Advertisement

Pure and Applied Geophysics

, Volume 170, Issue 3, pp 409–431 | Cite as

Geophysical Images of the North Anatolian Fault Zone in the Erzincan Basin, Eastern Turkey, and their Tectonic Implications

  • Ümİt Avşar
  • Erşan Türkoğlu
  • Martyn Unsworth
  • İlyas Çağlar
  • Bülent Kaypak
Article

Abstract

The collision between the Arabian and Eurasian plates in eastern Turkey causes the Anatolian block to move westward. The North Anatolian Fault (NAF) is a major strike-slip fault that forms the northern boundary of the Anatolian block, and the Erzincan Basin is the largest sedimentary basin on the NAF. In the last century, two large earthquakes have ruptured the NAF within the Erzincan Basin and caused major damage (M s = 8.0 in 1939 and M s = 6.8 in 1992). The seismic hazard in Erzincan from future earthquakes on the NAF is significant because the unconsolidated sedimentary basin can amplify the ground motion during an earthquake. The amount of amplification depends on the thickness and geometry of the basin. Geophysical constraints can be used to image basin depth and predict the amount of seismic amplification. In this study, the basin geometry and fault zone structure were investigated using broadband magnetotelluric (MT) data collected on two profiles crossing the Erzincan Basin. A total of 24 broadband MT stations were acquired with 1–2 km spacing in 2005. Inversion of the MT data with 1D, 2D and 3D algorithms showed that the maximum thickness of the unconsolidated sediments is ~3 km in the Erzincan Basin. The MT resistivity models show that the northern flanks of the basin have a steeper dip than the southern flanks, and the basin deepens towards the east where it has a depth of 3.5 km. The MT models also show that the structure of the NAF may vary from east to west along the Erzincan Basin.

Keywords

Magnetotellurics electrical resistivity fault zone conductor Erzincan Basin Eastern Turkey 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This research was funded by grants from NSERC and the Alberta Ingenuity Fund to Martyn Unsworth. It was also supported by a grant to İlyas Çağlar from the Scientific and Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK-CAYDAG 105Y022). Phoenix Geophysics (Toronto) is thanked for the loan of a broadband MT system. Alan Jones and Gary McNeice are thanked for the use of their tensor decomposition code. Ümit Avşar thanks the Tinçel cultural foundation for funding his research visit to the University of Alberta. We thank Eylem Türkoğlu, Bülent Tank of Boğaziçi University, Ahmet Şener and Tunç Demir of Istanbul Technical University for assistance during data collection. We also thank Erzincan Sugar Factory for assistance and accommodation. Lastly, we would like to thank two anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments. Topography maps were created using the generic mapping tools (GMT) software of Wessel and Smith, (1991).

Supplementary material

24_2012_521_MOESM1_ESM.tif (7.8 mb)
Fig. A1. One-dimensional layered inversion for the central stations on the West and East Profiles. The left panel shows models obtained by unconstrained 1D inversion. Models in the right panel were obtained by fixing the resistivity of the resistive layer to 500 Ωm. Straight lines and curves are 1D and 2D inversion results, respectively, (Türkoğlu, 2009). Supplementary material 1 (TIFF 7961 kb)
24_2012_521_MOESM2_ESM.tif (20.8 mb)
Fig. A2. Apparent resistivity, phase and tipper curves from 2D inversion with τ = 10 and α = 7 for stations used in 1D inversion. Error floors of 20 % and 10 % were applied to the resistivity and phase data, respectively. The error floor for the tipper data was set to 0.02. Symbols and solid lines indicate the observed data (rotated data) and inversion model responses, respectively. The phases are shown in the first quadrant. Supplementary material 2 (TIFF 21333 kb)
24_2012_521_MOESM3_ESM.tif (24.1 mb)
Fig. A3. Pseudosections of residuals of apparent resistivity, phase and tipper data for the inversion models shown in Fig. 10 for the West and East Profiles, respectively. Supplementary material 3 (TIFF 24701 kb)
24_2012_521_MOESM4_ESM.tif (32.4 mb)
Fig. A4. Z xx , Z yy and Z xy , Z yx apparent resistivity and phase curves for some stations in the Erzincan Basin. Solid lines illustrate responses from 3D inversion. Supplementary material 4 (TIFF 33214 kb)

References

  1. Aktar, M., Dorbath, C., and Arpat, E. (2004), The seismic velocity and fault structure of the Erzincan Basin, Turkey, using local earthquake tomography, Geophys. J. Int. 156, 497–505.Google Scholar
  2. Allen, C. R. (1969), Active faulting in northern Turkey. Contribution Number 1577, Division of Geology and Science, California Institute of Technology, 32.Google Scholar
  3. Ambraseys, N.N. (1970), Some Characteristic Features of the Anatolian Fault Zone, Tectonophysics 9, 143–165.Google Scholar
  4. Arpat, E., and Saroğlu, F.(1975), Some Recent Tectonic Events in Turkey, Bull. Geol. Soc. Turkey 18, 91–101.Google Scholar
  5. Aydın, A., and Nur, A. (1982), Evolution of pull-apart basins and their scale independence, Tectonics 1, 91–106.Google Scholar
  6. Bahr, K. (1988), Interpretation of the magnetotelluric impedance tensor: regional induction and local telluric distortion, J. Geophys. 62, 119–127.Google Scholar
  7. Barka, A.A., Toksöz, M. N., Kandisky-Cade K., and Gülen, L. (1987), Segmentation, Seismicity and Earthquake Potential of the Eastern Part of the North Anatolian Fault Zone, Yerbilimeri 14, 337–352.Google Scholar
  8. Barka, A., and Kandisky-Cade, K. (1988), Strike-slip faulting geometry in Turkey and its influence on earthquake activity, Tectonics V7, 663–684.Google Scholar
  9. Barka, A., and Gülen, L. (1989), Complex Evolution of the Erzincan Basin (Eastern Turkey) and its Pull-apart and Continental Escape Origin, J. Struct. Geol. 11, 275–283.Google Scholar
  10. Barka, A., and Eyidoğan, H. (1993), The Erzincan earthquake of 13 March 1992 in Eastern Turkey, Terra Nova 5, 190–194.Google Scholar
  11. Bayrak, Y., Yılmaztürk, A., and Öztürk, S. (2005), Relationship between fundamental seismic hazard parameters for the different source regions in Turkey, Natural Hazards 36, 445–462.Google Scholar
  12. Bedrosian, P.A., Unsworth, M.J., and Egbert, G. (2002), Magnetotelluric imaging of the creeping segment of the San Andreas Fault near Hollister, Geophysical Research Letters 29 (11), 1506.Google Scholar
  13. Bedrosian, P.A., Unsworth, M.J., Egbert, G.D., and Thurberd, C.H. (2004), Geophysical images of the creeping segment of the San Andreas fault: implications for the role of crustal fluids in the earthquake process, Tectonophysics 385, 137–158.Google Scholar
  14. Bedrosian, P.A., Maercklin, N., Weckmann, U., Bartov, Y., Rybergi T., and Ritter, O. (2007), Lithology-derived structure classification from the joint interpretation of magnetotelluric and seismic models, Geophys. J. Int. 170, 737–748.Google Scholar
  15. Berdichevsky, M.N., Dimitriev, V.I., Pozdnjakova, E.E. (1998), On two dimensional interpretation of magnetotelluric soundings, Geophys. J. Int. 133, 585–606.Google Scholar
  16. Bernard, P., Gariel, J., and Dorbath, L. (1992), Fault Location and Rupture Kinematics of the Magnitude 6.8, 1992 Erzincan earthquake, Turkey, from strong ground motion and regional records, Bull. of Seis. Society of America V87, No-5, 1230–1243.Google Scholar
  17. Bibby, H.M., Caldwell, T.G., and Brown, C. (2005), Determinable and non-determinable parameters of galvanic distortion in Magnetotellurics, Geophys. J. Int. 163, 915–930.Google Scholar
  18. Boerner, D.E., Kurtz, R.D., Craven, J.A., Rondenay, S., and Qian, W. (1995), Buried Proterozoic foredeep under the Western Canada Sedimentary Basin? Geology April v.23, no. 4, 297–300.Google Scholar
  19. Booker, J.R., Favetto, A., and Pomposiello, M.C. (2004), Low electrical resistivity associated with plunging of the Nazca flat slab beneath Argentina, Nature 429, 399–403.Google Scholar
  20. Caldwell, T.G., Bibby, H.M., and Brown, C. (2004), The magnetotelluric phase tensor, Geophys. J. Int. 158, 457–469.Google Scholar
  21. Dewey, J.F., and Şengör, A.M.C. (1979), Aegean and surrounding regions: Complex multi plate and continuum tectonics in a convergent zone, Geol. Soc. of Am. Bull. part.1, v.90, 84–92.Google Scholar
  22. Eberhart-Philips, D., Stanley, W.D., Rodriguez, B.D., and Lutter, W.J. (1995), Surface seismic and electrical methods to detect fluids related to faulting. Journal of Geophysical Research Vol. 100, No. B7, 12, 919–1293.Google Scholar
  23. Egbert, G.D. (1997), Robust multiple-station magnetotelluric data processing. Geophys. J. Int. 130, 475–496.Google Scholar
  24. Egbert, G.D., and Booker, J.R. (1986), Robust estimation of geomagnetic transfer functions, Geophys. J.R. Astron. Soc. 87, 173–194.Google Scholar
  25. Erdik, M., Yüzügüllü, O., Yılmaz, C., and Akkas, N. (1992), 13 March (Ms = 6.8) Erzincan Earthquake: A preliminary reconnaissance report, Soil Dynam. Earthq. Enging.11, 279–310.Google Scholar
  26. Fuenzalida, H., Dorbath, L., Cisternas, A., Eyidoğan, H., Barka, A., Rivera, L., Haessler, H., and Lyberis, N. (1997), Mechanism of the 1992 Erzincan earthquake and its aftershocks, tectonics of the Erzincan basin and decoupling on the North Anatolian Fault. Geophys. J. Int., 129, 1–28.Google Scholar
  27. Gaucher, E. (1994), Modele en porofondeur et en vitessedu basin d’Erzincan D.E. A. Instıtut de Physique Globe de Paris.Google Scholar
  28. Gamble, T.D., Goubau, W.M., and Clarke, J. (1979), Magnetotellurics with a remote reference, Geophysics 44, 53–68,Google Scholar
  29. Gökalp, H. (2007), Local earthquake tomography of the Erzincan basin and surrounding area in Turkey, Annals of Geophysics Vol 50. N.6.Google Scholar
  30. Groom, R. W., and Bailey, R. C. (1989), Decomposition of magnetotelluric impedance tensors in the presence of local three-dimensional galvanic distortion, Journal of Geophysical Research 94, 1913–1925.Google Scholar
  31. Grosser, H., Baumbach, M., Berckhemer, H., Baier, B., Karahan, A., Schelle, H., Krüger, F., Paulat, A., Michel, G., Demirtaş, R., Gencoğlu, S., and Yılmaz, R. (1998), The Erzincan (Turkey) earthquake (Ms = 6.8) of March 13, 1992 and its aftershock sequence, PAGEOPH Vol. 152, 465–505.Google Scholar
  32. Gündoğdu, O., Altınok, Y., Hisarlı, M., and Beyaz, H. (1992), 13 Mart 1992 Erzincan depremi gözlem değerlendirmeleri, Erzincan Depremi ve Türkiye Deprem Sorunu, ITU, Maden Fakültesi Yayını, 56–62.Google Scholar
  33. Gürbüz, A. (2010), Geometric characteristics of pull-apart basins, Lithosphere v.2, no.3, 199–206.Google Scholar
  34. Gürer, A., and Bayrak, M. (2007), Relation between electrical resistivity and earthquake generation in the crust of West Anatolia, Turkey, Tectonophysics 445, 49–65.Google Scholar
  35. Han, De-hua., Nur, A., and Morqan, D. (1986), Effects of porosity and clay content on wave velocities in sandstones, Geophysics Vol. 51. No. 11, P. 2093·2107,13.Google Scholar
  36. Hansen, P.C. (1992), Analysis of discrete ill-posed problems by means of the L-curve,Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics 34, 561–580.Google Scholar
  37. Hartleb, R.D., Dolan, J.F., Kozacı, Ö., Akyüz, S., and Seitz, G.G. (2006), A 2500-yr- long paleoseismological record of large, infrequent earthquakes on the North Anatolian Fault at Çukurçimen, Turkey, GSA Bulletin v.118, no. 7/8, p.823–840.Google Scholar
  38. Hempton, M.R., and Dunne, L.A. (1984), Sedimentation in Pull-apart Basins: Active Examples in Eastern Turkey, J. Geol. 92, 513–530.Google Scholar
  39. Jones, A.G. (1998), Waves of the future: Superior inferences from collocated seismic and electromagnetic experiments, Tectonophysics 286, 273–298.Google Scholar
  40. Jones, A.G. (1987), MT and reflection: an essential combination, Geophys. J. R. astr. Soc., 89, 7–18.Google Scholar
  41. Karslı, O., Chen, B., Uysal, I., Aydin, F., Wijbrans, J.R., and Kandemir, R. (2008), Elemental and Sr–Nd–Pb isotopic geochemistry of the most recent Quaternary volcanism in the Erzincan Basin, Eastern Turkey: framework for the evaluation of basalt–lower crust interaction, Lithos 106, 55–70.Google Scholar
  42. Kaypak, B., and Eyidoğan, H. (2005), One-dimensional crustal structure of the Erzincan basin, Eastern Turkey and relocations of the 1992 Erzincan earthquake (Ms = 6.8) aftershock sequence, Physics of the Earth Planetary Interiors 151, 1–20.Google Scholar
  43. Kaypak, B. (2008), Three dimensional V p and V p/Vs structure of the upper crust in the Erzincan basin eastern (Turkey), Journal of Geophysical Research v113, B07307.Google Scholar
  44. Keller, G.V., Rock and mineral properties, Electromagnetic methods in applied geophysics theory: (ed., Nabighian, M.N.) (Tulsa, Okla., Society of Exploration Geophysicists, 1987) v. 1, p. 13–51.Google Scholar
  45. Koçyiğit, A. (2003), Two-stage Evolutionary Model for the Erzincan Pull-Apart Basin on the North Anatolian Fault System (NAFS), “International Workshop on the North Anatolian, East Anatolian and Dead Sea Fault System:Recent Prog.”, p.31.Google Scholar
  46. Kozlovskaya, E., Hjelt, S.E. (2000), Modeling of Elastic and Electrical Properties of Solid-Liquid Rock System with Fractal Microstructure. Phys. Chem.Earth, Vol.25, No.2, 195–200.Google Scholar
  47. Kurashimo, E., and Hirata, N. (2004), Low Vp and Vp/Vs zone beneath the northern Fossa Magna basin, central Japan, derived from a dense array observation, Earth Planets Space 56, 1301–1308, 2004.Google Scholar
  48. Mackie, R. L., and Madden, T. R. (1993), Three-dimensional magnetotelluric inversion usingconjugate gradients, Geophys. J. Int. 115, 215–229.Google Scholar
  49. Marquis G., and Hyndman D.R. (1992), Geophysical support for aqueous fluids in the deep crust: seismic and electrical relationships, Geophys. J. Int. 110, 91–105.Google Scholar
  50. McClusky, S., Balassanian, S., Barka, A., Demir, C., Ergintav, S., Georgiev, I., Gurkan, O., Hamburger, M., Hurst, K., Kahle, H., Kastens, K., Kekelidze, G., King, R., Kotzev, V., Lenk, O., Mahmoud, S., Mishin, A., Nadariya, M., Ouzounis, A., Paradissis, S., Peter, Y., Prilepin, M., Reilinger, R., Sanli, I., Seeger, H., Tealeb, A., Toksoz, M., and Veis, G. (2000), GPS constraints on plate motion and deformation in the eastern Mediterranean: Implications for plate dynamics, Journal of Geophysical Research 105, 5695–5719.Google Scholar
  51. McKenzie, D.P. (1972), Active Tectonics of the Mediterranean Region, Geophs. Jour.Royal.Astron.Soc. 30, 109–185.Google Scholar
  52. McNeice, G.M., and Jones, A.G. (2001), Multisite, multifrequency tensor decomposition of magnetotelluric data, Geophysics 66, 158–173.Google Scholar
  53. Meju, M.A., Gallardo, L.A., Mohamed, A.K. (2003), Evidence for correlation of electrical resistivity and seismic velocity in heterogeneous near-surface materials Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 30, No. 7, 1373.Google Scholar
  54. Olowofela, J.A., Kamiyole I, C., and Adegoke, J.A. (2004), Effects of Clay content and porosity on wave velocities in unconsolidated Media using Empirical relations, J. Geophys.Eng. I, 234–239.Google Scholar
  55. Olsen, K.B., Archueleta, R.J., and Matarese, J.R. (1995), Three dimensional simulation of a magnitude 7.75 earthquake on the San Andreas fault, Science 270, 1628–1632.Google Scholar
  56. Olsen, K.B. (2000), Site amplification in Los Angeles basin from three dimensional modelling of ground motion, Bulletin of seismological society of America, 90 6B, 77–94.Google Scholar
  57. Over, S., K. S. Kavak, O. Bellier, and S. Ozden, Is the Amik Basin (SETurkey) a Triple Junction Area? Analyses of SPOT XS Imagery and Seismicity, Int. J. Remote Sensing, 25/19, 3857–3872, 2004.Google Scholar
  58. Özgül, N., and Turşucu, A. (1984), Stratigraphy of the Mesozoic carbonate sequence of the Munzur Mountains (eastern Taurides), in Geology of the Taurus Belt, (eds.) Tekeli, O, and Göncüoğlu, M., General Directorate and Mineral Research and Exploration, Ankara, pp 173–180.Google Scholar
  59. Padilha, A.L., Vitorello, I., and Brito M.P.A. (2002), Magnetotelluric soundings across the Taubat′e Basin, Southeast Brazil. Earth Planets Space 54, 617–627.Google Scholar
  60. Palacky, G.J. (1987), Resistivity characteristics of geologic targets, in Nabighian, M.N., ed., Electromagnetic methods in applied geophysics: Tulsa, Okla., Society of Exploration Geophysicists v.1, p. 53–129.Google Scholar
  61. Parkinson, W. D. (1962), The influence of continents and oceans on geomagnetic variations, Geophysical Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society 6, 441–449.Google Scholar
  62. Pomposiello, M.C., Favetto, A., Sainato C., Booker, J., and Shenghui, L. (2002), Imaging the sedimentary basin of the Tucuman Plain in the northern Pampean Ranges, Argentina, Journal of Applied Geophysics 49, 47–58.Google Scholar
  63. Reilinger, R., 25 others., (2006), GPS constraints on continental deformation in the Africa-Arabia-Eurasia continental collision zone and implications for the dynamics of plate interactions, Journal of Geophysical Research Vol111, B05411.Google Scholar
  64. Rice, S.P., Robertson, A. H. F., Ustaömer, T., İnan, N., and Taşlı, K. (2009), Late Cretaceous –Early Eocene tectonic development of the Tethyan suture zone in the Erzincan area, Eastern Pontides, Turkey. Geol. Mag. 146 (4), 567–590.Google Scholar
  65. Rodi, W., and Mackie, R.L. (2001), Nonlinear conjugate gradients algorithm for 2-D magnetotelluric inversion, Geophysics 66, 174–187.Google Scholar
  66. Sasaki, Y. (2001), Full 3-D Inversion of electromagnetic data on PC, J. Appl. Geophys., 46, 45–54.Google Scholar
  67. Siripunvaraporn, W., Egbert, G., Lenbury, Y., and Uyeshima, M. (2005), Three-dimensional magnetotelluric inversion: data-space method, Physics of the Earth and Planetary Interiors 150, 3–14.Google Scholar
  68. Stein, S., Barka, A.A., and Dieterich H.J. (1997), Progressive failure on the North Anatolian fault since 1939 by earthquake stress triggering, Geophys. J. Int. Vol. 128, Issue 3, pages 594–604.Google Scholar
  69. Şengör, A.M.C. (1979), The North Anatolian transform fault: its age, offset and tectonic significance, J. Geol. Soc., London 136, 269–282.Google Scholar
  70. Şengör, A. M. C., Tüysüz, O., İmren, C., Sakınc¸ M., Eyidoğan, H., Görür, N., Le Pichon, X., and Rangin C. (2005), The North Anatolian Fault: A new look, Annu. Rev. Earth Planet. Sci. 33, 37–112.Google Scholar
  71. Takei, Y.(2002), Effect of pore geometry on Vp/Vs: From equilibrium geometryto crack, J. Geophys. Res. 107(B2), 2043. doi: 10.129/2001JB000522.
  72. Tank, S.B., Honkura, Y., Ogawa, Y., Matsushima, M., Oshiman, N., Tuncer, M.K., Celik, C., Tolak, E., and Isikara, A.M. (2005), Magnetotelluric imaging of the fault rupture area of the 1999 Izmit (Turkey) earthquake, Physics of the Earth and Planetary Interiors 150, 213–225.Google Scholar
  73. Tatar, Y. (1978), Tectonic Study of the Erzincan-Refahiye Section of the North Anatolian Fault Zone, Hacettepe Univ. Earth Sci. 4, 201–236.Google Scholar
  74. Tikhonov, A.N., and Arsenin, V.Y. (1977), Solutions of Ill-Posed Problems, V.H. Winston and Sons: Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  75. Türkoglu, E., Unsworth, M., Çaglar, İ., Tuncer, V., and Avşar, Ü. (2008), Lithospheric structure of the Arabia-Eurasia collision zone in eastern Anatolia: Magnetotelluric evidence for widespread weaking by fluids? Geology 36, 619–622.Google Scholar
  76. Türkoğlu, E. (2009), A Magnetotelluric Investigation of the Arabia–Eurasia Collision in Eastern Anatolia, University of Alberta, Phd thesis, pp-208.Google Scholar
  77. Tüysüz, O. (1993), Erzincan çevresinin jeolojisi ve tektonik evrimi, 2. Ulusal Deprem Mühendisliği Konferansı. 10–13, Mart, Istanbul.Google Scholar
  78. Unsworth, M.J., Malin, P., Egbert, G.D., and Booker, J.R. (1997), Internal structure of the San Andreas fault at Parkfield, California, Geology 25, 359–362.Google Scholar
  79. Unsworth, M.J., and Bedrosian, P.A. (2004), Electrical resistivity at the SAFOD site from magnetotelluric exploration, Geophys. Res. Lett. 31, L12S05.Google Scholar
  80. Unsworth, M.J., Jones A.G., Wei, W., Marquis, G., Gokarn, G.S., Spratt J.E., and the INDEPTH-MT team. (2005), Crustal rheology of the Himalaya and Southern Tibet inferred from magnetotelluric data, Nature Vol43,8|3.Google Scholar
  81. Wannamaker, P.E., Booker, J.R., Jones, A.G., Chave, A.D., Filloux, J.H., Waff, H.S., and Law, L.K. (1989), Resistivity cross section through the Juan deFuca subduction system and its tectonic implications, J. Geophys. Res. 94, 14127–14144.Google Scholar
  82. Westaway R., and Arger, J. (2001), Kinematics of the Malatya–Ovacık Fault Zone, Geodinamica Acta 14, 103–131.Google Scholar
  83. Wiese, H. (1962), Geomagnetische tiefentellurik, Pure and Applied Geophysics 57, 31–46.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Basel AG 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ümİt Avşar
    • 1
  • Erşan Türkoğlu
    • 2
  • Martyn Unsworth
    • 3
  • İlyas Çağlar
    • 1
  • Bülent Kaypak
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of Geophysical Engineering, Faculty of MinesIstanbul Technical UniversityIstanbulTurkey
  2. 2.Quantec GeoscienceNorth YorkCanada
  3. 3.Department of PhysicsUniversity of AlbertaEdmontonCanada
  4. 4.Department of Geophysical Engineering, Faculty of EngineeringAnkara UniversityAnkaraTurkey

Personalised recommendations