Database of Recent Tsunami Deposits 

By Robert Peters and Bruce E. Jaffe 

Open-File Report 2010-1172

U.S. Department of the Interior 

U.S. Geological Survey 
U.S. Department of the Interior 

KEN SALAZAR, Secretary 

U.S. Geological Survey

Marcia K. McNutt, Director 

U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia 2010 

For product and ordering information: 

World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod 

Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS 

For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, 

its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment: 

World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov 

Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS 

Suggested citation: 

Peters, Robert, and Jaffe, B.E., 2010, Database of recent tsunami deposits: 

U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2010-1172, 12 p. and database 

[http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2010/1172/]. 

Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply 

endorsement by the U.S. Government. 

Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual 

copyright owners to reproduce any copyrighted material contained within this report. 
iii

Contents 

Abstract..............................................................................................................................................1

Introduction ........................................................................................................................................1

Structure of the database...................................................................................................................3

Limitations of the database ................................................................................................................4

Categories in the database ................................................................................................................4

Summary and future work................................................................................................................10

Acknowledgements..........................................................................................................................10

References Cited .............................................................................................................................10
Recent Tsunami Deposit Database 

By Robert Peters and Bruce E. Jaffe 

Abstract 

This report describes a database of sedimentary characteristics of tsunami deposits 

derived from published accounts of tsunami deposit investigations conducted shortly after 

the occurrence of a tsunami. The database contains 228 entries, each entry containing 

data from up to 71 categories. It includes data from 51 publications covering 15 tsunamis 

distributed between 16 countries. The database encompasses a wide range of depositional 

settings including tropical islands, beaches, coastal plains, river banks, agricultural fields, 

and urban environments. It includes data from both local tsunamis and teletsunamis. The 

data are valuable for interpreting prehistorical, historical, and modern tsunami deposits, 

and for the development of criteria to identify tsunami deposits in the geologic record. 

Introduction 

Tsunami deposits provide important information regarding the potential hazard, 

past occurrence, recurrence, and magnitude of tsunamis. Tsunami deposits have been 

used in the preparation of tsunami hazard maps (Priest and others, 1997; Walsh and 

others, 2000), in probabilistic studies used for modernizing flood hazard maps (Tsunami 

Pilot Study Working Group, 2006), and are an important part of evaluating sites for 

future nuclear power plants (Moore and Jaffe, 2007) and other potentially hazardous 

coastal installations, such as liquid natural gas facilities (Ross and others, 2004). Tsunami 

deposits preserved in the geologic record have been important in alerting scientists and 

the public to potential tsunami and earthquake hazards where the historical record is too 

short to include prior tsunami events (Satake and others, 1996). Tsunami deposits have 

the potential to provide information on tsunami overland flow velocities and wave 

heights, information that is often difficult to measure or estimate even immediately after a 

tsunami has occurred (Jaffe and Gelfenbaum, 2007). 

An important consideration in any tsunami deposit field study is developing 

criteria to identify tsunami deposits and to distinguish tsunami deposits from sediments 

deposited by storms or other processes. Criteria for identification of tsunami deposits 

have been established and published over the last two decades (Nelson and others, 1996; 

Dawson and Shi, 2000; Moore and Jaffe, 2007; Peters and others, 2007). Several studies 

address the issue of distinguishing tsunamis from storm deposits (Nanayama and others, 

2000; Goff and others, 2004; Tuttle and others, 2004; Kortekaas and Dawson, 2007; 

Morton and others, 2007). Tsunami deposit characteristics also have been defined based 

on numerical modeling of tsunami depositional processes (Jaffe and Gelfenbaum, 2007). 

Modeling studies usually rely on a set of idealized or simplified parameters or 

assumptions (Jaffe and Gelfenbaum, 2007). These conditions may not apply to the whole 

tsunami deposit and may be missed in isolated cores typical of paleotsunami surveys. 
2

Criteria based on sedimentary characteristics of paleotsunami deposits use characteristics 

of interpreted rather than known tsunami deposits (Dawson and Shi, 2000). Many studies 

have recognized the need to use modern tsunami deposits to develop criteria for 

identifying paleotsunami deposits (Nanayama and others, 2000; Kortekaas and Dawson, 

2007; Morton and others, 2007). However, criteria based on modern tsunami deposits are 

limited to specific regions and tsunamis. 

No single criterion is sufficient to identify a tsunami deposit. Identification 

criteria must be used in combination to determine if a deposit is consistent with tsunami 

deposition and to eliminate other depositional processes. Rarely do tsunami deposits, as 

observed in the field in trenches, outcrops, or cores, contain all of the sedimentary 

characteristics used in these identification criteria, and deposits originated by other 

coastal processes, such as storms, often share characteristics with tsunami deposits 

(Kortekaas and Dawson, 2007; Morton and others, 2007). Differences in tsunami deposits 

due to regional or even local differences in depositional, physiographic, and tectonic 

settings, as well as differences between tsunamis responsible for the deposits, complicate 

the problem of developing a single set of identification criteria that can be used in all 

tsunami deposit studies. While most recent tsunami deposit studies confirm a number of 

established tsunami deposit identification criteria, at least locally, they also show a great 

diversity from site to site and between tsunamis. To be most effective, tsunami deposit 

identification criteria must be tailored to each individual study and should be based, at 

least in part, on a set of sedimentary characteristics derived from observations of known 

recent tsunami deposits, ideally from similar settings. 

To facilitate development of identification criteria based on sedimentary 

characteristics derived from known tsunami deposits, the recent tsunami deposit database 

compiles data derived from published reports that encompass most known recent tsunami 

deposits. For the purposes of this database, recent tsunami deposit studies are studies that 

include descriptions of the characteristics of the tsunami deposit, and where the 

descriptions are made soon after the tsunami occurred, to minimize reworking of the 

deposit. In a recent tsunami deposit survey, identification of the tsunami deposit is often 

simple, and characteristics of the deposit may be recorded with little doubt of its origin. A 

possible exception to this is where the tsunami deposit is deposited directly over beach 

sand, and the location of the basal contact may involve some interpretation (Jaffe and 

others, 2003). While no specific time limit can be assigned in defining a recent tsunami 

deposit, the time elapsed between the tsunami and the field investigation should be short 

enough that identification of the tsunami deposit is not in question and the tsunami 

deposit has been minimally altered by natural or anthropogenic activity. In contrast, a 

historical tsunami deposit is a deposit from a known tsunami that occurred in the 

historical past that must be identified and interpreted from an outcrop, core, or trench, 

while a paleo-tsunami deposit records a tsunami that predates the historical record. 

Descriptions of tsunami sediments are relatively new in the literature. Shepard 

and others (1950) reported sediments on roadways in Hawaii following the 1946 Alaska 

earthquake and tsunami. Sediments deposited in Hawaii, Japan, and Chile by the 1960 

Chile tsunami were described by Eaton and others (1961), Kon'no (1961), and Wright 

and Mella (1963), respectively. Following the interpretation of sand layers in salt marsh 

stratigraphy along the Niawiakum River in southwest Washington as tsunami deposits 

(Atwater, 1987), a large number of papers were published describing tsunami deposits 
3

both in Cascadia and worldwide. Following the December 12, 1992, tsunami on Flores, 

Indonesia, tsunami-deposited sediments were described by Shi and others (1995). 

Tsunami sediments also were described following the July 12, 1993, Hokkaido-NanseiOki tsunami in Japan by Nishimura and Miyaji (1995) and Sato and others (1995). 

Tsunami sediment studies have followed every major tsunami since. The SumatraAndaman tsunami of December 26, 2004, initiated an unprecedented number of posttsunami field surveys, a large number of which included detailed tsunami sediment 

investigations. Most post-tsunami field surveys now include a sedimentary component 

and the quantity and quality of sedimentary data has steadily increased. The body of 

recent tsunami sediment data now encompasses a large number of depositional, 

physiographic, and geologic settings. The database presented here contains 228 entries. 

Each entry represents a specific site from a specific study and is derived from the body of 

published literature on tsunami deposits. The data are organized into 71 categories and 

contain data about the deposits, the tsunamis, the sites, and the methods used to collect 

the data. The database includes data from 51 publications documenting deposits from 15 

tsunamis distributed over 16 countries worldwide. 

Structure of the Database 

This recent tsunami deposit database uses the Microsoft Excel spreadsheet 

program to present and organize the data. The database is set up on two Microsoft Excel 

worksheets. The first worksheet describes tsunami deposits. The second is a list of the 

full references for papers cited in the database. The data format used in each of the 

included papers often varies from publication to publication. We have used numerical 

data, wherever possible, and when this is not available, we have used the authors’ own 

words or descriptions. Where conversions are clear, we have converted data into standard 

formats appropriate for the category, such as decimal degrees for latitude and longitude 

or centimeters for deposit thickness. If a publication describes more than one site, and if 

details for each site are given separately, each site is catalogued separately (that is a 

separate row is used for each deposit). Also, separate entries may be used if specific data 

apply to clearly defined cores, trenches, or transects. If only generalized data are given 

that apply to more than one site, sites may be grouped into a single entry. Generalized 

data are included for individual sites if it is clear that the data apply to that site. If 

significant differences in deposit characteristics are reported at different locations within 

a site, these also are catalogued separately. 

None of the publications cited in the database cover all data categories. Many 

publications are limited in scope and cover only a few categories. In others, tsunami 

deposits were only a secondary theme of the paper. For some sites, there is only mention 

that a tsunami or storm deposit was present, but no details are given. Some categories are 

present in the database that do not contain any entries. These categories are included 

because data appropriate to the category is included in other databases (for example, the 

Cascadia tsunami deposit database; Peters and others, 2003) and the category is included 

for comparison, or because the data may be useful in evaluating tsunami deposits. The 

database categories provide a guide to the type of data useful in tsunami deposit studies 

and to the type of data that needs to be recorded in the field and included in publications 

describing tsunami deposits. 
4

Limitations of the Database 

Care should be exercised in using these data. No attempt has been made to verify 

the data presented in this report. The data are derived from a variety of studies with 

differences in focus, scope, and intent. Details concerning techniques, errors, difficulties, 

inconsistencies, and potential alternate interpretations of the data are beyond the scope of 

this report. These are usually site-specific and the original citation should be consulted 

regarding the context of the data. This report contains data from both peer-reviewed 

journals and from publications not typically subjected to extensive peer review, such as 

technical papers or conference proceedings. Abstracts are not used in the database. A 

column for the type of publication is included in the database. While the degree of 

conformity to standard methods has increased as tsunami deposit studies have become 

more common, techniques still varied widely among the studies and the accuracy and 

precision between separate entries may not be comparable. No attempt has been made in 

this report to quantify errors. It is recommended that the original reference, supplied for 

each entry, be consulted before using data compiled in this report. 

Categories in the Database 

Entry number: The number of the entry in the database. 

Country: The country where the site is located. 

Location – general: The state, city, or other regional designation used to locate the site of 

the deposit. 

Site name – specific: The specific name of the site investigated. If more than one site is 

listed and coordinates apply to only one location, or if coordinates are supplied for 

more than one site, coordinates will be assigned in the order of the sites listed and 

sites with coordinates will be denoted by an asterisk (*). In some cases, general data 

are given for a wide area in one entry labeled “general”, then specific data are given 

for specific site, transects, or cores in subsequent entries. 

Transect number or designation: If data are derived from a single or group of transects, 

and multiple transects or groups of transects exist at the site, a transect designation is 

included. If the data represent a compilation or condensation of data derived from all 

transects, no transect designation is given. 

Core or trench number: The core or trench designation, or group of cores or trenches, that 

the data are derived from. 

Latitude (decimal degrees): Latitude of site where data were collected. The most precise 

location supplied by the authors is used. For example, if location data for a specific 

core or trench are supplied, this will be used. If not, site location data will be used. If 

multiple locations are given for a single entry, such as GPS coordinates for a group 

of cores or transects, a representative latitude or a range will be given. 

Longitude (decimal degrees): Longitude of site where data were collected. The most 

precise location supplied by the authors is used. For example, if location data for a 

specific core or trench are supplied, this will be used. If not, site location data will be 

used. If multiple locations are given for a single entry, such as GPS coordinates for a 

group of cores or transect, a representative latitude or a range will be given. 
5

Source of location data: Latitudes and longitudes reported by the authors are used, when 

possible, either from the primary publication or directly from one of the authors of 

the publication. If location data are not supplied by the author, Google Earth or 

Google Maps were used to derive a general location based on place names supplied 

by the authors. Some locations were too general to assign coordinates. Latitudes and 

longitudes other than those supplied by the authors are for general location reference 

only and may not precisely or accurately represent a site location. 

Date surveyed: dates, year, or period survey was conducted. 

Method of investigation (field methods): The method used to investigate tsunami 

sedimentation. Common investigative methods are trenches, gouge cores, cut banks, 

for example. Specific field methods may not be presented here, and the original 

citation should be consulted for details. 

Laboratory analyses performed: List of technical analyses performed on samples from the 

deposit, such as grain size or foraminiferal. Specific analytical techniques are not 

presented here, and the original citation should be consulted for details. 

Depositional setting: Depositional setting for tsunami or storm sedimentation, such as 

lake, coastal marsh, freshwater marsh, for example. 

Physiographic setting: The physiographic setting in which the tsunami deposits are 

located. The physiographic setting affects the flow conditions of the tsunami, and, 

therefore, sedimentation. Physiographic setting also may influence how some 

tsunami parameters, such as inundation, are measured. Some aspects of the geologic 

setting may be presented as well. 

Inundation reference: Inundation distance for open coastal settings is the maximum 

distance inland, normal to the shoreline, inundated by the tsunami. However, in other 

physiographic settings, the term inundation distance is subject to interpretation and 

the definition may change depending on the focus of the study. In a large bay or 

estuary, which may extend several kilometers inland from the open coast, a tsunami 

may propagate up a bay or even be focused by the bay. A tsunami that has a 

relatively small inundation distance in an open coastal setting or along a coast with 

cliffs may travel a greater distance up a river or estuary. Therefore, when considering 

inundation distance, it is important to note the physiographic setting and the 

reference point from which inundation distance is measured. When known, the 

reference point for measuring the inundation distance is given. “Open coast” means 

the inundation distance is measured normal to the trend of the shoreline. When 

warranted, a more specific reference may be given. “River mouth” means the 

distance is measured from the mouth of the river or estuary, perpendicular to the 

trend of the coast at the river mouth. “Up river” means the distance up a river or 

estuary and will not necessarily be in a straight line but will follow the course of the 

river. “Bay shore” means perpendicular to the trend of the shore within a bay. When 

“bay shore” is added to river descriptions it means the distance is measured from the 

mouth of a river that flows into a bay. 

Barrier height (m): The height, in meters, of any barrier, such as a dune or beach ridge, 

that the tsunami must overtop before reaching the depositional zone. 
6

Recent, historical, or prehistorical: All entries in this database are recent tsunami 

deposits. This column is included for comparison with other databases. Though these 

terms may infer a relative age for a deposit, they do not refer to a specific time 

period. “Recent” indicates that data were collected soon after the sediment was 

deposited. No criteria have been established yet in the literature to define or limit the 

time period termed “recent”, but for an event termed “recent”, tsunami sediment 

survey teams are organized soon after an event to document, measure and/or sample 

sediment before it has been disturbed by natural or anthropogenic processes. Ideally, 

this is immediately after the event, but if the event causes significant damage or loss 

of life, sediment survey teams usually arrive after initial relief efforts have been 

completed. A recent event is usually present at the surface. Follow-up studies 

occurring months to years after the event also may be termed “recent”. “Historical” 

refers to events recorded in the historical record that are recognized in the 

sedimentary record. “Prehistorical” refers to events only known through the 

sedimentary record. 

# Tsunamis at site: At some sites, more than one recent tsunami deposit was documented. 

Some studies also included a paleotsunami component to the investigation. The 

number of tsunamis preserved in geologic record at the site, from the surface to the 

maximum depth investigated is listed here. However, no details of historical or 

paleo-tsunami deposits are included in the database, even if they occur at the same 

site as a recent tsunami deposit. 

Event #: If more than one event is preserved, this entry represents the number of the 

tsunami event described. Event numbers increase down-core or section. At present, 

all events included in the database are recent. At some sites, more than one recent 

tsunami deposit was documented. MacInnes and others, (2009) report results from 

deposits by two recent tsunamis from the Kuril Islands. The most recent tsunami 

(January 13, 2007 is assigned event # 1 and the earlier tsunami (November 15, 2006) 

is assigned event # 2. Jaffe and others (2006) report two recent tsunamis on the 

island of Simeulue, Indonesia, but only data from the December 26, 2004, tsunami 

was presented in the report, so only results from the December 26, 2004, tsunami 

(event # 1) is included in the database. 

Date of tsunami: The date the tsunami occurred. 

Name/designation of tsunami: The name or designation of the tsunami. This often is the 

name of the region the tsunami originated or the area of its greatest impact. If more 

than one name is reported in the literature, the most accepted name is reported. 

Recurrence interval: If historical or paleotsunami surveys at the site allow calculation of a 

recurrence interval for tsunamis at the site, it is reported here. Recurrence intervals 

based on methods other than tsunami deposits are not reported. 

Cause of tsunami: A summary of the cause of the tsunami, such as earthquake, submarine 

landslide, or volcano. 

Locally generated or teletsunami: This entry designates if the tsunami was generated 

locally, relative to the site being described, or has traveled long distances or across 

ocean basins. 

Tsunami height (m): The reported size, in meters, of the tsunami at the site location. This 

statistic represents the size of the wave relative to sea level. It is different than the 

water depth, which is reported relative to ground level. 
7

Tsunami water depth at site (m): The maximum depth, in meters, of the water caused by 

the tsunami above the ground surface, estimated at the site, transect, core, or trench 

location. Surveys may use physical data, eyewitness reports, or a combination of the 

two to estimate water depth. Physical evidence may be broken branches, sediment 

deposits on structures, debris in trees, trim lines, or water marks. These are usually 

minimum estimates. Estimates based on eyewitness reports may overestimate or 

underestimate water depth. Original reference should be consulted for methods used 

to estimate water depth data. Water depth is different than tsunami height, which is 

measured relative to sea level. 

# Waves reported: The number of waves reported to have inundated the site. This may be 

from eye-witness accounts or interpreted from the tsunami deposit. 

Maximum inundation at site (m): The maximum inland extent of wave inundation, in 

meters, at the site (see “inundation reference”). 

Maximum run-up (m): The elevation of wave inundation at the limit of inundation at the 

site, in meters above mean sea level unless otherwise noted. 

Maximum inland extent of sedimentation (m): The shore-parallel extent of tsunamideposited sediment, in meters at a site. If a specific flow path is indicated, distance 

may be described along the flow path. Any change from shore-normal distance will 

be noted and described. 

Lateral extent of sedimentation (km): The shore-parallel extent of sediment, in kilometers 

at a site. Any change from shore-parallel in this column will be noted and described. 

Maximum sediment elevation (m): The maximum elevation of sediment at a site or along 

a transect, in meters above sea level. 

Distance from shore to deposit investigated (m): The distance, in meters, to site of core or 

trench where deposits are described. Unless otherwise noted, the distance is shorenormal. Any deviation from shore-normal distance will be noted and described. 

Deposit Elevation (m): The elevation of land surface at site of core or trench where 

deposits are described, in meters above sea level. 

Geometry: The two and three-dimensional characteristics of the deposit describing the 

shape and extent of the deposit, such as landward thinning, hummocky, or sand 

sheet. The entry may include descriptions of lateral changes in thickness and brief 

discussions of controlling factors. 

Deposit Thickness (cm): The tsunami deposit thickness, in centimeters. 

Vertical reference: Measurements or descriptions are often referenced to the top, bottom, 

or a specific location within the deposit. This entry defines where subsequent 

vertical measurements are referenced to (that is 0 cm = base of deposit, top of 

deposit, surface, or other reference as given in the publication). 

# Layers: The number of distinct layers or beds within the deposit. 

Layer thickness (cm): If more than one layer is present, the thickness, in centimeters, of 

the individual layers within the deposit (layer thickness of a single layer deposit is 

“deposit thickness” above). If layer numbers are assigned and used throughout the 

publication, layer numbers correspond to those used in the publication. If the author 

presents no numbering scheme and a vertical reference is indicated, layer numbers 

increase from the vertical reference. If no vertical reference is indicated, layer one 

corresponds to the uppermost layer in the sequence and layer numbers increase 

down-section. 
8

Layer characteristics: Sedimentary characteristics of the individual layers as described in 

the publication. Layer numbers correspond to and/or follow the criteria used for 

“layer thickness” above. 

Underlying material: A description of the material directly below the deposit. 

Basal contact: The nature of the basal contact of the deposit, including vertical rate of 

change (gradual, sharp, or abrupt) and process-oriented descriptions (such as 

erosional), or other descriptions relating to the nature of the contact. 

Overlying material: A description of the material overlying the deposit. Overlying 

material is usually absent in a recent tsunami deposit. However, if enough time has 

passed between the event and the investigation, and if the deposit is in a depositional 

(as opposed to an erosional) setting, sediments may overly a recent deposit. 

Upper contact: If the deposit is covered by overlying material, this describes the nature of 

the upper contact of the deposit, including vertical rate of change (gradual, sharp, or 

abrupt) and process-oriented descriptions (such as erosional), or other descriptions 

relating to the nature of the contact. 

Surface features: Features (such as ripples or mud cracks) present at the upper surface of 

the deposit. 

Grain size statistics - mean: This column is reserved for numerical statistics, although it 

may contain text qualifiers. 

Grain size statistics - median: This column is reserved for numerical statistics, although it 

may contain text qualifiers. 

Grain size statistics - mode: This column is reserved for numerical statistics, although it 

may contain text qualifiers. 

Grain size statistics - standard deviation: This column is reserved for numerical statistics, 

although it may contain text qualifiers. 

Grain size statistics - skewness: This column is reserved for numerical statistics, although 

it may contain text qualifiers. 

Grain size statistics - kurtosis: This column is reserved for numerical statistics, although 

it may contain text qualifiers. 

Grain size - text descriptions: A description of sediment grain size condensed from 

publication text. Text descriptions of grain sizes for the sand fraction often follow 

the Udden-Wentworth scale (Udden, 1914; Wentworth, 1922). Conversions between 

phi, millimeters, and text descriptions based on Udden-Wentworth are given by the 

following conversions: 

very coarse sand = 1.000 – 2.000 mm = 0.0 – -1.0 phi 

coarse sand = 0.500 – 1.000 mm = 1.0 – 0.0 phi 

medium sand = 0.250 – 0.500 mm = 2.0 – 1.0 phi 

fine sand = 0.125 – 0.250 mm = 3.0 – 2.0 phi 

very fine sand = 0.062 – 0.125 mm = 4.0 – 3.0 phi 

Granules to boulders: Grain sizes larger than the sand fraction present in the deposit, 

including granules, pebbles, cobbles, and boulders. 

Mud, clay or silt: Grain sizes smaller than the sand fraction present in the deposit, 

including silt, clay, or an unspecified combination (mud). 
9

Vertical grading: Vertical changes in grain size distribution. Grading descriptions may 

describe the whole deposit or individual or specific beds or portions of the deposit. 

Normal grading fines upward; reverse grading coarsens upward; massive indicates 

no discernable changes in grain size or bedding. 

Lateral grading: Changes in grain size laterally within the deposit, such as landward 

coarsening or fining. 

Mode - text descriptions: Text descriptions of the mode or modes of the grain size 

distribution of the deposit. No attempt is made in this column to interpret numerical 

statistics. 

Sorting - text descriptions: Text descriptions of grain size sorting within the deposit. 

Sorting may be statistically described by the standard deviation of the grain size 

distribution. Numerical calculations of standard deviation (sorting) are given in a 

separate column. Well-sorted deposits contain a narrow range of grain sizes; poorlysorted deposits contain a wide range of grain sizes. 

Skewness - text descriptions: Text descriptions of the skewness of the grain size 

distribution of the deposit. No attempt is made in this column to interpret numerical 

statistics. 

Kurtosis - text descriptions: Text descriptions of the kurtosis of the grain size distribution 

of the deposit. No attempt is made in this column to interpret numerical statistics. 

Grain texture: Texture descriptions, excluding grain size (given previously), including 

angularity and surface roughness of the grains comprising the deposit. 

Other sedimentary structures or properties: Other sedimentary characteristics or 

properties of the deposit described by the authors. 

Composition: Mineralogical or chemical composition or lithic descriptions of the 

deposits. 

Microflora and microfauna - foraminifera, diatoms, for example: Foraminifera, diatoms, 

and other microfossil assemblages within the deposit. This entry also may list any 

changes or similarities between the deposit and underlying and overlying material or 

surrounding environments. It is beyond the scope of the database to list all species 

below, within, or above the deposit. General results of diatom analyses are presented 

here. Individual publications should be consulted for specific data. 

Pollen: Changes in pollen assemblages between the underlying material, the tsunami or 

storm deposit, and the overlying material, can help determine sediment source and 

post-event environmental changes to the depositional system. It is beyond the scope 

of the database to list all species below, within, or above the deposit. General results 

of pollen analyses are presented here. Individual publications should be consulted for 

specific data. 

Macroscopic organics: Macroscopic organic inclusions in the deposit, such as shells, 

roots, woody debris, vegetation, and peat are listed here. 

Flow direction: If a flow direction has been determined by the authors, it is listed here. 

Flow direction may be a compass direction, may be referenced to a point, or may be 

descriptive, such as landward, return flow, or shore-parallel. 

Additional comments or data: This column is for any additional information pertaining to 

the data, qualifying data presented, or for any additional data that does not fit into 

the preceding categories. 
10

Reference: Reference for the report the data are derived from. Full references are 

provided on the second worksheet of the database. 

Reference type: The type of publication (such as peer-reviewed journal, conference 

proceedings, U.S. Geological Survey report, or technical paper) the paper is 

published in. 

Summary and Possible Future Research 

Investigations of sedimentary deposits from recent tsunamis are important in 

developing identification criteria for paleotsunami deposits and in interpreting both recent 

and paleotsunami deposits. Recent tsunami deposits have an advantage because the 

deposits are easily identified and may be correlated with data from the tsunami that 

deposited the sediment. This recent tsunami deposit database compiles data from 

published reports of tsunami deposit surveys, documenting sedimentary characteristics 

and tsunami data from 15 events that have occurred since 1946. The database contains 

228 entries. Each entry contains data from up to 71 categories. The database includes data 

from 51 publications describing recent tsunami deposits from 16 countries. 

Future research might include analyzing the data in this database. Trends could be 

examined within the database, to determine both the range and typical values observed 

for selected sedimentary characteristics, and identification criteria for tsunami could be 

determined for deposits based on the recent tsunami deposit data presented here. 

Acknowledgments 

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the U.S. Geological Survey 

Coastal and Marine Catastrophic Hazards Project funded this research. The views 

expressed are not necessarily those of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Susan 

Cochran and Steve Watt provided thoughtful reviews that improved this report. 

References Cited 

Atwater, B., 1987, Evidence for great Holocene earthquakes along the outer coast of 

Washington State: Science, v. 236, p. 942-944. 

Dawson, A.G. and Shi, S.Z., 2000, Tsunami deposits: Pure and Applies Geophysics, v. 

157, p. 875-897. 

Eaton, J. P., Richter, D.H., and Ault, W.U., 1961, The tsunami of May 23, 1960, on the 

Island of Hawaii: Seismological Society of America Bulletin, v. 51, p. 135-157. 

Goff, J., McFadgen, B.G., and Chague-Goff, C., 2004, Sedimentary differences between 

the 2002 Easter storm and the 15th-century Okoropunga tsunami, southeastern 

North Island, New Zealand: Marine Geology, v. 204, p. 235-250. 

Jaffe, B., and Gelfenbaum, G., 2007, A simple model for calculating tsunami flow speed 

from tsunami deposits: Sedimentary Geology, v. 200, p. 347–361. 

Jaffe, B., Gelfenbaum, G., Rubin, D., Peters, R., Anima, R., Swensson, M., Olcese, D., 

Bernales L., Gomez, J., and Riega, P., 2003, Tsunami deposits—Identification 

and interpretation of tsunami deposits from the June 23, 2001, Perú tsunami: 

Coastal Sediments ’03 Proceedings, 13 p. 
11

Jaffe, B.E., Borrero, J.C., Prasetya, G.S., Peters, R., McAdoo, B., Gelfenbaum, G., 

Morton, R., Ruggiero, P., Higman, B., Dengler, L., Hidayat, R., Kingsley, E., 

Kongko, W., Lukijanto, Moore, A., Titov, V., and Yulianto, E., 2006, Northwest 

Sumatra and offshore islands field survey after the December 2004 Indian Ocean 

tsunami: Earthquake Spectra, v. 22, p. S105–S135. 

Kon’no, E., Iwai, J., Kitamura, N., Kotaka, T. Mii, H. Nakagawa, H. Onuki, Y. Shibata 

T. and Takayanagi, Y., 1961, Geological observations of the Sanriku coastal 

region damaged by the tsunami due to the Chile earthquake in 1960 (in Japanese 

with English abstract): Contributions from the Institute of Geology and 

Paleontology, Tohoku University, v. 52, 40 p. 

Kortekaas, S. and Dawson, A.G., 2007, Distinguishing tsunami and storm deposits—An 

example from Martinhal, SW Portugal: Sedimentary Geology, v. 200, p. 208–221. 

MacInnes, B.T., Pinegina, T.K., Bourgeois, J., Razhigaeva, N.G., Kaistrenko, V.M., 

Kravchunovskaya, E.A., 2009, Field Survey and Geological Effects of the 15 

November 2006 Kuril Tsunami in the Middle Kuril Islands: Pure and Applied 

Geophysics, v. 166, p. 9-36. 

Moore, A., and Jaffe, B., 2007, Geologic evidence of tsunamis, in Gonzalez, F.I., 

Scientific and technical issues in tsunami hazard assessment of nuclear power 

plant sites: NOAA Technical Memorandum OAR PMEL-136, Pacific Marine 

Environmental Laboratory, Seattle, Wash., 125 p. plus appendices on CD. 

Morton, R., Jaffe, B., and Gelfenbaum, G., 2007, Physical criteria for distinguishing 

sandy tsunami and storm deposits using modern examples: Sedimentary Geology, 

v. 200, p. 184–207. 

Nanayama, F., Shigeno, K., Satake, K., Shimokaka, K., Koitabashi, S., Miyasaka, S., and 

Ishii, M., 2000, Sedimentary differences between the 1993 Hokkaido-Nansei-Oki 

tsunami and the 1959 Miyakojima typhoon at Taisei, southwestern Hokkaido, 

northern Japan: Sedimentary Geology, v. 135, p. 255-264. 

Nelson, A.R., Shennan, I., and Long, A., 1996, Identifying coastal subsidence in tidal 

wetland stratigraphic sequences at the Cascadia subduction zone of western North 

America: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 101, no. B3, p. 6115-6135. 

Nishimura, Y. and Miyaji, N., 1995, Tsunami deposits from the 1993 southwest 

Hokkaido earthquake and the 1640 Hokkaido Komagatake eruption, northern 

Japan: Pure and Applied Geophysics, v. 144, p. 719-733. 

Peters, R., Jaffe, B., and Gelfenbaum, G., 2007, Distribution and sedimentary 

characteristics of tsunami deposits along the Cascadia margin of western North 

America: Sedimentary Geology, v. 200, 372-386. 

Peters, R., Jaffe, B., Gelfenbaum., G., and Peterson, C., 2003, Cascadia tsunami deposit 

database: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 03–13. 23 p. 

Priest, G.R., Myers, E., Baptista, A., Kamphaus, R., and Peterson, C.D., 1997, Tsunami 

hazard map of the Yaquina Bay area, Lincoln County, Oregon: Oregon 

Department of Geology and Mineral Industries Interpretive Map Series IMS-2, 1 

sheet, scale 1:12,000. 

Ross, S., Boore, D.M., Fisher, M.A., Frankel, A.D., Geist, E.L., Hudnut, K.W., Kayen, 

R.E., Lee, H.J., Normark, W.R., and Wong, F.L., 2004, Comments on potential 

geologic and seismic hazards affecting coastal Ventura County, California: U.S. 

Geological Survey Open-File Report 2004-1286. 20 p. 
12

Satake, K., Shimazaki, K., Tsuji, Y. and Ueda, K., 1996, Time and size of a giant 

earthquake in Cascadia inferred from Japanese tsunami record of January 1700: 

Nature, v. 379, p. 246–249. 

Sato, H., Shimamoto, T., Tsutsumi, A., and Kawamoto, E., 1995, Onshore tsunami 

deposits caused by the 1993 southwest Hokkaido and 1983 Japan-Sea 

earthquakes: Pure and Applied Geophysics, v. 144, p. 693-717. 

Shepard, F. P., Macdonald, G.A., and Cox, D.C., 1950, The tsunami of April 1, 1946: 

University of California, Scripps Institute, Oceanography Bulletin, v. 5, p. 391-

528. 

Shi, S., Dawson, A.G. and Smith, D.E., 1995, Coastal sedimentation associated with the 

December 12th, 1992 tsunami in Flores, Indonesia, Pure and Applied Geophysics, 

v. 144, p. 525-536. 

Tsunami Pilot Study Working Group, 2006, Seaside, Oregon Tsunami Pilot Study – 

Modernization of FEMA flood hazard maps: Joint NOAA/USGS/FEMA Special 

Report, NOAA/OAR/PMEL, Seattle WA, 94 p. plus 7 appendices. 

Tuttle, M.P., Ruffman, A., Anderson, T., and Jeter., H., 2004, Distinguishing tsunami 

from storm deposits in Eastern North America—The 1929 Grand Banks tsunami 

versus the 1991 Halloween storm: Seismological Research Letters, v. 75, p. 177-

131. 

Udden, J.A., 1914, Mechanical composition of clastic sediments: Geological Society of 

America Bulletin, v. 25, p. 655-644. 

Walsh, T.J., Caruthers, C.G., Heinitz, A.C., Meyers, E.P., III, Baptista, A.M., Erdakos, 

G.B., and Kamphaus, R.A., 2000, Tsunami hazard map of the southern 

Washington coast—Modeled tsunami inundation from a Cascadia subduction 

zone earthquake: Washington Division of Geology and Earth Resources, Geologic 

Map GM-49. 

Wentworth, C.K., 1922, A scale of grade and class terms for clastic sediments: Journal of 

Geology, v. 30, p. 377-392. 

Wright, C. and Mella, A., 1963, Modifications to the soil pattern of south-central Chile 

resulting from seismic and associated phenomena during the period May to 

August 1960: Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, v. 53, p. 1,367-

1,402.