|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||
| JOURNAL HOME | HELP | CONTACT PUBLISHER | SUBSCRIBE | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
University of California, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, P.O. Box 808 Livermore, California 94550
Department of Geosciences, State University of New York, Stony Brook, New York 11794
Department of Geology and Geophysics, 319 Kline Geology Laboratory, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut 06520
Center for Adanced Radiation Studies, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois 60439
| The first 20% of the full text of this article appears below. |
| INTRODUCTION |
|---|
One of the biggest issues in global geodynamics is the style of mantle convection and the nature of chemical differentiation associated with convectional mass transport. Although evidence for deep mantle circulation has recently been found through seismic tomography (e.g., van der Hilst et al. (1997)), complications in convection style have also been noted. They include (1) significant modifications of flow geometry across the mantle transition zone as seen from high resolution tomographic studies (Fukao et al. 1992; Masters et al. 2000; van der Hilst et al. 1991) and (2) complicated patterns of flow in the deep lower mantle (~1500–2500 km), perhaps caused by chemical heterogeneity (Kellogg et al. 1999; van der Hilst and Karason 1999).
These studies indicate that while large-scale circulation involving the whole mantle no doubt occurs, significant deviations from simple flow geometry are also present. Two mineral properties have strong influence on convection: (1) density and (2) viscosity (rheology) contrasts. In the past, the effects of density contrast have been emphasized (Honda et al. 1993; Kellogg et al. 1999; Tackley et al.
| JOURNAL HOME | HELP | CONTACT PUBLISHER | SUBSCRIBE | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |