1 / 45

Thermal structure of continental lithosphere from heat flow and seismic constraints: Implications for upper mantle compo

Thermal structure of continental lithosphere from heat flow and seismic constraints: Implications for upper mantle composition and geodynamic models. Claire Perry GEOTOP-UQAM-McGill , Montreal, Canada. Stability of continental lithosphere. equilibrium between chemical and

thiery
Download Presentation

Thermal structure of continental lithosphere from heat flow and seismic constraints: Implications for upper mantle compo

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. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Thermal structure of continental lithosphere from heat flow and seismic constraints: Implications for upper mantle composition and geodynamic models Claire Perry GEOTOP-UQAM-McGill, Montreal, Canada

  2. Stability of continental lithosphere • equilibrium between chemical and • thermal buoyancy (e.g.,Jordan 1979) ? δFe# δT 150 km Perry et al. GJI (2003); Forte & Perry Science (2000) Accurate lithospheric thermal models required(heat flow, crustal heat production)

  3. Introduction : Global Terrestrial Heat Loss Pollack et al. (1993)

  4. Continental Heat Flow : example from Canadian Shield

  5. Heteogenity of Continents … • geological • compositional • link between • surface geology • and lateral • variations in Qs Canadian Shield

  6. generic thermal model for all cratons ? • influence of temperature + composition on • seismic velocity precise thermal model

  7. Thermal Structure of the Continental Lithosphere Gung et al. (2003) • variable seismic thickness • d3 detected by tomography

  8. Presentation Outline • Lithospheric thermal structure, upper mantle temperatures, and Pn velocity-temperature conversions from heat flow and seismic refraction studies • The thermal boundary layer of continental lithosphere and average mantle temperatures from a geodynamic flow model How does continental heat production affect lithospheric and mantle temperatures ?

  9. Variables of Continental Thermal Structure Problem

  10. Variables of Continental Thermal Structure Problem (Aavg~0.7 µWm-3) : distribution of radiogenic elements ? small (~0.02µWm-3)

  11. Archean Superior Province, Canada

  12. Heat Flow Data … • Qs Tmoho • correlation VP – T • mechanical resistance of lithosphere

  13. Distribution of Radiogenic elements _____________ Differentiation Index: DI= <Asurf> Ac Province DI Perry et al. JGR 2006a

  14. Distribution of Radiogenic elements _____________ Differentiation Index: DI= <Asurf> Ac Province DI Perry et al. JGR 2006a

  15. Crustal Model • distribution of ACR in crustal columns • Moho temperature estimated using using k(T) LITH5.0 (Perry et al. GJI, 2002) + more recent data • Hc, Pn Fixed Parameters: Qs, A0, k(T), Hc Free Parameter : Qm (constrained by xenolith + heat flow, A(z) constrained by Qm, Qs, Hc Principal unknown Qm

  16. Pn velocity

  17. Crustal Thickness

  18. Moho depth

  19. dV(Pn)/dT=-0.60x10-3 ± 10% kms-1K-1 (close to mineral physics estimates)

  20. Average Cratonic Mantle Composition Perry et al. JGR 2006b • on-craton VP-T ≠ off-craton VP-T • predicted/measured VP Qm≥ 12 mWm-2

  21. Preferred Mineralogical Composition :Superior upper-mantle joint Qs + Pn lithospheric mantle composition + Qm Perry et al. JGR 2006b

  22. Conclusions – Part I • Comparison of large-scale empirical geophysical data and in-situ experiments of mantle composition provide further confidence in mantle temperatures from seismic studies and heat flow • Joint inversions of heat flow and seismic Pn velocity constrain : • mantle mineralogical composition • effects of water ? • Average composition of cratonic mantle in southern Superior Province : ‘Proton’ or ‘Archon’ ? • Superior crust was rejuvenated by Keweenawan rifting at 1.1 Ga – metasomatism ?

  23. Using V-T conversions + upper mantle temperature from heat flow ++ crustal models (test tomographic model) • subcontinental mantle dynamics : • Thermo-chemical structure of cratonic roots Refine thermo-chem structure

  24. Thermal Boundary Layer at the base of Continents ‘rheological’ thickness of continent

  25. Example from Kaapvaal xenoliths

  26. Model Geometry

  27. Oceanic vs. Continental Geotherms • δc»δo • δc depends on A • (dT/dz)cond = • O(dT/dz)a

  28. Effect of Heat Production

  29. Distribution of Heat Production

  30. Δt = 0.25 Ga

  31. Continental thickness from seismic tomography d d from Nettles (2004)

  32. Continental thickness from seismic tomography d d d from Nettles (2004)

  33. Continental Thermal Boundary Layer

  34. Lateral Temperature Anomalies

  35. Scaling Law for Average Mantle Temperature Θ C = 1.02 Sotin & Labrosse (1999) Total oceanic area, F

  36. Continental geometry and average mantle temperature Perry, Jaupart & Tackley, in prep.

  37. Continent thermal structure and average mantle temperature Perry, Jaupart & Tackley, in prep.

  38. Hm + Vo + A × Vc = Ct = Htotal × Vtotal Effect of crustal accretion on the mantle’s thermal history ? Model Setup : To w d A D H To+ΔT Example Present-day Model :Example Archean Model : Htotal = 5 pW/kg Htotal = 10 pW/kg A = 300 pW/kg (~0.9μWm-3) A = 300 pW/kg RaH = 5 × 106 RaH = 5 × 107

  39. 1.0 0.5 0.0 Today Potential temperature Archean Same mean mantle temperature from two models after 1Ga

  40. 1.0 0.5 0.0 Today Potential temperature Archean Vrms continent/Vrms max RaH

  41. 1.0 0.5 0.0 Today Potential temperature Archean Tmanto~Tmant(t) A/H Tmanto>>Tmant(t) RaH

  42. Conclusions - II • Lateral temperature anomalies between ocean/continent diminished as A increases • Thickness of the thermal b.l. below continents depends strongly on A (A+ δ-) • Average mantle temperature may be scaled as a function of the total oceanic area • Implications for time evolution of mantle temperature • Average mantle temperature (and heat flow) may not be have been significantly higher than today : Feedback between mantle & continents : Ra, Acont

More Related