Large earthquake paleoseismology in the East Tennessee seismic zone: Results of an 18-month pilot study

Role of Large‐Scale Tectonic Forces in Intraplate Earthquakes of Central and Eastern North America

“…Although our model produces a reasonable match with P axes of earthquakes as well as with of stress inversions within the New Madrid region (Figures and ), it does not include a zone of potential lithosphere weakness there, which has been hypothesized to play a significant role in focusing deformation in the New Madrid region (Kenner & Segall, ; Liu & Zoback, ; Mooney et al, ). Other potential regions of lithospheric weakness may also play a role in focusing deformation (Hamburger & Rupp, ; Hatcher et al, ; Lamontagne et al, ; Murphy & Egbert, ; Wheeler, ). One example is the Mineral, Virginia, earthquake, which occurs within the zone of maximum strain rates, at the boundary between the stiff craton and a weaker intraplate region (Figures b and c), although Pratt et al () had argued that the 2011 event ruptured a new fault rather than reactivating an existing structure.…”

Crustal velocity structure associated with the eastern Tennessee seismic zone: Vp and Vs images based upon local earthquake tomography

“…The largest known earthquakes are the 1973 magnitude 4.6 Maryville, Tennessee, earthquake [Bollinger et al, 1976[Bollinger et al, , 1991 and the 2003 magnitude 4.6 Fort Payne, Alabama earthquake [Withers et al, 2004]. A systematic search for paleoseismic features is presently underway [Hatcher et al, 2013], but the surficial geology does not lend itself to liquefaction, and most liquefiable sediments along streams have been altered and submerged by Tennessee Valley Authority construction. alignment of epicenters along distinct trends [Chapman et al, 1997].…”

Paleoliquefaction Studies and the Evaluation of Seismic Hazard

“…Organic samples are collected for radiocarbon dating (e.g., References [5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][27][28][29][30][31][32]61,109,[116][117][118][119]123,125,[130][131][132][133][134][135][136][137][138]) and sediment samples are collected for optically stimulated luminescence (OSL) dating (e.g., References [28,118,139,140]). Organic samples are sought in close association with liquefaction features, such as in soils buried by or developed in sand blows.…”

“…Paleoliquefaction studies have been conducted in seismically active regions of central and eastern North America, including the New Madrid seismic zone in the central United States (US) (e.g., References [4][5][6][7][8]), the Charleston seismic zone in the southeastern US (e.g., References [9][10][11][12]), and the Charlevoix seismic zone in southeastern Canada [13], where large historical earthquakes are known to have induced liquefaction ( Figure 1). They have been carried out in the Wabash Valley (e.g., References [14,15]) and the Eastern Tennessee [16] seismic zones, where only small to moderate earthquakes occurred during the historical period. In addition, paleoliquefaction studies were conducted in interplate settings like the Dominican Republic and Puerto Rico in the northeastern Caribbean and the Pacific Northwest in the US, where subduction zones and crustal faults pose a significant seismic hazard (e.g., References [3,[17][18][19][20]).…”