Search USGS⌕ Search

USGS · 70048667

Crustal structure and fault geometry of the 2010 Haiti earthquake from temporary seismometer deployments

Abstract

Haiti has been the locus of a number of large and damaging historical earthquakes. The recent 12 January 2010 Mw 7.0 earthquake affected cities that were largely unprepared, which resulted in tremendous losses. It was initially assumed that the earthquake ruptured the Enriquillo Plantain Garden fault (EPGF), a major active structure in southern Haiti, known from geodetic measurements and its geomorphic expression to be capable of producing M 7 or larger earthquakes. Global Positioning Systems (GPS) and Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar (InSAR) data, however, showed that the event ruptured a previously unmapped fault, the Léogâne fault, a north‐dipping oblique transpressional fault located immediately north of the EPGF. Following the earthquake, several groups installed temporary seismic stations to record aftershocks, including ocean‐bottom seismometers on either side of the EPGF. We use data from the complete set of stations deployed after the event, on land and offshore, to relocate all aftershocks from 10 February to 24 June 2010, determine a 1D regional crustal velocity model, and calculate focal mechanisms. The aftershock locations from the combined dataset clearly delineate the Léogâne fault, with a geometry close to that inferred from geodetic data. Its strike and dip closely agree with the global centroid moment tensor solution of the mainshock but with a steeper dip than inferred from previous finite fault inversions. The aftershocks also delineate a structure with shallower southward dip offshore and to the west of the rupture zone, which could indicate triggered seismicity on the offshore Trois Baies reverse fault. We use first‐motion focal mechanisms to clarify the relationship of the fault geometry to the triggered aftershocks.

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 18.351113° to 18.671113° latitude; -72.793426° to -72.473426° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Roby Douilly, Jennifer S. Haase, William L. Ellsworth, Marie-Paule Bouin, Eric Calais, Steeve J. Symithe, John G. Armbruster, Bernard Mercier de Lepinay, Anne Deschamps, Saint‐Louis Mildor, Mark E. Meremonte, Susan E. Hough. 2013-07-31. Crustal structure and fault geometry of the 2010 Haiti earthquake from temporary seismometer deployments. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120120303

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Re-evaluation of shaking, dynamic strain, and the source of the 1886 Charleston, South Carolina, earthquake

As the largest historical event in the eastern United States, the 1886 Charleston, South Carolina, earthquake, plays a prominent role in our nation’s seismological and human history and an outsized role in our probabilistic ground‐motion hazard estimates, affecting building codes, insurance rates, and geophysical monitoring. Thus, constraining the characteristics of the 1886 earthquake source, as well as the nature of its shaking distribution and impacts to the extent possible, is essential. Given its vintage, however, societal, geological, and geophysical datasets are limited compared with those used in modern seismological analyses. Because of these limitations, some characteristics of the rupture model are fundamentally nonunique. Still, by re‐evaluating all available data, I can constrain several key aspects of this earthquake. I show that several interpretations in recent analyses are inconsistent regarding the inferred source; shaking; ground failure; and, particularly, railway impacts. Importantly, I have shown that although dynamic strain caused the ground failure that led to track deformation, without the intermediate liquefaction step, dynamic strain alone was unlikely to be the source of rail deformation, contrary to earlier studies. Had earlier pronouncements that dynamic strain is a real concern for bending railways held true, there would be serious ramifications for railway engineering as well as for other above‐ and below‐ground linear infrastructure.

South Carolina↗

ETAS-positive: Extracting unbiased epidemic-type aftershock models from incomplete earthquake catalogs

Earthquake catalogs are inherently incomplete, and short-term fluctuations in catalog completeness can strongly bias estimates of seismicity parameters. Here, we extend the positive statistics framework recently introduced for estimating Gutenberg–Richter a and b values to the Epidemic-Type Aftershock Sequence (ETAS) model. The approach focuses on complete magnitude–time intervals defined by pairs of earthquakes in which the second event is larger than the first. Comprehensive synthetic tests demonstrate that the proposed ETAS + method retrieves nearly unbiased parameter estimates even from highly incomplete catalogs, whereas parameters obtained using classical estimation approaches are strongly biased. Application to Southern California reveals a similar trend, with the productivity scaling parameter α approaching the b value, consistent with self-similar earthquake triggering within estimation uncertainties. Owing to its robustness against catalog incompleteness and computational efficiency, the ETAS + method provides a powerful new tool for seismicity analysis and earthquake forecasting.

California↗