Search USGSSearch

USGS · 70014338

Seismicity in South Carolina

Abstract

The largest historical earthquake in South Carolina, and in the southeastern US, occurred in the Coastal Plain province, probably northwest of Charleston, in 1886. Locations for aftershocks associated with this earthquake, estimated using intensities based on newspaper accounts, defined a northwest trending zone about 250 km long that was at least 100 km wide in the Coastal Plain but widened to a northeast trending zone in the Piedmont. The subsequent historical and instrumentally recorded seismicity in South Carolina images the 1886 aftershock zone. Except for a few scattered earthquakes and a swarm of shallow (≤ 4 km deep), small ( M L ≤ 2.5), primarily reverse faulting earthquakes that occurred along the flanks of a granite pluton about 60 km northwest of Columbia, the seismicity in the Piedmont province has been associated with water level changes in reservoirs. Reservoir induced seismicity (RIS) is shallow (≤ 6 km deep), primarily strike-slip or thrust faulting corresponding to an inferred maximum horizontal compressive stress oriented approximately N 60° E. Instrumentally recorded seismicity in the Coastal Plain province occurs in 3 seismic zones or clusters: Middleton Place-Summerville (MPSSZ), Adams Run (ARC), and Bowman (BSZ). Approximately 68% of the Coastal Plain earthquakes occur in the MPSSZ, a north trending zone about 22 km long and 12 km wide, lying about 20 km northwest of Charleston. The hypocenters of MPSSZ earthquakes range in depth from near the surface to almost 12 km. Thrust, strike-slip, and some normal faulting are indicated by the fault plane solutions for Coastal Plain earthquakes. The maximum horizontal compressive stress, inferred from the P-axes of the fault plane solutions, is oriented NE-SW in the shallow crust (< 9 km deep) but appears to be diffusely E-W between 9 to 12 km deep. Although there is localized variability, the current seismicity and associated faulting in South Carolina probably represent a regional response to the NE-SW maximum horizontal compressive stress prevalent throughout eastern North America.

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 32.078392275765026° to 35.26068178662756° latitude; -83.31606862062566° to -78.59177906612226° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Kaye M. Shedlock. 1988-10-01. Seismicity in South Carolina. https://doi.org/10.1785/gssrl.59.4.165

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Digitizer Suite: The Albuquerque Seismological Laboratory Digitizer Testing Suite

Laboratory testing of digitizers and seismometers helps ensure that prior to deployment the instrumentation can produce high quality data and is operating within specifications. In this work we detail the software package called: the Albuquerque Seismological Laboratory (ASL) Digitizer Test Suite. This Java software package provides several algorithms to verify various performance parameters of digitizers commonly used for recording analog seismic instruments. The goal of these tests is not to be exhaustive, but to identify common failures that could compromise the integrity of seismic data being recorded on the digitizer. For example, Sandia National Laboratories (e.g., Slad and Merchant, 2018) routinely do comprehensive testing of digitizers for various monitoring missions. While these tests reports are valuable for comprehensively characterizing a recording system, it would be resource intensive to conduct such tests on every seismic recorder used in a network. We focus on tests that include ways to estimate the sensitivity, timing, self-noise, and clip-level of the digitizer, as well as the fidelity of the signal being recorded. The software is publicly available and provides a way for the community to verify the integrity of a digitizer using a minimum amount of outside equipment.

Seismological Research Letters

The digital archivist: Automating legacy macroseismic data processing using large language models

Macroseismic data are a key resource to investigate shaking and damage from preinstrumental and early instrumental eras. However, data are often stored as inconsistently formatted reports describing observed shaking and damage, making manually parsing and interpreting accounts labor‐intensive. We introduce a novel workflow using Google’s Gemini 2.5 Pro large language model (LLM) to automate the extraction and structuring of macroseismic observations from summary reports. We apply this workflow to the 22 March 1957 M 5.3 Daly City, California, earthquake as a case study. We used Gemini to extract addresses, originally assigned modified Mercalli intensity values, and descriptions from each report. To address coordinate precision limits, addresses were geocoded via Google’s Geocoding application programming interface. This workflow yielded over 2300 geocoded intensity reports for the Daly City earthquake. We use the geocoded accounts, with the original report intensity assignments, to develop a shaking intensity map that in some respects rivals modern Did You Feel It? Maps. We also extract and present data for the 9 February 1971 M L 6.7 Sylmar, California, earthquake. Our results demonstrate the potential of LLMs for reliably extracting and analyzing large, unstructured macroseismic datasets. LLMs offer a scalable solution for rapidly digitizing macroseismic archives, enabling their broader use to constrain ground‐motion models in modern seismic hazard analysis and to improve our understanding of site effects in urban areas. The concepts explored here may also be applied to the handling of other legacy seismological and earth science data.

Seismological Research Letters