Letter | Published:

Imaging the Indian subcontinent beneath the Himalaya


The rocks of the Indian subcontinent are last seen south of the Ganges before they plunge beneath the Himalaya and the Tibetan plateau. They are next glimpsed in seismic reflection profiles deep beneath southern Tibet1, yet the surface seen there has been modified by processes within the Himalaya that have consumed parts of the upper Indian crust and converted them into Himalayan rocks2,3. The geometry of the partly dismantled Indian plate as it passes through the Himalayan process zone has hitherto eluded imaging. Here we report seismic images both of the decollement at the base of the Himalaya and of the Moho (the boundary between crust and mantle) at the base of the Indian crust. A significant finding is that strong seismic anisotropy develops above the decollement in response to shear processes that are taken up as slip in great earthquakes at shallower depths. North of the Himalaya, the lower Indian crust is characterized by a high-velocity region consistent with the formation of eclogite, a high-density material whose presence affects the dynamics of the Tibetan plateau.

Access optionsAccess options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.


All prices are NET prices.


  1. 1

    Zhao, W. & Nelson, K. D. Project INDEPTH Team. Deep seismic reflection evidence for continental underthrusting beneath southern Tibet. Nature 366, 557–559 (1993)

  2. 2

    DeCelles, P. G. et al. Stratigraphy, structure, and tectonic evolution of the Himalayan fold-thrust belt in western Nepal. Tectonics 20, 487–509 (2001)

  3. 3

    Bollinger, L. et al. Thermal structure and exhumation history of the Lesser Himalaya in Central Nepal. Tectonics 23, doi:10.1029/2003TC001564 (2004)

  4. 4

    Dueker, K. G. & Sheehan, A. F. Mantle discontinuity structure beneath the Colorado Rocky Mountains and High Plains. J. Geophys. Res. 103, 7153–7169 (1998)

  5. 5

    Kind, R. et al. Seismic images of crust and upper mantle beneath Tibet; evidence for Eurasian plate subduction. Science 298, 1219–1221 (2002)

  6. 6

    Brunel, M. Ductile thrusting in the Himalayas; shear sense criteria and stretching lineations. Tectonics 5, 247–265 (1986)

  7. 7

    Schelling, D. The tectonostratigraphy and structure of the eastern Nepal Himalaya. Tectonics 11, 925–943 (1992)

  8. 8

    Avouac, J.-P. Mountain building, erosion, and the seismic cycle in the Nepal Himalaya. Adv. Geophys. 46, 11–80 (2003)

  9. 9

    Zandt, G., Gilbert, H., Owen, T., Ducea, M. & Jones, C. Active foundering of a continental arc root beneath the southern Sierra Nevada in California. Nature 431, 41–44 (2004)

  10. 10

    Bilham, R., Larson, K. & Freymüller, J. GPS measurements of present-day convergence across the Nepal Himalaya. Nature 386, 61–64 (1997)

  11. 11

    Daniel, C., Hollister, L., Parrish, R. & Grujic, D. Exhumation of the Main Central Thrust from lower crustal depths, eastern Bhutan Himalaya. J. Metamorph. Geol. 21, 317–334 (2003)

  12. 12

    Kumar, M. R., Saul, J., Sarkar, D., Kind, R. & Shukla, A. Crustal structure of the Indian shield; new constraints from teleseismic receiver functions. Geophys. Res. Lett. 28, 1339–1342 (2001)

  13. 13

    Le Pichon, X., Fournier, M. & Jolivet, L. Kinematics, topography, shortening, and extrusion in the India-Asia collision. Tectonics 11, 1085–1098 (1992)

  14. 14

    Monsalve, G. et al. Earthquake locations, depths and source parameters from the Himalaya Nepal Tibet seismic experiment: Implications for continental lithospheric depth. Eos 84(46), S22A–0414 (2003)

  15. 15

    Pandey, M. R., Tandukar, R. P., Avouac, J.-P., Lave, J. & Massot, J.-P. Interseismic strain accumulation on the Himalayan crustal ramp (Nepal). Geophys. Res. Lett. 22, 751–754 (1995)

  16. 16

    Christensen, N. & Mooney, W. Seismic velocity structure and composition of the continental crust: A global view. J. Geophys. Res. 100, 9761–9788 (1995)

  17. 17

    Bousquet, R., Goffé, B., Henry, P., Le Pichon, X. & Chopin, C. Kinematic, thermal and petrological model of the central Alps: Lepontine metamorphism in the upper crust and eclogitization of the lower crust. Tectonophysics 273, 105–127 (1997)

  18. 18

    Bjornerud, M., Austrheim, H. & Lund, M. G. Processes leading to eclogitization (densification) of subducted and tectonically buried crust. J. Geophys. Res. 107, doi:10.1029/2001JB000527 (2002)

  19. 19

    Lyon-Caen, H. & Molnar, P. Gravity anomalies, flexure of the Indian plate, and the structure, support and evolution of the Himalaya and Ganga basin. Tectonics 4, 513–538 (1985)

  20. 20

    Cattin, R. et al. Gravity anomalies, crustal structure and thermo-mechanical support of the Himalaya of central Nepal. Geophys. J. Int. 147, 381–392 (2001)

  21. 21

    Hirn, A. & Sapin, M. The Himalayan zone of crustal interaction; suggestions from explosion seismology. Ann. Geophys. 2, 123–130 (1984)

  22. 22

    Molnar, P. A review of geophysical constraints on the deep structure of the Tibetan Plateau, the Himalaya and the Karakoram, and their geophysical implications. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond A 326, 33–88 (1988)

  23. 23

    Galvé, A. et al. Complex images of Moho and variation of Vp/Vs across the Himalaya and South Tibet, from a joint receiver-function and wide-angle-reflection approach. Geophys. Res. Lett. 29, doi:10.1029/2002GL015611 (2002)

  24. 24

    Sapin, M. & Hirn, A. Seismic structure and evidence for eclogitization during the Himalayan convergence. Tectonophysics 273, 1–16 (1997)

  25. 25

    Johnson, M. R. W. Shortening budgets and the role of continental subduction during the India-Asia collision. Earth Sci. Rev. 59, 101–123 (2002)

  26. 26

    Cotte, N. et al. Determination of the crustal structure in southern Tibet by dispersion and amplitude analysis of Rayleigh waves. Geophys. J. Int. 138, 809–819 (1999)

  27. 27

    Zhao, W., Sen, M., Stoffa, P. & Frohlich, C. Application of very fast simulated annealing to the determination of the crustal structure beneath Tibet. Geophys. J. Int. 125, 355–370 (1996)

  28. 28

    Jackson, J. A., Austrheim, H., McKenzie, D. & Priestley, K. Metastability, mechanical strength, and the support of mountain belts. Geology 32, 625–628 (2004)

  29. 29

    Chen, W. & Yang, Z. Earthquakes beneath the Himalaya and Tibet: Evidence for a strong lithospheric mantle. Science 304, 1949–1952 (2004)

  30. 30

    Henry, P., Le Pichon, X. & Goffe, B. Kinematic, thermal and petrological model of the Himalayas; constraints related to metamorphism within the underthrust Indian crust and topographic elevation. Tectonophysics 273, 31–56 (1997)

  31. 31

    Le Pichon, X., Henry, P. & Goffe, B. Uplift of Tibet; from eclogites to granulites; implications for the Andean plateau and the Variscan belt. Tectonophysics 273, 57–76 (1997)

  32. 32

    Frederiksen, A. & Bostock, M. Modelling teleseismic waves in dipping anisotropic structures. Geophys. J. Int. 141, 401–412 (2000)

Download references


We thank C. Jones and P. Molnar for comments; H. Gilbert, F. Blume, R. Bendick, the Department of Mines and Geology of Nepal, particularly R. K. Aryal and N. R. Shtapit, and the Chinese Academy of Sciences, in particular H. B. Liu, for their collaboration and assistance; the US National Science Foundation for support; and the Incorporated Research Institutions for Seismology for use of their instruments. Author Contributions V.S., A.S., S.S., M..P., R.B. and F.W. participated in the deployment and data collection. V.S., G.M. and A.S. performed the seismological analysis. S.S., R.B. and F.W. provided the tectonic and geological context. V.S. wrote the Letter with contributions from all authors.

Author information

Competing interests

Reprints and permissions information is available at npg.nature.com/reprintsandpermissions. The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Correspondence to Vera Schulte-Pelkum.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Notes

This contains Supplementary Methods, Supplementary Tables S1 and S2, and Supplementary Figures S1-S4. (PDF 249 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Further reading

Figure 1: Location map.
Figure 2: Receiver function analysis along profile and interpretation.
Figure 3: Observed and synthetic data showing the anisotropic shear zone, and explanation.


By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.