The terrestrial cratering record: I. Current status of observations

The location, size, and principal characteristics of the currently known proven and probable terrestrial impact structures are tabulated. Of the 78 known probable structures, only 3 are Precambrian and the majority are <300 my in age. A survey of the variation in preservation with size and age indicates that, unless protected by sedimentary cover, a structure <20 km in diameter has a recognizable life of <600 my. The depth-diameter relationships of terrestrial structures are similar to lunar craters; however, it is believed that terrestrial craters were always shallower than their lunar counterparts. Complex structures formed in sedimentary targets are shallower than those in crystalline targets, and the transition from simple to complex crater morphology occurs in sedimentary strata at approximately one-half the diameter of the morphology transition in crystalline rocks. This is a reflection of target strength. Although observations indicate that crater size, target strength, and surface gravity are variables in the formation of complex craters, they do not permit an unequivocal choice between collapse and rebound processes for the formation of complex structures. It may be that both processes act together in the modification of crater morphology during the later stages of excavation. The major emphasis of recent shock metamorphic studies has been toward the development of models of cratering processes. An important contribution has been the identification, through meteoritic contamination in the melt rocks, of the type of bolide at a number of probable impact structures. This has served to strengthen the link between the occurrence of shock metamorphic effects and their origin by hypervelocity meteorite impact.     

Scaling impact melting and crater dimensions: Implications for the lunar cratering record

Abstract— The dimensions of large craters formed by impact are controlled to a large extent by gravity, whereas the volume of impact melt created during the same event is essentially independent of gravity. This “differential scaling” fosters size-dependent changes in the dynamics of impact-crater and basin formation as well as in the final morphologies of the resulting structures. A variety of such effects can be observed in the lunar cratering record, and some predictions can be made on the basis of calculations of impact melting and crater dimensions. Among them are the following: (1) as event magnitude increases, the volume of melt created relative to that of the crater will grow, and more will be retained inside the rim of the crater or basin. (2) The depth of melting will exceed the depth of excavation at diameters that essentially coincide with both the inflection in the depth-diameter trend and the simple-to-complex transition. (3) The volume of melt will exceed that of the transient cavity at a cavity diameter on the order of the diameter of the Moon; this would arguably correspond to a Moon-melting event. (4) Small lunar craters only rarely display exterior flows of impact melt because the relatively small volumes of melt created can become choked with clasts, increasing the melt's viscosity and chilling it rapidly. Larger craters and basins should suffer little from such a process. (5) Deep melting near the projectile's axis of penetration during larger events will yield a progression in central-structure morphology; with growing event magnitude, this sequence should range from single peaks through multiple peaks to peak rings. (6) The minimum depth of origin of central-peak material should coincide with the maximum depth of melting; the main central peak in a crater the size of Tycho should have had a preimpact depth of close to 15 km.     

The impact cratering record of Fennoscandia

The current database of craterform structures in Fennoscandia contains 22 structures of impact origin and about fifty other structures which lack sufficient evidence for impact. The discovery rate of new structures has been one or two per year during the past ten years. The proven impact structures are located in southern Fennoscandia and the majority have been found in Proterozoic target rocks. The age of the structures varies from prehistoric to ≤ 1000 Ma and their diameters (D) from 0.04 km to 55 km. Nine of the structures contain impact melt. A characteristic feature of the Fennoscandian impact record is a relatively large number of small (≤ 5 km) but old (> 200 Ma) structures: this is a result of success of geophysical methods to discover small but old impact structures in an eroded shield covered with relatively thin overburden. Some of the large circular structures in satellite images and/or in geophysical maps may represent deeply eroded scars of very old impacts, but due to the lack of shock metamorphic features, impact-generated rocks or identified ejecta layers, they cannot yet be classified as impact sites. Two huge structures are proposed here as possible impact sites on the basis of circular satellite images and distinct geophysical anomalies: the Lycksele structure in northern Sweden (D ~ 120 km, see also Witschard, 1984) and the Valga structure in Latvia/Estonia (D ~ 180 km). However, endogeneous explanations, like buried granites, basement domings, or fault-bounded blocks are also possible for these structures. Hints, such as distal ejecta layers or impact produced breccia dykes, of an Archaean or Early Proterozoic impact structure have not been found in Fennoscandia so far. New ways of searching for these structures are proposed with particular emphasis on high-resolution integrated geophysical methods. The impact cratering rate in Fennoscandia is ~ 2.0 · 10^?14 km^?2 a^?1 (for craters with D > 3 km) corresponding to about two events per every 100 Ma for the last 700 Ma. Due to erosion, this is a minimal estimate but is higher than the global rate probably due to strong research activity for finding impact structures in Fennoscandia.     

The impact cratering record of Fennoscandia

The current database of craterform structures in Fennoscandia contains 22 structures of impact origin and about fifty other structures which lack sufficient evidence for impact. The discovery rate of new structures has been one or two per year during the past ten years. The proven impact structures are located in southern Fennoscandia and the majority have been found in Proterozoic target rocks. The age of the structures varies from prehistoric to 1000 Ma and their diameters (D) from 0.04 km to 55 km. Nine of the structures contain impact melt. A characteristic feature of the Fennoscandian impact record is a relatively large number of small ( 5 km) but old (> 200 Ma) structures: this is a result of success of geophysical methods to discover small but old impact structures in an eroded shield covered with relatively thin overburden. Some of the large circular structures in satellite images and/or in geophysical maps may represent deeply eroded scars of very old impacts, but due to the lack of shock metamorphic features, impact-generated rocks or identified ejecta layers, they cannot yet be classified as impact sites. Two huge structures are proposed here as possible impact sites on the basis of circular satellite images and distinct geophysical anomalies: the Lycksele structure in northern Sweden (D ~ 120 km, see also Witschard, 1984) and the Valga structure in Latvia/Estonia (D ~ 180 km). However, endogeneous explanations, like buried granites, basement domings, or fault-bounded blocks are also possible for these structures. Hints, such as distal ejecta layers or impact produced breccia dykes, of an Archaean or Early Proterozoic impact structure have not been found in Fennoscandia so far. New ways of searching for these structures are proposed with particular emphasis on high-resolution integrated geophysical methods. The impact cratering rate in Fennoscandia is ~ 2.0 · 10^–14 km^–2 a^–1 (for craters with D > 3 km) corresponding to about two events per every 100 Ma for the last 700 Ma. Due to erosion, this is a minimal estimate but is higher than the global rate probably due to strong research activity for finding impact structures in Fennoscandia.     

Martian cratering 12. Utilizing primary crater clusters to study crater populations and meteoroid properties

Images from Mars Global Surveyor and later images from Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter reveal that roughly half of the meteoroids striking Mars (at meter to few decameter crater diameters) fragment in the Martian atmosphere, producing small clusters of primary impact craters. Statistics of these “primary clusters” yield valuable information about important Martian phenomena and properties of interplanetary bodies, including meteoroid behavior in the Martian atmosphere, bulk strengths of bodies striking Mars, and the fraction of Martian “field secondary” craters, a datum that would improve crater count chronometry. Many Martian impactors fragment at altitudes significantly higher than 18 km above the mean surface of Mars, and we find that most bodies striking Mars and Earth have low bulk strengths, consistent with crumbly or highly fractured objects. Applying statistics of primary clusters at various elevations and independent diameter bins, we describe a technique to estimate the percentage of semirandomly scattered “field secondary” craters. Our provisional estimate of this percentage, in the diameter range ~250 m down to ~22 m, is ~40% to ~80% of the total impacts, with the higher percentages at smaller diameters. Our data argue against earlier suggestions of overwhelming dominance by either primaries or secondaries in this diameter range.     

Martian cratering 11. Utilizing decameter scale crater populations to study Martian history

New information has been obtained in recent years regarding formation rates and the production size‐frequency distribution (PSFD) of decameter‐scale primary Martian craters formed during recent orbiter missions. Here we compare the PSFD of the currently forming small primaries (P) with new data on the PSFD of the total small crater population that includes primaries and field secondaries (P + fS), which represents an average over longer time periods. The two data sets, if used in a combined manner, have extraordinary potential for clarifying not only the evolutionary history and resurfacing episodes of small Martian geological formations (as small as one or few km²) but also possible episodes of recent climatic change. In response to recent discussions of statistical methodologies, we point out that crater counts do not produce idealized statistics, and that inherent uncertainties limit improvements that can be made by more sophisticated statistical analyses. We propose three mutually supportive procedures for interpreting crater counts of small craters in this context. Applications of these procedures support suggestions that topographic features in upper meters of mid‐latitude ice‐rich areas date only from the last few periods of extreme Martian obliquity, and associated predicted climate excursions.     

Martian cratering II: Asteroid impact history

This paper considers the extent to which Martian craters can be explained by considering asteroidal impact. Sections I, II, and III of this paper derive the diameter distribution of hypothetical asteroidal craters on Mars from recent Palomar-Leiden asteroid statistics and show that the observed Martian craters correspond to a bombardment by roughly 100 times the present number of Mars-crossing asteroids. Section IV discusses the early bombardment history of Mars, based on the capture theory of Öpik and probable orbital parameters of early planetesimals. These results show that the visible craters and surface of Mars should not be identified with the initial, accreted surface. A backward extrapolation of the impact rates based on surviving Mars-crossing asteroids can account for the majority of Mars craters over an interval of several aeons, indicating that we see back in time no further than part-way into a period of intense bombardment. An early period of erosion and deposition is thus suggested. Section V presents a comparison with results and terminology of other authors.     

The inner solar system cratering record and the evolution of impactor populations

We review previously published and newly obtained crater size-frequency distributions in the inner solar system. These data indicate that the Moon and the terrestrial planets have been bombarded by two populations of objects. Population 1,dominating at early times, had nearly the same size distribution as the present-day asteroid belt, and produced heavily cratered surfaces with a complex, multi-sloped crater size-frequency distribution. Population 2, dominating since about 3.8–3.7 Gyr,had the same size distribution as near-Earth objects(NEOs) and a much lower impact flux, and produced a crater size distribution characterized by a differential –3single-slope power law in the crater diameter range 0.02 km to 100 km. Taken together with the results from a large body of work on age-dating of lunar and meteorite samples and theoretical work in solar system dynamics, a plausible interpretation of these data is as follows. The NEO population is the source of Population 2 and it has been in near-steady state over the past ～ 3.7–3.8 Gyr; these objects are derived from the main asteroid belt by size-dependent non-gravitational effects that favor the ejection of smaller asteroids. However, Population 1 was composed of main belt asteroids ejected from their source region in a size-independent manner, possibly by means of gravitational resonance sweeping during orbit migration of giant planets;this caused the so-called Late Heavy Bombardment(LHB). The LHB began some time before ～3.9 Gyr, peaked and declined rapidly over the next ～ 100 to 300 Myr,and possibly more slowly from about 3.8–3.7 Gyr to ～2 Gyr. A third crater population(Population S) consisted of secondary impact craters that can dominate the cratering record at small diameters.     

Impact cratering - a review,with special reference to the economic importance of impact structures and the Southern African impact crater record

Only since several decades has impact cratering been recognized as an important surface process on all planetary bodies in the Solar System. However, as the process has not yet been effectively introduced into geological curricula, it is necessary to inform a wider public about its importance for (i) planetary formation and (ii) evolution, (iii) the understanding of this process as a geological process, (iv) the terrestrial impact crater record and its limitations, and (v) the recognition criteria for terrestrial impact structures, as well as (vi) the need of improvement of the impact cratering record in the light of the potential danger of an impact catastrophe on this planet. It is, particularly for developing countries, of interest to examine the economic and educational-environmental potential of impact structures. That it is possible to carry out an effective, low-budget geological investigation of impact structures within a Second World environment is demonstrated by the discussion of the progress that has been made in recent years with regard to the Southern African impact crater record. Several recommendations on how to improve, on the one hand, the terrestrial impact crater record and, on the other, their general working situation by activation of workers in Developing Countries are discussed.     

Observations at terrestrial impact structures: Their utility in constraining crater formation

Abstract— Hypervelocity impact involves the near instantaneous transfer of considerable energy from the impactor to a spatially limited near‐surface volume of the target body. Local geology of the target area tends to be of secondary importance, and the net result is that impacts of similar size on a given planetary body produce similar results. This is the essence of the utility of observations at impact craters, particularly terrestrial craters, in constraining impact processes. Unfortunately, there are few well‐documented results from systematic contemporaneous campaigns to characterize specific terrestrial impact structures with the full spectrum of geoscientific tools available at the time. Nevertheless, observations of the terrestrial impact record have contributed substantially to fundamental properties of impact. There is a beginning of convergence and mutual testing of observations at terrestrial impact structures and the results of modeling, in particular from recent hydrocode models. The terrestrial impact record provides few constraints on models of ejecta processes beyond a confirmation of the involvement of the local substrate in ejecta lithologies and shows that Z‐models are, at best, first order approximations. Observational evidence to date suggests that the formation of interior rings is an extension of the structural uplift process that occurs at smaller complex impact structures. There are, however, major observational gaps and cases, e.g., Vredefort, where current observations and hydrocode models are apparently inconsistent. It is, perhaps, time that the impact community as a whole considers documenting the existing observational and modeling knowledge gaps that are required to be filled to make the intellectual breakthroughs equivalent to those of the 1970s and 1980s, which were fueled by observations at terrestrial impact structures. Filling these knowledge gaps would likely be centered on the later stages of formation of complex and ring structures and on ejecta.     

Itokawa's cratering record as observed by Hayabusa: Implications for its age and collisional history

In this paper, we study cratering and crater erasure processes and provide an age estimate for the near-Earth Asteroid (25143) Itokawa, the target of the mission Hayabusa, based on its crater history since the time when it was formed in the main belt by catastrophic disruption or experienced a global resetting event. Using a model which was applied to the study of the crater history of Gaspra, Ida, Mathilde and Eros [O'Brien, D.P., Greenberg, R., Richardson, J.E., 2006. Icarus 183, 79–92], we calculate the time needed to accumulate the craters on Itokawa's surface, taking into account several processes which can affect crater formation and crater erasure on such a low-gravity object, such as seismic shaking. We use two models of the projectile population and two scaling laws to relate crater diameter to projectile size. Both models of the projectile population provide similar results, and depending on the scaling law used, we find that the time necessary to accumulate Itokawa's craters was at least ∼75 Myr, and maybe as long as 1 Gyr. Moreover, using the same model and similar parameters (scaled accordingly), we provide a good match not only to Itokawa's craters, but also to those of Eros, which has also been imaged at high enough resolution to give crater counts in a similar size range to those on Itokawa. We show that, as for Eros, the lack of small craters on Itokawa is consistent with erasure by seismic shaking, although for Itokawa, the pronounced deficiency of the smallest craters (<10 m in diameter) requires another process or event in addition to just seismic shaking. A small body such as Itokawa is highly sensitive to specific events that may occur during its history. For example, the two parts of Itokawa, called head and body, may well have joined each other by a low-velocity impact within the last hundred thousand years [Scheeres, D.J., Abe, M., Yoshikawa, M., Nakamura, R., Gaskell, R.W., Abell, P.A., 2007. Icarus 188, 425–429]. In addition to providing an erasure mechanism for small craters, the proposed timescale of that event is consistent with the timescale necessary in our model to form the current, depleted population of just a few small (<10 m) craters on Itokawa, suggesting that it may be the explanation for the discrepancy between Itokawa's cratering record and that obtained from our equilibrium seismic shaking model. Other explanations for the depletion of the smallest craters on Itokawa, such as armoring by boulders lying on the surface, cannot be ruled out.     

Tectonic influences on the morphometry of the Sudbury impact structure: Implications for terrestrial cratering and modeling

Abstract— Impact structures developed on active terrestrial planets (Earth and Venus) are susceptible to pre‐impact tectonic influences on their formation. This means that we cannot expect them to conform to ideal cratering models, which are commonly based on the response of a homogeneous target devoid of pre‐existing flaws. In the case of the 1.85 Ga Sudbury impact structure of Ontario, Canada, considerable influence has been exerted on modification stage processes by late Archean to early Proterozoic basement faults. Two trends are dominant: 1) the NNW‐striking Onaping Fault System, which is parallel to the 2.47 Ga Matachewan dyke swarm, and 2) the ENE‐striking Murray Fault System, which acted as a major Paleoproterozoic suture zone that contributed to the development of the Huronian sedimentary basin between 2.45–2.2 Ga. Sudbury has also been affected by syn‐ to post‐impact regional deformation and metamorphism: the 1.9–1.8 Ga Penokean orogeny, which involved NNW‐directed reverse faulting, uplift, and transpression at mainly greenschist facies grade, and the 1.16–0.99 Ga Grenville orogeny, which overprinted the SE sector of the impact structure to yield a polydeformed upper amphibolite facies terrain. The pre‐, syn‐, and post‐impact tectonics of the region have rendered the Sudbury structure a complicated feature. Careful reconstruction is required before its original morphometry can be established. This is likely to be true for many impact structures developed on active terrestrial planets. Based on extensive field work, combined with remote sensing and geophysical data, four ring systems have been identified at Sudbury. The inner three rings broadly correlate with pseudotachylyte (friction melt) ‐rich fault systems. The first ring has a diameter of ?90 km and defines what is interpreted to be the remains of the central uplift. The second ring delimits the collapsed transient cavity diameter at ?130 km and broadly corresponds to the original melt sheet diameter. The third ring has a diameter of ?180 km. The fourth ring defines the suggested apparent crater diameter at ?260 km. This approximates the final rim diameter, given that erosion in the North Range is <6 km and the ring faults are steeply dipping. Impact damage beyond Ring 4 may occur, but has not yet been identified in the field. One or more rings within the central uplift (Ring 1) may also exist. This form and concentric structure indicates that Sudbury is a peak ring or, more probably, a multi‐ring basin. These parameters provide the foundation for modeling the formation of this relatively large terrestrial impact structure.     

The solar system cratering record: Voyager 2 results at Uranus and implications for the origin of impacting objects

The cratering record at Uranus shows two different crater populations of different ages. The old crater population occurs on the heavily cratered surfaces of Oberon, Umbriel, and Miranda, while the younger one is found on Titania, Ariel and the resurfaced areas of Miranda. Since only the young population occurs on Titania, this satellite must have experienced a global resurfacing event which obliterated the older population prior to the impact of objects causing the younger one. The old crater population is characterized by an abundance of large craters and a relative paucity of small ones. The young crater population, however, has an abundance of small craters and a paucity of large ones relative to the old population. Furthermore, the abundance of small craters and the paucity of large craters increases with decreasing density. This change in the size distribution is consistent with a population of impactors that evolved with time by mutual collision, and therefore was probably in planetocentric orbits. In fact, both crater populations may be the result of accretional remnants in planetocentric orbits that evolved with time by mutual collisions. If so, then the higher crater density on Miranda compared to Oberon and Umbriel suggests that both Oberon and Umbriel were also resurfaced early in their histories.A comparison of the Solar System cratering record from Mercury to Uranus (19 AU) shows different crater populations at different locations in the Solar System. Computer simulations using a modified Holsapple-Schmidt crater scaling and short-period comet impact velocities to recover the projectile diameters from the cratering record produce different projectile populations in different parts of the Solar System. Furthermore, adjusting the Jovian crater curve to match that in the inner Solar System requires differences in the impact velocities that are unrealistic for objects in heliocentric orbits. These results suggest that the Solar System cratering record cannot be explained by a single family of objects in heliocentric orbits, e.g., comets. One possible explanation is that the cratering record is the result of different families of objects (possibly accretional remnants) indigenous to that region of the Solar System in which the different crater populations are found. Thus, in the inner Solar System, the impactors responsible for heavy bombardment were in heliocentric orbits with semimajor axes less than 3 AU. In the outer Solar System, they may have been in planetocentric orbits around each of the Jovian planets.     

The record of impact cratering on the great volcanic shields of the Tharsis region of Mars

Mariner 9 images of the four great volcanic shields of the Tharsis region of Mars show many circular craters ranging in diameter from 100mm to 20 km. Previous attempts to date the volcanoes from their apparent impact crater densities yielded a range of results. The principal difficulty is sorting volcanic from impact craters for diameters $\text{?1}\text{km}$. Many of the observed craters are aligned in prominent linear and concentric patterns suggestive of volcanic origin. In this paper an attempt is made to date areas of shield surface, covered with high resolution images using only scattered small (?1 km) craters of probable impact origin. Craters of apparent volcanic origin are systematically excluded from the dating counts.The common measure of age, deduced for all surfaces studied, is a calculated “crater age” F′ defined as the number of craters equal to or larger than 1 km in diameter per 10⁶km². The conclusions reached from comparing surface ages and their geological settings are: (1) Lava flow terrain surfaces with ages, F′, from 180 to 490 are seen on the four great volcanoes. Summit surfaces of similar ages, F′ = 360 to 420, occur on the rims of calderas of Arsia Mons, Pavonis Mons, and Olympus Mons. The summit of Ascraeus Mons is possibly younger; F′ is calculated to be 180 for the single area which could be dated. (2) One considerably younger surface, F′ < 110, is seen on the floor of Arsia Mon's summit caldera. (3) Nearly crater free lava flow terrain surfaces seen on Olympus Mons are estimated to be less than half the age of a summit surface. The summit caldera floor is similarly young. (4) The pattern of surface ages on the volcanoes suggests that their eruption patterns are similar to those of Hawaiian basaltic shields. The youngest surfaces seem concentrated on the mid-to-lower flanks and within the summit calderas. (5) The presently imaged sample of shield surface, though incomplete, clearly shows a broad range of ages on three volcanoes—Olympus, Arsia, and Pavonis Mons.Estimated absolute ages of impact dated surfaces are obtained from two previously published estimates of the history of flux of impacting bodies on Mars. The estimated ranges of age for the observed crater populations are 0.5 to 1.2b.y. and 0.07 to 0.2b.y. Areas which are almost certainly younger, less than 0.5 or 0.07b.y., are also seen. The spans of surface age derived for the great shields are minimum estimates of their active lifetimes, apparently very long compared to those of terrestrial volcanoes.     

Accretion of the terrestrial planets. II

Some aspects and consequences of the theory of gravitational accretion of the terrestrial planets are examined. The concept of a “closed feeding zone” is somewhat unrealistic, but provides a lower bound on the accretion time. Safronov's relative velocity relation for planetesimals is not entirely consistent with the feeding zone model. A velocity relation which includes an initial velocity component is suggested. The orbital parameters of the planetesimals and the dimensions of the feeding zone are related to their relative velocities. The assumption of an initial velocity does not seriously change the accretion time.Mercury, Venus, and the Earth have accretion times on the order of 10⁸yr. Mars requires well over 10⁹yr to accrete by the same assumptions. Currently available data do not rule out a late formation of Mars, but the lunar cratering history makes it unlikely. If Mars is as old as the Earth, nongravitational forces or a violation of the feeding zone concept is required. One such possibility is the removal of matter from the zone of Mars by Jupiter's influence. The final sweeping up by Mars after this event would result in the scattering of a considerable mass among the other terrestrial planets. The late postaccretional bombardments infrerred for the Moon and Mercury may have had this source.     

The effect of the oceans on the terrestrial crater size‐frequency distribution: Insight from numerical modeling

Abstract— On Earth, oceanic impacts are twice as likely to occur as continental impacts, yet the effect of the oceans has not been previously considered when estimating the terrestrial crater size‐frequency distribution. Despite recent progress in understanding the qualitative and quantitative effect of a water layer on the impact process through novel laboratory experiments, detailed numerical modeling, and interpretation of geological and geophysical data, no definitive relationship between impactor properties, water depth, and final crater diameter exists. In this paper, we determine the relationship between final (and transient) crater diameter and the ratio of water depth to impactor diameter using the results of numerical impact models. This relationship applies for normal incidence impacts of stoney asteroids into water‐covered, crystalline oceanic crust at a velocity of 15 km s^?1. We use these relationships to construct the first estimates of terrestrial crater size‐frequency distributions (over the last 100 million years) that take into account the depth‐area distribution of oceans on Earth. We find that the oceans reduce the number of craters smaller than 1 km in diameter by about two‐thirds, the number of craters ?30 km in diameter by about one‐third, and that for craters larger than ?100 km in diameter, the oceans have little effect. Above a diameter of ?12 km, more craters occur on the ocean floor than on land; below this diameter more craters form on land than in the oceans. We also estimate that there have been in the region of 150 impact events in the last 100 million years that formed an impact‐related resurge feature, or disturbance on the seafloor, instead of a crater.