www.geologicacarpathica.com
G
G
G
G
GEOL
EOL
EOL
EOL
EOLOGICA CARPA
OGICA CARPA
OGICA CARPA
OGICA CARPA
OGICA CARPATHICA
THICA
THICA
THICA
THICA
, APRIL 2014, 65, 2, 147—161 doi: 10.2478/geoca-2014-0010
Introduction
The East Serbian part of the Carpatho-Balkanides comprises a
geodynamically complex zone which present-day structural
pattern is a result of Late Cretaceous subduction of the Vardar
zone below the ‘European’ units, followed by Cenozoic post-
collisional and neotectonic phases, namely extension and
younger transpression (e.g. Cvetković et al. 2004; Karamata
2006; Bada et al. 2007; Schmid et al. 2008) (Fig. 1). Since the
Late Miocene, the most important factor controlling regional
tectonic processes in this area has been the counterclockwise
rotation and northward motion of the Adriatic microplate in
respect to the Dinaric orogen (e.g. Ustaszewski et al. 2008). In
the Carpatho-Balkanides this motion is generally manifested
through moderate to weak but constant seismicity with stron-
ger earthquakes recorded mostly along well-known fault sys-
tems that were active in the neotectonic period (since the Late
Miocene) (Marović et al. 2002b; Bada et al. 2007).
Recent fault kinematics in this part of the Carpatho-Balkan
orogenic system are poorly documented. Several regional
studies, mostly including the Pannonian Basin or the northern
junction between the Getic and Danubian units (easternmost
part of Dacia) in Romania (see Schmid et al. 2008 and refer-
The recent fault kinematics in the westernmost part of the
Getic nappe system (Eastern Serbia): Evidence from fault
slip and focal mechanism data
ANA MLADENOVIĆ
1
, BRANISLAV TRIVIĆ
1
, MILORAD ANTIĆ
2
, VLADICA CVETKOVIĆ
1
,
RADMILA PAVLOVIĆ
1
, SLAVICA RADOVANOVIĆ
3
and BERNHARD FÜGENSCHUH
4
1
University of Belgrade, Faculty of Mining and Geology, Đušina 7, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia; ana.mladenovic@rgf.bg.ac.rs
2
Geologisch-Paläontologisches Institut, Universität Basel, Bernoullistrasse 32, 4056 Basel, Switzerland; m.antic@unibas.ch
3
Seismological Survey of Serbia, Tašmajdanski park bb, Poštanski fah 16, 11120 Belgrade, Serbia; slavica.radovanovic@seismo.gov.rs
4
Geology and Paleontology, Innsbruck University, Innrain 52f, A-6020 Innsbruck, Austria; bernhard.fuegenschuh@uibk.ac.at
(Manuscript received October 22, 2013; accepted in revised form March 11, 2014)
Abstract: In this study we performed a calculation of the tectonic stress tensor based on fault slip data and all available
focal mechanisms in order to determine the principal stress axes and the recent tectonic regime of the westernmost unit
of the Getic nappe system (Gornjak-Ravanica Zone, Eastern Serbia). The study is based on a combined dataset involv-
ing paleostress analyses, the inversion of focal mechanisms and remote sensing. The results show dominant strike-slip
kinematics with the maximal compression axis oriented NNE—SSW. This is compatible with a combined northward
motion and counterclockwise rotation of the Adria plate as the controlling factor. However, the local stress field is also
shown to be of great importance and is superimposed on the far-field stress. We managed to distinguish three areas with
distinct seismic activity. The northern part of the research area is characterized by transtensional tectonics, possibly
under the influence of the extension in the areas situated more to the northeast. The central and seismically most active
part is dominated by strike-slip tectonics whereas the southern area is slightly transpressional, possibly under the influ-
ence of the rigid Moesian Platform situated to the east of the research area. The dominant active fault systems are
oriented N—S (to NE—SW) and NW—SE and they occur as structures of either regional or local significance. Regional
structures are active in the northern and central part of the study area, while the active fault systems in the southern part
are marked as locally important. This study suggests that seismicity of this area is controlled by the release of accumu-
lated stress at local accommodation zones which are favourably oriented in respect to the active regional stress field.
Key words: Fault-plane solutions, paleostress, recent stress field, Getic nappe, East Serbia.
ences therein), were predominantly focused on determining
the general geodynamic evolution of the Carpatho-Balkan-
Pannonian region. The main conclusions considering the
Late Cretaceous-Cenozoic geodynamic evolution of the Getic-
Supragetic nappe system, as a major part of the Carpatho-
Balkanides in East Serbia, can be summarized by three
deformation phases (Matenco & Schmid 1999): (1) the Late
Cretaceous NNW-SSE contraction, (2) the Paleogene to Early
Miocene SSE-NNW extension, and (3) the Late Miocene
tectonics related predominantly to strike slip movements.
The youngest deformation phase occurred in Late Mio-
cene-Pliocene times and it is also related to the present day
stress field (Horvath & Cloetingh 1996; Marović et al.
2002b; Bada et al. 2007). It is characterized by strike-slip
tectonics mainly caused by SW compression (Horvath &
Cloetingh 1996; Marović et al. 2002b; Bada et al. 2007).
This state of the stress field is evident through a regional
phase of inversion of the Pannonian Basin (e.g. Bada et al.
2007). The major tectonic forces responsible for this stress
field are related to the counterclockwise rotation and north-
ward motion of the Adriatic microplate (‘Adria push’), and
this is also evident from earlier studies in the Pannonian Basin
and its immediate surroundings (Gerner et al. 1999; Marović
148
MLADENOVIĆ, TRIVIĆ, ANTIĆ, CVETKOVIĆ, PAVLOVIĆ, RADOVANOVIĆ and FÜGENSCHUH
G
G
G
G
GEOL
EOL
EOL
EOL
EOLOGICA CARPA
OGICA CARPA
OGICA CARPA
OGICA CARPA
OGICA CARPATHICA
THICA
THICA
THICA
THICA, 2014, 65, 2, 147—161
et al. 2002b; Grenerczy & Bada 2005; Bada et al. 2007). The
contact between the Serbo-Macedonian Massif and Car-
patho-Balkanides was either omitted or only partly included
in these regional studies, therefore, detailed information
about Miocene to recent tectonics of this tectonic zone is
missing. Although some studies do exist (Radovanović &
Pavlović 1992; Radovanović & Pavlović 1994; Marović et
al. 2002b), they focus on small areas and are not integrated
into the existing regional models (e.g. Horvath & Cloetingh
1996; Bada et al. 2007).
The main aim of this research is to better constrain the late
Miocene to recent stress field of the western part of the East
Serbian Carpatho-Balkanides by combining fault slip data
and focal mechanisms. The paleostress analysis of fault-slip
data (PSA) was performed on a number of fault planes with
different slip sense and containing multiple slip indicators
(e.g. striations). In this study only the youngest fault planes
were used, whereas the whole paleostress analysis, covering
brittle tectonic events from the Upper Cretaceous till recent
times, will be published in a separate paper. The fault-slip data
are integrated with the results of a focal mechanism analysis
(FMA) which included a systematic study of all available
earthquakes that happened in this part of the Carpatho-Bal-
kanides since 1983. Our study suggests that there is a strong
Fig. 1. Schematic geotectonic position of the research area (after Schmid et al. 2008). The dashed line represents the boundary between the Serbo-
Macedonian Massif and the Getic unit in the territory of southwesternmost Romania, eastern and southeastern Serbia and western Bulgaria.
149
RECENT KINEMATICS (FAULT SLIP AND FOCAL MECHANISM) IN GETIC NAPPE (E SERBIA)
G
G
G
G
GEOL
EOL
EOL
EOL
EOLOGICA CARPA
OGICA CARPA
OGICA CARPA
OGICA CARPA
OGICA CARPATHICA
THICA
THICA
THICA
THICA, 2014, 65, 2, 147—161
correlation between paleostress fault-slip data and data ob-
tained by inversion of focal mechanisms and that this correla-
tion can be generally used in elucidating the link between the
last tectonic phases and recent stress-field conditions.
Geotectonic setting
The research area is located within the westernmost part of
the Getic nappe system along its contact with the Supragetic
and the Serbo-Macedonian units (Fig. 2). Generally, these
geotectonic entities are derived from the Dacia Mega unit
(Schmid et al. 2008) or Bucovinian-Getic microplate (Kräutner
& Krstić 2003). Here, the boundary between these units is
overlain by a very thick (up to 4 km) Cenozoic sedimentary
cover (Marinković et al. 1978).
The Serbo-Macedonian Massif is composed of Upper Pro-
terozoic to Lower Paleozoic volcano-sedimentary rocks
metamorphosed under amphibolite facies conditions, and lo-
cally cut by granitoid intrusions (Dimitrijević 1963, 1967,
1995). The Supragetic unit belongs to the east-vergent Getic-
Supragetic nappe system (Marović 2001; Schmid et al.
2008). It consists of medium to low grade metamorphic
rocks intruded by early Paleozoic granitoids (Veselinović
et al. 1970; Kalenić et al. 1980). The Supragetic unit was
thrust eastward (in present-day geographical coordinates)
over the Getic nappe system during the late early Cretaceous
(Dimitrov 1931; Bonchev 1936; Zagorchev & Ruseva 1982;
Kounov et al. 2010). This contact can be observed on several
localities near Despotovac (Fig. 2, 2 – Morava roof thrust
of the Getic unit). The entire Getic-Supragetic nappe system
is interpreted as having been formed in mid-Cretaceous
times (‘Austrian phase’) (Matenco & Schmid 1999; Schmid
et al. 2008). During the Late Cretaceous ‘Laramian’ episode
this nappe stack has been thrust onto the Danubian units af-
ter the closure of the Ceahlau-Severin Ocean (Matenco &
Schmid 1999).
The immediate research area is situated within the Getic
unit which represents a single tectonic entity since the Paleo-
gene. Here, the Getic unit is composed of several zones rep-
resenting diverse pre-Cenozoic paleogeographic domains:
Proterozoic-Paleozoic basement, Jurassic-Cretaceous sedi-
mentary cover, Senonian tectonic trough and Gornjak-Ra-
vanica Zone (Dimitrijević 1995).
The basement consists of Proterozoic migmatites, gneisses,
and micaschists metamorphosed under amphibolite facies
conditions as well as of Paleozoic low grade to non-meta-
morphosed rocks. The whole sequence is intruded by Her-
cynian I-type granitoids (Gornjane, Brnjica, Neresnica,
Kräutner & Krstić 2002). The Jurassic—Cretaceous sedimen-
tary cover transgressively overlies the basement rocks and is
in tectonic contact with the Gornjak-Ravanica Zone which is
made up of Permian to Jurassic strata. The Senonian trough
sediments were deposited within a post-tectonic continental
basin postdating the Lower to Mid-Cretaceous main defor-
mation phase of the Getic-Supragetic nappe system (Kräutner
& Krstić 2002, 2003; Schmid et al. 2008). The basin is spa-
tially and temporally associated with Turonian—Campanian
(92—78 Ma) magmatic activity (“banatites”) that resulted
from the N-NE-dipping subduction of the Neotethys Ocean
further to the south and south-east (Drew 2005; Karamata
2006; Schmid et al. 2008).
The Gornjak-Ravanica Zone (GRZ) (Dimitrijević, 1995)
represents the Serbian equivalent of the widespread Saska-
Gornjak and Resita units which can be followed from Roma-
nia in the north through Serbia up to western Bulgaria in the
southeast (Kräutner & Krstić 2003). The GRZ is composed
of a thick sequence of red Permian sandstones covered by
Triassic and Jurassic limestones. The Mesozoic sediments
are intruded by banatites, genetically associated with the
Ridanj-Krepoljin fault (Fig. 2, 1 – Ridanj-Krepoljin dislo-
cation). The central part of the Gornjak-Ravanica Zone is
affected by the complex Ridanj-Krepoljin dislocation, which
also marks the westernmost margin of the Apuseni—Banat—
Timok—Srednegorie Magmatic and Metallogenetic Belt in
Serbia (e.g. Mitchell 1996; Karamata et al. 1997).
The major present day fault pattern along the East Serbian
Carpatho-Balkanides, as shown by Marović et al. (2002a,b),
was formed in the Early Miocene and is characterized by
NNW—SSE to N—S (NNE—SSW) striking longitudinal faults.
The other two fault systems with regional importance have a
transversal and diagonal character with respect to the general
strike of the tectonic units. Regional importance is attributed
to fault systems with significant quantifiable slip at the given
scale. Thus, local faults are systems representing secondary
structures that accommodate slip exerted on the systems with
regional importance.
Methods
This work combines methodologically independent proce-
dures of stress inversion of fault slip data (paleostress analy-
sis) and focal mechanism stress inversion. These procedures
are aimed at obtaining the active fault pattern and establish-
ing stress tensors acting in the studied area from the late
Miocene (using paleostress analysis) to recent times (by in-
version of focal mechanisms). In order to achieve the con-
nection between fault slip data observed in the field on the
mesoscale and data on focal mechanisms, which treat regional
faults and fault systems on the macro observation scale, a de-
tailed lineament trend analysis was also performed. The lin-
eaments confirmed by field observations and documented on
the 1 : 100,000 Geological Map (sheets: Požarevac, Lapovo,
Paraćin, Kučevo, Žagubica, Boljevac) are treated as regional
faults or fault zones.
Remote Sensing – Lineament trend analyses
The lineament trend analysis was done on satellite images
acquired by Landsat 7 ETM + sensor. Standard procedures
for image preprocessing and processing were performed, in-
cluding spectral image enhancement (brightness and contrast
enhancement, normalization of digital number values) and
spatial image enhancement (spatial filtering, morphological
filtering, and resolution enhancement). Final analysis and in-
terpretation were done on a mosaic of processed satellite im-
ages with combined digital elevation model (with 10 m
150
MLADENOVIĆ, TRIVIĆ, ANTIĆ, CVETKOVIĆ, PAVLOVIĆ, RADOVANOVIĆ and FÜGENSCHUH
G
G
G
G
GEOL
EOL
EOL
EOL
EOLOGICA CARPA
OGICA CARPA
OGICA CARPA
OGICA CARPA
OGICA CARPATHICA
THICA
THICA
THICA
THICA, 2014, 65, 2, 147—161
Fig. 2. Simplified tectonic map of the research area, adapted from Basic Geological Map of SFRY 1 : 100,000, sheets: Požarevac (L34-127),
Lapovo (L34-139), Paraćin (K34-007), Kučevo (L34-128), Žagubica (L34-140), Boljevac (K34-008). 1 – Ridanj-Krepoljin dislocation;
2 – Morava roof thrust of SGU. East vergent regional structure, generally oriented from N to S, which represents the tectonic boundary be-
tween the SGU and Getic unit; 3 – Red Permian sandstone floor thrust. A major thrust representing the tectonic boundary within two sub-
units of the Getic Unit; 4 – Rakova Bara Basin; 5 – Kučevo Basin; 6 – Žagubica Basin; 7 – Krivi Vir Basin; 8 – Sokobanja Basin;
9 – Morava Basin.
151
RECENT KINEMATICS (FAULT SLIP AND FOCAL MECHANISM) IN GETIC NAPPE (E SERBIA)
G
G
G
G
GEOL
EOL
EOL
EOL
EOLOGICA CARPA
OGICA CARPA
OGICA CARPA
OGICA CARPA
OGICA CARPATHICA
THICA
THICA
THICA
THICA, 2014, 65, 2, 147—161
Fig. 3. Map of epicenters and related focal mechanisms (double-line nodal planes on focal plane solutions are regarded as fault planes), and
results of the remote sensing lineament trend analysis. Dotted polygons represent areas with low seismic activity. Black lines on remote
sensing analysis represent confirmed neotectonic active faults, while grey lines were confirmed only in the field and on geological maps
and are not regarded as neotectonically active.
152
MLADENOVIĆ, TRIVIĆ, ANTIĆ, CVETKOVIĆ, PAVLOVIĆ, RADOVANOVIĆ and FÜGENSCHUH
G
G
G
G
GEOL
EOL
EOL
EOL
EOLOGICA CARPA
OGICA CARPA
OGICA CARPA
OGICA CARPA
OGICA CARPATHICA
THICA
THICA
THICA
THICA, 2014, 65, 2, 147—161
resolution), acquired and processed through ASTER GDEM
Project (ASTER GDEM ver. 2).
Standard criteria for determining the position of tectonic lin-
eaments on satellite images were used. Lineament trends were
initially proposed on the basis of morphological indicators in
the relief. Long and linear river streams, short streams that re-
tain the same direction over watersheds and belong to differ-
ent drainage systems, sharp changes of direction of streams
with the angle of 90 degrees, and abrupt linear and distinct
changes in the terrain slope are morphological forms that were
used to distinguish possible fault structure from lineaments re-
sulting from lithological differences. Analysis of fault data
observed on the field was done regarding their location and
orientation of the dominant fault system. Only those tectonic
lineaments which correspond to field observed data consider-
ing spatial and strike matching are taken into account. The fi-
nal interpretation was done by incorporating data from the
available geological maps (1 : 100,000 Geological Map, sheets:
Požarevac, Lapovo, Paraćin, Kučevo, Žagubica, Boljevac).
Analysis of satellite images, by its definition, cannot give
information about fault kinematics. However, it was, at least
to a certain extent, possible to clarify the neotectonic activity
of determined faults. Their clear morphological outline in
Pliocene and Quaternary sediments, their continuous orien-
tation along geological units of different age, are certain in-
dicators that these faults were neotectonically active. Taking
all these criteria into account, together with literature data
(aforementioned geological maps and neotectonic map of
Marović et al. 2002a), we produced a map of remote sensing
lineament trend analysis (Fig. 3). The faults were classified
as regional or local, according to their relative importance in
the research area. Lineaments that are featured as regional
faults are followed by strike on satellite images. They are
clearly visible on a kilometric scale, well documented by
field observation and literature data, and they were signifi-
cant for the brittle tectonic evolution of the research area.
The expression in relief of the faults was the criteria for their
classification as certain or uncertain (covered).
Paleostress analysis – fault slip stress inversion
Fault-slip data were collected during several field cam-
paigns in 2009 and 2010. The campaigns were carried out
Main stress axes
Datasets
Name
Method
σ
1
σ
2
σ
3
used
total
%
Fluct.
total
R
Regime
Quality
K01
NDA
27
20
245
64
122
14
11
11
100
8.2
0.91
transtension
c
M01
INV
352
7
234
74
83
13
13
13
100
1.8
0.12
transpression
c
M02
NDA
4
4
206
85
94
1
4
4
100
1.3
0.49
strike-slip
e
M03
INV
18
2
248
85
108
3
9
9
100
1.0
0.79
transtension
d
G01
INV
342
16
196
70
75
10
12
13
92.31
4.2
0.36
strike-slip
c
G02
NDA
177
25
351
63
86
2
11
11
100
7.2
0.48
strike-slip
c
G03
NDA
43
8
293
66
136
21
24
24
100
8.9
0.46
strike-slip
b
G04
NDA
16
12
181
77
286
3
8
8
100
3.9
0.50
strike-slip
d
G05
INV
347
11
228
66
81
20
32
32
100
8.4
0.56
strike-slip
a
R03
NDA
193
16
329
67
99
14
9
9
100
9.6
0.47
strike-slip
d
R02
NDA
216
4
106
76
307
12
21
21
100
8.9
0.52
strike-slip
b
R01
NDA
2
38
172
51
268
4
10
10
100
4.9
0.48
strike-slip
c
Table 1: Results of stress tensor inversion based on fault-slip data. The field “Fluct. total” represents the mean (per solution, i.e. tensor) an-
gular deviation of the calculated maximum shear stress in the fault plane from the measured slip indicators.
along four traverses (from north to south): Kučevo, Gornjak,
Manasija and Ravanica (Fig. 2). The majority of faults and
fault-slip data were observed in Tithonian reef carbonates
(Ravanica Limestone; Dimitrijević 1995). In order to deter-
mine the sense of slip on striated fault planes a variety of slip
criteria marked as Young Geological Data in the World
Stress Map project (Reinecker et al. 2005) were used. The
most common linear indicators observed on outcrops were
calcite fibers, cataclastic lineation (slickenlines), gouging-
grain grooves and “carrot-shaped” markings (Fig. 4). Addi-
tionally, slip was determined by observing asymmetric
grains, spall marks with congruent steps, lunate fractures,
knobby elevations and plucking markings (e.g. Petit 1987;
Doblas et al. 1997; Doblas 1998). Only those fault slip mea-
surements with a higher level of quality related to the type of
slip indicator were included in the calculations. This is docu-
mented in Table 1. Polyphase fault reactivations, which were
reflected by superimposed sets of slickensides, are observed
at all outcrops. The relative chronology of brittle structures
was established solely by the cross-cutting relationships of
faults and/or slip indicators. In addition, stress inversion based
on focal mechanisms served as a reference frame for the
youngest tectonic phase. Therefore, from the collection of pa-
leostress solutions integrated in a succession of tectonic events
with established relative age hierarchy, only those defining the
youngest stress field are treated in this paper.
Initial separation of data was based on the outcrop loca-
tion. Subsequent separation was indeed based on slip ob-
served on the given fault and its orientation. Paleostress
calculations of data-sets were done using the TectonicsFP
software (Ortner et al. 2002), with two approaches: direct in-
version method – INV (Angelier 1979) and Numerical Dy-
namic Analysis – NDA (Spang 1972; Sperner &
Ratschbacher 1994) (see Table 1). Direct inversion method
was applied to fault data sets with confirmed reactivated slip
along the pre-existing faults, while NDA method was used
for data sets where slip along newly formed fault systems
was supposed. The proof of reactivation is initially observed
during fieldwork by crosscutting relationships between slip
indicators and/or offsetting of older faults by the younger
ones. Similar displacements to the latter are distinguished in
remote sensing footage or geological maps of the area. The
final control of reactivation is performed after attempted
153
RECENT KINEMATICS (FAULT SLIP AND FOCAL MECHANISM) IN GETIC NAPPE (E SERBIA)
G
G
G
G
GEOL
EOL
EOL
EOL
EOLOGICA CARPA
OGICA CARPA
OGICA CARPA
OGICA CARPA
OGICA CARPATHICA
THICA
THICA
THICA
THICA, 2014, 65, 2, 147—161
stress analysis, since reactivated faults plot away from the
failure envelope on the Mohr stress diagram. The aim of ev-
ery inversion is to minimize the deviations between observa-
tions and a model. In the case of paleostress analysis
deviations between the observed slip and calculated shear
stress directions for a given fault-slip dataset should be mini-
mized. As mentioned by Gephart (1990), direction of shear
stress is dependent on only four out of six (independent) ele-
ments of the stress tensor, thus those four parameters can be
obtained using any kind of inversion methods. Three para-
meters relate to the orientations of the three principal stress
axes
σ
1
(maximum),
σ
2
(intermediate) and
σ
3
(minimum),
the fourth is the R parameter indicating the relative magni-
tude ratio between the intermediate principal stress and the
two extreme ones ((
σ
2
—
σ
3
)/(
σ
1
—
σ
3
)).
All data for fault slip analysis were divided into 12 blocks
– stations along profiles, where data collecting has been
Fig. 4. The most common linear indicators of the youngest tectonic activity. Arrows with thicker lines indicate the youngest phase, while
arrows with thinner lines, indicating one of the older phases, were put there to illustrate cross-cutting relationships of the lineations.
a – Kučevo traverse – kinematic indicators shown as cataclastic lineation and gouging-grain grooves; b – Gornjak traverse – most
common indicators presented as calcite fibres; c – Manasija traverse – the youngest lineation shown as gouging/plucking markings (Doblas
1998); d – Ravanica traverse – carrot shaped features indicating the youngest tectonic event.
performed (shown on Fig. 5). The general approach involved
the analysis of local tensors for detecting potential differences
in their orientations. Since the data were generally consistent
for the whole area, stress tensors are presented and discussed
per field traverse.
The quality assessment of the results was done using the
updated quality ranking system of the World Stress Map re-
lease 2008 (Heidbach et al. 2008). It involved applying the
lowest quality rank criteria among the following ones: the
total number of initial data-sets considered for calculations,
the percentage of used data-sets in the final calculation
against the total number of data, confidence rank based on
field observations, fluctuation angle between the calculated
slip and the slip observed on the outcrop, and the confidence
rank related to the type of the slip indicator used to deter-
mine the sense of shear in the field (see Table 1). The overall
quality of each result of stress tensor inversion was assigned
154
MLADENOVIĆ, TRIVIĆ, ANTIĆ, CVETKOVIĆ, PAVLOVIĆ, RADOVANOVIĆ and FÜGENSCHUH
G
G
G
G
GEOL
EOL
EOL
EOL
EOLOGICA CARPA
OGICA CARPA
OGICA CARPA
OGICA CARPA
OGICA CARPATHICA
THICA
THICA
THICA
THICA, 2014, 65, 2, 147—161
Fig. 5. a – Results of the paleostress analysis for 4 traverses;
b – Statistical synoptic diagram of attitude of stress axes.
155
RECENT KINEMATICS (FAULT SLIP AND FOCAL MECHANISM) IN GETIC NAPPE (E SERBIA)
G
G
G
G
GEOL
EOL
EOL
EOL
EOLOGICA CARPA
OGICA CARPA
OGICA CARPA
OGICA CARPA
OGICA CARPATHICA
THICA
THICA
THICA
THICA, 2014, 65, 2, 147—161
according to the World Stress Map quality ranking scheme
and ranges from ‘a’ (best) to ‘e’ (worst) (Sperner & Zweigel
2010).
Focal mechanism stress inversion
Focal mechanisms were calculated using the polarity of
first arrivals of P waves. Parameters of mechanisms were de-
fined by a double couple model with the velocity model de-
fined by Glavatović (1988). The data on first arrivals were
acquired from all available stations in bulletins of the Inter-
national Seismological Centre (ISC, 2011). The earthquakes
used in this study range in magnitude between 2.2 and 4.6
(Table 2). A weak seismicity in the research area as well as a
poor seismological network in the region prior to 2000 has
limited the data base to only 25 focal mechanisms. As it can
be seen in Table 2, all focal mechanisms of earthquakes from
the 1980s and 1990s were calculated only for higher magni-
tude events (M > 3). This was done in order to ensure that the
same quality rank could be assigned to these solutions as for
the solutions of events after 2000.
Based on the position of epicenters of the studied earth-
quakes three areas with higher seismic activity could be dis-
tinguished. These are: the northern (corresponds to traverse
Kučevo), the central (Gornjak and Manasija) and the southern
(Ravanica) area (see Fig. 3 and Table 3).
Label
Date
X
Y
M
H
Az NP1
Dip NP1
Az NP2
Dip NP2
Az P
Dip P
Az T
Dip T
KB101
27.01.1983
44.08
21.63
3.9
10.0
302 83 152
8
118
52
306
38
KB102
27.05.1988
44.15
21.53
4.4
13.4
327 51 104 48
306
2
212
67
KB103
28.05.1988
44.05
21.71
3.6
10.0
1
48
149
47
253
73
345
1
KB104
09.04.1989
44.27
21.71
3.0
10.0
182 81 280 49
148
21
42
35
KB105
28.10.1991
44.26
21.50
4.6
16.0
10
58
248
49
37
5
135
56
KB106
18.11.1991
44.23
21.50
3.2
10.0
161
63
273
53
129
6
33
48
KB107
16.03.1993
44.10
21.57
2.8
11.0
344 81 246 48
124
36
18
21
KB108
22.04.2003
44.25
21.36
2.9
10.0
128
71
27
63
166
5
260
34
KB109
26.11.2005
43.89
21.69
4.0
16.3
22
59
269
57
55
1
146
49
KB110
28.06.2006
44.54
21.73
3.4
12.9
14
63
258
50
43
7
143
51
KB111
02.07.2006
44.54
21.76
3.1
10.9
283 71 178 55
317
10
56
40
KB112
21.11.2006
43.84
21. 64
4.6
3.6
309
86
40
81
265
3
174
9
KB113
02.12.2006
44.07
21.4
3.7
12.3
218 69 109 49
249
12
352
45
KB114
20.12.2006
44.42
21.74
2.3
16.7
161
83
50
20
320
49
177
35
KB115
20.05.2007
44.03
21.74
3.3
4.1
27
88
296
59
166
23
67
20
KB116
13.02.2008
44.11
21.58
2.3
8.0
181
72
18
18
353
62
185
27
KB117
13.02.2008
44.18
21.66
2.1
2.3
89
73
302
20
253
61
98
27
KB118
22.06.2008
44.5
21.63
2.8
1.0
100 79 346 26
119
30
254
51
KB119
11.01.2009
43.81
21.65
2.2
23.0
346 55 157 35
184
79
342
10
KB120
01.02.2009
44.52
21.65
2.4
3.5
125
89
215
4
309
45
121
45
KB121
08.07.2009
43.88
21.5
2.6
3.1
323
84
53
83
278
1
188
9
KB122
21.11.2010
44.52
21.62
2.1
4.4
304 77 150 14
116
57
309
32
KB123
05.02.2011
44.16
21.70
2.4
3.5
247
80
16
15
237
34
81
53
KB124
20.10.2012
44.5
21.69
3.2
5.0
172
63
278
62
44
41
135
1
KB125
20.11.2012
43.76
21.64
3.2
5.0
336
64
214
43
0
12
109
56
Table 2: Focal mechanism solutions for studied earthquakes (azimuth and dip angle in form dip direction/dip).
According to Barth et al. (2008), the main deficiency of
this method of calculating the focal plane solutions is that
the orientation of the principal stress axes cannot be obtained
directly. By this method, one can obtain two nodal planes
which separate quadrants with dilatational or compressional
first P-waves arrivals. Inside these quadrants axes of maxi-
mum shortening and maximum dilatation are located. These
are P and T axes, respectively, and they represent principal
strain axes, which (in most cases) do not coincide with the
principal stress axes. Therefore, in order to obtain the orien-
tation of the stress axes, inversion of focal mechanism data
had to be done.
There are several methods developed for calculating the
stress tensor based on focal mechanism data (Angelier
1979; Gephart & Forsyth 1984; Michael 1987; Rivera &
Cisternas 1990; Angelier 2002). In this paper we performed
a formal stress inversion of focal mechanisms, following
the technique of Gephart and Forsyth (1984). This tech-
nique is linked to two main assumptions: (1) the chosen fo-
cal mechanism solution lies in a region with a uniform
stress field that is invariant in space and time, and (2) the
directions of earthquake slip and of maximum shear stress
are the same (Wallace—Bott hypothesis; Bott 1959). Result
of this inversion technique is a deviatoric stress tensor with
definite orientations of the three principal stress axes and
the ratio R.
Zone/Traverse(s)
Earthquakes
Northern/Kučevo
KB110, KB111, KB114, KB118, KB120, KB122, KB124
Central/Gornjak and Manasija
KB101, KB102, KB103, KB104, KB106, KB107, KB108, KB113, KB115, KB116, KB117, KB123
Southern/Ravanica
KB109, KB112, KB119, KB121, KB125
Table 3: Zones/traverses and corresponding earthquakes.
156
MLADENOVIĆ, TRIVIĆ, ANTIĆ, CVETKOVIĆ, PAVLOVIĆ, RADOVANOVIĆ and FÜGENSCHUH
G
G
G
G
GEOL
EOL
EOL
EOL
EOLOGICA CARPA
OGICA CARPA
OGICA CARPA
OGICA CARPA
OGICA CARPATHICA
THICA
THICA
THICA
THICA, 2014, 65, 2, 147—161
The quality ranking of the results of the focal mechanism
stress inversion (Fig. 6) was carried out according to the
scheme applied for fault slip data inversion (Heidbach et al.
2008). It evaluates the azimuthal accuracy of S
Hmax
obtained
by formal inversion of a number of well-constrained single-
event focal mechanisms that are located in close geographic
proximity (FMF category).
The dip data presented in this paper are displayed as dip di-
rection/dip angle, both for structural and focal mechanism data.
Fig. 6. a – Results of inversion of focal mechanisms data; b – Mohr’s diagrams obtained by the paleostress analysis.
Results
Fault slip analysis
General characteristics of the faults activated by the
youngest stress field in the research area are low dip angle of
striation and predominant strike-slip movements along the
fault planes. The results of fault slip analysis are shown in
Fig. 5 and in Table 1.
157
RECENT KINEMATICS (FAULT SLIP AND FOCAL MECHANISM) IN GETIC NAPPE (E SERBIA)
G
G
G
G
GEOL
EOL
EOL
EOL
EOLOGICA CARPA
OGICA CARPA
OGICA CARPA
OGICA CARPA
OGICA CARPATHICA
THICA
THICA
THICA
THICA, 2014, 65, 2, 147—161
For the northern part of the study area, in the Kučevo
traverse, a single statistical diagram is presented (K01 on
Fig. 5). This result features a conjugate system of strike-slip
faults which closely resembles dominant lineaments in the
Kučevo area observed by satellite imagery (Fig. 3). Stress ten-
sor exhibits strike-slip kinematics with NNE-SSW oriented
subhorizontal
σ
1
axis (K01 on Fig. 5). The dominant system
in this area is represented by NE-SW striking faults. Individ-
ual faults of this system exhibit sinistral strike-slip movements
along subvertical to vertical fault planes. A concomitant nor-
mal component is also recorded and it is most probably due to
somewhat steeper dipping shear direction. Relatively steep
normal-dextral slip is observed along the N—S striking faults,
representing a fault system conjugate to the aforementioned
one striking NE—SW.
Along the Gornjak traverse five tensors were distin-
guished (Fig. 5 and Table 1, tensors named with G-letter).
A NNE—SSW striking fault system dominates in most of
these solutions, but locally, NW—SE striking fault systems
are also observed. The same trends are also observable on a
larger scale as regionally important dislocations (Fig. 3). The
stress field resulted in sinistral strike-slip movements along
the NNE-SSW-striking fault system (e.g. G01, G02 and G05
on Fig. 5). Data-set G03 exhibits a slight deviation from the
aforementioned NNE—SSW pattern, exhibiting dextral slip
along similarly oriented faults. The remaining fault systems
trending NNW—SSE, NW—SE and NE—SW are of local im-
portance (e.g. G05). Along the NNW-SSE and NW—SE sys-
tems dextral strike-slip was recorded, while the NE—SW
striking faults exhibit sinistral strike-slip. Calculated stress
tensors generated strike-slip kinematics with the compressional
axis generally directed N—S, locally deviating NNE—SSW
(Fig. 5, G03).
Along the Manasija traverse three tensors were distin-
guished (Fig. 5). Solution M03 reveals the presence of a re-
gionally important ENE—WSW striking system with sinistral
slip. There is also a NW—SE system of local importance,
which has much steeper reverse-dextral slip. Diagram M01
(Fig. 5) represents a NNE—SSW striking sinistral strike-slip
fault system with regional importance. However, a NW—SE
system with dextral strike-slip is more frequent on the out-
crop-scale. This system can also be observed on the solution
M02 (Fig. 5). Calculated stress tensors represent strike-slip
kinematics with the NNE—SSW oriented
σ
1
axis.
Along the Ravanica traverse, the most important fault sys-
tems are generally striking NNW—SSE and NW—SE, as it is
shown on diagrams R01 and R02 (Fig. 5). The dominant
slips along this system are dextral and locally dextral nor-
mal. In this area a significant number of NE—SW striking lo-
cal faults are observed in the field and also detected by
remote sensing lineament analysis. The compressional axis
is oriented NNE—SSW.
The synoptic diagram of principal stress axes (Fig. 5b),
shows that the general directions of
σ
1
and
σ
3
are NNE—SSW
and ESE—WNW, respectively. Both axes are sub horizontal
with a mean dip of 18/08 and 99/06, respectively. The
σ
2
axis is steeply dipping in SW quadrant (mean dip 211/81).
Any discrepancies of the orientation of main axes result from
local perturbations due to stress releases along the reactivated
ruptures (i.e. slight obliquity) or inherent inaccuracies during
data collection propagated during subsequent correction and
paleostress calculation.
Focal mechanisms
The map of the focal plane solutions is given in Fig. 3,
whereas detailed information about each solution is reported
in Table 2. Correlation between the position of epicenters of
earthquakes and the field traverses is given in Table 3. The
(re)activation of the faults was determined according to the
location of aftershocks, correlation with known regional
fault systems and stress inversion.
The focal plane solutions of earthquakes in the northern
area (indicated in Table 3) reveal the presence of two general
groups of (re)activated faults. The strike of these faults is
NNE—SSW and E—W. Two different stress tensors, one
transpressional and another transtensional, with two focal so-
lutions corresponding to an almost pure normal slip, can be
distinguished. Focal mechanisms labelled KB118 and KB111
show a sinistral slip with an apparent reverse component
along the NNE—SSW faults, while solution KB110 shows that
this type of slip is also present on the E—W faults. A normal
slip occurred along the NNE—SSW faults, which can be seen
on the focal plane solutions KB120 and KB122. The focal
plane solutions KB114 and KB124, however, indicate sinistral
slip with an apparent normal (KB124) and normal slip with a
dextral component (KB114) along the E—W faults.
The central area is characterized by the largest number of
earthquakes. Focal plane solutions allow the recognizing of
three subgroups of fault planes. The first subgroup has a gen-
eral NNE—SSW strike, it is characterized by either transpres-
sional (KB102, KB106, KB108, KB104) or transtensional
tectonics (KB117, KB115, KB101), and has a more or less
preferred strike slip component. Faults with this strike were
also observed in the field. The field measurements also indi-
cate both dextral and sinistral slips along these fault planes,
which is evident along the Gornjak traverse. The second sub-
group has a NNW-SSE strike, and, like the previous sub-
group, has both transpressional (KB105, KB113, KB123)
and transtensional slip (KB107). This subgroup of fault
planes is also found in the field, where indications of both re-
verse and normal slip are observed (field points M02 and
G04). The third subgroup of E—W fault planes with almost
pure normal slip is found on the focal plane solutions KB103
and KB116. This subgroup is recorded on the field points
M03 and G01, where sinistral normal slip is observed.
The focal plane solutions for the southern part of the study
area reveal two different fault plane subgroups. The first sub-
group (KB109, KB112, KB121 and KB125) has a NW-SE
strike. Focal mechanisms for KB121 indicate almost pure
sinistral slip, while two others indicate reverse slip both with
sinistral and dextral components. The reverse slip was ob-
served in the field on fault planes having the same strike
(R01 and R02). However, none of the fault solutions along
the Ravanica profile shows a sinistral slip. The third sub-
group of fault planes has an ENE—WSW strike and almost
pure normal slip, and it is observed on the focal plane solu-
tion KB119. This is also confirmed by the diagram R02.
158
MLADENOVIĆ, TRIVIĆ, ANTIĆ, CVETKOVIĆ, PAVLOVIĆ, RADOVANOVIĆ and FÜGENSCHUH
G
G
G
G
GEOL
EOL
EOL
EOL
EOLOGICA CARPA
OGICA CARPA
OGICA CARPA
OGICA CARPA
OGICA CARPATHICA
THICA
THICA
THICA
THICA, 2014, 65, 2, 147—161
Tensor inversion of focal mechanisms tensor inversion
shows that the direction of maximum and minimum stress is
NNE—SSW and ESE—WNW, respectively (Fig. 6a), and that
in the central and southern area both stress axes are subhori-
zontal. The
σ
2
axis is subvertical in these two areas and in all
areas dipping towards the W. The values of the R ratio de-
crease when going from the northern to the southern parts of
the research area.
Discussion
As can be seen in Figures 3, 4 and 5, there is a good corre-
lation of the results among tensor inversion of fault slip data,
inversion of focal mechanisms and lineament pattern analy-
sis. This correlation indicates that in the research area the
Late Miocene strike-slip tectonic regime (Matenco &
Schmid 1999) continued to be active in recent times. This
observation coincides with the existing neotectonic interpreta-
tions in the Pannonian Basin (Bada et al. 2007), Serbia (south
of the Danube and Sava rivers; Marović et al. 2002a) and
northern part of the Getic Nappe in the Southern Carpathians
in of Romania (Matenco & Schmid 1999; Fügenschuh &
Schmid 2005).
Tensor inversion of fault slip and focal mechanism data
suggest that the studied area is characterized by subhorizon-
tal compressional and tensional axes as well by subvertical
σ
2
axes. This clearly implies a strike slip tectonic regime
with a general NNE—SSE orientation of maximum compres-
sion. The data also suggest that the compressional axis
slightly deviates in the northern and southern part with re-
spect to the central part of the research area (generally N—S
oriented maximal axis in both regions). Higher R values
( ~ 0.7) in the northern part (Fig. 6), obtained by both methods,
indicate a dominant transtensional regime in this area. The
shape of the stress ellipsoid tends to have an oblate form
(
σ
1
≥σ
2
>
σ
3
) (Fig. 7). This shows differences with respect to
the tectonic regime determined for the whole GRZ by this
study. The explanation can be twofold: local differences in
stress field or the influence of strike-slip tectonics which also
Fig. 7. Diagram of orientation of stress ellipsoid and related tectonic regimes, adapted from Bada et al. (2007). Numbers 1—4 indicate the
regions shown on Fig. 8
159
RECENT KINEMATICS (FAULT SLIP AND FOCAL MECHANISM) IN GETIC NAPPE (E SERBIA)
G
G
G
G
GEOL
EOL
EOL
EOL
EOLOGICA CARPA
OGICA CARPA
OGICA CARPA
OGICA CARPA
OGICA CARPATHICA
THICA
THICA
THICA
THICA, 2014, 65, 2, 147—161
activated normal faults in the southern Carpathian arc
(Schmid et al. 1998; Fügenschuh & Schmid 2005). In the
central part of the research area the average R value obtained
by both methods (Fig. 6), together with the position of stress
field axes (the medium stress axis is subvertical, and the other
two subhorizontal), implies a dominating strike-slip regime.
R values and the position of principal axes in the southern
part of the research area imply a tendency towards a prolate
stress ellipsoid. Such a stress regime indicates the affinity to
transpressional kinematics (Fig. 7).
Epicenter positions indicate that most earthquakes oc-
curred in the central part of the research area, more precisely,
in the area between Despotovac and Petrovac (Fig. 3). This
does not necessarily imply that this area has higher seismicity
(more frequent earthquakes), since the focal plane solutions
are calculated only for earthquakes with magnitude higher
than 2. On the other hand, this fact cannot be ignored either,
especially because it certainly indicates some kind of differ-
ent seismic activity in this zone with respect to the northern
(no stronger earthquakes) and southern part (low concentra-
tion of stronger earthquakes) of the study area. There are also
some differences regarding fault (re)activation patterns in the
northern and the central part on the one hand, and the south-
ern part of the research area on the other. Earthquakes from
the northern and the central part of the research area occurred
along generally N—S striking regional faults. By contrast,
Fig. 8. Schematic map of the recent tectonic stress regimes on the Balkan Peninsula and Pannonian Basin, adapted from Marović et al. (2002a),
Radovanović (2003), Fügenschuh & Schmid (2005), Bada et al. (2007), Kastelic et al. (2013). Numbers 1—4 indicates the regions studied by
Bada et al. (2007); tensors 5 and 6 are based on research of Marović et al. (2002a); tensor 7 indicate region studied by Fügenschuh & Schmid
(2005). The relative size of the presented arrows indicate the relative magnitude of the stress axes, i.e. their mutual ratio. Tensors presented
without a circle indicating the vertical axis are solutions where none of the axes were vertical, i.e. transtensional or transpressional.
earthquakes from the southern part occurred along faults that
are marked as local on the lineament trend interpretation.
Our results support the model of the “Adria push” mecha-
nism, according to which the maximum compressional stress
has a NE—SW orientation, generated in this way in the south-
ern Dalmatia region (Croatian coast, Dubrovnik – Split re-
gion) (Figs. 7 and 8) (Rebai et al. 1992; Gerner et al. 1999).
As shown by Bada et al. (2007), the azimuth of the
σ
1
axis is
N055° in the Timisoara seismogenic zone. Although situated
south of this seismogenic zone, the GRZ shows the same pat-
tern with the maximum compression axis oriented in a similar
direction (030/10). Similar
σ
1
orientations are found in the
Kraishte area in Bulgaria (tensor 3 of the phase D4 in Kounov
et al. 2011). According to Bada et al. (2007), dominant act-
ive fault systems in the Timisoara Zone display N—S and
ENE—WSW strikes, and the same applies to the GRZ where
both regional (N—S and NE—SW) and local (NE—SW and
NW—SE) faults show evidence of recent activity. In analogy to
the Timisoara Zone, this fact indicates that the distribution of
the epicenters, as well as of the fault mechanisms, can be ex-
plained by the release of accumulated stress at local accom-
modation zones that are favourably oriented with respect to
the active regional stress field. This explains why the maximum
horizontal stress axis slightly deviates from the maximum
compressional axis generated by the ‘Adria push’ mechanism
(related to the region of southern Dalmatia in Croatia).
160
MLADENOVIĆ, TRIVIĆ, ANTIĆ, CVETKOVIĆ, PAVLOVIĆ, RADOVANOVIĆ and FÜGENSCHUH
G
G
G
G
GEOL
EOL
EOL
EOL
EOLOGICA CARPA
OGICA CARPA
OGICA CARPA
OGICA CARPA
OGICA CARPATHICA
THICA
THICA
THICA
THICA, 2014, 65, 2, 147—161
Observations in the northern and southern parts of the
GRZ indicate that the local stress field is of high importance
in controlling recent tectonics in this area. The southern part
shows the affinity to transpressional tectonics likely influ-
enced by the rigid Moesian Promontory, situated east of our
study area (Fig. 8). The northern part is characterized by a
transtensional tectonic regime which could mark the onset of
the influence of the Pannonian Basin extension (Matenco &
Schmid 1999; Fügenschuh & Schmid 2005) (see also Fig. 8).
Conclusions
The correlation and joint inversion of calculated focal
mechanism and collected fault slip data led us to the following
conclusions related to the Late Miocene to present day tecton-
ics in the Eastern Serbian part of the Carpatho-Balkanides:
1. In most cases, there is a good agreement between (1) the
paleostress inversion, (2) the inversion of focal mechanisms
and (3) the remote sensing lineament analysis. This fact indi-
cates that the present day stress field is the same as the one
that was active in the Late Miocene, meaning that the tectonic
stress field has remained relatively uniform since that time.
2. The dominant tectonic stress regime in this area is de-
fined by the NNE—SSW horizontal
σ
1
, sub-vertical
σ
2
and
WNW—ESE horizontal
σ
3
resulting in strike-slip kinematics
along active faults. This is in very good agreement with neo-
tectonic reconstructions in the Pannonian Basin indicating
that the basin itself and its southern envelope underwent the
same neotectonic evolution.
3. There are differences in tectonic regime in the northern
and southern parts of the studied area. The transtensional
tectonic regime in the northern part probably resulted from
extension that acted more to the north-east of the study area.
In the southern part a transpressional tectonic regime was
dominant most likely because of the close vicinity of the rigid
Moesian Platform. The available data, however, cannot pro-
vide a more accurate explanation of these subtle differences
in tectonic conditions.
4. The maximum horizontal stress axis has a general
NNE—SSW orientation. This implies that the main source of
compression in the Balkan Peninsula is ‘Adria push’ which
also represents the major cause of seismicity in the studied
area. The seismicity is most likely controlled by the release of
accumulated tectonic stress along local weakened zones that
are favourably oriented in respect to the active stress field.
Acknowledgments: We thank Alexandre Kounov and an
anonymous reviewer for their constructive reviews that sig-
nificantly improved the paper, and to Dušan Plašienka for
his thorough editorial handling. This study was supported by
the Serbian Ministry of Education, Science and Technological
Development, Projects No. 176016 and No. TR 36009. Ana
Mladenović wants to thank the CEEPUS network “Earth-
Science Studies in Central and South-Eastern Europe” for
support. Vladica Cvetković thanks the Serbian Academy of
Sciences and Arts (Project Geodynamics). The authors would
like to thank Aleksandar Džunić for stimulating discussions
about the seismicity of this area and suggestions on an earlier
version of the manuscript. Milan Radovanović is kindly ac-
knowledged for language proofreading.
References
Angelier J. 1979: Determination of the mean principal directions of
stresses for a given fault population. Tectonophysics 56, 3—4,
T17—T26.
Angelier J. 2002: Inversion of earthquake focal mechanisms to ob-
tain the seismotectonic stress IV – a new method free of
choice among the nodal planes. Geophys. J. Int. 150, 588—609.
ASTER GDEM Project: http://www.jspacesystems.or.jp/ersdac/
GDEM/E/index.html
Bada G., Horvath F., Dovenyi P., Szafian P., Windhoffer G. &
Cloetingh S. 2007: Present-day stress field and tectonic inver-
sion in the Pannonian Basin. Global and Planetary Change 58,
165—180.
Barth A., Reinecker J. & Heidbach O. 2008: Stress derivation from
earthquake focal mechanisms. World Stress Map project, 1—36.
Bonchev E. 1936: Versuch einer tektonischen Synthese West-
bulgariens. Geol. Balcanica 2, 3, 5—48.
Bott M.H.P. 1959: The mechanics of oblique slip faulting. Geol.
Mag. 96, 109—117.
Cvetković V., Prelević D., Downes H., Jovanović M., Vaselli O. &
Pécskay Z. 2004: Origin and geodynamic significance of Ter-
tiary postcollisional basaltic magmatism in Serbia (central Bal-
kan Peninsula). Lithos 73, 3—4, 161—186.
Dimitrijević M.D. 1963: Sur l’âge du métamorphisme et des plisse-
ments dans la masse Serbo-macédonienne. Bull. du VIe congr.
De l’ass. Géol. Carpatho-balkanique, Vol. I. Stratigraphie, 3,
Warszawa and Kraków; Wyd. Geol., Warszawa, 339—347.
Dimitrijević M.D. 1967: Some problems of crystalline schists in
the Serbo-Macedonian Massif. Reports of VIII Congress of
CBGA, Petrology and Metamorphism, September 1967, Belgrade,
59—67.
Dimitrijević M.D. 1995: Geology of Yugoslavia. Gemini, Beograd,
1—187 (in Serbian).
Dimitrov C. 1931: Contribution to the geology and petrography of
Konyavo Mountain. Rev. Bulg. Geol. Soc. 3, 3—52 (in Bulgarian).
Doblas M. 1998: Slickenside kinematic indicators. Tectonophysics
295, 187—197.
Doblas M., Mahecha V., Hoyos M. & López-Ruiz J. 1997: Slicken-
side and fault surface kinematic indicators on active normal
faults of the Alpine Betic Cordilleras, Granada, southern
Spain. J. Struct. Geol. 19, 2, 159—170.
Drew L. 2005: A tectonic model for the spatial occurrence of por-
phyry copper and polymetallic vein deposits – Applications to
the central Europe. U.S. Geol. Surv. Sci. Report 2005—5272, 36 p.
ISBN 1-411-30960-X
Fügenschuh B. & Schmid S.M. 2005: Age and significance of core
complex formation in a very curved orogen: Evidence from
fission track studies in the South Carpathians (Romania). Tec-
tonophysics 404, 33—53.
Gephart J.W. 1990: Stress and the direction of slip on fault planes.
Tectonics 9, 4, 845—858.
Gephart J.W. & Forsyth D.W. 1984: An improved method for de-
termining the regional stress tensor using earthquake focal
mechanism data: application to the San Fernando earthquake
sequence. J. Geophys. Res. 89, 9305—9320.
Gerner P., Dovenyi P., Horvath F. & Muller B. 1995: State of recent
stress and seismotectonics in the Pannonian Basin and sur-
rounding area. Terra Abstr. 7, 1—123.
Gerner P., Bada G., Dovenyi P., Muller B., Onescu M.C., Cloetingh
S. & Horvath F. 1999: Recent tectonic stress and crustal defor-
161
RECENT KINEMATICS (FAULT SLIP AND FOCAL MECHANISM) IN GETIC NAPPE (E SERBIA)
G
G
G
G
GEOL
EOL
EOL
EOL
EOLOGICA CARPA
OGICA CARPA
OGICA CARPA
OGICA CARPA
OGICA CARPATHICA
THICA
THICA
THICA
THICA, 2014, 65, 2, 147—161
mation in and around the Pannonian Basin: data and models.
In: Durand B., Jolivet L., Horvath F. & Serrane M. (Eds.): The
Mediterranean Basins: Tertiary extension within the Alpine
orogen. Geol. Soc. London, Spec. Publ. 156, 269—294.
Glavatović B. 1988: Study of seismicity in the southern Adriatic
Sea by simultaneous processing of earthquakes. [Proučavanje
seizmičnosti južnog Jadrana simultanom obradom grupe 24
zemljotresa.] PhD Thesis, University of Belgrade, Factulty of
Mining and Geology, Belgrade, 1—213 (in Serbian).
Grenerczy G. & Bada G. 2005: GPS baseline length changes and
their tectonic interpretation in the Pannonian Basin. Geophys.
Res. Abstr., 7(04808).
Heidbach O., Tingay M., Barth A., Reinecker J., Kurfeß D. &
Müller B. 2008: The World Stress Map database release 2008.
Doi: 10.1594/GFZ.WSM.Rel2008
Horvath F. & Cloetingh S. 1996: Stress – induced late – stage
subsidence anomalies in the Pannonian Basin. Tectonophysics
266, 287—300.
International Seismological Centre 2011: On-line Bulletin. Internat.
Seis. Cent., Thatcham, United Kingdom.
http://www.isc.ac.uk
Kalenić M., Hadži-Vuković M., Dolić D., Lončarević Č. & Rakić
O. 1980: Geological map and Guide book for sheet Kučevo
(L34-128), Basic Geological Map of SFRY. Federal Geol.
Surv., Belgrade, 85 (in Serbian with English abstract).
Karamata S. 2006: The geodynamical framework of the Balkan
Peninsula: its origin due to the approach, collision and com-
pression of Gondwanian and Eurasian units. In: Robertson
A.H.F. & Mountrakis D. (Eds.): Tectonic development of the
Eastern Mediterranean Region. Geol. Soc. London, Spec. Publ.
260, 155—178.
Karamata S., Knežević V., Péckay Z. & Đor ević P. 1997: Magma-
tism and metallogeny of the Ridanj—Krepoljin belt (Eastern
Serbia) and their correlation with northern and eastern ana-
logues. Mineralium Depos. 32, 452—458.
Kastelic V., Vannoli P., Burrato P., Fracassi U., Tiberti M. & Valen-
sise G. 2013: Seismogenic sources in the Adriatic Domain. Mar.
Petrol. Geol. 42, 191—213.
Kräutner H. & Krstić B. 2002: Alpine and Pre-Alpine structural
units within the southern Carpathians and the eastern Bal-
kanides. Proceedings of XVII Congress of Carpathian-Balkan
Geological Association Bratislava. ISSN 1335-0552
Kräutner H. & Krstić B. 2003: Geological Map of the Carpatho-
Balkanides between Mehadia, Oravita, Niš and Sofia. Geol.
Inst. Serbia, Belgrade.
Kounov A., Seward D., Burg J.-P., Bernoulli D., Ivanov Z. & Han-
dler R. 2010: Geochronological and structural constraints on
the Cretaceous thermotectonic evolution of the Kraishte zone,
western Bulgaria. Tectonics 29, TC2002.
Kounov A., Burg J.-P., Bernoulli D., Seward D., Ivanov Z., Dimov
D. & Gerdjikov I. 2011: Paleostress analysis of Cenozoic
faulting in the Kraishte area, SW Bulgaria. J. Struct. Geol. 33,
859—874.
Marinković Đ., Nikolić D., Maksimčev S., Bundaleski M. & Vdovi-
jak B. 1978: Map of Tertiary base depths (southern of Sava and
Danube). NTC NIS, Novi Sad (in Serbian).
Marović M. 2001: Geology of Yugoslavia. University of Belgrade,
Faculty of Mining and Geology, Belgrade, 1—230 (in Serbian).
Marović M., Đoković I. & Toljić M. 2002a: Neotectonic map of
Serbia. Republic of Serbia, Ministry for the protection of natu-
ral resources and environment, Belgrade.
Marović M., Đoković I., Pešić L., Radovanović S., Toljić M. &
Gerzina N. 2002b: Neotectonics and seismicity of the southern
margin of the Pannonian Basin in Serbia. EGU Stephan Mueller
Spec. Publ. Ser. 3, 277—295.
Matenco L. & Schmid S. 1999: Exhumation of the Danubian nappes
system (South Carpathians) during the Early Tertiary: infer-
ences from kinematic and paleostress analysis at the Getic/
Danubian nappes contact. Tectonophysics 314, 401—422.
Michael A.J. 1987: Use of focal mechanisms to determine stress: a
control study. J. Geophys. Res. 92, 357—368.
Mitchell A.H.G. 1996: Distribution and genesis of some epizonal
Zn-Pb and Au provinces in the Carpathian-Balkan region.
Transactions of the Institution of Mining and Metallurgy, Sect.
B 105, 127—138.
Ortner H., Reiter F. & Acs P. 2002: Easy handling of tectonic data:
the programs TectonicVB for Mac and TectonicsFP for
Windows(TM). Computers & Geosciences 28, 1193—1200.
Petit J.P. 1987: Criteria for the sense of movement on fault surfaces
in brittle rocks. J. Struct. Geol. 9, 5—6, 597—608.
Radovanović S. 2003: Seismic hazard maps and spectra, results of
catalogue preparation, seismotectonic modeling and site class
definitions. Proc. of First International Conference, Science
and technology for safe development of lifeline systems natural
risks: Developments, tools and techniques in the CEI Area, 4—5
November 2003, Sofia, Bulgaria.
Radovanović S. & Pavlović R. 1992: Some aspects of earthquake
generation in the area of Svilajnac—Žagubica. Ann. Géol. Penins.
Balk. 56, 2, 43—60 (in Serbian).
Radovanović S. & Pavlović R. 1994: Earthquake mechanisms on the
Mlava fault. Ann. Géol. Penins. Balk. 58, 1, 73—85 (in Serbian).
Rebai S., Philip H. & Taboada A. 1992: Modern tectonic stress field
in the Mediterranean region: evidence for variation stress di-
rections at different scales. Geophys. J. Int. 110, 106—140.
Reinecker J., Heidbach O., Tingay M., Sperner B. & Müller B.
2005: The release 2005 of the World Stress Map.
(available online at www.world-stress-map.org).
Rivera L. & Cisternas A. 1990: Stress tensor and fault plane solu-
tions for a population of earthquakes. Bull. Seism. Soc. Amer.
80, 600—614.
Schmid S., Berza T., Diaconescu V., Froitzheim N. & Fügenschuh
B. 1998: Orogen – parallel extension in the South Carpathians
during the Paleogene. Tectonophysics 297, 1—4, 209—228.
Schmid S., Bernoulli D., Fügenschuh B., Matenco L., Schefer S.,
Schuster R., Tischler M. & Ustaszewski K. 2008: The Alpine-
Carpathian-Dinaride orogenic system: correlation and evolu-
tion of tectonic units. Swiss J. Geosci. 101, 139—183.
Spang J.H. 1972: Numerical method for dynamic analysis of calcite
twin lamellae. Geol. Soc. Amer. Bull. 183, 467—472.
Sperner B. & Ratschbacher L. 1994: A Turbo Pascal program pack-
age for graphical presentation and stress analysis of calcite de-
formation. Z. Dtsch. Geol. Gesell. 145, 414—423.
Sperner B. & Zweigel P. 2010: A plea for more caution in fault-slip
analysis. Tectonophysics 482, 29—41.
Ustaszewski K., Schmid S., Fügenschuh B., Tischler M., Kissling
E. & Spakman W. 2008: A map – view restoration of the Al-
pine-Carpathian-Dinaridic system for the Early Miocene.
Swiss. J. Geosci., 101, Suppl. 1, S273—S294.
Veselinović M., Antonijević I., Milošaković R., Mićić I., Krstić B.,
Čićulič M., Divljan M. & Maslarević Lj. 1970: Geological
map and Guide book for sheet Boljevac (K34-8), Basic Geo-
logical Map of SFRY. Federal Geol. Surv. Belgrade, 1—60 (in
Serbian with English abstract).
Zagorchev I. & Ruseva M. 1982: Nappe structure of the southern
parts of the Osogovo Mts. and the Pijanec region (SW Bulgaria).
Geol. Balcanica 12, 3, 35—37 (in Russian, with English abstract).