Hydrothermal activity on near‐arc sections of back‐arc ridges: Results from the Mariana Trough and Lau Basin

  • Edward T. Baker
    NOAA Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory 7600 Sand Point Way NE, Seattle Washington 98115 USA
  • Gary J. Massoth
    Institute of Geological and Nuclear Sciences P.O. Box 31‐312, Lower Hutt New Zealand
  • Ko‐ichi Nakamura
    National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology AIST Tsukuba Central 4 1‐1‐1 Higashi, Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305‐8562 Japan
  • Robert W. Embley
    NOAA Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory Hatfield Marine Science Center 2115 S.E. OSU Drive, Newport Oregon 97365 USA
  • Cornel E. J. de Ronde
    Institute of Geological and Nuclear Sciences P.O. Box 31‐312, Lower Hutt New Zealand
  • Richard J. Arculus
    Department of Geology Australian National University Canberra ACT 0200 Australia

書誌事項

公開日
2005-09
権利情報
  • http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor
DOI
  • 10.1029/2005gc000948
公開者
American Geophysical Union (AGU)

この論文をさがす

説明

<jats:p>The spatial density of hydrothermal venting is strongly correlated with spreading rate on mid‐ocean ridges (with the interesting exception of hot spot–affected ridges), evidently because spreading rate is a reliable proxy for the magma budget. This correlation remains untested on spreading ridges in back‐arc basins, where the magma budget may be complicated by subduction‐induced variations of the melt supply. To address this uncertainty, we conducted hydrothermal plume surveys along slow‐spreading (40–60 mm/yr) and arc‐proximal (10–60 km distant) sections of the southern Mariana Trough and the Valu Fa Ridge (Lau Basin). On both sections we found multiple plumes overlying ∼15–20% of the total length of each section, a coverage comparable to mid‐ocean ridges spreading at similar rates. These conditions contrast with earlier reported results from the two nearest‐arc segments of a faster spreading (60–70 mm/yr) back‐arc ridge, the East Scotia Ridge, which approaches no closer than 100 km to its arc. There, hydrothermal venting is relatively scarce (∼5% plume coverage) and the ridge characteristics are distinctly slow‐spreading: small central volcanic highs bookended by deep median valleys, and axial melt lenses restricted to the volcanic highs. Two factors may contribute to an unexpectedly low hydrothermal budget on these East Scotia Ridge segments: they may lie too far from the adjacent arc to benefit from near‐arc sources of melt supply, and subduction‐aided migration of mantle from the Bouvet hot spot may reduce hydrothermal circulation by local crustal warming and thickening, analogous to the Reykjanes Ridge. Thus the pattern among these three ridge sections appears to mirror the larger global pattern defined by mid‐ocean ridges: a well‐defined trend of spreading rate versus hydrothermal activity on most ridge sections, plus a subset of ridge sections where unusual melt delivery conditions diminish the expected hydrothermal activity.</jats:p>

収録刊行物

被引用文献 (6)*注記

もっと見る

問題の指摘

ページトップへ