↓ Skip to main content

On the consistency of seismically imaged lower mantle slabs

Overview of attention for article published in Scientific Reports, September 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 (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
3 blogs
twitter
5 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
75 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
76 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
On the consistency of seismically imaged lower mantle slabs
Published in
Scientific Reports, September 2017
DOI 10.1038/s41598-017-11039-w
Pubmed ID
Authors

G. E. Shephard, K. J. Matthews, K. Hosseini, M. Domeier

Abstract

The geoscience community is increasingly utilizing seismic tomography to interpret mantle heterogeneity and its links to past tectonic and geodynamic processes. To assess the robustness and distribution of positive seismic anomalies, inferred as subducted slabs, we create a set of vote maps for the lower mantle with 14 global P-wave or S-wave tomography models. Based on a depth-dependent threshold metric, an average of 20% of any given tomography model depth is identified as a potential slab. However, upon combining the 14 models, the most consistent positive wavespeed features are identified by an increasing vote count. An overall peak in the most robust anomalies is found between 1000-1400 km depth, followed by a decline to a minimum around 2000 km. While this trend could reflect reduced tomographic resolution in the middle mantle, we show that it may alternatively relate to real changes in the time-dependent subduction flux and/or a mid-lower mantle viscosity increase. An apparent secondary peak in agreement below 2500 km depth may reflect the degree-two lower mantle slow seismic structures. Vote maps illustrate the potential shortcomings of using a limited number or type of tomography models and slab threshold criteria.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 76 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 76 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 17 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 21%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 9%
Student > Master 5 7%
Student > Bachelor 4 5%
Other 9 12%
Unknown 18 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Earth and Planetary Sciences 46 61%
Unspecified 1 1%
Computer Science 1 1%
Environmental Science 1 1%
Psychology 1 1%
Other 1 1%
Unknown 25 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 33. 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 14 November 2019.
All research outputs
#1,201,942
of 25,218,929 outputs
Outputs from Scientific Reports
#11,954
of 138,726 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#23,881
of 322,032 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientific Reports
#503
of 5,596 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,218,929 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 138,726 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 322,032 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5,596 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 91% of its contemporaries.