1983
DOI: 10.1029/gl010i006p00421
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Indian ocean gravity low: Evidence for an isostatically uncompensated depression in the upper mantle

Abstract: The broad gravity low in the equatorial Indian Ocean south of Sri Lanka is the largest and most striking feature in the gravitational field of the earth. The most negative long‐wavelength free‐air gravity anomalies are found there and the sea surface (geoid) lies more than 100 meters below the best fitting ellipsoid. We propose a model of the lithosphere and upper mantle which accurately predicts the observed free‐air gravity and geoid elevation. This model is consistent with bathymetry and sediment thickness … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

1987
1987
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 19 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 14 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Most of the geoid lows have been linked to past subduction (Chase & Sprowl, 1983;Hager & Richards, 1989;Richards & Engebretson, 1992;Steinberger, 2000) as well as subduction coupled with mantle upwellings (Spasojevic et al, 2010). Several theories have been put forward to explain this negative anomaly, 10.1002/2017GL075392 such as depression of the core-mantle boundary (Negi et al, 1987), isostatically uncompensated crust (Ihnen & Whitcomb, 1983), and presence of paleo back-arc basins in the Neo-Tethys Ocean prior to India's collision with Eurasia (Nerlich et al, 2016). A recent study by Reiss et al (2017) found a hot midmantle anomaly beneath the Indian Ocean geoid low (IOGL) and concluded that this high-temperature anomaly along with cold material below 660 km farther south could be responsible for the geoid low.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Most of the geoid lows have been linked to past subduction (Chase & Sprowl, 1983;Hager & Richards, 1989;Richards & Engebretson, 1992;Steinberger, 2000) as well as subduction coupled with mantle upwellings (Spasojevic et al, 2010). Several theories have been put forward to explain this negative anomaly, 10.1002/2017GL075392 such as depression of the core-mantle boundary (Negi et al, 1987), isostatically uncompensated crust (Ihnen & Whitcomb, 1983), and presence of paleo back-arc basins in the Neo-Tethys Ocean prior to India's collision with Eurasia (Nerlich et al, 2016). A recent study by Reiss et al (2017) found a hot midmantle anomaly beneath the Indian Ocean geoid low (IOGL) and concluded that this high-temperature anomaly along with cold material below 660 km farther south could be responsible for the geoid low.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Probably, one of the locations of mass deficiency is at the core-mantle boundary (Hide and Malin, 1970;Negi et al, 1987;Padma Rao et al, 2017), and the other within the mantle (Kaula, 1972). According to Ihnen and Whitcomb (1983), the IOGL is caused by a sag in the crustal boundary whereas Marsh (1979), and Mishra et al (2004) opined as due to low-density rocks in the upper mantle (Mishra, 2014;. The IOGL is caused by a low-density anomaly stretching between the depth of 300 km and ~900 km in the northern Indian Ocean (Ghosh et al, 2017;Reiss et al, 2017) while Chase (1979) suggested approximately 1200 km.…”
Section: Geoid Anomalymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Different theories were put forward to explain this negative geoid anomaly. Uncompensated crust (Ihnen & Whitcomb, 1983), CMB deflection (Negi et al., 1987), lower mantle slabs (Rao & Kumar, 2014), mantle upwelling due to dehydration of subducted Mesozoic slabs (Spasojevic et al., 2010), presence of hot low‐velocity anomaly in mid to upper mantle depths (Ghosh et al., 2017) and superposition of high and low‐velocity anomalies beneath the Indian Ocean (Paul & Kumar, 2022; Rao et al., 2020; Steinberger et al., 2021) were all suggested as possible mechanisms. All these studies looked at the present‐day anomaly and were not concerned with how this geoid low came into existence.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%