2025年1月7日西藏定日6.8级地震发震构造与同震地表破裂特征

doi:10.3969/j.issn.0253-4967.2025.01.001

地震地质 ›› 2025, Vol. 47 ›› Issue (1): 1-15.DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.0253-4967.2025.01.001

• 西藏日喀则市定日县地震专题论文 • 上一篇下一篇

2025年1月7日西藏定日6.8级地震发震构造与同震地表破裂特征

石峰¹^,³⁾(), 梁明剑²⁾, 罗全星¹^,³⁾, 乔俊香¹^,³⁾, 张达¹^,³⁾, 王鑫¹^,³⁾, 易文星¹^,³⁾, 张佳伟¹^,⁵⁾, 张迎峰¹^,⁴⁾, 张会平¹^,⁵⁾, 李涛¹^,⁴⁾, 李安¹^,³⁾^,^*()

¹⁾ 中国地震局地质研究所, 地震动力学与强震预测全国重点实验室, 北京 100029
²⁾ 四川省地震局, 成都 610041
³⁾ 山西太原大陆裂谷动力学国家野外科学观测研究站, 北京 100029
⁴⁾ 新疆帕米尔陆内俯冲国家野外科学观测研究站, 北京 100029
⁵⁾ 西藏拉萨地球物理国家野外科学观测研究站, 北京 100029

收稿日期:2025-01-22 修回日期:2025-01-24 出版日期:2025-02-20 发布日期:2025-01-27
通讯作者: 李安
作者简介:
石峰, 男, 1984年生, 2014年于中国地震局地质研究所获构造地质学专业博士学位, 副研究员, 主要研究方向为活动构造与构造地貌, E-mail: Shifeng@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(IGCEA2502); 地震动力学国家重点实验室自主课题(LED2021A02)

SEISMOGENIC FAULT AND COSEISMIC SURFACE DEFORMATION OF THE DINGRI M_S6.8 EARTHQUAKE IN XIZANG, CHINA

SHI Feng¹^,³⁾(), LIANG Ming-jian²⁾, LUO Quan-xing¹^,³⁾, QIAO Jun-xiang¹^,³⁾, ZHANG Da¹^,³⁾, WANG Xin¹^,³⁾, YI Wen-xing¹^,³⁾, ZHANG Jia-wei¹^,⁵⁾, ZHANG Ying-feng¹^,⁴⁾, ZHANG Hui-ping¹^,⁵⁾, LI Tao¹^,⁴⁾, LI An¹^,³⁾^,^*()

¹⁾ State Key Laboratory of Earthquake Dynamics and Forecasting, Institute of Geology, China Earthquake Administration, Beijing 100029, China
²⁾ Sichuan Earthquake Administration, Chengdu 610041, China
³⁾ Shanxi Taiyuan Continental Rift Dynamics Nation Observation and Research Station, Beijing 100029, China
⁴⁾ Xingjiang Pamir Intracontinental Subduction National Observation and Research Station, Beijing 100029, China
⁵⁾ Lhasa National Geophysical Observation and Research Station, Beijing 100029, China

Received:2025-01-22 Revised:2025-01-24 Online:2025-02-20 Published:2025-01-27
Contact: LI An

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

2025年1月7日9时5分, 西藏自治区日喀则市定日县发生6.8级地震。中国地震台网中心测定震中位于(28.50°N, 87.45°E)。通过野外地质调查、震源机制解、余震分布等结果, 确定此次地震为正断型地震, 发震构造为申扎-定结裂谷断裂系南段的登么错断裂。登么错断裂走向近SN, 倾向W, 长约60km。此次地震产生的同震地表破裂主要位于登么错盆地以北的山区, 产生了长约25km的不连续同震地表破裂带。地表破裂带具有明显的分段特征, 根据空间延续性, 自南向北可分为3段, 依次为古荣—强嘎段、尼辖错段和羊姆丁错段, 最大垂直位错量为2.5~3.0m, 同时在登么错湖东岸产生了长约10km的地裂缝密集形变带。

关键词: 定日M_S6.8地震, 同震地表破裂, 发震构造, 申扎-定结裂谷断裂系, 登么错断裂

Abstract:

At 09:05 am on January 7, 2025, a M_S6.8 earthquake occurred in the Dingri, Xizang, China. The earthquake caused serious casualties and property losses. Research on the seismogenic structure and characteristics of earthquake surface rupture in this earthquake is beneficial to understanding the rupture behavior and dynamic mechanism of normal-fault earthquakes. Meanwhile, it provides a basis for predicting the future strong earthquake trend of the southern Xizang rift fault system. Its epicenter is located at 87.45°E, 28.50°N, 13km depth, the China Earthquake Networks Center measures. In order to constrain the seismogenic fault and characterize the co-seismic surface ruptures of this earthquake, field investigations were conducted immediately after the earthquake, combined with analyses of the focal parameters, aftershock distribution, and InSAR inversion of this earthquake.

This preliminary study finds that the seismogenic fault of the Dingri M_S6.8 earthquake is the Dengmocuo fault, which is an active ~60km long, NS-NE-striking and normal fault. The total length of the co-seismic surface ruptures is approximately 25km, located on the north segment of the Dengmocuo fault. Meanwhile, a dense deformation zone of ground fracture with a length of ~10km is generated on the east side of Dengmocuo Lake along the contour line of the lake shore. The earthquake also induced a large number of liquefaction structures and tensional fractures in valleys and basins.

Based on along-strike discontinuity due to the development of step-overs, the coseismic surface rupture zone can be subdivided into three segments: the Gurong-Qiangga, Nixiacuo, and Yangmudingcuo segments. The surface ruptures are relatively continuous and prominent along the Nixiacuo segments. Comparatively, co-seismic surface ruptures of Gurong-Qiangga and Yangmudingcuo segments are discontinuous. The maximum of coseismic vertical displacement is roughly determined to be 2.5—3.0m based on the scarps. The width of the surface rupture zone of the Dingri earthquake can reach up to 450m in some areas. The location of surface rupture zones is not limited to fault scarps and hanging walls. There are also a large number of secondary scarps and cracks distributed in the footwall. Many cracks are distributed in an en echelon or grid pattern.

Compared to the continuous surface rupture caused by strike-slip-type earthquakes in recent years, the surface rupture of the Dingri earthquake is very discontinuous, and there is an obvious difference in displacement between each segment of the surface rupture. Preliminary speculation suggests that it may be related to the characteristics of the fault movement. Unlike strike-slip faults where the dislocation direction is parallel to the strike, the dislocation direction of normal faults is perpendicular to the strike. In addition, the observed length of surface rupture and maximum displacement of the Dingri earthquake are basically consistent with the results calculated by empirical formulations.

Key words: Dingri M_S6.8 earthquake, coseismic surface ruptures, seismogenic fault, Shenzha-Dingjie rifts, Dengmocuo Fault

石峰, 梁明剑, 罗全星, 乔俊香, 张达, 王鑫, 易文星, 张佳伟, 张迎峰, 张会平, 李涛, 李安. 2025年1月7日西藏定日6.8级地震发震构造与同震地表破裂特征[J]. 地震地质, 2025, 47(1): 1-15.

SHI Feng, LIANG Ming-jian, LUO Quan-xing, QIAO Jun-xiang, ZHANG Da, WANG Xin, YI Wen-xing, ZHANG Jia-wei, ZHANG Ying-feng, ZHANG Hui-ping, LI Tao, LI An. SEISMOGENIC FAULT AND COSEISMIC SURFACE DEFORMATION OF THE DINGRI M_S6.8 EARTHQUAKE IN XIZANG, CHINA[J]. SEISMOLOGY AND GEOLOGY, 2025, 47(1): 1-15.

图/表 8

图1 定日地震区域地震构造背景图 MFT 喜马拉雅主前缘逆断裂; MBT 喜马拉雅主边界逆断裂; MCT 喜马拉雅主中央逆断裂; STD 藏南拆离系; YTSZ 雅鲁藏布江缝合带; BNSZ 班公湖-怒江缝合带; KF 喀喇昆仑断裂。 ①桑日-错那裂谷系; ②亚东-谷露裂谷系; ③申扎-定结裂谷系; ④尼玛-定日裂谷系; ⑤聂拉木-措勤裂谷系; ⑥仲巴-改则裂谷系; ⑦公珠措-亚热裂谷系。 GNSS数据来自文献(Wang et al., 2020), 震源机制根据GCMT目录, 绿色震源机制表示尼泊尔地震后定日附近的地震

Fig. 1 Seismogenic tectonic background map of the Dingri earthquake.

表1 定日地震震源机制解参数

Table1 Seismic mechanism parameters of the Dingri earthquake

北纬 /(°)	东经 /(°)	深度 /km	震级 /M_W	节面Ⅰ/(°)			节面Ⅱ/(°)			资料来源
北纬 /(°)	东经 /(°)	深度 /km	震级 /M_W	走向	倾向	滑动角	走向	倾向	滑动角	资料来源
28.50	87.45	11.5	6.9	182	22	-64	334	71	-100	台网中心
28.639	87.361	11.5	7.05	187	49	-78	349	42	-103	USGS
28.56	87.47	12.0	7.1	173	48	-92	356	42	-88	GCMT
28.639	87.361	14	7.2	196	44	-64	341	51	-113	IPGP
28.56	87.33	14	7.1	151	56	-116	12	41	-56	GFZ

图2 震源机制解和发震构造断层迹线根据文献(田婷婷, 2021)修改; 圆点为1 875个余震的震中(截至2025年1月12日11时14分), 由中国地震局地球物理研究所杨婷、王未来、房立华提供; 形变场原始陆探SAR观测数据由国家自然灾害防治研究院李永生提供

Fig. 2 Focal Mechanism and seismological structure map.

图3 定日地震地表破裂分布图

Fig. 3 Surface ruptures distribution map of Dingri earthquake.

图4 古荣—强嘎段地表破裂示意图 a 古荣—强嘎段震前高分影像; b 古荣—强嘎段地表破裂的远景照片, 位置见图a; c 古荣—强嘎段地表破裂的近景照片, 位置见图b; d 无人机航拍的地表破裂影像, 位置见图a

Fig. 4 Surface ruptures of Gurong-Qiangga segment.

图5 尼辖错段地表破裂示意图 a 尼辖错段震后的高分影像; b 尼辖错旁的地表破裂照片, 位置见图a; c 尼辖错北地表破裂陡坎和拉张的照片, 位置见图a; d 最大位移处的照片, 位置见图a; e 北段地表破裂的照片, 位置见图a; f 地表破裂展布的照片, 位置见图a; g 无人机航拍的地表破裂影像, 位置见图a

Fig. 5 Surface rupture of Nixiacuo segment.

图6 羊姆丁错段地表破裂示意图 a 羊姆丁错段震后高分影像; b 北段地表破裂的无人机照片, 位置见图a; c 南段地表破裂的无人机照片, 位置见图a; d 挤压鼓包的无人机照片, 位置见图a

Fig. 6 Surface rupture of Yangmudingcuo segment.

图7 登么错湖东岸地裂缝密集带 a 地裂缝密集带的无人机航拍影像; b 西侧挤压鼓包的照片, 位置见图a; c 东侧拉张裂缝的照片, 位置见图a

Fig. 7 Dense zone of ground fractures on the east bank of Dengmocuo Lake.

参考文献 42

[1]	卞爽, 于志泉, 龚俊峰, 等. 2021. 青藏高原近SN向裂谷的时空分布特征及动力学机制[J]. 地质力学学报, 27(2): 178—194.
	BIAN Shuang, YU Zhi-quan, GONG Jun-feng, et al. 2021. Spatiotemporal distribution and geodynamic mechanism of the nearly NS-trending rifts in the Tibetan plateau[J]. Journal of Geomechanics, 27(2): 178—194 (in Chinese).
[2]	高扬. 2024. 藏南定结—吉隆地区第四纪近SN向正断层作用的时空特征[D]. 北京: 北京大学.
	GAO Yang. 2024. Spatial-temporal characteristic of the Quaternary NS-trending normal faulting in the Dinggye-Gyrong area, southern Tibet[D]. Peking University, Beijing (in Chinese).
[3]	哈广浩, 吴中海, 何林. 2018. 藏南邛多江地堑的晚新生代沉积地层及对SN向裂谷形成时代的初步限定[J]. 地质学报, 92(10): 2051—2067.
	HA Guang-hao, WU Zhong-hai, HE Lin. 2018. Late Cenozoic sedimentary strata of Qiongduojiang graben, south Tibet: Preliminary constraint on the initial rifting age of the SN-trending rift[J]. Acta Geologica Sinica, 92(10): 2051—2067 (in Chinese).
[4]	侯丽燕, 单新建, 龚文瑜, 等. 2020. 基于多期DInSAR数据的2016年定结地震序列发震断层特征研究[J]. 地球物理学报, 63(4): 1357—1369.
	HOU Li-yan, SHAN Xin-jian, GONG Wen-yu, et al. 2020. Characterizing seismogenic fault of 2016 Dingjie earthquake based on multitemporal DInSAR[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 63(4): 1357—1369 (in Chinese).
[5]	田婷婷. 2021. 申扎-定结裂谷南段丁木错断裂晚第四纪古地震事件研究[D]. 北京: 中国地质大学(北京).
	TIAN Ting-ting. 2021. Dating of late Quaternary paleoseismic events of the Dingmu Cuo Fault in the southern section of Shenzha-Dingjie Rift[D]. China University of Geosciences, Beijing (in Chinese).
[6]	田婷婷, 吴中海. 2023. 西藏申扎-定结裂谷南段丁木错正断层的最新史前大地震事件及其地震地质意义[J]. 地质论评, 69(1): 53—55.
	TIAN Ting-ting, WU Zhong-hai. 2023. Recent prehistoric major earthquake event of Dingmucuo normal fault in the southern segment of Shenzha-Dingjie Rift and its seismic geological significance[J]. Geological Review, 69(1): 53—55 (in Chinese).
[7]	徐锡伟, 谭锡斌, 吴国栋, 等. 2011. 2008年于田 M_S7.3 地震地表破裂带特征及其构造属性讨论[J]. 地震地质, 33(2): 462—471. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0253-4967.2011.02.019.
	XU Xi-wei, TAN Xi-bin, WU Guo-dong, et al. 2011. Surface rupture features of the 2008 Yutian M_S7.3 earthquake and its tectonic nature[J]. Seismology and Geology, 33(2): 462—471 (in Chinese).
[8]	徐心悦. 2019. 藏南申扎-定结断裂系卡达正断裂晚第四纪活动性及其环境效应[D]. 北京: 中国地震局地质研究所.
	XU Xin-yue. 2019. Late Quaternary activity and its environmental effects of the N-S trend Kharta fault in Xainza-Dinggye rift, Southern Tibet[D]. Institute of Geology, China Earthquake Administration, Beijing (in Chinese).
[9]	张佳伟, 李汉敖, 张会平, 等. 2020. 青藏高原新生代SN走向裂谷研究进展[J]. 地球科学进展, 35(8): 848—862.
	ZHANG Jia-wei, LI Han-ao, ZHANG Hui-ping, et al. 2020. Research progress in Cenozoic N-S striking rifts in Tibetan plateau[J]. Advances in Earth Science, 35(8): 848—862 (in Chinese).
[10]	Armijo R, Tapponnier P, Mercier J L, et al. 1986. Quaternary extension in southern Tibet: Field observations and tectonic implications[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 91(B14): 13803—13872.
[11]	Bian S, Gong J, Zuza A V, et al. 2022. Along-strike variation in the initiation timing of the north-trending rifts in southern Tibet as revealed from the Yadong-Gulu rift[J]. Tectonics, 41(7): e2021TC007091.
[12]	Bian S, Gong J, Zuza A V, et al. 2020. Late Pliocene onset of the Cona rift, eastern Himalaya, confirms eastward propagation of extension in Himalayan-Tibetan orogen[J]. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 544:116383.
[13]	Chen H, Qu C, Zhao D, et al. 2024. Large-scale extensional strain in southern Tibet from Sentinel-1 InSAR and GNSS data[J]. Geophysical Research Letters, 51(19): e2024GL110512.
[14]	Chen Y, Li W, Yuan X, et al. 2015. Tearing of the Indian lithospheric slab beneath southern Tibet revealed by SKS-wave splitting measurements[J]. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 413: 13—24.
[15]	Cottle J M, Jessup M J, Newell D L, et al. 2009. Geochronology of granulitized eclogite from the Ama Drime Massif: Implications for the tectonic evolution of the South Tibetan Himalaya[J]. Tectonics, 28(1). doi: 10.1029/2008TC002256.
[16]	Gu D, Zhang J, Lin C, et al. 2022. Geochronological and metamorphic constraints on the exhumation of the Ama Drime Massif: Implications for the mid-Miocene evolution of Himalayan extensional structures[J]. Tectonophysics, 836:229408.
[17]	Hager C, Stockli D, Dewane T, et al. 2009. Anatomy and crustal evolution of the central Lhasa terrane(S-Tibet)revealed by investigations in the Xainza rift[Z]. EGU General Assembly Conference Abstracts: 11346.
[18]	Hou Z, Yang Z, Lu Y, et al. 2015. A genetic linkage between subduction- and collision-related porphyry Cu deposits in continental collision zones[J]. Geology, 43(3): 247—250.
[19]	Jessup M, Newell D, Cottle J, et al. 2008. Orogen-parallel extension and exhumation enhanced by denudation in the trans-Himalayan Arun River gorge, Ama Drime Massif, Tibet-Nepal[J]. Geology, 36(7): 587—590.
[20]	Kali E, Leloup P H, Arnaud N, et al. 2010. Exhumation history of the deepest central Himalayan rocks, Ama Drime range: Key pressure-temperature-deformation-time constraints on orogenic models[J]. Tectonics, 29(2). doi: 10.1029/2009TC002551.
[21]	Kapp P, Guynn J H. 2004. Indian punch rifts Tibet[J]. Geology, 32(11): 993—996.
[22]	Langille J M, Jessup M J, Cottle J M, et al. 2010. Kinematic evolution of the Ama Drime detachment: Insights into orogen-parallel extension and exhumation of the Ama Drime Massif, Tibet-Nepal[J]. Journal of Structural Geology, 32(7): 900—919.
[23]	Lee J, Hager C, Wallis S R, et al. 2011. Middle to late Miocene extremely rapid exhumation and thermal reequilibration in the Kung Co rift, southern Tibet[J]. Tectonics, 30(2): TC2007. doi: 10.1029/2010TC002745.
[24]	Li J, Song X. 2018. Tearing of Indian mantle lithosphere from high-resolution seismic images and its implications for lithosphere coupling in southern Tibet[J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115: 8296—8300.
[25]	McCaffrey R, Nabelek J. 1998. Role of oblique convergence in the active deformation of the Himalayas and southern Tibet Plateau[J]. Geology, 26(8): 691—694.
[26]	McCallister A T, Taylor M H, Murphy M A, et al. 2014. Thermochronologic constraints on the late Cenozoic exhumation history of the Gurla Mandhata metamorphic core complex, Southwestern Tibet[J]. Tectonics, 33(2): 27—52.
[27]	Molnar P, England P, Martinod J. 1993. Mantle dynamics, uplift of the Tibetan plateau, and the Indian Monsoon[J]. Reviews of Geophysics, 31(4): 357—396.
[28]	Molnar P, Tapponnier P. 1978. Active tectonics of Tibet[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 83(B11): 5361—5375.
[29]	Monsalve G, Sheehan A, Schulte-Pelkum V, et al. 2006. Seismicity and one-dimensional velocity structure of the Himalayan collision zone: Earthquakes in the crust and upper mantle[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 111(B10): B10301.
[30]	Ratschbacher L, Frisch W, Liu G, et al. 1994. Distributed deformation in southern and western Tibet during and after the India-Asia collision[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 99(B10): 19917—19945.
[31]	Ratschbacher L, Krumrei I, Blumenwitz M, et al. 2011. Rifting and strike-slip shear in central Tibet and the geometry, age and kinematics of upper crustal extension in Tibet[J]. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 353(1): 127—163.
[32]	Seeber L, Armbruster J G. 1984. Some elements of continental subduction along the Himalayan front[J]. Tectonophysics, 105(1-4): 263—278.
[33]	Styron R H, Taylor M H, Murphy M A. 2011. Oblique convergence, arc-parallel extension, and the role of strike-slip faulting in the High Himalaya[J]. Geosphere, 7(2): 582—596.
[34]	Styron R H, Taylor M, Sundell K. 2015. Accelerated extension of Tibet linked to the northward underthrusting of Indian crust[J]. Nature Geoscience, 8: 131—134.
[35]	Tapponnier P, Peltzer G, Dain A Y L, et al. 1982. Propagating extrusion tectonics in Asia: New insights from simple experiments with plasticine[J]. Geology, 10(12): 611—616.
[36]	Taylor M, Yin A, Ryerson F J, et al. 2003. Conjugate strike-slip faulting along the Bangong-Nujiang suture zone accommodates coeval east-west extension and north-south shortening in the interior of the Tibetan plateau[J]. Tectonics, 22(4). doi: 10.1029/2002TC001361.
[37]	Wang H, Elliott J R, Craig T J, et al. 2014. Normal faulting sequence in the Pumqu-Xainza Rift constrained by InSAR and teleseismic body-wave seismology[J]. Geochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems, 15(7): 2947—2963.
[38]	Wang H, Wright T J, Liu-Zeng J, et al. 2019. Strain rate distribution in south-central Tibet from two decades of InSAR and GPS[J]. Geophysical Research Letters, 46(10): 5170—5179.
[39]	Wang M, Shen Z K. 2020. Present-day crustal deformation of continental China derived from GPS and its tectonic implications[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 125(2): e2019JB018774.
[40]	Webb A A G, Guo H, Clift P D, et al. 2017. The Himalaya in 3D: Slab dynamics controlled mountain building and monsoon intensification[J]. Lithosphere, 9(4): 637—651.
[41]	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.
[42]	Wolff R, Hetzel R, Hölzer K, et al. 2023. Rift propagation in south Tibet controlled by under-thrusting of India: A case study of the Tangra Yumco graben(south Tibet)[J]. Journal of the Geological Society, 180(2): jgs2022-090.

2025年1月7日西藏定日6.8级地震发震构造与同震地表破裂特征

SEISMOGENIC FAULT AND COSEISMIC SURFACE DEFORMATION OF THE DINGRI M_S6.8 EARTHQUAKE IN XIZANG, CHINA

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 8

参考文献 42

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	邹俊杰, 邵志刚, 何宏林, 高璐, 许月怡, 窦爱霞, 梁泽毓. 2025年1月7日西藏定日M_S6.8地震地表破裂解译与建筑物震害损毁统计[J]. 地震地质, 2025, 47(1): 16-35.
[2]	杨建文, 金明培, 叶泵, 黎朕灵, 李庆. 2025年1月7日西藏定日6.8级地震震源破裂机理及邻区应力变化[J]. 地震地质, 2025, 47(1): 36-48.
[3]	魏本勇, 张钰曼, 石峰, 乔俊香, 王鑫, 张达. 基于现场调查的2025西藏定日M_S6.8地震房屋震害与人员伤亡分析[J]. 地震地质, 2025, 47(1): 64-79.
[4]	梁明剑, 董芸希, 左洪, 代友林, 肖本夫, 廖程, 谭凌, 王余伟, 李响, 汤才成, 张威, 张会平, 孟令媛, 苏金蓉, 吴微微, 李传友, 严媚. 2025年西藏定日6.8级地震登么错段地表变形特征及其成因[J]. 地震地质, 2025, 47(1): 80-89.
[5]	许英才, 郭祥云. 2023年平原M_S5.5地震矩张量反演及发震构造[J]. 地震地质, 2025, 47(1): 284-305.
[6]	王鑫, 张珂, 王玥. 内蒙古阿鲁科尔沁旗M_S5.9与M_S4.7地震序列特征及其发震构造分析[J]. 地震地质, 2024, 46(6): 1314-1331.
[7]	许永强, 雷建设, 胡晓辉. 2021年5月21日云南漾濞M_S6.4地震序列双差重定位及其构造意义[J]. 地震地质, 2024, 46(5): 1066-1090.
[8]	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.
[9]	陈翰林, 王勤彩, 张金川, 刘瑞丰. 四川芦山2022年6月 M_S6.1 地震的发震构造及其与2013年4月 M_S7.0 地震关系的探讨[J]. 地震地质, 2023, 45(5): 1233-1246.
[10]	傅莺, 胡斌, 赵敏, 龙锋. 2022年芦山M_S6.1地震序列的精确定位及发震构造[J]. 地震地质, 2023, 45(4): 987-1005.
[11]	刘白云, 赵莉, 刘云云, 王文才, 张卫东. 2021年5月22日青海玛多M7.4地震余震重新定位与断层面参数拟合[J]. 地震地质, 2023, 45(2): 500-516.
[12]	赵德政, 屈春燕, 张桂芳, 龚文瑜, 单新建, 朱传华, 张国宏, 宋小刚. 基于InSAR技术的同震形变获取、地震应急监测和发震构造研究应用进展[J]. 地震地质, 2023, 45(2): 570-592.
[13]	张珂, 王鑫, 杨红樱, 王玥, 徐岩, 李静. 2021年云南漾濞M_S6.4地震序列特征及其发震构造分析[J]. 地震地质, 2023, 45(1): 231-251.
[14]	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.
[15]	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.

2025年1月7日西藏定日6.8级地震发震构造与同震地表破裂特征

SEISMOGENIC FAULT AND COSEISMIC SURFACE DEFORMATION OF THE DINGRI MS6.8 EARTHQUAKE IN XIZANG, CHINA

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 8

参考文献 42

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

SEISMOGENIC FAULT AND COSEISMIC SURFACE DEFORMATION OF THE DINGRI M_S6.8 EARTHQUAKE IN XIZANG, CHINA