Comparing Aggradation, Superelevation, and Avulsion Frequency of Submarine and Fluvial Channels

Constraining the avulsion dynamics of rivers and submarine channels is essential for predicting the distribution of sediment, organic matter, and pollutants in alluvial, deltaic, and submarine settings. We create a geometric channel-belt framework relating channel, levee, and floodplain stratigraphy...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Zane R. Jobe, Nick C. Howes, Kyle M. Straub, Dingxin Cai, Hang Deng, Fabien J. Laugier, Luke A. Pettinga, Lauren E. Shumaker
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Frontiers Media S.A. 2020-05-01
Series:Frontiers in Earth Science
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/feart.2020.00053/full
id doaj-d10aeaed437b4476aa4b292cdc9043bb
record_format Article
spelling doaj-d10aeaed437b4476aa4b292cdc9043bb2020-11-25T02:04:39ZengFrontiers Media S.A.Frontiers in Earth Science2296-64632020-05-01810.3389/feart.2020.00053494827Comparing Aggradation, Superelevation, and Avulsion Frequency of Submarine and Fluvial ChannelsZane R. Jobe0Nick C. Howes1Kyle M. Straub2Dingxin Cai3Hang Deng4Fabien J. Laugier5Luke A. Pettinga6Lauren E. Shumaker7Colorado School of Mines, Golden, CO, United StatesMathworks, Natick, MA, United StatesTulane University, New Orleans, LA, United StatesColorado School of Mines, Golden, CO, United StatesColorado School of Mines, Golden, CO, United StatesChevron Energy Technology Company, Houston, TX, United StatesColorado School of Mines, Golden, CO, United StatesColorado School of Mines, Golden, CO, United StatesConstraining the avulsion dynamics of rivers and submarine channels is essential for predicting the distribution of sediment, organic matter, and pollutants in alluvial, deltaic, and submarine settings. We create a geometric channel-belt framework relating channel, levee, and floodplain stratigraphy that allows comparative analysis of avulsion dynamics for rivers and submarine channels. We utilize 52 channel-overbank cross-sections within this framework to provide avulsion criteria for submarine channels, and how they differ from rivers. Superelevation and a new channel-floodplain coupling metric are two key parameters that control channel-belt thickness in both rivers and submarine channels. While rivers only superelevate 1 channel depth above the floodplain prior to avulsion, submarine channels are more stable during aggradation, with superelevation values commonly > 3 channel depths. Additionally, channel-floodplain coupling in rivers is often weak, with floodplain aggradation negligible compared to channel aggradation, making rivers avulsion-prone. However, floodplain aggradation is more significant for submarine channels, resulting in stronger channel-floodplain coupling and thus a decreased potential for avulsion. The combination of enhanced superelevation and strong channel-floodplain coupling results in submarine channel-belts that can be as thick as ∼10 channel depths, while fluvial channel belts are limited to 2 channel depths. Submarine channels are more stable because turbidity currents have ∼50x lower density contrast between flow and ambient fluid as compared to rivers. This density contrast creates far less potential energy for avulsion, despite the much greater relief of submarine levees compared to fluvial levees. The modern Amazon submarine channel showcases this stability, with a channel belt that is ∼5 channel-depths thick for more than 400 streamwise km, which is more than twice the superelevation that a river is capable of. We interpret that enhanced floodplain aggradation and levee aggradation (and thus superelevation) in submarine channel belts are promoted by unique submarine flow characteristics, including turbidity current overspill, flow-stripping, and hemipelagic processes. We emphasize that rivers and submarine channels display very different avulsion dynamics and frequencies, profoundly affecting the stratigraphic architecture of channel-belt and downstream distributary deposits.https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/feart.2020.00053/fullturbiditescaling relationshipssubmarine fanmorphodynamicsriver
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Zane R. Jobe
Nick C. Howes
Kyle M. Straub
Dingxin Cai
Hang Deng
Fabien J. Laugier
Luke A. Pettinga
Lauren E. Shumaker
spellingShingle Zane R. Jobe
Nick C. Howes
Kyle M. Straub
Dingxin Cai
Hang Deng
Fabien J. Laugier
Luke A. Pettinga
Lauren E. Shumaker
Comparing Aggradation, Superelevation, and Avulsion Frequency of Submarine and Fluvial Channels
Frontiers in Earth Science
turbidite
scaling relationships
submarine fan
morphodynamics
river
author_facet Zane R. Jobe
Nick C. Howes
Kyle M. Straub
Dingxin Cai
Hang Deng
Fabien J. Laugier
Luke A. Pettinga
Lauren E. Shumaker
author_sort Zane R. Jobe
title Comparing Aggradation, Superelevation, and Avulsion Frequency of Submarine and Fluvial Channels
title_short Comparing Aggradation, Superelevation, and Avulsion Frequency of Submarine and Fluvial Channels
title_full Comparing Aggradation, Superelevation, and Avulsion Frequency of Submarine and Fluvial Channels
title_fullStr Comparing Aggradation, Superelevation, and Avulsion Frequency of Submarine and Fluvial Channels
title_full_unstemmed Comparing Aggradation, Superelevation, and Avulsion Frequency of Submarine and Fluvial Channels
title_sort comparing aggradation, superelevation, and avulsion frequency of submarine and fluvial channels
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
series Frontiers in Earth Science
issn 2296-6463
publishDate 2020-05-01
description Constraining the avulsion dynamics of rivers and submarine channels is essential for predicting the distribution of sediment, organic matter, and pollutants in alluvial, deltaic, and submarine settings. We create a geometric channel-belt framework relating channel, levee, and floodplain stratigraphy that allows comparative analysis of avulsion dynamics for rivers and submarine channels. We utilize 52 channel-overbank cross-sections within this framework to provide avulsion criteria for submarine channels, and how they differ from rivers. Superelevation and a new channel-floodplain coupling metric are two key parameters that control channel-belt thickness in both rivers and submarine channels. While rivers only superelevate 1 channel depth above the floodplain prior to avulsion, submarine channels are more stable during aggradation, with superelevation values commonly > 3 channel depths. Additionally, channel-floodplain coupling in rivers is often weak, with floodplain aggradation negligible compared to channel aggradation, making rivers avulsion-prone. However, floodplain aggradation is more significant for submarine channels, resulting in stronger channel-floodplain coupling and thus a decreased potential for avulsion. The combination of enhanced superelevation and strong channel-floodplain coupling results in submarine channel-belts that can be as thick as ∼10 channel depths, while fluvial channel belts are limited to 2 channel depths. Submarine channels are more stable because turbidity currents have ∼50x lower density contrast between flow and ambient fluid as compared to rivers. This density contrast creates far less potential energy for avulsion, despite the much greater relief of submarine levees compared to fluvial levees. The modern Amazon submarine channel showcases this stability, with a channel belt that is ∼5 channel-depths thick for more than 400 streamwise km, which is more than twice the superelevation that a river is capable of. We interpret that enhanced floodplain aggradation and levee aggradation (and thus superelevation) in submarine channel belts are promoted by unique submarine flow characteristics, including turbidity current overspill, flow-stripping, and hemipelagic processes. We emphasize that rivers and submarine channels display very different avulsion dynamics and frequencies, profoundly affecting the stratigraphic architecture of channel-belt and downstream distributary deposits.
topic turbidite
scaling relationships
submarine fan
morphodynamics
river
url https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/feart.2020.00053/full
work_keys_str_mv AT zanerjobe comparingaggradationsuperelevationandavulsionfrequencyofsubmarineandfluvialchannels
AT nickchowes comparingaggradationsuperelevationandavulsionfrequencyofsubmarineandfluvialchannels
AT kylemstraub comparingaggradationsuperelevationandavulsionfrequencyofsubmarineandfluvialchannels
AT dingxincai comparingaggradationsuperelevationandavulsionfrequencyofsubmarineandfluvialchannels
AT hangdeng comparingaggradationsuperelevationandavulsionfrequencyofsubmarineandfluvialchannels
AT fabienjlaugier comparingaggradationsuperelevationandavulsionfrequencyofsubmarineandfluvialchannels
AT lukeapettinga comparingaggradationsuperelevationandavulsionfrequencyofsubmarineandfluvialchannels
AT laureneshumaker comparingaggradationsuperelevationandavulsionfrequencyofsubmarineandfluvialchannels
_version_ 1724941950722768896