An official website of the United States government
SUMMARY Seismic anisotropy has been detected at many depths of the Earth, including its upper layers, the lowermost mantle and the inner core. While upper mantle seismic anisotropy is relatively straightforward to resolve, lowermost mantle anisotropy has proven to be more complicated to measure. Due to their long, horizontal ray paths along the core–mantle boundary (CMB), S waves diffracted along the CMB (Sdiff) are potentially strongly influenced by lowermost mantle anisotropy. Sdiff waves can be recorded over a large epicentral distance range and thus sample the lowermost mantle everywhere around the globe. Sdiff therefore represents a promising phase for studying lowermost mantle anisotropy; however, previous studies have pointed out some difficulties with the interpretation of differential SHdiff–SVdiff traveltimes in terms of seismic anisotropy. Here, we provide a new, comprehensive assessment of the usability of Sdiff waves to infer lowermost mantle anisotropy. Using both axisymmetric and fully 3-D global wavefield simulations, we show that there are cases in which Sdiff can reliably detect and characterize deep mantle anisotropy when measuring traditional splitting parameters (as opposed to differential traveltimes). First, we analyze isotropic effects on Sdiff polarizations, including the influence of realistic velocity structure (such as 3-D velocity heterogeneity and ultra-low velocity zones), the character of the lowermost mantle velocity gradient, mantle attenuation structure, and Earth’s Coriolis force. Secondly, we evaluate effects of seismic anisotropy in both the upper and the lowermost mantle on SHdiff waves. In particular, we investigate how SHdiff waves are split by seismic anisotropy in the upper mantle near the source and how this anisotropic signature propagates to the receiver for a variety of lowermost mantle models. We demonstrate that, in particular and predictable cases, anisotropy leads to Sdiff splitting that can be clearly distinguished from other waveform effects. These results enable us to lay out a strategy for the analysis of Sdiff splitting due to anisotropy at the base of the mantle, which includes steps to help avoid potential pitfalls, with attention paid to the initial polarization of Sdiff and the influence of source-side anisotropy. We demonstrate our Sdiff splitting method using three earthquakes that occurred beneath the Celebes Sea, measured at many transportable array stations at a suitable epicentral distance. We resolve consistent and well-constrained Sdiff splitting parameters due to lowermost mantle anisotropy beneath the northeastern Pacific Ocean.
more »
« less
Early Cambrian renewal of the geodynamo and the origin of inner core structure
Abstract Paleomagnetism can elucidate the origin of inner core structure by establishing when crystallization started. The salient signal is an ultralow field strength, associated with waning thermal energy to power the geodynamo from core-mantle heat flux, followed by a sharp intensity increase as new thermal and compositional sources of buoyancy become available once inner core nucleation (ICN) commences. Ultralow fields have been reported from Ediacaran (~565 Ma) rocks, but the transition to stronger strengths has been unclear. Herein, we present single crystal paleointensity results from early Cambrian (~532 Ma) anorthosites of Oklahoma. These yield a time-averaged dipole moment 5 times greater than that of the Ediacaran Period. This rapid renewal of the field, together with data defining ultralow strengths, constrains ICN to ~550 Ma. Thermal modeling using this onset age suggests the inner core had grown to 50% of its current radius, where seismic anisotropy changes, by ~450 Ma. We propose the seismic anisotropy of the outermost inner core reflects development of a global spherical harmonic degree-2 deep mantle structure at this time that has persisted to the present day. The imprint of an older degree-1 pattern is preserved in the innermost inner core.
more »
« less
- PAR ID:
- 10380448
- Publisher / Repository:
- Nature Publishing Group
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Nature Communications
- Volume:
- 13
- Issue:
- 1
- ISSN:
- 2041-1723
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Seismic anisotropy has been detected at many depths of the Earth, including its upper layers, the lowermost mantle and the inner core. While upper mantle seismic anisotropy is relatively straightforward to resolve, lowermost mantle anisotropy has proven to be more complicated to measure. Due to their long, horizontal ray paths along the core–mantle boundary (CMB), S waves diffracted along the CMB (Sdiff) are potentially strongly influenced by lowermost mantle anisotropy. Sdiff waves can be recorded over a large epicentral distance range and thus sample the lowermost mantle everywhere around the globe. Sdiff therefore represents a promising phase for studying lowermost mantle anisotropy; however, previous studies have pointed out some difficulties with the interpretation of differential SHdiff–SVdiff traveltimes in terms of seismic anisotropy. Here, we provide a new, comprehensive assessment of the usability of Sdiff waves to infer lowermost mantle anisotropy. Using both axisymmetric and fully 3-D global wavefield simulations, we show that there are cases in which Sdiff can reliably detect and characterize deep mantle anisotropy when measuring traditional splitting parameters (as opposed to differential traveltimes). First, we analyze isotropic effects on Sdiff polarizations, including the influence of realistic velocity structure (such as 3-D velocity heterogeneity and ultra-low velocity zones), the character of the lowermost mantle velocity gradient, mantle attenuation structure, and Earth’s Coriolis force. Secondly, we evaluate effects of seismic anisotropy in both the upper and the lowermost mantle on SHdiff waves. In particular, we investigate how SHdiff waves are split by seismic anisotropy in the upper mantle near the source and how this anisotropic signature propagates to the receiver for a variety of lowermost mantle models. We demonstrate that, in particular and predictable cases, anisotropy leads to Sdiff splitting that can be clearly distinguished from other waveform effects. These results enable us to lay out a strategy for the analysis of Sdiff splitting due to anisotropy at the base of the mantle, which includes steps to help avoid potential pitfalls, with attention paid to the initial polarization of Sdiff and the influence of source-side anisotropy. We demonstrate our Sdiff splitting method using three earthquakes that occurred beneath the Celebes Sea, measured at many transportable array stations at a suitable epicentral distance. We resolve consistent and well-constrained Sdiff splitting parameters due to lowermost mantle anisotropy beneath the northeastern Pacific Ocean.more » « less
-
Abstract The dynamics of Earth's D″ layer at the base of the mantle plays an essential role in Earth's thermal and chemical evolution. Mantle convection in D″ is thought to result in seismic anisotropy; therefore, observations of anisotropy may be used to infer lowermost mantle flow. However, the connections between mantle flow and seismic anisotropy in D″ remain ambiguous. Here, we calculate the present‐day mantle flow field in D″ using 3D global geodynamic models. We then compute strain, a measure of deformation, outside the two large‐low velocity provinces (LLVPs) and compare the distribution of strain with previous observations of anisotropy. We find that, on a global scale, D″ materials are advected toward the LLVPs. The strains of D″ materials generally increase with time along their paths toward the LLVPs and toward deeper depths, but regions far from LLVPs may develop relative high strain as well. Materials in D″ outside the LLVPs mostly undergo lateral stretching, with the stretching direction often aligning with mantle flow direction, especially in fast flow regions. In most models, the depth‐averaged strain in D″ is >0.5 outside the LLVPs, consistent with widespread observations of seismic anisotropy. Flow directions inferred from anisotropy observations often (but not always) align with predictions from geodynamic modeling calculations.more » « less
-
SUMMARY Mantle plumes form from thermal boundary layers, such as Earth's core–mantle boundary. As plumes rise towards the surface, they are laterally deflected by the surrounding mantle flow that is governed by deep mantle density and viscosity structures. The lateral motions of mantle plumes carry information of deep mantle structure and dynamics and are used to setup reference frames by which absolute plate motions are reconstructed. In this study, we compare two methods to compute deep mantle flow and lateral motion of plumes. In mantle convection (MC) models, the mantle flow field and lateral motions of plumes are determined by solving conservation equations forward-in-time from given initial conditions. In plume advection (PA) models, approximate viscosity and present-day density structures are used to calculate present-day mantle flow which is then propagated backward-in-time assuming zero thermal diffusion, and plume conduits are represented by continuous lines and are passively advected within the background mantle flow. The question is how assumptions in PA models influence the predictions of deep mantle flow and plume lateral motions. Here, we perform purely thermal MC models and thermochemical MC models with intrinsically dense materials in the lowermost mantle. The deep mantle flow and plume lateral motions are determined accurately in each MC model. We also perform PA models using the approximated present-day viscosity and temperature structures in these MC models. We find that PA models without considering temperature-dependence of viscosity and/or only using long wavelength present-day temperature structure (up to degree 20) often lead to an average of ∼50–60 per cent and ∼60–200 per cent differences of present-day mantle flow velocities than purely thermal MC models and thermochemical MC models, respectively. By propagating inaccurate flow fields backward-in-time in PA models often cause even larger errors of mantle flow velocities in the past. Even using the same parameters and starting from the same present-day mantle flow fields as in MC models, the PA models still show an average of ∼10–30 per cent misfit of mantle flow velocities after ∼40 Ma. In addition, we show that errors of mantle flow fields in PA models can cause ∼100–600 per cent differences of plume lateral motions than that constrained in MC models in the past 60 Ma. Even we use the mantle flow in MC models to advected virtual plumes in PA models, the virtual plumes could still show ∼50–300 per cent difference of lateral motions than dynamic plumes in MC models if the virtual plumes do not start with the same locations and/or shapes as plumes in MC models. We also find virtual plumes in PA models initiated at different locations and/or with different shapes can be later advected to similar locations, suggesting that the lateral motions of plumes in PA models can be non-unique. Therefore, it is important to consider the build-in assumptions of PA models when interpreting their predictions on deep mantle flow field and plume lateral motions. The accuracy of PA models would improve as we gain better understanding on Earth's deep mantle structure and dynamics.more » « less
-
Abstract Convective flow in the deep mantle controls Earth's dynamic evolution, influences plate tectonics, and has shaped Earth's current surface features. Present and past convection‐induced deformation manifests itself in seismic anisotropy, which is particularly strong in the mantle's uppermost and lowermost portions. While the general patterns of seismic anisotropy have been mapped for the upper mantle, anisotropy in the lowermost mantle (called D′′) is at an earlier stage of exploration. Here we review recent progress in methods to measure and interpret D′′ anisotropy. Our understanding of the limitations of existing methods and the development of new measurement strategies have been aided enormously by the availability of high‐performance computing resources. We give an overview of how measurements of seismic anisotropy can help constrain the mineralogy and fabric of the deep mantle. Specifically, new and creative strategies that combine multiple types of observations provide much tighter constraints on the geometry of anisotropy than have previously been possible. We also discuss how deep mantle seismic anisotropy provides insights into lowermost mantle dynamics. We summarize what we have learned so far from measurements of D′′ anisotropy, how inferences of lowermost mantle flow from measurements of seismic anisotropy relate to geodynamic models of mantle flow, and what challenges we face going forward. Finally, we discuss some of the important unsolved problems related to the dynamics of the lowermost mantle that can be elucidated in the future by combining observations of seismic anisotropy with geodynamic predictions of lowermost mantle flow.more » « less
