Cited by 38

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Volumetric analysis of complex lunar craters: Implications for basin ring formation

Hale, W. S., Grieve, Richard A. F.·1982·Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth

Abstract

The transition in hypervelocity impact structures from complex craters to basins is defined by a transition in uplifted central features from peaks to peak rings. Volumetric and morphologic analyses of the central peaks in complex lunar craters are combined with subsurface data from terrestrial complex impact structures in an effort to characterize the crater to basin transition. Central peak volumes in lunar craters with rim diameters (D rc) < 51 km follow a power‐law relationship to apparent crater volume. In craters with D rc > 80 km, central peak volume is relatively reduced and a second power‐law relationship is defined. The relative reduction in peak volume in craters with D rc > 80 km is associated with a relative decrease in peak height, and is accompanied by the development of a concentric zone of enhanced floor roughening. Studies of terrestrial complex impact structures suggest that the amount of uplifted material, as judged from its depth of origin, continues to increase with increasing rim diameter. This suggests that a redistribution of uplifted material away from a centralized peak may occur in the larger craters. The volumetric and morphologic changes described occur over a rim diameter range of 51–80 km, far below the previously proposed range for the crater to basin transition (D rc = 140–175 km). Evidence is presented to support a crater to basin transition beginning at D rc = 51–80 km, characterized by a relative reduction in central peak volume and the development of rings of floor roughening, which are suggested to be precursors of peak ring development.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1029/jb087is01p00a65

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 42

  1. Baldwin R. B., 1963, The Measure of the Moon
  2. 10.1029/GL003i003p00117 · DOI
  3. Cintala M. J., 1977, The effects of target characteristics on fresh crater morphology: Preliminary results for the Moon and Mercury, Proc. Lunar Sci. Conf. 8th, 3409
  4. Croft S. K., 1978, Lunar crater volumes: Interpretation by models of impact cratering and upper crustal structure, Proc. Lunar Planet. Sci. Conf. 9th, 3711
  5. Croft S. K., 1981, Multi‐ring Basins, Proc. Lunar Planet. Sci., 227
  6. 10.1111/j.1749-6632.1965.tb20411.x · DOI
  7. Dence M. R., 1977, Impact and Explosion Cratering, 247
  8. Floran R. M., 1976, Morphology of the Manicouagan ring‐structure, Quebec, and some comparisons with lunar basins and craters, Proc. Lunar Sci. Conf. 7th, 2845
  9. 10.1029/JB080i017p02444 · DOI
  10. 10.1016/0301-9268(80)90013-3 · DOI
  11. Grieve R. A. F., 1982, The Manicouagan impact structure' An analysis of its original dimensions and form, J. Geophys. Res.
  12. 10.1016/0019-1035(79)90179-9 · DOI
  13. Grieve R. A. F., 1981, Multi‐ring Basins, Proc. Lunar Planet. Sci., 37
  14. Hale W. S., 1979, Central peaks in lunar craters: Morphology and morphometry, Proc. Lunar Planet. Sci. Conf., 10th, 2623
  15. Hale W. S., 1980, Central peaks in mercurian craters: Comparisons to the Moon, Proc. Lunar Planet. Sci. Conf. 11th, 2191
  16. Hale W. S. J. W.Head The origin of peak rings and the crater to basin transition (abstract) Papers Presented to the Conference on Multi‐ring Basins: Formation and Evolution 27–30Lunar and Planetary Institute Houston 1980b.
  17. Hartmann W. K. Lunar crater counts VI: The young craters Tycho Aristarchus and Copernicus Comm. Lunar Planet. Lab. 7 145–156 Univ. of Arizona Press Tucson 1968.
  18. Hartmann W. K., 1972, Interplanet variations in crater morphology, Icarus, 18, 708
  19. 10.1007/BF00620390 · DOI
  20. Hawke B. R., 1977, Impact and Explosion Cratering, 815
  21. 10.1007/BF02629699 · DOI
  22. Head J. W., 1977, Impact and Explosion Cratering, 563
  23. Head J. W., 1978, Lunar and Planetary Science X, 485
  24. 10.1016/0019-1035(78)90169-0 · DOI
  25. Howard K. A., 1975, Flows of impact melt in lunar craters, J. Res. U. S. Geol. Surv., 3, 237
  26. 10.1029/JB087iB01p00371 · DOI
  27. 10.1007/BF01259285 · DOI
  28. Orphal D. L., 1978, An alternative model for the Manicouagan structure, Proc. Lunar Planet. Sci. Conf. 9th, 2695
  29. Pike R. J., 1977, Impact and Explosion Cratering, 489
  30. 10.1016/0019-1035(80)90083-4 · DOI
  31. Pike R. J. Geometric interpretation of lunar craters U. S. Geol. Surv. Prof. Pap. 1046‐c 77 1980b. · DOI
  32. Roddy D. J., 1977, Impact and Explosion Cratering
  33. Schultz P., 1976, Moon Morphology
  34. 10.1016/0019-1035(77)90075-6 · DOI
  35. 10.1016/0019-1035(76)90127-5 · DOI
  36. Ullrich G. W., 1977, Impact and Explosion Cratering, 959
  37. Whitford‐Stark J. L., 1982, Lunar and Planetary Science XIII, 861
  38. Wilshire H. G. T. W.Offield K. A.Howard D.Cummings Geology of the Sierra Madera Cryptoexplosion structure Pecos County Texas U. S. Geol. Surv. Prof. Paper 599‐H 42 1972. · DOI
  39. 10.1016/0019-1035(73)90023-7 · DOI
  40. Wood C. A., 1976, Comparison of impact basins on Mercury, Mars and the Moon, Proc. Lunar Sci. Conf. 7th, 3629
  41. Wood C. A., 1977, Crater degradation on Mercury and the Moon: Clues to surface evolution, Proc. Lunar Sci. Conf. 8th, 3503
  42. Wood C. A., 1978, Interior morphology of fresh martian craters: The effects of target characteristics, Proc. Lunar Planet. Sci. Conf. 9th, 3691

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 38

Metadata

Authors
Hale, W. S., & Grieve, R. A. F.
Venue
Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth
Published
1982-11-15
Volume
87
Issue
S01
ISSN
0148-0227
Cited by
38
References
0
Language
en

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