E

geodetic Observations of active intraplate crustal deformation in the wabash Valley seismic Zone and the southern illinois basin
Gerald A. Galgana and Michael W. Hamburger

Gerald A. Galgana1,2 and Michael W. Hamburger1

Online material: Figures showing observed and predicted GPS velocity vectors, including a tabulation of observed GPS velocities and modeled principal strain rates.

TECTONIC SETTING
The Wabash Valley seismic zone (WVSZ) is a broad, seismically active area located in southern Illinois, southwestern Indiana, and westernmost Kentucky. Situated within the WVSZ is the Wabash Valley fault system (WVFS), a series of parallel NNE-trending normal faults close to the Wabash River Valley, which marks the Indiana-Illinois border. The WVSZ is hypothesized to be a northeastern extension of the New Madrid seismic zone because of its location at the northnortheastern tip of the Reelfoot rift and the presence of deeply subsided structural lows within the zone (Braile, Hinze, et al. 1982; Braile, Keller et al. 1982; Sexton et al. 1986). However, the WVSZ is truncated at its southern end by the Cottage Grove fault and Rough Creek fault system (Figure 1), and several of the basement structures associated with the WVSZ terminate there (Bear et al. 1997). The WVSZ is associated with a significant concentration of recently recorded low to moderate magnitude (mb < 5.5) earthquakes (Figure 1). In addition, paleoseismic studies indicate the occurrence of at least seven strong (mb > 6) prehistoric earthquakes within the last 20,000 years (i.e., Obermeier et al. 1991; Munson et al. 1995). The Wabash Valley fault zone is demarcated by basementpenetrating faults that traverse Paleozoic sediments from SSW to NNE. Seismic reflection data show grabens with well-defined fault systems, in some cases extending to at least seven kilometers depth (Bear et al. 1997; McBride and Kolata 1999; McBride et al. 2007). The Commerce geophysical lineament (CGL) (Figure 1) is expressed by a line of strong magnetic and gravity anomalies that traverses the area from SSW to NNE and is coincident with the general strike of existing normal faults on the surface (Hildenbrand and Ravat 1997; Langenheim and Hildenbrand 1997). The Cottage Grove Rough CreekShawneetown fault system (Figure 1) runs almost perpendicular to this system of faults, trending almost west to east; Hicks Dome, a cryptovolcanic structure of probable Permian age (Denny et al. 2008), is located to the west while the La Salle fold system (Figure 1), a NNE-trending series of fault-cored monoclinal folds, is located in the north

INTRODUCTION
Seismically active intraplate continental settings are characterized by relatively low strain rates, but they nonetheless display evidence of active faulting and seismicity. Examples of these tectonic environments include seismically active areas of northern Eurasia, central India, Australia, and the U.S. mid-continent (e.g., Sykes 1978; Johnston 1996). They are characterized by low heat flow (e.g., Kusznir and Park 1984), relatively thick lithosphere, and presumably low strain rates (~10 10 10 12 yr1) (Gordon 1998). Yet in only a handful of these environments have geodetic measurements been used to provide constraints on the rates and directions of present-day deformation in these intraplate settings. We present precise geodetic observations and modeling results for one type-example of a continental, intraplate deformation zone: the Wabash Valley seismic zone (WVSZ) in the central United States. We use high-precision campaign-based GPS data from a network of GPS sites in the WVSZ to address evidence for present-day tectonic strain in an intraplate seismogenic zone. This study builds on the results of Hamburger et al. (2002), extending their preliminary one-year observation period (199798) to an eleven-year observation cycle (19972008). The observed evidence for active crustal deformation of the region is then modeled using a fault-and-block approach, which treats deformation as described by finite, rigid crustal blocks bounded by planar faults (e.g., Thatcher 1995; McClusky et al. 2001; Tapponnier et al. 2001; McCaffrey 2002). The main scientific questions delve into the nature of active deformation in this intraplate zone and address the role of fault systems in the deformation of the North American continent.
1. Department of Geological Sciences, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana 2. Now at Lunar and Planetary Institute, Universities Space Research Association, Houston, Texas
doi: 10.1785/gssrl .81.5.699

Seismological Research Letters Volume 81, Number 5 September/October 2010 699

40
Illinois River

ILLINOIS

Wabash Riv er

n alle A La S eB ticlin

INDIANA

lt l Fau arme Mt. C

ski aR ive r

elt

39

Ka ska

38
Ozark Dome

Cotta ge

Grov e Fau lt

Hicks Dom

Wa b Fau ash V a lt S yste lley m

L Wabash Valley l ica Seismic Zone ophys

Ge

am ine

t en

Co mm er

ce

Rough Cr eek Fault

KENTUCKY
Kentuc ky River

Fluorspar Area

37

MISSOURI

elf o

ot Ri ft

a Bl

v Ri ck

er

M Em issis ba sipp ym i en t
New Madrid Seismic Zone

m lt Syste ile Fau Pennyr

d Riv Cumberlan

er

36

ee R

iver

ARKANSAS

Re

TENNESSEE

Mis s Riv issippi er

Ten

ness

km 0 273 50 274 100 275

35 269

270

271

272

of the WVSZ (Hamburger and Rupp 1988; McBride 1997; McBride et al. 2007). The present average stress field is dominated by east-west to ENE-WSW compression (Hamburger and Rupp 1988; Zoback et al. 1989). The well-known New Madrid seismic zone (NMSZ), located southwest of the WVSZ, is a zone of high seismicity most notably the three M > 7 earthquakes of 181112 (Nuttli 1979; Johnston 1996)located within the Mississippi embayment. The embayment is a structural trough that contains thick Tertiary and Cretaceous strata, overlain by Quaternary alluvium (Figure 1) (Crone 1981). Evidence gathered from seismic and potential field data indicate that the NMSZ is coinci-

Figure 1. Seismotectonic map of the U.S. mid-continent, showing the Wabash Valley seismic zone and the New Madrid seismic zone. Historic and recent seismic events in the central United States are plotted, with white dots representing historical seismic events (Nuttli 1979) and black dots showing recent, instrumentally recorded seismic events from the Center for Earthquake Research and Information catalog.

dent with the northeast-trending Cambrian-age Reelfoot rift, defined by a system of high-angle normal faults that truncate basement rocks (Ervin and McGinnis 1975; Nelson and Zhang 1991). Seismicity in the NMSZ is defined by a few planelike structures (Stauder 1982; Himes et al. 1988; Chiu et al. 1992); motion is mainly right-lateral slip along the two main NE-SW fault segments and reverse slip along the intervening NW-SE segment (Stark 1997; Csontos and van Arsdale 2008). Earthquake repeat times in this region are estimated to range from 200 to 800 years, with a 500-year average recurrence time between earthquakes (Tuttle et al. 2002). The New Madrid and Wabash Valley seismic zones are separated by a zone of

700 Seismological Research Letters Volume 81, Number 5 September/October 2010

intensive deformation associated with the Cottage Grove Shawneetown fault systems in southern Illinois (Nelson and Krausse 1981; Nelson 1991) and the Rough Creek graben in western Kentucky, hypothesized to be a continuation of the Reelfoot rift, comprising the northern extension of the failed rift system (Kolata and Nelson 1991; Marshak and Paulsen 1996). The faults bounding the graben have been reactivated multiple times including the late Paleozoic era (Nelson 1991). Based on high-resolution seismic profiles, the motion along the Rough Creek fault underwent reverse orientation (Paleozoic to early Mesozoic), then strike-slip and normal sense of motions (Nelson 1991). GPS observations in the NMSZ have been the subject of many recent papers and vigorous discussions on their significance for earthquake hazard evaluation. Initial estimates of very high deformation rates in the region based on geodetic observations (Liu et al. 1992) have been dramatically reduced as new data have been collected (e.g., Weber et al. 1998; Newman et al. 1999). Similarly, higher-precision continuous GPS data have also been used to suggest high near-field deformation rates (Smalley et al. 2005), whereas subsequent reanalysis of longer data series (Calais et al. 2006) suggests that the observed motions remain well within the North American plate motion uncertainties. These studies have important implications for seismic hazard analysis, as the low deformation rates imply significantly longer recurrence rates in order to reconcile paleoseismic fault slip estimates with geodetic data and earthquake magnitude- frequency relationships. On the other hand, some geodynamic models (e.g., Kenner and Segall 2000) suggest that intraplate faulting mechanisms need not follow the same cycle of earthquake recurrence patterns as plate boundary systems. In addition, other models such as glacial isostatic loading have been investigated as possible time-variable triggers of mid-continent deformation and earthquakes in North America (Wu and Johnston 2000; Grollimund and Zoback 2001; Sella et al. 2007). The findings from a continentwide continuous GPS network (Calais et al. 2006) suggested that most of the systematic deformation in the region can be interpreted as a result of glacial isostatic adjustment (GIA). The observed patterns of residual surface velocities are similar to some of those predicted by the geodynamic models of Peltier (1994, 1996). Geodetic Data Acquisition and Processing Method The GPS network that provides the basis of this research extends over an area of approximately 100,000 km2 , with 48 campaign stations distributed across southern Illinois, southern Indiana, and western Kentucky. In addition, we observed a dense 19-station network in the Shawnee National Forest area in southern Illinois, near the intersection of the Wabash Valley fault system and the Rough Creek graben (Table S1 in the online material). The survey benchmarks are a mix of existing Coast and Geodetic Survey benchmarks and new benchmarks, including both stainless steel pins driven into bedrock and stainless steel rods situated in unconsolidated materials (Hamburger et al. 2002). Some stations are part of the High Accuracy Reference System (HARN), used as primary con-

trols for the U.S. geodetic network. Campaign observations were generally done on a 36- to 48-hour observing epoch, with 30-second sampling intervals. The set of observations per campaign was usually completed in approximately two to three weeks during summers in 1997, 1998, 2000, 2002, and 2007. Supplementary campaigns over the dense Shawnee network started in the year 2000, followed by campaigns in 2003 and 2008. We also combine the velocities derived from nine sites of the GAMA (GPS Array for Mid-America) network in the New Madrid seismic zone (Smalley et al. 2005) and four selected stations from the National Geodetic Surveys Continuously Operating Reference System (CORS) GPS network to spatially extend our observations and generate joint strain inversions with our GPS network (Table S1). In addition to densification, these continuous GPS (CGPS) stations provide additional stability by acting as redundant baseline controls and additional positional tie points linked to global and continental geodetic reference frames. We utilize the GAMIT software (King and Bock 1997; Herring et al. 2006a) to estimate loosely constrained positions of survey sites through double-differenced daily phase observations derived from seven campaign observations in 1997, 1998, 2000, 2002, 2003, 2007, and 2008. Position estimates are calculated by combining the campaign daily phase observations with sampled continuous data from 11 IGS (International Global Navigation Satellite System, formerly the International GPS Service), four CORS, and nine GAMA GPS sites (using data subsets during the campaign period only), along with atmospheric zenith delay, satellite orbit, and Earth orientation parameters, obtained from the NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory (NASA-JPL), the US Naval Observatory (USNO), and IGS, respectively. Coordinates were rotated into the Stable North America Reference Frame (SNARF version 1.0, Blewitt et al. 2005), the recently developed geocentric reference frame that minimizes the motion of fiducial sites within the North American tectonic plate and takes into account the effects of glacial isostatic anomalies (GIA). To account for site-dependent noise primarily coming from multipath errors, we applied elevation-dependent noise models depending on the phase observations. In the processing, we also accounted for effects emanating from long-wavelength site motions due to earth solid-body tides derived from the International Earth Rotation and Reference System Service or IERS 2003 (Herring et al. 2006a). Daily positions of these data from GAMIT were then determined using the GLOBK software (Herring et al. 2006b), with respect to a network of eight relatively stable IGS stations. Position estimates are then made using a seven-parameter Helmert transformation (translation, rotation, and scale) to minimize relative motion between sites and reference stations. Finally, velocity estimates were made from least-square linear fits through Kalman filtering of daily positions and covariance matrices of campaign stations and regional continuous GPS sites for each of the observation periods. This procedure is similar to the technique described in McCaffrey et al. (2007). We also added similar 14-day seasonal (days 195 to 205) observa-

Seismological Research Letters Volume 81, Number 5 September/October 2010 701

tions within the years 2004 and 2005 to improve velocity estimation of the continuous IGS, CORS, and GAMA networks. This is necessary to eliminate short-period variability in the long-term deformation signals that may be caused by localized, non-tectonic motions. The GLOBK software was then used to determine and tie these position and velocity estimates with respect to a network of around 120 IGS and CORS stations defining the SNARF. We also converted the station velocities based on a local station well outside the seismically active area of the WVSZ (i.e., with respect to station BLO1 in Bloomington, Indiana). This is to further assess velocity trends due to local deformation without the possible velocity bias introduced by the North American plate motions. We analyzed the resulting time series for every station and included random walk noise for all the component motions of all campaign and continuous sites. The applied noise is based on station velocity frequency distributions as well as reported random walk motions (e.g., from monument instability) from empirical data (e.g., see Williams 2003; Williams et al. 2004). We then generate the velocity field based on the GPS observations (Table S1), to be used as main input for various strain inversions. For this research, we utilize two sets: one that includes all of the Shawnee stations (for local-scale strain inversions), and one that includes only a 10-station subset of the Shawnee stations. This strategy is implemented so as not to include localized deformation within the heavily faulted Shawnee/Fluorspar district in the general block motions, and it reduces the likelihood of overweighing the dense Shawnee network in the regional strain estimates.

are defined either by purely rigid rotation, by a combination of rigid rotation and elastic strain due to fault locking, or even by including uniform internal block deformation. Models of block motions, fault slip rates, and fault coupling parameters are estimated through inversions relating surface motion with motion at depth using elastic half-space dislocation models (Okada 1985, 1992). Fault-locking parameters are estimated based on integration of coupling effects along small finite fault patches, which are defined by nodes along the block-bounding fault planes. The best-fit model is obtained by comparing observed and predicted motions, with the errors minimized by least squares through the simulated annealing/simplex minimization technique. For details regarding mathematical equations describing this modeling approach, we refer the reader to the more elaborate discussions of McCaffrey (2002).

RESULTS
GPS Velocity Patterns Observed GPS velocities in our study area display a small but systematic northward pattern of motion in the SNARF reference frame (Figure 2A). Most of the stations in the WVSZ network show a consistent NNW to northerly trend at rates ranging from less than 1 mm yr1 to 4 mm yr1, whereas stations of the GAMA network show a general trend of north-tonorthwest-directed motion at slightly lower velocities, less than 1 mm yr1 (i.e., stations PTGV, NWCC, STLE, and MCTY). More variability in site velocities is observed in this area: station RLAP (whose data were processed through 2005 only, since unusually large motions were recorded in 2006, which are suspected to have been affected by local, non-tectonic deformation sources [Calais and DeMets 2008]) shows apparent southwest-trending velocity, while PIGT and CVMS move to the south and northeast, respectively (Figure 2A). The majority of the observed stations have statistically significant velocities with respect to their formal error estimates, and very low north to east velocity component correlations (Table S1). Figure 2B shows the velocities with respect to a local reference frame, i.e., with respect to station BLO-1, located in Bloomington, Indiana. That station was chosen because of its location near the northeastern (stable) margin of the study area, its consistent observation through all of the measurement campaigns, and its high-quality bedrock benchmark and good sky visibility. In this reference frame, the systematic northwestward translation of the network disappears, and only internal motions remain. The velocities for most of the stations are within their 95% confidence ellipses. The few exceptions (e.g., NOL-1, SEBR, and KY02 in Kentucky; RUSH and W231 in Indiana; PIGT in Arkansas; and RLAP in Tennessee) show no obvious systematic spatial patterns. While these individual site velocities are mostly within their error estimates, these subtle motions may still carry some information about systematic strain within the network; our analysis of geodetic strain is presented in the following sections. The velocities for stations in the Shawnee National Forest network (Figure 3A) also show a generally northward trend

MODELING
We use the hypothesis of Marshak and Paulsen (1997) as a general approach for modeling. That is, we assume that the central United States can be characterized as a system of jostling blocks throughout the Phanerozoic, separated by faults and folds, and that these deforming zones control present-day deformation patterns. With this in mind, we treat tectonic structures surrounding the Wabash Valley (and New Madrid) areas to be potentially active faults. These bounding structures include the Wabash Valley fault system, the Rough Creek Pennyrile fault system, the Cottage GroveShawneetown fault system, and the Reelfoot rift. The intervening areas would be composed of relatively stable tectonic blocks between these structures. To model tectonic motions, we represent the area by a series of rotating elastic blocks on a spherical Earth, implemented through the software DEFNODE (McCaffrey 1995). These tectonic blocks are separated by faults, defined in turn by discrete, near-vertical planes (dip = 89, depth = 20 km, with fault patches defined for every 1 km along strike and along dip) along which motion is assumed to take place through elastic slip during earthquakes. Block motions can be constrained by published Euler poles and rotation rates, observed GPS velocities, and, where available, earthquake slip vectors. The large-scale motion of blocks is defined by relative rotation along Euler poles, with local deformation influenced by frictional coupling along bounding fault planes. Block motions

702 Seismological Research Letters Volume 81, Number 5 September/October 2010

Wabash Riv er

40
n alle A La S

Illinois River

ski aR ive r

ILLINOIS

INDIANA
lt l Fau arme Mt. C
COLU

A
RUSH

eB ticlin

CASP

Ka ska

elt

39

LITP VANP

IUCO BLO1 ROBP HAWT CRA1

JACO

FLOR CENP

OLNE AIRP GARD PK65 PC64 OTB1 BRN1 CARP HARM T356 ADY1 WHIO W231 ROL1

38

SPAR PINC FAAI

LOVI

LAC1 USI1 GOSP DAOW SEBR HART KY02 SAND

OMAH PEAB BARN POTT ROSI GURL STAZ Z405 STUR

LEDF

BESC

Ozark Dome

MKND

GPS4

KENTUCKY
NOL1

37

MISSOURI
MAIR

MUHL

Kentuc ky

River

EDVL MAYP LOGA

ac Bl

i kR

r ve
PIGT RLAP PTGV NWCC

d River Cumberlan

Mis siss ipp i Ri ver

Re

ee R

iver

36

ARKANSAS

elfo

MCTY STLE

ot

Rif

TENNESSEE

ness

2 mm/yr

Ten

CVMS

km 50 100 275

0 35 269 270 271 272 273

274

Figure 2. Observed regional velocity field of the southern Illinois basin and New Madrid regions, based on GPS campaigns and continuous observations (19972007). Velocities with 95% error ellipses (with random walk component accounting for monument instability) are plotted in the Stable North American Reference Frame (SNARF V1.0) (Figure 2A) and with respect to local station BLO1 in Bloomington, Indiana (Figure 2B, next page). Box with dotted line indicates the location of the Shawnee National Forest GPS stations (some stations removed for clarity), entirely shown in Figures 3A and 3B.

with respect to stable North America, although more variability and larger error estimates are observed due to shorter observation times. When referenced to station BLO1 (in Bloomington, Indiana), thus removing possible systematic motions with respect to the North American reference frame (Figure 3B), the station velocities are significantly reduced but trend northward at < 1 mm yr1, with more scatter in the eastwest direction. Velocities for stations in the Shawnee network relative to station BLO1 show generally 1 to 2 mm yr1 systematic eastward motion. Our observed northerly velocity field (in the North American reference frame) appears to have a similar

orientation with the observed (Calais et al. 2006) and modeled (Sella et al. 2007) northerly velocity trends of stations located in Indiana and Illinois. On the other hand, those velocities do not appear to be consistent with the spatially averaged residual velocity field determined by Calais et al. (2006), which suggests generally southerly velocities for the region within and south of the Great Lakes region. However, we note that that velocity field includes almost no points in southern Illinois, Indiana, or western Kentucky, and thus the discrepancy might be strongly affected by the addition of these velocities into the residual velocity field.

Seismological Research Letters Volume 81, Number 5 September/October 2010 703

40
Illinois River

ski aR ive r

ILLINOIS

Wabash Riv er

INDIANA
lt l Fau arme Mt. C
COLU

B
RUSH

n alle A La S eB ticlin
CASP

Ka ska

39

LITP VANP

IUCO BLO1 ROBP HAWT CRA1

elt

JACO

FLOR CENP

OLNE AIRP GARD PK65 PC64 OTB1 BRN1 CARP HARM T356 ADY1 WHIO W231 ROL1

38

SPAR PINC FAAI

LOVI

LAC1 USI1 GOSP DAOW SEBR HART KY02 SAND

OMAH PEAB BARN POTT ROSI BAY1 GURL STAZ Z405 STUR

LEDF

BESC

Ozark Dome

MKND

GPS4

KENTUCKY
NOL1

37

MISSOURI
MAIR

MUHL

Kentuc ky

River

EDVL MAYP LOGA

Re

36

ARKANSAS

MCTY STLE

elfo

ot

Rif

a Bl

PIGT

v Ri ck

er
RLAP PTGV NWCC

d Riv Cumberlan

er

TENNESSEE
iver ee R

siss ippi Rive r

2 mm/yr

CVMS

Ten

ness

km 50 100 275

0 272 273

35 269
Figure 2. (Continued).

Mis

270

271

274

Inversions To assess tectonic deformation in the WVSZ, we run models that treat the area as tectonic blocks that are separated by faults. We explore progressively more complex parameterizations of the study area. Initially, we run models with two regions separated by a single fault (the NNE-SSW trending WVFS); then we subdivide two more regions by adding an EW-trending fault zone (representing the Cottage Grove Rough Creek fault system). We also assess the contribution of internal strain in these two- and four-block models by allowing the blocks to deform internally. Finally, we assess the overall pattern of regional deformation without considering the fault system, by calculating an average strain rate field and then by determining spatial variations in the strain field.

Tectonic Blocks with Elastic Strain along Faults Two-block Model We begin with a simple two-block elastic model with an idealized NNE-SSW trending fault (representing the WVFS) dividing the region (Figure 4 and Figure S1 in the online material). This fault alignment reflects the structural predominance of the WVFS (Figure 1) and follows the general approach used in the previous study (Hamburger et al. 2002). This approach is used to test the hypothesis of active faulting along the WVFS or the subparallel Commerce geophysical lineament, which would be manifested by relative motion of the western block (i.e., southern Illinois) with respect to the eastern block (i.e., southwestern Indiana and western Kentucky). For this two-

704 Seismological Research Letters Volume 81, Number 5 September/October 2010

BRN1 LOVI CARP

OTB1

A
USI1

HARM

38

FAAI PINC

Cott age Gr

OMAH

ove Fau lt

T145 BESC LEDF PANK HORS HOPS PEAB

BARN MKND GPS4 CONC PARI POTT STUR

GPS6

GPS7

ROSI

STAF

BAY1

GURL COPL

MIDW

Fluorspar Area

STAZ

Z405

37

2 mm/yr km
MAIR

EDVL

0 271

50
MAYP

272

BRN1 R LOVI CARP

OTB1

B
USI1

38

HARM FAAI PINC

Cott age Gr

OMAH

ove Fau lt

T145 BESC LEDF PANK HORS HOPS PEAB

BARN MKND GPS4 CONC PARI POTT STUR

GPS6

GPS7

ROSI

STAF

BAY1

GURL COPL

MIDW

STAZ

Z405

Fluorspar Area

37
MAIR

2 mm/yr

km 50
MAYP

EDVL

0 271

272

Figure 3. Shawnee National Forest and Fluorspar area GPS network velocity field. Data from the 2000, 2003, and 2008 campaigns are combined with the 19972007 datasets for the large network. A) Observed campaign GPS velocities with 95% error ellipses are plotted with respect to stable North America. B) Observed GPS velocities plotted with respect to local station BLO1.

Seismological Research Letters Volume 81, Number 5 September/October 2010 705

1mm/a

39

km 0 50 100

38

WWAB EWAB

37

270

271

272

273

274

Figure 4. Block velocities from the two-block model, plotted with respect to the eastern Wabash block (EWAB).

block system, with the western and eastern Wabash blocks (WWAB and EWAB, respectively) divided by a NNE-SSWtrending WVFS, the inversion shows 0.73 0.14 mm yr1 southwest motion for block WWAB with respect to EWAB (Figure 4). Elastic strain curves across the WVFS-NMSZ do not differ significantly from zero, with no significant change in overall block velocities or block rotation crossing this structure. Coupling estimates along this fault plane indicate zero locking, but cannot be resolved given the low slip rate across the fault. The errors reported by the two-block model are well within the error level of GPS observations (e.g., ~2 mm yr1). Thus, these observations suggest that there is no significant, measurable systematic strain accumulation along the WVFS or Commerce Geophysical Lineament. Four-block Model We add an EW-trending boundary to represent the Cottage GroveRough Creek (CGRC) fault system. In this case, two fault systems (WVFS and CGRC) intersect near southern Illinois and are almost perpendicular at the point of intersection. This approach is used to test whether there is significant rigid motion between blocks separated by these major fault systems and to look specifically at the relative motions between the northern and southern blocks. The four-block model (Figure 5 and Figure S2 in the online material), which shows four blocks (INDY, ILLI, MISO, and KTKY divided by the NNESSW-trending WVFS-NMSZ fault line and the EW-trending CGRC fault system), indicates a similar trend in velocities as the previous test. With respect to INDY, ILLI (measured at the

block centroid) appears to move southeast (counter-clockwise) at a rate of 0.10 0.22 mm yr1, block MISO moves at 0.61 0.42 mm yr1 in a southwesterly direction, and block KTKY moves northeastward at 0.32 0.28 mm yr1 with counterclockwise block rotation (Figure 5). These velocities translate to left-lateral strike-slip motion along the WVFS between INDY and ILLI, transpression along the Rough Creek fault (between INDY and KTKY), and transtension along the Cottage Grove fault (between ILLI and MISO). The changing motion along the Cottage GroveRough Creek fault system (i.e., extensional to transpressional) results from the rotation of the two southern blocks. However, these velocity and fault slip values are statistically insignificant, as the values are all not distinguishable from zero with respect to the error levels at the 95% confidence interval. Velocity profiles across the faults show insignificant changes of ~0.1 to 0.3 mm yr1 across defined blocks. Coupling estimates from best-fit models reveal almost no resolvable locking along both faults. Strain Inversions from Internally Deforming Regions Tests for principal strain rates and directions through inversions of velocity residuals within selected regions (or polygons) were also implemented using the DEFNODE code (McCaffrey 1995). Inversions are run using different geographic subsets representing spatial groups with generally similar observed GPS velocities. In effect, this technique changes the sampling resolutions (through spatial windows) to determine patterns of continuous deformation in specific areas within the WVSZ.

706 Seismological Research Letters Volume 81, Number 5 September/October 2010

1mm/a

39

km

ILLI

50

100

38

INDY

37

MISO

KTKY

270

271

272

273

274

Figure 5. Block velocities from the four-block model, plotted with respect to Indiana block (INDY).

Moreover, this approach tests for strain consistency and/ or possible internal deformation within individual blocks. Initially, we run models that do not consider faults and treat the entire study area as 1) a single deforming block to determine the average regional strain, and 2) a multiblock system to determine the strain variability within the WVSZ region, based on subareas defined by different tectonic environments. Then, we assess the internal strain rates for the two- and fourblock systems described in the preceding section (Table S2 in the online material). These inversions determine whether internal strain significantly contributes to the overall pattern of regional deformation. Average Regional Strain Model Inversions using the residual Wabash GPS velocities within a single deforming polygon (i.e., solving for internal strain rates with the poles to North America fixed) reveal significant principal strain rates: we obtain a strain field with 1.60 0.60 ns yr1 NE-SW extension and 1.40 0.70 ns yr1 NW-SE compression within the entire study area (Figure 6). This test shows the average principal strain rates and directions for the study area. The compressive strain axis is rotated at ~45 compared to the almost E-W orientation of the principal stress axis found by Zoback and Zoback (1980), presumably due to the effect of observations in Kentucky near the Rough Creek graben. Spatially Variable Regional Strain Model To further examine spatial variability of the strain field, we use internally deforming multiple polygons to model the deforma-

tion field of subareas by enclosing structurally homogeneous areas within regular quadrilaterals. In this case, the boundaries are not necessarily faults or geologic discontinuities, but are based on the observed average velocity trends within subregions of the geodetic network. This approach resulted in the construction of a total of eight tectonic regions, with five polygons comprising the southern Illinois-Indiana-Kentucky area, and three polygons comprising the New Madrid area (Figure 7). In the multiple-block model, we obtain 3.14 2.36 ns yr1 E-W compression and 2.04 ns yr1 2.28 ns yr1 N-S extension in the SCWA block (south-central WVFS). There is 2.36 2.68 ns yr1 WNW-ESE compression and 3.42 2.33 ns yr1 NNE-SSW extension in the NCWA block (northcentral Wabash Valley block). We observe 4.26 3.11 ns yr1 NW-SE extension and 0.73 2.61 ns yr1 NE-SW extension in southwestern Indiana (NEWA block) and 2.61 3.43 ns yr1 NW-SE compression and 3.67 + 5.32 ns yr1 NE-SW extension in the WWAB block in southern Illinois. Block SEWA in Kentucky experiences 2.46 3.73 ns yr1 of nearly E-W extension and 1.24 2.96 ns yr1 nearly N-S extension. The central New Madrid block (CNMZ) experiences 4.66 7.67 NE-SW compression and 11.23 5.91 NW-SE extension (Table S2). We ignore results in the two southern blocks (i.e., WNMZ and ENMZ) due to larger errors resulting from the sparse GPS station coverage in those areas. These results indicate inferred strain rates of the same magnitude as the estimated error levels, hence indicating marginal significance. However, we note that the results for the multiple block system have principal strain rate directions similar to those obtained from the four-block

Seismological Research Letters Volume 81, Number 5 September/October 2010 707

41

40

39

38

WABZ

37 km 0 36 266

1 ns/yr

50 100 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276

Figure 6. Principal block strain rate axes showing average regional deformation (single-block or regional average model).

40

39

WWAB

NCWA NEWA

38

37

SCWA

SEWA
km 0 50 275

5 ns/yr

36 268

100 276

269

270

271

272

273

274

Figure 7. Principal block strain rate axes showing spatially variable regions within the WVSZ (multiple block or spatially varying regional model).

708 Seismological Research Letters Volume 81, Number 5 September/October 2010

40

39

38

WWAB EWAB
37 km 36 268 0 269 270 271 272 273 274 50 275 100 276
5 ns/yr

Figure 8. Principal block strain rate axes from the two-block model.

model (Table S2). The N97E principal compressive strain axis of the lithosphere near the WVFZ in southern Illinois (i.e., block SCWA) agrees with the map of stress patterns inferred from structural and geophysical data (i.e., principal compressive stress axes oriented at N8590E inferred from joints, hydrofractures, and focal mechanisms (Nelson and Bauer 1987) and N96EN101E from borehole breakouts (Bauer and Nelson 2005; Heidbach et al. 2008) and the N80E orientation of the principal compressive stress axis from continentwide geophysical studies (i.e., Zoback et al. 1989). Two-block Strain Model We then utilize the block geometries determined from previous inversions, taking into consideration the actual fault geometries as block boundaries. In these inversions, we invert for block strain rates to determine the amount of internal deformation experienced by regional blocks comprising the area. The results of our strain inversions suggest statistically significant tectonic strain in a number of areas within our geodetic network. The dual-block strain model (Figure 8) shows that the Indiana area (EWAB block) is dominated by 4.71 0.96 ns yr1 NW-SE extension, and 1.13 0.85 ns yr1 NE-SW extension, while the Illinois area (WWAB block) is dominated by 3.03 0.72 ns yr1 WNW-ESE compression and 0.99 0.53 ns yr1 NNE-SSW extension. Inversion results for both blocks indicate statistical significance at the 95% level, based on the number and spatial distribution of stations. The results suggest that there is a general change of strain patterns across the WVFZ. NW-SE extension in Indiana changes to WNW-ESE compres-

sion in Illinois while NE-SW compression in Indiana gives way to NNE-SSW extension in Illinois. The strain inversions for the two-block model indicate that the principal strain rate estimates are significantly above the error estimates (Table S2). Four-block Strain Model The four-block system (Figure 9) also demonstrates statistically significant regional strain patterns. Our results (Table S2) indicate that 4.50 1.42 ns yr1 WNW-ESE extension dominates the Indiana (INDY) block, with 0.69 1.42 ns yr1 NNWSSE extension. The Illinois block (ILLI) is dominated by 2.07 1.16 ns yr1 compression NW-SE and 1.34 1.18 ns yr1 NE-SW extension. The Kentucky block (KTKY) is dominated by 4.97 1.56 ns yr1 of nearly north-south extension and 1.27 1.95 ns yr1 of nearly east-west extension, while the Missouri block (MISO) has relatively larger 11.59 6.77 ns yr1 WNWESE compression and 1.12 7.94 ns yr1 NNE-SSW extension (inversion for MISO has low statistical significance because of sparsely distributed stations). The obtained principal strain rates imply that internal deformation of the other three blocks is marginally significant at the 95% confidence interval.

DISCUSSION
Comparisons of Block Models We compare the different inversion results using chi-square and F-ratio tests (Stein and Gordon 1984). We used these tests to examine the quality of fit for two- and four-block models, considering: 1) configurations of rigid block rotations and elas-

Seismological Research Letters Volume 81, Number 5 September/October 2010 709

40

39

ILLI
38

INDY

37

MISO

KTKY
km

5 ns/yr

36 268

0 269 270 271 272 273 274

50 275

100 276

Figure 9. Principal block strain rate axes from the four-block model.

tic fault-locking strain, and 2) combined rigid rotation, elastic fault-locking strain, and internal block strain. The four-block model with internal strain was found to be the best-fit model, with a reduced chi-square value of 1.96. The other models were found to be statistically inferior in comparison, based on the F-ratio tests (Table 1). The preferred model suggests that internal strain is a sizeable component of regional deformation, as opposed to rigid rotation only or rigid rotation combined with fault-locking strain. The preferred model also suggests that ~0.20.7 mm yr1 motion occurs along the E-W fault system (i.e., CGRC) as well as ~0.20.6 mm yr1 motion along the NNE-SSW-trending WVFS, but provides little evidence for possible elastic strain accumulation along these fault zones. Continuous Deformation Patterns in the WVSZ The regional average strain rate based on the single block inversion (Figure 6) indicates that deformation in the region is dominated by NW-SE compression and NE-SW extension. On the other hand, spatial variability of the strain rates is shown by the multiple block model (Figure 7): the southern Illinois side (block WWAB) experiences mainly NW-SE compression and NE-SW extension; the block along the length of the Wabash Valley fault system (block NCWA) experiences mostly compression normal to the fault axes and extension along it, suggesting relatively low resolved strain on the fault planes; the Shawnee area (block SCWA) in southern Illinois appears to be under transpressional strain; the Indiana area (block NEWA) experiences mostly NW-SE extension; and the Kentucky area (block SEWA) has N-S and E-W extension.

The observed deformation in the WVSZ can be interpreted by four distinct geodynamic models: 1) a result of gradual accumulation of regional tectonic strain, 2) the far-field influence of viscoelastic strain in the aftermath of the large New Madrid earthquakes, 3) effects of glacial unloading, or 4) jostling tectonic blocks. The first scenario of strain accumulation is difficult to reconcile with the orientation and spatial variability of the tectonic strain field obtained here. We do not find evidence for a single, uniform strain field that might result from application of a uniform stress field to a homogeneous continental lithosphere. However, that neglects the influence of significant variations in elastic properties associated with heterogeneous structure in the regione.g., fault terminations, accommodation zones, and changes in structural grain. Alternatively, the source of tectonic strain could involve spatially and temporally variable regional tectonic stresses associated with long-term viscoelastic effects associated with lower crust and mantle relaxation (and resulting tectonic strain) associated with the 181112 NMSZ earthquakes (e.g., Li et al. 2005). Our initial modeling results (combining realistic fault ruptures associated with the New Madrid earthquakes in an elastic lithosphere over a viscoelastic asthenosphere) predict that a significant increase on strain and seismicity rates can persist in a long period as a result of the 181112 NMSZ earthquakes (Hamburger et al. 2007). However, such predictions are strongly model-dependent and predict very low (< 1 mm/yr) velocities for this region. Based on the current limited accuracy of GPS measurements at this strain level and the small number of larger magnitude earthquakes (>M 5.0) in the region, this interpretation remains ambiguous.

710 Seismological Research Letters Volume 81, Number 5 September/October 2010

TABLE 1 Summary of tests for block configuration of the central United States Model A B C D Description 4 blocks with internal strain 2 blocks 2 blocks with internal strain 4 blocks Data 154 154 154 154 Parameters 27 9 15 27 DOF 127 145 139 139 Total 2 249.12 310.91 291.59 302.28 Reduced 2 1.96 2.14 2.10 2.17 Prob. (%) 10.05 18.38 13.41

The probability (Prob.) column indicates the degree to which the current model is statistically similar to the best fit model (Model A).

A possible third class of models that might explain our observed GPS velocities involves flexural models of glacial isostatic adjustment (GIA) in response to Holocene melting of continental glaciers in the northern United States and Canada. Glacial unloading has been identified as a probable source of surface deformation in eastern Canada and New England (Mazzotti et al. 2005) and has been proposed as a cause for seismic events in New Madrid (Grollimund and Zoback 2001). The flexural response of the continental lithosphere predicts a large area of uplift over the area of maximum ice cover (centered near Hudson Bay), an area of subsidence in the ice-free region to the south, and a hinge line, located somewhere in the Great Lakes Region (Calais et al. 2006). Our observed and modeled velocity patterns show similar trends when compared to observed (residual) horizontal velocities of GPS stations in the region (Calais et al. 2006) and predicted horizontal velocities resulting from glacial isostatic rebound models (Sella et al. 2007). In their models, the maximum uplift near the center (assumed at 55N, 75W) is predicted to be ~10 mm yr1, with subsidence at ~1.4 mm yr1 near the forebulge; the hinge line is determined to about 1,500 km from the GIA center. A vertical deformation gradient of ~1 mm yr1 just south of the GIA center is predicted between 1,000 and 2,000 km from the GIA center, located in northeastern Canada (Calais et al. 2006). The corresponding predicted horizontal motions are highly dependent on the mantle viscosity structure, with predicted strain rates on the order of 10 9 yr1. Our observed northerly velocity trends could thus comprise a far-field response, whereby surface velocities point radially toward the uplift center in northeastern Canada. Our block models show similar velocity trends to those predicted by one of the two-layered mantle earth models (Sella et al. 2007). In general, we believe that these two latter explanations of deformation (i.e., 12 mm yr1 N-NW motion as a combined effect of long-term post-seismic viscoelastic relaxation and glacial isostatic unloading) could both be reconciled with active regional seismicity and the observed GPS velocity field. Independent of the fundamental cause of this deformation, our block models also suggest that the long-term tectonic model of Marshak and Paulsen (1996, 1997) and Marshak et al. (2003) on jostling tectonic blocks within the U.S. mid-continent may provide a plausible model for representing active tectonics of intraplate seismic zones. Tectonic blocks that slowly

rotate, separated by faults, are shown by our two- and fourblock models. The regionalized block strain inversions (multiple-block model) indicate the presence of heterogeneous strain fields within the WVSZ. Unfortunately, we can still provide only limited constraints on more localized crustal motions, given that the GPS velocities remain marginally significant as compared to the errors and most stations are near the bounds of geodetic error and detection at velocities of ~1mm yr1.

CONCLUSIONS
While the accurate determination of our GPS site (and block) velocities depend strongly on the quality of selected fiducial stations that couple with the reference frame (i.e., SNARF), improved ambiguity resolution and meticulous error analysis has definitely improved the detection capability of our technique since the initial set of observations in 199798 (Hamburger et al. 2002). Our findings show that strain accumulation is very slow in this region, confirming the results of previous studies in nearby NMSZ (Weber et al. 1998; Newman et al. 1999; Calais et al. 2005, 2006; Calais and Stein 2009). Based on our models, we interpret the strain patterns in the southern Illinois basin as dominated by WNW-ESE compression and NNE-SSW extension, while the Indiana area experiences mostly WNW-ESE extension. The Kentucky area experiences mostly NNE-SSW extension. Geodetic measurements made within the dense Shawnee National Forest network (designed to focus on the Fluorspar area and spatially resolve the deformation field in this heavily faulted area) indicate that this area experiences mostly E-W compression and N-S extension. We note that the GPS observations resolve the compressional nature of the WVFS and the structurally fragmented nature of the Fluorspar area correlates well with the observed velocity field. While the strain rates in these areas exhibit systematic trends, the magnitudes remain marginal compared to current GPS accuracy and correspond well with low strain rates (~10 9 yr1) attributed to stable intraplate regions. Thus, for slowly deforming regions, use of campaign-style GPS observations remains significantly more useful than higher spatial coverage satellite-based Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar (InSAR) measurement techniques (e.g., Wright 2002), which remain incapable of providing surface velocity resolution at the subcentimeter level.

Seismological Research Letters Volume 81, Number 5 September/October 2010 711

Several improvements are needed to obtain the full spectrum of tectonic deformation in the WVSZ. First, the highly variable observed vertical motion patterns for the Wabash campaign stations need to be reprocessed and incorporated in a comprehensive regional velocity field. Accurate vertical velocities might provide some constraints on the consistency of the deformation field, i.e., whether the deformation field is predominantly tectonic deformation or related to continental GIA effects. Second, improved precision of observations can be readily obtained by extending the observation of existing campaign GPS networks in the region, e.g., reoccupation of the New Madrid regional campaign network (i.e., Newman et al. 1999) after an eleven-year hiatus is likely to produce significant improvements in velocity estimation. This can greatly enhance the spatial coverage of strain in the U.S. mid-continent by improving the far-field constraints on the deformation field. Last, the spatial distribution of campaign and continuous GPS stations should be increased to improve quantitative estimates of present-day tectonic deformation in the U.S. mid-continent.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We acknowledge the valuable help extended by the UNAVCO engineering and data archiving teams. We are indebted to Kaj Johnson, who provided great help in analyzing the GPS velocity field and its associated tectonic patterns, as well as in improving the manuscript. Terry Stigalls valuable presence enabled the completion of the field surveys, along with help from Qizhi Chen, Mark Bauer, John Rupp and the staff of the Indiana Geological Survey, Altair Galgana, and the many students who took part in the survey. Francisco Gomez and his team from the University of Missouri graciously assisted in the August 2008 Shawnee field observations. We thank Bob King (MIT) for his help in using GAMIT-GLOBK and Rob McCaffrey (RPI) for the DEFNODE modeling program. We used the Generic Mapping Tools (GMT) from Wessel and Smith (1991). We thank Eric Calais, Gary Pavlis, Al Rudman, and Bruce Douglas for helpful discussions. We acknowledge the thoughtful insights and valuable comments suggested by Brendan Crowell and Luciana Astiz, which greatly improved the manuscript. This research was supported by the U.S. Geological Survey National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP) grant No. 07HQGR0062 to MH; G.G. is supported in part by a postdoctoral fellowship from the LPI (USRA). This is LPI contribution No. 1555.

REFERENCES
Bauer, R., and J. Nelson (2005). Compilation of In-Situ Stress Measurements in Illinois. Illinois Geological Survey Report. 11 pp. Bear, G., J. Rupp, and A. Rudman (1997). Seismic interpretation of the deep structure of the Wabash Valley fault system. Seismological Research Letters 68 (4), 624640. Blewitt, G., D. Argus, R. Bennett, Y. Bock, E. Calais, M. Cramer, J. Davis, et al. (2005). A Stable North America Reference Frame (SNARF): First release, in UNAVCO/IRIS Joint Workshop, Stevenson, WA, June 2005.

Braile, L., W. Hinze, G. Keller, E. Lidiak (1982). The northeastern extension of the New Madrid Seismic Zone. In F. McKeown and L. Pakiser (Editors), Investigations of the New Madrid, Missouri, Earthquake Region. Geol. Surv. Professional Paper, 1236:175184. Braile, L., G. Keller, W. Hinze, and E. Lidiak (1982). An ancient rift complex and its relation to contemporary seismicity in the New Madrid seismic zone. Tectonics 1 (2), 225237. Calais, E., G. Mattioli, C. DeMets, J. Nocquet, S. Stein, A. Newman, and P. Rydelek (2005). Tectonic strain in plate interiors? Nature 438; doi:10.1038/nature04428. Calais E., J. Han, C. DeMets, and J. Nocquet (2006). Deformation of the North American plate interior from a decade of continuous GPS measurements. Journal of Geophysical Research 111, B06402; doi: 10.1029/2005JB004253. Calais, E., and C. DeMets (2008). Geodetic strain rates in the New Madrid seismic zone, 20002008: Converging toward zero. Eos, Transactions, American Geophysical Union 89 (53), Fall Meeting Supplement, Abstract G34A-07. Calais, E., and S. Stein (2009). Time-variable deformation in the New Madrid seismic zone. Science 323 (5,920),1,442. Chiu, J., A. Johnston, and Y. Yang (1992). Imaging the active faults of the central New Madrid seismic zone using PANDA area data. Seismological Research Letters 63, 375394. Crone, A. (1981). Sample Description and Stratigraphic Correlation of the New Madrid Test Well-1-X, New Madrid County, Missouri. USGS Open-File Report 81-426. Csontos, R., and R. Van Arsdale (2008). New Madrid seismic zone fault geometry. Geosphere 4 (5), 802813. Denny, F., W. Nelson, and J. Devera (2008). Bedrock Geology of Herod Quadrangle, Pope, Saline, and Hardin Counties, Illinois. Illinois State Geological Survey, state map series no. Herod-BG. Ervin, C., and L. McGinnis (1975). Reelfoot rift: Reactivated precursor to the Mississippi embayment. Bulletin of the Geological Society of America 86, 1,2871,295. Gordon, R. (1998). The plate tectonic approximation: Plate nonrigidity, diffuse plate boundaries, and global plate reconstructions. Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences 26, 615642. Grollimund, B., and M. Zoback (2001). Did glaciation trigger intraplate seismicity in the New Madrid seismic zone? Geology 29 (2),175 178. Hamburger, M., G. Galgana, Q. Chen, and K. Johnson (2007). Is there a connection between seismicity and deformation in the New Madrid and Wabash Valley seismic zones? Eos, Transactions, American Geophysical Union 88 (52), Fall Meeting Supplement, Abstract T51D-0766. Hamburger, M., and J. Rupp (1988). The June 1987 southeastern Illinois earthquake: Possible tectonism associated with the La Salle anticlinal belt. Seismological Research Letters 59, 151158. Hamburger, M., V. Rybakov, A. Lowry, B. Shen-Tu, and J. Rupp (2002). Preliminary results from a GPS geodetic network in the southern Illinois basin. Seismological Research Letters 73 (5), 762775. Heidbach, O., M. Tingay, A. Barth, J. Reinecker, D. Kurfe and B. Muller (2008). The release 2008 of the World Stress Map, available online at http://www.world-stress-map.org. Herring, T., R. King, and S. McClusky (2006a). GAMIT Reference Manual: GPS Analysis at MIT. Release 10.3. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Herring, T., R. King, and S. McClusky (2006b). GLOBK Reference Manual: Global Kalman Filter VLBI and GPS Analysis Program. Release 10.3. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Hildenbrand, T., and D. Ravat (1997). Geophysical setting of the Wabash Valley fault system. Seismological Research Letters 68, 567585. Himes, L., W. Stauder, and R. Herrmann (1988). Indication of active faults in the New Madrid seismic zone from precise location of hypocenters. Seismological Research Letters 59 (4), 123131.

712 Seismological Research Letters Volume 81, Number 5 September/October 2010

Johnston, A. (1996). Seismic moment assessment of earthquakes in stable continental regionsI. Instrumental seismicity. Geophysical Journal International 124, 381414. Kenner, S., and P. Segall (2000). A mechanical model for intraplate earthquakes: Applications to the New Madrid seismic zone. Science 289, 2,3292,332. King, R., and Y. Bock (1997). Documentation for the GAMIT GPS Analysis Software. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Kolata, D., and W. Nelson (1991). Tectonic history of the Illinois basin. In Interior Cratonic Basins, ed. M. Leighton, D. Kolata, F. Oltz, and J. Eidel, 263285. Tulsa, OK: American Association of Petroleum Geologists. Kusznir, N., and R. Park (1984). Intraplate lithosphere deformation and the strength of the lithosphere. Geophysical Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society 79 (2), 513538. Langenheim, V., and T. Hildenbrand (1997). The Commerce Geophysical Lineamentits source, geometry, and relation to the Reelfoot rift and the New Madrid seismic zone. Bulletin of the Geological Society of America 109, 580595. Li, Q., M. Liu, and E. Sandvol (2005). Stress evolution following the 1811 1812 large earthquakes in the New Madrid seismic zone. Geophysical Research Letters 32, L11310; doi:10.1029/2004GL022133. Liu, L., M. Zoback, and P. Segall (1992). Rapid intraplate strain accumulation in the New Madrid seismic zone. Science 257, 1,6661,669. Marshak, S., W. Nelson, and J. McBride (2003). Phanerozoic strike-slip faulting in the continental interior platform of the United States: Examples from the Laramide Orogen, Midcontinent, and Ancestral Rocky Mountains. In Intraplate Strike-Slip Deformation Belts, ed. F. Storti, R. Holdsworth, and F. Salvini, 159184. Geological Society Special Publication 210. London: Geological Society. Marshak, S., and T. Paulsen (1996). Midcontinent U.S. fault and fold zones: A legacy of Proterozoic intracratonic extensional tectonism? Geology 24, 151154. Marshak, S., and T. Paulsen (1997). Structural style, regional distribution, and seismic implications of Midcontinent fault and fold zones, United States. Seismological Research Letters 68, 511520. Mazzotti, S., T. James, J. Henton, and J. Adams (2005). GPS crustal strain, postglacial rebound, and seismic hazard in eastern North America: The Saint Lawrence Valley example. Journal of Geophysical Research 110, B11301; doi:10.1029/2004JB003590. McBride, J. (1997). Variable deep structure of a mid-continent fault and fold zone from seismic reflection: La Salle deformation belt, Illinois basin. GSA Bulletin 108 (11), 1,5021,513. McBride, J., and D. Kolata (1999). Upper crust beneath the central Illinois basin, United States. GSA Bulletin 111 (3), 375394. McBride, J., H. Leetaru, R. Bauer, B. Tingey, and S. Schmidt (2007). Deep faulting and structural reactivation beneath the southern Illinois basin. Precambrian Research 157 (14), 289313. McCaffrey, R. (1995). DEFNODE Users Guide. Troy, NY: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. McCaffrey, R. (2002). Crustal block rotations and plate coupling. In Plate Boundary Zones, ed. S. Stein and J. Freymueller. AGU Geodynamics Series 30. Washington, DC: American Geophysical Union. McCaffrey, R., A. Qamar, R. King, R. Wells, G. Khazaradze, C. A. Williams, C. W. Stevens, J. J. Vollick, and P. C. Zwick (2007). Fault locking, block rotation and crustal deformation in the Pacific Northwest. Geophysical Journal International 169, 1,3151,340. McClusky, S., S. Bjornstad, B. Hager, R. King, B. Meade, M. Miller, F. Monastero, and B. Souter (2001). Present-day kinematics of the eastern California Shear zone from a geodetically constrained block model. Geophysical Research Letters 28, 3,3693,372. Munson, P., C. Munson, and E. Pond (1995). Paleoliquefaction evidence for a strong Holocene earthquake in south-central Indiana. Geology 23 (4), 325328.

Nelson, W. (1991). Structural styles of the Illinois basin. In Interior Cratonic Basins, ed. M. Leighton, D. Kolata, D. Oltz, and J. Eidel, 209243. Tulsa, OK: American Association of Petroleum Geologists. Nelson, W., and R. Bauer (1987). Thrust faults in southern Illinois basinresult of contemporary stress? GSA Bulletin 98, 302307. Nelson, W., H. Krausse, and H. Bristol (1981). The Cottage Grove Fault System in Southern Illinois. Illinois State Geological Survey Circular 522, 65 pp. Nelson, K., and J. Zhang (1991). A COCORP deep reflection profile across the buried Reelfoot rift, south-central United States. Tectonophysics 197, 271293. Newman, A., S. Stein, J. Weber, J. Engeln, A. Mao, and T. Dixon (1999). Slow deformation and lower seismic hazard at the New Madrid seismic zone. Science 284, 622. Nuttli, O. (1979). Seismicity of the central United States. Reviews in Engineering Geology (Geological Society of America) 4, 6793. Obermeier, S., N. Bluer, C. Munson, P. Munson, W. Martin, K. McWilliams, D. Tabaczynski, J. Odum, M. Rubin, and D. Eggert (1991). Evidence of strong earthquake shaking in the lower Wabash Valley from prehistoric liquefaction features. Science 251, 1,061 1,063. Okada, Y. (1985). Surface deformation to shear and tensile faults in halfspace. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 75, 1,135 1,154. Okada, Y. (1992). Internal deformation due to shear and tensile faults in a half space. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 82 (2), 1,0181,040. Peltier, W. R. (1994). Ice-age paleotopography. Science 265, 195201. Peltier, W. R. (1996). Mantle viscosity and ice-age ice sheet topography. Science 273, 1,3591,364. Sella, G., S. Stein, T. Dixon, M. Craymer, T. James, S. Mazzotti, and R. Dokka (2007). Observation of glacial isostatic adjustment in stable North America. Geophysical Research Letters 34; L02306/ doi:10.1029/2006GL027801. Sexton, J., L. Braile, W. Hinze, and M. Campbell (1986). Seismic reflection profiling studies of a Precambrian rift beneath the Wabash Valley fault zone. Geophysics 51 (3), 640660. Smalley, R. Jr., M. Ellis, J. Paul, and R. Van Arsdale (2005). Space geodetic evidence for rapid strain rates in the New Madrid seismic zone of central USA. Nature 435; doi:10.1038/nature03642. Stauder, W. (1982). Present-day seismicity and identification of active faults in the New Madrid seismic zone. In Investigations of the New Madrid, Missouri Earthquake Region, ed. F. A. McKeown and L. C. Pakiser, 2130. USGS Professional Paper 1236. Stark, J. (1997). The East Continent Rift Complex: Evidence and Conclusions. GSA Special Paper 312. Stein, S., and R. Gordon (1984). Statistical tests of additional plate boundaries from plate motion inversions. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 69, 401412. Sykes, L. (1978). Intraplate seismicity, reactivation of preexisting zones of weakness, alkaline magmatism, and other tectonism postdating continental fragmentation. Reviews of Geophysics and Space Physics 16 (4), 621688. Tapponier, P., Z. Xu, F. Roger, B. Meyer, N. Arnaud, G. Wittlinger, and J. Yang (2001). Oblique stepwise rise and growth of the Tibet Plateau. Science 294, 1,6711,677. Thatcher, W. (1995). Microplate versus continuum descriptions of active tectonic deformation. Journal of Geophysical Research 100, 3,885 3,894. Tuttle, M., E. Schweig, J. Sims, R. Lafferty, L. Wolf, and M. Haynes (2002). The earthquake potential of the New Madrid seismic zone. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 92 (6), 2,0802,089. Weber, J., S. Stein, and J. Engeln (1998). Estimation of strain accumulation in the New Madrid seismic zone from GPS geodesy. Tectonics 17, 250266.

Seismological Research Letters Volume 81, Number 5 September/October 2010 713

Wessel, P., and W. H. Smith (1991). Free software helps map and display data. Eos, Transactions, American Geophysical Union 72, 441. Williams, S. (2003). The effect of coloured noise on the uncertainties of rates estimated from geodetic time series. Journal of Geodesy 76, 483494. Williams, S., Y. Bock, P. Fang, P. Jamason, R. Nikolaidis, L. Prawirodirdjo, M. Miller, and D. Johnson (2004). Error analysis of continuous GPS position time series. Journal of Geophysical Research 109, B03412; doi:10.1029/2003JB002741. Wright, T. (2002). Remote monitoring of the earthquake cycle using satellite radar interferometry. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society AMathematical, Physical, and Engineering Sciences 360 (1,801), 2,8732,888. Wu, P., and P. Johnston (2000). Can deglaciation trigger earthquakes in North America? Geophysical Research Letters 27 (9), 1,3231,326. Zoback, M., and M. Zoback (1980). State of stress in the conterminous United States. Journal of Geophysical Research 85 (B11), 6,113 6,156.

Zoback, M., M. Zoback, and 27 others (1989). Global pattern of tectonic stress. Nature 341, 291298.

Lunar and Planetary Institute Universities Space Research Association 3600 Bay Area Boulevard, Houston, Texas 77058 U.S.A.
galgana@lpi.usra.edu

(G. A. G.)

Department of Geological Sciences Indiana University Bloomington, Indiana 47405 U.S.A.

hamburg@indiana.edu

(M. W. H.)

714 Seismological Research Letters Volume 81, Number 5 September/October 2010