HR: 10:30h
AN: V42A-01 INVITED     [Abstracts]
TI: Constraints on Thermochemical Convection of the Mantle from Plume-related Observations
AU: * Zhong, S
EM: szhong@anquetil.colorado.edu
AF: Univ of Colorado, Dept. of Physics, Univ. of Colorado, Boulder, CO 80309 United States
AB: Although geochemical observations have long suggested a layered mantle with more enriched mantle material in the bottom layer to provide a significant amount of heat to the top layer, the nature of such a layering remains unclear. An important observation that has been used to argue against the conventional layered mantle model (i.e., the layering at the 670 km depth) was the plume heat flux [Davies, 1999]. Plume heat flux is estimated as ~ 3.5 TW, or 10% of the surface heat flux [Davies, 1988; Sleep, 1990]. In this study, we demonstrate with 3-D spherical models of mantle convection with depth- and temperature-dependent viscosity that observed plume heat flux, plume excess temperature (<350°C), and upper mantle temperature (~ 1300°C) can pose important constraints on the layered mantle convection. We show that for a purely thermal convection model (i.e., a whole mantle convection), the observations of plume heat flux, plume excess temperature, and upper mantle temperature can be simultaneously explained only when internal heating rate is about 65%. For smaller internal heating rate, plume heat flux and plume excess temperature would be too large, and upper mantle temperature would be too small, compared with the observed. This suggests that for a whole mantle convection the CMB heat flux needs to be > 10 TW. For a core with no significant heat producing elements, such large CMB heat flux may lead to too rapid cooling of the core or a too young inner core. A layered mantle convection may help reduce the CMB heat flux. For layered convection models, we found that the top layer needs to be ~70% internally heated to explain the upper mantle temperature and plume-related observations, and this required internal heating ratio is insensitive to the layer thickness for the bottom layer (we used ~600 km and 1100 km thicknesses). This result suggests that heat generation rate for the bottom layer cannot be significantly larger (< a factor of 2) than that for the top layer. thus challenging the conventional geochemical inference for an significantly enriched bottom layer. However, this is more consistent with recent estimate of the MORB source composition that increases heat producing element concentration by a factor of three compared with the previously proposed.
DE: 8120 Dynamics of lithosphere and mantle--general
DE: 8121 Dynamics, convection currents and mantle plumes
DE: 8124 Earth's interior--composition and state (old 8105)
SC: Volcanology, Geochemistry, Petrology [V]
MN: 2005 Joint Assembly