Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting 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.

Partial rupture of a locked patch of the Sumatra megathrust during the 2007 earthquake sequence


The great Sumatra–Andaman earthquake and tsunami of 2004 was a dramatic reminder of the importance of understanding the seismic and tsunami hazards of subduction zones1,2,3,4. In March 2005, the Sunda megathrust ruptured again, producing an event5 of moment magnitude (Mw) 8.6 south of the 2004 rupture area, which was the site of a similar event in 1861 (ref. 6). Concern was then focused on the Mentawai area, where large earthquakes had occurred in 1797 (Mw = 8.8) and 1833 (Mw = 9.0)6,7. Two earthquakes, one of Mw = 8.4 and, twelve hours later, one of Mw = 7.9, indeed occurred there on 12 September 2007. Here we show that these earthquakes ruptured only a fraction of the area ruptured in 1833 and consist of distinct asperities within a patch of the megathrust that had remained locked in the interseismic period. This indicates that the same portion of a megathrust can rupture in different patterns depending on whether asperities break as isolated seismic events or cooperate to produce a larger rupture. This variability probably arises from the influence of non-permanent barriers, zones with locally lower pre-stress due to the past earthquakes. The stress state of the portion of the Sunda megathrust that had ruptured in 1833 and 1797 was probably not adequate for the development of a single large rupture in 2007. The moment released in 2007 amounts to only a fraction both of that released in 1833 and of the deficit of moment that had accumulated as a result of interseismic strain since 1833. The potential for a large megathrust event in the Mentawai area thus remains large.

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

Relevant articles

Open Access articles citing this article.

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Get just this article for as long as you need it


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

Figure 1: Patches with strong interseismic coupling on the Sunda megathrust coincide with large seismic ruptures.
Figure 2: Models of megathrust slip during the M w = 8.4 and M w = 7.9 earthquakes show principal slip on widely separated patches.
Figure 3: Comparison of the moment released in 2007 with the moment deficit accumulated since the 1797 and 1833 earthquakes.


  1. Lay, T. et al. The great Sumatra-Andaman earthquake of 26 December 2004. Science 308, 1127–1133 (2005)

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Chlieh, M. et al. Coseismic slip and afterslip of the great M w 9.15 Sumatra-Andaman earthquake of 2004. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 97, S152–S173 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Ammon, C. J. et al. Rupture process of the 2004 Sumatra-Andaman earthquake. Science 308, 1133–1139 (2005)

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Subarya, C. et al. Plate-boundary deformation associated with the great Sumatra-Andaman earthquake. Nature 440, 46–51 (2006)

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Briggs, R. W. et al. Deformation and slip along the Sunda Megathrust in the great 2005 Nias-Simeulue earthquake. Science 311, 1897–1901 (2006)

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Newcomb, K. & McCann, W. Seismic history and seismotectonics of the Sunda arc. J. Geophys. Res. 92, 421–439 (1987)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  7. Natawidjaja, D. H. et al. Source parameters of the great Sumatran megathrust earthquakes of 1797 and 1833 inferred from coral microatolls. J. Geophys. Res. 111 10.1029/2005JB004025 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  9. Pacheco, J. F., Sykes, L. R. & Scholz, C. H. Nature of seismic coupling along simple plate boundaries of the subduction type. J. Geophys. Res. 98, 14133–14160 (1993)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  10. Sieh, K., Ward, S. N., Natawidjaja, D. & Suwargadi, B. W. Crustal deformation at the Sumatran subduction zone revealed by coral rings. Geophys. Res. Lett. 26, 3141–3144 (1999)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  11. Burgmann, R. et al. Interseismic coupling and asperity distribution along the Kamchatka subduction zone. J. Geophys. Res. 110 10.1029/2005JB003648 (2005)

  12. Suwa, Y., Miura, S., Hasegawa, A., Sato, T. & Tachibana, K. Interplate coupling beneath NE Japan inferred from three-dimensional displacement field. J. Geophys. Res. 111 10.1029/2004JB003203 (2006)

  13. Freymueller, J. T. & Beavan, J. Absence of strain accumulation in the western Shumagin segment of the Alaska subduction zone. Geophys. Res. Lett. 26, 3233–3236 (1999)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  14. Pritchard, M. E. & Simons, M. An aseismic slip pulse in northern Chile and along-strike variations in seismogenic behavior. J. Geophys. Res. 111 10.1029/2006JB004258 (2006)

  15. Chlieh, M., Avouac, J.-P., Sieh, K., Natawidjaja, D. H. & Galetzka, J. Heterogeneous coupling on the Sumatra megathrust constrained from geodetic and paleogeodetic measurements. J. Geophys. Res. 113 10.1029/2007JB004981 (2008)

  16. Meltzner, A. J. et al. Coseismic, postseismic, and interseismic deformation, and long-term segmentation near the boundary of the 2004 and 2005 Sunda megathrust ruptures. Eos 88 (Fall meeting), abstr. S24A-02 (2007)

  17. Natawidjaja, D. et al. Paleogeodetic records of seismic and aseismic subduction from central Sumatran microatolls, Indonesia. J. Geophys. Res. 109 10.1029/2003JB0002398 (2004)

  18. Natawidjaja, D. H. et al. Interseismic deformation above the Sunda Megathrust recorded in coral microatolls of the Mentawai islands, West Sumatra. J. Geophys. Res. 112 10.1029/2006JB004450 (2007)

  19. Thatcher, W. Order and diversity in the modes of Circum-Pacific earthquake recurrence. J. Geophys. Res. 95, 2609–2623 (1990)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  20. Ando, M. Source mechanisms and tectonic significance of historical earthquakes along Nankai Trough, Japan. Tectonophysics 27, 119–140 (1975)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  21. Lay, T., Kanamori, H. & Ruff, L. The asperity model and the nature of large subduction zone earthquakes. Earthq. Predict. Res. 1, 3–71 (1982)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Rosen, P. A., Henley, S., Peltzer, G. & Simons, M. Updated repeat orbit interferometry package released. Eos 85, 47 (2004)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  23. Rundle, J. B. & Kanamori, H. Application of an inhomogeneous stress (patch) model to complex subduction zone earthquakes - a discrete interaction matrix approach. J. Geophys. Res. 92, 2606–2616 (1987)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  24. Perfettini, H. & Ampuero, J. P. Dynamics of a velocity strengthening fault region: Implications for slow earthquakes and postseismic slip. J. Geophys. Res. 113 10.1029/2007JB005398 (2008)

  25. Liu, Y. & Rice, J. R. Aseismic slip transients emerge spontaneously in three-dimensional rate and state modeling of subduction earthquake sequences. J. Geophys. Res. 110, B08307 (2005)

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  26. Ben-Zion, Y. & Rice, J. R. Earthquake failure sequences along a cellular fault zone in a 3-dimensional elastic solid containing asperity and nonasperity regions. J. Geophys. Res. 98, 14109–14131 (1993)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  27. Cochard, A. & Madariaga, R. Complexity of seismicity due to highly rate-dependent friction. J. Geophys. Res. 101, 25321–25336 (1996)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  28. Park, S. C. & Mori, J. Are asperity patterns persistent? Implication from large earthquakes in Papua New Guinea. J. Geophys. Res. 112 10.1029/2006JB004481 (2007)

  29. Ji, C., Wald, D. & Helmberger, D. V. Source description of the 1999 Hector Mine, California earthquake, Part I: Wavelet domain inversion theory and resolution analysis. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 92, 1192–1207 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Abercrombie, R. E., Antolik, M. & Ekstrom, G. The June 2000 M w 7.9 earthquakes south of Sumatra: Deformation in the India-Australia Plate. J. Geophys. Res. 108 10.1029/2001JB000674 (2003)

Download references


This study was partly funded by the NSF (grant EAR-0538333) and the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation. This is Caltech Tectonics Observatory contribution no. 93. We thank R. Burgmann for comments and suggestions.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations


Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jean-Philippe Avouac.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

This file contains Supplementary Notes with Supplementary References, Supplementary Figures S1-S10 and Supplementary Tables S1-S7. (PDF 9803 kb)

PowerPoint slides

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Konca, A., Avouac, JP., Sladen, A. et al. Partial rupture of a locked patch of the Sumatra megathrust during the 2007 earthquake sequence. Nature 456, 631–635 (2008).

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI:

This article is cited by


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.


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