English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

The M ∼ 7 1915 Fucino (Central Italy) earthquake represents one of the most destructiveseismic events ever occurred in the Italian Peninsula. Several seismogenic faults have beenproposed in the past decades as the source of the earthquake by means of different approachesand techniques that lead to a variety of speculations about the source mechanism and the faultlocation, often contrasting with one another. The 1915 earthquake produced a remarkable dataset of 73 coseismic hydrological changes in the near and intermediate field that consist in variationof the flow of streams and springs, liquefaction, rise of water temperature and turbidity.In this paper, we study the coseismic water level changes induced by the 1915 earthquake inthe near field to provide convincing clues on the geometry of the earthquake causative fault.We model the coseismic strain field induced by seventeen individual faults proposed throughdifferent approaches, and compare its pattern with the distribution of streamflow changes.We find: (i) clues on the most probable geometry of the earthquake causative fault. Best fitsbetween modelled deformation and observed data are displayed by sources (derived by geologicalor seismological data) that share several distinctive features, as they are ∼135◦-striking,SW-dipping, 25–30-km-long normal faults located along the eastern side of the Fucino basin.These data point to the Serrone Fault and the Parasano Fault as the most likely causative structuresand support the hypothesis that the coseismic ruptures observed in the field representedprimary surface faulting. On the contrary, our calculations show that the Pescina Fault and theVentrino Fault are secondary faults from the perspective of the hydrological response. Finally,one of the best scoring potential sources (from geological data) is a multifaulting system thatconsiders the presence, in the central-western part of the basin, of fault splays synthetic andantithetic to the main seismogenic structures; therefore, we infer for these splays a possibleactive involvement in a 1915-like seismogenic process; (ii) evidence against a number ofseismogenic structures that were previously associated with the earthquake. In particular, theplots of coseismic strain induced by sources uniquely derived by macroseismic or geodeticdata prove to be inconsistent with the polarities of the hydrological signatures. Also, sourcesmainly characterized by reverse faulting and/or by right-lateral strike-slip component are discardedand (iii) as a final remark, we maintain that the study of the hydrological signatures ofearthquake strain can offer an alternative tool in the investigation of the historical seismicity,to estimate the focal mechanism of major earthquakes capable of giving rise to a consistentdata set of hydrological data

The hydrological signature of a seismogenic source: coseismic hydrological changes in response to the 1915 Fucino (Central Italy) earthquake