Ancient Crater Discovered Beneath the North Sea

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Meteoritic craters usually call to mind highly visible blemishes, like Arizona¿s Barringer Crater, Vredefort in South Africa and the moon¿s enormous Orientale basin. On the earth, these impact structures are rather a sorry lot, battered as they are by the elements and geological activity. The resulting erosion makes studying the conditions under which the craters formed difficult at best. To that end, an impact structure described today in the journal Nature may offer important new insights. According to the report, researchers have found and mapped a well-preserved crater hiding beneath the floor of the North Sea, where it formed an estimated 65 million years ago.

The subsea depression was discovered quite by accident, during prospecting of the area for oil and gas. Dubbed the Silverpit crater, it lies under 40 meters of water and a few hundred meters of sediments. Three-dimensional imaging, performed by Simon A. Stewart of BP plc in Aberdeen, U.K., and Philip J. Allen of Production Geoscience Ltd., in Banchory, U.K., revealed a crater some 20 kilometers across with a distinctive multi-ring pattern. Impact structures on the earth and moon generally fall into two categories: simple and complex. The larger the crater, the more complex it tends to be. Silverpit is thus unusual in that it is both relatively small and it has a multi-ring structure previously seen only in craters with diameters of at least 250 kilometers. (Exactly what causes rings to form is a matter of debate.) In fact, size differences notwithstanding, Silverpit actually looks more like the Valhalla crater on Jupiter¿s icy moon Callisto than any terrestrial crater.

But the case for Silverpit being an impact-generated feature (as opposed to the result of some geological process) is not closed yet. "The real test that Silverpit was created by an impact will be to look for shock effects in the rocks that form it," writes Canadian geologist John G. Spray of the University of New Brunswick in an accompanying commentary. "Shock-generated features such as unusual microscopic mineral deformations and shatter cones (conical fracture systems formed by shock waves in rock) would be compelling evidence of an impact origin."

Kate Wong is an award-winning science writer and senior editor for features at Scientific American, where she has focused on evolution, ecology, anthropology, archaeology, paleontology and animal behavior. She is fascinated by human origins, which she has covered for nearly 30 years. Recently she has become obsessed with birds. Her reporting has taken her to caves in France and Croatia that Neandertals once called home to the shores of Kenya’s Lake Turkana in search of the oldest stone tools in the world, as well as to Madagascar on an expedition to unearth ancient mammals and dinosaurs, the icy waters of Antarctica, where humpback whales feast on krill, and a “Big Day” race around the state of Connecticut to find as many bird species as possible in 24 hours. Wong is co-author, with Donald Johanson, of Lucy’s Legacy: The Quest for Human Origins. She holds a bachelor of science degree in biological anthropology and zoology from the University of Michigan. Follow her on Bluesky @katewong.bsky.social

More by Kate Wong

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe