CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 107earthquake and tectonic studiesGeological and Geophysical Studies WorldwideGeological and Geophysical Studies

Ablative subduction: A two-sided alternative to the conventional subduction model

Tao, Winston C., O'connell, Richard J.·1992·Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth
DOI 10.1029/91jb02422
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Subduction is conventionally modelled as a convergence and overlapping of two semirigid plates; such a convergence is one‐sided, in that one lithospheric plate descends while the other remains on the surface. We suggest an alternative model, one based on the dynamics of fluids. In this model, the viscous lower lithosphere flows downward, and the brittle upper lithosphere deforms in passive response. This process is potentially double‐sided, for we find that even a buoyant plate can be dragged downward by a dense, descending neighbor. Thus an apparent overriding plate may be worn away by a process of viscous ablation, with the rate of ablation a function of plate buoyancy. We call this process “ablative subduction”. Ablative subduction allows us to simply interpret observations concerning slab profiles, interplate seismicity, back arc tectonics, and complex processes such as double subduction and subduction polarity reversal. In performing experiments modelling the evolution of simple, fluid “slabs”, we find that slab profile is strongly influenced by ablation in the overriding plate. When ablation is weak, as when a buoyant continent borders the trench, deformable slabs adopt shallow, Andean‐style profiles. These profiles develop over time from an initially steep shape. More vigorous ablation rates, as might occur in an ocean‐ocean convergence, yield steeper, Marianas‐style profiles. Thus differences between Marianas‐style and Andean‐style slabs may result from differences in ablation rate and subduction duration. The occurrence of ablation might not be easily detected at depth, because material from subducting and ablating plates adhere closely as a single slab. These slabs show downdip deformations that are consistent with seismic focal mechanisms. Plate deformations associated with ablative subduction are also consistent with observed patterns of seismicity. In particular, the relative aseismicity of Marianas‐style plate boundaries is consistent with the ablative model; we may thus explain how plates can converge aseismically, without requiring that these plates be decoupled. Ablation should be weakest in Andean‐style subduction, although pulses of rapid ablation might lead to episodes of crustal shortening; in oceanic regions, the manifestation of ablation may depend upon tectonic regime. In an extensional area like the Marianas, ablation may be temporally self‐limiting, and ablative cycles may explain conflicting observations of tectonic erosion and accretion. In a compressional regime, vigorous ablation might lead to observations of double subduction and subduction reversal. In each case, the behavior of the lower lithosphere is relatively simple; what varies is the rate of ablation and the response of the upper lithosphere.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1029/91jb02422

Cites

87 of 87 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The hallmark of modern-day plate tectonics on Earth is the independent horizontal motion of lithospheric plates, facilitated at divergent plate boundaries by seafloor spreading, at transform plate boundaries by strike-slip fault motion, and at convergent plate boundaries by one-sided subduction.

    “The hallmark of modern-day plate tectonics on Earth is the independent horizontal motion of lithospheric plates, facilitated at divergent plate boundaries by seafloor spreading, at transform plate boundaries by strike-slip fault motion, and at convergent plate boundaries by one-sided subduction”

    From Secular change and the onset of plate tectonics on Earth (2020) · cites this paper as Tao and O'Connell, 1992

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 88 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Tao, W. C., & O'connell, R. J.
Affiliations
Harvard University (US)
Venue
Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth
Publisher
American Geophysical Union (AGU)
Published
1992-06-10
Volume
97
Issue
B6
Pages
8877-8904
ISSN
0148-0227 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1029/91jb02422
OpenAlex
W2004535879
Cited by
107
References
88
Citations by year
2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 8 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 6
FWCI
4.03
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor, 7407 d)
Locations
Journal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Geophysics › earthquake and tectonic studies
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Geophysics › Geological and Geophysical Studies Worldwide
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Geology › Geological and Geophysical Studies
Keywords
subduction, double subduction, subduction polarity reversal, interplate seismicity, slab deformation, crustal shortening, tectonic erosion

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review