↓ Skip to main content

The Medusae Fossae Formation as the single largest source of dust on Mars

Overview of attention for article published in Nature Communications, July 2018
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 (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
24 news outlets
blogs
7 blogs
twitter
15 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
4 Wikipedia pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
30 Mendeley
Title
The Medusae Fossae Formation as the single largest source of dust on Mars
Published in
Nature Communications, July 2018
DOI 10.1038/s41467-018-05291-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lujendra Ojha, Kevin Lewis, Suniti Karunatillake, Mariek Schmidt

Abstract

Transport of fine-grained dust is one of the most widespread sedimentary processes occurring on Mars today. In the present climate, eolian abrasion and deflation of rocks are likely the most pervasive and active dust-forming mechanism. Martian dust is globally enriched in S and Cl and has a distinct mean S:Cl ratio. Here we identify a potential source region for Martian dust based on analysis of elemental abundance data. We show that a large sedimentary unit called the Medusae Fossae Formation (MFF) has the highest abundance of S and Cl, and provides the best chemical match to surface measurements of Martian dust. Based on volume estimates of the eroded materials from the MFF, along with the enrichment of elemental S and Cl, and overall geochemical similarity, we propose that long-term deflation of the MFF has significantly contributed to the global Martian dust reservoir.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 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 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 30 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 40%
Researcher 6 20%
Student > Bachelor 3 10%
Other 1 3%
Student > Master 1 3%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 4 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Earth and Planetary Sciences 15 50%
Chemistry 2 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Physics and Astronomy 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 8 27%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 237. 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 21 January 2020.
All research outputs
#63,213
of 14,684,767 outputs
Outputs from Nature Communications
#896
of 27,705 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,505
of 274,236 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Communications
#1
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,684,767 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 27,705 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 48.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 274,236 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 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them