Depth extent of the Lau back-arc spreading center and its relation to subduction processes

Science

Volumn 278, Issue 5336, 1997, Pages 254-257

  Zhao, Dapeng ^a   Xu, Yingbiao ^b   Wiens, Douglas A ^b   Dorman, LeRoy ^c   Hildebrand, John ^c   Webb, Spahr ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BACKARC BASIN; BACKARC BASINS; MANGLE CONVECTION; MANTLE PROCESSES; MANTLE WEDGE; SEA FLOOR SPREADING; SEAFLOOR SPREADING; SEISMIC TOMOGRAPHY; SUBDUCTION;

ARTICLE; GEOLOGY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; THERMODYNAMICS; TOMOGRAPHY; WAVEFORM;

PACIFIC, LAU BASIN;

EID: 0030881678     PISSN: 00368075     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1126/science.278.5336.254     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. S. Uyeda, in Island Arcs, Deep Sea Trenches and Back-Arc Basins, M. Talwani and W. C. Pitman III, Eds. (American Geophysical Union, Washington, DC, 1977), pp. 1-14; M. N. Toksoz and P. Bird, in Island Arcs, Deep Sea Trenches and Back-Arc Basins, M. Talwani and W. C. Pitman III, Eds. (American Geophysical Union, Washington, DC, 1977), pp. 379-393; N. H. Sleep and M. N. Toksoz, Nature 33, 548 (1971).
2. S. Uyeda, in Island Arcs, Deep Sea Trenches and Back-Arc Basins, M. Talwani and W. C. Pitman III, Eds. (American Geophysical Union, Washington, DC, 1977), pp. 1-14; M. N. Toksoz and P. Bird, in Island Arcs, Deep Sea Trenches and Back-Arc Basins, M. Talwani and W. C. Pitman III, Eds. (American Geophysical Union, Washington, DC, 1977), pp. 379-393; N. H. Sleep and M. N. Toksoz, Nature 33, 548 (1971).
3. S. Uyeda, in Island Arcs, Deep Sea Trenches and Back-Arc Basins, M. Talwani and W. C. Pitman III, Eds. (American Geophysical Union, Washington, DC, 1977), pp. 1-14; M. N. Toksoz and P. Bird, in Island Arcs, Deep Sea Trenches and Back-Arc Basins, M. Talwani and W. C. Pitman III, Eds. (American Geophysical Union, Washington, DC, 1977), pp. 379-393; N. H. Sleep and M. N. Toksoz, Nature 33, 548 (1971).
4. D. W. Forsyth, in Mantle Flow and Melt Generation at Mid-Ocean Ridges, J. Morgan, D. Blackman, J. Sinton, Eds. (American Geophysical Union, Washington, DC, 1993), pp. 1-65; D. L. Turcotte and J. P. Morgan, in ibid., pp. 155-182.
5. D. W. Forsyth, in Mantle Flow and Melt Generation at Mid-Ocean Ridges, J. Morgan, D. Blackman, J. Sinton, Eds. (American Geophysical Union, Washington, DC, 1993), pp. 1-65; D. L. Turcotte and J. P. Morgan, in ibid., pp. 155-182.
6. S. M. Peacock, Science 248, 329 (1990).
7. L. N. Huppert and C. Frohlich, J. Geophys. Res. 86, 3771 (1981); G. Bock, ibid. 92, 13863 (1987); K. M. Fischer, K. C. Creager, J. H. Jordan, ibid. 96, 14403 (1991).
8. L. N. Huppert and C. Frohlich, J. Geophys. Res. 86, 3771 (1981); G. Bock, ibid. 92, 13863 (1987); K. M. Fischer, K. C. Creager, J. H. Jordan, ibid. 96, 14403 (1991).
9. L. N. Huppert and C. Frohlich, J. Geophys. Res. 86, 3771 (1981); G. Bock, ibid. 92, 13863 (1987); K. M. Fischer, K. C. Creager, J. H. Jordan, ibid. 96, 14403 (1991).
10. H. Zhou, Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. 61, 199 (1990); J. Geophys. Res. 101, 27791 (1996); R. van der Hilst, Nature 374, 154 (1995).
11. H. Zhou, Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. 61, 199 (1990); J. Geophys. Res. 101, 27791 (1996); R. van der Hilst, Nature 374, 154 (1995).
12. H. Zhou, Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. 61, 199 (1990); J. Geophys. Res. 101, 27791 (1996); R. van der Hilst, Nature 374, 154 (1995).
13. D. Wiens et al., IRIS Newsl. 14, 1 (1995).
14. R. Jacobson, L. Dorman, G. Purdy, A. Schultz, S. Solomon, Eos 72, 506 (1991).
15. D. Zhao, D. Christensen, H. Pulpan, J. Geophys. Res. 100, 6487 (1995).
16. D. Zhao, A. Hasegawa, S. Horiuchi, ibid.. 97, 19909 (1992); D. Zhao, A. Hasegawa, H. Kanamori, ibid. 99, 22313 (1994). A 3D net of nodes was set up in the Tonga-Fiji region with a horizontal grid spacing of 50 km and a vertical spacing of 25 to 50 km. Hypocentral locations of earthquakes and velocities at the grid nodes were taken as unknown parameters. The velocity at any point was calculated by linearly interpolating the velocities at the eight grid nodes surrounding that point. An efficient 3D ray tracing technique was used to calculate ray paths and travel times. A conjugate gradient algorithm [C. Paige and M. Saunders, ACM Trans. Math. Software 8, 43 (1982)] was used to solve the large sparse system of observational equations by regularizing the solution in a damped least-squares fashion [K. Aki and W. Lee, J. Geophys. Res. 81, 4381 (1976)]. The nonlinear tomographic problem was solved by iteratively conducting linear inversions. Hypocenters were relocated in the inversion process. For the local data from the 926 events (Fig. 1), raw arrival times were used in the inversion. For the teleseismic data with epicentral distances greater than 30°, we used the relative travel time residuals by removing the average of the travel time residuals for each station, to remove the effect of the structures outside the study area.
17. D. Zhao, A. Hasegawa, S. Horiuchi, ibid.. 97, 19909 (1992); D. Zhao, A. Hasegawa, H. Kanamori, ibid. 99, 22313 (1994). A 3D net of nodes was set up in the Tonga-Fiji region with a horizontal grid spacing of 50 km and a vertical spacing of 25 to 50 km. Hypocentral locations of earthquakes and velocities at the grid nodes were taken as unknown parameters. The velocity at any point was calculated by linearly interpolating the velocities at the eight grid nodes surrounding that point. An efficient 3D ray tracing technique was used to calculate ray paths and travel times. A conjugate gradient algorithm [C. Paige and M. Saunders, ACM Trans. Math. Software 8, 43 (1982)] was used to solve the large sparse system of observational equations by regularizing the solution in a damped least-squares fashion [K. Aki and W. Lee, J. Geophys. Res. 81, 4381 (1976)]. The nonlinear tomographic problem was solved by iteratively conducting linear inversions. Hypocenters were relocated in the inversion process. For the local data from the 926 events (Fig. 1), raw arrival times were used in the inversion. For the teleseismic data with epicentral distances greater than 30°, we used the relative travel time residuals by removing the average of the travel time residuals for each station, to remove the effect of the structures outside the study area.
18. D. Zhao, A. Hasegawa, S. Horiuchi, ibid.. 97, 19909 (1992); D. Zhao, A. Hasegawa, H. Kanamori, ibid. 99, 22313 (1994). A 3D net of nodes was set up in the Tonga-Fiji region with a horizontal grid spacing of 50 km and a vertical spacing of 25 to 50 km. Hypocentral locations of earthquakes and velocities at the grid nodes were taken as unknown parameters. The velocity at any point was calculated by linearly interpolating the velocities at the eight grid nodes surrounding that point. An efficient 3D ray tracing technique was used to calculate ray paths and travel times. A conjugate gradient algorithm [C. Paige and M. Saunders, ACM Trans. Math. Software 8, 43 (1982)] was used to solve the large sparse system of observational equations by regularizing the solution in a damped least-squares fashion [K. Aki and W. Lee, J. Geophys. Res. 81, 4381 (1976)]. The nonlinear tomographic problem was solved by iteratively conducting linear inversions. Hypocenters were relocated in the inversion process. For the local data from the 926 events (Fig. 1), raw arrival times were used in the inversion. For the teleseismic data with epicentral distances greater than 30°, we used the relative travel time residuals by removing the average of the travel time residuals for each station, to remove the effect of the structures outside the study area.
19. D. Zhao, A. Hasegawa, S. Horiuchi, ibid.. 97, 19909 (1992); D. Zhao, A. Hasegawa, H. Kanamori, ibid. 99, 22313 (1994). A 3D net of nodes was set up in the Tonga-Fiji region with a horizontal grid spacing of 50 km and a vertical spacing of 25 to 50 km. Hypocentral locations of earthquakes and velocities at the grid nodes were taken as unknown parameters. The velocity at any point was calculated by linearly interpolating the velocities at the eight grid nodes surrounding that point. An efficient 3D ray tracing technique was used to calculate ray paths and travel times. A conjugate gradient algorithm [C. Paige and M. Saunders, ACM Trans. Math. Software 8, 43 (1982)] was used to solve the large sparse system of observational equations by regularizing the solution in a damped least-squares fashion [K. Aki and W. Lee, J. Geophys. Res. 81, 4381 (1976)]. The nonlinear tomographic problem was solved by iteratively conducting linear inversions. Hypocenters were relocated in the inversion process. For the local data from the 926 events (Fig. 1), raw arrival times were used in the inversion. For the teleseismic data with epicentral distances greater than 30°, we used the relative travel time residuals by removing the average of the travel time residuals for each station, to remove the effect of the structures outside the study area.
20. D. Zhao et al., Eos (Fall Suppl.) 77, 498 (1996). The starting 1D model for the inversion was the IASP91 Earth model (25), but the crustal thickness has lateral variations according to a seismic refraction survey along the line of OBS stations (26) and the inversion of land station wave forms (75). The crustal thickness varies from 5 to 24 km, with the thickest crust beneath the Lau Ridge, Tonga arc, and Fiji Islands. Numerous previous studies (4, 5) have demonstrated the existence of the Tonga slab, which is at least 100 km thick with a P wave velocity of up to 7% faster. The slab substantially perturbs ray trajectories, such that the ray path perturbation can be over 100 km from that in the 1D Earth model (4, 9). Our primary concern in this study is the precise structure below the Lau Basin and in the mantle wedge. For this purpose, it was necessary to use a starting model incorporating the a priori slab information (8, 9) because we hoped to resolve the anomalies in the Lau Basin with a resolution of 50 to 70 km. We introduced the Tonga slab into the model using the slab geometry determined by Billington (27). The introduction of the slab into the model reduced the nonlinearity of the problem because seismic rays are traced realistically from the beginning of the inversion (8, 9). We conducted a number of inversions by changing the initial slab thickness from 50 to 150 km and the initial slab velocity from 1 to 9% faster than the normal mantle. We also conducted inversions without the slab in the starting model. All of the inversions imaged the very slow velocity anomalies beneath the Lau spreading center to about 100-km depth and the moderately slow anomalies to about 400-km depth, but there are 1 to 2.5% changes in the amplitudes of the anomalies and up to 10% changes in the final travel time residuals. The inversion with the starting model that included a 100-km-thick slab and that was 6% faster than the normal mantle resulted in the best fit of model to data. The results of this inversion are shown in Figs. 2 and 3.
21. To make a checkerboard in the resolution tests, we assigned positive and negative velocity anomalies with magnitudes of 5% to the 3D grid nodes. Synthetic data were calculated for the checkerboard model. Then we added random errors to the synthetic data and inverted them with the same algorithm that we used for the observed data. The inverted image of the checkerboard suggests where the resolution is good and where it is poor. The checkerboard resolution tests and other synthetic tests we conducted showed that both the high-velocity Tonga slab and the low-velocity back arc and mantle wedge were reliably resolved and that there was no trade-off between them.
22. Y. Tatsumi, J. Geophys. Res. 94, 4697 (1989); J. H. Davies and D. J. Stevenson, ibid. 97, 2037 (1992).
23. Y. Tatsumi, J. Geophys. Res. 94, 4697 (1989); J. H. Davies and D. J. Stevenson, ibid. 97, 2037 (1992).
24. Y. Zhang and T. Tanimoto, Nature 355, 45 (1992); T. Tanimoto and D. J. Stevenson, J. Geophys. Res. 99, 4549 (1994).
25. Y. Zhang and T. Tanimoto, Nature 355, 45 (1992); T. Tanimoto and D. J. Stevenson, J. Geophys. Res. 99, 4549 (1994).
26. Y. Shen and D. W. Forsyth, J. Geophys. Res. 100, 2211 (1995).
27. Y. Xu and D. Wiens, ibid., in press. To invert regional wave forms we used a nonlinear inversion method that adopts a reflectivity formalism (28) to compute the partial derivatives. This method allows the entire regional distance (400-to 1500-km range) wave form to be inverted from P wave arrival to surface waves at frequencies between 0.01 and 0.055 Hz. Broadband seismograms from earthquakes of 10 to 240 km deep that propagate almost entirely within one of the tectonic regions of the southwest Pacific were used in the wave form inversion. Parameter variances and resolution tests suggest that the results are well constrained to depths of about 200 km. The S wave velocities from the wave form inversion and the P wave velocities from the tomography would not necessarily show the same structure. The larger total heterogeneity from the wave form inversion may result from a greater effect of partial melt beneath the Lau back arc on S wave velocity than on P wave velocity (9, 29).
28. W. Su, R. L. Woodward, A. M. Dziewonski, Nature 360, 149 (1992).
29. G. Nolet and A. Zielhuis, J. Geophys. Res. 99, 15813 (1994); G. Nolet, in Processes of Deep Earth and Planetary Volatiles, K. Farley, Ed. (American Institute of Physics, New York, 1995), pp. 22-32.
30. G. Nolet and A. Zielhuis, J. Geophys. Res. 99, 15813 (1994); G. Nolet, in Processes of Deep Earth and Planetary Volatiles, K. Farley, Ed. (American Institute of Physics, New York, 1995), pp. 22-32.
31. A. B. Thompson, Nature 358, 295 (1992); H. Staudigel and S. D. King, Earth Planet Sci. Lett. 109, 517 (1992).
32. A. B. Thompson, Nature 358, 295 (1992); H. Staudigel and S. D. King, Earth Planet Sci. Lett. 109, 517 (1992).
33. A. Navrotsky and K. Bose, in Processes of Deep Earth and Planetary Volatiles, K. Farley, Ed. (American Institute of Physics, New York, 1995), pp. 221-228.
34. D. Toomey et al., Eos (Fall Suppl.) 77, 652 (1996).
35. D. Blackman et al., Geophys. J. Int. 127, 415 (1996).
36. J. S. Collier and M. C. Sinha, J. Geophys. Res. 97, 14031 (1992).
37. L. M. Parson and I. C. Wright, Tectonophysics 263, 1 (1996); B. Taylor, K. Zellmer, F. Martinez, A. Goodliffe, Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 144, 35 (1996).
38. L. M. Parson and I. C. Wright, Tectonophysics 263, 1 (1996); B. Taylor, K. Zellmer, F. Martinez, A. Goodliffe, Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 144, 35 (1996).
39. J. A. Pearce et al., in Volcanism Associated with Extension at Consuming Plate Margins, J. L. Smellie, Ed. (Geological Society, London, 1992), pp. 53-75; J. W. Hawkins, in Active Margins and Marginal Basins of the Western Pacific, B. Taylor and J. Natland, Eds. (American Geophysical Union, Washington, DC, 1995), pp. 125-173.
40. J. A. Pearce et al., in Volcanism Associated with Extension at Consuming Plate Margins, J. L. Smellie, Ed. (Geological Society, London, 1992), pp. 53-75; J. W. Hawkins, in Active Margins and Marginal Basins of the Western Pacific, B. Taylor and J. Natland, Eds. (American Geophysical Union, Washington, DC, 1995), pp. 125-173.
41. B. L. N. Kennett and E. R. Engdahl, Geophys. J. Int. 105, 429 (1991).
42. W. Crawford, S. Webb, J. Hildebrand, Eos (Fall Suppl.) 77, 478 (1996).
43. S. Billington, thesis, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, (1980).
44. B. L. N. Kennett, Seismic Wave Propagation in Stratified Media (Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1983); G. E. Randall, Geophys. J. Int. 118, 245 (1994).
45. B. L. N. Kennett, Seismic Wave Propagation in Stratified Media (Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1983); G. E. Randall, Geophys. J. Int. 118, 245 (1994).
46. U. H. Faul, D. R. Toomey, H. S. Waff, Geophys. Res. Lett. 21, 29 (1994).
47. We thank M. Bevis, W. Crawford, K. Draunidalo, S. Escher, T. Fatai, H. Gilbert, S. Helu, K. Koper, M. McDonald, J. McGuire, B. Park-Li, G. Prasad, E. Roth, A. Sauter, P. Shore, and L. Vuetibau for their assistance during the seismic experiment and at the data-processing stage and G. Abers and an anonymous referee for thoughtful reviews, which improved the manuscript. Broadband seismographs were obtained from the PASSCAL program of the Incorporated Research Institutions in Seismology (IRIS). Supported by the NSF under grants EAR-9219675, OCE-9314446, and EAR-9614502. This paper is Southern California Earthquake Center publication 386.