4.7 Article

Buffering of mantle conditions through water cycling and thermal feedbacks maintains magmatism over geologic time

期刊

出版社

SPRINGERNATURE
DOI: 10.1038/s43247-022-00617-0

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Despite planetary cooling and a lack of thermal equilibrium in the mantle, data-constrained numerical models show that the self-regulated mantle evolution, maintained by thermal and water cycling feedbacks, has allowed magma and volcanic activity to continue on Earth. Thus, the deep-water cycling and coupled feedback mechanisms have played a crucial role in maintaining a near-constant mantle viscosity and sustaining magmatic activity throughout Earth's history.
The Earth has remained magmatically and volcanically active over its full geologic history despite continued planetary cooling and a lack of thermal equilibrium in the mantle. Here we investigate this conundrum using data-constrained numerical models of deep-water cycling and thermal history. We find that the homologous temperature - the ratio of upper mantle to melting temperatures - initially declined but has been buffered at a nearly constant value since 2.5-2.0 billion years ago. Melt buffering is a result of the dependence of melting temperature and mantle viscosity on both mantle temperature and water content. We show that thermal and water cycling feedbacks lead to a self-regulated mantle evolution, characterised by a near-constant mantle viscosity. This occurs even though the mantle remains far from thermal equilibrium. The added feedback from water-dependent melting allows magmatism to be co-buffered over geological time. Thus, we propose that coupled thermal and water cycling feedbacks have maintained melting on Earth and associated volcanic/magmatic activity. Deep-water cycling enables a self-regulated mantle evolution which maintains a near-constant mantle viscosity and can explain why magmatism has continued despite planetary cooling throughout Earth's history, suggests data-constrained numerical modelling

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