Logan Medallist 4. Large-Scale Impact and Earth History

The current record of large-scale impact on Earth consists of close to 200 impact structures and some 30 impact events recorded in the stratigraphic record, only some of which are related to known structures. It is a preservation sample of a much larger production population, with the impact rate on Earth being higher than that of the moon. This is due to the Earth’s larger physical and gravitational cross-sections, with respect to asteroidal and cometary bodies entering the inner solar system. While terrestrial impact structures have been studied as the only source of ground-truth data on impact as a planetary process, it is becoming increasingly acknowledged that large-scale impact has had its effects on the geologic history of the Earth, itself. As extremely high energy events, impacts redistribute, disrupt and reprocess target lithologies, resulting in topographic, structural and thermal anomalies in the upper crust. This has resulted in many impact structures being the source of natural resources, including some world-class examples, such as gold and uranium at Vredefort, South Africa, Ni–Cu–PGE sulphides at Sudbury, Canada and hydrocarbons from the Campeche Bank, Mexico. Large-scale impact also has the potential to disrupt the terrestrial biosphere. The most devastating known example is the evidence for the role of impact in the Cretaceous–Paleocene (K–Pg) mass extinction event and the formation of the Chicxulub structure, Mexico. It also likely had a role in other, less dramatic, climatic excursions, such as the Paleocene–Eocene–Thermal Maximum (PETM) event. The impact rate was much higher in early Earth history and, while based on reasoned speculation, it is argued that the early surface of the Hadean Earth was replete with massive impact melt pools, in place of the large multiring basins that formed on the lower gravity moon in the same time-period. These melt pools would differentiate to form more felsic upper lithologies and, thus, are a potential source for Hadean-aged zircons, without invoking more modern geodynamic scenarios. The Earth-moon system is unique in the inner solar system and currently the best working hypothesis for its origin is a planetary-scale impact with the proto-Earth, after core formation at ca. 4.43 Ga. Future large-scale impact is a low probability event but with high consequences and has the potential to create a natural disaster of proportions unequalled by other geologic processes and threaten the extended future of human civilization, itself.RÉSUMÉLe bilan actuel de traces de grands impacts sur la Terre se compose de près de 200 astroblèmes et d'une trentaine d’impacts enregistrés dans la stratigraphie, dont seulement certains sont liés à des astroblèmes connus. Il s'agit d'échantillons préservés sur une population d’événements beaucoup plus importante, le taux d'impact sur Terre étant supérieur à celui de la lune. Cela tient aux plus grandes sections transversales physiques et gravitationnelles de la Terre sur la trajectoire des astéroïdes et comètes qui pénètrent le système solaire interne. Alors que les astroblèmes terrestres ont été étudiés comme étant la seule source de données avérée d’impacts en tant que processus planétaire, de plus en plus on reconnaît que les grands impacts ont eu des effets sur l'histoire géologique de la Terre. À l’instar des événements d'énergie extrême, les impacts redistribuent, perturbent et remanient les lithologies impliquées, provoquant dans la croûte terrestre supérieure des anomalies topographiques, structurelles et thermiques. Il en a résulté de nombreux astroblèmes à l’origine de ressources naturelles, dont certains exemples de classe mondiale tels que l'or et l'uranium à Vredefort en Afrique du Sud, les sulfures de Ni–Cu–PGE à Sudbury au Canada, et les hydrocarbures du Banc de Campeche au Mexique. Les grands impacts peuvent également perturber la biosphère terrestre. L'exemple le plus dévastateur connu nous est donné des indices du rôle de l'impact dans l'extinction de masse au Crétacé–Paléogène (K–Pg) et la formation de la structure de Chicxulub, au Mexique. Il a également probablement joué un rôle dans d'autres événements climatiques extraordinaires moins dramatiques, comme le Maximum thermal du Paleocène–Eocène (PETM). Le taux d'impact était beaucoup plus élevé au début de l'histoire de la Terre et, tout en étant basé sur une spéculation raisonnée, on fait valoir que la surface précoce de la Terre à l’Hadéen était tapissée de grands bassins en fusion, au lieu de grands bassins à couronnes multiples tels ceux qui se sont formés à la même période sur la lune ayant une gravité inférieure. Ces bassins en fusion se seraient différenciées pour constituer des lithologies plus felsiques sur le dessus, devenant ainsi une source potentielle de zircons d’âge Hadéen, sans qu’il soit nécessaire d’invoquer des scénarios géodynamiques plus récents. Le système Terre-lune est unique dans le système solaire interne. Actuellement la meilleure hypothèse de travail pour son origine est un impact planétaire avec la proto-Terre, après la formation du noyau à env. 4,43 Ga. La probabilité d’un futur grand impact est faible mais comporte des conséquences capables d’engendrer un désastre naturel aux proportions inégalées comparé à d'autres processus géologiques, menaçant l'avenir de la civilisation humaine elle-même

Impact Earth: A review of the terrestrial impact record

Over the past few decades, it has become increasingly clear that the impact of interplanetary bodies on other planetary bodies is one of the most ubiquitous and important geological processes in the Solar System. This impact process has played a fundamental role throughout the history of the Earth and other planetary bodies, resulting in both destructive and beneficial effects. The impact cratering record of Earth is critical to our understanding of the processes, products, and effects of impact events. In this contribution, we provide an up-to-date review and synthesis of the impact cratering record on Earth. Following a brief history of the Impact Earth Database (available online at http://www.impactearth.com), the definition of the main categories of impact features listed in the database, and an overview of the impact cratering process, we review and summarize the required evidence to confirm impact events. Based on these definitions and criteria, we list 188 hypervelocity impact craters and 13 impact craters (i.e., impact sites lacking evidence for shock metamorphism). For each crater, we provide details on key attributes, such as location, date confirmed, erosional level, age, target properties, diameter, and an overview of the shock metamorphic effects and impactites that have been described in the literature. We also list a large number of impact deposits, which we have classified into four main categories: tektites, spherule layers, occurrences of other types of glass, and breccias. We discuss the challenges of recognizing and confirming impact events and highlight weaknesses, contradictions, and inconsistencies in the literature. We then address the morphology and morphometry of hypervelocity impact craters. Based on the Impact Earth Database, it is apparent that the transition diameter from simple to complex craters for craters developed in sedimentary versus crystalline target rocks is less pronounced than previously reported, at approximately 3 km for both. Our analysis also yields an estimate for stratigraphic uplift of 0.0945D0.6862, which is lower than previous estimates. We ascribe this to more accurate diameter estimates plus the variable effects of erosion. It is also clear that central topographic peaks in terrestrial complex impact craters are, in general, more subdued than their lunar counterparts. Furthermore, a number of relatively well-preserved terrestrial complex impact structures lack central peaks entirely. The final section of this review provides an overview of impactites preserved in terrestrial hypervelocity impact craters. While approximately three quarters of hypervelocity impact craters on Earth preserve some portion of their crater-fill impactites, ejecta deposits are known from less than 10%. In summary, the Impact Earth Database provides an important new resource for researchers interested in impact craters and the impact cratering process and we welcome input from the community to ensure that the Impact Earth website (http://www.impactearth.com) is a living resource that is as accurate and as up-to-date, as possible

The Pele Offset Dykes, Sudbury impact structure, Canada

The Offset Dykes are impact-melt bearing dykes related to the 1.85 Ga Sudbury impact structure. Currently, the dykes extend radially outward from – or occur concentrically around – the Sudbury Igneous Complex, which is the remnant of a differentiated impact melt sheet and the source of the dykes. The recently identified three Pele Offset Dykes intrude into the Archean rocks north of the Sudbury Igneous Complex. In this study, the Pele dykes are characterized for the first time by a combination of fieldwork, optical microscopy, electron microprobe analyses, and bulk geochemical analyses. The Pele Offset Dykes stand out from the other Offset Dykes at Sudbury in two significant ways: (1) All other known Offset Dykes consist of an inclusion-rich lithology in the centre of the dyke and an inclusion-poor lithology along the margins. The Pele dykes, however, are only composed of the inclusion-poor phase. (2) The Pele dykes – particularly the Central and Eastern dykes – have a more evolved chemical composition relative to the other Offset Dykes. These observations suggest that the Pele dykes were emplaced after the other known Offset Dykes during two injection events: the Western followed by the Central and Eastern Pele dykes.The accepted manuscript in pdf format is listed with the files at the bottom of this page. The presentation of the authors' names and (or) special characters in the title of the manuscript may differ slightly between what is listed on this page and what is listed in the pdf file of the accepted manuscript; that in the pdf file of the accepted manuscript is what was submitted by the author

Impact-induced porosity and micro-fracturing at the Chicxulub impact structure

Porosity and its distribution in impact craters has an important effect on the petrophysical properties of impactites: seismic wave-speeds and reflectivity, rock permeability, strength, and density. These properties are important for the identification of potential craters and the understanding of the process and consequences of cratering. The Chicxulub impact structure, recently drilled by the joint International Ocean Discovery Program and International Continental scientific Drilling Program Expedition 364, provides a unique opportunity to compare direct observations of impactites with geophysical observations and models. Here, we combine small scale petrographic and petrophysical measurements with larger scale geophysical measurements and numerical simulations of the Chicxulub impact structure. Our aim is to assess the cause of unusually high porosities within the Chicxulub peak ring and the capability of numerical impact simulations to predict the gravity signature and the distribution and texture of porosity within craters. We show that high porosities within the Chicxulub peak ring are primarily caused by shock-induced micro-fracturing. These fractures have preferred orientations, which can be predicted by considering the orientations of principal stresses during shock, and subsequent deformation during peak-ring formation. Our results demonstrate that numerical impact simulations, implementing the Dynamic Collapse Model of peak-ring formation, can accurately predict the distribution and orientation of impact-induced micro-fractures in large craters which plays an important role in the geophysical signature of impact structures

Effect of Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitor and Angiotensin Receptor Blocker Initiation on Organ Support-Free Days in Patients Hospitalized with COVID-19: A Randomized Clinical Trial

International audienceIMPORTANCE: Overactivation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) may contribute to poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Objective: To determine whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) initiation improves outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: In an ongoing, adaptive platform randomized clinical trial, 721 critically ill and 58 non-critically ill hospitalized adults were randomized to receive an RAS inhibitor or control between March 16, 2021, and February 25, 2022, at 69 sites in 7 countries (final follow-up on June 1, 2022). INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized to receive open-label initiation of an ACE inhibitor (n = 257), ARB (n = 248), ARB in combination with DMX-200 (a chemokine receptor-2 inhibitor; n = 10), or no RAS inhibitor (control; n = 264) for up to 10 days. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was organ support-free days, a composite of hospital survival and days alive without cardiovascular or respiratory organ support through 21 days. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model. Odds ratios (ORs) greater than 1 represent improved outcomes. RESULTS: On February 25, 2022, enrollment was discontinued due to safety concerns. Among 679 critically ill patients with available primary outcome data, the median age was 56 years and 239 participants (35.2%) were women. Median (IQR) organ support-free days among critically ill patients was 10 (-1 to 16) in the ACE inhibitor group (n = 231), 8 (-1 to 17) in the ARB group (n = 217), and 12 (0 to 17) in the control group (n = 231) (median adjusted odds ratios of 0.77 [95% bayesian credible interval, 0.58-1.06] for improvement for ACE inhibitor and 0.76 [95% credible interval, 0.56-1.05] for ARB compared with control). The posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitors and ARBs worsened organ support-free days compared with control were 94.9% and 95.4%, respectively. Hospital survival occurred in 166 of 231 critically ill participants (71.9%) in the ACE inhibitor group, 152 of 217 (70.0%) in the ARB group, and 182 of 231 (78.8%) in the control group (posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitor and ARB worsened hospital survival compared with control were 95.3% and 98.1%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this trial, among critically ill adults with COVID-19, initiation of an ACE inhibitor or ARB did not improve, and likely worsened, clinical outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02735707