2017
DOI: 10.1016/j.icarus.2016.11.040
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Origin of discrepancies between crater size-frequency distributions of coeval lunar geologic units via target property contrasts

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

3
42
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 55 publications
(45 citation statements)
references
References 59 publications
3
42
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Similar discrepancies between the model ages of the ejecta blanket and melt deposits were observed at other Copernican craters (e.g., van der Bogert et al, 2010;Ashley et al, 2012;Zanetti et al, 2016;van der Bogert et al, 2016 ). Hiesinger et al (2012), as well as van der Bogert et al (2010van der Bogert et al ( , 2013van der Bogert et al ( , 2016 , discuss potential sources for the differences. Self-secondary cratering might cause an excess of craters on the ejecta relative to melt deposits ( Shoemaker et al, 1968;Plescia et al, 2010;Plescia and Robinson, 2011;Zanetti et al, 2014Zanetti et al, , 2016.…”
Section: Absolute Model Agessupporting
confidence: 58%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Similar discrepancies between the model ages of the ejecta blanket and melt deposits were observed at other Copernican craters (e.g., van der Bogert et al, 2010;Ashley et al, 2012;Zanetti et al, 2016;van der Bogert et al, 2016 ). Hiesinger et al (2012), as well as van der Bogert et al (2010van der Bogert et al ( , 2013van der Bogert et al ( , 2016 , discuss potential sources for the differences. Self-secondary cratering might cause an excess of craters on the ejecta relative to melt deposits ( Shoemaker et al, 1968;Plescia et al, 2010;Plescia and Robinson, 2011;Zanetti et al, 2014Zanetti et al, , 2016.…”
Section: Absolute Model Agessupporting
confidence: 58%
“…Self-secondary cratering might cause an excess of craters on the ejecta relative to melt deposits ( Shoemaker et al, 1968;Plescia et al, 2010;Plescia and Robinson, 2011;Zanetti et al, 2014Zanetti et al, , 2016. Alternatively, different target properties could cause final crater diameters to be smaller on melt versus ejecta ( Schultz et al, 1977;Dundas et al, 2010 ;van der Bogert et al, 2016 ). As a result, Hiesinger et al (2012) used the ages derived from the ejecta blankets of Tycho, Copernicus, and North Ray to revisit the lunar chronology, because ejecta blanket count areas were used in the initial calibration of the chronology.…”
Section: Absolute Model Agesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…North is toward the top. The base images are obtained by LROC NAC trajectory), as normal ejecta deposits have larger crater densities (e.g., van der Bogert et al 2010;Zanetti et al 2017). For example, Fig.…”
Section: Self-secondaries On the Moonmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…4) and their dominance in small crater populations on the continuous ejecta deposits of newly formed impact craters (e.g., the Hokusai case on Mercury), however, there are debates about whether or not self-secondaries are needed to explain the observed crater density differences on Copernican-aged lunar craters. Contemporaneous with the return of the self-secondaries scenario , the long-ignored but poorly understood effect of target properties on the SFD of small impact craters were interpreted to be the cause for the larger crater density on normal ejecta deposits than melt pools (e.g., van der Bogert et al 2010). According to this interpretation, different target properties (e.g., density, cohesion, porosity) can cause up to 2 times differences in crater rim-to-rim diameters for same-energy impactors, so that small craters formed on melt pools and normal ejecta deposits have both different SFD and densities .…”
Section: Formation Mechanism Of Self-secondaries On the Moon And Terrmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation