signals of dynamic coupling between mantle and lithosphere beneath the axis of the east pacific rise...

34
Signals of dynamic coupling between mantle and lithosphere beneath the axis of the East Pacific Rise Christopher J. Rowan , David B. Rowley, Alessandro Forte, Nathan Simmons & Stephen Grand. with thanks to CIFAR, Chuck DeMets, and Pavel Doubrovine Monday, 6 January 14

Upload: allochthonous

Post on 19-Jul-2015

204 views

Category:

Technology


1 download

TRANSCRIPT

Signals of dynamic coupling between mantle and lithosphere beneath

the axis of the East Pacific Rise

Christopher J. Rowan, David B. Rowley, Alessandro Forte, Nathan Simmons & Stephen Grand.

with thanks to CIFAR, Chuck DeMets, and Pavel Doubrovine

Monday, 6 January 14

The East Pacific Rise since 83 Ma

Isochrons generated from interpolating crossing data from Atwater & Severinghaus (1989), Cande & Haxby (1991), Munschy et al. (1996), Wilder (2003) & age grid of Müller et al. (2008)

Chron 34ny

(83 Ma)

• East Pacific Rise (EPR) is the remnant of much longer Pacific-Farallon Ridge.

• Has produced ~45% of reconstructable oceanic lithosphere since 83 Ma (Rowley 2008).

Monday, 6 January 14

EPR in the mantle reference frame

Rowley et al., submitted.

Unlike other spreading ridges, EPR axis has remained fixed over one region of the mantle.

Indo-Atlantic hotspot frame, Lord Howe circuit.

Monday, 6 January 14

EPR in the mantle reference frame

Rowley et al., submitted.

Unlike other spreading ridges, EPR axis has remained fixed over one region of the mantle.

Indo-Atlantic hotspot frame, Lord Howe circuit.

Monday, 6 January 14

EPR in the mantle reference frame

Rowley et al., submitted.

Unlike other spreading ridges, EPR axis has remained fixed over one region of the mantle.

Indo-Atlantic hotspot frame, Lord Howe circuit.

Monday, 6 January 14

Spreading asymmetry & its significance

Chron 24.3no (53.35 Ma)

Pacific isochron

Monday, 6 January 14

Spreading asymmetry & its significance

Chron 24.3no (53.35 Ma)

Pacific isochron

Chron 24.3no (53.35 Ma)

Pacific isochron

C24.3no Predicted

Nazca isochron

50.78 Ma

Monday, 6 January 14

Spreading asymmetry & its significance

Chron 24.3no (53.35 Ma)

Pacific isochron

Chron 24.3no (53.35 Ma)

Pacific isochron

C24.3no Predicted

Nazca isochron

50.78 Ma

Long term Pacific spreading fraction ≈ 0.42

Monday, 6 January 14

Spreading asymmetry & its significance

Chron 24.3no (53.35 Ma)

Pacific isochron

Chron 24.3no (53.35 Ma)

Pacific isochron

C24.3no Predicted

Nazca isochron

50.78 Ma

Long term Pacific spreading fraction ≈ 0.42

Without asymmetric spreading, EPR would not remain fixed.

symmetric since 50 Ma

Monday, 6 January 14

Spreading asymmetry & its significance

Chron 24.3no (53.35 Ma)

Pacific isochron

Chron 24.3no (53.35 Ma)

Pacific isochron

C24.3no Predicted

Nazca isochron

50.78 Ma

Long term Pacific spreading fraction ≈ 0.42

Without asymmetric spreading, EPR would not remain fixed.

symmetric since 50 Masymmetric since 50 Ma

& 83 Ma

Monday, 6 January 14

Stable mantle upwelling beneath EPR

cm/yr

Predicted mantle flow based on buoyancy distribution model TX2008

(Simmons et al. 2009) and ‘V2’ viscosity profile (Mitrovica & Forte 2004).

Rowley et al., submitted.650 km depth

Monday, 6 January 14

Stable mantle upwelling beneath EPR

cm/yr

Predicted mantle flow based on buoyancy distribution model TX2008

(Simmons et al. 2009) and ‘V2’ viscosity profile (Mitrovica & Forte 2004).

Rowley et al., submitted.250 km depth

Monday, 6 January 14

Stable mantle upwelling beneath EPR

cm/yr

Predicted mantle flow based on buoyancy distribution model TX2008

(Simmons et al. 2009) and ‘V2’ viscosity profile (Mitrovica & Forte 2004).

250 km depth

shaded area: radial flow velocity>2cm/yr

Monday, 6 January 14

Mantle flow & spreading behaviour

0

400

800

1200

1600

2000

2400

2800

de

pth

(km

)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120

distance (∆)

-0.5 0.0 0.5

δρ/ρ (%)

5 cm/yr

180˚ -170˚ -160˚ -150˚ -140˚ -130˚ -120˚ -110˚ -100˚ -90˚ -80˚ -70˚ -60˚-30˚

-20˚

-10˚

Divergent mantle flow in uppermost

mantle leads rather than lags overriding

plate motions.

It is also strongly asymmetric.

Monday, 6 January 14

Mantle flow & spreading behaviour

Pacific & Nazca plates have both slowed down in past 5-10 Ma...

Pacific

Age

Monday, 6 January 14

Mantle flow & spreading behaviour

Forte et al. 2008

Pacific & Nazca plates have both slowed down in past 5-10 Ma...

Pacific

Age

...matching modelled effects of changing mantle flow.

Monday, 6 January 14

Spreading rate & asymmetry

more Nazca plate

more Pacific plate

50 Myr record of spreading

asymmetry: clear variability

Rowan & Rowley, in revision

Monday, 6 January 14

Spreading rate & asymmetry

more Nazca plate

more Pacific plate

50 Myr record of spreading

asymmetry: clear variability

Increasing asymmetry

appear linked to increases in

spreading rate.

Rowan & Rowley, in revision

Monday, 6 January 14

More than slab pull?

Distribution of slab pull forces are consistent with absolute motions of Pacific and Nazca plates.(Conrad & Lithgow-Bertolli, 2002,2004)

NazcaPacific

Monday, 6 January 14

More than slab pull?

But changes induced by a time varying ‘plume push’* at ridge axis could increase spreading rate & asymmetry.*(cf. Cande & Stegman,

2011)

Distribution of slab pull forces are consistent with absolute motions of Pacific and Nazca plates.(Conrad & Lithgow-Bertolli, 2002,2004)

NazcaPacific

Monday, 6 January 14

Absolute motions of Pacific & Nazca/Farallon plates

N

E

W

Nazca

Pacific

calculated near ridge at 15º SMonday, 6 January 14

Absolute motions of Pacific & Nazca/Farallon plates

N

E

W

Nazca

Pacific

Before 50 Ma: both plates speed up & slow down in concert. Faster rates associated with more northerly drift.

calculated near ridge at 15º SMonday, 6 January 14

Absolute motions of Pacific & Nazca/Farallon plates

N

E

W

Nazca

Pacific

?Before 50 Ma: both plates speed up & slow down in concert. Faster rates associated with more northerly drift.

After 50 Ma: Pacific plate slows down and Nazca plate speeds up as they bear more W & E

calculated near ridge at 15º SMonday, 6 January 14

Absolute motions of Pacific & Nazca/Farallon plates

N

E

W

Nazca

Pacific

?Before 50 Ma: both plates speed up & slow down in concert. Faster rates associated with more northerly drift.

After 50 Ma: Pacific plate slows down and Nazca plate speeds up as they bear more W & E

These intervals also coincide with periods of high asymmetry.

calculated near ridge at 15º SMonday, 6 January 14

Explaining absolute motions

Slowdown of the Pacific plate may be explained

by upwelling being slightly west of centre...

Rowley et al., submitted

Monday, 6 January 14

Explaining absolute motions

NazcaPacific

Slowdown of the Pacific plate may be explained

by upwelling being slightly west of centre...

Rowley et al., submitted

Monday, 6 January 14

Ridge migration in mantle frameE

ridge perpen-dicular

Ridge perpendicular wobbles that average out to roughly zero...

Monday, 6 January 14

Ridge migration in mantle frameEN,E

ridge parallel

ridge perpen-dicular

Ridge perpendicular wobbles that average out to roughly zero......superposed on (mostly N) ridge parallel drift.

Monday, 6 January 14

Ridge migration in mantle frameEN,E

ridge parallel

ridge perpen-dicular

Ridge perpendicular wobbles that average out to roughly zero......superposed on (mostly N) ridge parallel drift.

Linked changes in mantle drift & spreading behaviourMonday, 6 January 14

Time variation of coupling signalsRadial

mantle flux Faster Slower

Spreading Rate Faster Slower

Asymmetry Higher Lower

Absolute NAZ/PAC motions

More ridge orthogonal

Less ridge orthogonal

Migration over mantle Slower Faster

A 15-25 Myr cycle?

Monday, 6 January 14

Time variation of coupling signalsRadial

mantle flux Faster Slower

Spreading Rate Faster Slower

Asymmetry Higher Lower

Absolute NAZ/PAC motions

More ridge orthogonal

Less ridge orthogonal

Migration over mantle Slower Faster

A 15-25 Myr cycle?

Monday, 6 January 14

More than slab pull!

The spreading behaviour of the EPR can only be fully explained

in terms of a significant dynamic contribution from mantle flow

under the ridge axis.

This contribution appears to have varied in

magnitude (~15-25 Myr periodicity) and may have changed fundamentally in

nature at ~50 Ma.

Monday, 6 January 14

More than slab pull!

The spreading behaviour of the EPR can only be fully explained

in terms of a significant dynamic contribution from mantle flow

under the ridge axis.

This contribution appears to have varied in

magnitude (~15-25 Myr periodicity) and may have changed fundamentally in

nature at ~50 Ma.

Monday, 6 January 14

Monday, 6 January 14