z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
Application of a Premelting Model to the Lithosphere‐Asthenosphere Boundary
Author(s) -
Yamauchi Hatsuki,
Takei Yasuko
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
geochemistry, geophysics, geosystems
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.928
H-Index - 136
ISSN - 1525-2027
DOI - 10.1029/2020gc009338
Subject(s) - geology , solidus , premelting , geophysics , mantle (geology) , asthenosphere , lithosphere , discontinuity (linguistics) , geothermal gradient , tectonics , seismology , physics , materials science , melting point , mathematical analysis , mathematics , alloy , quantum mechanics , composite material
A seismic discontinuity known as the G‐discontinuity, which has been prevailingly detected in the oceanic mantle, is considered to provide evidence of a sharp lithosphere‐asthenosphere boundary (LAB). We investigate whether this sharp LAB is explained by grain boundary premelting, which causes a solid‐state weakening of rock from just below the solidus temperature. We use an experimentally derived mechanical model describing the effect of premelting and calculate vertical profiles ofV SandQ S − 1for various sets of oceanic geotherm and solidus values. Based on the realistic volatile distribution and solidus profile obtained from a model of fractional decompression melting, we show that even when the oceanic upper mantle is melt free, geotherm sufficiently approaches the solidus at various plate ages, resulting in a steep reduction inV Sdue to the anelastic effect of premelting. A small amount of volatile adsorbed to grain boundary plays an important role in this result. The predicted seismic discontinuity sharpness (mostly ∼ 15 km) is consistent with seismological observations (≤15 km), predicted discontinuity depth (along ∼ 1300°C isotherm) is deeper than observations (along 1100°C isotherm), and predicted velocity reduction amplitude ( ∼ 1%–2%) is considerably smaller than observations (≥5%). Because the predicted velocity reduction amplitude is subject to uncertainty resulted from the limited experimental data, further study is needed for the mechanical effect of premelting. We further discuss a discrepancy of seismological results from receiver function and SS precursor studies and from surface wave studies, making it difficult to explain both data consistently.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here