Earth, Planets and Space

, Volume 59, Issue 1, pp 33–38 | Cite as

Identifying block rotations from remanent magnetization effect: Example from northern Central Turkey

Open Access


One of the difficulties in interpreting magnetic anomaly data is the distortion caused by rock body magnetization. There have been several successful studies carried out on the estimation of body magnetization based on the correlation of the Bouguer and magnetic anomaly data. A number of other significant research projects have aimed at identifying the effect of remanent magnetization in magnetic data only. In this paper, we present a threedimensional method for determining the body magnetization direction by means of comparing the amplitude of the analytic signal with the horizontal gradient of pseudogravity of magnetic anomaly using the correlation coefficient equation. The method has been successfully applied to test cases and is applied here to the aeromagnetic anomalies located in northern Central Turkey. Anomalies displaying individual polarities were separated out and correlated with themselves using the correlation coefficient equation. Counter-clockwise rotations in the range of 3° and 174° were determined. Clockwise rotations were determined in the range of 19° and 153°. The inclination of the body magnetization directions for one of the blocks was estimated to be 68.4°, while all other blocks had a low inclination angle of body magnetization in the range of 32° to 57°. These results may imply that these blocks gained their magnetizations when Turkey was at low latitudes. Possible buried faults are also identified. The results reported here comply with the new mobilistic theory.

Key words

Magnetic anomaly correlation coefficient function northern Central Anatolia block rotation buried faults 


  1. Ates, A., T. Kayiran, and I. Sincer, Structural Interpretation of the Marmara Region, NW Turkey from aeromagnetic, seismic and gravity data, Tectonophysics, 367, 41–99, 2003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baldwin, R. T. and R. Langel, Tables and Maps of the DGRF 1985 and IGRF 1990, International Union of Geodesy and Geophysical Association of Geomagnetism and Aeronomy, IAGA Bull., 54, 158, 1993.Google Scholar
  3. Baranov, V., A new method for interpretation of aeromagnetic maps: Pseudogravity anomalies, Geophysics, 22, 359–383,1957.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bilim, F. and A. Ates, A computer program to estimate the source body magnetization direction from magnetic and gravity anomalies, Comput. Geosci., 25, 231–240, 1999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bilim, F. and A. Ates, An enhanced method for estimation of body magnetization direction from pseudo-gravity and gravity data, Comput. Geosci., 30, 161–171, 2004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bingol, E., 1/2,000,000 scale geologic map of Turkey. Publication of the Mineral Research and Exploration (MTA) of Turkey, Ankara, 1989.Google Scholar
  7. Blakely, R. J., Potential Theory in Gravity and Magnetic Applications, 441 pp., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Blakely, R. J. and R. W. Simpson, Approximating edges of source bodies from magnetic or gravity anomalies, Geophysics, 51, 1494–1498, 1986.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Buyuksarac, A., D. Jordanova, A. Ates, and V. Karloukovski, Interpretation of the gravity and magnetic anomalies of the Cappadocia Region, Central Turkey, Pure Appl. Geophys., 162, 2197–2213, 2005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Goodacre, A. K., Some comments on the calculation of the gravitational and magnetic attraction of a homogeneous rectangular prism, Geophys. Prosp., 21, 66–69, 1973.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gursoy, H., J. D. A. Piper, O. Tatar, and L. Mesci, Palaeomagnetic study of the Karaman and Karapinar volcanic complexes, central Turkey: neotectonic rotation in the south-central sector of the Anatolian Block, Tectonophysics, 299, 191–211, 1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. McClusky, S., S. Balassanian, A. Barka, C. Demir, S. Ergintav, I. Georgiev, O. Gurkan, M. Hamburger, K. Hurst, H. Kahle, K. Kastens, G. Kekelidze, R. King, V. Kotzev, O. Lenk, S. Mahmoud, A. Mishin, M. Nadariya, A. Ouzounis, D. Paradissis, Y. Peter, M. Prilepin, R. Reilinger, I. Sanli, H. Seeger, A. Tealeb, M. N. Toksoz, and G. Veis, Global positioning system constraints on plate kinematics and dynamics in the eastern Mediterranean and Caucasus, J. Geophys. Res., 105, 5695–5719, 2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Meyer, P. L., Introductory Probability and Statistical Applications, 339 pp, Wesley Publishing Co., Massachusetts, Addison, 1965.Google Scholar
  14. Piper, J. D. A., H. Gursoy, and O. Tatar, Paleomagnetism and magnetic properties of the Cappadocian ignimbrite succession, central Turkey and neogene tectonics of the Anatolian collage, J. Volcan. Geoth. Res., 117, 237–262, 2002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Roest W. R. and M. Pilkington, Identifying remanent magnetization effects in magnetic data, Geophysics, 58, 653–659, 1993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Roest, W. R., J. Verhoef, and M. Pilkington, Magnetic interpretation using the 3-D analytic signal, Geophysics, 57, 116–25, 1992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Rotstein, Y., Counterclockwise rotation of the Anatolian block, Tectonophysics, 108, 71–79, 1984.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Sanver, M. and E. Ponat, Kirsehir ve dolaylarina iliskin paleomanyetik bulgular. Kirsehir Masifinin rotasyonu, Istanbul Yerbilimleri, 2, 231–238, 1981.Google Scholar
  19. Saribudak, M., M. Sanver, A. M. C. Sengor, and N. Gorur, Paleomagnetic evidence for substantial rotation of the Almacik flake within the North Anatolian Fault Zone, NW Turkey, Geophys. J. Int., 102, 563–568, 1990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Storetvedt, K. M., Global Wrench Tectonics, 397 pp, Fagbokforlaget, Norway, 2003.Google Scholar
  21. Zeitz, I. and R. G. Henderson, A preliminary report on model studies of magnetic anomalies of three-dimensional bodies, Geophysics, 21, 794–814, 1956.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Society of Geomagnetism and Earth, Planetary and Space Sciences (SGEPSS); The Seismological Society of Japan; The Volcanological Society of Japan; The Geodetic Society of Japan; The Japanese Society for Planetary Sciences. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Engineering, Department of Geophysical EngineeringCumhuriyet UniversitySivasTurkey
  2. 2.Faculty of Engineering, Department of Geophysical EngineeringAnkara UniversityAnkaraTurkey

Personalised recommendations