A. Nelson, A. Hawkes, Y. Sawai, S. Engelhart, R. Witter, Wendy C. Grant-Walter, L. Bradley, T. Dura, N. Cahill, B. Horton
{"title":"Identifying the Greatest Earthquakes of the Past 2000 Years at the Nehalem River Estuary, Northern Oregon Coast, USA","authors":"A. Nelson, A. Hawkes, Y. Sawai, S. Engelhart, R. Witter, Wendy C. Grant-Walter, L. Bradley, T. Dura, N. Cahill, B. Horton","doi":"10.5334/oq.70","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We infer a history of three great megathrust earthquakes during the past 2000 years at the Nehalem River estuary based on the lateral extent of sharp (≤3 mm) peat-mud stratigraphic contacts in cores and outcrops, coseismic subsidence as interpreted from fossil diatom assemblages and reconstructed with foraminiferal assemblages using a Bayesian transfer function, and regional correlation of 14C-modeled ages for the times of subsidence. A subsidence contact from 1700 CE (contact A), sometimes overlain by tsunami-deposited sand, can be traced over distances of 7 km. Contacts B and D, which record subsidence during two earlier megathrust earthquakes, are much less extensive but are traced across a 700-m by 270-m tidal marsh. Although some other Cascadia studies report evidence for an earthquake between contacts B and D, our lack of extensive evidence for such an earthquake may result from the complexities of preserving identifiable evidence of it in the rapidly shifting shoreline environments of the lower river and bay. Ages (95% intervals) and subsidence for contacts are: A, 1700 CE (1.1 ± 0.5 m); B, 942–764 cal a BP (0.7 ± 0.4 m and 1.0 m ± 0.4 m); and D, 1568–1361 cal a BP (1.0 m ± 0.4 m). Comparisons of contact subsidence and the degree of overlap of their modeled ages with ages for other Cascadia sites are consistent with megathrust ruptures many hundreds of kilometers long. But these data cannot conclusively distinguish among different types or lengths of ruptures recorded by the three great earthquake contacts at the Nehalem River estuary.","PeriodicalId":37172,"journal":{"name":"Open Quaternary","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Open Quaternary","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5334/oq.70","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6
Abstract
We infer a history of three great megathrust earthquakes during the past 2000 years at the Nehalem River estuary based on the lateral extent of sharp (≤3 mm) peat-mud stratigraphic contacts in cores and outcrops, coseismic subsidence as interpreted from fossil diatom assemblages and reconstructed with foraminiferal assemblages using a Bayesian transfer function, and regional correlation of 14C-modeled ages for the times of subsidence. A subsidence contact from 1700 CE (contact A), sometimes overlain by tsunami-deposited sand, can be traced over distances of 7 km. Contacts B and D, which record subsidence during two earlier megathrust earthquakes, are much less extensive but are traced across a 700-m by 270-m tidal marsh. Although some other Cascadia studies report evidence for an earthquake between contacts B and D, our lack of extensive evidence for such an earthquake may result from the complexities of preserving identifiable evidence of it in the rapidly shifting shoreline environments of the lower river and bay. Ages (95% intervals) and subsidence for contacts are: A, 1700 CE (1.1 ± 0.5 m); B, 942–764 cal a BP (0.7 ± 0.4 m and 1.0 m ± 0.4 m); and D, 1568–1361 cal a BP (1.0 m ± 0.4 m). Comparisons of contact subsidence and the degree of overlap of their modeled ages with ages for other Cascadia sites are consistent with megathrust ruptures many hundreds of kilometers long. But these data cannot conclusively distinguish among different types or lengths of ruptures recorded by the three great earthquake contacts at the Nehalem River estuary.
根据岩心和露头中尖锐(≤3 mm)泥炭-泥浆地层接触的横向范围、硅藻化石组合解释的同震沉降以及利用贝叶斯传递函数与有孔虫组合重建的同震沉降,以及14c模拟年龄的区域对比,推断了Nehalem河口近2000年来三次大逆冲地震的历史。从公元1700年开始的沉降接触点(接触点A),有时被海啸沉积的沙子覆盖,可以在7公里的距离上追踪到。接触点B和接触点D记录了早期两次大逆冲地震期间的沉降,范围要小得多,但可以追溯到700米乘270米的潮汐沼泽。虽然其他一些卡斯卡迪亚研究报告了在接触点B和接触点D之间发生地震的证据,但我们缺乏关于这种地震的广泛证据,可能是因为在下游河流和海湾快速变化的海岸线环境中保存可识别的证据很复杂。触点年龄(95%间隔)和沉降为:A, 1700 CE(1.1±0.5 m);B, 942-764 cal a BP(0.7±0.4 m和1.0 m±0.4 m);和D, 1568-1361 cal a BP (1.0 m±0.4 m)。与其他卡斯卡迪亚遗址的年龄相比,接触沉降及其模拟年龄的重叠程度与数百公里长的巨型逆冲断裂一致。但这些数据不能决定性地区分Nehalem河河口三次大地震接触记录的不同类型或长度的破裂。