4.7 Article

Space Geodetic Evidence of Basement-Involved Thick-Skinned Orogeny and Fault Frictional Heterogeneity of the Papuan Fold Belt, Papua New Guinea

期刊

出版社

AMER GEOPHYSICAL UNION
DOI: 10.1029/2022JB024227

关键词

coseismic and postseismic deformation; seismic and aseismic slip; thick-skinned orogeny; flat-ramp structure; fault heterogeneity

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [42174023]
  2. Innovation Foundation for Postgraduate of Central South University [2020zzts181]
  3. Hunan Provincial Innovation Foundation for Postgraduate [CX20200344]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigates the surface deformation after the 2018 Papua New Guinea earthquake and deduces fault slip models using remote sensing data. The results reveal that the earthquake reactivated fault structures and most of the slip occurred between 5 and 25 km. Additionally, three separated postseismic slip zones were identified.
Knowledge of the fault kinematics underlying the Papuan Fold Belt is important for better understanding the evolution of the orogen, but the active and long-term tectonics of the region remain widely debated. The 2018 M-w 7.5 Papua New Guinea earthquake provides an unprecedented opportunity to probe the active fault structure deep in the Papuan Fold Belt. Here, we use Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar data from four ALOS-2 acquisitions to study coseismic and postseismic ground deformation and invert for fault slip models. The results show that the oblique reverse earthquake reactivated a flat-ramp structure and ruptured through most of the crust with the majority of coseismic slip confined between 5 and 25 km. Additionally, we found three separated postseismic slip zones with variable spatial complementarity between coseismic and postseismic slip, dip-slip/strike-slip ratio, and seismic/aseismic budget at three separated postseismic slip zones. Our results demonstrate that thick-skinned tectonics dominate the current state of Papua New Guinea frontal orogen evolution.

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