پیوندهای مفید
اخبار و اعلانات
آمار
| تعداد نشریات | 158 |
| تعداد شماره‌ها | 6,226 |
| تعداد مقالات | 67,694 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 115,006,357 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 89,687,669 |
بررسی کارآمدی مدل پوسته CRUST 1.0 برای تخمین عمق موهو در منطقه خاورمیانه | ||
| فیزیک زمین و فضا | ||
| مقاله 1، دوره 48، شماره 1، اردیبهشت 1401، صفحه 1-11 اصل مقاله (3.37 M) | ||
| نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22059/jesphys.2021.317081.1007283 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| پرستو جلولی1؛ حمیدرضا سیاهکوهی* 2؛ حسین زمردیان3 | ||
| 1دانشجوی دکتری، گروه علوم زمین، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، واحد علوم و تحقیقات، تهران، ایران | ||
| 2استاد، گروه فیزیک زمین، مؤسسه ژئوفیزیک، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران | ||
| 3استاد، گروه علوم زمین، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، واحد علوم و تحقیقات، تهران، ایران | ||
| چکیده | ||
| با توجه به پیچیدگی و تنوع ساختار تکتونیکی در منطقه خاورمیانه، استفاده از روشی که بتواند عمق موهو را با بیشترین همخوانی با این ساختارها را ارائه دهد، از اهمیت ویژه‌ای برخوردار است. در این مقاله به مقایسه عمق موهو به‌دست‌آمده در منطقه خاورمیانه با استفاده از دو شیوه متفاوت؛ 1) وارون‌سازی گرانی منشورهای کروی، 2) تخمین عمق موهو با به‌کار‌گیری منشورهای کروی و استفاده از مدل پوسته لرزه‌ایCRUST1.0 ، می‌پردازیم. در حالت کلی به‌دست آوردن عمق از داده‌های گرانی یک مسئله وارون غیرخطی است. در هر دو شیوه داده‌های گرانی با استفاده از روش یودا برگردان می‌شوند. با توجه به وسعت منطقه، استفاده از منشورهای کروی به‌جای منشورهای تخت در روش وارون‌سازی به‌کار رفته علاوه‌بر در نظر گرفتن انحنای زمین موجب کارآمدی روش نیز می‌شود. کمینه عمق موهوی به‌دست آمده از روش اول ۱۲ کیلومتر مربوط به بخش‌هایی از اقیانوس هند و بیشینه عمق موهو ۵۴ کیلومتر مربوط به قسمت‌های غربی فلات تبت است که با مرز صفحات و ساختارهای تکتونیکی همبسته است. محدوده عمق موهو در روش دوم در بازه ۵/۷ تا ۴۹ کیلومتر است که مقدار کمینه مربوط به بخش‌هایی از اقیانوس هند و مقدار بیشینه مربوط به قسمت‌هایی از زاگرس است. مقایسه نتایج دو روش نشان می‌دهد که نتایج حاصل از روش اول به‌دلیل وارون‌سازی داده‌های گرانی‌سنجی نسبت به روش دوم که از مدل پوسته لرزه‌ای CRUST 1.0 برای تخمین عمق موهو استفاده کرده، کاملاً با مرز صفحات همخوانی داشته و کلیه ساختارهای تکتونیکی منطقه را نشان می‌دهد. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها | ||
| عمق موهو؛ منشورهای کروی؛ وارون‌سازی داده‌های گرانی؛ مدل پوسته CRUST1.0 | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| Evaluating CRUST1.0 crustal model efficiency for Moho depth estimation in Middle East region | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| Parastoo Jalooli1؛ Hamid Reza Siahkoohi2؛ Hossein Zomorrodian3 | ||
| 1Ph.D. Student, Department of Earth Sciences, Islamic Azad University, Science and Research Branch, Tehran, Iran | ||
| 2Professor, Department of Earth Physics, Institute of Geophysics, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran | ||
| 3Professor, Department of Earth Sciences, Islamic Azad University, Science and Research Branch, Tehran, Iran | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| Study of Moho in Middle East and surrounding region is of great importance for scientists, because it has a rich geological history and contains parts of the Eurasian, Indian, African and Arabian plates as the main plates and some small plates. According to complexity and different tectonic structures in Middle East using a proper method that yields a Moho depth model which is in accordance with these structures, has a great importance. In this paper we compare the Moho depth obtained from two different methods, 1) Gravity data inversion of spherical prisms (tesseroids) and 2) Moho depth evaluation using tesseroids and CRUST1.0 crustal model. Determining of Moho depth from gravity data is a nonlinear inverse problem. Regarding the extent of the study area we use an efficient inversion method (Uieda’s inversion method) in order to consider the earth's curvature by using spherical prisms instead of rectangular prisms. In this method one needs to minimize the cost function, where is the fidelity term, is the penalty term and is regularization parameter. In this method in addition to Moho depth, we need to estimate three hyper parameters namely the regularization parameter ( ), Moho reference level ( ) and density contrast ( ). They are estimated in two steps during the inversion by holdout-cross validation methods.To estimate the relief of the Moho from gravity data, first one must obtain the gravitational effect of the target anomalous density distribution attributed to the Moho relief, this requires eliminating all gravity effects other than that of the target anomalous density from observed data. In the first method tesseroid modeling is used to calculate the gravity effect of the topography and sediments. The effect of topography and crustal sediments are removed using global topography and crustal models. In the second method first we extract Moho depth over the study region from CRUST1.0 model and then evaluate gravity effect arising from this anomalous Moho, then using inversion method to estimate the Moho depth from CRUST 1.0 model. According to the results, the minimum depth of Moho is about 12 km in some parts of Indian Ocean and the maximum depth is about 54 km in the west of Tibetan plateau from the first method which is in accordance with plate boundaries and correlates well with the prominent tectonic features of the Middle East region. The Moho depth obtained from the second method varies between 7.5 and 49 km where the minimum depth is related to the parts of Indian Ocean and maximum depth is appeared in parts of the Zagros in Iran. Comparing the results of two methods demonstrates the acceptable performance of the adapted inversion procedure and utilization of spherical prisms but the calculated Moho depth from second method failed to estimate acceptable Moho depth especially in divergent boundary at Red sea, Gulf of Aden and Indian Ocean. The results indicate that the CRUST1.0 model, at least over an area with large extent, is not a suitable model for gravity inversion and Moho depth estimation. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها [English] | ||
| Moho depth, spherical prisms, gravity data inversion, CRUST1.0 crustal model | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
Afsari, N., Sodoudi, F., Taghizadeh Farahmand, F. and Ghassemi, M. R., 2011, Crustal structure of Northwest Zagros (Kermanshah) and Central Iran (Yazd and Isfahan) using teleseismic Ps converted phases. Journal of Seismology, 15(2), 341–353. Al-Damegh, K., Sandvol, E. and Barazangi, M., 2005, Crustal structure of the Arabian plate: New constraints from the analysis of teleseismic receiver functions. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett., 231, 177-196. Al-Hashmi, S., Gök, R., Al-Toubi, K., Al-Shijbi, Y., El-Hussain, I. and Rodgers, A. J., 2011, Seismic velocity structure at the southeastern margin of the Arabian Peninsula. Geophysical Journal International, 186(2), 782–792. Almadani, S. A., 2011, Reciever function studies of crustal structure, composition, and evolution beneath the Afar Depression, Ethiopia, Doctoral Dissertations, 2248, Missouri University of Science and Technology. Amante, C. and Eakins, B. W., 2009, ETOPO1 1 Arc-Minute Global Relief Model: Procedures, Data Sources and Analysis, NOAA Technical Memorandum NESDIS NGDC-24. National Geophysical Data Center, NOAA. Asgharzadeh, M. F., Von Frese, R. R. B., Kim, H. R., Leftwich, T. E. and Kim, J. W., 2007, Spherical prism gravity effects by Gauss-Legendre quadrature integration. Geophysical Journal International, 169(1), 1–11. Barthelmes, F. and Kohler, W., 2012, International Centre for Global Earth Models (ICGEM). Journal of Geodesy, 86(10), 932–934. Bird, P., 2003, An updated digital model of plate boundaries. Geochemistry, Geophysics and Geosystem, 4(3), 1027. Bott, M.H.P., 1960, The use of rapid digital computing methods for direct gravity interpretation of sedimentary basins. Geophys. J. Int., 3(1), 63-67. Dehghani, G. A. and Makris, J., 1984, The gravity field and crustal structure of Iran, N. Jb.Geol. Palaeont. Abh., 168, 215-229. Dugda, M. T., Nyblade, A. A., Julia, J., Langston, C. A., Ammon, C. J. and Simiyu, S., 2005, Crustal structure in Ethiopia and Kenya from receiver function analysis: Implications for rift development in eastern Africa. Journal of Geophysical Research, 110, B01303. Ebadi, S., Barzaghi, I., Safari, A. and Bahroudi, A., 2019, Evaluation of different gravimetric methods to Moho recovery in Iran. Annals of Geophysics, 62. Globig, J., Fernàndez, M., Torne, M., Vergés, J., Robert, A. and Faccenna, C., 2016, New insights into the crust and lithospheric mantle structure of Africa from elevation, geoid, and thermal analysis, Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 121, 5389–5424. Hammond, J. O. S., Kendall, J.-M., Stuart, G.W., Keir, D., Ebinger, C., Ayele, A. and Belachew, M., 2011, The nature of the crust beneath the afar triple junction: evidence from receiver functions. Geochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems, 12, Q12004. Hansen, S. E., Rodgers, A. J., Schwartz, S. Y. and Al-Amri, A. M. S., 2007, Imaging ruptured lithosphere beneath the Red Sea and Arabian Peninsula. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 259(3-4), 256–265. Heck, B. and Seitz, K., 2007, A comparison of the tesseroid, prism and pointmass approaches for mass reductions in gravity field modelling. Journal of Geodesy, 81(2), 121–136. Heydarizadeh Shali, H., Sampietro, D., Safari, A., Capponi, M. and Bahroudi, A., 2020, Fast collocation for Moho estimation from GOCE gravity data: the Iran case study. Geophysical Journal International, 221(1), 651-664. Karabulut, H., Paul, A., Ergun, T. A., Hatzfeld, D., Childs, D. M. and Aktar, M., 2013, Long-wavelength undulations of the seismic Moho beneath the strongly stretched Western Anatolia. Geophysical Journal International, 194(1). Karabulut, H., Paul, A., Değer Özbakır, A., Ergün, T. and Şentürk, S., 2019, A new crustal model of the Anatolia-Aegean domain: evidence for the dominant role of isostasy in the support of the Anatolian plateau. Geophysical Journal International. Kim, J. H., 2009, Estimating classification error rate: repeated crossvalidation, repeated hold-out and bootstrap. Computational Statics & Data Analysis, 53(11), 3735–3745. Laske, G., Masters, G., Ma, Z. and Pasyanos, M., 2013, Update on CRUST1. 0—A 1-degree global model of Earth’s crust. In Geophys. Res. Abstr, Vol. 15, p. 2658. Li, X., Bock, G., Vafidis, A., Kind, R., Harjes, H.-P., Hanka, W., Wylegalla, K., Van der Meijde, M. and Yuan, X., 2003, Receiver function study of the Hellenic subduction zone: imaging crustal thickness variations and the oceanic Moho of the descending African lithosphere. Geophysical Journal International, 155(2), 733–748. Li, X. and Gotze, H., 2001, Ellipsoid, geoid, gravity, geodesy, and geophysics, Geophysics, 66(6), 1660–1668. Mechie, J., Ben-Avraham, Z., Weber, M. H., Götze, H.-J., Koulakov, I., Mohsen, A. and Stiller, M., 2013, The distribution of Moho depths beneath the Arabian plate and margins. Tectonophysics, 609, 234–249. Mohammadi, N., Sodoudi, F., Mohammadi, E. and Sadidkhouy, A., 2013, New constraints on lithospheric thickness of the Iranian plateau using converted waves. Journal of Seismology, 17(3), 883–895. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10950-013-9359-2. Motaghi, K., Tatar, M. and Priestley, K., 2012, Crustal thickness variation across the northeast Iran continental collision zone from teleseismic converted waves, Journal of Seismology, 16, 253-260. Motavalli-Anbaran, S.-H., Zeyen, H., Brunet, M.-F. and Ardestani, V. E., 2011, Crustal and lithospheric structure of the Alborz Mountains, Iran, and surrounding areas from integrated geophysical modeling. Tectonics, 30(5). Motavalli‐Anbaran, S.-H., Zeyen, H. and Ardestani, V. E., 2013, 3D joint inversion modeling of the lithospheric density structure based on gravity, geoid and topography data — Application to the Alborz Mountains (Iran) and South Caspian Basin region. Tectonophysics, 586, 192-205. Nasrabadi, A., Sepahvand, M. R. and Dadjo, Z., 2019, Moho depth variations and Vp/Vs ratios in the seismotectonic zones of Central Iran, Eastern Iran, and Makran: using a modified Zhu and Kanamori method. Journal of Seismology. Paul, A., Hatzfeld, D., Kaviani, A., Tatar, M. and Pequegnat, C., 2010, Seismic imaging of the lithospheric structure of the Zagros mountain belt (Iran). In: Leturmy, P., Robin, C. (Eds.), Tectonic and stratigraphic evolution of Zagros and Makran during the Mesozoic–Cenozoic. Geol. Soc. London, Special Publications, 330, pp. 5–18. https://doi.org/10.1144/SP330.2. Radjaee, A. H., Rham, D., Mokhtari, M., Tatar, M., Priestley, K. and Hatzfeld, D., 2010, Variation of Moho depth in the Central part of Alborz Mountains, North of Iran. Geophysical Journal International, 181, 173–184. Salem, A., Green, C., Campbell, S., Fairhead, J. D., Cascone, L. and Moorhead, L., 2013, Moho depth and sediment thickness estimation beneath the Red Sea derived from satellite and terrestrial gravity data. Geophysics, 78(5), G89–G101. https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2012-0150.1. Sampietro, D., Mansi, A. and Capponi, M., 2018, Moho Depth and Crustal Architecture beneath the Levant Basin from Global Gravity Field Model. Geosciences, 8(6), 200. https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences8060200. Sanders, P., Priestly, K. and Taymaz, T., 1998, Variation in the crustal structure beneath western Turkey. Geophysical Journal International, 134, 373–389. Seber, D., Sandvol, E., Sandvol, C., Brindisi, C. and Barazangi, M., 2001, Crustal model for the Middle East and North Africa region: Implications for the isostatic compensation mechanism, Geophysical Journal International, 147, 630–638. Shad Manaman, N., Shomali, H. and Hemin, K., 2011, New constraints on upper-mantle S-velocity structure and crustal thickness of the Iranian plateau using partitioned waveform inversion. Geophysical Journal International, 184, 247–267. Silva, J., Santos, D. and Gomes, K., 2014, Fast gravity inversion of basement relief. Geophysics, 79(5), G79-G91. Sodoudi, F., Yuan, X., Kind, R., Heit, B. and Sadidkhouy, A., 2009, Evidence for a missing crustal root and a thin lithosphere beneath the Central Alborz by receiver function studies. Geophysical Journal International, 177(2), 733–742. Tatar, M. and Nasrabadi, A., 2013, Crustal thickness variations in the Zagros continental collision zone (Iran) from joint inversion of receiver functions and surface wave dispersion. Journal of Seismology, 17, 1321–1337. Tezel, T., Shibutani, T. and Kaypak, B., 2013, Crustal thickness of Turkey determined by receiver function. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences, 75, 36-45. Tiberi, C., Ebinger, C., Ballu, V., Stuart, G. and Oluma, B., 2005, Inverse models of gravity data from the Red Sea-Aden-East African rifts triple junction zone. Geophysical Journal International, 163(2), 775–787. Tiberi, C., Leroy, S., d'Acremont, E., Bellahsen, N., Ebinger, C., Al-Lazki, A. and Pointu, A., 2007, Crustal geometry of the northeastern Gulf of Aden passivemargin: localization of the deformation inferred from receiver function analysis. Geophysical Journal International, 168, 1247–1260. Uieda, L. and Barbosa, C.F.V., 2016, A gravity-derived Moho model for South America: source code, data, and model results from ‘Fast non-linear gravity inversion in spherical coordinates with application to the South American Moho’. Uieda, L., Barbosa, V. and Braitenberg, C., 2016, Tesseroids: forwardmodeling gravitational fields in spherical coordinates. Geophysics, 81, F41–F48. Zhu, L., Mitchell, B. J., Akyol, N., Cemen, I. and Kekovali, K., 2006, Crustal thickness variations in the Aegean region and implications for the extension of continental crust. Journal of Geophysical Research, 111, B01301. | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 679 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 438 |
||