| Title |
Peak-ring structure and kinematics from a multi-disciplinary study of the Schrödinger impact basin
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Nature Communications, October 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1038/ncomms13161 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
David A. Kring, Georgiana Y. Kramer, Gareth S. Collins, Ross W. K. Potter, Mitali Chandnani |
| Abstract |
The Schrödinger basin on the lunar farside is ∼320 km in diameter and the best-preserved peak-ring basin of its size in the Earth-Moon system. Here we present spectral and photogeologic analyses of data from the Moon Mineralogy Mapper instrument on the Chandrayaan-1 spacecraft and the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter Camera (LROC) on the LRO spacecraft, which indicates the peak ring is composed of anorthositic, noritic and troctolitic lithologies that were juxtaposed by several cross-cutting faults during peak-ring formation. Hydrocode simulations indicate the lithologies were uplifted from depths up to 30 km, representing the crust of the lunar farside. Through combining geological and remote-sensing observations with numerical modelling, we show that a Displaced Structural Uplift model is best for peak rings, including that in the K-T Chicxulub impact crater on Earth. These results may help guide sample selection in lunar sample return missions that are being studied for the multi-agency International Space Exploration Coordination Group. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 20 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 4 | 20% |
| Japan | 3 | 15% |
| Brazil | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 12 | 60% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 14 | 70% |
| Scientists | 5 | 25% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 5% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 2 | 3% |
| Unknown | 59 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 20% |
| Researcher | 10 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 10% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 7 | 11% |
| Unknown | 16 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 19 | 31% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 7 | 11% |
| Engineering | 5 | 8% |
| Chemistry | 2 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 4 | 7% |
| Unknown | 23 | 38% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 56. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 May 2018.
All research outputs
#720,270
of 24,588,574 outputs
Outputs from Nature Communications
#12,262
of 53,009 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,150
of 321,772 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Communications
#257
of 861 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,588,574 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 53,009 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 56.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 321,772 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 861 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.