Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Nearly Naked: Large Swarth Of Pacific Lacks Seafloor Sediment
Science News ^ | 10-14-2006 | Sid Perkins

Posted on 10/15/2006 6:09:44 PM PDT by blam

Nearly Naked: Large swath of Pacific lacks seafloor sediment

Sid Perkins

Oceanographers have discovered a broad, almost-bare patch of seafloor in the remote South Pacific. An unusual combination of circumstances has left the region without the mineral and organic sediments hundreds of meters deep that are typical elsewhere in the world's oceans, the scientists say.

BARE FACTS. A 2-million-square-kilometer region (orange) is almost devoid of seafloor sediment. E. Roell

The sediment-poor region is about the size of the Mediterranean Sea and centered approximately 4,000 kilometers east of New Zealand. Researchers discovered the area, which they dubbed the South Pacific Bare Zone, during a cruise early last year, says David K. Rea, a marine geologist at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor.

The scientists were surprised when their seismic equipment, which detects sediment only when it's at least 5 meters thick, indicated that there was no sediment in that region. The team then sent sampling equipment more than 4 km to the seafloor and discovered as little as 50 centimeters of sediment in some places.

A unique combination of factors seems to have dictated the area's dearth of sediment that's accumulated since the basalt crust below formed between 85 million and 34 million years ago, Rea and his colleagues report in the October Geology.

First, the area has nutrient-poor surface waters and so is home to few organisms. Therefore, there aren't large quantities of plankton to die, fall to the bottom, and accumulate, as they do in seas with high biological content, says Rea.

Second, the deepest waters in this area contain less carbonate and silica than those in other locations do, so skeletons of organisms that reach the seafloor dissolve.

Third, the bare zone is far from any major landmass, so little windblown dust ends up in the surface waters and eventually sinks. Finally, the region has little if any hydrothermal activity to spew water containing dissolved minerals that would precipitate.

Rea says that he and his colleagues had expected to find at least a dozen meters of sediment in the region. "It's fun to be wrong sometimes," he notes.

Neil C. Mitchell, a marine geologist at Cardiff University in Wales, suggests another factor that may contribute to the sediment skimpiness of the area. It's out of the path of major ocean currents, so Antarctic icebergs carrying material scraped from that continent don't pass over the bare zone and drop sediment, says Mitchell.

The sparse sediments may permit researchers to find seafloor substances that are typically hidden, says David Scholl, a marine geologist at Stanford University. For instance, meteor dust, which falls evenly over Earth's surface, may be more easily detectable in the bare zone than elsewhere, says Scholl.

If you have a comment on this article that you would like considered for publication in Science News, send it to editors@sciencenews.org. Please include your name and location.


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: naked; pacific; seafloor; sediment
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-43 next last
The orange box sure illustrates how big the Mediterranean isn't.
1 posted on 10/15/2006 6:09:45 PM PDT by blam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: blam
Truly interesting.

However.....someone's bound to say it, so.......

Bush's fault!

2 posted on 10/15/2006 6:15:31 PM PDT by edpc (Violence is ALWAYS a solution. Maybe not the right one....but a solution nonetheless)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blam

Is it X-rated, or only R?


3 posted on 10/15/2006 6:18:13 PM PDT by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blam
Someone will find a way to construe this as evidence that the Earth is only a few thousand years old.
4 posted on 10/15/2006 6:18:40 PM PDT by Physicist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blam
Since the world was in the grips of a Ice age 18,000 years ago with 2 mile thick glaciers where New York City is today, I can see a huge iceberg from antarctica scraping the sea floor clean.

Either that or it I second Bush's fault.

5 posted on 10/15/2006 6:21:27 PM PDT by UNGN (I've been here since '98 but had nothing to say until now)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blam

Bush's fault!


6 posted on 10/15/2006 6:22:14 PM PDT by flipper999 (vote early, vote often, vote republican even if it hurts.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cicero

>>>Is it X-rated, or only R?

I'm sure someone will call it 'art' and get a huge grant for it.


7 posted on 10/15/2006 6:23:24 PM PDT by teacherwoes ("It's not those who vote who are important; it's those who count the votes"- Josef Stalin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: blam
Well from my experiences sailing the seas on a submarine, the size of an area in the ocean is just a number. There really isn't any way to get an understanding of scale. Something that you might consider a tiny area in the Pacific Ocean could easily be many times the size of Texas.

All that you can really do is say how long it will take you to cross a stretch of ocean. No other comparisons were ever very useful for me. While it may make sense to say that the Mediterranean is small compared to the Pacific Ocean, it has an area of 965,000 square miles (about 4 times the size of Texas or 7 times the size of Montana). It is only small by comparison to something ridiculously large.
8 posted on 10/15/2006 6:23:48 PM PDT by burzum (Despair not! I shall inspire you by charging blindly on!--Minsc, BG2)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Physicist
"Someone will find a way to construe this as evidence that the Earth is only a few thousand years old."

No construing necessary: they will cite any condition and declare that it proves something. Pure non sequitur.

9 posted on 10/15/2006 6:27:40 PM PDT by SteveMcKing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: blam

Surely there must be some way to blame this on global warming.


10 posted on 10/15/2006 6:28:57 PM PDT by CFC__VRWC (AIDS, abortion, euthanasia - Don't liberals just kill ya?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: flipper999

Now if the D's take control of congress we will have to have another govt program to put sediment there.


11 posted on 10/15/2006 6:29:22 PM PDT by Busywhiskers (Democrats delinda est.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: blam
The orange box sure illustrates how big the Mediterranean isn't.

I had to check it out for myself, you're right.

12 posted on 10/15/2006 6:30:34 PM PDT by ThreePuttinDude ()...Hey Libs........NO FITZMAS FOR YOU.....()
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blam

Naked... Where are the pictures???


13 posted on 10/15/2006 6:30:38 PM PDT by Syntyr (Food for the NSA Line Eater -> "terrorist" "bomb" "plot" "kill" "overthrow" "coup de tas")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: flipper999
Bush's fault!

I am blaming John Howard on this one.

How long has the ocean floor been bare and when did he know about it ?

14 posted on 10/15/2006 6:31:27 PM PDT by llevrok (FREE KARASTAN !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: blam

Offshore drilling will not be coming to this chunk of the planet anytime soon.


15 posted on 10/15/2006 6:32:29 PM PDT by Dog Gone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blam

I blame Foley, Abramoff, and of course, The Jews....that last one was for Moveon.org and FU, I mean, DU.


16 posted on 10/15/2006 6:33:02 PM PDT by RadioCirca1970 (F.U. D.U!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blam
Oh ya' well here....dang


17 posted on 10/15/2006 6:33:15 PM PDT by ThreePuttinDude ()...Hey Libs........NO FITZMAS FOR YOU.....()
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Xenalyte; Cicero; xsmommy; Gabz

X-rayed (er, rated) nekkid see ping.


18 posted on 10/15/2006 6:34:53 PM PDT by Robert A Cook PE (I can only donate monthly, but Hillary's ABBCNNBCBS continue to lie every day!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: blam
All I know is....

If there's lot's of sediment, they'll this shows evidence of evolution.

If there's some sediment, they'll say this shows evidence of evolution.

It there's no sediment, they'll say this shows evidence of evolution.

19 posted on 10/15/2006 6:34:54 PM PDT by cookcounty (Coach Hastert: Good news! Your insurance DOES cover spine implants.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blam
So scientists have finally discovered areas of ocean floor almost devoid of sediment and they are surprised? Tsk! Tsk!

From the dawn of creation, there has been similar areas on dry land. They are known as deserts. Who in their right mind would ever have doubted that similar areas are present on the ocean floor?

That there are deserts of the deep comes as no surprise to thinking people.
20 posted on 10/15/2006 6:40:31 PM PDT by F.J. Mitchell ( I predict a victory for Republicans that will make Dims remember 1994 as the good old' days.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-43 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson