2025年1月7日西藏定日MS6.8强震发震断层三维模型与地震构造环境

doi:10.3969/j.issn.0253-4967.2025.03.20250030

地震地质 ›› 2025, Vol. 47 ›› Issue (3): 671-688.DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.0253-4967.2025.03.20250030

2025年1月7日西藏定日M_S6.8强震发震断层三维模型与地震构造环境

郭钊吾¹⁾(), 鲁人齐¹⁾^,^*(), 张金玉¹⁾, 房立华²⁾, 刘冠伸¹⁾, 吴熙彦¹⁾, 孙晓¹⁾, 祁诗淼¹⁾

1)中国地震局地质研究所, 地震动力学与强震预测全国重点实验室, 北京 100029
2)中国地震局地震预测研究所, 北京 100036

收稿日期:2025-01-25 修回日期:2025-02-10 出版日期:2025-06-20 发布日期:2025-08-13
通讯作者: *鲁人齐, 男, 1982年生, 研究员, 博士生导师, 长期从事活动构造与三维建模研究, E-mail: lurenqi@163.com。
作者简介:
郭钊吾, 男, 1996年生, 现为中国地震局地质研究所构造地质学专业在读博士研究生, 主要从事活动构造三维建模研究, E-mail: gzwrdzs@126.com。
基金资助:
西藏拉萨地球物理国家野外科学观测研究站研究课题(NORSLS21-01)

THREE-DIMENSIONAL MODEL OF SEISMOGENIC FAULT AND SEISMIC ENVIRONMENT OF XIZANG DINGRI M_S6.8 EARTHQUAKE OF JANUARY 7, 2025

GUO Zhao-wu¹⁾(), LU Ren-qi¹⁾^,^*(), ZHANG Jin-yu¹⁾, FANG Li-hua²⁾, LIU Guan-shen¹⁾, WU Xi-yan¹⁾, SUN Xiao¹⁾, QI Shi-miao¹⁾

1)State Key Laboratory of Earthquake Dynamics and Forecasting, Institute of Geology, China Earthquake Administration, Beijing 100029, China
2)Institute of Earthquake Forecasting, China Earthquake Administration, Beijing 100036, China

Received:2025-01-25 Revised:2025-02-10 Online:2025-06-20 Published:2025-08-13

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

2025年1月7日, 西藏定日县发生 M_S6.8 强震, 造成126人死亡, 最大烈度达Ⅸ度, 引起广泛关注。定日 M_S6.8 地震的震中位于登么错断裂附近, 初步推断该断裂为发震断裂。文中根据公开获取的地表地质调查结果、余震重定位和震源机制解数据, 基于SKUA-GOCAD三维建模平台, 构建了登么错断裂的三维几何模型, 揭示了定日 M_S6.8 强震发震断层在三维空间展布的几何学特征。研究表明, 登么错断裂具有明显的几何分段性, 断裂的几何结构和地震活动在空间中的分布具有一定的关联性。此次地震的主震发生在登么错断裂(P3段)三维结构突变的位置(断层面呈向东凸出的弧形), 该地震的孕育和发生可能与断层面复杂的几何结构有关。震中所处的藏南地区深部发育大型拆离层, 登么错断裂为上陡下缓的铲式正断层, 断层底部在上地壳拆离层下方消失, 并未进一步向下延伸, 属于藏南地区浅部正断层系统, 此次地震是浅部正断层应力释放的结果。通过Coulomb 3.4程序计算得到不同深度的库仑应力变化表明: 登么错断裂南段、藏南滑脱拆离系断裂中段、申扎-定结断裂南段、雅鲁藏布江断裂中段、达吉岭-昂仁-仁布断裂中段处于震后应力加载状态。因此, 建议对余震进行监测和开展地震危险性分析时重点关注上述区域。文中刻画了三维发震断裂模型, 初步分析了发震构造, 为该区域孕震环境以及地震危险性评估提供了依据与参考。

关键词: 定日M_S6.8强震, 震源机制, 发震构造, 三维断层模型, 库仑应力分析

Abstract:

At 09:05a.m. on January 7, 2025, a magnitude M_S6.8 earthquake struck Dingri County, Xizang, China, resulting in 126 fatalities and a maximum seismic intensity of Ⅸ. Occurring within a seismically active and tectonically complex region, this event drew significant attention from both the scientific community and the public. The epicenter was located near the Dengmecuo Fault, which has been preliminarily identified as the seismogenic fault.

This study utilized publicly available geological survey data, aftershock relocations, and focal mechanism solutions to construct a detailed three-dimensional geometric model of the Dengmecuo Fault. The model was developed using the SKUA-GOCAD 3D modeling platform, enabling a comprehensive analysis of the fault’s geometry. Results reveal pronounced geometric segmentation along the fault plane, with the spatial distribution of these structural features closely correlating with observed seismicity, highlighting the influence of fault geometry on earthquake generation.

The M_S6.8 Dingri earthquake occurred near a prominent structural irregularity on the Dengmecuo Fault, at point P3, where the fault plane bends into an eastward-projecting arc. This three-dimensional structural mutation likely played a role in the nucleation of the event, underscoring the relationship between fault complexity and seismic rupture. The Dengmecuo Fault, situated in the southern Tibetan plateau, is a listric normal fault characterized by a steep upper section and a gentler lower section that terminates within a detachment layer in the upper crust. It does not extend into the deeper lithosphere, indicating that it is part of the region’s shallow normal fault system. The earthquake is interpreted as the release of accumulated stress along this shallow fault structure.

To evaluate post-earthquake stress transfer and seismic hazard, Coulomb stress modeling(Coulomb 3.4)was conducted. The analysis indicates that several regional faults are now in a state of increased Coulomb stress, including the southern segment of the Dengmecuo Fault, the middle segment of the south Xizang detachment system, the southern segment of the Shenzha-Dingjie Fault, the central Yarlung-Zangbo Fault, and the midsection of the Dajiling-Angren-Renbu Fault. These fault segments are identified as potential sites for future seismic activity and merit heightened monitoring.

This study presents a detailed characterization of the three-dimensional geometry of the seismogenic fault responsible for the Dingri M_S6.8 earthquake and offers a preliminary analysis of regional seismogenic structures. The findings provide valuable insights into the tectonic setting of southern Xizang and contribute to the assessment of regional seismic hazard.

Key words: Dingri M_S6.8 Earthquake, focal mechanism solution, seismic structure, Three-Dimensional fault model, Coulomb stress analysis

郭钊吾, 鲁人齐, 张金玉, 房立华, 刘冠伸, 吴熙彦, 孙晓, 祁诗淼. 2025年1月7日西藏定日M_S6.8强震发震断层三维模型与地震构造环境[J]. 地震地质, 2025, 47(3): 671-688.

GUO Zhao-wu, LU Ren-qi, ZHANG Jin-yu, FANG Li-hua, LIU Guan-shen, WU Xi-yan, SUN Xiao, QI Shi-miao. THREE-DIMENSIONAL MODEL OF SEISMOGENIC FAULT AND SEISMIC ENVIRONMENT OF XIZANG DINGRI M_S6.8 EARTHQUAKE OF JANUARY 7, 2025[J]. SEISMOLOGY AND GEOLOGY, 2025, 47(3): 671-688.

图/表 9

图1 2025年1月7日西藏定日地震区域地震构造图 TP 青藏高原, AB 阿穆尔地块, OB 鄂尔多斯地块, NCB 华北地块, SCB 华南地块, SCS 南海。图1a所示白框为图1b范围

Fig. 1 Map showing tectonic background of Dingri earthquake of January 7, 2025, Xizang.

图2 研究区历史强震(M≥5)、余震重定位分布及地震烈度图不同颜色的小球代表不同的地震等级, 绿色小球代表双差定位的余震数据(据房立华, 私人通讯); 沙滩球代表地震的震源机制解 ① , 为上半球投影; 红色实线代表断层, 紫色实线代表InSAR解译地震断层 ② 。粉色和橘红色覆盖区域为地震烈度分布范围 ③

Fig. 2 Distribution of historical strong earthquakes(M≥5), aftershock relocation, and seismic intensity in the study area.

表1 不同研究机构反演得到的定日 MS6.8 地震的震源机制解

Table 1 The focal mechanism solutions for Dingri MS6.8 earthquake by different institutions

发震时间	北纬 /(°)	东经 /(°)	节面Ⅰ/(°)			节面Ⅱ/(°)			M_W	矩心深度 /km	产出机构
发震时间	北纬 /(°)	东经 /(°)	走向	倾角	滑动角	走向	倾角	滑动角	M_W	矩心深度 /km	产出机构
2025-01-07	28.5	87.45	334.00	71.0	-100.00	182.00	22.0	64.00	6.9	13	CENC
2025-01-07	28.5	87.45	346.00	49.0	-95.00	174.00	42.0	-85.00	7.0	10	IGCEA
2025-01-07	28.56	87.47	349.00	42.0	-103.00	187.00	49.0	-78.00	7.1	11.5	USGS
2025-01-07	28.56	87.33	151.00	56.0	-116.00	12.00	41.0	-56.00	7.1	14	GFZ
2025-01-07	28.63	87.36	196.00	44.0	-640.00	341.00	51.0	-113.00	7.2	14	IPGP
2025-01-07	28.76	87.49	189.33	52.8	-95.75				7.17	7.9	CDUT

图3 定日 MS6.8 地震震源机制解 a CENC计算结果; b IGCEA计算结果; c USGS计算结果; d GFZ计算结果; e IPGP计算结果; f CDUT计算结果

Fig. 3 The focal mechanism solution graphs for Dingri MS6.8 earthquake.

图4 定日震区可视化三维工区与数据加载 a 研究区三维工区, 紫色实线代表InSAR解释地震断层, 红色实线代表地质调查地震地表迹线; b 定日地震余震深度分布统计柱状图, 小球代表震后5d内的余震(来自房立华团队)

Fig. 4 Perspective view of the 3D modelling platform and loaded data in Dingri earthquake region.

图5 发震断层精细三维几何模型 a 发震断层深度三维模型, 紫色小球代表余震数据; b 断层倾角三维模型; c 断层走向三维模型。紫色实线代表InSAR解释地震断层, 红色实线代表地质调查地震地表迹线; 沙滩球为震源机制解, 红色沙滩球为2025年定日地震的震源机制解。

Fig. 5 Detailed 3D geometric model of the seismogenic fault.

图6 登么错断裂三维模型与分段特性紫色小球代表余震, 红色小球代表2020年 MW5.7 地震, 蓝色小球代表2025年1月7日定日地震; 不同颜色的断层面代表登么错断层的分段; 灰色实线代表深度等值线

Fig. 6 Segment characteristics of the Dengmecuo Fault.

图7 藏南裂谷系深部结构与地震分布特征分析 a 深度域接收函数剖面 ① , 位置见图1b; 黑色虚线代表藏南滑脱拆离系底界面(STD), 黄色虚线代表印度板块俯冲地壳顶界面的喜马拉雅逆冲断裂带(MHT), 灰蓝色虚线代表莫霍面(Moho), 灰色实线代表浅层正断层, 蓝色虚线代表推测深大断裂。b EW向跨藏南裂谷系震源深度及震源机制解投影剖面(高扬等, 2024), 位置见图1a, 黄色圆圈代表裂谷中M≥5的地震。COR 错那-沃卡裂谷; BWR 普兰-文布当桑裂谷; DXR 定结-申扎裂谷; GTR 岗嘎-当惹雍错裂谷; JGR 江曲藏布-改则裂谷; NCR 聂拉木-措勤裂谷; YGR 亚东-谷露裂谷; ZTR 仲巴-塔若错裂谷

Fig. 7 Deep structure of the south Tibetan rifting system.

图8 2025年1月7日定日 MS6.8 地震同震库仑应力变化 a 深度5km; b 深度10km; c 深度15km; d 深度20km。红色五角星代表定日 MS6.8 地震, 绿色实线代表登么错断裂, 黑色实线代表该区域内其他断裂

Fig. 8 Coulomb stress changes associated with the Dingri MS6.8 earthquake of January 7, 2025.

参考文献 76

[1]	蔡蔚, 卢占武, 黄荣, 等. 2024. 基于短周期密集台阵接收函数揭示的藏南错那洞穹窿地壳结构[J]. 地学前缘, 31(1): 170-180. DOI
	CAI Wei, LU Zhan-wu, HUANG Rong, et al. 2024. Crustal structure beneath the Cuonadong dome in southern Tibet revealed by receiver functions from a short-period dense array[J]. Earth Science Frontiers, 31(1): 170-180 (in Chinese). DOI
[2]	方金玲, 赵斌, 余建胜, 等. 2022. 2015年西藏定日 M_W5.7 地震震源参数估计和静态应力触发研究[J]. 大地测量与地球动力学, 42(9): 964-970.
	FANG Jin-ling, ZHAO Bin, YU Jian-sheng, et al. 2022. Research on the Seismic Source Model and Static Stress Triggering of the 2015 Dingri M_W5.7 earthquake[J]. Journal of Geodesy and Geodynamics, 42(9): 964-970 (in Chinese).
[3]	冯博, 李江海, 陶春辉, 等. 2024. 西南印度洋中脊49°E-52°E区域洋壳增生的构造与岩浆特征[J]. 地球物理学报, 67(12): 4733-4747.
	FENG Bo, LI Jiang-hai, TAO Chun-hui, et al. 2024. Magmatic and tectonic crustal accretion at the Southwest Indian Ridge between 49°E and 52°E[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 67(12): 4733-4747 (in Chinese).
[4]	付建刚, 李光明, 王根厚, 等. 2018. 北喜马拉雅E-W向伸展变形时限: 来自藏南错那洞穹隆Ar-Ar年代学证据[J]. 地球科学, 43(8): 2638-2650.
	FU Jian-gang, LI Guang-ming, WANG Gen-hou, et al. 2018. Timing of E-W extension deformation in North Himalaya: Evidences from Ar-Ar Age in the Cuonadong Dome, South Tibet[J]. Earth Science, 43(8): 2638-2650 (in Chinese).
[5]	高扬, 吴中海, 左嘉梦, 等. 2024. 藏南聂拉木-措勤裂谷南段第四纪正断层作用的时空特征[J]. 地球科学, 49(7): 2552-2569.
	GAO Yang, WU Zhong-hai, ZUO Jia-meng, et al. 2024. Spatial-temporal activity of Quaternary faults at Southern end of Nyalam-Coqen rift, Southern Tibet[J]. Earth Science, 49(7): 2552-2569 (in Chinese).
[6]	韩竹军, 董绍鹏, 谢富仁, 等. 2008. 南北地震带北部5次(1561-1920年)M≥7地震触发关系研究地球物理学报, 51( 6): 1776-1784.
	HAN Zhu-jun, DONG Shao-peng, XIE Fu-ren, et al. 2008. Earthquake triggering by static stress: The 5 major earthquakes with M>7( 1561-1920) in the northern section of South north seismic zone, China[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 51(6): 1776-1784 (in Chinese).
[7]	黄婷, 吴中海, 韩帅, 等. 2024. 西藏日喀则地区的活断层基本特征及地震灾害潜在风险评估[J]. 地震科学进展, 54(10): 696-711.
	HUANG Ting, WU Zhong-hai, HAN Shuai, et al. 2024. The basic characteristics of active faults in the region of Xigaze, Xizang and the assessment of potential earthquake disaster risks[J]. Progress in Earthquake Sciences, 54(10): 696-711 (in Chinese).
[8]	李春森, 徐啸, 向波, 等. 2023. 北喜马拉雅构造带东部Moho形态研究: 以接收函数3DCCP方法为例[J]. 地学前缘, 30(2): 57-67. DOI
	LI Chun-sen, XU Xiao, XIANG Bo, et al. 2023. Moho geometry in the eastern North Himalayan tectonic belt: An example of the receiver function 3DCCP method[J]. Earth Science Frontiers, 30(2): 57-67 (in Chinese). DOI
[9]	李海兵, 潘家伟, 孙知明, 等. 2021. 大陆构造变形与地震活动——以青藏高原为例[J]. 地质学报, 95(1): 194-213.
	LI Hai-bing, PAN Jia-wei, SUN Zhi-ming, et al. 2021. Continental tectonic deformation and seismic activity: A case study from the Tibetan plateau[J]. Acta Geologica Sinica, 95(1): 194-213 (in Chinese).
[10]	李琦, 李承涛, 赵斌, 等. 2024. 2020年西藏定日 M_W5.6 地震震源参数估计和应力触发研究[J]. 地球物理学报, 67(1): 172-188.
	LI Qi, LI Cheng-tao, ZHAO Bin, et al. 2024. Estimated seismic source parameters for 2020 Dingri M_W5.6 earthquake in Xizang and study on the stress triggering[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 67(1): 172-188 (in Chinese).
[11]	李雨森, 李为乐, 许强, 等. 2025. 2025年1月7日西藏定日 M_S6.8 地震InSAR同震形变探测与断层滑动分布反演[J/OL]. 成都理工大学学报(自然科学版): 1-13.
	LI Yu-sen, LI Wei-le, XU Qiang, et al. 2025. InSAR co-seismic deformation detection and fault slip distribution inversion of the M_S6.8 earthquake in Dingri, Tibet on January 7, 2025[J/OL]. Journal of Chengdu university of technology(Science & Technology Edition): 1-13 (in Chinese).
[12]	李振洪, 韩炳权, 刘振江, 等. 2022. InSAR数据约束下2016年和2022年青海门源地震震源参数及其滑动分布[J]. 武汉大学学报(信息科学版), 47(6): 887-897.
	LI Zhen-hong, HAN Bing-quan, LIU Zhen-jiang, et al. 2022. Source Parameters and Slip Distributions of the 2016 and 2022 Menyuan Qinghai Earthquakes Constrained by InSAR Observations[J]. Geomatics and Information Science of wuhan University, 47(6): 887-897 (in Chinese).
[13]	鲁人齐, 房立华, 郭志, 等. 2022. 2022年6月1日四川芦山 M_S6.1 强震构造精细特征[J]. 地球物理学报, 65(11): 4299-4310.
	LU Ren-qi, FANG Li-hua, GUO Zhi, et al. 2022. Detailed structural characteristics of the 1 June 2022 M_S6.1 Sichuan Lushan strong earthquake[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 65(11): 4299-4310 (in Chinese).
[14]	鲁人齐, 徐锡伟, 陈立春, 等. 2018. 2017年8月8日九寨沟 M_S7.0 地震构造与震区三维断层初始模型[J]. 地震地质, 40(1): 1-11. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0253-4967.2018.01.001.
	LU Ren-qi, XU Xi-wei, CHEN Li-chun, et al. 2018. Seismotectonics of the 8 august 2017 Jiuzhaigou earthquake and the Three-Dimensional fault models in the seismic region[J]. Seismology and Geology, 40(1): 1-11 (in Chinese). DOI
[15]	石峰, 梁明剑, 罗全星, 等. 2025. 2025年1月7日西藏定日6.8级地震发震构造与同震地表破裂特征[J]. 地震地质, 47(1): 1-15. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0253-4967.2025.01.001.
	SHI Feng, LIANG Ming-jian, LUO Quan-xing, et al. 2025. Seismogenic fault and coseismic surface deformation of the Dingri M_S6.8 earthquake in Tibet, China[J]. Seismology and Geology, 47(1): 1-15 (in Chinese). DOI
[16]	田婷婷, 吴中海. 2023. 西藏申扎-定结裂谷南段丁木错正断层的最新史前大地震事件及其地震地质意义[J]. 地质论评, 69(S1): 53-55.
	TIAN Ting-ting, WU Zhong-hai. 2023. Recent prehistoric major earthquake event of Dingmucuo normal fault in the southern segment of Shenzha-Dingjie rift and its seismic geological significance[J]. Geological Review, 69(S1): 53-55 (in Chinese).
[17]	万永革, 黄少华, 王福昌, 等. 2023. 2022年门源地震序列揭示的断层几何形状及滑动特性[J]. 地球物理学报, 66(7): 2796-2810.
	WAN Yong-ge, HUANG Shao-hua, WANG Fu-chang, et al. 2023. Fault geometry and slip characteristics revealed by the 2022 Menyuan earthquake sequence[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 66(7): 2796-2810 (in Chinese).
[18]	王永哲, 陈石, 陈鲲. 2021. InSAR 数据约束的 2020 年西藏定日 M_W5.7 地震源模型及构造意义[J]. 地震, 41(1): 116-128.
	WANG Yong-zhe, CHEN Shi, CHEN Kun. 2021. Source model and tectonic implications of the 2020 Dingri M_W5.7 earthquake constrained by InSAR data[J]. Earthquake, 41(1): 116-128 (in Chinese).
[19]	魏斌, 刘琦, 王振宇, 等. 2023. 强震震级预测中凹凸体识别与级联破裂相关研究综述[J]. 地震, 43(3): 1-17.
	WEI Bin, LIU Qi, WANG Zhen-yu, et al. 2023. Review on the research of asperity identification and cascading rupture in forecasting of earthquake magnitude[J]. Earthquake, 43(3): 1-17 (in Chinese).
[20]	吴超, 孙晶, 章国威, 等. 2024. 塔里木盆地库车坳陷中生代原型盆地性状及其石油地质意义[J]. 地质学报, 98(12): 3715-3734.
	WU Chao, SUN Jing, ZHANG Guo-wei, et al. 2024. Characteristics of Mesozoic prototype basin in the Kuqa depression of Tarim Basin and its petroleum geological significanc[J]. Acta Geologica Sinica, 98(12): 3715-3734 (in Chinese).
[21]	吴佳杰, 徐啸, 郭晓玉, 等. 2022. 喜马拉雅造山带东段错那裂谷的地壳结构[J]. 地学前缘, 29(4): 221-230. DOI
	WU Jia-jie, XU Xiao, GUO Xiao-yu, et al. 2022. Crustal structure of the Cona rift, eastern Himalaya[J]. Earth Science Frontiers, 29(4): 221-230 (in Chinese). DOI
[22]	吴永祺, 张海明. 2022. 断层几何形态和自发破裂的动力学参数对地震波场的影响[J]. 地球物理学报, 65(3): 965-977.
	WU Yong-qi, ZHANG Hai-ming. 2022. Effects of fault geometry and dynamic parameters of spontaneous rupture on seismic wave field[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 65(3): 965-977 (in Chinese).
[23]	吴中海, 张永双, 胡道功, 等. 2008. 西藏错那-拿日雍错地堑的第四纪正断层作用及其形成机制探讨[J]. 第四纪研究, 28(2): 232-242.
	WU Zhong-hai, ZHANG Yong-shuang, HU Dao-gong, et al. 2008. Quaternary normal faulting and its dynamic mechanism of the Cona-Nariyong Co graben in south-eastern Tibet[J]. Quaternary Sciences, 28(2): 232-242 (in Chinese).
[24]	徐心悦. 2019. 藏南申扎-定结断裂系卡达正断裂晚第四纪活动性及其环境效应[D]. 北京: 中国地震局地质研究所.
	XU Xin-yue. 2019. Late Quaternary activity and its environmental effects of the N-S trend Kharta fault in Xainza-Dinggye rift, Southern Tibet[D]. Institute of Geology, China Earthquake Administration, Beijing (in Chinese).
[25]	薛帅, 卢占武, 李文辉, 等. 2022. 北喜马拉雅错那洞穹窿深部三维电性结构及其构造意义[J]. 中国科学(D辑), 52(8): 1516-1531.
	XUE Shuai, LU Zhan-wu, LI Wen-hui, et al. 2022. Three-dimensional electrical resistivity structure beneath the Cuonadong dome in the Northern Himalayas revealed by magnetotelluric data and its implication[J]. Science China Earth Sciences, 52(8): 1516-1531 (in Chinese).
[26]	张佳伟, 李汉敖, 张会平, 等. 2020. 青藏高原新生代SN走向裂谷研究进展[J]. 地球科学进展, 35(8): 848-862. DOI
	ZHANG Jia-wei, LI Han-ao, ZHANG Hui-ping, et al. 2020. Research progress in cenozoic N-S striking rifts in Tibetan plateau[J]. Advances in Earth Science, 35(8): 848-862 (in Chinese). DOI
[27]	张进江. 2007. 北喜马拉雅及藏南伸展构造综述[J]. 地质通报, 26(6): 639-649.
	ZHANG Jin-jiang. 2007. A Review on the extensional structures in the northern Himalaya and southern Tibet[J]. Geological bulletin of China, 26(6): 639-649 (in Chinese).
[28]	张进江, 郭磊, 丁林. 2002. 申扎-定结正断层体系中、南段构造特征及其与藏南拆离系的关系[J]. 科学通报, 47(10): 738-743.
	ZHANG Jin-jiang, GUO Lei, DING Lin. 2002. The structural characteristics of the south and middle segments of the Shenzha-Dingjie normal fault system and their relationship with the southern Tibetan detachment system[J]. Chinese Science Bulletin, 47(10): 738-743 (in Chinese).
[29]	张丽芬, Bunichiro S, 廖武林, 等. 2016. 基于边界积分方程方法的弯折断层破裂传播过程控制因素分析[J]. 地球物理学报, 59(3): 981-991. DOI
	ZHANG Li-fen, Bunichiro S, LIAO Wu-lin, et al. 2016. Controlling factors analysis of dynamic rupture propagation simulation of curved fault based on Boundary integral equation method[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 59(3): 981-991 (in Chinese).
[30]	张小涛, 姜祥华, 薛艳, 等. 2020. 2020年3月20日西藏定日 M_S5.9 地震总结[J]. 地震地磁观测与研究, 41(4): 193-203.
	ZHANG Xiao-tao, JIANG Xiang-hua, XUE Yan, et al. 2020. Summary of the Dingri M_S5.9 earthquake in Tibet on March 20, 2020[J]. Seismological and Geomagnetic observation and Research, 41(4): 193-203 (in Chinese).
[31]	朱琳, 戴勇, 石富强, 等. 2022. 祁连-海原断裂带库仑应力演化及地震危险性[J]. 地震学报, 44(2): 223-236.
	ZHU Lin, DAI Yong, SHI Fu-qiang, et al. 2022. Coulomb stress evolution and seismic hazards along the Qilian-Haiyuan fault zone[J]. Acta Seismologica Sinica, 44(2): 223-236 (in Chinese).
[32]	Aki K. 1979. Characterization of barriers on an earthquake fault[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 84(B11): 6140-6148.
[33]	Armijo R, Tapponnier P, Mercier, et al. 1986. Quaternary extension in southern Tibet: Field observations and tectonic implication[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 91(B14): 13803-13872.
[34]	Bian S, Gong J F, Zuza A V, et al. 2020. Late Pliocene onset of the Cona rift, eastern Himalaya, confirms eastward propagation of extension in Himalayan-Tibetan orogen[J]. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 544:116383.
[35]	Carena S, Suppe J. 2002. Three-dimensional imaging of active structures using earthquake aftershocks: The Northridge thrust, California[J]. Journal of Structural Geology, 24(4): 887-904.
[36]	Chen Y, Li W, Yuan X H, et al. 2015. Tearing of the Indian lithospheric slab beneath southern Tibet revealed by SKS-wave splitting measurements[J]. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 413: 13-24.
[37]	Chevalier M L, Tapponnier P, van D W J, et al. 2020. Late Quaternary extension rates across the northern half of the Yadong-Gulu rift: Implications for east-west Extensionin southern Tibet[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 125(7): e2019JB019106.
[38]	Dewey J F. 1988. Extensional collapse of orogens[J]. Tectonics, 7(6): 1123-1139.
[39]	Ding L, Kapp P, Cai F L, et al. 2022. Timing and mechanisms of Tibetan plateau uplift[J]. Nature Reviews Earth & Environment, 3: 652-667.
[40]	Gao R, Zhou H, Lu Z W, et al. 2021. Deep seismic reflection evidence on the deep processes of tectonic construction of the Tibetan plateau[J]. Earth Science Frontiers, 28(5): 320-336.
[41]	Guo X Y, Gao R, Zhao J M, et al. 2018. Deep-seated lithospheric geometry in revealing collapse of the Tibetan plateau[J]. Earth Science Reviews, 185: 751-762.
[42]	Guo Z W, Lu R Q, Han Z J, et al. 2024. A 3D Seismotectonic Model and the spatiotemporal relationship of two historical large earthquakes in the Linfen Basin, North China[J]. Applied Sciences, 14(18): 8412.
[43]	Han S C, Zhang H J, Xin H J. 2022. USTClitho2.0: Updated Unified Seismic Tomography Models for continental China lithosphere from Joint Inversion of body-wave arrival times and surface-wave dispersion data[J]. Seismological Research Letters, 93(1): 201-215.
[44]	Harrison T M, Copeland P, Kidd W S F, et al. 1995. Activation of the Nyainqentanghla shear zone: Implications for uplift of the southern Tibetan plateau[J]. Tectonics, 14(3): 658-676.
[45]	Hubbard J, Almeida R, Foster A, et al. 2016. Structural segmentation controlled the 2015 M_W7.8 Gorkha earthquake rupture in Nepal[J]. Geology, 44(8): 639-642.
[46]	Jia K, Zhou S Y, Zhuang J C, et al. 2021. Stress transfer along the western boundary of the Bayan Har block on the Tibet Plateau from the 2008 to 2020 Yutian earthquake sequence in China[J]. Geophysical Research Letters, 48(15): e2021GL094125.
[47]	Kapp P, Guynn J H. 2004. Indian punch rifts Tibet[J]. Geology, 32(11): 993-996.
[48]	Kilsdonk B, Fletcher R C. 1989. An analytical model of hanging-wall and footwall deformation at ramps on normal and thrust faults[J]. Tectonophysics, 163(1-2): 153-168.
[49]	King G C P, Stein R S, Lin J. 1994. Static stress changes and the triggering of earthquakes[J]. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 84(3): 935-953.
[50]	Klemperer S L. 2006. Crustal flow in Tibet: Geophysical evidence for the physical state of Tibetan lithosphere, and inferred patterns of active flow[J]. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 268(1): 39-70.
[51]	Liang X F, Chen L, Tian X B, et al. 2023. Uplifting mechanism of the Tibetan plateau inferred from the characteristics of crustal structures[J]. Science China(Earth Sciences), 66(12): 2770-2790.
[52]	Lin J, Stein R S. 2004. Stress triggering in thrust and subduction earthquakes, and stress interaction between the southern San Andreas and nearby thrust and strike-slip faults[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 109(B2): B02303.
[53]	Liu G S, Lu R Q, He D F, et al. 2024. Deep blind fault activity: A fault model of strong M_W5.5 earthquake seismogenic structures in North China[J]. Remote sensing, 16(10): 1796.
[54]	Lozos J C, Oglesby D D, Duan B, et al. 2011. The effects of double fault bends on rupture propagation: A geometrical parameter study[J]. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 101(1): 385-398.
[55]	Lu R Q, Xu X W, He D F, et al. 2017. Seismotectonics of the 2013 Lushan M_W6.7 earthquake: Inversion tectonics in the eastern margin of the Tibetan plateau[J]. Geophysical Research Letters, 44(16): 8236-8243.
[56]	Lu R Q, Zhao C P, Zhang J Y, et al. 2024. 3D fault model and seismotectonics indicate the potential seismic risk in the Daliang Mountains, southeastern Tibetan plateau[J]. Journal of the Geological Society, 181(2): jgs2023-136.
[57]	Mallet J L. 1992. Discrete smooth interpolation in geometric modelling[J]. Computer-Aided Design, 24(4): 178-191.
[58]	Molnar P, England P, Martinod J. 1993. Mantle dynamics, uplift of the Tibetan plateau, and the Indian Monsoon[J]. Reviews of Geophysics, 31(4): 357-396.
[59]	Molnar P, Tapponnier P. 1978. Active tectonics of Tibet[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 83(B11): 5361-5375.
[60]	Qiu Q, Hill E M, Barbot S, et al. 2016. The mechanism of partial rupture of a locked megathrust: The role of fault morphology[J]. Geology, 44(10): 875-878.
[61]	Seeber L, Armbruster J G. 1984. Some elements of continental subduction along the Himalayan front[J]. Tectonophysics, 105(1-4): 263-278.
[62]	Shi D N, Wu Z H, Klemperer S L, et al. 2015. Receiver function imaging of crustal suture, steep subduction, and mantle wedge in the eastern India-Tibet continental collision zone[J]. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 414: 6-15.
[63]	Smith D K, Escartín J, Schouten H, et al. 2008. Fault rotation and core complex formation: Significant processes in seafloor formation at slow spreading midocean ridges(Mid-Atlantic Ridge, 13-15N)[J]. Geochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems, 9(3): Q03003.
[64]	Styron R H, Taylor M H, Murphy H A. 2011. Oblique convergence, arc-parallel extension, and the role of strike-slip faulting in the High Himalaya[J]. Geosphere, 7(2): 582-596.
[65]	Sun C, Li Z G, Zheng W J, et al. 2019. 3D geometry of range front blind ramp and its effects on structural segmentation of the southern Longmen Shan front, eastern Tibet[J]. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences, 181, 103911.
[66]	Sun X, Zhang J Y, Lu R Q, et al. 2025. Building the 3D seismic fault models for the 2021 M_S6.4 Yunnan Yangbi earthquake: The potential role of pre-existing faults in generating unexpected moderate-strong earthquakes in southeast Xizang[J]. Earthquake Science, 38(1): 1-17.
[67]	Tapponnier P, Peltzer G, Dain A Y L, et al. 1982. Propagating extrusion tectonics in Asia: New insights from simple experiments with plasticine[J]. Geology, 10(12): 611-616.
[68]	Taylor M, YI A. 2009. Active structures of the Himalayan-Tibetan orogen and their relationships to earthquake distribution, contemporary strain field, and Cenozoic volcanism[J]. Geosphere, 5(3): 199-214.
[69]	Taylor M, Yin An, Ryerson F J, et al. 2003. Conjugate strike-slip faulting along the Bangong-Nujiang suture zone accommodates coeval east-west extension and north-south shortening in the interior of the Tibetan plateau[J]. Tectonics 22(4): 1-18.
[70]	Toda S, Stein R S, Richards-Dinger K, et al. 2005. Forecasting the evolution of seismicity in southern California: Animations built on earthquake stress transfer[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research, 110(B5): B05S16.
[71]	Unsworth M J, Jones A G, Wei W, et al. 2005. Crustal rheology of the Himalaya and Southern Tibet inferred from magnetotelluric data[J]. Nature, 438(7064): 78-81.
[72]	Webb A A G, Guo H, Clift P D, et al. 2017. The Himalaya in 3D: Slab dynamics-controlled mountain building and monsoon intensification[J]. Lithosphere, 9(4): 637-651.
[73]	Wesnousky S G. 2006. Predicting the endpoints of earthquake ruptures[J]. Nature, 444(7117): 358-360.
[74]	Yao J Y, Yao D D, Chen F, et al. 2025. A preliminary catalog of early aftershocks following the 7 January 2025 M_S6.8 Dingri, Xizang earthquake[J]. Journal of Earth Science. doi: 10.1007/s12583-025-0210-9.
[75]	Zhang P Z, Mao F, Slemmons D B. 1999. Rupture terminations and size of segment boundaries from historical earthquake ruptures in the basin and range province[J]. Tectonophysics, 308(1-2): 37-52.
[76]	Zhang P Z, Slemmons D B, Mao F. 1991. Geometric pattern, rupture termination and fault segmentation of the Dixie Valley-Pleasant Valley active normal fault system, Nevada, USA[J]. Journal of Structural Geology, 13(2): 165-176.

2025年1月7日西藏定日M_S6.8强震发震断层三维模型与地震构造环境

THREE-DIMENSIONAL MODEL OF SEISMOGENIC FAULT AND SEISMIC ENVIRONMENT OF XIZANG DINGRI M_S6.8 EARTHQUAKE OF JANUARY 7, 2025

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 9

参考文献 76

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	许月怡, 徐贝贝, 徐晨雨, 邵志刚, 胡朝忠. 基于远震P波、强震波形和InSAR联合反演2025年西藏定日M_S6.8地震破裂过程[J]. 地震地质, 2025, 47(3): 734-746.
[2]	陈翰林, 王勤彩, 高锦瑞, 李君. 2025年西藏定日M_S6.8地震序列发震构造[J]. 地震地质, 2025, 47(3): 747-760.
[3]	尹欣欣, 左可桢, 赵翠萍, 蔡润. 西藏定日 M_S6.8 地震重定位及前震序列识别[J]. 地震地质, 2025, 47(3): 850-868.
[4]	王鹏, 戴宗辉, 孔雪, 李铂, 徐长朋, 张梦昕. 西藏定日 M_S6.8 地震序列应力场演化特征分析[J]. 地震地质, 2025, 47(3): 881-896.
[5]	李金, 邓明文, 张治广, 孙业君, 姚远, 徐凯驰. 2024年塔里木盆地尉犁5级震群发震构造[J]. 地震地质, 2025, 47(2): 463-487.
[6]	王雪竹, 吴传勇, 刘建明, 臧柯智, 袁海洋, 高瞻, 张金烁, 马云潇. 2024年1月23日新疆乌什 M_S7.1 地震序列重定位与发震构造[J]. 地震地质, 2025, 47(2): 488-506.
[7]	崔华伟, 尹昕忠, 陈九辉, 郭飚, 李涛, 姚远, 李世莹, 贾震. 帕米尔高原东北部地震活动及构造应力场特征[J]. 地震地质, 2025, 47(2): 577-596.
[8]	石峰, 梁明剑, 罗全星, 乔俊香, 张达, 王鑫, 易文星, 张佳伟, 张迎峰, 张会平, 李涛, 李安. 2025年1月7日西藏定日6.8级地震发震构造与同震地表破裂特征[J]. 地震地质, 2025, 47(1): 1-15.
[9]	盛书中, 王倩茹, 李振月, 李红星, 张小娟, 葛坤朋, 宫猛. 基于构造应力场研究2025年西藏定日6.8级地震的发震构造[J]. 地震地质, 2025, 47(1): 49-63.
[10]	许英才, 郭祥云. 2023年平原M_S5.5地震矩张量反演及发震构造[J]. 地震地质, 2025, 47(1): 284-305.
[11]	王鑫, 张珂, 王玥. 内蒙古阿鲁科尔沁旗M_S5.9与M_S4.7地震序列特征及其发震构造分析[J]. 地震地质, 2024, 46(6): 1314-1331.
[12]	许永强, 雷建设, 胡晓辉. 2021年5月21日云南漾濞M_S6.4地震序列双差重定位及其构造意义[J]. 地震地质, 2024, 46(5): 1066-1090.
[13]	郭祥云, 房立华, 韩立波, 李振月, 李春来, 苏珊. 川滇菱形块体东边界震源机制与应力场特征[J]. 地震地质, 2024, 46(2): 371-396.
[14]	董春丽, 张广伟, 李欣蔚, 王跃杰, 丁大业, 宫卓宏. 基于震源机制和地震定位研究2022年山西古交M_L4.1地震的发震构造[J]. 地震地质, 2024, 46(2): 414-432.
[15]	吴熙彦, 鲁人齐, 张金玉, 孙晓, 徐芳, 陈桂华. 中国地震科学实验场三维断层模型Web展示原型系统[J]. 地震地质, 2024, 46(1): 35-47.

2025年1月7日西藏定日MS6.8强震发震断层三维模型与地震构造环境

THREE-DIMENSIONAL MODEL OF SEISMOGENIC FAULT AND SEISMIC ENVIRONMENT OF XIZANG DINGRI MS6.8 EARTHQUAKE OF JANUARY 7, 2025

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 9

参考文献 76

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

2025年1月7日西藏定日M_S6.8强震发震断层三维模型与地震构造环境

THREE-DIMENSIONAL MODEL OF SEISMOGENIC FAULT AND SEISMIC ENVIRONMENT OF XIZANG DINGRI M_S6.8 EARTHQUAKE OF JANUARY 7, 2025