Search engine for discovering works of Art, research articles, and books related to Art and Culture
ShareThis
Javascript must be enabled to continue!

New Insights into Global Plume Buoyancy and Heat Fluxes from Numerical Models of Plume-Lithosphere Interaction

View through CrossRef
Earth's dynamic evolution is controlled by the interplay between mantle convection and plate tectonics. While subducted plates stir the mantle, upwelling plumes can lubricate, push, and break up plates. As the surface expression of upwelling plume dynamics, the plume buoyancy flux is traditionally estimated as the cross-sectional area of the hotspot swell multiplied by plate velocity (for intraplate hotspots) or multiplied by the full-spreading rate (for ridge-centred hotspots).This classical approach implies two big assumptions: that the swell is fully isostatically compensated by the hot ponding plume material at the base of the lithosphere; and that this plume material spreads at exactly the same speed as the overriding plate moves. However, geophysical observations and numerical models demonstrate that those assumptions are wrong. Hotspot swells are largely dynamically instead of fully isostatically compensated; to some extent, swells are further compensated by sublithospheric erosion [1]. Moreover, at least some plumes spread faster than plate motion [2]. For example, evidence in the North Atlantic from prominent V-shaped ridges, ephemeral landscapes, and off-axis uplift of oceanic gateways suggests that along-axis asthenospheric velocities can be an order of magnitude faster than the full plate-spreading rate near Iceland [3]. Thus, classical estimates for the buoyancy fluxes of deep-seated mantle upwellings may be strongly biased by surface-plate velocities [4]. Alternative estimates of plume buoyancy flux assume a constant swell decay timescale [4] but without any physical underpinning. As detailed estimates of dynamic seafloor topography are now available [5], it is time to revisit the buoyancy fluxes and, thereby, the mass and heat fluxes carried by mantle plumes.Here, we explore high-resolution regional-scale geodynamic models with a free surface to study plume-ridge interaction and swell compensation. We consider composite diffusion-dislocation creep in our models. We investigate the effects of plume temperature/radius, plate velocity (or spreading rate for ridge-centred hotspots), and mantle rheological parameters on plume-lithosphere interaction and swell support. Preliminary results demonstrate that plume spreading is significantly faster than plate motion for intermediate-to-large plumes at realistic rheological conditions. From this result, we update estimates of plume buoyancy fluxes, showing that the total heat flux carried by plumes across the core-mantle boundary is significantly larger than previously thought.  Reference List1. Cadio et al., 2012; doi:1016/j.epsl.2012.10.0062. Ribe & Christensen, 1999; doi:10.1016/S0012-821X(99)00179-X3. Poore et al., 2011; doi: 10.1038/ngeo11614. Hoggard et al., 2020; doi: 10.1016/j.epsl.2020.1163175. Hoggard et al., 2016; doi: 10.1038/ngeo2709
Title: New Insights into Global Plume Buoyancy and Heat Fluxes from Numerical Models of Plume-Lithosphere Interaction
Description:
Earth's dynamic evolution is controlled by the interplay between mantle convection and plate tectonics.
While subducted plates stir the mantle, upwelling plumes can lubricate, push, and break up plates.
As the surface expression of upwelling plume dynamics, the plume buoyancy flux is traditionally estimated as the cross-sectional area of the hotspot swell multiplied by plate velocity (for intraplate hotspots) or multiplied by the full-spreading rate (for ridge-centred hotspots).
This classical approach implies two big assumptions: that the swell is fully isostatically compensated by the hot ponding plume material at the base of the lithosphere; and that this plume material spreads at exactly the same speed as the overriding plate moves.
However, geophysical observations and numerical models demonstrate that those assumptions are wrong.
Hotspot swells are largely dynamically instead of fully isostatically compensated; to some extent, swells are further compensated by sublithospheric erosion [1].
Moreover, at least some plumes spread faster than plate motion [2].
For example, evidence in the North Atlantic from prominent V-shaped ridges, ephemeral landscapes, and off-axis uplift of oceanic gateways suggests that along-axis asthenospheric velocities can be an order of magnitude faster than the full plate-spreading rate near Iceland [3].
Thus, classical estimates for the buoyancy fluxes of deep-seated mantle upwellings may be strongly biased by surface-plate velocities [4].
Alternative estimates of plume buoyancy flux assume a constant swell decay timescale [4] but without any physical underpinning.
As detailed estimates of dynamic seafloor topography are now available [5], it is time to revisit the buoyancy fluxes and, thereby, the mass and heat fluxes carried by mantle plumes.
Here, we explore high-resolution regional-scale geodynamic models with a free surface to study plume-ridge interaction and swell compensation.
We consider composite diffusion-dislocation creep in our models.
We investigate the effects of plume temperature/radius, plate velocity (or spreading rate for ridge-centred hotspots), and mantle rheological parameters on plume-lithosphere interaction and swell support.
Preliminary results demonstrate that plume spreading is significantly faster than plate motion for intermediate-to-large plumes at realistic rheological conditions.
From this result, we update estimates of plume buoyancy fluxes, showing that the total heat flux carried by plumes across the core-mantle boundary is significantly larger than previously thought.
  Reference List1.
Cadio et al.
, 2012; doi:1016/j.
epsl.
2012.
10.
0062.
Ribe & Christensen, 1999; doi:10.
1016/S0012-821X(99)00179-X3.
Poore et al.
, 2011; doi: 10.
1038/ngeo11614.
Hoggard et al.
, 2020; doi: 10.
1016/j.
epsl.
2020.
1163175.
Hoggard et al.
, 2016; doi: 10.
1038/ngeo2709.

Related Results

Plume–ridge interactions: ridgeward versus plate-drag plume flow
Plume–ridge interactions: ridgeward versus plate-drag plume flow
Abstract. The analysis of mid-ocean ridges and hotspots that are sourced by deep-rooted mantle plumes allows us to get a glimpse of mantle structure and dynamics. Dynamical interac...
Corona structures driven by plume-lithosphere interactions and evidence for ongoing plume activity on Venus
Corona structures driven by plume-lithosphere interactions and evidence for ongoing plume activity on Venus
In the absence of global plate tectonics, mantle convection and plume-lithosphere interaction are the main drivers of surface deformation on Venus. Among documented tectonic struct...
Effect of ocean heat flux on Titan's topography and tectonic stresses
Effect of ocean heat flux on Titan's topography and tectonic stresses
INTRODUCTIONThe thermo-mechanical evolution of Titan's ice shell is primarily controlled by the mode of the heat transfer in the ice shell and the amount of heat coming from the oc...
What Is the Impact of Turfgrass on Urban Carbon Dioxide Fluxes?
What Is the Impact of Turfgrass on Urban Carbon Dioxide Fluxes?
Evaluating the efficacy of climate mitigation measures requires quantifying urban greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Both anthropogenic and biogenic GHG fluxes are important in urban ...
Variation in seed buoyancy of species in wetland ecosystems with different flooding dynamics
Variation in seed buoyancy of species in wetland ecosystems with different flooding dynamics
AbstractQuestion:Do species from communities with different flooding dynamics differ in seed buoyancy? Is there a trade‐off between seed buoyancy and seed longevity?Methods:Seeds o...
Fractal density and singularity analysis of heat flow over ocean ridges
Fractal density and singularity analysis of heat flow over ocean ridges
AbstractPeak heat flow occurs at mid-ocean ridges and decreases with the age of the oceanic lithosphere. Several plate models, including the Parsons and Sclater (PSM) model, Global...
Plume-SPH 1.0: A three-dimensional, dusty-gas volcanic plume model based on smoothed particle hydrodynamics
Plume-SPH 1.0: A three-dimensional, dusty-gas volcanic plume model based on smoothed particle hydrodynamics
Abstract. Plume-SPH provides the the first particle based simulation of volcanic plumes. SPH (smoothed particle hydrodynamics) has several advantages over currently used mesh based...
Magnesium Heat Sink Evaluations
Magnesium Heat Sink Evaluations
<div class="htmlview paragraph">A system has been constructed to estimate heat dissipated from geometrically identical heat sinks and pinfins extruded from magnesium (M1A) an...

Back to Top