Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-b5k59 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-07T15:59:36.356Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Holocene geo-ecological evolution of Lower Geyser Basin, Yellowstone National Park (USA)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 August 2021

Christopher M. Schiller*
Affiliation:
Department of Earth Sciences, Montana State University, Bozeman, MT 59717, USA
Cathy Whitlock
Affiliation:
Department of Earth Sciences, Montana State University, Bozeman, MT 59717, USA Montana Institute on Ecosystems, Montana State University, Bozeman, MT 59717, USA
Sabrina R. Brown
Affiliation:
Environmental Science Program, Defiance College, Defiance, OH 43512, USA
*
*Corresponding author e-mail address: christopherschiller@montana.edu
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Changes in climate and fire regime have long been recognized as drivers of the postglacial vegetation history of Yellowstone National Park, but the effects of locally dramatic hydrothermal activity are poorly known. Multi-proxy records from Goose Lake have been used to describe the history of Lower Geyser Basin where modern hydrothermal activity is widespread. From 10,300 cal yr BP to 3800 cal yr BP, thermal waters discharged into the lake, as evidenced by the deposition of arsenic-rich sediment, fluorite mud, and relatively high δ13Csediment values. Partially thermal conditions affected the limnobiotic composition, but prevailing climate, fire regime, and rhyolitic substrate maintained Pinus contorta forest in the basin, as found throughout the region. At 3800 cal yr BP, thermal water discharge into Goose Lake ceased, as evidenced by a shift in sediment geochemistry and limnobiota. Pollen and charcoal data indicate concurrent grassland development with limited fuel biomass and less fire activity, despite late Holocene climate conditions that were conducive to expanded forest cover. The shift in hydrothermal activity at Goose Lake and establishment of the treeless geyser basin may have been the result of a tectonic event or change in hydroclimate. This record illustrates the complex interactions of geology and climate that govern the development of an active hydrothermal geo-ecosystem.

Information

Type
Research Article
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
Copyright © University of Washington. Published by Cambridge University Press, 2021
Figure 0

Figure 1. (A) Location of Lower Geyser Basin, Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming, USA, with location of referenced sites (1) Cygnet Lake, (2) Yellowstone Lake, and (3) Loon Lake relative to Yellowstone National Park and the Yellowstone Plateau (an EPA Level IV Ecoregion; Chapman et al., 2004). (B) Goose Lake location within Lower Geyser Basin, and Midway Geyser Basin, with active thermal areas indicated by red stippling (Vaughan et al., 2014), large hydrothermal explosion craters indicated by black ticked outlines (Morgan et al., 2009), pre-AD 1988 extent of Pinus contorta-dominated forest in green (Despain, 1990), and extent of historical fires indicated by black hashed lines (Spatial Analysis Center, Yellowstone National Park, 2020). Evidence of hydrothermal activity is pervasive in the Goose Lake vicinity although the lake is not adjacent to any active thermal features. (C) Location of YNP4-GOS18 cores taken in the deepest part of Goose Lake. Bathymetry (m depth) modified from Arnold and Sharpe (1967).

Figure 1

Figure 2. Lithology and geochemistry of the composite Goose Lake core YNP4-GOS18. The core was divided into four stratigraphic units: (I) Indistinctly laminated diatomaceous ooze with clay; (II) Laminated diatomaceous ooze with sapropel and minor, fragmental plant remains, punctuated by antimony-rich fluorite mud (629–628 cm depth), the Mazama ash (620–619 cm depth), and a reworked ash-rich siliciclastic deposit (458.5–458 cm depth); (III) Thinly bedded diatom ooze with sapropel; (IV) Massive diatomaceous sapropel with high water content. The diagram of the composite core is based on core depth, except the correlation between GOS18-1A and GOS18-1D, which was made using the reworked Yellowstone ash. Shaded core drives (gray) were used in developing the composite record. Abundant arsenic is associated with geothermal water influx; and antimony-rich fluorite mud (619–618 cm depth) is definitively of hydrothermal provenance. Higher δ13Csediment (‰ VPDB) likely indicates an admixture with hydrothermally degassed carbon.

Figure 2

Figure 3. Image of YNP4-GOS18 core section and antimony abundance from scanning XRF analysis including fluorite mud occurring at 628–629 cm depth in the composite core. (A) SEM image of sediment immediately above contact with fluorite mud; note abundant diatom frustules, sponge spicules, and fine-grained clays and organics; (B) SEM image of fluorite mud with 81 wt. % fluorite. Note large diatoms in a matrix of fluorite spherules.

Figure 3

Figure 4. Bacon age-depth model for Goose Lake composite core YNP4-GOS18. Probability distributions are plotted for the core top (light blue horizontal line), calibrated radiocarbon ages (blue distribution curves), and the Mazama ash (red distribution curve). Red dashed line is the median probability age from all run age-depth iterations, representing the best point estimate of age for any given depth, which is used for remaining plots. Gray point cloud represents age model probability and contains a 95% confidence interval (dashed gray lines). Iteration history (left top), prior and posterior densities of the mean accumulation rate (middle top), and prior and posterior of the memory (right top) suggest reasonable adherence of the model to a priori mean accumulation rate and memory assignments.

Figure 4

Table 1. Goose Lake core age determinations. All numbered samples were measured at NOSAMS Laboratory at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution. Calibrated age ranges were calculated with CALIB ver. 7.1 (Stuiver et al., 2019) and age ranges with probabilities <0.01 are excluded.

Figure 5

Figure 5. Percentage diagrams of major pollen types and spores (>1%), total sum of terrestrial pollen, and charcoal data (CHAR and BCHAR) with significant and insignificant peaks from Goose Lake composite core YNP4-GOS18. Where present, curve exaggeration is 5×. Zone delineation is supported by CONISS dendrogram constructed with percentage data from terrestrial pollen.

Figure 6

Figure 6. Diagram of major diatom species percentages and influx (NISP/cm2/yr) of coccal algae from Goose Lake composite core YNP4-GOS18.

Figure 7

Table 2. Paleoecological sites and reference sources from within Pinus contorta forest site from Yellowstone National Park and the Yellowstone Plateau (an EPA Level IV Ecoregion; Chapman et al., 2004) used for comparison purposes with Goose Lake data.

Figure 8

Figure 7. Comparison plot of proxy data from the Goose Lake composite core YNP4-GOS18 with other sites on the Yellowstone Plateau (Cygnet Lake, Loon Lake, Yellowstone Lake). Seasonal insolation anomaly calculated for 44.5°N (Laskar et al., 2004). Forest cover at sites without significant surficial hydrothermal activity (Whitlock, 1993; Whitlock et al., 1995; Theriot et al., 2006) is plotted as standardized AP:NAP ratios (AP - NAP/AP + NAP; dotted line) with lowess smoother (solid line with shaded 95% confidence interval); fire activity at Cygnet Lake (Millspaugh et al., 2000; CHAR in black, BCHAR in red). Forest cover and fire activity plots for Goose Lake are juxtaposed with diatom and geochemical indicators of hydrothermal conditions.