The asthenosphere exists because the mantle's ability to deform is strongly dependent on temperature, pressure, composition, water and deformation mechanism. Cooling from the surface creates a strong lithosphere. Beneath it, hotter mantle deforms by material creep at much lower stress on geological timescales. The asthenosphere is predominantly solid weak rock, not a global ocean of magma. On the much shorter timescale of a seismic wave, it still supports S waves.
The hot shallow mantle can be close to its solidus. Water weakening of rocks and, in some settings, a small connected melt fraction can further lower effective viscosity. At greater depths, changes in pressure, homologous temperature, mineral structure and water storage modify the deformation laws; increasing depth does not imply indefinitely decreasing viscosity. Explaining a weak upper-mantle interval does not require every location to contain the same amount of melt.
There are several physically distinct boundaries to test. The thermal lithosphere-asthenosphere boundary describes a thermal transition, the mechanical boundary a contrast in long-term strength or viscosity, and the seismic lithosphere-asthenosphere boundary a change in seismic velocity or other wave properties. They need not have identical depths. A smooth geothermal gradient can explain broad thermal weakening, but a very sharp decrease of seismic velocity may require changes in melt fraction, hydration, composition or seismic anisotropy. A sharp shallow reflector within a craton might instead be an internal lithospheric boundary.[ref]
A global view of the lithosphere-asthenosphere boundary by Catherine A. Rychert and Peter M. Shearer. Abstract and pp. 495–498: converted-wave sharpness and the possibility that the imaged cratonic discontinuity lies within thicker lithosphere.
Begin with a thermal null model. A half-space cooling model givesIf a thermal boundary corresponds to a fixed temperature , its depth isso it deepens as the square root of plate age. Test that prediction against independently determined seafloor ages, bathymetry and heat flux. An oceanic plate cooling model adds finite thickness and basal heat supply, allowing the old-age depth to approach a finite value. For continents, include radiogenic heating, crustal thickness, the history of continental rifting or tectonic thickening, and advective heating by magma or mantle flow. A cold, dry craton and a recently extended volcanic region should not share the same thermal profile.
Then calculate the observable consequences of competing mechanisms rather than merely assigning a boundary to a map:
- Use receiver functions from both P-to-S conversion and S-to-P conversion to constrain the depth and sharpness of a negative seismic velocity contrast. Check for crustal reverberations and whether the result changes with incident direction or frequency. Combine these with Rayleigh waves, Love waves and seismic tomography to constrain the broader shear-wave velocity profile.
- Measure seismic attenuation and seismic anisotropy. Elevated temperature, small amounts of melt and aligned minerals can all affect apparent seismic velocity, but predict different attenuation, polarization and directional patterns. Convert laboratory elastic and anelastic measurements into synthetic seismic observations at the relevant frequencies.
- Obtain magnetotelluric sounding constraints on electrical conductivity, together with surface heat flux. Connected melt or hydrated material can enhance electrical conductivity, but the interpretation depends on composition and connectivity. Joint thermal, seismic and electrical modelling is more discriminating than any single proxy.
- Use mantle xenoliths and erupted magmas to constrain pressure, temperature, water content, melt depletion and composition, recognizing that transport can alter a sample. Relate these observations to geodynamic modelling of mantle convection, slab flow, mantle plumes and lithospheric rejuvenation.
Compare models against the observed boundary depth and its sharpness, including uncertainty and resolution. An age–depth trend with matching heat flux favours thermal control; a sharp discontinuity that fails the thermal prediction but coincides with an electrical anomaly can support a melt- or hydration-related transition. Neither observation alone proves a unique cause. The spatially varying boundary is best understood as the result of thermal evolution interacting with composition, fluids and deformation history.
Articles by others on the same topic
There are currently no matching articles.