Iraqi Geological Journal Ahmed and Abdulnaby 2023, 56 (1C), 235-247

Iraqi Geological Journal

Journal homepage: https://www.igj-iraq.org

Crustal Structure beneath SLY1 Station from Joint Inversion of Receiver

Function and Surface Wave Dispersion Analyses, Sulaymaniyah Area, NE
Iraq
Omar Q. Ahmed1,* and Wathiq G. Abdulnaby2
1
Department of Geology, College of Science, Universityof Sulaimaniyah, Sulaimaniyah,Iraq.
2
Department of Geology, College of Science, University of Basrah, Basrah,Iraq.
* Correspondence: [email protected]

Abstract
Received: The crustal structure beneath the Sulaymaniyah area in northeast Iraq which is located in a
10 June 2022
seismically active zone, was investigated and the results were presented in this study.
Teleseismic and regional earthquakes recorded by the Sulaymaniyah broadband seismic
Accepted: station (SLY1) were used to conduct the P-wave receiver functions and Rayleigh wave group
29 November 2022
velocities using Computer Programs in Seismology (CPS). Joint inversion of receiver
Published: functions and surface waves dispersion curves were used to infer the crustal structure below
31 March 2023 the station. The waveforms were analyzed for 72 earthquakes with epicentral distances
ranging from 30º to 90º that occurred during the period from October 2015 to Oct. 2021 with
magnitudes ≥ 7Mw. The generated crustal model shows that the sedimentary cover in the
area is around 6km with a P-wave velocity of 5.4817km/sec and Moho discontinuity around
48km with a P-wave velocity of 8.0560km/sec. These outcomes indicate that the crystalline
crustal thickness at Sulaymaniyah station is 42 km with a P-wave velocity ranging from
5.4817km/sec to 8.0560km/sec. There are two sharp discontinuities around 20km and 38km
with P-wave velocities of 5.9182km/sec and 7.1485km/sec respectively. It is believed that
these are the discontinuities between the upper, middle, and lower crust.
Keywords: Crustal structure; Joint inversion; Receiver functions; Surface wave
dispersion; Velocity model

1. Introduction
The governorate of Sulaymaniyah is situated in a seismically active zone that designates where the
Arabian and Eurasian tectonic plates collide. According to tectonic divides of Iraq by Fouad, 2015,
Sulaymaniyah is located in northern Iraq within the Zagros fold - thrust Belt (FTB), which is dominated
by three basement blocks (Fig.1).
Both Ameen, (1979) and Al-Azzawi, (2013) claim that these blocks are divided by two primary
faults that run in opposite directions. Sulaymaniyah territory is part of the Kirkuk block, which is largely
affected by the collision of the Eurasian and Arabian plates (Abdulnaby, 2019). Previous geophysical
investigations of the Zagros (FTB) in Iraq and the neighboring locations have shown that between 40
and 60 kilometers deep is Moho and the Conrad discontinuity's is between 18 and 22 kilometers of depth
(Abdulnaby et al., 2014a; Abdulnaby et al., 2014b). To understand the tectonic setting and the
geodynamics processes of any region, the thickness of the crust must be determined (Ramthan et al.,
2020).

DOI: 10.46717/igj.56.1C.16ms-2023-3-27
235
 Iraqi Geological Journal Ahmed and Abdulnaby 2023, 56 (1C), 235-247

According to Gök et al. (2008), the northern Arabian Platform's crust is consistent. As a result, the
differences in crustal thickness in the Zagros (FTB) demonstrate the tectonic evolution of the area where
the Arabian and Eurasian tectonic plates collide. The upper mantle Pn velocity was measured by Al-
Heety, (2002) beneath Baghdad ( BHD ) seismic station and it was found to be 7.8 Km/s. The crustal
structure (Moho depth) beneath the Anbar (ANB1) station is 44 km according to Rafea1 et al. (2022).
Mohammed and Al-Rahim (2020) note that the spatial differences of the tectonic regime and the stress
field are compatible with the neotectonic stress field.
An accurate understanding of crustal structure is essential to comprehend geodynamic development
and tectonic evolution. To conclude the crustal velocity structure below the Sulaymaniyah area, this
study analyzed the data from this station. According to the tectonic setting of the area, the crust's
thickness varies (Kearey et al., 2009; Havskov and Ottemöller, 2010). The crust beneath north-eastern
Iraq indicates crustal depth of 40-45 km for the foothills, which increases to 45-50 km below the core
of the Zagros-Bitlis zone (Gritto et al., 2010). The weak rheology of the uppermost mantle allowed
local sinking of the crust and deepening of the Moho boundary (Abdulnaby, 2020). The results of the
Receiver Function (RF) inversion suggest a slightly shallower Moho below the foothills at 40-50 km
depth, while it dips down to 45-55 km below the Zagros mountains (Gritto et al.,2008). The crustal
thickness was found to increase towards the Zagros thrust zone and the interplate seismicity is
significantly more dominant than the intraplate activity ( Aleqabi et al., 2012). The shear wave velocity
values are higher in the platform than in the plateau and generally, variations in crustal thickness and
velocity are found between the northern Arabian platform and the Turkish plateau (Ahmed, 2013).

Fig. 1. The location of the Sulaymaniyah broadband seismic station (SLY1) regards the tectonic
divides of Iraq as stated in Fuad (2015) and the three Zagros (FTB)'s basement blocks based on
(Ameen, 1979) and (Al-Azzawi, 2013)

2. Data
As part of network improvement project in the Middle East, Lawrence Livermore National
Laboratory (LLNL) of the U.S. Department of Energy funded the installation of SLY1 broadband
seismic station in collaboration of University of Sulaimani with University of Arkansas at Little Rock
(UALR). This instrument is three‐component Güralp Systems (CMG-3ESPD) with 24‐bit digitizers,
50Hz and with GPS timing system. This station, which is located at latitude 35.5784 and longitude

236
 Iraqi Geological Journal Ahmed and Abdulnaby 2023, 56 (1C), 235-247

45.3667, as a part of the Mesopotamian (MP) seismic network, was employed in this investigation
started collecting data on September 15, 2015. The data center of the MP network is the Seismological
Lab of Basrah University (SLUB).

2.1 Data of Receiver Functions

The SLY1 station has recorded primary waves from a considerable number of teleseismic quakes.
The waveforms were analyzed for 72 earthquakes with epicentral distances ranging from 30º to 90º that
occurred during the period from October 2015 to Oct. 2021 with magnitudes ≥ 7Mw (Table 1). The list
of these earthquakes was collected from the International Seismological Centre (ISC) Bulletin. Only 46
of these P-waves were chosen for the inversion process after the noisy events were disregarded (Fig. 2).
There are groups of events based on azimuths and epicentral distance. This is crucial for identifying
strong waveform patterns, especially in cases when the data are remarkably contaminated by noise
(Darbyshire et al., 2000).

Table 1. Teleseismic earthquakes were employed to calculate the receiver functions of this study

No. Date Time (UTC) Lat. Long. Depth(km) (Mw)

1 2015-10-26 09:09:32.62 36.4208 70.8008 216.7 7.1
2 2015-10-26 09:09:39.91 36.503 70.5277 204 7.6
3 2015-12-07 07:50:04.54 38.1252 72.885 14.2 7.1
4 2015-12-09 10:21:48.55 -4.1231 129.4453 26.6 7.1
5 2016-01-24 10:30:29.83 59.6855 -153.5814 126.6 7.2
6 2016-01-30 03:25:11.26 53.9502 158.4973 171 7.3
7 2016-03-02 12:49:48.85 -4.9196 94.2507 26.1 7.8
8 2016-03-02 15:12:06.11 -4.6888 94.2791 10 7
9 2016-04-13 13:55:18.54 23.1074 94.8533 151.4 7.1
10 2016-04-15 16:25:06.02 32.7207 130.7439 7 7.3
11 2016-07-29 21:18:24.72 18.5795 145.5253 213.7 7.7
12 2016-08-29 04:30:00.43 -0.2297 -17.8476 23 7.1
13 2016-11-21 20:59:48.56 37.2764 141.3754 4.5 7
14 2017-01-10 06:13:47.70 4.4134 122.5644 628.2 7.2
15 2017-07-17 23:34:14.56 54.4085 168.7028 8.4 7.9
16 2017-11-12 18:18:17.17 34.8685 45.8783 20.1 7.1
17 2017-11-17 22:34:18.84 29.835 95.0648 6.4 7
18 2018-01-23 09:31:40.91 55.9315 -149.1877 9.3 8
19 2018-07-20 23:56:02.02 18.3892 145.9568 148.9 7
20 2018-08-05 11:46:36.44 -8.3624 116.4131 31.9 7.1
21 2018-08-31 07:12:24.25 39.2789 21.6605 9.6 7.7
22 2018-09-28 10:02:43.80 -0.2775 119.9145 15.9 7.5
23 2018-10-25 22:54:51.80 37.475 20.7164 16.8 7
24 2018-11-30 17:29:27.73 61.3098 -150.0269 50.4 7
25 2018-12-20 17:01:55.32 55.0024 164.684 17.3 7.3
26 2018-12-29 03:39:09.96 5.8799 126.8725 64.4 7
27 2019-06-24 02:53:39.93 -6.3892 129.2474 221.2 7.3
28 2019-07-07 15:08:41.73 0.4597 126.1188 43.7 7
29 2019-07-14 09:10:50.96 -0.612 128.0954 13.7 7.4
30 2019-08-02 12:03:26.86 -7.2692 104.8553 52.3 7
31 2019-08-29 11:25:11.78 8.3827 92.2512 10 7.4

237
Iraqi Geological Journal Ahmed and Abdulnaby 2023, 56 (1C), 235-247

No. Date Time (UTC) Lat. Long. Depth(km) (Mw)

32 2019-11-03 00:16:26.90 23.153 103.875 17.1 8.5
33 2019-11-14 16:17:40.57 1.6213 126.4156 33 7.1
34 2019-11-21 03:25:01.30 19.51 101.32 5 7.7
35 2020-01-24 17:55:14.14 38.4312 39.0609 10 7.1
36 2020-02-10 18:20:09.25 13.1329 93.2938 39.6 7.7
37 2020-02-13 10:33:44.40 45.6161 148.959 143 7
38 2020-03-24 15:00:38.32 7.9108 92.349 71.6 7.4
39 2020-03-25 02:49:15.60 48.99 157.67 10 7.6
40 2020-05-06 13:53:57.70 -6.84 129.82 114 7
41 2020-07-22 06:12:44.81 55.0715 -158.596 28 7.8
42 2020-07-28 13:28:17.60 21.09 104.73 10 9.5
43 2020-08-17 01:25:56.50 21.17 104.95 10 7.6
44 2020-08-18 22:29:24.73 -4.2069 101.2411 26 7
45 2020-09-18 21:43:59.02 0.9298 -26.8533 10 7.3
46 2020-10-08 19:42:17.50 9.87 93.72 20 8.1
47 2020-10-19 20:54:38.95 54.602 -159.6258 28.4 7.6
48 2020-10-19 21:22:28.67 54.3536 -159.8541 22.6 7.2
49 2020-10-20 13:20:02.51 17.9617 146.2487 99.6 7.3
50 2020-10-30 11:51:27.34 37.8973 26.7838 21 7
51 2020-12-10 07:36:10.01 14.3413 120.0314 397.5 7.3
52 2021-01-11 21:32:59.01 51.2811 100.4383 10 7
53 2021-01-21 12:23:04.25 4.9931 127.5145 80 7
54 2021-02-13 14:07:49.79 37.7265 141.7751 44 7.1
55 2021-03-03 10:34:08.33 39.7231 22.211 10 7.1
56 2021-03-04 19:23:51.98 39.8812 21.9795 10 7.2
57 2021-03-20 09:09:44.96 38.4872 141.6443 58.4 7.2
58 2021-05-21 14:31:12.57 25.7261 99.9671 10 7
59 2021-05-21 18:04:14.56 34.5423 98.3039 10 7.5
60 2021-07-23 20:57:46.23 15.6854 120.1222 292.9 7.1
61 2021-07-29 06:15:46.30 55.71 -157.97 10 7.9
62 2021-07-29 06:23:34.95 55.4629 -157.7452 66.5 7.7
63 2021-07-29 06:32:35.10 55.39 -157.04 18 8.2
64 2021-07-29 08:39:27.63 22.9128 95.8559 10 7.3
65 2021-07-29 09:28:23.15 55.5989 -157.675 18.5 7.4
66 2021-08-11 17:46:12.73 6.442 126.6123 51.3 7.1
67 2021-08-12 21:03:48.12 6.088 127.1003 71.4 7
68 2021-08-14 11:57:42.80 55.38 -157.79 10 7
69 2021-08-14 12:08:40.54 28.2409 -43.9876 10 7
70 2021-09-10 20:10:45.44 45.6204 151.8421 42 7.3
71 2021-10-11 09:10:23.80 56.47 -156.69 10 7
72 2021-10-11 18:25:42.66 51.58 -174.3314 10 7.7

238
 Iraqi Geological Journal Ahmed and Abdulnaby 2023, 56 (1C), 235-247

Fig. 2. Location of teleseismic earthquakes used for receiver functions.

2.2. Data of Group Velocity

For surface (Rayleigh) wave group velocity dispersion curves analysis, seismic waveform data of
35 earthquakes were prepared (Table 2). These events have epicentral distances ≤ 30º that occurred
during the period from July 2015 to December 2019 with magnitudes ≥ 6.5Mw. For the inversion
procedure, 29 events have been chosen due to some of the dispersion curves' noisy quality (Fig. 3).

Table 2. List of the detected earthquakes to calculate the group velocity dispersion curves of Rayleigh
waves

No. Date Time (UTC) Lat. Lon. Depth (km) (Mw)

1 2015-07-03 01:07:46.21 37.4703 78.1205 19 6.6
2 2015-08-10 10:05:25.35 36.4846 71.2538 226 6.8
3 2015-10-26 09:09:39.91 36.5030 70.5277 204 7.2
4 2015-11-17 07:10:08.59 38.6751 20.532 11.4 6.5
5 2015-12-07 07:50:04.54 38.1252 72.885 14.2 6.5
6 2015-12-25 19:14:46.59 36.4636 71.1706 206.3 6.5
7 2016-01-12 20:04:59.07 36.5601 70.9893 239.5 6.5
8 2016-04-10 10:28:57.93 36.4351 71.1953 215.4 6.6
9 2016-06-26 11:17:11.22 39.3900 73.5101 8.6 6.6
10 2016-08-24 01:36:33.73 42.6769 13.1965 11.6 6.6
11 2016-10-26 19:18:08.03 42.9119 13.096 7.9 6.5
12 2016-10-30 06:40:19.16 42.8320 13.1035 9.6 6.7
13 2016-11-25 14:24:30.37 39.2043 74.0756 12.4 6.7
14 2017-01-18 10:14:11.29 42.5416 13.2689 10.1 6.6
15 2017-02-07 22:03:55.73 25.0988 63.2448 28.5 6.5
16 2017-05-03 04:47:13.19 39.4196 71.4808 16.9 6.7
17 2017-06-12 12:28:38.66 38.8846 26.344 9.7 6.5
18 2017-07-20 22:31:11.64 36.9674 27.4232 10.2 6.7

239
 Iraqi Geological Journal Ahmed and Abdulnaby 2023, 56 (1C), 235-247

No. Date Time (UTC) Lat. Lon. Depth (km) (Mw)

19 2017-08-08 23:27:52.27 44.3207 82.8287 14.9 6.5
20 2017-11-12 18:18:17.17 34.8685 45.8783 20.1 6.8
22 2017-12-01 02:32:45.10 30.6821 57.3548 8.8 6.6
23 2018-01-31 07:07:00.47 36.4864 70.8639 201.3 6.8
24 2018-05-09 10:41:44.53 36.9093 71.4096 111.8 7
25 2018-08-25 22:13:25.75 34.5828 46.2641 11.1 6.5
26 2018-08-29 09:09:38.40 27.3830 35.149 565.3 7.1
27 2018-08-31 07:12:24.25 39.2789 21.6605 9.6 7.7
28 2018-10-25 22:54:51.80 37.4750 20.7164 16.8 6.9
29 2018-11-25 16:37:32.61 34.3783 45.7559 17.3 6.5
30 2018-11-25 21:08:57.50 28.8060 32.084 15 7.1
31 2019-04-29 14:19:52.55 10.8611 57.291 13.3 6.5
32 2019-08-08 00:45:25.50 36.4905 70.1291 226.1 6.9
33 2019-11-14 05:26:24.13 9.80650 57.5702 9.2 6.8
34 2019-11-26 02:54:12.24 41.4481 19.6318 18 6.6
35 2019-12-20 11:39:51.87 36.4791 70.5613 211 6.7

Fig. 3. Locations of the seismic earthquakes (in green circles) for calculating the group velocity
dispersion curves of surface (Rayleigh) waves

3. Methods

3.1. Receiver Function Analysis

In global seismology, the seismic receiver function (RF) is a method that is frequently used because
it is easy to calculate and can yield useful information from a single station. When a teleseismic wave
reaches a seismic station, it carries information about the structure of the seismic source, how the wave
traveled, and the local structure just underneath the seismograph station (Shearer, 2019). The influences

240
 Iraqi Geological Journal Ahmed and Abdulnaby 2023, 56 (1C), 235-247

of the local structure must be separated from other elements to detect the local structure using this
teleseismic wave beneath a seismographic station. The receiver function is the waveform that forms
when the local structure below a seismic station is isolated from the other components.
A time series displaying the site response or "receiver function" is left after the vertical component
(Z) from the radial component (R) records or seismograms are deconvolved. Since maintaining the R to
Z amplitude ratio limits the near-surface velocity at the receiver site, the deconvolution method of
Ammon, (1991) was used in this study to produce the true-amplitude receiver function. RF analysis is a
technique that is currently extensively employed for figuring out the crustal structure under a 3-
component broadband seismograph station. A data-fitting technique called inversion of a waveform
seeks to get estimations of the properties of the crust from the receiver function.
By resolving a wave equation, the results are predicted from an initial model of the subsurface
parameters. The model is then modified using forward modeling approach to lessen the misfit between
the predicted and observed data. Once the mismatch between the model and (RFs) data is at a satisfactory
level, this process is repeated iteratively.

3.2. Group Velocity

Surface wave dispersion is crucial for understanding earth structure because surface wave velocities
change according to the depth range recorded by each frequency and period. The horizontal apparent
velocity of surface waves, also known as “group velocity”, is the velocity at which a wave group
apparent on a seismogram travels. Different frequency/period wave groups travel at various group
velocities. In the inversion of surface wave dispersion approach, the regional crustal structure along the
wave propagation path is ascertained using Rayleigh or Love wave dispersion curves. A pre-processed
trace of the Rayleigh and Love waves is utilized to create the group velocity dispersion curve using the
multiple filter technique (MFT) (instrument corrected).
By multiplying dispersed signals, this technique is used to identify group velocities as a function
of time. This technique was developed by Dziewonski et al. (1969); Herrmann (1973); Bhattacharya
(1983), and Levshin et al. (1992). By using the MFT of vertical component seismograms, the Rayleigh
wave group velocity is calculated.
The MFT entails three steps: computing the Fourier transform (FT) of the input waveform,
multiplying the complex spectrum by a Gaussian filter, and computing the inverse FT of the filtered
complex spectrum (Shapiro and Singh, 1999; Herrmann et al., 2007). Local or regional events were
employed with epicentral distances of less than 30° and magnitudes greater than 6.5 to determine the
fundamental mode surface (Rayleigh) waves' group velocity dispersion curves.

3.3. Joint Inversion

To produce a more precise crustal structure model prefer to combine RF and surface wave
dispersion using the joint inversion technique (Julia et al., 2000). Compared to independently using the
(RF) or surface wave dispersion, joint inversion yields a model of the crustal structure that is more
tightly restrained. A total of 29 Rayleigh surface wave dispersion curves and 50 (RFs) were used for the
joint inversion.

4. Software
Computer Programs in Seismology, 3.30 (Herrmann, 2013), was employed to calculate the receiver
functions and the group velocity, and then conduct the joint invention of the (RFs) and Rayleigh waves
dispersion curves.
Generic Mapping Tools (GMT) Version 6 was employed to create all maps in this study which is
an open-source program to analyze and display 2D and 3D datasets (Wessel et al., 2019).
241
 Iraqi Geological Journal Ahmed and Abdulnaby 2023, 56 (1C), 235-247

5. Results and Discussion

5.1. Receiver Functions

Convolution using a Gaussian function is used to smooth the receiver functions. Gaussian
parameters of 0.5, 1.0, 2.5, and 5.0 were used. Fig. 4 shows the receiver functions of 2018/10/25
22:54:51.8 earthquakes of 7.0 Mw that were smoothed with the four Gaussian filter parameters.
Fig. 5 represents the back azimuth of the earthquakes that were analyzed to calculate the (RFs).
The figure shows that the analyzed earthquakes are located at the east of the SLY1 station with a back
azimuth ranging from 18º to 122º.

Fig. 4 Rreceiver functions of 2018/10/25, 22:54:51.8 earthquakes of 7.0 Mw that were smoothed with
the four Gaussian filter parameters 0.5, 1.0, 2.5, and 5.0.

Fig. 5. RF of 50 teleseismic earthquakes that were recorded by the SLY1 station and their back
azimuth that ranges from 18º to 122º.

242
 Iraqi Geological Journal Ahmed and Abdulnaby 2023, 56 (1C), 235-247

5.2. Group Velocity

An illustration of the surface (Rayleigh) wave group velocity is shown in Fig. 6. In Table 2, event
number 25 has a magnitude of 6.5 Mw, a focal depth of 11 km, and a distance from the SLY1 station of
137.5 km. The example depicts the multiple filter analysis (MFA) of the vertical “Z-component” of this
event's multiple components.

Fig. 6. Group velocity of surface (Rayleigh) waves of the vertical component for the earthquakes that
occurred in 2018/08/25-22:13:25 of 6.5 Mw as an example

5.3. Joint Inversions

Utilizing the inversion of RF method, the crustal velocity structure beneath SLY1 was identified.
1-D velocity model was created via the time (T) domain linearized inversion method of Ammon (1991).
The inversion was performed using half-space starting models with horizontal layer thicknesses of 2 km
to a depth of 60 km with VS of 3.5, 4.0, and 4.5 km/sec and the damping factor was fixed to 0.4.
An initial model must be created in order to carry out the waveform inversion. A homogeneous
half-space starting earth structure model with a crustal shear-wave velocity of Vs = 4.1 km/sec was
applied to all inversions. To determine whether the first model would bias the result, other starting
models were used, and the results were comparable.
A crustal velocity structure underneath the Sulaymaniyah station was derived from the 50 receiver
functions that were inverted. In order to perform the inversion, the Gaussian filter parameter (Alpha =
1) was employed. The model fit RF is depicted in Fig. 7. The ratio of observed and predicted receiver
functions that fit each other ranges from 62 to 89 %.

243
 Iraqi Geological Journal Ahmed and Abdulnaby 2023, 56 (1C), 235-247

Fig. 7. The receiver functions' model fit. The red curve displays the model prediction, and the blue
curve displays the observed receiver function. Each receiver function is labeled with the station name,
the Alpha (Gaussian filter parameter), the percentage of fit, and the ray parameter (sec/km) to the left
of each trace and with the year, month, day (Julien day), hr. and min. at the upper right of each trace.
At the base of the figure is a time scale

By combining the inversion of teleseismic P-wave (RFs) and group velocity dispersion curves, the
crustal velocity structure underneath the SLY1 station was calculated and the maximum number of
iterations exceeds 50. The final velocity models are depicted in Fig.8 in terms of shear (S-wave)
velocity, primary (P-wave) velocity, and density (RHO). The inversion results reveal four significant
discontinuities in the crustal structure at distances of 6, 18, 38, and 48 kilometers beneath the SLY1
station (Table 3). The first discontinuity represents the sedimentary cover. The second and third
discontinuities represent the discontinuities within the crystalline crust. The last discontinuity represents
the Moho.

244
 Iraqi Geological Journal Ahmed and Abdulnaby 2023, 56 (1C), 235-247

Fig. 8. . Final crustal model for SLY1. The model is expressed in terms of Secondary wave velocity
(red line), Primary wave velocity (blue line), and RHO (green line).

Table 3. The crustal velocity structure of the SLY1 station.

Depth (km) VP (km/s) VS (km/s) RHO (gm/cc) Crustal Structure

0 4.4944 2.5070 2.4002 (0-6 km) Sedimentary Cover
6 5.4817 3.8058 2.5965
20 5.9182 3.3011 2.6906 (6-48 km) Crust
38 7.1485 3.9873 3.0232
48 8.0560 4.4936 3.3226
60 8.0560 4.4936 3.3226 (48-?? km) Upper Mantle

6. Conclusions
In this work, the P wave receiver functions were estimated to investigate the lithospheric structure
beneath the SLY1 seismic station, which is situated in the northeastern part of the Arabian plate. The
receiver functions were stacked and then jointly inverted with Rayleigh wave dispersion data. The Moho
depth beneath Sulaymaniyah station (SLY1) is approximately 48 km which is the thick sedimentary
basin covers the crystalline basement, while the thickness of the sedimentary layer is 6 km, according
to the results of the joint inversion of receiver functions and surface wave dispersion curves. These
outcomes indicate that the crystalline crustal thickness at the Sulaymaniyah station is 42 km, which is
equivalent to Moho depth minus sedimentary cover thickness. Comparing these models with previously
studied Moho depths within and around the study area reveals that the Moho depth is gradually
increasing from the Arabian platform toward the Zagros Mountains. The crystalline crust consists of the
upper, middle, and lower crusts.

245
 Iraqi Geological Journal Ahmed and Abdulnaby 2023, 56 (1C), 235-247

Acknowledgements

We are appreciative of the Lawrence Livermore Lab (LLNL) assistance in installing seismic stations in
Iraq. We acknowledge Dr. R. Herrmann (SLU) for developing the CPS software.

References
Abdulnaby, W., 2019. Structural geology and neotectonics of Iraq: Northwest Zagros. Developments in structural
geology and tectonics, 3, 53-73.
Abdulnaby, W., Mahdi, H., Al-Shukri, H.,Numan, N., 2014a. Stress patterns in Northern Iraq and surrounding
regions from formal stress inversion of earthquake focal mechanism solutions. Pure and Applied
Geophysics, 171(9), 2137-2153.
Abdulnaby, W., Mahdi, H., Numan, N., Al-Shukri, H., 2014b. Seismotectonics of the Bitlis–Zagros fold and thrust
belt in northern Iraq and surrounding regions from moment tensor analysis. Pure and applied geophysics,
171(7), 1237-1250.
Abdulnaby, W., Motaghi, K., Shabanian, E., Mahdi, H., Al-Shukri, H., Gök, R., 2020. Crustal structure of the
Mesopotamian Plain, East of Iraq. Tectonic, 39(11),
Ahmed, O.K., 2013. Seismotectonic study of northern Iraq and surroundings from waveform inversion method.
Journal of Zankoy Sulaimani-Part A (JZS-A), 15(2), 97-101.
Al-Azzawi, K. N., 2013, Paleo and Neo-Tectonics of the Mosul Fault and its Impact on the Tectonics of the
Foreland Area of Iraq: Iraqi National Journal of Earth Sciences, 13 (1), 59-74
Al-Heety, E.A., 2002. Crustal structure of northern Arabian Platform inferred using spectral ratio method. Journal
of Geodynamics, 34, 63–75.
Aleqabi, G.I., Alridha, N.A., Shaswar, O.Q.A., 2012. Crustal and uppermost mantel structure study of N-NE Iraq
Using Rayleigh wave Analyses. Tikrit Journal of Pure Science, 17(2), 195-203.
Ameen, M., 1979, Regional investigation of geoflexures and tectonic analysis in the simple folded zone of Iraq:
MSc, University of Mosul. Iraq
Ammon, C.J., 1991. The isolation of receiver effects from teleseismic P waveforms. Bulletin-Seismological
Society of America, 81(6), 2504-2510.
Bhattacharya, S., 1983. Higher order accuracy in multiple filter technique: Bulletin of the Seismological Society
of America, 73(5), 1395-1406.
Darbyshire, F.A., Priestley, K.F., White, R.S., Stefánsson, R., Gudmundsson, G.B., Jakobsdóttir, S.S., 2000.
Crustal structure of central and northern Iceland from analysis of teleseismic receiver functions.
Geophysical Journal International, 143(1), 163-184.
Dziewonski, A., Bloch, S., Landisman, M., 1969. A technique for the analysis of transient seismic signals. Bulletin
of the seismological Society of America, 59(1), 427-444.
Fouad, S.F., 2015. Tectonic map of Iraq, scale 1: 1000 000. Iraqi Bulletin of Geology and Mining, 11(1), 1-7.
Gök, R., Mahdi, H., Al-Shukri, H., Rodgers, A. J., 2008. Crustal structure of Iraq from receiver functions and
surface wave dispersion: implications for understanding the deformation history of the Arabian–Eurasian
collision: Geophysical Journal International, 172(3), 1179-1187.
Gritto, R., Matthew, S., Jacob, E., Hafidh, A., Youlin, C., Herrmann, R., Ghassan, I., Hrvoje, T., Bakir, S., Borhan,
I., Dawood S., Omar, K., Aras, M., Shaho, A., Ibrahim, F., Rashid, Z., Basoz, A., Layla, O., Nokhsha, A.,
Nian, A., Al-Nasiri T., Ali, A., Abdul-Karem, T., Samira, K., 2008. Crustal Structure of N- Iraq from
Receiver Function Analyses. Monitoring Research Review: Ground-Based Nuclear Explosion Monitoring
Technologies, 79-86.
Havskov, J., Ottemöller, L., 2010. Routine Data Processing in Earthquake Seismology: with sample data,
exercises and software. Springer Science & Business Media.
Herrmann, R.B., 1973. Some aspects of band-pass filtering of surface waves. Bulletin of the Seismological Society
of America, 63(2), 663-671.
Herrmann, R.B., 2013. Computer programs in seismology: An evolving tool for instruction and research. Seism.
Res. Letter. 84(6), 1081-1088.
Herrmann, R.B., Julia, J., Ammon, C.J., 2007. Lithospheric Structure of the Arabian Shield From the Joint
Inversion of Receiver Function and Surface-Wave Dispersion Observations. Tectonophysics, 371(1–4), 1-21.

246
 Iraqi Geological Journal Ahmed and Abdulnaby 2023, 56 (1C), 235-247

Julia, J., Ammon, C., Herrmann, R., Correig, A. M., 2000. Joint inversion of receiver function and surface wave
dispersion observations. Geophysical Journal International, 143(1), 99-112.
Kearey P., Klepeis, K.A., Vine F.J., 2009. Global tectonics ,3rd edition. John Wiley & Sons.
Levshin, A., Ratnikova, L., Berger, J., 1992. Peculiarities of surface-wave propagation across central Eurasia.
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 82(6), 2464-2493.
Mohammed, H.J., Al-Rahim, A.M., 2020. Evaluation stress field and tectonic regime in mid-eastern Iraq-western
Iran from the inversion of moment tensor focal mechanism data. Iraqi Geological Journal, 53(2A), 120-
1.
Rafea, H.F., Al-Heety, E.A., Abdulnaby, W., 2022. Crustal velocity structure of Western Iraq from inversion of
receiver functions at Anbar Seismic Station. Iraqi Geological Journal, 55 (2B), 25-34.
Ramthan A., Abdulnaby, W., Mahdi, N.A., Al-Shukri, H., 2020. Crustal structure beneath Al-Refaei seismic
station – central Mesopotamia, Iraq, using receiver function technique. Iraqi Geological Journal, 53 (2A),
77-87.
Shapiro, N., Singh, S., 1999. A systematic error in estimating surface-wave group-velocity dispersion curves and
a procedure for its correction. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 89(4), 1138-1142.
Shearer, P.M., 2019. Introduction to seismology, 2nd edition. Cambridge university press.
Wessel, P., Luis, J., Uieda, L., Scharroo, R., Wobbe, F., Smith, W. H., Tian, D., 2019. The generic mapping tools
version 6. Geochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems, 20(11), 5556-5564.

247