Impact Decompression Melting: A Possible Trigger for Impact Induced Volcanism and Mantle Hotspots ?

Jones, Adrian P.; Price, D.G.; DeCarli, Paul S.; Price, Neville J.; Clegg, Richard A.

doi:10.1007/978-3-642-55463-6_4

Cited by 15 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 76 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Consequently, the pressure release under the crater is much smaller than some recently published estimates (Jones et al, 2001).…”

Section: Stratigraphic Uplift Beneath Cratersmentioning

confidence: 57%

“…Terrestrial Venusian surface is estimated as 300 to 500 Myr (Schaber et al, 1992). Some authors, recognizing the difficulty of provoking volcanic eruptions by impacts on normal terrestrial lithosphere, suggest that impacts may induce a volcanic outburst if the impact happens to strike a pre-existing hot spot (Jones et al, 2001). However, statistical reasoning, coupled with the lifetimes of hot spots, indicates that such a coincidence is extremely improbable.…”

Section: Frequency Of Large-scale Impacts Vs Magmatic Eventsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Nevertheless, the idea that impacts may initiate volcanic eruptions on Earth or even the Moon has been vetted many times in recent years (Elkins-Tanton et al, 2002;Glickson, 1999;Jones et al, 1998;Jones et al, 2001;Rampino, 1987;Rogers, 1982;Ryder, 1994). Most of these proposals reiterate the original idea of Ronca (1966) that ascribes impact-induced volcanism to decompression melting beneath the impact crater.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Impacts do not initiate volcanic eruptions: Eruptions close to the crater

Ivanov

Melosh

2003

Geol

115

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Consequently, the pressure release under the crater is much smaller than some recently published estimates (Jones et al, 2001).…”

Section: Stratigraphic Uplift Beneath Cratersmentioning

confidence: 57%

Section: Frequency Of Large-scale Impacts Vs Magmatic Eventsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Impacts do not initiate volcanic eruptions: Eruptions close to the crater

Ivanov

Melosh

2003

Geol

115

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The mechanism by which meteorite impact may cause volcanism on the scale of a LIP and auto-obliteration of the crater was outlined by Jones et al (2002Jones et al ( , 2003. In contrast, Ivanov and Melosh (2003b) published numerical model results, which they claimed showed that impacts cannot initiate volcanic eruptions or produce a LIP on the given scale, except for unusually hot target materials.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 92%

“…Since then there has been significant controversy as to whether impact processes can actually induce large-scale volcanic eruptions (e.g., Jones et al, 2002Jones et al, , 2003Ivanov and Melosh, 2003a,b). A clear advantage of the theory that impacts trigger oceanic volcanism is that it can explain many features of oceanic plateaus without the special pleading required by plume models to explain the absence of any postflood-basalt seamount chains and present-day hotspots.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Modeling impact volcanism as a possible origin for the Ontong Java Plateau

Jones¹,

Wünemann²,

Price³

2005

Plates, Plumes and Paradigms

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We have conducted hydrocode simulations to test whether impact volcanism is a viable process to explain the origin of the OntongJava Plateau (OJP), currently recognized as the largest oceanic large igneous province (LIP) on Earth. First we demonstrate that the particular hydrocode we utilize (SALE-3MAT; e.g., Wünnemann et al., 2005) can produce the same results as the hydrocode SALEB used by Ivanov and Melosh (2003b), who claim that impacts do not trigger volcanism. We find their model to be accurate and obtain similar results after introducing a different method for estimating the amount of melt. Having also previously demonstrated that the thermal and physical state of the target lithosphere is critical to melt production (Jones et al., 2002), we use the dry lherzolite melting parameterization of Katz et al. (2003), and a hot geotherm appropriate for 20-to 10-Ma oceanic crust at the onset of the OJP at ca. 120 Ma (Ingle and Coffin, 2004). For the model with the largest amount of melt, we used a dunite projectile of diameter 30 km and velocity 20 km/s with vertical incidence.If the same projectile struck cold continental lithosphere, it would produce a ~300-km diameter impact crater, probably similar to the maximum estimates of the size of the largest impact crater preserved on Earth (Vredefort), where a central uplift of >10 km has been recognized. In our simulation, the effect of changing the target to hot oceanic lithosphere is quite dramatic, and produces massive melting both by heating and decompression. The melt is distributed predominantly as a giant subhorizontal disc with a diameter in excess of 600 km down to >150 km in depth in the upper mantle withiñ 10 min of the impact, although most of the initial melt is shallower than ~100 km. The total volume of mostly ultramafic melt, is ~2.5 ؋ 10 6 km 3 , ranging from superheated liquid (100% melt, >500 °°C above solidus) within 100 km of ground zero, to varying degrees of nonequilibrium partial melt with depth and distance. This melt volume would take up to tens of thousands of years to solidify. The total volume of melt produced would be approximately three times as much, yielding ~7.5 ؋ 10 6 km 3 of basalt, if the heat were distributed to produce 20-30% partial melting of the mantle. Larger melt volumes can easily be simulated by increasing projectile mass and/or by adopting hotter mantle, or nonanhydrous conditions. There is no upper limit on the volume 711 *on June 13, 2015 specialpapers.gsapubs.org Downloaded from of melt that can be generated in this way, although impact events become statistically less likely with increasing impactor size. We suggest that much of this melt would be buoyant and erupt rapidly, and that it would be followed by an extended secondary period of additional melting (which we have not modeled here) that would occur at greater depths (e.g., Elkins-Tanton et al., 2004). These results are sufficiently similar to the OJP to warrant serious multidisciplinary investigation, as suggested by Ingle and Coffin (2003a,b), including mantl...

show abstract

Protracted volcanism after large impacts: Evidence from the Sudbury impact basin

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Morphological studies of large impact structures on Mercury, Venus, Mars, and the Moon suggest that volcanism within impact craters may not be confined to the shock melting of target rocks. This possibility prompted reinvestigation of the 1.85 Ga subaqueous Sudbury impact structure, specifically its 1.5 km thick immediate basin fill (Onaping Formation). Historically, breccias of this formation were debated in the context of an endogenic versus an impact‐fallback origin. New field, petrographic, and in situ geochemical data document an array of igneous features, including vitric shards, bombs, sheet‐like intrusions, and peperites, preserved in exquisite textural detail. The geochemistry of vitric materials is affected by alteration, as expected for subaqueous magmatic products. Earlier studies proposed an overall andesitic chemistry for all magmatic products, sourced from the underlying impact melt sheet. The new data, however, suggest progressive involvement of an additional, more magnesian, and volatile‐rich magma source with time. We propose a new working model in which only the lower part of the Onaping Formation was derived by explosive “melt‐fuel‐coolant interaction” when seawater flooded onto the impact melt sheet in the basin floor. By contrast, we suggest that the upper 1000 m were deposited during protracted submarine volcanism and sedimentary reworking. Magma was initially sourced from the impact melt sheet and up stratigraphy, from reservoirs at greater depth. It follows that volcanic deposits in large impact basins may be related to magmatism caused by the impact but not directly associated with the impact‐generated melt sheet.

show abstract

Impact Decompression Melting: A Possible Trigger for Impact Induced Volcanism and Mantle Hotspots ?

Cited by 15 publications

References 76 publications

Impacts do not initiate volcanic eruptions: Eruptions close to the crater

Impacts do not initiate volcanic eruptions: Eruptions close to the crater

Modeling impact volcanism as a possible origin for the Ontong Java Plateau

Protracted volcanism after large impacts: Evidence from the Sudbury impact basin

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About