↓ Skip to main content

Crustal movements due to Iceland’s shrinking ice caps mimic magma inflow signal at Katla volcano

Overview of attention for article published in Scientific Reports, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (89th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
23 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
31 Mendeley
Title
Crustal movements due to Iceland’s shrinking ice caps mimic magma inflow signal at Katla volcano
Published in
Scientific Reports, May 2015
DOI 10.1038/srep10285
Pubmed ID
Authors

Karsten Spaans, Sigrún Hreinsdóttir, Andrew Hooper, Benedikt Gunnar Ófeigsson

Abstract

Many volcanic systems around the world are located beneath, or in close proximity to, ice caps. Mass change of these ice caps causes surface movements, which are typically neglected when interpreting surface deformation measurements around these volcanoes. These movements can however be significant, and may closely resemble movements due to magma accumulation. Here we show such an example, from Katla volcano, Iceland. Horizontal movements observed by GPS on the flank of Katla have led to the inference of significant inflow of magma into a chamber beneath the caldera, starting in 2000, and continuing over several years. We use satellite radar interferometry and GPS data to show that between 2001 and 2010, the horizontal movements seen on the flank can be explained by the response to the long term shrinking of ice caps, and that erratic movements seen at stations within the caldera are also not likely to signify magma inflow. It is important that interpretations of geodetic measurements at volcanoes in glaciated areas consider the effect of ice mass change, and previous studies should be carefully reevaluated.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 23 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 3%
Unknown 30 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 32%
Researcher 6 19%
Other 4 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 10%
Student > Postgraduate 2 6%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 3 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Earth and Planetary Sciences 24 77%
Physics and Astronomy 2 6%
Engineering 1 3%
Unknown 4 13%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 01 February 2020.
All research outputs
#1,267,621
of 17,349,416 outputs
Outputs from Scientific Reports
#11,855
of 93,282 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,237
of 240,313 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientific Reports
#401
of 3,736 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,349,416 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 93,282 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 240,313 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3,736 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.