| Title |
Multi-scale magnetic mapping of serpentinite carbonation
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Nature Communications, November 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1038/s41467-017-01610-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Masako Tominaga, Andreas Beinlich, Eduardo A. Lima, Maurice A. Tivey, Brian A. Hampton, Benjamin Weiss, Yumiko Harigane |
| Abstract |
Peridotite carbonation represents a critical step within the long-term carbon cycle by sequestering volatile CO2 in solid carbonate. This has been proposed as one potential pathway to mitigate the effects of greenhouse gas release. Most of our current understanding of reaction mechanisms is based on hand specimen and laboratory-scale analyses. Linking laboratory-scale observations to field scale processes remains challenging. Here we present the first geophysical characterization of serpentinite carbonation across scales ranging from km to sub-mm by combining aeromagnetic observations, outcrop- and thin section-scale magnetic mapping. At all scales, magnetic anomalies coherently change across reaction fronts separating assemblages indicative of incipient, intermittent, and final reaction progress. The abundance of magnetic minerals correlates with reaction progress, causing amplitude and wavelength variations in associated magnetic anomalies. This correlation represents a foundation for characterizing the extent and degree of in situ ultramafic rock carbonation in space and time. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Colombia | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 4 | 80% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 60% |
| Scientists | 1 | 20% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 77 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 77 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 20 | 26% |
| Researcher | 12 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 9 | 12% |
| Unknown | 18 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 39 | 51% |
| Environmental Science | 4 | 5% |
| Engineering | 3 | 4% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 2 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 4 | 5% |
| Unknown | 24 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 04 December 2017.
All research outputs
#13,574,541
of 23,009,818 outputs
Outputs from Nature Communications
#39,361
of 47,374 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#215,782
of 437,899 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Communications
#1,211
of 1,469 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,009,818 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 47,374 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 55.9. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 437,899 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,469 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.