Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Interpretation of surface fault scarps and palaeoseismic trenches is a key component of estimating fault slip rates, earthquake recurrence rates and maximum magnitudes for hazard assessments. Often these analyses rely on the assumption that successive earthquakes all breached the surface and that the ruptures are recorded topographically, or by the deposits exposed in a trench. The Mw7.2 1992 Suusamyr earthquake, Kyrgyzstan, is an apparently problematic case for such analyses because its ruptures show significant displacement but are only mapped as having broken the surface along small, disparate portions of the fault. Here we present the results of surveys conducted along the Suusamyr Fault to establish whether that is the case. Two sets of ruptures were identified following the earthquake. They are unusually short for their displacement and are separated by a 25 km gap. Using satellite imagery, high-resolution digital elevation models and palaeoseismic trenching we first reassess the distribution of the 1992 ruptures and then reconstruct the Holocene earthquake record to establish the extent to which the 1992 earthquake is representative of the rupture behaviour of this fault. We find evidence for at least two prehistoric surface rupturing earthquakes in the Holocene: one ∼3 ka and one >8 ka that, along with the modern event, gives recurrence intervals of ∼3 and ∼5 kyr. Within spatial gaps between segments of the 1992 ruptures there are clear prehistoric surface ruptures and the ruptures in each prehistoric earthquake were discontinuous. We conclude that there is significant variability in the surface rupture pattern of successive earthquakes on the Suusamyr Fault, with implications for the completeness of palaeoseismic records obtained from thrust scarps.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ainscoe et al. (2018) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: