2006
DOI: 10.1016/j.geomorph.2005.08.008
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evolution of the Bonneville shoreline scarp in west-central Utah: Comparison of scarp-analysis methods and implications for the diffusion model of hillslope evolution

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
56
0

Year Published

2007
2007
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 45 publications
(56 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
0
56
0
Order By: Relevance
“…It accounts for convex-upward hillslope profi les, and has been tested and calibrated using cosmogenic nuclide mass-balance measurements (McKean et al, 1993;Heimsath et al, 1997Heimsath et al, , 2001Heimsath et al, , 2005Small et al, 1999). The creep function has been widely applied to scarp degradation, including fault scarps and fl uvial, marine, and lake-shore terraces (Colman and Watson, 1983;Hanks et al, 1984;Andrews and Hanks, 1985;Andrews and Bucknam, 1987;Avouac, 1993;Avouac and Peltzer, 1993;Rosenbloom and Anderson, 1994;Arrowsmith and Rhodes, 1994;Enzel et al, 1996;Arrowsmith et al, 1998;Niviere et al, 1998;Hanks, 2000;Font et al, 2002;Phillips et al, 2003;Hsu and Pelletier, 2004;Kokkalas and Koukouvelas, 2005;Nash and Beaujon, 2006;Pelletier et al, 2006). Estimates of the rate coeffi cient K c have been obtained from a variety of approaches (see compilation by Martin and Church, 1997).…”
Section: Geomorphic Transport Functions For Hillslope Processesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It accounts for convex-upward hillslope profi les, and has been tested and calibrated using cosmogenic nuclide mass-balance measurements (McKean et al, 1993;Heimsath et al, 1997Heimsath et al, , 2001Heimsath et al, , 2005Small et al, 1999). The creep function has been widely applied to scarp degradation, including fault scarps and fl uvial, marine, and lake-shore terraces (Colman and Watson, 1983;Hanks et al, 1984;Andrews and Hanks, 1985;Andrews and Bucknam, 1987;Avouac, 1993;Avouac and Peltzer, 1993;Rosenbloom and Anderson, 1994;Arrowsmith and Rhodes, 1994;Enzel et al, 1996;Arrowsmith et al, 1998;Niviere et al, 1998;Hanks, 2000;Font et al, 2002;Phillips et al, 2003;Hsu and Pelletier, 2004;Kokkalas and Koukouvelas, 2005;Nash and Beaujon, 2006;Pelletier et al, 2006). Estimates of the rate coeffi cient K c have been obtained from a variety of approaches (see compilation by Martin and Church, 1997).…”
Section: Geomorphic Transport Functions For Hillslope Processesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The distinction between steady-state and non-steady-state landforms is signifi cant because topographic steady state is diffi cult to verify at the hillslope scale and because certain non-steady-state conditions can predict the same hillslope morphologies in the linear diffusion model as occur in the nonlinear model under the assumption of steady state ( Jimenez-Hornero et al, 2005). Studies of fault and pluvial shoreline scarps have successfully used Equation 1 for many years, but linearly slope-dependent transport models have also been successful in characterizing scarp evolution (e.g., Pelletier et al, 2006), largely because the local angle of stability in fault and shoreline scarps is not precisely known.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…By fitting model profiles to topographic profiles, we estimated values for κ t and best fit vertical fault offset magnitude Δ h following methods similar to those employed by Arrowsmith et al [1998] and the full‐scarp methods of Pelletier et al [2006]. In our analyses we assumed that the scarps evolved to 35° rapidly after offset began, and that an originally horizontal surface was offset by faulting.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%