4.7 Article

Constraints on MTZ Water Content From Joint Inversion of Diurnal Variations and Magnetospheric Signals

期刊

GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH LETTERS
卷 50, 期 10, 页码 -

出版社

AMER GEOPHYSICAL UNION
DOI: 10.1029/2023GL102765

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The electrical conductivity of mantle minerals is influenced by water content, and using long-period electromagnetic induction data can help determine mantle hydration. To get accurate results, a conductivity model with high resolution at relevant depths and comprehensive uncertainty analysis is needed. This global induction study combines data from the ionospheric diurnal variation and magnetospheric ring current bands, resulting in improved vertical resolution of radial conductivity variations in the mantle transition zone (MTZ). The analysis suggests a dry MTZ with pyrolitic composition, and based on uncertainties, the upper bound for average water content in the MTZ is estimated to be 0.3 wt.%.
Electrical conductivity of mantle minerals is highly sensitive to water content, so estimates of this physical parameter based on long-period electromagnetic induction data can help to constrain mantle hydration. Reliable constraints require conductivity model with sufficient resolution at relevant depths, as well as a comprehensive uncertainty analysis. In this global induction study, we combine data from the primarily ionospheric diurnal variation and longer-period magnetospheric ring current bands. Joint inversion of these two data sources allows significantly improved vertical resolution of radial conductivity variations, especially in the mantle transition zone (MTZ). We then evaluate how uncertainties in the resulting conductivity model, in thermal models, and in laboratory results affect water content estimates, focusing on the MTZ. Our analysis suggests that the conductivity model is best explained by a dry MTZ with pyrolitic composition. Considering the uncertainties, an upper bound on average water content in the MTZ is 0.3 wt.% of water.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据