| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
1 University of California,
Berkeley
Berkeley Seismological Laboratory
215 McCone Hall
Berkeley,
California
94027
ingrid{at}seismo.berkeley.edu
(I.A.J.,
R.B.)
2 Jet Propulsion Laboratory/California
Institute of Technology
4800 Oak Grove Drive
Pasadena, California
91109
(E.J.F.)
3 Université Pierre et Marie
Curie—Paris VI
Laboratoire de Tectonique—CNRS UMR7072
Barre
46-45 Niveau 2—Case 129
4, Place Jussieu F-75252, Paris Cedex 05,
France
(F.R.)
* Present address: U.S. Geological Survey, 345 Middlefield Road, MS 977, Menlo Park, California 94025.
We invert interferometric synthetic aperture radar (INSAR) data jointly with campaign and continuous global positioning system (GPS) data for slip in the coseismic and postseismic periods of the 2004 Parkfield earthquake. The INSAR dataset consists of eight interferograms from data collected by the Envisat and Radarsat satellites spanning the time of the earthquake and variable amounts of the postseismic period. The two datasets complement each other, with the INSAR providing dense sampling of motion in the range direction of the satellite and the GPS providing more sparse, but three-dimensional measurements of ground motion. The model assumes exponential decay of the postseismic slip with a decay time constant of 0.087 years, determined from time series modeling of continuous GPS and creepmeter data. We find a geodetic moment magnitude of M 6.2 for a 1-day coseismic model and Mw 6.1 for the entire postseismic period. The coseismic rupture occurred mainly in two slip asperities; one near the hypocenter and the other 15–20 km north. Postseismic slip occurred on the shallow portions of the fault and near the rupture areas of two M 5.0 aftershocks. A comparison of the geodetic slip models with seismic moment estimates suggests that the coseismic moment release of the Parkfield earthquake is as little as 25% of the total. This underlines the importance of aseismic slip in the slip budget for the Parkfield segment.
Online material: Complete data tables and supplemental tables.
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  D. C. Templeton, R. M. Nadeau, and R. Burgmann Behavior of Repeating Earthquake Sequences in Central California and the Implications for Subsurface Fault Creep Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, February 1, 2008; 98(1): 52 - 65. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 B. P. Allmann and P. M. Shearer A High-Frequency Secondary Event During the 2004 Parkfield Earthquake Science, November 23, 2007; 318(5854): 1279 - 1283. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. A. Harris and J R. Arrowsmith Introduction to the Special Issue on the 2004 Parkfield Earthquake and the Parkfield Earthquake Prediction Experiment Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, September 1, 2006; 96(4B): S1 - S10. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. Liu, S. Custodio, and R. J. Archuleta Kinematic Inversion of the 2004 M 6.0 Parkfield Earthquake Including an Approximation to Site Effects Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, September 1, 2006; 96(4B): S143 - S158. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. Langbein, J. R. Murray, and H. A. Snyder Coseismic and Initial Postseismic Deformation from the 2004 Parkfield, California, Earthquake, Observed by Global Positioning System, Electronic Distance Meter, Creepmeters, and Borehole Strainmeters Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, September 1, 2006; 96(4B): S304 - S320. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
K. M. Johnson, R. Burgmann, and K. Larson Frictional Properties on the San Andreas Fault near Parkfield, California, Inferred from Models of Afterslip following the 2004 Earthquake Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, September 1, 2006; 96(4B): S321 - S338. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
