Advertisement

Modelling Paleogeotherms in the Continental Lithosphere: A Brief Review and Applications to Problems in the Indian Subcontinent

  • R. N. SinghEmail author
  • Jibamitra Ganguly
Chapter
Part of the Society of Earth Scientists Series book series (SESS)

Abstract

In this work, we have reviewed the fundamental aspects of heat transfer theory that underlie the modelling of steady state and transient paleogeotherms in the continental lithosphere. We reviewed different types of models of paleogeotherms involving one or two layers, a combination of rheological and thermal boundary layers, and the stagnant-lid convection model in which convection is allowed in the lower part of a thermal boundary layer. We also reviewed the studies on the calculation of steady state paleogeotherm in the Dharwar cratons during the Proterozoic period that have been constrained by the heat flow data and the inferred P-T conditions of the mantle xenoliths in the Proterozoic kimberlite pipes. Several transient thermal models have also been discussed. These include the transient effects of CO2 fluxing from the mantle, crustal melting and melt focusing, and overthrusting. For the latter we considered both single and double thrust sheets derived from the same and different places. An interesting conclusion that emerges from this study is that a metamorphic field profile (MFP), which defines the locus of temperature maxima experienced by exhuming parcels of rocks in response to erosion, is not significantly affected by the different thrusting scenarios.

Keywords

Thermal Boundary Layer Mantle Xenolith Thrust Sheet Dharwar Craton Kimberlite Pipe 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgments

RNS is grateful to Indian National Science Academy, New Delhi, for award of a Senior Scientist position.

References

  1. Anderson MP (2005) Heat as a ground water tracer. Ground Water 43:951–968CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Artemieva I (2011) The lithosphere: an interdisciplinary approach. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, p 794CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bickle MJ, McKenzie D (1987) The transport of heat and matter by fluids during metamorphism. Contrib Mineral Petrol 95:384–392CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Birch F, Roy RF, Decker ER (1968) Heat flow and thermal history on New York and New England. In: Zen E, White WS, Hadley JB, Thompson JB Jr (eds) Appalachian geology: northern and maritime. Interscience, New York, pp 437–451Google Scholar
  5. Brady JB (1988) The role of volatiles in the thermal history of metamorphic terranes. J Petrol 29:1187–1213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bredehoefh JD, Papadopoulos IS (1965) Rates of vertical groundwater movement estimated from the Earth’s thermal profile. Water Resour Res 1:325–328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Carslaw HS, Jaeger JC (1959) Conduction of heat in solids, 2nd edn. Oxford University Press, London, p 510Google Scholar
  8. Dapine VD, Andronicos CA, Phipps-Morgan J (2008) Near-isothermal conditions in the middle and lower crust by melt migration. Nature 456:80–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Ganguly J, Bhattacharya PK (1987) Xenoliths in proterozoic kimberlites from southern India: petrology and geophysical implications. In: Nixon PH (ed) Mantle xenoliths, Springer, New York, pp 248–265 Google Scholar
  10. Ganguly J, Singh RN, Ramana DV (1995) Thermal perturbation during charnockitization and granulite facies metamorphism in southern India. J Metamorphic Geol 13:419–430CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ganguly J, Dasgupta S, Cheng W, Neogi S (2000) Exhumation history of a section of the Sikkim Himalayas, India: records in the metamorphic mineral equilibria and compositional zoning of garnet. Earth Planet Sci Lett 183:471–486CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gupta ML, Sunder A, Sharma SR (1991) Heat flow and heat generation in the Archean Dhanvar cratons and implications for the Southern Indian Shield geotherm and lithosphere thickness. Tectonophysics l94:107–122Google Scholar
  13. Lachenbruch AH (1968) Preliminary geothermal model of the Sierra Nevada. J Geophys Res 73:6877–6989Google Scholar
  14. Long AM (2010) Xenoliths: insights from upper mantle petrology. Unpublished MS Thesis, Cornell UniversityGoogle Scholar
  15. Mather KA, Pearson DG, McKenzie D, Kjarsgaard BA, Priestley K (2011) Constraints on the depth and thermal history of cratonic lithosphere from peridotite xenoliths, xenocrysts and seismology. Lithos 125:729–742CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. McKenzie D, Bickle MJ (1988) The volume and composition of melt generated by extension of the lithosphere. J Petrology 29:625–679CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. McKenzie D, Jackson J, Priestley K (2005) Thermal structure of oceanic and continental lithosphere. Earth Planet Sci Lett 233:337–349CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Nehru CE, Reddy AK (1989) Ultramafic xenoliths from Wajrakarur kimberlites, India. In: Ross J et al (eds) Kimberlites and related rocks. Geol Soc Aust, Spec Publ no 14:745–759Google Scholar
  19. Parsons B, McKenzie D (1978) Mantle convection and the thermal structure of the plates. J Geophys Res 83(B9):4485–4496CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Patel SC, Ravi S, Anilkumar Y, Naik A, Thakur SS, Pati JK, Nayak SS (2009) Mafic xenoliths in proterozoic kimberlites from eastern Dharwar craton, India: mineralogy and P-T regime. J Asian Earth Sci 34:336–346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Pollack HN, Chapman DS (1977) Regional variation of heat flow, geotherms, and lithospheric thickness. Tectonophysics 38:279–296CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Richter FM, McKenzie DP (1981) On some consequences and possible causes of layered mantle convection. J Geophys Res 86:1738–1744Google Scholar
  23. Roy S, Mareschal J-C (2011) Constraints on the deep thermal structure of the Dharwar craton, India, from heat flow, shear wave velocities, and mantle xenoliths. J Geophys Res 116:B02409. doi: 10.1029/2010JB007796 Google Scholar
  24. Rudnick RL, McDonough WF, O’Connell RJ (1998) Thermal structure, thickness and composition of continental lithosphere. Chem Geol 145:395–411CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Russell JK, Kopylova M (1999) A steady state conductive geotherm for the north central Slave, Canada: inversion of petrological data from the Jericho Kimberlite pipe. J Geophys Res 104(B4):7089–7101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Russell JK, Dipple GM, Kopylova MG (2001) Heat production and heat flow in the mantle lithosphere, Slave Craton, Canada. Phys Earth Planet Inter 123:27–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Singh RN, Negi JG (1979) A reinterpretation of the linear heat flow and heat production relationship for the exponential model of the heat production in the crust. Geophys J Roy Astron Soc 57:741–744CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Schatz J, Simmons G (1972) Thermal conductivity of earth materials at high temperatures. J Geophys Res 77:6966–6983CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Sleep NH (2003) Geodynamic implications of xenolith geotherms. Geochem Geophys Geosyst 4(9):1079. doi: 10.1029/2003GC000511 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Solomatov VS (1995) Scaling of temperature- and stress-dependent viscosity convection. Phys Fluids 7:266–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Solomatov VS, Moresi LN (2000) Scaling of time-dependent stagnant lid convection: application to small-scale convection on earth and other terrestrial planets. J Geophys Res 105:21795–21817CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Sorcar N, Hoppe U, Dasgupta S, Chakraborty S (2014) High temperature cooling histories of migmatites from the High Himalayan Crystallines in Sikkim, India: rapid cooling unrelated to exhumation? Contrib Mineral Petrol 167:957. doi: 10.1007/s00410-013-0957-3

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.CSIR-National Geophysical Research InstituteHyderabadIndia
  2. 2.Department of GeosciencesUniversity of ArizonaTucsonUSA

Personalised recommendations