Abstract
The majority of earthquakes are aftershocks1, yet aftershock physics is not well understood. Many studies suggest that static stress changes2,3 trigger aftershocks, but recent work suggests that shaking (dynamic stresses) may also play a role4,5. Here we measure the decay of aftershocks as a function of distance from magnitude 2–6 mainshocks in order to clarify the aftershock triggering process. We find that for short times after the mainshock, when low background seismicity rates allow for good aftershock detection, the decay is well fitted by a single inverse power law over distances of 0.2–50 km. The consistency of the trend indicates that the same triggering mechanism is working over the entire range. As static stress changes at the more distant aftershocks are negligible, this suggests that dynamic stresses may be triggering all of these aftershocks. We infer that the observed aftershock density is consistent with the probability of triggering aftershocks being nearly proportional to seismic wave amplitude. The data are not fitted well by models that combine static stress change with the evolution of frictionally locked faults3.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 51 print issues and online access
$199.00 per year
only $3.90 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on Springer Link
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Gardner, J. K. & Knopoff, L. Is the sequence of earthquakes in southern California, with aftershocks removed, Poissonian? Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 64, 1363–1367 (1974)
Stein, R. S. The role of stress transfer in earthquake occurrence. Nature 402, 605–609 (1999)
Dieterich, J. A. Constitutive law for the rate of earthquake production and its application to earthquake clustering. J. Geophys. Rev. 99, 2601–2618 (1994)
Gomberg, J., Bodin, P. & Reasenberg, P. A. Observing earthquakes triggered in the near field by dynamic deformations. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 93, 118–138 (2003)
Johnson, P. A. & Jia, X. Nonlinear dynamics, granular media and dynamic earthquake triggering. Nature 437, 871–874 (2005)
Ichinose, G. A., Anderson, J. G. & Smith, K. D. Static stress change caused by the 1978 Diamond Valley, California and 1994 Double Spring Flat Nevada earthquakes. Eos 78, abstr. S22B-04 (1997)
Ogata, Y. Statistical models for earthquake occurrence and residual analysis for point processes. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 83, 9–27 (1988)
Huc, M. & Main, I. G. Anomalous stress diffusion in earthquake triggering: Correlation length, time-dependence, and directionality. J. Geophys. Res. 108, 2324, doi:10.1029/2001JB001645 (2003)
Shearer, P., Hauksson, E. & Lin, G. Southern California hypocenter relocation with waveform cross-correlation, part 2: Results using source-specific station terms and cluster analysis. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 95, 904–915 (2005)
Dodge, D. A., Beroza, G. C. & Ellsworth, W. L. Foreshock sequence of the 1992 Landers, California earthquake and its implications for earthquake nucleation. J. Geophys. Res. 100, 9865–9880 (1995)
Rubin, A. M., Gillard, D. & Got, J. Streaks of microearthquakes along creeping faults. Nature 400, 635–641 (1999)
Kagan, Y. Y. Short-term properties of earthquake catalogs and models of earthquake source. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 94, 1207–1228 (2004)
Bak, P., Christensen, K., Danon, L. & Scanlon, T. Unified scaling law for earthquakes. Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, 109901 (2002)
Wells, D. L. & Coppersmith, K. J. New empirical relationships among magnitude, rupture length, rupture width, rupture area, and surface displacement. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 84, 974–1002 (1995)
Schwarz, G. Estimating the dimension of a model. Ann. Stat. 6, 461–464 (1978)
Main, I. G., Leonard, T., Papasouliotis, O., Hatton, C. G. & Meredith, P. G. One slope or two? detecting statistically significant breaks of slope in geophysical data, with application to fracture scaling relationships. Geophys. Res. Lett. 26, 2801–2804 (1999)
Vidale, J. E., Agnew, D. C., Johnston, M. J. S. & Oppenheimer, D. H. Absence of earthquake correlation with earth tides: An indication of high preseismic fault stress rate. J. Geophys. Res. 103, 24567–24572 (1998)
Omori, F. On the aftershocks of earthquakes. J. Coll. Sci. Imp. Univ. Tokyo 7, 111–200 (1894)
Kagan, Y. Y. & Knopoff, L. Spatial distribution of earthquakes: the two-point correlation function. Geophys. J. R. Astron. Soc. 62, 303–320 (1980)
Helmstetter, A., Kagan, Y. Y. & Jackson, D. D. Importance of small earthquakes for stress transfers and earthquake triggering. J. Geophys. Res. 110, B05S08, doi:10.1029/2004JB003286 (2005)
Campbell, K. W. Strong Motion Attenuation Relations (Academic, London, 2003)
Richter, C. F. An instrumental earthquake-magnitude scale. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 25, 1–32 (1935)
Kanamori, H. et al. Determination of earthquake energy release and M L using terrascope. Bull Seismol. Soc. Am. 83, 330–346 (1993)
Michael, A. J. & Jones, L. M. Seismicity alert probabilities at Parkfield, California, revisited. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 88, 117–130 (1998)
Felzer, K. R., Abercrombie, R. E. & Ekström, G. A common origin for aftershocks, foreshocks, and multiplets. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 94, 88–98 (2004)
Davidsen, J. & Paczuski, M. Analysis of the spatial distribution between successive earthquakes. Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 048501 (2005)
Silverman, B. W. Density Estimation for Statistics and Data Analysis (Chapman and Hall, New York, 1986)
Gutenberg, B. & Richter, C. F. Frequency of earthquakes in California. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 4, 185–188 (1944)
Acknowledgements
We thank R. Abercrombie, A. Felzer, N. Field, M. Gerstenberger, J. Gomberg, S. Gross, J. Hardebeck, M. Harrington, A. Helmstetter, S. Hough, L. Jones, Y. Kagan, H. Kanamori, I. Main, S. Prejean, P. Shearer, R. Stein, J. Vidale, K. Richards-Dinger and A. Yong for comments. This work was supported in part by the National Science Foundation.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
Reprints and permissions information is available at npg.nature.com/reprintsandpermissions. The authors declare no competing financial interests.
Supplementary information
Supplementary Figures
This file contains Supplementary Figures 1–9. The figures include information on data behaviour beyond the distances and times shown in the main paper, aftershocks in Japan and Northern California, comparison of the static stress change and rate and state friction aftershock model with data, a demonstration of aftershock location independence from mainshock magnitude, and discussion of data measurement technique. (PDF 895 kb)
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Felzer, K., Brodsky, E. Decay of aftershock density with distance indicates triggering by dynamic stress. Nature 441, 735–738 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1038/nature04799
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nature04799
This article is cited by
-
Change of deep subduction seismicity after a large megathrust earthquake
Nature Communications (2024)
-
Aftershocks following the 2011 Tohoku-Oki earthquake driven by both stress transfer and afterslip
Progress in Earth and Planetary Science (2023)
-
Seismic magnitude clustering is prevalent in field and laboratory catalogs
Nature Communications (2023)
-
Solid-earth tidal modulations of 2019 Ridgecrest earthquake sequence, California: any link with Coso geothermal field?
Journal of Seismology (2023)
-
Spatio-temporal clustering of successive earthquakes as inferred from analyses of global CMT and NIED F-net catalogs
Earth, Planets and Space (2022)
Comments
By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.