@article{SpoonerScheckWenderothGoetzeetal.2019, author = {Spooner, Cameron and Scheck-Wenderoth, Magdalena and G{\"o}tze, Hans-J{\"u}rgen and Ebbing, J{\"o}rg and Hetenyi, Gyoergy}, title = {Density distribution across the Alpine lithosphere constrained by 3-D gravity modelling and relation to seismicity and deformation}, series = {Solid earth}, volume = {10}, journal = {Solid earth}, number = {6}, publisher = {Copernicus}, address = {G{\"o}ttingen}, organization = {AlpArray Working Grp}, issn = {1869-9510}, doi = {10.5194/se-10-2073-2019}, pages = {2073 -- 2088}, year = {2019}, abstract = {The Alpine orogen formed as a result of the collision between the Adriatic and European plates. Significant crustal heterogeneity exists within the region due to the long history of interplay between these plates, other continental and oceanic blocks in the region, and inherited crustal features from earlier orogenies. Deformation relating to the collision continues to the present day. Here, a seismically constrained, 3-D structural and density model of the lithosphere of the Alps and their respective forelands, derived from integrating numerous geoscientific datasets, was adjusted to match the observed gravity field. It is shown that the distribution of seismicity and deformation within the region correlates well to thickness and density changes within the crust, and that the present-day Adriatic crust is both thinner and denser (22.5 km, 2800 kg m(-3) ) than the European crust (27.5 km, 2750 kg m(-3)). Alpine crust derived from each respective plate is found to show the same trend, with zones of Adriatic provenance (Austro-Alpine unit and Southern Alps) found to be denser and those of European provenance (Helvetic zone and Tauern Window) to be less dense. This suggests that the respective plates and related terranes had similar crustal properties to the present-day ones prior to orogenesis. The model generated here is available for open-access use to further discussions about the crust in the region.}, language = {en} } @article{SpoonerScheckWenderothCacaceetal.2022, author = {Spooner, Cameron and Scheck-Wenderoth, Magdalena and Cacace, Mauro and Anikiev, Denis}, title = {How Alpine seismicity relates to lithospheric strength}, series = {International journal of earth sciences}, volume = {111}, journal = {International journal of earth sciences}, number = {4}, publisher = {Springer}, address = {Berlin ; Heidelberg}, issn = {1437-3254}, doi = {10.1007/s00531-022-02174-5}, pages = {1201 -- 1221}, year = {2022}, abstract = {Despite the amount of research focussed on the Alpine orogen, different hypotheses still exist regarding varying spatial seismicity distribution patterns throughout the region. Previous measurement-constrained regional 3D models of lithospheric density distribution and thermal field facilitate the generation of a data-based rheological model of the region. In this study, we compute the long-term lithospheric strength and compare its spatial variation to observed seismicity patterns. We demonstrate how strength maxima within the crust (similar to 1 GPa) and upper mantle (> 2 GPa) occur at temperatures characteristic of the onset of crystal plasticity in those rocks (crust: 200-400 degrees C; mantle: similar to 600 degrees C), with almost all seismicity occurring in these regions. Correlation in the northern and southern forelands between crustal and lithospheric strengths and seismicity show different patterns of event distribution, reflecting their different tectonic settings. Seismicity in the plate boundary setting of the southern foreland corresponds to the integrated lithospheric strength, occurring mainly in the weaker domains surrounding the strong Adriatic plate. In the intraplate setting of the northern foreland, seismicity correlates to modelled crustal strength, and it mainly occurs in the weaker and warmer crust beneath the Upper Rhine Graben. We, therefore, suggest that seismicity in the upper crust is linked to weak crustal domains, which are more prone to localise deformation promoting failure and, depending on the local properties of the fault, earthquakes at relatively lower levels of accumulated stress than their neighbouring stronger counterparts. Upper mantle seismicity at depths greater than modelled brittle conditions, can be either explained by embrittlement of the mantle due to grain-size sensitive deformation within domains of active or recent slab cooling, or by dissipative weakening mechanisms, such as thermal runaway from shear heating and/or dehydration reactions within an overly ductile mantle. Results generated in this study are available for open access use to further discussions on the region.}, language = {en} } @article{DegenSpoonerScheckWenderothetal.2021, author = {Degen, Denise and Spooner, Cameron and Scheck-Wenderoth, Magdalena and Cacace, Mauro}, title = {How biased are our models?}, series = {Geoscientific model development : an interactive open access journal of the European Geosciences Union}, volume = {14}, journal = {Geoscientific model development : an interactive open access journal of the European Geosciences Union}, number = {11}, publisher = {Copernicus}, address = {G{\"o}ttingen}, issn = {1991-959X}, doi = {10.5194/gmd-14-7133-2021}, pages = {7133 -- 7153}, year = {2021}, abstract = {Geophysical process simulations play a crucial role in the understanding of the subsurface. This understanding is required to provide, for instance, clean energy sources such as geothermal energy. However, the calibration and validation of the physical models heavily rely on state measurements such as temperature. In this work, we demonstrate that focusing analyses purely on measurements introduces a high bias. This is illustrated through global sensitivity studies. The extensive exploration of the parameter space becomes feasible through the construction of suitable surrogate models via the reduced basis method, where the bias is found to result from very unequal data distribution. We propose schemes to compensate for parts of this bias. However, the bias cannot be entirely compensated. Therefore, we demonstrate the consequences of this bias with the example of a model calibration.}, language = {en} } @phdthesis{Spooner2021, author = {Spooner, Cameron}, title = {How does lithospheric configuration relate to deformation in the Alpine region?}, doi = {10.25932/publishup-51644}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-516442}, school = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam}, pages = {xiv, 138}, year = {2021}, abstract = {Forming as a result of the collision between the Adriatic and European plates, the Alpine orogen exhibits significant lithospheric heterogeneity due to the long history of interplay between these plates, other continental and oceanic blocks in the region, and inherited features from preceeding orogenies. This implies that the thermal and rheological configuration of the lithosphere also varies significantly throughout the region. Lithology and temperature/pressure conditions exert a first order control on rock strength, principally via thermally activated creep deformation and on the distribution at depth of the brittle-ductile transition zone, which can be regarded as the lower bound to the seismogenic zone. Therefore, they influence the spatial distribution of seismicity within a lithospheric plate. In light of this, accurately constrained geophysical models of the heterogeneous Alpine lithospheric configuration, are crucial in describing regional deformation patterns. However, despite the amount of research focussing on the area, different hypotheses still exist regarding the present-day lithospheric state and how it might relate to the present-day seismicity distribution. This dissertaion seeks to constrain the Alpine lithospheric configuration through a fully 3D integrated modelling workflow, that utilises multiple geophysical techniques and integrates from all available data sources. The aim is therefore to shed light on how lithospheric heterogeneity may play a role in influencing the heterogeneous patterns of seismicity distribution observed within the region. This was accomplished through the generation of: (i) 3D seismically constrained, structural and density models of the lithosphere, that were adjusted to match the observed gravity field; (ii) 3D models of the lithospheric steady state thermal field, that were adjusted to match observed wellbore temperatures; and (iii) 3D rheological models of long term lithospheric strength, with the results of each step used as input for the following steps. Results indicate that the highest strength within the crust (~ 1 GPa) and upper mantle (> 2 GPa), are shown to occur at temperatures characteristic for specific phase transitions (more felsic crust: 200 - 400 °C; more mafic crust and upper lithospheric mantle: ~600 °C) with almost all seismicity occurring in these regions. However, inherited lithospheric heterogeneity was found to significantly influence this, with seismicity in the thinner and more mafic Adriatic crust (~22.5 km, 2800 kg m-3, 1.30E-06 W m-3) occuring to higher temperatures (~600 °C) than in the thicker and more felsic European crust (~27.5 km, 2750 kg m-3, 1.3-2.6E-06 W m-3, ~450 °C). Correlation between seismicity in the orogen forelands and lithospheric strength, also show different trends, reflecting their different tectonic settings. As such, events in the plate boundary setting of the southern foreland correlate with the integrated lithospheric strength, occurring mainly in the weaker lithosphere surrounding the strong Adriatic indenter. Events in the intraplate setting of the northern foreland, instead correlate with crustal strength, mainly occurring in the weaker and warmer crust beneath the Upper Rhine Graben. Therefore, not only do the findings presented in this work represent a state of the art understanding of the lithospheric configuration beneath the Alps and their forelands, but also a significant improvement on the features known to significantly influence the occurrence of seismicity within the region. This highlights the importance of considering lithospheric state in regards to explaining observed patterns of deformation.}, language = {en} } @article{SpoonerScheckWenderothCacaceetal.2020, author = {Spooner, Cameron and Scheck-Wenderoth, Magdalena and Cacace, Mauro and G{\"o}tze, Hans-J{\"u}rgen and Luijendijk, Elco}, title = {The 3D thermal field across the Alpine orogen and its forelands and the relation to seismicity}, series = {Global and planetary change}, volume = {193}, journal = {Global and planetary change}, publisher = {Elsevier}, address = {Amsterdam}, issn = {0921-8181}, doi = {10.1016/j.gloplacha.2020.103288}, pages = {14}, year = {2020}, abstract = {Temperature exerts a first order control on rock strength, principally via thermally activated creep deformation and on the distribution at depth of the brittle-ductile transition zone. The latter can be regarded as the lower bound to the seismogenic zone, thereby controlling the spatial distribution of seismicity within a lithospheric plate. As such, models of the crustal thermal field are important to understand the localisation of seismicity. Here we relate results from 3D simulations of the steady state thermal field of the Alpine orogen and its forelands to the distribution of seismicity in this seismically active area of Central Europe. The model takes into account how the crustal heterogeneity of the region effects thermal properties and is validated with a dataset of wellbore temperatures. We find that the Adriatic crust appears more mafic, through its radiogenic heat values (1.30E-06 W/m3) and maximum temperature of seismicity (600 degrees C), than the European crust (1.3-2.6E-06 W/m3 and 450 degrees C). We also show that at depths of < 10 km the thermal field is largely controlled by sedimentary blanketing or topographic effects, whilst the deeper temperature field is primarily controlled by the LAB topology and the distribution and parameterization of radiogenic heat sources within the upper crust.}, language = {en} }