Geophysics: Postseismic mantle relaxation in the Central Nevada Seismic Belt

Science

Volumn 310, Issue 5753, 2005, Pages 1473-1476

  Gourmelen, Noel ^a   Amelung, Falk ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EARTHQUAKES; GEOLOGIC MODELS; INTERFEROMETRY; SEISMOLOGY;

GEODETIC STRAIN; HOLOCENE ACCELERATION; MANTLE RELAXATION; STRAIN INDICATORS;

GEOPHYSICS;

DEFORMATION; HOLOCENE; MANTLE PROCESS; POSTSEISMIC PROCESS;

ARTICLE; CENTRAL NEVADA SEISMIC BELT; DYNAMICS; EARTHQUAKE; GEOLOGY; GLOBAL POSITIONING SYSTEM; HOLOCENE; HYPOTHESIS; INTERFEROMETRY; MODEL; PRIORITY JOURNAL; UNITED STATES;

NEVADA; NORTH AMERICA; UNITED STATES;

EID: 28544448157     PISSN: 00368075     EISSN: 10959203     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1126/science.1119798     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. The variability of rate estimation from paleoseismologic study depends on the method used to measure the net slip vector (2-4). At the latitude of the GPS profile (at ∼39.3°N), we refer to the CNSB as the area including the Rainbow Mountain, Fourmile Flat, Fairview Peak, and Sand Springs faults (4). This corresponds to the area between -118.645° and -117.712° between the GPS sites B220 and C200 of (7).
2. J. W. Bell et al., Geol. Soc. Am. Bull. 111, 791 (1999).
3. S. J. Caskey, J. W. Bell, A. R. Ramelli, S. G. Wesnousky, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 94, 1255 (2004).
4. J. W. Bell, S. J. Caskey, A. Ramelli, L. Guerrieri, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 94, 1229 (2004).
5. W. Thatcher et al., Science 283, 1714 (1999).
6. J. L. Svarc, J. C. Savage, W. H. Prescott, A. R. Ramelli, J. Geophys. Res. 107, 10.1029/2001JB000579 (2002).
7. W. C. Hammond, W. Thatcher, J. Geophys. Res. 109, 10.1029/2003JB002746 (2004).
8. B. Wernicke, A. M. Friedrich, N. A. Niemi, R. A. Bennett, J. L. Davis, GSA Today 10, 1 (November 2000).
9. R. Bennett, B. P. Wernicke, N. A. Niemi, A. M. Friedrich, J. L. Davis, Tectonics 22, 10.1029/2001TC001355 (2003).
10. E. A. Hetland, B. H. Hager, J. Geophys. Res. 108, 10.1029/2002JB002257 (2003).
11. For SAR processing we used the commercial FOCUS processor, and for InSAR processing we used ROI_PAC V2.2.1 software (Jet Propulsion Laboratory). We did not reestimate the baseline between the satellite orbits with the use of topographic information because this may introduce second-order phase ramps. For InSAR studies over the Basin and Range, see (36).
12. The unit vector from the ground toward the radar is (0.384, -0.075, 0.92) in an [east, north, up] coordinate system for descending orbit.
13. LOS velocity is with respect to stable North America using the reference frame realization of (7).
14. G. Sella, personal communication.
15. F. F. Pollitz, J. Geophys. Res. 102, 17921 (1992).
16. w 6.8 to 7 (3, 21), predominantly a strike-slip earthquake. Modeling this earthquake showed that the postseismic deformation in LOS direction is more than an order of magnitude smaller than for the Dixie Valley earthquake, and thus it can be safely neglected.
17. R. E. Wallace, U. S. Geol. Surv. Prof. Pap. 7274-A (1984).
18. J. Caskey, S. G. Wesnousky, P. Zhang, D. B. Slemmons, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 86, 761 (1996).
19. K. M. Hodgkinson, R. S. Stein, G. Marshall, J. Geophys. Res. 101, 25437 (1996).
20. D. B. Slemmons, A. E. Jones, J. I. Gimlet, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 55, 537 (1965).
21. D. I. Doser, J. Geophys. Res. 91, 12572 (1986).
22. D. I. Doser, J. Geophys. Res. 93, 15001 (1988).
23. R. E. Abbott, J. N. Louis, S. J. Caskey, S. Pullammanappalllil, J. Geophys. Res. 106, 4169 (2001).
24. i = model, and N = number of data points.
25. R. D. Catchings, Geol. Soc. Am. Bull. 104, 117 (1992).
26. J. J. Lienkaemper, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 74, 2357 (1984).
27. F. F. Pollitz, G. Pettier, R. Burgmann, J. Geophys. Res. 105, 8035 (2000).
28. G. Kaufmann, F. Amelung, J. Geophys. Res. 105, 16341 (2000).
29. T. Nishimura, W. Thatcher, J. Geophys. Res. 108, 2389 (2003).
30. B. G. Bills, D. R. Currey, G. A. Marshall, J. Geophys. Res. 99, 22059 (1994).
31. J. E. Dixon, T. H. Dixon, D. Bell, R. Malservisi, Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 222, 451 (2004).
32. The postseismic model predicts at the latitude of the GPS profile (∼39.3°N) a 2-mm extension across the CNSB in a roughly east-west direction. Removing this from the GPS vectors of (7) leaves secular deformation of 0 to 2 mm/year, also roughly oriented east-west. Further north at the latitude of another GPS profile at 41°N latitude (37), the predicted postseismic deformation is less than 1 mm/year.
33. T. H. Dixon, S. Robaudo, J. Lee, M. C. Reheis, Tectonics 14, 755 (1995).
34. R. Malservisi, T. H. Dixon, P. C. La Femina, K. P. Furlong, Geophys. Res. Lett. 30, 10.1029/2003GL017408 (2003).
35. A. D. Frankel et al., U.S. Geol. Surv. Open-File Rep. 02-420 (2002).
36. F. Amelung, J. Bell, J. Geophys. Res. 108, 10.1029/2002JB001953 (2003).
37. W. C. Hammond, W. Thatcher, J. Geophys. Res. 110, 10.1029/2005JB003678 (2005).
38. We thank J. Bell, T. Dixon, P. LaFemina, G. Sella, and B. Hammond for discussions and comments, and W. Lengert for encouragement. SAR data were provided by the European Space Agency through a Category 1 project and the Western North America Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar Consortium (WinSAR). Supported by the National Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program, NASA Solid Earth Natural Hazard, the NSF EarthScope program, and CSTARS contribution number 3.