Migration of wide‐angle seismic reflection data from the Grenville Front in Lake Huron

Abstract

Under the auspices of the Great Lakes International Multidisciplinary Program on Crustal Evolution (GLIMPCE), coincident steep-and wide-angle seismic reflection data sets were acquired in Lake Huron. The wide-angle data were recorded at stationary onshore receivers during the shooting and recording of the conventional marine steep-angle survey. To extract information from the wide-angle data, a variety of processing techniques including automatic trace editing, amplitude balancing, F-K filtering, static corrections, and predictive deconvolution were applied to the wide-aperture commonreceiver gather before migration. The application of a slowness-weighted depth migration algorithm, which was first tested on synthetic data and which included a slowness filter, resulted in an image of the Grenville Front tectonic zone (GFTZ) remarkably similar to that observed in the multichannel steep-angle section. The migrated wide-angle data suggest that prominent bands of east dipping seismic reflections observed across the GFTZ extend unattenuated to depths of at least 45 km.

Deep seismic imaging of the eastern Nankai trough, Japan, from multifold ocean bottom seismometer data by combined travel time tomography and prestack depth migration

“…This class of tool is abundantly used in the processing of steep angle seismic data. However, their use is not restricted to this context and they can prove a valuable approach to wide-angle data processing too, as shown by previous studies on synthetic data McMechan and Fuis, 1987], real land data [McMechan and Fuis, 1987;Milkereit et al, 1990;Simon et al, 1996], land/ marine data [Lafond and Levander, 1995] and marine data [Holbrook et al, 1994;McIntosh et al, 2000;Fliedner and White, 2003]. In particular, imaging deep structures requires the use of strong postcritical reflected phases that are only recorded at large offset.…”

Models of the Earth’s crust from controlled-source seismology — Where we stand and where we go?

“…As demonstrated, e.g., by Malinowski (2009), reflectivity images formed based on wide-angle reflections complement velocity models and provide much more information for the geological interpretation. Attempts have been made to produce stacks of the WARR data (Carbonell et al 1998, Malinowski 2009, Mereu 2000 and apply pre-stack depth migration (e.g., Holbrook et al 1992, Milkereit et al 1990, Pilipenko et al 1999. Such an approach is hampered by the relatively large receiver/shot intervals Fig.…”

Mega‐scale Moho relief and the structure of the lithosphere on the eastern flank of the Viking Graben, offshore southwestern Norway

“…There, the structures are taken as indications of contractional shear, consistent with a strong lower crust Tectonics 10.1002/2014TC003778 [Burg et al, 2002;Mandal et al, 2013]. Also, Meissner [1996] emphasized that contraction structures in the lower crust has a better potential for preservation than do extension structures and cited the Wind River Thrust in Wyoming [Smithson et al, 1979[Smithson et al, , 1980, the Grenville front in North America [Green et al, 1988;Milkreit et al, 1990], and the Appalachians as examples of this.…”