Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 473

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 63 of the 63 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Geology and distribution of impact craters on Venus: What are they telling us?

Schaber, G. G., Strom, R. G., Moore, H. J., Soderblom, L. A., Kirk, R. L., Chadwick, D. J., Dawson, D. D., Gaddis, L. R., Boyce, J. M., Russell, Joel·1992·Journal of Geophysical Research: Planets

Abstract

Magellan has revealed an ensemble of impact craters on Venus that is unique in many important ways. We have compiled a data base describing the 842 craters on 89% of Venus' surface mapped through orbit 2578. (The craters range in diameter from 1.5 to 280 km.) We have studied the distribution, size‐density, morphology, geology, and associated surface properties of these craters both in the aggregate and, for some craters, in greater detail. We find that (1) the spatial distribution of craters is highly uniform; (2) the size‐density distribution of large craters (diameters ≥35 km) is similar to the young crater populations on other terrestrial planets but at a much lower density that indicates an average age of only about 0.5 Ga (based on the estimated population of Venus‐crossing asteroids); (3) unlike the case on other planets, the density of small craters (diameters ≤35 km) declines rapidly with decreasing diameters because of atmospheric filtering; (4) the spectrum of crater modification differs greatly from that on other planets: 62% of all craters are pristine, only 4% are embayed by lavas, and the remainder are affected by tectonism, but none are severely and progressively depleted (as extrapolated from the size‐density distribution of larger craters); (5) large craters have a progression of morphologies generally similar to those on other planets, but small craters are typically irregular or multiple rather than bowl shaped; (6) diffuse radar‐bright or ‐dark features surround some craters, and 367 similar diffuse “splotches” with no central crater are observed; and (7) other crater features unique to Venus include radar‐bright or ‐dark parabolic arcs opening westward and extensive outflows originating in crater ejecta. The first three of these observations are entirely unexpected. We interpret them as indicating that the planet's cratering record was erased by a global resurfacing event or events, the latest ending about 0.5 Ga, after which volcanic activity declined (but did not cease entirely). Since the last resurfacing event, a maximum of 10% of the planet has been resurfaced and only about 4% of the craters have been obliterated. Convective thermal evolution models support this interpretation (Arkani‐Hamed and Toksoz, 1984). Observations 3–7 confirm quantitatively the expectation that the dense atmosphere of Venus has strongly affected the production of craters. Large impactors have been relatively unaffected, intermediate‐sized ones have been fragmented and have produced overlapping or multiple craters, a narrow size range has produced shock‐induced “splotches” but no craters, and the smallest bodies have had no observable effect on the surface. The number of craters eliminated by the “atmospheric filter” is enormous, about 98% of the craters between 2 and 35 km in diameter that Magellan might have observed on a hypothetical airless Venus. Unique crater‐related features such as parabolas and outflow deposits demonstrate the roles of Venus' high atmospheric density and temperature in modifying the crater formation process. Finally, heavily fractured craters and lava‐embayed craters are found to have higher than average densities along the major fracture belts and rifted uplands connecting Aphrodite Terra and Atla, Beta, Themis, and Phoebe regiones. These craters thus provide physical evidence for recent volcanic and tectonic activity at a low level.

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 · 10.1029/92je01246

Cites

63 of 63 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 63 references

Cited by

See all 473

Metadata

Authors
Schaber, G. G., Strom, R. G., Moore, H. J., Soderblom, L. A., Kirk, R. L., Chadwick, D. J., Dawson, D. D., Gaddis, L. R., Boyce, J. M., & Russell, J.
Venue
Journal of Geophysical Research: Planets
Published
1992-08-25
Volume
97
Issue
E8
Pages
13257-13301
ISSN
0148-0227 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2077395178
Cited by
473
References
63
FWCI
46.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Geology and distribution of impact craters on Venus: What are they telling us? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1029/92je01246
The paper
Schaber, G. G., Strom, R. G., Moore, H. J., Soderblom, L. A., Kirk, R. L., Chadwick, D. J., Dawson, D. D., Gaddis, L. R., Boyce, J. M., & Russell, J. (1992). Geology and distribution of impact craters on Venus: What are they telling us? Journal of Geophysical Research: Planets. https://doi.org/10.1029/92je01246

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.