remotesensing-logo

Journal Browser

Journal Browser

Satellite and Ground-Based Remote Sensing of Seismic, Volcanic and Cyclonic Activity in the Earth-Atmosphere-Ionosphere System

A special issue of Remote Sensing (ISSN 2072-4292). This special issue belongs to the section "Earth Observation for Emergency Management".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (31 August 2024) | Viewed by 11483

Special Issue Editors


E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
1. Space Radio-Diagnostics Research Center, University of Warmia and Mazury, Olsztyn, Poland
2. Space Research Institute, National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine and State Space Agency of Ukraine, Kyiv, Ukraine
Interests: wave processes and synergetic coupling in active and nonlinear layered (lithosphere(earth)-atmosphere-ionosphere-magnetosphere) systems in wide frequency range; ionospheric monitoring; magnetic storms; lightning discharges; tropical cyclones; earthquakes; volcano eruptions; ionosphere

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Center for Investigations in Engineering and Applied Science (CIICAp), Institute for Investigations in Basic and Applied Science (IICBA), Autonomous University of State Morelos (UAEM), Cuernavaca, Morelos, Mexico
Interests: volcanic and seismic monitoring; resonant electromagnetic and acoustic wave phenomena; nonlinear phenomena in plasmas, solids, and geophysics; microwave and terahertz electronics; numerical simulation of nonlinear waves; mechanisms of lithosphere-ionosphere coupling

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Faculty of Engineering, Autonomous University of Carmen (UNACAR), Ciudad del Carmen, Campeche, Mexico
Interests: volcanic and seismic monitoring; signal processing; waves in geophysics; nonlinear phenomena in complex plasmas and geophysics

E-Mail Website
Co-Guest Editor
Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia (INGV)—Sezione Roma 2, Rome, Italy
Interests: lithosphere-atmosphere-ionosphere coupling (LAIC) processes; earthquakes preparation phases; seismic catalogue analysis; geomagnetic field; seismic and volcanic monitoring; non-linear signal processing

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

Earthquakes, volcanic eruptions and powerful atmospheric cyclones are the most powerful natural hazards faced by humanity. The spatial- and temporal-scale devastation caused by these phenomena can involve cities, regions or entire countries.

The costs, in terms of loss of human life and infrastructure damage, are huge each year. To enable the timely provision of information and the implementation of adequate measures, and thus, minimize the harm caused by these phenomena, advanced research should be conducted in this field. Once the subjects of individual disciplines, each of the abovementioned hazards is now studied more broadly whereby the synergy of the geospheres comprising the “Earth System” is expressed by lithosphere/hydrosphere–ionosphere coupling, which spreads through the atmosphere. Such physical connections are now recognized as the basis for the Earth’s complexity. To undertake the challenge of unraveling this complexity, a multiparametric and multidisciplinary approach is essential; this demands ever-deeper knowledge of the phases of preparation and coupling of the phenomena between the geospheres.

Furthermore, investigations of dynamic processes in the atmosphere, ionosphere and hydrosphere—which could be associated with strong seismic, volcanic and atmospheric activity—should take a synergistic approach.

With a view to developing a deeper insight into geophysical synergistic coupling processes in Earth’s open dynamic geosphere system, this Special Issue will focus on new observations, models, simulations, innovative algorithms and machine learning techniques applied to data from satellites, airplanes and the ground.

This Special Issue welcomes papers that discuss innovative multidisciplinary and multiparameter methods and applications for the monitoring and modelling of seismic, volcanic and powerful cyclone phenomena and their possible interactions and signatures in the ionosphere, from their preparation to their fully developed forms. We encourage submissions on topics including, but not limited to:

  • The development of algorithms for automation, validation and implementation in search of coupling in Earth’s geosphere system caused by seismic, volcanic and cyclonic activity.
  • Mapping of the global responses of Earth’s geospheres to local powerful sources (e.g., volcanic eruptions, typhoons and earthquakes).
  • The remote sensing of geomagnetic fields, ionospheric parameters and other data (e.g., TEC, VLF, ULF and particle precipitation).
  • The application of data-driven approaches, digital twin/combined physical theory and data processing, numerical modelling, and complex system theory to the investigation of Earth–atmosphere–ionosphere coupling processes, and physical models of the coupling between Earth’s geospheres.
  • The physical fields accompanying seismic, volcanic and strong atmospheric processes.
  • The application of new physical and chemical sensors in geophysics.
  • Dynamic and planetary, atmospheric gravity, electromagnetic and other wave processes in the lithosphere, hydrosphere, atmosphere and ionosphere that are associated with seismic, volcanic and cyclonic activity.

We welcome the submission of any papers that concern new and effective methods/remarkable improvements to known methods of remote sensing for identifying dynamic state/wave structures in the Earth, atmosphere and magnetosphere. At the same time, we ask potential authors to note how the phenomena and/or remote sensing methods they investigate, for example wave processes in the atmosphere and ionosphere, relate to coupling in the LEAIM system.

Prof. Dr. Yuriy G. Rapoport
Dr. Volodymyr Grimalsky
Dr. Anatoly Kotsarenko
Gianfranco Cianchini
Guest Editors

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Remote Sensing is an international peer-reviewed open access semimonthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2700 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • earthquake
  • volcanic eruption
  • strong atmospheric processes
  • complex monitoring in geophysics
  • numerical modeling
  • SAR processing
  • interferometry
  • time series analysis
  • photogrammetry and sonogrammetry
  • multi-spectral approaches
  • global navigation satellite system (GNSS)
  • wave processes
  • electromagnetic and acoustic perturbations in geophysics
  • different frequency ranges, including ULF, ELF, VLF, and higher
  • lithosphere-hydrosphere-atmosphere-ionosphere coupling and synergetic processes

Benefits of Publishing in a Special Issue

  • Ease of navigation: Grouping papers by topic helps scholars navigate broad scope journals more efficiently.
  • Greater discoverability: Special Issues support the reach and impact of scientific research. Articles in Special Issues are more discoverable and cited more frequently.
  • Expansion of research network: Special Issues facilitate connections among authors, fostering scientific collaborations.
  • External promotion: Articles in Special Issues are often promoted through the journal's social media, increasing their visibility.
  • e-Book format: Special Issues with more than 10 articles can be published as dedicated e-books, ensuring wide and rapid dissemination.

Further information on MDPI's Special Issue polices can be found here.

Published Papers (8 papers)

Order results
Result details
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

Jump to: Review

25 pages, 6462 KiB  
Article
Unusual Sunrise and Sunset Terminator Variations in the Behavior of Sub-Ionospheric VLF Phase and Amplitude Signals Prior to the Mw7.8 Turkey Syria Earthquake of 6 February 2023
by Mohammed Y. Boudjada, Pier F. Biagi, Hans U. Eichelberger, Giovanni Nico, Konrad Schwingenschuh, Patrick H. M. Galopeau, Maria Solovieva, Michael Contadakis, Valery Denisenko, Helmut Lammer, Wolfgang Voller and Franz Giner
Remote Sens. 2024, 16(23), 4448; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs16234448 - 27 Nov 2024
Abstract
We report on the recent earthquakes (EQs) that occurred, with the main shock on 6 February 2023, principally in the central southern part of Turkey and northwestern Syria. This region is predisposed to earthquakes because of the tectonic plate movements between Anatolian, Arabian, [...] Read more.
We report on the recent earthquakes (EQs) that occurred, with the main shock on 6 February 2023, principally in the central southern part of Turkey and northwestern Syria. This region is predisposed to earthquakes because of the tectonic plate movements between Anatolian, Arabian, and African plates. The seismic epicenter was localized at 37.08°E and 37.17°N with depth in the order of 10 km and magnitude Mw7.8. We use Graz’s very-low-frequency VLF facility (15.43°E, 47.06°N) to investigate the amplitude variation in the Denizköy VLF transmitter, localized in the Didim district of Aydin Province in the western part of the Anatolian region in Turkey. Denizköy VLF transmitter is known as Bafa transmitter (27.31°E, 37.40°N), radiating at a frequency of 26.7 kHz under the callsign TBB. This signal is detected daily by the Graz facility with an appropriate signal-to-noise ratio, predominantly during night observations. We study in this analysis the variations of TBB amplitude and phase signals as detected by the Graz facility two weeks before the earthquake occurrence. It is essential to note that the TBB VLF transmitter station and the Graz facility are included in the preparation seismic area, as derived from the Dobrovolsky relationship. We have applied the multi-terminators method (MTM), revealing anomalies occurring at sunset and sunrise terminator occasions and derived from the amplitude and the phase. Minima and maxima of the TBB signal are linked to three terminators, i.e., Graz facility, TBB transmitter, and EQ epicenter, by considering the MTM method. We show that the significant anomalies are those linked to the EQ epicenter. This leads us to make evident the precursor seismic anomaly, which appears more than one week (i.e., 27 January 2023) before EQ occurrence. They can be considered the trace, the sign, and the residue of the sub-ionospheric propagation of the TBB transmitter signal disturbed along its ray path above the preparation EQ zone. We find that the sunrise–sunset anomalies are associated with tectonic regions. One is associated with the Arabian–African tectonic plates with latitudinal stresses in the south–north direction, and the second with the African–Anatolian tectonic plates with longitudinal stresses in the east–west direction. The terminator time shift anomalies prior to EQ are probably due to the lowering (i.e., minima) and raising (i.e., maxima) of the ionospheric electron density generated by atmospheric gravity waves. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

24 pages, 21924 KiB  
Article
A Six-Year (2014–2020) Statistical Correlation Study of VLF Terminator Time Shift with Earthquakes in Japan
by Dimitrios Z. Politis, Sudipta Sasmal, Masashi Hayakawa, Haris Haralambous, Abhirup Datta and Stelios M. Potirakis
Remote Sens. 2024, 16(22), 4162; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs16224162 - 8 Nov 2024
Viewed by 672
Abstract
In this study, we present a six-year (2014–2020) statistical analysis of VLF subionospheric propagation data at 19 VLF receivers from the VLF transmitter with call name JJI and frequency 22.2 kHz, all located in Japan. Moderate and strong earthquakes (EQs) ( [...] Read more.
In this study, we present a six-year (2014–2020) statistical analysis of VLF subionospheric propagation data at 19 VLF receivers from the VLF transmitter with call name JJI and frequency 22.2 kHz, all located in Japan. Moderate and strong earthquakes (EQs) (ML4.5 and depth ≤ 50 km) that occurred in the wider area around Japan during the same time period with the available VLF data are investigated. The terminator times’ (TT) shift in VLF amplitude data as a possible precursor of an EQ are statistically examined, focusing on the correlation with seismic activity. The concept of the effective EQ magnitude (Meff) is used in order to define the total EQ energy possibly affecting the midpoint of each path for each day. It is important to note that dates when geomagnetic storms or solar flares occurred as well as dates corresponding to the already known winter effect on TT statistics in the north–south direction were excluded. The cross-correlation between TT statistical anomalies and seismic activity, represented by Meff, was extracted. Maximum cross-correlation values were found for most of the cases prior to the subsequent seismic activity, indicating a link between the ionospheric anomalies and the subsequent seismicity. Finally, the wide temporal range of the cross-correlation maxima temporal locations is justified by the inhomogeneity of the lower ionosphere, coupled with the anisotropy of the preseismic effect of the impending seismicity, highlighting the complexity of the EQ preparation processes. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

16 pages, 2191 KiB  
Article
Successful Tests on Detecting Pre-Earthquake Magnetic Field Signals from Space
by Homayoon Alimoradi, Habib Rahimi and Angelo De Santis
Remote Sens. 2024, 16(16), 2985; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs16162985 - 14 Aug 2024
Viewed by 1913
Abstract
Earthquake prediction is the holy grail of seismology and one of humanity’s greatest dreams. The Earth’s magnetic field appears to be one of the best possible precursors of earthquakes, although the topic is controversial. Recent advancements have made it possible to observe magnetic [...] Read more.
Earthquake prediction is the holy grail of seismology and one of humanity’s greatest dreams. The Earth’s magnetic field appears to be one of the best possible precursors of earthquakes, although the topic is controversial. Recent advancements have made it possible to observe magnetic fields from satellites with great accuracy. We utilize magnetic measurements from Swarm satellites to explore the potential identification of anomalous magnetic signals preceding earthquakes. Focusing on 1077 major earthquakes that occurred in 2014–2023 in the Alpine–Himalayan belt, we apply an automatic algorithm to data recorded 10 days before each earthquake. This analysis reveals clear pre-earthquake anomalies in the magnetic field components. Notably, a robust correlation is established between the duration of these anomalies and the earthquake magnitude, indicating that as the earthquake magnitude increases, so does the duration of the anomaly. Here we show that this method has a great ability to make predictions (high accuracy 79%, precision 88%, F1-score and hit rate 84%), thus becoming the basis for an Operational Earthquake Prediction System (OEPS). Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

19 pages, 3764 KiB  
Article
Study the Global Earthquake Patterns That Follow the St. Patrick’s Day Geomagnetic Storms of 2013 and 2015
by Dimitar Ouzounov and Galina Khachikyan
Remote Sens. 2024, 16(14), 2544; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs16142544 - 11 Jul 2024
Viewed by 757
Abstract
A response of global seismic activity to the geomagnetic storms of St. Patrick’s Day (March 17) in 2013 and 2015 is investigated. These two storms occurred during nearly identical storm sudden commencement times and similar solar flux levels. We have revealed a rather [...] Read more.
A response of global seismic activity to the geomagnetic storms of St. Patrick’s Day (March 17) in 2013 and 2015 is investigated. These two storms occurred during nearly identical storm sudden commencement times and similar solar flux levels. We have revealed a rather similar pattern of the most substantial earthquakes that have occurred since these storms. Two major crust continental earthquakes, in Iran (M = 7.7), 16 April 2013, and in Nepal (M = 7.8), 25 April 2015, have occurred with a time delay of ~30 and ~39 days after geomagnetic storm onsets in 2013 and 2015, respectively. After that, the great and major deep-focused earthquakes occurred beneath the Sea of Okhotsk (M = 8.3, 24 May 2013, Russia) and the Pacific Ocean (M = 7.8, 30 May 2015, Japan) with a time delay of ~68 and ~74 days, respectively. Geomagnetic storm onsets occurred at 06:04 UT in 2013 and 04:48 UT in 2015. At this time, the high latitudinal areas of the longitudinal regions, in which the mentioned earthquakes occurred in the future, were located under the polar cusp, where the solar wind plasma has direct access to the Earth’s environment. An analysis of the remaining ten earthquakes with M ≥ 7.5, which occurred around the globe in 2013 and 2015, proved the above findings that seismic activity may respond to geomagnetic storm onset with a time delay from some days to some months. Full article
Show Figures

Graphical abstract

25 pages, 11096 KiB  
Article
VLF Signal Noise Reduction during Intense Seismic Activity: First Study of Wave Excitations and Attenuations in the VLF Signal Amplitude
by Aleksandra Nina
Remote Sens. 2024, 16(8), 1330; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs16081330 - 10 Apr 2024
Viewed by 894
Abstract
This study is a continuation of pilot research on the relationships between seismic activity and changes in very low frequency (VLF) signals starting a few minutes or a few dozen minutes before an earthquake. These changes are recorded in the time and frequency [...] Read more.
This study is a continuation of pilot research on the relationships between seismic activity and changes in very low frequency (VLF) signals starting a few minutes or a few dozen minutes before an earthquake. These changes are recorded in the time and frequency domains and their duration can be influenced not only by the strongest earthquake but also by others that occur in a short time interval. This suggests that there are differences in these changes in cases of individual earthquakes and during the period of intense seismic activity (PISA). In a recent study, they were validated in the time domain by comparing the amplitude noise reductions during the PISA and before earthquakes that occurred in the analysed periods without intense seismic activity (PWISA). Here, we analyse the changes in the VLF signal amplitude in the frequency domain during the PISA and their differences are compared to the previously investigated relevant changes during PWISA. We observe the signal emitted by the ICV transmitter in Italy and received in Serbia from 26 October to 2 November 2016 when 907 earthquakes occurred in Central Italy. The study is based on analyses of the Fourier amplitude AF obtained by applying the fast Fourier transform (FFT) to the values of the ICV signal amplitude sampled at 0.1 s. The obtained results confirm the existence of one of the potential earthquake precursors observed during PWISA: significantly smaller values of AF for small wave periods (they can be smaller than 103 dB) than under quiet conditions (the expected values are larger than 102 dB). Exceptions were the values of AF for wave periods between 1.4 s and 2 s from a few days before the observed PISA to almost the end of that period. They were similar or higher than the values expected under quiet conditions. The mentioned decrease lasted throughout the observed longer period from 10 October to 10 November, with occasional normalisation. It was many times longer than the decreases in AF around the considered earthquakes during PWISA, which lasted up to several hours. In addition, no significant wave excitations were recorded at discrete small values of the wave periods during the PISA, as was the case for earthquakes during PWISA. These differences indicate the potential possibility of predicting the PISA if the corresponding earthquake precursors are recorded. Due to their importance for potential warning systems, they should be analysed in more detail in future statistical studies. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

20 pages, 4150 KiB  
Article
Analysis of Pre-Seismic Ionospheric Disturbances Prior to 2020 Croatian Earthquakes
by Mohammed Y. Boudjada, Pier F. Biagi, Hans U. Eichelberger, Giovanni Nico, Patrick H. M. Galopeau, Anita Ermini, Maria Solovieva, Masashi Hayakawa, Helmut Lammer, Wolfgang Voller and Martin Pitterle
Remote Sens. 2024, 16(3), 529; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs16030529 - 30 Jan 2024
Cited by 2 | Viewed by 1186
Abstract
We study the sub-ionospheric VLF transmitter signals recorded by the Austrian Graz station in the year 2020. Those radio signals are known to propagate in the Earth-ionosphere waveguide between the ground and lower ionosphere. The Austrian Graz facility (geographic coordinates: 15.46°E, 47.03°N) can [...] Read more.
We study the sub-ionospheric VLF transmitter signals recorded by the Austrian Graz station in the year 2020. Those radio signals are known to propagate in the Earth-ionosphere waveguide between the ground and lower ionosphere. The Austrian Graz facility (geographic coordinates: 15.46°E, 47.03°N) can receive such sub-ionospheric transmitter signals, particularly those propagating above earthquake (EQ) regions in the southern part of Europe. We consider in this work the transmitter amplitude variations recorded a few weeks before the occurrence of two EQs in Croatia at a distance less than 200 km from Graz VLF facility. The selected EQs happened on 22 March 2020 and 29 December 2020, with magnitudes of Mw5.4 and Mw6.4, respectively, epicenters localized close to Zagreb (16.02°E, 45.87°N; 16.21°E, 45.42°N), and with focuses of depth smaller than 10 km. In our study we emphasize the anomaly fluctuations before/after the sunrise times, sunset times, and the cross-correlation of transmitter signals. We attempt to evaluate and to estimate the latitudinal and the longitudinal expansions of the ionospheric disturbances related to the seismic preparation areas. Full article
Show Figures

Graphical abstract

28 pages, 17598 KiB  
Article
New Insights into the Simulations of Electric Currents for Discharges and ULF Magnetic-Field Perturbations: Applications to the Popocatepetl Volcano and a Micro-Discharge Model
by Vladimir Grimalsky, Anatolyi Kotsarenko, Vsevolod Yutsis, Sergey Pulinets and Abraham Del Razo Gonzalez
Remote Sens. 2024, 16(1), 151; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs16010151 - 29 Dec 2023
Viewed by 1071
Abstract
The noise-like behavior of geomagnetic anomalies observed in Tlamacas station (the Popocatepetl volcano, Mexico), linked to the ionization produced by intensive radon release, is presented in the experimental part of the study. The magnetic-field perturbations produced by electrical currents due to micro-discharges on [...] Read more.
The noise-like behavior of geomagnetic anomalies observed in Tlamacas station (the Popocatepetl volcano, Mexico), linked to the ionization produced by intensive radon release, is presented in the experimental part of the study. The magnetic-field perturbations produced by electrical currents due to micro-discharges on the terrain irregularities are considered in a theoretical model. The simulations demonstrated that the discharge mechanism can generate perturbations with magnitudes of up to 1–10 nT in the ultra-low frequency (ULF)) range of 10−3–10−1 Hz. ULF Magnetic-field perturbations can be higher within storm-weather conditions under an accumulation of electric charges in clouds in the mountainous regions. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Review

Jump to: Research

39 pages, 4113 KiB  
Review
A Tropical Cyclone or Typhoon as an Element of the Earth–Atmosphere–Ionosphere–Magnetosphere System: Theory, Simulations, and Observations
by Leonid F. Chernogor
Remote Sens. 2023, 15(20), 4919; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs15204919 - 11 Oct 2023
Cited by 4 | Viewed by 3281
Abstract
The premise has been validated that a tropical cyclone (TC, typhoon, hurricane), one of the most powerful large-scale formations systematically arising in the atmosphere, is an element of the ocean–atmosphere–ionosphere–magnetosphere system. The TC plays a crucial role with regard to a global-scale mass [...] Read more.
The premise has been validated that a tropical cyclone (TC, typhoon, hurricane), one of the most powerful large-scale formations systematically arising in the atmosphere, is an element of the ocean–atmosphere–ionosphere–magnetosphere system. The TC plays a crucial role with regard to a global-scale mass and energy exchange in this system. The study of this system encompasses a broad spectrum of physical phenomena occurring and processes operating within the system components, as well as the mechanisms of their interactions. The problem under discussion pertains to interdisciplinary science. Its scope ranges from different Earth sciences to geospace sciences, which comprise the physics of the ocean, meteorology, the physics of the Earth’s atmospheric and space environment, etc. Observations of the ionospheric response to the impact of a number of unique typhoons made using multifrequency multiple path oblique incidence ionospheric sounding have confirmed the definitive role that the internal gravity waves and infrasound play in producing atmospheric–ionospheric disturbances. It has been demonstrated that these disturbances are capable of significantly affecting the characteristics of high-frequency radio waves. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Back to TopTop