ALBERT

Description: 〈br /〉〈span class="detail_caption"〉Notes: 〈/span〉Zoback, Mary Lou -- New York, N.Y. -- Science. 2014 Oct 17;346(6207):283. doi: 10.1126/science.1261788.〈br /〉〈span class="detail_caption"〉Author address: 〈/span〉Mary Lou Zoback is a consulting professor in the Department of Geophysics, Stanford University, Stanford, CA. marylouz@stanford.edu.〈br /〉〈span class="detail_caption"〉Record origin:〈/span〉 〈a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25324360" target="_blank"〉PubMed〈/a〉

Description: 〈br /〉〈span class="detail_caption"〉Notes: 〈/span〉Gleick, P H -- Adams, R M -- Amasino, R M -- Anders, E -- Anderson, D J -- Anderson, W W -- Anselin, L E -- Arroyo, M K -- Asfaw, B -- Ayala, F J -- Bax, A -- Bebbington, A J -- Bell, G -- Bennett, M V L -- Bennetzen, J L -- Berenbaum, M R -- Berlin, O B -- Bjorkman, P J -- Blackburn, E -- Blamont, J E -- Botchan, M R -- Boyer, J S -- Boyle, E A -- Branton, D -- Briggs, S P -- Briggs, W R -- Brill, W J -- Britten, R J -- Broecker, W S -- Brown, J H -- Brown, P O -- Brunger, A T -- Cairns, J Jr -- Canfield, D E -- Carpenter, S R -- Carrington, J C -- Cashmore, A R -- Castilla, J C -- Cazenave, A -- Chapin, F S 3rd -- Ciechanover, A J -- Clapham, D E -- Clark, W C -- Clayton, R N -- Coe, M D -- Conwell, E M -- Cowling, E B -- Cowling, R M -- Cox, C S -- Croteau, R B -- Crothers, D M -- Crutzen, P J -- Daily, G C -- Dalrymple, G B -- Dangl, J L -- Darst, S A -- Davies, D R -- Davis, M B -- De Camilli, P V -- Dean, C -- DeFries, R S -- Deisenhofer, J -- Delmer, D P -- DeLong, E F -- DeRosier, D J -- Diener, T O -- Dirzo, R -- Dixon, J E -- Donoghue, M J -- Doolittle, R F -- Dunne, T -- Ehrlich, P R -- Eisenstadt, S N -- Eisner, T -- Emanuel, K A -- Englander, S W -- Ernst, W G -- Falkowski, P G -- Feher, G -- Ferejohn, J A -- Fersht, A -- Fischer, E H -- Fischer, R -- Flannery, K V -- Frank, J -- Frey, P A -- Fridovich, I -- Frieden, C -- Futuyma, D J -- Gardner, W R -- Garrett, C J R -- Gilbert, W -- Goldberg, R B -- Goodenough, W H -- Goodman, C S -- Goodman, M -- Greengard, P -- Hake, S -- Hammel, G -- Hanson, S -- Harrison, S C -- Hart, S R -- Hartl, D L -- Haselkorn, R -- Hawkes, K -- Hayes, J M -- Hille, B -- Hokfelt, T -- House, J S -- Hout, M -- Hunten, D M -- Izquierdo, I A -- Jagendorf, A T -- Janzen, D H -- Jeanloz, R -- Jencks, C S -- Jury, W A -- Kaback, H R -- Kailath, T -- Kay, P -- Kay, S A -- Kennedy, D -- Kerr, A -- Kessler, R C -- Khush, G S -- Kieffer, S W -- Kirch, P V -- Kirk, K -- Kivelson, M G -- Klinman, J P -- Klug, A -- Knopoff, L -- Kornberg, H -- Kutzbach, J E -- Lagarias, J C -- Lambeck, K -- Landy, A -- Langmuir, C H -- Larkins, B A -- Le Pichon, X T -- Lenski, R E -- Leopold, E B -- Levin, S A -- Levitt, M -- Likens, G E -- Lippincott-Schwartz, J -- Lorand, L -- Lovejoy, C O -- Lynch, M -- Mabogunje, A L -- Malone, T F -- Manabe, S -- Marcus, J -- Massey, D S -- McWilliams, J C -- Medina, E -- Melosh, H J -- Meltzer, D J -- Michener, C D -- Miles, E L -- Mooney, H A -- Moore, P B -- Morel, F M M -- Mosley-Thompson, E S -- Moss, B -- Munk, W H -- Myers, N -- Nair, G B -- Nathans, J -- Nester, E W -- Nicoll, R A -- Novick, R P -- O'Connell, J F -- Olsen, P E -- Opdyke, N D -- Oster, G F -- Ostrom, E -- Pace, N R -- Paine, R T -- Palmiter, R D -- Pedlosky, J -- Petsko, G A -- Pettengill, G H -- Philander, S G -- Piperno, D R -- Pollard, T D -- Price, P B Jr -- Reichard, P A -- Reskin, B F -- Ricklefs, R E -- Rivest, R L -- Roberts, J D -- Romney, A K -- Rossmann, M G -- Russell, D W -- Rutter, W J -- Sabloff, J A -- Sagdeev, R Z -- Sahlins, M D -- Salmond, A -- Sanes, J R -- Schekman, R -- Schellnhuber, J -- Schindler, D W -- Schmitt, J -- Schneider, S H -- Schramm, V L -- Sederoff, R R -- Shatz, C J -- Sherman, F -- Sidman, R L -- Sieh, K -- Simons, E L -- Singer, B H -- Singer, M F -- Skyrms, B -- Sleep, N H -- Smith, B D -- Snyder, S H -- Sokal, R R -- Spencer, C S -- Steitz, T A -- Strier, K B -- Sudhof, T C -- Taylor, S S -- Terborgh, J -- Thomas, D H -- Thompson, L G -- Tjian, R T -- Turner, M G -- Uyeda, S -- Valentine, J W -- Valentine, J S -- Van Etten, J L -- van Holde, K E -- Vaughan, M -- Verba, S -- von Hippel, P H -- Wake, D B -- Walker, A -- Walker, J E -- Watson, E B -- Watson, P J -- Weigel, D -- Wessler, S R -- West-Eberhard, M J -- White, T D -- Wilson, W J -- Wolfenden, R V -- Wood, J A -- Woodwell, G M -- Wright, H E Jr -- Wu, C -- Wunsch, C -- Zoback, M L -- Howard Hughes Medical Institute/ -- New York, N.Y. -- Science. 2010 May 7;328(5979):689-90. doi: 10.1126/science.328.5979.689.〈br /〉〈span class="detail_caption"〉Record origin:〈/span〉 〈a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20448167" target="_blank"〉PubMed〈/a〉

Description: Recently compiled data on the state of stress have been used to define stress provinces in the conterminous United States in which the orientation and relative magnitude of the horizontal principal stresses are fairly uniform. The observed pattems of stress constrain mechanisms for generating intraplate lithospheric stresses. Coupled with new information on geologic structure and tectonism in seismically active areas of the Midcontinent and East, these data help to define some characteristics common to these areas and to identify key questions regarding why certain faults seem to be seismically active.〈br /〉〈span class="detail_caption"〉Notes: 〈/span〉Zoback, M D -- Zoback, M L -- New York, N.Y. -- Science. 1981 Jul 3;213(4503):96-104.〈br /〉〈span class="detail_caption"〉Record origin:〈/span〉 〈a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17741175" target="_blank"〉PubMed〈/a〉

Description: Contemporary in situ tectonic stress indicators along the San Andreas fault system in central California show northeast-directed horizontal compression that is nearly perpendicular to the strike of the fault. Such compression explains recent uplift of the Coast Ranges and the numerous active reverse faults and folds that trend nearly parallel to the San Andreas and that are otherwise unexplainable in terms of strike-slip deformation. Fault-normal crustal compression in central California is proposed to result from the extremely low shear strength of the San Andreas and the slightly convergent relative motion between the Pacific and North American plates. Preliminary in situ stress data from the Cajon Pass scientific drill hole (located 3.6 kilometers northeast of the San Andreas in southern California near San Bernardino, California) are also consistent with a weak fault, as they show no right-lateral shear stress at approximately 2-kilometer depth on planes parallel to the San Andreas fault.〈br /〉〈span class="detail_caption"〉Notes: 〈/span〉Zoback, M D -- Zoback, M L -- Mount, V S -- Suppe, J -- Eaton, J P -- Healy, J H -- Oppenheimer, D -- Reasenberg, P -- Jones, L -- Raleigh, C B -- Wong, I G -- Scotti, O -- Wentworth, C -- New York, N.Y. -- Science. 1987 Nov 20;238(4830):1105-11.〈br /〉〈span class="detail_caption"〉Record origin:〈/span〉 〈a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17839366" target="_blank"〉PubMed〈/a〉

Description: We compute ground motions for the Beroza (1991) and Wald et al. (1991) source models of the 1989 magnitude 6.9 Loma Prieta earthquake using four different wave-propagation codes and recently developed 3D geologic and seismic velocity models. In preparation for modeling the 1906 San Francisco earthquake, we use this well-recorded earthquake to characterize how well our ground-motion simulations reproduce the observed shaking intensities and amplitude and durations of recorded motions throughout the San Francisco Bay Area. All of the simulations generate ground motions consistent with the large-scale spatial variations in shaking associated with rupture directivity and the geologic structure. We attribute the small variations among the synthetics to the minimum shear-wave speed permitted in the simulations and how they accommodate topography. Our long-period simulations, on average, under predict shaking intensities by about one-half modified Mercalli intensity (MMI) units (25%-35% in peak velocity), while our broadband simulations, on average, under predict the shaking intensities by one-fourth MMI units (16% in peak velocity). Discrepancies with observations arise due to errors in the source models and geologic structure. The consistency in the synthetic waveforms across the wave-propagation codes for a given source model suggests the uncertainty in the source parameters tends to exceed the uncertainty in the seismic velocity structure. In agreement with earlier studies, we find that a source model with slip more evenly distributed northwest and southeast of the hypocenter would be preferable to both the Beroza and Wald source models. Although the new 3D seismic velocity model improves upon previous velocity models, we identify two areas needing improvement. Nevertheless, we find that the seismic velocity model and the wave-propagation codes are suitable for modeling the 1906 earthquake and scenario events in the San Francisco Bay Area.

Description: We estimate the ground motions produced by the 1906 San Francisco earthquake making use of the recently developed Song et al. (2008) source model that combines the available geodetic and seismic observations and recently constructed 3D geologic and seismic velocity models. Our estimates of the ground motions for the 1906 earthquake are consistent across five ground-motion modeling groups employing different wave propagation codes and simulation domains. The simulations successfully reproduce the main features of the Boatwright and Bundock (2005) ShakeMap, but tend to over predict the intensity of shaking by 0.1-0.5 modified Mercalli intensity (MMI) units. Velocity waveforms at sites throughout the San Francisco Bay Area exhibit characteristics consistent with rupture directivity, local geologic conditions (e.g., sedimentary basins), and the large size of the event (e.g., durations of strong shaking lasting tens of seconds). We also compute ground motions for seven hypothetical scenarios rupturing the same extent of the northern San Andreas fault, considering three additional hypocenters and an additional, random distribution of slip. Rupture directivity exerts the strongest influence on the variations in shaking, although sedimentary basins do consistently contribute to the response in some locations, such as Santa Rosa, Livermore, and San Jose. These scenarios suggest that future large earthquakes on the northern San Andreas fault may subject the current San Francisco Bay urban area to stronger shaking than a repeat of the 1906 earthquake. Ruptures propagating southward towards San Francisco appear to expose more of the urban area to a given intensity level than do ruptures propagating northward.