Chinese Science Bulletin

, Volume 52, Issue 15, pp 2140–2146 | Cite as

Detection of methane plumes in the water column of Logatchev hydrothermal vent field, Mid-Atlantic Ridge

  • Zhou HuaiYang 
  • Wu ZiJun 
  • Peng XiaoTong 
  • Jiang Lei 
  • Tang Song 
Articles Oceanology


During DY105-17 cruise onboard the R/V “Da Yang Yi Hao” in 2005, methane concentrations in the water column above Logachev hydrothermal vent field were measured by applying stripping/trapping-gas chromatographic (GC) and the distinct methane plumes were detected. Results show that the background methane concentration within the Logachev area is from 1.05 nmol/L to 1.68 nmol/L, significantly higher than the background level of the Atlantic abyssal plain of 0.4–0.5 nmol/L, suggesting that hydrothermal venting is a major source of dissolved methane to the ocean. The highest anomalies of methane concentrations in the water column range from 7.14 nmol/L to 113.9 nmol/L and occur just at 180–500 m above the seafloor. The distribution of methane concentration and the structural characteristics of hydrothermal plumes are strongly influenced by the supply of underlying hydrothermal fluids, the mixing process of ocean bottom currents and the microbial oxidation. Furthermore, the differences in distribution of methane plume between the station MAR-CTD3 and the other stations indicate a probable unknown hydrothermal vent site nearby. There occurs high concentration of methane along with temperature and nephelometry anomalies, which strongly confirms that the subtle measurement of methane concentration in water column is one of the effective ways to locate active sites of hydrothermal venting.


Logachev vent field hydrothermal plume methane concentration anomalies 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Ernst G G J, Cave R R, German C R, et al. Vertical and lateral splitting of a hydrothermal plume at Steinahóll. Reykjanes Ridge, Iceland. Earth Planet Sci Lett, 2000, 179(3–4): 529–537CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lupton J E. Hydrothermal plumes: Near and far field. In: Humphris S. et al., ed. Physical, Chemical, Biological, and Geological Interactions within Hydrothermal Systems. Geophysical Monograph. 91, American Geophysical Union, 1995, 317–346Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ishibashi J, Wakita H, Okamura K, et al. Hydrothermal methane and manganese variation in the plume over the superfast-spreading southern East Pacific Rise. Geochm Cosmoch Acta, 1997, 61(3): 485–500CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chin C S, Klinkhammer G P, Wilson C. Detection of hydrothermal plumes on the northern Mid-Atlantic Ridge: results from optical measurements. Earth Planet Sci Lett, 1998, 162:1–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Stüben D, Stoffers P, Cheminée J, et al. Manganese, methane, iron, zinc, and nickel anomalies in hydrothermal plumes from Teahitia and Macdonald volcanoes. Geochim Cosmochim Acta, 1992, 56(10): 3693–3704CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Mottl M J, Sansone F J, Wheat C G, et al. Manganese and methane in hydrothermal plumes along the East Pacific Rise, 8°40′ to 11°50′N. Geochim Cosmochim Acta, 1995, 59(20): 4147–4165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Charlou J L, Donval J P. Hydrothermal methane venting between 12°N and 26°N along the Mid-Atlantic Ridge. J Geophys Res, 1993, 98(B6): 9625–9642Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Resing J A, Lupton J E, Feely R A, et al. CO2 and 3He in hydrothermal plumes: implications for mid-ocean ridge CO2 flux. Earth Planet Sci Lett, 2004, 226: 449–464CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kelley D S, Lilley M D, Lupton J E, et al. Enriched H2, CH4, and 3He concentrations in hydrothermal plumes associated with the 1996 Gorda Ridge eruptive event. Deep-Sea Res II, 1998, 45: 2665–2682CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Tsunogai U, Yoshida N, Ishibashi J, et al. Carbon isotopic distribution of methane in deep-sea hydrothermal plume, Myojin Knoll Caldera, Izu-Bonin arc: implications for microbial methane oxidation in the oceans and applications to heat flux estimation. Geochim Cosmochim Acta, 2000, 64(14): 2439–2452CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    de Angelis M A, Lilley M D, Baross J A. Methane oxidation in deep-sea hydrothermal plumes of the endeavour segment of the Juan de Fuca Ridge. Deep Sea Research Part I. 1993, 40(6): 1169–1186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Tsunogai U, Nakagawa F, Gamo T, et al. Stable isotopic compositions of methane and carbon monoxide in the Suiyo hydrothermal plume, Izu-Bonin arc: Tracers for microbial consumption/production. Earth Planet Sci Lett, 2005, 237(3–4): 326–340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cowen J P, Wen X, Popp B N. Methane in aging hydrothermal plumes. Geochim Cosmochim Acta, 2002, 66(20): 3563–3571CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sudarikov S M, Roumiantsev A B. Structure of hydrothermal plumes at the Logatchev vent field, 14°45′N, Mid-Atlantic Ridge: evidence from geochemical and geophysical data. J Volcanol Geotherm Res, 2000, 101: 245–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Charlou J L, Donval J P, Fouquet Y, et al. Geochemistry of high H2 and CH4 vent fluids issuing from ultramafic rocks at the Rainbow hydrothermal field (36°14′N, MAR). Chem. Geol, 2002, 191: 345–359CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kuhn T. Mineralogical, geochemical and biological investigations of hydrothermal systems on the Mid-Atlantic Ridge between 14°45′N and 15°05′N (HYDROMAR I). Meteor Berichte 03-04, Mid-Atlantic Expedition 2004, Cruise No. 60, Leg 3, Leitstelle Meteor, Institut für Meereskunde der Universität Hamburg, 2004Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Wilson C, Charlous J L, Ludford E, et al. Hydrothermal an omalies in the Lucky Strike segment on the Mid-Atlantic Ridge (37°17′N). Earth Planet Sci Lett, 1996, 142: 467–477CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Allen D E, Seyfried W E Jr. Serpentinization and heat generation: Constraints from Lost City and Rainbow hydrothermal systems. Geochim Cosmochim Acta, 2004, 68(6): 1347–1354CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Science in China Press 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Zhou HuaiYang 
    • 1
  • Wu ZiJun 
    • 1
    • 2
  • Peng XiaoTong 
    • 1
  • Jiang Lei 
    • 1
  • Tang Song 
    • 1
  1. 1.Guangzhou Institute of GeochemistryChinese Academy of SciencesGuangzhouChina
  2. 2.Institute of Polar EnvironmentUniversity of Science and Technology of ChinaHefeiChina

Personalised recommendations