Coseismic and Early Post-Seismic Slip Associated With The 1999 Izmit Earthquake (Turkey), From SAR Interferometry and Tectonic Field Observations

Geophys. J. Int.
(2003) 155, 93–110
Coseismic and early post-seismic slip associated with the 1999 Izmit
earthquake (Turkey), from SAR interferometry
and tectonic field observations
Ziyadin Çakir,1, ∗ Jean-Bernard de Chabalier,2 Rolando Armijo,2 Bertrand Meyer,2

Aykut Barka1 and Gilles Peltzer3
1 ITU, Istanbul, Turkey. E-mail: cakirz@itu.edu.tr
2 IPGP, CNRS, UMR 7578 and 7580, Paris, France
3 JPL, Caltech, CA 91109, USA
Accepted 2003 March 31. Received 2003 February 18; in original form 2002 July 16
SUMMARY
We use combined tectonic field observations and SAR data to determine an improved model of
the slip associated with the 1999 Izmit earthquake, which ruptured the North Anatolian Fault
at the eastern end of the Sea of Marmara. The leading goal is to understand the main features of
the coseismic and post-seismic deformation, which are captured together in the SAR data. To
achieve this, we make a critical analysis of the ERS1-2 SAR data, which allows atmospheric
effects to be identified and removed. We also use detailed field mapping and measurements
of the earthquake surface rupture. Dislocations in elastic half-space and a forward modelling
strategy allow us to obtain a slip model by steps. A trial-and-error approach is combined with
conventional inversion techniques to determine the slip in the different regions of the fault.
The SAR data are well explained with three main zones of high slip along the fault, releasing a
total moment of 2.3 × 1020 N m (M w = 7.6), which is higher than the seismological estimates
(1.7–2.0 × 1020 N m). The inhomogeneous slip distribution correlates with fault segments
identified at the surface. The Izmit rupture appears to have extended 30 km west of the Hersek
peninsula into the Sea of Marmara with slip tapering from 2 m to zero. The western end of the
rupture is located 40 km SSE from Istanbul. We show that some features seen near to Mudurnu
and Gevye and previously interpreted as slip on secondary faults are explained mostly as
atmospheric effects correlated with the topography. Using our approach and the available GPS
data we obtain a slip model that represents the coseismic slip alone, which suggests that the
moment release during the main shock was 1.9 × 1020 N m (M w = 7.5), consistent with the
seismological estimates. We conclude that the SAR data include the effects of 2 m of fast
after-slip during the month following the main shock, within a zone of the fault located 12–
24 km below the epicentral region. Near the hypocentre at a depth of 18 km, the fault appears to
have experienced dynamic slip of 1 m associated with the main shock, followed by 2 m of rapidly
decelerating post-seismic shear during the following month. We suggest that the distribution
of heterogeneous slip and loading along the different fault segments may be important factors
controlling the propagation of large earthquake ruptures along the North Anatolian Fault.
Key words: Izmit earthquake slip, coseismic, post-seismic deformation, InSAR.
can propagate. In turn, the rupture length depends on many factors,

I N T RO D U C T I O N
such as the degree of geometric complexity of the fault surface, its
The potential for the occurrence of moderate and large earthquakes roughness, the local state of tectonic loading preceding the event
along large strike-slip faults such as the North Anatolian or the San and the rupture dynamics during the event. Besides, slip during an
Andreas faults depends on the length to which a seismic rupture earthquake is known to distribute heterogeneously along the fault, a
feature that can be attributed to variation in frictional slip processes
(Tse & Rice 1986). In this paper we address the distribution of slip
∗ Now at: Institut de Physique du Globe, Strasbourg, France. E-mail: that occurred during and soon after the Izmit earthquake in Turkey,
ziyadin.cakir@eost.u-strasbg.fr. using tectonic field observations and geodetic SAR data that cover

C 2003 RAS 93
94 Z. Çakir et al.
Figure 1. Active faulting in the Marmara pull-apart region (from Armijo et al. 1999, 2002). The North Anatolian Fault (NAF) splays westwards into a northern
(N) branch and a southern (S) branch 100 km apart. Faults associated with recent earthquake breaks are outlined in light and dark grey. The 1999 events occurred
along a prominent fault splay east of Marmara. Fault-plane solutions from the USGS catalogue. The dashed and dotted rectangles outline, respectively, the area
enlarged in Fig. 2 and the location of interferograms in Fig. 3.
the event as well as 1 month of post-seismic deformation. Our aim is so the SAR data were considered less reliable than other indepen-
to characterize the different domains where unstable (coseismic) and dent data sets (e.g. Reilinger et al. 2000; Delouis et al. 2002). Using
stable (aseismic) slip may have occurred along different segments two tandem ERS1–ERS2 pairs, the topography and the meteoro-
along strike and particularly in the transitional zone at 12–18 km logical data, some of the atmospheric effects can be identified with
depth, where the earthquake nucleated. confidence and removed.
The 1999 August 17 Izmit earthquake (M w = 7.4 from long- Together the corrected SAR data and the tectonic observations
period waves) ruptured a portion of the plate boundary between Ana- provide an accurate and complete description of the surface defor-
tolia and Eurasia along the North Anatolian Fault (NAF) (Fig. 1). mation associated with the Izmit earthquake. Combining the two
The event was preceded by a sequence of six large earthquakes data sets allows us to determine the slip distribution with depth
that ruptured the NAF progressively from east to west during the for the different segments that ruptured. We proceed using a trial-
20th century (Barka & Kadinsky-Cade 1988; Barka 1996; Stein and-error approach to explore solutions consistent with the tec-
et al. 1997; Nalbant et al. 1998). The Izmit event was also followed, tonic information, then an inversion technique to improve the fit
3 months later on 1999 November 12, by another destructive earth- to the SAR data. Our approach explains the discrepancies between
quake (M w = 7.2) that ruptured the neighbouring Düzce Fault, east models deduced earlier from other data sets. Our final solution is
of the Izmit Fault (Akyüz et al. 2002). Within the next few decades a slip distribution that represents the coseismic slip and 1 month
large similar earthquakes are expected to rupture the submarine of post-seismic deformation captured by the SAR data. We use
fault system that extends west of the Izmit Fault under the Sea of the data from temporary and permanent GPS stations to separate
Marmara, adjacent to the city of Istanbul (Barka 1999; Hubert- the coseismic from the post-seismic slip, and thus to estimate the
Ferrari et al. 2000; Parsons et al. 2000; Atakan et al. 2002). amount, rate and depth distribution of the aseismic slip relative
Soon after the event, the Izmit Fault rupture was mapped in the to the coseismic slip. Finally, we discuss the implications of slip
field by an international team (Barka et al. 2002; Hartleb et al. heterogeneity, aseismic slip and fault segmentation in relation to
2002; Langridge et al. 2002; Rockwell et al. 2002). This allowed the short-period seismological results and the long-term geological
the surface fault geometry to be determined and the variation of evidence.
slip along strike to be measured with accuracy, due to the presence
of numerous markers of human origin which were offset across the
T E C T O N I C B A C KG R O U N D , F I E L D
fault (roads, railways, canals, walls, fences). However, the exact
O B S E RVAT I O N S O F T H E S U R FA C E
length of the rupture remained undetermined, because some tens of
BREAK, DISTRIBUTION OF
kilometres of its western extension under the eastern Sea of Marmara
A F T E R S H O C K S A N D B AT H Y M E T RY
could not be observed directly.
OF THE EASTERN SEA OF MARMARA
Several studies using various data sets (near-field strong motion
records, far-field body waves, GPS measurements and SAR inter- Unlike the previous earthquakes of the 20th century sequence, which
ferometry) have attempted to characterize the coseismic slip distri- broke 700 km along the linear eastern and central parts of the NAF,
bution, leading, however, to significantly differing results (Bouchon the 1999 Izmit and Düzce events ruptured a fault splay at the entrance
et al. 2000; Reilinger et al. 2000; Yagi & Kikuchi 2000; Tibi et al. of the more complex Sea of Marmara pull-apart region (Fig. 1). In
2001; Wright et al. 2001; Bürgmann et al. 2002; Delouis et al. 2002; this region the NAF divides into a number of fault branches involving
Feigl et al. 2002). The SAR interferograms obtained with ERS data significant subsidence and crustal extension (Barka & Kadinsky-
of the Izmit earthquake contain some signal due to a heterogeneous Cade 1988; Parke et al. 1999; Armijo et al. 1999, 2002). The 1999
troposphere. These effects were encountered in previous studies and earthquakes occurred close to where two previous events had already

C 2003 RAS, GJI, 155, 93–110
The 1999 Izmit earthquake (Turkey) 95
Ml=6
Ml=4
Ml=2
Figure 2. Fault segments and the breaks of the 1999 earthquake. Breaks of the Izmit (1999 August 17) and Düzce (1999 November 12) events are highlighted
in red and purple, respectively. Stars denote epicentres of main shocks. Yellow circles are M L ≥ 2 aftershocks recorded between 1999 August 20 and October 20
by the Tübitak permanent network (Özalaybey et al. 2002) and by a temporary array (Karabulut et al. 2002). The background DEM image is from GTOPO 30.
The Izmit break has 110 km length on land but secondary features and aftershock distribution suggest that it extends 50 km west of Gölcük, beyond the Hersek
peninsula and offshore Yalova (dashed red lines).
ruptured in 1957 and 1967 contiguous fault segments south of the and its connection with the main rupture at the Akyazi fault bend
Almacik block (Fig. 1). Together the Izmit and Düzce earthquakes is unclear. Another step-over is at the very eastern end of the rup-
ruptured almost completely the sinuous fault branch north of the ture near Gölyaka and the Eften Lake. This area experienced up to
Almacik block, so this block is now surrounded by the recent breaks. 20 cm of right-lateral slip during the Izmit (August) event and much
A prominent fault bend characterizes the surface rupture near the more (>5 m) lateral and normal slip during the subsequent Düzce
city of Akyazi (Fig. 2). It may be explained by the long-term counter- (November) event (Akyüz et al. 2002; Hartleb et al. 2002).
clockwise rotation of the Almacik block with respect to Eurasia Coseismic slip could be measured with precision along the fault
(Armijo et al. 1999, 2000). The geological evidence also indicates trace. Significant slip variability was observed at the scale of the su-
that the earthquakes ruptured the main branch of the NAF entering perficial complexities along the break (multiple mole-track branches
the Sea of Marmara at the Gulf of Izmit. This branch becomes and small stepovers), within a generally narrow fault zone (1–50 m).
gradually more extensional westward, as larger and larger fault step- Consequently, measurements of small markers sample fractions of
overs and deeper pull-apart basins filled with sediment occur along it the total deformation and usually underestimate the actual slip across
(e.g. Barka & Kadinsky-Cade 1988; Armijo et al. 2002, see Fig. 2). the fault zone. The slip appears less variable whenever large man-
Detailed observations and maps of the Izmit earthquake surface made markers crossing the fault (such as roads, railways and canals
rupture are reported by Barka et al. (2002). Here we summarize the for irrigation) could be surveyed. Such surveys integrate the defor-
main results relevant to this study. The rupture was observed on land mation across the fault zone better and are thus more reliable than
over a total length of 110 km. It is composed of a series of segments the local measurements of smaller markers, to which they provide
with overall E–W strike and mainly right-lateral slip. Seen in more upper bounds. Fig. 5(b) (see later) incorporates our best estimates
detail, the strike of the rupture changes gradually to N80◦ E as it of coseismic slip obtained from these surveys.
enters the Sea of Marmara and bends to a N70◦ E strike as it reaches Maximum right-lateral slip exceeding 5.5 m was measured in
the Almacik block. two areas, east of the Sapanca Lake and in the city of Gölçük.
Four main strike-slip segments are distinguished along the Izmit Vertical slip was generally minor, but locally it reached 2.3 m over
rupture, from west to east (Fig. 2): the Gölçük, the Izmit–Sapanca, the oblique NW-striking normal faults that bound the Izmit Bay
the Sapanca–Akyazi and the Karadere segments. Two clear exten- extensional step-over east of Gölçük. The hypocentre where the
sional step-overs separate the first three segments, at the Izmit Bay earthquake appears to have nucleated is to the east of the Izmit Bay
immediately east of Gölçük and at the Sapanca Lake. The Karadere and 5–10 km east of the region of maximum slip in Gölçük (Figs 2
segment forming the eastern end of the rupture has an ENE strike and 5).

C 2003 RAS, GJI, 155, 93–110
Table 1. ERS data and interferograms used in this study (track 157 frame 815). Ha is the altitude of ambiguity (the magnitude of
unmodelled topography required to create one fringe).
First orbit No, date Second orbit No, date H a (m) Interval (days) Interferogram
42229, 1999 August 12 42730, 1999 September 16 3147 35 ERS1
22556, 1999 August 13 23057, 1999 September 17 329 35 ERS2
42229, 1999 August 12 23057, 1999 September 17 42 36 ERS1–ERS2
22556, 1999 August 13 42730, 1999 September 16 38 34 ERS2–ERS1
42229, 1999 August 12 22556, 1999 August 13 41 1 August tandem
42730, 1999 September 16 23057, 1999 September 17 40 1 September tandem
West of Gölçük (Fig. 2) the rupture continued to an unknown strike, as the depth to the sea bottom increases dramatically (Fig. 2)
extent under water, possibly along the edges of, and/or across, the (e.g. Armijo et al. 2002). These two fault branches have a significant
elongated pull-apart feature seen in the bathymetry between Gölçük long-term antithetic normal component of slip. They run at the base
and the Hersek peninsula (Kuscu et al. 2002). The Gölçük strike- of the two large escarpments that bound the 1150 m deep Cinarcik
slip segment must be short (less than about 5 km), because it is Basin, which appears to be one of the largest pull-apart basins in
immediately flanked both to the east and the west by significant the Sea of Marmara (Barka & Kadinsky-Cade 1988; Armijo et al.
step-overs with normal and oblique slip. Many large slumps that 2002). In a later section we use the bathymetry, aftershock loca-
occurred all along the coastal area between Gölçük and Hersek tions and the SAR interferometry to determine the probable extent,
were interpreted as lateral spreading effects of the submarine part the geometry and the slip distribution of the Izmit rupture in this
of the earthquake rupture. However, no evident surface break was submarine region.
observed across the Hersek peninsula. Only some minor cracks were
noticed in the ground near the tip of the peninsula, where the long- T H E I N S A R D AT A A N D T H E
term morphology indicates the passage of a large strike-slip fault. AT M O S P H E R I C E F F E C T S
This has led to the inference that the surface break of the Izmit
earthquake ended somewhere east of the Hersek peninsula, with a We calculated several interferograms that span the 1999 Izmit earth-
total rupture length limited to 130 km. quake both in the descending and ascending modes of the Euro-
The distribution of well-located aftershocks suggests a longer pean Space Agency’s ERS1 and ERS2 satellites. Of these, only
rupture, possibly including the Yalova–Hersek segment, west of two ascending interferometric pairs have high coherence and give a
Hersek (Ito et al. 2002; Karabulut et al. 2002; Özalaybey et al. good image of surface deformation associated with the earthquake.
2002) (Fig. 2). Apart from aftershocks outlining the overall surface The two interferograms are formed by combining two pairs of tan-
rupture, three regions hosted significant swarms; south of Akyazi, dem images of ERS1 and ERS2 acquired several days before the
around the epicentre at Izmit, and north and west of Yalova. In fact, event in August (orbits ERS1-42229, ERS2-22556, 12–13 August)
three swarms of aftershocks are located definitely west of the Hersek and about a month after (orbits ERS1-42730, ERS2-23057, 16–17
peninsula (Karabulut et al. 2002). September) (Table 1, Fig. 3).
High-resolution bathymetric data acquired recently indicate that We used the two-pass method (Gabriel et al. 1989; Massonnet
west of the Hersek peninsula and north of Yalova the submarine fault et al. 1993) in which the topographic contribution to the interfero-
system splays apart into two main branches that veer towards a NW gram is removed using a digital elevation model (DEM). The ERS2
Figure 3. Interferograms of the Izmit earthquake. Data are from ESA satellites ERS1 and ERS2 acquired during ascending orbits. Surface rupture of Izmit
earthquake is outlined in red. Each fringe (one full colour cycle) represents 5.6 cm of range change along the radar line of sight (see text) whose horizontal
projection is indicated by a black arrow. Positive changes indicate that distance to satellite has increased. (a) ERS1 interferogram (12 August–16 September
1999). (b) ERS2 interferogram (13 August–17 September 1999). (c) Phase difference between the ERS1 and ERS2 interferograms. Here one fringe corresponds
to a range change of 2.8 cm. The four to five fringes seen in the north-eastern part of the interferogram are not correlated with topography and are likely to be
the consequence of a heterogeneous troposphere.

C 2003 RAS, GJI, 155, 93–110
interferogram is constructed using precise orbits calculated by the in this cusp region (Fig. 3c). This difference requires explanation
University of Delft (Scharroo & Visser 1998) and thus we assume it before modelling the earthquake faulting process. There appears
does not contain orbital residuals significant enough to be removed to be no correlation between the fringes in Fig. 3(c) and topogra-
(more than one fringe across the image). However, the precise orbits phy, in contrast with examples of similar features studied elsewhere
were not available for the ERS1 interferogram and therefore it may (Delacourt et al. 1998; Beauducel et al. 2000). Therefore, these
contain orbital fringes. This problem can be solved by removing fringes are very likely to be a consequence of a heterogeneous tropo-
the difference between the two interferograms attributable to orbital sphere (Feigl et al. 2002). It is not possible, however, to use a perfect
precision, in this case a plane that contains two and a half fringes ‘pairwise logic’ (Massonnet & Feigl 1998) to determine whether one
running roughly parallel to the satellite direction of flight. For the of the radar images contains most of the atmospheric effect. This is
relatively simple Izmit rupture this correction is enough to resolve because the orbital separation combining ERS1–ERS2 pairs are not
tectonic deformation in the far field, so orbital parameters are not suitable for obtaining coherent interferograms (see Table 1). Here
included in our inversion procedure. we use a comparable strategy, which is developed below.
The interferograms are filtered using a weighted power spectrum The two 1-day ERS1–ERS2 tandem pairs can be processed. With
algorithm (Goldstein & Werner 1998) and then coherent fringes such a short time period both tandem interferograms should be very
(about 87 per cent) are automatically unwrapped and sampled to coherent and contain practically no surface deformation. However,
be used for modelling. To have a clear view of the surface defor- coherence is almost completely lost in the southern and northwest-
mation (shape, gradient and the number of fringes), we present the ern regions in both interferograms, which is probably due to small
interferograms in Fig. 3 rewrapped with fringes, each fringe repre- altitudes of ambiguity (Table 1). The signal is poorly structured and
senting a range change of 5.66 cm (one wavelength) along the radar almost negligible in the August tandem interferogram (Fig. 4a). In
line of sight. Because the interferograms span a time interval ending contrast the September tandem interferogram contains in its coher-
about 1 month after the event, they must contain some centimetres of ent part an organized signal of up to three fringes (Fig. 4b). These
range change due to post-seismic deformation as deduced from the fringes have an elliptical shape over a wide region that is the same
GPS measurements (Reilinger et al. 2000; Bürgmann et al. 2002; as that of the cusp seen in the difference between the two coseismic
Ergintav et al. 2002; Feigl et al. 2002; Hearn et al. 2002). interferograms (Fig. 3c). The features seen in the September tandem
Despite the rough topography and dense vegetation cover, the pair are thus very likely to correspond to local atmospheric effects
coherence is fairly good over large parts of the interferograms. It is of meteorological origin, at the scale of the interferogram, much
lost in areas close to the fault (blank areas within the image frame). like similar features described elsewhere (cf. Massonnet & Feigl
This may be partly due to the steep slip gradient in these areas. 1998).
However, clear fringes can be observed within a few kilometres from We have checked the available meteorological data to see whether
the surface rupture along the southern side of the Izmit–Sapanca atmospheric changes occurred during the time interval when the
segment. Decorrelation also occurs in the flat areas in the central SAR tandem data were acquired, during 1999 September. Two of
and western parts of the interferograms, which is probably due to the NOAA satellite images acquired on the days of ERS data ac-
changes in the water content in the soils. quisitions are shown in Figs 4(c) and (d). The sky is clear in the
Because the displacement associated with the right-lateral strike Sea of Marmara region about 13 h before the ERS1 data acquisi-
slip occurs mostly in the E–W direction, that is nearly parallel to the tion (16 September) (Fig. 4c). However, clouds cover the area to the
radar line of sight, the fringes are mostly symmetric about the fault north and to the northeast of the Gulf of Izmit approximately 7 h
trace. The symmetry of fringes running parallel to the fault also before the acquisition of the ERS2 data (17 September) (Fig. 4d).
suggests that the fault is very steep. However, in the central part This change suggests that the atmospheric and weather conditions
of the interferograms the fringe rate appears higher on the northern were rapidly degrading from September 16 to 17. Accordingly, the
side of the fault than on its southern side. This feature may indicate atmospheric effects seen in the September tandem interferogram
that the fault dips steeply to the north, in agreement with the focal are most probably included in the ERS2 image, which explains why
mechanism of the main shock (Harvard CMT). The area of Izmit the ERS2 coseismic interferogram has more fringes than the ERS1
and Gölçük appears surrounded by elliptical-shaped fringes with one. In addition, the good atmospheric conditions prevailing on the
high rate, consistent with the large amounts of slip observed there. 16th September are similar to those seen in the NOAA data covering
Fringes with high rate are seen east of Gölçük towards the Hersek 1999 August 12 and 13 (that we do not show), when the first tandem
peninsula, and more spaced fringes continue for at least 15 km pair was acquired.
westwards beyond Hersek. Several fringes appear deflected in two Therefore, we prefer not to use the ERS2 interferogram to deduce
particular places: along the Mudurnu valley southeast of Akyazi and the source parameters of the Izmit event, in contrast with earlier
along the northwestern edge of the Geyve Basin, south of Sapanca. published work (Delouis et al. 2002; Wright et al. 2001).
These features appear to be along known faults but also appear
to correlate with sharp topographic features. The possibility that
MODELLING THE SLIP DISTRIBUTION
these features result from motion on secondary faults dynamically
triggered by motion on the main fault has been explored (Armijo The purpose of our modelling procedure is to determine a set of
et al. 2000; Wright et al. 2001; Feigl et al. 2002). We re-examine source parameters explaining both the tectonic observations and the
this possibility and explore further the hypothesis of atmospheric SAR data. As in other examples elsewhere in the world, the SAR
effects correlated with the topography. data set appears to be the best for deducing an overall image of the
The main difference between the two interferograms is on the static rupture at seismogenic depth. Although with similar accuracy
northern side of the fault. There the fringes in the ERS2 interfer- (within an error of less than 1 cm), the GPS measurements sample
ogram trend more NE on the western side and more NW on the discrete observation points with generally no comparable spatial
eastern side, making a broad concave-southwards cusp. Subtracting coverage. However, GPS measurements provide true displacement
one interferogram from the other shows that the ERS2 data contain vectors. For the Izmit event the GPS data have been used to model
at least two more fringes—or a maximum of 14 cm range change— slip (Reilinger et al. 2000; Bürgmann et al. 2002; Feigl et al. 2002)

C 2003 RAS, GJI, 155, 93–110
Figure 4. Identification of atmospheric effects. Tandem interferograms calculated from ERS1 and ERS2 images: (a) 12–13 August 1999 interferogram.
(b) 16–17 September 1999 interferogram. Each fringe represents 2.8 cm of ground shift away from satellite along the radar line of sight. The fringes seen in
the northern part of the September interferogram confirm the occurrence of tropospheric effects. (c, d) Meteorological data; NOAA DMSP images acquired
on 16 (c) and 17 (d) September 1999. The circle locates the study area. The tropospheric effects encountered in the ERS2 interferogram appear related to the
presence of clouds just before the acquisition of the 17 September ERS2 data.
and in a later section we discuss the main implications of this data is then refined by steps combining a trial-and-error approach with
set in view of our own results. a conventional inversion technique. The procedure seeks to fit the
The quality of the SAR data is generally poor close to the rupture SAR data that are sampled uniformly where the interferogram is
trace, due to lack of coherence. Pixel offsets across the fault trace coherent, in this case 14 000 samples of range change measured in
in the SAR amplitude images can be used to determine the surface the ERS1 interferogram. The shift between regions of the interfer-
slip (Michel et al. 1999; Peltzer et al. 1999). However, for the Izmit ogram to the north and south of the fault is fixed by fitting models
earthquake the results obtained with this technique are too scattered to the far field and checking for consistency with the GPS vectors
and thus of little use. A similar technique using SPOT satellite im- (Reilinger et al. 2000; Bürgmann et al. 2002).
ages provided good results only along one of the segments of the Our first-order model (model I) is obtained with a simplified fault
Izmit rupture (the Izmit–Sapanca segment; Michel & Avouac 2002). divided into vertical patches 5 km long along strike, consistent with
The particularly precise measurements of offset markers gathered the geometry of the observed surface rupture on land and with the
in the field after the event provide an overall coverage of the surface features seen in the bathymetry of the Sea of Marmara. Slip is purely
rupture (Fig. 5b) and the slip observed is consistent with the SPOT right-lateral strike-slip, consistent with the measurements gathered
data where the latter are available. at the surface for each patch and extrapolated uniformly down to
To model the ERS1 interferogram we use dislocations on rectan- 18 km depth (Fig. 5, I). This is the overall depth for which forward
gular planes embedded in an elastic half-space (Okada 1985). We modelling gives the best fit to the SAR data (rms of 2.4 cm in
use a forward modelling strategy to obtain a first-order model that range). The resulting geodetic moment is 2.5 × 1020 N m, which is

C 2003 RAS, GJI, 155, 93–110
Figure 5. The Izmit earthquake fault trace, the coseismic surface slip and the modelled slip distribution at depth. (a) Shaded topographic map with fault
segments and simplified fault trace. Surface breaks (thick line) of the Izmit (red) and Duzce (purple) events are indicated. Locations of mainshocks (stars) and
of aftershocks (yellow circles) as in Fig. 2. (b) Surface right-lateral slip projected along the fault trace. The sinuous curve in bold integrates the most robust
field measurements (dashed where extrapolated). The toothed graph in orange represents the discrete values used for modelling slip at depth in 32 fault patches
with 5 km length along the fault strike (model I). The hatched graph is the surface slip obtained by inversion in IIA. Segments and intersegment regions are
indicated on top, by pink and light blue stripes, respectively. (c) Model I: first-order forward modelling of slip distribution. Slip is purely right-lateral (in m).
Slip variation along strike is consistent with the tectonic observations and is extrapolated in vertical fault patches to variable depth to fit the SAR data. Best fit
is for uniform fault depth of 18 km. Red star represents main shock hypocentre. (d) Model IIA: obtained by inversion of slip in a fault with 224 vertical patches
5 × 4 km2 . Slip is inverted using model I as initial slip distribution. Lines of equal slip are in metres. Resulting slip in the patches near the surface (0–4 km depth)
is represented in b (hatched graph). (e) Model IIB: Inversion model with slip fixed for the patches near the surface (0–4 km depth). (f) Model III: Obtained by
inversion of slip in a fault slightly dipping north, using initial slip close to model IIB. Izmit–Sapanca and Sapanca–Akyazi segments have uniform 85◦ dip to
the north and 176◦ rake, other segments are vertical. Mainshock (red star) and aftershocks (yellow circles) projected along fault strike. Scalar moment (M o )
magnitude (M w ) and rms to the ERS1 data are indicated for each model.

C 2003 RAS, GJI, 155, 93–110
equivalent to a moment magnitude of M w = 7.6. The implied fault (Figs 5, IIA and b). Also the position of these residuals is close to
rupture is about 160 km long from Gölyaka to approximately 30 km the location of the largest aftershock (M l = 6.1; Özalaybey et al.
west of the Hersek peninsula. Below we discuss more precisely 2002) that occurred on September 13, during the time covered by the
how the western end of the rupture is constrained by the SAR data. SAR images. However, the source of this event is deep (16–18 km;
Overall, our first-order model is similar to that discussed for the Orgulu & Aktar 2001) and the magnitude moderate, so it is unlikely
ERS2 interferogram in Armijo et al. (2000). The good fit to the SAR that it may have modified the fringe pattern significantly.
data obtained with this very simple approach suggests a possible In a third modelling stage (model III) we seek to reduce residuals
correspondence between significant features of the slip distribution close to the fault trace by introducing small changes in the fault dip
observed at the surface and the slip distribution on the fault at depth. and rake. After trying different models we retained one with minor
Regions of relatively higher slip surrounded by regions of lower slip down-to-the-north normal movement, consistent with the apparent
would coincide with well-identified strike-slip segments such as the asymmetry of the fringe gradients in the central part of both the
Karadere, the Sapanca–Akyazi and the Gölçük segments. ERS1 and the ERS2 interferograms, as discussed earlier, and with
The distribution of residuals between the model and the SAR data the fault plane solution of the main shock (Fig. 1). Then, we inverted
is represented in Fig. 6(a). Residuals in the far field are flat, of small for slip using as an initial solution a slip distribution similar to that
amplitude and generally negative (except in the NW corner of the obtained in the previous modelling stage (IIB), keeping the near-
scene), indicating that the dislocation model slightly overestimates surface slip fixed. In model III (Fig. 5), all the fault patches of the
the overall far-field effect of the earthquake deformation. The broad two central segments (Izmit–Sapanca and Sapanca–Akyazi) have a
positive residuals in the NW corner of the scene could correspond dip of 85◦ to the north and a small component of normal faulting
to a minor atmospheric effect that we could not remove. Closer to (176◦ rake). The resolution of slip in this model is very similar to
the fault trace the residuals are somewhat larger (up to 6 cm in that in the vertical model. The rms is now 1.9 cm and the residuals
range) and more conspicuous, both positive and negative. This may close to Izmit are nearly erased (Fig. 6, III).
imply either local complexities of the actual deformation or local The regions with high slip in model III are very similar to those
atmospheric effects, which require a more detailed analysis. in our first-order model (I) but the progressive fit to the SAR data
A second modelling stage (models IIA and IIB) explores more has caused a cut-off of these regions at different depth. Slip centred
refined slip distributions over the fault at depth using an inversion in the Sapanca–Akyazi and the Karadere segments appears mostly
procedure and our first-order model as a starting solution. The pre- concentrated in the first 8 km near the surface. In contrast, the re-
vious fault is now divided into patches with vertical width of 4 km gion of very high slip centred in Gölçük, immediately west of the
down to 28 km depth (224 patches, 5 × 4 km2 ). We use a sim- hypocentre, seems more deeply rooted (down to 20 km; Fig. 5, III).
ple iterative linear least-squares inversion procedure (e.g. Ward & Total seismic moment and moment magnitude (2.3 × 1020 N m;
Barrientos 1986). Slip is the only free parameter; all other parame- M w = 7.6) are slightly lower than those in model I, but the fraction
ters are fixed. For each independent dislocation the problem is linear, of moment released by the Gölçük and nearby segments appears
but the solution is non-unique and unstable because the solutions on very significant (about two-thirds of the total moment).
the patches are not independent and the distribution of the data is Fig. 7 presents the synthetic fringes corresponding to model III,
heterogeneous (Du et al. 1992). To evaluate the resolution of the slip the resulting residual fringes and some selected profiles across the
on the different regions of the fault we used a truncated singular- ERS1 data and the model. Overall the synthetic fringes reproduce
value decomposition approach (e.g. Du et al. 1992) and smoothed very accurately the observations (cf. Fig. 7a with Fig. 3a). The excel-
solutions. Introducing artificially small slip perturbations we esti- lent fit to the data is also seen in the profiles (Fig. 7c). The maximum
mate that smoothed models can resolve a slip of less than 0.5 m in amplitude of range change across the fault is about 180 cm (pro-
the regions of the fault near the surface (≤12 km depth) and less file 3) corresponding to 4.7 m of horizontal displacement parallel
than 1 m in the regions between 12 and 24 km depth. The models to the fault, which is the value measured in the field at Gölçük and
cannot resolve a slip of less than 1 m in regions of the fault at depth imposed in the inversion. The obtained rms of 1.9 cm corresponds
greater than 24 km. The resolution of the slip in some regions of to an error of about 1 per cent. However, it is clear that the very
the fault at the shallow depth is bad, however, because of the poor good fit to the SAR data describing the deformation of the Earth’s
coherence of the interferogram in areas close to the fault trace. surface corresponds to a much larger uncertainty in the estimates
Fig. 5 (IIA and IIB) illustrates two different alternatives and Fig. 6 of slip across the fault at depth, due to the increasingly poor reso-
(IIA and IIB) the corresponding residuals. If slip is left free every- lution of the models. Using the slip data collected in the field at the
where the solution is very unstable (Fig. 5, IIA). The rms is reduced surface improves the stability of the solutions and reduces the slip
to 2.1 cm. Slip tends to be more heterogeneously distributed and uncertainty, as shown.
the regions of higher slip spread towards the sides. Slip in some
patches near the surface (0–4 km depth) is inconsistent with the
S E C O N D A RY FAU L T I N G V E R S U S
observed surface slip (see Fig. 5b). The most striking inconsisten-
AT M O S P H E R I C E F F E C T S I N
cies are along the Sapanca–Akyazi segment, where modelled slip
GEYVE AND MUDURNU
is much less than observed, and near Izmit, where a patch modelled
with very high slip (more than 8 m) seems artificial. The main discrepancies between model III and the ERS1 data are
If slip is fixed at the observed values in the patches near the in the Geyve and Mudurnu regions. Both the map of residuals and
surface and left free elsewhere (Fig. 5, IIB) the solution is more the profiles show short-wavelength residuals of up to 6 cm in range
stable. The fit to the data is similar (rms of 2.1 cm) and the regions of change (Fig. 7b and profiles P1, P2 in Fig. 7c), which coincide with
higher and lower slip remain well identified. Residuals are generally the places where several fringes appear deflected in the two original
smaller close to the fault trace (cf. Fig. 6, IIA and IIB) but relatively interferograms (Fig. 3).
large positive residuals remain on the northern side of the fault near These features can be interpreted as slip on secondary faults (e.g.
Izmit. It is probably not coincidence that these residuals are located Armijo et al. 2000; Wright et al. 2001; Feigl et al. 2002). After
where high near-surface slip is indicated by the previous inversion the Izmit earthquake some open cracks were observed along the

C 2003 RAS, GJI, 155, 93–110
C

2003 RAS, GJI, 155, 93–110
Figure 6. Residual (observed minus modelled) interferograms. The order of the interferograms follows the modelling stages discussed in the text. Residuals are expressed as positive (yellow to red scale) and
The 1999 Izmit earthquake (Turkey)
negative (green to blue scale) values indicating that models, respectively, over or under estimate the surface deformation (the coseismic change in range between the two ERS1 scenes). Residuals are for (a) model I,
the first-order forward model (Fig. 5, I); (b) model II, the inversion of slip in all the patches (Fig. 5, IIA); (c) model IIB, the inversion model with slip fixed in the patches near the surface (Fig. 5, IIB); (d) model III,
the inversion of slip in a fault allowing for a minor down-to-the-north normal component of slip between Izmit and Akyazi (Fig. 5, III); (e) model IV, the inversion model obtained once a phase delay correlated with
101
the topography is removed from the ERS1 data (see the discussion in the text and Fig. 8c).
Figure 7. Detailed analysis of model III. (a) Synthetic interferogram. Fringes are emphasized with brighter colours in the coherent parts of the ERS1
interferogram to facilitate comparison with the data shown in Fig. 3(a). The numbered lines indicate the position of the six N–S sections displayed in (c). (b)
The residual interferogram is the same as in Fig. 6 (III) but expressed in colour cycles (same colour scale as in a), with elevation contours superimposed every
500 m. The residuals covering the southern region of the interferogram appear closely correlated with the topography. (c) Observed (red) and modelled (blue)
profiles of range change across the fault. Significant small-scale misfits are seen across profiles 5 and 6 in the Geyve and Mudurnu regions (boxes labelled P1
and P2, location given in b). These are the two regions where deflected fringes are seen both in the ERS1 and in the ERS2 interferograms (see Fig. 3). The
right-hand panel in c gives enlarged profiles of P1, of P2 and of the corresponding residuals (data minus model; black lines).
trace of the Mudurnu Fault, which had ruptured in 1967, but no sign a phase delay that decreases exponentially with elevation (see the
of an earthquake surface break was reported in the Geyve basin caption of Fig. 8c). Adding such a delay to model III provides a
area. Wright et al. (2001) have modelled these features of the in- satisfactory non-tectonic explanation for the deflected fringes in
terferograms with a variety of fault kinematics and have preferred the Geyve and Mudurnu regions (Fig. 8c). The observation that
models that surprisingly involve left-lateral strike-slip (opposite to the short-wavelength noise in the original interferogram (Fig. 8b)
the known sense of slip on those faults), which would have been trig- appears somewhat reproduced in Fig. 8(c) suggests that this noise
gered by the main shock. In a similar way Feigl et al. (2002) have is also correlated with the topography.
chosen to model deformation in the Mudurnu valley with right- Thus both secondary faulting and tropospheric effects are able
lateral slip but in the Geyve area with left-lateral slip. Using the to correctly reproduce the observed features. However, the overall
known traces of the Mudurnu Fault and that of the fault along the correlation with the topography is robust and there is no indication
northwestern edge of the Geyve basin (Fig. 2), the two interfero- of the occurrence of large local shocks in Mudurnu and Geyve, si-
metric features can be reproduced reasonably well with right-lateral multaneously during the main shock or afterwards. In the ERS2 data
slip on both faults (Fig. 8a). of Mudurnu the short-wavelength signal does not appear to corre-
Fig. 7(b) shows that the residuals obtained by removing model III late perfectly well with the topography, which may suggest some
from the ERS1 data appear correlated with the topography over a fault slip (Wright et al. 2001). We conclude that the most significant
wide area in the southern part of the interferogram. This strongly part of the deflected fringes in the interferograms must result from
suggests a change in the tropospheric delay between the acquisition a tropospheric effect. The tectonic explanation is possible, but its
of the two radar scenes (Massonnet & Feigl 1998). The resulting shift significance is difficult to assess.
in the phase may decrease, linearly or exponentially, with increasing Finally, the tropospheric effect in Fig. 8(c) can be directly re-
elevation. Overall, the residuals in Fig. 7(b) are well explained with moved from the ERS1 data and the resulting interferogram inverted

C 2003 RAS, GJI, 155, 93–110
Figure 8. Modelling deflected fringes in the regions of Geyve and Mudurnu. For clarity here each colour cycle represents 2.8 cm of range change along the
line of satellite sight (the fringe frequency is twice that in previous figures). The observed fringes in the ERS1 interferogram are illustrated in the middle panel
(b) to facilitate comparison with the alternatives on the sides. (a) The synthetic fringes modelled by adding to model III right-lateral motion on two secondary
faults. The fault model requires the Mudurnu fault with 60◦ NNE dip, rupture 10 km long and 20 cm of right-slip between 1–15 km depth (M o = 1 × 1018 N m;
M w = 5.8). The NW Geyve fault is vertical with rupture 27 km long and 22 cm of right-lateral slip between 1–5 km depth (Mo 4 × 1017 N m; M w = 5.7). (c)
The synthetic fringes obtained by adding to model III an idealized atmospheric effect correlated with the topography. The used effect is a phase delay (PD in cm)
that decreases exponentially with increasing elevation (h in m). It is given by PD = 5.718 958 × [1 − exp (−0.001 6120h]). Interestingly, the short-wavelength
‘noise’ introduced by the topography is similar to the noise in the data.
for slip, using model III as an initial solution. The resulting slip
THE WESTERN END
distribution (not shown) is very similar to that of model III. How-
O F T H E I Z M I T RU P T U R E
ever, the residuals corresponding to this solution (given in Fig. 6e,
model IV) illustrate well the extent to which a tropospheric effect The SAR data can be used to resolve the western end of the Izmit
can explain the residuals in the Mudurnu and Geyve regions, which earthquake rupture. Fig. 9 is an enlargement of the data together
were not specifically addressed in our previous models (compare with two alternative rupture models for this region. Clearly, models
with I, IIA, IIB and III in Fig. 6). with rupture extending significantly westward beyond the Hersek
Figure 9. The western end of the Izmit rupture. Yellow circles are aftershocks recorded between 1999 August 20 and October 10 as in Fig. 2. Each fringe
represents 2.8 cm of range change, as in Fig. 8. Observed interferogram in the middle panel (b) for comparison with the two alternatives. The rms calculated
for this part of the interferogram is given in cm. (a) Synthetic fringes for a rupture extending 30 km west of the Hersek peninsula with the slip distribution of
model III (Fig. 5). The simplified Hersek–Yalova fault segment roughly coincides with a cluster of aftershock with almost planar, vertical distribution (Karabulut
et al. 2002). (c) Synthetic fringes for a rupture ending at the Hersek peninsula. Modelled fault trace in red. Black contour lines overprinted in (a) and (c) were
obtained by automatic unwrapping of the observed interferogram. The difference between (a) and (c) is equivalent to M o = 1.5 × 1019 N m, or an event
M w = 6.8, which would have ruptured the Yalova–Hersek segment.

C 2003 RAS, GJI, 155, 93–110
peninsula (Fig. 9a) fit much better the data than models with rupture mic displacements reproduced in Fig. 10(a), obtained by removing
ending at the Hersek peninsula (Fig. 9b). In model III (Fig. 7a) we at each non-permanent station the part of the motion attributed to
have adopted an idealized Yalova–Hersek fault segment geometry interseismic and to post-seismic deformation. This set of GPS vec-
consistent with the aftershock distribution and with the position of tors can be used to calibrate a coseismic model derived from our
prominent fault traces in the high-resolution bathymetry (Armijo ‘longer-period’ model III. We adopted the same approach (fixing
et al. 2002). The modelled fault coincides with an aftershock the same characteristics of the fault and slip near the surface as in
cluster with an almost planar, vertical distribution of hypocentres model III) to fit the coseismic horizontal displacement at the GPS
(Karabulut et al. 2002), which possibly defines the average po- stations and to obtain the corresponding slip distribution on the fault
sition of the strike-slip fault segment connecting the Izmit Fault at depth. The resulting ‘purely’ coseismic model can be compared
with the more extensional faults bounding the Cinarcik basin. The with model III (Figs 10c and b, respectively).
interferogram does not contain information close to the fault to Overall the observed horizontal vectors are correctly reproduced
better constrain complexities of its geometry and kinematics. For by the ‘purely’ coseismic model (rms = 4 cm), with the excep-
instance, there is possibly some normal fault component of slip as tion of a few stations close to the fault, which may be affected by
the fault enters more and more into the Sea of Marmara. How- spurious surface effects. Both the predicted coseismic displacement
ever, the overall symmetry of the observed fringes indicates that no and the GPS vectors in the far field (specifically to the north and
significant normal faulting has occurred and therefore we keep a south of Izmit, at 10–80 km distance from the fault trace) appear
vertical fault with pure right-slip. Slip across the modelled rupture systematically smaller (3–6 cm) than the corresponding horizon-
decreases over 30 km, from 4.5 m in Gölçük to 2 m in Hersek. tal displacement vectors predicted by our ‘longer-period’ model III
Then it tapers over the next 30 km (Yalova–Hersek segment), from (Fig. 10a). Similarly, the modelled coseismic slip on the fault at
2 m to zero (Fig. 5b). Thus a significant average slip of 1–2 m is depth is smaller than the slip in model III (Figs 10c and b) and the
required down to a depth of 10–15 km across the first 15 km of coseismic moment of 1.9 × 1020 N m is close to the seismological
the latter segment, immediately west of the Hersek peninsula. How- estimates. The difference in slip between the two models (Fig. 10d)
ever, no clear surface break was observed after the Izmit earthquake represents the after-slip that may have occurred in the month fol-
across the Hersek peninsula (Barka et al. 2002). Also, no fresh lowing the earthquake. There is some ‘noise’ possibly due to some
surface break has yet been detected on the sea bottom during the GPS stations close to the fault and to second-order defects of the
recent surveys devoted to mapping the submarine part of the fault, models. However, zones with positive slip (≥0.8 m) emerge above
west of Hersek (Le Pichon et al. 2001; Armijo et al. 2002; Polonia the noise. Some of these zones are located at 4–16 km depth under
et al. 2002). Thus the inferred rupture of the Yalova–Hersek segment regions of low coseismic slip and they are outlined by aftershock
may have not reached the Earth’s surface, although the moment re- activity. Examples are below the bend area of Akyazi in the central
leased would have been 1.5 × 1019 N m, equivalent to an event with part of the rupture, and below the Karadere segment at the east-
M w = 6.8. ern end of the rupture. Altogether these shallow after-slip regions
represent a small moment release (≤1 × 1019 N m). They may be
interpreted to occur in velocity strengthening regions of the fault
D I F F E R E N C E S F RO M P R E V I O U S
(Tse & Rice 1986). It is clear, however, that the most significant and
M O D E L S : S E PA R AT I N G C O S E I S M I C
well-resolved after-slip is found in the more deeply seated region
F R O M D E E P - S E AT E D P O S T - S E I S M I C
of the fault below Izmit and Gölçük. The part of the signal corre-
SLIP
sponding to this zone of large after-slip in the interferogram is a
Our preferred slip model (model III, Figs 5, 7, 9a) differs from set of paired lobes of fringes enclosing slopes with opposite sign,
previous models (Bouchon et al. 2000, 2002; Reilinger et al. 2000; which are symmetrically arranged on both sides of the fault trace
Yagi & Kikuchi 2000; Feigl et al. 2002; Wright et al. 2001; Delouis (Fig. 11). It is very improbable that such a complicated feature could
et al. 2002). The atmospheric effects in the ERS data, which we have have resulted from an atmospheric effect and we favour a tectonic
identified, explain some of the discrepancies with other models using origin. Thus the excess of slip in model III strongly suggests that
the geodetic data (SAR and GPS). However, the most significant after-slip reaching 2 m has occurred during the month following the
improvement comes from the use we make of a precise fault map main shock, within a zone of the fault located at 12–24 km depth be-
and of the slip data collected in the field, which reduce the range low the epicentral region. The corresponding moment release (0.3 ×
of possible solutions. However, our model III is consistent with the 1020 N m) is equivalent to an event with M w = 7.0 and represents
model proposed by Yagi & Kikuchi (2000), which is derived solely about 14 per cent of the total moment in model III. Therefore, the
from seismic data (near-field strong motion and teleseismic body difference in moment release between the ‘longer-period’ model III
wave data). and the seismological estimates appears to be explained by the oc-
Another important difference with other approaches concerns the currence of aseismic after-slip, deeply seated across the fault zone
moment release. The moment release in our preferred models (2.3 × below the epicentral region.
1020 N m) is somewhat higher than that deduced from the seismic
records (1.7–2.0 × 1020 N m; Tajima et al. 1999; Toksöz et al. 1999;
S L I P H E T E R O G E N E I T Y, FAU L T
Yagi & Kikuchi 2000). The difference may be due to the longer
S E G M E N T AT I O N A N D S I G N I F I C A N C E
time period (35 days) that is sampled by the SAR interferograms.
OF THE RAPID AFTER-SLIP
As stated earlier the SAR interferograms, and thus our models, may
contain significant post-seismic deformation. We explore this hy- Although broadly corroborating the interpretation of Reilinger et al.
pothesis using the published GPS data. (2000), our coseismic model, calibrated with the same GPS mea-
The GPS data include four permanent stations and observations surements, is simpler and appears more robust. It is consistent with
collected in several stations around the fault during many epochs be- the well-resolved features of the SAR interferometry and the tec-
fore and soon after the earthquake (Reilinger et al. 2000). Reilinger tonic observations. The modelling approach also allows us to discuss
et al. (2000) have used this data set to retrieve the horizontal coseis- the geometrical relation between the fault segments, the location

C 2003 RAS, GJI, 155, 93–110
Figure 10. Separating the early after-slip from the ‘purely’ coseismic slip. (a) Horizontal displacement is represented at the GPS stations. The coseismic GPS
observations (black arrows) are from Reilinger et al. (2000). The vectors in violet are predicted from the ‘longer-period’ model III represented in (b), which
includes the 29 days of post-seismic deformation captured by the ERS1 data. The vectors in red correspond to the coseismic model represented in (c), which
is derived from the same geometry and kinematics as model III, but calibrated to fit the coseismic GPS data. The blue line is the simplified fault trace. The
difference between (b) and (c) corresponds to the after-slip shown in (d). The red stars represent the main shock hypocentre. Aftershocks are in grey.
of the hypocentre and the slip distribution, either coseismic or the Both the ‘longer-period’ model III and the ‘purely’ coseismic
after-slip, and to draw simple mechanical inferences that differ from (GPS-derived) model indicate heterogeneous slip with three main
earlier inferences in some important aspects (Reilinger et al. 2000; zones of higher slip. Two of these zones correspond unequivocally
Bürgmann et al. 2002; Hearn et al. 2002). to individual fault segments that are well identified in the surface

C 2003 RAS, GJI, 155, 93–110
Figure 11. Post-seismic deformation of the Earth’s surface. The synthetic fringes represent the range change (in cm) corresponding to our after-slip model, as
retrieved from the ERS1 data and depicted in Fig. 10(d). It seems improbable that such a set of fringes including symmetric paired lobes on both sides of the fault
could be an atmospheric effect included in the data. The corresponding horizontal displacement (in red) can be compared with the total displacement observed
with GPS during the first 29 days after the mainshock (in black). The GPS data set on continuously recording stations shows rapidly decaying deformation but
the record is not complete (Bürgmann et al. 2002). The three stations in bold (KANT, TUBI and DUMT) are permanent stations already installed before the
mainshock. The other stations were installed within few days following the mainshock and they do not include the deformation that may have occurred during
the first 2–3 days after the mainshock. The large differences between the red and black arrows may be explained by very rapid, early after-slip reaching 1 m
that may have occurred in the region of Gölçük, around and below the hypocentre.
morphology, namely the Sapanca–Akyazi and the Karadere seg- the fault having substantial coseismic slip, including the hypocen-
ments. However, the third and largest zone of high slip, centred in tre. This alternating behaviour suggests that the after-slip zone is
the Gölçük segment but also comprising the Yalova–Hersek and the located at the transition between an upper region of the fault domi-
Izmit–Sapanca segments, is different: it extends through significant nated by stick–slip (seismogenic) and a lower region dominated by
fault stepovers. This larger zone contributes two-thirds of the to- plastic shear (aseismic). Our results suggest that the rapid after-slip
tal moment in the ‘longer-period’ model III and it is interesting to has penetrated deeply into the latter.
note that the hypocentre of the main shock is located at its edge. The SAR data must include all the post-seismic deformation dur-
In terms of slip distribution the Izmit rupture has smoothed out the ing the first 29 days following the earthquake and our results can
fault complexities (velocity strengthening regions) within the zone be checked for consistency with models derived from the GPS data,
with maximum moment release around Gölçük. This feature is con- which have less complete coverage in space and time. The zone of
sistent with the idea that under the Gölçük region a large slip deficit fast after-slip under Gölçük and Izmit that we deduce from the in-
and possibly a large elastic loading existed prior to the earthquake. It terferograms has been roughly depicted by Reilinger et al. (2000)
is also consistent with the occurrence of small events in this region using the post-seismic GPS data (see their fig. 3c). Yet, more recent
in the years before the main shock (Baris et al. 2002). Nucleation analyses of the GPS data suggest that the highest amount of after-
of large events at the edges of zones with high coseismic slip have slip has occurred below the Karadere Fault segment, at the eastern
been described elsewhere (Archuleta 1984). end of the rupture (Bürgmann et al. 2002; Hearn et al. 2002). The
For the three main zones of higher slip the lower cut-off in the most important discrepancy with our inferences is that none of the
coseismic slip occurs at about 15 km depth. However, the after-slip models derived from the GPS data predicts more than 0.4 m of
zone appears to extend well into the lower crust, down to 20–25 km after-slip during the 75–80 days following the main shock. Another
depth, directly under the zone of highest moment release and the difference concerns the depth to which the after-slip has penetrated.
main shock hypocentre. Thus, the most important after-slip does Bürgmann et al. (2002) and Hearn et al. (2002) suggested after-slip
not appear to be concentrated under segments with relatively little of 10–40 cm down to depths of 40 km. We find that a region with
coseismic slip, as suggested by Reilinger et al. (2000). Although slip of 1–3 m at 18 km depth is well resolved in our SAR mod-
the resolution in the depth estimate for the after-slip is poor (that els, while neither the SAR nor the GPS data can resolve slip of a
of the SAR data modelling, discussed earlier), the inference that few tens of centimetres in regions of the fault at more than 24 km
significant after-slip has occurred down to at least this depth range depth.
suggests static stress changes triggered by the earthquake over the The deformation field associated with the region of high after-
same depth. This depth range also seems to be in keeping with slip below Gölçük during the first 29 days after the main shock
the lateral extent (along strike) of the Gölçük high-slip region. Thus can be compared directly with the corresponding deformation de-
the rapid localized after-slip under Gölçük requires an elastic reduced from the published GPS records. These records show defor-
sponse of the mid-lower crust and accelerated aseismic shear across mation rapidly decaying with time after the main shock (Bürgmann
the fault zone. The Gölçük after-slip zone encompasses a region of et al. 2002). From the 13 permanent GPS stations available for the

C 2003 RAS, GJI, 155, 93–110
region, only three were in operation prior to the main shock and have Sapanca–Akyazi segment (Akyüz et al. 2002). Thus this latter seg-
thus captured without interruption all the post-seismic deformation ment also ruptured apparently under a critically loaded mode. This
(KANT, TUBI, DUMT; Fig. 11). The total horizontal displacement shows that even under sufficient tectonic load, individual segments
in these stations during this critical period of time (17 August to may or may not rupture in a concatenation of subevents involving
16 September) is consistent, within uncertainties, with the vectors their neighbouring segments. Conversely, it seems unlikely that the
predicted by the large after-slip below Gölçük (Fig. 11). The re- segment boundaries would have been enough to arrest the Izmit
maining 10 GPS stations started to be installed in the near field of rupture inside the region of inferred large slip deficit and elastic
the fault in the days following the earthquake. The earliest reliable overload, which may have existed in Gölçük prior to the earthquake.
daily solutions are available only 2 days after the main shock. For In other words, once triggered, the Izmit earthquake could not have
these stations the total post-seismic displacement recorded (between been smaller than the size of the overloaded region around Gölçük.
the date of each first solution and 16 September) is thus not com- There the slip deficit had probably grown larger than the slip that
plete, but it is worth comparing it with the corresponding vectors any of the small individual fault segments visible at the surface
predicted by our after-slip model (Fig. 11). Most of the vectors in could undergo alone, without having a high associated stress drop
the two sets have compatible directions. However, the vector magni- and producing high stress concentrations at the segment edges. The
tudes required by the large after-slip below Izmit–Gölçük are larger large coseismic slip in the overloaded region around Gölçük has
than the observed GPS vectors. This discrepancy is especially clear also immediately triggered particularly large and fast after-slip in
for stations around Izmit (HAMT, UCGT, BEST, MURT), where the the velocity-strengthening region of the fault immediately below.
after-slip requires about twice as much as the GPS vectors. For the The particular conditions around Gölçük may have also influ-
station placed near the eastern end of the rupture, however, (KOP1), enced the rupture propagation. The very short S–P time (1.78 s)
the two vectors are nearly coincident. We conclude that about half observed in a strong-motion station located beside the Sapanca–
of the large after-slip determined with the SAR data below Izmit– Akyazi segment 40 km east of the mainshock hypocentre can be
Gölçük may have occurred during the first 2 days following the main interpreted in two alternative ways: it could be the effect of either
shock. The rapidity of this large early after-slip would explain why a supershear rupture propagation, or the triggering of an asperity
it has not been incorporated in the models derived from the GPS by the P-wave arrival from the hypocentre (Bouchon et al. 2001;
data alone (Bürgmann et al. 2002; Hearn et al. 2002). If this line Sekiguchi & Iwata 2002). Both our inference of an overloaded re-
of reasoning is correct, then the maximum after-slip of about 2 m gion around the epicentral region and the observation of an exten-
at 16–18 km depth near the hypocentre would have started to occur sional jog with less coseismic slip at the Sapanca lake give support
at rates of up to 180 m yr−1 (1 m in 2 days), which is significantly to the triggered asperity hypothesis, albeit without contradicting the
faster (two orders of magnitude) than deduced earlier (Bürgmann supershear rupture propagation.
et al. 2002). Nevertheless, our results are not inconsistent with the The arguments above suggest that a heterogeneous slip and load-
main inference from the GPS modelling, indicating that a signifi- ing distribution along a large fault system such as the North Anato-
cant albeit much smaller amount of after-slip has occurred below the lian Fault may control propagation of large earthquake ruptures. For
Karadere fault segment, at the eastern end of the rupture (Bürgmann such a system, the notion of ‘characteristic earthquake’ (Schwartz &
et al. 2002; Hearn et al. 2002). Coppersmith 1984) would apply only to the critically loaded mode of
rupture along individual segments. However, it will be very difficult
to deduce from the surface slip distribution alone whether contigu-
ous segments with ‘characteristic ruptures’ have ruptured together
I M P L I C AT I O N S C O N C E R N I N G T H E
or not. In addition, the amount of coseismic slip on any segment
LONG-TERM GEOLOGICAL RECORD
will depend on variable degrees of slip deficit and load, or ‘excess
The correlation between the coseismic slip at depth and the measured load’. Overloaded segments possibly undergo more slip than scaling
slip along the surface rupture is good, indicating that slip distribu- laws would predict. These features are of concern to inferences of
tion at the surface is representative of that at depth. In retrospect rupture length and moment magnitude for past earthquakes deduced
this observation makes the surface slip distributions measured for from trenching. To describe distinct past events such as the Izmit
earlier earthquakes along the NAF more meaningful (Barka 1996). and the Düzce earthquakes would require relying upon the resolu-
However, the coseismic slip is unevenly correlated with the long- tion of many measurements of slip along the fault trace and upon
term fault segmentation seen in the morphology. The coseismic slip many well-resolved dates (provided that the events are separated by
distribution reproduces sharply the shape of the Sapanca–Akyazi a reasonably long time interval).
and the Karadere segments along the eastern part of the rupture, Part of the heterogeneity in the loading along the NAF is likely
but the boundaries between individual segments are not visible in to result from the fault segmentation, which may scale with the
the slip distribution for this earthquake around the high-slip region thickness of the seismogenic crust and may evolve as an effect of
around Gölçük. Brecciation mechanisms across fault jogs at segment wear during progressive slip and fault growth (e.g. Scholz 1987).
boundaries may explain such features (e.g. King 1983; Sibson 1986). However, large stress heterogeneities (as in Gölçük) may also have
Then it seems possible to make a distinction between two different grown up and evolved from an uneven slip distribution during pre-
modes of rupture: an overloaded segment mode in Gölçük, which is vious events. Thus the critical datum appears to be the distribution
capable of ‘erasing’ the jogs at segment boundaries, and a critically of slip deficit along the fault. For any segment along the NAF and at
loaded segment mode, which prevents the segment boundaries from any time the state of loading must integrate a complex slip history
high coseismic slip so that its long-term shape is preserved. Both including sequences of earthquakes that probably never repeat in the
have been favourable to the propagation of the Izmit rupture over its same way. The observations presented here give support to a variable
160 km length along strike (e.g. Harris et al. 2002). However, the slip model incorporating large earthquakes with variable magnitude
rupture stopped at the eastern end of the Karadere segment and the and rupture length, which would result from unsteady segment-to-
M w = 7.2 Düzce earthquake ruptured the next individual segment, segment rupture propagation (from overloaded segments to critically
3 months later, with a slip distribution comparable to that of the loaded segments and vice versa).

C 2003 RAS, GJI, 155, 93–110
24 km depth, directly under the zone of highest moment release

S U M M A RY
in Gölçük. The Gölçük after-slip zone encompasses a region of
Combining the SAR interferometry with the tectonic observations the fault having substantially slipped coseismically, including the
appears to be a powerful approach to resolving the features of the hypocentre.
slip distribution associated with the 1999 August 17 Izmit earth- Comparison of the after-slip retrieved from the SAR with the
quake. In this work the fault geometry, the fault kinematics and the available GPS records of post-seismic deformation (Bürgmann et al.
near-field deformation are resolved using well-constrained tectonic 2002) suggests that about half of the after-slip captured by the SAR
observations collected in the field. data below Izmit–Gölçük may have occurred during the first 2 days
The SAR data set provides the best overall image of the surface following the main shock. The rapidity of the early after-slip would
deformation and appears to be the most appropriate set for deducing explain why it has not been incorporated in the models derived
an overall image of the static rupture at seismogenic depth. However, from the GPS data alone (Bürgmann et al. 2002; Hearn et al. 2002).
the possible occurrence of atmospheric effects may hinder a good Accordingly, the maximum after-slip of 2 m at 16–18 km depth near
solution. A critical analysis of the SAR data using a pairwise logic the hypocentre would have started immediately after the mainshock
approach and independent meteorological data (from NOAA satel- at very fast rates (up to 1 m in 2 days).
lite images) allow us to identify atmospheric effects and to remove The correlation between the coseismic slip on the fault at depth
them from subsequent modelling. and slip measured along the surface break is good, indicating that slip
To calculate the slip distribution we use dislocations in elastic distribution at the surface is representative of that at depth. However,
half-space and an overall forward modelling strategy, which com- slip is unevenly correlated with the long-term fault segmentation:
bines a trial-and-error approach with a conventional inversion tech- the Izmit earthquake slip distribution reproduces well the shape of
nique. Improving the data fits by steps seems more appropriate than some segments with a ‘characteristic rupture’ (Sapanca–Akyazi and
uncontrolled inversion. Karadere segments), but it has smoothed out the fault complexities
Slip is underdetermined, but the use of well-constrained measure- at the boundaries between individual segments around the high-slip
ments of slip at the Earth’s surface reduces the range of possible so- region of Izmit–Gölçük. This suggests that under the Gölçük region
lutions considerably. The uncertainty in our slip estimates increases a large slip deficit and possibly a large elastic loading existed prior
with depth. A good fit to the SAR data (rms of less than 2 cm) to the earthquake. This feature is consistent with the occurrence of
corresponds to a slip resolution of less than 0.5 m in the regions of both the rapid early after-slip under the overloaded region and the
the fault near the surface (≤12 km depth) and less than 1 m in the small events in this region in the years preceding the main shock.
regions between 12 and 24 km depth. However, the models cannot The heterogeneous coseismic slip and the state of loading on the
resolve a slip of less than 1 m in regions of the fault at depth greater different segments of the NAF may result from a heterogeneous
than 24 km. distribution of slip deficit accumulated during previous large earth-
The best fits to the SAR data define an inhomogeneous slip distri- quakes. In turn, the slip history and associated stress heterogeneities
bution with three main zones of high slip along the fault and a total may be important factors controlling the occurrence of moderate
moment release of 2.3 × 1020 (M w = 7.6). The inhomogeneous slip and large earthquakes with variable magnitude and rupture length,
distribution correlates well with the overall geometry of the fault resulting from unsteady segment-to-segment rupture propagation
segmentation, which is well defined from the morphology. along the North Anatolian Fault.
The Izmit earthquake rupture appears to have extended well into
the eastern Sea of Marmara. The SAR data indicate that the Yalova–
Hersek segment ruptured for 30 km west of the Hersek peninsula, AC K N OW L E D G M E N T S
with slip tapering westwards from 2 m to zero and a moment release
of 1.5 × 1019 N m, equivalent to an event M w = 6.8. The western This work is part of Ziyadin Çakir’s PhD thesis with Aykut Barka
end of the rupture is located 40 km SSE from downtown Istanbul. and Rolando Armijo as co-advisors, under an agreement between
The SAR data show two sets of deflected fringes in the valleys our two institutions (ITU and IPGP). It has been performed within
of Mudurnu and Gevye, which have been previously interpreted as the framework of the collaborative programme on the seismic risk
resulting from slip triggered on secondary faults. We show that these in the Istanbul and Sea of Marmara region coordinated by the Turk-
features mostly result from atmospheric effects correlated with the ish TUBITAK and the French INSU-CNRS, with support from the
topography. A tectonic explanation is possible, but its significance French Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MAE). For the access to the ERS
is difficult to assess. imagery, critical to this study, we benefited from constant help and
The ERS1 SAR interferogram, and thus our models, cover a ‘long advice from the European Space Agency (ESA) under contract AO3-
period’ as they include the 29 days following the main shock and 354. We thank Geoffrey King, Peter Molnar and especially Renata
they may contain significant post-seismic deformation. Using our Dmowska for their sympathetic criticism, which helped to improve
‘longer-period model’ and the published GPS data describing the the manuscript. Tim Wright and Roland Bürgmann gave helpful re-
coseismic horizontal deformation (Reilinger et al. 2000) we have views. This is Institut de Physique du Globe de Paris (IPGP) paper
derived a slip model that better represents the coseismic slip alone. no 1914.
This model suggests that the moment release corresponding to the
main shock is 1.9 × 1020 N m (M w = 7.5), which is close to the
seismological estimates. REFERENCES
The foregoing approach allows us to retrieve the early post-
Akyüz, H.S., Hartleb, R., Barka, A., Altunel, E., Sunal, G., Meyer, B. &
seismic deformation that has been captured by the SAR data. The Armijo, R., 2002. Surface rupture and slip distribution of the 12 November
difference in moment release between our ‘longer-period’ model 1999 Düzce earthquake (M 7.1), north Anatolian Fault, Bolu, Turkey, Bull.
and the seismological estimates appears to be explained by the oc- seism. Soc. Am., 92, 61–66.
currence of fast aseismic after-slip, reaching 2 m during the month Archuleta, R.J., 1984. A faulting model for the 1979 Imperial Valley earth-
following the main shock, within a zone of the fault located at 12– quake, J. geophys. Res., 89, 4559–4585.

C 2003 RAS, GJI, 155, 93–110
Armijo, R., Meyer, B., Hubert, A. & Barka, A., 1999. Westward propaga- Goldstein, R.M. & Werner, C.L., 1998. Radar interferogram filtering for
tion of the North Anatolian Fault into the northern Aegean: timing and geophysical applications, Geophys. Res. Lett., 25, 4035–4038.
kinematics, Geology, 27, 267–270. Harris, R.A., Dolan, J.F., Hartleb, R. & Day, S.M., 2002. The 1999
Armijo, R., Meyer, B., Barka, A., de Chabalier, J.B. & Hubert, A., 2000. The Izmit, Turkey, earthquake: a 3-D dynamic stress transfer model of in-
fault breaks of the 1999 earthquakes in Turkey and the tectonic evolution traearthquake triggering, Bull. seism. Soc. Am., 92, 245–255.
of the Sea of Marmara: a summary, 55–62, in The 1999 Izmit and Düzce Hartleb, R.D. et al., 2002. Surface rupture and slip distribution along the
Earthquakes: Preliminary Results, eds Barka, A., Kozaci, O., Akyüz S. Karadere segment of the 17 August 1999 Izmit and the western section
& Altunel E., Istanbul Technical University, Istanbul. of the 12 November 1999 Düzce, Turkey, earthquakes, Bull. seism. Soc.
Armijo, R., Meyer, B., Navarro, S., King, G. & Barka, A., 2002. Asymmetric Am., 92, 67–78.
slip partitioning in the Sea of Marmara pull-apart: a clue to propagation Hearn, E.H., Bürgmann, R. & Reilinger, R.E., 2002. Dynamics of Izmit
processes of the North Anatolian Fault?, TerraNova, 14, 80–86. earthquake postseismic deformation and loading of the Düzce earthquake
Atakan, K., Ojeda, A., Meghraoui, M., Barka, A., Erdik, M. & Bodare, hypocenter, Bull. seism. Soc. Am., 92, 172–193.
A., 2002. Seismic hazard in Istanbul following the 17 August and Hubert-Ferrari, A., Barka, A., Jacques, E., Nalbant, S.S., Meyer, B., Armijo,
12 November 1999 Düzce earthquakes, Bull. seism. Soc. Am., 92, 466– R., Tapponnier, P. & King, G.C.P., 2000. Seismic hazard in the Marmara
482. Sea following the 17 August 1999 Izmit earthquake, Nature, 404, 269–
Baris, S., Ito, A., Ücer, S.B., Honkura, Y., Kafadar, N., Pektas, R., Komut, 273.
T. & Iskara, A.M., 2002. Microearthquake activity before the Izmit earth- Ito, A. et al., 2002. Aftershock activity of the 1999 Izmit, Turkey, earthquake,
quake in the eastern Marmara region, Turkey (1 January 1993–17 August revealed from microearthquake observations, Bull. seism. Soc. Am., 92,
1999), Bull. seism. Soc. Am., 92, 394–405. 418–427.
Barka, A., 1996. Slip distribution along the North Anatolian Fault associated Karabulut, H., Bouin, M.P., Bouchon, M., Dietrich, M., Cornou, C. & Aktar,
with the large earthquakes of the period 1939–1967, Bull. seism. Soc. Am., M., 2002. The seismicity in the eastern Marmara Sea after the 17 August
86, 1238–1254. 1999 Izmit earthquake, Bull. seism. Soc. Am., 92, 387–393.
Barka, A., 1999. The 17 August 1999 Izmit earthquake, Science, 285, 1858– King, G.C.P., 1983. The accommodation of strain in the upper lithosphere of
1859. the Earth by self-similar fault systems; the geometrical origin of b-value,
Barka, A. & Kadinsky-Cade, K., 1988. Strike-slip fault geometry in Turkey Pure appl. Geophys., 121, 761–815.
and its influence on earthquake activity, Tectonics, 7, 663–684. Kuscu, I., Okamura, M., Matsuoka, H. & Awata, Y., 2002. Active faults in the
Barka, A. et al., 2002. The surface rupture and slip distribution of the 17 Gulf of Izmit on the north Anatolian Fault, NW Turkey: a high-resolution
August 1999 Izmit earthquake M 7.4, North Anatolian fault, Bull. seism. shallow seismic study, Mar. Geol., 190, 421–443.
Soc. Am., 92, 43–60. Langridge, R.M., Stenner, H.D, Fumal, T.E., Christoffereson, S.A.,
Beauducel, F., Briole, P. & Froger, J.L., 2000. Volcano wide fringes in ERS Rockwell, T.K., Hartleb, R.D., Bachhuber, J. & Barka, A.A., 2002. Geom-
synthetic aperture radar interferograms of Etna: deformation or tropo- etry, slip distribution, and kinematics of surface rupture on the Sakarya
spheric effect, J. geophys. Res., 105, 16 391–16 402. fault segment during the 17 August 1999 Izmit, Turkey, earthquake, Bull.
Bouchon, M., Toksöz, N., Karabulut, H., Bouin, M.-P., Dietrich, M., Aktar, seism. Soc. Am., 92, 107–125.
M. & Edie, M., 2000. Seismic imaging of the Izmit rupture inferred from Le Pichon, X. et al., 2001. The active main Marmara fault, Earth planet.
the near-fault recordings, Geophys. Res. Lett., 27, 3013–3016. Sci. Lett., 192, 595–616.
Bouchon, M., Bouin, M.-P., Karabulut, H., Toksöz, M.N., Dietrich, M. & Massonnet, D. & Feigl, K.L., 1998. Radar interferometry and its applications
Rosakis, A.J., 2001. How fast is rupture during an earthquake? New in- to changes in the Earth’s surface, Rev. Geophys., 36, 441–500.
sights from the 1999 Turkey earthquakes, Geophys. Res. Lett., 28, 2723– Massonnet, D., Rossi, M., Carmona, C., Adragna, F., Peltzer, G., Feigl, K.
2726. & Rabaute, T., 1993. The displacement field of the Landers earthquake
Bouchon, M., Töksoz, M.N., Karabulut, H., Bouin, M.P., Dietrich, M., Aktar, mapped by radar interferometry, Nature, 364, 138–142.
M. & Edie, M., 2002. Space and time evolution of rupture and faulting Michel, R. & Avouac, J.P., 2002. Deformation due to the 17 August 1999
during the 1999 the Izmit (Turkey) earthquake, Bull. seism. Soc. Am., 92, Izmit, Turkey, earthquake measured from SPOT images, J. geophys. Res.,
256–266. 107, 10.1029/2000JB000390.
Bürgmann, R., Ergintav, S., Segall, P., Hearn, E.H., McClusky, S., Reilinger, Michel, R., Avouac, J.P. & Taboury J., 1999. Measuring ground displace-
R.E., Woith, H. & Zschau, J., 2002. Time-dependent distributed afterslip ments from SAR amplitude images: application to the Landers earthquake,
on and deep below the Izmit earthquake rupture, Bull. seism. Soc. Am., Geophys. Res. Lett., 26, 875–878.
92, 126–137. Nalbant, S.S., Hubert A. & King G.C.P., 1998. Stress coupling between
Delacourt, C., Briole, P. & Achache, J., 1998. Tropospheric corrections of earthquakes in northwest Turkey and the North Aegean sea, J. geopys.
SAR interferograms with strong topography: application to Etna, Geo- Res., 103, 14 469–24 486.
phys. Res. Lett., 25, 2849–2852. Okada, Y., 1985. Surface deformation due to shear and tensile faults in a
Delouis, B., Giardini, D., Lundgren, P. & Salichon J., 2002. Joint inversion half-space, Bull. seism. Soc. Am., 75, 1135–1154.
of InSAR, telesesimic and strong motion data for the spatial and temporal Orgulu, G. & Aktar, M., 2001. Regional moment tensor inversion for strong
distribution of earthquake slip: application to 1999 Izmit main shock, Bull. aftershocks of the August 17, Izmit earthquake (M w = 7.4), Geophys.
seism. Soc. Am., 92, 278–299. Res. Lett., 28, 371–374.
Du, Y., Aydin, A. & Segall, P., 1992. Comparison of various inversion Özalaybey, S., Ergin, M., Aktar, M., Tapırdamaz, C., Biçmen, F. & Yörük,
techniques as applied to determination of a geophysical deformation A., 2002. The 1999 Izmit earthquake sequence in Turkey: seismological
model for the Borah Peak earthquake, Bull. seism. Soc. Am., 82, 1840– and tectonic aspects, Bull. seism. Soc. Am., 92, 376–386.
1866. Parke, J. et al., 1999. Active faults in the Sea of Marmara, western
Ergintav, S., Bürgmann, R., McClusky, Çakmak, R., Reilinger, R.E., Turkey, imaged by seismic reflection profiles, TerraNova, 11, 223–
Lenk, O., Barka, A. & Özener, H., 2002. Postseismic deformation near 227.
the Izmit earthquake (17 August 1999, M 7.5) rupture zone, Bull, seism. Parsons, T., Shinji, T., Stein, R.S., Barka, A. & Dieterich, J.A., 2000. Height-
Soc. Am., 92, 194–207. ened odds of large earthquakes near Istanbul: an interaction-based prob-
Feigl, K.L. et al., 2002. Estimating slip distribution for the Izmit mainshock ability calculation, Science, 228, 661–665.
from coseismic GPS, ERS-1, RADARSAT, and SPOT measurements, Polonia, A. et al., 2002. Exploring submarine earthquake geology in the
Bull. seism. Soc. Am., 92, 138–160. Marmara Sea, EOS, Trans. Am. geophys. Un., 83, 235–236.
Gabriel, A.K., Goldstein, R.M. & Zebker, H.A., 1989. Mapping small eleva- Peltzer, G., Crampé, F. & King, G., 1999. Evidence of non linear elasticity
tion changes over large areas: differential radar interferometry, J. geophys. of the crust from the M w 7.6 Manyi (Tibet) earthquake, Science, 286,
Res., 94, 9183–9191. 272–276.

C 2003 RAS, GJI, 155, 93–110
Reilinger, R.E. et al., 2000. Coseismic and postseismic fault slip for the 17 North Anatolian fault since 1939 by earthquake stress triggering, Geophys.
August 1999 M = 7.5, Izmit, Turkey earthquake, Science, 289, 1519– J. Int., 128, 594–604.
1524. Tajima, F., Dreger, D., Breger, L., Uhrhammer, R. & Romanowicz, B., 1999.
Rockwell, T.K., Lindval, S., Dawson, T., Langridge, R., Lettis, W. & Klinger, Source rupture of the Aug. 17, 1999 Turkey earthquake and near-source
Y., 2002. Lateral offsets on surveyed cultural features resulting from the structural effects, EOS, Trans. Am. geophys. Un., supp., 80, 669.
1999 Izmit and Düzce earthquakes, Turkey, Bull. seism. Soc. Am., 92, Tibi, R. et al., 2001. Rupture precesses of the 1999 August 17 Izmit and
79–94. November 12 Düzce (Turkey) earthquakes, Geopys. J. Int., 144, F1–F7.
Scharroo, R. & Visser, P.N.A.M., 1998. Precise orbit determination and Toksöz, M.N., Reilinger, R.E., Doll, C.G., Barka, A.A. & Yalcin, N., 1999.
gravity field improvement for the ERS satellites, J. geophys. Res., 103, Izmit (Turkey) earthquake of the 17 August 1999: first report, Seism. Res.
8113–8127. Lett., 70, 669–679.
Scholz, C.H., 1987. Wear and gouge formation in brittle faulting, Geology, Tse, S. & Rice, J., 1986. Crustal earthquake instability in relation to the depth
15, 493–495. variation of frictional slip properties, J. geophys. Res., 91, 9452–9472.
Schwartz, D.P. & Coppersmith, K.J., 1984. Fault behavior and characteris- Ward, S.T. & Barrientos, S.E., 1986. An inversion for slip distribution and
tic earthquakes: examples from the Wasatch and San Andreas Faults, J. fault shape from geodetic observations of the 1983, Borah Peak, Idaho,
geophys. Res., 89, 5681–5698. earthquake, J. geophys. Res., 91, 4909–4919.
Sekiguchi, H. & Iwata, T., 2002. Rupture process of the 1999 Kocaeli, Turkey, Wright, T., Fielding, E. & Parsons, B., 2001. Triggered slip: observations of
earthquake estimated from strong-motion waveforms, Bull. seism. Soc. the 17 August 1999 Izmit (Turkey) earthquake using radar interferometry,
Am., 92, 300–311. Geophys. Res. Lett., 28, 1079–1082.
Sibson, R.H., 1986. Brecciation processes in fault zones: Inferences from Yagi, Y. & Kikuchi, M., 2000. Source rupture process of the Kocaeli, Turkey
earthquake rupturing, Pure appl. Geophys., 124, 159–176. earthquake of August 17, 1999 obtained by joint inversion of near-field
Stein, R.S., Barka, A. & Dieterich, J.H., 1997. Progressive failure on the data and teleseismic data, Geophys. Res. Lett., 27, 1969–1972.

C 2003 RAS, GJI, 155, 93–110

Coseismic and Early Post-Seismic Slip Associated With The 1999 Izmit Earthquake (Turkey), From SAR Interferometry and Tectonic Field Observations

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Coseismic and Early Post-Seismic Slip Associated With The 1999 Izmit Earthquake (Turkey), From SAR Interferometry and Tectonic Field Observations

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Coseismic and Early Post-Seismic Slip Associated With The 1999 Izmit Earthquake (Turkey), From SAR Interferometry and Tectonic Field Observations

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Geophys. J. Int.

(2003) 155, 93–110

Ziyadin Çakir,1, ∗ Jean-Bernard de Chabalier,2 Rolando Armijo,2 Bertrand Meyer,2

can propagate. In turn, the rupture length depends on many factors,

24 km depth, directly under the zone of highest moment release

You might also like