Present-Day Crustal Deformation in China Constrained by Global Positioning System Measurements

Qi Wang; Pei-Zhen Zhang; Jeffrey T. Freymueller; Roger Bilham; Kristine M. Larson; Xi'an Lai; Xinzhao You; Zhijun Niu; Jianchun Wu; Yanxin Li; Jingnan Liu; Zhiqiang Yang; Qizhi Chen

doi:10.1126/science.1063647

journal article Oct 19, 2001

Present-Day Crustal Deformation in China Constrained by Global Positioning System Measurements

Qi Wang

Pei-Zhen Zhang Jeffrey T. Freymueller

Roger Bilham

Kristine M. Larson Xi'an Lai Xinzhao You Zhijun Niu Jianchun Wu

Science Vol. 294 No. 5542 pp. 574-577 · American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS)

View at Publisher Save 10.1126/science.1063647

Abstract

Global Positioning System (GPS) measurements in China indicate that crustal shortening accommodates most of India's penetration into Eurasia. Deformation within the Tibetan Plateau and its margins, the Himalaya, the Altyn Tagh, and the Qilian Shan, absorbs more than 90% of the relative motion between the Indian and Eurasian plates. Internal shortening of the Tibetan plateau itself accounts for more than one-third of the total convergence. However, the Tibetan plateau south of the Kunlun and Ganzi-Mani faults is moving eastward relative to both India and Eurasia. This movement is accommodated through rotation of material around the eastern Syntaxis. The North China and South China blocks, east of the Tibetan Plateau, move coherently east-southeastward at rates of 2 to 8 millimeters per year and 6 to 11 millimeters per year, respectively, with respect to the stable Eurasia.

Topics

No keywords indexed for this article. Browse by subject →

References

39

[1]

10.1126/science.189.4201.419

[2]

Houseman G. A., England P., J. Geophys. Res. 91, 3651 (1986). 10.1029/jb091ib03p03651

[3]

Peltzer G., Tapponnier P., J. Geophys. Res. 93, 15095 (1988).

[4]

England P., Molnar P., Geophys. J. Int. 130, 551 (1997). 10.1111/j.1365-246x.1997.tb01853.x

[5]

Holt W. E., et al., J. Geophys. Res. 105, 19185 (2000). 10.1029/2000jb900045

[6]

Zhu W., et al.Sci. China D271997385.

[7]

10.1038/384450a0

[8]

Bilham R., et al., Nature 336, 61 (1997). 10.1038/386061a0

[9]

10.1130/0091-7613(1997)025<0179:gmocmi>2.3.co;2

[10]

Calais E., et al., Geophys. Res. Lett. 25, 4003 (1998). 10.1029/1998gl900067

[11]

Larson K. M., et al., J. Geophys. Res. 104, 1077 (1999). 10.1029/1998jb900043

[12]

Bendick R., et al., Nature 404, 69 (2000). 10.1038/35003555

[13]

Chen Z., et al., J. Geophys. Res. 105, 16215 (2000). 10.1029/2000jb900092

[14]

Shen Z., et al., J. Geophys. Res. 105, 5721 (2000). 10.1029/1999jb900391

[15]

Wang Q., et al., Sci. China D 31, 529 (2001).

[16]

China Seismological Bureau Xi'an Institute of Surveying and Mapping Chinese Academy of Science Chinese National Bureau of Surveying and Mapping University of Alaska University of Colorado Wuhan University Chang'an University Xinjiang Seismological Bureau and Fujian Seismological Bureau.

[17]

Lichten S. M., Border J. S., J. Geophys. Res. 92, 12751 (1987). 10.1029/jb092ib12p12751

[18]

10.1029/97jb00514

[19]

Heflin M. B., et al., Geophys. Res. Lett. 19, 131 (1992). 10.1029/91gl02933

[20]

Precise point positioning for the efficient and robust analysis of GPS data from large networks

J. F. Zumberge, M. B. Heflin, D. C. Jefferson et al.

Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans 1997 10.1029/96jb03860

[21]

We used data when available each day from IGS stations in Eurasia such as WUHN KIT3 LHAS IISC TSKB USUD IRKT BAHR ZWEN KSTU SELE POL2 YAKZ XIAN KUNM URUM NTUS BAKO TAEJ and SUWN. These stations are also used to transform daily solutions into the ITRF97.

[22]

Sillard P., Altamimi Z., Boucher C., Geophys. Res. Lett. 25, 3223 (1998). 10.1029/98gl52489

[23]

Each daily solution includes at least one of the roving stations shown in Fig. 1. The numbers of annual daily solutions from 1991 to 2001 are 38 29 35 57 107 97 149 153 283 126 and 176 respectively. Meanwhile we include in our network adjustment weekly averaged estimates and covariances of globally distributed permanent stations provided by Jet Propulsion Laboratory (SINEX files GPS week 0814-1128 available at ) on the purpose of realization of Eurasia-fixed frame.

[24]

The Eurasia reframe is realized by subtracting the rotation of the Eurasian plate relative to the ITRF97 from GPS-derived station velocities. The Eurasian plate rotates at 0.2523 ± 0.0035°/My about a pole at 56.9 ± 0.3°N –104.3 ± 0.3°E that is estimated by minimizing the adjustment to horizontal velocities of 11 stations within the stable Eurasia (ONSA WZTR NYAL KOSG METS KIT3 KSTU ZWEN ARTU POL2 and IRKT). The weighted rms of velocity adjustment for these 11 stations is 0.8 mm/year to which POL2 and KSTU contribute most (1.6 and 2.4 mm/year respectively). We tested other sets of stations to estimate the Eurasia motion. Different realizations of the Eurasia-fixed frame produce variations by no more than 2 to 3 mm/year in the southward components of all velocities and much smaller differences in the eastward component.

[25]

We estimated a total of 432 station velocities of which 78 were removed due to short time span (<1 year) or close location (<3 km) with other marks. Velocity tables including the remaining velocities in the Eurasia frame and ITRF97 are available at the Science Web site (26).

[26]

Supplementary material is available at www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/294/5542/574/DC1

[27]

We assume the average direction of motions of stations along the Lesser Himalaya represents the convergence direction between India and Eurasia. The motion of Indian plate relative to Eurasia is described about pole (27.3°N 23.0°E 0.40°/My) estimated from one station at Bangalore (IISC) and four stations along the Less Himalaya (MAHE NEPA BIRA and JANK). Our study shows that the current velocity of India is ∼22% slower than predicted by the NUVEL-1A model

[28]

10.1029/2000gl011832

[29]

10.1111/j.1365-246x.1990.tb06579.x

[30]

10.1029/94gl02118

[31]

Gordon R. G., Argus D. F., Heflin M. B., Eos 80, F273 (1999).

[32]

Zhang P., et al., Earthquake Res. China 12, 127 (1996).

[33]

10.1029/93gl00128

[34]

Molnar P., Gipson J. M., J. Geophys. Res. 101, 545 (1996). 10.1029/95jb02503

[35]

10.1029/jb094ib03p02787

[36]

Woerd J. V., et al., Geology 26, 695 (1998). 10.1130/0091-7613(1998)026<0695:hlsrdb>2.3.co;2

[37]

Molnar P., Deng Q., J. Geophys. Res. 89, 6203 (1984). 10.1029/jb089ib07p06203

[38]

Amijo R., et al., J. Geophys. Res. 91, 13803 (1986). 10.1029/jb091ib14p13803

[39]

We thank P. Molnar for a thoughtful review of the preprint of the paper. We also thank Z. Shen at University of California Los Angeles and P. Fang at University of California San Diego for their help. The thoughtful reviews by two anonymous referees are greatly acknowledged. This work has been supported by National Key Basic Research Program (G19980407) National Science Foundation of China (49825104) National Major Scientific Infrastructure Program (CMONOC) and National Climbing Project to authors in China; and NSF grants to J.T.F. (EAR-9725563) R.B (EAR-9306190) and K.M.L. (EAR-9727652) in the United States.

Cited By

1,003

Neotectonics, active tectonics and earthquake geology： terminology, applications and advances

Zhonghai Wu, Mengmeng Hu · 2019

Journal of Geodynamics

An Andean-type retro-arc foreland system beneath northwest South China revealed by SINOPROBE profiling

Jianhua Li, Shuwen Dong · 2018

Earth and Planetary Science Letters

New heat flow determination in northern Tarim Craton, northwest China

Shaowen Liu, Xiao Lei · 2015

Geophysical Journal International

Source area and rupture parameters of the 31 December 1881 Mw = 7.9 Car Nicobar earthquake estimated from tsunamis recorded in the Bay of Bengal

Modesto Ortiz, Roger Bilham · 2003

Journal of Geophysical Research: Oc...

Metrics

1,003

Citations

39

References

Details

Published: Oct 19, 2001
Vol/Issue: 294(5542)
Pages: 574-577

Authors

Q

Qi Wang

Institute of Seismology, China Seismological Bureau, Wuhan 430071, China.

P

Pei-Zhen Zhang

Center for Crustal Movement Studies and Institute of Geology, China Seismological Bureau, Beijing 100029, China.

J

Jeffrey T. Freymueller

Geophysical Institute, University of Alaska, Fairbanks, AK 99775, USA.

R

Roger Bilham

Department of Geological Sciences and CIRES, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO 80309, USA.

K

Kristine M. Larson

Department of Aerospace Engineering Sciences, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO 80309, USA.

X

Xi'an Lai

Institute of Seismology, China Seismological Bureau, Wuhan 430071, China.

X

Xinzhao You

Institute of Seismology, China Seismological Bureau, Wuhan 430071, China.

Z

Zhijun Niu

Center for Crustal Movement Studies and Institute of Geology, China Seismological Bureau, Beijing 100029, China.

J

Jianchun Wu

Center for Crustal Movement Studies and Institute of Geology, China Seismological Bureau, Beijing 100029, China.

Y

Yanxin Li

First Crustal Deformation Monitoring Center, China Seismological Bureau, Tianjin 300180, China.

J

Jingnan Liu

School of Geodesy and Geomatics, Wuhan University, Wuhan, 430071, China.

Z

Zhiqiang Yang

Department of Surveying Engineering, Chang'an University, Xi'an 710064, China.

Q

Qizhi Chen

Geophysical Institute, University of Alaska, Fairbanks, AK 99775, USA.

Cite This Article

Qi Wang, Pei-Zhen Zhang, Jeffrey T. Freymueller, et al. (2001). Present-Day Crustal Deformation in China Constrained by Global Positioning System Measurements. Science, 294(5542), 574-577. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1063647

Present-Day Crustal Deformation in China Constrained by Global Positioning System Measurements

You May Also Like