Advertisement

Pure and Applied Geophysics

, Volume 172, Issue 2, pp 415–425 | Cite as

Detection of Lineaments in Denizli Basin of Western Anatolia Region Using Bouguer Gravity Data

  • Figen F. Altinoğlu
  • Murat Sari
  • Ali Aydin
Article

Abstract

The aim of this study is to investigate the geostructural boundaries of the eastern part of Western Anatolia. To achieve this, three methods, horizontal gradient, analytic signal, and tilt angle, were used. With the application of each method to the Bouguer gravity data, the common lineaments were determined using maximum values of the horizontal gradient, analytic signal maps, and zero contours of the tilt angle maps. The basement topography was also produced using the Parker–Oldenburg algorithm. Then, the produced lineaments were compared with the active fault map of the region. The results suggested that although a good agreement between the current work and earlier work exists, the new four lineament regions were also detected. We concluded that this work will lead to better understanding of Anatolian geostructural and its impact on the larger scale geological processes.

Keywords

Lineament Denizli basin horizontal gradient analytic signal tilt angle 

References

  1. Aboud, E., Selim, E.S., and Bishlawy, E.A. (2010), Contribution of gravity and magnetic data in delineating the subsurface structure of Hammam Faroun Area, Gulf of Suez, Egypt, Arabian Journal of Geosciences 4, (1-2), 249–257.Google Scholar
  2. Altınoğlu, F.F., Investigation of Tectonics of Western Anatolia by Geophysical Methods, Ph.D. Thesis, (Pamukkale University, Turkey, 2012) pp. 224.Google Scholar
  3. Alptekin, Ö., Focal Mechanisms of Earthquakes in Western Turkey and Their Implications: Ph.D. Thesis, (New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology Socorro, New Mexico 1973) pp. 95.Google Scholar
  4. Aydoğan, D., Yüksel, A., Kara, İ., and Özler, M. (2001), Denizli (Çürüksu) havzasının gravite verileri ile modellenmesi, İstanbul Üni. Müh. Fak. Yerbilimleri Dergisi 14, 1–2, 93–108.Google Scholar
  5. Arısoy, M.Ö., and Dikmen, Ü. (2011), Potensoft: MATLAB-based Software for potential field data processing, modelling and mapping, Computer & Geosciences 37, 935–942.Google Scholar
  6. Bilim, F. (2007), Investigation into the lineaments and thermal structure of Kütahya-Denizli Region, Western Anatolia, from using aeromagnetic, gravity and seismological data, Physisc of the Earth and Planetory Interiors 165,135–146.Google Scholar
  7. Bingöl, E. (1976), Batı Anadolu’nun jeotektonik evrimi, M.T.A. Enst. Der. 86, 14–34.Google Scholar
  8. Bozkurt, E. (2001), Neotectonic of Turkey –a synthesis, Geodinamica Acta 14, 3–30.Google Scholar
  9. Bozkurt, E. (2003), Origin of NE-trending basins in Western Turkey, Geodinamica Acta 16, 61–81.Google Scholar
  10. Bozkurt, E., and Mittwede, S.K. (2005), Introduction: Evolution of Neogene extensional tectonics of Western Turkey, Geodinamica Acta 18, 153–165.Google Scholar
  11. Cordell, L., and Grauch, V.J.S., Mapping basement magnetization zones from aeromagnetic data in the San Juan Basin, New Mexico, (Ed. Hinze, W.J.) The utility of regional gravity and magnetic anomaly maps (Soc. Explor. Geophys., 1985) pp. 181–197.Google Scholar
  12. Gabor, D. (1946), Theory of communication, Journal of the Institute of Electrical Engineers 93, 429–457.Google Scholar
  13. Gómez-Ortiz, D., and Agarwal, B.N.P. (2005), 3DINVER.M: A MATLAB program to invert the gravity anomaly over a 3-D horizontal density interface by Parker–Oldenburg’s algorithm, Computer Geosci. 31, 513–520.Google Scholar
  14. Hornby, P., Boschetti, F., and Horovitz, F.G. (1999), Analysis of Potential field data in the wavelet domain, Geophysical Journal International 137, 175–196.Google Scholar
  15. Kaypak, B., and Gökkaya, G. (2012), 3D Imaging of the upper crust beneath the Denizli geothermal region by the local earthquake tomography, Western Turkey, Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research 211–212, 47–60.Google Scholar
  16. Kumar, N.J, Singh, A.P., Rao M.R.K.P., Chandrasekhar D.V., and Singh B. (2009), Gravity signatures derived crustal structure and tectonics of Achankovil shear zone Southern India, Gondwana Research 16, 45–55.Google Scholar
  17. Lyngsie, S.B., Thybo, H., and Rasmussen, T.M. (2006), Regional geological and tectonic structures of the North Sea area from potential field modelling, Tectonophysics 413 (3–4), 147–170.Google Scholar
  18. McKenzie, D. (1978), Active tectonics of the Alpine-Himalayan Belt: The Aegean Sea and surrounding regions, Geophys. J. R. Ast. Soc. 55, 217–254.Google Scholar
  19. McKenzie, D.P. (1972), Active tectonics of the Mediterranean Region, Geophys. J. R. Astr. Soc. 30 (1), 109–185.Google Scholar
  20. Miller, H.G. and Singh, V. (1994), Potential field tilt -a new concept for location of potential field sources, Journal of Applied Geophysics 32, 213–217.Google Scholar
  21. Nabighian, M.N. (1972), The Analytic Signal of two dimensional magnetic bodies with polygonal cross section: Its properties and use for automated anomaly interpretation, Geophysics 37, 507–517.Google Scholar
  22. Oldenburg, D.W. (1974), The inversion and interpretation of gravity anomalies, Geophysics 39, 526–536.Google Scholar
  23. Oruç, B., Sertçelik, İ., Kafadar, Ö., and Selim, H.H. (2013), Structural interpretation of the Erzurum Basin, Eastern Turkey, using curvature gravity gradient tensor and gravity inversion of basement relief, Journal of Applied Geophysics 88,105–113.Google Scholar
  24. Oruç, B. (2014), Structural interpretation of southern part of Western Anatolian using analytic signal of the second order gravity gradients and discrete wavelet transform analysis, Journal of Applied Geophysics 103, 82–98.Google Scholar
  25. Parker, R.L. (1973), The rapid calculation of potential anomalies, Geophys. J., R. Astr.Soc. 31, 447–455.Google Scholar
  26. Phillips, J.D., Locating magnetic contacts; a comparison of the horizontal gradient, analytic signal, and local wavenumber methods, Society of Exploration Geophysicists, Abstracts with Programs (Calgary 2000) pp. 402–405.Google Scholar
  27. Prasanna, H.M.I. (2013), High resolution local Moho determination using gravity inversion: A case study in Sri Lanka, Journal of Asian Earth Sciences 74, 62–70.Google Scholar
  28. Rapolla, A., Cella F., Fedi, M., and Florio, G.(2002), Improved techniques in data analysis and interpretation of potential fields: Examples of application in volcanic and seismically active areas, Annals of Geophysics 45, 6.Google Scholar
  29. Saibi, H., Nishijima, J., and Ehara, S. (2006), Processing and interpretation of gravity data for the Shimabara Peninsula Area, Southwestern Japan Memoirs of the Faculty of Engineering, Kyushu University 66, 2.Google Scholar
  30. Salem, A., Williams, S., and Fairhead, D. (2008), Interpretation of magnetic data using tilt-angle derivatives, Geophysics, 1–10.Google Scholar
  31. Sarı, C., and Şalk, M. (2006), Sediment thicknesses of the Western Anatolia graben structures determined by 2D And 3D analysis using gravity data, J. Asian Earth Sci. 26, 39–48.Google Scholar
  32. Spector, A., and Grant, F.S. (1970), Statistical models for interpreting aeromagnetic data, Geophysics 35, 293–302.Google Scholar
  33. Şengör, A.M.C. (1979), The North Anotolian Transform Fault: Its age, offset and tectonic significance, J. Geol. Soc. Lond. 136, 269–282.Google Scholar
  34. Şengör, A.M.C., and Kidd, W.S.F. (1979), Post-collisional tectonics of Turkish-Iranian plateau and a comprasion with Tibet, Tectonophysics 55, 361–376.Google Scholar
  35. Şengör, A.M.C., and Yılmaz, Y. (1981), Tethyan evolution of Turkey: a plate tectonic approach, Tectonophysics 75, 181–241.Google Scholar
  36. Şengör, A.M.C., Satir, M., and Akkök, R. (1984), Timing of tectonic events in the Menderes Massif, Western Turkey: Implications for tectonic evolution and evidence for Pan-African basement in Turkey, Tectonics 3, 693–707.Google Scholar
  37. Westaway, R. (2003), Kinematics of the Middle East and Eastern Mediterranean updated, Turkey J. Earth. Sci. 12, 5–46.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Basel 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Engineering, Department of GeophysicsPamukkale University, KınıklıDenizliTurkey
  2. 2.Department of Mathematics, Faculty of Art and SciencePamukkale UniversityDenizliTurkey

Personalised recommendations