Publication Date:
2016-07-21
Description:
Kawakatsu and Abe [2016] have highlighted the potential complicating effect of sediment reverberations on the analysis and interpretation of crust and mantle phases inferred from receiver functions analyzed from ocean-bottom seismograms. In their comment, they identify resonant peaks in the power spectrum at one of the stations, T06 , in the analysis of [ Olugboji et al ., 2016], and demonstrate with synthetic modeling how sediment-induced resonances can cause instability in the recovered receiver-function (RF) traces. They also request a detailed explanation of how LQT rotation is conducted, and why its use leads to stable receiver functions in the analysis of Olugboji et al . [2016]. We welcome this query as an opportunity to highlight certain technical aspects of the data-analysis procedures used in Olugboji et al [2016]. Our methods derive partly from methods recommended by previous studies of receiver functions estimated from seismic seafloor data [ Bostock and Trehu , 2012; Janiszewski and Abers , 2015; Audet , 2016], particularly the use of the modal wavefield decomposition [e.g., Reading et al , 2003]) (which we approximated by the LQT rotation) to suppress reverberation signals in the overlying water column [ Bostock and Trehu , 2012]. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
Electronic ISSN:
1525-2027
Topics:
Chemistry and Pharmacology
,
Geosciences
,
Physics
Permalink