Search for: All records

Abstract We present the first investigation of subsidence due to sediment compaction and consolidation in two laboratory‐scale river delta experiments. Spatial and temporal trends in subsidence rates in the experimental setting may elucidate behavior which cannot be directly observed at sufficiently long timescales, except for in reduced scale models such as the ones studied. We compare subsidence between a control experiment using steady boundary conditions, and an otherwise identical experiment which has been treated with a proxy for highly compressible marsh deposits. Both experiments have non‐negligible compactional subsidence rates across the delta‐top, comparable in magnitude to our boundary condition relative sea level rise rate of 250 μm/hr. Subsidence in the control experiment (on average 54 μm/hr) is concentrated in the lowest elevation (<10 mm above sea level) areas near the coast and is likely related to creep induced by a rising water table near the shoreface. The treatment experiment exhibits larger (on average 126 μm/hr) and more spatially variable subsidence rates controlled mostly by compaction of recent marsh deposits within one channel depth (∼10 mm) of the sediment surface. These rates compare favorably with field and modeling based subsidence measurements both in relative magnitude and location. We find that subsidence “hot spots” may be relatively ephemeral on longer timescales, but average subsidence across the entire delta can be variable even at our shortest measurement window. This suggests that subsidence rates over a short time frame may exceed thresholds for marsh platform drowning, even if the long term trend does not. 

Abstract Rising sea levels, subsidence, and decreased fluvial sediment load threaten river deltas and their wetlands. However, the feedbacks between fluvial and non‐fluvial (marsh) deposition remain weakly constrained. We investigate how non‐riverine, elevation‐controlled deposition typified by marshes impacts sediment partitioning between a delta's topset, coastal zone, and foreset by comparing a delta experiment with proxy marsh accumulation to a control. Marsh accumulation alters fluvial sediment distribution by decreasing the slope in the marsh window by ∼50%, creating a 78% larger marsh zone. Fluvial incursions into the marsh window trap 1.3 times more clastic volume. The volume exported to deep water remains unchanged. Marsh deposition shifts elevation distributions toward sea level, which produces a hypsometry akin to field‐scale deltas. The elevation‐lowering effect of marshes on an equilibrium delta shown here constitutes an unexplored feedback and an important aspect of coastal sustainability. 

Abstract Coastal and deltaic sediment balances are crucial for a region's sustainability. However, such balances remain difficult to quantify accurately, particularly for large regions. We calculate organic and mineral sediment mass and volume balances using field measurements from 273 Coastwide Reference Monitoring System sites across the Louisiana Coast between 2006 and 2015. The rapid relative sea level rise rate (average 13.4 mm/year) is offset by the small dry bulk densities observed (average 0.3 g/cm³) to produce a 16.2 ± 41.1% mass deficit and 24.1 ± 14.0% volume deficit, significantly smaller than recent predictions for 2000–2100 (73–79% mass deficit). Geostatisical estimates show that this deficit is primarily located in areas not directly nourished by major rivers, yet these regions still accumulate ~24 MT/year of mineral sediment. A fluvial sediment discharge of 113.8 MT/year suggests a coast‐wide trapping efficiency of 31.5 ± 15.8% of the riverine sediment, excluding subaqueous deposition. Organic accumulation accounts for 25% of all mass accumulation during our study period, and total organic mass accumulation per unit area is relatively constant in both directly and indirectly nourished regions. Sediment characteristics in the modern coastal wetlands differ from the Holocene deposit, suggesting secular changes within the system that will likely continue to influence coastal dynamics over the coming decades. Our results suggest that the gap between accommodation and accumulation (mass or volume) during this decade was not as large as the previously predicted century average. 

Abstract. We investigate the interaction of fluvial and non-fluvial sedimentation on the channel morphology and kinematics of an experimental river delta. We compare two deltas: one that evolved with a proxy for non-fluvial (“marsh”) sedimentation (treatment experiment) and one that evolved without the proxy (control). We show that the addition of the non-fluvial sediment proxy alters the delta's channel morphology and kinematics. Notably, the flow outside the channels is significantly reduced in the treatment experiment, and the channels are deeper (as a function of radial distance from the source) and longer. We also find that both the control and treatment channels narrow as they approach the shoreline, though the narrowing is more pronounced in the control compared to the treatment. Interestingly, the channel beds in the treatment experiment often exist below sea level in the terrestrial portion of the delta top, creating a ∼ 0.7 m reach of steady, non-uniform backwater flow. However, in the control experiment, the channel beds generally exist at or above relative sea level, creating channel movement resembling morphodynamic backwater kinematics and topographic flow expansions. Differences between channel and far-field aggradation produce a longer channel in-filling timescale for the treatment compared to the control, suggesting that the channel avulsions triggered by a peak in channel sedimentation occur less frequently in the treatment experiment. Despite this difference, the basin-wide timescale of lateral channel mobility remains similar. Ultimately, non-fluvial sedimentation on the delta top plays a key role in the channel morphology and kinematics of an experimental river delta, producing channels which are more analogous to channels in global river deltas and which cannot be produced solely by increasing cohesion in an experimental river delta.