Acta Geodaetica et Geophysica Hungarica

, Volume 40, Issue 3–4, pp 413–430 | Cite as

Tectonic weak zones determined by magnetotellurics along the CEL-7 deep seismics profile

  • A. Ádám
  • A. Novák
  • L. Szarka


In the contact zone of three tectonic units (Pannonian Basin, Eastern Alps and Dinarides), in a complicated — basin and range — geological situation magnetotelluric deep soundings were carried out along a 140 km long profile (CELEBRATION-007) with a site distance of 2 km. In this area deep fractures of the Basin run together in NE-SW direction.

In the paper various magnetotelluric images completed with gravity and magnetics are provided. In the traditional magnetotelluric approach, the structural indication of the TM and TE mode magnetotelluric sounding curves is clearly separated. The TM mode curves well express the resistive basement structure, already known from dense boreholes and detailed seismic exploration. The TE mode curves on the other hand (together with the induction vectors of very low values) definitely show the conductive root of the deep fractures, where the ductile materials are assumed to be raised into a very shallow depth of about of 8 km. The high heat flow of the area (about 100 mW/m2), which explains the shallowness of the conductive asthenosphere is also well indicated. The asthenosphere has more Alpine character in the NW part of the profile (its depth is about 80 km) and it is at smaller (about 50 km) depth in the SE part of the profile, due to the higher heat flow near the extensional Drava Basin. The induction vectors are also separated into two characteristic regions, according to their general direction, influenced by both local and remote effects.

A strong correlation is shown between magnetotelluric and gravity inversion results. A joint interpretation of magnetotelluric, gravity, magnetic results provide a quite comprehensive interpretation about the deep geological structures in SW-Hungary.


conductive asthenosphere deep fracture electric conducting zone inversion magnetotelluric sounding sedimentary basin 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Ádám A 1978: Phys. Earth Planet. Int., 17, P21–P28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ádám A 1987a: Phys. Earth Planet. Int., 45, 209–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ádám A 1987b: Gerlands Beitr. Geophysik, 96, 17–31.Google Scholar
  4. Ádám A 2001: Earth Planets Space, 53, 903–918.Google Scholar
  5. Ádám A 2002: Annals of Geophysics, 55 (5), 699–701.Google Scholar
  6. Ádám A, Koppán A 2004: Acta Geod. Geoph. Hung., 39, 363–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ádám A, Wesztergom V 2001: Acta Geol. Hung., 44, 167–192.Google Scholar
  8. Ádám A, Zalai P 2000: Magyar Geofizika (in Hungarian), 41, 60–74.Google Scholar
  9. Ádám A, Szarka L, Steiner T 1993: J. Geomag. Geoelectr., 45, 761–773.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ádám A, Szarka L, Prácser E, Varga G 1996: Geophys. Transactions, 40, 45–78.Google Scholar
  11. Ádám A, Novák A, Szarka L, Wesztergom V 2003: Acta Geod. Geoph. Hung., 38, 305–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Berdichevsky M N, Dmitriev V I 1976: Acta Geod. Geoph. Mont. Hung., 11, 447–484.Google Scholar
  13. Dövényi P, Horváth F, Liebe P, Gálfi J, Erki I 1983: Geophys. Transactions, 29, 3–114.Google Scholar
  14. Guterch A, Grad M, Keller G R, CELEBRATION 2000 Organizing Committee, CELEBRATION 2000 Experiment Team 2001: EOS Transactions, 82.Google Scholar
  15. Haas J ed. 2001: Geology of Hungary. Eötvös University Press, BudapestGoogle Scholar
  16. Jones A G 1993: J. Geomagn. and Geoelectr., 45, 933–956.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Ledo J 2002: 2-D versus 3-D magnetotelluric data interpretation. Electromagnetic Induction Workshop, Santa Fe, June 2002. Program and Abstract bookGoogle Scholar
  18. Kilényi É, Šefara J eds 1989: Geophys. Transactions, 36, 1–2 (Enclosure).Google Scholar
  19. Kiss J 2005: Magyar Geofizika (in press)Google Scholar
  20. Kis K, Agocs W B, Mayerhoff A A 1999: Geophys. Transactions, 42, 133–157.Google Scholar
  21. Németh G 1997: Magyar Geofizika (in Hungarian), 38, 67–69.Google Scholar
  22. Németh G 2005: Report on the geological experiments along the CEL-7 profile. ManuscriptGoogle Scholar
  23. Posgay K, Bodoky T, Hegedűs E, Kovácsvölgyi S, Lenkey L, Szafián P, Takács E, Tímár Z, Varga G 1995: Tectonophysics, 252, 467–484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ritter O, Junge A, Dawes G J K 1998: Geophys. J. Int., 132, 535–548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Rokityansky I I 1982: Geoelectromagnetic investigation of the Earth’s crust and Mantle. Springer Verglag, Berlin, Heidelberg, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Szarka L, Ádám A, Novák A, Kiss J, Madarasi A, Prácser E, Varga Z 2005: In: Proceedings of the 17th IAGA WG 1.2 on “Electromagnetic Induction in the Earth” Workshop, Hyderabad, India,
  27. Takács E, Pethő G, Szabó I 2005: Acta Geod. Geof. Hung., 40, 127–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Varga G 1979: Study of the geological basic profiles. Report on the telluric and magnetotelluric measurements in 1979 (in Hungarian). MÁELGI, ManuscriptGoogle Scholar
  29. Werner S 1953: Interpretation of magnetic anomalies at sheet-like bodies. Sveriges Geologiska Undersok, ser. C.C. Arsbok 43, N:06Google Scholar
  30. Wu N, Booker J R, Smith J T 1993: J. Geomagn. and Geoelectr., 45, 1073–1088.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. Ádám
    • 1
  • A. Novák
    • 1
  • L. Szarka
    • 1
  1. 1.Geodetic and Geophysical Research Institute of the Hungarian Academy of SciencesSopronHungary

Personalised recommendations