CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 33Geological and Geochemical AnalysisGeological and Geophysical StudiesGeological formations and processes

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 88 of the 90 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 54 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.

Thickness Characteristics of Pāhoehoe Lavas in the Deccan Province, Western Ghats, India, and in Continental Flood Basalt Provinces Elsewhere

Open access
Self, Stephen, Mittal, Tushar, Jay, Anne Elizabeth·2021·Frontiers in Earth Science
DOI 10.3389/feart.2020.630604
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Constraining the eruption rates of flood basalt lava flows remains a significant challenge despite decades of work. One potential observable proxy for eruption rates is flood basalt lava-flow lobe thicknesses, a topic that we tackle here quantitatively. In this study, we provide the first global compilation of pāhoehoe lava-lobe thicknesses from various continental flood basalt provinces (∼ 3,800 measurements) to compare characteristic thicknesses within and between provinces. We refer to thin lobes (∼ ≤5 m), characteristic of “compound” lavas, as hummocky pāhoehoe lava flows or flow-fields. Conversely, we term thicker lobes, characteristic of “simple” flows, as coming from sheet-lobe-dominated flows. Data from the Deccan Traps and Columbia River flood-basalt provinces are archetypal since they have the most consistent datasets as well as established chemo- and litho-stratigraphies. Examining Deccan lobe thicknesses, we find that previously suggested (and disputed) distinct temporal and regional distributions of hummocky pāhoehoe and sheet-lobe-dominated flow fields are not strongly supported by the data and that each geochemically defined formation displays both lobe types in varying amounts. Thin flow-lobes do not appear to indicate proximity to source. The modal lobe thickness of Deccan formations with abundant “thin” lava-lobes is 8 m, while the mode for sheet-lobe-dominated formations is only 17 m. Sheet-lobes up to 75–80 m are rare in the Deccan and Columbia River Provinces, and ones >100 m are exceptional globally. For other flood basalt provinces, modal thickness plots show a prevalence toward similar lobe thicknesses to Deccan, with many provinces having some or most lobes in the 5–8 m modal range. However, median values are generally thicker, in the 8–12 m range, suggesting that sheet-lobes dominate. By contrast, lobes from non-flood basalt flow-fields (e.g., Hawai’i, Snake River Plain) show distinctly thinner modes, sub-5 m. Our results provide a quantitative basis to ascertain variations in gross lava morphology and, perhaps, this will in future be related to emplacement dynamics of different flood basalt provinces, or parts thereof. We can also systematically distinguish outlier lobes (or regions) from typical lobes in a province, e.g., North American Central Atlantic Magmatic Province lava-lobes are anomalously thick and are closely related to feeder-intrusions, thus enabling a better understanding of conditions required to produce large-volume, thick, flood basalt lava-lobes and flows.

Overview

CoChat Summary

Written by AI from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This paper compiles ~3,800 pāhoehoe lava-lobe thickness measurements to compare continental flood basalt provinces, focusing on the Deccan Traps. It finds that CFB sheet-lobes typically cluster around 15–20 m globally, while non-flood-basalt systems such as Hawai‘i and the Snake River Plain have distinctly thinner modes.

Key findings

  • In the Deccan, formations with abundant thin lava-lobes have a modal lobe thickness of 8 m, while sheet-lobe-dominated formations have a mode of 17 m; sheet-lobes up to 75–80 m are rare, and >100 m lobes are exceptional globally.
  • The global mode for pāhoehoe sheet-lobes in CFB provinces is 15–20 m; many provinces have modes in the 5–8 m range, but median values are generally 8–12 m, suggesting sheet-lobe dominance.
  • Non-flood-basalt flow-fields show thinner modes: Hawai‘i and Snake River Plain modal lobe thicknesses are 3–7 m, with Kīlauea at 3 m and Mauna Loa/Mauna Kea at 8 m.
  • Hummocky pāhoehoe flow-fields represent approximately 5% of the total thickness of the Deccan Wai Subgroup but up to 77% in some Kalsubai Subgroup formations, based on one traverse.

Methods

  • The study compiles ~3,800 individual lava-lobe thickness measurements from continental flood basalt provinces and modern analogs, with primary datasets from the Deccan, Columbia River Basalt, and Karoo provinces.
  • Deccan data come from detailed volcanological logs covering ~5 km of lava flows across multiple transects, plus drill cores from Koyna and Killari and previously published sections from other Deccan subprovinces.
  • Lobe thickness was measured from the top of the upper crust to the bottom of the lower crust; thin lobes (<2 m) were measured by tape (±~10 cm), thicker lobes by barometric altimeter with differential GPS anchoring. Data are analyzed using kernel density estimators, violin plots, and Anderson-Darling and Epps-Singleton tests with hierarchical clustering.

Limitations

  • The paper states that small lobes are likely under-reported, the thickest lobes are rarely completely exposed, and the thinnest lobes are too numerous and/or weathered to measure accurately, so both size extremes are underrepresented.
  • It also states that only one Deccan traverse includes the lowest Kalsubai Subgroup formations, that Deccan data come from a small region of the central Western Ghats and may have regional bias, and that other CFB datasets are more variable in quantity and quality.
  • The text notes that a maximum reported Koyna core lobe thickness of 165 m must be treated with suspicion, that some datasets may be locationally biased, and that all reported data are from syn- and post-Mesozoic lavas; the relationship between lobe thickness and eruption rates remains an open question.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3389/feart.2020.630604

Cites

88 of 88 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Figures

FIGURE1 (A) Simpli fi ed geologic map of India showing distribution of main outcrops of Deccan Volcanic Province (DVP) and main sub-provinces (Deccan Plateau including the Western Ghats), Satpura region, Mandla Lobe, Malwa Plateau, and Kutchh-Saurashtra region (blue color). Figure also shows major sedimentary basins (with Gondwana basins highlighted in red), Proterozoic mobile belts, and major cratons: 1: Western Dharwar Craton, 2: Eastern Dharwar Craton, 3: Bastar Craton, 4: Eastern Ghats Belt, 5: Singhbhum Craton, 6: Bundelkhand Craton, 7: Aravalli Craton. Primary tectonic faults and lineaments (dashed lines) in Central India related to pre-existing Indian crustal features are: Barmer-Cambay rift zone, Central India Tectonic Zone (CITZ), Pranhita-Godavari rift zone (PGR), Kurduwadi Lineament zone (KLZ), Western Ghats Escarpment, Koyna Fracture Zone, and Ln 1-5 (lineaments inferred based on integrated analysis of gravity and magnetic data, Rajaram et al., 2017). (B) Map of Western Ghats area where majority of DVP data comes from, after Jay (2005); traverses for lava data shown in blue (see Figure 4 ). (C) Sketch map of DVP showing Deshmukh (1988) distribution of simple and compound lavas. Mumbai is located on all three maps.
FIGURE1 (A) Simpli fi ed geologic map of India showing distribution of main outcrops of Deccan Volcanic Province (DVP) and main sub-provinces (Deccan Plateau including the Western Ghats), Satpura region, Mandla Lobe, Malwa Plateau, and Kutchh-Saurashtra region (blue color). Figure also shows major sedimentary basins (with Gondwana basins highlighted in red), Proterozoic mobile belts, and major cratons: 1: Western Dharwar Craton, 2: Eastern Dharwar Craton, 3: Bastar Craton, 4: Eastern Ghats Belt, 5: Singhbhum Craton, 6: Bundelkhand Craton, 7: Aravalli Craton. Primary tectonic faults and lineaments (dashed lines) in Central India related to pre-existing Indian crustal features are: Barmer-Cambay rift zone, Central India Tectonic Zone (CITZ), Pranhita-Godavari rift zone (PGR), Kurduwadi Lineament zone (KLZ), Western Ghats Escarpment, Koyna Fracture Zone, and Ln 1-5 (lineaments inferred based on integrated analysis of gravity and magnetic data, Rajaram et al., 2017). (B) Map of Western Ghats area where majority of DVP data comes from, after Jay (2005); traverses for lava data shown in blue (see Figure 4 ). (C) Sketch map of DVP showing Deshmukh (1988) distribution of simple and compound lavas. Mumbai is located on all three maps.CC-BY · From the PDF
FIGURE 2 (A) Cartoon of section through hypothetical sheet fl ow lobe, after Thordarson and Self (1998), showing common arrangement of internal physical features; right face: UC -upper crustal zone; C -core; LC lower crustal zone; HVZ -horizontal vesicular zone; MV -megavesicles; VC -vesicle cylinders; PV -pipe vesicles; BVZ -basal vesicular zone; left face shows typical form and arrangement of cooling joints. On left, an ∼ 1 m thick lava lobe on K  ilauea, Hawai ' i, formed about 1991, showing all features on cartoon. (B) Comparison of logs of poorly exposed Deccan lavas where Ambenali Ghat climbs through upper part of Mahabaleshwar Fm sequence with stratigraphically equivalent lavas at Arthur ' s Seat, 7 km to north along strike, dominated by thick sheet lobes (inset photo shows the ∼ 60-m-thick lobes at Window Rock, Arthur ' s Seat, people for scale!). Ambenali Ghat road area is thought to have poor exposure due to presence of thinner lobes that are more prone to erosion and weathering, representing lateral transition from thick sheet-lobedominated cliff exposures to N (Arthur ' s Seat) to an area dominated by thinner lobes; modi fi ed from Jay (2005). (C) Cartoon of hummocky p  ahoehoe pile of lava forming though stages (A -C) , based on lavas in the Kimama drill core, Snake River Plain, after Potter et al. (2019).
FIGURE 2 (A) Cartoon of section through hypothetical sheet fl ow lobe, after Thordarson and Self (1998), showing common arrangement of internal physical features; right face: UC -upper crustal zone; C -core; LC lower crustal zone; HVZ -horizontal vesicular zone; MV -megavesicles; VC -vesicle cylinders; PV -pipe vesicles; BVZ -basal vesicular zone; left face shows typical form and arrangement of cooling joints. On left, an ∼ 1 m thick lava lobe on K  ilauea, Hawai ' i, formed about 1991, showing all features on cartoon. (B) Comparison of logs of poorly exposed Deccan lavas where Ambenali Ghat climbs through upper part of Mahabaleshwar Fm sequence with stratigraphically equivalent lavas at Arthur ' s Seat, 7 km to north along strike, dominated by thick sheet lobes (inset photo shows the ∼ 60-m-thick lobes at Window Rock, Arthur ' s Seat, people for scale!). Ambenali Ghat road area is thought to have poor exposure due to presence of thinner lobes that are more prone to erosion and weathering, representing lateral transition from thick sheet-lobedominated cliff exposures to N (Arthur ' s Seat) to an area dominated by thinner lobes; modi fi ed from Jay (2005). (C) Cartoon of hummocky p  ahoehoe pile of lava forming though stages (A -C) , based on lavas in the Kimama drill core, Snake River Plain, after Potter et al. (2019).CC-BY · From the PDF
FIGURE 3 (A) Detailed log of small section of Ambenali Ghat traverse, Deccan Volcanic Province, within Ambenali Formation lavas (see Figure 3B ) illustrating variety of morphologies in lava fl ows within one chemo-stratigraphic formation. Section is from 550 to 680 m above sea level and shows several sheet lobes under- and overlain by smaller precursor and break-out lobes, respectively, as well as other physical lava features indicated on key: from Jay (2005). (B) Composite section of Western Ghats lava fl ow stratigraphy showing geochemically de fi ned formations (following Beane et al., 1986). This study includes data from all named formations except Jawar, Igatpuri, and Panhala. Magnetic polarity of lavas is expressed at right, R -chron 29r; N equals chron 29n, after Jay et al. (2009). (C) Simpli fi ed stratigraphic logs of various Deccan transects showing geochemical formations (following Jay et al., 2009).
FIGURE 3 (A) Detailed log of small section of Ambenali Ghat traverse, Deccan Volcanic Province, within Ambenali Formation lavas (see Figure 3B ) illustrating variety of morphologies in lava fl ows within one chemo-stratigraphic formation. Section is from 550 to 680 m above sea level and shows several sheet lobes under- and overlain by smaller precursor and break-out lobes, respectively, as well as other physical lava features indicated on key: from Jay (2005). (B) Composite section of Western Ghats lava fl ow stratigraphy showing geochemically de fi ned formations (following Beane et al., 1986). This study includes data from all named formations except Jawar, Igatpuri, and Panhala. Magnetic polarity of lavas is expressed at right, R -chron 29r; N equals chron 29n, after Jay et al. (2009). (C) Simpli fi ed stratigraphic logs of various Deccan transects showing geochemical formations (following Jay et al., 2009).CC-BY · From the PDF
FIGURE 4 (A) Plots of lobe thickness in each Deccan lava formation vs altitude above mean sea level for traverses in central Western Ghats area; width of bar equals lobe thickness (see Figure 1B for traverse locations). Formations are shown by bar color (see key); + open dots equals with small lobes; + stars equals small-lobe-dominated. Red vertical lines show boles (weathering horizons, see text, note the bole line thickness is not to scale). Note also that lobes > 40 m thick are uncommon. (B) Flow thickness plotted against elevation above mean sea level in six logs through parts of Western Ghats lava series. Plots given from N to S (top to bottom; see Figure 1B for traverse locations) represent distance of ∼ 80 km. Formation ornaments as on (A) .
FIGURE 4 (A) Plots of lobe thickness in each Deccan lava formation vs altitude above mean sea level for traverses in central Western Ghats area; width of bar equals lobe thickness (see Figure 1B for traverse locations). Formations are shown by bar color (see key); + open dots equals with small lobes; + stars equals small-lobe-dominated. Red vertical lines show boles (weathering horizons, see text, note the bole line thickness is not to scale). Note also that lobes > 40 m thick are uncommon. (B) Flow thickness plotted against elevation above mean sea level in six logs through parts of Western Ghats lava series. Plots given from N to S (top to bottom; see Figure 1B for traverse locations) represent distance of ∼ 80 km. Formation ornaments as on (A) .CC-BY · From the PDF
FIGURE 5 (A) Plots of univariate kernel density estimators to calculate probability density function (PDF) of lava lobe thicknesses in Deccan data set. Vertical scale is % of PDF with area under PDF curve normalizing to one. Result for each recognized formation is arranged from youngest to oldest (top to bottom) with ticks at base of each plot showing actual value of measured lava lobe thicknesses. (B) Univariate kernel density estimator to calculate probability density function (PDF) of lava lobe thicknesses in accumulated formations within each Deccan subgroup, see Figure 3B ). Plot gives useful view of whole thickness distribution at a glance: middle (Lonavala) subgroup has one modal lobe thickness of ∼ 18 m and another at ∼ 50 m; lowest (Kalsubai) subgroup has smallest modal lobe thickness and coarse tail extending toward 50 m; upper (Wai) subgroup has same median thickness as middle subgroup and coarse tail extending toward 100 m. Each subgroup has small lobes and lowest one contains highest percentage.
FIGURE 5 (A) Plots of univariate kernel density estimators to calculate probability density function (PDF) of lava lobe thicknesses in Deccan data set. Vertical scale is % of PDF with area under PDF curve normalizing to one. Result for each recognized formation is arranged from youngest to oldest (top to bottom) with ticks at base of each plot showing actual value of measured lava lobe thicknesses. (B) Univariate kernel density estimator to calculate probability density function (PDF) of lava lobe thicknesses in accumulated formations within each Deccan subgroup, see Figure 3B ). Plot gives useful view of whole thickness distribution at a glance: middle (Lonavala) subgroup has one modal lobe thickness of ∼ 18 m and another at ∼ 50 m; lowest (Kalsubai) subgroup has smallest modal lobe thickness and coarse tail extending toward 50 m; upper (Wai) subgroup has same median thickness as middle subgroup and coarse tail extending toward 100 m. Each subgroup has small lobes and lowest one contains highest percentage.CC-BY · From the PDF
FIGURE 6 (A) Violin plot of fl ow lobe thickness variation ( y axis) vs formations in various traverses through DVP lavas of Western Ghats ( x axis). Width of violin represents amount of data for each formation and thickness range encapsulated in vertical distribution. White dot marks mean of distribution and black bar 75th -25th percentile range. (B) Same as Figure 5B , but with PDF for two Koyna area cores added (Koyna); note similarity with upper (Wai) sub-group PDF. In addition, fl ow lobe thickness datasets shown for Killari region (South-Eastern Deccan Plateau, Wai subgroup fl ows), and Deccan sub-Provinces (Mandla, Malwa, Narmada-Tapi Rift Zone equals Satpura, and North Western Deccan equals Cambay Rift Zone/Saurashtra, see Figure 1A ).
FIGURE 6 (A) Violin plot of fl ow lobe thickness variation ( y axis) vs formations in various traverses through DVP lavas of Western Ghats ( x axis). Width of violin represents amount of data for each formation and thickness range encapsulated in vertical distribution. White dot marks mean of distribution and black bar 75th -25th percentile range. (B) Same as Figure 5B , but with PDF for two Koyna area cores added (Koyna); note similarity with upper (Wai) sub-group PDF. In addition, fl ow lobe thickness datasets shown for Killari region (South-Eastern Deccan Plateau, Wai subgroup fl ows), and Deccan sub-Provinces (Mandla, Malwa, Narmada-Tapi Rift Zone equals Satpura, and North Western Deccan equals Cambay Rift Zone/Saurashtra, see Figure 1A ).CC-BY · From the PDF
FIGURE 7 (A) Plots of lobe thickness for Lesotho part of Karoo CFB Province from Jay et al. (2018) and Moulin et al. (2017) plotted as function of altitude above mean sea level; width of bar equals lobe thickness. Groups shown by bar color (see key in B ); + open dots equals with small lobes; + stars equals small-lobe-dominated. Red vertical lines equals boles (weathering horizons, note bole line thickness not to scale). (B) Plots of univariate kernel density estimators to calculate PDFs of lava lobe thicknesses of three Karoo sequences. Note relative similarity of the three distributions, due to SLs from 15 to 18 m thick, with Naude Nek lobes being a little thinner due to prevalence of HP lobes down to a few meters thickness.
FIGURE 7 (A) Plots of lobe thickness for Lesotho part of Karoo CFB Province from Jay et al. (2018) and Moulin et al. (2017) plotted as function of altitude above mean sea level; width of bar equals lobe thickness. Groups shown by bar color (see key in B ); + open dots equals with small lobes; + stars equals small-lobe-dominated. Red vertical lines equals boles (weathering horizons, note bole line thickness not to scale). (B) Plots of univariate kernel density estimators to calculate PDFs of lava lobe thicknesses of three Karoo sequences. Note relative similarity of the three distributions, due to SLs from 15 to 18 m thick, with Naude Nek lobes being a little thinner due to prevalence of HP lobes down to a few meters thickness.CC-BY · From the PDF
FIGURE 8 (A) Plots of univariate kernel density estimators to calculate PDF of lava lobe thicknesses for individual Wanapum Formation eruptive fl ow- fi elds (Palouse Falls; Gingko; Sand Hollow; Roza), Wanapum Formation data collectively, and Grande Ronde and Wallula Grand Ronde Formations; both the latter plots are Grande Ronde Basalt Formation (see text) from the Columbia River Basalt Province. (B) Summary PDFs of lava lobe thicknesses for individual Wanapum eruptive fl owfi elds (Palouse Falls; Gingko; Sand Hollow; Roza), Wanapum Formation data collectively, and Grande Ronde and Wallula Grand Ronde plots, which are Grande Ronde Basalt Formation (see text). ( B , inset) shows plot of univariate kernel density estimators to calculate PDF of lobe thicknesses for lavas of Kimama Borehole, Snake River Plain (after Potter et al., 2019); note thinness cf . Columbia River Basalt data.
FIGURE 8 (A) Plots of univariate kernel density estimators to calculate PDF of lava lobe thicknesses for individual Wanapum Formation eruptive fl ow- fi elds (Palouse Falls; Gingko; Sand Hollow; Roza), Wanapum Formation data collectively, and Grande Ronde and Wallula Grand Ronde Formations; both the latter plots are Grande Ronde Basalt Formation (see text) from the Columbia River Basalt Province. (B) Summary PDFs of lava lobe thicknesses for individual Wanapum eruptive fl owfi elds (Palouse Falls; Gingko; Sand Hollow; Roza), Wanapum Formation data collectively, and Grande Ronde and Wallula Grand Ronde plots, which are Grande Ronde Basalt Formation (see text). ( B , inset) shows plot of univariate kernel density estimators to calculate PDF of lobe thicknesses for lavas of Kimama Borehole, Snake River Plain (after Potter et al., 2019); note thinness cf . Columbia River Basalt data.CC-BY · From the PDF
FIGURE 9 (A) Plot of univariate kernel density estimators to calculate PDF of lobe thicknesses for lavas of Emeishan CFB Province, China, from 4 different areas; see text for details. (B) Plot of univariate kernel density estimators to calculate PDF of lobe thicknesses for lavas from Siberian CFB Province, Russia; see text for details. (C) Plot of univariate kernel density estimators to calculate PDFs of lobe thicknesses for lavas of CAMP Province in Morocco (including Argana Basin) and NE North America (Newark and Fundy Basins).
FIGURE 9 (A) Plot of univariate kernel density estimators to calculate PDF of lobe thicknesses for lavas of Emeishan CFB Province, China, from 4 different areas; see text for details. (B) Plot of univariate kernel density estimators to calculate PDF of lobe thicknesses for lavas from Siberian CFB Province, Russia; see text for details. (C) Plot of univariate kernel density estimators to calculate PDFs of lobe thicknesses for lavas of CAMP Province in Morocco (including Argana Basin) and NE North America (Newark and Fundy Basins).CC-BY · From the PDF
FIGURE 10 (A) Plot of univariate kernel density estimators to calculate PDF of lobe thicknesses for NAIP formations in Faroe Islands, West Greenland, and the North Sea fl oor (ODP data); see text for details. (B) Plot of univariate kernel density estimators to calculate PDF of lobe thicknesses for lavas from Ethiopian Traps; see text for details. (C) Plot of univariate kernel density estimators to calculate PDF of lobe thicknesses for lavas from the Neogene Flood Basalt Province in Iceland along with typical fl ow lobe thickness for a few modern eruptions. See text for details. (D) Plot of univariate kernel density estimators to calculate PDF of lobe thicknesses for lavas from island of Hawa ' i, including Mauna Loa, Mauna Kea, and K  ilauea. See text for details.
FIGURE 10 (A) Plot of univariate kernel density estimators to calculate PDF of lobe thicknesses for NAIP formations in Faroe Islands, West Greenland, and the North Sea fl oor (ODP data); see text for details. (B) Plot of univariate kernel density estimators to calculate PDF of lobe thicknesses for lavas from Ethiopian Traps; see text for details. (C) Plot of univariate kernel density estimators to calculate PDF of lobe thicknesses for lavas from the Neogene Flood Basalt Province in Iceland along with typical fl ow lobe thickness for a few modern eruptions. See text for details. (D) Plot of univariate kernel density estimators to calculate PDF of lobe thicknesses for lavas from island of Hawa ' i, including Mauna Loa, Mauna Kea, and K  ilauea. See text for details.CC-BY · From the PDF
FIGURE 11 (A) Box plot of lobe thicknesses in various CFB provinces, formations, and volcanoes for which data is available vs thickness of lobes. CFB provinces color-coded so that formations of each province have same color (and same colors as Figure 12 ). Bar in box is median (50th percentile); ends of box are 25th and 75th percentile; whisker ends are 5th and 95th percentile, and dots are outlying thicknesses of whole lobe thickness distribution for each entry. Data cut off at 75 m thickness; see (B) for whole range. (B) Violin plot of lobe thicknesses in various CFB provinces, formations, and volcanoes for which data is available vs thickness of lobes. Violins scaled to equal width so that total ranges more easily seen; as (A) for colors. White dot inside violin is median (50th percentile); ends of box are 25th and 75th percentile; line ends are 5th and 95th percentile; rest of violin encloses all data of whole lobe thickness distribution for each entry.
FIGURE 11 (A) Box plot of lobe thicknesses in various CFB provinces, formations, and volcanoes for which data is available vs thickness of lobes. CFB provinces color-coded so that formations of each province have same color (and same colors as Figure 12 ). Bar in box is median (50th percentile); ends of box are 25th and 75th percentile; whisker ends are 5th and 95th percentile, and dots are outlying thicknesses of whole lobe thickness distribution for each entry. Data cut off at 75 m thickness; see (B) for whole range. (B) Violin plot of lobe thicknesses in various CFB provinces, formations, and volcanoes for which data is available vs thickness of lobes. Violins scaled to equal width so that total ranges more easily seen; as (A) for colors. White dot inside violin is median (50th percentile); ends of box are 25th and 75th percentile; line ends are 5th and 95th percentile; rest of violin encloses all data of whole lobe thickness distribution for each entry.CC-BY · From the PDF
FIGURE 12 (A) Clustering of fl ow lobe thickness distributions using distance metric based on Anderson-Darling statistical tests. CFB provinces are color-coded so that formations of a CFB Province have the same color (same colors as Figure 11 ). CFB Provinces are clustered into three distinct sub-groups highlighting classes of PDFs. (B) Clustering of fl ow lobe thickness distributions using distance metric based on Epps Singleton statistical tests. CFB provinces are color-coded so that formations of a CFB province have the same color (same colors as Figure 11 ). CFB provinces are clustered into three distinct sub-groups highlighting classes of PDFs.
FIGURE 12 (A) Clustering of fl ow lobe thickness distributions using distance metric based on Anderson-Darling statistical tests. CFB provinces are color-coded so that formations of a CFB Province have the same color (same colors as Figure 11 ). CFB Provinces are clustered into three distinct sub-groups highlighting classes of PDFs. (B) Clustering of fl ow lobe thickness distributions using distance metric based on Epps Singleton statistical tests. CFB provinces are color-coded so that formations of a CFB province have the same color (same colors as Figure 11 ). CFB provinces are clustered into three distinct sub-groups highlighting classes of PDFs.CC-BY · From the PDF

Verification

Claims the paper makes

61 Own result · 26 Own interpretation · 23 Own method · 20 No full text of the sources · 12 Check pending · 8 Not checked yet · 4 Sources not found · 4 No basis given

  • It may state two separate claims as one. 55
  • Probably not a substantial claim. 29

Create a free account to see these claims.

Create a free account to see these assumptions.

80 more claims

Create a free account to see all 158 claims and to verify the 15 references still open.

See all claims — free account

Self-check

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

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

2 of 2

Citations

Cites

Show all 90 references

Research works printed but not linked: 13

  1. Deshmukh, 1988, Petrographic variations in compound flows of Deccan Traps and their significance, 305
  2. Garcia, 2007, Stratigraphy of the Hawai’i Scientific Drilling Project core (HSDP2): anatomy of a Hawai’ian shield volcano, Geochem. Geophys. Geosyst., 8, 1525, 10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2019.07.007 · DOI · Paper page
  3. Godbole, 1996, Lava stratigraphy of Deccan Basalts of Western Maharashtra, 125
  4. Guilbaud, 2005, Morphology, surface structures, and emplacement of lavas produced by Laki, AD 1783–1784, Geol. Soc. America Spec. Pap., 396, 81, 10.1130/2005.2396(07 · DOI
  5. Gupta, 2003, Borehole investigations in the surface rupture zone of the 1993 Latur SCR earthquake, Maharashtra, India: overview of results, 1
  6. Kasiviswanandham, 2003, Flow stratigraphy and paleomagnetic investigations of Bagli Volcanics, Malwa Deccan Traps MP, and to develop constraints on its petrogenesis
  7. Puffer, 1992, The palisades sill and Watchung Basalt flows, Northern New Jersey and Southeastern New York: a geological summary and field guide, 92
  8. Raja Rao, 1999, Distribution, structure and petrography of the Deccan Traps, India, 401
  9. Self, 1997, Emplacement of continental flood Basalt lava flows, 381
  10. Sharma, 2000, Variations in cooling, crystallization textures, and glass chemistry during emplacement of Kilauea Pahoehoe lobes, as constrained by in situ field experiments, GSA Abstr. Programs, 32
  11. K. V., 1999, Deccan volcanic province, 547
  12. Swanson, Chronological narrative of the 1969-71 Mauna Ulu eruption of Kilauea volcano, Hawaii, U.S.
  13. Walker, 1999, Some observations and interpretations on the Deccan Traps, 367

Cited by

See all 33

Related

Metadata

Authors
Self, S., Mittal, T., & Jay, A. E.
Affiliations
  • University of California, Berkeley (US)
  • Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US)
  • The Open University (GB)
Corresponding author
Self, Stephen
ORCID
Venue
Frontiers in Earth Science
Publisher
Frontiers Media SA
Published
2021-02-17
Volume
8
ISSN
2296-6463 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.3389/feart.2020.630604
OpenAlex
W3038594804
Cited by
33
References
90
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 7
FWCI
3.09
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Frontiers in Earth Science (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Open Research Online (The Open University) (acceptedVersion)
  • DSpace@MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
National Science Foundation
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Geochemistry and Petrology › Geological and Geochemical Analysis
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Geology › Geological and Geophysical Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Earth-Surface Processes › Geological formations and processes
Keywords
pahoehoe lava, continental flood basalts, Deccan Traps, Columbia River Basalt Group, eruption rate, lava flow morphology, flood basalt province

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.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-11-12, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-11-12 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

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