Abstract

The Alpine orogeny is characterized by tectonic sequences of subduction and collision accompanied by break-off events and possibly preceded by a flip of subduction polarity. The tectonic evolution of the transition to the Eastern Alps has thus been under debate. The dense SWATH-D seismic network as a complementary experiment to the AlpArray seismic network provides unprecedented lateral resolution to address this ongoing discussion. We analyze the shear-wave splitting of this data set including stations of the AlpArray backbone in the region to obtain new insights into the deformation at depth from seismic anisotropy. Previous studies indicate two-layer anisotropy in the Eastern Alps. This is supported by the azimuthal pattern of the measured fast axis direction across all analyzed stations. However, the temporary character of the deployment requires a joint analysis of multiple stations to increase the number of events adding complementary information of the anisotropic properties of the mantle. We, therefore, perform a cluster analysis based on a correlation of energy tensors between all stations. The energy tensors are assembled from the remaining transverse energy after the trial correction of the splitting effect from two consecutive anisotropic layers. This leads to two main groups of different two-layer properties, separated approximately at 13°E. We identify a layer with a constant fast axis direction (measured clockwise with respect to north) of about 60° over the whole area, with a possible dip from west to east. The lower layer in the west shows N–S fast direction and the upper layer in the east shows a fast axis of about 115°. We propose two likely scenarios, both accompanied by a slab break-off in the eastern part. The continuous layer can either be interpreted as frozen-in anisotropy with a lithospheric origin or as an asthenospheric flow evading the retreat of the European slab that would precede the break-off event. In both scenarios, the upper layer in the east is a result of a flow through the gap formed in the slab break-off. The N–S direction can be interpreted as an asthenospheric flow driven by the retreating European slab but might also result from a deep-reaching fault-related anisotropy.

Highlights

  • The development of seismic anisotropy is significantly affected by tectonic processes and the dynamics of the Earth’s interior (Savage 1999)

  • Seismic anisotropy is dominated by the lattice-preferred orientation of olivine crystals that align along the strain direction (Silver 1996; Karato et al, 2008), in response to mantle flow processes (Long and Becker 2010)

  • Shear-wave splitting characterizes anisotropy by a fast axis, which is parallel to the preferred orientation of the mantle minerals in a simple mantle flow–dominated anisotropic model, and a lag time, which scales with the strength of anisotropy and the extent of the anisotropic volume

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The development of seismic anisotropy is significantly affected by tectonic processes and the dynamics of the Earth’s interior (Savage 1999). Anisotropy results from the stressinduced alignment of cracks (Christensen, 1966; Nur and Simmons, 1969; Nur, 1971; Crampin 1987; Yousef and Angus 2016) in alternating layers of different seismic velocities like folded sediments (Backus 1962; Savage 1999) or (in the lower crust) an alignment of intrinsically anisotropic minerals. The latter occurs in the upper mantle lithosphere as frozen-in anisotropy. They result in a pronounced layered anisotropy when they sink (after possible break-off) into the mantle, due to a replacement flow of asthenospheric mantle material (Qorbani et al, 2015a)

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call