Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Letter
  • Published:

Evidence for a very-long-term trend in geomagnetic secular variation

Nature Geoscience volume 1, pages 395–398 (2008)Cite this article

Abstract

The Earth’s inner core is believed to inhibit rapid fluctuations in the geomagnetic field from developing into full polarity reversals1,2. Consequently, during the Precambrian, the smaller size of the inner core might suggest that polarity reversals could occur more readily. It is therefore surprising that there are indications that reversals were rare during this period3,4. Here we use new and existing palaeomagnetic data from three continents to examine the stability of the Earth’s magnetic field from 2.82 to 2.45 billion years ago. We show that, on average, geomagnetic secular variation (the field variations produced by normal geodynamo action) during the late Archaean and early Proterozoic was different from that of the past 200 million years; specifically, the apparent variability of the geomagnetic pole as viewed at low and mid-latitudes was reduced relative to the past 200 million years. According to both dynamo simulations4 and more recent palaeomagnetic field observations5, the observed pattern of secular variation suggests a lower frequency of polarity reversals 2.5 billion years ago. This may imply that the geodynamo is becoming progressively less stable over long timescales, consistent with some numerical simulations6,7, possibly as a result of changing outer-core geometry that has accompanied inner-core growth.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: VGP dispersion plots for the periods 2.45–2.82 Gyr and 0–5 Myr.
Figure 2: Comparison of PSV in the periods 2.45–2.82 Gyr and 0–195 Myr.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Gubbins, D. The distinction between geomagnetic excursions and reversals. Geophys. J. Int. 137, F1–F3 (1999).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Hollerbach, R. & Jones, C. A. Influence of the earth’s inner-core on geomagnetic fluctuations and reversals. Nature 365, 541–543 (1993).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Roberts, N. & Piper, J. D. A. in Geomagnetism (ed. Jacobs, J. A.) 163–260 (Elsevier, New York, 1989).

    Google Scholar 

  4. Coe, R. S. & Glatzmaier, G. A. Symmetry and stability of the geomagnetic field. Geophys. Res. Lett. 33, 2006GL027903 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. McFadden, P. L., Merrill, R. T., McElhinny, M. W. & Lee, S. H. Reversals of the earths magnetic-field and temporal variations of the dynamo families. J. Geophys. Res. 96, 3923–3933 (1991).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Morrison, G. & Fearn, D. R. The influence of Rayleigh number, azimuthal wavenumber and inner core radius on 2–1/2 D hydromagnetic dynamos. Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. 117, 237–258 (2000).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Roberts, P. H. & Glatzmaier, G. A. The geodynamo, past, present and future. Geophys. Astrophys. Fluid Dyn. 94, 47–84 (2001).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Smirnov, A. V. & Tarduno, J. A. Secular variation of the late Archean early Proterozoic geodynamo. Geophys. Res. Lett. 31doi:10.1029/2004GL020333 (2004).

  9. McElhinny, M. W. & McFadden, P. L. Palaeosecular variation over the past 5 Myr based on a new generalized database. Geophys. J. Int. 131, 240–252 (1997).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Hulot, G. & Gallet, Y. On the interpretation of virtual geomagnetic pole (VGP) scatter curves. Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. 95, 37–53 (1996).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. McFadden, P. L., Merrill, R. T. & McElhinny, M. W. Dipole quadrupole family modeling of paleosecular variation. J Geophys. Res. 93, 11583–11588 (1988).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Hulot, G. & Gallet, Y. Do superchrons occur without any palaeomagnetic warning? Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 210, 191–201 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Pavlov, V. & Gallet, Y. A third superchron during the Early Paleozoic. Episodes 28, 78–84 (2005).

    Google Scholar 

  14. Courtillot, V. & Olson, P. Mantle plumes link magnetic superchrons to Phanerozoic mass depletion events. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 260, 495–504 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. McFadden, P. L. & Merrill, R. T. History of earth’s magnetic-field and possible connections to core–mantle boundary processes. J. Geophys. Res. 100, 307–316 (1995).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Gubbins, D., Alfe, D., Masters, G., Price, G. D. & Gillan, M. J. Can the Earth’s dynamo run on heat alone? Geophys. J. Int. 155, 609–622 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Labrosse, S. Thermal and magnetic evolution of the Earth’s core. Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. 140, 127–143 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Lassiter, J. C. Constraints on the coupled thermal evolution of the Earth’s core and mantle, the age of the inner core, and the origin of the (OS)-O-186/(OS)-O-188 ‘core signal’ in plume-derived lavas. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 250, 306–317 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Brandon, A. D. & Walker, R. J. The debate over core–mantle interaction. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 232, 211–225 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Christensen, U. R. & Tilgner, A. Power requirement of the geodynamo from ohmic losses in numerical and laboratory dynamos. Nature 429, 169–171 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Buffett, B. A. Estimates of heat flow in the deep mantle based on the power requirements for the geodynamo. Geophys. Res. Lett. 29doi:10.1029/2001GL014649 (2002).

  22. Williams, G. E. Geological constraints on the Precambrian history of earth’s rotation and the moon’s orbit. Rev. Geophys. 38, 37–59 (2000).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Vandamme, D. A new method to determine paleosecular variation. Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. 85, 131–142 (1994).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Bates, M. P. & Halls, H. C. Broad-scale proterozoic deformation of the central superior-province revealed by paleomagnetism of the 2.45 Ga Matachewan dyke swarm. Can. J. Earth Sci. 28, 1780–1796 (1991).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Halls, H. C. & Palmer, H. C. The tectonic relationship of two early protorozoic dyke swarms to the Kapuskasing structural zone: A paleomagnetic and petrographic study. Can. J. Earth Sci. 27, 87–103 (1990).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Meert, J. G., Van der Voo, R. & Patel, J. Paleomagnetism of the Late Archean Nyanzian System, Western Kenya. Precambr. Res. 69, 113–131 (1994).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Strik, G. H. M. A., Blake, T. S., Zegers, T. E., White, S. H. & Langereis, C. G. Palaeomagnetism of flood basalts in the Pilbara Craton, Western Australia: Late Archaean continental drift and the oldest known reversal of the geomagnetic field. J. Geophys. Res. 108, EPM 2-1–EPM 2-21 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Wingate, M. T. D. A palaeomagnetic test of the Kaapvaal-Pilbara (Vaalbara) connection at 2.78 Ga. South African J. Geol. 101, 257–274 (1998).

    Google Scholar 

  29. Tarduno, J. A., Cottrell, R. D. & Smirnov, A. V. The Cretaceous superchron geodynamo: Observations near the tangent cylinder. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 99, 14020–14025 (2002).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Johnson, C. L. et al. Recent investigations of the 0–5 Ma geomagnetic field recorded by lava flows. Geochem. Geophys. Geosyst.doi:10.1029/2007GC001696 (in the press, 2008).

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was undertaken with funding provided by the Netherlands Science Foundation (NWO) and conducted under the programme of the Vening Meinesz Research School of Geodynamics (VMSG).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Palaeomagnetic Laboratory Fort Hoofddijk, Budapestlaan 17, Universiteit Utrecht, Utrecht 3584 CD, Netherlands

    Andrew J. Biggin, Geert H. M. A. Strik & Cor G. Langereis

Authors
  1. Andrew J. Biggin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Geert H. M. A. Strik
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Cor G. Langereis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

A.J.B. undertook the palaeosecular variation analyses and provided the interpretation. G.H.M.A.S. obtained the newly reported data from the Pilbara Craton and undertook PSV analyses on these. C.G.L. initiated the project and advised and assisted throughout.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andrew J. Biggin.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

Supplementary figures S1-S4 and table S1 (PDF 521 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Biggin, A., Strik, G. & Langereis, C. Evidence for a very-long-term trend in geomagnetic secular variation. Nature Geosci 1, 395–398 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo181

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo181

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing