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:

Common dependence on stress for the two fundamental laws of statistical seismology

Nature volume 462, pages 642–645 (2009)Cite this article

Abstract

Two of the long-standing relationships of statistical seismology are power laws: the Gutenberg–Richter relation1 describing the earthquake frequency–magnitude distribution, and the Omori–Utsu law2 characterizing the temporal decay of aftershock rate following a main shock. Recently, the effect of stress on the slope (the b value) of the earthquake frequency–magnitude distribution was determined3 by investigations of the faulting-style dependence of the b value. In a similar manner, we study here aftershock sequences according to the faulting style of their main shocks. We show that the time delay before the onset of the power-law aftershock decay rate (the c value) is on average shorter for thrust main shocks than for normal fault earthquakes, taking intermediate values for strike-slip events. These similar dependences on the faulting style indicate that both of the fundamental power laws are governed by the state of stress. Focal mechanisms are known for only 2 per cent of aftershocks. Therefore, c and b values are independent estimates and can be used as new tools to infer the stress field, which remains difficult to measure directly.

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: Influence of faulting style on the time delay before the onset of the power-law aftershock decay rate in southern California.
Figure 2: Influence of faulting style on the time delay before the onset of the power-law aftershock decay rate in Japan.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

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

    Google Scholar 

  2. Utsu, T. Aftershocks and earthquake statistics. J. Fac. Sci. Hokkaido Univ. Ser. VII 3, 379–441 (1965)

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  CAS  ADS  Google Scholar 

  4. Narteau, C., Shebalin, P. & Holschneider, M. Temporal limits of the power law aftershock decay rate. J. Geophys. Res. 107 B2359 10.1029/2002JB001868 (2002)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  5. Shcherbakov, R., Turcotte, D. L. & Rundle, J. B. A generalized Omori's law for earthquake aftershock decay. Geophys. Res. Lett. 31 L11613 10.1029/2004GL019808 (2004)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  6. Vidale, J. E., Peng, Z. & Ishii, M. Anomalous aftershock decay rates in the first hundred seconds revealed from the Hi-net borehole data. Eos Trans. AGU 85 (Fall Meet. Suppl.), abstr. S23C-07 (2004)

  7. Peng, Z. G., Vidale, J. E., Ishii, M. & Helmstetter, A. Seismicity rate immediately before and after main shock rupture from high frequency waveforms in Japan. J. Geophys. Res. 112 B03306 10.1029/2006JB004386 (2007)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  8. Enescu, B., Mori, J. & Miyasawa, M. Quantifying early aftershock activity of the 2004 mid-Niigata Prefecture earthquake (Mw6.6). J. Geophys. Res. 112, B04310, 10.1029/2006JB004629 (2007)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  9. Nanjo, K. Z. et al. Decay of aftershock activity for Japanese earthquakes. J. Geophys. Res. 112 B08309 10.1029/2006JB004754 (2007)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  10. Kilb, D., Martynov, V. & Vernon, F. Aftershock detection as a function of time: results from the ANZA seismic network following the 31 October 2001 M L 5.1 Anza, California, earthquake. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 97, 780–792 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Kagan, Y. Y. Short-term properties of earthquake catalogs and models of earthquake source. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 94, 1207–1228 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Lolli, B. & Gasperini, P. Comparing different models of aftershock rate decay: the role of catalog incompleteness in the first times after main shock. Tectonophysics 423, 43–59 (2006)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  13. Peng, Z. G., Vidale, J. E. & Houston, H. Anomalous early aftershock decay rate of the 2004 M w 6.0 Parkfield, California, earthquake. Geophys. Res. Lett. 33 10.1029/2006GL026744 (2006)

  14. Hauksson, E. Crustal structure and seismicity distribution adjacent to the Pacific and North America plate boundary in southern California. J. Geophys. Res. 105, 13875–13903 (2000)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  15. Gardner, J. & Knopoff, L. Is the sequence of earthquakes in southern California with aftershocks removed Poissonian? Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 5, 1363–1367 (1974)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Reasenberg, P. Second-order moment of central California seismicity, 1969–1982. J. Geophys. Res. 90, 5479–5495 (1985)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  17. Schorlemmer, D. & Woessner, J. Probability of detecting an earthquake. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 98, 2103–2117 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Wiemer, S. & Wyss, M. Minimum magnitude of completeness in earthquake catalogs: examples from Alaska, the western United States, and Japan. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 90, 859–869 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Sibson, R. H. Frictional constraints on thrusts, wrench and normal faults. Nature 249, 542–544 (1974)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  20. Dieterich, J. A constitutive law for rate of earthquake production and its application to earthquake clustering. J. Geophys. Res. 99, 2601–2618 (1994)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  21. Scholz, C. Microfractures, aftershocks, and seismicity. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 58, 1117–1130 (1968)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Shcherbakov, R. & Turcotte, D. L. A damage mechanics model for aftershocks. Pure Appl. Geophys. 161, 2379–2391 (2004)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  23. Ben-Zion, Y. & Lyakhovsky, V. Analysis of aftershocks in a lithospheric model with seismogenic zone governed by damage rheology. Geophys. J. Int. 165, 197–210 (2006)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  24. Atkinson, B. K. Subcritical crack growth in geological materials. J. Geophys. Res. 89, 4077–4114 (1984)

    Article  CAS  ADS  Google Scholar 

  25. Amitrano, D. Brittle-ductile transition and associated seismicity: experimental and numerical studies and relationship with the b-value. J. Geophys. Res. B 108 2044 10.1029/2001JB000680 (2003)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  26. O'Connell, D. R. H., Ma, S. & Archuleta, R. J. Influence of dip and velocity heterogeneity on reverse- and normal-faulting rupture dynamics and near-fault ground motions. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 97, 1970–1989 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Narteau, C., Shebalin, P. & Holschneider, M. Loading rates in California inferred from aftershocks. Nonlin. Process. Geophys. 15, 245–263 (2008)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  28. Schorlemmer, D. & Wiemer, S. Microseismicity data forecast rupture area. Nature 434, 1086 (2005)

    Article  CAS  ADS  Google Scholar 

  29. 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 (1994)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institut de Physique du Globe de Paris (UMR 7154, CNRS, Univ. P7), 4 Place Jussieu, 75252 Paris Cedex 05, France ,

    Clément Narteau, Svetlana Byrdina & Peter Shebalin

  2. Laboratoire de Géophysique Interne et Tectonophysique, UMR 5559, CNRS, Université de Savoie, IRD, 73376 Le Bourget-du-Lac Cedex, France ,

    Svetlana Byrdina

  3. International Institute of Earthquake Prediction Theory and Mathematical Geophysics, 84/32 Profsouznaya, Moscow 117997, Russia ,

    Peter Shebalin

  4. Department of Earth Sciences, University of Southern California, 3651 Trousdale Parkway, Los Angeles, California 90089, USA,

    Danijel Schorlemmer

Authors
  1. Clément Narteau
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Svetlana Byrdina
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Peter Shebalin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Danijel Schorlemmer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Clément Narteau.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

This file contains Supplementary Notes and Data, Supplementary Figures 1- 17 with Legends, Supplementary Table 1 and Supplementary References. (PDF 5106 kb)

PowerPoint slides

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Narteau, C., Byrdina, S., Shebalin, P. et al. Common dependence on stress for the two fundamental laws of statistical seismology . Nature 462, 642–645 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1038/nature08553

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nature08553

This article is cited by

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.

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