Search for: All records

Abstract Low‐velocity anomalies in the upper mantle beneath eastern North America, including the Northern Appalachian Anomaly (NAA), the Central Appalachian Anomaly (CAA), and the weaker Southern Coastal Anomaly (SCA), have been characterized by many continent‐scale and regional seismic studies. Different models have been proposed to explain their existence beneath the passive margin of eastern North America, variously invoking the past passage of hot spot tracks, modern upwelling due to edge‐driven convection, or other processes. Depending on the nature and origin of these anomalies, they may influence, and/or be influenced by, the mantle transition zone (MTZ) structure beneath them. Previous receiver function studies have identified an overall thinner MTZ beneath the eastern margin of the US than beneath the continental interior. In this study, we resolve the MTZ geometry beneath these low‐velocity anomalies in unprecedented detail using the scattered wavefield migration technique. We find substantially thinned MTZ beneath the NAA and the CAA, and a moderately thinned MTZ beneath the SCA. In all cases, the thinning is achieved via a minor depression of the 410‐km discontinuity and a major uplift of the 660‐km discontinuity, which suggests the presence of a series of MTZ‐penetrating deep upwellings beneath eastern North America. The upwellings beneath eastern North America and a similar style upwelling beneath Bermuda may initiate from ponded thermally buoyant materials below the MTZ fed by hot return flows from the descending Farallon slab in the deep mantle. 

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. 

Abstract Observations of seismic waves that have passed through the Earth's lowermost mantle provide insight into deep mantle structure and dynamics, often on relatively small spatial scales. Here we use SKS, S2KS, S3KS, and PKS signals recorded across a large region including the United States, Mexico, and Central America to study the deepest mantle beneath large swaths of North America and the northeastern Pacific Ocean. These phases are enhanced via beamforming and then used to investigate polarization‐ and propagation direction‐dependent shear wave speeds (seismic anisotropy). A differential splitting approach enables us to robustly identify contributions from anisotropy. Our results show strong seismic anisotropy in approximately half of our study region, indicating that anisotropy may be more prevalent than commonly thought. In some regions, the anisotropy may be induced by flow driven by sinking cold slabs, and in other, more compact regions, by upwelling flow. Measured splitting due to lowermost mantle anisotropy is sufficiently strong to be non‐negligible in interpretations of SKS splitting due to upper mantle anisotropy in certain regions, which may prompt future re‐evaluations of upper mantle anisotropy beneath North and Central America. 

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. 

Many regions of the Earth's mantle are seismically anisotropic, including portions of the lowermost mantle, which may indicate deformation due to convective flow. The splitting of ScS phases, which reflect once off the core-mantle boundary (CMB), is commonly measured to identify lowermost mantle anisotropy, although some challenges exist. Here, we use global wavefield simulations to evaluate commonly used approaches to inferring a lowermost mantle contribution to ScS splitting. We show that due to effects of the CMB reflection, only the epicentral distance range between 60° and 70° is appropriate for ScS splitting measurements. For this distance range, splitting is diagnostic of deep mantle anisotropy if no upper mantle anisotropy is present; however, if ScS is also split due to upper mantle anisotropy, the reliable diagnosis of deep mantle anisotropy is challenging. Moreover, even in the case of a homogeneously anisotropic deep mantle region sampled from a single azimuth by multiple ScS waves with different source polarizations (in absence of upper mantle anisotropy), different apparent fast directions are produced. We suggest that ScS splitting should only be measured at null stations and conduct such an analysis worldwide. Our results indicate that seismic anisotropy is globally widespread in the deep mantle. 

SUMMARY The dependence of seismic wave speeds on propagation or polarization direction, called seismic anisotropy, is a relatively direct indicator of mantle deformation and flow. Mantle seismic anisotropy is often inferred from measurements of shear-wave splitting. A number of standard techniques to measure shear-wave splitting have been applied globally; for example, *KS splitting is often used to measure upper mantle anisotropy. In order to obtain robust constraints on anisotropic geometry, it is necessary to sample seismic anisotropy from different directions, ideally using different seismic phases with different incidence angles. However, many standard analysis techniques can only be applied for certain epicentral distances and source–receiver geometries. To search for new ways to detect mantle anisotropy, instead of focusing on the sensitivity of individual phases, we investigate the wavefield as a whole: we apply a ‘wavefield differencing’ approach to (systematically) understand what parts of the seismic wavefield are most affected by splitting due to seismic anisotropy in the mantle. We analyze differences between synthetic global wavefields calculated for isotropic and anisotropic input models, incorporating seismic anisotropy at different depths. Our results confirm that the seismic phases that are commonly used in splitting techniques are indeed strongly influenced by mantle anisotropy. However, we also identify less commonly used phases whose waveforms reflect the effects of anisotropy. For example, PS is strongly affected by splitting due to seismic anisotropy in the upper mantle. We show that PS can be used to fill in gaps in global coverage in shear-wave splitting data sets (for example, beneath ocean basins). We find that PcS is also a promising phase, and present a proof-of-concept example of PcS splitting analysis across the contiguous United States using an array processing approach. Because PcS is recorded at much shorter distances than *KS phases, PcS splitting can therefore fill in gaps in backazimuthal coverage. Our wavefield differencing results further hint at additional potential novel methods to detect and characterize splitting due to mantle seismic anisotropy. 

Abstract The Yellowstone region (western United States) is a commonly cited example of intraplate volcanism whose origin has been a topic of debate for several decades. Recent work has suggested that a deep mantle plume, rooted beneath southern California, is the source of Yellowstone volcanism. Seismic anisotropy, which typically results from deformation, can be used to identify and characterize mantle flow. Here, we show that the proposed plume root location at the base of the mantle is strongly seismically anisotropic. This finding is complemented by geodynamic modeling results showing upwelling flow and high strains in the lowermost mantle beneath the Yellowstone region. Our results support the idea that the Yellowstone volcanism is caused by a plume rooted in the deepest mantle beneath southern California, connecting dynamics in the deepest mantle with phenomena at Earth's surface. 

SUMMARY Seismic traveltime anomalies of waves that traverse the uppermost 100–200 km of the outer core have been interpreted as evidence of reduced seismic velocities (relative to radial reference models) just below the core–mantle boundary (CMB). These studies typically investigate differential traveltimes of SmKS waves, which propagate as P waves through the shallowest outer core and reflect from the underside of the CMB m times. The use of SmKS and S(m-1)KS differential traveltimes for core imaging are often assumed to suppress contributions from earthquake location errors and unknown and unmodelled seismic velocity heterogeneity in the mantle. The goal of this study is to understand the extent to which differential SmKS traveltimes are, in fact, affected by anomalous mantle structure, potentially including both velocity heterogeneity and anisotropy. Velocity variations affect not only a wave's traveltime, but also the path of a wave, which can be observed in deviations of the wave's incoming direction. Since radial velocity variations in the outer core will only minimally affect the wave path, in contrast to other potential effects, measuring the incoming direction of SmKS waves provides an additional diagnostic as to the origin of traveltime anomalies. Here we use arrays of seismometers to measure traveltime and direction anomalies of SmKS waves that sample the uppermost outer core. We form subarrays of EarthScope's regional Transportable Array stations, thus measuring local variations in traveltime and direction. We observe systematic lateral variations in both traveltime and incoming wave direction, which cannot be explained by changes to the radial seismic velocity profile of the outer core. Moreover, we find a correlation between incoming wave direction and traveltime anomaly, suggesting that observed traveltime anomalies may be caused, at least in part, by changes to the wave path and not solely by perturbations in outer core velocity. Modelling of 1-D ray and 3-D wave propagation in global 3-D tomographic models of mantle velocity anomalies match the trend of the observed traveltime anomalies. Overall, we demonstrate that observed SmKS traveltime anomalies may have a significant contribution from 3-D mantle structure, and not solely from outer core structure.