Short‐term variations in the distribution of hydrothermal plumes along a superfast spreading center, East Pacific Rise, 27°30′–32°20′S

A multidisciplinary expedition to the southern East Pacific Rise (27°30′–32°20′S) provided an opportunity to compare the efficiency and effectiveness of two methods for mapping hydrothermal plumes: the standard conductivity‐temperature‐depth‐optical (CTDO) tow‐yo method and a towed fixed array of hydrographic and optical sensors (Miniature Autonomous Plume Recorders (MAPRs)). Six second‐order segments were mapped twice: once with CTDO tow‐yos, and then again with a fixed array of MAPRs attached to the cable of a deep‐towed side‐scan sonar. We found a high degree of overall agreement between the two methods in both the distribution and optical intensity of hydrothermal plumes. Between‐survey differences increased as time between surveys increased from <0.5 to >6 days, presumably because of advection of the plumes by local currents. Plume locations changed by as much as ∼10 km, implying a confidence limit in predicting vent site location using segment‐scale hydrothermal plume surveys. Towed MAPR arrays proved an efficient and effective method for acquiring coregistered geological and hydrothermal plume data.