Lithological control on multiple surface ruptures during the 2016–2017 Amatrice-Norcia seismic sequence

doi:10.1016/j.jog.2019.101676

Journal of Geodynamics

Volume 134, February 2020, 101676

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jog.2019.101676 Get rights and content

Highlights

•
The Amatrice-Norcia-Campotosto sequence involved progressively three rock volumes.
•
The progressive involvement of rock volumes limited the magnitude of the mainshocks.
•
Faulting was controlled by rigid and weak lithologies in different fault sectors.
•
Faulting was accommudated by development of km-scale normal fault-propagation folds.

Abstract

On August 24^th 2016, a M_w 6.0 earthquake started the Amatrice - Norcia (Central Italy) seismic sequence, generated by the extensional tectonics along the Apennines, that had its apex with the M_w 6.5 October 30^th mainshock. As a unique documented case reported in Italy, complex surface faulting occurred during both earthquakes along the Mt. Vettore fault. Multiple surface faulting was accompanied at depth by the development of a km-scale normal fault-propagation fold. This fold was characterized by breakthrough and by surface rupture within thick carbonatic layers only in the central and north-western area (Mt. Vettore). On the contrary, the fault remained blind where flexural slip was active in sandy-silty turbiditic deposits in the south-eastern area (Mt. Gorzano). We explain the different faulting behaviour with the occurrence of more rigid and competent lithologies in areas characterized by breakthrough and with the occurrence of weak lithologies in areas characterized by blind faulting. Overall, the entire seismic sequence appears as a gradual gravitational adjustment of the hangingwall block, slipping along a NW-trending and 80 km long fault system. In particular, the following crustal blocks, partially overlapping and with different length (30, 40 and 22 km, respectively), progressively collapsed during the sequence: the Amatrice sector during the August 24^th 2016, M_w 6.0 event, the Norcia-Visso sector during the October 26^th 2016, Mw 5.9 and the 2016 October 30^th M_w 6.5 event, and the Campotosto Lake sector during the four January 18^th 2017, M > 5 events. The progressive involvement of these three rock volumes, during the seismic sequence is here explained by the occurrence of a low angle detachment that limited the maximum potential depth of the mainshocks and consequently the dimensions of involved rock volumes, therefore limiting the magnitudes of the mainshocks.

Graphical abstract

Introduction

The spatio-temporal evolution of seismic sequence and surface ruptures are influenced by the complexity of the rock volume affected by earthquakes, such as lithological heterogeneities and tectonic settings (e.g., Yoshida et al., 1996; Stein et al., 1997; Lee et al., 2005; Valoroso et al., 2013; Valerio et al., 2017). Among these factors, the well-establish magnitude-displacement relationships show that an increase in earthquake magnitude is accompanied by an increase of surface displacement (Wells and Coppersmith, 1994; Ambraseys and Jackson, 1998). However, during the 2016–2017 Amatrice-Norcia seismic sequence in central Italy complex surface ruptures occurred along the fault system that generated the August 24^th M_w 6.0 and the October 30^th mainshocks (e.g., Pucci et al., 2017), implying complex interaction between magnitude and subsurface geology within the area affected by the seismic sequence. Along the fault scarp (nastrino) of the Mt. Vettore the main fault slipped 25 cm and even more than 100 cm during the two events. The October 30^th Mw 6.5 earthquake was recorded by local GPS stations positioned at a distance of few meters both in the footwall and in the hangingwall, documenting that slip evolved in 2–3 seconds and that the peak ground acceleration occurred after this displacement. This proves that the displacement on the fault surface was not due to a surficial landslide induced by shaking, but to the upward propagation and emergence of the buried fault plane (Wilkinson et al., 2017). Conversely, minor or absent surface displacement occurred along the Mt. Gorzano fault (Fig. 1).

The wealth of good quality seismological (e.g., ; Chiaraluce et al., 2017a,b), geodetic (e.g., Cheloni et al., 2016; Cheloni et al., 2017; Huang et al., 2017; Valerio et al., 2018; Bignami et al., 2019), and geological data (e.g., Pucci et al., 2017) acquired for the 2016–2017 Amatrice-Norcia sequence provide an excellent background to better understand the dynamics of surface fault rapture in this case history in Italy and possibly in other extensional tectonic settings. We interpret the complex pattern of surface rupture along fault strike as the interaction of geological and seismological variables.

The August 24^th 2016 M_w 6.0 and the on October 30^th 2016 M_w 6.5 earthquakes were accompanied by more than 74,000 aftershocks during a one-year long seismic sequence, including a M_w 5.9 event on October 26^th 2016 and four M_w > 5 events on January 18^th, 2017 (Fig. 1, Fig. 2; ; Chiaraluce et al., 2017a; data from ISIDe working group, 2016; http://iside.rm.ingv.it/iside/standard/index.jsp). The seismic sequence activated the Mt. Vettore fault system (central and north-western areas) and the Mt. Gorzano fault (south-eastern area), involving a rock volume characterized, at the surface, by a length of about 80 km, a width of about 15 km, and extending down to a depth of about 8 km. However, this seismogenic volume was activated progressively. This segmentation has been explained by the strong interaction between the inherited compressional thrusts and the younger and active normal faults (Chiaraluce et al., 2017a,b). Available geophysical, geodetic and geological data allow us to propose an alternative/complementary explanation for the segmentation of the seismic sequence in the framework of the graviquake model (Doglioni et al., 2015).

In summary, the present work investigates the origin of the multistage evolution of the seismic sequence, with the progressive involvement of different rock volumes affected by thousands of small (1 < M_w<5) magnitude events. In addition, we analyse the geometry of fault rupture and propose a model involving the development of a normal fault propagation fold during the August 24^th 2016, M_w 6.0 earthquake, later cross-cut by the upward fault propagation and slip during the October 30^th M_w 6.5 earthquake.

Section snippets

Geological and geophysical backgrounds

In the area affected by the 2016–2017 seismic sequence, thrusting and folding juxtaposed, since Tortonian time, up to ∼4.5 km thick pre-orogenic passive continental margin (Late Triassic dolostones/anhydrites and Jurassic-Oligocene limestones with marly interbeds) and foreland basin (Aquitanian-Tortonian marls and claystones with limestones interbeds) deposits above up to ∼3.5 km thick syn-orogenic deposits (i.e., foredeep deposits; Messinian claystones, marls, and sandstones of the Laga Fm.)

Methods

In this work, the following methods were used:

(1)
We processed SAR dataset (see Table 1) by means of classical differential SAR interferometry (Massonnet et al., 1993; Massonnet and Feigl, 1998). The phase topography component was removed thanks the SRTM Digital Elevation Model at 1 arcsec resolution (Farr et al., 2007). We reduced phase noise by applying adaptive filter (Goldstein and Werner, 1998), and we used the Minimum Cost Flow algorithm to unwrap the phase and obtain the deformation maps (

Seismological and InSAR data analysis

Fig. 5 shows surface deformation from Synthetic Aperture Radar Interferometry (InSAR) data and earthquake distribution for the Amatrice sequence, started with the 2016 August 24^th M_w 6.0 event (left panel of Fig. 5), the Norcia-Visso seismic sequence associated with the 2016 October 26^th Mw 5.9 and the 2016 October 30^th M_w 6.5 events (central panel of Fig. 5), and the Campotosto Lake sequence, characterized by the four 2017 January 18^th M > 5 events (right panel of Fig. 5).

From the combined

Discussion

Using geological, seismological, and geodetic data, we interpret the Amatrice-Norcia-Campotosto seismic sequence in the framework of the graviquakes model for normal fault-related earthquakes (Fig. 7), proposed for the 2009 L’Aquila seismic sequence (Doglioni et al., 2011). In this model, the main fault extends from the brittle upper crust down to the ductile lower crust, whereas an antithetic fault is confined within the brittle upper crust. During the interseismic phase, a dilated wedge

Conclusions

Analysing the Amatrice-Norcia-Campotosto seismic sequence we conclude that:

1)
the slip distribution at the surface can be interpreted in terms of the occurrence of a normal fault propagation fold below the Vettore Mt. area during the September 24^th M_w 6.0 event and that the fold was cut by the propagating extensional fault during the October 30^th Mw 6.5 event; on the contrary, faulting remained blind in the Campotosto area. This difference is likely explained by the occurrence of competent

Declaration of Competing Interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Acknowledgments

Federica Riguzzi, Emanuela Valerio, Pietro Tizzani and Patrizio Petricca are thanked for common work and for stimulating discussions. We also thank Lauro Chiaraluce for providing seismicity data. An anonymous reviewer and the Editor of Journal of Geodynamics are thanked for constructive criticism. Financial support from PRIN2015-Project 2015EC9PJ5_001, Progetti di Ateneo Sapienza 2016 (Carlo Doglioni and Luca Aldega), Progetto di Ateneo Sapienza 2017 (Eugenio Carminati) and CNR- Project:

References (52)

L. Chiaraluce et al.
The role of rheology, crustal structures and lithology in the seismicity distribution of the northern Apennines
Tectonophysics
(2017)
C. Collettini et al.
The development and behavior of low-angle normal faults during Cenozoic asymmetric extension in the Northern Apennines, Italy
J. Struct. Geol.
(2006)
C. Doglioni et al.
Role of the brittle–ductile transition on fault activation
Phys. Earth Planet. Inter.
(2011)
P. Galli et al.
Twenty years of paleoseismology in Italy
Earth. Rev.
(2008)
P. Petricca et al.
Graviquakes in Italy
Tectonophysics
(2015)
L. Smeraglia et al.
Field-to nano-scale evidence for weakening mechanisms along the fault of the 2016 Amatrice and Norcia earthquakes, Italy
Tectonophysics
(2017)
M. Albano et al.
Minor shallow gravitational component of the Mt. Vettore surface ruptures related to Mw 6, 2016 Amatrice earthquake
Ann. Geophys.
(2016)
N.N. Ambraseys et al.
Faulting associated with historical and recent earthquakes in the Eastern Mediterranean region
Geophys. J. Int.
(1998)
S. Bigi et al.
Stratigraphy, structural setting and burial history of the Messinian Laga basin in the context of Apennine foreland basin system
J. Mediterranean Earth Sci.
(2009)
C. Bignami et al.
Source identification for situational awareness of the August 24th 2016 Central Italy event
Ann. Geophys. Discuss.
(2016)

C. Bignami et al.

Volume unbalance on the 2016 Amatrice-Norcia (Central Italy) seismic sequence and insights on normal fault earthquake mechanism

Sci. Rep.

(2019)

Boncio et al.

Seismogenesis in Central Apennines, Italy: An integrated analysis of minor earthquake sequences and structural data in the Amatrice-Campotosto area

Ann. Geophys. Discuss.

(2004)

F. Calamita et al.

Le faglie normali quaternarie nella dorsale appenninica umbro-marchigiana: proposta di un modello di tettonica di inversione

Studi Geol. Camerti

(1994)

G.P. Cavinato et al.

Extensional basins in tectonically bimodal central Ap- ennines fold-thrust belt, Italy: response to corner flow above a subducting slab in retrograde motion

Geology

(1999)

D. Cheloni

GPS observations of coseismic deformation following the 2016, August 24, Mw 6 Amatrice earthquake (central Italy): data, analysis and preliminary fault model

Ann. Geophys.

(2016)

D. Cheloni et al.

Geodetic model of the 2016 Central Italy earthquake sequence inferred from InSAR and GPS data

Geophys. Res. Lett.

(2017)

L. Chiaraluce et al.

Imaging the complexity of an active normal fault system: The 1997 Colfiorito (central Italy) case study

J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth

(2003)

L. Chiaraluce et al.

The anatomy of the 2009 L’Aquila norma fault system (central Italy) imaged by high resolution foreshock and aftershock locations

J. Geophys. Res.

(2011)

L. Chiaraluce et al.

The 2016 Central Italy seismic sequence: A first look at the mainshocks, aftershocks and source models

Seismol. Res. Lett.

(2017)

D. Cosentino et al.

Geology of the central Apennines: a regional review

Geol. Italy: J. Virtual Explorer Electron. Ed.

(2010)

M. Costantini

A novel phase unwrapping method based on network programming

Ieee Trans. Geosci. Remote. Sens.

(1998)

G. Dalla Via et al.

Resolving vertical and east-west horizontal motion from differential interferometric synthetic aperture radar: the L’Aquila earthquake

J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth

(2012)

C. Doglioni et al.

Normal fault earthquakes or graviquakes

Sci. Rep.

(2015)

P. Elter et al.

Tensional and compressional areas in the recent (Tortonian to present) evolution of the northern Apennines

Boll. Geofis. Teor. Appl.

(1975)

EMERGEO Working Group

Coseismic effects of the 2016 Amatrice seismic sequence: First geological results

Ann. Geophys. Discuss.

(2016)

E. Falcucci et al.

The Campotosto seismic gap in between the 2009 and 2016-2017 seismic sequences of central Italy and the role of inherited lithospheric faults in regional seismotectonic settings

Tectonics

(2018)

Cited by (11)

Estimation of the maximum earthquakes magnitude based on potential brittle volume and strain rate: The Italy test case
2022, Tectonophysics
Citation Excerpt :
Normal fault rupture tends to propagate upward cutting the brittle crust (Carminati et al., 2004). However, normal faults may flatten shallower than the brittle-ductile transition depth into low-angle faults cutting throughout low friction formations as it occurred in the 2016–2017 Mw6.5 Amatrice-Norcia central Italy seismic sequence (Carminati et al., 2020). Also thrust faults may not necessarily cut down to the brittle-ductile transition (Hyndman et al., 1997).
One major critical issue in seismic hazard analysis deals with the computation of the maximum earthquake magnitude expected for a given region. Its estimation is usually based on the analysis of past seismicity that is incomplete by definition, or derived from the dimension of faults through empirical relationships with the intrinsic uncertainty in source characterization. Here, we propose a workflow aimed at providing a time-independent estimate for the maximum possible magnitude based on geological and geophysical evidence. Our estimate is also source unrelated as it is constrained by the seismic brittle volume of the crust that scales with the effective seismic energy. The seismic brittle volume is calculated considering fault kinematics and rock rheology (i.e., the brittle-ductile transition depth) over a grid that covers the entire study area. The maximum earthquake magnitude is calculated at each point of the grid based on a volume/magnitude empirical relationship. We apply this model to Italy for which we propose a map of the maximum possible magnitudes. Maximum predicted magnitudes are 7.3 ± 0.25 for thrust faulting, 7.6 ± 0.77 for normal faulting and 7.6 ± 0.37 for strike-slip faulting (± deviation from the mean value calculated at each node). These magnitudes are locally higher than the historical record. This could be due to an overestimation of the involved volumes; smaller volumes and lower magnitudes may occur where faults are detached at decollements shallower than the brittle ductile transition or where they behave aseismically. Alternatively, strong or major earthquakes could be possible, but they have longer recurrence time and they have never been recorded yet in Italy. Regardless these values are fully reliable or not, the recurrence of earthquakes with the predicted magnitude is related to current strain rates. We conclude that a large part of the Italian territory is prone to trigger Mw > 5 earthquakes.
U-Pb age of the 2016 Amatrice earthquake causative fault (Mt. Gorzano, Italy) and paleo-fluid circulation during seismic cycles inferred from inter- and co-seismic calcite
2021, Tectonophysics
Citation Excerpt :
During the last twenty years, earthquakes with low magnitude (Mw ≤4.0) and microseismicity widely occurred within the hanging wall of the MGF (Boncio et al., 2004a; Bigi et al., 2013). The most recent seismic sequence related to the activity of the MGF (and the adjacent MVFS) is represented by the 2016–2017 Amatrice-Norcia seismic sequence (Lavecchia et al., 2016; Scognamiglio et al., 2016; Chiaraluce et al., 2017; Bignami et al., 2019; Carminati et al., 2020; Figs. 2b, c). Large increases in springs discharge, changes of water-table position and streamflow were recorded for several month following the mainshocks of such a seismic sequence (Petitta et al., 2018).
The Mt. Gorzano Fault (MGF) is a major seismically active extensional fault of the central Apennines, responsible for the destructive Mw 6.0 Amatrice earthquake in 2016. The MGF developed during post-orogenic extensional tectonics, generating a continental basin in the hanging wall. The age of the onset of the MGF and the relationship among faulting, fluid circulation, and the seismic cycles are unknown. We investigate these issues by studying the footwall damage zone of the MGF (exhumed from ~2-3 km depth), where extensional structures and related mineralizations cut and partially overprint the pre-existing compressional orogenic fabric. Structural and geochemical analyses (REE, O, C and clumped isotopes) combined with U-Pb dating of calcite mineralizations show that extensional deformation along the MGF began at least ~2.5 Myr ago. Its activity has continued to the present-day with a mean slip rate of ~0.9 mm/yr, consistent with other seismically active extensional faults of the central Apennines. During Apennine contractional tectonics, orogenic structures and tectonic overburden hindered the ascent of deep fluids, which, therefore, may have been progressively overpressured. We postulate that such overpressure occasionally or cyclically triggered impulsive deformation (earthquakes). During the subsequent extensional phase (younger ~2.5 Ma), pre- or co-seismic crustal dilation opened pathways for the ascent of deep mineralizing fluids, which impregnated the fault damage zone and may have triggered earthquakes. The crustal reservoir of carbonate-rich fluids nowadays is the source of water for the Acquasanta thermal springs close to the Mt. Gorzano seismic area.
The influence of subsurface geology on the distribution of earthquakes during the 2016-–2017 Central Italy seismic sequence
2021, Tectonophysics
Citation Excerpt :
Along this section, we also projected the seismicity that occurred in both the hanging-wall and foot-wall, for a maximum distance of 2 km from the modelled surface (Fig. 10c). The inclined geological profile of Fig. 10c offers an immediate, comprehensive view of the relationships between the seismicity distribution and the pre-existing litho-mechanical stratigraphy of the crust (Carminati et al., 2020). The stronger lithological units, such as the Carbonates and Evaporites host the larger part of the seismicity, which is much less abundant in the weaker levels, represented by the Turbidites and by the phyllitic, uppermost part of the Basement.
In 2016–2017, a destructive sequence of earthquakes affected a wide portion of Central Italy, activating a complex, 80-km long system of SW-dipping normal faults and causing impressive surface faulting and widespread damage. Former studies providing reconstructions of the fault systems activated during this sequence, are mostly based on high-resolution seismological and geodetic data. In this paper, we integrate surface and subsurface geological data with the ones obtained by an irregular network of seismic reflection profiles, aimed at providing a comprehensive reconstruction of the subsurface lithologies and structures in this area. We have constructed a set of five geological cross-sections, passing through the mainshock epicentral areas (Mw > 5.5) of the seismic sequence. The cross-sections are extrapolated down to a depth of ca. 12 km, along which we have plotted relocated seismicity. Combined geological and seismological data support a new 3D seismotectonic model, illustrating the propagation through time and space of the seismic ruptures during the sequence. Our results show that the litho-mechanical stratigraphy exerted a primary control on the distribution of seismicity, as it is mostly hosted in the more competent lithologies (i.e. the Late Triassic-Paleogene succession, consisting of carbonates and evaporites). In addition, we illustrate the crucial role played by the inherited compressional structures in determining the lateral and vertical variations of the rheological properties of the upper crust and, eventually, the overall geometry and segmentation of the seismogenic extensional system. The workflow proposed here can be applied to other seismogenic zones throughout the world, since reliable seismotectonic models require an accurate reconstruction of the subsurface geological setting, based on a close integration of geological, geophysical and seismological data.
3D geological reconstruction of the M. Vettore seismogenic fault system (Central Apennines, Italy): Cross-cutting relationship with the M. Sibillini thrust
2020, Journal of Structural Geology
Citation Excerpt :
In this case the different expression of the coseismic ruptures affecting the hangingwall and footwall of the MSt can be explained by the combined effect of: i) diminishing fault displacement towards the southern termination of the fault and also ii) a less effective rupture propagation, from the deep seismic source up to its surface expression, possibly driven by lithological (= mechanical) control. The lithological control in promoting inelastic deformation is quite obvious: less competent rocks are commonly associated with a more distributed deformation; this is likely to be true for surface ruptures, as recently discussed for the surface faulting of the 2016–2017 seismic sequence by Carminati et al. (2019). In particular, the thickness of the overburden of loose sedimentary cover influences the surface expression of faulting, as observed in several surface faulting worldwide (Milliner et al., 2015; Teran et al., 2015; Zinke et al., 2014).
The 2016–2017 Amatrice-Norcia seismic sequence was triggered by the reactivation of a complex NNW-SSE trending, WSW-dipping normal fault system cross-cutting the Umbria-Marche fold and thrust belt near M. Vettore. This fault system produced clear and impressive co-seismic ruptures on normal faults in the hangingwall of the M. Sibillini thrust, whereas ruptures in the footwall were observed, but less clear. As a result, a strong controversy exists in the literature about the geometry of the seismogenic faults, their relationships with pre-existing thrusts, and the location of normal-faulting rupture tips. In this work, we present a 3D geological model of the M. Vettore area located between the Castelluccio basin and the outcrop of the M. Sibillini thrust, where the most evident co-seismic ruptures have been observed. The model shows the relationship between the ruptured normal faults and the M. Sibillini thrust, and was constructed using a grid of 14 geological cross-sections parallel and orthogonal to the main structural elements (i.e. normal faults and thrusts) down to a depth of 3 km. The model was built using reference structural surfaces, such as the top of the Early Cretaceous Maiolica Fm., the M. Sibillini thrust and the main seismogenic normal faults belonging to the M. Vettore fault system. The 3D model has allowed us to calculate the vertical cumulative throw distribution for the M. Vettore normal faults. The cumulative geological throw of ca. 1300 m across the normal faults in the proximity of the M. Sibillini thrust indicates that the seismogenic fault system continues into the footwall of the thrust, displacing it in the sub-surface. The results of this study provide important constraints on the cross-cutting relationships between active normal and pre-existing compressional structures in seismically active areas, contributing to a better definition of the faults segmentation, and the related seismic hazard.
Architecture and permeability structure of the Sibillini Mts. Thrust and influence upon recent, extension-related seismicity in the central Apennines (Italy) through fault-valve behavior
2024, Bulletin of the Geological Society of America
Fast Changes in Seismic Attenuation of the Upper Crust due to Fracturing and Fluid Migration: The 2016–2017 Central Italy Seismic Sequence
2022, Frontiers in Earth Science

View all citing articles on Scopus

View full text

Lithological control on multiple surface ruptures during the 2016–2017 Amatrice-Norcia seismic sequence

Highlights

Abstract

Graphical abstract

Introduction

Section snippets

Geological and geophysical backgrounds

Methods

Seismological and InSAR data analysis

Discussion

Conclusions

Declaration of Competing Interest

Acknowledgments

Tectonophysics

J. Struct. Geol.

Phys. Earth Planet. Inter.

Earth. Rev.

Tectonophysics

Tectonophysics

Minor shallow gravitational component of the Mt. Vettore surface ruptures related to Mw 6, 2016 Amatrice earthquake

Ann. Geophys.

Faulting associated with historical and recent earthquakes in the Eastern Mediterranean region

Geophys. J. Int.

Stratigraphy, structural setting and burial history of the Messinian Laga basin in the context of Apennine foreland basin system

J. Mediterranean Earth Sci.

Source identification for situational awareness of the August 24th 2016 Central Italy event

Ann. Geophys. Discuss.

Volume unbalance on the 2016 Amatrice-Norcia (Central Italy) seismic sequence and insights on normal fault earthquake mechanism

Sci. Rep.

Seismogenesis in Central Apennines, Italy: An integrated analysis of minor earthquake sequences and structural data in the Amatrice-Campotosto area

Ann. Geophys. Discuss.

Le faglie normali quaternarie nella dorsale appenninica umbro-marchigiana: proposta di un modello di tettonica di inversione

Studi Geol. Camerti

Extensional basins in tectonically bimodal central Ap- ennines fold-thrust belt, Italy: response to corner flow above a subducting slab in retrograde motion

Geology

GPS observations of coseismic deformation following the 2016, August 24, Mw 6 Amatrice earthquake (central Italy): data, analysis and preliminary fault model

Ann. Geophys.

Geodetic model of the 2016 Central Italy earthquake sequence inferred from InSAR and GPS data

Geophys. Res. Lett.

Imaging the complexity of an active normal fault system: The 1997 Colfiorito (central Italy) case study

J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth

The anatomy of the 2009 L’Aquila norma fault system (central Italy) imaged by high resolution foreshock and aftershock locations

J. Geophys. Res.

The 2016 Central Italy seismic sequence: A first look at the mainshocks, aftershocks and source models

Seismol. Res. Lett.

Geology of the central Apennines: a regional review

Geol. Italy: J. Virtual Explorer Electron. Ed.

A novel phase unwrapping method based on network programming

Ieee Trans. Geosci. Remote. Sens.

Resolving vertical and east-west horizontal motion from differential interferometric synthetic aperture radar: the L’Aquila earthquake

J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth

Normal fault earthquakes or graviquakes

Sci. Rep.

Tensional and compressional areas in the recent (Tortonian to present) evolution of the northern Apennines

Boll. Geofis. Teor. Appl.

Coseismic effects of the 2016 Amatrice seismic sequence: First geological results

Ann. Geophys. Discuss.

The Campotosto seismic gap in between the 2009 and 2016-2017 seismic sequences of central Italy and the role of inherited lithospheric faults in regional seismotectonic settings

Tectonics