Seafloor Backscatter Data: A Cost and Time-Effective Method for Exploration of Seafloor Massive Sulfide Deposits? A case study at the TAG district

With the world’s growing demand for metals, seafloor massive sulfides (SMS) deposits are now seen as a possible mineral resource that could contributes to secure metal supply for human needs. SMS deposits are characterized by high concentrations of base metals and at some place high contents of precious and rare metals. Since 1977 and the discovery of the first high temperature (HT) hydrothermal vent and its sulfide mineralization and high biodiversity, more than 300 sites are known today. If the exploration strategy for detection of active hydrothermal sites is now robust, their associated mineralization will not (and must not) constitute a potential target for deep-sea mining due to environmental concerns and technical limitations. Recent studies on SMS deposits are rather focused on extinct and buried mineralized sites characterized by a lower biomass. Several geophysical techniques to explore and detect extinct SMS (eSMS) and buried SMS (bSMS) have been developed (e.g. Kawada and Kasaya, 2017; Szitkar et al., 2017, 2014) using different approaches (e.g. regional or local scale; ship-based or using underwater vehicles) with several degrees of success or limitation. Here we present results from acoustic surveys performed on the TAG hydrothermal district during the BICOSE (2014) and LEVE-SMF (2016) cruises and direct observation provided by HOV (Nautile) dives carried out during HERMINE cruise (2017). Acoustic data were acquired using two different multibeam echosounders (MBES): the hull-mounted Kongsberg EM122 (12 kHz, R/V L’Atalante) and the ROV-mounted RESON SeaBat 7125 (400 kHz, ROV Victor) (Figure 1). After processing, acoustic seafloor backscatter data from both MBES provides complementary qualitative results in relation to the seafloor composition. The analysis of the seafloor backscatter data obtained by near-seafloor surveys with the high-resolution 400 kHz MBES shows a clear relationship between low backscatter strength values and areas covered with pelagic and hydrothermal sediments whereas high backscatter strength values are associated to pillow lavas and basaltic scree. Intermediate backscatter strength values are rather related to old and younger eSMS as well as to mineralization on TAG active mound.