Ggs 083 Font
Ggs 083 Font
Ggs 083 Font
Accepted 2012 November 22. Received 2012 July 6; in original form 2011 June 20
GJI Seismology
tion to real data, the seismicity distribution from the 3-D-MAXI catalogue is also compared to
the determinations obtained in a 1-D-layered VM. In addition to good-quality location uncer-
tainties, the clustering and the depth distribution confirm the 3-D-MAXI catalogue reliability.
The pattern of the seismicity distribution (a 13 yr record during the inter-seismic period of
the seismic cycle) is compared to the pattern of rupture zone and asperity of the Mw = 7.9
1942 and the Mw = 7.7 1958 events (the Mw = 8.8 1906 asperity patch is not defined). We
observe that the nucleation of 1942, 1958 and 1906 events coincides with areas of positive
Simple Bouguer anomalies and areas where marine terraces are still preserved on the coastal
morphology. From north to south: (1) the 1958 rupture zone is almost aseismic and is attributed
to a zone of high coupling; (2) south of the Galera alignment (perpendicular to the trench), the
1942 rupture zone presents moderate seismicity, deeper on the seismogenic interplate zone,
and abutting on the Jama cluster (to the south). This cluster is facing the Cabo Pasado cap
and positive Bouguer anomalies on the overriding margin. We suspect that this cluster reflects
a zone of local asperity (partial coupling). South of the Jama cluster, the spherical aseismic
zone in the Bahia area is interpreted as having a low seismic coupling (steady creep motion or
slow slip events). We suspect that the site that generated the three M > 7 events (1896, 1956
and 1998) correspond to a small patch of strong coupling. To the south, in the Manta-Puerto
Lopez zone, the seismicity is mainly organized in earthquake swarms (1998, 2002, 2005).
Although slow slip events have been observed in the area (Vallée et al. submitted), we infer
from the coastline shape, the marine terraces and the high positive Bouguer anomalies that the
seismicity here might reveal a significant amount of seismic coupling.
Key words: Seismic cycle; Seismicity and tectonics; Computational seismology; Subduction
zone processes; South America.
C The Authors 2013. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The Royal Astronomical Society. 263
264 Y. Font et al.
2.1 Geodynamic, structural and velocity data the model construction and structural units, we refer under the term
“North Andean Block” to the part of the block that extends from the
Subduction occurs beneath northern South America since at least
trench to the western Andes foothills. The real limit of the North
Early Jurassic time (Aspden et al. 1987; Jaillard et al. 1990; Kerr
Andean Block is still debated but we know it is located eastward,
& Tarney 2005). Many works have been conducted onland and
along the Andean Chain, and that it extends from the Puna Island
offshore which allow reconstructing the geodynamic evolution of
to north of Venezuela.
the region and highlight the complexity and 3-D structure of the
The surface topography included in the 3-DVM is irregular and
Ecuadorian subduction system. For the purpose of a 3-DVM con-
presents huge variations from about −4000 m near the trench to
struction, we summarize those works, distinguishing four main
+6000 m at some active volcanoes (Michaud et al. 2006). The
structural units over the southern Colombia—northern Peru region.
trench-to-coast distance (from 50 to 190 km) and trench geometry
Each of them has its own geometry and seismic velocity properties
vary laterally along the subduction, increasing in obliquity from
that one needs to consider to improve wave propagation compu-
∼10◦ in Central Ecuador, to ∼30◦ in southern Colombia (Trenkamp
tations. The structural units are: The Nazca Plate and associated
et al. 2002).
downgoing slab, and the overriding plate composed of three re-
gions: (1) the continental Guyana Shield and sedimentary basin
(east of the Andes), (2) the Andean Chain and inter-Andean val-
2.1.1 The Nazca Plate
Figure 1. Geodynamical framework of the Ecuadorian subduction zone. Simplified faults traces modified from Vallejo et al. (2009): CF = Cosanga Fault;
CPPF: Calacalı́ – Pujilı́ – Pallatanga Fault. Bathymetry/topography map from Michaud et al. (2006). Limits of the main sedimentary basins from Deniaud
(2000): BB = Borbon Basin; MB = Manabi Basin; PB = Progreso Basin.
266 Y. Font et al.
Figure 2. (a) Example of the lithospherical and upper mantle model of Ecuador along an E–W cross-section at 1.5◦ S established for the construction of the
3-DVM; thin lines define the principal limits of the structural units (sedimentary layer, crustal basement and upper mantle, for both tectonic plates—see colour
code within the figure). (b) Cross-section within the velocity model and geophysical data existing at (or near) this latitude (active seismic refraction from
Graindorge et al. (2004) and Ocola et al. (1975); crustal model from Simple Bouguer gravity field of Feininger & Seguin (1983); seismicity distribution from
Engdahl et al. (1998, in white) and RENSIG (in grey). Thin lines define the same principal limits of the structure shown in (a); (c) Active seismic refraction
model from Graindorge et al. (2004). (d) Crustal profile determined from Bouguer anomalies (Feininger & Seguin 1983). (e) 1-D velocity model along the
Andean Chain resulting from the Nariño active seismic experiment (from southern Colombia to central Ecuador, from Ocola et al. (1975)).
Seismicity along the Ecuadorian subduction zone 267
because of the Farallon Plate splitting along a preexistent NNE (4) Between the Carnegie Ridge and the Grijalva Fracture Zone,
fracture zone during Oligocene time (∼ 30–25 Ma; Hey 1977). The the trench is narrow (3–4 km wide), at 4 to 4.2 km depth and contains
crust is about 30 Ma south of the Grijalva Fracture Zone, 22 Ma about 300 m of infill deposit (2–2.2 km s–1 ; Calahorrano et al. 2008).
north of it, and decreases northwards to about 10 Ma at the southern The accretionary prism widens to 3 km. The subduction channel is
limit of the Yaquina Graben (Fig. 1; Lonsdale 1978, 2005; Lonsdale thin (maximum of 0.6 km) and imaged to 25 km landward from the
& Klitgord 1978). The rupture of the Farallon oceanic plate evolved trench (∼7.5 km deep). The Nazca Plate is locally dipping landward
into the E–W trending Cocos-Nazca Spreading Center. Around 23– at 6◦ . Off the Gulf of Guyaquil, a 3–10 km wide and 1 km thick
20 Ma, the interaction between the Galapagos Hot Spot and the sedimentary prism fronts the margin (Calahorrano et al. 2008).
spreading centre results in the formation of the Cocos (and Malpelo) Sediment accumulation is favored south of the Grijalva Fracture
Ridge north of the spreading centre and the Carnegie Ridge south Zone because the trench is deepest. The trench is 10 to 15 km
of it (Sallares & Charvis 2003). Near the Ecuadorian Trench, the wide, about 4.8 km deep and filled by about 500 m of sediment.
aseismic Carnegie Ridge is about 280 km wide and 2 km high with The subduction channel is visible from the trench (0.2 km thick)
respect to the neighbouring abyssal plain. reaching a thickness of ∼1 km before thinning to only 0.3 km at
The oceanic crust thickness varies laterally beneath the overriding ∼30 km of the trench landward (low velocity 2.8 km s–1 relative
margin as observed on wide-angle data, reaching up to 19 km be- to the 3.5–3.8 km s–1 of the overlying upper-plate basement). The
neath the Carnegie Ridge crest (Sallares & Charvis 2003) and 14 km Nazca crust is at 4.5 km depth before trench.
the Mesozoic (Aspden et al. 1992). They are covered by Ceno- axes following E–W and N–S directions, respectively. The SW cor-
zoic to modern volcanosedimentary units. The Western Cordillera ner is assigned to be the origin point, at 277◦ E and 6.5◦ S. The
consists of a volcanic arc that lies astride a basement composed heterogeneous velocity structures are characterized by a set of non-
of accreted oceanic plateau (same basement as the coastal area; overlapping, equal volume and constant VP velocity blocks. Each
Hughes & Pilatasig 2002). Both cordilleras are separated by the block dimension is 12 × 12 × 3 km in the x, y and z directions,
inter-Andean graben filled by Pliocene and Quaternary volcanosed- respectively. Therefore, structures thinner than 3 km (such as the
imentary rocks (sedimentary velocity for about 5 km of thickness; subduction channel, for instance) are incorporated in the average
Fig. 2d). Feininger & Seguin (1983) suggest that the basement un- velocity of the concerned blocks. The entire velocity model consists
derlying the inter-Andean graben consist of Real Cordillera rocks. of 516 120 blocks. In accordance with the shortest ray path method
The inter-Andean graben and active Calacali-Pujili Fault zone (at (Moser et al. 1992), ray tracing nodes are placed only on facets,
the eastern limit of the Western Cordillera) is considered as marking edges and vertices of blocks and each of them has a constant slow-
the suture zone between the continental basement to the east and ness (1/VP ). Because blocks are of constant velocity, that is straight
the oceanic one to the west. Within the 3-DVM, seismic velocities ray path within each block, there is no need for nodes inside the
are subsequently slightly lower in the Real Cordillera than in the blocks. The interval between two adjacent nodes is 3 km along the
Western Cordillera. The crustal depth and reflective Moho is not horizontal directions and 1 km vertically. Each block consists of 82
well constrained in this area. Active seismic, seismology and grav- nodes and 15 745 384 nodes constitute the whole velocity model.
Figure 3. (a) Horizontal and (b) vertical cross-sections showing VP lateral and vertical variations within the 3-D geo-realistic a priori P-velocity model
(3-DVM) constructed in the study. The 3-DVM is established from the integration of geological and geophysical information collected on the Ecuadorian
subduction system. It extends down to 300 km depth. Triangles on both shallower sections represent the position of seismic stations involved in the earthquake
location procedure.
270 Y. Font et al.
position is solved by searching for the maximum intersection num- volume is totally independent of the earthquake origin time as it
ber of equal differential time (EDT) volumes (Zhou 1994). An EDT only depends on arrival time difference and traveltime computa-
volume is described as the collection of grid nodes satisfying the tion. Subsequently, from EDT properties, the MAXI search process
arrival-time difference between two stations ± a tolerance value directly determines the three coordinate parameters (longitude, lat-
(in seconds) known as TERR. The node collection organizes in itude and depth). The origin-time is then evaluated a posteriori
space along a deformed 3-D hyperbolic volume. In a network of j once the hypocentre position is solved. Thus, the origin-time esti-
stations, C 2j = j×(2j−1) EDTs can be constructed and shall intersect mate does not affect the hypocentre search procedure. Accordingly,
around the hypocentral solution. Theoretically, an EDT volume in- except for specific situations, a good approximation of the depth pa-
cludes the hypocentre. It is important to acknowledge that an EDT rameter can be achieved using only P arrivals (if the 3-D P-velocity
272 Y. Font et al.
model well represents crust and mantle velocity heterogeneities), Broadly, the main advantages of MAXI is (1) to eliminate the ori-
from the intersections of all possible combination of EDT volumes. gin time unknown from the search procedure and subsequently to
The specific situations where the depth unknown can not be well re- retrieve the depth parameter independently from the origin time, (2)
solved concerns the cases where (1) all stations are at equal distance to show good performances when azimuthal coverage is poor, (3)
of the hypocentre, (2) the first arrival is a head wave at all stations to objectively filter inconsistent arrival times and (4) to be less sen-
and (3) the stations are so far that the curvature of the wave can be sitive to velocity model inaccuracies than techniques that minimize
neglected. In this study, thanks to the a priori station selection that traveltime residues (Theunissen et al. 2012).
always involves a near-by station, those specific cases should not
occur. 4.2 MAXI parametrization
For the establishment of the EDT volume, grid nodes are col-
lected by scanning a pre-computed reference file. This reference The MAXI earthquake location process will search for the so-
file stores the ray tracing traveltimes from each node of the dense lution showing the best consistency between input parameters
grid that covers the modelled region to each seismic station. The (such as arrival times, station positions and the discrete 3-DVM)
book-keeping system is strictly identical to the one described by and the parametrization of the system (e.g. grid geometry, TERR
Zhou (1994) who applied the shortest path method (Moser 1991; variations). A successful search process greatly depends on the
Moser et al. 1992) to compute ray tracings. parametrization implemented for the velocity grid and the MAXI
Table 1. Synthetic investigation results or study feasibility. The event thetic arrival times and perform earthquake location following the
distribution (in per cent) is classified per intervals of misfit (the misfit being exact same procedure (Fig. 6). The disturbance follows a Gaussian
the distance between the hypocenter solution and the initial event position). distribution between +/− 0.3 s. Allowing for noise in the arrival
Each column refers to a specific geographic group; the number of events is time data set decreases the quality of hypocenter determinations.
given in the second line of each column. In the best conditions of a known
Still, 51 per cent of the events from group O and M have a misfit
velocity model and exact P-waves arrival times, the application of the
MAXI technique using the spatial-and-temporal distribution of P-arrivals
lower than 10 km (1050 events with less than 5 km error).
within the 3-DVM resolves ∼70 per cent of hypocenter determination The last test reproduces the synthetic experiment (with exact
offshore Ecuador with less than 5 km of error. 3-D arrival times) but processing earthquake location within a 1-D
velocity model. The 1-D model is taken from the RENSIG (Table 2)
Andes Deep South Margin Offshore
and is projected on the same grid parametrization than the one
5470 1778 1843 1447 1860 used in the 3-D case. The classification of the results per range
00 < misfit < 05 km 90.3 80.4 69.2 57.2 67.5 of misfit (Fig. 7) is shown for comparison with 3-D experiment
05 < misfit < 10 km 5.2 12.5 20.3 20 18.4 (Fig. 5 or 6). The results confirm that, for the Ecuadorian subduction
10 < misfit < 15 km 1.2 2.9 6.6 10.7 6.5 configuration, processing earthquake location within a 1-D-velocity
15 < misfit < 20 km 0.5 1.8 1.4 4.6 3 model almost never allows accurate hypocenter position for offshore
20 < misfit < 50 km 0.3 1.4 1.9 5.5 2.2 earthquakes. This experiment highlights the damaging impact of
Figure 5. Noise-free synthetic experiment to examine the ability of the network (and its spatiotemporal heterogeneity) to solve earthquake locations for events
of group O and M (Offshore and Margin) within the 3-DVM. Initial event position (empty side of the stroke) is from the RENSIG. Synthetic 3-D P-wave arrival
times are retrieved with the genuine azimuthal gap. The parametrization of the MAXI technique and 3-DVM grid is identical to the application to real data (see
text for more details). The circles represent hypocenter solutions; the colour code indicates the azimuthal gap. Each map corresponds to a given misfit range
(see also Table 2). Below each map, the associated histogram evidences the absolute depth difference between the initial event and the solution (normalized
on the number of events involved in each range). The synthetic investigation suggests that the network spatiotemporal configuration is appropriate to resolve
70 per cent of earthquake locations offshore Ecuador.
Seismicity along the Ecuadorian subduction zone 275
Table 2. 1-D velocity model (named ASW) used In the second step, we relocated all seismicity using 37 stations,
for the RENSIG hypocenter determinations. The including ecen and carm only to retrieve residual values (but with-
depth of the each layer top limit is given with out using the stations in the search process). We then computed
respect to the sea level. static station corrections following the same event data separation
VP (km s–1 ) VS (km s–1 ) Layer depth (km) as explained above. The residual statistic analysis is conducted sepa-
rately for each geographic group of events (Andes–A-, Margin–M-,
3.32 1.94 3.30
5.90 3.45 0.30 Offshore–O-, South–S- and Deep–D-). Note that the rms of the
6.20 3.63 −11.70 residual distribution are small and never exceed 0.2 s, even for
6.70 3.92 −26.70 the stations ecen and carm, attesting that traveltime residuals are
8.10 4.74 −46.70 distributed according to narrow Gaussians. Residual averages for
stations ecen and carm are about −7 and −1 s (Table 3), which
Analysing EDT-intersection rate per station, 37 stations out of 39 suggests that, in the first location trial, EDTs from the stations ecen
are qualified as EDT-in at 86 per cent (on average), indicating that and carm did affect the hypocenter solutions. From the sharp shape
those stations create, by combination with whatever other station, of the Gaussian distribution, we consider that some velocity anoma-
EDTs that do intersect the hypocenter determination 86 per cent lies under the stations had not been taken into account within the
of the time. Both remaining stations (ecen and carm; Fig. 4) are 3-DVM, except for station ecen whose large residual average is not
EDT-out at 98 and 90 per cent (with ∼1000 and 100 arrivals for easily explained except by a station mislocation or a timing error.
ecen and carm, respectively), which mean that EDTs associated to Static term values are reported in Table 3. All values are relatively
both stations almost never intersect the hypocenter determination. small.
Residual averages reach nearly −8 and −2 seconds for ecen and The third stage relocates all seismicity, separated per geographic
carm, respectively. group of events, applying the corresponding station corrections.
276 Y. Font et al.
To obtain a high quality data set, we select earthquakes based perpendicular to the trench, 15 km landward from the trench to
on MAXI confidence factors: (1) Qedt ≥ 0.6 (2) interbarycenter 20 km inland from the coast line (Figs 8 and 9a). This seismic pat-
distance (between volumes V1 and V2; see section 4.1) <15 km tern is known as the Galera alignment (Segovia 2001). Hypocen-
(3) distance to first station <200 km and (4) number of V2 solu- ters mainly occur from about 10 to 30 km depth, along a plane
tion nodes <1000 (see section on MAXI technique). After quality dipping gently eastward, most probably the interplate seismogenic
selection, the Qedt average is 0.94 (±0.07), the average residual zone (Fig. 8—section 1). Seismicity also scatters within the over-
rms is 0.21 (±0.13) s, the average number of stations is 7.7 (±2.0, riding crust and, in less proportion, within the subducting plate.
and the average location uncertainties dx, dy, dz are 1.5 (±2.1 km), Southward, near 0.25◦ S, a cluster of earthquakes occurs at about
1.2 (±1.9 km), 1.4 (±1.8 km), respectively. Finally, our catalogue 10 km landward from the trench, extending over about 35 km of
is composed of 7950 earthquakes with a quality considered as high distance. At depth, this cluster (further on referred to the Jama
(Figs 8 (zoom) and 9a). cluster) essentially affects the overriding plate down to the pre-
sumed plate interface (dipping 10◦ towards the east). The interplate
activity is bounded between 8 and 14 km depth. Locally, a small
6.2 Results amount of seismic activity takes place deeper within the bending
Because hypocenter location uncertainties are generally underes- slab (beneath the trench) between 30 and 80 km depth (Fig. 8—
timated (Billings et al. 1994; Shearer 1997), earthquake location section 2).
quality can be assessed from seismicity clustering or alignment To the south, centred on 1.25◦ S, seismicity recurrently strikes
along well-known tectonic features. We thus will succinctly describe the margin through large seismic swarms. This cluster (further on
the seismicity observed at the vicinity of the interplate seismogenic referred as the Manta cluster after Vaca 2007) extends along 90 km,
zone and compare them to 1-D hypocenter determinations. in a direction parallel to the trench and 15–20 km landward from
To the north, near 0.5◦ N (near the town of Muisne; Fig. 1), a it. At depth, seismicity concentrates in the overriding plate down to
60-km-long alignment of earthquakes narrowly spreads ∼NW–SE, the plate interface (Fig. 8—section 3).
Seismicity along the Ecuadorian subduction zone 277
Table 3. Station corrections, in seconds, computed at 1-D model used by Instituto Geofı́sico was constructed based on the
each station of the selected subnetwork from the 3-D Andean geology and is used indistinctly in all the country (Table 2).
approach statistical investigations (see text for more de- Based on the MAXI-1-D results, the Galera alignment is barely
tails). Station location is shown on Fig. 2. Bold font recognizable. At this latitude, the Galera seismicity seems to start
highlights stations ecen and carm, qualified as EDT-out
about 30 km landward compared to MAXI-3-D results (Figs 9 and
(98 and 90 per cent, respectively).
10). The depth distribution shows two distinct clusters. The deeper
A D S M O one is extending from 10 to 50 km depth, the shallower strikes in
anti 0.19 0.06 0.16 −0.04 −0.11 part in the air and sea water and affects essentially the overriding
ara2 0.07 0.11 0.33 0.00 −0.06 margin. The Jama cluster epicentral position scatters east and west
calv −0.11 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 from the trench. Depth determinations range between –5 km (west
cars −0.01 0.04 0.00 0.07 −0.02 of the trench) to 40 km depth (at 80 km landward from the trench),
caya 0.05 −0.03 −0.14 −0.06 −0.06 affecting essentially the crust and mantle of the subducting plate.
chi1 −0.16 −0.01 −0.26 0.16 0.20 The Manta cluster is also scattered and separates in two groups
cone −0.28 0.08 −0.11 −0.19 −0.07 with a distance of ∼20 km. The northern one extends from 20 to
cota −0.07 0.04 0.10 0.09 0.15
30 km west of the trench to near the coastline, occurring to a large
ecen 7.23 7.09 6.64 7.23 7.67
degree within the water column. The southern one is located at less
−0.14
earthquake location uncertainties, traveltime residual statistics per underestimated and because uncertainties depend on the velocity
seismic station (Table 3) and the geological reasonableness of the model in which the solution is produced (Sambridge & Kennett
seismicity distribution. 1986; Billings et al. 1994; Shearer 1997). In addition to the high
The effect of the 3-DVM on earthquake location can be assessed values of the confidence indicators and small uncertainties, the
by comparing MAXI-3-D and MAXI-1-D results (application to MAXI-3-D seismicity appears to be reliable because it is consistent
real data; Figs 9 and 10). The distances between 1-D and 3-D- with the plate interface location in the vicinity of where one ex-
resolved hypocenters are in average 36 ± 23 km (dx = 7 ± 35 km, pects seismogenic deformation and because its clustering in space
dy = 7 ± 16 km and dz = 4 ± 15). As the only difference between conveys the image of seismic activity on a portion of a fault. As a
both catalogues is the velocity model in which ray paths propagate, first approximation, we therefore consider that the 3-DVM estab-
the differences in earthquake position directly illustrate the effect lished to represent velocity variations in the area is trustworthy and
of the differences in traveltime estimates between 3-D and 1-D advantageous for earthquake location.
models (see Table N2-old3, for 1-D model). First, we observe that In this study, we have constructed the VP 3-DVM with care.
this effect is not systematic (Figs 9 and 10). Relatively to MAXI-3- Nevertheless, initial data on crust and mantle velocity properties
D, the earthquake position of the Galera alignment tends to move do not uniformly cover the studied area and some necessary in-
land ward while a good proportion of Jama and Manta earthquakes formation is uncertain or missing (for instance, the forearc crustal
are moving seaward. The depth parameter also undergoes a non- thickness lacks recent constraints; magmatic chambers are not taken
systematic shift, deeper along the Muisne alignment and shallower into consideration). Therefore, the 3-DVM most certainly only ap-
for the western part of Jama and Manta clusters. Second, even proximates to first order the large-scale velocity variations. If non-
though the 3-D approach handles single-event locations, epicenters existent local heterogeneities might be introduced by mistake in
appear to better cluster. Third, even if the real hypocenter position the 3-DVM, we assume they are insignificant compared to large
is not known, the MAXI-3-D evaluation of depth (more consistent scales anomalies that a 1-D layered model would inexorably gen-
with the plate interface) also appears more realistic than MAXI-1-D erate when trying to represent a non-flat configuration of crust and
(Fig. 10). Consequently, despite that the quality of the 3-DVM is mantle such as in subduction zones. In such areas, 1-D-layered ve-
not directly evaluated as it would be in a tomographic inversion, its locity model obviously degrades traveltime computations and thus
implementation produces an image of seismicity that seems more earthquake location accuracy. Consequently, in subduction zone
reliable. seismological studies, exploration of the concept of a priori 3-D
In seismology, assessing the reliability of hypocenter determi- velocity models and questioning the classical 1-D-approach seem
nations is challenging because location uncertainties are generally fully appropriate.
Seismicity along the Ecuadorian subduction zone 279
A second question concerns the use of an unconstrained Mw = 8.2 1979 earthquake (Kanamori & McNally 1982; Mendoza
S-wave velocity model in earthquake location because, from what & Dewey 1984; Swenson & Beck 1996). The rupture zones of the
is said above, the accuracy of the velocity model mainly controls three smaller events (1942, 1958 and 1979), approximated from the
the quality of earthquake location. Indeed, a priori S-wave veloc- distribution of aftershocks, abut closely without significant overlap.
ity models are not available if tomographic inversions cannot be In the study area, the 1942 epicenter has been located near 0◦ S
performed. Furthermore, when tomographic investigations can be and 279.8◦ E (Kelleher 1972; Swenson & Beck 1996; Engdahl &
performed in subduction zones, it is observed that the VP /VS ratio Villaseñor 2002). Its rupture zone propagated from south to north
is far from constant in those systems because of the high fluid con- (Kelleher 1972; Mendoza & Dewey 1984, Fig. 11). The source–
tent and fracturing (e.g. DeShon et al. 2006). Variations of VP /VS time function of this event is characteristics of a single asperity
ratios are also in receiver function investigation (e.g. Audet et al. rupture (although its location is uncertain), and most of the seismic
2009). In addition, relatively to P arrivals, measuring S-wave arrival moment is assumed to be released within approximately 50 km of
times is complicated by the P-wave coda and conversions. Zeiler the epicenter (Swenson & Beck 1996). The original rupture zone
& Velasco (2009) reported that, at local to regional distance range extends westwards from the trench. In Fig. 11, we draw its contour
(0◦ –30◦ ), most of the picking errors were associated with the S and so that it fits the trench. The 1958 event occurred to the north,
Sg phases. By comparing common arrival times reported by several near 1◦ N and 280.5◦ E. It presumably ruptured unilaterally to the
institutions, they demonstrate that the average time difference for northeast abutting, but not overlapping, the 1979 rupture area. The
et al. 2006). Northeast of Rio Verde, the coastal area is described cumulates along the interplate seismogenic fault zone, the coseis-
as subsiding (Dumont et al. 2006). On the Manta Peninsula and mic phase that suddenly releases the accumulated stress through
La Plata Island, up to five marine terraces are observed and uplift large earthquake and, the post-seismic phase that corresponds to
rates have been estimated at 0.3 (± 0.02) mm and 0.4 (± 0.02) mm, the total stress relaxation along the plate interface. In this study,
respectively (Cantalamessa & Di Celma 2004; Pedoja et al. 2006). the 3-D-MAXI catalogue most certainly samples a part of the inter-
To the south, on Santa Elena Peninsula, a sequence of three ma- seismic period (Manchuel et al. 2011). The seismicity distribution
rine terraces is observed and the mean uplift rate is lower than 0.1 should correlate with surface rupture and asperity related to the
(±0.02) mm yr–1 . Pedoja et al. (2006) concluded that the uplift of stress built-up along the plate interface (Mogi 1979; Scholz 2002;
the Ecuador (and Peruvian) Talara Arc is reduced when compared Bollinger et al. 2004). We hereby intend to correlate the seismicity
to other regions where aseismic ridges are subducting. Although distribution (magnitude lower than 7) to the areas where stress might
the location accuracy of major earthquake epicenters might be de- be building on the interplate seismogenic fault zone. The rupture
batable, we note that the position of the 1958 and 1906 earthquake zone of the 1979 event is too far away from our catalogue sensitivity
nucleation remarkably falls in the areas where uplift indicators are and cannot be discussed here from our results.
well preserved in the coastal morphology (Fig. 11). These areas
coincide with the region of Simple Bouguer positive anomalies
7.3.1 1958 event rupture zone
(Feininger & Seguin 1983).
The scarcity of events within the known rupture zone of the Mw =
7.8 1958 event is genuine from the 3-D-MAXI catalogue (Fig. 11).
7.3 Seismicity and segmentation
This observation is coherent with the results of Manchuel et al.
Along subduction zones, the seismic cycle consists of three main (2011) on 3 months of temporary onshore–offshore seismic deploy-
stages (Reid 1910): the interseismic period during which stress ac- ment in the area, and with teleseismic observations that also image a
282 Y. Font et al.
lack of seismicity (EHB catalogue from 1964–2007, Engdahl et al. counter argument of the hypothesis is that no marine terraces are
1998). In this area, from marine geophysical investigation, Collot observed on the coast. One can nevertheless argue that this could be
et al. (2004) suggested that the Esmeraldas and Manglares fault because the coastal morphology is not well preserved in this region
(Fig. 11) could have delimited the lateral extension of the 1958 (or because onland observations have not been done yet).
rupture area (slightly displacing northwards the original rupture To the north, we can not apply the same reasoning. Indeed, if
area from Swenson & Beck 1996). In between those two faults, an we believe that the Galera alignment is bounding two segments of
outer basement high, which bounds the margin seaward of the 1958 the Ecuadorian subduction zone, its shape (i.e. a line rather than a
rupture zone, may have acted as a deformable buttress to seaward circle) is not coherent with a ‘classical’ asperity geometry.
propagation of coseismic slip. The Esmeraldas fault, such as men-
tioned by Collot et al. (2004) is not confirmed from the 3-D-MAXI
catalogue. However, a seismic alignment, parallel to the Esmeral- 7.3.3 1998 Bahia event zone
das fault and about 20 km south of it, has been evidenced from
recent investigation on microseismicity (Regnier et al. 2011; ADN The area from 0.25◦ S to ∼0.75◦ S (between Cabo Pasado and Manta;
program). From the 3-D-MAXI catalogue, we observe that the seis- Figs 1 and 11) differs widely from the 1942 rupture area. Three large
mic behavior of the interplate seismogenic zone changes drastically earthquakes occurred near Bahia during historical and instrumental
south of the Galera alignment, suggesting that this alignment also times: the Ml = 7.0 1896 event, the Ms = 7.3 1956 event (both from
budget of the total energy release by aseismic displacement, we do well as all the staff of the Instituto Geofisico that have installed and
not reject the probability of a large event in this area. maintained the network and manually measured arrival times. We
sincerely thank the anonymous reviewer, the editor, M. Cocco and
P. Mothes, for their comments that greatly contribute to improve the
7.3.5 South of Puerto Lopez area manuscript.
The southern segment of the Ecuadorian subduction sampled by
the 3-D-MAXI catalogue indicates a wide aseismic segment from FUNDING
1.5◦ S to south of the Gulf of Guayaquil (∼2.5◦ S). A earthquake
of magnitude greater than 7 occurred in the area: the Mw = 7.2 This study was funded by the Institut de Recherche pour le
earthquake in 1901 was located around 2◦ S, about 100 km west of Développement, Geoazur and the ANR blanc 2007 (program ADN,
the trench (Fig. 11) and the Mw = 7.5, near 3.5◦ S and 279◦ E, in Andes du Nord). This work is a contribution from the Laboratoire
1953 (EHB and SISRA catalogues). Mixte International Seismes & Volcans dans les Andes du Nord
supported by the IRD and the IGEPN.
8 C O N C LU S I O N
REFERENCES
Calahorrano, A., 2001. Carnegie Ridge subduction under the Ecuadorian Font, Y., Kao, H., Lallemand, S., Liu, C.-S. & Chiao, L.-Y., 2004. Hypocentre
margin: crustal modelisation from wide-angle data (in French), Master determination offshore of eastern Taiwan using the maximum intersection
thesis, 37 pp, Université de Pierre et Marie Curie, Villefranche-sur-Mer. method, Geophys. J. Int., 158(2), 655–675.
Calahorrano, A., Sallares, V., Collot, J.-Y., Sage, F. & Ranero, C.R., 2008. Garcia, L., 2009. 3D seismic imaging of the subduction zone at the
Nonlinear variations of the physical properties along the southern Ecuador Colombia-Ecuadorian frontier (in French), Université de Nice-Sophia
subduction channel; results from depth-migrated seismic data, Earth Antipolis, Villefranche-sur-Mer, 214 pp.
planet. Sci. Lett., 267(3–4), 453–467. Gomberg, J.S., Shedlock, K.M. & Roecker, S.W., 1990. The effect of S-wave
Cantalamessa, G. & Di Celma, C., 2004. Origin and chronology of Pleis- arrival times on the accuracy of hypocenter estimation, Bull. seism. Soc.
tocene marine terraces of Isla de la Plata and of flat, gently dipping Am., 80(6), 1605–1628.
surfaces of the southern coast of Cabo San Lorenzo (Manabi, Ecuador), Graindorge, D., Calahorrano, A., Charvis, P., Collot, J.-Y. & Bethoux, N.,
J. South Am. Earth Sci., 16, 633–648. 2004. Deep structures of the Ecuador convergent margin and the Carnegie
Case, J.E., Barnes, J., Paris, G., Gonzalez, H. & Vina, A., 1973. Trans- Ridge, possible consequence on great earthquakes recurrence interval,
Andean Geophysical Profile, Southern Colombia, Bull. geol. Soc. Am., Geophys. Res. Lett., 31(4), doi:10.1029/2003GL018803.
84(9), 2895–2903. Guillier, B., Chatelain, J.L., Jaillard, E., Yepes, H., Poupinet, G. & Fels,
Cediel, F., Shaw, R.P. & Caceres, C., 2003. Tectonic assembly of the northern J.F., 2001. Seismological evidence on the geometry of the orogenic sys-
Andean Block, AAPG Mem., 79, 815–848. tem in central-northern Ecuador (South America), Geophysical Research
Christophoul, F., Baby, P. & Davila, C., 2002. Stratigraphic responses to a Letters, 28(19), 3749–3752.
Litherland, M. & Aspden, J.A., 1992. Terrane-boundary reactivation; control Middle East, North Africa, and former Soviet Union. Seism. Res. Lett.,
on the evolution of the Northern Andes, J. South Am. Earth Sci., 5(1), 72(2), 293.
71–76. Pedoja, K., 2003. Les terrasses marines de la marge Nord Andine
Lomax, A., Zollo, A., Capuano, P. & Virieux, J., 2001. Precise, absolute (Equateur et Nord Pérou): relations avec le contexte géodynamique,
earthquake location under Somma-Vesuvius volcano using a new 3D PhD thesis, Université de Pierre et Marie Curie, Villefranche-sur-Mer,
velocity model, Geophys. J. Int., 146, 313–331. France.
Lonsdale, P., 1978. Ecuadorian subduction system, AAPG Bull., 62(12), Pedoja, K., Ortlieb, L., Dumont, F., Lamothe, M., Ghaleb, B., Auclair, M.
2454–2477. & Labrousse, B., 2006. Quaternary coastal uplift along the Talara Arc
Lonsdale, P., 2005. Creation of the Cocos and Nazca plates by fission of the (Ecuador, Northern Peru) from new marine terrace data, Mar. Geol., 228,
Farallon Plate, Tectonophysics, 404(3–4), 237–264. 73–91.
Lonsdale, P. & Klitgord, K.D., 1978. Structure and tectonic history of the Pontoise, B. & Monfret, T., 2004. Shallow seismogenic zone detected
eastern Panama Basin, Bull. geol. Soc. Am., 89(7), 981–999. from an offshore-onshore temporary seismic network in the Es-
Manchuel, K., Regnier, M., Bethoux, N., Font, Y., Sallares, V., Diaz, J. & meraldas area (northern Ecuador), Geochem., Geophys. Geosyst., 5,
Yepes, H., 2011. New insights on the interseismic active deformation doi:10.1029/2003GC000561.
along the North Ecuadorian—South Colombian (NESC) margin, Tecton- Prevot, R., Chatelain, J.L., Guillier, B. & Yepes, H., 1996. Tomography of
ics, 30(4), doi:10.1029/2010TC002757. the Ecuadorian Andes; evidence for continuity of the Central Andes. C.R.
Manchuel, K. et al., 2009. Seismicity and structural implication in the Es- Acad. Sci. Paris. Série 2. Sciences de la terre et des planètes, 323(10),
Theunissen, T., Font, Y., Lallemand, S. & Gautier, S., 2012. Improvements of Vallée, M. et al., 2013. Intense interface seismicity triggered by a shallow
the Maximum Intersection Method for 3D absolute earthquake location, slow-slip event in the Central-Ecuador subduction zone. J. geophys. Res.,
Bull. seism. Soc. Am., 102(4), 1764–1785. doi:2012JB009899.
Thomas, G., Lavenu, A. & Berrones, G., 1995. Subsidence evolution Vallejo, C., Winkler, W., Spikings, R.A., Luzieux, L., Heller, F. & Bussy,
of the northern part of the Ecuadorian Oriente basin (Upper Creta- F., 2009. Mode and timing of terrane accretion in the forearc of the
ceous to the present), (in French), C.R. Acad. Sci. Paris, 320(7), 617– Andes in Ecuador, in Kay, S.M., Ramos, V.A., and Dickinson, W.R.,
624. eds., Backbone of the Americas: Shallow Subduction, Plateau Uplift, and
Tichelaar, B.W. & Ruff, L.J., 1993. Depth of seismic coupling along sub- Ridge and Terrane Collision: Geological Society of America Memoir 204,
duction zones, J. geophys. Res., 98(B2), 2017–2037. doi:10.1130/2009.1204(09).
Trenkamp, R., Kellogg, J.N., Freymueller, J.T. & Mora, H.P., 2002. Wide Winckell, A. & Zebrowski, C., 1997. Los paisajes costeros, in Los Paisajes
plate margin deformation, southern Central America and northwestern Naturales del Ecuador. Geografısica del Ecuador, pp. 208–319, ed.
South America, CASA GPS observations, J. South Am. Earth Sci., 15, Winckel, A., CEDIG, Quito.
157–171. Witt, C., Bourgois, J., Michaud, F., Ordonez, M., Jimenez, N. & Sosson, M.,
Vaca, S., 2007. Sismotectonics of Manta-Ecuador region”, Sophia Antipolis 2006. Development of the Gulf of Guayaquil (Ecuador) during the Qua-
University, Nice-France. ternary as an effect of the North Andean block tectonic escape, Tectonics,
Vaca, S., Régnier, M., Béthoux, N., Alvarez, V. & Pontoise, B., 2009. Seis- 25(3), doi:10.1029/2004TC001723.
micity in the Manta region: the 2005-Manta seismic swarm, In: Collot Zeiler, C. & Velasco, A.A., 2009. Seismogram picking error from analyst