4.5 Review

Maximum earthquake magnitudes along different sections of the North Anatolian fault zone

期刊

TECTONOPHYSICS
卷 674, 期 -, 页码 147-165

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.tecto.2016.02.028

关键词

Seismology; Historical seismicity; Continental transform faults; Fault-zone characteristics; North Anatolian fault zone; Maximum earthquake magnitude

资金

  1. Helmholtz Association
  2. Helmholtz Postdoc Programme

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Constraining the maximum likely magnitude of future earthquakes on continental transform faults has fundamental consequences for the expected seismic hazard. Since the recurrence time for those earthquakes is typically longer than a century, such estimates rely primarily on well-documented historical earthquake catalogs, when available. Here we discuss the maximum observed earthquake magnitudes along different sections of the North Anatolian Fault Zone (NAFZ) in relation to the age of the fault activity, cumulative offset, slip rate and maximum length of coherent fault segments. The findings are based on a newly compiled catalog of historical earthquakes in the region, using the extensive literary sources that exist owing to the long civilization record. We find that the largest M7.8-8.0 earthquakes are exclusively observed along the older eastern part of the NAFZ that also has longer coherent fault segments. In contrast the maximum observed events on the younger western part where the fault branches into two or more strands are smaller. No first-order relations between maximum magnitudes and fault offset or slip rates are found. The results suggest that the maximum expected earthquake magnitude in the densely populated Marmara-Istanbul region would probably not exceed M7.5. The findings are consistent with available knowledge for the San Andreas Fault and Dead Sea Transform, and can help in estimating hazard potential associated with different sections of large transform faults. (C) 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.

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

4.5
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