International Journal of Earth Sciences

, Volume 100, Issue 6, pp 1293–1301 | Cite as

GPS-derived deformation rates in northwestern Himalaya and Ladakh

  • Sridevi Jade
  • H. J. Raghavendra Rao
  • M. S. M. Vijayan
  • V. K. Gaur
  • B. C. Bhatt
  • Kireet Kumar
  • Saigeetha Jaganathan
  • M. B. Ananda
  • P. Dileep Kumar
Original Paper

Abstract

Deformation rates derived from GPS measurements made at two continuously operating stations at Leh (34.1°N, 77.6°E) and Hanle (32.7°N, 78.9°E), and eight campaign sites in the trans-Himalayan Ladakh spanning 11 years (1997–2008), provide a clear picture of the kinematics of this region as well as the convergence rate across northwestern Himalaya. All the Ladakh sites move 32–34 mm/year NE in the ITRF2005 reference frame, and their relative velocities are 13–16 mm/year SW in the Indian reference frame and ~19 mm/year W with reference to the Lhasa IGS station in southeastern Tibet. The results indicate that there is no statistically significant deformation in the 200-km stretch between the continuous sites Leh and Hanle as well as between Leh and Nubra valley sites along the Karakoram fault, whereas the sites in and around the splayed Karakoram fault region indicate surface deformation of 2.5 mm/year. Campaign sites along the Karakoram fault zone indicate a fault parallel surface motion of 1.4–2.5 mm/year in the Tangste and western Panamik segment of the Karakoram fault, which quantifies the best possible GPS-derived dextral slip rate of 3 mm/year along this fault during this 11-year period. Baselines of Ladakh sites show convergence rates of 15–18 mm/year with respect to south India and 12–15 mm/year with respect to Delhi in north India and Almora in the Himalaya ~400 km north-northeast of Delhi. These constitute an arc normal convergence of 12–15 mm/year across the western Himalaya, which is consistent with arc normal convergence all along the Himalayan arc from west to east. Baseline extension rates of 14–16 mm/year between Lhasa and Ladakh sites are consistent with the east–west extension rate of Tibetan Plateau.

Keywords

Global positioning system (GPS) Ladakh Himalaya Karakoram fault Surface deformation India 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We acknowledge the grant of Department of Science and Technology, DST (ESS/CA/A9-14 IRHPA) and Ministry of Earth Sciences, MoES (MoES/P.O./Seismo/GPS/36/05), Government of India, to establish permanent GPS stations and to carry out regional GPS surveys to rigorously constrain the complex deformation regime in the Ladakh region. We acknowledge the support received from Indian Institute of Astrophysics, Ladakh division, for the continuous support in operation and maintenance of the Leh and Hanle permanent GPS sites. We thank Director, G.B. Pant Institute of Himalayan Environment and Development, for his support in operation of Almora permanent GPS station. We acknowledge the support of SIC, C-MMACS, for the GPS programme. We acknowledge the technical help of Mr. Shrungehswar in the preparation of the manuscript. Our sincere thanks to the reviews on this paper, which helped in vastly improving the quality of this manuscript.

References

  1. Altamimi Z, Collilieux X, Legrand J, Garayt B, Boucher C (2007) ITRF2005: a new release of the international terrestrial reference frame based on time series of station positions and earth orientation parameters. J Geophys Res 112:B09401. doi: 10.1029/2007JB004949 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Avouac JP, Tapponnier P (1993) Kinematic model of active deformation in central Asia. Geophys Res Lett 20:895–898CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Banerjee P, Bürgmann R (2002) Convergence across the northwest Himalaya from GPS measurements. Geophys Res Lett 29(13):1652. doi: 10.1029/2002GL015184 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Banerjee P, Burgmann R, Nagarajan B, Apel E (2008) Intraplate deformation of the Indian subcontinent. Geophys Res Lett 35:L18301. doi: 10.1029/2008GL035468 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bettinelli P, Avouac J, Flouzat M, Jouanne F, Bollinger L, Willis P, Chitrakar GR (2006) Plate motion of India and inter seismic strain in the Nepal Himalaya from GPS and DORIS measurements. J Geodesy. doi: 10.1007/s00190-006-0030-3
  6. Brown ET, Bendick R, Bourles DL, Gaur VK, Molnar P, Raisbeck GM, Yiou F (2002) Slip rates of the Karakoram fault, Ladakh, India, determined using cosmic ray exposure dating of debris flows and moraines. J Geophys Res 107(B9):2192. doi: 10.1029/2000JB000100 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chevalier ML, Ryerson FJ, Tapponnier P, Finkel RC, vander Woerd J, Haibing L, Quing L (2005) Slip-rate measurements on the Karakorum fault may imply secular variations in fault motion. Science 307:411–414. doi: 10.1126/science.1105466 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Estey LH, Meertens CM (1999) TEQC: the multi-purpose toolkit for GPS/GLONASS Data. GPS Solut 3(1):42–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Jade S (2004) Estimates of plate velocity and crustal deformation in the Indian subcontinent using GPS geodesy. Curr Sci 86:1443–1448Google Scholar
  10. Jade S, Bhatt BC, Yang Z, Bendick R, Gaur VK, Molnar P, Ananda MB, Kumar D (2004) GPS measurements from the Ladakh Himalaya, India: preliminary tests of plate-like or continuous deformation in Tibet. Geol Soc Am Bull 116:1385–1391CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Jade S, Mukul M, Bhattacharyya AK, Vijayan MSM, Saigeetha J, Ashok Kumar, Tiwari RP, Arun Kumar, Kalita S, Sahu SC, Krishna AP, Gupta SS, Murthy MVRL, Gaur VK (2007) Estimates of inter seismic deformation in Northeast India from GPS measurements. Earth Planet Sci Lett 263:221–234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. King RW, Bock Y (2006) Documentation of the GAMIT GPS analysis software. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, MassachusettsGoogle Scholar
  13. Lacassin R, Valli F, Arnaud N, Leloup PH, Paquette JL, Haibing L, Tapponnier P, Chevalier ML, Guillot S, Maheo G, Zhiqin X (2004) Large-scale geometry, offset and kinematic evolution of the Karakoram fault, Tibet. Earth Planet Sci Lett 219:255–269Google Scholar
  14. Murphy MA, Yin A, Kapp P, Harrison TM, Lin D, Jinghui G (2000) Southward propagation of the Karakoram fault system, southwest Tibet: timing and magnitude of slip. Geology 28:451–454CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Okada Y (1985) Surface deformation due to shear and tensile faults in a half-space. Bull Seismol Soc Amer 75(4):1135–1154Google Scholar
  16. Paul J, Burgmann R, Gaur VK, Bilham R, Larson KM, Ananda MB, Jade S, Mukul M, Anupama TS, Satyal G, Kumar D (2001) The motion and active deformation of India. Geophys Res Lett 28(4):647–650CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Phillips RJ, Searle MP (2007) Macrostructural and microstructural architecture of the Karakoram fault: relationship between magmatism and strike-slip faulting. Tectonics 26:TC3017. doi: 10.1029/2006TC001946 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Phillips RJ, Parrish RR, Searle MP (2004) Age constraints on ductile deformation and long-term slip rates along the Karakoram fault Ladakh. Earth Planet Sci Lett 226:305–319CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Rutter EH, Faulkner DR, Brodie KH, Phillips RJ, Searle MP (2007) Rock deformation processes in the Karakoram fault zone, Eastern Karakoram, Ladakh, NW India. J Struct Geol 29:1315–1326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Searle MP (1991) Geology and tectonics of the Karakoram Mountains. Wiley, Chichester, pp 1–358Google Scholar
  21. Searle MP, Weinberg RF, Dunlap WJ (1998) Transpressional tectonics along the Karakoram fault zone, northern Ladakh: constraints on Tibetan extrusion. In: Holdsworth RE, Strachan RA, Dewey JF (eds) Continental transpressional and transtensional tectonics, special publication 135. Geological Society of London, London, pp 307–326Google Scholar
  22. Wright TJ, Parsons B, England P, Fielding E (2004) InSAR observations of low slip rates on the major faults of western Tibet. Science 305:236–239. doi: 10.1126/science.1096388 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sridevi Jade
    • 1
  • H. J. Raghavendra Rao
    • 1
  • M. S. M. Vijayan
    • 1
  • V. K. Gaur
    • 1
    • 2
  • B. C. Bhatt
    • 2
  • Kireet Kumar
    • 3
  • Saigeetha Jaganathan
    • 1
  • M. B. Ananda
    • 1
  • P. Dileep Kumar
    • 1
  1. 1.CSIR Centre for Mathematical Modelling and Computer Simulation (C-MMACS)BangaloreIndia
  2. 2.Indian Institute of AstrophysicsBangaloreIndia
  3. 3.G B Pant Institute of Himalayan Environment and DevelopmentAlmoraIndia

Personalised recommendations