2022
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-16842-8
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A new chronology for tsunami deposits prior to the 1700 CE Cascadia earthquake from Vancouver Island, Canada

Abstract: Coastal deposits at Tofino, Ucluelet, and Port Alberni in Vancouver Island along the Cascadia subduction zone were re-examined to improve the earthquake history of the southwest coast of Canada. We found sand sheets interbedded within peat and mud, suggesting deposition by strong flows in a low-energy environment. Based on limiting maximum and minimum ages derived from plant macrofossils, the age of one of the sand sheets below the tsunami deposits of the great Cascadia earthquake in 1700 CE was estimated to b… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3
1

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 65 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The central Hikurangi margin is an end member in terms of the range and complexity of earthquake sources at a subduction zone. Yet, we recommend that the same level of detail is required for interpreting paleoseismic evidence at other plate boundaries where the possible contribution of UPFs is often not explicitly addressed (Nelson et al, 2021;Tanigawa et al, 2022). Normally, a plate interface rupture source is justified by (i) similarity between the paleo-evidence and historic examples of subduction earthquakes (Cisternas et al, 2005;Garrett et al, 2013;Sieh et al, 2015) and/or (ii) along-strike correlations of co-temporal evidence over large areas that could only be satisfied by rupture of the interface (Goldfinger et al, 2003;Ishizawa et al, 2022).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The central Hikurangi margin is an end member in terms of the range and complexity of earthquake sources at a subduction zone. Yet, we recommend that the same level of detail is required for interpreting paleoseismic evidence at other plate boundaries where the possible contribution of UPFs is often not explicitly addressed (Nelson et al, 2021;Tanigawa et al, 2022). Normally, a plate interface rupture source is justified by (i) similarity between the paleo-evidence and historic examples of subduction earthquakes (Cisternas et al, 2005;Garrett et al, 2013;Sieh et al, 2015) and/or (ii) along-strike correlations of co-temporal evidence over large areas that could only be satisfied by rupture of the interface (Goldfinger et al, 2003;Ishizawa et al, 2022).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%