1985
DOI: 10.4319/lo.1985.30.5.0944
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Anaerobic methane oxidation rates at the sulfate‐methane transition in marine sediments from Kattegat and Skagerrak (Denmark)1

Abstract: Concomitant radiotracer measurements were made of in situ rates of sulfate reduction and anaerobic methane oxidation in 2-3-m-long sediment cores. Methane accumulated to high concentrations (> 1 mM CH,) only below the sulfate zone, at 1 m or deeper in the sediment. Sulfate reduction showed a broad maximum below the sediment surface and a smaller, narrow maximum at the sulfate-methane transition. Methane oxidation was low (0.002-0.1 nmol CH, cm-3 d-l) throughout the sulfate zone and showed a sharp maximum at th… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

15
282
0

Year Published

2001
2001
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 510 publications
(297 citation statements)
references
References 42 publications
15
282
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In marine sediments, anaerobic methane oxidation is the dominant pathway for methane consumption (Blair and Aller, 1995;Borowski et al, 1996;Burns, 1998;Iverson and Jørgensen, 1985;Reeburgh, 1980), and consequently, the flux of methane to the atmosphere from marine sediments is small compared to other sources (Reeburgh, 1996). However, it is unclear whether this has always been true or if this process can be disrupted by future climate change, and thus, it is important to understand the mechanism of anaerobic methane oxidation.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In marine sediments, anaerobic methane oxidation is the dominant pathway for methane consumption (Blair and Aller, 1995;Borowski et al, 1996;Burns, 1998;Iverson and Jørgensen, 1985;Reeburgh, 1980), and consequently, the flux of methane to the atmosphere from marine sediments is small compared to other sources (Reeburgh, 1996). However, it is unclear whether this has always been true or if this process can be disrupted by future climate change, and thus, it is important to understand the mechanism of anaerobic methane oxidation.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While AOM is thus generally coupled to SO 4 2À reduction (SDMO) in marine waters and sediments (e.g. Iversen and Jørgensen, 1985;Boetius et al, 2000;Jørgensen et al, 2001), other electron acceptors of AOM have been much less frequently studied in freshwater systems. Due to low the SO 4 2À concentrations usually observed in freshwaters environments, AOM is often considered to be negligible compared to aerobic CH 4 oxidation (Rudd et al, 1974).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Anaerobic oxidation of CH 4 (AOM) is known to be coupled to the reduction of sulfate (SO Knittel and Boetius 2009;Ettwig et al 2010). Most studies of AOM have been conducted with marine sediment, and although the specific biochemical mechanisms have not yet been unraveled, the AOM coupled to sulfate reduction (SR) is a well-documented process, occurring in the sulfate-methane transition zone (SMTZ) in marine sediments, where it is performed by a consortium of archaea and sulfate-reducing bacteria (Iversen and Jørgensen 1985;Boetius et al 2000). Here the process is evident from the depth distribution of CH 4 and SO 2{ 4 (Reeburgh 1976;Iversen and Jørgensen 1985) and from stable isotopic composition (d 13 C) of CH 4 (Alperin et al 1988), and it can be directly quantified in incubations with 14 (Iversen and Jørgensen 1985;Treude et al 2005).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Most studies of AOM have been conducted with marine sediment, and although the specific biochemical mechanisms have not yet been unraveled, the AOM coupled to sulfate reduction (SR) is a well-documented process, occurring in the sulfate-methane transition zone (SMTZ) in marine sediments, where it is performed by a consortium of archaea and sulfate-reducing bacteria (Iversen and Jørgensen 1985;Boetius et al 2000). Here the process is evident from the depth distribution of CH 4 and SO 2{ 4 (Reeburgh 1976;Iversen and Jørgensen 1985) and from stable isotopic composition (d 13 C) of CH 4 (Alperin et al 1988), and it can be directly quantified in incubations with 14 (Iversen and Jørgensen 1985;Treude et al 2005). AOM coupled to SR efficiently consumes most of the methane produced in marine sediments, but there is little evidence of a role for this process in freshwater sediments, where SR is limited and methanogenesis is favored by sulfate concentrations that are typically 2-3 orders of magnitude lower than in the ocean.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%