BIOGEOCHEMICAL MODEL SUMMARY...RESULTS: Ni Chlor del F epr r R 2 X 0.66 0.44 X 0050.05 0 0030.003 X 0.07 0.005 X X 0.69 0.48 X X 0.69 0.48 X X 0.07 0.005 X X X 0.69 0.48 r = Pearson

BIOGEOCHEMICAL BIOGEOCHEMICAL BIOGEOCHEMICAL BIOGEOCHEMICAL MODEL SUMMARYMODEL SUMMARY

International Seabed AuthorityGeological Model Project

FINAL WORKSHOP Dec. 15, 2009

ITEMS FOR DISCUSSIONITEMS FOR DISCUSSIONITEMS FOR DISCUSSIONITEMS FOR DISCUSSION

•• HYPOTHESISHYPOTHESIS•• HYPOTHESISHYPOTHESIS

•• PROXY VARIABLESPROXY VARIABLES•• PROXY VARIABLESPROXY VARIABLES

•• REGRESSION MODELREGRESSION MODEL

•• RESULTSRESULTS

•• REGRESSION MODELREGRESSION MODEL

•• RESULTSRESULTS•• RESULTSRESULTS

•• PREDICTED METAL CONTENT PREDICTED METAL CONTENT

•• RESULTSRESULTS

•• PREDICTED METAL CONTENT PREDICTED METAL CONTENT DISTRIBUTIONSDISTRIBUTIONSDISTRIBUTIONSDISTRIBUTIONS



BIOGEOCHEMICAL MODEL:GENERAL HYPOTHESIS

BIOGEOCHEMICAL MODEL:GENERAL HYPOTHESISGENERAL HYPOTHESISGENERAL HYPOTHESIS

1. Sources of metals: Land, aeolian, and possibly East Pacific Rise2. Sediment particles consumed by biota; converted to larger fecal pellets that sink3. Fecal pellets metabolized by benthic fauna, releasing reduced metals3. Fecal pellets metabolized by benthic fauna, releasing reduced metals4. Reduced metals incorporated into nodules

Aeolian Sediments from Asia

Terrigenous Sediments

12

Mn from EPR?

EastPacificRi

134

Mn from EPR?

Rise34



PROPOSED SECOND ORDERRELATIONSHIP WITH

PROPOSED SECOND ORDERRELATIONSHIP WITH RELATIONSHIP WITH

PRIMARY PRODUCTIVITYRELATIONSHIP WITH

PRIMARY PRODUCTIVITY Maximum Mn, Ni, & CuMaximum Mn, Ni, & Cu

Accumulation RatePercentage

ng Cu%

LimitedbySupply

Limitedby

Dilution

crea

sin

Ni,

& C Supply

ofmetals

Dilutionfrom

Sediments

InM

n,

Increasing Biological Productivity



PROXY VARIABLESPROXY VARIABLESPROXY VARIABLESPROXY VARIABLES

SURFACE WATER SURFACE WATER SURFACE WATER SURFACE WATER •• SURFACE WATER SURFACE WATER CHLOROPHYLL (PRIMARY CHLOROPHYLL (PRIMARY

•• SURFACE WATER SURFACE WATER CHLOROPHYLL (PRIMARY CHLOROPHYLL (PRIMARY PRODUCTIVITY)PRODUCTIVITY)

•• DISTANCE FROM LAND & EPRDISTANCE FROM LAND & EPR

PRODUCTIVITY)PRODUCTIVITY)

•• DISTANCE FROM LAND & EPRDISTANCE FROM LAND & EPR•• DISTANCE FROM LAND & EPRDISTANCE FROM LAND & EPR

•• WATER DEPTH WATER DEPTH –– CCD (DEL)CCD (DEL)

•• DISTANCE FROM LAND & EPRDISTANCE FROM LAND & EPR

•• WATER DEPTH WATER DEPTH –– CCD (DEL)CCD (DEL)•• WATER DEPTH WATER DEPTH CCD (DEL)CCD (DEL)•• WATER DEPTH WATER DEPTH CCD (DEL)CCD (DEL)



PROXY 1: PROXY 1: CHLOROPHYLL (CHLOROPHYLL (chlorchlor))



PROXY 2: DISTANCE FROM PROXY 2: DISTANCE FROM LAND & EPR (LAND & EPR (FF ))LAND & EPR (LAND & EPR (FFeprepr))



PROXY 3: WATER PROXY 3: WATER DEPTH DEPTH –– CCD (DEL)CCD (DEL)

i n Fracture Zone

10°

15° Clarion Fractu

5° N

10

110°

W

130°

120°

140°

150°

lipperton Fracture Zone

Clipperto

CCD Data Poin t

Del (Water Depth - CCD, meters)-400 - -200

-200 - 0

0 - 200

200 - 400

400 - 600

600 - 800



REGRESSION REGRESSION MODELMODEL

METAL % f(chlorMETAL % f(chlor2 2 FF del) del) METAL % f(chlorMETAL % f(chlor2 2 FF del) del) METAL % = f(chlorMETAL % = f(chlor2 2 , , FFeprepr, , del) del) METAL % = f(chlorMETAL % = f(chlor2 2 , , FFeprepr, , del) del)



RESULTS: RESULTS: MnMnRESULTS: RESULTS: MnMn40

R = 0 492

Chlor del Fepr r R2

X 0.70 0.49 X 0.14 0.02

30

Wt.

%)

R = 0.49

X 0.34 0.13X X 0.75 0.56X X 0.70 0.49 X X 0.41 0.17

X X X 0 75 0 5620

Mn

(Dry

WX X X 0.75 0.56

r = Pearson Correlation Coefficient R2 = Coefficient of Determination = r2

0 00 0 05 0 10 0 1510

Regression Equation:Mn = -3,000Chlor + 630Chlor - 32

0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15

Surface Chlorophyll (mg/m)3



RESULTS: NiRESULTS: NiRESULTS: NiRESULTS: Ni

Chlor del Fepr r R2

X 0.66 0.44 X 0 05 0 003 X 0.05 0.003

X 0.07 0.005X X 0.69 0.48 X X 0.69 0.48 X X 0.07 0.005

X X X 0.69 0.48 r = Pearson Correlation Coefficient R2 = Coefficient of Determination = r2



RESULTS: CuRESULTS: CuRESULTS: CuRESULTS: Cu2.0

R = 0.392

Chlor del Fepr r R2

X 0.62 0.39 X 0.46 0.21

X 0 18 0 034

1.5

ry W

t. %

)

X 0.18 0.034X X 0.70 0.49 X X 0.65 0.42 X X 0.32 0.10

X X X 0.71 0.51 0 5

1.0

Cu

(Dr = Pearson Correlation Coefficient R2 = Coefficient of Determination = r2

0.00 0.05 0.10 0.150.0

0.5

Regression Equation:Cu = -140Chlor + 30Chlor - 0.52

Surface Chlorophyll (mg/m)3



COMPARISON OF COMPARISON OF REGRESSIONSREGRESSIONS

Proxy Variables in Regression

R2

Mn Ni CuMn Ni Cu

Chlor 0.49 0.44 0.39

Chlor del 0 56 0 48 0 49Chlor, del 0.56 0.48 0.49

Chlor, Fepr 0.49 0.48 0.42

Chlor del F 0 56 0 48 0 51Chlor, del, Fepr 0.56 0.48 0.51



SUMMARY OF SUMMARY OF RESULTSRESULTS

•• CHLOROPHYLL DOMINATES CHLOROPHYLL DOMINATES REGRESSIONREGRESSION

•• CHLOROPHYLL DOMINATES CHLOROPHYLL DOMINATES REGRESSIONREGRESSION

•• POTENTIALLY POTENTIALLY •• POTENTIALLY POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT INFLUENCE SIGNIFICANT INFLUENCE FROM delFROM delSIGNIFICANT INFLUENCE SIGNIFICANT INFLUENCE FROM delFROM del



PREDICTED MN DISTRIBUTIONPREDICTED MN DISTRIBUTION



PREDICTED NI DISTRIBUTIONPREDICTED NI DISTRIBUTION



PREDICTED CU DISTRIBUTIONPREDICTED CU DISTRIBUTION



SUMMARYSUMMARYSUMMARYSUMMARY

•• HYPOTHESIS SUPPORTED BY HYPOTHESIS SUPPORTED BY •• HYPOTHESIS SUPPORTED BY HYPOTHESIS SUPPORTED BY DATADATA

•• CHLOROPHYLL DOMINANT CHLOROPHYLL DOMINANT

DATADATA

•• CHLOROPHYLL DOMINANT CHLOROPHYLL DOMINANT •• CHLOROPHYLL DOMINANT CHLOROPHYLL DOMINANT

•• del POSSIBLY SIGNIFICANT del POSSIBLY SIGNIFICANT

•• CHLOROPHYLL DOMINANT CHLOROPHYLL DOMINANT

•• del POSSIBLY SIGNIFICANT del POSSIBLY SIGNIFICANT


Final WorkshopKingston, Jamaica, December 2009

Documents

BIOGEOCHEMICAL MODEL SUMMARY...RESULTS: Ni Chlor del F epr r R 2 X 0.66 0.44 X 0050.05 0 0030.003 X 0.07 0.005 X X 0.69 0.48 X X 0.69 0.48 X X 0.07 0.005 X X X 0.69 0.48 r = Pearson