Izvestiya, Atmospheric and Oceanic Physics

, Volume 54, Issue 8, pp 848–858 | Cite as

Ring-Shaped Seismicity Structures Forming before Large Earthquakes and the Great Earthquakes in the Western and Eastern Pacific

  • Yu. F. KopnichevEmail author
  • I. N. SokolovaEmail author


We consider the characteristics of seismicity before large earthquakes and the great earthquakes in the periphery of the Pacific Ocean. It is found that earthquakes with Mw = 7.0–9.2 that occurred in 1964–2016 were preceded by the formation of ring-shaped seismicity structures, usually in two depth ranges: 0–33 and 34–70 km. We obtain correlations between sizes of shallow (L) and deep (l) seismicity rings, threshold magnitudes (Mth1 and Mth2, respectively), and the time of their formation (T1 and T2, respectively) on magnitudes Mw of the mainshocks. It is shown that the sizes of ring-shaped structures at any given Mw for earthquakes in the western margin of the Pacific are significantly smaller than for those in the eastern margin. However, the values of Mth1 and Mth2 are close for these two regions. Parameters T1 and T2 vary considerably depending on the event, but on average they are ~27–30 years. It is supposed that the formation of ring-shaped structures is related to the migration of deep-seated fluids, while the difference between characteristics of these structures in the western and eastern margins of the Pacific are caused by different contents of fluids in the crust and upper mantle of the respective regions. This conclusion agrees with the available data on the peculiarities of aftershock processes of large earthquakes in the considered regions.


ring-shaped seismicity structures large earthquakes lithosphere deep-seated fluids 



  1. 1.
    Abers, G., Nakajima, J., van Keken, P., Kita, S., and Hacker, B., Thermal-petrological controls on the location of earthquakes within subducting plates, Mar. Geol., 2013, vols. 369–370, pp. 178–187.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Butler, R., Lay, T., Creager, K., et al., The global seismographic network surpasses its design goal, EOS, Trans. Am. Geophys. Union, 2004, vol. 85, no. 23, pp. 225–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Engdahl, E. and Villasenor, A., Global seismicity: 1990–1999, in International Handbook of Earthquake and Engineering Seismology, Elsevier, 2002, pp. 665–690.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gold, T. and Soter, S., Fluid ascent through the solid lithosphere and its relation to earthquakes, Pure Appl. Geophys., 1984/1985, vol. 122, pp. 492–530.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Goldfinger, C., Ikeda, Ya., Yeats, R., and Ren, J., Superquakes and supercycles, Seismol. Res. Lett., 2013, vol. 84, no. 1, pp. 24–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hier-Majumder, S. and Kohlstedt, D., Role of dynamic grain boundary wetting in fluid circulation beneath volcanic arcs, Geophys. Res. Lett., 2006, vol. 33, L08305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Husen, S. and Kissling, E., Postseismic fluid flow after the large subduction earthquake of Antofagasta, Chile, Geology, 2001, vol. 29, no. 9, pp. 847–850.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Karakin, A.V. and Lobkovskii, L.I., Hydrodynamics and the structure of two-phase asthenosphere, Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR, 1982, vol. 268, no. 2, pp. 324–329.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kopnichev, Yu.F. and Sokolova, I.N., Spatiotemporal variations of the S-wave attenuation field in the source zones of large earthquakes in the Tien Shan, Izv., Phys. Solid Earth, 2003, vol. 39, no. 7, pp. 568–579.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kopnichev, Yu.F. and Sokolova, I.N., Spatiotemporal variations of the S-wave attenuation field in source zones of strong earthquakes in the Tien Shan region: Evidence from the records of underground nuclear explosions, Dokl. Earth Sci., 2004, vol. 395, no. 3, pp. 461–464.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kopnichev, Yu.F. and Sokolova, I.N., Rise of mantle fluids in areas of sources of strong earthquakes and large fault zone: Geochemical evidence, Vestn. NYaTs RK, 2005, no. 2, pp. 147–155.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kopnichev, Yu.F. and Sokolova, I.N., Ring seismicity in different depth ranges before large and great earthquakes in subduction zones, Dokl. Earth Sci., 2009a, vol. 425, no. 2, pp. 448–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kopnichev, Yu.F. and Sokolova, I.N., Characteristics of ring seismicity in different depth ranges before large and great earthquakes in the Sumatra region, Dokl. Earth Sci., 2009b, vol. 429, no. 1, pp. 1385–1388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kopnichev, Yu.F. and Sokolova, I.N., Characteristics of ring seismicity in different depth ranges in the region of Northeast Japan, Vestn. Nats. Yad. Tsentra Resp. Kaz., 2009c, no. 3, pp. 88–97.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kopnichev, Yu.F. and Sokolova, I.N., On the correlation between seismicity characteristics and S-wave attenuation in the ring structures that appear before large earthquakes, J. Volcanol. Seismol., 2010, vol. 4, no. 6, pp. 396–411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kopnichev, Yu.F. and Sokolova, I.N., Annular seismicity structures and the March 11, 2011, earthquake (M w = 9.0) in Northeast Japan, Dokl. Earth Sci., 2011a, vol. 440, no. 1, pp. 1324–1327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kopnichev, Yu.F. and Sokolova, I.N., Inhomogeneities in the field of short-period S-wave attenuation at the source of the Maule (Chili, February 27, 2010; M w = 8.8) earthquake and their correlation with seismicity and the regional volcanism, Geofiz. Issled., 2011b, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 22–33.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kopnichev, Yu.F. and Sokolova, I.N., Ring structures of seismicity generated in the continental areas before strong earthquakes with different source mechanisms, Geofiz. Issled., 2013, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 5–15.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kopnichev, Yu.F. and Sokolova, I.N., Ring structures of seismicity in northern Chile and a successful forecast of the place and magnitude of the Iquique earthquake on April 1, 2014 (M w = 8.2), Vestn. Nats. Yad. Tsentra Resp. Kaz., 2015, no. 4, pp. 153–159.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kopnichev, Yu.F., Gordienko, D.D., and Sokolova, I.N., Space–time variations of the shear wave attenuation field in the upper mantle of seismic and low seismicity areas, J. Volcanol. Seismol., 2009, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 44–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Letnikov, F.A., Sinergetika geologicheskikh sistem (Synergy of Geological Systems), Novosibirsk: Nauka, 1992.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Müller, R., Sdrolias, M., Gaina, C., and Roest, W., Age, spreading rates and spreading symmetry of the world’s ocean crust, Geochem. Geophys. Geosyst., 2008, no. 9, Q04006. doi 10.1029/2007GC001743Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ogawa, R. and Heki, K., Slow postseismic recovery of geoid depression formed by the 2004 Sumatra-Andaman earthquake by mantle water diffusion, Geophys. Res. Lett., 2007, vol. 34, L06313. doi 10.1029/2007GL029340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Rojstaczer, S. and Wolf, S., Permeability changes associated with large earthquakes: An example from Loma Prieta, California, Geology, 1992, vol. 20, pp. 211–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Singh, S. and Suarez, G., Regional variation in the number of aftershocks (mb ≥ 5) of large subduction-zone earthquakes (Mw ≥ 7.0), Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am., 1988, vol. 78, no. 1, pp. 230–242.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Tajima, F. and Kanamori, H., Global survey of aftershock area expansion, Phys. Earth. Planet. Int., 1985, vol. 40, pp. 77–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Van’yan, L.L. and Hyndman, R.D., On the origin of electrical conductivity in the consolidated crust, Izv., Phys. Solid Earth, 1996, no. 4, pp. 268–284.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Yamanaka, Y. and Kikuchi, M., Asperity map along the subduction zone in northeast Japan inferred from regional seismic data, J. Geophys. Res., 2004, vol. 109, B07307. doi 10.1029/2004JB003203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Yamazaki, T. and Seno, T., Double seismic zone and dehydration embrittlement of the subducting slab, J. Geophys. Res., 2003, vol. 108, no. B4. doi 10.1029/2002JB001918Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Pleiades Publishing, Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Schmidt Institute of Physics of the Earth, Russian Academy of SciencesMoscowRussia
  2. 2.Institute of Geophysical Research, Ministry of Energy of the Republic of KazakhstanAlmatyKazakhstan

Personalised recommendations