system of classification has grown up based on this arbitrary assumption. "The extreme grades, which
appear of particular importance in the transport process, are in the great majority of analyses present in greater proportions than proba• bility would suggest." He plots a normal error probability curve
-bx y = ae of parabolic shape, and compares this to a nearly hyperbolic
grain size distribution for wind-blown sands. Water transported ma•
terial is not known to behave in the same manner. Either the size
intervals are too large, or the extreme grades have been discarded as of no significance, or excessive scatter shows the analysis to be un- 20
reliable. A similar tendency towards a power-law grading decrement exists for water-transported material, especially on the coarse side of the curves (Bagnold, 1968).
Population Probabilities
Linear segments of log-probability plots were claimed by Glaister
& Nelson (1974) to represent populations deposited by different mechani• cal processes: traction, saltation and suspension (i.e., three distinct truncated normal distributions). This postulate makes the mathematical assumption that these populations are mutually exclusive. We question their ability to segregate that portion of a distribution deposited from a single transport process. This conclusion was also independently reached by Shea (1974). In reality, the bed material load or population is tranported by three processes. The bed load population is trans• ported by traction and saltation, and the suspended load is transported by suspension and saltation. The wash load alone is a separate popula• tion by being a subset of the suspended load. Thus, each sediment popu• lation cannot be equated from a single process. The process population cannot be separated from the sediment population as shown by linear segments of log probability plots (Fig. 2). Figure 3 demonstrates this point with a Venn diagram.
Middleton (1976) provides the first attempt at direct evidence to prove the Visher (1969) hypothesis. He avoided labelling the line segments of probability plots with process populations in favour of sediment populations. The bed load population was allocated to the line segment for coarse grain sizes and the term intermittent suspension for the middle line segment. He used only average size distributions of bed 21 Process Population CZ3 traction A l\1 saltation B I 1 suspension C
let U = union Total load = n(AUBUC) = p+q + r+s+t+u + w Bed material Ioad = n(AUB)= p+t+-s + w+q + u (note here the subset r (wash load) of the suspension population is missing) Bed load = n(A) = p+s + t+w (note here only minor contributions of populations Band C) Suspended load = n (C)=r+t+w+u (note here only minor contributions of populations A and B)
Figure 3. Venn diagram. K3 23
material for a given environment and noted that the location of trunca• tion points for individual samples was highly variable. The average distribution was thought to reflect the dominant modes of sediment trans• port, i.e., intermittent suspension (in a fluvial environment). The individual distributions may possibly reflect the mechanism of transport that took place just before deposition, i.e., the bed load.
These statements suggest that after averaging the individual samples containing truncated populations, the averaged distribution will have totally new processes assigned to its truncated populations. Even after assuming the possibility of truncated normal distributions these statements remain puzzling. Although we agree that using experimental data is a step in the right direction, the precision of the data should be greatly improved (Middleton, 1976).
Truncated Distributions vs. Mixed Distributions
What is the meaning and importance of truncation points? Middleton
(1976) thought that the truncation points were related to (A) source,
(B) mechanical breakage, and (C) hydraulic sorting. Glaister and Nelson
(1974) placed importance on the truncation points being the beginning and ending of process populations for each sample. Middleton (1976) placed importance on the truncation points as the beginning and ending of sediment populations for average distributions in each depositional environment. Shea (1974) placed importance on the truncation points
(breaks) for the average distribution of many depositional environments to the general patterns of breakage of parent material (i.e., a combina• tion of A and B). Those who advocate the truncated population hypothesis must be certain that no mixing has occurred between the populations.
Only in certain modern environments may this be possible. In dealing 24
with paleo-environments though, (as in the case of samples taken from well cuttings) truncation of populations cannot be assumed. For in• stance, when a beach sand is blown landward, at what distance does the
distribution lose its original size distribution characteristics. The
transitional stage could be quite large and would evoke a mixed popula•
tion.
Tanner (1964) strongly advocated simple mixing among environments.
Three of his possibilities for one regime are: (a) a shelf area fed by
two streams, each of which delivers a sediment load having distinctive
size parameters; (b) the mixing of a stream flow component and a wave
erosion component; and (c) the mixing of two different hydrodynamic
regimes. There are actually many examples of environments where sediment mixing can occur. They could be classed into three categories:
a) True mixing - the mixing of two (or more) depositional environ•
ments . An example would be the mixing of wind blown sediment
with a hydrous sedimentary environment (lacustrine, fluvial,
marine, or estuarine).
b) Transitional mixing - the change of a depositional environment.
This type of mixing would involve the completion of one form of
transport and the beginning of a new form of transport (such as
the previously mentioned beach deposit to dune deposit).
c) Single Mode mixing - energy fluctuations in any one depositional
environment. An example would be deposition on a river bed,
later partial erosion during a high discharge, and finally a
second deposition with subsequent mixing of the two distribu•
tions before burial. 25
Resolution of Mixed Frequency Distributions into Normal (or log-normal) Components
Tanner (1964) notes that there are many methods that can be used in the analysis of zig-zag curves. Some of these are graphical (Sinclair, 1976), some of these are arithmetic (Tanner, 1959) and some of these are primarily a combination of experience and intuition (Tanner, 1964).
Most of Glaister and Nelson's (1974) distributions are unimodal and do not show inflexion at the truncation points. In well sorted populations mixed with one or more minor and poorly sorted populations (as Glaister and Nelson's curves indicate), and if population overlap is slight, bi- or tri-modality would result, with inflexions at the truncation points (Mundry, 1972).
If the distributions are made up of non-truncated log-normal components, then overlap between populations must be considerable. Swinbanks (1975) used an adaptation of Harding's (1949) graphical technique for splitting frequency distributions into normal components. He split a 3-straight-line segment dis• tribution from a coastal dune sample from Crescent Beach, Florida, using data published by Visher (1969). The result was two log-normal populations, a ma• jor (93%) well sorted population, and a minor (7%) very poorly sorted popula- . tion. The overlap of the two distributions is large and the tail ends of the plot consist of the minor populations' coarse and fine ends.
CONCLUDING REMARKS
The approximate abundances of traction, saltation and suspension pop• ulations are known for stream and air transport. Glaister and Nelson's (1974) curves from log-probability plots -of grain size do not reflect these abundances.
We conclude that these populations are intermixed during transportation as bed load, bed material load and suspended load. Separation of sediment pro• cesses from these mixed populations would be extremely complicated even if 26
ratios of measureable parameters from a given sediment sample are used. Den• sity, grain shape and surface texture should be used in addition to grain size if mechanical processes and their intermixed loads are to be separated. Sed• imentation diameters should be used instead of the direct or sieving methods.
The diameter of the particles in the aforementioned equations of mecha• nical processes is not always in a linear form. The result after changing the diameters to logarithmic values from such non-linear data would be to produce distributive coefficients (i.e., x,y,z, in x Log D + y Log D + z Log D). The coefficients from these equations of mechanical processes could cause over• lapping of their logarithmic values. The result is not clear.
The use of log-probability plots has many problems. First, the assump• tion that grain size distribution behaves as a probability distribution func• tion is still not verified. The idea that these plots show mutually exclusive events or processes has been contested. Possibly the tails represent part of just one process, but the errors here are largest on these plots. The error size should be a warning to those assigning much value to the line segment slope and the truncation points. The result of dividing the log distribution comprised of three line segments into log-normal components gives either two, three or no decipherable populations. The line segments then, are due to the representation of intermixed sediment populations resulting from mechanical processes of the system studied. Their separation cannot be easily accom• plished on the basis of present grain size analysis. 27
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
We would like to thank Dave Swinbanks for a graduate seminar at
U.B.C. related to this topic and the ensuing class discussion. 28
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Bagnold, R.A., 1941, Physics of blown sand and desert dunes. Methune and Co., London, 265 p.
, 1968, Deposition in the Process of Hydraulic trans• port: Sedimentology, v. 10, p. 45-56.
, 1973, The nature of saltation and of 'bed-load' transport in water. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A., v. 332, p. 473-504.
Bisal, F., and Nielson, K., 1962, Movement of Soil Particles in Salta• tion: Can. J. Soil Sci., v. 42, p. 81-86.
Briggs, L.I. and Middleton, G.V., 1965, Hydromechanical principles of sediment structure formation: Society Econ. Paleon. Mineral. Special Publ., no. 12, p. 5-16.
Einstein, H.A., 1942, Formulas for the Transportation of Bed-Load: Trans. Am. Soc. Civil Engns., v. 107, p. 561-597.
, 1950, The Bed-Load Function for Sediment Transpor• tation in Open Channel Flows: U.S. Dept. Agric, Soil Conserv. Serv., T.B. no. 1026, p. 1-71.
, Anderson, A.G., and Johnson, J.W., 1940, A Distinc• tion Between Bed-Load and Suspended Load in Natural Streams: Trans. Am. Geophys. Union, v. 21, p. 628-633.
, and El-Samni, E.S., 1949, Hydrodynamic Forces on a Rough Wall: Rev. Mod. Phys., v. 21, no. 3, p. 520-524.
, and Drone, R.B., 1961, Estuarial Sediment Transport Patterns: Proc. Am. Soc. Civil Engrs., v. 87, p. 51-60.
Gilbert, G.K., 1914, The Transportation of Debris by Running Water. U.S. Geol. Sur. Prof. Paper 86, 263 p.
Glaister, R.P., and Nelson, H.W.,*1974, Grain-size Distributions, An Aid in Facies Identification: Bull. Can. Pet. Geol., v. 22, p. 203-240.
Graf, W.H., 1971, Hydraulics of Sediment Transport, Chapter 9 - The Total Load: McGraw-Hill, p. 203-212.
, and Acaroglu, E.R., 1966, Settling velocities of natural grains. Internatl. Assoc. Sci. Hydrology Bull., v. 11, p. 27-43.
Harding, J.P., 1949, The use of probability paper for graphical analyses of polymodal frequency distributions: Jour. Marine Biol. Assoc., v. 28, p. 141-153. 29
Inman, D.L., and Bagnold, R.A., 1966. Part II. Littoral Processes. The Sea, M.N. Hill (ed.), v. 3, p. 529-553.
Kalinske, A.A., 1942, Criteria for Determining Sand-Transport by Surface-Creep and Saltation: Trans. Am. Geophys. Union, v. 23, p. 639-643.
Lane, E.W., and Carlson, E.J., 1954, Some observations on the effect of particle shape on the movement of coarse sediments: Trans. Am. Geoph. Union, v. 35, p. 453-462.
Middleton, G.V., 1976, Hydraulic interpretation of sand size distribu• tions. J. Geol. v. 84, p. 405-426.
Moss, A.J., 1963, The physical nature of common sandy and pebbly de• posits. Part II: Am. Jour. Sci., v. 261, p. 297-343.
Mundry, E., 1972, On the Resolution of Mixed Frequency Distributions into Normal Components: Mathematical Geology, v. 4, no. 1, p. 53-60
Shea, J.H., 1974, Deficiencies of clastic particles of certain sizes. J. Sed. Petrology, v. 44, p. 985-1003.
Sinclair, A.J., 1976, Applications of probability graphs in mineral exploration. Assoc. Expl. Geochem. Spec. Vol. #4, 95 p.
Sundborg, Ake, 1936, The River Klaralven, a Study of Fluvial Processes: Geografiska Annaler, v. 38, p. 127-316.
Swinbanks, D.B., 1975, A Sedimentological Study of 3 Sedimentary cycles of the Calciferous Sandstone series at Pittenweem. H.B.Sc. thesis, St. Andrews University, Scotland, p. 75-79.
Tanner, W.F., 1959, Sample components obtained by the method of dif• ferences. J. Sed. Petrology, v. 29, p. 204-211.
, 1964, Modification of sediment size distributions. J. Sed. Petrology, v. 34, p. 156-164.
Visher, G.S., 1969, Grain size distributions and depositional processes: J. Sed. Petrology, v. 39, p. 1074-1106.
White, CM., 1940, The equilibrium of grains on the bed of a stream: Roy. Soc. London, Proc. Ser. A, v. 179, p. 322-338. 30
VSA: A NEW FAST SIZE ANALYSIS TECHNIQUE FOR LOW SAMPLE WEIGHT BASED ON STOKES' SETTLING VELOCITY
Abstract
A new technique, VSA, provides a rapid, accurate and precise method of determining the grain size distribution of low weight samples. Its name, VSA, stands for Volume Size Analysis. The apparatus is inexpensive, requires no maintenance, and is portable. The results are provided in sedimentation diameters. A set of equations that discretely define the increasing volume of a homogeneous sediment sample settling in an en• closed volume of water is solved to adequately approximate the continuous distribution. The final distribution is in terms of weight percent when bulk densities of discrete settled volumes are calculated. This calcula• tion was shown to have only a marginal effect on the grain size distribu• tion of samples having means greater than 3 ym. 31
Introduction
The need to determine size distributions from various low-weight CD suspended sediment samples precludes the use of standard Sedigraph , sedimentation balance, pipette and hydrometer methods. The new size analysis method proposed here, VSA (Volume Size Analysis), centers on the solution to equations that discretely define the increasing volume of a homogeneous sediment sample settling in an enclosed volume of water. This solution has not been previously published.
Oden (1915, 1924) was the first to define the problem of a homo• geneous sample settling in an enclosed aqueous medium; his theory fur• nishes the foundation for all future settling size analysis methods
(Krumbein and Pettijohn, 1938). The solution for Oden's experimental setup, the Oden Balance, utilized tangents to the Oden curve (weight of accumulated sediment VS settling velocity), and resulted in a cumulative frequency curve. Because Oden's method depends on the sample being uni- modal, the system quickly fell out of use. More modern methods of size analysis include: the settling tube, in which a coarse sediment sample is introduced at the top of the settling medium and the rate of increase of settled sediment volume is directly related to the size distribution of the sample particles (Van Veen, 1936; Emery, 1938; Poole, 1957); the sedimentation balance, with which an increase in weight rather than volume is recorded (Douglas, 1946; Planked, 1962; Van Andel, 1964; Sengupta and
Veenstra, 1968; Felix, 1969; and Gibbs, 1974); and the rapid sediment analyzer (RSA), which measures the pressure differential in a column of water produced by sediment settling through a measured distance (Ziegler
et al, 1960; Schlee, 1966; Bascomb, 1968; Sanford and Swift, 1971; Nelson,
1976). The photoextinction method was developed to measure light intensity 32
through turbid water relating the rate of clearing to the settling of the sample (Ross, 1953; Jalvite and Paulus, 1956; Simmons, 1959; McKenzie, 1963;
Jordan et al., 1971; Niitsuma, 1971; Taira and Scholle, 1977). In all of these methods, except Oden's, the sample is introduced as a unit at the top of the settling medium. Convection currents are usually set up, giving slightly erroneous settling velocities (Poole, 1957; Kuenen, 1968; and
Gibbs, 1972). The cost of equipment for these methods is high, and all of them require a sample of 2 - 10 g (Galehouse, 1967). Many of these methods are only appropriate for analysis of sand, although some newer methods
(Taira and Scolle, 1977) can analyze both coarse and fine fractions. All of
these methods give their grain size data in terms of sedimentation diameters, a hydrodynamically sensitive property (Wadel, 1934; Poole, 1957; Middleton,
1967; Sengupta and Veenstra, 1968; Taira and Schoole, 1977; Syvitski and
Murray, 1977).
VSA, the method proposed here, was designed for rapid analysis of silt and clay, and solves the Oden curve with a pyramidal set of equations,
thus allowing analysis of mulitmodal samples. It is cheap, requiring only
an inexpensive clinical-type centrifuge using conical 15-ml0tubes. Only
100 mg of sample is required compared with a minimum of 5 g for the hydro•
meter or pipette method. Since the analysis is fast (four samples per 85 minutes when used down to a 0.45 ym size).there is no-need for keeping sam• ples in a water bath if the water settling medium is initially at room tem•
perature.
Other methods such as the sedigraph (Gandin and Fuerstenau, 1961;
Olivier et al., 1970, 1971), the Coulter Counter (McCave and Jarvis, 1973;
Walker et al., 1974; Swift et al., 1972), and the optical size analyzer
(Schubel, 1972) can compete in accuracy and speed of analysis, but their
cost is high. The sedigraph also needs a 3 g minimum, and although the 33
Coulter Counter ^ and optical size analyzer only need a few mg, their results are not in terms of sedimentation diameters.
Theory of Method
If particles in a uniform suspension are allowed to settle in a tube, then at a given time T(i) the volume Va(i) accumulated at the bottom of the tube will depend on the volume of sediment coarser than size x(i) - the size which settles the length of the tube in time T(i) - plus contributions of the finer size particles, with the contributions being dependent on their settling velocity: i.e.,
x(i) o
f Va(i) = [ f(x).dx + f'x(i) I ffiy (1) . ' OO' ^ x(i) Term 1 Term 2 where f(x) is the grain size frequency distribution of the sample and f'(x) is the settling time of any given size 'x'. In reality, of course, the grain size distribution does not extend to infinite sizes nor does it extend to zero size, but the above is the general equation for any grain size dis• tribution. Equation (1) simply states that the sediment accumulation
Va(i) is equal to the cumulative volume percent (first term) coarser than x(i) with settling time T(i) plus the time dependent fractions (second term) of the finer sizes. The method uses discrete rather than continuous readings and equation (1) can be approximated by a function of discrete sizes:
N V(x)-T(i) va(1).. jv(x) + (2)
Term 1 Term 2 34
where Va(i) = Total volume accumulated by time T(i) ;
T(x) = Settling time for size (x);
V(x) = Total volume of sediment between sizes equivalent
to settling time T(x-l) and T(x) ;
N = Total number of readings.
From this, if Vc(i) is the volume change between any time T(i-l) and
T(i) then
Vc(l) = £v(i) "^y1 ' V(i)J + [TCi) - T(i-ia '
Term 1 Term 2 Term 3
Here the change in volume Vc(i) for any time T(i) is equal to the total amount of particles that have settling times between T(i) and T(i-l)
(given as V(i) in term 1), minus the amount of these same particles that have previously settled (given as (T(i-l)/(T(i))•V(i) in term 2), plus the time dependent fractions of the other volumes of finer grain sizes (given as term 3). For example, the last volume increase Vc(N), is given by
T Vc(N) = V(N) - ^-l> . V(N) (4)
Term 1 Term 2 where volume V(N) having taken the longest time to settle makes up the last contribution to the cumulative settled volume, by an amount that is depen• dent on the total amount with the settling times between T(N-l) and T(N)
(first term) minus the amount that has previously settled (second term).
A pyramid set of equations combining the separate constituents can now be set up to give an end product that can be visually seen in an experiment.
As the number of readings, N, increases towards infinity, equation (2) be• gins to approximate equation (1). If the volume increases, Vc(i), are known and the individual volumes of any given particle size V(i) are 35
not, then by rearranging the equations given in (3), a solution to such a set of pyramid equations can be obtained. In the solution the last
constituent volume to settle out, V(N) (smallest particle size), must be solved first and then by back substitution one can solve for V(N-l) and so on to V(i). Equation (4) can be easily rearranged to give:
V(N) = T(N) -(T(N-1) ' VC(N> (5>
With each new iteration of (i) a new term is added such that
N .
6 V(i) = [Vc(i) - (T(i)>- T(i-l)) -l V(x)/T(x)] • T(1) _TC1-1) < >
which is a set of equations given by (3) rearranged to solve for the
discrete particle volumes V(i).
Check of Theory
Figure 1 shows a log probability plot of a theoretical log normal
distribution. Four sets of data from this sample were solved by equation
(3) to indicate how the resultant settled volumes would be read in an ex•
periment. The first data set was an N = 4 component system. Four par•
ticle diameters were used with their accompanying weight percent read
off the y-axis. The weight percents were converted to volumes (ml),
assuming a constant particle density with a given weight. The settling
times were calculated from particle diameters using Stokes' law. The
other sets of data had N = 8, N = 12, and N = 22, respectively. These
values were recombined to bring them back into a four-component system
for comparison. Figure 2 shows how the readings would be under each
component system if the volumes read during the experiment corresponded
to the settling time of the four preset particle settling times. Accur•
acy increases, but tends to even out after N = 12. VSA uses an N = 16 36
PARHCtE SIZE (/jm)
Figure 1. A log-probability plot of a theoretical sample showing points used in the analysis of the theory. 37
system for such a particle size range. Although more readings of Vc(i) could be taken during the experiment, the volume increase would soon become lower than the accuracy of detection, especially for very small sample weights. Fi• gure 2 also indicates that the value of Vc(i) decreases as N goes to infinity, for the fine end of the size distribution. This means that the resultant vol• ume of any given size interval on the fine end V(i) should increase as the number of readings increases, with the converse being true for the coarse end of the size distribution (Fig. 2). To increase the validity of an N = 16 system the log midpoint time values between readings for the reciprocal T values in equation (3) can be used. By reasoning that the increase of sedi• ment between any two times is a function of some mid-time interval, not the end time, justifies this approximation. Also, since grain size data approxi• mate a log normal distribution, the midpoint should be the log time midpoint, which is equivalent to the log size midpoint if Stokes' Law applies. Figure
17, a computer plot of an actual sample, shows that the better approximation only slightly alters the original solution.
Theoretical Example of a Four-Component System
Step 1 - Initial Combining (Experimental Results)
Vc(l) - fifi • V(A)+ fifi • V(B)+ |f§ • V(C) + fif} • V(D)
vc(2) - Ifiigpi • V(B) + Xt2g|« • , vc(3) - ii£i=iM . v(c) + «cga . V(D) Vc(4) - I(D>^;C) • V(D) 24 Figure 2. A VSA accuracy plot demonstrating that as the number of components (readings off the theoretical sample) increases, the closer the discrete equations approximate the con• tinuous distribution. Figure 7. VSA computer plot for sample Kam 14. 40 Step 2 - Subsequent Solution T(D) V(D) -•- Vc(4) T(D)-T(C) T(C)-T(B) T(C) V(C) Vc(3) V(D) T(D) T(C)-T(B) V T(B)-T(A) T(B)-T(A) T(B) V(B) Vc(2) V(C) T(C) T(D) T(B)-T(A) V(D) T(A) T(A) T(A) V(A) Vc(l) • V(D) - f(£y ' V(C) - T(D) T(B) • V(B) This solution only holds if the sample consists of only four discrete sizes. Step 3 - Better Approximation m,n\ * Vc(4) where T(D)* is the log midpoint between V(D)* = T(D)* — T(C) T(D) and T(C) , V(D)* is the new volume (better approximation) T(C)-T(B) 1 T(C)* V(C)* = Vc(3) - V(D)* T(D) * T(C)* - T(B) T(B)-T(A) fT(B)-T(A) T(B) * V(B)* = Vc(2) - • V(C)* V(D): T(C)* T(D) * T(B)* - T(A) T(A) . T(A) T(A) V(A)* = Vc(l) - V(D)* • V(C)* V(B)' T(D) * T(C)* T(B) * Relation of Volume to Weight Earlier works have demonstrated that the volume of material settling out cannot be directly converted to weight of material settling out. Trask (1930) found that in any particular sample the bulk density is practically constant for all constituents in the silt range (5 - 50 um). Meade (1964) cites many references to show that as clay particles decrease in size, void ratio (porosity) increases. Our experiments have corroborated both conclusions. Skempton (1953) has also shown that porosity (void ratio) decreases in clays and colloidal clays as the effective overburden pressure increases. Since 41 VSA utilizes a centrifuge for the clay end of the size spectrum there is in essence an increase in effective overburden pressure due to the high angular acceleration. This still does not increase the bulk density of the fine clay fractions enough to equal the bulk density of the silt fraction. Thus, as given in the method below, a calibration experiment must be run on samples to determine the density of the sediment fraction coarser than 6 ym and those fractions finer than 6 ym. In a given environment, the correction factors have been found to remain constant. If one is not sure that such a simplistic assumption can be made for an area, then the time involved in checking every sample only increases the total experimental time by 20%. Fulfillment of the Assumptions of Stokes' Law (1851) (1) The particle must be spherical, smooth, and rigid, and there should be no slipping between it and the medium. When water and natural sediments are used, both the slippage and rigidity conditions are satisfied (Arnold, 1911). Natural particles are seldom spheres but that is why the term 'sedimentation diameter' has come into use. Sedimentation diameter is the diameter of a sphere having the same specific gravity and terminal settling velocity as a given natural particle under identical settling conditions. (2) The medium may be considered homogeneous in comparison to the size of the particle. Water molecules are very small compared to particle size (Krumbein and Pettijohn, 1938). (3) The particle should fall as it would in a medium of unlimited extent. Although the tube diameters in the present study are 2 cm, the wall effects are still negligible (Arnold, 1911; Krumbein and Pettijohn, 1938). (4) Particles must have reached terminal fall velocity. For silt and clay particles this condition is reached almost instantly (Weyssenhoff, 1920). 42 (5) Particles must be greater than 0.1 ym (Galehouse, 1971). This is neces• sary to avoid the effects of Brownian motion of fine particles. (6) Particles must be no greater than 50 ym in diameter. Rubey (1933) noted that the observed settling velocity of natural sediments differs little from the theoretically determined Stokes values up to about 140 ym. The upper limit for the VSA apparatus is at 62 ym. Gibbs et al. (1971) have developed an equation that calculates settling velocity for the entire range of grain sizes. If VSA is to be converted for sand analysis, this equation must be used. (7) Particle concentration must be less than 1%. Irani and Callis (1963) showed that particles interfere with each other's settling path when the concentration exceeds 1%. VSA uses less than the 1% particle cut-off concentration. In summary, all assumptions have been satisfied using the VSA technique. Methodology The samples are first treated with ^0^ to remove organic matter, so 3 that particle density can be assumed to be 2.65 g/cm . The treated samples are dried, weighed and transferred to graduated 15 ml centrifuge tubes. The weight of the samples must be less than 0.3 g with a lower limit of 50 mg (most samples in this report averaged 100 to 150 mg, thus decreasing the risk of particle interference). The tubes must be able to withstand at least 3300 RPM. The settling medium (water) contained 0.05% Calgon^ as a dispersing agent. The samples are then dispersed (two minutes in a vortex mixer + two minutes in an ultrasonic bath, and handshaken just before each experiment). The tubes are placed in a frame with camera mount (Fig. 3) and the experiment begins with T = 0. Using a stopwatch, a photograph is taken at predetermined time intervals. The lighting consisted of a flashlight bulb behind each tube Figure 3. The VSA experimental setup. 44 and a 40 watt incandescent bulb in front. The camera was an SLR with a 50 mm macro lens. The film used was ASA 125 Kodak Plus-X. The time intervals de• pend on the size fractions desired. An example of a data sheet (Table 1) gives the elapsed time for photographs to give settling times approximately equiva• lent to 0.45, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 40, 48, and 64 um particle sizes. The temperature must also be recorded for each experimental run, as settling time is a function of fluid viscosity which in turn is a function of temperature. Eleven pictures are taken in a 48-minute period (to the 6 ym time equivalent); the tubes are then transferred to a clinical centrifuge, with an appropriate head, which was calibrated with a stroboscope. Five pictures taken over three centrifuge speeds (780, 2345 and 3300 RPM) complete the analysis., After each centrifuge run the tubes are taken out and the sediment layer is flattened by touching each tube with a vibro-engraving tool, then returned to the rack so that the picture may be taken. Settling during photography at this stage has been calculated to be negligible, as only the very fine particle size remains. After the film has been developed the negative is placed between two glass slides, viewed under a microscope having a calibrated ocular, and the cumulative height of the sediment from the tube bottom is read and recorded (Table 1).. The heights are changed by the computer program to volumes (ml). Since the test tubes used in this experiment have truncated cone-shaped lower parts, a suitable formula was used to convert the height measurement to volumes: 2 3 • h 2 2 V = ir • + A, • R, h • h 3 •o ' + Ro where RQ is the radius of the centrifuge tube bottom, is the slope of the cone, 45 VSA DATA SHEET # Sample #1 BAB 136C Sample #3 BAB 160C Sample #2 KAM 14 Sample #4 KAM 15 Lab Temperature: 23°C AEPS . T(J ) TET A TET RPM(N) H(J) (y) (sec.) (min.,sec.) (m.,s.) #1 #2 #3 #4 64 2.5 25s 25s 2.0 2. 7 1.0 0.2 58 4.5 45s 20s 2.8 4.6 2.0 1.2 50 6.5 1 m, 5s 20s 3. 3 5.2 2.6 1.7 32 10.0 1m,40s 35s 4.2 6.8 3.8 2. 7 28 13.0 2m,10s 30s 4. 7 7.5 4.5 3.1 24 18.0 3m 50s 5.8 9.0 6.1 3.9 20 26.0 4m,20s 1m,20s 6.4 10.0 7.0 4. 5 16 40.5 6m,45s 2m,25s 7.5 11.6 8.9 5. 7 12 72.0 12m 5m,15s 9.4 14.9 12.0 7.5 8. 162.0 27m 15m 11.2 18.0 14.9 9.5 6 288.0 48m 21m 12.4 20.0 16.2 10. 7 4 101 .2 49m 1m 780 14.8 23.0 18.0 12.1 3 181.2 50m,20s 1m,20s 780 16.5 24.0 19.0 13.0 2 406.2 54m, 5s 3m,45s 780 . 19.5 26.0 20.6 13.5 1 184.9 56m,25s 2m,20s 2345 25.5 31.0 23.5 16.0 0.45 361 . 1 60m,55s 4m,30s 3340 26.0 31.5 24.0 17.0 Table 1. An example of a data sheet after analysis of film taken (see Fig. 3) of four real samples. AEPS = the approximate equivalent particle size for any given settling time. T(J) is the time array that is used in the computer analysis. TET = total experimental time to settle any given AEPS. The VTET is the time elapse between measure• ments. H(J) is the total accumulated sediment height for any given TET. 46 h is the height in mm (height measured from film times magnification ratio), V is the volume in ml. All tubes were given a perfectly flat bottom by a professional glass blower at the 0.1 ml mark. This step is necessary to eliminate the test tube bottom rounding problem (Fig. 3). Calculation of Time Input for the Computer Analysis A set of diameters was originally selected to give adequate coverage through the clay and silt range. The diameters then must be calculated in terms of settling time for a given distance (Tanner and Jackson, 1947). The following equation was used to provide Stokes settling time for a given par• ticle diameter. log(t) = -2«log(D) + 4.05 + (0.01-b) where 4.05 is the constant at 20°C with particle density of 2.65 g/cm \ b is 20°C minus the temperature of experiment, D is the particle diameter (ym), t is the settling time to fall 1 cm (sec). Since the first part of the experiment takes place at IG the settling distance used is the length of water column. The second part of the experiment util• izes the centrifuge. Therefore, time input T(J) must be calculated using the various RPM settlings for the various readings. The following procedure can be used: Particle A^^ settles at T(a) at RPM N(a) , and at T(b) at RPM N(b), if N(b) > N(a) then T(b) < T(a). Particle settles at T(c) at RPM N(b), to settle particle A„ at RPM N(b) after all of 47 particles have already settled out at the previous RPM N(a), then centrifuged for an addi• tional T(x) where T(x) = T(c) - T(b). Thus the total elapsed time to settle both particles A^ and A^ will be T(a) plus T(x) with A^ having been centrifuged at RPM N(a) and having been centrifuged at RPM N(b). (Note: The centrifuge time to settle any given particle size consists of T(l), the period of centrifuge acceleration; T(2) , the period of constant velocity; and T(3) , the period of centrifuge decelera• tion.) The above procedure has been given in detail by Trask (1930) and Tanner and Jackson (1947). The following equation was used to provide Stokes' settling time for a given particle diameter using the centrifuge: log(t) = -2 log(D) + log(CT) - 2 log(N) + 9.071 where t is the time to settle from the surface of the settling medium, _3 Cj, is the correction factor for any temperature at density of 2.65 g/cm (see Tanner and Jackson, 1947) , 9.071 is the constant calculated with a knowledge of R, the radius of rotation to the tube bottom, and S, the radius of rotation to the surface of the suspension (see Tanner and Jackson, 1947), N is the RPM. In our experiments the settling distance correction due to its decrease with sediment accumulation was calculated to be negligible. This calculation should be made, however, to justify its negligibility (Trask, 1930). Calculation of Sediment Density As previously stated, it is necessary to convert volume percent to' weight percent by the determination of density for each size fraction. How• ever, the results of density calculations for samples used in this paper, taken from inland lakes, indicate that for the size fractions above 6 ym, 48 density is constant within experimental error. Therefore, it is only neces• sary to determine the density of the five fractions finer than 6 ym. In addition, it was found that for each lake the density values for any fraction finer than 6 ym were similar. In retrospect, only a few representative samples from each environment needed to be analyzed. For the 10 cm centrifuge tubes used the sample was allowed to settle naturally until all the 6 ym particles have settled (i.e., 48 minutes). The volume settled is photographically recorded. The supernatant liquid is decan• ted, and the sediment on the bottom is rinsed out, dried on an evaporating dish and weighed. From the volume and weight values, bulk density is calcula• ted for the sediment fraction coarser than about 6 ym. The supernatant liquid which was decanted, is homogenized by shaking and centrifuged to obtain the next size fraction. The procedure to obtain a bulk density value is repeated for this size fraction and every other size fraction down to 0.45 ym, giving a total of six density values. These are used to convert volume changes to weight changes. The final cumulative curve is in weight percent rather than volume percent. Table 2 indicates that after the sediment density corrections were made, the effect upon the non-corrected distribution is marginal if not negli- gible. Figure 4 shows the minimal effect (sample Kam 4 with an x value of 2 0.6) and the maximal effect (sample Kam 15 with an x value of 9.9). VSA Accuracy The VSA method was tested using nine samples against results that were obtained for these samples on the Sedigraph Model 5000D. The method of com• parison was the x2 test at the 95% confidence limits. Ninety-five percent of the sample weight was used in the comparison. The 5% in the coarse end was not used since the Sedigraph does not give accurate results in this end. This 49 Sample 1D X2 Kam 14 9.9 Kam 14 3.8 Bab 160C 4.6 Bab 136C 3.0 Kam 9 3.3 Kam 4 0.6 Kam 1 3.1 Kam 10 2.2 Bab 133C 4.2 Table 2. The xZ value is for the comparison of a sample's size distribution before and after it has been corrected for changes in density in the fine fractions. A low chi value indicates that the density correc• tion does little to change the size distribution. If the 95% confidence limits are used, accounting for 100% of the sample weight with 15 degrees of freedom, then the x2 value would have to be greater than 25.0 before the density corrections significantly altered the size distribution to reject the hypothesis that the distributions are the same. 3.0 5.0 7.0 9.0 11.0 13.0 EQUIVALENT SPHERICAL DIAMETER (0) Figure 4. The effect of density correction on two samples. Kam 15 and Kam 4 showed the highest and lowest density effect of the samples, respectively. 51 observation was checked using a 44 ym wet sieve on a known weight of each sam• ple. The results indicated that the VSA method accurately determined the ex• act coarse fraction. The Sedigraph always registered no sample weight in the coarse fractions of the analysis. Table 3 indicates that all nine samples were accepted as being one and the same as indicated for both methods by the X2 test. Except for sample Kam 1, all the remaining eight samples analyzed by VSA were found to have means between 0.3 and 2.2 ym coarser than by the Sedigraph. This, again, is a function of the inaccurate results by the Sedi• graph at the coarse end of the size distribution. Figure 5 compares the two methods graphically. The repeatability between two runs of the same sample based on the x test (at the 95% confidence limits utilizing 100% of the sample weight) is given in Table 4. Only one sample (Bab 136C) was rejected. Its rejection is not unusual since the sample is composed of over 30% ferric oxides and has a peculiar behavior in the 0.05% Calgon settling medium. The other samples passed the xZ test with means having an average variation of only 0.5 ym. Figure 6 shows the results of two samples run twice. Conclusion The VSA method is accurate and precise, and has some advantages over other methods. It is a fast, portable, inexpensive, maintenance-free method, needing only 50 - 300 mg of sample, yet providing results in sedimentation diameters. One minor disadvantage is that results are not immediate with the analysis but must be analyzed using either a computer or a programmable calcu• lator. Appendix 1 gives the Fortran G program with results from using the UBC IBM 370-168 computer. It should be noted that although graphs are plotted using a CALC0MP Model 563 plotter, some computing systems will not have such 52 Samp 1e ID Xv(y) Xs(y) Is there an acceptance betweer the two methods based on x2 test at the 95% confidence limits utilizing 95% of the sample- weight. Kam 15 6.8 5.5 YES Kam 14 9.0 6.8 YES Bab 160C 7.7 6.0 YES Bab 136C 5.0 3.5 YES Kam 9 2.9 2.9 YES Kam 4 3.2 2.8 YES Kam 1 2.7 2.4 YES Kam 10 5.0 3.7 YES Bab 133C 4.5 3.0 YES Table 3. The x test for acceptance between the si^ze distribution produced by the two methods, VSA and Sedigraph. Xv and Xs are the mean grain size of the VSA and Sedigraph methods, respectively. Figure 5. The comparison of one example (Kam 14) between VSA and Sedigraph methods. 54 Sample 1D Xi(y) X?(y) Is there an acceptance between two runs of the same sample based on x2 test at the 95% confidence limits utilizing of the sample weight. Kam 15 6.8 7.4 YES Kam 15 9.0 9.0 YES Bab 160C 7.7 8.0 YES Bab 136C 5.0 9.0 NO Kam 9 2.9 4.2 YES Kam 1 2.7 3.7 YES Standard A 2.0 2.2 YES Standard B 10.0 9.6 YES Table 4. The x test for acceptance between two runs of the same sample. X7 and X0 are the mean grain size of runs 1 and 2, respectively. EQUIVALENT SPHERICAL DIAMETER (0) gure 6. The replicability of two samples (Kam 14 and Standard A). 56 built-in programs. If similar CALCOMP routines are not available, the sub• routine SEDPLT and all main program lines beginning with an asterisk should be deleted resulting in the printing of two tables per sample. The first table contains the results before the better approximation routine, whose results are printed in the second table. An added printout feature is that the settling times of various particle sizes for a pre-specified temperature are provided. Acknowledgements Special thanks goes to J.W. Murray who financed this project under NRC Grant # 656224. Bill Barnes and Marc Bustin have our appreciation for critically reviewing the manuscript. The excellent drafting was completed by Gordon Hodge. The Inland Waters Directorate, Environmental Management Service of (R) Canada, supplied the sediment samples and their Sedigraph^ analysis, under the supervision of Chris Pharo who was instrumental in the completion of this project. 57 References Arnold, H.D., 1911, Limitations imposed by slip and inertia terms upon Stokes' Law for the motion of spheres through liquids: Phil. Mag., v. 22, p. 755-775. Bascomb, C.L., 1968, A new apparatus for particle size distribtuion: J. Sed. Petrology, v. 38, p. 878-884. Douglas, D.J., 1946, Interpretation of the results of mechanical analysis: J. Sed. Petrology, v. 16, p. 19-40. Emery, K.O., 1938, Rapid method of mechanical analysis of sands: J. Sed. Pe• trology, v. 8. p. 105-111. Felix, D.W., 1969, An inexpensive recording settling tube for analysis of sands: J. Sed. Petrology, v. 39, p. 777-780. Galehouse, J.S., 1971, Sedimentation analysis: In Carber, R.E. (Ed.), Proce• dures in Sedimentary Petrology: Wiley & Son, Inc., N.Y., p. 69-94. Gandin, A.M., and M.C Fuerstenau, 1961, Determination of particle size distri• bution by X-ray absorption: AIME Trans., v. 220, p. 364-366. Gibbs, R.J., M.D. Mathews, and D.A. Link, 1971, The relationship between sphere size and settling velocity: J. Sed. Petrology, v. 41, p. 7-18. Gibbs, R.J., 1972, The accuracy of particle size analyses utilizing settling tubes: J. Sed. Petrology, v. 42, p. 141-145. Gibbs, R.J.,.1974, A settling tube system for sand size analysis: J. Sed. Pe-^ trology, v. 44, p. 583-588. Irani, R.R. and CF. Callis, 1963, Particle size: Measurement, interpretation and application: John Wiley & Sons, 165 pp. Kuenen, P.H., 1968, Settling convection and grain-size analysis: J. Sed. Pe• trology, v. 41, p. 489-496. Krumbein, W.C, and F.J. Pettijohn, 1938, Manual of Sedimentary Petrography: Appleton Century Co., New York, N.Y., 549 pp. McCave, I.N., and J. Jarvis, 1973, Use of the model T Coulter Counter in size analysis of fine to coarse sand: Sedimentology, v. 20, p. 305-315. McKenzie, K.G., 1963, The adoption of a colorimeter for measuring silt-sized particles - A rapid photo-extinction (PE) method: J. Sed. Petrology, v. 33, p. 41-48. Meade, R.H., 1964, Removal of water and rearrangement of particles during the compaction of clayey sediments - Review: U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 497-B, p. 1-23. 58 Middleton, G.V., 1967, Experiments in density and turbidity currents, 3. The deposition of sediment: Can. J. Earth Sci., v. 4, p. 475-505. Nelson, T.A., 1976, An automated rapid sediment analyzer (ARSA): Sedimentology, v. 23, p. 867-872. Niitsuma, N., 1971, Automatic grain-size analyzer for sedimentological inves• tigation: Tohoku Univ., Inst. Geol. Pal., Contr. no. 72, p. 25-36. Oden, S., 1915, Eine neue methode zur mechanischen Bodenanalyze: Ant. Mitt. F. Bodenkunde, v. 5, p. 257-311. Oden, S., 1924, Methods to determine the size distribution of soil particles: Int. Soil Sci. Conf., Rome, Sec. 1-A, #5. Oliver, J.P., G.K. Hicken, and C. Orr, Jr.. 1970/71, Automatic particle size analysis in subsieve range: Pow. Technology, v. 4, p. 257-263. Plankeel, F.H., 1962, An improved sedimentation balance: Sedimentology, v. 1, p. 158-163. Poole, D.M., 1957, Size analysis of sand by a sedimentation technique: J. Sed. Petrology, v. 27, p. 460-468. Rose, H.E., 1953, The measurement of particle size in very fine powders: Con• stable and Co., London. Rubey, W.W., 1933, Settling velocities of gravel, sand, and silt particles: Am. J. Sci., v. 25, p. 325-338. Sanford, R.B., and D.J.P. Swift, 1971, Comparison of sieving and settling tech• niques, using a Benthos Rapid Sediment Analyzer: Seidmentology, v. 17, p. 257-264. Schlee, J., 1966, A modified Woods Hole rapid sediment analyzer: J. Sed. Pe• trology, v. 36, p. 403-413. Schubel, J.R., 1972, Distribution and transportation of suspended sediment in the Upper Chesapeake Bay: Geol. Soc. Am., v. 133, p. 151-167. Sengupta, S., and J.H. Veenstra, 1968, On sieving and settling techniques for sand analysis: Sedimentology, v. 11, p. 83-98. Shideler, G.L., 1976, A comparison of electronic particle counting and pipette techniques in routine mud analysis: J. Sed. Petrology, v. 46, p. 1017- 1025. Simmons, G., 1959, The photo-extinction method for the measurement of silt- sized particles: J. Sed. Petrology, v. 29, p. 233-245. Skempton, A.W., 1953, Soil mechanics in relation to geology: Yorkshire (Eng.) Geol. Soc. Proc, v. 29. p. 33-62. 59 Stokes, G.G. , 1951, On the effect of the internal friction of fluids on the motion of pendulums: Trans. Cambridge Philos. Soc, v. 9, p. 8-106. Swift, D.J.P., J.R. Schubel, and R.W. Sheldon, 1972, Size analysis of fine• grained suspended sediments: A Review: J. Sed. Petrology, v. 42, p. 122- 134. Syvitski, J.P., and J.W. Murray, 1977, Grain-size distribution using log- probability plots: A Discussion: Bull. Can. Petroleum Geol., v. 25, p. 683-694. Taira, A., and P.A. Scholle, 1977, Design and calibration of a photo-extinction settling tube for grain size analysis: J. Sed. Petrology, v. 47, p..1347- 1360. Talvite, N.A. , and J.H. Paulus, 1956, Recording photometric particle size analyzer: Review of Scientific Instruments, v. 27, p. 763-767. Tanner, C.B., and M.L. Jackson, 1947, Nomographs of sedimentation times for soil particles under gravity or centrifugal acceleration: Soil Sci. Soc. Proc, p. 60-65. Trask, P.C., 1930, Mechanical analyses of sediments by centrifuge: Econ. Geol., v. 25, p. 581-599. Van Andel, T.H., 1964, Recent marine sediments of Gulf of California: Am. Assoc., Petrol. Geol., Mem., v. 3, p. 216-310. Van Veen, J., 1936, Onderzoekingen in de Hoofden, in verband met de gesteld- heid der Nederlandsche Kust: Mw. Verh. Bat. Gen. Proefonderv. Wijsbeg., v. 2, 252 pp. Wadell, H., 1934, Some new sedimentation formulas: Physics, v. 5, p. 281-291. Walker, P.H., D.D. Woodyer, and J. Hutka, 1974, Particle size measurements by Coulter Counter of very small deposits and low suspended sediment con• centrations in streams: J. Sed. Petrology, v. 44, p. 673-679. Weyssenhoff, J., 1920, Betrachtungen uber den Guttigkeitsbereich der Stokes- schen und der Stokes-Cunninghamschen Formel: Ann. der Physik, v. 62, p. 1-45. Zeigler, J.M., G.G. Whitney, and C.R. Hayes, 1960, Woods Hole rapid sediment analyzer: J. Sed. Petrology, v. 30, p. 490-495. 60 A FAST TECHNIQUE FOR A LOW SAMPLE WEIGHT RANDOM ORIENTED MOUNT TO BE USED IN QUANTITATIVE XRD ANALYSIS ABSTRACT The Ag filter mounting technique has been described. The technique a) gives consistent random oriented mounts of clay minerals; and b) does not fractionate the mineral components due to their settling velocity. Only a few milligrams of sample are needed for a mount of even thickness with random particle distribution. The total analytical precision value of ± 7.5% (peak area) is even better than the conventional powder method. The method is sug• gested for general use in the study of clay minerals suspended in water or already deposited. 61 Introduction The need for accurate information on the mineralogy of marine suspended sediment has led to the use of Ag filters in the mounting of clay minerals for X-ray diffraction analysis (d'Anglejan, 1970; Manheim et al., 1972; Bornhold, 1972, 1975). The method is advantageous for qualitative analysis in that it can produce a mount of even thickness with random particle distribution. Sea- salt can also be washed out of the clays directly on the filter (Strickland and Parsons, 1972, p. 184). Diffractogram results can be accurately aligned using the 0.2359 nm, 0.2044 nm and 0.1445 nm sharp Ag metal reflections. Qua• litative diffractograms have been produced from as little as 0.2 mg of sample (Manheim et al., 1972) . The purpose of the investigation was to determine whether the Ag filter mounting technique could be used in quantitative clay mineral analysis of low sample weights. Previous mounting techniques used in quantitative mineral analysis have been discussed in detail by Gibbs (1965) and Stokke and Carson (1973). Such techniques should ensure that a) the mounted clay mixture is in a homogeneous layer, b) there is constant clay orientation (whether random or preferred), and c) the analytical precision is such that quantitative results are meaningful in their ability to detect subtle changes in nature. Methods The Ag filter mounting technique: The Ag filters (Selas Flotronics ^, were 13 mm in diameter with a nominal pore size of 0.45 ym. A filter is placed in filter holder attached to a suction filtering appara- tus (Fig. 1). A predetermined weight of sample that has been dispersed in distilled water is added by drops from a pipette to the filter under suction. The Ag filter is removed with forceps to a cleaned glass slide and left to air dry. A drop of nail polish is added to a pre-marked spot on another glass 62 -top of filter holder • O - ring • Ag filter 13mm screen bottom-filter holder tygon tubing 6] IS stop cock tubing to collection erlenmeyer - erlenmeyer in turn is connected to filter pump ure 1. Schematic of Ag filter mounting apparatus. 63 slide and the filter is transferred onto this drop. The nail polish location is such that the filter will lie directly in the X-ray path when inserted into the diffractometer. The filter is flattened around the edges (which contain no clay due to the 0-ring used in the above apparatus) with a microspatula. The mounted specimen (clay on Ag filter on glass slide) is ready for X-ray analysis or further treatments glycolation (1,2-ethylendiol) and/or heat• ing (550°C for 1 hour) typically used in clay mineral analysis (Carroll, 1970). Materials: The finely ground standards consisted of muscovite (pegmatite- type), chlorite (Cotopaxi, Colorado), kaolinite (well crystallized Georgia type), and illite (Fithian, Illinois). Natural samples also used were collec• ted as suspended sediment samples from a glacial run-off fjord, Howe Sound (Syvitski and Murray, 1978). Any size fractionation of the standards or sam• ples was based on Stokes settling velocity as carried out on the centrifuge. Testing Scheme: Powder mounts were prepared with approximately 200 mg each of pure standard or combination of standards thoroughly mixed by the method described by Gibbs (1965). Ten suspended sediment samples were each divided into two size frac• tions, 0.2 - 2 ym and 2.-63 ym. Ten mg of each fraction was then mounted by the pipette on a glass slide by the method described by Stokke and Carson (1973). Ten mg of each standard, combination of standards, or natural samples were prepared and mounted on the Ag filters as described above. In the case of comparison between the method using pipette on glass slide and that using the Ag filter, the pipette samples were re-used in the Ag filter mount to eliminate separation errors. In .this case, the Ag filters were weighed before and after filtration to ensure exact weight transfer. 64 The above mounts were prepared in triplicate. All mounts used for comparison were prepared and analyzed the same day to eliminate changes in laboratory temperature and humidity. X-radiation procedure: All mounts were analyzed on a standard Philips ^-^ 1010-75 wide angle X-ray diffractometer using nickel filtered copper Ka radiation generated at 40kV and 20mA. The scintillation detector slits were 1° x 0.2° x 1°. The recorder was a Philips^ PM 8000 strip chart recorder. Scan speed was l°/20/minute. Chart speed was 1 cm/minute providing a graph output at l°/29/cm. The time constant was 2 sec, with counts full scale of 1000. Diffractogram Interpretation: Areas under the peaks were measured by both a polar planimeter and by weighing a photocopy trace of the areas. Results Table 1 gives the precision of the various mounting techniques. These results were based on weights of photocopy traces of peak areas, which pro• vided the more precise method of peak area interpretation. The error due to roughness of the clay surface was measured by the difference in an initial run and its rerun after removal and re-insertion into the diffracometer with the mount slightly displaced. The preparation error was calculated from the replicate mounts of each technique. The measure of random orientation (for comparison purposes only) was calculated by the sum of the non 00£ basal reflections over the 001 basal reflection of a given standard. The Ag filter mount statistically (95% confidence limits) had a slightly higher degree of random orientation (within the total analytical precision) than the powder mount a technique widely used for random orientation of clay minerals (Carroll, 1970). Figure 2 gives a diffractogram of muscovite from both mounting techniques demonstrating their ability to pick up the non 001 basal reflections. Using the 1.0 nm/0.426 nm 65 . Ag Mount Powder Mount Pipette Mount Machine Precision - 4.2% - 4.2% - 4.2% Error due to clay surface roughness* ND ND - 2.;0% Mounting Error* - 3.3% - 4.8% -9.6% Total Analytical Precision - 7.5% - 9.0% -15.8% ND - not detectable (*) - error registered after machine precision is taken into account Table 1. Results from precision testing of mount methods. -2 8 32° 1I4c ,'2° 10 30° 28° 26° 24° 22° 20° 18° \6 0.285 nm 0.378 nml Ag Filter Mount / 20°C \ "Powder Mount Mica Standard 20°C Figure 2. Diffractograms of muscovite from a powder mount and Ag mount Note the abundance of non 00 £ reflections. 67 peak area ratio (i.e., mica/quartz) from the suspended sediment samples, the pipette on glass slide technique had ratio values 5 times those from the Ag filter method. Figure 3, a typical comparative result of these two methods, indicates the greatly reduced 1.04 nm (illite) and 0.708 (Fe-chlorite) re• flections, and a more distinct separation.of the 0.334 (quartz + mica) and 0.319 (feldspar) peaks, by the Ag filter mount. Mixtures of clay standards analyzed from the Ag filter mounts were compared to powder mounts, a method which is not based on grain settling and should therefore depict the true homogeneous mixture (Gibbs, 1965). The mix• tures consisted of varying amounts of chlorite (size range 6-20 ym) and muscovite (size range .5-2 ym) i.e., 25:75, 50:50, 75:25 and 90:10. The 0.7 nm/1.0 nm peak areas of the two methods show complete agreement (Fig. 4) indicating that no settling differentiation takes place during filtration. The pipette on glass slide mount method has previously been documented to cause size segregation of sample mixtures (Gibbs, 1965; Stokke and Carson, 1973). This conclusion is supported when comparing the pipette mount results to the Ag filter technique. The 1.00 nm/0.426 nm (mica/quartz) peak area ratios from the pipette mount results increased over 20 to 55 times the re- . suits given by the Ag filter mounts in the coarse fraction of the ten suspen• ded sediment samples analyzed. This is significant since the exact same material was analyzed under both methods. Figure 5 is a typical example of the expected low reflections from clay minerals in the coarse size fraction of a suspended sediment sample as demonstrated by the Ag filter mount. In this sample the 1.00 nm/0.426 nm ratio was increased 30.1 times through the size fractionation process of the pipette method. Discussion and Summary The Ag filter method gives consistent randomly oriented mounts of clay 28 Figure 3. Diffractograms of a suspended sediment sample 'Squamish' from the size fraction 0.2 - 2.0 ym using both a pipette on glass slide mount and a Ag filter mount. 8-4 10 25 50 75 90 % Chlorite ^> Figure 4. The 0.71 nm / 1.00 nm peak area ratio vs. percent chlorite in a chlorite-muscovite matrix for powder and Ag filter mount. •2 9 Pipette Mount 20°C Ag Filter Mount J 20°C \ Suspended Sediment "Squamish" o (2-63nm) Figure 5. Diffractograms of the coarse size fraction (2-63 ym) of the suspended sediment 'Squamish' sample from the pipette on glass slide mount and the Ag filter mount. 71 minerals with low sample weight. The value of random oriented mounts lies in the fact that the {060Jreflection of clay minerals is amplified. flection is used to determine the kaolin group from the septechlorite group, pyrophyllite from talc, dioctahedral mica from trioctahedral mica, dioctahe- dral mixed layer from trioctahedral illite or hydrobiotite, sudoite from chlorite, and dioctahedral smectite from trioctahedral smectite (Warsaw and Ray, 1961) . The Ag filter method does not fractionate the components due to their settling velocity. The total analytical precision value is good, even better than the powder method. This might be a function of the powder method particle orientation being slightly harder to control (i.e., motion in the packing process might cause some preferred orientation). The method is suggested for general use in the study of clay minerals suspended in water or already deposited. 72 Acknowledgement J.W. Murray financed this project under NRC Grant # 656224. The manuscript was critically reviewed by Dr. L. Lavkulitch, Dept. of Soil Science, U.B.C; Dr. R. Chase and Dr. J.W. Murray, Institute of Oceanography, U.B.C; and Dr. W.C. Barnes, Dept. of Geological Sciences, U.B.C 73 REFERENCES d'Anglejan, B.F. 1970. Studies on particulate suspended matter in the Gulf of St. Lawrence: Mar. Sci. Centre Manusc. Rept, #17, 51 pp. Bornhold, B.D.; Mascle, J.R.; and Harada,, K. 1972. Sediments in surface waters of the Eastern Gulf of Guinea: Woods Hole Oceanogr. Inst. Tech. Rept. #2948, 28 pp. 1975. Suspended matter in the southern Beaufort Sea: Beaurfort Sea Tech. Rept. #25b, 30 pp. Carroll, D. 1970. Clay Mineral: A Guide to Their X-ray Identification: Geol. Soc. Am. special paper 126, 80 pp. Gibbs, R.S. 1965. Error due to segregation in quantitative clay mineral X-ray diffraction mounting techniques: Am. Mineral. 50, 741-751. Manheim, F.T.; Hathaway, J.C; Uchupi, E. 1972. Suspended matter in surface waters oh the Northern Gulf of Mexico: Geol. Oceanogr. 17, 17-27. Stokke, P.R. and Carson, B. 1973. Variation in clay mineral X-ray diffraction results with the quantity of sample mounted: J. Sed. Pet. 43, 957-964. Strickland, J.D.H. and Parsons, T.R. 1972. A practical handbook of sea• water analysis: Fish. Res. Bd. Can. Bull. 167 (2nd ed.), 310 pp. Syvitski, J.P. and Murray, J.W. 1978. Flocculation, agglomeration,, and;zoo• plankton pelletization of suspended sediment in a fjord receiving glacial meltwater: Can. Jour. Earth Sci., in process. 74 THEORY, UTILIZATION AND RELIABILITY OF SUSPENDED SEDIMENT COLLECTORS IN LAKES AND OCEANS ABSTRACT The theory of sedimentation rates as measured by suspended sediment collectors is presented. Theoretical errors of sedimentation rates have been shown to increase sharply and non-linearly with increasing horizontal current and increasing trap tilt, and with decreasing particle size. Seven design considerations have been proposed for future trap construction. The insuffi• cient testing of previously used traps renders past results at best semi• quantitative. Initial tests suggest that, a) trap tilt should be reduced to a £ 0.1°, b) particle retention can be successful without the use of lids that might cause sediment deflection, c) the collection time of the organic fraction should be over a period of days rather than weeks, d) any upward vertical acceleration of water over a trap orifice will reduce sedimentation rates, particularly in the fine size fraction, and e) values of precision should be indicated for both total inorganic and organic sediment fractions. A theory and method to check the accuracy of collector catch ability based on grain size distributions is proposed. Its simplicity would make it practical for routine use in freshwater environments. For marine use, the method allows the calculation of the settling velocity of flocculated or otherwise enhanced settlement of particles where the. trap used is an accurate collector. 75 Introduction and Acknowledgement Suspended sediment collectors used to measure the downward flux of sediment are gaining acceptance as a standard tool in limnology and ocean- ology. Unfortunately, trap designs and collection results have been presented in the past without a comprehensive understanding of the basic theory of sediment entrapment within the collector. The lack of such theory has led to arguments over trap design and uncertainty as to the validity of pub• lished results. Kirchner (1975) evaluated traps by comparing the catch efficiencies of various sizes of cylindrical traps. Quantitative and quali• tative investigation of the reliability of traps in various hydrodynamic environments and under varying suspended loads, has not yet been undertaken. The aim of this paper is to: 1) provide a review of the present use of suspended sediment collectors, 2) present some of the theory behind sedimentation rates as measured by such collectors, 3) outline some theore• tical considerations in trap design emphasizing proposals to test future trap designs, 4) advance a method for quantitaive and qualitative evaluation of trap efficiency, and 5) propose future use of sediment collectors in the study of suspended sediment populations. The following manuscript was critically reviewed by Dr. J.W. Murray, Dr. R. Chase, and Dr. D. Swinbanks (Institute of Oceanography and Department of Geological Sciences, U.B.C); Dr. W.C. Barnes and Dr. L. Smith (Depart• ment of Geological Sciences, U.B.C); and A. Hay,. (Institute of Oceanography and Department of Physics, U.B.C). Appreciation for insights into the problem are also extended to Dr. P. Leblonde (Institute of Oceanography and Department of Physics, U.B.C.) and Dr. M. Quick (Department of Civil Engineering, U.B.C). 76 Sediment Trap Utility Early research into the sedimentation of particulate matter (Heim, 1900; Peterson and Boysen Jensen, 1911; Moore, 1931; Reissinger, 1932; Scott and Minor, 1936; Rossolino, 1937) was primarily aimed at defining the quantity, content and origin of matter falling onto the floor of a lake or ocean. Studies using sediment traps as collection tools address one or more of the following topics: 1) the relation of sedimentary organic matter to biological productivity (i.e., Thomas, 1950; Zeitschell, 1965; Trevallion, 1967; Funs, 1973; Pennington, 1974); 2) energy flow (in terms of organic matter) to and from the benthos (i.e., Lawacz, 1969; Johnson and Brinkhurst, 1971; Davis, 1975; Wiebe et al., 1976); 3) identification of planktonic remains in relation to growth and reproduction of such species (i.e., Berger and Soutar, 1967; Welch, 1973; Rigler et al., 1974; Webster et al., 1975; Hargrave et al., 1976); 4) the flux of sinking pollen for use in paleoloimnologic studies (i.e., Davis, 1967, 1968); 5) the settling flux of pelagic zooplankton fecal pellets (i.e., Wiebe et al., 1976; Honjo and Roman, 1978; Syvitski and Lewis, 1978); 6) transport of suspended sediment in nearshore environments (i.e., Fukushima and Mizo- guchi, 1958; Basinski and Lewandowski, 1974); 7) fractionation of phos• phates (i.e., Golterman, 1973); 8) major pathways and sources of trace metals (i.e., Hakanson, 1976; Spyridakis and Barnes, 1976); 9) intensity and extent of mineralization of organic matter (i.e., Kleerekoper, 1953); 10) the role of resuspension (i.e., Davis, 1968; Gasith, 1975; Oviatt and Nixon, 1975); 11) relationship of sedimentary matter to laminated sediments (i.e., Moore, 1931; Brunskill, 1969; Smith, 1978); 12) precipitation and 77 sedimentation of chemical sediments (i.e., Brunskill, 1969); 13) rates of postglacial accumulation (i.e., Pennington, 1974; Hargrave et al., 1976; Oviatt and Nixon, 1975) ; 14) transport and distribution of bottom sediments (Raymond and Stetson, 1931) and 15) hydrodynamics of settling mineral grains (Syvitski and Murray, 1978) and freshly precipitating matter (Watanabe and Hayashi, 1971). Theory of Sedimentation Rates In the case of uniform size particles settling in natural bodies of water, the rate of sedimentation is directly proportional to particle con• centration. When the particles are of non-uniform size, the total sedimen• tation rate is the summation of settling fluxes of each size fraction. Let us assume that we are dealing with a 'perfect' sediment trap that a) does not generate turbulence at its mouth or in any way hinder the settling of particles, b) retains all of the deposited material, and c) has its mouth at all times perpendicular to the vertical z-axis. Then, regardless of the size-range of particles present, the total true sedimentation rate, Zo, is defined as the weight of accumulation per area of capture opening per unit time: Zo = hff(x)-V(x)-dx = b/Z(x)-dx (1) a a where f(x) is the concentration of particles of any given size 'x' in the water column, V(x) is the settling velocity for any given size 'x', a is the smallest size settling in the water and, b is the largest particle size settling in the water, Z(x) is the sedimentation'rate of any given size 'x'. Equation (1) has been simplified from: b/Z(x)-dx = b/f(x)-V(x)-dx - Es b/G(x)-dx (2) a a a z2"zl where Es is the diffusivity of suspended sediment (usually assumed equal 78 to the vertical diffusivity for water a good assumption for particles in the Stokes range), z^ and z^ are the upper and lower depth limits in the water column for the study at hand, G(x) is the change in particle concentration of any given size 'x' between z, and z„, and Es b /G(x)*dx is the vertical diffusive flux. McCave (1975) has indicated that the vertical diffusive flux is about three orders of magnitude less than the settling flux (first term in equation (2)) and may be neglected in marine environments below the mixed layer. For the remainder of this paper it will be assumed that this term is indeed negligible. Since most size analytical methods give size frequency distributions in terms of discrete size fractions, equation (1) can be rewritten as: b b Zo = Ef(x)-V(x) = EZ(x) (3) a a where V(x) is the 'average' settling velocity of any class interval. The calculation of sedimentation rate only entails the vertical settling component of the particles, and therefore does not change when a horizontal current is present if laminar"flow is assumed. The settling component results from the downward gravitational force acting on each particle being larger than the upward buoyant force. If the water mass has a vertical component to its movement, than this is added or subtracted to the particles' settling velocities, depending on whether the water mass is moving down or up. If there is no horizontal current present, and the trap mouth is at some angle, a, from the vertical axis, then the apparent sedimentation rate, Zi, is given by: Zi = Zo'cosa (4) where Zo is the true sedimentation rate. The amount collected is dependent 79 on the area of catchment and since the tilted trap catchment area pro• jected onto a horizontal plane varies by cosa from its actual area (Fig. 1), equation (4) is justified. The apparent sedimentation rate, then, decreases with increasing trap tilt. This effect only becomes significant when a is larger than 20° (6% error at 20°). When a horizontal current is present, the apparent sedimentation rate increases and reaches a maximum when the trap mouth is aligned between the vertical and the horizontal. The tilted trap collects both the Zi component and a new XYi component from the horizontal current: Di = Zi + XYi (5) where Di is the new apparent sedimentation rate, and XYi, the apparent horizontal flux is defined as: XYi = 6«XYo«sin(a) (6) where the limit of a can vary from -90° to +90°, and coefficient due to increased stream flow conditions. 6 is empirically derived, and would tend to decrease the amount of trapped material from the horizontal flux, due to the streamline conditions around the tilted trap mouth. The true horizontal flux XYo, is given by: XYo = vb/f(x)*dx (7) a where v is the horizontal velocity. This equation assumes that the horizontal diffusive flux is negligible. The decrease or increase in sedimentation rate due to trap tilt can be considered in terms of error (%), E, given as: E = {(Di-Zo)/Zo}-100 (8) If we assume that 6 = 1 (i.e. no effect) then E increases sharply and 80 A .^.particle B 2. axis •-v-fall path 1 z axis -J--* 1-2 a-J Y*-UJJn\ opening PLAN VIEW of CATCHMENT AREA / \ o 0where a s r. coiat. AREA of CATCHMENT 2 2 A*7Tr A=7Tr . CO%oC gure 1. The effect of trap tilt when no horizontal water currents are present. 81 non-linearly with increasing tilt angle, a (Fig. 2). The sedimentation rate error, E, also increases sharply and non-linearly as particle size (i.e., particle settling velocity) decreases, in the presence of a horizon• tal current (Fig. 3). The real value of 6 is as yet not known. {Note? preliminary experimental work, by this author, has indicated <5 = 0.002 at v = 10 cm/sec and a = 45°, and 6 = 0.013 at v = 1 cm/sec and a = 45°.} If the tilted trap was not aligned directly into the horizontal current, then equation (5) becomes: Di = Zi+XYi«cos(0), -9O°<0<9O° (9) where 0 is the angle between the plan view of the horizontal current and the trap opening (Fig. 4a). When the trap mouth is outside of this region of alignment (-9O°>0>+9O°), the XYi term in equation (8) drops out, and only particles that have a descent angle, $, (Fig. 4b) greater than a will be collected in the trap. The error would increase as the sedimentation rate of particles with $ < a, increased. This error would also increase sharply and non-linearly as the horizontal current velocity, v, increased, since as v increases, the number of size fractions with ($ < a) sharply increases. Design and Testing of Traps Kirchner (1975) noted that traps have not received general acceptance because the rate of sediment accumulation in a trap does not necessarily equal that in a lake (or ocean). Revelle (1952) noted that a collecting device that does not interfere with the normal process of sedimentation is incompatible with a device that is built to retain the depositing material. The following design considerations are proposed for the 'perfect trap'. 1) The trap must maintain an upright position (ct^O. 1°) in the current regime being studied. 2) All material that falls through the trap opening 82 2 4 6 8 10 12 cm/sec Figure 2. Family of curves of percent error in apparent sedimentation rate vs. horizontal velocity at various tilt angles. Data was theoretically derived assuming a homogenous solution of 65 ym spheres (p =2.65) settling in 15 C fresh water under laminar flow. The above curves would not effectively change if the particles settled in saline water at higher or lower temperatures. 83 /0 cm/sec Figure 3. Family of curves of percent error in apparent sedimentation rate vs. horizontal velocity at various particle sizes with a = 1°. Data was theoretically derived assuming a homogeneous solution, as in Figure 2, with the total suspended concentration held constant. 84 A PLAN VIEW AX horizontal At if \ current -90° 90° oil porticl. y sizes retained • Zi + xyi.Cos (0°) At -90°>e>90° only particles whose descent angle is 0 >e<. will be collected Di= Zi + xyi.cos B Di = Zi + xyi.cos(90°) 1= vertical settling component 2= horizontal current component 3 = resultant velocity vector in the water P = descent angle Figure 4. The effect of trap tilt with a horizontal current present. A) illustrates how various trap alignments effect equation (9) B) labels must be retained until the trap reaches the surface. 3) Only matter settling under the influence of gravity and no self-propelled matter should be collected. 4) Organic material should be preserved in its natural settling state and not allowed to decompose and/or in turn permit new organic growth. 5) Trace metal contamination from the device to the collected sediment should be negligible if trace metal studies are being done. 6) Water motion in and above the trap caused by its presence should be minimized or at least its consequences under• stood, o 7) Collection precision should be easily calculable. These seven features are discussed below: 1) Tilt angle could potentially cause the most serious errors (Figs. 3 and 4), and has not been systematically tested in traps presently used. Visual estimation of trap tilt in the water (Brunskill, 1969; Wiebe et al., 1976) is not accurate enough for the errors involved. A tilt angle less than 20° has no significant effect in still water (equation 3), but the presence of at least some current is nearly universal. Preliminary tests by this author have indicated that two trap arrays remained vertical (a±0.1°) in currents up to 25 cm/sec. The first, pendulum type traps attached to a rigid frame on a trap line (Rossolimo, 1937; Thomas, 1950; Tutin, 1955; Watanabe and Hayashi, 1971; Pennington, 1974), remained vertical as long as enough weight was attached to the base of the trap (Fig. 5a). The second array consisted of traps attached to a line held tight and vertical from a ship by heavy weights that did not touch the ocean bottom (Fig. 5b). The ship had to be held stationary by an anchor line, thereby limiting the method to anchorable depths and ship time. Also, the water had to be calm 86 Figure 5. Suspension of trap arrays to eliminate tilt angle. For lengthy collection periods, trap array (A) is proposed. It will remain vertical in still water (A}) and with a current of magnitude, v, present (A2) • For short collection periods trap array type (B) is proposed since the traps remain vertical due to the trap line weight. 87 enough not to rock the ship. The first method is suitable for traps collecting sediment over an extended period, the second, for collection over a short period. 2) Particle retention, has caused the widest variation and expense in trap design. If the ratio of width to trap height is very large, the possibility of resuspension of the accumulated matter exists (Hakanson, 1976). This is especially true for funnel shaped traps (Ohle, 1962; Brunskill, 1969; Johnson and Brinkhurst, 1971; Watanabe and Hayashi, 1971; Oviatt and Nixon, 1975) where turbulent currents that form across the funnel inlet cause great loss of sedimenting material (Tutin, 1955). This may explain why sedimentation rates were found to decrease as funnel mouth increased (Johnson and Brinkhurst, 1971). Also, cylinder traps have retrieved 3 to 4 times more sediment per mouth area than funnel traps (Pennington, 1974). Accordingly, Kirchner (1975) discounted all funnel results. Traps having mouth diameter to cylinder height of 1:5 (7cm:35cm) were filled with a known sediment weight and size (x> = 5um, S.D. = 5um) and submerged in a river with currents up to 100 cm/sec (Syvitski and Murray, 1978). No sediment loss occurred, indicating that a tall, thin, cylindrical trap will retain all captured particles. Weight loss can also occur upon retrieval of some traps. Retrieval experiments of jar-traps being slowly drawn up with a known weight indicated no sediment loss (Scott and Minor, 1938). A layer of dye (Lugol's) placed on the bottom of cylindrical traps has also been used to indicate disturbance of trap sediment (Rigler et al., 1974; Kirchner, 1975). Syvitski and Murray (1978) using cylindrical traps (dia• meter to height of 1:5) containing dyed sea water, had a known sediment weight and size (jx = 4.3um, S.D. = 5.2um) added to them before descent to 88 150m. After retrieval at 0.3 m/sec only the top 7cm of the trap water had been disturbed with no resultant weight loss. Funnel traps (10 and 20cm diameter) tested in a similar manner, were found to develop 'whirlpool' eddies upon lidless retrieval, and loss of sediment that had been placed on funnel sides was significant. Therefore, suitable size lidless cylinders can be drawn up slowly and carefully to avoid sediment loss (Edmonson, 1971). When lids are needed for adequate retrieval, the complexity and expense of the trap increase; e.g., messenger operated closing apparatus (Fuhs, 1973; Davis, 1975), magnesium release mechanism (Berger and Soutar, 1967), hy• draulic lids (Kleerekoper, 1952), SCUBA diver assisted (Oviatt and Nixon, 1975) and even submarine assisted closing mechanisms (Wiebe et al., 1976). Lids situated above the trap before closure further increase the turbulence over the opening and could cause sediment deflection if a horizontal current is present (Fig. 6). 3) Nylon mesh over trap openings has been used (Trevallion, 1967) to eliminate the capturing of fish and zooplankton which take up residence in the trap over long periods of collection. Mesh that has openings large enough to allow entry to all non self-propelled settling matter will un• doubtedly admit abundant grazing ciliates and small zooplankton (Hargrave et al. , 1976; Wiebe et al., 1976). 4) Grazing and accompanying bacterial breakdown could also spur new organic growth which would result in a false organic sedimentation rate. The error in organic sedimentation rates will therefore increase as the collection time increases; therefore, detailed organic studies should aim at sampling intervals of days rather than weeks. Johnson and Brinkhurst Swnessenger release A closing lid .closing lid currant with magnetic flowlinas clasps trap mouth collection cylinder *-0.5juTTI 0.5pm 0.5j*n 65 pm 65jixn 65pm ^0 = 0.05 cm/s ec ^0 = 0.5 cm/ses c ^ = 5cm/se c 00 Figure 6. Effect of a closing lid situated above the trap mouth. A) illustrates a messenger release closing-lid trap (after Davis, 1975). B) provides the expected flow lines of current around the interfering closing-lid, if the current was directed into the lid at right angles, C) gives the settling paths of a typical suspended sediment particle range (0.5 - 65 um) at three horizontal currents, v. As'v increases, the barrier effect of the lid increases. 90 (1971) found that a six-day collection period yielded inorganic material identical with the sum of daily collections over the same six days, but more organic material. Traps with dual compartments have been designed to permit correction for attached growth (Fuhs, 1973; White and Wetzel, 1973). Preservatives (formaldehyde, chloroform, Lugol's solution) have also been used to stop organic decomposition and subsequent new organic growth (Lewacz, 1969; Rigler et al., 1974; Kirchner, 1975). If living organisms entered the trap, however, they would also die in the preservative and cause an error in the organic sedimentation rate. Not foreseeing a solution to the above problems, Hargrave et al, (1976) chose to redefine organic sedimentation rates as the depositon of relatively stable material after degradation during the collection. 5) Traps should be constructed out of plastics (acrylic, PVC) attached to nylon trap lines, if trace metals are to be analyzed. This is especially important when the collection time is large (Scott and Minor, 1936). 6) The consequence of water motion in and above the trap is not very well understood. The suggestions to date include: 1) traps increase the sedimentation rate by decreasing the turbulence of the water over the trap opening (Kleerekoper, 1952; Golterman, 1973); 2) traps increase the turbulence at the place of collection and therefore decrease the sedimentation rate, since local turbulence would retard the settling velocity of particles passing over the trap (Berger and Soutar, 1967) ; 3) increased turbulence around the trap may create deposition in the trap (Hakanson, 1976); and 4) traps (cylindrical) do not cause turbulence above the mouth and actually measure the true sedimentation rate (Davis, 1967; Pennington, 1974; Rigler 91 et al., 1974; and Kirchner, 1975). Davis (1967) used Hopkins (1950) efficiency experiment to conclude that sediment traps do not hinder or enhance sedimentation rates. Kirchner (1975) found the catch/unit area did not increase with the increasing trap diameter and concluded that a trap does not generate effective turbulence over its mouth. However, neither Davis (1967) nor Kirchner (1975) indicated the current regime for their tes The perturbation of flow in the region of the trap orifice and its effect on the settling of particles will be a function of the trap design and the ambient flow. Some insight can be gained from experience with pre• cipitation gauges, in which a catch deficiency that increases with wind speed has been demonstrated (Linsley et al., 1975) due to an upward de• flection of the flow over the gauge orifice (Warnick, 1953). The upward acceleration associated with this deflection would tend to inhibit the settling of coarser size particles and eliminate the capture of the fine size particles. Deficiency diagrams.like the one proposed in Figure 7 should be worked out for all traps in use. (A method is proposed in the following section 'Accuracy of Trap Collection'). The use of such infor• mation would necessitate 'trap users' to delimit their current environment through use of conventional metering techniques. To compensate for the effect of wind on precipitation measurement, shields have been devised so that the windflow above the orifice of the gauge would be parallel, with no acceleration at the orifice (McKay, 1969). Dye-gun experiments with sediment traps in a. flume 'with controlled current velocity are in the early stages of testing traps with two trap shields (Fig. 8a) by this author. The first trap shield was designed after the Canadian snow gauge shield (McKay, 1969) and is basically horn shaped 92 o-k /O cm/sec Figure 7. Possible family of curves of sediment trap catch deficiency vs. horizontal velocity at various particle sizes. At points A, the upward velocity generated over the trap mouth is equal to the downward settling velocity of that particle size and such particles would no longer be collected by the trap. 93 flume water aye gun dye gun ^shielded unshielded trap sediment trap PLAN VIEW SIDE VIEW Figure.8. A) is a schematic of a dye-gun experiment with shielded and unshielded traps in a controlled current velocity flume. Examples of two types of shields presently being tested for use on sediments traps are shown in B) and C). 94 (Fig. 8b). The second shield is a thin flat plate that sits over a cylindrical trap (Fig. 8c). Both were designed to eliminate any vertical component over the trap mouth. 7) Precision is calculable by placing more than one trap, preferably four, at each station level. This allows calculation of the standard error (S.E.) in sampling and the coefficient of variation (S.E./x*100) in percent. If the trap hangs vertically and the sediment collection is neither hindered nor enhanced, then the precision value may reflect the retention and recovery of the trap. The individual traps at each station level should be well seperated from each other (e.g., by 2m) if an unbiased estimate of precision is to be calculated (Syvitski and Murray, 1978). The precision of previously published trap data ranges from 1.9%-12.7% (Table 1). Syvitski and Murray (1978) found that their total inorganic weight precision of ±1.9% reflected laboratory techniques, not field recovery. The precision for organic matter of the same trap data averaged ±11.6%, indicating that any variation in the sample collection was due to organic factors. Since the collection periods ranged from six to twelve hours, in 8-10°C fjord water with low oxygen content, the variation was thought to be partly due to zooplankton and ciliate grazing, and partly to the variable settling characteristics.of organic matter. Thus, precision values should be indicated for both total inorganic and organic sediment fraction. White and Weitzel (1973) found their sample variation to in• crease with increasing collection area and they related this effect to the nonrandom entrapment of the larger detritus particles in the traps of large diameter. Two other errors in trap methodology could arise. The first is by 95 coefficient of variation Author # of traps/level range X data typi Brunskill (1969)** 4/level 5.6-20.9% 12.7% TSW*** White and Wetzell (19 73)** 4/level 1.2- 4.4% 2.8% TSW Pennington (1974)+ 2/level 0.0-10.0% ? TSW Gasith (1975)** 3/level 3.2- 6.9% 4.9% TSW Oviatt and Nixon (1975)** 8/level ? 10.5% TOW*** Webster et al. (1975) 4/level 2.0-26.0% 1 TSW 2.0-17.0% 1 TCW*** Hargrave et al. (1976) 4/level 4.0-25.0% 1 TSW Syvitski and Murray (1978) 4/level 0.0- 4.6% 1.9% TIW*** 1.2-25.2% 11.6% TOW ** data presented as x ± S.E. + data presented as range/x* 100 *** TSW = total sediment weight TOW = total organic weight TCW = total carbon weight TIW = total inorganic weight Table 1 Table of precision of past research 96 filling the trap with surface water before its location at the desired depth. This error, in .terms of the quantity and quality of collected material, should be evaluated or eliminated. Analysis of the surface water taken at the time of the trap set, for suspended inorganic and organic concentration, might be used to compensate for any quantitative contamination. Nordlie and Anderson (1972) filled their traps with filtered water prior to setting in order to eliminate any contamination. The second error arises from discarding the supernatant liquid immediately after trap retrieval (i.e., Kirchner, 1975), which removes an undetermined quantity of material and much of the finer clay-size material. To obviate this error, the traps should be left to stand long enough to allow complete settlement, or the solid matter in the supernatant liquid should be extracted by centrifuge, or the top water filtered to determine the weight of inorganic and organic matter. Accuracy of Trap Collection Hopkins (1950) and Davis (1967) tested the accuracy of collection by placing traps in large sedimentation tanks of still water containing a known concentration of suspensate. The efficiency of the containers in collecting falling grains was estimated by comparing the observed amount collected per unit area to the expected amount calculated from the total amount of grains added to the sedimentation tank divided by the tank area. The results indicated trap collection to be accurate but error values were not cited. Sedimentation rates from traps have also been compared to rates determined by radiometric dating (^-^Cs method, 210pb method) of deposited 97 sediment (Pennington, 1974; Spyridakis and Barnes, 1976). This method necessitates the conversion of radiometric rates to units of g/m /year, since conversion of trap values to depth per time (i.e., volume of sediment collected divided by the trap opening) has built-in problems. One major problem is the comparison of sediment bulk densities from cores to bulk densities of trap sediment (Lawacz, 1969; Syvitski and Swinbanks, 1978). Spyridakis and Barnes (1976) found trap collection to be within the experimental errors of 210Pb method. One limitation to using radiometric dates for comparison, is the problem of resuspension of bottom sediment. The traps must be strategically emplaced in the water column (Wiebe et al., 1976) so as not to collect bottom resuspension. Traps subjected to a resuspension event would register an increase in the deposited material while the lake (or sea floor) may have had sediment eroded away (Davis, 1967). Even if all the material resuspended was redeposited without loss on the bottom, the trap would still indicate a higher sedimentation rate. The use of radiometric deposition rates for testing trap accuracy involves the assumptions that a) bottom deposition at the core location is accurately depicted by the suspended collector, b) the radiometric depositional. rate (a value averaged over a number of years) can be compared with the shorter collection period of the trap, and c) biologic interaction (i.e., pelagic VS benthic) has been identical in both the trap site and the core site. The above method would still not indicate the qualitative capture ability of the trap (i.e., the size range of captured particles). To avoid the above complications, the following theory and method, based on particle size distributions, is proposed as a simple check on the 98 quantitative and qualitative catch ability of suspended sediment collectors. A size distribution of sediment collected in traps can be evaluated by a num• ber of methods that give results in terms of particle settling velocities. A review 6f> the limitations of each method, along with the advancement of a new size analytical method especially designed for the typically low sample weights collected in sediment collectors, is given by Syvitski and Swinbanks (1978). A size distribution is based on the weight frequency in percent versus particle size in equivalent spherical sedimentation diameters. The size dis• tribution of trap collected sediment is actually the distribution of individual size sedimentation rates, Z(x), as defined in equation (1) but in weight per- cents (or rather rate percents): (Z(x)/Zo)-100 = f(x)-V(x)/Zo-100 (10) Solving for f(x), the concentration of particles of any given size fraction 'x' in the water column, then: f(x) = Z(x~)/V(x) . (11) The 'average' settling velocity of any given size fraction 'x', V(x), can be calculated from Stokes Law of Settling with knowledge of the fluid viscosity and temperature of the water overlying the sediment collector. Direct compa• rison of f(x), as computed from sediment trap data, with the observed concen• trations sampled in the overlying waters by tests such as x2» could be used to determine the reliability in terms of quantitative capture. Statistical com• parison of the expected and observed size distribution in the water column is important since the trap may quantitatively approximate the total flux of ma• terial but still not capture all size fractions. This discrepancy could indi-. cate enhancement or deletion of certian size particles due to the trap mouth effect (design consideration #6). If f(x) is converted to percentiles, it can be plotted against particle diameter 'x' to provide the expected size 99 distribution of particles in the water column. The above method, using equation (11), is restricted to homogeneous water (constant fluid viscosity, water temperature, and particle concentation) over the maximum fall distance of the largest particle. This restriction is one of time rather than environment since most environments have horizontal layers of vertically homogeneous water. With foreknowledge of the stratifica• tion, the time of capture could be calculated so that the maximum particle fall distance is retained in the homogeneous water column. The time could range from minutes to months depending on the depth of the homogeneous water and the fastest settling particle present in the water column. A second assumption is that the particle flux over the collection time be constant. This restriction could be tested by measuring the variability of the particle concentration in the overlying waters during the time of trap collection. If the concentration variability was much larger than the precision of the sampling method, then the particle flux would not be constant. The resultant particle size distri• bution in the water column as calculated from the trap sediments would then become the 'average' size distribution over the period of collection. In this case the test for sediment trap catch efficiency would necessitate comparison to the 'average' size distribution based on many water samples taken during the time of trap collection. Particles should also fall individually since the method is based on the settling velocity of each discrete size fraction. Inorganic floes (Syvit• ski and Murray, 1978) and mineral-bearing zooplankton fecal pellets (Syvitski and Lewis, 1978) would obviate marine environments as natural testing grounds, however, low-productivity, high run-off fresh water lakes would be ideal. Geologic Implications from Sediment Trap Results The above method was undertaken in a British Columbian fjord, Howe 100 Sound, to indicate the effect of processes that increase the individual set• tling rate of suspended sediments (Syvitski and Murray, 1978). For instance, if the trap collected a greater abundance of finer particles than suggested from the expected sedimentation rate based on the suspended sediment size dis• tribution, that would indicate a particle settling enhancement process (floc• culation, zooplankton defecation) in operation. The actual accuracy of trap catchment had not been evaluated (i.e., in a fresh water environment) and, based on water motion over the. trap orifices possibly hindering the settlement of fine particles, the results are considered coarse approximations. Figure 9 gives a typical result of the expected and observed size fre• quency distributions in the water above the trap and in the trap itself. The quantitative values are provided in Table 2. The trap sediments overestimated the finer end of the suspended sediment size distribution and likewise the suspended sediments underestimated the finer fraction in the traps, which is opposite of the expected error effect of turbulence over the trap mouth. Since the observed values of Z(x) and f(x) in equation (11) were known, this large discrepancy was thought to be due to V(x) the average individual settling velocity of a given size fraction 'x'. If we assume that Z(x) is an accurate depiction of the observed average sedimentation rate of any given fraction 'x', and that f(x) accurately depicts the observed suspended sediment concen• tration of any size fraction 'x' in the water during the time of trap collec• tion, then V(x) the observed average settling velocity fo any size 'x' can be solved by rearranging equaiton (11): V(x) = Z(x)/f(x) (12) Table 2 also gives these observed values of V(x) with the theoretical Stokes settling values of each size fraction, and its enhancement factor (EH). The result indicates that the fine clay particles would mostly settle 40 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 Equivalent Spherical Sedimentation Diameter (0) where 0 = -log2(mm) Figure 9. Size distribution from extracted sediment from a water sample collected above the trap and the sediment sample in the trap. The expected distribution of each other were calculated using equation (11). ESSD* Sedimentation Rate,Z(x) Suspension Concentration,f(x) Settling VelocityV(x) EH** (ym) (g/m2/day) (g/m3) (m/day) observed expected observed expected observed expected 0.5 15.8 0.03 0.78 1018.2 20.3 0.014 1450 1.0 28.8 0.09 0.73 467.7 39.5 0.06 658 2.0 8.4 0.07 0.21 33.1 40.0 0.2 200 3.0 2.2 0.15 0.21 3.8 10.5 0.5 21 4.0 2.9 0.6 0.41 2.8 7.1 0.9 8 6.0 5.5 1.2 0.42 2.4 13.1 2. 1 6 8.0 23.4 5.1 0.83 5.7 28.2 3.8 7.4 12.1 52.1 .9.9 0.84 5.7 62.0 8.5 7.3 16.1 18.6 4.6 0.24 1.1 77.5 15.1 5.1 20.1 8.5 3.4 0.12 0.3 70.8 23.5 3.0 24.1 9.4 5.6 0.16 0.3 58.8 34.0 1.7 28.4 4.2 2.7 0.05 0.1 84.0 47.1 1.8 32.4 4.1 0.8 0.01 0.1 410.0? 61.1 ?6.7 40.1 11.0 11.5 0.10 0.1 110.0 94.1 1.2 48.2 .22.8 41.9 0.22 0.2 103.6 135.8 0.8 64.7 7.2 22.2 0.07 0.03 102.9 244.8 0.4 Total 224.8 81.9 5.4 1541.6 *ESSD = equivalent spherical sedimentation diameter **EH = enhancement factor = V(x)observed V(x)expected Table 2. Data is based on size distributions from particles collected in the water above a trap and in the trag. The collection period was for 8 hours, July 20, 1977, in 10 C sea water with a salinity of 24%0. The location was 2km seaward of the Squamish Delta (a o bay head delta) in the British Columbian fjord, Howe Sound. The trap was located 5m beneath the surface. The water sample was taken 4m above the trap. 103 at speeds equivalent to medium silt particles, due to some process of settling enhancement. Another use of grain size distributions from traps is in the study of laminated sediments. Recent investigation has suggested that sediment depo- sitional processes cannot be interpreted from bulk grain size analysis (Syvit• ski and Murray, 1977). Grace et al. (1978) having analyzed individual laminae in sandy sediments, found that significant variation exists in mean size and shape of the sublamina level size frequency distributions. Sediment collected from traps might be thought of as sublaminae. Therefore, analysis of size distributions of the sublaminae, with time and condition of depositional en• vironment, might supply insights for the interpretation of bulk grain size analysis. Figure 10 provides corroborative evidence that size frequency distribu-r tions of sublaminae vary with time. The distributions were from trap collec• ted sediment at one station and depth in Howe Sound collected during a seven month period (Syvitski and Murray, 1978). Conclusion Suspended sediment collectors have an important contribution to make in the fields of limnology and oceanology for measuring the downward flux of sediment. The quantitative and qualitative accuracy of such collectors is presently poorly known, and previously published data is at best semi-quanti• tative. The theory of sedimentation rates has been presented. By combining equations (1) and (9), the following equation of sedimentation rates as mea• sured by sediment traps result: Di = {b/f (x)-V(x) «dx}'Cosa + { ( (vb/f (x) «dx) • sina) • 6} • cos6 (13) 3. SL -90°<6<90°, -90° Theoretical errors of sedimentation rates have been shown to increase sharp- 100— 80- Station(7) - 55mm depth: 60- © April '77- 694.4 g/m2/day CD (2) June "77- 737.2 g/mVday (3) July 77- 241.2 g/mVday i ® August '77- 1304.4 g/mVday 4) 40- 2 > © October "77- 122.8 g/m /day E u 20- 2.0 4.0 6.0 80 10.0 12.0 14.0 Equivalent Spherical Sedimentation Diameter (0) where 0 = -log2(mm) o Figure 10. Size frequency distributions from sediment traps (sublaminae) collected over a seven month span in Howe Sound, B.C. The total inorganic sedimentation rate associated with each size distribution is also provided. 105 ly and non-linearly with increasing horizontal current and increasing trap tilt, and with decreasing particle size. Seven design considerations have been proposed for future trap construc• tion. The insufficient testing of previously used„ traps further decreases the reliability of past results. Initial tests suggest that a) trap tilt can be lowered to a < 0.1°; b) particle retention can be successful without the use of sophisticated and expensive lids that might cause further sediment deflection; c) problems still exist in the collection of the organic fraction it is suggested that the collection interval be reduced to days rather than weeks; d) the possible existence of an upward vertical acceleration over the trap orifice would tend to give reduce sedimentation rates, particularly apparent in the fine end of the size spectrum; and e) precision values of data should be indicated for both total inorganic and organic sediment frac• tions. A theory and method to check the quantitative accuracy of collector catch ability has been proposed. Its simplicity would make it practical for routine use. Its use as a test is restricted to fresh water environments with small zooplankton populations. Its use in the marine field has led to the ability to calculate the natural settling velocity of flocculated or otherwise enhanced particle settlement. This ability, which previously had not been recognized, is of significance in the fields of geochemistry, sedi- mentology and biology. Grain size distributions from traps have also been given importance in the study of laminated sediments. 106 REFERENCES Ansell, A.D, 1974. Sedimentation of organic detritus in Lochs Etive and Ceram, Angyll, Scotland. Mar. Biol. 27:263-273. Basinski, T., and Lewandowski, A. 1975. Field investigations of suspended sediment. Coastal Eng. Conf., 14th Int. Proc. 2:1096-1108. Berger, W.H., and Soutar, A. 1967. Planktonic foraminifera: field experiment on production rate. Science. 156:1495-1497. Brunskill, G.U. 1969. Fayetteville Green Lake, New York. II. Precipitation and sedimentation of calcite in a meromictic lake with laminated sediments. Limnol. Oceanogr. 14:830-847. Davis, J.M. 1975. Energy flow through the benthos in a Scottish Sea loch. Mar. Biol. 31:353-362. Davis, M.B. 1967. Pollen deposition in lakes as measured by sediment traps. Geol. Soc. Am. Bull. 78:849-858. . 1968. Pollen grains in lake sediments: Redeposition caused by seasonal water circulation. Science. 162:796-799. Edmonson, W.T.(ed.) 1971. International Biological Programme Handbook #17. 'A manual on methods for the assessment of secondary productivity in fresh waters'. Blackwell Scientific Publ. Fuhs, G.W. 1973. Improved device for the collection of sedimenting matter. Limnol. Oceanogr. 18:989-993. Fukushima, H., and Mizoguchi, Y. 1958. Field investigation of suspended littoral drift. Coastal Eng. Jap. 1:131-134. Gasith, A. 1975. Tripton sedimentation in eutrophic lakes - Simple correction for the resuspended matter. Verh. Internat. Verein. Limnol. 19:116-122. Golterman, H.L. 1973. Vertical movement of phosphate fresh water, p. 509-538. In E.S. Griffith et al. (eds.), Environmental phosphorous handbook. Wiley. Grace, J.T., Grothaus, B.T., and Ehrlich, R. 1978. Non-normal size frequency distributions of sand from individual laminae suggests reinterpre- tation of conventional size frequency data. Submitted to Jour, of Sed. Pet. Grim, J. 1950. Versuche zur ermittlung der produktionskoeffizienten einger planktophyten. Biol. 3bt. 69:147-174. Hakanson, L. 1976. A bottom sediment trap for recent sedimentary deposits. Limnol. Oceanogr. 21:170-174. Hargrave, B.T., Philips, G.A., and Taguchi, S. 1976. Sedimentation measure• ments in Bedford Basin, 1973-1974. Tech. Rept. Fish. Bd. Can. 608:129pp. 107 Heim, A. 1900. Der Schlairanabsatz am Grund des Vierwaldstatter Sees. Viertel- jahrsschr. Naturforsch. Ges Zurich 45:144-158. Hopkins, J.S. 1950. Differential floatation and deposition of coniferous and deciduous tree pollen. Ecology 31:638-641. Jarnefelt, H. 1955. Uber die sedimentation des sestons. Int. Ver. Theor. Angew. Limnol. Verh. 12:144-148. Johnson, M.G., and Brinkhurst, R.O. 1971. Benthic community metabolism in Bay of Quinte and Lake Ontario. J. Fish. Res. Bd. Can. 28:1715-1725. Kirchner, W.B. 1975. An evaluation of sediment trap methodology. Limnol. Oceanogr. 20: 657-660. Kleerekoper, H. 1952. A new apparatus for the study of sedimentation on lakes. Can. J. Zoology. 30:185-190. . 1953. The mineralization of plankton. Jour. Fish. Res. Bd. Can. 10: 283-291. Lawacz, W. 1969. The characteristics of settling materials and the formation of bottom deposits in a eutrophic lake. Mitt. Internat. Verein. Limnol. 17:319-331. Linsley, R.K., Kohler, M.A., and Paulhus, J.L.H. 1975. Hydrology for Engineers (2nd ed.). McGraw-Hill Book Co. McCave, I.N. 1975. Vertical flux of particles in the ocean. Deep Sea Res. 22:491-502. McKay, D.J. 1969. Review hydrometerological instrumentation, p.1-20. In Instrumentation and observation techniques..Proc. Hydrol. Symp. #7, Victoria, British Columbia, May 14-15, 1969. Moore, H.B. 1931. Muds of the Clyde Sea Area III. J. Mar. Biol. Assoc. U.K. 14:325-358. Nordlie, F.G., and Anderson, J.F. 1972. A sediment trap for use in soft- bottomed lakes. Florida Acad. Sci. Quart. Journ. (Gainsville). 35:155-157. Ohle, W. 1962. Der Stoffhaushalt der Seen als Grunglage einer allgemeiner Stoffwechseldynamik der Gewasser. Kiel. Meereforsch. 18:107-120. Oviatt, CA. , and Nixon, S.W. 1975. Sediment resuspension and deposition in Narragansett Bay. Estuarine Coast. Mar. Sci. 3:201-217. Pennington, W. 1974. Seston and sediment formation in five Lake District lakes. J. Ecol. 62: 215-251. Peterson, C.J. and Boysen Jensen, P. 1911. Valuation of the sea. I. Animal life in the sea, its food and quantity. Rep. Dan. Biol. Stn. 20:3-76. 108 Raymond, P.E., and Stetson, H.C. 1931. A new factor in the transportation and distribution of marine sediments. Science. 73:105-106. Reissinger, A. 1932. Quantitative Untersuchungen uber den schlammabsatz in Alpsee, dem Niedersonthofener See und dem Starnberger See. Arch. Hydro- biol. 24:535-542. Revelle, R. 1952. Discussion: 'Methods of exploring the ocean floor' by R.S. Sietz, p.206-208. In J.D. Isaacs and C. Iselin (eds.), Sympo• sium of Oceanographic Instrumentation, Div. Phy. Sci. NRC publ. 309. Rigler, F.H., MacCallum M.E., and Roff, J.C. 1974. Production of zooplankton in Char Lake. J. Fish. Res. Bd. Can. 31:637-646. Rossolimo, L. 1937. Materialy k poznanju sedimentaciiozernych otlozenij. Trudy Limnol. Stancii v Kosine. 21. Schick, G.B., Isaacs, J.D., and Sessions, M.H. 1968. Autonomous instruments in oceanographic research, p. 203-230. In F. Ah (ed.), Marine Sciences Instrumentation. 4. Scott, W., and Minor, D.H. 1936. Sedimentation in Winona Lake and Tippecanoe Lake, Kosciusko County, Indiana, July 31, 1930, to July 30, 1935. Ind. Acad. Sci. Proc, 1935. 45:275-286. Smith, N.D. 1978. Sedimentation processes and patterns in a glacier-fed lake with low sediment input. Can. Jour. Earth Sci. 15:741-756. Spyridakis, D.E., and Barnes, R.S. 1976. The effects of waste water diversion on heavy metal levels in the sediments of a large urban lake. Office of Water Research and Technology, Washington D.C, Project completion report, 38pp. Steele, J.H., and Baird, I.E. 1972. Sedimentation of organic matter in a Scottish sea loch. Memorie 1st. ital. Idrobiol. 29:73—88. Stephens, K., Sheldon, R.W., and Parsons, T.R. 1967. Seasonal variations in the availability of food for benthos in a coastal environment. Ecology. 48:852-855. Syvitski, J.P., and Murray, J.W. 1977. A discussion of grain size distribution using log probability plots. Bull. Can. Petroleum Geol. 25:683-694. . , and . 1978. Flocculation and zooplankton pellet- ization of suspended sediment in a high run-off fjord: Howe Sound, British Columbia. In preparation. ., and Lewis, A.G. 1978. Interaction of zooplankton and suspended sediments. Submitted to Sedimentology. ., and Swinbanks, D.D. 1978. VSA: A new fast size analysis technique for low sample weight based on Stokes settling velocity. Submitted to Jour. Sed. Pet. 109 Tauber, H. 1965. Differential pollen dispersal and the interpretation of pollen diagrams. Danm. Geol. Unders. II. 89:1-69. Thomas, E.A. 1950. Beitrag zur methodik der produktionsforschung in seen. Schweiz. Z. Hydrol. 12:25-37. Toyoda, L., Horie, S., and Saijo, Y. 1968. Studies on the sedimentation in Lake Biwa from the viewpoint of lake metabolism. Mitt. Internat. Verein. Limnol. 14:243-255. Trevallion, A. 1967. An investigation of detritus in Southampton water. J. Mar. Biol. Assoc. U.K. 47:523-532. Tutin, W. 1955. Preliminary observations on a year's cycle of sedimentation in Windemere, England. Mem. 1st. Italiano Idrobiologia, Supp. 8. 467-484. Warnick, C.C. 1953. Experiments with windshields for precipitation gauges. Trans. Am. Geophys. Union. 34:379-388. Watanabe, Y., and Hayashi, H. 1971. Investigation on the method for measuring the amount of freshly precipitating matter in lakes. Jap. J. Limnol. 32:40-45. Webster, T.J.M., Paranjab, M.A., and Mann, K.H. 1975. Sedimentation of organic matter in St. Margaret's Bay, Nova Scotia. J. Fish. Res. Bd. Can. 32:1399-1407. Weibe, P.H., Boyd, S.H., and Winget, C. 1976. Particulate matter sinking to the deep sea floor at 2000m in the Tongue of the Ocean, Bahamas, with a description of a new sedimentation trap. Jour. Mar. Res. 34:341-354. Welch, H.E. Jr. 1973. Emergence of chironomidae (Diptera) from Char Lake, Resolute, Northwest Territories. Can. J. Zoo. 5:1113-1123. White, W.S., and Wetzel R.G. 1973. A modified sedimentation trap. Limnol. and Oceanogr. 18:986-988. Zeitschel, B. 1965. Zur sedimentation von seston, eine produktionsbiologische untersuchung von sinkstoffen un sedimenten der westlichen und mittleren Ostsee. Kiel. Meeresforch. Bd. 21:55-80. 110 INTERACTION OF ZOOPLANKTON WITH SUSPENDED SEDIMENT ABSTRACT Marine zooplankton ingest suspended sediment at a rate dependent on sediment .concentration and mineralogy.. Ingested mineral;particles undergo chemical and mineral transformations which are functions of mineralogy, cation exchange capacity and residence time in the digestive tract. Zooplankton fecal pellets settle through the water column much faster than the settling velocity of their component particles. This increased settling rate allows clay to be deposited where the hydrodynamic nature of the environment would only allow coarse silt to fine sand deposition. Chlorite, vermiculite and halloysite have formed after zooplankton in• gestion of amphibole, montmorillonite and muscovite standards respectively. Such chemical changes add a new dimension to the ongoing arguments of clay mineral diagenesis. Ill INTRODUCTION Inorganic particles settling through the water column contribute the largest weight of material to the floors of the world's oceans. These particles settle individually or as floes; their rate of settlement being controlled by the nature of the particle. They are exposed to physical, chemical and biological processes which may effect some change on the nature of the particle during and after sedimentation. Clay mineral dis• tribution in bottom sediments has previously been explained on the basis of rate of settling and chemical changes after settlement. Little work has been done on the effect of biological processes occurring during and - after settlement. The present study examines the effect of zooplankton on sedimentation rates and clay mineralogy of suspended inorganic particles. Previous studies have been limited to the interaction of suspended sediment and benthic organisms (Verwey, 1952; Lund, 1957a, b; Anderson, Jonas and Odum, 1958; Rhoads, 1963; Haven and Morales-Alamo, 1966, 1968, 1972; Rhoads and Young, 1970; Chakrabarti, 1972; Boothe and Knauer, 1972; Prior, .1975; Cadee, 1976). The sedimentation of diatoms and coccoliths by pelagic zooplankton has also been recently investigated (Schrader, 1971; Roth, Mullin and Berger, 1975; Honjo, 1976; Honjo and Roman, 1978). It has been suggested that the activity of pelagic zooplankton may be the means by which small mineral particles, which according to the Stokes Law should require hundreds of days or even years to settle to the sea floor, are apparently rapidly sedimented (Lisitsin, 1961; Manheim, Hathaway and Uchupi, 1972). Such a mechanism was suggested for the formation of the well-defined clay zones related to source areas rather than,the indistinct mixtures that would be expected in the event of slow deposi• tion and consequent extensive mixing (Lisitsin, 1961). Flat, irregular 112 L mineral particles that range from 1 - 25 um have been reported in large quantities in the digestive tract of a large number of deep-water filter feeding copepods (Harding, 1974). Mauchline and Fisher (1969) noted that euphasiids are known to eat mineral grains as well as organic debris. Since 70% of the particulate material in the deep ocean is inorganic (Wangersky, 1965) , indiscriminate filter feeders must ingest inorganic mineral particles (Harding, 1974). Bacteria and adsorbed organics on suspended mineral surfaces have been suggested to provide nourishment for the filter feeding zooplankton (Robinson, 1957; Harding, 1974). Bigham (1974) has observed clay agglomerates in fecal pellets and implied that pellets may be an important form of marine sedimentation. The sedimentological implication of settling fecal pellets has importance in the vertical transport of trace metals (Johannes and Satomi, 1966; Frankenberg, Coles and Johannes, 1967) and radionucleides (Osterberg, 1963; Fowler and Small, 1972), formation of sedimentary oozes (Smayda, 1970; Schrader, 1971; Roth et al., 1975; and Honjo, 1976), nutrient cycling (Honjo and Roman, 1978), and deposition of inorganic particles (this paper). The study was designed to evaluate a) the ability of zooplankton to ingest autoclaved sediment, b) the effect of suspension concentration on the rate of pellet egestion, c) whether chemical or mineral transformation would occur after particles were ingested, d) the settling velocity of mineral-bearing fecal pellets and its relation to pellet volume, e) the effect of pellicle removal on mineral-bearing fecal pellet break-up, and f) the sedimentation rate of mineral-bearing fecal pellets naturally produced from pelagic zooplankton collected from Howe Sound, a high run• off, fjord-type estuary located in southwestern British Columbia. Moore (1931) first observed that fjords contained a high percentage of zooplankton 113 pellets incorporated in the bottom sediment, although he did not obtain their inorganic weight percent. MATERIALS AND METHODS a. The organism used in the laboratory studies was Tigriopus californicus, a harpacticoid copepod, which was maintained at room temperature (23°C) under fluorescent light conditions,. in Instant Oceair^ (31 %» salinity without added trace metals or organics) - a commercially prepared artificial sea water. Medium-rinsed T_. calif ornicus were left in autoclaved sea water solution (SWS) for four hours to cleanse their digestive tract. Suspensions of 25 mg of standard clays and 500 ml of SWS were each autoclaved for two hours to reduce the concentration of bacteria. (Contamination did occur, however, during transfer of the test organism.) The clay standards were illite (Fithian, Illinois), chlorite (Cotopaxi, Colorado), tremolite- richterite, vermiculite (African-type standard), muscovite, montmorillonite- bentonrte (Cameron, Arizona), Kaolin (well-crystallized type, Georgia), feldspar (microcline), and quartz. Fifty cleaned copepods were added to each of the clay suspensions contained in 1 - 1 Nalgene—^ flasks which were kept at reduced light condition and rotated at one RPM (New Brunswick^ roller drum) to keep the clays in suspension. (Fifty copepods were neces• sary to compensate for individual variation (Marshall and Orr, 1955).) The roller drum ran continuously for the 48-hour duration of the experiment. The copepods were then separated from the mixtures. The clay mixtures were suction-filtered onto 47 mm HA Millipore^ filters (0.45 ym nominal pore size), gently washed with distilled water to remove salts, and air dried in a desiccator. The filters were then mounted on glass slides with acetone after adding a few drops of clearing fluid (1:1:1 hexane:ethylene dichloride:l,4-dioxane). 114 The above experiment was repeated with various concentrations of a single standard clay (tremolite). b. T_. californicus is a marine intertidal copepod and in order to relate the lab studies to planktonic organisms in the field, zooplankton were collected from Howe Sound. The zooplankton, comprised mostly of copepods and euphausiids, were allowed to cleanse their digestive tracts by swimming in double filtered (0.45 ym) natural sea water for 24 hours. The experiment in a. was repeated on six zooplankton collections using 30 mg/£ of clay- size chlorite. c. A special copepod feeding apparatus (Fig. 1) was built to collect T_. californicus fecal pellets for chemical and mineralogical analysis. The copepods were free to swim into an elevated holder and feed on a clay mineral. When fecal pellets settled in the main part of the aquarium, they would pass through a 300 ym nylon screen to keep them away from the organism and thus ensure no ingestion by the copepods. When a sufficient number of pellets had accumulated (three weeks), they were removed and prepared for chemical and mineral analysis. Biological activity on the pellets was reduced with #202' Frustules °f diatoms produced as a result of contamination during the transfer of _T. calif ornicus became a source of silicon contamination In the elemental analysis. Quantitative element analysis utilized the ETEC® energy dispersive SEM, for comparing elemental ratios between clay standards and pellet residues. The clay standards, prepared with the same weights and filter size as the pellet residues, were vacuum filtered as a homogeneous layer ensuring identical clay layer thickness. It was assumed that relative elemental abundance did not change enough between standard and pellet residue to cause a noticeable change in 115 c -Watch Glass INSTANT OCEAN w ,0 Phleger Plastic Sea Water Solution Container S 31 %o, 23° C Clay Standard Copepods 300jim Plastic Netting Plastic Funnel Fecal Pellets Clamp Transparent Plastic Discharge Tube Figure 1. Schematic of one of sixteen aquariums built to collect inorganic pellets for chemical and mineral analysis. 116 element count due to elemental fluorescent interference. With this assumption, element peak heights of the two samples were compared directly in the form of cation ratios. Each analysis on the energy-dispersive SEM continued until the largest peak (Si) reached 8000 counts. Since there was silica enrich• ment in the pellet residue due to the diatom contamination, aluminum was chosen as the ratio denominator (Table 1). In the case of tremolite, which contains no Al, iron was used in the denominator (Table 1). Since pellet concentrations of the first experimental run were less than 1 mg, X-ray powder film analysis was carried out with the Debye-Scherrer camera. Only d-spacings less than 0.5 nm could be evaluated. The second experi• mental run yielded pellet concentrations greater than 1 mg. These and a corresponding standards were mounted onto separate 13 mm Ag filters (Selas (R) Flotronics^ , 0.45 ym nominal pore size), and fixed with nail polish onto glass slides. Diffractograms were produced from the samples and standards after air drying at 20°C and heat treatment at 300°C for 1 hour, and 550°C for 1 hour. Montmorillonite and vermiculite were also analyzed after glyeo• lation (1,2-ethanediol) before heat treatment. d. Approximately 80 mg of each mineral standard was added to individual Erlenmeyer flasks containing 450 ml of the SWS. Fifty thoroughly rinsed T_. californicus that had cleansed digestive tracts were added to each flask. The pellets, located along the bottom edges of the flask, were removed in small quantities with a micropipette to a watch glass containing SWS. Pellets were individually selected and added to a 1 - 1 graduated cylinder containing SWS. Each pellet was timed by stop watch over a predetermined fall distance, after it had reached terminal velocity. Before the pellet was allowed to reach the bottom, it was removed with an extension micro• pipette to a microscope slide where the .cross-sectional area was recorded. 117 e. After the cross-sectional area was recorded, the pellet was entered into a 30% ^2°2 batn or a 10% HCl bath for 90 seconds to remove any pellicle surrounding the pellet. The pellet was re-entered into the settling cylinder and its new settling time was recorded. f. Suspended sediment traps, based on a prototype described previously (Webster, Paranjabe and Mann, 1975; Syvitski and Murray, 1978) were used to collect fecal pellets in Howe Sound. The traps were located at more than one depth at any given station (Table 4). The study was conducted over the period of river freshet and time of maximum zooplankton population (i.e., May to November). Description of station location is given in a detailed article on Howe Sound sedimentology (Syvitski and Murray, 1978). Sediment was collected in the traps over 6- to 12-hour periods. The pellets were separated and concentrated by.a. flotation method (Dillon, .1964), and then counted. Approximately 20 fecal pellets from each sample were washed with distilled water, allowed to air dry, then weighed. They were next ashed in a muffle furnace at 400°C for four hours and their ash weight was recorded. The remains were examined under a transmitted light micro• scope which provided a visual estimation of the inorganic biogenic component. From these data the weight percent of inorganic sediment in one pellet can be calculated. The above procedure was repeated on five batches of pellets per sample. Fecal pellets collected in the field were examined and compared with fecal pellets produced in the lab, with the Cambridge Stereoscarf^SEM. RESULTS Table 1 indicates that zooplankton will.ingest autoclaved particles with a definite mineral preference. Preferred minerals (montmorillonite, illite) have the lowest residence time in the digestive tract and produce the largest fecal pellets. Both montmorillonite and illite had the 118 TABLE 1 MPS+ Mineral N* NPD** (hours) (um) Montmorillonite 1900 29 1.3 140 1330 13 1.8 125 Illite 1200 12 2.0 120 700 7 3.4 110 Chlorite 1000 10 2.4 120 Tremolite 790 8 3.0 120 Vermiculite 700 7 3.4 115 Muscovite 600 .6 4.0 110 600 6 4.0 110 Kaolin 420 4 5.6 105 Feldspar 300 3 8.3 100 Quartz 210 2 11.1 100 * number of pellets counted ** number of pellets per day produced by one Tigriopus californicus *** reaction time equalling the maximum time some mineral particles would reside in the digestive tract of a copepod assuming an even rate of pellet ejection + mean! .pellet size of long.axis Table 1. Variation in the egestion rate of Tigriopus for various mineral suspensions 119 smallest mean particle sizes, although their particles flocculated to .floe sizes between 5 and 20 ym. An increase in the concentration .of an acceptable particle, such as tremolite, causes an initial increase in the production of fecal pellets (Fig. 2) until, at 25 mg/£ of clay concentration, the highest pellet pro• duction was attained. Continued increase in the concentration, however, is not parallelled by an increase in fecal pellet production. The pellet size decreased slightly with increasing clay concentration. The natural zooplankton produced, on an average, only half the number of pellets per hour as the lab cultured T_. calif ornicus. Figure 6a is a scanning electron micrograph of a chlorite pellet produced by a freshly captured zooplankton. Montmorillonite addition was associated with a large increase in the number of T. californicus and an increase in swimming activity. Original stock populations increased by over 15 times in a one-month period. In the presence of the montmorillonite suspension, the adult colouration changed abruptly from a translucent pearl white to a dark orange red. Analysis of powder X-ray reflections on film from the first experi• mental run yielded no conclusive evidence of mineralogic change. The second experimental run, using standard powder diffraction methods, did detect crystallographic changes for montmorillonite (Fig. 3), tremolite- richterite (Fig. 4) and muscovite (Fig. 5). Generally, reflections from clay pellet residue were sharper than those of the corresponding standards. This was especially evident in the montmorillonite diffractogram (Fig. 3). There was no increase in the variability about the mean concentration for any one element when one compared the pellet residue to the clay standard from which the residue was produced. Except for microcline, all clay 0 20 40 60 80 100 Tremolite (mg/1) lonjent""^^ eSeSti°n °£ ^SEia-i *« changing mineral suspension 121 Figure 3. X-ray diffractograms of montmorillonite-bentonite standard and pellet residue sample after various treatments.' 122 Figure 4. X-ray diffractograms of tremolite-richterite standard and pellet residue sample after various treatments. .332 nm X-ray diffractograms of muscovite standard and pellet residue sample after various treatments. 124 studied showed some chemical change (Table 2). Pellets collected from T_. Calif ornicus which were fed a variety of inorganic standards, were found to have length to width ratios of 4:1 to 5.4:1. The correlation coefficient calculated for inorganic pellet volume and pellet settling rate was found to be 0.88. The 95% confidence belt for the correlation coefficient was 0.73 to.0.93 (N = 15). The linear regression equation, over the range of pellets observed, was calculated a -4 Y = X* 10 +4.9 where Y equals the settling rate (m/day) and X equals 3 the pellet volume (pm ). The settling rate of these inorganic pellets was found to change with mineralogy (Table 3). The mean settling rate for the mineral-bearing fecal pellets is greater than the settling rate for the mean particle size ingested, regardless of mineralogy (Table 3). The increase in settling rate by the pellets ranges from many times greater (in the case of chlorite) to many orders of magnitude greater (in the case of illite). Table 3 also shows these values translated into equivalent spherical sedimentation diameters. Tigriopus was found to ingest particles that ranged from 0.5 ym to 50 ym. Pellets soaked in HCl in order to remove any pellicle covering, showed no significant decrease in their settling velocity. Pellets soaked in ^2^2 had a slower (20%) settling rate, probably due to air bubbles forming in and buoying up the pellet. Bacteria and ciliate action on organic fecal pellets caused the insides to spill out. Such natural or induced break• down around mineral-bearing pellets had no noticeable effect. The fecal pellet weight of pelagic zooplankton from Howe Sound ranged from 7 to 42 tig, with a mean value of 30 yg. Eighty percent of the pellets collected had an inorganic weight percent greater than 90. Ninety percent of the pellets had an inorganic weight percent greater than 72. Both 125. TABLE 2 Mineral •Sample Standard ' Change(%) ratio Microcline Na/Al 0.08 0.08 NC* + 3' K/Al 1.01 1.03 -2** + : Muscovite K/Al 0.39 0.44 -11 + 4 Tremolite Al/Fe 1.13 0.83 +26 + 5 Ca/Fe 2.93 3.51 -16 + 4 Mg/Fe 2.85 3.02 -6 + 3 Mn/Fe 0.25 0.26 NC + 3 Chlorite Mg/Al 0.81 1.50 -46 + 5 Fe/Al 0.46 0.32 +30 + 5 Montmorillonite--Bentonite Mg/Al 0.26 0.14 +46 + 5 K/Al 0.21 0.23 -9 + 4 Ca/Al 0.088 0.061 +25 + 5 Fe/Al 0.24 0.20 +17 + 4 Vermiculite Mg/Al 1.03 1.74 -41 + 5 K/Al 0.37 0.94 -61 + 5 Ca/Al 0.23 0.28 -18 + 4 Ti/Al 0.16 0.21 -24 + 4 Fe/Al 0.40 0.54 -26 + 4 Illite K/Al 0.40 0.41 -2 + 3 Ti/Al 0.08 0.12 -33 + ? Fe/Al 0.24 0.22 +8 + 3 S/Al 0.12 0.11 +8 + 3 * no change ** indicates the pellet residue registered a 2% decrease in the K/Al ratio *** the +3% refers to the relative analytical error Table 2. Elemental ratios indicating chemical increases or decreases of the pellet residues compared to the clay standards. 12.6. TABLE 3 Equivalent Spherical Settling Rate (m/day) Sedimentation Diameters (x + S.D.) ' (ym) Mineral Pellet* Particles Pellet** Particles*** - Tremolite 227 +96 47+8 54 25 Illite 169 + 66 0.08 + 12 47 1 Montmorillonite 142 + 44 ND ND ND Chlorite 127 +46 48 + 39 41 25 Quartz 115 +56 34 + 11 39 21 ND = no data * based on N > 20 ** based on mean of individual pellets '•**• based on mean of the particle size of ingested clay standard Table 3. Comparison of mineral-bearing pellet settling rates and mean particle settling rates and their equivalent spherical sed• imentation diameter. 127 inorganic weight percent values indicate that most of the fecal pellets 3 consist of inorganic material. The pellet flux ranged from 7.1 x 10 to 5 2 5.8 x 10 pellets/m /day (Table 4). The pellet flux was translated into 2 pellet sedimentation rate (g/m /day) using the mean pellet weight of 30 yg There was no correlation between pellet sedimentation rate and either inorganic or organic sedimentation rates (Table 4), suggesting that hydro- graphic conditions play a major role in controlling the rate of sediment accumulation in Howe Sound. Station 5 is one example of the right time and conditions for mineral- bearing pellet sedimentation (Table 4). During July 1977, between 67% and 87% of the sediment fell as mineral-bearing fecal pellets which are collected by the 60 m and 100 m sediment traps. Analyzed pellets were composed of 98% mineral particles. The high mineral content was demonstrated by the SEM (Fig. 6e, f, g, h). Relatively few pellets had an organic outer covering (Fig. 6i, j). The pellets were composed of clay plates (muscovite, illite, chlorite, primarily) although quartz and feldspar were also found (Fig. 6h). DISCUSSION Clay Mineral Transformations Although previous studies have indicated that ingestion of clay minerals by zooplankton may occur (e.g. Robinson, 1957), chemical and mineral trans• formations of ingested sediments have not been considered. Transformations could occur through both mechanical and chemical mechanisms within the digestive tract. The copepod digestive tract has been reported to be acidic (Marshall and Orr, 1955a) but the extremity of the acid environment has since been contested by Honjo and Roman (1978). Vincente, Razzaghe and Robert -3 -4 (1976) treated weathered micas with 10 N oxalic acid and 10 N HCl and demon- 128 I TABLE 4 Pellet Total Date Station// DBSL* Pellet Flux Sedimentation Sedimentation „ Rate** Rate (m) (pellets/m /day) (g/m2/day) (g/m2/day) 6 May/77 1 45 1. 1 X 10 33.7 576.0 6 1 65 1.0 X 10 31.3 694.4 4 June/77 2 45 7.7 X 10 2.3 9.6 4 2 85 3.8 X 10 1.2 6.8 4 2 135 4.3 X 10 1.2 20.0 4 July/77 5 5 4.6 X 10 1.5 36.3 4 5 20 2.8 X 10 0.8 42.4 6 5 60 2.2 X 10 67.3 77.5 6 5 100 2.2 X 10 67.3 92.9 5 8 5 1.3 X 10 3.9 18.9 5 8 15 • 1.5 X 10 4.3 6.8 m 8 25 1.8 X 5.4 8.4 l4 8 35 6.6 X 10 1.9 9.7 6 Aug./77 2 5 1.9 X 10 58.1 302.4 5 2 45 4.6 X 10 13.9 157.2 Sept./77 1 5 1.2 X 10 3.5 1107.2 55 1 20 4.6 X 10 13.9 1202.4 5 1 40 2.7 X 10 8.1 1080.4 5 1 55 3.2 X 10 9.7 1304.4 2 40 1.3 X 39.5 382.8 6 2 80 1.1 X 10 33.7 292.8 6 2 120 1.4 X 10 40.6 335.2 5 Nov./77 1 5 4.6 X 10 13.9 28.8 5 1 20 6.2 X 10 18.6 39.2 6 1 40 1.0 X 10 31.3 70.0 5 1 55 7.7 X 10 23.2 122.8 * depth below sea level ** based on the mean pellet weight of 30ug (range 7-42) Table 4. Pellet flux, pellet sedimentation rate, and total sedimentation rate deduced from sediment collected from suspended sediment traps at various depths per station throughout the spring, summer and fall of 1977, from Howe Sound, B.C. l 29 130 131 Figure 6. Scanning electron micrographs of mineral-bearing fecal pellets: A) a chlorite pellet from freshly captured zooplankton; B) pellet containing bent vermiculite plates; C) tremolite pellet with new plate-like structures which are changed from the standard chain structures D); E) and its enlargement F), and G) are mineral- bearing fecal pellets collected from Howe Sound; H) another na• tural pellet containing quartz and feldspar particles; I) and its enlargement J) show a seldom-found organic covering on mineral- bearing pellets from Howe Sound. 132 strated that reflections from treated mica changed but remained extremely sharp. This suggests that a weak acidic- environment would be adequate to cause mineral transformations. The presence of digestive enzymes (Bond, 1934) and the physical mixing and grinding action imparted to the contents df the digestive tract through the musculature (Sullivan, 1977), along with the weak acid environment would further enhance the ability of zooplankton to alter clay minerals. An indication that mechanical pressure alone is impor• tant is given by the bent vermiculite plates in the fecal pellet shown in Figure 6b. To examine chemical and mineral transformation of ingested sediments, cation ratios were used. Aluminum was chaosen as the cation ratio denomin• ator (Table 2) since Al^H)^ has low solubility (pH 4 to 9) and Al has moder• ate stability in the clay lattice suggesting that it should not change appre• ciably. Since tremolite-richterite does not contain Al, however, Fe was 3+ used as the denominator as Fe has a low solubility at pH 4 to 7. The presence of S in the original illite standard was from euhedral pyrite association with the clay (Table 2). Possibly the identical increase in Fe and S in the pellet residue is fortuitous due to the pyrite being ingested in a slightly higher: amount than the clay illite. An observed high mortality rate (compared with the other clay minerals) when the copepods fed on illite, may be a result of the sulfide being directly or indirectly toxic. [Note: Ti was too close to background noise for adequate interpreta• tion of the apparent Ti/Al increase]. The iron increase (Table 2) in the chlorite pellet residue is probably 3+ Fe on the basis of solubility in sea water and the acid environment of the digestive tract. (There are no data available on the redox potential of 3+ the copepod gut environment.) The substitution of Fe for the decreased 2+ Mg may occur in either or both the micellar octahedral layer and the 133 brucite layer. The chemical change would satisfy the mineral stability and account for lack of change in XRD and the peak sharpness. Montmorillonite has a high cation exchange capacity, so it is not surprising that the Mg/Al, Ca/Al ratios increased with only a reduction in K/Al (Table 2). Montmorillonite has a tendency to fix Mg and transform to a vermiculite structure (Millot,..1970) . In our case the intermicellar and vacant octahedral sites could have adsorbed the Fe, Ca, and Mg cations. This produced the change from the standard broad 1.4 nm basal reflection to the sharp, well-defined peak that did not expand upon glycolation (Fig. 3). Also, the small 1.0 nm and increased 0.7 nm peaks with appropriate secondary basal reflections may have been produced by these changes. This could indicate that the montmorillonite altered in part to a 'vermiculite' structure (1.4 nm). Part of the new 'vermiculite' was completely collapsed, accounting for the enlarged 0.7 nm reflection, while some had only partially contracted (or re-expanded) to 0.99 nm. The new 'vermiculite' structure did not expand upon glycolation and collapsed to 0.95 nm at 300°C. The remaining 1.4 nm reflection at 300°C would be unaltered montmorillonite. Amino acids or other organic molecules might have entered the interlayer water position of the montmorillonite and thus kept the clay from expanding. Ensminger and Gieseking (1939, 1941, 1942) showed that montmorillonite forms complexes with proteins and that more protein is adsorbed under acid conditions. Pinck, Dyal and Allison (1954) showed that the adsorbed material was not available to enzyme attack. Oysters, clams and mullet, when fed montmorillonite, also contract its structure (Anderson e_t al., 1958) although the clay re-expanded under glycolation indicating that a vermiculite structure had not formed. 134 The muscovite pellet residue had new well-crystallized peaks which appeared at 0.76 nm and 0.38 nm, and completely disappeared upon heat treatment to 300°C for 1 hour (Fig. 5). The peaks were interpreted as basal reflections from a well-crystallized halloysite(?). Hydronium ions could have replaced the weakly bonded interlayer K, which would account for the apparent K/Al decrease (Table 2) but not the.0.76 nm spacing. Since muscovite was reduced in size with a ball mill, the K+ ion stability may have been decreased. This would be noticed more in the outer edges of mica platelets where exchange is likely to take place (Mortland, 1958). It is reasonable to assume that some of the H^0+ would + be replaced by K once back in sea water, reconverting this new crystal type back to 1.0 nm mica. The 0.76 nm peak might represent some meta- stable form during this conversion. The presence of Al in the tremolite-richterite standard must be a function of some associated Al rich mineral (like a phyllosilicate) too small in quantity to be detected by XRD analysis. The increase Al/Si ratio infers that the ..unknown Al silicate mineral was preferentially selected. Well- crystallized chlorite peaks (1.42 nm, 0.708 nm, 0.355 nm, and 0.28 nm) appeared upon X-ray analysis of the pellet residue, along with the stronger tremolite-richterite X-ray peaks (Fig. 4). The 1.4 nm 001 basal reflection disappeared upon heating to 300°C. Thus the chlorite is unstable and might be closer to a vermiculite structure. This would indicate that a well- defined brucite layer in the intermicellar space has not developed. Since chlorite is a Ca-poor mineral, the Ca/Al decrease (Table 2) seems reasonable. The Ca(0H)2 being soluble in the copepod digestive tract, would be free to leave with the other digestive fluids or be taken up by the organism. The fact that the tremolite-richterite standard was ball milled to clay size 135 prior to being fed to the copepods plus its high weathering potential (Loughnan, 1969, p. 60) might explain the partial chemical and mineral trans• formation. Figure 9c, a scanning electron micrograph of the standard, can be compared to the SEM of the tremolite-richterite pellet (Fig. 6c) to show the formation of the clay plates. Vermiculite pellet residue showed the largest change in chemistry and mineralogy. No large, well-defined X-ray reflections remained indicating at least partial crystallographic destruction. All metallic cation ratios de• creased after ingestion by the copepods (Table 2). The Al freed from the lattice breakdown would still be insoluble either as amorphous Al^O^ or more probably gibbsite Al^H)^. The leached cations, having no place to be re- sorbed in the crystal structure, would be lost. Those cations could dissolve in the digestive fluid,.or be adsorbed by organic molecules and subsequently either be taken up by the copepods or passed out of the digestive tract. Intracellular concretions of Ca and Fe have been: found in another harpacticoid copepod (Fahrenback, 1962) and in the domestic housefly (Sohal, Peters, and Hall, 1977) suggesting some uptake can occur. In summary, mineral transformation of at least part of some clay standards is suggested to have occurred in the digestive tract of Tigriopus californicus. This change is an increase or decrease in metal cations. Al• though the. lasting nature of .these changes has not been documented, it is suggested that the residence of clay particles in the copepod digestive tract may be responsible for some of the observed differences in mineral transfor• mation found in nature. Minerals that underwent some chemical and/or mineral change had been preferentially selected by the copepods (Table 1), suggesting that they may provide some cations to planktonic marine organisms. The one ex• ception, illite, contains a sulfide which may have been toxic. 136 Inorganic Particle Uptake The uptake pattern of inorganic.particles agrees with studies on food uptake with respect to concentration (e.g. Marshall and Orr, 1955a; Frost, 1975). There thus appears to be an "optimum" concentration at which fecal pellet production is highest and a "threshold" concentration below which pellet production is low. Tigriopus was found to ingest particles that ranged in size from 0.50 um to 50 ym. The lower limit of particle utilization in copepods had previously been found to be approximately 10 pm (Hargrave and Geen, 1970; Frost, 1975; Boyd, 1976; Nival and Nival, 1976). The apparent discrepancy is explained by Tigriopus ingesting 5 to 20 ym floes composed of clay size particles. The preferential ingestion of floes over discrete particles would also explain why the most abundant minerals, quartz and feldspar, in the water column of Howe Sound, are not the most abundant minerals ingested by the local pelagic zooplankton. Natural mineral-bearing pellets, primarily clay plates with a few quartz and feldspar particles, have the same basic composition as the natural inorganic floes (Syvitski and Murray, 1978). Particles smaller than 2 pm caught up in a floe matrix are found in abun• dance in natural fecal pellets (Fig. 6f). As an interesting aside, Yudonova (1940) noted 'red' Calanus occurred in abundance in the Barents Sea near the surface waters during the summer. Marshall and Orr (1955b, p. 93) suggested that a "special food" might trigger the swarms of red Calanus observed in Norwegian fjords and the Barents Sea. Although the "special food" was not identified, a red colouration occurs in T. californicus in an inorganic clay suspension. 137 Pellet Settling Rate Volume, shape, composition and compaction have been found to influence settling rates (Fowler and Small, 1972; Honjo and Roman, 1978). If one holds the other three factors constant, settling rate will increase as pellet volume (size) increases (Fowler and Small, 1972). Smayda (1969) stressed the importance of shape (i.e. length to width ratios) which appears to be hydrodynamically sound (Lane and Carlson, 1954; Graf and Acaroglu, 1966; Komar and Reimers, 1978). With pellet volume constant, mineral-bearing pellet settling rates (Table 3) are greater than values presented by Smayda (1969), although the shape of the mineral-bearing pellets (length to width ratios of 4:1 to 5.4:1) would suggest slower settling than the more spherical pellets presented by Smayda. A compositional change providing a change in pellet density could account for this increased rate of pellet settling, as inorganic mineral particles will normally be denser than organic matter. Pellet compaction varies with the composition of ;the internal particles as well as the concentration of material in the pellet. Compaction is related, then, to particle density and the particle packing coefficient. Marshall and Orr (1955a) and Honjo and Roman (1978) have found that the pellet length differed with diet. This is also suggested by the pellet size variation with mineralogy (Table 1). Pellet size alone, though, cannot account for the pellet settling rate variation due to mineralogy (Table 3). Tremolite- richterite pellets having the highest particle density (3.1) have the fastest settling velocity. Illite, the second fastest settling pellet type, has the next highest particle density (2.8 - 2.9) which would even be higher because of the associated.pyrite (density 5.0). Montmorillonite pellet settling velocity is due to a combination of .low particle density (2.3 - 2.6) and having the largest pellet size. Chlorite and quartz pellets settled 138 out the slowest, with chlorite pellets sinking faster due to the larger pellet size and higher particle density. The lack of^correlation between sedimentation rate and pellet sedimenta• tion rate (Table 4) in Howe Sound could be due to 1) an increase in sediment load being frequently associated with an increase in sand which is too coarse for zooplankton ingestion, 2) stations not having the same types and numbers of zooplankton, and 3) zooplankton population at any one station varies with the time of year. The destruction of an organic covering around mineral-bearing pellets, naturally or induced, does not significantly alter the pellet form or its settling velocity. The clay minerals in close contact with each other in the pellet, are held together by inorganic flocculation. CONCLUSION. Marine zooplankton ingest suspended sediment at a rate dependent on the suspension concentration and on particle mineralogy. Fecal pellets col• lected from a fjord receiving glacial run-off were mostly composed of clay plates. Their nutritive value probably stems from adsorbtion on the large surface areas of clays of bacteria and organic molecules. The clays that are ingested are largely in the form of floes. Mineral particles undergo chemical and mineral transformation in the zooplankton digestive tract, de• pending on partical mineralogy, cation exchange capacity and residence time in the digestive tract. Mineral-bearing egested fecal pellets settle through the water column many times faster than the individual component mineral particles. The settling velocity of mineral-bearing pellets has been found to vary with constituent particle densities and pellet volume (related to packing coefficients of the particles). When pellets are rich 139 in inorganic consitituents, the increased bulk density causes them to settle more rapidly than organic fecal pellets. This increased rate of settling allows clay particles to fall to the bottom and be deposited where the hydrodynamic environment would prevent deposition of particles finer than coarse silt. The rate of fecal pellet formation is at least partially dependent on the concentration of particles. There appears to be both an optimum and a threshold particle concentration that allows comparison with feeding rates. The chemical changes suffered by the various clay minerals due to zoo• plankton ingestion, need to be examined with many zooplankton species. The results may in part explain diagenesis of marine clay minerals. It may also add an interesting dimension to zooplankton nutrition. Special thanks go to J.W. Murray who partially financed this project under NRC Grant 65-6224. Other support came from two grants to the second author (NRC A-2067, INCRA 246). We are especially grateful to W.C. Barnes for his stimulating ideas throughout the study. 140 REFERENCES Anderson, A.E., Jonas, E.C. and Odum, H.T. (1958) Alteration of clay minerals by digestive processes of marine organisms. Science 127, 190-191. Bigham, G.H. (1974) Suspended sediments contributed to the southeastern U.S. continental shelf: An investigation by scanning electron microscopy. Mem. Inst. Geol. Bassin Aquitane 7, 103-108. Bond, R.M. (1934) Digestive enzymes of the pelagic copepod Calanus finmarchi- cus. Biol. Bull. 67, 461-465. Boothe, P.N. and Knauer, G.A. (1972) The possible importance of fecal mater• ial in the biological amplification of trace and heavy metals. Limnol. Oceanogr. 17, 270-274. Boyd, CM. (1976) Selection of particle size by filter-feeding copepods: A plea for reason. Limnol. Oceanogr. 21, 24-38. Cadee, G.S. (1976) Sediment reworking by Arenicola marina on tidal flats in the Dutchwadden Sea. Netherlands Sea Res. 10, 440-460. Chakrabarti, A. (1972) Beach structures produced by crab pellets. Sedimento• logy 18, 129-134. Dillon, W.P. (1964) Floatation technique for separating fecal pellets and small marine organisms for sand. Limnol.Oceanogr. 9, 601-602. Ensminger, L.E. and Gieseking, J.E. (1939) The absorption of proteins by montmorillonite clays. Soil Sci. 48, 467-473. . (1941) The absorption of proteins by montmorillonite clays and its effect on base exchange capacity. Soil Sci. 51, 125-132. . (1942) Resistance of clay absorbed proteins to proteolytic hydrolysis. Soil Sci. 53, 205-209. Fahrenbach, W.H. (1962) The biology of a harpactoid copepod. Le Cellule 62, 301-376. Fowler, S.W. and Small, L.F. (1972) Sinking rates of euphasiid fecal pellets. Limnol. Oceanogr. 17, 293-296. Frankenberg, D., Coles, S.L. and Johannes, R.E. (1967) The potential trophic significance of Callianasa major fecal pellets. Limnol. Oceanogr. 12, 113-120. Frost, B.W. (1975) A threshold feeding behavior in Calanus pacificus. Limnol. Oceanogr. 20, 263-266. Gauld, D.T. (1957) A peritrophic membrane in calanoid copepods. Nature 179, 325-326. Graf, W.H. and Acaroglu, E.R. (1966) Settling velocities of natural grains. Int. Assoc. Sci. Hydrology Bull. 11, 27-43. 141 Harding, G.C.H. (1974) The food of deep-sea copepods. Marine Biol. Assoc. U.K. Jour. 54, 14-155.. Hargrave, B.T. and Geen, G.H. (1970) Effects of copepod grazing in two natural phytoplankton populations. J. Fish. Res. Bd. Can. 27, 1395- 1403. Haven, D.S. and Morales-Alamo, R. (1966) Aspects of biodeposition by oysters and other invertebrate filter feeders. LimnOl. Oceanogr. 11, 487-498. and . (1968) Occurrence and transport of fecal pellets in suspension in a tidal estuary. Sed. Geol. 2, 141-151. . (1972) Biodeposition as a factor in sedimentation of fine suspen• ded solids in estuaries. Geol. Soc. Am., Memoir 133, B.W. Nelson (ed.) Environmental Framework of Coastal Plain Estuaries 121-130. Honjo, S. (1976) Coccoliths - Production, transportation and sedimentation. Marine micropaleontology 1, 65-79. Johannes, R.E. and Satomi, M. (1966) Composition and nutritive value of fecal pellets of a marine crustacean. Limnol. Oceanogr. 11, 191-197. Komar, P.D. and Reimers, C.E. (1978) Grain shape effects on settling rates. Jour. Geol. 86, 193-209. Lane, E.W. and Carlson, E.J. (1954) Some observations on the effect df par• ticle shape on the movement of coarse sediments. Am. Geophys. Union Trans. 35, 453-462. Lisitsin, A.P. (-1961) Distribution and composition of suspended matter in the seas and oceans (in Russian). In N.M. Strakhov (ed.), Recent sediments of seas and oceans. Izd. AN S.S.S.R., 175-231. Loughnan, F.C. (1969) Chemical Weathering of Silicate Minerals. Am. Elsevier Publ. Co., New York. Lund, E.J. (1957a) A quantitative study of clearance of a turbid medium and feeding by the oyster. Univ. Texas Inst. Mar. Sci. Publ. 4, 296-312. . (1957b) Self-silting by the oyster and its significance for se• dimentation geology. Univ. Texas Inst. Mar. Sci. Publ. 4, 320-327. Manheim, F.T., Hathaway, J.C. and Uchupi, E. (1972) Suspended matter in sur• face waters of the northern Gulf of Mexico. Geol. and Oceanogr. 17, 17-27. Marshall, S.M. and Orr, A.P. (1955) On the biology of Calanus finmarchicus. VIII Food uptake, assimilation and excretion in adult and larval stage V Calanus. Marine Biol. Assoc. U.K. 34, 495-529. and . (1955b) The biology of a marine copepod, Cala• nus finmarchicus (Gunnerus). Oliver and boyd publ., Edinburgh, Twee- dale Court. 142 Mauchline, J. and Fisher, L.R. (1969) The biology of euphasiids. Adv. Mar. Biol..7, 1-454. Millot, G. (1970) Geology of clays. Springer-Verlag, New York. Moore, H.B. (1931) The specific identification of fecal pellets. Jour. Marine Biol. Assoc. U.K. 17, 359-365. Mortland, M.M. (1958) Kinetics of potassium release from biotite. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc. 22, 503-508. Nival, P. and Nival, S. (1976) Particle retention efficiencies of a herbivorous copepod, Acartia clausi (adult and copepodite stages): Effects of gra• zing. Limnol. Oceanogr. 21, 24-38. Osterberg, C., Carey, A.G. and Curl, H. (1963) Acceleration of sinking rates of radio-nucleides in the ocean. Nature 200, 1276-1277. Pinck, L.A., Dyal, R.S. and Allison, F.E. (1954) Protein montmorillonitic com• plexes, their properties and the effect of soil microorganisms on their decomposition. Soil Sci. 78, 109-118. Pryor, W.A. (1975) Biogenic sedimentation and alteration of argillaceous sedi• ments in shallow marine environments. Geol. Soc. Am. Bull. 86, 1244-1254. Rhoads, D.C. (1963) Rates of sediment reworking by Yoldia limatula in Buzzards Bay, Massachusetts, and Long Island Sound. Jour. Sed. Petrology 33, 723- 727. and Young, D.K. (1970) The influence of deposit feeding organisms on sediment stability and community trophic structure. Sears Found. J. Mar. Res. 28, 150-178. Robinson, M. (1957) The effects of suspended materials on the reproductive rate of Daphnia magna. Univ. Texas Inst. Marine Sci. Publ. 4, 265-277. Roth, P.H., Mullin, M.M. and Berger, W.H. (1975) Coccolith sedimentation by fecal pellets: Laboratory and field observations. Geol. Soc. Am. Bull. 86, 1079-1084. Schrader, J.H. (1971) Fecal pellets: Role in sedimentation of pelagic diatoms. Science 174, 55-57. Smayda, T.J. (1969) Some measurements of the sinking rates of fecal pellets. Limnol. Oceanogr. 14, 621-626. . (1970) The suspension and sinking of phytoplankton in the sea. Oceanogr. Mar. Biol. Ann. Rev. 8, 353-414. Sohal, R.S., Peters, P.D. and Hall, T.A. (1977) Origin, structure, composition and age-dependence of mineralized dense bodies (concretions) in the mid• gut epithelium of the adult housefly, Musca domestica. Tissue and Cell 9, 87-102. 143 Sullivan, D.S. (1977) The digestive tract of a harpactoid copepod, Tigriopus californiCus. A light and electron microscope study. Unpub. M.Sc. thesis, University of British Columbia, Canada. Syvitski, J.P. and Murray, J.W. (1978) Flocculation and zooplankton pelletiza- tion of suspended sediment in a high run-off fjord; Howe Sound, British Columbia, (in prep). Verwey, J. (1952) On the ecology of distribution of cockle and mussel in the Dutch Waddensee, their role in sedimentation and the source of their food supply. Archiv. Nederland. Zool. 10, 171-240. Vincente, M.A., Razzaghe, M. and Robert, M. (1977) Vermiculite (intergrade) and smectite from mica under acidic conditions. Clay Minerals 12, 101-111. Wangersky, P.J. (1965) The organic chemistry of sea water. Am. Sci. 53, 358-374. Webster, T.J.M., Paranjabe, M.A. and Mann, K.H. (1975) Sedimentation of organic matter in St. Margaret's Bay, Nova Scotia. J. Fish. Res. Bd. Can. Udonova, O.N. (1940) Khimicheski sostav Calanus finmarchicus Barentsova Motya. Dokl. Akad". Nauk. S.S.S.R. 29, 218-224. 144 FLOCCULATION, AGGLOMERATION, AND ZOOPLANKTON PELLETIZATION OF SUSPENDED SEDIMENT IN A FJORD RECEIVING GLACIAL MELTWATER ABSTRACT Glacial flour (feldspar, quartz, trioctahedral mica, chlorite, amphi• bole, tourmaline and vermiculite) enters the surface layer of Howe Sound, southwestern British Columbia, as a sediment plume which moves quickly down- inlet while slowly mixing with the sea water. Although flocculation occurs in the lower, brackish waters of the surface layer, mixing and diffusion are the dominant means for sediment to enter the lower marine water. Once in the underlying marine water, zooplankton pelletization and biologic agglomeration of inorganic floccules takes place. These processes that enhance the indivi• dual particle settlement, generate a fast response between the surface layer and the lower marine layer in terms of sedimentation of particulate matter. Six types of marine particles are described. They are: 1) sand and silt grains commonly with attached clay particles; 2) clay clasts possibly related to river mudballs; 3) mineral-bearing fecal pellets from pelagic zooplankton; 4) large-grain inorganic floccules;; 5) colloidal floccules; and 6) inorganic-biogenic agglomerates. These particles have settling velo• cities exceeding those of their component grains. Settling velocities of particles less that 1 ym have been enhanced over 1400 times. Analysis of sediment trap data has led to the following conclusions: 1) water turbidity cannot be used as a measure of the downward flux of par• ticles; 2) deep water sand discharges are common near the mouth of the Sqa- misg River, which enter the head of the fjord; 3) size distributions of se• diment deposited on the sea-bed are a function of variable multimodal and/or non-log-normal size distributions from sediment falling through the water column. 145 INTRODUCTION Fjords are structurally-controlled, U-shaped valleys that extend from a mountainous hinterland down to the sea. They have deep basins, steep sides, one or more submerged sills, and one or more rivers that at one time drained glaciated alpine areas. The salinity distribution; of the water is typified by a shallow surface layer of fresh to brackish water from the river run-off, below which the horizontal and vertical salinity gradients of the lower marine layer are usually small. Fjords are found in Norway, Greenland, Canada, Chile, New Zealand, the United States, Scotland, and the Soviet Union, of which Canada has the greatest number. Previous geologic studies in fjords have been limited to describing bottom sediments and geochemistry (Bruun et al., 1955; Pickard, 1956; Toombs, 1956; Goss et al., 1963; von Huene, 1966; Skei et al., 1972; Macdonald and Murray, 1973; Holtedahl, 1975; Loring, 1976; Slatt and Gardiner, 1976). How• ever, Hoskins and Burrel (1972), Price and Skei (1975) and Sundby and Loring (1978) have described aspects of the sedimentation and geochemistry of suspen• ded sediments. This study was designed to investigate the sedimentation of suspended sediments in Howe Sound, a fjord in .British Columbia which receives: copious glacial run-off (Fig. 1). In particular, the following unresolved problems were examined: 1) How does the suspended sediment load behave upon.entry into a fjord? 2) How does the sedimentation rate change throughout the river fresh• et? 3) What is the relationship between the sediment in the water column and that collected by sediment traps? 4) Does the size distribution of the sus• pended load change from the river mouth outwards or downwards in the fjord? 5) By what: mechanism do the suspended particles settle out - as single 146 Figure 1. Location of the study area and sample sites within Howe Sound. 147 particles, by inorganic flocculation, by biological interaction or by other processes? 6) What are the in situ settling velocities of these particles? 7) Do agents that enhance the settling of particles, if present, influence clay mineral patterns along the fjord bottom? 8) What is the clay mineralogy of "glacial flour"? To complete such a comprehensive study, Howe Sound was chosen since there are pre-requisite physical and chemical data available from the fields of physical oceanography (Pickard, 1961; Waldichuk et al., 1968; Crean and Agnes, 1971; Bell, 1973, 1974, 1975), dynamic oceanography (Buckley and Pond, 1976; Buckley, 1977), geology (Mathews, 1958; Mathews et al., 1966; Terzaghi, 1956; Werner and Hyslop, 1968; Bell, 1975; Syvitski et al., in prep.), chemis• try (Thompson and McComas, 1973, 1974; Harbo et al., 1974; Macdonald and Wong, 1977), and biology (Levings, 1973a, 1974; Cliff and Stockner, 1973). Howe Sound lies within the Pacific Ranges of the Coast Mountains and is bounded on the south by the Georgia Lowland of the Coastal Trough. In the 42 km length of Howe Sound, there are two sills, one halfway down the fjord and the other at the fjord mouth. The maximum depth of 325 m is in the north of the first sill. Only the northern 17 km of the fjord (river mouth to first sill) were investigated. This section of the fjord is 3 km wide with a sill at 35 to 70 m depth at its southern end. The major source of freshwater is glacial melt water and winter snowfall in the Squamish River, which has an 3 -1 average discharge rate of 250 m -sec . The discharge is generally highest in 3 -1 the months of June through August (=480 m -sec ) and lowest from January to 3-1 2 March (=86 m -sec ). The Squamish River has a drainage area of 3636 km . METHODS Field procedure: Samples were collected on 10 cruises during the spring, summer and fall periods of 1976 and 1977 from R/V Active Lass. The ship was positioned on each of the stations (Fig. 1) by radar triangulation 148 and echo sounding. The ship did not anchor during station sampling when tran• sects were run (i.e., stations 1-2-3, stations 4-5-6, stations 7-8-9, or sta• tions A-K). Anchoring was done only when sediment traps were placed in the water and the current was measured. Over 800 water samples were collected at various levels within the water column. Surface samples were collected with a polyethylene bucket and subsurface samples with vertical arrays of 5- and d) 7-litre Niskin samplers. The samplers were slowly raised during Closure since this procedure was found to increase the chance of accurate recovery of the fast settling sand fraction. The recovered water samples were thoroughly shaken. A subsample was retained in 1-litre Nalgene bottles from which the temperature (± 0.1°C) ahd salinity (± 0.5%o) were measured.. Small samples (20 - 40 ml), immediately upon recovery and before shaking, were suction fil^ (R) tered on 47 mm HA Millipore filters (0.45 ym nominal pore size). The fil• ters were oven dried at 40°C for 18 hours and stored in individual Petri dishes for later optical and SEM analysis. The water samples were frozen until the particle concentration could be determined. Suspended sediment traps were constructed from clear acrylic plastic tubing (O.D. = 8.8 cm, W.T. = 0.64 cm) which were closed at one end to make 35 cm high cylindrical traps. The traps were attached by stainless steel hoseclamps to trap holders (4 traps per holder). The holders consisted of two 1.9 cm PVC pipes, 2 m in length, that intersected at a PVC block. The block was attached to a wire with wing-nuts. (Note: For further details refer to Webster et al. (1975); Syvitski (1978b) or contact the senior author of this paper.) Four of the above sediment traps were positioned at each depth. Four depths were monitored at stations (1), (2), (5) and (8). A total of twelve, 6 to 12 hour collections were made. Horizontal currents were measured 149 using a Savonius-rotor surface read-out current meter. Bottom sediment samples were collected along transect A-K (Fig, 1) using a Dietz-Lefond grab sampler. Preliminary testing of sediment trap: A cylindrical sediment trap having a mouth diameter of 7.5 cm and height of 35 cm had 5.028 gm of sediment deposited on the cylinder bottom.. The sediment had a mean grain size of 5 ym and stan• dard deviation of 5 ym. The trap was then submerged in running water for two hours where the flow ranged up to 100 cm*sec ^. The recovered sediment was analyzed for weight loss and change in size distribution. Four similar traps containing dyed sea water and known quantities of sediment ("x = 4.3 ym, S.D. = 5.2 ym) were placed in the trap holder and lowered 150 m (station (2), Howe Sound). The traps were retrieved at 0.3 m-sec ^ and the recovered sediment was weighed and size analyzed. This trap assembly was then lowered into a large pool of water and tested for tilt angle with a plumb line. Laboratory procedures: The water samples were immediately suction filtered upon thawing through two pre-weighed 47 mm HA Millipore^-' filters (0.45 ym nominal pore size). The filters were rinsed free of salts by passing 50 ml of filtered (0.45 ym) distilled water through them. The bottom filter was used as a control for filter weight loss (Gibbs, 1971). The filters were then oven dried at 40°C for 18 hours before weight determination, on a Mettler ® H20 balance (± 0.50 mg). The filters were next flame ignited using ethanol in porcelain crucibles and then combusted at 550°C for four hours in a muffle furnace. The remaining ash was weighed. Total suspended matter (TSM), percent inorganic matter (% IOM), and the percent organic matter (% OM) were then cal• culated. All the particulate matter greater than 0.2 ym was extracted from the bulk water samples by centrifugation. The extracted sediment was dried, washed in 30% H000, and sonicated before size analysis and/or XRD analysis. 150 The contents of the 192 recovered traps were allowed to settle for 72 hours in a refrigerator at 4 - 6°C, after which the top 3/4 of the supernatant liquid was decanted. Sediment from three of the four traps per station depth were washed in distilled water, shaken and centrifuged repeatedly until free of salts (test by AgNO^). The extracted sediment was then oven-dried at 40°C for 24 hours and weighed. One of the three dry trap samples was combusted for 8 hours at 400°C after an initial heat increase period of 2 hours. The resul• tant ash was weighed and the % OM and % IOM calculated. The second dry sample was bathed in 30% H^O^ and sonicated for subsequent size analysis. The third dry trap sample was analyzed on the Leco ^ carbon analyzer. The remaining wet sediment sample was wet sieved through a 63 ym sieve. The fecal pellets in the greater than 63 ym fraction were isolated by the CCl^ flotation method (Dillon, 1964), and then counted. Approximately 20 fecal pellets from each sample were washed with distilled water, allowed to air dry, and weighed. They were next ashed in a muffle furnace at 400°C for four hours and their ash weight was recorded. The remains were examined under a transmitted light microscope to provide a visual estimation of the inorganic biogenic component. From these data, the weight percent of inorganic sediment in one pellet was calculated. The above procedure was repeated on five batches of pellets per sample. The minus 63 ym fraction was washed free of salt, and freed of organic matter (30% H^O^) and iron oxides (citrate buffer-sodium dithionite method), for later XRD analysis. Size analytical procedure: Filters of the small water samples, containing less than 1 mg of particulate matter per 47 mm diameter filter, were optically size- analyzed. Twenty-five sample filters were mounted on glass slides with ace• tone after adding a few drops of clearing fluid (1:1:1 hexane:ethylene dichlo- ride:1,4-dioxane). Cover slips held the filters flat and in place. 151 (R) These filter slides were inserted into a Zeiss ^ phase contrast microscope connected to a Zeiss Particle Size Analyzer. Sixteen size fractions, ran• ging between 1 pm and 63 ym, were used in the analysis. Both 16x and 40x objective lenses and both light and dark phase contrasts were used in the counting of over 20,000 grains per sample. Due to random alignment of the particles on the filter (Syvitski, 1978a) the method measured the average intermediate grain diameters. Grain sphericity and grain roundness were also noted during size analysis. The volume size analysis (VSA) method (Syvitski and Swinbanks, 19 78) was used on 75 trap and water samples (> 50 mg of sedi• ment needed). The method, based on Stokes Law of Settling, produces results in equivalent spherical sedimentation diameters. The advantages and accuracy of the method are described elsewhere (Syvitski and Swinbanks, 1978). The method involved use of the UBC UBM 370-168 computing facility. Scanning Electron Microscopic Analysis: When the filtered samples covered less than 1% of the filtered surface area with particulate matter, the sample was examined by SEM for the existence and quantity of flocculated material. Fecal pellets separated from the sediment traps were also examined under the (R) Cambridge Stereoscan^ SEM. X-radiatiori procedure: Samples which had their organic fraction, salt, and and free iron oxide removed, were sonicated and size separated by centrifuga- J tion into 0.2 - 2 ym and 2 - 20 ym fractions. Between 8 - 10 mg of each size fraction was mounted for quantitative XRD analysis using the Ag filter moun• ting technique (Syvitski, 1978a). The method has a total analytical precision of ± 7.5% area. The samples are mounted with random orientation of the miner- (R) als. All mounts were analyzed on a Philips^ 1010-75 wide angle X-ray dif- fractometer using nickel filtered copper Ka radiation generated at 40 kv and 20 mA. The scintillation detector slits were 1x0.2x1. The scan speed was 152 1 , 28/minute between 3 and 65 and was recorded on a Philips ® PM 8000 strip recorder at 1°, 20/cm. The scan speed was decreased to h°, 28/minute between 24°-26° and 59°-63° for clay polytype determination. Each sample mount was run after gylcolation (1,2-ethanediol) and later heating to 500°C for 1 hour. Areas under the diffractogram peaks (1.70 nm, 1.20 nm, 1.00 nm, 0.710 nm, 0.426 nm, 0.320 nm) were measured as weights from a photocopy trace of the areas. Peak heights were measured for 0.84 nm and 0.348 nm peaks. RESULTS Some Physical Oceanographic Observations Appendix #2, the detailed data base, contains all observations,and mea• surements not specifically cited in this paper. Water temperatures in Howe Sound ranged from 7.6°C to 17.7°C during the sampling period. Three layers of transitional temperature were observed in the water column: the surface (0m), the halocline temperature maximum (htm), and the bottom marine water. The temperatures of each of these layers were averaged over the collection period for each measured day and are listed in Table 1. Results for stations (1) and. (2), 1977, are shown in Figure 2. The temperatures of both the surface and the htm increase during the day• light hours unless the day is cloudy or stormy. The temperatures of both the surface and htm, at any one time, increase down the fjord and laterally away from the main river jet. The variation in surface temperature is greater than that of the htm in the short term (hours). No short term and little long term (months) variation in temperature was observed in the deeper water. The deep water on the south side of the inner sill at station (9) was colder at similar water depths than the north side of the sill at station (7). The total suspended matter ranged between 0.3 - 77.7 mg/l and 0 - 6.2 mg/SL, for inorganic weight concentration (IWC) and organic weight concentra• tion (OWC), respectively. The htm depth was found to be an excellent way of 153 Average Temperature (°C) Station Date 0 m htm* bottom* 1,2,3 June 25/76 11,6 9.3 4,5,6 July 30/76 10.1 12.0 8.9 1,2,3 Aug. 16/76 10.9 11.9 9.3 2 Sept. 24/76 11.9 12.8 - 1 Apr. 26/77 8.9 11.1 7,8,9 Apr. 27/77 11.5 11.8 - 1 May 24/77 9.8 11.1 9.4 2 May 25/77 12.0 12.3 8.9 7,8,9 May 26/77 12.9 13.5 8.5 1 June 27/77 10.3 13.3 9.4 5 June 28/77 13.3 14.0 9.5 8 June 29/77 15.5 16.3 9.7 1 July 20/77 11.5 13.6 9.6 2 July 21/77 12.6 14.6 9.4 1 Aug. 22/77 11.4 13.8 9.5 2 Aug. 23/77 11.9 15.8 8.7 7,8,9 Aug. 24/77 13.0 17.7 9.5 1 Oct. 31/77 7.6 10.7 9.1 htm = halocline temperature maximum bottom = 5 m above the sea-bed Table 1. Mean daily temperature of the top surface water (0 m), the halocline temperature maximum, and the bottom marine water. Station number Water layer —i 1 1 1 1 1 r- May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Month, 1977 Figure 2. Temperature variations during the 1977 field season at station (1) and (2) in terms of surface water, halocline temperature maximum and bottom marine water. 155 dividing the surface water from the lower (deeper) marine water. The surface water has lower salinities and higher and more variable mean organic weight concentration (OWC) and inorganic weight concentration (IWC) than the lower marine water. The surface layer also has larger currents than the marine layer. These surface currents fluctuate over small depth intervals. The current velocity, in 1977, ranged from 0 to 41.0 cm-sec ^ at stations (1) and (2). The surface velocity on flood tide increased down the fjord . while the actual surface layer decreased in thickness, whereas, during ebb tide, the surface velocity decreased as the layer thickened. Thus the htm varies with depth through the tidal cycle. The surface water IWC was found to decrease down the fjord and laterally away from the main river jet while salinity (S%0) increased. Figure 3 indicates the typical linear relationship between surface IWC, salinity, and temperature, with distance from river mouth for November 1, 1977. Particulate Matter in Howe Sound Water The inorganic weight concentration was observed to range linearly with salinity through the surface layer and halocline. These dilution lines are plotted for the various stations and sample dates in Figure 4. The slope (m) , ordinate (b), correlation coefficient (r), and the number of samples (N), are given for these linear regressions of IWC vs. S%0 in Table 2. There is a linear relationship between m and b in these equations such that b = -26.15*m + 1.24 at r = -0.998 (Fig. 5). From a detailed analysis of the station (1) surface layer on April 26, 1977, the variability of IWC was found to decrease as salinity increased (Fig. 6). The .vertical daily"variation of IWC and OWC at this station and date are given in Figures 7a and 7b. Both daily averages indicate aim max• imum, something that is frequently noted in the stations close to the river mouth. The position of the halocline temperature maximum (htm)for this per- Inorganic Weight Concentration IWC vs. S%« Organic Weight Concentration (mg/1) (mg/1) Station(s) & Date xah aah N xbh abh N m b r N xah aah N xbh abh N 7,8,9 July 29/76 2.2 1.6 29 . 29 1.1 0.6 29 4,5,6 - July 30/76 3.8 2.1 25 0.26 7.3 -.98 18 1.3 0.6 25 1,2,3 - Aug. 16/76 8.1 . 5.6 24 * * ft 23 1.6 0.8 23 2 - Sept.. 24/76 3.2 1.8 21 0.9 0.5 12 -0.20 5.4 -.99 13 0.9 0.4 22 0.8 0.3 12 1 - Apr. 26/77 27.2 13.4 27 5.5 1.0 8 -1.30 38.0 -.93 29 3.7 2.6 29 1.8 0.2 7 7,8,9 - Apr. 27/77 4.8 1.2 18 2.9 0.9 6 -0.27 9.8 -.87 24 1,8 0.5 18 1.6 0.4 6 1 - May 24/77 5.8 1.8 8 1.6 0.3 10 -0.22 6.9 -.95 10 1.7 1.0 8 0.4 0.2 9 2 - May 25/77 3.0 1.3 8 0.7 0.3 18 -0.13 4.9 -.97 12 1.5 1.2 10 0.6 0.5 17 7,8,9 - May 26/77 1.6 0.2 12 0.6 0.2 14 ftft *ft ft* 12 1,0 0.2 12 0.2 0.2 14 1 - June 27/77 34.8 15.1 10 6.6o 2.6 10 -1.60 44.4 -.92 9 2.4 0.8 10 0.5 0.3 10 5 - June 28/77 12.0 4.0 10 2.0 0.7 15 -0.58 17.8 -.96 18 0.8 0.6 10 0.4 0.2 17 8 - June 29/77 2.9 1.0 9 1.0 0.4 13 -0.15 5.0 -.83 14 0.6 0.4 7 0.3 0.2 14 1 - July 20/77 30.6 19.4 8 3.4 1.6 12 -2.10 56.2 -.90 15 2.3 0.9 8 0.6 0.4 12 2 - July 21/77 24.5 12.9 8 3.2 1.1 12 -1.70 43.3 -.88 14 1.5 0.7 8 0.4 0.2 14 1 - Aug. 22/77 47.7 15.0 13 5.7 2.9 10 -2.30 61.6 -.89 16 3.0 1.2 12 0.6 0.5 10 2 - Aug. 23/77 18.1 9.4 12 5.7 5.0 14 -1. 10 29.5 -.90 14 1.3 0.9 12 0.7 1.0 14 7,8,9 — Aug. 24/77 5.9 4.1 15 1.0 0.5 8 -4.30 11.3 -.98 12 0.6 0.5 15 0.1 0.1 8 1 - Oct. 31/77 3.5 1.8 10 2.0 1.1 7 -0.30 -8.9 -.99 12 0.5 0.2 7 0.3 0.2 6 *_ narrow halocline, not enough data; ** not enough low salinity samples x = mean; a = standard deviation; N = # of samples ah = samples taken above the halocline bh = samples taken below the halocline m = slope, b = Y-ordinate for the linear regression of IWC vs. S%„ (surface layer data) r = correlation coefficient to this regression line (only given if r ^ |±.80|) Table 2. Daily mean, standard deviation, and number of samples of inorganic and organic weight concentration for both the surface layer and the lower marine layer. Also shown are the linear regression parameters for IWC vs. S%„ in the surface layer. r-30 o CD E O a-20 E CO Mo Distance out from River Mouth, k m rxver mouth. 153 Figure 4. Dilution lines of the surface water mixing with the marine water in terms of IWC vs. S%o . 159 160 Figure 6. Detailed analysis of the surface layer, station (1), April 26, 1977. Note that the variability of IWC decreases as S%„ increases. OWC, mg/1 Salinity, %o B marine water. 162 iod is marked against plots of daily temperature and salinity (Fig, 7c), The mean surface layer inorganic-weight-concentration, IWC(xah) ranges linearly with its standard deviation, IWC(aah) (Table 2). At r = 0.93, IWC(aah) = 0.42*IWC(xah) + 0.64. This relation also exists in the lower marine water with IWC(abh) = 0.5«IWC(xbh) - 0.15 at r = 0.80. The mean sur• face layer organic-weight-concentration (OWC) and its standard deviation are also linearly related with OWC(aah) = 0.52•OWC(xah) - 0.02 at r = 0.84. No such relation for organic weight concentration was found to exist in the low• er marine layer. The daily average of inorganic and organic weight concentra• tion ranges linearly with IWC(xah) = 20.0•OWC(xah) - 16.6 at r = 0.80. Sta• tion (1) was unique in that IWC.varied directly with OWC at the individual sample level in the surface layer. The regression line, IWC = 16.1*OWC - 6.2 at r = 0.92, was the same for both June 27, 1977 and July 29, 1977. This linear equation did change, however, for other months at station (1). The mean daily inorganic weight concentration of the lower marine water is linearly correlated with the mean daily inorganic weight concentration of the surface water, with IWC(xbh) = 0.12*IWC(5cah) + 0.7 at r = 0.92. The mean daily inorganic concentration in Howe Sound increases through the summer months and declines during the fall. High suspended loads are brought into the Sound through infrequent and short-lived spring or fall storms (i.e., April 23, 1977, Figure 8). The organic and inorganic concentra• tions were both high and variable in the surface layer throughout the summer 'freshet' for station (1) during the spring, summer and fall of 1977 (Figs. 9a and b). Many times water samples from the fjord bottom are more turbid than other shallower water samples (i.e., June 27, 1977, Figs. 9a and b). Mid- depth maxima at stations (1) and (2) were also observed, though they were short lived effects and not detected in a daily average. 163 Abov* htm o -| 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 April May Jun* July Aug Sept Oct Nov Month, 1977 Figure 8. The variations in inorganic weight concentration above and below the halocline temperature maximum for the 1977 field season at station (1). Illustrated are the daily mean ± one standard devia• tion of IWC. Note the April 26, 1977 storm peak. 164 Mean Daily IWC, mg/ I Figure 9. Vertical variations of A) inorganic and B) organic weight concentrations at station (1) for the 1977 field season. The values plotted are daily averages for each depth. 165 Preliminary Testing of Sediment Trap Loss of sediment from within the trap did not occur when a large hori-, zontal current (up to 100 cm-sec ^) passed over the trap mouth. All deposited sediment was retained when lidless traps were retrieved at normal winch speeds (0.3 m 4.6%). The mean coefficient of variation of organic recovery was 11.6% at N = 192 (range 1.2 - 25.2%). (Note: the 1.9% value reflected laboratory tech• niques, not field recovery. The 11.6% value was thought to reflect laboratory techniques, the variable settling characteristics of organic matter, and the grazing of zooplankton and ciliates.) Sedimentation Rates Sedimentation rates and inorganic grain size moment measures for each station and date are given in Table 3. Most of the sedimenting material is inorganic. The inorganic and organic sedimentation rates ranged from 6.8 to -2 -1 -2 -1 1304.4 g«m «day and 0.3 to 28.8 g»m -day , respectively. The organic sedimentation rate (OSR) in most cases is highly and linearly correlated with the inorganic sedimentation rate (ISR), although this relationship did change from station to station and with time of year. One linear relationship, ISR = 29.1-OSR - 33.6 at r = 0.996 remained constant for both April and May, 1977, at stations (1) and (2). 166 SEDIMENTATION RATES GRAIN SIZE MEASURES Date Station Depth. Total Organic Carbon Inorg. Pellet - :xc a Sk Kurt Cm) Cs- m 2'day 1) Cpm) Sept. 24/76 2 50 191.2 6.8 184.4 2 100 224.8 8.8 216.0 Apr. 26/77 1 5 783.2 28.2 11.7 754.4 9.4 5.6 0.0 1.5 1 20 530.8 17.6 5.3 513.2 9.8 6.1 1.1 3.1 1 40 596.0 20.0 10.8 576.0 33.7 9.5 3.6 -0.4 3.0 1 55 718.8 24.4 9.3 694.4 31.3 10.6 3.7 0.9 2.4 May 24/77 1 5 40.0 4.0 36.4 1 20 22.0 2.0 20.0 1 40 28.8 2.0 26.8 1 55 38.4 3.0 35.4 May 25/77 2 5 16.0 2.0 14.0 2 45 10.4 0.8 9.6 2.3 2 85 7.6 0.8 6.8 1.2 2 135 21.6 1.6 20.0 1.2 June 27/77 1 5 294.8 6.2 291.8 1 20 317.6 6.2 3.11.2 5.4 3.4 0.8 3.7 1 40 856.8 12.4 843.6 8.8 6.9 0.4 1.5 1 55 748.8 11.6 737.2 8.1 5.9 0.3 1.6 June 28/77 5 5 • 37.3 1.0 0.4 36.3 1.5 2.4 3.6 3.2 25.8 5 20 43.4 1.0 0.3 42.4 0.8 3.2 2.3 6.0 54.5 5 60 79.4 1.9 0.8 77.5 67.3 2.6 3.6 2.5 9.8 5 100 96.0 3.1 0.8 92.9 67.3 2.6 3.7 2.2 8.2 June 29/77 8 5 19.2 0.3 n 18.9 3.9 8 15 7.7 0.9 6.8 4.3 8 25 9.2 . 0.8 8.4 5.4 8 35 10.7 1.0 9.7 1.9 July 20/77 1 5 229.6 4.8 1.8 224.8 5.7 4.7 2.1 8.0 1 20 191.2 3.6 0.9 187.6 5.6 3.8 2.2 7.6 1 40 220.0 4.0 1.1 216.0 5.8 5.7 2.1 6.7 1 55 246.0 4.8 1.3 241.2. 5.5 5.1 1.7 5.1 July 21/77 2 5 308.0 5.6 1.2 302.4 58.1 7.3 5.3 1.1 3.4 2 45 160.8 3.6 1.0 157.2 13.9 5.2 4.4 1.8 5.8 2 85 145.2 5.2 1.2 140.0 5.2 2.7 0.6 2.9 2 135 157.2 5.2 1.7 152.0 5.0 5.8 2.1 6.6 Aug. 22/77 1 5 1120.4 13.2 1107.2 3.5 8.9 6.7 0.9 2.6 1 20 1215.6 13.2 1202.4 13.9 10.4 7.6 0.1 1.5 1 40 1093.2 12.8 1080.4 8.1 13.0 9.9 0.5 1.4 1 55 1317.6 13.2 1304.4 9.7 11.4 7.9 0.2 1.5 Aug. 23/77 2 5 188.0 9.2 179.6 6.1 4.5 1.3 3.9 2 45 387.2 4.4 382.8 39.5 7.6 5.0 0.8 2.4 2 85 297.6 4.8 292.8 33.7 7.4 4.6 0.7 2.0 2 135 340.0 4.8 335.2 40.6 5.4 3.5 1.1 3.5 Oct. 31/77 1 5 30.0 1.2 28.8 13.9 5.2 3.4 1.2 4.6 1 20 40.4 1.2 39.2 18.6 6.7 4.5 0.7 2.5 1 40 71.6 1.6 70.0 31.3 6.1 3.8 1,5 5,5 1 55 125.6 2.8 122.8 23.2 10.5 7.6 0.4 1.6 xc = mean, a = standard deviation, Sk = skewness coef., Kurt = kurtosis coef. Table 3. Total,, organic, carbon, inorganic, and pellet sedimentation rates with inorganic grain size measures as determined from trap collected sediment. 167 On June 27-29, 1977, sedimentation rates measured down the fjord at stations (1), (5) and (8) indicated that both ISR and OSR decreased linearly with increasing distance from the river mouth. Carbon sedimentation rates (CSR) are linearly related to organic sedimen• tation rates with CSR = 0.74-OSR - 1.08, with r = 0.80 at N = 16. The weight of individual pelagic zooplankton fecal pellets ranged from 7 to 42 ug (x = 30 yg). Four-fifths of the pellets collected have an inorgan• ic weight percent greater than 90. Most of the fecal pellets consist of non- 4 biogenic inorganic material. The pellet flux ranged from 2.8 x 10 to 2.2 x 6 —2 — 1 10 pellets*m -day . The pellet flux was translated into pellet sedimenta- -2 -1 tion rate (PSR) in g»m -day using the mean pellet weight of 30 yg (Table 3). The PSR does not correlate linearly with either ISR or OSR. On June 28, 1977, at station (5), between 67% and 87% of the sediment fell as mineral-bearing fecal pellets at the 60 m and 100 m levels respectively. Analysis of Table 3 reveals a linear correlation between the mean parti• cle size that was collected, xc, and ISR, i.e., Ic = 0.006«ISR + 4.3 with r = 0.85 at N = 31. Therefore, as ISR increases, so does the mean particle size collected. The mean daily IWC, measured from water samples taken contemporaneously at the same depth as sediment traps, has no correlation with the ISR calcula• ted for that depth. The ISR, as measured by the deepest trap per station, however, relates directly to the mean surface layer IWC. At r = 0.97, ISR = 27.8'IWCCxah) - 83.3. These same ISR values also correlate with the ordinate of the IWC vs. S%„ equation (b in Table 2) with ISR = 25-b - 190 at r = 0.97. The OSR, as measured by the deepest trap per station, correlates linearly with both the mean surface water OWC and the mean lower marine water OWC such that OSR = 7.7«0WC(xah) - 6.8 at r = 0.88 and OSR = 17.5•OWC(xah) - 4.4 at r = 0.90. 168 1400 -i I T 1 T T 1 r —I April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Month, 1977 Figure 10. The variation of inorganic sedimentation rates for the 1977 field season at station (1) as determined from 4 levels of sediment traps. Note the June 27 peaks for the 40 m and 55 m collection levels. These represent collection of the deep water sand flows generated at the river mouth. 169 The mean daily ISR, in Howe Sound, is highest during the summer months although its month-to-month fluctuations are very large (Fig, 10). The spring storm on April 26, 1977, brought about high sedimentation rates through in• creased river discharge. The sedimentation rates differ at the trap levels at any one station and time, producing surface maxima, or mid-depth maxima or bottom maxima (Table 3). Sediment Size Distributions In most cases the sediment collected in traps at any given station, were found to be similar in size distribution at the various levels in the water column. Station (1), October 31, 1977, was one example where this similarity was not the case. The variation in the collected sediment at the various levels (Fig. 11) was as radical as the variation at the 55 m level of station (1) throughout the year (Fig. 12). The inorganic sediment collected by the traps have mulitmodal, non-log-normal, size distributions. The inflection points in the size distributions are not constant at any one size fraction between the collection levels at any one station. Size distributions from surface suspended sediments and fjord-bottom sediment, along the profile transect stations A-K (Fig. 1), are indicated on log-probability plots (Figs. 13 and 14). The choice of station locations for this transect was determined from a general, qualitative surface circulation pattern for upper Howe Sound as deduced from a surface drogue study (see Fig. 3 of Buckley and Pond, 1976). Results indicate that both the suspended sedi• ment and the bottom sediment are multimodal and not log-normal. Most bottom sediment had 8' ct (3.5 ym) , 5.9 and 10.5 $ (0.5 - 1 ym) , 6.6 dal peaks, but these were variable between samples. Analysis of bottom sediment reveals a linear decrease in both mean and 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Equivalent Spherical Sedimentation Diameter, 0 Figure .11. Log-probability plot showing the large variation of size distri• butions between sediment collected from sediment traps at 4 levels, October 31, 1977, at station (1). CNote: each of these and other size distributions presented in this paper are constructed from 16 equally spaced data points, see Fig. 23). 1/1 98 -i Equivalent Spherical Sedimentation Diameter, ^ Figure 12. Log-probability plot of size distributions collected from the 55 m deep trap at station (1) throughout the 1977 field season. Note the variable multimodal, non-log-normal nature of the curves. Ill Stat ion 1 - A 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Equivalent Spherical Sedimentation Diameter, rf Figure 13. Log-probability plot of size distributions from suspended sediment samples collected along transect A-K from the surface-water (0 m) on July 22, 19.77. Note the variable, non-log-normal nature of the curves. 173 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Equivalent Spherical Sedimentation Diameter, rf Figure 14. Log-probability plot of size distributions from deposited sea-bed samples•collected along transect B-K on July 22, 1977. Note the multimodal, non-log-normal nature of the curves. 174 Standard deviation grain-size statistics and a general increase in the moment measure of skewness coefficient with increasing distance down the fjord. The grain size mean decreases from 11.5 ym (station B) near the river mouth to 1.2 ym (station K) on the south side of the sill. Suspended sediment also roughly decrease in mean grain size down the fjord, i.e., 3.3 ym at station (A), the river mouth, to 1.4 ym at station (K). There is little variation in the stan• dard deviation of the suspended sediment in grain size distribution (range 3.8 ym - 2.3 ym). These samples are all very positively skewed (sk > 2.3) and ex• tremely leptokurtic (kurt > 7.6). Deviation from log-normality for grain size increases down the fjord for both bottom sediment and suspended sediment. On November 1, 1977, suspended sediment collected from surface water of Howe Sound displayed a variety of non-log-normal and bimodal size distributions (Fig. 15) that differed significantly from those analyzed from the July 22, 1977, cruise (Fig. 13). Analysis of suspended sediment from other collection dates yielded further variable grain size distributions. The mean grain size of suspended sediment, Xs, is linearly correlated with the mean inorganic weight concentration of the surface layer with Xs = 0.6'IWC(xah) + 1.2 at r = 0.97. The equation is based on data from only sta• tions (1) and (2) and.because N = 8. should.be considered tentative... In.gen• eral, Xs decreases as IWC(xah) decreases. Optical analysis of particle diameter (intermediate cross-section) indi• cated little variation in suspended sediment with increasing depth through the surface layer (Fig. 16). This method did not distinguish floes though, as only discrete grains were measured. The average sphericity value is 0.81, and the average roundness 0.73. Description of Marine Particles Analysis of over 400 scanning electron micrographs of Howe Sound suspen• ded sediments revealed four types of marine particles: 1) attached mineral 175 Figure 15. Log-probability plot of size distributions from suspended sediment samples collected at five stations from the surface water (0 m) on November 1, 1977. These curves show an entirely different distri• bution as compared to those shown on Figure 13, although both are from suspended sediment samples. 176 4 6 8 1 Intermediate Cross - Sectional Diameter, $ Figure 16. Cummulative number percent curves of particle diameter through. the surface layer indicating little variation of particle size with depth. 177 grains; 2) clay clasts; 3) mineral-bearing fecal pellets from pelagic zooplank• ton; and 4) floccules (large-grain, colloidal and inorganic-biogenic types). All large silt particles (feldspar, quartz and hornblende) have smaller particles, usually less than 1 um, attached to them (Figs. 17A-C). The amount attached varies considerably from grain to grain, but many have coatings that might increase the original weight by an estimated 0.5%. The attached parti• cles are mostly clay plates although organic matter is also common. This form of particle interaction is described as attached mineral grains. Balls of clay, termed clay clasts, that ranged in diameter from 10 - 35 ym, have frequently been observed as a minor constituent of the suspended sedi• ments of Howe Sound (Figs. 17D-F). They are usually well-rounded sometimes almost perfect spheres. The clay plates (chlorite and biotite) align face to face, making a very compact and dense body. The plates have a mean grain size of 3.5 ym. Most of the mineral-bearing fecal pellets were identified as being pro• duced by eupasiids or copepods. The average pellet size is 100 ym in length and 38 ym in width (Figs. 18A-D). The pellets contain up to 98% clay plates (chlorite and biotite) and minor amounts of quartz, feldspar and hornblende. Apparently, the largest particle size ingested was 22 ym, although the average particle was only 2.8 ym in diameter. The clays are tightly packed and ran• domly oriented (i.e., face-to-face, edge-to-edge, face-to-edge). This would produce a lower density than that of the clay clasts described above. Three types of mineral-bearing floes were observed: 1) large grain floes; 2) colloidal floes; and 3) inorganic-biogenic floes. The large-grain floccules are composed mostly of clay plates larger than 2 ym (Fig. 19A-F). The clay alignment is generally edge-to-edge or a combination of face-to-face and edge- to-edge. (Note: the quick and gentle filtration of sea water is thought to maintain floe orientation.) In both cases the floes are two-dimensional (flat). 178 179 Figure 17. Silt grains of quartz (17A,17C) and feldspar (17B) carrying attached clay and organic particles. Spherical clay clasts possibly related to river mudballs are shown in 17D, 17E, and 17F. 181 Figure 18. Mineral-bearing fecal pellets (A-D). Figure 18A also shows a partly damaged Skeletonema sp. All pellets show a lack of quartz and feldspar grains and abundant clay mineral plates. The pellet of Figure 18A was produced from a pelagic copepod while Figure 18D shows a pelagic euphausiid fecal pellet. 182 183 Figure 19. Progressive growth of inorganic large grain floccules (A-F). The initial edge to edge plate configuration at S%0 = 3.0 (Fig. 19A) change to face to face configuration at S%„ = 20.0 and 29.0 respectively (Figs. 19B & 19C). Figure 19C shows atypical silt particles (quartz and feldspar) caught up in a floe, S%„ = 25.0. Figures 19E and 19F show the typical variety of three dimensional floes found in the lower-marine-waters. 184 The standard deviation of particle size in this floe type is usually large, The floe diameter range from 10 ym to 70 ym, or even larger, and depends pri• marily on the collection depth. Floes are rare in freshwater, At depths where the salinity of the water is 3%<> , floes are composed of 2 to 10 particles of edge-to-edge alignment. These floes are less than 25 ym in size. As salinity and collection depth increase, so does the floe size and range of particle sizes. The largest floes were collected at depths in the lower marine water. These floes are more equant and commonly have edge-to-face clay alignment. Also, these larger floccules tend to have more organic matter attached than those collected from the surface layer. Colloidal floes are mostly composed of less than 2 ym clay plates inter• mixed with colloidal material (Fig. 20A-D). The colloidal material forms the central part of the floe with clay plates attached around its outside. Its floccule size ranges from 15 to 35 ym up. The alignment of the clay plates is overlapping face-to-face and edge-to-edge. The shape is mostly flat. These floes were sometimes associated with the large-grain floes. Inorganic-biogenic floes resemble the large-grain floes, except that they contain over 30% inorganic biogenic components, such as broken diatom frustules (valves, valve mantles, girdles, marginal spinulae). These floes (Fig. 21A-F) recovered from the lower marine water, tend to be large (> 35 ym). The floes are equant and have a pseudo-random oriented structure, i.e., va• rious angles of edge-to-edge, edge-to-face and face-to-face plate alignments. The most abundant inorganic components were plate-like valves broken from Coscinodiscus lineatus. Fibres, possibly from setae of Corethron hystrix or Chaetocerous decipiens, tend to be wrapped around the clay particles and ac• tually tie them together. Organic mucus of unknown composition and origin also coat many of the floes. Carbonate excretions possibly from Tintinnids were found to be attached to some clay plates. 185 186 Figure 20. Variety of colloidal floccules, all having the characteristic flat- lying clay plate arrangement. The initial floe shape is round (Fig. 20A). This later changes into 'snake-like' shapes with depth (Figs. 20B & 20D). Figure 20C shows clay plates attached around an organic mucous substance. 187 188 Figure 21. Variety of inorganic-biogenic agglomerates; A) - clay plates tied together by organic fibres; B) - damaged centric diatom attached to inorganic particles; C) - Tiritinnid excretion on clay particles; D) - organic mucous and diatom frustules in• termixed with clay plates; E) - agglomerate of mostly diatom fragments intermixed with clay plates; and F) - typical three- dimensional agglomerate colonized by bacteria. 189 SEM analysis of the suspended sediment ash after combustion indicates that greater than 90% of the ash (by volume) is always mineral grains. The remainder is composed mostly of diatom frustules (CoscinOdiscus lineatus, As- terioriella sp., Skeletonema costatum, Chaetoceros sp., Navicula sp., Nitzscia sp.). The major mineral components identified by XRD and the atomic lattice spacings which distinguished them are: a) feldspar (bytownite, albite, orth- clase) - 0.639 nm, 0.403 nm, 0.39 nm, 0.366 nm, 0.34 nm, 0.321 hm, 0.319 nm, 0.314 nm, 0.300 nm, 0.2535 nm, 0.2285 nm, 0.213 nm, 0.182 nm; b) quartz - 0.426 nm, 0.334 nm, 0.246 nm, 0.2285 nm, 0.182 nm and 0.154 nm; c) trioctahedral mica (degraded biotite or biotite-vermiculite interlayer) -- broad 1.0 nm basal re• flection (1.23 nm to 0.98 nm) and 0.50 nm, 0.334 nm, 0.290 nm, 0.200 nm and 0.153 nm reflections; d) iron-rich chlorite (penninite) - weak first and third order basal reflections (1.4 nm, 0.472 nm) and strong second and fourth order basal reflections (0.71 nm, 0.354 nm) - (Note: often no 1.4 nm reflection was present before heat treatment and the 0.71 nm reflection was greatly reduced after heat treatment. Differentiation from kaolinite was based on the well defined 0.354 nm reflection at slow scan speed where the kaolinite 0.358 nm peak was never present.); e) amphibole (hornblende) - 0.84 nm, 0.296 nm, 0.282 nm, 0.2705 nm and 0.2585 nm; f) tourmaline - 0.638 nm, 0.348 nm, 0.296 nm, 0.258 nm, 0.238 nm and 0.219 nm; g) vermiculite (swelling variety) - 1.2 nm (1.1 nm - 1.23 nm) or 1.4 nm basal reflection which expanded to 1.55 nm up to 1.70 nm upon glycolation, (Note: exfoliation of silt and sand size 'golden' mica was observed after H-2^2 treatment' Also, the expansion to 1.7 nm of silt size mica eliminates montmorillonite as a possibility. The expansion of clay particles in the same sample does not eliminate montmorillonite, however, and 190 it may be present.) The minor mineral constituents are muscovite (same re• flections as for biotite except its [060] reflection is at 0.150 nm not 0.153 nm), pyroxene (0.300 nm, 0.294 nm, 0.213 nm, 0.200 nm, 0.082 nm), epidote (0.5018 nm, 0.2900 nm, 0.2396 nm, 0.2161 nm, 0.211 nm, 0.164 nm) , pyrophyllite (0.92 nm, 0.46 nm, 0.306 nm), ilmenite-magnetite (0.274 nm, 0.253 nm, 0.229 nm, 0.211 nm) , apatite (0.285 nm, 0.277 nm, 0.195 nm, 0.193 nm?, 0.183 nm?), and cassiterite? (0.334 nm, 0.264 nm). Tourmaline is more abundant in the coarser fraction than in the finer (in 79% of the samples), based on 0.348 nm to 0.32 nm peak height ratio. Quartz is also more abundant in the coarse fraction (in 82% of the samples) based on 0.426 nm to 0.32 nm peak area ratio. Amphibole is present in approx• imately equal abundance in both the coarse (2 - 20 ym) and the fine (0.2 - 2 ym) size fractions based on the 0.84 nm to 0.32 nm peak height ratio. In 97% of the samples, biotite is greater in the fine fraction based on the 1.00 nm to 0.32 nm peak area ratio. In all samples, chlorite-is greater in the fine fraction based on the 0.71 nm to 0.32 nm peak area ratio. The 0.32 nm peak (feldspar) is used as the denominator because of its ubiquitous nature. In 83% of the samples, chlorite compared to mica (0.71 nm/1.0 nm peak area ratio) is greater in the coarse fraction. Table 4 gives the peak area ratios of the major mineral constituents in the water samples and bottom sediment samples for both their 0.2 - 2 ym and 2 - 20 ym size fractions collected along transect A-K. No simple trends exist in mineralogy with distance from the river mouth. Both the suspended and bottom sediment have variable amounts of mica and little variability of chlo• rite and quartz relative to feldspar. Mica is concentrated in the first few kilometers from the river mouth; especially in the fine size fraction of the bottom samples and the coarse fraction of the suspended sediment samples. Water samples from transect A-K (<0.2ym) Bottom samples from transect A-K (<0.2um) Station 1.7nm 0.71nm l.OOnm 0.71nm 0.426nm 1.7nm 0.7lnm l.OOnm 0.7lnm 0.426nm l.Onm l.OOnm 0.32nm 0.32nm 0.320nm l.Onm l.OOnm 0.32nm 0.32nm 0.320nm A 0.11 0.47 0.32 0.15 0.04 B 0. 11 0.21 0.88 0.18 0.06 - 0.36 0.82 0.20 0.04 C - 0.36 0.36 0.09 - - 0.52 0.51 0.22 _ D - 0.21 0.47 0. 10 0.03 0. 15 0.25 1.42 0.36 E - 0.23 0.24 0.06 0.03 - 0.35 0.94 0.33 0.13 F - 0.20 0.56 0.11 0.07 - 0.42 0.63 0.26 G - 0.30 0.40 0. 12 0.05 - 0.77 0.38 0.29 0.08 H - 0.20 0.32 0.06 0.03 - 1.12 0.39 0.44 0.09 I — 0.25 0.36 0.09 0.02 - 0.48 0.52 0.25 0.08 J - 0.38 0.49 0.19 0.04 - 0.61 0.41 0.25 0.05 K 0. 17 0.66 0.11 0.03 - 0.70 0.17 0.12 0.07 size fraction 2-20um size fraction 2-20um A 1.03 0.46 0.20 0.09 0.06 B - 0.31 0.22 0.07 0.08 - 0.67 0.18 0.12 0.09 C — 0.25 0.14 0.04 0.03 - 0.44 0.24 0.10 0.07 D — 0.24 0. 19 0.05 0.05 - 0.51 0.29 0. 15 0.06 E — 0.60 0.05 0.03 0.04 - 0.29 0.28 0.08 0.11 F - 0.25 0. 17 0.04 0.03 - 0.57 0.18 0.10 0. 12 G - 0.27 0.08 0.02 "0.06 - 0.94 0.21 0.20 0.10 H - 0.25 0. 11 0.03 0.09 - 1.40 0.22 0.31 0. 14 I - 0.47 0. 10 0.04 0.09 - 0.84 0.22 0.19 0.15 J - 0.67 0. 10 0.07 0.06 - 0.57 0.19 0. 11 0. 13 K — 0.67 0.10 0.06 0.05 - 0.77 0.13 0.11 0.12 Table 4. Peak area ratios (XRD) for the major mineral constituents in the water samples and deposited sea-bed samples for both the 0.2 to 2.0 ym and 2.0 to 20.0 um size fractions as collected from transect A to K. 192 Analysis of suspended load discharge data Unpublished data for the Squamish River discharge, measured at a gauge station 5.0 km north of the delta, was provided by the Water Survey of Canada. In addition to a continuous record of water level, suspended load was measured in 1974 and 1975, unfortunately before this project began. Analysis of these data, however, yielded the following insights: 1) daily fluctuations in the suspended sediment concentration were at times larger than the fluctuations of the daily mean for that month; 2) suspended sediment concentration peaked in accordance with river discharge in July and August; there was a delay in the sediment discharge in the spring months, though, as compared to the river dis• charge; 3) as the suspended load increased, the proportion of sand increased, whereas that of silt and clay decreased. DISCUSSION Sediment-plume and Oceanography The suspended load enters the fjord as part of the cold glacial melt wa• ter. During the summer months, the river water skims across the surface of the fjord with little mixing in the surface layer (i.e., a 4%o salinity in- : crease from the river mouth to inner sill, a distance of 17 km). Substantial mixing, however, does occur in the fall and spring. During winter, when river discharge is lowest, wind mixing can essentially eliminate horizontal strati• fication (Hoos and Void, 1975), except right at the river mouth. The mixing that does take place during the summer, is caused by wind-generated turbulence and entrainment, which causes an up-inlet current to replace the sea water lost to the surface layer (Tully, 1958; Bowden, 1967; Pickard and Rogers, 1959; Rattray, 1967; Buckley, 1977). This subsurface current, which originates from outside the inner sill (Buckley, 1977), brings in warm saline water, causing the halocline temperature maximum. The mixing between the currents causes both salinity and temperature to increase in the surface layer and the suspen- 193 ded load to decrease. The slow and even mixing gives rise to the linear re• lationships of temperature, salinity and inorganic concentration with distance from the river mouth (Fig..3). The correlation of inorganic concentration and salinity suggests that processes that enhance the settling velocity of grains do not significantly alter this state of simple dilution. This is supported by the component particle-size distribution of the suspended sediments not changing with increasing depth through the surface layer (Fig. 16). That the dilution equation are themselves correlated (i.e., b = 26.15-m + 1.24, Fig. 5) suggests a uniform and constant mixing mechanism. The surface currents of 10 to 40 cm/sec are capable of keeping most of the sediment suspended even if the surface layer moved by a laminar flow. Wind-generated turbulence at the sur face (Buckley and Pond, 1976) is present and would account for particles great• er than 63 pm remaining in suspension in the surface layer, 17 km from the river mouth. The dominant cause of temporal variation in the surface layer flow has been related to wind forcing (Buckley and Pond, 1976; Buckley, 1977). The daily land-sea breezes gain their strength from funnelling through the steep-sided mountainous fjord. Surface current reversals have been found to occur during times of strong up-inlet winds (Buckley, 1977). During such e- vents, the surface current would slow down and stop and therefore increase the chance, of surface-layer sediments settling into the lower-marine-water. Generally though, over 50% of the initial suspended load, at station (1), exits over the inner sill during times of high river discharge. These up-inlet winds are thought to be responsible for the 1 m maxima in suspended load at stations near the river mouth. Here the down-inlet surface current flows 1 m below the sea surface when the surface water is slowed down or reversed. Deep water replacement north of the sill takes place about once every three years (Bell, 1973). Such replacements would not add significant sus- 194 pensates, but would rather flush out those from the inner basin. Short term variability of suspended concentrations at the surface are thought to be related to the river jet "swag" described by Buckley (1977). Orderliness or periodicity to this lateral motion of the jet is suggested since the mean IWC of the surface-layer varies directly as its standard deviation. This would be a surface phenomenon since the variability of sediment concen• tration decreases with increasing salinity. Most of the lower-marine-layer sediment originates from the surface- layer, which accounts for the linear correlation between the mean daily inor• ganic concentration at the surface with that of the lower-marine-water. This in turn suggests that: 1) the response time between the two layers is fast (days), indicating the presence of processes that enhance particle settlement, or 2) a steady state exists between the two layers which maintains itself for moderately long periods (weeks). ' Linear correlation between mean organic and inorganic concentrations in the surface-layer indicate the Squamish River as a major organic input into the fjord. Much of the river-borne seston is flushed out of the delta (Cliff and Stockner, 1973; Levings, 1973) during the river freshet. The surface sus• pended load causes greater than 99% light attenuation in the first meter which severely limits primary production and accounts for little autochthonous or• ganic material in the fjord (Cliff and Stockner, 1973). Much of the river- borne organic detritus falls close to the river delta. The remainder is flush• ed out of the fjord with the inorganic load. Sedimentation Rates Howe Sound is a basin of largely inorganic deposition in which the rate of sedimentation is in direct response to river discharge (as indicated by the suspended load at the surface). As the river discharge increases its compe• tence value increases, so that both grain size and sedimentation increase pro- 195 portlonately. The small quantities of sedimenting organic detritus are dir• ectly related to the sedimentation of inorganic grains. This suggests an in• timate association during particle settlement. Stratification and presence of substantial lower-marine-currents can be surmised from the variation of - sedimentation rates between levels at a given station and time. This is supported by current observations (Bell, 1974). The lack of correlation between sedimentation rates and the water tur• bidity surrounding the traps during the collection periods suggests that much of the suspended sediment in the lower marine water exists simply as back• ground through iwhich larger particles settle. This supports two conclusions: 1) sedimentation rates are a function of the coarse end of particle size dis• tribution (McCave, 1975; Syvitski, 1978b), unless particle aggregation has occurred (Kranck, 1975; Sycitski and Lewis, 1978); 2) water turbidity cannot be used as a measure of the downward flux of particles. One explanation for the increase in settling velocity of individual par• ticles, .is that mineral grains settle as components of zooplankton fecal pel• lets. It is a significant contributor to the total sedimentation rate, es• pecially of clay particles. The lack of correlation between total sedimenta• tion rate and pellet sedimentation rate could be due to: 1) increase in sed• iment load associated with an increase in the sand fraction, too coarse for zooplankton ingestion; and 2) each station not having the same zooplankton population in terms of types and numbers, and the population at any one sta• tion not remaining constant with time of year (Syvitski and Lewis, 1978). Deep Water Sand Flow The discharge of sand in deep water from the delta is suggested to ex• plain the mid-depth maximums in sedimentation at station (1). Vertical plankton hauls in that area have recovered up to 5 litres of sand (C. Levings, oral commun., 1978). These are not freshwater discharges of the type mention- 196 ed by Hoskins and Burrell (1972)*, but may be sand too coarse to travel in the surface layer; the sand quickly settles out and becomes entrained by a current at depth flowing seaward (suggested by Buckley, 1977), to settle out farther south. Bottom sedimentation maxima could be due to: 1) a slower moving mid-depth down-inlet current releasing its sand load before station (1) so that only the bottom trap would register the event; or 2) a sediment slump or turbidity current (Terzaghi, 1956). Size Distribution Characteristics Suspended sediment populations in rivers have been assumed to be log- normal and truncated (Middleton, 1977). This is not so in the Squamish River, where variable non-log-normal and multimodal size distributions are observed. The random change of these modes with distance down the fjord surface layer (Figs. 16 and 19) indicates that the original size distribution cannot be main• tained in this new and variable energy regime where perturbations of flow are the norm (Bell, 1974). The size modes of the bottom sediments were observed to be more consis• tent. Kranck (1975) suggested some size modes in marine sediment could be due to disaggregation during conventional analysis of previously flocculated mater• ial. Nichols (1972) indicated non-normal distributions to be the mixing of two log-normal populations. Grace et al. (1978) noted that individual laminae in bottom sediments have significant variation in mean size and in the shape of the sublamina size frequency: distributions of which they are composed. All of the above reasons are thought to contribute to the resultant size distri• bution of bulk sediment samples. It is thought that the last mechanism of size mode formation, however, is the most influential. If we assume that one day's collection in a trap will form part of a sedimentary lamina on the bot• tom (i.e., a sub-lamina), then summation of these distributions (biased by the 197 actual weight collected) should approximate the distribution on the bottom. Figure 22 is an example of how the 'observed' sediment on the fjord bottom compares with the 'expected' distribution calculated from curves given in Figure 12 and sedimentation rates given in Table 3. This trap was suspend• ed 5m above the bottom during the collection periods. Chi-squared analysis accepts the two distributions as indistinguishable at the 95% confidence limits (N = 16). Considering the error involved, the similarity is remarkable. Size distribution similarity between sediment collected at various _ levels at a given station and time suggests: 1) that the material has the same source (i.e., comes from the same part of the surface layer); and 2) that the particles collected have a vertical descent path. Variations in such size distributions (i.e., Fig. 11) suggest that particles fell along paths which intersected the surface layer at various distances from the river mouth, thus tapping different sources. Deviation from log-normality with increasing distance from the delta, for both suspended and bottom sediments, could be due to the disaggregation of samples before analysis. This does not necessarily imply that flocculation or aggregation increases "down inlet but simply that particles capable of fall• ing as single grains are less prevalent. This is supported by the fact that silt particles diminish down the inlet. The very positively skewed and ext• remely leptokurtic distributions from sediment collected far from the delta would then be artifacts of the method of size analysis. In situ Settling Velocity of Fjord Suspensates The in situ settling velocity of marine particles (aggregagates, floc• culates, fecal pellets) has not been analyzed in the past for lack of method. Recently, Soutar et al. (1977) proposed using sediment traps for such measure• ments although no method was detailed. Syvitski (1978b) developed the theory 98 -i 5 6 7 8 9 10 Equivalent Spherical Sedimentation Diameter, 0 Figure 22. The observed size distribution is from deposited sea-bed sediment at station (B). The ^ expected size distribution has been calculated from sub-laminae collected by a sediment oo trap 5 m above station (B) over five 8 to 12 collection intervals during the 1977 field season. 199 and method using samples and sediment traps. The method involves knowledge of: 1) the average concentration and dispersed -inorganic size distributions in terms of equivalent spherical sedimentation diameters (ESSD) from which fo(x) - the observed mean suspended sediment concentration of any size frac• tion 'x' in the water during time of collection - can be obtained; 2) the total inorganic sedimentation rate and the dispersed inorganic size dist• ribution of sediments collected by the trap, in terms of ESSD, from which Zo(x) - the observed average sedimentation rate of any size fraction 'x' - can be obtained; and 3) knowledge of fluid viscosity (salinity, temperature, pressure) of the water overlying the sediment collector, from thich Ve(x) - the expected theoretical Stokes settling value of each size fraction - can be obtained. The Vo(x) — the observed average settling velocity of any sli:e 'x' - can be solved using Vo(x) = Zo(x)/fo(x). The enhancement factor, .EH, can then be solved with EH(x) = Vo(x)/Ve(x). The expected sedimentation rate, Ze(x), can be solved using Ze(x) = fo(x)-Ve(x). The expected suspended sedi• ment concentration, fe(x), can be solved using fe(x) = Zo(x)/Ve(x). Accuracy of trap catchment in the field has yet to be evaluated. Preliminary experi• ments of Lau (1978) indicate that water motion over the trap orifices would prevent the capture of particles having the small settling velocities. There• fore, if marine sediments settled out as seperate particles, as suggested by Jacobs et al. (1973), sediment traps would furnish under-estimates of clay size particles. Figure -23 gives a typical result of the expected and observed size fre• quency distributions in the water above the trap and in the trap itself. The quantitative values are provided in Table 5. The trap sediment was found to overestimate the finer end of the suspended sediment size distribution, op• posite to the expected error effect of turbulence over the trap mouth. The 200 underestimation of the settling velocity in the very coarse size range is merely a function of the inadequate sampling of this fraction by a convention• al water sampler (McCave, 1975). Table 6 provides a summary of 10 such calcu• lations in terms of the average Ve(x), Vo(x) and EH. Results indicate that the processes, that cause enhancement of particle settling, result in a basic uniform settling velocity of approximately 20 m/day for particles less than 20 ym. A 20 um particle also has a settling velocity of approximately 20 m/day in Howe Sound water. These two observations support the Kranck Theory (Kranck, 1973, 1975) which states "... as progressively larger floes are formed, the transport velocities become more uniform and particle collision less frequent. Eventually a [steady] .state is reached in which the settling velocities of the largest floes equal the velocities of the largest grains and further flocculation ceases". She further states "...as floes become larger they also become more unstable and the stage where all sediment parti• cles have the same speed is approached, but not reached" (ibid). In the case of Howe Sound, the "largest grains" are those over 20 pm, which can be a sig• nificant amount of material. The enhancement of 0.7 ym particle settling velocity can be as high as 1500 times due to enhancement processes. Enhancement Processes of Particle Settling Problems in terminology still exist and, to avoid confusion, all doubt• ful terms are re-defined. Aggregates are inorganic particles strongly bond• ed by intermolecular or intramolecular, or atomic cohesive forces such that they survive dispersion by sonication (Schubel, 1968). Agglomerates are or• ganic and. inorganic matter weakly held by surface tension and organic cohe• sion due to biological activity.. Floccules are inorganic particles (mineral or biogenic) that are held together by electrostatic (Van der Waals) force. These terms have been widely (and unfortunately) used interchangeably. Equivalent Spherical Sedimentation Diameter (0) where 0 = -log^mm) o Figure 23. Expected and observed size distribution from water and trap samples as indicated in Table 5. ESSD* Sedimentation Rate,Z(x) Suspension Concentration,f(x) Settling VelocityV(x) EH** (pm) (g/m2/day) (g/m3) (m/day) observed expected observed expected observed expected 0.5 15.8 0.03 0.78 1018.2 20.3 0.014 1450 1.0 28.8 0.09 0.73 467.7 39.5 0.06 658 2.0 8.4 0.07. 0.21 33.1 40.0 0.2 200 3.0 2.2 0.15 0.21 3.8 10.5 0.5 21 4.0 2.9 0.6 0.41 2.8 7.1 0.9 8 6.0 5.5 1.2 0.42 2.4 13.1 2.1 6 8.0 23.4 5.1 0.83 5.7 28.2 3.8 7.4 12.1 52.1 9.9 0.84 5.7 62.0 8.5 7.3 16.1 18.6 4.6 0.24 • 1.1 77.5 15.1 5.1 20.1 8.5 3.4 0.12 0.3 70.8 23.5 3.0 24.1 9.4 5.6 0.16 0.3 58.8 34.0 1.7 28.4 4.2 2.7 0.05 0.1 84.0 47.1 1.8 32.4 4.1 0.8 0.01 0.1 410.0? 61.1 ?6.7 40.1 11.0 11.5 0.10 0.1 110.0 94.1 1.2 48.2 .22.8 41.9 0.22 0.2 103.6 135.8 0.8 64.7 7.2 22.2 0.07 0.03 102.9 244.8 0.4 Total 224.8 81.9 5.4 1541.6 *ESSD = equivalent spherical sedimentation •diameter **EH = enhancement factor = V(x)Observed V(x)expected Table 5. Data based on size distributions from sediment collected in the water 4 m above a trap and sediment collected 5 m beneath the sea surface within the sediment trap, at station (1). ho o The collection period was 8 hours in 10°C sea water with a salinity of 24%0. ro 203 AVERAGE Particle Size Vo(x) Ve(x) EH (ym) (m'day-1) (m*day-1) 0.7 22±7 0.015±.001 1466 1.4 24±6 0.07 ±.01 343 2.4 30±10 0.2 ±.1 150 3.4 22±7 0.6 ±.1 37 4.9 14±8 1.0 ±.2 14 6.9 14±4 2.2 ±.2 6 9.7 19±6 4.0 ±.3 2 13.8 21±12 8.7 ±.3 2 17.8 20±13 15.4 ±.4 1 Table 6. Summary of ten enhancement calculations (see Table 5) on particle settling velocities. 204 Based on these definitions field evidence has been reported of; 1) floccules by Postma (1967), Kajihara (1971), Sakamoto (1972), Kranck (1973), Bornhold (1975) , Biscay and Olsen (1976); 2) agglomerates by Kane (1967), Harding (1974) , Bigham (1974), Johnson (1974), Bornhold (1975), Biscaye and Olsen (1976) , Sholkovitz (1976), Lai (1977), and Syvitski and Lewis (1978); and 3) aggregates only by Ernissee and Abbott (1975). Most of these references give only casual observations using questionable methodology. Only Ernissee and Abbott (1975) used our method of immediate and gentle filtration of micro- samples so that the probability of one particle landing on another was less than 1%. Also, except in the present report, a classification of clumps of particles has not been set out. As a result, field data to support the theor• ies of processes that enhance settlement of particles in the natural environ• ment have not been helpful. The theory of flocculation has been adequately described previously (Verwey and Overbeek, 1948; Whitehouse et al., 1960; van Olphen, 1963; Hahn and Stumm, 1970; Edzwal and O'Melia, 1975) but only Sakamoto (1972) and Kranck (1973, 1975) have offered insights into flocculation in the marine environ• ment per se. The processes, of marine agglomeration are alsoipoorly under• stood. Kane (1967) suggested that bacteria could colonize a floccule and grow dense enough to form an agglomerate. Sholkovitz (1976) proposed the contemporaneous flocculation of clay minerals and Fe-humates. The interac• tion of pelagic zooplankton and suspended sediment has also received some recent attention (Syvitski and Lewis, 1978). Lewin and Mackas (1972) demon• strated the ability of the diatom Chaetoceros armatum to coat itself with mucilage to which clay minerals commonly adhere. The first suggestion of this came.from Lebour (1930) who suggested that Thalassiosira subtilis will form mucilaginous colonies to which debris might adhere. Ernissee and Abbott (1975) reported the formation of an in situ aggregate composed of Thalassio- 205 sira sp. and quartz or feldspar grains in the silt size-range. These grains were bound by a siliceous web emanating from the valves or girdle areas of the diatom. Biddle and Miles (1972) reported that silt grains carried at-:... tached clay. Paerl (1973) and Johnson (1974) demonstrated that mineral detri• tus can become encrusted with organic matter and microflora (fungi and bac• teria) . The following is proposed as the theory of particle interaction of Howe Sound suspended sediments: 1) the particles enter the fjord as single entities except for a) silt size grains of quartz, feldspar and hornblende which already possess attached particles of clay, and b) clay clasts, the origin of which may be similar to river mudball aggregates; 2) as the surface layer begins to mix with the marine water, the suspended load gets diluted downward, injecting some of the particles into the halocline; 3) inorganic salt-flocculation begins to take place. Clay plates of equal size (below 20 ym) flocculate initially with edge-to-edge orientation (Figs. 19A and B) . Non-platy minerals, however, continue to fall as single entities, although some get caught and become part of the floe (Fig. 19C); 4) the initial floe forming period does not cause an initial acceleration downwards, but increases the likelihood of further particle collision; 5) the colloidal floes (Figs. 20A and B), being of low density (Kranck, 1975) , are still moving downward faster by diffusion and mixing than by gravity settling; 6) during the ini• tial stage, stabilization of the floes (in terms of electrostatic forces) is slow due to the dilute suspended concentrations, i.e., 1 to 15 mg/il; 7) or• ganic cohesive forces start attaching part of the organic detritus that comes in contact with the floes (Figs. 21A-C). At this stage the term floccule be• comes inappropriate to some of these new agglomerates; 8) zooplankton, just under the halocline (Cliff and Stockner, 1973), start grazing on the floes and agglomerates, producing mineral-bearing fecal pellets (Figs. 18A-D). 206 Those non-platy minerals, such as quartz and feldspar, that still.settle as single entities, are not consumed by the zooplankton (Syvitski and Lewis, 1978); 9) some large-grain floes, due to size and settling velocity, escape the zooplankton grazing. They continue to increase in size, developing face- to-face and face-to-edge particle orientations until stable three-dimensional, deep-water floes are formed (Figs. 19D-F). Growth stops, since further par• ticle attachment would create hydrodynamic instability (Kranck, 1975) ; 10) the colloidal floes retain their two-dimensionality with depth and grow into snake• like floes (Fig. 20D). These floes are thought to produce the large "verti• cally aligned mucous-like streamers commonly observed in the water column during (submersible) dives in northern Howe Sound" as observed by Levings and McDaniel (1973); 11) during descent, some of the agglomerates become colon• ized by bacteria (Fig. 21F). Since these inorganic biogenic 'agglomerates' have both cohesive as well as electrostatic forces in operation, they develop 'formless' three-dimensional blobs (also visually observed through the sub• mersible by Levings and McDaniels, 1973). These blobs contain low density organic matter (i.e., dead phytoplankton) which would increase the porosity of the agglomerate (McCave, 1975; Sakamoto, 1972). Hoskins and Burrel (1972) first noted fjords as prime sites for "floc- culation". In Howe Sound, flocculation, aggregation and agglomeration are active, giving rise to six types of 'marine particles'. These particles would have variable settling velocities due to Reynold's drag coefficient (Sakamoto, 1972). Results from this study show that the idea of Meade (1972) that high concentrations (g/&) of highly charged particles in a low energy environment, are necessary ingredients for natural flocculation, can be dis• missed. Clay Mineralogy Lateral change in the clay mineralogy of bottom sediments, outward 207 from river deltas, was first explained by diagenetic processes (Grim, Dietz and Bradley, 1949; Powers, 1954; Johns and Grim, 1958; and Grim, 1968, p. 537). Later 'differential flocculation' was favoured (Whitehouse et al., 1960; Hahn and Stumm, 1970; Sakamoto, 1972; Edzwald et al., 1974; and Edzwald and O'Melia, 1975). Gibbs (1977) disputed both theories and suggested that the observed clay mineralogy in marine sediments is a function of the size distribution and settling rates of each mineral. Manheim et al. (1972) and McCave (1975) sug• gest aggregative processes (agglomerative?), including biological agencies, may be so strong as to swamp the differential settling tendencies of individu• al grains and make the sea-bed mineralogy resemble the surface mineralogy. Our results indicate agreement between the last two proposals. Floes and ag• glomerates suspended in Howe Sound are composed of various minerals. Since the floe composition is related to the size of available individual particles, the size distribution of each mineral is in fact responsible for sea-bed min• eralogy even though flocculation exists. Howe Sound is a depositional basin for immature sediments. That quartz and tourmaline are found in greater abundance in the coarse fraction, simply reflects their structural resistance to mechanical crushing. The multimodal nature of the size distributions from river suspended sediment might be de• rived from the summation of the individual mineral size distribution. The glacial flour of Howe Sound has been directly derived fyQjcjm the glacial erosion of both the plutonic crystalline complex of the Pacific Ranges and the Garibaldi volcanics of the Coast Mountains. Bustin and Mathews (1978) have noted that biotite alters to trioctahedral vermiculite, and to a minor biotite-vermiculite random-mixed layer in granitic clasts found in glacial and glaciofluvial deposits adjacent to Howe Sound. This is supported by our finding of biotite-vermiculite in Howe Sound after transport by the Squamish River, which flows through such deposits. 208 The concentration of expandable clay minerals (vermiculite, montmoril• lonite) near the mouth of the Squamish River is an interesting problem. Por^ renga (1966) found montmorillonite enriched in deep-water sediments at the front of the Niger delta. Nelson (1972) found montmorillonite deposited at the mouths of distributaries of the Po delta. He suggested that montmoril• lonite might already be flocculated in the river. Deposition of silt and sand-size vermiculite at the bay-head delta in Howe Sound is due to its coarse• ness. The reason for early deposition of the clay size vermiculite and mont• morillonite, however, is not clear. A tentative explanation is that colloi• dal clay particles that are observed attached to the large silt particles of quartz and feldspar could be these highly charged expandable minerals. Since these large silt grains settle near the river mouth, this mechanism might explain the colloidal deposition of montmorillonite and vermiculite. Analysis of the attached clay minerals on these silt grains by energy dispersive SEM might be used to solve the dilemma. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION 1) Glacial flour, derived from glacial erosion of both a plutonic crystalline and volcanic complex, is discharged into Howe Sound via the Squamish River. The discharge peaks in July and August. 2) The major constituents of the glacial flour are feldspar (bytownite, al- bite, orthoclase), quartz, trioctahedral mica (degraded biotite and biotite- vermiculite interlayer), chlorite (penninite), amphibole (hornblende), tour• maline, and vermiculite. 3) The multimodal, non-log-normal size distributions from river suspended sediment is thought to originate from the summation of the individual mineral size distributions. It was noted that tourmaline, vermiculite and quartz are concentrated in the > 2 ym size fraction; hornblende and feldspar are equally present throughout the sediment distribution; and chlorite, mica and 209 montmorillonite, are concentrated in the < 2 ym size fraction. 4) The surface-layer sediment plume moves quickly down the inlet while slowly mixing with the marine water. Although flocculation occurs in the lower brackish waters of the surface layer, mixing and diffusion are the dominant means for sediment to enter the lower marine water. 5) More than 50% of the initial suspended load in the surface layer exits out of the fjord during times of high river discharge. 6) The response time between the surface layer and the lower marine layer, in terms of sedimentation of the surface suspended sediments, is fast. This may be related to processes enhancing particle settlement. 7) Six marine particle types have been described. They are: i) sand and silt grains with attached clay particles; -ii) clay clasts possibly related to river mudballs; iii) mineral-bearing fecal pellets from pelagic zooplank• ton; iv) large-grain inorganic floccules; v) colloidal floccules; and vi) in• organic-biogenic agglomerates. 8) These marine particles have settling velocities in excess of their indi• vidual component grains. Generally, particles < 20 ym in diameter fall at 20 m/day. This gives particles < 1 ym in diameter a settling rate enhance• ment factor of over 1400 times. 9) The increased settling rate of the compound particles of inorganic and organic matter results in sediment traps collecting fine size particles in excess of that indicated by water turbidity. Therefore, water turbidity cannot be used as a measure of the downward flux of particles. 10) Stratification and the presence of currents below the surface layer are indicated by variations of sedimentation rates and size distributions (as determined from sediment traps) between levels in the water column at a given station and time. 210 11) Mid-depth sedimentation maxima have been related to deep-water sand discharges near the river mouth. 12) Size distribution of sediment deposited on the sea^-bed has been shown to be a function of the daily "sublaminae" caught in traps. The summation of these unimodal or multimodal and non-log-normal size distributions of sub- laminae then, is responsible for the size distributions of deposited sediment. 13) The increased down-inlet deviation from log-normality (of size distribu• tions of both the suspended and the deposited sediment) is an artifact of the method of size analysis. 14) Table 7 gives a summary of the linear relationships between field para• meters disclosed in this study. The equations of regression have been pro• vided in the text so that quantitative comparisons of Howe Sound with other fjords would be possible. Such equations are the first step towards building mathematical models of fjord sedimentation. Figure 24 is a graphic display of the sediment concentration in upper Howe Sound during the summer freshet. In conclusion, fjords receiving copious glacial run-off are deposition• al basins for immature clastic sediments intermixed with minor amounts of. silicious biogenic fragments. They offer an excellent example of floccular- tive and agglomerative sedimentary processes in action. 211 Results from Linear Regression Analysis IWCI as S%«.f (surface-layer) variability of IWC4- as S%0-t" (surface-layer) IWC4- as distance out from river mouthf (surface-layer) T°C+ as distance out from river mouthf (surface-layer) S%0+ as distance out from river mouthi (surface-layer) IWC(aah)t as IWC(xah)+ OWC(aah)t as OWC(xah)+ OWC(xah)t as IWC(xah)t OWC+'as IWCt at station (1) only (surface-layer) OWC(xbh)i as OWC(xah)+ at station (1) only IWC(xbh)t as IWC(xah)t IWC (abh) t as IWC(xbh)+ OSR+'as ISRt ISR+ as distance out from river moutht 0SR4- as distance out from river mouths CSR+ as OSRt xc+ as ISR+ ISR+ as IWC(xah)t OSRf as OWC(xah)t OSR+ as OWC(xbh)t xs+ as IWC(xah)f IWCf as current velocity!- (surface-layer) Table 7. Summary of the linear relationships between field parameters disclosed in this study. (For definition of the symbols in this table see text). to i—• Figure 24. Sediment concentration in upper Howe Sound during a typical day during the summer freshet. ro Indicated are athe deep water sand flow near the river mouth, and two conditions of water flow in the surface-layer. 213 Acknowledgement This project was financed under NRC Grant 65-6224, The Pacific Environ• ment Institute, West Vancouver, B.C., provided the research vessel, "R/V Ac• tive Lass", skippered by Mr. A. Matheson, under the auspices of Dr. C. Le^ vings. The Geological Survey of Canada, Terrain Science Division, supplied part of the field and laboratory equipment through the kindness of Dr. J. Milliman. Release of unpublished data from the Water Survey of Canada was provided by Mr. D. Dobson. Assistance in the field came from K. Syvitski, G. Hodge, and D. Swinbanks. Laboratory and drafting assistance came from G. Hodge and K. Syvitski. The manuscript was critically reviewed by Mr. R. Macdonald and Dr. R.L. Chase (Institute of Oceanography and Department of Geological Sciences, U.B.C); Dr. W.C. Barnes and Dr. R.V. Best (Department of Geological Sciences, U.B.C); Dr. L.M. Lavkulich (Department of Soil Science); Dr. Colin Levings (Pacific . Environment Institute, West. Vancouver); and Dr. A.G. Lewis (Institute of Oceanography and Department of Zoology, U.B.C). The authors are pleased to acknowledge the help and encouragment provided by their colleagues and these organizations. 214 REFERENCES d'Anglejan, B.F. 1970. Studies'on the particulate suspended matter in the Gulf of St. Lawrence. Mar. Sci. Centre MS. Rept., 17, pp. 1-51. Bell, L. 1975. Factors influencing the sedimentary environment of the Squa• mish River delta in southwestern British Columbia: unpubl. M.A.Sc. thesis, Geolog. Sci., U.B.C, 145p. Bell, W.H. 1973. The exchange of deep water in Howe Sound basin. Mar. Sci. Direct., Pac. Reg.; Pac. Mar. Sci. Rept., 73-13, 35p. 1974. Oceanographic observations in Howe Sound, 1972. Pac. Mar. Sci. Rept., 74-7, 113p. , 1975. The Howe Sound current metering program, Volume III - data report, stn. HS-5. Pac. Mar. Sci. Rept., 75-7, part A - 426p., part B - 440p. Biddle, P. and Miles, J.H. 1972. The nature of contemporary silts in British estuaries. Sedim. Geol., 7, pp. 23-33. Bigham, G.N. 1974. Suspended sediments contributed to the southeastern U.S. continental shelf: An investigation by scanning electron microscopy. Mem. Inst. Geol. Bassin Aquitane, 7, pp. 103-108. Biscaye, P.E. and Olsen, CR. 1976. Suspended particulate concentrations and compositions in the New York Bight. Am. Soc. Limnol. Oceanogr. spec, symp., 2, pp. 124-137. Bornhold, B.D. 1975. Suspended matter in the southern Beaufort Sea. Beaufort Sea tech. Rept. # 25b, 30p. Bowden, K.F. 1967. Circulation and diffusion. In Lauff, G.H., Estuaries. Am. Assoc. Adv. Sci. Pub., 83, pp. 15-36. Bruun, A.F., Brodie, J.W. and Fleming, CA. 1955. Submarine geology of Mil- ford Sound. New Zeal. Sci. Tech. Sect. B, 36, pp. 397-410. Buckley, J.R. and Pond, S. 1976. Wind and the surface circulation of a fjord. J. Fish. Res. Bd. Can., 33, pp. 2265-2271. . 1977. The currents, winds.and tides of northern Howe Sound. Unpublished manuscript Ph.D. thesis, University of British Columbia, 238p. Bustin, R.M. and Mathews, W.H. 1978. Selective weathering of granitic clasts. Submitted to Can. J. Earth Sci. Cliff, D.D. and Stockner, J.G. 1973. Primary and secondary components of the food-web of the outer Squamish. River estuary. Fish. Res. Bd. Can. MS. Rept., 1214, 45p. 215 Crean, P.B. and Agnes, A.B. 1971. Oceanographic records from twelve cruises in the Strait of Georgia and Juan de Fuca Strait, 1968. I. Introduc• tion. Dept. Energy, Mines, Res., Marine Sci. Br., Victoria, B.C. 55p. Dillon, W.P. 1964. Floatation technique for seperating fecal pellets and small marine organisms from sand. Limnol. Oceanogr., 9, pp. 601-602. Edzwald, J.K., Upchurch, J.B., O'Melia, C.R. 1974. Coagulation in estuaries. Environ. Sci. Tech., 8, pp. 58-63. Edzwald, J.K. and O'Melia, C.R. 1975. Clay distributions in recent estuarine sediments. Clays Clay Min., 29, pp. 39-44. Ernissee, J.J. and Abbott, W.H. 1975. Binding of mineral grains by a species of Thalassiosira. In Simonson, R., Third Symposium on Recent and Fossil Marine Diatoms. Kiel, Sept. 9-13, 1974; Royal octavo, 8, pp. 241-248. Gibbs, R.J. 1974. Suspended solids in water. New York, Plenum Press. 317p. . 1977. Clay mineral segregation in the marine environment. J. Sed. Petrol., 47, pp. 237-243. Grace, J.T., Grothaus, B.T. and Ehrlich, R. 1978. Non-normal size frequency distributions of sand from individual laminae suggest reinterpre- tation of conventional size frequency data. Submitted to Jour. Sed. Pet. Gross, G.M., Gucluer, S.M., Creager, J.S. and Dawson, W.A. 1963. Varved ma• rine sediments in a stagnant fjord. Science, 141, pp. 3584. Grim, R.E., Dietz, R.S. and Bradley, W.F. 1949. Clay mineral composition of some sediments from the Pacific Ocean off the California coast and the Gulf of California. Geol. Soc. Am. Bull., 60, pp. 1785-1808. . 1968. Clay Mineralogy, 2nd ed. New York, McGraw-Hill Book Co., 596p. Hahn, H.H. and Stum, W. 1970. The role of coagulation in natural waters. Am. J. Sci., 268, pp. 354-368. Harbo, R.M., McComas, F.T. and Thompson, J.A.J. 1974. Fluoride concentrations in two Pacific coast inlets - an indication of industrial contamina• tion. J. Fish. Res. Bd. Can., 31, pp. 1151-1154. Harding, G.C.H. 1974. The food of deep-sea copepods. Marine Biol. Assoc. U.K. Jour., 54, pp. 141-155. Holtedahl, H. 1975. The geology of the Hardanger fjord, West Norway. Norges Geologishe Undarokelse, Bull., 36, pp. 1-87. Hoos, L.M. and Void, CL. 1975. The Squamish River estuary status of environ• mental knowledge to 1974. Special Estuary Series #2. Rept. Est. Wor• king Gp. Dept. Environment Reg. Bd. Pac. Reg. 36lp. 216 Hoskins, CM. and Burrel, D.C. 1972. Sediment transport and accumulation in a fjord basin, Glacier Bay, Alaska. J. Geol., 80, pp. 539-551. Jacobs, M.B., Thorndike, E.M. and Ewing, M. 1973. A comparison of suspended particulate matter from nephloid and clear water. Mar. Geol., 14, pp. 117-128. Johns, W.D. and Grim, R.E. 1958. Clay mineral composition of recent sediments from the Mississippi River Delta. J. Sed. Petrol., 28, pp. 186-199. Johnson, R.G. 1974. Particulate matter at the sediment-water interface in coastal environments. J. Mar. Res., 32, pp. 313-330. Kajihara, M. 1971. Settling velocity and porosity of large suspended parti• cles. Jour. Oceanographic Soc. Japan, 27, pp. 158-162. Kane, J.E. 1967. Organic aggregates in surface waters of the Ligarian Sea. Limnol. Oceanogr., 12, pp. 287-294. Kranck, K. 1973. Flocculation of suspended sediment in the sea. Nature, 246, pp. 348-350. . 1975. Sediment deposition from flocculated suspension. Sedimento• logy, 22, pp. 111-123. Lai, D. 1977. The oceanic microcosm of particles. Science, 198, pp. 997-1009. Lau, Y.L. 1978. Laboratory study of cylindrical sedimentation traps, (pre• print) . Lebour, M.V. 1930. The planktonic diatoms of Northern seas. London, Dulau & Co., for the Ray Society. Levings, CD. 1973a. Intertidal benthos of the Squamish Estuary. Fish. Res. Bd. Can. MS. Rept., 1218, 60p. _. 1974. River diversion and intertidal benthos at the Squamish River Delta, British Columbia. Proc. Symp. on the Influence of Fresh• water Outflow in Biological Processes in Fjords. 18p. and McDaniel, N. 1973b. Biological observations from the submer• sible Pisces IV near Britannia Beach, Howe Sound, B.C. Fish. Res. Bd. Can. Tech. Rept., # 409, 23p. Lewin, J.C and Mackas, D. 1972. Blooms of surf-zone diatoms along the coast of the Olympic Peninsula, Washington, I. Physiological investigations of ChaetoCeras armatum and AsterOnella sOCiales in laboratory cultures. Mar. Biol., 16, pp. 171-181. Loring, D.H. 1976. The distribution and partition of zinc, copper and lead in the sediments of the Saguenay fjord. Can. Jour. Earth Sci., 13, pp. 960-972. 217 MacDotiald, R.D. and Murray, J.W. 1973. Sedimentation and manganese concretions in a British Columbia fjord (Jervis Inlet). Geol. Surv. Can., paper 73-23, 67p. MacDonald, R.W. and Wong, C.S. 1977. The distribution of mercury in Howe Smmd sediments. Pac. Mar. Sci. Rept. 77-22, 49p. McCave, I.N. 1975. Vertical flux of particles in the ocean. Deep Sea Res., 22, pp. 491-502. Manheim, F.T., Hathaway, J.C. and Uchupi, E. 1972. Suspended matter in sur• face waters of the northern Gulf of Mexico. Geol. Oceanogr., 17, pp. 17-27. Mathews, W.H. 1958. Geology of the Mount Garibaldi map-area, southwestern British Columbia, Canada. I. Igneous and metamorphic rocks. II Geomorphology and Quaternary volcanics. Geol. Soc. Amer. Bull., 69, pp. 161-178, pp. 179-198. , Murray, J.W. and McMillan, N.J. 1966. Recent sediments and their environment of deposition, Strait of Georgia and Fraser River Delta. (A manual for field conferences.) Prepared by Tenneco Oil and Minerals Ltd., Calgary, Alberta. Meade, R.H. 1972. Transport and deposition of sediments in estuaries. In Nelson, B.W. ed., Environmental Framework of Coastal Plain Estuaries, Geol. Soc. Am. Memoir 133, pp. 91-120. Middleton, G.V. 1976. Hydraulic interpretation of sand size distributions: J. Geology, 84, pp. 405-426. Nelson, B.W. 1972. Mineralogical differentiation of sediments dispersed from the Po delta. jLn Stanley, D.J. ed., The Mediterranean Sea: A natural sedimentation laboratory. Douden, Hutchison and Ross, Stroudsbourg Penn., pp. 441-454. Nichols, M.M. 1972. Sediments of the James River estuary, Virginia. In Nelson, B.W. Environmental Framework of Coastal Plain Estuaries, Geol. Soc. Am. Memoir 133, pp. 169-212. Paerl, H.W. 1973. Detritus in Lake Tahoe: structural modification by attached microflora. Science, 180, pp. 496-498. Pickard, G.L. 1956. Physical features of British Columbia inlets. T_n Ocean floors.around Canada. Proc. Trans. R. Soc. Can., 50, pp. 897-901. „and Rogers, K. 1959. Current measurements in Knight Inlet, Bri• tish Columbia. J. Fish. Res. Bd. Can., 16, pp. 635-684. 1961. Oceanographic features of inlets in the British Columbia mainland coast. J. Fish. Res. Bd. Can., 18, pp. 907-999. Porrenga, D.H. 1966. Clay minerals in recent sediments of the Niger delta. In Clays and Clay Minerals, Proceedings of the 14th National Conference, Pergamon Press, Oxford, pp. 221-233. 218 Postma, H. 1967. Sediment transport and sedimentation in the estuarine envi• ronment. In Lauff, G.H. ed., Estuaries. Am. Assoc. Adv. Sci. Pub., 83, pp."158-179. Powers, M.C. 1954. Clay diagenesis in the Chesapeake Bay area. In Swinefad, A. and Plummer, N. eds., Clays and Clay Minerals: 2nd Nat'l Conference on Clays and Clay minerals, Columbia, Mo, 1953, Proc, pp. 68-80. Price, B.N. and Skei, J.M. 1975. Areal and seasonal variations in the chemis• try of particulate matter in a deep water fjord. Est. Coastal Mar. Sci., 3, pp. 349-369. Rattray, M. Jr. 1967. Some aspects of the dynamics of circulation in fjords. In Lauff, G.H. ed., Estuaries. Am. Assoc. Adv. Sci. Pub., 83, pp. 52- 69. Sakamoto, W. 1972. Study on the process of river suspension from flocculation to accumulation in estuary. Tokyo Daigaku Jaiyo Kenkyojo Bull., 5, pp. 1-49. Scholkovitz, E.R. 1976. Flocculation of dissolved organic and inorganic mat• ter during the mixing of river water and sea water. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta, 40, pp. 831-845. Schubel, J.R. 1968. Suspended sediment of the northern Chesapeake Bay: Johns Hopkins Univ. Chesapeake Bay Inst. Tech. Rept. 35 (Ref. 68-2) 264p. . 1969. Size distribution of the suspended particles of the Ches• apeake Bay turbidity maximum. Netherlands Jour. Sea Research, 4, pp. 283-309. . 1972. Distribution and transportation of suspended sediment in upper Chesapeake Bay. In Nelson, B.W. ed., Environmental Framework of Coastal Plain Estuaries, Geol. Soc Am. Memoir 133, pp. 151-168. Skei, J.M., Price, N.B. and Calvert, S.E. 1972. The distribution of heavy me• tals in sediments of Sorfjord, Norway. Water, Air and Soil Poll., 1, pp. 452-461. Slatt, R.M. and Gardiner, W.W. 1976. Comparative petrology and source of sed• iments in Newfoundland fjords. Can. Jour. Earth Sci., 13, pp. 1460-1465. Soutar, S., Kling, S.A., Grill, P.A., Duffrin, E. and Bruland, K.W. 1977. Moni• toring the marine environment through sedimentation. Nature, 266, pp. 136-139. Sundby, B. and Loring, D.H. 1978. Geochemistry of suspended particulate matter in the Saguenay Fjord. Can. J. Earth Sci., 15, pp. 1002-1011. Syvitski, J.P. and Murray, J.W. 1977. A discussion of grain size distribution using log probability plots. Bull. Can. Petroleum Geol., 25, pp. 683- 694. and Lewis, A.G. 1978. Interaction of zooplankton and suspended sediments. Submitted to Sedimentology. 219 Syvitski, J,P. and Swinbanks, D.D. 1978. VSA: A new fast size analysis tech• nique for low sample weights based on Stokes settling velocity. Sub• mitted to Jour. Sed. Pet. • . 1978a. A fast technique for a low sample weight random oriented mount to be used in quantitative XRD analysis. Submitted to Jour. Sed. Pet. 1978b. Theory, utilization and reliability of suspended sedi• ment collectors in Lakes and Oceans. Submitted to Limnol. Oceanogr. , MacDonald, R. ahd Murray, J.W. 1978. Sedimentation of a Cana• dian fjord, Part B: Quaternary and Pleistocene deposits, (in prepara• tion) Terzaghi, K. 1956. Varieties of submarine slope failures. Har. Univ., Soil Mech. Ser. # 52, pp. 17-22. Thompson, J.A.J, and McComas, F.T. 1973. Distribution of mercury in the sedi• ments and waters of Howe Sound, B.C. Fish. Res. Bd. Can., Tech. Rept., # 396. and . 1974. Cu and Zn levels in submerged mine tailings at Britannia Beach, B.C. Fish. Res. Bd. Can., Tech. Rept., # 437. Toombs, R.B. 1956. Some characteristics of Bute Inlet sediments. Proc. Trans. R. Soc. Can., 50, 3. Tully, J.P. 1958. On structure, entrainment and transport in estuarine embay- ments. J. Marine Res., 17, pp. 523-535. van Olphen, H. 1963. An Introduction to Clay Colloidal Chemistry. Interscience, New York. Verwey, E.J.W. and Overbeek, J.Th.G. 1948. Theory of the Stability of Hydro• phobic Colloids. Elsevier, New York. von Huene, R. 1966. Glacial marine geology of Nuka Bay, Alaska, and adjacent continental shelf. Marine Geology, 4, pp. 291-304. Waldichuk, M., Markert, J.R. and Meikle, J.H. 1968. Fraser River estuary, Howe Sound and Malispina Strait: physical and chemical oceanographic data 1957- 1966. Fish. Res. Bd. Can. MS. Rept. # 939. Webster, T.J.M., Paranjabe, M.A. and Mann, K.H. 1975. Sedimentation of organ• ic matter in St. Margaret's Bay, Nova Scotia, J. Fish. Res. Bd. Can., 32, pp. 1399-1407. Werner, A.E. and Hyslop, W.F. 1968. Accumulation and composition of sediments from polluted water off the B.C. coast 1963-1966. Fish. Res. Bd. Can., MS. Rept. # 963. Whitehouse, V.G., Jeffrey, L.M. and Debrecht, J.D. 1960. Differential settling tendencies of clay minerals in saline waters. In Swineford, A. ed., Clays and Clay Minerals proc. 7th Nat'l. Conf. London, Pergamon Press, pp. 1-79. 220 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION The study of suspended sediment provides insight into the source, trans• port and accumulation of sediment in depositional basins. This allows field parameters used in the study of ancient environments to be evaluated under present day dynamic conditions. For example, many have used grain size fre• quency distributions from ancient sediment to interpret the paleo-hydraulic regime. The interpretations, however, are based on the simplistic assumption of single grain settling. Results from this thesis have indicated that processes that enhance the individual particle settlement are abundant in one coastal marine environment, the fjord. Most particles settling in the fjord environment, fell as: 1) sand and silt grains containing attached clay particles; 2) clay clasts possibly related to river mudballs; 3) mineral-bearing fecal pellets from pelagic zoo• plankton; 4) large grain inorganic floccules; 5) colloidal floccules; and 6) inorganic-biogenic agglomerates. These marine particles have settling ve• locities in excess of their individual component grains. Generally, particles < 20 pm in diameter fell at 20 m/day. This gives particles < 1 ym in diameter a settling rate enhancement factor of over 1400X. Obviously, paleo-hydraulic interpretations will be in error if enhancement processes such as salt-floccu- lation, zooplankton pelletization and biologic agglomeration are not taken into account. Size distributions of sediment deposited on the sea-bed have been shown to be a function of variable multimodal and/or non-log-normal size distributions from sub-laminae falling through the water column. The increase in deviation from log-normality down inlet, for size distributions of both suspended and deposited sediment, is an artifact of the size analytical method. These two facts further complicate paleo-hydraulic interpretations of ancient environments. 221 Specifically, the study of Howe Sound suspended sediments has revealed that glacial flour is derived from glacial erosion of both a plutonic and vol• canic complex. The flour (feldspar, quartz, trioctahedral mica, chlorite, amphibole, tourmaline and vermiculite) enters the surface-layer of the Howe Sound fjord as a sediment plume which moves quickly down inlet while slowly mixing with the marine water. Although flocculation occurs in the lower brack• ish water of the surface-layer, mixing and diffusion are the dominant means for sediment to enter the lower-marine-water. Once in the marine water, zooplank• ton pelletization and biologic agglomeration of inorganic floccules takes place. These processes that enhance the individual particle settlement, gen• erate a fast response time between the surface-layer and the lower-marine-layer in terms of sedimentation of particulate matter. Analysis of sediment trap data has led to the following conclusions: 1) water turbidity cannot be used as a measure of the downward flux of parti• cles; and 2) deep water sand discharges are common near the Squamish River mouth. Marine zooplankton have been found to ingest suspended sediment at a rate dependent on sediment concentration and mineralogy. Ingested mineral particles undergo chemical and mineral transformations as a function of min• eralogy, cation exchange capacity, and residence time in the digestive tract. Chlorite, vermiculite, and halloysite have formed after zooplankton ingestion of amphibole, montmorillonite, and muscovite standards, respectively. Such chemical changes may help explain diagenesis of marine clay minerals, and elucidate zooplankton nutrition. The settling velocity of mineral-bearing pellets have been found to vary with the density of the constituent particles and pellet volume (related to the packing coefficient of the particles). When pellets are rich in inorg- 222 anic constituents, the increased bulk density causes them to settle more ra• pidly than organic fecal pellets. This increased rate of settling allows clay particles to fall and be deposited where the hydrodynamic environment would prevent deposition particles finer than coarse silt. Many of the results and conclusions of this thesis would not have been possible using past methodology. The theory and method of three techniques to be used in the analysis of suspended sediment have been outlined. 1) Vol• ume Size Analysis (VSA), provides a rapid, accurate and precise method of determining grain size distributions of low weight samples. The method is based on the solution to a set of equations that discretely define the in• creasing volume of a homogeneous sediment sample settling in an enclosed vol• ume of water. The results are in terms of sedimentation diameters, a hydro- dynamically sensitive property. 2) The Ag filter mount provides a fast tech• nique for a low sample weight random oriented mount to be used in quantitative XRD analysis. The method has excellent precision and does not fractionate the mineral component due to their settling velocity. 3) Suspended sediment col• lectors have been used to measure the downward flux of sediment in the fjord environment. The traps have also provided a means to calculate the natural settling velocity of flocculated or otherwise enhanced particle settlement. APPENDIX 1 1 C "VSALSW"--VOLUME SIZE ANALYSIS LOW SAMPLS WEIGHT f C PROGRAMMER:J.P.M.SYVITSKI 1 f DATF:JAN.21/78 A C PEAO IN * OF READINGS.M: # OF FREE FALL READINGS, HI I * OF C E^ TR IF Uf. E READ 5 C INGS,N2;TFMPERATURF OF EXPERIMENT, TR; CENTRIFLGE TEMPERATURE CORRECT ION, 6 r r T; tHE TEMPFRATURE OF OUTPUT OT: THE SAMPLE IO.TITLF: 7 C RPM OF EACH CENTRIFUGE,RPMj TIME CF READING. T; HEIGHT FROM TESTTUHE 8 r. BOTTOM, V: AND NS IS THE » OF SAMPLES TO BE RUN. 9 REAL TO(30),V(30),T(30I. TR, B,ee ,CT,OT,TTI 30),OTTC30) 10 RF AL TC(30I ,D(30),VOL(30).VC(30),WT(30»,PWT(30) 11 REAL DLG(30 ) ,DM ID(30),TPT(30),TCNEW< 30),TONEW(30),VNEW(30> .RO.AK 12 REAL PPM(30) ,CPWT(30I .TITLEI 20 ),TEMPI(301.TEMP2130 I,TFMP3C301 13 INTEGER N.N 1 ,N2,M,MM,K'K,K, NS.MK 14 K=0 15* CALL DASHLNf.15,.10,.15,.ICI 16 R FAD (5,1) NS 17 101 READ (5,2) N ,Nl,N2,TR,CT,CT 18 BEAD (5,13) TITLE 19 13 FORMAT (20A4) 2C M=Nl+l 21 READ (5.3) (RPM(I),I«M,N) 22 READ (5.4) (TU).J*l,N) 23 READ (5,51 (VUI,J>l,NI 24 DD 8 1*1,5 25 8 WRITE 16,91 •. 2ft 9 FORMAT ( '0' ) 27 C 28 r ACCUMULATED SEDIMENT HEIGHTS ARE CONVERTED TO ACCUM. VOLUMES AND ?<•> C PRINTED. (NOTE: IF DENSITY CORRECTIONS ARE AVAILABLE THEY MUST 30 C BE USED TC RE-fALCULAT E THE VOLUMES TO WEIGHT AND RF-ENTEREO 31 C WITH STEPS 33 TO 37 REMOVED). 32 C 33 R0=.26 3* AK=.180 35 DD 6 J=1,N 36 VU) =V(J> + .71/51 37 6 V( Jl*3. i4L*{ (AK**2*V( J) **3 /3 ) <- (AK* PO*V (J) + *Z )*(R0**2*V (J) I I 38 WRITE (6,7) IV(J),J=UN) 3<5 7 FORMAT (16F8.4I 224 Ui UJ QC u. c x K UJ c UJ u3 -J o«t I lU CQ * ct — CC CC *CO «CC - I N* —• «M] UN UJ o o —* NM o o OD —• •• • O 1/N —J 3 o (/) o O — o NM * • (S• i Z o l/> UJ o o • + > o MM. —I —• «Z* UJ • CM HN NH 2 X (_) O l_ U O U <-i 81 60 I f)0 15 1=1,30 8? 15 VCK I )*0 83 on 21 1=1,N 84 VOL ( I ) = ( VC ( I )-( TC( U/TTJN1 )*V0L{ TC (1) /TTCN-l) )*VOL J2 J- 85 G(TC(I)/TT(N-2))* 86 £V0L(3>- ho 226 x rsi I I X r- Z X UJ <• I • » 2 LL LoUr X » a fc— X UJ fcX X O CS fcM» CM r- X UJ o •O• — at o t— — LL z fc 2 fc*-fc fcfc »— fc* » • o o X X •— Q. o < a *— o •e -1 o _l r~ ro -i INI 1- z LL . , !~ • u. M X • fc fc — (- a • w—t CM • LLi — » t LU 1/1 — — — — Z ^> • CNl Xfc z i—i #—. cot »— » CL U- O CO Jt 1 K fc l o 1 1- *^ a. X 2 z a. o X 31 » X * • X X X a. o (— LU — a u • w m • -J fcCO CJ CJ CJ V ¥ * * ¥ «f\ir^r\jrNjcMr^rgr^r^CM( ro ro 228 INITIAL OUTPUT . SAMPLE # KAK 14 #4 PARTICLE SIZE WEIGHT P EKLtNT CUM. hT. Z 15.00 C SETTLING TIME MICRONSJ (X I in (SEC/CM) 0.475 4.57 100.00 55 710,6.2 0.946 8. 53 95. 43 14061.76 1.919 6.45 86.91 3417.81 2.874 6.31 80. 46 1524.63 3.845 7.95 74. 15 851.51 6. 030 10.63 66.20 346.25 8.040 16.04 5i>. 57 194.77 12.060 15.46 39.53 86.56 16.079 6.22 24.07 48.69 20.066 4.60 17.85 31. 26 24. 119 7.62 13.05 21.64 28.381 2.24 5.42 15. 63 32.359 0.61 3.18 12.02 40.Ii7 0.74 2.57 7.61 48.238 1.39 1.63 5.41 64.718 0.44 0.44 3.01 229 BETTER APPROXIMATION ROUTIHE SAPPLE « KAM 14 *4 CUM. WT. 15.00 C SETTLING TIME PARTICLE SIZE WEIGHT PERCENT (SEC/CM) (MICRONS> U> ( SI 100.00 5571C62 0.475 5.89 94.11 14061.76 0.946 9.05 85.06 3417. 81 1.919 4.73 80.33 I 524.63 2.374 6.77 73. 56 851.51 3.845 7.60 65.95 346.25 6.030 11.32 54.63 194,77 8.040 16.74 37. 89 86. 56 12.060 14.06 23.83 48.69 16.079 3.99 19. 84 31.26 20. 068 5.42 14.42 21. 64 24.119 10.37 15.63 28.381 3.02 4.05 12.02 32.359 0.78 1. C3 7.81 40.13 7 0. 19 0.26 5.41 48.238 0.05 0.06 3.01 . 64.718 0.01 0.01 230 APPENDIX #2 FIELD DATA BASE ON HOWE SOUND SUSPENDED SEDIMENTS This appendix contains 1) the sediment trap data, 2) the precision of trap data, 3) the suspended sediment data, 4) the size analytical data, 5) the XPJ) data, and 6) the current meter data, for paper #6. The: method of analysis and station location are given in paper #6. The sample series number and the cruise number are identical. 231 TRAP//: 1 STATION//: 2 CRUISE//: 4 DATE: Sept. 24/76 TIME: 1100-1600 DBSL* / TSA** / % Org. / ODW+ / % Inorg. / IDW^ / TSR° / OSR°° / ISR°°0/ 50a 165.13 4.3 7.14 95.7 157.99 50b 188.27 3.9 7.30 96.1 180.97 50c 174.46 3.1 5.45 96.9 167.16 50d 174.47 2.7 4.75 97.3 169.72 x" 175.58 3.5 6.20 96.5 169.40 191i 2. 6.8 184.4 100a 208.10 3.6 7.53 96.4 200.57 100b 203.49 4.4 9.04 95.6 194.45 100c 190.23 4.2 8.05 95.8 182.18 lOOd 223.84 3.6 8.05 96.4 215.79 ~x 206.40 4.0 8.20 96.0 198.10 224.8 8.8 216.0 * depth below mean sea level (m) ** total dry weight of sediment accumulated (mg) + organic dry weight (mg) weight of combustible percent ++ inorganic dry weight (mg) 2 o total sedimentation rate (gm/m /day) oo organic sedimentation rate (gm/m^/day) ooo inorganic sedimentation rate (gm/m^/day) 232 TRAP//: 2 STATION//: 1 CRUISE//: 5 DATE: April 26/77 TIME:1110-1700 DBSL* / TSA** / % Org. / ODW+ / % Inorg. / IDW~H' / TSR° / OSR°° / ISR0°° / 5a 0.848 5b 0.858 3.70 0.032. 96.30 0.826 5c 0.889 3.70 0.033 96.30 0.856 X 0.865 3.70 0.032 96.30 0.833 783.2 28.8 754.4 25a 0.571 25b 0.570 3.30 0.019 96.70 0.551 25c 0.617 3.40 0.021 96.60 0.596 ~x 0.586 3.35 0.020 96.65 0.566 530.8 17.6 513.2 45a 0.664 45b 0.649 3.40 0.022 • 96.60 0.627 45c 0.661 3.30 0.022 96.70 0.639 ~x 0.658 3.35 0.022 96.65 0.636 596.0 20.0 576.0 65a 0.790 65b 0.799 3.40 0.027 96.60 0.722 X 0.794 718.8 24.4 694.4 ** (g) + (g) ++ (g) 233 TRAP//: 3 STATION//: 1 CRUISE//: 6 DATE: May 24/77 TIME: 1115-1415, 5m trap also in at 1430-1830 DBSL* / TSA** / % Org. / QDW+ / % Inorg. / IDW"4"*" / TSR° / OSR°° / ISR°OQ/ 5a 52.94 11.8 6.26 88.2 46.68 5b 51.81 10.1 5.21 89.9 46.60 5c 51.32 8.9 4.55 91.1 46.77 5d 51.26 8.2 4.20 91.8 47.06 X 51.83 9.8 5.08 90.2 46.75 40.0 4.0 36.4 25a 14.67 10.4 1.53 89.6 13.14 25b 17.89 9.1 1.63 90.9 16.26 25c 15.65 9.7 1.52 90.3 14.13 25d 17.08 11.0 1.88 89.6 15.20 X 16.32 10.0 1.63 90.0 14.69 22.0 2.0 20.0 45a 22.71. 7.9 1.80 92.1 20.92 45b 21.63 8.0 1.73 92.0 19.90 45c 21.82 6.8 1.48 93.2 20.34 45d 19.81 7.6 1.50 92.4 18.30 "x 21.49 7.6 92.4 92.4 18.30 28.8 2.0 26.8 55a 26.56 7.0 1.86 93.0 24.70 55b 31.53 7.' 3 2.30 92.7 29.23 55c 25.10 8.9 2.23 91.1 22.87 55d 31.19 10.5 3.29 89.5 27.90 ~x 28.60 8.4 2.40 91.6 26.20 38.4 3.0 35.4 ** (mg) + (mg) ++ (mg) 234 TRAP#: 4 STATION//: 2 CRUISE//: 6 DATE: May 25/77 TIME: 0815-1000, 1030-2045 DBSL* / TSA** / % Org. / QDW+ / % Inorg. / IDW"1"* / TSR° / 0SR°° / ISR°0° / 5a 37.18 14.4 5.34 85.6 31.83 5b 34.84 13.0 4.52 87.0 30.31 5c 35.07 11.6 4.07 88.4 31.00 "x 35.70 13.0 4.64 87.0 31.06 16.0 2.0 14.0 45a 23.33 9.6 2.23 90.4 21.09 45b 22.79 9.7 2.22 90.3 20.57 45c 21.40 7.7 1.66 92.3 19.42 X 22.53 9.0 2.03 91.0 20.36 10.4 0.8 9.6 85a 17.81 9.4 1.67 90.6 16.14 85b 17.26 8.5 1.46 91.5 15.79 85c 18.08 9.2 1.66 90.8 16.42 17.72 9.0 1.59 91.0 16.13 7.6 0.8 6.8 135a 47.70 6.8 3.23 93.2 44.47 135b 50.00 6.5 3.27 93.5 46.93 135c 46.00 7.2 3.31 92.8 42.69 X 47.97 6.8 3.28 93.2 44.69 21.6 1.6 20.0 ** (mg) + (mg) ++ (mg) 235 TRAP//: 5 STATION//: 1 CRUISE//: 7 DATE: June 27/77 TIME: 1130-1830 DBSL* / TSA** / % Org. / QDW+ / % Inorg. / IDW"^ / TSR° / OSR°° / ISR°°° / 3a 0.374 0.009 0.365 3b 0.386 0.008 0.378 X 0.380 2.1 0.008 97.9 0.372 294.8 6.2 291.8 13a 0.397 0.008 0.389 13b 0.419 0.008 0.411 13c 0.412 0.009 0.403 ~x 0.409 2.0 0.008 98.0 0.401 317.6 6.2 311.2 33a 1.104 0.015 1.089 33b 1.105 0.017 1.088 33c 1.102 0.017 1.085 X 1.104 1.5 0.016 98.5 1.087 856.8 12.4 843.6 53a 0.976 0.015 0.961 53b 0.953 0.015 0.938 ~x 0.964 0.015 0.950 748.0 11.6 737.2 ** (g) + (g) ++ (g) 236 TRAP//: 6 STATION//: 5 CRUISE//: 7 DATE: June 28/77 DATE: 1000-1030, 1230-1830 DBSL* / TSA** / % Org. / ODW+ / % Inorg. / IDW*4" / TSR° / OSR°° / ISR°°° / 5a 44.72 2.9 1.29 97. 1 43.43 5b 45.00 5c 44.51 X 44.74 2.9 1.30 97.1 43.44 37.3 1.0 36.3 20a 51.81 2.6 1.34 97.4 50.47 20b 53.44 20c 52.98 X 52.74 2.6 1.37 97.4 51.37 43.4 1.0 42.4 60a 96.21 2.4 2.26 97.6 93.95 60b 93.70 60c 95.20 - X 95.04 2.4 2.28 97.6 92.76 79.4 1.9 77.5 100a 110.94 2.8 3.16 97.2 107.78 100b 115.18 100c 117.05 X 114.39 2.8 3.20 97.2 112.2 96.0 3.1 92.4 ** (mg) + (mg) ++ (mg) 237 TRAP//: 7 STATION//: 8 CRUISE//: 7 DATE: June 29/77 TIME: 0920-1320 DBSL* / TSA** / % Org. / ODW+ / % Inorg. / IDW"*^ / TSR° / OSR°° / ISR°°° / 5a 13.80 5b 14.26 1.3 0.19 98.7 14.07 5c 14.30 X 14.42 1.3 0.18 98.7 13.94 19.2 0.3 18.9 15a 5.61 15b 5.96 13.8 0.82 86.2 5.14 15c 5.84 "x 5.80 13.8 0.80 86.2 5.00 7.7 0.9 6.8 25a 7.18 25b 6.67 8.8 0.59 91.2 6.08 © X 6.79 8.8 0.59 91.2 6.20 9.2 0.8 8.4 35a 8.15 35b 7.96 9.0 0.72 91.0 7.24 35c 7.63 X 7.91 9.0 0.71 91.0 7.20 10.7 1.0 9.7 ** (mg) + (mg) ++ (mg) 238 Part A TRAP//: 8 STATION//: 1 CRUISE//: 8 DATE: July 20/77 TIME: 1145-1330, 1355-1630, 1650-1945 DBSL* / TSA** / % Org. / ODW+ / % Inorg. / IDW44" / TSR° / OSR°° / ISRQO° / 5a 0.299 2.1 0.006 97.9 0.293 5b 0.313 "x 0.306 2.1 0.006 97.9 0.299 229.6 4.8 224.8 20a 0.254 1.9 0.005 98.1 0.249 20b 0.256 X 0.255 1.9 0.005 98.1 0.250 191.2 3.6 187.6 40a 0.293 40b 0.296 1.8 0.005 98.2 0.291 "x 0.294 1.8 0.005 98.2 0.289 220.0 4.0 216.0 55a 0.332 1.9 0.006 98.1 0.326 55b 0.325 X 0.328 1.9 0.006 98.1 0.332 246.0 4.8 241.2 ** (g) + (g) ++ (g) 239 Part B TRAP#: 8 STATION*: 1 CRUISE#: 8 DATE: July 20/77 TIME: DBSL* / TSA** / % Org. / ODW+ / % Inorg. / IDw"1"*" / TSR° / 0SR°° / ISR0°° / 5a 0.477 2.2 0.010 97.8 0.437 5b 0.465 X 0.456 2.2 0.010 97.8 0.446 342.0 7.6 334.4 20a 0.363 1.9 0.007 98.1 0.363 20b 0.377 X 0.370 1.9 0.007 98.1 0.363 276.8 4.8 272.0 40a 0.391 40b 0.406 1.7 0.007 98.3 0.399 X 0.398 1.7 0.007 98.3 0.391 298.4 4.8 293.6 55a 0.407 2.0 0.008 98.0 0.399 55b 0.397 ~x 0.402 2.0 0.008 98.0 0.394 301.2 5.6 295.6 ** (g) + (g) ++ (g) o data from traps at a = 45 240 Part A TRAP//: 9 STATION//: 2 CRUISE//: 8 DATE: July 21/77 TIME: 0850-1235, 1340-1800 DBSL* / TSA** / % Org. / QDW+ / % Inorg. / .IOW*"4"./ TSR° / 0SR°O / ISR°0° / 5 0.458 1.8 0.008 98.2 0.450 308.0 5.6 302.4 45 0.239 2.3 0.005 97.7 0.234 160.8 3.6 157.2 85a 0.220 3.5 0.008 96.5 0.212 85b 0.216 ~x 0.218 3.5 0.008 96.5 0.210 145.2 5.2 140.0 135a 0.231 135b 0.236 3.2 0.008 96.8 0.238 Q "x 0.234 3.2 0.008 96.8 0.232 157.2 5.2 152.0 ** (g) + (g) ++ (g) 241 Part B TRAP//: 9 STATION//: 2 CRUISE//: 8 DATE: July 21/77 TIME: 0850-1235, 1340-1800 DBSL* / TSA** / % Org. / ODW+ / % Inorg. / IDW"^ / TSR° / OSR°° / ISR°QO / 5a 0.571 1.8 0.01 98.2 0.561 5b 0.533 X 0.552 1.8 0.01 98.2 0.542 370.4 6.0 364.4 45a 0.243 2.1 0.005 97.9 0.238 45b 0.254 "x 0.248 2.1 0.005 97.9 0.243 167.2 4.0 163.2 85a 0.196 3.6 0.007 96.4 0.189 X 131.6 4.8 126.8 135a 0.262 135b 0.261 3.1 0.008 96.9 0.253 0 ~x 0.262 3.1 0.008 96.9 0.254 172.8 2.8 170.0 ** (g) + (g) ++ (g) data from traps at a = 45 242 TRAP//: 10 STATION//: 1 CRUISE//: 9 DATE: August 22/77 TIME: 1115-1330, 1405-1950 DBSL* / TSA** / % Org. / QDW+ / % Inorg. / IDW"^ / TSR° / 0SR°° / ISR°°° / 5a 1.65 5b 1.63 1.2 0.023 98.8 1.61 • 5c 1.67 ~x 1.65 1.2 0.020 98.8 1.63 1120.4 13.2 1107.2: 20a 1.78 1.1 0.024 98.9 1.76 20b 1.79 20c 1.81 X 1.79 1.1 0.020 98.9 1.77 1215.6 13.2 1202.4 40a 1.57 40b 1.67 1.2 0.022 98.8 1.65 40 c 1.58 "x 1.61 1.2 0.020 98.8 1.59 1093.2 12.8 1080.4 55a 1.93 1.0 0.023 99.0 55b 1.95 55c 1.95 X 1.94 1.0 0.020 99.0 1.92 1317.6 13.2 1304.4 ** (g) + (g) ++ (g) 243 TRAP//: 11 STATION//: 2 CRUISE//: 9 DATE: August 23/77 TIME: 0815-1945 DBSL* / TSA** / % Org. / ODW+ / % Inorg. / IDW"^ / TSR° / OSR°° / ISR°°° / 5a 0.40 5.0 0.016 95.0 0.38 5b 0.40 5c 0.41 X 0.40 5.0 0.020 95.0 0.38 188.8 9.2 179.6 40a 0.82 1.2 0.011 98.8 0.81 40b 0.82 40c 0.81 "x 0.82 1.2 0.010 98.8 0.81 387.2 4.4 382.8 80a 0.62 1.6 0.008 98.4 80b 0.63 80 c 0.63 X 0.63 1.6 0.010 98.4 0.62 297.6 4.8 292.8 120a 0.72 1.4 0.011 98.6 0.71 120b 0.72 120c 0.72 X 0.72 1.4 0.010 98.6 0.71 340.0 4.8 335,. 2 ** (g) + (g) ++ (g) TRAP//: 12 STATION//: 1 CRUISE//: 10 DATE: October 31/77 TIME: 110-1900 DBSL* / TSA* / % Org. / ODW / % Inorg. / IDW / TSR° / OSR°° / ISR°°0 / 5a 42.5 5b 45.3 5c 44.5 4.3 1.9 95.7 42.6 "x 44.1 4.3 1.8 95.7 42.3 30.0 1.2 28.8 20a 59.8 3.8 2.3 96.2 57.5 20b 58.8 20c 60.5 ~x 59.7 3.8 2.3 96.2 57.4 40.4 1.2 39.2 40a 104.0 2.2 2.3 97.8 101.7 40b 108.7 40c 103.5 X 105.4 2.2 2.3 97.8 103.1 71.6 1.6 70.0 55a 185.8 55b 185.0 2.3 4.2 97.7 180.8 55c 183.8 "x 184.8 2.3 4.3 97.7 180.6 125.6 2.8 122.8 ** (mg) + (mg) ++ (mg) 245 Sample ID* coefficient of variation0 (%) TSA** ODW*** IDW+ 5-1-5 2.0 5-1-25 4.6 5-1-45 1.2 6-1-5 1.5 17.9 0.2 6-1-25 8.8 10.2 9.2 6-1-45 5.7 9.9 5.7 6-1-55 11.7 25.2 11.1 6-2-5 3.6 13.9 2.5 6-2-45 4.4 16.0 4.2 6-2-85 2.4 7.4 2.0 6-2-135 4.2 1.2 4.8 7-1-13 2.7 6.9 2.8 7-1-33 0.1 7.1 0.2 7-5-5 0.6 7-5-20 1.6 7-5-60 1.3 7-5-100 2.7 7-8-5 2.0 7-8-15 3.1 7-8-25 3.9 7-8-35 3.3 9-1-5 1.2 9-1-20 0.9 9-1-40 3.4 9-1-55 0.6 9-2-5 1.4 9-2-40 0.7 9-2-80 0.9 9-2-120 0.0 10-1-5 3.3 J 10-1-40 2.2 10-1-55 2.5 S.E. lie • 100 where "x is the mean trap accumulation per station level * cruise - station - depth below sea level ** total sediment accumulated *** organic dry weight + inorganic dry weight 246 SERIES//: 1 DATE: June 25/76 S. & D. / TSM* / % Org. / OWC** / % Inorg. / IWC° / S % / T°C / TIME / IA-OIEL, 21.0 5.2 1.1 94.8 19.9 0.0 9.5 0800 lA-0m+ 1.2 0.0 0.0 100.0 1.2 lA-5m 11.3 35.3 4.0 64.7 7.3 5.5 11.3 lA-5m : 0.9 86.2 0.8 13.8 0.1 1A-I2m 7.7 35.3 2.7 64.7 5.0 24.0 10.0 lA-67m 14.6 25.9 3.8 74.1 10.8 28.0 9.4 2A-0mj, 17.5 0.0 0.0 100.0 17.5 0.0 12.3 0840 2A-0m 0.7 19.7 0.1 80.3 0.6 2A-5m 19.0 76.7 14.6 23.3 4.4 26.5 11.1 2A-15m 10.0 17.9 1.8 82.1 8.2 27.0 10.0 2A-145m 6.2 71.1 4.4 28.9 1.8 29.0 9.6 3A-0mJ, 5.7 29.5 1.7 70.5 4.0 1.0 12.2 0920 3A-0m 2.1 0.0 0.0 100.0 2.1 3A-5m 4.1 7.2 0.3 92.8 3.8 18.0 11.2 3A-15m 3.7 78.1 2.9 21.9 0.8 25.0 12.0 lB-Omj, 28.5 0.0 0.0 100.0 28.5 1.0 11.4 0950 LB-Om 1.7 3.7 0.1 96.3 1.6 lB-5m 7.2 9.5 0.7 90.5 6.5 16.0 11.9 lB-56m 6.1 41.6 2.5 58.4 3.6 29.0 9.3 2B-0mj, 21.1 5.0 1.1 95.0 20.0 1.5 12.2 1050 2B-0m 0.4 86.1 0.3 13.9 0.1 2B-5m 13.5 30.3 4.1 69.7 9.4 17.0 2B-lm 3.5 47.4 1.7 52.6 1.8 29.0 9.6 3B-0m* 12.0 46.0 5.5 54.0 6.5 2.0 10.6 1120 3B-0m 2.3 53.1 1.2 46.9 1.1 3B-15m 2.4 76.0 1.8 24.0 0.6 26.0 10.0 3B-64m 6.7 45.7 3.1 54.3 3.6 30.0 9.6 lC-5m 13.8 0.0 0.0 100.0 13.8 12.0 12.2 1150 lC-15m 6.8 56.5' 3.8 43.5 3.0 28.0 14.5 lC-bottom 5.2 32.2 1.7 67.7 3.5 31.0 9.5 3D-0mJ, ' 21.6 22.8 4.9 77.2 16.7 1.0 13.2 1545 3D-0m 0.2 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3D-5m 9.9 0.0 0.0 100.0 9.9 10.0 10.8 3D-15m 3.4 0.0 0.0 100.0 3.4 26.0 10.7 3D-65m 3.2 0.0 0.0 100.0 3.2 30.0 9.2 lD-Omt. 23.4 7.8 1.8 92.2 21.6 1.5 11.3 1600 lD-Om 0.3 57.3 0.2 42.7 0.1 lD-5m 9.0 18.7 1.7 81.3 7.3 13.0 10.8 ID-15m 8.2 17.3 1.4 82.7 6.8 30.0 10.6 lD-62m 4.3 3.4 0.1 96.6 4.2 31.0 4- silt +clay fraction * total suspended matter (mg/1) ++ sand fraction ** organic weight concentration (mg/1) o suspended inorganic weight concentration (mg/1) 247 SERIES//: 2 DATE: July 29/76 S- & D- A TSM*7 %,0rg. / OWC** / % Inorg. / IWC° / S %./ T°C / pH / TIME / 7A-0m 6.0 4.0 0.2 96.0 5.8 3.5 11.0 7.7 1100 7A-5m 2.7 47.0 1.3 53.0 1.4 22.0 10.4 7.8 7 A-7m 2.4 60.0 1.4 40.0 1.0 26.0 10.2 7.8 7A-10m 2.0 49.6 1.0 50.4 1.0 27.0 10.2 7.7 7A-250m 4.1 53.3 2.2 46.7 1.9 30.5 10.0 7.4 8A-0m 5.1 18.5 0.9 81.5 4.2 5.0 12.2 7.7 1135 8 A-2m 5.8 54.5 3.2 45.5 2.6 10.5 13.0 8.0 8A-4m 22.5 13.0 7.7 8 A-7m 2.3 40.0 0.9 60.0 1.4 25.5 12.0 7.7 8A-40m 10.3 94.0 9.7 6.0 0.6 28.0 10.0 7.7 9A-0m 4.8 'i 25.4 1.2 74.6 3.6 6.5 14.0 8.0 1310 9A-.9m 3.2 42.5 1.4 57.5 1.8 7.5 14.0 8.1 9A-2.6m 3.2 57.8 1.8 42.2 1.4 10.0 13.5 7.9 9A-5.2m 2.2 56.0 1.2 44.0 1.0 20.5 13.1 8.0 9A-138.6m 1.9 55.0 1.0 45.0 0.9 30.0 9.3 7.6 7B-0m 8.5 10.0 0.9 90.0 7.6 5.0 12.1 7.9 1350 7B-3m 2.7 41.0 1.1 59.0 1.6 11.0 13.2 8.0 7B-4.9m 2.0 62.0 1.2 38.0 0.8 18.0 13.5 7.8 7B-7.9m 1.7 54.0 0.9 46.0 0.8 24.0 12.3 7.8 7B-167Am 30.5 9.9 7.3 7B-167Bm 17.7 8.0 1.4 92.0 16.3 30.5 9.9 7.3 8B-0mA 3.7 38.6 1.4 61.4 2.3 •8.0 14.7 7.4 1435 8B-0mB 2.5 29.6 0.7 70.4 1.8 7.5 14.3 7.9 8B-lm 3.6 50.0 1.8 50.0 1.8 12.0 14.3 8.3 8B-3m 3.2 46.0 1.5 54.0 1.7 20.0 14.1 8.1 8B-6m 1.5 60.3 0.9 39.7 0.6 25.0 12.1 7.7 8B-36m 1.2 40.0 0.5 60.0 0.7 29.0 10.5 7.6 9B-0m 3.0 46.3 1.4 53.7 1.6 10.0 14.6 8.0 1520 9B-2m 3.2 48.1 1.5 51.9 1.7 12.0 13.1 7.9 9B-6m 1.2 68.0 0.8 32.0 0.4 23.5 13.1 7.9 7C-0m 6.0 28.2 1.7 71.8 4.3 6.0 13.7 7.0 1540 7C-2m 3.4 31.0 1.1 69.0 2.3 12.0 13.3 8.1 7C-6m 1.6 38.7 0.6 61.3 1.0 24.0 13.5 7.8 7C-340m 11.5 22.4 2.6 77.6 8.9 32.0 9.0 7.2 8C-0m 4.7 24.0 1.1 76.0 3.6 6.0 14.9 8.2 1630 8C-2m 4.6 35.8 1.6 64.2 3.0 12.0 15.2 8.3 8C-6m 1.6 62.4 0.6 37.6 1.0 23.0 13.7 8.0 8C-40m 2.4 63.1 1.5 36.9 0.9 29.5 9.8 7.6 248 SERIES//: 2 DATE: July 30/76 S. & D. / TSM* / :I Org. / owe** / ;I Inorg. / IWC° / S %./' T°C / pll / TIME / 4A-0m 8.3 13.3 1.1 86.7 7.2 0.5 10.1 7.2 0830 4A-1.7m 8.0 32.6 2.6 67.4 5.4 8.0„ 10.6 7.7 4A-3.5m 3.9 21.1 1.1 72.9 2.8 18.0 11.6 7.8 4A-6.lm 2.6 30.0 0.8 70.0 1.8 22.0 12.0 7.7 4A-295m 2.8 49.3 1.4 50.7 1.4 30.0 8.7 7.2 5A-0m 9.0 20.4 1.8 79.6 7.2 3.0 10.1 7.5 0915 5A-2m 7.9 16.3 1.3 83.7 6.6 4.5 10.5 7.8 5A-4m 6.0 24.1 1.4 75.9 4.6 21.5 12.0 7.7 5 A-7m 2.0 41.8 0.8 58.2 1.2 25.0 11.5 7.4 5A-235m 3.7 47.4 1.8 52.6 1.9 30.0 8.9 7.5 6A-0m 7.4 21.1 1.6 78.9 5.8 4.0 10.1 7.8 0945 6A-1.9m 4.4 10.9 0.5 89.1 3.9 11.5 12.0 8.1 6A-3.8m 3.1 48.0 1.5 52.0 1.6 19.0 12.6 8.1 6A-6.6m 1.7 33.3 0.6 66.7 1.1 25.0 12.0 7.8 6A-240m 3.2 35.0 1.1 65.0 2.1 31.5 8.6 7.7 4B-0m 6.6 41.7 3.1 58.3 3.5 2.0 9.9 7.5 1025 4B-1.6m 5.3 42.3 2.2 57.7 3.1 3.0 9.6 7.7 4B-3.3m 8.5 13.2 1.1 86.8 7.4 9.0 10.7 7.9 4B-5.7m 2.2 45.5 1.0 54.5 1.2 24.0 10.5 8.0 4B-197Am 5.9 35.7 2.1 64.3 3.8 30.5 9.0 7.8 4B-197Bm 1.5 14.3 0.2 85.7 1.3 31.0 5B-0m 4.7 24.0 1.1 76.0 3.6 3.0 10.9 1050 5B-2m 5.1 18.5 0.9 81.5 4.2 2.0 10.4 5B-4m 6.1 20.7 1.3 79.3 4.8 9.0 10.5 5B-7m 2.8 33.6 0.9 66.4 1.9 23.0 12.0 5B-207Am 3.5 17.6 0.6 82.4 2.9 31.0 9.0 6B-0m 6.8 18.3 1.2 81.7 5.6 5.0 11.3 1115 6B-lm 6.9 19.1 1.3 80.9 5.6 5.5 11.5 6B-3m 4.3 36.9 1.6 63.1 2.7 13.5 12.5 6B-6m 1.6 50.0 0.8 50.0 0.8 23.0 12.3 6B-229Am 2.7 40.7 1.1 59.3 1.6 31.0 9.1 6B-229Bm 2.2 52.0 1.1 48.0 1.1 31.0 9.1 249 SERIES*: 3 DATE: August .16/76 S. & D. / TSM* / % Org. / OWC** / % Inorg. / IWC° / S %. / T°C / TIME/ lA-Om 13.9 17.3 2.4 82.7 11.5 1.0 11.6 1030 lA-3m 14.9 0.6 0.1 99.4 14.8 10.0 12.7 lA-5m 4.2 45.0 SI.9 55.0 2.3 23.0 12.7 lA-8m 5.1 31.2 1.6 68.8 3.5 25.0 11.5 lA-86m 6.4 30.0 1.9 70.0 4.5 30.0 9.2 2A-0m 8.4 13.5 1.1 86.5 7.3 1.0 11.7 1110 2A-2m 15.6 39.8 6.2 60.2 9.4 2.0 11.4 2 A-4m • 4.6 39.5 1.8 60.5 2.8 22.0 11.6 2 A-7m 4.8 42.9 1.1 57. 1 2.7 28.0 10.4 2A-150Am 3.2 30.4 1.0 69.6 2.2 30.0 9.6 2A-150Bm 3.5 44.4 1.6 55.6 1.9 30.0 9.2 3A-0Am 20.5 9.6 2.0 90.4 18.5 0.0 10.4 1140 3A-OBm 11.4 20.0 2.3 80.0 9.1 0.0 10.3 3A-lm 9.4 8.8 0.8 91.2 8.6 0.5 11.2 3 A-3m 5.1 17.0 11.9 3A-6m 2.5 73.3 1.8 26.7 0.7 27.0 10.4 3A-55m 3.8. 26.6 1.0 73.4 2.8 30.0 9.5 lB-Om 20.8 11.3 2.4 88.7 18.4 10.0 10.4 1300 lB-lm 14.4 18.6 2.7 81.4 11.7 1.0 10.9 IB-3m 3.8 40.9 1.6 59.1 2.2 21.0 11.8 lB-6m 4.6 22.3 1.5 67.7 3.1 27.0 10.3 IB-7 9m 10.5 30.0 9.3 2B-0Am 9.1 0.0 0.0 100.0 9.1 2.0 11.3 1325 2B-0Bm 14.9 12.7 1.9 87.3 13.0 1.0 10.7 2B-2m 4.0 11.6 2B-4m 3.2 50.0 1.6 50.0 1.6 22.0 12.0 2B-7m 7.1 • 26.0 10.9 2B-147m 5.2 25.0 1.3 75.0 3.9 30.0 9.6 3B-0Am 12.1 10.3 1.3 89.7 10.8 0.0 10.1 1405 3B-0Bm 12.4 11.8 1.5 88.2 10.9 0.0 10.6 3B-lm 20.2 14.1 2.8 85.9 17.4 0.0 10.6 3B-3m 3.0 29.8 0.9 70.2 2.1 20.0 11.3 3B-6m 7.2 42.2 3.0 57.8 4.2 24.0 11.1 3B-70m 2.4 72.5 1.7 27.5 0.7 31.5 9.1 250 SERIES//: 4 DATE: September 24/76 S. & D. / TSM* /• % Org. / owe** / % Inorg., / iwc° /s •%./ T°C / TIME. 2-0m 2.8 4.0 0.1 96.0 2.7 6.0 13.0 1220 lm 5.4 20.8 1.6 79.2 3.8 •6.5 11.9 1230 3m 1.5 35.7 0.5 64.3 1.0 16.0 13.4 1230 10m 1.0 27.8 0.3 72.2 0.7 26.0 12.3 1230 118m 3.0 25.9 0.8 74.1 2.2 30.5 10.6 1225 0m 8.1 11.1 0.9 88.9 7.2 6.0 12.1 1250 Om 1.5 28.6 0.4 71.4 1.1 6.0 11.5 1251 Om 2.4 23.8 0.6 76.2 1.8 6.0 11.9 1252 lm 11.9 13.2 1.6 86.8 10.3 6.0 12.4 1310 3m 3.9 32.4 1.3 67.6 2.6 19.0 13.0 1310 10m 1.6 42.9 0.7 57.1 0.9 25.0 12.9 1310 116m 1.3 63.6 0.8 36.4 0.5 30.0 9.5 1325 lm 4.9 20.4 1.0 79.6 3.9 8.0 12.1 1415 3m 2.4 27.3 0.7 33.3 1.7 16.0 12.5 1415 10m 2.8 52.0 1.5 53.6 1.3 26.0 12.2 1415 15m 1.2 45.4 0.5 54.6 0.7 28.0 11.5 1415 Om 3.2 20.7 0.7 79.3 2.5 8.0 11.9 1423 Om 7.3 18.8 1.4 81.2 5.9 6.0 11.9 1428 lm 6.7 18.6 1.2 81.4 5.5 8.0 11.5 1436 3m 6.5 22.4 1.5 77.6 5.0 14.0 12.9 1436 10m 1.4 84.6 1.2 15.4 0.2 22.0 12.1 1438 15m 1.4 69.2 1.0 30.8 0.4 26.0 11.4 1440 Om 4.5 15.0 0.7 85.0 3.8 5.0 12.4 1450 Om 3.1 33.3 1.0 66.7 2.1 5.0 11.2 1510 ,0m 3.9 5.5 11.8 1523 lm 5.1 22.2 1.1 77.8 4.0 6.0 12.0 1515 3m 1.5 53.8 0.8 46.2 0.7 16.0 12.6 1515 10m 2.0 44.4 0.9 55.6 1.1 24.0 12.5 1520 15m 1.8 50.0 0.9 50.0 0.9 27.0 11.2 1515 Om 6.4 13.8 0.9 86.2 5.5 5.0 12.1 1545 lm . 5.0 11.6 1545 3m 2.3 20.0 0.5 80.0 1.8 14.0 12.2 1546 10m 1.1 56.0 0.6 44.0 0.5 24.0 11.9 1545 15m 1.9 42.9 0.8 57.1 1.1 26.0 11.6 1545 Om 1.9 24.1 0.5 75.9 1.4 11.8 1556 251 SERIES//: 5 DATE: April 26/77 S. & D. / TSM* I % Org. / OWC** / % Inorg. / IWC° / S %./ T°C / TIME / 1-Om 30.9 7.4 2.3 92.6 28.6 0.0 8.8 1310 1-lm 30.5 13.1 4.0 86.9 26.5 4.0 11.4 l-3m 21.5 17.1 3.7 82.9 17.8 13.0 11.2 l-5m 13.2 30.6 4.0 69.4 9.2 20.0 11.6 1-12m 55.0 27.6 1.5 72.4 4.0 28.0 10.4 1-Om 45.0 6.5 2.9 93.5 42.1 3.0 9.5 1335 1-lm 39.3 8.7 3.4 91.3 35.9 6.0 10.3 1-K3m 18.4 19.4 3.6 80.6 14.8 16.0 10.7 l-5m 8.5 25.7 2.2 74.3 6.3 25.0 10.4 l-12m 7.2 25.1 1.8 74.9 5.4 28.0 10.2 1-Om 35.0 14.1 4.9 85.9 30.1 0.0 8.6 1415 1-lm 66.3 6.7 4.4 93.3 61.9 2.0 9.9 l-3m 30.2 11.6 3.5 88.4 26.7 12.0 10.6 l-5m 18.2 21.5 3.9 78.5 14.3 18.0 10.9 1-12m 6.0 25.4 1.5 74.6 4.5 27.0 10.8 1-Om 32.2 1.3 0.4 98.7 31.9 0.0 8.2 1445 1-lm 55.7 28.1 15.7. 71.9 40.0 0.0 8.1 l-3m 23.8 11.5 2.7 88.5 21.1 10.0 9.5 l-5m 12.9 18.7 2.4 81.3 10.5 20.5 10.6 l-12m 8.9 22.2 2.0 77.8 6.9 27.0 9.4 1-Om 47.9 11.4 5.5 88.6 42.4 0.0 9.4 1545 1-lm 65.0 8.0 5.2 92.0 59.8 1.0 10.9 l-3m 28.4 11.1 3.2 88.9 25.2 12.0 10.9 l-5m 17.3 6.9 1.2 93. 1 16.1 20.0 11.9 1- 12m 6.1 23.6 1.4 76.4 4.7 27.0 10.5 1- Om 31.3 10.7 3.3 89.3 28.0 0.0 .9.0 1610 1- lm 44.2 10.2 4.5 89.8 39.7 2.0 9.0 1- 3m 29.9 9.0 2.7 91.0 27.2 4.0 10.0 1- 5m 27.8 10.6 2.9 89.4 24.9 18.0 11.6 1- 12m 7.8 19.6 1.5 80.4 6.3 26.5 10.3 1- Om 21.7 14.5 3.1 85.5 18.6 4.0 9.0 1635 1- lm 17.7 12.3 2.2 87.7 15.5 4.0 9.9 1- 3m 19.1 14.8 2.8 85.2 16.3 8.0 9.4 1- 5m 21.1 13.9 2.9 86.1 18.2 19.0 10.5 1- 12m 8.2 16.1 1.5 83.9 6.7 26.5 10.3 252 SERIES//: 5 DATE: April 27/77 S. & D. / TSM* 7 % Org. / owe** / :I Inorg. :/:iwc° :/ S %./ T°C / :TIME 9A-0m 8.0 36.4 2.9 63.6 5.1 15.00 11.4 0855 9 A-2m 5.6 24.2 1.4 75.8 4.2 16.0 10.8 9A-5m 9.4 20.6 1.9 79.4 7.5 23.5 11.2 9A-12m 4.3 43.2 1.9 56.8 2.4 28.0 10.8 9A-0m 8.6 23.8 2.0 76.2 6.6 15.0 10.8 8A-0m 7.1 21.6 1.5 78.4 5.6 15.0 10.5 0930 8A-lm 8.3 22.2 1.8 77.8 6.5 15.5 10.9 8 A-3m 6.6 37.8 2.5 62.2 4.1 22.5 10.4 8A-5m 4.5 43.4 2.0 56.6 2.5 26.0 10.9 8A-12m 4.0 30.7 1.2 69.3 2.8 29.5 10.4 7A-0m 7.5 17.7 1.3 82.3 6.2 10.0 11.0 1000 7A-lm 7.2 27.7 2.0 72.3 5.2 15.0 11.0 7A-3m 6.6 33.7 2.2 66.3 4.4 20.0 12.1 7A-5m 5.3 30.2 1.6 69.8 3.7 22.0 12.4 7A-12m 5.6 25.9 1.5 74.1 4.1 26.0 10.2 8B-0m 6.0 19.2 1.2 80.8 4.8 17.0 11.4 1030 8B-lm 6.0 26.6 1.6 73.4 4.4 18.0 12.3 8B-3m 6.5 25.3 1.6 74.4 4.9 22.0 12.5 8B-5m 5.1 25.1 1.3 74.9 3.8 26.0 11.8 8B-12m 4.1 43.6 1.8 56.4 2.3 29.0 12.2 9B-0m 5.3 24.4 1.3 75.6 4.0 17.0 13.4 1110 9B-lm 6.6 22.6 1.5 77.4 5.1 17.0 13.5 9B-3m 6.6 30.7 2.0 69.3 4.6 17.0 12.6 9B-5m 6.8 43.1 2.9 56.9 3.9 22.0 12.7 9B-12m 4.0 53.8 2.2 46.2 1.8 28.0 12.2 253 SERIES//: 6 DATE: May 24/77 S. & D. / TSM* / % Org. / owe** / :1: Inorg. :/:iwc° / S %, / T°C / TIME 1-Om 7.9 17.6 1.4 82.4 6.5 0.0 10.0 1245 1-lm 8.8 24.2 2.1 75.8 6.7 0.0 10.2 l-3m 8.3 43.7 3.6 56.3 4.7 5.0 11.6 l-5m 3.3 40.0 1.3 60.0 2.0 19.0 11.6 l-10m 1.8 35.2 0.6 64.8 1.2 29.0 9.8 l-20m 1.8 18.5 0.3 81.5 1.5 31.0 9.5 1315 l-40m 2.1 5.9 0.1 94.1 2.0 32.0 9.5 l-60m 2.2 29.8 0.7 70.2 1.5 32.0 9.5 l-70m 43.1 11.0 4.8 89.0 38.3 32.0 9.4 1-Om 6.2 10.0 0.6 90.0 5.6 1.5 9.6 1535 1-lm 9.1 13.5 1.2 86.5 7.9 2.0 9.9 l-3m 9.1 25.1 2.3 74.9 6.8 4.0 10.4 l-5m 3.5 28.6 1.0 71.4 2.5 22.0 10.6 l-10m 1.4 6.0 0.1 94.0 1.3 30.0 10.2 l-20m 1.7 27.4 0.5 72.6 1.2 32.0 9.9 1600 l-40m 1.8 30.1 0.5 69.9 1.3 32.0 10.0 1-4 5m 2.2 15.7 0.3 84.3 1.9 32.0 9.4 l-55m 2.2 7.9 0.2 92.1 2.0 32.0 9.5 254 SERIES//: 6 DATE: May 25/77 S. & D. / TSM* 7 % Org. / owe** 7 :;1 : inorg. /:IWC° 7 s:%./ T°C / TIME 2-Om 4.8 14.7 0.7 85.3 4.1 3.0 11.2 1030 2-lm 6.7 31.4 2.1 68.6 4.6 4.5 11.6 2-3m 4.0 28.1 1.1 71.9 2.9 15.0 12.2 2-5m 5.6 79.2 4.4 20.8 1.2 26.0 10.6 2-10m 1.2 25.0 0.3 75.0 0.9 30.0 9.4 2-20m 1.0 48.0 0.5 52.0 0.5 31.0 9.4 1100 2-4 Om 1.8 67.4 1.2 32.6 0.6 32.0 9.3 2-60m 1.1 32.4 0.4 67.6 0.7 32.0 9.4 2-8 Om 1.1 15.5 0.2 84.5 0.9 32.0 9.4 2-60Bm 1.1 30.8 0.3 69.2 0.8 32.0 9.4 1115 2-80Bm 0.7 2.>9 0.0 97.1 0.7 32.0 9.3 2-100m 1.1 34.8 0.4 65.2 0.7 32.0 9.1 2-120m 2.5 43.4 1.1 56.6 1.4 32.0 8.9 2T-0m 4.6 10.9 0.5 89.1 4.1 3.0 11.3 2-Om 5.3 30.2 1.6 69.8 3.7 5.0 12.5 1530 2-lm 5.7 30.8 1.8 69.2 3.9 9.5 13.5 2-3m 3.1 14.7 0.5 85.3 2.6 22.0 12.5 2-5m 2.0 42.4 0.8 57.6 1.2 29.0 10.5 2-10 1.0 27.7 0.3 72.3 0.7 30.5 10.1 2-20m 1.2 39.7 0.5 60.3 0.7 32.0 9.5 1550 2-30m 1.1 87.4 1.0 12.6 0.1 32.0 9.7 2-40m 2.3 82.4 1.9 17.6 0.4 32.0 9.6 2-5 Om 0.4 32.0 9.8 2-60m 1.1 53.8 0.6 46.2 0.5 32.0 9.4 1610 2-80m 1.2 67.5 0.8 32.5 0.4 32.0 9.5 2-100m 1.3 63.2 0.8 36.8 0.5 32.0 9.4 2-120m 1.4 30.4 0.4 69.6 1.0 32.0 9.4 2-Om 4.5 41.3 1.9 58.7 2.6 4.0 12.2 1625 255 SERIES//: 6 DATE: May 26/77 S. & D. 7 TSM* / % Org. / owe** / %: inorg. ./ IWC° :/ s:%.7 T°C/ :TIME 7-Om 2.4 32.2 0.8 67.8 1.6 12.0 12.5 0900 7-lm 2.8 34.3 1.0 65.7 1.8 11.5 13.1 7-3m 2.5 51.6 1.3 48.4 1.2 14.0 13.5 7-5m 2.4 45.9 1.1 54.1 1.3 15.0 14.0 7-9.8m. 0.8 46.9 0.4 53.1 0.4 28.5 9.5 0915 7-24.6m 0.4 10.5 0.0 89.5 0.4 30.0 8.7 7-49.2m 0.3 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.3 30.0 8.9 7-73.6m 1.1 39.1 0.4 60.9 0.7 30.0 8.8 0930 7-117m 0.8 40.5 0.3 59.5 0.5 30.5 8.6 7-182m 0.5 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.5 30.0 8.5 8-0m 2.3 30.8 0.7 69.2 1.6 11.5 13.1 0955 8-2m 2.4 34.9 0.8 65.1 1.6 12.0 13.0 8-4m 2.6 45.0 1.2 55.0 1.4 12.0 13.1 8-6m 2.7 43.8 1.2 56.2 1.5 14.0 12.3 8-9m 1.3 41.1 0.5 58.9 0.8 26.0 10.0 1010 8-2 2m 0.5 16.0 0.1 84.0 0.4 30.0 8.8 8-30m 0.8 26.5 0.2 73.5 0.6 30.0 8.8 9-0m 3.0 38.8 1.2 61.2 1.8 11.5 13.0 1020 9-lm 2.9 35.0 1.0 65.0 1.9 11.0 13.3 9-3m 2.6 37.1 1.0 62.9 1.6 12.5 13.5 9-5m 2.7 36.0 1.0 64.0 1.7 15.5 13.0 9-8m 1.5 25.9 0.4 74.1 1.1 25.0 10.1 1030 9-20m 0.6 22.4 0.1 77.6 0.5 29.5 8.5 • 9-4 lm 1.0 28.0 0.3 72.0 0.7 29.5 8.5 9-68m 0.7 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.7 30.0 8.5 1040 9-91m 0.7 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.7 30.0 8.4 9-113m 30.0 8.4 256 SERIES//: 7 DATE: June 27/77 S. & D. / TSM* / % Org. / owe** / %:Inorg. :/ iwc°: /:s:%./ T°C/ TIME 1-Om 57.4 5.3 3.1 94.7 54.3 2.0 10.2 1300 1-lm 33.2 8.4 2.8 91.6 30.4 2.0 11.2 l-2m 32.0 7.0 2.2 93.0 29.8 10.0 12.7 l-3m 16.5 9.6 1.6 90.4 14.9 14.0 13.8 l-4m 8.7 8.9 0.8 91.1 7.9 18.0 13.6 l-5m 7.8 7.9 0.6 92.1 9.2 23.0 13.2 1330 l-10m 5.9 0.0 0.0 100.0 5.9 28.0 11.3 l-20m 11.8 3.2 0.4 96.8 11.4 31.0 10.5 l-40m 6.3 1.7 0.1 98.3 6.2 32.0 10.1 l-55m 4.8 17.3 0.8 82.7 4.0 32.0 9.4 1-Om 43.5 7.6 3.3 92.4 40.2 2.0 10.5 1625 1-lm 55.2 6.2 3.4 93.8 51.8 2.0 10.9 l-2m 45.2 5.8 2.6 94.2 42.6 2.0 11.1 l-3m 49.7 3.6 1.8 96.4 47.9 2.0 11.3 l-4m 29.1 8.7 2l5 91.3 26.6 9.0 12.2 l-5m 11.0 8.8 1.0) 91.2 10.0 18.0 12.8 1650 l-10m 3.9 11.2 0.4 88.8 3.5 30.0 10.8 l-20m 3.9 11.7 0.5 88.3 3.4 31.0 10.5 1-4 Om 7.4 9.2 0.7 90.8 6.7 32.0 9.5 l-60m 8.9 7.3 0.7 92.7 8.2 32.0 9.4 257 SERIES// : 7 DATE: June 28/77 S . & D. / TSM* /:% Org., / owe** / % :Inorg. :/:iwc° /:s:%. / T°C / .TIME 5-Om 16.9 0.9 0.1 99.1 16.8 3.0 12.3 1015 5-lm 14.3 8.0 1.1 92.0 13.2 4.0 13.5 1005 5-2m 13.7 6.0 0.8 94.0 12.9 5.0 13.1 1005 5-3m 12.4 2.5 0.3 97.5 12.1 15.0 13.7 1010 5-4m 4.6 16.3 0.8 83.7 3.8 23.0 13.4 1010 5-5m .3.4 13.2 0.4 86.8 3.0 24.5 12.3 1015 5-7m 2'J9 13.7 0.4 86.3 2.5 28.0 11.8 1015 5-Om 19.8 5.4 1.1 94.6 18.7 3.0 14.3 1400 5-5m 4.8 11.0 0.5 89.0 4.3 23.0 14.5 1400 5-10m 2.0 0.2 0.0 99.5 2.0 31.0 11.9 1400 5-20m 1.7 0.0 0.0 100.0 1.7 32.0 11.2 1410 5-4 Om 1.6 8.0 0.1 92.0 1.5 32.0 10.8 1410 5-60m 2.2 16.6 0.4 83.4 1.8 32.0 9.5 1410 5-100m 1.7 7.3 0.1 92.7 1.6 32.0 9.5 1410 5-Om 17.4 8.5 1.5 91.5 15.9 4.0 13.2 1610 5-lm 17.8 8.2 1.5 91.8 16.3 4.0 13.2 1600 5-2m 11.8 0.0 0.0 100.0 11.8 8.0 13.9 1600 5-3m 10.3 10.1 1.0 89.9 9.3 9.0 13.7 1600 5-4m 7.5 6.0 0.4 94.0 7.1 15.0 13.6 1610 5-5m 4.9 10.5 0.5 89.5 4.4 23.0 14.3 1610 5-7m 3.0 14.8 0.5 85.2 2.5 28.0 13.5 1640 5-10m 2.1 19.1 0.4 80.9 1.7 32.0 11.2 1640 5-20m 2.3 23.8 0.5 76.2 1.8 32.0 9.9 1640 5-40m 1.5 35.5 0.5 64.5 1.0 33.0 9.8 1640 5-60m 2.0 24.3 0.5 75.7 1.5 33.0 9.8 1645 5-80m 2.1 33.8 0.7 66.2 1.4 33.0 9.7 1645 5-100m 2.1 24.1 0.5 75.9 1.6 33.0 9.5 1645 258 SERIES//: 7 DATE: June 29/77 S. & D. /-TSM*./ % Org. / OWC** / % Inorg. / IWC° / S %./ T°C / TIME / 8-0m 5.9. 14.3 0.8 85.7 5.1) 8.0 14.7 1010 8-lm 3.90 32.3 1.3 67.7 2.6; 8.0 16.1 0940 8-3m 2.1 12.5 0.3 87.5 1.8 18.0 15.8 0940 8-5m 2.0 46.8 0.9 53.2 1.1 20.0 15.3 0945 8-7m 1.4 26.6 0.4 73.4 1.0 26.0 12.9 0945 8-10m 1.6 10.2 0.2 89.8 1.4 28.0 12.0 0950 8-12m 1.2 10.0 0.1 90.0 1.1 30.0 11.2 0950 8-15m 1.3 0.0 0.0 100.0 1.3 30.0 10.6 0955 8-25m 1.1 13.4 0.1 86.6 1.0 31.0 10.0 0955 8-35m 1.0 23.6 0.2 76.4 0.8 32.0 9.8 1000 8-0m 3.5 13.4 0.5 86.6 3.0 7.0 16.2 1230 8-2m 3.8 21.6 0.8 78.4 3.0 8.0 16.6 1210 8-3m 2.8 5.0 0.1 95.0 2.7 12.0 16.2 1210 8-5m 2.8 21.0 0.6 79.0 2.2 20.0 15.6 1215 8-7m 2.2 26.8 0.6 73.2 1.6 26.0 12.7 1215 8-10m 1.2 36.9 0.2 63.1 1.4 30.0 11.6 1220 8-12m 0.8 35.5 0.3 64.5 0.5 30.0 10.9 1220 8-15m 0.8 34.2 0.3 65.8 0.5 31.0 10.4 1225 8-25m 1.0 30.3 0.3 69.7 0.7 32.0 9.8 1225 8-35m 0.8 6.8 0.1 93.2 0.7 32.0 9.6 1230 259 SERIES//: 8 DATE: July 20/77 S. & D. / TSM* / % Org. / owe** / ;I Inorg. / IWC° / S %./ T°C / TIME 1-Om 58.6 4.5 2.6 95.5 56.0 5.0 11.8 1440 1-lm 54.9 7.3 4.0 92.7 50.9 8.0 12.2 1450 l-2m 22.5 7.9 1.8 92.1 20.7 14.0 13.5 1450 l-3m 7.5 20.3 1.5 79.7 6.0 18.0 14.2 1500 l-4m 6.9 13.4 0.9 86.6 6.0 20.0 14.0 1500 l-5m 6.0 16.4 1.0 83.6 5.0 26.0 12.6 1515 l-10m 3.8 22.6 0.9 77.4 2.9 30.0 11.6 1515 l-20m 3.0 25.4 0.8 74.6 2.2 32.0 10.2 1525 l-40m 2C6 19.5 0.5 80.5 2.1 32.0 9.5 1525 l-55m 311 7.1 0.2 92.9 2.9 32.0 9.7 1544 1-Om 42.8 7.0 3.0 93.0 39.8 2.0 11.2 1720 1-lm 44.7 5.6 2.5 94.4 42.2 3.0 11.8 1720 l-2m 18.8 7.7 1.5 92.3 17.3 14.0 13.0 1720 l-3m 18.5 8.4 1.5 91.6 17.0 16.0 13.0 1730 l-4m 5.5 12.9 0.7 87.1 4.8 23.0 12.2 1730 l-5m 6.1 7.1 0.4 92.9 5.7 25.0 11.9 1737 l-10m 2.8 39.0 1.1 61.0 1.7 29.0 10.9 1737 l-20m 2.4 7.3 0.2 92.7 2.2 30.5 10.5 1750 l-40m 2.0 6.8 0.1 93.2 1.9 31.0 9.8 1750 1-5 5m 3.9 8.8 0.3 91.2 3.6 32.0 9.6 1800 260 SERIES//: 8 DATE: July 21/77 S. & D. / TSM* / % Org. 7 owe** / ;X Inorg. ./ IWC° / S .%./ T°C / TIME 2-Om 49.9 , 1.6 0.8 98.4 49.1 4.0 12.2 1005 2-lm 36.8 4.8 1.8 95.2 35.0 4.0 13.1 1005 2-2m 18.9 2.5 0.5 97.5 18.4 6.0 14.1 1005 2-3m 24.4 8.2 2.0 91.8 22.4 10.0 14.2 1010 2-4m 6.6 12.2 0.8 87.8 5.8 •18.0 14.6 1010 2-5m 5.0 7.2 0.4 92.8 4.6 20.0 14.5 1015 2-10m 2.5 14.7 0.4 85.3 2.1 30.0 11.6 1015 2-20m 32.0 10.8 1024 2-4 Om 2.4 20.6 0.5 79.4 1.9 33.0 9.6 1024 2-60m 33.0 9.8 1035 2-100m 2.1 26.6 0.6 73.4 1.5 33.0 9.8 1035 2-6 Om 1.7 12.5 0.2 87.5 1.5 35.0 9.4 1050 2-20m 1.8 6.1 0.1 93.9 1.7 33.0 10.1 1055 2-Om 28.2 8.3 2.3 91.7 25.9 8.0 13.5 1625 2-lm 25.2 4.7 1.2 95.3 24.0 8.0 14.1 1625 2-2m 16.9 13.7 2.3 86.3 14.6 16.0 14.7 1625 2-3m . 7.8 12.4 1.0 87.6 6.8 20.0 14.2 1632 2-4m 4.5 10.2 0.5 89.8 4.0 24.0 13.1 1632 2-5m 4.9 10.0 0.5 90.0 4.4 26.0 12.2. 1635 2-10m 4.1 14.6 0.6 85.4 3.5 30.0 10.2 1635 2-20m 2.5 4.8 0.1 95.2 2.4 31.0 10.2 1640 2-40m 2.6 6.6 0.2 93.4 2.4 32.0 9.6 1640 2-60m 1.7 3.8 0.1 96.2 1.6 32.0 9.7 1650 2-100m 1.8 10.4 0.2 87.6 1.6 32.0 9.4 1650 261 SERIES//: 9 DATE: August 22/77 S. & D. / TSM* / % Org. / owe** / ;I Inorg. / IWC° / S %./ T°C / TIME 1-Om 63.9 3.9 2.5 96.1 61.4 1.5 11.2 1240 1-lm 46.5 5.5 2.5 94.5 44.0 2.0 11.5 1240 l-2n© 35.0 2.3 0.8 97.7 34.2 3.0 11.6 1240 l-3m 38.9 5.8 2.3 94.2 36.6 3.0 12.1 1245 l-4m 38.0 5.2 2.0 94.8 36.0 9.0 13.2 1245 l-5m 32.4 9.4 3.0 90.6 29.4 16.0 14.0 1250 l-10m•, 12.4 7.6 0.9 92.4 11.5 27.0 12.3 1250 l-20m 7.2 4.3 0.3 95.7 6.9 30.0 10.7 1255 l-30m 6.5 12.1 0.8 87.9 5.7 30.0 9.8 1255 l-40m 7.8 10.3 0.8 89.7 7.1 30.0 9.8 1300 l-55m 5.7 0.4 94.3 6.6 31.0 9.5 1300 , 7-° 1-Om 77.7 6.4 5.0 93.6 72.7 2.0 11.5 1613 1-lm 74.1 6.1 4.5 93.9 69.6 2.0 11.3 1613 l-2n® 55.9 3.9 2.2 96.1 53.7 2.0 11.7 1613 l-3m 63.9 5.6 3.6 94.4 60.3 2.0 11.8 1617 l-4m 58.9 6.9 4.1 93.1 54.8 3.0 12.3 1617 l-5m© 36.2 9.9 3.6 90.1 32.6 6.0 13.6 1622 l-10nt£> 9.7 17.0 1.7 83.0 8.0 26.0 13.4 1622 l-20m© 4.8 12.1 0.6 87.9 4.2 29.0 10.7 1625 l-30m 2.8 2.0 0.1 98.0 2.7 30.0 10.0 1625 l-40m 2.6 11.3 0.3 88.7 2.3 30.0 9.8 1630 l-55m . 2.6 13.9 0.4 86.1 2.2 31.0 9.5 1630 (2) only silt and clay fraction 262 SERIES// : 9 DATE: August 23/77 S. & D. / TSM* / % Org. / owe** / % Inorg. / IWC° / S %./ T°C / TIME 2-Om 30.2 4.3 1.3 95.7 28.9 1.0 11.7 1002 2-lm 35.0 9.3 3.3 90.7 31.7 1.0 11.4 1002 2-2m 29.7 4.1 1.2 95.9 28.5 3.0 12.0 1002 2-3m 10.0 26.7 2.7 73.3 7.3 18.0 15.8 1006 2-4m 7.7 13.5 1.0 86.5 6.7 22.0 15.6 1006 2-5m 9.4 2.9 0.3 97.1 9.1 22.0 15.2 1012 2-10m 5.3 15.8 0.8 84.2 4.5 27.0 11.8 1012 2-20m 6.4 18.4 1.2 81.6 5.2 30.0 10.5 1016 l-40m 3.2 2.3 0.1 97.7 3.1 30.5 9.4 1016 2-60m 15.2 6.9 1.0 93.1 14.2 30.5 9.4 1020 2-80m 21.1 16.3 3.5 83.7 17.6 30.5 8.9 1020 2-100m 3.4 10.8 0.4 89.2 3.0 31.0 9.0 1035 2-120m 13.6 11.0 1.5 89.0 12.1 31.0 8.7 1035 2-0m 23.1 7.1 1.6 92.9 21.5 2.0 12.1 1542 2-lm 23.7 5.2 1.2 94.8 22.5 2.0 12.4 1542 2-2m 24.1 5.8 1.4 94.2 22.7 4.0 12.6 1542 2-3m 10.8 1.5 0.2 98.5 10.6 7.0 13.3 1545 2-4m 21.2 3.9 0.8 96.1 20 .4 15.0 15.5 1545 2-5m 7.7 4.6 0.4 95.4 7.3 18.0 15.7 1550 2-10m 3.8 4.7 0.2 95.3 3.6 26.0 12.5 1550 2-20m 2.8 8.4 0.2 91.6 2.6 30.0 10.1 1556 2-40m 3.3 2.4 0.1 97.6 3.2 30.0 9.7 1556 2-60m 2.9 3.6 0.1 96.4 2.8 30.0 9.5 1603 2-80m 3.6 4.0 0.1 96.0 3.5 30.0 9.0 1603 2-100m 2.1 0.0 0.0 100.0 2.1 30.0 9.0 1612 2-120m 2.5 0.0 0.0 100.0 2.1 30.0 8.8 1612 263 SERIES//: 9 DATE: August 24/77 S. & D. / TSM* / % Org. / OWC** /.% Inorg. / IWC° / S %./ T°C / TIME/ 7»0m 11.4 10.0 1.1 90.0 10.3 2.0 13.1 0857 7-lm 10.6 9.2 1.0 90.8 9.6 3.0 13.3 0857 7-3m 4.7 0.0 0.0 100.0 4.7 15.0 17.7 0857 7-5m 2.6 11.9 0.3 88.1 2.3 18.0 17.3 0904 7-7m 2.6 5.9 0.2 94.1 2.4 22.0 15.5 0904 7-10m 1.2 2.8 0.0 97.2 1.2 26.0 12.8 0908 7-20m 0.7 29.0 10.6 0908 7-40m 0.8 10.8 0.1 89.2 0.7 30.0 9.7 0914 8-0m 11.2 5.0 0.6 95.0 10.6 3.5 12.8 0927 8-lm 11.4 11.7 1.3 88.3 10.1 3.5 13.3 0930 8-3m 6.3 11.8 0.7 88.2 5.6 12.0 16.7 0930 8-5m 3.0 2.1 0.1 97.9 2.9 16.0 17.6 0935 8-7m 3.0 20.7 0.6 79.3 2.4 22.0 15.8 0935 8-10m 0.7 33.3 0.2 66.7 0.5 27.0 12.6 0940 8-20m 1.1 19.8 0.2 80.2 0.9 30.0 10.7 0940 8-30m 1.4 5.7 0.1 94.3 1.3 30.0 10.2 0945 9-0m 13.6 12.1 1.7 87.9 11.9 4.0 12.8 0957 9-lm 10.9 2.5 0.3 97.5 10.6 4.0 13.4 0957 9-3m 3.2 30.7 1.0 69.3 2.2 14.0 17.7 0957 9-5m 2.1 26.9 0.6 73.1 1.5 18.0 17.6 1001 9-7m 1.4 12.3 0.2 87.7 1.2 22.0 16.1 1001 9-10m 0.9 10.0 0.1 90.0 0.8 27.0 13.3 1005 9-20 2.3 10.3 0.2 89.7 2.1 30.0 10.5 1005 9-40m 0.7 13.2 0.1 86.8 0.6 30.0 9.4 1009 264 SERIES//: 10 DATE: October 31/77 S. & D. / TSM* / % Org.,/ OWC** /% Inorg. / IWC° /;S %./ T°C / TIME / 1-Om 7.0 7.3 0.5 92.7 6.5 7.0 7.6 1250 1-lm 7.0- 6.4 0.6 92.2 6.4 8.0 8.1 1250 l-2Am 3.3 20.0 10.0 1250 l-2Bm 5.1 12.6 0.7 87.4 4.4 14.0 9.1 1255 l-3Bm 2.1 21.0 10.0 1255 l-3Bm 4.1 16.0 0.7 84.0 3.4 19.0 9.9 1305 l-4Am 2.5" 5.8 0.2 94.2 2.3 21.0 10.3 1305 l-4Bm • 4.0 19.4 0.8 80.6 3.2 20.0 10.1 1310 l-5Am 2.4 10.3 0.2 89.7 2.2 22.5 10.3 1310 l-5Bm 1.0 25.0 10.7 1315 l-10Am 1.5 18.8 0.3 81.2 1.2 26.0 10.4 1315 1-1 OBm 2.1 25.0 10.4 1320 l-20Am 1.3 16.7 0.2 83.3 1.1 28.0 10.8 1320 l-20Bm 1.3 33.3 0.4 66.7 0.9 28.0 10.3 1325 l-40Am 2.7 0.0 0.0 100.0 2.3 29.5 9.4 1325 l-40Bm 2.5 15.2 0.4 84.8 2.1 29.0 9.4 1335 l-55m 4.8 14.5 0.7 85.5 4.1 30.0 911 1335 265 SERIES//: 10 DATE: November 1/77 S. & D. / TSM* / % Org. / OWC** / % Inorg.. / IWC° / S .%../ T°C / TIME / 1-Om 4.5 9.0 7.1 0850 l-5m 1.2 26.0 10.1 0850 2-Om 4.3 13.1 0.5 86.9 3.8 10.5 7.3 0910 2-5m 2.2 30.8 0.7 69.2 1.5 26.0 10.2 0910 4-0m 3.3 13.1 0.5 86.9 2.8 14.0 8.0 0920 4-5m 1.2 26.0 10.0 0920 8-0m — 1.8 18.0 8.7 1015 8-5m 1.3 21.3 0.3 78.7 1.0 25.0 10.4 1015 9-0m 2.5 22.8 0.6 77.2 1.9 19.0 9.3 1025 9-5m 1.3 13.8 0.2 86.2 1.1 23.0 10.0 1025 TRAP//: 2 STATION//: 1 CRUISE//: 5 Inorganic Sedimentation Rate (g/m /day) Trap depth: 5m 25m 45m 65m Particle Size*(um) 0.7 40.1 13.4 21.6 30.7 1.4 16.1 32.5 17.6 19.3 2.4 13.7 12.7 13.4 26.7 3.4 10.0 5.6 20.7 17.1 4.9 16.4 5.9 6.0 25.9 6.9 16.5 11.5 2.7 12.3 9.7 34.5 23.1 12.0 7.6 13.8 41.2 17.4 29.4 10.5 17.8 36.0 26.1 37.3 33.4 21.8 82.5 26.9 50.1 88.8 25.9 128.7 46.3 42.1 62.7 30.0 37.3 32.7 48.9 21.1 35.6 9.6 47.4 87.8 22.0 43.5 47.4 61.9 50.3 39.6 55.2 124.7 114.1 75.7 92.7 >64.0 99.9 35.7 60.4 184.6 Moment Measures x(ym) 9.4 9.8 9.5 10.6 S.D.(um) 5.6 6. 1 3.6 8.7 skewness 0.0 1.1 -0.4 0.9 kurtosis 1.5 3.1 3.0 2.4 ^equivalent spherical sedimentation diameter 267 TRAP//: 2 STATION//: 1 CRUISE//: 5 "1 I 1 1 1 1 2 4 6 8 10 12 ESSD* (0) *ESSD = equivalent spherical sedimentation diameter CWT% = cummulative weight percent 268 TRAP//: 5 STATION//: 1 CRUISE//: 7 2 Inorganic Sedimentation Rate (g/m /day) Trap depth: 13m 33m 53m Particle Size*(ym) 0.7 22.7 57.0 43.7 1.4 52. 1 131.0 100.4 2.4 15.2 38.3 29.3 3.4 3.9 9.8 7.5 4.9 3.5 13.5 14.7 6.9 12.6 33.4 30.2 9.7 34.5 24.6 25.1 13.8 45.4 20.6 65.4 17.8 13.1 33.2 73.0 21.8 16.8 41.3 37.1 25.9 31.6 75.1 42.3 30.0 9.2 21.9 12.6 35.6 2.4 5.6 3.9 43.5 7.6 42.5 29.4 55.2 20.7 135.1 97.6 >64.0 19.8 160.6 124.9 Moment Measures x(ym) 5.4 8.8 8.1 S.D.(ym) 3.4 6.9 5.9 skewness 0.8 0.4 0.3 kurtosis 3.7 1.5 1.6 269 *ESSD = equivalent spherical sedimentation diameter CWT% = cummulative weight percent TRAP//: 6 STATION//: 5 CRUISE//: 7 Inorganic Sedimentation Rate (g/m /day) Trap depth: 5m 20m 60m 100m Particle Size(ym)* 0.7 14.5 9.5 13.7 23.2 1.4 4.6 11.5 18.4 6.9 2.4 2.4 5.7 5.5 6.4 3.4 1.2 1.6 1.8 10.0 4.9 0.7 0.4 3.4 6.4 6.9 1.0 0.4 6.9 8.7 9.7 1.2 1.2 2.5 2.5 13.8 2.3 1.5 6.0 6.3 17.8 0.9 1.1 10.3 13.2 21.8 2.2 1.1 3.5 4.4 25.9 3.9 2.0 2.2 2.2 30.0 1.1 1.6 1.5 0.6 35.6 0.3 2.5 0.4 0.2 43.5 0.1 0.9 0.4 0.0 55.2 0.02 0.9 0.8 0.4 >64.0 0.01 1.0 0.2 1.4 Moment Measures x(ym) 2.4 3.2 2.6 2.6 S.D.(ym) 3.6 2.3 3.6 3.7 skewness 3.2 6.0 2.5 2.2 kurtosis 25.8 54.5 9.8 8.2 271 *ESSD = equivalent spherical sedimentation diameter CWT% = cummulative weight percent TRAP//: 8 STATION//: 1 CRUISE//: 8 Inorganic Sedimentation Rate (g/m /day) Trap depth: 5m 20m 40m 55m Particle Size*(um) 0.7 15.9 13.7 9.2 18.2 1.4 28.8 20.7 21. 1 15.9 2.4 8.4 6.0 6.2 10.5 3.4 2.2 1.9 1.8 11.1 4.9 2.9 5.1 8.4 7.3 6.9 5.5 11.6 17.8 10.3 9.7 23.4 12.0 13.4 14.7 13.8 52.1 24.3 19.8 44.9 17.8 18.6 34.4 5.1 47.6 21.8 8.5 12.5 23.0 13.6 25.9 9.4 8.3 50.2 3.5 30.0 4.2 4.6 14.7 2.1 35.6 4.1 5.8 3.8 3. 1 43.5 11.0 6.3 6.0 10.1 55.2 22.8 12.4 11.8 21.5 >64.0 7.2 7.9 3.7 6.8 Moment Measures x(um) 5.7 5.6 5.8 5.5 S.D.(um) 4.7 3.8 5.7 5.1 1skewness 2.1 2.2 2.1 1.7 kurtosis 8.0 7.6 6.7 5.1 TRAP//: 8 STATION//: 1 CRUISE//: 8 100 _, 80-J 60-\ 40-^ 20J *ESSD = equivalent spherical sedimentation diameter CWT% = cummulative weight percent 274 TRAP#: 9 STATION//: 2 CRUISE//: 8 2 Inorganic Sedimentation Rate (g/m /day) Trap depth: 5m 45m 85m 135m. Particle Size*(um) 0.7 23.5 16.2 16.1 6.2 1.4 16.3 14.1 5.7 14.9 2.4 23.9 12.0 5.5 8.8 3.4 6.9 5.3 11.6 10.6 4.9 3.8 5.4 16.0 7.4 6.9 8.5 8.0 4.6 6.9 9.7 10.7 16.2 3.3 11.3 13.8 5.6 7.8 10.0 6.4 17.8 3.8 2.1 12.2 7.9 21.8 27.9 12.9 9.9 16.9 25.9 62.2 28.6 15.5 34.2 30.0 37.2 8.4 7.2 10.0 35.6 10.3 2.1 7.4 2.6 43.5 •17.1 4.8 5.2 •2.5 55.2 33.9 9.9 7.7 4.3 >64.0 10.6 3.1 2.4 1.4 Moment Measures x(ym) 7.3 5.2 5.2 5.0 S.D.(ym) 5.3 4.4 2.7 5.8 skewness 1.1 1.8 0.6 2.1 kurtosis 3.4 5.8 2.9 6.6 TRAP#: 9 STATION//: 2 CRUISE//: 8 *ESSD = equivalent spherical sedimentation diameter CWT% = cummulative weight percent TRAP//: 10 STATION//: 1 CRUISE//: 9 Inorganic Sedimentation Rate (gm/m /day) Trap depth: 5m 20m 40m 55m Particle Size*(um) 0.7 78.4 191.5 27.3 77.0 1.4 54.7 55.6 62.8 98.9 2.4 15.3 16.9 18.3 27.7 3.4 3.9 4.4 4.7 7.1 4.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.8 6.9 7.4 0.3 1.2 0.4 9.7 16.5 0.1 3.7 0.1 13.8 33.4 0.01 13.1 11.4 17.8 65.6 26.3 21.9 29.7 21.8 128.4 111. 1 58.5 72.7 25.9 260.9 134.0 121.4 135.1 30.0 76.1 38.8 35.4 73.6 35.6 19.5 26.3 9.1 88.4 43.5 89.2 125.8 90.5 122.3 55.2 195.2 255.4 284.4 289.6 >64.0 61.4 214.6 326.9 268.6 Moment Measures x(ym) 8.9 10.4 13.0 11.4 S.D.(ym) 6.7 7.6 11.9 7.9 skewness 0.9 0.1 0.5 0.2 kurtosis 2.6 1.5 1.4 1.5 TRAP//: 10 STATION//: 1 CRUISE//: 9 °H 1 1 r 1 2 4 6 8 ESSD (0) *ESSD = equivalent spherical sedimentation diameter CWT% = cummulative weight percent 278 TRAP//: 11 STATION//: 24 CRUISE//: 9 2 Inorganic Sedimentation Rate (g/m /day) Trap depth: 5m 40m 80m 120m Particle Size*(um) 0.7 15 .8 13. 0 8 .9 49 .1 1.4 8 .2 37. 4 20 .6 12 .4 2.4 6 .1 26. 0 11 .2 7 .6 3.4 4 .6 7.3 17 .8 21 .6 4.9 6 .1 12. 2 14 .2 30 .5 6.9 6 .9 24. 2 5 .1 14 .7 9.7 14 .2 8.9 15 .9 13 .5 13.8 21 .2 16. 1 29 .5 33 .3 17.8 8 .3 24. 7 8 .6 30 .8 21.8 19 .6 28. 9 20 .9 29 .5 25.9 31 .8 5.1.8 43 .5 49 .8 30.0 9 .2 15. 1 13 .8 14 .5 35.6 2 .4 3. 9 5 .7 3 .7 43.5 6 .7 28. 5 20 .2 9 .9 55.2 14 .2 63. 9 43 .3 22 .5 >64.0 4 .5 21. 0 13 .6 11 .9 Moment Measures x(um) 6 .1 7.6 7 .4 5 .4 S.D. (ym) 4 .5 5. 0 4 .6 3 .5 skewness 1 .3 0. 8 0 .7 1 .1 kurtosis 3 .9 2. 4 2 .0 3 .5 TRAP//: 11 STATION//: 2 CRUISE//: 9 ESSD* (0) *ESSD = equivalent spherical sedimentation diameter CWT% = cummulative weight percent TRAP//: 12 STATION//: 1 CRUISE//: 10 Inorganic Sedimentation Rate (g/m /day) Trap depth: 5m 20m 40m 55m Particle Size*(pm) 0.7 2.1 6.3 4.2 4.6 1.4 4.8 3.4 9.7 7.0 2.4 1.4 0.9 2.8 2.6 3.4 1.1 0.2 1.0 1.8 4.9 1.8 0.1 1.2 0.5 6.9 1.3 1.6 1.2 0.1 9.7 2.3 4.2 1.5 0.03 13.8 1.7 2.7 7.2 4.4 17.8 0.9 2.0 12.7 10.0 21.8 2.0 2.1 6.3 2.9 25.9 4.0 3.8 6.9 3.0 30.0 1.2 1.1 2.3 16.3 35.6 0.3 0.3 1.6 26.6 43.5 0.4 2.6 3.2 7.7 55.2 1.3 5.9 5.0 9.7 >64.0 1-9 1.9 3.2 25.5 Moment Measures x(um) 5.2 6.7 6.1 10.5 S.D.(pm) 3.4 4.5 3.8 7.6 skewness 1.2 0.7 1.5 0.4 kurtosis 4.6 2.5 5.5 1.6 TRAP//: 12 STATION//: 1 CRUISE//: 10 *ESSD = equivalent spherical sedimentation diameter CWT% = cummulative weight percent GRAIN SIZE STATISTICS ON BOTTOM SEDIMENT TRANSECT Cruise & Station Mean(um) S.D.(ym) skewness kurtosis & Depth 8-B-85m 11.5 10.7 0.4 1.5 8-C-65m 10.1 10.5 1.2 2.9 8-D-177m 8.8 6.9 0.6 2.1 8-E-200m 6.3 4.8 0.9 2.6 8-F-200m 5.6 5.1 0.7 2.0 8-G-243m 2.5 3.7 2.9 21.2 8-H-278m 5.4 5.9 0.7 1.9 8-I-286m 3.0 2.8 5.8 78.0 8-J-135m 3.6 3.0 1.4 4.6 8-K-19m 1.4 2.7 8.4 112.6 8-L-136m 1.2 2.9 9.5 139.2 GRAIN SIZE STATISTICS ON SURFACE WATER TRANSECT MOMENT MEASURES Cruise & Station Mean(ym) S.D. (ym) skewness kurtosis 8-A-O 3.3 3.8 2.3 7.6 8-B-O 2.2 3.2 2.6 11.1 8-C-O 1.5 3.1 4.3 33.6 8-D-O 1.7 2.6 7.4 91.7 8-E-O 2.2 2.7 7.0 86.7 8-F-O 1.0 2.9 7.2 73.1 8-G-O 3.0 2.3 6.7 87.4 8-H-O 2.4 2.5 6.0 73.8 8-1-0 1.3 3.0 10.0 152.0 8-J-O 1.5 2.7 9.7 123.3 8-K-O 1.4 2.9 7.4 84.4 284 ension Concentration (mg/1) Sample ID** Particle Size* / 8-1-0 / 8-2-0 / 9-1-0 / 9-7-0 (ym) 0.7 6.98 9.04 4.59 0.69 1.4 6.52 6.50 10.55 1.69 2.4 1.90 2.25 3.09 0.70 3.4 1.89 2.46 2.50 0.19 4.9 3.61 3.79 5.12 0.05 6.9 3.71 3.17 6.32 0.32 9.7 7.40 2.85 10.00 0.69 13.8 7.46 4.22 7.95 0.56 17.8 2.13 1.22 2.24 0.86 21.8 1.09 0.31 1.92 0.25 25.9 1.39 0.08 3.25 0.06 30.0 0.41 0.02 : 1.41 0.62 35.6 0.12 0.00 .1.31 1.39 43.5 0.86 0.28 1.93 0.64 55.2 1.93 0.75 3.67 0.81 >64.0 0.61 0.56 1.15 0.78 Moment Measures x(ym) 3.3 2.2 4.1 6.8 S.D.(ym) 3.8 3.2 3.1 3.3 skevmess 2.3 2.6 2.0 0.2 kurtosis 7.6 11.1 6.8 3.4 * equivalent spherical sedimentation diameter ** cruise (series) - station - depth 285 SUSPENDED SEDIMENT SAMPLES CRUISE//: 9 2 4 6 8 10 12 ESSD* (0) *ESSD = equivalent spherical sedimentation diameter CWT% = cummulative weight percent Suspension Concentration (mg/1) Sample ID** Particle Size* / 10-1-0 / 10-2-0 / 10-4-0 / 10-8-0 / 10-9-0 (ym) 0.7 1158 2.27 1.44 0.93 0.94 1.4 0.72 0.73 0.42 0.28 0.35 2.4 0.36 0.37 0.17 0.12 0.26 3.4 0.10 0. 11 0.05 0.05 0.09 4.9 0.20 0.04 0.06 0.06 0.07 6.9 0.47 0.02 0.23 0.14 0.06 9.7 0.43 0.02 0.32 0.12 0.02 13.8 0.47 0.04 0.09 0.03 0.02 17.8 0.14 0.03 0.02 0.01 0.03 21.8 0.04 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.03 25.9 0.01 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.04 30.0 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 35.6 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 43.5 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 55.2 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 >64.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Moment Measures x(um) 1.4 0.9 1.0 1.0 0.9 S.D.(um) 3.5 3.1 3.8 3.2 2.9 skewness 3.6 15.5 8.2 9.3 11.5 kurtosis 22.5 283.2 106.8 136.2 176.3 287 Assorted Water Samples Station Date Depth Size fraction 0.7lnm 1.OOnm 0.7lnm 0.426nm r \ . x l.OOnm 0.32nm 0.32nm 0.320nm 1 June 25/76 ,0 0.2 - 2 0.40 0.30 0. 12 0.03 1 June 25/76 0 0.2 - 2 0.18 0.46 0.08 0.04 1 June 25/76 0 2.0 - 20 0.79 0.11 0.09 0.07 1 June 25/76 20 0.2 - 2 0.30 0.50 0.15 — 1 June 25/76 20 2.0 - 20 0.53 0.13 0.07 0.06 3 Aug. 16/76 0 0.2 - 2 0.27 0.48 0.13 0.05 3 Aug. 16/76 0 2.0 - 20 0.90 0.07 0.07 0.08 3 Aug. 16/76 66 0.2 - 2 0.25 0.39 0.08 0.08 3 Aug. 16/76 66 2.0 - 20 0. 19 0.34 0.09 0.06 Mamquam R. July 30/76 0 0.2 - 2 0.32 0.20 0.07 0.07 Mamquam R. July 30/76 0 2.0 - 20 4.00 0.02 0.07 0.05 1 July 30/76 0 0.2 - 2 0.43 0.37 0.16 0.08 1 July 30/76 0 2.0 - 20 0.61 0.07 0.04 0.06 1 July 30/76 0 0.2 - 2 0.15 1.44 0. 13 0.10 1 July 30/76 0 2.0 - 20 0.86 0.05 0.05 0.14 2 Sept. 24/76 141 0.2 - 2 1.26 0.18 0.23 0.09 2 Sept. 24/76 141 2.0 - 20 0.39 0.21 0.08 0.09 9 April 26/77 0 0.2 — 2 0.50 0.23 0.12 0.09 9 April 26/77 0 2.0 - 20 1.43 0.10 0.14 0.08 1 June 27/77 0 0.2 - 2 0.20 0.57 0.08 0.04 1 June 27/77 0 2.0 - 20 0.38 0.20 0.07 0.08 4 June 27/77 0 0.2 - 2 0.16 0.69 0. 11 0.06 8 June 27/77 0 0.2 - 2 0.28 0.71 0.20 0.04 Mill Cr. July 22/77 0 0.2 - 2 0.20 0.46 0.09 0.09 Mill Cr. July 22/77 0 2.0 - 20 0.68 0. 17 0. 12 0.06 Trap > Samples from Station (1) April 26, 1977 Depth Size Fraction 1. 70nm 0., 7 lnm 1.OOnm 0.71nm 0.426nm 0. 32nm 1.,00n m 0.32nm 0.32nm 0.320nm (m) (um.) 5 0.2 -• 2 _ _ _ 0. 18 0.04 5 2.0 -• 4„ 0. 26 - - 0.10 0.08 5 4.0 - 20. - - - - 0.10 25 0.2 -• 2 - 16. 0 0.02 0.39 0.03 25 2.0 -• 4 0. 96 - - 0.04 0.04 25 4.0 - 20 0. 65 - - 0.11 0. 14 45 0.2 -• 2 0. 53 7.. 3 0.04 0.06 0.06 45 2.0 -• 4 0. 42 28.0 0.01 0.06 0. 10 45 4.0 - 20 - - - 0.28 0.04 SERIES//: 8 STATION//: 2 DATE: July 21/77 DBSL* / CV** / CD*** / TIME / (m) (cm/sec) (mag.) 0.0 35.1 170° 0942 1.0 20.8 165° 0943 2.0 9.1 200° 0945 3.0 23.4 170° 0946 2.0 6.5 150° . 0947 4.0 27.3 170° 0948 4.0 23.4 170° 0950 4.0 19.5 170° 0957 2.0 3.9 35° 1000 118.0 ' 1.3 110° 1100 0.0 5.2 175° 1521 1.0 26.0 160° 1522 2.0 7.8 170° 1523 3.0 10.4 180° 1525 4.0 6.5 170° 1526 5.0 7.8 175° 1527 10.0 3.1 155° 1528 5.0 7.8 130° 1532 4.0 7.8 90° 1533 3.0 11.7 70° 1534 2.0 11.7 180° 1535 1.0 35.1 150° 1536 0.0 7.8 200° 1538 1.0 28.6 165° 1542 2.0 11.7 190° 1543 2.0 10.4 170° 1657 3.0 10.4 195° 1700 4.0 3.9 180° 1703 3.0 7.8 190° 1705 2.0 26.0 165° 1707 1.0 22.1 160° 1710 depth below sea level current velocity current direction SERIES//: 9 STATION//: 1 DATE: August 22/77 DBSL* '/ CV** / CD*** / TIME / (m) (cm/sec) (mag.) 0.0 41.0 260° 1416 0.0 33.8 250° 1432 1.0 32.5 265° 1434 3.0 11.7 315° 1435 5.0 1.0 200° 1438 10.0 2.3 220° 1442 20.0 3.2 150° 1446 30.0 2.9 80° 1450 40.0 3.2 60° 1458 30.0 4.3 280° 1502 20.0 5.9 310° 1507 10.0 5.2 235° 1512 5.0 10.4 255° 1521 3.0 19.9 315° 1526 1.0 46.8 280° 1529 0.0 53.3 265° 1531 0.0 39.0 262° 1635 100 35.1 262° 1640 3.0 8.8 345° 1642 5.0 13.0 235° 1644 7.0 7.8 215° 1647 8.0 7.2 225° 1650 9.0 2.6 207° 1651 10.0 5.2 122° 1653 9.0 2.6 185° 1656 8.0 7.8 200° 1700 7.0 9.1 180° 1703 5.0 14.3 175° 1705 3.0 4.6 347° 1712 1.0 22.1 270° 1714 0.0 26.0 260° 1716 . r; j M.1 0.0 29.9 285° 1910 SERIES//: 9 STATION//: 2 DATE: August 23/77 DBSL* / CV** / CD*** / TIME/ (m) (cm/sec) (mag.) 0.0 22.1 235° 1053 1.0 18.9 240° 1055 2.0 7.0 190° 1057 3.0 6.5 180° 1059 4.0 2.9 165° 1101 5.0 4.9 308° 1105 7.0 6.2 80 1108 10.0 3.6 75° 1110 20.0 4.6 115° 1115 30.0 4.3 265° 1120 20.0 3.2 225° 1125 10.0 2.0 180° 1127 5.0 1.3 170° 1129 3.0 3.9 285° 1131 1.0 14.3 320° 1135 0.0 12.4 235° 1139 0.0 11.2 270° 1626 1.0 11.2 275° 1628 2.0 .'•5.2 130° 1630 3.0 10.4 225° 1632 2.0 3.9 130° 1636 3.0 9.1 225° 1638 4.0 10.4 200° 1640 5.0 9.1 175° 1642 7.0 0.4 1644 10.0 7.2 75° 1645 20.0 0.6 1647 10.0 2.6 65° 1653 5.0 10.4 205° 1655 3.0 11.2 210° 1657 2.0 7.8 90° 1659 1.0 18.2 320° 1700 0.0 15.6 280° 1702 SERIES//: 10 STATION//: 1 DATE: October 31/77 DBSL* / CV** / CD*** / TIME / (m) (cm/sec) (mag. ) 0.0 29.0 1430 1.0 6.9 315° 1432 2.0 2.6 20° 1434 3.0 0.8 300° 1436 4.0 0.8 120° 1438 10.0 3.0 130° 1440 5.0 2.6 115° 1442 4.0 0.8 65° 1444 3.0 2.3 110° 1446 2.0 3.8 50° 1448 1.0 6.1 330° 1449 0.0 25.9 305° 1451 0.0 41.2 300° 1607 1.0 21.3 300° 1608 2.0 6.1 225° 1612 3.0 4.6 225° 1614 4.0 0.8 180° 1615 5.0 3.0 215° 1616 10.0 2.3 255° 1618 15.0 0.8 120° 1621 20.0 1.5 120° 1624 5.0 1.5 200° 1628 4.0 5.3 190° 1629 3.0 7.6 205° 1631 2.0 6.9 180° 1632 1.0 9.6 285° 1634 0.0 35.0 295° 1636 * depth below sea level JL JL current velocity A **N S\ /\ current direction -< Oo —» _l _J — — z N- I— O X O < o • I- t- o o o 1 • -N I I- t- — o -Hi N^ -< o M* M NN — Z I V, N- ar S O 0