Fig. 2: Comparison of selected observed and calculated gravity anomalies along cross-sections of the HESC at 553, 1457, 1757, 3023, 4321, and 5151 km distance along the HESC from Detroit Seamount (Fig. 1, inset). | Nature Communications

Fig. 2: Comparison of selected observed and calculated gravity anomalies along cross-sections of the HESC at 553, 1457, 1757, 3023, 4321, and 5151 km distance along the HESC from Detroit Seamount (Fig. 1, inset).

From: Seismic and gravity constraints on plate flexure and mantle rheology along the whole Hawaiian-Emperor seamount chain

Fig. 2

Grey lines show the observed free-air gravity anomaly based on Sandwell et al. V29.166. Blue lines show the bathymetry. Red lines show the calculated gravity anomaly based on Model D, which includes a ‘load boost’ γ = 1.35. Numbers below the bathymetry profiles show the best fit values (from left to right) of Te (km, bold font), root infill density (kg m-3), moat infill density (kg m−3), vertical shift (mGal) applied to the calculated gravity, and the Root Mean Square (RMS) difference (mGal, bold font) between observed and calculated gravity anomaly. Plots of the RMS difference against Te reveal an uncertainty in the best fit Te of 1–2 km (Supplementary Fig. S3).

Back to article page