Journals / Maden Tetkik ve Arama Dergisi / 2014 / Cilt: 149 - Sayı: 149

NEOTECTONIC-PERIOD CHARACTERISTICS, SEISMICITY, GEOMETRY AND SEGMENTATION OF THE TUZ GÖLÜ FAULT ZONE

Pages
19–68
Publication Date
2014-12-01
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Based on geologicage and slip amount, average annual slip-rate on TGFZ is 0.046 mm.1.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The Tuz Gölü Fault Zone (TGFZ) is one of the most important active intra-continental faultzones in central Anatolia.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The TGFZ with nearly 200 km in length and 2-25 km in width is a NWtrending, active normal fault zone with minor right-lateral strike-slip component.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Based on geologicage and slip amount, average annual slip-rate on TGFZ is 0.046 mm.1.
🔬Design:Lab & Field Experiment
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Tuz Gölü Fault Zone · Anatolia · Neotectonic

Abstract

The Tuz Gölü Fault Zone (TGFZ) is one of the most important active intra-continental faultzones in central Anatolia. The TGFZ with nearly 200 km in length and 2-25 km in width is a NWtrending, active normal fault zone with minor right-lateral strike-slip component. It extendsbetween the north of Lake Tuz at NW and at Kemerhisar (Ni¤de) SE. This zone is a transitionzone that separates the Central Anatolian Neotectonic Region into two-sub neotectonic regions,namely Kayseri-Sivas and Konya-Eskiflehir neotectonic regions. In this study, Neotectonicperiod characteristics, seismicity, geometry and segmentation of TGFZ are investigated. TGFZis composed of a total of eleven parallel or sub-parallel geometric fault segments with lengthranging from 9 to 30 km. In calculations based on empirical equations proposed for normalfaults, TGFZ segments are found to generate earthquakes with maximum magnitudes ofM=6.11-6.80 and during these earthquakes vertical displacements will be 0.34-1.41 m atmaximum with average of 0.25-0.68 m. Fault kinematic analysis studies conducted on TGFZshowed that a NE-SW trending extensional tectonic regime is effective in the region. Accordingto structural observations, stratigraphic relations and age data, neotectonic period for TGFZstarted early Pliocene. TGFZ is a structure of NE-SW trending extensional tectonic regime thatwas activated by the early Pliocene. This structure borders the recent Tuz Gölü Plio-Quaternarybasin to the east. By the early Pliocene, total normal slip is found 200-268 m. Based on geologicage and slip amount, average annual slip-rate on TGFZ is 0.046 mm.1. Girifl

🔖

Cite This Article

KÜRÇER, A., GÖKTEN, Y. E. (2014). NEOTECTONIC-PERIOD CHARACTERISTICS, SEISMICITY, GEOMETRY AND SEGMENTATION OF THE TUZ GÖLÜ FAULT ZONE. Maden Tetkik ve Arama Dergisi, Cilt: 149 - Sayı: 149, 19–68. https://ajindex.com/articles/54037

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. Afşin, M., Baş, H. 1996. Koçpınar (Aksaray) kaynaklarının su kimyası açısından değerlendirilmesi. Türkiye Jeoloji Kurumu Bülteni, 39(1), 75-86.
  2. Akıman, O., Erler, A., Göncüoğlu, M.C., Güleç, N., Güven, A., Türeli, T.K., Kadıoğlu, Y. 1993. Geochemical characteristics of granitoides along the western margin of the Central Anatolian Crystalline Complex and their tectonic implications. Geological Journal, 28, 371-382.
  3. Ambraseys, N. N., Jackson, J.A. 1998. Historical recent earthquakes Eastern Mediterranean. Geophy. J. Int. (1998), 133, 390-406.
  4. Andreasyan, H. 1970. Ermeni kaynaklarından derlenmiş deprem listesi. Prof. Dr. H. Soysal’s personal archive, (unpublished), İstanbul.
  5. Arıkan, Y. 1975. Tuzgölü havzasının jeolojisi ve petrol imkanları. Maden Tetkik ve Arama Dergisi, 85, 17- 38. Atabey, E. 1986. Maden Tetkik ve Arama 1/25 000 ölçekli arşiv haritaları Aksaray K 31 a1, a2, a3 ve a4 paftaları, Ankara, (unpublished). Atabey, E. 1989. Maden Tetkik ve Arama 1/100 000 Ölçekli açınsama nitelikli Türkiye Jeoloji Haritaları Serisi, Aksaray-H 17 (K 31) paftası, Ankara.
  6. Atabey, E., Ayhan, A. 1986.
  7. Niğde, Ulukışla, Çamardı, Çiftehan yöresinin jeolojisi, Maden Tetkik ve Arama Genel Müdürlüğü Report No: 8064, 60 s. Ankara, (unpublished). Atabey, E., Tarhan, N., Akarsu, B., Taşkıran, M.A. 1987.
  8. Şereflikoçhisar, Panlı (Ankara) – Acıpınar (Niğde) yöresinin jeolojisi. Maden Tetkik ve Arama Genel Müdürlüğü Report No: 8155. 69 s. Ankara, (unpublished). Aydar, E, Schmitt, A.K., Çubukçu, H.E., Akın, L., Ersoy, O., Şen, E., Duncan, R.A., Atici, G. 2012. Correlation of ignimbrites in the central Anatolian volcanic province using zircon and plagioclase ages and zircon compositions. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research 213-214, 83–97.
  9. Batum, İ. 1978. Nevşehir güneybatısındaki Göllüdağ ve Acıgöl volkanitlerinin jeokimyası ve petrolojisi. Yerbilimleri, 4/1-2, 70-88.
  10. Beker, K. 2002. İnsuyu Kireçtaşları (Karapınar/Konya) Ostrakod Topluluğunun Biyostratigrafik ve Kronostratigrafik İncelenmesi. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara, Yüksek Mühendislik Tezi, 93s. (unpublished). Beekman, P.H. 1965. Maden Tetkik ve Arama Genel Müdürlüğü, 1/25.000 ölçekli arşiv haritaları Aksaray L 32 d1 ve d2 paftaları, Ankara, (unpublished). Beekman, P.H. 1966. Hasandağı-Melendiz dağı bölgesinde Pliyosen ve Kuvaterner volkanizma faaliyetleri. Maden Tetkik ve Arama Dergisi 66, 88-103.
  11. Bozkurt, E. 2001. Neotectonics of Turkey–a synthesis.Geodinamica Acta 14, 3–30.
  12. Boztuğ, D., Jonc