Geology Reports⌕ Search

Geology topics

Research about New Madrid Seismic Zone

Source-linked reports with geographic coverage including New Madrid Seismic Zone.

7 recordsLinked to original sources
USGS2018

Coseismic sackungen in the New Madrid seismic zone, USA

High‐resolution lidar reveals newly recognized evidence of strong shaking in the New Madrid seismic zone in the central United States. We mapped concentrations of sackungen (ridgetop spreading features) on bluffs along the eastern Mississippi River valley in northwestern Tennessee that likely form or are reactivated during large earthquakes. These sackungen are concentrated on the hanging wall of the Reelfoot reverse fault and show a preferential orientation indicating ground failure normal to fault strike. These observations suggest that the sackungen record one or more earthquakes on the southern Reelfoot fault since the deposition of the ~30‐ to 11‐ka Peoria Loess and potentially constrain the minimum intensity of near‐fault ground motion. This study demonstrates that sackungen can be used to infer fault source and mechanism and, in combination with field‐based techniques, improve paleoseismic records and seismic hazard models.

New Madrid Seismic Zone↗
USGS2011

Studying geodesy and earthquake hazard in and around the New Madrid Seismic Zone

Workshop on New Madrid Geodesy and the Challenges of Understanding Intraplate Earthquakes; Norwood, Massachusetts, 4 March 2011 Twenty-six researchers gathered for a workshop sponsored by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and FM Global to discuss geodesy in and around the New Madrid seismic zone (NMSZ) and its relation to earthquake hazards. The group addressed the challenge of reconciling current geodetic measurements, which show low present-day surface strain rates, with paleoseismic evidence of recent, relatively frequent, major earthquakes in the region. The workshop presentations and conclusions will be available in a forthcoming USGS open-file report (http://pubs.usgs.gov).

Eos, Transactions, American Geophysical Union↗
USGS2011

Toward a consistent model for strain accrual and release for the New Madrid Seismic Zone, central United States

At the heart of the conundrum of seismogenesis in the New Madrid Seismic Zone is the apparently substantial discrepancy between low strain rate and high recent seismic moment release. In this study we revisit the magnitudes of the four principal 1811–1812 earthquakes using intensity values determined from individual assessments from four experts. Using these values and the grid search method of Bakun and Wentworth (1997), we estimate magnitudes around 7.0 for all four events, values that are significantly lower than previously published magnitude estimates based on macroseismic intensities. We further show that the strain rate predicted from postglacial rebound is sufficient to produce a sequence with the moment release of one M max 6.8 every 500 years, a rate that is much lower than previous estimates of late Holocene moment release. However, M w 6.8 is at the low end of the uncertainty range inferred from analysis of intensities for the largest 1811–1812 event. We show that M w 6.8 is also a reasonable value for the largest main shock given a plausible rupture scenario. One can also construct a range of consistent models that permit a somewhat higher M max , with a longer average recurrence rate. It is thus possible to reconcile predicted strain and seismic moment release rates with alternative models: one in which 1811–1812 sequences occur every 500 years, with the largest events being M max ∼6.8, or one in which sequences occur, on average, less frequently, with Mmax of ∼7.0. Both models predict that the late Holocene rate of activity will continue for the next few to 10 thousand years.

New Madrid Seismic Zone↗
USGS2009

Earthquake hazard in the New Madrid Seismic Zone remains a concern

There is broad agreement in the scientific community that a continuing concern exists for a major destructive earthquake in the New Madrid seismic zone. Many structures in Memphis, Tenn., St. Louis, Mo., and other communities in the central Mississippi River Valley region are vulnerable and at risk from severe ground shaking. This assessment is based on decades of research on New Madrid earthquakes and related phenomena by dozens of Federal, university, State, and consulting earth scientists. Considerable interest has developed recently from media reports that the New Madrid seismic zone may be shutting down. These reports stem from published research using global positioning system (GPS) instruments with results of geodetic measurements of strain in the Earth's crust. Because of a lack of measurable strain at the surface in some areas of the seismic zone over the past 14 years, arguments have been advanced that there is no buildup of stress at depth within the New Madrid seismic zone and that the zone may no longer pose a significant hazard. As part of the consensus-building process used to develop the national seismic hazard maps, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) convened a workshop of experts in 2006 to evaluate the latest findings in earthquake hazards in the Eastern United States. These experts considered the GPS data from New Madrid available at that time that also showed little to no ground movement at the surface. The experts did not find the GPS data to be a convincing reason to lower the assessment of earthquake hazard in the New Madrid region, especially in light of the many other types of data that are used to construct the hazard assessment, several of which are described here.

Arkansas, Illinois, Kentucky, Missouri, Tennessee↗
USGS2002

Magnitude estimates of two large aftershocks of the 16 December 1811 New Madrid earthquake

The three principal New Madrid mainshocks of 1811-1812 were followed by extensive aftershock sequences that included numerous felt events. Although no instrumental data are available for either the mainshocks or the aftershocks, available historical accounts do provide information that can be used to estimate magnitudes and locations for the large events. In this article we investigate two of the largest aftershocks: one near dawn following the first mainshock on 16 December 1811, and one near midday on 17 December 1811. We reinterpret original felt reports to obtain a set of 48 and 20 modified Mercalli intensity values of the two aftershocks, respectively. For the dawn aftershock, we infer a Mw of approximately 7.0 based on a comparison of its intensities with those of the smallest New Madrid mainshock. Based on a detailed account that appears to describe near-field ground motions, we further propose a new fault rupture scenario for the dawn aftershock. We suggest that the aftershock had a thrust mechanism and occurred on a southeastern limb of the Reelfoot fault. For the 17 December 1811 aftershock, we infer a M W of approximately 6.1 ± 0.2 . This value is determined using the method of Bakun et al. (2002), which is based on a new calibration of intensity versus distance for earthquakes in central and eastern North America. The location of this event is not well constrained, but the available accounts suggest an epicenter beyond the southern end of the New Madrid Seismic Zone.

Arkansas, Illinois, Missouri, Tennessee↗
USGS2001

GPS constraints on M 7-8 earthquake recurrence times for the New Madrid seismic zone

Newman et al. ( 1999 ) estimate the time interval between the 1811–1812 earthquake sequence near New Madrid, Missouri and a future similar sequence to be at least 2,500 years, an interval significantly longer than other recently published estimates. To calculate the recurrence time, they assume that slip on a vertical half-plane at depth contributes to the current interseismic motion of GPS benchmarks. Compared to other plausible fault models, the half-plane model gives nearly the maximum rate of ground motion for the same interseismic slip rate. Alternative models with smaller interseismic fault slip area can satisfy the present GPS data by having higher slip rate and thus can have earthquake recurrence times much less than 2,500 years.

Arkansas, Illinois, Kentucky, Missouri, Tennessee↗