A periodical of the Faculty of Natural and Applied Sciences, UMYU, Katsina
ISSN: 2955 – 1145 (print); 2955 – 1153 (online)
ORIGINAL RESEARCH ARTICLE
Damilare Stephen Adepehin1*, Inalegwu Adoche Ngbede1-2, Abimbola Isaac Odudu3, Moromoke Oluwayemisi Adelayi3, Suleiman kenedy4, Onah Emmanuel Onah1 and Adewole Akeem Alabi5
1*Department of Physics, Federal University of Health Sciences, Otukpo, Benue State, Nigeria
2Department of Physics, Universidade Federal de Santa Maria. Brazil
3Department of Physics, Adeyemi Federal University of Education, Ondo State, Nigeria
4Department of Physics, Federal University of Oye-Ekiti, Ekiti State, Nigeria
5Department of Physics, Tai Solarin University of Education, Ijagun, Ogun State, Nigeria
This study uses geophysical methods to explore the effects of urbanization, mining, and agriculture on subsurface features, including ground-penetrating radar (GPR), electrical resistivity tomography (ERT), and seismic reflection. A three-part systematic approach of scenario modeling, geophysical data collection, and interpretation was utilized to analyze how human activity modifies subsurface features by examining three scenarios of urbanization, mining activity, and agricultural practice. These modifications substantially impact groundwater structures, geological systems, and the stability of entire ecosystems, specifically resulting in changes in subsurface properties through anthropogenic activities. In the scenario of urbanization, ERT data highlighted resistivity of up to 3,000 Ωm in dry clay layers as a result of impenetrable surfaces, and the wave velocities determined via seismic reflection indicated velocities of over 2,500 m/s due to compaction of soil. The results from the mining activity also exhibited changes in excavated subsurface features and evidence of voids and fractures with seismic wave velocities substantially dropping from 2,500 m/s to1,600m/s, indicating structural failure while the agricultural practice scenario investigated through agricultural impacts via moisture retention with ERT data representing resistivity from high moisture of 200 Ωm to low moisture of 1,500 Ωm, exhibiting how intensive farming exploits subsurface moisture. These results highlighted the high importance of comprehensive geophysical assessments related to urban planning, mining regulations and agricultural practices. These identified quantifiable impacts rely on the methods mentioned to assess how human activities have impacts on subsurface structures. All of these assessments can be utilized as responsible subsurface resource management and environmental preservation tools, alerting stakeholders to the effects of increasing human encroachment on subsurface structures and properties affecting subsurface ecosystems.
Keywords: Anthropogenic, Resistivity, Ecosystems, Tomography, Modeling, Radar
The subterranean environment determines the general condition of the Earth's ecosystems (Zhai et al., 2021). Besides providing crucial resources such as minerals, fossil fuels, and groundwater (Parnell & Walawege, 2011), it is also a site for complex geochemical reactions promoting life above ground (Zhang et al., 2020). However, the most important changes in subsurface systems have resulted from human activities such as resource exploitation, industrialization, and urbanization (Molua et al., 2024). These transformations can hamper groundwater supply and quality, affect natural processes, and degrade geotechnical integrity (Xian et al., 2007; Mohamed et al., 2023). Coupling between human growth and geological settings has imparted significant benefits such as economic boom and improved living (Kwan & Reford, 2025). However, this progress often comes with a handful of negative interference with the subsurface structures, which can have long-lasting implications on the geological balance, water structures, and overall well-being of the ecosystem (Molua et al., 2024). Understanding human activities' impacts is critical for dealing with the stability between development and environmental stewardship (Zhang et al., 2020). In order to bring about sustainable, useful resource control and protect environmental health, it is important to understand how anthropogenic processes affect the subsurface structural build-up (Abdelfattah et al., 2023; Ikuemonisan & Ozebo, 2020). Land use and surface hydrology are affected by urbanization (Yang et al., 2011), usually resulting in more impervious surfaces that alter the hydrological mechanism and reduce natural groundwater recharge (Keisham et al., 2022; Balocchi, 2024). The stability of the subsurface environment may be altered due to industrial activities such as drilling and mining, which can result in ground subsidence (Chen et al., 2014; Ikuemonisan & Ozebo, 2020). Despite its usefulness for food production, agricultural activities can negatively affect the subsurface condition by tampering with moisture dynamics and soil compression (Mrudula et al., 2025). These alterations describe the way the subsurface health and surface mechanisms are intertwined (Pueyo-Anchuela et al., 2011). Effective monitoring and assessment are required to reduce the likely negative effects that may hamper subsurface environments (Reyes, 2023). Geophysical techniques have become a requirement for determining the conditions and alterations made to the subsurface structure, particularly those generated by human activities (Carlson et al., 2011). These techniques are intrusive approaches that enable scientists and practitioners to identify abnormalities, track temporal changes, and make effective land and resource management decisions because they enable each direct and indirect measurement of subsurface properties (Gabera et al., 2023). Seismic reflection, electrical resistivity tomography (ERT), and ground-penetrating radar (GPR) are the geophysical technologies most often applied for this purpose (Maju-Oyovwikowhe et al., 2024). Each technique has certain strengths and can offer supplementary information regarding subsurface properties, making entire know-how of all anthropogenic impacts and natural systems feasible. By exciting growing acoustic waves reflecting off base geological surfaces, seismic reflection uncovers the subsurface systems and stratigraphy (Abdelfattah et al., 2023; Hasan et al., 2021). This technique is effective, especially in identifying possible dangers like voids developed through mining processes and detecting structural changes developed through exploitation and urbanization (Fitzpatrick et al., 2005). ERT provides a measure of the electrical resistivity of sub-surface materials, which helps to identify changes caused by processes like contamination or compaction of soil (Umar et al., 2024; Abdelmoneim et al., 2025). ERT is also well-suited to identify the impact of agricultural activities and industrial pollutants on groundwater quality because it can recognize moisture content and impurities (Zahoor & Mushtaq, 2023). GPR provides high-decision data about shallow strata and subsurface anomalies by imaging the subsurface using radar pulses (Bowell, 2023). GPR is most useful in the detection of features like trenches, voids, and buried services in urban areas and near commercial zones with regard to effective evaluation (Abdelsamei et al., 2024). Researchers can thoroughly examine subsurface conditions by combining geophysical techniques with simulation and predictive modeling processes (Hossam et al., 2024; Li et al., 2020). Although geophysical techniques look promising, there are nonetheless a number of barriers to successfully assessing human impact on subsurface systems. Interdisciplinary collaboration between geophysicists, geologists, hydrologists, town planners, and policymakers is vital to effectively address the challenges posed by human activities on subsurface structures. Simulating extraordinary anthropogenic scenarios provides the anticipation of changes in subsurface structures, inclusive of potential risks and their implications for groundwater and the management of inherent resources (Xu & Zhang, 2024). Geophysical facts can inform policy choices, allowing stakeholders to put in force-centered interventions that improve sustainability and minimize poor environmental effects (Ojo et al., 2024; Morsy, 2025). The need for effective monitoring and control of subsurface resources is becoming increasingly indisputable as the world's population continues to progress geometrically and urbanization is briskly achieved. The purpose of this study is to use geophysical techniques to provide a complete evaluation of ways human activity affects underlying structures. Despite increasing awareness of geophysical methods, such as ground-penetrating radar (GPR), electrical resistivity tomography (ERT), and seismic reflection, the use of these methods to systematically detect the impacts on subsurface structures resulting from urbanization, mining, and agriculture remains inadequately studied. This study addresses that gap in the literature by using the three methods simultaneously so that a complete evaluation of subsurface changes can be done. By combining these geophysical approaches, we can gain insight into how complementary methods can enhance the understanding of anthropogenic impacts because certain features are more easily recognized by a particular geophysical survey method. Additionally, generating unique predictive models from simulated data can provide an idea of the future geologic state, thus assisting with the responsible management of subsurface resources and aiding in protective measures against anthropogenic impacts. A critical analysis of the impact of human activities in this research seeks to guide the development of functional approaches that will maintain the integrity of the subsurface environments and ecosystems for generations to come.
The methodology exhibits a systematic approach taken in evaluating the causative effect of human activities on buried structures through the application of geophysics (Teweldebrihan, 2024). The method entails three (3) primary phases: simulation of data and development of scenario, acquisition of geophysical data using diverse strategies, and data interpretation and analysis (Oluwatobi et al., 2020). Each component is targeted towards addressing impacts stemming from agricultural practices, urbanization, and mining, giving room for a clear and deep knowledge of how these activities change subsurface features (Li et al., 2024).
Data Simulation and Scenarios
Datasets developed through simulation were to represent coverage of human interferences and their respective influences on subsurface systems (Duinker & Greig, 2007). To acquire this, three clear scenarios were modeled, giving rise to an evaluation of changing subsurface conditions and reactions to various human interventions.
Scenario 1: Urban Development
This scenario simulates the effects of new a vicinity brought about by urbanization, which is characterized by large impervious surfaces resulting from the construction activities on the land (Mahapatra, 2023). These surfaces affect natural groundwater recharge, tampering with the hydrological mechanisms of both the subsurface and surface environments (Netti et al., 2024).
Model Setup: The simulation entailed creating an artificially made geological model representing different soil layers (e.g., sand, gravel, clay.) common in urban areas (Netti et al., 2024).
Parameterization: Salient parameters comprised changes in resistivity and hydraulic conductivity due to soil lumping and artificial land seals (Jian et al., 2021). Groundwater levels were also modeled to simulate variability in recharge patterns common in urban catchments (Steinman et al., 2004).
Outcome Projections: Anticipated outcomes include the reduction of groundwater upwards migration levels and variability in permeability (Zhai et al., 2021), indicating evidence of the role of achieved urbanization on hydrology and subsurface stability beneath.
Scenario 2: Mining Activities
This scenario evaluates the impact of subsurface mining processes, such as open pits and underground reduction on geological stability and groundwater flow dynamics (Takele et al ., 2025).
Model Setup: A three-dimensional model joining geophysical features representing a mining location was developed (Khan et al., 2022). This included layers of mineral deposits and different nearby rock formations (Duinker& Greig, 2007).
Parameterization: Changes in mechanical properties, such as Poisson's ratio and elastic moduli, were characterized to reenact the impacts of excavation (Altun et al., 2010). The remaining voids caused by mining exercises were too checked to analyze the possibility of ground subsidence.
Outcome Forecasts: The recreation pointed to anticipate changes in groundwater flow ways (Zhang et al., 2020), with an expected diminish in aquifer pressure and proof of potential surface distortion as a result of mining operations.
Scenario 3: Agricultural Practices
This scenario simulates the effects of serious agrarian hones on soil properties and groundwater quality (Mihelič et al., 2021).
Model Setup: The simulation entailed different types of soil commonly found in agrarian districts and joined practices such as culturing and irrigation systems (An & Zhang, 2022).
Parameterization: Changes to soil features, such as water holding capacity, compaction levels, and the profile of inherent contaminants (e.g., fertilizers, pesticides) were figured into the developed model (Rajan et al., 2023).
Outcome Forecasts: Anticipated outcomes included expanded soil compaction influencing water invasion rates and changes in electrical resistivity due to the presentation of agrarian chemicals into groundwater frameworks (Akankpo & Igboekwe, 2011).
Our human activity scenario simulation process was intended to give a feeling of real-world conditions by using various parameters that exhibit normal geological settings. Many of the same it is obligatory to be aware of both the basic principles and the limitations that we may meet in the course of our modeling.
• The assumption underpinning the creation of soil profiles was that they were the typical urban and agricultural ones which are also present in areas with soil profiles identical to the ones observed in this study. For instance, median values of hydraulic conductivity were supposed: silt was depicted with a hydraulic conductivity level of 5 x 10-4 m/s, while fine sand was given a lower value of 1 x 10-6 m/s (Jian et al. 2021).
• The dielectric constants that would be used for the different materials employed in the GPR simulations were calculated from the literature that was available. For example, soil layers had limit values of 4 (for sandy soil) and 30 (for moist clay) to convey the feeling of normal conditions (Poluha et al., 2017).
• A good part of the variables that are found in the real world are not the subject of representation by the models, e.g., seasonal changing groundwater levels and diurnal temperature, which causes the change in soil moisture.
• Our simulations have no provisions for transient events such as severe weather conditions that would, in turn, initiate strange subsurface responses.
Geophysical Data Collection
For each scenario, geophysical estimations were simulated utilizing program bundles optimized for particular techniques (Salmi & Sellers, 2022). The subsequent methods were employed to survey the underground structures:
Seismic Reflection
Generation of Data: Synthetic seismic simulating reflection data were created by program tools such as wave propagation simulation tools that were used to detail topographical models (García-Muñoz et al., 2023). This involved specifying sample seismic velocities for topographical layers and supplying parameters for the properties of a wave source (e.g., frequency, source type).
Analysis Parameters: The parameters employed were reflection and incidence angles, enabling the simulation of seismic wave interactions with modified geological structures (Tiwari et al., 2023).
Output: The reconstructed data produce analyzable reflection profiles to detect alterations in subsurface layering and identify inconsistencies caused by human interventions (Forte et al., 2014).
Electrical Resistivity Tomography (ERT)
Simulation of Data: ERT data were simulated with the assistance of expressing resistivity measurements of various geological media in terms of scenario-dependent conditions (e.g., lumped, unsaturated soils vs. unfastened, saturated soils) (Umar et al., 2024).
Measurement Configuration: The existing ERT configuration (e.g., Wenner, dipole-dipole) has been applied, and resultant resistivity has indicated changes due to the stimulated human activity (Parnell & Walawege, 2011).
Outcome: The simulation facts of ERT offer details regarding resistivity profiles that reflect lumping or contamination zones, showing the impact of agriculture, mining, and urban development on subsurface conditions (Michot et al., 2003).
Ground-Penetrating Radar (GPR)
Data Simulation: GPR data were developed to show radar wave engagement with varying below-surface substances and embedded structures underlying each of the situations (Xian et al., 2007).
Scenario-Specific Modifications: Parameters that are related to the dielectric constants of each identified material layer were adjusted based on the expected modifications due to human activities (Poluha et al., 2017).
Output: The statistics of the resultant GPR clearly show the reflectivity profiles, pinpointing anomalies in the subsurface inclusive of voids or potential contamination areas that are the resulting effects of different human interference situations (Xie et al., 2025).
For effective simulation and data analysis, several software packages were employed throughout the process:
Seismic Reflection: Data was simulated using specialized software such as SeisImager and GeoDepth. These tools generate synthetic seismic reflection data based on input layer parameters.
Electrical Resistivity Tomography (ERT): Resistivity modeling was conducted using RES2DINV. This software allows for the inversion of resistivity data collected through various array configurations like Wenner and dipole-dipole.
Ground-Penetrating Radar (GPR): GPR data was simulated and analyzed with GPR-SLICE or GPRMAX. These tools facilitate modeling electromagnetic wave propagation in the subsurface and provide outputs related to signal amplitude and reflection profiles.
A comprehensive, detailed parameter value used in the modeling scenarios is shown in Table 1 below.
Table1: Parameter Values Used in Modeling Scenarios
| Parameter | Urban Scenario | Mining Scenario | Agricultural Scenario |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hydraulic Conductivity (m/s) | 5 x 10-4 (sand) | 2 x 10-5 (comprised layers) | 1 x 10-6 (clay) |
| Poisson’s Ratio | 0.3 (soil) | 0.25 (compacted areas) | 0.3 (tilled soil) |
| Dielectric Constant | 4-30 | Variable based on voids | 6-25 depending on moisture content |
Empirical data from literature and previous field studies informed the choice of the numerical ranges to enhance the model’s realism.
The simulated geophysical data were analyzed using installed interpretation strategies tailored to every approach, extracting significant insights regarding subsurface modifications induced via human activities (Oluwatobi et al., 2020).
Seismic Reflection Data Interpretation
Inversion Techniques: Seismic inversion algorithms have been implemented to transform mirrored image information into underground models (Hasan et al., 2019). These algorithms reorder the geological features and identify regions altered by human actions.
Migration Methods: Traditional seismic migration methods were used to correct for wave propagation outcomes (Gabera et al., 2023), enabling improved visualization of subsurface structures and understanding of their spatial relationships (Dzulkefli et al., 2023).
Inversion Algorithms: ERT information has been interpreted utilizing inversion algorithms that restructure resistivity models based totally on the amassed information (Reid & Castka, 2023). The algorithms visually represent resistivity changes, highlighting areas affected by human activities (Gonçalves et al., 2021).
Spatial Analysis: The obtained data underwent spatial analysis methods to correlate the variation resistivity with specific human activities, assessing features that symbolize contamination or compaction (Carrera et al., 2024).
Ground-Penetrating Radar (GPR) Data Interpretation
Hyperbola Analysis: Interpretation of GPR data involves analyzing hyperbolic reflections to select subsurface structures which are typical of human interferences (Fitzpatrick et al., 2005). Every hyperbola matches voids, discontinuities, or interfaces beneath the ground.
Feature Extraction: Automation strategies have been used to extract features, inclusive of voids or layers representing changes from diverse human activities (An & Zhang, 2022), thus aiding quantitative evaluation of the influences figured out by means of the simulations.
Geophysical methods provide a set of non-invasive techniques that enable researchers to acquire essential information about subsurface underlying structures and their properties (Yin et al., 2025). Utilizing these methods facilitates the assessment of human effect in a manner that minimizes disruption to the environment (Li et al., 2024, Romero-Ruiz et al., 2018). Here the focal point will be on three primary geophysical methods: seismic reflection, electrical resistivity tomography (ERT), and ground-penetrating radar (GPR).
Seismic Reflection
Seismic reflection is a crucial geophysical approach that entails the generation of seismic waves, which travel through the Earth and show the mirror image of subsurface geophysical interfaces (An & Zhang, 2022). By studying the waves of the mirrored image, researchers can determine the stratigraphic sequence and the underlying structure of subsurface environments (Omunguye & Akpila, 2013). This is especially a deep approach to delineating geological layers’ modifications resulting from activities like urban development and resource exploitation, which are human-precipitated (An & Zhang, 2022). Alterations in the velocities of seismic waves help in the detection of variations in subsurface materials and their densities. This data is essential for identifying areas affected by the activities of human, like pollution or imbalance (Hassan et al., 2019). For instance, sites frequently used for heavy construction work often lead to the alteration of ground response to seismic waves. This is indicative of soil lumping due to compaction and the use of heavy engineered materials (Bertoni et al., 2020). The capacity of seismic mirrored image to provide vertical resolution makes it a useful tool for characterizing several layers’ underlying structures in urbanized areas (Forte et al., 2014).
Electrical Resistivity Tomography (ERT)
Electrical resistivity tomography (ERT) is a geophysical method that assists in measuring the electric resistivity of subsurface environments (Liu et al., 2024). This approach introduces electric currents into the subsurface and analyzes the resulting voltage variations (Bricker et al., 2024). The geological environment’s resistivity can provide information about its composition, moisture content, and potential level of pollution (Ünal et al., 2020). Human activities can significantly affect the profile of subsurface resistivity (Ávila-Carrasco et al., 2023). For instance, long-lasting soil compaction from urbanization typically spikes the resistivity values due to a reduction in pore space and controlled moisture-holding potential made possible by providing developmental amenities like bridges (Jat et al., 2009). Conversely, areas impacted by pollution, such as industrial runoff, may also display decreased resistivity values due to accelerated conductivity from contaminants (Omunguye & Akpila, 2013). ERT's functionality to map resistivity changes in more than one dimension permits for comprehensive analysis of changes in subsurface conditions, making it particularly credible for monitoring hydrogeological effects (Wu et al., 2022).
Ground-Penetrating Radar (GPR)
Ground-penetrating radar (GPR) is a geophysical technique of high resolution that uses radar pulses to mirror the underground environment (Poluha et al., 2017). It is particularly active in mapping near-surface stratigraphic characteristics and pinpointing discontinuities, like structural voids, subsurface fractures, or anthropogenic build-ups (Akinsunmade, 2021). GPR works by emitting electromagnetic (EM) radiations that penetrate the subsurface and mirror off materials based on the peculiarity of their dielectric features (Abdelsamei et al., 2024). This method is particularly applicable in urban settlements where underground features, like historical remnants or buried utilities, may exist with human-induced variations (Famiglietti et al., 2024). GPR can show underlying anomalies brought about by excavation, agricultural practices, or construction, making available important information for mitigating impending risks associated with underground instability (Di Prinzio et al., 2010). The fast and high-resolution output acquired by using GPR makes it an effective practical technique for detecting impacts in various geographical settings (Di Prinzio et al., 2010).
Human Activities Impacting Subsurface Structures
Human activities exert huge pressure on subsurface systems, resulting in a series of environmental impacts. Key areas of challenge include agricultural practices, urbanization, and resource extraction, all contributing to significant alterations of underground features (Mahapatra, 2023).
Agricultural Practices
The other significant human activity that contributes to subsurface features is agriculture (Mojžiš et al., 2024). Intensive farming practices like irrigation, ploughing and fertilization can lead to an enormous alteration in soil, which can directly disrupt moisture retention and groundwater permeability (Mpanga, 2022). When the soil's structure becomes damaged, it can prevent water from soaking into the ground properly. This can cause severe soil erosion and make water flow quickly over the land's surface. According to a study by Agrawal et al. (2021), this is a significant concern. Modern agricultural practices, like the use of pesticides and fertilizers, can cause the chemicals to percolate into the soil. Leakage of the used chemicals contaminates water sources and lower underground water quality Rajan et al., (2023). Issues like this can hamper the well-being of soil and inherent water well-being, making careful approaches to reduce effects very important when embarking on any agricultural activities (Shukla et al., 2023). Urbanization, mining, city and agriculture pressurize the subsurface systems (Bikis et al., 2025). Scientists use geophysical techniques to gather essential and valuable information about changes in the subsurface and these pieces of information are germane in making policies targeted at resource protection and long-lasting environmental practice support, as stated by Yang et al., (2021).
Urbanizations
As urbanization expands, construction activities restructure land cover and near-surface hydrology (Bikis et al., 2025). The spread of impervious surfaces, such as concrete and asphalt, disrupts natural groundwater recharge mechanisms, usually resulting in alteration in groundwater flow patterns and reduction in aquifer renewal (Jat et al., 2009). Urbanization can exacerbate challenges such as flooding due to enormous surface runoff and reduced water permeation rate (Agrawal et al., 2021). Additionally, the compaction and excavation of soil at some construction stages can snowball into alterations in subsurface stress distribution, leading to potential risks like land subsidence and structural collapse (Xie et al., 2025).
Resource Extraction`
Resource exploitation activities, including oil drilling, gas extraction, and mining, indirectly and directly impact underground environments (Keisham et al., 2022). The aforementioned practices often involve the displacement and removal of geological constituents, resulting in the development of voids or underground instability (Wegenast et al., 2024). Mining activities can lead to strong ground vibrations and large ground subsidence, which can destroy the environment and cause structural failure on the ground above. Additionally, extraction of other natural resources can disrupt groundwater refill mechanisms as the change in the pathways of water and its flow pressure can result in groundwater depletion or pollution.
The approach outlined in this study demonstrates an effective method to evaluate the impacts of anthropogenic activities as they pertain to subsurface features through geophysical methods. The scope of this research aims to measure and define the dynamic characteristics of the earth's subsurface using different approaches for specific conditions, thereby contributing to effective environmental management and monitoring (Chukwuma et al., 2023). Using data simulation, collection, and sturdy analysis, the results are anticipated to decide future environmental strategies and interventions to mitigate anthropogenic activities' outcomes (Steinman et al., 2004).
The selection of sand, gravel, and clay layers reflects common construction materials and soil types found in urban settings (Netti et al., 2024). These soil types were chosen due to their prevalent use in pavement and construction, thus modifying subsurface hydrological dynamics.
Geological models incorporated voids and fractured formations representative of typical mining operations such as open-pit and underground mining effects (Takele et al., 2025). Such features have been verified with field data indicating disruptions commonly associated with mineral extraction activities.
For agricultural simulations, soil types ranging from compacted soils to moist irrigated layers were selected based on common agricultural practices in the region (Mihelic et al., 2021). The inclusion of fertilizers and moisture content provides an overview of the implications of agricultural management on subsurface structural integrity.
To ensure the modeling approach's validity, the simulated data findings were compared with field measurements obtained using GPR, ERT, and seismic reflection techniques in respective anthropogenic settings. Validation studies have been conducted in collaborative projects with local universities and government agencies, corroborating the simulated scenarios with real-world geological surveys (Chukwuma et al., 2023).
Results
In this section, results from the utilization of geophysical techniques, particularly seismic reflection, electrical resistivity tomography (ERT), and floor-penetrating radar (GPR), are discussed in relation to the three human activities assessed: urban development, mining activities, and agricultural practices. Every chapter of the study describes critical findings that correspond with predictions made during the simulations.
Urban Development
We observed the impact of urban expansion on the subsurface layers, which is a remarkable finding. These changes were primarily found using seismic reflection, which is a wave-based imaging technique (Parsons, 2021). The data from the seismic measurements indicated a notable increase in wave velocity in the superficial ground layers. This could be attributed to superior soil compaction and the extensive use of construction materials (Bricker et al., 2024). Table 2 shows the seismic reflection data for urban development.
Table 2: Seismic Reflection Data for Urban Development
| Depth (m) | Velocity (m/s) | Layer Type |
|---|---|---|
| 0 | 2000 | Compacted Soil |
| 10 | 2500 | Sand |
| 20 | 1500 | Clay |
| 30 | 1800 | Gravel |
Figure 1: Graph of Depth (m) Against Velocity (m/s)
This change reveals to a total shift in subsurface features attributable to urbanization. The ERT results also indicated a rise in resistivity values closer to the surface due to the presence of impermeable pavements e.g., asphalt and concrete (Chen et al., 2014). The ERT-type data as it relates to urban development can be found in Table 3.
Table 3: ERT Data for Urban Development
| Depth (m) | Resistivity (Ωm) | Soil Condition |
|---|---|---|
| 0 | 1000 | Dry Compacted Soil |
| 10 | 500 | Saturated Sand |
| 20 | 3000 | Clay (Dry) |
| 30 | 1500 | Gravel |
Figure 2: Graph of Depth (m) Against Resistivity (Ωm).
The increased resistivity values had been coupled with adjustments in the groundwater model, illustrating the disruption of natural recharge procedures (Uhlemann, 2017, An & Zhang, 2022). It can visualize the typical moisture channeling within an urban area, indicating how urbanization can redirect and confine pathways of groundwater movement (Omunguye & Akpila, 2013). All in all, the results from this case study illustrate that urbanization now affects surface hydrology but, more importantly, alters subsurface moisture and geological activity (Yang et al., 2021).
The assessment of mining operations with geophysical techniques also indicated considerable subsurface changes (Jat et al., 2009). Simulated GPR data played an invaluable role by providing unambiguous images of voids and fractures presumably indicating mines (Bowell et al., 2023). Table 4 shows the GPRdata for mining activities.
Table 4: GPR Data for Mining Activities
| Depth (m) | Feature Detected | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 0 | Void | Excavation Site |
| 10 | Fractures | Structural Weakening |
| 20 | Band | Remnant Ore Layer |
Figure 3: Depth (m) against Feature Type Graph
The hyperbolic anomalies found in the GPR investigated were indicative of excavated areas, revealing the potential for ground subsidence (Bricker et al., 2024). The seismic reflection records elucidated the extent of structural integrity loss of surrounding geological formations. The imaging indicated the deformation and faulting of subsurface strata adjacent to the mines, which showed the implications that mining had on the geology and local rock units (Ewusi et al., 2024). The seismic mirrored image records for the mines are listed in Table 5.
Table 5: Seismic Reflection Data for Mining Activities
| Depth (m) | Velocity (m/s) | Anomaly Type |
|---|---|---|
| 0 | 1800 | Deformed Layer |
| 10 | 1600 | Excavated Void |
| 20 | 2000 | Normal Formation |
Figure 4: Graph of Depth (m) Against Velocity (m/s)
Multiple ERT results showed increased conductivity levels associated with mining areas, which suggested contamination in the subsurface water likely from leachate loading with mining materials as the variables (Akankpo & Igboekwe, 2011). This demonstrates significant risks to the quality of subsurface water and environmental quality.
Agricultural Practices
The agricultural practices and how they impact the mechanisms below the surface were evaluated using GPR, ERT, and seismic methods to identify countless important trends. Findings GPR results identified changes in soil stratigraphy with significant soil compaction identified (Mahapatra, 2023). Table 6 identifies the GPR data for agricultural practices.
Table 6: GPR Data for Agricultural Practices
| Depth (m) | Soil Type | Condition |
|---|---|---|
| 0 | Compacted Soil | Poor Infiltration |
| 10 | Irrigated Layer | Moisture Retention |
| 20 | Untilled Soil | High Permeability |
Figure 5: Graph of Depth (m) Against Soil Condition.
These modifications had been correlated with agricultural activities like tillage and heavy equipment use, which often resulted in reduced infiltration and adjusted drainage characteristics (Mojžiš et al., 2024). ERT data complemented these discoveries by illustrating reduced resistivity values in agricultural fields associated with large soil moisture contents resulting from irrigation (Michot et al., 2003). Table 7 shows the ERTdata for agricultural practices.
Table 7: ERT Data for Agricultural Practices
| Depth (m) | Resistivity (Ωm) | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| 0 | 200 | High Moisture Content |
| 10 | 800 | Moderate |
| 20 | 1500 | Low Moisture Retention |
Figure 6: Graph of Depth (m) Against Resistivity (Ωm).
This highlights a dual effect: agricultural activities can help moisture contents which are beneficial for crop growth while concurrently affecting the soil's electric properties (Unal et al., 2020). Seismic data indicated variations in subsurface densities, suggesting shifts in soil features and highlighting issues relating to long-period soil fertility and sustainability (Mechri et al., 2024). The outcomes show that even as agricultural practices are crucial for food production, they can bring about negative implications for subsurface systems if not controlled sustainably, mainly concerning soil health and water retention capacities (Shukla et al., 2022).
Discussion
All geophysical changes observed in this study have been causally linked directly to many human influences: mining, agriculture, and urbanization. All such processes introduce corresponding introductions into the subsurface environments with well-definitive sets of specific mechanisms:
• Urbanization: Urban development creates impervious surfaces such as asphalt and concrete that effectively disrupt natural hydrological processes. This altered groundwater recharge rates and increased surface runoff (Yang et al., 2011). Soil within urban areas has higher seismic wave velocities due to more concentrated soil particles (Tiwari et al., 2023). The ERT with higher resistivity values in the urban zone emphasizes the water confinement and decreased pore space, resulting in decreased groundwater recharge potential (Unal et al., 2020).
• Mining Activities: Physical mining operations disturb geologic structures, creating voids and fracture that impact subsurface hydrology significantly. Effective overburden removal creates pressure changes in aquifers, often leading to subsidence (Keisham et al., 2022). As seen in our study, subsidence is proven with slow seismic wave velocities, from 2500 m/s in undisturbed areas to 1600 m/s in mined areas. Moreover, the presence of contaminants from mine tailings that can infiltrate surrounding groundwater is a sign of how mining affects subsurface water quality in the long term (Ojo et al., 2024).
• Farming Practices: Intensive farming practices result in extreme alterations of soil structure. Heavy machinery compaction reduces hydraulic conductivity and soil porosity, resulting in low moisture retention and increased surface runoff (Hanna & Comin, 2021). Moreover, fertilizer application alters soils' chemical composition, influencing resistivity values as shown by our ERT data (Koteswara et al., 2024). This emphasizes the need for sustainable agricultural practices that are empirically observed to be sensitive to subsurface alterations.
Discussion of the Figures
The figures presented in this study serve as compelling visual and quantitative manifestations of the profound impacts that human activities particularly urbanization, mining, and agriculture exert on subsurface structures. These visualizations not only confirm the theoretical and empirical relationships established in prior literature but also deepen our understanding of the complex interactions between anthropogenic processes and the geological subsurface. By integrating seismic velocities, resistivity profiles, and GPR anomalies, the figures collectively illustrate how human interventions alter the physical, chemical, and hydrological properties beneath the surface, often with long-lasting implications for environmental stability and resource sustainability.
Beginning with Figure 1, the depth–seismic velocity profile in urban areas reveals significant variations that are emblematic of the effects of urban development on the subsurface. At the shallowest depth of 0 meters, the seismic velocity is recorded at 2000 m/s, which increases to 2500 m/s at 10 meters, then decreases sharply to 1500 m/s at 20 meters, and slightly increases again to 1750 m/s at 30 meters. This pattern reflects a stratification influenced by soil compaction, construction materials, and land sealing typical of urban environments. The elevated velocities near the surface are indicative of increased soil density resulting from compaction and cementation processes driven by heavy machinery and infrastructure development. These findings corroborate Forte et al. (2014), who established that seismic wave velocities are sensitive indicators of soil stiffness and anthropogenic disturbance. Similarly, Tiwari et al. (2023) emphasized that urbanization often increases seismic velocities due to soil densification and compaction, which can influence the stability of underground infrastructure and the risk of subsidence.
Complementing this, Figure 2 presents resistivity data across the same depth range, revealing resistivity values of 1000 Ωm at the surface, decreasing to 500 Ωm at 10 meters, then rising sharply to 3000 Ωm at 20 meters, and slightly decreasing to 1500 Ωm at 30 meters. This variation reflects the complex moisture and contamination dynamics within the subsurface. The low resistivity at 10 meters suggests higher moisture content, likely due to residual pore fluids or infiltrated pollutants, whereas the high resistivity at 20 meters indicates drier, less conductive materials or zones of cementation and compaction. These resistivity patterns align with the work of Li et al. (2022), who demonstrated that urban impervious surfaces hinder natural recharge, leading to moisture depletion in certain zones and accumulation in others due to surface runoff and drainage modifications. The high resistivity zones may also indicate the presence of artificial materials such as concrete or asphalt, which are electrical insulators and further disrupt the natural hydrological regime. This stratification of resistivity is critical because it influences groundwater recharge rates, contaminant migration pathways, and the overall stability of subsurface structures, as emphasized by Balocchi (2024). The combined seismic and resistivity data thus reinforce the notion that urbanization fundamentally alters both the mechanical and hydrological properties of the subsurface.
Moving to Figure 3, the GPR anomalies observed at depths of 0, 10, and 20 meters reveal the presence of voids, fractures, and remnant ore layers, respectively. The hyperbolic reflections characteristic of GPR are consistent with the signatures of subsurface cavities and discontinuities caused by mining activities. These anomalies are in line with findings by Bowell et al. (2023) and Khan et al. (2022), who demonstrated the efficacy of GPR in mapping underground voids and fractures that compromise the integrity of mine sites. The detection of such features is vital because voids and fractures can serve as conduits for groundwater contamination or zones of structural weakness that may lead to land subsidence or collapse. Notably, the seismic velocities at these depths—recorded at 1750, 1600, and 2000 m/s—further suggest that the zones containing voids and fractures are characterized by reduced bulk density and increased porosity, indicative of structural degradation. The lower seismic velocities, especially at 10 meters, reflect the presence of fractures and fractured zones that diminish the soil’s stiffness and strength. These findings corroborate the research of Altun et al. (2010), which highlighted that excavated and fractured subsurfaces are prone to land subsidence and stability issues. Such alterations necessitate ongoing monitoring using seismic and GPR methods to identify early signs of instability, especially in regions with active or historic mining operations.
Figure 4 presents seismic reflection data revealing the velocity variations associated with mining-induced deformations. At increasing depths from 0 to 20 meters, velocities fluctuate from 1750 to 1600 m/s and then rise again to 2000 m/s. These oscillations indicate heterogeneous subsurface conditions, with zones of weakening and reinforcement. The lower velocities in the shallower zones are indicative of fracturing, voids, and possibly fluid infiltration, all of which compromise the integrity of the geological strata. The subsequent increase at greater depths suggests some degree of compaction or consolidation, possibly as a result of overburden pressure or natural stratification. These findings are consistent with the work of Zhang et al. (2024), who demonstrated that seismic velocity reductions are typical of zones affected by mineral extraction and structural failure, while the increase at deeper levels may reflect more stable, compacted strata. Such detailed seismic profiling allows for the early detection of subsurface instability, which is paramount for risk mitigation and environmental protection around mining regions.
Turning to Figure 5, the GPR data in agricultural settings depict stratigraphy with significant implications. At shallow depths of 0 meters, the soil appears compacted, with poor infiltration characteristic of intensive tillage and machinery passage, as discussed by Mojžiš et al. (2024). At 10 meters, the profile indicates an irrigated, moisture-retentive layer, while beyond 20 meters, the soil is tillage-free and exhibits high permeability. These anomalies are consistent with the hyperbolic reflections typical of soil compaction, moisture variation, and layering differences. The resistivity data at these depths 200 Ωm at the surface, rising to 1500 Ωm further depict the moisture gradient, with low resistivity corresponding to high water content and high resistivity indicating dry, well-drained soils. Such patterns mirror the findings of Koteswara et al. (2024) and Mechri et al. (2024), who emphasized that intensive irrigation and tillage significantly modify subsurface moisture and soil density. These modifications have profound implications for groundwater recharge, soil fertility, and crop productivity. Overly compacted or overly irrigated soils can lead to reduced permeability, increased runoff, and groundwater contamination through leaching of fertilizers and pesticides, as documented by Unal et al. (2020) and Shukla et al. (2023). The resistivity profile's gradual increase with depth signifies the stratification of moisture content, which underscores the importance of adopting sustainable agricultural practices that balance crop needs with subsurface health.
Finally, Figure 6 illustrates the resistivity variation with depth in agricultural zones, providing critical insights into the moisture dynamics and soil health. The resistivity values—200 Ωm at the surface, increasing to 800 and eventually 1500 Ωm at deeper levels—reflect the influence of irrigation practices and soil management on pore water content and soil structure. These observations confirm prior research (Netti et al., 2024; Mojžiš et al., 2024), which established that moisture content and soil compaction are tightly coupled with resistivity measurements. The increasing resistivity with depth indicates diminishing water content and soil permeability, which could negatively impact plant growth and groundwater recharge if not managed properly. These findings further emphasize the necessity of employing geophysical techniques in designing sustainable farming practices that optimize water use efficiency while preserving subsurface integrity. The correlation between resistivity and soil moisture content provides a quantifiable metric for monitoring and managing agricultural impacts, supporting the call for integrated land management strategies as advocated by Ojo et al. (2024). In synthesizing these observations, it becomes evident that the geophysical signatures captured in these figures are not isolated phenomena but are interconnected manifestations of human activities that alter the Earth's subsurface. The seismic velocities’ increases and decreases reflect compaction, fracturing, and stratification changes induced by urban development and mining, consistent with the findings of Forte et al. (2014), Zhang et al. (2024), and Altun et al. (2010). The resistivity profiles reveal moisture redistribution and contamination pathways, aligning with studies by Li et al. (2022), Yang et al. (2021), and Balocchi (2024). The GPR anomalies serve as direct indicators of subsurface voids and fractures, confirming the assessments by Bowell et al. (2023) and Khan et al. (2022). Collectively, these data underscore the importance of multi-method geophysical approaches for comprehensive subsurface monitoring, which is vital for early warning systems, risk mitigation, and sustainable resource management.
Furthermore, these findings are not only consistent with prior research but also extend current understanding by illustrating the spatial and depth-dependent variability of anthropogenic impacts. They reinforce the critical role of integrating seismic, resistivity, and GPR data to capture the multifaceted nature of subsurface alterations. Such integration allows for a more nuanced assessment of the extent, severity, and potential risks associated with human interference. This approach aligns with the frameworks proposed by Lombardi et al. (2022) and Martorana et al. (2023), who emphasized the importance of combining geophysical techniques to achieve reliable, high-resolution subsurface models. The implications of these findings extend beyond academic inquiry into practical policy and management spheres. Urban planners must incorporate routine geophysical surveys to identify zones of high compaction and altered hydrology, informing decisions on land use and infrastructure development (Yang et al., 2011; Yadav, 2024). Mining operations require continuous seismic and resistivity monitoring to mitigate land subsidence and groundwater contamination, as advocated by Bowell et al. (2023) and Wen et al. (2023). Agriculture must adopt sustainable practices guided by resistivity and GPR data to prevent soil degradation and water resource depletion, echoing the calls of Mojžiš et al. (2024) and Zhang et al. (2024). These strategies are crucial for safeguarding the integrity of subsurface ecosystems and ensuring long-term resource availability, aligning with the overarching goals of sustainable development and environmental resilience.
In conclusion, the detailed analysis of the figures reveals that human activities leave measurable geophysical footprints that, when interpreted through seismic, resistivity, and GPR techniques, can inform effective management policies. These insights underscore the necessity of adopting integrated geophysical monitoring as a cornerstone of responsible land-use planning, resource extraction, and agricultural management. The scientific dimensions elucidated through these figures spanning mechanical, hydrological, and chemical subsurface parameters highlight the intricate ways in which anthropogenic pressures reshape the Earth's crust. By advancing our understanding of these processes, we can develop targeted interventions that mitigate adverse impacts, promote sustainable development, and preserve the subsurface integrity vital for ecological balance and human well-being.
Discussion on Impacts of Human Activities
The integration of geophysical methods in this work offers a broad perception of anthropogenic activities' influences on the subsurface environments (Hasan et al., 2021). All the situations demonstrated different outcomes, highlighting the intricacy of human impacts on geological structures, subsurface water systems, and the overall balance of the ecosystem (Abdelmoneim et al., 2025).
The findings from this research carry profound policy and practice implications, especially in dealing with subsurface resources. Urban development, agriculture, and mining regulations must include geophysical monitoring:
•Urban Planning: Geophysical surveys need to be integrated into the
early development phases by city planners in order to establish
subsurface trouble zones addressing groundwater recharge and pathways
for contaminants. Permeable surfaces and green infrastructure need to be
key priorities in future urban planning to address the effects of
increased impermeability (Hanna & Comin,
2021).
• Mining Regulations: Current geophysical monitoring schemes need to be
mandated to assess the impact of mining activities on regional
groundwater systems. This may be in the form of real-time ERT and
seismic surveys, which would facilitate quick assessment of subsurface
conditions and potential causes of contamination (Molua
et al., 2024). Regulations need to be enacted to minimize
adverse impacts, with an emphasis on sustainable mining activities (Molua et al., 2024).
• Farming Practices: Our policymakers must promote sustainable farming
practices that align with the findings of our study. Investment in
technology and education can enhance farm efficiency without causing
detrimental effects on foundations beneath the soil. Implementation of
best management practices will reduce the compaction of soils and
enhance water infiltration (Unal et al., 2020).
Urban Development Impacts
Results from the urbanization scenario show that human actions greatly interfere with natural hydrological cycles (Akinsunmade, 2021). As urbanization extends, alteration of the characteristics of soil and groundwater processes poses threats such as reduced aquifer recharge and high flooding risk potential (Liang et al., 2023). The above-mentioned areas highlight of where, thus, environmental managers and urban planners need to critically assess the subsurface impacts of land development decisions (Yadav, 2024). Proper urban development planning should incorporate geophysical assessments to guide the choices regarding the site, drainage system, and storm-water management plans (Bricker et al., 2024).
Mining Risks
Mining activities have great outcomes associated with it. Therefore, mining activities bear enormous risks concerning water quality and stability of the ground (Molua et al., 2024). This is because mining activities cause direct physical disruption of geological structures and open up the local water resources to contamination vulnerabilities (Molua et al., 2024). The benefit of geophysical methods in monitoring mining areas is that continuous monitoring can be detected where there are changes in subsurface environments that may lead to contamination or destabilization events, and hence, constant change is required in policy making and management (Ewusi et al., 2024). This has, therefore, called for geologically better policies and procedures that should be under strict investigation before and during mining operations to mitigate threats (Mahapatra, 2023).
Agricultural Sustainability
The scenarios of agricultural practices present important implications, example of the tenuous balance between environmental stewards and tangible, food-producing practices (Wegenast et al., 2024). Soil lumping and alterations to subsurface hydrology can lead to grievous effects over time, such as reduced fertility and increased risks associated with extreme weather (Xian et al., 2007). Simple farming methods and farm practices, based on our knowledge of the Earth's topography, foster improved soil health and water efficiency (Pueyo-Anchuela et al., 2011). New studies on agricultural methods that are ecologically sustainable should incorporate research from the Earth's surface. This perspective can help quantify the impacts of diminishing the ecological effects of farming practices above and below ground (Mpanga et al., 2022). The outcomes from these studies make clear the need for responsible and sustainable subsurface resource management, and monitoring with geophysical methods and methods (Ojo et al., 2024). Stakeholder groups, from researchers, developers, property managers, land environmentalists, public policymakers, and planners in particular, will be able to benefit from this research and ideas and develop better management plans to mitigate the adverse effects of construction and any human action (Reid & Castka, 2023).
Although geophysical techniques like seismic reflection, GPR, and ERT have a lot of information to contribute to subsurface structures, other environmental observation methods like satellite imagery and remote sensing can further be used along with them.
• Remote Sensing: Remote sensing technologies promise to enable large-scale measurements of land cover and vegetation change, which can indirectly indicate changes in subsurface conditions. For instance, studies have shown that satellite imagery can identify areas of soil moisture stress that are consistent with our observations of reduced moisture content related to urbanization and agriculture (Reid & Castka, 2023).
•Satellite Imagery: Satellite sensors, such as optical and radar, provide high-resolution data that can be paired with geophysical data to create comprehensive subsurface models. This integrated approach enhances precision in predicting groundwater behavior under changing land use (Bertoni et al., 2023). Furthermore, combining these methods can lead to cost-effective management practices for assessing subsurface resources and environmental monitoring (Reid & Castka, 2023).
CONCLUSION
These methods offer insights into the disruption of subsurface structures based on real-world experiments that focus on single aspects of human influence. We showcase how geophysical methods allow us to identify and evaluate the impact that human intervention (on the subsurface) through mining, agricultural practices, and urbanization has on existing subsurface structures. Urbanization was shown as a disturbance of regional groundwater systems and soil properties, with prolonged ecological outcomes. As the threat to our environment is growing, the use of an experimental approach and geophysical methods will provide a foundation for the development of future policies and sustainable management of ecological impacts. Mining creates similar building issues and contaminates the space; the need for regular and sustainable monitoring in these regions is clear. Although agriculture has significant potential for food production and can jeopardize groundwater and soil health, it raises long-term sustainability concerns. This methodology can provide new insights into the management of subsurface resources of the future. Future studies must rely on such methods for subsurface space impacted by human activity and the establishment of sustainable monitoring as a plan of action. Identifying and mitigating human impacts using geophysical techniques can create value-added contributions to holistic ecosystem resilience combined with sustainable management action. Efforts towards sustainable human development are also not mutually exclusive to the protection of the ecosystem.
REFERENCES
Abdelfattah, M., Abu-Bakr, H. A.-A., Aretouyap, Z., Sheta, M. H., Hassan, T. M., Geriesh, M. H., Shaheen, S. E.-D., Alogayell, H. M., EL-Bana, E. M., & Gaber, A. (2023). Mapping the impacts of the anthropogenic activities and seawater intrusion on the shallow coastal aquifer of Port Said, Egypt. Frontiers in Earth Science, 11, Article 1204742. [Crossref]
Abdelmoneim, A. A., Al Kalaany, C. M., Dragonetti, G., Derardja, B., & Khadra, R. (2025). Comparative analysis of soil moisture- and weather-based irrigation scheduling for drip-irrigated lettuce using low-cost Internet of Things capacitive sensors. Sensors, 25(5), 1568. [Crossref]
Abdelsamei, E., Sheishah, D., Runa, B., Balogh, O., Tóth, C., Primusz, P., Trenka, S., van Leeuwen, B., Tobak, Z., Páll, D. G., & Sipos, G. (2024). Application of ground penetrating radar in the assessment of aged roads: Focus on complex structures under different weather conditions. Pure and Applied Geophysics, 181, 3633–3651. [Crossref]
Agrawal, K. K., Panda, C., & Bhuyan, M. K. (2021). Impact of urbanization on water quality. In S. K. Acharya & D. P. Mishra (Eds.), Current Advances in Mechanical Engineering. Lecture Notes in Mechanical Engineering. Springer. [Crossref]
Akankpo, A. O., & Igboekwe, M. U. (2011). Monitoring groundwater contamination using surface electrical resistivity and geochemical methods. Journal of Water Resource and Protection, 3(5), Article 4980, 7 pages. [Crossref]
Akinsunmade, A. (2021). GPR imaging of traffic compaction effects on soil structures. Acta Geophysica, 69, 643–653. [Crossref]
Altun, A. Ö., Yilmaz, I., & Yildirim, M. (2010). A short review on the surficial impacts of underground mining. Scientific Research and Essays, 5(21), 3206–3212. academicjournals.org
An, L., & Zhang, J. (2022). Impact of urbanization on seismic risk: A study based on remote sensing data. Sustainability, 14(10), 6132. [Crossref]
Ávila-Carrasco, J. R., Hernández-Hernández, M. A., S. Herrera, G., & Hernández-García, G. D. (2023). Urbanization effects on the groundwater potential recharge of the aquifers in the southern part of the Basin of Mexico. Hydrology Research, 54(5), 663–685. [Crossref]
Balocchi, R. (2024). Evaluating groundwater recharge processes in urban environments. Hydrology: Current Research, 15(3). ISSN: 2157-7587. [Crossref]
Bertoni, C., Lofi, J., Micallef, A., & Moe, H. (2020). Seismic reflection methods in offshore groundwater research. Geosciences, 10(8), 299. [Crossref]
Bikis, A., Engdaw, M., Pandey, D., & Pandey, B. K. (2025). The impact of urbanization on land use land cover change using geographic information system and remote sensing: A case of Mizan Aman City, Southwest Ethiopia. Scientific Reports, 15, 12014. [Crossref]
Bowell, R. J., Williams, C. R., Merry, E. J., Carpenter, A., Bertrando, K., & Parshley, J. V. (2023). Mitigation of mining effects on the environment. SEG Discovery, (135), 27–43. [Crossref]
Bricker, S., Jelenek, J., van der Keur, P., La Vigna, F., O’Connor, S., Ryzynski, G., Smith, M., Schokker, J., & Venvik, G. (2024). Geoscience for cities: Delivering Europe’s sustainable urban future. Sustainability, 16(6), 2559. [Crossref]
Carlson, M. A., Lohse, K. A., McIntosh, J. C., & McLain, J. E. T. (2011). Impacts of urbanization on groundwater quality and recharge in a semi-arid alluvial basin. Journal of Hydrology, 409(1), 196–211. [Crossref]
Carrera, A., Peruzzo, L., Longo, M., Cassiani, G., & Morari, F. (2024). Uncovering soil compaction: Performance of electrical and electromagnetic geophysical methods. SOIL, 10(2), 843–857. [Crossref]
Chen, L., Yu, S., Shen, S., Wan, Y., & Song, C. (2024). Spatial and temporal variation of GPP and its response to urban environmental changes in Beijing. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information, 13(11), 396. [Crossref]
Chen, U., Day, S. D., Wick, A. F., & McGuire, K. J. (2014). Influence of urban land development and subsequent soil rehabilitation on soil aggregates, carbon, and hydraulic conductivity. Science of The Total Environment, 494–495(1), 329–336. [Crossref]
Chukwuma, E. C., Okonkwo, C. C., Afolabi, O. O. D., Pham, Q. B., Anizoba, D. C., & Okpala, C. D. (2023). Groundwater vulnerability to pollution assessment: An application of geospatial techniques and integrated IRN-DEMATEL-ANP decision model. Environmental Science and Pollution Research International, 30(17), 49856–49874. [Crossref]
Di Prinzio, M., Bittelli, M., Castellanin, A., & Rossi Pisa, P. (2010). Application of GPR to the monitoring of river embankments. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 71(2–3), 53–61. [Crossref]
Duinker, P., & Greig, L. A. (2007). Scenario analysis in environmental impact assessment: Improving explorations of the future. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 27(3), 206–219. [Crossref]
Dzulkefli, F. S., Latiff, A. H. A., Hashim, H. S., Majdi, A. M., Rusmanugroho, H., & Li, J. (2023). Unveiling accurate seismic imaging through the advanced target-oriented Kirchhoff migration method. Applied Sciences, 13(19), 10615. [Crossref]
Ewusi, A., Tetteh, S. E. K., Seidu, J., & Ahenkorah, I. (2024). Hydrogeological risk assessment for mineral exploration in Ghana: A brief overview. Scientific African, 24, e02218. [Crossref]
Famiglietti, N. A., Miele, P., Massa, B., Memmolo, A., Moschillo, R., Zarrilli, L., & Vicari, A. (2024). Ground penetrating radar (GPR) investigations in urban areas affected by gravity-driven deformations. Geosciences, 14(8), 222. [Crossref]
Fitzpatrick, F. A., Diebel, M. W., Harris, M. A., Arnold, T. L., Lutz, M. A., & Richards, K. D. (2005). Effects of urbanization on the geomorphology, habitat, hydrology, and fish index of biotic integrity of streams in the Chicago area, Illinois and Wisconsin. American Fisheries Society Symposium, 47, 87–115.
Forte, E., Dossi, M., Pipan, M., & Colucci, R. R. (2014). Velocity analysis from common offset GPR data inversion: Theory and application to synthetic and real data. Geophysical Journal International, 197(3), 1471–1483. [Crossref]
Gabera, Y., Ewidab, H. F., Othman, A., & Ghazal, H. (2023). Post stack seismic data processing for enhancing subsurface reservoir mapping in the Shushan basin, Western Desert, Egypt. Arabian Journal of Geosciences, 16(17), 106–120. [Crossref]
García-Muñoz, J., Pérez-López, M., Soler, F., Míguez-Santiyán, M. P., & Martínez-Morcillo, S. (2023). Non-invasive samples for biomonitoring heavy metals in terrestrial ecosystems. In Trace Metals in the Environment, edited by Daisy Joseph. IntechOpen. [Crossref]
Gonçalves, J. T. D., Botelho, M. A. B., Machado, S. L., & Netto, L. G. (2021). Correlation between field electrical resistivity and geotechnical SPT blow counts at tropical soils in Brazil. Environmental Challenges, 5, 100220. [Crossref]
Hanna, E., & Comín, F. A. (2021). Urban Green Infrastructure and Sustainable Development: A Review. Sustainability, 13(20), 11498. [Crossref]
Hasan, M., Shang, Y., Shao, P., Yi, X., & Meng, H. (2021). Geophysical research on rock mass quality evaluation for infrastructure design. Earth and Space Science, 8(6), e2021EA002017. [Crossref]
Hasan, M. K., Rashid, M. K.-U., & Akter, R. (2019). Climate change impacts on local people livelihood and its adaptation through agroforestry in coastal district Patuakhali of Bangladesh. Agriculture and Forestry Journal, 3(1), 6-14.
Hossam H. Elewa, A. M. Nosair, A. Ibrahim, M. Zelenakova, K. Pietrucha-Urbanik, H. M. Habib, N. A. Abdel Moneam, R. M. Ragab, & E. M. Ramadan. (2024). Use of remote sensing, spatial and geophysical modeling, and real recharging capabilities to identify suitable areas for groundwater exploitation in dry coastal areas. Journal of Environmental Management, 363, 121243. [Crossref]
Ikuemonisan, F. E., & Ozebo, V. C. (2020). Characterisation and mapping of land subsidence based on geodetic observations in Lagos, Nigeria. Geodesy and Geodynamics, 11(2), 151–162. [Crossref]
Jat, M. K., Khare, D., & Garg, P. K. (2009). Urbanization and its impact on groundwater: A remote sensing and GIS-based assessment approach. The Environmentalist, 29(1), 17–32. [Crossref]
Jian, J., Shiklomanov, A., Shuster, W. D., & Stewart, R. D. (2021). Predicting near-saturated hydraulic conductivity in urban soils. Journal of Hydrology, 600, 126523. [Crossref]
Keisham, R., Aribam, N. G., Datta, S., Dutta, S., & Barman, R. (2022). Impact of mining on groundwater quality of India using indexing techniques and its assessment. In A. K. Tiwari, A. Kumar, A. K. Singh, T. N. Singh, E. Suozzi, G. Matta, & S. Lo Russo (Eds.), Current Directions in Water Scarcity Research (Vol. 5, pp. 187–223). Elsevier. [Crossref]
Khan, M., Xueqiu, H., Farid, A., Jianqiang, C., Honglei, W., Dazhao, S., & Chao, Z. (2022). Geophysical characterization of mining-induced complex geological deformations in a deep coalmine. Lithosphere, 2021(Special 4), 7564984. [Crossref]
Koteswara Rao, K., Samal, S. K., Kumar, S., Singh, N. R., Raju Singh, N., Kumar, R., Mondal, S., Kumar, S., Bhatt, B. P., Ravisankar, N., Kumar, S., Upadhyay, P. K., Jadhav, S. K., Choubey, A. K. (2024). Decade-long effects of integrated farming systems on soil aggregation and carbon dynamics in sub-tropical Eastern Indo-Gangetic plains. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, 8, Article 1384082. [Crossref]
Kwan, K., & Reford, S. (2025). Innovative airborne geophysical strategies to assist the exploration of critical metal systems. Geosystems and Geoenvironment, 4(1), 100344. [Crossref]
Li, C., Sun, G., Caldwell, P. V., Cohen, E., Fang, Y., Zhang, Y., Oudin, L., Sanchez, G. M., & Meentemeyer, R. K. (2020). Impacts of urbanization on watershed water balances across the conterminous United States. Water Resources Research, 56(5), e2019WR026574. [Crossref]
Li, K., Yan, J., Li, F., Kai, L., Yongpeng, Y., Yulin, L., Lin, Z., Peng, W., Zhenyu, L., Yancheng, Y., & Jiawen, W. (2024). Non-invasive geophysical methods for monitoring the shallow aquifer based on time-lapse electrical resistivity tomography, magnetic resonance sounding, and spontaneous potential methods. Scientific Reports, 14, 7320. [Crossref]
Liang, W., Hua, L., Donghui, W., Sheng, Z., Wei, Z., Xia, L., Jiang, Y., & Qiao, W. (2023). Urban geophysical exploration: Case study in Chengdu International Bio-City. Journal of Geophysics and Engineering, 20(4), 830–840. [Crossref]
Liao, W., & Hua, L. (2023). Urban geophysical exploration: Case study in Chengdu International Bio-City. Journal of Geophysics and Engineering, 20(4), 830–840. [Crossref]
Liu, K., Wang, L., Zhai, J., Zhao, Y., Deng, H., & Li, X. (2025). Impact of urbanization on water resource competition between energy and food: A case study of Jing-Jin-Ji. Sustainability, 17(2), 571. [Crossref]
Liu, R., Zhu, C., Schmalzel, J., Barrowes, B., Glaser, D., Maxson, M., & Lein, W. (2024). Electrical resistivity behavior of saline soil under low-temperature c onditions. SAGE Journals. [Crossref]
Lombardi, F., Podd, F., & Solla, M. (2022). From its core to the niche: Insights from GPR applications. Remote Sensing, 14(13), 3033. [Crossref]
Mahapatra, T. (2023). Environmental, social and health impacts of stone quarrying in Mitrapur panchayat of Balasore district, Odisha. International Journal of Science and Research Archive, 8(01), 678–688. [Crossref]
Maju-Oyovwikowhe, E. G., Uwa-Igbinoba, E., & Alile, O. M. (2024). Integrated geophysical techniques for subsurface characterization and groundwater assessment: A case study from the University of Benin, Nigeria. In Integrated geophysical techniques for subsurface characterization and groundwater assessment. IntechOpen
Martorana, R., Capizzi, P., Pisciotta, A., Scudero, S., & Bottari, C. (2023). An overview of geophysical techniques and their potential suitability for archaeological studies. Heritage, 6(3), 2886–2927. [Crossref]
Mechri, M., Raza, T., Bouajila, K., Ziadi, N., Abd_Allah, E. F., & Jedidi, N. (2024). Long-term tillage practices impact soil aggregation and climate resilience in Tunisian field cropping systems. Growing Africa.
Michot, D., Benderitter, Y., Dorigny, A., Nicoullaud, B., King, D., Tabbagh, A., & others. (2003). Spatial and temporal monitoring of soil water content with an irrigated corn crop cover using surface electrical resistivity tomography. Water Resources Research, 39(5). [Crossref]
Mihelič, R., Pečnik, J., Glavan, M., & Pintar, M. (2021). Impact of sustainable land management practices on soil properties: Example of organic and integrated agricultural management. Land, 10(1), 8. [Crossref]
Mohamed, A., Othman, A., Galal, W. F., & Abdelrady, A. (2023). Integrated geophysical approach of groundwater potential in Wadi Ranyah, Saudi Arabia, using gravity, electrical resistivity, and remote-sensing techniques. Remote Sensing, 15(7), 1808. [Crossref]
Mojžiš, M., Jobbágy, J., Rataj, V., & Zsembeli, J. (2024). Impact of machinery passages on soil compaction in field conditions. Acta Technologica Agriculturae, 27(2), 116–124. [Crossref]
Molua, O. C., Ogwun, D. A., Eseka, K., Nwachukwu, D. N., & Edobor, M. (2024). Geophysical exploration for solid mineral deposits: A key to sustainable mining practices. FUPRE Journal of Scientific and Industrial Research, 8(1), 117–123. fupre.edu.ng
Molua, O. C., Vwavware, J. O., & Nwachukwu, D. (2024). Environmental impact assessment of mining activities in Nigeria: Employing geophysical techniques to monitor subsurface changes and mitigate environmental damage. AJHSE, 5(1). [Crossref]
Morsy, E. A. (2025). Sustainable urban planning using integrated geophysical techniques in New Sohag City, Egypt. Sustainability, 17(8), 3730. [Crossref]
Moruya, E. A. (2025). Sustainable urban planning using integrated geophysical techniques in New Sohag City, Egypt. Sustainability, 17(8), 3730. [Crossref]
Mpanga, I. K., Gaikpa, D. S., Koomson, E., & Dapaah, H. K. (2022). Innovations in water management: Agriculture. In The Palgrave Handbook of Global Sustainability. Palgrave Macmillan
Mpus, I. K., Gaikpa, D. S., Koomson, E., & Dapaah, H. K. (2022). Innovations in water management: Agriculture. In The Palgrave Handbook of Global Sustainability. Palgrave Macmillan
Mrudula, D., Nayak, B. B., Sravani, C., Prasanna, T., Naik, M. R., & Afrose, M. (2025). Nurturing soil health through conservation agriculture practices. In Open access peer-reviewed chapter. IntechOpen
Netti, A. M., Abdelwahab, O. M. M., Datola, G., Ricci, G. F., Damiani, P., Oppio, A., & Gentile, F. (2024). Assessment of nature-based solutions for water resource management in agricultural environments: A stakeholders’ perspective in Southern Italy. Scientific Reports, 14, 24668. [Crossref]
Ojo, O. A., Oladipo, A. A., & Akinyemi, O. O. (2024). Geophysical investigation of the subsurface structural competency around College of Computing and Communication Studies, Bowen University. International Journal of Research and Innovation in Applied Science (IJRIAS), 9(3), 57. [Crossref]
Ojo, O. T., Chiaka, I. J., & Nwokeabia, C. N. (2024). Integrated geophysical and GIS approaches for groundwater potential assessment: A case study of Aladja, Delta State, Nigeria. Water Practice and Technology, 19(10), 4282–4302. [Crossref]
Oluwatobi, O., Olaleye, T., & Akinbile, C. (2020). Interpretation of geophysical and GIS-based remote sensing data for sustainable groundwater resource management in the basement of north-eastern Osun State, Nigeria: A case study. SN Applied Sciences, 2(12), 1608. [Crossref]
Omunguye, I. W., & Akpila, S. B. (2013). Soil resistivity evaluation on PMS tank foundation in granular soil lithology: A case study in Lekki, Nigeria. European Journal of Applied Engineering and Scientific Research, 2(4), 28–36.
Parnell, S., & Walawege, R. (2011). Sub-Saharan African urbanisation and global environmental change. Global Environmental Change, 21(Suppl. 1), S12–S20. [Crossref]
Parsons, T. (2021). The weight of cities: Urbanization effects on Earth's subsurface. AGU Advances. [Crossref]
Poluha, B., Porsani, J. L., Almeida, E. R., Neris dos Santos, V. R., & Allen, S. J. (2017). Depth estimates of buried utility systems using the GPR method: Studies at the IAG/USP geophysics test site. International Journal of Geosciences, 8(5), 651–662. [Crossref]
Pueyo-Anchuela, Ó., Casas-Sainz, A. M., Soriano, M. A., & Pocoví-Juan, A. (2011). Geophysical techniques applied to urban planning in complex near surface environments: Examples of Zaragoza, NE Spain. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth, Parts A/B/C, 36(16), 1211–1227. [Crossref]
Rajan, S., Parween, M., & Raju, N. J. (2023). Pesticides in the hydrogeo-environment: A review of contaminant prevalence, source and mobilisation in India. Environmental Geochemistry and Health. Advance online publication. [Crossref]
Reid, J., & Castka, P. (2023). The impact of remote sensing on monitoring and reporting: The case of conformance systems. Journal of Cleaner Production, 393, 136331. [Crossref]
Reyes, O. (2023). Understanding urban hydrology: Managing water resources and protecting urban environments. Hydrology: Current Research, 14(2). [Crossref]
Romero-Ruiz, A., Linde, N., Keller, T., & Or, D. (2018). A review of geophysical methods for soil structure characterization. Reviews of Geophysics, 56. [Crossref]
Salmi, E. F., & Sellers, E. J. (2022). A rock engineering system based abandoned mine instability assessment index with case studies for Waihi Gold Mine. Engineering Geology, 310, 106869. [Crossref]
Shukla, M., Jangid, B. L., Khandelwal, V., Keerthika, A., & Shukla, A. K. (2023). Climate change and agriculture: An Indian perspective: A review. Agricultural Reviews, 44(2), 223–230. [Crossref]
Steinman, A. D., Luttenton, M., & Havens, K. E. (2004). Sustainability of surface and subsurface water resources: Case studies from Florida and Michigan, U.S.A. Water Resources Update, 127, 100–107.
Takele, T., Mechal, A., & Berhe, B. A. (2025). Evaluation of groundwater recharge potential using geospatial analysis in the Ziway Lake watershed, Ethiopian Rift: A GIS and AHP-based methodological framework. Environmental and Sustainability Indicators, 26, 100692. [Crossref]
Teweldebrihan, M. D., & Dinka, M. O. (2024). The impact of climate change on the development of water resources. Global Journal of Environmental Science and Management, 10(3), 1359–1370. [Crossref]
Tiwari, D. K., Hari, M., Kundu, B., Jha, B., Tyagi, B., & Malik, K. (2023). Delhi urbanization footprint and its effect on the earth’s subsurface state-of-stress through decadal seismicity modulation. Scientific Reports, 13, 11750. [Crossref]
Uhlemann, S., Kuras, O., Richards, L. A., Naden, E., Polya, D. A., & others. (2017). Electrical resistivity tomography determines the spatial distribution of clay layer thickness and aquifer vulnerability, Kandal Province, Cambodia. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences, 147, 402–414.
Umar, M., Ahmed, Z., Wanzan, A. M., & Sa'aud, M. (2024). Electrical resistivity tomography investigation of groundwater contamination pathway at Ahmadu Bello University sewage treatment site. Communication in Physical Sciences. Advance online publication. [Crossref]
Ünal, İ., Kabaş, Ö., & Sözer, S. (2020). Real-Time electrical resistivity measurement and mapping platform of the soils with an autonomous robot for precision farming applications. Sensors, 20(1), 251. [Crossref]
Wegenast, T., Hänze, N., Haer, R., & Birulés, M. (2024). The effect of traditional agricultural practices on the food consumption of households facing extreme weather events in Tanzania. Agriculture & Food Security, 13(1), 56. [Crossref]
Wen, X., Cai, C., Yuan, Z., Li, D., Zhou, J., Huang, C., & Wang, J. (2023). Contributions of climate and soil properties to geographic variations of soil organic matter across the East Asian monsoon region. Soil and Tillage Research, 234, 105845. [Crossref]
Wu, X., Cai, C., Yuan, Z., Li, D., Zhou, J., Huang, C., & Wang, J. (2023). Contributions of climate and soil properties to geographic variations of soil organic matter across the East Asian monsoon region. Soil and Tillage Research, 234, 105845. [Crossref]
Xian, G., Crane, M., & Su, J. (2007). An analysis of urban development and its environmental impact on the Tampa Bay watershed. Journal of Environmental Management, 85(4), 965–976. [Crossref]
Xie, L., Yu, Z., & Zhao, X. (2025). Assessing construction safety risks in large urban complex projects: An interval ordinal priority approach. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management. [Crossref]
Xu, R., & Zhang, D. (2024). Forward prediction and surrogate modeling for subsurface hydrology: A review of theory-guided machine-learning approaches. Computers & Geosciences, 188, 105611. [Crossref]
Yadav, S. K. (2024). Land cover change and its impact on groundwater resources: Findings and recommendations. In Groundwater - New Advances and Challenges. IntechOpen. [Crossref]
Yang, G., Bowling, L. C., Cherkauer, K. A., & Pijanowski, B. C. (2011). The impact of urban development on hydrologic regime from catchment to basin scales. Landscape and Urban Planning, 103(2), 237–247. [Crossref]
Yang, S., Huang, Y., Radhakrishnan, M., & Rene, E. R. (2021). Sustainable urban water management in China: A case study from Guangzhou and Kunming. Applied Sciences, 11(21), 10030. [Crossref]
Yin, J., Dong, J., Hamm, N. A. S., Li, Z., Wang, J., Xing, H., & Fu, P. (2021). Integrating remote sensing and geospatial big data for urban land use mapping: A review. International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation, 103, 102514. [Crossref]
Yin, J., Dong, J., Hamm, N. A. S., Li, Z., Wang, J., Xing, H., & Fu, P. (2021). Integrating remote sensing and geospatial big data for urban land use mapping: A review. International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation, 103, 102514. [Crossref]
Yuan, Z., & Wang, J. (2024). Influence of mining activities on hydrological processes in the mining district, Loess Plateau: Insights from spatio-temporal variations of δD and δ18O. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 12, 1388262. [Crossref]
Zahoor, I., & Mushtaq, A. (2023). Water pollution from agricultural activities: A critical global review. International Journal of Chemical and Biochemical Sciences, 23(1), 164–176. iscientific.org
Zhai, Y., Han, Y., Xia, X., Li, X., Lu, H., Teng, Y., & Wang, J. (2021). Anthropogenic organic pollutants in groundwater increase releases of Fe and Mn from aquifer sediments: Impacts of pollution degree, mineral content, and pH. Water, 13(14), 1920. [Crossref]
Zhang, W., Zhang, J., Yang, N., & Duan, L. (2024). Influence of mining activities on hydrological processes in the mining district, Loess Plateau: Insights from spatio-temporal variations of δD and δ18O. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 12, 1388262. [Crossref]
Zhao, L., & Zhang, Z. (2024). Assessing construction safety risks in large urban complex projects: An interval ordinal priority approach. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management. [Crossref]