21
A review of crust and upper mantle structure beneath the India subcontinent Arun Singh a,* , Chandrani Singh a , B. L. N. Kennett b a Department of Geology and Geophysics, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur, India b Research School of Earth Sciences, The Australian National University, Canberra ACT 2601, Australia Supplementary Material * Corresponding Author Email address: [email protected] (Arun Singh) 1

Supplementary Material... · A review of crust and upper mantle structure beneath the India subcontinent Arun Singha,, Chandrani Singha, B. L. N. Kennettb aDepartment of Geology and

  • Upload
    others

  • View
    0

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Supplementary Material... · A review of crust and upper mantle structure beneath the India subcontinent Arun Singha,, Chandrani Singha, B. L. N. Kennettb aDepartment of Geology and

A review of crust and upper mantle structure beneath the Indiasubcontinent

Arun Singha,∗, Chandrani Singha, B. L. N. Kennettb

aDepartment of Geology and Geophysics,Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur, India

bResearch School of Earth Sciences,The Australian National University, Canberra ACT 2601, Australia

Supplementary Material

∗Corresponding AuthorEmail address: [email protected] (Arun Singh)

1

Page 2: Supplementary Material... · A review of crust and upper mantle structure beneath the India subcontinent Arun Singha,, Chandrani Singha, B. L. N. Kennettb aDepartment of Geology and

Table S1: Crustal thickness and average crustal velocities of India and Tibet from teleseismic receiverfunctions. The references are same as used to create Figure 4. The seismic stations marked by asterisksymbol are avoided to create final maps due to large deviations in thickness estimates for the same station.Regions: HIM, Himalaya and Tibet; IGP, Indo-Gangetic Plains; SP, Shillong Plateau; MKH, Mikir Hills;DAFB, Delhi-Aravalli Fold Belt; DVP, Deccan Volcanic Province; NSL, Narmada-Son Lineament; EDC,Eastern Dharwar Craton; WDC, Western Dharwar Craton; SGT, Southern Granulite Terrain; BC, Bastarcraton;SC, Singhbhum Craton; BUC, Bundelkhand Craton;CB, Cuddapah Basin; VNB, Vindhyan Basin;EGT, Eastern ghats belt; GG, Godavari Graben; WG, Western Ghats; SRILK, Srilanka.

Station Latitude Longitude Average Thickness Poisson’s Average Average Region Reference(◦) (◦) Vp/Vs (km) Ratio Vp Vs

A01 36.43 94.87 1.78 49.50 0.270 6.20 3.48 HIM Xu et al. (2013a)

A01 36.43 94.87 1.81 48.00 0.280 6.22 3.44 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

A03 36.81 92.95 1.78 49.00 0.269 6.20 3.48 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

A05 37.02 91.74 1.83 57.00 0.287 6.38 3.49 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

AMDO 32.25 91.70 1.73 74.00 0.249 6.20 3.58 HIM Sherrington et al. (2004)

AML 28.05 96.48 – 53.97 – – – HIM Hazarika et al. (2012)

AXX 40.50 95.80 1.74 48.80 0.252 6.16 3.54 HIM Chen et al. (2010)

AXX 40.50 95.80 1.80 49.50 0.277 6.30 3.50 HIM Tian and Zhang (2013)

B02 32.97 94.14 1.79 75.00 0.273 6.48 3.62 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

B02 32.97 94.14 1.81 74.30 0.280 6.20 3.43 HIM Xu et al. (2013a)

BAS 30.06 96.91 1.81 68.40 0.280 6.20 3.43 HIM Wang et al. (2010)

BB14 29.37 90.18 – 80.00 – – 3.65 HIM Mitra et al. (2005)

BB18 28.93 89.74 – 76.00 – – 3.61 HIM Mitra et al. (2005)

BB20 28.73 89.66 – 76.00 – – 3.65 HIM Mitra et al. (2005)

BB23 28.49 89.66 – 62.00 – – 3.63 HIM Mitra et al. (2005)

BB34 29.10 89.25 – 76.00 – – 3.51 HIM Acton et al. (2011)

BDA 30.20 97.31 1.78 71.20 0.269 6.20 3.48 HIM Wang et al. (2010)

BDI 30.95 76.78 – 49.84 – – – HIM Rai et al. (2006)

BIRA 26.48 87.26 – 46.00 – – 3.78 HIM Acton et al. (2011)

BKD 26.92 92.11 1.73 57.00 0.250 6.35 3.67 HIM Kumar et al. (2004)

BKD 26.92 92.11 1.84 50.00 0.290 6.35 3.45 HIM Kumar et al. (2004)

BMD 27.27 92.42 – 48.00 – – 3.58 HIM Mitra et al. (2005)

BMI 29.81 95.82 1.69 66.60 0.231 6.20 3.67 HIM Wang et al. (2010)

BNJR 31.65 77.35 1.74 50.00 0.253 – – HIM Hazarika et al. (2013a)

bs 25.12 99.15 1.72 38.70 0.245 6.20 3.60 HIM Li et al. (2009)

BSP 31.30 76.78 – 49.84 – – – HIM Rai et al. (2006)

BTA 30.00 99.10 1.92 57.40 0.310 6.30 3.28 HIM Xu et al. (2013b)

BTGM 34.67 73.02 – 60.00 – – 3.63 HIM Li et al. (2009)

BUDO 35.53 93.90 1.73 69.00 0.249 6.26 3.62 HIM Sherrington et al. (2004)

C01 35.81 94.89 1.73 67.90 0.250 6.20 3.58 HIM Xu et al. (2013a)

C02 35.70 94.40 1.80 68.30 0.280 6.20 3.44 HIM Xu et al. (2013a)

C02 35.70 94.40 1.82 69.00 0.284 6.40 3.52 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

C03 35.90 93.77 1.79 70.00 0.273 6.40 3.58 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

C04 35.57 94.04 1.73 71.00 0.249 6.40 3.70 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

Continued on next page

Page 3: Supplementary Material... · A review of crust and upper mantle structure beneath the India subcontinent Arun Singha,, Chandrani Singha, B. L. N. Kennettb aDepartment of Geology and

Table S1 – Continued from previous page

Station Latitude Longitude Average Thickness Poisson’s Average Average Region Reference(◦) (◦) Vp/Vs (km) Ratio Vp Vs

C04 35.57 94.04 1.78 68.50 0.270 6.20 3.48 HIM Xu et al. (2013a)

C08 34.28 92.43 1.83 67.00 0.287 6.40 3.50 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

C09 33.86 92.25 1.78 67.50 0.270 6.20 3.48 HIM Xu et al. (2013a)

C09 33.86 92.25 1.81 69.00 0.280 6.47 3.57 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

C10 33.26 91.84 1.80 63.30 0.280 6.20 3.44 HIM Xu et al. (2013a)

C10 33.26 91.84 1.80 66.00 0.277 6.47 3.59 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

C11 32.79 91.86 1.74 66.50 0.250 6.20 3.56 HIM Xu et al. (2013a)

C11 32.79 91.86 1.85 63.00 0.294 6.47 3.50 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

C12 31.99 91.71 1.75 72.70 0.260 6.20 3.54 HIM Xu et al. (2013a)

C12 31.99 91.71 1.86 71.00 0.297 6.47 3.48 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

C13 34.00 91.55 1.88 66.00 0.303 6.47 3.44 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

C14 32.10 91.26 1.78 69.00 0.269 6.47 3.63 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

CAD 31.00 97.50 1.70 71.50 0.234 6.32 3.72 HIM Chen et al. (2010)

CHTG 27.60 88.64 – 54.00 – – 3.53 HIM Acton et al. (2011)

CHTO 18.79 98.98 1.65 30.90 0.210 – – HIM Bai et al. (2010)

CHUL 33.60 78.65 1.84 78.00 0.290 – – HIM Hazarika et al. (2013a)

CHUM 33.36 78.34 1.85 73.00 0.294 – – HIM Hazarika et al. (2013a)

cy 23.13 99.26 1.73 33.00 0.249 6.20 3.58 HIM Li et al. (2009)

D01 34.18 95.83 1.71 76.00 0.240 6.40 3.74 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

D06 33.79 96.73 1.68 80.90 0.230 6.20 3.69 HIM Xu et al. (2013a)

D06 33.79 96.73 1.78 72.00 0.269 6.48 3.64 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

D07 34.78 96.17 1.76 65.10 0.260 6.20 3.52 HIM Xu et al. (2013a)

D07 34.78 96.17 1.78 68.00 0.269 6.40 3.60 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

D08 34.92 94.78 1.71 69.00 0.240 6.40 3.74 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

D08 34.92 94.78 1.73 66.90 0.250 6.20 3.58 HIM Xu et al. (2013a)

D09 35.12 93.96 1.70 72.00 0.235 6.40 3.76 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

D09 35.12 93.96 1.72 68.70 0.240 6.20 3.60 HIM Xu et al. (2013a)

D10 34.37 97.92 1.83 63.00 0.290 6.20 3.39 HIM Xu et al. (2013a)

D10 34.37 97.92 1.84 63.00 0.290 6.40 3.48 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

D11 34.06 97.20 1.80 61.90 0.280 6.20 3.44 HIM Xu et al. (2013a)

D11 34.06 97.20 1.81 64.00 0.280 6.40 3.54 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

D12 33.41 97.28 1.75 78.00 0.258 6.48 3.70 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

D12 33.41 97.28 1.76 75.70 0.260 6.20 3.52 HIM Xu et al. (2013a)

D13 33.01 97.11 1.70 74.80 0.240 6.20 3.65 HIM Xu et al. (2013a)

D13 33.01 97.11 1.80 73.00 0.277 6.48 3.60 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

D14 32.95 96.08 1.79 78.00 0.273 6.48 3.62 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

D15 32.85 95.44 1.85 62.00 0.294 6.48 3.50 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

D18 32.89 94.70 1.70 76.00 0.235 6.48 3.81 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

D18 32.89 94.70 1.76 72.40 0.260 6.20 3.52 HIM Xu et al. (2013a)

D19 34.27 94.92 1.72 70.00 0.245 6.40 3.72 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

D19 34.27 94.92 1.78 67.50 0.270 6.20 3.48 HIM Xu et al. (2013a)

Continued on next page

Page 4: Supplementary Material... · A review of crust and upper mantle structure beneath the India subcontinent Arun Singha,, Chandrani Singha, B. L. N. Kennettb aDepartment of Geology and

Table S1 – Continued from previous page

Station Latitude Longitude Average Thickness Poisson’s Average Average Region Reference(◦) (◦) Vp/Vs (km) Ratio Vp Vs

D21 31.87 93.03 1.79 79.00 0.273 6.47 3.61 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

D23 31.54 95.26 1.75 69.30 0.260 6.20 3.54 HIM Xu et al. (2013a)

D23 31.54 95.26 1.75 73.00 0.258 6.48 3.70 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

D24 31.16 96.47 1.74 74.10 0.250 6.20 3.56 HIM Xu et al. (2013a)

D24 31.16 96.47 1.76 75.00 0.262 6.40 3.64 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

D25 31.99 96.51 1.68 75.80 0.230 6.20 3.69 HIM Xu et al. (2013a)

D25 31.99 96.51 1.77 74.00 0.266 6.40 3.62 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

D26 32.46 96.39 1.81 70.90 0.280 6.20 3.43 HIM Xu et al. (2013a)

D26 32.46 96.39 1.82 72.00 0.284 6.48 3.56 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

DCD 37.90 95.40 1.69 61.00 0.231 6.30 3.73 HIM Tian and Zhang (2013)

DCH 32.68 77.20 – 56.30 – – – HIM Rai et al. (2006)

DHT 40.00 94.80 1.79 49.20 0.273 6.30 3.52 HIM Tian and Zhang (2013)

DJLG 26.99 88.27 – 47.00 – – 3.59 HIM Acton et al. (2011)

DLH 37.40 97.40 1.73 60.80 0.249 6.30 3.64 HIM Tian and Zhang (2013)

DNB 29.54 98.23 1.80 66.60 0.277 6.20 3.44 HIM Wang et al. (2010)

DNL 27.91 96.32 – 50.34 – – – HIM Hazarika et al. (2012)

DRBK 34.10 78.12 1.81 72.00 0.280 – – HIM Hazarika et al. (2013a)

DUL 36.30 98.10 1.70 58.80 0.235 6.30 3.71 HIM Tian and Zhang (2013)

DUL 36.30 98.10 1.73 55.40 0.250 6.30 3.64 HIM Xu et al. (2013b)

ERDO 34.52 92.70 1.73 61.00 0.249 6.22 3.60 HIM Sherrington et al. (2004)

ES01 31.26 92.09 1.77 71.20 0.266 6.20 3.50 HIM Xu et al. (2013b)

ES02 31.00 92.54 1.77 68.90 0.266 6.20 3.50 HIM Xu et al. (2013b)

ES03 30.75 92.86 1.78 66.80 0.269 6.20 3.48 HIM Xu et al. (2013b)

ES04 30.65 93.25 1.72 68.10 0.245 6.20 3.60 HIM Xu et al. (2013b)

ES06 31.66 93.20 1.72 68.80 0.245 6.20 3.60 HIM Xu et al. (2013b)

ES08 31.28 93.84 1.67 71.20 0.220 6.20 3.71 HIM Xu et al. (2013b)

ES09 31.91 93.06 1.81 68.20 0.280 6.20 3.43 HIM Xu et al. (2013b)

ES10 31.84 93.79 1.68 72.50 0.226 6.20 3.69 HIM Xu et al. (2013b)

ES11 31.91 94.14 1.74 69.50 0.253 6.20 3.56 HIM Xu et al. (2013b)

ES12 31.59 94.71 1.68 69.10 0.226 6.20 3.69 HIM Xu et al. (2013b)

ES13 31.54 95.28 1.70 70.70 0.235 6.20 3.65 HIM Xu et al. (2013b)

ES14 31.25 95.90 1.74 71.40 0.253 6.20 3.56 HIM Xu et al. (2013b)

ES15 31.19 96.50 1.76 71.70 0.262 6.20 3.52 HIM Xu et al. (2013b)

ES17 31.27 97.55 1.67 72.30 0.220 6.20 3.71 HIM Xu et al. (2013b)

ES18 31.30 97.96 1.69 71.10 0.231 6.20 3.67 HIM Xu et al. (2013b)

ES20 30.73 96.10 1.70 70.50 0.235 6.20 3.65 HIM Xu et al. (2013b)

ES23 30.69 97.26 1.69 74.60 0.231 6.20 3.67 HIM Xu et al. (2013b)

ES25 30.12 97.30 1.72 73.20 0.245 6.20 3.60 HIM Xu et al. (2013b)

ES26 29.96 97.51 1.75 73.00 0.258 6.20 3.54 HIM Xu et al. (2013b)

ES28 29.72 98.43 1.83 65.90 0.287 6.20 3.39 HIM Xu et al. (2013b)

ES29 30.01 96.69 1.76 69.90 0.262 6.20 3.52 HIM Xu et al. (2013b)

Continued on next page

Page 5: Supplementary Material... · A review of crust and upper mantle structure beneath the India subcontinent Arun Singha,, Chandrani Singha, B. L. N. Kennettb aDepartment of Geology and

Table S1 – Continued from previous page

Station Latitude Longitude Average Thickness Poisson’s Average Average Region Reference(◦) (◦) Vp/Vs (km) Ratio Vp Vs

ES34 29.91 95.47 1.72 65.00 0.245 6.20 3.60 HIM Xu et al. (2013b)

ES35 29.96 94.78 1.75 60.20 0.258 6.20 3.54 HIM Xu et al. (2013b)

ES37 29.90 93.51 1.79 55.10 0.273 6.20 3.46 HIM Xu et al. (2013b)

ES38 30.02 92.97 1.72 63.60 0.245 6.20 3.60 HIM Xu et al. (2013b)

ES39 29.87 92.62 1.73 63.40 0.249 6.20 3.58 HIM Xu et al. (2013b)

ES40 29.71 92.15 1.76 64.60 0.262 6.20 3.52 HIM Xu et al. (2013b)

ES41 29.19 91.76 1.79 63.90 0.273 6.20 3.46 HIM Xu et al. (2013b)

ES43 29.04 92.23 1.85 63.30 0.294 6.20 3.35 HIM Xu et al. (2013b)

ES44A 29.07 93.38 1.75 62.80 0.258 6.20 3.54 HIM Xu et al. (2013b)

ES48 29.49 94.58 1.85 52.30 0.294 6.20 3.35 HIM Xu et al. (2013b)

ey 26.06 99.56 1.75 46.80 0.258 6.20 3.54 HIM Li et al. (2009)

EYA 26.10 99.90 1.75 47.80 0.260 6.30 3.60 HIM Xu et al. (2013b)

F01 34.05 96.30 1.72 73.00 0.245 6.40 3.72 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

F02 33.83 97.10 1.77 66.00 0.266 6.48 3.66 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

F03 32.85 96.58 1.73 76.00 0.249 6.48 3.75 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

F04 32.33 95.97 1.65 72.00 0.210 6.48 3.93 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

F06* 33.10 95.11 1.68 60.00 0.226 6.48 3.86 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

F06 33.10 95.11 1.71 79.50 0.240 6.20 3.63 HIM Xu et al. (2013a)

F12 31.51 96.32 1.64 82.00 0.204 6.40 3.90 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

F13 31.24 95.91 1.70 74.20 0.240 6.20 3.65 HIM Xu et al. (2013a)

F13 31.24 95.91 1.73 76.00 0.249 6.48 3.75 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

F14 31.56 94.65 1.65 75.00 0.210 6.48 3.93 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

F14 31.56 94.65 1.69 70.30 0.230 6.20 3.67 HIM Xu et al. (2013a)

F15 31.88 93.78 1.72 71.30 0.240 6.20 3.60 HIM Xu et al. (2013a)

F15 31.88 93.78 1.74 71.00 0.253 6.47 3.72 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

F16 31.70 92.42 1.74 70.80 0.250 6.20 3.56 HIM Xu et al. (2013a)

F16 31.70 92.42 1.74 73.00 0.253 6.47 3.72 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

G01 34.27 104.24 1.77 47.00 0.266 6.46 3.65 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

G02 33.78 102.97 1.77 51.00 0.266 6.27 3.54 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

G03 34.43 102.29 1.78 53.00 0.269 6.27 3.52 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

G04 35.05 104.57 1.80 49.00 0.277 6.46 3.59 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

G06 35.11 102.89 1.69 53.00 0.231 6.27 3.71 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

G07 34.35 105.04 1.71 45.00 0.240 6.46 3.78 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

G08 33.48 105.00 1.72 49.00 0.245 6.46 3.76 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

G09 32.87 106.46 1.75 47.00 0.258 6.21 3.55 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

G10 33.54 106.91 1.72 46.00 0.245 6.20 3.60 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

G11 33.91 105.97 1.73 46.00 0.249 6.46 3.73 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

G13 35.64 105.45 1.70 51.00 0.235 6.46 3.80 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

G15 35.38 107.34 1.69 41.00 0.231 6.12 3.62 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

G17 33.77 101.70 1.71 59.00 0.240 6.47 3.78 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

G17 33.77 101.70 1.71 59.00 0.240 6.47 3.78 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

Continued on next page

Page 6: Supplementary Material... · A review of crust and upper mantle structure beneath the India subcontinent Arun Singha,, Chandrani Singha, B. L. N. Kennettb aDepartment of Geology and

Table S1 – Continued from previous page

Station Latitude Longitude Average Thickness Poisson’s Average Average Region Reference(◦) (◦) Vp/Vs (km) Ratio Vp Vs

G18 32.87 104.78 1.68 53.00 0.226 6.46 3.85 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

GAN 27.32 88.60 – 49.00 – 6.03 3.49 HIM Singh et al. (2010)

GANZ 29.77 94.70 1.73 63.00 0.249 6.12 3.54 HIM Sherrington et al. (2004)

GHR 31.58 77.00 – 56.30 – – – HIM Rai et al. (2006)

GOM 36.20 94.80 1.71 69.20 0.240 6.30 3.68 HIM Tian and Zhang (2013)

GOM 36.20 94.81 1.73 65.60 0.247 6.47 3.74 HIM Chen et al. (2010)

GTA 39.40 99.80 1.71 52.80 0.240 6.30 3.68 HIM Tian and Zhang (2013)

GTA 39.40 99.82 1.69 50.70 0.233 6.32 3.74 HIM Chen et al. (2010)

GTOK 27.36 88.56 – 52.00 – – 3.54 HIM Acton et al. (2011)

GZH 29.78 94.06 1.75 61.00 0.258 6.20 3.54 HIM Wang et al. (2010)

H02 36.27 96.96 1.71 59.00 0.240 6.38 3.73 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

H05 35.66 98.41 1.71 74.00 0.240 6.47 3.78 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

H06 36.28 98.12 1.72 55.10 0.240 6.20 3.60 HIM Xu et al. (2013a)

H06 36.28 98.12 1.72 60.00 0.245 6.47 3.76 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

H09 37.61 99.39 1.68 63.00 0.226 6.47 3.85 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

H09 37.61 99.39 1.70 58.50 0.240 6.20 3.65 HIM Xu et al. (2013a)

H1100 29.99 85.70 1.78 72.80 0.269 6.20 3.48 HIM Xu et al. (2010)

H1110 30.07 85.55 1.70 76.30 0.235 6.20 3.65 HIM Xu et al. (2010)

H1120 30.14 85.41 1.80 73.50 0.277 6.20 3.44 HIM Xu et al. (2010)

H1130 30.21 85.33 1.77 73.20 0.266 6.20 3.50 HIM Xu et al. (2010)

H1140 30.28 85.30 1.74 74.30 0.253 6.20 3.56 HIM Xu et al. (2010)

H1150 30.36 85.31 1.73 74.30 0.249 6.20 3.58 HIM Xu et al. (2010)

H1160 30.43 85.29 1.73 74.30 0.249 6.20 3.58 HIM Xu et al. (2010)

H1170 30.50 85.20 1.71 75.70 0.240 6.20 3.63 HIM Xu et al. (2010)

H1180 30.58 85.18 1.72 75.70 0.245 6.20 3.60 HIM Xu et al. (2010)

H1190 30.65 85.14 1.70 77.30 0.235 6.20 3.65 HIM Xu et al. (2010)

H1220 30.86 85.07 1.74 77.00 0.253 6.20 3.56 HIM Xu et al. (2010)

H12 37.34 98.23 1.76 66.00 0.262 6.47 3.68 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

H12 37.34 98.23 1.77 65.00 0.270 6.20 3.50 HIM Xu et al. (2013a)

H1240 31.02 85.13 1.75 74.20 0.258 6.20 3.54 HIM Xu et al. (2010)

H1250 31.08 85.00 1.66 70.90 0.215 6.20 3.73 HIM Xu et al. (2010)

H1260 31.15 85.01 1.80 69.00 0.277 6.20 3.44 HIM Xu et al. (2010)

H1270 31.23 85.07 1.72 70.70 0.245 6.20 3.60 HIM Xu et al. (2010)

H1290 31.38 85.10 1.84 68.00 0.290 6.20 3.37 HIM Xu et al. (2010)

H1300 31.45 85.16 1.76 72.30 0.262 6.20 3.52 HIM Xu et al. (2010)

H1310 31.52 85.18 1.76 72.20 0.262 6.20 3.52 HIM Xu et al. (2010)

H1320 31.58 85.19 1.74 75.70 0.253 6.20 3.56 HIM Xu et al. (2010)

H13 36.97 97.65 1.70 60.10 0.240 6.20 3.65 HIM Xu et al. (2013a)

H13 36.97 97.65 1.80 55.00 0.277 6.38 3.54 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

H1360 31.86 84.95 1.80 76.30 0.277 6.20 3.44 HIM Xu et al. (2010)

H1400 32.12 84.69 1.72 69.00 0.245 6.20 3.60 HIM Xu et al. (2010)

Continued on next page

Page 7: Supplementary Material... · A review of crust and upper mantle structure beneath the India subcontinent Arun Singha,, Chandrani Singha, B. L. N. Kennettb aDepartment of Geology and

Table S1 – Continued from previous page

Station Latitude Longitude Average Thickness Poisson’s Average Average Region Reference(◦) (◦) Vp/Vs (km) Ratio Vp Vs

H1405 32.18 84.51 1.77 74.00 0.266 6.20 3.50 HIM Xu et al. (2010)

H1415 32.31 84.22 1.75 72.00 0.258 6.20 3.54 HIM Xu et al. (2010)

H1422 32.06 83.90 1.74 74.70 0.253 6.20 3.56 HIM Xu et al. (2010)

H1423 32.16 83.92 1.71 79.30 0.240 6.20 3.63 HIM Xu et al. (2010)

H1430 32.38 84.13 1.80 67.70 0.277 6.20 3.44 HIM Xu et al. (2010)

H1500 32.89 84.29 1.76 71.00 0.262 6.20 3.52 HIM Xu et al. (2010)

H1510 32.95 84.30 1.77 67.00 0.266 6.20 3.50 HIM Xu et al. (2010)

H1520 33.03 84.31 1.78 72.00 0.269 6.20 3.48 HIM Xu et al. (2010)

H1530 33.12 84.22 1.78 68.00 0.269 6.20 3.48 HIM Xu et al. (2010)

H15 37.52 96.00 1.75 60.00 0.258 6.38 3.65 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

H1550 33.26 84.25 1.74 74.45 0.253 6.20 3.56 HIM Xu et al. (2010)

H1560 33.31 84.25 1.74 67.50 0.253 6.20 3.56 HIM Xu et al. (2010)

H1570 33.42 84.26 1.81 64.40 0.280 6.20 3.43 HIM Xu et al. (2010)

H1590 33.63 84.17 1.70 66.50 0.235 6.20 3.65 HIM Xu et al. (2010)

H1600 33.75 84.27 1.77 66.70 0.266 6.20 3.50 HIM Xu et al. (2010)

H1610 33.86 84.26 1.71 69.50 0.240 6.20 3.63 HIM Xu et al. (2010)

H1620 33.97 84.22 1.73 67.00 0.249 6.20 3.58 HIM Xu et al. (2010)

H16 37.37 94.78 1.78 56.00 0.269 6.22 3.49 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

H17 38.03 94.55 1.78 60.80 0.270 6.20 3.48 HIM Xu et al. (2013a)

H17 38.03 94.55 1.79 63.00 0.273 6.46 3.61 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

H18 37.68 93.66 1.82 55.00 0.284 6.19 3.40 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

H19 38.26 92.14 1.74 62.00 0.253 6.34 3.64 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

H20 38.80 94.35 1.79 51.00 0.273 6.46 3.61 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

H21 39.58 94.27 1.86 51.00 0.297 6.46 3.47 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

H22 39.76 93.49 1.74 48.80 0.250 6.20 3.56 HIM Xu et al. (2013a)

H22 39.76 93.49 1.89 45.00 0.306 6.34 3.35 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

H23 39.51 94.90 1.74 68.90 0.250 6.20 3.56 HIM Xu et al. (2013a)

HMS 33.92 77.71 – 71.97 – – – HIM Rai et al. (2006)

HNI 30.22 99.82 1.79 59.50 0.273 6.20 3.46 HIM Wang et al. (2010)

HNL 32.75 78.97 – 84.17 – – – HIM Rai et al. (2006)

HTA 37.07 79.91 1.75 51.80 0.258 6.16 3.52 HIM Chen et al. (2010)

HTG 37.86 90.76 1.74 56.00 0.255 6.67 3.83 HIM Chen et al. (2010)

HWI 27.87 96.80 – 51.23 – – – HIM Hazarika et al. (2012)

HYL 28.07 96.54 – 54.28 – – – HIM Hazarika et al. (2012)

ILAM 26.91 87.92 – 44.00 – – 3.51 HIM Acton et al. (2011)

JYG 39.80 98.20 1.70 54.10 0.240 6.30 3.71 HIM Xu et al. (2013b)

JYG 39.80 98.20 1.71 54.80 0.240 6.30 3.68 HIM Tian and Zhang (2013)

K01 38.45 99.54 1.69 64.00 0.231 6.46 3.82 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

K02 35.24 100.99 1.71 60.00 0.240 6.47 3.78 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

K03 33.43 101.48 1.75 59.00 0.258 6.47 3.70 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

K05 34.16 100.44 1.75 61.00 0.258 6.47 3.70 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

Continued on next page

Page 8: Supplementary Material... · A review of crust and upper mantle structure beneath the India subcontinent Arun Singha,, Chandrani Singha, B. L. N. Kennettb aDepartment of Geology and

Table S1 – Continued from previous page

Station Latitude Longitude Average Thickness Poisson’s Average Average Region Reference(◦) (◦) Vp/Vs (km) Ratio Vp Vs

K06 34.68 100.64 1.76 63.00 0.262 6.47 3.68 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

K07 33.96 99.89 1.74 65.00 0.253 6.40 3.68 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

K10 35.33 100.23 1.74 62.00 0.253 6.47 3.72 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

K12 37.71 100.58 1.83 54.00 0.287 6.46 3.53 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

K13 37.05 102.40 1.72 54.00 0.245 6.17 3.59 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

K14 35.65 100.59 1.69 58.00 0.231 6.47 3.83 HIM Yue et al. (2012)

KALM 35.49 72.57 – 76.00 – – 3.54 HIM Li et al. (2009)

KAZA 32.22 78.07 1.78 60.00 0.269 – – HIM Hazarika et al. (2013a)

KDG 34.36 77.65 – 74.17 – – – HIM Rai et al. (2006)

KSH 39.52 75.92 1.82 60.30 0.282 6.16 3.38 HIM Chen et al. (2010)

KTH 32.31 77.14 – 56.30 – – – HIM Rai et al. (2006)

KUL 32.00 77.11 – 61.97 – – – HIM Rai et al. (2006)

LAC 22.60 99.90 1.71 35.40 0.240 6.30 3.68 HIM Xu et al. (2013b)

LAVA 27.07 88.66 – 48.00 – – 3.57 HIM Acton et al. (2011)

LCHG 27.69 88.74 – 58.00 – – 3.53 HIM Acton et al. (2011)

LCN 27.73 88.55 – 59.00 – 6.17 3.54 HIM Singh et al. (2010)

LEH 34.14 77.56 – 72.36 – – – HIM Rai et al. (2006)

LEH 38.80 93.40 1.63 64.20 0.198 6.30 3.87 HIM Tian and Zhang (2013)

LNZ 29.77 94.34 1.71 61.60 0.240 6.20 3.63 HIM Wang et al. (2010)

LOSR 32.44 77.75 1.79 59.00 0.273 – – HIM Hazarika et al. (2013a)

LPR 27.99 96.22 – 48.52 – – – HIM Hazarika et al. (2012)

LSA 29.70 91.15 1.73 79.90 0.249 6.40 3.70 HIM Chen et al. (2010)

LSA 29.70 91.15 1.73 80.00 0.249 6.21 3.59 HIM Sherrington et al. (2004)

LSA 29.70 91.15 – 88.00 – – 3.74 HIM Mitra et al. (2005)

LTI 27.94 96.72 – 51.22 – – – HIM Hazarika et al. (2012)

LUL 29.77 94.74 1.75 58.00 0.258 6.20 3.54 HIM Wang et al. (2010)

LUS 25.80 98.90 1.76 42.00 0.260 6.30 3.58 HIM Xu et al. (2013b)

LYT 41.10 95.50 1.89 45.80 0.306 6.30 3.33 HIM Tian and Zhang (2013)

MAD 34.90 98.20 1.75 68.80 0.260 6.30 3.60 HIM Xu et al. (2013b)

MAHE 33.26 78.50 1.81 75.00 0.280 – – HIM Hazarika et al. (2013a)

MAS 24.40 98.60 1.77 35.10 0.270 6.30 3.56 HIM Xu et al. (2013b)

MEL 22.30 99.60 1.72 33.30 0.240 6.30 3.66 HIM Xu et al. (2013b)

MERK 33.80 78.59 1.88 80.00 0.303 – – HIM Hazarika et al. (2013a)

MET 28.11 96.53 – 54.28 – – – HIM Hazarika et al. (2012)

MGN 27.50 88.54 – 59.00 – 5.84 3.49 HIM Singh et al. (2010)

MNK 29.70 98.60 1.79 66.10 0.273 6.20 3.46 HIM Wang et al. (2010)

MNSR 34.34 73.21 – 57.00 – – 3.65 HIM Li et al. (2009)

MTH 33.19 78.69 – 78.11 – – – HIM Rai et al. (2006)

MUDH 31.96 78.04 1.78 60.00 0.269 – – HIM Hazarika et al. (2013a)

MZT 25.20 98.50 1.84 36.60 0.290 6.30 3.42 HIM Xu et al. (2013b)

NAQ 32.25 92.25 1.70 78.30 0.234 6.47 3.81 HIM Chen et al. (2010)

Continued on next page

Page 9: Supplementary Material... · A review of crust and upper mantle structure beneath the India subcontinent Arun Singha,, Chandrani Singha, B. L. N. Kennettb aDepartment of Geology and

Table S1 – Continued from previous page

Station Latitude Longitude Average Thickness Poisson’s Average Average Region Reference(◦) (◦) Vp/Vs (km) Ratio Vp Vs

NDDR 33.14 78.60 1.82 75.00 0.284 – – HIM Hazarika et al. (2013a)

NIL 33.65 73.27 – 58.00 – – – HIM Vinnik et al. (2007)

NYOM 33.22 78.65 1.85 75.00 0.294 – – HIM Hazarika et al. (2013a)

PARO 27.56 89.32 – 61.00 – – 3.57 HIM Acton et al. (2011)

PATN 35.14 73.06 – 65.00 – – 3.60 HIM Li et al. (2009)

PHOB 34.05 78.44 1.87 75.00 0.300 – – HIM Hazarika et al. (2013a)

PULG 32.00 77.45 1.73 52.00 0.249 – – HIM Hazarika et al. (2013a)

QTS 39.70 97.70 1.78 54.80 0.270 6.30 3.54 HIM Xu et al. (2013b)

RTS 33.63 77.73 – 74.17 – – – HIM Rai et al. (2006)

RUP 27.20 92.40 1.73 47.00 0.250 6.35 3.67 HIM Kumar et al. (2004)

RUP 27.20 92.40 1.84 42.00 0.290 6.35 3.45 HIM Kumar et al. (2004)

SADU 34.73 72.34 – 62.00 – – 3.64 HIM Li et al. (2009)

SANG 31.02 91.70 1.73 67.00 0.249 6.49 3.75 HIM Sherrington et al. (2004)

SARA 31.53 77.79 1.74 50.00 0.253 – – HIM Hazarika et al. (2013a)

SBC 39.60 94.80 1.73 62.00 0.249 6.30 3.64 HIM Tian and Zhang (2013)

SBRA 34.03 72.68 – 52.00 – – 3.73 HIM Li et al. (2009)

SDL 27.87 96.89 – 50.92 – – – HIM Hazarika et al. (2012)

SGM 27.95 96.40 – 52.73 – – – HIM Hazarika et al. (2012)

SHAB 34.23 72.17 – 53.00 – – 3.76 HIM Li et al. (2009)

SHIN 35.08 72.47 – 75.00 – – 3.54 HIM Li et al. (2009)

SHR 29.88 96.68 1.78 64.50 0.269 6.20 3.48 HIM Wang et al. (2010)

SIN 27.23 88.50 – 42.00 – 6.23 3.55 HIM Singh et al. (2010)

SJA 26.94 93.00 1.78 70.00 0.270 6.35 3.57 HIM Kumar et al. (2004)

SNT 38.80 99.60 1.72 53.70 0.240 6.30 3.66 HIM Xu et al. (2013b)

SNT 38.80 99.60 1.77 51.80 0.266 6.30 3.56 HIM Tian and Zhang (2013)

SP25 28.18 89.30 – 68.00 – – 3.72 HIM Mitra et al. (2005)

SP27 27.67 89.08 – 62.00 – – 3.62 HIM Mitra et al. (2005)

SPAN 33.91 78.46 1.86 80.00 0.297 – – HIM Hazarika et al. (2013a)

SQH 80.08 32.50 1.76 70.20 0.262 6.47 3.68 HIM Chen et al. (2010)

st00 30.53 90.10 1.84 64.10 0.290 6.10 3.32 HIM Li et al. (2006)

st01 30.65 90.13 1.74 66.00 0.253 6.10 3.51 HIM Li et al. (2006)

st04 30.96 90.19 1.79 60.10 0.273 6.10 3.41 HIM Li et al. (2006)

st06 31.12 90.10 1.86 59.60 0.297 6.10 3.28 HIM Li et al. (2006)

st08 31.30 90.03 1.78 60.20 0.269 6.10 3.43 HIM Li et al. (2006)

st11 31.58 89.98 1.92 62.30 0.314 6.10 3.18 HIM Li et al. (2006)

st17 31.94 89.36 1.94 61.50 0.319 6.10 3.14 HIM Li et al. (2006)

st19 32.06 89.19 1.94 62.50 0.319 6.10 3.14 HIM Li et al. (2006)

st20 32.17 89.14 1.91 61.40 0.311 6.10 3.19 HIM Li et al. (2006)

st22 32.33 89.12 1.91 57.50 0.311 6.10 3.19 HIM Li et al. (2006)

st23 32.42 89.11 1.92 53.50 0.314 6.10 3.18 HIM Li et al. (2006)

st30 33.03 88.85 1.83 59.00 0.287 6.10 3.33 HIM Li et al. (2006)

Continued on next page

Page 10: Supplementary Material... · A review of crust and upper mantle structure beneath the India subcontinent Arun Singha,, Chandrani Singha, B. L. N. Kennettb aDepartment of Geology and

Table S1 – Continued from previous page

Station Latitude Longitude Average Thickness Poisson’s Average Average Region Reference(◦) (◦) Vp/Vs (km) Ratio Vp Vs

st32 33.24 88.84 1.86 60.00 0.297 6.10 3.28 HIM Li et al. (2006)

st33 33.33 88.83 1.77 57.60 0.266 6.10 3.45 HIM Li et al. (2006)

st34 33.41 88.76 1.82 58.50 0.287 6.10 3.35 HIM Li et al. (2006)

st35 33.48 88.74 1.79 60.00 0.273 6.10 3.41 HIM Li et al. (2006)

st36 33.52 88.60 1.83 58.40 0.287 6.10 3.33 HIM Li et al. (2006)

st37 33.61 88.52 1.87 59.30 0.300 6.10 3.26 HIM Li et al. (2006)

st38 33.65 88.50 1.85 60.30 0.294 6.10 3.30 HIM Li et al. (2006)

st39 33.76 88.40 1.87 59.00 0.300 6.10 3.26 HIM Li et al. (2006)

tc 25.03 98.52 1.85 35.00 0.294 6.20 3.35 HIM Li et al. (2009)

TGR 34.60 77.59 – 76.30 – – – HIM Rai et al. (2006)

TGU 27.89 88.53 – 61.00 – 5.96 3.48 HIM Singh et al. (2010)

TIJ 37.20 98.90 1.81 57.70 0.280 6.30 3.48 HIM Xu et al. (2013b)

TIJ 37.30 99.00 1.82 57.80 0.284 6.30 3.46 HIM Tian and Zhang (2013)

TKS 34.81 77.51 – 77.72 – – – HIM Rai et al. (2006)

TMY 30.06 95.20 1.74 57.40 0.253 6.20 3.56 HIM Wang et al. (2010)

TNC 25.00 98.50 1.85 36.60 0.290 6.30 3.41 HIM Xu et al. (2013b)

TNC 25.03 98.52 1.57 39.00 0.157 6.60 4.20 HIM Chen et al. (2010)

TNG 27.57 88.65 – 58.00 – 5.88 3.46 HIM Singh et al. (2010)

TTO 29.89 97.63 1.78 73.90 0.269 6.20 3.48 HIM Wang et al. (2010)

TUNL 36.13 94.80 1.73 67.00 0.249 6.34 3.66 HIM Sherrington et al. (2004)

USHU 30.01 97.00 1.73 77.00 0.249 6.40 3.70 HIM Sherrington et al. (2004)

WAD 24.10 98.10 1.71 36.40 0.240 6.30 3.68 HIM Xu et al. (2013b)

wd 24.09 98.07 1.70 35.30 0.235 6.20 3.65 HIM Li et al. (2009)

WLG 28.13 97.01 – 42.12 – – – HIM Hazarika et al. (2012)

WNDO 33.45 91.90 1.73 70.00 0.249 6.36 3.68 HIM Sherrington et al. (2004)

wx 27.20 99.30 1.76 54.60 0.262 6.20 3.52 HIM Li et al. (2009)

xc 28.90 99.80 1.77 44.80 0.266 6.20 3.50 HIM Li et al. (2009)

XHT 24.70 98.50 1.76 36.20 0.260 6.30 3.58 HIM Xu et al. (2013b)

XIGA 29.23 88.85 1.73 74.00 0.249 6.26 3.62 HIM Sherrington et al. (2004)

XIGA 29.23 88.85 – 71.00 – – 3.46 HIM Acton et al. (2011)

XIH 35.50 99.80 1.74 54.80 0.250 6.30 3.62 HIM Xu et al. (2013b)

YID 30.29 99.40 1.78 61.40 0.269 6.20 3.48 HIM Wang et al. (2010)

yl 25.89 99.37 1.73 44.80 0.249 6.20 3.58 HIM Li et al. (2009)

YN18 24.54 98.05 1.79 34.71 0.274 6.20 3.46 HIM Zha and Lei (2013)

YN19 25.11 97.93 1.89 33.30 0.305 6.20 3.28 HIM Zha and Lei (2013)

YN20 25.43 98.26 1.93 32.80 0.317 6.20 3.21 HIM Zha and Lei (2013)

YOD 24.00 99.20 1.83 33.20 0.290 6.30 3.44 HIM Xu et al. (2013b)

YUL 25.90 99.40 1.86 42.90 0.300 6.30 3.39 HIM Xu et al. (2013b)

zd 27.82 99.70 1.88 55.30 0.303 6.20 3.30 HIM Li et al. (2009)

ZHB 29.62 96.33 1.74 67.00 0.253 6.20 3.56 HIM Wang et al. (2010)

ZIR 27.47 93.76 1.73 39.00 0.250 6.35 3.67 HIM Kumar et al. (2004)

Continued on next page

Page 11: Supplementary Material... · A review of crust and upper mantle structure beneath the India subcontinent Arun Singha,, Chandrani Singha, B. L. N. Kennettb aDepartment of Geology and

Table S1 – Continued from previous page

Station Latitude Longitude Average Thickness Poisson’s Average Average Region Reference(◦) (◦) Vp/Vs (km) Ratio Vp Vs

ZIR 27.47 93.76 1.84 34.00 0.290 6.35 3.45 HIM Kumar et al. (2004)

ZOD 27.80 99.70 1.76 56.10 0.260 6.30 3.58 HIM Xu et al. (2013b)

BPN 25.67 91.91 – 35.00 – – 3.76 SP Mitra et al. (2005)

CHP-N 25.28 91.72 – 38.00 – – 3.76 SP Mitra et al. (2005)

CHP-S 25.28 91.72 – 44.00 – – 3.63 SP Mitra et al. (2005)

HMN 25.85 92.58 1.73 33.00 0.250 6.40 3.70 SP Kumar et al. (2004)

NGB 25.47 90.75 1.73 35.00 0.250 6.40 3.70 SP Kumar et al. (2004)

SHL 25.57 91.86 – 35.00 – – 3.77 SP Mitra et al. (2005)

SHL 25.57 91.88 1.69 35.00 0.230 6.40 3.79 SP Kumar et al. (2004)

DMK 26.22 93.06 1.73 34.00 0.250 6.40 3.70 MKH Kumar et al. (2004)

ALB 25.45 81.40 – 46.00 – – – IGP Kumar et al. (2012)

BAI 26.32 91.74 – 42.00 – – 3.86 IGP Mitra et al. (2005)

BHA 23.29 70.35 – 36.00 – – – IGP Mandal (2012)

BHU 23.21 69.65 – 39.00 – – – IGP Mandal (2012)

CHD 30.70 76.78 – 53.78 – – – IGP Rai et al. (2006)

CHP 23.27 70.28 – 36.00 – – – IGP Mandal (2012)

GAU 26.15 91.65 – 40.00 – – 3.63 IGP Mitra et al. (2005)

GDD 23.87 70.37 – 41.00 – – – IGP Mandal (2012)

GDM 23.07 70.12 – 38.00 – – – IGP Mandal (2012)

JPA 26.22 90.57 1.73 41.00 0.250 6.20 3.58 IGP Kumar et al. (2004)

JPA 26.22 90.57 1.81 35.00 0.280 6.20 3.43 IGP Kumar et al. (2004)

KGP 22.31 87.31 1.73 38.00 0.249 – – IGP Mitra et al. (2008)

KMG 24.85 92.34 – 39.00 – – 3.53 IGP Mitra et al. (2005)

KNP 23.40 69.91 – 37.00 – – – IGP Mandal (2012)

KUK 29.96 76.80 – 49.84 – – – IGP Rai et al. (2006)

MDP 27.63 95.81 – 45.20 – – – IGP Hazarika et al. (2012)

MTP 23.85 69.77 – 40.00 – – – IGP Mandal (2012)

NDD 23.31 70.12 – 36.00 – – – IGP Mandal (2012)

NGR 23.31 69.73 – 39.00 – – – IGP Mandal (2012)

NPR 23.11 69.58 – 40.00 – – – IGP Mandal (2012)

PAKR 24.63 87.85 – 38.00 – – 3.96 IGP Acton et al. (2011)

TAP 23.24 70.13 – 37.00 – – – IGP Mandal (2012)

TEZ 26.62 92.78 1.73 41.00 0.250 6.20 3.58 IGP Kumar et al. (2004)

TEZ 26.62 92.78 1.84 35.00 0.290 6.20 3.37 IGP Kumar et al. (2004)

TEZ 26.63 92.83 – 42.00 – – 3.83 IGP Mitra et al. (2005)

TPM 23.09 69.55 – 40.00 – – – IGP Mandal (2012)

VGH 23.00 69.80 – 38.00 – – – IGP Mandal (2012)

VJP 23.56 70.50 – 35.00 – – – IGP Mandal (2012)

VND 23.29 70.40 – 42.00 – – – IGP Mandal (2012)

AJMR 26.50 74.60 – 29.00 – – – DAFB Kumar et al. (2001)

GRG* 28.31 76.94 – 36.00 – – – DAFB Kumar et al. (2012)

Continued on next page

Page 12: Supplementary Material... · A review of crust and upper mantle structure beneath the India subcontinent Arun Singha,, Chandrani Singha, B. L. N. Kennettb aDepartment of Geology and

Table S1 – Continued from previous page

Station Latitude Longitude Average Thickness Poisson’s Average Average Region Reference(◦) (◦) Vp/Vs (km) Ratio Vp Vs

GRG 28.31 76.94 – 52.50 – – 3.75 DAFB Julia et al. (2009)

NDI* 28.65 77.20 – 41.96 – – – DAFB Rai et al. (2006)

NDI 28.68 77.22 – 55.00 – – 3.79 DAFB Julia et al. (2009)

BRT 27.08 77.39 – 37.00 – – – BUC Kumar et al. (2012)

BRT 27.08 77.39 – 37.50 – – 3.66 BUC Julia et al. (2009)

HRP 24.36 79.21 1.75 40.18 0.258 – – BUC Rai et al. (2005)

JHN 25.51 78.54 – 37.50 – – 3.66 BUC Julia et al. (2009)

JHN 25.51 78.54 – 38.00 – – – BUC Kumar et al. (2012)

BPL 23.24 77.43 – 52.50 – – 3.87 VNB Julia et al. (2009)

BTG 24.11 79.34 1.75 41.39 0.258 – – VNB Rai et al. (2005)

BTL 23.08 79.03 1.83 35.70 0.287 – – VNB Jagadeesh and Rai (2008)

BTL 23.08 79.03 – 40.00 – – 3.68 VNB Julia et al. (2009)

DMH 23.80 79.46 1.72 39.84 0.245 – – VNB Rai et al. (2005)

MHR 23.31 79.05 1.75 39.50 0.258 – – VNB Jagadeesh and Rai (2008)

MHR 23.31 79.05 – 40.00 – – 3.63 VNB Julia et al. (2009)

MJK 23.65 79.62 1.75 39.55 0.258 – – VNB Rai et al. (2005)

RWA 24.55 81.20 – 42.00 – – – VNB Kumar et al. (2012)

SGR 23.88 78.73 1.80 41.92 0.277 – – VNB Jagadeesh and Rai (2008)

SGR 23.88 78.73 – 42.50 – – 3.68 VNB Julia et al. (2009)

SGR 23.88 78.73 – 44.00 – – – VNB Kumar et al. (2012)

CTR 22.65 80.35 1.70 40.47 0.235 – – NSL Rai et al. (2005)

JBP 23.17 79.98 – 55.00 – – 3.81 NSL Julia et al. (2009)

JBP* 23.18 79.96 1.84 40.18 0.290 6.50 3.53 NSL Rai et al. (2005)

KHP* 22.74 79.48 1.88 35.94 0.303 – – NSL Jagadeesh and Rai (2008)

KHP 22.74 79.48 1.88 46.33 0.303 – – NSL Jagadeesh and Rai (2008)

KHP 22.74 79.48 – 52.50 – – 3.83 NSL Julia et al. (2009)

KNP* 22.87 79.34 1.91 30.96 0.311 – – NSL Jagadeesh and Rai (2008)

KNP* 22.87 79.34 1.91 45.00 0.311 – – NSL Jagadeesh and Rai (2008)

KNP 22.87 79.34 – 57.50 – – 3.86 NSL Julia et al. (2009)

KTG 23.44 79.78 1.78 40.47 0.269 – – NSL Rai et al. (2005)

TKR 22.85 80.23 1.72 39.25 0.245 – – NSL Rai et al. (2005)

TRN 23.03 80.11 – 50.45 – – – NSL Rai et al. (2005)

TRN 23.03 80.11 – 53.47 – – – NSL Rai et al. (2005)

AMDR 20.51 73.81 1.76 33.95 0.260 6.45 3.66 DVP Tiwari et al. (2006)

BHPL 23.20 77.40 – 46.00 – – 3.85 DVP Kumar et al. (2001)

BHUJ 23.30 69.70 – 44.00 – – – DVP Kumar et al. (2001)

HATT 20.56 73.70 1.76 31.09 0.260 6.45 3.66 DVP Tiwari et al. (2006)

JAYD 20.59 73.89 1.76 31.09 0.260 6.45 3.66 DVP Tiwari et al. (2006)

KAND 20.90 71.10 1.82 35.20 0.284 6.54 3.59 DVP Kumar and Mohan (2014)

KARD 17.30 74.20 1.76 36.50 0.260 6.51 3.70 DVP Kumar et al. (2001)

KHER 20.81 73.02 1.81 32.60 0.280 6.54 3.61 DVP Kumar and Mohan (2014)

Continued on next page

Page 13: Supplementary Material... · A review of crust and upper mantle structure beneath the India subcontinent Arun Singha,, Chandrani Singha, B. L. N. Kennettb aDepartment of Geology and

Table S1 – Continued from previous page

Station Latitude Longitude Average Thickness Poisson’s Average Average Region Reference(◦) (◦) Vp/Vs (km) Ratio Vp Vs

KIL 18.07 76.60 1.71 36.00 0.240 6.45 3.77 DVP Gupta et al. (2003)

KIL 18.07 76.60 1.74 36.40 0.253 6.82 3.92 DVP Rai et al. (2003)

KIL 18.07 76.60 – 37.50 – – 3.80 DVP Julia et al. (2009)

KOYN 17.40 73.75 1.76 39.27 0.260 6.45 3.66 DVP Tiwari et al. (2006)

KRD 17.31 74.18 1.76 36.00 0.260 6.45 3.66 DVP Gupta et al. (2003)

KRD 17.31 74.18 – 37.50 – – 3.79 DVP Julia et al. (2009)

MANK 22.56 70.25 1.81 38.80 0.280 6.54 3.61 DVP Kumar and Mohan (2014)

MOKR 21.61 69.78 1.82 37.40 0.284 6.54 3.59 DVP Kumar and Mohan (2014)

MPAD 20.48 73.81 1.76 33.40 0.260 6.45 3.66 DVP Tiwari et al. (2006)

MULG 19.16 73.30 1.76 35.80 0.260 6.45 3.66 DVP Tiwari et al. (2006)

NND 19.11 77.29 1.71 36.00 0.240 6.45 3.77 DVP Gupta et al. (2003)

NND 19.11 77.29 1.75 36.20 0.258 6.75 3.86 DVP Rai et al. (2003)

NND 19.11 77.29 – 35.00 – – 3.77 DVP Julia et al. (2009)

PUN 18.53 73.85 1.76 35.00 0.260 6.45 3.66 DVP Gupta et al. (2003)

PUN 18.53 73.85 – 37.50 – – 3.79 DVP Julia et al. (2009)

PUNE 18.50 73.80 1.76 36.50 0.260 6.51 3.70 DVP Kumar et al. (2001)

SONT 22.39 71.85 1.76 37.00 0.262 6.54 3.72 DVP Kumar and Mohan (2014)

TANA 21.58 71.97 1.80 37.40 0.277 6.54 3.63 DVP Kumar and Mohan (2014)

VARE 20.33 73.69 1.76 35.20 0.260 6.45 3.66 DVP Tiwari et al. (2006)

BOKR 23.80 85.90 – 54.00 – – – SC Kumar et al. (2001)

DGPR 23.30 87.20 – 38.00 – – 3.86 SC Acton et al. (2011)

DHAN 23.88 86.44 1.81 41.00 0.280 – – SC Kayal et al. (2011)

SRNG 20.94 85.26 – 48.00 – – 3.88 SC Acton et al. (2011)

BLSP 22.10 82.10 1.73 39.20 0.250 6.49 3.75 BC Kumar et al. (2001)

MNG 22.82 79.42 – 52.50 – – 3.82 BC Julia et al. (2009)

NGP* 21.09 79.03 1.73 34.44 0.249 – – BC Jagadeesh and Rai (2008)

NGP 21.15 79.05 – 52.50 – – 3.84 BC Julia et al. (2009)

SNI* 22.13 79.45 1.71 39.70 0.240 – – BC Jagadeesh and Rai (2008)

SNI 22.13 79.45 – 65.00 – – 3.91 BC Julia et al. (2009)

SRM 22.62 79.56 – 65.00 – – 3.92 BC Julia et al. (2009)

WRD* 20.96 78.71 1.87 30.64 0.300 – – BC Jagadeesh and Rai (2008)

WRD 20.96 78.71 – 57.50 – – 3.83 BC Julia et al. (2009)

MGR 16.46 80.50 1.73 47.10 0.247 6.45 3.73 EGT Borah et al. (2014)

PDR 14.30 79.64 1.76 29.50 0.262 6.45 3.66 EGT Borah et al. (2014)

PMR 15.10 79.37 1.76 39.50 0.262 6.45 3.66 EGT Borah et al. (2014)

VISK 17.70 83.30 – 35.00 – 3.75 – EGT Kumar et al. (2001)

ADL 19.65 78.57 1.80 37.87 0.277 – – GG Jagadeesh and Rai (2008)

ADL 19.65 78.57 – 40.00 – – 3.74 GG Julia et al. (2009)

KDG 17.66 80.69 1.73 44.00 0.250 6.45 3.73 GG Gupta et al. (2003)

KDG 17.66 80.69 – 41.20 – 6.49 3.74 GG Singh et al. (2012)

KDM 17.58 80.66 – 42.00 – 6.50 – GG Sarkar et al. (2003)

Continued on next page

Page 14: Supplementary Material... · A review of crust and upper mantle structure beneath the India subcontinent Arun Singha,, Chandrani Singha, B. L. N. Kennettb aDepartment of Geology and

Table S1 – Continued from previous page

Station Latitude Longitude Average Thickness Poisson’s Average Average Region Reference(◦) (◦) Vp/Vs (km) Ratio Vp Vs

VKP 18.38 80.54 – 38.70 – 6.23 3.71 GG Singh et al. (2012)

AMT 16.34 75.89 1.72 35.80 0.244 6.45 3.75 EDC Borah et al. (2014)

APT 16.39 78.67 1.80 32.05 0.277 6.45 3.58 EDC Borah et al. (2014)

ARK 16.27 76.95 1.76 33.95 0.262 6.45 3.66 EDC Borah et al. (2014)

BGL 13.02 77.57 1.73 35.00 0.250 6.45 3.73 EDC Gupta et al. (2003)

BGL 13.02 77.57 1.74 34.50 0.253 – – EDC Jagadeesh and Rai (2008)

BGL 13.02 77.57 1.74 35.00 0.253 6.51 3.74 EDC Rai et al. (2003)

BGL 13.02 77.57 1.76 34.90 0.261 6.45 3.66 EDC Borah et al. (2014)

BGL 13.02 77.57 – 35.00 – – 3.71 EDC Julia et al. (2009)

BKN 18.23 78.39 1.76 32.10 0.262 – – EDC Jagadeesh and Rai (2008)

BKN 18.23 78.39 – 32.50 – – 3.71 EDC Julia et al. (2009)

BKR 18.23 78.39 1.73 33.00 0.250 6.45 3.73 EDC Gupta et al. (2003)

DMR 18.05 79.63 – 33.40 – 6.89 3.60 EDC Singh et al. (2012)

GBA 13.56 77.36 1.73 34.00 0.250 6.45 3.73 EDC Gupta et al. (2003)

GBA 13.56 77.36 1.74 35.00 0.253 – – EDC Jagadeesh and Rai (2008)

GBA 13.56 77.36 1.75 35.00 0.256 6.45 3.69 EDC Borah et al. (2014)

GBA 13.56 77.36 1.75 36.00 0.258 6.56 3.75 EDC Rai et al. (2003)

HYB 17.42 78.55 1.73 33.00 0.250 6.40 3.70 EDC Saul et al. (2000)

HYB 17.42 78.55 1.73 33.00 0.250 6.45 3.73 EDC Gupta et al. (2003)

HYB 17.42 78.55 1.73 33.10 0.250 6.50 3.76 EDC Sarkar et al. (2003)

HYB 17.42 78.55 1.73 35.00 0.249 6.68 3.86 EDC Rai et al. (2003)

HYB 17.42 78.55 1.76 32.60 0.262 – – EDC Jagadeesh and Rai (2008)

HYB 17.42 78.55 – 32.50 – – 3.73 EDC Julia et al. (2009)

KDR 14.18 78.16 1.71 39.00 0.240 6.45 3.77 EDC Gupta et al. (2003)

KDR 14.18 78.16 1.76 40.05 0.261 6.45 3.66 EDC Borah et al. (2014)

KOL 12.95 78.25 1.73 33.00 0.250 6.45 3.73 EDC Gupta et al. (2003)

KOL 12.95 78.25 1.75 33.80 0.256 6.45 3.69 EDC Borah et al. (2014)

LTV 14.93 77.28 1.73 35.00 0.250 6.45 3.73 EDC Gupta et al. (2003)

LTV 14.93 77.28 1.74 33.80 0.253 – – EDC Jagadeesh and Rai (2008)

LTV 14.93 77.28 1.75 34.00 0.258 6.47 3.70 EDC Rai et al. (2003)

MBN 16.87 77.66 1.71 34.00 0.240 6.45 3.77 EDC Gupta et al. (2003)

MBN 16.87 77.66 1.75 34.00 0.258 – – EDC Jagadeesh and Rai (2008)

MBN 16.87 77.66 1.75 34.40 0.259 6.45 3.69 EDC Borah et al. (2014)

MBN 16.87 77.66 1.75 35.00 0.258 6.65 3.80 EDC Rai et al. (2003)

MBN 16.87 77.66 – 35.00 – – 3.82 EDC Julia et al. (2009)

MCR 13.69 78.24 1.72 37.20 0.245 6.45 3.75 EDC Borah et al. (2014)

NIR 12.95 78.25 – 32.50 – – 3.67 EDC Julia et al. (2009)

PKD 14.06 77.64 1.76 35.40 0.261 6.45 3.66 EDC Borah et al. (2014)

PSR 18.07 79.47 – 31.40 – 6.81 3.56 EDC Singh et al. (2012)

RPR 18.85 79.29 – 30.70 – 6.87 3.61 EDC Singh et al. (2012)

SLR 13.14 79.45 1.73 37.00 0.250 6.45 3.73 EDC Borah et al. (2014)

Continued on next page

Page 15: Supplementary Material... · A review of crust and upper mantle structure beneath the India subcontinent Arun Singha,, Chandrani Singha, B. L. N. Kennettb aDepartment of Geology and

Table S1 – Continued from previous page

Station Latitude Longitude Average Thickness Poisson’s Average Average Region Reference(◦) (◦) Vp/Vs (km) Ratio Vp Vs

SRS 18.97 78.36 – 34.40 – 6.55 3.85 EDC Singh et al. (2012)

TGH 12.96 77.35 1.72 36.90 0.245 6.45 3.75 EDC Borah et al. (2014)

TMK 13.34 77.19 1.77 35.70 0.266 6.45 3.64 EDC Borah et al. (2014)

TMK 13.34 77.19 1.81 35.00 0.280 6.45 3.56 EDC Gupta et al. (2003)

TMK 13.34 77.19 – 35.00 – – 3.71 EDC Julia et al. (2009)

UKD 14.99 77.25 1.77 33.70 0.266 6.45 3.64 EDC Borah et al. (2014)

UPL 17.29 78.92 1.71 32.50 0.240 6.50 3.80 EDC Sarkar et al. (2003)

BDT 13.74 75.63 1.73 37.95 0.248 6.45 3.73 WDC Borah et al. (2014)

BGM 16.12 74.65 1.72 48.60 0.245 6.45 3.75 WDC Borah et al. (2014)

CRP 13.02 76.32 1.76 44.00 0.260 6.45 3.66 WDC Gupta et al. (2003)

CRP 13.02 76.32 – 47.50 – – 3.86 WDC Julia et al. (2009)

DHR 15.43 74.98 1.77 44.30 0.265 6.45 3.64 WDC Borah et al. (2014)

DHR 15.43 74.98 1.78 43.00 0.270 6.45 3.62 WDC Gupta et al. (2003)

DHR 15.43 74.98 – 45.00 – – 3.86 WDC Julia et al. (2009)

DVG 14.45 75.92 1.71 42.00 0.240 6.45 3.77 WDC Gupta et al. (2003)

DVR 14.39 75.96 1.79 37.95 0.271 6.45 3.60 WDC Borah et al. (2014)

GDP 11.79 76.65 1.71 51.00 0.240 6.45 3.77 WDC Gupta et al. (2003)

GDP 11.79 76.65 1.76 49.35 0.262 6.45 3.66 WDC Borah et al. (2014)

GDP 11.79 76.65 – 45.00 – – 3.81 WDC Julia et al. (2009)

GOA 15.48 73.82 – 41.00 – 6.50 – WDC Sarkar et al. (2003)

GOA 15.49 78.83 1.73 42.00 0.250 6.45 3.73 WDC Gupta et al. (2003)

GRR 12.83 76.06 1.73 51.00 0.250 6.45 3.73 WDC Gupta et al. (2003)

HPT 15.28 76.32 1.73 36.00 0.247 6.45 3.73 WDC Borah et al. (2014)

HSN 12.83 76.06 1.76 46.15 0.260 6.45 3.66 WDC Borah et al. (2014)

HSN(NE) 12.83 76.06 – 47.50 – – 3.88 WDC Julia et al. (2009)

HSN(SE) 12.83 76.06 – 50.00 – – 3.90 WDC Julia et al. (2009)

HVR 14.84 75.37 1.72 45.50 0.245 6.45 3.75 WDC Borah et al. (2014)

HYR 13.88 76.49 1.73 46.50 0.248 6.45 3.73 WDC Borah et al. (2014)

KBC 13.33 76.69 1.71 42.00 0.240 6.45 3.77 WDC Gupta et al. (2003)

KSL 12.49 75.91 1.73 46.00 0.250 6.45 3.73 WDC Gupta et al. (2003)

KSL 12.49 75.91 1.76 53.60 0.260 6.45 3.66 WDC Borah et al. (2014)

MNGR 12.87 74.87 – 41.00 – 6.50 – WDC Sarkar et al. (2003)

MST 13.68 75.04 1.73 39.70 0.248 6.45 3.73 WDC Borah et al. (2014)

MYS 12.31 76.62 1.76 48.00 0.260 6.45 3.66 WDC Gupta et al. (2003)

MYS 12.31 76.62 1.83 48.60 0.287 6.45 3.52 WDC Borah et al. (2014)

MYS 12.31 76.62 – 52.50 – – 3.90 WDC Julia et al. (2009)

NLR 12.95 76.75 1.73 46.05 0.250 6.45 3.73 WDC Borah et al. (2014)

NTR 13.30 76.90 1.76 40.40 0.262 6.45 3.66 WDC Borah et al. (2014)

NTR 13.35 76.89 1.73 41.00 0.250 6.45 3.73 WDC Gupta et al. (2003)

SKP 12.92 75.77 1.83 46.70 0.287 6.45 3.52 WDC Borah et al. (2014)

SUP 15.26 74.54 1.77 37.90 0.265 6.45 3.64 WDC Borah et al. (2014)

Continued on next page

Page 16: Supplementary Material... · A review of crust and upper mantle structure beneath the India subcontinent Arun Singha,, Chandrani Singha, B. L. N. Kennettb aDepartment of Geology and

Table S1 – Continued from previous page

Station Latitude Longitude Average Thickness Poisson’s Average Average Region Reference(◦) (◦) Vp/Vs (km) Ratio Vp Vs

TPT 13.27 76.54 1.73 45.00 0.250 6.45 3.73 WDC Gupta et al. (2003)

TPT 13.27 76.54 1.73 46.80 0.250 6.45 3.73 WDC Borah et al. (2014)

TPT 13.27 76.54 – 47.50 – – 3.86 WDC Julia et al. (2009)

CUD 14.47 78.77 1.69 36.20 0.230 6.50 3.85 CB Sarkar et al. (2003)

CUD 14.47 78.77 – 35.00 – – 3.77 CB Julia et al. (2009)

CUD 14.48 78.77 1.73 35.00 0.250 6.45 3.73 CB Gupta et al. (2003)

CUD 14.48 78.77 1.74 35.55 0.253 6.45 3.71 CB Borah et al. (2014)

SLM 16.10 78.89 1.73 34.00 0.250 6.45 3.73 CB Gupta et al. (2003)

SLM 16.10 78.89 1.77 33.90 0.266 6.45 3.64 CB Borah et al. (2014)

SLM 16.10 78.89 1.78 35.00 0.269 6.53 3.67 CB Rai et al. (2003)

SLM 16.10 78.89 – 35.00 – – 3.76 CB Julia et al. (2009)

TDT 14.84 77.91 1.76 35.90 0.260 6.45 3.66 CB Borah et al. (2014)

CBR 11.27 76.94 1.76 46.20 0.260 6.45 3.66 SGT Borah et al. (2014)

KKL 11.65 78.83 1.73 38.75 0.249 6.45 3.73 SGT Borah et al. (2014)

KOD 10.23 77.46 1.75 43.50 0.258 – – SGT Rai et al. (2009a)

KOD 10.23 77.47 1.72 42.70 0.245 – – SGT Jagadeesh and Rai (2008)

KOD 10.23 77.47 1.73 43.00 0.250 6.45 3.73 SGT Gupta et al. (2003)

KOD 10.23 77.47 – 45.00 – – 3.83 SGT Julia et al. (2009)

MDR 13.07 80.25 1.71 40.00 0.240 6.45 3.77 SGT Gupta et al. (2003)

MDR 13.07 80.25 1.76 38.80 0.262 6.45 3.66 SGT Borah et al. (2014)

MDRS 13.10 80.20 – 38.00 – – 3.80 SGT Kumar et al. (2001)

MTD 11.78 76.01 1.74 50.30 0.253 6.45 3.71 SGT Borah et al. (2014)

MTP* 11.32 76.94 1.81 60.00 0.280 6.45 3.56 SGT Gupta et al. (2003)

MTP 11.32 76.94 – 45.00 – – 3.82 SGT Julia et al. (2009)

NKL 11.14 78.22 1.71 45.50 0.241 6.45 3.77 SGT Borah et al. (2014)

PBR 11.29 78.86 1.73 40.05 0.249 6.45 3.73 SGT Borah et al. (2014)

PCH 10.51 76.35 1.76 39.00 0.260 6.45 3.66 SGT Gupta et al. (2003)

TRV 8.51 76.96 1.72 36.50 0.245 – – SGT Rai et al. (2009a)

TRV 8.51 76.96 1.73 35.00 0.250 6.45 3.73 SGT Gupta et al. (2003)

TRV 8.51 76.96 1.74 35.00 0.253 – – SGT Jagadeesh and Rai (2008)

TRV 8.51 76.96 – 35.00 – – 3.77 SGT Julia et al. (2009)

TRVM 8.50 77.00 1.73 35.90 0.250 6.40 3.70 SGT Kumar et al. (2001)

YCD 11.78 78.21 1.73 46.50 0.249 6.45 3.73 SGT Borah et al. (2014)

KNR 11.84 75.42 1.81 43.52 0.280 6.45 3.56 WG Borah et al. (2014)

KZD 11.29 75.87 1.78 43.20 0.268 6.45 3.62 WG Borah et al. (2014)

MGL 12.91 74.90 1.81 40.95 0.279 6.45 3.56 WG Borah et al. (2014)

MLN 16.05 73.50 1.84 41.85 0.289 6.45 3.51 WG Borah et al. (2014)

PALK 7.27 80.70 1.73 34.00 0.250 – – SRILK Pathak et al. (2006)

PALK 7.27 80.70 1.72 37.50 0.245 – – SRILK Rai et al. (2009a)

Page 17: Supplementary Material... · A review of crust and upper mantle structure beneath the India subcontinent Arun Singha,, Chandrani Singha, B. L. N. Kennettb aDepartment of Geology and

References

Acton, C.E., Priestley, K., Mitra, S., Gaur, V.K., 2011. Crustal structure of the Darjeeling-Sikkim Himalaya and southernTibet. Geophys. J. Int. 184, 829–852. doi:10.1111/j.1365-246X.2010.04868.x.

Bai, L., Tian, X., Ritsema, J., 2010. Crustal structure beneath the Indochina peninsula from teleseismic receiver functions.Geophys. Res. Lett. 37, doi:10.1029/2010GL044874.

Borah, K., Rai, S., Gupta, S., Prakasam, K., Kumar, S., Sivaram, K., 2014. Preserved and modified mid-Archean crustal blocks in Dharwar craton: seismological evidence. Precambrian Research 246, 16–34.doi:10.1016/j.precamres.2014.02.003.

Chen, Y., Niu, F., Liu, R., Huang, Z., Tkali, H., Sun, L., Chan, W., 2010. Crustal structure beneath China from receiverfunction analysis. J. Geophys. Res. 115, doi:10.1029/2009JB006386.

Gupta, S., Rai, S.S., Prakasam, K.S., Srinagesh, D., Bansal, B.K., Chadha, R.K., Priestley, K., Gaur, V.K., 2003.The nature of the crust in southern India: Implications for Precambrian crustal evolution. Geophys. Res. Lett. 30,doi:10.1029/2002GL016770.

Hazarika, D., Arora, B., Bora, C., 2012. Crustal structure and deformation in the northeast India-Asia collision zone:constraints from receiver function analysis. Geophys. J. Int. 188, 737–749. doi:10.1111/j.1365-246X.2011.05267.x.

Hazarika, D., Kumar, N., Yadav, D., 2013a. Crustal thickness and Poissons ratio variations across the northwest Himalayaand eastern Ladakh. Acta Geophysica 61, 905–922. doi:10.2478/s11600-013-0128-y.

Jagadeesh, S., Rai, S., 2008. Thickness, composition, and evolution of the Indian Precambrian crust inferred frombroadband seismological measurements. Precambrian Research 162, 4–15. doi:10.1016/j.precamres.2007.07.009.

Julia, J., Jagadeesh, S., Rai, S.S., Owens, T.J., 2009. Deep crustal structure of the Indian shield from joint inversionof P wave receiver functions and Rayleigh wave group velocities: Implications for Precambrian crustal evolution. J.Geophys. Res. 114, doi:10.1029/2008JB006261.

Kayal, J., Srivastava, V., Kumar, P., Chatterjee, R., Khan, P., 2011. Evaluation of crustal and upper mantle structuresusing receiver function analysis: ISM broadband observatory data. J. Geo. Soc. India 78, 76–80. doi:10.1007/s12594-011-0069-5.

Kumar, M.R., Raju, P.S., Devi, E.U., Saul, J., Ramesh, D.S., 2004. Crustal structure variations in northeast India fromconverted phases. Geophys. Res. Lett. 31, doi:10.1029/2004GL020576.

Kumar, K.P., Mohan, G., 2014. Crustal velocity structure beneath Saurashtra, NW India, through waveform modeling:Implications for magmatic underplating. J. Asian Earth Sci. 79, Part A, 173–181. doi:10.1016/j.jseaes.2013.09.006.

Kumar, M.R., Saul, J., Sarkar, D., Kind, R., Shukla, A.K., 2001. Crustal structure of the Indian shield: New constraintsfrom teleseismic receiver functions. Geophys. Res. Lett. 28, 1339–1342. doi:10.1029/2000GL012310.

Kumar, T.V., Jagadeesh, S., Rai, S., 2012. Crustal structure beneath the ArcheanProterozoic terrain of north India fromreceiver function modeling. J. Asian Earth Sci. 58, 108–118.

Li, Y.H., Tian, X.B., Wu, Q.J., Zeng, R.S., Zhang, R.Q., 2006. The Poisson ratio and crustal structure of the centralTibetan plateau inferred from Indepth-III teleseismic waveforms: Geological and geophysical implications. ChineseJ. Geophys. 49, 924–931. doi:10.1002/cjg2.913.doi:10.1016/j.jseaes.2012.06.015.

Li, Y.H., Wu, Q.J., Tian, X.B., 2009. Crustal structure in the Yunnan region determined by modeling receiver functions.Chinese J. Geophys. 52, 67–80.

Mandal, P., 2012. Passivesource seismic imaging of the crust and upper mantle beneath the 2001 mw 7.7 bhuj earthquakeregion, gujarat, india. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 102, 252–266. doi:10.1785/0120110116.

Mitra, S., Bhattacharya, S.N., Nath, S.K., 2008. Crustal structure of the western Bengal basin from joint anal-ysis of teleseismic receiver functions and Rayleigh-wave dispersion. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 98, 2715–2723.doi:10.1785/0120080141.

Mitra, S., Priestley, K., Bhattacharyya, A.K., Gaur, V.K., 2005. Crustal structure and earthquake focal depths beneathnortheastern India and southern Tibet. Geophys. J. Int. 160, 227–248. doi:10.1111/j.1365-246X.2004.02470.x.

Pathak, A., Kumar, M.R., Sarkar, D., 2006. Seismic structure of Sri Lanka using receiver function analysis: A comparisonwith other high-grade Gondwana terrains. Gondwana Research 10, 198–202. doi:10.1016/j.gr.2005.10.006.

Rai, A., Gaur, V.K., Rai, S.S., Priestley, K., 2009a. Seismic signatures of the pan-African orogeny: implications forsouthern Indian high-grade terranes. Geophys. J. Int. 176, 518–528. doi:10.1111/j.1365-246X.2008.03965.x.

Rai, S., Kumar, T.V., Jagadeesh, S., 2005. Seismic evidence for significant crustal thickening beneath Jabalpurearthquake, 21 May 1997, source region in Narmadason lineament, central India. Geophys. Res. Lett. 32,doi:10.1029/2005GL023580.

Rai, S.S., Priestley, K., Gaur, V.K., Mitra, S., Singh, M.P., Searle, M., 2006. Configuration of the Indian Moho beneaththe NW Himalaya and Ladakh. Geophys. Res. Lett. 33, doi:10.1029/2006GL026076.

Rai, S.S., Priestley, K., Suryaprakasam, K., Srinagesh, D., Gaur, V.K., Du, Z., 2003. Crustal shear velocity structure ofthe south Indian shield. J. Geophys. Res. 108, doi:10.1029/2002JB001776.

Sarkar, D., Kumar, M.R., Saul, J., Kind, R., Raju, P.S., Chadha, R.K., Shukla, A.K., 2003. A receiver function

Page 18: Supplementary Material... · A review of crust and upper mantle structure beneath the India subcontinent Arun Singha,, Chandrani Singha, B. L. N. Kennettb aDepartment of Geology and

perspective of the Dharwar craton (India) crustal structure. Geophys. J. Int. 154, 205–211. doi:10.1046/j.1365-246X.2003.01970.x.

Saul, J., Kumar, M.R., Sarkar, D., 2000. Lithospheric and upper mantle structure of the Indian shield, from teleseismicreceiver functions. Geophys. Res. Lett. 27, 2357–2360. doi:10.1029/1999GL011128.

Sherrington, H.F., Zandt, G., Frederiksen, A., 2004. Crustal fabric in the Tibetan plateau based on waveform inversionsfor seismic anisotropy parameters. JGR 109, doi:10.1029/2002JB002345.

Singh, A., Kumar, M.R., Kumar, N., Saikia, D., Raju, P.S., Srinagesh, D., Rao, N.P., Sarkar, D., 2012. Seismic signaturesof an altered crust and a normal transition zone structure beneath the Godavari rift. Precambrian Research 220221,1–8. doi:10.1016/j.precamres.2012.07.006.

Singh, A., Kumar, M.R., Raju, P.S., 2010. Seismic structure of the underthrusting Indian crust in Sikkim Himalaya.Tectonics 29, doi:10.1029/2010TC002722.

Tian, X., Zhang, Z., 2013. Bulk crustal properties in NE Tibet and their implications for deformation model. GondwanaResearch 24, 548 – 559. doi:10.1016/j.gr.2012.12.024.

Tiwari, K.P., Surve, G., Mohan, G., 2006. Crustal constraints on the uplift mechanism of the western Ghats of india.Geophys. J. Int. 167, 1309–1316. doi:10.1111/j.1365-246X.2006.03093.x.

Vinnik, L., Singh, A., Kiselev, S., Kumar, M.R., 2007. Upper mantle beneath foothills of the western himalaya: sub-ducted lithospheric slab or a keel of the indian shield? Geophys. J. Int. 171, 1162–1171. doi:10.1111/j.1365-246X.2007.03577.x.

Wang, C.Y., Lou, H., Silver, P.G., Zhu, L., Chang, L., 2010. Crustal structure variation along 30◦N in the eastern Tibetanplateau and its tectonic implications. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 289, 367–376. doi:10.1016/j.epsl.2009.11.026.

Xu, Q., Zhao, J., Cui, Z., Pei, S., Liu, H., 2010. Moho offset beneath the central Bangong-Nujiang suture of Tibetanplateau. Chin. Sci. Bull. 55, 607–613. doi:10.1007/s11434-009-0387-9.

Xu, Q., Zhao, J., Pei, S., Liu, H., 2013a. Distinct lateral contrast of the crustal and upper mantle struc-ture beneath northeast tibetan plateau from receiver function analysis. Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. 217, 1 – 9.doi:10.1016/j.pepi.2013.01.005.

Xu, Q., Zhao, J., Pei, S., Liu, H., 2013b. Imaging lithospheric structure of the eastern himalayan syntaxis: New insightsfrom receiver function analysis. J. Geophys. Res. 118, 2323–2332. doi:10.1002/jgrb.50162.

Yue, H., Chen, Y.J., Sandvol, E., Ni, J., Hearn, T., Zhou, S., Feng, Y., Ge, Z., Trujillo, A., Wang, Y., Jin, G., Jiang,M., Tang, Y., Liang, X., Wei, S., Wang, H., Fan, W., Liu, Z., 2012. Lithospheric and upper mantle structure of thenortheastern Tibetan plateau. J. Geophys. Res. 117, doi:10.1029/2011JB008545.

Zha, X., Lei, J., 2013. Crustal thickness and Poissons ratio beneath the Yunnan region. Science China Earth Sciences56, 693–702. doi:10.1007/s11430-013-4583-8.

Page 19: Supplementary Material... · A review of crust and upper mantle structure beneath the India subcontinent Arun Singha,, Chandrani Singha, B. L. N. Kennettb aDepartment of Geology and

70˚ 75˚ 80˚ 85˚ 90˚ 95˚

10˚

15˚

20˚

25˚

30˚

35˚

BAY

OF BENGALARABIAN

SEA

TIBET

S

N

EW

0 4 8

Thickness st. dev. (km)

70˚ 75˚ 80˚ 85˚ 90˚ 95˚

10˚

15˚

20˚

25˚

30˚

35˚

BAY

OF BENGALARABIAN

SEA

TIBET

S

N

EW

0.00 0.02 0.04

Poisson’s ratio st. dev.

70˚ 75˚ 80˚ 85˚ 90˚ 95˚

10˚

15˚

20˚

25˚

30˚

35˚

BAY

OF BENGALARABIAN

SEA

TIBET

S

N

EW

0.0 0.1 0.2

Vs st. dev. (km/s)

(b)(a)

(c)

Figure S1: The standard deviation maps produced using receiver functions data for crustal thickness (Figure4), Poisson’s ratio (Figure 2a) and Vs (Figure 2b).

Page 20: Supplementary Material... · A review of crust and upper mantle structure beneath the India subcontinent Arun Singha,, Chandrani Singha, B. L. N. Kennettb aDepartment of Geology and

Figure S2: Filled circles (color based on geological province) are the node points where at least onemeasurement (crustal thickness, heat flow, lithospheric thickness using S-p receiver functions, 410 and 660times )is available. The same node points have been used to create the final image (Figure S3). The nodepoints are the coordinates (1◦x1 ◦), where data is interpolated based on all available results.

Page 21: Supplementary Material... · A review of crust and upper mantle structure beneath the India subcontinent Arun Singha,, Chandrani Singha, B. L. N. Kennettb aDepartment of Geology and

40

60

80

Thi

ckne

ss [k

m]

0 40 80 120 160 200 240 280 320 360 400

Nodes

0

2

4

Ele

v[km

]

HIM

IGP

DA

FB

DV

P

ED

CW

DC

SG

TB

C+

SC

+B

UC

CB

+C

TB

+V

NB

ALL

UM

+G

ND

ALL

UM

+G

ND

EG

TG

GS

RIL

AN

KA

40

60

80

100

Hea

t flu

x[m

Wm

−2 ]

80

120

160

200

240

Lab[

km]

41

42

43

44

45

46

410[

s]

66

67

68

69

70

71

660[

s]

Figure S3: The results from various studies are summarized here based upon the location of node points(Figure S2) in different geological provinces. Color scheme is same as used for node points. Each geologi-cal province results are arranged based on the elevation of the node point. HIM, Himalaya and Tibet; IGP,Indo-Gangetic Plains; DAFB, Delhi-Aravalli Fold Belt; DVP, Deccan Volcanic Province; EDC, EasternDharwar Craton; WDC, Western Dharwar Craton; SGT, Southern Granulite Terrain; BC, Bastar craton;SC,Singhbhum Craton; BUC, Bundelkhand Craton;CB, Cuddapah Basin; CTB, Chattishgarh Basin; VNB,Vindhyan Basin; ALLUM, Alluvium; GND, Gondwana; EGT, Eastern Ghats Belt; GG, Godavari Graben