Can Plate Bending Explain the Observed Faster Landward Motion of Lateral Regions of the Subduction Zone After Major Megathrust Earthquakes?

Journal Article (2023)
Author(s)

M. D’Acquisto (GFZ Helmholtz-Zentrum für Geoforschung, Universiteit Utrecht)

M. W. Herman (Universiteit Utrecht, California State University)

REM Riva (TU Delft - Physical and Space Geodesy)

R. Govers (Universiteit Utrecht)

Research Group
Physical and Space Geodesy
Copyright
© 2023 M. D’Acquisto, M. W. Herman, R.E.M. Riva, R. Govers
DOI related publication
https://doi.org/10.1029/2022JB025431
More Info
expand_more
Publication Year
2023
Language
English
Copyright
© 2023 M. D’Acquisto, M. W. Herman, R.E.M. Riva, R. Govers
Research Group
Physical and Space Geodesy
Issue number
3
Volume number
128
Reuse Rights

Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download, forward or distribute the text or part of it, without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license such as Creative Commons.

Abstract

Greater landward velocities were recorded after six megathrust earthquakes in subduction zone regions adjacent to the ruptured portion. Previous explanations invoked either increased slip deficit accumulation or plate bending during postseismic relaxation, with different implications for seismic hazard. We investigate whether bending can be expected to reproduce this observed enhanced landward motion (ELM). We use 3D quasi-dynamic finite element models with periodic earthquakes. We find that afterslip downdip of the brittle megathrust exclusively produces enhanced trenchward surface motion in the overriding plate. Viscous relaxation produces ELM when a depth limit is imposed on afterslip. This landward motion results primarily from in-plane elastic bending of the overriding plate due to trenchward viscous flow in the mantle wedge near the rupture. Modeled ELM is, however, incompatible with the observations, which are an order of magnitude greater and last longer after the earthquake. This conclusion does not significantly change when varying mantle viscosity, plate elasticity, maximum afterslip depth, earthquake size, megathrust locking outside of the rupture, or nature and location of relevant model boundaries. The observed ELM consequently appears to reflect faster slip deficit accumulation, implying a greater seismic hazard in lateral segments of the subduction zone.