Search for: All records

Abstract The Smithian–Spathian boundary interval is characterised by a positive carbon isotopic excursion in both δ¹³C_carband δ¹³C_org, concurrent with a major marine ecosystem reorganisation and the resurgence of microbialite facies. While these δ¹³C records have been traditionally interpreted as capturing global carbon cycle behaviour, recent studies have suggested that at least some excursions in early Triassic δ¹³C values may incorporate influences from authigenic or early diagenetic processes. To examine the mechanistic drivers of Smithian–Spathian boundary geochemistry, the carbonate geochemistry of a core from Georgetown, Idaho (USA), was analysed using a coupled δ^44/40Ca, δ²⁶Mg and trace‐metal framework. While the δ¹³C record in the Georgetown core is broadly similar to other Smithian–Spathian boundary sections, portions of the record coincide with substantial shifts in δ^44/40Ca, δ²⁶Mg and trace‐metal compositions that cannot feasibly be interpreted as primary. Furthermore, these geochemical variations correspond with lithology: The δ¹³C record is modulated by variations in the extent of dolomitisation, and the diagenetic styles recognised here coincide with individual lithostratigraphic units. A primary shift in local sea water δ¹³C values is inferred from the most geochemically unaltered strata, fromca3‰ in the middle Smithian toca5‰ in the early Spathian, although the timing and pathway through which this occurs cannot be readily identified nor extrapolated globally. Therefore, the Georgetown core may not directly record exogenic carbon cycle evolution, showing that there is a need for the careful reconsideration of the Smithian–Spathian boundary—and more broadly, Early Triassic—geochemical records to examine potential local and diagenetic influences on sedimentary geochemistry. 

Abstract Recent changes in US oceanographic assets are impacting scientists' ability to access seafloor and sub‐seafloor materials and thus constraining progress on science critical for societal needs. Here we identify national infrastructure needs to address critical science questions. This commentary reports on community‐driven discussions that took place during the 3‐dayFUTURE of US Seafloor Sampling Capabilities 2024 Workshop, which used an “all‐hands‐on‐deck” approach to assess seafloor and sub‐seafloor sampling requirements of a broad range of scientific objectives, focusing on capabilities that could be supported through the US Academic Research Fleet (US‐ARF) now or in the near future. Cross‐cutting issues identified included weight and size limitations in the over‐boarding capabilities of the US‐ARF, a need to access material at depths greater than ∼20 m below the seafloor, sampling capabilities at the full range of ocean depths, technologies required for precise navigation‐guided sampling and drilling, resources to capitalize on the research potential of returned materials, and workforce development.