Advertisement

Surveys in Geophysics

, Volume 9, Issue 3–4, pp 349–387 | Cite as

Regional EM studies in the 80's

  • S. E. Hjelt
Article

Abstract

The review describes in broad terms the development of regional EM studies during the last five-six years. Large simultaneous magnetometer arrays, broadband and dense profiling with five component instruments, the use of remote reference techniques and in-field data processing have increased both the number and the quality of EM surveys. The increase has been strong all over the world.

An extensive list of references, divided geographically, is presented. Selected examples of regional resisitivity-versus-depth curves are shown for Africa, the Baikal region, the Baltic Shield, the Canadian Shield, the Carpathian regions, the Central Andes, Iceland, India, the Juan de Fuca Plate, the Münsterland Basin, the Rio Grande rift, the Scottish Caledonides, the Tasman Sea, and for the United States in general. Because of the influence of tectonic settings and the metamorphic grade of rocks, only qualitative aspects of the results are relevant.

‘Classical’ array studies, especially in Australia, in the Carpathian regions, in India, in North Germany and in Scotland have been reinterpreted and completed with more accurate 2D modelling and dense MT profiling. In the USA and Canada also new regions have been surveyed extensively. New regional EM work has been conducted extensively on the Baltic Shield and in Central and North Africa, Siberia, China, in the areas around the Caspian and Black Seas and in South America.

The newest studies are supported by or compared with other geophysical data, which also are used in extrapolating for missing EM data density. There are several successful large-scale projects in operation: the European Geotraverse (EGT), the KAPG International Geotraverses and the EMSLAB project (with its first preliminary results). Regional EM studies have been increasingly applied to geothermal, hydrocarbon and mineral prospecting as well as local structural studies, e.g. studies of sites for nuclear waste disposal.

Keywords

Earth Planet Acta Geod Kola Peninsula Baltic Shield Deep Seismic Sounding 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

A. Europe A1. Baltic Shield

  1. Ádám, A., Kaikkonen, P., Hjelt, S. E., Pajunpää, K., Szarka, L., Verö, J., and Wallner, Á.: 1982, ‘Magnetotelluric and Audiomagnetotelluric Measurements in Finland’,Tectonophysics 90, 77–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ádám, A.: 1983, ‘EM Induction Studies in Finland and General Crustal Physics’, in Hjelt, S. E. (ed.),The Development of the Geoelectric Model of the Baltic Shield, Part 2. Proceedings of the 1st project symposium, Oulu, 15.–18.11.1983, Department of Geophysics, University of Oulu, Report, No. 8, pp. 1–16.Google Scholar
  3. Dyakonova, A. G., Dyakonov, B. P., and Skachkov, P. P.: 1983, ‘Electromagnetic Survey Results of the Murmansk Block of the Baltic Shield’, in Hjelt, S. E. (ed.),The Development of the Geoelectric Model of the Baltic Shield, Part 2. Proceedings of the 1st project symposium, Oulu, 15.–18.11.1983, Department of Geophysics, University of Oulu, Report, No. 8, pp. 217–232.Google Scholar
  4. Dyakonov, B. P., Krasnobayeva, A. G., Kachaev, Yu. P., Skachkov, P. P., Vishnev, V. S., and Astafyev, P. F.: 1982, ‘Rezultati elektromagnitnogo zondirovaniya s MGD-generatorom na Murmanskom bloke (Results of electromagnetic sounding with the MHD-generator on the Murmansk block)’, inGlubinnie elektromagnitnie zondirovaniya s primeneniem impulsnikh MGD-generatorov, Izd. Kolskogo Filiala AN SSSR, Apatiti, pp. 61–68.Google Scholar
  5. Golod, M. I., Klabukov, B. N., Grishin, A. S., and Vasin, N. D.: 1983, in Hjelt, S. E. (ed.),The Development of the Geoelectric Model of the Baltic Shield, Part 2. Proceedings of the 1st project symposium, Oulu, 15.–18.11.1983, Department of Geophysics, University of Oulu, Report, No. 8, pp. 180–204.Google Scholar
  6. Gorbunov, G. I., Belkov, I. P., Pavlovsky, V. I., Zhamaletdinov, A. A., Katseblin, P. L., Kachaev, Yu. P., Velikhov, Ye. P., Volkov, Yu. M., Dreizin, Yu. A., Kuksa, Yu. I., Zotov, A. V., Yevstigneyev, V. V. Lisin, A. S., Zhukov, B. P., Vengersky, V. V., and Babkov, Yu. P.: 1979, ‘Glubinnoje elektromagnitnoje zondirovanije s MGD-generatorom na Kolskom poluostrove (Electromagnetic depth sounding with the MHD-generator on the Kola peninsula)’, Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR 247, pp. 578–582.Google Scholar
  7. Gorbunov, G. I., Belkov, I. P., Pavlovsky, V. I., Zhamaletdinov, A. A., Velikhov, Ye. P., Volkov, Yu. M., and Dreizin, Yu. A.: 1982, ‘O kharaktere elektroprovodnosti zemnoi kori Kolskogo poluostrova po dannim zondirovaniya c MGD-generatorom (On the character of the electric conductivity of the Earth's crust on the Kola peninsula obtained from soundings with the MHD-generator)’, Geomagnetic Researches No 28, Radio i svjaz, Moskva, pp. 85–93.Google Scholar
  8. Heikka, J.: 1983, ‘The MHD source and preliminary results of 5-component registrations in Northern Finland’, in Hjelt S. E. (ed.),The Development of the Geoelectric model of the Baltic Shield, Part 2. Proceedings of the 1st project symposium, Oulu, 15.–18.11.1983, Department of Geophysics, University of Oulu, Report, No. 8, pp. 263–275.Google Scholar
  9. Heikka, J., Zhamaletdinov, A. A., Hjelt, S. E., Demidova, T. A., and Velikhov, Ye. P.: 1984, ‘Preliminary Results of MHD Test Registrations in Northern Finland’,J. Geophys. 55, 199–202.Google Scholar
  10. Hjelt, S. E.: 1984, ‘Deep Electromagnetic Studies of the Baltic Shield’,J. Geophys. 55, 144–152.Google Scholar
  11. Hjelt, S. E.: 1987, ‘Aspects of the Geoelectric Models of the Baltic Shield’,Precambr. Res. 35, 181–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hjelt, S. E., Kaikkonen, P., Pajunpää, K., Korja, T., and Heikka, J.: 1986, ‘Electromagnetic Studies of the Baltic Shield in Finland’,Ann. Geophysicae 4B:2, 131–138.Google Scholar
  13. Jones, A. G., 1981, ‘Geomagnetic Induction Studies in Scandinavia. — II. Geomagnetic Depth Sounding, Induction Vectors and Coast Effect’,J. Geophys. 50, 23–36.Google Scholar
  14. Jones, A. G.: 1982a, ‘Observations of the Electric Asthenosphere Beneath Scandinavia’,Tectonophysics 90, 37–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Jones, A. G.: 1982b, ‘On the Electrical Crust-Mantle Structure in Fennoscandia: No Moho and the Asthenosphere Revealed?’,Geophys. J. R. Astron. Soc. 68, 371–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Jones, A. G.: 1983, ‘The Electrical Structure of the Lithosphere and Asthenosphere Beneath the Fennoscandian Shield’,J. Geomag. Geoelectr. 35, 811–827.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Jones, A. G., Olafsdottir B., and Tiikkainen, J.: 1983, ‘Geomagnetic Induction Studies in Scandinavia. — III. Magnetotelluric Observations’,J. Geophys. 54, 35–50.Google Scholar
  18. Kaikkonen, P.: 1983, ‘Some Results of the Thin Sheet Approximation for the Baltic Shield’, in Hjelt, S. E. (ed.),The Development of the Geoelectric Model of the Baltic Shield, Part 2. Proceedings of the 1st project symposium, Oulu, 15.–18.11.1983, Department of Geophysics, University of Oulu, Report, No. 8, pp. 96–97.Google Scholar
  19. Kaikkonen, P. and Pajunpää, K.: 1984, ‘Audiomagnetotelluric Measurements Across the Lake Ladoga-Bothnian Bay Zone in Central Finland’,Geophys. J. R. Astr. Soc. 78, 439–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kaikkonen, P., Vanyan, L. L., Hjelt, S. E., Shilovsky, A. P., Pajunpää, K., and Shilovsky, P. P.: 1983, ‘A Preliminary Geoelectrical Model of the Karelian Megablock of the Baltic Shield’,Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. 32, 301–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Korja, T.: 1983, ‘On Magnetotelluric Measurements in Finland’, in Hjelt, S. E. (ed.), inThe Development of the Geoelectric Model of the Baltic Shield, Part 2. Proceedings of the 1st project symposium, Oulu, 15.–18.11.1983, Department of Geophysics, University of Oulu, Report, No. 8, pp. 276–296.Google Scholar
  22. Korja, T.: 1986a, ‘Electromagnetic Studies on the POLAR Profile: Preliminary Results’, Department of Geophysics, University of Oulu, Report No. 12, 47 pp.Google Scholar
  23. Korja, T.: 1986b, ‘On the Geoelectrical Structure of the Crust and Upper Mantle in Finland’, (in Finnish) Unpubl. Lis. Thesis, Univ. of Oulu, Dept of Geophysics.Google Scholar
  24. Korja, T., Zhang, P., and Pajunpää, K.: 1986, ‘Magnetovariational and Magnetotelluric Studies of the Oulu Anomaly on the Baltic Shield in Finland’,J. Geophys. 59, 32–41.Google Scholar
  25. Krasnobaeva, A. G., Dyakonov, B. P., Astafyev, P. F., Batalova, O. V., Vishnev, V. S., Gavrilova, I. E., Zhuravlyova, B., and Kirillov, S. K.: 1981, ‘Structure of the Northeastern Part of the Baltic Shield from Magnetotelluric Data’, Physics of the Earth, Bull AN SSSR. No. 6, 65–73.Google Scholar
  26. Küppers, F. and Post, H.: 1981, ‘A Second Generation Gough-Reitzel Magnetometer’,J. Geomag. Geoelectr. 33, 225–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lange, K.: 1979, ‘Induktionseffekte in Nordskandinavien — untersucht am Beispiel zweier ostwärts fliessender polarer Elektrojets’, Dipl. thesis, Universität zu Münster, 160 pp.Google Scholar
  28. Lisin, A. S., Medvedev, F. A., and Yevsigneyev, V. V.: 1982, ‘Fizicheskoje modelirovanije elektrodinamiki istochnika polja, pitajemogo MGD-generatorom’ (Physical modeling of the electrodynamic source field fed by the MHD generator), inGlubinnie elektromagnitnie zondirovaniya s primeneniem impulsnikh MGD-generatorov, Izd. Kolskogo Filiala AN SSSR, Apatiti, pp. 129–135.Google Scholar
  29. Osipova, I. L., Hjelt, S.-E., and Vanyan, L. L.: 1987, ‘Source Field Problems in Northern Parts of the Baltic Shield’,Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. (in print).Google Scholar
  30. Pajunpää, K.: 1983, ‘Magnetometer Array Studies in Central and South-Eastern Finland’, in Hjelt, S. E., (ed.),The Development of the Geoelectric Model of the Baltic Shield, Part 2. Proceedings of the 1st project symposium, Oulu, 15.–18.11.1983, Department of Geophysics, University of Oulu, Report, No. 8, pp. 245–262.Google Scholar
  31. Pajunpää, K.: 1984, ‘Magnetometer Array Studies in Finland-Determination of Single Station Transfer Functions,J. Geophys. 55, 153–160.Google Scholar
  32. Pajunpää, K.: 1986, ‘Magnetometer Array Studies in South-Eastern Finland on the Baltic Shield’,J. Geophys. 59, 23–31.Google Scholar
  33. Pajunpää, K., Heikka, J., and Korja T.: 1983, ‘Magnetometer Array Studies in Finland’,J. Geomag. Geoelectr. 35, 543–553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Rasmussen, T. M.: 1987, ‘Magnetotelluric Investigations of the Baltic Shield in Sweden. Techniques and Geophysical Implications’, Diss. Univ. Uppsla. Acta Univ. Ups.Google Scholar
  35. Rasmussen, T., Zhang, P., and Pedersen, L. B.: 1983, ‘Preliminary Results from Magnetotelluric Measurements along the Fennolora Profile’, in Hjelt S. E. (ed.),The Development of the Geoelectric Model of the Baltic Shield, Part 2. Proceedings of the 1st project symposium, Oulu, 15.–18.11.1983, Department of Geophyscis, University of Oulu, Report, No. 8, pp. 307–327.Google Scholar
  36. Rasmussen, T. M., Roberts, R. G., and Pedersen, L. B.: 1987, ‘Magnetotellurics along the Fennoscandian Long Range Profile’,Geoph. J. R. Astron. Soc. 89, 799–820.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Richmond, A. D., and Baumjohann, W.: 1983, ‘Three-Dimensional Analysis of Magnetometer Array Data’,J. Geophys. 54, 138–156.Google Scholar
  38. Roberts, R. G., Zhang, and Pedersen, L. B.: 1983, ‘Remote Reference Magnetotellurics Across a Mylonite Shear Zone in Southern Sweden: A Preliminary Report’, in Hjelt S. E. (ed.),The Development of the Geoelectric Model of the Baltic Shield, Part 2. Proceedings of the 1st project symposium, Oulu, 15.–18.11.1983, Department of Geophysics, University of Oulu, Report, No. 8, pp. 328–339.Google Scholar
  39. Rokityansky, I. I.: 1983, ‘Geoelectromagnetic Studies of the Baltic and Ukrainian Shield: Review of Some Results’, in Hjelt S. E. (ed.),The Development of the Geoelectric Model of the Baltic Shield, Part 2. Proceedings of the 1st project symposium, Oulu, 15.–18.11.1983, Department of Geophysics, University of Oulu, Report, No. 8, pp. 110–150.Google Scholar
  40. Rokityansky, I. I., Kulik, S. N., and Rokityanskaya, D. A.: 1981, ‘The Ladoga Electric Conductivity Anomaly (In Russian)’,J. Geophysics, The Ukr. Acad. Sci.,3, No 2, 97–100.Google Scholar
  41. Vagin, S. A., Vardanyants, I. L., Kovtun, A. A., Kokvina, E. L., Moisejev, O. N., Saveljev, A. A., and Uspenskii, N. I.: 1985, ‘Magnetotelluricheskie zondirovanija v intervale periodov 10−3–104 s na Murmanskom bloke Kolskogo poluostrova i v Chentralnoi Karelii (Magnetotelluric sounding in the period interval 10−3–104 s on the Murmansk block of the Kola peninsula and in Central Karelia)’,Physics of the Earth, Bull. AN SSSR 21:5, 48–56.Google Scholar
  42. Vanyan, L. L., Demidova, T. A., Yegorov, I. V., and Palshin, N. A.: 1986, ‘On the Deep Dipole DC Soundings of the Baltic Shield (in Russian)’,Physics of the Earth, Bull. AN SSSR 22:8, 63–71.Google Scholar
  43. Velikhov, Ye. P., Zhukov, B. P., Gorbunov, G. I., Volkov, Yu. M., Zhamaletdinov, A. A., Lisin, A. S., Tokarev, A. D., Kuksa, Yu. I., Kirillov, S. K., and Poltanov, A. Ye.: 1983, ‘The Deep Electric Section of Basement by Results of MHD-Sounding on the Kola Peninsula’, in Hjelt S. E. (ed.),The Development of the Geoelectric model of the Baltic Shield, Part 2. Proceedings of the 1st project symposium, Oulu, 15.–18.11.1983, Department of Geophysics, University of Oulu, Report, No. 8, pp. 205–216.Google Scholar
  44. Velikhov, Ye. P., Gorbunov, G. I., Volkov, Yu. M., Zhukov, B. P., Vanyan, L. L., Demidova, T. A., Zhamaletdinov, A. A., Hjelt, S. E., and Heikka, J.: 1983, ‘First Soviet-Finnish Experiment to Registrate Signals of the MHD-Generator (in Russian)’,Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR 271, 324–327.Google Scholar
  45. Velikhov, Ye. P., Zhamaletdinov, A. A., Belkov, I. P., Gorbunov, G. I., Hjelt, S. E., Lisin, A. S., Vanyan, L. L., Zhdanov, M. S., Demidova, T. A., Korja, T., Kirillov, S. K., Kuksa, Yu. I., Poltanov, A. Ye., Tokarev, A. D., and Yevstigneyev, V. V.: 1986, ‘Electromagnetic Studies on the Kola Peninsula and in Northern Finland by Means of a Powerful Controlled Source’,J. Geodynamics 5, 237–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Velikhov, Ye. P., Zhamaletdinov, A. A., and Zhdanov, M. S.: 1984, ‘Eksperiment “Khibiny” (in Russian)’,Zemlya i vselennaya, No5, 12–19.Google Scholar
  47. Velikhov, Ye. P., Zhdanov, M. S., and Frenkel, M. A.: 1984, ‘Interpretation of MHD Sounding on the Kola Peninsula Using the New Method of Electromagnetic Migration (in Russian)’,Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR 276, 329–334.Google Scholar
  48. Velikhov, Ye. P., Zhdanov, M. S., and Frenkel, M. A.: 1987, ‘Interpretation of MHD-Sounding Data from from the Kola Peninsula by the Electromagnetic Migration Method’,Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. 45, 149–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Zhamaletdinov, A. A.: 1982, ‘Normal Electric Cross-section of the Crystalline Basement and its Geothermal Interpretation from MHD-soundings on the Kola peninsula’ (in Russian), inGlubinnie elektromagnitnie zondirovaniya s primeneniem impulsnikh MGD-generatorov, Izd. Kolskogo Filiala AN SSSR, Apatiti, pp. 35–46.Google Scholar
  50. Zhamaletdinov, A. A.: 1984, ‘Electrical Depth Models for Shields and Ancient Platforms’ (in Russian), inKorovije anomalii elektroprovodnosti, Nauka, Leningrad, pp. 21–27.Google Scholar
  51. Zhang P., Rasmussen T., Korja T., Koivukoski K., Hjelt S. E., and Pedersen L. B.: 1983, ‘Preliminary Results from a MT Study of a Conductive Zone in Finland’, in Hjelt, S. E. (ed.),The Development of the Geoelectric Model of the Baltic Shield, Part 2. Proceedings of the 1st project symposium, Oulu, 15.–18.11.1983, Department of Geophysics, University of Oulu, Report, No. 8, pp. 296–306.Google Scholar
  52. Zhang, P., Rasmussen, T. M., and Pedersen, L. B.: 1987, ‘Electrical Resistivity Structure of the Siljan Impact Region’,J. Geophys. Res. (subm.)Google Scholar
  53. Zhdanov, M. S., and Frenkel, M. A.: 1983, ‘The Solution of Inverse Problem on the Basis of the Analytical Continuation of Transient Electromagnetic Field in the Reverse Time.J. Geomag. Geoelectr. 35, 745–776.Google Scholar
  54. The Development of the Geoelectric Model of the Baltic Shield, Part 1. (Hjelt, S. E., Vanyan, L. L. eds.). Department of Geophysics, University of Oulu, Report, No. 7.Google Scholar
  55. The Development of the Geoelectric Model of the Baltic Shield, Part 2, Proceedings of the 1st project symposium, Oulu, 15.–18.11.1983 (Hjelt, S E., ed.). Department of Geophysics, University of Oulu, Report, No. 8.Google Scholar

A2. The Carpathian Region

  1. Abramova, L. M., Gaidash, S. P., Kharitonov, A. L., Korotaev, S. M., Shabeliansky, S. V., and Trofimov, I. L.: 1984, ‘Marine Electromagnetic Measurements on the Bulgarian Continental Shelf of the Black See (Preliminary report),Acta Geod. Geophys. et Montan. Hung. 19, 5–13.Google Scholar
  2. Abramova, L. M., Golubev, N. G., Karpman, I. V., Kondraseva, N. V., and Sneyer, V. S.: 1984, ‘Geoelectric Inhomogeneities in the Eastern Part of the International Geotraverse V’,Acta Geod. Geophys. et Montan. Hung. 19, 15–18.Google Scholar
  3. Ádám, A.: 1981, ‘Statistische Zusammenhänge zwischen elektrischen Leitfähigkeitsverteilung und Bruchtektonik in Transdanubien (West-Hungarn)’,Acta Geod. Geophys. et Montan. Hung. 16, 97–113.Google Scholar
  4. Ádám, A.: 1984, ‘Fractures as Conducting Dykes and Corresponding Two-dimensional Models’,Geophys. Prospecting 32, 543–553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Ádám, A.: 1985a, ‘Electromagnetic Induction Studies at the Geodetic and Geophysical Research Institute (Sopron)’, in Special Issue of the Geodetic and Geophysical Research Institute of the Hungarian Acad. of Sciences in Honour of Prof. Tárczy-Hornoch, A., pp. 126–141.Google Scholar
  6. Ádám, A.: 1985b, ‘Electric Conductivity Increase in the Earth's Crust in Transdanubia (W-Hungary)’. A Status Report,Acta Geod. Geophys. et Montan. Hung. 20, 173–182.Google Scholar
  7. Ádám, A., Duma, G., Gutdeutsch, R., Verö, J., and Wallner, Á.: 1984a, ‘Periadriatic Lineament in the Alps by Magnetotellurics (in Hungarian)’,Magyar Geofizika 25, 136–150.Google Scholar
  8. Ádám, A., Duma, G., Gutdeutsch, R., Verö, J., and Wallner, Á.: 1986a, ‘Periadriatic Lineament in the Alps Studied by Magnetotellurics’,J. Geophys. 59, 103–111.Google Scholar
  9. Ádám, A., Märcz, F., Verö, J., Wallner, Á., Duma, G., and Gutdeutsch, R.: 1981, ‘Magnetotelluric Sounding in the Transition Zone between the Eastern Alps and Pannonian Basin’,J. Geophys. 50, 37–44.Google Scholar
  10. Ádám, A., and Pospisil, L.: 1984b, ‘Crustal Conductivity Anomalies in the Carpathian Region’,Acta Geod. Geophys. et Montan. Hung. 19, 19–34.Google Scholar
  11. Ádám, A., Szarka, L., and Varga, M.: 1983, ‘Physical and Mathematical Modeling of Crustal Conductivity Anomalies in the Pannonian Basin’,Acta Geod. Geophys. et Montan. Hung. 18, 467–488.Google Scholar
  12. Ádám, A., Szarka, L., Verö, J., and Wallner, Á.: 1986b, ‘Magnetotellurics (MT) in Mountains — Noise, Topographic and Crustal Inhomogeneity Effects’,Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. 42, 165–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ádám, A., Vanyan, L. L., Varlamov, D. A., Yegorov, I. V., and Shilovski, A. P.: 1983c, ‘Deep Electric Conductivity of the Pannonian (Transdanubian) Basin’,Phys. Solid Earth, Bull AN SSSR 20:6, 100–102. (Engl. transl. pp. 477–479).Google Scholar
  14. Bromek, A.: 1982, ‘Modelling of Electromagnetic Induction with Finite Element Method for Two-dimensional Structures. Comparison of Results Obtained with Finite Element and Finite-differences methods for the Carpathian Model’,Acta Geophys. Pol. 30, 153–166.Google Scholar
  15. Červ, V., Pek, J., and Praus, O.: 1984, ‘Models of Geoelectrical Anomalies in Czechoslovakia’,J. Geophys. 55, 161–168.Google Scholar
  16. Jankowski, J., Szymanski, A., Tarlowski, Z., Pěč, K., Pěčová, J., Petr, V., Praus, O., and Červ, V.: 1980, ‘Electromagnetic Induction in the Carpathian Field Experiments and Modelling (abstr. only)’, Publ. Inst. Geophys., Pol. Acad. Sci. A-8, 127–128.Google Scholar
  17. Jankowski, J., Tarlowski, Z., Praus, O., Pěčová, J., and Petr, V.: 1985, ‘The Results of Deep Geomagnetic Soundings in the West Carpathians’,Geoph. J. R. Astron. Soc. 80, 561–574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Pěč, K., Pěčová, J., and Praus, O.: 1980, ‘Inverse Magnetotelluric Problem for Sounding Curves from Czechoslovak Iocalities’,J. Geomag. Geoelctr. 32, Suppl. I, 159–170.Google Scholar
  19. Pěčová, J.: 1982, ‘Determination of the Depth of a Conductivity Anomaly by Separating the Geomagnetic Variation Field into its Internal and External Part’,Travaux Géophysiques XXX, 179–197.Google Scholar
  20. Petr, V., Pěčová, J., and Praus, O.: 1984, ‘Induction Vector Estimates in the Bohemian Massif and in the Transition Zone to the Carpathians’,Studia Geoph. et Geod. 28, 172–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Petr, V., Pěčová, J., and Praus, O.: 1985, ‘Anomaly of Geomagnetic Variations in the Southeastern Margin of the Bohemian Massif’,Studia Geoph. et Geod. 29, 169–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Petr, V., Pěčová, J., Praus, O., and Pec, K.: 1987, ‘Anomalous Induction Zone near the Eastern Margin of the Bohemian Massif’,Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. 45, 161–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Pichá, B., Červ, V., and Pek, J.: 1984, ‘Magnetotelluric Inversion along the Osvetimany-Brezova pod Bradlom Profile’,Studia Geoph. et Geod. 28, 101–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Praus, O., Červ, V., and Pek, J.: 1982, ‘Geomagnetic Induction Vectors and their 2D Inversion’,Contr. Geoph. Inst. Slov. Acad. Sci. 13, 55–63.Google Scholar
  25. Praus, O., Pěčová, J., Petr, V., Pěč, K., Hvoždara, M., Červ, V., Pek, J., and Laštovičková, M.: 1981, ‘Electromagnetic Induction and Electrical Conductivity of the Earth's Body’, in A. Zatopek (ed.),Geophysical Syntheses in Szechoslovakia. VEDA Publ. House, Slovak Acad. Sci., Bratislava, pp. 297.Google Scholar
  26. Rokityansky, I. I., and Yudin, M. N.: 1984, ‘Modeling of the Electromagnetic Field in the Carpathian Region’,Acta Geod. Geophys. et Montan. Hung. 19, 139–144.Google Scholar
  27. Stânicâ, M., and Stânicâ, D.: 1981, ‘The Use of Natural Electromagnetic Field of the Earth for the Construction of a Structural Model of the East Carpathian Arch (in Romanian)’,St. Cerc. Geol. Geofiz. Geogr., Geofizika 19, 41–51.Google Scholar
  28. Stânicâ, M., and Stânicâ, D.: 1984, ‘Crust and Upper Mantle Investigation by Magnetotelluric Soundings in Romania’,Acta Geod. Geophys. et Montan. Hung. 19, 147–152.Google Scholar
  29. Zhdanov, M. S., Varentsov, I. M., and Bilinsky, A. I.: 1983, ‘Formalized 2D Interpretation of the Induction Anomaly in the Soviet Carpathians’,Acta Geod. Geophys. et Montan. Hung. 18, 165–171.Google Scholar
  30. Zhdanov, M. S., Berdichevsky, M. N., Shneer, V. S., Fainberg, E. B., Bobrov, V. N., Bilinsky, A. I., Kulik, S. N., and Logvinov, I. M.: 1984, ‘Synchronous Magnetotelluric Measurements along a Profile in the Soviet Carpathian Region’,Acta Geod. Geophys. et Montan. Hung. 19, 185–188.Google Scholar
  31. Zhdanov, M. S., Golubev, N. G., Varentsov, I. M., Abramova, L. M., Shneer, V. S., Berdichevsky, M. N., Zhdanova, O. N., Gordienko, V. V., Kulik, S. N., and Bilinsky, A. I.: 1986, ‘2-D Model Fitting of a Geomagnetic Anomaly in the Soviet Carpathians’,Ann. Geophysicae 4, B3, 335–342.Google Scholar

A3. North Germany

  1. Bahr, K.: 1983, ‘Joint Interpretation of Magnetotelluric and Geomagnetic Data and Local Telluric Distortions’,J. Geomag. Geoelectr. 35, 555–566.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bejarano-Gerke, G., and Jödicke, H.: 1984, ‘Magnetotellurik in Münsterland und am Niederrhein’, inProtokoll über das 10. Kolloquium “Elektromagnetische Tiefenforschung’, Graftahl/Oberbayern, 19.–23. März 1984, pp. 93–102.Google Scholar
  3. Berktold, A., and Legner, P.: 1984, ‘Zur Vertikalkomponente der erdmagnetischen Variationen in Bereich der variskischen Grossstrukturen Mitteleuropas’, inProtokoll über das 10. Kolloquium “Elektromagnetische Tiefenforschung”, Graftahl/Oberbayern, 19.–23. März 1984, pp. 45–46.Google Scholar
  4. Büchter, C.: 1984, ‘Vergleichende Untersuchung magnetotellurischer Tiefensondierungen und elektrischer Bohrlochmessungen an der Tiefbohrung Münsterland 1’, inProtokoll über das 10. Kolloquium “Elektromagnetische Tiefenforschung”, Graftahl/Oberbayern, 19.–23. März 1984, pp. 79–92.Google Scholar
  5. Dittus, H., Teufel, U., and Berktold, A.: 1984, ‘Messungen mit den Methoden der Audio-Magnetotellurik, Magnetotellurik und Erdmagnetischen Tiefensondierung längs eines NS-Profiles über den Alpennordland vom Waginger See bis zur Reiteralpe’, inProtokoll über das 10. Kolloquium “Elektromagnetische Tiefenforschung”, Graftahl/Oberbayern, 19.–23. März 1984, pp. 47–58.Google Scholar
  6. Jödicke, H.: 1984, ‘Zur Deutung magnetotellurisch nachgewiesener guter Leiter im teiferen Untergrund Nordwestdeutschlands’, inProtokoll über das 10. Kolloquium “Elektromagnetische Tiefenforschung”, Graftahl/Oberbayern, 19.–23 März 1984, pp. 331–334.Google Scholar
  7. Jödicke, H.: 1985, ‘Good Conducting Layers at Great Depth in the NW-German Sedimentary Basin’. Paper prestented at EUG III, April 1–4 1985, Strasbourg, France,Terra Cognita 5, 300 (abstract only).Google Scholar
  8. Jödicke, H., and Grinat, M.: 1985, ‘Magnetotelluric Measurements at the SE Flank of the Stavelot-Venn Anticline using the Remote Reference Technique’, N.Jb. Geol. Paläont. Abh. 171: 1–3, 425–440.Google Scholar
  9. Jödicke, H., Keil, M., Blohm, E-K., and Wagenitz, V.: 1982, ‘Magnetotellurische und geoelektrische Untersuchungen im Gebiet der magnetischen Anomalie von Soest-Erwitte und ihre Bedeutung für die stratigraphische Einstufung des prädevonischen Konduktors im Untergrund Nordwestdeutschlands’,Fortschr. Geol. Rheinl. u. Westf. 30, 363–403.Google Scholar
  10. Jödicke, H., Untiedt, J., Olgemann, W., Schulte, L., und Wagenitz, V.: 1983, ‘Electrical Conductivity Structure of the Crust and Upper Mantle beneath the Rhenish Massif’, in Fuchs, K. et al. (eds.),Plateau uplift, Springer-Verlag, pp. 288–302.Google Scholar
  11. Regner, P., and Berktold, A.: 1984, ‘Distribution of Electrical Conductivity near the Transition Zone Moldanubikum/Saxothuringikum’. Paper presented at Origin and evolution of the Earth, Moon and their planetary neighbours, Feb 1984, Mainz, FRG,Terra Cognita 4, 110 (abstract only).Google Scholar
  12. Wagenitz, V.: 1982, ‘Tellurisch-magnetotellurische Untersuchungen zur Bestimmung der elektrischen Leitfähigkeit in der oberen Kruste im Bereich der Anomalie von Bramsche und des Niedersächsischen Tektogens’, Diss. Univ. Münster, 138 pp.Google Scholar

A4. British Isles

  1. Banks, R. J., and Beamisch, D.: 1984, ‘Local and Regional Induction in the British Isles’,Geoph. J. R. Astron. Soc. 79, 539–553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Banks, R. J., Beamish, D., and Geake, M. J.: 1983, ‘Magnetic Variation Anomalies in Northern England and Southern Scotland’,Nature 303, 516–518.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Beamish, D.: 1985, ‘The Frequency Characteristics of Anomalous Vertical Fields Observed in the British Isles’,J. Geophysics 57, 207–216.Google Scholar
  4. Beamish, D.: 1986, ‘Deep Crustal Geoelectric Structure Beneath the Northumberland Basin’,Geoph. J. R. Astron. Soc. 84, 619–640.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Beamish, D., and Banks, R. J.: 1983, ‘Geomagnetic Variation Anomalies in Northern England: Processing and Presentation of Data from a Non-simultaneous Array’,Geoph. J. R. Astron. Soc. 75, 513–519.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Beamish, D., and Smythe, D. K.: 1986, ‘Geophysical Images of the Deep Crust: The Iapetus Suture’,J. Geol. Soc. London (submitted).Google Scholar
  7. Hutton, V. R. S., Mbipom, E. W., and Hill, E. R. G.: 1984, ‘Geoelectromagnetic Studies in the Region of the North Atlantic Shield Fragment in Scotland’, in Hjelt, S. E. (ed.),The Development of the Geoelectric Model of the Baltic Shield, Part 2. Proceedings of the 1st project symposium, Oulu, 15.–18.11.1983, Department of Geophysics, University of Oulu, Report, No. 8, pp. 151–165.Google Scholar
  8. Hutton, V. R. S., Ingham, M. R., and Mbipom, E. W.: 1980, ‘An Electrical Model of the Crust and Upper Mantle in Scotland’,Nature 287, 30–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hutton, V. R. S., and Jones, A. G.: 1980, ‘Magnetovariational and Magnetotelluric Investigations in S. Scotland’,Adv. Earth Planet. Sci. 9, 141–150.Google Scholar
  10. Hutton, V. R. S., Dawes, G., Ingham, M R., Kirkwood, S., Mbipom, E. W., and Sik, J.: 1981, ‘Recent Studies of Time Variations of Natural Electromagnetic Fields in Scotland’,Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. 24, 66–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ingham, M. R., and Hutton, V. R. S.: 1982a: ‘Crustal and Upper Mantle Electrical Conductivity Structure in Southern Scotland’,Geoph. J. R. Astron. Soc. 69, 579–594.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Ingham, M. R., and Hutton, V. R. S.: 1982b, ‘The Interpretation and Tectonic Implications of the Geoelectric Structure of Southern Scotland’,Geoph. J. R. Astron. Soc. 69, 595–606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kirkwood, S., Hutton, V. R. S., and Sik, J.: 1981, ‘A Geomagnetic Study of the Great Glen Fault’,Geoph. J. R. Astron. Soc. 66, 481–490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Meju, M. A., and Hutton, V. R. S.: 1986, ‘An Interpretative Analysis of Magnetotelluric Measurements Across the Great Glen Fault, North Scotland’, Proc. UK Geophysical Assembly X,Geoph. J. R. Astron. Soc. (abstract only)Google Scholar
  15. Mbipom, E. W., and Hutton, V. R. S.: 1983, ‘Geoelectromagnetic Measurements across the Moine Thrust and the Great Glen in Northern Scotland’,Geoph. J. R. Astron. Soc. 74, 507–524.Google Scholar
  16. Sik, J., Hutton, V. R. S., Dawes, G., and Kirkwood, S.: 1981, ‘A Geomagnetic Variation Study of Scotland’,Geoph. J. R. Astron. Soc. 66, 491–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Sule, P. O., and Hutton, V. R. S.: 1986, ‘A Broadband Magnetotelluric Study in South-Eastern Scotland: Data Acqusition, Analysis and One-dimensional Modelling’,Ann. Geophys. 4, B2, 145–156.Google Scholar

A5. Travale/Toscana Geothermal Studies

  1. Berktold, A. J., Dittus, H. J., Eigner, K.-H., and Teufel, U.: 1985, ‘Investigation of the Geothermal Anomaly of Travale (Tuscany) by Telluric, Magnetotelluric and Geomagnetic Deep Sounding Measurements’,Geothermics,14, 663–672.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Duprat, A., and Gole, F.: 1985, ‘Magnetotelluric Soundings in the Travale Area, Tuscany’,Geothermics,14, 689–696.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Duprat, A., Roudot, M., and Spitz, S.: 1985, ‘A Test of the Transiel Method on the Travale Geothermal Field’,Geothermics 14, 705–712.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Hutton, V. R. S.: 1985, ‘Magnetic, Telluric and Magnetotelluric Measurements at the Travale Test Site, Tuscany 1980–1983: An Overview’,Geothermics 14, 637–644.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Hutton, V. R. S., Dawes, G. J. K., Devlin, T., and Roberts, R.: 1985, ‘A Broadband Tensorial Magnetotelluric Study in the Travale Geothermal Field’,Geothermics 14, 645–652.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. LeMasne, D.: 1985, ‘Tests of Electric and Electromagnetic Methods in the Travale Geothermal Field’,Geothermics 14, 697–703.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Mosnier, J., and Planson, F.: 1985, ‘Differential Magnetic Soundings in the Travale Geothermal Area’,Geothermics 14, 749–754.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Otten, J., and Musmann, G.: 1985, ‘Application of Active Audiomagnetotellurics (AAMT) in the Geothermal Field of Travale, Tuscany’,Geothermics 14, 673–688.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Schwarz, G.: 1984, ‘Die elektrische Leitfähigkeit in der Toskana und ein daraus abgeleitetes geothermisches Modell—insbesondere für die Anomalie von Travale’, Berliner Geowiss. Abh. Reihe B, Heft 8, 95 pp.Google Scholar
  10. Schwarz, G., Haak, V., and Rath, V.: 1985, ‘Electrical Conductivity Studies in the Travale Geothermal Field, Italy’,Geothermics 14, 653–661.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Van Ngoc, P., Boyer, D., and Kieffer, G.: 1982, ‘Sur la structure interne profonde d'un secteur du flanc sud de l'Etna et sa relation avec l'évolution structurale du volcan sicilien’,C.R. Acd. Sc. Paris 295, Ser II, 891–894.Google Scholar

A6. Geotraverses A6.1. EGT

  1. Berktold, A.: 1986, ‘The Conductivity Distribution in the Middle and Lower Crust of Central Europe, Compilation of Data—New Results’, Manuscript, 4+6 pp.Google Scholar
  2. Haak, V.: 1985a, ‘Geodynamic Significance of Electrically Well Conducting Structures in the Crust and Upper Mantle—With Reference to the EGT’, in Galson, D. A., Müller, St. (eds.), Proc. Second Workshop on the European Geotraverse (EGT) Project, European Science Foundation, July 1985.Google Scholar
  3. Haak, V.: 1985b, ‘A Geoelectric Cross Section along the Central and Southern Part of the European Geotraverse’,Terra Cognita 5, 161 (abstract only).Google Scholar
  4. Hjelt, S. E.: 1985, ‘Preliminary Notes Concerning the Geoelectric Structure of the EGT Northern Segment’,Terra Cognita 5, 158 (abstract only).Google Scholar
  5. Müller, W., and Losecke, W.: 1985, ‘Magnetotelluric Results from the Northern Apennines and the Po Basin and Recent Progress in Magnetotelluric Techniques’, in Galson, D. A., Müller, St. (eds.),Proc. Second Workshop on the European Geotraverse (EGT) Project, European Science Foundation, July 1985 (abstract only).Google Scholar
  6. Symposium on the European Geotraverse Project, Papers presented at EUG III, April 1–4, 1985, Strasbourg, France,Terra Cognita 5, 156–163 (abstracts only).Google Scholar

A6.2. ECORS

  1. Gazes, M., Torreilles, G., Bois, C., Damotte, B., Galdéano, G., Hirn, A., Mascle, A., Matte, P., Van Ngoc, P., and Raoult, J.-F.: 1985, ‘Structure de la croute hercynienne du Nord de la France: premiers résultats du profil ECORS’, Bull. Soc. Géol. Fr. (8), t. I, No. 6, 925–941.Google Scholar
  2. Van Ngoc, P., and LeMouel, J. L.: 1985, ‘Electrical Properties of the Earth's Crust along Profile “North of France” (ECORS Programme) by Deep Magnetotelluric Soundings’,Terra Cognita 5, 301 (abstract only).Google Scholar

A6.3. KAPG Geotraverses

  1. Ingerov, A. I., and Rokiyansky, I. I.: 1986, ‘Deep Magnetotelluric Soundings on the Ukrainian Shield’, (in Russian),Geoph. Zurnal AN Ukr. SSR 8:3, 3–13.Google Scholar

B. ASIA B1. India

  1. Arora, B. R., Lilley, F. E. M., Sloane, M. N., Singh, B. P., Srivastava, B. J., and Prasad, S. N.: 1982, ‘Geomagnetic Induction and Conductive Structures in North-West India’,Geoph. J. R. Astron. Soc. 69, 459–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arora, B. R., and Mahashabde, M. V.: 1987, ‘A Transverse Conductive Structure in the Northwest Himalaya’,Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. 45, 119–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Chamalaun, F. H., Prasad, S. N., Lilley, F. E. M., Srivastava, B. J., Singh, B. P., and Arora, B. R.: 1986, ‘On the Interpretation of the Distinctive Pattern of Geomagnetic Induction Observed in North-West India’,Manuscript, 19+5 pp.Google Scholar
  4. Lilley, F. E. M., Singh, B. P., Arora, B. R., Srivastava, B. J., Prasad, S. N., and Sloane, M. N.: 1981, ‘A Magnetometer Array Study in North-West India’,Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. 25, 232–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Nityananda, N., Agarwal, A. K., and Singh, B. P.: 1981, ‘An Explanation of Induced Magnetic Variations at Sabhawala, India’,Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. 25, 226–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Nityananda, N., and Jayakumar, D.: 1983, ‘Proposed Relation between Anomalous Geomagnetic Variations and the tectonic History of South India’,Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. 27, 223–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ramaswamy, V., Agarwal, A. K., and Singh, B. P.: 1985, ‘A Three-dimensional Numerical Model Study of Electromagnetic Induction around the Indian Peninsula and Sri Lanka Island’,Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. 39, 52–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Srivastava, B. J., Singh, B. P., and Lilley, F. E. M.: 1984, ‘Magnetometer Array Studies in India and the Lithosphere’,Tectonophysics 105, 355–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Srivastava, B. J., Prasad, S. N., Singh, B. P., Arora, B. R., Thakur, N. K., and Mahashabde, M. V.: 1982, ‘Induction Anomalies in GeomagneticS q in Peninsular India’,Geophys. Res. Lett. 9, 1135–1138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Takeda, M., and Maeda, H.: 1979, ‘Effect of the Coast-line Configuration of South India and Sri Lanka Region on the Induced Field at Short Period’,J. Geophys. 45, 209–218.Google Scholar
  11. Thakur, N. K., Mahashabde, M. V., Arora, B. R., Singh, B. P., Srivastava, B. J., and Prasad, S. N.: 1981, ‘Anomalies in Geomagnetic Variations on Peninsular India near Palk Strait’,Geophys. Res. Lett. 8, 947–950.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Vozoff, K.: 1984, ‘Model Study for the Proposed Magnetotelluric (MT) Traverse in North India’,Tectonophysics 105, 399–411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

B2. Siberia

  1. Avagimov, A. A., Ashirov, T. A., Berdichevsky, M. N., Dubrovskiy, V. G., Dubrovskaya, Ye. V., Il'amanov, K., Lagutinskaya, L. P., Nepesov, K., Smirnov, Ya. B., Sopiyev, V. A., Tavnelova, O. M., and Fainberg, E. B.: 1981, ‘Geoelectrical and Thermal Model of the Deep Structure of Southern Turanian Plate’,Phys. Solid Earth, Bull AN SSSR 17: 7, 15–28.Google Scholar
  2. Berdichevsky, M. N., Vanyan, L. L., Kuznetsov, V. A., Levadny, V. T., Mandelbaum, M. M., Nechaeva, G. P., Okulessky, B. A., Shilovsky, P. P. and Shpak, I. P.: 1980, ‘Geoelectrical of the Baikal Region’,Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. 33, 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Babadzhanor, T. L., Basov, M. D., Gatina, P. M., Ashirmatov, A. S., Belyavskiy, V. V., Karzhauv, A. T., Tal'-Virskiy, B. B., Dubrovskiy, V. G., Berdichersky, M. N., Yakovlev, A. G., Faynberg, E. B.: 1986, ‘The Southern Tien-Shan Electrical Conductivity Anomaly’,Phys. Solid Earth, Bull AN SSSR 22: 576–584.Google Scholar
  4. Debabov, A. S., Demidova, T. A. and Yamikyan, V. O.: 1984, ‘Results of Spectral Iteration Modeling of a Magnetotelluric Field in Armenia’,Phys. Solid Earth, Bull AN SSSR 20, 556–562.Google Scholar
  5. Demidova, T. A., Yegorov, I. V., and Yanikyan, V. O.: 1985, ‘Galvanitcheskie iskaschenija magnetotellurischeskogo polja Malogo Kavkaza’,Geomagnetism and Aeronomy 25: 3, 474–481.Google Scholar
  6. Ingerov, A. I., Rokityansky, I. I., Rokityanskaya, D. A., and Schuman, V. N.: 1985, ‘Geoelectric Cross-Section along the Part Vinnitsa-Evpatorija of the Geotraverse VI (in Russian)’,Geoph. Zurnal AN Ukr. SSR 7: 5, 69–74.Google Scholar
  7. Ingerov, A. I., and Rokityansky, I. I.: 1986, ‘Depth Magnetotelluric Soundings on the Ukrainian Shield’ (in Russian, Engl. abstract)’,Geoph. Zurnal AN Ukr. SSR 8: 3, 3–13.Google Scholar
  8. Moroz, Yu. F.: 1984, ‘On the Deep Structure of Eastern Kamchatka Obtained from Magnetotelluric Soundings (in Russian)’,Vulkanologija i seismologija 1984: 5, 85–90.Google Scholar
  9. Nifikorov, V. M., Alperovitch, I. M., and Vanyan, L. L.: 1983, ‘Some Peculiar Curves of Magnetotelluric Sounding on Sakhalin and Methods for their Interpretation (in Russian)’,Tikhookeanskaja Geologija 1983: 5, 59–65.Google Scholar
  10. Shilovsky, A. P.: 1985, ‘Deep Electrical Conductivity in Eastern Siberia’,Acta Geod. Geophys. et Montan. Hung. 20, 183–185.Google Scholar
  11. Zinger, B. Sh., Dubrovskiy, V. G., Fainberg, E. B., Berdichevsky, M. N., Il'amanov, K.: 1984, ‘Quasi-three-dimensional Modeling of Magnetotelluric Fields in the Southern Turanian Plate and the South Caspian Megabasin’,Phys. Solid Earth, Bull AN SSSR 20: 1, 69–81 (engl. transl. pp. 52–61).Google Scholar

B3. China

  1. Gu Qun, Sun Jie, Shi Shulin, and Shi Zhangsong: 1980, ‘The Features of Highly Electrical Conductivity Layer in North China and Northwest China Regions (in Chinese, abstract in English),Seismology and Geology (Dizhen Dizhi), 2: 2, 21–29.Google Scholar
  2. Lin Chang-you, Zhang Yun-lin, Shi Yu-lan, Jian Mei, and Li Zhu-guo: 1984, ‘On the Magnetotelluric Research in the Eastern Region of the He-Xi Corridor’, (in Chinese, abstract in English),Acta Geophysica Sinica 27, 131–143.Google Scholar
  3. Francheteau, J., Jaupart, C., Allegre, C. J., Courtillot, V., and Cheng, Y.: 1982, ‘Heat Flow Measurements in Tibet’, (abstract only),EOS Trans,63, No. 45, 1092.Google Scholar
  4. Liu Guodong, Gu Qun, Shi Shulin, Sun Jie, Shi Zhang-song, and Liu Jinhan: 1983, ‘The Electrical Structure of the Crust and Upper Mantle and its Relationship with Seismicity in the Beijing-Tianjin-Tangshan Region and Adjacent Area’, (in Chinese, abstract in English),Acta Geophysica Sinica 26: 2, 149–157.Google Scholar
  5. Liu Guodong, Shi Shulin, and Wang Baojun: 1984, ‘Conductive Layer in the Crust in North China and its Relation to Crustal Tectonism’,Scientia Sinica, SerB 27, 1093–1104.Google Scholar
  6. Ma Xingyan, Liu Guodang, and Su Juan: 1984, ‘The Structure and Dynamics of the Continental Lithosphere in North-northeast China’,Ann. Geophysicae 2, 611–620.Google Scholar
  7. State Seismological Bureau, Mangnetotelluric Sounding Group: 1984, ‘Deep-seated Electric Conductivity in the Tangshan Area, China’, (in Chinese, abstract in English),Seismology and Geology (Dizhen Dizhi) 6: 2, 1–5.Google Scholar
  8. Van Ngoc, P., Boyer, D., and Therme, P.: 1983, ‘Electrical Properties of the Earth's Crust by Deep Magneto-telluric Soundings from Yong Ba Jain to Lhozag (Tibet)’,Terra Cognita 3, 270.Google Scholar
  9. Van Ngoc, P., Boyer, D., Therme, P., Yuan, X. C., Li, L., and Jin, G. Y.: 1986, ‘Partial Melting Zones in the Crust on Southern Tibet from Magnetotelluric Results’,Nature 319, No. 6051, 310–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Wang Baojun, and Gao Weian: 1984, ‘A Finite Element Approach to Magnetotelluric Sounding Data for the Two-dimension Structures in the Beijing-Tianjin-Tangshan Area’, (in Chinese, abstract in English),Seismology and Geology (Dizhen Dizhi) 6: 1, 69–80.Google Scholar
  11. Zhao Guoze, and Zhao Yonggui: 1984, ‘Correlation between the Structures of Crust and Upper Mantle and the Thermal Events’, (in Chinese, abstract in English),Seismology and Geology (Dizhen Dizhi),6: 3, 49–57.Google Scholar

B4. Japan and Pacific

  1. Chave, A. C., VonHerzen, R. P., Poehls, K. A., and Cox, C. S.: 1981, ‘Electromagnetic Induction Field in the Deep Ocean North-east of Hawaii: Implications for Mantle Conductivity and Source Fields’,Geophys. J.R. Astron. Soc. 66, 379–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Filloux, J. H.: 1980, ‘Magnetotelluric Soundings over the Northeast Pacific may reveal Spatial Dependence of Depth and Conductance of the Asthenosphere’,Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 46, 244–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Filoux, J. H.: 1981, ‘Magnetotelluric Exploration of the North Pacific: Progress Report and Preliminary Soundings near a Spreading Ridge’,Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. 25, 187–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Filloux, J. H.: 1982, ‘Magnetotelluric Experiment over the ROSE Area,J. Geophys. Res. 87, 8.364–8.378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Honkura, Y.: 1982, ‘Electrical Conductivity Structure Beneath Oceans’,Earth Man. 4, 311–318. (in Japanese)Google Scholar
  6. Honkura, Y.: 1983, ‘Peninsula Effect in Central Japan and their Relation to the Electrical Conductivity Structure’,J. Geomag. Geoelectr. 35, 39–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Honkura, Y., Isezaki, N., and Yaskawa, K.: 1983, ‘Electrical Conductivity Structure beneath the North-western Philippine Sea as inferred from the Island Effect on Minami-daito Island’,J. Geomag. Geoelectr. 35, 365–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. RESEARCH GROUP for CRUSTAL RESISTIVITY STRUCTURE, Japan: 1983, ‘Preliminary Report on a Study of Resistivity Structure beneath the Northern Honyu of Japan,’J. Geomag. Geoelectr. 35, 589–608.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Sato, S.: 1981, ‘Upper Mantle Conductivity Structures in North Eastern Japan from Magneto-telluric Data’,Butsuri-Tanko (Geophys. explor.) 34, 56–68.Google Scholar
  10. Yukutake, T., Filloux, J. H., Segawa, J., Hamano, Y., and Utada, H.: 1983, ‘Preliminary Report on a Magnetotelluric Study in the Northwest Pacific’,J. Geomag. Geoelectr. 35, 575–587.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

B5. Australia

  1. Chamalaun, F. H.: 1985, ‘Geomagnetic Deep Sounding Experiment in the Central Flinders Ranges of South Australia’,Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. 37, 174–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Constable, S. C.: 1983, ‘Deep Resistivity Studies of the Australian Crust’, Thesis (unpubl.) Australian National Univ., Canberra.Google Scholar
  3. Constable, S. C.: 1985a, ‘Resistivity Studies over the Flinders Conductivity Anomaly, South Australia’,Geophys. J. R. Astron. Soc. 83, 775–786.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Constable, S. C.: 1985b, ‘Electrical Studies of the Australian Crust: a Review’, Aust. J. Earth Sci. (subm.)Google Scholar
  5. Constable, S. C., McElhinny, M. W., and McFadden, P. L.: 1984, ‘Deep Schlumberger Sounding and the Crustal Resistivity Structure of Central Australia’,Geophys. J. R. Astron. Soc. 79, 893–910.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Ferguson, I. J., Filloux, J. H., Lilley, F. E. M., Bindoff, N. L., and Mulhearn, P. J.: 1985, ‘A Seafloor Magnetotelluric Sounding in the Tasman Sea’,Geophys. Res. Letters 12, 545–548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Filloux, J. H., Lilley, F. E. M., Ferguson, I. J., Bindoff N. L., and Mulhearn, P. J.: 1985, ‘The Tasman Project of Seafloor Magnetotelluric Exploration’,Explor. Geophysics (Bull. Austr. Soc. Explor. Geophys.) 16, 221–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Finlayson, D. M.: 1982, ‘Geophysical Differences in the Lithosphere between Phanerozoic and Precambrian Australia’,Tectonophysics 84, 287–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Ingham, M. R.: 1985a, ‘Magnetotelluric Measurements in the Wellington Region’,New Zealand J. of Geology and Geophysics 28, 397–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ingham, M. R.: 1985b, ‘Magnetovariational Measurements in the Cook Strait Region of New Zealand’,Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. 39, 182–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Lilley, F. E. M.: 1982, ‘Geomagnetic Field Fluctuations over Australia in relation to Magnetic Surveys’,Bull. Austr. Soc. Explor. Geophys. 13, 68–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Lilley, F. E. M.: 1984, ‘On the Spatial Pattern of Magnetic Fluctuations in the Cobar Area, NSW’,Explor. Geophysics (Bull. Austr. Soc. Explor. Geophys.) 15, 79–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Lilley, F. E. M., and Sloane, M. N.: 1981a, ‘Ideal Phase in Estimating the Spatial Gradient of Magnetic Daily Variations Recorded by Magnetometer Arrays’,J. Geomag. Geoelectr. 33, 517–525.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Lilley, F. E. M., Woods, D. V., and Sloane, M. N.: 1981b, ‘Electrical Conductivity from Australian Magnetometer Arrays using Spatial Gradient Data’,Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. 25, 202–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lilley, F. E. M., Woods, D. V., and Sloane, M. N.: 1981c, ‘Electrical Conductivity Profiles and Implications for the Absense or Presence of Partial Melting beneath Central and Southeast Australia,’Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. 25, 419–428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Strack, K. M.: 1984, ‘The Deep Transient Electromagnetic Sounding Technique: First Field Test in Australia’,Explor. Geophysics (Bull. Austr. Soc. Explor. Geophys.) 15, 251–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. White, A., and Milligan, P. R.: 1987, ‘Geomagnetic Variations across the Southern Adelaide Geosyncline, South Australia’, J. Geomag. Geoelectr. (in print)Google Scholar
  18. White, A., and Polatajko, O. W.: 1985, ‘Electrical Conductivity Anomalies and Relationship with the Tectonics of South Australia’,Geophys. J. R. Astron. Soc. 80, 757–771.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

C. Africa

  1. Albouy, Y., Babour, K., and Guetat, Z.: 1982, ‘Anomalie de conductivité au Sénegal Oriental’,Cah. ORSTOM, Ser. Geophys. 19 11–20.Google Scholar
  2. DeBeer, J. H., Van Zijl, J. S. V., and Gough, D. I.: 1982, ‘The Southern Cape Conductive Belt (South Africa): Its Composition, Origin and Tectonic Significance’,Tectonophysics 83, 205–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Menvielle, M., and Le Mouël, J. L.: 1985, ‘Existence d'une anomalie de conductivité dans le Haut Atlas marocain et concentration des courants telluriques á l'échelle régionale’,Bull. Soc. Géol. France, 553–558.Google Scholar
  4. Menvielle, M., and Rossignol, J. C.: 1982, ‘Consequences tectoniques de lexistence d'une anomalie de conductivité électrique au Nord du Maroc,Can J. Earth Sci. 19, 1507–1517.Google Scholar
  5. Ogunade, S. O.: 1983, ‘A Perspective of the Induction Studies in South Western Nigeria’,J. Geomag. Geoelectr. 35, 567–573.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Ritz, M.: 1982a, ‘Sondage magnétotellurique profonnd sur le craton ouest africain (République de Haute-Volta). Esquisse de modéles pour le craton ouest-africain’,J. Geomag. Geoelectr. 34, 447–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ritz, M.: 1982b, ‘Etude régionale magnétotellurique des structures de la conductivité électrique sur la bordure occidentale du craton ouest africaine en République du Sénegal’,Can. J. Earth Sci. 19, 1408–1416.Google Scholar
  8. Ritz, M.: 1983a, ‘Use of the Magnetotelluric Method for a better Understanding of the West African Shield’,J. Geophys. Res. 88, B12, 10.625–10.633.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Ritz, M.: 1983b, ‘The Distribution of Electric Conductivity on the Eastern Boarder of the West African Craton (Republic of Niger)’,Geoph. J. R. Astron. Soc. 73, 475–488.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ritz, M.: 1984a, ‘Electrical Resistivity Structure of the Senegal Basin as Determined from Magnetotelluric and Differential Geomagnetic Soundings’,Geoph. J. R. Astron. Soc. 79, 635–649.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ritz, M.: 1984b, ‘Inhomogenous Structure of the Senegal Lithosphere from Deep Magnetotelluric Soundings’,J. Geophys. 89: B13, 11.317–11.331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Ritz, M., and Vassal, J.: 1987, ‘Geoelectromagnetic Measurements across the Southern Senegal Basin (West Africa)’,Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. 45, 75–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Schwarz, G.: 1986, ‘Ein Datenkatalog mit den Ergebnissen der magnetotellurischen Messungen im Atlas-System von Marokko’, DFG-Bericht, Inst. Geophys. Wiss., Freie Univ. Berlin.Google Scholar
  14. Schwarz, G., Rath, V., and Haak, V.: 1986, ‘Magnetotellurische und erdmagnetische Sondierungen im Marokkanischen Atlas’,Berliner Geowiss. Abh. (A) 66, 289–300.Google Scholar
  15. Van Ngoc, P., et al.: 1980, ‘Propriétés électriques de la croute et du manteau supérieur du rift d'Asal (Djibouti) d'après les sondages magnéto-telluriques profonds’,Bull. Soc. Géol. France (7) t. XXII, 6, 863–871.Google Scholar
  16. Bingham, D. K., Gough, D. I., and Ingham, M. R.: 1985, ‘Conductive Structures under the Canadian Rocky Mountains’,Can. J. Earth Sci. 22, 385–398.Google Scholar
  17. Camfield, P. A.: 1981, ‘Magnetometer Array Study in a Tectonically Active Region of Quebec, Canada’,Geophys. J. R. Astron. Soc. 65, 553–570.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. DeLaurier, J. M., Plet, F. C., and Drury, M. J.: 1981, ‘A Geomagnetic Depth Sounding Profile Across the Northern Yukon and the Mackenzie Delta Region’,Can. J. Earth Sci. 18, 1092–1100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. DeLaurier, J. M., Auld, D. R., and Law, L. K.: 1983, ‘The Geomagnetic Response across the Continental Margin off Vancouver Island: Comparison of Results from Numerical Modelling and field Data’,J. Geomag. Geoelectr. 35, 517–528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Edwards, R. N., Law, L. K., Wolfgram, P. A., Nobes, D. C., Bone, M. N., Trigg, D. F., and DeLaurier, J. M.: 1985, ‘First Results of the MOSES Experiment: Sea Sediment Conductivity and Thickness Determination, Bute Inlet, British Columbia, by Magnetometer Offshore Electrical Sounding’,Geophysics 50, 153–161.Google Scholar
  21. Flores, C., Kurtz, R. D., and DeLaurier, J. M.: 1985, ‘Magnetotelluric Exploration in the Meager Mountain Geothermal Area, Canada’,Acta Geod. Geoph. et Montan. Hung. 20, 165–171.Google Scholar
  22. Gough, D. I.: 1986a, ‘Mantle Upflow Tectonic in the Canadian Cordillera’,J. Geophys. Res. 91, 1909–1920.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Gough, D. I.: 1986b, ‘Magnetotelluric Evidence for Subduction of Seafloor Sediments’,Nature 321, No. 6070, 566.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gough, D. I., Bingham, D. K., Ingham, M. R., and Alabi, A. O.: 1982, ‘Conductive Structure in South-western Canada: A Regional Magnetometer Array Study’,Can. J. Earth Sci. 19, 1680–1690.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Gupta, J. C., Kurtz, R. D., Camfield, P. A., and Niblett, E. R.: 1985, ‘A Geomagnetic Induction Anomaly from IMS Data near Hudson Bay, and its Relation to Crustal Electrical Conductivity in Central North America’,Geophys. J. R. Astron. Soc. 81, 33–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Handa, S., and Camfield, P. A.: 1984, ‘Crustal Electrical Conductivity in North-central Saskatchewan: The North American Central Plains Anomaly and its Relation to a Proterozoic Plate Margin’,Can. J. Earth Sci. 21, 533–543.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hutton, V. R. S., Gough, D. I., Dawes, G. J. K. and Travassos, J.: 1987, ‘Magnetotelluric Soundings in the Canadian Rocky Mountains’,Geophys. J. R. Astron. Soc. 90, 245–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Ilkisik, O. M., Redman, J. D., Hsu, D. T., and Strangway, D. S.: 1983, ‘AMT Sounding Through Conductive Glacial Clays in the Canadian Shield’,J. Geomag. Geoelectr. 35, 455–472.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Ingham, M. R., Bingham, D. K., and Gough, D. I.: 1983, ‘A Magnetovariational Study of a Geothermal Anomaly’,Geophys. J. R. Astron. Soc. 72, 597–618.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Jones, A. G.: 1983, ‘Electromagnetic Investigations in Eastern Canada — A Concise Review’, in Hjelt S. E (ed.),The Development of the Geoelectric Model of the Baltic Shield, Part 2. Proceedings of the 1st project symposium, Oulu, 15.–18.11.1983, Department of Geophysics, University of Oulu, Report, No. 8, pp. 166–178.Google Scholar
  31. Jones, A. G., and Garland, G. D.: 1986a, ‘Electromagnetic Sounding from Observations taken during the First International Polar Year’, MUSK-OX 34, 35–43.Google Scholar
  32. Jones, A. G., and Garland, G. D.: 1986b, ‘Preliminary Interpretation of the Upper Crustal Structure Beneath Prince Edward Island’,Ann. Geophysicae,4: B2, 157–164.Google Scholar
  33. Jones, A. G., and Savage, P. J.: 1986c, ‘North American Central Plains Anomaly Goes East’,Geophys. Res. Lett. 13, 685–688.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kurtz, R. D.: 1982, ‘Magnetotelluric Interpretation of Crustal and Mantle Structure in the Grenville Province’,Geophys. J. R. Astron. Soc. 70, 373–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Kurtz, R. D., and Niblett, E. R.: 1984, ‘A Magnetotelluric Survey over the East Bull Lake Gabbro-Anorthosite Complex’, Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd./EDA Technical Record TR-236.Google Scholar
  36. Kurtz, R. D., and Niblett, E. R.: 1985, Electromagnetic Studies of the Asthenosphere in the Canadian Shield, (manuscript).Google Scholar
  37. Kurtz, R. D., DeLaurier, J. M. and Gupta, J. C.: 1986, ‘A Magnetotelluric Sounding Across the Vancouver Island Detects the Subducting Juan de Fuca Plate’,Nature 321, 596–599.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Kurtz, R. D., Niblett, E. R., Chouteau, M., Scott, W. J., and Newitt, L. R.: 1980, ‘An Anomalous Electrical Resistivity Zone near Ste-Mathilde, Quebec’,J. of the Can. Soc. of Explor. Geoph. 16, 56–67.Google Scholar
  39. Kurtz, R. D., Ostrowski, J. A., and Niblet, E. R.: 1986, ‘A Magnetotelluric Survey over the East Bull Lake Gabbro-Anorthosite Complex’,J. Geophys. Res. 91, B7, 7403–7416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Law, L. K. and Greenhouse, J. P.: 1981, ‘Geomagnetic Variation Sounding of the Asthenosphere Beneath the Juan de Fuca Ridge’,J. Geophys. Res. 86, 976–978.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. McCollor, D. C., Chapel, B. E., Watanabe, T., Slawson, W. F., and Shier, R. M.: 1982, ‘E. M. Exploration with Power Line Harmonic Fields’,EOS, Trans. Amer. Geophys. Union 63, 910.Google Scholar
  42. McCollor, D. C., Watanabe, T., Slawson, W. F., and Shier, R. M.: 1983, ‘An E. M. Method for Earth Resistivity Measurements Using Power Line Harmonic Fields’,J. Geomag. Geoelectr. 35, 221–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Nienaber, W., Hibbs, R. R., Dosso, H. W., and Law, L. K.: 1982, ‘An Estimate of the Conductivity Structure of the Vancouver Island Region from Geomagnetic Results’,Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. 27, 300–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Oldenburg, D. W.: 1981, ‘Conductivity Structure of Oceanic Upper Mantle Beneath the Pacific Plate’,Geophys. J. R. Astron. Soc. 65, 359–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Oldenburg, D. W., Whittall, K. P., and Parker, R. L.: 1984, ‘Inversion of Ocean Bottom Magnetotelluric Data Reviseted’,J. Geophys. Res. 89, 1829–1833.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Prugger, A. F., and Woods, D. V.: 1984, ‘The Pattern of Anomalous Geomagnetic Variation Fields over the Midcontinental Gravity High’,J. Geophys. Res. 89, B9, 7773–7782.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Woods, D. V.: 1985, ‘Large-Scale Electromagnetic Induction Investigation of the Kapuskasing Structural Zone, Northern Ontario’, in Current Res., Part A, Geol Survey of Canada, Paper 85-1A, pp. 533–542.Google Scholar
  48. Woods, D. V., and Allard, M.: 1986, ‘Reconnaissance Electromagnetic Induction Study of the Kapuskasing Structural Zone: Implications for Lower Crustal Conductivity’,Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. 42, 135–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

D2. Iceland

  1. Beblo, M., and Björnsson, A.: 1985, ‘Magnetotelluric Results in North-East Iceland — Electrical Conductivity, Temperature, Crust and Mantle Structure’,Acta Geod. Geoph. et Montan. Hung. 20, 153–158.Google Scholar
  2. Beblo, M., Björsson, A., Árnason, K., Stein, B., and Wolfgram, P.: 1983, ‘Electrical Conductivity Beneath Iceland- Constraints Imposed by Magnetotelluric Results on Temperature, Partial Melt, Crust and Mantle Structure’,J. Geophys. 53, 16–28.Google Scholar
  3. Eysteinsson, H. and Hermance, J. F.: 1985, ‘Magnetotelluric Measurements across the Eastern Neovolcanic Zone in South Iceland’,J. Geophys. Res. 90, B12, 10.093–10.103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Flovenz, O. G., Georgsson, L. S. and Árnson, K.: 1985, ‘Resistivity Structure of the Upper Crust in Iceland’,J. Geophys. Res. 90, B12, 10.136–10.150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Georgsson, L. S.: 1981, ‘A Resistivity Survey on the Plate Boundaries in the Western Reykjanes Peninsula, Iceland’,Trans. Geotherm. Resourc. Counc. 5, 75–78.Google Scholar
  6. Haak, V.: 1983, ‘Sind Island und Afar basalt-arme Mantel-Diapire? Argumente aus der Verteilung der elektrischen Leitfähigkeit’,Habilit. Schrift, Freie Univ. Berlin, 118 pp.Google Scholar
  7. Hermance, J. F.: 1981, ‘Crustal Genesis in Iceland: Geophysical Constraints on Crustal Thickening with Age’,Geophys. Res. Lett. 8, 203–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hersir, G. P., Björnsson, A., and Pedersen, L. B.: 1984, ‘Magnetotelluric Survey Across the Active Spreading Zone in Southwest Iceland’,J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res. 20, 253–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Schmeling, H.: 1984a, ‘Partial Melt in the Asthenosphere and in the Upper Mantle Below Iceland — A Combined Interpretation of Seismic and Geoelectric Data’,Terra Cognita 4, 104–105 (abstract only).Google Scholar
  10. Schmeling, H.: 1984b, ‘Constraints on the Degree and Geometry of Partial Melt in the Oceanic Asthenosphere and Beneath Iceland’,Terra Cognita 4, 255–256 (extended abstract).Google Scholar
  11. Schmeling, H.: 1985, ‘Partial Melt Below Iceland: A Combined Interpretation of Seismic and Conductivity Data’,J. Geophys. Res. 90, B12, 10.105–10.116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Thayer, R. E., Björnsson, A., Alvarez, L., and Hermance, J. F.: 1981, ‘Magma Genesis and Crustal Spreading in the Northern Neovolcanic Zone of Iceland: Telluric and Magnetotelluric Constraints’,Geoph. J. R. Astron. Soc. 65, 423–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

D3. South America

  1. Baldis, B., Demicheli, J., Febrer, J., Fournier, H., Garcia, E., Gasco, J. C., Mamani, M., and Pomposiello, C.: 1983, ‘Magnetotelluric Diversified Results along a 1200 km Long Profile Showing at its North-West End an Important Geothermal Area in the Provinces of Tucuman and Santiago del Estero in Argentina’,J. Geomag. Geoelectr. 35, 609–621.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Raldis, B., Bemicheli, J., Febrer, J., Fournier, H., Garcia, E., Gasco, J. C., Mamani, M., and Pomposiello, C.: 1983, ‘Magnetotelluric Results along a 1200 km Long Deep Profile with an Important Geothermal Area at its North-West End in the Provinces of Tucuman and Santiago del Estero in Argentina’,Acta Geod. Geoph. et Mont. Hung. 18, 489–499.Google Scholar
  3. Febrer, J. Baldis, B., and Fournier, H.: 1980, ‘Sondaje magnetotelurico profundo en Chamical, La Rioja’,Geoacta 10.Google Scholar
  4. Gasco, J. C., Febrer, J., Demicheli, J., and Fournier, H.: 1982, ‘Zarate M-T Sounding and Upper Mantle Resistivity’,Acta Geod. Geoph. et Mont. Hung. 17, 307–309.Google Scholar
  5. Haak, V., and Giese, P.: 1986, ‘Subduction Induced Petrological Processes as Inferred from Magnetotelluric, Seismological and Seismic Observations in N-Chile and S-Bolivia’,Berliner Geowiss. Abh. (A) 66, 231–246.Google Scholar
  6. Schwarz, G.: 1985, ‘Ein Datenkatalog mit den Ergebnissen der magnetotellurischen Messungen in den Zentralen Anden von Nord-Chile und Süd-Bolivien’ DFG-Bericht, Inst. Geophys. Wiss., Freie Univ. Berlin.Google Scholar
  7. Schwarz, G., Haak, V., Martinez, E., and Bannister, J.: 1984, ‘The Electrical Conductivity of the Andean Crust in Northern Chile and Southern Bolivia as Inferred from Magnetotelluric Measurements.J. Geophys. 55, 169–178.Google Scholar
  8. Schwarz, G., Martinez, E., and Bannister, J.: 1984, ‘Die Verteilung der elektrischen Leitfähigkeit aus Magnetotellurik-Messungen’.Terra Cognita 4 107 (abstract only).Google Scholar
  9. Schwarz, G., Martinez, E., and Bannister, J.: 1985, ‘Untersuchungen zur elektrischen Leitfähigkeit in den Zentralen Anden’,Berliner Geowiss. Abh. (A) 66, 49–72.Google Scholar
  10. Tarits, P., and Menvielle, M.: 1986, ‘The Andean Conductivity Anomaly Reexamined’,Ann. Geophysicae 4B, 63–70.Google Scholar
  11. Vatin-Perignon, N., Pomposiello, C., Mamani, M., Maidana, A., Keller, M., Gasco, J. C., Fournier, H., and Febrer, J.: 1985, ‘The Hot Dome of Taco Ralo in the NW of Argentina’,Acta Geod. Geoph. et Mont. Hung. 20, 159–163.Google Scholar

D4. U.S.A. and Mexico

  1. Ander, M. E.: 1984, ‘A Detailed Magnetotelluric/Audiomagnetotelluric Study of the Jemez Volcanic Zone, New Mexico’,J. Geophys. Res. 89, B5, 3335–3353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ander, M. E., Goss, R., Strangway, D., Hillebrand, C., Laughlin, A. W., and Hudson, C.: 1980, ‘Magnetotelluric/Audiomagnetotelluric Study of the Zuni Hot Dry Rock Prospect, New Mexico’,Geothermal Resources Council Trans. 4, 5–8.Google Scholar
  3. Gamble, T. D., Goubau, W. M., Goldstein, N. E., Miracky, R., Stark, M., and Clarke, J.: 1981, ‘Magnetotelluric Studies at Cerro Prieto’,Geothermics 10, 169–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Goldstein, N. E., Mozley, E., and Wilt, M.: 1982, ‘Interpretation of Shallow Electrical Features from Electromagnetic and Magnetotelluric Surveys at Mount Hood, Oregon’,J. Geophys. Res. 87, B4, 2815–2828.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Greenhouse, J. P., and Bailey, R. C.: 1981, ‘A Review of Geomagnetic Measurements in the Eastern United States: Implications for Continental Tectonics’,Can. J. Earth Sci. 18, 1268–1289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Group Seven, Inc.: 1981, ‘Western Nevada Magnetotelluric Survey’, Internal Report, 24+6 pp.Google Scholar
  7. Group Seven, Inc.: 1981, ‘Clear Lake, California, Magnetotelluric Survey’, Internal Report, 22+6 pp.Google Scholar
  8. Group Seven, Inc.: 1981, ‘Snake River Plain/Southeastern Oregon Magnetotelluric survey’, Internal Report, 24+6 pp.Google Scholar
  9. Group Seven, Inc.: 1982, ‘Southwestern United States Magnetotelluric Survey’, Internal Report, 24+6 pp.Google Scholar
  10. Hermance, J. F., and Karlsdottir, R.: 1986, ‘The Major Boundary Faults in Eastern Long Valley Caldera; Magnetotelluric and Gravity Constraints’,Geophys. Res. Letters 13, 479–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hermance, J. F., Slocum, W. M., and Neumann, G. A.: 1984, ‘The Long Valley/Mono Basin Volcanic Complex: A Preliminary Magnetotelluric and Magnetic Variation Interpretation’.J. Geoph. Res. 89, B10, 8.325–8.337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Jiracek, G. R., Gustafson, E., and Mitchell P. S.: 1983, ‘Magnetotelluric Results Opposing Magma origin of Crustal Conductors in the Rio Grande Rift’,Tectonophysics 94, 299–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Jiracek, G. R., Rodi, W. L., and Vanyan, L. L.: 1987, ‘Implications of Magnetotelluric Modelling for the Deep Crustal Environment in the Rio Grande Rift’,Phys. Earth Planet, Inter. 45, 179–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Keller, G. V., and Jacobson, J. J.: 1983, ‘Deep Electromagnetic Soundings Northeast of the Geysers Steam Field’,Geothermal Resources Council Trans. 7, 491–502.Google Scholar
  15. Keller, G. V., and Jacobson, J. J.: 1983, ‘Megasource Electromagnetic Survey in the Bruneau-Grandview Area, Idaho’,Geothermal Resources Council Trans. 7, 505–510.Google Scholar
  16. Keller, G. V.: 1986, ‘Electrical Structure of the Crust and Outer Mantle Beneath the United States: Part 1, Methods for Determining the Conductivity Profile, Part 2, Survey of data’. (manuscript)Google Scholar
  17. Keller, G. V.: 1987, ‘Conductance Map of the United States’, (Progress report),Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. 45, 216–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Keshet, Y., and Hermance, J. F.: 1986, ‘A New Regional Electrical Model for the Southern Section of the Rio Grande Rift and the Adjacent Basin and Range and Great Plains’,J. Geophys. Res. 91, B6, 6359–6366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Long, C. L.: 1985, ‘Regional Audiomagnetotelluric Study of the Questa Caldera, New Mexico’,J. Geoph. Res. 90: B13, 12.270–11.274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. MIT Field Geophysics Course (S. Park et al.): 1985, ‘A Geophysical Study of Mesquite Valley: Nevada—California Boarder’.J. Geoph. Res. 90, B10, 8.685–8.689.Google Scholar
  21. Mitchell, P.S.: 1983, ‘Deep Magnetotelluric Profiling of the Southern Albuquerque-Belen Basin, New Mexico’, M.S. Thesis, San Diego State Univ., San Diego, Calif.Google Scholar
  22. Mozley, E. C.: 1982, ‘An Investigation of the Conductivity Distribution in the Vicinity of Cascade Volcano’, Ph. D. Thesis, Univ. Calif., Berkeley, 385 pp.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Pedersen, J. and Hermance, J. F.: 1981, ‘Deep Electrical Structure of the Colorado Plateau as Determined from Magnetotelluric Measurements’,J. Geoph. Res. 86, 1.849–1.857.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Prugger, A. F., and Woods, D. V.: 1984, ‘The Pattern of Anomalous Geomagnetic Variations Fields over the Midcontinent Gravity High’,J. Geoph. Res. 89, B9, 7.773–7.782.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Ricard, Y., Froidevaux, C., and Hermance, J. F.: 1983, ‘Model Heat Flow and Magnetotellurics for the San Andreas and Oceanic Transform Faults’,Ann. Geophysicae 1, 47–52.Google Scholar
  26. Stanley, W. D.: 1982, ‘A Regional Magnetotelluric Survey of the Cascades Mountains Region’, U.S. Geol. Survey, Open File Report, 82–126.Google Scholar
  27. Stanley, W. D.: 1982, ‘Magnetotelluric Soundings on the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory Facility, Idaho,J. Geoph. Res. 87, 2.683–2.691.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Stanley, W. D.: 1984, ‘Tectonic Study of Cascade Range and Columbia Plateau in Washington State Based Upon Magnetotelluric Sounding’,J. Geoph. Res. 89, B6, 4.447–4.460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Thomson, B. G., Nekut, A., and Kuckes, A. F.: 1983, ‘A Deep Crustal Electromagnetic Sounding in the Georgia Piedmont’,J. Geophys. Res 88, B11, 9461–9473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Wannamaker, P.E.: 1983, ‘Resistivity Structure of the Northern Basin and Range’, Geothermal Resources Council, Spec. Report No. 13, 345–362.Google Scholar
  31. Wilt, M., Goldstein, N. E., Stark, M., Haught, J. R., and Morrison, H. F.: 1983, ‘Experience with the EM-60 Electromagnetic System for Geothermal Exploration in Nevada,Geophyscis 48, 1090–1101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Young, P. D., and Cox, S. C.: 1981, ‘Electromagnetic Active Source Sounding near the East Pacific Rise’,Geophys. Res. Lett. 8, 1043–1046.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

E. Earlier Reviews and Papers of General Interest

  1. Ádám, A.: 1980, ‘Relation of Mantle Conductivity to Physical Conditions within the Asthenosphere’,Geoph. Surveys 4, 43–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alabi, A. O.: 1983, ‘Magnetometer Array Studies’,Geoph. Surveys 6, 153–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Campbell, W. H., and Schiffmacher, E. R.: 1986, ‘A Comparison of Upper Mantle Subcontinental Electric Conductivity for North America, Europe and Asia’,J. Geophysics 59, 56–61.Google Scholar
  4. Cox, C. S.: 1981, ‘On the Electrical Conductivity of the Oceanic Lithosphere’,Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. 25, 196–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Edwards, R. N.: 1977, ‘Electromagnetic Methods for the Mappings of Regional Crustal Conductivity Anomalies’.Acta Good. Geoph. et Montan. Hung. 11, 399–425.Google Scholar
  6. Edwards, R. N., Bailey, R. C., and Garland, G. D.: 1981, ‘Conductivity Anomalies: Lower Crust or Asthenosphere?’,Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. 25, 263–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fournier, H.: 1980, ‘Recent Work in Magnetotelluric Soundings of the Lower Crust and Uppermost Mantle’,Geoph. Surveys 4, 89–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gough, D. I.: 1983, ‘Electromagnetic Geophysics and Global Tectonics’,J. Geoph. Res. 88, B4, 3367–3377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gough, D. I., and Ingham, M. R.: 1983, ‘Interpretation Methods for Magnetometer Arrays’,Rev. Geophys. Spce Phys. 21, 805–827.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Haak, V., and Hutton, R.: 1985, ‘Electrical Resistivity in Continental Lower Crust’, J. Geol. Soc. London.Google Scholar
  11. Hermance, J. F.: 1983, ‘Electromagnetic Induction Studies’,Rev. Geophys. Space Phys. 21, 652–665.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Jones, A. G.: 1981, ‘On a Type Classification of Lower Crustal Layers under Precambrian Regions,J. Geophys. 49, 226–233.Google Scholar
  13. Jones, A. G.: 1983, ‘The Problem of Current Channeling: A Critical Review’,Geophys. Surveys 6, 57–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kaikkonen, P.: 1986, ‘Numerical Electromagnetic Modeling Including Studies of Characteristics Dimensions: A Review’,Surveys in Geophysics 8, 301–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Keller, G. V.: 1982, ‘Electrical Properties of Rocks and Mineral’, in Carmichael, R. S. (ed.), Handbook of Physical Properties of Rocks, Vol. 1. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Fla. USA, pp. 217–272.Google Scholar
  16. Roy, K. K., and Ghose, R.: 1985, ‘Magnetotelluric and Seismic Evidences for Crust-Mantle Heterogeneities’,Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. 41, 143–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Strangway, D. S.: 1984, ‘The Audiofrequency Magnetotelluric (AMT) Sounding’, in Fitch (ed.), Meth. Explor. Geophys., Vol. 5.Google Scholar
  18. Vanyan, L. L., and Cox, S. C.: 1983, ‘Comparison of Deep Conductivities Beneath Continents and Oceans,J. Geomag. Geoelectr. 35, 805–809.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ward, S.H.: 1983, ‘Controlled Source Electrical Methods for Deep Exploration’,Geophys. Surveys 6, 137–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

F. Books

  1. Alperovich, I. M., Busnov, V. P., Varlamov, D. A., Konnov, Yu. K., Konovalov, Yu. F., Koschlakov, G. V., Chernyaskii, G. A., Skeinkman, A. L., and Yakovlev, I. A.: 1982, ‘Magnetotellurics in Oil Exploration in the U.S.S.R.’, English translation by G. V. Keller, editors: K. Vozoff, M. Asten. SEG (Soc. Explor. Geophysicists), Tulsa, OK, 65 pp.Google Scholar
  2. Berdichevsky, M. N., and Zhdanov, M. S.: 1985, ‘Advanced Theory of Deep Magnetotelluric Sounding’, Elsevier, Amsterdam-Oxford-New York-Tokyo, 408 pp.Google Scholar
  3. Kaufmann, A., and Keller, G. V.:1981, ‘The Magnetotelluric Sounding Method’, Elsevier, Amsterdam-Oxford-New York, 591 pp.Google Scholar
  4. Kaufmann, A., and Keller, G. V.: 1983, ‘Frequency and Transient Soundings’, Elsevier, Amsterdam-Oxford-New York, 685 pp.Google Scholar
  5. Kovtun, A. A.: 1980, ‘Ispolzovanie estestvennogo elektromagnitnogo polja pri izutshenii elektroprovodnostii Zemli’, (Study of the Earth's Electrical Conductivity by means of Natural Electromagnetic Field), Leningrad Univ. Press (Izd. Leningr. Univers.), Leningrad, 196 pp.Google Scholar
  6. Patra, H. P., and Mallick, K.: 1980, ‘Geosounding Principles, 2 Time-varying Geoelectric Soundings’, Elsevier Amsterdam-Oxford-New York, 419 pp.Google Scholar
  7. Rokityansky, I. I.: 1982, ‘Geoelectromagnetic Investigations of the Earth's Crust and Mantle’, Springer-Verlag, Würzburg, 381 pp.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Vanyan, L. L., and Shilovsky, P. P.:1983, ‘Glubinnaja elektroprovodnost okeanov i kontinentov (Global Electrical Conductivity of Oceans and Continents), “Nauka”, Moskva, 88 pp.Google Scholar
  9. Vanyan, L. L., Debabov, A. S., and Judin, M. N.: 1984, ‘Interpretatsija dannikh magnitotellurischeskikh zondirovanij neodnorodnij cred. (Interpretation of Magnetotelluric Soundings in Nonlayered Media). “Nedra”, Moskva, 199 pp.Google Scholar
  10. Vozoff, K.: 1986, ‘Magnetotelluric Methods’, SEG, Reprint series, No. 5, Tulsa, USA, 763 pp.Google Scholar
  11. Zhamaletdinov, A. A., (ed.): 1984, ‘Korovie anomalii elektroprovodnostii (Crustal Anomalies of the Electrical Conductivity), Collection of Articles’, “Nauka”, Leningrad, 160 pp.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1988

Authors and Affiliations

  • S. E. Hjelt
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of GeophysicsUniversity of OuluOuluFinland

Personalised recommendations