Gradistic vs. Cladistic Views in the Classification of Chondrites: The (L,H) Dichotomy and the Missing L/LL Precursors (NIPR Statistics VI.)

Details Gradistic vs. Cladistic Views in the Classification of Chondrites: The (L,H) Dichotomy and the Missing L/LL Precursors (NIPR Statistics VI.) Gradistic vs. Cladistic Views in the Classification of Chondrites: The (L,H) Dichotomy and the Missing L/LL Precursors (NIPR Statistics VI.)

Mar 1999

adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-data_query?bibcode=1999lpi....30.1337l&link_type=abstract

30th Annual Lunar and Planetary Science Conference, March 15-29, 1999, Houston, TX, abstract no. 1337

Computer Science

Scientific paper

Chondritic parent body evolutionary trends were projected -- on the
basis of the NIPR Antarctic dataset (Yanai et al, 1995) -- in
multicomponent functions (i.e. Fe-C-H2O race) of chondrite types for all
groups. We looked for the possible precursors of L/LL chondrites.

Affiliated with

Also associated with

No associations

Rating

Gradistic vs. Cladistic Views in the Classification of Chondrites: The (L,H) Dichotomy and the Missing L/LL Precursors (NIPR Statistics VI.) does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this scientific paper.

If you have personal experience with Gradistic vs. Cladistic Views in the Classification of Chondrites: The (L,H) Dichotomy and the Missing L/LL Precursors (NIPR Statistics VI.), we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and Gradistic vs. Cladistic Views in the Classification of Chondrites: The (L,H) Dichotomy and the Missing L/LL Precursors (NIPR Statistics VI.) will most certainly appreciate the feedback.

Rate now

Comments { 0 }

Profile ID: LFWR-SCP-O-1475438