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.

  • Article
  • Published:

Geometric controls on cascading rupture of the 2023 Kahramanmaraş earthquake doublet

Nature Geoscience volume 16, pages 1054–1060 (2023)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

How fault geometry controls the rupture propagation and segmentation of a strike-slip event is an open question. Deciphering the relationship between the geometric fault complexity and seismic kinematics is essential for both understanding the seismic hazard posed by a particular fault and gaining insights into the fundamental mechanics of earthquake rupture. Here we integrate the finite-fault inversion of synthetic aperture radar observations and back projection of high-frequency teleseismic array waveforms to investigate the rupture geometry of the 2023 Mw 7.8 and Mw 7.6 Kahramanmaraş (southeastern Turkey) earthquake doublet and its impact on the kinematics and slip distribution. We find that large slip asperities are separated by fault bends, whereas intense high-frequency (~1 Hz) sources occur near the branching junctions, suggesting that geometric barriers could decelerate rupture propagation and enhance high-frequency wave radiations. In addition, supershear rupture propagating along the relatively high-velocity material is prone to occur on geometrically simple and smooth faults with relatively few aftershocks. These kinematic characteristics highlight that the geometric complexity of the fault system may be a key factor in the irregular cascading rupture process.

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

Fig. 1: Tectonic setting of the 2023 Kahramanmaraş earthquake doublet.
Fig. 2: Inversion results in a three-dimensional perspective.
Fig. 3: BP results of the Mw 7.8 and Mw 7.6 Kahramanmaraş earthquake doublet.
Fig. 4: Spatial relationship between geometric features of faults and seismic kinematics.

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The Sentinel-1 Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) data are made available by the European Space Agency and can be accessed at http://scihub.copernicus.eu/dhus. The GNSS raw data are provided by Türkiye Ulusal Sabit GNSS Ağı-Aktif (TUSAGA-Active) System (https://www.tusaga-aktif.gov.tr/Web/DepremVerileri.aspx). All seismograms are available online. The seismic data are provided by the Incorporated Research Institutions for Seismology (IRIS, www.iris.edu) and the Data Management Center of China National Seismic Network at the Institute of Geophysics, China Earthquake Administration (SEISDMC, https://doi.org/10.7914/SN/CB, https://data.earthquake.cn/index.html). The catalogue of relocated aftershocks of the 2023 Turkey earthquake doublet is available at https://github.com/YijianZhou/Seismic-Catalog/blob/main/ding-zhou_eqs-2023_tk-palm_v4.ctlg. The geodetic data, slip models and datasets relevant to BP results can be downloaded from https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8271589. Detailed README files are available, providing summaries of the data and data formats.

Code availability

The open-source GMTSAR software can be accessed at https://github.com/gmtsar/gmtsar. The PRIDE PPP-AR is available at https://github.com/PrideLab/PRIDE-PPPAR. The SDM code can be found at ftp://ftp.gfz-potsdam.de/pub/home/turk/wang/. The MATLAB code of SEBP is available at https://github.com/lsmeng/MUSICBP/tree/SEBP. Figures in this study were generated using GMT59. All other codes used in this study are available upon request.

References

  1. Bruhat, L., Fang, Z. & Dunham, E. M. Rupture complexity and the supershear transition on rough faults. J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 121, 210–224 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Duan, B. & Oglesby, D. D. Multicycle dynamics of nonplanar strike-slip faults. J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 110, B03304 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Kase, Y. & Day, S. M. Spontaneous rupture processes on a bending fault. Geophys. Res. Lett. 33, L10302 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Fan, W., Shearer, P. M., Ji, C. & Bassett, D. Multiple branching rupture of the 2009 Tonga–Samoa earthquake. J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 121, 5809–5827 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Zhang, L., Liu, Y., Li, D., Yu, H. & He, C. Geometric control on seismic rupture and earthquake sequence along the Yingxiu–Beichuan fault with implications for the 2008 Wenchuan earthquake. J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 127, e2022JB024113 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Manighetti, I. et al. Generic along-strike segmentation of Afar normal faults, East Africa: implications on fault growth and stress heterogeneity on seismogenic fault planes. Geochem. Geophys. Geosyst. 16, 443–467 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Okuwaki, R. & Yagi, Y. Role of geometric barriers in irregular-rupture evolution during the 2008 Wenchuan earthquake. Geophys. J. Int. 212, 1657–1664 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Reilinger, R. et al. GPS constraints on continental deformation in the Africa–Arabia–Eurasia continental collision zone and implications for the dynamics of plate interactions. J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 111, B05411 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Taymaz, T., Westaway, R. & Reilinger, R. Active faulting and crustal deformation in the Eastern Mediterranean region. Tectonophysics 391, 1–9 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Duman, T. Y. & Emre, Ö. The East Anatolian Fault: geometry, segmentation and jog characteristics. Geol. Soc. Lond. Spec. Publ. 372, 495–529 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Güvercin, S. E., Karabulut, H., Konca, A. Ö., Doğan, U. & Ergintav, S. Active seismotectonics of the East Anatolian Fault. Geophys. J. Int. 230, 50–69 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Melgar, D. et al. Sub- and super-shear ruptures during the 2023 Mw 7.8 and Mw 7.6 earthquake doublet in SE Türkiye. Seismica https://doi.org/10.26443/seismica.v2i3.387 (2023).

  13. Ambraseys, N. N. Temporary seismic quiescence: SE Turkey. Geophys. J. Int. 96, 311–331 (1989).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Dal Zilio, L. & Ampuero, J.-P. Earthquake doublet in Turkey and Syria. Commun. Earth Environ. 4, 71 (2023).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Emre, Ö. et al. Active fault database of Turkey. Bull. Earthq. Eng. 16, 3229–3275 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Okuwaki, R., Yagi, Y., Taymaz, T. & Hicks, S. P. Multi-scale rupture growth with alternating directions in a complex fault network during the 2023 south-eastern Türkiye and Syria earthquake doublet. Geophys. Res. Lett. 50, e2023GL103480 (2023).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Shen, Z.-K. et al. Slip maxima at fault junctions and rupturing of barriers during the 2008 Wenchuan earthquake. Nat. Geosci. 2, 718–724 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Earthquakes (USGS, 2023); https://usgs.gov/programs/earthquake-hazards/earthquakes

  19. Meng, L., Zhang, A. & Yagi, Y. Improving back projection imaging with a novel physics-based aftershock calibration approach: a case study of the 2015 Gorkha earthquake. Geophys. Res. Lett. 43, 628–636 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Zhang, Y., Bao, H., Aoki, Y. & Hashima, A. Integrated seismic source model of the 2021 M 7.1 Fukushima earthquake. Geophys. J. Int. 233, 93–106 (2023).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Zhang, Y., Bao, H., Meng, L. & Aoki, Y. Understanding and mitigating the spatial bias of earthquake source imaging with regional slowness enhanced back-projection. J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 128, e2022JB025525 (2023).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Laske, G., Masters, G., Ma, Z. & Pasyanos, M. E. CRUST1.0: an updated global model of Earth’s crust. Geophys. Res. Abstr. 14, abstr. EGU2012-3743-1 (2012).

  23. Li, B. et al. Rupture heterogeneity and directivity effects in back-projection analysis. J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 127, e2021JB022663 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Guo, R., Zheng, Y. & Xu, J. Stress modulation of the seismic gap between the 2008 Ms 8.0 Wenchuan earthquake and the 2013 Ms 7.0 Lushan earthquake and implications for seismic hazard. Geophys. J. Int. 221, 2113–2125 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Elliott, A. J., Dolan, J. F. & Oglesby, D. D. Evidence from coseismic slip gradients for dynamic control on rupture propagation and arrest through stepovers. J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 114, B02312 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Klinger, Y., Michel, R. & King, G. C. P. Evidence for an earthquake barrier model from Mw ~7.8 Kokoxili (Tibet) earthquake slip-distribution. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 242, 354–364 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Liang, Z., Wei, Z., Sun, W. & Zhuang, Q. Surface slip distribution and earthquake rupture model of the Fuyun Fault, China, based on high-resolution topographic data. Lithosphere 2021, 7913554 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Madariaga, R. High-frequency radiation from crack (stress drop) models of earthquake faulting. Geophys. J. R. Astron. Soc. 51, 625–651 (1977).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Yamashita, T. High-frequency acceleration radiated by unsteadily propagating cracks and its near-source geometrical attenuation. J. Phys. Earth 31, 1–32 (1983).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Tang, R., Yuan, J. & Gan, L. Free-surface-induced supershear transition in 3-D simulations of spontaneous dynamic rupture on oblique faults. Geophys. Res. Lett. 48, e2020GL091621 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Rousseau, C.-E. & Rosakis, A. J. Dynamic path selection along branched faults: experiments involving sub-Rayleigh and supershear ruptures. J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 114, B08303 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Templeton, E. L. et al. Finite element simulations of dynamic shear rupture experiments and dynamic path selection along kinked and branched faults. J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 114, B08304 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Bouchon, M. et al. Faulting characteristics of supershear earthquakes. Tectonophysics 493, 244–253 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Perrin, C., Manighetti, I., Ampuero, J.-P., Cappa, F. & Gaudemer, Y. Location of largest earthquake slip and fast rupture controlled by along-strike change in fault structural maturity due to fault growth. J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 121, 3666–3685 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Manighetti, I., Mercier, A. & De Barros, L. Fault trace corrugation and segmentation as a measure of fault structural maturity. Geophys. Res. Lett. 48, e2021GL095372 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Qiao, X., Zhou, Y. & Zhang, P. Along-strike variation in fault structural maturity and seismic moment deficits on the Yushu–Ganzi–Xianshuihe fault system revealed by strain accumulation and regional seismicity. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 596, 117799 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Westaway, R. O. B. & Arger, J. A. N. The Gölbaşı basin, southeastern Turkey: a complex discontinuity in a major strike-slip fault zone. J. Geol. Soc. 153, 729–744 (1996).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Tan, O. A homogeneous earthquake catalogue for Turkey. Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. 21, 2059–2073 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Balkaya, M., Akyüz, H. S. & Özden, S. Paleoseismology of the Sürgü and Çardak faults—splays of the Eastern Anatolian Fault Zone, Türkiye. Turk. J. Earth Sci. 32, 402–420 (2023).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Goebel, T. H. W., Brodsky, E. E. & Dresen, G. Fault roughness promotes earthquake-like aftershock clustering in the lab. Geophys. Res. Lett. 50, e2022GL101241 (2023).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Ding, H. et al. High-resolution seismicity imaging and early aftershock migration of the 2023 Kahramanmaraş (SE Türkiye) Mw 7.9 & 7.8 earthquake doublet. Earthq. Sci. https://www.equsci.org.cn/en/article/doi/10.1016/j.eqs.2023.06.002 (2023).

  42. Bouchon, M. & Karabulut, H. The aftershock signature of supershear earthquakes. Science 320, 1323–1325 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Bao, H. et al. Global frequency of oceanic and continental supershear earthquakes. Nat. Geosci. 15, 942–949 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Langer, S., Olsen-Kettle, L. & Weatherley, D. Identification of supershear transition mechanisms due to material contrast at bimaterial faults. Geophys. J. Int. 190, 1169–1180 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Shlomai, H. & Fineberg, J. The structure of slip-pulses and supershear ruptures driving slip in bimaterial friction. Nat. Commun. 7, 11787 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Wang, H. et al. Isotropic and anisotropic P wave velocity structures of the crust and uppermost mantle beneath Turkey. J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 125, e2020JB019566 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Bayrak, E., Yılmaz, Ş., Softa, M., Türker, T. & Bayrak, Y. Earthquake hazard analysis for East Anatolian Fault Zone, Turkey. Nat. Hazard. 76, 1063–1077 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Lomax, A. Precise, NLL-SSST-coherence hypocenter catalog for the 2023 Mw 7.8 and Mw 7.6 SE Turkey earthquake sequence data sets. Zenodo https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7699882 (2023).

  49. Sandwell, D., Mellors, R., Tong, X., Wei, M. & Wessel, P. Open radar interferometry software for mapping surface deformation. Eos 92, 234–234 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Goldstein, R. M. & Werner, C. L. Radar interferogram filtering for geophysical applications. Geophys. Res. Lett. 25, 4035–4038 (1998).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Chen, C. W. & Zebker, H. A. Two-dimensional phase unwrapping with use of statistical models for cost functions in nonlinear optimization. J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 18, 338 (2001).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Geng, J. et al. PRIDE PPP-AR: an open-source software for GPS PPP ambiguity resolution. GPS Solut. 23, 91 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Jónsson, S. N., Zebker, H., Segall, P. & Amelung, F. Fault slip distribution of the 1999 Mw 7.1 Hector Mine, California, Earthquake, estimated from satellite radar and GPS measurements. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 92, 1377–1389 (2002).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Wang, R. et al. The 2011 Mw 9.0 Tohoku earthquake: comparison of GPS and strong-motion data. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 103, 1336–1347 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Okada, Y. Surface deformation due to shear and tensile faults in a half-space. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 75, 1135–1154 (1985).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Bao, H. et al. Early and persistent supershear rupture of the 2018 magnitude 7.5 Palu earthquake. Nat. Geosci. 12, 200–205 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Meng, L. et al. Double pincer movement: encircling rupture splitting during the 2015 Mw 8.3 Illapel earthquake. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 495, 164–173 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Meng, L., Huang, H., Xie, Y., Bao, H. & Dominguez, L. A. Nucleation and kinematic rupture of the 2017 Mw 8.2 Tehuantepec earthquake. Geophys. Res. Lett. 46, 3745–3754 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Wessel, P. et al. The Generic Mapping Tools version 6. Geochem. Geophys. Geosyst. 20, 5556–5564 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

H.S. was supported by the Strategic Priority Research Program of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (XDB 41000000). R.G. and X.T. were supported by the State Key Laboratory of Geodesy and Earth’s Dynamics (S22L620104). Y. Zhang, R.G., X.T. and J.W. were supported by the Open Fund of Wuhan Gravitation and Solid Earth Tides National Observation and Research Station (WHYWZ202210). Y. Zheng and D.L. were supported by the NSFC grants (42274082, 42030108). The teleseismic waveforms of the China array are provided by the Data Management Center of China National Seismic Network at the Institute of Geophysics, China Earthquake Administration. T.T. and T.E. acknowledge the Istanbul Technical University Research Fund (ITU-BAP) and the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation Research Fellowship Award for providing computing facilities through the Humboldt-Stiftung Follow-Up Program.

Author information

Author notes

  1. These authors contributed equally: Yijun Zhang, Xiongwei Tang, Dechuan Liu.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Innovation Academy for Precision Measurement Science and Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Wuhan, China

    Yijun Zhang, Xiongwei Tang, Rumeng Guo, Jingqi Wang & Heping Sun

  2. College of Earth and Planetary Sciences, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China

    Xiongwei Tang, Jingqi Wang & Heping Sun

  3. State Key Laboratory of Geological Processes and Mineral Resources, School of Geophysics and Geomatics, China University of Geosciences, Wuhan, China

    Dechuan Liu & Yong Zheng

  4. Department of Geophysical Engineering, the Faculty of Mines, İstanbul Technical University, Istanbul, Turkey

    Tuncay Taymaz & Tuna Eken

Authors
  1. Yijun Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Xiongwei Tang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Dechuan Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Tuncay Taymaz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Tuna Eken
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Rumeng Guo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Yong Zheng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Jingqi Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Heping Sun
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

R.G. conceived and led the study. Y. Zhang and D.L. performed the uniform SEBP and regional SEBP. X.T. performed the InSAR analysis and finite-fault inversion. Y. Zhang, X.T., D.L., R.G., T.T., T.E., Y. Zheng, J.W. and H.S. wrote the paper and participated in the interpretation of the results.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rumeng Guo.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Peer review

Peer review information

Nature Geoscience thanks Lei Zhang and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work. Primary Handling Editor: Tamara Goldin, in collaboration with the Nature Geoscience team.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Extended data

Extended Data Fig. 1 Mapping fault traces.

Sentinel-1 wrapped interferograms of the descending (a) and ascending (d) tracks. Unwrapped deformation of the descending (b) and ascending (e) tracks. Range pixel offset results of the 2023 Kahramanmaraş earthquake doublet along the descending (c) and ascending (f) tracks. Red and blue colors mean that the displacements move toward and away from the satellite, respectively. The black lines represent the mapped traces of the seismogenic faults. The red and green stars are the epicenters of the Mw 7.8 earthquake and the Mw 7.6 earthquake, respectively.

Extended Data Fig. 2 Estimation of the potential impact of postseismic deformation.

GNSS time series of ANTE (a) and EKZ1 (b) sites. LOS postseismic deformation along the ascending (c) and descending (d) track. Yellow triangles show the locations of ANTE and EKZ1, respectively. The beachball indicates the focal mechanism of the Mw 6.3 aftershock on February 20, 2023 (USGS). Other symbols are the same as Extended Data Fig. 1.

Extended Data Fig. 3 Search results of our preferred model.

(a) The trade-off between the data misfit and model roughness. (b) The search for dip of the Mw 7.6 earthquake. The red circle indicates the optimal dip of 76°.

Extended Data Fig. 4 InSAR fittings.

Observations of the ascending (a) and descending (d) orbits. Predictions along ascending (b) and descending (e) tracks. (c) and (f) Associated residuals.

Extended Data Fig. 5 Checkerboard test results.

(a) The input of slip distribution. (b) The recovered slip distribution using the same inversion strategies.

Extended Data Fig. 6 Station distribution.

Telesesimic arrays for back-projection analysis of the 2023 Mw 7.8 (a) and Mw 7.6 (b) Kahramanmaraş earthquake doublet. The colored triangles represent the seismic stations from arrays in Alaska (AK) and China (CN). The red and green stars denote the locations of the Mw 7.8 and Mw 7.6 earthquakes in the 2023 Kahramanmaraş earthquake doublet.

Extended Data Fig. 7 Spatial bias of BPs.

Spatial biases of the Mw 7.8 earthquake for the AK array, before (a) and after (b) the regional SEBP calibration.

Extended Data Fig. 8 Background seismicity.

Seismic activity in southeastern Türkiye during 1900–2018 from ref. 38. (a) Distribution of background seismicity and the 2023 Kahramanmaraş earthquake doublet. The red and green stars indicate the locations of the epicenters of the Mw 7.8 and Mw 7.6 earthquakes. The red dots indicate earthquakes of small magnitude (1 < M < 5.5) while yellow stars indicate earthquakes of larger magnitude (5.5 < M < 8.0). The black lines indicate the mapped fault traces. The green lines represent the depth profiles of earthquakes. (b) Cross-section of the earthquake locations for profiles AB and BC. (c) Cross-section of the earthquake locations for profile DE.

Extended Data Fig. 9 Lateral variation of the isotropic Vp images resolved at three depth layers.

At the central top of each map, the layer depth is given: (a) 4, (b) 12, and (c) 21 km. Relatively high and low Vp perturbations from ref. 46 are represented by the blue and red colors, respectively. The red and green stars indicate the locations of the epicenters of the Mw 7.8 and Mw 7.6 events. The black lines indicate the mapped fault traces.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

Supplementary Tables 1–5.

Supplementary Video 1

BP movie for the Mw 7.8 earthquake.

Supplementary Video 2

BP movie for the Mw 7.6 earthquake.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zhang, Y., Tang, X., Liu, D. et al. Geometric controls on cascading rupture of the 2023 Kahramanmaraş earthquake doublet. Nat. Geosci. 16, 1054–1060 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-023-01283-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-023-01283-3

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