Geology Reports⌕ Search

USGS · 70203901

Determining Moho depth beneath sedimentary basins using regional Pn multiples

Abstract

The study of the Moho beneath thick sedimentary basins involving natural earthquakes is challenging, as low‐velocity materials often cause strong reverberations that mask Moho signals. Here, we develop a method to determine the depth of the Moho by taking advantage of the presence of the sediments. The method utilizes the first Pn crustal multiple from regional earthquakes PnPn and its differential travel time with respect to Pn. PnPn is usually weak in amplitude; thus, it is difficult to identify in regions without a sedimentary cover. However, PnPn is significantly amplified in the presence of low‐velocity sediments because of an increase in the near‐surface P‐to‐P reflection coefficient. The arrival time, amplitude, and wave shape of PnPn, if normalized by the reference Pn, are insensitive to earthquake source parameters, such as focal mechanism and focal depth. We demonstrate the potential of this method using both 1D and 2D waveform simulations. Synthetic waveforms suggest that PmpPn and PnPmp (one Pn leg merges to PmP near the source or the receiver) largely contribute to the PnPn amplitudes, which depend on the near‐surface structure at their free‐surface P‐to‐P reflection points. We further validate the method with two field examples in the Imperial Valley; one is near the United States–Mexico border, and the other is in Oklahoma in the central United States. Both examples suggest that the method can be used to study the Moho either near the source or the receiver.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

C. Yu, Z. Zhan, E. Hauksson, Elizabeth S. Cochran, D. Helmberger. 2019-05-07. Determining Moho depth beneath sedimentary basins using regional Pn multiples. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120180325

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Re-evaluation of shaking, dynamic strain, and the source of the 1886 Charleston, South Carolina, earthquake

As the largest historical event in the eastern United States, the 1886 Charleston, South Carolina, earthquake, plays a prominent role in our nation’s seismological and human history and an outsized role in our probabilistic ground‐motion hazard estimates, affecting building codes, insurance rates, and geophysical monitoring. Thus, constraining the characteristics of the 1886 earthquake source, as well as the nature of its shaking distribution and impacts to the extent possible, is essential. Given its vintage, however, societal, geological, and geophysical datasets are limited compared with those used in modern seismological analyses. Because of these limitations, some characteristics of the rupture model are fundamentally nonunique. Still, by re‐evaluating all available data, I can constrain several key aspects of this earthquake. I show that several interpretations in recent analyses are inconsistent regarding the inferred source; shaking; ground failure; and, particularly, railway impacts. Importantly, I have shown that although dynamic strain caused the ground failure that led to track deformation, without the intermediate liquefaction step, dynamic strain alone was unlikely to be the source of rail deformation, contrary to earlier studies. Had earlier pronouncements that dynamic strain is a real concern for bending railways held true, there would be serious ramifications for railway engineering as well as for other above‐ and below‐ground linear infrastructure.

South Carolina↗

ETAS-positive: Extracting unbiased epidemic-type aftershock models from incomplete earthquake catalogs

Earthquake catalogs are inherently incomplete, and short-term fluctuations in catalog completeness can strongly bias estimates of seismicity parameters. Here, we extend the positive statistics framework recently introduced for estimating Gutenberg–Richter a and b values to the Epidemic-Type Aftershock Sequence (ETAS) model. The approach focuses on complete magnitude–time intervals defined by pairs of earthquakes in which the second event is larger than the first. Comprehensive synthetic tests demonstrate that the proposed ETAS + method retrieves nearly unbiased parameter estimates even from highly incomplete catalogs, whereas parameters obtained using classical estimation approaches are strongly biased. Application to Southern California reveals a similar trend, with the productivity scaling parameter α approaching the b value, consistent with self-similar earthquake triggering within estimation uncertainties. Owing to its robustness against catalog incompleteness and computational efficiency, the ETAS + method provides a powerful new tool for seismicity analysis and earthquake forecasting.

California↗