Recurrence interval of strong earthquakes in the se Altai, Russia revealed by tree-ring analysis and radiocarbon dating
and
Jan 24, 2018
About this article
Article Category: Conference Proceedings of the 12International Conference “Methods of Absolute Chronology” May 11-13, 2016, Gliwice-Paniówki, Poland
Published Online: Jan 24, 2018
Page range: 20 - 33
Received: Jun 28, 2016
Accepted: Oct 23, 2017
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/geochr-2015-0083
Keywords
© 2018 R. Nepop and A. Agatova, published by Sciendo
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.
Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Application of tree-ring analysis to earthquake studies_ Direct and indirect effects are presented under a “process-effect-response” model_ Various aspects of studying growth disturbances in trees affected by geomorphic processes are analyzed in (Stoffel and Bollschweiler, 2008) and application of tree-ring analysis to paleoseismology is discussed in detail by Jacoby (1997)_
| Process | Effect | Response |
|---|---|---|
| rupturing | splitting the trunk, root system damage | suppression, missed rings, mortality |
| tectonic scarp formation | tilting of stems | reaction wood formation |
| slope failures, devastating mass movements | elimination of the entire forest stand | recolonization of bare surface |
| landslides, rock falls, debris flows | tilting of stems | reaction wood formation |
| stem burial | suppression, mortality, exceptionally – growth increase in case of rich nutrition and water supply | |
| root exposure | growth suppression, mortality | |
| wood penetrating injuries, scars | callus tissue formation and overgrowing the wound | |
| decapitation, elimination of branches | growth suppression | |
| ground shaking | decapitation, root system and major limb damage | suppression, missed rings, mortality |
| change in hydrology | change in water table | suppression, growth increase |
| various earthquake induced surface processes | elimination of neighboring trees | the growth release in survivor trees |
Radiocarbon dates used for estimating the recurrence interval of strong prehistoric earthquakes in the SE Altai_
| Calibrated age (cal BP) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sample Lab. cod | Location | Sample type | 14C age Radiocarbon analysis was made on cc – charcoal, ha – humic acid, w – wood. | Interpretation | ||
| Significance level 68.2% | Significance level 95.4% | |||||
| IGAN 4090 | T1 | seismically cut fossil soil exhumed in rupture of the 2003 Chuya earthquake | 2340–2290 (17.3%) 2260–2150 (50.9%) | 2360–2110 (95.4%) | low possible date of strong earthquake that cut and buried soil layer | |
| IGAN 4092 | T1 | char coal from seismically deformed fossil soil | 1420–1290 (68.2%) | 1530–1280 (95.4%) | low possible date of strong earthquake that deformed and buried soil layer | |
| IGAN 4103 | T2 | paleosoils overlaid by colluvium sediments | 630–600 (13.3%) 560–500 (54.9%) | 660–460 (95.4%) | period of tectonic respite and soil formation at the foot of the steep slope | |
| IGAN 4104 | T2 | paleosoils overlaid by colluvium sediments | 650–580 (50.8%) 570–540 (17.4%) | 670–520 (95.4%) | period of tectonic respite and soil formation at the foot of the steep slope | |
| IGAN 4105 | T1 | seismically cut fossil soil exhumed in rupture of the 2003 Chuya earthquake | 930–790 (68.2%) | 970–730 (95.4%) | low possible date of strong earthquake that cut and buried soil layer | |
| IGAN 4106 | T2 | paleosoils overlaid by colluvium sediments | 730–630 (50.6%) 600–560 (17.6%) | 770–540 (95.4%) | period of tectonic respite and soil formation at the foot of the steep slope | |
| SOAN 8416 | T1 | seismically cut peat layer covered lacustrine sediments with seismic convolutions | 2100–2080 (3.9%) 2070–1920 (64.3%) | 2150–1880 (95.4%) | low possible date of earthquake that formed convolution structures | |
| SOAN 8417 | T1 | charcoal from paleosoil layer | 2880–2780 (68.2%) | 2950–2770 (95.4%) | low possible date of strong earthquake that deformed and buried soil layer | |
| SOAN 8418 | T1 | fossil soil with charcoal overlaid by colluvium sediments | 2750–2690 (26.8%) 2640–2610 (9.0%) 2590–2500 (32.5%) | 2750–2480 (95.4%) | period of tectonic respite and soil formation | |
| SOAN 8419 | T1 | fossil soil with charcoal overlaid by colluvium sediments | 3640–3550 (48.6%) 3540–3490 (19.6%) | 3690–3660 (3.9%) 3650–3460 (91.5%) | period of tectonic respite and soil formation | |
| SOAN 8425 | K | wood fragment from humified loam layer overlaid by colluvium sediments | 790–700 (68.2%) | 900–860 (6.4%) 830–810 (1.1%) 800–680 (87.9%) | stabilization period of the alluvial-colluvial fan at the foot of the rocky slope | |
| SOAN 8549 | K | humified loam layer overlaid by colluvium sediments | 3590–3400 (68.2%) | 3700–3340 (95.4%) | stabilization period of the alluvial–colluvial fan at the foot of the rocky slope | |
| SOAN 8658 | T1 | wood fragments from fossil peat layer in the proximal part of the giant landslide triggered by the 2003 Chuya earthquake | 670–620 (31.9%) 610–550 (36.3%) | 690–530 (95.4%) | upper possible date of strong earthquake that coursed peat bog formation | |
| SOAN 8659 | T1 | contemporary soil overlapping seismically cut paleosoils | 320–280 (50.2%) 170–150 (18.0%) | 430–360 (15.0%) 330–270 (55.2%) 190–140 (21.3%) 20–0 (4.0%) | upper possible date of strong paleoearthquake | |
| SOAN 8663 | T1 | seismically cut fossil soil with charcoal | 2680–2640 (9.5%) 2610–2600 (1.6%) 2500–2340 (57.0%) | 2720–2310 (95.4%) | low possible date of strong earthquake that cut and buried soil layer | |
| SOAN 8664 | T1 | fossil peat layer with charcoal in the proximal part of the giant landslide triggered by the 2003 Chuya earthquake | 1050–1030 (4.6%) 990–910 (63.6%) | 1060–900 (87.2%) 870–800 (8.2%) | upper possible date of strong earthquake that coursed peat bog formation | |
| SOAN 8665 | T1 | seismically cut fossil soil with charcoal | 2360–2300 (55.0%) 2230–2200 (13.2%) | 2360–2290 (59.4%) 2270–2150 (36.0%) | low possible date of strong earthquake that cut and buried soil layer | |
| SOAN 8666 | T1 | wood fragments from fossil soil layer | 1930–1860 (54.5%) 1850–1820 (13.7%) | 1990–1810 (95.4%) | low possible date of strong earthquake that deformed and buried soil layer | |
| SOAN 8667 | T1 | wood fragments from fossil soil layer | 2680–2640 (10.5%) 2610–2590 (2.3%) 2500–2340 (55.4%) | 2720–2320 (95.4%) | low possible date of strong earthquake that deformed and buried soil layer | |
| SOAN 8668 | T1 | wood fragments from fossil soil layer | 2720–2680 (13.1%) 2640–2490 (55.1%) | 2740–2430 (95.4%) | low possible date of strong earthquake that deformed and buried soil layer | |
| SOAN 8669 | T1 | fossil soil with charcoal | 2750–2690 (25.5%) 2640–2610 (8.4%) 2600–2500 (34.3%) | 2760–2460 (95.4%) | low possible date of strong earthquake that interrupt soil formation | |
| SOAN 8670 | T1 | charcoal in sandy loams | 4240–4090 (68.2%) | 4380–4370 (0.5%) 4360–4320 (1.6%) 4300–4060 (85.4%) 4050–3980 (7.9%) | intensification of slope processes | |
| SOAN 8671 | T1 | charcoal in lacustrine sediments | 4230–4080 (62.5%) 4030–4010 (5.7%) | 4290–4270 (1.1%) 4260–3980 (94.3%) | upper possible date of strong earthquake that coursed lake formation | |
| SOAN 8672 | T1 | buried peat | 3970–3940 (11.2%) 3930–3830 (57.0%) | 4080–4040 (3.3%) 4000–3810 (84.4%) 3800–3720 (7.7%) | upper possible date of strong earthquake that coursed peat bog formation | |
| SOAN 8673 | T1 | buried peat layer in the proximal part of the giant landslide triggered by the 2003 Chuya earthquake | 730–670 (68.2%) | 770–660 (95.4%) | upper possible date of strong earthquake that coursed peat bog formation | |