2024年乌什MW7.0地震InSAR同震形变与发震构造

doi:10.3969/j.issn.0253-4967.2025.02.20240142

地震地质 ›› 2025, Vol. 47 ›› Issue (2): 429-447.DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.0253-4967.2025.02.20240142

2024年乌什M_W7.0地震InSAR同震形变与发震构造

陈子龙¹⁾(), 刘刚¹^,²⁾^,^*(), 李琦¹⁾, 陈威¹⁾, 赵昕宇³⁾, 林牧¹^,⁴⁾, 陶隆文¹⁾, 乔学军¹^,²⁾, 聂兆生¹^,²⁾

¹⁾ 中国地震局地震研究所, 武汉 430071
²⁾ 中国地震局地震大地测量重点实验室, 武汉 430071
³⁾ 中国科学技术大学, 合肥 230026
⁴⁾ 武汉引力与固体潮国家野外科学观测研究站, 武汉 430071

收稿日期:2024-11-27 修回日期:2025-01-16 出版日期:2025-04-20 发布日期:2025-06-07
通讯作者: * 刘刚, 男, 1984年生, 研究员, 主要研究方向为地震大地测量, E-mail: whgpslg@cgps.ac.cn。
作者简介:
陈子龙, 男, 2000年生, 现为中国地震局地震研究所大地测量学与测量工程专业在读硕士研究生, 主要研究方向为地震大地测量学, E-mail: 13147197065@163.com。
基金资助:
国家重点研发专项(2022YFC3003703); 国家自然科学基金(42304005); 中国地震局地震研究所和应急管理部国家自然灾害防治研究院基本科研业务专项(IS202216316); 武汉引力与固体潮国家野外科学观测研究站开放研究基金(WHYWZ202404); 新疆地质灾害防治重点实验室开放基金(XKLGP2022K01); 新疆地质灾害防治重点实验室开放基金(XKLGP2022K02)

INSAR COSEISMIC DEFORMATION AND SEISMOGENIC STRUCTURE OF THE 2024 M_W7.0 WUSHI EARTHQUAKE

CHEN Zi-long¹⁾(), LIU Gang¹^,²⁾^,^*(), LI Qi¹⁾, CHEN Wei¹⁾, ZHAO Xin-yu³⁾, LIN Mu¹^,⁴⁾, TAO Long-wen¹⁾, QIAO Xue-jun¹^,²⁾, NIE Zhao-sheng¹^,²⁾

¹⁾ Institute of Seismology, China Earthquake Administration, Wuhan 430071, China
²⁾ Key Laboratory of Earthquake Geodesy, China Earthquake Administration, Wuhan 430071, China
³⁾ University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, China
⁴⁾ Wuhan National Field Scientific Observation and Research Station for Gravity and Solid Earth Tides, Wuhan 430071, China

Received:2024-11-27 Revised:2025-01-16 Online:2025-04-20 Published:2025-06-07

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

文中利用Sentinel-1升、降轨影像获取2024年乌什 M_W7.0 地震的视线向同震形变场, 并约束发震断层几何参数和滑动分布。最佳断层模型为沿走向弯折的双断层结构, 弯折前后走向变化约为25°, 倾角约有20°的差异。断层滑动为高倾角逆冲兼左旋走滑, 主要分布于震中及其西侧, 东侧幅度低且相对弥散, 整体分布具有浅部滑移亏损特征。几何差异和滑动分布的空间相关性表明发震构造在震中以东存在几何复杂体, 以障碍体模式阻碍破裂传播。同震扩展围限于玉山古溪和乌什凹陷之间, 东、西两侧的断裂阶区和复杂构造限定了破裂规模。M_W5.7余震形成了清晰的LOS向变形, 最优模型显示其发震断层偏离主震迹线约10°, 倾向SE, 断层面地表迹线与地表破裂几乎重合, 浅层滑动量与调查所得的错断量相当。

关键词: 乌什地震, InSAR同震形变, 断层几何参数, 滑动分布

Abstract:

On January 30, 2024, an M_W7.0 earthquake struck the Wushi region of the southern Tianshan Mountains, Xinjiang, China. This earthquake, located in a tectonically active zone dominated by intense crustal shortening and thrust faulting, providing a valuable opportunity to investigate fault geometry and rupture mechanisms in the region. We utilized Sentinel-1 InSAR data combined with advanced inversion techniques to analyze the coseismic deformation field, determine fault parameters, and explore the spatial relationship between the mainshock and aftershocks.
High-resolution coseismic deformation fields were generated using D-InSAR processing of Sentinel-1A ascending and descending orbit data. Nonlinear inversion methods were employed to calculate fault geometry and sliding distribution, with both single-fault and dual-fault models tested to accommodate the complex faulting characteristics. Residual analysis was performed to examine the relationship between the mainshock and the M_W5.7 aftershock, and geological surveys were used to validate fault models and rupture characteristics.
The maximum line-of-sight(LOS)displacement of the coseismic deformation field reached 70cm, displaying an elliptical pattern along the Maidan Fault. The dual-fault model revealed significant geometric complexity: the fault strike rotates clockwise by 20°~25° east of the epicenter, and the dip angle decreases from 60° in the west to 40° in the east. Fault slip was primarily concentrated west of the epicenter, characterized by high-angle thrusting with a left-lateral component, while slip in the eastern segment was lower in magnitude and relatively dispersed. The overall distribution exhibited shallow slip deficit. The correlation between geometric variations and sliding distribution suggests the presence of a geometric barrier east of the epicenter, acting as an obstacle to rupture propagation. The coseismic rupture was confined between the Yushanguxi River and the Wushi depression, with fault steps and structural complexities on the eastern and western boundaries limiting the rupture extent. The M_W5.7 aftershock produced a clear LOS deformation field, with the fault strike deviating by ~10° from the mainshock trace and dipping southeast. The surface trace of the aftershock fault closely aligned with mapped surface ruptures, and the shallow slip magnitude matched the observed vertical offsets from geological surveys.
We also demonstrates that fault geometry plays a significant role in controlling rupture propagation and termination. The geometric barrier east of the epicenter effectively limited eastward rupture propagation, while a wide fault step near the Yushanguxi River constrained the western rupture. The Wushi earthquake was identified as a blind rupture event, with no significant primary surface rupture. The distribution of secondary geological hazards aligned well with fault slip characteristics, and the spatial relationship between aftershock slip and the mainshock highlights fault segmentation within the Ush thrust belt.

Key words: Wushi earthquake, InSAR coseismic deformation field, fault geometric parameters, sliding distribution

陈子龙, 刘刚, 李琦, 陈威, 赵昕宇, 林牧, 陶隆文, 乔学军, 聂兆生. 2024年乌什M_W7.0地震InSAR同震形变与发震构造[J]. 地震地质, 2025, 47(2): 429-447.

CHEN Zi-long, LIU Gang, LI Qi, CHEN Wei, ZHAO Xin-yu, LIN Mu, TAO Long-wen, QIAO Xue-jun, NIE Zhao-sheng. INSAR COSEISMIC DEFORMATION AND SEISMOGENIC STRUCTURE OF THE 2024 M_W7.0 WUSHI EARTHQUAKE[J]. SEISMOLOGY AND GEOLOGY, 2025, 47(2): 429-447.

图/表 14

图 1 地震构造背景图 a 影像数据覆盖范围及该区域1950年以来6级以上历史地震分布; b 震后60d内的不同震级的余震分布。历史地震信息及震源机制解来自USGS; 断裂分布信息来自中国地震局地质研究所

Fig. 1 Tectonic background.

表 1 不同机构和研究公布的发震断层参数

Table1 Fault parameters published by different organizations and studies

来源		震中位置	走向/(°)	倾角/(°)	滑动角/(°)	震级/M_W
USGS		78.64°E,41.26°N	235	45	42	7.0
			113	62	126
GCMT		78.57°E,41.19°N	236	48	47	7.0
			110	57	127
CENC		78.63°E,41.26°N	233	49	41	7.1
			131	60	131
李雨森等,2024		78.63°E,41.26°N	229	62.4	50.45	7.0
赵磊等,2024		78.60°E,41.19°N	228	67	60	7.0
黄旺等,2024		78.60°E,41.23°N	230	48	48	7.0
能懿菡等,2025		78.64°E,41.23°N	230	57	41	7.1
柳姣姣等,2025		78.63°E,41.26°N	230	67	45	7.0
本研究最优单断层模型F₁		78.63°E,41.24°N	225	56	51	7.1
本研究双断层模型	F₁		225	60	41	7.01
	F₂		250	40	56

表2 本文采用的Sentinel-1卫星数据

Table2 Sentinel-1 satellite data used in this study

卫星轨道	轨道号	主影像时间	辅影像时间	极化方式	干涉模式	时间基线/d
升轨	T056	2024-01-14	2024-01-26	VV	IW	12
降轨	T136	2024-01-20	2024-02-25	VV	IW	36
降轨	T034	2024-01-13	2024-01-25	VV	IW	12

图 2 升、降轨差分干涉条纹图和同震形变场 a T56差分干涉条纹图; b T136差分干涉条纹图; c T34差分干涉条纹图; d T56升轨同震形变场; e T136降轨同震形变场; f T34降轨同震形变场。红色五角星表示CENC震中, 白色五角星表示北京时间2024年1月30日 MW5.7 余震的位置

Fig. 2 Ascending and descending differential interferograms and coseismic deformation field.

表3 单断层和双断层模型参数设置范围

Table3 Parameter ranges for single-fault and dual-fault models

模型	走向/(°)	倾角/(°)	滑动角/(°)	长度/km	宽度/km	滑动量/m
单断层模型F₁段	[180,270]	[5,85]	[10,80]	[20,100]	[5,25]	[0.1,5.0]
双断层模型F₁段	[180,270]	[5,85]	[10,80]	[20,30]	[10,20]	[0.1,5.0]
双断层模型F₂段	[180,270]	[5,85]	[10,80]	[10,20]	[10,20]	[0.1,5.0]

图 3 均匀断层模型几何参数的后验概率密度 a 单断层模型F1; b 双断层模型F1; c 双断层模型F2

Fig. 3 Posterior probability density of geometric parameters for the uniform fault model.

表 4 单断层和双断层模型最优参数结果

Table4 Optimal parameter results for single-fault and dual-fault models

模型	走向/(°)	倾角/(°)	滑动角/(°)	长度/km	宽度/km	滑动量/m	上边界埋深/km
单断层模型F₁段	225	56	51	34.44	16.92	2.01	5.95
双断层模型F₁段	225	60	41	28.62	15.47	2.55	6.52
双断层模型F₂段	250	40	56	14.01	18.32	0.95	5.87

图 4 几何参数反演的单断层和双断层模型模拟残差红色边框表示断层面的地表投影, 实线部分表示断层面上边界, 白色五角星表示GCMT给出的2024年1月30日 MW5.7 余震震中, 残差分布直方图表示残差值(单位: m)的数量分布

Fig. 4 Modeling residuals for single-fault and dual-fault models from geometric parameter inversion.

图 5 滑动分布图 a 单断层模型F1; b 双断层模型1; c 双断层模型2; d 双断层模型2的上边界延伸至地表。黄色五角星表示矩心震中位置, 蓝色三角形标识最大滑动量, 黑色箭头方向及大小表示子断层滑动矢量

Fig. 5 Sliding distribution.

图 6 双断层模型2模拟形变场残差分布白色五角星表示2024年1月30日5.7级余震的震中位置

Fig. 6 Residual distribution of modeled deformation field for dual-fault model 2.

图 7 余震同震形变场和T136D模型2残差分布 a T56A同震形变场; b T34D同震形变场; c T136D模型2滑动分布残差; T056A的时间范围2024年1月26日—2月7日, T034D的时间范围2024年1月25日—2月6日; 黑色框线表示图 6中余震附近较大残差值覆盖的区域;图c中深紫色线为地表破裂位置(张博譞等, 2024)

Fig. 7 Coseismic deformation field of the aftershock and residual distribution for T136D in model 2.

表 5 MW5.7余震(北京时间2024-01-30, 06:27:40)震源参数

Table5 Source parameters of the MW5.7 aftershock(BJT: 2024-01-30, 06:27:40)

来源	震中位置	深度/km	走向/(°)	倾角/(°)	滑动角/(°)	震级/M_W
GCMT	41.12°N,78.63°E	12	221	49	65	5.7
			76	47	116
本研究	41.14°N,78.62°E	2.8	65	58	89	5.71

图 8 余震滑动分布

Fig. 8 Sliding distribution of the aftershock.

图 9 同震和余震滑动分布平面图黄色虚线表示张博譞等(2024)的调查路线3和7; 深红色断层线来自吴传勇(2016); 绿色实线表示河流

Fig. 9 Plan view of coseismic and aftershock sliding distributions.

参考文献 40

[1]	黄旺, 李杰, 陈荣柳, 等. 2024. 2024年1月23日乌什 M_W7.0 地震InSAR同震形变与滑动分布特征[J]. 内陆地震, 38(2): 166-172. doi: 10.16256/j.issn.1001-8956.2024.02.009.
	HUANG Wang, LI Jie, CHEN Rong-liu, et al. 2024. InSAR coseismic deformation and sliding distribution characteristics of the Wushi M_W7.0 earthquake on January 23, 2024[J]. Inland Earthquake, 38(2): 166-172. (in Chinese) DOI
[2]	李瑞, 李杰, 刘代芹, 等. 2021. 柯坪块体周缘主要断裂闭锁程度与滑动亏损速率的分布特征[J]. 中国地震, 37(4): 868-877.
	LI Rui, LI Jie, LIU Dai-qin, et al. 2021. Distribution characteristics of locking fraction and sliding deficit rate along main faults around Keping block[J]. Earthquake Research in China, 37(4): 868-877. (in Chinese)
[3]	李雨森, 李为乐, 许强, 等. 2024. 2024年新疆乌什 M_S7.1 地震InSAR同震形变探测与断层滑动分布反演[J]. 成都理工大学学报(自然科学版), 51(4): 641-653.
	LI Yu-sen, LI Wei-le, XU Qiang, et al. 2024. Coseismic deformation and slip distribution of the 2024 M_S7.1 Wushi earthquake based on InSAR observations[J]. Journal of Chengdu University of Technology(Science & Technology Edition), 51(4): 641-653. (in Chinese)
[4]	梁乐, 朱彤. 2024. 新疆乌什7.1级地震救援工作需防余震风险[N]. 科技日报, 2024-01-24(3).
	LIANG Le, ZHU Tong. 2024. Rescue work for the M_W7.1 Wushi earthquake in Xinjiang needs to prevent aftershock risks[N]. Science and Technology Daily, 2024-01-24(3). (in Chinese)
[5]	刘代芹, Liu M, 王海涛, 等. 2016. 天山地震带境内外主要断层滑动速率和地震矩亏损分布特征研究[J]. 地球物理学报, 59(5): 1647-1660. DOI
	LIU Dai-qin, Liu M, WANG Hai-tao, et al. 2016. Slip rates and seismic moment deficits on major faults in the Tianshan region[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 59(5): 1647-1660. (in Chinese)
[6]	刘静, 纪晨, 张金玉, 等. 2015. 2015年4月25日尼泊尔 M_W7.8 地震的孕震构造背景和特征[J]. 科学通报, 60(27): 2640-2655.
	LIU Jing, JI Chen, ZHANG Jin-yu, et al. 2015. Tectonic setting and general features of coseismic rupture of the 25 April, 2015 M_W7.8 Gorkha, Nepal earthquake[J]. Chinese Science Bulletin, 60(27): 2640-2655. (in Chinese)
[7]	柳姣姣, 张永志, 郝小叶, 等. 2025. 基于Sentinel-1A的2024年新疆乌什 M_W7.0 地震地表形变与断层滑动分布反演[J]. 大地测量与地球动力学, 45(2): 170-176.
	LIU Jiao-jiao, ZHANG Yong-zhi, HAO Xiao-ye, et al. 2025. Inversion of surface deformation and fault sliding distribution of the 2024 Wushi M_W7.0 earthquake in Xinjiang based on Sentinel-1A[J]. Journal of Geodesy and Geodynamics, 45(2): 170-176. (in Chinese)
[8]	木妮拉·局玛洪, 艾力夏提·玉山, 李瑞, 等. 2022. 2020年伽师 M_S6.4 地震InSAR同震形变与滑动分布特征分析[J]. 震灾防御技术, 17(3): 549-556.
	MUNILA Juma-hong, AILIXIATI Yu-shan, LI Rui, et al. 2022. Analysis on InSAR coseismic deformation and sliding distribution characteristics of the 2020 Jiashi M_S6.4 earthquake[J]. Technology for Earthquake Disaster Prevention, 17(3): 549-556. (in Chinese)
[9]	能懿菡, 韩炳权, 刘振江, 等. 2025. InSAR观测揭示的2024年新疆乌什 M_W7.0 地震地表形变及发震断层模型[J]. 武汉大学学报(信息科学版), 50(2): 368-376.
	NENG Yi-han, HAN Bing-quan, LIU Zhen-jiang, et al. 2025. Coseismic surface displacement and source model of the 2024 M_W7.0 Wushi(Xinjiang, China)earthquake revealed by InSAR observations[J]. Journal of Wuhan University(Information Science Edition), 50(2): 368-376. (in Chinese)
[10]	王敏. 2014. 新疆乌什县地质灾害发育特征及易发性评价研究[D]. 南京: 南京大学.
	WANG Min. 2014. Study on the development characteristics and susceptibility evaluation of geological disasters in Wushi County, Xinjiang[D]. Nanjing University, Nanjing. (in Chinese)
[11]	王晓萌. 2021. 中国西部活动断块地震灾害时空对称结构与相关机理研究[D]. 西安: 陕西师范大学.
	WANG Xiao-meng. 2021. Study on the spatiotemporal symmetric structure and related mechanism of seismic disasters in active blocks in western China[D]. Shaanxi Normal University, Xi'an. (in Chinese)
[12]	王子韬, 程惠红, 董培育, 等. 2020. 天山造山带及邻区孕震应力场及断裂带活动性特征的数值实验分析[J]. 地球物理学报, 63(11): 4037-4049. DOI
	WANG Zi-tao, CHENG Hui-hong, DONG Pei-yu, et al. 2020. Numerical analysis of seismogenic stress field and fault activity characteristics of Tianshan orogen and its adjacent areas[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 63(11): 4037-4049. (in Chinese)
[13]	吴传勇, 阿里木江, 戴训也, 等. 2014. 西南天山迈丹断裂东段晚第四纪活动的发现及构造意义[J]. 地震地质, 36(4): 976-990. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0253-4967.2014.04.004.
	WU Chuan-yong, Alimujiang, DAI Xun-ye, et al. 2014. Discovery of late Quaternary activity along the eastern segment of the Maidan Fault in southwestern Tianshan and its tectonic implications[J]. Seismology and Geology, 36(4): 976-990. (in Chinese)
[14]	吴传勇. 2016. 西南天山北东东走向断裂的晚第四纪活动特征及在天山构造变形中的作用[D]. 北京: 中国地震局地质研究所.
	WU Chuan-yong. 2016. Late Quaternary activity characteristics of the NEE-trending faults in southwestern Tianshan and their role in Tianshan tectonic deformation[D]. Institute of Geology, China Earthquake Administration, Beijing. (in Chinese)
[15]	闫纪元, 冯军, 张雪华, 等. 2024. 2024年1月23日新疆阿克苏地区乌什 M_S7.1 地震地表变形特征初步调查[J/OL]. 北京大学学报(自然科学版) [2025-03-20].
	YAN Ji-yuan, FENG Jun, ZHANG Xue-hua, et al. 2024. Preliminary investigation on surface deformation characteristics of the Wushi M_S7.1 earthquake on January 23, 2024, in the Aksu region, Xinjiang[J/OL]. Journal of Peking University(Natural Science Edition) [2025-03-20]. (in Chinese)
[16]	杨少敏, 李杰, 王琪. 2008. GPS研究天山现今变形与断层活动[J]. 中国科学(D辑), 38(7): 872-880.
	YANG Shao-min, LI Jie, WANG Qi. 2008. GPS study of present-day deformation and fault activity in the Tianshan[J]. Science in China(Ser D), 38(7): 872-880. (in Chinese)
[17]	张博譞, 钱黎, 李涛, 等. 2024. 2024年1月23日新疆乌什 M_S7.1 地震地质灾害和地表破裂[J]. 地震地质, 46(1): 220-234. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0253-4967.2024.01.013.
	ZHANG Bo-xuan, QIAN Li, LI Tao, et al. 2024. Geological disasters and surface ruptures of the January 23, 2024 M_S7.1 Wushi earthquake, Xinjiang, China[J]. Seismology and Geology, 46(1): 220-234. (in Chinese)
[18]	赵磊, 陈志丹, 谢磊, 等. 2024. 2024年1月23日 M_W7.0 乌什地震InSAR同震形变场和断层滑动分布[J]. 地球与行星物理论评, 55(4): 453-460.
	ZHAO Lei, CHEN Zhi-dan, XIE Lei, et al. 2024. Coseismic deformation and slip model of the 2024 M_W7.0 Wushi earthquake obtained from InSAR observation[J]. Reviews of Geophysics and Planetary Physics, 55(4): 453-460. (in Chinese)
[19]	赵鹏翔, 马建, 黄帅堂, 等. 2024. 乌什7.1级地震烈度评定与震害特征分析[J]. 内陆地震, 38(2): 112-120. DOI
	ZHAO Peng-xiang, MA Jian, HUANG Shuai-tang, et al. 2024. Intensity assessment and seismic damage characteristics analysis of the Wushi M_S7.1 earthquake[J]. Inland Earthquake, 38(2): 112-120. (in Chinese) DOI
[20]	周德敏. 2013. 中西天山现今地壳形变特征及地震危险性分析[D]. 北京: 中国地震局地质研究所.
	ZHOU De-min. 2013. Characteristics of present-day crustal deformation and seismic hazard analysis in central and western Tianshan[D]. Institute of Geology, China Earthquake Administration, Beijing. (in Chinese)
[21]	朱爽, 梁洪宝, 魏文薪, 等. 2021. 天山地震带主要活动断层现今的滑动速率及其地震矩亏损[J]. 地震地质, 43(1): 249-261. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0253-4967.2021.01.015.
	ZHU Shuang, LIANG Hong-bao, WEI Wen-xin, et al. 2021. Slip rates and seismic moment deficits on major faults in the Tianshan region[J]. Seismology and Geology, 43(1): 249-261. (in Chinese) DOI
[22]	Duan B, Oglesby D D. 2005. Multicycle dynamics of nonplanar strike-slip faults[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 110(B3): B03304. https://doi.org/10.1029/2004JB003298.
[23]	Elliott A J, Dolan J F, Oglesby D D. 2009. Evidence from coseismic slip gradients for dynamic control on rupture propagation and arrest through stepovers[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 114(B2): B02306. https://doi.org/10.1029/2008JB005969.
[24]	Elliott R J, Jolivet R, González J P, et al. 2016. Himalayan megathrust geometry and relation to topography revealed by the Gorkha earthquake[J]. Nature Geoscience, 9(2): 174-180.
[25]	Guo N, Wu Y, Zhu S, et al. 2024. Coseismic deformation and interseismic strain accumulation of the 2024 M_S7.1 Wushi earthquake in Xinjiang, China[J]. Advances in Space Research, 74(3): 1234-1245. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asr.2024.05.012.
[26]	Jónsson S, Zebker H, Segall P, et al. 2002. Fault sliding distribution of the 1999 M_W7.1 Hector Mine, California, earthquake, estimated from satellite radar and GPS measurements[J]. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 92(4): 1377-1389. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120000922.
[27]	Klinger Y, Michel R, King G C P. 2006. Evidence for an earthquake barrier model from M_W-7.8 Kokoxili(Tibet)earthquake slip-distribution[J]. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 242(3-4): 354-364. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.epsl.2005.12.003.
[28]	Li J, Yao Y, Li R, et al. 2022. Present-day strike-slip faulting and thrusting of the Kepingtage fold-and-thrust belt in southern Tianshan: Constraints from GPS observations[J]. Geophysical Research Letters, 49(14): e2022GL099105. https://doi.org/10.1029/2022GL099105.
[29]	Liu-Zeng J, Yao W, Liu X, et al. 2022. High-resolution structure-from-motion models covering 160km-long surface ruptures of the 2021 M_W7.4 Madoi earthquake in northern Qinghai-Tibetan plateau[J]. Earthquake Research Advances, 2(2): 100140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eqrea.2022.100140.
[30]	Song S, Li Y, Hao M. 2022. Active crustal deformation model of the Fen-Wei rift zone, North China: Integration of geologic, geodetic, and stress direction datasets[J]. Frontiers in Earth Science, 10:964800. https://doi.org/10.3389/feart.2022.964800.
[31]	Vasyura-Bathke H, Dettmer J, Steinberg A, et al. 2020. The Bayesian earthquake analysis tool[J]. Seismological Research Letters, 91(2A): 1003-1018. https://doi.org/10.1785/0220190162.
[32]	Wang Q, Xuejun Q, Qigui L, et al. 2011. Rupture of deep faults in the 2008 Wenchuan earthquake and uplift of the Longmen Shan[J]. Nature Geoscience, 4(9): 634-640. https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo1232.
[33]	Wang R, Diao F, Hoechner A. 2013. SDM-A geodetic inversion code incorporating with layered crust structure and curved fault geometry[C]// EGU General Assembly Conference Abstracts, EGU2013-2411.
[34]	Wei G, Chen K, Lyu M, et al. 2023. Complex strike-slip faulting during the 2021 M_W7.4 Maduo earthquake[J]. Communications Earth & Environment, 4(1): 319. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43247-023-00779-y.
[35]	Wells D L, Coppersmith K J. 1994. New empirical relationships among magnitude, rupture length, rupture width, rupture area, and surface displacement[J]. Bulletin of the seismological Society of America, 84(4): 974-1002.
[36]	Wesnousky S G. 2006. Predicting the endpoints of earthquake ruptures[J]. Nature, 444(7117): 358-360. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature05275.
[37]	Wesnousky S G. 2008. Displacement and geometrical characteristics of earthquake surface ruptures: Issues and implications for seismic-hazard analysis and the process of earthquake rupture[J]. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 98(4): 1609-1632.https://doi.org/10.1785/0120070111.
[38]	Whipple K X, Shirzaei M, Hodges K V, et al. 2016. Active shortening within the Himalayan orogenic wedge implied by the 2015 Gorkha earthquake[J]. Nature Geoscience, 9(9): 711-716. DOI
[39]	Zheng A, Yu X, Xu W, et al. 2020. A hybrid source mechanism of the 2017 M_W6.5 Jiuzhaigou earthquake revealed by the joint inversion of strong-motion, teleseismic and InSAR data[J]. Tectonophysics, 789:228538. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tecto.2020.228538.
[40]	Zheng R, Zou R, Dong R, et al. 2024. The 2024 M_W7.0 Wushi earthquake in southern Tianshan convergent zone: Finite-fault model for the coseismic rupture and aftershock[J]. Seismological Research Letters, 95(5): 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1785/0220240126.

2024年乌什M_W7.0地震InSAR同震形变与发震构造

INSAR COSEISMIC DEFORMATION AND SEISMOGENIC STRUCTURE OF THE 2024 M_W7.0 WUSHI EARTHQUAKE

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 14

参考文献 40

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	陈建波, 郑黎明, 李涛, 陈杰, 姚远, 钱黎, 张博譞, 胡宗凯, 刘冠伸, 李金. 2024年1月23日新疆乌什M_S7.1地震宏观震中与地质灾害调查[J]. 地震地质, 2025, 47(2): 561-576.
[2]	陈长云, 尹海权. 新疆地区现今地壳变形特征与强震危险性概率预测[J]. 地震地质, 2025, 47(2): 384-404.
[3]	徐晶, 季灵运, 刘传金. 2022年泸定M_S6.8地震震前区域变形背景及同震形变特征[J]. 地震地质, 2024, 46(3): 645-664.
[4]	王雨晴, 冯万鹏, 张培震. 交角约90°共轭断裂的现今形变及对构造应力场的指示意义——以2019年M_W≥6.4菲律宾地震序列为例[J]. 地震地质, 2022, 44(2): 313-332.
[5]	徐芳, 鲁人齐, 王帅, 江国焰, 龙锋, 王晓山, 苏鹏, 刘冠伸. 基于多元约束方法的2020年四川青白江M_S5.1地震构造研究[J]. 地震地质, 2022, 44(1): 220-237.
[6]	邱江涛, 季灵运, 刘雷, 刘传金. 2020年西藏尼玛M_W6.3地震的InSAR同震形变与构造意义[J]. 地震地质, 2021, 43(6): 1586-1599.
[7]	徐晓雪, 季灵运, 朱良玉, 王光明, 张文婷, 李宁. 漾濞M_S6.4地震同震形变特征及发震构造探讨[J]. 地震地质, 2021, 43(4): 771-789.
[8]	华俊, 赵德政, 单新建, 屈春燕, 张迎峰, 龚文瑜, 王振杰, 李成龙, 李彦川, 赵磊, 陈晗, 范晓冉, 王绍俊. 2021年青海玛多M_W7.3地震InSAR的同震形变场、断层滑动分布及其对周边区域的应力扰动[J]. 地震地质, 2021, 43(3): 677-691.
[9]	王绍俊, 刘云华, 单新建, 屈春燕, 张国宏, 解朝娣, 赵德政, 范晓冉, 华俊, 梁诗明, 张克亮, 代成龙. 2021年云南漾濞M_S6.4地震同震地表形变与断层滑动分布[J]. 地震地质, 2021, 43(3): 692-705.
[10]	贾蕊, 张国宏, 解朝娣, 单新建, 张迎峰, 李成龙, 黄自成. 2019年巴基斯坦新米尔普尔M_W6.0地震的同震形变场与断层滑动分布反演[J]. 地震地质, 2021, 43(3): 600-613.
[11]	温少妍, 单新建, 张迎峰, 刘云华, 汪驰升, 宋春燕. 基于Sentinel-1A的新疆阿克陶M_S6.7地震同震形变与滑动分布特征[J]. 地震地质, 2020, 42(6): 1401-1416.
[12]	郑博文, 龚文瑜, 温少妍, 张迎峰, 单新建, 宋小刚, 刘云华. 基于Sentinel-1A的2016年青海门源M_W5.9地震发震构造特征[J]. 地震地质, 2018, 40(4): 872-882.
[13]	张迎峰, 张国宏, 单新建, 温少妍. 2015年尼泊尔GorkhaM_W7.9地震与KodariM_W7.3地震InSAR数据反演及其应力触发分析[J]. 地震地质, 2017, 39(1): 104-116.
[14]	薛莲, 孙建宝, 沈正康. 2010年1月12日海地M_W7.0地震 InSAR同震形变观测及同震滑动分布反演[J]. 地震地质, 2011, 33(1): 157-174.
[15]	张国宏, 单新建, 李卫东. 汶川M_S 8.0地震库仑破裂应力变化及断层危险性初步研究[J]. 地震地质, 2008, 30(4): 935-944.

2024年乌什MW7.0地震InSAR同震形变与发震构造

INSAR COSEISMIC DEFORMATION AND SEISMOGENIC STRUCTURE OF THE 2024 MW7.0 WUSHI EARTHQUAKE

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 14

参考文献 40

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

2024年乌什M_W7.0地震InSAR同震形变与发震构造

INSAR COSEISMIC DEFORMATION AND SEISMOGENIC STRUCTURE OF THE 2024 M_W7.0 WUSHI EARTHQUAKE