Earth and Planetary Science Letters 296 (2010) 195–209

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Earth and Planetary Science Letters

j o u r n a l h o m e p a g e : w w w. e l s ev i e r. c o m / l o c a t e / e p s l

An integrated gravity model for Europe's crust and upper mantle

M.K. Kaban a,⁎, M. Tesauro a,b, S. Cloetingh b
a
Deutsches GeoForschungsZentrum Potsdam (GFZ), Germany
b
Netherlands Research Centre for Integrated Solid Earth Science, Faculty of Earth and Life Sciences, VU University Amsterdam, The Netherlands

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: We present an integrated gravity model of the European lithosphere based on an analysis of a number of
Received 13 October 2009 new data-sets, leading to a much higher resolution than provided by previous models. First of all, a recent
Received in revised form 12 April 2010 crustal model (EuCRUST-07) is used to quantify the crustal contribution to the observed gravity field and to
Accepted 20 April 2010
identify the effect of mantle heterogeneity. The new gravity field model is based on a combination of satellite
Available online 11 June 2010
(CHAMP and GRACE) and terrestrial data. We also use these data-sets to estimate residual mantle gravity
Editor: L. Stixrude anomalies and residual topography, reflecting the effect of mantle density variations induced by temperature
and compositional heterogeneity. The separation of these effects is vital for a proper assessment of mantle
Keywords: structure and evolution. In addition, we utilize a new tomographic model for P- and S-velocity anomalies
3D gravity modeling beneath Europe, which is a-priori corrected for crustal structure using EuCRUST-07. The seismic velocity
lithosphere anomalies were subsequently converted into temperature anomalies using a mineral physics approach. We
density structure estimate the effect of temperature variations on the gravity field and subtract it from the total mantle field.
upper mantle The residual fields point to an important role of compositional density anomalies in the upper mantle. A
number of key features of the compositional density distribution, so far invisible in seismic tomography data,
are detected for the first time.
© 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Quantification of density inhomogeneities in the crust and upper
mantle is important for geodynamic studies. Thermal and compositional
density anomalies in the upper mantle exert a prime control on the
coupling of deep Earth and surface processes. Previous studies (e.g. Kaban
et al., 2003) have demonstrated that seismic tomography can identify
inhomogeneities in mantle structure mainly related to temperature
anomalies. However, many other features, which play also a key role in
dynamic processes, remain hidden from seismic studies. These anomalies
can partly be resolved by an integration with gravity modelling. In
addition, density variations in the crust and mantle lithosphere
significantly affect stress fields within the lithosphere. Gravity modelling
has also been frequently used to investigate the lithospheric structure of
Europe and to constrain magnitudes of tectonic forces.
So far most investigations were carried out to obtain information
directly from the observed field (like Bouguer anomalies), to infer
overall crustal structure (e.g. Gomez-Ortiz, 2005; Rotstein et al., 2006;
Pinto et al., 2005). However, the employment of only gravity data is
not sufficient to obtain a reliable model, since the solution of the
inverse gravity problem is usually non-unique (e.g. Kaban et al.,
2004). Therefore, other geophysical data (primarily seismic) are
⁎ Corresponding author. Deutsches GeoForschungsZentrum (GFZ) Potsdam, Tele-
grafenberg, 14473 Potsdam, Germany.
E-mail addresses: kaban@gfz-potsdam.de (M.K. Kaban), magdala@gfz-potsdam.de
(M. Tesauro), sierd.cloetingh@falw.vu.nl (S. Cloetingh).
required and used in many studies to investigate the lithosphere (e.g.
Kaban and Mooney, 2001; Kozlovskaya et al., 2001; 2004; Ayala et al.,
2003; Lyngsie et al., 2006; Pedreira et al., 2007). Furthermore, several
attempts were made to use gravity data together with topography and
surface heat flow to constrain thermal structure of the lithosphere as
for example in the Pannonian Basin (Zeyen et al., 2002) and the
Eastern Carpathians (Dérerová et al., 2006).
However, most of these studies cover relatively small areas of
Europe, with a number of them (e.g. Kozlovskaja et al., 2004; Pedreira
et al., 2007) based on interpretations of separate seismic sections.
These studies have also been performed using different modelling
approaches, data-sets and reference models. Therefore, on a full
European scale, it is difficult to compare the results obtained for
different subregions. The first gravity model of the Eurasian
lithosphere was constructed by Artemjev et al. (1994). However,
this large-scale model, based on sparse and by now obsolete data,
does not resolve many important details of the European lithosphere.
A number of subsequent studies focused on the European region (e.g.
Yegorova and Starostenko, 1999, 2002; Artemieva et al., 2006;
Tesauro et al., 2007). The initial data used in these studies are also
incomplete and largely outdated in the light of crustal and gravity data
only recently acquired. It should also be noted that most of these
studies are limited to an investigation of the composite density
structure of the mantle without a separation of temperature and
compositional effects. Up till now, this has been investigated only for
very large structures (ca. 1000 km of larger) (e.g. Kaban et al., 2003;
Artemieva et al., 2006).

0012-821X/$ – see front matter © 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.epsl.2010.04.041
196 M.K. Kaban et al. / Earth and Planetary Science Letters 296 (2010) 195–209
Reliability of the gravity modelling strongly depends on robust-
ness of the crust/upper mantle models, which are mainly based on
seismic data. As widely demonstrated, the observed gravity field is
strongly affected by density anomalies within the crust, being the
most heterogeneous layer in the Earth (e.g. Kaban et al., 2004). The
crustal effect can almost completely mask the effect of mantle
anomalies, especially on a regional level. A common way to overcome
this difficulty invokes the a priori calculation of the crustal gravity
effect and its subsequent subtraction from the observed gravity field.
The resulting residual mantle anomalies directly image density
variations in the mantle (e.g. Kaban et al., 2003). The latter are
suitable for geodynamic reconstructions and for modelling of the
processes responsible for the evolution of the lithosphere. Attempts to
calculate mantle gravity anomalies have been made since the '70s
(e.g. Nersesov et al., 1975), when the first seismic experiments
provided data on the crustal structure. However, a prerequisite for
reliable 3D models is the availability of a sufficiently large body of
high-quality seismic data. In this context, it has been demonstrated
that significant errors in Moho position might lead to errors in the
residual mantle anomalies, in excess of 100 mGal (Tesauro et al.,
2008). Therefore, the construction of a new mantle gravity model for
Europe, using the most recent data on crustal structure and a self-
consistent approach, is obviously a great challenge.
Below we present a new gravity model of the European
lithosphere (35°N–71°N, 25°W–35°E). This model is based on
several data-sets, which are greatly improved in comparison with
previous studies. To remove the crustal effect from the observed
gravity field, we use a new 3D model of the crust (EuCRUST-07,
Tesauro et al., 2008). The observed gravity field model is based on
joint interpretation of existing terrestrial and new satellite data,
which provide for the first time a homogeneous coverage of the
whole study area (Förste et al., 2008). Temperature variations in the
upper mantle are determined from an inversion of a recent
tomography model (Koulakov et al, 2009). This model has been a
priori corrected for the crustal effect, using EuCRUST-07 (Tesauro
et al., 2008). These constraints provide the opportunity to construct
for the first time an integrated density model of Europe's upper
mantle, which enables to resolve some key temperature and
compositional anomalies.
2. Calculation of the gravity effect of the crust
2.1. Gravity data
Although a large amount of surface gravity observations is
available for Europe, it has even till recently been rather problematic
to construct a homogeneous gravity map for the entire region.
Existing national gravity surveys are often incomplete and the
corrections (including, for example, terrain corrections) applied to
the initial observations are often not specified. New satellite data
(CHAMP and GRACE) provide for the first time a basis for construction
of such a homogeneous gravity model. We use EIGEN-GL04C, which is
based on a combination of satellite (CHAMP and GRACE) and
terrestrial data (Förste et al., 2008). The model is complete to a
degree/order 360 in terms of spherical harmonic coefficients and
resolves features of about 55 km width in the geoid and gravity
anomaly fields. This resolution is more than sufficient for the present
study since we focus on the mantle structure. A special band-limited
combination method has been applied in order to preserve the high
accuracy from the satellite data in the lower frequency band of the
geopotential and to form a smooth transition to the high frequency
information obtained from surface data. For the specified resolution,
the GL04C model is very close to the new EGM2008 model (Pavlis
et al., 2008). The Bouguer correction has been computed using
ETOPO-2 data for elevations/bathymetry (http://dss.ucar.edu/data-
sets/ds759.3/). The resulting Bouguer anomalies, together with the
topography and the map showing main tectonic features of Europe
are displayed in Fig. 1(a–c).
2.2. Key features of the gravity calculations
As common, we perform gravity calculations relative to a
standard reference density model, which depends on depth only.
This method intrinsically reduces “edge” effects. We assume for the
average density of the crystalline crust a value of 2.85 g/cm3, in
agreement with regional and global compilations (Christensen and
Mooney, 1995). The anomalous effect of each crustal layer is
computed relative to this value. Although density within the crust
increases with depth, the total gravity effect of the whole crust will
be the same. In addition, a constant reference density is also more
suitable for the calculations (Kaban et al., 2004). The Moho depth of
the reference model corresponds to its average level (28.1 km)
beneath the entire study area. It should be noted that a particular
choice of a horizontally homogeneous reference model essentially
only affects a constant level of the calculated fields. The latter is out
of the scope of the present study, where we address spatial
variations in gravity. The most important parameter is the average
density of the upper mantle, which is set to 3.32 g/cm3. However, it
has been demonstrated that variations of this parameter within
reasonable limits (± 0.04 g/cm3) do not change the results signifi-
cantly (Kaban et al., 2004).
Within the study area the grid resolution for the calculations is
15′ × 15′, as for EuCRUST-07. Outside this, the data from the global
crustal model of Kaban et al. (2004) are used, which has a resolution
of 1° × 1°. This global model represents a combination of the regional
models for Northern and Central Eurasia (Kaban, 2001), North
America (Kaban and Mooney, 2001) and of the global model
CRUST2.0 (Bassin et al., 2000) outside these areas. These data are
less reliable than EuCRUST-07. However, due to their location far
away from the points used in the calculation, uncertainties in the
crustal model do not significantly affect the results (Kaban et al.,
2004). Therefore, the gravity effect of each crustal layer or boundary is
calculated, considering variations of the corresponding layer/bound-
ary over the whole Earth up to antipodes. This is a main difference
between our approach and most previous analyses. The gravity
anomaly of each layer within the Earth's crust and mantle is calculated
using 3D algorithms for a spherical Earth, taking into account changes
of density in the horizontal and vertical direction and the average
elevation of each cell. The sum of the gravity effect of elementary
volumes corresponding to the initial grids is computed. The algorithm
of Artemjev and Kaban (1994), based on the formulas of Strakhov
et al. (1989), and improved in Kaban and Mooney (2001) and Kaban
et al., (2002), is used for the calculation. The estimated accuracy of the
calculations is within 1 mGal.
2.3. Gravity effect of sediments
The thickness of sediments in the study area is specified in the
EuCRUST-07 model with considerable detail (Tesauro et al., 2008).
However, the density structure of the sedimentary layer is not
homogeneous in both vertical and lateral directions. Furthermore,
density variations within sediments often produce even larger gravity
effects than the variations in its thickness (e.g. Kaban and Mooney,
2001). Geophysical exploration methods and drilling data reveal a
very complex structure of the sedimentary cover, including numerous
local boundaries. Due to this strong heterogeneity, it is very difficult to
joint separate strata in well-logs into uniformed layers over the whole
region. Whenever possible we use a detailed division of the
sedimentary layer obtained from local studies, like in Northern
Europe (Scheck-Wenderoth et al., 2007) and in the Northwestern
Mediterranean (Ayala et al., 2003). In the areas where detailed models
are not available, we construct a smooth density–depth relationship
 M.K. Kaban et al. / Earth and Planetary Science Letters 296 (2010) 195–209
Fig. 1. (a) Main tectonic features of the study area modified from Jarosiński et al. (2006). Abbreviations are as follows: B-VM—Bruno–Vistulicum massif; E-H—Elba–Hamburg fault zone; MHF—mid-Hungarian fault zone; MM—Malopolska
massif; MZF—Mur–Žilina fault zone; RG—Rhine graben; STZ—Sorgenfrei–Tornquist fault zone; TB—Transylvanian basin; TESZ—Trans-European suture zone; TTZ—Teisseyre–Tornquist fault zone. (b) ETOPO-2 European topography (http://dss.
ucar.edu/datasets/ds759.3/) averaged to 15′ × 15′ resolution (km). (c) Bouguer anomaly map (mGal).

197
198 M.K. Kaban et al. / Earth and Planetary Science Letters 296 (2010) 195–209
Fig. 2. Density–depth relationships for different classes of sedimentary basins based on
well-log and seismic data. Curves 1 and 4 are characteristic for basins with minimum
and maximum density values of sediments at the same depth, respectively. The first
curve is typical for marine deposits and the latter for basins in Iberia (the Ebro, the
Duero and the Tajo basin) and basins in the Northwestern European foreland (e.g. the
Paris and Aquitan basins). Curves 2 and 3 are characteristic for basins with intermediate
density values of sediments at the same depth. Curve 2 is typical for sediments located
in some Central European basins, (e.g. the Molasse Basin) and Curve 3 is representative
for sediments of the Pannonian basin.
based on averaged borehole and seismic data and on well-determined
density–compaction relations. Therefore, we consider only general
lithology characteristics of each specific basin, while the small-scale
heterogeneity of the sedimentary cover is left for local studies. For
investigations of the crystalline crust and especially of the mantle, this
approach provides sufficient resolution. The validity and efficiency of
this approach has been demonstrated in numerous previous studies
related to gravity modelling of sedimentary basins (e.g., Jachens and
Moring 1990; Langenheim and Jachens, 1996; Artemjev and Kaban,
1994; Kaban and Mooney, 2001; Kaban et al., 2004).
The density–depth relationships, which are used for the basins
where more detailed data are not available, are shown in Fig. 2. The
most important changes occur in the upper 6–8 km, where the effect
of compaction dominates over other factors. For other basins,
lithology changes lead to a more rapid increase of density with
depth. These relationships are based on seismic and geological data,
which are summarized in the Appendix A.
For the gravity calculations, the sedimentary cover has been
divided into 6 sub-layers (Table 1). Following this approach, we can
with sufficient accuracy incorporate sharp changes of density with
depth. The thickness of the layers is increased to account for the
changes of the vertical density gradient, which decreases with depth.
Estimation of the gravity effect of the sedimentary cover, as a
contribution of 6 sub-layers instead of a single layer, lead to a marked
improvement of the results, with differences up to 70 mGal. This field
ranges between 0 and − 280 mGal (Fig. 3a) and reflects the
sedimentary thickness distribution. However, the influence of the
lateral density variations is also clearly visible when we compare the
gravity effect of basins with similar thicknesses of sediments. For
instance, the contrast in density between the Ebro Basin (character-
ized by a relatively high density) and the Pannonian Basin
(characterized by a low density) gives a difference of ∼ 30 mGal in
their gravity effect.
Table 1
Thickness (km) and density (g/cm3) of the sub-layers of the sedimentary cover, used
for the gravity calculations.
Layers Thickness Density (min–max)/mean
(km) (g/cm3)
1 0–0.5 1.88–2.67/2.10
2 0.5–1.5 1.9–2.57/2.20
3 1.5–3 1.9–2.69/2.35
4 3–5 2.15–2.67/2.48
5 5–8 2.39–2.66/2.56
6 8–16.262 2.47–2.65/2.60
2.4. Gravity effect of the crystalline crust and Moho
The gravity effect of the crystalline crust was computed in two
steps. We have estimated the impact of the Moho variations taking
constant density values for the crust and mantle from the reference
model. Separately, the effect of density variations within the
crystalline crust (independently for the upper and lower crust) was
estimated relative to the initially used constant value. All together,
these fields represent the anomalous effect of the heterogeneous crust
relative to the laterally homogeneous reference model.
The velocities in the crystalline crust have been converted to
densities using non-linear relationships of Christensen and Mooney
(1995), which depend on depth. The anomalous gravity effect of the
consolidated crust varies from − 140 to 350 mGal (Fig. 3b). Significant
differences are found between the areas West and East to the Trans
European Zone (TESZ) and also within Western Europe. Eastern
Europe is mostly characterized by higher values than Western Europe
(up to 350 mGal over the Baltic Shield). In Western Europe the
anomalies mostly range between −100 mGal (e.g. in the Paris basin)
to about +110 mGal in England. The continental part of Western
Europe is mainly affected by negative anomalies, while in some
oceanic domains, especially those characterized by a thick mafic crust
(e.g. in the Vøring basin), positive anomalies are observed (Fig. 3b).
The gravity effect of the Moho variations spans from −450 mGal
to 450 mGal (Fig. 3c), with the lowest values localized in areas
characterized by deep Moho, such as, for example, in the Baltic Shield
and the East European Platform (EEP) and the highest values
corresponding to areas of shallow Moho (oceanic or sub-oceanic
crust).
3. Mantle gravity anomalies and the residual topography
Residual mantle anomalies obtained after removing the crustal
effect from the observed gravity field are displayed in Fig. 4a. They
reflect variations in both temperature and mantle composition and
range from approximately −240 mGal to + 310 mGal. The procedure
of removing the crustal effect is illustrated for a cross-section in
Fig. 4c. For example, the Moho uplift under the Balearic Sea causes the
gravity maximum, which significantly exceeds the Bouguer maxi-
mum. However, this difference is fully compensated by the effect of
low-density sediments, which results in near-zero mantle anomalies.
Similarly, a negative effect of the Moho root under Southern Norway is
compensated by an increased density within the crystalline crust.
Potential errors of the residual field depend on the reliability of the
crustal model since the initial gravity field and topography are
determined with high accuracy. This issue has been extensively
discussed by Kaban and Schwintzer (2001) and Kaban et al. (2003). As
the density of sediments normally approaches crystalline crustal
density at depths greater than 5 km, errors in the sedimentary
thickness are not the main error source. The density variations within
sedimentary layers (relative to the normal density 2.7 g/cm3) are
assumed to be known with an accuracy of about 15% (Kaban and
Mooney 2001). This might give a difference in the gravity effect up to
 M.K. Kaban et al. / Earth and Planetary Science Letters 296 (2010) 195–209 199

Fig. 3. (a–c) Gravity effect of the crustal layers (mGal). (a) Sedimentary layer. (b) Gravity Crystalline crust. (c) Moho variations.
 200
M.K. Kaban et al. / Earth and Planetary Science Letters 296 (2010) 195–209
Fig. 4. (a–c) Residual mantle anomalies of the gravity field obtained after removal of the crustal effect (including topography and water) from the observed field (mGal). (a) Total anomaly (200 b L). (b) Mid-wavelength component
(200 b L b 2000 km) of residual mantle anomalies, displaying a close correlation with specific tectonic structures. The black line depicts location of cross-section displayed in Fig. 4c. (c) Cross-section showing the gravity effect of each crustal
component (sediments, crystalline crust and Moho), the Buguer anomalies, and the residual mantle anomalies (total and mid-term component).
 M.K. Kaban et al. / Earth and Planetary Science Letters 296 (2010) 195–209
15 mGal. For the Moho depth, it is usually assumed that possible
errors of a single determination might be about 5% for the recent and
up to 10% for the old ones. However, for relatively wide anomalies,
each anomaly is always based on many determinations, including
independent data. In this case, an average determination error might
be reduced to 0.5 km for well-studied areas and to 1 km for the areas
with moderate data coverage (Kaban and Mooney, 2001; Kaban and
Schwintzer, 2001). This could result in an error from 10 to 20 mGal.
Error standard deviations in the mean density of the crystalline crust
as determined from seismic velocities could be from 0.02 g/cm3 to
0.03 g/cm3 (e.g. Christensen and Mooney, 1995). Assuming a
thickness of 15 km for the upper and lower crustal layers, this may
lead to an error of 12–18 mGal for each. Comprising all error sources
and considering that they are independent, the estimated standard
deviations in the residual gravity anomalies amount approximately to
30–50 mGal, depending on the data coverage.
The amplitudes of the most prominent anomalies significantly
exceed possible determination errors, with the signal-to-noise ratio
from 3 to 7. A pronounced large-scale difference (∼200 mGal) is
found between Eastern and Western Europe. Strong negative residual
mantle anomalies suggest the presence of low density masses within
the upper mantle and provide an indirect evidence for high mantle
temperatures in Western Europe. The transition from positive to
negative residual gravity anomalies coincides with the TESZ, as also
observed in previous studies (e.g. Kaban, 2001; Yegorova and
Starostenko, 2002; Tesauro et al., 2007). Distinct characteristics of
smaller scale tectonic units obtained in the present study are resolved
due to the higher resolution of the initial crustal data.
As demonstrated in continental-wide and global studies, mantle
gravity anomalies can be separated into two components depending
on wavelength (e.g. Kaban, 2001). The long-wavelength component
reflects large-scale structural heterogeneities of the lithosphere,
mostly related to its thermal regime. To emphasize the differences
between specific tectonic units, the long-wavelength component
(approx. L N 2000 km) is subtracted from the total mantle gravity field.
For a reliable estimation of the long-wavelength component also data
outside the region under study are incorporated from the most
complete global database (Kaban et al., 2004).
The amplitude of the “regional” field (wavelengths ca.
200 km b L b 2000 km) is about ±180 mGal, as shown in Fig. 4b. The
regional mantle gravity field is heterogeneously distributed in
Western Europe, showing in some areas sharp lateral changes. For
instance, from the Tyrrhenian to the Adriatic Sea an increase of
290 mGal is observed over a distance of 600 km, while from the
Pannonian basin to the Carpathians a similar rise (250 mGal) is found
over a distance of only 300 km (Fig. 4b). A chain of negative mantle
anomalies (between −50 mGal and −150 mGal) depicts the areas of
active neotectonics and recent back-arc extension in the Western
Mediterranean (Tyrrhenian Sea and Valencia Trough–Balearic Basin),
the Pannonian basin, the Massif Central and the Upper Rhine Graben
(Fig. 4b). These negative anomalies are likely of thermal origin (e.g.
Tesauro et al., 2009). The high temperature regime in these areas is
possibly controlled by upwelling of hot asthenosphere (e.g. in the
Western Mediterranean Sea), which is confirmed by high values of the
surface heat flow and low P- and S-wave velocities (Zito et al., 2003;
Koulakov et al., 2009). A very distinctive positive anomaly
(N150 mGal) is located over the Dinarides, extending with lower
amplitude over the Adriatic Sea (∼ 100 mGal) and the Ionian Sea
(∼60 mGal). These positive anomalies support the notion of a cold
and high density domain in the uppermost mantle, which can be
related to an increase of lithospheric thickness (e.g. beneath the
Adriatic plate) or to the presence of a cold subducting slab (e.g.
beneath the Dinarides). On the other hand, the Alps and the Hellenic
arc, although characterized by thick lithosphere due to the subducting
slab, show negligible anomalies (less than ±50 mGal), possibly on
account of compensation of thermal and compositional effects.
201
Another strong positive anomaly (N150 mGal), observed over the
Carpathians and extending to the Moesian Platform, might be related
to the presence of a thick lithosphere in this area, as also imaged by
tomography data (Koulakov et al., 2009). Two other smaller positive
anomalies (60–80 mGal) characterize the Aquitaine Basin, extending
over the Pyrenees and Cantabrian Mountains and over the Paris Basin,
where also a thick lithosphere is expected. The positive anomaly
found over the North Sea (up to 110 mGal) is in a good correspon-
dence with a low thermal anomaly (Tesauro et al., 2009).
Anomalies of small amplitude (less than ±50 mGal) characterize
most part of the Baltic Shield and the EEP (Fig. 4b). In this area the
temperature anomalies, related to the presence of a thick cold
lithosphere, are possibly compensated by the compositional anoma-
lies due to the iron depleted mantle, which effect will be investigated
in the next section. This compensation is not extended to the Southern
part of Norway, as revealed by the negative anomaly in this area
(−60 mGal). Therefore, the high topography present there might be
partly sustained isostatically by a low density mantle, as also
hypothesized in previous studies (e.g. Ebbing, 2008). Differences
with previous models (e.g. Kaban, 2001; Yegorova and Starostenko,
1999 and 2002; Tesauro et al., 2007), are due to the updated crustal
model used for the calculations. Our results are more robust, have a
higher resolution and show better correspondence between the
anomalies and geological features. According to our study, for
example, the Tyrrhenian and Balearic Sea are characterized by
negative anomalies, with two minima located in the Southern part
of the Tyrrhenian Sea and in the Valencia Trough, in agreement with a
high thermal regime (Tesauro et al., 2009). In comparison with earlier
studies, in some European regions (e.g. Bay of Biscay and North Sea)
our results show anomalies having opposite sign (positive instead of
negative), which raises questions concerning previous interpreta-
tions. In addition, the positive anomaly previously detected over the
Pyrenees by Tesauro et al. (2007) is in the present study extended to
the West over the Cantabrian Mountains. These findings point to the
presence of thick lithospheric roots also below this mountain chain.
In addition to the residual mantle gravity anomalies, residual
topography (Hres) is computed. Residual topography represents that
part of the surface relief, which is under- or over compensated by
density variations in the initial crustal model (Kaban et al., 2003):
 
1  1 T R−z 2
Hres = ρtop Hobs + ∫0 ΔρðzÞ dz ð1Þ
ρ ρ R
where ρtop is the average block density (including the effects of ice
and sediments) of topography (Hobs), ρ – is the average density of the
residual topography, which is set to 2.67 g/cm3, ΔρðzÞ is the density
anomaly (including all discontinuities like ocean floor topography and
Moho variations) relative to a horizontally homogeneous reference
model with zero density above the geoid, Hobs is the topography
height (zero for sea areas), z is the depth below geoid, R is the radius of
the Earth. The bottom level of isostatic compensation (T) is taken here
at the base of the crust since the mantle material is homogeneous in
the initial model.
Apart from determination errors, the medium and large-scale
component of the residual topography arises from two sources
(Kaban et al. 2003). First, continental Hres depends on the density
distribution in the uppermost mantle: high residuals are supported by
low density lithosphere roots, while low residuals are balanced by
high density anchors. The second source of Hres is the normal stress at
the base of the lithosphere due to mantle flow, defined as ‘dynamic’
topography. Despite the formal discrimination between the two
sources, the effect of large-scale upper mantle density variations,
whether from below or from inside the lithosphere, on Hres is similar.
Large-scale variations of Hres may not be supported by a rigid
lithosphere and consequently they should be compensated by density
inhomogeneities in the upper mantle (Kaban et al., 2003). There are
202 M.K. Kaban et al. / Earth and Planetary Science Letters 296 (2010) 195–209
some other factors, like non compensated post-glacial deformations,
but their amplitude is relatively small (b100 m). Therefore, Hres may
serve as an additional parameter to improve the knowledge about
mantle structure. The local small-scale component is mostly due to
not compensated local density anomalies in the crust (isostatic
deviations) and errors in the initial crustal model.
It is difficult to estimate the dynamic input of deep inhomogene-
ities to residual topography over continents without considering a
complete global dynamic model of the Earth. Different authors give
amplitudes of the dynamic topography ranging from 0.5 km to 1 km
and 2 km (e.g. Pari and Peltier, 2000; Steinberger et al., 2001).
However, an indirect guess may be obtained by comparison with the
mantle gravity field. Actually, the effect of dynamic deformations of
the Earth's surface is subtracted in the mantle gravity anomalies, since
these deformations are part of the observed topography and crustal
structure. Thus, the dynamic contribution can be considered less
important when mantle gravity anomalies and Hres are inversely
correlated with an appropriate scaling factor.
The residual topography with removed small-scale features
(L N 200 km) varies between − 3.5 km and +3.2 km and is displayed
in Fig. 5. The uncertainties of the calculated variations of Hres stem
from the same error sources as in the mantle gravity. On the
continents, Hres error is estimated to be about 0.35 km for the areas
with a well known crustal structure (e.g. Central Europe) and to be as
large as 0.8 km for regions having a poor seismic data coverage (e.g.
the oceanic domain). The residual topography is usually not
correlated with topography (Figs. 1b and 5). The high elevated areas
might be characterized by a positive residual topography (e.g.
Western Alps), negative (e.g. Carpathians) or close to zero (e.g.
Eastern Alps). On the other hand, not negligible residual topography
often appear in flat regions, as discussed below.
The comparison with the residual gravity anomalies (Fig. 4a)
shows that the regions with large negative residual gravity anomalies
are characterized by large positive Hres and vice versa. Both
amplitudes vary similarly after appropriate scaling. This good
correspondence indicates that the dynamic contribution is small
relative to the total variations of Hres (Kaban et al., 2003). However,
some exceptions are visible around Iceland, where the strong positive
residual topography (∼ 1.5 km) corresponds to a relative small
negative mantle anomaly (−80 mGal), supposing some dynamic
support. These differences hold the potential, to be explored in future
work, to resolve density anomalies, which are responsible for both
Fig. 5. Residual topography (km). The density is set to 2.67 g/cm3.
residual gravity and topography, and to determine their depth (e.g.
Kaban et al., 2007).
Furthermore, it appears that most parts of Eastern Europe are over
compensated, being predominantly characterized by negative anoma-
lies of Hres. By contrast, Western Europe appears mostly compensated
or for some areas even under compensated. More in detail, in Eastern
Europe the strongest negative anomalies in residual topography are
located over the Carpathians (about − 2.5 km). These findings could
be due to the presence of an anomalously high density upper mantle
and/or dynamic support. A more interesting result is the negative
residual topography (up to − 1.5 km) observed in some parts of the
Archean–Paleoproterozoic blocks of the EEP, where the topography is
almost flat, showing undulation within 200 m (Fig.1b). Therefore,
without excluding the possibility of the dynamic contribution to
residual topography, the mantle lithosphere of this region might be
not as strongly iron depleted as commonly assumed, but show a more
complex density distribution (e.g. Artemieva, 2007).
In Western Europe the only large negative anomaly is observed in
the Eastern Alps and the Dinarides (−2 km), which extends to the
west over the Adriatic plate with a lower amplitude (−1.5 km). A
smaller negative anomaly (up to −1 km) is observed over the North
Sea and the Paris basin. The former is characterized by a strong Plio-
Quarternary subsidence (e.g. Kooi et al., 1998), while the latter shows
almost a flat topography.
It should be noted, that although the Western Alps are character-
ized by a thick lithospheric root and subducting slabs, as imaged by
tomography data (e.g. Bijwaard and Spakman, 2000; Piromallo and
Morelli, 2003; Koulakov et al., 2009), they appear slightly under
compensated (0.5 km). The most significant positive anomalies are
observed for North and South Iceland (N3 km), which can be partly
explained by large-scale and deep mantle sources (e.g. Kaban et al.,
2002). Other parts of Europe, such as the European Cenozoic Rift
System (ECRIS) and the Paris basin, are mainly characterized by
anomalies of smaller amplitude (up to ±1.5 km) with a reverse sign
compared to the residual mantle gravity anomalies.
4. Gravity effect of temperature variations and composition in the
upper mantle
As shown in the previous section, patterns of the residual mantle
anomalies correspond to tectonic division of the region. It is important
to understand, which factors (temperature or composition) control
 M.K. Kaban et al. / Earth and Planetary Science Letters 296 (2010) 195–209 203

Fig. 6. (a) Gravity effect of temperature variations in the upper mantle (mGal), based on the inversion of a tomography model. (b) Gravity anomalies (mGal) obtained after removal
of the temperature induced field from the total mantle field. These residuals provide evidence for strong compositional variations in the upper mantle, which are not reflected in the
seismic model (see text for discussion). Black lines depict locations of cross-sections displayed in Fig. 8.

density distribution. We use a new thermal model of the upper mantle
by Tesauro et al. (2009) to quantify the gravity effect of temperature
variations. By comparing this effect with the residual mantle gravity
anomalies, inferences can be made on compositional density varia-
tions in the mantle.
The thermal model has been derived based on new tomography
data of Koulakov et al. (2009). This tomography model has two
principal differences from previous ones. First, it is a-priori corrected
for the crustal effect using EuCRUST-07 model. Second, it has been
paid special attention to an estimate of real amplitudes of velocity
anomalies. It has been demonstrated that the new model contains
much more detail than previous models covering the same region
(Koulakov et al., 2009). Therefore, using this model for temperature
estimations gives more robust results (Tesauro et al., 2009).
Temperatures have been estimated from P-wave velocities using
velocity derivatives calculated taking into account the effects of
anharmonicity and anelasticity (e.g. Sobolev et al., 1997; Goes et al.,
2000).
Assuming that the seismic model is well resolved and the
composition is known, the uncertainty of the absolute temperatures
may reach ±100 °C (Cammarano et al., 2003). However, for the
purposes of the gravity modelling only temperature variations at any
specific depth are important. The latter are much better constrained
than absolute temperatures. In this case the main uncertainty stems
from temperature derivatives of the elastic parameters. Their errors
are estimated to be between 10% and 20% (e.g. Goes et al, 2000;
Cammarano et al., 2003). This may lead to an uncertainty of the
inferred temperatures about ±70 °C above 300 km (Tesauro et al.,
2009), which corresponds to a change of the gravity effect of about
50 mGal at most.
Another important issue is the effect of compositional differences.
Hyndman et al. (2009) discuss in detail this effect on temperature
estimations for various depths. The maximum temperature difference
is about 150 °C between the ‘Off-Craton’ and ‘Archean’ composition at
shallow depths (b120 km). At greater depths, this difference is
reduced progressively to about 65 °C, on account of the anelasticity
204 M.K. Kaban et al. / Earth and Planetary Science Letters 296 (2010) 195–209
Fig. 7. (a–b) Total mantle gravity anomalies versus the gravity effect of temperature
variations (mGal). (a) Mid and long-wavelength component (L N 350). (b) Mid-
wavelength component (350 b Lb2000 km).
effect. Therefore, the compositional effect is particularly important for
the Archean cratons (e.g. Hieronymus and Goes, 2010). By contrast, in
the tectonically active areas, the melting temperature is reached at
shallow depths (about 100 km) and the effect of compositional
differences is strongly reduced. For those areas, the main uncertainty
is due to the anelasticity model used (e.g. Shapiro and Ritzwoller,
2004). The area of our study mostly covers tectonically active and
relatively young structures and only a small part of the East European
Platform. The latter is not as strongly depleted as the Archean Baltic
Shield located north of the study area, where we may assume
maximal compositional changes (e.g. Artemieva, 2009; Artemieva
et al., 2006; Kaban et al., 2003). For these reasons, we assume that in
our case the compositional changes are less important.
The effect of water and melt content on seismic velocities could be
important, especially for high-temperature zones. This means that for
some deep low-velocity anomalies (e.g. in the Tyrrhenian Sea) the
temperature increase might be not as pronounced as predicted from
the inversion. We discuss this possibility analyzing the residual
gravity field. In general there is a good agreement of the mantle
geotherms of the present thermal model and those obtained in
previous studies (e.g. Goes et al., 2000), as well as with independent
data based on the observed heat flow (Tesauro et al., 2009).
In order to eliminate small-scale artefacts, seismic velocities
employed in the temperature inversion have been processed by a
low-pass filter retaining only the wavelengths greater than 350 km.
Therefore, some local features revealed by seismic studies (e.g.
receiver functions) might not be visible in the smoothed map due to
different resolution (Tesauro et al., 2009). To be consistent, the
residual mantle field has also been filtered with the same filter to
leave only the wavelengths, which are presented in the temperature
field. These features should be sufficiently well-resolved in the
tomography model, which is demonstrated by various resolution
tests (Koulakov et al., 2009). Since the gravity effect of the mantle
layers is reduced by a factor of exp(−2πZ / L) (where L is the
wavelength and Z is the depth), the impact of the layers deeper than
50 km to the observed field at the shorter wavelengths is negligible.
Outside the study area we used the global tomography model of
Bijwaard and Spakman (2000). This is more important with respect to
the edge effects than for the crustal calculation, since the depth to the
anomalous masses is much higher. The calculated temperature
variations are converted into density applying a depth dependent
thermal expansion coefficient (Tesauro et al., 2009).
The gravity anomalies induced by temperature variations range
from −110 mGal to 230 mGal, as shown in Fig. 6a. In contrast with the
residual mantle anomalies, they are distributed rather homogeneously
with maximum positive values associated to the EEP, on account of its
thick cold lithospheric roots, and negative values over Western Europe.
The minimum values are located over the Tyrrhenian Sea, the ECRIS and
the Pannonian Basin. Probably in the Tyrrhenian Sea even lower values
might be expected on account of its extremely thin lithosphere
predicted from previous studies (e.g. Panza and Raikova, 2008). The
temperature induced mantle gravity field shows only an overall
similarity with the whole mantle gravity anomaly. Eastern Europe is
mostly characterized by strong positive anomalies in both cases, in
contrast with Western Europe. However, there are many pronounced
differences even for large tectonic units within these domains, as
shown in Fig. 7a–b. The relationship between the residual gravity
anomalies and the temperature induced gravity variations is charac-
terized by a general trend with very strong deflections from the
regression line (Fig. 7a). Furthermore, when we compare the fields after
removing the long-wavelength component, almost no correlation is
found (Fig. 7b). Amplitudes of the temperature-induced gravity
anomalies are reduced by a factor of 2 or even more, while amplitudes
of the total mantle field remain significant. At first instance it appears
logical to explain such a large difference just by a lack of resolution of
the temperature model based on seismic tomography. However, an
increase of the amplitudes of the mid-wavelength temperature-
induced gravity anomalies inevitably requires at least one of the
following options: either amplitudes of the tomography model should
be increased drastically, or the conversion factor V-to-T should be
several times larger (in the extreme case thermal variations are not
reflected in the tomography image at all). To our opinion this is
unlikely. As mentioned, corresponding features are well-resolved in the
tomography model (Koulakov et al., 2009) and possible errors in
temperature estimations cannot result in such large differences
(Tesauro et al., 2009). Another explanation for this phenomenon is
therefore required. Thermal differentiation within the lithosphere is
continuously reducing through time (especially for mid- or small-scale
features). By contrast, the compositional differentiation of the upper
mantle is largely controlled by tectonic evolution and remains
preserved within the lithosphere through time. This evidences that
the density structure within the mantle under Europe largely depends
on both factors (temperature and composition) and cannot be
adequately described by using only seismic data.
 M.K. Kaban et al. / Earth and Planetary Science Letters 296 (2010) 195–209 205

Fig. 8. (a–c) Residual mantle anomalies of the gravity field, gravity effect of temperature variations in the upper mantle and the residual “compositional” anomalies along three cross-
sections (mGal). Sections location is shown in Fig. 6b. Abbreviations are as in the text.
206 M.K. Kaban et al. / Earth and Planetary Science Letters 296 (2010) 195–209
The gravity effect of compositional variations in the lithosphere is
calculated by subtracting “temperature” gravity anomalies from the
total mantle field, processed like the temperature, by a low-pass filter,
retaining the wavelengths greater than 350 km (Fig. 6b). Further-
more, the mantle gravity field also contains the signal from depths
below 300 km that was the limit of the temperature calculations.
However, this signal is weaker than the upper mantle signal, and
amounts to about 10–15% of the total mantle anomaly (Kaban et al.,
2003). This finding is consistent with results derived from joint
inversion of global seismic tomography and gravity data (Ricard et al.,
1993; Currieu et al., 1995; Forte and Perry, 2000). We also remove this
component from the “whole mantle” anomaly using the results of
Kaban and Schwintzer (2001). Although the effect of the deep mantle
strongly depends on the employed model, this uncertainty does not
appear to exert a major influence on the results.
The remaining gravity anomalies predominantly reflect composi-
tional variations in the mantle and span from −200 to +170 mGal.
Compared to the thermal gravity field (very smooth), the composi-
tional anomalies are changing more locally. The EEP is characterized
by a pronounced gravity low, which is typically within the range
−150 to −200 mGal, implying corresponding compositional changes
(i.e. iron depletion). In Western Europe the strongest negative
anomaly (up to − 120 mGal) is observed over the Hellenic arc.
Large positive compositional gravity anomalies are found over the
Dinarides (N120 mGal) and over a part of the North German Basin
(NGB) (∼ 100 mGal). The latter anomaly does not exactly correspond
to the tectonic division of the region. This might be partially related to
uncertainties in the tomography model, which is not well defined
here. The positive anomalies are located over the Caledonian province,
between the Thor and the Rheic Suture. Therefore, the closure of two
oceans in the Paleozoic and the consequent amalgamation of terrains
in this area (Ziegler et al., 2001) could result in a compositional
differentiation within the upper mantle with respect to the Sveco-
Norvegian province in the North and the Variscides in the South.
The relationship of the temperature and compositional gravity
anomalies is strikingly different for different tectonic units, as
displayed in three cross-sections (Fig. 8a–c). Both components have
similar amplitudes over the Balearic Sea and the Massif Central
(Fig. 8a). In most areas characterized by a high thermal regime
(Tesauro et al., 2009), such as the Pannonian basin and the Tyrrhenian
Sea, the compositional anomalies are small, suggesting that the
temperature model satisfactorily describes the mantle density
structure (Fig. 8b). On the other hand, the compositional anomalies
are predominant over areas characterized by subducting slabs, such as
the Adriatic plate and the Dinarides and over the Hellenic arc (Fig. 8c).
However, the sign of the compositional anomalies is opposite, which
might be attributed to a different nature of the slabs. Petrological data
have also revealed complex spatial and temporal variations of
composition of the volcanic rocks from the circum-Aegean region to
the central part of Anatolia (e.g. Doglioni et al., 2002). These results
likely point to small-scale variations in the composition and physical
conditions of the subducted African plate. However, due to a relatively
large depth, the gravity effect at the surface of these variations within
the mantle is expected to be small and not reflected in the residual
mantle fields. Therefore, the broad positive anomaly over the Hellenic
arc more likely reflects the signature of the mantle wedge (lighter
than the subducted slab), instead of a strong compositional change. By
contrast, the positive anomaly over the Dinarides and the Adriatic
plate might be due to a denser subducting slab. In this context, the
difference in the anomaly sign is probably closer related to the
subduction mode than to the nature of the slabs themselves.
Furthermore, it should be noted that the positive anomaly sharply
decreases south of the Adriatic Sea, in the same locations where
seismic and GPS studies (e.g. Oldow and Ferranti, 2004; Grenerczy
and Kenyeres, 2004) point to the presence of the boundary between
the Adriatic and African plates. Although many questions remain on
the fine structure and causes of the residual mantle anomalies over
the Dinarides and Hellenic arc, the present results sustain the
hypothesis that the Adriatic and African plates are independent (e.g.
Mantovani et al., 2004).
5. Conclusions
In this paper we estimated the mantle field using a density model,
based on a new digital crustal model (EuCRUST-07) and new
compilations of the sedimentary cover of Western and Eastern Europe.
The gravity effect of the crust was estimated and subtracted from the
total gravity field. The residual mantle anomalies, which reflect
compositional and temperature variations in the mantle, demonstrate
a close correlation with tectonic features. In particular, strong negative
anomalies (up to −150 mGal) are observed over the Tyrrhenian Sea, the
ECRIS and the Pannonian basin, while positive anomalies (N150 mGal)
are found over the Dinarides and the Adriatic Sea. Very small anomalies
(± 50 mGal) are found over the EEP, probably on account of
compensation of the temperature (low) and compositional effects
(mantle iron depletion). The positive anomaly previously observed over
the Pyrenees, is extended to the west over the Cantabrian Mountains,
pointing to the presence of thick lithospheric roots beneath this area.
The residual topography, estimated using the new crustal density
model, shows largely a negative correlation with the residual mantle
anomalies. This suggests isostatic compensation in most parts of the
study area, by additional mass anomalies located in the mantle. These
findings pertain to relatively large structures of about several hundred
km or more. An exception is given by Iceland, where the relative strong
residual topography (+1.5 km) is not compensated by a relative weak
negative mantle anomaly (−80 mGal), pointing to a strong dynamic
support of the topography in this area.
A new thermal model has been used to estimate the gravity effect
induced by temperature variations. Subtracting this field from the
total mantle anomalies, gave the opportunity to determine compo-
sitional anomalies. The anomalies related to temperature are fairly
homogeneously distributed, showing a strong difference between
Eastern (cold) and Western (hot) Europe, with negative values
(∼ 100 mGal) located over Neogene extensional basins (e.g. the
Tyrrhenian basin). By contrast, compositional anomalies demonstrate
a much more heterogeneous distribution. The field east of the TESZ is
smoother, and characterized by negative values over the EEP (about
−150 mGal), likely due to iron depletion. Both positive and negative
compositional anomalies are found over Western Europe. The
Dinarides and Hellenic arc, both underlain by subducted slabs, are
characterized by an opposite sign of the compositional anomalies with
positive values over the Adriatic plate and negative values over the
Aegean Sea. These findings support the existence of independent
Adriatic and African plates with possibly different modes of
subduction.
Acknowledgements
Valuable comments from the Editor Prof. Tilman Spohn, Jörg
Ebbing and an anonymous reviewer greatly improved the original
manuscript. Funding was kindly provided by NWO (Netherlands
Organization for Scientific Research), SRON (Space Research Organi-
zation Netherlands) and DFG (German Research Foundation) RO-
2330/4-II.
Appendix A. Density structure of sediments
The sedimentary cover in the study area is very heterogeneous.
Very deep basins (N10 km), located in different parts of Europe, were
formed both in compressional (e.g. the Carpathians foredeep) and
extensional regimes (e.g. North Atlantic rifted continental margins
and Neogene Mediterranean back-arc basins). At the same time,
 M.K. Kaban et al. / Earth and Planetary Science Letters 296 (2010) 195–209 207

sedimentary thicknesses are minor in many other areas, such as the
EEP (Tesauro et al., 2008). Data available from previous studies have
been analysed to determine the density of the sediments in the study
area. Thickness, seismic velocities, age and, whenever possible,
densities, of sediments for the European basins are displayed in
Table A1.
From this table it can be observed that the density of the
sedimentary layer strongly varies with depth and from basin to
basin. Previous sedimentary models are characterized by different
resolutions, which make the construction of a homogeneous model
for the whole region rather difficult. For instance, in recent work of
Scheck-Wenderoth et al. (2007) the sedimentary cover in the Møre
and Vøring basins has been divided in 6 sub-layers of different age,
thickness and average P-wave velocity. By contrast, for the thick
sedimentary package of the Aquitaine Basin (up to 10 km) only the
surface and bottom compressional velocities are available (Pedreira
et al., 2003), without any information on possible internal boundaries.
As pointed out earlier, for the areas where detailed models are not
available, we draw smooth density–depth relationships (Fig. 2). These
curves reflect a general trend of density increasing with depth in
accordance with compaction laws in the upper part and lithology
changes in the lower part of the section (Kaban and Mooney, 2001). At
the same time, these relationships are consistent with averaged
borehole and seismic data (Table A1). When only seismic data are
available, velocities are converted to densities using the relationship
Table 2
Age, weighted average density (g/cm3) and maximum thickness (km) of sediments for
different European geological settings. The values of thickness refer to the part of the
geological structures displayed in the map.
Geological feature Age Mean
density
(g/cm3)
of Nafe and Drake, (1961). Features like density inversion with depth
and abrupt lateral changes within a basin are not taken into account
and left for future local studies.
The resulting distribution of the weighted average density of the
sedimentary layer for the study area is summarised in Table 2. Recent
to Miocene age sediments of the Tyrrhenian, Adriatic and Balearic Sea
have a low density value (2.2–2.3 g/cm3), even if they reach a
thickness over 7 km. By contrast, along the North Atlantic rifted
margins relatively high densities (up to 2.5 g/cm3) are observed in the
deep basins (e.g. the Porcupine and the Vøring basin). Continental
sediments have a low average density (b2.1 g/cm3) only when their
thickness is low (b2 km). Increased density values (N2.4 g/cm3) are
typical for pre-Tertiary sediments, filling 4–6 km deep (and even
more) basins. These basins are found in a continental (e.g. the Polish
Through and the Carpathian foredeep), as well as in a marine (e.g.
Black Sea basin) setting. Young basins (e.g. the Pannonian Basin) are
usually characterized by relatively soft sediments (∼2.35 g/cm3). One
exception is given by the Iberian basins (the Ebro, the Duero and the
Tajo basin), where, despite their young age (Tertiary) and their
moderate thickness (∼ 5 km), a very high density is estimated (N2.5 g/
cm3) from seismic data (Vidal, 1998). These basins underwent a major
phase of Miocene till recent uplift, leading to the erosion of a
significant part of their initial basin fill (Gaspar Escribano et al., 2001).
The present model has much higher resolution than previous models
(e.g. Yegorova and Starostenko, 2002), showing spatial density
variations between tectonic units, and is more robust on account of
the recent data employed.
Appendix B. Supplementary data
a
Max Supplementary data associated with this article can be found, in
thickness
the online version, at doi:10.1016/j.epsl.2010.04.041.
(km)

Central European Basin Paleozoic–Tertiary 2.40–2.45 10

System References
Møre and Vøring Margin Pre-Cretaceous–Quaternary 2.45–2.50 15
Lofoten Margin Pre-Cretaceous–Quaternary 2.40–2.45 8 Artemieva, I., 2009. The continental lithosphere: reconciling thermal, seismic, and
Upper Rhine Graben Late Paleozoic–Quaternary 2.45 4 petrologic data. Lithos 109, 23–46.
Cantabrian–Pyrenees Mesozoic–Tertiary 2.50–2.55 5 Artemieva, I., 2007. Dynamic topography of the East European craton: shedding light
Aquitaine Basin Mesozoic–Tertiary 2.45–2.50 10 upon lithospheric structure, composition and mantle dynamics. Glob. Planet.
Duero Basin Mesozoic–Tertiary 2.50–2.55 6 Change 58 (1–4), 411–434.
Ebro and Tajo Basin Mesozoic–Tertiary 2.50–2.55 6 Artemieva, I., Thybo, H., Kaban, M.K., 2006. Deep Europe today: geophysical synthesis of
Balearic Sea Tertiary–Quaternary 2.35 5 the upper mantle structure and lithospheric processes over 3.5 Ga. In: Gee, D.,
Gulf of Cadiz Tertiary–Quaternary 2.30–2.35 4 Stephenson, R. (Eds.), European Lithosphere Dynamics: Geol. Soc. Lond. Mem., no.
32, pp. 11–41.
Bay of Biscay Mesozoic–Quaternary 2.25–2.35 2
Artemjev, M.E., Kaban, M.K., 1994. Density inhomogeneities, isostasy and flexural
Iberian Abyssal Plain Tertiary–Quaternary 2.10–2.20 2
rigidity of the lithosphere in the Transcaspian region. Tectonophysics 240,
Provençal–Corsica margin Tertiary–Quaternary 2.30 5
281–297.
Gulf of Lyon Tertiary–Quaternary 2.20–2.25 2 Ayala, C., Torne, M., Pous, J., 2003. The lithosphere–asthenosphere boundary in the
Tyrrhenian Sea Tertiary–Quaternary 2.25–2.30 5 western Mediterranean from 3D joint gravity and geoid modeling: tectonic
Ionian Sea Mesozoic–Quaternary 2.30–2.35 6 implications. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 209, 275–290.
Eastern Mediterranean Sea Tertiary–Quaternary 2.35 8 Bassin, C., Laske, G., Masters, G., 2000. The current limits of resolution for surface wave
Aegean Sea Tertiary–Quaternary 2.05–2.15 2 tomography in North America. EOS Trans. AGU 81, F897.
Po Plain Tertiary–Quaternary 2.45–2.50 15 Barton, A.J., White, R.S., 1997. Custal structure of Edoras Bank continental margin and
Molasse Basin Tertiary–Quaternary 2.45 6 mantle thermal anomalies beneath the North Atlantic. J. Geophys. Res. 102,
Adriatic Sea Mesozoic–Quaternary 2.25–2.30 4 3109–3129.
Ligurian Sea Tertiary–Quaternary 2.30–2.35 5 Bijwaard, H., Spakman, W., 2000. Non-linear global P-wave tomography by iterated
South Rockall Basin Late Paleozoic–Quaternary 2.30–2.35 5 linearized inversion. Geophys. J. Int. 141, 71–82.
Lousy and Rosemery Bank Mesozoic–Quaternary 2.25–2.30 2 Cammarano, F., Goes, S., Vacher, P., Giardini, D., 2003. Inferring upper-mantle
temperatures from seismic velocities. Phys. Earth Planet. Int. 138, 197–222.
North Rockall Basin Mesozoic–Quaternary 2.30–2.35 6
Casten, U., Snopek, K., 2006. Gravity modelling of the Hellenic subduction zone—a
Iceland–Faeroe Ridge Mesozoic–Quaternary 2.20–2.25 2
regional study. Tectonophysics 417, 183–200.
Porcupine Basin Mesozoic–Quaternary 2.45–2.50 12 Chian, D., Louden, K.F., Minshull, T., Whitmarsh, R., 1999. Deep structure of the ocean–
Edoras Bank Mesozoic–Quaternary 2.20–2.25 2 continent transition in the southern Iberian Abyssal Plain from seismic refraction
Hatton Basin Mesozoic–Quaternary 2.30 4 profiles: Ocean Drilling Program (Legs 149 and 173) transect. J. Geophys. Res. 104
Focşani Basin Late Mesozoic–Quaternary 2.45–2.50 16 (B4), 7443–7462.
Transylvania Basin Paleozoic–Quaternary 2.25 5 Christensen, N.I., Mooney, W.D., 1995. Seismic velocity structure and composition of
Foredeep Carpathians Tertiary–Quaternary 2.45–2.50 7 the continental crust: a global view. J. Geophys. Res. 100, 9761–9788.
Pannonian Basin Mesozoic–Quaternary 2.35–2.40 5 Contrucci, I., Nercessian, A., Béthoux, N., Mauffret, A., Pascal, G., 2001. A Ligurian (Western
Black Sea Mesozoic–Quaternary 2.45–2.50 12 Mediterranean Sea) geophysical transect revisited. Geophys. J. Int. 146, 74–97.
Dnieper–Donets Rift Paleozoic–Quaternary 2.40–2.50 10 Corrieu, V., Thoraval, C., Ricard, Y., 1995. Mantle dynamics and geoid Green functions.
Russian Rift Paleozoic–Quaternary 2.40–2.45 3 Geophys. J. Int. 120, 516–523.
Dérerová, J., Zeyen, H., Bielik, K., Salman, M., 2006. Application of integrated geophysical
a
The values of thickness are referred to the part of the geological features displayed modeling for determination of the continental lithospheric thermal structure in the
in Fig. 1a. eastern Carpathians. Tectonics 25 (TC3009). doi:10.1029/2005TC001883.
208 M.K. Kaban et al. / Earth and Planetary Science Letters 296 (2010) 195–209
de Voogd, B., Truffert, C., Chamot-Rooke, N., Huchon, P., Lallemant, S., Le Pichon, X.,
1992. Two-ship deep seismic sounding in the basins of the eastern Mediterranean
Sea (Pasiphae cruise). Geophys. J. Int. 109, 536–552.
Doglioni, C., Agostini, S., Crespi, M., Innocenti, F., Manetti, P., Riguzzi, F., Savasçin, Y.,
2002. On the Extension in Western Anatolia and the Aegean Sea. In: Rosenbaum, G.,
Lister, G.S. (Eds.), Reconstruction of the Evolution of the Alpine–Himalayan
Orogen: J. Virtual Explor., 8, pp. 161–176.
Ebbing, J., 2007. Isostatic density modelling explains the missing root of the Scandes.
Norw. J. Geol. 87, 13–20.
ETOPO-2 (http://dss.ucar.edu/datasets/ds759.3/).
Fernández, M., Torne, M., Garcia-Castellanos, D., Vergés, J., Wheeler, W., Karpuz, R.,
2004. Deep structure of the Vøring Margin: the transition from a continental shield
to a young oceanic lithosphere. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 221, 131–144.
Fernández-Viejo, G., 2005. The ESCI-N Project after a decade: a synthesis of te results
and open questions. Trab. Geol. Univ. Oviedo 25, 9–25.
Finetti, I.R., 2005. Understanding the ionides and their geodynamics. In: Finetti, I.R.
(Ed.), CROP Project, Deep Seismic Exploration of the Central Mediterranean and
Italy. Elsevier, pp. 197–224.
Finetti, I.R., Del Ben, A., Forlin, E., Prizzon, A., 2005. Review of the main results of the
pioneering MS seismic exploration programme in the deep water of the
Mediterranean Sea (OGS, 1969–1980). In: Finetti (Ed.), CROP Project, Deep Seismic
Exploration of the Central Mediterranean and Italy. Elsevier, pp. 1–30.
Forte, A.M., Perry, H.K.C., 2000. Geodynamic evidence for a chemically depleted
continental tectonosphere. Science 290, 1940–1944.
Förste, C., Schmidt, R., Stubenvoll, R., Flechtner, F., Meyer, U., Koenig, R., Neumayer, H.,
Biancale, R., Lemoine, J.-M., Bruinsma, S., Loyer, S., Barthelmes, F., Esselborn, S.,
2008. The GeoForschungsZentrum Potsdam/Group de Recherche de Gèodésie
Spatiale satellite-only and combined gravity field models: EIGEN-GL04S1 and
EIGEN-GL04C. J. Geod. 82, 331–346.
Gaspar-Escribano, J.M., van Wees, J.D., ter Voorde, M., Cloetingh, S., Roca, E., Cabrera, L.,
Munoz, J.A., Ziegler, P.A., Garcia-Castellanos, D., 2001. Three dimensional flexural
modelling of the Ebro Basin (NE Iberia). Geophys. J. Int. 145, 349–367.
Goes, S., Govers, R., Vacher, P., 2000. Shallow mantle temperatures under Europe from
P and S wave tomography. J. Geophys. Res., 105 (B5), 11,153–11,169.
Gomez-Ortiz, D., Tejero-López, R., Babín-Vich, R., Rivas-Ponce, A., 2005. Crustal density
structure in the Spanish Central System derived from gravity data analysis (Central
Spain). Tectonophysics 403, 131–149.
Gonzáles, A., Torné, M., Córdoba, D., Vidal, N., Matias, L., Diaz, J., 1996. Crustal thinning
in the Southwestern Iberia Margin. Geophys. Res. Lett. 23 (18), 2477–2480.
Grad, M, Guterch, G., Keller, R., Janik, T., Hegedüs, E., Vozár, J., Ślaczka, A., Tiira, T.,
Yliniemi, J., 2006. Lithospheric structure beneath trans-Carpathian transect from
Precambrian platform to Pannonian basin: CELEBRATION 2000 seismic profile
CEL05. J. Geophys. Res. 111 (B3301). doi:10.1029/2005JB003647.
Grenerczy, G., Kenyeres, A., 2004. Crustal deformation between Adria and the European
Platform from Space Geodesy. In: Pinter, N., Grenerczy, G., Weber, J., Stein, S.,
Medak, D. (Eds.), The Adria Microplate: GPS Geodesy, Tectonics and Hazards: NATO
Science Series IV: Earth and Environmental Science, Vol. 61, pp. 321–334.
Hansen, M.B., Scheck-Wenderoth, M., Hübscher, Ch., Lykke-Andersen, H., Dehghani, A.,
Hell, B., Gajewski, D., 2007. Basin evolution of the northern part of the Northeast
German Basin — insights from a 3D structural model. Tectonophysics 437, 1–16.
Hauser, F., O'Reilly, B.M., Jacob, A.W.B., Shannon, P.M., Makris, J., Vogt, U., 1995. The
crustal structure of the Rockall Through: differential stretching without under-
plating. J. Geophys. Res. 100 (B3), 4097–4116.
Hauser, F., Raileanu, V., Fielitz, W., Dinu, C., Landes, M., Bala, A., Prodehl, C., 2007.
Seismic crustal structure between the Transylvanian Basin and the Black Sea,
Romania. Tectonophysics 430, 1–25.
Hieronymus, C., Goes, S., 2010. Complex cratonic seismic structure from thermal
models of the lithosphere: effects of variations in deep radiogenic heating.
Geophys. J. Int. 180, 999–1012.
Hyndman, R.D., Currie, C.A., Mazzotti, S., Frederiksen, A., 2009. Temperature control of
continental lithosphere elastic thickness: effective elastic thickness Te vs upper
mantle velocity Vs. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 277, 539–548.
Jachens, R.C., Moring, C., 1990. Maps of the thickness of Cenozoic deposits and the
isostatic residual gravity over basement for Nevada. U.S. Geol. Surv. Open File Rep.,
90-404, 15 pp.
Jarosiński, M., Beekman, F., Bada, G., Cloetingh, S., 2006. Redistribution of recent
collision push and ridge push in Central Europe: insights from FEM modelling.
Geophys. J. Int. 167, 860–880.
Jones, K.A., Warner, M., Le Meur, D., Pascal, G., Tay, P.L., the IMERSE Working Group,
2002. Wide-angle images of the Mediterranean Ridge backstop structure. Mar.
Geol. 186, 145–166.
Kaban, M.K., 2001. A gravity model of the North Eurasia crust and upper mantle: 1.
Mantle and isostatic residual gravity anomalies. Russ. J. Earth Sci. 3 (2), 143–163
maintained and distributed by AGU, http://www.agu.org/wps/rjes/.
Kaban, M.K., Flovenz, O.G., Palmason, G., 2002. Nature of the crust–mantle transition
zone and the thermal state of the upper mantle beneath Iceland from gravity
modelling. Geophys. J. Int. 149, 281–299.
Kaban, M.K., Mooney, W., 2001. Density structure of the lithosphere in the southwestern
United States and its tectonic significance. J. Geophys. Res. 106, 721–740.
Kaban, M.K., Schwintzer, P., 2001. Oceanic upper mantle structure from experimental
scaling of Vs and density at different depths. Geophys. J. Int. 147, 199–214.
Kaban, M.K., Schwintzer, P., Artemieva, I.M., Mooney, W.D., 2003. Density of the
continental roots: compositional and thermal contributions. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett.
209, 53–69.
Kaban, M.K., Schwintzer, P., Reigber, Ch., 2004. A new isostatic model of the lithosphere
and gravity field. J. Geod. 78, 368–385.
Kaban, M.K., Tesauro, M., Cloetingh, S.A.P.L., 2007. A new gravity model of the
lithosphere of Northern Eurasia based on joint inversion of the gravity and seismic
data. IUGG General Assembly, Perugia 2007 July 2–13, JSS013.
Klingelhoeffer, F., Edwards, R.A., Hobbs, R.W., England, R.W., 2005. Crustal structure of
the NE Rockall Trough from wideangle seismic data modelling. J. Geophys. Res. 110,
B11105. doi:10.1029/2005JB003763.
Kooi, H., Johnston, P., Lambeck, K., Smither, C., Molendijk, R., 1998. Geological causes of
recent (100 yr) vertical land movement in the Netherlands. Tectonophysics 299,
297–316.
Koulakov, I., Kaban, M.K., Tesauro, M., Cloetingh, S., 2009. P and S velocity anomalies in
the upper mantle beneath Europe from tomographic inversion of ISC data.
Geophys. J. Int. 179, 345–366.
Kozlovskaja, E.G., Elo, E., Hjelt, S.-E., Yliniemi, J., Pittijärvi, M., Seismic Tomography
Working Group, S.V.E.K.A.L.A.P.K.O., 2004. 3-D density model of the crust of
southern and central Finland obtained from joint interpretation of the SVEKA-
LAPKO crustal P-wave velocity models and gravity data. Geophys. J. Int. 158,
827–848.
Kozlovskaya, E.G., Karatayev, G.I., Yliniemi, J., 2001. Lithosphere structure along the
northern part of EUROBRIDGE in Lithuania; results from integrated interpretation
of DSS and gravity data. Tectonophysics 339, 177–191.
Landes, M., Ritter, J.R.R., Readman, P.W., O'Reilly, B.M., 2005. A review of the Irish crustal
structure and signatures from the Caledonian and Variscan Orogenies. Terra Nova
17, 111–120.
Langenheim, V.E., Jachens, R.C., 1996. Gravity data collected along the Los Angeles
regional seismic experiment (LARSE) and preliminary model of regional density
variations in basement rocks, southern California. U.S. Geol. Surv. Open File Rep.,
96-682, 25 pp.
Lenkey, L., 1999. Geothermics of the Pannonian basin and its bearing on the tectonics of
Basin evolution. Ph.D. Thesis,Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, pp. 215.
Lyngsie, S.B., Thybo, H., Rasmussen, T.M., 2006. Regional geological and tectonic
structures of the North Sea area from potential field modelling. Tectonophysics 413,
147–170.
Makris, J., Egloff, F., Nicolich, R., Rihm, R., 1999. Crustal structure from the Ligurian Sea
to the Northern Apennines—a wide angle seismic transect. Tectonophysics 301,
305–319.
Makris, J., Egloff, R., Jacob, A.W.B., Mohr, P., Murphy, T., Ryan, P., 1988. Continental crust under
the southern Porcupine Seabight west of Ireland. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 89, 387–397.
Makris, J., Yegorova, T., 2006. A 3-D density–velocity model between the Cretan Sea and
Libya. Tectonophysics 417, 201–220.
Mantovani, E., Babbucci, D., Viti, M., Albarello, D., Mugnaioli, E., Cenni, N., Casula, G.,
2004. Post-Late Miocene kinematics of the Adria microplate: inferences from
geological, geophysical and geodetic data. In: Pinter, N., Grenerczy, G., Weber, J.,
Stein, S., Medak, D. (Eds.), The Adria Microplate: GPS Geodesy, Tectonics and
Hazards: NATO Science Series IV: Earth and Environmental Science, Vol. 61, pp.
51–69.
McKenzie, G.D., Shannon, P.M., Jacob, A.W.B., Morewood, N.C., Makris, J., Gaye, M.,
Egloff, F., 2002. The velocity structure of the sediments in the southern Rockall
Basin: results from new wide-angle seismic modelling. Mar. Petrol. Geol. 19,
989–1003.
Nafe, S.E., Drake, C.L., 1961. Physical properties of marine sediments. In: Hill, M.N. (Ed.),
The Sea: Interscience, vol. 3, pp. 794–819. New York.
Nersesov, I.L., Artembev, M.E., Gosimov, A., 1975. Isolation of density heterogeneities in
the lithosphere of the high-mountain regions of Central Asia on the basis of
gravimetric and seismologic data. Phys. Solid Earth 11 (5), 292–297.
Oldow, J.S., Ferrnati, L., 2004. Fragmentation of Adria and active decollement tectonics
within the southern peri-Tyrrhenian Orogen, Italy. In: Pinter, N., Grenerczy, G., Weber,
J., Stein, S., Medak, D. (Eds.), The Adria Microplate: GPS Geodesy, Tectonics and Hazards:
NATO Science Series IV: Earth and Environmental Science, Vol. 61, pp. 269–286.
O'Reilly, B.M., Hauser, F., Ravaut, C., Shannon, P.M., Readman, P.V., 2006. Crustal
thinning, mantle exhumation and serpentinization in the Porcupine Basin, offshore
Ireland: evidence from wide-angle seismic data. J. Geol. Soc. 163, 775–787.
Panza, G.F., Raykova, R.B., 2008. Structure and rheology of lithosphere in Italy and
surrounding. Terra Nova 20, 194–199.
Pari, G., Peltier, W.R., 2000. Subcontinental mantle dynamics: a further analysis based
on the joint constraints of dynamic surface topography and free-air gravity.
J. Geophys. Res. 105, 5635–5662.
Pavlis, N.K., Holmes, S.A., Kenyon, S.C., Factor, J.K., 2008. European Geosciences Union
General Assembly, Vienna, Austria, April 13–18, 2008.
Pedreira, D., Pulgar, J.A., Gallart, J., Dıaz, J., 2003. Seismic evidence of Alpine crustal
thickening and wedging from the western Pyrenees to the Cantabrian Mountains
(north Iberia). J. Geophys. Res. 108 (B4). doi:10.1029/2001JB001667.
Pedreira, D., Pulgar, J.A., Gallart, J., Torne, M., 2007. Three-dimensional gravity and
magnetic modeling of crustal indentation and wedging in the western Pyrenees–
Cantabrian Mountains. J. Geophys. Res. 112, B12405. doi:10.1029/2007JB005021.
Pinto, V., Casas, A., Rivero, L., Torné, M., 2005. 3D gravity modeling of the Triassic salt
diapirs of the Cubeta Alavesa (northern Spain). Tectonophysics 405, 65–75.
Piromallo, C., Morelli, A., 2003. P wave tomography of the mantle under the Alpine–
Mediterranean area. J. Geophys. Res 108 (B2), 2065. doi:10.1029/2002jb001757.
Ricard, Y., Richard, M., Lithgow Bertelloni, C., Le Stunff, Y., 1993. A geodynamic model of
mantle density heterogeneity. J. Geophys. Res. 98B, 21895–21909.
Richardson, K.R., Smallwood, J.R., White, R.S., Snyder, D.B., Maguire, P.K.H., 1998. Crustal
structure beneath the Faroe Islands and the Faroe–Iceland Ridge. Tectonophysics
300, 159–180.
Rotstein, Y., Edel, J.B., Gabriel, G., Boulanger, D., Schaming, M., Munschy, M., 2006.
Insight into the structure of the Upper Rhine Graben and its basement from a new
compilation of Bouguer Gravity. Tectonophysics 425, 55–70.
 M.K. Kaban et al. / Earth and Planetary Science Letters 296 (2010) 195–209
Scheck-Wenderoth, M., Lamarche, J., 2005. Crustal memory and basin evolution in the
Central European Basin System—new insights from a 3D structural model.
Tectonophysics 397, 143–165.
Scheck-Wenderoth, M., Raum, T., Faleide, J.I., Mjelde, R., Horsfield, B., 2007. The
transition from the continent to the ocean: a deeper view on the Norwegian
margin. J. Geol. Soc. London 164, 1–14.
Shapiro, N.M., Ritzwoller, M.H., 2004. Thermodynamic constraints on seismic
inversions. Geophys. J. Int. 157, 1175–1188.
Smith, L.K., White, R.S., Kusznir, N.J., iSIMM Team, 2005. Sturcture of the Hatton Basin
an adjacent continental margin. In: Dorè, A.G., Vining, B.A. (Eds.), Petroleum
Geology: North-West Europe and Global Perspectives—Proceedings of the 6th
Petroleum Geology Conference. : Petroleum Geology Conferences Ltd. The
Geological Society, London, pp. 947–956.
Sobolev, S.V., Zeyen, H., Granet, M., Achauer, U., Bauer, C., Werling, F., Altherr, R., Fuchs,
K., 1997. Upper mantle temperatures and lithosphere–asthenosphere system
beneath the French Massif Central constrained by seismic, gravity, petrologic and
thermal observations. Tectonophysics 275, 143–164.
Środa, P., Czuba, W., Grad, M., Guterch, A., Tokarski, A.K., Janik, T., Rauch, M., Keller, G.R.,
Hegedus, E., Vozar, J., CELEBRATION 2000 Working Group, 2006. Crustal and upper
mantle structure of the Western Carpathians from CELEBRATION 2000 profiles CEL01
and CEL04: seismic models and geological implications. Geohys. J. Int. 167, 737–760.
Starostenko, V., Buryanov, V., Makarenko, I., Rusakov, O., Stephenson, R., Nikishin, A.,
Georgiev, G., Gerasimov, M., Dimitriu, R., Legostaeva, O., Pchelarov, V., Sava, C.,
2004. Topography of the crust–mantle boundary beneath the Black Sea Basin.
Tectonophysics 381, 211–233.
Steinberger, B., Schmeling, H., Marquart, G., 2001. Large-scale lithospheric stress field and
topography induced by global mantle circulation. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 186, 75–91.
Strakhov, V.N., Romaniuk, T.V., Frolova, N.K., 1989. Method of direct gravity problem
solution for modeling of global and regional gravity anomalies (in Russian). In:
Strakhov, V. (Ed.), New Methods of the Gravity and Magnetic Anomaly
Interpretation. Inst. Phys. of the Earth, Moscow, pp. 118–235.
Szafian, P., Horváth, F., 2006. Crustal structure in the Carpatho-Pannonian region:
insights from three-dimensional gravity modelling and their geodynamic signif-
icance. Int. J. Earth Sci. (Geol. Rundsch.) 95, 50–67.
Tesauro, M., Kaban, M.K, Cloetingh, S.A.P.L., 2008. EuCRUST-07: a new reference model
for the European crust. Geophys. Res. Lett. 35. doi:10.1029/2007GL032244
LXXXXX.
Tesauro, M., Kaban, M.K., Cloetingh, S.A.P.L., 2009. A new thermal and rheological model
of the European lithosphere. Tectonophysics 476, 478–495.
Tesauro, M., Kaban, M.K., Cloetingh, S.A.P.L., Hardebol, N.J., Beekman, F., 2007. 3D
strength and gravity anomalies of the European lithosphere. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett.
263, 56–73.
209
Thinon, I., Matias, L., Réhault, J.P., Hirn, A., Fidalgo-Gonzáles, L., Avedick, F., 2003. Deep
structure of the Armorican Basin (Bay of Biscay): a review of Norgasis seismic
reflection and refraction data. J. Geol. Soc. London 160, 99–116.
Tsikalas, F., Eldholm, T.O., Faleide, J.I., 2005. Crustal structure of the Lofoten–Vesterålen
continental margin, off Norway. Tectonophysics 404, 151–174.
Vacher, P., Souriau, A., 2001. A three-dimensional model of the Pyrenean deep structure
based on gravity modelling, seismic images and petrological constraints. Geophys.
J. Int. 145, 460–470.
Vidal, N., Gallart, J., Dañobeitia, J.J., 1998. A deep seismic crustal transect from the NE
Iberian Peninsula to the western Mediterrenean. J. Geophys. Res. 103 (B6),
12381–12396.
Vogt, U., Makris, J., O'Reilly, B.M., Hauser, F., Readman, P.W., Jacob, A.W.B., Shannon, P.M.,
1998. The Hatton Basin and continental margin: crustal structure from wide-angle
seismic and gravity data. J. Geophys. Res. 103 (B6), 12545–12566.
Waldhauser, F., Lippitsch, R., Kissling, E., Ansorge, J., 2002. High-resolution teleseismic
tomography of upper mantle structure using an a priori 3D crustal model. Geophys.
J. Int. 150, 141–403.
Yegorova, T.P., Starostenko, V.I., 1999. Large-scale three-dimensional gravity analysis of
the lithosphere below the transition zone from Western Europe to the East
European Platform. Tectonophysics 314, 83–100.
Yegorova, T.P., Starostenko, V.I., 2002. Lithosphere structure of Europe and Northern Atlantic
from regional three-dimensional gravity modelling. Geophys. J. Int. 151, 11–31.
Zeyen, H., Novak, O., Landes, M., Prodehl, C., Driad, L., Him, A., 1997. Refraction seismic
investigations of the northern Massif Central, France. In: Fuchs, K., Altherr, R.,
Müller, B., Prodehl, C. (Eds.), Stress and Stress Release in the Lithosphere. Structure
and Dynamic Processes in the Rifts of Western Europe. : Tectonophysics, 275.
Elsevier, pp. 99–118.
Ziegler, P.A., Cloetingh, S., Guiraud, R., Stampfli, G.M., 2001. Peri-Tethyan platforms:
constraints on dynamic of rifting and basin inversion. In: Ziegler, P.A., Cavazza, W.,
Robertson, A.H.F., Crasquin-Soleau, S. (Eds.), Peri-Tethys Memoir 6: Peri-Tethyan
Rift/Wrench Bains and Passive Margins: Mémoires du Muséum National d'Histoire
Naturelle, 186, pp. 9–49.
Zito, G., Mongelli, F., de Lorenzo, S., Doglioni, C., 2003. Heat flow and geodynamics in the
Tyrrhenian Sea. Terra Nova 15, 425–432.