Abstract
The Vrancea seismic zone, located in the bend region of the South-Eastern Carpathians, is a unique area with both crustal and intermediate-depth seismic activity and is known as one of the most active seismic area in Europe. Moderate crustal seismicity is recorded all over the Carpathian region, but the far more intense activity occurs in a small subcrustal seismogenic volume beneath the SE‐bend of the Carpathian arc with about 20 × 50 km lateral and 110 km vertical extent (70–180 km depth). A unique slab geometry, likely preserved until the present, causes stress localization due to the slab bending and subsequent stress release resulting in large mantle earthquakes in the region. The main focus of this study is to determine the focal mechanisms for events with a magnitude larger than 2.7, between 2005 and 2020 and evaluate the current stress field along the Vrancea subcrustal region, from the derived fault plane solutions. The main style of faulting for Vrancea subcrustal events presents a predominant reverse one, with two main earthquakes categories: the first one with the nodal planes, oriented NE–SW parallel with the Carpathian Arc and the second one with the nodal planes, oriented NW–SE perpendicular on the Carpathian Arc. The results of stress inversion indicate a dominant thrust faulting style, with an average stress regime index of 2.87. The stress pattern shows similar partitioning with vertical extension in the slab and no preferred orientation in the overlying crust, showing a transition regime from the extensional regime in the Moesian Platform to the compressional regime in the Vrancea subcrustal zone.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
The Vrancea area (Romania) is known as a zone with frequent crustal and intermediate (60–180 km in depth) seismic activity and represent one of the most active seismic zones in Europe (Fig. 1) (Knapp et al. 2005; Marmureanu et al. 2016a, b, 2017). It is located in the South-Eastern corner of the Carpathians arc, at the contact between the East-European plate and the Intra-Alpine and Moesian subplates (Radulian et al. 2000; Marmureanu et al. 2016a, b).
From the seismogenic point of view, the complexity of the seismic processes of the Vrancea area remains far from being fully understood. The Vrancea region is a puzzling part of the Carpathian–Pannonian system due to its unique intra-continental situation as it marks the last part of the subduction/collision process along this region (Ismail-Zadeh et al. 2012; Martin et al. 2006). The hypocenters of the earthquakes are limited to a small epicentral region of approximately 30 × 70 km2 lateral and 160 km vertical extent (Knapp et al. 2005) within a remnant slab of the subducted oceanic Tethyan lithosphere (Ismail-Zadeh et al. 2012; Manea et al. 2022; Ferrand and Manea 2021). The distribution of the hypocenters within a 3D thermal model can be seen in Fig. 1 (right). The intense seismicity at intermediate depths in the Vrancea region is either the evidence of the current dehydration of an oceanic slab (Ferrand and Manea 2021) and/or due to an increase in the stress applied to this volume (Ismail-Zadeh et al. 2000). For this reason, large mantle seismic events are frequent in the region and over four earthquakes with moment magnitudes (Mw) > 7 occurred in the last century (Craiu et al. 2016a, b; Cioflan et al. 2022; Manea et al. 2020) which produced significant damage in Romania and neighboring countries (Kronrod et al. 2013; Cioflan et al. 2016; 2022).
The specific features of this seismic area (earthquake energy, macroseismic area and epicenter distribution) are comparable to the seismic foci from Hindu Kush Mountains-Pamir area close to the collision zone between the Indian and Eurasian plates, in central Asia and Bucaramanga region in the Andes of Colombia, South America (Ismail-Zadeh et al. 2012).
In the last decades, the number of focal mechanisms available for Vrancea intermediate-depth has increased significantly because of extended observation time, improvement in the seismic network and more elaborate calculation procedures (Radulian et al. 2019, Craiu et al. 2012). Many studies on calculation or analysis earthquakes focal mechanism were previously performed for Romania: analysis of the seismic activity in the Vrancea intermediate-depth source region during the period 2010–2015 (Craiu et al. 2016a, b); seismic activity and focal mechanisms analysis for different seismic zones of Romania 2010–2014 (Craiu et al. 2015b, a); the source mechanism of the seismic events recorded in the adjacent zones of Vrancea (Craiu et al. 2016a, b, 2018); the catalog published by Radulian et al. (2002) for the earthquakes that occurred before 1997; the mechanisms of several low-magnitude earthquakes of Vrancea region and surroundings, determined by high-frequency waveform inversion in Ardeleanu (2018) and Ardeleanu and Raileanu (2011). The fault plane solutions computed for the (1998–2012) was published by Radulian et al. (2018), the present paper being an extension and an improvement in previous studies. The focal mechanism of earthquakes is essential in the study of seismotectonic. They are illustrating the relationship between earthquakes and their causative faults. As such, they provide very useful information about tectonic activity in the study area.
In this study, we determined the fault plane solutions (FPS) of 437 seismic events that occurred starting in January 2005, in the Vrancea region and their magnitudes range between 2.7 and 5.6 Mw, according with Romplus catalog (Mihaela et al. 2022), (see Figs. 1 and 2). Besides this, the temporal and spatial variations of regional stress field orientation were determined from the inversion of fault kinematic and earthquake focal mechanism data. This newly focal mechanisms catalog can be used to improve understanding of the contemporary seismotectonic processes and contribute to a better constraint of the source variability for the seismic hazard evaluations.
Method and data acquisition
Earthquake focal mechanisms
As part of the upgrade of the Romanian Seismic Network during the last decade, earthquake detection has increased since the number of seismic stations installed has also known an impressive rate, therefore we have obtained much more fault plane solutions.
We processed earthquake data recorded by the National Institute for Earth Physics from Romania (NIEP) from 2005 to 2020. During this period, NIEP had undergone a steady upgrade from digital strong-motion K2—composed of 44 strong motion sensors, a telemetry network consisting of 14 short-period sensors, and a seismic array composed of 10 seismic sensors (9 short-period sensors and a 3 component broadband sensors), in 2005 to 117 velocity stations (broadband and short-period) and 163 strong motion stations (EpiSensor-2 g full scale) (Fig. 2) by the end of 2020 (Marmureanu et al. 2021). The stations are distributed to cover the entire territory with more stations located around the Vrancea seismic zone.
More than 4000 local earthquakes were recorded by NIEP from January 1, 2005 to December 31, 2020, in the Vrancea subcrustal/intermediate-depth region, with magnitudes Mw ranging between 2.1 and 5.6 (ROMPLUS catalog—www.infp.ro). Of these, the fault plane solutions could be calculated for 437 seismic events, with magnitude Mw starting from 2.7 to 5.6.
In this study, we used a relocated data set that was obtained by manually picking and location (Hypocenter code/Seisan software (Havskov et al. 2020). Errors in P-wave first-motion observations can occur due to station polarity reversal or incorrect selection of direct P-arrival picks because of a low signal-to-noise ratio. Following the careful analysis of the waveforms (3 components/station) all the stations for which the minimum quality conditions were not met, were eliminated (the signal-to-noise ratio greater than 2.5 and the recorded P-waves were unfiltered). For these reasons, to constrain our focal mechanism solutions by reducing the number of discrepancies, we proof-checked the dataset for possible reversal polarities and we filtered the polarities based on the weight assigned to the P-onset (discrete classed from 0, best, to 3, worse) keeping only polarities for picks with weights 0 and 1 and rejecting those with weight 2 and 3. The 1-D velocity model used for event locations and focal plane solutions was the one obtained by Koulakov et al. (2010).
The fault plane solutions have been obtained on the basis of the first motion of P-wave polarities using FOCMEC code developed by Snoke et al. (1984), distributed as part of the FOCMEC package (http://www.geol.vt.edu/outreach/vtso/focmec) and incorporated in SEISAN software (Havskov and Ottemöller, 2020).
The solutions estimated from P-wave polarities were obtained by using no less than 10 observations, this, in the first part of the catalog, where the number of stations was small, following that the number of polarities increased, with improving the number of stations installed in the Romanian Seismic Network, therefore its confidence level is considerable.
In order to obtain a high degree of confidence for the fault plane solutions, the input parameters were manually processed (phase picking, weight and polarity, location, etc.). The code makes a grid search and finds how many polarities fit each possible solution. All solutions with less than a given number of wrong polarities within given error limits are then written out and plotted. Then the preferred solution is selected, which is stored in the output file or the database.
We used the R software (R Core Team 2021) and RFOC library (Lees 2018), which includes subroutines to represent and classify all the focal mechanisms in our catalog. In order to represent focal mechanism data, Frohlich and Apperson (1992) proposed a diagram to visualize focal mechanism data as a function of the rupture type. This classification is not accurate, presenting distortion issues (Frohlich 2001), and Kagan (2005) used the Kaverina et al. (1996) projection to avoid them. The latter projection is applied in our study. The fault type was divided by seven types of double couple classification: (N: normal; N-SS: normal-strike-slip; SS-N: strike-slip-normal; SS: strike-slip; SS-R: strike-slip-reverse; R-SS: reverse-strike-slip; R: reverse) alike to the conceptual geological characterization of faults. To furnish thorough data and facilitate easy insertion in different databases, we also provided the classification adopted by the World Stress Map project (Zoback 1992). This classified the events into five types (N, N-SS, SS, R-SS, R), and those not fitting in any of the five types were placed in the unknown category (Table 1 in Appendix).
Tectonic stress inversion
The stress regime based on the inversion of 437 earthquake focal mechanisms obtained during this study has been determined by the Win-Tensor program package (Delvaux and Sperner 2003). The inversion is especially supported by the idea that the stress field is uniform and invariant in space and time, and slip on a plane occurs in the direction of the maximum resolved shear stress (Bott 1959; Delvaux and Barth 2010). The fault-slip data are inverted to get the parameters of the reduced stress tensor. These four parameters are the principal stress axes σ1, σ2 and σ3, where σ1 > σ2 > σ3 and the stress ratio R = σ2 − σ3/σ1 − σ3, (0 < R < 1), which defines the magnitude of σ2 relative to the magnitudes of σ1 and σ3 (Delvaux and Sperner 2003).
According to Delvaux and Sperner (2003), the stress regime depends on the orientation of the principal stress axes and the shape of the stress ellipsoid (R): extensional when σ1 is vertical, strike-slip when σ2 is vertical, and compressional when σ3 is vertical. In order to express numerically the stress regime, we used the stress regime index R′, determined based on the stress ratio R and the most vertical stress axis (σ1, σ2 or σ3). This is defined as: R’ = R for normal faulting regime (σ1 is vertical), R′ = 2 − R for strike-slip regimes (σ2 is vertical) and R′ = 2 + R for thrust faulting regimes (σ3 is vertical) (Delvaux and Sperner 2003).
The horizontal principal stress direction SHmax (maximum horizontal stress axis) or Shmin (minimum horizontal stress axis) are computed according to the method of Lund and Townend (2007) and follow the guidelines and terminology used in the World Stress Map Project (available online at http://www.world-stress-map.org/).
Results and discussion
Seismicity and focal mechanism retrieval and distribution
We computed a catalog of focal mechanisms, with strike, dip, and rake for both nodal planes of each mechanism, P and T axis (azimuth and plunge), following the convention by Aki and Richards (1980). The minimum and maximum horizontal stress (Shmin and SHmax), stress regime index, the style of faulting, polarities number and polarities errors are also presented in Table 1 in Appendix.
The new catalog of focal mechanisms obtained for earthquakes recorded in Vrancea intermediate-depth area comprises 437 solutions, for events with magnitudes Mw starting from 2.7 to 5.6 and interval depth 60–162 km, that occurred from 2005 to 2020 (Table 1 in Appendix). A magnitude Mw threshold of 2.7 was chosen, considering the values that provided well-constrained fault plane solutions, on the basis of the network configuration and the resulting available polarities.
From 2005 to 2020 have been recorded a large series of significant intermediate-depth earthquakes in Vrancea seismic area. The substantial improvements in the Romanian Seismic Network (especially in the number of the real-time seismic stations) and a greater azimuthal coverage makes it possible a better understanding of the fault plane mechanisms and a better-constrained solution for the depth-intermediate Vrancea earthquakes. At the same time, the quality of the recorded data has been improved allowing a better location of the seismic events. Therefore, in 2005 the minimum magnitude to obtain a focal mechanism solution was around 3.8, using 10 good polarities, and in 2018, the minimum magnitude is 2.7, using 40 good polarities. Figure 3 shows the difference in the number of stations used for an earthquake of the same magnitude Mw = 4.1, the first in 2005-with 15 polarities and the second in 2020 with 79 polarities.
The magnitude for intermediate-depth Vrancea earthquakes depends on seismic attenuation, and for that reason (strong attenuation in the Carpathian Arc) the seismic signal amplitude is diminished (Oth et al. 2008), which makes it difficult for us to detect earthquakes with Mw < 2.0, and also the capacity of the seismic source to generate frequent events with Mw > 7.0 (Radulian et al. 2000). Most of the seismic events recorded in this area have an average magnitude of Mw = 3.5 (Radulian et al. 2000).
In Fig. 4 are plotted the hypocenters of the seismic events with focal mechanisms solutions available from the Vrancea region, which is characterized by a puzzling intermediate-depth high seismicity body (Ismail-Zadeh et al. 2012; Martin et al. 2006) with the stronger seismic activity concentrated between 60 and 160 km depth. This indicates the almost vertical pattern of the intermediate-depth seismicity, which is very well correlated with the seismic tomography of Vrancea (Petrescu et al. 2021, Maţenco et al. 2007, Ismail-Zadeh et al. 2000).
The spatial distribution of the focal mechanisms that was obtained in our study is shown in Fig. 5. To observe the local changes in the distribution of the focal mechanisms with depth, we divided them into different depth intervals: 60–80 km, 80–110 km, 110–130 km and 130–160 km. We can distinguish two domains of depth depending on the number of events that occurred in the analyzed period (60–110 km and 110–160 km) in Fig. 5, as well as on the account of the energy released by these earthquakes in the same period (Trifu et al. 1994; Radulian et al. 2002).
The spatial distribution (hypocenters) of the focal mechanisms is in perfect agreement with the geometry of the Vrancea zone, oriented NE–SW, parallel with the Carpathian Arc (Radulian et al. 2000; Ismail-Zadeh et al. 2012; Ferrand and Manea 2021).
Focal mechanisms classification and interpretation
To analyze the type of faulting, we have classified earthquakes with focal mechanisms as normal (N), normal-strike-slip (N-SS), strike-slip-normal (SS-N), strike-slip (SS), strike-slip-reverse (SS-R), reverse–strike-slip (R-SS), reverse (R) faulting based on the theory described in the methodology. The resulting diagram incorporating those 7 fields classification to the Kaverina projection is shown in Fig. 6A. The average style of faulting by depth thresholds and in agreement with the World Stress Map project (Zoback 1992) is shown in Fig. 6B.
For the Vrancea seismic zone in most of the cases (75%), the fault plane solutions show a reverse fault mechanism, followed by a reverse fault with an important strike-slip component (12.6%). Normal or normal—strike-slip faults are observed only for 17 events (3.8%) with magnitudes Mw ≤ 4.0, located in the deeper part of the seismogenic zone (h > 110 km). Several mechanisms exhibit a strike-slip significant component, 28 events (6.4%). At 9 events, the type of faults could not be identified (Fig. 6).
Tectonic regime stress inversion
For the intermediate-depth earthquakes recorded in Vrancea, from the nodal plane orientation point of view, we can distinguish two main earthquakes categories. The first one contains the majority of earthquakes that are mainly characterized by the nodal planes oriented NE–SW, parallel with the Carpathian Arc and with the strike angle distribution in perfect agreement with the geometry of the Vrancea zone (Fig. 7) and with previous studies (Craiu et al. 2015a, b; Radulian et al. 2000; Tugui and Craiu 2008). Notably, this geometric alignment corresponds to the system of rupture faults for the most important Vrancea earthquakes (Onescu and Trifu 1987; Radulian et al. 2002). The second category that characterizes the Vrancea intermediate-depth earthquakes is the fault plane solutions in which the nodal planes are oriented NW–SE, perpendicular to the Carpathian Arc.
For the majority of events, the slip is strongly concentrated around 90°direction, indicating a clear reverse faulting mechanism on steeply dipping faults. For the other predominant part of the events, the slip angle indicates the pronounced dip-slip faulting, but with an increase of a second strike-slip component (Fig. 7), (Radulian et al. 2019).
An alternative way of indicating the spatial distribution of earthquake focal sphere data is to plot the density distributed contours of P- and T-axes as they vary spatially (Fig. 8). This represents a measure of the variation of stress orientation in an active tectonic region.
As can be seen in Fig. 8, the principal T axis tends to be almost vertical, while the principal P axis tends to be horizontal, with a predominant direction oriented perpendicular to the Carpathians Arc.
While individual focal mechanism solutions are the primary focus of this study (Table 1 in Appendix), it is worthwhile describing the overall spatial structure of the seismotectonic deformation field, as inferred from the analysis of our catalog. Indeed, we can make the assumption that the earthquake focal mechanisms reflect the state of stress of the studied areas, which implies that at a first approximation, the P-axes and T-axes correspond to the principal stress axes σ1 and σ3, respectively (Figs. 8 and 9).
Figure 9 shows the well-known Right Dihedron method (Delvaux 2012), a graphical method for the determination of the range of possible orientations of σ1 and σ3, stress axes in fault analysis.
For the seismic source delineated in the Vrancea intermediate-depth area, the stress field has almost a pure compressional stress regime (σ3 vertical), with maximum horizontal stress (SHmax) oriented in NW–SE direction. The horizontal stress magnitude is not very well constrained due to the radial compressional character of the stress tensor. The R ratio is 0.81 (close to 1), which means that the relative magnitudes of the σ2 and σ1 stress axes are almost similar. As these axes are subhorizontal for a compressional regime, SHmax (~ σ1) and Shmin (~ σ2) are not very well differentiated.
The results of stress inversions of intermediate-depth earthquakes, SHmax orientation and thrust fault regime with a radial component (R′ = 2.87) are consistent with the observed geological Vrancea setting and the results of previous studies (Petrescu et al. 2021; Oncescu and Trifu 1987).
The most encountered fault plane solution striking in the NE–SW direction and dipping toward NW (Figs. 7 and 9) is considered a rupture plane, in agreement with the spatial distribution of earthquakes and source directivity analysis (Radulian et al. 2000; Tugui and Craiu 2008; Oncescu and Trifu 1987). At the same time, a smaller number of less significant earthquakes have the rupture plane oriented almost perpendicular to the previous rupture plane and to NE–SW alignment of epicentral distribution of earthquakes.
Another aspect of the stress patterns obtained from formal stress inversion of fault plane solutions reveals numerous characteristics of the current stress field that are not reproduced by large-scale numerical models.
Conclusions
We determined the latest focal mechanisms catalog of 437 earthquakes that occurred in the Vrancea intermediate zone, from January 2005 to December 2020 using first-motion polarities, processed manually, applying the FOCMEC method (Table 1 in Appendix). We also determined the stress field via focal mechanism inversion, (the main stress axes, maximum horizontal stress) and the tectonic regime for the seismogenic body delimited by the Vrancea area.
To determine a refined catalog with high-quality focal mechanisms, we used selection criteria based on parameters that are sensitive to the variation of data quality and the data coverage on the focal sphere. Nodal plane uncertainty is correlated with the number of observations in which the more observations the smaller range of uncertainty.
The new result shows that in the subcrustal Vrancea source, reverse faults are predominant, regardless of depth or magnitude range. The stress field obtained is pure compressional with a radial component (R′ = 2.87). The maximum horizontal stress (SHmax) obtained for Vrancea intermediate-depth is mainly NW–SE oriented, with in good agreement with the geometry Vrancea slab and other study (Petrescu et al. 2021; Radulian et al. 2018). Other tectonic regimes as normal and strike-slip faults are also present in the studied dataset, but they are retrieved for a reduced number of events.
It is well known that Vrancea is one of the most active seismic zones in Europe, being characterized by intermediate-depth seismicity with frequent earthquakes of magnitude MW ≥ 7. Intermediate-depth earthquakes (60–160 km), analyzed in this paper, constitute a part of a small subcrustal body-oriented NE–SW, which represents a relic slab of the subducted lithosphere (Ismail-Zadeh et al. 2000), with the axes of compression and tension close to the horizontal and vertical directions, respectively. Vrancea region is still a major source of seismic hazard (Cioflan et al. 2022), and latest catalog of focal mechanisms obtained in this study will help to implement the new research about the seismic source and seismotectonic characterization.
References
Aki K, Richards PG (1980) Quantitative seismology, theory and methods, vol I and II. W.H. Freeman, San Francisco
Ardeleanu L (2018) On the determination of fault plane solutions of weak crustal earthquakes of Vrancea region (Romania). Acta Geod Geophys 53:717–730
Ardeleanu L, Raileanu V (2011) The focal mechanism of low magnitude subcrustal earthquakes of Vrancea retrieved by high frequency waveform inversion. Rom Rep Phys 63(2):503–519
Asch K., (2003). The 1:5 Million International Geological Map of Europe and Adjacent Areas: Development and Implementation of a GIS-enabled Concept. Geologisches Jahrbuch, SA 3, Stuttgart: E. Schweizerbartsche Verlagsbuchhandlung.
Bott MHP (1959) The mechanisms of oblique slip faulting. Geol Mag 96:109–117
Cioflan CO, Toma-Danila D, Manea EF (2016) Seismic loss estimates for scenarios of the 1940 Vrancea earthquake. In: Vacareanu R, Ionescu C (eds) The 1940 Vrancea earthquake. Issues, insights and lessons learnt. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 425–439. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-29844-3_30
Cioflan CO, Manea EF, Apostol BF (2022) Insights from neo-deterministic seismic hazard analyses in Romania. In: Panza G, Kossobokov VG, Laor E, DeVivo B (eds) Earthquakes and sustainable infrastructure: neodeterministic (NDSHA) approach guarantees prevention rather than cure. Elsevier
Craiu M, Craiu A, Ionescu C, Popa M, Radulian M (2012) New local magnitude calibration for Vrancea (Romania) intermediate-depth earthquakes. Rom Rep Phys 64(4):1097–1108
Craiu A, Craiu M, Diaconescu M, Marmureanu A (2016a) 2013 seismic swarm recorded in Galati area, Romania- focal mechanism solutions, Acta Geodaetica et. Geophysica 52(1):53–67. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40328-016-0161-9
Craiu A, Diaconescu M, Craiu M, Marmureanu A, Ionescu C (2016b) Analysis of the seismic activity in the Vrancea intermediate-depth source region during the period 2010–2015. In: Vacareanu R, Ionescu C (eds) The 1940 Vrancea earthquake. Issues, insights and lessons learnt. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 189–203. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-29844-3_13
Craiu A, Ghita C, Craiu M, Diaconescu M, Mihai M, Ardeleanu L (2019) The source mechanism of the seismic events during the sequence of the moderate-size crustal earthquake of November 22, 2014 of Vrancea region (Romania). Ann Geophys. https://doi.org/10.4401/ag-7617
Craiu A, Craiu M, Diaconescu M, Marmureanu A (2015a). Seismic activity and focal mechanisms analysis for different seismic zones of Romania (2010–2014). In:15th International multidisciplinary scientific Geoconference, SGEM 2015a conference proceedings, ISBN 978–619–7105–33–9/ISSN 1314–2704, June 18–24, Book1 3: 947–956
Craiu M, Marmureanu A, Craiu A, Ionescu C (2015b) Real-time earthquake location performance of Romanian Seismic Network (RONET) for Vrancea intermediate-depth earthquakes, as the first step in EEWS, SGEM2015b, ISBN 978–619–7105–33–9/ISSN 1314–2704, June 18–24, Book1 3: 925–932
Delvaux D (2012) Release of program Win-Tensor 4.0 for tectonic stress inversion: statistical expression of stress parameters. EGU General Assembly, Vienna, 2012. Geophys Res Abs 14:EGU2012-5899
Delvaux D, Sperner B (2003) Stress tensor inversion from fault kinematic indicators and focal mechanism data: the TENSOR program. In: Nieuwland D (Eds) New Insights into Structural Interpretation and Modelling: Geol. Soc. Lond. Spec. Publ., 212: 75–100
Delvaux D, Barth A (2010) African stress pattern from formal inversion of focal mechanism data. Implic Rift Dyn Tectonophys 482:105–128
Ferrand TP, Manea EF (2021) Dehydration-induced earthquakes identified in a subducted oceanic slab beneath Vrancea, Romania. Sci Rep 11(1):1–9. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-89601-w
Frohlich C (1992) Triangle diagrams ternary graphs to display similarity and diversity of earthquake focal mechanisms. Phys Earth Planet Inter 75:193–198
Frohlich C (2001) Display and quantitative assessment of distributions of earthquake focal mechanisms. Geophys J Int 144(2):300–308
Havskov J, Voss PH, Ottemoller L (2020) Seismological observatory software: 30 Yr of SEISAN. Seismol Res Lett 91(3):1846–1852
Ismail-Zadeh A, Matenco L, Radulian M, Cloetingh S, Panza G (2012) Geodynamics and intermediate-depth seismicity in Vrancea (the south-eastern Carpathians): current state-of-the art. Tectonophysics 530:50–79
Ismail-Zadeh AT, Panza GF, Naimark BM (2000) Stress in the descending relic slab beneath the Vrancea region, Romania. In: Panza G, Radulian M, Trifu CI (eds) Seismic hazard of the Circum-Pannonian Region. Birkhäuser, Basel, pp 111–130
Kagan YY (2005) Double-couple earthquake focal mechanism: Random rotation and display. Geophys J Int 163(3):1065–1072
Kaverina AN, Lander AV, Prozorov AG (1996) Global creepex distribution and its relation to earthquake-source geometry and tectonic origin. Geophys J Int 125(1):249–265
Knapp JH, Knapp CC, Raileanu V, Matenco L, Mocanu V, Dinu C (2005) Crustal constraints on the origin of mantle seismicity in the Vrancea Zone, Romania: the case for active continental lithospheric delamination. Tectonophysics 410(1–4):311–323
Koulakov I, Zaharia B, Enescu B, Radulian M, Popa M, Parolai S, Zschau J (2010) Delamination or slab detachment beneath Vrancea? New arguments from local earthquake tomography. Geochem Geophys Geosyst. https://doi.org/10.1029/2009GC002811
Kronrod T, Radulian M, Panza G, Popa M, Paskaleva I, Radovanovich S, Pekevski L (2013) Integrated transnational macroseismic data set for the strongest earthquakes of Vrancea (Romania). Tectonophysics 590:1–23
Lees JM (2018) RFOC: graphics for spherical distributions and earthquake focal mechanisms. R package version 3.4–6. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=RFOC
Lund B, Townend J (2007) Calculating horizontal stress orientations with full or partial knowledge of the tectonic stress tensor. Geophys J Int 270:1328–1335
Manea EF, Cioflan CO, Coman A, Michel C, Poggi V, Fäh D (2020) Estimating geophysical bedrock depth using single station analysis and geophysical data in the extra-Carpathian area of Romania. Pure Appl Geophys 177(10):4829–4844
Manea EF, Cioflan CO, Danciu L (2022) Ground-motion models for Vrancea intermediate-depth earthquakes. Earthq Spectra 38(1):407–431. https://doi.org/10.1177/87552930211032985
Marmureanu G, Cioflan CO, Marmureanu A, Manea EF (2016a) Main characteristics of November 10, 1940 strong Vrancea earthquake in seismological and physics of earthquake terms. In: Vacareanu R, Ionescu C (eds) The 1940 Vrancea earthquake. Issues, insights and lessons learnt. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 73–83. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-29844-3_5
Marmureanu G, Marmureanu A, Manea EF, Toma-Danila D, Vlad M (2016b) Can we still use classic seismic hazard analysis for strong and deep Vrancea earthquakes. Rom Rep Phys 61(3–4):728–738
Marmureanu G, Manea EF, Cioflan CO, Marmureanu A, Toma-Danila D (2017) Spectral response features used in last IAEA stress test to NPP Cernavoda (ROMANIA) by considering strong nonlinear behaviour of site soils. Rom J Phys 62:822
Marmureanu A, Ionescu C, Grecu B, Toma-Danila D, Tiganescu A, Neagoe C, Toader V, Craifaleanu IG, Dragomir CS, Meiţă V, Liashchuk OI, Dimitrova L, Ilieş I (2021) From national to transnational seismic monitoring products and services in the Republic of Bulgaria, Republic of Moldova, Romania, and Ukraine. Seismol Res Lett 92(3):1685–1703
Martin M, Wenzel F, CALIXTO Working Group (2006) High-resolution teleseismic body wave tomography beneath SE-Romania-II. Imaging of a slab detachment scenario. Geophys J Int 164(3):579–595
Matenco L, Bertotti G, Leever K, Cloetingh S, Schmid SM, Tărăpoancă M, Dinu C (2007) Large-scale deformation in a locked collisional boundary: Interplay between subsidence and uplift, intraplate stress, and inherited lithospheric structure in the late stage of the SE Carpathians evolution: CARPATHIANS-POSTCOLLISIONAL EVOLUTION. Tectonics 26(4):n/a-n/a. https://doi.org/10.1029/2006TC001951
Mihaela P, Chircea A, Dinescu R, Neagoe C, Grecu B (2022) Romanian earthquake catalogue (ROMPLUS). Mendeley Data V1. https://doi.org/10.17632/tdfb4fgghy.1
Oncescu M, Trifu CI (1987) Depth variation of moment tensor principal axes in Vrancea (Romania) seismic region in Annales geophysicae. Series b Terrestrial Planetary Phys 5:149–154
Oth A, Bindi D, Parolai S, Wenzel F (2008) S-Wave attenuation characteristics beneath the Vrancea Region in Romania: new insights from the inversion of ground-motion spectra. Bull Seismol Soc Am 98:2482–2497. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120080106
Petrescu L, Borleanu F, Radulian M, Ismail-Zadeh A, Maţenco L (2021) Tectonic regimes and stress patterns in the Vrancea Seismic Zone: Insights into intermediate-depth earthquake nests in locked collisional settings. Tectonophysics 799:228688
R Core Team (2021) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R foundation for statistical computing, Vienna, Austria. URL https://www.R-project.org/
Radulian M, Popescu E, Bala A, Utale A (2002) Catalog of the fault plane solutions for the earthquakes occured on the Romanian territory. Rom J Phys 47:663–670
Radulian M, Mandrescu N, Panza G, Popescu E, Utale A (2000) Characterization of seismogenic zones of Romania. In: Panza G, Radulian M, Trifu CI (eds) Seismic hazard of the Circum-Pannonian Region. Birkhäuser, Basel. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-0348-8415-0_4
Radulian M, Bala A, Popescu E, Toma-Danila D (2018) Earthquake mechanism and characterization of seismogenic zones in south-eastern part of Romania. Ann Geophys. https://doi.org/10.4401/ag-7443
Radulian M, Bălă A, Ardeleanu L, Toma-Danila D, Petrescu L, Popescu E (2019) Revised catalogue ofearthquake mechanisms for the events occurred in Romania until the end of twentieth century: REFMC. Acta GeodGeophys 54:3–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40328-018-0243-y
Snoke JA, Munsey JW, Teague AG, Bollinger GA (1984) A program for focal mechanism determination by combined use of polarity and SV-P amplitude ratio data. Earthquake Note 55:15
Trifu CI, Radulian M (1994) Dynamics of a seismic regime: Vrancea -a case history in nonlinear dynamics andpredictability of geophysical phenomena. In: Gabrielov AM, Newman WI (eds) Geophysical monograph, vol 18. IUUG. AGU, Washington DC, pp 43–53
Tugui A, Craiu M (2008) Inversion of the October 27, 2004 Vrancea (Romania) earthquake using teleseismic waveforms data. Acta Geod Geoph Hung 43(2–3):175–181
Zoback ML (1992) First- and second-order patterns of stress in the lithosphere: the world stress map project. J Geophys Res 97(8):11703–11728
Acknowledgements
This study was carried out within the National Research Program (project MULTIRISC no PN19080201, PN19080202), partially by a grant of the Romanian Ministry of Education and Research, CCCDI—UEFISCDI, DETACHED project, PN-III-P2-2.1-PED-2019-1195, within PNCDI III and SETTING project, cofunded from the Regional Development European Fund (FEDR) through the Operational Competitivity Programme 2014-2020, Contract No. 336/390012. The seismic networks cited are the Romanian Seismic Network (RSN, https://doi.org/10.7914/SN/RO). We thank Dr. Thomas Ferrand for his help in assembling figure 1.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Edited by Prof. Semih Ergintav (ASSOCIATE EDITOR) / Prof. Ramón Zúñiga (CO-EDITOR-IN-CHIEF).
Appendix
Appendix
See Table 1.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Craiu, A., Craiu, M., Mihai, M. et al. Vrancea intermediate-depth focal mechanism catalog: a useful instrument for local and regional stress field estimation. Acta Geophys. 71, 29–52 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11600-022-00906-4
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11600-022-00906-4