AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS OF GORDON EVERETT NESS (Name of Student) for the M. S. (Degree) in Oceanography presented on 9 February 1972 (Major) (Date) Title: THE STRUCTURE AND SEDIMENTS OF SURVEYOR DEEP-SEA CHANN: Abstract approved: Dr. L. D. Kulm Surveyor Deep-Sea Channel extends for approximately 700 km over the northern Alaskan Abyssal Plain. It originates near the base of the continental slope opposite Dry Bay and Alsek Strath and termin- ates in the Aleutian Trench south of Kodiak Island. East of Giacomini Seamount, the axial gradient of the channel is in the order of 10 rn/km and its morphology is in agreement with prediction, assuming a depo- sitional equilibrium with channelized turbidity currents. West of Giacomini Seamount, the axial gradient increases to values as high as 7. 5 rn/km. as the channel course turns toward the northwest and plunges into the trench. Over this part of its length the measured center channel relief and cross-sectional area of the channel increase, contradicting prediction. The lower channel is found to be erosional in nature, this effect being a response to downwarping of the northern rim of the Pacific Plate into the Aleutian Trench. Redacted for Privacy
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS OF
GORDON EVERETT NESS(Name of Student)
for the M. S.(Degree)
in Oceanography presented on 9 February 1972(Major) (Date)
Title: THE STRUCTURE AND SEDIMENTS OF SURVEYOR
DEEP-SEA CHANN:
Abstract approved:Dr. L. D. Kulm
Surveyor Deep-Sea Channel extends for approximately 700 km
over the northern Alaskan Abyssal Plain. It originates near the base
of the continental slope opposite Dry Bay and Alsek Strath and termin-
ates in the Aleutian Trench south of Kodiak Island. East of Giacomini
Seamount, the axial gradient of the channel is in the order of 10 rn/km
and its morphology is in agreement with prediction, assuming a depo-
sitional equilibrium with channelized turbidity currents. West of
Giacomini Seamount, the axial gradient increases to values as high as
7. 5 rn/km. as the channel course turns toward the northwest and
plunges into the trench. Over this part of its length the measured
center channel relief and cross-sectional area of the channel increase,
contradicting prediction. The lower channel is found to be erosional
in nature, this effect being a response to downwarping of the northern
rim of the Pacific Plate into the Aleutian Trench.
Redacted for Privacy
The channel originated in early to middle Pliocene time coeval
with the initiation of pronounced tectonism and intense glaciation in
southeastern Alaska, At this time, the channel was located perhaps
200 km south of its present position with relation to the North
American Plate, and may have been linked with one of the fossil sea-
channels on the eastern Aleutian Abyssal Plain. Throughout its
history, the channel has not been linked with any consistent river
drainage system, its sediment source instead being the large system
of piedmont glaciers in southeastern Alaska,
The distribution of coarse sedimentary material over the
northern Gulf of Alaska strongly suggests that turbidity current acti-
vity has not been confined to only those regions close to Surveyor
Deep-Sea Channel,
THE STRUCTURE AND SEDIMENTS OFSURVEYOR DEEP-SEA CHANNEL
by
Gordon Everett Ness
A THESIS
subrriitted to
Oregon State University
in partial fulfillment ofthe requirements for the
degree of
Master of Science
June 197Z
APPROVED:
Associate Professor of Ôcanographyin charge of major
Chairman o%f Department of ceanography
Dean of Graduate School
Date thesis is presented 9 February 1972
Typed by Marjorie Hay for Gordon Everett Ness
Redacted for Privacy
Redacted for Privacy
Redacted for Privacy
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First, I would like to thank my major professor, Dr. L. D.
Kuim, for his support and patience, and for allowing me the freedom
to pursue my own line of inquiry into the subject of this thesis.
Secondly, I want to thank Paul Komar, Don Heinrichs, Ted Moore,
Dick Couch, Ross Heath and Jerry van Andel for taking time with me
to discuss various aspects of this work. Dave Rea, with his
familarity of the North Pacific, has also been of great help. A
special debt of gratitude is owed to Roland von Huene of the U. S.
Geological Survey, and John Wageman and Fred Naugler of NOAA for
providing me with critically needed seismic profiles. Their thought
provoking scientific reports also constitute a good portion of the
background to this work. In that respect, I also wish to acknowledge
the work of Gary Griggs on Cascadia Deep-Sea Channel. We sailed
together on Yaloc-70 and enjoyed many a late night discussion on
channels and channel processes to my great benefit.
It is impossible to even begin to thank each of the many others
who have aided me in one way or another. Certainly the crew of the
R/V Yaquina merits any such consideration. Chief Bob Ingersoll
has helped me in many ways, from keeping seismic equipment
running to keeping my efforts in proper perspective. For similar
reasons I thank my father Oscar Ness, and an old and good friend
George Bent who suggested I read Hesse' s Magister Ludi during any
troubled moments. My office partner and shipmate, Commander
Doctor Professor John Harlett, USN, who graduated just when I
needed him most, is greatly missed. It is hereby acknowledged that
Margie Hay, who tried to make some grammatical sense out of my
scribbled sentence fragments, is entitled to one supper of her choice
at any of River City' s finer dining establishments.
This work was made possible through the financial support of
the Office of Naval Research (Contract Nc,nr N00014-67-A-0369-007)
and the National Science Foundation (Grants No. GA 1246 and GA
159Z6). A departmental assistantship and a hard working and tolerant
wife provided personal financial support.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION 1
MORPHOLOGY OF THE CHANNEL 6
Contrast in Bank Heights 11Center Channel Relief 15Cross Sectional Area 18
SUB-BOTTOM STRUCTURE 23
Character of the Seismic Reflectors 23Age of the Channel Basal Reflectors 27Longitudinal Development of the Channel 31
CHANNEL RELATED SEDIMENTS 40
CHANNEL RESPONSES TO REGIONAL TECTONISM 45
The Eastern Source of Sediments 45Trench Related Downwarping of the Lower Channel 51
CONCLUSIONS AND GEOLOGIC HISTORY 61
BIBLIOGRAPHY 65
APPENDIX 1. Location and Physiography of Channel Profiles 70
APPENDIX 2. Transport Calculations from Channel Profiles 71
APPENDIX 3. Magnetic Stratigraphy of Core Y70-4-56 72
I. Trackline, drill hole and piston core locations 5
2. Bathymetric chart - northern Gulf of Alaska 7
3. Channel axial gradient and center channel relief 8
4. Normalized channel bathymetric profiles 9
5. Channel morphologic parameters 12
6. Relationship between center channel relief andaxial gradient 16
7. Channel cross sectional area 20
8. Seismic section of abyssal plain sediments 24
9. Long seismic profiles near and across the middleand lower channel 26
10. Magnetic stratigraphy of Core Y70-4-56 29
11. Upper channel seismic profiles 32
12. Middle channel seismic profiles 33
13. Lower channel seismic profiles 34
14. Occurrence of coarse material in piston cores 42
15. Transverse mercator projection of North Pacificabout rotation pole at 530 N, 53° W 52
16. Transverse mercator projection of North Pacificearly Pliocene time 57
THE STRUCTURE AND SEDIMENTS OFSURVEYOR DEEP-SEA CHANNEL
INTRODUCTION
In 1958, William Gibson of the Coast and Geodetic Survey map-
ped the course of a broad and linear depression on the seafloor of the
Gulf of Alaska. Noting its apparent gentle relief, its depth and
distance from shore, and the similarity of its orientation with respect
to the Aleutian Trench and to structural features on the adjacent
southern Alaskan landmass, Gibson suggested that its origin was
tectonic, "Marking the southeast edge of the Aleutian Trench1'
(Gibson, 1958). Two years later, in describing the morphology of the
Gulf of Alaska seafloor, Gibson again discussed the feature and reco-
gnized its sedimentary origin. He then named it Surveyor Deep-Sea
Channel. Gibson still however stressed the tectonic relationship be-
tween the channel, the geosynclinal Aleutian Trench and its seaward-
moving anticlinal rise, the channel being developed in a moving fore-
deep and confined there by the rise (Gibson, 1960). I find it
satisfying that Gibson' s almost intuitive stress on the tectonic
character of Surveyor Deep-Sea Channel seems to be justified even
in terms of the most recent evidence, which will be presented in
support of this thesis.
Gibson published his two papers immediately prior to the onset
2
the so-called geologic revolution. Only within the past decade have
the concepts implicit in the New Global Tectonics been accepted, or
for that matter even proposed. Marine geologists and geophysicists,
in particular among earth scientists, have readily accepted them. As
a result, the whole scale and direction of geologic thinking has
changed. Horizontal stresses and motions have for the most part re-
placed their vertical counterparts in relative importance, and many
broad syntheses have been accomplished through the unifying concepts
of the new tectonics.
Prior to this revolution, geosynclinal theories dominated the
study of tectonics, and Gibson understandably stated his working
hypotheses in the vocabulary of those theories. Though it may seem
trivial to some, it should be stated however that to name something
is not to know it, and the vast nomenclature that developed in the
literature of geosynclines is symptomatic of the fact that the theories
were not adequate to account for a genetic mechanism. There are
eighteen modifying prefixes to the word geosyncline listed in the 1959
English edition of the glossary 'Geologic Nomenclature" published by
the Royal Geological and Mining Society of the Netherlands
(Schieferdecker, 1959). This number is exclusive of such related
terms as fossa, tethys, backdeep, foredeep, marginal foredeep and
the "leptogeosyncline" of Trumpy (1960). Clearly, the theories were
in trouble as the number of terms must have approached the number
3
of known geosynclines. This proliferation of definitions brings to
mind the decline in the popularity of the lute when that instrument
grew to include sixteen strings. The geosynclinal theories had be-
come, like the lute, baroque.
In an article discussing the methods of the earth sciences,
Chamberlin (1904) pointed out that "not a little consists of generaliz-
ations from incomplete data, of inferences hung on chains of uncer-
tam logic, of interpretations not beyond question, of hypotheses not
fully verified, and of speculations none too substantial. A part of the
mass is true science, a part philosopy .. a part speculation, and a
part is yet unorganized material." Gibson worked within the concep-
tual framework of geosynclinal theories, and was also faced with the
problem stated by Chamberlin. A decade later, the theories have
changed but the problem of methodology remains. I think it is funda-
mental that ultimately the only proof of a geologic construct is the
measure of its synergy, that is, its capacity to accept and integrate
a wide variety of data.
This thesis will attempt a new discussion of Surveyor Deep-Sea
Channel and its relationship to the Alaskan Abyssal Plain and the
adjacent landmasses. An attempt will be made to apply certain
quantitative methods of analysis to the morphology of the channel,
and the response of the channel to tectonic influences will be investi-
gated. The study will enjoy the benefits of new evidence and a newer
conceptual framework. Nonetheless, it will depend upon an acquired
intuition and this hopefully will be its strength. The theories are
certain to change, but perhaps something of value will remain of this
effort, so that twelve years from now someone may at least find
pleasure in its reading.
The bulk of the data supporting this thesis was obtained from
the summer, 1970, cruise of the R/V Yaquina of Oregon State tJniver-
sity. Bathymetric and sub-bottom seismic profiles pertinent to this
cruise are labeled with the prefix 'TYaloc" (Figure 1). Thirteen piston
cores were also recovered during that cruise. Five excellent seismic
profiles of the western portion of Surveyor Deep-Sea Channel and the
eastern Aleutian Trench were provided the author by John Wageman
and Fred Naugler of the Pacific Oceanographic Laboratories, NOAA.
These are labeled 'Oceanographer." In addition, three short seismic
profiles of Surveyor Deep-Sea Channel in the vicinity of Giacomini
Seamount were provided by Roland von Huene of the Office of Marine
Geology and Hydrology, U. S. Geological Survey. These are
labeled "Surveyor."
r
I54 152
I I I
TRACKLINE, DRILL-HOLEAND PISTON CORE LOCATIONS
NORTHERN GULF OF ALASKA
.OPPER HUGACH FAIRWEATHER
I/\ YAKUTAT
O:4//\S -
CROSSY70-3-48
S 53DSDP SITE 80
S 178OSOP SITE Y7O-2-41
Y70-2-SURVEYOR
71 Y7O-2-4O37
0 Y70454Y70-2-35 Y70-2-39
SURVEYORCHANNEL
Y7O-4-56
I I I I
(. 153'OI4 N, 141' 41.4 W
50' 148' .146' 44' 142' .
Figure 1. Trackline, drill hole and piston core locations. UI
MORPHOLOGY OF THE CHANNEL
The course of Surveyor Deep-Sea Channel extends from the
northeastern edge of the Alaskan Abyssal Plain, near the base of the
continental slope adjacent to Yakutat Seavalley and Alsek Strath, to
the floor of the eastern Aleutian Trench immediately southeast of
Kodiak Island (Figure 2). Its length is approximately 700 km. The
general trend of the channel is parallel to the trench for over slightly
more than half its length, curving generally to the southwest. In the
vicinity of Giaconiini Seamount, the channel turns toward the north-
west and its gradient steepens as it plunges into the trench.
It is convenient to refer to three portions of the channel as
upper, middle and lower (Figures 3 and 4). In the upper portion
(profiles A and B), the relief in the center of the channel is in the
order of 100 m and the axial gradient is approximately 1.4 rn/km
(Appendix I). In the middle channel (profiles C, D, E, F), the relief
is fairly uniform at about 165 m, increasing slightly to 190 m near
profile F, and the axial gradient here decreases to an average of
about 1 rn/km. In the lower channel (profiles G, H, I, J, K), the
relief increases from about 200 in to more than 450 m. Similarly,
the axial gradient increases from about 2 rn/km to a value of 7. 5
rn/km at profile I, then decreases somewhat as the channel approach-
es the floor of the Aleutian Trench.
154 150 146 )42 I8I I I
II I I I I I I I I
BATHYMETRIC CHARTNORTHERN GULF OF ALASKASHOWING COURSE OF SURVEYOR CHANNEL
-
S. 0. AREA WEST OF 142 30 AFTER VON HUENE AND SHOR (1969),. . AREA EAST OF )42 30 NECONTOURED FROM GIBSON ((960)
WITH SUPPLEMENTARY .ALOC-7O BATHYMETRIC PROFILES
DEPTH (N METERS- LOPPER 1Y
-.j
IRIVER LOCATION OF ILLUSTRATED PROFILES
60 KAYAKICY
- ..
ISLANDBAY
. YAKUTATBAY
60
-:
'000 EAVALLEY bR YY BA:'
5858
& '
O0 2))
00 ii
f 0 KDIAK500 /iAMOUNT 00/
GIACOM IN)
AMUN)QWNN°
SEAMOUNT 56
154 152 150 I48 )46 144 142 140 138 136
Figure Z. Bathymetric chart - northern Gulf of Alaska.
DISTANCE ALONG AXIS (KM)700 600 500 400 300 200 tOO 0
I I I I I I I
C-)
m2
I-
mxz2P1I-
H
LOWER MIDDLECHANNEL CHANNEL
K
Figure 3. Channel axial gradient and center channel relief.Depths corrected from Matthews Tables (1939).
UPPERCHANNEL
3600
D
3800
40000
4200Irn
4400
rn3
4600U)
15000
0wU)
Lu
I-.
-JLu>
I-
>-4
c'J
North (Right) Bank South (Left) BankA
B
C
D
H
I
-T\\ rK\/
0.4 3O0/ V.E.30X
0.5400
0.6
0.7 500
15 JO 5 0 5 10 15
KILO MET ER S
Figure 4 Normalized channel bathymetric profiles.
10
The cross sectional area of the channel (Appendix I), measured
from the original bathymetric records (Figure 4) and corrected for
crossing angles, shows a general increase downchannel and ranges
from about 3 x 105m2 for profile A to almost 12 x 105m2 for profile
K near the Aleutian Trench floor. The areas of profiles C, D and E
are each about 5.5 x iOm2. Profiles F and G exhibit smaller cross
sectional areas, and mark a slight reversal in trend from that of an
overall increasing area along the channel length.
Bathymetric profiles of Surveyor Channel reveal a bank morpho-
logy similar to that of Cascadia Channel (Griggs and Kulm, l970a).
In the upper channel, a pronounced levee, elevated well above the
adjacent abyssal plain, occurs on the north bank (Figure 4, profile A).
The relief of the levee above the surface of the plain is approximately
40 meters. Its width is 13 kilometers. Downchannel from profile A
the north bank is concave upward and is consistently higher than the
south but no definite levees are found. Profile B suggests a very
broad levee, but the trackline did not continue far enough to the north
to determine if it is of markedly shallower depth than the bathymetry
of the plain.
The morphology of the channel can be examined in terms of
turbidity current dynamics by assuming its profile to be in deposition-
al equilibrium with large full-channel turbidity currents. As
suggested by ivlenard (1955), the levees and banks of the channel will
11
be here considered to have been constructed by periodic sheetfiow
spillover from large turbulent flows of suspended sediment moving
downchannel. Three approaches will be used to discuss the morpho-
logy of Surveyor Deep-Sea Channel as a function of turbidity current
dynamics.
Contrast in Bank Heights
Komar (1969) estimated the flow parameters of turbidity
currents for several crossings of Monterey Deep-Sea Channel by
setting up and solving an equation relating the centrifugal, Coriolis
and pressure gradient accelerations acting upon a full-channel flow
(Figure 5). Balancing these accelerations yields a simple quadratic
equation
U2 AH-r
+ 2fltJsin+J
=0
where U is the flow velocity,.fl.. is the angular velocity of the earth
about its axis, is the geographic latitude of the channel, g is the
acceleration of gravity, / is the density of the turbidity current and
, is the density of water. The terms for the radius of curvature of
the channel R, the difference in bank or levee heights on either side
of the channel A H, and the channel width W are measured from
bathymetric profiles and plan views of the channel course.
;../'
/ 'T
R
Figure 5. Channel morphologic parameters
N)
13
If, in the northern hemisphere, the right bank of a channel is
higher than the left, looking downchannel, the Coriolis acceleration
must either add to the centrifugal acceleration (a left turning channel)
or be of greater magnitude but opposite sign (a right turning channel).
For the left bank to be higher than the right, the centrifugal accelera-
tion must exceed the Coriolis acceleration and be of opposite sign (a
right turning channel). With a straight channel course, the radius of
curvature goes to infinity and the centrifugal term drops out of the
equation. The right bank should therefore be higher than the left.
These relationships of the channel course to the bank heights
were found by Komar to hold for crossings of Monterey Deep-Sea
Channel. Using measurements of H, W and R, Komar calculated
curves of U versus from the above equation. The method has
also been applied to Cascadia Deep-Sea Channel using data from
Griggs (1969) and was found to yield reasonably consistent velocities
where the radius of curvature could be unambiguously determined
(Ness, 1970). The method of solving for velocities has not been
applied to Surveyor Deep-Sea Channel since the number of normal
oriented crossings is insufficient to accurately determine the
necessary morphologic parameters. The illustrated profile,s
(Figure 4) are however consistent with prediction, the right (north)
bank being always higher than the left, particularly in the linear and
steeper upper channel where the velocity dependent Coriolis term
14
dominates. The difference between bank heights decreases down-
channel from crossing H where the channel curves to the right and the
centrifugal acceleration opposes but does not exceed the Coriolis
acceleration. Profile K (Figure 4) is from a crossing at an angle to
the channel course on the steep seaward rise of the trench. Geo-
metrically adjusting the profile to be normal to the channel course
corrects for true horizontal distances, but the artificially high bank
height difference cannot be so removed. In any case, the right bank
is higher than the left and this is consistent with the other lower
channel profiles.
It is significant that the bank height morphology of the three
deep-sea channels so examined can be accounted for without exception
using the method of Komar. In no case does a measured channel
profile contradict its predicted morphology as would, for example, a
profile of a left turning channel in the northern hemisphere with a
higher left bank. The lack of contradictory evidence strongly implies
that the Coriolis, centifugal and pressure gradient accelerations are
dominant influences in the depositional formation of deep- sea channels.
It is further significant that the method applies equally well to
both the upper and lower, leveed and non-leveed, portions of deep-
sea channels. The non-leveed bank height contrasts commonly exhi-
bited in long bathymetric profiles from middle and lower portions of
both Cascadia (Griggs and Kulm, 1970a) and Surveyor Deep-Sea
15
Channels are therefore most probably related to deposition from the
differential spiflover of channelized turbidity currents.
Center Channel Relief
Komar (1972) analyzed the relative thickness of the head and
body of channelized turbidity currents and their relationship to the
channel axial gradient and the center channel relief. The equation
expressing this relationship isI
( hh= \h ) Fr
where V is the velocity of the head, Ti is the velocity of the body, hh
is the head thickness, hb the body thickness, and Fr is the Froude
number which is in part slope dependent. Komar found that for a
Froude number of 0.75 (corresponding to an axial slope of about 2.2
mlkm), the thickness of the head and the body of a flow should be
equal (Figure 6). For lower Froude numbers (lower slopes) the body
thickness will exceed the head thickness and channel spillover will be
predominantly from the body of the flow. For higher Froude numbers
(slopes steeper than 2.2 mfkm) the head thickness will exceed the
body thickness and spillover will consist of material from the head of
the flow. Suspended material within the head is continuously derived
from the body of the flow and the net velocity of the head is limited to
that of the body.
hb
hh
14
Sifl .48
0.0001 0.0010 0.0022
BODY SPILLING HEAD SPILLING
Ic.,JIcjiO
u,IoFtOdl"flI'
CLLu)
hh i I
FROUDE NUMBER, FrFigure 6. Relationship between center channel relief and
axial gradient.
1.5
17
For any given flow, the head thickness changes less in response
to changes in slope than does the body thickness. Therefore, even at
higher Froude number values, for reasonable slopes the head thick-
ness will not greatly exceed the body thickness. A typical channel of
constantly decreasing gradient should gradually increase in relief
over its length until, presumably at extremely low slope values
typical of central abyssal plains, the gravitational driving energy of
the turbidity currents becomes negligible and deposition occurs. The
break-up of the channel into a distributary network may also enhance
deposition of the suspended sediments.
The measured axial gradients of the upper and middle portions
of Surveyor Channel are all less than 2. 2 rn/km (Appendix I), with
profile A having the steepest gradient and therefore predictably the
least relief in the center of the channel. The middle channel gradients
are more gentle, and the measured relief correspondingly increases
in response to an increasing body thickness. Downchannel from
Giacomini Searnount, the axial gradients increase to values greater
than 2. 2 rn/km and the channel relief should therefore presumably
decrease in equilibrium with head spilling conditions. Instead, the
measured values of center channel relief continue to increase from
about 200 meters to more than 400 meters (Figure 3 and Appendix I)..
Surveyor Deep-Sea Channel is unique among known channels in that
its axial gradient increases markedly over the distal portion of its
length where it plunges into the Aleutian Trench. Over this length,
its relief greatly exceeds any values predicted upon an equilibrium
between the flow parameters and the channel morphology.
Cross Sectional Area
The volume transport of a full-channel turbidity current can be
estimated from the application of an equation of the form
Q=UA
where Q is the discharge rate, U is the average velocity of the
current and A is the cross sectional area of the channel. Since the
average velocity of the current is limited to the velocity of the body
of the flow, the motion of the current in a channel of slope is
governed by a Chezy-type equation of the formI12
L't gh (1 +) Cfj
where Cf is a bottom drag coefficient and ' is the ratio of the drag
at the upper interface of the current to the bottom drag (Komar,
1971). Assuming that no dilution of the flow by entrainment occurs,
and that the drag coefficients are constant, it follows that
IU °" (hb Sifl,
)2
and therefore that
19
Q S (hb sine)2 A
In effect, where the axial gradient decreases the velocity should
decrease, resulting in an increased channel cross sectional area for
a given discharge. Values of (h sin,)2 A for the Surveyor Deep-Sea
Channel bathymetric profiles have been summarized in Appendix II.
Assuming a constant discharge Q, a predicted area for any
profile A relative to the measured area of another, A, can be deter-
mined from the relationshipI
A1[hsin$ 12
h.sinp A1 iJ
Predicted area curves so generated (Figure 7) show that measured
middle channel areas are consistent with respect to one another. The
analysis predicts the smaller area of profile F and perhaps even G.
The slope used for crossing F is the downchannel slope, that is, the
change in axial depth between crossings F and G (Figure 3). It would
be equally valid to choose the upchannel depth contrast between
crossings E and F to determine the slope at F. Curves fit through
areas C, D and E would then fall only slightly below area F, and area
G would appear to be more in equilibrium with the middle channel.
The true slope at F is probably of some intermediate value, but the
distance between crossings is too great for a finer resolution.
The measured cross sectional areas of profile A and perhaps
DISTANCE ALONG AXIS (K M)
600 500 400 300 200 100 0I I
PREDICTEDAREA CURVES
I
H
T
I
A
-I- _D B0_____.rC0 -T-0 .i 0--
-I-
Figure 7. Measured channel cross sectional area from profiles Athrough K. Vertical bars include ± 15° ambiguity incrossing angles and errors in determining depths basedupon the scale of each original record.
C,I200
400
600
800
1000
1200
C)cIoU)
m-4(1)mmCj)1r3
I-
m
C
21
profile B are smaller than the predicted areas, area A being only
about half the predicted value. Since no channel crossings were made
east of crossing A, its actual slope is unknown, and it may be much
steeper than the downchannel value chosen which might explain its
small area. An alternative explanation for this will be discussed
later.
Most important to this discussion however, is the fact that
measured lower channel cross sectional areas are dramatically out
of equilibrium with middle channel areas, being larger by as much as
a factor of three (and even more with respect to their own predicted
values).
In summary, the depositional aspects of the morphology of
Surveyor Deep-Sea Channel show expected characteristics. Leveed
banks occur in the steeper upper reaches of the channel. The
occurrence is similar to that of Cascadia Deep-Sea Channel (Griggs,
1969) and appears to be common for channels developed on steeper
slopes and on the upper reaches of deep-sea fans (Normark, 1970).
The non-leveed banks of the middle and lower channel exhibit a bank
height contrast in conformity with their depositiona]. development
from the spillover of channelized turbidity currents. The lower
channel however is distinctly dissimilar from the middle and upper
reaches of the channel with respect to both its increased cross
sectional area and its greater center channel relief. From the
22
vicinity of Giacornini Seamount to the Aleutian Trench, Surveyor
Deep-Sea Channel is not in equilibrium with its predicted model.
Seismic reflection records, which will be discussed next, strongly
suggest that the lower channel has undergone post-formational
ero sion.
23
SUB- BOTTOM STRUCTURE
Seismic reflection records taken over the northern Gulf of
Alaska reveal the ubiquitous nature of a characteristic series of sub-
bottom reflectors. They appear to be best developed near and to the
north of Surveyor Deep-Sea Channel, though some can be recognized
as far as 500 km to the south. Profile VI (Figure 8) from Yaloc 70
data, is the best detailed record in this study and most clearly
illustrates the nature of these reflectors. In general, four thick
stratified units can be recognized above acoustic basement.
Character of the Seismic Reflectors
The uppermost unit (Unit A) extends from the sediment-water
interface to a depth of 0. 2 seconds (two-way travel time). It consists
of a strong and continuous initial set of low frequency reflectors ex-
tending to a depth of about 0. 07 seconds. Between 0. 07 and 0. 2
seconds, except for a single strong reflector of 0. 14 seconds, weak
and higher frequency returns become increasingly discontinuous with
distance from the channel.
At a depth of 0. 2 seconds, a pair of strong low frequency re-
flectors, common to most of the records and only occasionally dis-
continuous, marks the upper interface of the second seismic unit
(Unit B). Below that, to a depth of 0.4 seconds, weak reflectors
show the same trend in discontinuity as those of the first seismic
unit.
25
At a depth of 0. 4 seconds a single particularly strong low fre-
quency reflector occurs within a group of several strong closely
spaced reflectors. These mark the top of the third seismic unit
(Unit C) which is about 0. 25 seconds thick. Other reflectors in this
unit are much less continuous and return higher frequencies than any
others in the section. Occasional strong returns of short horizontal
extent occur.
At a depth of 0. 6 to 0. 7 seconds, the final seismic unit (Unit D)
begins and extends downward to acoustic basement. It is character-
ized by strong, fairly continuous and somewhat deformed low fre-
Figure 16. Transverse mercator projection of North Pacificearly Pliocene lime0
channel over the seaward rise of the trench and erosion began.
It is difficult to determine from the data available if the eastern
Aleutian Trench was in existence in Pliocene times, or if the site of
the present trench was simply occupied by a gentle syncline. The
fossil turbidites of the eastern Aleutian Abyssal Plain described by
Hurley (1960), Hamilton (1967) and others, are found to be associated
with buried channels having a northeast trend and described by Grim
and Naugler (1969), Mammerickx (1970), Naugler (1970) and others.
Recent research by Jones, Ewing and Truchan (1971) suggests that
turbidity current activity in the eastern Aleutian Abyssal Plain
ceased about 6,9 m. y. B. P. , the time of isolation being determined
from extrapolated sedimentation rates and seismic profiles, using a
1.70 km/sec seismic velocity for the overlying abyssal plain sedi-
ments, This seismic velocity seems high. Hamilton (1969) gives
seismic velocities for pelagic sediments in the North Pacific that
range from 1.49 to 1. S3 km/sec. This is about 10% less than the
1.70 km/sec value and would result in a younger date for the cessa-
tion of turbidite deposition.
Naugler (1970) suggests that the easternmost Aleutian Channel
represents one of the last stages of turbidite deposition on the
Aleutian Abyssal Plain, the fossil Seamap Channel being cut off
earlier as a result of being closer to the trench. He raises the
possibility that the fossil Aleutian Channel may have been linked to
59
Surveyor Channel prior to capture of the latter by the downbowing
trench. A possible early Pliocene connection between the two
channels around the central hill and seamount province is shown in
Figure 16, The curvature required is less than that exhibited by
Cascadia Channel where it encounters the Blanco Fracture Zone and
abruptly turns to the west through Cascadia Gap to reach Tufts
Abyssal Plain. The relative depths of the channels of the two
abyssal plains are compatible with such a reconstruction. The real
problem centers around the relative dates of the turbidites. Most
published evidence suggests that the youngest Aleutian Plain turbidites
are at least slightly older than the basal reflectors of Surveyor Deep-
Sea Channel, however the age of the turbidite horizons near the upper
reaches of Aleutian Channel has yet to be determined.
Jones, Ewing and Truchan (1971) report a pelagic sediment
thickness of about 120 meters near the fossil Seamap Channel on the
Aleutian Abyssal Plain. D. S.D. P. Site 183 is located only slightly to
the north of Seamap Channel, As previously mentioned, the earliest
glacial records in cores recovered from that site occur at an esti-
mated depth of 130 meters, near the base of the Pliocene, This
corresponds to an average glacial sedimentation rate of about 25 m/
a rather high figure for pelagic sedimentation, This rate is
also twice as high as any sedimentation rate found by Jones and all,
and more than three times higher than the average rate they used to
determine the time at which turbidity current activity ceased on the
Aleutian Ahyssal Plain. Certainly a case can be made for more
recent, channel related, turbidite deposition.
Several possibilities arise. If Seamap Channel was connected
to a northern source of sediments, the Aleutian Trench may have
formed here as recently as middle or even early Pliocene.
Alternatively, if Seamap Channel was connected to an eastern source,
on the Alaskan Abyssal Plain, the trench could be older and Seamap
Channel would have been isolated when its eastern portion was
carried into the trench. The possibility exists that another deep-sea
channel may have been located on the Alaskan Abyssal Plain north of
Surveyor.
The Pleistocene age determination of Kulmetal. (1972) for the
genesis of the eastern Aleutian Trench certainly represents a
youngest limit. It may have originated earlier but the high rate of
burial in the axis, coupled with continuous subduction, would cer-
tainly mask any seismic evidence for a pre- Pleistocene trench.
61
CONCLUSIONS AND GEOLOGIC HISTORY
The morphology of Surveyor Deep-Sea Channel is found for most
of its length to be in agreement with that predicted by turbidity current
dynamic models. The measured contrasts in levee or bank heights
on either side of the entire channel are consistent with an assumed
depositional equilibrium between the channel morphology and turbi-
dity currents spilling the channel banks in response to Coriolis and
centrifugal accelerations.
That part of the channel east of Giaconiini Seamount also dis-
plays variations in center channel relief and cross sectional area
that are consistent with prediction. As the axial gradient decreases
downchannel the center channel relief increases in response to
changes in the slope dependent Froude number of turbidity currents.
Similarly, the measured cross sectional area of the channel in-
creases in response to changes in the slope dependent body velocity
of turbidity currents.
For that part of Surveyor Deep-Sea Channel west of Giacomini
Seamount the axial gradient increases sharply as the channel turns
northward and plunges into the eastern Aleutian Trench. The mea-
sured center channel relief and cross sectional area of this portion
of the channel continue to increase, dramatically contradicting pre-
diction. Sub-bottom seismic reflection profiles reveal that the
62
anomalous morphology of the lower channel is due to erosion in
response to a post- depositional increase in the axial gradient.
The uniform thickness and gentle declivity of seismic units, and
the continuity of individual sets of reflectors over wide expanses of
the Alaskan Abyssal Plain suggest that channel related turbidity
current activity has been responsible for the deposition of terrigen-
ous sediments over most of the northern Gulf of Alaska. The tex-
tural characteristics of sampled sediments support this conclusion,
there being a general increase in the number and thickness of coarse
grained units with proximity to both the continental slope and
Surveyor Deep-Sea Channel.
Both the well developed geologic history of the southeastern Alaskan
landmass and the stratigraphy of a ubiquitous and characteristic set
of reflectors commonly found near the channel thalweg suggest that
Surveyor Deep-Sea Channel originated in early to middle Pliocene time
coeval with the initiation of major glaciation and pronounced tectonism
in southeastern Alaska. These two processes would provide large
volumes of poorly sorted clastic material to the outer shelf and upper
slope of the continental margin. Earthquake activity, here in an area
of extreme seismic instability, would periodically initiate massive
slumping and failure in these deposits along wide expanses of the
upper slope. The resultant broad and trubulent sediment suspensions
may have been partially funneled inward by lateral bathymetric highs
upon reaching the base of the continental slope. Here the more
coarse grained materials within the flow would be deposited and high
velocity jets would be developed near the base of the sheetfiowing
turbidity current. A system of tributary channels would then co-
alesce forming the major course of Surveyor Deep-Sea Channel. The
genesis of the channel may therefore be unrelated to turbidity current
activity within a submarine canyon. In addition, its related sediments
were obtained directly from glacial sources unmodified by river
transport.
Implications from plate tectonic theories suggest that at the
time of its initial formation, Surveyor Deep-Sea Channel was located
more than 200 kilometers to the south of its present proximal position
with respect to sediment sources and the adjacent southeastern
Alaskan landmass. In the early history of its development, it may
have been distally contiguous with one of the fossil deep-sea channels
of the eastern Aleutian Abyssal Plain.
Motion of the Pacific plate with respect to North America re-
suited in the capture of Surveyor Deep-Sea Channel by the eastern
Aleutian Trench. This event largely isolated the Aleutian Abyssal
Plain from continental sediment sources. It also caused an increase
in the axial gradient of that portion of Surveyor Deep-Sea Channel
west of Giacornini Seamount, as the northern edge of the oceanic
plate was downwarped into the Aleutian Trench. Erosion by
64
accelerated turbidity currents is thought to be responsible for the
dramatic increase in center channel relief and cross- sectional area
of the lower reaches of the present course of the channel.
65
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Berg, E. 1964. The Alaskan Earthquake, Its Location and SeismicSetting: Proceedings, 15th Alaskan Science Conference, AAAS,p. 218-232.
Berggren, W. A. 1972. Hungarian Jour, of Paleontology, in press.
Burk, C. A. 1965. Geology of the Alaskan Peninsula - Island Arcand Continental Margin: Geol. Soc. Am Mem., 99.
Carison, P. R. 1968. Marine Geology of Astoria Submarine Canyon:Ph. D. Thesis, Oregon State University, Corvallis. 259 pages.
Chase, T. E., H. W. Menard and J. Mammerickx. 1969. Bathy-metry of the North Pacific: Sheet No. 3 of 10, SlO.
Chamberlin, T. C. 1904. The Methods of the Earth-Sciences:Popular Sci. Monthly, 66, p. 66-7 5.
Coulter, H. W., D. M. Hopkins, T. N. V. Karistrom, T. L. Pewe,C. Wahrhaftig and J. R. Williams. 1965. Map Showing Extentof Glaciations in Alaska: Misc. Geol. Investigations Map 1-415,U. S. Geol. Survey.
Cox, A. and G. B. Dairymple. 1967. Geomagnetic Polarity Epochs:Nunivak Islands, Alaska: Earth and Planetary Sci Letters, 3,p. 173-177.
Curray, 3. R. and D. G. Moore. 1971. Growth of the Bengal Deep-Sea Fan and Denudation in the Himalayas: Bull. Geol. Soc. Am.82, p. 563-572.
Davis, T. N. and C. Echols. 1962. A Table of Alaska Earthquakes,1788-1961: Geophys. Res. Rept. 8, Alaska University,Fairbanks, 43 pages.
Gibson, W. M. 1960. Submarine Topography in the Gulf of Alaska:Bull. Geol. Soc. Am., 71, p. 1087-1108.
Gibson, W. M. 1958. Gulf of Alaska Trough Parallels AleutianTrench: Bull. Geol. Soc. Am., 69, p. 611-614.
Griggs, G. B. 1969. Cascadia Channel: The Anatomy of a Deep-Sea Fan: Ph. D. Thesis, Oregon State University, Corvallis.183 numb, leaves,
Griggs, G. B, and L. D. Kulm. 1970a, Physiography of CascadiaDeep-Sea Channel: Northwest Science, 44, p. 82-93.
Griggs, G. B. and L. D. Kulm. 1970b. Sedimentation in CascadiaDeep-Sea Channel: Bull. Geol. Soc. Am., 81, p. 1361-1384.
Grim, P. and F. P. Naguler. 1969. Fossil Deep-Sea Channel onthe Aleutian Abyssal Plain: Science, 163, p. 383-386.
Grow, J. A. and T. Atwater. 1970. Mid-Tertiary Tectonic Transi-tion in the Aleutian Arc: Bull. Geol. Soc. Am., 81, p. 3715-3722.
Hamilton, E. L. 1969. Sound Velocity, Elasticity, and RelatedProperties of Marine Sediments, North Pacific. I. SedimentProperties, Environmental Control, and Empirical Relation-ships: Naval Undersea Res. and Development Center, NUC TP143, U. S. Navy.
Hamilton, E. L. 1967. Marine Geology of Abyssal Plains in the Gulfof Alaska: J. Geophys. Res.., 72, p. 4189-4213.
Heirtzler, J. R., G. 0. Dickson, E. M. Herron, W. C. Pitman andX, Le Pichon. 1968. Marine Magnetic Anomalies, GeomagneticField Reversals and Motions of the Ocean Floor and Continents:J, Geophys. Res., 73, p. 2119-2136,
Hurley, R. 3. 1960. The Geomorphology of Abyssal Plains in theNortheast Pacific Ocean: SIO Ref. 60-7, unpublished manu-script.
Isacks, B., J. Oliver and L, R. Sykes. 1968. Seismology and theNew Global Tectonics: J. Geophys. Res., 73, p. 5855-5899.
Jones, E. 3. W., J. Ewing and M. Truchan. 1971. Aleutian PlainSediments and Litho spheric Plate Motions: J. Geophys. Res,,76, p. 8121-8127.
67
Komar, P. D. 1969. The Channelized Flow of Turbidity Currentswith Application to Monterey Deep-Sea Fan Channel: J.Geophys. Res., 74, p. 4544-4558.
Komar, P. D. 1972. The Relative Significance of Head and BodySpill From a Channelized Turbidity Current: Bull. Geol. Soc.Am. , in press.
Kuim, L. D., R. von Huene, J. R. Duncan, J. C. Ingle, S. A. Kling,L. M. Musich, 0. Weser, D. J. W. Piper, H. Schrader andS. W. Wise. 1972. Results of Leg XVIII DSDP: (Abstract)Cordilleran Section Meeting of the Geol. Soc. Am., in press.
Le Pichon, S. 1968. Sea-Floor Spreading and Continental Drift: 3.Geophys. Res., 73, p. 3661-3697.
Mammerickx, J. 1970. Morphology of the Aleutian Abyssal Plain:Bull. Geol. Soc. Am., 81, p. 3457-3464.
Matthews, D. 3. 1939. Tables of the Velocity of Sound in PureWater and Sea Water for Use in Echo-Sounding and Sound-Ranging: Admiralty Hydrographic Department, London,H. D. 282, 52 pages.
Martin, B. D. and K. 0. Emery. 1967. Geology of MontereyCanyon, California: Am. Association Petrol. Geol. Bull., 51p. 2281-2304.
McKenzie, D. P. and R. L. Parker. 1967. The North Pacific: AnExample of Tectonics on a Sphere: Nature, 216, p. 1276-1280.
Menard, H. W. and R. S. Dietz. 1951. Submarine Geology of theGulf of Alask: Geol. Soc. Am. Bull., 62 P. 1263-1285.
Middleton, G. V. 1966. Experiments on Density and TurbidityCurrents I. Motion of the Head: Canadian Jour, of EarthSciences, 3, p. 523-546.
Menard, H. W. 1955. Deep-Sea Channels, Topography and Sedi-mentation: Am. Assoc. Petrol. Geol. Bull. , 39, p. 236-255.
Morgan, W. 3. 1968. Rises, Trenches, Great Faults, and CrustalBlocks: J. Geophys. Res., 73, p. 1959-1982.
Naugler, F. P. 1970. Aleutian Deep-Sea Channel on the AleutianAbyssal Plain: Nature, 228, No. 5276, p. 1081-1082.
Nelson, C. H. 1968. Marine Geology of Astoria Deep-Sea Fan:Ph. D. Thesis, Oregon State University, Corvallis. 59numb, leaves.
Ness, G. E. 1970. Turbidity Current Velocity Calculations forCascadia Deep-Sea Channel: Deep-Sea Sediments Term Report,Oregon State University, Corvallis. 16 pages.
Normark, W. R. 1970. Growth Patterns of Deep-Sea Fans: Am.Assoc. Petrol. Geol. Bull., 54, p. 2170-219 5.
Peter, G., B. H. Erickson and P. J. Grim. 1970. MagneticStructure of the Aleutian Trench and Northeast Pacific Basin:The Sea, Vol. 4, part II, p. 191-222.
Pitman, W. C. and D. E. Hayes. 1968. Sea-Floor Spreading in theGulf of Alaska: J. Geophys. Res., 73, p. 6571-6580.
Schieferdecker, A. A. G., editor, 1959. Geological Nomenclature:Royal Geological and Mining Society of the Netherlands.523 pages.
Scholl, D. W., J. S. Creager, R. E. Boyce, R. J. Echols, T. J.Fullam, 3. A. Grow, I. Koizum, J. H. Lee, H. Ling, P. R.Supko, R. J. Stewart and T. R. Worsley. 1971. Deep SeaDrilling Project Leg XIX: Geotimes, 16(11), p. 12-15.
St. Amand, P. 1957. Geological and Geophysical Synthesis of theTectonics of Portions of British Columbia, The YukonTerritory and Alaska: Geol. Soc. Am. Bull., 68, p. 1343-1370.
Stauder, W. 1968a. Mechanism of the Rat Island Earthquake Sequenceof 4 February 1965 with Relation to Island Arcs and Sea-FloorSpreading: J. Geophys. Res., 73, p. 3847-3858.
Stauder, W. 1968b. Tensional Character of Earthquake FociBeneath the Aleutian Trench with Relation to Sea-FloorSpreading: J. Geophys. Res., 73, p. 7693-7701.
Stoneley, R. 1967. The Structural Development of the Gulf ofAlaska Sedimentary Province in Southern Alaska: Geol. Soc.London Quart. Jour., 123, p. 25-57.
Trimpy, R. 1960. Paleotectonic Evolution of the Central andWesternAips: Geol. Soc. Am. Bull., 71, P. 843-908.
von Huene, R. and G. G. Shor, 1969. The Structure and TectonicHistory of The Eastern Aleutian Trench: Geol. Soc. Am. Bull.,80, p. 1889-1902.
von Huene, R., E. H. Lathram and E. Reimnitz. 1971. FuturePetroleum Provinces of the U. S. - Their Geology and Poten-tial: Cram, I. H. (ed,), Amer. Assoc. Petrol. Geol. Mem.15, vol. 1, p. 136-152.
von Huene, R., L. D. Kuim, J. R. Duncan, J. C. Ingle, S. A. Kling,L. M. Musich, D. J. W. Piper, R. M. Pratt, H. Schrader,0. Weser and S. W. Wise, Jr. 1971. Deep Sea DrillingProject Leg XVIII: Geotimes, 16(10), p. 12-16.
Wilde, P. 1965. Monterey Deep-Sea Fan: Ph. D. Thesis, HarvardUniversity, Cambridge.
APPENDICES
APPENDIX I. Location and Physiography of Channel Profiles
Crossing Latitude LongitudeAxialDepth
CenterChannelRelief
AxialGradient Cross Sectional Area
A 58008.41 N 141°41.0' W 3707 rn 99 m 1.4 rn/km 2.98 x105m2 ± 10%
B 58°06.O' 143°02.2' 3830 117 1.3 4.58 7%
C 57°46.9' 143°53.5' 3920 168 0.8 5.74 8%
D 57°32. S 144°41. 0' 3965 165 1.2 5.39 8%
E 57°20.1' 145°25.1' 4027 168 0.9 5,65 11%
F 56033.21 146041.51 4130 190 2.0 3.50 15%
G 56°04.8' 147°14. 3' 4254 212 2.4 4.39 9%
H 55°40.9' 148019.1! 4461 242 4.9 9.76 10%
I 5504601 149°00.5' 4689 366 7.5 7.07 14%
J 55°486' 149°12.0' 4804 421 5.8 787 8%
K 55°530' 149°28.8' 4912 450 3.5 11.55 10%
L 56°lO.5' 150008.0I 5107-J
APPENDIX II. Transport Calculations from Channel
71
Profiles
h Asin p tan p (m)
1
(h sin f3 10 5m2 Q (h sinp)A
A .0014 99 .3722 2.98 1.11
B .0014 117 .4047 4.58 1.85
C .0009 168 .3888 5.74 2.23
D .0009 165 .3854 5,39 2.08
E .0009 168 .3888 5,65 2.20
F .0021 190 .6317 3,50 2.22
G .0021 212 .6672 4.39 2.93
H .0056 242 1.1641 9.76 11.36
I .0056 366 1.4316 7.07 10.12
J .0056 421 1.535 7.87 12.08
K .0056 450 1.652 11,55 19.08
72
APPENDIX III, Magnetic Stratigraphy of Core Y70-4-56
APPENDIX IV. Alaskan Abyssal Plain Piston Core Locations and Descriptions
Core No. Latitude Longitude Length Description
Y70-2-35 55° 49.7'N 149° 10.9'W 400 cm
Y70-2-37 56° 08,5'N 147° 20.O1W 1211 cm
Y70-2-39 550 59.9'N 146° 24.3'W 1207 cm
Y70-2-40 56° 31.O'N 143° 48.9tW 988 cm
Y70-2-41 57° 10.2'N 141° 03,6'W 1151 cm
Lower channel axis core. Massive cleanmedium green and black sand throughout.
Lower channel north bank core. Massive,only occasionally laminated, medium green-gray silty clay. Two prominent sandmembers occur near the core bottom andone occurs at the very top.
Abyssal plain core south of lower channel.Medium gray silty clay with abundant siltlenses and two prominent sand membersnear top. One sand lens in lower half ofcore.
Abyssal plain core south of middle channel.Medium gray silty clay with abundant siltlenses and two prominent sand membersat top. Several closely spaced sand lensesin lower half of core.
Abyssal plain core south of upper channel.Medium gray silty clay with abundant sandlenses throughout. Upper two meters onlyfaintly laminated.
-JU.'
APPENDIX IV (Continued)
Core No. Latitude Longitude Length Description
Y70-3--48 58° 07.8'N 141° 40.9TW 537 cm
Y70-3-49 58° 10. 61N 141° 39.O'W
Y70-3-50 58° 06.1'N 141° 38.8'W
Y70-4-51 59° 05. OtN 143° 40.Z'W
590 cm
595 cm
588 cm
Y70-4-52 58° 54.6'N 143° 42.4'W 1128 cm
Upper channel axis core. Medium graysilty clay. Massive sand units up to 115 cmthick in upper half of core. 30 cm ofpebbles up to 7 mm at bottom of core.
Upper channel north bank core. Mediumgray clayey silt with abundant fine sandlenses throughout.
Upper channel south bank core. Mediumgray clayey silt with abundant fine sandlenses throughout.
Abyssal plain core near trench and lowercontinental slope. Medium gray silty claywith abundant sand lenses. Three sandmembers at top of core to 100 cm thick.
-J
APPENDIX IV (Continued)
Core No. Latitude Longitude Length Description
Y70-4-53 570 32.3'N 144° 43.O'W 417 cm Middle channel axis core. Massive non-laminated medium gray silty clay in upperhalf of core with several sand lenses inmiddle section. Massive fine sand membersup to 70 cm thick in lower half of core.:
Y70-4-54 56° 05. 2TN 140° 41. 3'W 1207 cm Abyssal plain core 200 km south of upperchannel. Medium gray silty clay withabundant silt lenses throughout.
Y70-4-56 53° 01.4'N 141° 41.4'W 1765 cm Central Alaskan Abyssal Plain core nearouter Baranof Fan. Medium gray mud withmany widely spaced silt lenses. Manyforam- rich zones and at least one ashlayer.