2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.jag.2014.02.003
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Perturbing effects of sub-lithospheric mass anomalies in GOCE gravity gradient and other gravity data modelling: Application to the Atlantic-Mediterranean transition zone

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
29
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 30 publications
(29 citation statements)
references
References 56 publications
0
29
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This body, already imaged by Blanco and Spakman (1993) and Spakman and Wortel (2004), has been clearly mapped in the new teleseismic tomographic images obtained from the exploitation of the TopoIberia and PICASSO datasets (Bezada et al, 2013, 2014, Bonnin et al, 2014. Those images suggest that the almost vertical slab tears beneath the Eastern Betics, hence providing an explanation of the uplift rates observed in this zone (Garcia-Castellanos and Villaseñor, 2011).…”
Section: Geological and Geophysical Settingmentioning
confidence: 71%
“…This body, already imaged by Blanco and Spakman (1993) and Spakman and Wortel (2004), has been clearly mapped in the new teleseismic tomographic images obtained from the exploitation of the TopoIberia and PICASSO datasets (Bezada et al, 2013, 2014, Bonnin et al, 2014. Those images suggest that the almost vertical slab tears beneath the Eastern Betics, hence providing an explanation of the uplift rates observed in this zone (Garcia-Castellanos and Villaseñor, 2011).…”
Section: Geological and Geophysical Settingmentioning
confidence: 71%
“…At the lithospheric scale other data sets such as SKS splitting [ Diaz and Gallart , ] and surface wave and teleseismic body wave tomography [ Bezada et al ., ; Palomeras et al ., ] also show first order discontinuities below this area. Our results are not consistent with the Moho depth values of 32–36 km previously estimated from heat flow data [ Soto et al ., ] or from combining elevation, geoid, gravity and petrological constrains [ Fullea et al ., ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For instance, using seismic tomography or geodynamic modeling to determine the location and dimension of the mass sources in the mantle, Greff‐Lefftz et al () estimate in a Bayesian framework the corresponding radial density profile and the viscosity profile accounting for dynamic deflections of the internal interfaces that simultaneously explain the amplitude of the geoid, the gravity vector, and the gravity gradients. More locally at upper mantle scales, Fullea et al () constrain the density anomalies using thermal modeling of a subducting slab and test the impact of a continuous or discontinuous sublithospheric slab mass anomaly on the estimated lithospheric structure. On the Moon, Andrews‐Hanna et al () assume a tabular shape of the subsurface mass anomalies causing the observed linear gravity gradient anomalies and exhibit a continuous set of solutions, describing the trade‐offs between the density contrast, the top depth, bottom depth, and lateral extent of the sources, which are then further constrained by adding independent knowledge on acceptable density contrasts or by imposing the bottom depth.…”
Section: Application To Different Types Of Mass Sourcesmentioning
confidence: 99%