Eurasian Soil Science

, Volume 50, Issue 9, pp 1069–1076 | Cite as

Electrical resistance profiles of permafrost-affected soils in the north of Western Siberia according to their vertical electrical sounding

  • E. V. Abakumov
  • V. M. Tomashunas
  • I. I. Alekseev
Soil Physics


Vertical electrical sounding (VES) of soils and underlying permafrost was performed on key plots in the north of Western Siberia (the Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous Okrug). It was supposed that the values of apparent electrical resistivity should sharply change at the boundary between the active layer and permafrost. Gleyzems, peat gleyzems, podzols, and petrozems studied on the key plots within the Yamal and Gydan peninsulas were characterized by different depths of the active layer. It was found that the electrical resistivity in the permafrost is one to two orders of magnitude higher than that in the active layer of the soils of different textures. Our study suggests that the VES method can be used to diagnose permafrost without disturbance of the soil cover. This conclusion is of special interest for long-term permafrost monitoring programs on permanent key plots. In general, the data obtained by VES are in agreement with the results of determination of the active layer thickness by traditional field methods.


vertical electrical sounding permafrost active layer cryozems gleyzems tundra Gleysols Podzols 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    A. T. Akimov, Theory and Practice of Electrical Sounding of Permafrost, Trudy PNIIS, Vol. 6 (Moscow, 1971), Vol. 6.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    I. I. Alekseev, E. V. Abakumov, and V. M. Tomashunas, “Catenary differentiation of soils at the foothills of the Polar Urals by the example of a plot in the Khalyatalbei River (tributary of the Shchuchya River) basin,” Samar. Luka: Probl. Reg. Global. Ekol. 24 (4), 146–149 (2015).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    D. Yu. Vlasov, E. V. Abakumov, V. M. Tomashunas, V. A. Krylenkov, and M. S. Zeleneskaya, “Microbiota of soils and anthropogenic substrates of the Yamal Peninsula,” Gig. Sanit., No. 5, 49–51 (2014).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    D. A. Kaverin and A. V. Pastukhov, “Genetic characterization of permafrost-affected soils of barren circles on flat-topped peat mounds in the Bol’shezemel’skaya tundra,” Izv. Samar. Nauch. Tsentra, Ross. Akad. Nauk 15 (3), 55–62 (2013).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    A. I. Pozdnyakov, “Bioelectric potentials in the soil- plant system,” Eurasian Soil Sci. 44, 742–750 (2013).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    A. I. Pozdnyakov, “Electrical parameters of soils and pedogenesis,” Eurasian Soil Sci. 44, 1050–1058 (2008).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    A. I. Pozdnyakov and P. I. Eliseev, “Dependence of the specific electrical resistance on some properties of anthropogenically transformed coarse-textured soils of agrolandscapes in the humid zone,” Vestn. Orenb. Gos. Univ., No. 10 (146), 98–104 (2012).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    A. I. Pozdnyakov, L. A. Pozdnyakova, and A. D. Pozdnyakova, Stationary Electric Fields in Soils (KMK, Moscow, 1996) [in Russian].Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    V. M. Tomashunas and E. V. Abakumov, “The content of heavy metals in soils of the Yamal Peninsula and Belyi Island,” Gig. Sanit., No. 6, 26–31 (2014).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    E. Abakumov and V. Tomashunas, “Electric resistivity of soils and upper permafrost layer of the Gydan Peninsula,” Polarforschung, No. 44, 7–34 (2016).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    E. Ejarque and E. Abakumov, “Stability and biodegradability of organic matter from Arctic soils of Western Siberia: insights from 13C-NMR spectroscopy and elemental analysis,” Solid Earth Discuss. 7 (4), 3021–3052 (2015).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    S. I. Fadele, P. O. Sule, and B. B. M. Dewu, “The use of vertical electrical sounding (VES) for groundwater exploration around Nigerian college of aviation technology (NCAT), Zaria, Kaduna State, Nigeria,” Pac. J. Sci. Technol. 14 (1), 549–555 (2013).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    J. Gibas, G. Rachlewicz, and W. Szczucinski, “Application of DC resistivity soundings and geomorphological surveys in studies of modern Arctic glacier marginal zones, Petuniabukta, Spitsbergen,” Pol. Polar Res. 26 (4), 239–258 (2005).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    C. Hauck, D. V. Muhll, and H. Maurer, “Using DC resistivity tomography to detect and characterize mountain permafrost,” Geophys. Prospect. 51, 273–284 (2003).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    I. V. Michels Turu and X. Ros Visus, “Geophysical survey carried out in the Hansbreen glacial front (Hornsund, SW Spitsbergen): surface nuclear magnetic resonance (SNMR), magnetic susceptibility of rocks and electrical resistivity facies: permafrost identification and subglacial aquifers,” IV Congreso Ibérico de la I.P.A. Núria (Vall de Ribes, 2013).Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    A. I. Pozdnyakov, L. A. Pozdnyakova, and L. O. Karpachevskii, “Relationship between water tension and electrical resistivity in soils,” Eurasian Soil Sci. 44, S78–S83 (2006).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    W. Scott, P. Sellmann, and J. Hunter, “Geophysics in the study of permafrost,” in Geotechnical and Environmental Geophysics (Society of Exploration Geophysics, Tulsa, OK, 1990), pp. 355–384.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    S. A. Smernikov, A. I. Pozdnyakov, and E. V. Shein, “Assessment of soil flooding in cities by electrophysical methods,” Eurasian Soil Sci. 44, 1059–1065 (2008).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    H. Vanhala, P. Lintinen, and A. Ojala, “Electrical resistivity study of permafrost on Ridnitšohkka Fell in Northwest Lapland, Finland,” Geophysica 44 (1–2), 103–118 (2009).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Pleiades Publishing, Ltd. 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • E. V. Abakumov
    • 1
  • V. M. Tomashunas
    • 1
  • I. I. Alekseev
    • 1
  1. 1.Saint Petersburg State UniversitySt. PetersburgRussia

Personalised recommendations