Biological
Enhancement of Speleogenesis in Carbonate Karst Systems
Buchanan 2022
Abstract
1. Introduction
Speleogenesis, the formation and development of caves, has
traditionally been considered a primarily geochemical process driven by the
dissolution of carbonate rocks. However, recent studies underscore the role of
biological processes in accelerating and shaping cave formation (Banks, Burke
and Smith, 2010). This biogenic speleogenesis occurs in environments where
microbial metabolism, organic matter decomposition, and faunal activity
contribute to the geochemical environment. In particular, subterranean ecosystems
in karst environments offer a dynamic interplay between biology and geology
that enhances cave development.
2. CO₂ and Acid Generation
Subterranean fauna and microbes respire and produce carbon
dioxide (CO₂), which reacts with water to form carbonic acid (H₂CO₃):
CO2+H2O→H2CO3
This acid dissociates into bicarbonate (HCO₃⁻)
and hydrogen ions (H⁺), promoting limestone dissolution:
CaCO3+H2CO3→Ca2++2HCO3
Such reactions drive karstification and enhance porosity in
carbonate systems (Ford and Williams, 2007).
3. Sulfuric Acid Speleogenesis (SAS)
In hypogenic environments, sulphur-oxidizing bacteria
metabolise hydrogen sulphide (H₂S) into sulfuric acid (H₂SO₄):
H2S+2O2→H2SO4
This stronger acid aggressively dissolves limestone, a
mechanism observed in cave systems like Carlsbad Caverns and Cueva de Villa Luz
(Engel, Stern and Bennett, 2004).
4. Microbial Biofilms and Organic Acids
Microbes colonise cave walls in biofilms, concentrating
acidic byproducts such as acetic and citric acid, which locally reduce pH and
intensify dissolution (Northup and Lavoie, 2001). This leads to microscale
pitting, etching, and ultimately larger void formation, particularly under
oligotrophic conditions where nutrient cycles are tightly regulated.
5. Bioturbation and Physical Alteration
Stygofauna like amphipods, isopods, and worms disturb
sediments and promote water circulation, a process known as bioturbation. This
facilitates microbial colonisation, enhances nutrient availability, and
increases rock surface exposure to acidic conditions (Gibert and Deharveng,
2002). Such activities mechanically aid in opening fissures and extending cave
systems.
6. Synergistic Biospeleogenesis
Biogenic speleogenesis is a result of synergistic feedback
loops: biological CO₂ and acid production promotes dissolution, creating voids
that are further colonised and expanded by living organisms. This cycle leads
to long-term cave evolution that is both chemically and biologically mediated
(Barton and Northup, 2007).
7. Conceptual Diagram
The conceptual diagram below illustrates the interactions
between subterranean life and cave formation processes, including CO₂
respiration, acid generation, microbial etching, and faunal bioturbation:
8. Conclusion
The role of biological communities in speleogenesis is
increasingly recognised as a crucial driver in carbonate karst systems. From
microbial acid production to physical sediment manipulation by stygofauna,
these interactions enhance cave formation and expand our understanding of
subterranean ecosystem functions. Future research and conservation strategies
must account for these biogenic contributions when assessing karst hydrology
and ecosystem services.
References
Banks, E., Burke, G. and Smith, B. (2010) ‘Microbial effects
on karst dissolution’, Geomicrobiology Journal, 27(4), pp. 274–288.
Barton, H.A. and Northup, D.E. (2007) ‘Geomicrobiology in
cave environments: past, current and future perspectives’, Journal of Cave
and Karst Studies, 69(1), pp. 163–178.
Engel, A.S., Stern, L.A. and Bennett, P.C. (2004) ‘Microbial
contributions to cave formation: new insights into sulfuric acid
speleogenesis’, Geology, 32(5), pp. 369–372.
Ford, D. and Williams, P. (2007) Karst Hydrogeology and
Geomorphology. Chichester: Wiley.
Gibert, J. and Deharveng, L. (2002) ‘Subterranean
ecosystems: a truncated functional biodiversity’, Bioscience, 52(6), pp.
473–481.
Northup, D.E. and Lavoie, K.H. (2001) ‘Geomicrobiology of
caves: a review’, Geomicrobiology Journal, 18(3), pp. 199–222.
Comments