Published in

Elsevier, Earth and Planetary Science Letters, (331-332), p. 21-30

DOI: 10.1016/j.epsl.2012.02.021

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Quantifying Holocene lithospheric subsidence rates underneath the Mississippi Delta

Journal article published in 2012 by Shi-Yong Yu, Torbjörn E. Törnqvist ORCID, Ping Hu
This paper is available in a repository.
This paper is available in a repository.

Full text: Download

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Red circle
Postprint: archiving forbidden
Red circle
Published version: archiving forbidden
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

Editor: J. Lynch-Stieglitz Keywords: Mississippi Delta relative sea level glacial isostatic adjustment flexural subsidence Holocene The pattern of Holocene relative sea-level (RSL) change on the US Gulf Coast has been a long-standing subject of debate, featuring opposing scenarios of continuous submergence versus one or more Holocene RSL highstands. The significance of this debate is that the relative role of eustasy, glacial isostatic adjustment (GIA), and lithospheric flexural subsidence associated with Mississippi Delta sediment loading remains unre-solved. Here we present a new RSL record from the Louisiana Chenier Plain, > 100 km west of the Mississippi Delta margin, based on AMS 14 C dated marsh basal peat. This enables us to provide – for the first time – constraints on Holocene lithospheric subsidence rates underneath one of the world's major deltas. Our new record conclusively shows that no middle Holocene RSL highstands occurred on the central US Gulf Coast. Rather, it exhibits a pattern of progressive RSL rise comparable to that from the Mississippi Delta, sug-gesting that long-wavelength GIA is a dominant deformational process driving lithospheric subsidence in the entire region by means of forebulge collapse. Nevertheless, a 0.15 ± 0.07 mm/yr differential rate of subsidence between the Chenier Plain and key portions of the Mississippi Delta (including the New Orleans metropolitan area) exists. This shows that while the sediment loading effect is real, it is about an order of magnitude smaller than recent studies have postulated.