An official website of the United States government
Abstract Oceanic transform faults connect spreading centers and are imprinted with previous tectonic events. However, their tectonic interactions are not well understood due to limited observations. The Discovery transform fault system at 4°S, East Pacific Rise (EPR), represents a young transform system, offering a unique opportunity to study the interplay between faulting and other tectonic events at an early phases of an oceanic transform system. Discovery regularly hostsM5–6 characteristic earthquakes, and the seafloor north of Discovery includes a 35 km‐long rift zone that records a complex history of rifting, faulting and volcanism, suggesting that the transform faults likely interact with regional tectonic activity. We apply a machine‐learning enabled workflow to locate 21,391 earthquakes recorded during a 1‐year ocean bottom seismometer experiment in 2008. Our results indicate that seismicity on the western Discovery fault is separated into seven patches with distinct aseismic and seismic slip modes. Additionally, we observe a patch of off‐fault seismicity near where seafloor abyssal hills intersect the rift zone. This seismicity may have been caused by varying opening rates as spreading rate decreases from north to south in the rift zone. Our findings suggest that the Discovery system is still evolving, and that system equilibrium has not been reached between rifting and faulting. These results reflect the complex yet rarely observed interactions between fault slip, plate rotation, and rifting which are likely ubiquitous at oceanic transform systems.
more »
« less
In‐Situ V p / V s Reveals Fault‐Zone Material Variation at the Westernmost Gofar Transform Fault, East Pacific Rise
Abstract Ocean transform faults often generate characteristic earthquakes that repeatedly rupture the same fault patches. The westernmost Gofar transform fault quasi‐periodically hosts ∼M6 earthquakes every ∼5 years, and microseismicity suggests that the fault is segmented into five distinct zones, including a rupture barrier zone that may have modulated the rupture of adjacentM6 earthquakes. However, the relationship between the systematic slip behavior of the Gofar fault and the fault material properties is still poorly known. Specifically, the role of pore fluids in regulating the slip of the Gofar fault is unclear. Here, we use differential travel times between nearby earthquakes to estimate the in‐situVp/Vsof the fault‐zone materials. We apply this technique to the dataset collected by an ocean‐bottom‐seismometer network deployed around the Gofar fault in 2008, which recorded abundant microearthquakes, and find a moderateVp/Vsof 1.75–1.80 in the rupture barrier zone and a lowVp/Vsof 1.61–1.69 in the down‐dip edge of the 2008M6 rupture zone. This lateral variation inVp/Vsmay be caused by both pore fluids and chemical alteration. We also find a 5%–10% increase inVp/Vsin the barrier zone during the 9 months before the mainshock. This increase may have been caused by fluid migrations or slip transients in the barrier zone.
more »
« less
- PAR ID:
- 10401673
- Publisher / Repository:
- DOI PREFIX: 10.1029
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth
- Volume:
- 128
- Issue:
- 3
- ISSN:
- 2169-9313
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Abstract Two major earthquakes (MW7.8 and MW7.7) ruptured left-lateral strike-slip faults of the East Anatolian Fault Zone (EAFZ) on February 6, 2023, causing >59,000 fatalities and ~$119B in damage in southeastern Türkiye and northwestern Syria. Here we derived kinematic rupture models for the two events by inverting extensive seismic and geodetic observations using complex 5-6 segment fault models constrained by satellite observations and relocated aftershocks. The larger event nucleated on a splay fault, and then propagated bilaterally ~350 km along the main EAFZ strand. The rupture speed varied from 2.5-4.5 km/s, and peak slip was ~8.1 m. 9-h later, the second event ruptured ~160 km along the curved northern EAFZ strand, with early bilateral supershear rupture velocity (>4 km/s) followed by a slower rupture speed (~3 km/s). Coulomb Failure stress increase imparted by the first event indicates plausible triggering of the doublet aftershock, along with loading of neighboring faults.more » « less
-
Abstract Understanding the dynamics of microearthquakes is a timely challenge with the potential to address current paradoxes in earthquake mechanics, and to better understand earthquake ruptures induced by fluid injection. We perform fully 3D dynamic rupture simulations caused by fluid injection on a target fault for Fault Activation and Earthquake Ruptures experiments generatingMw ≤ 1 earthquakes. We investigate the dynamics of rupture propagation with spatially variable stress drop caused by pore pressure changes and assuming different slip‐weakening constitutive parameters. We show that the spontaneous arrest of propagating ruptures is possible by assuming a high fault strength parameter S, that is, a high ratio between strength excess and dynamic stress drop. In faults with high S values (low rupturing potential), even minor variations inDc(from 0.45 to 0.6 mm) have a substantial effect on the rupture propagation and the ultimate earthquake size. Modest spatial variations of dynamic stress drop determine the rupture mode, distinguishing self‐arresting from run‐away ruptures. Our results suggest that several characteristics inferred for accelerating dynamic ruptures differ from those observed during rupture deceleration of a self‐arresting earthquake. During deceleration, a decrease of peak slip velocity is associated with a nearly constant cohesive zone size. Moreover, the residual slip velocity value (asymptotic value for a crack‐like rupture) decreases to nearly zero. This means that an initially crack‐like rupture becomes a pulse‐like rupture during spontaneous arrest. These findings highlight the complex dynamics of small induced earthquakes, which differ from solutions obtained from conventional crack‐like models of earthquake rupture.more » « less
-
Abstract The 1938MS8.3 and 2021MW8.2 earthquakes both ruptured within the Semidi segment of the Aleutian‐Alaska subduction zone. The large‐slip distribution of the 2021 event is well constrained within the depth range 25–45 km, with seaward tsunami observations excluding significant shallower coseismic slip. The 1938 event slip distribution is more uncertain. Regional and far‐field tide gauge observations for the 1938 event are modeled to constrain the location of large coseismic slip. The largest slip (2.0 m) is located below the continental shelf on a 180‐km‐long portion of the rupture extending further northeast than the 2021 rupture, to near Sitkinak Island. Minor slip (1.0 m) extends seaward under the continental slope to 8 km deep, where large slip may have occurred in 1788. The megathrust shallower than 25 km depth to the southwest experienced many small aftershocks and aseismic slip following the 2021 event, and has limited slip deficit.more » « less
-
Abstract On 4 and 6 July 2019, two large strike‐slip earthquakes withW‐phase moment magnitudesMWW6.5 (foreshock) andMWW7.1 (mainshock) struck the Eastern California Shear Zone, northeast of Ridgecrest. The faulting geometry and kinematic coseismic slip distribution of both events are determined by jointly inverting seismological and geodetic observations guided by aftershock and surface rupture locations. The foreshock ruptured two orthogonal faults with a prominent L‐shaped geometry with maximum slip of ~1.1 m on the NE‐SW segment. The mainshock faulting extended NW‐SE along several primary fault segments that straddle the foreshock slip. The surface rupture and slip model indicate mostly near‐horizontal strike‐slip motion with maximum slip of ~3.7 m, but there is a localized vertical dip‐slip motion. Both the foreshock and mainshock ruptures terminate in regions of complex surface offsets. High aftershock productivity and low rupture velocity may be the result of rupture of a relatively immature fault system.more » « less
