Glacial‐Isostatic Adjustment Models Using Geodynamically Constrained 3D Earth Structures
Abstract Glacial‐isostatic adjustment (GIA) is the key process controlling relative sea‐level (RSL) and paleo‐topography. The viscoelastic response of the solid Earth is controlled by its viscosity structure. Therefore, the appropriate choice of Earth structure for GIA models is still an important a...
Main Authors: | , , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Wiley
2021-11-01
|
Series: | Geochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1029/2021GC009853 |
_version_ | 1797638012516958208 |
---|---|
author | M. Bagge V. Klemann B. Steinberger M. Latinović M. Thomas |
author_facet | M. Bagge V. Klemann B. Steinberger M. Latinović M. Thomas |
author_sort | M. Bagge |
collection | DOAJ |
description | Abstract Glacial‐isostatic adjustment (GIA) is the key process controlling relative sea‐level (RSL) and paleo‐topography. The viscoelastic response of the solid Earth is controlled by its viscosity structure. Therefore, the appropriate choice of Earth structure for GIA models is still an important area of research in geodynamics. We construct 18 3D Earth structures that are derived from seismic tomography models and are geodynamically constrained. We consider uncertainties in 3D viscosity structures that arise from variations in the conversion from seismic velocity to temperature variations (factor r) and radial viscosity profiles (RVP). We apply these Earth models to a 3D GIA model, VILMA, to investigate the influence of such structure on RSL predictions. The variabilities in 3D Earth structures and RSL predictions are investigated for globally distributed sites and applied for comparisons with regional 1D models for ice center (North America, Antarctica) and peripheral regions (Central Oregon Coast, San Jorge Gulf). The results from 1D and 3D models reveal substantial influence of lateral viscosity variations on RSL. Depending on time and location, the influence of factor r and/or RVP can be reverse, for example, the same RVP causes lowest RSL in Churchill and largest RSL in Oregon. Regional 1D models representing the structure beneath the ice and 3D models show similar influence of factor r and RVP on RSL prediction. This is not the case for regional 1D models representing the structure beneath peripheral regions indicating the dependence on the 3D Earth structure. The 3D Earth structures of this study are made available. |
first_indexed | 2024-03-11T12:56:31Z |
format | Article |
id | doaj.art-7470de0c81da41acbef8b8549460f3d8 |
institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
issn | 1525-2027 |
language | English |
last_indexed | 2024-03-11T12:56:31Z |
publishDate | 2021-11-01 |
publisher | Wiley |
record_format | Article |
series | Geochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems |
spelling | doaj.art-7470de0c81da41acbef8b8549460f3d82023-11-03T17:00:31ZengWileyGeochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems1525-20272021-11-012211n/an/a10.1029/2021GC009853Glacial‐Isostatic Adjustment Models Using Geodynamically Constrained 3D Earth StructuresM. Bagge0V. Klemann1B. Steinberger2M. Latinović3M. Thomas4GFZ German Research Centre for Geosciences Potsdam GermanyGFZ German Research Centre for Geosciences Potsdam GermanyGFZ German Research Centre for Geosciences Potsdam GermanyGFZ German Research Centre for Geosciences Potsdam GermanyGFZ German Research Centre for Geosciences Potsdam GermanyAbstract Glacial‐isostatic adjustment (GIA) is the key process controlling relative sea‐level (RSL) and paleo‐topography. The viscoelastic response of the solid Earth is controlled by its viscosity structure. Therefore, the appropriate choice of Earth structure for GIA models is still an important area of research in geodynamics. We construct 18 3D Earth structures that are derived from seismic tomography models and are geodynamically constrained. We consider uncertainties in 3D viscosity structures that arise from variations in the conversion from seismic velocity to temperature variations (factor r) and radial viscosity profiles (RVP). We apply these Earth models to a 3D GIA model, VILMA, to investigate the influence of such structure on RSL predictions. The variabilities in 3D Earth structures and RSL predictions are investigated for globally distributed sites and applied for comparisons with regional 1D models for ice center (North America, Antarctica) and peripheral regions (Central Oregon Coast, San Jorge Gulf). The results from 1D and 3D models reveal substantial influence of lateral viscosity variations on RSL. Depending on time and location, the influence of factor r and/or RVP can be reverse, for example, the same RVP causes lowest RSL in Churchill and largest RSL in Oregon. Regional 1D models representing the structure beneath the ice and 3D models show similar influence of factor r and RVP on RSL prediction. This is not the case for regional 1D models representing the structure beneath peripheral regions indicating the dependence on the 3D Earth structure. The 3D Earth structures of this study are made available.https://doi.org/10.1029/2021GC009853glacial‐isostatic adjustment modelingrelative sea‐leveldeglaciation |
spellingShingle | M. Bagge V. Klemann B. Steinberger M. Latinović M. Thomas Glacial‐Isostatic Adjustment Models Using Geodynamically Constrained 3D Earth Structures Geochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems glacial‐isostatic adjustment modeling relative sea‐level deglaciation |
title | Glacial‐Isostatic Adjustment Models Using Geodynamically Constrained 3D Earth Structures |
title_full | Glacial‐Isostatic Adjustment Models Using Geodynamically Constrained 3D Earth Structures |
title_fullStr | Glacial‐Isostatic Adjustment Models Using Geodynamically Constrained 3D Earth Structures |
title_full_unstemmed | Glacial‐Isostatic Adjustment Models Using Geodynamically Constrained 3D Earth Structures |
title_short | Glacial‐Isostatic Adjustment Models Using Geodynamically Constrained 3D Earth Structures |
title_sort | glacial isostatic adjustment models using geodynamically constrained 3d earth structures |
topic | glacial‐isostatic adjustment modeling relative sea‐level deglaciation |
url | https://doi.org/10.1029/2021GC009853 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT mbagge glacialisostaticadjustmentmodelsusinggeodynamicallyconstrained3dearthstructures AT vklemann glacialisostaticadjustmentmodelsusinggeodynamicallyconstrained3dearthstructures AT bsteinberger glacialisostaticadjustmentmodelsusinggeodynamicallyconstrained3dearthstructures AT mlatinovic glacialisostaticadjustmentmodelsusinggeodynamicallyconstrained3dearthstructures AT mthomas glacialisostaticadjustmentmodelsusinggeodynamicallyconstrained3dearthstructures |