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

net/publication/257785854

Groundwater resources assessment using integrated geophysical techniques

in the southwestern region of Peninsular Malaysia

Article  in  Arabian Journal of Geosciences · November 2013

DOI: 10.1007/s12517-012-0700-9

CITATIONS READS

25 352

4 authors, including:

Mohamed S. E. Juanah Sharharin Ibrahim

Ministry Of Water Resources Universiti Putra Malaysia
1 PUBLICATION   25 CITATIONS    18 PUBLICATIONS   181 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Delineation of Karst Terrain by Using Resistivity Techniques View project

Development of a coupled flow and solute transport modelling for Astaneh-Kouchesfahan groundwater resources, North of Iran View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Sharharin Ibrahim on 20 April 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Groundwater resources assessment using
integrated geophysical techniques in the
southwestern region of Peninsular Malaysia

Mohamed S. E. Juanah, Shaharin

Ibrahim, Wan Nor Azmin Sulaiman &
Puziah Abdul Latif

Arabian Journal of Geosciences

ISSN 1866-7511

Arab J Geosci
DOI 10.1007/s12517-012-0700-9

1 23
Your article is protected by copyright and all
rights are held exclusively by Saudi Society
for Geosciences. This e-offprint is for personal
use only and shall not be self-archived in
electronic repositories. If you wish to self-
archive your work, please use the accepted
author’s version for posting to your own
website or your institution’s repository. You
may further deposit the accepted author’s
version on a funder’s repository at a funder’s
request, provided it is not made publicly
available until 12 months after publication.

1 23
 Author's personal copy
Arab J Geosci
DOI 10.1007/s12517-012-0700-9
ORIGINAL PAPER
Groundwater resources assessment using integrated
geophysical techniques in the southwestern region
of Peninsular Malaysia
Mohamed S. E. Juanah & Shaharin Ibrahim &
Wan Nor Azmin Sulaiman & Puziah Abdul Latif
Received: 1 June 2012 / Accepted: 23 September 2012
# Saudi Society for Geosciences 2012
Abstract Combined geophysical techniques such as
multi-electrode resistivity, induced polarization, and
borehole geophysical techniques were carried out on
volcano-sedimentary rocks in the north of Gemas as
part of the groundwater resource’s investigations. The
result identifies four resistivity units: the tuffaceous
mudstone, tuffaceous sandstone, the tuff bed, and the
shale layer. Two types of aquifer systems in terms of
storage were identified within the area: one within a
fracture system (tuff), which is the leaky area through
which vertical flow of groundwater occurs, and an in-
tergranular property of the sandy material of the aquifer
which includes sandstone and tuffaceous sandstone. The
result also reveals that the aquifer occupies a surface
area of about 3,250,555 m 2 with a mean depth of
43.71 m and a net volume of 9.798×107 m3. From the
approximate volume of the porous zone (28 %) and the
total aquifer volume, a usable capacity of (274.339±
30.177)×107 m3 of water in the study area can be de-
duced. This study provides useful information that can
be used to develop a much broader understanding of the
nature of groundwater potential in the area and their
relationship with the local geology.
M. S. E. Juanah (*) : S. Ibrahim : W. N. A. Sulaiman : P. A. Latif
Faculty of Environmental Studies, Department
of Environmental Science, Universiti Putra Malaysia,
Serdang, Malaysia
e-mail: msejuana@yahoo.co.uk
S. Ibrahim
e-mail: shaharin@env.upm.edu.my
W. N. A. Sulaiman
e-mail: wannor@env.upm.edu.my
P. A. Latif
e-mail: puziah@env.upm.edu.my
Keywords Groundwater resources . Electrical resistivity .
Induced polarization . Porosity distribution
Introduction
With Malaysia increasingly becoming an industrialized na-
tion, the need for quality water to meet its domestic and
industrial requirements is becoming a major challenge, since
most of the surface waters are experiencing an increase in
pollution and/or contamination due to industrialization and
agricultural activities. This has resulted in an increase in
groundwater exploitation as it is often safe from pollution.
The study of groundwater resources in the study area and
its surrounding has not been done in detail, and it is among
the driest areas in Malaysia, recording an average rainfall of
less than 2,000 mm/year and has a history of drought
(MINT and JMG 2006). Most of the demand for water in
this area is a result of agricultural activities, mainly paddy
plantations. There is also vast increase in demand of water
supply both during the normal and dry seasons because the
ability to use surface water resources is very minimal.
Therefore, the need for quality groundwater to be explored
and to determine the groundwater flow for a database of its
management is vital in assessing the availability of water for
drinking, industrial, and agricultural purposes (Wattanasen
and Elming 2008).
Geophysical techniques have been experiencing consid-
erable progress in recent years, and their combined applica-
tion, together with geological control, is an approach that is
gaining widespread acceptance in groundwater exploration.
Hence, the need to employ geophysical techniques is vital in
groundwater resource’s mapping as the movement and oc-
currence of groundwater are highly localized and unpredict-
able, and it has been proven to be the most successful
 Author's personal copy
techniques. Several integrated geophysical techniques have
been used for a number of geological and hydrogeological
purposes in recent times. Wattanasen and Elming (2008) ap-
plied direct and indirect methods of groundwater investigation
in southern Sweden using magnetic resonance sounding and
vertical electrical sounding; Turesson (2006) carried out
ground-penetrating radar and resistivity independently to eval-
uate their capability to assess water content and porosity for
saturated zone in a sandy section; El Kashouty et al. (2011)
used hydrogeophysical techniques to investigate groundwater
potential in El Bawiti, Northern Bahariya Oasis, Western
Desert Egypt; Marescot et al. (2008) use induced polarization
(IP) and resistivity survey to distinguished between low per-
meable clay/graphite and permeable water-bearing zone in
slope instability studies in Swiss Alps; De Domenico et al.
(2006) applied IP and resistivity measurement at archaeological
site of Tindary, Italy, and they observed an imperfect agreement
of the models.
Hence, a careful appliance or integration of techniques is
most important to become successful technologically, as
well as cost-effectively for any groundwater exploration. It
is an undoubted fact that groundwater cannot be detected
directly by any one geophysical method without appropriate
knowledge of interpretation and a broader understanding of
the subsurface hydrogeological condition. Khalil et al.
(2012), Van Dam (2010), Soupios et al. (2010), Sinha et
al. (2009), Lesmes and Friedman (2005), Yaramanci et al.
(2002), and Hubbard and Rubin (2000) emphasize the use of
two or more complementary geophysical methods to en-
hance data interpretation, and according to them, with many
assemblages of geophysical data available, excellent results
will be produced with significantly better interpretations
than with a single method. De Domenico et al. (2006), on
the other hand, also state that an integrated approach of
geophysical techniques is likely to exceed the cost of any
single method survey; the benefit is so high, such that the
cost-to-benefit ratio of the whole operation will be drasti-
cally lowered, and this will make the financial effort well
rewarded.
Conventional geophysical methods such as seismic, mag-
netics, electrical, and electromagnetic methods have often
been used to map the geometry of aquifers (Wattanasen and
Elming 2008), particularly for groundwater investigations,
geological mapping, contaminant mapping, etc. These
methods have been used to estimate location, transmissivity,
specific capacity, and other aquifer parameters, despite the
ambiguity of the interpreted results and also due to limita-
tion in each method and the site dependence. However, with
the improvements in geophysical instruments over the years,
the development of better methods, such as time domain
electromagnetic (Khalil et al. 2012), transient electromag-
netic system (Al-Garni and El-Kaliouby 2011), magnetic
resonance survey (Perttu et al. 2011), two-dimensional
Arab J Geosci
(2D) multi-electrode resistivity imaging (Ewusi et al.
2009), etc., has resulted in the widening of its applications.
The search for groundwater in the study area is a relevant
applied research issue that requires study. It is an alternative that
should be extensively explored and protected so that it can be
fully utilized when the region is facing a crisis or critical situa-
tion of water stress. Hence, this study aims to develop a much
broader understanding of the nature of groundwater potential in
the study area and its relations with the local geology and can
also be used to assess the potential of groundwater for the
present and future based on geophysical information.
The study area
The study area is in the north of Gemas, Negri Sembilan,
located between Kampung Londah and Kampung Ulu
Ladang (Fig. 1a) with Utm coordinates 292445.3 N,
509656.3 E, and 289613.2 N, 511568.6E covering an area
of about 5,419,661 m2. Both Kg Londah and Kg Ulu
Ladang are 6–8 km respectively from Gemas which is about
165 km from Kuala Lumpur, the capital city. Gemas is a
major transit point for trains moving from the west and east
coast of Peninsular Malaysia.
The study area is relatively flat with elevation ranging
between 40 and 70 m above mean sea level. The natural
vegetation within the study area was once an aesthetic rain
forest which has been destroyed by man as a result of
agricultural activities. It is mainly rural, and the inhabitants
are farmers who are involved in paddy plantations and
perennial crops such as rubber and oil palm plantations. It
is drained in the northwest by Sungai Muar, which forms a
continuous boundary of water around the project area to-
wards which a myriad of drainage system flows and in the
south–southwest is drained by Sungai Gemenche.
The climate of the study area is tropical with relative
humidity of 95 %, and the temperature ranges from 20 °C to
30 °C on an average throughout the year. It is characterized by
the northeast and southwesterly monsoons. The northeast
monsoon blows from October to March and forms the wet
season that is responsible for the heavy rainfalls while the
southwest monsoon occurs between May and September,
which is the period of the dry season. The study area is among
the driest areas in Malaysia, recording an average rainfall of
less than 2,000 mm/year, which is less than the mean average
rainfall of 4,000 mm/year for Malaysia.
Geology of the study area
Understanding the geology of the area is an important aspect
in the petrophysical interpretation since different rock forma-
tions exist within the area, and each of these formations
generally has different petrophysical properties which will
influence the hydraulic behavior of the studied aquifer system.
 Author's personal copy
Arab J Geosci
Fig. 1 Location map and
general geology of the study
area showing positions of the
electrical resistivity profile
lines, boreholes, and
observation wells
Generally, the geology of the study area (Fig. 1) is
based on the old sedimentary rocks with age between
Middle Triassic to the Late Triassic of the Gemas
Formation. The Gemas Formation is the lateral equiva-
lent of the Samatan Formation and is characterized by a
rapidly alternating sequence of carbonaceous shale,
sandstone, pyroclastic rocks or volcanic rocks, and silt-
stone, with few lenses of chert and crystalline lime-
stone. The shale and siltstone, when fresh and well
bedded, are typically black. Where tuff is present, the
associated shale and siltstone are tuffaceous.
The Mesozoic strata to the east of Samantan
Formation rest unconformably on the Middle Permian
limestone, shale, and sandstone. The lower part of the
Mesozoic succession contains tuffaceous rocks, and to
the south, the Semantan Formation is overlain by
Jurassic–Cretaceous sediments of the Ma’Okil and
Paloh Formations. The Ma’Okil Formation is para-
conformable on the Samantan Formation based on their
structural conformity. The strata of the Samantan
Formation forms series of NNW–SSE trending open
synclines and anticlines, and beds generally dip at 30–
60°, though steeper dips may also occur (Hutchison and
Denis 2009).
The base and top of the Samantan Formation are
not exposed, and most of the rock outcrop have
undergone weathering, turning into clay, silty clay, or
silt. However, analysis of aerial photographs showed
that most of these areas represent lineament faults or
fractures or cracks that are directed nearly north–south
(MINT and JMG 2006).
Based on structural and stratigraphic data analysis by
Abdullah (2009), the formation is interpreted to either overlie
conformably on or to pass laterally into the Gua Musang
Formation and is in turn overlain by strata of the younger
Tembeling Group which contains clasts of tuff, sandstone, and
mudstone, thus indicating that part of the Samantan succes-
sion was uplifted and eroding during deposition of the
Tembeling sediments.
Hydrogeology
The sources of groundwater in the area are totally dependent
on secondary tectonic structures (secondary porosity) such as
fractures and fault that formed the bedrock aquifer. Most of the
areas in Gemas show lineament faults or fractures that are
directed towards the north–south direction (MINT and JMG
2006). This is in agreement with the strata of the Samantan
Formation series of NNW–SSE. This NNW–SSW direction
of faults is consistent with the flow of the River (Sungai
Muar), and it can be seen as well in the quarry close to the
borehole at Kampong Ulu Ladang.
 Author's personal copy
Arab J Geosci

Materials and methods
Field survey method
Electrical resistivity technique is a well-established tech-
nique for both 2D and three-dimensional (3D) subsurface
electrical imaging. The measurements are normally carried
out using computer-controlled system with a large number
of electrodes laid out along straight lines with constant
electrode spacing (Metwaly et al. 2010; Kemna et al. 2002).
In the present work, eleven 2D multi-electrode resistivity
survey lines (as shown in Table 1 and Fig. 1) were carried
out employing 40–80 electrodes connected to the
microprocessor-driven resistivity meter functional with the
Wenner configuration. The Wenner configuration was used
because it has the strongest signal strength and is good in
resolving vertical changes, i.e., horizontal structures (Loke
2011). The resistivity data from the profile were inverted
using the RES2DINV to obtain the true 2D resistivity im-
age. The ABEM Terrameter SAS 1000/4000, which
employs the static Lund automatic resistivity imaging sys-
tems suitable for high-resolution 2D resistivity surveys and
provides detailed information both laterally and vertically
along the profile to investigate complex geological struc-
tures, was used (Kirsch and Yaramanci 2009). The geophys-
ical measurements were designed in such a way that they
were as close as possible to the existing boreholes, in order
to use the latter for calibration purposes.
The process involved positioning electrodes with equal
spacing along the profile. A multi-core cable with equal
distant “takeout” for connecting the electrodes was placed
along the profile, and the jumper was used to connect the
electrodes to the takeout. Data acquisition began when the
cables were connected to the switching box, and the elec-
trode contacts were checked to make sure the electrodes
make good contact (best in quality) (Soupios et al. 2007)
with the ground in order to portray the actual resistance of
the ground. The measurements were controlled by the
microprocessor-driven resistivity meter connected to a lap-
top (Kirsch and Yaramanci 2009).
Induced polarization
The induced polarization technique is based on the same
principles as the electrical resistivity methods and was car-
ried out immediately after the electrical resistivity survey
using the same setup and electrode arrangements. The main
difference is that an alternating current in the form of a
square wave is injected into the ground instead of DC
current, and the transient decay of the applied voltage is
recorded when the transmitter is switched off. Thus, by
integrating the area under the voltage decay curve, the
chargeability of the geological formation could be evaluated
(Dahlin et al. 2002).
Borehole geophysics

Borehole logging was carried out in an uncased borehole

Table 1 Summary of geophysical survey using the Mount Sopris portable matrix v.8 logger instru-
ment that consisted of 2PGA-1000 Gamma probe and
Survey line Date System used Survey 2PFA-1000 poly-fluid resistivity and temperature probe.
surveyed characteristics
The borehole measurement is made by lowering the probe
Lines KGL 001 October ABEM Wenner array into the borehole with an average speed of 3 m/min and
2010 SAS4000 α010.0 m electrically transmitting data in the form of digital signals to
e040 the surface, and these data are then recorded as a function of
d0120 m depth or distance along the borehole. These measurements
Line KUL 002 October ABEM Wenner array
are related to the physicochemical properties of the rock
2010 SAS4000 α010 m
surrounding the boreholes and the properties of the fluid
e040
saturating the pore spaces in the formation.
d0120 m
Laboratory method
Lines KUL 003 February ABEM Wenner array
and KUL 004 2011 SAS4000 α02.0 m
In order to quantitatively assess the full potential of an
e080
aquifer using geophysical techniques, knowledge about the
d024 m
relationship between the petrophysical properties of the rock
Lines KGL 005, April 2011 ABEM Wenner array
KUL 006, KGL 007, SAS4000 formation and hydrogeological characteristics is very im-
α05.0 m
KGL 008, KUL 009, portant. Understanding this relationship will enable us to
e040
KUL 010, KGL 011 determine properties such as porosity, cementation, density,
d028.7 m
particle size distribution, clay content, pore water saturation,
Where α is the electrode spacing, e is the electrode spacing, and d is the the quality of pore water, formation factor, etc., as these
expected depth properties are known to affect geophysical measurements
 Author's personal copy
Arab J Geosci
(Taheri Tizro et al. 2012; Mele et al. 2012; Niwas et al.
2011; Soupios et al. 2007). These relationships can then be
used for the calibration of the electrical resistivity survey
and the geophysical logs response of the logging suite.
According to Batte et al. (2010), for any geophysical tech-
nique to be successful, calibration of geophysical data with
hydrogeological and geological ground truth information is
important. Furthermore, the use of field measurement to be
validated by laboratory measurement according to Giao et
al. (2003) increases credibility and effectiveness of the
method.
As a result of this, a number of laboratory measurements
using British Standard Guide, BS 1377–2: 2001 (Cavelieri
2001), and American Petroleum Institute guidelines
(American Petroleum Institute 1998) were carried out on a
suite of near-subsurface soil samples and rock samples to
determine the influence of various factors such as effective
porosity, soil and rock resistivity, and apparent formation
factor under varying conditions. The resistivities of different
rocks type were determined using the 4284A precision
inductance, conductance, and resistance (LCR) meter with
an Angilent 16451 B dielectric material test fixture.
Results and discussion
Borehole geophysical log
The geological borehole log information, together with the
natural gamma ray, fluid resistivity, temperature log, and
water level measurements at the two borehole locations
were used in the interpretations of geophysical result.
Lithology profile of each of the two boreholes was based
on natural gamma ray and the local borehole geological
cross-section while the hydrogeological conditions under
ambient conditions were determined using fluid resistivity
and temperature logs. Detailed studies of the natural gamma
and fluid column (temperature and fluid conductivity) have
been carried out, and the utilization of these logs (particu-
larly the natural gamma logs) has enabled the correlation of
the geophysical logs with the lithostratigraphic units within
the study area.
The geological borehole description was matched with
the electrical resistivity image at the borehole location, and
from comparison, the resistivity of each individual type of
lithology can be inferred.
In the natural gamma correlation carried out in the two
boreholes, the presence of distinctive marker such as the
fractures and with the presence of high natural gamma
anomaly associated with shale can be used in defining the
lithostratigraphic position of the beds penetrated by the
boreholes, as shown below in Fig. 2a, b. Hence, the pres-
ence of shale and fracture (due to the possible presence of
clay in the fractures) was detected by the natural gamma ray.
The fracture point on the gamma ray log which coincides
with the fluid log is suggestive of the fluid entering (water
inflows) point between the shale and tuff zone.
From the fluid conductivity and temperature log mea-
surement, an abrupt shift at 1.2 and at 32.5 m was observed
at the conductivity and temperature log in Fig. 2a. Also at
Fig. 2b, an abrupt shift at 2.4 and 45.5 m was observed at
the conductivity and temperature logs. These abrupt shifts
were confirmed from the water level meter as the water
level.
Figure 2a, b shows correlation between the natural gam-
ma ray, temperature, fluid resistivity logs, and the lithologic
units of Kampung Londah and Kampung Ulu Ladang.
Electrical resistivity and induced polarization image
Selective 2D inversions of the electrical resistivity and
chargeability of the 11 profile lines are shown in Figs. 3,
4, 5, and 6; these figures represent the characteristic features
of the geology and hydrogeology of the study area.
The images were obtained by the end of five iterations.
Most of the resistivity sections have an root mean square
(RMS) error of less than 8 % with only two having RMS
errors of 11.8 % and 17.2 %, respectively. This high RMS
error is because of high contact resistance of certain electro-
des that causes the current penetration to be impeded. The
overall resistivity range in the images is 10–2,500 ohmm
with most of the multi-electrode resistivity imaging domi-
nated by high resistivity (>100 ohmm), although several
images have low resistivity zones (<100 ohmm).
The IP soundings were carried out simultaneously along-
side the resistivity in order to be correlated with the electri-
cal resistivity data for the delineation of the groundwater
aquifer zone. The interpretation of the IP sounding curves
shows large variations in the chargeability values ranging
from 0 to 100 ms. The chargeability parameters used in the
delineation of the aquifer are complex and are based on the
resistivity result.
The result of the profile KGL 001 was obtained with
RMS error of 5.2 % after five iterations. It is located in
Kampung Londah at about 250 m parallel to the train track.
The subsurface resistivity distribution of the profile is
shown in Fig. 3a.
Three distinct resistivity zones along the profile can be
observed. At the first layer, an intermediate resistivity
(>100 ohmm) can be observed at the top and bottom layers
between 70 to 190 m along the survey line for a depth of
approximately 25 m and from 450 to 630 m for a depth of
about 10 m, respectively. These areas are likely to be dry
weathered tuff. Another intermediate resistivity layer
extends between the positions of 270 m to 530 m for a
depth of approximately 100 m forming a doom shape
 Author's personal copy
Fig. 2 a, b Shows correlation between the natural gamma ray, temperature, fluid resistivity logs, and the lithologic units of Kampung Londah and
Kampung Ulu Ladang
layering. From borehole investigation, this zone is likely to
be tuff with quartzite. This zone could be the leaky layer as
it is associated with fractures through which the local
groundwater systems are connected (Furi et al. 2011).
The second layer has a resistivity between 80 and 90 ohm
m and can be observed as a thin layer interbedded with the
tuff zone. Results from borehole log shows that this zone is
likely to be shale.
The third layer is a saturated zone, and from field obser-
vation, the layer at the position between 640 and 800 m
along the survey line is observed as very saturated weath-
ered soft clay. This zone may probably be the weathering
product of tuff. Another saturated zone from field observa-
tion is between 200 and 450 m along the profile line.
The high chargeability zone (M>10 ms) that corresponds
with the doom shape structure of the intermediate resistivity
zone (100–400 ohmm) is probably indicative of tuff while the
resistivity of the saturated zone between 160 and 350 m along
the survey line with depth exceeding 35 m corresponds to the
tuffaceous sandstone of high chargeability. The low resistivity
zone between 580 and 660 m for a depth of 60 m corresponds
to high chargeability zone of possibly tuffaceous sandstone. In
Arab J Geosci
addition, the low resistivity zone between 280 to 360 m along
the profile line corresponds to low chargeability (M<1 ms).
The resistivity pseudo-section shows geophysical unit (prob-
ably shale) of low resistivity (<100 ohmm) that corresponds to
lower chargeability (M<5 ms) as shown in Fig. 2d.
The potential zones for groundwater resources defined
along the survey line are mainly in three locations as indi-
cated by the circles. Though these layers are continuous,
preference should be given to the positions already selected.
From the record of water level meter, fluid resistivity, and
temperature logs of the borehole, these areas are likely to be
associated with groundwater.
Additionally, the significant correlation of low resistivity
with low chargeability (Fig. 2a) is indicative of groundwa-
ter. The zones of low resistivity are located at a depth
exceeding 2.5 m; hence, the expected groundwater potential
layer is located at a depth of more than 20–60 m from the
surface and in some cases can reach up to a depth of 80 m.
The profile KGL 002 is located at Kampung Ulu Ladang
with a survey line of 800 m. A borehole is located at 610 m
along the survey line. The subsurface resistivity and charge-
ability distribution of the area is shown in Fig. 2c, d with an
 Author's personal copy
Arab J Geosci

Fig. 3 Showing 2D pseudo-section inverse model and chargeability for KGL 001 and KGL 002
 Author's personal copy
Arab J Geosci

Fig. 4 Showing 2D pseudo-section inverse model and chargeability for KGL 003 and KGL 004
 Author's personal copy
Arab J Geosci

Fig. 5 2D pseudo-section inverse model and chargeability for KGL 005 and KGL 006

RMS error of 17.5 % for resistivity and 14.1 % for charge- Two main resistivity zones can be identified from this
ability after five iterations. profile. A high resistivity zone (600–2,500 ohmm) along the
 Author's personal copy
Arab J Geosci

Fig. 6 2D pseudo-section inverse model and chargeability for KGL 007 and KGL 008

profile from 20 to 590 m can be seen at the top part of the
image for a varying depth of up to 30 m. Based on infor-
mation extracted from geological map, borehole log, and
field observation; this zone is found to be sandstone. Also
based on borehole information, a high resistivity zone from
260 to 360 m for a depth of 40 m is probably highly
fractured tuffaceous sandstone. East of this zone between
450 and 520 m along the profile line from the surface is a
dome-shaped structure that extends up to a depth of about
50 m. This zone is probably sandstone interbedded with tuff.
 Author's personal copy
Arab J Geosci
The second zone from 120 to 800 m is an intermediate
resistivity zone of tuff interbedded with thin shale layers.
From the borehole log information, the presence of fractures
and high natural gamma signals is observed at this point.
Possible lateral change in facies can be observed in the
profile from 190 to 520 m for a varying depth of up to
120 m, in which tuff interbedded with quartzite (tuffaceous
sandstone) can be observed at one end in the east and a
dome-shaped structure of possibly massive sandstone that is
not fractured or consists of more quartzitic content of the
sediment or material, observed in the west.
The potential zone for groundwater resources defined
along the survey line can be seen in four areas. This resis-
tivity zone corresponds to the borehole log information
based on fluid conductivity, temperature, and the charge-
ability values. The zones of low resistivity are located at a
depth exceeding 16 m. Therefore, the expected potential
layer is located at a depth of more than 16–40 m from the
surface and in some cases can reach up to a depth of 120 m.
The profile KGL 003 displays similar features with pro-
file KGL 001, both in geometry and in subsurface resistivity
distribution with an RMS error of 6.7 % and chargeability of
14.9 % after five iterations as shown in Fig. 4a, b. This area
is located about 500 m south of KGL001.
Three distinct resistivity zones can be observed in the profile,
and the profile length is 160 m. The first layer in the western part
of the survey line has high resistivity (>300 ohmm) between 18
and 42 m along the profile with an approximate depth of 10 m
and at a depth greater 20 m. Field observation indicated that this
zone is weathered sandstone. The second layer has low resistiv-
ity (80–90 ohmm) and can be seen forming thin layering with
an intermediate resistivity zone. This zone is likely to be shale.
While the third layer has intermediate resistivity (>100 ohmm)
and extends between 62 and 104 m with an approximate vertical
extension of 16 m, forming a dome-shaped structure. This zone
can also be seen on the east end and extends from 126 to 138 m
for an approximate depth of 11 m.
High chargeability zone (M>10 ms) corresponds to the
dome-shaped structure of the intermediate resistivity (100–
400 ohmm), and this is probably indicative of tuff and
tuffaceous sandstone while the resistivity of the saturated
zone between 36 and 128 m along the survey line with depth
exceeding 7 m corresponds to the tuffaceous sandstone,
some with high chargeability.
The potential zone for groundwater resources defined
along the survey lines is in two locations at a depth of more
than 6–13 m from the surface, though it can reach a depth of
up to 24 m. This is in correlation with the geophysical unit
of low resistivity (<100 ohmm) and low chargeability (M<
5 ms) of the profile.
Profile KGL 004 is located in a rubber plantation at Kg
Ulu Ladang. The line length is 160 at 2 m electrode spacing
and an approximate depth of 24 m. The subsurface electrical
resistivity distribution with 5.8 % and 3.2 % chargeability
respectively after five iterations, as shown on Fig. 4c, d.
A thin layering of tuff can be identified across the profile
from 50 to 148 m for an approximate depth of 2 m. Below
this zone is a highly fractured resistivity zone (>1,000 ohm
m), i.e., zones of high resistivity with a pinch out zone of
low resistivity in between which indicates that it has rela-
tively more fissures that cause the resistivity to be lower
than the rest. This zone can be seen from the surface of the
profile up to a depth of 9 m from 2 to 34 m and increases in
intensity from tuffaceous sandstone at the bottom to weath-
ered sandstone at the top. This zone from chargeability
image is highly saturated with groundwater.
Potential groundwater resources can be identified at the
tuffaceous sandstone (98–114 m from the surface up to a
vertical depth of 12 m) and at the low resistivity zones
(<100 ohmm) from 32 to 64 m and 94 to 104 m along the
profile, and these layers correspond to high chargeability
(>10 ms) of tuffaceous sandstone as shown in Fig. 4d.
The profile KGL 005 is located in the oil palm farm in Kg
Londah. The length of the line is 200 m and an electrode
spacing of 5 m with an approximate depth of 30 m. The
subsurface resistivity distribution with RMS error of 2.5 %
and 2.7 % chargeability after five iterations are shown on
Fig. 5a and b, respectively.
A high resistivity zone (>100 ohmm) can be seen running
horizontally across the profile between 7 and 35 m and be-
tween 80 and 170 m for a vertical depth of about 10 m. From
field investigation, this zone is the red tuffaceous mud stone.
Below this region is an intermediate resistivity zone (100–
400 ohmm), and this zone is the tuff bed. A saturated zone
which is the dominant zone in the image is interbedded with
thin layering of shale and extends vertically downwards for an
approximate depth of about 20 m. Within this zone, from both
the resistivity and chargeability image, is a possible fracture
tuff saturated with groundwater. Two zones of potential
groundwater resources were identified from the low resistivity
zones, and these areas correlate with low chargeability zones
(<1 ms). The zones of low resistivity are located at a depth
exceeding 6 m. Therefore, the expected potential layer is
located at a depth of more than 6–30 m from the surface.
The profile KGL 006 is located at a road junction in
Kampung Londah leading to Pasir Besar. The subsurface
resistivity distribution with RMS error 3.3 % and 4.8 %
chargeability respectively after five iterations are shown in
Fig. 5c, d. This profile line is about 1–2 m away from a
stream and runs parallel to it for almost 200 m.
An intermediate resistivity zone (100–300 ohmm) can be
seen between 150 and 190 m along the profile for a vertical
depth of about 10 m. The saturated zone which is the dominant
zone in the image extends vertically for an approximate depth
of up to 30 m. Zones of potential groundwater resources were
identified from the low resistivity zones, and these areas
 Author's personal copy
Arab J Geosci

correlate with high chargeability zones (M>10 ms) of the

tuffaceous sandstone interbedded with tuff. The zones of low
resistivity are located at a depth exceeding 2 m. Therefore, the
expected potential layer is located at a depth of more than 2–
25 m from the surface and can reach up to depth of 30 m.
The profile KGL 007 runs parallel to KGL 002. The profile
line is 200 m with electrode spacing of 5 m. The subsurface
resistivity distribution with RMS error 3.3 % and chargeability
1.5 % respectively after five iterations are shown on Fig. 6a, b.
Two main resistivity zones can be identified. A high resis-
tivity zone (100–600 ohmm) can be seen at the surface from 5
to 195 m up to a depth of 8 m; this zone is interpreted as the
Fig. 7 Relationship between apparent formation factor and fractional
highly fractured tuffaceous mudstone. An intermediate resistiv- porosity
ity zone (100–500 ohmm), possibly tuff can be observed from a
depth of about 10 up to 30 m along the profile line (10–165 m). layer, possibly tuff, can be observed across the top layer of the
A possible fracture exists in this zone and based on correlation profile line from 0–85 and 110–200 m. Another resistivity zone
with the low chargeability zone (M>1 ms); the material present (400–600 ohmm) from 85 to 110 m extends down to about
in the fracture is possibly clay. Two low-resistivity zones 8 m. This zone is slightly fractured and is likely to be tuffaceous
(<100 ohmm) can also be seen on the profile between 35 and sandstone (Table 2).
75 m from the surface up to a depth of 28 m and between 105
and 135 m from the surface to a depth of 28 m. These low-
resistivity zones (<80 ohmm) are interbedded with thin shale Porosity distribution and quantitative estimation
layer (80–90 ohmm) and correlates with low chargeability as of groundwater resources
shown in Fig. 6a, b. This correlation is indicative of potential
groundwater resources. The zones of low resistivity are located The results obtained from the inversion of the multi-electrode
at a depth exceeding 10 m. Hence, the expected potential layer resistivity, borehole logs, and laboratory techniques are useful
is located at a depth of more than 10–30 m from the surface. in estimating groundwater resources and defining the subsur-
The profile KGL 008 is located on the main road leading face porosity distribution. Understanding the hydrogeological
to Kampung Ulu Ladang with a survey line of 200 m and properties of the formation is very important in determining
electrode spacing of 5 m. The subsurface resistivity and porosity distribution of the aquifer. In order to achieve this, a
chargeability distribution with RMS error 6.8 % and 8.2 % laboratory-established equation (Eq. 2) obtained by fitting a
respectively after five iterations are shown on Fig. 6c, d. curve-fit regression (Fig. 7) of the apparent formation factor
The saturated zone (<100 ohmm) is the dominant zone in (F) and fractional porosity (ϕ) of the soil and rock samples
the image. They are observed from a very shallow depth of which is the common form of the Archie equation, Fα 0a ϕ−m,
>6 m up to a depth of 28 m with a thin shale layering as were used, where α and m are constant and Fα is the apparent
observed from borehole logs in Kg Londah and Kg Ulu formation factor which is given as:
Ladang. These low-resistivity zones are associated with
ρo
groundwater potentials and correlate well with the low char- Fa ¼ ð1Þ
ρw
geability zones. An intermediate resistivity (100–300 ohmm)

Table 2 Lithology, resistivity, and chargeability range for obtaining potential groundwater in Kg Londah and Kg Ulu Ladang

Lithological unit Nature/characteristics Resistivity range, Chargeability range, Hydrological significance

(Rock type) ohmm ms (potential for obtaining
groundwater)

Tuffaceous mudstone Weathered/fractured/ 900–2,500 25–60 Poor–moderate groundwater

cracks potential
Shale Contact with tuff/ 80–90 1–5 Moderate–good potential
fractured
Tuff Fractured/fissure 100–400 5–25 Good groundwater potential
Tuffaceous sandstone (tuff with Fractured/fissure 500–1,200 25–80 Very good groundwater potential
quartzite)
Sandstone Weathered/fractured/ 2000–2500 80–100 Excellent groundwater potential
massive
 Author's personal copy
Arab J Geosci

Where ρo is the bulk resistivity obtained from the rock
and soil samples and ρw is the measured fluid resistivity
obtained from the borehole and observation wells.
The power regression obtained from the relationship
between apparent formation factor and fractional porosity
of the integrated soil and rock samples after taking account
of the clay effect is given by the equation:
Fa ¼ 0:8017f1:805
The R2 00.8843 and standard error estimated of 0.207
indicate that 88 % of the total variations in the formation
is explained or accounted for by the power fitted regression
equation, Fα 00.8017ϕ−1.805.
This equation is then applied to the field resistivity data
to calculate the subsurface porosity distribution of the satu-
rated formation (Eq. 3) as shown in column 8 of Table 3.
Consequently, understanding the bulk resistivity of the for-
mation is very important. The bulk resistivity which is the
true resistivity is obtained from the inversion of the apparent
resistivity of the field data using RES2DINV as shown in
Figs. 3, 4, 5, and 6. The RES2DINV is electrical resistivity
software used in inverting apparent resistivity of field data
to obtain the true resistivity and true depth of the resistivity
image. Thus, as a result of the inversion of the field data, the
true resistivity, true depth, and the x-position were saved in
XYZ format. The calculated true resistivity or bulk resistiv-
ity is then divided by the formation water resistivity which is
obtained from in situ electrical conductivity measurement
from the boreholes and observation wells along which the
survey lines were run to obtain the resistivity formation
factor.
From the information obtained from the subsurface elec-
trical resistivity, borehole log data, and the water-bearing
zone, the porosity distributions of the subsurface were de-
termined from Eq. 3 (Soupios et al. 2007).
∅ ¼ e m lnðaÞþ m lnð Fa Þ
1 1 1
ð3Þ
The inferred aquifer thickness data was used to determine
the surface area and volume as occupied by pores in the
subsurface using Surfer 9 software (Golden Software Inc.
2010). Surfer is a software package used in transforming
XYZ data to create contour maps, 3D surface maps
(Fig. 8a), shaded relief maps, base maps, etc. It is also used
ð2Þ in the calculations of cross-sections, areas, and volumes. The
bedrock elevation, aquifer thickness, the north of reference
coordinates, and east of reference coordinate were determined
for each of the data points of the electrical resistivity imaging
line. The “easting’s” of each line was considered the X-axis,
the “northings” as the Y-axis and the contour, and/or the
aquifer thickness elevation considered as Z-axis.
Hence, the volume of the aquifer was obtained from the
aquifer elevation thickness data (Fig. 8b). From the appli-
cation of Surfer, the total volume of the aquifer is
9.7978332×107 m3. Mathematically, the usable volume ca-
pacity or the theoretical storage capacity was calculated
from Eq. 4, (George et al. 2011).
V ¼ VT Θ ð4Þ
Where V is the theoretical usable volume or maxi-
mum storage (cubic meters); VT is the total volume of
the aquifer (9. 7978332 × 107 m 3 ) calculated from
Surfer; and Θ is the average porosity of the aquifer
which is 28 %.
However, in order to account for the error in the volume,
and based upon Eq. 4, the fractional volume error,
ΔV =V ¼ ΔL=L þ ΔW =W þ ΔD=D þ ΔΘ=Θ ð5Þ
Where ΔV is the error in volume V; ΔL is the error in
length L; ΔW is an error in width w; ΔD is the error in depth

Table 3 Showing porosity distribution of the study area

Location Bulk resistivity, Ωm Aquifer resistivity, Ωm Aquifer thickness, m Apparent formation factor (Fα) a m Porosity (∅)

KGL 001 107.74 34.03 60 3.17 0.80 1.81 0.28

KGL 002 431.33 48 50 8.99 0.80 1.81 0.26
KGL 003 124.27 40.11 17 3.10 0.80 1.81 0.33
KGL 004 596.94 39.01 13 15.30 0.80 1.81 0.20
KGL 005 261.57 30.18 15 8.67 0.80 1.81 0.27
KGL 006 245.21 30.18 23 8.12 0.80 1.81 0.28
KGL 007 158.83 35.61 22 4.46 0.80 1.81 0.39
KGL 008 115.80 28.59 24 4.05 0.80 1.81 0.41
KGL 009 379.01 49.54 16 7.65 0.80 1.81 0.29
KGL 010 797.81 39.5 12 20.20 0.80 1.81 0.17
KGL 011 116.85 22.78 20 5.13 0.80 1.81 0.36
 Author's personal copy
Fig. 8 a Three-dimensional
contour map of the study area
showing surface elevation and
borehole location. b Three-
dimensional map showing the
spatial distribution of the aqui-
fer thickness in the study area
d (0.1 m3); and ΔΘ is the error in porosity (0.01 %). ΔL and
Δw are almost negligible.
Hence,
ΔV =V ¼ 0 þ 0 þ 0:1 þ 0:01
ΔV ¼ V ð0:11Þ ¼ ð274:339  107 Þ  ð0:11Þ
ΔV ¼ 30:177  107
Thus, from the approximate volume of the porous zone
which is 28 % of the total aquifer volume, we can conclude
that there exist (274.339±30.177)×107 m3 or (300±30)×
107 m3 of water within the study area.
Conclusion
In quantifying groundwater potential in the area, hydro-
geological properties of the different rock types such as
tuffaceous mudstone, shale, the fractured tuff and tuffa-
ceous sandstone, the lithological contacts, and fracturing
of the various lithologies were obtained from the bore-
hole geophysical logs, the electrical resistivity, and in-
duced polarization. This information was used to
determine potential groundwater zones, and the induced
polarization technique was used to distinguish between
clay and groundwater.
Five main lithologies, tuffaceous mudstone, tuff, tuff
with quartzite (tuffaceous sandstone), sandstone, and
shale, were identified based on-field investigation,
Arab J Geosci
borehole logs, electrical resistivity, laboratory method,
and induced polarization values (Table 1). The tuffa-
ceous sandstone was differentiated based on the high
resistivity and chargeability values associated with sand-
stone and also through the borehole logs while the high
resistivity values associated with tuffaceous mudstone
was based on laboratory analysis and electrical resistiv-
ity of the rocks. The resistivity of tuff zone was differ-
entiated based on the borehole information and also
because it is the dominant rock type in the area. The
shale layer was differentiated based on borehole log,
electrical resistivity, and induced polarization.
The resistivity layers in Kg Londah and Kg Ulu Ladang
can be categorized into four resistivity layer units. The first
layer, tuffaceous mudstone, which is a semi-confined layer,
has high resistivity values (800–2,500 Ωm) and can be
found at the top. This zone ranges between 0 and 6 m and
in some cases can reach up to a depth of 15 m from the
surface.
The second resistivity layer, tuffaceous sandstone (tuff
with quartzite), has moderate to high resistivity of 500–
1,200 ohm and is normally found interbedded with the tuff.
From borehole log, this zone is highly fractured and, hence,
a good groundwater potential zone. Where the sandstone is
not interbedded with tuff, it may be weathered and probably
massive (not fractured or more quartzitic content of the
sediment or material) with resistivity between 2,000 and
2,500 ohm.
 Author's personal copy
Arab J Geosci
The third resistivity layer, the tuff bed, has resistivity that
ranges between 100 and 400 ohm. The thickness of this
layer can range from 1 to 60 m, though it can reach up to a
depth of 100 m; it is the dominant rock type within the area,
and from the borehole log information, this zone consists of
fractures and/or fissures. The fourth resistivity layer is the
shale layer. This layer has a resistivity in the range 80–
90 ohm. It is found forming a thin layering with the tuff
and hence forms major contact with the tuff.
Therefore, based on the borehole log, electrical resis-
tivity data, and induced polarization data, the aquifer
system within the study area can be classified into:
1. Unconfined to semi-confined aquifer trending in W–E
direction: unconfined aquifer, in places where weath-
ered sandstone overlies the tuff, shale, and tuffaceous
sandstone and semi-confined aquifer when tuffaceous
mudstone overlies the fractured tuff interbedded with
tuffaceous sandstone and thin shale layers.
2. In terms of storage, the aquifer properties can be con-
sidered into two:
(a) One within a fracture system
(b) Properties of the sandy material of the aquifer
which includes sandstone and tuffaceous
sandstone
3. Although shale can be considered as aquitard, however,
the present investigation indicated that fractures do oc-
cur within the shale; hence, the shale layer can contrib-
ute to the storage within the aquifer system.
Additionally, the results obtained from the profiles show
that the aquifer occupies a surface area of at least
3,250,555 m2 and has a mean depth of 43.71 m. Thus, from
the approximate volume of the porous zone which is 28 %
of the total aquifer volume, we can conclude that there exist
(274.339±30.177)×107 m3 or (300±30)×107 m3 of water
within the study area. Although this figure is only an esti-
mate, and it is open to further refinement, it, therefore,
provides useful information in the exploitation and manage-
ment of groundwater resources within the study area.
Finally, results from combined geophysical techniques
have proven to be useful in delineating groundwater poten-
tial zone, locating possible borehole drilling sites, and has
shown geological structures such as fractures and/or fissures
through which deep and shallow groundwater can be asso-
ciated. This study can therefore be used to develop a much
broader understanding of the nature of groundwater poten-
tial in the area and their relationship with the local geology.
Hence, it is hoped that findings from this work will offer
reliable background information for future development of
groundwater resources and its management in Kampung
Londah and Kampung Ulu Ladang.
Acknowledgments The authors sincerely thank Universiti Putra
Malaysia for providing financial assistance through the research uni-
versity grant (RUGS), under project number 05-01-11-11216 RU and
vote number 9199825. The first Author also wishes to thank the
Ministry of Higher Education Malaysia, for providing him with the
Commonwealth and Fellowship plan scholarship. We thank anony-
mous reviewers and Dr. Mohamed Khalifa (University Technology
PETRONAS, Malaysia) for their comments, from which the paper
has greatly benefited.
References
Abdullah NT (2009) Geology of peninsular Malaysia (Mesozoic stra-
tigraphy). In: Hutchison, CS, Denis NK Tan (ed). University of
Malaya/Geol Soc Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. p. 107–123
Al-Garni MA, El-Kaliouby HM (2011) Delineation of saline ground-
water and sea water intrusion zones using transient electromag-
netic (TEM) method, Wadi Thuwal area, Saudi Arabia. Arab J
Geosci 4(3):655–668
American Petroleum Institute (1998) Recommended practices for core
analysis. Recommended practice 40, second edition, February
1998. API, Washington, DC
Batte A, Barifaijo E, Kiberu J, Kawule W, Muwanga A, Owor M,
Kisekulo J (2010) Correlation of geoelectric data with aquifer
parameters to delineate the groundwater potential of hard rock
terrain in central Uganda. Pure Appl Geophys 167(12):1549–
1559. doi:10.1007/s00024-010-0109-x
Cavelieri G (2001) British standard guide BS 1377–2. British Standard
Institution, London
Dahlin T, Leroux V, Nissen J (2002) Measuring techniques in induced
polarisation imaging. J Appl Geophys 50(3):279–298.
doi:10.1016/s0926-9851(02)00148-9
De Domenico D, Giannino F, Leucci G, Bottari C (2006) Integrated
geophysical surveys at the archaeological site of Tindari (Sicily, Italy).
J Archaeol Sci 33(7):961–970. doi:10.1016/j.jas.2005.11.004
El Kashouty M, Aziz A, Soliman M, Mesbah H (2011) Hydrogeo-
physical investigation of groundwater potential in the El Bawiti,
Northern Bahariya Oasis, Western Desert, Egypt. Arab J Geosci 5
(5):953–970. doi:10.1007/s12517-010-0253-8
Ewusi A, Kuma JS, Voigt HJ (2009) Utility of the 2-D multi-electrode
resistivity imaging technique in groundwater exploration in the
Voltaian sedimentary basin, Northern Ghana. Nat Resour Res 18
(4):267–275
Furi W, Razack M, Haile T, Abiye T, Legesse D (2011) The hydro-
geology of Adama-Wonji basin and assessment of groundwater
level changes in Wonji wetland, Main Ethiopian Rift: results from
2D tomography and electrical sounding methods. Environmental
Earth Sciences 62(6):1323–1335. doi:10.1007/s12665-010-0619-y
George NJ, Obianwu VI, Obot IB (2011) Estimation of groundwater
reserve in unconfined frequently exploited depth of aquifer using
a combined surficial geophysical and laboratory techniques in
The Niger Delta, South–South, Nigeria. Advances in Applied
Science Research 2(1):163–177
Giao PH, Chung SG, Kim DY, Tanaka H (2003) Electric imaging and
laboratory resistivity testing for geotechnical investigation of
Pusan clay deposits. J Appl Geophys 52(4):157–175.
doi:10.1016/s0926-9851(03)00002-8
Hubbard SS, Rubin Y (2000) Hydrogeological parameter estimation
using geophysical data: a review of selected techniques. J Contam
Hydrol 45(1–2):3–34. doi:10.1016/s0169-7722(00)00117-0
Hutchison CST, Denis NK (ed) (2009) Geology of Peninsular Malaysia
(Mesozoic stratigraphy): The University of Malaya and The Geo-
logical Society of Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
 Author's personal copy
JMG M (2006) Study of groundwater resources in the valley beef farm
site, Gemas, Negri Sembilan. Mineral Geoscience, Malaysian
Institute for Nuclear Technology Research, Negri Sembilan
Kemna A, Kulessa B, Vereecken H (2002) Imaging and characterisation
of subsurface solute transport using electrical resistivity tomography
(ERT) and equivalent transport models. J Hydrol 267(3):125–146
Khalil MA, Abbas AM, Santos FM, Masoud U, Salah H (2012)
Application of VES and TDEM techniques to investigate sea
water intrusion in Sidi Abdel Rahman area, northwestern coast
of Egypt. Arab J Geosci 1–9 (in press)
Kirsch R, Yaramanci U (2009) Geoelectrical methods. In: Kirsch R (ed)
Groundwater geophysics. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, pp 85–117
Lesmes DP, Friedman SP (2005) Relationships between the electrical
and hydrogeological properties of rocks and soils. In: Rubin Y,
Hubbard SS (eds) Hydrogeophysics, vol. 50. Springer, Nether-
lands, pp 87–128
Loke, M. H. (2011). A practical guide to 2-D and 3-D electrical imaging
surveys. RES2DINV Manual, IRIS Instruments, Orleans, France
Marescot L, Monnet R, Chapellier D (2008) Resistivity and induced
polarization surveys for slope instability studies in the Swiss Alps.
Eng Geol 98(1–2):18–28. doi:10.1016/j.enggeo.2008.01.010
Mele M, Bersezio R, Giudici M (2012) Hydrogeophysical imaging of
alluvial aquifers: Electrostratigraphic units in the quaternary Po
alluvial plain (Italy). Int J Earth Sci 101:2005-2025
Metwaly M, El-Qady G, Massoud U, El-Kenawy A, Matsushima J, Al-
Arifi N (2010) Integrated geoelectrical survey for groundwater
and shallow subsurface evaluation: case study at Siliyin spring,
El-Fayoum, Egypt. International Journal of Earth Sciences 99
(6):1427–1436
Niwas S, Tezkan B, Israil M (2011) Aquifer hydraulic conductivity
estimation from surface geoelectrical measurements for Krauthau-
sen test site, Germany. Hydrogeol J 19(2):307–315. doi:10.1007/
s10040-010-0689-7
View publication stats
Arab J Geosci
Perttu N, Wattanasen K, Phommasone K, Elming S-Å (2011) Charac-
terization of aquifers in the Vientiane Basin, Laos, using magnetic
resonance sounding and vertical electrical sounding. J Appl Geo-
phys 73(3):207–220. doi:10.1016/j.jappgeo.2011.01.003
Sinha R, Israil M, Singhal D (2009) A hydrogeophysical model of the
relationship between geoelectric and hydraulic parameters of an-
isotropic aquifers. Hydrogeol J 17(3):495–503. doi:10.1007/
s10040-008-0424-9
Soupios PM, Kalisperi D, Kanta A, Kouli M, Barsukov P, Vallianatos F
(2010) Coastal aquifer assessment based on geological and geo-
physical survey, northwestern Crete, Greece. Environmental Earth
Sciences 61(1):63–77
Soupios PM, Kouli M, Vallianatos F, Vafidis A, Stavroulakis G (2007)
Estimation of aquifer hydraulic parameters from surficial geo-
physical methods: a case study of Keritis Basin in Chania
(Crete–Greece). J Hydrol 338(1):122–131
Taheri Tizro A, Voudouris K, Basami Y (2012) Estimation of porosity
and specific yield by application of geoelectrical method–a case
study in western Iran. J Hydrol 454:160-172
Turesson, A (2006) Water content and porosity estimated from ground-
penetrating radar and resistivity. J Appl Geophys 58(2):99–111.
doi:10.1016/j.jappgeo.2005.04.004
Van Dam RL (2010) Landform characterization using geophysics—
recent advances, applications, and emerging tools. Geomorphol-
ogy. doi:10.1016/j.geomorph.2010.09.005
Wattanasen K, Elming S-Å (2008) Direct and indirect methods for
groundwater investigations: a case-study of MRS and VES in the
southern part of Sweden. J Appl Geophys 66(3–4):104–117.
doi:10.1016/j.jappgeo.2008.04.005
Yaramanci U, Lange G, Hertrich M (2002) Aquifer characterisation
using surface NMR jointly with other geophysical techniques at
the Nauen/Berlin test site. J Appl Geophys 50(1–2):47–65.
doi:10.1016/s0926-9851(02)00129-5