Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Quantifying crater production and regolith overturn on the Moon with temporal imaging

Abstract

Random bombardment by comets, asteroids and associated fragments form and alter the lunar regolith and other rocky surfaces. The accumulation of impact craters over time is of fundamental use in evaluating the relative ages of geologic units. Crater counts and radiometric ages from returned samples provide constraints with which to derive absolute model ages for unsampled units on the Moon and other Solar System objects1,2,3,4. However, although studies of existing craters and returned samples offer insight into the process of crater formation and the past cratering rate, questions still remain about the present rate of crater production, the effect of early-stage jetting during impacts and the influence that distal ejecta have on the regolith. Here we use Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter Camera (LROC) Narrow Angle Camera (NAC) temporal (‘before and after’) image pairs to quantify the contemporary rate of crater production on the Moon, to reveal previously unknown details of impact-induced jetting, and to identify a secondary impact process that is rapidly churning the regolith. From this temporal dataset, we detected 222 new impact craters and found 33 per cent more craters (with diameters of at least ten metres) than predicted by the standard Neukum production and chronology functions for the Moon2. We identified broad reflectance zones associated with the new craters that we interpret as evidence of a surface-bound jetting process. We also observe a secondary cratering process that we estimate churns the top two centimetres of regolith on a timescale of 81,000 years—more than a hundred times faster than previous models estimated from meteoritic impacts (ten million years)5.

Access options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

Figure 1: Detection and distribution of new impact craters.
Figure 2: Annual cumulative size–frequency distribution of newly formed craters discovered with NAC temporal pairs.
Figure 3: Signatures of crater formation in NAC temporal-pair ratios.
Figure 4: Examples and annual size–frequency distribution of splotches.

References

  1. 1

    Ivanov, B. A. in Chronology and Evolution of Mars (eds Kallenbach, R. et al.) 87–104 (Springer, 2001)

  2. 2

    Neukum, G., Ivanov, B. A. & Hartmann, W. K. Cratering records in the inner Solar System in relation to the lunar reference system. Space Sci. Rev. 96, 55–86 (2001)

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3

    Hartmann, W. K. Martian cratering 8: isochron refinement and the chronology of Mars. Icarus 174, 294–320 (2005)

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4

    Stöffler, D. & Ryder, G. Stratigraphy and isotope ages of lunar geologic units: chronological standard for the inner Solar System. Space Sci. Rev. 96, 9–54 (2001)

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5

    Gault, D. E., Hörz, F., Brownlee, D. E. & Hartung, J. B. Mixing of the lunar regolith. In Proc. Lunar Sci. Conf. 5th Vol. 3 (ed. Gose, W. A ) 2365–2386 (Lunar and Planetary Institute, 1974)

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  6. 6

    Daubar, I. J. et al. New craters on Mars and the Moon. Lunar Planet. Sci. Conf. 42, abstr. 2232 (2011)

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  7. 7

    Robinson, M. S. et al. New crater on the Moon and a swarm of secondaries. Icarus 252, 229–235 (2015)

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8

    Suggs, R. M., Moser, D. E., Cooke, W. J. & Suggs, R. J. The flux of kilogram-sized meteoroids from lunar impact monitoring. Icarus 238, 23–36 (2014)

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9

    Madiedo, J. M., Ortiz, J. L., Morales, N. & Cabrera-Cano, J. A large lunar impact blast on 2013 September 11. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 439, 2364–2369 (2014)

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10

    Michael, G. G., Kneissl, T. & Neesemann, A. Planetary surface dating from crater size–frequency distribution measurements: Poisson timing analysis. Icarus 277, 279–285 (2016)

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11

    Le Feuvre, M. & Wieczorek, M. A. Nonuniform cratering of the Moon and a revised crater chronology of the inner Solar System. Icarus 214, 1–20 (2011)

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12

    Shoemaker, E. M. in Physics and Astronomy of the Moon (ed. Kopal, Z. ) 283–357 (Academic Press, 1963)

  13. 13

    Melosh, H. J. Impact Cratering: A Geologic Process (Oxford Univ. Press, 1989)

  14. 14

    Oberbeck, V. R. The role of ballistic erosion and sedimentation in lunar stratigraphy. Rev. Geophys. Space Phys. 13, 337–362 (1975)

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15

    Johnson, B. C., Bowling, T. J. & Melosh, H. J. Jetting during vertical impacts of spherical projectiles. Icarus 238, 13–22 (2014)

    CAS  ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16

    Hapke, B. & van Hoen, H. Photometric studies of complex surfaces, with applications to the Moon. J. Geophys. Res. 68, 4545–4570 (1963)

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17

    Hapke, B. Bidirectional reflectance spectroscopy. Icarus 195, 918–926 (2008)

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18

    Veverka, J. in Physical Studies of Minor Planets NASA SP-267 (ed. Gehrels, T. ) 79–90 (NASA, 1971)

  19. 19

    Bandfield, J. L. et al. Lunar cold spots: granular flow features and extensive insulating materials surrounding young craters. Icarus 231, 221–231 (2014)

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20

    Vickery, A. M. The theory of jetting: application to the origin of tektites. Icarus 105, 441–453 (1993)

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21

    Melosh, H. J. & Sonett, C. P. When worlds collide: jetted vapor plumes and the Moon’s origin. In Origins of the Moon Proc. Conf. (eds Hartmann, W. K. et al. .) 621–642 (Lunar and Planetary Institute, 1986)

  22. 22

    Clegg, R. N., Jolliff, B. L., Robinson, M. S., Hapke, B. W. & Plescia, J. B. Effects of rocket exhaust on lunar soil reflectance properties. Icarus 227, 176–194 (2014)

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  23. 23

    Clegg-Watkins, R. N. et al. Photometric characterization of the Chang’e-3 landing site using LROC NAC images. Icarus 273, 84–95 (2016)

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  24. 24

    Shkuratov, Y., Kaydash, V., Sysolyatina, X., Razim, A. & Videen, G. Lunar surface traces of engine jets of Soviet sample return probes: the enigma of the Luna-23 and Luna-24 landing sites. Planet. Space Sci. 75, 28–36 (2013)

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  25. 25

    Schultz, P. H. & Gault, D. E. Clustered impacts: experiments and implications. J. Geophys. Res. 90, 3701–3732 (1985)

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  26. 26

    Swann, G. A. et al. Geology of the Apollo 14 Landing Site in the Fra Mauro Highlands. Professional Paper 880 (US Geological Survey, 1977)

  27. 27

    McKay, D. S. et al. . in Lunar Sourcebook (eds Heiken, G. H. et al.) 285–356 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 1991)

  28. 28

    Fruchter, J. S., Rancitelli, L. A. & Perkins, R. W. Recent and long-term mixing of the lunar regolith based on 22Na and 26Al measurements in Apollo 15, 16, and 17 deep drill stems and drive tubes. In Proc. Lunar Sci. Conf. 7th Vol. 1 (ed. Merrill, R. B. ) 27–39 (Lunar Planetary Institute, 1976)

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  29. 29

    Fruchter, J. S., Rancitelli, L. A., Laul, J. C. & Perkins, R. W. Lunar regolith dynamics based on analysis of the cosmogenic radionuclides 22Na, 26Al, and 53Mn. In Proc. Lunar Sci. Conf. 8th Vol. 3 (ed. Merrill, R. B. ) 3595–3605 (Lunar Planetary Institute, 1977)

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  30. 30

    Fruchter, J. S., Rancitelli, L. A., Evans, J. C. & Perkins, R. W. Lunar surface processes and cosmic ray histories over the past several million years. In Proc. Lunar Sci. Conf. 9th Vol. 2 (ed. Merrill, R. B. ) 2019–2032 (Lunar Planetary Institute, 1978)

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  31. 31

    Robinson, M. S. et al. Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter Camera (LROC) instrument overview. Space Sci. Rev. 150, 81–124 (2010)

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  32. 32

    Thompson, S. D., Bowles, Z. R., Povilaitis, R. Z., Daubar, I. J. & Robinson, M. S. Recent impacts on the Moon. 45th Lunar and Planet. Sci. Conf. abstr. 2769 (2014)

  33. 33

    Speyerer, E. J. J. et al. Pre-flight and on-orbit geometric calibration of the lunar reconnaissance orbiter camera. Space Sci. Rev. 200, 357–392 (2016)

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  34. 34

    Anderson, J. A., Sides, S. C., Soltesz, D. L., Sucharski, T. L. & Becker, K. J. Modernization of the Integrated Software for Imagers and Spectrometers. Lunar Planet. Sci. Conf. 35, abstr. 2039 (2004)

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  35. 35

    Gonzalez, R. C. & Woods, R. E. Digital Image Processing (Addison-Wesley, 1992)

  36. 36

    Daubar, I. J., McEwen, A. S., Byrne, S., Kennedy, M. R. & Ivanov, B. The current martian cratering rate. Icarus 225, 506–516 (2013)

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  37. 37

    Marchi, S., Mottola, S., Cremonese, G., Massironi, M. & Martellato, E. A new chronology for the Moon and Mercury. Astron. J. 137, 4936–4948 (2009)

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  38. 38

    Ivanov, B. A. Earth/Moon impact rate comparison: searching constraints for lunar secondary/primary cratering proportion. Icarus 183, 504–507 (2006)

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  39. 39

    Brown, P. G. et al. A 500-kiloton airburst over Chelyabinsk and an enhanced hazard from small impactors. Nature 503, 238–241 (2013)

    CAS  ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  40. 40

    Daubar, I. J. et al. Changes in blast zone albedo patterns around new martian impact craters. Icarus 267, 86–105 (2016)

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We acknowledge the engineers and technical support team at NASA Goddard Space Flight Center and Arizona State University who enable the collection of a vast image archive of the lunar surface that will be used for decades to come. This work is supported by the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) Project and the Arizona State University LROC contract.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

E.J.S. drafted the manuscript and authored the CRISP software used to identify surface changes. R.Z.P. classified and catalogued the temporal changes. M.S.R. is the principal investigator for the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter Camera and provided key contributions to the scientific interpretations. P.C.T. aided in the scientific interpretations of splotches and reflectance zones. R.V.W. assisted in optimizing the change detection software and assessed temporal changes. All of the authors contributed to interpretation and analysis of the data.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Emerson J. Speyerer.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Additional information

Reviewer Information Nature thanks M. Cintala, B. Ivanov and the other anonymous reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.

Extended data figures and tables

Extended Data Figure 1 Reflectance changes caused by emplacement of splotches.

Histogram of reflectance changes associated with low-reflectance (top; n = 18,756) and high-reflectance (bottom; n = 1,757) splotches.

Extended Data Figure 2 Distribution of NAC temporal pairs.

Image footprints colour-coded by the number of days between the before and after observations (June 2009 to May 2015). The size of image footprints are exaggerated for display clarity.

Extended Data Figure 3 Temporal-pair statistics.

Left, distribution of the area covered by individual temporal pairs versus the temporal spacing between the corresponding observations. Right, histogram of the ground sampling distance for each after image of the NAC temporal pair.

Extended Data Figure 4 Effect of image registration errors.

ad, Examples of a temporal ratio image with decreasing pixel offsets (ratio of NAC frames M188678240LR/M1180548227LR): 10-pixel offset (7.8-m offset; a); 5-pixel offset (3.9-m offset; b); 3-pixel offset (2.3-m offset; c); and <1-pixel offset (<0.8-m offset; d). The larger offsets in ac make the identification of the new impact crater impossible.

Extended Data Figure 5 R-plot of new crater population.

Relative crater frequency R of the 222 new impact craters identified with temporal imaging. For reference, a 1-yr isochron (grey line) derived from the NPF is overlaid for diameters of ≥10 m. Error bars are estimated on the basis of Poisson statistics of counts.

Extended Data Figure 6 Details of the impact process recorded in the temporal pair.

Temporal ratio image of the 17 March 2013 impact site surrounded by four distinct reflectance zones (ratio of NAC frames M1129645568L/M183689789L).

Extended Data Figure 7 Range of reflectance zones associated with new impacts.

Maximum zone distance versus crater diameter for each of the four reflectance zones observed around new impacts. Craters smaller than 3 m in diameter were excluded from the least-squares fit.

Extended Data Table 1 Least-squares fit to maximum zone distance compared to crater diameter
Extended Data Table 2 Span of the proximal reflectance zones

PowerPoint slides

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Speyerer, E., Povilaitis, R., Robinson, M. et al. Quantifying crater production and regolith overturn on the Moon with temporal imaging. Nature 538, 215–218 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1038/nature19829

Download citation

Further reading

  • Impact gardening on Europa and repercussions for possible biosignatures

    • E. S. Costello
    • , C. B. Phillips
    • , P. G. Lucey
    •  & R. R. Ghent

    Nature Astronomy (2021)

  • Rationale for BepiColombo Studies of Mercury’s Surface and Composition

    • David A. Rothery
    • , Matteo Massironi
    • , Giulia Alemanno
    • , Océane Barraud
    • , Sebastien Besse
    • , Nicolas Bott
    • , Rosario Brunetto
    • , Emma Bunce
    • , Paul Byrne
    • , Fabrizio Capaccioni
    • , Maria Teresa Capria
    • , Cristian Carli
    • , Bernard Charlier
    • , Thomas Cornet
    • , Gabriele Cremonese
    • , Mario D’Amore
    • , M. Cristina De Sanctis
    • , Alain Doressoundiram
    • , Luigi Ferranti
    • , Gianrico Filacchione
    • , Valentina Galluzzi
    • , Lorenza Giacomini
    • , Manuel Grande
    • , Laura G. Guzzetta
    • , Jörn Helbert
    • , Daniel Heyner
    • , Harald Hiesinger
    • , Hauke Hussmann
    • , Ryuku Hyodo
    • , Tomas Kohout
    • , Alexander Kozyrev
    • , Maxim Litvak
    • , Alice Lucchetti
    • , Alexey Malakhov
    • , Christopher Malliband
    • , Paolo Mancinelli
    • , Julia Martikainen
    • , Adrian Martindale
    • , Alessandro Maturilli
    • , Anna Milillo
    • , Igor Mitrofanov
    • , Maxim Mokrousov
    • , Andreas Morlok
    • , Karri Muinonen
    • , Olivier Namur
    • , Alan Owens
    • , Larry R. Nittler
    • , Joana S. Oliveira
    • , Pasquale Palumbo
    • , Maurizio Pajola
    • , David L. Pegg
    • , Antti Penttilä
    • , Romolo Politi
    • , Francesco Quarati
    • , Cristina Re
    • , Anton Sanin
    • , Rita Schulz
    • , Claudia Stangarone
    • , Aleksandra Stojic
    • , Vladislav Tretiyakov
    • , Timo Väisänen
    • , Indhu Varatharajan
    • , Iris Weber
    • , Jack Wright
    • , Peter Wurz
    •  & Francesca Zambon

    Space Science Reviews (2020)

  • On the importance of self-secondaries

    • Zhiyong Xiao

    Geoscience Letters (2018)

  • Meteorites pummel the Moon far more than expected

    • Alexandra Witze

    Nature (2016)

  • Moon churn

    • Andrew Mitchinson

    Nature (2016)

Comments

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.

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing