Global mantle flow and the development of seismic anisotropy: Differences between the oceanic and continental upper mantle

167 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Shear Wave Splitting and Mantle Anisotropy: Measurements, Interpretations, and New Directions (2009, background): “A great deal of attention is being paid to the prediction of seismic anisotropy from geodynamical models of mantle flow (e.g., Becker et al. 2003; Behn et al. 2004; Conrad et al. 2007; Long et al. 2007b; Kneller et al. 2008; Lowman et al. 2007; Becker 2008) and, in particular, in utilizing technique”
Mantle dynamics and seismic anisotropy (2010, methodology): “Conrad et al. (2007) explored the role of lateral viscosity variations; allowing for those led to a slight improvement in fit to SKS splitting underneath continental domains.”
Radial seismic anisotropy as a constraint for upper mantle rheology (2007, background): “How these two domains partition with depth and tectonic province, and what this implies for lateral viscosity variations (LVVs), is still debated (e.g. Gung et al., 2003; Conrad et al., 2007; Becker et al., 2007a; Fouch and Rondenay, 2006).”
Identifying global seismic anisotropy patterns by correlating shear-wave splitting and surface-wave data (2009, background): “, 2006), and also at global 91 scale (Behn, et al., 2004; Becker et al., 2007; Conrad et al., 2007).”