Magnetotelluric and seismological determination of the lithosphere-asthenosphere transition in Central Europe

Praus, Oldřich; Pěčová, Jana; Petr, Václav; Babuška, Vladislav; Plomerová, Jaroslava

doi:10.1016/0031-9201(90)90262-v

Cited by 96 publications

(50 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…We remark that such comparisons are fraught with uncertainty, arising (among other things) from large spatial variations in lithospheric thickness beneath cratons (e.g., Artemieva and Mooney, 2002). Nevertheless, our comparisons of LAB depth provide some support for previously inferred consistency of seismic and MT methods (e.g., Calcagnile and Panza, 1987;Praus et al, 1990;Jones, 1999), and demonstrate the compatibility of these results with inferences of lithospheric thickness from creep modelling. Seismic inferences exhibit a greater scatter than those from MT studies, no doubt reflecting the subtle expression of the LAB beneath cratons in surface-wave velocity models as well as the paucity of S-receiver function analyses in these regions.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 74%

“…The thickness of the resistive lithosphere is relatively well determined by magnetotelluric (MT) observations. Previous compilations have demonstrated that the electrical asthenosphere is in good agreement with seismically-defined low-velocity zones (e.g., Calcagnile and Panza, 1987;Praus et al, 1990;Jones, 1999). Based on laboratory studies of electrical conductivity in mantle rocks, this change in conductivity at the LAB may be explained by either partial melt or the presence of small amount of water in the mantle.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 86%

“…Globally, comparisons with seismic data have shown, as early as 1963 (Ádám, 1963;Fournier et al, 1963), that the electrical asthenosphere accords well spatially and in depth with the seismically-defined asthenosphere (e.g., Calcagnile and Panza, 1987;Praus et al, 1990;Jones, 1999). Typical values quoted for the resistivity of the electrical asthenosphere are in the range of 5-25 -m, whereas at depths of 200-250 km a dry mantle mineralogy on an adiabat will yield a resistivity of hundreds of ⋅m (Xu et al, 2000).…”

Section: Elas Layermentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The elusive lithosphere–asthenosphere boundary (LAB) beneath cratons

Eaton

Darbyshire

Evans

et al. 2009

Lithos

382

288

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The lithosphere-asthenosphere boundary (LAB) is a first-order structural discontinuity that accommodates differential motion between tectonic plates and the underlying mantle. Although it is the most extensive type of plate boundary on the planet, its definitive detection, especially beneath cratons, is proving elusive. Different proxies are used to demarcate the LAB, depending on the nature of the measurement. Here we compare interpretations of the LAB beneath three The seismic LAB beneath cratons is typically regarded as the base of a high-velocity mantle lid, although some workers infer its location based on a distinct change in seismic anisotropy.Surface-wave inversion studies provide depth-constrained velocity models, but are relatively insensitive to the sharpness of the LAB. The S-receiver function method is a promising new seismic technique with complementary characteristics to surface-wave studies, since it is 2 sensitive to sharpness of the LAB but requires independent velocity information for accurate depth estimation. Magnetotelluric (MT) observations have, for many decades, imaged an "electrical asthenosphere" layer at depths beneath the continents consistent with seismic lowvelocity zones. This feature is most easily explained by the presence of a small amount of water in the asthenosphere, possibly inducing partial melt. Depth estimates based on various proxies considered here are similar, lending confidence that existing geophysical tools are effective for mapping the LAB beneath cratons.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 74%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 86%

Section: Elas Layermentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The elusive lithosphere–asthenosphere boundary (LAB) beneath cratons

Eaton

Darbyshire

Evans

et al. 2009

Lithos

382

288

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The reason of such a strong discrepancy needs more detailed investigations. In general, in most part of the study area a good agreement between the lithospheric thickness variations and previous local models of European lithosphere was found (e.g., Praus et al, 1990;Babuška and Plomerová, 2006). The thinnest lithosphere (<100 km) is observed in the ECRIS and in the Tyrrhenian Sea, where also an updoming of the Moho is observed (see previous chapter).…”

Section: Lithosphere Thickness Of Europesupporting

confidence: 53%

“…The methods, which provide isotropic tomography images of the mantle using body waves (e.g., Arlitt, 1999) or surface waves (e.g., Cotte et al, 2002), can estimate also position of the LAB. Magnetotelluric measurements (Praus et al, 1990;Korja et al, 2002) provide another means for determination of the LAB, showing the layer with increased electrical conductivity, possibly on account of partial melting at the lithosphere base. The widely adopted thermal definition considers the lithosphere as the layer, in which heat transfer occurs prevalently by conduction, below a temperature threshold of about 1,300ºC, at which starts partial melting (e.g., Anderson, 1989;Artemieva and Mooney, 2001).…”

Section: Lithosphere Thickness Of Europementioning

confidence: 99%

Thermal and Rheological Model of the European Lithosphere

Tesauro¹,

Kaban²,

Cloetingh³

2009

New Frontiers in Integrated Solid Earth Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A thermal and rheological model of the European lithosphere (10 • W-35E; 35N-60N) is constructed based on a combination of new geophysical models. To determine temperature distribution a tomography model is used, which was improved by corrections for the crustal effect using a new digital model of the European crust (EuCRUST-07). The uppermost mantle under western Europe is generally characterized by temperatures ranging between 900 and 1,100 • C, with the hottest areas corresponding to basins, that experienced recent extension (e.g., Tyrrhenian Sea and Pannonian Basin). By contrast, upper mantle temperatures at this depth under eastern Europe are about 550-750 • C, whereby the lowest values are found in the northeastern part of the study area. EuCRUST-07 and the new thermal model are used to calculate the strength distribution within the European lithosphere. Differently from previous approaches, lateral variations of lithology and density derived from EuCRUST-07 are used to construct the new strength distribution model. Following the approach of Burov and Diament (1995), the lithospheric rheology is employed to calculate variations of the elastic thickness of the lithosphere. According to these estimates, in western Europe the lithosphere is more heterogeneous than in eastern Europe. Western Europe, with dominantly crust-mantle decoupling is mostly characterized by lower values of strength and

show abstract

Lithospheric structure of Central Europe: Puzzle pieces from Pannonian Basin to Trans‐European Suture Zone resolved by geophysical‐petrological modeling

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We have analyzed the thermochemical structure of the mantle in Central Europe, a complex area with a highly heterogeneous lithospheric structure reflecting the interplay of contraction, strike slip, subduction, and extension tectonics. Our modeling is based on an integrative 3‐D approach (LitMod) that combines in a self‐consistent manner concepts and data from thermodynamics, mineral physics, geochemistry, petrology, and solid Earth geophysics. This approach minimizes uncertainties of the estimates derived from modeling of various data sets separately. To further constrain our 3‐D model we have made use of the vast geophysical and geological data (2‐D and 3‐D, shallow/crustal versus deep lithospheric experiments) based on experiments performed in Central Europe in the past decades. Given the amount and the different nature/resolution of the available constraints, one of the most challenging tasks of this study was to consistently combine them, finding a trade‐off between all local and regional data sets available in a way that (i) preserves as many structural details as possible and (ii) summarizes those data sets into a single robust regional model. The resulting P/T‐dependent mantle densities are in LitMod 3‐D calculated based on a given mineralogical composition. They therefore provide more reliable estimates compared to pure gravity models, which enhance modeling of the crustal structures. Our results clearly indicate presence of several lithospheric domains characterized by distinct features, Pannonian Basin being one of the most outstanding ones. It has the thinnest crust and lithosphere in the area modeled, characterized by relatively fertile composition.

show abstract

Magnetotelluric and seismological determination of the lithosphere-asthenosphere transition in Central Europe

Cited by 96 publications

References 8 publications

The elusive lithosphere–asthenosphere boundary (LAB) beneath cratons

The elusive lithosphere–asthenosphere boundary (LAB) beneath cratons

Thermal and Rheological Model of the European Lithosphere

Lithospheric structure of Central Europe: Puzzle pieces from Pannonian Basin to Trans‐European Suture Zone resolved by geophysical‐petrological modeling

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About