See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/271949508

Electromagnetic signatures of collision zones in India

Article  in  Geotectonics · July 2014

DOI: 10.1134/S0016852114040050

CITATIONS READS
0 519

2 authors:

T. Harinarayana K. Veeraswamy
National Geophysical Research Institute; Gujarat Energy Research and Management … CSIR - National Geophysical Research Institute, Hyderabad, India
73 PUBLICATIONS   886 CITATIONS    31 PUBLICATIONS   389 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by K. Veeraswamy on 17 April 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

ISSN 00168521, Geotectonics, 2014, Vol. 48, No. 4, pp. 327–345. © Pleiades Publishing, Inc., 2014.

Electromagnetic Signatures of Collision Zones in India1

T. Harinarayana* and K. Veeraswamy
CSIR  National Geophysical Research Institute, Uppal Road, Hyderabad—500007, India.
* Presently working as Director, GERMI, Gandhinagar, Gujarat.
email: thari54@yahoo.com, kv.swamy@gmail.com
Received June 20, 2011

Abstract—Indian subcontinent has experienced intense tectonic activity within the continent in the form of
subduction, continent–continent collision, subduction–collision–accretion tectonics. Deep electrical sig
natures of intense tectonic activity are presented for three different regions: Himalayan region, Central
Indian Tectonic zone and Southern Granulite terrain. Two long traverses at each region are discussed along
with other geophysical data. The geoelectric sections across the Himalayan region have shown a clear north
ward dipping signature of the anomalous conductive features at upper to midcrustal depths. This model gave
a clear evidence for the collision and subduction processes. The profiles across the Central Indian tectonic
zone constituting major eastwest trending faults and mobile belts provided the evidence for the presence of
mantle derived fluids at midcrustal depths and also gave a clear evidence for the collision processes between
the Bundelkhand craton and the Dharwar craton. The collision–accretion tectonic process is observed in
Southern Granulite terrain of south India. Evidence for the exhumation of mantle derived fluids to the mid
crustal depths has been observed along the Vattalakundu–Kanyakumari profile, while the subduction–colli
sion–accretion processes have been observed along Kolattur–Palani geotransect. In all the three tectonically
active regions, the deep electrical structure mapped from magnetotellurics, gave a clear evidence for the pres
ence of anomalous conductive structures that can be related to active tectonic regime that has paved a way for
better understanding of the evolution of the deep crust. In this paper all the earlier works in three regions with
emphasis on tectonics are briefly reviewed.

Keywords: electromagnetic signature, collision zones, electrical conductivity, magnetotellurics, lithosphere,

Himalayas, suture, longitudinal conductance
DOI: 10.1134/S0016852114040050

1
INTRODUCTION
Continental rifts and valleys, collision of the cra
tons and mega block structures are important tectonic
features on the surface of the continental crust.
Among the various physiographic features, collision
phenomena plays an important role as they are the
centers and formed due to complex interaction of tec
tonic and magmatic processes and helps to understand
the evolution of the crust. Major collision tectonic
regions are associated with deformation, metamor
phism, magmatism and appear as major linear fea
tures. These collision processes seem to be observed as
an episodic and known to have taken place since late
Archean times [15, 16, 84, 100, 105]. Study of colli
sion tectonics and its geodynamic phenomena of Pre
cambrian times is a Herculean task due to many
uncertainties in that period. This is due to the absence
of clear evidence of other different geological pro
cesses such as formation of sedimentary basins, multi
ple phases of igneous intrusives with overprinting rela
tionships etc. Archean period in the geological history
is very important as a major portion of the present day
crust was formed and stabilized during that period
1 The article is published in the original.
[60]. Among the various theories that explain the evo
lution of the crust, plate tectonic theory could explain
major characteristics of the cratons, lithospheric
plates, collision phenomena and unified the existing
theories on the formation of geosynclines, continental
drift, plume tectonics etc. [11, 75, 84, 105, 112].
The collision process can be visualized in different
ways. One such type is convergent margins in which
the oceanic crust is subducted. In such a process nar
row zones of deformation occurs which can be traced
from near surface to lithospheric depths or more.
When two plates of oceanic and continental type col
lide, subduction process may not occur due to lower
density of the continental crust. If the size of the con
tinental crust is small it is more likely that terrain
accretion may occur [80]. Coney et al. [17] are the first
to recognize the terrain accretion process in Canadian
Cordillera and showed an evidence for growth of con
tinents over a geological time. Such accretion process
can be mapped even today in the northern Canadian
Cordillera in the form of accretion of Yakutat block
accreted to North America [51]. Another form of col
lision is a continent–continent collision process,
where the two continents are large in size. Such pro
cess can occur and the deformation due to collision

327
328 HARINARAYANA, VEERASWAMY
process can extend over few thousands of kilometers.
For example, the deformation observed in the Indian
Ocean can be related to the continent–continent col
lision process of India–Eurasia. The deformation in
the Central Indian Ocean has been observed in two dif
ferent spatial scales—one in a smaller scale (~5–10 km)
in the form of reverse faulted blocks and the other in a
large scale (~100–300 km) exhibiting in the form of
folds within the oceanic lithosphere [9, 19].
The study of continent–continent collision pro
cess is important as it provides clues on global weather
conditions and also on the composition of the sea
water. For example, it is believed that the assembly of
the present day continents has influenced the mon
soon [55] and also the water in the oceans [24, 66].
Our improved knowledge on the earth system helps for
better understanding on the interaction of the plates
with climate influencing tectonics [110]. Another
important process during continentcontinent colli
sion is the mountain building activity, e.g., formation
of the spectacular Himalayan mountains in Asia and
also the Alps mountains in Europe.
A number of models are discussed to explain the
continental collision processes based on the geologi
cal, geochemical and geophysical data. While the sur
face and near surface features are well explained based
on the geological and geochemical data, the subsur
face features are mapped from geophysical data. The
present paper is devoted to understand the geodynam
ical processes of collision tectonics in a plate tectonic
framework by utilizing the conductivity characteristics
of the deep crust along different geotraverses using
deep electromagnetic technique, namely, the “Mag
netotellurics.” This technique has played an important
role in mapping the deep crust and upper mantle
structures and also helps to understand the crust–
mantle characterization process. The recent
INDEPTH studies in Tibet have characterized the
deep crust and mantle structures and have given an
evidence for the presence of fluids at lower crust. The
various tectonic features in different continents have
also been mapped by magnetotelluric studies [36, 44].
Magnetotelluric Method
Electromagnetic (EM) theory is originated from
four fundamental equations proposed by James Clerk
Maxwell. These equations are from the wellknown
principles of Ampere’s and Faraday’s laws related to
electric and magnetic fields. They are further analyzed
by Tikhonov [97] and Cagniard [10] and proposed a
relation between the resistivity of a medium and elec
tricmagnetic field variations. These relations gave
birth to a new geophysical method, namely “the Mag
netotellurics (MT).”
More details on the methodology and other details
can be seen in several publications [107] and reviews
and it’s application to different geological problems
can be seen [43, 100, 103]. The collision zones have
been studied by using deep geophysical techniques in
different parts of the world. This includes deep seismic
and deep e.m. techniques. Before presenting the
e.m. signatures of collision zone tectonics, a brief
description of electrical structure of the collision
zones is briefly described here.
EM signatures of Collision Zones in Other Regions
Although the present study is limited to Indian sub
continent, a brief description of other similar regions
is presented in the following which provide better
understanding.
Arabia–Eurasia Collision Zone in Eastern Anatolia.
The Arabia–Eurasia collision in Eastern Anatolia is
generally accepted to be at a younger stage (~12 Ma)
of development than the India–Asia (45–70 Ma) col
lision [21, 83, 84]. The moderately young age of this
collision gives an opportunity to study the common
features for both zones and examine the temporal evo
lution. On the basis of passive seismic and gravity stud
ies Zor et al. [116] showed that the crust beneath 2 km
high plateau has been thickened to around 50 km.
Turkoglu et al. [99] have primarily used long period
MT data to study large scale resistivity structure on two
main transects of eastern Anatolia, extending from the
Arabian Plate to the Black Sea. The eastern transect
(see fig. 5 in [100]) passes through the area where
direct convergence occurs between the Arabian and
Eurasian plates. The resistivity model obtained by
2D inversion of the data reveals a high conductive
midcrustal layer. The conductance of this layer
exceeds 5000 S at some places, but it does not maintain
this value over the same spatial area, hence, resistivity of
the upper mantle can be constrained in Anatolia. A
decoupling between upper and lower parts of the lithos
phere can occur due to the presence of fluids that may
weaken the crust and mantle to allow lateral flow.
European Alps and Pyrenees. The Alps were formed
by a collision—as the European Plate was subducted
southward beneath parts of the African Plate—that
closed the Tethys Ocean. The collision was relatively
longlasting with major events in the Cretaceous and
early Tertiary period [18, 25]. Structural mapping and
seismic reflection have been integrated to image the
structures from surface to the upper mantle, and are
dominated by Southdipping structures in the crust
[89]. The deformation rate (2 mm/year) is slow across
the Alps [12] as compared to convergence rate across
Himalayas. Zones of high conductivity were deline
ated using a localized MT survey in the Pennine Alps
of Switzerland by Losito et al. [48] and attributed them
to the presence of interconnected graphite. Other MT
surveys have delineated a major zone of crustal high
conductivity [47] which has beeninterpreted as a
zone with at least 5% partial melting [30].
AltiplanoPuna Plateau. The AltiplanoPuna Pla
teau is 1800 km long and 300–400 km wide in the
Central Andes, making this as the second largest pla
GEOTECTONICS Vol. 48 No. 4 2014
 ELECTROMAGNETIC SIGNATURES OF COLLISION ZONES IN INDIA 329

68° 76° 84° 92°

Ka
36° istan 36°
Koh

rak
La d Tectonic map of India

ora
akh (after Valdiya, 2010)

m
0 500 1000 km

F
ult
Tr
an
Fa

s
an

H
im
am

A ad
Ch

ri
H F
im
ala IndusTsangpo
ya suture Lo
n Ma hi
Fr t
on in B
ta oun
nge

lT dar
28° yT Main
r ra

Jaisalmer Cent
ral T B 28°
tha

T
ga
Kir

Agra Na
Sab
arm

Lucknow Shillong
F Patna
ati g

ge
G

ran
rabe

t
men Dauki F
n linea
n

aSo

ar
Indore mad
Nar

o M ya nm
Jabalpur M

Sagaing F
ah
D an
C ad
ig
20°
Go

ra
be 20°

Ind
da

n
Bastar
va

Mumbai Bhubaneshwar
ri g
rab

Koyna
en

Hyderabad

Chitradurga
shear zone
Bangalore
12° Chennal Primarily fault/shear zone 12°

Primarily thrust
MoyarAttur
shear zone PlaghatCauvery
shear zone Thrust/fault
Achankovil shear zone MT traverses
Trivandrum

72° 80° 88°

Fig. 1. Simplified tectonic map of India (modified from [102]) along with locations of MT profiles (A–F) discussed in the present
study.

teau on the Earth. Unlike Tibetan and Anatolian pla plano has a very high crustal conductivity, with the
teaus, the AltiplanoPuna Plateau has been uplifted conductance locally exceeding 20000 S, which has
without terrane accretion or continentcontinent col been interpreted with melt fractions in excess of 14%.
lision. Even though it is not a case of true continent– Interestingly, this conductor is not present further
continent collision, investigations of this feature are north near 18° S [7].
pertinent here because they show that two quite differ In the following, deep electromagnetic investiga
ent sets of tectonic processes can result in the forma tions using magnetotellurics are described along vari
tion of a high plateau [3]. Longperiod MT surveys by ous geotransects (Fig. 1) and the subsurface structure
Brasse et al. [8] and Schwarz and Kruger [90] at 21° in the form of resistivity variation are discussed in
and 22° S, respectively, showed that the southern Alti terms of collision tectonics. Continent–continent

GEOTECTONICS Vol. 48 No. 4 2014

330 HARINARAYANA, VEERASWAMY

log conductance, s
4 (a)

3
2
1
(b)
Rampur
SubHimalaya Lesser Himalaya Window Higher Himalaya

MBT

MCT
10

9
8
16

13

11
14

12

10
15
18

6
5
7
3

4
1
0 R1 C4 Resistivity,
C3
C1 Ωm
10 8192
Depth, km

R2 2048
20 512
C2
128
30 32
8
40

50
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
South Distance, km North

Fig. 2. The longitudinal conductance (conductivity integrated from the surface to 50 km) computed along the profile (a) and geo
electrical section derived from the 2D inversion of MT data along MandiRohtangpass profile in NW Himalayas (modified from
[104] (b). Light grey symbols towards northern part of the profile indicate the positions of hot springs. C1–C4 and R1–R2 cor
respond to conductive and resistive blocks, respectively.

collision is a fundamental tectonic process that has
shaped the evolution of the Earth’s surface. A broad
range of geodynamic models have been developed to
explain the structure and temporal evolution of conti
nent–continent collisions. A series of collisions have
occurred in the Indian subcontinent from north to
south. These are (i) the Himalayan collision zone, the
largest and youngest [100, 102], (ii) the Central Indian
suture zone, formed by the convergence of the south
ern and northern blocks of the Indian subcontinent,
and (iii) the PalghatCauvery and NWSE oriented
Achankovil suture zones. The electrical resistivity sec
tion derived from Magnetotelluric (MT) data covering
the above tectonic zones is described below.
Himalayan Collision Zone
It is well known that the Himalayas are known to be
the youngest orogenic belts that have originated due to
continental collision between two mega plates, namely
the India and Eurasia [54, 113]. The region has been
studied by geological and geophysical studies to
understand the deep Himalayan structure [4, 94, 101].
The deformation due to collision process has resulted
in melting of the crust and other metamorphic pro
cesses at midlower crustal depths [5]. The collision
between India and Asia occurred along the Indus–
Tsangpo Suture (ITS), beginning in the West and the
tectonic style has been changed completely during 45
to 70 Ma [2, 108]. MT studies have been taken up by
several scientific organizations under INDEPTH
project to understand the deep structure and mechan
ics of the Himalaya–Tibet region. Distinct conductive
structures have been delineated within the Tibetan
crust in the vicinity of YarlungZangbo suture zone,
which makes the surface manifestation of the India–
Asia collision [94].
Western Himalayas
The Cenozoic Himalaya–Tibet orogeny is geody
namically active region to understand the crust–man
tle structure, composition etc. Geophysical investiga
tions such as seismic, electromagnetic etc. being con
ducted in this active collision zone to delineate the
deeper structures and their possible relation with the
ongoing deformation processes. MT measurements
were made along different profiles in recent years that
cross parts of Southern Tibet and the Himalaya. Even
though these profiles are distributed in western, cen
tral and eastern parts of Himalayan tectonic zone,
their coverage in Himalaya–Tibet orogeny remain

GEOTECTONICS Vol. 48 No. 4 2014

 ELECTROMAGNETIC SIGNATURES OF COLLISION ZONES IN INDIA 331

4 (a)

log conductance, s
3

2
(b)

MCT
MBT
MBT
Lesser Himalaya Higher Himalaya
Resistivity,
Ωm
0 R1 3200
10 C1 C3 1224
Depth, km

C2
468
20 R2
179
R3
30 68
40 26
10
50
20 40 60 80 100
South Distance, km North

Fig. 3. Resistivity model derived from the 2D inversion of MT data along a transect in Eastern Himalayas (modified from [65]).
The conductance for the top 50 km along the profile is also shown. Abbreviations: MBT—Main Boundary Thrust, MCT—Main
Central Thrust and MFT—Main Frontal Thrust. C1–C3 and R1–R3 correspond to conductive and resistive blocks respectively.
log conductance, s

(a)
4

2
(b)
Nepanagar
Burhanpur

Dorwa

Barwa

24 23 21 19 17 15 13 11 9 7 5 3 1 Resistivity,
0 Ωm

10 10K
Depth, km

20 1K
30 100
40 10
50
1
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
South Distance, km North

Fig. 4. Resistivity section along Burhanpur–Barwa transect derived from magnetotelluric data (modified from [20]). The con
ductance (for the top 50 km) variation along the profile is shown in the top panel.

GEOTECTONICS Vol. 48 No. 4 2014

332 HARINARAYANA, VEERASWAMY

4 (a)

log conductance, s
3

1
(b)

NNF
NSF
GF

TF

23

35

43
45
20

27

39
16
18

31

41
11
3
5
7
9
1

Resistivity,
0 Ωm
10000
10
2683
20 720
Depth, km

30 193
52
40
14
50 4
1
60
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280
South Distance, km North

Fig. 5. Resistivity section along MahanKhajuria Kalan transect derived from magnetotelluric data (modified from [59]). Top
panel corresponds to conductance (conductivity × thickness of top 50 km). Abbreviations: GF—Gavligarh Fault, NNF—Nar
mada North Fault, NSF—Narmada South Fault, TF—Tapti Fault.

sparse due to logistic problems. Hence, in the Hima
layan region, a major gap lies between Main central
thrust (MCT) and Main boundary thrust (MBT). One
of the important studies in this direction was
INDEPTH which delineated deeper structure (up to
100 km) in the NE parts of Higher Himalayas, Indus
Tsangpo Suture Zone to Southern Tibet. Some more
MT studies have also been undertaken on the NW,
central and NE parts of the Himalayan region to
understand conductivity structure [4, 29, 39]. Most of
these MT experiments either cover the Higher Hima
layas to Southern Tibet or MBT to Siwalik/Dhar
masala formations except a few studies which cover
the zone between Higher Himalayas to south of MBT
in the central part. It contains most of active thrust
zones and epicenters of great earthquakes of Hima
laya. The seismicity in the North western Himalyan
region is well known due to occurrence of 1905 great
Kangra earthquake, where MCT/MBT has taken sud
den northward turn. Because of this there is a signifi
cant and closely spaced assemblage of thrust belts
between MCT and MBT. Keeping this in view, MT
investigations were carried out to delineate the con
ductivity structure in the region from Higher Himala
yas to Siwaliks.
The magnetotelluric data collected in this region
(line A in Fig. 1) has been subjected to different inver
sion models using various combinations of inversion
settings, such as single mode and joint inversion of
TETM data [104]. Topographic variations (400–
4000 m) are included in the model as a part of the
inversion to accommodate the possible effects due to
large topographical changes along the profile. The
resistivity structure in the area resulted from the
2D inversion in the MT model is discussed below.
The interpretation of MT data along 150 km Bilas
pur–Rohtangpass profile (Fig. 2) delineates certain
distinct features of different resistivities. A shallow
(extending up to ~8 km depth) conductive (2–16 Ω m)
feature lies near the southern end of the profile (i.e.,
south of MT station—16), as shown in Fig. 2 as fea
ture “C1”. It indicates the presence of the Siwa
lik/Dharmasala group of sediments. Feature “C2”
seems to be a steep and deep penetrating (>40 km)
conductive anomaly (~10 Ω m), which spatially coin
cides with the Main Boundary Thrust (MBT) of the
Himalayas and closely associated with other
thrusts/faults. Presence of basement ridges on the
western side of Chail thrust and the closeness of the
Rampur window of the lesser Himalaya on eastern side
might have contributed to the northward turn of these

GEOTECTONICS Vol. 48 No. 4 2014

 ELECTROMAGNETIC SIGNATURES OF COLLISION ZONES IN INDIA
(otherwise NWSE oriented) thrust belts. In such cir
cumstances, it is possible to argue that the fluid con
tent of the MBT continues from the MT station no. 16
to Kangra region. The presence of ShaliDeoban
group of sediments plus the fluid content of the Chail
thrust in Lesser Himalayan region has been reflected
as a northward dipping conductive zone (5–30 Ω m)
and shown in the figure as feature “C3”. Feature “R1”
corresponds to a high resistive (>5000 Ω m) north dip
ping block revealed between Chail and Jutogh (Mun
siari) thrusts containing Chail metamorphics and may
correspond to the overthrusting of the crystalline
basement as shown in Fig. 2.
Near surface horizontal conductive feature (“C4”)
seems to contain fluids which in turn released as hot
springs (shown by red symbols in Fig. 2). Highly resis
tive (>5000 Ω m) zone towards northern end most
probably represents the Higher Himalayan crystal
lines. Feature “R2” represents a deeply buried (>8 km)
and highly resistive (>2000 Ω m) near vertical zone
(Fig. 2) of the lesser Himalayan crystallines under the
well known “Rampur window.” The confined nature
of this buried (8–50 km) resistive body is reflected on
the surface in the form of elliptical shaped “Rampur
window.” The reason for the efficacy of this method
appears to be the conductivity (or resistivity) contrasts
that one may expect at the interface of sediments
(often wet and/or moist) and/or fluids, and the base
ment.
Longitudinal conductance up to a depth of 50 km
has been computed and plotted along the profile as
shown in Fig. 2. There is a general decrease of conduc
tance from south to north with ~1000 S near MBT and
Lesser Himalayas and 700–800 S for the higher Hima
layas with a prominent low value near Rampur. This is
due to the presence of a large resistive block (R2 in Fig. 2)
below Rampur.
Eastern Himalayas
From deep geoelectric structure mapped by mag
netotellurics in the Tibetan plateau, central part of
Nepal and NW part of Himalayas gave an evidence for
the existence of anomalous conductive layers at mid
upper crustal depths. The anomalous conductor is
interpreted due to the presence of crustal fluids such as
aqueous or metamorphic fluids and also due to partial
melts [4, 13, 101]. The Himalayas of Sikkim region lies
between the Nepal and Bhutan and falls towards the
eastern part of the Himalayan arc. This region has not
paid much attention as compared to other segments of
the Himalayas [41]. Patro and Harinarayana [65]
made an attempt to understand the tectonic processes
associated with the continentcontinent collision in
the Sikkim Himalayan region by studying the deep
geoelectric signatures of the important thrust systems,
namely the Main Frontal Thrust (MFT), the Main
Boundary Thrust (MBT) and the Main Central Thrust
(MCT).
GEOTECTONICS Vol. 48 No. 4 2014
333
In a near northsouth direction the magnetotellu
ric measurements are made cutting across the various
thrust such as MBT, MFT, MCT and MHT covered by
18 stations (line B in Fig. 1). The nonlinear conjugate
gradient algorithm of Rodi and Mackie [79] has been
applied to the MT data along a profile and 2D model
ing has been carried out. The geoelectric structure
along the profile is presented in Fig. 3. The structure
beneath the MFT and MBT zones is underlined by
anomalous conductors (C1 in Fig. 3) characterized by
10–40 Ω m that extends from shallow depth to upper
crustal levels to a depth of about 10 km. Such a low
Resistivity is identified with Siwalik sediments in the
Gangetic plains [31].Towards the north of the MBT,
i.e., below the lesser Himalayan region another two
anomalous (2–5 Ω m) crustal conductors (C1 and C2
in Fig. 3) can be seen. The high resistive upper crustal
metamorphic rocks in the lesser Himalayan region is
shown as R1 in the Fig. 3 with Resistivity of about
1000 Ω m. From the broadband seismological studies
[56] in Central Nepal gave an evidence for low velocity
zone beneath MHT. It is known that the overlying sed
iments may act as a lubricant for the low angle (10°–
15°) underthrusting of the continental crust. The
observed conductor (C1) may be due to these sedi
ments along with the trapped aqueous fluids in the
fault zone. Additionally the northeast dipping con
ductor derived along the profile (Fig. 3) corresponds
to the signature of the MHT. The dipping crust below
the Asian continent represents the high resistive fea
tures (R2 and R3). This is due to the presence of the
shallow conductor (C1). From the study of joint mod
eling of gravity and magnetic anomalies Tiwari et al.
[98] have suggested for the presence of metasediments
in lesser Himalayas extending to a depth of 12 km. The
observed sediments in the lesser Himalayas coincide
with the metamorphic rocks [53]. From our model the
conductive metasediments (C1 and C2) seems to be
extending up to the MCT. From geodetic and geomor
phic studies the MCT is observed to be active even
today [37]. Based on the regional, thermobarometric
and geochronological data Robinson et al. [78] have
suggested that MCT is a part of southward dipping
thrust and absence of major reactivation in the region.
Below the higher Himalayas at a shallow depth of 5 km
another anomalous conductor (2–5 Ω m) is deline
ated. Interestingly this conductive feature (C3) corre
sponds to the MHT in Higher Himalayas. The likely
cause for the anomalous conductors observed along
the profile is due to the presence of the metamorphic
fluids as continuous underthrusting of the Indian plate
helps to release the metamorphic fluids due to dehy
dration process. In an earlier study also an anomalous
conductor is observed towards the north of MCT.
Additionally along the 100line profile of INDEPTH
study Chen et al. [13] have shown the conductive crust
between 10–40 km depth towards the southern part of
the profile near Yadong. In the present study also
anomalous conductor (C3) has been delineated that
334 HARINARAYANA, VEERASWAMY
spatially corresponds to the conductor observed along
the 100line profile. The electrical signatures in the
form of anomalous conductors delineated form the
present study spatially corresponds to the major tec
tonic features such as MFT, MBT, MCT and MHT.
Similar features have also been observed along the par
allel profile in Central Nepal.
The longitudinal conductance has been computed
along the profile considering the resistivities up to a
depth of 50 km (Fig. 3) The conductance value has
maintained at 1000 S above the anomalous conductive
zones (C1, C2 and C3 in Fig. 3) while there is a sharp
decrease at the boundaries of conductive zones. Such
a feature is indicative of a resistor, conductorblocks
juxtaposed to each other which makes a way for an
environment for movement of blocks.
Central Indian Tectonic Zone
One of the major tectonic zones of the Indian sub
continent is Central Indian Tectonic Zone (CITZ)
divides the Indian plate into two regions—Southern
peninsular block and northern foreland block [1, 40,
111]. This zone is believed to be formed during Mid
to Late Archaean period. Differential crustal move
ments have taken place along this zone since the
Archaean times. It has been reactivated several times
since then and recognized as a major Proterozoic col
lision zone between Bundelkhand and Aravalli cratons
in the north and Bastar and Dharwar cratons in the
southern block. It is sutured during PalaeoProtero
zoic time to form as Indian plate [81, 87, 111, 115].
Such deformations are believed to continue even today
as frequent occurrence of earthquakes at both upper
and lower crustal depths. Additionally, deep crustal
faults have been identified from deep seismic studies
and are believed to be reactivated through the palaeo
rift environment [50]. From regional geological stud
ies, the evolution of the CITZ is believed to be origi
nated in the Archaean to Early Proterozoic and differ
ent cratons are sutured together to form as a shield
region [62]. It is also believed that the region has expe
rienced strong compressional and extensional events
during Archaean to MesoProterozoic period [67].
Considering the regional geological studies, a plate
tectonic model has been proposed with southerly dip
ping subduction of the Bundelkhand craton below the
Bastar craton [87, 111]. However, northerly dipping
model has also been proposed showing the northerly
dipping subduction process of the Bastar craton below
the Bundelkhand craton [81]. During Late Cretaceous
to Early Tertiary period this region became the source
for out pour of lava, presently well known as Deccan
traps. This seems to be the last episode of the reactiva
tion processes of CITZ. The northern boundary can be
identified as the well known NarmadaSon lineament
(NSL) zone and the southern boundary is the Tapti
Purna lineament zone. Within the NSL zone, Nar
mada north fault and Narmada south fault are the
major tectonic features. In the following, the deep
crustal electrical signatures along the two near parallel
traverses are presented.
Burhanpur–Barwa Transect
It is well known that the continental rifts are the
sources of anomalous structures and its signatures can
be seen even to deep crustal depths, this includes the
thinning of the lithosphere due to asthenospheric
upwelling. Anomalous high heat flow values with low
pwave velocity and density within the lithosphere are
the characteristic features of rift regions [64]. MT data
has been acquired along a transect from Burhanpur to
Barwa (line C in Fig. 1) across the NSL region passes
through Satpura horst, Narmada graben and Tapti
Purna graben and mainly occupies the region between
Narmada and Tapti region [28, 73]. 2D modeling of
the data has revealed two anomalous conductive fea
tures (10–100 Ω m) at mid crustal depths. They lie
below Narmada graben and south of Satpura hill
range, located between Nepanagar and Burhanpur.
The heat flow value is about 70 mW m–2 [76] over the
anomalous conductive feature near Dorwa. The base
ment structure seems to be fractured as the resistivity
observed for the basement is about 200 Ω m. The
undulations in the Moho with discontinuity of 3–4 km
upward shift in the southern part of the profile is an
indication of an intense tectonic activity that could
result in the form of a major fault extending to deep
crust. The anomalous conductor could be due to accu
mulation of fluids in the crust. Another interesting fea
ture is gravity low near the anomalous conductor in
the north. Nayak [63] has integrated the available data
in the region and is of the view that mantle originated
material might have reached the crust along the two
crustal scale faults delineated from DSS studies [45].
He also interpreted continuity of mantle derived
material between these two faults. This observation
correlates well with the anomalous conductors deline
ated from magnetotelluric study. The reflection pat
tern in the vicinity of the anomalous conductor shows
a northward continuation at lower crustal depths
(Fig. 4). Reflectors inferred from DSS are more prom
inent from a depth of 25–40 km, where less resistivity
value is observed. These prominent reflectors are dom
inant in the anomalous conductive regions both
towards north as well as towards south near Dorwa and
north of Burhanpur. Similar anomalous high conduc
tive zones are also shown along a parallel—Damoh
JabalpurMandla MT profile. The anomalous con
ductive features here were attributed to partial melting
of mantle and release of saline fluids in the shallow
crust [28]. From the xenolith data, the high conduc
tive zones may represent ultramafic rocks such as
pyroxinites and websterites which has appreciable
quantities of paramagnetic minerals. The presence of
paramagnetic minerals such as magnetite, titano
magnetite could be responsible for the anomalous high
GEOTECTONICS Vol. 48 No. 4 2014
 ELECTROMAGNETIC SIGNATURES OF COLLISION ZONES IN INDIA
conductive zones observed in MT response [20].
Another possibility for the anomalous conductivity
zone is the fluid inclusions in the rock. However, if
they are not continuous the reason for the anomalous
conductivity due to fluid inclusion is a remote possi
bility.
Observations from magnetotelluric studies, deep
seismic studies and also from petrological studies, it
can be inferred that the rifting along the CITZ has led
to compositional changes at lithospheric depths and
has resulted in densification of the crust. Presence of
large amount of magmatic rocks at lower crust might
have lead to the thickening of the crust before the pre
rift thickness. Additionally, high density due to mag
matic accretion which has melted the crust by intru
sion of the mantle material might have lead to increase
in the density at lower crustal depths relative to the
shallow crust [20].
From the conductance values computed up to a
depth of 50 km, two prominent highs (>3000 S) are
observed corresponding to the anomalous midcrustal
conductor delineated along the profile. Similar to the
conductance observed in Himalayas where intense
tectonic activity is well known, it is interesting to see
similar trend in the central India also. This indicates
CITZ also a region of intense tectonic activity.
Mahan–Khajuria Kalan Transect
This transect cuts across the major lithounits of
NSL region—Purga graben, Tapti valley, Satpura
mobile belt, Mahakoshal rift belt and also major faults
such as Puma fault, Gauligarh fault, Tapti fault, Nar
mada south fault and Narmada north fault. Forty five
magnetotelluric stations have been occupied along this
transect (line D in Fig. 1) with a station interval of ~5–
8 km (see fig. 1 of Naganjaneyulu et al. [59]). The 2D
modeling has revealed a high resistive upper crust with
resistivity values ranging from 1000 to 5000 Ω m.
While such is the general nature of the upper crust a
few narrow steep anomalous conductivity features
have been observed at places that closely coincide with
the geological faults on the surface. Among these
faults, some of them are delineated from earlier deep
seismic studies and a few of them are not reflected
from the seismic study. The new faults which are
mapped by MT are Kaddam, Purna and Gauligarh
faults. The low resistive mid to lower crust has been
observed all along the transect with a resistivity values
ranging from 50–300 Ω m. Anomalous conductive
features (<20 Ω m) have been observed for Gauligarh
fault and Narmada north fault. These conducting fea
tures, which are distinct, and separated by the resistive
upper crust and they seem to be unconnected (Fig. 5).
Low resistive anomalies in general can be explained
due to variety of reasons such as presence of fluids
[38], partial melts [88], thin film graphite [27] or a
combination of these factors. In active tectonic
regions the interconnectivity between the conductors
GEOTECTONICS Vol. 48 No. 4 2014
335
is unlikely [43, 109]. Since the study region is one of
the tectonically active regions the reason for conduc
tivity anomaly may not be due to thin graphite films.
Generation of partial melts requires a minimum of
700°C [96]. The available heat flow data doesn’t sup
port for the presence of such a high temperature in the
region and the modeling studies suggests the tempera
tures do not exceed 500–580°C [68]. The gravity data
along this transect reveals high gravity (~50 mGal)
towards south, where Tapti and Purna faults are
located. The anomalous conductors (~20 Ω m) associ
ated with these faults also occur at depths of 10–
20 km. Low seismic pwave velocity of 6.7–7.2 km/s
in the deep crust of MahanChipner together with
high conductivity and high gravity gave an indication
for the possible presence of magmatic bodies, possibly
filled with fluids, intruded into the crust from mantle
due to underplating.
From the results derived from magnetotelluric
studies along with the gravity, seismic and heat flow
studies along the traverse in central India, it can be
seen that the region might have undergone tectonic
reactivation as two distinct processes. The region
north of Narmada River is characterized by the fluids
in the deep crust while towards the southern segment
dominated by the underplated material. Additionally,
upper crust is resistive but dissected by a narrow zone,
steeply dipping conductive features indicating the col
lision tectonics of the region. The well known Bun
delkhand craton towards the north and Dharwar cra
ton towards the south might be colliding with each
other number of times that has resulted in dissection of
the upper crust into number of smaller block struc
tures in the upper crust as observed in the NSL region.
The longitudinal conductance computed to a
depth of 50 km is shown less than 1000 S for most part
of the profile except at three locations where crustal
conductors have been delineated (Fig. 5). At these
locations the values have reached more than 1000 S.
From such an observation northern half of the traverse
is relatively less active (except near NNF) as compared
to the southern part.
Southern Granulite Terrain Region
In Southern Granulite Terrain (SGT), high grade
metamorphic rocks have been identified towards south
of the Kuppam (13° N) and low grade metamorphic
rocks towards the north. The high grade metamorphic
rocks mainly consist of charnockites. There seems to
be a boundary extending in eastwest direction
between these two types of rocks. In view of this, the
region has attained importance to many earth scien
tists [14, 15, 23, 49, 61, 67, 72]. Additionally, major
tectonic units have been identified in this region. They
are Moyer–Bhavani Suture Zone (MBSZ) towards
north and Palghat–Cauvery Suture Zone (PCSZ),
Achankovil Suture Zone (AKSZ) etc. towards south
within SGT [23]. Three major tectonic blocks have
336 HARINARAYANA, VEERASWAMY

log conductance, s
4 (a)

3
2
1
(b)
PCSZ CSZ

Resistivity,

12
13
14
10

16
17
18
11
2 Ωm
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1

0
100000
10
17013
20
Depth, km

2894
30 492
40 84
50 14
60 2
70
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
South Distance, km North

Fig. 6. Geoelectric structure obtained from 2D MT inversion across PalghatCauvery suture zone (modified from [58]). The con
ductance (from surface to 50 km) computed along the profile is also shown. Abbreviations: CSZ—Chennimalai Suture Zone,
PCSZ—Palghat Cauvery Suture Zone.

also been identified within the region. The northern
block dominated by granitegreenstone terrain, the
central block mostly consists of migmatitic gneisses
with enclaims of metasedimentary metabasicultraba
sic rocks. Towards the south the rock is dominated by
quartzofeldspathic gneisses with enclaves of meta
sedimentary formations. These blocks are separated by
the mega suture zones [14, 86].
To understand the deep crustal structure of this
complex region integrated geophysical studies consists
of seismic reflection/refraction, deep magnetotellu
rics, regional gravity and also deep resistivity sound
ings have been carried out [33, 77, 82, 92, 93].
Regional geological, geochemical, geochronological
and structural studies have also been carried out along
the geotransect from Kuppam to Kanyakumari [6, 42].
These studies have identified major tectonic blocks
juxtaposed each other and also features related to rel
ics of collision tectonics phenomena. In our present
study, the deep electrical crustal signatures related to
collision tectonics are presented along the two
transects namely Kuppam to Palani cutting across the
major suture zones of MoyarBhavani and Palghat–
Cauvery. In another transect starting from Palani to
Kanyakumari cutting across the well known Achank
ovil Suture zone.
The Palghat Suture zone has shown anomalous
high electrical conductivity [57, 58]. This high con
ductive feature at mid crustal depths is correlated spa
tially with gravity high of 20 mGal. Interestingly,
Moho upwarp has been delineated from deep seismic
studies in this region [70]. Such features are an indica
tion that the region must have experienced intense
crustmantle interaction due to which large amount of
fluids originated from the mantle is trapped at upper
crustal depths. In the following deep electrical signa
tures across two major suture zones—PalghatCau
very and Achankovil—are presented.
Palghat Cauvery Suture Zone
Magnetotelluric studies have inferred a block
structure with distinct resistivity variation with MBSZ
as a marker separating the Archean Dhwarwar craton
towards north and granulite terrain towards south.
Similarly, another block structure has been inferred
with PCSZ as a marker. The suture zones have exe
cuted anomalous high electrical conductivity in the
region [34]. An interesting feature observed is the
Mettur Suture Zone (MTSZ) is acting like a marker
between the low highgrade metamorphic rocks in the
crust with high resistivity character (10000 Ω m)
towards north and low resistivity (3000 Ω m) towards
the south for the profile from Kuppam towards north
to Bommidi towards north (see Fig. 6). MTSZ exhibits
anomalously high conductivity (100 Ω m) at mid
lower crustal depths. The reasons for anomalous high
conductivity could be due to the presence of fluids and

GEOTECTONICS Vol. 48 No. 4 2014

 ELECTROMAGNETIC SIGNATURES OF COLLISION ZONES IN INDIA
also perhaps the presence of graphite. The presence of
graphites at old collision zones is expected [34]. Simi
lar to MTSZ marked resistivity variation is also
observed across MBSZ with 40000 Ω m. towards north
and about 5000 Ω m towards south east as shown in
Fig. 6. It is interesting to see the differing deep crustal
reflectors on either side of the MBSZ. From the obser
vation of such a phenomina from magnetotellurics as
well as seismics a continentcontinent collision tec
tonics can be inferred [57].
Earlier, on the basis of gravity data, Krishna Brah
mam [46] has delineated the suture characteristics
along the PCSZ in addition to identification of thicker
and thinner crusts with granitic intrusives at depths.
However, recent gravity studies [52, 93, 106] have
derived inputs from other studies like DSS to model
the observed gravity anomalies within the PCSZ.
Meager seismic tomography studies [32, 69] also pro
vided valuable information on a southward subduc
tion. Magnetotelluric studies across PCSZ (line E in
Fig. 1) have inferred block structure in this region [33,
34]. On the basis of MT data integrated with gravity
Naganjaneyulu and Santosh [58] inferred that the
upper crust is highly resistive (>20000 Ω m) with a
density of about 2.72 g/cm3 extending up to 14–15 km
representing the felsic crust. The high resistivity
accompanied by relatively low gravity is attributed to
the granitic bodies (Fig. 6). Between the two suture
zones (PCSZ and CSZ) anomalous low resistivity
(<300 Ω m) is delineated at midlower crustal depths.
Such low resistive material is considered as anomalous
according to normal MT classification [43]. In gen
eral, factors like partial melts and graphite at the grain
boundary reflects anomalously low resistivity values
(<300 Ω m).
Low resistivity structures delineated in this region
in the lower crust can be correlated with sedimentary
layers due to largescale overthrusting or fluid filled
suture zones. Subducted oceanic lithosphere which
was subsequently hydrated during exhumation and
retrograde metamorphism could be one of the possible
explanations for the high density and low resistivity
observed in the region. The highpressure mafic gran
ulites within the PCSZ have been correlated to the
remnants of subducted and metamorphosed oceanic
crust [86]. However, according to Roy et al. [82] pres
ence of partial melts in this region can be ruled out due
to low heat flow values observed in the region (28–
38 mW m–2). Evidence for remnants of accreted oce
anic lithosphere has been reported by Santosh et al.
[85] from different domains within the PCSZ includ
ing ophiolite suite and diopside dykes. According to
Naganjaneyulu and Santosh [58], the nature of the
southward dipping low resistivity and high density
anomaly suggests a fragment of the eclogitised and
partly exhumed subducted oceanic lithosphere,
marked by the domal structure.
The longitudinal conductance has been computed
for 50 km and plotted above the geoelectric section
GEOTECTONICS Vol. 48 No. 4 2014
337
(see Fig. 6). The longitudinal conductance in SGT
region is low as compared to other two regions (Hima
layas and CITZ). However, between the major suture
zones (PCSZ and CSZ) the conductance value is
~1000 S. In view of such an observation the tectonic
activity is relatively low all along the SGT except near
the two mega suture zones.
Achankovil Suture Zone
Similar to MBSZ and MTSZ, Achankovil Suture
Zone (AKSZ) is known to be one of the interesting
tectonic features in SGT. While the other suture zones
are oriented nearly in eastwest direction the AKSZ is
oriented in NWSE direction. As mentioned earlier,
the SGT region comprises of the distinct block struc
ture separated by various suture zones. The Achank
ovil Suture Zone forms as a marker between the
Madhurai block in the north and KeralaKondalite
block towards the south [23]. The Madhurai block is
dominated by charnokite massif and also with
metasedimentary rocks of quarzites, carbonates,
banded iron formations etc. The age of charnokite
massif is believed to be NeoProterozoic [85]. The
extension of the AKSZ runs about 120 km with a width
of about 25 km. The dominant rock types within the
AKSZ are metamorphic and also magmatic rocks that
include charnokites, garnet biotite gneises, calcarious
silicates and mafic granulites etc. It is believed that
AKSZ has similar features to that of Ranotsara shear
zone in the southern part of Madagascar [71, 74].
Magentotelluric data acquired along a traverse [22]
cuts across AKSZ—from Vattalkundu to Kanyaku
mari (line F in Fig. 1) has exhibited high resistive
upper crustal feature up to a depth of about 10 km with
an increased thickness to about 15 km beneath AKSZ.
Anomalous conductive feature from lower crust to
upper mantle depths (see C in Fig. 7) is clearly deline
ated below AKSZ. Additionally, a resistive domal like
feature is observed below Madhurai block with a mod
erately conducting feature separating the upper crust
and the domal resistive feature. The anomalous con
ductive feature (C) has shown a palm tree shape struc
ture indicating that AKSZ has experienced intense
tectonic activity originated from lower crust to upper
mantle depths. Interestingly, gravity high is observed
near AKSZ region that can be correlated with the
anomalous deep crustal structure. Another interesting
feature observed from seismic tomographic studies is
high velocity (Vp > 6.3 and Vs > 3.7 km/s) structure to
a depth of 8 km in the upper crust near AKSZ. Remote
sensing and structural fabric of the rocks have shown a
series of lineaments that are dipping towards AKSZ
from either side [71].
It is interesting to compare the deep resistivity
structure with other geophysical studies. The seismic
reflection image along a part of the present traverse,
i.e., from Vattalkundu to Kalugumalai supports the
dome like resistive feature below Madurai granulite
338 HARINARAYANA, VEERASWAMY

3 (a)

log conductance, s
2

1 Kanyakumari
(b)

Kalugumalai

Vattalkundu
KKB AKSZ MGB
33

25
30

20

15

10

1
0
Resistivity,
Ωm
10
8192
2048
Depth, km

20
C
512
30 128
32
40 8

50
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240
South Distance, km North

Fig. 7. Resistivity section across Achankovil Suture Zone derived from Magnetotelluric data (modified from [22]). Arrows indi
cate the upward flow of asthenosphere. The conductance for the top 50 km along the profile is also shown. Abbreviations:
AKSZ—Achankovil Suture Zone, KKB—Kerala Khondalite Block, MGB—Madurai Granulite Block.

block as the reflectors delineated from seismics palm tree like structure delineated below the profile
between 3–8 and 12–13 s TWT. Additionally, gravity near AKSZ is also located where the longitudinal con
high between Sedapatti and Sarvatapuram also sup ductance is more than 100 S.
ports the resistive domal like feature. Strong southerly
dipping features observed from seismic reflection
image [70] correlates with the southerly dipping fea DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS
ture below Kalugumalai. Computed gravity data for Study of collision zones is important as they reveal
the model constrained from seismic and magnetotel anomalous tectonic features and processes related to
luric studies have shown a good fit with the observed orogeny. In the present study, collision zone related to
gravity data. The Bouguer gravity low is associated subduction processes and also interactions between
with a low density and relatively less resistive (<1000 Ω m) the cratons and suture zones are presented in Hima
rocks of Kerala Khondalite block. High density with layan, central Indian and Southern Granulite terrain
moderately resistive quartzite and banded iron forma regions. Based on geoelectric sections along with tec
tion from shallow to mid crustal depths is spatially cor tonic models proposed earlier, line diagrams have been
rectable with gravity high below AKSZ. From the prepared with major anomalous resistive/conductive
above correlation, and also from the available geologi structures and presented in Figs. 8a–8d. The well
cal and geophysical data, it can be concluded that the known Himalayan region is studied with deep geoelec
deep crust beneath AKSZ is probably associated with tric structure along two traverses—one in Sikkim
low resistive but high density feature. Himalayas towards the east and the other in Garwal
The longitudinal conductance computed up to a Himalayas towards the west. Sengor and Kidd [91]
depth of 50 km (Fig. 7) has shown a decreasing trend have brought out an analogy between the origin of
from south to north indicating that relatively stable Tibetan plateau due to subduction processes in Hima
crustal section from VattalkunduKalugumalai as layas and the Anatolian plateau originated due to the
compared to KalugumalaiKanyakumari, where the collision zone between the Arabia and Eurasia conti
conductance reaches more than 100 S. Interestingly, a nents. Similar to southern Tibet, the geodynamic

GEOTECTONICS Vol. 48 No. 4 2014

 ELECTROMAGNETIC SIGNATURES OF COLLISION ZONES IN INDIA
modeling of Anatolian plateau suggests the weakening
of the rocks for the crustal flow [5]. In both the Tibetan
and Anatolian plateau the entire colliding plateau does
not underthrust in the region and both are character
ized by the shallow asthenosphere. Similarly, Froi
devaux and Richard [26] have compared the Tibetan
Plateau with the Altiplano and observed that both have
similar patterns of low level thrusting and extended to
higher elevation. Thus the study of collision zones has
greater potential to provide constraints to the rheolog
ical properties of the crust and upper mantle.
The magnetotelluric profile in the western part of
the Himalayas crosses the MBT, Shivalik sediments,
Chail thrust, Rampur window, MCT and higher
Himalayan rocks of high grade metamorphics (Fig. 1).
The northward dipping signature is clearly brought out
by the MT study [104] in the form of anomalous con
ductive layer with a thickness of ~10 km (Fig. 2). It is
known that Himalayan collision zone tectonics has
occurred during Cenozoic period. In this collision
zone two major orogenic belts have been identified.
One is the Pacific type orogeny towards north of ITSZ
and the other is southern collision type orogeny
towards south of ITSZ. They have identified a flower
shaped structure for the ITSZ. The cartoon of the
Himalayan orogeny is redrawn and presented in
Fig. 8a. Our present MT study is located over a colli
sion type orogeny of Himalayas. Major features of the
geoelectric section presented in Fig. 8a show a clear
dipping nature of the upper crust with a massive felsic
intrusive body at lower crust and upper mantle depths
below Rampur. MBT has shown its signature in the
form of anomalous conductivity feature probably due
to weak zones filled with fluids in the upper crust.
Arora et al. [4] have studied the Pacific orogeny region
of the western Himalayas. A line drawing for their
model is prepared and presented in Fig. 8a. Northward
dipping feature is clearly indicated in their model.
Steep dipping of Moho towards north is also well cor
related.
The MT profile across Sikkim Himalayas [65]
passes through MFT at the foot hills of the Himalayas,
MBT and MCT in lesser and higher Himalayan
region. The deep resistivity section derived along the
profile has exhibited dipping signature of the anoma
lous conductive feature towards north (Fig. 3). In Sik
kim Himalayas, Tiwari et al. [98] have conducted grav
ity and magnetic surveys, along the MT profile. They
have shown a clear signature of flexure of underthrust
ing Indian plate with large variation in Moho depth. A
bow shaped sedimentary formation of lesser Himala
yas is compared with a cross section of metamorphic
rocks [53]. Their model has shown a thin feature of
lesser Himalayan metasediments towards north
related to the curvilinear shape of MCT. They further
extended their model towards north and joins with the
INDEPTH [35] profile. Part of the line diagram of
their tectonic model is presented in Fig. 8b. Another
line diagram based on the present study covering MFT,
GEOTECTONICS Vol. 48 No. 4 2014
339
MBT and MCT showing major features of crust is pre
sented in the Fig. 8b. The dipping nature of the upper
crust near MCT is clearly identified as anomalous
conductivity feature, probably related to mafic/ultra
mafic rocks associated with fluids. High resistive fea
ture at lower crust is seen towards south of MCT, prob
ably related to felsic type of dry rocks. From compari
son of the two MT transects on western and eastern
parts of Himalayas, the anomalous conductive feature
is thin (~10 km) in the Garhwal Himalayas, whereas,
it is thicker (>10 km) for the Sikkim Himalayas.
The central Indian tectonic zone and Narmada
Lineament Zone is believed to have experienced,
intense tectonic activity with collision process
between the two major cratonic blocks namely, the
Bundelkhand craton towards the north and Dharwar
craton towards the south. Two prominent anomalous
conductive features along BurhanpurBarwa profile
have been delineated; one near Dorwa and another
between Nepanagar and Burhanpur (Fig. 4). From the
observation of undulating Moho from DSS studies,
anomalous conductive features at midcrustal depths
and from xenoliths data, it is interpreted that appre
ciable quantities of ultra mafic rocks such as pyrox
inites and websterites might have originated from the
deep mantle [20]. These rocks contain magnetite and
titanomagnetitic minerals that could be responsible
for the high conductivity at midcrustal depths. The
two near parallel MT profiles oriented approximately
in northsouth direction have shown clear evidence
for the continuous tectonic activity in the region. The
resistive upper crust is dissected by various crustal scale
faults (Fig. 5). Steeply dipping anomalous conductive
features are spatially correlates with the well known
geological faults [59]. This is clearly delineated along
MahanKhajuriakalan profile. A line diagram showing
the central Indian collision type tectonics is presented
in Fig. 8c. Major features derived from the geoelectric
section of Central India are presented in the form of
another line diagram in Fig. 8c. The prominent signa
ture of the model is a high resistive upper crust and a
low resistive lower crust with a dipping signature from
Narmada south fault towards north. The anomalous
conductive features are interpreted as layeredintru
sive structures. Conductive linear features between the
block faulted upper crust are also observed which can
be attributed to weak zones partially filled with fluids.
The model supports collision type tectonics of CITZ
with a clear dipping signature towards north. This
model also supports the model proposed by Roy and
Prasad [81].
Southern Granulite terrain is believed to contain
number of crustal blocks juxtaposed to each other and
separated by mega suture zones. The magnetotelluric
traverses from Kuppam to Kanyakumari has shown
the resistive upper crust and a conductive lower crust
with anomalous conductor between the Chennimalai
suture zone and PalghatCauvery suture zone (Fig. 6).
Moho upwarping has been observed from deep seismic
 340

(a) (b)
YZS

MBT
MCT
STD
South Collisiontype orogen Pacifictype orogen North South North
0 INT LH THS
ITSZ SW HHC (UC)
(i) Basement
20 MC
Moho LC
40 Mantle
(i)

Depth, km
60
80
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
(ii) (iii) Distance, km
RW TSZ ITSZ LB

MBT
LH HH
0 ?
0
? Lesser Himalaya Higher Himalaya

MFT
MBT
MCT

20 Mafic crust ? MHT 20 (ii)

?
Weak zone
40 Felsic 40 0
intrusive

Depth, km
Mafic
60 crust
0 50 100 150

Depth, km
Distance, km Indian
20
Moho 80

Depth, km
100 Felsic crust
40
0 50 100 150 200
(c) Distance, km
(i)
Central India suture
Collisiontype Pacifictype

Upper crust Upper crust

Lower crust
HARINARAYANA, VEERASWAMY

Mantle

(d)
(ii) South North

TF

GF
PCSZ
CSZ

KKB AKSZ MGB

NSF
NNF
South North Block faulted TTG crust
0 Deccap traps/sediments

GEOTECTONICS
0
Upper crust

20
20

Vol. 48
Weak zones
Moho Intrusive
Lower crust Intrusive
40 Intrusive

Depth, km
Moho
Depth, km

Marion
Resistive upper mantle 40 plume
influence

No. 4
60
0 100 200 300 0 100 200 300

2014
Distance, km Distance, km
 ELECTROMAGNETIC SIGNATURES OF COLLISION ZONES IN INDIA 341

Fig. 8. Line diagrams showing tectonic features of Western Himalayas (a), Eastern Himalayas (b), Central Indian tectonic zone (c) and
Southern granulite terrain (d). The collision type and Pacific type orogeny of Himalayan region [85] is shown in (a) (i). The tec
tonic features based on the present study are shown in (a) (ii), and based on earlier study [4] are shown in (a) (iii). The line diagram
showing the features of eastern Himalayas from gravity and magnetic studies [98] is shown in (b) (i) and major features derived
from MT study are presented in (b) (ii), which are consistent with the earlier tectonic model. The Central Indian tectonic features
are shown in (c) (i) and major features derived from MT studies are shown in the form of a line diagram. The dipping signatures
of the upper and lower crust and its correlation with the earlier suggested tectonic model can be seen. A line diagram showing the
major features of southern granulite terrain is presented in (d). The dipping signatures towards south from PCSZ, CSZ and below
the MGB which are consistent with earlier proposed model by [85].

studies between these two suture zones. A prominent
local gravity high spatially correlates with anomalous
conductor and Moho upwarping supports the occur
rence of high pressure metagabbros and garnet
amphibolites representing the metamorphosed oce
anic crust [58]. Further south of this profile, from Vat
talakundu to Kanyakumari, has shown interesting
deep crustal features. The dipping reflectors inferred
from the seismic study spatially correlates with the
resistivity discontinuity at a few places. A palm tree
like anomalous conductivity feature (Fig. 7) is associ
ated with Achankovil suture zone indicating the exhu
mation of deep mantle rocks to the midcrustal depths
[22]. The occurrence of such a feature is an indicative
of intense tectonic activity which has become the
source for the presence of mega features such as Pal
ghatCauvery, Chennimalai and Achankovil suture
zones. A tectonic model is proposed by Santosh et al.
[85] in Southern Granulite terrain of south India with
a possibility of two Cambrian collision belts. They
have shown that Kerala Khondalite Belt (KKB) repre
sents a rift basin where sediments were deposited pos
sibly around 700 Ma. Yoshida [114] has traced the
extension of the Khondalite belt into Madagascar
towards west and Sri Lanka towards east, and believed
that it is the trace of the Mozambique ocean closure.
Our study has shown deep crustal signature exhibiting
a flower structure at lower crustal and upper mantle
depths with a possibility of exhumation of mantle to
the upper crustal depths. Additionally it is known that
the Marion plume has influenced this region during
Madagascar breakup [95]. The upper crust of PCSZ
and CSZ region has shown the presence of block
faulted TonaliteTrondhjemiteGranodiorite (TTG)
crust separated by linear intrusive structures. The
upper crust has shown a tendency of dipping signature
towards south extending to lower crust and upper
mantle depths. This feature is inline with the tectonic
model proposed in fig. 12 of Santosh et al. [85], which
has shown NeoProterozoic collision tectonics indi
cating a dipping signature towards south.
From the study of longitudinal conductance of the
crust and upper mantle (i.e., 0–50 km) it is observed
that an intense tectonic activity is evidenced in the
regions of high electrical conductance (>1000 S). In
view of this, the Himalayan region and CITZ have
shown large conductance value at places as compared
to SGT region. The regions of large conductance can
be interpreted as the presence of weak zones. It is pos
sible that these weak zones can manifest itself in the
form of crustal scale fault structures. In such a sce
nario, reactivation of adjacent crustal blocks can be
expected.
On the basis of MT results from six profiles in three
different regions, it can be concluded that if the crustal
longitudinal conductance reaches 1000 S or more due
to the presence of deep crustal conductors, as a rule of
thumb, the region may be considered as tectonically
active. The present study although has indicated
important subsurface features along the six transects,
its interpretation is based on two dimensional model
ing only. However, for more realistic models, addi
tional data along different parallel transects with three
dimensional modeling may provide greater constraints
and confidence on the subsurface structure.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We thank Dr Y.J. Bhaskara Rao, Director of NGRI
for his permission to publish this study. This study is
partly supported by PSC0204 funds.
REFERENCES
1. S. K. Acharyya, “The nature of mesoproterozoic cen
tral Indian tectonic zone with exhumed and reworked
older granulites,” Gondwana Res. 6, 197–214 (2003).
2. J. C. Aitchison, J. R. Ali, and A. M. Davis, “When and
where did India and Asia collide?,” J. Geophys. Res.
112 (B05423), doi: 10.1029/2006JB004706
3. R. W. Allmendinger, T. E. Jordan, S. M. Kay, and
B. L. Isacks, “The evolution of the AltiplanoPuna
plateau of the central Andes,” Ann. Rev. Earth Planet.
Sci. 25, 139–174 (1997).
4. B. R. Arora, M. J. Unsworth, and G. Rawat, “Deep
resistivity structure of the Northwest Indian Himalaya
and its tectonic implications,” Geophys. Res. Lett. 34
(L04307) (2007).
5. C. Beaumont, R. A. Jamieson, M. H. Nguyen, and
B. Lee, “Himalayan tectonics explained by extrusion
of a lowviscosity crustal channel coupled to focused
surface denudation,” Nature 414, 738–742 (2001).
6. Y. J. Bhaskar Rao, A. S. Janardhan, T. Vijayakumar,
et al., “K, Sm–Nd model ages and Rb–Sr isotopic
systematics of charnockites and gneisses across the
Cauvery shear zone, southern India: implications for
the Archaean–Neoproterozoic terrane boundary in
the southern granulite terrain,” Memoir Geol. Soc.
Ind. 50, 297–317 (2003).

GEOTECTONICS Vol. 48 No. 4 2014

342 HARINARAYANA, VEERASWAMY
7. H. Brasse and D. Eydam, “Electrical conductivity
beneath the Bolivian Orocline and its relation to sub
duction processes at the South American continental
margin,” J. Geophys. Res. 113, B07109 (2008), doi:
10.1029/2007JB005142
8. H. Brasse, P. Lezaeta, V. Rath, et al., “The Bolivian
Antiplano conductivity anomaly,” J. Geophys. Res.
107 (2096) (2002), doi: 10.1029/2001JB000391
9. J. M. Bull, C. DeMets, K. S. Krishna, et al., “Recon
ciling plate kinematic and seismic estimates of lithos
pheric convergence in the Central Indian Ocean,”
Geology 38, 307–310 (2010).
10. I. Cagniard, “Basic theory of the magnetotelluric
method of geophysical prospecting,” Geophysics 18,
605–635 (1953).
11. A. J. Calvert, E. W. Sawer, W. J. Davis, and J. N. Lud
den, “Archaean subduction inferred from seismic
images of mantle suture in the superior provinces,”
Nature 375, 670–674 (1995).
12. A. Caporali, C. Aichorn, M. Becker, et al., “Geoki
nematics of central Europe: new insights from the
CERGOP2/environment project,” J. Geodyn. 45,
246–256 (2008).
13. L. Chen, J. R. Booker, A. G. Jones, et al., “Electrically
conductivity crust in Southern Tibet from INDEPTH
magnetotelluric surveying,” Science 274, 1694–1696
(1996).
14. T. R. K. Chetty and Y. J. Bhaskar Rao, “The Cauvery
shear zone, southern granulite terrain, India: a crustal
scale flower structure,” Gondwana Res. 10, 77–85
(2006).
15. T. R. K. Chetty, I. Fitzsimons, L. Brown, et al.,
“Crustal structure and tectonic evolution of the South
ern Granulite Terrain, India: introduction,” Gond
wana Res. 10, 3–5 (2006).
16. K. C. Condie, “Episodic continental growth and
supercontinents: a mantle avalanch connection?,”
Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 163, 97–108 (1998).
17. P. Coney, D. L. Jones, and J. Monger, “Cordilleran
suspect terranes,” Nature 288, 329–333 (1980).
18. M. Coward and D. Dietrich, “Alpine tectonics—an
overview,” Ed. by M. P. Coward, D. Dietrich, and
R. D. Park, in Alpine Tectonics, Geol. Soc. Spec. Publ.
45, 1–29 (1989).
19. M. Delescluse, L. G. J. Montesi, and N. Chamot
Rooke, “Fault reactivation and selective abandonment
in the oceanic lithosphere,” Geophys. Res. Lett. 35
(L16312) (2008), doi: 10.1029/2008GL035066
20. A. G. Dessai, M. Peinado, S. G. Gokarn, and
H. Downes, “Structure of the deep crust beneath the
Central Indian tectonic zone: an integration of geo
physical and xenolith data,” Gondwana Res. 17, 162–
170 (2010).
21. J. F. Dewey, M. R. Hempton, W. S. F. Kidd, et al.,
“Shortening of continental lithosphere: the Neotec
tonics of eastern Anatolia: a young collision zone,”
Ed. by M. P. Coward and A. C. Ries, in Collision Tec
tonics, Geol. Soc. Spec. Publ. 19, 3–36 (1986).
22. G. Dhanunjaya Naidu, C. Manoj, P. K. Patro, et al.,
“Deep electrical signatures across the Achankovil
shear zone, Southern Granulite Terrain inferred from
magnetotellurics,” Gondwana Res. (2011), doi:
10.1016/J.GR.2010.12.002
23. S. A. Drury, N. B. W. Harris, R. W. Holt, et al., “Pre
cambrian tectonics and crustal evolution in south
India,” J. Geol. 92, 3–20 (1984).
24. J. M. Edmond, “Himalayan tectonics, weathering
processes and the strontium isotope record in marine
limestones,” Science 258, 1594–1597 (1992).
25. M. A. Edwards and B. Grasemann, “Mediterranean snap
shots of accelerated slab retreat: subduction instability in
stalled continental collision,” Ed. by D. J. J. van Hinsber
gen, M. A. Edwards, and R. Govers, in Collision and
Collapse at the Africa–Arabia–Eurasia Subduction
Zone, Geol. Soc. Lond. Spec. Publ. 311, 155–192
(2009).
26. C. Froidevaux and Y. Richard, “Tectonic evolution of
high plateaus,” Tectonics 134, 227–238 (1987).
27. P. W. J. Glover and F. J. Vine, “Electrical conductivity
of carbon bearing granulites at raised temperatures and
pressures,” Nature, No. 3609, 723–726 (1992).
28. S. G. Gokarn, “Electrical conductivity patterns along
transects over the Indian lithospheric domains of dif
fering temporal evolution: a review,” Memoir Geol.
Soc. Ind. 53, 129–147 (2003).
29. S. G. Gokarn, G. Gupta, C. K. Rao, and C. Selvaraj,
“Electrical structure across the Indus–Tsangpo suture
and Shyok suture zones in Northwest Himalaya using
magnetotelluric studies,” Geophys. Res. Lett. 29, 1–4
(2002).
30. P. W. J. Golver, J. Pous, P. Queralt, et al., “Integrated
twodimensional lithospheric conductivity modeling
in the Pyrenees using field scale and laboratory mea
surements,” Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 178, 59–72
(2000).
31. G. Gupta, S. G. Gokarn, and B. P. Singh, “Thickness
of the Siwalik sediments in the Mohand–Ramnagar
region using magnetotelluric studies,” Phys. Earth
Planet. Interior 83, 217–224 (1994).
32. S. Gupta, S. S. Rai, K. S. Prakasam, et al., “The
nature of the crust in southern India: implications for
Precambrian crustal evolution,” Geophys. Res. Lett.
30 (1419) (2003), doi: 10.1029/2002GL016770
33. T. Harinarayana, K. Naganjaneyulu, C. Manoj, et al.,
“Magnetitelluric investigations along KuppamPalani
geotransect, South India—2D modeling results,”
Memoir Geol. Soc. Ind. 50, 107–124 (2003).
34. T. Harinarayana, K. Naganjaneyulu, and B. P. K.
Patro, “Detection of collision zone in South Indian
shield region from magnetotelluric studies,” Gond
wana Res. 10, 48–56 (2006).
35. M. L. Hauck, K. D. Nelson, L. D. Brown, et al.,
“Crustal structure of the Himalaya orogen at ~90 east
longitude from INDEPTH deep reflection profiles,”
Tectonics 17, 481–500 (1998).
36. S. E. Hjelt, T. Korja, E. Kozlovskaya, et al., “BEAR
and SVEKALAPKO Seismic Tomography Working
Groups. Electrical conductivity and seismic velocity
structures of the lithosphere beneath the Fennoscan
dian Shield,” Geol. Soc. Lond. Memoir 32, 541–559
(2006).
GEOTECTONICS Vol. 48 No. 4 2014
 ELECTROMAGNETIC SIGNATURES OF COLLISION ZONES IN INDIA
37. K. V. Hodges, J. M. Hurtado, and K. K. Whipple,
“Southward extrusion of Tibetan crust and its effect on
Himalayan tectonics,” Tectonics 20, 799–809 (2001).
38. R. D. Hyndman and P. M. Shearer, “Water in the lower
continental crust: modeling magnetotelluric and seis
mic reflection results,” Geophys. J. Int. 98, 343–365
(1989).
39. M. Israil, D. K. Tyagi, P. K. Gupta, and S. Niwas,
“Magnetotelluric investigations for imaging electrical
structure of Garwhal Himalayan corridor, Uttara
khand, India,” J. Earth System Sci. 117, 189–200
(2008).
40. S. C. Jain, K. K. K. Nair, and D. B. Yedekar, “Geology
of the SonNarmadaTapti lineament zone in Central
India, Project CRUMNSONATA,” Geol. Surv. Ind.
Spec. Publ. 10, 1–154 (1995).
41. A. K. Jain, S. Singh, R. M. Manickavasagam, et al.,
“HIMPROBE program: integrated studies on geology,
petrology, geochemistry and geophysics of the Trans
Himalaya and Karakoram,” Memoir Geol. Soc. Ind.
53, 1–56 (2003).
42. A. K. Jain, S. Singh, and R. M. Manickavasagam,
“Intracontinental shear zones in the southern Gran
ulite terrain: their kinematics and evolution,” Memoir
Geol. Soc. Ind. 50, 225–253 (2003).
43. A. G. Jones, “Electrical properties of the lower conti
nental crust,” Ed. by D. M. Fountain, R. Arculus, and
R. W. Kay, in Continental lower crust (Elsevier Publica
tions, 1992), pp. 81–144.
44. A. G. Jones, J. Ledo, and I. J. Ferguson, “Electromag
netic images of the transHudson orogen: the North
American Central Plains anomaly revealed,” Can. J.
Earth Sci. 42, 457–478 (2005).
45. K. L. Kaila, P. R. Reddy, M. M. Dixit, and P. Koteswar
Rao, “Crustal structure across the NarmadaSon line
ament, Central India from deep seismic soundings,”
J. Geol. Soc. Ind. 26, 465–480 (1985).
46. N. Krishna Brahmam, “Gravity in relation to crustal
structure, paleosutures and seismicity of southern
India,” Memoir Geol. Soc. Ind. 25, 165–201 (1993).
47. J. Ledo, C. Ayala, J. Pous, et al., “New geophysical
constraints on the deep structure of the Pyrenees,”
Geophys. Res. Lett. 27, 1037–1040 (2000).
48. G. Losito, P. A. Schnegg, C. Lambelet, et al., “Micro
scopic scale conductivity as explanation of magneto
telluric results from the Alps of western Switzerland,”
Geophys. J. Int. 147, 602–609 (2001).
49. T. M. Mahadevan, “Geological evolution of south
Indian shield—constraints on modeling,” Memoir
Geol. Soc. Ind. 50, 25–46 (2003).
50. D. M. Mall and A. P. Singh, “Sarkar structure and seis
motectonics of Satpura, Central India,” Curr. Sci. 88,
1621–1627 (2005).
51. S. Mazzotti and R. D. Hyndman, “Yakutat collision
and strain transfer across the northern Canadian Cor
dillera,” Geology 30, 495–498 (2002).
52. D. C. Mishra, V. Vijaya Kumar, and R. P. Rajasekhar,
“Analysis of airborne magnetic and gravity anomalies
of peninsular shield, India integrated with seismic and
magnetotelluric results and gravity anomalies of
Madagascar, Sri Lanka and East Antarctica,” Gond
wana Res. 10, 6–17 (2006).
GEOTECTONICS Vol. 48 No. 4 2014
343
53. A. Mohan, B. F. Windley, and M. P. Searle, “Geother
mobarometry and development of inverted metamor
phism in the Darjeeling–Sikkim region of the eastern
Himalaya,” J. Metamorphic Geol. 7, 95–110 (1989).
54. P. Molnar and P. Tapponnier, “Cenozoic tectonics of
Asia: effects of a continental collision,” Science 189,
419–426 (1975).
55. P. Molnar, P. England, and J. Martinod, “Mantle
dynamics, uplift of the Tibetan Plateau and the Indian
Monsoon,” Rev. Geophys. 31, 357–396.
56. J. L. Nabelek, J. Vergene, and G. Hetenyi, “Project
HiCLIMB: a synoptic view of the Himalayan colli
sion zone and Southern Tibet,” EOS Trans. 86 (52),
T52A02 (2005).
57. K. Naganjaneyulu and T. Harinarayana, “Evidence for
continent–continent collision zone in the South
Indian Shield region,” Gondwana Res. 6, 902–911
(2003).
58. K. Naganjaneyulu and M. Santosh, “The Cambrian
collisional suture of Gondwana in southern India: a
geophysical appraisal,” J. Geodynam. 50, 256–267
(2010).
59. K. Naganjaneyulu, G. Dhanunjaya Naidu,
M. Someswara Rao, et al., “Deep crustal electromag
netic structure of central India tectonic zone and its
implications,” Phys. Earth Planet. Interior 181, 60–
68 (2010).
60. S. M. Naqvi, Geology and Evolution of the Indian Plate:
from Hadean to Holocene—4 Ga to 4 Ka (Capital pub
lishing Company, New Delhi, 2005), 450 p.
61. S. M. Naqvi and J. J. W. Rogers, Precambrian Geology
of India (Oxford University Press, New York, 1987),
p. 223.
62. S. M. Naqvi, D. Rao, and H. Narain, “The protocon
tinental growth of the Indian shield and the antiquity
of its rift valleys,” Precam. Res. 1, 345–398 (1974).
63. P. N. Nayak, “Deep crustal configuration of central
India,” Geol. Surv. India Spec. Publ. 28, 67–98
(1990).
64. C. O’Neill, A. Lenardic, J. A. M. Ellinek, and
L. Moresi, “Influence of supercontinents on deep
mantle flow,” Gondwana Res. 15, 276–287 (2009).
65. B. P. K. Patro and T. Harinarayana, “Deep geoelectric
structure of the Sikkim Himalayas (NE India) using
magnetotelluric studies,” Phys. Earth Planet. Interior
173, 171–176 (2009).
66. J. Quade, L. Roe, P. DeCelles, and T. Ojha, “The late
Neogene 87Sr/86Sr record of lowland Himalayan riv
ers,” Science 276, 1828–1831 (1997).
67. B. P. Radakrishna, “Suspect tectonostratigraphic ter
rane elements in the Indian Subcontinent,” J. Geol.
Soc. Ind. 34, 1–24 (1989).
68. S. N. Rai and S. Thiagarajan, “A tentative 2D thermal
model of central India across the NarmadaSon linea
ment (NSL),” J. Asian Earth Sci., Ser. A 28, 363–371
(2006).
69. S. S. Rai, D. Srinagesh, and V. K. Gaur, “Granulite
evolution in the South India—a seismic tomographic
perspective continental crust of India,” Memoir Geol.
Soc. Ind. 25, 235–264 (1993).
344 HARINARAYANA, VEERASWAMY
70. B. Rajendra Prasad, G. Kesava Rao, D. M. Mall, et al.,
“Tectonic implications of seismic reflectivity pattern
observed over the Precambrian Southern Granulite
Terrain, India,” Precam. Res. 153, 1–10 (2007).
71. K. G. Rajesh and T. R. K. Chetty, “Structure and tec
tonics of the Achankovil Shear Zone, southern India,”
Gondwana Res. 10, 86–98 (2006).
72. M. Ramakrishnan, “CratonMobile belt relations in
southern granulite terrain,” Memoir Geol. Soc. Ind.
50, 1–24 (2003).
73. C. K. Rao, Y. Ogawa, S. G. Gokarn, and G. Gupta,
“Electromagnetic imaging of magma across the Nar
mada Son lineament, central India,” Earth Planets
Space 56, 229–238 (2004).
74. U. Raval and K. Veeraswamy, “India–Madagascar
Separation: breakup along a preexisting—mobile belt
and chipping of the craton,” Gondwana Res. 6, 467–
485 (2003).
75. U. Raval and K. Veeraswamy, “Within and beyond the
protocontinents: some geophysical aspects reflecting
geodynamics of the Indian continental lithosphere,”
IAGR Memoir 10, 263–285 (2007).
76. Ravishankar, “Heat flow map of India and discussion
on its geological and economic significance,” Ind.
Miner. 42, 89–110 (1988).
77. P. R. Reddy, B. Rajendra Prasad, V. Vijaya Rao, et al.,
“Deep seismic reflection and refraction/wideangle
reflection studies along KuppamPalani transect in the
southern granulite terrain of India,” Memoir Geol.
Soc. Ind. 50, 79–106 (2003).
78. D. M. Robinson, P. G. De Celles, C. N. Garzione,
et al., “Kinematic model for the Main Central Thrust
in Nepal,” Geology 31, 359–362 (2003).
79. W. Rodi and R. L. Mackie, “Nonlinear conjugate gra
dients algorithm for 2D magnetotelluric inversion,”
Geophysics 66, 174–187 (2001).
80. Y. Rotstein and A. L. Kafka, “Seismotectonics of the
southern boundary of Anatolia, Eastern Mediterra
nean region: subduction, collision and arc jumping,”
J. Geophys. Res. 87, 7694–7706 (1982).
81. A. Roy and M. H. Prasad, “Tectonothermal events in
Central Indian Tectonic Zone (CITZ) and its implica
tions in Rodinian crustal assembly,” J. Asian Earth Sci.
22, 115–129 (2003).
82. S. Roy, L. Ray, P. Senthil Kumar, et al., “Heat flow and
heat production in the Precambrian gneissgranulite
province of southern India,” Memoir Geol. Soc. Ind.
50, 177–191 (2003).
83. E. Sandvol, N. Turkelli, and M. Barazangi, “The East
ern Turkey seismic experiment: the study of a young
continentcontinent collision,” Geophys. Res. Lett.
30, doi: 10.1029/2003GL018912
84. M. Santosh, “India’s Paleoproterozoic Legacy,” Geol.
Soc. Lond. Spec. Publ. (2011).
85. M. Santosh, S. Maruyama, and K. Sato, “Anatomy of
a Cambrian suture in Gondwana: pacifictype orogeny
in southern India?,” Gondwana Res. 16, 321–341
(2009).
86. M. Santosh, T. Tsunogae, H. Shimizu, and J. Dubessy,
“Fluid characteristics of retrogressed eclogites and
mafic granulites from the Cambrian Gondwana suture
zone in southern India,” Contrib. Mineral. Petrol.
159, 349–369 (2010).
87. A. B. Sarbadhikari and S. K. Bhowmik, “Constraining
the metamorphic evolution of a cryptic hot Mesoprot
erozoic orogen in the Central Indian Tectonic Zone,
using P–T pseudosection modeling of mafic intrusions
and host reworked granulites,” Precam. Res. 162,
128–149 (2008).
88. F. R. Schilling, G. M. Partzsch, H. Brasse, and
G. Schward, “Partial melting below the magmatic arc
in the central Andes deduced from magnetotelluric
field experiments and laboratory data,” Phys. Earth
Planet. Interior 103, 17–31 (1997).
89. S. M. Schmid, O. A. Pfiffher, N. Froitzheim, et al.,
“Geophysicalgeological transect and tectonic evolu
tion of the Swiss–Italian Alps,” Tectonics 15, 1036–
1064 (1996).
90. G. Schwarz and D. Kruger, “Resistivity cross section
through the southern Central Andes as inferred from
magnetotelluric and geomagnetic depth soundings,”
J. Geophys. Res. 102, 11957–11978 (1997).
91. A. M. C. Sengor and W. S. F. Kidd, “The postcolli
sional tectonics of the Turkish–Iranian Plateau and a
comparison with Tibet,” Tectonophysics 55, 361–376
(1979).
92. S. B. Singh, J. Stephen, U. K. Singh, et al., “Electrical
signatures in the high grade metamorphic terrain of
South India using deep resistivity sounding studies,”
Memoir Geol. Soc. Ind. 50, 125–138 (2003).
93. A. P. Singh, D. C. Mishra, V. Vijaya Kumar, and
M. B. S. Vyaghreswara Rao, “Gravitymagnetic sig
natures and crustal architecture along Kuppam–
Palani geotransect, South India,” Memoir Geol. Soc.
Ind. 50, 139–163 (2003).
94. J. E. Spratt, A. G. Jones, K. D. Nelson, and
M. J. Unsworth, “INDEPTH MT Team. Crustal
structure of the India–Asia collision zone, southern
Tibet, from INDEPTH MT investigations,” Phys.
Earth Planet. Interior 150, 227–237 (2005).
95. M. Storey, J. J. Mahoney, A. D. Saunders, et al., “Tim
ing of hotspot related volcanism and the breakup of
Madagascar and India,” Science 262, 852–855
(1995).
96. A. B. Thompson, “Metamorphism and fluids,” Ed. by
G. C. Brown, C. J. Hawkesworth, R. C. L. Wilson, in
Understanding the Earth (Cambridge University Press,
1992).
97. A. N. Tikhonov, “Determination of the electrical char
acteristics of deep layers of the Earths core,” Dokl.
Akad. Nauk USSR 73, 295–297 (1950).
98. V. M. Tiwari, M. B. S. Vyghreswara Rao, D. C. Mishra,
and B. Singh, “Crustal structure across Sikkim, NE
Himalay from new gravity and magnetic data,” Earth
Planet. Sci. Lett. 247, 61–69 (2006).
99. E. Turkoglu, M. Unsworth, I. Caglar, et al., “Lithos
pheric structure of the Arabia–Eurasia collision zone
in eastern Anatolia: magnetotelluric evidence for
widespread weakening by fluids?,” Geology 36, 619–
622 (2008).
100. M. Unsworth, “Magnetotelluric studies of active con
tinent–continent collisions,” Surv. Geophys. 31,
137–161 (2010).
GEOTECTONICS Vol. 48 No. 4 2014
 ELECTROMAGNETIC SIGNATURES OF COLLISION ZONES IN INDIA
101. M. J. Unsworth, A. G. Jones, W. Wei, et al., “Crustal
rheology of the Himalaya and Southern Tibet inferred
from magnetotelluric data,” Nature 438, 78–81
(2005).
102. K. S. Valdiya, The Making of India—Geodynamic Evo
lution (Macmillan Publishers India Ltd., 2010), p. 816.
103. K. Veeraswamy and T. Harinarayana, “Electrical sig
natures due to thermal anomalies along mobile belts
reactivated by the trail and outburst of mantle plume:
evidences from the Indian subcontinent,” J. Appl.
Geophys. 58, 313–320 (2006).
104. K. Veeraswamy, K. K. Abdul Azeez, Sharana Basava,
et al., “Electrical structure across lesser and higher
NW Himalaya, India,” Chin. J. Geophys. 53, 576–
584 (2010).
105. V. Vijaya Rao, “Geodynamics of the collision zones:
phases of lithospheric evolution from the Indian
shield,” Memoir Geol. Soc. Ind. 72, 165–194 (2008).
106. V. Vijaya Rao, K. Sain, P. R. Reddy, and W. D. Mooney,
“Crustal structure and tectonics of the northern part of
the Southern Granulite Terrane, India,” Earth Planet.
Sci. Lett. 251, 90–103 (2006).
107. K. Vozoff, Magnetotelluric Methods, Geophysics
Reprint series (SEG Publication, 1986), Vol. 5, p. 764.
108. C. Wang, X. Zhao, Z. Liu, et al., “Constraints on the
early uplift history of the Tibetan Plateau,” Proc. Natl.
Acad. Sci. 105, 4987–4992 (2009).
GEOTECTONICS Vol. 48 No. 4 2014
View publication stats
345
109. P. E. Wannamaker, “Comments on ‘The petrologic
case for a dry lower crust’,” Ed. by W. D. B. Yardley
and J. W. Valley, J. Geophys. Res. 105, 6057–6064
(2000).
110. K. X. Whipple, “The influence of climate on the tec
tonic evolution of mountain belts,” Nat. Geosci. 2,
97–104 (2009).
111. D. B. Yedekar, S. C. Jain, K. K. K. Nair, and K. Dutta,
“The Central Indian Collision Suture,” Geol. Surv.
India, Spec. Publ. 28, 1–43 (1990).
112. T. Yellappa, T. R. K. Chetty, T. Tsunogae, and M. San
tosh, “The Manamedu Complex: geochemical con
straints on Neoproterozoic suprasubduction zone
ophiolite formation within the Gondwana suture in
southern India,” J. Geodynamics 50, 168–285 (2010).
113. A. Yin and T. M. Harrison, “Geologic evolution of the
Himalayan–Tibetan orogen,” Ann. Rev. Earth Planet.
Sci. 28, 211–280 (2000).
114. M. Yoshida, “Geochronological data evaluation:
implications for the Proterozoic tectonics of East
Gondwana,” Gondwana Res. 12, 228–241 (2007).
115. M. Yoshida, R. S. Divi, and M. Santosh, “Precam
brian Central India and its role in the Gondwanland–
Rodinia context,” Gondwana Res. 4, 208–211 (2001).
116. E. Zor, C. Gurbuz, N. Turkelli, et al., “The crustal
structure of the East Anatolian Plateau from receiver
functions,” Geophys. Res. Lett. 30, 8044 (2003).