Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

An assessment of seismicity parameters in northwest Himalaya and adjoining regions

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Natural Hazards Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this study, an assessment of seismicity parameters in the northwest Himalaya and adjoining regions using an earthquake catalog from India Meteorological Department covering a period from June 1, 1998 to June 30, 2011 has been carried out. The spatial distributions of seismicity parameters, namely magnitude of completeness, M C, a value, b value, and correlation fractal dimension, D C, are estimated for the studied region. The M C, a, and b values are found to be 2.5, 4.601, and 0.83, respectively. Despite significant gaps, the spatial distributions of a and b values are seen to follow similar trend and are found scattering in between Main Boundary Thrust (MBT) and South Tibet Detachment, adjoining areas of Mahendragarh-Dehradun Fault (MDF), Delhi-Haridwar Ridge (DHR) and Moradabad Fault (MF), and the southern flank of Karakoram Fault and Indus-Tsangpo Suture Zone. The estimated spatial distribution of b and a values is within 90 % of confidence level, thereby indicating non-uniform stress accumulation or higher rock fracturing density in the studied region caused by strong tectonization following several earthquakes. Negative correlation between low b value and high D C is observed predominantly in the region between the MBT and Munsiari Thrust or Main Central Thrust-I of Garhwal and Kumaon Himalaya, adjoining zones of MDF, DHR, and MF of Indo-Gangetic plain, and the eastern flank of the studied region, suggesting the presence of asperities in the zone. At the same time, active creeping process can be inferred in between the MBT and Main Central Thrust of Garhwal Himalaya and the surrounding areas of Shimla region of the Himalayan arc to the northwestern part of the studied region from the positive correlation between b value and D C. The results indicate that the structural heterogeneity caused by different stress accumulation and rock fracturing densities exists due to continuous tectonic adjustments between different geomorphic features of the studied region. An attempt has also been made to classify the studied region into smaller seismic zones by observing the spatial patterns of b value and D C that are fractal properties of the observed seismicity, along with the prevalent fault networks.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Agrawal SK, Chawla J (2006) Seismic assessment for Delhi region. Curr Sci 91:1717–1724

    Google Scholar 

  • Aki K (1965) Maximum likelihood estimate of b in the formula log N = a − bM and its confidence limits. Bull Earthq Res Inst Tokyo Univ 43:237–239

    Google Scholar 

  • Allen JRL (1986) Earthquake magnitude-frequency, epicentral distance, and soft-sediment deformation in sedimentation basins. Sediment Geol 46:67–75

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ambraseys NN, Douglas J (2004) Magnitude calibration of north Indian earthquakes. Geophys J Int 158:1–42

    Google Scholar 

  • Arita K (1983) Origin of the inverted metamorphism of the Lower Himalayas Central Nepal. Tectonophysics 95:43–60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arora BR, Gahalaut VK, Naresh K (2012) Structural control on along-strike variation in the seismicity of the northwest Himalaya. J Asian Earth Sci. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jseaes.2012.06.001

  • Aviles CA, Scholz CH, Boatwright J (1987) Fractal analysis applied to characteristic segments of the San Andreas fault. J Geophys Res 92:331–344

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Basab M (2011) Clusters of Moderate Size Earthquakes along Main Central Thrust (MCT) in Himalaya. Int J Geosci 2:318–325

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bender B (1983) Maximum likelihood estimation of b-value for magnitude grouped data. Bull Seismol Soc Am 73:831–851

    Google Scholar 

  • Bilham R, Larson K, Freymueller J (1997) GPS measurements of present-day convergence across the Nepal Himalaya. Nature 386:61–64

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • BIS (2002) IS 1893-2002 (part 1): Indian standard criteria for earthquake resistant design of structures, part 1-general provision and buildings. Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi

    Google Scholar 

  • Bormann P, Liu R, Ren X, Gutdeutsch R, Kaiser D, Castellaro S (2007) Chinese national network magnitudes, their relation to NEIC magnitudes, and recommendations for new IASPEI magnitude standards. Bull Seismol Soc Am 97:114–127

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burchfiel BC, Chen Z, Hodges KV, Liu Y, Royden LH, Deng C, Xu J (1992) The South Tibet detachment system, Himalayan orogen: extension contemporaneous with and parallel to shortening in a collisional mountain belt. Geol Soc Am Spec Pap 269:1–41

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burg JP, Leyreloup A, Girardeau J, Chen GM (1987) Structure and metamorphism of a tectonically thickened continental crust—the Yalu Tsangpo suture zone (Tibet). Philos Trans R Soc Lond Ser A 321:67–86

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castellaro S, Bormann P (2007) Performance of different regression procedures on the magnitude conversion problem. Bull Seismol Soc Am 97:1167–1175

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castellaro S, Mulargia F, Kagan YY (2006) Regression problems for magnitude. Geophys J Int 165:913–930

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chernick MR (1999) Bootstrap methods: a practitioner’s guide, wiley series in probability and statistics. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Dezes P (1999) Tectonic and metamorphic evolution of the central Himalayan domain in Southeast Zanskar (Kashmir, India). Mémoires de Géologie. Doctoral thesis, Universite de Lausanne 32:149

  • Gansser A (1964) The Geology of the Himalayas. Wiley, New York, 289 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Grassberger P, Procaccia I (1983) Measuring the strangeness of strange attractors. Physica D 9:189–208

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • GSI (2000) Seismotectonic atlas of India and its environs. Geological Survey of India, Calcutta

    Google Scholar 

  • Gutenberg GB, Richter CF (1944) Frequency of earthquakes in California. Bull Seismol Soc Am 34:185–188

    Google Scholar 

  • Iyengar RN, Ghosh S (2004) Microzonation of earthquake hazard in greater Delhi area. Curr Sci 87:1193–1202

    Google Scholar 

  • Iyengar RN, Sharma D, Siddiqui JM (1999) Earthquake history of India in medieval times. Indian J Hist Sci 34(3):181–237

    Google Scholar 

  • Javed NM, Nakata T, Philip G, Virdi NS (2003) Preliminary observations from trench near Chandigarh, NW Himalaya and their bearing on active faulting. Curr Sci 85:1793–1798

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaila KL, Gaur VK, Narain H (1972) Quantitative seismicity maps of India. Bull Seismol Soc Am 62:1119–1131

    Google Scholar 

  • Kayal JR (1996) Precursor seismicity, foreshocks, and aftershocks of the Uttarkashi earthquake of October 20, 1991 at Garhwal Himalaya. Tectonophysics 263:339–345

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khattri KN, Chander R, Gaur VK, Sarkar I, Kumar S (1989) New seismological results on the tectonics of the Garhwal Himalaya. Proc India Acad Sci 98(1):91–109

    Google Scholar 

  • Knopoff L, Kagan YY, Knopoff R (1982) b values for foreshocks and aftershocks in real and simulated earthquake sequences. Bull Seismol Soc Am 72:1663–1676

    Google Scholar 

  • Kondo H, Nakata T, Akhtar SS, Wesnousky SG, Sugito N, Kaneda H, Tsutsumi H, Khan AH, Khattak W, Kausar AB (2008) Long recurrence interval of faulting beyond the 2005 Kashmir earthquake around the northwestern margin of the Indo-Asian collision zone. Geology 36(9):731–734. doi:10.1130/G25028A.1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kumar S, Wesnousky SG, Rockwell TK, Ragona D, Thakur VC, Seitz GG (2001) Earthquake recurrence and rupture dynamics of Himalayan Frontal Thrust, India. Science 294:2328–2331

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kumar S, Wesnousky SG, Rockwell TK, Thakur VC, Seitz GG (2003) Earthquake recurrence and rupture dynamics of Himalayan Frontal Thrust, India. Science 294:2328–2331

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kumar S, Wesnousky SG, Rockwell TK, Briggs RW, Thakur VC, Jayangondaperumal R (2006) Paleoseismic evidence of great surface-rupture earthquakes along the Indian Himalaya. J Geophys Res. doi:10.1029/2004JB003309

    Google Scholar 

  • Kumar S, Wesnousky SG, Jayangondaperumal R, Nakata T, Kumahara Y, Singh V (2010) Paleoseismological evidence of surface faulting along the northeastern Himalayan front, India: timing, size, and spatial extent of great earthquakes. J Geophys Res 115:B12422. doi:10.1029/2009JB006789

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lave J, Yule D, Sapkota S, Basant K, Madden C, Attal M, Pandey R (2005) Evidence for a great medieval earthquake (~ 1000 A.F.) in the central Himalayas, Nepal. Science 307:1302–1305

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mahajan AK, Thakur VC, Sharma ML, Sharma M (2010) Probabilistic seismic hazard map of Himalaya and its adjoining area, India. Nat Hazards 53:443–457

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malik JN, Nakata T, Philip G, Suresh N, Virdi NS (2008) Active fault and paleoseismic investigation: evidence of historic earthquake along Chandigarh Fault in the frontal Himalayan zone, NW India. J Himal Geol 29(2):109–117

    Google Scholar 

  • Mogi K (1962) Magnitude-frequency relationship for elastic shocks accompanying the fractures of various materials and some related problems in earthquakes. Bull Earthq Res Inst Tokyo Univ 40:831–883

    Google Scholar 

  • Molnar P (1984) Structure and Tectonics of the Himalaya: constraints and implications of geophysical data. Annu Rev Earth Planet Sci 12:489–518

    Google Scholar 

  • Mukhopadhyay B, Acharyya A, Dasgupta S (2010) Potential source zones for Himalayan earthquake constraints from spatial-temporal clusters. Nat Hazards. doi:10.1007/s11069-010-9618-2

    Google Scholar 

  • Nakata T (1989) Active faults of the Himalaya of India and Nepal. Geo Soc Am Spec Pap 232:243–264

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Narenberg MAA, Essex C (1990) Correlation dimension and systematic geometric effects. Phys Rev A 42:7065–7074

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oldham T (1883) A catalogue of Indian earthquakes from the earliest time to the end of A.D. 1869. Mem Geol Surv India 29:163–215

    Google Scholar 

  • Oncel AO, Wilson TH (2002) Space-time correlations of seismotectonic parameters: example from Japan and from Turkey preceding the Izmith earthquake. Bull Seismol Soc Am 92:339–349

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oncel AO, Wyss M (2000) The major asperities of the 1999 M 7.4 Izmit earthquake, defined by the microseismicity of the two decades before it. Geophys J Int 143:501–506

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paudyal H, Singh HN (2007) Anomalous seismic activity in Far-Western Nepal and its adjoining regions. Extended Abstract, Pro. Vol. MTGST, 40–43

  • Philip G, Suresh N, Bhakuni SS, Gupta V (2011) Paleoseismic investigation along Nalagarh Thrust: evidence of late pleistocene earthquake in Pinjaur Dun, Northwestern sub-Himalaya. J Asian Earth Sci 40:1056–1067

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raghukanth STG (2010) Estimation of seismicity parameters of India. Seismol Res Lett 81:207–217

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rajendran CP, Rajendran K (2005) The status of central seismic gap: a perspective based on the spatial and temporal aspects of the large Himalayan earthquakes. Tectonophysics 395:19–39

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richter CF (1935) An instrumental earthquake magnitude scale. Bull Seismol Soc Am 25:1–31

    Google Scholar 

  • Ristau J, Rogers GC, Cassidy JF (2005) Moment magnitude-local magnitude calibration for earthquake in western Canada. Bull Seismol Soc Am 95:1994–2000

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roy PNS, Mondal SK (2009) Fractal nature of earthquake occurrence in northwest Himalayan region. J Ind Geophys Union 13:63–68

    Google Scholar 

  • Scholemmer D, Wiemer S, Wyss M (2005) Variations in earthquake-size distribution across different regime. Nature 437:539–542

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schorlemmer D, Neri G, Wiemer S, Mostaccio A (2003) Stability and significance tests for b-value anomalies: example from the Tyrrhenian Sea. Geophys Res Lett 30:1835. doi:10.1029/2003GL017335

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seeber L, Armbruster JG (1981) Great detachment earthquakes along the Himalayan arc and long forecasting: In: Richards DW, Simpson PG (eds) Earthquake prediction—an international review. Am Geophys U Maurice Ewing Ser 4:259–277

  • Shanker D, Sharma ML (1998) Estimation of seismic hazard parameters for the Himalayas and its vicinity from complete data files. Pure Appl Geophys 152:267–279

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shikha R, Gahalaut VK, Raju PS, Kayal JR (2005) Rupture parameters of the 1999 Chamoli earthquake in Garhwal Himalaya: constraints from aftershocks and change in failure stress. Tectonophysics 404:23–32

    Google Scholar 

  • Singh DD, Harsh KG (1980) Source dynamics of two great earthquakes of the Indian sub-continent: the Bihar-Nepal earthquake of January 15, 1934 and the Quetta earthquake of May 30, 1935 A.D. Bull Seismol Soc Am 70:757–773

    Google Scholar 

  • Singh HN, Paudyal H, Shanker D, Panthi A, Kumar A, Singh VP (2010) Anomalous seismicity and Earthquake Forecast in western Nepal Himalaya and its adjoining Indian region. Pure Appl Geophys 167:667–684

    Google Scholar 

  • Sushil K, Rama S, Deepika J (2010) Fractal dimension and b-value mapping in north-west Himalaya and adjoining regions, India. Adv Geosci 26:83–96

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thakur VC, Pandey AK (2004) Active deformation of Himalayan Frontal Thrust and piedmont zone south of Dehradun in respect of seismotectonics of Garhwal Himalaya. J Himal Geol 25:25–31

    Google Scholar 

  • Thingbaijam KKS, Nath SK, Yadav A (2008) Recent seismicity in northeast India and its adjoining region. J Seismol 12:107–123

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thingbaijam KKS, Chingtham P, Nath SK (2009) Seismicity in the north-west frontier province at the Indian-Eurasian plate convergence. Seismol Res Lett 80:599–608

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turcotte DL (1986) A fractal model of crustal deformation. Tectonophysics 132:361–369

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Utsu T (1965) A method for determining the value of b in the formula logN = a − bM showing the magnitude-frequency relation for the earthquakes. Geophys Bull Hokkaido Univ 13:99–103

    Google Scholar 

  • Utsu T (1999) Representation and analysis of the earthquake size distribution: a historical review and some new approaches. Pure Appl Geophys 155:509–535

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wesnouski SG, Scholz CH, Shimazaki K, Matsuda T (1983) Earthquake frequency distribution and the mechanics of faulting. J Geophys Res 88:9331–9340

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiemer S, Baer M (2000) Mapping and removing quarry blast events from seismicity catalogs. Bull Seismol Soc Am 90:525–530

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiemer S, Wyss M (2000) Minimum magnitude of complete reporting in earthquake catalogs: examples from Alaska, the Western United States, and Japan. Bull Seismol Soc Am 90:859–869

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wyss M, Sammis CG, Nadeau RM, Wiemer S (2004) Fractal dimension and b-value on creeping and locked patches of the San Andreas Fault near Parkfield, California. Bull Soc Am 94:410–421

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yadav RBS, Yusuf Bayrak, Tripathi JN, Chopra S, Singh AP, Erdem Bayrak (2011) A probabilistic assessment of earthquake hazard parameters in NW Himalaya and the adjoining regions. Pure Appl Geophys. doi:10.1007/s00024-011-0434-8

    Google Scholar 

  • Yadav RBS, Bayrak Y, Tripathi JN, Chopra S, Bayrak E (2012a) Regional variation of the ω-upper bound magnitude of GIII distribution in Hindukush-Pamir Himalaya and the adjacent regions: a perspective on earthquake hazard. Tectonophysics 544–545:1–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yadav RBS, Tsapanos TM, Bayrak Y, Koravos GCh (2012b) Probabilistic appraisal of earthquake hazard parameters deduced from a Bayesian approach in the northwest frontier of the Himalayas. Pure Appl Geophys 170(3):283–295

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yadav RBS, Tsapanos TM, Koravos GCh, Bayrak Y, Devlioti KD (2013) Spatial mapping of earthquake hazard parameters in the Hindukush-Pamir Himalaya and adjacent regions: implication for future seismic hazard. J Asian Earth Sci 70:115–124

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yu G, Khattri KN, Anderson JG, Brune JN, Zeng Y (1995) Strong ground motion from the Uttarkashi, Himalaya, India, earthquake: comparison of observations with synthetics using the composite source model. Bull Seismol Soc Am 85:31–50

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors express their sincere thanks to Secretary, Ministry of Earth Sciences, for providing necessary facilities for carrying out this work and permission to publish this paper. The authors are thankful to the India Meteorological department (IMD) for providing earthquake catalog to carry out this research work. The authors also thank their respective organizations for their support in the study. The authors are grateful to anonymous referee, Dr. Mark Stirling and Dr. KKS Thingbaijam, for their valuable comments and suggestions, which lead to great improvement in the original manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Ministry of Earth Sciences, New Delhi, 110003, India

    P. Chingtham, S. Chopra & B. K. Bansal

  2. Institute of Geodynamics, National Observatory of Athens, Athens, Greece

    I. Baskoutas

Authors
  1. P. Chingtham
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. S. Chopra
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. I. Baskoutas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. B. K. Bansal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to P. Chingtham.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Chingtham, P., Chopra, S., Baskoutas, I. et al. An assessment of seismicity parameters in northwest Himalaya and adjoining regions. Nat Hazards 71, 1599–1616 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-013-0967-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-013-0967-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation