Does strong slab parallel flow exist in the mantle wedge
Download
1 / 32

Does strong slab-parallel flow exist in the mantle wedge? - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 65 Views
  • Uploaded on

Does strong slab-parallel flow exist in the mantle wedge?. Thanks to: David Abt, Catherine Rychert, Mariela Salas, Laura Martin, Alexis Walker (Brown University) Geoff Abers, Laura Auger, Ellen Syracuse, Terry Plank (Boston University) J. Marino Protti, Victor Gonzalez

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' Does strong slab-parallel flow exist in the mantle wedge?' - kevork


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Does strong slab parallel flow exist in the mantle wedge

Does strong slab-parallel flow exist in the mantle wedge?

Thanks to:

David Abt, Catherine Rychert, Mariela Salas, Laura Martin, Alexis Walker (Brown University)

Geoff Abers, Laura Auger, Ellen Syracuse, Terry Plank

(Boston University)

J. Marino Protti, Victor Gonzalez

(OVSICORI, Universidad Nacional)

Wilfried Strauch, Pedro Perez, Allan Morales

(INETER)

MARGINS


Kneller et al. (2005)

Lassak et al. (2006)


Where is strongly 3D flow required?

Terms:

2D = wedge corner flow coupled to surface plate motions

3D = strong slab-parallel flow

Examine:

  • Local S splitting

  • Paths outside wedge corner

Fischer et al. (2000)


Local S splitting fast directions relative to arc strike

Region fore-arc beyond arc

  • Ryukyu (Long & van der Hilst, 2006) //

  • Cascadia (Currie et al., 2004) //

  • Honshu (Nakajima & Hasegawa, 2005)// normal

  • Aleutians (Yang et al., 1995) //

  • Izu Bonin (Anglin & Fouch, 2005) variable

  • N. New Zealand (Morley et al., 2006) // normal & N

  • Tonga (Smith et al., 2001) // rotation to normal

  • Marianas (Pozgay et al., in prep.) // rotation to normal

  • Alaska (Christensen & Abers, in prep.) normal //

  • Kamchatka (Levin et al., 2004) normal //

  • S. America (Polet et al., 2000) variable

  • S. America (Anderson et al., in prep.) //

  • Nicaragua/Costa Rica (Abt et al., in prep.) normal? // + complexity


Honshu

Nakajima and Hasegawa (2004)

Consistent with 2D corner flow

With B-fabric in wedge corner


Tonga

Smith et al. (2001)

Arc-// in wedge corner, BUT gradual rotation to arc-normal in back-arc

Not consistent with melt-free 2D corner flow

After Turner and Hawkesworth (1998)


Marianas - Pozgay et al. (in prep.)

Arc-// in wedge corner, but stays arc-// beyond arc

Not consistent with melt-free 2D corner flow

Spatial Averaging

Rose Diagrams - plotted at station


Kamchatka - Levin et al. (2004)

Arc-normal in wedge corner, arc-// beyond arc

Not consistent with melt-free 2D corner flow


Chile/Argentina

Anderson et al. (in prep.)

Arc-// beyond arc

Not consistent with simple 2D corner flow





  • Inversion:

  • model: 70% single xtal olivine, 30% single xtal opx

  • parameters: olivine a-axis azimuth, plunge & strength

  • split waveform for each path in successive blocks

  • calculate synthetic splitting at surface

  • invert residuals (data - synthetic splitting) using iterative damped least-squares method


  • Inversion:

  • model: 70% single xtal olivine, 30% single xtal opx

  • parameters: olivine a-axis azimuth, plunge & strength

  • split waveform for each path in successive blocks

  • calculate synthetic splitting at surface

  • invert residuals (data - synthetic splitting) using iterative damped least-squares method


  • Inversion:

  • model: 70% single xtal olivine, 30% single xtal opx

  • parameters: olivine a-axis azimuth, plunge & strength

  • split waveform for each path in successive blocks

  • calculate synthetic splitting at surface

  • invert residuals (data - synthetic splitting) using iterative damped least-squares method



  • Hypotheses for anisotropy sampled by local S below and farther into back-arc

  • Beyond arc:

  • 2D corner flow + melt fabric

  • 3D flow around slab edge (or tear)

  • Flow along slab driven by changes in slab dip

  • Upwelling/downwelling beneath arc (Behn & Hirth)

  • Fore-arc:

  • Direction controlled by flow +/- B-fabric

  • But watch for upper plate, slab contributions


2D corner flow below and farther into back-arc

Cagnioncle et al. (2006)


2D corner flow + melt fabric below and farther into back-arc

Oriented melt with arc-// strike

(melt LPO effects not required)

  • Marianas, Tonga, C. America require broader melting zones

  • C. America SKS?

Cagnioncle et al. (2006)


3D flow around slab edge below and farther into back-arc

Kincaid et al. (2006)


No rollback below and farther into back-arc

Trench parallel

Partial trench parallel

In cross section is corner flow

Kincaid et al. (2006)


Rollback: below and farther into back-arc

No more

corner flow

Slab translates

Kincaid et al. (2006)


3D flow around slab edge below and farther into back-arc

Challenge:

Need slab-// flow over 500 km from slab edge, close to slab - enhance with slab dip changes - enhance with low viscosities in mantle wedge

Supported by:

Geochemical evidence for flow around corner

Tonga

Costa Rica/Nicaragua

Herrstrom et al. (1995), Abratis & Woerner (2001), Feigenson (2004) - signature of Galapagos hotspot

After Turner and Hawkesworth (1998)


3D flow around slab edge below and farther into back-arc

Challenge:

Need slab-// flow over 500 km from slab edge, close to slab - enhance with slab dip changes - enhance with low viscosities in mantle wedge

Supported by:

Geochemical evidence for flow around corner

In situ LPO data from Talkeetna arc

Mehl et al. (2003)


Upwellings or downwellings beneath arc below and farther into back-arc

Behn and Hirth

(this meeting)


Upwellings or downwellings beneath arc below and farther into back-arc

  • Hard to match width of arc-// fast zone

  • May explain 3D variations in anisotropy resolved in C. America

Behn and Hirth

(this meeting)


Feedbacks below and farther into back-arc

Broader melt zones required in flow, T, melting models

If anisotropy = 2D corner flow + melt

velocity &

attenuation images

Need 3D flow, T, melting models

If anisotropy =

flow parallel to slab


Feedbacks below and farther into back-arc

Broader melt zones required in flow, T, melting models

If anisotropy = 2D corner flow + melt

Marianas

velocity &

attenuation images

C. America

Tonga

Need 3D flow, T, melting models

If anisotropy =

flow parallel to slab


Conder and Wiens (2006) below and farther into back-arc


Feedbacks below and farther into back-arc

Broader melt zones required in flow, T, melting models

If anisotropy = 2D corner flow + melt

V, Q (T, volatiles, melt, grain size, dislocations)

velocity &

attenuation images

V, Q (T, volatiles, melt, grain size, dislocations)

Need 3D flow, T, melting models

If anisotropy =

flow parallel to slab


ad