Toward understanding tectonic control on the Mw 8.8 2010 Maule Chile earthquake

Moreno, M.; Melnick, Daniel; Rosenau, Matthias; Báez, Juan Carlos; Klotz, J.; Oncken, Onno; Tassara, Andrés Ollero; Chen, J.; Bataille, K.; Bevis, Michael; Socquet, Anne; Bolte, John; Vigny, Christophe; Brooks, B. A.; Ryder, Isabelle; Grund, Volker; Smalley, B.; Carrizo, D.; Bartsch, M.; Häse, H.

doi:10.1016/j.epsl.2012.01.006

Cited by 214 publications

(326 citation statements)

References 57 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

296

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Map showing the distribution of seismic stations from the IMAD deployment (inverted green triangles) and the continuous GPS stations with circles (labeled with station name). Coseismic slip distribution of the 2010 Maule earthquake shown with blue lines (5 m slip contours, Moreno et al 2012). Plate convergence after Angermann et al (1999).…”

Section: S U P P O Rt I N G I N F O R M At I O Nmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Therefore, Blue triangles indicate seismic station from the International Maule Aftershock Deployment (IMAD) and red triangles indicate GPS stations which were operating during the mainshock. Co-seismic slip distribution of the 2010 and 1960 Chile earthquake (5 m slip contours, Moreno et al 2009Moreno et al , 2012 are shown with blue and grey contours, respectively. Rupture zones of other previous earthquakes are shown with black lines: 1835 event from Barrientos (1988); 1985 earthquake from Beck et al (1998).…”

Section: T H E 0 1 0 F E B Rua Ry 7 M W 8 8 M Au L E E a Rt H Q Ua mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparison of postseismic afterslip models with aftershock seismicity for three subduction-zone earthquakes: Nias 2005, Maule 2010 and Tohoku 2011

Lange¹,

Bedford²,

Moreno³

et al. 2014

Geophysical Journal International

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: S U P P O Rt I N G I N F O R M At I O Nmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: T H E 0 1 0 F E B Rua Ry 7 M W 8 8 M Au L E E a Rt H Q Ua mentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of postseismic afterslip models with aftershock seismicity for three subduction-zone earthquakes: Nias 2005, Maule 2010 and Tohoku 2011

Lange¹,

Bedford²,

Moreno³

et al. 2014

Geophysical Journal International

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Delouis et al, 2010;Vigny et al, 2011;Pollitz et al, 2011;Lorito et al, 2011;Moreno et al, 2012). We compare our afterslip model with a coseismic slip model obtained from inversion of 82 GPS measurements (described in detail in Section 3), which is similar in magnitude and distribution to the model of Moreno et al (2012).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A high-resolution, time-variable afterslip model for the 2010 Maule Mw = 8.8, Chile megathrust earthquake

Bedford

Moreno

Báez

et al. 2013

Earth and Planetary Science Letters

104

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Editor: P. ShearerKeywords: subduction post-seismic megathrust afterslip GPS MauleThe excellent spatial coverage of continuous GPS stations in the region affected by the Maule 8.8 2010 earthquake, combined with the proximity of the coast to the seismogenic zone, allows us to model megathrust afterslip on the plate interface with unprecedented detail. We invert post-seismic observations from continuous GPS sites to derive a time-variable model of the first 420 d of afterslip. We also invert co-seismic GPS displacements to create a new co-seismic slip model. The afterslip pattern appears to be transient and non-stationary, with the cumulative afterslip pattern being formed from afterslip pulses. Changes in static stress on the plate interface from the co-and post-seismic slip cannot solely explain the aftershock patterns, suggesting that another process -perhaps fluid related -is controlling the lower magnitude aftershocks. We use aftershock data to quantify the seismic coupling distribution during the post-seismic phase.Comparison of the post-seismic behaviour to interseismic locking suggests that highly locked regions do not necessarily behave as rate-weakening in the post-seismic period. By comparing the inter-seismic locking, co-seismic slip, afterslip, and aftershocks we attempt to classify the heterogeneous frictional behaviour of the plate interface.

show abstract

“…The M w 8.8 Maule 2010 megathrust earthquake [Vigny et al, 2011;Moreno et al, 2012] generated continentalscale deformation, accompanied by strain rotation and enhanced the coupling on segments adjacent to the rupture [Klein et al, 2016;Ruiz et al, 2016;Melnick et al, 2017;Loveless, 2017]. This process is described as a superinterseismic phase that increases shear stress away from the rupture zone of a great earthquake, bringing these areas closer to failure.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reawakening of large earthquakes in south central Chile: The 2016 M_w 7.6 Chiloé event

Ruiz

Moreno

Melnick

et al. 2017

Geophysical Research Letters

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

On 25 December 2016, the Mw 7.6 Chiloé earthquake broke a plate boundary asperity in south central Chile near the center of the rupture zone of the Mw 9.5 Valdivia earthquake of 1960. To gain insight on decadal‐scale deformation trends and their relation with the Chiloé earthquake, we combine geodetic, teleseismic, and regional seismological data. GPS velocities increased at continental scale after the 2010 Maule earthquake, probably due to a readjustment in the mantle flow and an apparently abrupt end of the viscoelastic mantle relaxation following the 1960 Valdivia earthquake. It also produced an increase in the degree of plate locking. The Chiloé earthquake occurred within the region of increased locking, breaking a circular patch of ~15 km radius at ~30 km depth, located near the bottom of the seismogenic zone. We propose that the Chiloé earthquake is a first sign of the seismic reawakening of the Valdivia segment, in response to the interaction between postseismic viscoelastic relaxation and changes of interseismic locking between Nazca and South America.

show abstract

Toward understanding tectonic control on the Mw 8.8 2010 Maule Chile earthquake

Cited by 214 publications

References 57 publications

Comparison of postseismic afterslip models with aftershock seismicity for three subduction-zone earthquakes: Nias 2005, Maule 2010 and Tohoku 2011

Comparison of postseismic afterslip models with aftershock seismicity for three subduction-zone earthquakes: Nias 2005, Maule 2010 and Tohoku 2011

A high-resolution, time-variable afterslip model for the 2010 Maule Mw = 8.8, Chile megathrust earthquake

Reawakening of large earthquakes in south central Chile: The 2016 M_w 7.6 Chiloé event

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Toward understanding tectonic control on the Mw 8.8 2010 Maule Chile earthquake

Cited by 214 publications

References 57 publications

Comparison of postseismic afterslip models with aftershock seismicity for three subduction-zone earthquakes: Nias 2005, Maule 2010 and Tohoku 2011

Comparison of postseismic afterslip models with aftershock seismicity for three subduction-zone earthquakes: Nias 2005, Maule 2010 and Tohoku 2011

A high-resolution, time-variable afterslip model for the 2010 Maule Mw = 8.8, Chile megathrust earthquake

Reawakening of large earthquakes in south central Chile: The 2016 Mw 7.6 Chiloé event

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Reawakening of large earthquakes in south central Chile: The 2016 M_w 7.6 Chiloé event