Geo-Marine Letters

, Volume 30, Issue 1, pp 47–62 | Cite as

A snapshot of suspended sediment and fluid mud occurrence in a mixed-energy embayment, Tijucas Bay, Brazil

  • Carlos Augusto Fran ça Schettini
  • Dermeval Costa de Almeida
  • Eduardo Siegle
  • Ant ônio Carlos Brand ão de Alencar
Original

Abstract

Along the southern Brazilian coast, Tijucas Bay is known for its unique muddy tidal flats associated with chenier plains. Previous field observations pointed to very high suspended sediment concentrations (SSCs) in the inner parts of the bay, and in the estuary of the Tijucas River, suggesting the presence of fluid mud. In this study, the occurrences of suspended sediments and fluid mud were examined during a larger-scale, high-resolution 2-day field campaign on 1–2 May 2007, encompassing survey lines spanning nearly 80 km, 75 water sampling stations for near-bottom density estimates, and ten sediment sampling stations. Wave refraction modeling provided qualitative wave energy estimates as a function of different incidence directions. The results show that SSC increases toward the inner bay near the water surface, but seaward near the bottom. This suggests that suspended sediment is supplied by the local rivers, in particular the Tijucas. Near-surface SSCs were of the order of 50 mg l−1 close to the shore, but exceeded 100 mg l−1 near the bottom in the deeper parts of the bay. Fluid mud thickness and location given by densimetry and echo-sounding agreed in some places, although being mostly discordant. The best agreement was observed where wave energy was high during the campaign. The discrepancy between the two methods may be an indication for the existence of fluid mud, which is recorded by one method but not the other. Agreement is considered to be an indication of fluidization, whereas disagreement indicates more consolidation. Wave modeling suggests that waves from the ENE and SE are the most effective in supplying energy to the inner bay, which may induce the liquefaction of mud deposits to form fluid mud. Nearshore mud resuspension and weak horizontal currents result in sediment-laden offshore flow, which explains the higher SSCs measured in the deeper parts of the bay, besides providing a mechanism for fine-sediment export to the inner shelf.

Keywords

Liquefaction Wave Height Suspended Sediment Acoustic Doppler Current Profiler Cohesive Sediment 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Supplementary material

367_2009_152_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (1 mb)
Supplementary material, approximately 1.01 MB.

References

  1. Allen GP, Sauzay G, Castaing P, Jouanneau JM (1977) Transport and deposition of suspended sediment in the Gironde estuary, France. In: Wiley M (ed) Estuarine processes, vol 2. Academic, New York, pp 63–81Google Scholar
  2. Ara újo CES, Franco D, Melo E, Pimenta F (2003) Wave regime characteristics of the southern Brazilian coast. In: Proc 6th Int Conf Coastal and Port Engineering in Developing Countries, COPEDEC VI, September 2003, Colombo, Sri Lanka, Paper no 97, CD-ROMGoogle Scholar
  3. Asp NE, Buynevich I, Siegle E, Fitzgerald D, Klein AHF, Cleary W, Angulo R (2005) Coastal geomorphology of Tijucas, SC-Brazil: preliminary Holocene evolution model. In: Anais X Congr Associa ç ão Brasileira de Estudos do Quatern ário, 9–16 October 2005, Guarapari, Brazil, ABEQUA, pp 6–12Google Scholar
  4. Bartholom ä A, Kubicki A, Badewien TA, Flemming BW (2009) Suspended sediment transport in the German Wadden Sea—seasonal variations and extreme events. Ocean Dynamics 59:213–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Been K, Sills GC (1981) Self weight consolidation of soft soils: an experimental and theoretical study. Geotechnique 31:519–535CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Buynevich I, Asp N, Fitzgerald D, Cleary W, Klein AHF, Siegle E, Angulo R (2005) Mud in the surf: nature at work in a Brazilian bay. EOS Trans Am Geophys Union 86:301–308CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Carver RE (1971) Procedures in sedimentary petrology. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  8. Dean WE (1974) Determination of carbonate and organic matter in calcareous sediments and sedimentary rocks by loss on ignition; comparison with other methods. J Sediment Res 44(1):242–248Google Scholar
  9. Deines KL (1999) Backscatter estimation using broadband acoustic Doppler current profilers. In: Proc IEEE 6th Work Conf Current Measurements, 13–16 September 1999, San Diego, CA, pp 249–253Google Scholar
  10. de Wit PJ, Kranenburg C (1997) The wave induced liquefaction of cohesive sediment beds. Estuarine Coastal Shelf Sci 45:261–271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. DHI (2007) MIKE21 FM. User guide and reference manual. DHI, H ørsholmGoogle Scholar
  12. Downing JP, Sternberg RW, Lister CRB (1981) New instrumentation for the investigation of sediment suspension processes in the shallow marine environment. Mar Geol 42:19–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dyer KR (1986) Coastal and estuarine sediment dynamics. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  14. Dyer KR (1995) Sediment transport processes in estuaries. In: Perillo GME (ed) Geomorphology and sedimentology of estuaries. Elsevier, New York, pp 423–449CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Eisma D (1986) Flocculation and de-flocculation of suspended matter in estuaries. J Sea Res 20(1/3):183–199Google Scholar
  16. Fitzgerald DM, Cleary WJ, Buynevich IV, Hein CJ, Klein AHF, Nils EA, Angulo R (2005) Strand plain evolution along the southern coast of Santa Catarina, Brazil. J Coastal Res SI 50:1–15Google Scholar
  17. Flemming BW (2000) A revised textural classification of gravel-free muddy sediments on the basis of ternary diagrams. Cont Shelf Res 20:1125–1137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Foda MA, Tzang SY (1994) Resonant fluidization of silty soil by water waves. J Geophys Res 99:463–475Google Scholar
  19. Foda MA, Hunt JR, Chou HT (1993) A nonlinear model for the fluidization of marine mud by waves. J Geophys Res 98:7039–7047CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Folk RL (1966) A review of grain-size parameters. Sedimentology 6(2):73–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Fontein W, Wal J (2006) Assessing nautical depth efficiently in terms of rheological characteristics. In: Proc Int Hydrographic Conf, 6–9 November 2006, Antwerp, Belgium, Hydro InternationalGoogle Scholar
  22. GAPLAN (1986) Atlas de Santa Catarina. Aerofoto Cruzeiro, Rio de JaneiroGoogle Scholar
  23. Gartner JW (2004) Estimating suspended solid concentrations from backscatter intensity measured by Doppler current profiler in San Francisco Bay, California. Mar Geol 211:169–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hesp PA, Giannini PCF, Martinho CT, Silva GM, Asp NE (2009) The Holocene barrier systems of the Santa Catarina coast, southern Brazil. In: Dillenburg S, Hesp P (eds) Geology and geomorphology of Holocene coastal barriers of Brazil. Lecture Notes in Earth Sciences, vol 107. Springer, Berlin, pp 93–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hoitink AJF, Hoekstra P (2005) Observations of suspended sediments from ADCP and OBS measurements in a mud-dominated environment. Coastal Eng 52:103–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Holdaway GP, Thorne PD, Flatt D, Jones SE, Prandle D (1999) Comparison between ADCP and transmissometer measurements of suspended sediment concentration. Cont Shelf Res 19:421–441CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Holthuijsen LH, Booij N, Herbers THC (1989) A prediction model for stationary, short-crested waves in shallow water with ambient current. Coastal Eng 13:23–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kineke GC, Sternberg RW (1992) Measurements of high concentrated suspended sediments using the optical backscatterance sensor. Mar Geol 108(3/4):253–258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kirby R, Parker WR (1983) The distribution and behavior of the fine sediment in the Severn estuary and inner Bristol Channel. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 40:83–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lamb MP, Parsons JD (2005) High-density suspensions formed under waves. J Sediment Res 75(3):386–397CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lohrmann A (2001) Monitoring sediment concentration with acoustic backscattering instruments. Nortek AS, Rud, Norway, Nortek Tech Note no 03Google Scholar
  32. McAnally WH, Friedrichs C, Hamilton D, Hayter E, Shrestha P, Rodriguez H, Sheremet A, Teeter A (2007a) Management of fluid mud in estuaries, bays, and lakes. I. Present state of understanding of character and behavior. J Hydraul Eng 133(1):9–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. McAnally WH, Teeter A, Schoellhamer D, Friedrichs C, Hamilton D, Hayter E, Shrestha P, Rodriguez H, Sheremet A, Kirby R (2007b) Management of fluid mud in estuaries, bays, and lakes. II. Measurement, modeling, and management. J Hydraul Eng 133(1):23–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Mehta AJ, Hayter EJ, Parker WR, Krone RB, Teeter AM (1989) Cohesive sediment transport. 1. Process description. ASCE J Hydraul Eng 115:1076–1093CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Menon MG, Gibbs RJ, Phillips A (2004) Accumulations of muds and metals in the Hudson River estuary turbidity maximum. Environ Geol 34(2/3):214–222Google Scholar
  36. Raudkivi AJ (1990) Loose boundary hydraulics, 3rd edn. Pergamon, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  37. Schettini CAF (2002a) Caracteriza ç ão f ísica do estu ário do rio Itaja í-A çu. Rev Brasileira Recursos H ídricos 7(1):123–142Google Scholar
  38. Schettini CAF (2002b) Near bed sediment transport in the Itaja í-A çu River estuary, southern Brazil. In: Winterwerp JC, Kranenburg C (eds) Fine sediment dynamics in the marine environment. Elsevier, New York, pp 499–512CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Schettini CAF, Toldo EE Jr (2006) Fine sediment transport modes in the Itaja í-A çu estuary, Southern Brazil. J Coastal Res SI 39:515–519Google Scholar
  40. Schettini CAF, Zaleski AR (2006) A utiliza ç ão de perfiladores ac ústicos de corrente por efeito Doppler na determina ç ão do material particulado em suspens ão na água: aplica ç ões. Rev Brasileira Recursos H ídricos 11(2):201–208Google Scholar
  41. Schettini CAF, Carvalho JLB, Jabor P (1996) Comparative hydrology and suspended matter distribution of four estuaries in Santa Catarina State, southern Brazil. In: Proc Worksh Comparative Studies of Temperate Coast Estuaries, 29 July–2 August 1996, Bahia Blanca, Argentina, IADO, pp 29–32Google Scholar
  42. Schettini CAF, Ricklefs K, Truccolo EC, Golbig V (2006) Synoptic hydrography of a highly stratified estuary. Ocean Dynamics 56:308–319CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Schrottke K, Becker M, Bartholom ä A, Flemming BW, Hebbeln H (2006) Fluid mud dynamics in the Weser estuary turbidity zone tracked by high-resolution side-scan sonar and parametric sub-bottom profiler. Geo-Mar Lett 26(3):185–198. doi: 10.1007/s00367-006-0027-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Siegle E, Asp NE (2007) Wave refraction and long shore transport patterns along the southern Santa Catarina Coast. Braz J Oceanogr 55(2):109–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Siegle E, Schettini CAF, Klein AHF, Toldo EE Jr (2009) Hydrodynamics and suspended sediment transport in the Cambori ú estuary—Brazil: pre jetty conditions. Braz J Oceanogr 57(2):123–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Stark N, Wever TF (2009) Unravelling subtle details of expendable bottom penetrometers (XBP) deceleration profiles. Geo-Mar Lett 29:39–45. doi: 10.1007/s00367-008-0119-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Stech JL, Lorenzzetti JA (1992) The response of the South Brazil Bight to the passage of wintertime cold fronts. J Geophys Res 97(C6):9507–9520CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Teeter AM (1992) Evaluation of a new fluid mud survey system at field sites. US Army Eng Waterways Experiment Station, Dredging Res Tech Notes DRP-2-05Google Scholar
  49. Teeter AM (1994) Fluid mud survey investigations at the Calcasieu Lake entrance channel, Florida. US Army Engineers Waterways Experiment Station, Dredging Res Tech Notes DRP-2-08Google Scholar
  50. Tolman HL (1997) User manual and system documentation of WAVEWATCH-III version 1.15. NOAA/NWS/NCEP/OMB Tech Note 151Google Scholar
  51. Tolman HL (1999) User manual and system documentation of WAVEWATCH-III version 1.18. NOAA/NWS/NCEP/OMB Tech Note 166Google Scholar
  52. Traykovski P, Geyer WR, Irish JD, Lynch JF (2000) The role of wave-induced density-driven fluid mud flows for cross-shelf transport on the Eel River continental shelf. Cont Shelf Res 20:2113–2140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Truccolo EC, Franco D, Schettini CAF (2006) The low frequency sea-level oscillations in the northern coast of Santa Catarina, Brazil. J Coastal Res SI 39:547–552Google Scholar
  54. van Rijn LC (1993) Principles of sediment transport in rivers, estuaries and coastal seas. Aqua, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  55. Winterwerp JC (2005) Reducing harbor siltation. I. Methodology. J Waterway Port Coastal Ocean Eng 131(6):258–266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Winterwerp JC, van Kesteren WGM (2004) Introduction to the physics of cohesive sediment dynamics in the marine environment. Elsevier, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  57. Wright LD, Nittrouer CA (1995) Dispersal of river sediments in coastal seas: six contrasting cases. Estuaries Coasts 18(3):494–508CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Wright LD, Friedrichs CT, Kiom SC, Scully ME (2001) Effects of ambient currents and waves on gravity-driven sediment transport on continental shelves. Mar Geol 175:25–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Zaleski AR, Schettini CAF (2006) Procedimentos para calibra ç ão de perfiladores ac ústicos de corrente por efeito Doppler para a determina ç ão da concentra ç ão do material particulado em suspens ão na água. Rev Brasileira Recursos H ídricos 11(3):191–200Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Carlos Augusto Fran ça Schettini
    • 1
  • Dermeval Costa de Almeida
    • 2
    • 3
  • Eduardo Siegle
    • 4
  • Ant ônio Carlos Brand ão de Alencar
    • 5
  1. 1.Instituto de Ci ências do MarUniversidade Federal do Cear á (LABOMAR/UFC)FortalezaBrazil
  2. 2.Mestrado em Ci ência e Tecnologia Ambiental, Centro de Ci ências Tecnol ógicas da Terra e do MarUniversidade de Vale do Itaja í (CTTMar/UNIVALI)Itaja íBrazil
  3. 3.Servi ços de Opera ç ões Mar ítmas LTDA (SOMAR)Rio de JaneiroBrazil
  4. 4.Instituto Oceanogr áficoUniversidade de S ão Paulo (IO-USP)S ão PauloBrazil
  5. 5.Centro de Ci ências Tecnol ógicas da Terra e do MarUniversidade de Vale do Itaja í (CTTMar/UNIVALI)Itaja íBrazil

Personalised recommendations