土耳其2023年2月6日 MW7.5 Elbistan地震地表破裂带分布特征

doi:10.3969/j.issn.0253-4967.2024.06.003

地震地质 ›› 2024, Vol. 46 ›› Issue (6): 1263-1279.DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.0253-4967.2024.06.003

土耳其2023年2月6日 M_W7.5 Elbistan地震地表破裂带分布特征

俞晶星¹⁾(), 任治坤¹⁾^,^*(), 张会平¹⁾, 李传友¹⁾, 王世广²⁾, 龚正²⁾, 周晓成³⁾, 徐岳仁³⁾, 梁朋³⁾, 马字发¹⁾, 李俊杰¹⁾

¹⁾ 地震动力学国家重点实验室, 中国地震局地质研究所, 北京 100029
²⁾ 中国地震局地球物理研究所, 北京 100081
³⁾ 中国地震局地震预测研究所, 地震预测重点实验室, 北京 100036

收稿日期:2023-09-01 修回日期:2023-11-24 出版日期:2024-12-20 发布日期:2025-01-22
通讯作者: *任治坤, 男, 1980年生, 博士, 研究员, 主要从事活动构造和定量地貌学等方面研究, E-mail: rzk@ies.ac.cn。
作者简介:
俞晶星, 男, 1987年生, 副研究员, 主要从事新构造与活动构造研究, E-mail: jingxingyu@ies.ac.cn。
基金资助:
中国地震局地质研究所基本科研业务专项(JB-23-02); 国家自然科学基金(41888101); 国家自然科学基金(42272260); 国家自然科学基金(U2239202)

SURFACE RUPTURE OF THE FEBRUARY 6, 2023 M_W7.5 ELBISTAN EARTHQUAKE IN TURKEY

YU Jing-xing¹⁾(), REN Zhi-kun¹⁾^,^*(), ZHANG Hui-ping¹⁾, LI Chuan-you¹⁾, WANG Shi-guang²⁾, GONG Zheng²⁾, ZHOU Xiao-cheng³⁾, XU Yue-ren³⁾, LIANG Peng³⁾, MA Zi-fa¹⁾, LI Jun-jie¹⁾

¹⁾ State Key Laboratory of Earthquake Dynamics, Institute of Geology, China Earthquake Administration, Beijing 100029, China
²⁾ Institute of Geophysics, China Earthquake Administration, Beijing 100081, China
³⁾ Key Laboratory of Earthquake Prediction, Institute of Earthquake Forecasting, China Earthquake Administration, Beijing 100036, China

Received:2023-09-01 Revised:2023-11-24 Online:2024-12-20 Published:2025-01-22

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

2023年2月6日土耳其东南部发生2次破坏性地震, 中国地震局土耳其地震科学考察队对2次地震的地表破裂开展了详细调查。震后现场调查表明, 其中第2次地震事件(Elbistan地震)发生在东安纳托利亚断裂带的北分支断裂(Cardak断裂)上, 形成了一条长约140km的主地表破裂带, 同时形成一条与主破裂带近垂直展布、长约20km的分支破裂。主破裂带西起Göksun, 沿近EW向展布至Sürgü断裂西端, 然后向NE传递至Malatya断裂带南段, Cardak断裂全段和Malatya断裂带南段为此次地震的发震构造。地表破裂带总体呈线性连续展布, 各次级破裂呈左旋左阶拉张或左旋右阶挤压的雁列式组合, 沿线一系列冲沟、山脊、麦田、田埂、栅栏、道路和车辙等位错标志指示断层以纯左旋走滑运动为主, 野外实测最大水平位错为(7.6±0.3)m。结合东安纳托利亚断裂带上的历史地震分布和此次“双震”地表破裂与周边活动断裂的几何展布, 认为东安纳托利亚断裂东北段、 Sürgü断裂和Malatya断裂未来的地震危险性应该引起重点关注。

关键词: 2023年土耳其 M_W7.5 Elbistan地震, 地表破裂, 最大同震位移, Cardak断裂, 东安纳托利亚断裂

Abstract:

On February 6, 2023, two destructive earthquakes struck southern and central Turkey and northern and western Syria. The epicenter of the first event(M_W7.8)was 37km west-northwest of Gaziantep. The earthquake had a maximum Mercalli intensity of Ⅻ around the epicenter and in Antakya. It was followed by a M_W7.7 earthquake nine hours later. This earthquake was centered 95km north-northeast from the first one. There was widespread damage and tens of thousands of fatalities. In response to these catastrophic events, in March 2023, a seismic scientific expedition led by China Earthquake Administration(CEA)was promptly organized to investigate the surface ruptures caused by these earthquakes. Here, we focus on the surface ruptures of the second earthquake, known as the Elbistan earthquake. The post-earthquake field survey revealed that the Elbistan earthquake occurred on the East Anatolian fault zone's northern branch(the Cardak Fault). This event resulted in forming a main surface rupture zone approximately 140km long and a secondary fault rupture zone approximately 20km long, which is nearly perpendicular to the main rupture.

We combined the interpretation of high-resolution satellite imagery and geomorphic investigations along the fault to determine the fault geometry and kinematics of the second earthquake event. The Elbistan earthquake formed a main surface rupture zone approximately 140km long, which strikes in an east-west direction along the Cardak Fault. The main rupture zone starts from Göksun in the west and extends predominantly eastward until the western end of the Sürgü Fault. It then propagates northeast along the southern segment of the Malatya fault zone. The entire Cardak Fault and the Malatya fault zone's southern segment are considered seismic structures for this earthquake. The overall surface rupture zone exhibits a linear and continuous distribution. Secondary ruptures show a combination of left-lateral strike-slip or left-lateral oblique-thrust deformation. Along the rupture zone, a series of en echelon fractures, moletracks, horizontal fault striations, and numerous displaced piercing markers, such as mountain ridges, wheat fields, terraces, fences, roads, and wheel ruts, indicate the predominance of pure left-lateral strike-slip motion for most sections. The maximum measured horizontal displacement is(7.6±0.3)m. According to the empirical relationship between the seismic moment magnitude of strike-slip faulting earthquakes and the length of surface rupture(SRL), a main rupture zone of 140km in length corresponds to a moment magnitude of approximately 7.6. Based on the relationship between the seismic moment magnitude and the maximum coseismic displacement, a maximum coseismic displacement of(7.6±0.3)m corresponds to a moment magnitude of about 7.5. The magnitudes derived from the two empirical relationships are essentially consistent, and they also agree with the moment magnitude provided by the USGS. Besides the main surface rupture zone, a secondary fault rupture zone extends nearly north-south direction for approximately 20km long. Unfortunately, due to the limited time and traffic problem, we did not visit this north-south-trending secondary fault rupture zone.

According to the summary of the history of earthquakes, it is evident that the main surface rupture zone has only recorded one earthquake in history, the 1544 M_S6.8 earthquake, which indicates significantly less seismic activity compared to the main East Anatolian Fault. Moreover, the “earthquake doublet” will inevitably significantly impact the stress state and seismic hazard of other faults in the region. Seismic activity in this area remain at a relatively high level for years or even decades to come. The east-west striking fault, which has not been identified on the published active fault maps at the western end of the surface rupture zone, and the north-east striking Savrun Fault, which did not rupture this time, will experience destructive earthquakes in the future. It remains unknown why the east-west striking rupture did not propagate to the Sürgü Fault this time. More detailed paleoearthquake studies are needed to identify whether it is due to insufficient energy accumulation or because this section acts as a barrier. If the Sürgü Fault, about 40km long, was to rupture entirely in the future, the magnitude could reach 7 based on the empirical relationship.

Considering the distribution of historical earthquakes along the East Anatolian fault zone, as well as the geometric distribution of the surface ruptures from the recent “earthquake doublet” and the surrounding active faults, it is believed that the future earthquake hazards in the northeastern segment of the East Anatolian fault zone, the northern segment of the Dead Sea Fault, and the Malatya Fault deserve special attention.

Key words: 2023 M_W7.5 Turkey Elbistan earthquake, Surface rupture, Maximum seismic slip, Cardak Fault, East Anatolian Fault

俞晶星, 任治坤, 张会平, 李传友, 王世广, 龚正, 周晓成, 徐岳仁, 梁朋, 马字发, 李俊杰. 土耳其2023年2月6日 M_W7.5 Elbistan地震地表破裂带分布特征[J]. 地震地质, 2024, 46(6): 1263-1279.

YU Jing-xing, REN Zhi-kun, ZHANG Hui-ping, LI Chuan-you, WANG Shi-guang, GONG Zheng, ZHOU Xiao-cheng, XU Yue-ren, LIANG Peng, MA Zi-fa, LI Jun-jie. SURFACE RUPTURE OF THE FEBRUARY 6, 2023 M_W7.5 ELBISTAN EARTHQUAKE IN TURKEY[J]. SEISMOLOGY AND GEOLOGY, 2024, 46(6): 1263-1279.

图/表 9

图1 土耳其“双震”区域地震构造与震中分布图断裂资料修改自文献(Zelenin et al., 2022)。 NAF 北安纳托利亚断裂; EAF 东安纳托利亚断裂; DSF 死海断裂; CSF Cardak-Sürgü断裂; MF Malatya断裂; TF Tuzgölü断裂; EDF Ecemis-Deliler断裂; KMF Kyrenia-Misis断裂; CA 塞浦路斯弧

Fig. 1 Tectonic framework of eastern Anatolia and the epicenters of the 2023 earthquake doublet in Turkey.

图2 东安纳托利亚断裂带几何分段、历史地震及此次“双震”地表破裂分布图黑色与灰色断裂改自文献(Zelenin et al., 2022); 红色线段为此次“双震”地表破裂, 是在Korhan等①(① https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.36259.32808。)和USGS②(② https://doi.org/10.5066/P985I7U2。)解译结果的基础上, 结合野外调查和航空影像解译后完善的结果。断裂分段依据文献(Duman et al., 2013); 历史地震地表破裂分布依据文献(Ambraseys, 1989; Duman et al., 2013; Pousse-Beltran et al., 2020; Güvercin et al., 2022; Karabacak et al., 2023)。 DSF 死海断裂; CSF Cardak-Sürgü断裂; MF Malatya断裂; NAF 北安纳托利亚断裂

Fig. 2 Segmentations, historical earthquakes, and distribution of surface ruptures of the Turkey earthquake doublet along the East Anatolian fault zone.

表1 东安纳托尼亚断裂带历史地震

Table1 Historical earthquakes along the East Anatolian fault zone

编号	年份	震中位置	震级	位置	参考文献
1	521		M_S7.5		SECNE^①
2	995	38.7°N,40.0°E	M_S7.0~7.8	Palu	Ambraseys et al., 1998
3	1114	37.9°N, 37.0°E	M_S7.8	Marash	Ambraseys, 2009; Duman, 2013
4	1513	37.5°N, 36.5°E	M_S7.4+	Malatya-Tarsus	Ambraseys, 1989
5	1544	38.0°N, 37.0°E	M_S6.8	Zitun-Malatya	Ambraseys, 1989; SECNE^①
6	1822	36.7°N, 36.9°E	M_S7.5	Aafrine	Ambraseys, 1989; Ambraseys et al., 1998; Duman, 2013
7	1866	38.5°N, 40.9°E	M_S7.2	Göynük	Ambraseys, 1989
8	1872	36.4°N, 36.5°E	M_S7.2-	AmikGölü	Ambraseys, 1989; Ambraseys et al., 1998; Duman, 2013
9	1874	38.5°N, 39.5°E	M_S7.1+	Gölcük	Ambraseys, 1989; Ambraseys et al., 1998
10	1875	38.5°N, 39.5°E	M_S6.7	Gölcük	Ambraseys, 1989; Ambraseys et al., 1998
11	1893	38.0°N, 38.3°E	M_S7.1+	SouthMalatya	Ambraseys, 1989; Ambraseys et al., 1998
12	1905	38.1°N, 38.6°E	M_S6.8	Malatya	Ambraseys, 1989; Ambraseys et al., 1998
13	1971	39.0°N, 40.7°E	M_S6.8	Bingöl	Ambraseys, 1989; Ambraseys et al., 1998
14	1986	38.0°N, 37.8°E	M_S5.8	Doǧansehir	Taymaz et al., 1991
15	2010	38.8°N, 40.0°E	M_W6.1	Palu	Tan et al., 2011; Duman, 2013
16	2020	38.4°N, 39.1°E	M_W6.8	Sivrice	Güvercin et al., 2022

图3 土耳其“双震”地表破裂分布及Elbistan地震主要调查点分布图灰色断层线改自文献(Zelenin et al., 2022); 红色线段为此次“双震”地表破裂

Fig. 3 Surface ruptures of the Turkey earthquake doublet and investigation sites of the Elbistan event.

图4 Cardak段的地表破裂带断错地貌特征 a 地表破裂带西端点的航空影像; b地表破裂西端点附近的断错地貌; c、 d 地表破裂在Cardak断裂西段的典型断错地貌, 断层沿基岩与洪积扇界线附近展布或切过冲沟沟口阶地

Fig. 4 Surface ruptures along the Cardak Fault.

图5 EW向和NE向破裂带交会位置的断裂分布图红色线条为野外或航空影像解译的实际地表破裂的位置, 绿线为推测地表破裂的位置

Fig. 5 Distribution of surface ruptures at the junction of the EW-striking and NE-striking segments.

图6 地表破裂北东端点附近的断裂展布和破裂带特征 a 地表破裂带北东端点航空影像; b 断裂错断一矩形水池, 水平位移约30cm; c 断裂错断小路路面, 水平位移约30cm, 地表破裂可继续向NE延伸约10m

Fig. 6 Surface ruptures at the northeastern end.

图7 地表破裂最大水平位错调查结果 a 位于震中以西约4km处位错测量点的航空影像; b 位于震中以东约15km处位错测量点的航空影像; c 地表破裂穿过麦田中部形成清晰的地表破裂; d 田埂被左旋错断, 水平位移为(7.4±0.2)m; e 马路被左旋错断, 路边小冲沟水平位移为(7.6±0.3)m

Fig. 7 Maximum horizontal offset of the surface rupture.

图8 典型地表破裂野外照片 a 2个山脊被左旋位错交会; b 图a中断层面的水平擦痕; c 基岩山脊被左旋错断形成“眉脊”; d 栅栏和水泥基座被断裂左旋错断, 位移为(5.2±0.1)m; e 马路被错断, 位移为(0.9±0.1)m; f 坐落在断裂上的房子被整体震塌

Fig. 8 Photos showing typical surface ruptures.

参考文献 41

[1]	Aktuǧ B, Ozener H, Dogru A, et al. 2016. Slip rates and seismic potential on the East Anatolian Fault System using an improved GPS velocity field[J]. Journal of Geodynamics, 94-95: 1—12.
[2]	Aktuǧ B, Parmaksız E, Kurt M, et al. 2013. Deformation of central Anatolia: GPS implications[J]. Journal of Geodynamics, 67: 78—96.
[3]	Allen M, Jackson J, Walker R. 2004. Late Cenozoic reorganization of the Arabia-Eurasia collision and the comparison of short-term and long-term deformation rates[J]. Tectonics, 23(2): TC2008.
[4]	Ambraseys N N. 1989. Temporary seismic quiescence: SE Turkey[J]. Geophysical Journal International, 96(2): 311—331.
[5]	Ambraseys N N, Jackson J A. 1998. Faulting associated with historical and recent earthquakes in the Eastern Mediterranean region[J]. Geophysical Journal International, 133(2): 390—406.
[6]	Ambraseys N N. 2009. Earthquakes in the Mediterranean and Middle East: A Multidisciplinary Study of Seismicity Up to 1900[M]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139195430.
[7]	Armijo R, Meyer B, Hubert A, et al. 1999. Westward propagation of the North Anatolian fault into the northern Aegean: Timing and kinematics[J]. Geology, 27(3): 267—270.
[8]	Båth M. 1965. Lateral inhomogeneities of the upper mantle[J]. Tectonophysics, 2(6): 483—514.
[9]	Cetin H, Güneyli H, Mayer L. 2003. Paleoseismology of the Palu-Lake Hazar segment of the East Anatolian fault zone, Turkey[J]. Tectonophysics, 374(3-4): 163—197.
[10]	Dal Zilio L, Ampuero J P. 2023. Earthquake doublet in Turkey and Syria[J]. Communications Earth & Environment, 4(1): 71.
[11]	Dewey J F, Hempton M R, Kidd W S F, et al. 1986. Shortening of continental lithosphere: The neotectonics of Eastern Anatolia—A young collision zone[J]. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 19(1): 1—36.
[12]	Duman T Y, Emre Ö. 2013. The East Anatolian Fault: geometry, segmentation and jog characteristics[J]. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 372(1): 495—529.
[13]	Emre Ö, Duman T Y, Özalp S, et al. 2018. Active fault database of Turkey[J]. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 16(8): 3229—3275.
[14]	England P, Houseman G, Nocquet J M. 2016. Constraints from GPS measurements on the dynamics of deformation in Anatolia and the Aegean[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 121(12): 8888—8916.
[15]	Floyd M A, Billiris H, Paradissis D, et al. 2010. A new velocity field for Greece: Implications for the kinematics and dynamics of the Aegean[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 115(B10). https://doi.org/10.1029/2009JB007040.
[16]	Güvercin S E, Karabulut H, Konca A Ö, et al. 2022. Active seismotectonics of the East Anatolian Fault[J]. Geophysical Journal International, 230(1): 50—69.
[17]	Hempton M R. 1985. Structure and deformation history of the Bitlis suture near Lake Hazar, southeastern Turkey[J]. Geological Society of America Bulletin, 96(2): 233—243.
[18]	Jackson J. 1994. Active tectonics of the Aegean region[J]. Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences, 22: 239—271.
[19]	Karabacak V, Özkaymak Ç, Sözbilir H, et al. 2023. The 2023 Pazarcık(Kahramanmaraş, Türkiye)earthquake(M_W: 7.7): Implications for surface rupture dynamics along the East Anatolian fault zone[J]. Journal of the Geological Society, 180(3): jgs2023-020. https://doi.org/10.1144/jgs2023-020.
[20]	Karabulut H, Güvercin S E, Hollingsworth J, et al. 2023. Long silence on the East Anatolian fault zone(Southern Turkey)ends with devastating double earthquakes(6 February 2023)over a seismic gap: Implications for the seismic potential in the Eastern Mediterranean region[J]. Journal of the Geological Society, 180(3): jgs2023-021. https://doi.org/10.1144/jgs2023-021.
[21]	Le Pichon X, Kreemer C. 2010. The Miocene-to-present kinematic evolution of the Eastern Mediterranean and Middle East and its implications for dynamics[J]. Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences, 38: 323—351.
[22]	Li S, Wang X, Tao T, et al. 2023. Source model of the 2023 Turkey earthquake sequence imaged by Sentinel-1 and GPS measurements: Implications for heterogeneous fault behavior along the East Anatolian fault zone[J]. Remote Sensing, 15(10): 2618.
[23]	Mai P M, Aspiotis T, Aquib T A, et al. 2023. The destructive earthquake doublet of 6 February 2023 in South-Central Türkiye and Northwestern Syria: Initial observations and analyses[J]. The Seismic Record, 3(2): 105—115.
[24]	McClusky S, Balassanian S, Barka A, et al. 2000. Global Positioning System constraints on plate kinematics and dynamics in the eastern Mediterranean and Caucasus[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 105(B3): 5695—5719.
[25]	McKenzie D. 1972. Active tectonics of the Mediterranean region[J]. Geophysical Journal International, 30(2): 109—185.
[26]	Meghraoui M, Gomez F, Sbeinati R, et al. 2003. Evidence for 830 years of seismic quiescence from palaeoseismology, archaeoseismology and historical seismicity along the Dead Sea Fault in Syria[J]. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 210(1-2): 35—52.
[27]	Pousse-Beltran L, Nissen E, Bergman E A, et al. 2020. The 2020 M_W6.8 Elazıǧ (Turkey) earthquake reveals rupture behavior of the East Anatolian Fault[J]. Geophysical Research Letters, 47(13): e2020GL088136. https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GL088136.
[28]	Reilinger R E, McClusky S C, Souter B J, et al. 1997. Preliminary estimates of plate convergence in the Caucasus collision zone from global positioning system measurements[J]. Geophysical Research Letters, 24(14): 1815—1818.
[29]	Reilinger R, McClusky S, Vernant P, et al. 2006. GPS constraints on continental deformation in the Africa-Arabia-Eurasia continental collision zone and implications for the dynamics of plate interactions[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 111(B5). https://doi.org/10.1029/2005JB004051.
[30]	Reitman N G, Briggs R W, Barnhart W D, et al. 2023. Rapid surface rupture mapping from satellite data: The 2023 Kahramanmaraş, Turkey(Türkiye), earthquake sequence[J]. The Seismic Record, 3(4): 289—298.
[31]	Şengör A M C, Görür N, Aroglu F. 1985. Strike-slip faulting and related basin formation in zones of tectonic escape: Turkey as a case study[G]∥Biddle K T, Christie-Blick N, eds. Strike-Slip Faulting and Basin Formation. Society of Economic Paleontologists and Mineralogists, Special Publication, 37:227—267.
[32]	Seyitoǧlu G, Aktuǧ B, Esat K, et al. 2022. Neotectonics of Turkey(Türkiye)and surrounding regions: A new perspective with block modelling[J]. Geologica Acta, 20(4): 1—21.
[33]	Shcherbakov R, Turcotte D L. 2004. A modified form of Bath's law[J]. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 94(5): 1968—1975.
[34]	Tan O, Tapirdamaz M C, Yörük A. 2008. The earthquake catalogues for Turkey[J]. Turkish Journal of Earth Sciences, 17(2): 405—418.
[35]	Tan O, Pabuçcu Z, Tapırdamaz M C, et al. 2011. Aftershock study and seismotectonic implications of the 8 March 2010 Kovancılar(Elazıǧ, Turkey)earthquake(M_W=6.1)[J]. Geophysical Research Letters, 38(11). https://doi.org/10.1029/2011GL047702.
[36]	Taymaz T, Eyidogan H, Jackson J. 1991. Source parameters of large earthquakes in the East Anatolian fault zone(Turkey)[J]. Geophysical Journal International, 106(3): 537—550.
[37]	Taymaz T, Ganas A, Yolsal-Çevikbilen S, et al. 2021. Source mechanism and rupture process of the 24 January 2020 M_W6.7 Doǧanyol-sivrice earthquake obtained from seismological waveform analysis and space geodetic observations on the East Anatolian fault zone(Turkey)[J]. Tectonophysics, 804:228745. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tecto.2021.228745.
[38]	Taymaz T, Yilmaz Y, Dilek Y. 2007. The geodynamics of the Aegean and Anatolia: Introduction[J]. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 291(1): 1—16.
[39]	Walters R J, Parsons B, Wright T J. 2014. Constraining crustal velocity fields with InSAR for Eastern Turkey: Limits to the block-like behavior of Eastern Anatolia[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 119(6): 5215—5234.
[40]	Wells D L, Coppersmith K J. 1994. New empirical relationships among magnitude, rupture length, rupture width, rupture area, and surface displacement[J]. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 84(4): 974—1002. https://doi.org/10.1785/BSSA0840040974.
[41]	Zelenin E, Bachmanov D, Garipova S, et al. 2022. The active faults of Eurasia Database(AFEAD): The ontology and design behind the continental-scale dataset[J]. Earth System Science Data, 14: 4489—4503.

土耳其2023年2月6日 M_W7.5 Elbistan地震地表破裂带分布特征

SURFACE RUPTURE OF THE FEBRUARY 6, 2023 M_W7.5 ELBISTAN EARTHQUAKE IN TURKEY

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 9

参考文献 41

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	牛鹏飞, 韩竹军, 郭鹏, 李科长, 吕丽星. 2022年青海门源 M_S6.9 地震灾害致灾机理[J]. 地震地质, 2024, 46(4): 761-782.
[2]	陈柏旭, 余中元, 肖鹏, 戴训也, 张世龙, 郑荣荧. 青藏高原东北缘榆木山东缘断裂地表破裂带的新发现及其地震地质意义[J]. 地震地质, 2024, 46(3): 589-607.
[3]	张博譞, 钱黎, 李涛, 陈杰, 许建红, 姚远, 房立华, 谢超, 陈建波, 刘冠伸, 胡宗凯, 杨文心, 张军龙, 庞炜. 2024年1月23日新疆乌什M_S7.1地震地质灾害和地表破裂[J]. 地震地质, 2024, 46(1): 220-234.
[4]	游子成, 毕海芸, 郑文俊, 彭慧, 梁淑敏, 段磊, 覃乙根. 基于高分辨率遥感影像的地震破裂带精细特征研究——以理塘断裂为例[J]. 地震地质, 2023, 45(5): 1057-1073.
[5]	郭婷婷, 徐锡伟, 袁仁茂, 杨宏智. 逆断层上覆土层地表破裂影响因素的数值模拟[J]. 地震地质, 2023, 45(5): 1200-1218.
[6]	张浩, 李丽梅, 蒋新, 章东, 许汉刚. 郯庐断裂带安丘-莒县断裂江苏段古地震研究新进展[J]. 地震地质, 2023, 45(4): 880-895.
[7]	王辽, 谢虹, 袁道阳, 李智敏, 薛善余, 苏瑞欢, 文亚猛, 苏琦. 结合野外考察的2022年门源M_S6.9地震地表破裂带的高分七号影像特征[J]. 地震地质, 2023, 45(2): 401-421.
[8]	吴中海, 白玛多吉, 叶强, 韩帅, 史亚然, 尼玛次仁, 高扬. 西藏阿里阿鲁错地堑系的第四纪活动性、最新同震地表破裂及其地震地质意义[J]. 地震地质, 2023, 45(1): 67-91.
[9]	李东臣, 任俊杰, 张志文, 刘亮. 基于高分辨率无人机影像的地震地表破裂半自动提取方法--以2021年M_S7.4青海玛多地震为例[J]. 地震地质, 2022, 44(6): 1484-1502.
[10]	李传友, 孙凯, 马骏, 李俊杰, 梁明剑, 房立华. 四川泸定6.8级地震--鲜水河断裂带磨西段局部发起、全段参与的一次复杂事件[J]. 地震地质, 2022, 44(6): 1648-1666.
[11]	姚生海, 盖海龙, 殷翔, 刘炜, 张加庆, 袁建新. 阿木尼克山山前地表破裂带与1962年6.8级地震关系的讨论[J]. 地震地质, 2022, 44(4): 976-991.
[12]	刘小利, 夏涛, 刘静, 姚文倩, 徐晶, 邓德贝尔, 韩龙飞, 贾治革, 邵延秀, 王焱, 乐子扬, 高天琪. 2021年青海玛多M_W7.4地震分布式同震地表裂缝特征[J]. 地震地质, 2022, 44(2): 461-483.
[13]	韩龙飞, 刘静, 姚文倩, 王文鑫, 刘小利, 高云鹏, 邵延秀, 李金阳. 2021年玛多M_W7.4地震震中区地表破裂的精细填图及阶区内的分布式破裂讨论[J]. 地震地质, 2022, 44(2): 484-505.
[14]	王文鑫, 邵延秀, 姚文倩, 刘静, 韩龙飞, 刘小利, 高云鹏, 王子君, 秦可心, 屠泓为. 基于摄影测量技术对玛多M_W7.4地震地表破裂特征的快速提取及三维结构的室内重建[J]. 地震地质, 2022, 44(2): 524-540.
[15]	姚文倩, 王子君, 刘静, 刘小利, 韩龙飞, 邵延秀, 王文鑫, 徐晶, 秦可心, 高云鹏, 王焱, 李金阳, 曾宪阳. 2021年青海玛多M_W7.4地震同震地表破裂长度的讨论[J]. 地震地质, 2022, 44(2): 541-559.

土耳其2023年2月6日 MW7.5 Elbistan地震地表破裂带分布特征

SURFACE RUPTURE OF THE FEBRUARY 6, 2023 MW7.5 ELBISTAN EARTHQUAKE IN TURKEY

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 9

参考文献 41

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

土耳其2023年2月6日 M_W7.5 Elbistan地震地表破裂带分布特征

SURFACE RUPTURE OF THE FEBRUARY 6, 2023 M_W7.5 ELBISTAN EARTHQUAKE IN TURKEY