The seismic gap theory identifies regions of elevated hazard based on a lack of recent seismicity in comparison with other portions of a fault. It has successfully explained past earthquakes (see, for example, ref. 2) and is useful for qualitatively describing where large earthquakes might occur. A large earthquake had been expected in the subduction zone adjacent to northern Chile, which had not ruptured in a megathrust earthquake since a M ∼8.8 event in 1877. On 1 April 2014 a M 8.2 earthquake occurred within this seismic gap. Here we present an assessment of the seismotectonics of the March-April 2014 Iquique sequence, including analyses of earthquake relocations, moment tensors, finite fault models, moment deficit calculations and cumulative Coulomb stress transfer. This ensemble of information allows us to place the sequence within the context of regional seismicity and to identify areas of remaining and/or elevated hazard. Our results constrain the size and spatial extent of rupture, and indicate that this was not the earthquake that had been anticipated. Significant sections of the northern Chile subduction zone have not ruptured in almost 150 years, so it is likely that future megathrust earthquakes will occur to the south and potentially to the north of the 2014 Iquique sequence.

The distribution of slip during subduction megathrust earthquakes depends on the slip deficit that accumulates on the plate interface prior to the event. We develop 3‐D finite element models of subduction zones to investigate how locked zones restrict surrounding regions on the plate boundary from sliding. What is new is that we quantify the slip around asperities on the megathrust. The models show plate interface slip increasing from zero at the edge of a locked zone to the relative plate motion over a distance of ~200 km along the megathrust. This area of reduced slip accumulates a seismic moment deficit up to 10 times larger than the moment deficit in the asperity alone. Updip of locked areas, slip at the trench can be reduced by more than 50% of the plate motion. Despite large displacements of the upper plate near the trench, this region moves as a semirigid block. Rupture models of the 2011 Tohoku earthquake, its tsunami characteristics, and geophysical observations near the trench can be interpreted to reflect the consequences of slip deficit accumulated on a low friction interface updip of the seismogenic zone. Neighboring asperities affect plate interface slip in a nonlinear way. Multiple asperities have overlapping pseudo‐coupled regions that may restrict the magnitude of coseismic slip in single‐asperity ruptures. Once an earthquake has a rupture length greater than ~250 km, it may recover the entire accumulated slip deficit. This is consistent with the magnitude of coseismic slip in several recent great megathrust earthquakes.

Recent megathrust events in Tohoku (Japan), Maule (Chile), and Sumatra (Indonesia) were well recorded. Much has been learned about the dominant physical processes in megathrust zones: (partial) locking of the plate interface, detailed coseismic slip, relocking, afterslip, viscoelastic mantle relaxation, and interseismic loading. These and older observations show complex spatial and temporal patterns in crustal deformation and displacement, and significant differences among different margins. A key question is whether these differences reflect variations in the underlying processes, like differences in locking, or the margin geometry, or whether they are a consequence of the stage in the earthquake cycle of the margin. Quantitative models can connect these plate boundary processes to surficial and far‐field observations. We use relatively simple, cyclic geodynamic models to isolate the first‐order geodetic signature of the megathrust cycle. Coseismic and subsequent slip on the subduction interface is dynamically (and consistently) driven. A review of global preseismic, coseismic, and postseismic geodetic observations, and of their fit to the model predictions, indicates that similar physical processes are active at different margins. Most of the observed variability between the individual margins appears to be controlled by their different stages in the earthquake cycle. The modeling results also provide a possible explanation for observations of tensile faulting aftershocks and tensile cracking of the overriding plate, which are puzzling in the context of convergence/compression. From the inversion of our synthetic GNSS velocities we find that geodetic observations may incorrectly suggest weak locking of some margins, for example, the west Aleutian margin.

No abstract