Neotectonics and related crustal deformation along Carbyn thrust fault, South Andaman, India: implications of the frontal surface faulting and propagation of tectonic activity towards Andaman trench

  • Gulam Rasool Bhat
  • S. BalajiEmail author
  • Vazeem Iqbal
  • B. Balakrishna
  • Maqbool Yousuf
Original Paper


Paleoseismic investigations have been carried out across an ~ 10-m-high scarp along the Carbyn thrust fault, that marks the structural contact between the overriding Ophiolite suite of the Cretaceous age and under riding Andaman Flysch group (Oligocene) in the outer-arc setting of the Northern segment of Sunda-Andaman subduction zone. The Carbyn thrust fault is one of the important concomitant faults in the accretionary prism of the Andaman subduction zone and the surface trace marks a N-S trending thrust fault with Easterly dip which extends for a length of about 30 km in the Eastern half of South Andaman, starting from Carbyn area up to Chidiyatapu (Southernmost tip of the South Andaman) through Kodiyaghat and Burmanallah areas. The thrust has emplaced dismembered Cretaceous Ophiolite slices over Oligocene siliciclastic turbidites (Andaman Flysch) almost in a N-S trending linear zone of deformation. The 10-m-high scarp expressed at the interface between Ophiolite suite and Andaman Flysch group borders the topographic front of Ophiolite suite and breaks the Quaternary and late Holocene succession almost up to a length of 3.7 km from Carbyn to Burmanallah area, registers the youngest surface deformation along the thrust. The scarp is abrupt and sharp trending in N-S direction shows variations in displacement along the strike and has preserved its initial geometry without erosion. Trench exposure and Georadar survey across the scarp at Carbyn area reveals a very low angle thrust fault that cuts the bedrock surface (Ultramafics of Ophiolite Suite) rocks against the young alluvial surface deposited by Prothrapur Nallah and Carbyn creek at Carbyn area. The thrust fault shows flattening of the fault geometry around 16° at the base of the trench and dips 8–10° at near surface. The expression of the scarp at the frontal position of Ophiolite Suite and verging towards the West displacing late Holocene sediments reflects advancing of thrusting and propagation of tectonic activity towards Andaman trench.


Palaeoseismology Tectonic scarp Landscape evolution Ophiolite suite Crustal deformation Andaman trench 



The authors are also thankful to Pondicherry University for providing the necessary facilities during the field work. We are exceedingly grateful to Additional Principle Chief Conservator of Forests (APCC) Andaman and Nicobar region for providing permission for excavation and help during field studies in the forest area.

Funding information

The first and second authors are grateful to MOES project (MOES/P. O (Seismo)/1 (268)/2015 dt. 25 Feb 2016) for providing the financial support in carrying out the project.


  1. Balaji S (2010) A palaeostress analysis of Precambrian granulite terrain of Northern Tamil Nadu, peninsular India-a remote sensing study. Asian J Geoinform 10:23–30Google Scholar
  2. Bilham R, Gaur VK (2001) Geodetic contributions to the study of Seismotectonics in India. Curr Sci 79:1259–1269Google Scholar
  3. Bilham R, Engdahl ER, Feldl N, Satyabala SP (2005) Partial and complete rupture of the Indo-Andaman plate boundary 1847-2004. Seismol Res Lett 76:299–311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Curray JR (2005) Tectonics and history of the Andaman Sea region. J Asian Earth Sci 25:187–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Earnest A, Rajendran CP, Rajendran K, Anu R, Arun GM, Mohan PM (2005) Near-field observations on the co-seismic deformation associated with the 26 December 2004 Andaman-Sumatra earthquake. Curr Sci 89:1237–1244Google Scholar
  6. Gahalaut VK, Nagarajan B, Catherine JK, Kumar S (2006) Constraints on 2004 Sumatra-Andaman earthquake rupture from GPS measurements in Andaman-Nicobar Islands. Earth Plan Sci Lett 242:365–474CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Lay T, Kanamori H, Ammon CJ, Nettles M, Ward SN, Aster RC, Beck SL, Bilek SL, Brudzinski MR, Butler R, DeShon HR, Estorm G, Satake K, Sipkin S (2005) The great Sumatra-Andaman earthquake of 26 December 2004. Science 308:1127–1133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Malik JN, Murty CVR, Durgesh Rai C (2006) Landscape changes in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands (India) after the December 2004 great Sumatra earthquake and Indian Ocean tsunami. Earthquake Spectra 22(3):S43–S66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Malik JN, Shishikura M, Echigo Y, Ikeda K, Satake H, Kayanne Y, Murty CVR, Dikshit O (2011) Geologic evidence for two pre-2004 earthquakes during recent centuries near Port Blair, South Andaman Island, India. Geology 39(6):559–562CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Malik JN, Banerjee C, Afzal K, Frango CJ, Shishikura M, Satake K, Singhvi AK (2015) Stratigraphic evidence for earthquake and tsunami on the west coast of South Andaman Island, India during the past 1000 years. Tectonophysics 661:49–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. McCaffrey R (1992) Oblique plate convergence, slip vectors, and forearc deformation. J Geophys Res 97:8905–8915CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. McGill SF, Sieh K (1991) Surficial offsets on the central and eastern Garlock fault associated with prehistoric earthquakes. J Geophys Res 96:148–227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Meghraoui M, Jaegy R, Lammali K, Albarede F (1988) Late Holocene earthquake sequences on the El Asnam (Algeria) thrust fault. Earth Planet Sci Lett 90:187–203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Meltzner AJ (2010) Earthquake recurrence, clustering, and persistent segmentation near the southern end of the 2004 Sunda megathrust rupture, Ph.D. thesis, Calif. Inst. of Technol., Pasadena. THESIS:06012010-082222484
  15. Ortiz M, Bilham R (2003) Source area and rupture parameters of the 31 December 1881 Mw 7.9 Car Nicobar earthquake estimated from tsunami recorded in the Bay of Bengal. J Geophys Res 108:1–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Pal T, Chakraborty PP, Duttagupta T, Singh CD (2003) Geodynamic evolution of an outer arc in convergent margin of active Burma–Java subduction complex, a document from Andaman islands, Bay of Bengal. Geol Mag 140:289–307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Paul J, Bürgmann R, Gaur VK, Bilham R, Larson K, Ananda MB, Jade S, Mukul M, Anupama TS, Satyal G, Kumar D (2001) The motion and active deformation of India. Geophys Res Lett 28:647–650CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Rajendran CP, Earnest A, Rajendran K, Das RD, Kesavan S (2003) The 13 September 2002 North Andaman (Diglipur) earthquake: an analysis in the context of regional seismicity. Curr Sci 84(7):919–924Google Scholar
  19. Rajendran CP, Rajendran K, Anu R, Earnest A, Machado T, Mohan PM, Freymueller J (2007) Crustal deformation and seismic history associated with 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake: a perspective from the Andaman-Nicobar Islands. BullSeism Soc Amer 97:S174–S191Google Scholar
  20. Rajendran K, Rajendran CP, Earnest A, Ravi Prasad GV, Dutta K, Anu R (2008) Age estimates of the coastal terraces of the Andaman and Nicobar region. Tectonophysics 455:53–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Roy SK (1992) Accretionary prism in Andaman Forearc. Geol Surv India Spec Publ 29:27–38Google Scholar
  22. Sieh K, Natawidjaja D (2000) Neotectonics of the Sumatran fault, Indonesia. J Geophys Res 105:295–326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Sinvhal H, Khattri KN, Rai K, Gaur VK (1978) Neotectonics and the space time seismicity of the Andaman and Nicobar region. Bull Seis Am 68:399–409Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Saudi Society for Geosciences 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gulam Rasool Bhat
    • 1
  • S. Balaji
    • 1
    Email author
  • Vazeem Iqbal
    • 1
  • B. Balakrishna
    • 2
  • Maqbool Yousuf
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Disaster ManagementPondicherry UniversityPort BlairIndia
  2. 2.Department of GeologyOsmania UniversityHyderabadIndia
  3. 3.National Institute of TechnologySrinagarIndia

Personalised recommendations