Volume 2, Issue 2 — Year 2025 — Article e100040

ISSN (Online): 3115-8129 Biannually

Geomorphologic Landform Analysis of the Hormuz Salt Dome from a Geotourism Perspective

Article Type: Research
Pages: e100040
DOI: https://doi.org/10.22034/CGEL.2.2.e100040
Crossmark
Open Access
Authors
Affiliations
  1. Department of Geology, Shahid Bahonar University of Kerman, Kerman 7616913439, Iran
Corresponding author
Email: yasamanparvar575@gmail.com
ORCID: 0009-0009-1555-6793
Received: 22 August 2025 / Accepted: 2 October 2025 / Published: 19 October 2025
Abstract

Salt domes are among the most intriguing geomorphological landforms, offering significant geotourism potential due to their unique geological features and striking landscapes. The Hormuz salt dome, located in southern Hormozgan Province, is an exceptional example of such formations, shaped by both internal and external geological processes over time. These domes originate beneath sedimentary rock layers, rising to the surface due to the lower density of salt compared to overlying rocks, tectonic activity, and the visco-plastic properties of salt. This study investigates the geomorphological evolution of the Hormuz salt dome using a combination of satellite imagery, topographic and geological analysis, and field surveys. The results reveal a diverse range of landforms, including salt creep, salt rivers, cauliflower-like formations, and dissolution-induced features, all of which enhance the geotouristic value of the region. These remarkable structures not only provide insight into salt tectonics but also serve as natural attractions for geotourists, researchers, and nature enthusiasts. By highlighting the unique geomorphological features of the Hormuz salt dome, this research underscores its significance as a key geotourism destination, promoting sustainable tourism and scientific exploration while fostering a deeper appreciation of Earth’s dynamic processes.

Keywords

Geomorphology, Salt dome evolution, Hormuz Island, Geotourism, Landform analysis

Data availability statement

The data supporting the findings of this study are available within article. No publicly archived dataset was generated.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Highlights
  • Hormuz salt dome shows unique geomorphological features
  • Salt tectonics form diverse landforms
  • High geotourism and scientific value
References
  1. Al-Zoubi A., ten Brink U.S. (2001). Salt diapirs in the Dead Sea basin and their relationship to Quaternary extensional tectonics. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 18(7), 779-797. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0264-8172(01)00031-9.
  2. Arian M., Noroozpour H. (2015). Tectonic geomorphology of Iran’s salt structures. Open Journal of Geology, 5(2), 61-72. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojg.2015.52006.
  3. Bland M.T., Buczkowski D.L., Sizemore H.G., Ermakov A.I., King S.D., Sori M. M., Russell C.T. (2019). Dome formation on Ceres by solid-state flow analogous to terrestrial salt tectonics. Nature Geoscience, 12(10), 797-801. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-019-0453-0.
  4. Chen A., Lu Y., Ng Y.C. (2015). The principles of geotourism. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, Germany.
  5. Derakhshani R., Lankof L., Ghasemi Nejad A. (2024). Artificial intelligence-driven assessment of salt caverns for underground hydrogen storage in Poland. Scientific Reports, 14, 14246. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-64020-9.
  6. Desa K.M. (1997). Conservation geology: A case for the ecotourism industry of Malaysia. Engineering Geology and the Environment, 5, 4037.
  7. Doktor M., Mayer W. (2016). Department of General Geology and Geotourism. Geology, Geophysics and Environment, 42(2), 211-217.
  8. Dowling R.K. (2013). Global geotourism–an emerging form of sustainable tourism. Czech Journal of Tourism, 2(2), 59-79.
  9. Drinia H., Voudouris P., Antonarakou A. (2023). Geoheritage and geotourism resources: education, recreation, sustainability II. Geosciences, 13(11), 350. https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences13110350.
  10. Duffy O., Hudec M., Peel F., Apps G., Bump A., Moscardelli L., Shuster M. (2023). The role of salt tectonics in the energy transition: An overview and future challenges. Tektonika, 1(1), 18-48. https://doi.org/10.55575/tektonika2023.1.1.11.
  11. Ellison R.A., Thomas R.J., Jacobs J., Pharaoh T.C. (2022). Anatomy and uplift history of the emergent salt domes of the United Arab Emirates. Arabian Journal of Geosciences, 15(1), 23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-021-09034-7.
  12. Faramarzi N.S., Amini S., Schmitt A.K., Hassanzadeh J., Borg G., McKeegan K., Mortazavi S.M. (2015). Geochronology and geochemistry of rhyolites from Hormuz Island, southern Iran: A new record of Cadomian arc magmatism in the Hormuz Formation. Lithos, 236, 203-211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lithos.2015.08.017.
  13. Geng M., Ali M.Y., Fairhead J.D., Pilia S., Bouzidi Y., Barkat B. (2022). Hormuz salt distribution in the United Arab Emirates: Implications for the location of hydrocarbon fields. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 143, 105797. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2022.105797.
  14. Geological Survey and Mineral Exploration of Iran, GSI (2009). Geology map and report for Hormuz region. The Geological Survey and Mineral Exploration of Iran press, Tehran, Iran.
  15. Ghanbarian M.A., Derakhshani R. (2022). The folds and faults kinematic association in Zagros. Scientific Reports, 12(1), 8350. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-12337-8.
  16. Ghanbarian M.A., Yassaghi A., Derakhshani R. (2021). Detecting a sinistral transpressional deformation belt in the Zagros. Geosciences, 11(6), 226. https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences11060226.
  17. Gutiérrez F., Zarei M., Hudec M.R., Deirnik H. (2023). Normal faulting and landsliding in morpho-structural domes related to buried salt stocks, Zagros Mountains, Iran. Insights into salt breakout. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 155, 106376. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2023.106376.
  18. Herrera-Franco G., Montalván-Burbano N., Carrión-Mero P., Apolo-Masache B., Jaya-Montalvo, M. (2020). Research trends in geotourism: A bibliometric analysis using the scopus database. Geosciences, 10(10), 379. https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences10100379.
  19. Hose T.A. (2000). European geotourism–geological interpretation and geoconservation promotion for tourists. Geological Heritage: its Conservation and Management, 127-146.
  20. Hudec M.R., Jackson M.P. (2012). De Re Salica: Fundamental principles of salt tectonics. Regional Geology and Tectonics: Phanerozoic Passive Margins, Cratonic Basins and Global Tectonic Maps, 1, 19-41.
  21. Islam M.S.U., Wali A. (2024). A comprehensive review of deep learning techniques for salt dome segmentation in seismic images. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 230, 105504. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jappgeo.2024.105504.
  22. Jackson M.P.A., Hudec M.R. (2017). Salt Tectonics: Principles and Practice. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, UK.
  23. Jallouli C., Chikhaoui M., Braham A., Turki M.M., Mickus K., Benassi R. (2005). Evidence for Triassic salt domes in the Tunisian Atlas from gravity and geological data. Tectonophysics, 396(3-4), 209-225. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tecto.2004.12.003.
  24. Kent P.E. (1979). The emergent Hormuz salt plugs of southern Iran. Journal of Petroleum Geology, 2(2), 117-144.
  25. Kent P.E. (1987). Island salt plugs in the Middle East and their tectonic implications. Dynamical Geology of Salt and Related Structures, 5, 3-38.
  26. Khodabakhshnezhad A., Arian M. (2016). Salt tectonics in the Southern Iran. International Journal of Geosciences, 7(03), 367. https://doi.org/10.4236/ijg.2016.73029.
  27. Kubalíková L. (2013). Geomorphosite assessment for geotourism purposes. Czech Journal of Tourism, 2(2), 80-104.
  28. Lamich D., Marschalko M., Yilmaz I., Bednářová P., Niemiec D., Durďák J., Duda R. (2016). Utilization of engineering geology in geo-tourism: few case studies of subsidence influence on historical churches in Ostrava-Karvina District (Czech Republic). Environmental Earth Sciences, 75, 128. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-015-4993-3.
  29. Mikhailenko A.V., Nazarenko O.V., Ruban D.A., Zayats P.P. (2017). Aesthetics-based classification of geological structures in outcrops for geotourism purposes: a tentative proposal. Geologos, 23(1), 45-52. https://doi.org/10.1515/logos-2017-0004.
  30. Nasir S., Al-Saad H., Alsayigh A., Weidlich O. (2008). Geology and petrology of the Hormuz dolomite, Infra-Cambrian: Implications for the formation of the salt-cored Halul and Shraouh islands, Offshore, State of Qatar. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences, 33(5-6), 353-365. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jseaes.2008.02.003.
  31. Newsome D., Dowling R., Leung Y.F. (2012). The nature and management of geotourism: A case study of two established iconic geotourism destinations. Tourism Management Perspectives, 2, 19-27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2011.12.009.
  32. Newsome D., Ladd P. (2022). The dimensions of geotourism with a spotlight on geodiversity in a subdued landscape. International Journal of Geoheritage and Parks, 10(3), 351-366. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijgeop.2022.06.001.
  33. Ólafsdóttir R. (2019). Geotourism. Geosciences, 9(1), 48. https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences9010048.
  34. Ólafsdóttir R., Tverijonaite E. (2018). Geotourism: a systematic literature review. Geosciences, 8(7), 234. https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences8070234.
  35. Ranjbaran M., Zamanzadeh S.M., Sotohian F. (2020). Geotourism attractions of Hormuz Island, Iran. GeoJournal of Tourism and Geosites, 28(1), 232-245. https://doi.org/10.30892/gtg.28118-465.
  36. Rostami A., Alipour S., Abedini A. (2020). Petrology, geochemistry, and tectonomagmatic setting of volcanic rocks of the Hormuz and the Gachin salt domes (Hormozgan Province, Iran). Petrological Journal, 11(2), 81-104. https://doi.org/10.22108/ijp.2020.121790.1162.
  37. Ruban D.A. (2015). Geotourism—A geographical review of the literature. Tourism Management Perspectives, 15, 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2015.03.005.
  38. Sahraei H., Ehteshami-Moinabadi M., Alavi S.A. (2023). Variation of seismicity parameters and its link to tectonic features of the central portion of the Zagros Fold-Thrust Belt, Iran. Geologica Carpathica, 74(4), 355-369.
  39. Schuba C.N., Moscardelli L. (2023). Subsurface storage in the Mississippi Salt Basin domes: Considerations for the emerging hydrogen economy. AAPG Bulletin, 107(11), 1957-1970. https://doi.org/10.1306/05302322160.
  40. Stewart S.A. (2018). Hormuz salt distribution and influence on structural style in NE Saudi Arabia. Petroleum Geoscience, 24(2), 143-158. https://doi.org/10.1144/petgeo2017-011.
  41. Talbot C.J. (1998). Extrusions of Hormuz salt in Iran. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 143(1), 315-334. https://doi.org/10.1144/GSL.SP.1998.143.01.21.
  42. Toma C., Seghedi A., Popa R.G. (2022). Salt is the Seed of Life: a Geotourism Potential Analysis of Salt Areas in Buzău Land, Romania. Geoheritage, 14, 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12371-021-00639-8.
  43. Vera-Arroyo A., Bedle H. (2023). Contrasting faulting styles of salt domes and volcanoes: Can unsupervised learning techniques differentiate fault styles?. Interpretation, 11(1), C1-C13. https://doi.org/10.1190/INT-2022-0018.1.
  44. Xue Y., Luan X., Raveendrasinghe T.D., Wei X., Jin L., Yin J., Qiao J. (2024). Implications of salt tectonics on hydrocarbon ascent in the Eastern Persian Gulf: Insights into the formation mechanism of salt diapirs, gas chimneys, and their sedimentary Interactions. Journal of Ocean University of China, 23(6), 1515-1533. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11802-024-5821-8.
  45. Yazdi A., Arian M.A., Tabari M.M.R. (2014). Geological and geotourism study of Iran geology natural museum, Hormoz Island. Open Journal of Ecology, 4(11), 703-714. https://doi.org/10.4236/oje.2014.411060.
  46. Zanganehasadi M., Zandi R., Shafiei N. (2023). Spatial analysis of the rate of displacement of salt domes and its relationship with groundwater drops Case study of southeastern Fars. Journal of Geography and Planning, 27(85), 101-108. https://doi.org/10.22034/gp.2022.51350.2996.
How to cite
Parvar, Y. (2025). Geomorphologic Landform Analysis of the Hormuz Salt Dome from a Geotourism Perspective. Civil and Geoengineering Letters, 2(2), e100040. https://doi.org/10.22034/CGEL.2.2.e100040
Note: Please verify the citation against your preferred style guide.
Share
X LinkedIn Facebook Email Mendeley
Article Metrics
1052 Readers
674 Downloads
N/A Citations
PDF XML Back to Issue