Latest Pleistocene and Holocene slip rates on the Lone Mountain fault: Evidence for accelerating slip in the Silver Peak-Lone Mountain extensional complex

Lifton, Zachery M.; Frankel, Kurt L.; Newman, A. V.

doi:10.1002/2013tc003512

Cited by 12 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 56 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…GPS: Lifton et al (2013) CVF: Foy et al (2012) EPF: Reheis & Sawyer (1997) FLVF: Frankel et al (2011) LMF: Lifton et al (2015) RVF: Berry (1997) WMFZ (dextral): Lifton (2013) WMFZ (dextral): Kirby et al (2006) WMFZ (dextral) model prediction: this study ( Fig. 13b) WMFZ (normal): Kirby et al (2006) VT: Pinter (1995; this study) Geologic sum v1 Geologic sum v2 Geologic sum v3…”

Section: Keymentioning

confidence: 71%

“…The sum of geologic fault slip rates reported in Lifton et al (2013) does not include several Notes: S-magnitude of dextral slip; α-post rotation clockwise angle between the rotating block and shear zone boundary; Wn-width of the shear zone after rotation; ϕ-initial clockwise angle between the rotating block and shear zone boundary; ω-clockwise rotation angle = α-ϕ; Pn-width of the rotating block after rotation; Rmagnitude of sinistral slip. geologic fault slip rates, including the approximately EW-extension across the Volcanic Tableland (Pinter, 1995; this study) and the Round Valley normal fault (Berry, 1997), NW-SE extension across the Lone Mountain fault (Lifton et al, 2015) and the faster dextral fault slip rates along the White Mountain fault zone (Lifton, 2013). These new or previously unconsidered slip rates may account for the apparent discrepancy between geologic and geodetic slip rates (e.g., Frankel et al, 2011;Nagorsen-Rinke et al, 2013).…”

Section: Geologic Versus Geodetic Ratesmentioning

confidence: 98%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Dextral, normal, and sinistral faulting across the eastern California shear zone–Mina deflection transition, California-Nevada, USA

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Strike-slip faults commonly include extensional and contractional bends and stepovers, whereas rotational stepovers are less common. The Volcanic Tableland, Black Mountain, and River Spring areas (California and Nevada, USA) (hereafter referred to as the VBR region) straddle the transition from the dominantly NW-striking dextral faults that define the northwestern part of the eastern California shear zone into a rotational stepover characterized by dominantly NE-striking sinistral faults that define the southwestern Mina deflection. New detailed geologic mapping, structural studies, and 40Ar/39Ar geochronology across the VBR region allow us to calculate Pliocene to Pleistocene fault slip rates and test predictions for the kinematics of fault slip transfer into this rotational stepover. In the VBR, Mesozoic basement is nonconformably overlain by a Miocene sequence of rhyolite, dacite, and andesite volcanic rocks that yield 40Ar/39Ar ages between 22.878 ± 0.051 Ma and 11.399 ± 0.041 Ma. Miocene rocks are unconformably overlain by an extensive sequence of Pliocene basalt and andesite lava flows and cinder cones that yield 40Ar/39Ar ages between 3.606 ± 0.060 Ma and 2.996 ± 0.027 Ma. The Pliocene sequence is, in turn, unconformably overlain by Quaternary tuffs and sedimentary rocks. This sequence of rocks is cut by NS- to NW-striking normal faults across the Volcanic Tableland that transition northward into NS-striking normal faults across the Black Mountain area and that, in turn, transition northward into NW-striking dextral and NE-striking sinistral faults in the River Spring area. A range of geologic markers were used to measure offset across the faults in the VBR, and combined with the age of the markers, yield minimum ∼EW-extension rates of ∼0.5 mm/yr across the Volcanic Tableland and Black Mountain regions, and minimum NW-dextral slip and NE-sinistral slip rates of ∼0.7 and ∼0.3 mm/yr, respectively, across the River Spring region. In the River Spring area, our preferred minimum dextral slip and sinistral slip rates are 0.8–0.9 mm/yr and 0.7–0.9 mm/yr, respectively. We propose three kinematic fault slip models, two irrotational and one rotational, whereby the VBR region transfers a portion of dextral Owens Valley fault slip northwestward into the Mina deflection. In irrotational model 1, Owens Valley fault slip is partitioned into two components, one northeastward onto the White Mountain fault zone and one northwestward into the Volcanic Tableland. Slip from the two zones is then transferred northward into the southwestern Mina deflection. In irrotational model 2, Owens Valley fault slip is partitioned into three components, with the third component partitioned west-northwest onto the Sierra Nevada frontal fault zone. In the rotational model, predicted sinistral slip rates across the southwestern Mina deflection are at least 115% greater than our observed minimum slip rates, implying our minimum observed rates underestimate true sinistral slip rates. A comparison of summed geologic fault slip rates, parallel to motion of the Sierra Nevada block relative to the central Great Basin, from the Sierra Nevada northeastward across the VBR region and into western Nevada are the same as geodetic rates, if our assumptions about the geologic slip rate across the dextral White Mountain fault zone is correct.

show abstract

Section: Keymentioning

confidence: 71%

Section: Geologic Versus Geodetic Ratesmentioning

confidence: 98%

Dextral, normal, and sinistral faulting across the eastern California shear zone–Mina deflection transition, California-Nevada, USA

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The other distributions that are in common usage are timedependent distributions, meaning that the probability of an event occurring at any time since the previous event changes with the elapsed time since that event. This class of distributions includes the lognormal, Weibull, and Brownian passage-time (Matthews et al, 2002) distributions. Though these distributions differ in notable ways, particularly in the properties of the right tails at values greater than several times the mean (Davis et al, 1989;Matthews et al, 2002), they share a general shape and, given suitable parameters, generated sample sets of small size may not be substantively different.…”

Section: Earthquake Recurrence Interval Distributionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This class of distributions includes the lognormal, Weibull, and Brownian passage-time (Matthews et al, 2002) distributions. Though these distributions differ in notable ways, particularly in the properties of the right tails at values greater than several times the mean (Davis et al, 1989;Matthews et al, 2002), they share a general shape and, given suitable parameters, generated sample sets of small size may not be substantively different. In fact, the distributions are similar enough that it is difficult, if not impossible, to discriminate between them given realistic seismologic and paleoseismologic datasets (Matthews et al, 2002;Ogata, 1999).…”

Section: Earthquake Recurrence Interval Distributionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Furthermore, the magnitude of displacement is independent of the corresponding recurrence interval. The framework of elastic rebound theory in its most basic form should predict some correspondence between inter-event (loading) duration and slip magnitude, and this is included (implicitly or explicitly) in oscillator models incorporating complete stress or strain release in each earthquake (e.g., Matthews et al, 2002;DiCaprio et al, 2008) or in any model where coseismic friction drops to zero, as this is functionally equivalent (because f a = τ a s /τ a n , where f a , τ a s , and τ a n are, respectively, friction at rupture arrest, shear stress at rupture arrest, and effective normal stress at rupture arrest; zero friction implies zero shear stress, or complete stress drop). Given a reasonably constant loading rate, complete shear stress or strain release implies some proportionality between the loading time and displacement.…”

Section: Stochastic Displacement Historiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The impact of earthquake cycle variability on neotectonic and paleoseismic slip rate estimates

Styron

2019

Solid Earth

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Because of the natural (aleatoric) variability in earthquake recurrence intervals and coseismic displacements on a fault, cumulative slip on a fault does not increase linearly or perfectly step-wise with time; instead, some amount of variability in shorter-term slip rates results. Though this variability could greatly affect the accuracy of neotectonic (i.e., late Quaternary) and paleoseismic slip rate estimates, these effects have not been quantified. In this study, idealized faults with four different, representative, earthquake recurrence distributions are created with equal mean recurrence intervals (1000 years) and coseismic slip distributions, and the variability in slip rate estimates over 500- to 100 000-year measurement windows is calculated for all faults through Monte Carlo simulations. Slip rates are calculated as net offset divided by elapsed time, as in a typical neotectonic study. The recurrence distributions used are quasi-periodic, unclustered and clustered lognormal distributions, and an unclustered exponential distribution. The results demonstrate that the most important parameter is the coefficient of variation (CV = standard deviation ∕ mean) of the recurrence distributions rather than the shape of the distribution itself. Slip rate variability over short timescales (< 5000 years or 5 mean earthquake cycles) is quite high, varying by a factor of 3 or more from the mean, but decreases with time and is close to stable after ∼40 000 years (40 mean earthquake cycles). This variability is higher for recurrence distributions with a higher CV. The natural variability in the slip rate estimates compared to the true value is then used to estimate the epistemic uncertainty in a single slip rate measurement (as one would make in a geological study) in the absence of any measurement uncertainty. This epistemic uncertainty is very high (a factor of 2 or more) for measurement windows of a few mean earthquake cycles (as in a paleoseismic slip rate estimate), but decreases rapidly to a factor of 1–2 with > 5 mean earthquake cycles (as in a neotectonic slip rate study). These uncertainties are independent of, and should be propagated with, uncertainties in fault displacement and geochronologic measurements used to estimate slip rates. They may then aid in the comparison of slip rates from different methods or the evaluation of potential slip rate changes over time.

show abstract

36Cl exposure dating of glacial features to constrain the slip rate along the Mt. Vettore Fault (Central Apennines, Italy)

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Latest Pleistocene and Holocene slip rates on the Lone Mountain fault: Evidence for accelerating slip in the Silver Peak-Lone Mountain extensional complex

Cited by 12 publications

References 56 publications

Dextral, normal, and sinistral faulting across the eastern California shear zone–Mina deflection transition, California-Nevada, USA

Dextral, normal, and sinistral faulting across the eastern California shear zone–Mina deflection transition, California-Nevada, USA

The impact of earthquake cycle variability on neotectonic and paleoseismic slip rate estimates

36Cl exposure dating of glacial features to constrain the slip rate along the Mt. Vettore Fault (Central Apennines, Italy)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About