Journal of South American Earth Sciences 71 (2016) 278e295

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of South American Earth Sciences

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jsames

Intraplate stress field in South America from earthquake focal

mechanisms
~o a, *, Fa
Marcelo Assumpça bio L. Dias a, Ivan Zevallos b, 1, John B. Naliboff c
a ~o Paulo, Rua do Mata
IAG, Universidade de Sa ~o 1226, 05508-090, Sa ~o Paulo, SP, Brasil
b , Santar
Universidade Federal do Oeste do Para em, PA, Brasil
c
Earth and Planetary Sciences Department, University of California at Davis, CA, USA

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: We present an updated compilation of earthquake focal mechanisms in Brazil together with focal
Received 12 December 2014 mechanisms from the sub-Andean region (mainly from global CMT catalogs). All earthquakes in the sub-
Received in revised form Andean region show reverse (majority) or strike-slip faulting mechanisms. Focal mechanisms in Brazil
15 June 2016
show reverse, strike-slip and normal faulting. Focal mechanisms of nearby earthquakes in the same
Accepted 3 July 2016
Available online 5 July 2016
tectonic environment were grouped and inverted for the stress tensor. In the sub-Andean region, stresses
are compressional, as expected, with the principal major compression (S1) roughly E-W, on average. A
slight rotation of S1 can be observed and is controlled by the orientation of the Andean plateau. In the
sub-Andean region, the intermediate principal stress (S2) is also compressional (i.e., larger than the
lithostatic pressure, Sv), a feature that is not always reproduced in numerical models published in the
literature. In mid-plate South America stresses seem to vary in nature and orientation. In SE Brazil and
the Chaco-Pantanal basins, S1 tends to be oriented roughly E-W with S2 approximately equal to S3. This
stress pattern changes to purely compressional (both SHmax and Shmin larger than Sv) in the Sa ~o
Francisco craton. A rotation of SHmax from E-W to SE-NW is suggested towards the Amazon region.
Along the Atlantic margin, the regional stresses are very much affected by coastal effects (due to
continent/ocean spreading stresses as well as flexural effects from sediment load at the continental
margin). This coastal effect tends to make SHmax parallel to the coastline and Shmin (usually S3)
perpendicular to the coastline. Few breakout data and in-situ measurements are available in Brazil and
are generally consistent with the pattern derived from the earthquake focal mechanisms. Although
numerical models of global lithospheric stresses tend to reproduce the main large-scale features in most
mid-plate areas, the S1 rotation from ~E-W in SE Brazil to SE-NW in the Amazon region are not well
explained by the current numerical models. This means that the observed stress pattern in mid-plate
South America should provide new insights into upper mantle dynamics, distinct from current global
convection models.
© 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction models of plate stresses (e.g., Mendiguren and Richter, 1978;

Mapping the stress field in intraplate regions is important to
help evaluate models of the plate driving forces and geodynamic
properties of the upper mantle (e.g., Bird, 1998; Lithgow-Berteloni
and Guynn, 2004; Naliboff et al., 2012). Early work on the compi-
lation of observed stress measurements, such as Assumpça ~o (1992)
for South America, Zoback (1992a) for the world and numerical
* Corresponding author.
~o).
E-mail address: marcelo@iag.usp.br (M. Assumpça
1 nica, Chile.
Now at Imagineria-Eletro
Coblentz and Richardson, 1996; Meijer, 1995; Meijer et al., 1997;
Heidbach et al., 2008 for the case of South America) showed that
the first order patterns of intraplate stresses (i.e., continental scale
field) could be explained by four major sources: 1) ridge-push
forces, 2) spreading stresses from lateral density variations in the
lithosphere (such as between the Andean plateau and the stable
South American platform, or between continental and oceanic
crusts), 3) plate interaction forces (such as in the Nazca-South
America convergent margin), and 4) lithosphere/asthenosphere
basal drag. These early compilations of intraplate stress measure-
ments (World Stress Map Project-WSM; Zoback, 1992a,b) indicated

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jsames.2016.07.005
0895-9811/© 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 ~o et al. / Journal of South American Earth Sciences 71 (2016) 278e295
M. Assumpça
that most plates had a predominant, long wavelength, relatively
uniform stress field, which was attributed to large-scale plate-wide
forces. Local sources of stress were thought to have a relatively
minor effect in mid-plate regions. More recent compilations
(Tingay et al., 2006; Heidbach et al., 2007, 2010), however, indicate
a higher degree of stress variability with local forces having the
same importance as plate-wide forces. While uniform stress fields
up to ~2000 km can be observed, short wavelength patterns (down
to less than 200 km length) are just as common, even in mid-plate
regions such as Scandinavia (Heidbach et al., 2010) or some areas of
the Canadian east coast (Reiter et al., 2014).
While stresses arising from lateral density variations (including
ridge-push) can be calculated from the known density structure of
the lithosphere, plate collision and asthenospheric drag are more
difficult to evaluate. The vertically averaged differential stresses
from lateral density variations (spreading stresses and ridge-push)
tend to lie in the range 10e50 MPa (e.g., Turcotte and Schubert,
1982). Numerical modeling of intraplate stresses shows that this
is the level of stresses at continental scales (e.g., Naliboff et al.,
2009, 2012).
Global numerical models of intraplate stresses (e.g., Bird, 1998;
Lithgow-Berteloni and Guynn, 2004; Naliboff et al., 2009, 2012)
automatically take into account plate interactions and lateral den-
sity variations, but still depend on global tomography models with
poorly constrained upper mantle velocities and relatively uncertain
lithosphere thickness projections to estimate the stress contribu-
tion from basal drag forces. In fact, comparing the calculated with
the observed crustal stress field in mid-plate regions is a key tool to
investigate mantle convection patterns and rheological properties
(e.g., Naliboff et al., 2009).
In addition to constraining geodynamic models, knowledge of
the crustal stress field is fundamental to better understand the
causes of intraplate seismicity. Several models of intraplate seis-
micity have been proposed (e.g., Mazzotti, 2007; Talwani, 2014),
which broadly include identification of crustal weak zones or
mechanisms of stress concentration in the upper crust. The
distinction between models of crustal weaknesses and models of
stress concentration can only be made by mapping the intraplate
stress field in detail. Moreover, definition of seismic zones for
hazard analysis can benefit from maps of crustal stresses.
Assumpça ~o et al. (2014) suggested that seismic zones in Brazil seem
to be characterized by different stress regime or orientation.
Improved mapping of the stress field will help better delineate
intraplate seismic zones.
Here we update the early compilation of intraplate focal
mechanism solutions in South America (Assumpça ~o, 1992),
including recently published focal mechanisms in Brazil. We also
present some new, unpublished focal mechanisms of small Brazil-
ian earthquakes. Ferreira et al. (1998) and Assumpça ~o (1998a,b)
estimated stress orientations by inverting focal mechanisms of
groups of earthquakes and compared with stress models of the
South American plate available at the time (Meijer, 1995; Coblentz
and Richardson, 1996; Meijer et al., 1997). Here, we updated the
stress estimates with new groups in Brazil and in the Andean region
and discuss the main patterns of the observed stress field. We also
compare the observed data with an updated numerical model for
South America.
2. Focal mechanisms
2.1. Data compilation
We updated the database used by Assumpça ~o (1992) and
Assumpça~o and Araujo (1993) mainly with a) Centroid Moment
Tensor solutions compiled from the ISC, b) focal mechanisms
279
published in the literature, and c) new focal mechanisms for recent
Brazilian events. All compiled focal mechanism solutions are
included in the last version of the WSM (Heidbach et al., 2016).
They are shown in Fig. 1a as an approximate estimate of the
orientation of the maximum horizontal compression (“SHmax”):
the P axes are plotted for reverse and strike-slip mechanisms, and
the B (Null) axes for normal faulting events. We used the criteria of
Zoback (1992a) for assigning the stress regime. Fig. 1b shows all
geographical names mentioned in this paper
All data were ranked for quality. The present WSM criteria are
based on the reliability of a focal mechanism to indicate the SHmax
orientation. Because the major compressional axis (S1) can be
oriented anywhere in the P-wave dilatational quadrant of the focal
mechanism (e.g. McKenzie, 1969), the best WSM quality for a single
solution is “C”, corresponding to SHmax uncertainty of ±20
to 25
.
Here we adapted these criteria, and ranked the focal mechanisms as
qualities C1, C2, and D with the following criteria:
C1: the focal mechanism is well constrained by two indepen-
dent data sets. For example, good quality first motion data (clear
and well distributed polarities) and independent solution from
waveform fitting; or good distribution of polarity data and the fault
plane identified by the distribution of aftershocks. Identification of
the fault plane helps restrain the possible orientation of SHmax
(Zoback, 1992b).
C2: Well constrained by one set of data only, such as first-motion
polarities or waveform fitting at several stations. Fault plane not
usually identified.
D: Just one set of data, and nodal planes not too tightly con-
strained. For example, a regional moment tensor inversion with few
stations, or a composite focal mechanism with uncertainties in the
nodal planes between 20
and 30
.
The use of composite focal mechanisms is regarded as a poor
stress indicator, for which the WSM criteria recommend a D-quality
assignment. The majority of composite focal mechanisms compiled
here for Brazil, however, were obtained from aftershock studies
using local networks. It has long been observed that intraplate
aftershock sequences in Brazil almost always occur in the same
rupture plane of the mainshock (e.g., Ferreira et al., 1998;
Chimpliganond et al., 2010; Barros et al., 2009, 2015; Carvalho
et al., 2016). In several cases, the space distribution of the after-
shocks used in the focal mechanism solution clearly identifies
which one of the nodal planes is the fault plane. For these cases we
believe that composite mechanisms with local aftershocks can be
as valuable as a single solution for a large event, and can be ranked
as C-quality.
Poorly determined focal mechanisms were ranked quality “E”
and were not used, but were retained in the database for
completeness sake.
2.1.1. Moment-tensor solutions
For the sub-Andean region, Zevallos (2001) analysed 62 CMT
solutions from 1990 to 1998. Different solutions (Harvard or USGS)
for the same earthquake were checked and the one most consistent
with P-wave first motions at regional stations was chosen. The
solutions were ranked for quality (D, C2 and C1), as above, ac-
cording to the available independent first motion data. Quality C1
was assigned to solutions where P-wave first motion data could
confirm at least one of the nodal planes (i.e., a change of
compressional to dilatational first motion was consistent with the
CMT solution). Quality C2 was assigned to solutions consistent with
first-motions but no nodal plane could be checked. Quality D was
assigned when there were not enough clear first motions to test the
CMT solution. From 1999 to 2014, we used the GCMT solutions, as
compiled by the ISC, all of them ranked as quality D (not yet
checked for consistency with polarity data).
280 ~o et al. / Journal of South American Earth Sciences 71 (2016) 278e295
M. Assumpça

Fig. 1. a. Focal mechanism data for intraplate South America. Blue and green bars denote direction of the P axes of thrust and strike-slip events; red bars are B axes of normal
faulting events. Open bars are in-situ measurements (overcoring and hydrofrac). Bar size indicates data quality, according to Table S1 (Suplementary Material). Major geological
provinces are: GS ¼ Guyana shield, CBS ¼ Central Brazil shield, SFC ¼ S~ao Francisco craton; AmB ¼ Amazon basin, PnB ¼ Parnaiba Basin, PcB ¼ Parecis Basin, PrB ¼ Parana  Basin,
ChB ¼ Chaco Basin, Pt ¼ Pantanal Basin, TP ¼ Tocantins foldbelt Province. Thick solid lines are plate boundaries (Coffin et al., 1998): barbed green line ¼ trenches; red ¼ Mid-Atlantic
ridge; orange ¼ transform faults of the Caribbean plate and Andean Block (AB) including several “slivers”. Large and small open arrows show convergence direction of the Nazca and
the Caribbean plates, respectively, relative to South America. The brown line is the 3000 m elevation indicating the Andean plateau. The dashed line along the Atlantic coast is the
200 m bathymetry. b. Names of countries and regions mentioned in the text. PeL ¼ Pernambuco Lineament.

2.1.2. Compilation of regional studies
Many regional studies have been published since the compila-
tion of Assumpça ~o (1992) and new intraplate focal mechanisms
were compiled. In the sub-Andean region above the flat-slab near
Sierras Pampeanas, NW Argentina, focal mechanisms determined
by regional waveform modeling indicate predominantly reverse or
strike-slip faulting, with P axes generally trending E-W or SE-NW
(Alvarado et al., 2005; Alvarado and Beck, 2006; Alvarado and
Ramos, 2011). In the southern Puna plateau a large temporary 74-
station regional network provided 17 focal mechanisms (Mulcahy
et al., 2014), well constrained by P-wave first motions, ranging
from oblique reverse, strike-slip and oblique normal faulting,
consistent with roughly E-W oriented compression and N-S
tension.
In Peru, Tavera and Buforn (2001) determined focal mechanisms
for several crustal sub-Andean events by teleseismic waveform
modeling. In Ecuador and Colombia, Ego et al. (1996) and Legrand
et al. (2002) analysed focal mechanisms of crustal earthquakes
determined by teleseismic waveform inversion (mainly HRVD so-
lutions) as well as from first motions at local network. Inversion of
those mechanisms showed E-W compression in most of the
northern Andes (interpreted as due to the Nazca plate convergence)
and a rotation towards NW-SE north of 5oN (interpreted as an effect
of the Caribbean plate on the Andean Block). In the Central Andes,
Devlin et al. (2012) determined 32 focal mechanisms of crustal
earthquakes, using teleseismc P- and SH-wave modeling, and
compared with InSAR data and global CMT solutions. The preferred
solutions of Devlin et al. (2012) were incorporated in our database.
 ~o et al. / Journal of South American Earth Sciences 71 (2016) 278e295
M. Assumpça
Fig. 1. (continued).
Three small events (Mw ~4.5) in the Guyana shield were well
recorded by the Venezuela network (Palma et al., 2010) and had
well distributed P-wave first motions showing strike-slip mecha-
nism with N-S oriented P axes. Interestingly, this N-S orientation in
the Guyana shield seems consistent with the P axes observed
further south in the Amazon Basin (Fig. 1).
In central Brazil, focal mechanisms determined for the northern
part of the Parecis basin in the Amazon craton (Barros et al., 2009)
and the Goia s-Tocantins seismic zone, between the Amazon and
~o Francisco cratons (Barros et al.,2015; Carvalho et al., 2016),
Sa
indicate roughly NW-SE oriented P axes, as seen in Fig. 1. Lopes
(2008), Chimpliganond et al. (2010) and Agurto et al. (2015)
showed predominantly reverse faults in the S~ ao Francisco craton
with approximately E-W oriented P axes, which suggest a rotation
of compressional stresses from E-W in Eastern Brazil to SE-NW
towards the Amazon craton.
In the Pantanal Basin, a magnitude 4.8 event in 15-June-2009
had an oblique reverse faulting with ENE-WSW oriented P axis
 Basin, a
(Dias et al., 2016a,b). In the northeastern part of the Parana
long sequence of water-well induced earthquakes, with
281
magnitudes up to 3, occurred from 2005 to 2009 (Assumpça ~o et al.,
2010). Dicelis et al. (2013) determined a composite focal mecha-
nism for one particular swarm of this sequence, which showed
oblique normal faulting on an E-W oriented, North dipping fault
plane (Fig. 1a).
In Northeastern Brazil, several new focal mechanisms have been
calculated especially along the Pernambuco Lineament (Fig. 1a,b), a
major Paleozoic shear zone reactivated under the present neo-
tectonic stresses (Ferreira et al., 2008; Lopes et al., 2010; Lima-Neto
et al., 2013, 2014), which indicates E-W compressional and N-S
tensional deviatoric stresses. Other areas in Northeast Brazil, around
the Potiguar marginal basin, have been studied by França et al.
(2004), Nascimento et al. (2004), Lima-Neto et al. (2010), Oliveira
et al. (2010, 2015) and Dantas et al. (2011) showing a predominance
of strike-slip and normal faults consistent with earlier interpretation
of coast-parallel compressional and coast-perpendicular tensional
deviatoric stresses (e.g., Ferreira et al., 1998).
2.1.3. Additional new mechanisms in Brazil
In addition to the data above, compiled from published work,
282 ~o et al. / Journal of South American Earth Sciences 71 (2016) 278e295
M. Assumpça

we present below two examples of new focal mechanisms included
in this study.
2.1.3.1. Miranda (Pantanal basin), 06-Nov-2015. In November 2015
an event with magnitude 4 mb occurred in the Pantanal Basin
(West-central Brazil) and was well recorded by some regional
stations (Fig. 2). The few P-wave polarities were not enough to
constrain the focal mechanism. The Rayleigh and Love waves
recorded by two regional stations (AQDB and PP1B at 134 and
245 km distance) were then used to constrain the focal mechanism.
First, the group velocity dispersion to each station was used to
estimate the velocities of the shallow layers of the upper crust
between epicenter and station. The focal mechanism and depth
were then varied to best fit the observed waveforms using the
software ISOLA (Sokos and Zahradnik, 2008, 2013) with the
frequency-range test developed by Dias (2016) and Dias et al.
(2016b) The best moment-tensor solution is in general agreement
with the P-wave polarities. Several aftershocks in the range
3.0e3.5 mb were recorded by regional stations and a HYPODD
relative location by Ciardelli and Assumnpça ~o (2016) using corre-
lated P- and S-wave arrivals indicated a NS-trending, E dipping
plane (dashed line in Fig. 2b). The very good agreement with one of
the nodal planes of the waveform inversion ranks this mechanism
as quality C1. This event occurred as a predominantly reverse
faulting mechanism with E-W oriented P axis, consistent with the
two previous mechanisms in the Pantanal Basin.
 (Central Brazil shield), 12-July-2014.
2.1.3.2. Rio Peti, Southern Para
A sequence of small earthquakes, with maximum magnitude of ~4
on 12-July-2014, occurred in the southern part of the Amazon
craton and was recorded by the recently installed stations of the
Brazilian Seismic Network (Fig. 3a). The three closest stations
(283e470 km) were used in a regional moment tensor inversion
(Fig. 3c) with the ISOLA code. Before doing the waveform inversion,
the shallow layers of the local crustal velocity model were deter-
mined with the Rayleigh and Love group-velocity dispersion with
the method of Dias (2016) and Dias et al. (2016b) . The strike-slip
solution was consistent with the P-wave polarity data at the four
closest stations (Fig. 3b). Relative location of six events of the
sequence, using cross-correlation of Lg-wave arrivals (Ciardelli and
Assumpça ~o, 2016), suggested the NNW-SSE nodal plane of the
moment-tensor solution to be the fault. However, the frequency-
range test of the moment tensor inversion showed relatively
large uncertainty (about 30
) in the nodal plane orientations and

Fig. 2. Focal mechanism solution of the 3.8 Mw Miranda earthquake of November 6, 2015. a) Map with the epicenter (star) and the stations with first P-wave motion used in the
focal mechanism. b) fault plane solution (solid lines) from the waveform modeling and P polarities from the regional stations. Crosses and circles are compressional and dilatational
P-wave first motions, respectively. The dashed line is the fault plane defined by relocation of the aftershocks. c) Waveform modeling of the AQDB and PP1B stations (134 and 245 km
away). Black and red lines are observed and synthetic traces, respectively.
 ~o et al. / Journal of South American Earth Sciences 71 (2016) 278e295
M. Assumpça 283

Fig. 3. Focal mechanism of the Rio Peti event of 2014/07/12 with magnitude 3.9 Mw, in the Amazon. a) epicenter (star) and recording stations (black triangles). b) focal mechanism
solution and independent P-wave first motions, which are consistent with the solution. c) waveform fit of the Rayleigh wave (black line is the observed trace, red line the synthetic
seismogram) by regional moment-tensor inversion using the three nearest stations (283e470 km away).

this event was ranked C2 quality (See supplementary material).
Altogether, seven new mechanisms in Brazil were determined
by Dias (2016) and are included in the Supplementary materials.
2.2. Stress patterns from single measurements
Fig. 1a shows the data set of focal mechanisms compiled here,
with a few additional in-situ measurements. Each colored bar
represents one focal mechanism. The orientation of the bar would
be the best estimate of the maximum horizontal stress (SHmax) if
no other data were available. Blue and green bars are the orienta-
tion of the P axes of reverse and strike-slip mechanisms. Red bars
are the orientation of the B axes of normal faulting events, which
are the best estimate for the SHmax orientation in this case. The
earthquake data is complemented by a few in-situ measurements:
hydro-fracturing tests in central Brazil and SE coast, and an over-
coring measurement in the Caraíba copper mine NE Brazil (previ-
ously compiled by Assumpça ~o, 1992). Only two new in-situ
measurements were added, both in SE Brazil: shallow hydro-
fracturing measurement (average ~100 m depth) at the Simplício
hydroelectric power plant (Armelin et al., 2000), and overcoring
measurements at ~200 m depth in the Morro da Usina mine
(Magalha ~es, 1999). We also included single breakout data for mid-
plate Brazil reported by Lima et al. (1997).
A predominance of reverse and strike-slip mechanisms is clearly
seen, as typical of most intraplate regions. Normal faulting occurs
mainly in the high Andean plateau and in some isolated areas in the
Eastern part of the continent closer to the Atlantic margin. Along
the Andean foreland belt P axes tend to have an average E-W
orientation and seem to be consistent for hundreds of km. How-
ever, small-scale changes can be seen.
2.2.1. Andean and sub-Andean belts
In the Andean Block of Ecuador and Colombia (North of 0
lati-
tude) focal mechanisms are more varied indicating short-scale
features possibly caused by relative motion between crustal
blocks and slivers (Ego et al., 1996; Alvarado et al., 2014; Nocquet
et al., 2014). Strike-slip mechanisms are more common. South of
0
(Ecuador and northern Peru), reverse faulting predominates
with a trend of P axes to have an average E-W orientation.
284 ~o et al. / Journal of South American Earth Sciences 71 (2016) 278e295
M. Assumpça
In the Andes, normal faults occur mainly at high elevations, as a
result of lateral spreading of the Andean plateau (gravitational
collapse). In the Andean plateau of Southern Peru, Bolivia and
Northern Argentina, few focal mechanisms are available because of
the relatively low crustal seismicity in the high Andes. The few
mechanisms (e.g., Deverche re et al., 1989) tend to have normal or
strike-slip faulting in agreement with the expected extension of the
plateau due to gravitational collapse (e.g., Turcotte and Schubert,
1982; Meijer et al., 1997). Most P axes of strike-slip events tend to
align in the E-W orientation, especially in the Central Andes.
On the other hand, almost all sub-Andean earthquakes are
characterized by reverse faulting with P axes trending E-W, on
average. A regional variation of the average “SHmax” orientation is
apparent: E-W compression is observed in Ecuador and northern
Peru, changing to SW-NE in Bolivia (between 12oS to 20oS); about
E-W again in Jujuy and Salta provinces (22oS to 25oS); a WNW-ESE
average orientation near La Rioja (25oS to 30oS), and E-W again
south of 30oS near San Juan. The average orientations of the P axes
tend to be perpendicular to the front of the Andean plateau: lateral
gravitational spreading of the Andean plateau causes a local
compression in the sub-Andean belt, increasing the regional, plate-
wide compression (e.g., Assumpça ~o and Araujo, 1993; Heidbach
et al., 2008).
2.2.2. Mid-plate region
In midplate South America (mainly Brazil) earthquakes tend to
have reverse or strike-slip faulting. Normal faulting occurs mainly
in Northeastern Brazil. Fig. 4 shows the distribution of the 76
midplate focal mechanisms according to Frohlich's (1992) diagram:
pure strike-slip (27) and reverse faults (26) account for 70% of all
data, and pure normal faults (14) for 18%. Less than 10% are clas-
sified as oblique faulting (strike-slip with large thrust or normal
component).
Despite the sparse distribution of focal mechanisms, one can
observe a trend of E-W compression in SE Brazil (in the middle and
southern parts of the Sa~o Francisco craton), extending to the Pan-
tanal and Chaco basins. This regional E-W compression has been
Fig. 4. Ternary diagram for classification of focal mechanism type (Frohlich, 1992). Blue
dots ¼ reverse mechanisms, green ¼ strike-slip, red ¼ normal faulting. Two gray dots
indicate that the orientations of the P, T, and B axes cannot be used to estimate SHmax.
Data points refer to mid-plate events only.
predicted by plate-wide forces (e.g., Coblentz and Richardson, 1996;
Naliboff et al., 2009).
From the Tocantins province in central Brazil to the Guyana
shield in the Amazon craton, a relatively consistent trend of N-S to
NW-SE orientation of the P axes can be observed. Whether this is an
evidence of a broad scale stress field, different from the E-W
domain in the sub-Andean and southern Brazil, remains to be
confirmed. The ~ N-S orientation of the P axes in the Amazon basin
had been interpreted by Zoback and Richardson (1996) as an effect
of local flexural forces from lower crustal loads identified by an
alignment of gravity highs along the axis of the Amazon basin.
Similarly, flexural stresses from a SW-NE oriented lithospheric load,
due to a thinned crust, were proposed by Assumpça ~o and Sacek
(2013) for the Tocantins province. The other focal mechanisms in
the Central Brazil and Guyana shields have not been identified yet
with any potential local sources of stress that could rotate the
resulting stresses towards the NW.
Along the SE and Northern coast, one can observe a trend of
“SHmax” to be roughly parallel to the coastline. Fig. 5 shows the
observed data for NE Brazil where the effect of the northern coast
seems to influence the stress orientations more strongly than
predicted by the regional numerical model of Coblentz and
Richardson (1996). Other numerical models (Meijer, 1995;
Naliboff et al., 2012) also predict an SHmax orientation changing
more gradually across continental margins than observed. These
models take into account the spreading stresses from lateral den-
sity variations across the continent-ocean transition, but not flex-
ural stresses due to sediment load in the passive margins.
Evidences of the importance of flexural stresses in mid-plate South
America have been proposed by Ferreira et al. (1998), Assumpç~ ao
(1998b), Watts et al. (2009); Assumpça ~o et al. (2011, 2014), and
Assumpça ~o and Sacek (2013), and will be discussed below.
3. Stress inversions
3.1. Inversion method
The P and T axes of a focal mechanism may differ substantially
from the principal stresses S1 (maximum compression) and S3
(minimum compression) acting in the crust. The P axis, for
example, can differ up to 90
from S1 (McKenzie, 1969) depending
on the relative value of the intermediate stress (S2) and the
orientation of the fault plane (S1 can lie anywhere in the P-wave
first-motion dilatational quadrant of the nodal plane solution).
Assuming the shear stress in the fault plane has the same direction
of the slip vector, several different focal mechanisms can be used to
narrow the range of possible orientations of the principal stresses,
including the relative magnitude of the intermediate principal
stress S2, here expressed as the shape factor f ¼ (S2-S3)/(S1-S3).
Assuming that all events are subject to the same stress field (i.e., the
orientations of S1, S2, S3, and the shape factor, normally called as
“stress tensor”), several methods can be used such as those of
Angelier (1984), Gephart and Forsyth (1984), and Michael (1984,
1987). The classical method of Angelier (1984) does not distin-
guish between the two nodal planes (i.e., the results are the same
whichever nodal plane is the fault). However, the choice of which
nodal plane is the actual fault does make a difference in the possible
orientation of the principal stresses as seen in Fig. 6. Most methods
find the stress tensor that minimizes the difference between the
directions of the observed slip vector (“rake”) and the calculated
shear stress on the fault plane (e.g., Michael, 1987). This implies that
the only uncertainty in the focal mechanism is the rake and that the
fault plane orientation has no error. Gephart and Forsyth (1984), on
the other hand, fit the stress tensor assuming uncertainties in
strike, dip and rake of the fault mechanism. A method to solve
 ~o et al. / Journal of South American Earth Sciences 71 (2016) 278e295
M. Assumpça 285

Fig. 5. Stresses and free-air gravity anomalies in NE Brazil. Colored bars are “SHmax” directions estimated from focal mechanisms (as in Fig. 1a); thick black bars are SHmax inferred
from the average orientation of several breakouts in the Potiguar sedimentary basin (Reis et al., 2013). Thin black solid and open bars are SHmax/Shmin theoretical stresses
modelled by Coblentz and Richardson (1996), CR96 in the legend. Pg ¼ Potiguar basin; TB ¼ Tucano-Jatoba basin, PnB ¼ Parnaíba Basin; SFC ¼ Sa ~o Francisco craton. Gray line is the
Pernambuco Lineament (PeL). Open squares are main cities. Note the high gravity anomaly along the continental shelf between the coastline and the 200 m bathymetry, which may
indicate mass excess and possibly flexural stresses from sediment load. Free-Air anomalies from Sa  (2004).

Fig. 6. Example of misfit between observed slip (arrow) and the calculated shear stress
resolved in the plane (other end of the thick segment), for the two nodal planes of a
single mechanism. The stress tensor has S1 oriented E-W, S2 oriented NS (shape factor
f ¼ 0.5) and S3 vertical. The focal mechanism is: nodal plane P1: strike 45
, dip 55
,
slip 120
; plane P2: strike 180
, dip 45
, slip 55
. The stress tensor is consistent with
the rake ¼ 120 of the nodal plane 1, but has a misfit of 35
if the fault was the nodal
plane 2.
simultaneously for the stress tensor and focal mechanisms (when
only polarities are known for a cluster of events) was developed by
Rivera and Cisternas (1990) and used for Ecuador by Legrand et al.
(2002), for example. A review of the main methods for stress tensor
determination was given by Maury et al. (2013).
Here we formed groups of earthquakes, as shown in Fig. 7, and
inverted the focal mechanisms for the stress tensor orientation that
best fitted the observed rakes. In the Andes, where more focal
mechanisms are available, the groups spanned smaller areas (a few
hundred km). We tried to avoid mixing events from clearly
different tectonic environment such as Andean plateau and fore-
land basins. In the mid-continent, where there are fewer focal
mechanisms, larger areas (up to 1500 km long) were necessary to
estimate the stress tensor. For each group, a grid search of all
possible orientations of S1 and S3 and the shape factor f ¼ (S2-S3)/
(S1-S3) was carried out using the code of Michael (1987), which
minimizes the misfit between the observed rake and the calculated
shear stress direction. During the grid-search, if the fault plane was
not known, the two nodal planes were tested at every orientation
and the plane with the smaller difference between calculated and
observed rakes was considered. Focal mechanisms were also
weighted according to the quality factor assigned to the fault plane
solution (C1, C2 or D).
Our main interest is to determine the regional patterns of the
crustal stresses at length scale of a few hundred km. Because the
earthquake depths (a few tens of km at most) are much smaller
than the size of the areas (mostly around 2
to 5
), the average
286 ~o et al. / Journal of South American Earth Sciences 71 (2016) 278e295
M. Assumpça
Fig. 7. Selection of focal mechanisms for the stress tensor estimates. Numbers at the top edge of each area correspond to the group ID in Table 1 and Figs. 8 and 9 (for mid-plate
region) and Figs. S8 and S9 for the Andean region (Supplementary material).
stresses were constrained to be vertical and horizontal (because of
the free surface, one of the principal orientations has to be vertical).
The stress inversions for groups 1 to 9 (midplate South America)
are shown in Fig. 8, constrained to give horizontal and vertical
stress orientations (groups 9 to 25 in the Andes are shown in Figs S8
and S9 of the Supplementary Materials). For example, the five focal
mechanisms for group1 (San Francisco craton) resulted in an E-W
oriented S1, a N-S S2, and a vertical S3. The shape factor f ¼ 0.7
indicates the deviatoric S2 (Shmin) is 70% of the deviatoric S1
(using the vertical stress, S3 in this case, as reference). In this
example, the small number of focal mechanisms (five) does not
qualify the stress tensor for quality A or B with the WSM criteria
and so it was ranked as C quality in Table 1, which shows the stress-
tensor results for all 25 selected groups.
3.2. Assessing uncertainties
We estimated the uncertainties in the SHmax orientation, with a
resampling bootstrap method. For each of the 25 groups, we
created 1000 sets of focal mechanisms with the same number of
events (i.e., events can be selected more than once in any set) by
random selection of the original group. Weights of 3, 2 and 1 were
applied to the focal mechanisms with qualities C1, C2, and D,
respectively. The distributions of the 1000 trials of SHmax orien-
tation and shape factor are shown in Fig. 9 for mid-plate events and
S9 for sub-Andean events. All results are summarized in Table 1.
The colors in Fig. 9 refer to the stress regime: blue for thrust regime,
green for strike-slip, and red for normal regime, according to the
most common regime in the bootstrap resampling. Qualities A, B,
and C, were assigned according to the number of mechanisms and
the misfit in the calculated rake (or the uncertainty in the SHmax
distribution of the bootstrap resamplings), following the WSM
criteria.
3.3. Resulting stress patterns
The resulting stress orientations for intraplate South America,
obtained by inverting the focal mechanisms of Fig.1a, are shown in
Fig. 10, which also includes published results of stress tensors from
local/regional studies in Southern Colombia, Ecuador and northern
Peru (Ego et al., 1996; Legrand et al., 2002), in Central Peru (Dorbath
et al., 1986; Carey-Gailhardis and Mercier, 1987; and Deverche re
et al., 1989); in the Jujuy and Salta provinces of northern
nchez et al., 2012), and in the Sierra
Argentina (Cahill et al., 1992; Sa
Pie de Palo and Sierras Pampeanas near San Juan, NW Argentina
(Siame et al., 2005; Richardson et al., 2012). Near the continental
 ~o et al. / Journal of South American Earth Sciences 71 (2016) 278e295
M. Assumpça 287

Fig. 8. Stress inversions for the nine groups of focal mechanisms in midplate South America (Groups 1 to 9 in Fig. 7). The principal stress orientations, S1 (gray diamond), S2 (solid
triangle), and S3 (open circle), were constrained to the vertical and horizontal orientations. Arrows indicate the observed slip motion in the fault plane; thick segment on the fault
plane indicates the misfit between observed and calculated rakes.

margin of SE Brazil, four composite focal mechanisms from a dam-
induced earthquake sequence (Mendiguren, 1980) were inverted
for a stress tensor. Blue bars and yellow arrows are compressional
and tensional deviatoric stresses, respectively. Fig. 10 is com-
plemented with SHmax orientations obtained by averaging several
breakout measurements in a given area, shown as thick black bars
(Lima et al., 1997; Reis et al., 2013, for northern Brazil, and the
World Stress Map database for southwestern Argentina).
The general pattern of predominantly compressional stresses
(compressional SHmax and Shmin) can be seen with S1 oriented
roughly E-W, on average, especially along the Andean foreland and
in Southeastern Brazil. However, regional rotations of SHmax along
the sub-Andean belt as well as along the Atlantic coast can be seen.
A large-scale NW-SE oriented stress field seems to span most of the
mid-plate region across the Amazon craton.
3.3.1. Andean foreland belt
The pattern of compressional stresses (compressional SHmax
and Shmin) in the sub-Andean belt is confirmed as well as the
rotation of S1 around the bend of the Andean plateau. In Colombia
(around 5oN) compression seems to be roughly parallel to the
relative motion between the Caribbean and South American plates
(Ego et al., 1996). Colombia and Venezuela, however has not been
sampled well enough in our study due to the complexity of the
288 ~o et al. / Journal of South American Earth Sciences 71 (2016) 278e295
M. Assumpça

Table 1
Results of the SHmax orientation and shape factor (f) from the stress-tensor inversions shown in Fig. 10. Group number refers to Fig. 7. Misfit is the average rake residual (o) in
the stress-tensor inversion (Fig. 8 and S8). Average SH and f (and standard deviations) from the boot-strap resamplings are from Fig. 9 and S9. Quality refers to the World Stress
Map criteria depending on the number of focal mechanisms in the group and the rms misfit or the standard deviation of the bootstrap. “Reg” ¼ stress regime: R ¼ thrust/reverse
(S3 Vertical), S ¼ strike-slip (S2 vertical) and N ¼ normal (S1 vertical).

Group Lat 
() Lon 
() No SHmax 
() f misfit 
() WSM Bootstrap results Reg
FMs Qual.
SH() sd f sd

1 15.06 43.53 5 80 0.7 22 C 70 38 0.51 0.20 R

2 20.92 46.24 10 68 0.6 36 B 77 19 0.48 0.34 S
3 8.36 36.07 7 86 0.8 8 C 86 2 0.71 0.15 S
4 4.02 39.51 11 114 0.3 9 B 114 2 0.31 0.12 S
5 5.38 37.62 12 112 0 10 B 115 5 0.06 0.05 R
6 5.67 36.20 13 58 0.3 5 B 58 3 0.37 0.13 S
7 19.71 60.45 10 84 0.3 4 B 84 4 0.30 0.05 R
8 11.57 52.89 8 134 0.5 15 B 134 4 0.51 0.16 S
9 2.87 62.71 6 134 0.3 12 C 140 24 0.34 0.19 R
10 10.59 61.59 14 8 0.7 50 C 18 37 0.78 0.19 N
11 10.16 69.49 13 130 0.5 4 B 128 4 0.54 0.09 R
12 5.43 73.39 22 100 0 20 B 105 12 0.24 0.20 R
13 0.33 77.82 16 82 0.1 17 A 82 4 0.15 0.11 S
14 2.31 78.24 20 100 0 13 A 100 2 0.13 0.14 R
15 6.42 76.81 24 112 0.7 16 A 101 15 0.68 0.14 R
16 10.30 74.95 29 92 0.6 14 B 90 12 0.55 0.19 R
17 11.37 73.88 19 78 0.8 7 A 77 11 0.77 0.05 R
18 14.89 72.60 26 90 0.8 19 A 88 8 0.79 0.11 S
19 16.32 71.59 27 152 0.5 37 A 151 8 0.52 0.17 N
20 17.39 65.43 9 44 0.3 9 B 45 5 0.36 0.13 S
21 23.75 64.62 14 86 0.1 14 B 87 4 0.15 0.08 S
22 26.44 67.22 19 88 0.6 25 A 88 8 0.60 0.19 S
23 27.50 66.83 33 96 0.4 26 A 102 9 0.35 0.15 R
24 31.87 68.01 54 72 0.6 17 A 78 10 0.52 0.11 R
25 35.84 70.34 11 84 0.1 19 B 83 8 0.18 0.15 R

Fig. 9. Distribution of the boostrap results for groups G1 to G9 (midplate South America). Rose diagram ¼ SHMax orientations; histogram ¼ shape factor f. Colors refer to the stress
regime: blue for thrust-faulting regime (vertical principal stress ¼ S3), green for strike-slip (vertical stress ¼ S2), and red for normal-faulting (vertical S1). The mean and standard
deviations are indicated at the top, followed by “(0)” or “(95)” which is the significance of the mean orientation. For each group the number of focal mechanisms is indicated by N at
the top right of the histogram.

various slivers in the North Andean block (e.g., Nocquet et al., 2014) In Ecuador (latitude ~0
) S1 is roughly E-W, on average, con-
whose interaction and relative motion require a more detailed firming previous estimate by Ego et al. (1996) and Legrand et al.
analysis. (2002). However, some variation of the compressional orientation
 ~o et al. / Journal of South American Earth Sciences 71 (2016) 278e295
M. Assumpça 289

Fig. 10. Stress pattern in intraplate South America. Blue bars and yellow arrows (with a small circle in the middle) are stress orientations from inversion of focal mechanisms, as
selected in Fig. 7. Open bars are in-situ measurements and black solid bars are statistically significant average SHmax orientation from several breakout measurements (Lima et al.,
1997; Reis et al., 2013). The gray bar in the Parana basin is the average orientation of the six breakouts from Fig. 1a: although not statistically significant at the 90% level it is
nevertheless similar to the nearby SHmax orientations.

seems to be suggested. In the southern part of the North Andean
sliver (near 0
latitude), SHmax tends to be parallel to the Nazca
plate convergence in agreement with crustal deformation
measured by GNSS (Global Navigation Satellite System) data by
Nocquet et al. (2014). The stress tensors include both our estimates
as well as those of Ego et al. (1996) and Legrand et al. (2002). In the
sub-Andean regions of southern Ecuador and northern Peru (~2
to
3oS), the SHmax orientation tends to be WNW-ESE, different from
the Nazca plate convergence but in agreement with measured
crustal deformation in the so called “Inca Sliver” (Nocquet et al.,
2014). Clearly, the relative motion between different lithospheric
blocks and slivers cause a short-scale variation of the stress field.
In the Bolivian sub-Andes (~18oS) S1 is oriented NE-SW,
perpendicular to the local front of the Andean plateau. Near Jujuy,
Argentina (~24oS), S1 changes to roughly E-W and in La Rioja
(~28oS) S1 rotates to ESE-WNW, probably as an effect of the
spreading stresses of the Puna plateau. The gravitational spreading
of the plateau contributes to making S1 roughly perpendicular to
the Andean front as indicated by Assumpç~ ao and Araujo (1993).
South of about 30oS, where the Andean plateau gets narrow
again, the maximum compression tends to get parallel to the
Nazca-South America convergence, possibly because of a smaller
influence from spreading stresses of the narrow Andean plateau.
However, both seismicity and stresses result from a complex
interaction not only of plate boundary forces but also of local forces
related to the flat subduction in the Sierras Pampeanas region (e.g.,
Alvarado et al., 2005; Alvarado and Ramos, 2011).
3.3.2. Andean plateau
Present extension in the high Andean plateau, due to gravita-
tional collapse, is well known both from focal mechanism studies as
well as from recent geological faulting (e.g., Mercier et al. (1992) for
observations and Meijer et al. (1997) for numerical modeling). This
can be seen in Fig. 10 by the N-S tensional stresses in southern Peru
and in the southern Puna plateau. The regional E-W compression
from the Nazca plate convergence is thought to partially
290 ~o et al. / Journal of South American Earth Sciences 71 (2016) 278e295
M. Assumpça
compensate lateral E-W spreading of the plateau making N-S
extension more pronounced.
3.3.3. MidPlate region
Near the Chaco and Pantanal basins (~20oS, Figs. 1 and 9) and in
SE Brazil (central and southern part of the Sa ~o Francisco craton)
compressional stresses trend roughly E-W, on average. S1 seems to
rotate towards SE-NW across the Amazon craton. This trend is
based on very few focal mechanisms but is consistent with one
hydrofrac measurement in central Brazil and breakout data in the
Amazon basin. A possible explanation for the orientation of S1 in
the Amazon craton is the relative convergence of the North-Andean
block and the Caribbean plate with the South-American plate. This
source of stress was modelled by Meijer (1995) who showed that its
effect could reach large areas of the Amazon. However, effects of
local sources of stress, such as flexural forces from lithospheric
loads (Zoback and Richardson (1996) for the Amazon and
Assumpça ~o and Sacek (2013) for central Brazil) cannot be ruled out
as perturbations of a more uniform mid-plate stress field, as dis-
cussed before. Other alternative explanations related to astheno-
spheric drag will be discussed below.
In NE Brazil, a clear trend of S1 parallel to the coastline can be
observed. Also, Shmin in NE Brazil tends to be tensional perpen-
dicular to the northern coast. A detailed look at the stress pattern in
NE Brazil (as discussed in Fig. 5) shows that S1 varies rapidly along
the coast following closely the coastline. The breakout data shown
along the Atlantic margin (10oS to 15oS in Fig. 10) are averages of
many measurements (Lima et al., 1997); although there was a large
scatter in the breakout data set, all averages are statistically sig-
nificant. The SHmax parallel to the coast can be interpreted as due
to extension perpendicular to the coastline overcoming the E-W
regional compression from plate-wide forces. This means that local
sources of stress in NE Brazil, related to the continental margin, are
very important and are probably larger than the regional, long-
wavelength component from plate-wide forces. This suggests a
significant contribution of local flexural stresses due to sediment
load in the continental shelf as suggested by Assumpça ~o (1998a)
and Assumpça ~o et al. (2011).
3.4. Midplate stress patterns and GPS strain rate
The SIRGAS (Geocentric Reference System for the Americas)
network of GNSS stations has been used to estimate intraplate
strain rates. In the sub-Andean region, large shortening strain rates
(on the order of 1 x 108/y) have been observed consistent with
the predominantly E-W oriented compressional stresses (e.g.
Marotta et al., 2013; Nocquet et al., 2014). However, measurements
of the very low strain rates in the central part of the continent
(stable, midplate region) are probably below the GNSS accuracy
given the short time span between measurements.
We tried to estimate regional strain rates using the 2009 model
of the absolute velocity field for South America, called VEMOS2009,
which is a smoothly varying velocity field interpolated on the
SIRGAS data (Drewes and Heidbach, 2012). The overall strain rate
across the Amazon region, between Central Brazil and the Guyana
shield, is a shortening rate of 0.03  108/y, which would be
consistent with the predominantly compressional stresses
observed from focal mechanisms (Figs. 1a and 10). On the other
hand, Marotta et al. (2013) analysed the original SIRGAS velocity
data in South America, using triangular sub-networks, and found
predominantly dilatational strains in most of the stable mid-plate
region (of the order of þ0.1  108/y), even though statistically
not significant in most of the mid-continent region. Predominance
of dilatational strain is not consistent with the stresses observed
from focal mechanisms. This discrepancy is probably due to
insufficient accuracy of the GNSS data series to determine very low
strain rates in midplate South America. Similar difficulties were
found by Marotta et al. (2015) in a detailed study of strain rates in
Northeast Brazil, with rather scattered results and no clear relation
with the stresses derived from the focal mechanisms.
4. Discussion
The observed patterns of crustal stresses (Fig. 10) show large-
scale features (such as the roughly E-W compressional stresses
along most of the sub-Andean region) and local rotations, such as in
NE Brazil. This highlights the importance of local stresses that may
have the same, or even larger, magnitude as the regional stresses.
Numerical models of the regional, plate-wide lithospheric stresses
have been calculated using different methods. We now compare
some of these theoretical estimates to help separate regional from
local sources of stress.
4.1. Numerical models
An early numerical model of the South American plate was
given by Coblentz and Richardson (1996) where a purely elastic,
100 km thick lithospheric shell was subject to “plate boundary”
forces corresponding to ridge-push (mainly from mid-Atlantic
ridge), spreading stresses from the continent/ocean transition as
well as from the Andean plateau, plate collision forces (especially
from the Nazca subduction and the Caribbean transpressional
motion) and an asthenospheric drag pushing the South American
plate towards the NW (Fig. 12a). The model reproduced the mainly
E-W compression in mid-plate South America, with a slight trend of
rotation towards SE-NW in the Amazon, and the tensional stresses
in the high Andean plateau. However, differential stresses along the
Andean foreland had very low-magnitudes (i.e., Shmin y SHmax)
and the E-W tension in the Andean plateau was not consistent with
the observations of N-S tension (and E-W SHmax).
In that type of calculation, the spreading stresses (“ridge-push”,
continent/ocean transition and Andean plateau) could be estimated
directly from the topography or gravity field (with some assump-
tions regarding isostasy). On the other hand, contact forces such as
the Nazca plate “collision” and asthenospheric drag were parame-
ters to be adjusted to best fit the observed stresses. In the model of
Coblentz and Richardson (1996) the magnitude of all contact forces
were chosen to best fit the available stress data of the World Stress
Map Project at the time (Assumpç~ ao, 1992). An even better fit to the
NW-SE compressional orientation in the Amazon could be obtained
by increasing the magnitude of the collision with the Caribbean
plate (Meijer, 1995). While such type of modeling was helpful in
showing what kind of forces are predominant, little can be learned
about upper mantle convection, for example.
Global models of intraplate stresses have now been used where
there is no need to parameterize contact forces as they are taken
into account automatically through the asthenospheric drag arising
from convection models (e.g. Bird, 1998; Lithgow-Bertelloni and
Guynn, 2004; Ghosh et al., 2008, 2009; Naliboff et al., 2009, 2012).
While there are less free parameters to improve the fit to the
observed stress data, more can be learned about the reliability of
upper- and lower-mantle density models as well as global crustal
models. Numerical models of Lithgow-Berteloni and Guynn (2004)
for global stresses showed that the best fit to the observed stresses
in South America were achieved for a global convection model
derived from slab history and crustal structure from CRUST2.0
(model SLB þ TD0 of Lithgow-Berteloni and Guynn, 2004). How-
ever, this model predicted strike-slip stresses in mid-plate South
America, not compressional stresses as we observe in Fig. 10. When
crustal densities are based on isostasy (their model TD5) a rotation
 ~o et al. / Journal of South American Earth Sciences 71 (2016) 278e295
M. Assumpça 291

of SHmax towards NW-SE in the Amazon was obtained. However,
in this model the southern part of South America was poorly fit
with N-S trending SHmax.
Here we improved the global model of Naliboff et al. (2009,
2012) by using CRUST1.0 to derive more accurate spreading
stresses from the gravitational potential energy (GPE) shown in
Fig. 11. These spreading stresses are mostly less than 10 MPa in mid-
plate South America but can reach values as high as 25e30 MPa in
the Andean plateau and sub-Andean regions.
Stresses resulting from lithosphere basal tractions are then
added to get the total crustal stresses. Basal tractions (or
“asthenospheric drag”) are calculated with a combination of two
flow fields: a plate-driven and a density-driven mantle convection
model (Naliboff et al., 2009). In the density-driven convection,
upper mantle seismic velocity anomalies (from the tomography
model of Ritsema et al., 2004) are converted to density anomalies,
which drive mantle flow (such as the high-velocity Nazca
subducted slab which tends to sink and cause counter flow beneath
the mid-plate region of the South American plate). In the plate-
driven model, upper mantle flow is constrained by the absolute
NUVEL-1A surface plate motions (DeMets et al., 1994). The final
stresses are shown in Fig. 12c. In this numerical test, stresses from
basal tractions dominate the GPE stresses and magnitudes can
reach 60e65 MPa.
4.2. Comparison with observations
When comparing the calculated stresses with the observations,
one must take into account that small-scale features (such as the
complex structure of the North Andean Block) are not expected to
be modelled in detail due to the lower resolution of the global
crustal model and numerical model. For consistency, the numerical
model resolution (1ox1o) matches the resolution of Crust 1.0. The
calculated stresses (Fig. 12c) compare reasonably well with the

Fig. 11. Principal stresses due to the gravitational potential energy (GPE), i.e., “spreading stresses” from lateral density variations, based on the CRUST1.0 model. Solid and white
lines are compressional and tensional stresses, respectively. Blue areas, generally related to high topography, indicate an extensional regime; green areas a compressional regime.
292 ~o et al. / Journal of South American Earth Sciences 71 (2016) 278e295
M. Assumpça
Fig. 12. Theoretical and observed intraplate stresses in South America. a) Stresses from regional plate-wide forces acting on a 100 km thick elastic plate (model 3 of Coblentz and
Richardson, 1996; their Fig. 6). b) Observed stresses as in Fig. 10 c) Total stresses arising from superposition of GPE stresses (Fig. 11) and tractions at the base of the lithosphere
(asthenospheric drag) arising from a combination of density-driven and plate-motion mantle convection within a global circulation model; background colors as in Fig. 11.
observed stresses (Fig. 12b) in the central and southern Andes. In
the Andean plateau, the ~E-W compression and N-S tension are
well correlated. In the sub-Andean region of Ecuador and Peru ~ E-
W oriented compressional stresses are also consistent with the
observations. Near the Bolivian orocline, the observed stresses
indicate ENE-WSW compression and a small NNW-SSE tension,
which is also seen in the numerical model. South of ~25oS purely
compressional stresses are seen again in the sub-Andean belt of
Argentina.
In SE Brazil (Paran a basin and Sa ~o Francisco cratons) the
observed ENE-WSW SHmax is reasonably well reproduced in the
numerical model, although the stress regime is not an exact fit. In
the equatorial margin (from NE Brazil to the Amazon fan) the coast
parallel SHmax is also well matched.
The main discrepancy between the observed stresses and the
numerical model is seen in the mid-plate region. The numerical
model shows a much more uniform ENE-WSW compression all
along the stable continental area, whereas the observed data
strongly indicates a change from ENE-WSW compression in the
south to SE-NW compression all across the Central Brazil and
Guyana shields. GPE stresses (Fig. 11) do not indicate any change in
the predominant orientation of SHmax similar to the observations.
Because stresses from basal traction dominate the GPE stresses,
convection models with improved upper mantle density structures
may provide a better fit to the change in the predominant SHmax
orientation.
It is important to note, however, that the thin-shell approxi-
mation used to calculated stresses assumes full coupling between
the entire lithosphere and basal tractions, which will not occur if
rheological layering fully or partially decouples portions of the
lithosphere (Naliboff et al., 2009). Similarly, assumptions in calcu-
lating GPE regarding the lithosphere's density distribution and
thickness, thin-shell/sheet approximation (i.e. vertical averaging
and no depth-dependence) and lack of flexural stresses also
introduce unrealistic deviations from observed stress patterns
(Naliboff et al., 2012). However, it is not the purpose of this paper to
explore all the possible variations in the numerical models, but only
to indicate the potential use of the South American stress data in
future studies of global stresses and upper mantle dynamics.
4.3. Importance of local sources of stress
At present, global models of lithospheric stresses do not have
sufficient resolution or sufficient regional crustal density models to
map small-scale features of the stress field. For this reason, flexural
stresses and other sources of local perturbations (such as major
faults that act as weakness zones) are not commonly taken into
account. The numerical model shown in Fig. 12c does not include
local flexural effects. However, stresses from local sources can be as
important as the regional stresses (e.g., Heidbach et al., 2010;
Assumpça ~o and Sacek, 2013).
In the mid-continent stable platform Assumpça ~o et al. (2014)
showed that intraplate seismicity correlates with high values of
free-air gravity anomalies, and proposed that flexural stresses were
an important contribution to crustal stresses. In the mid-continent,
crustal loads (evidenced by high gravity anomalies) would produce
compressional stresses in the upper crust right above the load in a
zone about 100e200 km wide (e.g. Assumpça ~o and Sacek, 2013). At
the continental margins, such as in NE Brazil (Fig. 5), the sediment
load of the continental shelf would cause compressional stresses
offshore (beneath the load; e.g., Assumpça ~o, 1998a) as well as
tensional stresses onshore, towards the peripheral bulge. Effective
elastic thicknesses in the coastal area of NE Brazil vary from 10 to
25 km (Pe rez-Gussinie et al., 2007) which would produce the
largest tensional stresses about 50e100 km from the sediment
load, consistent with the focal mechanisms shown in Fig. 5. This
could help explain the observed tensional stresses perpendicular to
the coastline. The few focal mechanisms in Fig. 5 show that the
reverse faulting events tend to be farther away from the coast and
the events closer to the continental shelf tend to be strike-slip or
normal faulting, which is consistent with the proposed tensional
local stresses from flexural effects.
It is interesting to note that a clear difference in the depth dis-
tribution between sub-Andean events and mid-plate events can be
observed (Fig. 13). Alvarado and Ramos (2011) and Devlin et al.
(2012) show that crustal events in the Andean foreland tend to
occur in different crustal levels from about 5 to about 35 km depth,
with lower crust events more common above the flat-slab regions
of Peru and Argentina, presumably due to a thicker thermal
 ~o et al. / Journal of South American Earth Sciences 71 (2016) 278e295
M. Assumpça
Fig. 13. Depth distribution of intraplate crustal earthquakes: a) sub-Andean belt, data
from Devlin et al. (2012); b) mid-continental region (Brazil and Paraguay). In both
cases only reliable focal depths were used, such as those from teleseismic body-wave
modeling, or local network hypocentral determination. Depths inferred only from
surface-wave modeling (such as GCMT or regional waveform inversion) were not used.
lithosphere. In contrast, earthquakes in the mid-continent region
tend to be much shallower and concentrate in the upper crust.
Events with magnitude 5.0 mb at about 1 km depth are not un-
common (e.g., Chimpliganond et al., 2010; Barros et al., 2015). The
very shallow depths in the mid-continental area make the seis-
micity more susceptible to flexural stresses which are higher in the
brittle upper crust, close to the surface.
5. Conclusions
The revised and updated compilation of focal mechanisms in
intraplate South America shows that horizontal compressional
stresses predominate, not only in the Andean foreland belt, but also
in mid-plate areas of the continent. Far from the coast, the SHmax
orientation seems to be relatively uniform over continental-scale
regions, and two main domains could be proposed. a) Average E-
W orientation from the sub-Andean belt to SE Brazil, with small
local rotations observed along the Sub-Andes of Bolivia and
Argentina, caused mainly by gravitational effects of the Andean
plateau, as well as near the North Andean block in northern Peru,
Ecuador and Colombia, due to relative motion between small
crustal slivers, and b) Average SE-NW orientation across the whole
Amazon craton (from the Central Brazil to the Guyana shields).
While the first, ~E-W domain has been relatively well reproduced
in numerical models employing basal tractions from subduction-
dominated mantle convection (e.g. Fig. 12c), the Amazonian
domain has not been well explained by global models. Perhaps the
effect of the thick lithosphere in the Amazon craton has not been
properly taken into account in current mantle convection models.
Along the Atlantic coast, effects of the continental margin
(tensional stresses perpendicular to the coastline) strongly rotate
the resulting stress field causing a trend of SHmax to be parallel to
the coastline. Besides gravitational effects across the continent-
ocean transition, flexural stresses from sediment load in the con-
tinental shelf are suggested to be equally important, such as in SE
Brazil (Assumpça ~o, 1998a; Assumpç~ ao et al., 2011) and in the
Amazon fan (Watts et al., 2009).
Flexural stresses from sediment load are usually considered a
localized effect and are not often taken into account in global
293
numerical models of intraplate stresses (e.g., Lithgow-Berteloni and
Guynn, 2004). However, local flexural effects can cause large de-
viations from the “regional” stress orientations. For this reason as
well as the fundamental assumptions of thin-sheet/shell models,
comparison of the observed stresses with results of numerical
models must be made taking into account significant potential
“distortions” of the regional field. Clearly, more focal mechanisms
in mid-plate South America are necessary to separate regional
component from more localized sources of stress.
Numerical models of global lithospheric stresses (e.g., Lithgow-
Berteloni and Guynn, 2004; Ghosh et al., 2008, 2009; Naliboff et al.,
2009, 2012) often correctly predict large-scale patterns of the stress
field, such as the general E-W orientation of SHmax in South
America (e.g., Fig. 12c), but have not been able to accurately
reproduce many observed smaller scale (<1000 km) variations of
the observed stress field. This is primarily due to the use of global
crustal models that frequently deviate from regional models, un-
certainty regarding the mantle lithosphere and asthenosphere
density structure, numerical resolution, lack of flexural stresses and
depth-averaging required by the GPE and thin sheet and shell ap-
proximations. Improved crustal and upper mantle density models
are clearly necessary for the South American plate, as well as 3-D
lithospheric models that include vertical and lateral variations in
rheology. The observed pattern of stress field in South America
(Figs. 1a and 10) should be useful in constraining the more accurate,
higher resolution new generation of numerical models of litho-
spheric stresses.
Acknowledgments
Work carried out with CNPq grants 30.9724/2009-0 and
30.6547/2013-9, INCT/”Tectonic Studies” project 573713/2008-1,
FAPESP scholarship 2011/20165-9 and 2014/26015-7, and Petro-
bras/Geotectonic BRASIS project. We thank Oliver Heidbach and an
anonymous reviewer for detailed comments and suggestions on an
early version of the paper.
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary data related to this article can be found at http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jsames.2016.07.005.
References
Agurto, H., Assumpça ~o, M., Ciardelli, C., Albuquerque, D.F., Barros, L.V., França, G.S.L.,
2015. The 2012-2013 Montes Claros earthquake series in the Sa ~o Francisco
Craton, Brazil: new evidence for non-uniform intraplate stresses in mid-plate
South America. Geophys. J. Int. 200, 216e226. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/gji/
ggu333.
Alvarado, A., Audin, L., Nocquet, J.M., Lagreulet, S., Segovia, M., Font, Y.,
Lamarque, G., Yepes, H., Mothes, P., Rolandone, F., Jarrín, P., Quidelleur, X., 2014.
Active tectonics in Quito, Ecuador, assessed by geomorphological studies, GPS
data, and crustal seismicity. Tectonics 33. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/
2012TC003224.
Alvarado, P., Beck, S., Zandt, G., Araujo, M., Triep, E., 2005. Crustal deformation in the
south-central Andes backarc terranes as viewed from regional broad-band
seismic waveform modelling. Geophys. J. Int. 163, 580e598.
Alvarado, P., Beck, S., 2006. Source characterization of the san Juan (Argentina)
crustal earthquakes of 15 January 1944 (Mw 7.0) and 11 June 1952 (Mw 6.8).
Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 243, 615e631.
Alvarado, P., Ramos, V.A., 2011. Earthquake deformation in the northwestern Sierras
Pampeanas of Argentina based on seismic waveform modelling. J. Geodyn. 51,
205e218.
Angelier, J., 1984. Tectonic analysis of fault slip data sets. J. Geophys. Res. 89,
5835e5848.
Armelin, J.L., Porfirio, N.T., Piovezani, J.D., 2000. Determinaça ~o do estado de tenso ~ es
in situ no maciço rochoso do AHE Simplício. In: 2o. Congresso Brasileiro de
Túneis e Estruturas Subterra ^neas, Proceedings, CD-ROM.
Assumpça ~o, M., 1992. The regional intraplate stress field in South America.
J. Geophys. Res. 97, 11.889e11.903.
Assumpça ~o, M., Araujo, M., 1993. Effect of the Altiplano-Puna plateau, South
294 ~o et al. / Journal of South American Earth Sciences 71 (2016) 278e295
M. Assumpça
America, on the regional intraplate stress. Tectonophysics 221, 475e496.
Assumpç~ ao, M., 1998a. Seismicity and stresses in the Brazilian passive margin. Bull.
Seism. Soc. Am. 88 (1), 160e169.
Assumpç~ ao, M., 1998b. Focal mechanisms of small earthquakes in SE Brazilian
shield: a test of stress models of the South American plate. Geophys. J. Int. 133,
490e498.
Assumpç~ ao, M., Yamabe, T.H., Barbosa, J.R., Hamza, V., Lopes, A.E.V., Balancin, L.,
Bianchi, M.B., 2010. Seismic activity triggered by water wells in the Paran a Ferreira, J.M., Oliveira, R.T., Takeya, M.K., Assumpça
Basin, Brazil. Water Resour. Res. 46, W07527. http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/
2009WR008048.
Assumpç~ ao, M., Dourado, J.C., Ribotta, L.C., Mohriak, W.U., Dias, F.L., Barbosa, J.R.,
2011. The S~ ao Vicente earthquake of april 2008 and seismicity in the conti-
nental shelf off SE Brazil: further evidence for flexural stresses. Geophys. J. Int.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-246X.2011.05198.x.
Assumpç~ ao, M., Sacek, V., 2013. Intra-plate seismicity and flexural stresses in
Central Brazil. Geophys. Res. Lett. 40, 487e491. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/
grl.50142, 2013.
Assumpç~ ao, M., Ferreira, J., Bezerra, F.H., França, G.S., Barbosa, J.R., Menezes, E.,
Ribotta, L.C., Pirchiner, M., Nascimento, A., Dourado, J.C., 2014. Intraplate seis-
micity in Brazil. In: Talwani, P. (Ed.), Intraplate Earthquakes. Cambridge U.P.,
ISBN 978-1-107-04038-0, 398 pp., (chapter 3), p 50e71.
Barros, L.V., Assumpç~ ao, M., Quinteros, R., Caixeta, D., 2009. The intraplate Porto dos
Gaúchos seismic zone in the Amazon craton d Brazil. Tectonophysics 469
(1e4), 37e47. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tecto.2009.01.006.
Barros, L.V., Assumpça ~o, M., Chimpliganond, C., Carvalho, J.M., Von Huelsen, M.G.,
Caixeta, D., França, G.S., Albuquerque, D.F., Ferreira, V.M., Fontenele, D.P., 2015.
The Mara Rosa 2010 GT-5 earthquake and its possible relationship with the
continental-scale Transbrasiliano Lineament. J. South Am. Earth Sci. 60, 1e9.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jsames.2015.02.002.
Bird, P., 1998. Testing hypotheses on plate-driving mechanisms with global litho-
sphere models including topography, thermal structure and faults. J. Geophys.
Res. 103, 10,115e10,129.
Cahill, T., Isacks, B., Whitman, D., Chatelain, J.L., Pe rez, A., Jer Ming, C., 1992. Seis-
micity and tectonics in Jujuy province, northwestern Argentina. Tectonics 11,
944e959.
Carey-Gailhardis, E., Mercier, J.L., 1987. A numerical method for determining the
state of stress using focal mechanisms of earthquake populations: application
to Tibetan teleseisms and microseismicity of Southern Peru. Earth Planet. Sci.
Lett. 82, 165e179.
Carvalho, J., Barros, L.V., Zahradnik, J., 2016. Focal mechanisms and moment mag-
nitudes of micro-earthquakes in central Brazil by waveform inversion with
quality assessment and inference of the local stress field. J. South Am. Earth Sci.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jsames.2015.07.020 (This Special Issue).
Ciardelli, C., Assumpça ~o, M., 2016. Rupture-length x Magnitude for Intraplate
Earthquakes in Brazil Using Cross-correlation of Regional Lg Waves. Abstract, II
Regional Assembly of the IASPEI's Latin American and Caribbean Seismological
Commission, Costa Rica, June 2016.
Chimpliganond, C., Assumpça ~o, M., von Huelsen, M., França, G.S., 2010. The intra-
cratonic caraíbas-itacarambi earthquake of December 09, 2007 (4.9 mb), Minas
Gerais state, Brazil. Tectonophysics 480, 48e56.
Coblentz, D.D., Richardson, R.M., 1996. Analysis of the South America intraplate
stress field. J. Geophys. Res. 101, 8,643e8,657.
Coffin, M.F., Gahagan, L.M., Lawver, L.A., 1998. Present-day Plate Boundary Digital
Data Compilation. University of Texas Institute for Geophysics Technical Report
No. 174, pp. 5. Data available on. http://www-udc.ig.utexas.edu/external/plates/
data.htm (accessed 14.06.16, last update in the data in July 2012).
Dantas, R.R.S., Lima Neto, H.C., Ferreira, J.M., Nascimento, A.F., Assumpç~ ao, M.,
Bezerra, F.H.R., Menezes, E.A.S., Spinelli, R.M.R.P., Costa, N.P., 2011. Atividade
sísmica em Pedra Preta-RN em 2010. In: Congress of the Braz. Geophysical Soc.,
Rio de Janeiro, 2011 (Extended abstract).
DeMets, C., Gordon, R., Argus, D., Stein, S., 1994. Effect of recent revisions to the
geomagnetic reversal time scale on estimates of current plate motions. Geo-
phys. Res. Lett. 21, 2191e2194. http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/94GL02118.
Deverche re, J., Dorbath, C., Dorbath, L., 1989. Extension related to a high topog-
raphy: results from a microearthquake survey in the Andes of Peru and tec-
tonics implications. Geophys. J. Int. 98, 281e292.
Devlin, S., Isacks, B.L., Pritchard, M.E., Barnhart, W.D., Lohman, R.B., 2012. Depths
and focal mechanisms of crustal earthquakes in the central Andes determined
from teleseismic waveform analysis and InSAR. Tectonics 31, TC2002. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1029/2011TC002914.
Dias, F.L., 2016. Focal Mechanisms and the Intraplate Stress Pattern in Brazil. Ph.D.
thesis (in Portuguese). University of Sa ~o Paulo, Dept. of Geophysics, 158 pp.
Dias, F.L., Assumpça ~o, M., Facincani, E.M., França, G.S., Assine, M.L., Paranhos
Filho, A.C., Gamarra, R.M., 2016a. The 2009 earthquake, magnitude 4.8 mb, in
the Pantanal Wetlands, western Brazil. Ann. Braz. Acad. Sci. (in press).
Dias, F., Zahradnik, J., Assumpça ~o, M., 2016b. Path-specific, dispersion-based ve-
locity models and moment tensors of moderate events recorded at few distant
stations: examples from Brazil and Greece. J. South Am. Earth Sci. This Special
Issue.
Dicelis, G., Assumpça ~o, M., Prado, R., Agurto, H., Barbosa, J.R., 2013. Relocated
earthquakes in Bebedouro, Parana  basin, Brazil: confirmed induction by water
wells. In: American Geophysical Union, Fall Meeting, Abstract.
Dorbath, C., Dorbath, L., Cisternas, A., Deverchere, J., Diament, M., Ocola, L.,
Morales, M., 1986. On crustal seismicity of the Amazonian foothills of the
central Peruvian Andes. Geophys. Res. Lett. 13 (10), 1023e1026. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1029/GL013i010p01023.
Drewes, H., Heidbach, O., 2012. The 2009 horizontal velocity field for South America
and the Caribbean. In: Kenyon, S., Pacino, M.C., Marti, U. (Eds.), Geodesy for
Planet Earth, vol. 136. IAG Symposia, pp. 657e664.
brier, M., Lavenu, A., Yepes, H., Egues, A., 1996. Quaternary state of stress in
Ego, F., Se
the Northern Andes and the restraining bend model for the Ecuadorian Andes.
Tectonophysics 259 (1e3), 101e116.
~o, M., 1998. Superposition of
local and regional stresses in NE Brazil: evidence from focal mechanisms
around the Potiguar marginal basin. Geophys. J. Int. 134, 341e355.
Ferreira, J.M., Bezerra, F.H.R., Sousa, M.O.L., Nascimento, A.F., Sa , J.M., França, G.S.,
2008. The role of Precambrian mylonitic belts and present-day stress field in
the coseismic reactivation of the Pernambuco lineament, Brazil. Tectonophysics
456, 111e126.
França, G.S., Ferreira, J.M., Takeya, M.K., 2004. Seismic activity in Senador S a-CE,
Brazil, 1997e1998. Braz. J. Geophys. 22, 115e125.
Frohlich, C., 1992. Triangle diagrams: ternary graphs to display similarity and di-
versity of earthquake focal mechanisms. Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. 75, 193e198.
Gephart, J.W., Forsyth, D.W., 1984. An improved method for determining the
regional stress tensor using earthquake focal mechanism data: application to
the San Fernando earthquake sequence. J. Geophys. Res. 89, 9305e9320.
Ghosh, A., Holt, W.E., Wen, L., Haines, A.J., Flesch, L.M., 2008. Joint modelling of
lithosphere and mantle dynamics elucidating lithosphere-mantle coupling.
Geophys. Res. Lett. 35, L16309.
Ghosh, A., Holt, W.E., Flesch, L.M., 2009. Contribution of gravitational potential
energy differences to the global stress field. Geophys. J. Int. 179, 787e812.
Heidbach, O., Reinecker, J., Tingay, M., Müller, B., Sperner, B., Fuchs, K., Wenzel, F.,
2007. Plate boundary forces are not enough: second- and third-order stress
patterns highlighted in the World Stress Map database. Tectonics 26, TC6014.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2007TC002133.
Heidbach, O., Iaffaldano, G., Bunge, H.P., 2008. Topography growth drives stress
rotations in the central Andes: observations and models. Geophys. Res. Lett. 35,
L08301. http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2007GL032782.
Heidbach, O., Rajabi, M., Ziegler, M., Reiter, K., the WSM Team, 2016. The World
Stress Map Database Release 2016-Global Crustal Stress Pattern Vs. Absolute
Plate Motion. EGU Abstract 4861.
Heidbach, O., Tingay, M., Barth, A., Reinecker, J., Kurfes, D., Müller, B., 2010. Global
crustal stress pattern based on the World Stress Map database release 2008.
Tectonophysics. 482, 3e15.
Legrand, D., Calahorrano, A., Guillier, B., Rivera, L., Ruiz, M., Villago mez, D., Yepes, H.,
2002. Stress tensor analysis of the 1998e1999 tectonic swarm of northern Quito
related to the volcanic swarm of Guagua Pichincha volcano, Ecuador. Tecto-
nophysics 344 (1e2), 15e36.
Lima, C., Nascimento, E., Assumpç~ ao, M., 1997. Stress orientations in Brazilian
sedimentary basins from breakout analysis - implications for force models in
the South American plate. Geophys. J. Int. 130 (1), 112e124.
Lima Neto, H.C., Ferreira, J.M., Nascimento, A.F., Bezerra, F.H.R., Spineli, R.M.P.,
Costa, N.P., Menezes, E.A.S., 2010. Estudo das re plicas do sismo de magnitude
4.3 em Taipu - RN ocorrido em 2010. IV Simp. Bras. Geofísica. Brasilia-DF, 2010.
Extended abstract.
Lima Neto, H.C., Ferreira, J.M., Bezerra, F.H.R., Assumpça ~o, M., do Nascimento, A.F.,
Sousa, M.O.L., Menezes, E.A.S., 2013. Upper crustal earthquake swarms in S~ ao
Caetano: reactivation of the Pernambuco shear zone and trending branches in
intraplate Brazil. Tectonophys. 608, 804e811. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.tecto.2013.08.001.
Lima Neto, H.C., Ferreira, J.M., Bezerra, F.H.R., Assumpça ~o, M., do Nascimento, A.F.,
Sousa, M.O.L., Menezes, E.A.S., 2014. Earthquake sequences in the southern
block of the Pernambuco Lineament, NE Brazil: stress field and seismotectonic
implications. Tectonophys. 633, 211e220. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.tecto.2014.07.010.
Lithgow-Bertelloni, C., Guynn, J.H., 2004. Origin of the lithospheric stress field.
J. Geophys. Res. 109, B01408. http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2003JB002467.
Lopes, A.E.V., 2008. Estudo das tenso ~ es intraplaca no Brasil. PhD thesis. IAG, Uni-
versity of Sa ~o Paulo, Brazil, 177 pp.
Lopes, A.E.V., Assumpç~ ao, M., do Nascimento, A.F., Ferreira, J.M., Menezes, E.A.S.,
Barbosa, J.R., 2010. Intraplate earthquake swarm in Belo Jardim, NE Brazil:
reactivation of a major Neoproterozoic shear zone (Pernambuco lineament).
Geophys. J. Int. 180, 1302e1312. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-
246X.2009.04485.x.
Magalha ~es, F.S., 1999. Tenso~ es regionais e locais: Casos no territo  rio brasileiro e
padra ~o geral. PhD thesis. Escola de Engenharia de Sa ~o Carlos, USP, 225 pp.
Marotta, G.S., França, G.S., Monico, J.F.G., Fuck, R.A., Araújo Filho, J.O., 2013. Strain
rate of the South American lithospheric plate by SIRGAS-CON geodetic obser-
vations. J. South Am. Earth Sci. 47, 136e141. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.jsames.2013.07.004.
Marotta, G.S., França, G.S., Monico, J.F.G., Bezerra, F.H.R., Fuck, R.A., 2015. Strain rates
estimated by geodetic observations in the Borborema Province. Braz. J. South
Am. Earth Sci. 58, 1e8.
Maury, J., Cornet, F.H., Dorbath, L., 2013. A review of methods for determining stress
fields from earthquake focal mechanisms: application to the Sierentz 1980
seismic crisis (Upper Rghine graben). Bull. Soc. Geol. Fr. 184 (4e5), 319e334.
Mazzotti, S., 2007. Geodynamic models for earthquake studies in intraplate North
America. In: Stein, S., Mazzotti, S. (Eds.), Continental Intraplate Earthquakes:
Science, Hazard, and Policy Issues, vol. 425. Geological Society of America,
pp. 17e33.
 ~o et al. / Journal of South American Earth Sciences 71 (2016) 278e295
M. Assumpça
McKenzie, D.P., 1969. The relationship between fault plane solutions for earth-
quakes and the directions of the principal stresses. Bull. Seism. Soc. Am. 59,
591e601.
Meijer, P.T., 1995. Dynamics of Active Continental Margins: the Andes and the
Aegean Regions. PhD Thesis. Utrecht University, The Netherlands.
Meijer, P.T., Govers, R., Wortel, M.J.R., 1997. Forces controlling the present-day state
of stress in the Andes. Earth Planet. Sci. Let. 148, 157e170.
Mendiguren, J.A., 1980. A procedure to resolve areas of different source mechanism
when using the method of composite nodal plane solution. Bull. Seism. Soc. Am.
70 (4), 985e998.
Mendiguren, J.A., Richter, F.M., 1978. On the origin of compressional intraplate
stresses in South America. Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. 16, 318e326.
Mercier, J.L., Sebrier, M., Lavenu, A., Cabrera, J., Bellier, O., Dumont, J.F., Machare , J.,
1992. Changes in the tectonic regime above a subduction zone of Andean type:
the Andes of Peru and Bolivia during Pliocene-Pleistocene. J. Geophys. Res. 97,
11945e11982.
Michael, A.J., 1984. Determination of stress from slip data: faults and folds.
J. Geophys. Res. 89, 11517e11526.
Michael, A.J., 1987. The use of focal mechanisms to determine stress: a control study.
J. Geophys. Res. 92, 357e368.
Mulcahy, P., Chen, C., Kay, S.M., Brown, L.D., Isacks, B.L., Sandvol, E., Heit, B., Yuan, X.,
Coira, B.L., 2014. Central Andean mantle and crustal seismicity beneath the
Southern Puna plateau and the northern margin of the Chilean-Pampean flat
slab. Tectonics 33. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/2013TC003393.
Naliboff, J.B., Conrad, C.P., Lithgow-Bertelonni, C., 2009. Modification of the litho-
spheric stress field by lateral variations in plate-mantle coupling. Geophys. Res.
Lett. 36, L22307. http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2009GL040484.
Naliboff, J.B., Lithgow-Bertelonni, C., Ruff, L.J., Koker, N., 2012. The effects of litho-
spheric thickness and density structure on Earths stress field. Geophys. J. Int.
188, 1e17. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-246X.2011.05248.x.
Nascimento, A.F., Cowie, P.A., Lunn, R.J., Pearce, R.G., 2004. Spatio-temporal evolu-
tion of induced seismicity at Açu reservoir, NE Brazil. Geophys. J. Int. 158,
1041e1052. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-246X.2004.02351.x.
Nocquet, J.-M., Villegas-Lanza, J.C., Chlieh, M., Mothes, P.A., Rolandone, F., Jarrin, P.,
Cisneros, D., Alvarado, A., Audin, L., Bondoux, F., Martin, X., Font, Y., Re gnier, M.,
Vallee, M., Tran, T., Beauval, C., Maguin~ a Mendoza, J.M., Martinez, W., Tavera, H.,
Yepes, H., 2014. Motion of continental slivers and creeping subduction in the
northern Andes. Nat. Geosci. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/NGEO2099. March 2014.
Oliveira, P.H.S., Ferreira, J.M., Nascimento, A.F., Bezerra, F.H.R., Soares, J.E., Fuck, R.,
2010. Estudo da Sismicidade na Regia ~o de Sobral e CE, NE do Brasil, em 2008. IV
Simp. Bras. Geofísica. Brasilia-DF, 2010. Extended abstract.
Oliveira, P.H.S., Ferreira, J.M., Bezerra, F.H.R., Assumpç~ ao, M., Nascimento, A.F.,
Sousa, M.O.L., Menezes, E.A.S., 2015. Influence of the continental margin on the
stress field and seismicity in the intraplate Acaraú seismic zone, NE Brazil.
Geophys. J. Int. 202 (3), 1453e1462. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggv211.
Palma, M., Audemard, F., Romero, G., 2010. New focal mechanism solutions for
Venezuela and neighbouring areas 2005-2008: importance of the National
Seismological Network's density and distribution. Rev. Te c. Ing. Univ. Zulia 33
(2), 108e121.
rez-Gussinie
Pe , M., Lowry, A.R., Watts, A.B., 2007. Effective elastic thickness of South
America and its implications for intracontinental deformation. Geochem.
295
Geophys. Geosystems 8 (5), Q05009. http://dx.doi.org/10.1020/2006GC001511.
Reiter, K., Heidbach, O., Schmitt, D., Haug, K., Ziegler, M., Moeck, I., 2014. A revised
crustal stress orientation database for Canada. Tectonophys. 636, 111e124.
Reis, A.F.C., Bezerra, F.H.R., Ferreira, J.M., Nascimento, A.F., Lima, C.C., 2013. Stress
magnitude and orientation in the Potiguar Basin, Brazil: implications on
faulting style and reactivation. J. Geophys. Res. 118, 5550e5563. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1002/2012JB009953.
Richardson, T., Gilbert, H., Anderson, M., Ridgway, K.D., 2012. Seismicity within the
actively deforming eastern Sierras Pampeanas, Argentina. Geophys. J. Int. 188,
408e420. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-246X.2011.05283.x.
Ritsema, J., van Heijst, H., Woodhouse, J., 2004. Global transition zone tomography.
J. Geophys. Res. 109, B02302. http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2003JB002610.
Rivera, L., Cisternas, A., 1990. Stress tensor and fault plane solutions for a population
of earthquakes. Bull. Seism. Soc. Am. 80, 600e614.
S
a, N.C., 2004. O campo de gravidade, o geo ide e a estrutura crustal na America do
Sul: Novas estrate gias de representaç~ ao. Tese de Livre-Doce ^ncia. Universidade
de S~ ao Paulo, 121pp.
S
anchez, G., Araujo, M., Alvarado, P., 2012. Last main earthquakes in the northwest
of Argentina. Seismology Simposium. Peruvian Geol. Congr. extended abstr.,
4pp.
brier, M., Araujo, M., 2005. Deformation partitioning in flat
Siame, L.L., Bellier, O., Se
subduction setting: case of the Andean foreland of western Argentina
o o
(28 Se33 S). Tectonics 24, TC5003. http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2005TC001787.
Sokos, E.N., Zahradnik, J., 2008. ISOLA a Fortran code and a Matlab GUI to perform
multiple-point source inversion of seismic data. Comput. Geosci. 34 (8),
967e977.
Sokos, E.N., Zahradnik, J., 2013. Evaluating centroid-moment-tensor uncertainty in
the new version of ISOLA software. Seismol. Res. Lett. 84 (4), 656e665.
Talwani, P., 2014. Unified model for intraplate earthquakes. In: Talwani, P. (Ed.),
Intraplate Earthquakes. Cambridge U.P, ISBN 978-1-107-04038-0, pp. p275e302
(chapter 11).
Tavera, H., Buforn, E., 2001. Source mechanism of earthquakes in Peru. J. Seismol. 5,
519e539.
Tingay, M.R.P., Müller, B., Reinecker, J., Heidbach, O., 2006. In: State and Origin of the
Present-day Stress Field in Sedimentary Basins: New Results from the World
Stress Map Project. Paper Presented at the 41st U.S. Symposium on Rock Me-
chanics (USRMS), 06-1049, Golden, CO.
Turcotte, D.L., Schubert, G., 1982. Geodynamics Applications of Continuum Physics
to Geological Problems. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., ISBN 0-471-06018-6, p. 450
Watts, A.B., Rodger, M., Peirce, C., Greenroyd, C.J., Hobbs, R.W., 2009. Seismic
structure, gravity anomalies, and flexure of the Amazon continental margin, ́ NE
Brazil. J. Geophys. Res. 114, B07103. http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2008JB006259.
Zevallos, 2001. Esforços Na Placa Continental Sul-americana. M.Sc. Dissertation. IAG,
University of Sa ~o Paulo, p. 69.
Zoback, M.L., 1992a. First- and second-order patterns of stress in the lithosphere:
the world stress map project. J. Geophys. Res. 97 (B8), 11703e11728.
Zoback, M.L., 1992b. Stress field constraints on intraplate seismicity in eastern North
America. J. Geophys. Res. 97 (B8), 11761e11782.
Zoback, M.L., Richardson, R.M., 1996. Stress perturbation associated with the
Amazonas and other ancient continental rifts. J. Geophys. Res. 101, 5459e5475.