## 4 Results and Discussion
### Non-Destructive Techniques  
Figure 4 also includes the derived variation of soil electrical conductivity with depth at the coring site. Multiple vertical profiles have been extracted from the geophysical line passing above the coring site (emTST06, Figure 2), within \(+/-2.5\) m surface distance from it, and all show a gradual increase in the measured quantity with depth, which ranges from circa 70 mS/m close to the ground surface to 215 mS/m at the depth of 4 m. The linear increase in conductivity with depth is very slow within the top 1 m (almost constant, if considering spatial variability), slightly accelerates between 1-2 m, and shows a clear change in rate at the depth of 2 m. These depths of conductivity rate changes are in excellent agreement with the boundaries determined and described earlier based on the core analysis. Although the increasing trend of conductivity with depth contradicts the density distribution of materials in the soil profile, it may be explained by the increase in water content with depth and its elevated salinity due to the proximity of the site to the seashore.  
The consistency between core analysis results and geophysical measurements concerning the identification of sections in the soil/sediments stratigraphy is better pronounced when all measured profiles are examined. Figure 5 shows the inverted 2D distribution of conductivity along all nine profiles. Conductivity values systematically present a three-layer-like distribution, which we attribute to the three stratigraphic units.  
Examples of field-wide conductivity distributions at three different depths (0.4, 2.3, and 4.6 m), resulting from the inversion of the collected geophysical data, are shown in Figure 6. The first two distributions (at 0.4 and 2.3 m) correspond to the upper and middle units and reflect a slight increase in conductivity from SW to NE (Figure 6). The third distribution, corresponding to the depth of 4.6 m is close to the maximum investigated depth and shows that soil conductivity is quite constant throughout most of the examined area. In Figure 7, we marked as an example, on profile TST02 (Figures 3 and 4), the three different units: (a) the upper unit, at 0.0-1.0 m depth of conductivity \(<\)50 mS/m; (b) the middle unit at 1.0-2.5 m depth, of conductivity 50-150 mS/m; and (c) the lower unit, at 2.5-5.0 m depth and conductivity of \(>\)150 mS/s.  
The 3D model, obtained through INOBITEC software for core AG, presents variations that are attributed to changes in sediment physical properties (Figure 8). From 0.00 to 0.50 m, the core presents increased HU values that reflect higher density (Figure 8). Attaching HU boundaries on the 3D model and excluding the sediment in the studied volume reveals shell fragments in the unit as well as organic residues that were also macroscopically observed. From 0.50 to 1.00 m, the water-clogged organic-rich sediment presents decreased values of HU (Figure 8). This unit is also characterized by the lowest measured values of electrical conductivity. Variations in HU values and a completely different setting are observed from 1.00 to 4.00 m, with increased HU values, and organic residues and root remains are observed (Figure 8). This unit, composed mainly of sand, is also highly correlated with the increased values presented in the electrical conductivity profile.  
Figure 4: Electrical conductivity profiles as extracted by the EMP-400 profiler from the studied field.  
Figure 5: Electrical conductivity profile around the coring site (within +/\(-\)2.5 m surface distance along with profile TST06.  
Figure 6: Contour map of the electric conductivity in three different slices at depths of 0.4 m, 2.3 m, and 4.6 m.