Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

Marine Geology 250 (2008) 180 – 198

www.elsevier.com/locate/margeo

Mass-transport deposits on the Rosetta province (NW Nile deep-sea

turbidite system, Egyptian margin): Characteristics,
distribution, and potential causal processes
Sébastien Garziglia a,⁎, Sébastien Migeon a , Emmanuelle Ducassou b ,
Lies Loncke c , Jean Mascle a
a
Géosciences Azur, BP 48, 06235, Villefranche-sur-Mer, France
b
Université Bordeaux 1, UMR-CNRS 5805 EPOC, av. des facultés, 33405 Talence cedex, France
c
Université de Picardie Jules Verne, UMR 8110, Dept de Géologie, 80000 Amiens, France
Received 8 January 2007; received in revised form 13 December 2007; accepted 14 January 2008

Abstract

In the Nile deep-sea turbidite system (NDSTS), the province fed by the Rosetta branch of the Nile delta is characterised by the recurrent
activity of gravity processes. Seven mass-transport deposits (MTDs) were recognised from the upper to the mid slope, downstream from
imbricated scars (~ 30 km-long, ~ 200 m high) running along the shelf edge nearby the Rosetta canyon. Extending on surfaces between 200 and
5000 km2, with estimated volumes from 3 to 500 km3, these MTDs represent about 40% (up to 90% locally) of the total Pleistocene–Holocene
sedimentary thickness. Three types of MTDs can be distinguished on the basis of their scale. Each has also a distinctive internal configuration and
distribution within the Rosetta depositional setting. Age estimates of two MTDs point towards relationships between climate and submarine mass
failures through sea-level changes, sediment supply, or a combination of both. Additionally, the presence of gas in the sediment and earthquake
shaking may have concurred to trigger large-scale failures on the low slope angles (1°–2°) of the Rosetta area.
© 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Keywords: mass-transport deposit; Nile deep-sea turbidite system; sedimentary deformations; transport process; potential causal processes

1. Introduction (Nadim, 2005). Slope failures are known to occur disproportio-

Submarine slope failures and products, of different scales and
styles, constitute an integral part of the evolution of continental
margin morphologies and sedimentary architectures (Posamentier
and Kolla, 2003). Extensive research projects led by both acade-
mia and industry have increased awareness that understanding the
significance, extent, and frequency of these processes are critical
for generating quantitative models of margin development, and
for mitigating their potential detrimental consequences to offshore
installations and to people and infrastructures along the coastline
⁎ Corresponding author. IFREMER, BP 70, 29280 Plouzané Cédex, France.
Tel.: +33 298 224 257.
E-mail addresses: garzi@geoazur.obs-vlfr.fr, sebastien.garziglia@ifremer.fr
(S. Garziglia), sebastien.migeon@geoazur.obs-vlfr.fr (S. Migeon),
e.ducassou@epoc.u-bordeaux1.fr (E. Ducassou), lies.loncke@u-picardie.fr
(L. Loncke), jean.mascle@geoazur.obs-vlfr.fr (J. Mascle).
0025-3227/$ - see front matter © 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.margeo.2008.01.016
nately throughout the world's continental margins depending on
the environmental setting. Because of their unique sedimentolo-
gic and physiographic characters, river-fed depositional systems
experience slope failure to a much greater extent than the other
parts of the world's seafloor (Lee, 2005). Indeed, rivers contribute
large amounts of sediment to relatively localised areas on the
continental margins (Lee, 2005). Therefore, the continental slope
susceptibility to failure in river-fed depositional systems, and
particularly at low latitudes, is strongly influenced by climate
through changes in deposition rates and centres (Owen et al.,
2007).
This paper focuses on the western province of the Nile deep-
sea turbidite system (NDSTS) fed by the Rosetta branch of the
Nile river, which is one of the longest rivers in the world and has
a summer flood regime (Fig. 1a) (Ducassou et al., in press-a).
There, the presence at the shelf edge of two prominent
 S. Garziglia et al. / Marine Geology 250 (2008) 180–198 181

Fig. 1. (a) Swath bathymetry of the Nile deep-sea fan (NDSTS), (Sardou and Mascle, 2003). In black, main tectonic elements across the Egyptian continental margin.
The black box shows the location of the study area. b) Geodynamical sketch of the Eastern Mediterranean. Location of (a) is outlined by the black box.

imbricated scars suggests the occurrence of large-scale failure
events. The aims of this paper are: (1) to evaluate common
characteristics such as morphological expression, internal
configuration, basal surface geometry, and differences between
the successive MTDs, to tentatively assess the various types of
failure and transport mechanisms; (2) to estimate the ages of
these events and thus estimate their recurrence; (3) to tentatively
discriminate the role and impacts of internal and external factors
that have predisposed the area to repeated failures; (4) to better
evaluate the potential geo-hazards since many gas/oil compa-
nies are investigating this hydrocarbon-rich province. Finally,
the results from this study should help to better recognise and
describe the domains affected by submarine slope instabilities,
to evaluate some of the triggering mechanisms and related
factors, and to estimate the impact of MTDs on the evolution of
the nearby Rosetta depositional setting.
2. Geological background
2.1. Geodynamic context
The geodynamic setting of the eastern Mediterranean and its
surroundings is characterised by a complex pattern of active, thick-
skinned, crustal-scale tectonics (Mascle et al., 2000; McClusky
et al., 2000) resulting from interactions among various tectonic
plates and microplates (Fig. 1b). The region is surrounded by
various geodynamic structures such as: (a) the almost aborted Suez
Rift to the southeast; (b) the Dead Sea/Levant and east Anatolian
Fault zone related to motion of the Arabian plate with respect to
Africa to the east and northeast; (c) the subduction/collision of
Africa beneath Europe and the rapidly moving Aegean-Anatolian
microplate along the eastern Hellenic and Cyprus arcs, to the north
(Chaumillon et al., 1996; McClusky et al., 2000; Huguen et al.,
2001); and (d) the Egyptian passive margin that is inferred to have
been initiated by rifting from Jurassic to Early Cretaceous times
(Dolson et al., 2000).
2.2. Regional seismicity
As a result of the complex tectonic setting of the Eastern
Mediterranean (Fig. 1b), earthquakes occurred in the vicinity of
the Egyptian continental margin both in recent and historical
times (El-Araby and Sultan, 2000; El-Sayed et al., 2004). The
spatial distribution of the epicentres shows that there are
domains of intense (e.g., at plate boundaries) and of low (e.g.,
offshore area) seismicity (El-Sayed et al., 2004). Offshore Egypt
the magnitudes are moderate (Ms = 6.7), nonetheless some
earthquakes were felt in northern Egypt (Ambraseys et al.,
182 S. Garziglia et al. / Marine Geology 250 (2008) 180–198
Fig. 2. Bathymetric map of the study area (from Sardou and Mascle, 2003) with
the location of Prismed II (1998) and Fanil (2000) multibeam tracklines
respectively indicated by white and black dotted lines. The black area indicates
the seabed maps derived from 3D blocks (BP-Egypt). The high-resolution
seismic-reflection profiles (courtesy BP-Egypt) are indicated in black; white
dots show piston cores sampled during Nautinil (2003) and Vanil (2004) cruises.
1994). However, more than 50% of the earthquakes recorded
in the Nile Delta are generally large-magnitude earthquakes
(Ms N 7.5) generated either in the Aegean domain or in the Red
Sea (El-Sayed et al., 2004).
Fig. 3. Interpreted bathymetric map of the upslope part of the Rosetta area. Location of the two scar segments affecting the shelf edge is shown. Note the abrupt
truncation of the upstream part of the channel–levee system 3, and of the downstream part of the channel–levee system 5'.
2.3. Morphostructural characteristics of the NDSTS
The modern Nile deep-sea turbidite system (NDSTS) has
been built since the late Miocene on a segment of the Egyptian
passive margin as a consequence of the huge sedimentary supply
delivered by the Nile River (Ross and Uchupi, 1977; Dolson et al.,
2000). The structural pattern of the Egyptian margin results from a
complex interplay among two main fault trends: the NW–SE
trending Temsah fault system, and the NE–SW trending, Rosetta
faults (Fig. 1a) (Aal et al., 2000; Camera, 2006). These basement
faults created during Mesozoic rifting may have been partly
reactivated during Miocene rifting of the Suez–Red Sea Rift
system (Mascle et al., 2000). In addition to crustal-scale tectonics,
thin-skinned tectonics, generated by downslope movements
above a Messinian salt layer have exerted fundamental controls
on the overall morphology of the NDSTS (Loncke et al., 2006).
Regional variations in salt thickness and base-salt geometry have
generated deformational structures typical of both gravity gliding
and spreading (Loncke et al., 2006). These first order processes
are augmented, depending on the area, by secondary seafloor-
shaping processes such as gravity flows, mass-wasting events,
fluid seepages and mud expulsions (Loncke and Mascle, 2004;
Mascle et al., 2006). The NDSTS shows significant lateral
asymmetry, and can be divided, according to the prevailing
seafloor-shaping processes, into four distinct morphostructural
provinces namely the “western”, “central”, “eastern” and
 S. Garziglia et al. / Marine Geology 250 (2008) 180–198
“Levantine” provinces (Fig. 1) (Loncke et al., 2006; Mascle et al.,
2006).
The western province spreads along the continental slope,
from the edge of an almost 80 km-wide shelf, off the Rosetta
feeding branch of the Nile delta (Fig. 1). The continental
slope extends over more than 130 km, with typical angles of
1° to 2.5°. It is imprinted by a dense network of meandering
and branching channel–levee systems (Fig. 1a) (Mascle
et al., 2006). The most recent of these systems connects to the
Rosetta canyon incising the outer shelf and the upper
continental slope (Fig. 1). East of the Rosetta canyon head,
slope failures have significantly impacted the morphology of
the area in the form of wide imbricated scars running along
the shelf edge (Fig. 1). On both side of the Rosetta canyon,
two gas chimneys and associated North Alex and Horus mud
volcanoes contribute to the diversity of the seafloor
morphology (Fig. 3) (Loncke and Mascle, 2004; Loncke et
al., 2006). Dupré et al. (2007) reported secondary seeps,
likely fed by subsidiary conduits channelling fluids out
towards the periphery of North Alex mud volcano.
2.4. Sedimentological characteristics
Seismic data indicate that the Plio-Quaternary sediment
cover has an average thickness of 2 km, but may locally exceed
3 km (Camera, 2006; Loncke et al., 2006). Regional piston core
studies showed a general transition from fine-bedded prodeltaic
deposits, on the upper slope, to turbidite-rich deposits on the
middle to lower slope (Maldonado and Stanley, 1979).
Fig. 4. Interpreted slope gradient map of the upslope part of the Rosetta area. Location of the two scar segments affecting the shelf edge is shown.
183
Sediments consist primarily of clays and silts, with secondary
sandy, carbonated, and sapropelic deposits (Loncke et al., 2002;
Ducassou, 2006). During the Quaternary, clastic muds related to
Nile flooding periods and hemipelagic muds dominate the
sedimentation over the NDSTS. A minor coarser fraction is
attributed to turbidite deposition (Ducassou et al., in press-a).
Recent work of Ducassou et al. (in press-b) revealed the direct
relationship between gravity sedimentation on the NDSTS and
both climate and glacio-eustatic oscillations. Major sedimentary
transfers and accumulations occurred during sea-level low-
stands but also during rising and sea-level highstands coeval to
pluvial periods. The whole Rosetta area recorded the highest
sedimentation rates between 12 and 8 ka BP (~ 150 cm/ka). This
period correlates both with enhanced pluvial conditions
(Nabtian Wet Phase) over the catchment area of the Nile, and
with a relative sea-level rising in the Mediterranean.
3. Data and methods
The Prismed II (1998) and Fanil (2000) cruises, carried out by
the Geosciences-Azur laboratory, provided bathymetric maps of
nearly 90% of the studied area using the Simrad EM12 and
EM300-Dual multibeam systems, respectively (Fig. 2). The
mapping of the upper slope/outer shelf area was achieved using
3D seismic blocks provided by BP-Egypt (Fig. 2). The sea floor
data were merged to provide a bathymetric and a slope gradient
map with a spatial resolution of 100 m (Sardou and Mascle,
2003). These maps allowed identification and morphological
analysis of superficial mass-wasting related features when larger
184 S. Garziglia et al. / Marine Geology 250 (2008) 180–198
than ~ 1 km2, such as: (i) head and footwall scars, (ii) irregular to
hummocky seafloor relief, (iii) sharp disruptions of channel–
levee systems.
High-resolution seismic-reflection data provided by BP-
Egypt allowed imaging of deeper structures, locally up to 3 s
TWTT. MTDs were recognised using criteria established on
the basis of several previous studies (Hampton et al., 1996;
Lee et al., 2002; Martinez et al., 2005). MTD internal
structures typically range from nearly transparent, very
chaotic facies to moderately organised, imbricated organisa-
tion, both of which contrast with more continuous facies
characteristic of undisturbed slope deposits. MTDs were
correlated across the seismic profile network with a ~ 2 km
regular spacing (Fig. 2). Isopach maps of correlatable MTDs
were constructed assuming average seismic velocities of
1600 m s − 1 within the first 0.5 s, and of 1800 m s − 1 between
0.5 and 1.5 s. MTDs areal extensions and volumes were then
computed using a GMT software module.
In order to groundtruth the geophysical interpretations, three
Kullenberg cores were collected from three distinct MTDs
during two surveys. Lithological description and X-ray imaging
(SCOPIX digital system; Migeon et al., 1999) allowed
examination of deformational structures such as faults, folds
and/or tilted layers originally inferred to be sub-horizontal.
Geochronological control on MTD formation was performed
using a detailed ecostratigraphic scheme based on planktonic
foraminifera distribution, constrained in time with oxygen
isotope records, tephrachronology and radiocarbon data devel-
oped for the NDSTS by Ducassou et al. (2007).
4. Results
4.1. Seafloor morphology
The shelf edge east of Rosetta canyon is affected by
NW-dipping imbricated scars reaching about 30 km in length
for a mean height of 200 m (Fig. 3). The slope gradient map
displays two main scar segments disconnected by a NW–SE
trending relief (Figs. 3 and 4).
The easternmost scar (segment A in Figs. 3 and 4) is 14 km
wide and displays the highest slope angles ranging between 11
and 35 °. We assume that this steep scar may be the source area
of a relatively recent failure event. Downslope, two main
seafloor features can be ascribed to the resulting MTD: 1) the
obliteration of the upstream part of the channel–levee system 3,
2) the uneven and hummocky texture extending from ~ 800 m
to ~ 1300 m water depth (Figs. 3a and 4a). The hummocky
mounds are generally ~ 300 m across and 10 to 20 m in height
(Fig. 3).
The westernmost scar (segment B in Figs. 3 and 4) dips
more gently at an angle of 3–9°. Downstream from this scar, the
seafloor is fairly smooth suggesting that MTD features are
buried. However, at about 1250 m water depth, the abrupt
truncation of the channel–levee system 5' is interpreted to be
due to a relatively recent failure event. Although no distinct
headscarp can be observed, this event likely originated from the
failure of the eastern levee of the Rosetta canyon (Fig. 3).
4.2. Stratigraphic distribution of the MTDs
Seismic data reveal several widespread MTDs located
between the upper to the mid slope in the study area (Figs. 5
and 6). Seven outstanding examples of MTDs were identified at
different stratigraphic levels within the 1.5 s TWTT (~ 1200 m)
thick Pleistocene to Holocene sedimentary cover. Their relative
ages were determined from their respective emplacement in the
sedimentary column and from their cross-cutting relationships.
Each MTD is assigned a number from 1 to 7 according to its
position in the stratigraphic section. The oldest MTD (i.e. in the
lowest stratigraphic position) called SL1 appears partly
reworked by the following events, SL2 and SL3 (Figs. 5, 6).
With the exception of SL6 and SL7, which both lie in the
uppermost 100–200 m below the seafloor, all others MTDs are
interbedded within packages made of high amplitude, contin-
uous seismic reflectors. These packages of variable thickness
and morphology consist mainly of amalgamated channel–levee
complexes and hemipelagic intervals. Fig. 7 shows the strati-
graphic relationships between each MTD. The areal extension
of each MTD as mapped from seismic data is shown in Fig. 8.
4.3. Types of MTDs
Three types of MTDs can be broadly distinguished on the
basis of their dimensional characteristics given in Table 1. Fig. 9
presents isopach maps illustrating the thickness variability of
four MTDs of distinct types. Type 1 regroups the smallest scale
MTDs represented by SL5 and SL7, which are typically on the
order of few tens of meters thick and cover surfaces of
~ 220 km2 with volumes b10 km3. Type 2 comprises SL3, SL4,
and SL6 MTDs ranging typically from tens of meters to 100 m
thick. They are characterised by a large range of surfaces and
volumes, respectively, between 400 and 800 km2 and between
10 and 50 km3. Type 3 is only represented by SL2, which is the
largest MTD identified. Its thickness varies from several tens to
several hundreds of meters. It clearly extends toward the north
beyond the seismic data set limits. SL2 minimum surface area
and volume are estimated to be ~ 5000 km2 and ~ 500 km3. Such
values are on the order of 20 to 30 times greater than the other
identified MTDs. Since the oldest MTD, SL1, appears strongly
eroded, its surface and volume as shown on Table 1 are not
totally reliable, and it will not be discussed hereafter. Table 2
summarizes the characteristics of each MTDs type.
4.3.1. Type 1 MTDs
SL5 and SL7 MTDs both lie at mid slope where they display
highly disrupted to transparent facies bounded by high-ampli-
tude reflectors (Figs. 5, 6). Their upper surface is rather smooth,
whereas their thickness fluctuates above their undulating basal
surfaces, which are likely inherited from the pre-existing
topography (Figs. 5, 6, 9). They are characterised by wedge-
shaped toes and lateral margins that are concordant with the
underlying reflectors. This suggests that they translated in an
unconfined manner (Figs. 5, 6).
SL7 likely sourced from the failure of the nearby eastern
levee of the Rosetta canyon, evidenced by the abrupt truncation
 S. Garziglia et al. / Marine Geology 250 (2008) 180–198
Fig. 5. (a): Dip-oriented seismic-reflection profile (see Figs. 2 and 9 for location). Interpretation shows stratigraphic context of five MTDs in the eastern part of the study area. Location of NLK13 core collected in SL6 is
shown. (b) Along-strike oriented seismic profile (see Figs. 2 and 9 for location). Interpretation shows stratigraphic context of all the MTDs of the study area.

185
 186
S. Garziglia et al. / Marine Geology 250 (2008) 180–198
Fig. 6. Dip-oriented seismic profile (see Figs. 2 and 9 for location) showing the stratigraphic context of five MTDs in the western part of the study area. Location of MD04-2725 core collected from SL7 is shown.
 S. Garziglia et al. / Marine Geology 250 (2008) 180–198 187

Fig. 7. Schematic cross sections through (a) the scar segment A, and (b) the scar segment B showing stratigraphic setting of all the MTDs.

of the channel–levee system 5' expressed on the seafloor (Figs.
3 and 6). However, SL7 parent headscarp is not clearly
discernable on the eastern levee of the Rosetta canyon. SL5
affects the western levee of a paleo canyon that may correspond
to its source area, though no distinct headscarp can be ascribed
to this MTD (Fig. 5).
4.3.2. Type 2 MTDs
Type 2 MTDs cover large portions of the slope, downstream
from the imbricated scars affecting the shelf edge (Figs. 5, 6
and 8). The upslope portion of SL3 is located 17 km
downstream from the shelf-edge area incised by the Rosetta
canyon (Fig. 8). It is as yet unclear whether SL3 sourced from
the shelf edge or from the upper slope. SL4 extends beyond the
upslope limits of the seismic data set (Fig. 8). Its most proximal
deposits identified lie about 11 km downstream from the scar
segment B where it likely sourced. The upslope component of
SL6 is located approximately 6 km away from the foot of the
scar segment A, which is inferred to correspond to its source
area (Figs. 7 and 8).
The seismic character of type 2 MTDs includes low ampli-
tude chaotic facies and packages of higher amplitude facies
showing a greater degree of coherency (Figs. 6, 10, 11, 12).
These generally steeply tilted packages exhibit varying degrees
of internal deformation from plane parallel to folded and highly
deformed reflectors. They are commonly separated by steeply
landward dipping discontinuities interpreted as reverse faults
formed under compression (Figs. 11 and 12). These faults often
form imbricates of multiple thrusts that are generally respon-
sible for substantial thickening of MTDs (Figs. 5, 6 and 9).
Within SL3 and SL6, three distinct depositional units are
recognised on the basis of their internal character and geometry.
Their proximal and distal depositional units appear internally
disorganised with nearly flat upper surfaces (Figs. 5, 6 and 10).
By contrast, their proximal depositional units (PDU), which
account for about 70% of the total volume of these MTDs, are
dominated by imbricated thrusts creating hummocky upper
surfaces (Figs. 5, 6, 9, 11, 12). Within SL6 IDU, these deforma-
tional structures result in the uneven and hummocky texture
observed on the seafloor (see Section 5.1) (Figs. 11 and 12).

Table 1
MTDs Surface Mean Volume Runout General direction of
area thickness distance movement
(km2) (m) (km 3) (km)
SL1 629 25 22 ? ?
SL2 ~ 5000 70 ~ 500 ~ 150 SE to NW
SL3 450 46 13 37 SE to NW turning SW to
NE and finally SE to NW
Fig. 8. Map showing areal distributions of MTDs on the Rosetta slope. White,
SL4 760 77 4 63 SE to NW
grey and black contour colours refer, respectively; to type 1, type 2 and type 3
SL5 226 37 7 18 S to N
MTDs. SL1 contoured in red is not associated, to any MTD types. Locations of
SL6 505 48 14 56 SE to NW
MD04-2728, MD04-2725 and NLK13 core collected respectively from SL2,
SL7 220 11 2,5 20 SE to NW
SL7 and SL6 are shown.
188 S. Garziglia et al. / Marine Geology 250 (2008) 180–198

Fig. 9. Isopach maps (in meters) of four MTDs, SL2, SL4, SL6 and SL7. The distinct depositional units within SL6 (PDU, proximal depositional unit; IDA,
intermediate depositional unit; DDU, distal depositional unit) are limited by dotted lines; thick lines (Figs. 5–12) indicate the location of seismic profiles.

Facies distribution within SL3 and SL6 suggests that imbricated during their emplacement (Figs. 5 and 6). These compressional
thrust faults formed when these MTDs encountered a subtle structures are more widely distributed throughout SL4, though
positive change in gradient (b 2°) of the underlying topography they are particularly well developed in its toe and in other

Table 2
MTD Name Scale Distribution Source area Internal configuration Basal surface
Type 1 SL5 Thickness: few 10s m Mid slope Levees Highly disrupted to transparent Conformable
SL7 Surface: ~200 km2
Volume: b10 km3
Type 2 SL3 Thickness: 10s to N100 m From the upper to the Shelf edge/upper slope Organised (imbricated thrusts) Locally erosive
SL4 Surface: 400–800 km2 mid slope to highly disrupted
SL6 Volume: 10–50 km3
Type 3 SL2 Thickness: 100–250 m From the mid slope to the Mid slope Headward unit: organised Locally erosive
Surface: ~5000 km2 deep basin (back-tilted blocks)
Volume: ~ 500 km3 Intermediate unit: transparent with
few rafted blocks
 S. Garziglia et al. / Marine Geology 250 (2008) 180–198 189

Fig. 10. Dip-oriented seismic profile showing the upslope part of SL2 and the distal part of SL6 (see Figs. 2 and 9 for location). The headscarp of SL2 forms a nearly
vertical boundary separating the transparent seismic facies of the MTD from channel–levee layered packages. Note the presence of an interpreted tilted block and
extensional structures within the proximal depositional area of SL2. The upslope part of its intermediate depositional unit is defined by the presence of a staircase
geometry affecting its basal surface above which MTD thickness drastically increases. Note also the morphological variability of SL6 upper surface from its
intermediate depositional area that displays compressional ridges, to its toe region that is nearly flat.

regions where it is buttressed against outer continuous strata
(Fig. 11). Consequently, SL4 thickness fluctuates significantly
from tens to more than 100 m within three local depocenters
(Fig. 9).
The basal surface of SL4 corresponds to sub-horizontal and
continuous reflectors mostly concordant with the underlying
strata (Figs. 5, 6, and 11). In some places, this surface is affected
by small positive relief formed by remnant blocks (Fig. 10). The
bases of SL3 and SL6 distal depositional units (DDU) are also
conformable (Figs. 5, 6, 10 and 11). By contrast, the basal
surfaces of their proximal and intermediate depositional units
locally ramp up and down in the stratigraphic section (Fig. 12).
Erosional reliefs are generally on the order of 20 m with rather
flat bases or tops. However, the base of SL6 IDU shows an
abrupt truncation forming a staircase-like geometry whose steep
flank exceeds 70 m in height (Fig. 12).
In their upslope part, SL3 and SL6 MTDs are bounded
laterally by steep flanks cutting into the surrounding strata. The
steepness of their flanks tends to decrease progressively
downslope. In their distal parts they display wedge-shaped
lateral margins that appear concordant with the underlying strata.
The aspect of SL4 lateral flanks does not vary in the same
fashion. Gentle flanks cross-cutting stratigraphy dominate
whereas steep flanks occur locally where SL4 is buttressed
against outer strata.
4.3.3. Type 3 MTD
SL2 is mostly characterised by a transparent seismic facies
extending from the mid slope to the deep basin (Figs. 5, 6
and 8). Its headscarp is located about 30 km downslope from
the shelf edge, in a water depth of about 1200 m (Figs. 7, 8, 9).
On dip seismic profiles, it corresponds to a nearly vertical
boundary, the height of which varies from about 100 m in its
eastern and central part to a few tens of meters on its western
sides (Figs. 7, 9, 10). Within the overall transparent facies of
SL2, we observe in a close up-view some back-tilted packages,
made of semi-coherent and medium amplitude reflectors, lying
adjacent to the headscarp (Fig. 10). Such packages are

Fig. 11. Dip-oriented seismic profile showing the upslope part of SL6 and the toe region of SL4 (see Figs. 2 and 9 for location). Note the presence of compressional
ridges associated with imbricated thrusts within the upslope part of SL6. SL4 toe region appears as the downslope boundary between chaotic seismic facies and
continuous high-amplitude reflectors of a channel–levee system. Note the presence of compressional structures and associated thickening of SL4 as it is buttressed
against downslope strata.
190 S. Garziglia et al. / Marine Geology 250 (2008) 180–198
Fig. 12. Dip-oriented seismic profile showing SL6 intermediate depositional unit. Note the presence of imbricated thrusts within the MTD and associated
compressional ridges affecting its upper surface. Note also the staircase-like geometry affecting its basal surface.
interpreted as rotated blocks separated by normal faults. Similar,
though generally less tilted packages, interpreted as rafted
blocks, are scattered into SL2 until about 50 km away from its
headscarp. Proceeding basinward, SL2 seismic facies appears
constantly transparent suggesting mechanical transformations
during its downslope translation. In its most distal part imaged,
it is affected by salt detachment growth faults with up to tens of
meters of vertical throw (Fig. 7).
When SL2 does not overlay SL1, its basal surface
corresponds to sets of continuous seismic reflectors with a
mean gradient of ~ 1° (Figs. 5a and 10). Although this surface is
mostly regular, it locally truncates the underlying reflectors.
About 20 km downslope from its headscarp, the base of SL2
ramps down in the stratigraphic section to create a staircase-like
geometry whose steep border (~ 30°) exceeds 80 m in height
(Fig. 10). This abrupt relief correlates with a substantial increase
in SL2 thickness and width (Figs. 8 and 9). On strike profiles,
SL2 generally exhibits a slightly undulating basal surface
bounded laterally by steep flanks that truncate otherwise sub-
parallel reflectors. Near the headscarp, this basal surface ramps
up in the surrounding strata, which results in the asymmetrical
shape of SL2 (Fig. 5b). Its eastern margin appears as a thin
tongue of sediment that overrides the ramp. By contrast, its
western margin is bounded by an abrupt and steep flank (N 30°)
suggesting that the bulk of its deposit is significantly entrenched
within the surrounding strata (Fig. 5b).
4.4. Kullenberg core ground truths
Three Kullenberg cores were collected from each of the three
distinct MTD types (Fig. 8). The 29.63 m long Calypso core
MD04-2728 was obtained in the intermediate depositional unit
(IDU) of SL2. The 28.67 m long Calypso core MD04-2725, was
obtained in the upstream part of SL7 (Fig. 6). Core NLK13,
8.8 m long was obtained in SL6 IDU (Fig. 5a). These cores
allowed description of lithological variations and deforma-
tional structures within the upper part of the three MTDs. The
lithologic log of each core is given in Fig. 13. A thin (2–10 cm)
hemipelagic organic-rich muddy layer corresponding to sapro-
pel S1 (8940 ± 30 to 6930 ± 50 yr cal. BP (Ducassou et al.,
2007)) is recognised at the top of all cores (see Cramp and
O'Sullivan (1999) for a review of Neogene sapropels in the
Mediterranean).
4.4.1. Core MD04-2728 (Fig. 13a)
The first 10 cm of this core consists of light brown
hemipelagic clay overlying the dark sapropel S1 layer. In the
first 15 m below sapropel S1, the core consists of homogeneous,
poorly bioturbated, dark clay alternating with silty and sandy
turbidites a few mm to a few cm thick. The number of turbidites
increases downcore. Silty and sandy turbiditic beds, ranging in
thickness from millimeters to centimeters, are more abundant
into the hemipelagic clayey sequence. In the last (basal) 5 m of
the core, below sapropel S4 (Fig. 13a), a sharp litho-facies
change occurs: lighter and darker clayey and silty beds (1–5 mm
thick) are tilted by 45° and affected by core-scale faults and folds
(Fig. 14).
4.4.2. Core MD04-2725 (Fig. 13b)
The top of this core consists of 50 cm-thick hemipelagic
deposits overlying sapropel S1. Between 144 and 1045 cm, core
sections are exclusively made of poorly bioturbated dark clay,
and slightly silty clay. From 150 to 2250 cm, core sections are
interpreted as typical undisturbed, fine-grained levee deposits
(Migeon et al., 2000). Between 1045 and 2246 cm, coarser silty
beds are interbedded with clayey sediments. From 2250 cm,
similar clayey and silty beds are tilted about 30–40° (Fig. 15).
From 2550 cm to the base of the core, silty beds show a dip
angle inversion suggesting the presence of a folded structure.
4.4.3. Core NLK13 (Fig. 13c)
The first 110 cm of the core consists of light brown
hemipelagic clayey deposits and includes sapropel S1. Further
down, NLK13 is made of alternating dark and light clayey beds
and silty turbidites interpreted as typical fine-grained levee
deposits (Migeon et al., 2000). These deposits are tilted by 20 to
45° and cross cut by normal and reverse faults (Fig. 16).
4.5. Sediment deformations
Analysis of each core reveals that the top of the three
sampled MTDs display similar deformational structures.
 S. Garziglia et al. / Marine Geology 250 (2008) 180–198 191

Fig. 13. (a), (b), (c): Lithologic logs of (a) core MD04-2728 collected from the intermediate depositional unit of SL2, (b) core MD04-2725 collected from the upstream
part of SL7, (c) core NLK13 collected from the intermediate depositional unit of SL6.

Showing dips greater than 30°, the MTD pattern differs from or less uniform (Figs. 14, 15, 16). Analyses of abrupt changes
channel–levee or hemipelagic deposits. Each core includes in dip give rise to identification of sections to the scale of tens
sections where intervals of various dips are separated by of centimetres (Figs. 14, 15, 16). Many individual sections
discrete shear surfaces, between which the dip appears more show the preserved original structure while others contain
192 S. Garziglia et al. / Marine Geology 250 (2008) 180–198

Fig. 14. (a), (b): Selected intervals of core MD04-2728 collected in SL2. (a) Interval with alternation of lighter and darker clayey and silty beds (1–5 mm thick) tilted by
45° and affected by core-scale faults. (b) Interval showing a core-scale folds and probably associated fault.

deformed strata affected by core-scale sediment normal and
inverse faulting (Fig. 14b, 16). This would indicate that the
sediment within the upper part of the MTDs has moved in a
coherent fashion and would have been transported as fairly
large blocks.
In addition to visual lithological descriptions, X-ray images
reveal the presence of deformational structures such as
centimeter-scale folds and/or loss of internal coherency, within
sections previously interpreted as homogeneous (Fig. 17). We
suspect that these features result from rafting of overlying more
coherent blocks. There may be a continuum between deformed
and poorly consolidated blocks and sedimentary matrix in
taking up shear within the MTDs. In most cases, individual
blocks appear to be in direct contact with one another without an
intervening matrix.
4.6. Dating of MTDs emplacement
Based on the high-resolution planktonic foraminifera zonal
scheme recently developed for the NDSTS (Ducassou et al.,
2007), the hemipelagic layers overlying the MTDs have been
dated and calibrated with Holocene/Pleistocene oxygen isotope
stages.
In the basal sections of core MD04-2728, a carbonate-rich
pelagic layer containing planktonic fauna typical of isotopic
sub-stage 5d (105–115 ka BP) drapes the top of SL2 deposits
(Fig. 13a). As sapropel S5 (117–125 ka BP; Bar-Matthews
et al., 2000) is not observed within SL2 deposits, we assumed
that the deposition of SL2 MTD occurred between 117 and
105 ka BP.
Biostratigraphic analysis made on core MD04-2725, reach-
ing the upper part of SL7, indicates the presence of sapropel S1
directly on top of the core (Fig. 13b). Thus SL7 has necessarily
been triggered before 8940 ± 30 yr cal. BP (age of the base of S1
Ducassou et al., 2007). However, the remaining core is barren
and did not allow dating.
In core NLK13, SL6 remobilized sediment is observed in the
first tens centimetres below layer S1 (Fig. 13c). The upper part
of deposit SL6 contains planktonic faunas typical of early
Holocene (~ 10–9 ka BP; Ducassou et al., 2007; Fig. 13). The
age of SL6 event is then estimated between 10 and 9 ka.
Since SL3, SL4 and SL5 have been formed during the
~ 110 ka time spans between SL2 and SL6, and assuming evenly

Fig. 15. Two well-layered intervals with different dips separated by a discrete Fig. 16. Photo and interpretation of a selected interval of core NLK13 collected
shear surface within core MD04-2725 collected in SL7. On top clayey and silty in SL6, showing a fold and core-scale faults affecting clayey and silty beds. The
beds are tilted about 30–40°. faults observed at the base might be related to the folding.
 S. Garziglia et al. / Marine Geology 250 (2008) 180–198 193

Fig. 17. X-ray images of selected sections of core NLK13 collected in SL6. (a) X-ray image and interpretation of a section showing two intervals affected by several
deformational features. In the upper interval, clayey and silty beds are tilted by 20°, and few beds appear contorted. In the lowest interval, centimeter-scale folds appear
interbedded within probable matrix. (b) Detail showing contorted laminae and normal faults affecting clayey and silty beds. (c) Detail showing three intervals with
differing dipping separated by discrete shear surfaces. In the upper one, clayey and silty beds are tilted by 45°. In the middle one, clayey and silty beds are less tilted but
affected by inverse faults. The top of the lowest interval is characterised by sub-horizontal silty beds.

spaced failure events, the recurrence estimates of large-scale
instability events are on the order of 27 ka.
5. Discussion
5.1. MTDs dimensional characteristics and distribution
The seven identified MTDs range from 200 to 5000 km2 in
surface area and from 3 to 500 km3 in volume. Many smaller
MTDs are present, but not correlatable across the seismic
profiles network or not identified due to the resolution of the
data set. Well characterised MTDs comprise about 40%, and in
some cases even 90% of the Pleistocene–Holocene sedimentary
column in the Rosetta area. In the nearby “central province” of
the NDSTS, Newton et al. (2004) reported that MTDs account
for similar portions (30% to 94%) of the Quaternary section.
This quantitatively demonstrates that mass wasting constitutes
an integral part of the evolution and depositional style of the
NDSTS. However, in the Rosetta area, the volume of failed
material appears more asymmetrically distributed than in the
“central province” of the NDSTS. Interestingly, we observe a
few general patterns of distribution of MTD types (Fig. 8 and
Table 2). Type 1 includes SL5 and SL7 (~220 km2 and
b 10 km3) both lying at mid slope, and inferred to result from
levee failures. Type 2 MTDs (400–800 km2 and 10–50 km3),
which include SL3, SL4, and SL6, extend from the upper to the
mid slope. Although the headscarp of SL3 is not discernable, it
likely sourced from a region between the shelf edge and the
upper slope. The SL4 and SL6 locations suggest that they derive
from shelf-edge failures that created, respectively, the scar
segment B and A. Type 3 comprises only the SL2 MTD whose
scale (at least 5000 km2 and 500 km3) is comparable to some of
the world's largest mass-wasting deposits (Canals et al., 2004).
Within the study area, its minimum estimated volume is at least
five times larger than the total volume of the other identified
MTDs. It lies adjacent to its initiation area at mid slope and
extends down to the deep basin.
Each type of MTD occurs on slope gradients ranging
between 1° and 1.7° which does not bear any relationship to the
volumes of the failed material. Rather, the patterns of
distribution of MTD types suggest that failure processes, in
conjunction with the distribution of geologic weakness and the
type of material, are the controlling factor of MTDs scale.
5.2. Transport processes
Core analyses reveal similarities in lithologies and deforma-
tional structures within MTDs of three distinct types (i.e. SL2,
194 S. Garziglia et al. / Marine Geology 250 (2008) 180–198
SL6, and SL7). The limited degree of internal deformation
observed in cores suggests that reworked deposits have been
transported as sliding blocks with strain occurring within weaker
regions. These observations are restricted to the uppermost few
meters in the MTDs while we suspect that lower levels in the
MTDs were subjected to greater stresses during movement and
deposition. In trying to make some inferences about the overall
transport processes of the MTDs we examine their 1) headscarp,
2) geometry, 3) style and distribution of internal deformations,
4) basal surface, and 5) runout distance. Seafloor and seismic-
reflection data suggest that each of these characteristics varies
with respect to MTD types.
Type 1 MTDs (SL5 and SL7) occur as thin layers which lack
internal organisation though they don't exhibit totally homo-
geneous characters (Table 2). They are characterised by rather
smooth surficial topographies while they tend to thin over
bathymetric highs and thicken at the lows (Figs. 5 and 6). These
last characteristics may reflect intense remoulding or fluidizing
of material during emplacement, or imply material with low
apparent shear strength (Gee et al., 1999). Minisini et al. (2006)
suspected that MTDs lacking of a well-defined parent headscarp
suggest in situ deformation with only a minor component of
downslope movement. The fact that the headscarp of SL7 is not
discernable on the bathymetry though this MTD is in surficial
position may support this interpretation, and suggest low shear
strength of its constitutive material.
By contrast, remaining coherency in reflectors, and other
characteristics associated to type 2 MTDs, such as variable
deposits thickness, steep margins, and positive surface relief,
imply a transport of material with strength (Table 2) (Gee et al.,
1999). According to McAdoo et al. (2000) the height and the
steepness of the SL6 headscarp (scar segment A on Figs. 3 and 4)
are also consistent with the failure of material with a high degree
of consolidation. The gentler slope angles of the scar segment B
suggest that degradation processes or draping by younger units
may have contributed to smoothing the original scar morphology
(Figs. 4 and 8). Both of these scar segments (A and B) appear
completely evacuated suggesting high velocities of the failed
masses. This configuration also supports the evidence that type 2
MTDs result from whole-body failure. Their internal architec-
tures suggest that during their emplacement, they have been
segmented, disaggregated and even transformed into highly
disrupted deposits in response to dynamic stresses. Transport
and evolution of the MTDs might have been controlled by
mechanical properties of the failed material, morphologies of the
seafloor and frictional coupling at their bases. Comparison of
SL4 and SL6, which both derive from the shelf edge (scar
segments B and A, respectively), illustrates the impacts of
several of these controlling parameters. SL4 downslope move-
ment has been stopped by the presence of buttressing (Fig. 11).
The resulting compression upon deposition created imbricate
thrusts predominantly in the toe region of SL4. By contrast, we
interpret that the downslope movement of SL6 has been
controlled by a decrease in the slope gradient of about 2° from
its proximal to its intermediate depositional area (Fig. 5). The
failed mass may have decelerated and, eventually, packages of
consolidated material stopped in the intermediate depositional
area. Here, compressional stresses might have created imbri-
cated thrusts while only looser material travelled further to form
the internally disorganised distal depositional unit. SL3 displays
similar internal configuration as SL6 suggesting that they both
experienced similar transport processes and downslope evolu-
tion. Within SL3 and SL6, evidences for the transport of large
packages of consolidated material needs to be reconciled with
the erosional relief observed at the base of their proximal and
intermediate depositional units (Figs. 5, 6 and 12).
Although the seismic character of SL2 is dominated by a
transparent facies, it exhibits an intricate depositional architec-
ture including 1) a headward unit characterised by extensional
rotated blocks, 2) an intermediate unit characterised by rafted
blocks evolving downslope into 3) an entirely internally
disrupted unit. This succession of deformation patterns reflects
the dynamic stresses undergone by the failed mass over both
short and long transport distances. SL2 volume appears far too
significant to proceed from the only identified limited source
area (Fig. 8). This tends to suggest incremental incorporation of
new material during its emplacement. However, its basal surface
generally corresponds to sets of continuous reflectors, with only
one prominent staircase-like geometry at its base that can attest
to the erosive power of the flow (Fig. 10). Because the location
of this abrupt relief correlates with a substantial increase in
thickness and width of SL2, we suspect at least a two-phase
emplacement for this event (Figs. 8 and 9). The rotated blocks
forming the SL2 headward unit imply only minor downslope
transportation of material and point towards a retrogressive
failure process occurring by upslope migration of the headwall
(Gauer et al., 2005). Regarding the retrogressive slide model
(Kvalstad et al., 2005), we interpret the staircase-like geometry
affecting the base of SL2 as one of the initially developed
headscarps. According to Kvalstad et al. (2005), this initial
headscarp may have conceivably formed before the mobility of
the failed mass was too low, blocking further retrogression along
the initial base layer. Consequently, the retrogressive process
continued along a shallower weak layer, creating a step in SL2
base, and eventually the uppermost headscarp as observed in the
Storegga slide (Kvalstad et al., 2005). However, during the first
emplacement phases, the mobility of the initially failed mass
must have been sufficiently high to induce disruption and intense
remoulding of its constitutive material. Intense remoulding,
increasing the water content, together with sustained high excess
pore pressures within the SL2 basal shear surface might have
been necessary to explain its high mobility (Elverhøi et al., 2005;
Gauer et al., 2005).
5.3. Potential causal processes
The origin of mass failures in the Rosetta area may well be as
diverse as the mechanisms of failure. However, excess pore
pressure generation, and presence of mechanically weak layers or
a combination of both are unequivocally recognised as key
parameters influencing slope stability (Sultan et al., 2004a,b;
Huhn et al., 2006). To explain the large-scale failures on the low
slope angles (1°–2°) of the Rosetta area, several internal and
external factors might have acted individually, or interacted, to
 S. Garziglia et al. / Marine Geology 250 (2008) 180–198
induce excess pore pressure and/or to sufficiently reduce sediment
shear strength (Kvalstad et al., 2005). High pore pressure can be
created through rapid sediment deposition, gas charging, melting
of gas hydrates contained within the sediment, and earthquake
shaking (Sultan et al., 2004a,b). Except earthquake shaking, all
the factors cited above are directly or indirectly influenced by sea-
level fluctuations. Hence, correlations between age estimates of
the MTDs and the relative sea-level fluctuation curve in the
Mediterranean yield critical information about failure causal
processes (see Fig. 18).
5.4. Rapid sediment deposition
Sediments carried seaward of the Rosetta branch were accu-
mulated in a relatively localised area. Consequently, gravity
sedimentation has been extremely susceptible to both climate
and glacio-eustatic oscillations (Ducassou et al. in press-b). The
SL6 event was triggered, between 10 and 9 ka which correlates
with a period of enhanced sediment supply (N150 cm ka− 1),
resulting from frequent, high-magnitude floods (Ducassou et al.,
in press-a). This maximum sedimentation rate was estimated
from cores located at mid slope (Ducassou et al., in press-b).
Because the sea level was between 35 and 25 m below the
present-day sea level during the period of enhanced sediment
supply, the largest sediment accumulation likely occurred on the
outer shelf and upper slope area. Such conditions might have
caused overloading inducing gradual but sufficient excess pore
pressure in fine-grained sediment (Leynaud et al., 2007). The
consequent reduction in vertical effective stress might have
induced a shear strength decrease within a so-called weak layer
that predisposed SL6 to failure from the shelf edge. A similar
mechanism induced by climate change through a combination of
sedimentary processes associated with relative sea-level oscilla-
tions is suspected to have generated the Western and Eastern
debris flows on the Amazon Fan (Maslin et al., 2005).
Fig. 18. Timing of SL2 and SL6 formation relative to Mediterranean sea-level
oscillations (Ducassou, 2006). Marine isotopic stages 1,2,3,4 and marine
isotopic sub-stages 5a, 5c, 5d and 5e are indicated.
195
5.5. Presence of gas in the sediments
Depending on the gas concentration and the pressure–
temperature conditions, gas (thermogenic or biogenic) can
occur in sediment either as a dissolved component, as a free gas,
or as a solid hydrate (Sultan et al., 2004b). The Rosetta area is
known as a gas-rich province (Dolson et al., 2002), and the
vigorous degassing from the centre of the North Alex mud
volcano and peripheral seeps at less than 3 km from the source
area of SL6 suggest the occurrence of gas in the surrounding
sedimentary column (Loncke et al., 2004; Prinzhofer et al.,
2005). According to Bentham et al. (2006), the primary phase of
activity for gas chimneys and associated mud volcano
development within the NDSTS is during the Early–Middle
Pliocene. Dupré et al. (2007) suspected that the intense
degassing activity of North Alex may be facilitated by the
low water column pressure. It is plausible that North Alex
degassing activity was even more vigorous when the sea level
was lower such as occurred when SL6 was triggered (35 to 25 m
below the present-day sea level, Fig. 18). According to Best
et al. (2003), the presence of gas bubbles within the coarser
sediment fraction, or in clays containing fabric can significantly
reduce the overall permeability of the ground, since they block
the larger pores that carry the majority of the flow. Hence, free
gas release on the upper slope, close to SL6 source area could
have aided and subsequently reinforced excess pore pressure
generation induced by rapid sediment accumulation.
Loncke et al. (2004) suspected that deep-seated pre-
existing fractures related to the Rosetta fault trend acted as
conduits for fluid ascent that generated the North Alex and
Horus mud volcanoes (Fig. 3). There are no others reported
seepage structures ascribed to the surface expression of deep-
seated gas chimneys. However, it is conceivable that gas
leakages occur extensively along deep-seated pre-existing
fractures, and hence widely affect the susceptibility to failure
in the Rosetta area.
5.6. Melting of gas hydrate
Gas hydrates form and exist in environments where there is a
sufficient gas supply, and the temperature and pore pressure
requirements allow stability. Gas chemistry, pore size distribution
and pore water salinity also influence gas hydrate formation and
stability (Sultan, 2007). The data analysed in this study do not
provide any clear evidences for the presence of gas hydrates such
as bottom-simulating reflectors. However, correlating the present-
day areas of methane hydrate stability with the potential sources
of biogenic or thermogenic gas in the Eastern Mediterranean,
Praeg et al. (2005) estimated that methane hydrates may occur in
the NDSTS below depths of 1000–1250 m.
The initiation of the largest MTD, SL2, occurred between
1300 and 1200 m water depth which is not the steepest part of
the slope nor is it related to any obvious sedimentological or
depositional parameter (e.g. maximum sedimentation rate).
Based on analogy with the present, we tentatively speculate that
methane hydrates may have been stable 120 ka ago, prior to SL2
triggering, during the Eemian sea-level high stand (Fig. 18).
196 S. Garziglia et al. / Marine Geology 250 (2008) 180–198
SL2 was triggered between 117 and 105 ka, during the fol-
lowing sea-level drop of about 50 m (Fig. 18). There is not any
published information about the evolution of sea-bottom
temperature during this period of time. However, regarding
the gas hydrate stability law (Sultan, 2007), we speculate that if
the decrease in hydrostatic pressure following the Eemian high
stand was not outweighed by a decrease in sea bottom water
temperature, hydrate might have been destabilised. Because
hydrate formation impedes the normal mechanical consolida-
tion of the hydrate-bearing sediment, hydrate destabilisation
through dissociation or dissolution may lead to a significant
plastic deformation due to the loss of cementation (Sultan, 2007).
Further research taking into account the transient thermal
evolution, the nature of gas, the pore size distribution and the
pore water salinity are required to estimate the excess pore
pressure generated, whether by hydrate dissociation and/or
dissolution that may occur, respectively, at the base and at the
top of the hydrate stability zone.
5.7. Earthquake shaking
Earthquakes may have direct and indirect effects on slope
sediment (Wright and Rathje, 2003). Triggering mechanisms
resulting directly from earthquakes include loading from hori-
zontal and vertical accelerations, fault rupture-induced sliding,
and liquefaction and strength loss due to undrained cyclic
loading. Other mechanisms such as redistribution of excess pore
water pressures are indirectly induced by earthquakes.
Due to its location, within the tectonically active region of
the Eastern Mediterranean, the Egyptian passive continental
margin has been affected by many earthquakes, both in recent
and historical time (El-Sayed et al., 2004). Even if the two main
fault trends (Temsah and Rosetta, see Fig. 1 for location) are
thought to have been active mostly in early Cretaceous, low-
magnitude earthquake epicentres (Ms not exceeding 6.7) have
been reported offshore Egypt during the Quaternary (El-Sayed
et al., 2004). El-Sayed et al. (2004) estimated that peak-ground
acceleration can be as high as 300 cm s− 2 for an expected total
duration of shaking of about 3 s at less than 100 km from such
earthquakes. The energies of the mean peaks of such events are
generally of frequencies below 4 Hz. However, in the study area
the main seismic hazards are associated to remote earthquakes
located mainly in the Eastern Mediterranean (i.e., Hellenic Arc
(El-Sayed et al. (2004)). Strong earthquakes (Ms N 7.5) in the
Hellenic Arc have long duration of shaking on the order of
minutes with relatively weak peaks (4 cm s− 2) of very low
frequency (around 1 Hz). Determining the likely effect of an
earthquake of a given magnitude requires knowledge of the
precise epicentre location, sediment mechanics, and more
specifically, local site response. Following Biscontin and
Pestana (2006) we assume that earthquake ground motions
with very low frequency content, such as those obtained from
remote events, tend to be more detrimental to deep soil deposits
and induce more significant pore pressure and larger permanent
deformations. Moreover, remote events, especially in the Hellenic
Arc, are more common than local ones (El-Sayed et al., 2004).
However, when combined with the existence of excess pore
pressure/underconsolidation forming a weak layer, even local
earthquakes might have induced failure in the area (Biscontin and
Pestana, 2006). When subjected to earthquakes with peak
frequencies below 4 Hz, small displacements may concentrate at
the weak layer. Increasing the pore pressure during cyclic loading
may significantly increase the concentrated displacements at the
weak layer. In this case, the weak layer may become the slip
surface on which the failure develops (Biscontin and Pestana,
2006).
As mentioned, type 2 MTDs are sourced from the shelf edge/
upper slope areas, which correspond to a crucial hinge zone for
sediment transport and accumulation that is strongly influenced
by sea-level fluctuation. Given that SL6 occurs during a period
of high sedimentation, it is conceivable to assume that the other
type 2 MTDs (SL3 and SL4) may also have been influenced by
sedimentation rate. However, this is not to say that rapid
sedimentation is the sole triggering mechanism, just perhaps a
necessary condition: given the ever-present (i.e., not as severely
dependent on sea level and climate fluctuations) possibility of
gas charging and earthquakes, rapid sedimentation may not be
necessarily implicated as the sole triggering mechanism, leaving
the open question as to the combined influence of these various
triggering factors.
6. Conclusions
1. The Pleistocene–Holocene sedimentary section (~ 1200 m
thick) of the Rosetta area hosts seven outstanding MTDs.
With surfaces ranging between 200 and 5000 km2 and
volumes ranging from 3 to 500 km3 these MTDs represent
about 40%, up locally to 90%, of the Pleistocene–Holocene
sedimentary cover. Mass wasting thus constitutes a major
depositional process within the Rosetta area.
2. The identified MTDs can be divided into three types. Within
each type, MTDs share similarities with respect to 1) their
dimensional characteristics 2) their distribution, 3) their
internal configuration, and in turn, 4) their significance and
impact within the Rosetta depositional setting.
3. Type 1 MTDs (SL5 and SL7) correspond to small-scale
MTDs (~ 220 km2 and b10 km3) likely sourced from levee
failures at mid slope, and imply material with low apparent
shear strength.
4. Type 2 MTDs (SL3, SL4, and SL6) refer to medium-scale
MTDs (400–800 km2 and 10–50 km3) triggered from the
shelf edge/upper slope areas. Each results from whole-body
failure and implies the transport of material with strength.
Two of the three (SL3 and SL6) display evidence of
significant downslope transformation from cohesive to
disintegrative flows.
5. Type 3 MTDs comprise the SL2 MTD which is not only
atypical in size (at least 5000 km2, 500 km3, and extending
from the mid slope to the deep basin), but also in its internal
configuration. The rotated blocks within its headward unit
and the prominent step at its base point towards a
retrogressive process for this event.
6. In the Rosetta area, where the slope gradient is quite low
(max ~ 2°), several concurring factors might have predispose
 S. Garziglia et al. / Marine Geology 250 (2008) 180–198
the well dated MTDs SL2 (117–105 ka) and SL6 (10–9 ka)
to failure. These include the presence of gas in the sediment,
rapid sediment accumulation and sea-level fluctuations
affecting both the location of sediment supply and
potentially the gas hydrates stability.
7. When combined with the excess pore pressure/underconso-
lidation induced by the recognised predisposing factors,
ground shaking imparted by a large remote earthquake
(Ms N 7.8) in the Eastern Mediterranean and even a moderate
local earthquake (Ms N 6.5) might have been sufficient to
trigger failure.
Acknowledgments
We thank the crews and technical teams aboard the Ifremer
R/V L'Atalante and le Suroit, as well as the scientific parties of
Prismed 2, Fanil and Nautinil surveys; the French Margin
program (GRD Marges) and the former CNRS/INSU Ocean
group for their financial support during completion of this work.
O. Sardou who had processed different bathymetry data on which
most of the illustrations of this paper are based. We would also
like to express our greatest appreciation to A. Cattaneo and
R. Viesca for their constructive reviews and suggestions. The
manuscript benefited from constructive reviews and comments by
A. Camerlenghi and M. Rebesco. We are indebted to V. Felt and
P. Boucher (BP-Egypt) for the access to some BP unpublished
data.
References
Aal, A.A., El Barkooky, A., Gerrits, M., Meyer, H., Schwander, M., Zaki, H.,
2000. Tectonic evolution of the Eastern Mediterranean Basin and its
significance for hydrocarbon prospectivity in the ultradeepwater of the Nile
Delta. Lead. Edge 19 (10), 1086–1102.
Ambraseys, N.N., Melville, C.P., Adam, R.D., 1994. The Seismicity of Egypt,
Arabia and the Red Sea a Historical Review. Cambridge University Press.
Bar-Matthews, M., Ayalon, A., Gilmour, M., Matthews, A., Hawkesworth, C.J.,
2003. Sea-land oxygen isotopic relationships from planktonic foramini-
fera and speleothems in the Eastern Mediterranean region and their
implication for paleorainfall during interglacial intervals. Geochim.
Cosmochim. Acta 67 (17), 3181–3199 A Special Issue Dedicated to
Robert Clayton.
Bentham, P.A., Pasley, M., Birt, C., 2006. The style and timing of mud
volcanism in the offshore Nile Delta, Egypt. AAPG/GSTT Hedberg
Conference, Mobile Shale Basins – Genesis, Evolution and Hydrocarbon
Systems, Port of Spain, Trinidad & Tobago, 4–7 June, 2006.
Best, A.I., Clayton, C.R.I., Longva, O., Szuman, M., 2003. In: Locat, J.,
Mienert, J. (Eds.), The Role of Free Gas in the Activation of Submarine
Slides in Finneidfjord in Submarine Mass Movements and their Con-
sequences. Kluver Acad. Publ., Dordrecht, The Netherlands, pp. 491–498.
Biscontin, G., Pestana, J.M., 2006. Factors affecting seismic response of
submarine slopes. Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. vol. 6 (1), 97–107.
Camera, L., 2006. Structure de la marge passive egyptienne au large du Nil:
contribution des données de sismique multitrace et de gravimètrie.
Univeristé Pierre et Marie Curie, Villefranche sur Mer. 161pp.
Canals, M., Lastras, G., Urgeles, R., Casamor, J.L., Mienert, J., Cattaneo, A., De
Batist, M., Haflidason, H., Imbo, Y., Laberg, J.S., Locat, J., Long, D., Longva,
O., Masson, D.G., Sultan, N., Trincardi, F., Bryn, P., 2004. Slope failure
dynamics and impacts from seafloor and shallow sub-seafloor geophysical
data: case studies from the COSTA project. Mar. Geol. — COSTA 213 (1–4),
9–72.
197
Chaumillon, E., Mascle, J., Hoffmann, H.J., 1996. Deformation of the western
Mediterranean Ridge: importance of Messinian evaporitic formations.
Tectonophysics 263 (1–4), 163–190.
Cramp, A., O'Sullivan, G., 1999. Neogene sapropels in the Mediterranean: a
review. Mar. Geol. 153, 11–28.
Dolson, J.C., Boucher, P.J., Shann, M.V., 2000. Exploration Potential in the
Offshore Mediterranean, Egypt. Perspective from the Context of Egypt's
Future Resources and Business Challenges, EAGE Conference on Geology
and Petroleum Geology, Malta.
Dolson, J.C., Boucher, P.J., Dodd, T., Ismail, J., 2002. The petroleum
potential of the emerging Mediterranean offshore gas plays, Egypt. Oil
Gas J. 100 (20), 32–37.
Ducassou, E., 2006. Evolution du système turbiditique profond du Nil au cour
du Quaternaire récent. Université Bordeaux 1, Bordeaux. 344 pp.
Ducassou, E., Capotondi, L., Murat, A., Bernasconi, S.M., Mulder, T., Gonthier,
E., Migeon, S., Duprat, J., Giraudeau, J., Mascle, J., 2007. Multiproxy Late
Quaternary stratigraphy of the Nile deep-sea turbidite system — towards a
chronology of deep-sea terrigeneous systems. Sediment. Geol. 200 (1–2),
1–13.
Ducassou, E., Mulder, T., Migeon, S., Gonthier, E., Murat, A., Capotondi, L.,
Bernasconi, S., Mascle, J., in press-a. Nile floods recorded in deep
Mediterranean sediments. Quaternary Research.
Ducassou, E., Migeon, S., Mulder, T., Capotondi, L., Bernasconi, S., Murat, A.,
Mascle, J., in press-b. Evolution of the Nile Deep-Sea Turbidite System
during Late Quaternary: a new model to constrain the growth pattern of
turbidite systems. Sedimentology.
Dupré, S., Woodside, J., Foucher, J.-P., de Lange, G., Mascle, J., Boetius, A.,
Mastalerz, V., Stadnitskaia, A., Ondreas, H., Huguen, C., Harmégnies, F.,
Gontharet, S., Loncke, L., Deville, E., Niemann, H., Omoregie, E., Olu-Le
Roy, K., Fiala-Médioni, A., Dählmann, A., Caprais, J.-C., Prinzhofer, A.,
Sibuet, M., Pierre, C., Damste, J.S.S., the NAUTINIL Scientific Party, 2007.
Seafloor geological studies above active gas chimneys off Egypt (Central
Nile Deep Sea Fan). Deep Sea Res., Part I 54 (7), 1146–1172.
El-Araby, H., Sultan, M., 2000. Integrated Seismic Risk Map of Egypt. Seismol.
Res. Lett. 71 (1), 53.
El-Sayed, A., Korrat, I., Hussein, H.M., 2004. Seismicity and seismic hazard in
Alexandria (Egypt) and its surroundings. Pure Appl. Geophys. 161 (5–6),
1003–1019.
Elverhøi, A., Issler, D., De Blasio, F.V., Ilstad, T., Harbitz, C.B., Gauer, P., 2005.
Emerging insights on the dynamics of submarine debris flows. Nat. Hazards
Earth Syst. Sci. 5, 633–648.
Gauer, P., Kvalstad, T.J., Forsberg, C.F., Bryn, P., Berg, K., 2005. The last phase
of the Storegga Slide: simulation of retrogressive slide dynamics and
comparison with slide-scar morphology. Mar. Pet. Geol. 22, 171–178.
Gee, M.J.R., Masson, D.G., Watts, A.B., Allen, P.A., 1999. The Saharian debris
flow: an insight into the mechanics of long runout submarine debris flows.
Sedimentology 46, 317–335.
Hampton, M.A., Lee, H.J., Locat, J., 1996. Submarine landslides. Rev. Geophys.
34 (1), 33–59.
Huguen, C., Mascle, J., Chaumillon, E., Woodside, J.M., Benkhelil, J., Kopf, A.,
Volkonskaia, A., 2001. Deformational styles of the eastern Mediterranean
Ridge and surroundings from combined swath mapping and seismic
reflection profiling. Tectonophysics 343 (1–2), 21–47.
Huhn, K., Kock, I., Kopf, A.J., 2006. Comparative numerical and analogue
shear box experiments and their implications for the mechanics along the
failure plane of landslides. Nor. J. Geol. 86, 209–220.
Kvalstad, T.J., Andresen, L., Forsberg, C.F., Berg, K., Bryn, P., Wangen, M.,
2005. The Storegga slide: evaluation of triggering sources and slide
mechanics. Mar. Pet. Geol. 22, 245–256.
Lee, H.J., Syvitski, J.P.M., Parker, G., Orange, D., Locat, J., Hutton, E.W.H.,
Imram, J., 2002. Distinguishing sediment waves from slope failure deposits:
field examples, including the 'Humboldt slide', and modelling results. Mar.
Geol. 192 (1–3), 79–104.
Lee, H.J., 2005. Undersea landslides: extent and significance in the Pacific
Ocean, an update. Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. 5, 877–892.
Leynaud, D., Sultan, N., Mienert, J., 2007. The Role of Sedimentation Rate and
Permeability in the Slope Stability of the Formerly Glaciated Norwegian
Continental Margin: the Storegga Slide Model. Landslides 4 (4), 297–309.
198 S. Garziglia et al. / Marine Geology 250 (2008) 180–198
Loncke, L., Gaullier, V., Bellaiche, G., Mascle, J., 2002. Recent depositional
patterns of the Nile deep-sea fan from echo-character mapping. AAPG Bull.
86 (7), 1165–1186.
Loncke, L., Gaullier, V., Mascle, J., Vendeville, B., Camera, L., 2006. The Nile
deep-sea fan: an example of interacting sedimentation, salt tectonics, and
inherited subsalt paleotopographic features. Mar. Pet. Geol. 23 (3), 297–315.
Loncke, L., Mascle, J., Fanil Scientific Parties, 2004. Mud volcanoes, gas
chimneys, pockmarks and mounds in the Nile deep-sea fan (Eastern
Mediterranean): geophysical evidences. Mar. Pet. Geol. 21 (6), 669–689.
Maldonado, A., Stanley, J., 1979. The Nile Cone: submarine fan development
by cyclic sedimentation. Mar. Geol. 20 (1), 27–35.
Martinez, J.F., Cartwright, J., Hall, B., 2005. 3D seismic interpretation of slump
complexes: examples from the continental margin of Israel. Basin Res. 17,
83–108.
Mascle, J., Benkhelil, J., Bellaiche, G., Zitter, T., Woodside, J., Loncke, L.,
2000. Marine geologic evidence for a Levantine–Sinai plate, a new piece of
the Mediterranean puzzle. Geology 28 (9), 779–782.
Mascle, J., Sardou, O., Loncke, L., Migeon, S., Caméra, L., Gaullier, L., 2006.
Morphostructure of the Egyptian continental margin: insights from swath
bathymetry surveys. Mar. Geophys. Res. 27 (1), 49–59.
Maslin, M., Vilela, C., Mikkelsen, N., Grootes, P., 2005. Causes of catastrophic
sediment failures of the Amazon Fan. Quat. Sci. Rev. 24, 2180–2193.
McAdoo, B.G., Pratson, L.F., Orange, D.L., 2000. Submarine landslide
geomorphology, US continental slope. Mar. Geol. 169, 103–136.
McClusky, S., Balassanian, S., Barka, A., Demir, C., Ergintav, S., Georgiev, I.,
Gurkan, O., Hamburger, M., Hurst, K., Kahle, H., Kastens, K., Kekelidze,
G., King, R., Kotzev, V., Lenk, O., Mahmoud, S., Mishin, A., Nadariya, M.,
Ouzounis, A., Paradissis, D., Peter, Y., Prilepin, M., Reilinger, R., Sanli, I.,
Seeger, H., Tealeb, A., Toksöz, M.N., Veis, G., 2000. Global Positioning
System constraints on plate kinematics and dynamics in the eastern
Mediterranean and Caucasus. J. Geophys. Res. B: Solid Earth 105 (3),
5695–5719.
Migeon, S., Weber, O., Faugeres, J.-C., Saint-Paul, J., 1999. SCOPIX: a new X-ray
imaging system for core analysis. Geo-Mar. Lett. 18 (3), 251–255.
Migeon, S., Savoye, B., Faugeres, J.C., 2000. Quaternary development of migrating
sediment waves in the Var deep-sea fan: distribution, growth pattern, and
implication for levee evolution. Sediment. Geol. 133 (3–4), 265–293.
Minisini, D., Trincardi, F., Asioli, A., 2006. Evidence of slope instability in the
Southwestern Adriatic Margin. Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. 6, 1–20.
Nadim, F., 2006. Challenges to geo-scientists in risk assessment for submarine
slides. Nor. J. Geol. 86, 351–362.
Newton, C.S., Shipp, R.C., Mosher, D.C., Wach, G.D., 2004. Importance of
mass transport complexes in the quaternary development of the Nile Fan,
Egypt. In: Conference, O.T (Ed.), Offshore Technology Conference. OTC,
Houston, Texas, p. 16742.
Owen, M., Day, S., Maslin, M., 2007. Late Pleistocene submarine mass
movements: occurrence and causes. Quat. Sci. Rev. 26 (7–8), 958–978.
Posamentier, H.W., Kolla, V., 2003. Seismic geomorphology and stratigraphy of
depositional elements in deep-water settings. J. Sediment. Res. 73 (3),
367–388.
Praeg, D., Unnithan, V., Camerlenghi, A., Lazzari, P., Salon, S., Tinivella, U.,
Zanolla, C., 2005. Gas hydrate stability in the Mediterranean Sea since the
last glacial maximum: results from the HYDRAMED project. European
Geoscience Union. Geophysical Research Abstracts, vol. 8, p. 396.
Prinzhofer, A., Deville, E., Foucher, J.-P., Caprais, J.-C., Mascle, J., 2005.
Geochemistry of gas emanations from mud volcanoes and pockmarks from
offshore Egypt. AAPG International Conference. Paris, France.
Ross, D.A., Uchupi, E., 1977. Structure and sedimentary history of southeastern
Mediterranean Sea-Nile Cone area. AAPG Bull. 61 (6), 872–902.
Sardou, O., Mascle, J., 2003. Cartographie par sondeur multifaisceaux du delta sous
marin profond du Nil et des domaines voisins. Deux cartes (Morphobathymétrie
et mosaiques d'images acoustiques. In: CIESM (Editor).
Sultan, N., Cochonat, P., Canals, M., Cattaneo, A., Dennielou, B., Haflidason, H.,
Laberg, J.S., Long, D., Mienert, J., Trincardi, F., Urgeles, R., Vorren, T.O.,
Wilson, C., 2004a. Triggering mechanisms of slope instability processes and
sediment failures on continental margins: a geotechnical approach. Mar.
Geol. 213, 291–321.
Sultan, N., Cochonat, P., Foucher, J.-P., Mienert, J., 2004b. Effect of gas
hydrates melting on seafloor slope instability. Mar. Geol. 213, 379–401.
Sultan, N., 2007. Excess pore pressure and slope failure resulting from gas–hydrates
dissociation and dissolution. In: Conference, O.T. (Ed.), Offshore Technology
Conference. OTC, Houston, Texas, p. 18532.
Wright, S.G., Rathje, E.M., 2003. Triggering mechanisms of slope instability
and their relationship to earthquakes and tsunamis. Pure Appl. Geophys.
160, 1865–1877.