Sources of mud based on Clay mineralogical analysis

1. Sources of mudbased onClay mineralogical analysis Edwin Zeelmaekers & Noël Vandenberghe with collaboration of Kathleen Fontaine , Liesbeth Grégoire Wathab Mohammad, Nancy Weyns, Ria Brepoels

2. The problem : several potential sources cited • Dover Strait (coastal erosion, rivers, Atlant. Ocean) • Sea bottom erosion (Tertiary, Pleistocene, Holocene) • and * dredging mud dump site • River input from Scheldt • The issue : How to find out what happens in reality ? * 2 3 1

3. Rigorous quantification possible if illitic and smectitic components of interstratifications and the discrete minerals are quantified together and split in a subsequent step by CEC Details of clay mineralogy determined on oriented slides Techniques used are XRD and CEC Compare clay minerals: - geographically in present day environment as provenance indicators - progressively back in time (Holocene ,Eemian & Pleistocene salt marshes …) looking for a relationship with the main riversystem Clay mineral approach ± 250samples

4. Type of clay mineralogypresent in the the BCS muds • R0 IS, smectite, illite, kaolinite, small amounts of chlorite and vermiculite • XRD records

5. BCS recent and modern muds • The clay mineralogy of muds identified as ‘Holocene’ and as ‘recent’ is identical • The clay mineralogy of BCS bottom samples and BCS suspension samples is identical • Small differences in clay mineralogy between samples taken in different parts of the BCS exist, but they are never systematic

6. Recent North Sea bottom and suspension clays are similar to recent Scheldt & Rupel suspension and bottom sediment. ± 25 samples in Scheldt

9. Source Area: Scheldt river system ? • The clay mineralogy of suspension, bottom and riverbank samples of the Scheldt river (upstream & estuary), the Paulinaschor and its tributary Rupel is very similar to the BCS muds. • The former group is slightly more variable. The samples from the Scheldt river system also appear to be slightly more smectitic than the BCS muds, especially upstream from Antwerp and in the Rupel.

10. Source Area: Dover Strait Beach samples Suspension samples

11. Source Area: Dover Strait – English coast Clay mineralogy comparison: more smectite & kaolinite– quasi no vermiculite & chlorite 7 samples between Portsmouth and Folkstone Provenance conclusion: no major contribution to BCS Muds from English coast

12. Source Area: Dover Strait – French coast • observations - Samples taken near the Belgian border are very similar to the BCS muds (up to Gravelines) - Samples taken between Calais and the Somme Estuary appear more different from the BCS muds, exhibit a higher variability, slightly different crystal-chemistry of the minerals.. ….. the Pas de Calais between La Manche and the North Sea also seems to be a clay mineralogical boundary…… • Provenance conclusion: not entirely excluded but not likely

13. Source Area: Dover Strait – Atlantic Ocean Clay mineralogy comparison:Almost no IS & smectite, only illite, kaolinite, chlorite Provenance conclusion: major contribution from the Atlantic Ocean unlikely

14. Source Area: Northern North Sea Clay mineralogy comparison:much more chlorite, kaolinite & illite Scotland-Norway Provenance Conclusion: unlikely source for the North Sea muds

15. Conclusions Dover Strait and northern North Sea provenance: British and Atlantic component of Dover Strait origin are excluded French coastal component is inconclusive but likely not a main contributor Northern North Sea is excluded as a source

16. Source Area: Erosion of Sea bottom - Eocene Clay mineralogy comparison:more discretesmectite, minor illite and kaolinite; no vermiculite & chlorite smectite Provenance conclusion: no major contribution from Eocene

17. Source Area: Erosion of Sea bottom - Pleistocene • Equivalents sampled from Upper Pleistocene (Weichsel) cover sands and loams • Lower Pleistocene clays from Belgium (Campine Clays) and Dutch Roer area (Tegelen Clays) • Clay mineralogy comparison: variable clay mineralogy, often (distinctly) different from BCS muds (containing mixed-layered chlorite-smectite,...). The overall smectite content is clearly lower than BCS muds. Conclusion: no major contribution from these specific deposits

18. Source Area: Erosion of Sea bottom - Pleistocene

19. And erosion of interglacial salt marsh clays ? Are Holocene pre-modern and pre-recent salt marshes present ? Probably not much eroded if present at all…. Since 600BC

20. However interesting that the clay mineralogy of some ‘Roman and medieval’ salt marshes (Holocene Polder klei) are similar to BCS muds ….

21. Source Area/Comparison – Holocene ‘Polderkleien’ • Sampled in the coastal zone from undeep drill cores • Clay mineralogy comparison: near coast samples (Veurne) are very similar to the BCS Muds, others are much more smectitic (Diksmuide). • Provenance conclusion: if the more smectitic samples can be assumed to be Eocene influenced , then for the remaining samples a link with the BCS muds is probable

22. was there Eem marsh clay to be eroded?

23. ….and again identical clay mineralogy Provenance conclusion: strong link between BCS muds and Eem clay is very likely

24. In Early Pleistocene time the Scheldt system was flowing north and Campine-Tegelen clays have mineralogy different from BCS …but BCS has same clay mineralogy as the interglacial Scheldt system when it was flowing eastwards in the Flemish valley (Holsteinian , Eemian …) and in the Westerschelde (Holocene )

25. General conclusions • Several potential source areas could be excluded as major contributors • The results for the French coast remain somewhat inconclusive • The BCS muds appear to be strongly related to the present and the past east-flowing Scheldt River system • If the muds have a marine origin, the sediment must potentially be transported as far as St-Amands in the Scheldt and Rumst in the Rupel.