www.geologia-croatica.hr Journal of the Croatian Geological Survey and the Croatian Geological Society 2024 | 77/3 | 235–242 | 5 Figs. | 1 Supplement | 1. INTRODUCTION Karst caves are formed in carbonate rocks mainly due to a pro­ cess of rock removal by dissolution when water circulates un­ derground and interacts with the carbonates (e.g. FORD & WILLIAMS, 2007). This process leaves behind empty spaces with shapes and morphological features that are informative of the various parametres that guide the process of speleogene­ sis, namely the hydrology, chemistry and availability of rock fractures and discontinuities. Other agents can additionally contribute to the formation of caves including erosion in mainly well­formed mature cave systems (e.g. FARANT & SMART, 2011), breakdown when physical conditions are fa­ vourable for ceiling collapse (e.g. WHITE & WHITE, 2000; OSBORNE, 2002), or condensation corrosion by water that condenses on the rock surface when it is colder than the air (e.g. DREYBRODT et al., 2005; GABROVŠEK et al., 2010). A process-based classification of caves can be found in LA­ ZARIDIS (2022). All these various processes are amalga­ mated during speleogenesis and they shape the expansion of the cave space. They can act simultaneously or in successive phases of development with variations in their intensity. The resulting morphology of each agent is predictable and can be investigated in the karst cave environment. This is the key to identifying morphological features at various scales when understanding speleogenesis. Large­scale features including the ground plan pattern are related to the speleogenetic phases, whereas features in the dimensions of passages or even smaller openings are relatively susceptible to phase changes and mainly reflect events of various cave modifications such as corrosion by invasive water, erosion, condensation corrosion, and collapse (e.g. LAURITZEN & LUNDBERG, 2000). Deciphering rock surface origins in a karst cave: insights from the Rača Cave, Lastovo, Croatia Georgios Lazaridis1,*, Konstantinos P. Trimmis2, Ivan Drnić3 and Kristina Brkić Drnić4 1 Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Faculty of Sciences, School of Geology, 54124 Thessaloniki, Greece; (*corresponding author: geolaz@geo.auth.gr) 2 University of Bristol, Department of Anthropology and Archaeology, 43 Woodland Road, BS8 100 Bristol, UK 3 Archaeological Museum, Trg Nikole Zrinskog 19/1, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia 4 University of Zadar, Department of Archaeology, Ulica Mihovila Pavlinovića 1, 23000 Zadar, Croatia doi: 10.4154/gc.2024.13 Abstract This paper outlines a comprehensive fieldwork methodology for discerning the origin of rock surfaces within a karst cave environment. This methodology is particularly utilized in a cave with breakdown morphology. Using Rača Cave in Lastovo, Croatia as a case study, we ex- plore geological and morphological features through advanced surface analysis. The ap- proach involves meticulous measurement of rock discontinuities, joint patterns, and surface formations. Cost-efficient and time-efficient data collection and processing during field-work were undertaken with FieldClino Move and Polycam applications on smartphones. Visuali- zation techniques were employed to elucidate the interplay between erosion, deposition, and speleogenetic processes. However, when it comes to studying these forms various factors obscure observations and interpretations. These are mainly depositional phases of clastic and chemical sediments that cover the floor and the upper part of the cave passages, respectively. To summarise, the following surfaces can be observed in caves and studied to understand their development: • Dissolution surfaces of the carbonate rock due to flowing underground water • Dissolution surfaces due to condensation corrosion that re­sculpt wall­rocks and speleothems • Surfaces that correspond to bedding planes and rock fractures revealed after breakdown events • Depositional features • Erosional sensu lato surfaces that correspond to paragenesis (e.g. PASINI, 2009). The complexity of these processes and their interaction can make the identification and discrimination of the various morphological features during fieldwork challenging and sometimes questionable. This was the case during fieldwork in the archaeological Rača Cave in Croatia. The first impression when entering the cave is that it is formed due to collapse favoured by the intermediate dip­angle of the bedding planes. The goal of this research is to identify speleogenetic processes and to distinguish the cause­and­effect relationship of primary structural elements (bedding, faults) with the occurrence of different dissolution and depositional forms in the speleological object. To investigate, identify, and visualize specific surfaces we combined measurements of the orientation of a large number of structural elements, dissolution features, together with 3D scanning of the cave. Article history: Manuscript received: August 22, 2023 Revised manuscript accepted: June 04, 2024 Available online: October 02, 2024 Keywords: cave survey, 3D scanning, structural analysis, Adriatic Sea, Dinarides, speleogenesis, dissolution, breakdown G eo lo gi a C ro at ic a 236 Geologia Croatica 77/3 2. GEOLOGICAL SETTING Lastovo Island is located in the vicinity of a notable seismi­ cally active area (e.g. GARAŠIĆ, 2021). Along with 45 other smaller islands, it forms the Lastovo Archipelago, where Up­ per Jurassic to mid-Cretaceous limestones were deposited on the Adriatic carbonate platform (VLAHOVIĆ et al., 2002). The karst landform of the area was formed after the Alpine orogeny (VLAHOVIĆ et al., 2005; KORBAR, 2009) that shaped the area, due to the exogenous processes. Most of the continental karst caves in Croatia are of vertical development (GARAŠIĆ, 1991), whereas most of the submerged caves are horizontally developed (SURIĆ et al., 2010). Late Jurassic mudstone and wackestone are the oldest rocks that crop out on the island. A fault running along the northern shoreline of the island distinguishes the younger carbonate rocks from the older succession (SOKAČ et al., 2014). The island's landscape features the presence of karst depressions and formations such as poljes and karren. 3. CAVE DESCRIPTION Rača cave is located on the island of Lastovo at 140 m asl (N42˚ 44´ 05´́ , E016˚ 54´ 38´́ WGS84; Fig. 1a), and is the largest recorded cave on the island to date (MARJANAC, 1956; DRNIĆ & BRKIĆ DRNIĆ, 2023). The cave's develop- mental orientation aligns along a W­E axis, and its entrance is a result of breakdown processes (refer to Fig. 1b). The initial chamber stands as the largest, while subsequent chambers are demarcat ed by the presence of speleothem depositions, which take shape as expansive columns and flowstone. Small windows formed amidst the speleothems establish inter connections between different areas of the chambers. Notably, the vertical span of the cave measures ~17 metres. Enclosing the cave's ground plan, the minimum encompassing rectangle spans dimensions of ~73 metres by ~20 metres, as extracted from the 3D scan. Within the cave, the floor is covered with clastic sediments, forming a cone of debris near the entrance. As one ventures towards the cave's depths, the sediment-laden floor assumes a relatively horizontal disposition. Subsequent chambers exhibit progressively lower elevations above sea level. The ceiling primarily consists of flat inclined surfaces. Dominating the central expanse of the cave, substantial speleothems such as stalagmites and columns partition the various chambers. These formations exhibit signs of breakage, characterized by an array of cracks, some of which are filled with calcite deposits. In the entrance zone, it can be observed and should be noted, that these formations display evidence of corrosion attributed to condensation processes. However, in the cave's more profound recesses, the speleothems appear unaffected by this corrosive phenomenon, either covered by calcite encru­ stations stemming from stagnant water or otherwise not subjected to this specific process. 4. METHODOLOGY To identify and visualize dissolution surfaces within the cave, the approach involved creating a comprehensive dataset of rock discontinuities in the limestone above the cave. This dataset encompasses measurements of dip direction and dip angle for both bedding planes and rock fractures, such as joints. These measurements were meticulously acquired using the FieldMove Clino application by Midland Valley (Petroleum Engineering and Structural Geology Software), after checking the calibration of the smartphone’s sensors (magnetometer/ gyroscope/accelerometer; see software’s manual at www. petex.com). The collected data were associated with the "limestone" unit utilized in our analysis. Subsequently, random measurements were conducted within the cave, correlating with a designated unit termed "cave". Notably, these mea sure­ ments were taken on exposed surfaces devoid of speleothem coverings and were distributed throughout the cave's extent. The next phase involved projecting and comparing the two datasets on a unified stereo net diagram and scatter diagram. The scatter diagram served to establish the 99% confidence interval ellipses for bedding planes and the pair of joint sets defined within the limestone unit. Plot and confidence intervals are drawn in PAST software (HAMMER et al., 2001). For classification purposes, any measurements from the "cave" Figure 1. Location and three-dimensional space of the Rača Cave: a – Croatia map with Lastovo Island and Rača Cave depicted. b – Ground-plan of the cave. G eologia C roatica 237Lazaridis et al.: Deciphering rock surface origins in a karst cave: insights from the Rača Cave, Lastovo, Croatia dataset that overlapped with the range of the "limestone" dataset were categorized as breakdown surfaces. Conversely, measurements outside this range were indicative of dissolution processes. To comprehensively document these features, we utilized photo documentation and 3D modelling techniques employing the 3D scanner application and LiDAR sensors integrated into the iPhone 14 Pro. With respect to the mapping grades of the International Union of Speleology (UIS) as given in HÄUSELMANN (2011), the survey has the possibility to provide scans that are reliable to a single centimetre (ZACZEK- PEPLINSKA & KOWALSKA, 2022) and although variable, they easily fit grade 5 and, in many cases, can reach the prerequisites for grade 6. Map detail grade corresponds to 4, which is the maximum detail, and regarding qualifications the suffixes B to F fit to this method (HÄUSELMANN, 2011). In terms of qualitative assessment, various criteria were employed to distinguish different sections of side walls and ceilings see Supplement: • Condensation corrosion was discerned through observed cuts in speleothems, which formed cupolas or similar pockets • Breakdown surfaces were typified by a flat ceiling following bedding planes, angular connections between planar surfaces, and abrupt terminations of adjacent smooth dissolution pockets • Surfaces not aligning with the aforementioned criteria commonly pertained to dissolution stages of speleogenesis and could exhibit attributes including cupolas, scallops, flutes, pendants, and more • Furthermore, surfaces linked to erosion sensu lato, referred to as paragenesis, were discerned by their distinctive dissolution forms. These features were intricately connected with specific cave passages and micro-scale morphologies. Notable examples encom- passed paragenetic pendants, meandering paragenetic canyons, lateral notches with half-tube configurations, and scallops (FARRANT & SMART, 2011; LAURITZEN & LAURITSEN, 1995). 5. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Caves represent underground voids that emerge through distinct geological and biological processes (refer to LAZARIDIS, 2022, for a formal definition). These spaces are delineated by boundaries (CURL, 1964), referred to as surfaces throughout the text, and are intimately linked to the direct action of speleogenetic processes. Examining these surfaces facilitates the identification of various events and agents responsible for their creation, encompassing both erosional and depositional manifestations. Although this methodology primarily concentrates on surfaces with erosional characteristics, it's important to recognize that both types of surfaces offer crucial insights into comprehending cave evolution. We meticulously measured rock discontinuities (n=52) of thick-bedded limestone on the surface above the cave and at a distance of about 50 metres from the cave entrance (Fig. 2). In this area, where the limestone crops out, we recognized bedding planes, exhibiting an average dip direction and angle of 12°/14° and two groups of joints: J1: 184°/50° and J2: 111°/72°. Within the cave's interior, we conducted measurements on arbitrary rock surfaces (n=139), deliberately avoiding those concealed by speleothems. These measurements were plotted on the stereonet diagram illustrated in Fig. 3a. While an overlap between the two datasets is evident, it is noteworthy that a substantial number of cave surfaces do not align with the orientations of rock discontinuities. In pursuit of deeper insight, we further projected all data onto the scatter diagram shown in Figure 3c. correlating strike with dip angle. As anticipated, the two datasets display partial overlap. Ellipses on this diagram represent the 99% confidence interval (the percentage of the population that falls in these ellipses), underscoring that surfaces falling within these ellipses cannot be rejected as belonging to the rock's discontinuities, at a level of significance α=0.01. The shared domain between the "cave" dataset and the "limestone" dataset signifies surfaces that reasonably align with bedding planes Figure 2. a – location of the entrance of Rača Cave and the area where “limestone” dataset of rock discontinuities was measured. b – characteristic appearance of the limestone in the cave surroundings. G eo lo gi a C ro at ic a 238 Geologia Croatica 77/3 Figure 4. The first and largest chamber of Rača Cave, with ceiling surfaces dominated by breakdown surfaces along bedding planes and joints of the limestone. Figure 3. Analysis of “limestone” and “cave” datasets from Rača Cave. a – Rock discontinuities and random rock surfaces of the cave boundaries are plotted together: bedding planes (b.p.), and two joint sets J1 and J2 are indicated. b – random rock surfaces that correspond to dissolution surfaces; data for which the hypothesis to belong to limestone discontinuities cannot be rejected have been excluded (see Fig. 5 and text). c – Scatter diagram of the “limestone” and “cave” datasets analysed from Rača Cave. Coloured dots and ellipses of 99% confidence intervals are plotted for the “limestone” dataset that consists of the group of bedding planes (b.p.; green dots) and joint sets J1 (blue dots) and J2 (red dots). Black dots represent the “cave” dataset of random rock surfaces that define the cave boundaries. d – SW view of the cave, where the ceiling defined by bedding planes (b.p.) and the walls defined by joints (J1) can be observed (see text). G eologia C roatica 239Lazaridis et al.: Deciphering rock surface origins in a karst cave: insights from the Rača Cave, Lastovo, Croatia and joints originating from breakdown events. Qualitatively, these surfaces significantly contribute to the definition of the cave's contours, a characteristic demonstrated in the three- dimensional cave model showcased in Figure 3d. and in Figure 4. of the first chamber. Considering both the quantitative findings and qualitative observations, the overall morphology of Rača Cave distinctly exhibits characteristics associated with collapse formations (Fig. 4). Within diverse insular environments, such as Mallorca, a range of cave classifications are discernible, encompassing "va­ dose shafts," "vadose located caves," "phreatic caves," and "in­ sular caves" (as described by GINÉS, 1995). Notably, break­ down caves are prevalent within the category of "vadose located caves." These cases comprise segments, where the original cave boundaries undergo transformation due to the dislodgment of blocks from the ceiling or walls. This phenomenon, coupled with the deposition of speleothems, often muddles observations and complicates speleogenetic interpretations. It is worth not­ ing that numerous other cave types, such as structurally con­ trolled caves, conduit­caves, network caves, and mechanical shafts, as discussed by GINÉS (1995), commonly exhibit sec­ tions influenced by breakdown-related alterations. Rača Cave, while predominantly showcasing breakdown characteristics, appears to offer indications of processes be­ yond mere breakdown. As delineated in Figure 3c., several surfaces deviate from the 99% confidence interval designated for limestone discontinuities. This subset of the dataset is pro­ jected on the stereonet of Figure 3b. and is indicative of dis­ solution surfaces, with the caveat that paragenetic features lack qualitative verification. These surfaces predominantly define the southern segments of the cave and manifest as relatively diminutive cupolas adorning the cave ceilings or resemble a long smooth and curved surface that extends along the long axis of the cave (Fig. 5). Speleothems formed within these regions exhibit signs of condensation corrosion (Fig. 5a), signifying some degree of modification resulting from this process. Such surfaces are delimited upwards to breakdown surfaces. Old and younger breakdown events can be recognized by differences in the smoothness of the surfaces (Fig. 5b), indicating that this process took place in multiple events. Various methodologies that relate structural analysis, cave morphology, cave morphometry and hydrogeology have been introduced and applied on numerous caves and karst systems (e.g. PLAN et al., 2009; PICINI, 2011; JOUVES et al., 2017; SZCZYGIEŁ et al., 2022; DORA et al., 2023) in order to in­ vestigate their speleogenesis. However, in the case of Rača Cave, these methods had limitations or cannot even be applied due to the extent of breakdown morphology. That means in every explored passage of the cave the dominant features are related to collapse. The origin of the very few dissolution fea­ tures that were identified is speculative. The general shape of the cave exhibits an E-W elongation, affected by the joint sets J1 and the bedding planes. According to studies on cave de­ velopment and active tectonics, (so­called cavitonics), cave passages tend to be developed perpendicular to the extensional component of the stress field (LITTVA et al., 2015; SHANOV & KOSTOV, 2015; LAZARIDIS et al., 2024) and this con­ forms to the orientation of the nontectonic E­W structures in the broader area (MARINČIĆ, 1997). Regarding the employed fieldwork techniques, it's important to highlight that the capability to gather and promptly visualize data significantly and instantly enhanced our comprehension of the diverse morphological surfaces within the cave. Furthermore, the concurrent generation of 3D models (Fig. 1b) facilitated the documentation of these characteristics, emerging as a comprehensive tool for cave site investigation. By enabling observations from multiple perspectives and presenting the cave as a cohesive entity, this approach transcended the practice of examining individual segments in isolation. Figure 5. a – Illustration of a dissolution surface at the lower part of the first chamber in Rača Cave and how it is associated with breakdown surfaces and corroded speleothems by condensation corrosion. b – The same spot observed from the northern part of the first chamber, where breakdown surfaces of two different events can be observed. G eo lo gi a C ro at ic a 240 Geologia Croatica 77/3 6. CONCLUSIONS It's not uncommon for breakdown morphology to obscure the clear identification of features associated with the dissolution stages of speleogenesis. Through our analysis, we have presented compelling evidence for the existence of additional processes within Rača Cave, a site predominantly characterized by breakdown formations. The manifestation of these processes becomes evident through the presence of dissolution surfaces, which exhibit a statistically significant distinction from the rock discontinuities. These distinctions are effectively visualized using scatter diagrams. By employing qualitative criteria, we have successfully identified condensation corrosion and particular original phreatic features. The selected tools not only proved to be time-efficient but also enabled engagement in real-time data visualization while perceiving the cave's morphology as a cohesive entity. In its entirety, our fieldwork analysis has provided a comprehensive understanding of various intricacies related to the surfaces that delineate the boundaries of the cave. Moreover, this analysis has enabled us to perform statistical comparisons of datasets, thereby attributing a level of significance to our observations. ACKNOWLEDGMENT We sincerely thank the Anonymous Reviewers for their constructive comments, which greatly contributed to the improvement of our paper. REFERENCES CURL, R.L. (1964): On the definition of a cave.– Bulletin of National Speleo­ logical Society, 26, 1, 1−6. DORA, D., LAZARIDIS, G., VOUVALIDIS, K., TOKMAKIDIS, K. & VENI, G. (2023): Morphometric Analyses of Greek Caves: How Mor­ phology Predicts Cave Origin.– Bulletin of the Geological Society of Greece, 60/1, 14–26. doi: 10.12681/bgsg.34887 DREYBRODT, W., GABROVŠEK, F. & PERNE, M. (2005): Condensation Corrosion: A Theoretical Approach.– Acta Carsol., 34/2, 317–347. doi: 10.3986/ac.v34i2.262 DRNIĆ, K.B. & DRNIĆ, I. (2023): An island in the heart of the Adriatic Sea – finds from the Rača cave on the island of Lastovo.– In: DRNIĆ, K.B., TRIMMIS, P.K. & DRNIĆ, I. (eds): Finds stories, addressing mobility through people and object biographies. Archaeological Museum in Za­ greb, 17–30. FARRANT, A.R. & SMART, P.L. (2011): Role of sediment in speleogenesis; sedimentation and paragenesis.– Geomorphology, 134, 79–93. doi: 10.1016/j.geomorph.2011.06.006 GABROVŠEK, F., DREYBRODT, W. & PERNE, M. (2010): Physics of con­ densation corrosion in caves.– In: CARRASCO, F., VALSERO, J.J.D. & LAMOREAUX, J.W. (eds.): Advances in research in karst media. Spring­ er, Berlin, Heidelberg, 491–496. doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-12486-0_75 GARAŠIĆ, M. (1991): Morphological and hydrogeological classification of speleological structures (caves and pits) in the Croatian karst area.– Ge­ ološki vjesnik, 44, 289–300. GARAŠIĆ, M. (2021): The Dinaric Karst System of Croatia: Speleology and Cave Exploration.– Springer International Publishing, 462 p. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-80587-6 GINÉS, J. (1995): L'endocarst de Mallorca: els mecanismes espeleogenètics/ Mallorca's endokarst the speleogenetic mechanisms.– Endins: publicació d'espeleologia, 71–86. HAMMER, Ø., HARPER, D.A. & RYAN, P. (2001): PASΤ: Paleontological Statistics Software Package for Education and Data Analysis.– Palaeon­ tologia Electrónica, 4, 1–9. HÄUSELMANN, P. (2011): UIS mapping grades.– International Journal of Speleology, 40/2, 15. JOUVES, J., VISEUR, S., ARFIB, B., BAUDEMENT, C., CAMUS, H., COLLON, P. & GUGLIELMI, Y. (2017): Speleogenesis, geometry, and topology of caves: A quantitative study of 3D karst conduits.– Geomor- phology, 298, 86–106. doi: 10.1016/j.geomorph.2017.09.019 LAURITZEN, S. & LAURITSEN, A. (1995): Differential diagnosis of para­ genetic and vadose canyons.– Cave and Karst Science 21/2, 55–59. LAURITZEN, S. & LUNDBERG, J. (2000): Solutional and erosional morp­ hology of caves.– In: KLIMCHOUK, A., FORD, D.C., PALMER, A.N. & DREYBRODT, W. (eds.): Speleogenesis. Evolution of Karst Aquifers. Huntsville, National Speleological Society. LAZARIDIS, G.T. (2022): Definition and process-based classification of ca­ ves.– Acta Carsol., 51/1, 65–77. doi: 10.3986/ac.v51i1.10611 LITTVA, J., HOK, J. & BELLA, P. (2015): Cavitonics: Using caves in active tectonic studies (Western Carpathians, case study).– Journal of Structu­ ral Geology, 80, 47–56. doi: 10.1016/j.jsg.2015.08.011 MARINČIĆ, S. (1997): Tectonic structure of the island of Hvar (southern Cro­ atia).– Geologia Croatica, 50/1, 57–77. MARJANAC, S. (1956): Pećine i jame otoka Lastova.– Speleolog, 4/1–2, 10–19. OSBORNE, R.A.L. (2002): Cave breakdown by vadose weathering.– Int. J. Speleol., 31/1, 37–53. doi: 10.5038/1827-806X.31.1.3 PASINI, G. (2009): A terminological matter: paragenesis, antigravitative ero­ sion or antigravitational erosion?– International Journal of Speleology, 38/2, 129–138. doi: 10.5038/1827-806X.38.2.4 PICCINI, L. (2011): Recent developments on morphometric analysis of karst caves.– Acta Carsologica, 40/1. doi: 10.3986/ac.v40i1.27 PLAN, L., FILIPPONI, M., BEHM, M., SEEBACHER, R. & JEUTTER, P. (2009): Constraints on alpine speleogenesis from cave morphology – a case study from the eastern Totes Gebirge (Northern Calcareous Alps, Austria).– Geomorphology, 106/1–2, 118–129. doi: 10.1016/j.geomorph. 2008.09.011 SHANOV, S. & KOSTOV, K. (2014): Dynamic tectonics and karst.– Springer, 123 p. doi: 10.1007/978-3-662-43992-0 SOKAČ, B., GRGASOVIĆ, T. & HUSINEC, A. (2014): Clypeina lagustensis n. sp., a new calcareous alga from the Lower Tithonian of the Lastovo Island (Croatia).– Geologia Croatica, 67/2, 75–86. doi: 10.4154/GC.2014.06 SURIĆ, M., LONČARIĆ, R. & LONČAR, N. (2010): Submerged caves of Cro­ atia: distribution, classification and origin.– Environmental Earth Scien­ ces, 61, 1473–1480. doi: 10.1007/s12665-010-0463-0 SZCZYGIEŁ, J., SOBCZYK, A., MACIEJEWSKI, M. & FERNANDEZ, O. (2022): Variscan vs. Alpine structural controls: Karstic proto­conduit development within Palaeozoic marble post­conditioned by Alpine fault­ ing (the Niedźwiedzia Cave, NE Bohemian Massif).– Geomorpho­ logy, 415, 108423. doi: 10.1016/j.geomorph.2022.108423 VLAHOVIĆ, I., TIŠLJAR, J., VELIĆ, I. & MATIČEC, D. (2002): The Karst Dinarides are composed of relics of a single Mesozoic platform: facts and consequences.– Geologia Croatica, 55/2, 171–183. VLAHOVIĆ, I., TIŠLJAR, J., VELIĆ, I. & MATIČEC, D. (2005): Evolution of the Adriatic carbonate platform: palaeogeography, main events and depositional dynamics.– Paleogeography Paleoclimatology Paleoeco­ logy, 220, 333–360. doi: 10.1016/j.palaeo.2005.01.011 WHITE, E. & WHITE, W. (2000): Breakdown morphology.– In: KIMCHOUK, A.B., FORD, D.C., PALMER, A.N. & DREYBRODT, W. (eds.): Speleo­ genesis: Evolution of karst aquifers. Huntsville, National Speleological Society, 2000, 427–429. ZACZEK-PEPLINSKA, J. & KOWALSKA, M. (2022): Evaluation of the LiDAR in the Apple iPhone 13 Pro for use in Inventory Works.– In: XXVII FIG Congress, 11–15. G eologia C roatica 241Lazaridis et al.: Deciphering rock surface origins in a karst cave: insights from the Rača Cave, Lastovo, Croatia Table S1. Analytic presentation of measured discontinuities in the dataset “limestone”. Structural element Measured surfaced Bedding 22 Joint set J1 19 Joint set J2 11 Table S2. Dataset of limestone discontinuities measured on the surface above the cave. planeType dip dipAzimuth strike Joint 70.1904 183.722 93.72202 Joint 71.92961 186.2168 96.21678 Joint 60.76754 192.3736 102.3736 Joint 62.6535 192.4151 102.4151 Joint 64.44534 193.5039 103.5039 Joint 77.69932 197.5304 107.5304 Joint 68.17551 198.4231 108.4231 Joint 74.88907 199.1452 109.1452 Joint 58.83289 199.8249 109.8249 Joint 63.27093 199.9023 109.9023 Joint 69.60873 200.4109 110.4109 Joint 85.67558 200.4482 110.4482 Joint 71.74333 201.4845 111.4845 Joint 57.07592 203.2287 113.2287 Joint 54.55397 204.0684 114.0684 Joint 66.88847 205.9646 115.9646 Joint 65.23213 216.743 126.743 Joint 87.45946 222.5092 132.5092 Joint 50.05435 230.8193 140.8193 Joint 72.88331 111.2763 201.2763 Joint 72.42332 292.5967 202.5967 Joint 72.5682 295.1761 205.1761 Joint 73.54114 295.1895 205.1895 Joint 84.91031 295.4134 205.4134 Joint 86.36198 296.3551 206.3551 Joint 86.05621 117.4916 207.4916 Joint 80.64629 302.1627 212.1627 Joint 77.13354 302.394 212.394 Joint 75.96823 123.3732 213.3732 Joint 87.56434 304.0756 214.0756 Bedding 33.92595 11.76361 281.7636 Bedding 18.18498 13.17101 283.171 Bedding 49.6176 22.13975 292.1398 Bedding 43.83539 33.53652 303.5365 Bedding 17.92305 35.95442 305.9544 Bedding 34.05956 37.33838 307.3384 Bedding 24.52202 39.90214 309.9021 Bedding 24.21395 40.07541 310.0754 Bedding 21.47653 42.40966 312.4097 Bedding 23.21844 46.46361 316.4636 Bedding 25.54895 46.49007 316.4901 Bedding 21.27693 46.68997 316.69 Bedding 26.13662 47.05231 317.0523 Bedding 21.49175 50.81533 320.8153 Bedding 24.11968 50.95646 320.9565 Bedding 23.2489 53.51107 323.5111 Bedding 15.40437 56.47585 326.4758 Bedding 21.90978 56.59077 326.5908 Bedding 20.95658 56.98454 326.9845 Bedding 20.81037 57.46151 327.4615 Bedding 15.07527 62.99094 332.9909 Bedding 14.88991 76.0735 346.0735 Table S3. Dataset of randomly measured wall and ceiling surfaces inside the cave. dip dipAzimuth strike 51.81017685 25.68552208 295.6855 38.88447952 340.7792358 250.7792 34.71315765 17.41595268 287.416 52.15966415 16.62786484 286.6279 47.99376678 353.7681274 263.7681 48.86156464 347.1168823 257.1169 60.07530594 13.40961266 283.4096 46.13370514 348.4091187 258.4091 43.0787735 2.44380283 272.4438 54.68507385 289.0726013 199.0726 50.70658493 38.46739197 308.4674 46.82404327 23.12981987 293.1298 45.12934875 32.50724792 302.5073 34.96255875 21.45202637 291.452 30.47458839 24.12602997 294.126 43.03783417 353.1479492 263.1479 43.27635574 354.4704285 264.4704 46.67576599 5.80060196 275.8006 79.74478912 359.5907593 269.5908 38.39340973 32.11775589 302.1178 43.78738022 1.73403418 271.734 47.98820877 22.04389 292.0439 53.92189026 58.53795242 328.538 15.10485268 74.88994598 344.89 55.31650925 274.9995422 184.9995 56.0885582 231.2857666 141.2858 34.16085052 182.554245 92.55425 11.69459152 57.89809036 327.8981 40.20506668 176.2858124 86.28581 86.48286438 341.5631409 251.5631 80.80680847 176.1418762 86.14188 80.18000793 175.7680359 85.76804 44.0525589 188.3782349 98.37823 16.46254921 192.9366455 102.9366 41.74983597 192.8010559 102.8011 37.04017639 202.0323181 112.0323 50.96066284 196.0754395 106.0754 51.62998581 197.9461517 107.9462 6.95496511 114.7550278 24.75503 35.15284348 197.7796936 107.7797 53.35619354 172.0287781 82.02878 63.40547562 203.5804443 113.5804 38.98209763 189.9543915 99.95439 36.01334763 189.4803619 99.48036 26.29405022 178.7600708 88.76007 47.84452438 184.2487488 94.24875 42.01301956 179.4407654 89.44077 51.16294861 179.5746765 89.57468 61.87059021 176.6659546 86.66595 55.70941544 169.532074 79.53207 18.06053925 103.279274 13.27927 30.76000023 168.9787598 78.97876 22.31475639 152.1667175 62.16672 12.49810219 85.66561127 355.6656 51.95710754 147.5499573 57.54996 17.23378563 41.6733284 311.6733 43.19434357 196.2207336 106.2207 Supplement 1. G eo lo gi a C ro at ic a 242 Geologia Croatica 77/3 64.37724304 182.5814514 92.58145 43.95110321 185.7926483 95.79265 16.25034142 10.27902889 280.279 48.64162827 180.4055176 90.40552 57.17521667 180.3766937 90.37669 50.62455368 128.3023834 38.30238 37.45290375 176.8956909 86.89569 52.34550476 169.4284363 79.42844 21.38539886 36.22367477 306.2237 62.66679764 163.6212921 73.62129 89 163.9104157 73.91042 65.28587341 176.6878815 86.68788 69.71627045 170.976471 80.97647 51.29399872 165.8537598 75.85376 14.28626442 29.36658859 299.3666 66.05008698 165.7699432 75.76994 56.39934158 118.6528854 28.65289 25.03895378 6.43108511 276.4311 70.78977966 95.69387054 5.693871 54.30705261 135.006073 45.00607 73.24403381 315.0262451 225.0262 85.31558228 301.187439 211.1874 41.76155853 124.7254257 34.72543 38.45618439 157.5586548 67.55865 51.37637329 99.48777771 9.487778 50.13928604 135.6249085 45.62491 61.85085297 144.1279602 54.12796 68.43937683 87.5002594 357.5002 43.7901001 62.85770798 332.8577 72.55857849 118.746788 28.74679 61.11566925 149.2992249 59.29922 51.21696472 136.0491486 46.04915 51.47016525 133.4876251 43.48763 79.19998932 266.4174194 176.4174 87.05994415 339.9796753 249.9797 83.25766754 318.3826294 228.3826 32.68767929 14.32559872 284.3256 22.32835007 7.10480309 277.1048 36.77183151 2.26389885 272.2639 46.52796555 29.3073349 299.3073 35.97826767 29.97133255 299.9713 37.30485153 22.42285919 292.4229 87.18093872 349.376648 259.3766 22.72686386 23.99195671 293.9919 45.86300278 14.26215935 284.2621 87.20011902 329.190033 239.19 83.81307983 335.3583984 245.3584 44.34930038 11.4164257 281.4164 20.08646393 30.0602951 300.0603 54.93972778 5.80375576 275.8038 51.82859802 36.19450378 306.1945 27.45674896 33.88423157 303.8842 11.77245617 43.2335968 313.2336 5.56982136 340.2375794 250.2376 53.21250534 23.3540554 293.3541 35.98528671 24.30040359 294.3004 42.97766876 38.8841629 308.8842 28.94192314 314.7141113 224.7141 19.21271324 243.3904572 153.3905 38.65695953 35.6414032 305.6414 73.00608826 125.1915512 35.19155 50.79981613 196.4559631 106.456 74.38387299 121.3219833 31.32198 28.61218643 23.44040871 293.4404 37.10426712 153.8766785 63.87668 44.60998154 151.1885681 61.18857 46.7310257 22.80583572 292.8058 27.00732613 121.293747 31.29375 38.61858749 124.3654327 34.36543 42.93967056 117.3129196 27.31292 56.49079895 123.5715027 33.5715 36.60788345 158.1975555 68.19756 35.08895874 158.9268341 68.92683 20.82408524 152.7225952 62.7226 31.75463486 18.40585899 288.4059 46.60958099 206.6821899 116.6822 38.52404785 16.68103218 286.681 80.98046112 124.2035065 34.20351 43.18328857 204.8309326 114.8309 14.6488924 36.44748306 306.4475 18.79786301 51.42290497 321.4229 37.2375946 26.81740189 296.8174 Table S3. Continued.