Surveys in Geophysics

, 32:827 | Cite as

Depth-Recursive Tomography of the Bohemian Massif at the CEL09 Transect—Part A: Resolution Estimates and Deblurring Aspects

Article

Abstract

The refraction CEL09 profile from the CELEBRATION 2000 project intersects the main terranes of the Bohemian Massif in the NW–SE direction: the Saxothuringian, the Teplá-Barrandian, the Moldanubian and the Moravo-Silesian. In its easternmost part, it crosses the Western Outer Carpathians overthrust westward onto the Bohemian Massif. Only the first 450 km were surveyed with the densest deployment of shot points providing data suitable for a reliable geological interpretation. The first-arrival depth-recursive tomography was applied here to derive a P-wave velocity image of the upper and middle crust (Part A). The proper interpretation of the obtained velocity features is the subject of the accompanying paper (Part B). The attained resolution in the velocity image is shown to be superior as compared with the previous CEL09 models based also on the more uncertain later arrivals of reflection waves. The applied DRTG (depth-recursive tomography on grid) method is based on a regular network of refraction grid rays generated for iteratively updated starting models. Only the distinct first arrivals with minimum uncertainty are used for the DRTG inversions to yield the maximum resolution. Thanks to the full control of the data fit by the grid rays used, the statistical lateral resolution could be determined at single grid depths for the chosen confidence levels. Thus, the lateral sizes of the anomalies that can be yet resolved are determined in dependence on their depths and their velocity excesses. The defocusing of the imaged features is studied on the basis of the spatial responses to spike excitation. The calculated spatial responses also allowed the edge smearing of the velocity anomalies to be assessed. Special attention is paid to the imaging of low-velocity zones that are usually suppressed by the smoothing measures used in standard tomographic methods. An improvement was achieved if the smoothing was suggested with regard to the occurrence of the low-velocity zones repeatedly appearing in higher iterations. The gained deblurring effect concerns both the negative and positive anomalies as documented on the velocity features interpreted in the accompanying paper.

Keywords

Refraction tomography Depth-recursive tomography Lateral resolution Impulse response Two-point resolution Deblurring of velocity image CEL09 refraction profile Bohemian Massif 

References

  1. Aki K, Richards PG (1980) Quantitative seismology, volume II. W. H. Freeman and Company, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  2. Flecha I, Martí D, Carbonell R, Escuder-Virueteb J, Pérez-Estaún A (2004) Imaging low-velocity anomalies with the aid of seismic tomography. Tectonophysics 388:225–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Grad M, Guterch A, Mazur S, Keller GR, Špičák A, Hrubcová P, Geissler WH (2008) Lithospheric structure of the Bohemian Massif and adjacent Variscan belt in central Europe based on profile S01 from the SUDETES 2003 experiment. J Geophys Res 113:B10304. doi:10.1029/2007JB005497
  4. Guterch A, Grad M, Špičák A, Brückl E, Hegedüs E, Keller GR, Thybo H (2003a) An overview of recent seismic refraction experiments in central Europe. Stud Geoph Geod 47:651–657CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Guterch A, Grad M, Keller GR, Posgay K, Vozár J, Špičák A, Brückl E, Hajnal Z, Thybo H, Selvi O, CELEBRATION 2000 Seismic Experiment Team (2003b) CELEBRATION 2000 seismic experiment. Stud Geophys Geod 47:659–670CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Hole JA (1992) Non-linear high-resolution three-dimensional seismic travel time tomography. J Geophys Res 97:6553–6562CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hrubcová P, Sroda P, Špičák A, Guterch A, Grad M, Keller GR, Brückl E, Thybo H (2005) Crustal uppermost mantle structure of the Bohemian Massif based on CELEBRATION 2000. J Geophys Res 110:B11305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Lutter WJ, Nowak RL, Braile LW (1990) Seismic imaging of upper crustal structure using travel times from the PASCAL Ouachita experiment. J Geophys Res 95:4621–4631CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Matte P, Maluski H, Rajlich P, Franke W (1990) Terrane boundaries in the Bohemian Massif: result of large-scale Variscan shearing. Tectonophysics 177:151–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Novotný M (1981) Two methods of solving the linearized two-dimensional inverse seismic kinematic problems. J Geophys 50:7–15Google Scholar
  11. Novotný M (2012) Depth-recursive tomography of Bohemian Massif at Cel09 transect—Part B: interpretation. Surv Geophys (in preparation)Google Scholar
  12. Novotný M, Skácelová Z, Mrlina J, Mlčoch B, Růžek B (2009) Depth-recursive tomography along the Eger Rift using the S01 profile refraction data: tested at the KTB super drilling hole, structural interpretation supported by magnetic, gravity and petrophysical data. Surv Geophys 30:561–600. doi:10.1007/s10712-009-9068-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Novotný M, Špičák A, Weinlich FH (2011) Depth-recursive tomography reveals the focal zones of West Bohemian earthquake swarms and their sealing caps as distinct low and high-velocity anomalies. The IUGG 2011 Abstract Proceedings, Abstract ID 2429, Melbourne, AustraliaGoogle Scholar
  14. Pitra P, Burg JP, Guiraud M (1999) Late Variscan strike-slip tectonics between the Teplá-Barrandian and Moldanubian terranes (Czech Bohemian Massif): petrostructural evidence. J Geol Soc London 156:1003–1020CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Růžek B, Hrubcová P, Novotný M, Špičák A, Karousová O (2007) Inversion of travel times obtained during active seismic refraction experiments CELEBRATION 2000, ALP 2002 AND SUDETES 2003. Stud Geoph Geod 51:141–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Storn R, Price K (1997) Differential evolution—a simple and efficient heuristic for global optimization over continuous spaces. J Glob Optim 11:241–354CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Švancara J, Chlupáčová M (1997) Density model of geological structure along the profile 9HR. In: Vrána S, Štědrá V (eds) Geological model of western Bohemia related to the KTB borehole in Germany. J Geol Sci 47:32–36 (Prague)Google Scholar
  18. Švancara J, Gnojek I, Hubatka F, Dědáček K (2000) Geophysical field pattern in the West Bohemian geodynamic active area. Stud Geophys Geod 44:307–326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Švancara J, Špaček P, Hubatka F (2005) Chap. 3 in Novotný M et al. SLICE-seismic lithospheric investigation of Central Europe (in Czech). Final report, Czech Geological Survey—Geofond, PragueGoogle Scholar
  20. Tomek Č, Dvořáková V, Vrána S (1997) Geological interpretation of the 9HR and 503M seismic profiles in western Bohemia. J Geol Sci 47:43–51 PragueGoogle Scholar
  21. Zelt CA (1994) Software package ZPLOT. Bullard Laboratories, University of Cambridge, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  22. Zelt CA (1999) Modeling strategies and model assessment for wide-angle seismic traveltime data. Geophys J Int 139:183–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Zelt CA, Smith RB (1992) Seismic traveltime inversion for 2-D crustal velocity structure. Geophys J Int 108:16–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Zhang J, ten Brink US, Toksöz MN (1998) Nonlinear refraction and reflection traveltime tomography. J Geophys Res 103:29743–29757CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Geophysics ASCRPrague 4Czech Republic

Personalised recommendations