Curie depth in Greenland area
-
摘要: 基于全球磁异常数据，利用质心法计算格陵兰岛地区的居里面深度，并结合最新的热流资料、地壳结构和大洋年龄进行分析，加深了对研究区热结构的认识。首先，总结了磁性体满足不同分布时，居里面深度计算的理论公式和校正因子的选择。在格陵兰岛地区应用分形分布，结果表明，研究区居里面深度$ {h}_{{\rm{b}}} $在40 km以内，平均值约为20 km，估算误差约为2.7 km。校正$ {h}_{{\rm{b}}} $得到地形到居里面的距离$ {h}_{{\rm{m}}} $和沉积层底界面到居里面的距离$ {h}_{{\rm{c}}} $，并根据不同的地壳类型对地表实测热流数据校正得到$ {Q}_{{\rm{s}}} $。对比结果显示$ {h}_{{\rm{m}}} $与$ {Q}_{{\rm{s}}} $基本成负相关，计算结果合理。进一步分析表明，研究区居里面总体上浅于莫霍面，但在格陵兰岛北部部分区域居里面深于莫霍面，在大洋地区的$ {h}_{{\rm{c}}} $随洋壳年龄的增大而增大。Abstract: This paper estimates the Curie depth in Greenland area based on the global magnetic anomaly data by using the centroid method. For further analysis we introduce the latest heat flow data, crustal structure and ocean age, which helps to deepen the understanding of thermal structure in the studied area. When the magnetic body satisfies different distribution assumptions, the different theoretical formulas and correction factors for calculating the Curie depth are summarized. Among these distribution assumptions, we apply the fractal distribution assumption to the Greenland area. The result shows that the Curie depth （$ {h}_{{\rm{b}}} $） in the studied area is within 40 km, with an average depth of about 20 km and an estimation error of about 2.7 km. Based on $ {h}_{{\rm{b}}} $, we calculate the distance $ {h}_{{\rm{m}}} $ from topography to Curie depth and the distance $ {h}_{{\rm{c}}} $ from the top crystalline basement to Curie depth. Besides, we correct surface heat flow to obtain $ {Q}_{{\rm{s}}} $ according to different crustal types. We find that $ {Q}_{{\rm{s}}} $ is approximately inversely proportional to $ {h}_{{\rm{m}}} $, which proves that the result is reasonable. Further analysis shows that $ {h}_{{\rm{b}}} $ in the studied area is generally shallower than Moho depth, while in part of the northern Greenland, $ {h}_{{\rm{b}}} $ is deeper than Moho. In the ocean, $ {h}_{{\rm{c}}} $ increases with the age of the ocean crust.
-
Keywords:
- Greenland /
- Curie depth /
- the fractal distribution /
- geothermal heat flow
-
-
![]()
图 7 从地形到居里面的距离hm （a）及校正之后的热流Qs （b）
Figure 7. The distance from topography to Curie depth hm （a） and the corrected heat flow Qs （b）
![]()
图 3 研究区热流实测数据（a）和机器学习预测数据（b）（数据来源于Colgan et al，2022）
Figure 3. Geothermal heat flux in the studied area by measuring （a） and predicting using machine learning method （b）（data from Colgan et al，2022）
![]()
图 4 某一窗口在高波数段估计$ {h}_{\mathrm{t}} $ （a）和低波数段估计${h_0}$ （b）的示例
Figure 4. Example of estimating $ {h}_{{\rm{t}}} $ at high wavenumber （a） and estimating $ {h}_{0} $ at low wavenumber （b） in a certain window
![]()
图 5 研究区居里面深度$ {h}_{\mathrm{b}}（\mathrm{a}）\mathrm{及} $估算误差$ \delta $ （b）
Figure 5. Curie depth $ {h}_{\mathrm{b}}（\mathrm{a}） $ and estimation error $ \delta $ （b） in the studied area
![]()
图 6 陆地（a）与海洋（b）的地层层位结构示意图
Figure 6. Schematic stratigraphic structure of land （a） and ocean （b）
![]()
图 8 $ {Q}_{\mathrm{s}} $与$ {h}_{\mathrm{m}} $的相关性
Figure 8. Correlations between $ {Q}_{\mathrm{s}} $ and $ {h}_{\mathrm{m}} $
![]()
图 9 研究区居里面深度与地壳结构和洋壳年龄的对比分析
（a） 莫霍面深度（数据来源于Steffen et al，2017）；（b） 沉积层厚度（数据来源于Straume et al，2019）；（c） 沉积层底界面到居里面的距离$ {h}_{\mathrm{c}} $；（d） 大洋地壳年龄（数据来源于Seton et al，2020）
Figure 9. Analysis of Curie depth with crustal structure and ocean crustal age in the studied area
（a） Moho depth （data from Steffen et al，2017）；（b） Sediment thickness （data from Straume et al，2019）；（c） The distance from the top crystalline basement to Curie depth $ {h}_{\mathrm{c}} $； （d） Ocean crustal age （data from Seton et al，2020）
-
江伟伟,李磊,王春晖,杜凌. 2011. 格陵兰岛附近海域海平面变化的初步研究[J]. 中国海洋大学学报,41(10):10–16. Jiang W W,Li L,Wang C H,Du L. 2011. A preliminary analysis on sea level change in the seas near the Greenland[J]. Periodical of Ocean University of China,41(10):10–16 (in Chinese).
Amante C, Eakins B W. 2009. ETOPO1 1 Arc-Minute Global Relief Model: Procedures, Data Sources and Analysis[R]. NOAA Technical Memorandum Nesdis NDGC-24, Boulder: NOAA.
Artemieva I M. 2019. Lithosphere thermal thickness and geothermal heat flux in Greenland from a new thermal isostasy method[J]. Earth-Sci Rev,188:469–481. doi: 10.1016/j.earscirev.2018.10.015
Bamber J L,Siegert M J,Griggs J A,Marshall S J,Spada G. 2013. Paleofluvial mega-canyon beneath the central Greenland ice sheet[J]. Science,341(6149):997–999. doi: 10.1126/science.1239794
Colgan W,Wansing A,Mankoff K,Lösing M,Hopper J,Louden K,Ebbing J,Christiansen F G,Ingeman-Nielsen T,Liljedahl L C,MacGregor J A,Hjartarson Á,Bernstein S,Karlsson N B,Fuchs S,Hartikainen J,Liakka J,Fausto R,Dahl-Jensen D,Bjørk A,Naslund J O,Mørk F,Martos Y,Balling N,Funck T,Kjeldsen K K,Petersen D,Gregersen U,Dam G,Nielsen T,Khan A,Løkkegaard A. 2022. Greenland geothermal heat flow database and map (Version 1)[J]. Earth Syst Sci Data,14(5):2209–2238. doi: 10.5194/essd-14-2209-2022
Kelemework Y,Fedi M,Milano M. 2021. A review of spectral analysis of magnetic data for depth estimation[J]. Geophysics,86(6):J33–J58. doi: 10.1190/geo2020-0268.1
Li C F,Wang J,Lin J,Wang T T. 2013. Thermal evolution of the North Atlantic lithosphere:New constraints from magnetic anomaly inversion with a fractal magnetization model[J]. Geochem Geophys Geosyst,14(12):5078–5105. doi: 10.1002/2013GC004896
Li C F,Zhou D,Wang J. 2019. On application of fractal magnetization in Curie depth estimation from magnetic anomalies[J]. Acta Geophys,67(5):1319–1327. doi: 10.1007/s11600-019-00339-6
Lu Y,Li C F,Wang J,Wan X L. 2022. Arctic geothermal structures inferred from Curie-point depths and their geodynamic implications[J]. Tectonophysics,822:229158. doi: 10.1016/j.tecto.2021.229158
MacGregor J A,Bottke Jr W F,Fahnestock M A,Harbeck J P,Kjær K H,Paden J D,Stillman D E,Studinger M. 2019. A possible second large subglacial impact crater in northwest Greenland[J]. Geophys Res Lett,46(3):1496–1504. doi: 10.1029/2018GL078126
Martos Y M,Jordan T A,Catalán M,Jordan T M,Bamber J L,Vaughan D G. 2018. Geothermal heat flux reveals the iceland hotspot track underneath Greenland[J]. Geophys Res Lett,45(16):8214–8222. doi: 10.1029/2018GL078289
Maus S,Barckhausen U,Berkenbosch H,Bournas N,Brozena J,Childers V,Dostaler F,Fairhead J D,Finn C,von Frese R R B,Gaina C,Golynsky S,Kucks R,Lühr H,Milligan P,Mogren S,Müller R D,Olesen O,Pilkington M,Saltus R,Schreckenberger B,Thébault E,Caratori Tontini F. 2009. EMAG2:A 2–arc min resolution Earth Magnetic Anomaly Grid compiled from satellite,airborne,and marine magnetic measurements[J]. Geochem Geophys Geosyst,10(8):Q08005.
Rogozhina I,Petrunin A G,Vaughan A P M,Steinberger B,Johnson J V,Kaban M K,Calov R,Rickers F,Thomas M,Koulakov I. 2016. Melting at the base of the Greenland ice sheet explained by Iceland hotspot history[J]. Nat Geosci,9(5):366–369. doi: 10.1038/ngeo2689
Ross H E,Blakely R J,Zoback M D. 2006. Testing the use of aeromagnetic data for the determination of Curie depth in California[J]. Geophysics,71(5):L51–L59. doi: 10.1190/1.2335572
Seton M,Müller R D,Zahirovic S,Williams S,Wright N W,Cannon J,Whittaker J M,Matthews K J,McGirr R. 2020. A global data set of present-day oceanic crustal age and seafloor spreading parameters[J]. Geochem Geophys Geosyst,21(10):e2020GC009214.
Steffen R,Strykowski G,Lund B. 2017. High-resolution Moho model for Greenland from EIGEN-6C4 gravity data[J]. Tectonophysics,706/707:206–220. doi: 10.1016/j.tecto.2017.04.014
Straume E O,Gaina C,Medvedev S,Hochmuth K,Gohl K,Whittaker J M,Abdul Fattah R,Doornenbal J C,Hopper J R. 2019. GlobSed:Updated total sediment thickness in the world’s oceans[J]. Geochem Geophys Geosyst,20(4):1756–1772. doi: 10.1029/2018GC008115
Toyokuni G,Matsuno T,Zhao D P. 2020a. P wave tomography beneath Greenland and surrounding regions 1:Crust and upper mantle[J]. J Geophys Res:Solid Earth,125(12):e2020JB019837.
Toyokuni G,Matsuno T,Zhao D P. 2020b. P wave tomography beneath Greenland and surrounding regions 2:Lower mantle[J]. J Geophys Res:Solid Earth,125(12):e2020JB019839.
-
期刊类型引用(15)
1. 陈珍，郝冰，李远东，周正华，卞祝，韩轶. 含软弱土层场地地震动加速度反应谱特征周期调整方法. 地震学报. 2024(04): 734-750 . 
本站查看
2. 李平，陈钰鑫，高志寅，徐建元，乔峰，林明远. 不同场地类别对反应谱特征周期的影响. 地震学报. 2024(04): 724-733 . 本站查看
3. 李平，范钟元，周楷，徐建元. 基于强震记录的土层结构放大作用研究——以SMASS台阵为例. 震灾防御技术. 2024(04): 661-674 . 百度学术
4. 郭婷婷，陈龙伟，吴晓阳，袁晓铭，李瑞山. 等效线性化方法计算深厚土层地震反应的可靠性研究. 振动与冲击. 2023(18): 172-179 . 百度学术
5. 李瑞山，吴进辉，陈龙伟，袁晓铭，李明睿. 软土场地地震动效应概率化模型. 岩土工程学报. 2023(S2): 189-194 . 百度学术
6. 王竞雄，李鸿晶，邢浩洁. 水平成层场地地震反应的集中质量切比雪夫谱元分析方法. 地震学报. 2022(01): 76-86 . 本站查看
7. 齐文浩，王振清，薄景山，郑桐. 汶川地震汉源县城震害分布与场地反应分析. 哈尔滨工程大学学报. 2020(03): 383-389 . 百度学术
8. Wang Yushi，Li Xiaojun，Lan Riqing，Wang Ning，Chen Hongjuan. Development and Prospect of Study on Soil Nonlinear Dynamic Characteristics under Strong-Motion. Earthquake Research in China. 2017(01): 12-24 . 必应学术
9. 李平，刘红帅，薄景山，李孝波，于晓辉. 汶川M_S8.0地震河谷地形对汉源县城高烈度异常的影响. 地球物理学报. 2016(01): 174-184 . 百度学术
10. 刘方成，杨峻，武景芳. 软弱层几何特性与剪切波速对场地反应谱的影响研究. 防灾减灾工程学报. 2016(05): 773-784 . 百度学术
11. Liu Hongshuai，Bo Jingshan，Li Ping，Qi Wenhao，Zhang Yudong. Site amplification effects as an explanation for the intensity anomaly in the Hanyuan Town during the Wenchuan M_w 7.9 earthquake. Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration. 2016(03): 435-444 . 必应学术
12. 王玉石，李小军，兰日清，王宁，陈红娟. 强震动作用下土体非线性动力特征研究发展与展望. 震灾防御技术. 2016(03): 480-492 . 百度学术
13. 李平，薄景山，袁一凡，肖瑞杰，刘红帅. 汶川地震中九襄断裂对汉源烈度异常的影响. 西南交通大学学报. 2015(06): 1055-1060+1073 . 百度学术
14. 齐文浩，陈龙伟，单振东，汪云龙. 芦山7.0级地震宏观场地效应. 地震工程与工程振动. 2013(04): 29-34 . 百度学术
15. 刘红帅，杨俊波，薄景山，刘宇. 汶川地震汉源县城高烈度异常区基岩地震动输入. 地震工程与工程振动. 2013(02): 27-36 . 百度学术
其他类型引用(10)
下载:
计量
- 文章访问数: 281
- HTML全文浏览量: 168
- PDF下载量: 80
- 被引次数: 25
