2006
DOI: 10.1016/j.jog.2006.01.006
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Current motion and short-term deformations in the Suez–Sinai area from GPS observations

Abstract: SUMMARYWe analyze data from four GPS campaigns carried out between 1997 and 2002 on a network of 11 sites in the Suez-Sinai, the area of collision between the African and the Arabian plates. This is the key area to understand how and in which way Sinai behaves like a sub-plate of the African plate and the role played between seismic and geodetic (long term) deformation release.Our analysis shows that, on average, the Suez-Sinai area motion (in terms of ITRF00 velocities) matches African plate motion (NNR-NUVEL… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2008
2008
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 42 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Because of the lack of data constraining the motion of the Sinai subplate until very recently, regional kinematic models usually ignored the Gulf of Suez and only considered the relative motion between Arabia and Nubia. As a direct consequence the motion along the DST has usually been overestimated by at least 1 mm/a [ Garfunkel and Bartov , 1977; Bosworth and Taviani , 1996; Mahmoud et al , 2005; Riguzzi et al , 2006]. Typically, determination of slip rate based on the analyses of 45 spreading rates from the Red Sea since 3.2 Ma, but ignoring a component of opening across the Gulf of Suez, led to the value of 8.3 ± 2.9 mm/a on the southern DST since the Pliocene [ Chu and Gordon , 1998], which barely overlaps values discussed above, based on direct measurements along the southern DST.…”
Section: Discussion Of the Gps Results With Previous Slip Rate Estimatesmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…Because of the lack of data constraining the motion of the Sinai subplate until very recently, regional kinematic models usually ignored the Gulf of Suez and only considered the relative motion between Arabia and Nubia. As a direct consequence the motion along the DST has usually been overestimated by at least 1 mm/a [ Garfunkel and Bartov , 1977; Bosworth and Taviani , 1996; Mahmoud et al , 2005; Riguzzi et al , 2006]. Typically, determination of slip rate based on the analyses of 45 spreading rates from the Red Sea since 3.2 Ma, but ignoring a component of opening across the Gulf of Suez, led to the value of 8.3 ± 2.9 mm/a on the southern DST since the Pliocene [ Chu and Gordon , 1998], which barely overlaps values discussed above, based on direct measurements along the southern DST.…”
Section: Discussion Of the Gps Results With Previous Slip Rate Estimatesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In contrast, Tapponnier and Armijo [1985] argue for right‐lateral motion based on probably still active E‐W thrusts and folds branching at the northwestern tip of the gulf and N‐S normal fault in western Sinai (features mapped on Figure 9). Recent GPS studies [ Mahmoud et al , 2005; Reilinger et al , 2006; Riguzzi et al , 2006], although on the basis of a similar data set, do not agree with this interpretation. Both Mahmoud et al [2005] and Reilinger et al [2006] adjust local and regional data with an elastic block model and obtain 1–1.5 mm/a of extension and 2 mm/a of left‐lateral slip.…”
Section: Arabia‐sinai‐nubia Relative Motionmentioning
confidence: 86%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…While some studies speculate that they could be caused by interseismic elastic strain accumulation along the faults bounding the pull-apart basins in the Gulf of Aqaba (e.g., Pietrantonio et al 2016), others point out that they could be due to postseismic motions induced by the 1995 Nuweiba Earthquake (e.g., Piersanti et al 2001;Pe'eri et al 2002;Riguzzi et al 2006;Gomez et al 2020).…”
Section: Faultmentioning
confidence: 99%