Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 292

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 201 of the 201 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Subduction-transition zone interaction: A review

Open access
Goes, Saskia, Agrusta, Roberto, van Hunen, Jeroen, Garel, Fanny·2017·Geosphere

Abstract

As subducting plates reach the base of the upper mantle, some appear to flatten and stagnate, while others seemingly go through unimpeded. This variable resistance to slab sinking has been proposed to affect long-term thermal and chemical mantle circulation. A review of observational constraints and dynamic models highlights that neither the increase in viscosity between upper and lower mantle (likely by a factor 20–50) nor the coincident endothermic phase transition in the main mantle silicates (with a likely Clapeyron slope of –1 to –2 MPa/K) suffice to stagnate slabs. However, together the two provide enough resistance to temporarily stagnate subducting plates, if they subduct accompanied by significant trench retreat. Older, stronger plates are more capable of inducing trench retreat, explaining why backarc spreading and flat slabs tend to be associated with old-plate subduction. Slab viscosities that are ∼2 orders of magnitude higher than background mantle (effective yield stresses of 100–300 MPa) lead to similar styles of deformation as those revealed by seismic tomography and slab earthquakes. None of the current transition-zone slabs seem to have stagnated there more than 60 m.y. Since modeled slab destabilization takes more than 100 m.y., lower-mantle entry is apparently usually triggered (e.g., by changes in plate buoyancy). Many of the complex morphologies of lower-mantle slabs can be the result of sinking and subsequent deformation of originally stagnated slabs, which can retain flat morphologies in the top of the lower mantle, fold as they sink deeper, and eventually form bulky shapes in the deep mantle.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1130/ges01476.1

Cites

201 of 201 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 201 references

Metadata

Authors
Goes, S., Agrusta, R., van Hunen, J., & Garel, F.
Venue
Geosphere
Published
2017-06-01
Volume
13
Issue
3
Pages
644-664
ISSN
1553-040X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2606876715
Cited by
292
References
201
FWCI
17.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Subduction-transition zone interaction: A review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1130/ges01476.1
The paper
Goes, S., Agrusta, R., van Hunen, J., & Garel, F. (2017). Subduction-transition zone interaction: A review. Geosphere. https://doi.org/10.1130/ges01476.1

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.