The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Ocean bathymetry and mantle convection: 1. Large‐scale flow and hotspots
Abstract
Numerical models of plate‐scale convection confined to the upper mantle predict large deviations from observed ocean bathymetry, gravity, and geoid, while whole mantle models yield first‐order agreement with these observations. The upper mantle models fail because there is insufficient radioactivity in the upper mantle to explain the surface heat flux, the upper mantle must therefore be heated mainly from below, the resulting hot boundary layer generates buoyant material, and when this buoyant material rises to the base of the lithosphère, it generates large positive anomalies in topography (2 km), the geoid (30 m), and gravity (50 mGal). The concept of the magnitude of a hotspot swell is introduced: it is the rate at which new topography is created, expressed as a volume per unit time, and is a measure of the buoyancy and heat fluxes in the underlying plume. By this measure the major Pacific hots pots dominate the Earth's total plume flux, but plumes account for less than 10% of the Earth's total heat flux. This is comparable to the amount of heat likely to be coming from the core and supports the idea that plumes originate at the core mantle boundary and not at the 670‐km transition. These results indicate that mantle convection is dominated by a plate‐scale flow which penetrates throughout the mantle, with a secondary mode involving plumes rising from a weak thermal boundary layer at the bottom of the mantle.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Convection plumes in the lower mantle
MORGAN, W. J. (1971) · Nature · doi:10.1038/230042a0 · Cited by 2,565
Some remarks on heat flow and gravity anomalies
McKenzie, D. P. (1967) · Journal of Geophysical Research · doi:10.1029/jz072i024p06261 · Cited by 751
Thermal conductivity of Earth materials at high temperatures
Schatz, J. F., & Simmons, G. (1972) · Journal of Geophysical Research · doi:10.1029/jb077i035p06966 · Cited by 445
Convection and the Large Scale Circulation of the Mantle
Richter, F. M. (1973) · Journal of Geophysical Research · doi:10.1029/jb078i035p08735 · Cited by 251
Cited by
Large igneous provinces: Crustal structure, dimensions, and external consequences
Coffin, M. F., & Eldholm, O. (1994) · Reviews of Geophysics · doi:10.1029/93rg02508 · Cited by 1,544
Hotspots and mantle plumes: Some phenomenology
Sleep, N. H. (1990) · Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth · doi:10.1029/jb095ib05p06715 · Cited by 1,119
Graham, D. W. (2002) · Reviews in Mineralogy and Geochemistry · doi:10.2138/rmg.2002.47.8 · Cited by 771
The dynamics of Cenozoic and Mesozoic plate motions
Lithgow‐Bertelloni, C., & Richards, M. A. (1998) · Reviews of Geophysics · doi:10.1029/97rg02282 · Cited by 649
Potassium, rubidium, and cesium in the Earth and Moon and the evolution of the mantle of the Earth
McDonough, W. F., Sun, S.-S., Ringwood, A. E., Jagoutz, E., & Hofmann, A. W. (1992) · Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta · doi:10.1016/0016-7037(92)90043-i · Cited by 473
Metadata
- Authors
- Davies, G. F.
- Venue
- Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth
- Publisher
- American Geophysical Union (AGU)
- Published
- 1988-09-10
- Volume
- 93
- Issue
- B9
- Pages
- 10467-10480
- ISSN
- 0148-0227 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2017043022
- Cited by
- 511
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 11.33
- 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: Ocean bathymetry and mantle convection: 1. Large‐scale flow and hotspots. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1029/jb093ib09p10467
- The paper
- Davies, G. F. (1988). Ocean bathymetry and mantle convection: 1. Large‐scale flow and hotspots. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth. https://doi.org/10.1029/jb093ib09p10467
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.