A comparison between karst development in two main zones of Iran: case study—Keyno anticline (Zagros Range) and Shotori anticline (Central Iran)

This study focuses on the karstic groundwater of two main zones of Iran: Keyno anticline (Zagros Range) and Shotori Mountains (Central Iran). Mean annual precipitation of these areas is 1100 and 150 mm, respectively. The major carbonate rocks of Shotori Mountains consist of the Permian Jamal formati...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Arabian journal of geosciences 2015-12, Vol.8 (12), p.10833-10844
Hauptverfasser: Chitsazan, Manouchehr, Karimi Vardanjani, Hossein, Karimi, Haji, Charchi, Abbas
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 10844
container_issue 12
container_start_page 10833
container_title Arabian journal of geosciences
container_volume 8
creator Chitsazan, Manouchehr
Karimi Vardanjani, Hossein
Karimi, Haji
Charchi, Abbas
description This study focuses on the karstic groundwater of two main zones of Iran: Keyno anticline (Zagros Range) and Shotori Mountains (Central Iran). Mean annual precipitation of these areas is 1100 and 150 mm, respectively. The major carbonate rocks of Shotori Mountains consist of the Permian Jamal formation limestones, the middle Triassic Shotori formation dolomites, and middle to upper Jurassic Esfandiar formation grey limestones. Results of isotope analysis demonstrated that samples do not show serious evaporation effect and rain directly infiltrates into aquifers. By analyzing the hydrographs of karst springs, it is revealed that the contribution of quick flow is less than 33 % in all of them. Relatively stable discharge and electrical conductivity, low recession coefficients, and high base flow component imply a diffuse system in related aquifers. According to these studies, it seems that there is no developed karst system in Shotori Mountains, and some large voids observed in well logs can be attributed to the paleoclimate. Because of the complexity in structure and very low precipitation, the Shotori Mountains have many differences compared to other karstic area of Iran, such as the Zagros belt. Geomorphology studies show obvious differences between karstic features in this area and typical karstic area. There are not any advanced morphological karst features such as poljes and sinkholes and other typical features (rill karren, runnel karren, etc.) replace with vespiary features, microspitz karren, and similar features. Purity of limestone in Shotori Mountains is the same as Zagros, and then the main reason for morphological differences can be attributed to the lower precipitation in Shotori area. On the other hand, the main controlling factor in valley generation in this area is tectonic (faults and rejuvenation); therefore, there are no real karstic valleys.
doi_str_mv 10.1007/s12517-015-1961-x
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1798739384</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1798739384</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-a414t-330458d9034ff84503e6af2a62962e2fbf6e62e06d53bd056d80dbf62d86abc33</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9UMtOwzAQjBBIlMIHcPOxPQTsOHEcbqjiUVEJiceFi-XGm5KS2MV2acuJb0B8IV-CSxHixGlHuzOzmomiQ4KPCMb5sSNJRvIYkywmBSPxcivqEM5YnGeUb_9iQnajPeemGDOOc96J3k9RadqZtLUzGo3BLwA0epLWeaTgBRoza0F7VGvkFwa1MoBXo8EhU6GhlfoEldIBcn6uVp9vH1ew0gZJ7euyqTWg3oOcWOPQjdQT6IeDQrePxhtb_yUNwgsrm2_D_n60U8nGwcHP7Eb352d3g8t4dH0xHJyOYpmS1MeU4jTjqsA0rSqeZpgCk1UiWVKwBJJqXDEIADOV0bHCGVMcq7BMFGdyXFLajXob35k1z3NwXrS1K6FppAYzd4LkBc9pQXkaqGRDLUMWZ6ESM1u30q4EwWLdv9j0L0L_Yt2_WAZNstG4wA3hrZiaudUh0T-iLxRZi5E</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1798739384</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>A comparison between karst development in two main zones of Iran: case study—Keyno anticline (Zagros Range) and Shotori anticline (Central Iran)</title><source>SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings</source><creator>Chitsazan, Manouchehr ; Karimi Vardanjani, Hossein ; Karimi, Haji ; Charchi, Abbas</creator><creatorcontrib>Chitsazan, Manouchehr ; Karimi Vardanjani, Hossein ; Karimi, Haji ; Charchi, Abbas</creatorcontrib><description>This study focuses on the karstic groundwater of two main zones of Iran: Keyno anticline (Zagros Range) and Shotori Mountains (Central Iran). Mean annual precipitation of these areas is 1100 and 150 mm, respectively. The major carbonate rocks of Shotori Mountains consist of the Permian Jamal formation limestones, the middle Triassic Shotori formation dolomites, and middle to upper Jurassic Esfandiar formation grey limestones. Results of isotope analysis demonstrated that samples do not show serious evaporation effect and rain directly infiltrates into aquifers. By analyzing the hydrographs of karst springs, it is revealed that the contribution of quick flow is less than 33 % in all of them. Relatively stable discharge and electrical conductivity, low recession coefficients, and high base flow component imply a diffuse system in related aquifers. According to these studies, it seems that there is no developed karst system in Shotori Mountains, and some large voids observed in well logs can be attributed to the paleoclimate. Because of the complexity in structure and very low precipitation, the Shotori Mountains have many differences compared to other karstic area of Iran, such as the Zagros belt. Geomorphology studies show obvious differences between karstic features in this area and typical karstic area. There are not any advanced morphological karst features such as poljes and sinkholes and other typical features (rill karren, runnel karren, etc.) replace with vespiary features, microspitz karren, and similar features. Purity of limestone in Shotori Mountains is the same as Zagros, and then the main reason for morphological differences can be attributed to the lower precipitation in Shotori area. On the other hand, the main controlling factor in valley generation in this area is tectonic (faults and rejuvenation); therefore, there are no real karstic valleys.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1866-7511</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1866-7538</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s12517-015-1961-x</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg</publisher><subject>Earth and Environmental Science ; Earth Sciences ; Original Paper</subject><ispartof>Arabian journal of geosciences, 2015-12, Vol.8 (12), p.10833-10844</ispartof><rights>Saudi Society for Geosciences 2015</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-a414t-330458d9034ff84503e6af2a62962e2fbf6e62e06d53bd056d80dbf62d86abc33</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-a414t-330458d9034ff84503e6af2a62962e2fbf6e62e06d53bd056d80dbf62d86abc33</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s12517-015-1961-x$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s12517-015-1961-x$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925,41488,42557,51319</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Chitsazan, Manouchehr</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Karimi Vardanjani, Hossein</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Karimi, Haji</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Charchi, Abbas</creatorcontrib><title>A comparison between karst development in two main zones of Iran: case study—Keyno anticline (Zagros Range) and Shotori anticline (Central Iran)</title><title>Arabian journal of geosciences</title><addtitle>Arab J Geosci</addtitle><description>This study focuses on the karstic groundwater of two main zones of Iran: Keyno anticline (Zagros Range) and Shotori Mountains (Central Iran). Mean annual precipitation of these areas is 1100 and 150 mm, respectively. The major carbonate rocks of Shotori Mountains consist of the Permian Jamal formation limestones, the middle Triassic Shotori formation dolomites, and middle to upper Jurassic Esfandiar formation grey limestones. Results of isotope analysis demonstrated that samples do not show serious evaporation effect and rain directly infiltrates into aquifers. By analyzing the hydrographs of karst springs, it is revealed that the contribution of quick flow is less than 33 % in all of them. Relatively stable discharge and electrical conductivity, low recession coefficients, and high base flow component imply a diffuse system in related aquifers. According to these studies, it seems that there is no developed karst system in Shotori Mountains, and some large voids observed in well logs can be attributed to the paleoclimate. Because of the complexity in structure and very low precipitation, the Shotori Mountains have many differences compared to other karstic area of Iran, such as the Zagros belt. Geomorphology studies show obvious differences between karstic features in this area and typical karstic area. There are not any advanced morphological karst features such as poljes and sinkholes and other typical features (rill karren, runnel karren, etc.) replace with vespiary features, microspitz karren, and similar features. Purity of limestone in Shotori Mountains is the same as Zagros, and then the main reason for morphological differences can be attributed to the lower precipitation in Shotori area. On the other hand, the main controlling factor in valley generation in this area is tectonic (faults and rejuvenation); therefore, there are no real karstic valleys.</description><subject>Earth and Environmental Science</subject><subject>Earth Sciences</subject><subject>Original Paper</subject><issn>1866-7511</issn><issn>1866-7538</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2015</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9UMtOwzAQjBBIlMIHcPOxPQTsOHEcbqjiUVEJiceFi-XGm5KS2MV2acuJb0B8IV-CSxHixGlHuzOzmomiQ4KPCMb5sSNJRvIYkywmBSPxcivqEM5YnGeUb_9iQnajPeemGDOOc96J3k9RadqZtLUzGo3BLwA0epLWeaTgBRoza0F7VGvkFwa1MoBXo8EhU6GhlfoEldIBcn6uVp9vH1ew0gZJ7euyqTWg3oOcWOPQjdQT6IeDQrePxhtb_yUNwgsrm2_D_n60U8nGwcHP7Eb352d3g8t4dH0xHJyOYpmS1MeU4jTjqsA0rSqeZpgCk1UiWVKwBJJqXDEIADOV0bHCGVMcq7BMFGdyXFLajXob35k1z3NwXrS1K6FppAYzd4LkBc9pQXkaqGRDLUMWZ6ESM1u30q4EwWLdv9j0L0L_Yt2_WAZNstG4wA3hrZiaudUh0T-iLxRZi5E</recordid><startdate>20151201</startdate><enddate>20151201</enddate><creator>Chitsazan, Manouchehr</creator><creator>Karimi Vardanjani, Hossein</creator><creator>Karimi, Haji</creator><creator>Charchi, Abbas</creator><general>Springer Berlin Heidelberg</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7UA</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>H96</scope><scope>L.G</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20151201</creationdate><title>A comparison between karst development in two main zones of Iran: case study—Keyno anticline (Zagros Range) and Shotori anticline (Central Iran)</title><author>Chitsazan, Manouchehr ; Karimi Vardanjani, Hossein ; Karimi, Haji ; Charchi, Abbas</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a414t-330458d9034ff84503e6af2a62962e2fbf6e62e06d53bd056d80dbf62d86abc33</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2015</creationdate><topic>Earth and Environmental Science</topic><topic>Earth Sciences</topic><topic>Original Paper</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Chitsazan, Manouchehr</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Karimi Vardanjani, Hossein</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Karimi, Haji</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Charchi, Abbas</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Water Resources Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 2: Ocean Technology, Policy &amp; Non-Living Resources</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><jtitle>Arabian journal of geosciences</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Chitsazan, Manouchehr</au><au>Karimi Vardanjani, Hossein</au><au>Karimi, Haji</au><au>Charchi, Abbas</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>A comparison between karst development in two main zones of Iran: case study—Keyno anticline (Zagros Range) and Shotori anticline (Central Iran)</atitle><jtitle>Arabian journal of geosciences</jtitle><stitle>Arab J Geosci</stitle><date>2015-12-01</date><risdate>2015</risdate><volume>8</volume><issue>12</issue><spage>10833</spage><epage>10844</epage><pages>10833-10844</pages><issn>1866-7511</issn><eissn>1866-7538</eissn><abstract>This study focuses on the karstic groundwater of two main zones of Iran: Keyno anticline (Zagros Range) and Shotori Mountains (Central Iran). Mean annual precipitation of these areas is 1100 and 150 mm, respectively. The major carbonate rocks of Shotori Mountains consist of the Permian Jamal formation limestones, the middle Triassic Shotori formation dolomites, and middle to upper Jurassic Esfandiar formation grey limestones. Results of isotope analysis demonstrated that samples do not show serious evaporation effect and rain directly infiltrates into aquifers. By analyzing the hydrographs of karst springs, it is revealed that the contribution of quick flow is less than 33 % in all of them. Relatively stable discharge and electrical conductivity, low recession coefficients, and high base flow component imply a diffuse system in related aquifers. According to these studies, it seems that there is no developed karst system in Shotori Mountains, and some large voids observed in well logs can be attributed to the paleoclimate. Because of the complexity in structure and very low precipitation, the Shotori Mountains have many differences compared to other karstic area of Iran, such as the Zagros belt. Geomorphology studies show obvious differences between karstic features in this area and typical karstic area. There are not any advanced morphological karst features such as poljes and sinkholes and other typical features (rill karren, runnel karren, etc.) replace with vespiary features, microspitz karren, and similar features. Purity of limestone in Shotori Mountains is the same as Zagros, and then the main reason for morphological differences can be attributed to the lower precipitation in Shotori area. On the other hand, the main controlling factor in valley generation in this area is tectonic (faults and rejuvenation); therefore, there are no real karstic valleys.</abstract><cop>Berlin/Heidelberg</cop><pub>Springer Berlin Heidelberg</pub><doi>10.1007/s12517-015-1961-x</doi><tpages>12</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1866-7511
ispartof Arabian journal of geosciences, 2015-12, Vol.8 (12), p.10833-10844
issn 1866-7511
1866-7538
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1798739384
source SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings
subjects Earth and Environmental Science
Earth Sciences
Original Paper
title A comparison between karst development in two main zones of Iran: case study—Keyno anticline (Zagros Range) and Shotori anticline (Central Iran)
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-06T19%3A46%3A26IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=A%20comparison%20between%20karst%20development%20in%20two%20main%20zones%20of%20Iran:%20case%20study%E2%80%94Keyno%20anticline%20(Zagros%20Range)%20and%20Shotori%20anticline%20(Central%20Iran)&rft.jtitle=Arabian%20journal%20of%20geosciences&rft.au=Chitsazan,%20Manouchehr&rft.date=2015-12-01&rft.volume=8&rft.issue=12&rft.spage=10833&rft.epage=10844&rft.pages=10833-10844&rft.issn=1866-7511&rft.eissn=1866-7538&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s12517-015-1961-x&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1798739384%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1798739384&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true