 |
| Titel |
Relations between heat flow, topography and Moho depth for Europe |
| VerfasserIn |
Marcin Polkowski, Jacek Majorowicz, Marek Grad |
| Konferenz |
EGU General Assembly 2013
|
| Medientyp |
Artikel
|
| Sprache |
Englisch
|
| Digitales Dokument |
PDF |
| Erschienen |
In: GRA - Volume 15 (2013) |
| Datensatznummer |
250078848
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Zusammenfassung |
| The relation between heat flow, topography and Moho depth for recent maps of Europe is
presented. New heat flow map of Europe (Majorowicz and Wybraniec, 2010) is based on
updated database of uncorrected heat flow values to which paleoclimatic correction is applied
across the continental Europe. Correction is depth dependent due to a diffusive thermal
transfer of the surface temperature forcing of which glacial–interglacial history has the largest
impact. This explains some very low uncorrected heat flow values 20–30 mW/m2 in the
shields, shallow basin areas of the cratons, and in other areas including orogenic belts were
heat flow was likely underestimated. New integrated map of the European Moho depth (Grad
et al., 2009) is the first high resolution digital map for European plate understand
as an area from Ural Mountains in the east to mid-Atlantic ridge in the west, and
Mediterranean Sea in the south to Spitsbergen and Barents Sea in Arctic in the north. For
correlation we used: onshore heat flow density data with palaeoclimatic correction (5318
locations), topography map (30 x 30 arc seconds; Danielson and Gesch, 2011) and Moho
map (longitude, latitude and Moho depth, each 0.1 degree). Analysis was done in
areas where data from all three datasets were available. Continental Europe area
could be divided into two large domains related with Precambrian East European
craton and Palaeozoic Platform. Next two smaller areas correspond to Scandinavian
Caledonides and Anatolia. Presented results show different correlations between
Moho depth, elevation and heat flow for all discussed regions. For each region
more detailed analysis of these relation in different elevation ranges is presented. In
general it is observed that Moho depth is more significant to HF then elevation.
Depending on region and elevation range HF value in mW/m2 is up to two times
larger than Moho depth in km, while HF relation to elevation varies much more. |
|
|
|
|
|
|