USGS ScienceSearch

USGS · 70148360

Hydroacoustic signatures of Colorado Riverbed sediments in Marble and Grand Canyons using multibeam sonar

Abstract

Characterizing the large-scale sedimentary make-up of heterogeneous riverbeds (Nelson et al., 2014), which consist of a patchwork of sediment types over small scales (less than one to several tens of meters) (Dietrich and Smith, 1984) requires high resolution measurements of sediment grain size. Capturing such variability with conventional physical (e.g. grabs, cores, and dredges) or underwater photographic sampling (Rubin et al., 2007; Buscombe et al., 2014a) would be prohibitively costly and time-consuming. However, characterizing bed sediments using high-frequency (several hundred kilohertz) acoustic backscatter from swath-mapping systems has the potential to provide near complete coverage of the bed (Brown and Blondel, 2009; Brown et al., 2011; Snellen et al., 2013), at resolutions down to a few centimeters, which photographic sampling could not practically achieve within the same time and with the same positional accuracy. In shallow water, the physics of high frequency scattering of sound are relatively poorly understood, therefore acoustic sediment classification are almost always statistical (Snellen et al., 2013). Many such methods proposed to date are designed for characterizing large areas of seabed (Brown and Blondel, 2009; Brown et al., 2011) at relatively poor resolution (tens of meters to several hundred meters) and therefore rely on aggregation of data over scales much larger than the typical scales of sediment patchiness on heterogeneous riverbeds. In response to this need, Buscombe et al. (2014b, 2014c) developed a new statistical method for acoustic sediment classification based on spectral analysis of backscatter. This method is both continuous in coverage and of sufficient resolution (order meter or less) to characterize sediment variability on patchy riverbeds. Here, we apply these methods to multibeam echosounder (MBES) data collected from the bed of the Colorado River in Marble and Grand Canyons. Sediment dynamics on the Colorado River in Grand Canyon National Park have been studied for several decades (e.g. Howard and Dolan, 1981; Rubin et al., 2002). Particular focus has been given to sandbars in large eddies downstream of tributary debris fans (Schmidt, 1990) because they are considered valuable resources by stakeholders and managers. Due to the severe limitations in sand supply imposed by Glen Canyon Dam (Howard and Dolan, 1981; Topping et al., 2000; Hazel et al., 2006), understanding the effectiveness of sandbar management practices, such as controlled floods (Rubin et al. 2002; Topping et al., 2006; Hazel et al., 2010), and the long-term fate of sand in Grand Canyon over decadal timescales, requires construction of accurate sand budgets, which involves detailed monitoring of influx, efflux and changes in sand storage (Topping et al., 2000; Topping et al., 2010; Grams et al., 2013) and assessments of uncertainties in sand-budget calculations (Grams et al., 2013). In order to estimate the sand budget, it is necessary to estimate what component of observed morphological changes is sand and what component is coarser. Grams et al. (2013) classified sand and coarse substrates using topographic roughness derived from digital elevation models, but the classification skill was estimated to be only 60-70%. In addition, sand bedforms had to be delineated manually, and validation was based on grain-size observations with positional uncertainties up to tens of meters. Because the morphology of the Colorado riverbed in Grand Canyon is mapped - to a large extent - using MBES (Kaplinski et al., 2009), the primary motivation for the present study is to examine how uncertainties in sand budgets can be constrained by producing maps of surface sediment types using the completely automated methods of Buscombe et al (2014b, 2014c) based on statistical analysis of MBES acoustic backscatter.

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 36° to 37° latitude; -112.5° to -111.25° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Daniel D. Buscombe, Paul E. Grams, Matthew Kaplinski, Robert B. Tusso, David M. Rubin. 2015. Hydroacoustic signatures of Colorado Riverbed sediments in Marble and Grand Canyons using multibeam sonar. https://pubs.usgs.gov/publication/70148360

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Time-to-depth conversion of seismic-reflection data from eastern Lake Superior and implications for the eastern arm of the Midcontinent Rift

Seismic-reflection data were acquired in the mid 1980s along several lines across eastern Lake Superior by industry and the Great Lakes International Multidisciplinary Program on Crustal Evolution (GLIMPCE) (Fig. 1). The lines form part of a larger network of crossing lines over the entire lake, which can be used to develop three-dimensional geologic models of the Mesoproterozoic Midcontinent Rift that lies below. To better interpret these lines, we developed velocity models to convert seismic reflections versus two-way travel time (TWTT) to reflections versus depth. In addition, the velocity models themselves provide insights into the structure of the Midcontinent Rift by recognizing common velocity ranges for certain rock types (Grauch, 2023).

eastern Lake Superior

Revisiting the utility of regional-scale, high-quality geophysical data in mineral exploration - A case study featuring the Mammoth Magnetic Anomaly, Pinal County, Arizona

Regional aeromagnetic surveys passively measure the total magnetic intensity (TMI) and are a foundational tool used in mineral exploration (Airo, 2015). With the increased global demand and the number of critical mineral resources required for manufacturing high-tech devices, developing high-quality, regional-scale geophysical surveys could aid critical mineral exploration efforts and geologic mapping. In 2019, the U. S. Geological Survey launched the Earth Mapping Resources Initiative (Earth MRI) to modernize the geologic and geophysical mapping of regions that have the potential to contain critical mineral resources within the United States. In support of planning Earth MRI geophysical surveys, Drenth and Grauch (2019) defined five aeromagnetic data quality rankings (rank 1 through rank 5) applying them to the airborne geophysical survey inventory of the United States (Johnson et al., 2021). Rank 1 aeromagnetic surveys are of the highest quality, meeting modern standards and allowing best practices for qualitative and quantitative interpretation; whereas rank 5 aeromagnetic surveys are of the lowest quality, being useful only for qualitative interpretation of broad features. Through the Earth MRI effort, 48 high-quality, regional-scale rank 1 and 2 airborne magnetic and radiometric geophysical surveys have been planned, collected, or publicly release through May 2025 (U. S. Geological Survey, 2025). Here, a portion of a rank 1 Earth MRI aeromagnetic survey in southeast Arizona is presented and compared to a legacy rank 5 aeromagnetic survey over the Mammoth Magnetic Anomaly (MMA), demonstrating how modern, high-quality aeromagnetic data improves our view of crustal geology, aiding mineral exploration.

Arizona

Early Miocene volcanic rocks and associated tectonics, Lava Hills and southern Bristol Mountains, California

Volcanic rocks of latest Oligocene to early Miocene age form an east-west belt across part of the central eastern Mojave Desert from the Whipple Mountains on the east to the Rosamond Hills on the west. We term this the central belt because it is separated from northern and southern belts by swaths with no volcanic rocks. Limited geochronologic data indicate that much of the belt is latest Oligocene and early Miocene in age, about 24 to 19 Ma, a finding that is consistent with these rocks being overlain by the 18.8 Ma Peach Spring Tuff in many places. We describe Miocene geology in a central area of the belt, in the Lava Hills, southern Bristol Mountains, and southern Old Dad Mountains. Sedimentary basins formed coeval with early andesite to rhyolite volcanism, progressing from fluvial and lacustrine tuffaceous sandstone to volcanic lavas, tuffs, and breccias, indicating that early basins formed proximal to volcanic edifices. Higher strata are fluvial and lacustrine with lavas punctuating the sequence. Although basins may partly have been formed within topographic lows bounded by volcanic domes, plateaus, and stratovolcanoes, consistent stratigraphic sections over wide areas indicate that tectonic basin evolution affected broad areas. The volcanic section is capped by local basalt flows and the regional Peach Spring Tuff. Limited data on normal faults support interpretations of early extensional basin development caused by northeast-southwest oriented stretching. Later extension caused stratal rotations, tilting early deposits down to the southwest. This tilted and subsequently beveled basin architecture was overlain by the youngest volcanic deposits, primarily rhyolite and basalt. The Peach Spring Tuff, 18.8 Ma, lies within this upper unit. Similar stratigraphic and structural relations are exposed in the nearby Marble Mountains and Van Winkle Mountain sections, reinforcing that a broad area underwent similar volcanism and tectonism. In our study area the upper unit is only very gently tilted except near dextral strike-slip faults of the eastern California shear zone. These late Miocene to Recent faults are represented as four main fault zones spaced about 5 km apart, representing distributed shear north of the Bristol Lake basin.

California