Seismotectonic zoning in east-central Italy deduced from an analysis of the Neogene to present deformations and related stress fields

Lavecchia, Giusy; Brozzetti, Francesco; Barchi, Massimiliano R.; Menichetti, Marco; Keller, J.

doi:10.1130/0016-7606(1994)106<1107:szieci>2.3.co;2

Cited by 270 publications

(156 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

148

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The current rate of extension is 4 mm/year [D'Agostino et al, 2008] and its orientation is consistent with available focal mechanism solutions [Anderson and Jackson, 1987;Montone et al, 2004], borehole breakout [Mariucci et al, 1999] and geological data [Lavecchia et al, 1994;Roberts and Michetti, 2004].…”

Section: Seismicity and Tectonic Settingmentioning

confidence: 59%

The anatomy of the 2009 L'Aquila normal fault system (central Italy) imaged by high resolution foreshock and aftershock locations

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

[1] On 6 April (01:32 UTC) 2009 a M W 6.1 normal faulting earthquake struck the axial area of the Abruzzo region in central Italy. We study the geometry of fault segments using high resolution foreshock and aftershock locations. Two main SW dipping segments, the L'Aquila and Campotosto faults, forming an en echelon system 40 km long (NW trending). The 16 km long L'Aquila fault shows a planar geometry with constant dip (∼48°) through the entire upper crust down to 10 km depth. The Campotosto fault activated by three events with 5.0 ≤ M W ≤ 5.2 shows a striking listric geometry, composed by planar segments with different dips along depth rather than a smoothly curving single fault surface. The investigation of the spatiotemporal evolution of foreshock activity within the crustal volume where the subsequent L'Aquila main shock nucleated allows us to image the progressive activation of the main fault plane. From the beginning of 2009 the foreshocks activated the deepest portion of the fault until a week before the main shock, when the largest foreshock (M W 4.0) triggered a minor antithetic segment. Seismicity jumped back to the main plane a few hours before the main shock. Secondary synthetic and antithetic fault segments are present both on the hanging and footwall of the system. The stress tensor obtained by inverting focal mechanisms of the largest events reveals a NE trending extension and the majority of the aftershocks are kinematically consistent. Deviations from the dominant extensional strain pattern are observed for those earthquakes activating minor structures.

show abstract

Section: Seismicity and Tectonic Settingmentioning

confidence: 59%

The anatomy of the 2009 L'Aquila normal fault system (central Italy) imaged by high resolution foreshock and aftershock locations

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Conversely, a thick-skin deformation implying a rather severe involvement of the crystalline basement in the crustal shortening has been hypothesized by other authors [Barchi, 1991;Lavecchia et al, 1994;Barchi et al, 1998;Coward et al, 1999]. Analogous controversies exist on the Southern Apennine deep structure since a quite important contribution of the crystalline basement to the post-Tortonian mountain chain has been postulated by some authors [Casero et al, 1988;Endignoux et al, 1989;Mazzoli et al, 2000;Menardi Noguera and Rea, 2000;Speranza and Chiappini, 2002] whilst a thin-skin tectonic style implying greater volumes of sedimentary rocks and consequently greater amounts of shortening has been proposed by other authors [Patacca et al, 2000;Patacca and Scandone, 2004a;Scrocca et al, 2005].…”

Section: Stratigraphic-structural Lineaments Of the Central Apenninesmentioning

confidence: 94%

Structural architecture of the central Apennines: Interpretation of the CROP 11 seismic profile from the Adriatic coast to the orographic divide

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We present an interpretation of the eastern half portion of the CROP 11 line, a deep reflection seismic profile 265 km long that cuts across the central Apennines from the Tyrrhenian coast to the Adriatic coast. In the study area the line cuts across a pile of thrust sheets that underwent tectonic transport between the Messinian and the Pleistocene. In its easternmost part, the line runs through the Plio‐Pleistocene deposits of the Adriatic foredeep. In the foreland region the CROP 11 line integrates previous information on the crustal structure derived from petroleum exploration and from deep seismic sounding refraction experiments. In particular, the CROP 11 line confirms the existence of a very thick sedimentary sequence underlying the Mesozoic‐Tertiary carbonates of the Apulia Platform interpreted as the Paleozoic‐Triassic sedimentary cover of a pre‐Cambrian crystalline basement. In the mountain chain, where the base thrust of the orogenic wedge reaches a depth of about 25 km, this sedimentary sequence appears to be the deepest geological unit incorporated in the thrust system. This interpretation of the CROP 11 profile suggests an unusual thin‐skin tectonic style implying the detachment from the original basement and the incorporation in the post‐Tortonian tectonic wedge of a very thick Paleozoic‐Triassic sedimentary sequence possibly affected by low‐grade metamorphism in the lower part. Other new suggestions from the CROP 11 seismic data concern the origin of the Fucino basin, one of the most remarkable Plio‐Pleistocene intramontane basins. The normal faults bordering this structural depression, as other important normal faults present in the central Apennines (e.g., the Caramanico fault system in the Majella region), seem to have been controlled by gravitational‐collapse processes driven by uplift during crustal shortening rather than by a generalized extension subsequent to the Apennine compression, as usually reported in the geological literature. If this interpretation is correct, the strong seismic activity in correspondence to the Apennine watershed may be related to the very recent increase in the structural relief caused by an out‐of‐sequence propagation of the active thrusts.

show abstract

“…The time gap between shortening and extension that has been used to reconstruct both a seismotectonic model for central Italy (Lavecchia et al, 1994) and a model to estimate the rate of rock uplift in the contractional part of the Apennines (Cavinato and DeCelles, 1999) is questioned. These models assume that the central Apennine extensional deformation migrated eastward ~2 m.y.…”

Section: New Insights Into the Evolution Of The Apennine Postorogenicmentioning

confidence: 99%

New insights into the onset and evolution of the central Apennine extensional intermontane basins based on the tectonically active L’Aquila Basin (central Italy)

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Seismotectonic zoning in east-central Italy deduced from an analysis of the Neogene to present deformations and related stress fields

Cited by 270 publications

References 0 publications

The anatomy of the 2009 L'Aquila normal fault system (central Italy) imaged by high resolution foreshock and aftershock locations

The anatomy of the 2009 L'Aquila normal fault system (central Italy) imaged by high resolution foreshock and aftershock locations

Structural architecture of the central Apennines: Interpretation of the CROP 11 seismic profile from the Adriatic coast to the orographic divide

New insights into the onset and evolution of the central Apennine extensional intermontane basins based on the tectonically active L’Aquila Basin (central Italy)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About