Observations of Mantle Seismic Anisotropy Using Array Techniques: Shear‐Wave Splitting of Beamformed SmKS Phases

Shear‐wave splitting measurements are commonly used to resolve seismic anisotropy in both the upper and lowermost mantle. Typically, such techniques are applied to SmKS phases that have reflected (m‐1) times off the underside of the core‐mantle boundary before being recorded. Practical constraints for shear‐wave splitting studies include the limited number of suitable phases as well as the large fraction of available data discarded because of poor signal‐to‐noise ratios (SNRs) or large measurement uncertainties. Array techniques such as beamforming are commonly used in observational seismology to enhance SNRs, but have not been applied before to improve SmKS signal strength and coherency for shear wave splitting studies. Here, we investigate how a beamforming methodology, based on slowness and backazimuth vespagrams to determine the most coherent incoming wave direction, can improve shear‐wave splitting measurement confidence intervals. Through the analysis of real and synthetic seismograms, we show that (a) the splitting measurements obtained from the beamformed seismograms (beams) reflect an average of the single‐station splitting parameters that contribute to the beam; (b) the beams have (on average) more than twice as large SNRs than the single‐station seismograms that contribute to the beam; (c) the increased SNRs allow the reliable measurement of shear wave splitting parameters from beams down to average single‐station SNRs of 1.3. Beamforming may thus be helpful to more reliably measure splitting due to upper mantle anisotropy. Moreover, we show that beamforming holds potential to greatly improve detection of lowermost mantle anisotropy by demonstrating differential SKS–SKKS splitting analysis using beamformed USArray data.

[1]  M. Long,et al.  Slab-driven flow at the base of the mantle beneath the northeastern Pacific Ocean , 2022, Earth and Planetary Science Letters.

[2]  Zhi Li,et al.  Kilometer-scale structure on the core–mantle boundary near Hawaii , 2022, Nature Communications.

[3]  M. Long,et al.  Constraining deep mantle anisotropy with shear wave splitting measurements: challenges and new measurement strategies , 2022 .

[4]  D. Evans,et al.  Reconciling supercontinent cycle models with ancient subduction zones , 2021, Earth and Planetary Science Letters.

[5]  G. Bokelmann,et al.  Constraints on Olivine Deformation From SKS Shear‐Wave Splitting Beneath the Southern Cascadia Subduction Zone Back‐Arc , 2021, Geochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems.

[6]  C. Thomas,et al.  Modeling of Seismic Anisotropy Observations Reveals Plausible Lowermost Mantle Flow Directions Beneath Siberia , 2021, Geochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems.

[7]  G. Rümpker,et al.  Resolving Seismic Anisotropy of the Lithosphere–Asthenosphere in the Central/Eastern Alps Beneath the SWATH-D Network , 2021, Frontiers in Earth Science.

[8]  Xiaoran Chen,et al.  Small Shear Wave Splitting Delays Suggest Weak Anisotropy in Cratonic Mantle Lithosphere , 2021, Geophysical Research Letters.

[9]  T. Nissen‐Meyer,et al.  Sensitivity of SK(K)S and ScS phases to heterogeneous anisotropy in the lowermost mantle from global wavefield simulations , 2021, Geophysical Journal International.

[10]  S. Lebedev,et al.  Dynamics of the Upper Mantle in Light of Seismic Anisotropy , 2021 .

[11]  B. Romanowicz,et al.  Effects of upper mantle structure beneath Alaska on core-sensitive seismic wave absolute and differential measurements: Implications for estimates of inner core anisotropy , 2021 .

[12]  G. Bokelmann,et al.  Shear-Wave Splitting in the Alpine Region , 2021, Geophysical Journal International.

[13]  M. Long,et al.  Seismic anisotropy in the lowermost mantle beneath North America from SKS-SKKS splitting intensity discrepancies , 2020 .

[14]  T. Nissen‐Meyer,et al.  Full wave sensitivity of SK(K)S phases to arbitrary anisotropy in the upper and lower mantle , 2020 .

[15]  M. Long,et al.  Strong seismic anisotropy in the deep upper mantle beneath the Cascadia backarc: Constraints from probabilistic finite-frequency SKS splitting intensity tomography , 2020 .

[16]  J. Wookey,et al.  A potential post-perovskite province in D″ beneath the Eastern Pacific: evidence from new analysis of discrepant SKS–SKKS shear-wave splitting , 2020 .

[17]  L. Miyagi,et al.  A Library of Elastic Tensors for Lowermost Mantle Seismic Anisotropy Studies and Comparison With Seismic Observations , 2020, Geochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems.

[18]  B. Romanowicz,et al.  Upper mantle slab under Alaska: contribution to anomalous core-phase observations on south-Sandwich to Alaska paths , 2020, Physics of the Earth and Planetary Interiors.

[19]  C. Thomas,et al.  An investigation of seismic anisotropy in the lowermost mantle beneath Iceland , 2019, Geophysical Journal International.

[20]  M. Long,et al.  Lowermost Mantle Anisotropy Beneath Africa From Differential SKS‐SKKS Shear‐Wave Splitting , 2019, Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth.

[21]  G. Abers,et al.  SKS Splitting Beneath Mount St. Helens: Constraints on Subslab Mantle Entrainment , 2019, Geochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems.

[22]  T. Torsvik Earth history: A journey in time and space from base to top , 2019, Tectonophysics.

[23]  Martin van Driel,et al.  AxiSEM3D: broad-band seismic wavefields in 3-D global earth models with undulating discontinuities , 2019, Geophysical Journal International.

[24]  J. Ritter,et al.  Widespread seismic anisotropy in Earth’s lowermost mantle beneath the Atlantic and Siberia , 2019, Geology.

[25]  American Geophysical Union (AGU) , 2018, The Grants Register 2022.

[26]  S. Zhong,et al.  The source location of mantle plumes from 3D spherical models of mantle convection , 2017 .

[27]  H. Tavera,et al.  Lowermost mantle anisotropy near the eastern edge of the Pacific LLSVP: constraints from SKS–SKKS splitting intensity measurements , 2017 .

[28]  H. Ford,et al.  Deformation in the lowermost mantle beneath Australia from observations and models of seismic anisotropy , 2017 .

[29]  Stephen S. Gao,et al.  Seismic azimuthal anisotropy beneath the eastern United States and its geodynamic implications , 2017 .

[30]  M. C. Reiss,et al.  SplitRacer: MATLAB Code and GUI for Semiautomated Analysis and Interpretation of Teleseismic Shear‐Wave Splitting , 2017 .

[31]  T. Nissen‐Meyer,et al.  Efficient global wave propagation adapted to 3-D structural complexity: a pseudospectral/spectral-element approach , 2016 .

[32]  J. Wookey,et al.  The limits of ray theory when measuring shear wave splitting in the lowermost mantle with ScS waves , 2016 .

[33]  M. Long The Cascadia Paradox: Mantle flow and slab fragmentation in the Cascadia subduction system , 2016 .

[34]  M. Long,et al.  Seismic anisotropy in the lowermost mantle near the Perm Anomaly , 2015 .

[35]  H. Ford,et al.  Lowermost mantle flow at the eastern edge of the African Large Low Shear Velocity Province , 2015 .

[36]  G. Masters,et al.  A uniformly processed data set of SKS shear wave splitting measurements: A global investigation of upper mantle anisotropy beneath seismic stations , 2014 .

[37]  Stephen S. Gao,et al.  A uniform database of teleseismic shear wave splitting measurements for the western and central United States , 2014 .

[38]  J. Woodhouse,et al.  Global radially anisotropic mantle structure from multiple datasets: A review, current challenges, and outlook , 2014 .

[39]  B. Romanowicz,et al.  Observations of changing anisotropy across the southern margin of the African LLSVP , 2013 .

[40]  M. Savage,et al.  Silver and Chan revisited , 2013 .

[41]  G. Stuart,et al.  Detection of a tall ridge at the core–mantle boundary from scattered PKP energy , 2013 .

[42]  Andrew M. Walker,et al.  MSAT - A new toolkit for the analysis of elastic and seismic anisotropy , 2012, Comput. Geosci..

[43]  Chad Trabant,et al.  Data Products at the IRIS DMC: Stepping Stones for Research and Other Applications , 2012 .

[44]  J. Wookey,et al.  New advances in using seismic anisotropy, mineral physics and geodynamics to understand deformation in the lowermost mantle , 2011 .

[45]  S. Chevrot,et al.  High-resolution imaging of the deep anisotropic structure of the San Andreas Fault system beneath southern California , 2011 .

[46]  J. Wookey,et al.  Deformation of the lowermost mantle from seismic anisotropy , 2010, Nature.

[47]  T. Becker,et al.  Mantle dynamics and seismic anisotropy , 2010 .

[48]  R. Russo,et al.  Source-side shear wave splitting and upper mantle flow in the Chile Ridge subduction region , 2010 .

[49]  Lion Krischer,et al.  ObsPy: A Python Toolbox for Seismology , 2010 .

[50]  Haiying Gao,et al.  Shear wave splitting and the pattern of mantle flow beneath eastern Oregon , 2009 .

[51]  M. Long Complex anisotropy in D" beneath the eastern Pacific from SKS-SKKS splitting discrepancies , 2009 .

[52]  C. Thomas,et al.  Improving Seismic Resolution Through Array Processing Techniques , 2009 .

[53]  Neil D. Selby,et al.  Application of a Generalized F Detector at a Seismometer Array , 2008 .

[54]  Federica Marone,et al.  The depth distribution of azimuthal anisotropy in the continental upper mantle , 2007, Nature.

[55]  B. Romanowicz,et al.  A Three-Dimensional Radially-Anisotropic Model of Shear Velocity in the Whole Mantle , 2006 .

[56]  G. Helffrich,et al.  Core–mantle boundary structure investigated using SKS and SKKS polarization anomalies , 2006 .

[57]  G. D. Price,et al.  Efficacy of the post-perovskite phase as an explanation for lowermost-mantle seismic properties , 2005, Nature.

[58]  Jeffrey Park,et al.  B-type olivine fabric in the mantle wedge: Insights from high-resolution non-Newtonian subduction zone models , 2005 .

[59]  J. Wookey,et al.  Lowermost mantle anisotropy beneath the north Pacific from differential S—ScS splitting , 2005 .

[60]  F. Niu,et al.  Seismic anisotropy in the lower mantle: A comparison of waveform splitting of SKS and SKKS , 2004 .

[61]  L. Wen,et al.  Mapping the geometry and geographic distribution of a very low velocity province at the base of the Earth's mantle , 2004 .

[62]  D. Bercovici,et al.  Whole-mantle convection and the transition-zone water filter , 2002, Nature.

[63]  Sebastian Rost,et al.  ARRAY SEISMOLOGY: METHODS AND APPLICATIONS , 2002 .

[64]  S. Chevrot Multichannel analysis of shear wave splitting , 2000 .

[65]  P. Tackley,et al.  Mantle convection and plate tectonics: toward an integrated physical and chemical theory , 2000, Science.

[66]  Thomas J. Owens,et al.  The TauP Toolkit: Flexible Seismic Travel-Time and Raypath Utilities , 1999 .

[67]  Walter H. F. Smith,et al.  New, improved version of generic mapping tools released , 1998 .

[68]  Paul G. Silver,et al.  Seismic anisotropy of oceanic upper mantle: Shear wave splitting methodologies and observations , 1998 .

[69]  E. R. Engdahl,et al.  Evidence for deep mantle circulation from global tomography , 1997, Nature.

[70]  P. Silver SEISMIC ANISOTROPY BENEATH THE CONTINENTS: Probing the Depths of Geology , 1996 .

[71]  Paul G. Silver,et al.  Shear wave splitting and subcontinental mantle deformation , 1991 .

[72]  B. Romanowicz,et al.  AZIMUTHAL ANISOTROPY IN THE EARTH FROM OBSERVATIONS OF SKS AT GEOSCOPE AND NARS BROADBAND STATIONS , 1989 .

[73]  D. L. Anderson,et al.  Petrological constraints on seismic anisotropy , 1989 .

[74]  L. Vinnik,et al.  Anisotropy of the mantle inferred from observations of P to S converted waves , 1984 .

[75]  D. L. Anderson,et al.  Preliminary reference earth model , 1981 .

[76]  Paul G. Richards,et al.  Pulse distortion and Hilbert transformation in multiply reflected and refracted body waves , 1975, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America.

[77]  D. Davies,et al.  Vespa Process for Analysis of Seismic Signals , 1971 .