Open AccessComment [on “Deep‐penetration heat flow probes raise questions about interpretations from shorter probes” by Géli et al.]
Author(s) -
Fisher A. T.,
Villinger H.,
Pfender M.,
Müller M.,
Grevemeyer I.,
Kaul N.,
Harris R. N.,
Von Herzen R. P.,
Wheat C. G.
Publication year - 2002
Publication title -
eos, transactions american geophysical union
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.316
H-Index - 86
eISSN - 2324-9250
pISSN - 0096-3941
DOI - 10.1029/2002eo000133
Subject(s) - seabed , geology , heat flow , seafloor spreading , thermal , flow (mathematics) , oceanography , sampling (signal processing) , geophysics , mechanics , thermodynamics , physics , optics , detector
Géli et al. [2001] ( Eos , 17 July 2001, p.317) present sub‐sea floor thermal profiles collected with temperature sensors and data loggers attached to 18‐m‐long sediment cores. Some of these thermal profiles include significant non‐linearities, particularly within the shallowest 5 m below sea floor (mbsf). Géli et al. [2001] assert that thermal data collected with data loggers attached to long core barrels provide a more precise means of interpreting marine heat‐flow data than do thermal data collected with shorter, conventional heat flow probes. This assertion is not supported by the data presented. Géli et al. [2001] also suggest that the observed non‐linearities are indicative of perturbations to steady‐state, conductive conditions within sea‐floor sediments resulting from recent changes in bottom water temperature (BWT) or pore fluid flow. We contend that the data shown by Géli et al. [2001] are more likely explained by sampling artifacts or errors in interpretation's described below. Each of these possibilities must be confidently eliminated before one can interpret the data to indicate bottom‐water temperature changes or fluid flow. We also urge taking a more balanced view of the strengths and weaknesses of sea‐floor, heat‐flow data collected with different tools, and caution against dismissing data collected with conventional probes as being generally less reliable than those collected with long piston cores.