Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 296

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 271 of the 271 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Comparisons of the kinematics and deep structures of the Zagros and Himalaya and of the Iranian and Tibetan plateaus and geodynamic implications

Open access
Hatzfeld, Denis, Molnar, Peter·2010·Reviews of Geophysics

Abstract

We compare the geologic histories, the deep structures, and the present-day kinematics of deformation of the Himalaya and the adjacent Tibetan Plateau with those of the Zagros and Iranian Plateau to test geodynamic processes of continental collision.Shortly after India and Arabia collided with Eurasia, horizontal shortening manifested itself by folding and thrust faulting of sedimentary rock detached from India's and Arabia's underlying crystalline basement.Subsequently, slip on thrust faults stacked slices of India's basement to build the Himalaya on India's northern margin.Such faulting has not yet developed in the Zagros, where collision is more recent and Arabia penetrates into Eurasia more slowly than India does, so that postcollision convergence with Eurasia is less.The greater elevation, thicker crust, and more marked heterogeneity of the upper mantle beneath the Tibetan than beneath the Iranian Plateau also reflect a more advanced stage of development.Moreover, while thrust or reverse faulting and crustal shortening continue on the margins of both plateaus, normal faulting, suggesting horizontal extension and crustal thinning, occurs within Tibet but not in Iran.Hence, the balance of forces that built the high Tibetan Plateau must have changed, apparently some time since ∼15 Ma.Removal of Tibetan mantle lithosphere could have altered that balance.If mantle lithosphere beneath the Iranian Plateau has been removed, however, the change in force balance has been too small to initiate normal faulting.Low seismic wave speeds in the uppermost mantle just beneath the Moho of both plateaus suggest (to us) that lithosphere beneath both is thin, consistent with late Cenozoic removal of it, but alternative explanations might account for these low speeds.Despite its apparently thin, and hence presumably weak, mantle lithosphere, much of central Iran undergoes little deformation.It illustrates how a crustal block can behave rigidly not necessarily because it is strong but because deviatoric stresses can be small.Whereas differences between the two regions clearly depend on the amount that Arabia and India have penetrated into Eurasia, which scales with both the dates of collision and rates of convergence, we see no differences in the operative processes that depend on the present-day rates of convergence.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1029/2009rg000304

Cites

271 of 271 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 271 references

Metadata

Authors
Hatzfeld, D., & Molnar, P.
Venue
Reviews of Geophysics
Published
2010-06-29
Volume
48
Issue
2
ISSN
  • 0096-1043 (ISSN-L)
  • 8755-1209
OpenAlex
W1997255700
Cited by
296
References
271
FWCI
35.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Comparisons of the kinematics and deep structures of the Zagros and Himalaya and of the Iranian and Tibetan plateaus and geodynamic implications. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1029/2009rg000304
The paper
Hatzfeld, D., & Molnar, P. (2010). Comparisons of the kinematics and deep structures of the Zagros and Himalaya and of the Iranian and Tibetan plateaus and geodynamic implications. Reviews of Geophysics. https://doi.org/10.1029/2009rg000304

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.