Deep seismic structure of the Earth's crust along the Baltic Sea profile

Estimates of current Icelandic stress tensors from the inversion of microearthquake fault plane solutions

“…A preliminary model indicates a thickening of the crust underneath the fault zones in the southern part of the South Svecofennian Subprovince, just north of the Transscandinavian Igneous Belt, with the Moho depth reaching about 50 km. This deepening of the Moho agrees with earlier presented models from the Fennolora line (Lund 1990;Guggisberg et al 1991) and results from the Baltic Sea profile (Ostrovsky et al 1993). The Moho depression indicates a NW-SE trending tectonic zone for which the surface expression might be the different fault zones reported from this area in southeastern Sweden.…”

The BERSERC project, phase one: A tectonic model of southwestern Sweden, Skagerrak and southern Norway based on crustal seismics

“…A preliminary model indicates a thickening of the crust underneath the fault zones in the southern part of the South Svecofennian Subprovince, just north of the Transscandinavian Igneous Belt, with the Moho depth reaching about 50 km. This deepening of the Moho agrees with earlier presented models from the Fennolora line (Lund 1990;Guggisberg et al 1991) and results from the Baltic Sea profile (Ostrovsky et al 1993 The project BERSERC (Balticas Evolution Revealed by Seismic Experiments on a Reflecting Crust) aims to display a three-dimensional image of the crust of SW Sweden. This will mainly be done by means of seismic investigations and existing geophysical and geological data.…”

Gravity-derived Moho map for Latvia

“…Refraction profiles were digitized by hand and afterwards sampled in 2 km intervals to match the spatial resolution of the models. The multiple refraction seismic studies of the area were conducted in a period of two decades -from 1984 to 2000 (Sadov & Penzina 1986;Ostrovsky et al 1994;Bogdanova et al 2006;Grad et al 2006), resulting in various measurement and interpretation methodologies and precision. To take this into account, we used the Moho uncertainty map provided by Grad et al (2009) as a guideline to assign weight to each refraction seismic profile.…”

“…First, there are digitalization errors. All the seismic survey data were georeferenced manually and digitized from figures in various publications (Sadov & Penzina 1986;Ostrovsky et al 1994;Bogdanova et al 2006;Grad et al 2006), which inevitably leads to a digitalization error. Such errors could significantly affect smallscale data, but we believe that the effect on large scale models, such as the Moho, is minor.…”

“…Fig.4. A, refraction seismic surveys and their respective calculated Moho interface depths in the vicinity of Latvia (digitized fromSadov & Penzina 1986;Ostrovsky et al 1994;Bogdanova et al 2006;Grad et al 2006); B, Moho depth, calculated from the gravity measurements using iterative modelling (the present work); C, subset of the European Moho depth map fromGrad et al (2009); D, difference between the calculated Moho depth and the European Moho depth map fromGrad et al (2009) shown in Fig.4C.…”