1982
DOI: 10.1016/0040-1951(82)90038-5
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Crustal structure measurements near FRAM II in the pole abyssal plain

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
15
0

Year Published

1985
1985
2003
2003

Publication Types

Select...
4
3

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 26 publications
(15 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
0
15
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Other investigations (Fig. 1a, lines a, d and f) yield a crustal thickness of 6-7 km (Kristoffersen et al 1982;Duckworth et al 1982). These results are too sparse in geographical distribution for any systematic match with global models to be perceived.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 70%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Other investigations (Fig. 1a, lines a, d and f) yield a crustal thickness of 6-7 km (Kristoffersen et al 1982;Duckworth et al 1982). These results are too sparse in geographical distribution for any systematic match with global models to be perceived.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 70%
“…1a, lines a, d and f) yield a crustal thickness of 6–7 km (Kristoffersen et al. 1982; Duckworth et al . 1982).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Melting models based on decompression melting of upwelling mantle [e.g., Reid and Jackson , 1981; Bown and White , 1994; Sparks and Parmentier , 1994] predict that melt production and crustal thickness decrease rapidly at spreading rates less than about 15 mm/yr as the result of conductive cooling of the uprising mantle. The few seismic studies that exist away from the “Yermak H‐Zone” to the west of 3°E have consistently shown thin 2–3 km crust [e.g., Duckworth et al , 1982; Jackson et al , 1982, 1990]. Quantitative modeling of bathymetry and gravity profiles across the Gakkel Ridge led Coakley and Cochran [1998] to conclude that if the average crustal density is less than 2900 kg/m 3 , than the average crustal thickness must be less than 4 km and probably no more than 1–2 km to satisfy the gravity data.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Seismic refraction measurements in the Eurasian Basin are limited to the western portion of the basin to the west of 20°E [ Jackson et al , 1990; Kristoffersen , 1990] and show a great range of crustal thickness. Measurements in some regions give a normal oceanic crustal thickness of 6–8 km, while other measurements suggest very thin 2–3 km thick crust [ Duckworth et al , 1982; Jackson et al , 1982]. Jackson et al [1982] argue that, on a set of refraction lines collected on the ice station FRAM I, thicker crust is associated with unusually high amplitude seafloor spreading magnetic anomalies and thin crust with areas of lower amplitude magnetic anomalies.…”
Section: Structure Of the Eurasian Basinmentioning
confidence: 99%