Surface Fault Ruptures and Slip Distributions of the Mw 6.6 11 April 2011 Hamadoori, Fukushima Prefecture, Northeast Japan, Earthquake

Mizoguchi, Kazuo; Uehara, Shin–ichi; Ueta, Keiichi

doi:10.1785/0120110308

Cited by 29 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Young surface cracks are also found above the northern end of the Maule 2010 slip area (Aron et al, ; Arriagada et al, ) where normal faults are long‐lived features (Aron et al, ). Young surface cracks were identified above the downdip end of the Tohoku 2011 finite fault (Mizoguchi et al, ). Normal faulting earthquakes deeper in the overriding plate followed shortly after the 2011 Tohoku earthquake (Asano et al, ; Kato et al, , ; Toda & Tsutsumi, ), the 2010 Maule main shock (Farías et al, ; Hicks et al, ; Ryder et al, ), and the 2014 Iquique earthquakes (Hayes, ).…”

Section: Comparison With Observationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Geodetic Signature of the Earthquake Cycle at Subduction Zones: Model Constraints on the Deep Processes

Govers

Furlong

Wiel

et al. 2018

Reviews of Geophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent megathrust events in Tohoku (Japan), Maule (Chile), and Sumatra (Indonesia) were well recorded. Much has been learned about the dominant physical processes in megathrust zones: (partial) locking of the plate interface, detailed coseismic slip, relocking, afterslip, viscoelastic mantle relaxation, and interseismic loading. These and older observations show complex spatial and temporal patterns in crustal deformation and displacement, and significant differences among different margins. A key question is whether these differences reflect variations in the underlying processes, like differences in locking, or the margin geometry, or whether they are a consequence of the stage in the earthquake cycle of the margin. Quantitative models can connect these plate boundary processes to surficial and far‐field observations. We use relatively simple, cyclic geodynamic models to isolate the first‐order geodetic signature of the megathrust cycle. Coseismic and subsequent slip on the subduction interface is dynamically (and consistently) driven. A review of global preseismic, coseismic, and postseismic geodetic observations, and of their fit to the model predictions, indicates that similar physical processes are active at different margins. Most of the observed variability between the individual margins appears to be controlled by their different stages in the earthquake cycle. The modeling results also provide a possible explanation for observations of tensile faulting aftershocks and tensile cracking of the overriding plate, which are puzzling in the context of convergence/compression. From the inversion of our synthetic GNSS velocities we find that geodetic observations may incorrectly suggest weak locking of some margins, for example, the west Aleutian margin.

show abstract

Section: Comparison With Observationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Geodetic Signature of the Earthquake Cycle at Subduction Zones: Model Constraints on the Deep Processes

Govers

Furlong

Wiel

et al. 2018

Reviews of Geophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…On the Yunodake fault, scarps were <1 m in height. Near the southeastern end of this fault rupture, linear slickenlines pitching toward the northwest at an angle of 60° were observed (Figure 8) (Mizoguchi et al, 2012), which describes dextral‐normal slip on the southwest‐dipping fault. These slickenlines can be traced to within a few centimeters of the top of the scarp, suggesting that they were formed early in the rupture.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…The data on which this article is based can be found within Avagyan et al (2003), Caskey et al (1996), Fletcher et al (2014), Kearse et al (2018, 2019), Mizoguchi et al (2012), Otsubo, Shigematsu, et al (2013), Otsuki et al (1997), Pan et al (2014), Perrin et al (2016), Philip et al (1992), Shimamoto (1996), Slemmons (1957), and Spudich et al (1998).…”

Section: Data Availability Statementmentioning

confidence: 99%

On‐Fault Geological Fingerprint of Earthquake Rupture Direction

Kearse

Kaneko

2020

JGR Solid Earth

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How earthquake ruptures evolve and propagate are major outstanding questions in seismology. Our current understanding is limited to modern events captured by seismic networks, making it impossible to observe rupture propagation that occurred during earthquakes in the distant past. Here we propose a new method to discern the rupture propagation directions of past large earthquakes based on geological features preserved on fault slip planes. These features-called slickenlines-are striations formed during seismic slip and record dynamic fault movement during past surface-breaking earthquakes. We develop a theoretical framework that links slickenline curvature with rupture mode and rupture propagation direction for all faulting types and test our model using a global catalogue of historical surface-rupturing earthquakes with seismologically constrained rupture directions. Our results reveal that historical observations are consistent with theoretical predictions, thus providing a robust way to uncover the rupture directions of large earthquakes that lack instrumental data. Plain Language Summary How earthquake ruptures evolve and propagate are major outstanding questions in seismology. Currently, we are unable to observe the details of earthquakes that occurred in the distant past, which limits our understanding to events recorded by modern technology. Here we propose a new method to uncover the rupture propagation direction of past large earthquakes, using geological features preserved on faults scarps. These features-called slickenlines-are scratch marks that form when two sides of a fault move past one another during an earthquake. We develop a theoretical framework that links the geometry of slickenlines with rupture propagation direction for all types of faults and test our model using a global catalogue of surface-breaking earthquakes. Our results reveal a strong link between our model and the available data, providing a new way to uncover the rupture direction of large earthquakes that are not recorded by modern seismic instruments.

show abstract

“…After the Tohoku-Oki earthquake, many shallow normal-faulting earthquakes occurred in the southern Abukuma Mountains, of which the largest and most damaging was the Iwaki earthquake (M w 6.6) of 11 April 2011. Two known active faults, the Itozawa and Yunodake faults, ruptured simultaneously in that event (Mizoguchi et al 2012;Toda and Tsutsumi 2013), and the subsurface seismogenic faults were inferred to be splay faults with steep dips through most of the seismogenic zone (Fukushima et al 2013). Paleoseismic studies estimated recurrence intervals (based on the most recent and penultimate surface rupturing events) of 800-5900 years for the Yunodake fault (Miyashita 2018) and > 12,000 years for the Itozawa fault (Toda and Tsutsumi 2013;Niwa et al 2013).…”

Section: Tectonic Settingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The largest of these, the 11 April 2011 Iwaki earthquake (M w 6.6), produced two subparallel surface ruptures ~ 15-km long and 14-km long ( Fig. 1; Mizoguchi et al 2012;Toda and Tsutsumi 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Surface rupture and characteristics of a fault associated with the 2011 and 2016 earthquakes in the southern Abukuma Mountains, northeastern Japan, triggered by the Tohoku-Oki earthquake

Komura

Aiyama

Nagata

et al. 2019

Earth Planets Space

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The 2011 Tohoku-Oki offshore subduction earthquake (M w 9.0) triggered many normal-type earthquakes inland in northeastern Japan. Among these were two very similar normal-faulting earthquakes in 2011 (M w 5.8) and 2016 (M w 5.9), which created surface ruptures along the newly named Mochiyama fault within the southern Abukuma Mountains, northeastern Japan, where no active faults had been previously mapped by interpretation of aerial photographs. We conducted field surveys in this area immediately after both earthquakes, and we performed trench excavations and observations of fault fracture zones after the 2016 event. These activities were complemented by an interferometric synthetic aperture radar analysis that mapped the areas of deformation and locations of surface discontinuities for both events. The combined results document the coseismic behavior of the Mochiyama fault during both events. Subtle tectonic geomorphic features associated with the fault were evident in a lidar digital elevation model of the area, and layered structures of gouge were documented in the field. These lines of evidence indicate repeated activity at shallow crustal levels and the possibility of Quaternary activity. In addition, our trench excavations revealed at least one faulting event before 2011. Our comparison of paleoseismic records on this and two other normal faults in the Abukuma Mountains suggests that great earthquakes in the Japan Trench supercycle of 500-700 years do not consistently trigger ruptures on these faults, and the case of 2011, in which the Tohoku-Oki megathrust earthquake triggered all three faults, is a rare occurrence.

show abstract

Surface Fault Ruptures and Slip Distributions of the Mw 6.6 11 April 2011 Hamadoori, Fukushima Prefecture, Northeast Japan, Earthquake

Cited by 29 publications

References 16 publications

The Geodetic Signature of the Earthquake Cycle at Subduction Zones: Model Constraints on the Deep Processes

The Geodetic Signature of the Earthquake Cycle at Subduction Zones: Model Constraints on the Deep Processes

On‐Fault Geological Fingerprint of Earthquake Rupture Direction

Surface rupture and characteristics of a fault associated with the 2011 and 2016 earthquakes in the southern Abukuma Mountains, northeastern Japan, triggered by the Tohoku-Oki earthquake

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About