Search

Although submarine landslides have been studied for decades, a persistent challenge is the integration of diverse geoscientific datasets to characterize failure processes. We present a core‐log‐seismic integration study of the Tuaheni Landslide Complex to investigate intact sediments beneath the undeformed seafloor as well as post‐failure landslide deposits. Beneath the undeformed seafloor are coherent reflections underlain by a weakly‐reflective and chaotic seismic unit. This chaotic unit is characterized by variable shear strength that correlates with density fluctuations. The basal shear zone of the Tuaheni landslide likely exploited one (or more) of the low shear strength intervals. Within the landslide deposits is a widespread "Intra‐debris Reflector", previously interpreted as the landslide's basal shear zone. This reflector is a subtle impedance drop around the boundary between upper and lower landslide units. However, there is no pronounced shear strength change across this horizon. Rather, there is a pronounced reduction in shear strength ∼10–15 m above the Intra‐debris Reflector that presumably represents an induced weak layer that developed during failure. Free gas accumulates beneath some regions of the landslide and is widespread deeper in the sedimentary sequence, suggesting that free gas may have played a role in pre‐conditioning the slope to failure. Additional pre‐conditioning or failure triggers could have been seismic shaking and associated transient fluid pressure. Our study underscores the importance of detailed core‐log‐seismic integration approaches for investigating basal shear zone development in submarine landslides. Plain Language Summary: Submarine landslides move enormous amounts of sediment across the seafloor and have the potential to generate damaging tsunamis. To understand how submarine landslides develop, we need to be able to image and sample beneath the seafloor in regions where landslides have occurred. To image beneath the seafloor we generate sound waves in the ocean and record reflections from those waves, enabling us to produce "seismic images" of sediment layers and structures beneath the seafloor. We then use scientific drilling to sample the sediment layers and measure physical properties. In this study, we combine seismic images and drilling results to investigate a submarine landslide east of New Zealand's North Island. Drilling next to the landslide revealed a ∼25 m‐thick layer of sediment (from ∼75–95 m below the seafloor) that has strong variations in sediment strength and density. We infer that intervals of relatively low strength within this layer developed into the main sliding surface of the landslide. Additionally, results from within the landslide suggest that the process of landslide emplacement has induced a zone of weak sediments closer to the seafloor. Our study demonstrates how combining seismic images and drilling data helps to understand submarine landslide processes. Key Points: We integrate scientific drilling data with seismic reflection data to investigate the submarine Tuaheni Landslide ComplexBasal shear zone of the landslide likely exploited a relatively low shear strength interval within an older (buried) mass transport depositLandslide emplacement seems to have induced an additional weak zone that is shallower than the interpreted base of the landslide deposit [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although subaqueous slopes on active continental margins are subject to a variety of failure styles, their movement mechanisms during earthquakes remain poorly constrained. A primary explanation is that few submarine landslides have been directly sampled for detailed investigation. We have conducted a series of dynamic shear experiments on samples recovered from the base of the Tuaheni Landslide Complex, located off the east coast of the North Island of New Zealand, to explore its behaviour during earthquakes. Our experiments suggest that whilst the basal landslide sediments can be prone to liquefaction in certain conditions, this is not a likely failure mechanism at the stress states operating in the low angled shear zone at the base of this landslide system. Instead, episodic landslide movement can occur through basal sliding when pore water pressures increase sufficiently to lower the shear zone effective stress to the material failure envelope. These low effective stress conditions are most likely to be reached during earthquakes that produce large amplitude, long duration ground shaking. The observed behaviour provides a credible mechanism through which subaqueous landslides moving on low angled shear zones in similar materials may be subject to episodic movement during earthquakes without undergoing catastrophic failure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Submarine landslides pose a hazard to coastal communities as they can generate powerful tsunamis, and threaten critical offshore infrastructure such as seafloor cable networks that underpin global communications. Such events can be orders of magnitude larger than their onshore equivalents. Despite the hazard they pose, many aspects of submarine landslides remain poorly understood, such as why they fail on low angle (<2°), seemingly stable slopes. Many studies have proposed that failure on low slope angles, and the large areal extent of submarine landslides, may be controlled by the presence of laterally-extensive weak layers embedded within the slope stratigraphy, which precondition slopes to failure. Little remains known, however, about the characteristics and processes that control and form weak layers. We conducted a comprehensive review of published submarine landslide studies that examine failure planes and apparent weak layers associated with historical and ancient submarine landslides. Based on a new global landslide catalogue that comprises 64 case studies, this review aims to investigate the types of sediment that form weak layers and to understand the controls on their global variability. Existing classification schemes are based on mechanical process(es), and do not readily enable a diagnosis of weak layers from unfailed sediments. Here, a new and complementary classification of weak layers based on lithology is introduced. This classification enables weak layer recognition from sediment cores (including those sampling unfailed sediments), and allows us to attribute failure mechanisms to different environmental settings where distinct types of weak layers are more likely. The results show that failure planes usually form in the vicinity of an interface between distinct lithologies that together comprise a weak layer. The weak layers of 22 of the 64 case studies were related to characteristic sediment sequences within the slope stratigraphy, of which 19 were classified based on direct measurements from sediment cores and in-situ measurements: 16 weak layers were classified as siliciclastic, four as volcaniclastic, and two as fossiliferous sediment sequences. Only three submarine landsides were related to clay-dominated weak layers. In addition, failure along lithological contrasts was inferred for six case studies. Based on global depositional models likely locations of these different types of weak layer can be inferred. These include oceanic gateways where long-term circulation can create distinct permeability interfaces within siliciclastic sequences, areas of high productivity where biogenic sediments may dominate, and regions that experience widespread ash fall from volcanic eruptions. We highlight that many submarine landslide studies have historically not collected sediment cores that characterise weak layers within intact sedimentary sequences and instead have focused on characterising the slope failure deposit. As weak layers can collapse or become heavily modified during failure, there is a widespread omission of key information required for geotechnical analysis to determine where and why certain slopes are predisposed to failure. We conclude by highlighting the need to combine detailed geotechnical measurements with sedimentological and geophysical analyses including grain-scale observations (e.g. micro-Computed Tomography 3D imagery), and emphasise the importance of a uniform workflow that will allow for a better comparison between individual studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]