Letter | Published:

Earthquake potential revealed by tidal influence on earthquake size–frequency statistics

Nature Geoscience volume 9, pages 834837 (2016) | Download Citation

Abstract

The possibility that tidal stress can trigger earthquakes is long debated1,2,3,4,5,6. In particular, a clear causal relationship between small earthquakes and the phase of tidal stress is elusive2,3,4,5,6,7,8. However, tectonic tremors deep within subduction zones are highly sensitive to tidal stress levels9,10,11,12,13, with tremor rate increasing at an exponential rate with rising tidal stress11,12,13. Thus, slow deformation and the possibility of earthquakes at subduction plate boundaries may be enhanced during periods of large tidal stress. Here we calculate the tidal stress history, and specifically the amplitude of tidal stress, on a fault plane in the two weeks before large earthquakes globally, based on data from the global14, Japanese15, and Californian16 earthquake catalogues. We find that very large earthquakes, including the 2004 Sumatran, 2010 Maule earthquake in Chile and the 2011 Tohoku-Oki earthquake in Japan, tend to occur near the time of maximum tidal stress amplitude. This tendency is not obvious for small earthquakes. However, we also find that the fraction of large earthquakes increases (the b-value of the Gutenberg–Richter relation decreases) as the amplitude of tidal shear stress increases. The relationship is also reasonable, considering the well-known relationship between stress and the b-value17,18,19,20. This suggests that the probability of a tiny rock failure expanding to a gigantic rupture increases with increasing tidal stress levels. We conclude that large earthquakes are more probable during periods of high tidal stress.

Access optionsAccess options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

References

  1. 1.

    On lunar and solar periodicities of earthquakes. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. 61, 455–465 (1897).

  2. 2.

    , & Statistical test of the tidal triggering of earthquakes: contribution of the ocean tide loading effect. Geophys. J. Int. 122, 183–194 (1995).

  3. 3.

    , , & Absence of earthquake correlation with Earth tides: an indication of high preseismic fault stress rate. J. Geophys. Res. 103, 24567–24572 (1998).

  4. 4.

    , & Earth tides can trigger shallow thrust fault earthquakes. Science 306, 1164–1166 (2004).

  5. 5.

    , & Earthquakes and the moon: syzygy predictions fail the test. Seismol. Res. Lett. 75, 607–612 (2004).

  6. 6.

    et al. Evidence of earthquake triggering by the solid earth tides. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 278, 370–375 (2009).

  7. 7.

    Tidal triggering of earthquakes precursory to the recent Sumatra megathrust earthquakes of 26 December 2004 (Mw 9.0), 28 March 2005 (Mw 8.6), and 12 September 2007 (Mw 8.5). Geophys. Res. Lett. 37, L02301 (2010).

  8. 8.

    Tidal triggering of earthquakes prior to the 2011 Tohoku-Oki earthquake (Mw 9.1). Geophys. Res. Lett. 39, L00G26 (2012).

  9. 9.

    , , , & Tidal modulation of nonvolcanic tremor. Science 319, 186–189 (2008).

  10. 10.

    , & Non-volcanic tremor resulting from the combined effect of Earth tides and slow slip events. Nat. Geosci. 1, 676–678 (2008).

  11. 11.

    , , , & Tidal triggering of low frequency earthquakes near Parkfield, California: implications for fault mechanics within the brittle–ductile transition. J. Geophys. Res. 117, B05301 (2012).

  12. 12.

    & Controls on plate motion by oscillating tidal stress: evidence from deep tremors in western Japan. Geophys. Res. Lett. 41, 3842–3850 (2014).

  13. 13.

    Low friction and fault weakening revealed by rising sensitivity of tremor to tidal stress. Nat. Geosci. 8, 409–415 (2015).

  14. 14.

    , & The global CMT project 2004–2010 centroid-moment tensors for 13,017 earthquakes. Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. 200–201, 1–9 (2012).

  15. 15.

    , , & Automated seismic moment tensor determination by using on-line broadband seismic waveforms. Zisin 51, 149–156 (1998).

  16. 16.

    , & Computing a large refined catalog of focal mechanisms for southern California (1981–2010): temporal stability of the style of faulting. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 102, 1179–1194 (2012).

  17. 17.

    & Earthquake size distribution in subduction zones linked to slab buoyancy. Nat. Geosci. 7, 904–908 (2014).

  18. 18.

    , & Variations in earthquake-size distribution across different stress regimes. Nature 437, 539–542 (2005).

  19. 19.

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

  20. 20.

    , , , & Acoustic emissions document stress changes over many seismic cycles in stick-slip experiments. Geophys. Res. Lett. 40, 2049–2054 (2013).

  21. 21.

    & Complex Green’s function for diurnal/semidiurnal loading problems. J. Geod. Soc. Jpn 47, 225–230 (2001).

  22. 22.

    SPOTL: Some Programs for Ocean-Tide Loading SIO Technical Report (Scripps Institution of Oceanography, 2012).

  23. 23.

    & Efficient inverse modeling of barotropic ocean tides. J. Atmos. Ocean. Technol. 19, 183–204 (2002).

  24. 24.

    , & Ocean tide models developed by assimilating TOPEX/POSEIDON altimeter data into hydrodynamical model: a global model and a regional model around Japan. J. Oceanogr. 56, 567–581 (2000).

  25. 25.

    , , & Tidal sensitivity of tectonic tremors in Nankai and Cascadia subduction zones. J. Geophys. Res. 120, 7587–7605 (2015).

  26. 26.

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

  27. 27.

    Representation and analysis of the earthquake size distribution: a historical review and some new approaches. Pure Appl. Geophys. 155, 509–535 (1999).

  28. 28.

    & Hierarchy in earthquake size distribution. Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. 37, 149–168 (1985).

  29. 29.

    & Earthquakes as multiscale dynamic ruptures with heterogeneous fracture surface energy. J. Geophys. Res. 110, B11303 (2005).

  30. 30.

    Criticality of rupture dynamics in 3-D. Pure. Appl. Geophys. 157, 1981–2001 (2000).

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are grateful for helpful comments from H. Kao and J. Vidale. This work was supported by the Earthquake and Volcano Hazards Observation and Research Program, MEXT and JSPS KAKENHI (16H02219). Figures were prepared using the Generic Mapping Tools (Wessel and Smith, 1998).

Author information

Affiliations

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

    • Satoshi Ide
    •  & Suguru Yabe
  2. Earthquake Research Institute, University of Tokyo, 1-1-1 Yayoi, Bunkyo, Tokyo 113-0032, Japan

    • Yoshiyuki Tanaka

Authors

  1. Search for Satoshi Ide in:

  2. Search for Suguru Yabe in:

  3. Search for Yoshiyuki Tanaka in:

Contributions

S.I. designed the plan of study, carried out tidal stress calculations and the statistical analysis, and wrote the manuscript. S.Y. and Y.T. developed a calculation system for the tidal stress and contributed to the discussion.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Satoshi Ide.

Supplementary information

PDF files

  1. 1.

    Supplementary Information

    Supplementary Information

About this article

Publication history

Received

Accepted

Published

DOI

https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo2796

Further reading