USGS Science⌕ Search

USGS · 70036541

Neotectonics and paleoseismology of the Limón and pedro miguel faults in Panamá: earthquake hazard to the Panamá canal

Abstract

We present new geologic, tectonic geomorphic, and geochronologic data on the slip rate, timing, and size of past surface ruptures for the right-lateral Lim??n and Pedro Miguel faults in central Panam??. These faults are part of a system of conjugate faults that accommodate the internal deformation of Panam?? resulting from the ongoing collision of Central and South America. There have been at least three surface ruptures on the Lim??n fault in the past 950-1400 years, with the most recent during the past 365 years. Displacement in this young event is at least 1.2 m (based on trenching) and may be 1.6-2 m (based on small channel offsets). Awell-preserved 4.2 m offset suggests that the penultimate event also sustained significant displacement. The Holocene slip rate has averaged about 6 mm=yr, based on a 30-m offset terrace riser incised into a 5-ka abandoned channel. The Pedro Miguel fault has sustained three surface ruptures in the past 1600 years, the most recent being the 2 May 1621 earthquake that partially destroyed Panam?? Viejo. At least 2.1 m of slip occurred in this event near the Canal, with geomorphic offsets suggesting 2.5-3 m. The historic Camino de Cruces is offset 2.8 m, indicating multimeter displacement over at least 20 km of fault length. Channel offsets of 100-400 m, together with a climate-induced incision model, suggest a Late Quaternary slip rate of about 5 mm=yr, which is consistent with the paleoseismic results. Comparison of the timing of surface ruptures between the Lim??n and Pedro Miguel faults suggests that large earthquakes may rupture both faults with 2-3 m of displacement for over 40 km, such as is likely in earthquakes in the M 7 range. Altogether, our observations indicate that the Lim??n and Pedro Miguel faults represent a significant seismic hazard to central Panam?? and, specifically, to the Canal and Panam?? City.

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 7.089990476360545° to 9.763197528547247° latitude; -83.056640625° to -77.113037109375° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Thomas Rockwell, Edon Gath, Tania Gonzalez, Chris Madden, Danielle Verdugo, Caitlin Lippincott, Tim Dawson, Lewis A. Owen, Markus Fuchs, Ana Cadena, Pat Williams, Elise Weldon, Pastora Franceschi. 2010-12-06. Neotectonics and paleoseismology of the Limón and pedro miguel faults in Panamá: earthquake hazard to the Panamá canal. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120090342

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Re-evaluation of shaking, dynamic strain, and the source of the 1886 Charleston, South Carolina, earthquake

As the largest historical event in the eastern United States, the 1886 Charleston, South Carolina, earthquake, plays a prominent role in our nation’s seismological and human history and an outsized role in our probabilistic ground‐motion hazard estimates, affecting building codes, insurance rates, and geophysical monitoring. Thus, constraining the characteristics of the 1886 earthquake source, as well as the nature of its shaking distribution and impacts to the extent possible, is essential. Given its vintage, however, societal, geological, and geophysical datasets are limited compared with those used in modern seismological analyses. Because of these limitations, some characteristics of the rupture model are fundamentally nonunique. Still, by re‐evaluating all available data, I can constrain several key aspects of this earthquake. I show that several interpretations in recent analyses are inconsistent regarding the inferred source; shaking; ground failure; and, particularly, railway impacts. Importantly, I have shown that although dynamic strain caused the ground failure that led to track deformation, without the intermediate liquefaction step, dynamic strain alone was unlikely to be the source of rail deformation, contrary to earlier studies. Had earlier pronouncements that dynamic strain is a real concern for bending railways held true, there would be serious ramifications for railway engineering as well as for other above‐ and below‐ground linear infrastructure.

South Carolina↗

ETAS-positive: Extracting unbiased epidemic-type aftershock models from incomplete earthquake catalogs

Earthquake catalogs are inherently incomplete, and short-term fluctuations in catalog completeness can strongly bias estimates of seismicity parameters. Here, we extend the positive statistics framework recently introduced for estimating Gutenberg–Richter a and b values to the Epidemic-Type Aftershock Sequence (ETAS) model. The approach focuses on complete magnitude–time intervals defined by pairs of earthquakes in which the second event is larger than the first. Comprehensive synthetic tests demonstrate that the proposed ETAS + method retrieves nearly unbiased parameter estimates even from highly incomplete catalogs, whereas parameters obtained using classical estimation approaches are strongly biased. Application to Southern California reveals a similar trend, with the productivity scaling parameter α approaching the b value, consistent with self-similar earthquake triggering within estimation uncertainties. Owing to its robustness against catalog incompleteness and computational efficiency, the ETAS + method provides a powerful new tool for seismicity analysis and earthquake forecasting.

California↗