Acta Geophysica

, Volume 66, Issue 6, pp 1495–1507 | Cite as

A statistical analysis of seismo-ionospheric TEC anomalies before 63 Mw ≥ 5.0 earthquakes in Turkey during 2003–2016

  • Erman ŞentürkEmail author
  • Murat Selim Çepni
Research Article - Atmospheric and Space Sciences


In this study, pre-seismic and post-seismic total electron content (TEC) anomalies of 63 Mw ≥ 5.0 earthquakes in Turkey (36°–42°N, 26°–45°E) were statistically investigated. The largest earthquake that occurred in Turkey during 2003–2016 is the Mw 7.1 Van earthquake on October 23, 2011. The TEC data of epicenters is obtained from CODE-GIM using a simple 4-point bivariate interpolation. The anomalies of TEC variations were determined by using a quartile-based running median process. In order to validate GIM results, we used the GPS-TEC data of available four IGS stations within the size of the Van earthquake preparation area. The anomalies that are detected by GIM and GPS-TEC show a similar pattern. Accordingly, the results obtained with CODE-GIM are reliable. The statistical results show that there are not prominent earthquake precursors for Mw ≤ 6.0 earthquakes in Turkey.


Total electron content Earthquake precursor Statistical analysis CODE-GIM GPS/GNSS 


  1. Afraimovich EL, Astafyeva EI (2008) TEC anomalies: local TEC changes prior to earthquakes or TEC response to solar and geomagnetic activity changes? Earth Planets Space 60(9):961–966CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aggarwal M (2015) Anomalous changes in ionospheric TEC during an earthquake event of 13–14 April 2010 in the Chinese sector. Adv Space Res 56(7):1400–1412CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Akhoondzadeh M, Parrot M, Saradjian MR (2010) Electron and ion density variations before strong earthquakes (M > 6.0) using DEMETER and GPS data. Nat Hazards Earth Syst 10(1):7–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Alizadeh M, Schuh H, Todorova S, Schmidt M (2011) Global ionospheric maps of VTEC from GNSS, satellite altimetry and FORMOSAT-3/COSMIC data. J Geod 85(12):975–987CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chakrabarty D, Bagiya MS, Thampi SV, Iyer KN (2012) Solar EUV flux (0.1-50 nm), F10.7 cm flux, sunspot number and the total electron content in the crest region of equatorial ionization anomaly during the deep minimum between solar cycle 23 and 24. Indian J Radio Space Phys 41(2):110–120Google Scholar
  6. Ciraolo L, Azpilicueta F, Brunini C, Meza A, Radicella SM (2007) Calibration errors on experimental slant total electron content (TEC) determined with GPS. J Geod 81(2):111–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dautermann T, Calais E, Haase J, Garrison J (2007) Investigation of ionospheric electron content variations before earthquakes in southern California, 2003–2004. J Geophys Res B Solid Earth 112:1–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dobrovolsky IP, Zubkov SI, Miachkin VI (1979) Estimation of the size of earthquake preparation zones. Pure appl Geophys 117:1025–1044CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dogan U, Ergintav S, Skone S, Arslan N, Oz D (2011) Monitoring of the ionosphere TEC variations during the 17th August 1999 Izmit earthquake using GPS data. Earth Planets Space 63(12):1183–1192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fuying Z, Yun W, Yiyan Z, Jian L (2011) A statistical investigation of pre-earthquake ionospheric TEC anomalies. Geod Geodyn 2(1):61–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gulyaeva T, Arikan F (2016) Statistical effects under geomagnetic quiet and storm conditions. Geomat Nat Hazards Risk. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Guo J, Li W, Yu H, Liu Z, Zhao C, Kong Q (2014) Impending ionospheric anomaly preceding the Iquique Mw8.2 earthquake in Chile on 2014 April 1. Geophys J Int 203(3):1461–1470CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hajra R, Chakraborty SK, Tsurutani BT, DasGupta A, Echer E, Brum CGM, Gonzalez WD, Sobral JHA (2016) An empirical model of ionospheric total electron content (TEC) near the crest of the equatorial ionization anomaly (EIA). J. Space Weather Space Clim. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hattori K, Hirooka S, Kunimitsu M, Ichikawa T, Han P (2014) Ionospheric anomaly as an earthquake precursor: case and statistical studies during 1998–2012 around Japan. In: General assembly and scientific symposium (URSI GASS), 2014 XXXIth URSIGoogle Scholar
  15. Hayakawa M, Fujinawa Y (eds) (1994) c. Terra Science Publishing Company, Tokyo, p 667Google Scholar
  16. Hayakawa M, Molchanov OA (eds) (2002) Seismo electromagnetics: lithosphere–atmosphere–ionosphere coupling. TERRAPUB, Tokyo, p 477Google Scholar
  17. Hayakawa M, Kasahara Y, Nakamura T, Muto F, Horie T, Maekawa S, Hobara Y, Rozhnoi AA, Solovieva M, Molchanov OA (2010) A statistical study on the correlation between lower ionospheric perturbations as seen by subionospheric VLF/LF propagation and earthquakes. J Geophys Res 115:1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hocke K (2008) Oscillations of global mean TEC. J Geophys Res Space Phys 113:1–13Google Scholar
  19. Jin S, Occhipinti G, Jin R (2015) GNSS ionospheric seismology: recent observation evidences and characteristics. Earth Sci Rev 147:54–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kaladze TD, Pokhotelov OA, Shah HA, Khan MI, Stenflo L (2008) Acoustic-gravity waves in the Earth’s ionosphere. J Atmos Solar-Terr Phys 70(13):1607–1616CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ke F, Wang Y, Wang X, Qian H, Shi C (2016) Statistical analysis of seismo-ionospheric anomalies related to Ms > 5.0 earthquakes in China by GPS TEC. J Seismolog 20(1):137–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Klimenko MV, Klimenko VV, Karpov IV, Zakharenkova IE (2011) Modeling of seismoionospheric effects initiated by internal gravity waves. Russ J Phys Chem 30(5):41–49Google Scholar
  23. Kon S, Nishihashi M, Hattori K (2011) Ionospheric anomalies possibly associated with M ≥ 6.0 earthquakes in the Japan area during 1998–2010: case studies and statistical study. J Asian Earth Sci 41(4):410–420CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Le H, Liu JY, Liu L (2011) A statistical analysis of ionospheric anomalies before 736 M6.0 + earthquakes during 2002–2010. J Geophys Res 116:1–5Google Scholar
  25. Liu JY, Chuo YJ, Shan SJ, Tsai YB, Chen YI, Pulinets SA, Yu SB (2004) Pre-earthquake ionospheric anomalies registered by continuous GPS TEC measurements. Ann Geophys 22(5):1585–1593CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Liu JY, Chen YI, Chuo YJ, Chen CS (2006) A statistical investigation of preearthquake ionospheric anomaly. J Geophys Res 111:1–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Liu JY, Chen CH, Chen YI, Yang WH, Oyama KI, Kuo KW (2010) A statistical study of ionospheric earthquake precursors monitored by using equatorial ionization anomaly of GPS TEC in Taiwan during 2001–2007. J Asian Earth Sci 39(1–2):76–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Liu JY, Chen CH, Tsai HF (2013a) A statistical study on seismo-ionospheric precursors of the total electron content associated with 146 M ≥ 6.0 earthquakes in Japan during 1998–2011. Earthquake prediction studies: Seismo Electromagnetics, edited by M. Hayakawa, 1–13Google Scholar
  29. Liu JY, Yang WH, Lin CH, Chen YI (2013b) A statistical study on the characteristics of ionospheric storms in the equatorial ionization anomaly region: GPS total electron content observed over Taiwan. J Geophys Res Space Phys 118(6):3856–3865CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Maekawa S, Horie T, Yamauchi T, Sawaya T, Ishikawa M, Hayakawa M, Sasaki H (2006) A statistical study on the effect of earthquakes on the ionosphere, based on the subionospheric LF propagation data in Japan. Ann Geophys 24:2219–2225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Masci F (2012) The study of ionospheric anomalies in Japan area during 1998–2010 by Kon et al.: an inaccurate claim of earthquake-related signatures? J Asian Earth Sci 57:1–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Masci F, Thomas JN, Villani F, Secan JA, Rivera N (2015) On the onset of ionospheric precursors 40 min before strong earthquakes. J Geophys Res A: Space Phys 120(2):1383–1393CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. McClusky S, Reilinger R, Mahmoud S, Sari DB, Tealeb A (2003) GPS constraints on Africa (Nubia) and Arabia plate motions. Geophys J Int 155:126–138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Ouzounov D, Pulinets SA, Romanov A, Romanov A, Tsybulya K, Davidenko D, Kafatos M, Taylor P (2011) Atmosphere-ionosphere response to the M9 Tohoku earthquake revealed by multi instrument space-borne and ground observations: preliminary results. Earthq Sci 24(6):557–564CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Parrot M (2012) Statistical analysis of automatically detected ion density variations recorded by DEMETER and their relation to seismic activity. Ann Geophys 55(1):149–155Google Scholar
  36. Pulinets SA (1998) Seismic activity as a source of the ionospheric variability. Adv Space Res 22(6):903–906CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Pulinets SA (2009) Physical mechanism of the vertical electric field generation over active tectonic fault. Adv Space Res 44(6):767–773CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Pulinets SA, Boyarchuk KA (2004) Ionospheric precursors of earthquakes. Springer, Germany, p 315Google Scholar
  39. Pulinets SA, Legen’ka AD, Gaivoronskaya TV, Depuev VK (2003) Main phenomenological features of ionospheric precursors of strong earthquakes. J Atmos Sol Terr Phys 65(16–18):1337–1347CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Pundhir D, Singh B, Lakshmi DR, Reddy BM (2015) A study of ionospheric precursors associated with the major earthquakes occurred in Pakistan region. J Ind Geophys Union 19(1):71–76Google Scholar
  41. Reilinger R et al (2006) GPS constraints on continental deformation in the Africa-Arabia-Eurasia continental collision zone and implications for the dynamics of plate interactions. J Geophys Res 111:B05411. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Rozhnoi A, Solovieva M, Molchanov O, Biagi P-F, Hayakawa M (2007) Observation evidences of atmospheric Gravity Waves induced by seismic activity from analysis of subionospheric LF signal spectra. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 7(5):625–628CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Schaer S, Gurtner W, Feltens J (1998) IONEX: the ionosphere map exchange format version 1. In: Proceedings of the IGS AC workshop, Darmstadt, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  44. Şentürk E, Çepni MS (2018) Performance of different weighting and surface fitting techniques on station-wise TEC calculation and modified sine weighting supported by the sun effect. J Spatial Sci 5:2–10.1080/14498596.2017.1417169Google Scholar
  45. Shah M, Jin S (2015) Statistical characteristics of seismo-ionospheric GPS TEC disturbances prior to global Mw ≥ 5.0 earthquakes (1998–2014). J Geodyn 92:42–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Sorokin VM, Chmyrev VM, Yaschenko AK (2006) Possible DC electric field in the ionosphere related to seismicity. Adv Space Res 37(4):666–670CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Thomas JN, Love JJ, Komjathy A, Verkhoglyadova OP, Butala M, Rivera N (2012) On the reported ionospheric precursor of the 1999 Hector Mine. California earthquake. Geophys. Res. Lett. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Thomas JN, Huard J, Masci F (2017) A statistical study of global ionospheric map total electron content changes prior to occurrences of M ≥ 6.0 earthquakes during 2000–2014. J Geophys Res Space Phys. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Wen S, Chen CH, Yen HY, Yeh TK, Liu JY, Hattori K, Peng H, Wang CH, Shin TC (2012) Magnetic storm free ULF analysis in relation with earthquakes in Taiwan. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 12:1747–1754CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Yao YB, Chen P, Zhang S, Chen JJ, Yan F, Peng WF (2012) Analysis of pre-earthquake ionospheric anomalies before the global M = 7.0 + earthquakes in 2010. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 12:575–585CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Institute of Geophysics, Polish Academy of Sciences & Polish Academy of Sciences 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Surveying EngineeringKocaeli UniversityKocaeliTurkey

Personalised recommendations