Table 1 Existing and new deformation rates for the Tuz Gölü Fault Zone

From: Pure dip-slip along the Tuz Gölü Fault Zone accommodates east-west extension of Central Anatolia

Vertical displacement (mm/a)

Strike-slip movement (mm/a)

Reference

Method

0.04 (northern)

0.053 (southern)

N.D.

Kürçer and Gökten25

Paleoseismic trenching, 14C and 40Ar/39Ar geochronology23

1.2

4.7

Aktuğ et al.29

Kinematic analysis, GPS block modeling

0.03–0.05 (western)

0.08–0.13 (eastern)

N.D.

Özsayın et al.21

Geomorphology, geology, 40Ar/39Ar geochronology

N.D.

0.58–3.53

Krystopowicz38

Kinematic analysis and 40Ar/39Ar geochronology

0.0714–0.112

N.D.

Öztürk et al.26

Electrical resistivity and thermoluminescence dating,

2.0

1.8

Gezgin et al.30

GNSS, GPS block modeling

N.D.

3

Özbey et al.17

GPS block modeling, InSAR-kinematic analysis, geomorphology

1.12 ± 0.08a

same as F3b

−0.47 ± 0.12a

same as F3b

This study

Lava flow F2 restoration and zircon double-dating

0.90 ± 0.06a

1.23 ± 0.08b

0.01 ± 0.08a

0.06 ± 0.08b

Lava flow F3 restoration and zircon double-dating

0.73 ± 0.06a

1.78 ± 0.08b

0.30 ± 0.06a

1.25 ± 0.08b

Lava flow F4 restoration and zircon double-dating

  1. N.D. none detected; afor 60° fault dip; b for 30° fault dip; positive and negative values indicate dextral and sinistral strike slip, respectively. Uncertainties in ± account for the horizontal and vertical uncertainties of the DEM (5 m and 3.4 m, respectively), as well as the age uncertainties of the ZDD dating at 95% confidence; they do not include any geological uncertainties which increase uncertainties on rates to those resulting from different fault angle assumptions. F3 slip rates extrapolated to F2 for 30° fault dip produce realistic morphology in the ridgeline identified as the F2 southern levee, which is then used for piercing point reconstruction at 60° fault dip.