A geologic recipe for transient slip within the seismogenic zone:
Insight from the Guerrero seismic gap, Mexico
Allen Husker1, Luca Ferrari2, Claudia Arango-Galván1, Fernando Corbo-Camargo3, and Jorge Arturo Arzate-Flores2
1
Instituto de Geofísica, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, 04510 Mexico City, Mexico
2
Centro de Geociencias, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Juriquilla 76230, Mexico
3
CONACYT–Centro de Geociencias, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, 76230 Juriquilla, Mexico
ABSTRACT
The largest-magnitude slow slip events (SSEs) in the world are
found to invade the seismogenic zone in the Guerrero seismic gap in
Mexico. The Guerrero SSEs repeat within the same region every 4
yr. Here we examine the geological and geophysical evidence for the
mechanism that allows for transient slip in the gap and at no other
point along the >1000-km-long subduction zone. We find that long-
lasting past magmatic activity most likely produced an imperme-
able gabbroic layer in the lower crust within the gap. This body has
acted as a seal to trap fluids and over-pressurize the plate interface,
thereby generating a transient slip region allowing for SSEs to invade
the seismogenic zone. This suggests that transient slip can occur in
typically seismogenic regions, but requires special conditions. It also
adds to the growing evidence that the Guerrero gap may have a lower
seismic hazard compared to the rest of the coast, which is opposite
to what is reported by government agencies.
INTRODUCTION
Slow slip events (SSEs) are found to repeat within a given region in
a subduction zone. Commonly this is in the transition between the updip
brittle zone, where earthquakes occur, and the downdip freely slipping
ductile regime (Hyndman et al., 2015; Audet and Kim, 2016). Evidence
suggests that a seal at the base of the crust just updip from the mantle
wedge tip traps fluids, creating very elevated pore fluid pressure, which
allows for transient slip as opposed to stable sliding or dynamic slip dur-
ing earthquakes (Audet et al., 2009; Peacock et al., 2011). However, this
model does not explain the along-strike limits of SSE regions nor those
SSE regions that have been observed further updip on the plate interface
within the seismogenic zone where megathrust earthquakes typically occur
(Radiguet et al., 2012; Dixon et al., 2014; Wallace et al., 2016). An out-
standing question is, then, what geophysical conditions define the limits
of a SSE region. Brudzinski and Allen (2007) linked the limits of SSEs
with specific recurrence intervals to the overlying plate geology in Casca-
dia. These limits are important for seismic hazard when SSEs are found
within a megathrust earthquake region. Because geophysical conditions
seem to determine the type of slip, SSEs and earthquakes usually occur in
separate areas, and zones of SSEs have been used to ascertain the limits
of megathrust earthquakes (e.g., Chapman and Melbourne, 2009; Beroza
and Ide, 2011; Dixon et al., 2014; Hyndman et al., 2015; Audet and Kim,
2016). SSEs within the seismogenic zone may indicate purely transient
slip, therefore limiting the region where megathrust earthquakes can occur.
It is particularly important to understand the role of SSEs in seismic
hazard in Guerrero, Mexico, where GPS evidence suggests that SSEs
are invading the seismogenic zone within a well-established seismic gap
(Singh et al., 1981; Radiguet et al., 2012). The Guerrero gap, like the Tokai
gap in Japan, is cited as the hazard that leads to the highest seismic risk
for the country due to its proximity to the capital, the megacity Mexico
City with >20 million inhabitants in the greater metropolitan area (e.g.,
GEOLOGY, January 2018; v. 46; no. 1; p. 35–38  |  Data Repository item 2018007  | https://doi.org/10.1130/G39202.1 |  Published online 16 November 2017
GEOLOGY 
© |  Volume
2017 Geological 46  | ofNumber
Society America. | www.gsapubs.org
1  For permission to copy, contact editing@geosociety.org.
Nishenko and Singh, 1987; Mogi, 2004; Espinosa-Aranda et al., 2009).
Both gaps have SSEs, but those in Mexico are the largest-magnitude in
the world, and reduce the slip in the Guerrero gap by 4× compared to the
rest of the seismogenic zone (Ozawa et al., 2002; Radiguet et al., 2012).
Unlike in the Tokai gap, the recorded history of earthquakes in Guerrero
is limited to only ~200 yr, so the gap is defined by the subduction rate and
the recurrence rate of large (M 7+) earthquakes along the plate boundary
(Nishenko and Singh, 1987). No large earthquake has occurred in the
Guerrero gap for >100 yr, whereas the typical recurrence interval is on
the order of 30–60 yr for the rest of the plate boundary (Nishenko and
Singh, 1987). There were M 7+ earthquakes in the Guerrero gap in A.D.
1899 and 1911, but their exact epicenters are poorly constrained (García
Acosta and Suárez Reynoso, 1996; UNAM Seismology Group, 2015). A
recent study found that even now, average epicentral locations recorded
in global catalogs (>M 5) in the Mexican subduction zone are on average
26 km toward N54°E relative to those determined by local catalogs with
the denser local network (Hjörleifsdóttir et al., 2016).
The geometry of Mexico’s plate boundary allows for a detailed study of
the gap and the SSEs there. It is the only place in the world where there is
1000 km of coastline within 100 km distance of the trench with a seismic
gap in the middle. Large earthquakes (>M 7) have ruptured at least par-
tially beneath the coast (Fig. 1) so that characteristics of the seismogenic
zone can be measured from land-based studies. We take advantage of that
to look for physical differences throughout the seismogenic zone of the
plate interface that coincide with the gap by combining evidence from
seismotectonic analysis, magnetotelluric (MT) profiles, and the previ-
ous magmatic history. The combined geophysical evidence allows us to
determine the conditions that allow for transient slip in the seismogenic
zone of the Guerrero gap and explore the implications for seismic hazard.
MULTI-TECHNIQUE EVIDENCE
Seismotectonics
All of the well-recorded earthquakes on the plate-plate interface are
offshore within the gap, but extend onshore to either side (Fig. 1). The
trench-perpendicular extent of the seismogenic zone is then defined by
where thrust earthquakes are observed to either side of the gap. The
rupture of the recent A.D. 2014 Mw 7.3 Papanoa, Mexico, earthquake
initiated at the northwest edge of the gap, then traveled northwest away
from the gap (UNAM Seismology Group, 2015). However, its two larg-
est aftershocks (Mw 6.5 and Mw 6.1) and their aftershock region lie away
from the Mw 7.3 event and exclusively offshore within the Guerrero gap
(Fig. 1). Their locations coincide with a band of thrust earthquakes on
the interface recorded over a 13 yr period (Fig. 1, pink area) (Pacheco
and Singh, 2010). The earthquake locations were determined as part of
a detailed earthquake (M 2.9–6.6) relocation and focal mechanism study
in Guerrero (Pacheco and Singh, 2010). Within the gap this band is lim-
ited to the updip, offshore area, whereas to the southeast of Acapulco,
35
 Mexico Figure 1. Study area (red square, inset) in southern Mexico coast. Pro-
City -120
files P1–P4 are magnetotelluric profiles evaluated in this study, with
-100 triangles showing sounding locations. Solid black line outlines repeat-
ing slow slip event (SSE) region, with thick dashed line showing poorly
-80 constrained extent of SSEs (Radiguet et al., 2012). Thick green outline
is area of A.D. 2014 Mw 7.3 Papanoa, Mexico, earthquake determined by
-60 inverting teleseismic waves and static field (UNAM Seismology Group,
2015). Green star is epicenter of mainshock (UNAM Seismology Group,
North American Plate
2015). Small green circles are aftershocks recorded within 1 month of
Ixtapa
P1
mainshock, as determined by Mexican National Seismological Ser-
vice. Red stars are epicenters of the two largest aftershocks (northern
P2 Oaxaca
Gue P3
star, Mw 6.5; southern star, Mw 6.1) (UNAM Seismology Group, 2015)
rre
Gap ro with associated aftershocks as red circles. Pink area is zone where
Acapulco thrust events were located at slip interface by a relocation and focal
-40 mechanism study (Pacheco and Singh, 2010). Large historical mega-
P4 thrust earthquakes (dotted gray lines) (Kostoglodov and Pacheco,
Mid 1999) and depth (km) of subducting slab (solid thin gray lines) (Ferrari
dle
Am -20 et al., 2012) are also shown. The contours are a global model to show
Cocos Plate eric
a Tr
enc where the flat slab is in the region, but are not well constrained. More
h
Huatulco well-constrained slab interfaces are shown in Figure 2. Cream-colored
region represents Trans-Mexican Volcanic Belt. In inset, green line is
the coast, purple lines are the tectonic plate interfaces at the surface.

the band is found inland coinciding with the downdip extent of the large
megathrust earthquakes (Fig. 1). Many other small earthquakes were
found to be off of the interface within the gap, but those on the interface
were limited to the pink region from Figure 1 (Pacheco and Singh, 2010).
Similarly, Audet and Kim (2016) found that earthquakes within six sub-
duction zones around the world tend not to be located on the interface in
regions of slow slip. This trend is not universal, as seismicity (1.8 ≤ M ≤
4.1) in Ecuador seems to be located directly on the SSE patch (Vallée et al.,
2013). However, the coincidence of the limit of the interplate earthquakes
with the Guerrero gap and the SSEs seems to define a region. The exact
updip extent of the SSEs is poorly constrained from GPS inversion due
to a lack of station coverage (Radiguet et al., 2012), so we suggest that
the limits of these events outline the limit of the transient slip zone, and
that the SSEs most likely end at the coast (Fig. 1).
Magnetotelluric Soundings
Magnetotelluric (MT) probes provide insights into the electrical con-
ductivity distribution in the crust and uppermost mantle, which can be
used as a proxy for certain phenomena observed in subduction zones
such as fluid distribution, partial melting, magmatic and metamorphic
processes, plate locking, or subducted sediments (e.g., Jödicke et al., 2006;
as well as a region to the east-southeast (P2, P3, P4) (Fig. 1). Soundings
of profiles P2 and P4 were obtained in previous studies (Jödicke et al.,
2006; Arzate-Flores et al., 2016) but have been reexamined here, whereas
profiles P1 and P3 were obtained exclusively for this study. Ten sound-
ings for profiles P1 and P3 were measured using three MTU Phoenix
(Phoenix Geophysics) devices working simultaneously (Fig. 1), but one
sounding from P3 was unusable due to noise in the measurement. Loca-
tion and measuring time depended on site availability and security. The
security limited the inland distance the new profiles could be extended.
We have limited all profiles examined here to the same length to compare
the same area, although the soundings from P2 and P4 extended much
further inland (Jödicke et al., 2006; Arzate-Flores et al., 2016). More
information about the MT methodology and resolution is provided in
the GSA Data Repository1.
Figure 2 shows the results of the MT profiles and the slab interface as
deduced by seismic studies (Domínguez et al., 2006; Pérez-Campos et al.,
2008), except in profile P4 where it was deduced in an extended MT study
(Fig. DR12 in the Data Repository; Arzate-Flores et al., 2016). Another
receiver function study covering the area of profiles P3 and P4 was not as
GSA Data Repository item 2018007, MT resolution details and supplementary
1 

Wannamaker et al., 2014). We present four MT profiles running roughly figures, is available online at http://www.geosociety.org/datarepository/2018/ or
perpendicular to the coast and covering the center of the gap (profile P1) on request from editing@geosociety.org.

Figure 2. Magnetotelluric P1: In Gap P2: Edge of Gap P3: Far from Gap P4: Far from Gap
(MT) profiles, southern
0

Mexico coast (see Fig. 1 for

10

locations). Color scheme Gab

goes from resistive (cold bro
ic S
Depth (km)

eal
20

[blue] colors) to conduc-

tive (hot [red] colors). Slab
interfaces (black line): The
30

interface in P1 comes from

earthquake relocations
40

(white dots) and P-wave

tomography recorded by
50

0 10 20 30 40 50 0 10 20 30 40 50 0 10 20 30 40 50 0 10 20 30 40 50
a temporary seismic net-
Distance from the coast (km) Distance from the coast (km) Distance from the coast (km) Distance from the coast (km)
work located within the
Ohm
Guerrero seismic gap
(Domínguez et al., 2006).
The P2 slab interface was 1 3 10 25 70 150 400 900

determined from receiver functions recorded by a temporary dense (5 km station spacing) seismic line (Pérez-Campos el al., 2008). The slab
interface in P4 is explained in Figure DR12 in the Data Repository (see figure caption; see footnote 1). The slab interface in P3 is shown as in
P2, but it should be between P2 and P4 (which do not greatly vary) according to seismicity studies that indicate a gradual change in depth
between the two (Pardo and Suárez, 1995). P3 and P4 each have another sounding within 10 km of the right edge of the figure.

|  Volume 46  |  Number 1  |  GEOLOGY

36 www.gsapubs.org 
dense, but it found similar depths to the slab interface where it coincided
with those profiles (Rodríguez-Domínguez, 2016). Profiles P1 and P2,
located in the gap and on its edge, respectively, show high conductivity
below or near the plate interface. The opposite—high conductivity in the
overlying crust and none below the plate interface—is observed in P3 and
P4, located outside the gap. In the gap, the high-conductivity layer likely
indicates free fluids within the oceanic crust, capped by an impermeable
seal. The widely favored explanation for slow slip transients in subduc-
tion zones is that the capped free fluids are likely over-pressurized, which
lowers the normal stress allowing for the SSEs. This explanation coincides
with our MT results in the seismic gap and the existence of the SSEs there.
However, outside of the seismic gap, free fluids appear to be pervasive
in the upper plate, with no free fluids in the oceanic crust, suggesting a
more permeable upper plate and the absence of fluid overpressure in the
oceanic crust (consistent with a strong megathrust fault). This is also
seen in Figure DR12 where SSEs and tremors occur only where there is
evidence of fluids (high conductivity) trapped within the plate beneath
the SSEs and tremors.
Geology and Magmatic Evolution
The structure of the subducting plate does not change significantly
inside the gap. The age of the oceanic plate uniformly increases from
west to east, being ca. 15 Ma in the gap area. Similarly, the volume of
incoming and subducting sediment slightly increases from west to east,
but is not anomalous in the gap (Manea and Manea, 2003). In turn, the
analysis of the magmatic evolution of the upper plate sheds light on the
origin of the impermeable seal. From 90 Ma to 20 Ma, arc magmatism
migrated 1200 km along the coast from west to east (Fig. 3) (Ferrari et
al., 2014). Along most of the coast, magmatism only lasted for ~10 m.y.
However, in the region of the Guerrero gap magmatism started ~35 m.y.
before the eastward-migrating pulse arrived. In total, the Guerrero gap
region experienced ~45 m.y. of continuous magmatism compared to ~10
m.y. for the rest of the coastal belt. This persistent magmatic activity began
in the Late Cretaceous–Paleocene with the emplacement of granitic to
granodioritic bodies and continued in the Eocene with the emplacement
of geochemically distinct dry magmas and, particularly, a series of gab-
broic plutons near the coast (Ferrari et al., 2014). In other subduction
zones, the occurrence of SSEs has been explained by the existence of
an impermeable gabbroic lower crust (Katayama et al., 2012). Persistent
magmatism in western Guerrero between ca. 75 Ma and 30 Ma (and
especially the dry Eocene magmatism) is likely to have produced a thick
gabbroic lower crust that coincides with the resistive lower crust seen in
profile P1 (Fig. 2). According to Ferrari et al. (2014), the formation of a
temporal slab window that opened in the gap region and was followed by
forearc removal in the late Oligocene–early Miocene explains why some
magmatism moved along strike but another pulse persisted and produced
90
Late Cretaceous - Tertiary magmatism of southern Mexico
80 G - Gap
Puerto
Vallarta Trans-M
70
Age (Ma)
60 U-Pb
Ar-Ar
50 Rb-Sr
40
30
Puerto
Vallarta Ixtapa Acapulco
20
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
Distance along the coast (km)
GEOLOGY  |  Volume 46  |  Number 1  | www.gsapubs.org 37
gabbroic plutons in the Guerrero gap. We suggest that the gabbroic lower
crust in the gap created a seal, trapping the downgoing fluids from the
subduction zone within the slab. This elevates the pore fluid pressure and
allows for SSEs. The forearc removal brought the plutons even closer to
the trench and allowed the SSEs to invade the seismogenic zone.
DISCUSSION
The evidence suggests that SSEs can partially invade the seismogenic
zone in the Guerrero gap due to fluids trapped beneath a highly resis-
tive, thick gabbroic crust. The conditions that allow for transient slip
within the seismogenic zone are very specific and unusual. Magmatic
underplating lasted for ~45 m.y. in the gap, something that did not occur
at any other point along the Mexican subduction zone. In addition, the
subsequent truncation of the margin and forearc removal (reviewed in
Ferrari et al., 2014) brought the gabbroic lower crust very close to the
trench. The implication is that SSEs located within a seismogenic zone
are related to the conjunction of unusual geological processes that allow
for transient slip. There is no other point along the 1000+ kilometers of
the subduction zone where SSEs have been observed within the seismo-
genic zone despite a GPS network along the coast that sits directly above
it. The magmatic intrusions that created this zone have been in place for
the past 35 m.y. The evidence suggests that this is the only place where
SSEs can occur in the seismogenic zone and that they are a permanent
feature of the subduction zone.
This leads to the question of what this implies for seismic hazard. The
SSEs reduce slip by 4× within the gap (Radiguet et al., 2012). At the very
least, the return time for a large earthquake there should be 4× that of the
rest of the coast, which means that the seismic hazard within the gap is
much less than outside. The only two large earthquakes (M 7+) in the gap
were poorly located events (UNAM Seismology Group, 2015). They may
have occurred outside the gap or offshore within the region where smaller
earthquakes are found on the interface (Fig. 1). The much better-studied
2014 Mw 7.3 earthquake started at the edge of the gap, and the current
conditions (i.e., not enough accumulated strain in the gap or the transient
slip region) propagated the rupture away from the gap. Then the two larg-
est aftershocks occurred in the offshore small thrust earthquake region,
30–40 km from the Mw 7.3 epicenter and the rest of the aftershocks (Fig. 1).
We suggest that this behavior in the offshore region is due to the typical
strain buildup and dynamic slip release of the stick-slip cycle, but the
onshore transient slip region limits the dynamic earthquakes on the inter-
face. The lone case recorded thus far of a megathrust earthquake invading
a SSE region was the Mw 9.0 Tohoku-Oki (Japan) earthquake, although
the exact dimensions of the SSE are unknown because it was measured
by only a few stations (Ito et al., 2013). Perhaps the extremely large size
of the earthquake allowed it to invade the transient slip zone. Nonethe-
less, the many other examples of the separation of SSEs and megathrust
20º
exican Volcanic Figure 3. Magmatic activity
Belt of Mexican subduction zone
from available isotope ages
(modified from Ferrari et al.,
18º
Ixtapa G-Gap 2014) taken from near coast.
Lavender area depicts mag-
Acapulco
matic pulse migrating along
Neogene volcanism 16º
coast. G-Gap—Guerrero
Gap; SSE—slow slip event
48 - 35 Ma gabbros described here and shown
90 - 25 Ma magmatism in Figure 1.
98º 96º
earthquakes (e.g., Chapman and Melbourne, 2009; Beroza and Ide, 2011;
Dixon et al., 2014; Hyndman et al., 2015) and the extremely low slip
accumulation within the transiently slipping portion of the gap (Radiguet
et al., 2012) lead us to suggest that there may be lower the seismic hazard
in the region of the Guerrero gap compared to the rest of the coast. This
contrasts with the official information supplied by government agencies
(e.g., CENAPRED, 2016) derived from numerous gap theory studies after
the 1985 Mw 8.1 earthquake filled the Michoacan gap (e.g., Nishenko and
Singh, 1987), which forecast a large earthquake in the Guerrero gap in
the future. In addition, the limitation that transient slip regions present to
regular earthquakes may be a limiting factor in other subduction zones,
reducing the hazard there as well. Finally, long-standing seismic gaps may
represent a place to look for SSEs such as those in Tokai and Guerrero.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We thank V.H. Espíndola-Castro from the Mexican National Seismological Service
for providing the aftershock locations used in Figure 1, and for the suggestions
of anonymous reviewers. This work was supported by Universidad Nacional
Autónoma de México (UNAM) PAPIIT grant IN107116 and by Internal Projects
grants from the Instituto de Geofísica, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.
REFERENCES CITED
Arzate-Flores, J.A., Molina-Garza, R., Corbo-Camargo, F., and Márquez-Ramírez,
V., 2016, Low angle contact between the Oaxaca and Juárez terranes deduced
from magnetotelluric data: Pure and Applied Geophysics, v. 173, p. 3357–
3371, https://​doi​.org​/10​.1007​/s00024​-016​-1295​-y.
Audet, P., and Kim, Y., 2016, Teleseismic constraints on the geological environ-
ment of deep episodic slow earthquakes in subduction zone forearcs: A review:
Tectonophysics, v. 670, p. 1–15, https://​doi​.org​/10​.1016​/j​.tecto​.2016​.01​.005.
Audet, P., Bostock, M.G., Christensen, N.I., and Peacock, S.M., 2009, Seismic evi-
dence for overpressured subducted oceanic crust and megathrust fault sealing:
Nature, v. 457, p. 76–78, https://​doi​.org​/10​.1038​/nature07650.
Beroza, G.C., and Ide, S., 2011, Slow earthquakes and nonvolcanic tremor: Annual
Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences, v. 39, p. 271–296, https://​doi​.org​/10​
.1146​/annurev​-earth​-040809​-152531.
Brudzinski, M.R., and Allen, R.M., 2007, Segmentation in episodic tremor and
slip all along Cascadia: Geology, v. 35, p. 907–910, https://​doi​.org​/10​.1130​
/G23740A​.1.
CENAPRED (Centro Nacional de Prevención de Desastres), 2016, Sismos en
México: Brecha de Guerrero: http://www.cenapred.unam.mx/es/Publicaciones/
archivos/280-INFOGRAFASISMOSENMXICO-BRECHADEGUERRERO.
PDF (accessed August 2016).
Chapman, J.S., and Melbourne, T.L., 2009, Future Cascadia megathrust rupture
delineated by episodic tremor and slip: Geophysical Research Letters, v. 36,
L22301, https://​doi​.org​/10​.1029​/2009GL040465.
Dixon, T.H., Jiang, Y., Malservisi, R., McCaffrey, R., Voss, N., Protti, M., and
Gonzalez, V., 2014, Earthquake and tsunami forecasts: Relation of slow slip
events to subsequent earthquake rupture: Proceedings of the National Acad-
emy of Sciences of the United States of America, v. 111, p. 17,039–17,044,
https://​doi​.org​/10​.1073​/pnas​.1412299111.
Domínguez, J., Suárez, G., Comte, D., and Quintanar, L., 2006, Seismic veloc-
ity structure of the Guerrero gap, Mexico: Geofísica Internacional, v. 45,
p. 129–139.
Espinosa-Aranda, J.M., Cuellar, A., Garcia, A., Ibarrola, G., Islas, R., Maldonado,
S., and Rodriguez, F.H., 2009, Evolution of the Mexican Seismic Alert System
(SASMEX): Seismological Research Letters, v. 80, p. 694–706, https://​doi​
.org​/10​.1785​/gssrl​.80​.5​.694.
Ferrari, L., Orozco-Esquivel, T., Manea, V., and Manea, M., 2012, The dynamic his-
tory of the Trans-Mexican Volcanic Belt and the Mexico subduction zone: Tec-
tonophysics, v. 522, p. 122–149, https://​doi​.org​/10​.1016​/j​.tecto​.2011​.09​.018.
Ferrari, L., Bergomi, M., Martini, M., Tunesi, A., Orozco‐Esquivel, T., and López‐
Martínez, M., 2014, Late Cretaceous–Oligocene magmatic record in southern
Mexico: The case for a temporal slab window along the evolving Carib-
bean–North America–Farallon triple boundary: Tectonics, v. 33, p. 1738–1765,
https://​doi​.org​/10​.1002​/2014TC003525.
García Acosta, V., and Suárez Reynoso, G., 1996, Los Sismos en la Historia de
México, Tomo I: Mexico City, Mexico, UNAM-CIESAS-Fondo de Cultura
Económica, 718 p.
Hjörleifsdóttir, V., Singh, S.K., and Husker, A., 2016, Differences in epicentral lo-
cation of Mexican earthquakes between local and global catalogs: An update:
Geofísica Internacional, v. 55, p. 79–93.
|  Volume 46  |  Number 1  |  GEOLOGY
38 www.gsapubs.org 
Hyndman, R.D., McCrory, P.A., Wech, A., Kao, H., and Ague, J., 2015, Cascadia
subducting plate fluids channelled to fore-arc mantle corner: ETS and silica de-
position: Journal of Geophysical Research. Solid Earth, v. 120, p. 4344–4358,
https://​doi​.org​/10​.1002​/2015JB011920.
Ito, Y., et al., 2013, Episodic slow slip events in the Japan subduction zone before
the 2011 Tohoku-Oki earthquake: Tectonophysics, v. 600, p. 14–26, https://​
doi​.org​/10​.1016​/j​.tecto​.2012​.08​.022.
Jödicke, H., Jording, A., Ferrari, L., Arzate, J., Mezger, K., and Rüpke, L., 2006,
Fluid release from the subducted Cocos plate and partial melting of the crust
deduced from magnetotelluric studies in southern Mexico: Implications for
the generation of volcanism and subduction dynamics: Journal of Geophysical
Research, v. 111, B08102, https://​doi​.org​/10​.1029​/2005JB003739.
Katayama, I., Terada, T., Okazaki, K., and Tanikawa, W., 2012, Episodic tremor
and slow slip potentially linked to permeability contrasts at the Moho: Nature
Geoscience, v. 5, p. 731–734, https://​doi​.org​/10​.1038​/ngeo1559.
Kostoglodov, V., and Pacheco, J.F., 1999, Cien Años de Sismicidad en México:
http://​u suarios​. geofisica​. unam​. mx​/ vladimir​/ sismos​/ 100a%F1os.html
(accessed August 2016).
Manea, M., and Manea, V.C., 2003, Sediment fill in the Middle America Trench
inferred from gravity anomalies: Geofísica Internacional, v. 42, p. 603–612.
Mogi, K., 2004, Two grave issues concerning the expected Tokai Earthquake: Earth,
Planets, and Space, v. 56, p. li–lxvi, https://​doi​.org​/10​.1186​/BF03353074.
Nishenko, S.P., and Singh, S.K., 1987, Conditional probabilities for the recur-
rence of large and great interplate earthquakes along the Mexican subduction
zone: Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, v. 77, p. 2095–2114,
10.1029/JB090iB05p03589.
Ozawa, S., Murakami, M., Kaidzu, M., Tada, T., Sagiya, T., Hatanaka, Y., Yarai,
H., and Nishimura, T., 2002, Detection and monitoring of ongoing aseismic
slip in the Tokai region, central Japan: Science, v. 298, p. 1009–1012, https://​
doi​.org​/10​.1126​/science​.1076780.
Pacheco, J., and Singh, S.K., 2010, Seismicity and state of stress in Guerrero
segment of the Mexican subduction zone: Journal of Geophysical Research,
v. 115, B01303, https://​doi​.org​/10​.1029​/2009JB006453.
Pardo, M., and Suárez, G., 1995, Shape of the subducted Rivera and Cocos plates
in southern Mexico: Seismic and tectonic implications: Journal of Geophysical
Research: Solid Earth, v. 100, https://​doi​.org​/10​.1029​/95jb00919.
Peacock, S.M., Christensen, N.I., Bostock, M.G., and Audet, P., 2011, High pore
pressures and porosity at 35 km depth in the Cascadia subduction zone: Geol-
ogy, v. 39, p. 471–474, https://​doi​.org​/10​.1130​/G31649​.1.
Pérez‐Campos, X., Kim, Y., Husker, A., Davis, P.M., Clayton, R.W., Iglesias, A.,
Pacheco, J.F., Singh, S.K., Manea, V.C., and Gurnis, M., 2008, Horizontal sub-
duction and truncation of the Cocos Plate beneath central Mexico: Geophysi-
cal Research Letters, v. 35, L18303, https://​doi​.org​/10​.1029​/2008GL035127.
Radiguet, M., Cotton, F., Vergnolle, M., Campillo, M., Walpersdorf, A., Cotte, N.,
and Kostoglodov, V., 2012, Slow slip events and strain accumulation in the
Guerrero gap, Mexico: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 117, B04305,
https://​doi​.org​/10​.1029​/2011JB008801.
Rodríguez-Domínguez, M.A., 2016, Transición del ángulo de subducción de la
placa de Cocos en la zona Centro-Sur de México [Master’s thesis]: Mexico
City, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, 65 p.
Singh, S.K., Astiz, L., and Havskov, J., 1981, Seismic gaps and recurrence periods
of large earthquakes along the Mexican subduction zone: A reexamination:
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, v. 71, p. 827–843.
UNAM (Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México) Seismology Group, 2015,
Papanoa, Mexico earthquake of 18 April 2014 (Mw7.3): Geofísica Interna-
cional, v. 54, p. 363–386.
Vallée, M., et al., 2013, Intense interface seismicity triggered by a shallow slow
slip event in the Central Ecuador subduction zone: Journal of Geophysical Re-
search: Solid Earth, v. 118, p. 2965–2981, https://​doi​.org​/10​.1002​/jgrb​.50216.
Wallace, L.M., Webb, S.C., Ito, Y., Mochizuki, K., Hino, R., Henrys, S., Schwartz,
S.Y., and Sheehan, A.F., 2016, Slow slip near the trench at the Hikurangi
subduction zone, New Zealand: Science, v. 352, p. 701–704, https://​doi​.org​
/10​.1126​/science​.aaf2349.
Wannamaker, P.E., Evans, R.L., Bedrosian, P.A., Unsworth, M.J., Maris, V., and
McGary, S.R., 2014, Segmentation of plate coupling, fate of subduction fluids,
and modes of arc magmatism in Cascadia, inferred from magnetotelluric re-
sistivity: Geochemistry Geophysics Geosystems, v. 15, p. 4230–4253, https://​
doi​.org​/10​.1002​/2014GC005509.
Manuscript received 4 April 2017
Revised manuscript received 3 October 2017
Manuscript accepted 9 October 2017
Printed in USA
Copyright of Geology is the property of Geological Society of America and its content may
not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's
express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for
individual use.