USGS Science⌕ Search
Home/Archive/USGS

USGS · 70148627

Strong ground motion inferred from liquefaction caused by the 1811-1812 New Madrid, Missouri, earthquakes

Thomas L. Holzer·Thomas E. Noce·Michael J. Bennett
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Peak ground accelerations (PGAs) in the epicentral region of the 1811–1812 New Madrid, Missouri, earthquakes are inferred from liquefaction to have been no greater than ∼0.35 g . PGA is inferred in an 11,380  km 2 area in the Lower Mississippi Valley in Arkansas and Missouri where liquefaction was extensive in 1811–1812. PGA was inferred by applying liquefaction probability curves, which were originally developed for liquefaction hazard mapping, to detailed maps of liquefaction by Obermeier (1989) . The low PGA is inferred because both a shallow (1.5 m deep) water table and a large moment magnitude ( M 7.7) earthquake were assumed in the analysis. If a deep (5.0 m) water table and a small magnitude ( M 6.8) earthquake are assumed, the maximum inferred PGA is 1.10 g . Both inferred PGA values are based on an assumed and poorly constrained correction for sand aging. If an aging correction is not assumed, then the inferred PGA is no greater than 0.22 g . A low PGA value may be explained by nonlinear site response. Soils in the study area have an average V S 30 of 220±15  m/s. A low inferred PGA is consistent with PGA values estimated from ground‐motion prediction equations that have been proposed for the New Madrid seismic zone when these estimates are corrected for nonlinear soil site effects. This application of liquefaction probability curves demonstrates their potential usefulness in paleoseismology.

Explore related subjects

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of AmericaArticle
90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 35.52104976129943° to 36.9367208722872° latitude; -90.50811767578125° to -89.07989501953125° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Thomas L. Holzer, Thomas E. Noce, Michael J. Bennett. 2015-08-04. Strong ground motion inferred from liquefaction caused by the 1811-1812 New Madrid, Missouri, earthquakes. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120130258

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

USGS2026

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↗
USGS2026

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↗