the catwalk, core sections were scanned with the STMSL by the physical properties team and immediately taken to the downhole logging laboratory, which allowed dissolved oxygen measurements to be taken <2 h after core arrival on deck. In lithified or firm sediments, the temperature and O₂ sensors could not be fully inserted into the core. A table of all O₂ data from Expedition 395 are included in GEOCHEM in Supplementary material.

## 9.4. Sediment and basalt geochemistry

### 9.4.1. Inorganic and organic carbon, nitrogen, and sulfur

TIC was measured by quantifying the carbon dioxide evolved from an acidification process on a UIC Coulometrics 5017 CO₂ coulometer. Powdered bulk sediment was weighed (~10 mg) using a Cahn C-31 automated electrobalance system with two electronic balances and a computer averaging system that corrects for ship motion. The sediment was transferred to a clean sample vial, where it was reacted with 5.0 mL of 1 M HCl on a hot plate at 50°C for 2–5 min (depending on CaCO₃ content), until all CaCO₃ was converted to CO₂. Sample gas was then transferred using an N₂ carrier gas to a coulometer cell that was filled with a monoethanolamine solution and a colorimetric pH indicator. As the gas passed through the cell, CO₂ was quantitatively absorbed and reacted with the monoethanolamine to form a titratable acid. The increased acidity causes the color indicator to change, and the spectrophotometer tracked the change in light transmittance.

Weight percent calcium carbonate was calculated from the TIC content assuming that CO₂ was derived from calcium carbonate as follows:

$$CaCO_3 (wt\%) = \text{coulometer reading (TIC; µg)} \times 8.333/\text{sample mass (mg)}.$$

This approach is based on the assumption that calcium carbonate is the only carbonate mineral present; therefore, the ratio of the molar mass of CaCO₃ (100.087 g/mol) and C (12.011 g/mol) equals 8.333. A standard reference material (>99.9% CaCO₃; Fisher Scientific) was used to determine analytical precision (TIC = 0.5 wt%; CaCO₃ = 0.6 wt%). Weight percent TOC was calculated by subtracting TIC from TC.

Concentrations of TOC, total nitrogen (TN), and TS (TS = Expedition 395 only) in sediments were determined using flash combustion on a ThermoScientific FlashSmart carbon-hydrogen-nitrogen-sulfur (CHNS) elemental analyzer. Approximately 15 mg of powdered sample was weighed into tin capsules on the Cahn C-31 automated electrobalance. To ensure complete combustion of sulfur, an equivalent mass of V₂O₅ catalyst was mixed with the sample before sealing the tin capsule. Samples were combusted in the elemental analyzer at 1020°C in a stream of helium. Nitrogen oxides were reduced to N₂ in the presence of reduced copper (650°C), and the CO₂, N₂, and SO₂ produced from the sample were separated on a GC column (2 m long). Sample gas intensities were detected using a thermal conductivity detector and normalized to a carbon-nitrogen-sulfur calibration standard (2.5-bis[5-tert-butyl-benzoxazol-2-yl]thiophene) (C = 72.53 wt%; N = 6.517 wt%; S = 7.44 wt%). Two reference standards (NIST 2704 and Buffalo River Sediment) were run every 10 samples to monitor for analytical drift and determine analytical precision (typically better than 5% for all elements).

### 9.4.2. X-ray diffraction

Approximately 5 cm³ of bulk sediment was collected for geochemical analyses from squeeze cake residue and/or directly sampled by the sedimentology team. Samples analyzed for bulk mineralogy were freeze-dried for >12 h and homogenized to a fine powder using an agate mortar and pestle. X-ray diffraction (XRD) analyses of bulk powders were performed using a Malvern Panalytical Aeris XRD system operated at 40 kV voltage, 15 mA current, and 5°–99° 2θ goniometer angle stepped through 0.0110° increments with a scan speed of 32.9 s/step. The divergence split for the operation was 0.23°.

Diffractograms of bulk samples were evaluated with either Malvern Panalytical HighScore Plus or Bruker EVA software, which allowed for basic peak characterization (e.g., background removal and characteristic peak intensity) and mineral identification. To identify minor mineral phases in the carbonate- and/or nannofossil-rich sediments at the base of the sedimentary sequence from
Hole U1564F, a small subset of samples was decarbonated using a 1 M sodium acetate buffer solution adjusted to pH 5.0 with acetic acid. Samples were broken into small pieces, which were placed into centrifuge tubes with 20 mL of buffer solution for 5 h. Following the leaching procedure, samples were centrifuged, the supernatant was decanted, and the remaining solids were mixed with a new buffer for another 5 h before final centrifugation and rinsing. These residual samples were then freeze-dried and subjected to the process described for bulk samples above. Remaining sample material was stored in a glass vial and archived.

### 9.4.3. Loss on ignition

As an initial estimate of the degree of alteration of basalt samples, 5.00 ± 0.05 g of each sample powder was weighed into a quartz crucible and then ignited to determine the weight loss on ignition. During Expeditions 395 and 395C, samples were heated for 4 h at 1025°C. Estimated precision is ±0.02 g (±0.4%).

### 9.4.4. Bulk chemistry of sediment and basalt

Major oxide ($Al_2O_3$, CaO, $Fe_2O_3$, $K_2O$, MgO, MnO, $Na_2O$, $P_2O_5$, $SiO_2$, and $TiO_2$) and minor element (Ba, Cr, Cu, Ni, S, Sc, Sr, V, Y, Zn, and Zr) concentrations were determined using ICP-AES with the shipboard Agilent 5110. The shipboard ICP-AES analyses of samples closely followed the methods described by Murray et al. (2000). Each sediment, basalt, and reference material sample was treated according to the ICP Sample Preparation user guide (https://tamu-eas.atlas.sian.net/wiki/spaces/LMUG/pages/7341017694/ICP+Sample+Preparation). The calibration spreadsheet used during Expeditions 395C and 395 identifies sample types (e.g, blank, drift monitor, standard, check standard, or unknown), and, based on this information, completed all data corrections (internal standard, blank, and drift corrections, in that order). For bulk sediment geochemistry, ICP-AES measurements were taken from carbonate residues. For basalt samples, representative samples were cut from the working halves of cores recovered during Expeditions 395 and 395C for major and minor/trace element analyses. One sample of basalt was selected every ~10 m from the least altered material in the core to obtain a downhole record of the primary magmatic conditions. ICP-AES samples and a thin section billet were both taken from the same core interval where possible. Rock samples were then ultrasonicated in trace metal-grade 70% isopropyl alcohol for 15 min and in 18.2 MΩ deionized water for another 10 min. The cleaned rock pieces were dried for 12 h at 110°C and then crushed to <1 cm chips between two disks of Delrin plastic in a hydraulic press. The chips were powdered using a SPEX Shatterbox with a tungsten carbide grinding canister. As documented for previous IODP expeditions, contamination from the tungsten carbide mill is negligible for most of the elements analyzed during shipboard chemical analyses, although Co contamination during the powdering process is possible (Godard et al., 2009).

Powdered bulk sediment and basalt samples were weighed (100 ± 0.5 mg) and mixed with $LiBO_2$ flux (400.0 ± 0.5 mg). An aqueous $LiBr$ solution (10 µL of 0.172 mM) was added to the flux and powder mixture as a nonwetting agent to prevent the fused bead from sticking to the crucible during cooling. Standard reference samples (AGV-1, BCR-2, BHVO-2, BIR-1, BRR-1, JB-1a, JB-2, JB-3, JGb-1, JR-1, RGM-1, and JA-1) (Table T11) and full procedural blanks were prepared as stock solutions and included with unknowns in each ICP-AES run. Standard stock solutions prepared at the final dilution factor for ICP analysis (5000:1) can last several weeks without deterioration (Coggon et al., 2024). Reference materials (BHVO-2, BCR-2, and BRR-1) were measured as check standards during each run to quantify instrument drift (Table T12). Elemental concentrations for reference materials are given in Imai et al. (1995) and Jochum et al. (2016); basalt samples and standard reference materials were not combusted prior to ICP-AES measurements because this approach may cause inconsistent results during standardization (Jochum et al., 2016).

Samples were fused in Pt-Au (95:5) crucibles for ~12 min at 1250°C in an internally rotating induction furnace (Bead Sampler NT-2100). After cooling, beads were transferred to 125 mL HDPE bottles and dissolved in 50 mL 10% $HNO_3$, which was aided by shaking with a Burrell wrist-action bottle shaker for 1 h. Next, 0.5 mL of each solution was diluted with 4.4 mL of 10 wt% trace metal-grade $HNO_3$ and 0.1 mL of an internal standard solution containing Be, In (100 µg/g), and Sb (200 µg/g). The final dilution factor for the samples is ~5000:1. Check standards and drift and blank samples are measured 4–5 times through the course of each run. Each solution is analyzed 3 times,
and each analysis is reported as an average. The optical wavelengths that produced the best calibration curves, as defined by their correlation coefficients (r values), were used to calculate solution concentrations. For all major elements except potassium, multiple wavelengths per element had r values of 0.999X and were 10× above instrument detection limits in their linear dynamic ranges. Results from all such wavelengths, in many cases both axially and radially measured by the instrument, were used to calculate solution concentrations.

<table><caption>**Table T11.** Sediment and basalt ICP-AES standards and accepted values, Expeditions 395 and 395C. **Download table in CSV format.**</caption><thead><tr><th></th><th>Al<sub>2</sub>O<sub>3</sub><br>(%)</th><th>Ba<br>(ppm)</th><th>CaO<br>(%)</th><th>Co<br>(ppm)</th><th>Cr<br>(ppm)</th><th>Cu<br>(ppm)</th><th>Fe<sub>2</sub>O<sub>3</sub><br>(%)</th><th>K<sub>2</sub>O<br>(%)</th><th>MgO<br>(%)</th><th>MnO<br>(%)</th><th>Na<sub>2</sub>O<br>(%)</th><th>Ni<br>(ppm)</th><th>P<sub>2</sub>O<sub>5</sub><br>(%)</th><th>S<br>(ppm)</th><th>Sc<br>(ppm)</th><th>SiO<sub>2</sub><br>(%)</th><th>Sr<br>(ppm)</th><th>TiO<sub>2</sub><br>(%)</th><th>V<br>(ppm)</th><th>Y<br>(ppm)</th><th>Zn<br>(ppm)</th><th>Zr<br>(ppm)</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>AGV-1</td><td>17.15</td><td>1,226</td><td>4.94</td><td>15.3</td><td>10.1</td><td>60</td><td>6.77</td><td>2.92</td><td>1.53</td><td>0.09</td><td>4.26</td><td>16</td><td>0.49</td><td></td><td>12.2</td><td>58.84</td><td>662</td><td>1.05</td><td>121</td><td>20</td><td>88</td><td>227</td></tr><tr><td>BCR-2</td><td>13.64</td><td>683</td><td>6.97</td><td>42</td><td>18</td><td>19</td><td>13.43</td><td>1.72</td><td>3.42</td><td>0.175</td><td>3.25</td><td>12</td><td>0.35</td><td></td><td>32.6</td><td>54.1</td><td>346</td><td>2.26</td><td>416</td><td>37</td><td>127</td><td>188</td></tr><tr><td>BHVO-2</td><td>13.5</td><td>130</td><td>11.4</td><td>45</td><td>280</td><td>127</td><td>12.3</td><td>0.43</td><td>7.23</td><td></td><td>2.22</td><td>119</td><td>0.27</td><td></td><td>31.8</td><td>49.9</td><td>389</td><td>2.73</td><td>317</td><td>26</td><td>103</td><td>172</td></tr><tr><td>BIR-1</td><td>15.35</td><td>7.7</td><td>13.24</td><td>51.4</td><td>382</td><td>126</td><td>11.26</td><td>0.027</td><td>9.68</td><td>0.171</td><td>1.75</td><td>166</td><td>0.046</td><td></td><td>44</td><td>47.77</td><td>108</td><td>0.96</td><td>313</td><td>16</td><td>71</td><td>22</td></tr><tr><td>BRR-1</td><td>14.41</td><td>6.85</td><td>11.665</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>12.175</td><td>0.06</td><td>8.77</td><td>0.205</td><td>2.08</td><td></td><td>0.14</td><td></td><td>43.98</td><td>48.91</td><td>69</td><td>0.985</td><td></td><td>27.71</td><td></td><td></td><td>55.22</td></tr><tr><td>GSP-2</td><td>14.9</td><td>1,340</td><td>2.1</td><td>7.3</td><td>20</td><td>43</td><td>4.9</td><td>5.38</td><td>0.96</td><td></td><td>2.78</td><td>17</td><td>0.29</td><td></td><td>6.3</td><td>66.6</td><td>240</td><td>0.66</td><td>52</td><td>28</td><td>120</td><td>550</td></tr><tr><td>HISS-1</td><td>1.38</td><td></td><td>1.6</td><td>0.65</td><td>30</td><td>2.29</td><td>0.352</td><td>0.4</td><td>0.124</td><td>0.009</td><td>0.503</td><td>2.16</td><td></td><td></td><td>94.12</td><td>96.9</td><td>0.127</td><td>6.8</td><td></td><td></td><td>4.94</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>JB-1b</td><td>14.38</td><td>397.4</td><td>9.6</td><td>27.76</td><td>352</td><td>117.7</td><td>9.02</td><td>1.32</td><td>8.14</td><td>0.147</td><td>2.63</td><td>75.4</td><td>0.256</td><td></td><td>25.9</td><td>51.11</td><td>119.7</td><td>1.23</td><td>357.6</td><td></td><td></td><td>485.3</td></tr><tr><td>JB-2</td><td>14.64</td><td></td><td>9.82</td><td>38</td><td>28.1</td><td>225</td><td>14.25</td><td>0.42</td><td>4.62</td><td>0.218</td><td>16.6</td><td>0.101</td><td>17.9</td><td></td><td>53.5</td><td>53.25</td><td>178</td><td>1.19</td><td>575</td><td>24.9</td><td>108</td><td>51.2</td></tr><tr><td>JB-2a</td><td>14.67</td><td>219</td><td>9.79</td><td>40</td><td>28</td><td>274</td><td>14.18</td><td>0.41</td><td>4.58</td><td>0.214</td><td>2.03</td><td>14.5</td><td>0.095</td><td></td><td>53.22</td><td>179</td><td>1.18</td><td>574</td><td>25.4</td><td>109</td><td>61.8</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>JB-3</td><td>17.2</td><td></td><td>9.79</td><td>34.3</td><td>58.1</td><td>194</td><td>11.82</td><td>0.78</td><td>5.19</td><td>0.177</td><td>36.2</td><td>0.294</td><td>9.86</td><td></td><td>33.8</td><td>50.96</td><td>403</td><td>1.44</td><td>372</td><td>26.9</td><td>100</td><td>97.8</td></tr><tr><td>JGB-1</td><td>17.49</td><td>64.3</td><td>11.9</td><td>60.1</td><td>57.8</td><td>85.7</td><td>15.06</td><td>0.24</td><td>7.85</td><td>0.189</td><td>1.2</td><td>25.4</td><td>0.056</td><td>1,910</td><td>35.8</td><td>43.66</td><td>327</td><td>1.6</td><td>635</td><td>10.4</td><td>109</td><td>32.8</td></tr><tr><td>LKSD-1</td><td>7.8</td><td>430</td><td>10.8</td><td>11</td><td>31</td><td>44</td><td>4.11</td><td>1.1</td><td>1.7</td><td>0.1</td><td>2</td><td>16</td><td>0.2</td><td>15,700</td><td>9</td><td>40.1</td><td>250</td><td>0.5</td><td>50</td><td>19</td><td>331</td><td>134</td></tr><tr><td>MESS-4</td><td>14.95</td><td>920</td><td>1.83</td><td>13</td><td>94.3</td><td>32.9</td><td>5.42</td><td>2.87</td><td>2.62</td><td>0.038</td><td>1.7</td><td>42.8</td><td>0.238</td><td>1,580</td><td>13.4</td><td>59.47</td><td>132</td><td>0.641</td><td>216</td><td>20</td><td>147</td><td>96</td></tr><tr><td>NBS-1C</td><td>1.3</td><td>84</td><td>50.3</td><td>1.15</td><td>19</td><td></td><td>0.55</td><td>0.28</td><td>0.42</td><td>0.025</td><td>0.02</td><td></td><td>0.04</td><td></td><td>1.3</td><td>6.83</td><td>250</td><td>0.07</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>17.8</td></tr><tr><td>NBS-99A</td><td>20.41</td><td>2,330</td><td>2.14</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>0.064</td><td>5.18</td><td>0.02</td><td></td><td>6.2</td><td></td><td>0.02</td><td></td><td>65.04</td><td></td><td></td><td>0.007</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>PACS-3</td><td>12.43</td><td></td><td>2.64</td><td>12.1</td><td>90.6</td><td>326</td><td>5.87</td><td>1.51</td><td>2.32</td><td>0.056</td><td>4.74</td><td>39.5</td><td>0.215</td><td>11,700</td><td>55.83</td><td>267</td><td>0.737</td><td>129</td><td></td><td></td><td>376</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>SCO-1</td><td>13.67</td><td>570</td><td>2.62</td><td>10.5</td><td>68</td><td>28.7</td><td>5.14</td><td>2.77</td><td>2.72</td><td>0.053</td><td>0.9</td><td>27</td><td>0.206</td><td></td><td>62.78</td><td>174</td><td>0.628</td><td>131</td><td>26</td><td>103</td><td>160</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>SDC-1</td><td>15.8</td><td>630</td><td>1.4</td><td>18</td><td>64</td><td>30</td><td>6.32</td><td>3.28</td><td>1.69</td><td>0.205</td><td>38</td><td>0.16</td><td></td><td></td><td>65.8</td><td>180</td><td>1.01</td><td>102</td><td></td><td></td><td>103</td><td>290</td></tr><tr><td>SDO-1</td><td>12.27</td><td>397</td><td>1.05</td><td>46.8</td><td>66.4</td><td>60.2</td><td>9.34</td><td>3.35</td><td>1.54</td><td>0.042</td><td>0.38</td><td>99.5</td><td>0.11</td><td></td><td>13.2</td><td>49.28</td><td>75.1</td><td>0.71</td><td>160</td><td>40.6</td><td>64.1</td><td>165</td></tr><tr><td>SO-1</td><td>17.59</td><td>870</td><td>2.46</td><td>29</td><td>170</td><td>61</td><td>3.18</td><td>3.83</td><td>0.11</td><td>2.7</td><td>92</td><td>0.15</td><td></td><td></td><td>17.7</td><td>54.98</td><td>331</td><td>0.87</td><td>133</td><td>24.5</td><td>144</td><td>84</td></tr><tr><td>STSD-2</td><td>16.1</td><td>540</td><td>4</td><td>19</td><td>116</td><td>47</td><td>7.5</td><td>2.1</td><td>3.1</td><td>0.1</td><td>1.7</td><td>53</td><td>0.3</td><td>600</td><td>16</td><td>53.7</td><td>400</td><td>0.8</td><td>101</td><td>37</td><td>246</td><td>185</td></tr><tr><td>W-2</td><td>15.35</td><td>182</td><td>10.87</td><td>44</td><td>93</td><td>103</td><td>10.74</td><td>0.627</td><td>6.37</td><td>0.163</td><td>2.14</td><td>70</td><td>0.131</td><td></td><td>35</td><td>52.44</td><td>194</td><td>1.06</td><td>262</td><td>24</td><td>77</td><td>94</td></tr></tbody></table>

<table><caption>**Table T12.** Reproducibility of major oxides and minor elements in ICP-AES check standards, Expeditions 395 and 395C. — not applicable. **Download table in CSV format.**</caption><thead><tr><th rowspan="2"></th><th colspan="4">BHVO-2</th><th colspan="4">BCR-2</th><th colspan="4">BRR-1</th><th colspan="4">BIR-1</th></tr><tr><th>Accepted</th><th>Exp<br>395</th><th>σ</th><th>Exp<br>395C</th><th>σ</th><th>Accepted</th><th>Exp<br>395</th><th>σ</th><th>Exp<br>395C</th><th>σ</th><th>Accepted</th><th>Exp<br>395</th><th>σ</th><th>Exp<br>395C</th><th>σ</th><th>Accepted</th><th>Exp<br>395</th><th>Exp<br>395C</th><th>σ</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td colspan="16">Major oxide elements (wt%):</td></tr><tr><td>SiO</td><td>49.60</td><td>48.81</td><td>0.75</td><td>39.66</td><td>3.52</td><td>54.10</td><td>53.18</td><td>0.62</td><td>54.00</td><td>—</td><td>48.91</td><td>49.56</td><td>0.48</td><td>50.27</td><td>0.84</td><td>47.77</td><td>—</td><td>40.98</td><td>2.66</td></tr><tr><td>TiO</td><td>2.73</td><td>2.77</td><td>0.03</td><td>2.73</td><td>0.03</td><td>2.26</td><td>2.27</td><td>0.02</td><td>2.27</td><td>—</td><td>0.99</td><td>1.03</td><td>0.02</td><td>1.04</td><td>0.03</td><td>0.96</td><td>—</td><td>0.97</td><td>0.01</td></tr><tr><td>Al</td><td>13.44</td><td>13.38</td><td>0.12</td><td>13.56</td><td>0.09</td><td>13.50</td><td>13.42</td><td>0.17</td><td>13.48</td><td>—</td><td>14.41</td><td>14.55</td><td>0.11</td><td>14.70</td><td>0.12</td><td>15.35</td><td>—</td><td>15.82</td><td>0.13</td></tr><tr><td>Fe</td><td>12.39</td><td>12.02</td><td>0.24</td><td>12.40</td><td>0.19</td><td>13.80</td><td>13.45</td><td>0.06</td><td>13.77</td><td>—</td><td>12.18</td><td>11.82</td><td>0.28</td><td>12.07</td><td>0.09</td><td>0.09</td><td>11.26</td><td>—</td><td>11.61</td><td>0.17</td></tr><tr><td>MnO</td><td>0.17</td><td>0.16</td><td>0.00</td><td>0.17</td><td>0.00</td><td>0.24</td><td>0.19</td><td>0.01</td><td>0.20</td><td>—</td><td>0.21</td><td>0.18</td><td>3.40</td><td>0.19</td><td>0.01</td><td>0.17</td><td>—</td><td>0.17</td><td>0.00</td></tr><tr><td>MgO</td><td>7.26</td><td>7.01</td><td>0.16</td><td>7.18</td><td>0.08</td><td>3.59</td><td>3.52</td><td>0.07</td><td>3.60</td><td>—</td><td>8.77</td><td>8.42</td><td>0.24</td><td>8.74</td><td>0.09</td><td>9.68</td><td>—</td><td>9.56</td><td>0.10</td></tr><tr><td>CaO</td><td>11.40</td><td>11.17</td><td>0.17</td><td>11.40</td><td>0.11</td><td>7.12</td><td>7.03</td><td>0.05</td><td>7.11</td><td>—</td><td>11.67</td><td>11.80</td><td>0.11</td><td>11.95</td><td>0.19</td><td>13.24</td><td>—</td><td>13.40</td><td>0.15</td></tr><tr><td>Na</td><td>2.22</td><td>2.16</td><td>0.04</td><td>2.21</td><td>0.02</td><td>3.16</td><td>3.22</td><td>0.08</td><td>3.12</td><td>—</td><td>2.08</td><td>1.97</td><td>0.07</td><td>2.01</td><td>0.05</td><td>1.75</td><td>—</td><td>1.83</td><td>0.02</td></tr><tr><td>K</td><td>0.51</td><td>0.49</td><td>0.04</td><td>0.53</td><td>0.01</td><td>1.79</td><td>1.73</td><td>0.01</td><td>1.77</td><td>—</td><td>0.06</td><td>0.05</td><td>0.01</td><td>0.06</td><td>0.00</td><td>0.03</td><td>—</td><td>0.03</td><td>0.00</td></tr><tr><td>P</td><td>0.27</td><td>0.26</td><td>0.01</td><td>0.28</td><td>0.00</td><td>0.35</td><td>0.35</td><td>0.01</td><td>0.36</td><td>—</td><td>0.14</td><td>0.08</td><td>0.00</td><td>0.09</td><td>0.03</td><td>0.05</td><td>—</td><td>0.03</td><td>0.01</td></tr><tr><td>Sum</td><td>99.99</td><td>98.21</td><td>—</td><td>90.11</td><td>—</td><td>99.91</td><td>98.35</td><td>—</td><td>99.68</td><td>—</td><td>99.40</td><td>99.47</td><td>—</td><td>101.11</td><td>—</td><td>100.25</td><td>—</td><td>94.41</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td colspan="16">Minor elements (µg/g):</td></tr><tr><td>Sc</td><td>31.80</td><td>31.24</td><td>0.45</td><td>31.58</td><td>0.30</td><td>33.00</td><td>32.68</td><td>0.13</td><td>33.53</td><td>—</td><td>43.98</td><td>43.15</td><td>0.57</td><td>44.09</td><td>0.30</td><td>44.00</td><td>—</td><td>44.04</td><td>0.46</td></tr><tr><td>V</td><td>318</td><td>311.93</td><td>3.89</td><td>315</td><td>4</td><td>416</td><td>400.66</td><td>3.10</td><td>418</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>305.34</td><td>3.00</td><td>313</td><td>4</td><td>313</td><td>—</td><td>319</td><td>4</td></tr><tr><td>Cr</td><td>287</td><td>275.85</td><td>4.51</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>18</td><td>18.09</td><td>1.67</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>358.00</td><td>3.11</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>382</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Ni</td><td>120</td><td>115.69</td><td>5.89</td><td>111</td><td>6</td><td>20</td><td>14.71</td><td>3.68</td><td>13</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>119.20</td><td>3.30</td><td>126</td><td>3</td><td>166</td><td>—</td><td>168</td><td>4</td></tr><tr><td>Zn</td><td>104</td><td>97.39</td><td>3.89</td><td>114</td><td>10</td><td>130</td><td>127.85</td><td>0.90</td><td>130</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>78.91</td><td>1.33</td><td>86</td><td>3</td><td>71</td><td>—</td><td>99</td><td>8</td></tr><tr><td>Rb</td><td>9.3</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>46.0</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>0.3</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Sr</td><td>394</td><td>388.02</td><td>4.24</td><td>389</td><td>3</td><td>346</td><td>339.90</td><td>5.29</td><td>337</td><td>—</td><td>69</td><td>69.64</td><td>0.52</td><td>70</td><td>1</td><td>108</td><td>—</td><td>108</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>Y</td><td>25.9</td><td>26.40</td><td>0.38</td><td>26.1</td><td>0.4</td><td>37.0</td><td>36.32</td><td>0.23</td><td>36.1</td><td>—</td><td>27.7</td><td>27.57</td><td>0.66</td><td>27.6</td><td>0.5</td><td>16.0</td><td>—</td><td>16.4</td><td>0.6</td></tr><tr><td>Zr</td><td>171</td><td>169.86</td><td>1.75</td><td>161</td><td>3</td><td>188</td><td>185.87</td><td>1.58</td><td>187</td><td>—</td><td>55</td><td>56.63</td><td>1.20</td><td>57</td><td>2</td><td>16</td><td>—</td><td>15</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>Ba</td><td>131</td><td>132.56</td><td>2.29</td><td>133</td><td>1</td><td>683</td><td>688.72</td><td>7.11</td><td>684</td><td>—</td><td>7</td><td>7.37</td><td>0.34</td><td>7</td><td>1</td><td>7</td><td>—</td><td>7</td><td>0</td></tr><tr><td>n</td><td>4</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>10</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>4</td><td>—</td><td>1</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>5</td><td>—</td><td>4</td><td>—</td><td>0</td><td>10</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr></tbody></table>
Analytical reproducibility on the ICP-AES for basalt analysis is a function of both the measurement precision of the chosen wavelengths (typical uncertainties are <1% to 2%) and the number of wavelengths calibrated for each element because each measured wavelength is an independent abundance determination. For the higher abundance major elements (Si, Al, Fe, Mg, and Ca), all of which are measured axially and/or radially on multiple wavelengths, precision was between ±0.6% and ±1.1%, whereas the lower abundance major species (Na, K, Ti, and Mn) range +0.7% to +1.9% (ICP-AES; Table T13).

### 9.4.5. Basalt analysis using portable X-ray fluorescence spectrometer

An onboard handheld pXRF was used to quickly assess downhole compositional changes in recovered basalt. During Expedition 395 and 395C, pXRF was used to conduct qualitative geochemical assessments of basalt samples in the core through direct measurements on fresh-cut rock surfaces. Although the pXRF data were used to broadly identify cursory basalt geochemistry, these should be regarded as qualitative.

During Expedition 395C, shipboard XRF measurements were made with the Olympus Delta Premium DP-6000 Handheld XRF analyzer. During Expedition 395, a Bruker Tracer 5g Handheld XRF analyzer was used. These instruments are self-contained energy-dispersive XRF survey tools that include data correction packages tailored to a variety of applications (e.g., metals, plastics, soils and minerals, and consumer goods). Instrumental data correction methods combine Compton normalization strategies (specific to lower-Z elements) and fundamental parameters (FP)

<table><caption>**Table T13.** Precision and detection limits for ICP-AES basalt and sediment analysis, Expedition 395. * = Calculated as 3x standard deviation of the blank. † = Based on replicate analyses of unknowns. (A) = axial, (R) = radial, (B) = both. **Download table in CSV format.**</caption><thead><tr><th>Element<br>(unit)</th><th>Wavelengths used<br>(nm)</th><th>In-rock<br>detection limit*</th><th>Precision<br>(%)†</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td rowspan="2">Al<sub>2</sub>O<sub>3</sub> (wt%)</td><td>308.215 (B)</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>396.152 (B)</td><td>0.19</td><td>0.59</td></tr><tr><td>Ba (ppm)</td><td>455.403 (B)</td><td>0.29</td><td>1.1</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="3">CaO (wt%)</td><td>315.887 (A)</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>317.933 (B)</td><td>0.12</td><td>0.78</td></tr><tr><td>318.127 (A)</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2">Cr (ppm)</td><td>431.865 (B)</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>267.716 (A)</td><td>1</td><td>0.75</td></tr><tr><td>Cu (ppm)</td><td>327.395 (A)</td><td>2.5</td><td>1.2</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="3">Fe<sub>2</sub>O<sub>3</sub> (wt%)</td><td>238.204 (B)</td><td>0.005</td><td>1.1</td></tr><tr><td>239.563 (A)</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>258.588 (B)</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2">K<sub>2</sub>O (wt%)</td><td>259.940 (B)</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>766.491 (A)</td><td>0.001</td><td>0.73</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="3">MgO (wt%)</td><td>202.582 (A)</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>277.983 (B)</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>279.078 (B)</td><td>0.015</td><td>1.1</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2">MnO (wt%)</td><td>280.270 (A)</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>257.610 (B)</td><td>0.002</td><td>0.89</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2">Na<sub>2</sub>O (wt%)</td><td>588.995 (A)</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>589.592 (B)</td><td>0.004</td><td>1.9</td></tr><tr><td>Ni (ppm)</td><td>231.604 (A)</td><td>8.3</td><td>1.9</td></tr><tr><td>P<sub>2</sub>O<sub>5</sub> (wt%)</td><td>213.618 (A)</td><td>0.021</td><td>5.2</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2">Sc (ppm)</td><td>361.383 (A)</td><td>0.54</td><td>0.92</td></tr><tr><td>424.682 (A)</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2">SiO<sub>2</sub> (wt%)</td><td>251.611 (B)</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>288.158 (B)</td><td>0.024</td><td>0.84</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2">Sr (ppm)</td><td>407.771 (B)</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>421.552 (B)</td><td>0.48</td><td>2.7</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2">TiO<sub>2</sub> (wt%)</td><td>334.941 (B)</td><td>&lt;0.001</td><td>1.4</td></tr><tr><td>368.520 (B)</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2">V (ppm)</td><td>292.401 (R)</td><td>9.1</td><td>1.1</td></tr><tr><td>326.769 (A)</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Y (ppm)</td><td>371.029 (A)</td><td>0.54</td><td>0.64</td></tr><tr><td>Zn (ppm)</td><td>213.857 (A)</td><td>2.6</td><td>2.7</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2">Zr (ppm)</td><td>327.307 (A)</td><td>9.4</td><td>2.2</td></tr><tr><td>343.823 (A)</td><td></td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>
methodologies, which solve a series of nonlinear equations for each analyzed element. The parameters used in the FP equations comprise metrics for the X-ray source, fluorescence intensities, absorption coefficients, and absorption edge effects for each wavelength analyzed, together with parameters for sample geometry (e.g., van Sprang, 2000).

Both the Olympus and Bruker pXRF instruments include geologic materials correction protocols: the Geochem analysis protocol on the Olympus instrument and the GeoExploration protocol on the Bruker instrument. These protocols, which include both FP and Compton normalization correction, optimize analysis for many higher atomic number species, as well as a number of key lower atomic weight elements. Many of the elements determined using pXRF basalts (Cd, Sb, As, Hg, W, Mo, Bi, Ag, Sn, Se, Pb, Th, and U) commonly occur at levels below the in-rock detection limits for these instruments, and a few (in particular V, Sc, and Ba) suffer from spectral interference problems that preclude reliable analysis at the levels likely to be encountered in common igneous rocks or marine sediments. Elements with low atomic numbers (Na, Mg, Si, and Al) are poor at generating X-rays and produce only low-energy, readily absorbed X-rays. Consequently, even though these species are high in abundance, their X-ray yields are poor and nonlinearly related to concentration. As such, pXRF is analytically useful for a subset of elements whose abundances are high enough for detection, and which produce X-rays that are sufficiently energetic for quantifiable analysis. This list of elements varies somewhat with rock type, but commonly includes K, Ca, Ti, V, Cr, Mn, Fe, Ni, Zn, Cu, Rb, Sr, Y, and Zr. Depending on the homogeneity of the sample material, purpose of the analysis, and time available, one or more measurements were made for each sample. Where multiple measurements were taken, these were averaged to provide a single sample analysis. Two powdered standard reference materials (BHVO-2 and BCR-2) were analyzed with each set of unknowns to track daily machine performance, which is consistent with past practice (e.g., Ryan et al. 2017; Johnston et al., 2018).

During Expeditions 395C and 395, pXRF measurements were made on the archive halves of the cores. The pXRF instrument was secured with a custom stand that minimized movement during each analysis and allowed for precise determination of the instrument position on the core section. An 8 mm spot size was used to integrate any small-scale heterogeneities in the basalt.

During Expedition 395, the GeoExploration Protocol with the Oxide 3-phase instrumental method was used following guidance provided from shore-based testing of the Bruker pXRF system at the GCR. As was noted during previous IODP expeditions, concentrations obtained using only the instrument's correction protocols do not align with recognized values for standard reference materials. TiO₂ was commonly 8%-10% low relative to accepted values, whereas K₂O was generally within a few percent of reference sample values. Most major oxide concentrations (e.g., SiO₂, MgO, and Al₂O₃) were generally low relative to accepted values and varied considerably from run to run. More elements were accessible using the Bruker pXRF relative to the Olympus, a number of which are potentially useful in examining the sourcing of recovered basalts (Ti, Zr, Y, V, Zn, and Cu) and the potential extent of hydrothermal alteration (K, Ca, Sr, and Rb). When possible, the pXRF measurements were conducted on unaltered basalt; however, because of the near-pervasive alteration at Site U1564, it was not always possible to identify unaltered material.

**9.5. Shore-based X-ray fluorescence scanning**

Three different intervals totaling approximately 265 m of core from Expedition 395C were XRF scanned at the GCR using a fourth-generation Avaatech core scanner (Table T14).

Core sections were removed from the refrigerator and equilibrated to room temperature. Each section was lightly scraped with a clean glass slide to provide a fresh, flat surface, and clasts were removed. Plastic end caps were cut below the level of the sediment to allow the detector prism to land flush on the sediment. Each section was covered with a 4 µm thick layer of Ultralene plastic foil to provide a barrier between the sediment and the prism.

Each section was scanned at 2 cm intervals using three energies (10, 30, and 50 kV). Following standard IODP procedure, the measured area was 10 mm downcore and 12 mm across the core. No filter was used for the 6 s, 10 kV, 0.16 mA measurements. A thick palladium filter was used for
<table><caption>**Table T14.** Shore-based XRF scanning methods, Expedition 395C. **Download table in CSV format.**</caption><thead><tr><th>Hole</th><th>Interval<br>CSF-A (m)</th><th>10 kV</th><th>30 kV</th><th>50 kV</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>395C-</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>U1554E</td><td>5H-1 to 15H-7 (94.82–199.54)</td><td>X</td><td>X</td><td>X</td></tr><tr><td>U1554F</td><td>3R-1 to 5R-2 (620.04–641.5)</td><td>X</td><td>X</td><td>X</td></tr><tr><td>U1563A</td><td>1H-1 (0–1.5)<br>10H-6 (90.95–92.44)<br>19H-7 to 45F-4 (178.03–310.02)</td><td>X</td><td>X</td><td>X</td></tr></tbody></table>

the 6 s, 30 kV (1.25 mA) measurements, and a copper filter was used for the 10 s, 50 kV (0.75 mA) measurements. Intervals disturbed by coring were not scanned.

The raw spectra of counts per channel were converted to elemental intensities using models created in the software program bAxil and batch processed using the software bAxilBatch. Data were examined, and counts with positive argon values (indicating a poor contact with the sediment or very low total counts) were removed.

## 9.6. Microbiological sample collection

Sediment samples were collected for shore-based microbiological (MBIO) analyses. Microbiological samples were collected from the top of Section 3 in each core during Expeditions 395C and 395 (i.e., at the same frequency as IW samples). Approximately 5 mL of sediment was sampled with an autoclaved, cut-end 5 mL syringe from the section of core adjacent to the core sampled for IW analyses. For sediments in harder intervals at deeper depth, an additional 2 cm whole-round sample was taken next to the IW sample and aseptically sampled for microbiological analyses. This sediment was split into a 1 mL sample mixed with 5 mL artificial seawater and 600 µL 10× cryoprotectant glycerol-TE (glyTE), and the remaining ~4 mL of sediment was left in the syringe. Approximately 0.1 g of sediment was also mixed with 0.9 mL artificial seawater and 1 µL of Redox-Sensor Green (ThermoFisher) and incubated under anoxic conditions for 30 min with shaking before 100 µL of glyTE was mixed in. All sediment samples were flash frozen with liquid nitrogen and stored at –80°C before shipment to shore-based laboratories. Hard rock samples from Expedition 395C (Holes U1554F, U1555H, U1555I, U1562A, U1562B, and U1563B) were selected immediately after cores were shaken onto ethanol-sterilized half liners and placed into a sterile sample bag before being stored at –80°C before shipment to shore-based laboratories. For Expedition 395 (Hole U1564F), whole-round hard rock samples were further processed before freezing. After selection, samples were rinsed in 0.2 µm filtered 70% ethanol twice, followed by a 100% ethanol rinse and then drying in a flame-sterilized metal box on a clean bench equipped with a tabletop air filtration unit (KOACH T 500-F, Koken Ltd., Japan). Pristine pieces of inner hard rock samples were chipped with a flame-sterilized chisel to remove the exteriors of core samples that came into contact with drilling fluid (approximately 10–20 cm³). A sample (~1 cm³) of each whole round was then crushed and processed following the sediment split sample protocols outlined above, and all pieces of hard rock processed for microbiological analyses were flash frozen in liquid nitrogen before being stored at –80°C prior to shipment to shore-based laboratories.

## 10. Downhole measurements

Downhole measurements were used to estimate the in situ physical, chemical, and structural properties of the formations penetrated by boreholes and can provide stratigraphic, lithologic, mineralogical, and geochemical insights into the drilled sequence of rocks. Downhole measurements can include wireline logging data, which provide a variety of continuous formation measurements with depth, or spot-depth measurement logs such as formation temperature logging and vertical seismic imaging. Collectively, this provides information on formation properties at a scale between that of geophysical surveys and laboratory measurements from core material. Accordingly, wireline logging data are useful for calibration and interpretation of geophysical survey data (e.g., downhole seismic velocity measurements), and they provide data for the integrated
understanding of physical properties and seismic information and the in situ conditions of recovered core samples. These data can also provide a complementary data set to be jointly interpreted alongside core measurements, including filling gaps where core recovery is incomplete.

The suite of downhole measurements collected in holes drilled as part of Expeditions 384, 395C, and 395 are detailed in Table T15.

**10.1. Wireline logging**

During wireline logging operations, up to four Schlumberger tool strings were deployed after completion of coring operations (Figure F16; Table T15). Logging data were recorded as the tool string was lowered and raised in the borehole (downlogs and uplogs, respectively) on a seven-conductor wireline cable that moves the string at various constant speeds, typically 250–550 m/h, depending on logistical constraints. During Expeditions 384, 395C, and 395, four different tool strings were deployed. The triple combo tool string included five tools: the Magnetic Susceptibility Sonde (MSS), High-Resolution Laterolog Array (HRLA), Accelerator Porosity Sonde (APS), Hostile Environment Litho-Density Sonde (HLDS), and Hostile Environment Natural Gamma Ray Sonde (HNGS). The FMS-sonic tool string included four tools: the FMS, Dipole Sonic Imager (DSI), General Purpose Inclinometry Tool (GPIT), and HNGS. The UBI tool string included the UBI, GPIT, and HNGS. The VSI tool string included two tools: the VSI and HNGS. All four tool strings were equipped with the HNGS to allow correlation between different tool strings and logging runs. Given the configuration of the tool strings, only the tool at the very bottom of the string reaches the bottom of the hole, leading to offsets in the greatest depth measured between the tools on the individual tool string.

The triple combo tool string measured formation MS, resistivity (shallow, medium, and deep into the formation), porosity, density, NGR (referred to as gamma log in Downhole measurements in the site chapters), and spectral gamma radiation (K, Th, and U). The FMS-sonic tool string provided a microresistivity borehole image, formation ($V_p$) and shear wave velocity ($V_s$), borehole orientation (deviation and horizontal azimuth), formation gamma log, and spectral gamma radiation. The UBI tool string collected an acoustic borehole image, measured borehole orientation (deviation and horizontal azimuth), collected a formation gamma log, and measured spectral gamma radiation. The VSI tool string acts as a receiver for acoustic energy generated by a seismic source deployed from the vessel, and the attached HNGS provides formation gamma log counts and spectral gamma radiation counts.

Each tool string contained an Enhanced Digital Telemetry Cartridge (EDTC) (Figure F16), which combines a high-speed telemetry downhole modem with a scintillation gamma ray detector. The EDTC provided high-speed (>1 Mbps) communication between the borehole tools in the hole and the Schlumberger multi-tasking acquisition and imaging system (MAXIS) aboard *JOIDES Resolution*. The gamma ray detector provided a total formation gamma radiation count, which can be correlated with similar measurements made using the HNGS in other tool strings. Additionally, the EDTC contained a single-axis accelerometer that recorded Z-axis acceleration, which can be used to measure downhole tool motion and assist with speed corrections on wireline logs in postacquisition data processing. During wireline logging operations, incoming data were recorded and monitored in real time on the MAXIS logging computer by the Schlumberger logging engineer aboard *JOIDES Resolution*, during which initial processing of data was performed. Once logging operations concluded on site, acquired data were sent to the LDEO-BRG for further processing. General wireline logging operations, processing, and quality control methods are discussed here; however, selected additional details and notes are given in the site chapters because processing methods varied between Expeditions 384, 395C, and 395.

Prior to downhole logging, the holes underwent various preparation procedures, documented in detail in Operations in the site chapters. Procedures included wiper trips to clear the hole, flushing debris from the hole by circulating high-viscosity mud and then filling it with a seawater-based logging gel (e.g., sepiolite mud mixed with seawater and weighted with barite) to stabilize the borehole walls, and flushing mud from the hole with seawater prior to a UBI tool string pass.
<table><caption>Table T15. Downhole logging, Expeditions 384, 395C, 395. NA = not available. Download table in CSV format.</caption><thead><tr><th>Hole</th><th>Tool string</th><th>Logging pass</th><th>From depth WSF (m)</th><th>To depth WSF (m)</th><th>Pipe depth WSF (m)</th><th>Notes</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>384-</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>U1555G</td><td>MSS-B/HRLA/APS/HLDS/HNGS</td><td>Downlog</td><td>0</td><td>258</td><td>203</td><td>Caliper closed</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>MSS-B/HRLA/APS/HLDS/HNGS</td><td>Repeat (uplog)</td><td>254.5</td><td>308</td><td>203</td><td>Recorded open hole</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>MSS-B/HRLA/APS/HLDS/HNGS</td><td>Main (uplog)</td><td>0</td><td>297</td><td>203</td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td>FMS/DSI/GPIT/HNGS</td><td>Downlog</td><td>0</td><td>297</td><td>203</td><td>Caliper closed</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>FMS/DSI/GPIT/HNGS</td><td>Repeat</td><td>251</td><td>297</td><td>203</td><td>Reference pass</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>FMS/DSI/GPIT/HNGS</td><td>Main</td><td>0</td><td>297</td><td>203</td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td>VSI/HNGS</td><td>NA</td><td>235.1</td><td>295.6</td><td>203</td><td>2 stations acquired, 10 shots at each station</td></tr><tr><td>395C-</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>U1555H</td><td>Formation Temperature</td><td>NA</td><td>24</td><td>119</td><td></td><td>4 measurements (Cores 4H, 7H, 10H, and 13H)</td></tr><tr><td>U1555I</td><td>MSS-B/HRLA/APS/HLDS/HNGS</td><td>Downlog</td><td>0</td><td>371</td><td>85</td><td>Reference pass, caliper closed</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>MSS-B/HRLA/APS/HLDS/HNGS</td><td>Uplog</td><td>220</td><td>371</td><td>85</td><td>Tool stuck</td></tr><tr><td>U1563A</td><td>Formation Temperature</td><td>NA</td><td>35.9</td><td>121.4</td><td></td><td>4 measurements (Cores 4H, 7H, 10H, and 13H)</td></tr><tr><td>U1563B</td><td>MSS-B/HRLA/APS/HLDS/HNGS</td><td>Downlog</td><td>0</td><td>277</td><td>~85.5</td><td>Caliper closed</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>MSS-B/HRLA/APS/HLDS/HNGS</td><td>Repeat (uplog)</td><td>170</td><td>314</td><td>~85.5</td><td>Recorded open hole</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>MSS-B/HRLA/APS/HLDS/HNGS</td><td>Main (uplog)</td><td>0</td><td>316</td><td>~85.5</td><td>Reference pass</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>VSI/HNGS</td><td>NA</td><td>69</td><td>122</td><td>~85.5</td><td>4 stations acquired</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>FMS/DSI-2/GPIT/HNGS</td><td>Downlog</td><td>0</td><td>277</td><td>~85.5</td><td>Caliper closed</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>FMS/DSI-2/GPIT/HNGS</td><td>Repeat (uplog)</td><td>140</td><td>309</td><td>~85.5</td><td>Recorded open hole</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>FMS/DSI-2/GPIT/HNGS</td><td>Main (uplog)</td><td>0</td><td>311</td><td>~85.5</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>U1554E</td><td>MSS-B/HRLA/APS/HLDS/HNGS</td><td>Downlog</td><td>0</td><td>647</td><td>~70.7</td><td>Reference pass, caliper closed</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>MSS-B/HRLA/APS/HLDS/HNGS</td><td>Repeat (uplog)</td><td>527</td><td>647</td><td>~70.7</td><td>Recorded open hole</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>MSS-B/HRLA/APS/HLDS/HNGS</td><td>Main (uplog)</td><td>0</td><td>647</td><td>~62.8</td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td>FMS/DSI-2/GPIT/HNGS</td><td>Downlog</td><td>0</td><td>647</td><td>~72</td><td>Caliper closed</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>FMS/DSI-2/GPIT/HNGS</td><td>Repeat (uplog)</td><td>122</td><td>647</td><td>~72</td><td>Recorded open hole</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>FMS/DSI-2/GPIT/HNGS</td><td>Main (uplog)</td><td>0</td><td>647</td><td>~62</td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Formation Temperature</td><td>NA</td><td>66</td><td>161</td><td></td><td>4 measurements (Cores 2H, 5H, 8H, and 11H)</td></tr><tr><td>U1554F</td><td>MSS-B/HRLA/APS/HLDS/HNGS</td><td>Downlog</td><td>0</td><td>764</td><td>590</td><td>Casing at 603.5 m WSF, caliper closed</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>MSS-B/HRLA/APS/HLDS/HNGS</td><td>Repeat (uplog)</td><td>655</td><td>781</td><td>590</td><td>Casing at 603.5 m WSF</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>MSS-B/HRLA/APS/HLDS/HNGS</td><td>Main (uplog)</td><td>0</td><td>781</td><td>590</td><td>Casing at 603.5 m WSF, reference pass</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>FMS/DSI-2/GPIT/HNGS</td><td>Downlog</td><td>0</td><td>782</td><td>590</td><td>Casing at 603.5 m WSF, caliper closed</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>FMS/DSI-2/GPIT/HNGS</td><td>Repeat (uplog)</td><td>650.5</td><td>781</td><td>590</td><td>Casing at 603.5 m WSF, recorded open hole</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>FMS/DSI-2/GPIT/HNGS</td><td>Main (uplog)</td><td>0</td><td>781</td><td>590</td><td>Casing at 603.5 m WSF</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>UBI/GPIT/HNGS</td><td>Downlog</td><td>0</td><td>776</td><td>590</td><td>No image, casing at 603.5 m WSF</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>UBI/GPIT/HNGS</td><td>Uplog</td><td>631</td><td>775</td><td>590</td><td>Recorded open hole, casing at 603.5 m WSF</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>UBI/GPIT/HNGS</td><td>Uplog</td><td>586</td><td>775</td><td>590</td><td>Recorded open hole, casing at 603.5 m WSF</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>UBI/GPIT/HNGS</td><td>Uplog</td><td>0</td><td>584</td><td>590</td><td>No image, casing at 603.5 m WSF</td></tr><tr><td>U1562A</td><td>Formation Temperature</td><td>NA</td><td>21</td><td>116</td><td></td><td>4 measurements (Cores 4H, 7H, 10H, and 13H)</td></tr><tr><td>U1562B</td><td>MSS-B/HRLA/APS/HLDS/HNGS</td><td>Downlog</td><td>0</td><td>559</td><td>86</td><td>Caliper closed</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>MSS-B/HRLA/APS/HLDS/HNGS</td><td>Repeat (uplog)</td><td>136</td><td>559</td><td>86</td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td>MSS-B/HRLA/APS/HLDS/HNGS</td><td>Main (uplog)</td><td>0</td><td>560</td><td>86</td><td>Reference pass</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>FMS/DSI-2/GPIT/HNGS</td><td>Downlog</td><td>0</td><td>485</td><td>86</td><td>Caliper closed</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>FMS/DSI-2/GPIT/HNGS</td><td>Repeat (uplog)</td><td>419</td><td>558</td><td>86</td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td>FMS/DSI-2/GPIT/HNGS</td><td>Main (uplog)</td><td>0</td><td>558</td><td>86</td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td>VSI/HNGS</td><td>NA</td><td>81</td><td>113</td><td>86</td><td>4 stations acquired (420, 428.5, 459.4, and 556.1 m DSF)</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>UBI/GPIT/HNGS</td><td>Uplog</td><td>408</td><td>553</td><td>86</td><td>No image</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>UBI/GPIT/HNGS</td><td>Uplog</td><td>410</td><td>553</td><td>86</td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td>UBI/GPIT/HNGS</td><td>Uplog</td><td>0</td><td>407</td><td>86</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>U1564C</td><td>MSS-B/HRLA/APS/HLDS/HNGS</td><td>Downlog</td><td>0</td><td>593</td><td>79</td><td>Caliper closed</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>MSS-B/HRLA/APS/HLDS/HNGS</td><td>Repeat (uplog)</td><td>483</td><td>631</td><td>77.5</td><td>Recorded open hole</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>MSS-B/HRLA/APS/HLDS/HNGS</td><td>Main (uplog)</td><td>0</td><td>632</td><td>77.5</td><td>Reference pass</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>FMS/DSI-2/GPIT/HNGS</td><td>Downlog</td><td>0</td><td>596</td><td>79</td><td>Caliper closed</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>FMS/DSI-2/GPIT/HNGS</td><td>Uplog</td><td>0</td><td>629</td><td>79</td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Formation Temperature</td><td>NA</td><td>26</td><td>140</td><td></td><td>5 measurements (Cores 4H, 7H, 10H, 13H, and 15H)/no data</td></tr><tr><td>395-</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>U1554H</td><td>Formation Temperature</td><td>NA</td><td>37.9</td><td>147.1</td><td></td><td>5 measurements (Cores 4H, 7H, 10H, 13H, 16H)</td></tr><tr><td>U1564D</td><td>Formation Temperature</td><td>NA</td><td>38</td><td>123.5</td><td></td><td>4 measurements (Cores 4H, 7H, 10H, 13H)</td></tr><tr><td>U1564E</td><td>Formation Temperature</td><td>NA</td><td>34.3</td><td>119.8</td><td></td><td>4 measurements (Cores 4H, 7H, 10H, 13H)</td></tr><tr><td>U1564F</td><td>MSS-B/HRLA/APS/HLDS/HNGS</td><td>Downlog</td><td>0</td><td>1117.1</td><td>~60</td><td>MSS-B and APS malfunctioned; casing at 551 m WSF</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>MSS-B/HRLA/APS/HLDS/HNGS</td><td>Repeat (uplog)</td><td>1057.2</td><td>1171.2</td><td>~60</td><td>Recorded open hole; MSS-B and APS malfunctioned; casing at 551 m WSF</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>MSS-B/HRLA/APS/HLDS/HNGS</td><td>Main (uplog)</td><td>0</td><td>1170.6</td><td>~60</td><td>MSS-B and APS malfunctioned; casing at 551 m WSF</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>FMS/DSI-2/GPIT/HNGS</td><td>Downlog</td><td>508</td><td>1116.2</td><td>~60</td><td>Caliper closed; DSI-2 damaged; casing at 551 m WSF</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>FMS/DSI-2/GPIT/HNGS</td><td>Repeat (uplog)</td><td>539.5</td><td>1169.3</td><td>~60</td><td>DSI-2 damaged; casing at 551 m WSF</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>FMS/DSI-2/GPIT/HNGS</td><td>Main (uplog)</td><td>528.3</td><td>1169.6</td><td>~60</td><td>DSI-2 damaged; casing at 551 m WSF</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>UBI/GPIT/HNGS</td><td>Downlog</td><td>524.3</td><td>1165.6</td><td>~60</td><td>No image; casing at 551 m WSF</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>UBI/GPIT/HNGS</td><td>Uplog</td><td>987.6</td><td>1164.4</td><td>~60</td><td>Recorded open hole; high resolution UBI images; casing at 551 m WSF</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>UBI/GPIT/HNGS</td><td>Uplog</td><td>539.8</td><td>1163.9</td><td>~60</td><td>Low resolution UBI images; casing at 551 m WSF</td></tr><tr><td>U1602B</td><td>Formation Temperature</td><td>NA</td><td>33.7</td><td>119.2</td><td></td><td>4 measurements (Cores 4H, 7H, 10H, 13H)</td></tr><tr><td>U1602E</td><td>MSS-B/HRLA/APS/HLDS/HNGS</td><td>Downlog</td><td>31.7</td><td>1277.8</td><td>76</td><td>Caliper closed</td></tr></tbody></table>
### 10.1.1. Wireline-logged properties and tool measurement principles

The wireline-logged properties and the principles of the tools used to measure them are described below and detailed in Table T16. Detailed information on individual tools and their geologic applications may be found in Serra (1984, 1986, 1989), Schlumberger (1989, 1994), Rider (1996), Goldberg (1997), Lovell et al. (1998), Helm-Clark et al. (2004), and Ellis and Singer (2007). A complete list of acronyms for the Schlumberger wireline tools and the various measurements made by each of these tools can be found in Table T17 and at https://www.apps.slb.com/cmd/index.aspx.

#### 10.1.1.1. Magnetic susceptibility

The MSS is a nonstandard wireline tool designed by the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory (LDEO). It measures the ease with which formations are magnetized when subjected to a magnetic field and is often related to the concentration and composition (size, shape, and mineralogy) of magnetic minerals (principally magnetite) in the formation. The MSS measures borehole MS at two vertical (i.e., depth) resolutions. The MSS incorporates a single-coil electric inductor sensor

<figure><img src="image_21.png" /><figcaption>**Figure F16.** Wireline tool string diagrams, Expeditions 395C and 395. Tool combinations were modified at some sites based on operational conditions. Diagrams are not to scale. LEH-MT = logging equipment head-mud temperature tool.</figcaption></figure>

<table><caption>**Table T16.** Downhole measurements, Expeditions 384, 395C, and 395. All tool and tool string names except MSS are trademarks of Schlumberger. NA = not applicable. Download table in CSV format.</caption><thead><tr><th>Tool string</th><th>Tool</th><th>Measurement</th><th>Depth of investigation (cm)</th><th>Approximate vertical resolution (cm)</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td rowspan="6">Triple combo</td><td>EDTC</td><td>Total gamma ray</td><td>61</td><td>30</td></tr><tr><td>HNGS</td><td>Spectral gamma ray</td><td>24</td><td>51</td></tr><tr><td>HLDS</td><td>Bulk density</td><td>15</td><td>38</td></tr><tr><td>APS</td><td>Neutron porosity</td><td>18</td><td>36</td></tr><tr><td>HRLA</td><td>Resistivity</td><td>127 (deepest, R5)</td><td>30</td></tr><tr><td>MSS-DR</td><td>Magnetic susceptibility (deep reading)</td><td>20</td><td>40</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="6">FMS-sonic</td><td>EDTC</td><td>Total gamma ray</td><td>61</td><td>30</td></tr><tr><td>HNGS</td><td>Spectral gamma ray</td><td>24</td><td>51</td></tr><tr><td>DSI</td><td>Acoustic velocity</td><td>Variable</td><td>274</td></tr><tr><td>GPIT</td><td>Tool orientation and acceleration</td><td>NA</td><td>NA</td></tr><tr><td>FMS</td><td>Microresistivity</td><td>25</td><td>0.5</td></tr><tr><td>EDTC</td><td>Total gamma ray</td><td>61</td><td>30</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="4">UBI</td><td>HNGS</td><td>Spectral gamma ray</td><td>24</td><td>51</td></tr><tr><td>GPIT</td><td>Tool orientation and acceleration</td><td>NA</td><td>NA</td></tr><tr><td>UBI</td><td>Acoustic images</td><td>Variable</td><td>0.50-2.0</td></tr></tbody></table>
that, when positioned against the borehole wall, is capable of measuring inductance as affected by the volume susceptibility of the formation over the volume of investigation. The sensor is pushed against the borehole wall using a bowspring that eccentricizes the tool. The coil is incorporated in a resonant circuit to produce a frequency that changes linearly with borehole susceptibility. This frequency is measured with the MSS microprocessor and converted into MS by applying scale and offset calibration constants. The MSS provided ~40 cm vertical resolution measurements with a ~20 cm depth of horizontal investigation. The MSS also contains a deep-reading sensor that employs three coils arranged coaxially along the length of the tool. This sensor provided a complimentary MS measurement that has a reduced sensitivity to the quality of the contact of the sensor with the borehole wall.

The MSS was run as the lowermost tool in the triple combo tool string using a specially developed data translation cartridge that enabled the MSS to be run in combination with Schlumberger wireline tools.

MSS data were plotted as uncalibrated instrument units on linear grids in 10⁻⁵ SI units. MSS measurements can be affected by temperature (higher temperatures lead to higher MS) and borehole size and shape (borehole sizes larger than 9⅞ inches or those experiencing washouts can lower MS measurements). For quality control and environmental correction of MSS data, the tool also measured internal tool temperature, Z-axis acceleration, and low-resolution borehole conductivity.

<table><caption>**Table T17.** Acronyms and units used for downhole wireline tools and measurement, Expeditions 384, 395C, and 395. Download table in CSV format.</caption><thead><tr><th>Tool</th><th>Output</th><th>Description</th><th>Unit</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>EDTC</td><td>Enhanced Digital Telemetry Cartridge</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td>GR</td><td>Total gamma ray</td><td>gAPI</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>ECGR</td><td>Environmentally corrected gamma ray</td><td>gAPI</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>EHGR</td><td>High-resolution environmentally corrected gamma ray</td><td>gAPI</td></tr><tr><td>HNGS</td><td>Hostile Environment Natural Gamma Ray Sonde</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td>HSGR</td><td>Standard (total) gamma ray</td><td>gAPI</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>HCGR</td><td>Computed gamma ray (HSGR minus uranium contribution)</td><td>gAPI</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>HFK</td><td>Potassium</td><td>wt%</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>HTHO</td><td>Thorium</td><td>ppm</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>HURA</td><td>Uranium</td><td>ppm</td></tr><tr><td>APS</td><td>Accelerator Porosity Sonde</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td>APLC</td><td>Near/array limestone corrected porosity</td><td>Dec. fraction</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>STOF</td><td>Computed standoff</td><td>Inch</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>SIGF</td><td>Formation capture cross section</td><td>Capture units</td></tr><tr><td>HLDS</td><td>Hostile Environment Litho-Density Sonde</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td>RHOM</td><td>Bulk density</td><td>g/cm³</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>PEFL</td><td>Photoelectric effect</td><td>barn/e⁻</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>LCAL</td><td>Caliper (measure of borehole diameter)</td><td>Inch</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>DRH</td><td>Bulk density correction</td><td>g/cm³</td></tr><tr><td>HRLA</td><td>High-Resolution Laterolog Array</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td>RLA</td><td>Apparent resistivity from computed focusing mode</td><td>Ωm</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>RT_HRLT</td><td>True resistivity</td><td>Ωm</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>RM_HRLT</td><td>Borehole fluid resistivity</td><td>Ωm</td></tr><tr><td>MSS</td><td>Magnetic Susceptibility Sonde</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td>LSUS</td><td>Magnetic susceptibility, deep reading (DR)</td><td>Uncalibrated unit</td></tr><tr><td>FMS</td><td>Formation MicroScanner</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td>C1, C2</td><td>Orthogonal hole diameters</td><td>Inch</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>P1AZ</td><td>Pad 1 azimuth<br>Spatially oriented resistivity images of borehole wall</td><td>Degree (°)</td></tr><tr><td>GPIT</td><td>General Purpose Inclinometry Tool</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td>DEVI</td><td>Hole deviation</td><td>Degree (°)</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>HAZI</td><td>Hole azimuth</td><td>Degree (°)</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>F<sub>x</sub>, F<sub>y</sub>, F<sub>z</sub></td><td>Earth's magnetic field (three orthogonal components)</td><td>Oersted</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>A<sub>x</sub>, A<sub>y</sub>, A<sub>z</sub></td><td>Acceleration (three orthogonal components)</td><td>m/s²</td></tr><tr><td>DSI</td><td>Dipole Sonic Imager</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td>DTCO</td><td>Compressional wave slowness</td><td>μ/ft</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>DTSM</td><td>Shear wave slowness</td><td>μ/ft</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>DT1</td><td>Shear wave slowness, Lower dipole</td><td>μ/ft</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>DT2</td><td>Shear wave slowness, Upper dipole</td><td>μ/ft</td></tr><tr><td>UBI</td><td>Ultrasonic Borehole Imager</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td>HAZI</td><td>Borehole azimuth<br>Spatially oriented acoustic images of borehole wall</td><td>Degree (°)</td></tr></tbody></table>
#### 10.1.1.2. Porosity

Formation porosity was measured with the APS. A neutron source allows epithermal neutron measurements to be made while shielding the detector. This setup allows determination of porosity values that are less influenced by environmental conditions such as hole size and shape and the salinity of the borehole fluid. The near-array ratio epithermal porosity is the primary porosity measurement generated by the tool. The tool's source-to-detector spacing is optimized to provide formation hydrogen index measurements that are free of formation matrix density effects. Five detectors in the tool provide information on porosity, gas detection, clay content, improved vertical resolution, and borehole corrections.

When measuring porosity in formations comprised of clay or hydrous alteration minerals, a correction to the porosity provided by the tool is required to account for the bound H₂O in these minerals. The tool needs to be eccentricized in the hole to acquire good quality readings, which was achieved through use of an in-line centralizer. Calipers were closed during all tool descents, which precludes the collection of porosity data during the down logging runs. Poor connection between the tool and the borehole wall can result in attenuation of the formation signal by the borehole fluid and generate overestimates of formation porosity. As borehole size increases, epithermal count rates from the formation become increasingly masked by the borehole signal. In fluid-filled holes, the fluid salinity (chlorine is a strong neutron absorber) and density (additives such as barite increase mud density) can yield lower porosity determinations. When acquiring data with the APS through drilling pipe, because iron is a strong neutron absorber, increased porosity determination can be expected.

#### 10.1.1.3. Electrical resistivity

The HRLA provided six resistivity measurements with different depths of investigation (≤127 cm), including the borehole (mud) resistivity and five measurements of formation resistivity with increasing penetration into the formation. The tool sends a focused current into the formation and measures the intensity necessary to maintain a constant drop in voltage across a fixed interval, providing direct resistivity measurements. The array has one central (source) electrode and six electrodes above and below it that serve alternatively as focusing and returning current electrodes. By rapidly changing the roles of these electrodes, a simultaneous resistivity measurement at six penetration depths is achieved. The HRLA is designed to ensure that all signals are measured at exactly the same time and tool position to reduce the sensitivity to shoulder bed effects when crossing sharp boundaries of beds that are thinner than the electrode spacing. The HRLA is designed to eliminate the need for a surface reference electrode, thus improving formation resistivity evaluation compared to traditional dual induction tools and allowing a wide range of formation resistivities to be measured (e.g., in high-porosity sediments as well as in basalt). The HRLA needs to maintain good contact with the borehole wall for optimal results, so knuckle joints are used to centralize the tool. The HRLA, unlike traditional laterolog tools, is sensitive to both vertical and horizontal resistivity. As such, different depths of investigation resistivity measurements (shallow, medium, and deep) can allow identifying when formation resistivity anisotropy exists (assuming no invasion). The HRLA provides resistivity data at a vertical resolution of 30.48 cm.

#### 10.1.1.4. Gamma log

The HNGS was used on all tool strings to measure natural radioactivity in the formation. The HNGS uses two bismuth-germanate scintillation detectors to measure the gamma log of a formation, measured in American Petroleum Institute gamma radiation units (gAPI). The HNGS also uses 256-window spectroscopy to resolve the obtained gamma spectrum into the three most common components of naturally occurring radiation: potassium (⁴⁰K), thorium (²³²Th), and uranium (²³⁸U). The high-energy part of the spectrum is divided into three energy windows, each covering a characteristic peak of the three radioactive components, and the concentration of each component is determined from the count rates in each window: K in weight percent and Th and U in ppm. The computation of the elemental abundances uses a least-squares method of extracting U, Th, and K elemental concentrations from the spectral measurements. The HNGS filters out gamma ray energies below 500 keV (using only the higher energy gamma rays), eliminating sensitivity to bentonite or KCl in the drilling mud and improving measurement accuracy. The HNGS also provides a measure of the uranium-free or computed gamma ray measured in gAPI. The HNGS provides data at a vertical resolution of 30.48 cm and has a depth of investigation of 61 cm.
The depth of investigation is affected by hole size, mud density, formation bulk density (denser formations display a slightly lower radioactivity) and the energy of the gamma rays (higher energy gamma rays can reach the tool detector from deeper within the formation). HNGS data are corrected for borehole diameter variations during acquisition with the MAXIS system, and other effects can be investigated using other wireline measurements such as caliper and density data.

The EDTC contains a sodium iodide scintillation gamma detector that measures the total natural gamma ray emissions of the formation. These gamma log measurements are similarly affected by borehole size, mud density, and formation bulk density, which should be considered when using this data for scientific interpretation. Both tools were operated while the tool string passed through the remaining drill-pipe in the hole, measuring a subdued data set. If the results of the uplog and downlog agree, quantitative interpretations can be made on that data set.

#### 10.1.1.5. Density and photoelectric factor

Formation density was measured using the HLDS. The HLDS contains a cesium (¹³⁷Cs) gamma ray source (662 keV) and far- and near-gamma ray detectors mounted on a shielded skid or pad that is pressed against the borehole wall by a hydraulically activated decentralizing arm. Gamma rays emitted by the source undergo Compton scattering, by which gamma rays are scattered by electrons in the formation. The number of scattered gamma rays that reach the detectors is proportional to the density of electrons in the formation, which is in turn related to bulk density. The HLDS provided data at a vertical resolution of 38.1 cm, but the depth of investigation, reported to be in the range of tens of centimeters, is difficult to quantify. The density measured in the downlog runs is unreliable because it cannot be corrected for the borehole shape as the caliper arms are closed.

The HLDS also provides the photoelectric effect (PEF), a measure of the photoelectric absorption of low-energy gamma radiation. Photoelectric absorption of gamma rays occurs when their energy falls below 150 keV as a result of being repeatedly scattered by electrons in the formation. PEF is determined by comparing the counts from the far detector in the high-energy region, where only Compton scattering occurs, with those in the low-energy region, where count rates depend on both reactions. The far detector on the HLDS is used for this as it has a greater depth of investigation.

Good contact between the tool and borehole wall and the tool pad is essential to generate high-confidence data from the HLDS; poor contact results in underestimation of density values. Caliper measurements of the borehole were used to assess contact quality. Borehole shape impact on density measurements was automatically corrected during acquisition and is reported as a corrected bulk density log. In the deeper parts of the hole, the PEF log should be used with caution, especially in sections of borehole with washouts, because barium in the logging mud masks the signal despite a correction for the influence of such mud.

#### 10.1.1.6. Borehole resistivity images

The FMS-sonic provided high-resolution, electrical resistivity-based images of the borehole walls. These images allowed the identification of a range of geologic and stress field related borehole wall features and measurements of their orientation, width, and relative resistive response. Data from such wireline logs can be used for a range of geologic applications from facies characterization to geomechanical analyses. The tool consists of four orthogonal imaging pads each containing 16 microelectrode buttons that are pressed against the borehole wall during logging. The electrodes are arranged in two diagonally offset rows of eight electrodes each. A focused current is emitted from the four pads into the formation, and current intensity variations are measured by the array of buttons on each of the pads at a sampling interval of 2.5 mm. The maximum extension of the caliper arms on which the pads are mounted is 40.6 cm. In holes or sections of holes with a diameter >40.6 cm, pad contact with the borehole wall will be inconsistent and FMS image quality may appear out of focus and too conductive. Irregular (rough) borehole walls will also adversely affect the images if contact with the wall is poor. Approximately 30% of the circumference of a borehole with a diameter of 25 cm was imaged during a single pass with the FMS. Multiple uplog and downlog passes with the tool were performed in an effort to capture greater circumference of
the borehole with the FMS image. The maximum depth of investigation for the FMS is 25 cm, and
it has a vertical resolution of 5 mm.

Processing of the measurements recorded by the tool was performed onshore by the LDEO-BRG.
FMS acquisition parameters and current intensity data collected by the buttons were quality con-
trolled, and the latter were checked for consistency or deviations across buttons and across pads,
as well as checked for dead buttons or pads. The FMS data analysis procedure used the deviation,
hole azimuth, accelerometer, and magnetometer data from the GPIT to orient the images to mag-
netic north. Each of these data streams was quality controlled, and appropriate corrections were
applied when possible, including corrections for magnetic declination during acquisition and
using accelerometer and magnetometer X-Y plane crossplots to assess and adjust data for minor
tool decentralization issues. Current intensity measurements, which reflect microresistivity varia-
tions in the formation, were transformed into high-resolution false-colored images of variable
intensity. Speed corrections using accelerometer data from the GPIT were applied to the images to
reduce image quality deterioration from any stick and pull events during logging or misalignment
of button data to remove zigzag effects. A button correction was applied if dead buttons were pres-
ent, which replaces a defective button trace with the adjacent good button trace. An EMEX voltage
correction is applied when the current response is outside of the operating range to prevent
reporting of false relative formation conductivity. A static normalization was performed on the
images to improve the overall visual image quality, and a dynamic normalization (using a 2 m win-
dow) was performed on the images to highlight features in sections where resistivity anomalies
were subdued relative to the overall resistivity range in the section. During all stages of the image
log processing, the image was visually inspected for artifacts (Lofts and Bourke, 1999).

10.1.1.7. Acoustic velocity

The DSI measured the transit times between sonic transmitters and an array of eight receivers. Borehole formation velocities (Vp, Vs, and Stoneley slowness) can be measured using the DSI in a variety of manners depending on tool recording mode during acquisition. During Expeditions 384 and 395C, the DSI was operated in P and S monopole and upper and lower dipole modes, and during Expedition 395 it was operated in P and S monopole and upper and lower dipole modes with Stoneley mode added for Hole U1564F. In P and S monopole mode, the monopole transmitter is excited by a high-frequency pulse to measure Vp and Vs. In upper and lower dipole mode, the DSI measures Vs using firings from the upper and lower dipole transmitter, respectively. The DSI has a vertical resolution of 1 m at a 15.24 cm sampling interval and a 23 cm depth of investigation.

The DSI incorporates both monopole and crossed-dipole transmitters with an eight-station array of electronically configurable hydrophones for monopole and dipole reception. Low- and high-frequency acoustic pulses drive the monopole transducer for Stoneley wave excitation and Vs and Vp measurements, respectively. A low-frequency acoustic pulse drives each dipole transducer for the creation of shear waves. A low-frequency transducer option (capable of excitation <1 kHz) is used for large diameter holes or for acoustically slow formations and shear wave generation. The receiver section of the tool contained eight receiver stations spaced 15.24 cm apart and spanned 106.7 cm of the tool string. Each station contains hydrophone pairs, one oriented in line with the upper dipole transmitter and one in line with the lower dipole transmitter. Outputs from each pair are differenced for dipole reception and summed for monopole reception. The tool acquisition cartridge performs automatic gain control and digitizes eight separate waveforms from more than one firing and then transmits the signal uphole. Threshold detectors allow for detection of compressional first-motion and derivation of compressional slowness. The DSI dipole also allows for detection of Vs in soft and hard formations.

The direct velocity measurements are a combination of replicate measurements and therefore are
free from the effects of formation damage, or enlarged borehole diameter (Schlumberger, 1989).
Depths of investigation (i.e., into the borehole wall) depend on formation type and Vs and Vp slow-
ness, the variable spacings between various transmitter and receiver pairs, and the wavelength and
frequency of the acoustic pulse and whether it is a head wave or guided wave, all of which is
dynamically modified for borehole and borehole fluid conditions during acquisition.
#### 10.1.1.8. Tool inclinometry

During wireline logging, a three-axis accelerometer and a three-axis magnetometer in the GPIT recorded vertical and horizontal tool motion and magnetic field measurements. This information was then used to define the inclinometry of the tool in terms of deviation (DEVI; from vertical), hole azimuth (HAZI), and relative bearing (RB). These data were used to accurately define the tool system axis with respect to Earth's gravity and magnetic fields. Inclinometry data were used to determine the acceleration and orientation of the FMS-sonic and UBI tool strings, mainly for the purpose of producing borehole image logs oriented to magnetic north.

#### 10.1.1.9. Borehole acoustic images

Acoustic images of the borehole wall were generated from measurements taken using the UBI. Acoustic-based images of the borehole wall allow the identification of a range of geologic and stress field related borehole wall features and measurements of their orientation, width, and relative acoustic response. Data from such wireline logs can be used for a range of geologic applications from facies characterization to geomechanical analyses.

The UBI features a high-resolution transducer, which emits ultrasonic pulses at a frequency of 500 kHz that are reflected by the borehole surface and then received by the same transducer, recording the amplitude and traveltime of the reflected signal. These acoustic pulses are sent out through the drilling fluid in the borehole to interact with borehole wall formation. These acoustic waves are attenuated to various degrees based on a combination of (1) the reflection coefficient of the borehole fluid/borehole wall interface, (2) the lithology of the borehole wall, and (3) the morphology of the borehole wall. The nonattenuated part of the acoustic pulse is reflected back to the tool, where it is received by the same transducer, and this returned signal is used to generate images of the borehole wall. Two images were generated: an image that displays variations in returning amplitude of the acoustic wave and an image that displays variations in acoustic pulse two-way traveltime around the borehole. Traveltime data were also converted into a measure of borehole radius using the velocity of the acoustic pulse on the borehole fluid (provided as slowness) and the tool radius (4.285 cm). As with the resistivity image logs, the acoustic image log processing sequence used inclinometry data from the GPIT to orient images to true magnetic north. The continuous rotation of the transducer as it logs the borehole produces a 360° image of the inside of the borehole wall.

Processing of acoustic image log data was performed onshore by the LDEO-BRG. The UBI processing sequence used the deviation, hole azimuth, accelerometer, and magnetometer data from the GPIT to orient the images to magnetic north; these data were quality controlled, and appropriate corrections were applied when possible. Corrections included those for magnetic declination during acquisition and the use of accelerometer and magnetometer X-Y plane crossplots to assess and adjust data for minor tool decentralization issues. Speed corrections using accelerometer data from the GPIT were performed on the images to reduce image quality deterioration from stick and pull events during logging. When the UBI is eccentered in the borehole, the amplitude response is increased in the directions where the distance to the borehole wall is decreased and vice versa. Similarly, the traveltime will be reduced in directions where the tool is closer to the borehole wall. An eccentering correction was applied to correct for both these issues; for amplitude, the correction removed low-order angular harmonic components of the signal with a periodicity equal to 1.5 revolutions. For traveltime image data, defects from eccentering such as early picks and missing data were corrected using circular to elliptical models for the borehole or the casing and the eccentering radius and orientation were used to correct for image distortion. The distance and direction of points on the borehole wall are initially given with the tool axis as the origin. A radius eccentering correction procedure calculated the geometrical center of the points on the borehole wall, and the distance to those points was recalculated relative to the geometrical borehole center. Both corrected (XRAD) and uncorrected (RAD) radius images were provided as outputs. An azimuth equalization process removes preferential borehole enlargements at particular borehole azimuths, due to keyseat effects for example, by using the background response for all azimuths over a 3 m window. A static normalization was performed on the amplitude images to improve the overall visual image quality, and a dynamic normalization (using a 1 m long window) was performed on the amplitude images to highlight features in sections of the hole where amplitude anomalies were relatively subdued relative to the overall amplitude range in the section. During
each stage of the image log processing, the image was visually inspected for artifacts (Lofts and Bourke, 1999).

### 10.1.1.10. Vertical seismic profiles

During vertical seismic profile (VSP) experiments, the borehole VSI was anchored against the borehole wall at multiple stations to record the full waveform of elastic waves generated by a seismic source positioned just below the sea surface. These check-shot measurements relate depth in the hole to traveltime in seismic reflection profiles and the depth of the stations was chosen according to the depth of interesting reflectors in the seismic profile. The VSI used during Expedition 395C contained a three-axis geophone that was anchored against the borehole wall at specified depths, with 5–10 air gun shots typically taken at each station. To minimize the impact on marine mammals, protected species observation protocols were followed during data collection. During Expedition 395C, the presence of whales in the exclusion zone prevented VSI operations in Holes U1554F and U1564C. VSPs were performed at four depths in Hole U1562B (Table T15). The seismic source was deployed 38 m from the moonpool (yielding a borehole offset of ~47 m) and 7–9 m below the sea surface using the aft port crane. When no protected species were observed, a soft ramp-up of the gun was performed to a maximum pressure of 2000 psi. The seismic source consisted of two 250-inch Sercel G III air guns in a parallel cluster spaced 1 m apart and fired at 2000 psi. All processing, including first arrival picking and stacking, was performed by the Schlumberger logging engineer during Expedition 395C. The data were then converted into SEG-Y format by the LDEO-BRG using code developed in-house. Stacks were generally calculated with at least nine good traces, and all the data in the SEG-Y format files were sorted into shot gathers. Because of frequent whale activity, time constraints, and washed out boreholes, no VSP data were collected during Expedition 395.

## 10.2. Formation temperature measurements

At all Expedition 395C and 395 sites, in situ formation temperature measurements were made at selected depths in the sediments to assess the thermal structure of the upper sedimentary section and to measure regional heat flow.

The APCT-3 tool fits directly into a modified coring shoe of the APC system and consists of a battery pack, a data logger, and a platinum resistance-temperature device calibrated over a temperature range of 0°–30°C. Before entering the borehole, the tool is held at the seafloor for 5–10 min to thermally equilibrate with bottom water. The lowest temperature recorded in the water column is preferred over the average temperature at the seafloor as an estimate of bottom water temperature because (1) this measurement is more repeatable and (2) the bottom water is expected to have the lowest temperature in the profile. After the APC system penetrates the sediment, it is held in place for ~10 min as the APCT-3 tool records the temperature of the formation at 1 s intervals. When the APC system is hydraulically inserted into the formation, there is typically an instantaneous temperature increase due to frictional heating. This heat gradually dissipates into the surrounding sediment as the temperature at the APCT-3 tool equilibrates toward the temperature of the sediment.

The equilibrium temperature of the sediment is estimated by applying a mathematical heat-conduction model to the temperature decay record (Horai and Von Herzen, 1985). The synthetic thermal decay curve for the APCT-3 tool is a function of the geometry and thermal properties of the probe and the sediment (Bullard, 1954; Horai and Von Herzen, 1985). The equilibrium temperature must be estimated by applying a fitting procedure in the TP-Fit software (Heesemann et al., 2006). However, when the APC system does not achieve a full stroke or when vessel heave pulls the APC system up from full penetration, the temperature equilibration curve is disturbed and temperature determination is less accurate. The nominal accuracy of the APCT-3 tool temperature measurements is ±0.05°C. These temperature measurements, combined with measurements of thermal conductivity, were subsequently used to estimate heat flow at each site (see Thermal conductivity).
# 11. Age model

Age models for the sedimentary successions of at least one hole at each site were constructed using shipboard paleomagnetic and biostratigraphic age constraints, which were interpreted alongside information from sedimentology, physical properties, and reflection seismic profiles. These age models are considered preliminary because we expect them to be improved by (1) construction of composite depth scales by interhole splicing in some instances, (2) future refinement of paleomagnetic and biostratigraphic data, (3) astronomical tuning of sedimentologic and/or geochemical records, and (4) improved and synthesized interpretation of seismic reflection data and sediment accumulation patterns across the region in light of the drilled sedimentary record. The age models presented here are intended to guide sampling and future research.

For each site, paleomagnetic and biostratigraphic data were collated on a common geologic timescale. The timescale used for Expedition 395 is mostly taken from the GPTS of Ogg (2020), which was published as part of *Geologic Time Scale 2020* (Gradstein et al., 2020). Unfortunately, there are inconsistencies between various chapters in Gradstein et al. (2020), most notably between the GPTS presented by Ogg (2020) and that used in the Neogene timescale of Raffi et al. (2020), but also between both of those chapters and the Quaternary GPTS of Gibbard and Head (2020). For the Pleistocene, Ogg (2020) used calibrations from Channell et al. (2020) for most of the reversal ages between Subchrons C1r.1r and C2r.2r, whereas Raffi et al. (2020) used calibrations from the Geologic Time Scale 2016 (Ogg et al., 2016). For the early to middle Miocene, both Raffi et al. (2020) and Ogg (2020) referenced the orbitally tuned ages of magnetic reversals from Subchron C5Bn.1r to C5Dr.1n from Kochhann et al. (2016). However, only the data tables of Raffi et al. (2020) appear to have been updated to reflect this. For Expedition 395, we follow the GPTS of Ogg (2020) by including the revised Pleistocene reversal ages of Channell et al. (2020). Because of the lack of consistency between chapters in the Gradstein et al. (2020) volume, we avoid the term “Geologic Time Scale 2020” and refer to our paleomagnetic timescale as “Ogg (2020) with modifications from Kochhann et al. (2016).”

The first step in constructing each age model was to compile all available biostratigraphic and paleomagnetic age constraints on an age-depth plot. These points seldom fall on a straight line, which may be because individual age estimates are unreliable for one reason or another (diachrony of biohorizons or poor preservation, for example) or because of changes in sedimentation rate (inflection points) or hiatuses. The age-depth information was therefore considered in light of both sedimentologic information and the site survey seismic reflection data for each site. Sedimentologic descriptions can provide information on sudden lithologic changes or variations in bedding inclination; the presence of event beds such as turbidites or ash bands; and evidence for reworking, bioturbation, slumping, or mixing of sediment. Seismic reflection profiles can indicate lateral pinching out or condensation of strata or changes in the homogeneity of sediment, but they only provide an approximate guide to where in the succession such complexities might be expected. Combining this information, a series of age model tie points was selected. Together, these tie points constitute a preliminary age model for the hole or holes from which it is possible to infer a preliminary age from any sample depth.

Preliminary age models have two main components: (1) a series of interpolations (generally linear) between selected control points and (2) identification of the depth levels of possible hiatuses or zones of mixed sedimentation and/or slumping. Where the paleomagnetic records are clear, unambiguous, and consistent with the biostratigraphic data, each well-defined paleomagnetic reversal was used as a tie point. Biostratigraphic tie points were used mainly in intervals where paleomagnetic data are absent or ambiguous, usually the deeper parts of the holes cored using the XCB or the RCB systems. Only those biohorizons that are both clearly located in the succession and reasonably well calibrated to the geomagnetic polarity reversal record were used as age model tie points.

A list of the estimated depth levels of epoch and subepoch boundaries was made for each site by interpolation between neighboring tie points. The age of the oldest sediment in each hole was estimated so it can be compared with the estimated age of basement inferred from seafloor spreading rates and regional sea-surface magnetic anomaly surveys.
## References

Abrantes, F., Hodell, D.A., Alvarez Zarikian, C.A., Brooks, H.L., Clark, W.B., Dauchy-Tric, L.F.B., dos Santos Rocha, V., Flores, J.-A., Herbert, T.D., Hines, S.K.V., Huang, H.-H.M., Ikeda, H., Kaboth-Bahr, S., Kuroda, J., Link, J.M., McManus, J.F., Mitsunaga, B.A., Nana Yobo, L., Pallone, C.T., Pang, X., Peral, M.Y., Salgueiro, E., Sanchez, S., Verma, K., Wu, J., Xuan, C., and Yu, J., 2024. Expedition 397 methods. In Hodell, D.A., Abrantes, F., Alvarez Zarikian, C.A., and the Expedition 397 Scientists, Iberian Margin Paleoclimate. Proceedings of the International Ocean Discovery Program, 397: College Station, TX (International Ocean Discovery Program).
https://doi.org/10.14379/iodp.proc.397.102.2024

Acton, G., Morris, A., Musgrave, R., Zhao, X., and IODP SRM Personnel, 2017. Assessment of the New Superconducting Rock Magnetometer (SRM) on the JOIDES Resolution.
http://iodp.tamu.edu/publications/JRSO/SRM_Workshop_2017.pdf

Acton, G.D., Borton, C.J., and the Leg 178 Shipboard Scientific Party, 2002a. Palmer Deep composite depth scales for Leg 178 sites 1098 and 1099. In Barker, P.F., Camerlenghi, A., Acton, G.D., and Ramsay, A.T.S. (Eds.), Proceedings of the Ocean Drilling Program, Scientific Results. 178: College Station, TX (Ocean Drilling Program), 1-35.
https://doi.org/10.2973/odp.proc.sr.178.202.2001

Acton, G.D., Okada, M., Clement, B.M., Lund, S.P., and Williams, T., 2002b. Paleomagnetic overprints in ocean sediment cores and their relationship to shear deformation caused by piston coring. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 107:2067-2081.
https://doi.org/10.1029/2001JB000518

Agnini, C., Fornaciari, E., Raffi, I., Catanzariti, R., Pälike, H., Backman, J., and Rio, D., 2014. Biozonation and biochronology of Paleogene calcareous nannofossils from low and middle latitudes. Newsletters on Stratigraphy, 47(2):131-181.
https://doi.org/10.1127/0078-0421/2014/0042

Aksu, A.E., and Kaminski, M.A., 1989. Neogene and Quaternary planktonic foraminifer biostratigraphy and biochronology in Baffin Bay and the Labrador Sea. In Srivastava, S.P., Arthur, M., Clement, B., et al., Proceedings of the Ocean Drilling Program, Scientific Results. 105: College Station, TX (Ocean Drilling Program), 287-304.
https://doi.org/10.2973/odp.proc.sr.105.122.1989

Anthonissen, E.D., 2009. A new Pliocene biostratigraphy for the northeastern North Atlantic. Newsletters on Stratigraphy, 43/2:91-126.

Backman, J., Raffi, I., Rio, D., Fornaciari, E., and Pälike, H., 2012. Biozonation and biochronology of Miocene through Pleistocene calcareous nannofossils from low and middle latitudes. Newsletters on Stratigraphy, 45(3):221-244.
https://doi.org/10.1127/0078-0421/2012/0022

Bartington Instruments, L., 2011. Operation Manual for MS2 Magnetic Susceptibility System: Oxford, UK (Bartington Instruments, Ltd.).
https://gmw.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/MS2-OM0408.pdf

Baumann, K.-H., and Freitag, T., 2004. Pleistocene fluctuations in the northern Benguela Current system as revealed by coccolith assemblages. Presented at the Calcareous nannofossil palaeoecology and palaeoceanographic reconstructions, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marmicro.2004.04.011

Berggren, W.A., Kent, D.V., Swisher, C.C., III, Aubry, M.-P., Berggren, W.A., Kent, D.V., Aubry, M.-P., and Hardenbol, J., 1995. A revised Cenozoic geochronology and chronostratigraphy. In Berggren, W.A., Kent, D.V., Aubry, M.-P., and Hardenbol, J. (Eds.), Geochronology, Time Scales and Global Stratigraphic Correlation. SEPM Special Publication, 54.
https://doi.org/10.2110/pec.95.04.0129

Blum, P., 1997. Physical properties handbook: a guide to the shipboard measurement of physical properties of deep-sea cores. Ocean Drilling Program Technical Note, 26.
https://doi.org/10.2973/odp.tn.26.1997

Blum, P., Rhinehart, B., and Acton, G.D., 2020. International Ocean Discovery Program Expedition 384 Preliminary Report. International Ocean Discovery Program.
https://doi.org/10.14379/iodp.pr.384.2020

Bown, P.R., and Dunkley Jones, T., 2012. Calcareous nannofossils from the Paleogene equatorial Pacific (IODP Expedition 320 Sites U1331-1334). Journal of Nannoplankton Research, 32:3-51.

Bullard, E.C., 1954. The flow of heat through the floor of the Atlantic Ocean. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, A: Mathematical and Physical Sciences, 222(1150):408-429.
https://doi.org/10.1098/rspa.1954.0085

Chaisson, W.P., and Leckie, R.M., 1993. High-resolution Neogene planktonic foraminifer biostratigraphy of Site 806, Ontong Java Plateau (western equatorial Pacific). In Berger, W.H., Kroenke, L.W., Mayer, L.A., et al., Proceedings of the Ocean Drilling Program, Scientific Results. 130: College Station, TX (Ocean Drilling Program), 137-178.
https://doi.org/10.2973/odp.proc.sr.130.010.1993

Chaisson, W.P., and Pearson, P.N., 1997. Planktonic foraminifer biostratigraphy at Site 925: middle Miocene-Pleistocene. In Shackleton, N.J., Curry, W.B., Richter, C., and Bralower, T.J. (Eds.), Proceedings of the Ocean Drilling Program, Scientific Results. 154: College Station, TX (Ocean Drilling Program), 3-31.
https://doi.org/10.2973/odp.proc.sr.154.104.1997

Channell, J.E.T., Singer, B.S., and Jicha, B.R., 2020. Timing of Quaternary geomagnetic reversals and excursions in volcanic and sedimentary archives. Quaternary Science Reviews, 228:106114.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2019.106114

Coggon, R.M., Teagle, D.A.H., Sylvan, J.B., Reece, J., Estes, E.R., Williams, T.J., Christeson, G.L., Aizawa, M., Albers, E., Amadori, C., Belgrano, T.M., Borrelli, C., Bridges, J.D., Carter, E.J., D'Angelo, T., Dinarès-Turell, J., Doi, N., Estep, J.D., Evans, A., Gilhooly, W.P., III, Grant, L.C.J., Guérin, G.M., Harris, M., Hojnacki, V.M., Hong, G., Jin, X., Jonnalagadda, M., Kaplan, M.R., Kempton, P.D., Kuwano, D., Labonte, J.M., Lam, A.R., Latas, M., Lowery, C.M., Lu, W., McIntyre, A., Moal-Darrigade, P., Pekar, S.F., Robustelli Test, C., Routledge, C.M., Ryan, J.G., Santiago Ramos, D., Shchepetkina, A., Slagle, A.L., Takada, M., Tamborrino, L., Villa, A., Wang, Y., Wee, S.Y., Widlansky, S.J., Yang, K., Kurz, W., Prakasam, M., Tian, L., Yu, T., and Zhang, G., 2024. Expedition 390/393 methods. In Coggon, R.M., Teagle, D.A.H., Sylvan, J.B., Reece, J., Estes, E.R., Williams, T.J., Christeson, G.L., and the Expedition 390/393 Sci-
entists, South Atlantic Transect. Proceedings of the International Ocean Discovery Program, 390/393: College Station, TX (International Ocean Discovery Program). https://doi.org/10.14379/iodp.proc.390393.102.2024

de Kaenel, E., and Villa, G., 1996. Oligocene-Miocene calcareous nanofossil biostratigraphy and paleoecology from the Iberia abyssal plain. In Whitmarsh, R.B., Sawyer, D.S., Klaus, A., and Masson, D.G. (Eds.), Proceedings of the Ocean Drilling Program, Scientific Results. 149: College Station, TX (Ocean Drilling Program). https://doi.org/10.2973/odp.proc.sr.149.208.1996

Dearing, J.A., Dann, R.J.L., Hay, K., Lees, J.A., Loveland, P.J., Maher, B.A., and O'Grady, K., 1996. Frequency-dependent susceptibility measurements of environmental materials. Geophysical Journal International, 124(1):228–240. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-246X.1996.tb06366.x

Drury, A.J., Westerhold, T., Hodell, D., and Röhl, U., 2018. Reinforcing the North Atlantic backbone: revision and extension of the composite splice at ODP Site 982. Climate of the Past, 14(3):321–338. https://doi.org/10.5194/cp-14-321-2018

Ellis, D.V., and Singer, J.M., 2007. Well Logging for Earth Scientists (2nd edition): New York (Elsevier). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-4602-5

Evans, H.B., 1965. GRAPE* - A Device For Continuous Determination Of Material Density And Porosity. Presented at the SPWLA 6th Annual Logging Symposium (Volume II).

Expedition 339 Scientists, 2013. Methods. In Stow, D.A.V., Hernández-Molina, F.J., Alvarez Zarikian, C.A., and the Expedition 339 Scientists, Proceedings of the Integrated Ocean Drilling Program. 339: Tokyo (Integrated Ocean Drilling Program Management International, Inc.). https://doi.org/10.2204/iodp.proc.339.102.2013

Flower, B.P., 1999. Data report: planktonic foraminifers from the subpolar North Atlantic and Nordic Seas: Sites 980–987 and 907. In Raymo, M.E., Jansen, E., Blum, P., and Herbert, T.D. (Eds.), Proceedings of the Ocean Drilling Program, Scientific Results. 162: College Station, TX (Ocean Drilling Program). https://doi.org/10.2973/odp.proc.sr.162.038.1999

Fornaciari, E., Backman, J., and Rio, D., 1993. Quantitative distribution patterns of selected Lower to Middle Miocene calcareous nanofossils from the Ontong Java Plateau. In Berger, W.H., Kroenke, L.W., Mayer, L.A., et al., Proceedings of the Ocean Drilling Program, Scientific Results. 130: College Station, TX (Ocean Drilling Program), 245–256. https://doi.org/10.2973/odp.proc.sr.130.009.1993

Fornaciari, E., and Rio, D., 1996. Latest Oligocene to early Middle Miocene quantitative calcareous nanofossil biostratigraphy in the Mediterranean region. Micropaleontology, 42(1):1–36. https://doi.org/10.2307/1485981

Gibbard, P.L., and Head, M.J., 2020. The Quaternary period. In Gradstein, F.M., Ogg, J.G., Schmitz, M.D., and Ogg, G.M. (Eds.), Geologic Time Scale 2020. Dordrecht, Netherlands (Elsevier), 1217–1255. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-824360-2.00030-9

Gieskes, J.M., Gamo, T., and Brumsack, H.J., 1991. Chemical methods for interstitial water analysis aboard JOIDES Resolution. Ocean Drilling Program Technical Note, 15. https://doi.org/10.2973/odp.tn.15.1991

Godard, M., Awaji, S., Hansen, H., Hellebrand, E., Brunelli, D., Johnson, K., Yamasaki, T., Maeda, J., Abratis, M., Christie, D., Kato, Y., Mariet, C., and Rosner, M., 2009. Geochemistry of a long in-situ section of intrusive slow-spread oceanic lithosphere: results from IODP Site U1309 (Atlantis Massif, 30°N Mid-Atlantic-Ridge). Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 279(1–2):110–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.epsl.2008.12.034

Goldberg, D., 1997. The role of downhole measurements in marine geology and geophysics. Reviews of Geophysics, 35(3):315–342. https://doi.org/10.1029/97RG00221

Graber, K.K., Pollard, E., Jonasson, B., and Schulte, E. (Eds.), 2002. Overview of Ocean Drilling Program engineering tools and hardware. Ocean Drilling Program Technical Note, 31. https://doi.org/10.2973/odp.tn.31.2002

Gradstein, F.M., Ogg, J.G., Schmitz, M.D., and Ogg, G.M. (Eds.), 2020. The Geologic Time Scale 2020: Amsterdam (Elsevier BV). https://doi.org/10.1016/C2020-1-02369-3

Hagelberg, T., Shackleton, N., Pisias, N., and the Shipboard Scientific Party, 1992. Development of composite depth sections for Sites 844 through 854. In Mayer, L., Pisias, N., Janecek, T., et al., Proceedings of the Ocean Drilling Program, Initial Reports. 138: College Station, TX (Ocean Drilling Program), 79–85. https://doi.org/10.2973/odp.proc.ir.138.105.1992

Hagelberg, T.K., Pisias, N.G., Shackleton, N.J., Mix, A.C., and Harris, S., 1995. Refinement of a high-resolution, continuous sedimentary section for studying equatorial Pacific Ocean paleoceanography, Leg 138. In Pisias, N.G., Mayer, L.A., Janecek, T.R., Palmer-Julson, A., and van Andel, T.H. (Eds.), Proceedings of the Ocean Drilling Program, Scientific Results. 138: College Station, TX (Ocean Drilling Program). https://doi.org/10.2973/odp.proc.sr.138.103.1995

Harms, J.C., and Choquette, P.W., 1965. Geologic evaluation of a gamma-ray porosity device. Presented at the SPWLA 6th Annual Logging Symposium, Dallas, TX, May 1965.

Heesemann, M., Villinger, H.W., Tréhu, A.T.F.M., and White, S., 2006. Data report: testing and deployment of the new APCT-3 tool to determine in situ temperatures while piston coring. In Riedel, M., Collett, T.S., Malone, M.J., and the Expedition 311 Scientists, Proceedings of the Integrated Ocean Drilling Program. 311: Washington, DC (Integrated Ocean Drilling Program Management International, Inc.). https://doi.org/10.2204/iodp.proc.311.108.2006

Helm-Clark, C.M., Rodgers, D.W., and Smith, R.P., 2004. Borehole geophysical techniques to define stratigraphy, alteration and aquifers in basalt. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 55(1):3–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jappgeo.2003.06.003

Hilgen, F., Aziz, H.A., Bice, D., Iaccarino, S., Krijgsman, W., Kuiper, K., Montanari, A., Raffi, I., Turco, E., and Zachariasse, W.-J., 2005. The global boundary stratotype section and point (GSSP) of the Tortonian Stage (Upper Miocene) at Monte Dei Corvi. International Union of Geological Sciences, 28(1):6–17. https://doi.org/10.18814/epiiugs/2005/v28i1/001
Hilgen, F.J., Abdul Aziz, H., Krijgsman, W., Raffi, I., and Turco, E., 2003. Integrated stratigraphy and astronomical tuning of the Serravallian and lower Tortonian at Monte dei Corvi (Middle–Upper Miocene, northern Italy). Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, 199(3):229–264.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0031-0182(03)00505-4

Horai, K., and Von Herzen, R.P., 1985. Measurement of heat flow on Leg 86 of the Deep Sea Drilling Project. In Heath, G.R., Burckle, L. H., et al., Initial Reports of the Deep Sea Drilling Project. 86: Washington, DC (US Government Printing Office), 759–777. https://doi.org/10.2973/dsdp.proc.86.135.1985

Iaccarino, S., 1985. Mediterranean Miocene and Pliocene planktonic foraminifera. In Bolli, H.M., Saunders, J.B., and Perch-Nielsen, K. (Eds.), Plankton stratigraphy. 1: New York (Cambridge University Press).

Imai, N., Terashima, S., Itoh, S., and Ando, A., 1995. 1994 compilation of analytical data for minor and trace elements in seventeen GSJ geochemical reference samples, "igneous rock series". Geostandards Newsletter, 19(2):135–213.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-908X.1995.tb00158.x

Jochum, K.P., Weis, U., Schwager, B., Stoll, B., Wilson, S.A., Haug, G.H., Andreae, M.O., and Enzweiler, J., 2016. Reference values following ISO guidelines for frequently requested rock reference materials. Geostandards and Geoanalytical Research, 40(3):333–350. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-908X.2015.00392.x

Johnston, R., Ryan, J.G. and the Expedition 366 Scientists, 2018. pXRF and ICP-AES characterization of shipboard rocks and sediments; protocols and strategies. In Fryer, P., Wheat, C.G., Williams, T., and the Expedition 366 Scientists, Proceedings of the International Ocean Discovery Program. 366: College Station, TX (International Ocean Discovery Program). https://doi.org/10.14379/iodp.proc.366.110.2018

Jutzeler, M., White, J.D.L., Talling, P.J., McCanta, M., Morgan, S., Le Friant, A., and Ishizuka, O., 2014. Coring disturbances in IODP piston cores with implications for offshore record of volcanic events and the Missoula megafloods. Geochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems, 15(9):3572–3590. https://doi.org/10.1002/2014GC005447

Kirschvink, J.L., 1980. The least-squares line and plane and the analysis of palaeomagnetic data. Geophysical Journal International, 62(3):699–718. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-246X.1980.tb02601.x

Kochhann, K.G.D., Holbourn, A., Kuhnt, W., Channell, J.E.T., Lyle, M., Shackford, J.K., Wilkens, R.H., and Andersen, N., 2016. Eccentricity pacing of eastern equatorial Pacific carbonate dissolution cycles during the Miocene Climatic Optimum. Paleooceanography, 31(9):1176–1192. https://doi.org/10.1002/2016PA002988

Kvenvolden, K.A., and McDonald, T.J., 1986. Organic geochemistry on the *JOIDES Resolution*—an assay. Ocean Drilling Program Technical Note, 6. https://doi.org/10.2973/odp.tn.6.1986

Le Maitre, R.W., Steckeisen, A., Zanettin, B., Le Bas, M.J., Bonin, B., and Bateman, P. (Eds.), 2002. Igneous Rocks: A Classification and Glossary of Terms (Second edition): Cambridge, UK (Cambridge University Press).
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511535581

Lirer, F., Foresi, L.M., Iaccarino, S.M., Salvatorini, G., Turco, E., Cosentino, C., Sierro, F.J., and Caruso, A., 2019. Mediterranean Neogene planktonic foraminifer biozonation and biochronology. Earth-Science Reviews, 196:102869.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earscirev.2019.05.013

Lofts, J.C., and Bourke, L.T., 1999. The recognition of artefacts from acoustic and resistivity borehole imaging devices. In Lovell, M., Williamson, G., and Harvey, P. (Eds.), Borehole Imaging: Applications and Case Histories. Geological Society Special Publication, 159: 59–76. https://doi.org/10.1144/GSL.SP.1999.159.01.03

Lourens, L., Hilgen, F., Shackleton, N.J., Laskar, J., and Wilson, D., 2004. The Neogene period. In Smith, A.G., Gradstein, F.M. and Ogg, J.G., A Geologic Time Scale 2004. Cambridge, UK (Cambridge University Press), 409–440.
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511536045.022

Lourens, L.J., Antonarakou, A., Hilgen, F.J., Van Hoof, A.A.M., Vergnaud-Grazzini, C., and Zachariasse, W.J., 1996. Evaluation of the Plio-Pleistocene astronomical timescale. Paleooceanography, 11(4):391–413.
https://doi.org/10.1029/96PA01125

Lovell, M.A., Harvey, P.K., Brewer, T.S., Williams, C., Jackson, P.D., and Williamson, G., 1998. Application of FMS images in the Ocean Drilling Program: an overview. In Cramp, A., MacLeod, C.J., Lee, S.V., and Jones, E.J.W. (Eds.), Geological Evolution of Ocean Basins: Results from the Ocean Drilling Program. Geological Society, London, Special Publication, 131: 287–303. https://doi.org/10.1144/GSL.SP.1998.131.01.18

Lurcock, P.C., and Florindo, F., 2019. New developments in the PuffinPlot paleomagnetic data analysis program. Geochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems, 20(11):5578–5587. https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GC008537

Manheim, F.T., and Sayles, F.L., 1974. Composition and origin of interstitial waters of marine sediments, based on deep sea drill cores. In Goldberg, E.D., The Sea (Volume 5): Marine Chemistry: The Sedimentary Cycle. New York (Wiley), 527–568. http://pubs.er.usgs.gov/publication/70207491

Marsaglia, K., Milliken, K., and Doran, L., 2013. IODP digital reference for smear slide analysis of marine mud, Part 1: Methodology and atlas of siliciclastic and volcanogenic components. Integrated Ocean Drilling Program Technical Note, 1. https://doi.org/10.2204/iodp.tn.1.2013

Marsaglia, K., Milliken, K., Leckie, R., Tentori, D., and Doran, L., 2015. IODP smear slide digital reference for sediment analysis of marine mud, Part 2: Methodology and atlas of biogenic components. Integrated Ocean Drilling Program Technical Note, 2. https://doi.org/10.2204/iodp.tn.2.2015

Martini, E., 1971. Standard Tertiary and Quaternary calcareous nannoplankton zonation. Proceedings of the Second Planktonic Conference, Roma, 1970:739–785.

Murray, R.W., Miller, D.J., and Kryc, K.A., 2000. Analysis of major and trace elements in rocks, sediments, and interstitial waters by inductively coupled plasma–atomic emission spectrometry (ICP-AES). Ocean Drilling Program Technical Note, 29. https://doi.org/10.2973/odp.tn.29.2000

Ogg, J.G., 2020. Geomagnetic Polarity Time Scale. In Gradstein, F.M., Ogg, J.G., Schmitz, M., and Ogg, G. (Eds.), *Geo-logic Time Scale 2020*. Amsterdam (Elsevier), 159–192. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-824360-2.00005-X

Ogg, J.G., Ogg, G.M., and Gradstein, F.M., 2016. A Concise Geologic Time Scale 2016: New York (Elsevier).
Okada, H., and Bukry, D., 1980. Supplementary modification and introduction of code numbers to the low-latitude coccolith biostratigraphic zonation (Bukry, 1973; 1975). Marine Micropaleontology, 5(3):321-325.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-8398(80)90016-X

Olafsson, G., 1992. Oligocene/Miocene morphometric variability of the Cyclicargolithus group from the equatorial Atlantic and Indian Oceans. Memorie di Scienze Geologiche, 43:283-295.

Parnell-Turner, R., Briais, A., and LeVay, L.J., 2023. Expedition 395 Scientific Prospectus Addendum: Reykjanes Mantle Convection and Climate. International Ocean Discovery Program.
https://doi.org/10.14379/iodp.sp.395add.2023

Parnell-Turner, R., Briais, A., and LeVay, L., 2020. Expedition 395 Scientific Prospectus: Reykjanes Mantle Convection and Climate. International Ocean Discovery Program. https://doi.org/10.14379/iodp.sp.395.2020

Parnell-Turner, R.E., Briais, A., LeVay, L.J., and the Expedition 395 Scientists, 2025. Supplementary material, https://doi.org/10.14379/iodp.proc.395supp.2025. In Parnell-Turner, R.E., Briais, A., LeVay, L.J., and the Expe-
dition 395 Scientists, Reykjanes Mantle Convection and Climate. Proceedings of the International Ocean Discovery
Program, 395: College Station, TX (International Ocean Discovery Program).

Parnell-Turner, R.E., Briais, A., LeVay, L.J., Cui, Y., Di Chiara, A., Dodd, J.P., Dunkley Jones, T., Dwyer, D., Eason, D.E., Friedman, S.A., Hemming, S.R., Hochmuth, K., Ibrahim, H., Jasper, C., Karatsolis, B.T., Lee, S., LeBlanc, D.E., Lind-say, M.R., McNamara, D.D., Modestou, S.E., Murton, B., OConnell, S., Pasquet, G.T., Pearson, P.N., Qian, S.P., Rosenthal, Y., Satolli, S., Sinnesael, M., Suzuki, T., Thulasi Doss, T., White, N.J., Wu, T., Yang Yang, A., dos Santos Rocha, V., Pearman, C., and Tian, C.Y., 2025. Expedition 395 summary. In Parnell-Turner, R.E., Briais, A., LeVay, L.J., and the Expedition 395 Scientists, Reykjanes Mantle Convection and Climate. Proceedings of the International Ocean Discovery Program, 395: College Station, TX (International Ocean Discovery Program).
https://doi.org/10.14379/iodp.proc.395.101.2025

Pasini, G., and Colalongo, M.L., 2004. The Pliocene-Pleistocene boundary-stratotype at Vrica, Italy. In Van Couvering, J., The Pleistocene Boundary and the Beginning of the Quaternary Cambridge (Cambridge University Press), 15-46.

Pearson, P.N., and Chaisson, W.P., 1997. Late Paleocene to Middle Miocene planktonic foraminifer biostratigraphy of the Ceara Rise. In Shackleton, N.J., Curry, W.B., Richter, C., and Bralower, T.J. (Eds.), Proceedings of the Ocean Drilling Program, Scientific Results. 154: College Station, TX (Ocean Drilling Program), 33-68.
https://doi.org/10.2973/odp.proc.sr.154.106.1997

Perch-Nielsen, K., 1985. Cenozoic calcareous nannofossils. In Bolli, H.M., Saunders, J.B., and Perch-Nielsen, K. (Eds.), Plankton Stratigraphy (Volume 1). Cambridge, UK (Cambridge University Press), 427-554.

Pimmel, A., and Claypool, G., 2001. Introduction to shipboard organic geochemistry on the JOIDES Resolution. Ocean Drilling Program Technical Note, 30. https://doi.org/10.2973/odp.tn.30.2001

Poore, R.Z., 1979. Oligocene through Quaternary planktonic foraminiferal biostratigraphy of the North Atlantic: DSDP Leg 49. In Luyendyk, B.P., Cann, J.R., et al., Initial Reports of the Deep Sea Drilling Project. 49: Washington, DC (US Government Printing Office), 447-517. https://doi.org/10.2973/dsdp.proc.49.115.1979

Poore, R.Z., and Berggren, W.A., 1975. Late Cenozoic planktonic foraminiferal biostratigraphy and paleoclimatology of Hatton-Rockall Basin; DSDP Site 116. Journal of Foraminiferal Research, 5(4):270-293.
https://doi.org/10.2113/gsjfr.5.4.270

Raffi, I., Backman, J., Fornaciari, E., Pälike, H., Rio, D., Lourens, L., and Hilgen, F., 2006. A review of calcareous nanno-
fossil astrobiochronology encompassing the past 25 million years. Quaternary Science Reviews, 25(23):3113-3137.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2006.07.007

Raffi, I., Wade, B.S., Pälike, H., Beu, A.G., Cooper, R., Grundwell, M.P., Krijgsman, W., Moore, T., Raine, I., Sardella, R., and Vernyhorova, Y.V., 2020. The Neogene Period. In Gradstein, F.M., Ogg, J.G., Schmitz, M.D., and Ogg, G. (Eds.), Geologic Time Scale 2020. (Elsevier), 1141-1215. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-824360-2.00029-2

Reagan, M.K., Pearce, J.A., Petronotis, K., Almeev, R., Avery, A.A., Carvallo, C., Chapman, T., Christeson, G.L., Ferré, E.C., Godard, M., Heaton, D.E., Kirchenbaur, M., Kurz, W., Kutterolf, S., Li, H.Y., Li, Y., Michibayashi, K., Morgan, S., Nelson, W.R., Prytulak, J., Python, M., Robertson, A.H.F., Ryan, J.G., Sager, W.W., Sakuyama, T., Shervais, J.W., Shimizu, K., and Whattam, S.A., 2015. Expedition 352 methods. In Reagan, M.K., Pearce, J.A., Petronotis, K., and the Expedition 352 Scientists, Izu-Bonin-Mariana Fore Arc. Proceedings of the International Ocean Discovery Pro-
gram, 352: College Station, TX (International Ocean Discovery Program).
https://doi.org/10.14379/iodp.proc.352.102.2015

Richter, C., Acton, G., Endris, C., and Radsted, M., 2007. Handbook for shipboard paleomagnetists. Ocean Drilling Program Technical Note, 34. https://doi.org/10.2973/odp.tn.34.2007

Rider, M.H., 1996. The Geological Interpretation of Well Logs (Second edition): Houston, TX (Gulf Publishing Com-
pany).

Rio, D., Raffi, I., and Villa, G., 1990. Pliocene-Pleistocene calcareous nannofossil distribution patterns in the western Mediterranean. In Kastens, K.A., Mascle, J., et al., Proceedings of the Ocean Drilling Program, Scientific Results. 107: College Station, TX (Ocean Drilling Program), 513-533. https://doi.org/10.2973/odp.proc.sr.107.164.1990

Rio, D., Sprovieri, R., and Raffi, I., 1984. Calcareous plankton biostratigraphy and biochronology of the Pliocene-Lower Pleistocene succession of the Capo Rossello area, Sicily. Marine Micropaleontology, 9(2):135-180.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-8398(84)90008-2

Rosenthal, Y., Holbourn, A.E., Kulhanek, D.K., Aiello, I.W., Babila, T.L., Bayon, G., Beaufort, L., Bova, S.C., Chun, J.-H., Haowen, D., Drury, A.J., Dunkley Jones, T., Eichler, P.P.B., Fernando, A.G.S., Gibson, K.A., Hatfield, R.G., Johnson, D.L., Kumagai, Y., Tiegang, L., Linsley, B.K., Meinicke, N., Mountain, G.S., Opdyke, B.N., Pearson, P.N., Poole, C.R., Ravelo, A.C., Sagawa, T., Schmitt, A., Wurtzel, J.B., Jian, X., Yamamoto, M., and Zhang, Y.G., 2018. Expedition 363 methods. In Rosenthal, Y., Holbourn, A.E., Kulhanek, D.K., and the Expedition 363 Scientists, Western Pacific
Warm Pool. Proceedings of the International Ocean Discovery Program, 363: College Station, TX (International Ocean Discovery Program). https://doi.org/10.14379/iodp.proc.363.102.2018

Rothwell, R.G., 1989. Minerals and Mineraloids in Marine Sediments: An Optical Identification Guide: London (Elsevier). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-1133-8

Ruddiman, W.F., Kidd, R.B., Baldauf, J.G., Clement, B.M., Dolan, J.F., Eggers, M.R., Hill, P.R., Keigwin, L.D., Jr., Mitchell, M., Philippis, I., Robinson, F., Salehipour, S.A., Takayama, T., Thomas, E., Unsold, G., and Weaver, P.P.E., 1987. Initial Reports of the Deep Sea Drilling Project, 94: Washington, DC (US Government Printing Office). https://doi.org/10.2973/dsdp.proc.94.1987

Ryan, J.G., Shervais, J.W., Li, Y., Reagan, M.K., Li, H.Y., Heaton, D., Godard, M., Kirchenbaur, M., Whattam, S.A., Pearce, J.A., Chapman, T., Nelson, W., Prytulak, J., Shimizu, K., and Petronotis, K., 2017. Application of a handheld X-ray fluorescence spectrometer for real-time, high-density quantitative analysis of drilled igneous rocks and sediments during IODP Expedition 352. Chemical Geology, 451:55-66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemgeo.2017.01.007

Schlumberger, 1989. Log Interpretation Principles/Applications, SMP-7017: Houston (Schlumberger Education Services).

Schlumberger, 1994. IPL Integrated Porosity Lithology, SMP-9270: Houston (Schlumberger Education Services).

Serra, O., 1984. Fundamentals of Well-log Interpretation (Volume 1): The Acquisition of Logging Data: Amsterdam (Elsevier).

Serra, O., 1986. Fundamentals of Well-Log Interpretation (Volume 2): The Interpretation of Logging Data: Amsterdam (Elsevier).

Serra, O., 1989. Formation MicroScanner Image Interpretation, SMP-7028: Houston (Schlumberger Education Services).

Shipboard Scientific Party, 1987. Site 646. In Srivastava, S.P., Arthur, M., Clement, B., et al., Proceedings of the Ocean Drilling Program, Initial Reports. 105: College Station, TX (Ocean Drilling Program), 419-674. https://doi.org/10.2973/odp.proc.ir.105.105.1987

Shipboard Scientific Party, 2003. Leg 202 summary. In Mix, A.C., Tiedemann, R., Blum, P., et al., Proceedings of the Ocean Drilling Program, Initial Reports. 202: College Station, TX (Ocean Drilling Program). https://doi.org/10.2973/odp.proc.ir.202.101.2003

Sierro, F.J., Hernandez-Almeida, I., Alonso-Garcia, M., and Flores, J.A., 2009. Data report: Pliocene-Pleistocene planktonic foraminifer bioevents at IODP Site U1313. In Channell, J.E.T., Kanamatsu, T., Sato, T., Stein, R., Alvarez Zarikian, C.A., Malone, M.J., and the Expedition 303/306 Scientists, Proceedings of the Integrated Ocean Drilling Program. 303/306: College Station, TX (Integrated Ocean Drilling Program Management International, Inc.). https://doi.org/10.2204/iodp.proc.303306.205.2009

Sissing, W., 1977. Biostratigraphy of Cretaceous calcareous nannoplankton. Geologie en Mijnbouw, 56:37-65.

Speijer, R.P., Pälike, H., Hollis, C.J., Hooker, J.J., and Ogg, J.G., 2020. The Paleogene Period. In Gradstein, F.M., Ogg, J.G., Schmitz, M., and Ogg, G. (Eds.), Geologic Time Scale 2020. (Elsevier), 1087-1140. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-824360-2.00028-0

Spiegler, D., 1999. Bolboforma biostratigraphy from the Hatton-Rockall Basin (North Atlantic). In Raymo, M.E., Jansen, E., Blum, P., and Herbert, T.D., Proceedings of the Ocean Drilling Program, Scientific Results, 162. College Station, TX (Ocean Drilling Program), 35-49. https://doi.org/10.2973/odp.proc.sr.162.013.1999

Spiegler, D., and Jansen, E., 1989. Planktonic foraminifer biostratigraphy of Norwegian Sea sediments: ODP Leg 104. In Eldholm, O., Thiede, J., Taylor, E., et al., Proceedings of the Ocean Drilling Program, Scientific Results. 104: College Station, TX (Ocean Drilling Program), 681-696. https://doi.org/10.2973/odp.proc.sr.104.157.1989

Spiegler, D., and Spezzaferri, S., 2005. Bolboforma - an overview. Paläontologische Zeitschrift, 79(1):167-181. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03021760

Sun, Z., Jian, Z., Stock, J.M., Larsen, H.C., Klaus, A., Alvarez Zarikian, C.A., Boaga, J., Bowden, S.A., Briais, A., Chen, Y., Cukur, D., Dadd, K.A., Ding, W., Dorais, M.J., Ferré, E.C., Ferreira, F., Furusawa, A., Gewecke, A.J., Hinojosa, J.L., Höfig, T.W., Hsiung, K.-H., Huang, B., Huang, E., Huang, X.-L., Jiang, S., Jin, H., Johnson, B.G., Kurzawski, R.M., Lei, C., Li, B., Li, L., Li, Y., Lin, J., Liu, C., Liu, C., Liu, Z., Luna, A., Lupi, C., McCarthy, A.J., Mohn, G., Ningthoujam, L.S., Nirrengarten, M., Osono, N., Peate, D.W., Persaud, P., Qiu, N., Robinson, C.M., Satolli, S., Sauermilch, I., Schindlbeck, J.C., Skinner, S.M., Straub, S.M., Su, X., Tian, L., Van der Zwan, F.M., Wan, S., Wu, H., Xiang, R., Yadav, R., Yi, L., Zhang, C., Zhang, J., Zhang, Y., Zhao, N., Zhong, G., and Zhong, L., 2018. Expedition 367/368 methods. In Sun, Z., Jian, Z., Stock, J.M., Larsen, H.C., Klaus, A., Alvarez Zarikian, C.A., and the Expedition 367/368 Scientists, South China Sea Rifted Margin. Proceedings of the International Ocean Discovery Program, 367/368: College Station, TX (International Ocean Discovery Program). https://doi.org/10.14379/iodp.proc.367368.102.2018

Teske, A., Lizarralde, D., Höfig, T.W., Aiello, I.W., Ash, J.L., Bojanova, D.P., Buatier, M.D., Edgcomb, V.P., Galerne, C.Y., Gontharet, S., Heuer, V.B., Jiang, S., Kars, M.A.C., Khogenkumar Singh, S., Kim, J.-H., Koornneef, L.M.T., Marsaglia, K.M., Meyer, N.R., Morono, Y., Negrete-Aranda, R., Neumann, F., Pastor, L.C., Peña-Salinas, M.E., Pérez Cruz, L.L., Ran, L., Riboulleau, A., Sarao, J.A., Schubert, F., Stock, J.M., Toffin, L.M.A.A., Xie, W., Yamanaka, T., and Zhuang, G., 2021. Expedition 385 methods. In Teske, A., Lizarralde, D., Höfig, T.W., and the Expedition 385 Scientists, Guaymas Basin Tectonics and Biosphere. Proceedings of the International Ocean Discovery Program, 385: College Station, TX (International Ocean Discovery Program). https://doi.org/10.14379/iodp.proc.385.102.2021

van Sprang, H.A., 2000. Fundamental parameter methods in XRF spectroscopy. In Blanton, T., Brehm, L., and Schmelting, M. (Eds.), JCPDS-International Centre for Diffraction Data 2000. Advances in X-ray Analysis, 42: 1-10.
Von Herzen, R., and Maxwell, A.E., 1959. The measurement of thermal conductivity of deep-sea sediments by a needle-probe method. *Journal of Geophysical Research*, 64(10):1557–1563.
https://doi.org/10.1029/JZ064i010p01557

Wade, B.S., Pearson, P.N., Berggren, W.A., and Pälike, H., 2011. Review and revision of Cenozoic tropical planktonic foraminiferal biostratigraphy and calibration to the geomagnetic polarity and astronomical time scale. *Earth-Science Reviews*, 104(1–3):111–142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earscirev.2010.09.003

Weaver, P.P.E., 1987. Late Miocene to recent planktonic foraminifers from the North Atlantic: Deep Sea Drilling Project Leg 94. In Ruddiman, W.F., Kidd, R. B., Thomas, E., et al., Initial Reports of the Deep Sea Drilling Project. 94: Washington, DC (US Government Printing Office), 703–727. https://doi.org/10.2973/dsdp.proc.94.114.1987

Weaver, P.P.E., and Clement, B.M., 1986. Synchroneity of Pliocene planktonic foraminiferal datums in the North Atlantic. *Marine Micropaleontology*, 10(4):295–307. https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-8398(86)90033-2

Weaver, P.P.E., and Clement, B.M., 1987. Magnetobiostratigraphy of planktonic foraminiferal datums: Deep Sea Drilling Project Leg 94, North Atlantic. In Ruddiman, W.R., Kidd, R. B., Thomas, E., et al., Initial Reports of the Deep Sea Drilling Project. 94: Washington, DC (US Government Printing Office), 815–829.
https://doi.org/10.2973/dsdp.proc.94.120.1987

Wei, W., 1991. Evidence for an earliest Oligocene abrupt cooling in the surface waters of the Southern Ocean. *Geology*, 19(8):780–783. https://doi.org/10.1130/0091-7613(1991)019<0780:EFAEOA>2.3.CO;2

Wei, W., and Wise, S.W., 1989. Paleogene calcareous nannofossil magnetobiochronology: results from South Atlantic DSDP Site 516. *Marine Micropaleontology*, 14(1):119–152. https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-8398(89)90034-0

Wentworth, C.K., 1922. A scale of grade and class terms for clastic sediments. *The Journal of Geology*, 30(5):377–392.
https://doi.org/10.1086/622910

White, J.D.L., McPhie, J., and Skilling, I., 2000. Peperite: a useful genetic term. *Bulletin of Volcanology*, 62:65–66.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s004450050293

Young, J.R., 1998. Neogene. In Bown, P.R., Calcareous Nannofossil Biostratigraphy. Dordrecht, Netherlands (Kluwer Academic Publishing), 225–265.

Young, J.R., and Bown, P.R., 2014. Some emendations to calcareous nannoplankton taxonomy. *Journal of Nannoplankton Research*, 33(1):39–46.

Zijderveld, J.D.A., 1967. AC demagnetization of rocks: analysis of results. In Runcorn, S.K.C., Creer, K.M., and Collinson, D.W. (Eds.), *Methods in Palaeomagnetism. Developments in Solid Earth Geophysics*, 3: 254–286.
https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-1-4832-2894-5.50049-5