Abstract
Methane transport from subsurface reservoirs to shallow marine sediment is characterized by unique biogeochemical interactions significant for ocean chemistry. Sulfate-Methane Transition Zone (SMTZ) is an important diagenetic front in the sediment column that quantitatively consumes the diffusive methane fluxes from deep methanogenic sources toward shallow marine sediments via sulfate-driven anaerobic oxidation of methane (AOM). Recent global compilation from diffusion-controlled marine settings suggests methane from below and sulfate from above fluxing into the SMTZ at an estimated rate of 3.8 and 5.3 Tmol year–1, respectively, and wider estimate for methane flux ranges from 1 to 19 Tmol year–1. AOM converts the methane carbon to dissolved inorganic carbon (DIC) at the SMTZ. Organoclastic sulfate reduction (OSR) and deep-DIC fluxes from methanogenic zones contribute additional DIC to the shallow sediments. Here, we provide a quantification of 8.7 Tmol year–1 DIC entering the methane-charged shallow sediments due to AOM, OSR, and the deep-DIC flux (range 6.4–10.2 Tmol year–1). Of this total DIC pool, an estimated 6.5 Tmol year–1 flows toward the water column (range: 3.2–9.2 Tmol year–1), and 1.7 Tmol year–1 enters the authigenic carbonate phases (range: 0.6–3.6 Tmol year–1). This summary highlights that carbonate authigenesis in settings dominated by diffusive methane fluxes is a significant component of marine carbon burial, comparable to ∼15% of carbonate accumulation on continental shelves and in the abyssal ocean, respectively. Further, the DIC outflux through the SMTZ is comparable to ∼20% of global riverine DIC flux to oceans. This DIC outflux will contribute alkalinity or CO2 in different proportions to the water column, depending on the rates of authigenic carbonate precipitation and sulfide oxidation and will significantly impact ocean chemistry and potentially atmospheric CO2. Settings with substantial carbonate precipitation and sulfide oxidation at present are contributing CO2 and thus to ocean acidification. Our synthesis emphasizes the importance of SMTZ as not only a methane sink but also an important diagenetic front for global DIC cycling. We further underscore the need to incorporate a DIC pump in methane-charged shallow marine sediments to models for coastal and geologic carbon cycling.
Introduction
Methane (CH4) is an important greenhouse gas with a significant role in the geological evolution of Earth’s carbon cycle and ongoing climate change. Compared to carbon dioxide (CO2), methane has ∼28 times higher warming potential (Stocker et al., 2014), and marine methane reservoirs constitute a large exchangeable carbon pool in the Earth’s shallow subsurface, which is significant for carbon cycle dynamics (Kvenvolden, 2002). Continental margins are characterized by methane flux sites that involve transfer in dissolved and gaseous forms via diffusion and advection from subsurface reservoirs to the seafloor. Methane transport toward the seafloor creates a characteristic chemosynthetic ecosystem based on benthic microbial interactions and highly interconnected carbon cycling coupled with other elements such as sulfur, iron, calcium, and trace metals (Suess, 2010). They are thus sites of unique geosphere-biosphere coupling that plays a significant role in the chemical and biological composition of the oceans, as well as the global carbon cycle (Judd and Hovland, 2009; ; Levin et al., 2016; Suess, 2018).
Some abrupt climate change events in paleoclimate records are potentially linked to massive dissociation of subsurface methane reservoirs into the oceans and atmosphere (e.g., ; Hesselbo et al., 2000; Jiang et al., 2003). On the contemporaneous Earth, marine methane fluxes are effectively prevented from entering the atmosphere by microbial interactions in shallow sediments and water columns (; Ruppel and Kessler, 2017). These processes convert methane carbon to inorganic and organic carbon pool (Figure 1) and prevent the direct impact of methane on the climate system (Reeburgh, 2007). However, the fate of this methane-derived carbon pool is overlooked and could be relevant to oceanic carbon cycling (; ; ). Here we quantify methane-derived carbon cycling in shallow marine sediments in settings characterized by diffusive methane fluxes. We do this by assessing the transformation of methane carbon to inorganic and organic carbon pools (Figure 1) with the goal to assess its contribution to global oceanic carbon budgets. We emphasize settings dominated by diffusive rather than advective methane transport because of relatively well-constrained porewater data availability for global diffusive fluxes of methane and sulfate.
FIGURE 1
Sulfate-Methane Transition Zones and Associated Carbon Cycling
Sulfate-methane transition zone (SMTZ) is an important diagenetic front where the upward flux of methane encounters downward diffusive sulfate flux and undergoes sulfate-driven anaerobic methane oxidation (AOM) (Reeburgh, 1976; ; Malinverno and Pohlman, 2011). During AOM, both methane and sulfate are consumed, and hydrogen sulfide (as HS–) and dissolved inorganic carbon (DIC) present mostly as bicarbonate (HCO3–) are produced (; Orphan et al., 2001). The net reaction can be expressed as:
Anaerobic methane oxidation in shallow sediment effectively consumes the methane diffusion in marine sediments (Reeburgh, 2007; Knittel and Boetius, 2009). A recent compilation by from 740 sites of wide oceanographic settings suggests that 2.8–3.8 Tmol CH4 undergoes sulfate-driven AOM annually. This range was higher than the average ∼1 Tmol CH4 year–1 proposed by Wallmann et al. (2012), closer to 3–5.2 Tmol CH4 year–1 estimated by Henrichs and Reeburgh (1987), and much lower than the estimated 19 Tmol CH4 year–1 by Hinrichs and Boetius (2002).
Here we highlight that SMTZ is not only important as a methane sink but also for DIC cycling in methane-charged shallow sediments. We do this by quantifying the sources and sinks of DIC cycling associated with the SMTZ at diffusive flux settings (Figure 1).
DIC Sources at SMTZ
The SMTZ often contains higher DIC concentrations that can be accounted for AOM (Figure 2). Organoclastic sulfate reduction (OSR, Eq. 2) and deep-DIC flux from methanogenic zones are the primary sources of this excess DIC ().
FIGURE 2
The SMTZ depth is largely controlled by the upward flux of methane () as well as the rate of organic matter degradation, which then controls rates of OSR and methanogenesis (Meister et al., 2013). In diffusive settings, OSR and AOM consume the sulfate at the SMTZ supported by organic matter buried into the SMTZ as well as dissolved organic carbon (DOC) that is produced below the SMTZ and migrates upward (; Komada et al., 2016; Jørgensen et al., 2019a). An estimated 11–80 Tmol year–1 of SO42– is reduced globally in marine sediments (Jørgensen and Kasten, 2006; Thullner et al., 2009; ). suggested that 5.3 Tmol year–1 of this global marine SO42– reduction occurs at sites where methane transport occurs through diffusion.
A global estimate for methane and sulfate fluxing to the SMTZ in diffusive settings yielded an average ratio (CH4:SO42–) of 1:1.4 (). A combined effect of AOM and OSR (; Kastner et al., 2008; Komada et al., 2016; Jørgensen et al., 2019b), as well as cryptic C-S cycling within SMTZ (due to concurrent production and consumption of methane), have been suggested to be causing this higher sulfate flux relative to methane flux (; Hong et al., 2013, 2014; ).
In addition to AOM and OSR, deep-DIC fluxing from methanogenic depths provides another important source for DIC through the SMTZ (; Solomon et al., 2014). Methanogenesis in deeper sediment can produce DIC in the form of CO2 which can be summarized as Eq. 3 (Meister et al., 2019b):
This CO2 would dissociate to HCO3– and H+, causing a pH decrease. This step, in turn, would favor weathering of silicate minerals in marine sediments (Marine Silicate Weathering-MSiW), resulting in alkalinity production and pH buffering (; Wallmann et al., 2008; Solomon et al., 2014; Kim et al., 2016; Wehrmann et al., 2016, Eq. 4).
As a result of MSiW, methanogenic DIC enters the SMTZ as alkalinity instead of CO2 (Wallmann et al., 2008). Additional deep-DIC could enter the methanogenic zone and shallow sediments due to fluid expulsion from greater depths [e.g., continental crust alteration (Meister et al., 2011)].
Fate of the DIC Entering SMTZ
Fate of the DIC pool entering the SMTZ primarily involves precipitation as authigenic carbonate minerals, autotrophic microbial consumption, and transport toward the water column. AOM, OSR, and deep-DIC flux will increase the DIC concentration and carbonate alkalinity of pore fluids at SMTZ (; Yoshinaga et al., 2014). Higher carbonate alkalinity, in turn, will stimulate authigenic carbonate precipitation at SMTZ (; Orphan et al., 2004; Naehr et al., 2007; ; ; Prouty et al., 2016) via the following reaction ():
A small portion of total DIC from SMTZ will be assimilated into biomass by autotrophic microbes and eventually become part of sedimentary organic carbon (SOC; Sivan et al., 2007; Ussler and Paull, 2008). The remaining DIC enters overlying sediment and eventually the water column if it is not involved in diagenesis on the way.
Calculations
The flux of DIC to the water column from methane charged sediments F(DIC–out), can be represented by Eqs 6 and 7, respectively.
As discussed below, Total(DIC) represents the ratio of DIC from AOM, OSR, and deep flux to methane entering the SMTZ. F(DIC–AOM), F(DIC–OSR), and F(DIC–deep) represent the DIC input to Total(DIC) via AOM, OSR, and deep flux, respectively. F(DIC–OSR) considers the depth-integrated DIC pool via OSR, which includes the SMTZ and sulfate reduction zone (SRZ) above. F(Carb), F(SOC), and F(DIC–out) represent the DIC output from Total(DIC) via authigenic carbonate precipitation, microbial uptake to SOC, and DIC outflux toward the water column, respectively (Figure 1). Net DIC fluxes from the sediment in methane-charged shallow sediments depend on the rates of these parameters. We would also like to mention that DIC cycling in shallow marine sediments, in general, can be influenced by processes not directly related to methane cycling like carbonate dissolution, organic matter degradation using electron acceptors other than sulfate, as well as submarine groundwater discharge (e.g., ; Higgins et al., 2009; Moore, 2010; Hu and Cai, 2011; ). However, we focus our attention on diffusive methane charged settings and hence to the parameters in Eqs 6 and 7 for our DIC calculations, with an emphasis on their importance in marine DIC budgets.
Estimations of Parameter Values
F(DIC–AOM) and F(DIC–OSR)
Modeling studies have shown that the methane flux at fluid advection rates of up to 60 cm year–1 is almost completely consumed within shallow sediments (Luff and Wallmann, 2003; Luff et al., 2004), primarily via AOM. Hence, AOM efficiency would be lower in advective settings and higher in diffusive settings. As we focus on diffusive settings in this study, a 100% AOM efficiency is used for our budget calculation. Thus, for a 1:1.4 ratio of CH4:SO42– fluxing toward the SMTZ as a global average in diffusive settings (), AOM accounts for 1 mol (70%) and OSR accounts for 0.4 mol (30%) of total SO42– consumption.
F(DIC–deep)
Deep-DIC flux to the SMTZ is prevalent in diffusive methane flux settings (e.g., ; Wallmann et al., 2008; ; ; Scholz et al., 2013; Solomon et al., 2014). However, the global trend of this deep-DIC flux is not well established. If methane from deep below is biogenic, F(DIC–deep) should be 100% of the CH4 flux. As a result of MSiW, methanogenic DIC contributes as alkalinity, and silicate-bond cations are released (Wallmann et al., 2008; Solomon et al., 2014; Pierre et al., 2016), resulting in deep-DIC sequestration via carbonate precipitation within methanogenic zones (Torres et al., 2020). Additional deep-DIC sinks coupled to Fe/Mn reduction in the methanogenic zones was proposed by Solomon et al. (2014) and available literature reports also show a lower deep-DIC flux rate (; ; Wehrmann et al., 2011; Komada et al., 2016; Hu et al., 2017; Zhang et al., 2019). Hence, we assume a conservative estimate of 50% of CH4 flux to our budget as the average F(DIC–deep).
Fcarb
Reported average DIC uptake by authigenic carbonates from the total DIC pool at the SMTZ varies from 7–36% (Luff and Wallmann, 2003; Snyder et al., 2007; Wallmann et al., 2008; Hong et al., 2013; ; Komada et al., 2016; ; Zhang et al., 2019), with upper estimates ranging up to 50% (Smith and Coffin, 2014). However, it is important to note that authigenic carbonates may not precipitate at all methane flux settings. Events of high-intensity fluxes (Karaca et al., 2010; ), fluid flux with low dissolved methane concentrations, settings with intense bioturbation or high sedimentation rates (Luff et al., 2004; ) can inhibit carbonate precipitation. Furthermore, dissolution of authigenic carbonates can occur under multiple conditions, including when aerobic methanotrophy produces CO2, when sulfide oxidation produces acid, which is corrosive (Matsumoto, 1990; Himmler et al., 2011); CO2 produced from methanogenesis (Meister et al., 2011); and due to CO2 produced in thermogenic gas seeps (Kinnaman et al., 2010)—among other drivers of dissolution. Rates of authigenic carbonate dissolution at diffusive methane flux sites are not well known. In our calculations, we assume a conservative estimate of 20% for FCarb as an average, considering the still-limited global perspective. This value is comparable to the recent estimates of Zhang et al. (2019, 20%) and Komada et al. (2016, 25%), who treated all three parameters in Eq. 6 as Total(DIC).
Fsoc
In exceptional cases, up to 85% incorporation of AOM induced DIC has been reported for the SOC pool (). However, in general, the production of new microbial biomass in anoxic sediments based on AOM is negligible due to low growth yield and accounts for only 1–3% of the methane consumption (Nauhaus et al., 2007; Treude et al., 2007). Hence the bulk SOC pool often does not represent the new biomass and the DOC produced via AOM (Ussler and Paull, 2008; ). Modeling studies have shown that AOM is the dominant process at SOC values <5% (Sivan et al., 2007). Hence, we use an FSOC = 5% as an average estimate for DIC conversion to organic carbon at the SMTZ in our calculation.
F(DIC–out)
With a portion of Total(DIC) going to authigenic carbonate and SOC, the remaining DIC from Total(DIC) (averaging 75% based on a Fcarb = 20 and FSOC = 5%) enters the overlying sediment and eventually the water column if it is not involved in diagenesis on the way. This DIC flux can, in turn, and significantly impact ocean chemistry.
It is also important to mention that methane fluxes are highly variable in time, resulting in upward and downward movement of the SMTZ (e.g., Malone et al., 2002; Meister et al., 2007, 2019a; ; Meister, 2015). Such dynamic conditions could lead to strong variations in the parameters discussed above and the net DIC sinks and sources. Hence, we consider an extended range of these parameters in Table 1 to address the flux variability. This approach also considers the still-limited global perspective of these parameters.
TABLE 1
| Average | Variable | ||
| Parameter | rate | range | Examples |
| AOM:OSR (for consumption of total sulfate entering SMTZ) | 70:30 | 100:0–30:70 | Kastner et al., 2008; ; ; Meister et al., 2013; Hu et al., 2015, 2017; Komada et al., 2016; Wu et al., 2016; Wurgaft et al., 2019; Zhang et al., 2019 |
| F(DIC–deep) | 50% | 20–75% | Luff and Wallmann, 2003; Snyder et al., 2007; Wallmann et al., 2008; Hong et al., 2013; ; Komada et al., 2016; Hu et al., 2017; ; Zhang et al., 2019 |
| Fcarb | 20% | 10–35% | Luff and Wallmann, 2003; Wallmann et al., 2006; Snyder et al., 2007; Karaca et al., 2010; Hong et al., 2013; ; Komada et al., 2016; Hu et al., 2017; ; Zhang et al., 2019 |
| FSOM | 5% | 1–10% | Nauhaus et al., 2007; Sivan et al., 2007; Treude et al., 2007; Ussler and Paull, 2008; ; ; Jørgensen et al., 2019a |
| F(DIC–out) | 75% | 50–90% | ; Wallmann et al., 2008; ; ; Wehrmann et al., 2011; Scholz et al., 2013; Solomon et al., 2014; Zhang et al., 2019 |
Parameters controlling the DIC fluxes at SMTZ, with their average and extended range considered in carbon flux calculation.
DIC Production via AOM and OSR
We assume global average DIC production at SMTZ as suggested by along with their average CH4:SO42– fluxes to SMTZ of 1:1.4. This approach assumes quantitative methane consumption at SMTZ. AOM produces 1 mole of DIC for every mole of SO42– consumed. OSR, on the other hand, would produce 2 moles of DIC for every mole of SO42– consumed (Eqs 1 and 2). For a global average CH4:SO42– flux to the SMTZ of 1:1.4, 1.8 moles of DIC will be produced by sulfate reduction via AOM and OSR—that is, of the total 1.4 moles of SO42– entering SMTZ, 1 mole DIC will be produced by 1 mole SO42– reduction via AOM, and the remaining 0.4 moles of SO42– yields 0.8 moles DIC via OSR. Thus, the SO42–: DIC ratio from a CH4: SO42– flux ratio of 1:1.4 at the SMTZ will be 1.4:1.8 or 1:1.3 (Figure 3).
FIGURE 3
Total DIC Through the SMTZ
Considering an average F(DIC–deep) of 50% of the CH4 flux, Total(DIC) through the SMTZ for a CH4: SO42– flux ratio of 1:1.4 can be given as:
Of this Total(DIC), an estimated DIC outflow toward the water column can be calculated using an average estimate of FCarb = 20 and FSOC = 5 as:
Thus, on average, for every mole of CH4 entering the SMTZ in diffusive setting, ∼0.5 moles of DIC precipitates as authigenic carbonate and ∼1.7 moles of DIC flow upward from the SMTZ toward the seafloor and water column.
Global Estimate
A global estimate of DIC cycling in diffusive methane-charged shallow sediments is derived using the recent compilation of global diffusive methane and sulfate fluxes into the SMTZ in marine settings from 740 sites by , Tables 2–4).
TABLE 2
| Region [water | SO42– flux | CH4 flux | Average SMTZ |
| depth (m)] | (Tmol year–1) | (Tmol year–1) | depth (mbsf) |
| Inner shelf (0–10) | 1.6 | 1.2 | 0.5 |
| Inner shelf (10–50) | 1.7 | 1.2 | 2 |
| Outer shelf (50–200) | 1 | 0.7 | 4 |
| Slope (200–2000) | 0.8 | 0.5 | 12.8 |
| Rise (2000–3500) | 0.07 | 0.05 | 143.4 |
| >3500 | 0.1 | 0.07 | 168.9 |
| Total | 5.3 | 3.8 |
Global estimate of diffusive CH4 and SO42– flux based on 1:1.4 ratio, and average SMTZ depth compiled from 740 sites ().
TABLE 3
| From | Calculated | ||||||||
| Region [water depth (m)] | SO42– flux (Tmol year–1) | CH4 flux (Tmol year–1) | DIC Via AOM¶ (Tmol year–1) | DIC via OSR∗ (Tmol year–1) | DIC from deep sediments# (Tmol year–1) | Total(DIC) (Tmol year–1) | DIC sequestered via Carbonates¶¶ (Tmol year–1) | DIC sequestered via SOC∗∗ (Tmol year–1) | DIC Out## (Tmol year–1) |
| Inner shelf (0–10) | 1.6 | 1.2 | 1.2 | 0.8 | 0.60 | 2.60 | 0.52 | 0.13 | 1.95 |
| Inner shelf (0–50) | 1.7 | 1.2 | 1.2 | 1 | 0.60 | 2.80 | 0.56 | 0.14 | 2.10 |
| Outer shelf (50–200) | 1 | 0.7 | 0.7 | 0.6 | 0.35 | 1.65 | 0.33 | 0.08 | 1.24 |
| Slope (200–2000) | 0.8 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.6 | 0.25 | 1.35 | 0.27 | 0.07 | 1.01 |
| Rise (2000–3500) | 0.07 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.04 | 0.03 | 0.12 | 0.02 | 0.01 | 0.09 |
| >3500 | 0.1 | 0.07 | 0.07 | 0.06 | 0.04 | 0.17 | 0.03 | 0.01 | 0.12 |
| TOTAL | 5.3 | 3.8 | 3.8 | 3 | 1.9 | 8.7 | 1.7 | 0.4 | 6.5 |
Average values for parameters in Table 2, for a global CH4 flux of 3.8 Tmol year–1 and SO42– flux of 5.3 Tmol year–1.
AOM and OSR consumes 70% and 30% of SO42– entering the SMTZ, respectively, F(DIC–deep) = 50% of CH4 flux, Fcarb = 20%, FSOC = 5%, and F(DIC–out) = 75% of the Total(DIC). ¶ DIC via AOM = CH4 flux (quantitative methane consumption). *DIC via OSR = 2 * (SO42– flux – CH4 flux). #DIC from deep sediments = 0.5*CH4 flux. ¶¶DIC sequestered via Carbonates (Fcarb) = Total(DIC)*0.2. **DIC sequestered via SOC (FSOC) = Total(DIC)*0.05. ## DIC Outflux (FDIC–out) = Total(DIC)∗0.75.
TABLE 4
| From | Calculated | ||||||||
| Region [water depth (m)] | SO42– flux (Tmol year–1) | CH4 flux (Tmol year–1) | DIC Via AOM (Tmol year–1) | DIC via OSR (Tmol year–1) | DIC from deep sediments (Tmol year–1) | Total(DIC) (Tmol year–1) | DIC sequestered via Carbonates (Tmol year–1) | DIC sequestered via SOC (Tmol year–1) | DIC out (Tmol year–1) |
| Inner shelf (0–10) | 1.6 | 0.5–1.6 | 0.5–1.6 | 0–2.24 | 0.1–1.2 | 1.9–3.1 | 0.19–1.0 | 0.02–0.3 | 1.0–2.8 |
| Inner shelf (10–50) | 1.7 | 0.5–1.7 | 0.5–1.7 | 0–2.38 | 0.1–1.3 | 2.0–3.3 | 0.2–1.2 | 0.02–0.3 | 1.0–3.0 |
| Outer shelf (50–200) | 1 | 0.3–1 | 0.3–1 | 0–1.4 | 0.06–0.8 | 1.2–1.9 | 0.12–0.7 | 0.01–0.2 | 0.6–1.7 |
| Slope (200–2000) | 0.8 | 0.2–0.8 | 0.2–0.8 | 0–1.12 | 0.05–0.6 | 1.0–1.5 | 0.1–0.5 | 0.01–0.2 | 0.5–1.4 |
| Rise (2000–3500) | 0.07 | 0.02–0.07 | 0.02–0.07 | 0–0.098 | 0.004–0.1 | 0.08–0.13 | 0.01–0.05 | 0.001–0.01 | 0.04–0.12 |
| >3500 | 0.1 | 0.03–0.1 | 0.03–0.1 | 0–0.14 | 0.01–0.1 | 0.1–0.2 | 0.01–0.07 | 0.001–0.02 | 0.06–0.2 |
| Total | 5.3 | 1.6–5.3 | 1.6–5.3 | 0–7.4 | 0.3–4.0 | 6.4–10.2 | 0.6–3.6 | 0.1–1 | 3.2–9.2 |
Range of DIC flux values based on variable ranges of DIC flux parameters in Table 1 details in the Supplementary Data.
Synthesis
We highlight the major DIC fluxes through the SMTZ in methane-charged shallow marine sediments under diffusion-controlled settings with the following estimated values (Figure 4):
FIGURE 4
- a.
8.7 Tmol year–1 DIC input [Total(DIC)] due to AOM, OSR, and deep-DIC flux (range: 6.4–10.2 Tmol year–1) enters the shallow sediments.
- b.
6.5 Tmol year–1 DIC outflux F(DIC–out) toward the seafloor and water column (range 3.2–9.2 Tmol year–1).
- c.
1.7 Tmol year–1 DIC sink via authigenic carbonate precipitation (Fcarb) (range: 0.6–3.6 Tmol year–1).
- d.
0.4 Tmol year–1 DIC enters the SOC pool due to microbial uptake (FSOC) (range 0.1–1 Tmol year–1).
We would like to point out that our model curve is determined from current turnover rates and methane fluxes would vary strongly over time. While data necessary to constrain the temporal variability of fluxes is not available, we acknowledge this limitation. Consideration of an extended range for all the parameters we used in our DIC budget aims to address this dynamic nature of methane fluxes. Furthermore, it is also important to note that present estimates on global marine methane fluxes are heavily dependent on data from continental margins. Methane venting in the deep sea remains to a great part unexplored (e.g., ). The uncertainty on global marine methane flux estimates is expected to narrow down in the coming decade with rapidly improving mapping efforts and long-term flux monitoring programs. We also emphasize that we based our DIC flux estimates on the pore fluid data compiled by , due to an extensive geochemical database it considers (740 global sites from a wide range of oceanographic settings). Calculations based on the other estimates, ∼1.2 Tmol CH4 year–1 by Wallmann et al. (2012) and 19 Tmol CH4 year–1 by Hinrichs and Boetius (2002) would provide much wider flux range (Supplementary Table 3).
Importance of Methane Derived Authigenic Carbonate Precipitation
Methane-derived authigenic carbonate precipitation in diffusive settings averaging 1.7 Tmol year–1 (range: 0.6–3.6 Tmol year–1) is close to the 1 Tmol year–1 estimated by Sun and Turchyn (2014) and 1.5 Tmol year–1 suggested by Wallmann et al. (2008), for a methane flux estimate of 5 Tmol year–1). Our estimated average corresponds to 11–15% of 11–15 Tmol year–1 carbonate accumulation estimated for continental shelf sediments and 15% of ∼11 Tmol year–1 in pelagic oceans (Milliman, 1993; ; Milliman and Droxler, 1996; Iglesias-Rodriguez et al., 2002; Schneider et al., 2006; Wallmann and Aloisi, 2012).
However, this estimate is an order of magnitude higher than the recently suggested estimate of 0.14 Tmol year–1 by . Multiple factors could be responsible for this mismatch. Previous estimates for global carbonate authigenesis were based primarily on the Ca2+ flux into sediments from the overlying water column and do not account for Ca2+ fluxes toward shallow sediment from deep methanogenic zones due to MSiW (Longman et al., 2019). Further, a higher authigenic carbonate sink is expected when Mg2+ fluxes into shallow marine sediments are also considered along with the Ca2+ fluxes (; ). Moreover, the CH4 and SO42– flux data used in this study from the compilation by covers a higher number of diffusive methane flux locations from IODP and non-IODP expeditions than those used by Sun and Turchyn (2014) and , which were based solely on the ODP/IODP database. Estimates of global methane flux-related processes based exclusively on the ODP/IODP dataset have important limitations. So far, only a handful of ODP/IODP expeditions (e.g., 146, 164, 204, X311, and X341S) were dedicated to methane/gas hydrate research. Further, to the best of our knowledge, ∼33 drill sites have shown SMTZ depths below 10 mbsf. The data compilation used here from includes data from 323 non-IODP sediment cores (coring sites) globally with ∼290 sites with an SMTZ depth of <10 mbsf, and the remaining sites have an SMTZ depth of <20 mbsf. Many of the past ODP/IODP sites do not have pore fluid measurements from the top 1 mbsf whereas the data from non-IODP sediment cores focused on diffusive methane flux sites shows ∼100 global sites with an SMTZ less than 1 mbsf. Thus, the drilling-based dataset grossly underestimates DIC entering the SMTZs in coastal settings, which in turn constitutes ∼65% of global diffusive methane flux. Hence, the combination of IODP and non-IODP sediment core data used here, based on , can provide better constraints to the global DIC cycling at diffusive methane flux settings.
Recently, it was postulated that carbonate cap rocks sealing the majority of hydrocarbon systems could be formed via AOM (). Further, carbonate authigenesis is suggested to be more dominant in slope settings, especially during the periods of widespread anoxia in geologic history, because of the prevalent anaerobic respiration in comparison to margins (Higgins et al., 2009; Schrag et al., 2013). These studies suggest large unexplored authigenic carbonate deposits that account for thousands of Gt C sequestration over millions of years. Authigenic carbonates formed below SMTZ in methanogenic zones (Ca[Fe,Mg,Mn,Ba]CO3) with distinctly enriched δ13C (>5‰) are well known (e.g., Rodriguez et al., 2000; Naehr et al., 2007; Meister et al., 2011; Solomon et al., 2014; Teichert et al., 2014; Pierre et al., 2016; Phillips et al., 2018; Torres et al., 2020). If we assume 20–50% of the DIC from methanogenic zones is sequestered as authigenic carbonate below the SMTZ, net methane-induced authigenic carbonate precipitation at the SMTZ and in the methanogenic depths below would be 2.5–3.6 Tmol year–1, for a global 3.8 Tmol year–1 of methane production suggested by . This range is consistent, at the lower end, with the estimate of 3.3–13.3 Tmol year–1 by Wallmann et al. (2008) and the higher end of 1–4 Tmol year–1 suggested by Torres et al. (2020). These estimates amount to a significant carbon sink that must be accounted for in global carbonate accumulation budgets.
Importance of DIC Outflux to the Water Column: Implication to C-S-Fe Dynamics
In present-day settings, 6.5 Tmol year–1 (range 3.2–9.2 Tmol year–1) of DIC flux toward the seafloor and water column from the SMTZ. In comparison, this amount is ∼20% (range: 10–28%) of the ∼33 Tmol year–1 of global riverine DIC fluxing to the oceans (Meybeck, 1993; ; ; Li et al., 2017). Most of our estimated DIC outflux (98%) occurs in continental margin sediments with shallow SMTZ depths of ∼13 mbsf (Table 2). Hence, this DIC flux can enter the water column, if it is not involved in diagenesis on the way, and impact ocean chemistry. As oceans continue to absorb rapidly rising atmospheric CO2, the water column is prone to pH reduction with significant changes to ocean chemistry, associated biogeochemical cycling, and marine ecology (). A pH reduction on the scale of 0.3–0.4 units has been predicted for the end of the 21st century (). Further, under advective conditions, methane can enter the water column and undergo aerobic methane oxidation, which consumes bottom water oxygen and contributes to acidification through the production of CO2 (; ; ).
Alkalinity contribution from the sediments to the water column has important implications for ongoing climate change as they can reduce the ocean acidification effect and even enhance the CO2 absorption capacity of surface water (; ; Thomas et al., 2008; Hu and Cai, 2011; Krumins et al., 2013; ). Hence, evaluating the contribution of DIC outflux to the water column in terms of total alkalinity (TA) to DIC ratio is of great importance. Most (86%) of the DIC outflux at diffusive methane flux settings is occurring within SMTZ depths of ≤4 mbsf and bathymetry below 200 m (Tables 2–4). Minimum TA/DIC ratios in the water column 20 m above the seabed under oxygen-limited conditions on continental shelves (100–250 m bathymetry) is generally ≤1 (Figure 5). This relationship implies that if the DIC outflux has a TA/DIC ratio of >1, it is contributed as alkalinity to the water column.
FIGURE 5
TA/DIC for the net DIC entering the SMTZ and above in diffusive settings—considering inputs from AOM (TA/DIC ratio = 2), OSR (TA/DIC ratio = 1), the deep-DIC flux (TA/DIC ratio = 1), and the average rates of DIC input parameters in Table 1 – will produce a value ∼1.4:
However, the TA/DIC flux ratio from this pool would be determined by the authigenic carbonate precipitation and the balance between sulfide burial and oxidation. As discussed below, sulfide burial relates to the extent of sulfide oxidation and related acid production. Otherwise, assuming the stoichiometry from Wallmann et al. (2008) (H2S + 2/5Fe2O3 → 2/5FeS2 + 1/5 FeS + 1/5 FeO + H2O), formation of sulfide minerals at the SMTZ would have no net impact on the TA/DIC ratio of DIC outflux. Carbonate precipitation would consume bicarbonate and reduce the TA by a factor of two. Thus, while methane derived authigenic carbonate precipitation sequesters a portion of total DIC entering the SMTZ, it will also contribute CO2 to the water column from shallow sediments by reducing the alkalinity of the DIC outflux. Net TA/DIC of DIC outflux for our average DIC budget (Figure 4) under hypothetical complete sulfide burial can be given by:
This relationship suggests that even with a hypothetical complete sulfide burial, Fcarb > 20% can cause DIC outflux to contribute CO2 to the water column. Maximum and Minimum TA/DIC estimates for DIC outflux based on varying parameter ranges used in this model are provided in Supplementary Table 2.
Alkalinity flux would be different when sulfide oxidation occurs. AOM and OSR produce ∼5.3 Tmol year–1 sulfide at SMTZ (equivalent to total SO42– consumption). Complete or at least significant sulfide burial (e.g., Hensen et al., 2003; ) could result in a substantial alkalinity contribution from sediments. Oxidation of this entire sulfide pool can, in contrast, produce acid and effectively neutralize the alkalinity flux. It has been suggested that globally 5 to 20% of the sulfide produced in sediments is buried as iron minerals (e.g., FeS, FeS2) or with organic matter and the remaining is reoxidized to sulfate (; Jørgensen, 1982; Jørgensen and Nelson, 2004; Zopfi et al., 2004; Wasmund et al., 2017).
Since marine methane flux settings have diagenetic systems different than sites without methane fluxes (e.g., ), the sulfide burial rate at diffusive methane flux settings could differ from the global average (). For example, nearly quantitative precipitation of all reduced sulfur by AOM was reported for an iron-rich, non-steady-state setting (Hensen et al., 2003) and more recently, and two thirds of sulfide produced via AOM and OSR at the SMTZ was inferred to undergo burial (Wurgaft et al., 2019). Availability of reactive iron (for sulfide burial) as well as the ratio of burial versus oxidation of the sulfide produced at the SMTZ is thus an important parameter in determining the impact of methane induced carbon cycling at diffusive methane flux settings. In general, a combination of higher sulfide burial with lower carbonate precipitation rates can result in a DIC outflux that contributes alkalinity from sediments, and the opposite can result in DIC contribution as CO2. We assume the latter to be dominant in the present-day setting—that is, inefficient sulfide burial and high carbonate precipitation—which implies that out fluxing DIC would be a contributor to ongoing ocean acidification. We also emphasize the importance of integrated C-S-Fe approach to understand how these subsurface processes affect water column chemistry. Future studies should quantify the rates of sulfide oxidation and carbonate authigenesis in diverse and globally distributed settings characterized by subsurface methane fluxes to improve on these first-order estimates.
Conclusion
We estimated DIC cycling in methane charged shallow sediments with global values for diffusive methane and sulfate fluxes into the SMTZ. Our synthesis highlights major diffusive methane-powered carbon fluxes with 8.7 Tmol year–1 DIC (range 6.4–10.2 Tmol year–1) entering the shallow sediments due to AOM, OSR, and the deep-DIC flux. An estimated 6.5 Tmol year–1 (range 3.2–9.2 Tmol year–1) of the this DIC pool flows toward the water column. This DIC outflux will contribute alkalinity or CO2 in different proportions to the water column, depending on the rates of authigenic carbonate precipitation and sulfide oxidation. At present, settings with pervasive authigenic carbonate precipitation and sulfide oxidation are contributing CO2 and thus to ocean acidification. Our estimates also suggest that globally distributed precipitation of authigenic carbonate minerals at SMTZ characterized by diffusive methane transport sequesters an average of 1.7 Tmol year–1 (range: 0.6–3.6 Tmol year–1). This estimate is equivalent to ∼15% of carbonate accumulation in neritic and in pelagic sediments, respectively. Our study also suggests the need for detailed pore fluid chemical analysis in future expeditions at diffusive settings, which would include quantification of F(DIC–deep), Fcarb, and sulfide oxidation rates. Overall, we emphasize that settings characterized by diffusive methane fluxes may play an even larger role in oceanic carbon cycling via conversion of methane carbon to inorganic carbon, which contributes significantly to oceanic DIC pool and carbonate accumulation. These pathways must be included in coastal and geologic carbon models.
Statements
Data availability statement
All datasets generated for this study are included in the article/Supplementary Material.
Author contributions
SA conceptualized the project and wrote the manuscript. RC, HA, and TL helped in the expansion of concepts, manuscript preparation, data synthesis, and calculations.
Funding
TL acknowledges funding from the ACS-PRF.
Acknowledgments
SA would like to acknowledge the TAMUCC CMSS Research Assistantship during this manuscript preparation and Dr. Xinping Hu (TAMUCC) for constructive discussions on chemical implication of the DIC outflux in the article. We would like to thank the two reviewers for their constructive inputs that greatly improved this manuscript.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Supplementary material
The Supplementary Material for this article can be found online at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmars.2020.00206/full#supplementary-material
References
1
AleksandraB.-G.KatarzynaŁ-M. (2018). Porewater dissolved organic and inorganic carbon in relation to methane occurrence in sediments of the Gdańsk Basin (southern Baltic Sea).Cont. Shelf Res.16811–20. 10.1016/j.csr.2018.08.008
2
AloisiG.BouloubassiI.HeijsS. K.PancostR. D.PierreC.DamstéJ. S. S.et al (2002). CH4-consuming microorganisms and the formation of carbonate crusts at cold seeps.Earth Planet. Sci. Lett.203195–203. 10.1016/s0012-821x(02)00878-6
3
AloisiG.WallmannK.DrewsM.BohrmannG. (2004). Evidence for the submarine weathering of silicate minerals in Black Sea sediments: possible implications for the marine Li and B cycles.Geochem. Geophys. Geosyst.5:Q04007. 10.1029/2003GC000639
4
Amiotte SuchetP.ProbstJ. L.LudwigW. (2003). Worldwide distribution of continental rock lithology: implications for the atmospheric/soil CO2 uptake by continental weathering and alkalinity river transport to the oceans.Global Biogeochem. Cycles17:1038. 10.1029/2002GB001891
5
ArcherD. E. (1996). An atlas of the distribution of calcium carbonate in sediments of the deep sea.Global Biogeochem. Cycles10159–174. 10.1029/95gb03016
6
AufdenkampeA. K.MayorgaE.RaymondP. A.MelackJ. M.DoneyS. C.AlinS. R.et al (2011). Riverine coupling of biogeochemical cycles between land, oceans, and atmosphere.Front. Ecol. Environ.953–60. 10.1890/100014
7
BakerP. A.BurnsS. J. (1985). Occurrence and formation of dolomite in organic-rich continental margin sediments.AAPG Bull.691917–1930.
8
BayonG.PierreC.EtoubleauJ.VoissetM.CauquilE.MarssetT.et al (2007). Sr/Ca and Mg/Ca ratios in niger delta sediments: implications for authigenic carbonate genesis in cold seep environments.Mar. Geol.24193–109. 10.1016/j.margeo.2007.03.007
9
BerelsonW.BalchW.NajjarR.FeelyR.SabineC.LeeK. (2007). Relating estimates of CaCO3 production, export, and dissolution in the water column to measurements of CaCO3 rain into sediment traps and dissolution on the sea floor: a revised global carbonate budget.Global Biogeochem. Cycles21:GB1024. 10.1029/2006GB002803
10
BerelsonW. M.ProkopenkoM.SansoneF.GrahamA.McmanusJ.BernhardJ. M. (2005). Anaerobic diagenesis of silica and carbon in continental margin sediments: discrete zones of TCO 2 production.Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta694611–4629. 10.1016/j.gca.2005.05.011
11
BergR. D. (2018). Quantifying the Deep: The Importance of Diagenetic Reactions to Marine Geochemical Cycles.Thesis Ph.D., University of Washington, Washington, D.C.
12
BergR. D.SolomonE. A.TengF.-Z. (2019). The role of marine sediment diagenesis in the modern oceanic magnesium cycle.Nat. Commun.101–10.
13
BernerR. A. (1982). Burial of organic carbon and pyrite sulfur in the modern ocean: its geochemical and environmental significance.Am. J. Sci.282451–473. 10.2475/ajs.282.4.451
14
BeuligF.RoyH.McglynnS. E.JorgensenB. B. (2019). Cryptic CH4 cycling in the sulfate-methane transition of marine sediments apparently mediated by ANME-1 archaea.ISME J.13250–262. 10.1038/s41396-018-0273-z
15
BiastochA.TreudeT.RüpkeL. H.RiebesellU.RothC.BurwiczE. B.et al (2011). Rising Arctic Ocean temperatures cause gas hydrate destabilization and ocean acidification.Geophys. Res. Lett.38:L08602. 10.1029/2011GL047222
16
BoetiusA.RavenschlagK.SchubertC. J.RickertD.WiddelF.GiesekeA.et al (2000). A marine microbial consortium apparently mediating anaerobic oxidation of methane.Nature407:623. 10.1038/35036572
17
BoetiusA.WenzhöferF. (2013). Seafloor oxygen consumption fuelled by methane from cold seeps.Nat. Geosci.6725–734. 10.1038/ngeo1926
18
BorowskiW. S.PaullC. K.UsslerW. (1996). Marine pore-water sulfate profiles indicate in situ methane flux from underlying gas hydrate.Geology24655–658.
19
BorowskiW. S.PaullC. K.Ussler IiiW. (1997). Carbon cycling within the upper methanogenic zone of continental rise sediments; an example from the methane-rich sediments overlying the Blake Ridge gas hydrate deposits.Mar. Chem.57299–311. 10.1016/s0304-4203(97)00019-4
20
BoudreauB. P.LuoY.MeysmanF. J.MiddelburgJ. J.DickensG. R. (2015). Gas hydrate dissociation prolongs acidification of the Anthropocene oceans.Geophys. Res. Lett.429337A–9344A.
21
BowlesM. W.MogollónJ. M.KastenS.ZabelM.HinrichsK.-U. (2014). Global rates of marine sulfate reduction and implications for sub–sea-floor metabolic activities.Science344889–891. 10.1126/science.1249213
22
BradburyH. J.TurchynA. V. (2019). Reevaluating the carbon sink due to sedimentary carbonate formation in modern marine sediments.Earth Planet. Sci. Lett.51940–49. 10.1016/j.epsl.2019.04.044
23
BrennerH.BraeckmanU.Le GuittonM.MeysmanF. J. (2016). The impact of sedimentary alkalinity release on the water column CO 2 system in the North Sea.Biogeosciences13841–863. 10.5194/bg-13-841-2016
24
BurdigeD. J.KomadaT. (2011). Anaerobic oxidation of methane and the stoichiometry of remineralization processes in continental margin sediments.Limnol. Oceanogr.561781–1796. 10.4319/lo.2011.56.5.1781
25
CaesarK. H.KyleJ. R.LyonsT. W.TripatiA.LoydS. J. (2019). Carbonate formation in salt dome cap rocks by microbial anaerobic oxidation of methane.Nat. Commun.10:08.
26
ChatterjeeS.DickensG. R.BhatnagarG.ChapmanW. G.DuganB.SnyderG. T.et al (2011). Pore water sulfate, alkalinity, and carbon isotope profiles in shallow sediment above marine gas hydrate systems: a numerical modeling perspective.J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth116:B09103. 10.1029/2011JB008290
27
ChenC.-T. A. (2002). Shelf-vs. dissolution-generated alkalinity above the chemical lysocline.Deep Sea Res. Part II: Top. Stud. Oceanogr.495365–5375. 10.1016/s0967-0645(02)00196-0
28
ChenC. T. A.WangS. L. (1999). Carbon, alkalinity and nutrient budgets on the East China Sea continental shelf.J. Geophys. Res. Oceans10420675–20686. 10.1029/1999jc900055
29
ChuangP.-C.YangT. F.WallmannK.MatsumotoR.HuC.-Y.ChenH.-W.et al (2019). Carbon isotope exchange during anaerobic oxidation of methane (AOM) in sediments of the northeastern South China Sea.Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta246138–155. 10.1016/j.gca.2018.11.003
30
CoffinR.HamdanL.SmithJ.RoseP.PlummerR.YozaB.et al (2014). Contribution of vertical methane flux to shallow sediment carbon pools across Porangahau Ridge, New Zealand.Energies75332–5356. 10.3390/en7085332
31
CoffinR. B.OsburnC. L.PlummerR. E.SmithJ. P.RoseP. S.GrabowskiK. S. (2015). Deep sediment-sourced methane contribution to shallow sediment organic carbon: atwater valley, texas-louisiana shelf, gulf of mexico.Energies81561–1583. 10.3390/en8031561
32
ContrerasS.MeisterP.LiuB.Prieto-MollarX.HinrichsK.-U.KhaliliA.et al (2013). Cyclic 100-ka (glacial-interglacial) migration of subseafloor redox zonation on the Peruvian shelf.Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.11018098–18103. 10.1073/pnas.1305981110
33
CrémièreA.PierreC.Blanc-ValleronM.-M.ZitterT.ÇaðatayM. N.HenryP. (2012). Methane-derived authigenic carbonates along the North Anatolian fault system in the Sea of Marmara (Turkey).Deep Sea Res. Part I: Oceanogr. Res. Pap.66114–130. 10.1016/j.dsr.2012.03.014
34
DickensG. R. (2003). Rethinking the global carbon cycle with a large, dynamic and microbially mediated gas hydrate capacitor.Earth Planet. Sci. Lett.213169–183. 10.1016/s0012-821x(03)00325-x
35
DickensG. R. (2011). Down the rabbit hole: toward appropriate discussion of methane release from gas hydrate systems during the Paleocene-Eocene thermal maximum and other past hyperthermal events.Clim. Past7831–846. 10.5194/cp-7-831-2011
36
DickensG. R.O’neilJ. R.ReaD. K.OwenR. M. (1995). Dissociation of oceanic methane hydrate as a cause of the carbon isotope excursion at the end of the Paleocene.Paleoceanography10965–971. 10.1029/95pa02087
37
DickensG. R.SnyderG. T. (2009). Interpreting upward methane flux from marine pore water profiles.Fire Ice Winter97–10.
38
DoneyS. C.FabryV. J.FeelyR. A.KleypasJ. A. (2009). Ocean acidification: the other CO2 problem.Ann. Rev. Mar. Sci.1169–192.
39
EggerM.RiedingerN.MogollónJ. M.JørgensenB. B. (2018). Global diffusive fluxes of methane in marine sediments.Nat. Geosci.11:421. 10.1038/s41561-018-0122-8
40
FeelyR. A.DoneyS. C.CooleyS. R. (2009). Ocean acidification: present conditions and future changes in a high-CO2 world.Oceanography2236–47. 10.5670/oceanog.2009.95
41
FengD.ChenD.PeckmannJ.BohrmannG. (2010). Authigenic carbonates from methane seeps of the northern Congo fan: microbial formation mechanism.Mar. Petrol. Geol.27748–756. 10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2009.08.006
42
FormoloM. J.LyonsT. W. (2013). Sulfur biogeochemistry of cold seeps in the Green Canyon region of the Gulf of Mexico.Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta119264–285. 10.1016/j.gca.2013.05.017
43
HenrichsS. M.ReeburghW. S. (1987). Anaerobic mineralization of marine sediment organic matter: rates and the role of anaerobic processes in the oceanic carbon economy.Geomicrobiol. J.5191–237. 10.1080/01490458709385971
44
HensenC.ZabelM.PfeiferK.SchwenkT.KastenS.RiedingerN.et al (2003). Control of sulfate pore-water profiles by sedimentary events and the significance of anaerobic oxidation of methane for the burial of sulfur in marine sediments.Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta672631–2647. 10.1016/s0016-7037(03)00199-6
45
HesselboS. P.GrockeD. R.JenkynsH. C.BjerrumC. J.FarrimondP.Morgans BellH. S.et al (2000). Massive dissociation of gas hydrate during a Jurassic oceanic anoxic event.Nature406392–395. 10.1038/35019044
46
HigginsJ. A.FischerW.SchragD. (2009). Oxygenation of the ocean and sediments: consequences for the seafloor carbonate factory.Earth Planet. Sci. Lett.28425–33. 10.1016/j.epsl.2009.03.039
47
HimmlerT.BrinkmannF.BohrmannG.PeckmannJ. (2011). Corrosion patterns of seep-carbonates from the eastern Mediterranean Sea.Terra Nova23206–212. 10.1111/j.1365-3121.2011.01000.x
48
HinrichsK.-U.BoetiusA. (2002). “The anaerobic oxidation of methane: new insights in microbial ecology and biogeochemistry,” in Ocean Margin Systems, edsWeferG.BilletD.HebbelnD.JorgensenB. B.SchlüterM.Van WeeringT. C. E. (Berlin: Springer), 457–477. 10.1007/978-3-662-05127-6_28
49
HongW.-L.TorresM. E.KimJ.-H.ChoiJ.BahkJ.-J. (2013). Carbon cycling within the sulfate-methane-transition-zone in marine sediments from the Ulleung Basin.Biogeochemistry115129–148. 10.1007/s10533-012-9824-y
50
HongW.-L.TorresM. E.KimJ.-H.ChoiJ.BahkJ.-J. (2014). Towards quantifying the reaction network around the sulfate–methane-transition-zone in the Ulleung Basin, East Sea, with a kinetic modeling approach.Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta140127–141. 10.1016/j.gca.2014.05.032
51
HuC.-Y.YangT. F.BurrG. S.ChuangP.-C.ChenH.-W.WaliaM.et al (2017). Biogeochemical cycles at the sulfate-methane transition zone (SMTZ) and geochemical characteristics of the pore fluids offshore southwestern Taiwan.J. Asian Earth Sci.149172–183. 10.1016/j.jseaes.2017.07.002
52
HuX.CaiW. J. (2011). An assessment of ocean margin anaerobic processes on oceanic alkalinity budget.Global Biogeochem. Cycles25:GB3003. 10.1029/2010GB003859
53
HuY.FengD.LiangQ.XiaZ.ChenL.ChenD. (2015). Impact of anaerobic oxidation of methane on the geochemical cycle of redox-sensitive elements at cold-seep sites of the northern South China Sea.Deep Sea Res. Part II: Top. Stud. Oceanogr.12284–94. 10.1016/j.dsr2.2015.06.012
54
Iglesias-RodriguezM. D.ArmstrongR.FeelyR.HoodR.KleypasJ.MillimanJ. D.et al (2002). Progress made in study of ocean’s calcium carbonate budget.Eos Trans. Am. Geophys. Union83365–375. 10.1029/2002eo000267
55
JiangG.KennedyM. J.Christie-BlickN. (2003). Stable isotopic evidence for methane seeps in Neoproterozoic postglacial cap carbonates.Nature426822–826. 10.1038/nature02201
56
JørgensenB.NelsonD. (2004). Sulfide oxidation in marine sediments: geochemistry meets microbiology.GSA Spec. Pap.37963–81.
57
JørgensenB. B. (1982). Mineralization of organic matter in the sea bed—the role of sulphate reduction.Nature296:643. 10.1038/296643a0
58
JørgensenB. B.BeuligF.EggerM.PetroC.ScholzeC.RøyH. (2019a). Organoclastic sulfate reduction in the sulfate-methane transition of marine sediments.Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta254231–245. 10.1016/j.gca.2019.03.016
59
JørgensenB. B.FindlayA. J.PellerinA. (2019b). The biogeochemical sulfur cycle of marine sediments.Front. Microbiol.10:849. 10.3389/fmicb.2019.00849
60
JørgensenB. B.KastenS. (2006). “Sulfur cycling and methane oxidation,” in Marine Geochemistry, edsSchulzH. D.ZabelM. (Berlin: Springer), 271–309. 10.1007/3-540-32144-6_8
61
JuddA.HovlandM. (2009). Seabed Fluid Flow: The Impact on Geology, Biology and the Marine Environment.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
62
KaracaD.HensenC.WallmannK. (2010). Controls on authigenic carbonate precipitation at cold seeps along the convergent margin off Costa Rica.Geochem. Geophys. Geosyst.11:Q08S27. 10.1029/2010GC003062
63
KastnerM.ClaypoolG.RobertsonG. (2008). Geochemical constraints on the origin of the pore fluids and gas hydrate distribution at Atwater Valley and Keathley Canyon, northern Gulf of Mexico.Mar. Petrol. Geol.25860–872. 10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2008.01.022
64
KeyR. M.OlsenA.van HeuvenS.LauvsetS. K.VeloA.LinX.et al (2015). Global Ocean Data Analysis Project, Version 2 (GLODAPv2), ORNL/CDIAC-162, ND-P093. Tennessee: Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center. 10.3334/CDIAC/OTG.NDP093_GLODAPv2
65
KimJ. H.TorresM. E.HaleyB. A.RyuJ. S.ParkM. H.HongW. L.et al (2016). Marine silicate weathering in the anoxic sediment of the Ulleung Basin: evidence and consequences.Geochem. Geophys. Geosyst.173437–3453. 10.1002/2016gc006356
66
KinnamanF. S.KimballJ. B.BussoL.BirgelD.DingH.HinrichsK.-U.et al (2010). Gas flux and carbonate occurrence at a shallow seep of thermogenic natural gas.Geo-Mar. Lett.30355–365. 10.1007/s00367-010-0184-0
67
KnittelK.BoetiusA. (2009). Anaerobic oxidation of methane: progress with an unknown process.Annu. Rev. Microbiol.63311–334. 10.1146/annurev.micro.61.080706.093130
68
KomadaT.BurdigeD. J.LiH.-L.MagenC.ChantonJ. P.CadaA. K. (2016). Organic matter cycling across the sulfate-methane transition zone of the Santa Barbara Basin, California Borderland.Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta176259–278. 10.1016/j.gca.2015.12.022
69
KruminsV.GehlenM.ArndtS.CappellenP. V.RegnierP. (2013). Dissolved inorganic carbon and alkalinity fluxes from coastal marine sediments: model estimates for different shelf environments and sensitivity to global change.Biogeosciences10371–398. 10.5194/bg-10-371-2013
70
KvenvoldenK. A. (2002). Methane hydrate in the global organic carbon cycle.Terra Nova14302–306. 10.1046/j.1365-3121.2002.00414.x
71
LauvsetS. K.KeyR. M.OlsenA.Van HeuvenS.VeloA.LinX.et al (2016). A new global interior ocean mapped climatology: the 1× 1 GLODAP version 2.Earth Syst. Sci. Data8325–340. 10.5194/essd-8-325-2016
72
LevinL. A.BacoA. R.BowdenD. A.ColacoA.CordesE. E.CunhaM. R.et al (2016). Hydrothermal vents and methane seeps: rethinking the sphere of influence.Front. Mar. Sci.3:72. 10.3389/fmars.2016.00072
73
LiM.PengC.WangM.XueW.ZhangK.WangK.et al (2017). The carbon flux of global rivers: a re-evaluation of amount and spatial patterns.Ecol. Indic.8040–51. 10.1016/j.ecolind.2017.04.049
74
LongmanJ.PalmerM. R.GernonT. M.MannersH. R. (2019). The role of tephra in enhancing organic carbon preservation in marine sediments.Earth-Sci. Rev.192480–490. 10.1016/j.earscirev.2019.03.018
75
LuffR.WallmannK. (2003). Fluid flow, methane fluxes, carbonate precipitation and biogeochemical turnover in gas hydrate-bearing sediments at Hydrate Ridge, Cascadia Margin: numerical modeling and mass balances.Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta673403–3421. 10.1016/s0016-7037(03)00127-3
76
LuffR.WallmannK.AloisiG. (2004). Numerical modeling of carbonate crust formation at cold vent sites: significance for fluid and methane budgets and chemosynthetic biological communities.Earth Planet. Sci. Lett.221337–353. 10.1016/s0012-821x(04)00107-4
77
MalinvernoA.PohlmanJ. W. (2011). Modeling sulfate reduction in methane hydrate-bearing continental margin sediments: does a sulfate-methane transition require anaerobic oxidation of methane?Geochem. Geophys. Geosyst.12:Q07006. 10.1029/2011GC003501
78
MaloneM. J.ClaypoolG.MartinJ. B.DickensG. R. (2002). Variable methane fluxes in shallow marine systems over geologic time: the composition and origin of pore waters and authigenic carbonates on the New Jersey shelf.Mar. Geol.189175–196. 10.1016/s0025-3227(02)00474-7
79
MatsumotoR. (1990). Vuggy carbonate crust formed by hydrocarbon seepage on the continental shelf of Baffin Island, northeast Canada.Geochem. J.24143–158. 10.2343/geochemj.24.143
80
MeisterP. (2015). For the deep biosphere, the present is not always the key to the past: what we can learn from the geological record.Terra Nova27400–408. 10.1111/ter.12174
81
MeisterP.BrunnerB.PicardA.BöttcherM. E.JørgensenB. B. (2019a). Sulphur and carbon isotopes as tracers of past sub-seafloor microbial activity.Sci. Rep.9:604.
82
MeisterP.LiuB.KhaliliA.BöttcherM. E.JørgensenB. B. (2019b). Factors controlling the carbon isotope composition of dissolved inorganic carbon and methane in marine porewater: an evaluation by reaction-transport modelling.J. Mar. Syst.200:103227. 10.1016/j.jmarsys.2019.103227
83
MeisterP.GutjahrM.FrankM.BernasconiS. M.VasconcelosC.MckenzieJ. A. (2011). Dolomite formation within the methanogenic zone induced by tectonically driven fluids in the Peru accretionary prism.Geology39563–566. 10.1130/g31810.1
84
MeisterP.LiuB.FerdelmanT. G.JørgensenB. B.KhaliliA. (2013). Control of sulphate and methane distributions in marine sediments by organic matter reactivity.Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta104183–193. 10.1016/j.gca.2012.11.011
85
MeisterP.MckenzieJ. A.VasconcelosC.BernasconiS.FrankM.GutjahrM.et al (2007). Dolomite formation in the dynamic deep biosphere: results from the Peru Margin.Sedimentology541007–1032. 10.1111/j.1365-3091.2007.00870.x
86
MeybeckM. (1993). Riverine transport of atmospheric carbon: sources, global typology and budget.Water Air Soil Pollut.70443–463. 10.1007/978-94-011-1982-5_31
87
MillimanJ.DroxlerA. (1996). Neritic and pelagic carbonate sedimentation in the marine environment: ignorance is not bliss.Geol. Rundschau85496–504. 10.1007/s005310050090
88
MillimanJ. D. (1993). Production and accumulation of calcium carbonate in the ocean: budget of a nonsteady state.Global Biogeochem. Cycles7927–957. 10.1029/93gb02524
89
MooreW. S. (2010). The effect of submarine groundwater discharge on the ocean.Annu. Rev. Mar. Sci.259–88.
90
NaehrT. H.EichhublP.OrphanV. J.HovlandM.PaullC. K.Ussler IiiW.et al (2007). Authigenic carbonate formation at hydrocarbon seeps in continental margin sediments: a comparative study.Deep Sea Res. Part II: Top. Stud. Oceanogr.541268–1291. 10.1016/j.dsr2.2007.04.010
91
NauhausK.AlbrechtM.ElvertM.BoetiusA.WiddelF. (2007). In vitro cell growth of marine archaeal-bacterial consortia during anaerobic oxidation of methane with sulfate.Environ. Microbiol.9187–196. 10.1111/j.1462-2920.2006.01127.x
92
OlsenA.KeyR. M.Van HeuvenS.LauvsetS.VeloA.LinX.et al (2016). An internally consistent data product for the world ocean: the global ocean data analysis project, version 2 (GLODAPv2).Earth Syst. Sci. Data20161–1.
93
OrphanV. J.HouseC. H.HinrichsK. U.MckeeganK. D.DelongE. F. (2001). Methane-consuming archaea revealed by directly coupled isotopic and phylogenetic analysis.Science293484–487. 10.1126/science.1061338
94
OrphanV. J.IiiW. U.NaehrT. H.HouseC. H.HinrichsK.-U.PaullC. K. (2004). Geological, geochemical, and microbiological heterogeneity of the seafloor around methane vents in the Eel River Basin, offshore California.Chem. Geol.205265–289. 10.1016/j.chemgeo.2003.12.035
95
PhillipsS. C.HongW.-L.JohnsonJ. E.FahnestockM. F.BryceJ. G. (2018). Authigenic carbonate formation influenced by freshwater inputs and methanogenesis in coal-bearing strata offshore Shimokita, Japan (IODP site C0020).Mar. Petrol. Geol.96288–303. 10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2018.06.007
96
PierreC.Blanc-ValleronM.-M.CaquineauS.MärzC.RaveloA. C.TakahashiK.et al (2016). Mineralogical, geochemical and isotopic characterization of authigenic carbonates from the methane-bearing sediments of the Bering Sea continental margin (IODP Expedition 323, Sites U1343–U1345).Deep Sea Research Part II: Top. Stud. Oceanogr.125133–144. 10.1016/j.dsr2.2014.03.011
97
ProutyN. G.SahyD.RuppelC. D.RoarkE. B.CondonD.BrookeS.et al (2016). Insights into methane dynamics from analysis of authigenic carbonates and chemosynthetic mussels at newly-discovered Atlantic Margin seeps.Earth Planet. Sci. Lett.449332–344. 10.1016/j.epsl.2016.05.023
98
ReeburghW. S. (1976). Methane consumption in Cariaco Trench waters and sediments.Earth Planet. Sci. Lett.28337–344. 10.1016/0012-821x(76)90195-3
99
ReeburghW. S. (2007). Oceanic methane biogeochemistry.Chem. Rev.107486–513. 10.1021/cr050362v
100
RodriguezN.PaullC.BorowskiW. (2000). “30. Zonation of authigenic carbonates within gas hydrate-bearing sedimentary sections on the Blake Ridge: offshore southeastern north America,” in Proceedings of the Ocean Drilling Program, Scientific Results, Fremantle, 30.
101
RuppelC. D.KesslerJ. D. (2017). The interaction of climate change and methane hydrates.Rev. Geophys.55126–168. 10.1002/2016rg000534
102
SchneiderR. R.SchulzH. D.HensenC. (2006). Marine Carbonates: Their Formation and Destruction.Berlin: Springer, 311–337.
103
ScholzF.HensenC.SchmidtM.GeersenJ. (2013). Submarine weathering of silicate minerals and the extent of pore water freshening at active continental margins.Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta100200–216. 10.1016/j.gca.2012.09.043
104
SchragD. P.HigginsJ. A.MacdonaldF. A.JohnstonD. T. (2013). Authigenic carbonate and the history of the global carbon cycle.Science339540–543. 10.1126/science.1229578
105
SivanO.SchragD.MurrayR. (2007). Rates of methanogenesis and methanotrophy in deep-sea sediments.Geobiology5141–151. 10.1111/j.1472-4669.2007.00098.x
106
SmithJ. P.CoffinR. B. (2014). Methane flux and authigenic carbonate in shallow sediments overlying methane hydrate bearing strata in Alaminos Canyon, Gulf of Mexico.Energies76118–6141. 10.3390/en7096118
107
SnyderG. T.HirutaA.MatsumotoR.DickensG. R.TomaruH.TakeuchiR.et al (2007). Pore water profiles and authigenic mineralization in shallow marine sediments above the methane-charged system on Umitaka Spur, Japan Sea.Deep Sea Res. Part II: Top. Stud. Oceanogr.541216–1239. 10.1016/j.dsr2.2007.04.001
108
SolomonE. A.SpivackA. J.KastnerM.TorresM. E.RobertsonG. (2014). Gas hydrate distribution and carbon sequestration through coupled microbial methanogenesis and silicate weathering in the Krishna–Godavari basin, offshore India.Mar. Petrol. Geol.58233–253. 10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2014.08.020
109
StockerT. F.QinD.PlattnerG.-K.TignorM.AllenS. K.BoschungJ.et al (2014). Climate change 2013: The Physical Science Basis.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
110
SuessE. (2010). “Marine cold seeps,” in Handbook of Hydrocarbon and Lipid Microbiology, edsTimmisK. N.McGenityT.Roelof van der MeerJ.de LorenzoV. (Berlin: Springer), 185–203. 10.1007/978-3-540-77587-4_12
111
SuessE. (2018). “Marine cold seeps: background and recent advances,” in Hydrocarbons, Oils and Lipids: Diversity, Origin, Chemistry and Fate, ed.WilkesH. (Berlin: Springer), 1–21. 10.1007/978-3-319-54529-5_27-1
112
SunX.TurchynA. V. (2014). Significant contribution of authigenic carbonate to marine carbon burial.Nat. Geosci.7201–204. 10.1038/ngeo2070
113
TeichertB.JohnsonJ. E.SolomonE. A.GiosanL.RoseK.KocherlaM.et al (2014). Composition and origin of authigenic carbonates in the Krishna–Godavari and Mahanadi Basins, eastern continental margin of India.Mar. Petrol. Geol.58438–460. 10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2014.08.023
114
ThomasH.SchiettecatteL.SuykensK.KoneY. M.ShadwickE. F.ProweA.et al (2008). Enhanced ocean carbon storage from anaerobic alkalinity generation in coastal sediments.Biogeosciences6267–274. 10.5194/bg-6-267-2009
115
ThullnerM.DaleA. W.RegnierP. (2009). Global-scale quantification of mineralization pathways in marine sediments: a reaction-transport modeling approach.Geochem. Geophys. Geosyst.10:Q10012.
116
TorresM. E.HongW.-L.SolomonE. A.MillikenK.KimJ.-H.SampleJ. C.et al (2020). Silicate weathering in anoxic marine sediment as a requirement for authigenic carbonate burial.Earth-Sci. Rev.200:102960. 10.1016/j.earscirev.2019.102960
117
TreudeT.OrphanV.KnittelK.GiesekeA.HouseC. H.BoetiusA. (2007). Consumption of methane and CO2 by methanotrophic microbial mats from gas seeps of the anoxic Black Sea.Appl. Environ. Microbiol.732271–2283. 10.1128/aem.02685-06
118
Ussler IIIW.PaullC. K. (2008). Rates of anaerobic oxidation of methane and authigenic carbonate mineralization in methane-rich deep-sea sediments inferred from models and geochemical profiles.Earth Planet. Sci. Lett.266271–287. 10.1016/j.epsl.2007.10.056
119
WallmannK.AloisiG. (2012). “The Global carbon cycle: geological processes,” in Fundamentals of Geobiology, edsKnollA. H.CanfieldD. E.KonhauserK. O. (Hoboken, NJ: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.), 20–35. 10.1002/9781118280874.ch3
120
WallmannK.AloisiG.HaeckelM.ObzhirovA.PavlovaG.TishchenkoP. (2006). Kinetics of organic matter degradation, microbial methane generation, and gas hydrate formation in anoxic marine sediments.Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta703905–3927. 10.1016/j.gca.2006.06.003
121
WallmannK.AloisiG.HaeckelM.TishchenkoP.PavlovaG.GreinertJ.et al (2008). Silicate weathering in anoxic marine sediments.Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta722895–2918. 10.1016/j.gca.2008.03.026
122
WallmannK.PineroE.BurwiczE.HaeckelM.HensenC.DaleA.et al (2012). The global inventory of methane hydrate in marine sediments: a theoretical approach.Energies52449–2498. 10.3390/en5072449
123
WasmundK.MußmannM.LoyA. (2017). The life sulfuric: microbial ecology of sulfur cycling in marine sediments.Environ. Microbiol. Rep.9323–344. 10.1111/1758-2229.12538
124
WehrmannL.OckertC.MixA.GussoneN.TeichertB.MeisterP. (2016). Repeated occurrences of methanogenic zones, diagenetic dolomite formation and linked silicate alteration in southern Bering Sea sediments (Bowers Ridge, IODP Exp. 323 Site U1341).Deep Sea Res. Part II Top. Stud. Oceanogr.125117–132. 10.1016/j.dsr2.2013.09.008
125
WehrmannL. M.Risgaard-PetersenN.SchrumH. N.WalshE. A.HuhY.IkeharaM.et al (2011). Coupled organic and inorganic carbon cycling in the deep subseafloor sediment of the northeastern Bering Sea Slope (IODP Exp. 323).Chem. Geol.284251–261. 10.1016/j.chemgeo.2011.03.002
126
WuZ.ZhouH.RenD.GaoH.LiJ. (2016). Quantifying the sources of dissolved inorganic carbon within the sulfate-methane transition zone in nearshore sediments of Qi’ao Island, Pearl River Estuary, Southern China.Sci. China Earth Sci.591959–1970. 10.1007/s11430-016-0057-0
127
WurgaftE.FindlayA. J.VigderovichH.HerutB.SivanO. (2019). Sulfate reduction rates in the sediments of the Mediterranean continental shelf inferred from combined dissolved inorganic carbon and total alkalinity profiles.Mar. Chem.21164–74. 10.1016/j.marchem.2019.03.004
128
YoshinagaM. Y.HollerT.GoldhammerT.WegenerG.PohlmanJ. W.BrunnerB.et al (2014). Carbon isotope equilibration during sulphate-limited anaerobic oxidation of methane.Nat. Geosci.7:190. 10.1038/ngeo2069
129
ZhangY.LuoM.HuY.WangH.ChenD.(2019). An areal assessment of subseafloor carbon cycling in cold seeps and hydrate-bearing areas in the northern south china sea.Geofluids20191–14. 10.1155/2019/2573937
130
ZopfiJ.FerdelmanT. G.FossingH.AmendJ. P.EdwardsK. J.LyonsT. W. (2004). “Distribution and fate of sulfur intermediates—sulfite, tetrathionate, thiosulfate, and elemental sulfur—in marine sediments,” in Sulfur Biogeochemistry – Past and Present, edsAmendJ. P.EdwardsK. J.LyonsT. W. (Boulder, CO: Geological Society of America).
Summary
Keywords
marine carbon cycle, marine methane fluxes, sulfate methane transition zone, anaerobic methane oxidation, methane derived authigenic carbonates, dissolved inorganic carbon, sediment carbon budget, ocean acidification
Citation
Akam SA, Coffin RB, Abdulla HAN and Lyons TW (2020) Dissolved Inorganic Carbon Pump in Methane-Charged Shallow Marine Sediments: State of the Art and New Model Perspectives. Front. Mar. Sci. 7:206. doi: 10.3389/fmars.2020.00206
Received
08 September 2019
Accepted
16 March 2020
Published
15 April 2020
Volume
7 - 2020
Edited by
Laura Anne Bristow, University of Southern Denmark, Denmark
Reviewed by
Bo Thamdrup, University of Southern Denmark, Denmark; Patrick Meister, University of Vienna, Austria
Updates
Copyright
© 2020 Akam, Coffin, Abdulla and Lyons.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Sajjad A. Akam, sajjada@tamucc.edu
This article was submitted to Marine Biogeochemistry, a section of the journal Frontiers in Marine Science
Disclaimer
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.