4.7 Article

The 2018 Mw 7.9 Offshore Kodiak, Alaska, Earthquake: An Unusual Outer Rise Strike-Slip Earthquake

Journal

Publisher

AMER GEOPHYSICAL UNION
DOI: 10.1029/2019JB019267

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Science Foundation
  2. National Aeronautics and Space Administration under NSF [EAR-1724794]
  3. China Earthquake Administration [2019CSES0109]
  4. National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) [41874053, 41874094, 41731072, 41574057]
  5. B-type Strategic Priority Program of the Chinese Academy of Sciences
  6. DREAM projects of MOST, China [2016YFC0600101]
  7. China University of Geosciences (Wuhan) [CUGCJ1707]
  8. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities, China University of Geosciences (Wuhan) [CUGCJ1707, 162301132637]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The rupture process of the 2018 M-w 7.9 offshore Kodiak (Alaska) earthquake is still in hot dispute because of a lack of offshore observations, thus causing difficulties for understanding seismogenic tectonics and tsunami hazards. In this study, teleseismic body waves, high-rate GPS, seismic waves preceding tsunami waves, static GPS, and tsunami data are jointly used to resolve the faulting geometry and coseismic slip distribution of the offshore Kodiak earthquake. Tests of a series of finite fault rupture models illustrate that an optimal five-fault model can reconcile all available data sets well. The results reveal that the asperity on each fault segment is located near the hypocenter, with peak slip of similar to 7.8 m. The aftershock loci appear to be complementary to the mainshock slips, demonstrating the velocity-strengthening regions that predominantly slip aseismically. Based on a tectonic stress field analysis, we propose that the 2018 Kodiak earthquake is attributed to a combination of enhanced tensional stress following the 1964 M-w 9.2 Alaska earthquake and compressional stress produced by the collision of the Yakutat terrane with North America.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available