Search USGS⌕ Search

place

Russia

Russia: explore 3 source-linked works published from 2025 to 2026, with original documents and citations.

This collection is a preview while coverage and quality are evaluated.

Search within this collection

Coverage and selection

Includes records with this source-supplied label or an explicit phrase match in their metadata. Matches indicate a mention, not proof that a paper uses a method or tests a material. Source versions are consolidated by DOI.

Sources: usgs. Collection updated 2026-09-20. Counts describe this index, not the complete source archives.

Rapid characterization of the 2025 Mw 8.8 Kamchatka, Russia earthquake

The 29 July 2025 M w 8.8 Kamchatka, Russia, earthquake was the sixth largest instrumentally recorded earthquake. This event was seismically well observed at regional and teleseismic distances, but publicly available near‐source data were sparse at the time of the event, presenting unique challenges for rapid source and impact characterization. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) National Earthquake Information Center provides global real‐time monitoring for earthquakes, including rapid response information products that estimate source characteristics, shaking, and the resulting impacts. We describe the USGS rapid response earthquake information products following the Kamchatka event and discuss their implications for ongoing hazards in the region. We describe potential improvements to our response workflows motivated by this event, including more rapid constraints on source geometries and the automated selection of fault geometries for finite‐fault inversions. The rapid response products together support the interpretation of a unilateral southwestward rupture with significant slip on the southwestern end of the rupture extent. The M w 8.8–9.0 event in 1952, which ruptured a comparable extent of the Kuril–Kamchatka subduction interface, has many similarities to the 2025 rupture. This illustrates that slip deficits may remain following great earthquakes and highlights the usefulness of comparative studies between historic and modern events.

Kuril-Kamchatka subduction zone↗

Speleothem evidence for Late Miocene extreme Arctic amplification – An analogue for near-future anthropogenic climate change?

The Miocene provides an excellent climatic analogue for near-future runaway anthropogenic warming, with atmospheric CO 2 concentrations and global average temperatures similar to those projected for the coming century under extreme-emissions scenarios. However, the magnitude of Miocene Arctic warming remains unclear due to the scarcity of reliable proxy data. Here we use stable oxygen isotope and trace element analyses, alongside clumped isotope and fluid inclusion palaeothermometry of speleothems to reconstruct palaeo-environmental conditions near the Siberian Arctic coast during the Tortonian (8.68 ± 0.09 Ma ). Stable oxygen isotope records suggest warmer-than-present temperatures. This is supported by temperature estimates based on clumped isotopes and fluid inclusions giving mean annual air temperatures between + 6.6 and + 11.1 °C , compared with − 12.3 °C today. Trace elements records reveal a highly seasonal hydrological environment. Our estimate of > 18 °C of Arctic warming supports the wider consensus of a warmer-than-present Miocene and provides a rare palaeo-analogue for future Arctic amplification under high-emissions scenarios. The reconstructed increase in mean surface temperature far exceeds temperatures projected in fully coupled global climate models, even under extreme-emissions scenarios. Given that climate models have consistently underestimated the extent of recent Arctic amplification, our proxy data suggest Arctic warming may exceed current projections.

Lena River delta↗

Reconstruction of Holocene and Last Interglacial vegetation dynamics and wildfire activity in Southern Siberia

Wildfires are a rapidly increasing threat to boreal forests. While our understanding of the drivers behind wildfires and their environmental impact is growing, it is mostly limited to the observational period. Here we focus on the boreal forests of southern Siberia and exploit a U–Th-dated stalagmite from Botovskaya Cave, located in the upper Lena region of southern Siberia, to document wildfire activity and vegetation dynamics during parts of two warm periods: the Last Interglacial (LIG; specifically part of the Last Interglacial maximum between 124.1 and 118.8 ka) and the Holocene (10–0 ka). Our record is based on levoglucosan (Lev), a biomarker sensitive to biomass burning, and on lignin oxidation products (LOPs) that discriminate between open and closed forest and hard- or softwood vegetation. In addition, we used carbonate carbon stable isotope ratios ( δ 13 C ), which reflect a dominant control of the host rock, to evaluate soil respiration and local infiltration changes. Our LOP data suggest that, during the Last Interglacial, the region around Botovskaya Cave was characterised by open forest, which by ca. 121.5 ka underwent a transition from fire-resistant hardwood to fire-prone softwood. The Lev record indicates that fire activity was high and increased towards the end of Last Interglacial just before 119 ka. In contrast, the Holocene was characterised by a closed-forest environment with mixed hard- and softwood vegetation. Holocene fire activity varied but at a much lower level than during the Last Interglacial. We attribute the changes in wildfire activity during the intervals of interest to the interplay between vegetation and climate. The open forests of the Last Interglacial were more likely to ignite than their closed Holocene equivalents, and their flammability was aided by warmer and drier summers and a stronger seasonal temperature contrast due to the increase in seasonal insolation difference compared to the Holocene. Our comparison of the last two interglacial intervals suggests that, with increasing global temperatures, the boreal forest of southern Siberia may become progressively more vulnerable to higher wildfire activity.

Botovskaya Cave, Siberia↗
Compare source metadata on this page

These are bibliographic comparisons, not experimental rankings. Follow the original document for methods and conditions.