Montana Tech Library Digital Commons @ Montana Tech Graduate Theses & Non-Theses Student Scholarship Summer 2017 FOUNDATIONS FOR A GEOBIOCHEMICAL CHARACTERIZATION OF MUDPOTS IN YELLOWSTONE NATIONAL PARK Georgia Dahlquist Montana Tech Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.mtech.edu/grad_rsch Part of the Geochemistry Commons Recommended Citation Dahlquist, Georgia, "FOUNDATIONS FOR A GEOBIOCHEMICAL CHARACTERIZATION OF MUDPOTS IN YELLOWSTONE NATIONAL PARK" (2017). Graduate Theses & Non-Theses. 132. http://digitalcommons.mtech.edu/grad_rsch/132 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Scholarship at Digital Commons @ Montana Tech. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Theses & Non-Theses by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ Montana Tech. For more information, please contact [email protected]. FOUNDATIONS FOR A GEOBIOCHEMICAL CHARACTERIZATION OF MUDPOTS IN YELLOWSTONE NATIONAL PARK by Georgia Dahlquist A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Geoscience: Geochemistry Option Montana Tech 2017 ii Abstract Mudpots are acidic, turbid thermal features formed by the argillic or sericitic alteration of rock with enough fluid to create a viscous feature. Prior to this research, the combination of interdisciplinary sampling for geochemistry, mineralogy, and microbiology of rhyolite hosted mudpots, particularly in chemically distinct subregions of an area, remained largely unavailable. This work discusses mudpots and nearby hot springs sampled in Yellowstone National Park (YNP) in July 2016 and the measured in situ pH, temperature, and conductivity values, and dissolved oxygen concentrations. Water, filtered via gravity pre-filtration and 1.2 µm and 0.8/0.2µm syringe filtration, yielded δD and δ18O values and major anions, cations, and trace element concentrations. Sediment collected for biological and mineralogical analysis revealed that mudpots, with approximate viscosities ranging from 5 to 100 centipose (mPa*s), had trace element geochemical “fingerprints” that can be linked with underlying rock units. Turbid hot springs of similar pH and temperature lacked consistent chemical similarity to mudpots, however mudpots shared chemical similarity with respect to major anions and cations to hot springs from similar thermal source waters. Chloride concentrations and δD determined similarities between source waters. Despite having similar concentrations of major anions and cations with nearby acid sulfate hot springs, mudpots differ from these hot springs in their trace element relative abundance “fingerprints” that make connections between surficial geochemistry and variations in chemical composition of underlying rock units. Such comparisons are not possible with hot springs. 16S and 18S rRNA gene microbial diversity analyses show that mudpots host organisms with a variety of known metabolisms, such as methanogenesis, nitrification, and ammonia oxidation. There are microbes common to thermal areas in mudpots, however no genus common to all mudpots. Mudpots, formed by alteration of volcanic rock by acidic steam, serve as both indicators of underlying geology and distinct microbial ecosystems offering insight into potentially ancient analogs. Keywords: mudpot, geochemistry, Yellowstone, montmorillonite, kaolinite, methanogenesis, Central Plateau Member rhyolite iii Dedication To E. T. Allen and Arthur L. Day, the first of few to find sampling mudpots “disagreeable and tedious, not [an] impossible task” and to my parents for support, encouragement, and help building a wealth of custom made equipment to make mudpot sampling a little less disagreeable and tedious. iv Acknowledgements This work would not be possible without the time and dedication of my advisor, Alysia Cox, members of LEGEND (Laboratory Exploring Geochemical Engineering in Natural Dynamics), Renée Schmidt, Shanna Law, Mallory Nelson, James Foltz, McKenzie Dillard, Cynthia Cree and Jordan Foster; the GEOPIG (Group Exploring Organic Processes in Geochemistry) 2016 field team, particularly Everett Shock and Vince Debes; sample analysis from Jackie Timmer, Ashley Huft, and Gary Wyss; and my graduate thesis committee, Chris Gammons, Katie Hailer, and Bill Drury, for their collective wisdom. In addition to all of the help, encouragement, and advice, this undertaking was made possible by the generous funding from the Montana Tech Faculty Development Initiative Grant to Alysia Cox and Georgia Dahlquist, the Montana Tech Faculty Seed Grant to Alysia Cox, the Montana Water Center Grant to Alysia Cox, the Montana Research and Economic Development Initiative (MREDI) Grant to Jerry Downey, Ed Rosenberg, Hsin-Hsiung Huang, and Alysia Cox, and the NASA Exobiology Award number NNX-16AJ61G to Everett Shock, Alysia Cox, Jason Raymond, Jordan Okie, Kris Fecteau, and Grayson Boyer. Permission to collect and analyze samples was granted by National Park Service permit number YELL-2016-SCI-7008 to Alysia Cox. v Table of Contents ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................................ II DEDICATION ........................................................................................................................................... III ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................................................................... IV LIST OF TABLES ....................................................................................................................................... IX LIST OF EQUATIONS ............................................................................................................................... XII LIST OF FIGURES .................................................................................................................................... XIII 1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................. 1 1.1. Mudpot Formation ............................................................................................................. 1 1.2. Summation of Mudpot Discoveries .................................................................................... 3 1.3. Yellowstone Geology .......................................................................................................... 4 1.4. Thesis Objectives/Statement of Purpose ............................................................................ 8 2. METHODS ...................................................................................................................................... 10 2.1. Cleaning Protocols ............................................................................................................ 10 2.1.1. Trace Metal Cleaning Procedure ....................................................................................................... 10 2.1.2. Other Bottle Cleaning Procedures ..................................................................................................... 11 2.1.2.1. δD and δ18O ............................................................................................................................... 11 2.1.2.2. Dissolved Organic Carbon ......................................................................................................... 11 2.1.3. Sterilization Procedures .................................................................................................................... 11 2.1.3.1. Field Ethanol Sterilization.......................................................................................................... 11 2.1.3.2. Microwave Sterilization ............................................................................................................ 11 2.2. Field Methods ................................................................................................................... 12 2.2.1. Filtration ............................................................................................................................................ 12 2.2.1.1. Water ........................................................................................................................................ 12 vi 2.2.1.2. Mud ........................................................................................................................................... 12 2.2.1. In situ Meters .................................................................................................................................... 16 2.2.2. Spectrophotometry ........................................................................................................................... 16 2.2.3. Biological Matter Collection .............................................................................................................. 18 2.2.3.1. Suspended Sediment ................................................................................................................ 18 2.3. Lab Methods .................................................................................................................... 18 2.3.1. Biological Analysis ............................................................................................................................. 18 2.3.1.1. DNA Extraction .........................................................................................................................