To Understand Subduction Initiation, Study Forearc Crust: To Understand Forearc Crust, Study Ophiolites

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/261014864
To understand subduction initiation, study forearc crust: To understand

forearc crust, study ophiolites
Article in Lithosphere · November 2012

DOI: 10.1130/L183.1
CITATIONS READS
209 525
5 authors, including:
Bob Stern Mark Reagan

University of Texas at Dallas University of Iowa
499 PUBLICATIONS 23,397 CITATIONS 190 PUBLICATIONS 4,967 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE
Osamu Ishizuka Yasuhiko Ohara

National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology Hydrographic and Oceanographic Department of Japan
155 PUBLICATIONS 3,927 CITATIONS 141 PUBLICATIONS 3,243 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Masters Thesis View project
Subduction Initiation and Tethyan Suturing-Zagros Orogenic Belt View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Scott A. Whattam on 16 September 2014.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

RESEARCH
To understand subduction initiation, study forearc crust:

To understand forearc crust, study ophiolites
R.J. Stern1*, M. Reagan2*, O. Ishizuka3*, Y. Ohara4*, and S. Whattam5*
1
GEOSCIENCES DEPARTMENT, UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT DALLAS, RICHARDSON, TEXAS 75083-0688, USA
2
DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCE, UNIVERSITY OF IOWA, IOWA CITY, IOWA 52242, USA
3
INSTITUTE OF GEOSCIENCE AND GEOINFORMATION, GEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF JAPAN/AIST, CENTRAL 7, 1-1-1, HIGASHI, TSUKUBA, IBARAKI 305-8567, JAPAN
4
HYDROGRAPHIC AND OCEANOGRAPHIC DEPARTMENT OF JAPAN, TOKYO 104-0045, JAPAN
5
DEPARTMENT OF EARTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES, KOREA UNIVERSITY, SEOUL 136-701, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
ABSTRACT
Articulating a comprehensive plate-tectonic theory requires understanding how new subduction zones form (subduction initiation). Because
subduction initiation is a tectonomagmatic singularity with few active examples, reconstructing subduction initiation is challenging. The
lithosphere of many intra-oceanic forearcs preserves a high-fidelity magmatic and stratigraphic record of subduction initiation. We have
heretofore been remarkably ignorant of this record, because the “naked forearcs” that expose subduction initiation crustal sections are dis-
tant from continents and lie in the deep trenches, and it is difficult and expensive to study and sample this record via dredging, diving, and
drilling. Studies of the Izu-Bonin-Mariana convergent margin indicate that subduction initiation there was accompanied by seafloor spread-
ing in what ultimately became the forearc of the new convergent margin. Izu-Bonin-Mariana subduction initiation encompassed ~7 m.y. for
the complete transition from initial seafloor spreading and eruption of voluminous mid-ocean-ridge basalts (forearc basalts) to normal arc
volcanism, perhaps consistent with how long it might take for slowly subsiding lithosphere to sink ~100 km deep and for mantle motions
to evolve from upwelling beneath the infant arc to downwelling beneath the magmatic front. Many ophiolites have chemical features that
indicate formation above a convergent plate margin, and most of those formed in forearcs, where they were well positioned to be tectoni-
cally emplaced on land when buoyant crust jammed the associated subduction zone. We propose a strategy to better understand forearcs
and thus subduction initiation by studying ophiolites, which preserve the magmatic stratigraphy, as seen in the Izu-Bonin-Mariana forearc;
we call these “subduction initiation rule” ophiolites. This understanding opens the door for on-land geologists to contribute fundamentally
to understanding subduction initiation.
LITHOSPHERE; v. 4; no. 6; p. 469–483 | Published online 16 May 2012 doi: 10.1130/L183.1
INTRODUCTION there are few active examples, and (2) nearly in Eocene time (Ishizuka et al., 2011). Major
all of the evidence for tectonic, magmatic, and subduction initiation episodes are hemispheric
A better understanding of the mechanisms sedimentary responses to subduction initia- in scale and necessarily reorganize upper-man-
by which new subduction zones form is criti- tion is preserved in forearcs, which are deeply tle flow, and in many cases are accompanied by
cal for advancing the solid Earth sciences. Until submerged and buried beneath sediments. We widespread and voluminous igneous activity.
we can reconstruct how and why this happens, would prefer to study subduction initiation in Here, we outline a strategy that promises to
we cannot pretend to understand a wide range progress, but there are few places to do this. accelerate our understanding of processes asso-
of important Earth processes and properties, One such active region however, is the Puysegur ciated with major subduction initiation episodes
including lithospheric strength, composition, subduction zone off the coast of southern New by considering both the subduction initiation
and density, and the driving force behind plate Zealand (LeBrun et al., 2003; Sutherland et al., record preserved in forearcs and insights from
motions. In spite of this, our understanding of 2006). However, as only a narrow segment of studying well-preserved ophiolites. The record
the subduction initiation process has advanced the Australia-Pacific transform plate margin is of subduction initiation is preserved in igneous
slowly, for two important reasons: (1) Sub- affected, studies of Puysegur cannot capture all crust and upper-mantle residues and the associ-
duction initiation is an ephemeral process, so of the processes that accompany major subduc- ated sediments on the overriding plate next to the
tion initiation events, i.e., those that change the trench. These collectively comprise the forearc
lithospheric force balance sufficiently to cause (Dickinson and Sealey, 1979) and provide the
changes in plate motion and stimulate volumi- best record of subduction initiation. Significant
*E-mails: [email protected]; mark-reagan@uiowa
.edu; [email protected]; [email protected]; nous magmatism, as discussed herein. Such parts of forearcs may be lost by tectonic erosion
[email protected]. episodes shaped the western margin of North (Scholl and von Huene, 2009); nevertheless,
Editor’s note: This article is part of a special issue ti- America in Mesozoic time (Dickinson, 2004), whatever remains contains the best record of
tled “Initiation and Termination of Subduction: Rock Re- established a convergent margin along SW the processes that accompanied subduction ini-
cord, Geodynamic Models, Modern Plate Boundaries,”
edited by John Shervais and John Wakabayashi. The
Eurasia in Late Cretaceous time (Moghadem tiation of that particular convergent margin. We
full issue can be found at http://lithosphere.gsapubs and Stern, 2011), and engendered most of the explore why this record has been overlooked and
.org/content/4/6.toc. active subduction zones of the western Pacific summarize recent studies of forearc crust and
LITHOSPHERE
For | Volume
permission to 4 | Number
copy, contact 6 | www.gsapubs.org
[email protected] | © 2012 Geological Society of America 469
STERN ET AL.
upper mantle, and what the results reveal about of a convergent plate margin is provided by the some is scraped off to form an accretionary
subduction initiation. The expense and diffi- Late Mesozoic of California, with the Francis- prism. Such situations of forearc thickening and
culty of directly studying forearc igneous rock can mélange representing exhumed subduction- widening are globally unusual, because most
exposures are huge obstacles to our progress, so zone material, the Great Valley Group repre- forearcs lose upper-plate crust to the subduc-
we explore the potential of some ophiolites for senting the forearc basin, and the Sierra Nevada tion zone due to tectonic erosion, as a result of
illuminating forearc composition and magmatic Batholith representing the roots of the magmatic normal faulting, oversteepening, and basal frac-
stratigraphy. Ophiolites are exposed on land and arc. This is indeed an excellent example of a turing and abrasion along the plate interface.
so are vastly easier and cheaper to study than sediment-rich convergent margin, but empha- Another misconception (due to bias toward
forearcs. We conclude that those ophiolites that sis on California and other sediment-dominated studying sediment-rich convergent margins) is
formed in a forearc provide important opportu- forearc examples has inhibited appreciation of that all inner-trench slopes have very low slopes
nities for advancing our understanding of sub- forearc crust itself. (<3°), when, in fact, erosive margins, especially
duction initiation. The strategy of comparative Many—but not all—continental forearcs those exposing igneous basement, are much
study of igneous forearc crust and ophiolites, are excellent examples of convergent margins steeper, typically with slopes of 3°–7° (Clift and
coupled with geodynamic modeling, promises affected by high sediment flux. Some continental Vannucchi, 2004). Estimates of the proportion of
to lead to major advancements in our under- convergent margins—such as Peru-Chile and NE accretionary versus erosive convergent margins
standing of subduction initiation processes. Japan—do not have high sediment flux, but these vary. According to Clift and Vannucchi (2004),
have not been textbook examples because the 57% of the cumulative length of trenches is ero-
FOREARCS interesting outcrops are in very deep water, and sive and 43% is accretionary, whereas Scholl
thus are difficult and expensive to study. In con- and von Huene (2007) estimated that 74% and
Forearcs comprise the bulk of any arc-trench trast, forearcs away from continents are mostly 26% are erosive and accretionary, respectively.
system, occupying the ~150–200-km-wide sediment starved (Clift and Vannucchi, 2004). Thickness of sediment on the downgoing plate
region above the subducted plate between the Such naked forearcs expose crust and upper is the single most important control on whether
trench and the magmatic arc. Forearcs are rela- mantle, which are readily accessed by drilling a margin is erosive or accretionary. A sediment
tively stable and low standing—intra-oceanic through thin sediment cover, as was done during thickness of ~500 m divides the two types of
forearcs lie entirely below sea level—and are Deep Sea Drilling Project (DSDP) Leg 60 and margins. Other factors favoring tectonic erosion
morphologically unimpressive compared to Ocean Drilling Program (ODP) Legs 125 and include collision of large bathymetric features
spectacular volcanoes of the flanking magmatic 126 in the Izu-Bonin-Mariana arc and ODP Leg such as seamounts (Clift and Vannucchi, 2004)
arc and the tremendous gash of the trench. For 135 in the Tonga forearc (Bloomer et al., 1995). and presence of rasping grabens on the downgo-
these reasons, it is understandable that forearcs ing plate (Hilde, 1983).
were either overlooked or misunderstood when EROSIVE VERSUS ACCRETIONARY Although most forearcs are erosive, they are
the geologic implications of plate tectonics were FOREARCS more poorly known than accretionary forearcs
first being explored in the late 1960s and 1970s. because they are harder to study, and a smaller
During this time, thinking about forearcs was Subordinate proportions of forearcs are research community has been interested in them.
dominated by examples on or near continents, accretionary, growing by deposition of large Erosive forearcs are exclusively submarine, so
such as California, Japan, Alaska, and Indone- sediment loads from a flanking continent, which studying them requires research vessels with
sia (for an account of early thinking about what bury forearc crust beneath forearc basins and technology to examine and sample the bottom
would come to be called forearcs, see Dickin- then overflow to the trench, where these sedi- (Fig. 1A). Compared to accretionary forearcs,
son, 2001). Even today, the textbook example ments briefly ride on the subducting plate before erosive forearcs lie in deeper water, farther from
Figure 1. Photographs of on-land (left) and submerged (right) forearc exposures. Left photo shows how easy it is for geoscientists to examine litholo-
gies and structures on land. Right photo is taken from Shinkai 6500 YK1012, Dive 1231, ~6000 m deep in the southern Mariana Trench. Only one or two
scientists at a time can go down to examine and sample rocks. Costs of an on-land field trip are a miniscule fraction of the expense of a submarine field
trip. Photo on the left is Franciscan radiolarian chert exposed on the Marin headlands, California (photo by S. Graham). Field of view on right is ~7 m.
470 www.gsapubs.org | Volume 4 | Number 6 | LITHOSPHERE

Subduction initiation, forearcs, and ophiolites | RESEARCH
the continents, making them more difficult and margins contain potential economic deposits cation. Seismic-reflection profiling over naked
expensive to study. In contrast, accretionary of hydrocarbons, which attract the attention of forearcs yields much less interesting seismic
forearcs lie in shallower water, and parts rise oil companies; erosive margins do not. Finally, reflection images, and they are more difficult to
above sea level (e.g., Kodiak Island, Alaska; accretionary margins attract more geophysical interpret (Fig. 2B). It is so much easier and more
Shimanto Belt, SW Japan; and Nias and Men- interest than do erosive margins. Accretionary rewarding to study accretionary margins that it
tawai, Sumatra), where they are relatively easy margins are characterized by progressive defor- is a wonder that erosive margins are studied as
to study (Fig. 1B). Accretionary margins are mation of sedimentary layering, which spatially much as they are.
found near continents and so are usually in some and temporally changes from flat lying and In spite of the challenges of studying erosive
nation’s territorial waters or exclusive economic unconsolidated at the trench to steeply dipping forearcs, it is important that we do so. Naked
zone, which attracts study by the scientists of and lithified arcward (Fig. 2A). Such lithostruc- forearcs expose igneous infrastructure in the
that nation. Most of the great accretionary mar- tural variations reward seismic-reflection profil- inner trench wall and bury this crust under thin
gins lie in the Northern Hemisphere, facing the ing with spectacular images, on which structural sediments of the forearc itself, providing the best
largest continents, biggest rivers, and greatest interpretations, publications, and proposals can opportunities for in situ investigations of this
sediment flux. The Northern Hemisphere is also be based. In contrast, intra-oceanic forearcs are lithosphere by drilling, dredging, and diving.
where the richest nations are—the ones most generally sediment starved because they are far
likely to support large-scale geoscientific efforts from continents, and thus large sediment fluxes. FOREARC CRUST AND UPPER MANTLE
needed for marine tectonic studies. In contrast, These comprise a subclass of erosive margins
erosive margins often lie far away from conti- known as “naked forearcs” (Stern, 2002), which An important characteristic of many naked
nents, rich nations, and scientists. Accretionary lack thick sedimentary cover and obvious imbri- forearcs is the presence of peridotite—exposed
3
V.E. ~1.5x Sedimented Forearc (Indonesia)
-
- back thrust
Depth (km)
out-of-sequence thrust
(backstop thrust)
branch
ch tth
branch thr
hrus
rust
rust
thrust reduced coherent
imaging
décollement
dé
déc oll
llem
ment
10
Sediment-flooded
A trench
2
5 km Naked forearc (Mariana) V.E. ~2x
B 21
Figure 2. Comparison of seismic-reflection profiles of (A) sedimented and (B) naked (unsedimented) forearcs. (A) Prestack depth-migrated section of
multichannel reflection profile off the Sunda Strait, from Kopp and Kukowski (2003) and interpreted by them. An arcward increase in material strength
results in a segmentation of the margin. Faint seaward- and landward-dipping faults cut the trench fill in the protothrust zone of segment I, indicat-
ing the first stages of faulting. The deformation front marks the onset of faulting in conjugate pairs of fore-thrusts and back thrusts. The frontal active
accretionary prism (segment II) is composed of tilted thrust slices separated by regularly spaced thrust faults. The transition to the fossil accretionary
prism of the outer high is marked by a prominent out-of-sequence thrust. Segment III forms the backstop to the frontally accreted material and dis-
plays much reduced tectonic activity, mainly manifested in the occasional reactivation of previous thrusts, which helps adjust the taper. (B) Mariana
forearc, trench, and part of incoming Pacific plate shown as depth section (MCS Line 22–23, from Oakley et al., 2008). Circles locate the points along
the plate reflection where depths were recorded. Normal faults on the incoming plate and the Mariana forearc are interpreted. The toe of the forearc is
uplifted as the flank of a Pacific plate seamount subducts. M—seafloor multiple; V.E.—vertical exaggeration.
LITHOSPHERE | Volume 4 | Number 6 | www.gsapubs.org 471

STERN ET AL.
0° 60°E 120°E 180° 120°W 60°W Figure 3. Known locations of peri-

dotite exposures in the lower parts
of inner-trench walls, shown in
60° bold: (1) South Sandwich (Pearce
N et al., 2000); (2) Tonga (Fisher and
Aegean Aleutians Engel, 1969; Bloomer and Fisher,
Makran Japan Cascades
Kuriles 1987); (3) Mariana (Bloomer, 1983;
Him Lesser
alay Ohara and Ishii, 1998; Michibayashi
a
30° Philippines Izu-Bonin Antilles et al., 2007, 2009); (4) Izu-Bonin
Mariana (Okamura et al., 2006; Ishizuka et
Central America al., 2011). Mariana and Izu-Bonin
Ind New Britain forearcs also bring up peridotite
0° on
esi Vanuatu in serpentine mud volcanoes
a (Fryer et al., 1995; Parkinson and
Tonga
Andes
Pearce, 1998). Peridotites repre-
New
30° Hebrides sent the bases of in situ ophiolites
Kermadec
South that make up the crust and upper
Sandwich mantle of intra-oceanic forearcs.
Other inner-trench walls may also
expose peridotite, but most have
60° not been sampled as extensively
S as these four.
upper mantle—in the lower trench wall. Trench as “bulk silicate earth” (BSE). Several studies an idealized upper-mantle composition, but one
peridotite exposures demonstrate that the Moho have estimated PM compositions, including which acknowledges the extraction of the conti-
is also exposed, along with a complete crustal Mg# (100Mg/[Mg + Fe] = 89–90), CaO (2.8– nental crust. “Pyrolite” is another idealized com-
section at shallower depths, and indicate the 3.7 wt%), and Al2O3 (3.5–4.5 wt%; see table 2 of position (Green and Falloon, 1998) that is very
thickness of the crust. Lyubetskaya and Korenaga, 2007). These esti- similar to FMM. FMM and pyrolite approximate
Peridotite is exposed in the inner walls of mates constrain minimum Mg# and maximum the composition of upper mantle that partially
intra-oceanic trenches at depths >8 km in the CaO and Al2O3 contents of the upper-mantle melts to generate oceanic crust beneath diver-
Tonga Trench (Bloomer and Fisher, 1987) but source region of most basalts. Because Earth has gent plate boundaries (spreading ridges) and to
can be found as shallow as 5800 m in the south- been recycling surface materials and melting to produce arc melts beneath convergent margins
ern Mariana Trench (Michibayashi et al., 2009). make basalt for several billion years, significant (note that other components such as pyroxenite
Such depths are mostly beyond the reach of tracts of primitive upper mantle are unlikely to exist in the mantle, but these melt almost com-
manned submersibles, which currently cannot exist. Instead, the concept of “fertile mid-ocean- pletely, leaving no identifiable residue).
descend below 6500 m, so forearc peridotites ridge basalt (MORB)–type mantle” (FMM; If PM, BSE, FMM, and pyrolite were rocks
are rarely sampled except by dredging. Still, we Pearce et al., 2000) is more useful. FMM is also instead of ideas, they would be classified as
know about intra-oceanic peridotite exposures
in four trenches: Izu-Bonin, Mariana, Tonga,
and South Sandwich (Figs. 3 and 4). In addi-
tion, mantle peridotite is brought up by serpen-
Depth below sea level (km)
tine mud volcanoes, which are common in the

Mariana forearc and are also known from the
Izu forearc (Fryer, 2002).
Volcanics
Because of its importance for understanding
the nature and origin of intra-oceanic forearcs,
some basic concepts about mantle peridotite in
general and forearc peridotite in particular are Gabbro
presented here. These are residues after partial
melting and complement magmatic rocks such
as lavas—especially basalts—which are more RB
common subjects of marine petrologic study. MO
Because Earth has had mantle since shortly
after it formed, but this has been modified by
melt extraction and mixing with subducted
materials, idealized compositions are useful for
Peridotite
this discussion. For example, “primitive” mantle
(PM) refers to an idealized chemical composi- Figure 4. Interpretive section of a typical intra-oceanic forearc as reconstructed from dredging of the
tion after the core segregated but before the con- Tonga Trench. Figure is from Bloomer and Fisher (1987), reproduced with permission of Journal of Geol-
tinental crust was extracted. PM is also known ogy. N- and E- MORB refer to normal and enriched mid-ocean ridge basalt. V.E.—vertical exaggeration.

lherzolite, an olivine-rich ultramafic rock that Ol
contains >5% clinopyroxene (cpx), the remain-
A Dunite
B FMM
der being orthopyroxene and an aluminous 10 90

phase (spinel or garnet; Fig. 5A). Changes in 5
peridotite composition due to partial melting 20 80
on
Harzburgite
leti
are simple and clear. Melt depletion dimin-
ep
30
70
Melt d
ishes abundances of cpx, CaO, and Al2O3 and
increases Cr# (Cr/Cr + Al) in the residual spi- 40 15 Abyssal peridotite
FMM 60
nel (Fig. 5). This is because basalts, which
are rich in CaO and Al2O3 (~12 and 16 wt%, 50 50
respectively), are generated by partial melting Lherzolite 25
of lherzolite, which is much poorer in CaO and Opx Cpx Mariana forearc peridotite
Al2O3 (~3 and ~4 wt%, respectively for FMM;

Figure 5. What happens to peridotites when
Fig. 5B). Clinopyroxene contains nearly all they melt: (A) Changes in modal mineralogy
the CaO in peridotite, whereas spinel in FMM (and thus rock type) with progressive melting,
contains ~35% Al2O3 (a few percent Al2O3 is
also dissolved in pyroxene). Melt depletion
plotted on International Union of Geological
Sciences (IUGS) classification for peridotites
C
Boninite
decreases the proportion of cpx, so that the (LeBas and Streckeisen, 1991). Fertile mid-
residue progressively changes from lherzolite to ocean-ridge basalt (MORB)–type mantle (FMM)
is mostly peridotite, consisting of olivine (Ol),
harzburgite (<5% cpx); extreme melt depletion
MD
orthopyroxene (Opx), and clinopyroxene (Cpx), Forearc peridotite
yields dunite (>90% olivine; Fig. 5A). comprising lherzolite. Melting to produce basal-
Even though most forearc peridotite expo- tic melts depletes peridotite in clinopyroxene, Cr#
sures are serpentinized, there are robust mineral so that residual peridotite after ~20% melting
and whole-rock compositional characteristics is harzburgite, with <5% clinopyroxene. Melting
that are remarkably unaffected by such altera- of harzburgite yields boninite melts and resid- Backarc
basin
ual dunite. (B) Bulk-rock abundances of Al2O3 Abyssal peridotite
tion. These include changes in the proportions peridotite
versus CaO (volatile free, normalized to 100%
of minerals (Fig. 5A), major-element bulk total), showing how melting depletes perido- FMM
chemistry (Fig. 5B), and spinel compositions tites in these elements. The compositions of
(Fig. 5C). All of these reflect the amount of melt FMM and mantle residue after 5%, 15%, and Mg#
depletion, as discussed already. 25% partial melting of FMM are from Pearce
These approaches allow us to compare the and Parkinson (1993). Fields for abyssal and forearc peridotites are from Pearce et al. (1992). (C)
Composition of spinels in peridotite, plotted on Cr# (Cr/Cr + Al) versus Mg# (Mg/Mg + Fe+2) dia-
“refractoriness” of peridotites from various tec-
gram. Fields are after Dick and Bullen (1984), modified to show the composition of backarc basin
tonic settings, i.e., how much melt depletion peridotites from the Mariana Trough (Ohara et al., 2002). Melting preferentially extracts Al from
they have experienced. This reveals that forearc spinel, increasing Cr# as melting progresses. Composition of FMM spinels and approximate trend
peridotites are the most depleted ultramafic of melt depletion (MD) are also shown.
rocks from any modern tectonic environment,
with the highest Cr# spinels and lowest propor-
tion of cpx and whole-rock abundances of CaO ger exist. Such transitory conditions are linked strength elements (HFSEs; elements with high
and Al2O3 (Bonatti and Michael, 1989). Not all to subduction initiation in the next section. valence and small ionic radius). High LILE/
forearc peridotites are so depleted; for example, Igneous rocks of exposed forearc crust above HFSE ratios in boninites reflect metasomatism
some from the South Sandwich forearc include peridotites (Fig. 4) are only now becoming the of the source mantle by hydrous fluid released
lherzolites with up to 3.7% Al2O3 and 4.4% focus of geoscrutiny. At one time, forearc crust from subducted crust and sediments (Gill, 1981;
CaO, along with spinels with Cr# as low as ~0.4 was thought to comprise oceanic crust that was Stern et al., 1991; Pearce et al., 1992). This fluid
(Pearce et al., 2000). Morishita et al. (2011) trapped when subduction began (e.g., Dickin- lowers peridotite melting temperature at the
documented two populations of spinel in Izu- son and Sealey, 1979), so the origin of forearc same time that it re-enriches it in fluid-mobile
Bonin forearc dunites, one group with moder- igneous crust has not, until recently, been much elements, including LILEs and LREEs.
ate Cr# (0.4–0.6), and the other with high Cr# studied. This is changing, partly because of what Not all naked forearcs have boninite, but
(>0.8). Variations in spinel compositions not- is now recognized as the unusually strong deple- at least one of them—the Izu-Bonin-Mariana
withstanding, forearc peridotites are dominated tion of forearc peridotites and because of inter- arc system—does (Fig. 6A; Stern et al., 1991;
by ultradepleted compositions rarely found in est in boninites. Boninites are lavas with unusual Macpherson and Hall, 2001). Probably the best
other tectonic environments. combinations of high silica and magnesium exposure of boninite in the world is found in
The unusually depleted nature of forearc coupled with low calcium and aluminum abun- the Bonin (Ogasawara) islands (Taylor et al.,
peridotites requires unusual melting conditions: dances. These compositional features reflect 1994). These boninites erupted on the seafloor
abnormally high temperature, volatile flux, or low-pressure melting of harzburgitic mantle ca. 46–48 Ma, shortly after subduction began
both. Whatever the cause, these depletions are (e.g., Falloon and Danyushevsky, 2000), which ca. 52 Ma (Ishizuka et al., 2006, 2011). Recent
all the more noteworthy because forearcs asso- is not otherwise observed on modern Earth. In studies of Izu-Bonin-Mariana forearc crust
ciated with mature arcs have unusually low heat addition, boninites are enriched in large ion exposed in the inner-trench wall (Fig. 6B) reveal
flow (Stein, 2003) and rarely are volcanically lithophile elements (LILEs; elements with low that boninite may be the uppermost component
active. Whatever conditions caused the unusu- valence and large ionic radius) and light rare of forearc crust, underlain by thicker, slightly
ally extensive melting beneath forearcs no lon- earth elements (LREEs) relative to high field older tholeiitic basalts, which Reagan et al.

STERN ET AL.
Age Approximate Mariana forearc, and we prefer to interpret this

Lithology
A (Ma) depth (m) as another exposure of basalts that formed when
Izu-Bonin-Mariana subduction began.
Arc tholeiites To conclude this section, it is clear that our
and calc- 37–44 understanding of the composition of forearc
n
Pacific alkaline
plate crust is incomplete, largely due to the difficulty
a
rocks
Jap
of accessing and studying this material. Much

Tokyo ∗ High-Mg Subaerially of what we think we know is based upon studies
andesite 44–45 exposed
..
..
.
of the Izu-Bonin-Mariana forearc. We anticipate
. Boninite that Izu-Bonin-Mariana forearc crust is repre-
. 3 (and related sentative of igneous rocks that form when sub-
Izu-
. 44–48
30° differentiates) duction begins, but we cannot be sure until we
B
have studied the igneous rocks of other forearcs

onin
. 5500–4760
B** 2 Pillow lava in similar detail.
. * hyaloclastite
-Ma
. Basalt (FAB) 50–52

.
Philippine SUBDUCTION INITIATION
ria
Sheeted dike
6300
na arc
Sea plate
.. Gabbro/ Gabbro In this section, we discuss igneous activity
20° N .
. Mesozoic 50–52
. associated with the formation of a new sub-
system
. basalt
.. ? duction zone. As presented already, much of
*
. * Basalt
? 6780 what we understand about the igneous crust of
500 km * forearcs comes from studies of the Izu-Bonin-
**
1 Peridotite Mariana system. The fundamental question we
address for this forearc, and one that is pertinent
130° E 140° 150°
B for many others is: Does subduction initiation
generate this broad swath of crust, which ulti-
Figure 6. (A) Schematic map of the Izu-Bonin-Mariana arc system, showing principal tectonic fea-
tures and forearc crustal sections discussed in text. 1—study of Reagan et al. (2010); 2—study of mately forms the forearc (Fig. 8)? Also, what
Ishizuka et al. (2011); 3—study of DeBari et al. (1999). Asterisk marks location of Deep Sea Drill- happens when the subduction zone itself forms?
ing Project (DSDP) Site 458; B is location of Bonin (Ogasawara) Islands. White region is seafloor For the Izu-Bonin-Mariana arc system, we have
<2500 m deep. Dashed line shows location of profile in Figure 8. (B) Schematic columnar section of documented the progression of igneous activity
crust exposed in the Bonin inner-trench wall, from Ishizuka et al. (2011), used with permission by in the forearc about the time that the Pacific plate
Elsevier. FAB—forearc basalt.
changed its motion, and we have concluded that
this activity resulted from the dynamic response
of the crust and upper mantle to subduction initi-
(2010) called “forearc basalts.” Forearc basalt richer in silica). In spite of these differences, ation. The basic idea is: at ca. 52 Ma, old, dense
lavas and related dikes have chemical compo- most forearc basalts also have trace-element lithosphere of the Pacific plate began to sink,
sitions similar to MORB. Forearc basalts were (Figs. 7B and 7C) and isotopic compositions perhaps due to differential subsidence across a
first recognized in the southern Mariana forearc (Reagan et al., 2010) that are MORB-like, lithospheric weakness, such as an old fracture
SE of Guam, where they crop out trenchward whereas younger forearc lavas have composi- zone (Fig. 9A; Stern and Bloomer, 1992). We
of thin boninites and younger arc rocks (Rea- tions suggesting that subducted fluids were conclude that subduction initiation at this time
gan et al., 2010). This outcrop pattern, as well involved in their genesis. For example, lavas was hemispheric in scale: much of the western
as the volcanic stratigraphy drilled in the Mari- generated by melting in the presence of a fluid Pacific, extending south from Izu-Bonin-Mari-
ana forearc at DSDP Site 458 (Fig. 6B) indi- from a subducting plate (e.g., Mariana arc lavas ana to Fiji and the Tonga-Kermadec convergent
cates that forearc basalts here are older than and boninites) typically have elevated Th/Yb margin, formed new subduction zones about this
the boninites and were likely the first lavas to compared to MORB. On a plot of Th/Yb versus time. This was accompanied by voluminous gen-
erupt when the Izu-Bonin-Mariana subduction Nb/Yb, most Izu-Bonin-Mariana forearc basalts eration of forearc basalts, boninite, and related
zone formed (Reagan et al., 2010; Ishizuka et plot with MORB along the unmodified “mantle igneous rocks, much of which is now preserved
al., 2011). Below the forearc basalts, there are array,” whereas younger, subduction-influenced in these forearcs. We are not sure whether these
gabbroic rocks, and then mantle peridotites, as lavas trend toward Th/Yb typical of Mariana arc new subduction zones were caused by, or were
summarized in Figure 6B (Ishizuka et al., 2011). lavas (Fig. 7E). Note that Figure 7 also plots the the cause of the change in the Pacific plate abso-
Forearc basalts have major-element compo- chemostratigraphies of ophiolitic lavas, a point lute motion, from NNW to WNW at ca. 50 Ma,
sitions that are broadly MORB-like, although which is discussed further below. as reflected by the bend in the Emperor-Hawaii
significant differences exist, at least for Izu- DeBari et al. (1999) studied the Izu-Bonin- seamount chain (Sharp and Clague, 2006), but
Bonin-Mariana forearc basalts. Forearc basalts Mariana inner-trench wall (6100–6500 m deep) both events happened about the same time.
are generally not as rich in TiO2 as is typical near 32°N (Fig. 6A) and documented the pres- There are many challenges to this summary of
MORB, which often contains >1.4 wt% TiO2. ence of MORB-like basalts. They interpreted Izu-Bonin-Mariana subduction initiation. These
Forearc basalts can also be more rich in SiO2 these to represent older oceanic crust that was include hypotheses that: (1) interaction with a
than typical MORB (most forearc basalts con- trapped when subduction began. However, the mantle plume was responsible for boninite for-
tain <51% but forearc basalt–boninite tran- composition of these lavas is identical to those of mation (Macpherson and Hall, 2001); (2) extru-
sitional lavas at DSDP Sites 458 and 459 are forearc basalts from elsewhere in the Izu-Bonin- sion of Indian Ocean–Asian asthenosphere due

A B
C D
E F
Figure 7. Whole-rock geochemical data of stratigraphically constrained (i.e., lower versus upper) subalkaline lavas and latest-
stage dikes of Izu-Bonin-Mariana forearc lavas (left) and ophiolites of the Eastern Mediterranean–Persian Gulf region (right).
Forearc chemical data are from Reagan et al. (2010) and Ishizuka et al. (2011). Ophiolite data are from Albania (Mirdita; data
from Dilek et al., 2008); Greece (Pindos; data from Saccani and Photiades, 2004); Cyprus (Troodos; data from Flower and Levine,
1987); and Oman (Semail; data from Godard et al., 2003) as compiled by Whattam and Stern (2011). (A) Izu-Bonin-Mariana
(IBM) forearc and (B) Tethyan ophiolites on the SiO2 versus FeOt/MgO subalkaline affinity discrimination diagram (Miyashiro,
1974). (C) Izu-Bonin-Mariana forearc and (D) Tethyan ophiolite lavas on chondrite-normalized rare earth element (REE) plots
(REE concentrations from Nakamura, 1974). (E) Izu-Bonin-Mariana forearc and (F) Tethyan ophiolite lavas on the Nb/Yb ver-
sus Th/Yb plot (Pearce, 2008). Compositional data have been filtered to include samples with reported major-oxide totals of
98%–102% and loss on ignition (LOI) <7%. In A, total iron is expressed as FeOt (= Fe2O3 × 0.89), and oxide concentrations were
recalculated and normalized to 100% on an anhydrous (volatile-free) basis. In E and F, abbreviations are N- and E-M—normal
and enriched mid-ocean-ridge basalt (MORB). Note that in B, the only “lower lava” samples that plot as calc-alkaline (n = 4) are
from Troodos. In addition, Troodos is not represented on F because the data set of Flower and Levine (1987) does not include
concentrations of Th, Nb, and Yb. Modern Mariana arc lava data (blue dots) in E are from Peate and Pearce (1998). FAB—forearc
basalt; FC—fractional crystallization.

STERN ET AL.
Volcanic front Inner forearc Outer forearc Trench

Distance from trench (km) Figure 8. Simplified P-wave veloc-
180 150 100 50 0 ity structure beneath Izu forearc
0
(approximately E-W line at
Vp ~1.9 sediments 30°50′E), modified after Kamimura
3.3 Volcanics et al. (2002), with interpreted
5 4.3
4.8 Altered basalt and diabase 4.5 3.2 lithologies. Note that forearc
4.5 crustal thickness decreases from
6.3
Depth (km)
5.8 6.3 ~11 km near the volcanic front

10 6.7 Gabbro 6.5
6.8 to 5 km or less near the trench.
Moho
7.0 6.4 e
rfac Note also significantly lower
7.3 inte st Vp ~6.
8
15 n a n ic cru P-wave seismic velocity (Vp) in
o ce
Mantle cti er o
uppermost mantle beneath the
b du U pp outer forearc (6.4–6.8 km/s vs.
Vp ~8.0 Su p ~7.0 7.3–8.0 km/s), probably reflecting
20 ust V Subducted Moho
n i c cr greater serpentinization beneath
ce a the outer forearc.
ro Mantle Vp ~8.0
we V.E. ~4x
Lo
25
to Tethys closure was a major cause of western

A Young Oceanic crust Old
Pacific arc rollback and basin opening (Flower
LM LM et al., 2001); (3) boninite formation reflected
the intersection of an active spreading ridge and
TF/FZ
AM AM a subduction-transform fault transition (Des-
champs and Lallemand, 2003); (4) compression
across a preexisting fracture zone was required
B Early protoforearc spreading (FAB)
(Hall et al., 2003); (5) lateral compositional
buoyancy contrast within oceanic lithosphere
Upwelling fertile controls subduction initiation (Niu et al., 2003);
asthenosphere; (6) the new Izu-Bonin-Mariana convergent mar-
no interaction with Sinking slab; rapid trench rollback
gin cut across, rather than followed, preexist-
slab-derived fluid
ing lithospheric fabric, such as remnant arcs,
C Late protoforearc spreading (VAB/BON) fracture zones, and spreading ridges (Taylor
and Goodliffe, 2004); and (7) subduction of the
v v v v v v v v v v v
Pacific-Izanagi spreading ridge triggered a chain

Depleted mantle stagnates; reaction of tectonic plate reorganizations that
strong interaction led to Izu-Bonin-Mariana and Tonga-Kermadec
with slab-derived fluid subduction initiation (Whittaker et al., 2007).
There is clearly a lot of uncertainty about
Localized magmatic arc Forearc crust
D (volcanic front) Fig. 11
what caused the Izu-Bonin-Mariana subduc-
tion initiation and attendant boninite volca-
v v v v v v v v v v v
nism, but there is no disagreement that it was
accompanied by voluminous igneous activity.
True subduction;
This formed Izu-Bonin-Mariana forearc crust
trench rollback slows (Figs. 6 and 8) as well as crustal tracts well to
the west of the present volcanic front, includ-
ing the West Mariana Ridge and Kyushu-Palau
Figure 9. Subduction initiation, formation of the forearc, and evolution of magmatic systems, modi- Ridge. Stern and Bloomer (1992) conserva-
fied after Metcalf and Shervais (2008). (A) Older, thicker, colder, and denser lithosphere (right) is jux-
tively (i.e., assuming generation of 6-km-thick
taposed with young, thinner, hotter, and more buoyant lithosphere across a zone of weakness (e.g.,
transform fault or fracture zone [TF/FZ]). (B) Subsidence of old lithosphere allows asthenosphere to
crust) estimated that 1200–1800 km3 of crust
flood over it. Upwelling asthenosphere melts due to decompression, generating mid-ocean-ridge were produced per kilometer of arc during Izu-
basalt (MORB)–like basalt (forearc basalts of Reagan et al., 2010) accompanied by seafloor spread- Bonin-Mariana subduction initiation, and that
ing. (C) Continued lithospheric subsidence or beginning of downdip motion of slab is accompanied this episode lasted 10 m.y., for a crustal growth
by penetration of slab-derived fluids into upwelled mantle, causing melting of depleted harzbur- rate of 120–180 km3/km. This is equivalent to
gite. (D) Downdip motion of lithosphere signals start of true subduction, which terminates rapid the volume of crust produced at a mid-ocean-
trench rollback and protoforearc spreading. Forearc mantle cools, and igneous activity retreats
ridge spreading at 2–3 cm/yr. In fact, Izu-Bonin-
~200 km to what becomes the magmatic arc. Izu-Bonin-Mariana subduction initiation encom-
passed ~7 m.y. for the complete transition from initial seafloor spreading to normal arc volcanism. Mariana mean crustal thickness produced dur-
BON—boninite; FAB—forearc basalt; VAB—volcanic arc basalts; LM—lithospheric mantle (gray); ing this episode was probably greater than 6 km,
AM—asthenospheric mantle (white). Note tectonic setting of lava sequence shown in Figure 11. as shown in Figure 8 for the Izu forearc. For the

Mariana forearc, Calvert et al. (2008) concluded leads logically to the idea that hinged subsid- the Ontong-Java Plateau on the north side of
that 15-km-thick crust just east of the magmatic ence of the older, thicker, and denser Pacific the Solomon arc in Miocene time caused a new
front formed during a brief magmatic episode plate allowed asthenosphere to well up and fill subduction zone to form to the south (Mann and
early in the arc’s history. Furthermore, Izu- the widening chasm, accompanied by extensive Taira, 2004), in what may be the best actualistic
Bonin-Mariana subduction initiation probably decompression melting (Fig. 8B). The sequence example of subduction polarity reversal. Stern
lasted less than 10 m.y.; Ishizuka et al. (2011) of events summarized in Figure 9 encapsulates (2004) characterized this type of subduction
estimated that it took ~7 m.y. before a stable the idea of spontaneous subduction initiation initiation, which includes the Puysegur trench
magmatic arc was established near the position (Stern, 2004), including early extension and example, as reflecting “induced” nucleation of
that it still occupies. Finally, subduction erosion seafloor spreading. On the other hand, we can- a subduction zone. Induced nucleation of a sub-
has removed a significant amount of forearc; a not rule out the possibility that induced (forced) duction zone conceptually contrasts with “spon-
width of 1 km removed per million years trans- subduction initiation might also have been asso- taneous” nucleation of a subduction zone” such
lates into 240 km3/km of lost crust. All these ciated with early voluminous igneous activity, as Izu-Bonin-Mariana may be. Stern (2004) fur-
considerations indicate that Izu-Bonin-Mariana due to the likelihood of lithospheric collapse ther suggested that induced nucleation of a sub-
crustal growth related to subduction initiation and asthenospheric upwelling, as modeled by duction zone may not be associated with volu-
was significantly greater than 120–180 km3/km. Hall et al. (2003). minous forearc igneous activity, such as that
Such high crustal growth rates and the Does current knowledge about Izu-Bonin- forming the Izu-Bonin-Mariana forearc. If so,
absence of large, central volcanoes of Eocene Mariana subduction initiation serve as a useful forearcs formed by induced nucleation of a sub-
age in the Izu-Bonin-Mariana forearc imply model for reconstructing how other forearcs duction zone may have fundamentally different
that crust was formed by seafloor spreading, form? We cannot be sure because we know so crustal structures and origins than those formed
at least during the early, forearc basalts–domi- little about their crust, but Izu-Bonin-Mariana during spontaneous nucleation of a subduc-
nated episode. This is consistent with the pres- serves as a useful analogue for the Tonga-Ker- tion zone. The generalization that spontaneous
ence of dense diabase dike swarms at the base madec forearc. This crust is exposed only on the nucleation of a subduction zone results in broad
of the forearc basalts sequence in the Izu-Bonin- island of ‘Eua and was drilled near the trench at forearc magmatism, whereas induced nucleation
Mariana forearc (Reagan et al., 2010; Ishizuka ODP Site 841. Arc tholeiite, gabbro, and harz- of a subduction zone does not, may not be true.
et al., 2011). Furthermore, the composition of burgitic peridotite have been dredged from the At least one example of induced nucleation of
forearc basalts, which is similar to MORB, inner-trench wall, suggesting to Bloomer et a subduction zone—Aleutian subduction initia-
implies a similar origin by decompression al. (1995) that the Tonga forearc is floored by tion—may be an example of induced nucleation
melting beneath a spreading ridge (Plank and crust similar in age and composition to that of of a subduction zone with attendant forearc
Langmuir, 1992). Small central volcanoes may Izu-Bonin-Mariana, including Eocene boninite igneous activity. Scholl (2007) and Minyuk and
have formed during later, boninitic volcanism, (Crawford et al., 2003). The oldest known rocks Stone (2009) suggested that Aleutian subduction
for example, at ODP Site 786B (Lagabrielle et in the Tonga-Kermadec forearc are 46–40 Ma initiation exploited SSW-trending strike-slip
al., 1992), but the thicker, older forearc basalt arc-type lavas occurring below Upper Middle faults related to the “tectonic escape” of Alaska,
succession seems to have been emplaced by Eocene limestones on ‘Eua (Ewart and Bryan, associated with motion along the North Pacific
tectonomagmatic processes akin to seafloor 1972; Duncan et al., 1985; Tappin and Balance, Rim Orogenic Stream (Redfield et al., 2007). A
spreading. There is no clear evidence about the 1994). ODP drilling at Site 841 in the Tongan curved system of long strike-slip faults propa-
arrangement of spreading ridges that might have forearc recovered a thick sequence of low-K gated southwestward across the North Pacific
existed; Stern (2004) inferred short segments arc tholeiitic rhyolites (Bloomer et al., 1994), Rim throughout Cenozoic time, disrupting older
aligned oblique to the evolving convergent plate dated by McDougall (1994) at 44 ± 2 Ma. Far- subduction zones along the Bering Sea shelf
boundary, although no good magnetic anomaly ther north in the Tongan forearc, true low-Ca edge. Recently obtained ca. 46 Ma 40Ar/39Ar
patterns have yet been identified in any forearc boninitic rocks and associated backarc basin– ages from Aleutian forearc igneous rocks (Jicha
that could be interpreted as spreading fabric. type basalts of probable Eocene age have been et al., 2006; Minyuk and Stone, 2009) provide
Given that seafloor spreading best explains dredged at depths in excess of 4 km (Falloon minimum age constraints for the timing of Aleu-
the tectonic environment for Izu-Bonin-Mariana et al., 1987) and have yielded ages between 45 tian subduction initiation, although Aleutian
forearc crust formation, the logical conclusion is and 35 Ma (Bloomer et al., 1998). It is not clear subduction initiation generated middle Eocene
that a strongly extensional environment existed whether or not these boninitic lavas were gen- magmatic rocks as early as ca. 50 Ma (Scholl,
at that time. There is no evidence that early erated in the same ca. 52 Ma subduction initia- 2007). The effects of tectonic erosion at con-
Izu-Bonin-Mariana subduction was accompa- tion event as that responsible for the subduction vergent margins must be considered for any
nied by compression, as would be expected if initiation boninite–refractory-forearc mantle thoughtful subduction initiation analysis. Naked
the new subduction zone was caused by one package of the Izu-Bonin-Mariana arc system forearcs are likely to be trimmed back by sub-
plate being forced beneath the other (induced to the north. duction erosion, at rates that can vary from a few
subduction initiation of Stern, 2004), although We emphasize that not all subduction zones to several kilometers per million years (Clift and
such evidence (uplift-related unconformity, form by processes outlined here. As outlined by Vannucchi, 2004; Scholl and von Huene, 2007).
thrust faulting) might have been obliterated by Stern (2004), some subduction zones form as Subduction erosion thus can remove all of the
Eocene igneous activity. Such evidence of initial a result of plate-boundary reconfigurations, for evidence for a magmatic forearc in several tens
compression without forearc volcanism charac- example, as a result of terrane accretion or conti- of millions of years, as may be the case for the
terizes the Puysegur mini-subduction initiation nental collision. Collision of India with Eurasia Andean forearc.
episode, which serves as an excellent example is a good example of this, although a new sub- Keeping such caveats and complications
of induced subduction initiation. The conclusion duction zone has not yet formed behind (south in mind, it seems reasonable to conclude that
that a strongly extensional environment accom- of) India, reflecting the great strength of Indian many forearcs form as a result of voluminous
panied Izu-Bonin-Mariana subduction initiation Ocean lithosphere (Stern, 2004). Collision of yet ephemeral igneous activity accompanying

STERN ET AL.
subduction initiation. This makes it worthwhile forearc crust (and accreted sediments) is a key important part of modern geologic thought since
to reconsider the origins of forearc igneous component of orogens. These tracts of obducted the 1960s, but there is a lot of confusion about
rocks that formed about the same time as sub- forearc lithosphere are known as ophiolites. the tectonic environment in which they formed.
duction initiation. For example, the ca. 55 Ma Much of this misunderstanding results from
Siletzia terrane of the Oregon and Washington OPHIOLITES a lack of appreciation of the disparate lines of
Coast Ranges formed about the same time as evidence needed to reconstruct ophiolites, espe-
Cascadia subduction initiation and is variously Ophiolites are fragments of oceanic litho- cially structural geology, igneous geochemistry,
interpreted as an accreted oceanic plateau (Dun- sphere that have been tectonically emplaced on and marine geology. Ophiolites were originally
can, 1982), produced by the Yellowstone plume land. A complete “Penrose” ophiolite includes thought to form at mid-ocean ridges, but we now
head (Pyle et al., 2009), or due to a tear in the tectonized peridotite, gabbro, sheeted dikes, understand that most sediments and all crust on
subducting slab (Humphreys, 2008). The pos- and pillow basalt (Anonymous, 1972), but this the downgoing plate are subducted. If the down-
sibility that Siletzia formed in situ as a forearc idealization is rarely seen because ophiolites are going plate includes very thick (>1 km; Clift and
magmatic response to Cascadia subduction ini- faulted and fragmented during emplacement or Vannucchi, 2004) sediments, some of this may
tiation should also be entertained. because one, or more, unit was never generated. be scraped off, and sometimes seamounts may
Finally, we should consider the possibil- Nevertheless, ophiolites are key petrotectonic be transferred from the subducting to the over-
ity of subduction “re-initiation,” i.e., the case indicators, perhaps the single most impor- riding plate, but normal oceanic crust itself has
where a subduction zone once existed, then tant indicator of ancient plate-tectonic activity never been demonstrated to be transferred from
was extinguished, and then resumed at about (Stern, 2005). Ophiolites mark tectonic sutures, downgoing to overriding plate (i.e., by seismic-
the same location, because of either induced or indicating both the location of ancient oceans reflection profiling) at any modern convergent
spontaneous nucleation of a subduction zone. and convergent plate boundaries where buoyant margin (Fig. 10C). Changes in plate motion
The Cretaceous and younger evolution of SW lithosphere was partially subducted, also known might trap mid-ocean-ridge crust in what may
Japan serves as an example of this. Subduc- as collision zones (Dilek, 2003). As a result, ultimately become a forearc (e.g., Macquarie
tion of Pacific seafloor beneath NE Japan has ophiolites are often highly altered and faulted, Island; Varne et al., 2000), but this is likely a
been continuous, but subduction of the Philip- and much effort and imagination are needed very unusual tectonic scenario.
pine Sea beneath SW Japan has been episodic. to reconstruct the original crust and uppermost In the 1970s, geoscientists (beginning with
During Cretaceous time, a subduction zone mantle section. Ophiolites are unequivocal evi- Miyashiro, 1973) began to recognize the simi-
dipped beneath what is now SW Japan, asso- dence of seafloor spreading and have been an larity of some ophiolite lava compositions to
ciated with a robust magmatic arc. Subduction
there ceased and was replaced by a transform
fault (shear margin) during Paleogene time. This
lithospheric weakness was converted into a new A Forearc ophiolite: Easy to emplace B Backarc ophiolite: Difficult to emplace
subduction zone beginning in latest Oligocene Forearc Backarc basin

time, with an attendant flare-up of forearc igne- lithosphere lithosphere
ous activity (Kimura et al., 2005). Other likely
examples of subduction re-initiation include the
Paleogene Cascadia system and the Late Juras- Ophiolite
Ophiolite
sic of California.
To conclude this section, the igneous crust
and uppermost mantle of forearcs do not gener-
ally represent trapped oceanic lithosphere but in
fact typically form during upper-plate spreading
associated with subduction initiation (Shervais,
2001; Stern, 2004). There is no doubt that we
C MORB ophiolite: Almost impossible to emplace
MORB
need to better understand the composition and lithosphere
mode of formation of forearc crust, not only for Buoyant crust
its own sake but also to better reconstruct events
accompanying subduction initiation. Such stud- Subducting plate
ies require studying naked forearcs, with all the
challenges this entails. In the next section, we Suture
propose a complementary strategy that takes
advantage of the fact that forearc lithosphere is
commonly emplaced (obducted) when buoyant
lithosphere—particularly continental crust—on Figure 10. Tectonic cartoon illustrating the relative feasibility of emplacing oceanic lithospheres
the downgoing plate enters and clogs a sub- created in forearc, backarc basin, and mid-ocean-ridge settings. (A) It is relatively easy to emplace
duction zone (Wakabayashi and Dilek, 2003). forearc lithosphere. Subduction of buoyant material commonly leads to failure of subduction zone,
Introduction of buoyant lithosphere disrupts the and isostatic rebound of buoyant material emplaces ophiolite. (B) It is difficult to emplace backarc
basin oceanic lithosphere. Compression and shortening across the arc will lead to uplift of the arc.
normal operation of a subduction zone, so that
(C) It is almost impossible to emplace true mid-ocean-ridge basalt (MORB) crust at a convergent
subducted materials are partially regurgitated, plate boundary. Sediments and fragments of seamounts may be scraped off the downgoing plate,
and overlying forearc lithosphere is lifted above but subducting MORB-type lithosphere is nowhere known to be transferred from downgoing to
sea level (Glodny et al., 2005). Consequently, overriding plate (modified after Stern, 2004).

those of convergent margins, leading to the we propose an alternative definition that bet- tion progress from early decompression melts of
concept of the “suprasubduction zone” ophio- ter captures the important elements of what are unmodified fertile (lherzolitic) mantle to yield
lite (Pearce et al., 1984). This created tension called ophiolites in the literature. An ophiolite forearc basalts to younger hydrous flux melts
between conclusions based on structural stud- must consist of a significant proportion of harz- of depleted (harzburgitic) mantle that has been
ies, which indicated ophiolites form by seafloor burgitic peridotite (depleted mantle) and pil- strongly modified by subduction-related fluids
spreading, and those based on geochemistry, lowed basalt. Gabbro and sheeted dikes may be to yield late high-Mg andesites and boninitic
which indicated ophiolites form at convergent missing, but there should be associated deep- lavas. If the subduction initiation process con-
margins. This tension was temporarily rec- sea sediments. These units should be exposed tinues long enough to generate steady-state sub-
onciled by the idea that suprasubduction zone above sea level. This definition is more consis- duction with downwelling mantle overlying the
ophiolites formed in backarc basins (Dewey, tent with common usage of the term ophiolite sinking plate, then normal arc volcanics will cap
1976; Pearce, 2003). This reconciled structural than is the Penrose definition. the subduction initiation sequence as the locus
evidence of seafloor spreading with geochemi- Based on emplacement mechanisms, Waka- of magmatism retreats from the trench. This
cal evidence for convergent margin setting, but it bayashi and Dilek (2003) distinguished four types magmagenetic evolution is portrayed in Fig-
is difficult to see how a backarc basin, ~200 km of ophiolites: (1) “Tethyan” ophiolites, emplaced ures 7 and 11, which encapsulate the subduction
from the convergent plate boundary, would be over passive continental margins; (2) “Cordille- initiation tectonic evolution shown in Figure 9.
emplaced (Fig. 10B). This logic train is further ran” ophiolites, emplaced over subduction com- Whattam and Stern (2011) outlined the argu-
derailed for some ophiolites interpreted as fossil plexes; (3) “ridge-trench intersection” ophiolites ments and implications of the subduction initia-
backarc basins because the associated arc and emplaced through complex processes resulting tion rule and proposed that ophiolites showing
forearc, which are typically ~200 km wide and from the interaction between a spreading ridge this progression be termed “subduction initia-
~30 km thick, are usually not identified (e.g., and a subduction zone; and (4) the unique Mac- tion rule ophiolites.”
Semail ophiolite interpretation of Godard et al., quarie Island ophiolite, which was subaerially It has long been recognized that some
2003). Furthermore, there are no known Ceno- exposed as a result of a change in plate-boundary ophiolites contain igneous rocks with strong
zoic examples of backarc basin closure (Stern, configuration along a mid-ocean-ridge system. chemical affinities to both mid-ocean-ridge
2004), which is required to emplace a backarc The first two types represent the overwhelming and arc basalts. Distinguishing compositions
basin ophiolite. majority of ophiolites, with the second two types of MORB-like lavas include >1% TiO2, vari-
A simple and elegant solution to the ophio- comprising miniscule proportions. Tethyan- and able depletion in LREEs, absence of HFSEs
lite emplacement problem is that whatever Cordilleran-type ophiolites reflect the fundamen- (e.g., Nb, Ta), depletions on spider (primitive
crust comprises the forearc is most likely to be tally different nature of the subducted oceanic mantle– or N-MORB–normalized) diagrams,
emplaced during plate collision. This process is realms, with Tethyan ophiolites subducting rela- La/Nb <1, etc.; we regard these early MORB-
often referred to as “obduction,” although this tively narrow oceans before colliding with conti- like sequences as forearc basalts. In contrast,
term originally described how oceanic crust on nental fragments and Cordilleran ophiolites gen- volcanic arc–like basalts have lower TiO2, are
the downgoing plate was thrust over the con- erally subducting Pacific seafloor, which contains enriched in fluid-mobile elements (e.g., LILEs
vergent margin (Coleman, 1971). Forearc litho- no continental fragments. and LREEs), and have strong HFSE depletions
sphere is optimally situated for obduction (Wak- Given that most ophiolites originate in relative to LREE (e.g., La/Nb >1, etc.; Pearce,
abayashi and Dilek, 2003). It is straightforward forearcs, is it possible to independently deter- 2003). Recognition of both arc-like and MORB-
to envisage emplacement of forearc lithosphere mine whether or not a given ophiolite formed like compositions in some ophiolites has
above the same subduction system in which it during subduction initiation or as a result of encouraged some workers to infer formation in
was generated due to isostatic uplift following some other process, as outlined herein? Such a backarc basin (e.g., Beccaluva et al., 2004) or a
partial subduction of buoyant crust that jams the an assessment would be very useful because of complex, multistage tectonic history, for exam-
subduction zone (Fig. 10A). This process—akin the difficulties involved in studying submerged ple, eruption of the two suites in discrete tec-
to sliding a spatula under a pancake or fried egg forearc igneous rocks and reconstructing sub- tonic environments (e.g., Saccani and Photiades,
to lift it—is also most likely to yield the least- duction initiation processes. If ophiolites could 2004; Godard et al., 2003). The reasons against
disrupted ophiolites, and those most likely to be so linked, it could pay huge dividends in formation as a backarc basin are outlined in the
approximate the Penrose ophiolite ideal, such advancing our understanding of the fundamen- previous section. The conclusion here that the
as Troodos (Cyprus) and Semail (Oman). Dur- tal tectonic province of forearc and processes of basaltic sections in ophiolites are forearc basalts
ing the early days following the plate-tectonic subduction initiation. The next section summa- (Reagan et al., 2010) is supported by the obser-
revolution, when it was thought that forearc crust rizes a chemostratigraphic approach for evalu- vation that most Izu-Bonin-Mariana forearc
was relict, trapped oceanic crust, this provided ating whether or not a given ophiolite formed basalts have lower Ti/V ratios than MORB,
an attractive way to emplace MORB-type ophio- during subduction initiation. which probably results from the enhanced melt-
lites. As discussed previously herein, there is lit- ing that commonly occurs in nascent subduction
tle evidence to support the idea that forearcs are THE SUBDUCTION INITIATION RULE settings. The presence of transitional lavas with
composed of trapped oceanic crust that existed compositions that progress from forearc basalts
in the region prior to the formation of a new sub- The subduction initiation rule (Whattam and to boninite with time at DSDP Sites 458 and 459
duction zone. It is increasingly clear from the Stern, 2011) predicts that ophiolites that form also supports this contention. Some ophiolites
simple perspective of plausible emplacement as a result of subduction initiation processes may reflect complex tectonic histories, but this
mechanisms that forearcs are the most likely consist of a sequence of igneous rocks formed cannot serve as the general explanation for sub-
source of ophiolites (Casey and Dewey, 1984; by a magma source that changed progressively duction initiation rule ophiolites. Furthermore,
Milson, 2003; Metcalf and Shervais, 2008). in composition by the combined effects of melt any inference of complex tectonic histories is
Because most ophiolites are very incom- depletion and subduction-related metasoma- inconsistent with the absence of unconformi-
plete and rarely satisfy the Penrose definition, tism. Magmas erupted during subduction initia- ties or significant sedimentary horizons between

STERN ET AL.
The four Tethyan ophiolites mentioned here

The Subduction Initiation Rule show subduction initiation rule relationships,
with lower lavas being more MORB-like and
Lava Mantle Age upper lavas being more arc-like, as Whattam
and Stern (2011) showed. Troodos and Semail
composition composition are at either end of the 3000-km-long ophiolite
Youngest belt that marks the Late Cretaceous forearc of
Calc-alkaline
Sometimes boninite
SW Asia, including the inner and outer ophio-
Harzburgitic mantle source lite belts of Zagros, Iran (Moghadam and Stern,
Mostly LREE-depleted
Lower ΣREE
Modified by fluids from
2011). The magmatic chemostratigraphies of the
Higher TiO2, Y, Zr subducted crust /sediments
many Zagros ophiolites have not been worked
Lower Ti/V
Higher Cr/Y out, but these ophiolites in many cases have
strong compositional affinities in some respect
to arc magmas, for example, with respect to La/
1–3 km Nb (arc lavas usually have La/Nb >1.4 accord-
ing to Condie, 1999). It is very likely that we
will be able to work out magmatic stratigraphies
in more ophiolites around the world, but this
will require thoughtful integrated structural and
petrologic studies.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

Tholeiitic
LREE-depleted
Higher ΣREE
Subduction initiation rule ophiolites provide
Higher TiO2, Y, Zr Lherzolitic mantle source wonderful opportunities to better understand the
Higher Ti/V Unaffected by fluids from crust and upper mantle of magmatic forearcs
Lower Cr/Y subducted crust/sediments Oldest and the ways in which new subduction zones
form. Identifying and studying subduction ini-
Figure 11. The subduction initiation rule, simplified after Whattam and Stern (2011). Ophiolites
tiation rule ophiolites will provide easy access
(and forearc crust) that form as a result of subduction initiation preserve systematic variations in
basalt compositions (left), from mid-ocean-ridge basalt (MORB)–like at the base to volcanic arc)– to forearc lithosphere samples and structures,
like basalt (VAB), even boninitic, at the top. This reflects changes in the source mantle as a new allowing many scientific perspectives to be
subduction zone starts, beginning with adiabatic upwelling of asthenosphere that is not influ- engaged cheaply and easily. Where ophiolites
enced by subduction-related fluids (Fig. 9B) to form MORB-like basalts (forearc basalts) by seafloor can be firmly linked to forearcs through applica-
spreading. Fluids from the sinking lithosphere become increasingly important with time, eventu- tion of the subduction initiation rule and other
ally reaching and metasomatically re-enriching the increasingly depleted mantle source of melts
approaches, geodynamic models for subduc-
(Fig. 9C). Asthenospheric upwelling diminishes in importance with time and is ultimately replaced
by induced convection as sinking lithosphere begins downdip motion, and true subduction begins
tion initiation can be more easily developed
(Fig. 9D). This isolates the forearc mantle wedge, leading to establishment of localized magmatic and tested. Because subduction initiation rule
arc behind a cold, dead forearc. LREE—light rare earth element; ∑REE— total rare earth element ophiolites are fossil forearcs, they often can be
concentrations. traced across strike for tens of kilometers and
along strike for hundreds of kilometers. Ero-
sion of deformed subduction initiation rule
ophiolite lavas with MORB-like versus volca- ingly interpreted to be products of magmatism ophiolites exposes various levels, allowing four-
nic arc–like basalt compositions. Such inter- in a single (suprasubduction zone) tectonic set- dimensional reconstructions of timing as well
ruptions might be difficult to identify because ting, albeit one that changed rapidly. as vertical, across-strike, and along-strike mag-
of ophiolite deformation, but such an important It is worth emphasizing that it is generally matic variations. Sampling for geochronology is
and distinctive feature should sometimes be difficult to recognize a magmatic stratigraphy in easier than for in situ forearcs because of this
recognized if this interpretation is generally cor- ophiolites, because they are so often jumbled by exposure, and relations of such dated samples to
rect. Conversely, the interpretation of a single, faulting, and because lavas and associated intru- the surrounding rocks and fabrics provide con-
rapidly evolving magmagenetic environment is sions with different chemistries appear similar text for interpreting the ages. The multiple per-
favored because such a hiatus is generally not in the field. We recognize four ophiolites that spectives and levels of detail allowed by these
observed. In addition, lavas with compositions have been studied in sufficient detail to recon- approaches mean that many aspects of forearc
that are transitional between forearc basalts and struct their magmatic stratigraphies: Mirdita, crust structure and subduction initiation can be
boninites have been observed in some ophiolites Pindos, Troodos, and Semail (as summarized understood much better by indirect study of sub-
(e.g., Dilek and Furnes, 2009). As a result, ophi- by Whattam and Stern, 2011). There are other duction initiation rule ophiolites than by study-
olite compositional variability is increasingly examples of subduction initiation rule ophiolites ing forearcs directly, as can be seen by mentally
ascribed to progressive depletion and metaso- that could also be considered, for example, the comparing the experiences captured in Figure 1.
matism of the mantle source as the ophiolite 485–489 Ma ophiolite belt that can be traced Even as we recognize that studies of sub-
magmatic crust forms (e.g., Shervais, 2001; >1000 km from Newfoundland down into the duction initiation rule ophiolites are essential
Beccaluva at al., 2005; Dilek and Furnes, 2009). Taconic suture of New York (Bédard et al., for understanding forearcs, studies of in situ
Ophiolite lava compositions thus are increas- 1998; Schroetter et al., 2003; Pagé et al., 2009). forearc crust need to move forward. We are only

beginning to understand the igneous crust of a ferent than that seen for Izu-Bonin-Mariana, for Bloomer, S.H., Falloon, T., Petcovic, H., Nielsen, R.L., and Dun-
can, R.A., 1998, Petrology and geochemistry of volcanic
single forearc in any detail—that of Izu-Bonin- example, by having upper alkalic lavas instead and plutonic rocks from the Tonga forearc, southwest
Mariana—and this example seems to be unusual of volcanic arc–like basalt overlying tholeiites. Pacific (abstract): Eos (Transactions, American Geophysi-
in terms of the abundance of early-arc boninites. Above all, combined studies of subduction cal Union), v. 79, no. 45, Fall Meeting supplement, p. F420.
Bonatti, E., and Michael, P.J., 1989, Mantle peridotites from
We need to continue to test and refine what we initiation rule ophiolites and forearc crust need continental rifts to ocean basins to subduction zones:
know about forearc magmatic evolution. It is to be integrated with geodynamic modeling to Earth and Planetary Science Letters, v. 91, p. 297–311,
doi:10.1016/0012-821X(89)90005-8.
especially important that we drill and sample learn about the ways in which new subduction
Calvert, A.J., Klemperer, S.L., Takahashi, N., and Kerr, B.C.,
through the magmatic stratigraphy of an igneous zones form. Geodynamic modeling of subduc- 2008, Three-dimensional crustal structure of the Mari-
forearc in order to better understand the sequence tion initiation needs to be firmly tethered in real- ana island arc from seismic tomography: Journal of
Geophysical Research–Solid Earth, v. 113, doi:10.1029
and timing of magmas at one location, allowing ity, and the more that such models attempt to /2007JB004939.
us to answer questions such as: What are the explain the rocks making up a real forearc and Casey, J.F., and Dewey, J.F., 1984, Initiation of subduction
relative proportions of forearc basalts versus vol- ophiolite, the more rapidly our understanding of zones along transform and accreting plate bound-
aries, triple-junction evolution, and forearc spread-
canic arc–like basalt/boninitic lavas? How does this fundamental Earth processes will advance. ing centres—Implications for ophiolitic geology and
forearc basalt magmatism transition to volcanic obduction in Gass, G., Lippard, S.J., and Shelton, A.W.,
arc–like basalt magmatism? Is it gradational or eds., Ophiolites and Oceanic Lithosphere: Geological
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Society of London Special Publication 13, p. 269–290,
abrupt? How long does forearc volcanism last? doi:10.1144/GSL.SP.1984.013.01.22.
Answering such questions for an in situ forearc We thank Dave Scholl for edifying comments on Clift, P.D., and Vannucchi, P., 2004, Controls on tectonic accre-
tion versus erosion in subduction zones: Implications for
and comparing these answers with those for sub- accretionary prisms and Steve Graham for the the origin and recycling of the continental crust: Reviews
duction initiation rule ophiolites will be key tests photo of a Franciscan chert exposure. Thought- of Geophysics, v. 42, RG2001, doi:10.1029/2003RG000127.
of the ideas presented in this paper. Furthermore, ful reviews by Rod Metcalf, Jean Bédard, and Coleman, R.G., 1971, Plate tectonic emplacement of upper
mantle peridotites along continental edges: Journal of
there are aspects of forearc structure and evolu- editors John Shervais and John Goodge are Geophysical Research, v. 76, p. 1212–1222, doi:10.1029
tion that cannot be understood without studying much appreciated. This manuscript was written /JB076i005p01212.
extant forearcs. For example, active serpentine Condie, K.C., 1999, Mafic crustal xenoliths and the origin
while Stern enjoyed a Blaustein Fellowship at
of the lower continental crust: Lithos, v. 46, p. 95–101,
mud volcanoes in the Mariana forearc serve as Stanford University. Stern’s research on intra- doi:10.1016/S0024-4937(98)00056-5.
actualistic models for sedimentary serpentinite oceanic arcs has been supported by the National Crawford, A.J., Meffre, S., and Symonds, P.A., 2003, Chapter
25—120 to 0 Ma tectonic evolution of the southwest
deposits associated with some forearcs (Fryer Science Foundation, most recently by grant Pacific and analogous geological evolution of the 600
et al., 1995; Fryer, 2002). Knowing that these OCE-0961352. Reagan acknowledges research to 220 Ma Tasman fold belt system, in Hillis, R.R., and
mud volcanoes exist has stimulated the search support from National Science Foundation grant Müller, R.D., eds., Evolution and Dynamics of the Aus-
tralian Plate: Geological Society of Australia Special
for ancient serpentine mudflows (e.g., Teklay, EAR-0840862. This is University of Texas at Publication 22, p. 377–397.
2006). Another example is the problem of tec- Dallas Geosciences contribution 1228. DeBari, S.M., Taylor, B., Spencer, K., and Fujioka, K., 1999,
tonic erosion, which can remove a few kilome- A trapped Philippine Sea plate origin for MORB from
the inner slope of the Izu-Bonin Trench: Earth and Plan-
ters of forearc crust in a few million years. Stud- REFERENCES CITED etary Science Letters, v. 174, p. 183–197, doi:10.1016
ies of active systems are generally aware that /S0012-821X(99)00252-6.
Anonymous, 1972, Penrose field conference on ophiolites: Deschamps, A., and Lallemand, S., 2003, Geodynamic set-
some crust is missing, whereas studies of ophiol- Geotimes, v. 17, p. 24–25. ting of Izu-Bonin-Mariana boninites, in Larter, R.D.,
ites rarely consider this complication. Beccaluva, L., Coltori, M., Giunta, G., and Siena, F., 2004, and Leat, P.T., eds., Intra-Oceanic Subduction Systems:
Another point worth emphasizing is that Tethyan vs. Cordilleran ophiolites: A reappraisal of dis- Tectonic and Magmatic Processes: Geological Society
tinctive tectono-magmatic features of supra-subduction of London Special Publication 219, p. 163–185.
there may be a wide range of subduction ini- complexes in relation to the subduction mode: Tectono- Dewey, J.F., 1976, Ophiolite obduction: Tectonophysics,
tiation magmatic products. Our models now physics, v. 393, p. 163–174, doi:10.1016/j.tecto.2004.07.034. v. 31, p. 93–120, doi:10.1016/0040-1951(76)90169-4.
are heavily biased toward the Izu-Bonin-Mar- Beccaluva, L., Coltorti, M., Saccani, E., and Siena, F., 2005, Dick, H.J.B., and Bullen, T., 1984, Chromian spinel as a pet-
Magma generation and crustal accretion as evidenced rogenetic indicator in abyssal and Alpine-type perido-
iana convergent margin, which has abundant by supra-subduction ophiolites of the Albanide- tites and spatially associated lavas: Contributions to
boninitic lavas and serpentinite mud volcanoes. Hellenide Subpelagonian zone: The Island Arc, v. 14, Mineralogy and Petrology, v. 86, p. 54–76, doi:10.1007
p. 551–563, doi:10.1111/j.1440-1738.2005.00483.x. /BF00373711.
The Izu-Bonin-Mariana forearc may serve as
Bédard, J.H., Lauzière, K., Tremblay, A., and Sangster, A., Dickinson, W.R., 2001, Ch. 16: The coming of plate tectonics
a useful example of intra-oceanic subduction 1998, Evidence from Betts Cove ophiolite boninites to the Pacific Rim, in Oreskes, N., ed., Plate Tectonics:
initiation, but it could be less useful as a model for forearc seafloor-spreading: Tectonophysics, v. 284, An Insider’s History of the Modern Theory of the Earth:
p. 233–245, doi:10.1016/S0040-1951(97)00182-0. Boulder, Colorado, Westview Press, p. 264–287.
for continental margin subduction initiation. Bloomer, S.H., 1983, Distribution and origin of igneous rocks Dickinson, W.R., 2004, Evolution of the North American
Subcontinental mantle lithosphere is compo- from the landward slopes of the Mariana Trench: Jour- Cordillera: Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sci-
sitionally distinct from that beneath the ocean nal of Geophysical Research, v. 88, no. B9, p. 7411–7428, ences, v. 32, p. 13–45, doi:10.1146/annurev.earth.32
doi:10.1029/JB088iB09p07411. .101802.120257.
basins (Bonatti and Michael, 1989), and conti- Bloomer, S.H., and Fisher, R.L., 1987, Petrology and geo- Dickinson, W.R., and Sealey, D.R., 1979, Structure and stra-
nental and oceanic mantle may melt to different chemistry of igneous rocks from the Tonga Trench—A tigraphy of forearc regions: The American Association
extents during subduction initiation. Because non-accreting plate boundary: The Journal of Geology, of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, v. 63, p. 2–31.
v. 95, p. 469–495, doi:10.1086/629144. Dilek, Y., 2003, Ophiolite concept and its evolution, in Dilek,
there are likely to be significant differences in Bloomer, S.H., Ewart, W., Hergt, J.M., and Bryant, W.T., 1994, Y., and Newcomb, S., eds., Ophiolite Concept and the
magmatic products from that shown by Izu- Geochemistry of igneous rocks from ODP Site 841, Evolution of Geological Thought: Geological Society of
Tonga forearc, in Hawkins, J.W., Parsons, L., Allan, America Special Paper 373, p. 1–16.
Bonin-Mariana and ophiolites, we should keep
J., et al., Proceedings of the Ocean Drilling Program, Dilek, Y., and Furnes, H., 2009, Structure and geochemis-
an open mind when considering the origin of Scientific Results Volume 135: College Station, Texas, try of Tethyan ophiolites and their petrogenesis in
any magmatic forearc built about the time that Ocean Drilling Program, p. 625–646. subduction rollback systems: Lithos, v. 113, p. 1–20,
Bloomer, S.H., Taylor, B., MacLeod, C.J., Stern, R.J., Fryer, doi:10.1016/j.lithos.2009.04.022.
subduction began at a given convergent mar- P., Hawkins, J.W., and Johnson, L., 1995, Early arc Dilek,Y., Furnes, H., and Shallo, M., 2008, Geochemistry of the
gin. The Siletzia terrane of coastal Oregon and volcanism and the ophiolite problem: A perspective Jurassic Mirdita ophiolite (Albania) and the MORB to
Washington (Duncan, 1982) could be an exam- from drilling in the western Pacific, in Taylor, B., and SSZ evolution of a marginal basin oceanic crust: Lithos,
Natland, J., eds., Active Margins and Marginal Basins v. 100, p. 174–209, doi:10.1016/j.lithos.2007.06.026.
ple of continental margin subduction initiation of the Western Pacific: American Geophysical Union Duncan, R.A., 1982, A captured island chain in the Coast
where the magmatic sequence is somewhat dif- Geophysical Monograph 88, p. 1–30. Range of Oregon and Washington: Journal of Geophysi-

STERN ET AL.
cal Research, v. 87, no. B13, p. 10,827–10,837, doi:10.1029 Ishizuka, O., Kimura, J.-I., Li, Y.B., Stern, R.J., Reagan, M., Tay- Minyuk, P.S., and Stone, D.B., 2009, Paleomagnetic deter-
/JB087iB13p10827. lor, R.N., Ohara, Y., Bloomer, S.H., Ishii, T., Hargrove, U.S., mination of paleolatitude and rotation of Bering Island
Duncan, R.A., Vallier, T.L., and Falvey, D.A., 1985, Volcanic III, and Haraguchi, S., 2006, Early stages in the evolution (Komandorsky Islands) Russia: Comparison with rota-
episodes at ‘Eua, Tonga islands, in Scholl, D.W., and of Izu-Bonin arc volcanism: New age, chemical, and iso- tions in the Aleutian Islands and Kamchatka: European
Vallier, T.L., eds., Geology and Offshore Resources topic constraints: Earth and Planetary Science Letters, Geophysical Union Stephan Mueller Special Publica-
of the Pacific Island Arcs–Tonga Region: Houston, v. 250, p. 385–401, doi:10.1016/j.epsl.2006.08.007. tion Series, v. 4, p. 329–348, doi:10.5194/smsps-4-329
Texas, Circum-Pacific Council for Energy and Mineral Ishizuka, O., Tani, K., Reagan, M.K., Kanayama, K., Umino, -2009.
Resources, and American Association of Petroleum S., Harigane, Y., Sakamoto, I., Miyajima, Y., Yuasa, M., Miyashiro, A., 1973, The Troodos ophiolitic complex was
Geologists, Earth Science Series, v. 2, p. 281–290. and Dunkley, D.J., 2011, The timescales of subduction probably formed in an island arc: Earth and Planetary
Ewart, A., and Bryan, W.B., 1972, Petrography and geochemis- initiation and subsequent evolution of an oceanic Science Letters, v. 19, p. 218–224, doi:10.1016/0012-821X
try of the igneous rocks from E’ua, Tongan Islands: Geo- island arc: Earth and Planetary Science Letters, v. 306, (73)90118-0.
logical Society of America Bulletin, v. 83, p. 3281–3298, p. 229–240, doi:10.1016/j.epsl.2011.04.006. Miyashiro, A., 1974, Volcanic rock series in island arcs and
doi:10.1130/0016-7606(1972)83[3281:PAGOTI]2.0.CO;2. Jicha, B.R., Scholl, D.W., Singer, B.S., Yogodzhinsky, G.M., active continental margins: American Journal of Sci-
Falloon, T.J., and Danyushevsky, L.V., 2000, Melting of refrac- and Kay, S.M., 2006, Revised age of Aleutian Island ence, v. 274, p. 321–355, doi:10.2475/ajs.274.4.321.
tory mantle at 1.5, 2 and 2.5 GPa under anhydrous and arc formation implies high rate of magma production: Moghadam, H.S., and Stern, R.J., 2011, Geodynamic evolu-
H2O-undersaturated conditions: Implications for the Geology, v. 34, p. 661–664, doi:10.1130/G22433.1. tion of late Cretaceous Zagros ophiolites: Formation of
petrogenesis of high-Ca boninites and the influence of Kamimura, A., Kasahara, J., Shinohara, M., Hino, R., Shio- oceanic lithosphere above a nascent subduction zone:
subduction components on mantle melting: Journal bara, H., Fujie, G., and Kanazawa, T., 2002, Crustal Geological Magazine, v. 148, p. 762–801, doi:10.1017
of Petrology, v. 41, p. 257–283, doi:10.1093/petrology structure study at the Izu-Bonin subduction zone /S0016756811000410.
/41.2.257. around 31°N: Implications of serpentinized materi- Morishita, T., Tani, K., Shukono, H., Harigane, Y., Tamura, A.,
Falloon, T.J., Green, D.H., and Crawford, A., 1987, Dredged als along the subduction plate boundary: Physics of Kumagai, H., and Hellebrand, E., 2011, Diversity of
igneous rocks from the northern termination of the the Earth and Planetary Interiors, v. 132, p. 105–129, melt conduits in the Izu-Bonin-Mariana forearc mantle:
Tofua magmatic arc, Tonga and adjacent Lau Basin: doi:10.1016/S0031-9201(02)00047-X. Implications for the earliest stage of arc magmatism:
Australian Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 34, p. 487–506, Kimura, J.-I., Stern, R.J., and Yoshida, T., 2005, Re-initiation Geology, v. 39, p. 411–414, doi:10.1130/G31706.1.
doi:10.1080/08120098708729428. of subduction and magmatic responses in SW Japan Nakamura, N., 1974, Determination of REE, Ba, Fe, Mg,
Fisher, R.L., and Engel, C.G., 1969, Ultramafic and basaltic during Neogene time: Geological Society of America Na and K in carbonaceous and ordinary meteorites:
rocks dredged from the nearshore flank of the Tonga Bulletin, v. 117, p. 969–986, doi:10.1130/B25565.1. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, v. 38, p. 757–775,
Trench: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 80, Kopp, H., and Kukowski, N., 2003, Backstop geometry and doi:10.1016/0016-7037(74)90149-5.
p. 1373–1378, doi:10.1130/0016-7606(1969)80[1373:UAB accretionary mechanics of the Sunda margin: Tecton- Niu, Y., O’Hara, M.J., and Pearce, J.A., 2003, Initiation of
RDF]2.0.CO;2. ics, v. 22, no. 6, p. 1072, doi:10.1029/2002TC001420. subduction zones as a consequence of lateral com-
Flower, M.F.J., and Levine, H.M., 1987, Petrogenesis of a Lagabrielle, Y., Sizun, J.-P., and Arculus, R.J., 1992, The con- positional buoyancy contrast within the lithosphere,
tholeiite-boninite sequence from Ayios Mamas, Troo- structional and deformational history of the igneous a petrological perspective: Journal of Petrology, v. 44,
dos ophiolite: Evidence for splitting of a volcanic arc?: basement penetrated at Site 786, in Fryer, P., Pearce, p. 851–866, doi:10.1093/petrology/44.5.851.
Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology, v. 97, J.A., Stokking, L.B., et al., Proceedings of the Ocean Oakley, A.J., Taylor, B., and Moore, G.F., 2008, Pacific plate
p. 509–524, doi:10.1007/BF00375328. Drilling Program, Scientific Results, Volume 125: Col- subduction beneath the central Mariana and Izu-Bonin
Flower, M.F.J., Russo, R.M., Tamaki, K., and Hoang, N., 2001, lege Station, Texas, Ocean Drilling Program, p. 263–276. forearcs: New insights from an old margin: Geochem-
Mantle contamination and the Izu-Bonin-Mariana LeBas, M.J., and Streckeisen, A.L., 1991, The IUGS sys- istry Geophysics Geosystems, v. 9, no. 6, Q06003,
(IBM) ‘high-tide mark’: Evidence for mantle extrusion tematics of igneous rocks: Journal of the Geological doi:10.1029/2007GC001820.
by Tethyan closure: Tectonophysics, v. 333, p. 9–34, Society of London, v. 148, p. 825–833, doi:10.1144 Ohara, Y., and Ishii, T., 1998, Peridotites from southern Mari-
doi:10.1016/S0040-1951(00)00264-X. /gsjgs.148.5.0825. ana forearc: Heterogeneous fluid supply in mantle
Fryer, P., 2002, Recent studies of serpentinite occurrences LeBrun, J.-F., Lamarche, G., and Collot, J.-Y., 2003, Subduc- wedge: The Island Arc, v. 7, p. 541–552.
in the oceans: Mantle-ocean interactions in the plate tion initiation at a strike-slip boundary: The Cenozoic Ohara, Y., Stern, R.J., Ishii, T., Yurimoto, H., and Yamazaki, T.,
tectonic cycle: Chemie der Erde, v. 62, p. 257–302, Pacific-Australian plate boundary, south of New Zea- 2002, Peridotites from the Mariana Trough: First look
doi:10.1078/0009-2819-00020. land: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 108, no. B9, at the mantle beneath an active back-arc basin: Con-
Fryer, P., Mottl, M., Johnson, L., Haggerty, J., Phipps, S., and 2453, doi:10.1029/2002JB002041. tributions to Mineralogy and Petrology, v. 143, p. 1–18,
Maekawa, H., 1995, Serpentine bodies in the forearcs of Lyubetskaya, T., and Korenaga, J., 2007, Chemical com- doi:10.1007/s00410-001-0329-2.
western Pacific convergent margins: Origin and asso- position of Earth’s primitive mantle and its variance: Okamura, H., Sarai, S., and Kim, Y.U., 2006, Petrology of
ciated fluids, in Taylor, B., and Natland, J., eds., Active 1. Methods and results: Journal of Geophysical forearc peridotite from the Hahajima Seamount, the
Margins and Marginal Basins of the Western Pacific: Research, v. 112, B03211, doi:1029/2005JB004223. Izu-Bonin arc, with special reference to chemical char-
American Geophysical Union Geophysical Monograph Macpherson, C.G., and Hall, R., 2001, Tectonic setting of acteristics of chromian spinel: Mineralogical Maga-
88, p. 259–279. Eocene boninite magmatism in the Izu-Bonin-Mariana zine, v. 70, p. 15–26, doi:10.1180/0026461067010310.
Gill, J.B., 1981, Orogenic Andesites and Plate Tectonics: New forearc: Earth and Planetary Science Letters, v. 186, Pagé, P., Bédard, J.H., and Tremblay, A., 2009, Geochemical
York, Springer-Verlag, 390 p. p. 215–230, doi:10.1016/S0012-821X(01)00248-5. variations in a depleted fore-arc mantle: The Ordovi-
Glodny, J., Lohrmnann, J., Echtler, H., Gräfe, K., Seifert, W., Mann, P., and Taira, A., 2004, Global tectonic significance cian Thetford Mines ophiolite: Lithos, v. 113, p. 21–47,
Collao, S., and Figueroa, O., 2005, Internal dynamics of the Solomon Islands and Ontong Java Plateau doi:10.1016/j.lithos.2009.03.030.
of a paleoaccretionary wedge: Insights from combined convergent zone: Tectonophysics, v. 389, p. 137–190, Parkinson, I.J., and Pearce, J.A., 1998, Peridotites from the
isotope tectonochronology and sandbox modeling of doi:10.1016/j.tecto.2003.10.024. Izu-Bonin-Mariana forearc (ODP Leg 125): Evidence
the south-central Chilean forearc: Earth and Planetary McDougall, I., 1994, Dating of rhyolitic glass in the Tonga for mantle melting interaction in a supra-subduction
Science Letters, v. 231, p. 23–39, doi:10.1016/j.epsl forearc (Hole 841B), in Hawkins, J.W., Parsons, L., and zone setting: Journal of Petrology, v. 39, p. 1577–1618,
.2004.12.014. Allan, J., et al., Proceedings of the Ocean Drilling Proj- doi:10.1093/petrology/39.9.1577.
Godard, M., Dautria, J.-M., and Perrin, M., 2003, Geochemi- ect, Scientific Results Leg 135: College Station, Texas, Pearce, J.A., 2003, Supra-subduction zone ophiolites: The
cal variability of the Oman ophiolite lavas: Relation- Ocean Drilling Program, p. 923–924. search for modern analogues, in Dilek, Y., and New-
ship with spatial distribution and paleomagnetic direc- Metcalf, R.V., and Shervais, J.W., 2008, Supra-subduction comb, S., eds., Ophiolite Concept and the Evolution
tions: Geochemistry Geophysics Geosystems, v. 4, zone ophiolites: Is there really an ophiolite conun- of Geological Thought: Geological Society of America
no. 6, 8609, doi:10.1029/2002GC000452. drum?, in Wright, J.E., and Shervais, J.W., eds., Ophio- Special Paper 373, p. 269–293.
Green, D.H., and Falloon, T.J., 1998, Pyrolite: A Ringwood lites, Arcs, and Batholiths: Geological Society of Amer- Pearce, J.A., 2008, Geochemical fingerprinting of oceanic
concept and its current expression, in Jackson, I., ed., ica Special Paper 438, p. 191–222. basalts with applications to ophiolite classification and
The Earth’s Mantle: New York, Cambridge University Michibayashi, K., Tasaka, M., Ohara, Y., Ishii, T., Okamoto, A., the search for Archean oceanic crust: Lithos, v. 100,
Press, p. 311–378. and Fryer, P., 2007, Variable microstructure of peridotite p. 14–48, doi:10.1016/j.lithos.2007.06.016.
Hall, C.E., Gurnis, M., Sdrolias, M., Lavier, L.L., and Mül- samples from the southern Mariana Trench: Evidence Pearce, J.A., and Parkinson, I.J., 1993, Trace element models
ler, R.D., 2003, Catastrophic initiation of subduction of a complex tectonic evolution: Tectonophysics, for mantle melting: Application to volcanic arc petro-
following forced convergence across fracture zones: v. 444, p. 111–118, doi:10.1016/j.tecto.2007.08.010. genesis, in Prichard, H.M., Alabaster, T., Harris, N.B.,
Earth and Planetary Science Letters, v. 212, p. 15–30, Michibayashi, K., Ohara, Y., Stern, R.J., Fryer, P., Kimura, J.-I., and Neary, C.R., eds., Magmatic Processes and Plate
doi:10.1016/S0012-821X(03)00242-5. Tasaka, M., Harigane, Y., and Ishii, T., 2009, Peridotites Tectonics: The Geological Society of London Special
Hilde, T.W.C., 1983, Sediment subduction versus accretion derived from a ductile shear zone within backarc litho- Publication 76, p. 373–403.
around the Pacific: Tectonophysics, v. 99, p. 381–397, spheric mantle, southern Mariana Trench: Results of Pearce, J.A., Lippard, S.J., and Roberts, S., 1984, Character-
doi:10.1016/0040-1951(83)90114-2. a Shinkai 6500 dive: Geophysics Geochemistry Geo- istics and tectonic significance of supra-subduction
Humphreys, E., 2008, Cenozoic slab windows beneath the systems, v. 10, doi:10.1029/2008GC002197. zone ophiolites, in Kokelaar, B.P., and Howells, M.F.,
western United States, in Circum-Pacific Tectonics, Geo- Milson, J., 2003, Forearc ophiolites: A view from the west- eds., Marginal Basin Geology: Volcanic and Associated
logic Evolution, and Ore Deposits Symposium—Pro- ern Pacific, in Dilek, Y., and Robinson, P.T., eds., Ophiol- Sedimentary and Tectonic Processes in Modern and
ceedings Volume: Arizona Geological Society Digest, ites in Earth History: The Geological Society of London Ancient Marginal Basins: Geological Society of Lon-
p. 389–398. Special Publications 218, p. 507–515. don Special Publication 16, p. 77–94.

Pearce, J.A., Vander Laan, S.R., Arculus, R.J., Murton, B.J., struction, in Hatcher, R.D., Jr., Carlson, M.P., McBride, gin, southwest New Zealand: New Zealand Journal of
Ishii, T., Peate, D.W., and Parkinson, I.J., 1992, Boninite J.H., and Martínez Catalán, J.R., eds., 4-D Framework Geology and Geophysics, v. 49, p. 131–149.
and harzburgite from Leg 125 (Bonin-Mariana forearc): of Continental Crust: Geological Society of America Tappin, D.R., and Balance, P.F., 1994, Contributions to the
A case study of magma genesis during the initial Memoir 200, p. 9–32. sedimentary geology of ‘Eua Island, Kingdom of
stages of subduction, in Fryer, P., et al., Proceeding Scholl, D.W., and von Huene, R., 2009, Implications of esti- Tonga: Reworking in an oceanic forearc, in Stevenson,
of the Ocean Drilling Program, Scientific Results, Site mated magmatic additions and recycling losses at A.J., Herzer, R.H., and Balance, P.F., eds., Geology and
778–786, Bonin-Mariana Region: College Station, the subduction zones of accretionary (non-collisional) Submarine Resources of the Tonga–Lau–Fiji Region:
Texas, Ocean Drilling Program, p. 623–659. and collisional (suturing) orogens, in Cawood, P., and South Pacific Applied Geoscience Commission
Pearce, J.A., Barker, P.F., Edwards, S.J., Parkinson, I.J., Kröner, A., eds., Accretionary Orogens in Space and (SOPAC), Suva, Technical Bulletin 8, p. 1–20.
and Leat, P.T., 2000, Geochemistry and tectonic sig- Time: The Geological Society of London Special Publi- Taylor, B., and Goodliffe, A.M., 2004, The West Philip-
nificance of peridotites from the South Sandwich cation 318, p. 105–125. pine Basin and the initiation of subduction, revis-
arc-basin system, South Atlantic: Contributions to Schroetter, J.-M., Pagé, P., Bédard, J.H., Tremblay, A., and ited: Geophysical Research Letters, v. 31, doi:10.1029
Mineralogy and Petrology, v. 139, p. 36–53, doi:10.1007 Bécu, V., 2003, Forearc extension and seafloor spread- /2004GL020136.
/s004100050572. ing in the Thetford Mines ophiolite complex, in Dilek, Taylor, R.N., Nesbitt, R.W., Vidal, P., Harmon, R.S., Auvray,
Peate, D., and Pearce, J., 1998, Causes of spatial composi- Y., and Robinson, P.T., eds., Ophiolites in Earth History: B., and Croudace, I.W., 1994, Mineralogy, chemistry,
tional variations in Mariana arc lavas: Trace element Geological Society of London Special Publication 218, and genesis of the Boninite series volcanics, Chichi-
evidence: The Island Arc, v. 7, p. 479–495. p. 231–251. jima, Bonin Islands, Japan: Journal of Petrology, v. 35,
Plank, T., and Langmuir, C.H., 1992, Effects of the melting Sharp, W.D., and Clague, D.A., 2006, 50-Ma initiation of p. 577–617, doi:10.1093/petrology/35.3.577.
regime on the composition of the oceanic crust: Jour- Hawaiian-Emperor Bend records major change in Teklay, M., 2006, Neoproterozoic arc–back-arc system ana-
nal of Geophysical Research, v. 97, no. B13, p. 19,749– Pacific plate motion: Science, v. 313, p. 1281–1284, log to modern arc–back-arc systems: Evidence from
19,770, doi:10.1029/92JB01769. doi:10.1126/science.1128489. tholeiite-boninite association, serpentinite mudflows
Pyle, D.G., Duncan, R., Wells, R.E., Graham, D.W., Harrison, Shervais, J.W., 2001, Birth, death, and resurrection: The life and across-arc geochemical trends in Eritrea, southern
B., and Hanan, B., 2009, Siletzia: An oceanic large igne- cycle of suprasubduction zone ophiolites: Geochem- Arabian-Nubian Shield: Precambrian Research, v. 145,
ous province in the Pacific Northwest: Geological Soci- istry Geophysics Geosystems v. 2, no. 1, doi:10.1029 p. 81–92, doi:10.1016/j.precamres.2005.11.015.
ety of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 41, no. 7, /2000GC000080. Varne, R., Brown, A.V., and Falloon, T., 2000, Macquarie
p. 369. Stein, C., 2003, Heat flow and flexure at subduction zones: Island; its geology, structural history, and the timing
Reagan, M.K., Ishizuka, O., Stern, R.J., Kelley, K.A., Ohara, Geophysical Research Letters, v. 30, doi:10.1029 and tectonic setting of its N-MORB to E-MORB mag-
Y., Blichert-Toft, J., Bloomer, S.H., Cash, J., Fryer, P., /2003GL018478. matism, in Dilek, Y., et al., eds., Ophiolites and Oceanic
Hanan, B.B., Hickey-Vargas, R., Ishii, T., Kimura, J.I., Stern, R.J., 2002, Subduction zones: Reviews of Geophys- Crust, New Insights from Field Studies and the Ocean
Peate, D.W., Rowe, M.C., and Woods, M., 2010, Fore- ics, v. 40, doi:10.1029/2001RG000108. Drilling Program: Geological Society of America Spe-
arc basalts and subduction initiation in the Izu-Bonin- Stern, R.J., 2004, Subduction initiation: Spontaneous and cial Paper 349, p. 301–320.
Mariana system: Geochemistry Geophysics Geosys- induced: Earth and Planetary Science Letters, v. 226, Wakabayashi, J., and Dilek, Y., 2003, What constitutes
tems, v. 11, Q03X12, doi:10.1029/2009GC002871. p. 275–292. ‘emplacement’ of an ophiolite?: Mechanisms and rela-
Redfield, T.F., Scholl, D.W., Fitzgerald, P.G., and Beck, M.E., Stern, R.J., 2005, Evidence from ophiolites, blueschists, tionship to subduction initiation and formation of met-
Jr., 2007, Escape tectonics and the extrusion of Alaska: and ultrahigh-pressure metamorphic terranes that amorphic soles, in Dilek, Y., and Robinson, P.T., eds.,
Past, present, and future: Geology, v. 35, p. 1039–1042, the modern episode of subduction tectonics began Ophiolites in Earth History: Geological Society of Lon-
doi:10.1130/G23799A.1. in Neoproterozoic time: Geology, v. 33, p. 557–560, don Special Publications 218, p. 427–447, doi:10.1144
Saccani, E., and Photiades, A., 2004, Mid-ocean ridge doi:10.1130/G21365.1. /GSL.SP.2003.218.01.22.
and supra-subduction affinities in the Pindos Massif Stern, R.J., and Bloomer, S.H., 1992, Subduction zone Whattam, S.A., and Stern, R.J., 2011, The ‘subduction-initi-
ophiolites (Greece): Implications for magma genesis infancy: Examples from the Eocene Izu-Bonin-Mariana ation rule’: A key for linking ophiolites, intra-oceanic
in a proto-forearc setting: Lithos, v. 73, p. 229–253, and Jurassic California arcs: Geological Society of forearcs and subduction initiation: Contributions
doi:10.1016/j.lithos.2003.12.002. America Bulletin, v. 104, p. 1621–1636, doi:10.1130/0016- to Mineralogy and Petrology, v. 162, p. 1031–1045,
Scholl, D.W., 2007, Viewing the tectonic evolution of the 7606(1992)104<1621:SZIEFT>2.3.CO;2. doi:10.1007/s00410-011-0638-z.
Kamchatka-Aleutian (KAT) connection with an Alaska Stern, R.J., Morris, J., Bloomer, S.H., and Hawkins, J.W., Whittaker, J.M., Müller, R.D., Leitchenkov, G., Stagg, H.,
crustal extrusion perspective, in Eichelberger, J., Gor- Jr., 1991, The source of metasomatic fluids and the Sdrolias, M., Gaina, C., and Goncharov, A., 2007, Major
deev, E., Izbekov, P., Kasahara, M., and Lees, J., eds., generation of arc melts: Trace element and radiogenic Australian-Antarctic plate reorganization at Hawaiian-
Volcanism and Subduction: The Kamchatka Region: isotope evidence from Eocene boninites, Mariana Emperor Bend time: Science, v. 318, p. 83–86, doi:10.1126
American Geophysical Union Geophysical Mono- forearc: Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, v. 55, /science.1143769.
graph 172, p. 3–35. p. 1467–1481, doi:10.1016/0016-7037(91)90321-U.
Scholl, D.W., and von Huene, R., 2007, Crustal recycling at Sutherland, R., Barnes, P., and Uruski, C., 2006, Miocene– MANUSCRIPT RECEIVED 29 SEPTEMBER 2011
modern subduction zones applied to the past—Issues Recent deformation, surface elevation, and volcanic REVISED MANUSCRIPT RECEIVED 28 MARCH 2012
of growth and preservation of continental basement intrusion of the overriding plate during subduction MANUSCRIPT ACCEPTED 11 APRIL 2012
crust, mantle geochemistry, and supercontinent recon- initiation, offshore southern Fiordland, Puysegur mar- Printed in the USA
View publication stats

To Understand Subduction Initiation, Study Forearc Crust: To Understand Forearc Crust, Study Ophiolites

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

To Understand Subduction Initiation, Study Forearc Crust: To Understand Forearc Crust, Study Ophiolites

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

To Understand Subduction Initiation, Study Forearc Crust: To Understand Forearc Crust, Study Ophiolites

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

To understand subduction initiation, study forearc crust: To understand

Article in Lithosphere · November 2012

Bob Stern Mark Reagan

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Osamu Ishizuka Yasuhiko Ohara

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Masters Thesis View project

Subduction Initiation and Tethyan Suturing-Zagros Orogenic Belt View project

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

To understand subduction initiation, study forearc crust:

LITHOSPHERE; v. 4; no. 6; p. 469–483 | Published online 16 May 2012 doi: 10.1130/L183.1

470 www.gsapubs.org | Volume 4 | Number 6 | LITHOSPHERE

LITHOSPHERE | Volume 4 | Number 6 | www.gsapubs.org 471

0° 60°E 120°E 180° 120°W 60°W Figure 3. Known locations of peri-

tine mud volcanoes, which are common in the

472 www.gsapubs.org | Volume 4 | Number 6 | LITHOSPHERE

der being orthopyroxene and an aluminous 10 90

Al2O3 (~3 and ~4 wt%, respectively for FMM;

LITHOSPHERE | Volume 4 | Number 6 | www.gsapubs.org 473

Age Approximate Mariana forearc, and we prefer to interpret this

of accessing and studying this material. Much

have studied the igneous rocks of other forearcs

. Basalt (FAB) 50–52

474 www.gsapubs.org | Volume 4 | Number 6 | LITHOSPHERE

LITHOSPHERE | Volume 4 | Number 6 | www.gsapubs.org 475

Volcanic front Inner forearc Outer forearc Trench

5.8 6.3 ~11 km near the volcanic front

to Tethys closure was a major cause of western

Pacific-Izanagi spreading ridge triggered a chain

476 www.gsapubs.org | Volume 4 | Number 6 | LITHOSPHERE

LITHOSPHERE | Volume 4 | Number 6 | www.gsapubs.org 477

subduction zone beginning in latest Oligocene Forearc Backarc basin

478 www.gsapubs.org | Volume 4 | Number 6 | LITHOSPHERE

LITHOSPHERE | Volume 4 | Number 6 | www.gsapubs.org 479

The four Tethyan ophiolites mentioned here

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

480 www.gsapubs.org | Volume 4 | Number 6 | LITHOSPHERE

LITHOSPHERE | Volume 4 | Number 6 | www.gsapubs.org 481

482 www.gsapubs.org | Volume 4 | Number 6 | LITHOSPHERE

LITHOSPHERE | Volume 4 | Number 6 | www.gsapubs.org 483

View publication stats

You might also like