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 Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The general <q>basin and range</q> Apennine topographiccharacteristic is generally attributed to the presently active normal faultsystems, whose long-term activity (throughout the Quaternary) is supposed tohave been responsible for the creation of morphological/structural highs andlows. By coupling field geological survey and geophysical investigations, wereconstructed the 3-D geological model of an inner tectonic basin of thecentral Apennines, the Subequana Valley, bounded to the northeast by thesouthern segment of one of the major active and seismogenic normal faults ofthe Apennines, known as the Middle Aterno Valley–Subequana Valley fault system.Our analyses revealed that, since the late Pliocene, the basin evolved in adouble half-graben configuration through a polyphase tectonic development.An early phase, Late Pliocene–Early Pleistocene in age, was controlled bythe ENE–WSW-striking and SSE-dipping Avezzano–Bussi fault, that determinedthe formation of an early depocentre towards the N–NW. Subsequently, themain fault became the NW–SE-striking faults, which drove the formation duringthe Quaternary of a new fault-related depocentre towards the NE. Byconsidering the available geological information, a similar structuralevolution has likely involved three close tectonic basins aligned along theAvezzano–Bussi fault, namely the Fucino Basin, the Subequana Valley, and theSulmona Basin, and it has been probably experienced by other tectonic basinsof the chain. The present work therefore points out the role of pre-existingtransverse tectonic structures, inherited by previous tectonic phases, inaccommodating the ongoing tectonic deformation and, consequently, ininfluencing the structural characteristics of the major active normalfaults. This has implications in terms of earthquake fault rupturepropagation and segmentation. Lastly, the morpho-tectonic setting of theApennine chain results from the superposition of deformation events whosegeological legacy must be considered in a wider evolutionary perspective.Our results testify that a large-scale <q>basin and range</q> geomorphologicalfeature – often adopted for morpho-tectonic and kinematic evaluations inactive extensional contexts, as in the Apennines – just led byrange-bounding active normal faults may be actually simplistic, as it couldnot be applied everywhere, owing to peculiar complexities of the localtectonic histories

Active faulting, 3-D geological architecture and Plio-Quaternary structural evolution of extensional basins in the central Apennine chain, Italy