Interpretation of the 3D geoelectrical model of the Kocheriv structure of the Western Ukrainian Shield
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24028/gj.v46i4.304895Keywords:
geoelectromagnetic methods, interpretation of a three-dimensional model, electrical conductivity anomalies, ore occurrences of minerals, Ukrainian shield, Kocheriv structure, fault zoneAbstract
The interpretation of the 3D model of the Kocheriv structure of the Ukrainian shield, based on the data of experimental observations of the low-frequency electromagnetic field of the Earth in a wide range of periods, was carried out by S.I. Subbotin Institute of Geophysics of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine. The main result of the geological-geoelectrical interpretation is that the Kocherivsynclinorium within its geological limits did not appear as a solid conductive structure; new anomalies of low resistance were discovered in the near-surface part of the crust (from the surface to 0.5—2 km), which correspond to structural and metallogenic features,extend along the Vilensky and Kocheriv faults, which belong to the Zvizdal-Zaliska fault zone and the Vilshansky (Brusyliv fault zone) and their intersection with the Central fault zone; an abnormally heterogeneous distribution of resistivity in the crust at depths from 15 to 30 km west of the Ukrainian shield was confirmed. The resistivity of the host rocks is on average 10,000 Ω·m, it extends over almost the entire thickness of the crust up to 50 km, which spatially agrees well with the massifs of granites of the Zhytomyr and Fastiv complexes of the Volyn and Ros’ Domain. The nature of the electrical conductivity anomaly may be the result of transport of ore components together with fluids from the crust and mantle during tectonic-magmatic activation, which allows predicting areas promising for endogenous mineralization as projections of deep anomalies to the day surface.
A connection between endogenous mineralization within the Kocheriv structure and low- resistivity anomalies was established. Zones of deep faults, to which low-resistivity anomalies are confined, require further study, such as the sublatitude anomaly along the Masheryn fault. Anomalies in the north of the Kocheriv structure at the intersection of the Kocheriv and Glukhiv faults and further south within the deepest (up to 2 km from the surface) near-surface sub-latitudinal conductor, which spatially coincides with the Komariv sub-latitudinal fault zone, stand out as promising for mineral exploration that meets geoelectrical criteria.
References
Belyavsky, V.V., Burakhovich, T.K., Kulik, S.N., Sukhoi, V.V. Electromagnetic methods in the study of the Ukrainian shield and the Dnieper-Donets depression. Kyiv: Zannanya, 2001, 227 p. (in Russian).
Burakhovych, T.K., Ilienko, V.A., & Kushnir, A.M. (2023). Three-dimensional geoelectrical model of the central part of the Zvizdal-Zaliska and Brusyliv fault zones of the Ukrainian Shield. Geofizicheskiy Zhurnal, 44(5), 13―33. https://doi.org/10.24028/gj.v44i5.272325 (in Ukrainian).
Burakhovych, T.K., & Kulik, S.N. (2009). Three-dimensional geoelectric model of the earth’s crust and upper mantle of the western part of the Ukrainian Shield and its slopes. Geofizicheskiy Zhurnal, 31(1), 88―99 (in Russian).
Burakhovych, T., Nikolaev, I., Sheremet, E., & Shirkov, B. (2015). Geoelectric anomalies of the Ukrainian shield and their relation to mineral deposits. Geofizicheskiy Zhurnal, 37(6), 42―63. https://doi.org/10.24028/gzh.0203-3100.v37i6. 2015.111171 (in Russian).
Gintov, О.B., Orlyuk, M.I., Entin, V.A., Pashkevich, I.K., Mychak, S.V., Bakarzhieva, M.I., Shimkiv, L.M., & Marchenko, A.V. (2018). The structure of the Western and Central parts of the Ukrainian schield. Controversial issues. Geofizicheskiy Zhurnal, 40(6), 3―29. https://doi.org/10.24028/gzh.0203-3100.v40i6.2018.151000 (in Ukrainian).
Antsiferov, A.V. (Ed.). (2009). Geological and geophysical model of the Nemirovsko-Kocherovskoy suture zone of the Ukrainian shield. Donetsk: Weber, 254 p. (in Russian).
State geological map of Ukraine, scale 1:200,000, sheet M-35-XVIII (Fastiv). (2003). Kyiv: Geoinform of Ukraine (in Ukrainian).
Ilyenko, V.A., Kushnir, A.M., & Burakhovych, T.K. (2019). Electromagnetic studies of Zvizdal-Zaliska and Brusyliv fault zones of the Ukrainian shield. Geofizicheskiy Zhurnal, 41(4), 97—113. https://doi.org/10.24028/gzh.0203-3100.v41i4. 2019.177370 (in Ukrainian).
Karly, Z.V., Syomka, V.O., Stepanyuk, L.M., Bondarenko, S.M., Karly, V.E., Syomka, L.V. (2015). Geochemical features of crystalline rocks of the central part Kocherivska depression (Uk¬rai¬nian Shield). Geochemistry and Ore Formation, (35), 11―18. https://doi.org/10.15407/gof. 2015.35.011 (in Ukrainian).
Correlative chronostratigraphic scheme of the Early Precambrian of the Ukrainian Shield. Explanatory note. (2004). Kyiv: UkrDGRI, NSK of Ukraine, 30 p. (in Ukrainian).
Mychak, S.V., Bakarzhyeva, M.I., Farfuliak, L.V., & Marchenko, A.V. (2022). The inner structure and kinematics of the Zvizdal-Zalisk and Brusyliv fault zones of the Ukrainian shield by the results of tectonophysical, magnetometrical data. Geofizicheskiy Zhurnal, 44(1), 83―110. https://doi.org/10.24028/gzh.v44i1.253712 (in Ukrainian).
Nikolaev, I.Y., Kushnir, A.M., Ilyenko, V.A., & Nikolaev, Y.I. (2019). Electromagnetic studies of the western part of the Ukrainian Shield. Geofizicheskiy Zhurnal, 41(3), 120―133. https://doi.org/10.24028/gzh.0203-3100.v41i3.2019.172433 (in Ukrainian).
Pristay, A.N., Pronenko, V.A., Korepanov, V.E., & Ladanivskiy, B.T. (2014). Role of electrical measurements at deep magnetotelluric sounding of the Earth. Geofizicheskiy Zhurnal, 36(6), 173―182. https://doi.org/10.24028/gzh.0203-3100.v36i6.2014.111062 (in Russian).
Starostenko, V.I., Gintov, O.B., & Kutas, R.I. (2011). Geodynamic development of the lithosphere of Ukraine and its role in the formation and location of mineral deposits. Geofizicheskiy Zhurnal, 33(3), 3―22. https://doi.org/10.24028/gzh.0203-3100.v33i3.2011.116919 (in Russian).
Syomka, V.O. (2012). Genetic types of Mo and W metasomatites of Ukrainian shield. Geochemistry and Ore Formation, (31-32), 38—46. https://doi.org/10.15407/gof.2012.31.038 (in Ukrainian).
Tectonic map of Ukraine. Scale 1:1000000. Part II. Tectonics of the foundation of the Ukrainian seam. Scale 1:2 000000. Explanatory note. (2007). Kyiv: Ministry of Environmental Protection of Ukraine, State Geological Service, Ukrainian State Geological Exploration Institute, Ivan Franko Lviv National University (in Ukrainian).
Usenko, O.V. (2024). Thermodynamic conditions of granitization and metamorphism of rocks in the northwestern part of the Ukrainian shield. Geofizicheskiy Zhurnal, 46(2), 34―52. https://doi.org/10.24028/gj.v46i2.294984 (in Ukrainian).
Sheremet, E.M., Krivdik, S.G., & Burakho¬vych, T.K. (2013). Criteria for ore exploration in the subduction areas of the Ukrainian Shield. Saarbruken, Germany. LAPLAMBERT Academic Publ., 418 p. (in Russian).
Adetunji, A.Q., Ferguson, I.J., & Jones, A.G. (2015). Imaging the mantle lithosphere of the Precambrian Grenville Province: large-scale electrical resistivity structures. Geophysical Journal International, 201(2), 1040—1061. https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggv060.
Berdichevsky, M.N., & Dmitriev, V.I. (2008). Models and Methods of Magnetotellurics. Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, 563 p.
Chen, C.W., Rondenay, S., Evans, R.L., & Snyder, D.B. (2009). Geophysical detection of relict metasomatism from an Archean (~3.5 Ga) subduction zone. Science, 326, 1089—1091. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1178477.
Curtis, S., & Thiel, S. (2019). Identifying lithospheric boundaries using magnetotellurics and Nd isotope geochemistry: An example from the Gawler Craton, Australia. Precambrian Research, 320, 403—423. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.precamres.2018.11.013.
Faiola, A., & Bennett, D. (2022). In the Ukraine war, a battle for the nation’s mineral and energy wealth. Washington Post. August 10, 2022. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/08/10/ukraine-russia-energy-mineral-wealth/.
Mackie, R.L., & Booker, J. (1999). Documentation for mtd3fwd and d3-to-mt. GSY-USAInc., 2261 Market St., Suite 643, San Francisco, CA 94114.
Neska, A. (2016). Conductivity Anomalies in Central Europe. Surveys in Geophysics, 37, 5—26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10712-015-9349-8.
Spratt, J.E., Jones, A.G., Jackson, V.A., Collins, L., & Avdeeva, A. (2009). Lithospheric geometry of the Wopmay orogen from a Slave craton to Bear Province magnetotelluric transect. Jour-¬nal of Geophysical Research, 114, B01101. https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JB005326.
Unsworth, M.J., & Rondenay, S. (2012). Mapping the distribution of fluids in the crust and lithospheric mantle utilizing geophysical methods. In D.E. Harlov, H. Austrheim (Eds.), Metasomatism and the Chemical Transformation of Rock (pp. 535―598). Berlin: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-28394-9_13.
Wang, E., Unsworth, M., & Chacko, T. (2017). Geoelectric structure of the Great Slave Lake shear zone in northwest Alberta: implications for structure and tectonic history. Canadian Jour¬-
nal of Earth Sciences, 55(3), 295—307. https:// doi.org/10.1139/cjes-2017-0067.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Tatiana Burakhovych, Volodymyr, Anton
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
