Question

Difficulty: HardAssessing Model Support and Contradiction

### Origin of the Hawaiian-Emperor Bend

The Hawaiian-Emperor seamount chain is a long line of volcanic islands and seamounts in the Pacific Ocean. A prominent 60° bend in the chain separates the older Emperor Seamounts from the younger Hawaiian Ridge. Two models propose different explanations for this bend.

Model 1 (Stationary Plume Model)
The mantle plume (hotspot) that created the seamounts remains completely stationary relative to the deep mantle. The Pacific Plate moved northward prior to 47 million years ago, creating the Emperor Seamounts. Around 47 million years ago, a major change in plate tectonic forces caused a sudden, sharp change in the Pacific Plate's motion to the northwest, forming the Hawaiian Ridge. The bend is entirely due to this change in plate motion.

Model 2 (Drifting Plume Model)
The Pacific Plate has moved in a constant northwestward direction for the past 80 million years. Prior to 47 million years ago, the mantle plume itself was drifting rapidly southward due to mantle convection currents, while the Pacific Plate moved northwestward over it. This relative motion created the north-south oriented Emperor Seamounts. Around 47 million years ago, the southward drift of the mantle plume slowed down and stopped, leaving the plume stationary at 19N19^\circ\text{N}. Since then, only the constant northwestward plate motion has formed the seamounts, resulting in the bend.

Table 1 shows the paleomagnetic latitude (the latitude at which the rock cooled and solidified, indicating the position of the hotspot at the time of eruption) and age of several seamounts in the chain. The current latitude of the active Hawaiian hotspot is 19N19^\circ\text{N}.

SeamountAge (million years)Paleomagnetic Latitude (N^\circ\text{N})
Detroit (Emperor)8136
Suiko (Emperor)6532
Koko (Emperor)4922
Daikakuji (near the Bend)4719
Midway (Hawaiian)2819

Based on the models and the data in Table 1, which model is supported by the paleomagnetic latitude measurements of the seamounts?

  1. A
    Model 1 only, because the paleomagnetic latitude decreased from 81 million years ago to 47 million years ago, indicating that the plume was stationary.
  2. Model 2 only, because the paleomagnetic latitude decreased from 81 million years ago to 47 million years ago and remained constant after 47 million years ago, indicating that the plume drifted and then became stationary.Answer
  3. C
    Both Model 1 and Model 2, because the paleomagnetic latitude remained constant at 19N19^\circ\text{N} across all sampled seamounts, indicating that the plume never moved.
  4. D
    Neither Model 1 nor Model 2, because the paleomagnetic latitude increased from 81 million years ago to 47 million years ago, contradicting both models' predictions of southward plume movement.

Answer

Model 2 only, because the paleomagnetic latitude decreased from 81 million years ago to 47 million years ago and remained constant after 47 million years ago, indicating that the plume drifted and then became stationary.
The correct answer is the option stating that Model 2 only is supported. Model 2 proposes that before 47 million years ago, the mantle plume drifted southward, and after 47 million years ago, it became stationary at 19N19^\circ\text{N}. The data in Table 1 shows that from 81 million years ago to 47 million years ago, the paleomagnetic latitude decreased from 36N36^\circ\text{N} to 19N19^\circ\text{N} (southward drift). From 47 million years ago to 28 million years ago, it remained constant at 19N19^\circ\text{N} (stationary plume). This directly supports Model 2 and contradicts Model 1, which claims the plume was always stationary.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the claims of Model 1 and Model 2 regarding plume movement.
Model 1 predicts the plume was always stationary, meaning the paleomagnetic latitude of all erupted seamounts should be constant. Model 2 predicts the plume drifted southward (decreasing latitude) before 47 million years ago and remained stationary (constant latitude) after 47 million years ago.
Establishing the expectations of each model allows us to compare them directly to the experimental data.
2
Examine the data in Table 1 to identify the trend in paleomagnetic latitude over time.
Between 81 million years ago and 47 million years ago (Detroit, Suiko, Koko, Daikakuji), the paleomagnetic latitude decreased from 36N36^\circ\text{N} to 19N19^\circ\text{N}. After 47 million years ago (Daikakuji to Midway), the paleomagnetic latitude remained constant at 19N19^\circ\text{N}.
Translating the tabular data into a physical trend reveals the movement pattern of the eruption source over time.
3
Evaluate which model aligns with the observed data trend.
The observed trend of southward drift (decreasing latitude) followed by a stationary phase matches Model 2's prediction. The changing latitude before 47 million years ago directly contradicts Model 1's claim of a stationary plume.
Determining support or contradiction requires linking the empirical data trend to the specific mechanisms proposed by the models.

Key Concept

Assessing Model Support and Contradiction
Rate this question