Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
On February 6, 2023, a devastating earthquake with a moment magnitude of MW7.8 struck the town of Pazarcik in south-central Türkiye, followed by another powerful earthquake with a moment magnitude of MW7.6 that struck the nearby city of Elbistan 9 h later. To study the characteristics of surface deformation caused by this event and the influence of fault rupture, this study calculated the static coseismic deformation of 56 stations and dynamic displacement waveforms of 15 stations using data from the Turkish national fixed global navigation satellite system (GNSS) network. A maximum static coseismic displacement of 0.38 m for the MW7.8 Kahramanmaras earthquake was observed at station ANTE, 36 km from the epicenter, and a maximum dynamic coseismic displacement of 4.4 m for the MW7.6 Elbistan earthquake was observed at station EKZ1, 5 km from the epicenter. The rupture-slip distributions of the two earthquakes were inverted using GNSS coseismic deformation as a constraint. The results showed that the Kahramanmaras earthquake rupture segment was distinct and exposed on the ground, resulting in significant rupture slip along the Amanos and Pazarcik fault segments of the East Anatolian Fault. The maximum slip in the Pazarcik fault segment was 10.7 m, and rupture occurred at depths of 0–15 km. In the Cardak fault region, the Elbistan earthquake caused significant ruptures at depths of 0–12 km, with the largest amount of slip reaching 11.6 m. The Coulomb stress change caused by the Kahramanmaras earthquake rupture along the Cardak fault segment was approximately 2 bars, and the area of increased Coulomb stress corresponded to the subsequent rupture region of the MW7.6 earthquake. Thus, it is likely that the MW7.8 earthquake triggered or promoted the MW7.6 earthquake. Based on the cumulative stress impact of the MW7.8 and MW7.6 events, the southwestern segment of the East Anatolian Fault, specifically the Amanos fault segment, experienced a Coulomb rupture stress change exceeding 2 bars, warranting further attention to assess its future seismic hazard risk.
Li et al. (Fri,) studied this question.