2016
DOI: 10.1002/2015gc006148
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Modeled temperatures and fluid source distributions for the Mexican subduction zone: Effects of hydrothermal circulation and implications for plate boundary seismic processes

Abstract: In subduction zones, spatial variations in pore fluid pressure are hypothesized to control the sliding behavior of the plate boundary fault. The pressure‐temperature paths for subducting material control the distributions of dehydration reactions, a primary control on the pore fluid pressure distribution. Thus, constraining subduction zone temperatures are required to understand the seismic processes along the plate interface. We present thermal models for three margin‐perpendicular transects in the Mexican su… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
14
2

Year Published

2016
2016
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 124 publications
1
14
2
Order By: Relevance
“…This relation implies that changes of dilatancy every 20 days are instantaneously translated into changes of pore pressure. Since the permeability is low within the oceanic crust [ Audet et al ., ; Peacock et al ., ; Perry et al ., ] where fluids are likely to be present in Guerrero [ Song et al ., ; Kim et al ., ], fluid diffusion is slow enough to make our approach valid for the time span of the SSE [ Villafuerte , ]. To confine fluids within the top 5 km of the subducted slab we considered B = 0.9 in that layer and B = 0 elsewhere.…”
Section: Elastic Fields Induced By the 2006 Ssementioning
confidence: 99%
“…This relation implies that changes of dilatancy every 20 days are instantaneously translated into changes of pore pressure. Since the permeability is low within the oceanic crust [ Audet et al ., ; Peacock et al ., ; Perry et al ., ] where fluids are likely to be present in Guerrero [ Song et al ., ; Kim et al ., ], fluid diffusion is slow enough to make our approach valid for the time span of the SSE [ Villafuerte , ]. To confine fluids within the top 5 km of the subducted slab we considered B = 0.9 in that layer and B = 0 elsewhere.…”
Section: Elastic Fields Induced By the 2006 Ssementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Also in this region, Song et al (2009) identify ultraslow seismic-velocity zones in the subducting crust, attributed to excess fluid pressures. Perry et al (2016) generate thermal models of the margin and link them with petrologic models to predict the distribution of subducting slab alteration and dehydration. Models that include hydrothermal circulation predict regions of focused fluid release from subducting sediment in the areas of tremor, slow slip, and the ultraslow layer (Perry et al, 2016).…”
Section: Mexicomentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Perry et al (2016) generate thermal models of the margin and link them with petrologic models to predict the distribution of subducting slab alteration and dehydration. Models that include hydrothermal circulation predict regions of focused fluid release from subducting sediment in the areas of tremor, slow slip, and the ultraslow layer (Perry et al, 2016). In models without hydrothermal circulation, subducting sediment heats and dehydrates substantially before reaching the flat section of the slab, leaving very little fluid for release in the areas of tremor, slow slip, and the ultraslow layer (most dehydration of the subducting basement rock is predicted to occur deeper than the flat-slab section) (Perry et al, 2016).…”
Section: Mexicomentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Figure 4d shows the temperature rise for different widths predicted by equation (2). According to thermal models of the subducted Cocos plate, the temperature of the slab where the earthquake took place is between 600 and 700 • C (Manea & Manea, 2011;Perry et al, 2016). The melting temperature of peridotite and gabbroic rocks at those depths (i.e., at 1.5-2 GPa) range between 1400 and 1800 • C (Katz et al, 2003;Nielsen et al, 2010;Philpotts & Ague, 2009;Takahashi & Scarfe, 1985).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%