Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Slow slip along the Hikurangi margin linked to fluid-rich sediments trailing subducting seamounts

  • Article
  • Published:

From Nature Geoscience

View current issue Submit your manuscript

Abstract

Large seamounts and basement relief cause permanent deformation when they collide with the overriding plate at subduction zones. The resulting structural and compositional heterogeneities have been implicated as controlling factors in megathrust slip behaviour. Subducting seamounts may temporarily lock plates, favouring subsequent large earthquakes. Alternatively, seamounts may redistribute stress, reducing seismic slip. Here we present three-dimensional seismic data from the seamount-studded subducting Hikurangi Plateau along New Zealand’s North Island. We find that one well-imaged seamount, the Pāpaku Seamount, locally uplifts the overriding plate and leaves a tube-shaped lens of sediment trailing in its wake. Anomalously low seismic velocities within and below the Pāpaku lens and along the megathrust fault are consistent with the presence of unconsolidated, overpressured fluid-rich sediments. Similar observations from an older sediment lens, which corresponds to the location of a 2014 slow-slip rupture event, suggest that such overpressures can persist along the megathrust due to delayed drainage out of the subducting plate. The collocation of the 2014 slow-slip earthquake with this sediment lens suggests that these fluid-rich regions define zones that enable slow slip. We hypothesize that sediment lenses left behind by subducting seamounts can create low-effective-stress patches within transitionally stable marine sediment along the megathrust that are conducive to slow slip.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1: Bathymetric map of the Hikurangi margin.
Fig. 2: Seismic profiles across the Hikurangi margin.
Fig. 3: Perspective view of seismic volume looking southwest.
Fig. 4: Perspective views of the 3D volume looking northeast.
Fig. 5: Perspective view of the northern Hikurangi margin looking west showing seamount collisions.

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Raw seismic reflection data are available at https://doi.org/10.1594/IEDA/324554 (ref. 49). The processed 3D PSDM data used in interpretation are available at https://doi.org/10.26022/IEDA/331022 (ref. 50). The seismic velocity model produced from 3D full-waveform inversion and used in the interpretation are available at https://doi.org/10.26022/IEDA/331023 (ref. 51). Ocean-bottom seismometer data are available via https://www.jamstec.go.jp/rimg/e/. Bathymetry data are available via https://niwa.co.nz/oceans/tools-and-resources. All data from MGL1801 (Cruise DOI: 10.7284/907876) are available at https://www.marine-geo.org/tools/search/entry.php?id=MGL1801.

References

  1. von Huene, R., Ranero, C. R., Weinrebe, W. & Hinz, K. Quaternary convergent margin tectonics of Costa Rica, segmentation of the Cocos Plate, and central American volcanism. Tectonics 19, 314–334 (2000).

    Google Scholar 

  2. Dominguez, S., Lallemand, S. E., Malavieille, J. & von Huene, R. Upper plate deformation associated with seamount subduction. Tectonophysics 293, 207–224 (1998).

    Google Scholar 

  3. Dominguez, S., Malavieille, J. & Lallemand, S. E. Deformation of accretionary wedges in response to seamount subduction: insights from sandbox experiments. Tectonics 19, 182–196 (2000).

    Google Scholar 

  4. Park, J.-O., Tsuru, T., Kaneda, Y. & Kono, Y. A subduction seamount beneath the Nankai accretionary prism off Shikoku, southwestern Japan. Geophys. Res. Lett. 26, 931–934 (1999).

    Google Scholar 

  5. Ruh, J. B., Sallarès, V., Ranero, C. R. & Gerya, T. Crustal deformation dynamics and stress evolution during seamount subduction: high-resolution 3-D numerical modeling. J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 121, 6880–6902 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  6. Park, J. O., Tsuru, T., Kodaira, S., Cummins, P. R. & Kaneda, Y. Splay fault branching along the Nankai subduction zone. Science 297, 1157–1160 (2002).

    Google Scholar 

  7. Moore, G.F. et al. Structural and seismic stratigraphic framework of the NanTroSEIZE Stage 1 transect. In Proc. Integrated Ocean Drilling Program Vol. 314/315/316 (eds Kinoshita, M. et al.) 1–46 (International Ocean Discovery Program, 2009).

  8. Morgan, J. K. & Bangs, N. L. Recognizing seamount–forearc collisions at accretionary margins: insights from discrete numerical simulations. Geology 45, 635–638 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  9. Sun, T., Saffer, D. & Ellis, S. Mechanical and hydrological effects of seamount subduction on megathrust stress and slip. Nat. Geosci. 13, 249–255 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  10. Wallace, L. M., Beavan, J., McCaffrey, R. & Darby, D. Subduction zone coupling and tectonic block rotations in the North Island, New Zealand. J. Geophys. Res. 109, B1240 (2004).

    Google Scholar 

  11. Jiang, Y. S. et al. Slow slip events in Costa Rica detected by continuous GPS observations, 2002–2011. Geochem. Geophys. Geosyst 13, Q04006 (2012).

    Google Scholar 

  12. Nishimura, T. Short-term slow slip events along the Ryukyu Trench, southwestern Japan, observed by continuous GNSS. Prog. Earth Planet. Sci. 1, 22 (2014).

    Google Scholar 

  13. Kato, A. et al. Propagation of slow slip leading up to the 2011 Mw 9.0 Tohoku-Oki earthquake. Science 335, 705–708 (2012).

    Google Scholar 

  14. Scholz, C. H. & Small, C. The effect of seamount subduction on seismic coupling. Geology 25, 487–490 (1997).

    Google Scholar 

  15. Wang, K. & Bilek, S. L. Do subducting seamounts generate or stop large earthquakes? Geology 39, 819–822 (2011).

    Google Scholar 

  16. Saffer, D. M. & Wallace, L. M. The frictional, hydrologic, metamorphic and thermal habitat of shallow slow earthquakes. Nat. Geosci. 8, 594–600 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

  17. Vallee, M. et al. Intense interface seismicity triggered by a shallow slow slip event in the Central Ecuador subduction zone. J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 118, 2965–2981 (2013).

    Google Scholar 

  18. Sage, F., Collot, J.-Y. & Ranero, C. R. Interplate patchiness and subduction-erosion mechanisms: evidence from depth-migrated seismic images at the central Ecuador convergent margin. Geology 34, 997–1000 (2006).

    Google Scholar 

  19. Kimura, G. et al. Rejuvenated extension of the Philippine Sea plate and its effect on subduction dynamics in the Nankai Trough. Isl. Arc 30, e12402 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

  20. Schwartz, S. Y. & Rokosky, J. M. Slow slip events and seismic tremor at circum-Pacific subduction zones. Rev. Geophys. 45, RG3004 (2007).

    Google Scholar 

  21. Wallace, L. M. et al. Slow slip near the trench at the Hikurangi subduction zone, New Zealand. Science 352, 701–704 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  22. Barnes, P. M. et al. 2020 Slow slip source characterized by lithological and geometric heterogeneity. Sci. Adv. 6, eaay3314 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  23. Crundwell, M. P. & Woodhouse, A. Biostratigraphically constrained chronologies for Quaternary sequences from the Hikurangi margin of north-eastern Zealandia. N. Z. J. Geol. Geophys. https://doi.org/10.1080/00288306.2022.2101481 (2022).

  24. Bell, R., Holden, C., Power, W., Wang, X. & Downes, G. Hikurangi margin tsunami earthquake generated by slow seismic rupture over a subducted seamount. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 397, 1–9 (2014).

    Google Scholar 

  25. Barker, D. H. N. et al. Geophysical constraints on the relationship between seamount subduction, slow slip, and tremor at the north Hikurangi subduction zone, New Zealand. Geophys. Res. Lett. 45, 12804–12813 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  26. Chesley, C., Naif, S., Key, K. & Bassett, D. Fluid-rich subducting topography generates anomalous forearc porosity. Nature 595, 255–260 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

  27. Bell, R. et al. Seismic reflection character of the Hikurangi subduction interface, New Zealand, in the region of repeated Gisborne slow slip events. Geophys. J. Int. 180, 34–48 (2010).

    Google Scholar 

  28. Bangs, N. L., Gulick, S. P. S. & Shipley, T. H. Seamount subduction erosion in the Nankai Trough and its potential impact on the seismogenic zone. Geology 34, 701–704 (2006).

    Google Scholar 

  29. Saffer, D.M. et al. Site U1518. In Hikurangi Subduction Margin Coring, Logging, and Observatories. Proceedings of the International Ocean Discovery Program, 372B/375 (eds Wallace, L.M. et al.) (2019); https://doi.org/10.14379/iodp.proc.372B375.103.2019

  30. Arai, R. et al. Team three-dimensional P wave velocity structure of the northern Hikurangi margin from the NZ3D experiment: evidence for fault-bound anisotropy. J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 125, e2020JB020433 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  31. Cook, A. E. et al. Physical properties and gas hydrate at a near-seafloor thrust fault, Hikurangi margin, New Zealand. Geophys. Res. Lett. 47, e2020GL088474 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  32. Solomon, E. A. et al. Geochemical constraints on fluid–rock reactions, fluid sources, and flow pathways along the IODP Expedition 375 transect; northern Hikurangi margin. 2018 Am. Geophys. Fall Meeting abstr. T54C-07 (2018).

  33. Saffer, D. M. et al. Expedition 372B/375 summary. In Hikurangi Subduction Margin Coring, Logging, and Observatories. Proceedings of the International Ocean Discovery Program, 372B/375 (eds Wallace, L.M. et al.) (2019); https://doi.org/10.14379/iodp.proc.372B375.101.2019

  34. French, M. E. & Morgan, J. K. Pore fluid pressures and strength contrasts maintain frontal fault activity, northern Hikurangi margin, New Zealand. Geophys. Res. Lett. 47, e2020GL089209 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  35. Fagereng, Å. et al. Mixed deformation styles observed on a shallow subduction thrust, Hikurangi margin, New Zealand. Geology 47, 872–876 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  36. Morgan, J. K. et al. Seafloor overthrusting causes ductile fault deformation and fault sealing along the northern Hikurangi margin. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 593, 117651 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  37. Gase, A. C. et al. Crustal structure of the northern Hikurangi margin, New Zealand: variable accretion and overthrusting plate strength influenced by rough subduction. J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 126, e2020JB021176 (2021).

  38. Tilley, H., Moore, G.F., Bangs, N., Han, S., & Barnes, P. Deformation of an intraslope basin above the site of slow earthquakes at the Hikurangi subduction margin. 2018 Am. Geophys. Fall Meeting abstr. T21A-06 (2018).

  39. Aretusini, S., Meneghini, F., Spagnuolo, E., Harbord, C. W. & Di Toro, G. Fluid pressurisation and earthquake propagation in the Hikurangi subduction zone. Nat. Commun. 12, 2481 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

  40. Bassett, D., Sutherland, R. & Henrys, S. Slow wavespeeds and fluid overpressure in a region of shallow geodetic locking and slow slip, Hikurangi subduction margin, New Zealand. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 389, 1–13 (2014).

    Google Scholar 

  41. Araki, E. et al. Recurring and triggered slow-slip events near the trench at the Nankai Trough subduction megathrust. Science 356, 1157–1160 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  42. Ellis, S. et al. Fluid budgets along the northern Hikurangi subduction margin, New Zealand: the effect of a subducting seamount on fluid pressure. Geophys. J. Int. 202, 277–297 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

  43. Warren-Smith, E. et al. Episodic stress and fluid pressure cycling in subducting oceanic crust during slow slip. Nat. Geosci. 12, 475–481 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  44. Nakajima, J. & Uchida, N. Repeated drainage from megathrusts during episodic slow slip. Nat. Geosci. 11, 351–356 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  45. Collot, J.-Y., Lewis, K., Lamache, G. & Lallemand, S. The giant Ruatoria debris avalanche on the northern Hikurangi margin, New Zealand: result of oblique seamount subduction. J. Geophys. Res. 106, 19271–19279 (2001).

    Google Scholar 

  46. Pedley, K. L., Barnes, P. M., Pettinga, J. R. & Lewis, K. B. Seafloor structural geomorphic evolution of the accretionary frontal wedge in response to seamount subduction, Poverty Indentation, New Zealand. Mar. Geol. 270, 119–138 (2010).

    Google Scholar 

  47. Chow, B., Kaneko, Y. & Townend, J. Evidence for deeply subducted lower-plate seamounts at the Hikurangi subduction margin: implications for seismic and aseismic behavior. J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 127, e2021JB022866 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  48. NZ3D data processing team. NZ3D seismic data processing report. (Marine Geoscience Data Systems, 2022); https://www.marine-geo.org/tools/search/Document_Accept.php?client=DataLink&doc_uid=4871&entry_id=MGL1801

  49. Bangs, N. et al. Multi-Channel Seismic Shot Data from the Hikurangi Subduction Margin Collected During R/V Marcus G. Langseth Expedition MGL1801 (Interdisciplinary Earth Data Alliance, 2018); https://doi.org/10.1594/IEDA/324554

  50. Bangs, N. et al. NZ3D Seismic Reflection Data Volume - Prestack Depth Migration (PSDM) (Interdisciplinary Earth Data Alliance, 2022); https://doi.org/10.26022/IEDA/331022

  51. Bangs, N. et al. NZ3D Velocity Data Volume – 3D TTI Full Waveform Inversion (3DTTIFWI) (Interdisciplinary Earth Data Alliance, 2022); https://doi.org/10.26022/IEDA/331023

  52. Thomsen, L. Weak elastic anisotropy. Geophysics 51, 1954–1966 (1986).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank the captains, crew and onboard science parties of the RV Tangaroa and the RV Marcus G. Langseth for their contribution to the data acquisition. We thank Paradigm Geophysical for providing software. We thank NIWA for providing bathymetry data. The academic NZ3D project was financially supported by US NSF (award #s 1559298 (N.L.B., S.H. and A.C.G.), 1901645 (N.L.B. and S.H.), 1559008 (G.F.M. and H.L.T.), 2023186 (G.F.M. and H.L.T.), 1558574 (H.J.T.) and 1558440 (J.H.E.)), NERC NE/M021203/1 (R.E.B., R.D. and L.F.), JAMSTEC (R.A. and S.K.), NZ MBIE and GNS Science (D.H.N.B., S.A.H., D.B., R.K., V.S. and B.F.).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute for Geophysics, Jackson School of Geosciences, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA

    Nathan L. Bangs, Shuoshuo Han & Andrew C. Gase

  2. Department of Earth, Environmental and Planetary Sciences, Rice University, Houston, TX, USA

    Julia K. Morgan

  3. Department of Earth Science and Engineering, Imperial College, London, UK

    Rebecca E. Bell, Richard Davy & Laura Frahm

  4. Japan Agency for Marine–Earth Science and Technology, Yokohama, Japan

    Ryuta Arai & Shuichi Kodaira

  5. School of Earth and Space Sciences, University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei, China

    Xinming Wu

  6. Department of Earth Sciences, University of Hawai’i at Manoa, Honolulu, HI, USA

    Hannah L. Tilley & Gregory F. Moore

  7. Marinespace, Southampton, UK

    Hannah L. Tilley

  8. GNS Science, Lower Hutt, New Zealand

    Daniel H. N. Barker, Stuart A. Henrys, Dan Bassett, Richard Kellett, Valerie Stucker & Bill Fry

  9. Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, University of California, Santa Cruz, CA, USA

    Joel H. Edwards

  10. Zanskar Geothermal & Minerals, Inc, Salt Lake City, UT, USA

    Joel H. Edwards

  11. Department of Earth and Space Science, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA

    Harold J. Tobin

  12. School of Geography, Earth and Environmental Science, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK

    Tim J. Reston

Authors
  1. Nathan L. Bangs
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Julia K. Morgan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Rebecca E. Bell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Shuoshuo Han
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Ryuta Arai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Shuichi Kodaira
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Andrew C. Gase
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Xinming Wu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Richard Davy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Laura Frahm
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Hannah L. Tilley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Daniel H. N. Barker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  13. Joel H. Edwards
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  14. Harold J. Tobin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  15. Tim J. Reston
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  16. Stuart A. Henrys
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  17. Gregory F. Moore
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  18. Dan Bassett
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  19. Richard Kellett
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  20. Valerie Stucker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  21. Bill Fry
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

N.L.B., R.E.B., S.K., R.A. and S.A.H., designed the experiment. N.L.B., S.H. H.L.T., D.H.N.B., J.H.E, H.J.T, T.J.R. D.B. R.K., V.S. and B.F. helped with data acquisition at sea on the RV Lanseth or RV Tangaroa. N.L.B. and S.H. directed CGG in data processing. N.L.B., J.K.M., S.H., A.C.G. and X.W. conducted the data interpretation. R.E.B., R.D. and L.F. conducted initial full-waveform inversions. All authors contributed to the writing of this manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nathan L. Bangs.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Peer review

Peer review information

Nature Geoscience thanks Jacob Geersen, Jean-yves Collot and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work. Primary Handling Editor: Louise Hawkins, in collaboration with the Nature Geoscience team.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Extended data

Extended Data Fig. 1 Inline 774 from the NZ3D seismic data volume with and without the velocity model.

Top image is the seismic profile. This is the same line as shown in Fig. 2, but without interpretation. Bottom section has an overlay of the velocity model. See Fig. 1 for location.

Extended Data Fig. 2 Inline 188 from the NZ3D seismic data volume with and without the velocity model.

Top image is the seismic profile. This is the same line as shown in Fig. 2, but without interpretation. Bottom section has an overlay of the velocity model. See Fig. 1 for location.

Extended Data Fig. 3 Map showing locations of features discussed in the text.

Map directly overlaps with Fig. 1 and shows the seamounts and sediment lenses in NZ3D survey area (black rectangle), and slip during the 2014 slow slip event21. Barbed black line marks the deformation front. The NZ3D survey is 15 × 65 km2. Red dashed lines (with green shading) are seamount locations imaged within the 3D volume. Dark blue shading shows the outline of an inferred seamount from Barker et al.25) based on a two-dimensional seismic profile and magnetic anomalies. Cyan shading shows the position of a sediment lens in the wake of the Pāpaku seamount and beneath the Pāpaku fault, and second sediment lens believed to have formed from an older, subducted seamount. Slip contours are in mm.

Extended Data Fig. 4 Three-dimensional perspective view showing the sediment lens geometry.

This view looks north and shows the seismic data volume with the sediment lens (light shading) updip from the Pāpaku seamount. The Pāpaku sediment lens formed in the wake of the subducting Pāpaku seamount. The yellow surface is the Pāpaku fault, which forms a lateral ramp that intersects the décollement in an arcuate pattern. It extends farthest downdip above the Pāpaku seamount peak. The sediment lens beneath the Pāpaku fault fills in the space updip from the Pāpaku seamount. The peak of the Pāpaku seamount lies directly updip from the thickest section of the sediment lens, which thins to the SW updip of the flank of the Pāpaku seamount. A second sediment lens lies beneath Tuaheni ridge and is believed to have formed from an older subducted seamount.

Extended Data Fig. 5 Perspective view showing the sediment lens beneath the Pāpaku fault and underlying basement seismic velocities.

Light shading shows the geometry of the sediment lens beneath the Pāpaku fault. The colored surface lies 500 m below the top of the subducting basement (red line) and shows the average velocity within the uppermost 500 m of subducting basement. Basement velocities are consistently lower beneath the sediment lens associated with the Pāpaku seamount than regions outside of the influence of the sediment lens to the southwest. This correlation suggests that the sediment lens inhibits drainage from beneath it.

Extended Data Fig. 6 Inline 480 from the NZ3D seismic data volume with and without the velocity model.

Top image is the seismic profile. Bottom section has an overlay of the velocity model. Inline 480 is located mid-way between Inlines 188 and 774, which are located in Fig. 1. This line lies ~ 350 m south of the IODP Expedition 372/375 drilling transect.

Extended Data Fig. 7

Full-waveform inversion models of streamer and OBS records. Surface streamer shot record (top) and a portion of an OBS shot record (bottom) with an FWI model from inversion up to 7 Hz superimposed on top. The positive lobe of the signal is shaded in black and the negative left unshaded to show where fit is good (blue showing) and poor (red showing). Models of both the reflections in the shot records and refractions in the OBS records fit the data well, and were further improved in subsequent inversions.

Extended Data Fig. 8 Common image gathers (CIG) across Inline 500 showing the flattening of deep events following depth migration using the FWI/tomographic inversion model.

Gathers are flattened across the full range of offsets within depths equivalent to regions interpreted in Figs. 3, 4, Supplementary Figs. 4 & 5. These flattened gathers help validate the velocity model.

Extended Data Fig. 9 OBS20 geophone record showing first arrivals and the corresponding model result.

Shown is one record from one of 97 OBS used in the FWI and tomographic inversion. a) OBS20 record with first arrivals picked (blue line) to compare with synthetic model. b) Synthetic model produced from FWI and tomographic inversion of OBS 20. First arrival picked (red line) to compare with data. c) Comparison of first arrivals from OBS 20 and synthetic seismogram derived from FWI and tomographic inversion by CGG Services (Singapore) showing excellent agreement at all offset ranges out to ~25 km. FWI was limited to 25 km offsets due to previous shot noise and weak signals at higher offsets. ε and δ are Thomsen anisotropy parameters52. See Arai et al.30 for location.

Extended Data Fig. 10 Comparison of the initial and the final images for Inline 500.

The initial (top) and the final (bottom) images for Inline 500 produced with initial and final velocity models to show improved continuity of major reflections, reduced interference from reflections crosscutting primary reflections, higher reflection amplitudes, and more geologically realistic structures.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

Supplementary Figs. 1–13, Discussions and references.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bangs, N.L., Morgan, J.K., Bell, R.E. et al. Slow slip along the Hikurangi margin linked to fluid-rich sediments trailing subducting seamounts. Nat. Geosci. 16, 505–512 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-023-01186-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-023-01186-3

  • Springer Nature Limited

Search

Navigation