1988
DOI: 10.1029/jb093ib05p04731
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Deformation in the Yakataga Seismic Gap, southern Alaska, 1980–1986

Abstract: A 60‐by‐40‐km trilateration network in the Yakataga seismic gap was surveyed in 1980, 1982, 1984, and 1986 with precise electro‐optical distance‐measuring equipment to measure strain accumulation. The overall deformation is roughly approximated by a 0.24±0.03 µstrain/yr N32°W±2.4° uniaxial contraction that is uniform in time. However, the spatial distribution of deformation shows some concentration of convergence in the neighborhood of the Chugach‐St. Elias fault and of right‐lateral shear across the Contact f… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
14
0

Year Published

1991
1991
2013
2013

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 25 publications
(15 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
1
14
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Farther east, our model shows an average of 5.4 ± 1.8 mm/yr left‐lateral motion with 13.8 ± 6.9 mm/yr of reverse slip, although this fault segment is only partially coupled. Our prediction of left‐lateral shear along the Malaspina fault agrees with the results of Savage and Lisowksi [], who found left‐lateral shear across a zone roughly aligned with the trend of the Malaspina fault through Icy Bay.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 91%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Farther east, our model shows an average of 5.4 ± 1.8 mm/yr left‐lateral motion with 13.8 ± 6.9 mm/yr of reverse slip, although this fault segment is only partially coupled. Our prediction of left‐lateral shear along the Malaspina fault agrees with the results of Savage and Lisowksi [], who found left‐lateral shear across a zone roughly aligned with the trend of the Malaspina fault through Icy Bay.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 91%
“…None of the faults in our model have published geodetic or geologic slip rate estimates. Previous models of the St. Elias orogen [e.g., Sauber et al ., ; Savage and Lisowski , ] have usually assumed that the main source of the regional deformation is strain accumulation along a subduction interface that is slipping at a rate equal to the Pacific plate–North America relative velocity. This rate of motion was 50–60 mm/yr, depending on the plate motion model used [e.g., Minster and Jordon , ; Chase , ; DeMets et al ., ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The ongoing rate of tectonic deformation over the last 20 years has been estimated from trilateration, very-long-baseline interferometry (VLBI) and GPS measurements [Savage and Lisowski, 1988;Ma et al, 1990;Sauber et al, 1993Sauber et al, , 1997. The rate and orientation of tectonic stress and strain is due primarily to subduction of the Pacific plate and collision of the Yakutat terrane with interior Alaska (Figure 2).…”
Section: Tectonic Stress and Strain Orientation And Magnitudementioning
confidence: 99%
“…ΔCFF uncertainty ±10 kPa. References: 1, Plafker et al [1994]; 2, Lahr et al [1986]; 3, Savage and Lisowski [1988]; 4, Richter and Matson [1971].…”
Section: Combined Effect Of Nm and Df Events On Regional Fault Systemsmentioning
confidence: 99%