5
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Slow slip in subduction zones: Reconciling deformation fabrics with instrumental observations and laboratory results

      1 , 2 , 3 , 1 , 4
      Geosphere
      Geological Society of America

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisher
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Cataclasites are a characteristic rock type found in drill cores from active faults as well as in exposed fossil subduction faults. Here, cataclasites are commonly associated with evidence for pervasive pressure solution and abundant hydrofracturing. They host the principal slip of regular earthquakes and the family of so-called slow earthquakes (episodic slip and tremor, low to very low frequency earthquakes, etc.). Slip velocities associated with the formation of the different types of cataclasites and conditions controlling slip are poorly constrained both from direct observations in nature as well as from experimental research. In this study, we explore exposed sections of subduction faults and their dominant microstructures. We use recently proposed constitutive laws to estimate deformation rates, and we compare predicted rates with instrumental observations from subduction zones. By identifying the maximum strain rates using fault scaling relations to constrain the fault core thickness, we find that the instrumental shear strain rates identified for the family of “slow earthquakes” features range from 10−3s−1 to 10−5s−1. These values agree with estimated rates for stress corrosion creep or brittle creep possibly controlling cataclastic deformation rates near the failure threshold. Typically, pore-fluid pressures are suggested to be high in subduction zones triggering brittle deformation and fault slip. However, seismic slip events causing local dilatancy may reduce fluid pressures promoting pressure-solution creep (yielding rates of <10−8 to 10−12s−1) during the interseismic period in agreement with dominant fabrics in plate interface zones. Our observations suggest that cataclasis is controlled by stress corrosion creep and driven by fluid pressure fluctuations at near-lithostatic effective pressure and shear stresses close to failure. We posit that cataclastic flow is the dominant physical mechanism governing transient creep episodes such as slow slip events (SSEs), accelerating preparatory slip before seismic events, and early afterslip in the seismogenic zone.

          Related collections

          Most cited references179

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Fault rocks and fault mechanisms

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            The global range of subduction zone thermal models

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              An integrated perspective of the continuum between earthquakes and slow-slip phenomena

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Geosphere
                Geological Society of America
                1553-040X
                November 22 2021
                February 01 2022
                November 22 2021
                February 01 2022
                : 18
                : 1
                : 104-129
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Helmholtz-Zentrum Potsdam, GFZ; Telegrafenberg, D-14473 Potsdam, Germany
                [2 ]Institut für Geologische Wissenschaften, Freie Universität Berlin, Malteserstrasse 74-100, D-12249 Berlin, Germany
                [3 ]Université de Paris, Institut de Physique du Globe de Paris, CNRS, F-75005 Paris, France
                [4 ]Institut für Geowissenschaften, Universität Potsdam, D-14476 Potsdam, Germany
                Article
                10.1130/GES02382.1
                bb2b0058-d1c1-432c-933c-0c3aa3abc400
                © 2022
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article