Electrical resistivity structure at the North-Central Turkey inferred from three-dimensional magnetotellurics

Abstract

Magnetotelluric data analyses and three-dimensional modeling techniques were implemented to investigate the crustal electrical structure in the North-Central Turkey, along a 190-km-long profile crossing Çankırı Basin, İzmir-Ankara-Erzincan Suture Zone and Central Pontides. In this area, the segment of the North Anatolian Fault (NAF) shows 280-km-long restraining bend, where it was near the focus of the hazardous 1943 Tosya Earthquake (M: 7.6). Structure around the NAF exhibits resistive characteristics at both sides of the fault reaching to at least 25 km of depth. Fluids below the brittle-ductile transition were not detected which will nucleate earthquakes in the area. This resistive structure implies an asperity zone of the NAF, which was ruptured in 1943. The presence of a fluid-bearing upwelling conductive anomaly in Central Pontides may suggest that beneath the deep brittle crust, there may exists a fluid-enriched conductive forearc region, which may have caused by a prograde source related to paleo-tectonic processes.

The electrical conductivity of albite feldspar: Implications for oceanic lower crustal sequences and subduction zones

“…The albite electrical conductivity model presented in this study may be useful in several ways. Specifically, in the monitoring of volcanic systems (Aizawa et al, 2014;Aizawa et al, 2009;Aizawa et al, 2005;Comeau et al, 2015;Díaz et al, 2012;Ingham et al, 2009); in understanding shallow structures such as crustal-scale brittle and ductile fracture zones (Comeau et al, 2020b;Karas et al, 2017;Ozaydin et al, 2018;Tank et al, 2018); in understanding deep earth structure and plumbing systems (Bai et al, 2010;Comeau et al, 2020a;Kühn et al, 2014;Unsworth, 2010;Wannamaker et al, 2009); in searching for resource zones (Cherevatova et al, 2015a;Corseri et al, 2017;Heinson et al, 2006); as well as in (volatile sensitive)…”

Estimating interpretation uncertainty from magnetotelluric inversion

“…Often studies rely on a single MT inversion model for interpretation with little consideration given to model variability (e.g. Aboud et al, 2018;Majcin et al, 2018;Özaydın et al, 2018). While there are examples of inversion uncertainty incorporated into interpretation (Tietze and Ritter, 2013;Meqbel et al, 2014), analysis of inversion variability is typically qualitative, such as by visual comparison of inversion results.…”