Journal of Applied Geophysics 165 (2019) 60–76

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Applied Geophysics

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jappgeo

Analysis of the tectonic and sedimentary features of the southern margin

of the Krzeszowice Graben in Southern Poland based on an integrated
geoelectrical and geological studies
Tomasz Woźniak, Grzegorz Bania ⁎
AGH University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Geology, Geophysics and Environment Protection, Al. Mickiewicza 30, 30-059 Kraków, Poland

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: In this paper, geophysical technique ERT (Electrical Resistivity Tomography) supported by geological methods
Received 4 December 2018 (macroscopic and microscopic observations) have been used to study shallow structure of the southern margin
Received in revised form 10 April 2019 of the Krzeszowice Graben in the vicinity of Nawojowa Góra (southern Poland). The fieldwork was focus on the
Accepted 15 April 2019
characterizing facies of the Upper Jurassic sediments that crops out in the selected quarry. Special attention was
Available online 22 April 2019
also paid on its microfacies development in order to broadly characterise these sediments. Geological studies of
Keywords:
the exposed sediments have revealed that in this site calciturbidites and debris-flow deposits are present. The 2D
Electrical resistivity tomography ERT survey has been developed over the quarry exposure and within adjacent area, with the aim of identifying
Forward modeling the 2D subsurface geology. Separate ERT survey lines have been performed and in the case of each profile, com-
Upper Jurassic limestones bined array configuration has been applied. In all obtained 2D ERT cross-sections, gradient analysis (showing the
Tectonic distribution of the maximum vertical and horizontal gradients of the interpreted resistivity) was carried out.
Gravity-flow deposits These data provides additional information about spatial distributions of the various geoelectrical/geological
Krzeszowice Graben layers. Beyond the Upper Jurassic sediments, which prevail in the research area, several lithological units were
outlined on the ERT profiles that contain both the Upper Cretaceous sediments, Oligocene-Miocene karst deposits
as well as Quaternary deposits. The use of the both geological and geophysical methods has allowed also delin-
eating the zones which could be interpreted as fault zones. Geological interpretation has been considerably en-
hanced by forward 2D ERT modeling, by which it was possible to resolve some of the hypothesis derived from
the interpretation of the field data. The distribution of the gravity flow deposits of different types in the marginal
southern part of the Krzeszowice Graben reflects Late Jurassic fault activity. All obtained data have ultimately lead
to a better understanding of the sediment distributions and the presence of tectonics in the geological context of
the southern margin of the Krzeszowice Graben, supplying relevant information to its geological interpretation.
© 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Electrical Resistivity Tomography (ERT), in recent times, is one of the
well-established, low cost, non-invasive as well as most frequently used
geophysical tool with the wide range of applications (see e.g. Loke et al.,
2013, and references therein). This method can provide visualization of
the variations in electrical resistivity of subsurface embodied in 2/3D
images. ERT has been routinely and successfully used worldwide in nu-
merous geological studies, in particular within the sedimentology re-
search (see e.g. Smith and Sjogren, 2006; Hirsch et al., 2008; Pellicer
and Gibson, 2011; Ikhane et al., 2012; Orlando, 2013; Mościcki et al.,
2014; Gonzales et al., 2016; Nur Amalina et al., 2017; Hisham et al.,
2017; Woźniak et al., 2018). Moreover, numerous scientific
⁎ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: bania@agh.edu.pl (G. Bania).
contributions have demonstrated the usefulness of the ERT survey ap-
plied to the geological discontinuities represented by faults (Suzuki
et al., 2000; Caputo et al., 2003; Fazzito et al., 2009; Suski et al., 2010;
Štěpančíková et al., 2011; Bufford et al., 2012; Terrizzano et al., 2012;
Berge, 2014; Díaz et al., 2014; Seminsky et al., 2016; Mojica et al.,
2017; Zhu et al., 2017).
An additional tool supporting the analysis and solving of different is-
sues in which geoelectrical methods are used (especially ERT) is numer-
ical modeling. The modeling will allow checking how a given situation,
i.e. spatial geological structure described by physical parameters (geo-
physical model), will be mapped in simulated research results and
their inversion (Suski et al., 2010; Qarqori et al., 2012; Bania and
Ćwiklik, 2013; Bermejo et al., 2017). In addition, ERT synthetic modeling
enables to analyse different scenarios and choose i.e. the appropriate
measurement method (Catt et al., 2009; Danielsen and Dahlin, 2010;
Papadopoulos et al., 2010; Berge and Drahor, 2011; Kaufmann et al.,
2012; Frid et al., 2017).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jappgeo.2019.04.010
0926-9851/© 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
 T. Woźniak, G. Bania / Journal of Applied Geophysics 165 (2019) 60–76
In this paper, we present results of the detailed integrated
geoelectrical and geological studies of the southern frame of the
Krzeszowice Graben nearby the Nawojowa Góra. The Krzeszowice Gra-
ben extending for roughly 30 km in approximately W–E direction,
among Krzeszowice and Kraków (Fig. 1), with an average width of
around 2–4 km forms one of the spectacular structural elements of the
Silesian-Kraków Homocline (Figs. 1 and 2). It is widely accepted, in
the Polish geological literature, that the Krzeszowice Graben represent
a structure and products of an extensional tectonics that began to affect
in the Cenozoic (Dżułyński, 1953; Gradziński, 1972) and have been gen-
erated by the overthrusting Outher Carpathian nappes (Fig. 1). In this
paper, ERT research included both fieldworks and numerical modeling.
Fig. 1. Geological map of the Silesian-Kraków Homocline without further Quaternary
deposits (after Rühle et al., 1977; modified) with marked positions of the Kraków-
Lubliniec Fault Zone (K-LFZ) and Krzeszowice-Charsznica Fault (K-ChF) that disturbs the
homocline basement (location of the faults after Habryn et al., 2014). The area in the
black rectangle magnified in Fig. 2.
61
Moreover, the used geophysical method has been preceded by a thor-
ough geological examination of the Upper Jurassic sediments that are
exposed in the selected quarry in the Nawojowa Góra. Data from the
field ERT measurements and numerical modeling enriched with the
geological studies (macroscopic and microscopic) have been jointly
analysed in order to provide contributions towards better understand-
ing the geological features of the research area.
2. Geological framework
2.1. Structural and tectonic context
From a geological point of view, the investigated area is positioned
along the southern margin of the Krzeszowice Graben, known as the
Tenczyński Horst (Dżułyński, 1953), in the south part of the regional
tectonic unit of the Silesia-Kraków Homocline (Fig. 2a). This structural
entity, which extends on the NNW–SSE direction inherited from the
Variscian movements (Burzewski, 1969), began to form in the Early Al-
pine (and more precisely in the Early Cimmerian) orogenic phase (see
Burzewski, 1969; Kutek and Głazek, 1972; Krokowski, 1984; Górecka,
1993). The final structure of the homocline is the result of multistage
Cenozoic deformations that often reactivated older Variscian structural
directions (see Krokowski, 1984; Żaba, 1999; Matyszkiewicz et al.,
2006; Matyszkiewicz et al., 2015a). These deformations have led to for-
mations of a tectonic horst and graben structures that are well-marked
in the morphology, including the Krzeszowice Graben (Dżułyński,
1953). In addition, Middle-Late Alpine tectonic movements have been
responsible for the lowering the southern homocline edge, placing it
in the Carpathian Foredeep, in the Miocene (Bogacz, 1967; cf. Fig. 2b).
The formation of the faults that frame the tectonic structures of the
major graben and horst, in general linked to the Neogene tectonics in
the area of research, has been widely debated, hence their precise age
is difficult to unequivocally determine (Dżułyński, 1953;
Alexandrowicz, 1960; Gradziński, 1962; Dżułyński et al., 1966; Bogacz,
1967; Radwański, 1968; Gradziński, 1972; Rutkowski, 1989, 1993).
The main faulting stage corresponds to the Savian phase of the Alpine
orogeny that took place at the turn of the Oligocene and Miocene
(Felisiak, 1992). Recent researches have revealed also that some of the
faults might have been formed already in the Late Jurassic or even ear-
lier (Matyszkiewicz, 1996, 1997b; Ziółkowski, 2007; Nawrocki et al.,
2008; Matyja and Ziółkowski, 2014; Matyszkiewicz et al., 2016;
Woźniak et al., 2018). On top of that, some of the faults were responsible
for transferring low temperature hydrothermal solutions (Gołębiowska
et al., 2010; Kochman and Matyszkiewicz, 2012; Matyszkiewicz et al.,
2015a, 2016).
From a tectonic point of view, the master faults that frame the
Krzeszowice Graben and the faults related to the surrounding fault-
adjoining zones are primarily normal, high-angle (mostly 70–90°)
dip-slip faults which arrangement forms complex steep-like block pat-
terns (Dżułyński, 1953; Bogacz, 1967; Gradziński, 1972; Krokowski,
1984; cf. Fig. 2b). Reverse dip-slip faults occur only locally along the
step-like and step-like hinge block structures (Felisiak and
Matyszkiewicz, 2001). Furthermore, the complex structure of the
fault-adjoining zones is also emphasized by the presence of the tectonic
en èchelone faults (Dżułyński, 1953; Gradziński, 1972; see also Fig. 2a)
and tectonic megabreccia blocks (cf. Dżułyński, 1953). In addition, the
low angle shears that are connected to the near-fault flexures are also
notorious from the areas of the fault zones (Krokowski, 1984;
Matyszkiewicz and Krajewski, 1996; Matyszkiewicz et al., 2015b). The
fault throws appointed pursuant to the Callovian/Oxfordian boundary
are varied, up to a few hundred meters (e.g. Rutkowski, 1993). In addi-
tion, it is assumed that for main fault that separates Ojców Plateau
(northern margin) from the Krzeszowice Graben (Fig. 2), the overall
vertical fault displacement is made up of the numerous occurred sec-
ondary faults, along with the hinge faults (Bogacz, 1967;
Matyszkiewicz and Krajewski, 1996; Matyszkiewicz et al., 2015b).
62 T. Woźniak, G. Bania / Journal of Applied Geophysics 165 (2019) 60–76

Fig. 2. A – Geological bedrock map of the southern part of the Silesian-Kraków Homocline with the location of the Winnica Hill (black asterisk) in Nawojowa Góra (geology after
Gradziński, 2009; modified and simplified); B – Schematic geological N-S cross-section across the Krzeszowice Graben between Bolechowice and Zabierzów (after Matyszkiewicz
et al., 2015b; modified).

2.2. Sub-Mesozoic basement of the Krzeszowice Graben
The Sub-Mesozoic basement of the Krzeszowice Graben is formed by
the folded Paleozoic and Precambrian formations, of significant litholog-
ical diversity (Habryn et al., 2014; Buła et al., 2015, and references
therein). These units are disturbed by, well-defined and comprehen-
sively documented, the Kraków-Lubliniec Fault Zones (Buła et al.,
1997; Żaba, 1999; Buła et al., 2015; cf. K-LFZ in Fig. 1). The width of
this zone normally does not exceed 0.5 km (Buła et al., 1997) and
their generalized NW–SE course is disturbed, around the Krzeszowice,
by the younger Krzeszowice-Charsznica transverse strike-slip fault
(Habryn et al., 2014; cf. K-ChF in Fig. 1). It is commonly accepted that
the K-LFZ is presumably part of the larger transcontinental Kraków-
Hamburg tectonic zone (Franke and Hoffmann, 1999), and have been
active since the Early Paleozoic (Morawska, 1997; Żaba, 1999). Further-
more, the K-LFZ designate the boundary between two terrane-like
units, referred to Małopolska and Upper Silesian Blocks (MB and USB
in Fig. 1), which are positioned on the southwest foreground of the
East European Craton (Dadlez et al., 1994). Furthermore, the K-LFZ is ac-
companied by the Variscian magmatism, dated back to the Late
Carboniferous-Early Permian as well (Nawrocki et al., 2008, 2010;
Żelaźniewicz et al., 2008). These phenomena occur generally on either
side of K-LFZ, however, their largest clusters are located across the mar-
ginal parts of the Małopolska Block (Buła et al., 1997; Żaba, 1999).
2.3. Sediments related to the margins of the Krzeszowice Graben
Geologically, the Upper Jurassic carbonates of significant facies di-
versity (Dżułyński, 1952) are the essential elements in the geological
structure both north and south graben margin (Fig. 2a–b). Paleogeo-
graphically, the deposition of these carbonates, at the present-day re-
search area, took place along the passive shelf that bordered the
Tethys Ocean from the north (Leinfelder et al., 1996). According to
Matyszkiewicz et al. (2012) seawater that occupied this shelf were
well oxygenated with an alkanity comparable to that of the recent
world oceans. In terms of the lithostratigraphy, the entire Upper Jurassic
sediment section corresponds to limestones, which are of Oxfordian to
Kimmeridgian age, composed of the three differentiated facies (Fig. 3).
These include both massive and bedded facies as well as peculiar basinal
facies covering diverse submarine gravity flow deposits that belongs to
 T. Woźniak, G. Bania / Journal of Applied Geophysics 165 (2019) 60–76
Fig. 3. Lithostratigraphic section of the Upper Jurassic strata in the southern part of the
Silesian-Kraków Homocline (after Matyszkiewicz et al., 2016; modified) including three
lithologically diversified facies: massive facies (preserved fragments of the carbonate
buildups); bedded facies and peculiar basinal facies covering submarine gravity-flow
deposits of different origin (mostly grain flows, debris flows and calciturbidites). The
approximate stratigraphic position of the Upper Jurassic sediments from the studied site
is marked with the black bar.
63
the microbial-sponge megafacies (Gwinner, 1971; Matyszkiewicz,
1999; Matyszkiewicz et al., 2006). According to Kutek (1994), the un-
derlying Middle Jurassic deposits (of the Callovian–Bathonian age; see
Fig. 3) together with the Upper Jurassic sediments belong to the
transgressive-regressive Callovian–Lower Kimmeridgian tectono-
stratigraphic unit. The total preserved thickness of the Upper Jurassic
sediments, in the Kraków area, is about 250 m (Matyszkiewicz et al.,
2015b), but lengthwise fault zones related to the Krzeszowice Graben
their value is diversified, mostly due to the erosion and tectonic
processes.
During the Early and the beginning of the Late Cretaceous the Upper
Jurassic sediments have been partially cut by the planation surface,
which has been covered then by the transgressive Upper Cretaceous
sediments (Marcinowski, 1974). Their deposition took place on the
so-called Kraków Swell (Marcinowski, 1974; Walaszczyk, 1992), and
their thickness ranges from few to several m (Kołodziej et al., 2010).
Furthermore, the Upper Cretaceous lithological assemblage is character-
ized here by the occurrence of the numerous stratigraphic gaps (with
the stromatolites) and discontinuity surfaces (e.g. Jasionowski, 1995;
Kędzierski et al., 2013). These sediments occur locally in the successive
step-like fault structures, down-throwing the Upper Cretaceous de-
posits towards the graben interior (Fig. 2b). Generally, in terms of litho-
stratigraphy these sediments are represented by the Santonian–
Campanian marls (and marly limestones and siliceous chalky facies)
and Turonian limestones that rest, on the one hand, on the Albian?/
Cenomanian sands and quartzose conglomerates or, on the other
hand, directly on an abrasion surface truncating the Upper Jurassic lime-
stones (Walaszczyk, 1992; Jasionowski, 1995; also Bromley et al., 2009,
and references therein).
The Cenozoic deposits, preserved inside zones related to the graben
margins as well, include Oligocene–early Miocene differentiated resid-
ual deposits that have been related with the weathering both of the
Upper Cretaceous and Upper Jurassic sediments (Alexandrowicz,
1969; Gradziński, 1962; Felisiak, 1992). For detailed information,
concerning their development, refer to Felisiak (1992). Their wide dis-
tribution is limited to the various types of erosional karst forms, joint
surfaces, fault planes as well as fillings of the sub-Miocene valleys in
which these sediments are cropping out on the slopes and on the floors
of the modern valleys (Felisiak, 1992).
Above-mentioned Mesozoic and Cenozoic sediments are covered by
the Quaternary deposits that are of Pleistocene to Holocene age, which
thickness reaches up only to a few m (e.g. Rutkowski, 1993).
2.4. The research site
The study site is restricted to the slopes of the Winnica Hill (324 m.a.
s.l), which are formed primarily by Upper Jurassic limestones, posi-
tioned inside most northerly part of the Tenczynek Horst, nearby the
Nawojowa Góra (Fig. 2a). Several abandoned quarries across this hill
are exposed here, in which primarily the Upper Jurassic limestones of
the bedded facies crop out (Gradziński, 1962). The presented study
was carried out in the artificial, abandoned quarry (located on the pri-
vate property), which were established on the N hill slopes (coordi-
nates: 50.1244667°, 19.6661333°), but also it is close surroundings
(Fig. 4). This research site has not been described in detail so far, and
the scarcity of the ammonite specimens has prevented using the
biozonation in determining the accurate stratigraphic position of the ex-
posed sediments. Precise stratigraphic position as belonging to the Ox-
fordian interval from the Cordatum Zone to the Transversarium Zone
(for biozonation see Fig. 3) was established and defined in the Upper Ju-
rassic limestones that are exposed in the Młynka quarry, approximately
4 km SE from the Nawojowa Góra (Głowniak, 2006; Jurkowska and
Kołodziej, 2013).
64 T. Woźniak, G. Bania / Journal of Applied Geophysics 165 (2019) 60–76

Fig. 4. Research site. Lower part: location map of the abandoned quarry at Nawojowa Góra with the position of the ERT profiles (NWG 1–3). Upper part: general view of the studied
exposure of the Upper Jurassic sediments within the quarry wall. Explanation: 1- poorly bedded limestones containing cherts, 2- limestone breccias, 3- marls, 4- limestones rubble, 5-
discontinuity surfaces, 6- karstified bedded limestones with cherts. Fragment of the quarry wall in rectangle, magnified in Fig. 6.

3. Methods Environment Protection at the AGH University of Science and Technol-

3.1. Macroscopic observation and microfacies analysis of the Upper Jurassic
limestones
Macroscopic examination of the exposed Upper Jurassic limestones
has been performed in the extremely N part of the eastern wall,
where they crop out at two benches (Fig. 4). For the purpose of the
microfacies studies, due to good accessibility conditions, only the lime-
stones that are exposed at the lower bench have been collected. The
sampling procedure was performed prior to the geophysical ERT field
survey. From the lower bench, 12 oriented rock samples have been col-
lected from which 14 oriented thin sections were prepared, in the
Grinding workshop of the Faculty of Geology, Geophysics and
ogy in Kraków. Microfacies analysis has been performed through the
OLYMPUS SZX9 optical microscope. For a description of the limestones
microfacies, classification based on the Dunham textural scheme
(Dunham, 1962) with its later modifications (Embry III and Klovan,
1972) have been applied.
3.2. Field ERT data acquisition
SuperSting R8 resistivity meter (manufactured by an Advanced
Geosciences, Inc. AGI) coupled with multielectrode acquisition system,
a linear array of the 56 electrodes, have been employed for every field
survey (Fig. 5). Three 2D electrical resistivity profiles (labeled as NWG
1–3), each about 110 m long, running on the approximately N-S
 T. Woźniak, G. Bania / Journal of Applied Geophysics 165 (2019) 60–76
Fig. 5. Field view of the research site in the surroundings of the Nawojowa Góra quarry, with the ERT equipment used for the field measurements and location of the two ERT profiles (black
arrows). KG – Krzeszowice Graben.
direction have been completed, over the quarry exposure in the field
(Fig. 4). The along-line electrodes spacing (Δx) in each measurement
profile was 2 m. As it is shown in Fig. 4 the ERT profiles NWG 2–3 run
parallel to each other and their beginnings due to the natural obstacles
have been moved southbound by around 65 m in relation to the begin-
ning of the NWG–1 ERT profile. Moreover, in order to avoid impact from
the quarry wall on the measurement result, the first measurement pro-
file has been remote from the quarry edge of about 3 m. In addition, ERT
data was acquired along the slope with elevation differences, on which
accurate elevation of each electrode along the ERT profile has been de-
termined by the geodetic leveling.
Field data sets have been acquired with a combination of three dif-
ferent arrays, that made up of 7-levels of Wenner array (‘a’ =
1,2,3,5,7,10,14 Δx), coupled with the appropriate instructions for the
Schlumberger array, and with the dipole-dipole array. For the latter
array lengths of current and potential dipoles ‘a’ = 1,2,3,4,5,6 Δx and
separation factor ‘n’ = 1,2,3,4,5,6 have been used. The use of the 56 elec-
trodes on every measurement ERT profile enables us to obtain 1943
data points (including accordingly: 620 points for the Wenner-
Schlumberger array and 1323 points for the dipole-dipole array). Simi-
larly, combined array has been tested in ERT measurement by Stummer
et al. (2004). This array ensures obtaining so-called overlapping data
levels (Loke, 2012). The advantage of using such an array is a smaller de-
crease in the resolution along with the increasing depth of investigation
in the ERT method.
3.3. ERT field data inversion
Res2Dinv software (ver. 3.59.111) by Geotomo Software has been
used to invert the data obtained during ERT field works into a 2D
model of subsurface (Loke, 2012). Many different parameter settings
available in this software have been tested, so the authors have devel-
oped their own set. First of all, two basic inversion variants, robust,
blocky (L1-norm) and smoothness-constrained (L2-norm) methods
have been analysed (Loke et al., 2003). As has been shown in
geoelectrical research the L1-norm is specifically dedicated to the
models showing sharp and straight boundaries (Dahlin and Zhou,
65
2004; Elwaseif and Slater, 2010; Danielsen and Dahlin, 2010; Gómez-
Ortiz et al., 2010; Loke, 2012). On the other hand, L2-norm is found to
be preferable for models where subsurface geology is characterized by
smoother variations of the resistivity (Loke et al., 2003). As a result,
L1-norm was preferred throughout the inversion process in the field ex-
amples. The robust inversion was chosen because the main interpreta-
tion purpose was to isolate better the boundaries between the
contrasting geoelectrical centres in the interpreted images. Table 1 sum-
marizes two types of inversion (L1-norm and L2-norm) through the ob-
tained error values and the number of iterations. Another option,
changed from the default settings of the program, was ‘Reduce Effect of
Side Blocks’ through which the impact of the boundary blocks of the ap-
plied model mesh on the inversion results may be limited. This impact
occurs quite often, in particular in the case of the relatively high (already
from about 1:200) resistivity contrasts in the centre and is manifested
by bidding or undercutting the resistivity values of the zones
interpreted at the edges of the resulting images (Loke, 2012). In this op-
tion, the ‘Slight’ settings, for which the best results have been obtained,
were selected. Additionally, with the application of this function, im-
provements in reducing the abs. error value for the tested data have
been observed. From the other settings, we chose an option resulting
in the creation of inversion mesh, in which all blocks are equal in
width. Two mesh nodes between two adjacent electrodes were also
used. During the data inversion, the elevations of each electrode length-
wise the measurement lines have been applied. It is important to em-
phasize that the terrain morphology is crucial for ERT measurements,
Table 1
Comparison of the absolute error (ABS) and root mean square error (RMS) values based
on the two inversion methods: L1-norm (robust, blocky) and L2-norm (smooth).
Surface ERT survey line Inversion method
Robust Smooth
ABS% Iteration No. RMS% Iteration No.
NWG–1 4.59 8 7.48 7
NWG–2 2.91 14 7.46 7
NWG–3 1.76 11 5.56 7
66 T. Woźniak, G. Bania / Journal of Applied Geophysics 165 (2019) 60–76
as it significantly influences the data inversion process (Fox et al., 1980;
Loke, 2000; Lu et al., 2015).
Furthermore, the analysis of the vertical and horizontal gradients of
the interpreted resistivity distributions have been performed in the
Surfer (Golden Software) at all obtained ERT profiles. This method will
ensure a more efficient analysis of the resistivity sections in terms of
the presence of the sharp structural boundaries (cf. Woźniak et al.,
2018).
3.4. Forward 2D ERT modeling
The synthetic 2D geoelectrical models presented also in this paper,
were generated through forward modeling in order to extend the dis-
cussion on the use of the ERT method to detail the partially known shal-
low geological subsurface sediments distributions and to discard and/or
maintain some of the hypothesis derived from ERT profiles. The forward
2D ERT modeling has been developed with the application of the
Res2Dmod software (ver. 3.02.01) of Geotomo Software. For the pur-
pose of this publication, forward modeling was accomplished using
the finite-element (cf. Loke, 2012) method in each synthetic
geoelectrical model. Identical block grid, using 4 grid nodes for the
basic electrode spacing 2 m (Δx), and for 56 electrodes (as in the field
measurements), have been applied (Fig. 10). Vertically, up to a depth
of 10 m, the mesh blocks have a fixed height of 0.5 m, and from 10 m
in depth their height is gradually increasing. Moreover, during the for-
ward modeling for each model we have used the terrain morphology
that occurred in field conditions for individual ERT profiles (cf. Fig. 8).
For simplicity, simulated measurement results for the synthetic resistiv-
ity models (Fig. 10a1–a3) have been calculated for the dipole-dipole
array in contrast to the field measurements, where the combined
array have been applied. The parameters ‘a’ and ‘n’ of dipole-dipole
array were the same as those used in the field measurements. Inversion
of the data sets, obtained from the forward 2D modeling have been car-
ried out using the same inversion software (Res2Dinv; ver. 3.59.111)
with identical parameters (i.a. L1-norm) as used to process the
pseudo-sections measured in the field. Table 2 summarizes the obtained
abs. error values and the number of iterations for the resistivity models.
4. Results
4.1. Description of the exposed Upper Jurassic limestones
The macroscopic, field observations have revealed that the Upper Ju-
rassic sediments that are exposed at the lower bench are represented,
from the bottom to top, by two units which correspond to: (U–1: a-b)
the poorly bedded and highly fractured limestones with numerous
cherts, and (U–2) the limestones breccia together with cherts and iso-
lated carbonate block in significant quantities (Fig. 4).
In microscopic view, the lower part of the U–1 (labeled as U–1a in
Fig. 4) is developed in a packstones-wackestones texture (Fig. 7a). The
main recognizable detrital components are: oncoids, microoncoids
(with the bioclasts, of the different type, in the nuclei), intraclasts and
peloids. Among the biogenic components the dominants elements are:
(i) fine-grained echinoderm detritus with preserved elements of the
echinoids spines as well as plates; (ii) remains of the Saccocoma sp.
(Fig. 7b-c); (iii) calcified spicules of the siliceous sponges (micritized,
in certain cases); (iv) Crescentiella sp. (which is defined as symbiosis
Table 2
Resistivity models– absolute error (ABS) values and number of iterations.
Resistivity model Robust inversion method
ABS%
NWG–1M 1.53
NWG–2M 1.50
NWG–3M 1.52
between nubecularid foraminifers cyanophyceans; cf. Senowbari-
Daryan et al., 2008); (v) parts of the thin-shelled bivalves as well as
(vi) foraminifers and radiolarians. Moreover, numerous calcispheres
were also found among the biogenic components. Secondarily, frag-
ments of the siliceous and calcareous sponges, but also brachiopods
shells were also observed under the microscope. It should be noted
that within these microfacies normal grading as well as parallel arrange-
ment of the bioclasts have been observed. Some of the biogenic compo-
nents bioclasts are covered with the microbial crust of various origins.
Moreover, the crushed bioclasts fragments and traces of the compaction
processes have been commonly observed. The upper part of the U–1 (la-
beled as U–1b in Fig. 4) is developed as the microbial-sponge
boundstones and fine-grained wackestones (Fig. 7d). Apart from the
microbialites (developed mostly as leiolits and thrombolites) and calci-
fied siliceous sponges in the boundstones, also encrusters are observed.
The traces of the compaction are common. Within the wackestones, fine
detrital elements of the echinoderm plates, spicules of the siliceous
sponges, single oncoids and polychaetes (Terebella lapilloides) are
evident.
The boundary between U–2 and underlying U–1 is running right
along the irregular, erosive surface with clearly apparent depression in
its course (red arrows in Fig. 4). Furthermore, this surface is marked
by the occurrence of the thick brownish-greenish marly unit with the
white-coated cherts as well as locally occurred greenish-greyish sands.
Microfossils among which: (i) foraminifers specimens (Lenticulina cf.
ruesti, Lenticulina sp.); (ii) sponges (?Paracraticularia cylindrica), but
also the spicules and skeleton fragments of the siliceous sponges; (iii)
brachiopods (?Lacunosella cf. cracoviensis); (v) sclerosponges
(Neuroporasp.); (vi) echinoids, bivalve as well as bryozoans; and (vii)
admixture of the Cretaceous material (planktonic foraminifers, glauco-
nite grains) have been identified within this marly unit.
The limestones collected from the U–2 are developed as the
wackestones (Fig. 7e). Under the microscope view, these wackestones
contain numerous of the echinoderms detritus, crushed bivalves shells
(with the locally preserved microbial crust on them), tuberoids,
Crescentiella sp., ostracods, as well as single juvenile gastropods, bra-
chiopods, bryozoans, foraminifers, and serpulids. Stylolites and
microstylolites are observed common within these microfacies.
From a tectonic point of view, the exposed at the lower bench Upper
Jurassic limestones host discontinuities surfaces of various origin, which
is particularly evident in the extremely NNE part of the bench (Fig. 6).
The upper bench (Fig. 4) is dominated by the poorly bedded
karstified limestones with cherts that dips towards the N–NE. The ob-
served karst structures are filled mostly with brownish-yellow-grey
weathered residuum and locally limestone debris as well.
4.2. Field ERT measurements and gradient results
The results of the geophysical interpretation of the data for three ERT
profiles (NWG 1–3) are presented below in the form of the two-
dimensional sections which illustrates the distribution of the
interpreted resistivity (Fig. 8).
The 2D electrical section from the ERT profile NWG–1 allows for the
distinction between the two various resistivity layers (Fig. 8a). The first
of them, occurring in the upper part represents a shallow superficial
layer with variable resistivity character. Within this layer, apparent
zones with a value of the interpreted resistivity ranging from around
40 to 100 Ωm and from 100 to approximately 600 Ωm can be distin-
guished. The thickness of the superficial layer is differentiated and is
lowest from the beginning to the approx. 45 m length of the NWG–1
profile where it is about 1 m. Later in the profile, the thickness varies
from 1 (85 m in length) to about 8 m (52 m in length). The second
Iteration No.
layer, directly underlying shallow superficial layer is characterized by
10 much higher resistivity values with the range from 600 to 10.000 Ωm.
10 Inside this layer, four high resistivity structures (N2.000 Ωm) with
10
geometric shapes, resembling individual blocks can be readily isolated
 T. Woźniak, G. Bania / Journal of Applied Geophysics 165 (2019) 60–76
Fig. 6. Fracture with steep surface of the complicated morphology (black arrows), cutting through the Upper Jurassic limestones in the NNE part of the quarry wall within the lower bench
(Close-up of the red rectangle indicated on the Fig. 4). The observed fracture is filled with the brownish-greyish clayey karstic residuum together with small, angular limestones fragments
(close-up of the black rectangle).
(H1–4 in Fig. 8a). These structures are explicitly separated from each
other by the lower resistivity zones (~700–1.500 Ωm). In addition, be-
tween 30 and 38 m of NWG–1 profile length, an anomalous geometric
structure having a slightly lower resistivity value of around 200 Ωm
(L1 in Fig. 8a) can be observed. Another low resistivity structure, with
the resistivity value of about 100 Ωm (L2 in Fig. 8a) is apparent either.
Moreover, below the high resistivity layer (between 45 and 78 m in sec-
tion length) close to the lower limit of the interpreted image, zone with
reduced resistivity (whose value is around 60 Ωm) is apparent (black
arrows in Fig. 8a).
Cross-section from the ERT profile NWG–2 depicts the three
geoelectrical layers (Fig. 8b). The first, superficial layer extends over
the entire cross-section and its interpreted resistivity ranges from
approx. 200 to 400 Ωm. Only in the initial part of the profile, i.e. to
around 25 m of its length, it is characterized by the reduced resistivity
to a minimum of the 80 Ωm. Their thickness is differentiated and is be-
tween 1 (south end) to around 5 m (north end). The second layer, with
a resistivity value from 5 to the 120 Ωm, extends from its 20 m in length
until the end of the section. The lowest interpreted resistivities are ap-
parent in the zone, which starts at the 46 m of its length. The thickness
of the second layer is the highest in the central part of the NWG–2 sec-
tion (around 7 m), whereas in both north and south ends its value de-
creases to about 3 m. The third, high resistivity layer, that exists most
deeply extends over the entire cross-section and is characterized by
the resistivity range from 300 to 10.000 Ωm. Two structures with dis-
tinct shapes and high resistivity values (N1.600 Ωm) are evident within
it (H5–6 in Fig. 8b). They are separated by a zone, between 40 and 58 m
length of the section, with a relatively lower resistivity of around
400 Ωm.
NWG–3 ERT cross-section shows much more complicated and com-
plex resistivity distribution, compared to the previously NWG 1–2 sec-
tions, than one would expect (Fig. 8c). In its area, the high resistivity
zone (of about 200–2.000 Ωm) on the southern side of the section is ap-
parent, with locally occurring indentations of low resistivity layer
(50–200 Ωm). The high resistivity zone extends to about 67 m length
of the NWG–3 section, and the mentioned low resistivity indentations
are apparent in the three zones, around the 10, 30 as well as 35–52 m
section length (L3-L5 in Fig. 8c). From the 50 to the 66 m in section
length, a relatively low resistivity layer (about 5–50 Ωm) occur near
67
the surface, and its thickness reaches 3 m. From here this layer runs
southwards under the surface and rapidly increases its thickness up to
15 m (see 70 m in section length; Fig. 8c). Further, in the southern direc-
tion, the low resistivity zone is dissected by a high resistivity layer
(about 200–400 Ωm), which is located at depth of about 7 m. Further-
more, the mentioned low resistivity complex is covered from the sur-
face by the high resistivity layer (approx. 200–400 Ωm) which
thickness reaches locally up to a few meters. It should be also noted
that between 50 and 60 m in section length, at a depth of about 15 m,
the low resistivity layer is also observed (L6 in Fig. 8c).
Furthermore, cross-sections for the NWG1–3 profiles, that show dis-
tributions of the vertical (cf. black dotted lines) and horizontal (cf. navy
blue dotted lines) gradients (Fig. 8a–c), reveal the course of the proba-
ble structural boundaries. Thus, they elaborate on the structure of the
research geological area by revealing numerous, non-apparent in the
interpreted resistivity cross-sections, boundaries between the contrast-
ing zones and/or geoelectrical structures.
5. Discussion
5.1. Comprehensive geological interpretation
The ERT results combined with the field geological data allow us to
verify the relationship between the electrical resistivity distribution
and the geological structure in terms of location the boundary between
different geological bodies and either to improve the knowledge about
the tectonic features in the area of research.
The electrical resistivity regions on the electrical sections NWG 1–3
where the resistivity value range from 600 to 10.000 Ωm (NWG–1),
300–10.000 Ωm (NWG–2) as well as 200–2.000 Ωm (NWG–3) (cf.
Fig. 8a–c) respectively, corresponds to the material composed of the
Upper Jurassic limestones (Fig. 9). In addition, in the electrical section
of the profile NWG–1 the same sediments occur near the surface,
which has been confirmed during the field works. A layer that occurs
at the depth of about 7 m between 70 and 100 m NWG–3 section length
(cf. Fig. 8c) with a resistivity in the range from 200 to 400 Ωm can be
also associated with the Upper Jurassic sediments (Fig. 9). Attention
should be paid to the fact that these Upper Jurassic limestones have
68 T. Woźniak, G. Bania / Journal of Applied Geophysics 165 (2019) 60–76

not been divided into specific facies (cf. Woźniak et al., 2018), but they
were treated as the one geological unit (Fig. 9).
The presence of the low resistivity structure, at the bottom of the
NWG–1 section between 45 and 75 m of its length (black arrows in
Fig. 8a), can be probably related to the inversion process (e.g. Loke
and Barker, 1996). This structure, which top surface is designated by
the vertical gradient of the interpreted resistivity, has been interpreted
for the boundary blocks of the inversion mesh. Frequently, in the ERT re-
sults especially at the borders of the interpreted model, that sort of the
high/low resistivity zones are being observed in relation to the whole
interpreted resistivity cross-section (cf. e.g. Bania and Ćwiklik, 2013).
It depends, among other things, on the complexity of the geological
structure and hence from the real resistivity distribution in the exam-
ined structure. It should be also noted that the abs. error value for the
NWG–1 profile, which stands at 4.59%, is relatively large compared to
the abs. errors for the remaining profiles (Fig. 8a–c). These introduce ad-
ditional uncertainty in the interpretation. In our view, the discussed
structure should not be interpreted as the potential next layer within
the analysed geological structure, hence it has been considered also as
the Upper Jurassic limestones (Fig. 9).
The presence of the high resistivity structures (labeled as H1–6 in
Fig. 8a–b) that are apparent within the limits of the Upper Jurassic lime-
stones may be explained differently. In the case of NWG–1 ERT profile,
an overwhelming part of this profile have been established in the
close proximity to the quarry wall (see Fig. 4). It could have influenced
the increase of the measured values of the apparent resistivity, espe-
cially for the larger arrays. This, in turn, would result in an increase in
the values of the interpreted resistivity for the high resistivity zones ap-
parent in the NWG–1 section (H1–4 in Fig. 8a). This phenomenon should
be linked with the occurrence of the 3D-effects, so-called side-effect (cf.
e.g. Sjödahl et al., 2006; Bania and Ćwiklik, 2013). On the other hand, the
high resistivity structures, which have been preserved along the
NWG–1 (H1–4) and NWG–2 sections (H5) (cf. Fig. 8a–b), probably may
also be associated with the occurrence of the dehydrated zones inside
the Upper Jurassic limestones. From a different perspective, it cannot
be excluded that these high resistivity structures together with zones
between them, with reduced values of the interpreted resistivity
(700–1.500 Ωm; Fig. 8a) may also be related to changes in the facies de-
velopment of the Upper Jurassic limestones (cf. Woźniak et al., 2018).
An interesting case of high resistivity structure occurs within the nearly
southern part of the NWG–2 section among about its 76–90 m length
(H6 in Fig. 8b). In this case, it is highly likely that this structure can be
associated with the vadose cave that had been developed within the
Upper Jurassic limestones (question mark in the black circle in Fig. 9).
Electrical resistivity values that represent the resistivity interval
from 5 to 120 Ωm, assigned to the second layer in the NWG–2 section
(Fig. 8b), can be probably equated with the Upper Cretaceous deposits
that cover the underlying Upper Jurassic limestones (cf. Fig. 9). Their ir-
regular top surface is well marked in this cross-section by the calculated
vertical gradient of the interpreted resistivity (Fig. 8b). We are of the op-
tion that the low resistivity layer (5–50 Ωm) which occurs in the follow-
ing NWG–3 section (Fig. 8c) may also be attributed to the Upper
Cretaceous deposits. However, the occurrence is probably limited to
the more or less lateral layer, whose structural boundaries are desig-
nated by two vertical gradients (Fig. 8c).
On the analysed cross-sections (Fig. 8a–c), different structures of
karst origin, which are filled with the material of the different resistivity,

Fig. 7. Thin-section photomicrographs showing the microfacies of Upper Jurassic

limestones from the research site. A – fine bioclastic wackestones; B-C – Saccocoma
secundibrnchilas (white arrows) of various shapes (cf. Keupp and Matyszkiewicz, 1997;
Krajewski et al., 2014; Benzaggagh et al., 2015); D – microbial-sponge boundstones:
column of layered thrombolite (lT) developed upon a calcified siliceous sponge (Sp); E –
bioclastic wackestones with recrystallized serpulids tubes (white arrows) that are filled
with internal sediments and cements of several generations.
 T. Woźniak, G. Bania / Journal of Applied Geophysics 165 (2019) 60–76 69

Fig. 8. ERT field data inversion results for the NWG 1–3 profiles with marked contours that represent calculated maximum values of the vertical (black dotted lines) and horizontal (navy
blue dotted lines) gradients of the interpreted resistivities.

have been identified (Fig. 9). Such structures labeled as the L1 and L2
within the NWG–1 section (cf. Fig. 8a) represent probably the small
size, almost oval-shaped and elongated forms (Fig. 9). It seems likely
that similar situation occurs for the two indentations of the low resistiv-
ity layer that are placed at about 10 m and 30 m of the NWG–3 section
length (L3 and L4 in Fig. 8c). Additionally, the same situation is true for
the low resistivity layer that is labeled as L5 in the same section. Another
karst structures are represented by the probable karst channels which
are apparent in the NWG–1 (from 56 of its length; cf. Fig. 8a) and
NWG–3 (L5 in Fig. 8c) sections accordingly. Moreover, the large karst
structure that supposedly corresponds to the karst well that is devel-
oped below the Upper Cretaceous deposits have been identified be-
tween the 66–90 m of the NWG–3 section length (Fig. 9). Similar
karst structures to those interpreted in the cross-sections are known
from around the Krzeszowice Graben, where the age of deposits that
fill them has been designated as the Oligocene–early Miocene
(Felisiak, 1992).
The Quaternary deposits identified based on the ERT results repre-
sent primarily the medium-thick superficial layers in the following
NWG 2–3 sections (Fig. 9), in which resistivity ranges from 200 to 400
Ωm (see Fig. 8b–c). Attention should be paid also to the fact that the
Quaternary deposits have been found along all profiles during the
field observations. Within the geological interpretation sections this
layer was omitted, in the case of certain sections, due to their presum-
ably insignificant volume that was not marked on the results of the
ERT measurement (Fig. 8a–c). This concerns mainly to the entire near
70 T. Woźniak, G. Bania / Journal of Applied Geophysics 165 (2019) 60–76

Fig. 9. Interpreted geological cross-sections. Explanation: 1- Quaternary deposits, 2- Oligocene–early Miocene karst deposits, 3- Upper Cretaceous sediments, 4- Upper Jurassic sediments,
5- Karts void, 6- Faults.

surface area of the NWG–1 section (in which Quaternary sediments
cover the karst deposits) and to the area from the beginning to the
around 66 m of the NWG–3 section length (Upper Jurassic and Upper
Cretaceous cover) (Fig. 9).
The integration of the applied methods has led us also to interpret
the tectonic phenomena, especially zones which allowed to identify
them as a series of faults or, more precisely the fault zones in the area
of research. Generally, it has been shown that the sharp resistivity con-
trasts, but also the flexed patterns on the interpreted resistivity sections
may be related to these structures (e.g. Bran et al., 2017, and references
therein). These specific distributions of the interpreted resistivity con-
tours can be investigated and analysed by means of the numerical
modeling (cf. Nguyen et al., 2005; Ishola et al., 2015). Furthermore, it
should be also noted that the fault zones in the ERT sections reflect
the lower resistivities compared to the adjoining units (e.g. Díaz et al.,
2014) what may be caused e.g. by the fluid migration along these
zones and by developing along them the karst structures that are filled
with the low resistivity materials, e.g. clays, silts (see e.g. Berge, 2014;
Štěpančíková et al., 2011; Woźniak et al., 2018). In addition, the faults
course have been also suggested based on the sections that were
superimposed with the calculated values of the vertical and horizontal
gradients of the interpreted resistivity (black and blue navy dotted
lines in Fig. 8a–c). Analysing the occurrence of the horizontal gradients
is evident that they frame the high resistivity structures (cf. Fig. 8a–c).
 T. Woźniak, G. Bania / Journal of Applied Geophysics 165 (2019) 60–76
Fig. 10. 2D geoelectrical models (a1-a3) together with corresponding inversion results (b1-b3).
Inside the areas interpreted as the Upper Jurassic limestones, it deter-
mines the probable fault zones that form borders of the individual tec-
tonic blocks of the different size (Fig. 9). In some cases, breaking the
continuity of the course of the maximum vertical gradient is also appar-
ent, in particular, it is clearly visible within the NWG–2 section (Fig. 8b).
This phenomenon may indicate at this point occurrence of the fault
zone. Furthermore, we are of the option that some of the interpreted
faults may propagate, from rigid Upper Jurassic limestones to the over-
lying (more plastic) Cretaceous deposits (Fig. 9), which unfortunately
does not result directly from the course analysis of the horizontal gradi-
ents (Fig. 8a–c). It should be noted that this suggestion is supported by
the presence both of the fault-related folds and flexures which are
known from the Upper Cretaceous deposits (Felisiak and
Matyszkiewicz, 2001).
In addition, it cannot be excluded that the fault zones are accompa-
nied by the narrow zones of tectonic breccias, but due to the possibility
of their smooth transition into undisturbed sediments and a rather
small size (Felisiak and Matyszkiewicz, 2001), it is not possible to
trace their occurrence on the achieved ERT results. It should be also
recalled that normal character of the interpreted faults has not been rec-
ognized through the ERT method, however, indirectly this faults charac-
ters may indicate the presence of curved horizontal gradients (cf. white
arrows in Fig. 8a) that may correspond to the normal listric faults. The
discontinuity surfaces that cut through the exposed Upper Jurassic lime-
stones in the outcrop (Fig. 6) are probably also faults that may have used
71
the pre-existing joint surfaces (Gradziński, 1962; Matyszkiewicz and
Krajewski, 1996).
5.2. Analysis of the 2D ERT models and its inversion results
Three geoelectrical models (Fig. 10a1-a3) have been generated,
which are meant to reflect the geological structure of the research
area. The modeling process was based on the obtained ERT data inver-
sion results, analysis of the maximal vertical and horizontal gradients
of the interpreted resistivity (Fig. 8a–c) and of results of the geological
interpretation (Fig. 9). In the initial phase, the simple models have
been set up that in the next step were successively modified so that
they correlate with the fields results for the best. Particular consider-
ation should be given to the fact that in all situations 2D model has
been considered, it means, do not varying in the perpendicular direction
to the designated survey line. For this reason, the models proposed by
authors may deviate from the real 3D geological medium structure. In
addition, the applied dipole-dipole array in the modeling process may
reflect the considered situations in a slightly different way, in compari-
son to the combined array (in this particular case dipole-dipole and
Wenner-Schlumberger arrays) used in the field works. Besides, the in-
version results in ERT 2D methods are ambiguous. It should be under-
stood that for the many calculated highly variant geoelectrical models
the apparent resistivity pseudosections will be similar and correct at
the same time, with an arbitrarily assumed error level. By comparing
72 T. Woźniak, G. Bania / Journal of Applied Geophysics 165 (2019) 60–76
the inversion results for the model data (cf. Fig. 10b1–b3) with the field
data (cf. Fig. 8a–c) minor differences in the obtained images can be ob-
served. The geoelectrical models have been intended to present the geo-
logical medium in the most simplified way that is why the simplest
geometric solids were used (Fig. 10a1–a3). Nevertheless, the entire 2D
ERT modeling process allowed to exclude or confirm some of the inter-
pretative assumptions made.
In the NWG–1M model (Fig. 10a1) near the surface zone with a small
thickness (max. 2 m) and resistivity of 50 Ωm that continues through-
out entire model occur. It can be identified as karst deposits (Fig. 9). Be-
tween 58 and 92 m of the NWG–1M profile length, this zone is
submerged slightly below the surface. Within the model, structures
with the distinct resistivities are apparent, ranging from 500 to 10.000
Ωm, which are identified as the Upper Jurassic limestones (Fig. 9). Dif-
ferences in the accepted resistivity values can be associated with various
conditions of these limestones (e.g. brevity, dampness, cracks, hydra-
tion, facies changes). The most important structures of the model are
high resistivity (10.000 Ωm) limestones blocks. As it is shown in this
model, they do not go deep into infinity. This model assumption allows
to obtain the most similar model inversion results (Fig. 10b1) as for the
field data (Fig. 8a). From the other hand, in the case of assumptions that
the high resistivity blocks are continuing deeply, it was impossible to
recreate a similar inversion image. In our opinion, we believe that
these blocks can actually go deeper, while in the deeper parts of the me-
dium these limestones will have lower resistivity values. The model
shows that the zones below the discussed blocks have resistivity values
of the 1000 and 2500 Ωm (Fig. 10b1). This may be explained, on the one
hand, by the hydration of the rock complex that is placed deeper. From a
different perspective, the resistivity value of 10.000 Ωm for blocks is rel-
atively high. At lower resistivity values, it was not possible to recon-
struct the situation from the inversion of field data, which may be
related to the location of the NWG-1 profile (Fig. 4). It was located in
the close proximity to the quarry wall, which most probably resulted
in an increase of the resistivity of the interpreted H1-H4 structures on
the inversion results (Fig. 8a). Within the NWG–1M model, two struc-
tures with a resistivity of 150 and 100 Ωm, respectively, are also appar-
ent at a depth of 3 m and around 34 and 53 m of its length (Fig. 10a1).
These structures should be treated as the karst voids that are filled by
the diversified material (Fig. 9).
The NWG–2M model (Fig. 10a2) assumes that the geological me-
dium is built of Upper Jurassic limestones with a resistivity range from
500 to 10.000 Ωm. These limestones are covered by a layer of Upper
Cretaceous deposits (from 10 to 250 Ωm). As it is shown in this
model, these deposits extend from about 14 m of the profile length
and continue to its end, and their maximum thickness is about 5 m (be-
tween 16 and 28 m). It was assumed that their resistivity variability re-
sults from the differentiated content of clay material, the more it is, the
resistivity is lower. Directly below the Upper Cretaceous deposits, the
limestones which correspond to the Upper Jurassic are apparent. This
layer continues deep into infinity. In this situation, in contrast to the
prior NWG–1M model (cf. Fig. 10a1), this assumption enabled to obtain
similar inversion results between the model (Fig. 10b2) and field data
(Fig. 8b). It can be concluded on this basis that in the case of the
NWG–1 section (Fig. 10b1), an increase in the interpreted resistivity
value for the limestones is more likely due to the closeness of the quarry
wall. The most interesting aspect on the NWG–2M model is a zone with
a resistivity of 1.000.000 Ωm located between 74 and 92 m of its length
(Fig. 10a2). The modeling process showed that it is not possible to obtain
a similar inversion result of the model data (Fig. 10b2) to the inversion
of the field data (Fig. 8b) by setting a lesser value of resistivity, e.g.
10.000 Ωm for the considered zone. Therefore, the value 1.000.000
Ωm has been assumed. It should be noted that on the model data inver-
sion results (Fig. 10b2) much lower values of the interpreted resistivity,
of around 10.000 Ωm, was obtained. This introduces an additional diffi-
culty in interpreting the considered zone. On the one hand, it was re-
ported that dry limestone may adopt such high values of the
resistivity (cf. Telford et al., 1990) but, on the other hand, it can be con-
cluded that in the present area there may occur a void of karst origin (cf.
Fig. 9; question mark in the black circle). In addition, this anomalous
zone occurs close to the assumed numerical model limits. The influence
on the images obtained in the inversion process may also have the resis-
tivities of the boundary blocks of the inversion mesh (cf. Loke, 2012).
Only the extension of the ERT survey in the considered area could pro-
vide new information that might confirm or deny these speculations.
The NWG–3M model (Fig. 10a3) present the most complex
geoelectrical medium in relation to previous models. Resistivity values
in range from 150 to 2500 Ωm have been established here for the
Upper Jurassic limestones. Other objects, with a resistivity from 10 to
100 Ωm, can be associated with Upper Cretaceous sediments and
karst deposits that are filled by the low resistivity material (e.g. clay,
silt). Based on geological interpretation results (Fig. 9), it has been set
up that the model zone of the low resistivity subsurface layer, located
on the profile from its 50 m and continuing to its end, corresponds to
the Upper Cretaceous deposits. In the area of the 70 m of the profile
length, these deposits border from the bottom, at depth of 5 m with a
large karst zone (see 66–88 m of the profile). In order to achieve the
similar inversion result for the model data (Fig. 10a3) to that for field
data (Fig. 8c), the assumption that this zone continues deeper beyond
the model boundaries has been done. Other karst zones that have
been set up on this model are the consecutively areas with a resistivity
of 25 Ωm (placed between 27 and 33 m length) and 50 Ωm (36–50 m
length). Both abovementioned structures occur at depth of around
3 m. Between approximately 10–12 m length of the model, a vertical ob-
ject with a resistivity of 50 Ωm have been assumed (Fig. 10). It has
allowed interpreting a similar zone (Fig. 10b3) as for the field data
(Fig. 8c), where it is also clearly marked for the plotted distributions of
the maximum gradients. It is highly likely that such structure is related
to the karst phenomenon (cf. Fig. 9). Nevertheless, the analysed zone
occurs very closely to the model's boundary, therefore, their karst origin
cannot be certainly confirmed.
5.3. Interpretation of the examined Upper Jurassic limestones
Based on the detailed sedimentological analysis (from both field and
microscopic study) of the Upper Jurassic limestones exposed at the
quarry, it can be concluded that these sediments have been deposited
as a result of different gravity flows. At the research site, these assump-
tions fit well to the sediments features from the examined lower bench.
The sediments development of the poorly bedded limestones with
cherts (Fig. 4) geologically can be explained in two separate ways. On
the one hand, these limestones display characteristic features that can
be associated with the calcareous turbidites (see Eberli, 1987; Flügel,
2004; Savary and Ferry, 2004; Rubert et al., 2012; Quiquerez et al.,
2013), and this only applies to the lower part of this unit (cf. U–1a in
Fig. 4). Microscopic examinations have revealed that the sediments
composition is similar to that of the Saccocoma-calciturbidites which
have been thoroughly described by Matyszkiewicz (1996).
Calciturbidites are a useful geological indicator of sea-level fluctuations
because they document deposition during periods of highstand sea-
level (see e.g. Andresen et al., 2003; Lasemi and Jalilian, 2010; Reijmer
et al., 2012; Rubert et al., 2012). It is generally accepted that presence
of Saccocoma-calciturbidites may be linked to the deepening phase of
the sedimentary basin that took place in the Lower Kimmeridgian inter-
val belonging to the Platynota zone (Matyszkiewicz, 1996; also
Krajewski et al., 2014). The upper part of the U–1 (U–1b in Fig. 4), on
the other hand, could indicate that right after calciturbidite deposition,
temporary conditions favourable for the development of the carbonate
buildups might have occurred. The U–2, which corresponds to lime-
stone breccias, represent gravity related episode of the debris flow de-
position. Moreover, it cannot be excluded that this event has been also
accompanied, to a lesser extent, by the submarine rock-fall. This as-
sumption is supported by the presence of the large isolated limestone
 T. Woźniak, G. Bania / Journal of Applied Geophysics 165 (2019) 60–76 73

block found in preserved debris flow that can be interpreted as the 2011; Matyszkiewicz et al., 2016) as well as by the significant dif-
olistholith. The depression that is evident in the course of the boundary ferences in the facial development of the Upper Jurassic lime-
between both units (red arrows in Fig. 4) forms WSW–ENE trending stones (see Dżułyński, 1952; Matyszkiewicz, 1997b; Matyja and
channel that documents gravity flow paleotransport direction. The ori- Ziółkowski, 2014).
entation of the erosional channels parallel to nearby faults that are asso-
ciated with the tectonic frame of the Krzeszowice Graben was outlined 6. Conclusions
by Matyszkiewicz (1996), and nowadays it has also been confirmed by
geoelectrical research carried out by Woźniak et al. (2018). Due to the The following conclusions could be arrived at in this study:
lack of buoyancy (cf. Drzewiecki and Simó, 2002) and effect of the
1. The joint application of the electrical resistivity tomography
hydroplaning (cf. Mohrig et al., 1998; Harbitz et al., 2003; Elverhøi
(ERT) together with geological observation (both the macro-
et al., 2005) the observed debris flow could not be transported for a
scopic and microscopic) have allowed for partial depiction as
long distance from a source area. It should be also noted that the pres-
well as refinement of the complex geological structure of the S
ence of this deposit record the destruction phase of the carbonate
edge of the Krzeszowice Graben in the vicinity of the Nawojowa
buildups that resulted in the Late Jurassic sea bottom relief became
Góra. The analyses made allowed to trace the spatial distribution
partly smoothed in the research area (Matyszkiewicz, 1997b;
of the sediments and tectonic phenomena within the research
Krajewski, 2001).
area, supplying a considerable contribution to its geological
Similar development of the Upper Jurassic sediments, to those de-
interpretations.
scribed in this paper, where debris flow deposits covered the calcareous
2. The numerical forward 2D ERT modeling made it possible to con-
turbidites, are known up to now in the research area only from the three
firm some of the assumptions about the geological structure of
outcrops (Matyszkiewicz, 1996). It should be noted that only one of
the research area, and to draw further, additional hypotheses
these outcrops, i.e. placed in Ujazd (Fig. 2), is situated near the northern
about it. The inversion results for the analysed models have
edge of the Krzeszowice Graben (Matyszkiewicz, 1996; Matyszkiewicz
shown good agreement with their field counterparts. The models
et al., 2015b). It is understood that these sediments that are exposed
that relate to the NWG–1 and NWG–2 profiles are much simpler
along these exposures stratigraphically represent Lower Kimmeridgian
compared to the model for the NWG–3 profile. The significant
(Matyszkiewicz, 1996; Matyszkiewicz and Olszewska, 2007;
complexity of this model results from the presence of the highly
Matyszkiewicz et al., 2015b). The same situation appears to hold for
developed karst phenomena, what was interpreted as a result of
the sediments in the research site in Nawojowa Góra.
the geological studies. The usefulness of the forward 2D model-
ing as an effective geophysical technique that can be widely
5.4. Remarks on the occurrence of the Upper Jurassic gravity flow deposits
used as an additional interpretative tool has been also
demonstrated.
The well-preserved gravity related redeposited Upper Jurassic
3. The results obtained from the analysis of the maximum gradients of
deposits are notorious from the narrow faulted zones that are
the interpreted resistivity (both vertical and horizontal) were used
followed the structural boundaries of the Krzeszowice Graben.
for individuating the presumable location of the faults in the research
These deposits, especially are widely encountered lengthwise the
area, in many cases where geological and geomorphological informa-
northern margin of the graben, along which the most spectacular
tion have not confirmed their occurrence.
exposures of them are being observed (Matyszkiewicz, 1996;
4. Sedimentological observations associated with detailed microfacies
Matyszkiewicz and Krajewski, 1996; Ziółkowski, 2007;
analysis conducted on the Upper Jurassic limestones exposed in the
Matyszkiewicz et al., 2015b; Woźniak et al., 2018). It should also
Nawojowa Góra quarry revealed the presences of abundant plank-
be noted that, to a lesser extent, similar redeposited sediments
tonic Saccocoma crinoids. Their occurrence in the studied strata,
are known up to now only from the few outcrops on the south
placed in the southern margin of the Krzeszowice Graben is recorded
side of the graben (Matyszkiewicz et al., 2012; Matyszkiewicz
for the first time.
et al., 2016). It is generally accepted that into the Late Jurassic epi-
5. Undoubtedly, the presence of the gravity-flow deposits in the
continental basin, in the area of research, temporary deteriora-
Nawojowa Góra point to the Late Jurassic synsedimentary tectonic.
tions of conditions that influenced growth of the carbonate
This tectonic activity in the Krzeszowice Graben, initiated by
buildups (internal drowning cf. Bice and Stewart, 1990) along
synsedimentary activity of Kraków-Lubliniec Fault Zone at the SW
with synsedimentary tectonics favoured the development of the
margin of the Małopolska Block, was the main triggering mechanism
gravity-flow deposits (Matyszkiewicz et al., 2016). This tectonics
which was responsible for the development of the gravity-flow
has been, in particular the most intensive in the Late Jurassic in-
deposits.
terval of the Platynota zone (Matyszkiewicz, 1996) and was a re-
6. The presence of structures which are associated with the
percussion of the transregional factors linked to the opening of
synsedimentary tectonic, preserved in the narrow faulted zones fol-
the Northern Atlantic and Tethys Oceans (Ziegler, 1990;
lowing the boundary of the graben indicates that least a portion of
Allenbach, 2002). Simultaneously, the Late Jurassic rejuvenation
the faults already existed in the Late Jurassic.
of older faults at the margins of the Paleozoic homocline base-
ment, especially the Kraków-Lubliniec Fault Zone (Fig. 1) took
place (Żaba, 1999; Matyszkiewicz et al., 2006, 2015a, 2015b,
2016). Recent sedimentological studies, carried out in Acknowledgements
neighbouring areas, have revealed that the Lowermost
Kimmeridgian gravity-flows are also evidently present in the: The authors benefited greatly from the constructive comments and
Holy Cross Mountains; Wolbrom, Kleszczów and Złoczew Graben; suggestions of J. Matyszkiewicz and W.J. Mościcki. Sincere thanks are
Łódź Depression, but also in the Ukrainian part of the Carpathian due to W. Barwicz-Piskorz for kindly help in the microfauna identifica-
Foredeep (Matyszkiewicz et al., 2006; Krajewski et al., 2011, tion. The authors would like to thank W. Błachut and D. Adaszek for
2014, 2016, 2017). Lastly, it should be also noted that the manifes- their help in the ERT field measurements. The authors are grateful also
tation of the intensive tectonic activity, in the southern part of the to anonymous reviewer for the constructive comments. The presented
Silesian-Kraków Homocline is documented, not only by gravity- research was financially supported by the two AGH University of
flow deposits but also by presence of neptunian dykes and Science and Technology Grants: No.15.11.140.637 (TW) and
stromatactis-like cavities (Matyszkiewicz, 1993, 1997a; Olchowy, No.15.11.140.221 (GB).
74 T. Woźniak, G. Bania / Journal of Applied Geophysics 165 (2019) 60–76
References
Alexandrowicz, S.W., 1960. Budowa geologiczna okolic Tyńca. Biul. Inst. Geol. 152, 5–93
(In Polish).
Alexandrowicz, S.W., 1969. Couches du Paléogène de la partie méridionale du Plateau de
Cracovie. Ann. Soc. Geol. Pol. 39, 681–696 (In Polish with French summary).
Allenbach, R.P., 2002. The ups and downs of “Tectonic Quiescence”—recognizing
differential subsidence in the epicontinental sea of the Oxfordian in the Swiss Jura
Mountains. Sediment. Geol. 150, 323–342. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0037-0738(01)
00202-0.
Andresen, N., Reijmer, J.J.G., Droxler, A.W., 2003. Timing and distribution of calciturbidites
around a deeply submerged carbonate platform in a seismically active setting (Pedro
Bank, Northern Nicaragua Rise, Caribbean Sea). Int. J. Earth Sci. 92, 573–592. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s00531-003-0340-0.
Bania, G., Ćwiklik, M., 2013. 2D Electrical Resistivity Tomography interpretation ambigu-
ity – example of field studies supported with analogue and numerical modelling.
Geol., Geophys. Environ. 39, 331–339. https://doi.org/10.7494/geol.2013.39.4.331.
Benzaggagh, M., Homberg, C., Schnyder, J., Ben Abdesselam-Mandaoui, S., 2015. Descrip-
tion and biozonation of crinoid saccocomid sections from the Upper Jurassic sedi-
ments (Oxfordian-Tithonian) of the western Tethyan realm. Ann Paleontol. 101,
95–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annpal.2015.02.002.
Berge, M.A., 2014. Electrical resistivity tomography investigations on a paleoseismological
trenching study. J. Appl. Geophys. 109, 162–174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jappgeo.2014.07.022.
Berge, M.A., Drahor, M.G., 2011. Electrical resistivity tomography investigations of multi-
layered archaeological settlements: part I – modelling. Archaeol. Prospect. 18,
159–171. https://doi.org/10.1002/arp.414.
Bermejo, L., Ortega, A.I., Guérin, R., Benito-Calvo, A., Pérez-González, A., Parés, J.M., Aracil,
E., Bermúdez de Castro, J.M., Carbonell, E., 2017. 2D and 3D ERT imaging for identify-
ing karst morphologies in the archaeological sites of Gran Dolina and Galería Com-
plex (Sierra de Atapuerca, Burgos, Spain). Quat. Int. 433, 393–401. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.quaint.2015.12.031.
Bice, D.M., Stewart, K.G., 1990. The formation and drowning of isolated carbonate sea-
mounts: tectonic and ecological controls in the northern Apennines. In: Tucker, M.,
Wilson, J.L., Crevello, P.D., Sarg, J.R., Read, J.F. (Eds.), Carbonate Platforms: Facies, Se-
quences and Evolution. Special Publication of The International Association of Sedi-
mentologist 9. Blackwell Oxford., pp. 145–168 https://doi.org/10.1002/
9781444303834.ch6.
Bogacz, K., 1967. The geological structure of the northern border of the Krzeszowice Gra-
ben. Prace Geol. Oddz. PAN w Krakowie. 41, 1–94 (In Polish with English summary).
Bran, D.M., Tassone, A.A., Menichetti, M., Cerredo, M.E., Lozano, J.G., Lodolo, E., Vilas, J.F.,
2017. Shallow architecture of Fuegian Andes lineaments based on Electrical Resistiv-
ity Tomography (ERT). Evidences of transverse extensional faulting in the central
Beagle Channel area. Andean Geol. 45, 1–34. https://doi.org/10.5027/andgeov45n1-
3002.
Bromley, R.G., Kędzierski, M., Kołodziej, B., Uchman, A., 2009. Large chambered sponge
borings on a Late Cretaceous abrasion platform at Cracow. Poland. Cretaceous Res.
30, 149–160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cretres.2008.07.001.
Bufford, K.M., Atekwana, E.A., Abdelsalam, M.G., Shemang, E., Atekwana, E.A., Mickus, K.,
Moikwathai, M., Molwalefhe, L., 2012. Geometry and faults tectonic activity of the
Okavango Rift Zone, Botswana: evidence from magnetotelluric and electrical resistiv-
ity tomography imaging. J. Afr. Earth Sci. 65, 61–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jafrearsci.2012.01.004.
Buła, Z., Jachowicz, M., Żaba, J., 1997. Principal characteristics of the Upper Silesian Block
and Małopolska Block border zone (southern Poland). Geol. Mag. 134, 669–677.
Buła, Z., Habryn, R., Jachowicz-Zdanowska, M., Żaba, J., 2015. Precambrian and Lower Pa-
leozoic of the Brunovistulicum (eastern part of the Upper Silesian Block, southern
Poland) – the state of the art. Geol Q. 59, 123–134. https://doi.org/10.7306/gq.1203.
Burzewski, W., 1969. Les conditions structurales du Jurassique de la règion d'Olkusz et de
Wolbrom comme bordières pour les gisements pètrolifères du Basssin de Nida. Prace
Geol. Pan. 61, 3–91 (In Polish with French summary).
Caputo, R., Piscitelli, S., Oliveto, A., Rizzo, E., Lapenna, V., 2003. The use of electrical resis-
tivity tomographies in active tectonics: examples from the Tyrnavos Basin. Greece.
J. Geodyn. 36, 19–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0264-3707(03)00036-X.
Catt, L.M., West, L.J., Clark, R.A., 2009. The use of reference models from a priori data to
guide 2D inversion of electrical resistivity tomography data. Geophys. Prospect. 57,
1035–1048. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2478.2008.00774.x.
Dadlez, R., Kowalczewski, Z., Znosko, J., 1994. Some key problems of the pre-Permian tec-
tonics of Poland. Geol. Q. 38, 169–190.
Dahlin, T., Zhou, B., 2004. A numerical comparison of 2D resistivity imaging with 10 elec-
trode arrays. Geophys. Prospect. 52, 379–398. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-
2478.2004.00423.x.
Danielsen, B.E., Dahlin, T., 2010. Numerical modelling of resolution and sensitivity of ERT
in horizontal boreholes. J. Appl. Geophys. 70, 245–254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jappgeo.2010.01.005.
Díaz, D., Maksymowicz, A., Vargas, G., Vera, E., Contreras-Reyes, E., Rebolledo, S., 2014. Ex-
ploring the shallow structure of the San Ramón thrust fault in Santiago, Chile (~ 33.5
S), using active seismic and electric methods. Solid Earth 5, 837–849. https://doi.org/
10.5194/se-5-837-2014.
Drzewiecki, P.A., Simó, J.A., 2002. Depositional processes, triggering mechanisms and sed-
iment composition of carbonate gravity flow deposits: examples from the Late Creta-
ceous of the south-central Pyrenees. Spain. Sediment Geol. 146, 155–189. https://doi.
org/10.1016/S0037-0738(01)00171-3.
Dunham, R.J., 1962. Classification of carbonate rocks according to depositional texture. In:
Ham, W.E. (Ed.), Classification of Carbonate Rocks- a Symposium. American Associa-
tion of Petroleum Geologists Memoir vol. 1, pp. 108–121.
Dżułyński, S., 1952. The origin of the Upper Jurassic limestones in the Cracow area.
Rocznik Polskiego Towarzystwa Geologicznego. vol. 21, pp. 125–180 (In Polish,
with English summary).
Dżułyński, S., 1953. Tektonika południowej części Wyżyny Krakowskiej. Acta Geol. Pol. 3,
325–440 (In Polish).
Dżułyński, S., Henkiel, A., Klimek, K., Pokorny, J., 1966. The development of Valleys in the
Southern part of the Cracow Upland. Ann. Soc. Geol. Pol. 36, 329–343 (In Polish with
English summary).
Eberli, G.P., 1987. Carbonate turbidite sequences deposited in rift-basins of the Jurassic
Tethys Ocean (eastern Alps, Switzerland). Sedimentology 34, 363–388. https://doi.
org/10.1111/j.1365-3091.1987.tb00576.x.
Elverhøi, A., Issler, D., De Blasio, F.V., Ilstad, T., Harbitz, C.B., Gauer, P., 2005. Emerging in-
sights into the dynamics of submarine debris flows. Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. 5,
633–648. https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-5-633-2005.
Elwaseif, M., Slater, L., 2010. Quantifying tomb geometries in resistivity images using wa-
tershed algorithms. J. Archaeol. Sci. 37, 1424–1436. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jas.2010.01.002.
Embry III, A.F., Klovan, J.E., 1972. Absolute water depth limits of late Devonian paleoeco-
logical zones. Geol. Rundsch. 61, 672–686.
Fazzito, S.Y., Rapalini, A.E., Cortés, J.M., Terrizzano, C.M., 2009. Characterization of Quater-
nary faults by electric resistivity tomography in the Andean Precordillera of Western
Argentina. J. S. Am. Earth Sci. 28, 217–228. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jsames.2009.06.001.
Felisiak, I., 1992. Oligocene–early Miocene karst deposits and their importance for recog-
nition of the development of tectonic and relief in the Carpathian Foreland, Kraków
Region. South. Pol. Ann. Soc. Geol. Polon. 62, 173–207 (In Polish with English
summary).
Felisiak, I., Matyszkiewicz, J., 2001. Upper Jurassic sedimentation, Tertiary, pre-Badenian
fault tectonics and karst features. In: Paulo, A., Krobicki, M. (Eds.), Przewodnik
LXXII Zjazdu Polskiego Towarzystwa Geologicznego w Krakowie. Państwowy
Instytut Geologiczny, pp. 26–37 (In Polish with English summary).
Flügel, E., 2004. Microfacies of Carbonate Rocks: Analysis, Interpretation and Application.
Springer, Berlin 976 pp.
Fox, R.C., Hohmann, G.W., Killpack, T.J., Rijo, L., 1980. Topographic effects in resistivity and
induced polarization surveys. Geophysics 45, 75–93. https://doi.org/10.1190/
1.1441041.
Franke, D., Hoffmann, N., 1999. Das Elbe-Lineament-bedeutende Geofraktur oder
Phantomgebilde?-Teil 2: Regionale Zusammenhange. Z. Geol. Wiss. 27, 319–350 (In
German).
Frid, V., Averbach, A., Frid, M., Dudkinski, D., Liskevich, G., 2017. Statistical analysis of re-
sistivity anomalies caused by underground caves. Pure Appl. Geophys. 174,
997–1012. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00024-015-1106-x.
Głowniak, E., 2006. The Platysphinctes immigration event: biostratigraphic and
palaeobiogeographic implications for the Middle Oxfordian (Late Jurassic) seas of
Central Europe (NW Germany and Poland). Neues Jahrb. Geol. Palaontol. Abh. 241,
155–201. https://doi.org/10.1127/njgpa/241/2006/155.
Gołębiowska, B., Pieczka, A., Rzepa, G., Matyszkiewicz, J., Krajewski, M., 2010. Iodargyrite
from Zalas (Cracow area, Poland) as an indicator of Oligocene–Miocene aridity in
Central Europe. Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol. 296, 130–137. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.palaeo.2010.06.022.
Gómez-Ortiz, D., Martín-Velázquez, S., Martín-Crespo, T., De Ignacio-San José, C., Lillo, J.,
2010. Application of electrical resistivity tomography to the environmental character-
ization of abandoned massive sulphide mine ponds (Iberian Pyrite Belt, SW Spain).
Near Surf. Geophys. 8, 65–74. https://doi.org/10.3997/1873-0604.2009052.
Gonzales, A., Dahlin, T., Barmen, G., Rosberg, J.E., 2016. Electrical resistivity tomography
and induced polarization for mapping the subsurface of alluvial fans: A case study
in Punata (Bolivia). Geosciences 6, 51. https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences6040051.
Górecka, E., 1993. Geological setting of the Silesian-Cracow Zn-Pb deposits. Geol. Q. 37,
127–146.
Gradziński, R., 1962. Origin and development of subterranean karst in the southern part
of the Cracow Upland. Ann. Soc. Geol. Pol. 32, 429–492 (In Polish with English
summary).
Gradziński, R., 1972. Przewodnik Geologiczny po Okolicach Krakowa. Wydawnictwa
Geologiczne, Warszawa 335 pp. (In Polish).
Gradziński, R., 2009. Geological Map of Kraków region without Quaternary and terrestrial
Tertiary deposits. Wydawnictwa Instytutu Nauk Geologicznych PAN, Kraków.
Gwinner, M.P., 1971. Carbonate rocks of the Upper Jurassic in SW-Germany. In: Müller, G.
(Ed.), Sedimentology of Parts of Central Europe. Kramer, Frankfurt a. M., pp. 192–207.
Habryn, R., Buła, Z., Nawrocki, J., 2014. The Kraków sector of the Kraków-Lubliniec tec-
tonic zone in the light of data obtained from new boreholes of Trojanowice 2 and
Cianowice 2. Biul. Państw Inst. Geol. 459, 47–60 (In Polish with English summary).
Harbitz, C.B., Parker, G., Elverhøi, A., Marr, J.G., Mohrig, D., Harff, P.A., 2003. Hydroplaning
of subaqueous debris flows and glide blocks: Analytical solutions and discussion.
J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 108, 2349–2366. https://doi.org/10.1029/2001JB001454.
Hirsch, M., Bentley, L.R., Dietrich, P., 2008. A comparison of electrical resistivity, ground
penetrating radar and seismic refraction results at a river terrace site. J. Environ.
Eng. Geophys. 13, 325–333. https://doi.org/10.2113/JEEG13.4.325.
Hisham, H., Nordiana, M.M., Jia, T.Y., 2017. Evaluation of Semanggol Formation (Permian
Facies) using Electrical Resistivity Tomography and Seismic Refraction Tomography
Parameter. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 62, 012008. https://doi.org/10.1088/
1755-1315/62/1/012008.
Ikhane, P.R., Omosanya, K.O., Akinmosin, A.A., Odugbesan, A.B., 2012. Electrical Resistivity
Imaging (ERI) of Slope Deposits and Structures in some parts of Eastern Dahomey
Basin. J. Appl. Sci. 12, 716–726. https://doi.org/10.3923/jas.2012.716.726.
Ishola, K.S., Nawawi, M.N.M., Abdullah, K., 2015. Combining multiple electrode arrays for
two-dimensional electrical resistivity imaging using the unsupervised classification
 T. Woźniak, G. Bania / Journal of Applied Geophysics 165 (2019) 60–76
technique. Pure Appl. Geophys. 172, 1615–1642. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00024-
014-1007-4.
Jasionowski, M., 1995. A Cretaceous non-depositional surface in the Kraków Upland
(Mydlniki, Zabierzów): burrows, borings and stromatolites. Ann. Soc. Geol. Pol. 65,
63–77 (In Polish with English summary).
Jurkowska, A., Kołodziej, B., 2013. Taphonomic differentiation of Oxfordian ammonites
from the Cracow Upland. Poland. Paläont Z. 87, 67–82. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s12542-012-0149-x.
Kaufmann, O., Deceuster, J., Quinif, Y., 2012. An electrical resistivity imaging-based
strategy to enable site-scale planning over covered palaeokarst features in the
Tournaisis area (Belgium). Eng. Geol. 133, 49–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
enggeo.2012.01.017.
Kędzierski, M., Kołodziej, B., Hoffmann, M., Machaniec, E., Stworzewicz, E., Szulc, J., 2013.
Budowa geologiczna i paleontologia regionu krakowskiego: dolny perm, środkowa i
górna jura, górna kreda. In: Kędzierski, M., Kołodziej, B. (Eds.), Aktualizm i
Antyaktualizm w Paleontologii. XXII Konferencja Naukowa Sekcji Paleontologicznej
Polskiego Towarzystwa Geologicznego. Polskie Towarzystwo Geologiczne,
pp. 87–100 (In Polish).
Keupp, H., Matyszkiewicz, J., 1997. Zur Fazies relevanz von Saccocoma-Resten
(Schwebcrinoiden) in Oberjura-Kalken des nördlichen Tethys-Schelfs. Geol. Bl
Nordost-Bayern. 47, 53–70 (In German, with English summary).
Kochman, A., Matyszkiewicz, J., 2012. Microbial laminites with coprolites from Upper Ju-
rassic carbonate buildups (Kraków-Częstochowa Upland, Poland). Ann. Soc. Geol. Pol.
82, 331–347.
Kołodziej, B., Szulc, J., Machaniec, E., Kędzierski, M., Duda, M., 2010. Injection dykes as ev-
idence of Campanian synsedimentary tectonics on the Kraków Swell, southern
Poland. Ann. Soc. Geol. Pol. 80, 285–301.
Krajewski, M., 2001. Upper Jurassic chalky limestones in the Zakrzówek Horst, Kraków,
Kraków-Wieluń Upland (South Poland). Ann. Soc. Geol. Pol. 71, 43–51.
Krajewski, M., Król, K., Olszewska, B., Felisiak, I., Skwarczek, M., 2011. Facies of the Upper
Jurassic-Lower Cretaceous sediments in the basement of the Carpathian Foredeep
(western Ukraine). Ann. Soc. Geol. Pol. 81, 291–307.
Krajewski, M., Olchowy, P., Felisiak, I., 2014. Lower Kimmeridgian layer with bored and
encrusted hiatus concretions (Upper Jurassic, Central Poland): implications for stra-
tigraphy and basin evolution. Ann. Soc. Geol. Pol. 84, 113–129.
Krajewski, M., Olchowy, P., Felisiak, I., 2016. Late Jurassic facies architecture of the
Złoczew Graben: implications for evolution of the tectonic-controlled northern
peri-Tethyan shelf (Upper Oxfordian–Lower Kimmeridgian, Poland). Facies 62, 4.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10347-015-0455-3.
Krajewski, M., Olchowy, P., Zatoń, M., Bajda, T., 2017. Kimmeridgian hardground-
sequence boundary from the Mesozoic margin of the Holy Cross Mountains (central
Poland): implications for the evolution of the northern Tethyan carbonate shelf. Fa-
cies 63, 15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10347-017-0496-x.
Krokowski, J., 1984. Mesoscopic structural studies of the Permo-Mesozoic deposits in the
south-eastern part of the Silesia-Cracow Upland (southern Poland). Ann. Soc. Geol.
Pol. 54, 79–121 (In Polish).
Kutek, J., 1994. Jurassic tectonic events in south-eastern cratonic Poland. Acta Geol. Pol.
44, 167–221.
Kutek, J., Głazek, J., 1972. The Holy Cross area, Central Poland, in the Alpine cycle. Acta
Geol. Pol. 22, 603–653.
Lasemi, Y., Jalilian, A.H., 2010. The Middle Jurassic basinal deposits of the Surmeh Forma-
tion in the Central Zagros Mountains, southwest Iran: facies, sequence stratigraphy,
and controls. Carbonates Evaporites 25, 283–295. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13146-
010-0032-3.
Leinfelder, R.R., Werner, W., Nose, M., Schmid, D.U., Krautter, M., Laterneser, R.R., Tacacs,
M., Hartmann, D., 1996. Paleoecology, growth parameters and dynamics of coral,
sponge and microbolite reefs from the Late Jurassic. Göttinger Arb. Geol. Paläont.
Sb. 2, 227–248.
Loke, M.H., Barker, R.D., 1996. Rapid Least-Squares Inversion of Apparent Resistivity
Pseudosections by a Quasi-Newton Method. Geophys. Prospect. 44, 131–152.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2478.1996.tb00142.x.
Loke, M.H., 2000. Topographic modelling in resistivity imaging inversion. 62nd EAGE Con-
ference & Technical Exhibition Extended Abstracts, D-2 http://www.geotomosoft.
com/topoabs.pdf.
Loke, M.H., 2012. Tutorial: 2-D and 3-D Electrical Imaging Surveys. Geotomo Software,
Malaysia.
Loke, M.H., Ackworth, I., Dahlin, T., 2003. A comparison of smooth and blocky inversion
methods in 2D electrical imaging surveys. Explor. Geophys. 34, 182–187. https://
doi.org/10.1071/EG03182.
Loke, M.H., Chambers, J.E., Rucher, D.F., Kuras, O., Wilkinson, P.B., 2013. Recent develop-
ments in the direct-current geoelectrical imaging method. J. Appl. Geophys. 95,
135–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jappgeo.2013.02.017.
Lu, D.B., Zhou, Q.Y., Junejo, S.A., Xiao, A.L., 2015. A systematic study of topography effect of
ERT based on 3-D modeling and inversion. Pure Appl. Geophys. 172, 1531–1546.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00024-014-1015-4.
Marcinowski, R., 1974. The transgressive Cretaceous (Upper Albian through Turonian)
deposits of the Polish Jura Chain. Acta Geol. Pol. 24, 117–220.
Matyja, B.A., Ziółkowski, P., 2014. Upper Jurassic stratigraphy and facies differentiation—a
case study of the Cianowice 2 and Trojanowice 2 boreholes (Olkusz Upland and
Krzeszowice Graben borderland). Biul. Inst. Geol. 459, 93–108 (In Polish with English
summary).
Matyszkiewicz, J., 1993. Genesis of stromatactis in an Upper Jurassic carbonate
buildup (Młynka; Cracow Region, Southern Poland); internal reworking and
erosion of organic growth cavities. Facies 28, 87–96. https://doi.org/10.1007/
BF02539730.
75
Matyszkiewicz, J., 1996. The significance of Saccocoma-calciturbidites for the analysis of
the Polish epicontinental late Jurassic Basin: an example from the Southern
Cracow-Wielun Upland (Poland). Facies 34, 23–40. https://doi.org/10.1007/
BF02546155.
Matyszkiewicz, J., 1997a. Stromatactis cavities and stromatactis-like cavities in the Upper
Jurassic carbonate buildups at Młynka and Zabierzów (Oxfordian, southern Poland).
Ann. Soc. Geol. Pol. 67, 45–55.
Matyszkiewicz, J., 1997b. Microfacies, sedimentation and some aspects of diagenesis of
Upper Jurassic sediments from the elevated part of the Northern peri-Tethyan
Shelf, a comparative study on the Lochen area (Schwabische Alb) and the Cracow
area (Cracow-Wielun Upland, Poland). Berl. Geowiss. Abh. E21, 1–111.
Matyszkiewicz, J., 1999. Sea-bottom relief versus differential compaction in ancient plat-
form carbonates: a critical reassessment of an example from Upper Jurassic of the
Cracow-Wieluń Upland. Ann. Soc. Geol. Pol. 69, 63–79.
Matyszkiewicz, J., Krajewski, M., 1996. Lithology and sedimentation of Upper Jurassic
massive limestones near Bolechowice, Kraków-Wieluń Upland, south Poland. Ann.
Soc. Geol. Pol. 66, 201–232.
Matyszkiewicz, J., Olszewska, B., 2007. Osady podmorskich spływów
grawitacyjnych pogranicza oksfordu i kimerydu w Ujeździe. Tomy Jurajskie. 4,
109–117 (In Polish).
Matyszkiewicz, J., Krajewski, M., Kędzierski, J., 2006. Origin and evolution of an Upper Ju-
rassic complex of carbonate buildups from Zegarowe Rocks (Kraków–Wieluń Upland,
Poland). Facies 52, 249–263. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10347-005-0038-9.
Matyszkiewicz, J., Kochman, A., Duś, A., 2012. Influence of local sedimentary conditions on
development of microbialites in the Oxfordian carbonate buildups from the southern
part of the Kraków–Częstochowa Upland (South Poland). Sediment. Geol. 263,
109–132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sedgeo.2011.08.005.
Matyszkiewicz, J., Kochman, A., Rzepa, G., Gołębiowska, B., Krajewski, M., Gaidzik, K., Żaba,
J., 2015a. Epigenetic silicification of the Upper Oxfordian limestones in the Sokole
Hills (Kraków-Częstochowa Upland): relationship to facies development and tecton-
ics. Acta Geol. Pol. 65, 192–214.
Matyszkiewicz, J., Felisiak, I., Hoffmann, M., Kochman, A., Kołodziej, B., Krajewski, M.,
Olchowy, P., 2015b. Transgressive Callovian succession and Oxfordian microbial-
sponge carbonate buildups in the Kraków Upland. In: Haczewski, G. (Ed.), Guidebook
for Field Trips Accompanying 31st IAS Meeting of Sedimentology Held in Kraków on
22nd–25th of June. Polskie Towarzystwo Geologiczne , pp. 51–74. http://www.ing.uj.
edu.pl/documents/4243866/646a50cd-485d-4136-b2bc-d649e9aea869.
Matyszkiewicz, J., Krajewski, M., Kochman, A., Kozłowski, A., Duliński, M., 2016. Oxfordian
neptunian dykes with brachiopods from the southern part of the Kraków-Często-
chowa Upland (southern Poland) and their links to hydrothermal vents. Facies 62,
12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10347-016-0464-x.
Mohrig, D., Ellis, C., Parker, G., Whipple, K.X., Hondzo, M., 1998. Hydroplaning of subaque-
ous debris flows. GSA Bull. 110, 387–394. https://doi.org/10.1130/0016-7606(1998)
110b0387:HOSDFN2.3.CO;2.
Mojica, A., Pérez, T., Toral, J., Miranda, R., Franceschi, P., Calderón, C., Vergara, F., 2017.
Shallow electrical resistivity imaging of the Limón fault, Chagres River Watershed.
Panama Canal. J. Appl. Geophys. 138, 135–142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jappgeo.2017.01.010.
Morawska, A., 1997. The Lubliniec fracture zone: boundary of the Upper Silesia and
Malopolska Massifs, southern Poland. Ann. Soc. Geol. Pol. 67, 429–437.
Mościcki, W.J., Bania, G., Ćwiklik, M., Borecka, A., 2014. DC resistivity studies of shallow
geology in the vicinity of Vistula River flood bank in Czernichów village (near Krakow
in Poland). Stud. Geotech. Mech. 36, 63–70. https://doi.org/10.2478/sgem-2014-
0008.
Nawrocki, J., Fanning, M., Lewandowska, A., Polechońska, O., Werner, T., 2008.
Palaeomagnetism and the age of the Cracow volcanic rocks (S Poland). Geophys.
J. Int. 174, 475–488. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-246X.2008.03804.x.
Nawrocki, J., Krzemiński, L., Pańczyk, M., 2010. 40Ar-39Ar ages of selected rocks and min-
erals from the Kraków-Lubliniec Fault Zone, and their relation to the Paleozoic struc-
tural evolution of the Malopolska and Brunovistulian terranes (S Poland). Geol. Q. 54,
289–300.
Nguyen, F., Garambois, S., Jongmans, D., Pirard, E., Loke, M.H., 2005. Image processing of
2D resistivity data for imaging faults. J. Appl. Geophys. 57, 260–277. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jappgeo.2005.02.001.
Nur Amalina, M.K.A., Nordiana, M.M., Bery, A.A., Bin Anuar, M.N.A., Maslinda, U., Sulaiman,
N., Saharudin, M.A., Hisham, H., Nordiana, A.N., Taqiuddin, Z.M., 2017. Application of
2-D Resistivity Imaging and Seismic Refraction Method in Identifying the Structural
Geological Contact of Sedimentary Lithologies. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Sci. 62, 012005.
https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/62/1/012005.
Olchowy, P., 2011. Possible origin of stromatactis-like cavities in Upper Jurassic sediments
from the Wielkanoc quarry near Gołcza (Kraków–Częstochowa Upland, southern
Poland)—experimental studies. Facies 57, 613–625. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10347-
010-0262-9.
Orlando, L., 2013. Some considerations on electrical resistivity imaging for characteriza-
tion of waterbed sediments. J. Appl. Geophys. 95, 77–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jappgeo.2013.05.005.
Papadopoulos, N.G., Yi, M.J., Kim, J.H., Tsourlos, P., Tsokas, G.N., 2010. Geophysical investi-
gation of tumuli by means of surface 3D electrical resistivity tomography. J. Appl.
Geophys. 70, 192–205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jappgeo.2009.12.001.
Pellicer, X.M., Gibson, P., 2011. Electrical resistivity and Ground Penetrating Radar for the
characterisation of the internal architecture of Quaternary sediments in the Midlands
of Ireland. J. Appl. Geophys. 75, 638–647. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jappgeo.2011.09.019.
Qarqori, K., Rouai, M., Moreau, F., Saracco, G., Dauteuil, O., Hermitte, D., Boualoul, M., Le
Carlier de Veslud, C., 2012. Geoelectrical tomography investigating and modeling of
76 T. Woźniak, G. Bania / Journal of Applied Geophysics 165 (2019) 60–76
fractures network around Bittit Spring (Middle Atlas, Morocco). Int. J. Geophys. 2012,
1–13. https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/489634.
Quiquerez, A., Sarih, S., Allemand, P., Garcia, J.P., 2013. Fault rate controls on carbonate
gravity-flow deposits of the Liassic of Central High Atlas (Morocco). Mar. Pet. Geol.
43, 349–369. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2013.01.002.
Radwański, A., 1968. Lower Tortonian transgression onto the Miechów and Cracow Up-
lands. Acta Geol. Pol. 18, 387–443 (In Polish with English summary).
Reijmer, J.J., Palmieri, P., Groen, R., 2012. Compositional variations in calciturbidites and
calcidebrites in response to sea-level fluctuations (Exuma Sound, Bahamas). Facies
58, 493–507. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10347-011-0291-z.
Rubert, Y., Jati, M., Loisy, C., Cerepi, A., Foto, G., Muska, K., 2012. Sedimentology of
resedimented carbonates: facies and geometrical characterisation of an upper Creta-
ceous calciturbidite system in Albania. Sediment. Geol. 257, 63–77. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.sedgeo.2012.02.009.
Rühle, E., Ciuk, E., Osika, R., Znosko, J., 1977. Geological Map of Poland without Quaternary
deposits, Scale 1: 500 000. Wydawnictwa Geologiczne, Warszawa (In Polish).
Rutkowski, J., 1989. Geological structure of the Cracow region. Prz. Geol. 3, 302–307 (In
Polish with English summary).
Rutkowski, J., 1993. DGMP in 1: 50 000 Sheet Kraków (No. 973) Explanations. Państwowy
Instytut Geologiczny, Warszawa In Polish. http://bazadata.pgi.gov.pl/data/smgp/
arkusze_txt/smgp 0973.pdf.
Savary, B., Ferry, S., 2004. Geometry and petrophysical parameters of a calcarenitic turbi-
dite lobe (Barremian-Aptian, Pas-de-la-Cluse, France). Sediment. Geol. 168, 281–304.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sedgeo.2004.04.004.
Seminsky, K.Z., Zaripov, R.M., Olenchenko, V.V., 2016. Interpretation of shallow electrical
resistivity images of faults: tectonophysical approach. Russ. Geol. Geophys. 57 (9),
1349–1358. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rgg.2016.08.020.
Senowbari-Daryan, B., Bucur, I.I., Schlagintweit, F., Săsăran, E., Matyszkiewicz, J., 2008.
Crescentiella, a new name for “Tubiphytes” morronensis CRESCENTI, 1969: an enig-
matic Jurassic–Cretaceous microfossil. Geol. Croatica 61, 185–214. https://doi.org/
10.4154/GC.2008.17.
Sjödahl, P., Dahlin, T., Zhou, B., 2006. 2.5D resistivity modeling of embankment dams to
assess influence from geometry and material properties. Geophysics 71,
G107–G114. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.2198217.
Smith, R.C., Sjogren, D.B., 2006. An evaluation of electrical resistivity imaging (ERI) in Qua-
ternary sediments, southern Alberta. Can. Geosphere 2, 287–298. https://doi.org/
10.1130/GES00048.1.
Štěpančíková, P., Dohnal, J., Pánek, T., Łój, M., Smolková, V., Šilhán, K., 2011. The applica-
tion of electrical resistivity tomography and gravimetric survey as useful tools in an
active tectonics study of the Sudetic Marginal Fault (Bohemian Massif, central
Europe). J. Appl. Geophys. 74, 69–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jappgeo.2011.03.007.
Stummer, P., Maurer, H., Green, A.G., 2004. Experimental design.Electrical resistivity data
sets that provide optimum subsurface information. Geophysics 69, 120–139. https://
doi.org/10.1190/1.1649381.
Suski, B., Brocard, G., Authemayou, C., Muralles, B.C., Teyssier, C., Holliger, K., 2010. Local-
ization and characterization of an active fault in an urbanized area in central
Guatemala by means of geoelectrical imaging. Tectonophysics 480, 88–98. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.tecto.2009.09.028.
Suzuki, K., Toda, S., Kusunoki, K., Fujimitsu, Y., Mogi, T., Jomori, A., 2000. Case studies of
electrical and electromagnetic methods applied to mapping active faults beneath
the thick quaternary. Eng. Geol. 56, 29–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0013-7952(99)
00132-5.
Telford, W.M., Geldart, L.P., Sheriff, R.E., 1990. Applied Geophysics. Cambridge University
Press (729 pp).
Terrizzano, C.M., Fazzito, S.Y., Cortés, J.M., Rapalini, A.E., 2012. Electrical resistivity tomog-
raphy applied to the study of neotectonic structures, northwestern Precordillera Sur,
Central Andes of Argentina. J. S. Am. Earth Sci. 34, 47–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jsames.2011.10.002.
Walaszczyk, I., 1992. Turonian through Santonian deposits of the Central Polish Uplands;
their facies development, inoceramid paleontology and stratigraphy. Acta Geol. Pol.
42, 1–122.
Woźniak, T., Bania, G., Mościcki, J.W., Ćwiklik, M., 2018. Electrical resistivity tomography
(ERT) and sedimentological analysis applied to investigation of Upper Jurassic lime-
stones from the Krzeszowice Graben (Kraków Upland, southern Poland). Geol. Q.
62, 287–302. https://doi.org/10.7306/gq.1403.
Żaba, J., 1999. The structural evolution of Lower Paleozoic succession in the Upper Silesia
Block and Małopolska Block border zone, southern Poland. Prace Państw Inst. Geol.
166, 1–162 (In Polish with English summary).
Żelaźniewicz, A., Pańczyk, M., Nawrocki, J., Fanning, M., 2008. A Carboniferous/Permian,
calc-alkaline, I-type granodiorite from the Małopolska Block, Southern Poland: impli-
cations from geochemical and U-Pb zircon age data. Geol. Q 52, 301–308.
Zhu, T., Zhou, J., Wang, H., 2017. Localization and characterization of the Zhangdian-
Renhe fault zone in Zibo city, Shandong province, China, using electrical resistivity to-
mography (ERT). J. Appl. Geophys. 136, 343–352. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jappgeo.2016.11.016.
Ziegler, P.A., 1990. Geological Atlas of Western and Central Europe. Shell Internationale
petroleum Maatschapij, The Hauge.
Ziółkowski, P., 2007. Stratygrafia i zróżnicowanie facjalne górnej jury wschodniej części
Wyżyny Krakowskiej. Tomy Jurajskie 4, 25–38 (In Polish).