GEMMA: An Earth crustal model based on GOCE satellite data

Reguzzoni, Mirko; Sampietro, Daniele

doi:10.1016/j.jag.2014.04.002

Cited by 137 publications

(151 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

143

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The total crustal thickness of each cell and its associated uncertainty correspond, respectively, to the mean and the half range of three crustal models obtained from different approaches: the global crustal model based on reflection and refraction data 'CRUST 2.0' (Bassin et al 2000;Laske et al 2001), the global shear velocity model of the crust and upper mantle 'CUB 2.0' (Shapiro and Ritzwoller 2002), and the high-resolution map of Moho (crust-mantle boundary) depth based on the gravity field data 'GEMMA' (Reguzzoni and Tselfes 2009;Reguzzoni and Sampietro 2015). The reference model incorporates the relative proportional thickness of the crustal layers along with density and elastic properties (compressional and shear wave velocity) reported in CRUST 2.0.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Expected geoneutrino signal at JUNO

Strati

Baldoncini

Callegari

et al. 2015

Prog. in Earth and Planet. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Constraints on the Earth's composition and on its radiogenic energy budget come from the detection of geoneutrinos. The Kamioka Liquid scintillator Antineutrino Detector (KamLAND) and Borexino experiments recently reported the geoneutrino flux, which reflects the amount and distribution of U and Th inside the Earth. The Jiangmen Underground Neutrino Observatory (JUNO) neutrino experiment, designed as a 20 kton liquid scintillator detector, will be built in an underground laboratory in South China about 53 km from the Yangjiang and Taishan nuclear power plants, each one having a planned thermal power of approximately 18 GW. Given the large detector mass and the intense reactor antineutrino flux, JUNO aims not only to collect high statistics antineutrino signals from reactors but also to address the challenge of discriminating the geoneutrino signal from the reactor background. The predicted geoneutrino signal at JUNO is 39:7 þ6:5 −5:2 terrestrial neutrino unit (TNU), based on the existing reference Earth model, with the dominant source of uncertainty coming from the modeling of the compositional variability in the local upper crust that surrounds (out to approximately 500 km) the detector. A special focus is dedicated to the 6°× 4°local crust surrounding the detector which is estimated to contribute for the 44% of the signal. On the basis of a worldwide reference model for reactor antineutrinos, the ratio between reactor antineutrino and geoneutrino signals in the geoneutrino energy window is estimated to be 0.7 considering reactors operating in year 2013 and reaches a value of 8.9 by adding the contribution of the future nuclear power plants. In order to extract useful information about the mantle's composition, a refinement of the abundance and distribution of U and Th in the local crust is required, with particular attention to the geochemical characterization of the accessible upper crust where 47% of the expected geoneutrino signal originates and this region contributes the major source of uncertainty.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Expected geoneutrino signal at JUNO

Strati

Baldoncini

Callegari

et al. 2015

Prog. in Earth and Planet. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We further computed the Moho depth and density contrast within the study area on a 1 × 1 arcdeg spherical grid by solving the system of condition equations in Equation (22). This solution combines the parameters W estimated from the vertical gravity gradients, the combined topographic- …”

Section: Combined Solution For the Moho Parametersmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We further computed the Moho depth and density contrast within the study area on a 1ˆ1 arc-deg spherical grid by solving the system of condition equations in Equation (22). This solution combines the parameters W estimated from the vertical gravity gradients, the combined topographic-bathymetric gravitational contribution computed from the SRTM30 data, the gravitational contribution of sediments estimated using the CRUST1.0 sediment data and the CRUST1.0 Moho parameters T 0 and ∆ρ 0 .…”

Section: Combined Solution For the Moho Parametersmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[22] took into consideration the lateral as well as radial density variation within the crystalline crustal layers and simultaneously adjusted all the densities and estimated the Moho depth. A method for a simultaneous determination of the Moho depth and density contrast developed by [23] was based on solving the Vening Meinesz-Moritz's (VMM) inverse problem of isostasy [24][25][26][27].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Moho Density Contrast in Central Eurasia from GOCE Gravity Gradients

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Seismic data are primarily used in studies of the Earth's inner structure. Since large parts of the world are not yet sufficiently covered by seismic surveys, products from the Earth's satellite observation systems have more often been used for this purpose in recent years. In this study we use the gravity-gradient data derived from the Gravity field and steady-state Ocean Circulation Explorer (GOCE), the elevation data from the Shuttle Radar Topography Mission (SRTM) and other global datasets to determine the Moho density contrast at the study area which comprises most of the Eurasian plate (including parts of surrounding continental and oceanic tectonic plates). A regional Moho recovery is realized by solving the Vening Meinesz-Moritz's (VMM) inverse problem of isostasy and a seismic crustal model is applied to constrain the gravimetric solution. Our results reveal that the Moho density contrast reaches minima along the mid-oceanic rift zones and maxima under the continental crust. This spatial pattern closely agrees with that seen in the CRUST1.0 seismic crustal model as well as in the KTH1.0 gravimetric-seismic Moho model. However, these results differ considerably from some previously published gravimetric studies. In particular, we demonstrate that there is no significant spatial correlation between the Moho density contrast and Moho deepening under major orogens of Himalaya and Tibet. In fact, the Moho density contrast under most of the continental crustal structure is typically much more uniform.

show abstract

“…The Moho depth was derived taking the density contrast (between mantle and crust) as a constant being equal to 0.630 kg/m 3 (a homogeneous crust of density 2.67 kg/m 3 and a homogeneous mantle of density 3.27 kg/m 3 ) (Reguzzoni and Sampietro, 2015). The spatial resolution of the crustal models is 0.5° × 0.5°.…”

Section: Global Crustal Models: Gemma and Crust 10mentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysis of Isostatically-Balanced Cortical Models Using Modern Global Geopotential Models

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The knowledge of the Earth's gravity field and its temporal variations is the main goal of the dedicated gravity field missions CHAMP, GRACE and GOCE. Since then, several global geopotential models (GGMs) have been released. This paper uses geoid heights derived from global geopotential models to analyze the cortical features of the Tandilia structure which is assumed to be in isostatic equilibrium. The geoid heights are suitably filtered so that the structure becomes apparent as a residual geoid height. Assuming that the geological structure is in isostatic equilibrium, the residual geoid height can be assimilated and compared to the isostatic geoid height generated from an isostatically compensated crust. The residual geoid height was obtained from the EGM2008 and the EIGEN-6C4 global geopotential models, respectively. The isostatic geoid was computed using the cortical parameters from the global crustal models GEMMA and CRUST 1.0 and from local parameters determined in the area under study. The obtained results make it clear that the isostatic geoid height might become appropriate to validate crustal models if the structures analyzed show evidence of being in isostatic equilibrium.Keywords: Geopotential models, crustal models, isostatic geoid, EGM2008, EIGEN-6C4, GEMMA, CRUST1.0 Resumo:O conhecimento do campo de gravidade da Terra e suas variações temporais é o objetivo principal das missões de campo de gravidade dedicadas CHAMP, GRACE e GOCE. Desde então, vários modelos geopotenciais globais (GGMs) foram lançados. Este artigo usa os níveis de geoide derivados de modelos geopotenciais globais para analisar as características corticais da estrutura de Tandilia, que se supõe estar no equilíbrio isostático. As alturas do geoide são adequadamente filtradas para que a estrutura se torne aparente como uma altura residual de geoide. Supondo que a estrutura geológica esteja em equilíbrio isostático, a altura residual do geoide pode ser assimilada e comparada com a altura do geoostato isostático gerada a partir de uma crosta compensada isostática. A altura residual de geoide foi obtida a partir dos modelos geopotenciais globais EGM2008 e EIGEN-6C4, respectivamente. O geóide isostático foi calculado utilizando os parâmetros corticais dos modelos crustais globais GEMMA e CRUST 1.0 e dos parâmetros locais determinados na área estudada. Os resultados obtidos deixam claro que a altura do geoide isostático pode se tornar apropriada para validar modelos crustais se as estruturas analisadas mostrarem evidências de estar em equilíbrio isostático. Palavras-chave:Modelos geopotenciais, modelos crustais, geoide isostático, EGM2008, EIGEN-6C4, GEMMA, CRUST1.0.

show abstract

GEMMA: An Earth crustal model based on GOCE satellite data

Cited by 137 publications

References 22 publications

Expected geoneutrino signal at JUNO

Expected geoneutrino signal at JUNO

Moho Density Contrast in Central Eurasia from GOCE Gravity Gradients

Analysis of Isostatically-Balanced Cortical Models Using Modern Global Geopotential Models

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About