Tectonophysics, 148 (1988) 131-146 131

Elsevier Science Publishers B.V., Amsterdam - Printed in The Netherlands

Aftershocks of the western Argentina (Caucete) earthquake

of 23 November 1977: some tectonic implications

C-J. LANGER 1 and G.A. BOLLINGER ,

] U.S. Geological Survey, P.O. Box 25046-Mail Stop 966, Denver Federal Center, Denver, CO 80225 (U.S.A.)
* Department of Geological Sciences, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA 24061 (U.S.A.)

(Received April 10,1987; revised version accepted August 14,1987)

Abstract

Langer, C.J. and Bolhnger, G.A., 1988. Aftershocks of the western Argentina (Caucete) earthquake of 23 November
1977: some tectonic implications. Tectonophysics, 148: 131-146.

An aftershock survey, using a network of eight portable and two permanent seismographs, was conducted for the
western Argentina (Caucete) earthquake (MS 7.3) of November 23, 1977. Monitoring began December 6, almost 2
weeks after the main shock and continued for 11 days. The data set includes 185 aftershock hypocenters that range in
the depth from near surface to more than 30 km. The spatial distribution of those events occupied a volume of about
100 km long ~50 km wide X30 km thick. The volumnar nature of the aftershock distribution is interpreted to be a
result of a bimodal distribution of foci that define east- and west-dipping planar zones. Efforts to select which of those
zones was associated with the causal faulting include special attention to the determination of the mainshock focal
depth and dislocation theory modeling of the coseismic surface deformation in the epicentral region. Our focal depth
(25-35 km) and modeling studies lead us to prefer an east-dipping plane as causal. A previous interpretation by other
investigators used a shallower focal depth (17 km) and similar modeling calculations in choosing a west-dipping plane.
Our selection of the east-dipping plane is physically more appealing because it places fault initiation at the base of the
crustal seismogenic layer (rather than in the middle of that layer) which requires fault propagation to be updip (rather
than downdip).

sequence, Kadinsky-Cade (1985) confirmed that

Introduction the earthquake was a double event composed of a
magnitude-6.8 (Ms) foreshock followed 20.8 s
The faulting associated with the western later by a magnitude-7.3 (Ms) main shock. Co-
Argentina (Caucete) earthquake of November 23, ordinates of the two events are approximately
1977, initiated at the northeast edge of the Sierra 31.15S, 67.78OW (foreshock) and 31.73OS,
Pie de Palo, a small mountain range in the western 67.75 W (mainshock) and define a north-south
Sierras de las Pampaenas (Fig. 1). Although origi- separation of some 65 km (Kadinsky-Cade, 1985,
nally thought to be a single Ms 7.4 earthquake fig. 1 herein). The focal depth of the foreshock is
(U.S. Geological Survey, 1977), the twin-event in- taken as 17 km, a value determined by Chinn and
terpretation for the November 23, 1977, main Isacks (1983) using synthetic seismogram match-
shock was first suggested by ST. Harding (U.S. ing of long-period P-waveforms. The main shock
Geological Survey, written commun., 1978) in San focal depth was estimated to be at 17 km (the
Juan, Argentina, at the April 30-May 4, 1979, same as the foreshock) by Kadinsky-Cade (1985),
United States-Argentina seminar presentation on also from P-waveform modeling. However, a sub-
source properties of the 1977 earthquake. Re- sequent interpretation of vertical, broad-band dig-
cently, in a detailed description of the mainshock ital data recorded by three seismic observatories

0040-1951/88/$03.50 Q 1988 Elsevier Science Publishers B.V.

132

24'

Fig. 1. A. Map of southwestern South America showing the principal tectonic provinces. Sierras de las Pampaenas are shown by
horizontal hatchures; the aftershock study area is enclosed by the rectangle. B. Map showing aftershock study area. Foreshock
epicenter (solid S-pointed star, northeast margin of Sierra Pie de Palo) and main shock epicenter (large 6-pointed star, due east of
Vallecito) are from Kadinsky-Cade (1985); asterisks indicate ISC teleseismically located aftershock epicenters determined from 50 or
more station readings, Nov.-Dec., 1977. Reverse fault focal mechanism solutions (equal area, lower hemisphere projections) and
numeric identifiers are from Chinn and Hacks (1983); foreshock (72) and largest aftershocks 11/28 (73) and 12/06 (74). Known
faults are shown by heavy solid lines; dashed where inferred. Hachures on down-dropped sides and Precambrian rocks in the Sierra
Pie de Palo are shown by pattern symbols from INPRES (1977) geologic map. Cities and villages are indicated by square symbols
and names.

(Chiang Mai, Thailand (CHTO); Mashhad, Iran
(MAIO); and Matsushiro, Japan (MAJO)) and the
Graefenberg, West Germany (GRF) array, all with
differing azimuths and distances from the western
Argentina source, suggests strongly that the main
shock had a focal depth between 25 and 35 km
(G.L. Choy, U.S. Geological Survey, written com-
mun., 1987).
The earthquake occurred within the Sierras
Pampeanas tectonic province, a region described
by Jordan and Allmendinger (1986) as a series of
north-trending mountain ranges, separated by
wide, flat basins, that override the nearly horizon-
tally subducted Nazca plate. Structurally, the 1977
earthquake sequence is associated with an uplift of
Precambrian metamorphic and intrusive rocks with
about 2.2 km of vertical relief, and the Valle de1
Bermejo (Fig. l), a basin to the east that contains
more than 2 km of alluvial deposits. Considerable
new information about the seismicity, geology,
and tectonics of western Argentina including the
region of the 1977 earthquake and adjacent areas
has been published or reported recently (Unger,
1981; Chinn and Isacks, 1983; Jordan et al., 1983;
Bastias and Weidmann, 1983; Baldis et al., 1984;
Whitney and Bastias, 1984; Kadinsky-Cade, 1985;
Kadinsky-Cade et al., 1985; Reilinger and Kadin-
sky-Cade, 1985; Jordan and Allmendinger, 1986;
H. Bastias, written commun., 1987; and Bollinger
and Langer 1988).
Both the geology (e.g., basement uplift and
stratigraphic offset on faults) and the seismology
(focal mechanism solutions) are compatible with
east-west compressional stress producing mod-
 MAY (Marayes) 09 DEC 77
2104 UTC !

BRR ( Bermejo ) 11 DEC 77

1700 UTC

Fig. 2. Example seismograms of aftershocks recorded at stations MAY and BRR, see Fig. 3 for station locations. Each seismogram is
a 48-h record, drum speed was 10 min per revolution (60 mm/min) with a trace separation of 1 mm.
134

erate to high-angle, reverse-slip faulting for the
shallow (less than 70 km) intraplate earthquakes.
In the western Sierras de las Pampeanas, including
the Sierra Pie de Palo, those reverse faults are
predominantly east-dipping. Focal mechanism
solutions for the 1977 foreshock and two of the
larger aftershocks shown in Fig. 1 exhibit reverse-
faulting on northerly trending nodal planes (Chinn
and Isacks, 1983). Mechanisms of 11 previous
well-located shallow earthquakes in or near the
Andes and south of 18S latitude indicate similar
solutions (Stauder, 1973; Chinn and Isacks 1983).
In this paper we present the results of an
aftershock study based on local data from a ten-
station seismograph network. The complete net-
work was not in-place until about two weeks after
the main shock, and thus did not monitor the
earliest portions of the aftershock sequence. The
network operated for almost 11 days, recorded
several thousand aftershocks, and provided a large
amount of high-quality data from which to select
events for study (see Fig. 2 for example seismo-
grams).
The objectives of our study are: (1) to locate
accurately a subset of the aftershock hypocenters
considered to be representative of the later portion
of the aftershock sequence; and from those results
(2) infer the tectonic features of the Sierra Pie de
Palo and Valle de1 Bermejo associated with the
foreshock/main shock/aftershock series. Focal
mechanism solutions and intermediate depth
events are discussed only briefly.
Instrumentation and data analysis
Aftershocks were recorded by a temporary net-
work that consisted of eight U.S. Geological Survey
(USGS) vertical component, smoked-paper seis-
mographs augmented by two permanent INPRES
(Instituto National de Prevention Sismica) seis-
mograph stations. Network operation was con-
tinuous from December 6 through December 17,
1977. Table 1 lists the station coordinates and
periods of operation and Fig. 3 shows the station
distribution relative to the aftershock epicenters.
Precise time corrections at all network stations
were determined by comparing UTC radio time
transmissions (WWV or LOL) with recorder clock
times during record changes. Clock drift usually
did not exceed 20 ms/day. System magnifications
of the USGS seismographs were generally low for
post-earthquake monitoring, ranging between
about 30K and 60K at 10 Hz. The amplifier gains
were limited at four stations because they were
sited on alluvial deposits and close to cultural
noise sources. But, owing to the intense aftershock
activity including numerous aftershocks of magni-
tude > 2.0, the low magnification levels posed no
problem. Peak-to-peak deflections of the recorder
styli were limited at 10 mm to help minimize
recorded aftershocks from over-writing each other
(Fig. 2). The photographically recorded seismo-
grams from two permanent INPRES stations (SAJ
in San Juan and CFA near Coronel Fontana) were
particularly useful because they provided short-

TABLE 1

Coordinates for aftershock study seismograph stations

Name Station Lat. Long. Elevation Period of

(OS) (W Cm) Operation
Bermejo BBB 31O34.14 61 37.86 603 Dec. 9-17
Coronel Fontana CFA 31O36.42 68O14.34 621 permanent
Chucuma CHU 31OO6.12 67 O15.06 835 Dec. 5-17
Marayes MAY 31O31.68 61 o 20.28 707 Dec. 6-17
Mogna MOG 30 O41.64 68O18.00 125 Dec. 5-17
San Juan SAJ * 31O31.57 68 o 33.48 689 permanent
San Miguel SAM 32O12.30 67O 35.34 500 Dec. 6-18
Usno SNO 30 o 34.32 6131.92 915 Dec. 6-17
Vallecito VIC 31O44.28 6157.90 700 Dec. 6-18
Cerro Villicun VIL 31 O19.80 68O28.14 690 Dec. 5-17
-
* Wood-Anderson seismograph operated by INPRES (Instituto National de Prevention Sismica) in San Juan.
 32

KILOMETERS

Fig. 3. Map of aftershock epicenters (open circles) determined from locally recorded data. Seismograph stations are shown by open
triangles with center dot and three-letter station codes. Epicenters of intermediate depth events (aftershocks deeper than 100 km) are
shown by solid dots (two of these events are off the west side of the figure). Locations of two orthogonal sets of hypocentral cross
sections are given by A-A', B-B, and C-C, D-D. Note that B-B and D-D are subparallel to the two dominant fault trends in
the area. Other symbols same as for Fig. 1.

period horizontal data to aid in determining accu-
rate S-wave arrival times.
To maintain uniformity and internal con-
sistency of phase-arrival time picks, one person
measured all first motion times of the located
aftershocks. S-phases from seismograms of the
temporary stations (vertical seismometers only)
were identified by the abrupt changes in ampli-
tude and/or period of the seismic signal. Accu-
racy of most P-wave times is considered to be
within +0.05 s; the S-wave readings from SAJ
and CFA records are believed accurate to f0.25 s
and from the temporary stations, the selected S-
phase times are probably accurate to &0.40 s.
Because the amplitudes of the strong signals
were clipped, aftershock magnitudes, Mu, were
estimated by the signal duration method of Lee et
al. (1972). Even though the duration magnitude
136

equation used the parameters derived for Cali-
fornia earthquakes, not being adjusted for the
Argentine hypocentral locale, it does standardize
the relative size of events for this study.
To select the aftershocks used for our study
from the large number of recorded events, we
applied the following arbitrary criteria: (1) the
aftershock had to be large enough to be clearly
recorded at the distant station, SNO (a good sig-
nal level at that outlying location usually assured
that the aftershock had sufficient energy to be well
recorded at most or all of the other network
stations), and (2) clear S-wave arrivals from the
aftershock had to be recorded at CFA and/or
SAJ as well as at least two other stations with
good azimuthal separation (usually CHU, VIC, or
VIL; see Fig. 3). The above procedure resulted in
the selection of 270 aftershocks as candidates for
analysis.
Of the 270 selected events, acceptable hypo-
centers (RMS G 0.25 s, ERH < 2.0 km, ERZ Q 4.0
km) were determined by HYP071 (Lee and Lahr,
1975) for 185 aftershocks and nine intermediate-
depth earthquakes (a listing of the various loca-
tion parameters and error measures for all 194
shocks is given in Bollinger and Langer, 1988).
With two exceptions, the hypocenters were com-
puted using at least eight P-phase and two S-phase
data. The average root-mean-square (RMS) error
of the travel-time residuals was 0.12 s; averages of
the standard hypocentral errors indicated +0.7
km for the horizontal and 51.5 km in depth
(ERH and ERZ, respectively, in the HYP071
standard error statistics). Although these ex-
pressed standard errors do not represent actual
error limits (Boyd and Snoke, 1984) use of S-phase
data, as discussed later, improve the location accu-
racy. Distribution of the HYP071 solution quality
measures are: (A) 16% (B) 56% and (C) 28%.
Thus, more than 70% of the solutions are rated as
good to excellent.
To characterize the reliability of the aftershock
focal depths, values of ~nimum station-to-epi-
center distance/depth of focus ( Dti,/Dfoc) were
calculated and averaged for depth intervals of O-5
km, 5-10 km, and > 10.0 km (Table 2a). The
deepest interval (> 10.0 km) contains 142 (77%) of
the accepted aftershock locations and has an aver-
age Dti,/Df,ratio of 1.28. Although Lee et al.
(1971) and Lee and Stewart (1981) require a
De/D%, of less than 1.0 for reliable focal
depths, the basis for their statement is predicated
on hypocenters computed by P-arrival times only.
Buland (1976) states that the use of S data, com-
bined with their corresponding P-times, improves
the quality of earthquake hypocenters. For

TABLE 2

Aftershock depth statistics

(a) Comparison of average and spread of L&,/I), and ERZ 2 against depth intervals of hypocenters-all aftershocks

Depth interval Number of &iJD,, ERZ (&km)

(km) aftershocks
average spread average spread

0-d 5.0 12 22.06 6.88-36.25 2.36 0.85-3.63

5.0- Q 10.0 31 5.56 0.75 9.66 1.57 0.73-4.00
> 10.0 142 1.28 0.03- 3.49 1.38 0.18-3.99
(b) Comparison of average and spread of ERZ against D,&D, intervals-ah aftershocks

Dti,/%x Number of ERZ(ztkm)

interval (km) aftershocks
average spread

O-6 1.0 60 0.73 0.19- 2.50

1.0-d 2.0 60 1.63 0.38- 3.99
2.0-d 10.0 54 1.83 0.73- 4.00
> 10.0 11 2.40 0.8% 3.63

Din/Of, = minimum station-to-epicenter distance/depth of focus.

2 ERZ = HYPO71 depth standard error.
 137

TABLE 3 and station corrections developed by Bollinger

P-wave velocity model-Sierra Pie de Palo region in western and Langer (1988) for the network. Given the
Argentina (from Bollinger and Langer, 1988) extreme variation (O-6 km) of the thickness of the
sediments beneath the network seismographs and
P-wave velocity Thickness Depth to top
(km) of layer (km) the local geologic and physiographic complexities,
(km/s)
2.87 2.4 0
that model development was no trivial task. Basi-
5.88 7.6 2.4 cally, the procedure consisted of determining an
6.2 22.0 10.0 average two-layer, lo-km thick sedimentary and
1.3 23.0 32.0 upper basement velocity structure (from shallow
8.1 half-space 55.0
refraction measurements) and combining that with
v&,/v, = 1.70. Volponis (1968) middle and lower crust velocity
and thickness estimates along with J.C. Castanos
(oral commun., 1977) estimates of the upper man-
locating earthquakes within or just outside small tle velocity and total crustal thickness. Addition-
networks, Uhrhammer (1980) has demonstrated ally, individual station corrections were de-
the importance of S data, particularly when the termined to account for systematic traveltime dif-
S-times are from peripheral stations. Through ex- ferences at each station site resulting from (1) the
amination of the earthquake location problem, average velocity model and (2) unknown
Ellsworth and Roecker (1981) conclude that be- sources. Those corrections incorporated the aver-
cause S waves add information that can not be age HYPO71 travel-time residuals from selected,
replicated by P waves considerable improvement well-recorded events together with the difference,
in the control of hypocenter parameters results at each station, between known (from refraction
from a mix of P- and S-wave data. We do not data) and model (average) one-way vertical
disagree that, in principal, if D,&Q, < 1.0, focal travel times. Serious error in locations is probably
depths will be better determined than if D,,,JD, absent as indicated by the aforementioned error
> 1.0. Nevertheless, if good quality S data are and quality measures for the aftershock hypo-
used in conjunction with P data, the resultant centers and the internal consistency of our results.
hypocentral locations are probably reliable even if
the D,,,JDf, ratio is somewhat greater than 1.0.
Intermediate depth earthquakes
Some measure of depth reliability may also be
indicated by the values of ERZ listed in Bollinger
and Langer (1988). Averages of ERZ were con- Nine earthquakes with depths between 110 km
trasted against the three depth intervals and aver- and 135 km were located during this study. Fig-
age values of D,,,JDf, in Table 2(a) and, against ures 3, 4, and 5 show those hypocenters clearly
four intervals of D,,/D, in Table 2(b). Even separated in depth (about 70 km) from the
though results of the comparison are not conclu- aftershock volume. These intermediate depth
sive, they do show that, for the aftershocks studied, shocks are associated with the flat segment (dip
ERZ as well as Dti,/Df, tend to minimize with of about 10E) of a major seismic zone related to
increasing depth. Table 2 suggests then that most the Nazca plate and beneath the study area.
hypocenters below 10 km have dependable depth According to Barazangi and Isacks (1976) that
constraints and that there are also some hypo- zone occurs within the descending lithosphere.
centers above 10 km that may be useful for inter- They show a vertical section (D-D in their Fig. 4)
pretating the spatial characteristics of the in which earthquakes cluster in depth intervals of
aftershocks. about 20-60 km and 80-130 km that is within a
Any systematic locational error or bias is most horizontal range of approximately 50 km on either
likely the result of network geometry coupled with side (E-W) of the 1977 aftershock region. Thus,
the inadequacies of the four-layer over a half-space aftershocks of the 1977 event and the intermediate
P-wave velocity model (Table 3), the V,/V, ratio, depth earthquakes are in the same general depth
138

A DISTANCE (KY) A
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
I

20 -

40-

ii 60c
Y
c

: 801
n
w
0

100 -

t
. .
. . .
120 - .

.
140-

B DISTANCE (KM) B
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140

NO.
40 - x I
po -
Y

ES0 -
n

:
100 -

. . .
0 . l*
120 - .

140 -

I *

Fig. 4. Vertical section plots of hypocenters along sections A-A (top) and B-B (bottom). Inset shows histograms for ERH and
ERZ in kilometers (HYP071; Lee and Lahr, 1975). See Fig. 3 for locations of section lines. Symbols: solid five-pointed star is
foreshock hypocenter; solid six-pointed star is main shock hypocenter; open circles denote aftershock hypocenters and solid dots are
for intermediate depth foci. No vertical exaggeration.
 139

intervals (2-35 km and 110-135 km). The cor- earthquakes, between the selected data set of
respondence, both in depth range and spatial sep- Barazangi and Isacks (1976) and our aftershock
aration for shallow and intermediate depth data set helps support our arguments that the

c DISTANCE (KM) c

40 - o
0
0

s 6o
Y

= 80 -

iii
0
100 -

l * .
. . . l
120 -
.

140 -

LJ DISTANCE (KM) D
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
0
I I I I I

20 -

g60 -
Y

=80-
0
w -
0
100 -

- . . .
. . .
120 -
.

.
140 -

Fig. 5. Vertical section plots of hypocenters along sections C-C (top) and D-D (bottom). See Fig. 3 for the locations of
cross-section lines and Fig. 4 for histograms for ERH and ERZ in kilometers (HYPO71; Lee and Lahr, 1975). Symbols are same as in
Fig. 4. No vertical exaggeration.
140
velocity model values determined by Bollinger and
Langer (1988) are reasonable.
St&e of stress and earthquake focaI mechanisms
The Sierra Pie de Palo epicentral area is within
a broad region of central Chile and western
Argentina where the crust is being compressed in
an east-west direction. From the alignment of
earthquake focal mechanism P-axes, Stauder
(1975) showed much of Peru to be in east-west
compression. Chinn and Isacks (1983) presented
focal mechanisms for earthquakes located outside
Peru that indicate east-west compression in west-
em South America, and, in particular, reverse-
faulting mechanisms on northerly-stung planes
(Fig. 1) for the November 23, 1977 foreshock and
two large aftershocks (Ms 5.8 on November 28
and h4s 5.9 on December 6). Chinn and Isacks
(1983) also reported a similar (reverse faulting)
focal mechanism for the Ms 6.0, September 26,
1972 earthquake in the Sierra Pie de Palo locale.
In Jordan et al. (1983), Andean tectonics is
studied in relation to the geometry of the sub-
ducted Nazca plate. They noted that the distribu-
tion of the crustal seismicity is similar to the
patterns of the Pliocene-Pleistocene geologic
structures. They interpret this similarity to imply
that the Neogene deformation of the Andes is
continuing today.
With respect to the area of this aftershock
study, Jordan et al. (1983) and Jordan and
Allmendinger (1986) compared it to the area of
Laramide-age deformation in North America,
pointing out that Pliocene-Pleistocene uplifts of
the crystalline basement (the Sierra Pie de Palo as
an example) took place on reverse-faults in the
Pampean Ranges. They also observed that, above
the flat segments of the subducting Nazca plate
and east of the Andes, both the geology and the
seismicity indicate horizontal compression due to
plate convergence as far as about 800 km from the
trench. Recent field observations by R.A. Whitney
(Mackey School of Mines, Reno, Nevada, written
commun., 1986) and H.E. Bastias (written com-
mun., 1987) show the west side of the Valle de1
Bermejo being thrust against the east flank of the
Sierra Pie de Palo, providing additional evidence
of east-west compression in the epicentral region.
Source size: fault length, rupture area and source
volume
The 65 km separation of the two shocks com-
posing the double mainshock constitute one esti-
mate of the fault length associated with this event.
However, that estimate is probably minimal be-
cause it does not account for any faulting beyond
the terrnini of the line defined by the two epi-
centers.
The principal spatial characteristics of the 185
aftershocks are illustrated in Figs. 3, 4, and 5.
Figure 3 shows that most of the aftershock activity
is between the foreshock and the main shock. The
spatial pattern of hypocenters in cross section
(Figs. 4 and 5) does not immediately suggest a
planar distribution but rather defines a complex
volume about 30 km (Z) by 50 km (E-W) by 100
km (N-S). The north-south dimension constitutes
another estimate of the fault length which in this
case, may be over estimated because it might
include faulting at the ends that was not part of
the mainshock process.
Note that the seismic source volume is situated
somewhat asy~et~caBy with respect to the
surface expression of the Sierra Pie de Palo, that
is, roughly 37% of the aftershock volume (contain-
ing about 80 or 43% of the hypocenters) is within
the eastern half of the mountain; the remaining
aftershocks are located to the east in the Valle de1
Bermejo. The Sierra Pie de Palo possesses a rather
high degree of north-south sy~et~ and, with
one exception, the western half of the feature is
void of aftershock seismicity. The 34 ISC locations
(Fig. 1) also show the same general pattern as our
aftershocks but appear to be concentrated more to
the east. Only about 25% of the ISC epicenters are
beneath the surface expression of the Sierra Pie de
Palo.
There are relatively few hypocenters in the 10
to 25 km depth range (Figs. 4 and 5) resulting in
a pattern with a hollow zone in vertical section.
This hollow zone may define a region of nearly
complete strain relaxation about the mainshock.
For such a case, the causal fault displacement
would occur in a ~~y-str~n~ inner-zone with
the later aftershocks occurring on the periphery of
that zone. Aftershocks in the outer-zone would
 141

be due to strain from the dynamic loading brought and Utsu (1969) overestimated the source dimen-
about by the initial shock, perhaps in conjunction sions.)
with the ambient stress field. Similar examples Estimating a fault plane area based on the
have been cited by King et al. (1985) for dip-slip maximum dimensions of the 1977 aftershock zone,
(normal) faulting in the Gulf of Corinth and Ouyed (Figs. 3 and 4) gives values (3000-4000 km) that
et al. (1983) for dip-slip (reverse) faulting near El are two to three times larger than the area pre-
Asnam, Algeria. Alternatively, the observed hol- dicted by the magnitude-fault area relationships.
low effect may be the result of crustal strength or Outward migration of aftershocks with time
rheology variations with depth. and/or the occurrence of aftershocks related to
Statistical correlations between earthquake secondary faulting could, and probably did in-
magnitude and surface fault rupture have been crease the extent of the aftershock zone. Using
made by Slemmons (1977) and Mark and Bonilla lower magnitude shocks (M, as small as 2.1 in
(1977) and refined recently by Bonilla et al. (1984). this study) than those used to derive the magni-
But these relationships were developed using tude-fault plane area relations would also result in
surface measurements of fault length and thus an enlarged aftershock area being considered.
cannot be directly applied to the 1977 Argentina
earthquake owing to the almost complete absence Source geometry: dips of the fault planes
of surface fault rupture (refer to Whitney and
Bastias, 1984, for a brief description of 1977 fault In vertical dip-section (Fig. 4, A-A), the
displacement). Wyss (1979) suggested that the use aftershock foci strongly suggest a bifurcating dis-
of fault area (A in km2) rather than only consider- tribution with east- and west-dipping branches.
ing length would improve magnitude estimates. In These branches extend to depths of more than 30
developing his preferred equation, M = 4.15 + log km from their juncture at about 15 km in depth.
A for M > 5.6, he advocated defining the fault The two nodal planes in each of the three focal
plane area by using the length of surface ruptures, mechanisms developed for events in this sequence
the spatial extent of aftershocks, analyses of (Fig. 1) have east and west dips that generally
seismic body and surface waves, and static dislo- agree with the aftershock distribution and thereby
cation modeling of geodetic displacements. Sir@ suggest that multiple faults dipping in both direc-
et al. (1980) refined and added to Wyss data and, tions were active.
using the basic premise of Wyss (1979) extended The question remains, however, as to the mech-
the magnitude-fault area statistics to include anics of the doublet mainshock fault(s) and its
specific magnitudes of Ms and Mw. Their linear direction of dip. Kadinsky-Cade et al. (1985)
regression of magnitude versus area results in the studied the observed 1 m of coseismic uplift asso-
expression Ms = a + b log A where the preferred ciated with the earthquake using Volponis (1979)
value for a = 4.402 and b = 0.929. The equations data from an approximate east-west level-line
developed in the Wyss, Singh et al. studies predict survey that was diverted around the south end of
that the magnitude 7.3 (MS) Argentine mainshock the Sierra Pie de Palo. Applying the dislocation
and the magnitude 6.8 (MS) foreshock could rup- modeling technique of Savage and Hastie (1966)
ture faults with areas of about 1300-1400 km2 that uses measured surficial deformation to esti-
and 350-450 km2, respectively. Similar rupture mate the geometry and displacement of a buried
areas result from Utsus (1969) relationship be- fault, Kadinsky-Cade et al. (1985) and Reilinger
tween average aftershock area (excluding swarms), and Kadinsky-Cade (1985) conclude that the MS
.&, and the mainshock magnitude, M, where 7.3 mainshock was accompanied by nearly 4 m of
M, = 4.1 + log A,. (Wyss study is virtually inde- reverse slip on a buried, north-striking ( - N2 W)
pendent of Utsus work in that only 11 of the 83 fault. They used a subset (108) of our 185
magnitude-area measurements used by Wyss were aftershock locations to help guide the placement
derived from Utsu (1969); Wyss believed that the and size of their proposed fault which they de-
aftershock zone as defined by Utsu and Seki (1955) fined as 80 km long X 24 km wide (area = 1920
142

km*) and dipping west at 35 from 17 km to
some 30 km in depth (see Kadinsky-Cade et al.,
1985, their figs. 6 and 7). Addition~ly, Kadinsky-
Cade et al. (1985) discuss attempts to model a
conjugate east-dipping fault, and found that their
west-dipping plane fit the asymmetry of observed
uplift (steeper on the east side) better than an
east-dipping plane. However, they noted two diffi-
culties posed by the west-dip-fault model:
(1) Fault rupture must be downdip from an
initiation point at about 17 km deep and near the
middle of the seismogenic layer.
Most large earthquake faults are observed to
rupture updip from near the base of the seismo-
genie layer (Das and Seholtz, 1983; Sibson, 1982;
Smith and Richins, 1984). Because Kadinsky-Cade
et al. (1985) estimated their mainshock doublet
focal depths (both 17 km) to be accurate to *5
km, they judged the direction of fault propagation
to be non-critical.
(2) There is an offset of about 10 km between
their proposed fault plane and the more easterly
located hypocenter for the mainshock. They con-
clude that the 10 km offset might not be real
owing to uncertainty in their location and non-
uniqueness in the matching of a fault model to a
single leveling line.
Thus, Kadinsky-Cade et al. (1985) primarily
supported a west-dipping fault on the basis of the
match between their model results and the mea-
sured uplift pattern.
Note, that a focal depth for the mainshock
of 25-35 km, from the analysis of broad-band
data (Choy, written commun., 1987) rather than

30.8C 6 7. ZOO

ct-luv

VIL

0 I I
30 km J_
B
(a)

Fig. 6. (a) Epicenter map and (b) vertical section plots of hypocenters showing interpreted east-dipping (53O) fault striking NO9OE
(rectangular box and heavy line). Aftershock symbols indicate magnitude (M,) intervals where triangles = 2-2.9, circles = 3-3.9, and
squares = 4-4.9; five and six pointed stars are foreshock and preferred location of main shock, respectively.

A DIST (KM)
B DIST (KM)
40.0
50.0
Fig. 6b.
the 17 km of Kadinsky-Cade et al. (1985), places it
at the base of the east-dipping aftershock distribu-
tion rather than at the top of the belt-dipping
aftershock foci (Fig. 6). Because that basal loca-
tion is more in accord with known observations,
we were motivated to perform ad~tion~ model-
ing calculations for the coseismic uplift data.
Modeling surface deformation using dislocation
theory is intrinsically non-u~que. A classic exam-
ple of this characteristic was presented by Stauder
and Bollinger (1966) in their study of the 1964,
Ms 8.3 Alaskan earthquake. Applying dislocation
theory to Plafkers (1965) measurements of surface
deformation, Press (1965) and Press and Jackson
(1965) inferred the causal fault motion to be dip-
143
(b,)
B
00
0
(b$
0
slip on a near vertical plane. Later Stauder and
Bollinger (1966) used virtually the same data and
modeling technique to show that a shallow-dip-
ping thrust fault was an equally valid interpreta-
tion of the deformational data.
Results of our modeling calculations shown in
Fig. 7 are for a uniform reverse displacement of
4.9 m over the entire surface of a rectangular,
eat-~pp~g fault plane 60 km long by 18 km
wide with its upper boundary at 14 km below the
surface (see Fig. 6). We also employed dislocation
theory using an algorithm similar but more versa-
tile than the one developed by Savage and Hastie
(1966), as had Kadinsky-Cade et al. (1985). There
are slight differences in the results from the two
144

-100
loo-
EAST EDGE OF
SIERRA PIE DE PALO
j
+ SO- - SO

H
9
p 60- -60

: 40- -40

9 WEST EDGE OF
I= 20- SIERRA PIE DE PALO
r!
L

O-

--20
I 1 1 I I I I 1 I I I I I
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 SO so 100 110 120
DISTANCE Ikml

Fig. 7. Comparison of modeled vertical deformation based on dislocation theory. Solid dots are observed elevation changes from the
leveling surveys (Volponi, 1979) described by Kadinsky-Cade et al. (1985). The long dash-short dash curve is from a west-dipping
fault described by Kadinsky-Cade et al. (1985) in their fig. 6; the dashed curve shows results obtained using the same west-dipping
fault parameters in our dislocation modeling program; the solid curve indicates our results from east-dipping fault model.

algorithms (shown in Fig. 7) but they are negligi- the 1 m of coseismic uplift measured by leveling
ble. We judge that our fit to the level-line data surveys.
using an east-dipping plane ( - 53 ) is much bet- (3) We interpret the west-dipping aftershock
ter than Kadinsky-Cade et al. (1985) fit for their foci to be associated with secondary faulting and
east-dipping plane. We also judge that our results conjugate with the causal fault. We do recognize,
are as good as those for Kadinsky-Cades west- however, that it is possible for those foci, either by
dipping planes fit, except for the agreement with themselves or in combination with the easterly
the two most extreme uplift values. Our fit is dipping activity, to be associated with some part
certainly adequate to demonstrate that an east- of the causal faulting.
dipping causal fault is a viable candidate for the (4) The selection of the direction of dip for the
source fault of this double earthquake. mainshock faulting depends on whether primary
emphasis is placed on (1) its focal depth, which
Conclusions determines location of initiation of faulting within
the seismogenic crust and updip or downdip rup-
The results from our portable network study of ture propagation or (2) on the fidelity achieved in
the aftershock sequence following the November modeling the observations of its associated surface
23, 1977, Caucete, Argentina earthquake plus a deformation. We choose the former, which leads
revised estimate of the mainshock focal depth lead to a causal east dip, while Kadinsky-Cade et al.
us to propose the following conclusions: chose the latter which requires a westerly dip.
(1) In vertical dip-section, the aftershock foci
exhibit a bifurcated distribution with the branches Acknowledgmenk
dipping to the east and to the west.
(2) We interpret the east-dipping aftershock Our appreciation is extended to the Instituto
foci to be associated with the causal fault for the National de Prevention Sismica (INPRES) and all
mainshock of this doublet earthquake and for personnel who gave their time and resources dur-
the faulting to have ruptured updip from an ini- ing the field study. We are particularly indebted to
tiation depth of 25-35 km. This faulting caused Ing. Julio Aguirre Ruiz, Director, and Dr. Juan C.
 145

Castano, staff seismologist, for their assistance in INPRES (Instituto National de Prevention Sismica), 1977. El
arranging and providing the necessary scientific terremoto de San Juan de1 23 de Noviembre de 1977,
Informe Preliminar. Republica Argentina, San Juan, 103
and logistical support. We are also grateful to S.T.
PP.
Algermissen for his endeavors in coordinating this Jordan, T.E. and Allmendinger, R.W., 1986. The Sierras
joint U.S.-Argentine post-earthquake research ef- Pampeanas of Argentina: a modem analogue of Rocky
fort. Mountain foreland deformation. Am. J. Sci., 276: 737-764.
The authors express gratitude to J.P. Whitcomb Jordan, T.E., Isacks, B.L., Alhnendinger, R.W., Brewer, J.A.,

and R.F. Henrisey for their work in the field and Ramos, V.A. and Ando, C.J., 1983. Andean tectonics related
to geometry of subducted Nazca plate. Geol. Sot. Am
to Martha Adams, who carefully read and
Bull., 94: 341-361.
processed the seismic data. We are also indebted Kadinsky-Cade, K., 1985. Seismotectonics of the Chile margin
to George Choy for his time and efforts in de- and the 1977 Caucete earthquake of western Argentina. Ph.
termining the main shock focal depth. E. Crans- D. thesis, Cornell Univ., Ithaca, N.Y., 253 pp.
wick and A.J. Crone critically reviewed the Kadinsky-Cade, K., Reilinger, R. and Isacks, B.L., 1985.
Surface deformation associated with the November 23,
manuscript, giving a generous amount of time in
1977, Caucete, Argentina earthquake sequence. J. Geophys.
making constructive suggestions.
Res., 90: 12691-12700.
King, G.C.P., Onyang, Z.X., Papadimitriou, P., Deschamps,
References
A., Gagnepain, J., Houseman, G., Jackson, J.A., Soufleris,
Alhnendinger, R.W., Ramos, V.A., Jordan, T.E., Palma, M. C. and Virieux, J., 1985. The evolution of the Gulf of
and Isacks, B.L., 1983. Paleogeography and Andean struc- Corinth (Greece): an aftershock study of the 1981 earth-
tural geometry, northwest Argentina. Tectonics, 2: 1-16. quakes. Gcophys. J. R. Astron. Sot., 80: 677-693.
Baldis, B., Beresi, M., Bordonaro, 0. and Vaca, A., 1984. The Lee, W.H.K. and Lahr, J.C., 1975. HYPO71 (revised): a com-
Argentine procordillera as a key to Andean structure. Epi- puter program for determining hypocenter, magnitude, and
sodes, 7(3): 14-19. first-motion pattern of local earthquakes. U.S. Geol. Surv.,
Barazangi, M. and Isacks, B., 1976. Spatial distribution of Open-File Rep., 113 pp.
earthquakes and subduction of the Nazca plate beneath Lee, W.H.K. and Stewart, S.W., 1981. Principles and applica-
South America. Geology, 4: 686-692. tions of microearthquake networks. Advan. Geophys.,
Bastias, H.E. and Weidmann, N., 1983. Mapa de fallamiento Suppl. 2. Academic Press, New York, N.Y., 293 pp.
modern0 de la provincia de San Juan, 1: 5CQlOO. Instituto Lee, W.H.K., Eaton, M.S. and Brabb, E.E., 1971. The earth-
National de Prevention Sismica (INPRES), San Juan, quake sequence near Danville, California, 1970. Bull.
Argentina. Seismol. Sot. Am., 61: 1771-1794.
Bollinger, G.A. and Langer, C.J., 1988. Development of a Lee, W.H.K., Bennett, R.E. and Meagher, K.L., 1972. A method
velocity model for locating aftershocks in the Sierra Pie de of estimating magnitude of local earthquakes from signal
Palo region of western Argentina. U.S. Geol. Surv. Bull., duration. U.S. Geol. Surv., Open-File Rep., 28 pp.
1795, 35 pp. Mark, R.K. and Bonilla, M.G., 1977. Regression analysis of
Bonilla, M.G., Mark, R.K. and Lienkaemper, J.J., 1984. Statis- earthquake magnitude and surface fault length using the
tical relations among earthquake magnitude, surface rup- 1970 data of Bonilla and Buchanan. U.S. Geol. Surv.,
ture length, and surface fault displacement. Bull. Seismol. Open-File Rep., 77-614: 8 pp.
Sot. Am., 74: 2374-2411. Ouyed, M., Yielding, G., Hatzfeld, D. and King, G.C.P., 1983.
Boyd, T.M. and Snoke, A.J., 1984. Error estimates in some An aftershock study of the El Asnam (Algeria) earthquake
commonly used earthquake location programs. Earthquake of 10 October 1980. Geophys. J. R. Aston. Sot., 73:
Notes, 55(2): 3-6. 605-639.
Buland, R., 1976. The mechanism of locating earthquakes. 4afker, G., 1965. Tectonic deformation associated with the
Bull. Seismol. Sot. Am., 66: 173-187. 1964 Alaska earthquake. Science, 148: 1675-1687.
Chinn, D.S. and Isacks, B.L., 1983. Accurate source depths and Press, F., 1965. Displacements, strains, and tilts at teleseismic
focal mechanisms of shallow earthquakes in western South distances. J. Geophys. Res., 70: 2395-2412.
America and the New Hebrides Island Arc. Tectonics, 2: Press, F. and Jackson, D., 1965. Alaska earthquake, 27 March
529-563. 1964-vertical extent of faulting and elastic strain energy
Das, S. and Scholtz, C., 1983. Why large earthquakes do not release. Science, 147: 867-868.
nucleate at shallow depths. Nature, 305: 621-623. Reihnger, R. and Kadinsky-Cade, K., 1985. Earthquake defor-
Ellsworth, W.L. and Roecker, S.W., 1981. Sensitivity of the mation cycle in the Andean back-arc, Western Argentina. J.
earthquake location problem to network geometry. In: S.W. Geophys. Res., 90: 12701-12712.
Roecker-Seismicity and Tectonics of the Pam&Hindu Savage, J.C. and Hastie, L.M., 1966. Surface deformation
Kush Region of Central Asia. Ph.D. Thesis, Massachusetts associated with dip-slip faulting. J. Geophys. Res., 71:
Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Mass., pp. 57-93. 4897-4904.
146

Sibson, R.H., 1982. Fault zone models, heat flow, and the Unger, R., 1981. Regional seismology in Argentina. Air Force
depth distribution of earthquakes in the continental crust Office of Scientific Research, Bolling AFB, D.C., Final
of the United States. Bull. Seismol. Sot. Am., 72: 151-163. Tech. Rep. ARPA No. AO3291-26, 45 pp.
Singh, S.K., Bazan, E. and Esteva, L., 1980. Expected earth- Utsu, T., 1969. Aftershocks and earthquake statistics (I). J.
quake magnitude from a fault. Bull. Seismol. Sot. Am., 70: Fat. Sci., Hokkaido Univ., VII (3): 129-195.
903-914. Utsu, T. and Seki, A., 1954. A relation between the area of
Slemmons, D.B., 1977. Faults and earthquake magnitude: U.S. aftershock region and the energy of the main shock. J.
Army Eng. Waterw. Exp. Stn., Vicksburg, Miss., Misc. Pap. Seismol. Sot. Jpn., 7: 233-240.
S-73-1, Rep. 6: 129 pp. U.S. Geological Survey, 1977. Preliminary determination of
Smith, R.B. and Richins, W.D., 1984. Seismicity and earth- epicenters. Monthly Listing for the months of November
quake hazards of Utah and the Wasatch Front: Paradigm and December, 1977.
and paradox. Proc. Conf. XXVI, A Workshop on Evalua- Volponi, F.S., 1968. Los terremotos de Mendoza de1 21 de
tion of Regional and Urban Earthquake Hazards and Risk Octubre de 1968 y la estructura de la corteza terrestre (The
in Utah. In: U.S. Geol. Surv., Open-File Rep. 84-763: Mendoza earthquakes of 21 October 1968 and the structure
73-112. of the earths crust). Univ. Nat. Cuyo, Fat., Ing., Acta
Stauder, W., 1973. Mechanism and spatial distribution of Luyana Ing., XII: 95-110.
Chilean earthquakes with relation to subduction of the Volponi, F.S., 1979. Report of the Argentina-United States
oceanic plate. J. Geophys. Res., 78: 5033-5061. binational symposium about the Caucete earthquake of
Stauder, W., 1975. Subduction of the Nazca plate under Peru November 23rd, 1977. Instituto Sismologico Zonda, Uni-
as evidenced by focal mechanisms and by seismicity. J. versidad National de San Juan, San Juan, 44 pp.
Geophys. Res., 80: 1053-1064. Whitney, R.A. and Bastias, H., 1984. The Pre-Cordilleran
Stauder, W. and Bollinger, G.A., 1966. The focal mechanism of active overthrust belt, San Juan Province, Argentina (Field
the Alaska earthquake of March 28, 1964, and of its Trip 17). AMU. Meet. 19th Geol. Sot. Am., Reno, Nev.,
aftershock sequence. J. Geophys. Res., 71: 5283-5296. 1984, Western Geol. Excursions: 354-386.
Uhrhammer, R.A., 1980. Analysis of small seismographic sta- Wyss, M., 1979. Estimating maximum expectable magnitude of
tion networks. Bull. Seismol. Sot. Am., 70: 1369-1380. earthquakes from fault dimensions. Geology, 7: 336-340.