Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-8r8nv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-10T13:01:20.596Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Isostatic postglacial rebound over Fennoscandia with a self-gravitating spherical visco-elastic Earth model

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

E. Le Meur*
Affiliation:
Laboratoire de Glaciologie et Géophysique de l’Environnement, 38402 Saint-Martin-d’Hères Cedex, France
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Accounting for isostasy in glaciological models has always been a necessity but these models mostly use very simple parameterizations (Le Meur and Huybrechts, 1996). The need for more realistic isostatic parameterizations rapidly became apparent, especially in the treatment of bedrock-sensitive issues such as the grounding-line migration (Huybrechts, 1990a, b). To this end, a rather sophisticated Earth model, avoiding most of the common assumptions, has been developed and is presented here. The two key groups of parameters, to which the model is most sensitive, are the Earth properties and the rheological law used for the mantle. The aim of this paper is first to justify the use of Maxwell rheology for the mantle and then to tune the most sensitive Earth parameter, namely the mantle viscosity, in order to match the numerous present-day uplift data over Fennoscandia. So, in the first instance, a short review of the different available rheologies is presented and discussed. The visco-elastic theory, as well as the mathematical background used in the present model, is also briefly sketched. Secondly, a glacial scenario over Fennoscandia served as an input for the model in a calibration test on the mantle-viscosity values. The degree of agreement of the model outputs with the present-day measurements gives a reference set of Green functions, to which one can reasonably refer when modelling the isostatic response over areas where such a control is not possible (Le Meur and Huybrechts, 1996). Finally, a closer look to the time-dependent surface displacements will confirm the ability for the model to reproduce correctly the main postglacial rebound characteristic features.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © International Glaciological Society 1996
Figure 0

Fig. 1. The initial ice-loading configuration used in the present study for the Last Glacial Maximum 18 000 years ago. Contours are given every 250 m end the maximum thickness is 2640 m. Ice loading over Iceland is not considered. The white fringe represents the aerially exposed areas as a consequence of the sea-level lowering of 130 m for that time.

Figure 1

Fig. 2. The glacial scenario at 14 kye\zetaars BP. The corresponding sea-level drop is 106 m.

Figure 2

Fig. 3. The glacial scenario at 10 kyears BP. The corresponding sea-level drop is 27 m.

Figure 3

Fig. 4. The two different scenarios tested in the sensitivity to initial conditions in terms of total ice volume. For the loading-scenario B, the ice thicknesses before the LGM (left of the vertical dashed line) cue deduced from that for the LGM with a weighting factor between 0.6 and 1 to match the reconstruction from Baumann and others (1995).

Figure 4

Fig. 5. Deflection profiles along the transect for the initial condition test. A and B stand for the corresponding scenarios whereas −18, −8 and 0 stand for 18 kyears BP, 8 kyears BP and present, respectively.

Figure 5

Table 1. Viscosity values for the six first runs in Pa s. The top row gives the upper-mantle viscosity, whereas the left column gives the lower mantle one. One can notice that the lower mantle is always taken to be more viscous than the upper one except for run 4

Figure 6

Fig. 7. Map of a 4° by 8° smoothed free-air gravity anomaly in mgal over Fennoscandia (from Bailing, 1980). These values have to be lowered by about 10 mgal in order to provide relevant equivalent remaining displacements.

Figure 7

Fig. 6. Map of the present-day rate of uplift over Fennoscandia (from Bailing, 1980). The contours are in mm a−1 and refer to the mean sea level. Absolute vertical velocities are obtained in adding the present-day eustatic component (about 1 mm a−1) to these values. The southwest–northeast transect for the sensitivity test has been outlined.

Figure 8

Fig. 8. Modelled rates of uplift for runs 1 to 7 along the southwest—northeast transect. The expected maximum value of 10 mm a−1 value is outlined.

Figure 9

Fig. 9. Deviation from steady state at present in terms of surface displacements along the transect for runs 1 to 7. These distances can also be interpreted as the expected displacements to come in the future before the surface reaches the ice-free condition steady state (flat surface).

Figure 10

Fig. 10. Steady-state response of the reference model in terms of surface displacements in m for the LGM, 18 kyears ago. The consequences of the sea-level lowering (130 m) are depicted as on Figures 1–3.

Figure 11

Fig. 11. The same as Figure 10 but for 8 kyears BP and with a corresponding sea-level retreat of 7 m.

Figure 12

Fig. 12. Displacement pattern for the present day in m. These values can also be interpreted as the remaining displacements before the model recovers a steady state (flat surface), that is, in the present case, in about 23 000 rears, or in other words, 30 000 years after the last crystal of ice melted (memory effect).

Figure 13

Fig. 13. Map of the present-day rate of Uplift in mm a−1 for the reference run.

Figure 14

Fig. 14. Map of the free-air gravity anomaly in mgal for the reference run.