4.6 Article

Mantle subducting slab structure in the region of the 2010 M8.8 Maule earthquake (30-40°S), Chile

期刊

GEOPHYSICAL JOURNAL INTERNATIONAL
卷 191, 期 1, 页码 317-324

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-246X.2012.05624.x

关键词

Seismicity and tectonics; Seismic tomography; Subduction zone processes

资金

  1. National Science Foundation [EAR-1114245]
  2. Division Of Earth Sciences
  3. Directorate For Geosciences [1114245] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We present a new tomographic model of the mantle in the area of the 2010 M8.8 Maule earthquake and surrounding regions. Increased ray coverage provided by the aftershock data allows us to image the detailed subducting slab structure in the mantle, from the region of flat slab subduction north of the Maule rupture to the area of overlapping rupture between the 1960 M9.5 and the 2010 M8.8 events to the south. We have combined teleseismic primary and depth phase arrivals with available local arrivals to better constrain the teleseismic earthquake locations in the region, which we use to conduct nested regionalglobal tomography. The new model reveals the detailed structure of the flat slab and its transition to a more moderately dipping slab in the Maule region. South of the Maule region, a steeply dipping relic slab is imaged from similar to 200 to 1000 km depth that is distinct from the moderately dipping slab above it and from the more northerly slab at similar depths. We interpret the images as revealing both horizontal and vertical tearing of the slab at similar to 38 degrees S to explain the imaged pattern of slab anomalies in the southern portion of the model. In contrast, the transition from a horizontal to moderately subducting slab in the northern portion of the model is imaged as a continuous slab bend. We speculate that the tearing was most likely facilitated by a fracture zone in the downgoing plate or alternatively by a continental scale terrane boundary in the overriding plate.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据