The Next Marmara Earthquake: Disaster Mitigation, Recovery and Early Warning

Editorial Board (August 2017)
Editor-in-Chief
Yasuo Ogawa, Tokyo Institute of Technology, Japan

Vice Editors-in-Chief
Masato Furuya, Hokkaido University, Japan
Solid Earth Science

Nozomu Nishitani, Nagoya University, Japan
Space Science

Editors
Valerio Acocella
Ryosuke Ando
Yosuke Aoki
Kimiyuki Asano
Nanan Balan
Stephen Bannister
Paul Bedrosian
Phil Cummins
Koji Fukuma
Thomas Hobiger
Hauke Hussmann
Art Jolly
Attila Komjathy
Alexey Kuvshinov

Juanjo Ledo
Huixin Liu
Takuto Maeda
Koji Matsumoto
Yohei Miyake
Mitsuhiro Nakagawa
Junichi Nakajima
Haruhisa Nakamichi
Yasuhito Narita
Takuya Nishimura
Azusa Nishizawa
Takaaki Noguchi
Masahito Nose
Makiko Ohtake

Keiji Ohtsuki
Kyoko Okino
Taku Ozawa
Severine Rosat
Takeshi Sakanoi
David Shelly
Benoit Taisne
Hiroshi Takenaka
Sunny TamYoshiyuki Tanaka
Yanbin Wang
Yih-Min Wu
Takuji Yamada
Mare Yamamoto

Hiroo Kanamori
Jun'ichiro Kawaguchi
Takafumi Matsui
Hitoshi Mizutani

Toshitaka Tsuda
Zhongliang Wu
Kiyoshi Yomogida

Advisory Board
Benjamin Fong Chao
Bernard Chouet
Yoshimori Honkura
Toshihiko Iyemori

Journal Scope
Earth, Planets and Space (EPS) is the official journal of the Society of Geomagnetism and Earth, Planetary
and Space Sciences, The Seismological Society of Japan, The Volcanological Society of Japan, The
Geodetic Society of Japan, and The Japanese Society for Planetary Sciences.
EPS is a peer-reviewed, open-access journal published under SpringerOpen. It is an international journal
covering scientific articles in the entire field of earth and planetary sciences, particularly geomagnetism,aeronomy, space science, seismology, volcanology, geodesy, and planetary science. EPS also welcomesarticles in new and interdisciplinary subjects, and technical reports on instrumentation and software.
The journal was launched in 1998 and has since published over 3000 articles. All of them are available forfree on SpringerLink:
http://link.springer.com/journal/40623
More information about the journal, its article collections, and the submission process is available on thejournal homepage:
http://earth-planets-space.springeropen.com
Submit your next research article to Earth, Planets and Space via:
https://www.editorialmanager.com/epsp
Yours sincerely,
Prof. Yasuo Ogawa
Editor-in-Chief, Earth, Planets and Space
editor-in-chief@earth-planets-space.org

Earth, Planets and Space
Hori et al. Earth, Planets and Space (2017) 69:65
DOI 10.1186/s40623-017-0648-9

Open Access

PREFACESpecial issue “The next Marmara
earthquake: disaster mitigation, recovery,
and early warning”
Takane Hori1*, Ali Pinar2, Ocal Necmioglu2, Muneo Hori3 and Azusa Nishizawa4
with Mw = 7.25 on the Main Marmara Fault is expected
to heavily damage or destroy 2–4% of the near 1,000,000
buildings in Istanbul, which has a population of around
13 million, with 9–15% of the buildings receiving
medium damage and 20–34% of the buildings lightly
damaged (Erdik 2013).
The aim of this special issue is to gather information
about the risk of another Marmara earthquake from thelatest geophysical, geological, geotechnical, computational, and building science research results to discuss
ways of mitigating disaster in advance. The collectionof 12 papers constituting this special issue is based onrecent research on imaging the crustal structure, thegeometry of the fault segments and their microseismicity features, source characteristics of large earthquakes
inferred from historical seismograms, tsunami hazard
assessment and mitigation studies, site response evaluations, and development of an integrated earthquake simulation system.
Polat et al. (2016) portrayed a tomographic image of thecrust beneath the Sea of Marmara and its close surrounding area, derived from a dataset of more than ninety thousand P- and S-wave arrival times from local earthquakes
recorded at land-based stations and ocean bottom seismographs. Their seismic velocity images illustrate positive
anomalies nearby the fault segments of NAF, correlatingwith regions of higher seismicity. The study of Yamamoto
et al. (2015) closely inspects the NAF segments beneaththe Sea of Marmara, especially the fault geometry andtheir seismic activity carried out by the deployment of
15 OBS stations at locations close to the Main Marmara
Fault (MMF). A deeper than previously known seismogenic zone, extending to the lower crust, is one of themost striking features derived from the OBS observations. The offshore seismic stations nearby MMF constrained the depth, dip, and lateral extent of the seismicity
much better and, consequently, the geometry of the fault

The Marmara Sea, accommodating the fault segments ofa major transform fault, is well known as a seismic gap
along the North Anatolian Fault (NAF), running throughthe northern part of Turkey and connecting the East
Anatolian convergent area with the Hellenic subduction
zone (e.g., Pınar 1943; Toksöz et al. 1979; Pondard et al.
2007; Şengör et al. 2014). It is obvious from historical
records spanning more than 2000 years that the regionis subject to frequent strong shaking that is likely associated with tsunami waves, threatening heavily populated
and industrialized locations (Ambraseys 2002; Erdik et al.
2004; Hébert et al. 2005). In the twentieth century, magnitude (M) 7-class earthquakes sequentially occurredfrom east to west along the NAF zone, as shown in Fig. 1(Stein et al. 1997). The last two successive events hit theeastern Marmara region in August 17 and November 12,
1999, known as Izmit (Mw = 7.5) and Düzce (Mw = 7.2)
earthquakes, respectively, killing about 20,000 people anddevastating the region. On the other hand, at the western edge of Marmara Sea, an M ~ 7 earthquake occurredin 1912, rupturing onshore and offshore fault segments
where 4–5 m lateral displacements were measured(Armijo et al. 2005; Aksoy et al. 2010). Furthermore, inthe Marmara Sea, it has been considered that the last M7
class earthquake occurred in 1766. With an average slip
rate of 2 cm/year, several meters have accumulated overthe past 250 years (Straub 1996; Meade et al. 2002). Basedon a time-dependent model that includes the coseismic
and post-seismic effects of the 1999 Kocaeli earthquakewith moment magnitude Mw = 7.4, Parsons (2004) concluded that the probability of an earthquake with Mw > 7
in the Sea of Marmara near Istanbul is 35–70% in thenext 30 years. According to a 2011 study, an earthquake*Correspondence: horit@jamstec.go.jp
1
Japan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and Technology, Yokohama,Japan
Full list of author information is available at the end of the article© The Author(s) 2017. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium,provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license,
and indicate if changes were made.

1

The Next Marmara Earthquake: Disaster Mitigation, Recovery and Early Warning
Hori et al. Earth, Planets and Space (2017) 69:65

Page 2 of 4

Fig. 1 Surface rupture extent associated with major earthquakes along NAF

based probabilistic seismic hazard analysis (PSHA)
methodology where broadband strong ground motion
simulations are conducted. To generate the high-frequency (0.5–20 Hz) part of the broadband earthquake
simulation, real, small-magnitude earthquakes recorded
by a local seismic array were used as empirical Green’s
functions. As for frequencies below 0.5 Hz, the synthetic
Green’s functions are calculated by an explicit 2D/3D
elastic finite difference wave propagation routine.
Aytore et al. (2016) used NAMI-DANCE code to carryout high-resolution tsunami simulations in the Marmara Sea, focusing on Haydarpaşa Port in the megacityof Istanbul, and computed the tsunami parameters inand around the port. They observed that the stability ofthe breakwaters is one of the major factors that influence
whether agitation and inundation can be diminished in
the event of a tsunami in Haydarpaşa Port, as harbor protection structures have not been designed to withstandtsunamis. The flow depth, momentum fluxes, and current
pattern were identified as the other factors that cause
unexpected circulation and uncontrolled movementsof objects on land and vessels in the sea. Cankaya et al.
(2016) applied a new methodology in Yenikapı region asa case study for tsunami vulnerability assessment, basedon high-resolution coastal inundation modeling. Using
NAMI-DANCE code, they constructed vulnerability
at location and evacuation resilience maps, using theanalytical hierarchical process (AHP) method of multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) to define the tsunami
human vulnerability of the region. The vulnerability at
location map is composed of metropolitan use, geology,
elevation, and distance from shoreline layers, whereas
the evacuation resilience map considers slope, distancewithin flat areas, distance to buildings, and distance toroad networks layers. Following this, they computed thetsunami risk map from the proposed new relationship,
which uses flow depth maps, vulnerability at location

segments. The geometry between the fault segments andthe orientation of the maximum horizontal compressive
stress axis is correlated through the frictional strength offaults in the study presented by Pinar et al. (2016). They
use the frequency distribution of P- and T-axes of the
focal mechanisms of events taking place around threefault segments in the eastern Marmara. A low frictionalcoefficient for the Princes’ Islands segment and high frictional coefficients for the Yalova-Çınarcık and YalovaHersek segments are derived by the authors.
Further information on the fault segmentation of NAF
in the Marmara Sea and north Aegean Sea regions isdetermined by modeling the waveforms at broadband
land stations to retrieve the source properties of moderate to large events, estimating the CMT parameters andsource time functions (Nakano et al. 2016). The source
time function of the 2014 North Aegean earthquake(Mw = 6.9) provides evidence on ruptures of different
fault segments associated with the mainshock. Moreover, the CMT solutions derived for the events taking
place along the MMF fault indicate fault parallel T-axis
orientations, suggesting segmentation and developmentof local extension features. Baştürk et al. (2016) relocated
two ancient moderate-sized earthquakes, using historicalseismograms of events occurring in 1935 in the proximityof Marmara Island. Applying modern techniques to theold seismograms, CMT parameters for the two events
are retrieved that indicate predominantly normal faulting mechanisms taking place at the upper crust. Similarsource parameters are obtained for the 1963 Çınarcık
earthquake, whose location was long a subject of debate.
The location of the fault segment ruptured by the 1963
earthquake and its source mechanism is of great importance in seismic hazard assessment studies. Mert et al.
(2016) tried to predict the strong ground motions to begenerated by a rupture on the Princes’ Islands segment,
which lies beneath the Çınarcık basin, using physically2Earth, Planets and Space
Hori et al. Earth, Planets and Space (2017) 69:65

Page 3 of 4

The Marmara region, long ago identified as a seismic
gap, is waiting for the impending major earthquake torupture the MMF segments. Meanwhile, several studies
have been carried out to determine the seismic hazard
level, the fault geometry and segmentation, mitigationof seismic risk, rapid response, and early warning. All
these subjects are tackled in this special issue, making avaluable contribution on the existing information that isconstrained by high-quality data acquired in the frame of
the MarDIM project, a joint effort of Turkish and Japanese scientists financially supported by JICA, JST and theMinistry of Development in Turkey.

maps, and evacuation resilience maps. Necmioglu (2016)indicated that in the absence of adequate post-earthquake assembly areas, especially in heavily urbanized
Istanbul, citizens would be rushing to landfill assembly
and recreational areas in the coastal parts of the city after
a major earthquake. To address this, he proposed a model
for a tsunami warning system specific for the Marmara
region that is strongly coupled with the earthquake early
warning system and stakeholders of tsunami mitigation
activities, such as the local and regional components ofdisaster and emergency management and civil protection units. This would ensure that the citizens would stayaway from the coastline in case of a large earthquake.
Necmioglu also discussed associated challenges, such as
decoupled earthquake and tsunami mitigation activities
in the Marmara region.
Istanbul is the largest metropolitan city expected to be
hit by the impending Marmara Sea earthquake. Rapid
response systems are effective in mitigating the loss oflife and property. Zülfikar et al. (2017) describe how realtime ground motion shaking maps are constructed fromthe strong motion stations distributed throughout thedensely populated areas of the city. Building damage estimation is then computed by using grid-based building
inventory, and the related loss is estimated. Zülfikar et al.
(2017) further inform how rapidly estimated data enablepublic and private emergency management authorities
to take action to allocate and prioritize resources, minimizing casualties in urban areas during immediate postearthquake periods. Site response plays an important rolein generating shake maps. Karagoz et al. (2015) explore
the S-wave velocity structure of shallow soils using
microtremors to estimate site responses in Tekirdag
and the surrounding area. They collected data at 44
sites in Tekirdag, Marmara Ereglisi, Corlu, and Muratlı,
and estimated phase velocities of Rayleigh waves fromthe microtremor data using a spatial autocorrelation
method. A hybrid genetic simulated annealing algorithm
was applied by the authors to obtain a 1D S-wave velocity structure at each site. All the studies constituting thisspecial issue contribute to some extent to an integrated
earthquake simulation (IES) system that was developed
for Istanbul by Sahin et al. (2016). The IES for Istanbul
is built in MATLAB and includes site response analysis
as well as structural seismic response analysis of existingbuildings; building models are made by using GIS databases. An initial application is performed in the Zeytinburnu District of Istanbul, and the results are expressedin the form of spatial distribution of ground motion andbuilding responses. The IES analysis illustrates a nonuniform distribution of seismic responses, indicating thepossibility that there are more severely damaged areas in
the district compared with others.

Author details
1
Japan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and Technology, Yokohama, Japan.
2
Kandilli Observatory and Earthquake Research Institute, Bogazici University,
Istanbul, Turkey. 3 Earthquake Research Institute, The University of Tokyo,
Tokyo, Japan. 4 Hydrographic and Oceanographic Department, Japan Coast
Guard, Tokyo, Japan.

Publisher’s NoteSpringer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Received: 12 April 2017 Accepted: 25 April 2017

References
Aksoy ME, Meghraoui M, Vallée M, Çakır Z (2010) Rupture characteristics of the
A.D. 1912 Mürefte (Ganos) earthquake segment of the North Anatolian
fault (western Turkey). Geology 38(11):991–994. doi:10.1130/G31447.1
Ambraseys N (2002) The seismic activity of the Marmara sea region over thelast 2000 years. Bull Seismol Soc Am 92:1–18. doi:10.1785/0120000843
Armijo R, Pondard N, Meyer B, Ucarkus G, Lepinay BM, Malavieille J,
Dominguez S, Gustcher MA, Schmidt S, Beck C, Cagatay N, Cakir Z, Imren
C, Eris K, Natalin B, Ozalaybey S, Tolun L, Lefevre I, Seeber L, Gasperini
L, Rangin C, Emre Ö, Sarikavak K (2005) Submarine fault scarps in the
Sea of Marmara pull-apart (North Anatolian Fault): implications forseismic hazard in Istanbul. Geochem Geophys, Geosyst G3 6(6):Q06009.
doi:10.1029/2004GC000896. ISSN: 1525-2027
Aytore B, Yalciner AC, Zaytsev A, Cankaya CZ, Suzen ML (2016) Assessmentof tsunami resilience of Haydarpaşa Port in the Sea of Marmara by
high-resolution numerical modeling. Earth Planets Space 201668:139.
doi:10.1186/s40623-016-0508-z
Baştürk NB, Özel NM, Caciagli M (2016) Seismic parameters re-determinedfrom historical seismograms of 1935-Erdek–Marmara Island and1963-Çınarcık Earthquakes. Earth Planets Space. 68:158. doi:10.1186/
s40623-016-0528-8
Cankaya ZC, Suzen ML, Yalciner AC, Kolat C, Zaytsev A, Aytore B (2016) A new
GIS-based tsunami risk evaluation: METU tsunami human vulnerability
assessment (MeTHuVA) tsunami risk analysis Geographic information
systems (GIS) Multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) Analytical hierarchical process (AHP) Tsunami Istanbul Yenikapı
Erdik M (2013) Earthquake risk in Turkey. Science 341:72
Erdik M, Demircioglu M, Sesetyan K, Durukal E, Siyahi B (2004) Earthquake hazard in Marmara region, Turkey. In: 13th world conference on earthquake
engineering, Vancouver, BC, Canada August 1–6, 2004 paper no: 270
Hébert H, Schindelé F, Altinok Y, Alpar B, Gazioglu C (2005) Tsunami hazard in
the Marmara Sea (Turkey): a numerical approach to discuss active faulting and impact on the Istanbul coastal areas. Mar Geol 215(1–2):23–43.
doi:10.1016/j.margeo.2004.11.006

3

The Next Marmara Earthquake: Disaster Mitigation, Recovery and Early Warning
Hori et al. Earth, Planets and Space (2017) 69:65

Page 4 of 4

Karagoz Ö, Chimoto K, Citak S, Ozel Ö, Yamanaka H, Hatayama K (2015) Estimation of shallow S-wave velocity structure and site response characteristics
by microtremor array measurements in Tekirdag region, NW Turkey. Earth
Planets Space 201567:176. doi:10.1186/s40623-015-0320-1
Meade BJ, Bradford HH, McClusky SC, Reilinger RE, Ergintav S, Lenk O, Barka
A, Ozener H (2002) Estimates of seismic potential in the Marmara Sea
region from block models of secular deformation constrained by global
positioning system measurements. Bull Seismol Soc Am 92(1):208–215.
doi:10.1785/0120000837
Mert A, Fahjan YM, Hutchings LJ, Pınar A (2016) Physically based probabilistic
seismic hazard analysis using broadband ground motion simulation: acase study for the Prince Islands Fault, Marmara Sea. Earth Planets Space
201668:146. doi:10.1186/s40623-016-0520-3
Nakano M, Citak S, Kalafat D (2016) Focal mechanism determinations ofearthquakes along the North Anatolian fault, beneath the Sea of Marmara and the Aegean Sea. Earth Planets Space 201567:159. doi:10.1186/
s40623-015-0330-z
Necmioğlu Ö (2016) Design and challenges for a tsunami early warning
system in the Marmara Sea. Earth Planets Space 201668:13. doi:10.1186/
s40623-016-0388-2
Parsons T (2004) Recalculated probability of M > 7 earthquakes beneath the
Sea of Marmara, Turkey. J Geophys Res. doi:10.1029/2003JB002667
Pınar N (1943) Marmara Denizi Havzasının Sismik Jeoloji ve Meteorolojisi/
Géologie et Météorologie Sismique du Bassin de Mer Marmara. PhD
thesis. Inst. Géol., Inst. Phys. Gén. Univ. İstanbul, Kenan Matbaası. 63 pp+1 foldout map
Pınar A, Coşkun Z, Mert A, Kalafat D (2016) Frictional strength of North
Anatolian fault in eastern Marmara region. Earth Planets Space 68:62.
doi:10.1186/s40623-016-0435-z
Polat G, Özel NM, Koulakov I (2016) Investigating P- and S-wave velocity
structure beneath the Marmara region (Turkey) and the surroundingarea from local earthquake tomography. Earth Planets Space 201668:132.
doi:10.1186/s40623-016-0503-4

Pondard N, Armijo R, King GCP, Meyer B, Flerit F (2007) Fault interactions in the
Sea of Marmara pull-apart (North Anatolian Fault): earthquake clusteringand propagating earthquake sequences. Geophys J Int 171(3):1185–1197.
doi:10.1111/j.1365-246X.2007.03580.x
Sahin A, Sisman R, Askan A, Hori M (2016) Development of integrated earthquake simulation system for Istanbul. Earth Planets Space 201668:115.
doi:10.1186/s40623-016-0497-yŞengör AMC, Grall C, İmren C, LePichon X, Görür N, Henry P, Karabulut H,
Siyako M (2014) The geometry of the North Anatolian transform fault
in the Sea of Marmara and its temporal evolution: implications forthe development of intracontinental transform faults. Can J Earth Sci
51(3):222–242. doi:10.1139/cjes-2013-0160
Stein RS, Barka AA, Dieterich JH (1997) Progressive failure on the North
Anatolian fault since 1939 by earthquake stress triggering. Geophys J Int
128:594–604
Straub, C., 1996. Recent crustal deformation and strain accumulation in theMarmara Sea region, NW Anatolia inferred from GPS measurements. PhD
Thesis, ETH
Toksöz M, Shakal A, Michael A (1979) Space–time migration of earthquakes
along the North Anatolian fault zone and seismic gaps. Pure appl Geophys 117:1258–1270
Yamamoto Y, Takahashi N, Citak S, Kalafat D, Pinar A, Gurbuz C, Kaneda
Yoshiyuki (2015) Offshore seismicity in the western Marmara Sea, Turkey,
revealed by ocean bottom observation. Earth Planets Space 201567:147.
doi:10.1186/s40623-015-0325-9
Zülfikar AC, Fercan NÖZ, Tunç S, Erdik M (2017) Real-time earthquake shake,damage, and loss mapping for Istanbul metropolitan area. Earth Planets
Space 201769:9. doi:10.1186/s40623-016-0579-x

4

Earth, Planets and SpaceFRONTIER LETTER

Open Access

Assessment of tsunami resilience of Haydarpaşa Port in the Sea ofMarmara by high-resolution numerical modeling
Betul Aytore, Ahmet Cevdet Yalciner*, Andrey Zaytsev, Zeynep Ceren Cankaya
and Mehmet Lütfi Suzen
Earth, Planets and Space 2016, 68:139 DOI: 10.1186/s40623-016-0508-z
Received: 27 October 2015, Accepted: 6 July 2016, Published: 2 August 2016

Abstract
Turkey is highly prone to earthquakes because of active fault zones in the region. The Marmara region located at the western extension of the North
Anatolian Fault Zone (NAFZ) is one of the most tectonically active zones in Turkey. Numerous catastrophic events such as earthquakes or earthquake/landslide-induced tsunamis have occurred in the Marmara Sea basin. According to studies on the past tsunami records, the Marmara coasts have been hit
by 35 different tsunami events in the last 2000 years. The recent occurrences of catastrophic tsunamis in the world’s oceans have also raised awarenessabout tsunamis that might take place around the Marmara coasts. Similarly, comprehensive studies on tsunamis, such as preparation of tsunami databases,
tsunami hazard analysis and assessments, risk evaluations for the potential tsunami-prone regions, and establishing warning systems have accelerated.
However, a complete tsunami inundation analysis in high resolution will provide a better understanding of the effects of tsunamis on a specific criticalstructure located in the Marmara Sea. Ports are one of those critical structures that are susceptible to marine disasters. Resilience of ports and harbors
against tsunamis are essential for proper, efficient, and successful rescue operations to reduce loss of life and property. Considering this, high-resolution
simulations have been carried out in the Marmara Sea by focusing on Haydarpaşa Port of the megacity Istanbul. In the first stage of simulations, the mostcritical tsunami sources possibly effective for Haydarpaşa Port were inputted, and the computed tsunami parameters at the port were compared todetermine the most critical tsunami scenario. In the second stage of simulations, the nested domains from 90 m gird size to 10 m grid size (in the port
region) were used, and the most critical tsunami scenario was modeled. In the third stage of simulations, the topography of the port and its regions wereused in the two nested domains in 3-m and 1-m resolutions and the water elevations computed from the previous simulations were inputted from theborder of the large domain. A tsunami numerical code, NAMI DANCE, was used in the simulations. The tsunami parameters in the highest resolution werecomputed in and around the port. The effect of the data resolution on the computed results has
been presented. The performance of the port structures and possible effects of tsunami on port
operations have been discussed. Since the harbor protection structures have not been designed towithstand tsunamis, the breakwaters’ stability becomes one of the major concerns for less agitationand inundation under tsunami in Haydarpaşa Port for resilience. The flow depth, momentum fluxes,
and current pattern are the other concerns that cause unexpected circulations and uncontrolled
movements of objects on land and vessels in the sea.

Keywords: Tsunami, Resilience, Port, Marmara Sea, Simulation, Modeling

Figure 2*Corresponding author: Ahmet Cevdet Yalciner, yalciner@metu.edu.tr

FULL PAPER

Open Access

Offshore seismicity in the western Marmara Sea, Turkey, revealed byocean bottom observation
Yojiro Yamamoto*, Narumi Takahashi, Seckin Citak, Doğan Kalafat, Ali Pinar, Cemil Gurbuz
and Yoshiyuki Kaneda
Earth, Planets and Space 2015, 67:147 DOI: 10.1186/s40623-015-0325-9
Received: 9 June 2015, Accepted: 3 September 2015, Published: 15 September 2015

Abstract
The faults’ geometry and their seismic activity beneath the Marmara Sea have been under debate for a couple of decades. We
used data recorded by three ocean bottom seismographs (OBSs) over a period of 3 months in 2014 to investigate therelationship of fault geometry to microseismicity under the western Marmara Sea in Turkey. We detected a seismic swarm at
13 to 20 km depth beneath the main Marmara fault (MMF), and the maximum depth of seismogenic zone was 25 km within
the OBS observation area. These results provided evidence that the dip of the MMF is almost vertical and that the seismogenic
zone in this region extends into the lower crust. Our analysis of past seismicity indicated that the seismic swarm we recorded
is the most recent of an episodic series of seismic activity with anaverage recurrence interval of 2–3 years. The repetitive seismicity
indicates that the MMF beneath the western Marmara Sea iscoupled and that some of the accumulated strain is released every
2 to 3 years. Our study shows that OBS data can provide useful
information about seismicity along the MMF, but more extensive
studies using more OBSs deployed over a wider area are needed
to fully understand the fault geometry and stick–slip behavior of
faults under the Marmara Sea.

Keywords: North Anatolian fault, Marmara Sea, Ocean bottom
seismograph, Seismic activity

Figure 2*Corresponding author: Yojiro Yamamoto, yamamotoy@jamstec.go.jp
5The Next Marmara Earthquake: Disaster Mitigation, Recovery and Early Warning

FULL PAPER

Open Access

Focal mechanism determinations of earthquakes along the North
Anatolian fault, beneath the Sea of Marmara andthe Aegean Sea
Masaru Nakano*, Seckin Citak and Doğan Kalafat
Earth, Planets and Space 2015, 67:159 DOI: 10.1186/s40623-015-0330-z
Received: 11 June 2015, Accepted: 16 September 2015, Published: 28 September 2015,

Abstract

Keywords: Centroid moment tensor, Strike-slip fault system, Fault segment
boundary, SWIFT system

Depth (km)Depth (km)We determined the centroid moment tensor (CMT) solutions of earthquakes that occurred along the North Anatolian fault(NAF) beneath the Sea of Marmara and the Aegean Sea, using data obtained from Turkey’s broad-band seismograph network.
The CMT solution of the 2014 Aegean Sea earthquake (Mw 6.9) represents a strike-slip fault, consistent with the geometry of
the NAF, and the source-time function indicates that this event comprised several distinct subevents. Each subevent is
considered to have ruptured a different fault segment. This observation indicates the existence of a mechanical barrier,namely a NAF segment boundary, at the hypocenter. CMT solutions of background seismicity beneath the Aegean Sea
represent strike-slip or normal faulting along the NAF or its branch faults. The tensional axes of these events are oriented
northeast–southwest, indicating a transtensional tectonic regime. Beneath the Sea of Marmara, the CMT solutions represent
mostly strike-slip faulting, consistent with the motion of the NAF, but we identified a
(a) 0
(b) 0
normal fault event with a tensional axis parallel to the strike of the NAF. Thismechanism indicates that a pull-apart basin, marking a segment boundary of the
NAF, is developing there. Because ruptures of a fault system and large earthquake
20
20
magnitudes are strongly controlled by the fault system geometry and fault length,
mapping fault segments along NAF can help to improve the accuracy of scenarios
40
40developed for future disastrous earthquakes in the Marmara region.
0

2

4

6

8

VP (km/s)

0

2

4

6

VS (km/s)’
Figure2*Corresponding author: Masaru Nakano, mnakano@jamstec.go.jp

FULL PAPER

Open Access

Estimation of shallow S-wave velocity structure and site response
characteristics by microtremor array measurements in
Tekirdag region, NW Turkey
Ozlem Karagoz*, Kosuke Chimoto, Seckin Citak, Oguz Ozel, Hiroaki Yamanaka and Ken Hatayama
Earth, Planets and Space 2015, 67:176 DOI: 10.1186/s40623-015-0320-1
Received: 26 March 2015, Accepted: 29 August 2015, Published: 4 November 2015

Abstract
In this study, we aimed to explore the S-wave velocity structure of shallow soils using microtremors in order to estimate site
responses in Tekirdag and surrounding areas (NW Turkey). We collected microtremor array data at 44 sites in Tekirdag,
Marmara Ereglisi, Corlu, and Muratlı. The phase velocities of Rayleigh waves were estimated from the microtremor data usinga Spatial Autocorrelation method. Then, we applied a hybrid genetic simulated annealing algorithm to obtain a 1D S-wave
velocity structure at each site. Comparison between the horizontal-to-vertical ratio of microtremors and computed ellipticitiesof the fundamental mode Rayleigh waves showed good agreement with validation models. The depth of the engineering
bedrock changed from 20 to 50 m in the Tekirdag city center and along the coastline with a velocity range of 700–930 m/s,
and it ranged between 10 and 65 m in Marmara Ereglisi. The average S-wave velocity of the engineering bedrock was 780 m/s
in the region. We obtained average S-wave velocities in the upper 30 m tocompare site amplifications. Empirical relationships between the AVs30, thesite amplifications, and also average topographic slopes were established foruse in future site effects microzonation studies in the region.

Keywords: AVs30, Microtremor array observation, Phase velocity,

Shear-wave velocity, Site amplification, Slope, Tekirdag

Figure 2*Corresponding author: Ozlem Karagoz, karagoz.o.aa@m.titech.ac.jp
6Earth, Planets and Space

FULL PAPER

Open Access

Frictional strength of North Anatolian fault in eastern
Marmara region
Ali Pinar*, Zeynep Coşkun, Aydin Mert and Doğan Kalafat
Earth, Planets and Space 2016, 68:62 DOI: 10.1186/s40623-016-0435-z
Received: 30 July 2015, Accepted: 4 April 2016, Published: 23 April 2016

Abstract
Frequency distribution of azimuth and plunges of P- and T-axes of focal mechanisms is compared with the orientation of
maximum compressive stress axis for investigating the frictional strength of three fault segments of North Anatolian fault(NAF) in eastern Marmara Sea, namely Princes’ Islands, Yalova–Çınarcık and Yalova–Hersek fault segments. In this frame, we
retrieved 25 CMT solutions of events in Çınarcık basin and derived a local stress tensor incorporating 30 focal mechanisms
determined by other researches. As for the Yalova–Çınarcık and Yalova–Hersek fault segments, we constructed the frequency
distribution of P- and T-axes utilizing 111 and 68 events, respectively, to correlate the geometry of the principle stress axes
and fault orientations. The analysis yields low frictional strength for the Princes’ Island fault segments and high frictional
strength for Yalova–Çınarcık, Yalova–Hersek segments. The local stress tensor derived from the inversion of P- and T-axes ofthe fault plane solutions of Çınarcık basin events portrays nearly horizontal maximum compressive stress axis oriented N154E
which is almost parallel to the peak of the frequency distribution of the azimuth of the P-axes. The fitting of the observed andcalculated frequency distributions is attained for a low frictional coefficient which is about μ ≈ 0.1. Evidences on the weaknessof NAF segments in eastern Marmara Sea region are revealed by other geophysicalobservations. Our results also show that the local stress field in Çınarcık basin is rotated≈30° clockwise compared to the regional stress tensor in Marmara region derived fromthe large earthquakes, whereas the local stress tensor in Yalova–Çınarcık area is foundto be rotated ≈30° counterclockwise. The rotation of the two local stress fields isderived in the area where NAF bifurcates into two branches overlaying large electricalconductor.

Keywords: Local stress field, Frictional coefficient, Marmara Sea, Çınarcık basin, Stressfield rotation

Figure 1*Corresponding author: Ali Pinar, pinara@boun.edu.tr

FULL PAPER

Open Access

Development of integrated earthquake simulation system
for Istanbul
Abdurrahman Sahin*, Rafet Sisman, Aysegul Askan and Muneo Hori
Earth, Planets and Space 2016, 68:115 DOI: 10.1186/s40623-016-0497-y
Received: 9 April 2015, Accepted: 22 June 2016, Published: 12 July 2016

Abstract
Recent advances in computing have brought a new and challenging way to tackle the earthquake hazard and disaster problems: integrationof the seismic actions in the form of numerical models. For this purpose, integrated earthquake simulation (IES) has been developed in Japan,
and now a new version is being developed in Turkey which targets Istanbul. This version of IES is being built in MATLAB and includes site
response analysis and structural analysis of existing buildings with data obtained via GIS databases. In this study, we present an initial
application in Zeytinburnu district of Istanbul where the results are expressed in the form of spatial distributions of ground motion andbuilding responses. At the end of the analysis, it is seen that most of the buildings make small displacements and the displacement values are
directly proportional to the total height of the structures. Since the obtained ground motion distribution and peak values are not very high,structural damage has not been observed under the current simulation. The effect of bedrock
depth and soil parameters on strong ground motion distribution has been observed. The mosteffective ground motion locations in the selected area have been determined, and the criticalbuildings that have maximum displacement during the earthquake motion are detected.
Currently, the IES on MATLAB does not include the source to bedrock wave propagation
mechanism and the resulting ground motions at each grid point. In future studies, alternativemodels for this purpose along with input model parameters for Istanbul will be applied. Oncethe source-to-structure integrated model is complete, past earthquakes as well as potential
scenario events in Istanbul will be modeled in the final form of IES on MATLAB. Results will bevaluable for a variety of purposes ranging from disaster mitigation to emergency
management. In future part of this study, site vibration tests will also be made for buildingsthat do not comply with seismic design codes and constitute the largest portion of the seismic
risk. New models will be developed for these buildings and adopted into the IES system.

Keywords: Integrated earthquake simulation, Full-scale models, Earthquake disaster
simulation, Earthquake hazard simulation, Virtual city, SoVeLAB, CitySeis*Corresponding author: Abdurrahman Sahin, abdsahin@yildiz.edu.tr
7

Figure 1

The Next Marmara Earthquake: Disaster Mitigation, Recovery and Early Warning

FULL PAPER

Open Access

Investigating P- and S-wave velocity structure beneath the Marmara
region (Turkey) and the surrounding area from local
earthquake tomography
Gulten Polat*, Nurcan Meral Özel and Ivan Koulakov
Earth, Planets and Space 2016, 68:132 DOI: 10.1186/s40623-016-0503-4
Received: 19 October 2015, Accepted: 5 July 2016, Published: 22 July 2016

Abstract
We investigated the crustal structure beneath the Marmara region and the surrounding area in the western part of the North
Anatolian fault zone. These areas have high seismicity and are of critical significance to earthquake hazards. The study was
based on travel-time tomography using local moderate and microearthquakes occurring in the study area recorded by the Multi-Disciplinary
Earthquake Research in High Risk Regions of Turkey project and Kandilli
Observatory and Earthquake Research Institute. We selected 2131
earthquakes and a total of 92,858 arrival times, consisting of 50,044 P-wave
and 42,814 S-wave arrival times. We present detailed crustal structure
down to 50 km depth beneath the Marmara region for P- and S-wave
velocities using the LOTOS code based on iterative inversion. We used the
distributions of the resulting seismic parameters (Vp, Vs) to pick out
significant geodynamical features. The high-velocity anomalies correlate
well with fracturing segments of the North Anatolian fault. High seismicity
is mostly concentrated in these segments. In particular, low velocities wereobserved beneath the central Marmara Sea at 5 km depth.

Keywords: Marmara Sea, North Anatolian fault zone, Seismic tomography,
Seismic velocity structure, Seismicity

Figure 2*Corresponding author: Gulten Polat, gultenpolat2005@gmail.com

FULL PAPER

Open AccessA new GIS-based tsunami risk evaluation: MeTHuVA (METU tsunami
human vulnerability assessment) at Yenikapı, Istanbul
Zeynep Ceren Cankaya, Mehmet Lutfi Suzen, Ahmet Cevdet Yalciner*, Cagil Kolat, Andrey Zaytsev
and Betul Aytore
Earth, Planets and Space 2016, 68:133 DOI: 10.1186/s40623-016-0507-0
Received: 28 December 2015, Accepted: 6 July 2016, Published: 22 July 2016

Abstract
Istanbul is a mega city with various coastal utilities located on the northern coast of the Sea of Marmara. At Yenikapı, there are criticalvulnerable coastal utilities, structures, and active metropolitan life. Fishery ports, commercial ports, small craft harbors, passenger terminals ofintercity maritime transportation, waterfront commercial and/or recreational structures with residential/commercial areas and public utility
areas are some examples of coastal utilization that are vulnerable to marine disasters. Therefore, the tsunami risk in the Yenikapı region is an
important issue for Istanbul. In this study, a new methodology for tsunami vulnerability assessment for areas susceptible to tsunami is
proposed, in which the Yenikapı region is chosen as a case study. Available datasets from the Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality and Turkish
Navy are used as inputs for high-resolution GIS-based multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) evaluation of tsunami risk in Yenikapı.
Bathymetry and topography database is used for high-resolution tsunami numerical modeling where the tsunami hazard, in terms of coastal
inundation, is deterministically computed using the NAMI DANCE numerical code, considering earthquake worst case scenarios. In order todefine the tsunami human vulnerability of the region, two different aspects, vulnerability at location and evacuation resilience maps werecreated using the analytical hierarchical process (AHP) method of MCDA. A
vulnerability at location map is composed of metropolitan use, geology,
elevation, and distance from shoreline layers, whereas an evacuation resilience
map is formed by slope, distance within flat areas, distance to buildings, anddistance to road networks layers. The tsunami risk map is then computed by the
proposed new relationship which uses flow depth maps, vulnerability at location
maps, and evacuation resilience maps.

Keywords: METU tsunami human vulnerability assessment (MeTHuVA),

Tsunami risk analysis, Geographic information systems (GIS), Multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA), Analytical hierarchical process(AHP), Tsunami, Istanbul, Yenikapı*Corresponding author: Ahmet Cevdet Yalciner, yalciner@metu.edu.tr
8

Figure 1

Earth, Planets and Space

FULL PAPER

Open AccessPhysically based probabilistic seismic hazard analysis using
broadband ground motion simulation: a case study for the
Prince Islands Fault, Marmara Sea
Aydin Mert*, Yasin M. Fahjan, Lawrence J. Hutchings and Ali Pinar
Earth, Planets and Space 2016, 68:146 DOI: 10.1186/s40623-016-0520-3
Received: 3 August 2015, Accepted: 2 August 2016, Published: 22 August 2016

Abstract
The main motivation for this study was the impending occurrence of a catastrophic earthquake along the Prince Island Fault (PIF) in the Marmara
Sea and the disaster risk around the Marmara region, especially in Istanbul. This study provides the results of a physically based probabilistic
seismic hazard analysis (PSHA) methodology, using broadband strong ground motion simulations, for sites within the Marmara region, Turkey,
that may be vulnerable to possible large earthquakes throughout the PIF segments in the Marmara Sea. The methodology is called physically
based because it depends on the physical processes of earthquake rupture and wave propagation to simulate earthquake ground motion time
histories. We included the effects of all considerable-magnitude earthquakes. To generate the high-frequency (0.5–20 Hz) part of the broadband
earthquake simulation, real, small-magnitude earthquakes recorded by a local seismic array were used as empirical Green’s functions. For thefrequencies below 0.5 Hz, the simulations were obtained by using synthetic Green’s functions, which are synthetic seismograms calculated by an
explicit 2D/3D elastic finite difference wave propagation routine. By using a range of rupture scenarios for all considerable-magnitude
earthquakes throughout the PIF segments, we produced a hazard calculation for frequencies of 0.1–20 Hz. The physically based PSHA used here
followed the same procedure as conventional PSHA, except that conventional PSHA
utilizes point sources or a series of point sources to represent earthquakes, and thisapproach utilizes the full rupture of earthquakes along faults. Furthermore, conventional
PSHA predicts ground motion parameters by using empirical attenuation relationships,
whereas this approach calculates synthetic seismograms for all magnitudes ofearthquakes to obtain ground motion parameters. PSHA results were produced for 2, 10,
and 50 % hazards for all sites studied in the Marmara region.

Keywords: Simulation of strong ground motion, Probabilistic seismic hazard assessment,
Empirical Green’s function, Synthetic Green’s function, Prince Island Fault

Figure 2*Corresponding author: Aydin Mert, mertay@boun.edu.tr

FULL PAPER

Open Access

Seismic parameters re-determined from historical seismogramsof 1935-Erdek–Marmara Island and 1963-Çınarcık Earthquakes
Nilay Başarır Baştürk*, Nurcan Meral Özel and Marco Caciagli
Earth, Planets and Space 2016, 68:158 DOI: 10.1186/s40623-016-0528-8
Received: 31 August 2015, Accepted: 24 August 2016, Published: 20 September 2016

Abstract
In this study, the original seismograms of the 1935-Erdek–Marmara Island and 1963-Çınarcık Earthquakes, recorded at local
and regional distances, were vectorized. The epicentral locations have been calculated using available readings from originalrecords and also ISS and seismic station bulletins for 04.01.1935-14:41 and 16:20 Marmara Island–Erdek Earthquakes and18.09.1963-16:58 Çınarcık Earthquake. The epicenter determinations show that the first event in 04.01.1935 was located at
40.72N–27.72E, while the second one occurred at 40.61N–27.43E, indicating that both were located near the Marmara Island.
Another finding is that the 1963 event was located at 40.80N–29.18E, near the Princes’ Island fault. Furthermore, moment
tensor inversion method was applied on these earthquakes by using original seismograms, which provided an opportunity toilluminate the seismotectonic features of Marmara Region based on the retrieved fault mechanism solutions. For the first time,
the fault mechanisms for 04.01.1935-14:41 and 16:20 Earthquakes
were determined using moment tensor inversion from theoriginal seismic waveforms. Likewise, the result obtained for thefault mechanism of 1963 Çınarcık Earthquake showed normal
fault mechanism with much shallower depth than estimatedbefore. Our preferred solutions showed that the fault mechanisms
for the three events are normal faults and coincide with theseismotectonic structure of the Marmara Region.

Keywords: Historical seismograms, Seismic parameters, Çınarcık
Earthquake, Erdek–Marmara Island Earthquake

Figure 1*Corresponding author: Nilay Başarır Baştürk, nilaybasarir@gmail.com; nilay.basturk@boun.edu.tr
9

The Next Marmara Earthquake: Disaster Mitigation, Recovery and Early Warning

FULL PAPER

Open Access

Real-time earthquake shake, damage, and loss mappingfor Istanbul metropolitan area
A. Can Zülfikar*, N. Özge Zülfikar Fercan, Süleyman Tunç and Mustafa Erdik
Earth, Planets and Space 2017, 69:9 DOI: 10.1186/s40623-016-0579-x
Received: 6 September 2015, Accepted: 29 November 2016, Published: 3 January 2017

Abstract
The past devastating earthquakes in densely populated urban centers, such as the 1994 Northridge; 1995 Kobe; 1999 series of Kocaeli, Düzce,and Athens; and 2011 Van-Erciş events, showed that substantial social and economic losses can be expected. Previous studies indicate that
inadequate emergency response can increase the number of casualties by a maximum factor of 10, which suggests the need for research on
rapid earthquake shaking damage and loss estimation. The reduction in casualties in urban areas immediately following an earthquake can be
improved if the location and severity of damages can be rapidly assessed by information from rapid response systems. In this context, a research
project (TUBITAK-109M734) titled “Real-time Information of Earthquake Shaking, Damage, and Losses for Target Cities of Thessaloniki and
Istanbul” was conducted during 2011–2014 to establish the rapid estimation of ground motion shaking and related earthquake damages andcasualties for the target cities. In the present study, application to Istanbul metropolitan area is presented. In order to fulfill this objective,
earthquake hazard and risk assessment methodology known as Earthquake Loss Estimation Routine, which was developed for the EuroMediterranean region within the Network of Research Infrastructures for European Seismology EC-FP6 project, was used. The current application
to the Istanbul metropolitan area provides real-time ground motion information obtained by strong motion stations distributed throughout thedensely populated areas of the city. According to this ground motion information,building damage estimation is computed by using grid-based building inventory, andthe related loss is then estimated. Through this application, the rapidly estimatedinformation enables public and private emergency management authorities to takeaction and allocate and prioritize resources to minimize the casualties in urban areas
during immediate post-earthquake periods. Moreover, it is expected that during anearthquake, rapid information of ground shaking, damage, and loss estimations will
provide vital information to allow appropriate emergency agencies to take immediate
action, which will help to save lives. In general terms, this study can be considered as an
example for application to metropolitan areas under seismic risk.

Keywords: Rapid response, Loss estimation and mapping, Shakemaps, Damage
estimation, Real-time information, Istanbul city

Figure 3*Corresponding author: A. Can Zülfikar, can.zulfikar@boun.edu.tr; aczulfikar@gtu.edu.tr

TECHNICAL REPORT

Open Access

Design and challenges for a tsunami early warning systemin the Marmara SeaÖcal Necmioğlu
Earth, Planets and Space 2016, 68:13 DOI: 10.1186/s40623-016-0388-2
Received: 31 July 2015, Accepted: 16 January 2016, Published: 28 January 2016

Abstract
Since 1900, around 90,000 people have lost their lives in 76 earthquakes in Turkey, with a total affected population of around 7 million anddirect losses of around 25 billion USD. Based on a time-dependent model that includes coseismic and post-seismic effects of the 1999 Kocaeli
earthquake with moment magnitude Mw = 7.4, Parsons (J Geophys Res. 109, 2004) concluded that the probability of an earthquake with Mw > 7
in the Sea of Marmara near Istanbul is 35 to 70 % in the next 30 years. According to a 2011 study, an earthquake with Mw = 7.25 on the Main
Marmara Fault is expected to heavily damage or destroy 2 to 4 % of around 1,000,000 buildings in Istanbul with a population around 13 million,
with 9 to 15 % of the buildings receiving medium damage and 20 to 34 % of the buildings damaged lightly (Erdik, Science 341:72, 2013). In theabsence of adequate post-earthquake assembly areas especially in the heavily urbanized Istanbul, it is evident that after a major earthquake,
especially in the coastal parts of the city, citizens would be storming to landfill assembly and recreational areas. Besides earthquakes, around 30
tsunamis have been reported by Altınok et al. (Natural Hazards Earth System
Science 11:273–293, 2011) in the Marmara Sea. Among those, catastrophic
earthquakes such as 1509, 1766, and 1894 resulted in considerable tsunamis andsome damage. The latest tsunami observed in Marmara was due to a triggered
submarine landslide of the 1999 Mw = 7.4 Kocaeli earthquake which led toreported run-up heights of 1–3 m in most places (Tinti et al., Marine Geology
225:311–330, 2006). In this study, I propose a design for a tsunami warning system
specific for the Marmara region that is strongly coupled with the earthquake early
warning system (due to the short arrival times of tsunami) and stakeholders of thetsunami mitigation activities, such as local and regional components of disasterand emergency management and civil protection units, to ensure that the citizens
would remain away from the coastline in case of a large earthquake, while
discussing associated challenges such as decoupled earthquake and tsunami
mitigation activities in the Marmara region.

Keywords: Marmara, Tsunami early warning

Figure 2

Corresponding author: Öcal Necmioğlu, ocal.necmioglu@boun.edu.tr
10

Information for Contributors
General1.

Manuscripts should be submitted through the journal’s Editorial Manager system(https://www.editorialmanager.com/epsp/default.aspx).

2.

Only papers not previously published will be accepted, and the emphasis is on theoriginality of concept or observation.

3.

Four varieties of article types are available.
3.1“Full papers” without word limit.

3.2“Express Letters” have a limit of 5000 words including the title page, abstract,
keywords, main text, declarations, references, figure legends and table legends.
The sum of the number of figures and tables should be less than or equal to 5.

3.3“Frontier Letters” can be submitted upon invitation by the Editor-in-Chief. “Frontier
Letters” have a limit of 11,000 words including legends for figures and tables. One
figure or table not exceeding one A4 page is counted as 500 words.

3.4
4.

“Technical reports” describe the technical development of instrument or software.

Authors retain the copyright, and distribution of articles is free under cc-by license.

Technical
1.

Manuscripts should be written in English with double spacing.

2.

Each manuscript should be organized in the following order: title, authors’ names,
affiliations, abstract, key words, main text, acknowledgement, appendix, references, andsupplementary materials.

3.

The corresponding author should be clearly indicated.

4.

The abstract is limited to 300 words and should be informative and include principal
findings and conclusions. Please avoid abbreviations.

5.

The main text can have multiple free headings.

6.

High-resolution figures should be provided in the following format; PDF (preferred
format for diagrams), PNG (preferred format for photos or images), EPS ,TIFF, JPEG, BMP.

7.

References must follow the Springer Basic style.

Correspondence
If you have any questions, please contact editorial@earth-planets-space.com.

© EPS Steering Committee 2017 All rights reserved.
A Grant-in-Aid for Publication of Scientific Research Results (251001) from Japan
Society for the Promotion of Science is used for printing.

Contents
Special issue “The next Marmara earthquake: disaster mitigation, recovery, and early warning”. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Takane Hori, Ali Pinar, Ocal Necmioglu, Muneo Hori and Azusa Nishizawa
Assessment of tsunami resilience of Haydarpaşa Port in the Sea of Marmara by high-resolution numerical modeling. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Betul Aytore, Ahmet Cevdet Yalciner, Andrey Zaytsev, Zeynep Ceren Cankaya and Mehmet Lütfi Suzen
Offshore seismicity in the western Marmara Sea, Turkey, revealed by ocean bottom observation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Yojiro Yamamoto, Narumi Takahashi, Seckin Citak, Doğan Kalafat, Ali Pinar, Cemil Gurbuz and Yoshiyuki Kaneda
Focal mechanism determinations of earthquakes along the North Anatolian fault, beneath the Sea of Marmara and the
Aegean Sea . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Masaru Nakano, Seckin Citak and Doğan Kalafat
Estimation of shallow S-wave velocity structure and site response characteristics by microtremor array measurements
in Tekirdag region, NW Turkey. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ozlem Karagoz, Kosuke Chimoto, Seckin Citak, Oguz Ozel, Hiroaki Yamanaka and Ken Hatayama
Frictional strength of North Anatolian fault in eastern Marmara region. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ali Pinar, Zeynep Coşkun, Aydin Mert and Doğan Kalafat
Development of integrated earthquake simulation system for Istanbul. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Abdurrahman Sahin, Rafet Sisman, Aysegul Askan and Muneo Hori
Investigating P- and S-wave velocity structure beneath the Marmara region (Turkey) and the surrounding area fromlocal earthquake tomography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Gulten Polat, Nurcan Meral Özel and Ivan Koulakov
A new GIS-based tsunami risk evaluation: MeTHuVA (METU tsunami human vulnerability assessment) at Yenikapı,
Istanbul . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Zeynep Ceren Cankaya, Mehmet Lutfi Suzen, Ahmet Cevdet Yalciner,
Cagil Kolat, Andrey Zaytsev and Betul Aytore

1
5
5
6

6
7
7
8

8

Physically based probabilistic seismic hazard analysis using broadband ground motion simulation: a case study for the
Prince Islands Fault, Marmara Sea . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aydin Mert, Yasin M. Fahjan, Lawrence J. Hutchings and Ali Pinar 9
Seismic parameters re-determined from historical seismograms of 1935-Erdek–Marmara Island and 1963-Çınarcık
Earthquakes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nilay Başarır Baştürk, Nurcan Meral Özel and Marco Caciagli 9
Real-time earthquake shake, damage, and loss mapping for Istanbul metropolitan area
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A. Can Zülfikar, N. Özge Zülfikar Fercan, Süleyman Tunç and Mustafa Erdik 10
Design and challenges for a tsunami early warning system in the Marmara Sea . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Öcal Necmioğlu 10

Cover image: Yamamoto, Y. et al., Earth, Planets and Space 2015, 67:147 DOI: 10.1186/s40623-015-0325-9