Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Letter
  • Published:

Earthquake size distribution in subduction zones linked to slab buoyancy

Nature Geoscience volume 7, pages 904–908 (2014)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

The occurrence of subduction zone earthquakes is primarily controlled by the state of stress on the interface between the subducting and overriding plates. This stress state is influenced by tectonic properties, such as the age of the subducting plate and the rate of plate motion1,2,3,4. It is difficult to directly measure stress on a plate interface. However, the stress state can be inferred using the Gutenberg–Richter relationship’s5 b-value, which characterizes the relative number of small compared to large earthquakes and correlates negatively with differential stress6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13. That is, a subduction zone characterized by relatively frequent large earthquakes has a low b-value and a high stress state. The b-value for subduction zones worldwide varies significantly14,15, but the source of this variance is unclear. Here we use the Advanced National Seismic System earthquake catalogue to estimate b-values for 88 sections in different subduction zones globally and compare the b-values with the age of the subducting plate and plate motions. The b-value correlates positively with subducting plate age, so that large earthquakes occur more frequently in subduction zones with younger slabs, but there is no correlation between b-value and plate motion. Given that younger slabs are warmer and more buoyant, we suggest that slab buoyancy is the primary control on the stress state and earthquake size distribution in subduction zones.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: Summary of b-value estimation.
Figure 2: The 88 study regions with estimated b-values.
Figure 3: Comparison between tectonic properties and estimated b-values.
Figure 4: Schematic diagram of a subduction zone.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Molnar, P. & Atwater, T. Interarc spreading and Cordilleran tectonics as alternates related to the age of subducted oceanic lithosphere. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 41, 330–340 (1978).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Ruff, L. & Kanamori, H. Seismicity and the subduction process. Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. 23, 240–252 (1980).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Ruff, L. & Kanamori, H. Seismic coupling and uncoupling at subduction zones. Tectonophysics 99, 99–117 (1983).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Scholz, C. H. & Campos, J. On the mechanism of seismic decoupling and back arc spreading at subduction zones. J. Geophys. Res. 100, 22103–22115 (1995).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Gutenberg, B. & Richter, C. F. Frequency of earthquakes in California. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 34, 185–188 (1944).

    Google Scholar 

  6. Scholz, C. H. The frequency–magnitude relation of microfracturing in rock and its relation to earthquakes. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 58, 399–415 (1968).

    Google Scholar 

  7. Goebel, T. H. W. et al. Identifying fault heterogeneity through mapping spatial anomalies in acoustic emission statistics. J. Geophys. Res. 117, B03310 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Goebel, T. H. W., Schorlemmer, D., Becker, T. W., Dresen, G. & Sammis, C. G. Acoustic emissions document stress changes over many seismic cycles in stick-slip experiments. Geophys. Res. Lett. 40, 2049–2054 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Spada, M., Tormann, T., Wiemer, S. & Enescu, B. Generic dependence of the frequency-size distribution of earthquakes on depth and its relation to the strength profile of the crust. Geophys. Res. Lett. 40, 709–714 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Schorlemmer, D., Wiemer, S. & Wyss, M. Variations in earthquake–size distribution across different stress regimes. Nature 437, 539–542 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Wiemer, S. & Wyss, M. Mapping the frequency–magnitude distribution in asperities: An improved technique to calculate recurrence times? J. Geophys. Res. 102, 15115–15128 (1997).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Ghosh, A., Newman, A. V., Thomas, A. M. & Farmer, G. T. Interface locking along the subduction megathrust from b-value mapping near Nicoya Peninsula, Costa Rica. Geophys. Res. Lett. 35, L01301 (2008).

    Google Scholar 

  13. Nanjo, K. Z., Hirata, N., Obara, K. & Kasahara, K. Decade-scale decrease in b value prior to the M9-class 2011 Tohoku and 2004 Sumatra quakes. Geophys. Res. Lett. 39, L20304 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Kagan, Y. Y. & Jackson, D. D. Tohoku earthquake: A surprise? Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 103, 1181–1194 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Tsapanos, T. M. b-values of two tectonic parts in the circum-Pacific belt. Pure Appl. Geophys. 134, 229–242 (1990).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Uyeda, S. & Kanamori, H. Back-arc opening and the mode of subduction. J. Geophys. Res. 84, 1049–1061 (1979).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Heuret, A., Conrad, C. P., Funiciello, F., Lallemand, S. & Sandri, L. Relation between subduction megathrust earthquakes, trench sediment thickness and upper plate strain. Geophys. Res. Lett. 39, L05304 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Ide, S. The proportionality between relative plate velocity and seismicity in subduction zones. Nature Geosci. 6, 780–784 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Bird, P. An updated digital model of plate boundaries. Geochem. Geophys. Geosyst. 4, 1027 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Woessner, J. & Wiemer, S. Assesing the quality of earthquake catalogues: Estimating the magnitude of completeness and its uncertainty. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 95, 684–698 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Aki, K. Maximum likelihood estimate of b in the formula logN = a − bM and its confidence limits. Bull. Earthq. Res. Inst. Univ. Tokyo 43, 237–239 (1965).

    Google Scholar 

  22. Müller, R. D., Sdrolias, M., Gaina, C. & Roest, W. R. Age, spreading rates, and spreading asymmetry of the world’s ocean crust. Geochem. Geophys. Geosyst. 9, Q04006 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Argus, D. F., Gordon, R. G. & DeMets, C. Geologically current motion of 56 plates relative to the no-net-rotation reference frame. Geochem. Geophys. Geosyst. 12, Q11001 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Parsons, B. & Sclater, J. G. An analysis of the variation of ocean floor bathymetry and heat flow with age. J. Geophys. Res. 82, 803–827 (1977).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Smith, W. H. F. & Sandwell, D. T. Global sea floor topography from satellite altimetry and ship depth soundings. Science 277, 1956–1962 (1997).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Hilde, T. W. C. & Uyeda, S. in Geodynamics of the Western Pacific–Indonesian Region (eds Hilde, T. W. C. & Uyeda, S.) 75–89 (AGU, 1983).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  27. Scholz, C. H. & Campos, J. The seismic coupling of subduction zones revisited. J. Geophys. Res. 117, B05310 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Gibowicz, S. J. Stress drop and aftershocks. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 63, 1433–1446 (1973).

    Google Scholar 

  29. Ogata, Y. Statistical models for earthquake occurrences and residual analysis for point processes. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 83, 9–27 (1988).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Zhuang, J., Ogata, Y. & Vere-Jones, D. Stochastic declustering of space–time earthquake occurrences. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 97, 369–380 (2002).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by JSPS KAKENHI (23244090) and MEXT KAKENHI (21107007). Figures were prepared using Generic Mapping Tool (Wessel and Smith, 1998).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Earth and Planetary Science, University of Tokyo, Hongo 7-3-1, Bunkyo, Tokyo 113-0033, Japan

    Tomoaki Nishikawa & Satoshi Ide

Authors
  1. Tomoaki Nishikawa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Satoshi Ide
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

S.I. constructed a system for the statistical analysis of seismic sequences. T.N. analysed the data and wrote the paper.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tomoaki Nishikawa.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

Supplementary Information (PDF 3885 kb)

Supplementary Information

Supplementary Information (XLSX 61 kb)

Supplementary Information

Supplementary Information (XLSX 58 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Nishikawa, T., Ide, S. Earthquake size distribution in subduction zones linked to slab buoyancy. Nature Geosci 7, 904–908 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo2279

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo2279

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing