Dating and characterizing late holocene earthquakes using paleomagnetics

In this thesis I apply paleomagnetic techniques to paleoseismological problems. I investigate the use of secular-variation magnetostratigraphy to date prehistoric earthquakes; I identify liquefaction remanent magnetization (LRM), and I quantify coseismic deformation within a fault zone by measuring the rotation of paleomagnetic vectors.

In Chapter 2 I construct a secular-variation reference curve for southern California. For this curve I measure three new well-constrained paleomagnetic directions: two from the Pallett Creek paleoseismological site at A.D. 1397-1480 and A.D. 1465-1495, and one from Panum Crater at A.D. 1325-1365. To these three directions I add the best nine data points from the Sternberg secular-variation curve, five data points from Champion, and one point from the A.D. 1480 eruption of Mt. St. Helens. I derive the error due to the non-dipole field that is added to these data by the geographical correction to southern California. Combining these yields a secular variation curve for southern California covering the period A.D. 670 to 1910, with the best coverage in the range A.D. 1064 to 1505.

In Chapter 3 I apply this curve to a problem in southern California. Two paleoseismological sites in the Salton trough of southern California have sediments deposited by prehistoric Lake Cahuilla. At the Salt Creek site I sampled sediments from three different lakes, and at the Indio site I sampled sediments from four different lakes. Based upon the coinciding paleomagnetic directions I correlate the oldest lake sampled at Salt Creek with the oldest lake sampled at Indio. Furthermore, the penultimate lake at Indio does not appear to be present at Salt Creek. Using the secular variation curve I can assign the lakes at Salt Creek to broad age ranges of A.D. 800 to 1100, A.D. 1100 to 1300, and A.D. 1300 to 1500. This example demonstrates the large uncertainties in the secular variation curve and the need to construct curves from a limited geographical area.

Chapter 4 demonstrates that seismically induced liquefaction can cause resetting of detrital remanent magnetization and acquisition of a liquefaction remanent magnetization (LRM). I sampled three different liquefaction features, a sandbody formed in the Elsinore fault zone, diapirs from sediments of Mono Lake, and a sandblow in these same sediments. In every case the liquefaction features showed stable magnetization despite substantial physical disruption. In addition, in the case of the sandblow and the sandbody, the intensity of the natural remanent magnetization increased by up to an order of magnitude.

In Chapter 5 I apply paleomagnetics to measuring the tectonic rotations in a 52 meter long transect across the San Andreas fault zone at the Pallett Creek paleoseismological site. This site has presented a significant problem because the brittle long-term average slip-rate across the fault is significantly less than the slip-rate from other nearby sites. I find sections adjacent to the fault with tectonic rotations of up to 30°. If interpreted as block rotations, the non-brittle offset was 14.0+2.8, -2.1 meters in the last three earthquakes and 8.5+1.0, -0.9 meters in the last two. Combined with the brittle offset in these events, the last three events all had about 6 meters of total fault offset, even though the intervals between them were markedly different.

In Appendix 1 I present a detailed description of my standard sampling and demagnetization procedure.

In Appendix 2 I present a detailed discussion of the study at Panum Crater that yielded the well-constrained paleomagnetic direction for use in developing secular variation curve in Chapter 2. In addition, from sampling two distinctly different clast types in a block-and-ash flow deposit from Panum Crater, I find that this flow had a complex emplacement and cooling history. Angular, glassy "lithic" blocks were emplaced at temperatures above 600° C. Some of these had cooled nearly completely, whereas others had cooled only to 450° C, when settling in the flow rotated the blocks slightly. The partially cooled blocks then finished cooling without further settling. Highly vesicular, breadcrusted pumiceous clasts had not yet cooled to 600° C at the time of these rotations, because they show a stable, well clustered, unidirectional magnetic vector.

Computational Predictions of G Protein-Coupled Receptor Structures and Binding Sites

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) are the largest family of proteins within the human genome. They consist of seven transmembrane (TM) helices, with a N-terminal region of varying length and structure on the extracellular side, and a C-terminus on the intracellular side. GPCRs are involved in transmitting extracellular signals to cells, and as such are crucial drug targets. Designing pharmaceuticals to target GPCRs is greatly aided by full-atom structural information of the proteins. In particular, the TM region of GPCRs is where small molecule ligands (much more bioavailable than peptide ligands) typically bind to the receptors. In recent years nearly thirty distinct GPCR TM regions have been crystallized. However, there are more than 1,000 GPCRs, leaving the vast majority of GPCRs with limited structural information. Additionally, GPCRs are known to exist in a myriad of conformational states in the body, rendering the static x-ray crystal structures an incomplete reflection of GPCR structures. In order to obtain an ensemble of GPCR structures, we have developed the GEnSeMBLE procedure to rapidly sample a large number of variations of GPCR helix rotations and tilts. The lowest energy GEnSeMBLE structures are then docked to small molecule ligands and optimized. The GPCR family consists of five subfamilies with little to no sequence homology between them: class A, B1, B2, C, and Frizzled/Taste2. Almost all of the GPCR crystal structures have been of class A GPCRs, and much is known about their conserved interactions and binding sites. In this work we particularly focus on class B1 GPCRs, and aim to understand that family’s interactions and binding sites both to small molecules and their native peptide ligands. Specifically, we predict the full atom structure and peptide binding site of the glucagon-like peptide receptor and the TM region and small molecule binding sites for eight other class B1 GPCRs: CALRL, CRFR1, GIPR, GLR, PACR, PTH1R, VIPR1, and VIPR2. Our class B1 work reveals multiple conserved interactions across the B1 subfamily as well as a consistent small molecule binding site centrally located in the TM bundle. Both the interactions and the binding sites are distinct from those seen in the more well-characterized class A GPCRs, and as such our work provides a strong starting point for drug design targeting class B1 proteins. We also predict the full structure of CXCR4 bound to a small molecule, a class A GPCR that was not closely related to any of the class A GPCRs at the time of the work.