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.

  • Article
  • Published:

Assembly of the basal mantle structure beneath Africa

Nature volume 603, pages 846–851 (2022)Cite this article

Subjects

An Author Correction to this article was published on 27 May 2022

This article has been updated

Abstract

Plate tectonics shapes Earth’s surface, and is linked to motions within its deep interior1,2. Cold oceanic lithosphere sinks into the mantle, and hot mantle plumes rise from the deep Earth, leading to volcanism3,4. Volcanic eruptions over the past 320 million years have been linked to two large structures at the base of the mantle presently under Africa and the Pacific Ocean5,6. This has led to the hypothesis that these basal mantle structures have been stationary over geological time7,8, in contrast to observations and models suggesting that tectonic plates9,10, subduction zones11,12,13,14 and mantle plumes15,16 have been mobile, and that basal mantle structures are presently deforming17,18. Here we reconstruct mantle flow from one billion years ago to the present day to show that the history of volcanism is statistically as consistent with mobile basal mantle structures as with fixed ones. In our reconstructions, cold lithosphere sank deep into the African hemisphere between 740 and 500 million years ago, and from 400 million years ago the structure beneath Africa progressively assembled, pushed by peri-Gondwana slabs, to become a coherent structure as recently as 60 million years ago. Our mantle flow models suggest that basal mantle structures are mobile, and aggregate and disperse over time, similarly to continents at Earth’s surface9. Our models also predict the presence of continental material in the mantle beneath Africa, consistent with geochemical data19,20.

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

Fig. 1: Structure of the lower mantle and volcanic eruption locations from 320 Ma to the present day.
Fig. 2: Distributions of distances between basal mantle structures and reconstructed eruption locations.
Fig. 3: Match of model basal mantle structures to volcanic eruption locations and tomographic models.
Fig. 4: Dynamic assembly of the African basal mantle structure and predicted continental crust in the deep Earth.

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Data generated for this study are available at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6031641. Source data are provided with this paper.

Code availability

The code used to compute the mantle flow models is available at https://github.com/EarthByte/citcoms. Figure 1 was created with the Generic Mapping Tools82 (GMT6) which is open-source software licensed under the GNU Lesser General Public License. Key Python scripts to compute the results shown in Figs. 2, 3 are available at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6031641. Figures 2, 3 were produced with the open-source Python library Matplotlib83, and Fig. 4 was created with ParaView67, which is shared openly under the 3-Clause BSD License.

Change history

References

  1. Bunge, H.-P. et al. Time scales and heterogeneous structure in geodynamic Earth models. Science 280, 91–95 (1998).

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. McNamara, A. K. & Zhong, S. Thermochemical structures beneath Africa and the Pacific Ocean. Nature 437, 1136–1139 (2005).

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Bercovici, D., Schubert, G. & Glatzmaier, G. A. Three-dimensional spherical models of convection in the Earth’s mantle. Science 244, 950–955 (1989).

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Campbell, I. H. Large igneous provinces and the mantle plume hypothesis. Elements 1, 265–269 (2005).

    Google Scholar 

  5. Burke, K., Steinberger, B., Torsvik, T. H. & Smethurst, M. A. Plume generation zones at the margins of large low shear velocity provinces on the core–mantle boundary. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 265, 49–60 (2008).

    ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Torsvik, T. H., Burke, K., Steinberger, B., Webb, S. J. & Ashwal, L. D. Diamonds sampled by plumes from the core–mantle boundary. Nature 466, 352–355 (2010).

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Conrad, C. P., Steinberger, B. & Torsvik, T. H. Stability of active mantle upwelling revealed by net characteristics of plate tectonics. Nature 498, 479–482 (2013).

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Dziewonski, A. M., Lekic, V. & Romanowicz, B. A. Mantle anchor structure: an argument for bottom-up tectonics. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 299, 69–79 (2010).

    ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Irving, E. Drift of the major continental blocks since the Devonian. Nature 270, 304–309 (1977).

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  10. Merdith, A. S. et al. Extending full-plate tectonic models into deep time: linking the neoproterozoic and the phanerozoic. Earth-Sci. Rev. 214, 103477 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

  11. Moresi, L., Betts, P. G., Miller, M. S. & Cayley, R. A. Dynamics of continental accretion. Nature 508, 245–248 (2014).

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Domeier, M. & Torsvik, T. H. Plate tectonics in the late Paleozoic. Geosci. Front. 5, 303–350 (2014).

    Google Scholar 

  13. Flament, N., Williams, S., Müller, R. D., Gurnis, M. & Bower, D. J. Correspondence: Reply to ‘Numerical modelling of the PERM anomaly and the Emeishan large igneous province’. Nat. Commun. 8, 822 (2017).

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Li, Z. X. et al. Decoding Earth’s rhythms: modulation of supercontinent cycles by longer superocean episodes. Precambrian Res. 323, 1–5 (2019).

    ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Tarduno, J., Bunge, H.-P., Sleep, N. & Hansen, U. The bent Hawaiian–Emperor hotspot track: inheriting the mantle wind. Science 324, 50–53 (2009).

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Hassan, R., Müller, R. D., Gurnis, M., Williams, S. E. & Flament, N. A rapid burst in hotspot motion through the interaction of tectonics and deep mantle flow. Nature 533, 239–242 (2016).

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Frost, D. A. & Rost, S. The P-wave boundary of the large-low shear velocity province beneath the Pacific. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 403, 380–392 (2014).

    ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Lynner, C. & Long, M. D. Lowermost mantle anisotropy and deformation along the boundary of the African LLSVP. Geophys. Res. Lett. 41, 3447–3454 (2014).

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  19. Doucet, L. S. et al. Distinct formation history for deep-mantle domains reflected in geochemical differences. Nat. Geosci. 13, 511–515 (2020).

    ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Jackson, M., Becker, T. & Steinberger, B. Spatial characteristics of recycled and primordial reservoirs in the deep mantle. Geochem. Geophys. Geosyst. 22, e2020GC009525 (2021).

    ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Mégnin, C. & Romanowicz, B. A. The three‐dimensional shear velocity structure of the mantle from the inversion of body, surface and higher‐mode waveforms. Geophys. J. Int. 143, 709–728 (2000).

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  22. Houser, C., Masters, G., Shearer, P. & Laske, G. Shear and compressional velocity models of the mantle from cluster analysis of long-period waveforms. Geophys. J. Int. 174, 195–212 (2008).

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  23. Kustowski, B., Ekström, G. & Dziewoński, A. M. Anisotropic shear‐wave velocity structure of the Earth’s mantle: a global model. J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 113, B06306 (2008).

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  24. Simmons, N. A., Forte, A. M., Boschi, L. & Grand, S. P. GyPSuM: a joint tomographic model of mantle density and seismic wave speeds. J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 115, B12310 (2010).

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  25. Ritsema, J., Deuss, A., van Heijst, H. J. & Woodhouse, J. H. S40RTS: a degree-40 shear-velocity model for the mantle from new Rayleigh wave dispersion, teleseismic traveltime and normal-mode splitting function measurements. Geophys. J. Int. 184, 1223–1236 (2011).

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  26. Auer, L., Boschi, L., Becker, T. W., Nissen‐Meyer, T. & Giardini, D. Savani: a variable resolution whole‐mantle model of anisotropic shear velocity variations based on multiple data sets. J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 119, 3006–3034 (2014).

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  27. French, S. W. & Romanowicz, B. A. Whole-mantle radially anisotropic shear velocity structure from spectral-element waveform tomography. Geophys. J. Int. 199, 1303–1327 (2014).

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  28. Davies, D., Goes, S. & Lau, H. C. P. In The Earth’s Heterogeneous Mantle (eds Khan, A. & Deschamps, F.) 441–477 (Springer, 2015).

  29. Garnero, E. J., McNamara, A. K. & Shim, S.-H. Continent-sized anomalous zones with low seismic velocity at the base of Earth’s mantle. Nat. Geosci. 9, 481–489 (2016).

    ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Ni, S., Tan, E., Gurnis, M. & Helmberger, D. V. Sharp sides to the African superplume. Science 296, 1850–1852 (2002).

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Tkalčić, H., Young, M., Muir, J. B., Davies, D. R. & Mattesini, M. Strong, multi-scale heterogeneity in Earth’s lowermost mantle. Sci. Rep. 5, 18416 (2015).

    ADS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Davaille, A. & Romanowicz, B. Deflating the LLSVPs: bundles of mantle thermochemical plumes rather than thick stagnant “piles”. Tectonics 39, e2020TC006265 (2020).

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  33. Doubrovine, P. V., Steinberger, B. & Torsvik, T. H. A failure to reject: testing the correlation between large igneous provinces and deep mantle structures with EDF statistics. Geochem. Geophys. Geosyst. 17, 1130–1163 (2016).

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  34. Austermann, J., Kaye, B. T., Mitrovica, J. X. & Huybers, P. A statistical analysis of the correlation between large igneous provinces and lower mantle seismic structure. Geophys. J. Int. 197, 1–9 (2014).

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  35. Davies, D., Goes, S. & Sambridge, M. On the relationship between volcanic hotspot locations, the reconstructed eruption sites of large igneous provinces and deep mantle seismic structure. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 411, 121–130 (2015).

    ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Garnero, E. J. & McNamara, A. K. Structure and dynamics of Earth’s lower mantle. Science 320, 626–628 (2008).

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Zhong, S. & Rudolph, M. L. On the temporal evolution of long‐wavelength mantle structure of the Earth since the early Paleozoic. Geochem. Geophys. Geosyst. 16, 1599–1615 (2015).

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  38. Flament, N., Williams, S., Müller, R., Gurnis, M. & Bower, D. J. Origin and evolution of the deep thermochemical structure beneath Eurasia. Nat. Commun. 8, 14164 (2017).

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. Flament, N. Present-day dynamic topography and lower-mantle structure from palaeogeographically constrained mantle flow models. Geophys. J. Int. 216, 2158–2182 (2019).

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  40. Johansson, L., Zahirovic, S. & Müller, R. D. The interplay between the eruption and weathering of large igneous provinces and the deep‐time carbon cycle. Geophys. Res. Lett. 45, 5380–5389 (2018).

    ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Tappe, S., Smart, K., Torsvik, T., Massuyeau, M. & de Wit, M. Geodynamics of kimberlites on a cooling Earth: clues to plate tectonic evolution and deep volatile cycles. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 484, 1–14 (2018).

    ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Lekic, V., Cottaar, S., Dziewonski, A. & Romanowicz, B. A. Cluster analysis of global lower mantle tomography: a new class of structure and implications for chemical heterogeneity. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 357, 68–77 (2012).

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  43. Kolmogorov, A. Sulla determinazione empirica di una lgge di distribuzione. Giorn. Inst. Ital. Attuari 4, 83–91 (1933).

    Google Scholar 

  44. Matthews, K. J. et al. Global plate boundary evolution and kinematics since the late Paleozoic. Global Planet. Change 146, 226–250 (2016).

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  45. Young, A. et al. Global kinematics of tectonic plates and subduction zones since the late Paleozoic Era. Geosci. Front. 10, 989–1013 (2019).

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  46. Rudolph, M. L. & Zhong, S. History and dynamics of net rotation of the mantle and lithosphere. Geochem. Geophys. Geosyst. 15, 3645–3657 (2014).

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  47. Torsvik, T. H. et al. Deep mantle structure as a reference frame for movements in and on the Earth. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. 111, 8735–8740 (2014).

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  48. Lau, H. C. et al. Tidal tomography constrains Earth’s deep-mantle buoyancy. Nature 551, 321–326 (2017).

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Bower, D. J., Gurnis, M. & Seton, M. Lower mantle structure from paleogeographically constrained dynamic Earth models. Geochem. Geophys. Geosyst. 14, 44–63 (2013).

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  50. Zhong, S., McNamara, A., Tan, E., Moresi, L. & Gurnis, M. A benchmark study on mantle convection in a 3-D spherical shell using CitcomS. Geochem. Geophys. Geosyst. 9, Q10017 (2008).

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  51. Gurnis, M. et al. Plate tectonic reconstructions with continuously closing plates. Comput. Geosci. 38, 35–42 (2012).

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  52. Bower, D. J., Gurnis, M. & Flament, N. Assimilating lithosphere and slab history in 4-D Earth models. Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. 238, 8–22 (2015).

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  53. Stadler, G. et al. The dynamics of plate tectonics and mantle flow: from local to global scales. Science 329, 1033–1038 (2010).

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Coltice, N., Husson, L., Faccenna, C. & Arnould, M. What drives tectonic plates? Sci. Adv. 5, eaax4295 (2019).

    ADS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  55. Flament, N. et al. Topographic asymmetry of the South Atlantic from global models of mantle flow and lithospheric stretching. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 387, 107–119 (2014).

    ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Chopelas, A. & Boehler, R. Thermal expansivity in the lower mantle. Geophys. Res. Lett. 19, 1983–1986 (1992).

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  57. Tosi, N., Yuen, D. A., de Koker, N. & Wentzcovitch, R. M. Mantle dynamics with pressure- and temperature-dependent thermal expansivity and conductivity. Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. 217, 48–58 (2013).

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  58. Hassan, R., Flament, N., Gurnis, M., Bower, D. J. & Müller, R. D. Provenance of plumes in global convection models. Geochem. Geophys. Geosyst. 16, 1465–1489 (2015).

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  59. Jaupart, C., Labrosse, S. & Mareschal, J. In Treatise on Geophysics. Volume 7: Mantle Dynamics 1st edn (ed. Bercovici, D.) 253–303 (Elsevier, 2007).

  60. Steinberger, B. & Calderwood, A. R. Models of large‐scale viscous flow in the Earth’s mantle with constraints from mineral physics and surface observations. Geophys. J. Int. 167, 1461–1481 (2006).

    ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  61. Billen, M. I. Modeling the dynamics of subducting slabs. Annu. Rev. Earth Planet. Sci. 36, 325–356 (2008).

    ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  62. Williams, S., Wright, N. M., Cannon, J., Flament, N. & Müller, R. D. Reconstructing seafloor age distributions in lost ocean basins. Geosci. Front. 12, 769–780 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

  63. van der Meer, D. G., Spakman, W., van Hinsbergen, D. J., Amaru, M. L. & Torsvik, T. H. Towards absolute plate motions constrained by lower-mantle slab remnants. Nat. Geosci. 3, 36–40 (2010).

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  64. Hernlund, J. W. & Houser, C. On the statistical distribution of seismic velocities in Earth’s deep mantle. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 265, 423–437 (2008).

    ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  65. Dziewonski, A. M. & Anderson, D. L. Preliminary reference Earth model. Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. 25, 297–356 (1981).

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  66. Ricard, Y., Richards, M., Lithgow-Bertelloni, C. & Le Stunff, Y. A geodynamic model of mantle density heterogeneity. J. Geophys. Res. 98, 21895–21909 (1993).

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  67. Ahrens, J., Geveci, B. & Law, C. Paraview: an end-user tool for large data visualization. In The Visualization Handbook (eds Hansen, C. D. & Johnson, C. R.) 717–731 (Academic Press, 2005).

  68. Müller, R. D. et al. Ocean basin evolution and global-scale plate reorganization events since Pangea breakup. Annu. Rev. Earth Planet. Sci. 44, 107–138 (2016).

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  69. Torsvik, T. H. et al. Phanerozoic polar wander, palaeogeography and dynamics. Earth Sci. Rev. 114, 325–368 (2012).

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  70. Torsvik, T. H., Müller, R. D., van der Voo, R., Steinberger, B. & Gaina, C. Global plate motion frames: toward a unified model. Rev. Geophys. 46, RG3004 (2008).

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  71. Torsvik, T. H. & Voo, R. V. D. Refining Gondwana and Pangea palaeogeography: estimates of Phanerozoic non-dipole (octupole) fields. Geophys. J. Int. 151, 771–794 (2002).

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  72. Merdith, A. S. et al. A full-plate global reconstruction of the Neoproterozoic. Gondwana Res. 50, 84–134 (2017).

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  73. Domeier, M. A plate tectonic scenario for the Iapetus and Rheic oceans. Gondwana Res. 36, 275–295 (2016).

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  74. Domeier, M. Early Paleozoic tectonics of Asia: towards a full-plate model. Geosci. Front. 9, 789–862 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  75. MacQueen, J. Some methods for classification and analysis of multivariate observations. In Proc. Fifth Berkeley Symp. Mathematical Statistics and Probability: Volume 1 (eds Le Cam, L. M. & Neyman, J.) 281–297 (Univ. California Press, 1967).

  76. Bryan, S. E. & Ernst, R. E. Revised definition of large igneous provinces (LIPs). Earth Sci. Rev. 86, 175–202 (2008).

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  77. Coffin, M. F. et al. Large igneous provinces and scientific ocean drilling: Status quo and a look ahead. Oceanography 19, 150–160 (2006).

    Google Scholar 

  78. Ernst, R. E. Large Igneous Provinces (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2014).

  79. Richards, M. A., Duncan, R. A. & Courtillot, V. E. Flood basalts and hot-spot tracks: plume heads and tails. Science 246, 103–107 (1989).

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Müller, R. D. et al. GPlates: building a virtual Earth through deep time. Geochem. Geophys. Geosyst. 19, 2243–2261 (2018).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  81. Knuth, D. E. Art of Computer Programming. Volume 2: Seminumerical Algorithms (Addison-Wesley, 2014).

  82. Wessel, P., Smith, W. H., Scharroo, R., Luis, J. & Wobbe, F. Generic mapping tools: improved version released. Eos 94, 409–410 (2013).

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  83. Hunter, J. D. Matplotlib: a 2D graphics environment. IEEE Ann. Hist. Comput. 9, 90–95 (2007).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

N.F. and Ö.F.B. were supported by Australian Research Council grant LP170100863 (industry partner: De Beers). S.E.W. was supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China grant 41972237 and by Australian Research Council grants DP180102280 and DP200100966. A.S.M. was supported by the Deep Carbon Observatory and the Richard Lounsbery Foundation. This research was supported by the Australian Government’s National Collaborative Research Infrastructure Strategy (NCRIS), with access to computational resources provided by the National Computational Infrastructure (NCI) through the National Computational Merit Allocation Scheme and through the University of Wollongong (UOW).

Author information

Author notes

  1. Andrew S. Merdith

    Present address: School of Earth and Environment, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK

Authors and Affiliations

  1. GeoQuEST Research Centre, School of Earth, Atmospheric and Life Sciences, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia

    Nicolas Flament & Ömer F. Bodur

  2. Department of Geology, Northwest University, Xi’an, China

    Simon E. Williams

  3. UnivLyon, Université Lyon 1, ENS de Lyon, CNRS, UMR 5276 LGL-TPE, Villeurbanne, France

    Andrew S. Merdith

Authors
  1. Nicolas Flament
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ömer F. Bodur
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Simon E. Williams
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Andrew S. Merdith
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

N.F.: conceptualization, methodology, software, validation, formal analysis, investigation, writing of the original draft, and visualization. Ö.F.B.: methodology, software, formal analysis, review and editing of the paper, and visualization. S.E.W.: methodology, software, and review and editing of the paper. A.S.M.: resources and review and editing of the paper.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nicolas Flament.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Peer review

Peer review information

Nature thanks Allen McNamara and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work. Peer reviewer reports are available.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Extended data figures and tables

Extended Data Fig. 1 Temporal distribution of considered volcanic eruptions.

Histograms showing the number of volcanic eruptions as a function of age. a, Back to 320 Ma. b, Back to 640 Ma. The number of volcanic eruptions over the considered period for each database is given in brackets. Databases: J18 (ref. 40) and T18 (ref. 41).

Extended Data Fig. 2 Location of volcanic eruptions from 320 Ma in different reconstructions.

High-velocity (white) and low-velocity (grey) regions revealed by k-means cluster analysis between 1,000 km and 2,800 km depth for seismic tomographic model Savani26, and location of volcanic eruptions (diamonds, J18, ref. 40) and kimberlites (circles, T18, ref. 41) reconstructed at their time of eruption and shown at present day using tectonic reconstruction M16 (ref. 44; a), tectonic reconstruction Y19 (ref. 45; b), tectonic reconstruction M21 (ref. 10; c), and tectonic reconstruction M21-NNR without net rotation (no net rotation or ‘NNR’) (d). In a–d, the brown lines are present-day coastlines Symbols are coloured by age. Robinson projection at Earth’s surface.

Extended Data Fig. 3 Spatial match of lower mantle structure between mantle flow and tomographic models with respect to tomographic model Savani, and distance to hot basal mantle structures from Savani.

a, Intersection of mantle structure revealed by k-means cluster analysis between 1,000 km and 2,800 km for tomographic model Savani26 and mantle flow model cases 1–9 as indicated. Orange (true positive) indicates high-temperature model regions and low-velocity tomographic regions, grey (true negative) indicates low-temperature model regions and high-velocity tomographic regions, green (false positive) indicates high-temperature model regions and high-velocity tomographic regions and blue (false negative) indicates low-temperature regions and low-velocity tomographic regions. b, As in a but for tomographic model Savani and other tomographic models as indicated. Orange (true positive) indicates low-velocity regions for both models, grey (true negative) indicates high-velocity regions for both models, green (false positive) indicates high-velocity regions for Savani and low-velocity regions for other models and blue (false negative) indicates low-velocity regions for Savani and high-velocity regions for other models. c, Angular distance (AD) to the edge or interior (as indicated) of LLSVPs (delineated by a red contour) as derived by k-means cluster analysis of tomographic model Savani between 1,000 km and 2,800 km depth. In a and b, the white lines indicate a value of five (solid) and a value of one (dotted) in a vote map for low-velocity regions in S-wave tomographic models42. Present-day coastlines are shown in black in a–c. Robinson projection at Earth’s surface.

Extended Data Fig. 4 Distributions of distances between basal mantle structures and volcanic eruption locations.

Sample empirical distribution functions (EDFs; blue lines) showing the cumulative probability of minimum angular distances between volcanic eruption locations (J18 and T18) and the closest BMS for the last 320 Myr. Grey lines are a series of 1,000 random EDFs each consisting of points in random locations with the same temporal distribution as in the sample EDF. a, For S-wave tomographic models as indicated. b, For mantle flow models cases 1–22 as indicated.

Extended Data Fig. 5 Match between volcanic eruption locations, tomographic models and mantle flow models for different tectonic reconstructions.

a, Fractional area fa of the surface of cluster maps covered by slow (in tomography) or hot (in flow models, averaged over 320 Myr) BMSs. b, Spatial match \(\overline{{\rm{Acc}}}\) between present-day BMSs for a given case and LLSVPs imaged by tomographic models. c, Time-averaged median of minimum angular distances \(\widetilde{\theta }\) between BMSs and volcanic eruption locations from 320 Ma. d, Fraction fs of random EDFs compared to which the sample EDF passes a statistical test. In a–d, the first four rows show results for tomographic models (stationary LLSVPs) and different tectonic reconstructions as indicated, and the fifth and last row shows results for a series of mantle flow models (mobile BMSs) based on different tectonic reconstructions as indicated. NNR, no-net-rotation reference frame; MFM, mantle flow model. Tectonic reconstructions: M16, ref. 44; Y19, ref. 45; M21, ref. 10. The horizontal lines denote reference cases. The grey shadings in a–c highlight the range of results for tomographic models.

Source data

Extended Data Fig. 6 Match of model basal mantle structures to volcanic eruption locations and tomographic models: structure interiors and over 640 Myr.

a–d, Match to BMS interiors. a, Fractional area fa of the surface of cluster maps covered by slow (in tomography) or hot (in flow models, averaged over 320 Myr) BMSs. b, Spatial match \(\overline{{\rm{Acc}}}\) between present-day BMSs for a given case and LLSVPs imaged by tomographic models. c, Time-averaged median of minimum angular distances \(\widetilde{\theta }\) between BMSs and volcanic eruption locations from 320 Ma, considering distances to be zero within BMSs and positive outwards from their edges. d, Fraction fs of random EDFs compared to which the sample EDF passes a statistical test. e–h, Match to BMS edges over 640 Myr. e, Fractional area fa of the surface of cluster maps covered by hot (in flow models, averaged over 640 Myr) or slow (in tomography) BMSs. f, Same as b. g, Time-averaged median of minimum angular distances \(\widetilde{\theta }\) between BMSs and volcanic eruption locations from 640 Ma. h, Same as d. In g, h, open symbols denote results for reconstruction M21 as opposed to M21-NNR. In a–h, the first row shows results for a series of tomographic models (stationary LLSVPs), and subsequent rows show results for mantle flow models (mobile BMSs) across which parameters are varied as indicated. BL, basal layer; T1–T7, tomographic models 1–7; C1–C12, mantle flow model cases 1–12. The horizontal lines denote reference cases. The grey shadings in a–c, e–g highlight the range of results for tomographic models.

Source data

Extended Data Fig. 7 Match of model basal mantle structures to volcanic eruption locations and tomographic models: varying model parameters and African hemisphere.

a–d, Match for varied model parameters as indicated. a, Fractional area fa of the surface of cluster maps covered by slow (in tomography) or hot (in flow models, averaged over 320 Myr) BMSs. b, Spatial match \(\overline{{\rm{Acc}}}\) between present-day BMSs for a given case and LLSVPs imaged by tomographic models. c, Time-averaged median of minimum angular distances \(\widetilde{\theta }\) between BMSs and volcanic eruption locations from 320 Ma. d, Fraction fs of random EDFs compared to which the sample EDF passes a statistical test. e–h, Match in the African hemisphere. e, Same as a but for different model cases. f, Global spatial match \(\overline{{\rm{Acc}}}\) between present-day BMSs for a given case and LLSVPs imaged by tomographic models. g, Time-averaged median of minimum angular distances \(\widetilde{\theta }\) between BMSs and volcanic eruption locations in the African hemisphere (within 10,000 km of a point located at 0° N, 11° E; ref. 47) from 320 Ma. h, For points within the African hemisphere, fraction fs of random EDFs compared to which the sample EDF passes a statistical test. In a–h, the first row shows results for a series of tomographic models (stationary LLSVPs), and subsequent rows show results for mantle flow models (mobile BMSs) across which parameters are varied as indicated. C1–C22, mantle flow model cases 1–22; T1–T7, tomographic models 1–7; ISD, initial slab depth; PCD, phase change depth; BL, basal layer. The horizontal lines denote reference cases. The grey shadings in a–c, e–g highlight the range of results for tomographic models.

Source data

Extended Data Fig. 8 Snapshots of tectonic reconstruction and synthetic seafloor ages.

a–f, Location of tectonic blocks for tectonic reconstruction M21-NNR10 in the no-net-rotation frame with synthetic seafloor ages62. Snapshots are shown at: 740 Ma (a), 550 Ma (b), 400 Ma (c), 250 Ma (d), 100 Ma (e), 0 Ma (f). The reconstructed subduction zones are shown as black lines with triangles on the overriding plate, reconstructed mid-oceanic ridges and transform faults are shown in light orange, reconstructed ancient continental interiors are show as light grey polygons with a pattern fill, and present-day coastlines are shown in white in f. The colour scale indicates the palaeo-age of the ocean crust. WGB, west Gondwanan blocks; PTNM, Palaeo-Tethys northern margin; GWM, Gondwana western margin. Robinson projection at Earth’s surface.

Extended Data Fig. 9 Model initial temperature field and present-day temperature and viscosity.

a, b, Initial temperature field for case 7 at 1,000 Ma. a, Temperature at 109 km depth. Reconstructed subduction zones are shown in red, mid-oceanic ridges and transform faults in yellow, and continental blocks in grey. Robinson projection at Earth’s surface. b, Temperature along an equatorial cross-section (green line in a). Numbers above the colour scale indicate non-dimensional temperature, and numbers below the colour scale indicate temperature in kelvin. c, d, Horizontally averaged present-day mantle temperature (c) and viscosity (d). The grey line in d is a viscosity profile adjusted to fit the geoid and post-glacial rebound60.

Extended Data Table 1 Boundary conditions and parameters for mantle flow model cases
Full size table

Supplementary information

Peer Review File

41586_2022_4538_MOESM2_ESM.mp4

Supplementary Video 1 Structure of the lower mantle and location of volcanic eruptions from 640 Ma to the present day. High-velocity (white) and low-velocity (grey) regions revealed by cluster analysis between 1,000 km and 2,800 km depth for 22 mantle flow model cases and seven tomographic models, and location of volcanic eruptions (diamonds, J18, ref. 40) and kimberlites (circles, T18, ref. 41) reconstructed from 640 Ma in 20-Myr increments. Results are shown starting 40 Myr into models starting after 600 Ma. Locations are shown for eruptions within 10 Myr of the considered age. The black lines indicate a value of (solid) and a value of one (dotted) in a vote map for low-velocity regions in S-wave tomographic models[42]. Symbols are coloured by age.

41586_2022_4538_MOESM3_ESM.mp4

Supplementary Video 2 Evolution of the spatial match of lower mantle structure between mantle flow and tomographic models with respect to tomographic model Savani from 640 Ma to the present day. Intersection of mantle structure revealed by k-means cluster analysis between 1,000 km and 2,800 km for tomographic model Savani[26] and 22 mantle flow model cases and seven tomographic models mantle flow as indicated, since 640 Ma in 20-Myr increments. Results are shown starting 40 Myr into models starting after 600 Ma. Orange (true positive) indicates high-temperature (or low-velocity) regions and low-velocity tomographic regions, grey (true negative) indicates low-temperature (or high-velocity) regions and high-velocity tomographic regions, green (false positive) indicates high-temperature (or low-velocity) regions and high-velocity tomographic regions and blue (false negative) indicates low-temperature (or fast-velocity) regions and low-velocity tomographic regions. The white lines indicate a value of five (solid) and a value of one (dotted) in a vote map for low-velocity regions in S-wave tomographic models[42]. The time-dependent value of \(\overline{{\rm{Acc}}}\) is reported next to each panel.

41586_2022_4538_MOESM4_ESM.mp4

Supplementary Video 3 Evolution of mantle temperature in the African mantle domain from 740 Ma to the present day. Mantle structures 155 K colder than ambient mantle below 300 km depth (coloured by depth with cold colours), and mantle structures 310 K hotter than ambient mantle below 170 km depth (coloured by depth with warm colours) predicted by case 7, shown in 20-Myr increments since 740 Ma for the African mantle domain (the video is centred on the prime meridian, 0° longitude). Reconstructed plate boundaries are shown in cyan and the graticule spacing is 30°.

41586_2022_4538_MOESM5_ESM.mp4

Supplementary Video 4 Evolution of mantle temperature in the African mantle domain from 740 Ma to the present day. Same as Supplementary Video 3, but for case 4.

41586_2022_4538_MOESM6_ESM.mp4

Supplementary Video 5 Evolution of mantle temperature in the African mantle domain from 740 Ma to the present day. Same as Supplementary Video 3, but for case 9.

41586_2022_4538_MOESM7_ESM.mp4

Supplementary Video 6 Recycling of continental crust in the African mantle domain from 740 Ma to the present day. Mantle structures 310 K hotter than ambient mantle below 170 km depth (coloured by depth with warm colours), and mantle predicted to consist of at least 5% continental crust (below 170 km depth, coloured by depth with cold colours) shown in 20-Myr increments since 740 Ma for the African mantle domain (the video is centred on the prime meridian, 0° longitude). Reconstructed plate boundaries are shown in cyan and the graticule spacing is 30°.

41586_2022_4538_MOESM8_ESM.mp4

Supplementary Video 7 Recycling of continental crust in the Pacific mantle domain from 740 Ma to the present day. Mantle structures 310 K hotter than ambient mantle below 170 km depth (coloured by depth with warm colours), and mantle predicted to consist of at least 5% continental crust (below 170 km depth, coloured by depth with cold colours) shown in 20-Myr increments since 740 Ma for the Pacific mantle domain (the video is centred on the date line, 180° longitude). Reconstructed plate boundaries are shown in cyan and the graticule spacing is 30°.

Source data

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Flament, N., Bodur, Ö.F., Williams, S.E. et al. Assembly of the basal mantle structure beneath Africa. Nature 603, 846–851 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-022-04538-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-022-04538-y

This article is cited by

Comments

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.

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