Sediment bioturbation experiments and the actual rock record
by Carl R. Froede Jr
Figure 1. Filter-feeding organisms have penetrated the quartz sands
creating vertical to subvertical burrows. The displaced sand now lies adjacent to
the opening of the burrow. The vertical nature and spacing of these tubes would
limit the extent of bioturbation. Only through a large population of organisms would
the horizontal sedimentary fabric be completely removed. Diameter of the larger
sand piles is approximately 10 cm. These particular traces would fall into the Skolithos
Ichnofacies. This setting is a modern subtidal lagoon located in St. Andrews State
Park, Panama City Beach, Florida.
The bioturbation of sediments by trace makers is often perceived by naturalists
as a process requiring extensive periods of time. Little experimental work has been
conducted to either support or refute such a concept. However, recent laboratory
analysis indicates that the bioturbation of marine sediments can occur within short
periods of time.
Bioturbation experiments
Marine worms, bivalves (clams), arthropods (shrimp and crabs), and echinoderms (sea
urchins and brittle stars) are just some of the many animals that live on or in
marine sediments (figures 1 and 2). The study of traces created in sediment is identified
as ichnology (Gk ichnos = trace).1
Recently, an investigation was conducted to determine the rate that select bivalves,
arthropods, and echinoderms could bioturbate marine sediments. The animals were
collected from tidal flats and shallow subtidal sediments from the Ogeechee estuary,
Georgia (U.S.A).2 They were
placed into glass aquaria filled with alternating layers of sand and heavy minerals
with each layer being approximately 5 to 10 mm thick.2 Examination of
the rate of bioturbation occurred at 1, 6, 24, 72 and 144 hour intervals by collecting
X-ray images of the aquaria sidewalls.2
Experiment results
The results of the study indicate that:
However, recent laboratory analysis indicates that the bioturbation of marine sediments
can occur within short periods of time.
“ … ten filter-feeding individuals could take as long as 115 yr to
churn a 1 m2 plot of sediment, by indexing the measured burrowing rates
to realistic animal population densities. Ten such mobile deposit feeders as irregular
echinoderms could bioturbate the same sediment in just 42 days. Under maximum population
densities modeled, the animals could bioturbate the sediment plot in 61 min. Given
the reported results, qualitative interpretation of the rock record is possible:
highly burrowed examples of the Skolithos Ichnofacies reflect high population
densities and at least seasonal time spans. Highly burrowed examples of the Cruziana
Ichnofacies may represent moderate population densities and short time spans.”3
Figure 2. Mobile deposit feeders have left a trail on top of the
quartz sand as they plowed through the sediments looking for food. These types of
trace makers moving through the sediment substrate would rapidly bioturbate the
sands and destroy any laminations in the sediments. These traces would fall into
the Cruziana Ichnofacies. The width of view is approximately 60 cm. The
setting is a modern subtidal lagoon located in St. Andrews State Park, Panama City
Beach, Florida.
It should be noted that the filter-feeding animals are interpreted to occur in the
Skolithos Ichnofacies (figure 3) while the mobile deposit feeders would
be found in the Cruziana Ichnofacies (figure 4). The benthic environment
for each of these ichnofacies is defined as:
“Skolithos Ichnofacies (shifting substrates)—Lower littoral
to infralittoral, moderate to relatively high-energy conditions most typical. Associated
with slightly muddy to clean, well-sorted, shifting sediments subject to abrupt
erosion or deposition. Higher energy increases physical reworking and obliterates
biogenic sedimentary structures, leaving a preserved record of physical stratification.
Generally corresponds to the beach foreshore and shoreface; but numerous other settings
of comparable energy levels also may be represented, such as some estuarine point
bars, tidal deltas, and deep-sea fans.
“Cruziana Ichnofacies (shifting to stable substrates)—In shallow
marine settings, typically includes infralittoral to shallow circalittoral substrates
below minimum but not maximum wave base, to somewhat quieter conditions offshore;
moderate to relatively low energy; well-sorted silts and sands, to interbedded muddy
and clean sands, moderately to intensely bioturbated; negligible to appreciable
(though not necessarily rapid) sedimentation. A very common type of depositional
environment, including not only shelves and epeiric embayments but also littoral
to sub-littoral parts of certain estuaries, bays, lagoons, and tidal flats.”4
Implications for the rock record
the challenge to explaining highly bioturbated sediments no longer requires deep
time—it depends on the availability and types of trace makers.
If we are consistent in applying the uniformitarian philosophy to the rock record
then we should expect a high level of bioturbation for almost all of the sediments
deposited in a former marine setting, especially if that environment existed with
little to no change for thousands to millions of years. Counter to that conceptualization,
some diluvialists have predicted that we should expect little sediment bioturbation
due to the high-energy conditions associated with the Genesis Flood.5 Within this diluvial interpretation it could be
postulated that the rapid deposition of sediments, one atop another, would leave
little time for trace makers to move in and stir them. However, neither perspective
is consistent with the actual rock record (figure 5).
Figure 3. Skolithos traces dominate this exposure of the
Meridian Sand from Campbell Mountain, Alabama. Note the vertical to subvertical
traces in the sand filled by gray clay. Conditions were optimum for trace maker
activity and the amount of time necessary to create these traces could be measured
in months, not years or decades. Sediment deposition during this portion of the
Flood was low enough to allow the bioturbation of the sediments and the destruction
of any preexisting sedimentary fabric. Scale in inches and centimeters.
|
Figure 4. This image shows Cruziana traces created as casts on
the base of a sandstone layer.7
This type of sediment stirring activity would rapidly destroy any preexisting sedimentary
fabric. This outcrop is located alongside Lookout Mountain, Georgia (USA). Scale
in inches and centimeters.
|
Figure 5. Sidewall along Providence Canyon, Georgia (USA). Uniformitarians
assert that these sands were deposited in a mixed-energy barrier island setting
cut by tidal inlets.8 Some
of the canyon sidewalls display a few sub-vertical Ophiomorpha traces but
many more do not. This sidewall exhibits no evidence of any bioturbation where it
would be expected within the hypothesized uniformitarian setting. The cross-bedding
displayed in the sands indicates this was a high-energy depositional environment.
While some trace makers were present in this energetic setting, they had little
opportunity to bioturbate the sediments due to rapid deposition and the reworking
of the sediments during the later stages of the Flood. Scale in 15-cm divisions.
The presence or absence of trace fossils and bioturbated sediments is dependent
on many different factors including trace maker population density, sediment firmness,
salinity, pH, food and oxygen. Also, the behavior of trace makers facing abnormal
environmental stress should be considered. For example, Woodmorappe6 proposed a unique idea suggesting that rapid bioturbation
could occur concurrently in several vertical tiers if the stressed ichnofauna were
protected from sediment compaction and provided an aerobic environment. Many different
factors would go into determining if this occurred or if the traces were rapidly
produced as individual layers. There are many reasons why sediments may or may not
have been bioturbated within a proposed diluvial setting and the site-specific paleoenvironmental
factors should be identified.
Conclusions
Recent laboratory experiments document that the bioturbation of marine sediments
can occur over a short period of time depending on the type and population density
of trace makers. For uniformitarians, the lack of any stirred sediment requires
that they appeal to punctuated catastrophic events. Such events do not eliminate
their reliance on deep time assumptions—the vertical rock record should exhibit
layers of intense bioturbation interrupted by nonbioturbated sedimentary events
followed by intense bioturbation. However, this is not typically found in the actual
rock record.
As diluvialists, we can use trace fossils to help define the probable geologic conditions
in which the traces were created relative to the Flood setting. Knowing the differences
in the rate of bioturbation between the Skolithos and Cruziana
ichnofacies allows diluvialists to possibly estimate the time period in which these
traces were formed. Where no bioturbation has occurred, we need to determine the
factors that prevented trace makers from stirring those sediments.
The importance of this new experimental work cannot be overemphasized as the challenge
to explaining highly bioturbated sediments no longer requires deep time—it
depends on the availability and types of trace makers. A large population of filter-feeding
or mobile sediment-feeding animals could easily bioturbate marine sediments within
the short time frames of the global Flood of Genesis. The lack of any bioturbation
should direct us to other important considerations why sediment stirring did not
occur.
Related articles
References
- Cowart, J.H. and Froede, C.R., Jr., The use of trace fossils
in refining depositional environments and their application to the creationist model,
Creation Research Society Quarterly 31:117–124,
1994. This is an overview of the field of ichnology as it relates to the global
Flood of Genesis. Return to text.
- Gingras, M.K., Pemberton, S.G., Dashtgard, S. and Dafoe, L.,
How fast do marine invertebrates burrow? Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology
270:280–286, 2008. Return to text.
- Gingras et al., ref. 2, p. 280.
Return to text.
- MacEachern, J.A., Pemberton, S.G., Gingras, M.K. and Bann,
K.L., The ichnofacies paradigm: A fifty-year retrospective; in: Miller,
W., III. (Ed.), Trace Fossils: Concepts, Problems, Prospects, Elsevier,
New York, pp. 52–77, 2007; p. 59. Return to text.
- Anonymous, Burrowing rates, Geoscience Newsletter
17:2, 2009. Return to text.
- Woodmorappe, J.,
Are soft-sediment trace fossils (ichnofossils) a time problem for the Flood?
Journal of Creation 20(2):113–122, 2006.
Return to text.
- Froede, C.R., Jr. and Cowart, J.H., Dougherty Gap: evidence
for a turbidity current paleoenvironment, Creation Research Society Quarterly
32:202–214, 1996. Return to text.
- Donovan, A.A., Sedimentology of the Providence Formation;
in: Reinhardt, J. (Ed.), Stratigraphy and Sedimentology of Continental Nearshore
and Marine Cretaceous Sediments of the Eastern Gulf Coastal Plain, Georgia
Geological Society, Atlanta, GA, pp. 29–44, 1986. Return to
text.
| Ken E. wrote: “I just wanted to drop a note to express my gratitude for the kind of information you supply at the CMI web-site. I love science and find it thrilling to see how it may be used to glorify God and build faith in Him.” Glorify God in His creation.  | | |
|
