| Literature DB >> 29928689 |
Akira Ijiri1,2, Fumio Inagaki1,2,3, Yusuke Kubo4, Rishi R Adhikari5, Shohei Hattori6, Tatsuhiko Hoshino1,2, Hiroyuki Imachi2,7, Shinsuke Kawagucci2,7, Yuki Morono1,2, Yoko Ohtomo1,2, Shuhei Ono8, Sanae Sakai7, Ken Takai2,7,9, Tomohiro Toki10, David T Wang8, Marcos Y Yoshinaga11, Gail L Arnold12, Juichiro Ashi13, David H Case14, Tomas Feseker11, Kai-Uwe Hinrichs11, Yojiro Ikegawa15, Minoru Ikehara16, Jens Kallmeyer5, Hidenori Kumagai2, Mark A Lever12, Sumito Morita17, Ko-Ichi Nakamura18, Yuki Nakamura13, Manabu Nishizawa7, Victoria J Orphan14, Hans Røy12, Frauke Schmidt11, Atsushi Tani19, Wataru Tanikawa1,2, Takeshi Terada20, Hitoshi Tomaru21, Takeshi Tsuji22,23, Urumu Tsunogai24, Yasuhiko T Yamaguchi13,25, Naohiro Yoshida6,9.
Abstract
Microbial life inhabiting subseafloor sediments plays an important role in Earth's carbon cycle. However, the impact of geodynamic processes on the distributions and carbon-cycling activities of subseafloor life remains poorly constrained. We explore a submarine mud volcano of the Nankai accretionary complex by drilling down to 200 m below the summit. Stable isotopic compositions of water and carbon compounds, including clumped methane isotopologues, suggest that ~90% of methane is microbially produced at 16° to 30°C and 300 to 900 m below seafloor, corresponding to the basin bottom, where fluids in the accretionary prism are supplied via megasplay faults. Radiotracer experiments showed that relatively small microbial populations in deep mud volcano sediments (102 to 103 cells cm-3) include highly active hydrogenotrophic methanogens and acetogens. Our findings indicate that subduction-associated fluid migration has stimulated microbial activity in the mud reservoir and that mud volcanoes may contribute more substantially to the methane budget than previously estimated.Entities:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29928689 PMCID: PMC6007163 DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.aao4631
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Adv ISSN: 2375-2548 Impact factor: 14.136
Fig. 1Location of the study sites (KMV#5) and seismic profiles of the Kumano forearc basin.
(A) Bathymetric map showing the location of KMV#5 in the Kumano forearc basin and IODP Sites C0002 and C0009. (B) Transect seismic cross-section in the middle part of the Kumano Basin based on the data from Morita et al. (). (C) P-wave velocity predicted by three-dimensional (3D) tomography inversion during 3D prestack depth migration based on the data from Tsuji et al. (). The overpressure zone (fluid or gas accumulation zone) is identified as a low-amplitude and low-velocity zone at 400 to 700 mbsf in the forearc basin sequence. The low-velocity zone, which is located above the ridge because of the megasplay fault displacement, suggests that the overpressured fluids are moving upward along the interpreted ancient megasplay faults. The mud volcanoes are located along the northern extension of the megasplay faults.
Fig. 2Chloride concentration and stable isotopic compositions of pore water in sediments of KMV#5.
Vertical profile of Cl− (A), δ18O (B), and δD (C) of pore water in sediments. Circle and square plots represent pore water sample and water from dissociated gas hydrate fragment, respectively. Dashed line represents the averaged isotopic value of methane hydrates, and blue-filled range denotes original δ18O and δD values of pore water before the formation of methane hydrates.
Fig. 3Depth profiles of biogeochemical parameters in sediments of KMV#5.
(A) Vertical profiles of CH4 concentrations. (B) δ13C and δD of methane. (C) Concentrations of SO42−, acetate, and dissolved inorganic carbon (DIC). (D) δ13C of acetate, DIC, and total organic carbon (TOC). (E) H2 concentrations. Δ13CH3D temperatures are shown in (B).
Fig. 4Graphs of stable isotopic gas classifications in sediments of KMV#5.
(A) Relationship between C1/C2 and δ13CCH4 with respect to gas source () at KMV#5. Black solid line represents the most plausible two–end-member mixing scenario between biogenic and thermogenic hydrocarbons, and the black dashed curves show the possible range based on varying assumptions. Blue dashed curve shows the scenario between the biogenic hydrocarbon with normal δ13CCH4 (−65‰) and thermogenic hydrocarbons. Percentage labels represent contribution of biogenic methane to the total methane. (B) Relationships between δ13CCH4 and δ13CCO2 with isotope fractionation lines (). (C) Relationships between δ13CCH4 and δDCH4 with respect to gas source (). In (A) to (C), the data from the other mud volcanoes in the Kumano Basin (), Nankai Trough area (see Supplementary Methods), and Cascadia margin () are plotted. (D) Clumped isotopologues of methane from KMV#5 and other locations (, , ). Solid green curve represents isotopic equilibrium, with εmethane/water calibration [εmethane/water = (D/H)methane/(D/H)water − 1] given by Horibe and Craig (). Green shading represents ranges of εmethane/water calibrations from other published studies ().
Fig. 5Depth profiles of cell abundance, taxonomic composition of microbial communities, potential activities, and in situ energy yields in sediments of KMV#5.
(A) Cell abundance in the mud volcano samples (black dots) and the Kumano Basin sediment at Site C0002 (white dots), approximately 30 km south of KMV#5. The dashed line indicates the minimum quantification limit of sedimentary microbial cells, representing the upper limit of 95% confidence intervals of negative controls. (B and C) Taxonomic compositions of bacterial (B) and archaeal (C) communities in mud volcano sediments based on 16S ribosomal RNA (rRNA) gene sequences. Number in parentheses indicates the sample depth. nd, not detected. (D) Potential activities of homoacetogenesis, hydrogenotrophic methanogenesis, acetoclastic methanogenesis, and hydrogenase assessed by radiotracer incubation experiments. (E) Gibbs free energy yields of homoacetogenesis and hydrogenotrophic methanogenesis under in situ conditions (H2, 28.1 mM) and headspace H2 concentrations.
Fig. 6Schematic figure illustrating methanogenesis in the deep mud volcano sediments associated with fluid migration via the megasplay fault.
The cross-section is based on seismic profiles (see Fig. 1 and fig. S1).