Kinematics of the India‐Eurasia collision zone from GPS measurements
Abstract
We use geodetic techniques to study the India‐Eurasia collision zone. Six years of GPS data constrain maximum surface contraction rates across the Nepal Himalaya to 18 ± 2 mm/yr at 12°N ±13° (1σ). These surface rates across the 150‐km‐wide deforming zone are well fitted with a dislocation model of a buried north dipping detachment fault striking 105°, which aseismically slips at a rate of 20 ± 1 mm/yr, our preferred estimate for the India‐to‐southern‐Tibet convergence rate. This is in good agreement with various geologic predictions of 18 ± 7 mm/yr for the Himalaya. A better fit can be achieved with a two‐fault model, where the western and eastern faults strike 112° and 101°, respectively, in approximate parallelism with the Himalayan arc and a seismicity lineament. We find eastward directed extension of 11 ± 3 mm/yr between northwestern Nepal Lhasa, also in good agreement with geologic and seismic studies across the southern Tibetan plateau. Continuous GPS sites are used to further constrain the style and rates of deformation throughout the collision zone. Sites in India, Uzbekistan, and Russia agree within error with plate model prediction.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
GPS rates measured within an earthquake cycle could be lower than geological rates averaged over a longer time interval.
“Thus GPS rates measured within an earthquake cycle could be lower than geological rates averaged over a longer time interval [Larson et al., 1999].”
From Crustal shortening in the Andes: Why do GPS rates differ from geological rates? (2000) · cites this paper as Larson et al., 1999
The inferred maximum post-LIA uplift rate of up to a few mm yr-1 from experiments with or without a low asthenospheric thermal anomaly (TA ≤ 100 °C) is within the same order of magnitude of maximum uplift rates measured in collisional orogens such as the European Alps and the Himalayas.
“The inferred maximum post-LIA uplift rate of up to a few mm yr -1 from experiments with or without a low asthenospheric thermal anomaly (TA ≤ 100 °C, Fig. 7c) is within the same order of magnitude of maximum uplift rates measured in collisional orogens such as the European Alps”
From Fast uplift in the southern Patagonian Andes due to long- and short-term deglaciation and the asthenospheric window underneath (2024) · cites this paper as Larson et al., 1999
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 59 · Cited by 381
- Authors
- Larson, K. M., Bürgmann, R., Bilham, R., & Freymueller, J. T.
- Venue
- Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth
- Publisher
- American Geophysical Union (AGU)
- Published
- 1999-01-10
- Volume
- 104
- Issue
- B1
- Pages
- 1077-1093
- ISSN
- 0148-0227 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1968527129
- Cited by
- 381
- References
- 59
- Citations by year
- 2026: 8 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 18 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 17 · 2013: 21 · 2012: 16
- FWCI
- 16.25
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Geophysics › earthquake and tectonic studies
- Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Geology › Geological and Geophysical Studies
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Aerospace Engineering › GNSS positioning and interference
- Keywords
- India-Asia collision, Himalayan deformation, detachment faults, aseismic slip, dislocation model, Nepal Himalaya, plate convergence rate, GPS velocity field, plate motion
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review