Complex rupture during the 12 January 2010 Haiti earthquake

Journal name:
Nature Geoscience
Volume:
3,
Pages:
800–805
Year published:
DOI:
doi:10.1038/ngeo977
Received
Accepted
Published online

Abstract

Initially, the devastating Mw 7.0, 12 January 2010 Haiti earthquake seemed to involve straightforward accommodation of oblique relative motion between the Caribbean and North American plates along the Enriquillo–Plantain Garden fault zone. Here, we combine seismological observations, geologic field data and space geodetic measurements to show that, instead, the rupture process may have involved slip on multiple faults. Primary surface deformation was driven by rupture on blind thrust faults with only minor, deep, lateral slip along or near the main Enriquillo–Plantain Garden fault zone; thus the event only partially relieved centuries of accumulated left-lateral strain on a small part of the plate-boundary system. Together with the predominance of shallow off-fault thrusting, the lack of surface deformation implies that remaining shallow shear strain will be released in future surface-rupturing earthquakes on the Enriquillo–Plantain Garden fault zone, as occurred in inferred Holocene and probable historic events. We suggest that the geological signature of this earthquake—broad warping and coastal deformation rather than surface rupture along the main fault zone—will not be easily recognized by standard palaeoseismic studies. We conclude that similarly complex earthquakes in tectonic environments that accommodate both translation and convergence—such as the San Andreas fault through the Transverse Ranges of California—may be missing from the prehistoric earthquake record.

At a glance

Figures

  1. Tectonic setting of the 2010 Leogane earthquake.
    Figure 1: Tectonic setting of the 2010 Léogâne earthquake.

    The inset shows the broad configuration of the Caribbean–North America plate boundary in the region of Hispaniola, with major faults (red) and the relative-plate-motion vector (arrow). The main panel shows the epicentral region of the 12 January 2010 earthquake. Aftershocks (yellow circles), sized by magnitude, and CMT solutions are shown at their NEIC locations. The surface projection of coseismic slip on each major subfault is coloured and contoured (dashed lines) by slip amplitude, at 50cm intervals. The approximate location of the EPGF is shown in red. Numbered blue squares represent major population centres: 1=Port-au-Prince, 2=Léogâne, 3=Port Royal.

  2. Observed coastal uplift and vertical-deformation signal from InSAR.
    Figure 2: Observed coastal uplift and vertical-deformation signal from InSAR.

    Circles denote observation points, sized and coloured by their amounts of uplift (blue denotes subsidence). The white star represents the NEIC hypocentre. Major population centres are shown with white squares (PaP=Port-au-Prince). The colour map represents the vertical component of ground motion from the sum of the ascending and descending interferograms. The approximate location of the EPGF is shown in red. a, Siderastrea siderea microatoll uplifted by 0.64±0.11m at Beloc site. Coral die-down was 0.45m at the time of measurement. b, Deep fractures caused by lateral spreading along the coast at Bellevue. c,d, Images of patch reef adjacent to Beloc before the earthquake (c) in 2005 (Digital Globe) and after the earthquake (d) in January 2010 (Google). In d the bleached uplifted reef reflects tectonic uplift whereas extensive lateral spreading along the coast has caused localized secondary subsidence. e, Estimates of the east component of the ground motion from the difference of the ascending and descending interferograms.

  3. Three-dimensional view of proposed fault geometry for Leogane earthquake rupture.
    Figure 3: Three-dimensional view of proposed fault geometry for Léogâne earthquake rupture.

    View to the northwest. Thick solid lines are the surface projection of each fault. Dash–dot lines link planes to cross-sectional projections of their slip distributions. Arrows represent the slip direction, scaled by amplitude, for each fault. Rupture initiates on the steep EPGF (A) at the earthquake hypocentre (star), extending to the west. The backside of the shallowly north-dipping blind thrust (Léogâne fault, B) is visible near the hypocentre and to the west. Rupture also occurs on a south-dipping structure to the east of the hypocentre (C), whose surface projection occurs north of the peninsula coastline. On each fault plane, black dashed lines are isochrons of the earthquake rupture, in 2s increments (6s contour labelled for reference). PaP=Port-au-Prince, L=Léogâne, PG=Petit Goâve, G=Ile de la Gonave.

  4. Plate-boundary moment release.
    Figure 4: Plate-boundary moment release.

    Cross-sectional projections of the amount of horizontal plate-boundary moment released during the 2010 Léogâne earthquake, as a percentage of the moment accumulated since 1770, based on our preferred rupture model for the earthquake. Fault planes A, B and C correlate to the steeply south-dipping EPGF fault trace, the more shallowly north-dipping fault most dominant in the earthquake rupture and the eastern, south-dipping 45° thrust structure, respectively (also shown in Fig. 3).

References

  1. Cavallo, E., Powell, A. & Becerra, O. Estimating the Direct Economic Damage of the Earthquake in Haiti (RES Working Papers 4652, Inter-American Development Bank, Research Department, 2010).
  2. Dixon, T. et al. Relative motion between the Caribbean and North American plates and related boundary zone deformation based on a decade of GPS observations. J. Geophys. Res. 103, 1515715182 (1998).
  3. Manaker, D. M. et al. Interseismic plate coupling and strain partitioning in the Northeastern Caribbean. Geophys. J. Int. 174, 889903 (2008).
  4. Mann, P. et al. 18th Caribbean Geological Conference, March 24–28, 2008, Santo Domingo http://www.ig.utexas.edu/jsg/18_cgg/Mann3.htm.
  5. Mann, P., Matumoto, T. & Burke, K. Neotectonics of Hispaniola—plate motion, sedimentation, and seismicity at a restraining bend. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 70, 311324 (1984).
  6. Frohlich, C. & Apperson, K. D. Earthquake focal mechanisms, moment tensors, and the consistency of seismic activity near plate boundaries. Tectonics 11, 279296 (1992).
  7. Prentice, C. S. et al. Seismic hazard of the Enriquillo Plantain Garden fault in Haiti inferred from palaeoseismology. Nature Geosci. doi:10.1038/ngeo991 (in the press).
  8. Nettles, M. & Hjörleifsdóttir, V. Earthquake source parameters for the January 12 Haiti main shock and aftershock sequence. Geophys. J. Int. 183, 375380 (2010).
  9. Taylor, F. W., Frohlich, C., Lecolle, J. & Strecker, M. Analysis of partially emerged coals and reef terraces in the central Vanuatu arc: Comparison of contemporary coseismic and nonseismic with quaternary vertical movements. J. Geophys. Res. 92, 49054933 (1987).
  10. Briggs, R. W. et al. Deformation and slip along the Sunda megathrust in the great 2005 Nias–Simeulue earthquake. Science 311, 18971901 (2006).
  11. Calais, E. et al. Transpressional rupture of an unmapped fault during the 2010 Haiti earthquake. Nature Geosci. doi:10.1038/ngeo992 (in the press).
  12. Puebellier, M., Mauffret, A., Leroy, S., Vlia, J. M. & Amilcar, H. Plate boundary readjustment in oblique convergence: Example of the Neogene of Hispaniola, Greater Antilles. Tectonics 19, 630648 (2000).
  13. Florensov, N. A. & Solonenko, V. P. (eds) The Gobi-Altai Earthquake (Akademiya Nauk USSR, 1963) [in Russian] (English translation, US Department of Commerce, 1965).
  14. Pacheco, J. F., Estabrook, C. H., Simpson, D. W. & Nábêlek, J.L. Teleseismic body wave analysis of the 1988 Armenian earthquake. Geophys. Res. Lett. 16, 14251428 (1989).
  15. Hanks, T. C. & Krawinkler, H. The 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake and its effects: Introduction to the special issue. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 81, 14151423 (1991).
  16. Berberian, M. et al. The 1997 May 10 Zirkuh (Qa’enat) earthquake (Mw 7.2): Faulting along the Sistan suture zone of eastern Iran. Geophys. Res. Lett. 136, 671694 (1999).
  17. Aagaard, B. T., Anderson, G. & Hudnut, K. W. Dynamic rupture modeling of the transition from thrust to strike-slip motion in the 2002 Denali fault earthquake, Alaska. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 94, S190S201 (2004).
  18. Talebian, M. et al. The 2003 Bam (Iran) earthquake: Rupture of a blind strike-slip fault. Geophys. Res. Lett. 31, L11611 (2004).
  19. Liu-Zeng, J. et al. Co-seismic ruptures of the 12 May 2008, Ms 8.0 Wenchuan earthquake, Sichuan: East–west crustal shortening on oblique, parallel thrusts along the eastern edge of Tibet. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 286, 355270 (2009).
  20. Bayarsayhan, C. et al. 1957 Gobi-Altay, Mongolia, earthquake as a prototype for southern California’s most devastating earthquake. Geology 24, 579582 (1996).
  21. Heaton, T. H. Evidence for and implications of self-healing pulses of slip in earthquake rupture. Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. 64, 120 (1990).
  22. Ji, C., Helmberger, D. V. & Wald, D. J. A teleseismic study of the 2002, Denali, Alaska, earthquake and implications for rapid strong motion estimation. Earthq. Spectra 20, 617637 (2004).
  23. Wessel, P. & Smith, W. H. F. New, improved version of Generic Mapping Tools released. EOS Trans. AGU 79, 579 (1998).

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

  1. US Geological Survey, Golden, Colorado 80401, USA

    • G. P. Hayes,
    • R. W. Briggs,
    • A. J. Crone &
    • R. Gold
  2. Synergetics Inc., Fort Collins, Colorado 80524, USA

    • G. P. Hayes
  3. California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California 91125, USA

    • A. Sladen,
    • T. Ito &
    • M. Simons
  4. Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California 91109, USA

    • E. J. Fielding
  5. US Geological Survey, Menlo Park, California 94025, USA

    • C. Prentice
  6. US Geological Survey, Pasadena, California 91106, USA

    • K. Hudnut
  7. University of Texas Institute of Geophysics, Jackson School of Geosciences, University of Texas, Austin 78758, USA

    • P. Mann &
    • F. W. Taylor
  8. Nagoya University 464-8601, Japan

    • T. Ito

Contributions

G.P.H. and R.W.B. were responsible for writing the main manuscript and supplement and generating figures. G.P.H. conducted seismic fault inversions and moment-balance calculations. E.J.F. carried out InSAR analysis. G.P.H., R.W.B., A.S. and E.J.F. were jointly responsible for the fault model. A.S. carried out joint inversions in collaboration with E.J.F., M.S. and T.I. R.W.B., C.P., K.H., P.M., F.W.T., A.J.C. and R.G. were all involved in field studies and contributed data and interpretations from these studies. PALSAR data were provided to T.I. under the JAXA cooperative agreement. All authors contributed to the interpretation of results and discussion of ideas in this study.

Competing financial interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to:

Author details

Supplementary information

PDF files

  1. Supplementary Information (4mb)

    Supplementary Information

Additional data