Geology ReportsSearch

USGS · 70014728

Gray whale and walrus feeding excavation on the Bering Shelf, Alaska

Abstract

Sidescan sonar has been used to delineate benthic feeding structures of the California gray whale ( Eschrichtius robustus ) and Pacific walrus ( Odobenus rosmarus divergens ) on the northeastern Bering Shelf. The gray whales (average mouth length, 2.0 m), when suction feeding on infaunal amphipods, create shallow pits in the sea floor, typically 2.5 m x 1.5 m x 10 cm deep, which are distinct and mappable on sidescan sonographs. Similarly, walrus, when foraging for shallow clams, create long, linear feeding furrows that average 47 x 0.4 x 0.1 m (length-width-depth). The distribution of the whale pits over 22,000 km 2 of the Bering Shelf closely matches 1) sightings of feeding whales identified by mud plumes; 2) the distribution of ampeliscid amphipods, the gray whale's main prey; and 3) the distribution of a transgressive inner-shelf fine sand that serves as a substrate for the amphipods. The walrus' furrows are recognized over 6,600 km 2 of variable muddier or coarser-grained substrate with clam-rich benthic communities that surround the fine sand substrate of whale feeding areas. The whale feeding pits are commonly enlarged and oriented by seasonal storm-related scour. Nonenlarged pits (less than 5.3 m 2 in area) form a discrete statistical population that we define as fresh . We estimate that a minimum of 5.6 percent (1,200 km 2 ) of the feeding area of the northeastern Bering Shelf (22,000 km 2 ) was covered by fresh pits made by whales during the 1980 feeding season. Assuming that the average pit depth is 10 cm, a minimum of 120 x 10 6 m 3 (172 x 10 6 metric tons) of sediment, equivalent to about three times the yearly sediment load of the Yukon River, is excavated and injected into the water column by as many as 16,000 gray whales feeding in northeastern Bering Sea each season. As a result of 1) sediment resuspension by whales, 2) average current speeds of 10.7 cm/s northward during the feeding season, and 3) enhanced post-feeding current scour because of bottom roughening, the following occur: the majority of the clay fraction (4.3 x 10 6 metric tons) of resuspended sediment is advected to the Chukchi Sea each year; sand gradually is transported northward and fills old feeding pits; modern mud does not accumulate in this region; and the whale-disturbed sand lacks physical sedimentary structures and matrix mud. Walrus feeding features are smaller, formed in higher-energy environments, and modified more rapidly than whale feeding pits. The amount of sediment reworking by walrus feeding may nearly equal that of whale feeding, but this cannot be quantified accurately.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

C.H. Nelson, K.R. Johnson, J. H. Barber. 1987. Gray whale and walrus feeding excavation on the Bering Shelf, Alaska. https://doi.org/10.1306/212f8b4d-2b24-11d7-8648000102c1865d

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Role of microbial processes in linking sandstone diagenesis with organic-rich clays

Numerous chemical reactions within clay sequences have been proposed to produce dissolved material for diagenesis of deeply-buried sands. However, reactions responsible for solubilizing inorganic and organic constituents in clays at intermediate depths, and their importance to sandstone diagenesis, have not been evaluated. Results from this study show that the processes of microbial organic-acid production (via fermentation) in clays and microbial organic-acid consumption (via sulfate reduction) in sands effectively link organic-rich clays to sandstone diagenesis in the Black Creek Formation of South Carolina. Diagenetic processes have resulted in the formation of 10 volume percent calcite cement, 0.1 volume percent authigenic pyrite, and 1.5 volume percent secondary porosity in Black Creek sands. However, the distribution of these diagenetic processes is not uniform, resulting in net destruction of porosity in some parts of the sand and net porosity enhancement in other parts. Mass balance-derived rates of microbial organic-acid production (10 (super -5) mmole carbon 1 (super -1) yr (super -1) ) and microbial CO 2 production (4 x 10 (super -5) mmole l (super -1) yr (super -1) ) show that microbial processes can account for all organic carbon in the calcite cements (at least 11% of carbonate carbon based on isotope-balance calculations), all observed authigenic pyrite, and all observed secondary porosity. These findings show that microbial processes can serve to link organic-rich clays with sandstone diagenesis at intermediate depths.

Journal of Sedimentary Petrology

Lithofacies analysis of colluvial sediments - an aid in interpreting the recent history of Quaternary normal faults in the Basin and Range Province, western United States

Inferring the frequency and magnitude of past earthquakes from the stratigraphy in exposures of normal-faulted sediments is difficult because colluvial lithofacies assemblages adjacent to faults are complex. Similarities in facies assemblages adjacent to young fault scarps in arid to semiarid areas, such as the Basin and Range province, allow lithofacies to be grouped into two genetic architectural elements: debris and wash elements. Upper and lower facies associations can commonly be recognized within each element. A lithofacies code scheme, similar to those used in the analysis of fluvial and glacial lithofacies sequences, provides a concise way of illustrating lithofacies relations in fault exposures. The source lithology of colluvial lithofacies is shown in the code, and soil-horizon symbols can be included. The architecture of lithofacies assemblages near fault scarps in semiarid areas is explained by a model of colluvial sedimentation in response to a single surface faulting event. Analysis of lithofacies assemblages exposed in three trenches across normal faults in the eastern Basin and Range shows how the model can be used to interpret fault histories. Similar facies analysis methods may be useful in interpreting colluvial sequences formed by non-tectonic processes.

Journal of Sedimentary Petrology

Modern sedimentary environments in Boston Harbor, Massachusetts

Analyses of sidescan-sonar records supplemented by available bathymetric, sedimentary, subbottom, and bottom-current data reveal the distributions of the following three categories of sedimentary environments within the glaciated, topographically complex Boston Harbor estuary in Massachusetts. 1) Environments of erosion appear on the sonographs either as patterns with isolated strong reflections or as uniform patterns of strong reflectivity. These patterns define outcrops of bedrock or till and coarse lag deposits that are being scoured and winnowed by tidal- and wave-induced currents. Erosional areas are located primarily along mainland and insular shores, within large channels that have strong tidal currents, atop submerged ridges and knolls, and across much of the harbor entrance. 2) Environments of deposition are depicted on the sidescan-sonar records as smooth, featureless surfaces that have low to moderate reflectivity. Depositional environments are found predominantly over shallow subtidal flats and in broad bathymetric lows where tidal currents are weak. Sediments within depositional areas are organic-rich sandy and clayey silts that are accumulating at rates ranging from 0.01 to 0.11 g/cm 2 /yr or 4000 to 46,100 metric tons/yr. The cumulative mass of modern mud in harbor depocenters is 24.3 million metric tons. 3) Environments of sediment reworking constitute areas affected by a combination of erosional and depositional processes. They are characterized on the sonographs by mosaics of light and dark patches produced by relatively subtle and gradational changes in reflectivity. Reworked sediments have diverse grain sizes that overlap and are transitional between those of the other two sedimentary environments, and they are indicative of highly variable bottom currents.

Massachusetts