- Open Access
The 2016 Kumamoto–Oita earthquake sequence: aftershock seismicity gap and dynamic triggering in volcanic areas
© The Author(s) 2016
- Received: 22 July 2016
- Accepted: 29 October 2016
- Published: 15 November 2016
- Seismic Velocity
- Japan Meteorological Agency
- Trigger Event
- Earthquake Sequence
- Volcanic Area
Tectonic faults often lie near volcanoes (Azzaro 1999; Nishigami 1997), and therefore, large inland earthquakes sometimes strike volcanic regions (Ando and Okuyama 2010; Moran et al. 2002). The elucidation of the influence of volcanic areas, in addition to the fault geometries and other properties, on earthquake generation is essential for better understanding of the seismo-volcano tectonics as well as for improvement in the accuracy of natural hazard evaluation.
This earthquake sequence broke out in the Kumamoto Prefecture at 21:26 on April 14, 2016 [hereafter all times are written using the Japan Standard Time (UTC + 9)] by an M w 6.2 event (hereafter “event α”), which gave rise to devastating ground motion, followed by an M w 6.0 event (“event β”) at 0:03 on April 15, 2016, located at a distance of only 10 km south from the event α (Fig. 1). An even larger and, so far, the largest event (M w 7.0; “event γ”) struck at 1:25 on the 16th near the event α and caused further damage through the strong ground-shaking in the surrounding area. The hypocenters of all three events were located along the Futagawa and Hinagu fault systems. Following the event γ, the seismicities in two volcanic areas, the northern Aso and Yufuin–Beppu areas, became active. In addition, seismicity gaps are also observed between the Futagawa fault system and the northern Aso area (we refer to this gap as the Aso gap), and between the northern Aso and the Yufuin–Beppu areas.
This earthquake sequence raises several questions: Why were these faults ruptured not by a single large earthquake but by three successive ones? What caused the seismic gaps? Toward addressing these questions, phenomenological understanding of this earthquake sequence is essential. This paper presents following seismological observations: the underground fault geometry of the Hinagu and Futagawa fault systems inferred from distribution of aftershocks refined by an earthquake relocation analysis; the relationship between the Aso gap and the rupture process of the largest shock, event γ, inferred from a finite fault slip inversion using strong-motion data; and a detection and quantification of a dynamic triggering event in the Yufuin–Beppu area, Oita prefecture. Based on these observations, we will show a perspective to solve the abovementioned questions.
One-dimensional seismic velocity and attenuation structure
V p (km/s)
V s (km/s)
We investigated the geometries of faults over which the three large events occurred, based on relocated hypocenters in the entire region shown in Fig. 1. The relocation was conducted with the hypoDD program (Waldhauser and Ellsworth 2000), using 282,999 and 253,335 arrival time differences for the P- and S-waves, respectively. These arrival times are picked for 2770 events that occurred between 14 and 21 of April 2016, and listed on the Japan Meteorological Agency (JMA) Unified Earthquake Catalog.
For calculating double-difference of arrival times, we allow that each event have up to 15 neighbors within 10 km according to the JMA catalog. Each pair must have 8 or more of travel time difference data from either P- or S-arrivals from stations within 100 km from event locations. We gave half of weights for S-arrival times than P-arrival times. Finally, we successfully relocated the 2370 events, reducing the weighted root-mean-square of the residual times from 0.1436 to 0.0510 s (Additional file 1: Figure S1).
The result implies that the three major events ruptured the fault planes of different geometries. The spatial distributions of small earthquakes before and after the event γ are clearly different. The event α was initiated on the vertical fault (E–E′ cross section in Fig. 3b), as also implied by the first-motion focal mechanism (Fig. 1a) estimated from seismograms of KiK-net (Okada et al. 2004), the HASH code (Hardebeck and Shearer 2002), and the velocity structure (Fig. 2; Table 1). The event β was initiated on the steeply dipping fault rather than vertical one, and the nucleation of the event γ occurred on another vertical fault. Several earthquakes preceded the event γ around its hypocenter (E–E′ cross section in Fig. 3b). This activity started right after the occurrence of the event α. We do not see increase in seismicity rate of this activity. On the basis of a catalog constructed with a matched filter technique, Kato et al. (2016) showed migrations of seismicity following the event α, which also propagated to the nucleation point of the events β and γ.
Geometry of the fault model for the slip inversion analysis
We express the slip direction between those corresponding to the pure normal faulting and the pure right-lateral strike-slip faulting by their summation. On the fault planes, we placed one-dimensional spline functions (“triangular functions”) every 2.5 km in space and every 2 s in time to represent the spatiotemporal distribution of the fault slip velocity. The time windows on the faults are open for 12 s from the time when a hypothetical rupture front with the velocity of 3.0 km/s arrives from the hypocenter.
We inverted the displacement waveforms obtained by integrating the original acceleration data twice after the removal of the offset and bandpass-filtering between 0.025 and 0.25 Hz. Moreover, we resampled the data every 0.4 s.
We calculated the Green’s functions using the one-dimensional seismic velocity model (Fig. 2; Table 1) by the reflection-transmission matrix method (Kennett and Kerry 1979) and wavenumber integral method (Bouchon 1981) while accounting for anelastic attenuation (Takeo 1985).
We aligned the data and the Green’s functions by S-arrivals to suppress bias of unmodeled lateral variation of velocity structure. Actually, we performed the alignment from P-arrival of the event γ, and S-P time of a collocated event (M j 4.3) that occurred at 4:51 on April 16, 2016, was measured using Hi-net or KiK-net data at the same boreholes. This is because we found it difficult to pick the S-arrivals for the event γ due to the overlapping P waves,
We inverted the data using the nonnegative least square algorithm (Lawson and Hanson 1995) with a spatial smoothing constraint. The intensity was objectively set in such a way as to minimize the Akaike’s Bayesian Information Criterion (Uchide and Ide 2007; Yabuki and Matsu’ura 1992).
The waveform fits by the estimated model (Figs. 3a, 4c, d) are shown in Fig. 4b. The variance reduction (ratio of the variance of the residual to that of the data) was 71%, which is quite reasonable. The estimated model yields a seismic moment of 5.1 × 1019 Nm (M w 7.1) and implies that the fault rupture extends below the northern part of the Aso caldera, rupturing the shallow portion of the Aso gap by the oblique slip with a peak slip of around 6 m. Few fore- and aftershocks occurred in the large slip areas. This result has an overall similarity to a model proposed by Yagi et al. (2016) inferred from teleseismic data. The existence of the large slip area penetrating the Aso caldera is also supported by the field observation of the surface rupture (Shirahama et al. 2016) and the InSAR analysis (Geospatial Information Authority of Japan 2016).
The amplitude ratios of the accelerograms high-pass-filtered at 16 Hz range from 3 to 13 with a median of 5 (Fig. 5). This inter-station variation in the amplitude ratios is due to many factors including the differences in source locations and focal mechanisms. Therefore, we choose the median value as the high-frequency amplitude ratio of these two events. The moment ratio of the triggered event to the M w 5.1 event is then estimated to be 125, implying that the M w of the triggered event was 6.5. It should be noted that this estimation is very rough because it strongly relies on the validity of the assumption of the ω 2 model and the self-similar scaling law. Therefore, we conservatively conclude that the triggered event was a mid-M w 6 event.
First, we have revealed the geometries of the faults ruptured by three distinct large earthquakes. The complex fault system may have prevented the simultaneous rupture of all these faults (Anderson et al. 2003), and instead, large earthquakes occurred successively. However, it should be noted that complexities in fault geometry do not always stop earthquake rupture. For example, in the 2012 off Sumatra earthquake, multiple strike-slip faults were ruptured by a single earthquake (Meng et al. 2012; Satriano et al. 2012; Wang et al. 2012; Yue et al. 2012). In the Nankai and Tonankai megathrust earthquakes, some M8-class events ruptured one of these regions, and some events ruptured both regions simultaneously (Ando 1975). Further investigations are needed to confirm how the irregularities of fault geometries contributed the earthquake generation.
Next, we have shown that the Aso gap corresponds to the large slip area by the largest event (event γ). Owing to the small amount of stress remaining for aftershock production, it is often observed that fewer aftershocks occur in the fault segments with a large slip area (Mendoza and Hartzell 1988). However, it is quite unusual that fewer aftershocks in the Aso gap are observed even below the large slip area. While a rigorous discussion on the origins of the Aso gap requires further investigation of the volcanic structure and resultant fault behaviors, a high temperature due to the geotherm of Mt. Aso must play an important role. Three-dimensional magnetotelluric surveys (Asaue et al. 2012; Hata et al. 2016) identified low electric resistivity in this area. Although the interpretation of the low resistivity is still ambiguous, one can interpret the low resistivity as indication of high temperature area, because, relatively high geothermal gradient (40–90 K/km around 1 km of depth) was observed in Mt. Aso (Tanaka et al. 2004a, b). Moreover, Curie-point depth (Okubo et al. 1985) in the Aso gap is shallower than that in the rupture area of the event γ. The magma chamber of Mt. Aso located west of the active crater and east of the Aso gap (Sudo and Kong 2001) will contribute the high temperature in the Aso gap. The fact that earthquakes before the Kumamoto earthquake distribute in the very shallow portion of the Aso gap (Fig. 3c) may reflect an effect of the geotherm. These observations will be a key to understand the influence of the volcanic geotherm on the formation of the Aso gap. Our fault slip model further suggests that the seismicity in the northern Aso can be interpreted as usual aftershocks of the event γ.
On the dynamic triggering event, we hypothesize that the triggered rupture reached Beppu from Yufuin, which is supported by the following empirical relation and observations: The scaling law for the fault length (Wells and Coppersmith 1994) implies a fault length of 10–20 km for this mid-M w 6.0 triggered earthquake; the seismicity was activated immediately after the event γ (Fig. 1b) in the elongated zone with a length of almost 20 km; and the In-SAR image from ALOS-2 also indicates a surface offset of up to 6 cm for 10 km or longer along the surface trace of a pre-existing fault (Geospatial Information Authority of Japan 2016). This dynamic triggering mechanism produced an apparent gap in seismicity between the northern Aso and Yufuin–Beppu areas, which is different from the case in the Aso gap described above.
The features of the earthquake sequence we revealed give rise to new questions. It is important to understand the mechanism of the formation of the complex system of the Futagawa and Hinagu faults. The fault slip model strongly suggests that large stress accumulation is possible at shallow depths near the volcanos, where the accumulation mechanism remains an open question. Furthermore, the formation mechanism of the Aso gap is not yet fully elucidated. Here, detailed information on the structure of Mt. Aso should advance our understanding. While, in this paper, we discuss the influence of volcanic areas on earthquake generation, the effect of this earthquake sequence on the volcanic activities should also be investigated. These studies will contribute to the improvement in the accuracy of the scenarios of potential disaster in the seismo-volcano tectonics, which are used for evaluating the natural hazards posed by these events.
TU performed all data analyses with help from HH, RM and KI, and drafted the manuscript. MN produced the movie to display the hypocentre distribution in three-dimensional space. NS provided geological interpretation. RA provided comments from the viewpoint of earthquake source dynamics. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
We thank Nobuo Matsushima for providing his trace data of the caldera rim of Mt. Aso. We also thank Maki Hata, Yoshiki Shirahama, Chen Ji, one anonymous reviewer, and the Editor for their constructive comments. We used the phase data from the JMA Unified Earthquake Catalog (based on seismic data from JMA, NIED, and Kyushu University) and seismograms from Hi-net, KiK-net, and K-NET of NIED (Okada et al. 2004).
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
- Aki K (1967) Scaling law of seismic spectrum. J Geophys Res 72:1217–1231. doi:10.1029/JZ072i004p01217 View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Anderson JG, Brune JN, Louie JN, Zeng Y, Savage M, Yu G, Chen Q, dePolo D (1994) Seismicity in the western Great Basin apparently triggered by the Landers, California, earthquake, 28 June 1992. Bull Seismol Soc Am 84:863–891Google Scholar
- Anderson G, Aagaard B, Hudnut K (2003) Fault interactions and large complex earthquakes in the Los Angeles area. Science 302:1946–1949. doi:10.1126/science.1090747 View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Ando M (1975) Source mechanisms and tectonic significance of historical earthquakes along the Nankai Trough, Japan. Tectonophysics 27:119–140. doi:10.1016/0040-1951(75)90102-X View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Ando R, Okuyama S (2010) Deep roots of upper plate faults and earthquake generation illuminated by volcanism. Geophys Res Lett 37:L10308. doi:10.1029/2010GL042956 Google Scholar
- Asaue H, Kubo T, Yoshinaga T, Koike K (2012) Application of magnetotelluric (MT) resistivity to imaging of regional three-dimensional geologic structures and groundwater systems. Nat Resour Res 21:383–393. doi:10.1007/s11053-012-9184-2 View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Atkinson GM, Hanks TC (1995) A high-frequency magnitude scale. Bull Seismol Soc Am 85:825–833Google Scholar
- Azzaro R (1999) Earthquake surface faulting at Mount Etna volcano (Sicily) and implications for active tectonics. J Geodyn 28:193–213. doi:10.1016/S0264-3707(98)00037-4 View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Bouchon M (1981) A simple method to calculate Green's functions for elastic layered media. Bull Seismol Soc Am 71:959–971Google Scholar
- Brodsky EE, Karakostas V, Kanamori H (2000) A new observation of dynamically triggered regional seismicity: earthquakes in Greece following the August, 1999 Izmit, Turkey earthquake. Geophys Res Lett 27:2741–2744View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Dziewonski AM, Chou TA, Woodhouse JH (1981) Determination of earthquake source parameters from waveform data for studies of global and regional seismicity. J Geophys Res 86:2825–2852. doi:10.1029/JB086iB04p02825 View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Ekström G, Nettles M, Dziewoński AM (2012) The global CMT project 2004–2010: centroid-moment tensors for 13,017 earthquakes. Phys Earth Planet Inter 200–201:1–9. doi:10.1016/j.pepi.2012.04.002 View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Fujiwara H et al (2009) A study on 'national seismic hazard map for Japan'. Technical note of the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, no 336. National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, Tsukuba, Japan (in Japanese)Google Scholar
- Fujiwara H et al (2012) Some improvements of seismic hazard assessment based on the 2011 Tohoku earthquake. Technical note of the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, no 379. National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, Tsukuba, Japan, pp 1–349 (in Japanese)Google Scholar
- Geospatial Information Authority of Japan (2016) Information on the 2016 Kumamoto earthquake. http://www.gsi.go.jp/BOUSAI/H27-kumamoto-earthquake-index.html#3. Accessed 27 Sept 2016 (in Japanese)
- Gomberg J, Reasenberg PA, Bodin P, Harris RA (2001) Earthquake triggering by seismic waves following the Landers and Hector Mine earthquakes. Nature 411:462–466. doi:10.1038/35078053 View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Hardebeck JL, Shearer PM (2002) A new method for determining first-motion focal mechanisms. Bull Seismol Soc Am 92:2264–2276View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Hartzell SH, Heaton TH (1983) Inversion of strong ground motion and teleseismic waveform data for the fault rupture history of the 1979 Imperial Valley, California, earthquake. Bull Seismol Soc Am 73:1553–1583Google Scholar
- Hata M, Takakura S, Matsushima N, Hashimoto T, Utsugi M (2016) Crustal magma pathway beneath Aso caldera inferred from three-dimensional electrical resistivity structure. Geophys Res Lett. doi:10.1002/2016GL070315 Google Scholar
- Hill DP, Prejean SG (2007) Dynamic triggering. Treatise Geophys. doi:10.1016/B978-044452748-6.00070-5 Google Scholar
- Hirata N, Matsu'ura M (1987) Maximum-likelihood estimation of hypocenter with origin time eliminated using nonlinear inversion technique. Phys Earth Planet Inter 47:50–61. doi:10.1016/0031-9201(87)90066-5 View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Kato A, Ji Fukuda, Nakagawa S, Obara K (2016) Foreshock migration preceding the 2016 Mw 7.0 Kumamoto earthquake, Japan. Geophys Res Lett. doi:10.1002/2016GL070079 Google Scholar
- Kennett BLN, Kerry NJ (1979) Seismic waves in a stratified half space. Geophys J R Astron Soc 57:557–583View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Kilb D, Gomberg J, Bodin P (2000) Triggering of earthquake aftershocks by dynamic stresses. Nature 408:570–574View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Lawson CL, Hanson RJ (1995) Solving least squares problems, Classics in Applied Mathematics. SIAM, PhiladelphiaView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Matsubara M, Obara K, Kasahara K (2008) Three-dimensional P- and S-wave velocity structures beneath the Japan Islands obtained by high-density seismic stations by seismic tomography. Tectonophysics 454:86–103. doi:10.1016/j.tecto.2008.04.016 View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Matsumoto Y (1979) Some problems on volcanic activities and depression structures in Kyushu, Japan. Mem Geol Soc Jpn 16:127–139 (in Japanese) Google Scholar
- Matsumoto S et al (2015) Spatial heterogeneities in tectonic stress in Kyushu, Japan and their relation to a major shear zone. Earth Planets Space 67:172. doi:10.1186/s40623-015-0342-8 View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Mendoza C, Hartzell SH (1988) Aftershock patterns and main shock faulting. Bull Seismol Soc Am 78:1438–1449Google Scholar
- Meng L, Ampuero J-P, Stock J, Duputel Z, Luo Y, Tsai VC (2012) Earthquake in a maze: compressional rupture branching during the 2012 M w 8.6 Sumatra earthquake. Science 337:724–726. doi:10.1126/science.1224030 View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Moran S, Stihler S, Power J (2002) A tectonic earthquake sequence preceding the April–May 1999 eruption of Shishaldin Volcano, Alaska. Bull Volcanol 64:520–524. doi:10.1007/s00445-002-0226-1 View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Nakata T, Imaizumi T (2002) Digital active fault map of Japan. University of Tokyo Press, Tokyo (in Japanese) Google Scholar
- Nishigami K (1997) Spatial distribution of coda scatterers in the crust around two active volcanoes and one active fault system in central Japan: inversion analysis of coda envelope. Phys Earth Planet Inter 104:75–89. doi:10.1016/S0031-9201(97)00058-7 View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Okada Y, Kasahara K, Hori S, Obara K, Sekiguchi S, Fujiwara H, Yamamoto A (2004) Recent progress of seismic observation networks in Japan—Hi-net, F-net, K-NET and KiK-net. Earth Planets Space 56:xv–xxviiiView ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Okubo Y, Graf RJ, Hansen RO, Ogawa K, Tsu H (1985) Curie point depths of the Island of Kyushu and surrounding areas, Japan. Geophysics 50:481–494. doi:10.1190/1.1441926 View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Satriano C, Kiraly E, Bernard P, Vilotte J-P (2012) The 2012 Mw 8.6 Sumatra earthquake: evidence of westward sequential seismic ruptures associated to the reactivation of a N-S ocean fabric. Geophys Res Lett 39:L15302. doi:10.1029/2012GL052387 View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Shirahama Y, Yoshimi M, Awata Y, Maruyama T, Azuma T, Miyashita Y, Mori H, Imanishi K, Takeda N, Ochi T, Otsubo M, Asahina D, Miyakawa A (2016) Characteristics of the surface ruptures associated with the 2016 Kumamoto earthquake sequence, central Kyushu, Japan. Earth Planets Space. doi:10.1186/s40623-016-0559-1 [ePub ahead of print]Google Scholar
- Sudo Y, Kong L (2001) Three-dimensional seismic velocity structure beneath Aso Volcano, Kyushu, Japan. Bull Volcanol 63:326–344. doi:10.1007/s004450100145 View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Takeo M (1985) Near-field synthetic seismograms taking into account the effects of anelasticity—the effects of anelastic attenuation on seismograms caused by a sedimentary layer. Pap Meteorol Geophys 36:245–257 (in Japanese) View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Tanaka A, Yamano M, Yano Y, Sasada M (2004a) Geothermal gradient and heat flow data in and around Japan (I): appraisal of heat flow from geothermal gradient data. Earth Planets Space 56:1191–1194. doi:10.1186/bf03353339 View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Tanaka A, Yano Y, Sasada M (2004b) Geothermal gradient data in and around Japan. Digital Geoscience Map, vol. DGM P-5, Geological Survey of Japan, TsukubaGoogle Scholar
- The Headquarters for Earthquake Research Promotion (2002) Long-term evaluation of the Futagawa-Hinagu fault zone, 1st edn. The Headquarters for Earthquake Research Promotion. http://www.jishin.go.jp/main/chousa/katsudansou_pdf/93_futagawa_hinagu.pdf. Accessed 28 Sept 2016 (in Japanese)
- The Headquarters for Earthquake Research Promotion (2013) Long-term evaluation of the Futagawa and Hinagu fault zones (2013 rev). The Headquarters for Earthquake Research Promotion. http://www.jishin.go.jp/main/chousa/katsudansou_pdf/93_futagawa_hinagu_2.pdf. Accessed 28 Sept 2016 (in Japanese)
- Uchide T, Ide S (2007) Development of multiscale slip inversion method and its application to the 2004 mid-Niigata Prefecture earthquake. J Geophys Res 112:B06313. doi:10.1029/2006JB004528 View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Waldhauser F, Ellsworth WL (2000) A double-difference earthquake location algorithm: method and application to the northern Hayward fault, California. Bull Seismol Soc Am 90:1353–1368View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Wang D, Mori J, Uchide T (2012) Supershear rupture on multiple faults for the Mw 8.6 Off Northern Sumatra, Indonesia earthquake of April 11, 2012. Geophys Res Lett 39:L21307. doi:10.1029/2012GL053622 Google Scholar
- Wells DL, Coppersmith KJ (1994) New empirical relationships among magnitude, rupture length, rupture width, rupture area, and surface displacement. Bull Seismol Soc Am 84:974–1002Google Scholar
- Yabuki T, Matsu'ura M (1992) Geodetic data inversion using a Bayesian information criterion for spatial distribution of fault slip. Geophys J Int 109:363–375View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Yagi Y, Okuwaki R, Enescu B, Kasahara A, Miyakawa A, Otsubo M (2016) Rupture process of the 2016 Kumamoto earthquake in relation to the thermal structure around Aso volcano. Earth Planets Space 68:118. doi:10.1186/s40623-016-0492-3 View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Yue H, Lay T, Koper KD (2012) En echelon and orthogonal fault ruptures of the 11 April 2012 great intraplate earthquakes. Nature 490:245–249. doi:10.1038/nature11492 View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Yukutake Y, Honda R, Harada M, Aketagawa T, Ito H, Yoshida A (2012) Remotely triggered seismicity in Hakone volcano following the 2011 Off the Pacific Coast of Tohoku Earthquake. Earth Planets Space 64:269–277. doi:10.5047/eps.2011.09.002 View ArticleGoogle Scholar