TESTING THE USE OF

MICROFOSSILS TO RECONSTRUCT
GREAT EARTHQUAKES AT
CASCADIA

S.E. Engelhart, B.P. Horton, A.R. Nelson, A.D. Hawkes, R.C. Witter, K. Wang,
P.-L. Wang, and C.H. Vane
INTRODUCTION

• Cascadia Subduction Zone

• Located on the Pacific Northwest Coastline of the USA
• Famous for its A.D. 1700 earthquake (magnitude 8.8-9.2)
• Separates the North American Plate from the Explorer, Juan de Fuca, and Gorda plates
Figure 1. A: Map of Cascadia subduction zone of western North America showing location
of South Slough (an arm of Coos Bay) and Coquille River, Oregon.
INTRODUCTION

• Transfer Functions (paleoecology)

• Relate species and environmental data with a variable, such as pH
• In this study, elevation levels were used as a function of microfossil assemblages.
• Can convert microfossil data into coastal subsidence estimates
INTRODUCTION

• Earthquake cycle
• Interseismic – deep, steady, and slow aseismic slip
• Preseismic
• Coseismic – rapid shallow slip
• Postseismic
INTRODUCTION

• Studies of coastal stratigraphy and fossils in Cascadia

• helped reconstruct timing and magnitude of great (mag > 8) earthquakes
• provided estimates of rate of upper-plate deformation
• Using tidally-sensitive microfossils (diatoms and foraminifera):
• coastal land-level changes can be inferred
• provided estimates of rate of upper-plate deformation
PREVIOUS STUDIES

• Nelson et al. (1996a)

• Described stratigraphic evidence of the A.D. 1700 earthquake
• Estimated magnitude: 8.8-9.2
• Shannen et al. (1996)
• Amount of subsidence in earthquakes was estimated using differences in lithology and fossil
assemblages across contacts
PREVIOUS STUDIES

• Guilbault et al. (1996) and Hawkes et al. (2011)

• Used microfossil-based statistical transfer functions
• Improved upon initial estimates
• However…
• Rate of post-earthquake microfossil colonization and effects of bioturbation near subsidence
contacts add uncertainty to estimates (Hawkes et al., 2011; Hemphill-Haley, 1995; Nelson et
al., 1996b)
PREVIOUS STUDIES

• Yeats et al. (1997)

• Strain accumulation during beginning of interseismic period is exhibited by coastal
subsidence.
• Sawai et al. (2004); Hawkes et al. (2005); Shennan and Hamilton (2016)
• Small changes in microfossils used to infer modest subsidence prior to a coseismic rupture
• Might be explained by transient precursory slip along offshore part of megathrust
METHODOLOGY

Block of modern high- Shallow pit in the tidal Foram & geochemical
marsh peat flats data analysis

Investigate strat. record at Testing of foram-based

Coquille River transfer function
RECONSTRUCTING LAND-LEVEL CHANGE

• Conducted in South Slough, Oregon

• Transplant methodology followed Hamilton et al. (2005)
• One high-marsh station (2.36 m MLLW) and one tidal-flat station (1.74 m MLLW)
• A 0.35x0.35x0.1 m block of peaty high-marsh sediments was removed
• Transplanted to a tidal-flat pit
• Short cores collected across the transplant contact 1 year and 5 years later
Figure 1. A: Map of Cascadia subduction zone of western North America showing location
of South Slough (an arm of Coos Bay) and Coquille River, Oregon.
Figure 1. B: Location of marsh transplant in Hidden Creek, South Slough, that was sampled for
foraminifera and geochemical analyses.
RECONSTRUCTING LAND-LEVEL CHANGE

• Conducted in South Slough, Oregon

• Transplant methodology followed Hamilton et al. (2005)
• One high-marsh station (2.36 m MLLW) and one tidal-flat station (1.74 m MLLW)
• A 0.35x0.35x0.1 m block of peaty high-marsh sediments was removed
• Transplanted to a tidal-flat pit
• Total vertical lowering: 0.64m
• Short cores collected across the transplant contact 1 year and 5 years later
 Plate 2. The transplanted block one year after the experiment began at an elevation of 1.74m
above mean lower low water. The station was remarked at this time with more permanent white
PVC pipe before sampling with a Russian corer. One centimeter of new muddy sediment is
visible on top of the transplanted block. The PVC pipe was still clearly visible when sampled
again after five years.
RECONSTRUCTING LAND-LEVEL CHANGE

• Use of fossil assemblages to reconstruct land-level change

• Transfer function methods require modern dataset of foram assemblages spanning full range of
tidal elevations
• In this study, modern datasets from Hawkes et al. (2011) and Engelhart et al. (2013) were used
• Contains 152 samples from intertidal zones of six estuaries
RECONSTRUCTING LAND-LEVEL CHANGE

• Use of fossil assemblages to reconstruct land-level change

• Used a weighted averaging partial least squares (WA-PLS) transfer function
• Applied the TF to assemblages from each centimeter of the core
• Geochemical data
• Measurements of δ13C, total organic carbon (TOC), and total nitrogen using Costech Elemental
Analyzer
• Hydrocarbon (HC) concentrations measured using pyrolysis
SIMULATION OF COSEISMIC SUBSIDENCE

• Low marsh-tidal flat species Miliammina fusca incorporated into block

• Lower section of the block dominated by agglutinated species
• Haplophragmoides spp., Jadammina macrescens, Trochammina inflata
Figure 2. Lithology, initial (black bars) and modified (gray bars) foraminiferal assemblages, transfer function reconstructions of elevation for initial (black) and modified (gray)
assemblages, and total organic carbon (TOC) and hydrocarbon (HC) analyses for samples above and below contact between transplanted block of high-marsh peat and 5 yr
accumulation of overlying tidal flat mud. Calculated subsidence with error in meters is marked on the reconstruction. MLLW—mean lower low water; Mf—Miliammina fusca; Jm—
Jadammina macrescens; Ti—Trochammina infl ata; Hs—Haplophragmoides spp.; Tr—Trochamminita irregularis.
SIMULATION OF COSEISMIC SUBSIDENCE

• Coseismic subsidence (CS) and error (CSerror) obtained using the following equations:
SIMULATION OF COSEISMIC SUBSIDENCE

• Transfer function gives an estimate of block lowering of 0.17 ± 0.24 m

• Significant underestimate compared to 0.64m.
• Findings of low marsh-tidal flat foram within high-marsh soil mimics a pre-seismic
signal (Hamilton et al., 2005)
• May be the result of either infaunal burrowing or sediment-mixing at peat-mud mixing
Figure 2. Lithology, initial (black bars) and modified (gray bars) foraminiferal assemblages, transfer function reconstructions of elevation for initial (black) and modified (gray)
assemblages, and total organic carbon (TOC) and hydrocarbon (HC) analyses for samples above and below contact between transplanted block of high-marsh peat and 5 yr
accumulation of overlying tidal flat mud. Calculated subsidence with error in meters is marked on the reconstruction. MLLW—mean lower low water; Mf—Miliammina fusca; Jm—
Jadammina macrescens; Ti—Trochammina infl ata; Hs—Haplophragmoides spp.; Tr—Trochamminita irregularis.
SIMULATION OF COSEISMIC SUBSIDENCE

• Decreases show that it is not infaunal burrowing that would introduce allochthonous
sediments to change the geochemical signatures of peat
• Sediment mixing may be responsible
SIMULATION OF COSEISMIC SUBSIDENCE

• Geochemical profiles suggest little mixing below 10 cm depth (where M. fusca

abundances are 7%)
• To remove effects of mixing, M. fusca abundances were adjusted to 7%
Figure 2. Lithology, initial (black bars) and modified (gray bars) foraminiferal assemblages, transfer function reconstructions of elevation for initial (black) and modified (gray)
assemblages, and total organic carbon (TOC) and hydrocarbon (HC) analyses for samples above and below contact between transplanted block of high-marsh peat and 5 yr
accumulation of overlying tidal flat mud. Calculated subsidence with error in meters is marked on the reconstruction. MLLW—mean lower low water; Mf—Miliammina fusca; Jm—
Jadammina macrescens; Ti—Trochammina infl ata; Hs—Haplophragmoides spp.; Tr—Trochamminita irregularis.
SIMULATION OF COSEISMIC SUBSIDENCE

• Adjustments resulted to a new transfer function-predicted elevation of 0.61 ± 0.24 m.

• A similar amount of coseismic subsidence might have been a result of a magnitude
8.1-8.8 earthquake (Wang et al., 2013)
COSEISMIC SUBSIDENCE DURING THE A.D. 1700
EARTHQUAKE

• A brown peat sample collected at Coquille River 0.94-0.74 m depth

• Geochemical signatures suggest it is the AO horizon of an upland forest soil
• Dominance of M. fusca in the upper section of soil suggests sediment mixing
• Failure to consider such mixing results in coseismic subsidence of 0 m
Figure 1. A: Map of Cascadia subduction zone of western North America showing location
of South Slough (an arm of Coos Bay) and Coquille River, Oregon.
Figure 3. Lithology, foraminiferal assemblages, and total organic carbon (TOC) values for samples
above and below the A.D. 1700 earthquake contact at Osprey Marsh, Coquille River, Oregon.
Abbreviations as in Figure 2.
CONCLUSIONS

• Sediment mixing may introduce form species into buried marsh soils of higher
intertidal environments from lower ones.
• Identification of sediment mixing suggests it may explain assemblage changes
previously interpreted as pre-seismic land-level changes.
• Transplant simulation shows foram TF can accurately reconstruct subsidence during
great earthquakes.
REVIEW

• The title is short and catchy.

• Abstract explained the whole study well enough.
• Introduction, significance, problems, and previous studies were enough to build up
the study.
• Methodologies are meticulous and trustworthy enough.
REVIEW

• Results were positive.

• Conclusions answered the problems of this study.
ADDITIONAL REFERENCES

• Appalachian State University (n.d.). Earthquakes and Seismotectonics. Retrieved 12

October 2017 from
http://www.appstate.edu/~marshallst/GLY3160/lectures/5.5_The_Earthquake_Cycle.
pdf

• Pacific Northwest Seismic Network (n.d.). Cascadia Subduction Zone. Retrieved 12

October 2017 from https://pnsn.org/outreach/earthquakesources/csz
TESTING THE USE OF
MICROFOSSILS TO RECONSTRUCT
GREAT EARTHQUAKES AT
CASCADIA

S.E. Engelhart, B.P. Horton, A.R. Nelson, A.D. Hawkes, R.C. Witter, K. Wang,
P.-L. Wang, and C.H. Vane