Acta Geophysica

, Volume 67, Issue 2, pp 437–448 | Cite as

Teleseismic moment tensors of the 5 April 2017, Mw6.1, Fariman, northeast Iran, earthquake

  • Mohammad Ashtari JafariEmail author
Research Article - Solid Earth Sciences


On 5 April 2017, an Mw6.1 earthquake occurred about 50 km NE of the city of Fariman, northeast Iran. Several hundreds of aftershocks including two M > 5 events followed the main shock. The quake struck numerous towns and villages across the region, killed one person, and injured tens of people. Many schools and universities were evacuated around the epicentral area, and a lot of people left their residences for a few days. The northeastward motion of the central Iran toward Eurasia influences the epicentral region. Regional movements occur by shortening on the northwest-trending reverse faults. We studied teleseismic source parameters of this earthquake by applying different moment tensor decomposition methods including grid search for the nodal planes of the best double couple; linear inversion for a deviatoric moment tensor; grid search for the best double-couple moment tensor; grid search for the best deviatoric moment tensor; and grid search for the best full moment. Based on the moment tensors, the event occurred on a reverse fault following the regional compressional motion. The results of this study will provide useful information for future regional seismotectonic investigations and are of significant use for applications such as regional seismic hazard evaluations.


Nodal planes Moment tensor inversion Double couple Deviatoric moment tensor Full moment tensor 



I would like to thank Sean Ford and anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments and valuable suggestions. I acknowledge Ramón Zúñiga (co-editor-in-chief), Zbigniew Wiśniewski (managing editor), and Eleftheria Papadimitriou (chief editor) for their helps. I acknowledge IRSC, IRIS, ISC, GCMT, and USGS for providing their data for analysis. Computer programs in seismology (Herrmann 2013), moment decomposition code (Vavrycuk 2015a), and GMT (Wessel and Smith 1995) were used for computations and drawing some figures.

Supplementary material

11600_2019_256_MOESM1_ESM.docx (9.6 mb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 9822 kb)


  1. Ashtari Jafari M (2008) Lessons learned from the Bam urban earthquake. In: 14th world conference on earthquake engineering. Beijing, China,
  2. Ashtari Jafari M (2013) Spatial distribution of seismicity parameters in the Persian Plateau. Earth Plants Space 65:863–869. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ashtari Jafari M (2016) Lessons learned from the recent earthquakes in Iran. In: D’Amico S (ed) Earthquakes and their impact on society. Springer International Publishing.
  4. Aso N, Ohta K, Ide S (2016) Mathematical review on source-type diagrams. Earth Planets Space 68:52. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Berberian M, Ghorashi M, Shoja-Taheri J, Talebian M (2000) Seismotectonic and earthquake-fault hazard investigations in the Mashhad-Neyshabour region. Report No. 72, Geological Survey of IranGoogle Scholar
  6. D’Amico S, Cammarata L, Cangemi M, Cavallaro D, Di Martino R, Firetto Carlino M (2014) Seismic moment tensors and regional stress in the area of the December 2013–January 2014, Matese earthquake sequence (Central Italy). J Geodyn 82:118–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dufumier H, Riverra L (1997) On the resolution of the isotropic component in moment tensor inversion. Geophys J Int 131:595–606. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dziewonski AM, Ekström G, Salganik MP (1992) Centroid-moment tensor solutions for July–September 1991. Phys Earth Planet Inter 72:1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Ekström G, Nettles M, Dziewonski AM (2012) The global CMT project 2004–2010: centroid-moment tensors for 13017 earthquakes. Phys Earth Planet Inter 200:1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Foulger GR, Julian BR (2015) Non-double-couple earthquakes. Encycl Earthq Eng. Google Scholar
  11. Herrmann RB (2013) Computer programs in seismology: an evolving tool for instruction and research. Seismol Res Lett 84:1081–1088CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Herrmann RB, Benz H, Ammon CJ (2011) Monitoring the earthquake source process in north America. Bull Seismol Soc Am 101:2609–2625CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hjörleifsdottir V, Ekström G (2010) Effects of three-dimensional Earth structure on CMT earthquake parameters. Phys Earth Planet Inter 179:178–190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Jost ML, Herrmann RB (1989) A student’s guide to and review of moment tensors. Seismol Res Lett 60:37–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Julian BR, Miller AD, Foulger GR (1998) Non-double-couple earthquakes 1. Theory Rev Geophys 36:525–549CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kagan YY (1991) 3-D rotation of double-couple earthquake sources. Geophys J Int 106:709–716CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kanamori H, Rivera L (2008) Source inversion of W phase: speeding up seismic tsunami warning. Geophys J Int 175:222–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Konstantinou KI, Rontogianni S (2011) A comparison of teleseismic and regional seismic moment estimates in the European-mediterranean region. Seismol Res Lett 82:188–200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Miller AD, Foulger GR, Julian BR (1998) Non-double-couple earthquakes 2. Observations. Rev Geophys 36:551–568CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Montagner JP, Kennett BLN (1996) How to reconcile body-wave and normal-mode reference earth models. Geophys J Int 125:229–248. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ortega R, Quintanar L, Rivera L (2014) Full moment tensor variations and isotropic characteristics of earthquakes in the Gulf of California transform fault system. Pure Appl Geophys 171:2805–2817. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Shabanian E, Bellier O, Siame L, Arnaud N, Abbassi MR, Cocheme JJ (2009) New tectonic configuration in NE Iran: active strike-slip faulting between the Kopeh Dagh and Binalud mountains. Tectonics, 28, TC5002,
  23. Vavrycuk V (2002) Non-double-couple earthquakes of 1997 January in West Bohemia, Czech Republic: evidence of tensile faulting. Geophys J Int 149:364–373CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Vavrycuk V (2005) Focal mechanisms in anisotropic media. Geophys J Int 161:334–346. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Vavrycuk V (2015a) Moment tensor decompositions revisited. J Seismol 19:231–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Vavrycuk V (2015b) Moment tensors: decomposition and visualization. In: Beer M, Kougioumtzoglou I, Patelli E, Au SK (eds) Encyclopedia of earthquake engineering. Springer, Berlin. Google Scholar
  27. Wessel P, Smith WHF (1995) New version of the generic mapping tools released. EOS 76:329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Zhu L, Ben-Zion Y (2013) Parameterization of general seismic potency and moment tensors for source inversion of seismic waveform data. Geophys J Int 194:839–843CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Institute of Geophysics, Polish Academy of Sciences & Polish Academy of Sciences 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of GeophysicsUniversity of TehranTehran 16Iran

Personalised recommendations