Nannofossil palaeoecology of Lower Miocene sapropels from IODP Expedition 359, the Maldives

• Published in: Palaeogeography, palaeoclimatology, palaeoecology palaeoclimatology, palaeoecology, 2021-06, Vol.571, p.110325, Article 110325
• Main Authors: Young, Jeremy R., Archontikis, Odysseas A., Su, Xiang, Pratiwi, Santi D.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Age-models; Anoxic sediments; Coccoliths; Early Miocene; Indian Ocean; Microfossils
• ISSN: 0031-0182; 1872-616X
• DOI: 10.1016/j.palaeo.2021.110325

During IODP expedition 359 multiple holes recovered Modern to Middle Miocene sediments from the Kardiva Drift which is strongly influenced by monsoonally-driven currents. Two holes continued below the drift into Lower Miocene sediments that were deposited under rather different conditions following Oligocene subsidence of the Maldives Ridge. These sediments are characterised by marked alternation between dark organic-rich sapropelic sediments and pale nannofossil oozes. This interval is also characterised by generally good to excellent nannofossil preservation. Nannofossil assemblages from the sapropel and non-sapropel intervals are broadly similar; both sediment types contain diverse normal marine assemblages and no taxa are confined to either sediment type. In the sapropels nannofossil abundance and diversity tends to be lower and Cyclicargolithus floridanus specimens are smaller. In addition Umbilicosphaera abundances are higher in the non-sapropel layers whilst Discoaster abundance is higher in most sapropels. These differences are more marked in the better developed sapropels. The nannofossil evidence supports the interpretation from geochemistry that sapropel formation was primarily driven by changes in bottom water ventilation linked to sea-level change rather than surface water productivity. •Well-preserved nannofossil assemblages are described from sapropels.•The sapropels are dated to 21.5–24 Ma (Early Miocene and end Oligocene).•The sapropels assemblages are quantitatively different from those in the intervening beds.•The assemblage changes are suggestive of increased productivity during sapropel formation.•Increased productivity is unlikely to be the prime driver of sapropel formation.