1] The International Bathymetric Chart of the Arctic Ocean (IBCAO) released its first gridded bathymetric compilation in 1999. The IBCAO bathymetric portrayals have since supported a wide range of Arctic science activities, for example, by providing constraint for ocean circulation models and the means to define and formulate hypotheses about the geologic origin of Arctic undersea features. IBCAO Version 3.0 represents the largest improvement since 1999 taking advantage of new data sets collected by the circum-Arctic nations, opportunistic data collected from fishing vessels, data acquired from US Navy submarines and from research ships of various nations. Built using an improved gridding algorithm, this new grid is on a 500 meter spacing, revealing much greater details of the Arctic seafloor than IBCAO Version 1.0 (2.5 km) and Version 2.0 (2.0 km). The area covered by multibeam surveys has increased from $6% in Version 2.0 to $11% in Version 3.0.

Bathymetry (seafloor depth), is a critical parameter providing the geospatial context for a multitude of marine scientific studies. Since 1997, the International Bathymetric Chart of the Arctic Ocean (IBCAO) has been the authoritative source of bathymetry for the Arctic Ocean. IBCAO has merged its efforts with the Nippon Foundation-GEBCO-Seabed 2030 Project, with the goal of mapping all of the oceans by 2030. Here we present the latest version (IBCAO Ver. 4.0), with more than twice the resolution (200 × 200 m versus 500 × 500 m) and with individual depth soundings constraining three times more area of the Arctic Ocean (∼19.8% versus 6.7%), than the previous IBCAO Ver. 3.0 released in 2012. Modern multibeam bathymetry comprises ∼14.3% in Ver. 4.0 compared to ∼5.4% in Ver. 3.0. Thus, the new IBCAO Ver. 4.0 has substantially more seafloor morphological information that offers new insights into a range of submarine features and processes; for example, the improved portrayal of Greenland fjords better serves predictive modelling of the fate of the Greenland Ice Sheet. Background & Summary A broad range of Arctic climate and environmental research, including questions on the declining cryosphere and the geological history of the Arctic Basin, require knowledge of the depth and shape of the seafloor 1-3. Bathymetry provides the geospatial framework for these and other studies 4 and has impact on many processes, including the pathways of ocean currents and, thus, the distribution of heat 5,6 , sea-ice decline 7 , the effect of inflowing warm waters on tidewater glaciers 8 , and the stability of marine-based ice streams and outlet glaciers grounded on the seabed 9-11. Bathymetric data from large parts of the Arctic Ocean are, however, not available or extremely sparse due to difficulties, both logistical and political, in accessing the region 12. The International Bathymetric Chart of the Arctic Ocean (IBCAO) project, was initiated in 1997 in St Petersburg, Russia, to address the need for up-to-date digital portrayals of the Arctic Ocean seafloor 13. Since 1997, three Digital Bathymetric Models (DBMs) have ingested new data sets compiled by the IBCAO project team and have been released for public use 14-16. These DBMs comprised grids with a regular cell size of 2.5 × 2.5 km (Ver. 1.0), 2 × 2 km (Ver. 2.0) and 500 × 500 m (Ver. 3.0) on a Polar Stereographic projection. Depth estimates for grid cells between constraining depth observations were interpolated by the continuous curvature spline in a tension gridding algorithm 17. All depth data available at the time of the compilations were used, including multi-and single-beam bathymetry, and contours and soundings digitized from depth charts, with direct depth observations having the highest priority and digitized contours the lowest 18. Recognizing the importance of complete global bathymetry, the General Bathymetric Chart of the Ocean (GEBCO), a project under the auspices of the International Hydrographic Organization (IHO) and the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commissio...

No abstract

Multibeam bathymetry and 3.5-kHz sub-bottom profiler data collected from the US icebreaker Healy in 2003 provide convincing evidence for grounded ice on the Chukchi Borderland off the northern Alaskan margin, Arctic Ocean. The data show parallel, glacially induced seafloor scours, or grooves, and intervening ridges that reach widths of 1000 m (rim to rim) and as much as 40 m relief. Following previous authors, we refer to these features as “megascale glacial lineations (MSGLs).” Additional support for ice grounding is apparent from stratigraphic unconformities, interpreted to have been caused by ice-induced erosion. Most likely, the observed sea-floor features represent evidence for massive ice-shelf grounding. The general ESE/WNW direction of the MSGLs, together with sediment, evidently bulldozed off the Chukchi Plateau, that is mapped on the western (Siberian) side of the plateau, suggests ice flow from the Canada Basin side of Chukchi Borderland. Two separate generations of glacially derived MSGLs are identified on the Chukchi Borderland from the Healy geophysical data. The deepest and oldest extensive MSGLs appear to be draped by sediments less than 5 m thick, whereas no sediment drape can be distinguished within the resolution of the sub-bottom profiles on the younger generation.

No abstract

No abstract

The Levant continental margin is divided into two major segments by the Carmel structure, which extends from the Dead Sea fault into the eastern Mediterranean. New seismic reflection data over the unexplored northern segment are used for completing the structural framework of the Levant area, together with existing data south of it. Inclusive depth structural maps of the area were produced for the base Pliocene and base Messinian evaporites. Previous studies indicate that differences between the two segments are well expressed in the deep crustal structure. The present study, which focuses mainly on the shallow section, shows that these differences are maintained throughout the accumulation of young sedimentary units, and even in the bathymetry. This preservation of segmentation, both in the shallow and in the deep structure, insinuates that the two segments were formed through different continental breakup processes, which continue to dictate the style of sediment accumulation.

No abstract