The ∼300‐km‐long eastern Tennessee seismic zone, United States, is the secondmost seismically active region east of the Rocky Mountains. Seismicity generally occurs below the Paleozoic fold‐and‐thrust belt within the Mesoproterozoic basement, at depths of 5–26 km, and earthquake magnitudes during the instrumental record have been moment magnitude (Mw) ≤4.8. Evidence of surface deformation may not exist or be difficult to detect because of the vegetated and soil‐mantled landscape, landslides, locally steep topography, anthropogenic landscape modification, or long, irregular recurrence intervals between surface‐rupturing earthquakes. Despite the deep seismicity, analog models indicate that accumulation of strike‐slip or oblique‐slip displacement at depth could be expected to propagate upward through the Paleozoic section, producing a detectable surficial signal of distributed faulting. To identify potential surface deformation, we interrogated the landscape at different spatial scales. We evaluated morphotectonic and channel metrics, such as channel sinuosity and catchment‐scale hypsometry. In addition, we mapped possible fault‐related topographic features on 1‐m lidar data. Finally, we integrated our observations with available bedrock and Quaternary surficial mapping and subsurface geophysical data. At a regional scale, most morphotectonic and channel metrics have a strong lithologic control. Within smaller regions of similar lithology, we observe changes in landscape metrics like channel sinuosity and catchment‐scale hypsometry that spatially correlate with new lineaments identified in this study and previously mapped east–west Cenozoic faults. These faults have apparent left‐lateral offsets, are optimally oriented to slip in the current stress field, and match kinematics from the recent focal mechanisms, but do not clearly preserve evidence of late Pleistocene or Holocene tectonic surface deformation. Most newly mapped lineaments might be explained by either tectonic or nontectonic origins, such as fluvial or karst processes. We also reevaluated a previously described paleoseismic site and interpret that the exposure does not record evidence of late Pleistocene faulting but instead is explained by fluvial stratigraphy.

You do not have access to this content, please speak to your institutional administrator if you feel you should have access.