2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.pepi.2015.10.001
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Crustal structure and composition beneath the northeastern Tibetan plateau from receiver function analysis

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

2
1
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 71 publications
2
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The estimated crustal thicknesses were further interpolated into meshed 0.2°× 0.2°grids of the study area ( Figure 7a). The crustal thickness varies from ∼65 km in the NETP to ∼40 km in the western NCC (Figure 7), which is consistent with previous estimates from the H-κ stacking method [e.g., Li et al, , 2014Li et al, , 2015Pan and Niu, 2011;Tian and Zhang, 2013 . A difference in the Moho depth is observed from the QLT to Alxa block by as much as 10 km across the HF and NQF (Figure 7).…”
Section: Crustal Thicknesssupporting
confidence: 89%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The estimated crustal thicknesses were further interpolated into meshed 0.2°× 0.2°grids of the study area ( Figure 7a). The crustal thickness varies from ∼65 km in the NETP to ∼40 km in the western NCC (Figure 7), which is consistent with previous estimates from the H-κ stacking method [e.g., Li et al, , 2014Li et al, , 2015Pan and Niu, 2011;Tian and Zhang, 2013 . A difference in the Moho depth is observed from the QLT to Alxa block by as much as 10 km across the HF and NQF (Figure 7).…”
Section: Crustal Thicknesssupporting
confidence: 89%
“…The estimated crustal thicknesses were further interpolated into meshed 0.2° × 0.2° grids of the study area (Figure a). The crustal thickness varies from ∼65 km in the NETP to ∼40 km in the western NCC (Figure ), which is consistent with previous estimates from the H ‐ κ stacking method [e.g., Li et al ., , , ; Pan and Niu , ; Tian and Zhang , ; H. Wang et al ., ; Wang et al ., ; X. Wang et al ., ; W. Wang et al ., ; Xu et al ., ; Zheng et al ., ] and active‐source seismic profiles [e.g., Jia et al ., ; Liu et al ., ; Teng et al ., ; C. Y. Wang et al ., ; S. J. Wang et al ., ]. A difference in the Moho depth is observed from the QLT to Alxa block by as much as 10 km across the HF and NQF (Figure ).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…One striking feature of Figure b is the low Poisson's ratio ( σ ≤ 0.24) in the junction among the northern Longmen Shan, eastern Kunlun fault, and western Qinling orogenic belt. Poisson's ratio is also rather low beneath the central Qilian orogen, which is consistent with recent receiver function studies (Li et al, ; Zheng et al, ). In contrast, most of the Ordos block and Sichuan basin have moderate‐to‐high Poisson's ratio (~0.27), due to their thick sediments.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 90%