Geology Jenga

Archives / 2014 / June

Moraines in Costa Rica? Really?

Moraines in Costa Rica? Really?

During a recent trip to Costa Rica in May, I had a conversation with some family and friends in which I uttered those words: “Moraines in Costa Rica? Really?” as they were describing a trek they’d undertaken earlier this year to the summit of Cerro Chirripó. This is the highest peak in the country (3819 m a.s.l.), part of the Cordillera de Talamanca (9°30′ N, 83°30′ W) in southern central Costa Rica.

Relief of Costa Rica and location of Cerro Chirripó. Base map courtesy of Sting (WikiCommons CC BY-SA 3.0)

Relief of Costa Rica and location of Cerro Chirripó. Base map courtesy of Sting (WikiCommons CC BY-SA 3.0)

Map board at entrance to Parque Nationale Chirrippo. Photo courtesy of Scott Schillereff.

Map board at entrance to Parque Nationale Chirrippo. Photo courtesy of Scott Schillereff.

While the photographs looked stunning (on a clear day, both oceans are visible from the summit), I was especially intrigued by their description of the landscape surrounding the peak: curved valleys, moraines and other landforms often associated with glacial activity were visible as they were above the tree-line. There are certainly no glaciers there at present (apparently hail occurs occasionally at the summit) and Costa Rica can definitely be classified as a tropical environment today. However this inspired me to track down research confirming (or not) that these landforms are indeed glacial in origin and, if so, discover the timing and duration of this period of high-altitude tropical glaciation.

The summit of Chirrippo (trail with hikers on left for scale). Photo courtesy of Scott Schillereff.

The summit of Chirrippo (trail with hikers on left for scale). Photo courtesy of Scott Schillereff.

Sunrise over the Caribbean from the summit of Cerro Chirripó. Photo courtesy of Scott Schillereff.

Sunrise over the Caribbean from the summit of Cerro Chirripó. Photo courtesy of Scott Schillereff.

It turns out the first papers on episodic glaciations in Costa Rica and other Central American countries emerged in the 1950s and investigations have continued through to the present day (particularly by researchers at the University of Tennessee). Much of the peer-reviewed research I found for Cerro Chirripó in particular is based on geomorphic surveys as well as analysis of sediment cores extracted from lakes located on valley floors along the flanks of the mountain. Many of these lakes have formed behind what appear to be moraines (see photo). A particularly interesting feature near the base of these sediment cores is a distinct shift from light-coloured material dominated by mineral particles to much darker brown or black sediments rich in organic matter. This transition is observed in lacustrine sequences all over the world, and certainly here in the UK, and is commonly attributed to the transition from the Younger Dryas interstadial at the end of the last glacial period into the early Holocene. The dark, more organic sediments are typical of deposition through the Holocene as the climate warmed and vegetation cover expanded around the world. A series of radiocarbon dates confirm a similar timing for these sediment transitions in multiple lakes around Cerro Chirripó, ranging between 12, 360 and 9, 470 calibrated years Before Present (BP) within the dating uncertainties (Horn, 1990; Orvis and Horn, 2000). The span of these dates likely relates to the relative position of the each lake with respect to the retreating glacier during the period of deglaciation, and the timing corresponds nicely with the Younger Dryas event (12, 900 – 11, 600 cal. yr BP). In fact, evidence for a Younger Dryas re-advance has been reported elsewhere in the neotropics including the Columbian Cordillera, the Eastern Cordillera of Equador, the Cordillera Real in Bolivia and around the Malinche volcano in central Mexico (references are found in Lachniet, 2004).

Panoramic view from summit of Cerro Chirripó with lakes visible in the foreground that have formed behind what appear to be moraines. Photo courtesy of Peter Anderson (WikiCommons CC BY-SA 3.0)

Panoramic view from summit of Cerro Chirripó with lakes visible in the foreground that have formed behind what appear to be moraines. Photo courtesy of Peter Anderson (WikiCommons CC BY-SA 3.0)

In terms of geomorphic evidence, phases of glacial advance and retreat are recorded by the large medial (a ridge running through the middle of a valley where two glaciers meet), lateral (two parallel ridges on either side of a glacier) and terminal (ridges formed at the end of a glacier) moraines found in the valleys around Cerro Chirripó. These fingerprints are found up to four hundred metres below the summit (Lachniet, 2004). Other field evidence includes striated bedrock (smoothed and grooved rock formed as ice moves across the surface; see photo).

Striated bedrock near Cerro Chirripó. Photo courtesy of Scott Schillereff.

Striated bedrock near Cerro Chirripó. Photo courtesy of Scott Schillereff.

To date, researchers have been unable to find suitable organic material at the base of the moraines to attempt radiocarbon dating but they are assumed to represent the maximum extent of the last ice advance, equating to a total ice-covered area of 35 km2. Similar features found at lower elevations in other parts of the Cordillera may point towards even more extensive ice cover during stages earlier in the Pleistocene but no effort to date these landforms has yet been invested. A recent review paper (Lachniet and Roy, 2011) emphasised that obtaining further radiocarbon dates from the lake sediments and landforms is critical to better understand the timing and duration of local and wider tropical glaciations. They also suggest OSL may be suitable, but cosmogenic radionuclide dating has been largely unsuccessful due to intense weathering of rock surfaces in the humid tropical environment.

Looking into the research and browsing through photographs of Cerro Chirripó has certainly inspired me to aim to hike up the mountain on my next visit to Costa Rica. One of the amazing things about Costa Rica and other Central American countries that I have backpacked through is how much the climate and landscape and culture can vary across relatively short distances – but trying to imagine glaciers sweeping down the valleys is very difficult to imagine!!

References

Horn, S.P. (1990) Timing of deglaciation in the Cordillera de Talamanca, Costa Rica. Climate Research 1, 81-83. PDF

Lachniet, M. (2004) Late Quaternary glaciation of Costa Rica and Guatemala, Central America. In: Ehlers, J., Gibbard, P. (Eds.) Quaternary Glaciations – Extent and Chronology Part III: South America, Asia, Africa, Australasia, Antarctica. Elsevier, Amsterdam, 135-138. DOI: 10.1016/S1571-0866(04)80118-0

Lachniet, M. and Roy, A. (2011) Costa Rica and Guatemala. In: Ehlers, J., Gibbard, P., Hughes, P. (Eds.) Quaternary Glaciations: Extent and Chronology. Elsevier, Amsterdam, 843-848. DOI: 10.1016/B978-0-444-53447-7.00060-X

Orvis, K. and Horn, S.P. (2000) Quaternary glaciers and climate on Cerro Chirripó, Costa Rica. Quaternary Research 54, 24-37. DOI: 10.1006/qres.2000.2142

Is it your duty to communicate your science?

Hello everyone!

Gosh! It’s been a long time since I’ve blogged, I apologise! I am in the deepest, darkest hole that is called thesis writing. To make matters worse, the post today isn’t even my own! Having said that, it is a a fantastic guest post  by Ekbal Hussain. on why scientist SHOULD communicate the science that they do!

whats_science

Ekbal’s main interest lies in natural hazards and he feels passionately about science communication and the importance of divulging our scientific knowledge to the wider public, particularly those at risk of natural hazards. He is currently undertaking his PhD in geodetic monitoring of strain accumulation along the North Anatolian Fault in Turkey. I highly recommend his blog, Climate and Geohazards hosted by Climate and Geohazard Services at Leeds University. Ekbal tweets at @ekh_rocksci.

In the post today Ekbal outlines why it scientist should communicate their science. I agree, we certainly do that on a regular basis by attending conferences and producing papers, but Ekbal argues we have a responsibility to make our research accessible to other, much wider, audiences. What is the best method for reaching those audiences? Undoubtedly face-to-face communication is paramount, but a a man after my own heart, Ekbal is a huge advocate for the use of social media, particularly twitter. I’ll finish with this, as Ekbal says, when it come to twitter: JUST DO IT!

After the really great discussions at the science communication splinter meeting at the EGU General Assembly on Monday, I felt inspired to write up some of my thoughts on why science communication is so important.

All scientists have a responsibility to communicate their science. To a large extent that is exactly what happens. We write scientific papers and present at conferences. These are all important forms of communication. However, I believe that we also need to communicate it to the non-scientists and the non-specialists.

Why? Well for multiple reasons: to inform and educate others particularly if the the scientific results could impact their lives, e.g. natural hazards and climate change, raise awareness of your field and the dynamic nature of science.

For me, a very important aspect of science communication is to inspire! You may one day become the world leader in your field but after you retire who will take over the mantle from you? We obviously love what we are doing, (yes yes, I know research has its ups and downs but we love the science really). So we have a responsibility to encourage, enthuse and empower the younger generation to get involved with the geosciences and equip them with similar communication skills so they can do the same.

We all have a responsibility to inspire, for without it the flame of discovery in our science will fizzle out and leave the world a much darker place. (That’s a really cheesy line, but I’m quite proud it …)

At the splinter meeting we discussed the importance of science communication via social media compared to face-to-face communication.

Undoubtedly both are very important and applicable in different settings. I am a great fan of face-to-face communication. Because you can directly share your love and passion for your subject. So be naturally appealing, be enthusiastic and energetic and use all the tools at your disposal. Be expressive with your hands, your face and your eyebrows because these all give social cues to the listener to become more engaged and attentive. There is nothing worse than an inattentive audience. Use your charisma to reel them in.

Face-to-face communication does not have to wait till you are in a classroom either. You can communicate science to your housemates, to your friends, on the train, to the person sitting next to you in the plane etc. Make Everywhere your playground and the World your audience!

In terms of digital communication…. just do it! Why? because you are helping to populate the internet with good, correct science. So when the concerned citizen wants to know about the risks of fracking in his/her neighbourhood and they Google ‘fracking risk’, make sure your blog is the first hit!

Maybe more importantly, you are doing it for yourself too. By writing blogs and tweeting you are developing skills in communication and dissemination of what is actually fairly complex knowledge. These are very valuable skills not only for an academic career but for a non-academic one too.

At the risk of waffling, I’ll end here and encourage you all to talk, write, be enthusiastic and engaging. Stop hoarding all that love for your science and let others experience it too!

Ekbal

Happy communicating!

Ekbal

 

P.s. Follow me on twitter: @ekh_rocksci

P.s.s. And check out my blog on climate and natural hazards: climateandgeohazards.wordpress.com