Geophysical Research Letters

Correction to “Mercury's geochronology revised by applying Model Production Function to Mariner 10 data: Geological implications”

Authors

Errata

This article corrects:

  1. Mercury's geochronology revised by applying Model Production Function to Mariner 10 data: Geological implications Volume 36, Issue 21, Article first published online: 7 November 2009

[1] In the paper “Mercury's geochronology revised by applying Model Production Function to Mariner 10 data: Geological implications” by Matteo Massironi et al. (Geophysical Research Letters, 36, L21204, doi:10.1029/2009GL040353, 2009), the last two rows of Table 1 were incorrectly aligned. The corrected Table 1 is reproduced here.

Table 1. Comparison Between MPF-NEO, MPF-MBA and NPF Ages
Geological UnitsMPF-NEOMPF-MBANPF Age
Ageχ2Ageχ2
Highlands (heavily cratered terrain + intercrater plains)4.18 ± 0.02638.54.06 ± 0.0266.34.07 ± 0.03
Chekhov3.97 ± 0.011.193.98 ± 0.020.704.05 ± 0.08
Dostoevskij3.94 ± 0.010.453.94 ± 0.010.203.99 ± 0.06
Pushkin3.94 ± 0.031.633.94 ± 0.030.893.98 ± 0.06
Raphael3.94 ± 0.028.553.94 ± 0.024.20-
Haydn3.93 ± 0.023.953.92 ± 0.031.793.99 ± 0.06
Tolstoj3.91 ± 0.020.423.92 ± 0.020.293.97 ± 0.05
Shakespeare3.83 ± 0.013.283.87 ± 0.024.88-
Beethoven3.80 ± 0.020.513.79 ± 0.020.203.86 ± 0.05
Caloris (interior)     
top layer (10 km)3.74 ± 0.041.723.73 ± 0.072.643.77 ± 0.06
top layer (4.3 Km)3.50 ± 0.030.163.59 ± 0.020.10 

Ancillary