3.8 Proceedings Paper

A review of the embedded time scales of flood basalt volcanism with special emphasis on dramatically short magmatic pulses

出版社

GEOLOGICAL SOC AMER INC
DOI: 10.1130/2014.2505(15)

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

There are at least a dozen Phanerozoic continental flood basalts and oceanic plateaus (large igneous provinces) that roughly obey a rule of two times one million (volume of extruded lava of one million cubic kilometers and duration of volcanic activity similar to 1 m.y.). The correlation between large igneous province ages and mass extinctions (and oceanic anoxia events) is excellent, but quantitative scenarios are still wanting. We hypothesize that the temporal sequences of extrusions determine the severity of extinction: Volcanic pulses separated by thousands of years allow the ocean-atmosphere system time to recover, whereas large volcanic pulses occurring in a shorter sequence may result in a runaway effect and cause a mass extinction. Detailed flow-by-flow magnetic stratigraphies of thick sections have identified directional groups (sequences of superimposed lava flows with the same paleomagnetic direction that cooled in a time too short to record secular variation). With help of this simple tool, many single eruptive events with a volume larger than 1000 km(3), some in excess of 10,000 km(3), emplaced in possibly less than a decade, have been identified. We review this evidence, mainly for the following flood basalt provinces: Columbia, Brito-Arctic, Deccan, Karoo-Ferrar, Central Atlantic magmatic province, and Siberian Traps. Large igneous province volcanism occurs in a highly discontinuous way, on embedded time scales, on the order of 10 m.y., 1 m.y., 100 k.y., and 10 yr. This provides constraints for models of plume-lithosphere interaction and magma production. A next step is to model the consequences of massive injection of gases that can be derived from these time and duration estimates. Early attempts are reviewed in a companion paper in this volume.

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

3.8
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