Éditeur(s) : HAL CCSD Elsevier
Résumé : International audience
Although subducting slabs undergo a bending deformation that resists tectonic plate motions, the magnitude of this resistance is not known because of poor constraints on slab strength. However, because slab bending slows the relatively rapid motions of oceanic plates, observed plate motions constrain the importance of bending. We estimated the slab pull force and the bending resistance globally for 207 subduction zone transects using new measurements of the bending curvature determined from slab seismicity. Predicting plate motions Using a global mantle flow model, we constrain the viscosity of the bending slab to be at most similar to 300 times more viscous than the upper mantle: stronger slabs are intolerably slowed by the bending deformation. Weaker slabs, however, cannot transmit a pull force sufficient to explain rapid trenchward plate motions unless slabs stretch faster than seismically observed rates of similar to 10(-15) s(-1). The constrained bending viscosity (similar to 2 x 10(23) Pa s) is larger than previous estimates that yielded similar or larger bending resistance (here similar to 25% of forces). This apparent discrepancy occurs because slabs bend more gently than previously thought, with an average radius of curvature of 390 km that permits subduction Of Strong slabs. This gentle bending may ultimately permit plate tectonics on Earth.
ISSN: 0012-821X

hal-00412383
https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00412383
DOI : 10.1016/j.epsl.2008.05.009

Éditeur(s) : HAL CCSD Landes Bioscience
Résumé : International audience
In 2008 we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, research on this topic has continued to accelerate, and many new scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Accordingly, it is important to update these guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Various reviews have described the range of assays that have been used for this purpose. Nevertheless, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to measure autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. A key point that needs to be emphasized is that there is a difference between measurements that monitor the numbers or volume of autophagic elements (e.g., autophagosomes or autolysosomes) at any stage of the autophagic process vs. those that measure flux through the autophagy pathway (i.e., the complete process); thus, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation needs to be differentiated from stimuli that result in increased autophagic activity, defined as increased autophagy induction coupled with increased delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (in most higher eukaryotes and some protists such as Dictyostelium) or the vacuole (in plants and fungi). In other words, it is especially important that investigators new to the field understand that the appearance of more autophagosomes does not necessarily equate with more autophagy. In fact, in many cases, autophagosomes accumulate because of a block in trafficking to lysosomes without a concomitant change in autophagosome biogenesis, whereas an increase in autolysosomes may reflect a reduction in degradative activity. Here, we present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of methods for use by investigators who aim to examine macroautophagy and related processes, as well as for reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a formulaic set of rules, because the appropriate assays depend in part on the question being asked and the system being used. In addition, we emphasize that no individual assay is guaranteed to be the most appropriate one in every situation, and we strongly recommend the use of multiple assays to monitor autophagy. In these guidelines, we consider these various methods of assessing autophagy and what information can, or cannot, be obtained from them. Finally, by discussing the merits and limits of particular autophagy assays, we hope to encourage technical innovation in the field.
Autophagy

hal-00735751
https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00735751
PUBMED : 22966490

Éditeur(s) : HAL CCSD American Geophysical Union
Résumé : International audience
Giant earthquake (moment magnitude M-w >= 8.5) forecasts for subduction zones have been empirically related to both tectonic stresses and geometrical irregularities along the subduction interface. Both of these controls have been suggested as able to tune the ability of rupture to propagate laterally and, in turn, exert an important control on giant earthquake generation. Here we test these hypotheses, and their combined influence, by compiling a dataset of trench fill thickness (a proxy for smoothing of subducting plate relief by sediment input into the subduction channel) and upper plate strain (a proxy for the tectonic stresses applied to the subduction interface) for 44 segments of the global subduction network. We statistically compare relationships between upper plate strain, trench sediment thickness and maximal earthquake magnitude. We find that the combination of both large trench fill (>= 1 km) and neutral upper plate strain explains spatial patterns of giant earthquake occurrence to a statistically significant degree. In fact, the concert of these two factors is more highly correlated with giant earthquake occurrence than either factor on its own. Less frequent giant earthquakes of lower magnitude are also possible at subduction zones with thinner trench fill and compressive upper plate strain. Extensional upper plate strain and trench fill < 0.5 km appear to be unfavorable conditions, as giant earthquakes have not been observed in these geodynamical environments during the last 111 years. Citation: Heuret, A., C. P. Conrad, F. Funiciello, S. Lallemand, and L. Sandri (2012), Relation between subduction megathrust earthquakes, trench sediment thickness and upper plate strain, Geophys. Res. Lett., 39, L05304, doi: 10.1029/2011GL050712.
ISSN: 0094-8276

hal-00745636
https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00745636
https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00745636/document
https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00745636/file/heuretGRL2012.pdf
DOI : 10.1029/2011GL050712