4.7 Article

Holocene earthquake history and slip rate of the southern Teton fault, Wyoming, USA

期刊

GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA BULLETIN
卷 132, 期 7-8, 页码 1566-1586

出版社

GEOLOGICAL SOC AMER, INC
DOI: 10.1130/B35363.1

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The 72-km-long Teton normal fault bounds the eastern base of the Teton Range in northwestern Wyoming, USA. Although geomorphic surfaces along the fault record latest Pleistocene to Holocene fault movement, the postglacial earthquake history of the fault has remained enigmatic. We excavated a paleoseismic trench at the Buffalo Bowl site along the southernmost part of the fault to determine its Holocene rupture history and slip rate. At the site, similar to 6.3 m of displacement postdates an early Holocene (ca. 10.5 ka) alluvial-fan surface. We document evidence of three surface-faulting earthquakes based on packages of scarp-derived colluvium that postdate the alluvial-fan units. Bayesian modeling of radiocarbon and luminescence ages yields earthquake times of ca. 9.9 ka, ca. 7.1 ka, and ca. 4.6 ka, forming the longest, most complete paleoseismic record of the Teton fault. We integrate these data with a displaced deglacial surface 4 km NE at Granite Canyon to calculate a postglacial to mid-Holocene (14.4-4.6 ka) slip rate of similar to 1.1 mm/yr. Our analysis also suggests that the postglacial to early Holocene (14.4-9.9 ka) slip rate exceeds the Holocene (9.9-4.6 ka) rate by a factor of similar to 2 (maximum of 3); however, a uniform rate for the fault is possible considering the 95% slip-rate errors. The similar to 5 k.y. elapsed time since the last rupture of the southernmost Teton fault implies a current slip deficit of similar to 4-5 m, which is possibly explained by spatially/temporally incomplete paleoseismic data, irregular earthquake recurrence, and/or variable per-event displacement. Our study emphasizes the importance of minimizing slip-rate uncertainties by integrating paleoseismic and geomorphic data sets and capturing multiple earthquake cycles.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据