scholarly journals Uplift rate transients at subduction margins due to earthquake clustering

Tectonics ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 35 (10) ◽  
pp. 2370-2384 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vasiliki Mouslopoulou ◽  
Onno Oncken ◽  
Sebastian Hainzl ◽  
Andrew Nicol
Keyword(s):  
Uplift Rate ◽  
Earthquake Clustering

Bathymetry and uplift rate of the Gulf of Aqaba, Dead Sea Fault.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthieu Ribot ◽  
Yann Klinger ◽  
Edwige Pons-Branchu ◽  
Marthe Lefevre ◽  
Sigurjón Jónsson
Keyword(s):  
High Resolution ◽  
Tectonic Evolution ◽  
Active Faults ◽  
Major Change ◽  
Dead Sea ◽  
Fault System ◽  
Arabian Plate ◽  
Gulf Of Aqaba ◽  
Uplift Rate ◽  
The Dead

<p>Initially described in the late 50’s, the Dead Sea Fault system connects at its southern end to the Red Sea extensive system, through a succession of left-stepping faults. In this region, the left-lateral differential displacement of the Arabian plate with respect to the Sinai micro-plate along the Dead Sea fault results in the formation of a depression corresponding to the Gulf Aqaba. We acquired new bathymetric data in the areas of the Gulf of Aqaba and Strait of Tiran during two marine campaigns (June 2018, September 2019) in order to investigate the location of the active faults, which structure and control the morphology of the area. The high-resolution datasets (10-m posting) allow us to present a new fault map of the gulf and to discuss the seismic potential of the main active faults.</p><p>We also investigated the eastern margin of the Gulf of Aqaba and Tiran island to assess the vertical uplift rate. To do so, we computed high-resolution topographic data and we processed new series of U-Th analyses on corals from the uplifted marine terraces.</p><p>Combining our results with previous studies, we determined the local and the regional uplift in the area of the Gulf of Aqaba and Strait of Tiran.</p><p>Eventually, we discussed the tectonic evolution of the gulf since the last major change of the tectonic regime and we propose a revised tectonic evolution model of the area.</p><p> </p>

Formation and preservation of marine terraces during multiple sea level stands

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luca C Malatesta ◽  
Noah J. Finnegan ◽  
Kimberly Huppert ◽  
Emily Carreño
Keyword(s):  
Sea Level ◽  
Basic Assumption ◽  
Cumulative Exposure ◽  
Marine Terrace ◽  
Uplift Rate ◽  
Marine Terraces ◽  
Uplift Rates ◽  
Ca 50 ◽  
Wave Erosion ◽  
Mis 5E

<p>Marine terraces are a cornerstone for the study of paleo sea level and crustal deformation. Commonly, individual erosive marine terraces are attributed to unique sea level high-stands. This stems from early reasoning that marine platforms could only be significantly widened under moderate rates of sea level rise as at the beginning of an interglacial and preserved onshore by subsequent sea level fall. However, if marine terraces are only created during brief windows at the start of interglacials, this implies that terraces are unchanged over the vast majority of their evolution, despite an often complex submergence history during which waves are constantly acting on the coastline, regardless of the sea level stand.<span> </span></p><p>Here, we question the basic assumption that individual marine terraces are uniquely linked to distinct sea level high stands and highlight how a single marine terrace can be created By reoccupation of the same uplifting platform by successive sea level stands. We then identify the biases that such polygenetic terraces can introduce into relative sea level reconstructions and inferences of rock uplift rates from marine terrace chronostratigraphy.</p><p>Over time, a terrace’s cumulative exposure to wave erosion depends on the local rock uplift rate. Faster rock uplift rates lead to less frequent (fewer reoccupations) or even single episodes of wave erosion of an uplifting terrace and the generation and preservation of numerous terraces. Whereas slower rock uplift rates lead to repeated erosion of a smaller number of polygenetic terraces. The frequency and duration of terrace exposure to wave erosion at sea level depend strongly on rock uplift rate.</p><p>Certain rock uplift rates may therefore promote the generation and preservation of particular terraces (e.g. those eroded during recent interglacials). For example, under a rock uplift rate of ca. 1.2 mm/yr, Marine Isotope Stage (MIS) 5e (ca. 120 ka) would resubmerge a terrace eroded ca. 50 kyr earlier for tens of kyr during MIS 6d–e stages (ca. 190–170 ka) and expose it to further wave erosion at sea level. This reoccupation could accordingly promote the formation of a particularly wide or well planed terrace associated with MIS 5e with a greater chance of being preserved and identified. This effect is potentially illustrated by a global compilation of rock uplift rates derived from MIS 5e terraces. It shows an unusual abundance of marine terraces documenting uplift rates between 0.8 and 1.2 mm/yr, supporting the hypothesis that these uplift rates promote exposure of the same terrace to wave erosion during multiple sea level stands.</p><p>Hence, the elevations and widths of terraces eroded during specific sea level stands vary widely from site-to-site and depend on local rock uplift rate. Terraces do not necessarily correspond to an elevation close to that of the latest sea level high-stand but may reflect the elevation of an older, longer-lived, occupation. This leads to potential misidentification of terraces if each terrace in a sequence is assumed to form uniquely at successive interglacial high stands and to reflect their elevations.</p>

Present and postglacial rates of uplift for glaciated northern and eastern North America derived from postglacial uplift curves

1970 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 703-715 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. T. Andrews
Keyword(s):  
North America ◽  
Eastern North America ◽  
Hudson Bay ◽  
High Cell ◽  
Uplift Rate ◽  
Radiocarbon Dates ◽  
Marine Deposits ◽  
Maximum Value ◽  
Current Maximum ◽  
A Current

Average rates of postglacial uplift reach a maximum value of nearly 4 m 100 y−1 over southeastern Hudson Bay, and another high cell, with rates of about 2.5 m 100 y−1, lies between Bathurst Inlet and Southampton Island. Current rates of uplift are underestimated if exponential curves are fitted solely to dated raised marine deposits without considering the amount of future recovery. Rates of rebound are, instead, derived from A/t where A is uplift in the first 1000 y since deglaciation, and t is time since deglaciation. For the northwest margin of the former ice sheet coefficients of determination for rate of uplift, at specific times, as a function of distance are [Formula: see text]. Maps of rates of uplift for northern and eastern North America are presented for 8000 y B.P., 6000 y B.P. and the present day. They reveal the existence of three uplift centers and show that rates of uplift declined from a maximum of 10 to 12 m 100 y−1, immediately following deglaciation, to a current maximum of about 1.3 m 100 y−1. Agreement is satisfactory when calculated rates of uplift are compared with those derived from geological observations, radiocarbon dates, and from water-level records. A final map shows isochrones on the uplift rate of ~1 m 100 y−1. The rate dropped to this value about 10 000 y ago on the outer northwest and southeast coasts, whereas the value might not be reached for another 2000 y in southeastern Hudson Bay.

Variable uplift rate through time: Holocene coral reef and neotectonics of Lutao, eastern Taiwan

2018 ◽  
Vol 156 ◽  
pp. 201-206 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chuan-Chou Shen ◽  
Chung-Che Wu ◽  
Chang-Feng Dai ◽  
Shou-Yeh Gong
Keyword(s):  
Coral Reef ◽  
Uplift Rate

scholarly journals Landscape evolution models using the stream power incision model show unrealistic behavior when <i>m</i> ∕ <i>n</i> equals 0.5

2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 807-820 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey S. Kwang ◽  
Gary Parker
Keyword(s):  
Steady State ◽  
Landscape Evolution ◽  
Drainage Area ◽  
Uplift Rate ◽  
Stream Power ◽  
River Incision ◽  
Vertical Incision ◽  
Small Scales ◽  
Insight Into

Abstract. Landscape evolution models often utilize the stream power incision model to simulate river incision: E = KAmSn, where E is the vertical incision rate, K is the erodibility constant, A is the upstream drainage area, S is the channel gradient, and m and n are exponents. This simple but useful law has been employed with an imposed rock uplift rate to gain insight into steady-state landscapes. The most common choice of exponents satisfies m ∕ n = 0.5. Yet all models have limitations. Here, we show that when hillslope diffusion (which operates only on small scales) is neglected, the choice m ∕ n = 0.5 yields a curiously unrealistic result: the predicted landscape is invariant to horizontal stretching. That is, the steady-state landscape for a 10 km2 horizontal domain can be stretched so that it is identical to the corresponding landscape for a 1000 km2 domain.

Thermal and kinetic constraints on the tectonic applications of thermobarometry

1991 ◽  
Vol 55 (378) ◽  
pp. 57-69 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter D. Crowley
Keyword(s):  
Thermal Structure ◽  
Closure Temperature ◽  
Normal Faults ◽  
Metamorphic Petrology ◽  
Uplift Rate ◽  
Garnet Porphyroblasts ◽  
One Dimensional ◽  
Garnet Composition ◽  
Garnet Diffusion ◽  
Equilibration Model

AbstractMetamorphic petrology, and in particular quantitative thermobarometry, offer the possibility of identifying faults in metamorphic terrains by the metamorphic and/or thermobarometric breaks that occur across them. Furthermore, the sense of the thermobarometric break (e.g. warmer, deeper rocks on top of colder, shallower ones) and its magnitude could be useful tools for determining the sense and magnitude of the fault. The sensitivity of thermobarometry to tectonic variables such as fault throw and uplift rate, has been tested by a series of one-dimensional numerical re-equilibration models for both thrust and normal faults. In each of these models, the post-tectonic re-equilibration of a model garnet-biotite geothermometer is simulated by coupling one-dimensional numerical thermal and garnet diffusion models. After cooling and uplift, a thermobarometric temperature was calculated by using a near-rim garnet composition (5–10 µm from the rim) calculated by the re-equilibration model and biotite from the model matrix. The models varied the thermal structure of the model orogen prior to faulting, the depth of the fault, the structural throw of the fault, and the uplift rate following faulting.All models produced zoned garnet porphyroblasts that recorded P-T conditions that were different from those at the time of fault motion. Most of the models produced thermobarometric breaks that were in the same sense as the temperature break at the time of fault motion. Normal faults produced a normal thermobarometric gradient with higher temperatures recorded below the fault than above it. Many, but not all of the thrust models produced a thermobarometric inversion near the fault, with higher temperatures locally recorded above the fault than below it. However, the magnitude of thermobarometric break correlated poorly with the fault throw. Most models developed thermobarometric breaks that were much smaller than the breaks that existed at the time of fault motion. The size of the thermobarometric break was commonly of the same magnitude as would be generated from microprobe analytical error. The models suggest that for metamorphic rocks whose thermal peak does not exceed a narrowly defined closure temperature, thermobarometry faithfully recorded the P-T conditions of the metamorphic peak. The closure temperature increases slightly with increasing uplift rate, but overall is rather insensitive to the uplift rate or other tectonic variables. For rocks whose thermal peaks is above the closure temperature, however, the model thermobarometer recorded a temperature that was very close to the closure temperature.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document