Content uploaded by Alun Hubbard
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Alun Hubbard on Dec 05, 2018
Content may be subject to copyright.
LETTERS
PUBLISHED ONLINE: 11 APRIL 2016 | DOI: 10.1038/NGEO2696
Regulation of ice stream flow through subglacial
formation of gas hydrates
Monica Winsborrow*, Karin Andreassen, Alun Hubbard, Andreia Plaza-Faverola,
Eythor Gudlaugsson and Henry Patton
Variations in the flow of ice streams and outlet glaciers are
a primary control on ice sheet stability, yet comprehensive
understanding of the key processes operating at the ice–bed
interface remains elusive. Basal resistance is critical, especially
sticky spots—localized zones of high basal traction—for main-
taining force balance in an otherwise well-lubricated/high-slip
subglacial environment1. Here we consider the influence of
subglacial gas-hydrate formation on ice stream dynamics, and
its potential to initiate and maintain sticky spots. Geophysical
data document the geologic footprint of a major palaeo-
ice-stream that drained the Barents Sea–Fennoscandian ice
sheet approximately 20,000 years ago. Our results reveal a
∼250 km2sticky spot that coincided with subsurface shallow
gas accumulations, seafloor fluid expulsion and a fault complex
associated with deep hydrocarbon reservoirs. We propose that
gas migrating from these reservoirs formed hydrates under
high-pressure, low-temperature subglacial conditions. The gas
hydrate desiccated, stiened and thereby strengthened the
subglacial sediments, promoting high traction—a sticky spot—
that regulated ice stream flow. Deep hydrocarbon reservoirs
are common beneath past and contemporary glaciated areas,
implying that gas-hydrate regulation of subglacial dynamics
could be a widespread phenomenon.
Ice stream flow is largely determined by the degree to which
gravitational driving stress is resisted by lateral shear at its margins
and friction at its base. The primary resistive force is lateral drag
from adjacent slower-moving ice, but this is insufficient to balance
the driving stress, and the spatial distribution of subglacial traction
is critical to overall ice stream stability. Consequently, variations
in basal friction will cause variations in ice stream velocity, with
a well-lubricated, weak bed promoting fast flow. Observations
from the Siple Coast ice streams, West Antarctica, indicate that
basal shear stress is disproportionally focused on localized areas
of high basal traction, or so-called sticky spots, surrounded by
a well-lubricated deformable bed of weaker strength1. Sticky spot
distribution and extent thus plays a critical role in regulating ice
stream flow, with ice stream shutdown observed to follow their
widespread development2,3.
Sticky spots can form if subglacial sediments are desiccated and
stiff, or if freezing conditions prevail at the ice–bed interface1,4.
Subglacial sediment shear strength is directly related to normal
effective stress (ice load minus basal water pressure, although, in
the case of basal sediments we are explicitly referring to pore-water
pressure). This means that a small reduction in basal pore-water
pressure causes a significant increase in sediment strength. This
initial change in water pressure can be triggered by two processes
First, reorganization of, or changes in, the availability of subglacial
10° W
75° N
70° N
65° N
60° N
0°10° E20° E30° E
Longitude
Latitude
40° E50° E
Russia
Sklinnadjupet
ice stream
Limited
data
availability
Håkjerringdjupet
ice stream
Barents
Sea
Ice stream
Water depth (m)
5,0000
100 km
Norway
Norway
Finland
Sweden
Russia
Fig. 2
7019/1-1
Russia
Maximum
ice extent
Hydrocarbon
field or find
Figure 1 | Last Glacial Maximum ice extent of the Eurasian ice sheet
complex8.The ice sheet complex was drained by multiple fast-flowing ice
streams9,30, many of which flowed over hydrocarbon reservoirs.
Hydrocarbon information from the Norwegian Petroleum Directorate
(www.npd.no) and the British Government (www.gov.uk/oil-and-gas).
meltwater ‘water piracy’3,5, or second, basal freeze-on caused by
changes in ice thickness or the increased advection of cold surface
ice to the bed2,6,7. On the basis of observations from a palaeo-ice-
stream bed on the Norwegian continental shelf, we introduce a
third mechanism for sticky spot formation: pore-water piracy and
sediment stiffening due to subglacial gas-hydrate accumulation.
Håkjerringdjupet is a glacially overdeepened cross-shelf trough
in the southwest Barents Sea (Fig. 1). At the Last Glacial Maximum
(∼24,000 years ago) the entire Barents Sea and Norwegian
continental shelf were covered in ice8, with Håkjerringdjupet
draining ice westwards from the mainland to an ice margin located
© 2016 Macmillan Publishers Limited. All rights reserved
CAGE—Centre for Arctic Gas Hydrate, Environment and Climate, Department of Geology, UiT The Arctic University of Norway, 9037 Tromsø, Norway.
*e-mail: monica.winsborrow@uit.no
370 NATURE GEOSCIENCE | VOL 9 | MAY 2016 | www.nature.com/naturegeoscience
NATURE GEOSCIENCE DOI: 10.1038/NGEO2696 LETTERS
70° 40′ N
70° 30′ N
18° E 19° E
Longitude
Latitude
>4002000
Water depth (m)
Older glacigenic sediments
Deglacial glacigenic and
Holocene marine sediments
5 km
100 ms
Bedrock/glacigenic sediments boundary
West East
Rafted sediments
a
b
Source depression
Fault complex
Bedrock
10 km
N
Rafted
sediments
GZW
GZW
MSGLs
MSGLs
Source
depression
Fig. 3
Fig. 2b
Troms−Finnmark
Fault Complex
MSGLs
Figure 2 | Past ice streaming and glacitectonic deformation in Håkjerringdjupet. a, Bathymetric map showing landforms indicating fast-flowing ice
(MSGLs: mega-scale glacial lineations, black lines and GZW: grounding zone wedge deposits) and glacitectonic landforms indicating slow-flowing ice
(rafted sediments and source depression). b, Profile based on analogue two-dimensional (2D) seismic data showing the overdeepened source depression
associated with the Troms–Finnmark Fault Complex. Within the source depression older glacigenic sediments are largely absent. Upstream, east of the
fault complex, these sediments are widespread and undisturbed; whereas downstream (west of the fault complex), rafted blocks of older glacigenic
sediments form hummocky glacitectonic hills (Supplementary Fig. 1)16.
at the shelf edge9. The trough is dissected by the Troms–Finnmark
Fault Complex, and the sea floor is characterized by a complex
glacial landform assemblage (Fig. 2a). Most widespread are highly
elongated (lengths over 50km and widths of the order of 500 m),
streamlined sedimentary deposits, aligned parallel to the trough
axis (Fig. 2a). These are observed across the whole trough, with
the exception of the northern part, west of the fault complex and
are interpreted as mega-scale glacial lineations (MSGLs), formed
beneath a fast-flowing ice stream10,11. Aligned transverse to the
trough axis are two broad wedge-shaped deposits with asymmetrical
profiles (steeper down-ice slopes) and MSGLs on their surface
(Fig. 2a). These have been interpreted to be grounding zone wedges
(GZWs), formed during standstills or readvances in the course of
ice margin retreat12,13. Landform assemblages of MGSLs and GZWs
have been identified widely across formerly glaciated continental
shelves, their formation attributed to the rapid, episodic retreat of
ice streams14.
Unusual for a palaeo-ice-stream bed is the hummocky mor-
phology of the northern part of Håkjerringdjupet (Fig. 2a), which
comprises a broad depression, bounded laterally by the margins of
the Troms–Finnmark Fault Complex and by an area of irregular
hills beyond the western margin of the fault complex (Fig. 2a).
The depression covers approximately 250km2, and represents an
overdeepening of 90m from the sea floor east of the fault complex.
The bedrock–glacigenic sediment boundary is also overdeepened
and rough beneath the seafloor depression (Fig. 2b). The irregular
hills cover an area similar to that of the depression and have a maxi-
mum elevation of approximately 80 m relative to the surrounding
sea floor. Older glacigenic sediments, deposited before deglacia-
tion15, have both a uniform thickness and stratified acoustic signa-
ture across much of Håkjerringdjupet, but are largely absent from
the depression, and have an unusually great and varying thickness
within the hummocky hills (Fig. 2b and Supplementary Fig. 1).
Furthermore, within the hills, the older glacigenic sediments have a
chaotic seismic reflection pattern comprised of blocks of randomly
oriented, acoustically stratified sediments (Supplementary Fig. 1).
Consistent with previous work16, we interpret this to be a glacitec-
tonic hill–hole pair, formed from rafted subglacial sediment and
bedrock which have been displaced (creating a source depression),
transported with the overlying ice, and deposited, forming irregular
hills. Glacitectonic rafting of sediment/bedrock occurs along a low-
strength decollement, which may represent the boundary between
consolidated and soft sediment, or frozen and non-frozen sedi-
ment. These processes imply slow ice flow on a high-traction/low-
slip subglacial environment, in contrast to the rest of the Håkjer-
ringdjupet palaeo-ice-stream bed, which records fast ice flow on a
low-traction/high-slip subglacial environment. In the geomorphic
record, sticky spots are suggested to appear as a disruption to the
classic pattern of parallel MSGLs formed by streaming ice flow4.
Therefore, we conclude that the glacitectonic source depression and
rafted sediments are the geologic imprint of a sticky spot on the
Håkjerringdjupet ice stream bed.
NATURE GEOSCIENCE | VOL 9 | MAY 2016 | www.nature.com/naturegeoscience
© 2016 Macmillan Publishers Limited. All rights reserved
371
LETTERS NATURE GEOSCIENCE DOI: 10.1038/NGEO2696
5 km
Troms−Finnmark
Fault Complex
N
Rafted
sediments Source
depression
Fig. 3f
Fig. 3g
Fig. 3c
Fig. 3d
Fig. 3e
Fig. 3b
Source depression
North
South
2 km
100 ms
Fault complex
Bedrock
Seafloor
reflection
a
f
g
b
c
d
e
Rafted sediments
West
East
Fault complex
source depression
2 km
100 ms
Phase-reversed
reflection
Bedrock
500 m 500 m
500 m 500 m
Figure 3 | Focused fluid flow and shallow gas accumulations. a, Central Håkjerringdjupet bathymetry showing glacitectonic landforms and mega-scale
glacial lineations (black lines). b–e, Hillshaded bathymetry showing abundant, large pockmarks within the source depression (b), smaller, less dense
pockmarks east of the fault complex (c), abrupt transition from pockmarked source depression to the adjacent, unpockmarked sea floor (d) and no
pockmarks within the rafted sediments (e). f,g, 3D seismic profiles showing phase-reversed reflections (black circles) indicative of shallow gas and fluid
flow (black dashed arrows), localized to the fault complex, beneath the source depression. Black line indicates boundary between glacial sediments and
sedimentary bedrock.
Numerous small circular depressions (typically <50 m diameter
and <7 m deep) are evident across the sea floor of Håkjerringdjupet
(Fig. 3a–e) and are interpreted as pockmarks, formed by focused
fluid flow through the sea floor. The presence of pockmarks is
consistent with the current or past migration of hydrocarbons from
an underlying reservoir17. Their distribution and size is not uniform,
with the highest density and largest examples found in the source
depression, within the fault complex (Fig. 3b). Pockmarks are also
observed east of the fault complex, where they tend to be smaller
and less dense (Fig. 3c). There is a sharp boundary between areas
of sea floor with and without pockmarks (Fig. 3d), and pockmarks
are largely absent from the rafted sediments (Fig. 3e), the grounding
zone wedges and the area of MSGLs in the southern part of
the trough.
Seismic data from central Håkjerringdjupet show multiple
faults and the presence of high-amplitude, phase-reversed
reflections along dipping layers that are classical indicators of gas
accumulations and migration from deeper reservoirs along faults
(Fig. 3f,g). These shallow gas accumulations are restricted to the
substrate underlying the pockmarked source depression, which
is also the zone of maximum fault displacement. In the southern
part of the trough, the fault escarpment is less abrupt, no deep
seafloor depression is seen (Fig. 2) and pockmarks and shallow
gas accumulations are largely absent (Fig. 3). We therefore infer
a link between structurally controlled gas migration from deeper
reservoirs and the formation of the Håkjerringdjupet sticky spot.
Indeed, a discovery well drilled 15 km north of Håkjerringdjupet
(Wellbore 7019/1-1, Fig. 1) proved gas in two reservoirs (Middle
Jurassic and Lower Cretaceous), and the Troms–Finnmark Fault
Complex is associated with multiple major hydrocarbon discoveries
in the southwestern Barents Sea (Norwegian Petroleum Directorate
2015; www.npd.no).
Thermogenic gas from deep reservoirs is less dense than either
water or sediments, and migrates upwards, along faults and
permeable sediment layers. In the Arctic, migrating gas from leaking
petroleum systems may be trapped in the shallow subsurface in
the form of gas hydrates, ice-like solids that form under the high-
pressure, low-temperature conditions found in marine sediments
and permafrost18. In Håkjerringdjupet, present-day pressure and
temperature conditions are just outside the boundary for methane-
hydrate formation (Supplementary Fig. 2). However, under glacial
conditions, ice was grounded in Håkjerringdjupet (as evidenced
372
© 2016 Macmillan Publishers Limited. All rights reserved
NATURE GEOSCIENCE | VOL 9 | MAY 2016 | www.nature.com/naturegeoscience
NATURE GEOSCIENCE DOI: 10.1038/NGEO2696 LETTERS
Rafted sediments Source depression
East
West
Gas
migration
Faulted
bedrock
Subglacial
water Glacier ice
Håkjerringdjupet
ice stream
Bedrock
1,200 m 400 m
Gas
hydrate Fault complex
Sediments
Gas-hydrate stability zone
Free gas zone
Figure 4 | Conceptual model of subglacial gas-hydrate formation in
Håkjerringdjupet at the Last Glacial Maximum. The fault complex
facilitates focused fluid flow from deeper reservoirs to the ice–bed
interface. This migrating gas formed concentrated patches of gas hydrates
within the gas-hydrates stability zone (calculated on the basis of numerical
modelling, Supplementary Fig. 2), associated with faults, fractures and
porous sediments.
by subglacial bedforms such as mega-scale glacial lineations),
creating the low-temperature, high-pressure conditions necessary
for a thick zone (∼400m) of methane-hydrate stability beneath
the ice stream (Supplementary Fig. 2). Migrating gas entering the
region of methane-hydrate stability would have combined with pore
water under high pressure within the subglacial sediments and
shallow sedimentary bedrock, forming hydrates (Fig. 4). Given the
heavily faulted and fractured bedrock and the heterogeneous nature
of the subglacial sediments within Håkjerringdjupet15, rather than
forming a continuous layer, gas hydrate is expected to have formed
in patches of high saturation, localized around faults and fractures
and in areas of porous sediments (Fig. 4).
Gas hydrate desiccates and stiffens host sediments as a result of
pore-water piracy into the gas-hydrate cage structure, cementation
of grains, and the greater strength and lower volume of gas hydrate
compared with its constituent gas and ice19–22. Gas-hydrate-bearing
sediments from the Mackenzie Delta, northern Canada, show a
more than eightfold increase in sediment shear strength when gas
hydrate develops (Supplementary Fig. 3), from an initial shear
strength of 0.8 to 6.7MPa with 60% hydrate saturation20. Assuming
a similar relative increase in shear strength, the strength of gas-
hydrate hosting sediments and shallow bedrock in Håkjerringdjupet
would have been far in excess of that of ‘weak’ till recovered from
beneath the Siple Coast ice streams, West Antarctica23 and typical
driving stresses of active ice streams, which tend not to exceed
20 kPa (ref. 24).
Patches of desiccated, stiff gas-hydrate-hosting sediments and
shallow bedrock beneath the Håkjerringdjupet ice stream would
have locally enhanced basal friction, thereby providing resistance to
the flow of the overlying ice. These high-shear-strength sediments
would probably have formed a strong frictional bond with the
overlying ice, favouring glacitectonic decollement deeper within
the substrate. Thrusting and subsequent deposition of hydrate-
bearing sediments and shallow bedrock by the slow-moving ice
created the glacitectonic hill–hole pair visible on the present-day
sea floor.
Major hydrocarbon reservoirs exist across the shelf areas
previously glaciated by the last Eurasian ice sheet complex, and
several palaeo-ice-streams flowed over substrates associated with
confirmed hydrocarbon systems (Fig. 1). The high-pressure, low-
temperature subglacial conditions that prevailed beneath these ice
streams would have promoted widespread gas-hydrate formation,
particularly at leaking reservoirs with focused gas migration, and
consequent regulation of ice stream basal thermomechanics and
flow. Multiple observations across the footprint of the palaeo-
ice-sheet may now require reinterpretation on the basis of this
hypothesis. For example, the large glacitectonic landforms and
heavily overconsolidated till associated with the Sklinnadjupet ice
stream9,25 which flowed over the extensive hydrocarbon reservoirs
(Fig. 1 and Supplementary Fig. 4), and the widespread occurrence
of overconsolidated glacial sediments across the southwestern
Barents Sea26 are consistent with gas-hydrate regulation of ice
stream flow.
Abundant gas-hydrate accumulations are proposed to exist
beneath the Antarctic and Greenland ice sheets, based on the
presence of extensive sedimentary basins and modelling studies27,28.
Furthermore, gas hydrates have been identified in ice-core samples
from above subglacial Lake Vostok, East Antarctica29. So far, the
role of potentially widespread gas-hydrate reservoirs in modifying
the critically sensitive thermomechanical regime at the base of
contemporary ice sheets, along with their impact on ice stream
force balance and dynamics, has not been recognized. Given current
lack of knowledge regarding subglacial gas-hydrate distribution, this
previously unforeseen control represents a significant unknown in
attempts to model the current and future discharge and evolution
of contemporary ice sheets, along with their contribution to global
sea-level rise.
Methods
Methods and any associated references are available in the online
version of the paper.
Received 27 August 2015; accepted 10 March 2016;
published online 11 April 2016
References
1. Alley, R. B. In search of ice-stream sticky spots. J. Glaciol. 39, 447–454 (1993).
2. Tulaczyk, S., Kamb, W. B. & Engelhardt, H. F. Basal mechanics of Ice Stream B,
West Antarctica 2. Undrained plastic bed model. J. Geophys. Res. 105,
483–494 (2000).
3. Anandakrishnan, S. & Alley, R. B. Stagnation of Ice Stream C, West Antarctica
by water piracy. Geophys. Res. Lett. 24, 265–268 (1997).
4. Stokes, C. R., Clark, C. D., Lian, O. B. & Tulaczyk, S. Ice stream sticky spots:
a review of their identification and influence beneath contemporary and
palaeo-ice-streams. Earth Sci. Rev. 81, 217–249 (2007).
5. Alley, R. B., Anandakrishnan, S., Bentley, C. R. & Lord, N. A water-piracy
hypothesis for the stagnation of Ice Stream C, Antarctica. Ann. Glaciol. 20,
187–194 (1994).
6. Bougamont, M., Tulaczyk, S. & Joughin, I. Response of subglacial sediments to
basal freeze-on 2. Application in numerical modeling of the recent stoppage of
Ice Stream C, West Antarctica. J. Geophys. Res. 108, 2223 (2003).
7. Christoffersen, P. & Tulaczyk, S. Response of subglacial sediments to basal
freeze-on 1. Theory and comparison to observations from beneath the West
Antarctic ice sheet. J. Geophys. Res. 108, 2222 (2003).
8. Svendsen, J. I. et al. Late Quaternary ice sheet history of northern Eurasia.
Quat. Sci. Rev. 23, 1229–1271 (2004).
9. Ottesen, D., Dowdeswell, J. A. & Rise, L. Submarine landforms and the
reconstruction of fast-flowing ice streams within a large Quaternary ice sheet:
the 2500-km-long Norwegian-Svalbard margin (57◦–80◦N). Geol. Soc. Am.
Bull. 117, 1033–1050 (2005).
10. King, E., Hindmarsh, R. & Stokes, C. R. Formation of mega-scale glacial
lineations observed beneath a West Antarctic ice stream. Nature Geosci. 2,
585–588 (2009).
11. Stokes, C. R. & Clark, C. D. Geomorphological criteria for identifying
Pleistocene ice streams. Ann. Glaciol. 28, 67–74 (1999).
12. Ottesen, D., Stokes, C. R., Rise, L. & Olsen, L. Ice-sheet dynamics and ice
streaming along the coastal parts of northern Norway. Quat. Sci. Rev. 27,
922–940 (2008).
13. Winsborrow, M. C. M., Stokes, C. R. & Andreassen, K. Ice stream
flow-switching during the deglacation of the south-western Barents Sea. Geol.
Soc. Am. Bull. 124, 275–290 (2012).
14. Dowdeswell, J. A., Ottesen, D., Evans, J., Ò Cofaigh, C. & Anderson, J. B.
Submarine glacial landforms and rates of ice stream collapse. Geology 36,
819–822 (2008).
NATURE GEOSCIENCE | VOL 9 | MAY 2016 | www.nature.com/naturegeoscience
© 2016 Macmillan Publishers Limited. All rights reserved
373
LETTERS NATURE GEOSCIENCE DOI: 10.1038/NGEO2696
15. Rokoengen, K., Bugge, T. & Løfaldli, M. Quaternary geology and deglaciation
of the continental shelf off Troms, north Norway. Boreas 8, 217–227 (1979).
16. Sættem, J. in Formation and Deformation of Glacial Deposits (eds Warren, C. R.
& Croot, D. C.) 95–113 (Balkema, 1994).
17. Hovland, M. & Judd, A. G. Seabed Pockmarks and Seepages: Impact on Geology,
Biology and the Marine Environment (Graham and Trotman, 1988).
18. Sloan, E. D. & Koh, C. Clathrate Hydrates of Natural Gases (CRC Press, 2008).
19. Waite, W. F. et al. Physical properties of hydrate-bearing sediments. Rev.
Geophys. 47, RG4003 (2009).
20. Winters, W. J., Pecher, I. A., Waite, W. F. & Mason, D. H. Physical properties
and rock physics models of sediment containing natural and
laboratory-formed methane gas hydrate. Am. Mineral. 89, 1221–1227 (2004).
21. Hyodo, M. et al. Mechanical behavior of gas-saturated methane
hydrate-bearing sediments. J. Geophys. Res. 118, 5185–5194 (2013).
22. Durham, W. B., Kirby, S. H., Stern, L. A. & Zhang, W. The strength and
rheology of methane clathrate hydrate. J. Geophys. Res. 108, 2182 (2003).
23. Kamb, B. Rheological nonlinearity and flow instability in the deforming bed
mechanism of ice stream motion. J. Geophys. Res. 96, 16585–16595 (1991).
24. Joughin, I., MacAyeal, D. R. & Tulaczyk, S. Basal shear stress of the Ross ice
streams from control method inversions. J. Geophys. Res. 109, B09405 (2004).
25. Sættem, J., Rise, L., Rokoengen, K. & By, T. Soil investigations, offshore mid
Norway: a case study of glacial influence on geotechnical properties. Glob.
Planet. Change 12, 271–285 (1996).
26. Sættem, J., Rise, L. & Westgaard, D. A. Composition and properties of
glacigenic sediments in the southwestern Barents Sea. Mar. Geotechnol. 10,
229–255 (1992).
27. Wadham, J. L. et al. Potential methane reservoirs beneath Antarctica. Nature
488, 633–637 (2012).
28. Wallmann, K. et al. The global inventory of methane hydrate in marine
sediments: a theoretical approach. Energies 5, 2449–2498 (2012).
29. Uchida, T., Hondoh, T., Mae, S., Lipenkov, V. Y. & Duval, P. Air-hydrate crystals
in deep ice-core samples from Vostok Station, Antarctica. J. Glaciol. 40,
79–86 (1994).
30. Clark, C. D., Hughes, A. L. C., Greenwood, S. L., Jordan, C. & Sejrup, H. P.
Pattern and timing of retreat of the last British-Irish ice sheet. Quat. Sci. Rev.
44, 112–146 (2012).
Acknowledgements
This work was partly supported by the Research Council of Norway through its Centres
of Excellence funding scheme, project number 223259; the PetroMaks project
‘Glaciations in the Barents Sea area, GlaciBar’ (grant 200672) and the European
Commission FP7-People 2012- Initial Training Networks ‘Glaciated North Atlantic
Margins, GLANAM’ (grant 317217). We thank the Norwegian Mapping Authority and
the Geological Survey of Norway for providing the high-resolution bathymetry data set
through the MAREANO programme, TGS for providing the 3D seismic data set and
SINTEF Petroleum Research for providing analogue and digital 2D seismic data.
Author contributions
K.A. developed the study. M.W. interpreted the geophysical data sets and wrote the paper.
A.H. contributed to the writing and editing of the paper, advised on its scope and wrote
the code for the ice sheet model. H.P. modelled ice thickness and basal temperature.
K.A., A.P.-F. and E.G. helped with the interpretation and analysis. M.W. and H.P.
prepared the figures. All authors discussed ideas and commented on the paper.
Additional information
Supplementary information is available in the online version of the paper. Reprints and
permissions information is available online at www.nature.com/reprints.
Correspondence and requests for materials should be addressed to M.W.
Competing financial interests
The authors declare no competing financial interests.
374
© 2016 Macmillan Publishers Limited. All rights reserved
NATURE GEOSCIENCE | VOL 9 | MAY 2016 | www.nature.com/naturegeoscience
NATURE GEOSCIENCE DOI: 10.1038/NGEO2696 LETTERS
Methods
Stability plots for methane hydrate were calculated using gas-hydrate phase
boundaries assuming pure methane18 and a geothermal gradient of
−0.038 ◦C m−1, suggested to be an average value for the Barents Sea31.
A present-day bottom water temperature of 6 ◦C was used, based on a large
data set of conductivity–temperature–density (CTD) casts acquired
within Håkjerringdjupet in the years 2000–2015, downloaded from the
World Ocean Database. Estimates of ice thickness and basal temperature
during the Last Glacial Maximum were extracted from a high-resolution
(10 km) simulation of the Eurasian ice sheet complex, calculated using a
first-order, three-dimensional (3D) thermomechanical ice flow model
(UiT model32). Explicit technical details on the derivation and implementation
of the model can be found from its previous application to the
Celtic Ice Sheet33.
Data availability. The multibeam swath bathymetry data set used in this study is
available from the Norwegian Mapping Authority via the website www.mareano.no.
The 3D seismic data set (FP12_PRCMIG) was acquired from TGS, and 2D seismic
data sets (analogue and digital) were acquired from SINTEF Petroleum Research.
References
31. Smelror, M., Petrov, O., Larssen, G. B. & Werner, S. Geological History of the
Barents Sea (Norges geologiske undersøkelse, 2009).
32. Auriac, A. et al. Glacial isostatic adjustment associated with the Barents
Sea ice sheet: a modelling inter-comparison. Quat. Sci. Rev.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2016.02.011 (in the press).
33. Hubbard, A. et al. Dynamic cycles, ice streams and their impact on the extent,
chronology and deglaciation of the British-Irish ice sheet. Quat. Sci. Rev. 28,
758–776 (2009).
NATURE GEOSCIENCE |www.nature.com/naturegeoscience
© 2016 Macmillan Publishers Limited. All rights reserved