The first modified mercalli intensity map of Maku, NW Iran

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-3459110/v1

Download PDF

Research Article

The first modified mercalli intensity map of Maku, NW Iran

https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3459110/v1

This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License

You are reading this latest preprint version

The aim of this study is to provide a probabilistic modified Mercalli intensity (PMMI) map based on seismological studies for the Maku Quadrangle. The study area is located in the NW corner of Iran. The occurrence of several destructive earthquakes and the existence of active faults represent a high level of seismicity in this area. While investigating the seismotectonics and b-value, all active seismic sources were identified and the seismic parameters were calculated for those. Then the PMMI map was calculated using four attenuation equations. The results showed that the maximum intensity is in the form of a strip running NW-SE and showed good compatibility with the Iğdır and Balıkgölü faults. The present results are in good agreement with the shake map of earthquakes which occurred in the region.

modified Mercalli intensity

active fault

Maku

seismic sources

shake map

1.1 Literature review

The MMI is a way to show what effect an earthquake has on the surface of the Earth. One of the first attempts to develop the Giuseppe Mercalli's Mercalli intensity scale of 1902 was introduced by Wood and Neumann (Wood and Neumann, 1930). Then, drawing upon more reliable criteria, which served as indicators of the severity of ground shaking, Stover and Coffman (Stover and Coffman, 1993) revised the MMI scaling. The preparation of an MMI map is based on connecting points of equal intensity to each other and drawing the intensity contours. However, such maps are only useful when coping with earthquakes that have already occurred, and they give no insight into the possible effects and intensity of upcoming earthquakes. Therefore, knowing the possible intensity and danger of prospective earthquakes could lend invaluable perspective to the safety engineering of structures. For this purpose, the current study, for the first time, attempts to develop the MMI maps through the probabilistic method.

1.2 Tectonic and Seismotectonic

In recent decades, the construction of high-rise buildings has made significant progress (Berberian, 2014). Awareness of the seismic situation and its hazards is an important part of the studies in this field. Seismic intensity has a significant impact on the design of structures, and is also well considered in studies evaluating liquefaction and slope stability. The current study investigates the Maku quadrangle, which is located in the northwest corner of Iran (Fig. 1), and also stretches to parts of Turkey, Armenia, and Azerbaijan. The existence of Mount Ararat and Mount Tendürek, both volcanic, and the occurrence of large earthquakes(Jarahi, 2017) caused by active faults(Berberian, 2014; Faridi et al., 2019), indicate a high level of seismicity in this region. Additionally, the cluttered state of stratigraphic layers(Alizadeh et al., 2019; Moayyed et al., 2020) and the accompanying sedimentary units, along with volcanic units, represent the impact tectonic activity has on the region (Fig. 1). Finally, the high crustal slip rate(Karakhanian et al., 2002; Karakhanian et al., 2004; Karakhanian et al., 2013) in this area is another reason for its seismicity and its importance.

The study area includes the structural block of Aras (NW Iran) (Berberian and Yeats, 1999), which is located in the area between the Iranian, Arabian, and Caucasian plates and is affected by the movements resulting from the interactions between these three zones. The Northwestern part of Iran, as one of the components of the structural area of the "Caucasus", is located in its southeastern part called the Turkish-Iranian plate. The Turkish-Iranian plate is part of the convergence of the Arab-Eurasian plates. This plate was formed at the beginning of the continental-continental convergence (10.7–13 million years ago) and the intersection of the Paratitis Ocean (between the Black Sea and the Caspian Sea)(Van Couvering and Miller, 1971). From a morphological point of view, this plate has an average height of 2 km. The Caucasus Territorial Structure includes two north-south convergence zones, one between the Arabian and Eurasian plates in the east (convergence rate of 30 mm per year) and the other between the African and European plates in the west (with a convergence rate of 10 mm per year)(Cisternas and Philip, 1997). The difference in velocity between these two plates is represented by a left-lateral strike-slip movement (NE-SW trend in Fig. 1a) on the border between the Arabian plates (east) and Africa (west). With the opening of the Red Sea in Tortonian (Upper Miocene, about 10 million years ago) and the movement of the Arabian plate to the north, the Anatolian block (Central Turkey) began to move westward, and the Iranian block moved eastward. At the same time, the central part of the Caucasus faced shortening and deformation (folding and reverse faulting)(Cisternas and Philip, 1997). Earthquake focal mechanisms of this area follow strike-slip faults with NW trending(Jackson, 1992). Moreover, three dominant structural trends (NW-SE, NE-SW, and W-E) can be observed, which are limited by the north-south transform faults. Faults trending NE-SW are mainly left-lateral strike-slip (such as the East Anatolian fault); NW-SE faults are mainly sinistral (such as the North Tabriz fault), and east-west structural trends mainly include reverse faults, thrust faults, and folds(Solaymani Azad, 2009). Part of the convergence between the Arabian and Eurasian plates in northwestern Iran runs along the sinistral fault system with a NW-SE trending. Another part of this convergence is absorbed by reverse faults in the northern parts(Jackson, 1992; Westaway, 1990). Considering that this area is surrounded by shear faults, it seems that in addition to transfer movements, the study area is also involved in counter-clockwise rotational movements(Copley and Jackson, 2006).

Generally, to carry out PMMI, earthquake catalogs, seismicity parameters, seismic sources, and attenuation models are required. The region's earthquake catalog was taken from the ISC website (http://www.isc.ac.uk/). All historical (Ambraseys, 2009; Ambraseys and Jackson, 1998; Ambraseys and Melville, 1982; Berberian, 1995) and recent earthquakes (2 < M < 7.4) in the study area with a 20-km buffer were examined from the year 800 to 2023. Among these historical events, the earthquakes of 1696 and 1840 with magnitudes of 7 and 7.4, respectively, were the largest ones in the region. These events were associated with the movement of the Caldıran and Maku faults. For the 1840 earthquake, three relatively small earthquakes were reported by Berberian (Berberian, 1976, 1995), which were aftershocks of the main earthquake. The largest most recent earthquake occurred in 1976 with a magnitude of 7.2 and was in connection with the reactivation of the Caldiran fault (Table 1). Based on the relocation of the earthquake catalog, it seems that the Garni, Gailatu-Siah Chesmeh-Khoy (GSK), Igdir, and Caldiran faults can be considered as the main seismic elements of this area. First, the magnitude column in the catalog was completed by statistical analysis of earthquakes. In doing so, an equation was formed using the events whose both magnitudes of Ms and mb had been recorded. Figure 2 shows the equation for converting Ms to mb and vice versa in an earthquake catalog (Fig. 2). Then, the event catalog was ready for Gutenberg-Richter (Gutenberg and Richter, 1956) formula calculations to access the b-value. Throughout the area of the study, the distribution of earthquakes was uneven. Thus, there were not enough events to calculate b-value for each seismic source. Zmap (Wiemer, 2001) software was able to estimate the b-value using Gutenberg-Richter (Gutenberg and Richter, 1956) method as a propagation map.

Table 1

Short list of main earthquake events in the study area. (Amb: Ambraseys and Melville (1982); Ber: Berberian 1995)
Ref.	Associated Fault	Magnitude		MMI	Epicenter		Date
Ref.	Associated Fault	Mw	Ms	Ber.	Longitude	Latitude	Day	Month	Year
Amb.	Nakhchivan		5.2		44.573	39.883	13	2	863
Amb.	Nakhchivan		6	VIII	44.72	39.773	24	12	893
Ber	Garni		6.1	VIII	45.121	39.679		4	906
Ber	GSK	5.3	5.3	VII	44.4	39.08	-	-	1319
Amb.	Caldıran		7	IIX	43.9	39.1	14	4	1696
Amb.	Maku (Igdir)		6	VIII	43.7	39.7			1834
Ber	Maku (Igdir)	7.3	7.4	IX	43.9	39.5	2	7	1840
Ber	Maku (Igdir)		4.7	VI	43.9	39.5	6	7	1840
Ber	Maku (Igdir)		5	VI+	43.9	39.5	26	7	1840
Ber	Maku (Igdir)		4.8	VI	43.9	39.5	27	7	1840
Ber	GSK		5.5		44.23	39.24	29	4	1968
Ber	Caldıran	7	7.2	IX	44.03	39.083	24	11	1976
Ber	Caldıran		5.4		44.03	39.083	26	5	1977
Ber	Caldıran		7.4		44.122	39.107	20	4	1988
ISC	Van	7.2	7.3	IX	43.4465	38.7294	23	10	2011
ISC	Maku (Igdir)	5.0	5.1		44.0558	38.4673	25	6	2020

In this study, Ez-Frisk 8.06 (Ez-FRisk, 2018) software was used to calculate PMMI values. For this purpose, the seismic sources database, taking all seismicity parameters into consideration, needed to be defined; thus, a 3-dimensional representation of the geometry of a fault source was used (Fig. 3). A fault is characterized by its surface trace and its vertical cross-section. The surface trace of the fault was displayed by connected line segments between fault points. The vertical cross sections were characterized by two dip angles and three depths. These depths specified the minimum depth of the energy released (top of seismogenic layer), the depth where the dip angle changed, and the depth at the end of the seismogenic layer. Due to the lack of earthquake distribution, determining the seismogenic layer for this region was not possible, so Sesetyan et al. (Şeşetyan et al., 2018) method was selected for the purpose. In this representation of fault geometry, the fault cross-section is not allowed to vary along the length of the fault; portions of the fault surface between plane segments are modeled as surfaces of rotation. Figure 3 shows the seismic source geometry. Earthquake epicenters are located in the surface projection of the rupture area. This is the high-risk area around a seismic source. To determine the dip of each fault, Basili et al. (Basili et al., 2013) and Giardini et al. (Giardini et al., 2013) studies was used. Finally, the PMMI was calculated using four attenuation equations. For this purpose, EZ-FRISK uses the classic Everden and Thomson (Evernden, 1976) amplification methodology.

3.1. Earthquake Recurrence Model

For the exponential magnitude distribution, a standard Gutenberg-Richter b-value calculation was utilized and the outcome was given as the input to the Ez-Frisk for carrying out the probabilistic hazard analysis. For the characteristic magnitude model, the highest rates of occurrence of large earthquakes were taken into account. Since the calculation of activity rate (𝛌) was not possible for this area (low distribution of earthquakes), the use of slip rate was inevitable. Where fault activity was designated by slip rate in mm/year, the slip rate was converted to an activity rate. Before starting the analysis, foreshocks and aftershocks were removed from earthquake catalogs using Gardener and Knopoff (Gardener and Knopoff, 1974) declustering option in Zmap. Using b-value map (Fig. 4) and correlating it to the location of the seismic sources, the b-value for each source was considered (Table 2). Low values of b indicate high stress zones (Kanamori, 2013). In other words, such areas could be the location of future destructive earthquakes (Jarahi, 2017). According to the Fig. 4, there is a lower b-values area in northeastern part of the map; therefore, it is likely that a future earthquake will occur during Igdir fault movement. It should be noted, however, that this conclusion is based only on the earthquakes catalog. This hypothesis can be strengthened by considering the nature of historical and prehistoric earthquakes.

Table 2

Seismogenic parameters of seismic sources of Maku
No.	Source Name	Guttenberg-Richter (Zmap)		Length	Slip Rate (mm/y)	M_max	Dip & Dip Direction
No.	Source Name	b	β	(km)	Slip Rate (mm/y)	(Mw)	Dip & Dip Direction
1	Caldıran	0.9	2.1	73	1.3	7.2	85–90 SW
2	Garni	0.6	1.4	96	1.5	7.1	40–60 NE
3	Aralik	0.6	1.4	91	1.2	7.1	85–85 S
4	Iğdır(1)	0.5	1.2	47	0.7	6.6	85–85 NE
5	Iğdır(2)	0.9	2.1	80	0.7	7	85–85 SW
6	Iğdır(3)	0.5	1.2	110	0.5	6.5	85–85 NE
7	Doğubayazıt	0.9	2.1	130	1.1	7.2	50–50 SW
8	GSK	0.6	1.4	50	0.5	6.7	85–90 SW
9	Balıkgölü(S1)	0.7	1.6	110	1	7.2	85–85 NE
10	Balıkgölü(S2)	0.5	1	35	0.5	6.4	85–85 NE
11	Erciş (S1)	1	2.3	35	0.6	6.4	85–85 SW
12	Erciş (S2)	0.9	2.1	39	0.7	6.5	85–85 NE
β = Ln10*b

3.2. Seismic Source

The seismic sources of the area were identified with the help of existing articles and documents as well as satellite imagery. In drawing the faults and mapping them, attempts were made to compare and review all previous studies (Ambraseys, 2009; Ambraseys and Jackson, 1998; Barka and Reilinger, 1997; Berberian and Tchalenko, 1976; Gülkan et al., 1978; Jarahi, 2017; Tchalenko and Berberian, 1974). Nazari et al. (Nazari et al., 2013), Karakhanian et al. (Karakhanian et al., 2013), Giardini et al. (Giardini et al., 2013), Basili et al. (Basili et al., 2013), and Gulen et al. (Gulen et al., 2011) have shed light on identifying and segmenting the structural elements of Maku area. These studies identified 13 active faults (seismic sources) (Fig. 5). Some of seismic sources are extended out of study area therefore during the running of Ez-Frisk, the entire length was selected for analysis. In the previous sections, the seismic variables of each seismic source were calculated (Table 2). The maximum magnitude (Mmax) of each source was calculated based on the average of four empirical relationships (Ambraseys and Jackson, 1998; Nowroozi, 1985; Wells and Coppersmith, 1994; Zare, 1995). Wherever the value of the calculated maximum magnitude (Mmax) proved to be smaller than the magnitude of the actual earthquake caused by the fault, the latter was taken as the Mmax rather than the former. The slip rate of each source was selected based on GPS studies (Copley and Jackson, 2006; Emre et al., 2018; Karakhanian et al., 2013).

3.3. Ground motion prediction equations

Ground motion prediction equations (GMPEs), or attenuation models, are one of the most important parts in seismological studies. The GMPEs used for intensity calculation are not commonly found in the studies already conducted. Therefore, choosing the GMPEs is limited to Ez-Frisk equation library and the seismotectonic regime of the study area. Maku region is an active tectonic region with shallow crustal seismicity. Based on this, four global models (Atkinson and Kaka, 2007; Atkinson and Sonley, 2000; Bakun et al., 2003; Wald et al., 1999) were selected for PMMI analysis. Wald et al., (Wald et al., 1999) developed relationships between MMI, peak ground acceleration (PGA) and velocity (PGV). Atkinson and Sonley (Atkinson and Sonley, 2000) developed the empirical relationships between response spectra and MMI using parameters such as the observed ground motion amplitude, moment magnitude, and close distance to fault. Bakun et al., (Bakun et al., 2003) using the magnitude and distance parameters, found a new model for MMI. Atkinson and Kala (Atkinson and Kaka, 2007) identified a relationship between PGV and MMI. These models have been formulated using shallow crustal earthquakes of USA with the magnitude range of 3.7 ≤ M ≤ 7.4, which is the same as seismotectonic regime of the study area. Due to the logic tree of this study, the weights of all models were the same.

For GMPEs calculations, due to the lack of data on soil conditions, the value of 760 m/s (Rock) was selected as S-wave velocity for upper 30 m (V_s30) of sediments and/or rocks (BSSC, 1997). Using the mentioned GMPEs, the PMMI was calculated for the Maku quadrangle for return periods of 475, 975, and 2475 years (Figs. 6–8). In this part, using a probabilistic method, the PMMI maps for future earthquakes were drawn. However, for the sake of comparison, the intensity maps of retrospective earthquakes were to be drawn as well. As a result, making use of USGS ShakeMap data for recent events and the findings of the studies carried out by Berberian (Berberian, 1995) and Ambraseys and Melville (Ambraseys and Melville, 1982) (Table 1), the intensity maps of the occurred earthquakes (Fig. 9) were acquired.

In this study, the PMMI was calculated for the Maku quadrangle. The PMMI maps showed a tolerance of II to IX for 475 years, III to X for 975 years, and IV to X⁺ for 2475 years return periods. In all three maps, it can be clearly seen that the highest intensity of the earthquakes is related to the activity of the Iğdır and Balıkgölü faults. The distribution of intensity follows the Northwestern to Southeastern trend of these faults. Based on this, the mentioned faults can be considered as the most destructive tectonic element in the Maku region. As already mentioned, studies about the PMMI maps whose results could be compared with those of the current study are rare, and only a handful of shake maps of occurred earthquakes are at hand. The maximum intensity of IX was reported for the Bingol earthquake, which occurred in 2003 with a magnitude of Ms 6.7. The epicenter of the earthquake was in the southwest of Maku. In the event of the 1988 Spitak earthquake, at the distance of 30 km from the epicenter, the intensity reached V with a magnitude of Ms 6.7. The earthquake was in connection with the Garni fault movements located in the south of Armenia. The shake map of this earthquake showed the IX value at the epicenter, which decreased to V at a 30-km distance. The 2011 Van earthquake with a magnitude of 7.2 in the southeast of the study area showed X + intensity values for the epicenter. At a distance of less than 30 km from the epicenter, the intensity decreased to VI. In the study of the seismic intensity map for the 475-year return period, in the location of the Iğdır and Balıkgölü faults, the maximum values of the intensity were X, and they reduced to IV at a distance of about 30 km. Therefore, the results showed a good correlation with the USGS shake maps of the Spitak, Bingol, and Van earthquakes. On the other hand, a look at the northern part of the area shown in Fig. 9 reveals that it does not match the study results for 475-year return period, which is mainly due to the lack of earthquake events in the area. The importance of intensity maps in seismicity studies should be given more attention than before. The results of this study can be considered as the basis for seismic designs for the Maku region.

Data Availability statement

There are no data for availability.

Funding statement

The authors declare no specific funding for this work.

Competing Interests statement

The authors declare there are no competing interests.

Alizadeh, A., Behyari, M., & Golandam, H. (2019). Structural evolution and halokinesis of Khaje salt diapir, north–west of Iran. Geotectonics, 53, 533–540.https://doi.org/10.1134/S0016852119040022
Ambraseys, N. (2009). Earthquakes in the Mediterranean and Middle East: a multidisciplinary study of seismicity up to 1900. Cambridge University Press.
Ambraseys, N. N., & Jackson, J. A. (1998). Faulting associated with historical and recent earthquakes in the Eastern Mediterranean region. Geophysical Journal International, 133(2), 390–406. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-246X.1998.00508.x
Ambraseys, N. N., and Melville, C. P., (1982), A History of Persian Earthquakes, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 219 p.:
A Atkinson, G. M., & Kaka, S. I. (2007). Relationships between felt intensity and instrumental ground motion in the central United States and California. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 97(2), 497–510. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120060154
Atkinson, G. M., & Sonley, E. (2000). Empirical relationships between modified Mercalli intensity and response spectra. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 90(2), 537–544. https://doi.org/10.1785/0119990118
Bakun, W. H., Johnston, A. C., & Hopper, M. G. (2003). Estimating locations and magnitudes of earthquakes in eastern North America from modified Mercalli intensities. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 93(1), 190–202. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120020087
Barka, A., & Reilinger, R. (1997). Active tectonics of the Eastern Mediterranean region: deduced from GPS, neotectonic and seismicity data.
Basili, R., Kastelic, V., Demircioglu, M. B., Garcia Moreno, D., Nemser, E. S., Petricca, P., Sboras, S. P., Besana-Ostman, G. M., Cabral, J., Camelbeeck, T., Caputo, R., Danciu, L., Domac, H., Fonseca, J., García-Mayordomo, J., Giardini, D., Glavatovic, B., Gulen, L., Ince, Y., Pavlides, S., Sesetyan, K., Tarabusi, G., Tiberti, M. M., Utkucu, M., Valensise, G., Vanneste, K., Vilanova, S., and Wössner, J., (2013), The European Database of Seismogenic Faults (EDSF) compiled in the framework of the Project SHARE:
Berberian, M. (1976). An explanatory note on the first seismotectonic map of Iran, a seismotectonic review of the country. Contribution to the seismotectonic of Iran (Part III).
Berberian, M. (1995), Natural Hazards and the First Earthquake Catalogue of Iran; Volume 1- Historical Hazards in Iran Prior to 1900, 649p.
Berberian, M. 2014, Earthquake and Coseismic Surface Faulting on the Iranian Plateau; a Historical, Social, and Physical Approach, Elsevier, 770 p.
Berberian, M., & Tchalenko, J. S. (1976). Field study and documentation of the 1930 Salmas (Shahpur-Azarbaidjan) earthquake. Geol. Surv. Iran, 39, 271–342.
Berberian, M., & Yeats, R. S. (1999). Patterns of historical earthquake rupture in the Iranian Plateau. Bulletin of the Seismological society of America, 89(1), 120–139. https://doi.org/10.1785/BSSA0890010120
Council, B. S. S. (1997). NEHRP Recommended Provisions for Seismic Regulations for New Buildings and Other Structures, Part1 Provisions. FEMA302.
Cisternas, A., Philip, H., Giardini, D., & Balassanian, S. (1997). Seismotectonics of the Mediterranean region and the Caucasus. Historical and Prehistorical earthquakes in the Caucasus, 28, 39–77.
C Copley, A., & Jackson, J. (2006). Active tectonics of the Turkish-Iranian plateau. Tectonics, 25(6), 25. 10.1029/2005TC001906
Danciu, L., Şeşetyan, K., Demircioglu, M., Gülen, L., Zare, M., Basili, R., … Giardini, D. (2018). The 2014 earthquake model of the Middle East: seismogenic sources. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 16, 3465–3496. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-017-0096-8
Emre, Ö., Duman, T. Y., Özalp, S., Şaroğlu, F., Olgun, Ş., Elmacı, H., & Çan, T. (2018). Active fault database of Turkey. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 16(8), 3229–3275. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-016-0041-2
Evernden, J. F. (1976). Abnormal Animal Behavior Prior to Earthquakes, I: Proceedings of EHRP Conference I: Convened Under the Auspices of National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program… Held at Menlo Park, California on October 23–24, 1976. US Department of Commerce, National Technical Information Service.
Ez-FRisk, (2018), Software for Earthquake Ground Motion Estimation: Boulder, Colorado, Risk Engineering INC.
Faridi, M., Nazari, H., Burg, J. P., Haghipour, N., Talebian, M., Ghorashi, M., … Sahebari, S. S. (2019). Structural characteristics, paleoseismology and slip rate of the Qoshadagh fault, northwest of Iran. Geotectonics, 53, 280–297. https://doi.10.1134/S0016852119020031
Gardner, J. K., & Knopoff, L. (1974). Is the sequence of earthquakes in Southern California, with aftershocks removed, Poissonian?. Bulletin of the seismological society of America, 64(5), 1363–1367.doi:10.1785/BSSA0640051363
Giardini, D., Woessner, J., Danciu, L., Crowley, H., Cotton, F., Grünthal, G., Pinho, R., Valensise, G., Akkar, S., Arvidsson, R., Basili, R., Cameelbeeck, T., Campos-Costa, A., Douglas, J., Demircioglu, M. B., Erdik, M., Fonseca, J., Glavatovic, B., Lindholm, C., Makropoulos, K., Meletti, C., Musson, R., Pitilakis, K., Sesetyan, K., Stromeyer, D., Stucchi, M., and Rovida, A., (2013), Seismic Hazard Harmonization in Europe (SHARE): Online Data Resource: SHARE.
Gulen, L., & EMME, W. (2011, December). Active faults and seismic sources of the Middle East region: earthquake model of the Middle East (EMME) project. In AGU Fall Meeting Abstracts (Vol. 2011, pp. S11C-06).
Gülkan, P., Gürpinar, A., Celebi, M., Arpat, E., & Gencoglu, S. (1978). Engineering report on the Muradiye-Caldiran, Turkey, earthquake of 24 November 1976. National Research Council, National Academy of Sciences.
Gutenberg, B., & Richter, C. F. (1956). Earthquake magnitude, intensity, energy, and acceleration: (Second paper). Bulletin of the seismological society of America, 46(2), 105–145. https://doi.org/10.1785/BSSA0320030163
Hartmann, J., & Moosdorf, N. (2012). Global Lithological Map Database v1. 0.
J Jackson, J. (1992). Partitioning of strike-slip and convergent motion between Eurasia and Arabia in eastern Turkey and the Caucasus. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 97(B9), 12471–12479. https://doi.org/10.1029/92JB00944
J Jarahi, H. (2017). Delineate location of the last earthquake case study NW of Iran. American Journal of Geosciences, 7(1), 7–13. doi:10.3844/ajgsp.2017.7.13
Jarvis, A., Reuter, H. I., Nelson, A., & Guevara, E. (2008). Hole-filled SRTM for the globe Version 4, available from the CGIAR-CSI SRTM 90m Database.
Kanamori, H. (1981). The nature of seismicity patterns before large earthquakes. Earthquake prediction: An international review, 4, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1029/ME004p0001
Karakhanian, A., Djrbashian, R., Trifonov, V., Philip, H., Arakelian, S., & Avagian, A. (2002). Holocene-historical volcanism and active faults as natural risk factors for Armenia and adjacent countries. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research, 113(1–2), 319–344. 10.1016/S0377-0273(01)00264-5
Karakhanian, A. S., Trifonov, V. G., Philip, H., Avagyan, A., Hessami, K., Jamali, F., … Adilkhanyan, A. (2004). Active faulting and natural hazards in Armenia, eastern Turkey and northwestern Iran. Tectonophysics, 380(3–4), 189–219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tecto.2003.09.020
Karakhanyan, A., Vernant, P., Doerflinger, E., Avagyan, A., Philip, H., Aslanyan, R., … Masson, F. (2013). GPS constraints on continental deformation in the Armenian region and Lesser Caucasus. Tectonophysics, 592, 39–45.doi:10.1016/j.tecto.2013.02.002
Moayyed, M., ValinasabZarnagh, F., Jahangiri, A., & Azizi, H. (2021). Petrography and Petrology of early Paleozoic bimodal metavolcanic rocks in North of Maku, North West of Iran. Scientific Quarterly Journal of Geosciences, 30(118), 109–122.https://dorl.net/dor/20.1001.1.10237429.1399.30.118.10.0
Nazari, H., Talebian, M., & Ghorashi, M. (2013). Seismotectonic Map of NW Iran. Geological Survey of Iran.
Nowroozi, A. A. (1985). Empirical relations between magnitudes and fault parameters for earthquakes in Iran. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 75(5), 1327–1338. https://doi.org/10.1785/BSSA0750051327
Şeşetyan, K., Danciu, L., Demircioğlu Tümsa, M. B., Giardini, D., Erdik, M., Akkar, S., … Yılmaz, M. T. (2018). The 2014 seismic hazard model of the Middle East: overview and results. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 16, 3535–3566.http://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-018-0346-4
Solaymani Azad, S. (2009). Evaluation de l'aléa sismique pour les villes de Téhéran, Tabriz et Zandjan dans le NW de l'Iran: approche morphotectonique et paléosismologique (Doctoral dissertation, Montpellier 2).
Stover, C. W., and Coffman, J. L., (1993), Seismicity of the United States, 1568–1989 (revised), 1527.
Tchalenko, J. S., & M.. Berberian. (1974). The Salmas (Iran) earthquake of May 6th, 1930. S. Pio X.
Van Couvering, J. A., & Miller, J. A. (1971). Late Miocene marine and non-marine time scale in Europe. Nature, 230(5296), 559–563. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1586058
W Wald, D. J., Quitoriano, V., Heaton, T. H., & Kanamori, H. (1999). Relationships between peak ground acceleration, peak ground velocity, and modified Mercalli intensity in California. Earthquake spectra, 15(3), 557–564. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1586058
Wells, D. L., & Coppersmith, K. J. (1994). New empirical relationships among magnitude, rupture length, rupture width, rupture area, and surface displacement. Bulletin of the seismological Society of America, 84(4), 974–1002. https://doi.org/10.1785/BSSA0840040974
W Westaway, R. (1990). Seismicity and tectonic deformation rate in Soviet Armenia: implications for local earthquake hazard and evolution of adjacent regions. Tectonics, 9(3), 477–503. https://doi.org/10.1029/TC009i003p00477
Wiemer, S. (2001). A software package to analyze seismicity: ZMAP. Seismological Research Letters, 72(3), 373–382. https://doi.org/10.1785/gssrl.72.3.373
Wood, H. O., & Neumann, F. (1931). Modified Mercalli intensity scale of 1931. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 21(4), 277–283.doi:10.1785/BSSA0210040277
Zare, M. (1995). Reasonable relationship for magnitude, intensity, and peak horizontal acceleration based on Iranian earthquakes. Journal of Earthquake Engineering and Seismology, 12–14.

No competing interests reported.

Download PDF

Editor assigned by journal
31 Oct, 2023
Submission checks completed at journal
24 Oct, 2023
First submitted to journal
17 Oct, 2023

You are reading this latest preprint version

The first modified mercalli intensity map of Maku, NW Iran

Status:

Version 1

Abstract

Figures

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Literature review

1.2 Tectonic and Seismotectonic

2. Methodology

3. Results

3.1. Earthquake Recurrence Model

3.2. Seismic Source

3.3. Ground motion prediction equations

4. Discussion and Conclusions

Declarations

References

Additional Declarations

Status:

Version 1