77
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Seismicity around Southern Lake Erie during 2013–2020 in Relation to Lake Water Level

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisher
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The water level change in the Great Lake region can modulate stresses in the nearby fault system and potentially induce earthquakes. We perform a systematic analysis of local seismicity around southern Lake Erie during 2013–2020 to investigate the relation between seismicity and lake water level change. We obtain a newly detected catalog of tectonic earthquakes, which reveals 20–40 M > 0 earthquakes/yr before 2019. The peak seismicity rate in 2019 is dominated by active aftershocks following the 2019 ML 4.0 Ohio earthquake. The clustering analysis reveals both clusters with multiple events and stand-alone events that might represent isolated zones of crustal weakness in this region. The absolute location analysis identifies a group of earthquakes around the epicenter of the 1986 M 5 earthquake, which might be linked to the nearby injection activities. To evaluate the potential interaction with changing water loading of Lake Erie, we then model the coulomb stress change (ΔCSC) caused by elastic lake-water loading and find that ΔCSC strongly depends on effective friction coefficient (μ′). Considering the geometry of the receiver fault, higher lake water level results in positive ΔCSC and would promote failure when μ′≤0.3, and leads to negative ΔCSC and would discourage rupture when μ′>0.3. Further analysis indicates a lack of temporal correlation between long-term seismicity and water level variations before the 2019 Ohio sequence, suggesting that water level fluctuations do not modulate long-term seismicity. However, we cannot fully rule out the impact of increasing water level on reactivating the fault that hosted the 2019 Ohio earthquake sequence because of the uncertainty of μ′. Our results highlight the necessity of denser and closer monitoring of lake seismicity to further investigate the impact of changing water loading on reactivating shallow faults in this region.

          Related collections

          Most cited references55

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Preliminary reference Earth model

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            The role of stress transfer in earthquake occurrence

            Ross Stein (1999)
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Change in failure stress on the southern san andreas fault system caused by the 1992 magnitude = 7.4 landers earthquake.

              The 28 June Landers earthquake brought the San Andreas fault significantly closer to failure near San Bernardino, a site that has not sustained a large shock since 1812. Stress also increased on the San Jacinto fault near San Bernardino and on the San Andreas fault southeast of Palm Springs. Unless creep or moderate earthquakes relieve these stress changes, the next great earthquake on the southern San Andreas fault is likely to be advanced by one to two decades. In contrast, stress on the San Andreas north of Los Angeles dropped, potentially delaying the next great earthquake there by 2 to 10 years.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Seismological Research Letters
                Seismological Society of America (SSA)
                0895-0695
                1938-2057
                May 09 2022
                May 09 2022
                Affiliations
                [1 ]National Key Laboratory of Geological Processes and Mineral Resources, China University of Geosciences, Wuhan, Hubei Province, China
                [2 ]Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, College of Literature, Science, and Arts, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, U.S.A.
                [3 ]School of Earth, Environment and Society, College of Arts and Sciences, Bowling Green State University, Bowling Green, Ohio, U.S.A.
                [4 ]Earth and Environmental Sciences, College of Arts and Sciences, Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York, U.S.A.
                [5 ]School for Environment and Sustainability, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, U.S.A.
                [6 ]Division of Geological Survey, Ohio Department of Natural Resources, Columbus, Ohio, U.S.A.
                Article
                10.1785/0220210343
                cd54b6e9-4329-4153-be31-15d580d8a48e
                © 2022
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article