Abstract
The August 24, 2016 Amatrice earthquake (Ml 6.0) struck a region of the central Apennines (Italy) where several active faults were known since decades, most of which are considered the surface expression of seismogenic sources potentially able to rupture during earthquakes with M of up to 6.5-7. The current debate on which structure/s activated during the mainshock and the possibility that conterminous faults may activate in a near future urged us gathering all the data on surface geological evidence of fault activity we collected over the past 15-20 years in the area. We then map the main tectonic structures of the 2016 earthquake epicentral and mesoseismal region. Our aim is to provide hints on their seismogenic potential, as possible contribution to the national Database of Individual Seismogenic Source (DISS) and to the Database of the active and capable fault ITaly HAzard from CApable faults (ITHACA).
Highlights
The A ugust 24, 2016 A matrice earthquake (M l 6.0) struck a region of the central A pennines (Italy) where several active faults were known since decades, most of which are considered the surface expression of seismogenic sources potentially able to rupture during earthquakes with M of up to 6.5-7
As for fau lt cap ability, i.e. a fau lt able to ru p tu re the su rface, w e ad op t the 6.0±0.2 threshold m agnitu d e for su rface fau lting, on the ord er of that p rop osed by Michetti et al (2000) for the Ap ennine fau lts
As for the tim e interval to assess active and cap able fau lting, w e ad op t the criteria p rovid ed by Galad ini et al (2012), for the Italian extensional d om ain: a fau lt should be consid ered as active and cap able if it d isp lays evid ence of activation in the last 0.8 Myr, u nless it is sealed by d ep osits or land form s not you nger than the Last Glacial Maxim u m
Summary
The A ugust 24, 2016 A matrice earthquake (M l 6.0) struck a region of the central A pennines (Italy) where several active faults were known since decades, most of which are considered the surface expression of seismogenic sources potentially able to rupture during earthquakes with M of up to 6.5-7. H ence, to assess and m ap an active and capable extensional fault/ fault system as primary expression of a d eep seism ogenic sou rce, w e d efine concep tu al and factu al criteria based on Qu aternary geological, geom orp hological and stru ctu ral field evid ence From these criteria w e d erive “requ isites” that a fault m ust all have: 1) the fau lt m u st show evid ence of d isp lacement of d eposits and / or land form s (d erived from field observations and paleoseism ological trenching across fau lt traces) in d iverse sectors of its trace, for d ifferent ages (Mid d le Pleistocene-H olocene interval), w ith offsets that m u st increase w ith the age of d isp laced featu res (Fig. 1). Most of these stu d ies d efined that active faulting only based on the recognition of su p p osed m orp hotectonic features, such as the sole local exposition of the fau lt p lane at few p laces at the base of a given fau lt-scarp , or the recognition in the field of geom orphic features (e.g. triangular facets) su p p osed to be fau lt-related , cannot be consid ered satisfactory w hen taken alone
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
