Comment on ‘Consequences of progressive eclogitization on crustal exhumation, a mechanical study’ by H. Raimbourg, L. Jolivet and Y. Leroy

Two simple end-member models of a subduction channel have been proposed in the literature: (i) the ‘pressure-imposed’ model for which the pressure within the channel is assumed to be lithostatic, the channel walls have negligible strength with respect to lateral pressure gradients, and the channel geometry therefore varies with time and (ii) the ‘geometry-imposed’ model of constant channel geometry, rigid walls and resultant lateral variation in pressure. Neither of these models is realistic, but they provide lower and upper bounds to potential pressure distributions in natural subduction zones. The critical parameter is the relative strength of the confining plates, reflected in the effective viscosity ratio between the channel fill and the walls. The assertion that the ‘geometry-imposed’ model is internally inconsistent is incorrect—it merely represents one bound to possible behaviour and a bound that may be approached for realistic values of the effective viscosity for weak channel fill (e.g. unconsolidated ocean-floor sediments) and relatively cold and strong subducting and overriding lithospheric plates.