Abstract
Warming air and sea temperatures, longer open-water seasons and sea-level rise collectively promote the erosion of permafrost coasts in the Arctic, which profoundly impacts organic matter pathways. Although estimates on organic carbon (OC) fluxes from erosion exist for some parts of the Arctic, little is known about how much OC is transformed into greenhouse gases (GHGs). In this study we investigated two different coastal erosion scenarios on Qikiqtaruk – Herschel Island (Canada) and estimate the potential for GHG formation. We distinguished between a delayed release represented by mud debris draining a coastal thermoerosional feature and a direct release represented by cliff debris at a low collapsing bluff. Carbon dioxide (CO2) production was measured during incubations at 4°C under aerobic conditions for two months and were modeled for four months and a full year. Our incubation results show that mud debris and cliff debris lost a considerable amount of OC as CO2 (2.5 ± 0.2 and 1.6 ± 0.3% of OC, respectively). Although relative OC losses were highest in mineral mud debris, higher initial OC content and fresh organic matter in cliff debris resulted in a ∼three times higher cumulative CO2 release (4.0 ± 0.9 compared to 1.4 ± 0.1 mg CO2 gdw–1), which was further increased by the addition of seawater. After four months, modeled OC losses were 4.9 ± 0.1 and 3.2 ± 0.3% in set-ups without seawater and 14.3 ± 0.1 and 7.3 ± 0.8% in set-ups with seawater. The results indicate that a delayed release may support substantial cycling of OC at relatively low CO2 production rates during long transit times onshore during the Arctic warm season. By contrast, direct erosion may result in a single CO2 pulse and less substantial OC cycling onshore as transfer times are short. Once eroded sediments are deposited in the nearshore, highest OC losses can be expected. We conclude that the release of CO2 from eroding permafrost coasts varies considerably between erosion types and residence time onshore. We emphasize the importance of a more comprehensive understanding of OC degradation during the coastal erosion process to improve thawed carbon trajectories and models.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Article number | 630493 |
| Pages (from-to) | 1-20 |
| Number of pages | 20 |
| Journal | Frontiers in Earth Science |
| Volume | 9 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 26 Mar 2021 |
Bibliographical note
Funding Information:We would like to thank O. Burckhardt, J. Oury, C. Burau, D. Scheidemann, H. Meyer, M. Weiner, K. Keskitalo, and D. Jong for support during lab work. K. Klein and D. Jong are thanked for assistance during field work and J. Kahl for logistical support. We thank A. Irrgang for contributing photographs from field work. We would like to especially thank the park rangers and R. Gordon from Qikiqtaruk ? Herschel Island Territorial Park for their support and guidance on their land. The Aurora Research Institute in Inuvik is thanked for the logistical support on site. Data supporting this study is available on the PANGAEA data repository (in review; data submitted on 05 January 2021). Funding. We acknowledge and are grateful for the financial support from the H2020 project NUNATARYUK (grant 773421), the Helmholtz young investigators group TEAM (grant VH-NG-821 to TS) and the ERC StG project THAWSOME (grant 676982 to JV). JS was supported by the Changing Arctic Ocean program (NERC-BMBF project CACOON, grant 03F0806A) and CB by the German research foundation DFG (BE 6485/1-1).
Publisher Copyright:
© Copyright © 2021 Tanski, Bröder, Wagner, Knoblauch, Lantuit, Beer, Sachs, Fritz, Tesi, Koch, Haghipour, Eglinton, Strauss and Vonk.
Copyright:
Copyright 2021 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
Funding
We would like to thank O. Burckhardt, J. Oury, C. Burau, D. Scheidemann, H. Meyer, M. Weiner, K. Keskitalo, and D. Jong for support during lab work. K. Klein and D. Jong are thanked for assistance during field work and J. Kahl for logistical support. We thank A. Irrgang for contributing photographs from field work. We would like to especially thank the park rangers and R. Gordon from Qikiqtaruk ? Herschel Island Territorial Park for their support and guidance on their land. The Aurora Research Institute in Inuvik is thanked for the logistical support on site. Data supporting this study is available on the PANGAEA data repository (in review; data submitted on 05 January 2021). Funding. We acknowledge and are grateful for the financial support from the H2020 project NUNATARYUK (grant 773421), the Helmholtz young investigators group TEAM (grant VH-NG-821 to TS) and the ERC StG project THAWSOME (grant 676982 to JV). JS was supported by the Changing Arctic Ocean program (NERC-BMBF project CACOON, grant 03F0806A) and CB by the German research foundation DFG (BE 6485/1-1).
| Funders | Funder number |
|---|---|
| European Research Council | |
| Horizon 2020 Framework Programme | 676982, 773421, VH-NG-821 |
| NERC-BMBF | 03F0806A |
| Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft | BE 6485/1-1 |
UN SDGs
This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
-
SDG 13 Climate Action
-
SDG 14 Life Below Water
Keywords
- Arctic
- biogeochemistry
- biomarkers
- carbon cycling
- carbon dioxide
- coastal erosion
- greenhouse gases
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Permafrost Carbon and CO2 Pathways Differ at Contrasting Coastal Erosion Sites in the Canadian Arctic'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver