EGU2020-12150, updated on 12 Jun 2020
https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu2020-12150
EGU General Assembly 2020
© Author(s) 2020. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Investigating seismic segmentation and recurrence patterns of great earthquakes along the Chilean megathrust.

Diego Molina1,4, Andres Tassara1,4, Jean-Paul Ampuero2, and Daniel Melnick3,4
Diego Molina et al.
  • 1Universidad de Concepción, Ciencias de la Tierra, Departamento de geología, Concepcion, Chile (diegmolinao@gmail.com)
  • 2Université Côte d’Azur, IRD, CNRS, Observatoire de la Côte d’Azur, Géoazur, France
  • 3Instituto de Ciencias de la Tierra, TAQUACh, Universidad Austral de Chile, Valdivia, Chile
  • 4Millennium Nucleus The Seismic Cycle Along Subduction Zones, Valdivia, Chile

Megathrust earthquakes at subduction zones are one of the most devastating natural phenomena. Understanding the relationships between their temporal recurrence, spatial segmentation and the frictional structure of the megathrust is of primary relevance. We analyzed the common spatial variability of gravity anomalies, geodetic locking and wedge taper basal friction (three independent proxies for megathrust frictional structure) along the Chilean margin. A marked along-strike segmentation has emerged that is organized into three hierarchical levels. At a subcontinental-scale (103 km), we observe a first-order difference between Central (18-32°S) and Southern (32°-46°S) Andes. This is marked by a dominance of positive/negative gravity, high/low locking, high/low friction along the Central/Southern segments. We explain this as mainly reflecting the combined effect on effective normal stress (σeff) of a high/low density forearc and low/high pore pressure along both megathrust segments, in agreement with the geological structure of the forearc, sediment input at the trench and the long-term architecture of the Andes. Inside this large-scale subdivision, we identify a number of segments (102 km) that are limited by marked small-scale (101 km) changes in the first-order tendency of the three proxies coinciding with geological features of both plates. When we compare this against the paleoseismic, historic and instrumental record of past earthquakes in Chile, we note that segments largely coincide with seismic asperities, i.e. those regions of the megathrust concentrating the largest fraction of coseismic slip. Bridging these two scales, the rupture length of giant (Mw 8.5-9.5) earthquakes, which encompassed several asperities, define an intermediate hierarchic level of organization (102-103 km). Considering this segmentation into the conceptual framework of the rate-and-state friction (RSF) law, we infer that asperities inside the rate-weakening seismogenic zone of the Central Andean megathrust are dominantly unstable (i.e. σeffc = the critical stress defined by RSF parameters) and therefore prone to initiate and concentrate the coseismic rupture. In contrast, most of the asperities along the Southern mega-segment are likely characterized by a conditionally-stable behavior (σeffc) that allows a rich and complex seismogenic behavior where interseismic creep and locking are both possible and large coseismic slip propagation is dominant. This can explain the apparent difference in the recurrence of giant earthquakes along both mega-segments, since the synchronization of unstable asperities in the Central Andean megathrust (2000-3000 yr recurrence time) is less probable than in the case of conditionally-stable asperities in the Southern segment (300-500 yrs). We will test these hypothesis developing numerical simulations of multiple seismic cycles with setups representing the inferred contrast on the physical properties of the megathrust along the Chilean margin, and we will present preliminary results of this exercise. 

How to cite: Molina, D., Tassara, A., Ampuero, J.-P., and Melnick, D.: Investigating seismic segmentation and recurrence patterns of great earthquakes along the Chilean megathrust. , EGU General Assembly 2020, Online, 4–8 May 2020, EGU2020-12150, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu2020-12150, 2020