## 5 Discussion  
Magnetic characteristics are rarely explored in cave environments with a carbonate origin. Since allogenic cave sediments in the Dinaric Karst have shown the presence of heavier mineral compositions [10], as in caves of similar origin around the world [43], this research aimed to determine whether magnetism can be effectively measured in a cave environment and to compare a portable measuring device with a commonly used laboratory device. Magnetic susceptibility values measured in Slov\(\acute{\text{a}}\)cka Cave and the Crnopac Cave System using the Kappameter KM-7 device differ significantly from those obtained in \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline  & **SL1-3** & **KG1-14** & **KG2-8** \\ \hline calcite (Cal) & presence/high & high/very high & absence \\ siderite (Sd) & absence & possible & absence \\ quartz (Qz) & high & presence/high & very high \\ plagioclase (PI) & absence & absence & possible \\ K-feldspar (Kfs) & possible & possible & possible \\ goethite (Gth) & presence/high & presence & \\ hematite (Hem) & possible & possible & \\ gibbsite (Gbs) & presence & presence & absence \\ anatase (Ant) & possible & possible & absence \\ magnetite (Mag) & absence & possible & absence \\ unidentified mineral (X1) & absence & absence & presence \\ unidentified mineral (X2) & absence & presence & absence \\ mica (Mca) & presence/high & high & possible \\ mixed layer/irregular minerals (MM/IM) & IM possible & IM possible & possible \\ kaolinite (Kln) & high & Kln and/or Chl high & possible \\ chlorite (Chl) & possible & & possible \\
14 \(\AA\) minerals (14 \(\AA\)) & high/very high & Vrm, Sme, MM high & absence \\ amorphous component (AC) & presence & presence & possible \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 1: List of minerals and their representation in samples SL1-3, KG1-14, and KG2-8 determined by XRD. Mineral abbreviations after [42]. the laboratory with the Bartington MS2B device (see Figure 4, and Tables S1-S6). This discrepancy is further supported by the statistical analysis (see Table 2), with the KG1 profile showing the largest differences. However, the correlation coefficient and r-squared indicate low to moderate correlation with the laboratory values. Furthermore, evidenced errors (RMSE and MAE) from 16 to 30 \(\times\) 10\({}^{-5}\) SI for SL1 and KG1 profiles, while for KG2 errors are lower than 10 \(\times\) 10\({}^{-5}\) SI. Therefore, the KG2 profile has the closest distribution of magnetic susceptibility values compared to the values measured in the laboratory (see Table 2). A comparison of low and high laboratory frequencies indicates that there are no superparamagnetic minerals present. Discrepancies between the values recorded by the two devices are anticipated, given that each device operates at different frequencies. However, even the statistical parameters reveal distinct patterns within the values. These findings suggest that the KM-7 device is highly sensitive to cave environments. Nevertheless, this in situ device proves to be sufficiently precise and accurate for preliminary investigations, allowing for the examination of profiles with measureable changes in magnetic susceptibility values on site. Profile SL1, located near the entrance of the Slovacka Cave (see Figure 2) is densely measured and significant variations in magnetic susceptibility values are determined. The highest values were obtained within the first 0.5 m of the profile, up to 99.4 \(\times\) 10\({}^{-5}\) SI units. In the interval from 0.5-1.0 m of the profile, values constantly decrease to 20 \(\times\) 10\({}^{-5}\) SI units, and further are constant. Sample SL1-3 has one of the highest measured magnetic susceptibility values and comprise the following minerals: goethine, gibbsite, kaolinite, as well as various phylosilicates, including micas. Due to metallic ions in their composition, these minerals are paramagnetic, even ferrimagnetic to anti-ferrimagnetic.