Next Article in Journal
A Modified Wake Oscillator Model for the Cross-Flow Vortex-Induced Vibration of Rigid Cylinders with Low Mass and Damping Ratios
Previous Article in Journal
Offshore Measurements and Numerical Validation of the Mooring Forces on a 1:5 Scale Buoy
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
JMSE
Volume 11
Issue 2
10.3390/jmse11020232
jmse-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Communication

Rapid Magnetic Susceptibility Characterization of Coastal Morphosedimentary Units at Two Insular Strandplains in Estonia

by
Ilya V. Buynevich
1,*,
Hannes Tõnisson
2,
Alar Rosentau
3,
Tiit Hang
3,
Are Kont
2,
Toru Tamura
4,
Sten Suuroja
5,
Valdeko Palginõmm
2 and
Sophia F. S. Döring
6
1
Department of Earth and Environmental Science, Temple University, 1901 N 13th St., Philadelphia, PA 19122, USA
2
Institute of Ecology, Tallinn University, 10120 Tallinn, Estonia
3
Institute of Ecology and Earth Sciences, University of Tartu, 50409 Tartu, Estonia
4
Geological Survey of Japan (AIST), Tsukuba, Central 7, 1-1-1, Higashi, Tsukuba 305-8567, Japan
5
Geological Survey of Estonia, 12618 Tallinn, Estonia
6
Hochschule Bremen, 28199 Bremen, Germany
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11(2), 232; https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse11020232
Submission received: 7 December 2022 / Revised: 9 January 2023 / Accepted: 12 January 2023 / Published: 17 January 2023
(This article belongs to the Section Marine Environmental Science)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Coastal archives of changing hydrometeorological conditions include mineralogical anomalies, such as heavy-mineral concentrations (HMCs) of variable thickness and intensity, which contain varying ferrimagnetic (e.g., magnetite) fractions. As an effective alternative to laborious mineralogical and granulometric analysis, we present the first set of bulk-volume low-field magnetic susceptibility (MS) databases from beach and dune lithosomes in the Western Estonian archipelago: Harilaid cuspate foreland (westernmost Saaremaa Island) and Tahkuna strandplain (northernmost Hiiumaa Island). Readings were conducted both in situ from trench walls and on core subsamples. At the Tahkuna site, late Holocene beach ridges reveal substantially lower values: quartz-dominated dune sequences grade from 5–20 μSI downward to diamagnetically dominated (−1–7 μSI) beach facies. Values are higher (20–140 μSI) in historically reactivated parabolic dunes that are encroaching southward over the strandplain. At the Harilaid site, four beach dune ridges (height: 2–3 m) that span the past 250–300 years show a general increase in mean MS from 320–850 μSI with decreasing age, with peaks of 1000–2000 μSI below the dune crests (depth: ~0.3–0.6 m) likely related to contemporary wind acceleration during ridge aggradation. The highest mineralogical anomalies range from 2000–5500 μSI in the historic dune sections and exceed 8000 μSI along the actively eroding upper-berm segments, typical of HMCs generated by moderate storms. MS anomalies are likely correlated with high-amplitude electromagnetic signal responses in georadar records and provide useful information for optical luminescence sampling strategies. Our study demonstrates that magnetic susceptibility trends provide a useful means of rapidly assessing relative temporal changes in overall wave/wind climates, help identify and correlate discrete anomalies related to extreme events, serve as local beach/dune boundary indicators, and represent potentially quantifiable paleo-energy indices.

1. Introduction

Coastal accumulation forms serve as morphological and sedimentary archives of past oceanographic forcings, with beach/dune ridges (strandplains) and reactivated dunes preserving rich archives of long-term wave climates, storm impacts, and near-surface wind activities [1,2,3,4,5,6]. Reconstructing the signatures of environmental and anthropogenic changes in coastal landscapes is particularly important in a current regime of rapid shifts in climate, sea level, and sediment supply. However, in many siliciclastic beach and dune lithosomes, evidence of past events is often preserved as erosional (discontinuities, density lag) rather than depositional geoindicators. Textural and stratigraphic data alone are not always adequate for locating and mapping these event signatures, and in this context, lithological anomalies, such as heavy mineral concentrations (HMCs) provide a rich dataset, which (1) is recognized visually in outcrops, trenches, and cores; (2) can be correlated with geophysical data anomalies (georadar reflections); and (3) offers a means of quantitative assessment of the energy conditions responsible for producing a specific anomaly [4,7,8,9,10].
To date, however, little research has been carried out to rapidly and effectively assess such anomalies in the field or laboratory as an independent component of coastal stratigraphic and geophysical research [4,11]. Low-field bulk magnetic susceptibility (MS) is emerging as a means of such in situ analyses of Holocene beach and aeolian deposits [12,13,14]. The aim of this study is to assess a new dataset of MS values from two sites along the Estonian archipelago (Tahkuna, Hiiumaa Island and Harilaid, Saaremaa Island; Figure 1) in order to demonstrate the effectiveness of the method as a potential new component of coastal geological research. Rather than an interpretative dataset addressing specific interpretations of hydroclimatic conditions responsible for HMC formation, this paper presents examples of potential MS values encountered in spatially and temporally different settings, having a similar physiographic background.

2. Study Areas

Study sites are located in the middle section of the Tahkuna peninsula on the Northern Hiiumaa Island (Figure 1B) and Harilaid peninsula, NW Saaremaa Island Figure 1C). The first site is a north-facing coastal strandplain anchored to bedrock headlands, whereas the second is a cuspate foreland exposed to both the west (erosional section) and northeast. Over the past two millennia, the coastlines of Estonian islands have been outpacing the regional sea level rise by 2–3 mm/yr (a trend decreasing in a southerly direction) as a response to neotectonic and glacio-isostatic uplift [15,16,17]. Therefore, the majority of the coastal sedimentary systems have undergone varying rates of uplift during and following their formation [18,19,20,21].
This shoreline is functionally tideless, with fair-weather wave heights of <0.5 m. Storm surges (wave height > 2.0 m) and sea ice are the primary drivers of change along many accumulation forms [22,23,24]. Depositional landforms range from gravel to sand, with the present study concentrated on sandy lithosomes, primarily 1.0–1.2 m high beach/dune ridge sets (Figure 1 and Figure 2). The Harilaid peninsula has been the focus of recent investigations, which demonstrate that the ridges formed within the past 250–300 years and the substantial erosion in the west are the result of intense storms in the 20th century [22,23,25]. One of the most recent impacts was by the winter storm Gudrun in 2005 [26,27,28].

3. Materials and Methods

This study is part of a regional, multi-institutional geological research effort in December 2019. For assessing the relative magnitude of exposed heavy mineral concentrations (driven primarily by the ferrimagnetic fraction, e.g., magnetite), 170 bulk-volume magnetic susceptibility values were obtained in situ. Measurements were made using a portable Trimble® Nomad® 900 handheld computer with a high-sensitivity Bartington® MS3 m. We used the MS2K field scanning sensor (operational frequency: 0.93 kHz) with a sensitivity threshold of 50% at a surface diameter of 2.5 cm (response area) and a response depth of 0.3 cm into the sediment (10% at 0.8 cm) [4]. Due to the response decay with depth, the field sensor is ideal for measuring relative MS values on moderately smooth sediment surfaces, particularly where the sampling of thin HMC horizons is problematic. Most samples in this study had a mean grain size in a medium sand range (0.2–0.5 mm), with microscope analysis indicating that nearly all opaque and non-opaque heavy minerals (density > 2.7 g/cm3) comprise a finer fraction in each sample.
Measurements were made at 5 or 10 cm intervals in trench walls (2 at Tahkuna; 3 trenches and 1 outcrop at Harilaid; Figure 1 and Figure 2A,B,E; Table 1) guided by visible sedimentological variations (heavy mineral concentrations, etc.). At three inter-ridge swale sites, an electric vibracore with a window sampler was used to extract subsamples, which were laid out at stratigraphic intervals on a wooden board for measurements (one at Tahkuna; two at Harilaid; Figure 2C). In addition, samples were taken from modern beach and dune surfaces, as well as the cover soil and moss horizons. All sites were geolocated using a high-precision RTK GPS system. The field measurement drift was <1%, and selected subsamples remeasured in the lab and were shown to have <3% variation from values obtained in the field. The data campaign also included high-resolution geophysical (70/300 MHz) georadar surveys (Figure 2D), with the ultimate aim of correlating lithostratigraphic units and MS trends with subsurface bounding surfaces.

4. Results

The results of the field measurements are summarized in Table 1 and are presented in Figure 3 and Figure 4. It is worth noting that relative, rather than absolute, MS values need to be considered when comparing trends within each site, both spatially and temporally. The Late Holocene beach ridges at Tahkuna strandplain yielded relatively low MS values with a mean of 4.4 and 4.7 μSI for ridges TUH-1 (0.7 m deep) and TUH-2 (0.95 m), respectively (Table 1; Figure 2A and Figure 3). The 0.9 m deep trench through the upper, younger section of a ~5 m high parabolic dune had substantially higher susceptibility values, with an average of 68.4 μSI and maximum of >140 μSI (Site 5A; Figure 1, Figure 2B and Figure 3).
The four ridges at Harilaid foreland yielded substantially higher values than Tahkuna (Table 1; Figure 3). The modern beach had the highest MS values, with a very-thin-layer (2–3 mm) cover placer deposit exceeding 8100 μSI. The modern dunes and aeolian ramp have anomalies with average values of ~450 μSI (Figure 2E). It is worth noting that unusually high MS values of modern subenvironments are largely due to bedding plane measurements, in contrast to trench wall sensor attitude that captures background values from underlying and overlying laminae (Figure 3). In the trenches, cores, and outcrops, many HMC layers exceed 5 mm and show a wide spectrum of bulk MS, with a vast majority in a 100–1000 μSI range (note the logarithmic scale in Figure 3). An organic-rich (decomposed seaweed) sample in core KII-1 provided the lowest MS of 16.6 μSI, whereas the highest for a geological sample was an HMC in core KII-2 at 5158.2 μSI.
Table
Table 1. Bulk low-field magnetic susceptibility (κ, μSI) values (minimum, maximum, and mean) of 170 sand samples from a suite of morphostratigraphic units and modern subenvironments (see Figure 1 for locations). The context of selected anomalous readings is indicated below, with the majority of MS maxima corresponding to visible heavy mineral concentrations. Note an increase in mean κ through time at Harilaid strandplain (R1 to R4). Buried organics at a 1.9 m depth in core KII-1 (a) yielded low MS values similar to those of the modern swash zones (b). The modern beach (wave-reworked) and dune (wind-transported) samples show that the aeolian ramp (e) along the western scarp (truncated ridge R1) derives its sediment from the HMC-rich upper berm (c). In contrast, the upper part of the scarp and dune top (d) have low values similar to the top of R1.
Table 1. Bulk low-field magnetic susceptibility (κ, μSI) values (minimum, maximum, and mean) of 170 sand samples from a suite of morphostratigraphic units and modern subenvironments (see Figure 1 for locations). The context of selected anomalous readings is indicated below, with the majority of MS maxima corresponding to visible heavy mineral concentrations. Note an increase in mean κ through time at Harilaid strandplain (R1 to R4). Buried organics at a 1.9 m depth in core KII-1 (a) yielded low MS values similar to those of the modern swash zones (b). The modern beach (wave-reworked) and dune (wind-transported) samples show that the aeolian ramp (e) along the western scarp (truncated ridge R1) derives its sediment from the HMC-rich upper berm (c). In contrast, the upper part of the scarp and dune top (d) have low values similar to the top of R1.
Locationn kminkmax k ¯
Tahkuna (n = 68)
TUH-129–7.328.44.4
TUH-2 core20–3.340.94.7
TUH-5A190140.868.4
Harilaid (n = 102)
R1 1345.71069.9326.6
KII-1 core1716.6 a283.7208.7
R212 140.21264.3419.6
KII-2 core1965.55158.2561.6
R317 195.71966.7754.4
R415 415.92030.1851.5
Beach316.9 b8173.1 c2905.4
Dune645.7 d1130.1 e444.4
a Organics; b swash zone; c upper berm; d dune top; e aeolian ramp.
A stratigraphic pattern includes an MS increase in all sections within 0.3–0.6 m below the ridge crest (Figure 2E and Figure 4A). The maximum at 0.4 m is especially well constrained. A second trend is an increase in the average MS values of the four ridge crests with decreasing age (seaward) from ~330 to 850 μSI (ridge R1 and R4, respectively; Table 1; Figure 4B).

5. Discussion and Conclusions

The results of our study show several distinct patterns and highlight the importance of analyzing site-specific trends in relative magnetic susceptibility values from individual cores or trenches to several ridges within a set. Inter-site contrast (between all Tahkuna and Harilaid samples; Table 1) has a greater bearing on the difference in their depositional timeframe. Therefore, each site provides its own pattern of MS trends, and no attempt was made to directly compare them other than to highlight the contrasting ranges of absolute values (Figure 3).
The low values at Tahkuna are due to the dominance of diamagnetic quartz, with minor amounts of felsic feldspar (see inset in Figure 3). This segment of the strandplain formed within the past 2200 years (Figure 1 and Figure 2A) and likely represents a relatively calm hydroclimatic regime (Tõnisson et al., 2018). The parabolic dune likely formed ~800 yBP as a result of the reworking of beach ridge segments seaward of beach ridges 1 and 2 [29]. Such dunes often provide an independent archive of wind stress related to coastal storms [1,2,3,4,12,30,31,32,33,34]. Future research is planned along the seaward sections of Tahkuna strandplain to see how they compare to the much higher values found at the Harilaid site on Saaremaa.
At the Harilaid foreland, the magnetite fraction is the primary cause of magnetic susceptibility values, with other paramagnetic minerals (e.g., almandine garnet, ilmenite, and amphiboles; see inset in Figure 3) causing additional MS increases [35,36,37,38]. Thin, high-value anomalies can be potentially used to locate the beach dune boundary, with further research needed. This can be accomplished by comparing the depth of such an anomaly with a georadar signature of the upper berm: (1) flattening of seaward-dipping clinoforms or (2) transition between the sub-horizontal (berm) and chaotic (foredune) bounding surfaces [5,39,40,41].
Thick heavy mineral concentrations, similar to those at Harilaid, often accompany morphological signatures of beach and dune sections that have undergone storm reworking [7,8,10,42,43]. These can be identified in trenches and GPR images as strong (high-amplitude) seaward-dipping sub-horizontal reflections of eroded beach faces and/or steep disconformities that truncate paleo-berm (berm scarp) or dune (dune scarp) bounding surfaces [9,11,39,42,44,45]. Such efforts are underway for images collected during MS surveys (Figure 2D) and will be the focus of future publications. An additional aspect of HMCs, even thin horizons, is their potential adverse influence on optically stimulated luminescence dating (OSL) results [39]. Thus, the strategy for selecting intervals for OSL sampling can be easily guided by MS measurements in trenches and outcrops (Figure 2E) selected for chronological control, as was the case in this study.
Such integrated datasets of textural, MS, chronological, and high-resolution geophysical data are revolutionizing coastal research in sand-dominated sequences that have been challenging to study using traditional geological techniques. For example, the granulometric analysis of HMC-quartz couplets that may be a result of deposition during the waning stages of a storm will often show a reverse grading. Hydrodynamically, however, the finer-grained heavy mineral fraction is coarser due to surface area/volume considerations and dispersive pressure effects [7,10,46,47,48]. When grain size data are “normalized” using MS values, which are a function of both density and particle size, a more accurate picture can be obtained and included in the quantitative analysis of shear stress.
It is possible that MS peaks at 30–60 cm depths below each ridge crest (Figure 4A) may be due to the acceleration of near-surface wind due to vertical ridge growth (aggradation), with capping sediment representing a cessation in wind activity and initiation of vegetation. Alternatively, there may be a pedogenic component to such HMC trends, although it is present in ridges of varying ages. A trend of a progressive mean MS increases from older to younger sites (R1-R4; Table 1; Figure 4B) may be related to either (1) a temporal increase in the overall energy of the aero/hydrodynamic agents during deposition or (2) changes in the sediment source with a finite fraction of heavy minerals (primarily magnetite). Such trends may potentially serve for intra-site (along a single ridge) or inter-site (coeval ridges) morphostratigraphic correlations.
Recent research on Estonian strandplains [6,49,50,51] proposes a climatically mediated cyclicity, with major ridge sets and morphostratigraphic discontinuities likely related to storm periods. Ultimately, such patterns may be linked to hemisphere-scale perturbations in North Atlantic Oscillation or related phenomena, with Estonia being the easternmost coastal region in this system [29,52].
Our dataset will be compared to other paleotempestological proxies, such as clastic flux in coastal wetlands [53], to investigate a potential for an integrated erosional–depositional regional database for intense historic and prehistoric events. Furthermore, localized HMC anomalies have the potential to reveal past tracking surfaces of paleo-ecological and archaeological significance by accentuating footprints on otherwise monotonous aeolian bedding planes [12,14,21,54]. This study demonstrates that the low-field MS methodology presented here has high potential to complement ongoing and future research along the Baltic coastal sequences in Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia and will serve as valuable lithostratigraphic and paleo-energy indicators.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, I.V.B. and H.T.; methodology, I.V.B.; software, I.V.B.; validation, I.V.B., H.T.; formal analysis, I.V.B.; investigation, I.V.B., H.T., T.T., A.R., T.H., S.S., A.K., V.P. and S.F.S.D.; resources, H.T.; data curation, I.V.B.; writing—original draft preparation, I.V.B.; writing—review and editing, I.V.B., A.R., T.H., A.K.; visualization, I.V.B.; supervision, I.V.B. and H.T.; project administration, H.T.; funding acquisition, I.V.B. and H.T. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by [Estonian Research Council Grants] and [the College of Science and Technology (Temple University, USA)], grant number [IUT18-9 and PRG1471]. And The APC was funded by [Estonian Research Council Grants] and [the College of Science and Technology (Temple University, USA)].

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Acknowledgments

We thank the people of Hiiumaa and Saaremaa for their hospitality during field research.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Clemmensen, L.B.; Andreasen, F.; Heinemeier, J.; Murray, A. A Holocene coastal aeolian system, Vejers, Denmark: Landscape evolution and sequence stratigraphy. Terra Nova 2001, 13, 129–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Clarke, M.L.; Rendell, H.M.; Tastet, J.-P.; Clavé, B.; Massé, L. Late-Holocene sand invasion and North Atlantic storminess along the Aquitaine Coast, southwest France. Holocene 2002, 12, 231–238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Clarke, M.L.; Rendell, H.M. Effects of storminess, sand supply and the North Atlantic Oscillation on sand invasion and coastal dune accretion in western Portugal. Holocene 2006, 16, 341–355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Buynevich, I.V.; Bitinas, A.; Pupienis, D. Lithological anomalies in a relict coastal dune: Geophysical and paleoenvironmental markers. Geophys. Res. Lett. 2007, 34, L09707. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  5. Tamura, T. Beach ridges and prograded beach deposits as palaeoenvironment records. Earth Sci. Rev. 2012, 114, 279–297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Suursaar, Ü.; Rosentau, A.; Hang, T.; Tõnisson, H.; Tamura, T.; Vaasma, T.; Vandel, E.; Vilumaa, K.; Sugita, S. Climatically induced cyclicity recorded in the morphology of uplifting Tihu coastal ridgeplain, Hiiumaa Island, eastern Baltic Sea. Geomorphology 2022, 404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Komar, P.D.; Wang, C. Processes of selective grain transport and the formation of placers on beaches. J. Geol. 1984, 92, 637–655. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Smith, A.W.; Jackson, L.A. Assessment of the past extent of cyclone beach erosion. J. Coast. Res. 1990, 6, 73–86. [Google Scholar]
  9. Dougherty, A.J.; FitzGerald, D.M.; Buynevich, I.V. Evidence for storm-dominated early progradation of Castle Neck Barrier, Massachusetts, USA. Mar. Geol. 2004, 210, 123–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Kattaa, B. Heavy mineral survey of the Syrian beach sands, south of Tartous: Their nature, distribution and potential. Explor. Min. Geol. 2004, 11, 31–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Van Dam, R.L.; Hendrickx, J.M.H.; Cassidy, N.J.; North, R.E.; Dogan, M.; Borchers, B. Effects of magnetite on high-frequency ground-penetrating radar. Geophysics 2013, 78, H1–H11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Buynevich, I.V. Morphologically induced density lag formation on bedforms and biogenic structures in aeolian sands. Aeolian Res. 2012, 7, 11–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Pupienis, D.; Buynevich, I.V.; Ryabchuk, D.; Jarmalavičius, D.; Žilinskas, G.; Fedorovič, J.; Kovaleva, O.; Sergeev, A.; Cichoń-Pupienis, A. Spatial patterns in heavy-mineral concentrations along the Curonian Spit coast, southeastern Baltic Sea. Estuar. Coast. Shelf Sci. 2017, 195, 41–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Buynevich, I.V. Detection of mineralogically accentuated biogenic structures with high-resolution geophysics: Implications for ichnology and geoecology. J. Geol. Geogr. Geoecol. 2020, 29, 252–257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Vassiljev, J.; Saarse, L.; Grudzinska, I.; Heinsalu, A. Relative sea level changes and development of the Hiiumaa Island, Estonia, during the Holocene. Geol. Quat. 2015, 59, 517–530. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Rosentau, A. and 28 co-authors. A Holocene relative sea-level database for the Baltic Sea. Quat. Sci. Rev. 2021, 266, 107071. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Nirgi, T.; Grudzinska, I.; Kalińska, E.; Konsa, M.; Jõeleht, A.; Alexanderson, H.; Hang, T.; Rosentau, A. Late-Holocene relative sea-level changes and palaeoenvironment of the Pre-Viking Age ship burials in Salme, Saaremaa Island, eastern Baltic Sea. Holocene 2022, 32, 237–253. [Google Scholar]
  18. Kont, A.; Ratas, U.; Puurmann, E. Sea-level rise impact on coastal areas of Estonia. Clim. Chang. 1997, 36, 175–184. [Google Scholar]
  19. Kriiska, A.; Hang, T.; Rosentau, A. Palaeogeographic model for the SW Estonian coastal zone of the Baltic Sea. In The Baltic Sea Basin (Central and Eastern European Development Studies; Harff, J., Bjorck, S., Hoth, P., Eds.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelbeg, Germany, 2011; pp. 165–188. [Google Scholar]
  20. Vilumaa, K.; Ratas, U.; Tõnisson, H.; Kont, A.; Pajula, R. Multidisciplinary approach to studying the formation and development of beach-ridge systems on non-tidal uplifting coasts in Estonia. Boreal Env. Res. 2017, 22, 67–81. [Google Scholar]
  21. Muru, M.; Rosentau, A.; Preusser, F.; Plado, J.; Sibul, I.; Jõeleht, A.; Bjursäter, S.; Aunap, R.; Kriiska, A. Reconstructing Holocene shore displacement and Stone Age palaeogeography from a foredune sequence on Ruhnu Island, Gulf of Riga, Baltic Sea. Geomorphology 2018, 303, 434–445. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Rivis, R.; Ratas, U.; Kont, A. Some Implications of Coastal Processes Associated with Climate Change on Harilaid, Western Estonia. In Proceedings of the Littoral 2002. 6th International Symposium: The Changing Coast, Porto, Portugal, 22–26 September 2002; pp. 133–139. [Google Scholar]
  23. Orviku, K.; Suursaar, Ü.; Tõnisson, H.; Kullas, T.; Rivis, R.; Kont, A. Coastal changes in Saaremaa Island, Estonia, caused by winter storms in 1999, 2001, 2005 and 2007. J. Coast. Res. 2009, SI56, 1651–1655. [Google Scholar]
  24. Orviku, K.; Tõnisson, H.; Jaagus, J. Sea ice shaping the shores. J. Coast. Res. 2011, SI64, 681–685. [Google Scholar]
  25. Suursaar, Ü.; Jaagus, J.; Kont, A.; Rivis, R.; Tõnisson, H. Field observations on hydrodynamic and coastal geomorphic processes off Harilaid Peninsula (Baltic Sea) in winter and spring 2006−2007. Estuar. Coast. Shelf Sci. 2008, 80, 31–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Soomere, T.; Behrens, A.; Tuomi, L.; Nielsen, J.W. Wave conditions in the Baltic proper and in the Gulf of Finland during windstorm Gudrun. Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. 2008, 8, 37–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Tõnisson, H.; Orviku, K.; Jaagus, J.; Suursaar, Ü.; Kont, A.; Rivis, R. Coastal damages on Saaremaa Island, Estonia, caused by the extreme storm and flooding on January 9, 2005. J. Coast. Res. 2008, 24, 602–614. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Tõnisson, H.; Suursaar, Ü.; Rivis, R.; Kont, A.; Orviku, K. Observation and analysis of coastal changes in the West Estonian Archipelago caused by storm Ulli (Emil) in January 2012. J. Coast. Res. 2013, SI65, 832–837. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Tõnisson, H.; Suursaar, Ü.; Kont, A.; Muru, M.; Rivis, R.; Rosentau, A.; Tamura, T.; Vilumaa, K. Rhythmic patterns of coastal formations as signs of past climate fluctuations on uplifting coasts of Estonia, the Baltic Sea. J. Coast. Res. 2018, SI85, 611–615. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Seppälä, M. Deflation and redeposition of sand dunes in Finnish Lapland. Quat. Sci. Rev. 1995, 14, 799–809. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Lancaster, N. Response of eolian geomorphic systems to minor climate change: Examples from the southern Californian deserts. Geomorphology 1997, 19, 333–347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Botha, G.A.; Bristow, C.S.; Porat, N.; Duller, G.; Armitage, S.J.; Roberts, H.M.; Clarke, B.M.; Kota, M.W.; Schoeman, P. Evidence for dune reactivation from GPR profiles on the Maputuland coastal plain, South Africa. In Ground Penetrating Radar in Sediments; Bristow, C.S., Jol, H.M., Eds.; Geological Society: London, UK, 2003; Volume 211, pp. 29–46. [Google Scholar]
  33. Habicht, H.-L.; Rosentau, A.; Jõeleht, A. GIS-based multiproxy coastline reconstruction of the eastern gulf of Riga, Baltic Sea, during the stone age. Boreas 2017, 46, 83–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Tõnisson, H.; Suursaar, Ü.; Rivis, R.; Tamura, T.; Aarna, T.; Vilumaa, K.; Kont, A. Characteristics and formation of a solitary dune belt encountered along the coast of Estonia. J. Coast. Res. 2020, SI95, 689–694. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Raukas, A.; Bird, E.D.; Orviku, K. The provenance of beaches on the Estonian islands of Hiiumaa and Saaremaa. Proc. Est. Acad. Sci. Geol. 1994, 43, 81–92. [Google Scholar]
  36. Raukas, A.; Koch, R.; Juriado, K.; Järvelill, J.I. Anomalous radioactivity level and high concentrations of heavy minerals in Lemme area, South-West Estonia. Baltica 2014, 27, 93–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  37. Shankar, R.; Thompson, R.; Prakash, T.N. Estimation of heavy and opaque mineral contents of beach and offshore placers using rock magnetic techniques. Geo. Mar. Lett. 1996, 16, 313–318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Järvelill, J.-I.; Kleesment, A.; Raukas, A. Accumulation of heavy minerals in the eastern coast of the Gulf of Riga, south-western Estonia. Bull. Geol. Soc. Finl. 2015, 87, 67–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Buynevich, I.V.; FitzGerald, D.M.; Goble, R.J. A 1500-year record of North Atlantic storm activity based on optically dated relict beach scarps. Geology 2007, 35, 543–546. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Buynevich, I.V.; Jol, H.M.; FitzGerald, D.M. Coastal Environments. In Ground Penetrating Radar: Theory and Applications; Jol, H.M., Ed.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2009; pp. 299–322. [Google Scholar]
  41. van Heteren, S.; FitzGerald, D.M.; McKinlay, P.A.; Buynevich, I.V. Radar facies of paraglacial barrier systems: Coastal New England, USA. Sedimentology 1998, 45, 181–200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Buynevich, I.V.; FitzGerald, D.M.; van Heteren, S. Sedimentary records of intense storms in Holocene barrier sequences, Maine, USA. Mar. Geol. 2004, 210, 135–148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Buynevich, I.V.; Kadurin, S.V. Paleo-storm indicators within Sasyk Liman baymouth barrier, Ukraine. Geol. Bull. Lviv Natl. Univ. Ukr. 2015, i, 53–59. [Google Scholar]
  44. Rosentau, A.; Jõeleht, A.; Plado, J.; Aunap, R.; Muru, M.; Eskola, K.O. Development of the Holocene foredune plain in the Narva-Jõesuu area, eastern Gulf of Finland. Geol. Q. 2013, 57, 89–100. [Google Scholar]
  45. Vilumaa, K.; Tõnisson, H.; Sugita, S.; Buynevich, I.V.; Kont, A.; Muru, M.; Preusser, F.; Bjursäter, S.; Vaasma, T.; Vandel, E.; et al. Past extreme events recorded in the internal architecture of coastal formations in the Baltic Sea region. J. Coast. Res. 2016, SI75, 775–779. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Komar, P.D. Physical processes of waves and currents and the formation of marine placers. Rev. Aquat. Sci. 1989, 1, 393–423. [Google Scholar]
  47. Hughes, M.G.; Keene, J.B.; Joseph, R.G. Hydraulic sorting of heavy-mineral grains by swash on a medium-sand beach. J. Sediment. Res. 2000, 70, 994–1004. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  48. Tomkins, M.R.; Nielsen, P.; Michael, G.; Hughes, M.G. Selective entrainment of sediment graded by size and density under waves. J. Sediment. Res. 2003, 73, 906–911. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Suursaar, Ü.; Tõnisson, H. Storminess-related rhythmic ridge patterns on the coasts of Estonia. Estonian J. Earth Sci. 2017, 66, 220–237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Suursaar, Ü.; Kall, T.; Steffen, H.; Tõnisson, H. Cyclicity in ridge patterns on the prograding coasts of Estonia. Boreas 2019, 48, 913–928. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Suursaar, Ü.; Jaagus, J.; Tõnisson, H. How to quantify long-term changes in coastal sea storminess? Estuar. Coast. Shelf Sci. 2015, 156, 31–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Tõnisson, H.; Suursaar, Ü.; Orviku, K.; Jaagus, J.; Kont, A.; Willis, D.A.; Rivis, R. Changes in coastal processes in relation to changes in large-scale atmospheric circulation, wave parameters and sea levels in Estonia. J. Coast. Res. 2011, SI64, 701–705. [Google Scholar]
  53. Vandel, E.; Vaasma, T.; Sugita, S.; Tõnisson, H.; Jaagus, J.; Vilumaa, K.; Anderson, A.; Kont, A. Reconstruction of past storminess: Evaluation of an indicator approach using aeolian mineral grains buried in peat deposits, Estonia. Quat. Sci. Rev. 2019, 218, 215–227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Rosentau, A.; Nirgi, T.; Muru, M.; Bjursäater, S.; Hang, T.; Preusser, F.; Risberg, J.; Sohar, K.; Tõnisson, H.; Kriiska, A. Holocene relative shore level changes and Stone Age hunter-gatherers in Hiiumaa Island, eastern Baltic Sea. Boreas 2020, 49, 783–798. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Jmse 11 00232 g001 550
Figure 1. (A) Location of Hiiumaa (B) and Saaremaa (C) Islands along the east coast of the Baltic Sea. (B) Tahkuna strandplain, northern Hiiumaa Island, with locations of a beach ridge trench (Site TUH-1; see Figure 2A), nearby core sample (TUH-2), and a deep trench through a large parabolic dune (Site 5A; Figure 2B). (C) Harilaid strandplain, northwest Saaremaa Island, showing locations of the four trenched ridge generations (trenches R1-4). Cores KII-1 and KII-2 (see Figure 2C) were taken through ridges R1 and R2 (Figure 2D), respectively, with a coastal exposure measured for ridge R3 (see Figure 2E; GoogleEarthTM database).
Figure 1. (A) Location of Hiiumaa (B) and Saaremaa (C) Islands along the east coast of the Baltic Sea. (B) Tahkuna strandplain, northern Hiiumaa Island, with locations of a beach ridge trench (Site TUH-1; see Figure 2A), nearby core sample (TUH-2), and a deep trench through a large parabolic dune (Site 5A; Figure 2B). (C) Harilaid strandplain, northwest Saaremaa Island, showing locations of the four trenched ridge generations (trenches R1-4). Cores KII-1 and KII-2 (see Figure 2C) were taken through ridges R1 and R2 (Figure 2D), respectively, with a coastal exposure measured for ridge R3 (see Figure 2E; GoogleEarthTM database).
Jmse 11 00232 g001
Jmse 11 00232 g002 550
Figure 2. Field photographs of sampled sites on Hiiumaa (A,B) and Saaremaa (C–E) Islands (see Figure 1B,C for locations). (A) A trench through a beach ridge shows well-sorted quartz-rich sand down to a water table at 0.7 m. A Bartington MS2K field sensor was used for in situ magnetic susceptibility (MS) measurements. Core TUH-2 was taken landward of the trench. (B) A 1 m deep trench through the top of a high parabolic dune seaward of TUH sites. (C) Samples from a 2.4 m deep core KII-2 (ridge R2) at the Harilaid strandplain arranged on a wooden board showing darker, less oxidized sand with depth (toward the bottom of the photo). The personal digital assistant (PDA) and MS sensor are visible, with MS3 m in the backpack. (D) Ridge 2 and a seaward swale (R2/R3), with a ground-penetrating radar (GPR) antenna (~1 m long) for scale. (E) An erosional scarp reveals the bedding of the upper beach and dune section of ridge R3. Thin paleosol horizons and multiple heavy mineral concentrations (HMC) were measured in situ.
Figure 2. Field photographs of sampled sites on Hiiumaa (A,B) and Saaremaa (C–E) Islands (see Figure 1B,C for locations). (A) A trench through a beach ridge shows well-sorted quartz-rich sand down to a water table at 0.7 m. A Bartington MS2K field sensor was used for in situ magnetic susceptibility (MS) measurements. Core TUH-2 was taken landward of the trench. (B) A 1 m deep trench through the top of a high parabolic dune seaward of TUH sites. (C) Samples from a 2.4 m deep core KII-2 (ridge R2) at the Harilaid strandplain arranged on a wooden board showing darker, less oxidized sand with depth (toward the bottom of the photo). The personal digital assistant (PDA) and MS sensor are visible, with MS3 m in the backpack. (D) Ridge 2 and a seaward swale (R2/R3), with a ground-penetrating radar (GPR) antenna (~1 m long) for scale. (E) An erosional scarp reveals the bedding of the upper beach and dune section of ridge R3. Thin paleosol horizons and multiple heavy mineral concentrations (HMC) were measured in situ.
Jmse 11 00232 g002
Jmse 11 00232 g003 550
Figure 3. Database of all MS values from the Tahkuna (Hiiumaa) and Harilaid (Saaremaa) sites (logarithmic MS scale). Site names on top reflect the overall pattern as values at Harilaid are 1–2 orders of magnitude greater (mostly >100 μSI), with a low-value outlier representing an organic sample and the highest (>1000 μSI) corresponding to modern beach HMCs and specific intervals in trench/core samples (see Figure 4 for selected vertical and lateral stratigraphic trends). Modern upper-berm (UB) and aeolian ramp (AR) HMCs have unusually high MS values (Table 1) due to bedding plane measurements, in contrast to other points. Insets show medium quartz-rich sand and a slightly finer-grained HMC from an active beach at Harilaid (scale bar = 1 cm).
Figure 3. Database of all MS values from the Tahkuna (Hiiumaa) and Harilaid (Saaremaa) sites (logarithmic MS scale). Site names on top reflect the overall pattern as values at Harilaid are 1–2 orders of magnitude greater (mostly >100 μSI), with a low-value outlier representing an organic sample and the highest (>1000 μSI) corresponding to modern beach HMCs and specific intervals in trench/core samples (see Figure 4 for selected vertical and lateral stratigraphic trends). Modern upper-berm (UB) and aeolian ramp (AR) HMCs have unusually high MS values (Table 1) due to bedding plane measurements, in contrast to other points. Insets show medium quartz-rich sand and a slightly finer-grained HMC from an active beach at Harilaid (scale bar = 1 cm).
Jmse 11 00232 g003
Jmse 11 00232 g004 550
Figure 4. Vertical (trench/core stratigraphic) and lateral (morphostratigraphic) trends. (A) Mean values and ranges of trench and outcrop-based in situ MS values from four ridges (R1-R4). Note a well-constrained high MS anomaly at a 0.4 m depth. (B) Mean values of each ridge reveal an increasing trend in a morphostratigraphically younger direction, with the most recent R4 having a >2.5 higher mean MS compared to R1. Two cores (KII-1 and 2) are shown as circles for comparison; however, they have a much greater range of variations due to the presence of both organics and deep HMCs.
Figure 4. Vertical (trench/core stratigraphic) and lateral (morphostratigraphic) trends. (A) Mean values and ranges of trench and outcrop-based in situ MS values from four ridges (R1-R4). Note a well-constrained high MS anomaly at a 0.4 m depth. (B) Mean values of each ridge reveal an increasing trend in a morphostratigraphically younger direction, with the most recent R4 having a >2.5 higher mean MS compared to R1. Two cores (KII-1 and 2) are shown as circles for comparison; however, they have a much greater range of variations due to the presence of both organics and deep HMCs.
Jmse 11 00232 g004
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Buynevich, I.V.; Tõnisson, H.; Rosentau, A.; Hang, T.; Kont, A.; Tamura, T.; Suuroja, S.; Palginõmm, V.; Döring, S.F.S. Rapid Magnetic Susceptibility Characterization of Coastal Morphosedimentary Units at Two Insular Strandplains in Estonia. J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, 232. https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse11020232

AMA Style

Buynevich IV, Tõnisson H, Rosentau A, Hang T, Kont A, Tamura T, Suuroja S, Palginõmm V, Döring SFS. Rapid Magnetic Susceptibility Characterization of Coastal Morphosedimentary Units at Two Insular Strandplains in Estonia. Journal of Marine Science and Engineering. 2023; 11(2):232. https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse11020232

Chicago/Turabian Style

Buynevich, Ilya V., Hannes Tõnisson, Alar Rosentau, Tiit Hang, Are Kont, Toru Tamura, Sten Suuroja, Valdeko Palginõmm, and Sophia F. S. Döring. 2023. "Rapid Magnetic Susceptibility Characterization of Coastal Morphosedimentary Units at Two Insular Strandplains in Estonia" Journal of Marine Science and Engineering 11, no. 2: 232. https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse11020232

APA Style

Buynevich, I. V., Tõnisson, H., Rosentau, A., Hang, T., Kont, A., Tamura, T., Suuroja, S., Palginõmm, V., & Döring, S. F. S. (2023). Rapid Magnetic Susceptibility Characterization of Coastal Morphosedimentary Units at Two Insular Strandplains in Estonia. Journal of Marine Science and Engineering, 11(2), 232. https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse11020232

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop