1887
Volume 57, Issue 4
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2478

Abstract

ABSTRACT

The way potential fields convey source information depends on the scale at which the field is analysed. In this sense a multiscale analysis is a useful method to study potential fields particularly when the main field contributions are caused by sources with different depths and extents. Our multiscale approach is built with a stable transformation, such as depth from extreme points. Its stability results from mixing, in a single operator, the wavenumber low‐pass behaviour of the upward continuation transformation of the field with the enhancement high‐pass properties of ‐order derivative transformations. So, the complex reciprocal interference of several field components may be efficiently faced at several scales of the analysis and the depth to the sources may be estimated together with the homogeneity degrees of the field. In order to estimate the source boundaries we use another multiscale method, the multiscale derivative analysis, which utilizes a generalized concept of horizontal derivative and produces a set of boundary maps at different scales. We show through synthetic examples and application to the gravity field of Southern Italy that this multiscale behaviour makes this technique quite different from other source boundary estimators.

The main result obtained by integrating multiscale derivative analysis with depth from extreme points is the retrieval of rather effective information of the field sources (horizontal boundaries, depth, structural index). This interpretative approach has been used along a specific transect for the analysis of the Bouguer anomaly field of Southern Apennines. It was set at such scales, so to emphasize either regional or local features along the transect. Two different classes of sources were individuated. The first one includes a broad, deep source with lateral size of 45∼50 km, at a depth of 13 km and having a 0.5 structural index. The second class includes several narrower sources located at shallowest depths, ranging from 3–6 km, with lateral size not larger than 5 km and structural indexes ranging from 1–1.5. Within a large‐scale geological framework, these results could help to outline the mean structural features at crustal depths.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/j.1365-2478.2009.00808.x
2009-05-12
2020-03-31
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. BalduzziA., CasnediR., CrescentiU., MostardiniF. and TonnaM.1982. Il Plio‐Pleistocene del sottosuolo del Bacino Lucano (avanfossa appenninica). Geologica Romana21, 89–111.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. BaranovW.1976. Potential Fields and Their Transformations in Applied Geophysics . Gebrüder‐Borntraeger.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. BlakelyR.J. and SimpsonR.W.1986. Approximating edges of source bodies from magnetic or gravity anomalies. Geophysics51, 1494–1498.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. CarrozzoM.T., LuzioD., MargiottaC. and QuartaT.1986. Gravity Anomaly Map of Italy . CNR: ‘Progetto Finalizzato Geodinamica’– Sub‐project: ‘Modello Strutturale Tridimensionale’.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. CooperG.R.J. and CowanD.R.2006. Enhancing potential field data using filters based on the local phase. Computers & Geosciences32, 1585–1591.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. D’ArgenioB., PescatoreT. and ScandoneP.1973. Schema geologico dell’Appennino Meridionale Campania e Lucania). In: Moderne vedute sulla geologia dell’ Appennino. Problemi attuali di Scienza e di cultura, Quaderno 183 , pp. 49–72. Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, Rome .
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Fedi
    Fedi2002. Multiscale derivative analysis: A new tool to enhance gravity source boundaries at various scales. Geophysical Research Letters29, 16–1–16–4.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. FediM.2007. DEXP: A fast method to determine the depth and the structural index of potential fields sources. Geophysics72, 1–11.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. FediM., CellaF., FlorioG. and RapollaA.2005. Multiscale derivative analysis of the gravity and magnetic fields of Southern Apennines (Italy). In: CROP Deep Seismic Exploration of the Mediterranean Region (ed. I.R.Finetti ), pp. 281–318. Elsevier.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. FediM. and FlorioG.2001. Detection of potential fields source boundaries by enhanced horizontal derivative method. Geophysical Prospecting49, 40–58.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. FediM. and FlorioG.2002. A stable downward continuation by using the ISVD method. Geophysical Journal International151, 146–156.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. FediM. and FlorioG.2006. SCALFUN: 3D analysis of potential field scale function to determine independently or simultaneously structural index and depth to source. 76th SEG meeting, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA, Expanded Abstracts, 963–967.
  13. FinettiI. and Del BenA.1986. Geophysical study of the Tyrrhenian opening. Bollettino di Geofisica, Teorica e Applicata28, 75–156.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. FlorioG. and FediM.2006. Euler deconvolution of vertical profiles of potential field data. 76th SEG meeting, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA, Expanded Abstracts, 958–962.
  15. MazzoliS., CorradoS., De DonatisM., ScroccaD., ButlerR.W.H., Di BucciD., NasoG., NicolaiC. and ZucconiV.2000. Time and space variability of ‘thin‐skinned’ and ‘thick‐skinned’ thrust tectonics in the Apennines (Italy). Rendiconti Lincei Scienze Fisische e Naturali11, 5–39.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Menardi NogueraA. and ReaG.2000. Deep structure of the Campanian–Lucanian Arc (Southern Apennine, Italy). Tectonophysics324, 239–265.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. MostardiniF. and MerliniS.1986. Appennino Centro‐Meridionale. Sezioni geologiche e proposta di modello strutturale. Memorie della Societa Geologica Italiana35, 177–202.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. ParottoM. and PraturlonA.2004. The Southern Apennine Arc. In: Geology of Italy (eds V.Crescenti , S.D’Offizi , S.Merlino and L.Sacchi ), pp. 33–58. Società Geologica Italiana, Rome .
    [Google Scholar]
  19. StavrevP.Y.1997. Euler deconvolution using differential similarity transformations of gravity and magnetic anomalies. Geophysical Prospecting45, 207–246.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. VerduzcoB., FairheadJ. D., GreenC.M. and MackenzieC.2004. New insights into magnetic derivatives. The Leading Edge22, 116–119.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. WijnsC., PerezC. and KowalczykP.2005. Theta map: Edge detection in magnetic data. Geophysics70, 39–43.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1111/j.1365-2478.2009.00808.x
Loading
/content/journals/10.1111/j.1365-2478.2009.00808.x
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error