Post-critical SsPmp and its applications to Virtual Deep Seismic Sounding (VDSS) – 2: 1-D imaging of the crust/mantle and joint constraints with receiver functions

Virtual Deep Seismic Sounding (VDSS) has emerged as a novel method to image the crust–mantle boundary (CMB) and potentially other lithospheric boundaries. In Part 1, we showed that the arrival time and waveform of post-critical SsPmp, the post-critical reflection phase at the CMB used in VDSS, is...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:Geophysical Journal International
Main Authors: Liu, Tianze, Klemperer, Simon L., Ferragut, Gabriel, Yu, Chunquan
Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
Language:unknown
Published: Royal Astronomical Society 2019
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggz370
Description
Summary:Virtual Deep Seismic Sounding (VDSS) has emerged as a novel method to image the crust–mantle boundary (CMB) and potentially other lithospheric boundaries. In Part 1, we showed that the arrival time and waveform of post-critical SsPmp, the post-critical reflection phase at the CMB used in VDSS, is sensitive to several different attributes of the crust and upper mantle. Here, we synthesize our methodology of deriving Moho depth, average crustal V_p and uppermost-mantle V_p from single-station observations of post-critical SsPmp under a 1-D assumption. We first verify our method with synthetics and then substantiate it with a case study using the Yellowknife and POLARIS arrays in the Slave Craton, Canada. We show good agreement of crustal and upper-mantle properties derived with VDSS with those given by previous active-source experiments and our own P receiver functions (PRF) in our study area. Finally, we propose a PRF-VDSS joint analysis method to constrain average crustal V_p/V_s ratio and composition. Our PRF-VDSS joint analysis shows that the southwest Slave Craton has an intermediate crustal composition, most consistent with a Mesoarchean age. © The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The Royal Astronomical Society. This article is published and distributed under the terms of the Oxford University Press, Standard Journals Publication Model (https://academic.oup.com/journals/pages/open_access/funder_policies/chorus/standard_publication_model) Accepted 2019 August 9. Received 2019 August 2; in original form 2019 February 19. We thank Brad Hacker from University of California, Santa Barbara, who provided his compilation of laboratory measurements. We thank the Data Management Center of the Incorporated Research Institutions for Seismology (IRIS-DMC) for the waveforms of the Yellowknife array and Canadian Hazards Information Service for the data of the POLARIS array. We also thank Jieyuan Ning from Peking University and two anonymous reviewers for their valuable advice. Tianze ...