HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (1) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Selby, N. D. Articles by Porter, D. Search for Related Content GeoRef GeoRef Citation

Seismic Discrimination in Southern Xinjiang: The 13 March 2003 Lop Nor Earthquake

¹ AWE Blacknest
Brimpton, Reading, RG7 4RS, United Kingdom
 (N.D.S., D.B., A.D., R.H., D.P.)

² Department of Earth Sciences
University of Oxford
Oxford, OX1 3PR, United Kingdom
 (R.H.)

Earthquakes that occur near known nuclear test sites are invaluable for evaluating the capabilities of the International Monitoring System (IMS), currently being established to monitor compliance with the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT). On 13 March 2003 a seismic disturbance with magnitude m_b (National Earthquake Information Center [NEIC]) 4.8 occurred near the Chinese nuclear test site at Lop Nor, southern Xinjiang. Here we attempt to identify this disturbance as an earthquake by using three types of seismic data: (1) teleseismic P waves recorded at IMS stations; (2) long-period surface waves recorded at a network of stations in Eurasia that simulates the proposed IMS seismic network in this region, and (3) long-period full waveform (P, S, and surface wave) modeling at station WMQ, which is approximately 250 km from the reported epicenter of the 13 March 2003 disturbance.

We find that all impulsive teleseismic P-wave onsets show compressive first motion and that discrimination using the m _b :M_s criterion requires assumptions that cannot be justified on theoretical grounds. However, by combining the three data types, we conclude that the observations are consistent with a double-couple source with strike = 125 ± 10°, dip = 40 ± 10°, rake = 90 ± 10°, and moment M₀ 5.5 ± 1 x 10¹⁵ N m.

That said, consistency of the seismic wave field with a double couple does not immediately rule out an explosion source, because tectonic release accompanying an explosion can make it impossible to resolve the isotropic moment using long-period data. The strongest argument for an earthquake is that both the regional surface waves, and waveform modeling at WMQ, give an estimated focal depth of 6 ± 1 km. This result reinforces the importance of focal depth determination to CTBT monitoring, in particular, for shallow earthquakes with mechanisms that are close to perfect 45° reverse-dip-slip, which are difficult to discriminate by using other methods. Fortunately, depth determination using surface waves is especially favorable for this type of earthquake, if a sufficient number of stations can be used. We therefore recommend that long-period data recorded at auxiliary seismic stations of the IMS be utilized by the International Data Centre to monitor compliance with the CTBT.