Environmental Science and Pollution Research (2020) 27:22486–22498

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-08738-9

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Electrical resistivity imaging for detection of hydrogeological active

zones in karst areas to identify the site of mining waste disposal
Mosaad Ali Hussein Ali 1,2 & Shulin Sun 1 & Wei Qian 1 & Bohari Abdou Dodo 1

Received: 17 December 2019 / Accepted: 2 April 2020 / Published online: 21 April 2020
# Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2020

Abstract
Hydrogeological active zones found in mine waste (tailings) dumping sites are a major source of concern that threatens the safety
of the environment and groundwater, especially in karstic areas. Therefore, detecting and identifying these regions correctly will
help in selecting the appropriate sites for tailings disposal and avoid consequential environmental problems. In this study,
electrical resistivity imaging (ERI) surveys with high-resolution data were carried out to detect hydrogeological active zones
in an area proposed as a settling pond for mining tailings accumulated from El Mochito mine property, located in the north-
western section of Honduras. Two-dimensional (2-D) inversion results of thirty-four survey lines revealed several zones of low
resistivity. These zones indicate water-/clay-bearing regions that are structurally weak. However, some survey lines, the limestone
beneath the surface is entirely compacted; as such, it is considered to be an ideal site for tailings pond construction. In addition, on
the eastern side of the valley, there is a large chunk limestone layer that is compacted and can be considered for tailings pond
construction. The ERI method provided insight and developed an informative subsurface map to detect the hydrogeological
active zones, thus proving it as a beneficial tool used for selecting disposal sites for mining tailings in karstic areas.

Keywords Karst areas . Mining tailings disposal . Resistivity survey . Inversion

Introduction
Karstic regions are characterized by a certain type of for-
mation formed in carbonate and evaporative rocks, mainly
by dissolution processes, which usually create
hydrogeological active zones (e.g. voids and fractured
zones) (Han and Liu 2004; Chalikakis et al. 2011;
Garcia and Grohmann 2019; Milanović et al. 2019). The
structure of karstic systems is highly complex, and the
mechanism of the relevant zones can be very heteroge-
neous (White 2007; Ford and Williams 2013; Cardona
et al. 2018; Li et al. 2018; Morales et al. 2018; Rusjan
Responsible editor: Philippe Garrigues
* Mosaad Ali Hussein Ali
mossad_ali2000@aun.edu.eg
1
School of Earth Science and Engineering, Hohai University,
Nanjing, People’s Republic of China
2
Department of Mining and Metallurgy Engineering, Faculty of
Engineering, Assiut University, Assiut, Egypt
et al. 2019). Thus, the karstic system is one of the chal-
lenges and obstacles to the selection of waste disposal
sites (Bengtsson et al. 1994; Matias et al. 1994; Gogu
and Dassargues 2000; Foster et al. 2002; Bakalowicz
2005; Chambers et al. 2006; Gao et al. 2019). Where,
mining tailings (waste) disposal sites can have a signifi-
cant impact on environmental and groundwater contami-
nation and should be properly planned and monitored es-
pecially in these karstic regions (Milanovic 2002; Calo
and Parise 2009). Detecting and identifying these regions
correctly will help in selecting the appropriate sites of
tailings disposal.
Traditional techniques for detecting fractures and
karst areas, such as drilling samples, are impeded by
complex geological structures, asymmetric spatial distri-
bution, and variable sizes of topographic characteristics
(Ortoleva 2002; Slob et al. 2010). Moreover, these tech-
niques are a relatively high cost. Electrical resistivity
imaging (ERI) method is currently a well-established
and useful tool for detecting fractures and karstic areas
with low resistivity values due to its sensitivity to low-
resistive materials such as water and clay (Dobrin and
Savit 1960; Zhou et al. 2001, 2002; Storz et al. 2000;

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Environ Sci Pollut Res (2020) 27:22486–22498 22487

Fig. 1 A simplified sequence of mining operations

Zhou et al. 2000; Caputo et al. 2003; Binley and
Kemna 2005; Oldenborger et al. 2005; Drahor et al.
2006; Sudha et al. 2009; Cardarelli et al. 2010; Eissa
et al. 2019). The ERI is a relatively low-cost, rapid,
non-invasive, simple, and routinely applied method of
producing spatial models based on the contrast of the
subsurface geoelectrical properties (Cushing et al. 2008;
Georgaki et al. 2008). This method has been used in
many applications and has proven to be extremely use-
ful in several fields, for instance, environmental issues,
hydrological engineering, minerals exploration, and geo-
technical engineering studies (Leney 1966; Maillot and
Sumner 1966; Schwartz and McClymont 1977; Urish
1983; Kemna et al. 2000; Ahmed and Sulaiman 2001;
Slater and Lesmes 2002; Soupios et al. 2007; Frid et al.
2008; Greve et al. 2011; Kumar et al. 2019). However,
there is a dearth of published studies on ERI applica-
tions in environmental mining assessment, particularly
in the selection of a suitable site for mining tailings
disposal pond.

Fig. 2 A map showing Honduras border (red colour) and the location of El Mochito property (yellow star) (Éric et al. 2018)

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

22488
Fig. 3 A simplified stratigraphic
column for the Mochito mine
property (Éric et al. 2018)
The study area is El Mochito mine property, north-western
Honduras. This property consists of underground mines of
sulphide deposit (lead-zinc-silver) and the concentrator to ob-
tain the concentrate (lead and zinc) and tailings (a dense fluid
bearing uneconomic materials blended with a flotation solu-
tion). In the ore process plant, vast quantities of flotation tail-
ings are producing, reach the equivalent of 3000 t/d, pumped
to tailings storage facilities (TSF) via around 4.5-km tailings
pipeline from the processing plant (Éric et al. 2018). The mine
has created three TSFs (Éric et al. 2018). Tailings disposed to
the TSF are almost free from chemicals detrimental to the
environment and contain only suspended solids. Also, the
cyanide is used to depressing the Zn in the Pb flotation step
during the flotation process but is damaged in tailings before
Table 1 A general resistivity range of some subsurface materials in the
property (Keller and Frischknecht 1966; Telford et al. 1990)
Resistivity (Ω-m) Materials
1–100 Clay
10–100 Alluvium
10–1000 Fresh groundwater
60–1000 Sand
70–5000 Limestone
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
Environ Sci Pollut Res (2020) 27:22486–22498
disposal. Once the tailings are pumped into the pond, the
solids settle to the bottom of the pond, then the excess clean
water is drained into the environment,as stated in the
Environmental Impact Assessment and operating permit
(Éric et al. 2018). Figure 1 illustrates a simplified scenario of
these operations (Ault 2004).
This study aims to map the subsurface environment for
detailed resistivity in an area of approximately 1 km
*500 m, in an attempt to detect and map the hydrogeological
active zones (karst structures) in the area that is planned to be
tailings disposal pond (dam and pit) at El Mochito mine prop-
erty, north-western Honduras. In this study, the Wenner-Alpha
array system of the multi-electrode ERI surface was per-
formed using a high-resolution resistivity data survey to help
determine the location of the pond for dumping mining tail-
ings in the El Mochito mine property. This paper is divided
into four major sections. The location and geological setting of
the study area are described in Section 2. In Section 3, we
presented a methodology for collecting and analysing resistiv-
ity datasets for thirty-four survey lines. The results and inter-
pretation of the ERI 2-D inversion lines are given in Section 4.
The ERI method provided insight and developed an informa-
tive subsurface map to detect the hydrogeological active
zones, thus proving it as a beneficial tool used for selecting
disposal sites for mining tailings in karstic areas.
Environ Sci Pollut Res (2020) 27:22486–22498 22489

Fig. 4 Location map of the surface lines survey

Site description Valley), western Honduras as shown in Fig. 2, from which

the “Upper Jurassic” to “Quaternary” units determine the
The El Mochito mine property is located at (Lat, Lon = outcropping stratigraphy extent (Finch 1981; Samson
14.869, − 88.078) the southwest of the Sula graben (Sula et al. 2008). The mine property is hosted in an

Fig. 5 The EarthProbe survey

system components

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

22490 Environ Sci Pollut Res (2020) 27:22486–22498

Table 2 Specifications of the EarthProbe system

Survey item Specifications

Survey type DC resistivity

Geophysical system EarthProbe, DCIP system (RESECSS II)
Data type Full-waveform, 256 ms on-time and 256 ms off-time, castle waveform
Survey configuration Surface DCIP: Wenner-Alpha array
Voltage input The system uses 12 V DC, and it has a transformer inside to convert 12 V into 24 V to 800 V
Electrode spacing 2.3 m

Table 3 Criteria for verification of QA/QC data during the survey

Survey item QA/QC survey Acceptable threshold

Waveform The current and voltage waveforms must be a “castle shape”; also, 0.9
the current and voltage time-series correlation must be above a specified threshold
Injection current The injected current has to be within a specified range Above 1 mA
Measured voltage The measured voltage has to be within a specified range 5–10,000 mV
Stacked voltages The standard deviation of processed (stacked) voltage dataset must be below a determined threshold 5%
Self-potential The self-potential system must be below a determined threshold 100 mV

approximately 6000-m-thick sedimentary basin of the
“Mesozoic” sediments that cross the country in a nearly
east-west direction (Gose and Finch 1992). These strati-
fied series are underlain by “Palaeozoic” metamorphic
rocks and overlain by “Tertiary” volcanic rocks; Fig. 3
shows the simplified stratigraphic description of the mine
property (Gose and Finch 1992). Table 1 shows the nor-
mal and general range of the geoelectrical properties of
stratifie d m aterials in the p roperty (Keller a nd
Frischknecht 1966; Telford et al. 1990).

Fig. 6 Example of the apparent resistivity survey line pseudo-section for line 12

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Environ Sci Pollut Res (2020) 27:22486–22498
Fig. 7 The 2-D inversion result of resistivity for lines 1–6
Materials and methods
To delineate and map karst structures in the area planned to be
a pond for mining tailings disposal, we carried out the
geoelectrical survey on thirty-four lines on the surface spaced
20 m apart, covering an area approximately 1 km * 500 m, see
Fig. 4. The base electrode separation “a-spacing” was 2.3 m.
The GPS data of each electrode of the survey lines was mea-
sured by the total station, to take into account a topographic
effect on the inversion processes. Due to the location of the
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
22491
pond in the valley (ravine), this is why we chose the direction
of the survey lines perpendicular to its axis.
The resistivity datasets were collected by deploying the
EarthProbe system multi-electrode cables. EarthProbe is a
high-resolution DC (direct current) resistivity and induced po-
larization logging and tomography survey system in Fig. 5
(Qian 2007). The system can be configured to collect high-
resolution surface and borehole DC resistivity and induced
polarization data. For this survey, the resistivity data were
collected using the high-resolution a 2-D surface DC
22492
Fig. 8 The 2-D inversion result of resistivity for lines 7–12
surveying technique (Loke et al. 2013). Only voltage and
current were measured, resulting in a calculation of apparent
resistivity. In this study, conventional electrode nomenclature
is used, whereby “A” denotes the positive current electrode,
“B” the negative current electrode, “M” the positive potential
electrode, and “N” the negative potential electrode. This ac-
quisition system allows measurements with a high precision
of 0.25 μV (Qian et al. 2007). A summary of the system and
survey specifications can be found in Table 2.
To achieve a better lateral resolution, the Wenner-
Alpha array was applied to get the apparent resistivity
pseudo-sections and their resistivity inversion sections.
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
Environ Sci Pollut Res (2020) 27:22486–22498
Stainless steel stakes were used for current electrodes
(A-B) as well as for the potential electrodes (M-N). In
this array, A-M-N-B is equally spaced, and for each read-
ing, the “a-spacing” between all electrodes is incremented
by one. Apparent resistivity (ρa) is calculated from the
primary voltage and transmitted current using geometrical
factors (K) based on the Wenner-Alpha array geometry
(Telford et al. 1990). Because these data were collected
in steep topography, we only used resistances (voltage
divided by current) for our data. However, data are
displayed in ρa using standard Wenner-Alpha array geo-
metrical factor derived for a flat air-earth interface.
Environ Sci Pollut Res (2020) 27:22486–22498
Fig. 9 The 2-D inversion result of resistivity for lines 13–18
Dipole-dipole data in resistivity has an optimum resolution
for shallow lateral features, but the data quality is always a
problem unless a substantial amount of time is willing to be
spent in the field. Moreover, dipole-dipole also is a better array
for this application if good data quality can be achieved.
However, through our experiments in the field, we found that
dipole-dipole data quality is poor, and we have limited field
time to collect both dipole-dipole and Wenner data. In consid-
eration that our first objective is the cavity existence and lo-
cation, we decided that only Wenner data are collected. Since
Wenner array provides good quality, stable data, it can be
better fitted in inversions. An example from previous works
that demonstrated that Wenner array is superior to dipole-
dipole array in such case can be found in Gélis et al. 2010
and Neyamadpour et al. 2010. However, integration with oth-
er methods, like seismic, always increases the resolution and
reduces the ambiguity. The dilemma is the increased costs
with marginal returns. Shallow engineering boreholes are of-
ten inexpensive in comparison with the seismic method in
steep topography. Furthermore, this resistivity survey pro-
vides a baseline for resistivity tailing pond monitoring later
on.
To ensure reliability and maintain the required quality level
in the measured data, the survey was conducted in accordance
with quality assurance (QA) and quality control (QC). Several
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
22493
QA/QC standard criteria have been implemented throughout
the survey to evaluate the quality of the measured datasets.
Acceptable thresholds have been confirmed by the operator in
accordance with industry-accepted practices and site-specific
conditions. Table 3 shows the QA/QC criteria applied to this
survey.
Figure 6 depicts an example of surface pseudo-section gen-
erated for this survey. The data are presented from west to east
along the x-axis, with the midpoint calculated based on the
electrode location. The depth below the surface has been ap-
proximated based on the application of the formula (AB/3)
whereby AB is the distance between the current electrodes
(m) (Telford et al. 1990; Heng et al. 2016). This assumption
is typically used as a rule-of-thumb for the Wenner-Alpha
array. The depth below the surface has been corrected to ele-
vation and plotted as pseudo-elevation along the y-axis. True
depth of responses, however, will be dependent upon the re-
sistivity of the media and can only be determined with reason-
able accuracy by undertaking a 2-D or 3-D inversion, as
applicable.
For analysing and inversion the data of each line, we used
the DCIP2D inversion algorism developed by the UBC
“University of British Columbia” and based on the proposal
of Oldenburg et al. 1993; Oldenburg and Li 1994; and Li and
Oldenburg 2000. DCIP2D is a geoelectrical inverse modelling
22494
Fig. 10 The 2-D inversion result of resistivity for lines 19–24
software that estimates the resistivity and/or chargeability dis-
tribution in the underground based on a numerical solution
into an overparameterized and constrained optimization prob-
lem. This problem is intrinsically nonlinear and requires iter-
ative solutions, in addition to some forms of the regularization
to stabilize the final solution and provide a model that is real-
istic in a geologic sense. The DCIP2D modelling system uses
the finite-difference approach to the governing differential
equations. For more details of the DCIP2D, inversion can be
located in Oldenburg et al. 1993.
For data misfit, the RMS error describes the data misfit
between measured apparent resistivity datasets and the for-
ward modelling calculations. Therefore, they are diverse from
each other, however, not completely independent.
Theoretically, the RMS error would be ideal if it was close
to zero. But practically not like that, where, e.g., Hauck and
Kneisel 2008 and Kim et al. 2013 illustrated that a proper
RMS error has to be close to the field dataset error and not
be zero since quite low RMS is indicative of datasets over-
fitting and could be misleading about a real model. Due to the
steep topography and 3-D nature of the cavities in the study
area, the 2-D inversion data misfit is high in comparison with
traditional 2-D resistivity inversions. However, we believe
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
Environ Sci Pollut Res (2020) 27:22486–22498
that the cavities indicated in the data are adequately reflected
in the 2-D inversion results, although their depths and shapes
are probably estimated with large errors. In the evaluation of
the results, we only trust the existences and lateral locations of
the cavities found. Moreover, there are some cases in the lit-
erature indicating that the acceptable ERI with a high RMS
error was 54%, but this is normal due to the high contrast in
the measured resistivity values (Martinez et al. 2009).
Therefore, the misfit data limits depend largely on the nature
of the measured data.
Results and discussion
Depending on the geological evidence and prior research car-
ried out at the El Mochito mine property, these studies re-
vealed a heavily jointed (voids) limestone, and karstic cavities
were seen in underground tunnels and borehole samples
(Finch 1981; Cunningham 1984; Bundschuh and Alvarado
2012; Éric et al. 2018). The tunnels are around 80 m beneath
the ground surface, and borehole samples indicate the pres-
ence of very weathered limestone, limestone remaining soil
overlying deeply fractured and karstified limestone bedrocks.
Environ Sci Pollut Res (2020) 27:22486–22498
Fig. 11 The 2-D inversion result of resistivity for lines 25–30
The residual soils consist of medium dense sands and gravels
with a thickness of up to 10 m underlying a few meters of soft
clayey soil. The residual soils consist of medium dense sands
and gravels with a thickness of up to 10 m underlying a few
meters of soft clayey soil. Many voids were found in borehole
samples at depth within the rock; these voids were partly filled
with clay, which may indicate water movement (Cunningham
1984; Gutiérrez et al. 2014; Éric et al. 2018).
Due to the study area in the north of Honduras near to the
Caribbean Sea coast, exposed directly to the trade winds, it is
very rainy during the year, with a total of 2800/3000 mm per
year https://www.climatestotravel.com/climate/honduras. In
addition, the terrain of the area is the basin form; as shown
in Fig. 6, this leads to a gathering of rains, muds, and crumbs
resulting from rains erosion process. Accordingly, the
possibility of the presence of empty cavities in the study
area is weak. In general, this site is characterized by highly
weathered limestone, fractured zones, and voids filled with
water/clay, which are called hydrogeological active zones,
and have low resistivity properties.
Figure 7 shows the inverted sections from lines 1 to 6.
From the inverted section for line 1, we can see many highly
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
22495
weathered limestone spots at the surface. The valley has a
water-bearing fracture zone that penetrates a relatively com-
pact limestone layer. The surface weathering becomes heavy
underneath line 2. Besides, the crack at the valley became
enlarged underneath line 2. Line 3 shows similar features as
that of line 2. The limestone base underneath line 4 has a lower
resistivity in comparison with that of lines 1–3. This may
reflect that the limestone is more fractured and wet underneath
line 4. Lines 5 and 6 show similar features as that of line 2.
The inverted sections from lines 7 to 12 are shown in Fig. 8.
The limestone underneath line 7 seems very compact, except
that there is a void as denoted. The limestone underneath line
8 seems very compact, except the crack at the valley. Line 9 is
similar to line 7, but the void appears on the east side. A void
and a fractured zone were identified underneath line 10. There
is a compact chunk of limestone underneath line 11. At the
western end of line 11, the limestone seems to have been
compromised with fractures and fluid on the surface. Most
of the limestone beneath line 12 is compact. At the surface,
the limestone is heavily weathered.
Figure 9 shows the inverted sections from lines 13 to 18.
The features of lines 13 to 15 are similar to line 11. The
22496
Fig. 12 The 2-D inversion result of resistivity for lines 31–34
limestone base beneath lines 11–15 at the valley seems to be
the best structure to carry mining tailings. The western side of
the limestone layer started to display fracturing (low resistiv-
ity) below line 16. This pattern lasts from line 16 to 27 as
shown in Fig. 10 and Fig. 11. The eastern side of the limestone
base can be considered to hold tailings pond. From lines 28 to
the end, the limestone beneath these lines is extremely com-
promised of fractures and water as shown in Figs. 11 and 12.
Conclusions
The ERI method can be an important tool in mapping the
hydrogeological zones in karst areas for a great variety of
engineering applications. This study demonstrates that major
water-filled cavities in karst areas can be efficiently mapped
with minimum cost by using the ERI method for tailing pond
site selection. From lines 11–15, the limestone underneath is
compact, thus good for the construction of the tailings pond.
On the east side of the valley below lines 16–27, there is a
large chunk of compact limestone layer, which can be consid-
ered for tailing pond construction as well. Our results are
borehole tested and it proves that the ERI method is the most
cost-effective in this application.
However, integration with other methods, like seismic, al-
ways increases the resolution and reduces the ambiguity. The
dilemma is the increased costs with marginal returns. Shallow
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
Environ Sci Pollut Res (2020) 27:22486–22498
engineering boreholes are often inexpensive in comparison
with the seismic method in steep topography. Furthermore,
this resistivity survey provides a baseline for resistivity tailing
pond monitoring later on.
In the future, we plan to integrate GPR into our toolkit. We
believe that GPR can map the top of the cavity. For the cavity
bottom, 3D inversion of borehole resistivity data might be the
only choice.
Acknowledgments The authors are thankful to the Honduras Mining
Company for permission to publish.
References
Ahmed AM, Sulaiman WN (2001) Evaluation of groundwater and soil
pollution in a landfill area using electrical resistivity imaging survey.
Environ Manag 28:655–663
Ault KM (2004) Sulfur and lead isotope study of the El Mochito Zn-Pb-
Ag deposit. Econ Geol 99:1223–1231
Bakalowicz M (2005) Karst groundwater: a challenge for new resources.
Hydrogeol J 13:148–160
Bengtsson L, Bendz D, Hogland W, Rosqvist H, Åkesson M (1994)
Water balance for landfills of different age. J Hydrol 158:203–217
Binley, A., and A. Kemna, 2005. DC resistivity and induced polarization
methods, in Hydrogeophysics, Springer, 129–156
Bundschuh J, Alvarado GE (2012) Central America, two volume set:
geology, Resources and Hazards. CRC Press
Calo F, Parise M (2009) Waste management and problems of groundwa-
ter pollution in karst environments in the context of a post-conflict
scenario: the case of Mostar (Bosnia Herzegovina). Habitat Int 33:
63–72
Environ Sci Pollut Res (2020) 27:22486–22498
Caputo R, Piscitelli S, Oliveto A, Rizzo E, Lapenna V (2003) The use of
electrical resistivity tomographies in active tectonics: examples from
the Tyrnavos Basin, Greece. J Geodyn 36:19–35
Cardarelli E, Cercato M, Cerreto A, Di Filippo G (2010) Electrical resis-
tivity and seismic refraction tomography to detect buried cavities.
Geophys Prospect 58:685–695
Cardona A, Gutierrez-Ojeda C, Martinez-Morales M, Ortiz-Flores G,
González-Hita L (2018) Hydrogeochemical characterization and
evolution of a regional karst aquifer in the Cuatrociénegas area,
Mexico. Environ Earth Sci 77:785
Chalikakis K, Plagnes V, Guerin R, Valois R, Bosch FP (2011)
Contribution of geophysical methods to karst-system exploration:
an overview. Hydrogeol J 19:1169
Chambers JE, Kuras O, Meldrum PI, Ogilvy RD, Hollands J (2006)
Electrical resistivity tomography applied to geologic,
hydrogeologic, and engineering investigations at a former waste-
disposal site. Geophysics 71:B231–B239
Cunningham, C. G., 1984. Earth and water resources and hazards in
Central America: US Department of the Interior, Geological Survey
Cushing, M., A. Revil, C. Gélis, D. Jougnot, F. Lemeille, J. Cabrera, A.
De Hoyos, and M. Rocher, 2008. Resistivity survey aiming at iden-
tifying hydrogeologically active zones in limestone and clay forma-
tions: application to the Tournemire Experimental Station (Aveyron,
France). 3rd AMIGO workshop, 15–18
Dobrin, M. B., and C. H. Savit, 1960. Introduction to geophysical
prospecting: McGraw-hill New York
Drahor MG, Göktürkler G, Berge MA, Kurtulmucs TÖ (2006)
Application of electrical resistivity tomography technique for inves-
tigation of landslides: a case from Turkey. Environ Geol 50:147–155
Eissa R, Cassidy N, Pringle J, Stimpson I (2019) Electrical resistivity
tomography array comparisons to detect cleared-wall foundations
in brownfield sites. Q J Eng Geol Hydrogeol qjegh2018-192
Éric, V., M. P. Cullen, and D. G. Feasby, 2018. NI 43–101 technical report
amended preliminary economic assessment for the optimization and
expansion of the El Mochito mine
Finch RC (1981) Mesozoic stratigraphy of Central Honduras. AAPG Bull
65:1320–1333
Ford D, Williams PD (2013) Karst hydrogeology and geomorphology.
Wiley
Foster, S., R. Hirata, D. Gomes, M. D’Elia, and M. Paris, 2002.
Groundwater quality protection: a guide for water service compa-
nies, Municipal Authorities and Environment Agencies: The World
Bank
Frid V, Liskevich G, Doudkinski D, Korostishevsky N (2008) Evaluation
of landfill disposal boundary by means of electrical resistivity im-
aging. Environ Geol 53:1503–1508
Gao H-Y, Xu Z-M, Wang K, Ren Z, Yang K, Tang Y-J, Tian L, Chen J-P
(2019) Evaluation of the impact of karst depression-type impound-
ments on the underlying karst water systems in the Gejiu mining
district, southern Yunnan, China. Bull Eng Geol Environ:1–16
Garcia GPB, Grohmann CH (2019) DEM-based geomorphological map-
ping and landforms characterization of a tropical karst environment
in southeastern Brazil. J S Am Earth Sci 93:14–22
Gélis C, Revil A, Cushing ME, Jougnot D, Lemeille F, Cabrera J, De
Hoyos A, Rocher M (2010) Potential of electrical resistivity tomog-
raphy to detect fault zones in limestone and argillaceous formations
in the experimental platform of Tournemire, France. Pure Appl
Geophys 167:1405–1418
Georgaki I, Soupios P, Sakkas N, Ververidis F, Trantas E, Vallianatos F,
Manios T (2008) Evaluating the use of electrical resistivity imaging
technique for improving CH4 and CO2 emission rate estimations in
landfills. Sci Total Environ 389:522–531
Gogu RC, Dassargues A (2000) Current trends and future challenges in
groundwater vulnerability assessment using overlay and index
methods. Environ Geol 39:549–559
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
22497
Gose WA, Finch RC (1992) Stratigraphic implications of palaeomagnetic
data from Honduras. Geophys J Int 108:855–864
Greve AK, Acworth RI, Kelly BFJ (2011) 3D cross-hole resistivity to-
mography to monitor water percolation during irrigation on cracking
soil. Soil Res 49:661–669
Gutiérrez F, Parise M, De Waele J, Jourde H (2014) A review on natural
and human-induced geohazards and impacts in karst. Earth Sci Rev
138:61–88
Han G, Liu C-Q (2004) Water geochemistry controlled by carbonate
dissolution: a study of the river waters draining karst-dominated
terrain, Guizhou Province, China. Chem Geol 204:1–21
Hauck, C., C. Kneisel, And others, 2008. Applied Geophysics in
Periglacial Environments: Cambridge University Press
Heng, M., L. Geotomo, and M. H. Loke, 2016. Least-squares
Deconvolution of apparent resistivity Pseudosections
Keller, G. V., and F. C. Frischknecht, 1966. Electrical methods in geo-
physical prospecting
Kemna A, Binley A, Ramirez A, Daily W (2000) Complex resistivity
tomography for environmental applications. Chem Eng J 77:11–18
Kim J-H, Supper R, Tsourlos P, Yi M-J (2013) Four-dimensional inver-
sion of resistivity monitoring data through L p norm minimizations.
Geophys J Int 195:1640–1656
Kumar A, Yang T, Sharma MP (2019) Greenhouse gas measurement
from Chinese freshwater bodies: a review. J Clean Prod 233:368–
378
Leney GW (1966) Field studies in iron ore geophysics. Mining Geophys
1:391
Li Y, Oldenburg DW (2000) 3-D inversion of induced polarization data.
Geophysics 65:1931–1945
Li Z, Xu X, Xu C, Liu M, Wang K (2018) Dam construction impacts on
multiscale characterization of sediment discharge in two typical
karst watersheds of Southwest China. J Hydrol 558:42–54
Loke MH, Chambers JE, Rucker DF, Kuras O, Wilkinson PB (2013)
Recent developments in the direct-current geoelectrical imaging
method. J Appl Geophys 95:135–156
Maillot EE, Sumner JS (1966) Electrical properties of porphyry deposits
at Ajo, Morenci, and Bisbee, Arizona. Mining Geophys 1:273–287
Martinez J, Benavente J, Garcia-Aróstegui JL, Hidalgo MC, Rey J (2009)
Contribution of electrical resistivity tomography to the study of de-
trital aquifers affected by seawater intrusion–extrusion effects: the
river Vélez delta (Vélez-Málaga, southern Spain). Eng Geol 108:
161–168
Matias MS, da Silva MM, Ferreira P, Ramalho E (1994) A geophysical
and hydrogeological study of aquifers contamination by a landfill. J
Appl Geophys 32:155–162
Milanovic P (2002) The environmental impacts of human activities and
engineering constructions in karst regions. Episodes 25:13–21
Milanović P, Maksimovich N, Meshcheriakova O (2019)
Characterization of surface and underground karst features, in dams
and reservoirs in evaporites. Springer:35–51
Morales T, Uriarte JA, Angulo B, Olazar M, Arandes JM, Antigüedad I
(2018) Characterization of flow and transport dynamics in karst
aquifers by analyzing tracer test results in conduits and recharge
areas (the Egino massif, Basque Country, Spain): environmental
and management implications. Environ Earth Sci 77:291
Neyamadpour A, Wan Abdullah WAT, Taib S, Neyamadpour B (2010)
Comparison of Wenner and dipole–dipole arrays in the study of an
underground three-dimensional cavity. J Geophys Eng 7:30–40
Oldenborger GA, Routh PS, Knoll MD (2005) Sensitivity of electrical
resistivity tomography data to electrode position errors. Geophys J
Int 163:1–9
Oldenburg DW, Li Y (1994) Inversion of induced polarization data, vol
59, pp 1327–1341
Oldenburg DW, McGillivray PR, Ellis RG (1993) Generalized subspace
methods for large-scale inverse problems. Geophys J Int 114:12–20
22498
Ortoleva, P., 2002. Methods and systems for simulation-enhanced frac-
ture detections in sedimentary basins
Qian, W., 2007. Borehole resistivity tomography for mineral exploration.
69th EAGE conference and exhibition incorporating 2007
Qian, W., B. Milkereit, G. McDowell, K. Stevens, and S. Halladay, 2007.
Borehole resistivity logging and tomography for mineral explora-
tion. Proceedings of exploration 07: fifth decennial international
conference on mineral exploration, 1115–1118
Rusjan S, Sapač K, Petrič M, Lojen S, Bezak N (2019) Identifying the
hydrological behavior of a complex karst system using stable iso-
topes. J Hydrol 577:123956
Samson IM, Williams-Jones AE, Ault KM, Gagnon JE, Fryer BJ (2008)
Source of fluids forming distal Zn-Pb-Ag skarns: evidence from
laser ablation–inductively coupled plasma–mass spectrometry anal-
ysis of fluid inclusions from El Mochito, Honduras. Geology 36:
947–950
Schwartz FW, McClymont GL (1977) Applications of surface resistivity
methods. Groundwater 15:197–202
Slater LD, Lesmes D (2002) IP interpretation in environmental investi-
gations. Geophysics 67:77–88
Slob E, Sato M, Olhoeft G (2010) Surface and borehole ground-
penetrating-radar developments. Geophysics 75:75A103–75A120
Soupios P, Papadopoulos I, Kouli M, Georgaki I, Vallianatos F, Kokkinou
E (2007) Investigation of waste disposal areas using electrical
methods: a case study from Chania, Crete, Greece. Environ Geol
51:1249–1261
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
Environ Sci Pollut Res (2020) 27:22486–22498
Storz H, Storz W, Jacobs F (2000) Electrical resistivity tomography to
investigate geological structures of the earth’s upper crust. Geophys
Prospect 48:455–471
Sudha K, Israil M, Mittal S, Rai J (2009) Soil characterization using
electrical resistivity tomography and geotechnical investigations. J
Appl Geophys 67:74–79
Telford WM, Telford WM, Geldart LP, Sheriff RE, Sheriff RE (1990)
Applied geophysics. Cambridge university press
Urish DW (1983) The practical application of surface electrical resistivity
to detection of ground-water pollution. Groundwater 21:144–152
White WB (2007) A brief history of karst hydrogeology: contributions of
the NSS. J Cave Karst Stud 69:13–26
Zhou W, Beck BF, Stephenson JB (2000) Reliability of dipole-dipole
electrical resistivity tomography for defining depth to bedrock in
covered karst terranes. Environ Geol 39:760–766
Zhou QY, Shimada J, Sato A (2001) Three-dimensional spatial and tem-
poral monitoring of soil water content using electrical resistivity
tomography. Water Resour Res 37:273–285
Zhou W, Beck BF, Adams AL (2002) Effective electrode array in map-
ping karst hazards in electrical resistivity tomography. Environ Geol
42:922–928
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdic-
tional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Terms and Conditions
Springer Nature journal content, brought to you courtesy of Springer Nature Customer Service Center GmbH (“Springer Nature”).
Springer Nature supports a reasonable amount of sharing of research papers by authors, subscribers and authorised users (“Users”), for small-
scale personal, non-commercial use provided that all copyright, trade and service marks and other proprietary notices are maintained. By
accessing, sharing, receiving or otherwise using the Springer Nature journal content you agree to these terms of use (“Terms”). For these
purposes, Springer Nature considers academic use (by researchers and students) to be non-commercial.
These Terms are supplementary and will apply in addition to any applicable website terms and conditions, a relevant site licence or a personal
subscription. These Terms will prevail over any conflict or ambiguity with regards to the relevant terms, a site licence or a personal subscription
(to the extent of the conflict or ambiguity only). For Creative Commons-licensed articles, the terms of the Creative Commons license used will
apply.
We collect and use personal data to provide access to the Springer Nature journal content. We may also use these personal data internally within
ResearchGate and Springer Nature and as agreed share it, in an anonymised way, for purposes of tracking, analysis and reporting. We will not
otherwise disclose your personal data outside the ResearchGate or the Springer Nature group of companies unless we have your permission as
detailed in the Privacy Policy.
While Users may use the Springer Nature journal content for small scale, personal non-commercial use, it is important to note that Users may
not:

1. use such content for the purpose of providing other users with access on a regular or large scale basis or as a means to circumvent access
control;
2. use such content where to do so would be considered a criminal or statutory offence in any jurisdiction, or gives rise to civil liability, or is
otherwise unlawful;
3. falsely or misleadingly imply or suggest endorsement, approval , sponsorship, or association unless explicitly agreed to by Springer Nature in
writing;
4. use bots or other automated methods to access the content or redirect messages
5. override any security feature or exclusionary protocol; or
6. share the content in order to create substitute for Springer Nature products or services or a systematic database of Springer Nature journal
content.
In line with the restriction against commercial use, Springer Nature does not permit the creation of a product or service that creates revenue,
royalties, rent or income from our content or its inclusion as part of a paid for service or for other commercial gain. Springer Nature journal
content cannot be used for inter-library loans and librarians may not upload Springer Nature journal content on a large scale into their, or any
other, institutional repository.
These terms of use are reviewed regularly and may be amended at any time. Springer Nature is not obligated to publish any information or
content on this website and may remove it or features or functionality at our sole discretion, at any time with or without notice. Springer Nature
may revoke this licence to you at any time and remove access to any copies of the Springer Nature journal content which have been saved.
To the fullest extent permitted by law, Springer Nature makes no warranties, representations or guarantees to Users, either express or implied
with respect to the Springer nature journal content and all parties disclaim and waive any implied warranties or warranties imposed by law,
including merchantability or fitness for any particular purpose.
Please note that these rights do not automatically extend to content, data or other material published by Springer Nature that may be licensed
from third parties.
If you would like to use or distribute our Springer Nature journal content to a wider audience or on a regular basis or in any other manner not
expressly permitted by these Terms, please contact Springer Nature at

onlineservice@springernature.com