New Magnetic Anomaly Map of the Antarctic

Abstract

The second generation Antarctic magnetic anomaly compilation for the region south of 60°S includes some 3.5 million line-km of aeromagnetic and marine magnetic data that more than doubles the initial map's near-surface database. For the new compilation, the magnetic data sets were corrected for the International Geomagnetic Reference Field, diurnal effects, and high-frequency errors and leveled, gridded, and stitched together. The new magnetic data further constrain the crustal architecture and geological evolution of the Antarctic Peninsula and the West Antarctic Rift System in West Antarctica, as well as Dronning Maud Land, the Gamburtsev Subglacial Mountains, the Prince Charles Mountains, Princess Elizabeth Land, and Wilkes Land in East Antarctica and the circumjacent oceanic margins. Overall, the magnetic anomaly compilation helps unify disparate regional geologic and geophysical studies by providing new constraints on major tectonic and magmatic processes that affected the Antarctic from Precambrian to Cenozoic times.Plain Language Summary Given the ubiquitous polar cover of snow, ice, and seawater, the magnetic anomaly compilation offers important constraints on the global tectonic processes and crustal properties of the Antarctic. It also links widely separated areas of outcrop to help unify disparate geologic studies and provides insights on the lithospheric transition between Antarctica and adjacent oceans, as well as the geodynamic evolution of the Antarctic lithosphere in the assembly and breakup of the Gondwana, Rodinia, and Columbia supercontinents and key piercing points for reconstructing linkages between the protocontinents. The magnetic data together with ice-probing radar and gravity information greatly facilitate understanding the evolution of fundamental large-scale geological processes such as continental rifting, intraplate mountain building, subduction and terrane accretion processes, and intraplate basin formation.

Moho Depths of Antarctica: Comparison of Seismic, Gravity, and Isostatic Results

“…1.3 to 1.0 Ga) are also observed, and their origin could be located in a putative~1,000-km-distant source region in the GSM province, where Ferraccioli et al (2011) hypothesized that a major coeval orogenic belt exists, based on their aeromagnetic and airborne gravity interpretation. Aeromagnetic studies also suggest that the cratonal margin of EANT, at least at crustal level, gets much closer to the coast along our modeling profile compared to the northern parts, where the Ross Orogen appears to be considerably wider (Ferraccioli, Armadillo, Jordan, et al, 2009;Ferraccioli, Armadillo, Zunino, et al, 2009;Ferraccioli et al, 2002;Golynsky et al, 2018).…”

“…The lithosphere of the Antarctic continent is still poorly known, despite several major airborne geophysical campaigns including the acquisition of extensive gravity and magnetic measurements and recent continental‐scale data compilations (e.g., Aitken et al, , Aitken et al, ; Chiappini et al, ; Ferraccioli, Armadillo, Jordan, et al, , Ferraccioli, Armadillo, Zunino, et al, , Ferraccioli et al, ; Scheinert et al, ; Golynsky et al, , ) and a variety of recent seismological studies (e.g., An et al, ; Chaput et al, ; Hansen et al, ; Ramirez et al, ; Ramirez et al, ; Shen et al, ; Shen et al, ).…”

Earth tectonics as seen by GOCE - Enhanced satellite gravity gradient imaging

“…The thick ice sheet cover and the remoteness of Antarctica make geological and geophysical investigations particularly challenging. Hence, Hdespite the large extent of recent aeromagnetic 31 and aerogravity data coverage 32 , a continental-scale tectonic elements map that is required to aid global plate reconstructions 33 remains to be defined.…”

Geothermal Heat Flux in Antarctica: Assessing Models and Observations by Bayesian Inversion

“…In contrast to previous studies, the MCMC approach would still leave some freedom for lateral variance of the thermal parameters, while at the same time it would be geologically constrained. For West Antarctica, such an approach is not possible, but here one should make use of the wealth of geophysical high-resolution data acquired over the last years (e.g., Golynsky et al, 2018;Scheinert et al, 2016;Shen et al, 2018) and couple these in the analysis.…”