↓ Skip to main content

Massive blow-out craters formed by hydrate-controlled methane expulsion from the Arctic seafloor

Overview of attention for article published in Science, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
45 news outlets
blogs
5 blogs
twitter
67 tweeters
facebook
4 Facebook pages
googleplus
2 Google+ users
video
1 video uploader

Citations

dimensions_citation
39 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
108 Mendeley
Title
Massive blow-out craters formed by hydrate-controlled methane expulsion from the Arctic seafloor
Published in
Science, June 2017
DOI 10.1126/science.aal4500
Pubmed ID
Authors

K. Andreassen, A. Hubbard, M. Winsborrow, H. Patton, S. Vadakkepuliyambatta, A. Plaza-Faverola, E. Gudlaugsson, P. Serov, A. Deryabin, R. Mattingsdal, J. Mienert, S. Bünz

Abstract

Widespread methane release from thawing Arctic gas hydrates is a major concern, yet the processes, sources, and fluxes involved remain unconstrained. We present geophysical data documenting a cluster of kilometer-wide craters and mounds from the Barents Sea floor associated with large-scale methane expulsion. Combined with ice sheet/gas hydrate modeling, our results indicate that during glaciation, natural gas migrated from underlying hydrocarbon reservoirs and was sequestered extensively as subglacial gas hydrates. Upon ice sheet retreat, methane from this hydrate reservoir concentrated in massive mounds before being abruptly released to form craters. We propose that these processes were likely widespread across past glaciated petroleum provinces and that they also provide an analog for the potential future destabilization of subglacial gas hydrate reservoirs beneath contemporary ice sheets.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 67 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 108 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
France 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Unknown 106 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 33 31%
Researcher 19 18%
Unspecified 15 14%
Student > Master 11 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 8 7%
Other 22 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Earth and Planetary Sciences 51 47%
Unspecified 25 23%
Environmental Science 14 13%
Engineering 5 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 4%
Other 9 8%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 433. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 October 2018.
All research outputs
#20,593
of 13,092,793 outputs
Outputs from Science
#1,081
of 61,123 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,057
of 267,099 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science
#46
of 951 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,092,793 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 61,123 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 43.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 267,099 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 951 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.