Study on the source characteristics and seismogenic structure of the 2021 Yangbi <i>M</i><sub>S </sub>6.4 earthquake sequence

ZHOU Minting; HE Xiaohui; LIU Zhiliang; WANG Weitao

doi:10.12090/j.issn.1006-6616.2025183

Volume 32 Issue 3

Jun. 2026

Turn off MathJax

Article Contents

Article Navigation > Journal of Geomechanics > 2026 > 32(3): 545-562

ZHOU M T，HE X H，LIU Z L，et al.，2026. Study on the source characteristics and seismogenic structure of the 2021 Yangbi MS 6.4 earthquake sequence[J]. Journal of Geomechanics，32（3）：545−562 doi: 10.12090/j.issn.1006-6616.2025183

Citation:

ZHOU M T，HE X H，LIU Z L，et al.，2026. Study on the source characteristics and seismogenic structure of the 2021 Yangbi M_S6.4 earthquake sequence[J]. Journal of Geomechanics，32（3）：545−562 doi: 10.12090/j.issn.1006-6616.2025183

Citation:

PDF( 11149 KB)

Study on the source characteristics and seismogenic structure of the 2021 Yangbi M_S6.4 earthquake sequence

doi: 10.12090/j.issn.1006-6616.2025183

ZHOU Minting^{1, 2
,},
HE Xiaohui^{1, 2, 3
,
,},
LIU Zhiliang^{1, 2
,},
WANG Weitao^4
,

1.
School of Earth Sciences and Engineering, Sun Yat-sen University, Zhuhai 519082, Guangdong, China
2.
Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Geodynamics and Geohazards, Zhuhai 519082, Guangdong, China
3.
Southern Marine Science and Engineering Guangdong Laboratory (Zhuhai), Zhuhai 519082, Guangdong, China
4.
Institute of Geophysics, China Earthquake Administration, Beijing 100081, China

Funds: This research was financially supported by the National Nature Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 42494913 and 42474070).

More Information

Received: 2025-12-18
Revised: 2026-05-12
Accepted: 2026-05-27

Available Online: 2026-06-10

Published: 2026-06-28

Abstract

Abstract

Objective On 21 May 2021, an M_S6.4 earthquake struck Yangbi County, Dali Prefecture, Yunnan Province — the largest event near the Weishan Basin segment of the Weixi–Qiaohou fault since 1976. The mainshock produced no surface rupture and did not occur on any known active fault. Despite numerous previous studies, the precise seismogenic structure and causative faults of this typical foreshock–mainshock–aftershock sequence (including seven M_S  ≥ 4.0 foreshocks and 22 M_S ≥ 4.0 aftershocks) remain controversial; some results are poorly constrained or even mutually contradictory. Furthermore, the occurrence of moderate-to-strong earthquakes surrounding the source area has increased significantly in recent years. This study thus aims to elucidate the rupture behaviour and seismogenic environment of the entire earthquake sequence. Methods Using pre-existing focal mechanism solutions of minor earthquakes as reference events, we adopted the relative centroid relocation method and time–frequency source characterisation method to calculate rupture directivity parameters for ten M_S ≥ 4.0 events. In addition, we calculated the radiation efficiency for all M_S ≥ 3.0 earthquakes based on waveform recording from local seismic station. Results Our results demonstrate distinct along-strike segmentation of rupture directivity across the Yangbi sequence. On the northwestern segment of the sequence, five earthquakes feature NW-striking fault planes. On the southeastern segment, four earthquakes exhibit faults either NW or NE. The largest foreshock (M_S 5.6) and the largest aftershock (M_S 5.2) both rupture toward the NE, indicating that they did not occur on the same fault as the M_S 6.4 mainshock. Combined with previous relocation and geodetic results, we interpret that these two events occurred on conjugate faults. The M_S 6.4 mainshock ruptured toward the NW, consistent with the dominant rupture azimuth of the NW segment, suggesting that the mainshock primarily ruptured the NW-trending master fault, whereas conjugate faulting in the SE segment constitutes an important component of the entire sequence. For the M_S 4.4 foreshock, the relative centroid method yields a rupture direction toward the NW, while the time–frequency source method gives a direction toward the SE. This event is therefore interpreted as a frequency-dependent bilateral rupture. We further calculated and corrected the radiation efficiency values for all M_S≥ 3.0 events. The efficiency results show a similar along-strike segmentation: the radiation efficiency differs systematically between the NW and SE segments. Integrating rupture directivity patterns, radiation efficiency measurements and regional geological constraints, we infer that the segmentation in rupture directivity is primarily caused by differences in fault frictional properties between the NW and SE segments. Conclusions The Yangbi earthquake sequence exhibits distinct segmentation in rupture directivity, with the NW segment dominated by NW-striking master fault rupture and the SE segment characterized by conjugate faulting. The M_S 4.4 foreshock corresponds to a frequency-dependent bilateral rupture event. The segmentation in radiation efficiency further supports the interpretation of different fault frictional regimes along the fault strike. [Significance] These findings deliver new constraints on the source characteristics and seismogenic structure of the Yangbi earthquake sequence. They improve our knowledge of the regional tectonic setting and earthquake nucleation cycle, and offer valuable seismological evidence for future seismic hazard assessment across the study area.
- Yangbi M_S 6.4 earthquake,
- earthquake sequence,
- source mechanism,
- seismogenic structure,
- rupture directionality

Full-text Translaiton by iFLYTEK

The full translation of the current issue may be delayed. If you encounter a 404 page, please try again later.

FullText(HTML)

References(68)

References

[1]	BOATWRIGHT J, 2007. The persistence of directivity in small earthquakes[J]. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 97(6): 1850-1861. doi: 10.1785/0120050228
[2]	CALDERONI G, ROVELLI A, BEN-ZION Y, et al., 2015. Along-strike rupture directivity of earthquakes of the 2009 L’Aquila, central Italy, seismic sequence[J]. Geophysical Journal International, 203(1): 399-415. doi: 10.1093/gji/ggv275
[3]	CHANG Z F, CHANG H, ZANG Y, et al., 2016. Recent active features of Weixi-Qiaohou fault and its relationship with the Honghe fault[J]. Journal of Geomechanics, 22(3): 517-530. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[4]	CHEN J L, HAO J L, WANG Z, et al., 2022. The 21 May 2021 M_W 6.1 Yangbi earthquake: a unilateral rupture event with conjugately distributed aftershocks[J]. Seismological Research Letters, 93(3): 1382-1399. doi: 10.1785/0220210241
[5]	DENG Q D, 2007. Map of active tectonics in China[M]. Beijing: Seismological Press. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[6]	DUAN M Q, ZHAO C P, ZHOU L Q, et al., 2021. Seismogenic structure of the 21 May 2021 M_S6.4 Yunnan Yangbi earthquake sequence[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 64(9): 3111-3125. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[7]	FAN W J, CUI X F, ZHAO X Y, 2022. Current state of tectonic stress in northwestern Yunnan and its relationship with earthquakes[J]. Acta Seismologica Sinica, 44(4): 632-643. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[8]	FAN W J, 2023. Evolutionary characteristics of the focal mechanism consistency parameter before the Yangbi M_S6.4 earthquake[J]. Journal of Geodesy and Geodynamics, 43(1): 82-88. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[9]	GAO J Y, LI Y H, WANG Z S, et al., 2022. Crustal velocity structure of the southeastern Tibetan Plateau and its geological implications for the Yunnan Yangbi M_S6.4 earthquake[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 65(2): 604-619. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[10]	GOEBEL T H W, BRODSKY E E, DRESEN G, 2023. Fault roughness promotes earthquake-like aftershock clustering in the lab[J]. Geophysical Research Letters, 50(8): e2022GL101241. doi: 10.1029/2022GL101241
[11]	GONG W Z, YE L L, QIU Y X, et al., 2022. Rupture directivity of the 2021 M_W 6.0 Yangbi, Yunnan earthquake[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 127(9): e2022JB024321. doi: 10.1029/2022JB024321
[12]	HE X H, NI S D, LIU J, 2015. Rupture directivity of the August 3rd, 2014 Ludian earthquake (Yunan, China)[J]. Science China Earth Sciences, 58(5): 795-804. doi: 10.1007/s11430-015-5053-2
[13]	HE X H, ZHAN Z W, ZHANG P Z, et al., 2018. Rupture directivity of the 18 April 2008 Mt. Carmel, Illinois, earthquake from modeling of local seismic waveforms[J]. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 108(6): 3278-3288. doi: 10.1785/0120180156
[14]	HU J, ZHAO T, BAI C Y, et al., 2021. Three-dimensional P and S wave velocity structure and earthquake relocation of the May 21, 2021 Yangbi M_S6.4 source region[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 64(12): 4488-4509. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[15]	International Earthquake Science Data Center. Broadband Seismic Station Data of the 2021 Yangbi M_S 6.4 Earthquake Sequence[DS]. Beijing: International Data Center for Earthquake Science, 2021. DOI:10.11998/IESDC
[16]	JI Z W, CHEN X L, ZHANG B, 2022. Preliminary finite difference simulation of long-period strong ground motions for the Yangbi M_S6.4 earthquake[J]. Reviews of Geophysics and Planetary Physics, 53(1): 85-91. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[17]	KANAMORI H, MORI J, HAUKSSON E, et al., 1993. Determination of earthquake energy release and M_L using TERRAscope[J]. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 83(2): 330-346.
[18]	KANEKO Y, SHEARER P M, 2014. Seismic source spectra and estimated stress drop derived from cohesive-zone models of circular subshear rupture[J]. Geophysical Journal International, 197(2): 1002-1015. doi: 10.1093/gji/ggu030
[19]	KANEKO Y, SHEARER P M, 2015. Variability of seismic source spectra, estimated stress drop, and radiated energy, derived from cohesive-zone models of symmetrical and asymmetrical circular and elliptical ruptures[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 120(2): 1053-1079. doi: 10.1002/2014JB011642
[20]	LEI X L, WANG Z W, MA S L, et al., 2021. A preliminary study on the characteristics and mechanism of the May 2021 M_S6.4 Yangbi earthquake sequence, Yunnan, China[J]. Acta Seismologica Sinica, 43(3): 261-286. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[21]	LI C Y, ZHANG J Y, WANG W, et al. The seismogenic fault of the 2021 Yunnan Yangbi M_S 6.4 earthquake [J]. Seismology and Geology, 43(3): 706-721.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[22]	LI D H, DING Z F, WU P P, et al., 2021. The characteristics of crustal structure and seismogenic background of Yangbi M_S6.4 earthquake on May 21, 2021 in Yunnan Province, China[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 64(9): 3083-3100. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[23]	LI X Y, LI S Y, GAO Y, et al., 2024. Advancements in deep tectonics and dynamic mechanisms beneath the eastern Tibetan Plateau: inspirations from the 9th and 10th WTGTP workshops[J]. Reviews of Geophysics and Planetary Physics, 55(2): 205-216. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[24]	LIU M, LI H Y, LI L, et al., 2022. Multistage nucleation of the 2021 Yangbi M_S 6.4 earthquake, Yunnan, China and its foreshocks[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 127(5): e2022JB024091. doi: 10.1029/2022JB024091
[25]	LIU M, TAN Y J, GUO H, et al., 2025. Fluids and fault structures underlying the complex foreshock sequence of the 2021 Mw 6.1 Yangbi earthquake[J]. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 651: 119173. doi: 10.1016/j.epsl.2024.119173
[26]	LIU W, YAO H J, WEI S J, 2021. Frequency-dependent rupture characteristics of the 30 October 2016 Mw 6.5 Norcia, Italy earthquake inferred from joint multi-scale slip inversion[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 126(5): e2020JB020706. doi: 10.1029/2020JB020706
[27]	LONG F, QI Y P, YI G X, et al., 2021. Relocation of the M_S6.4 Yangbi earthquake sequence on May 21, 2021 in Yunnan Province and its seismogenic structure analysis[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 64(8): 2631-2646. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[28]	QIN L B, CHEN W W, NI S D, et al., 2014. A method of resolving earthquake rupture directivity with relative centroid location and it's application to the 2008 Yingjiang M_S6.0 earthquake[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 57(10): 3259-3269. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[29]	SUN Q S, ZHANG W H, GUO X Y, et al., 2023. Preliminary study of seismogenic structure and rupture process of the Yangbi M_S 6.4 earthquake sequence from May 2021[J]. ActaGeologicaSinica, 97(2): 349-363. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[30]	TIAN J H, GAO Y, LUO Y, 2023. Deep seismogenic tectonics of Yangbi M_S6.4 on 21 may 2021 in the SE margin of the Tibetan Plateau from earthquake sequence relocation, stress field and seismic anisotropy[J]. Tectonophysics, 851: 229768. doi: 10.1016/j.tecto.2023.229768
[31]	WANG G M, WU Z H, PENG G L, et al., 2021. Seismogenic fault and it’s rupture characteristics of the 21 May, 2021 Yangbi M_S6.4 earthquake: analysis results from the relocation of the earthquake sequence[J]. Journal of Geomechanics, 27(4): 662-678. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[32]	WANG Y, HU S Q, HE X H, et al., 2021. Relocation and focal mechanism solutions of the 21 May 2021 M_S6.4 Yunnan Yangbi earthquake sequence[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 64(12): 4510-4525. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[33]	XU X W, ZHANG P Z, WEN X Z, et al., 2005. Features of active tectonics and recurrence behaviors of strong earthquakes in the western Sichuan Province and its adjacent regions[J]. Seismology and Geology, 27(3): 446-461. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[34]	YAN K, WANG W J, PENG F, et al., 2022. The seismogenic structures and migration characteristics of the 2021 Yangbi M6.4 earthquake sequence in Yunnan, China[J]. Science China Earth Sciences, 65(8): 1522-1537. doi: 10.1007/s11430-021-9933-1
[35]	YANG J Y, WEN Y M, XU C J, 2021. The 21 May 2021 M_S6.4 Yangbi (Yunnan) earthquake: a shallow strike-slip event rupturing in a blind fault[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 64(9): 3101-3110. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[36]	YANG M, WANG H W, WEN R Z, et al., 2023. Study on the rupture directivity of the 2021 Yangbi earthquake sequence[J]. Acta Seismologica Sinica, 45(5): 836-848. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[37]	YAO H J, GERSTOFT P, SHEARER P M, et al., 2011. Compressive sensing of the Tohoku-Oki Mw 9.0 earthquake: Frequency-dependent rupture modes[J]. Geophysical Research Letters, 38(20): L20310. doi: 10.1029/2011gl049223
[38]	YIN J X, YAO H J, YANG H F, et al., 2017. Frequency-dependent rupture process, stress change, and seismogenic mechanism of the 25 April 2015 Nepal Gorkha M_W7.8 earthquake[J]. Science China Earth Sciences, 60(4): 796-808. doi: 10.1007/s11430-016-9006-0
[39]	ZHA X, FU R S, DAI Z Y, et al., 2009. Applying InSAR technique to accurately relocate the epicentre for the 1999 M_S = 5.6 Kuqa earthquake in Xinjiang Province, China[J]. Geophysical Journal International, 176(1): 107-112. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-246X.2008.03994.x
[40]	ZHANG K L, GAN W J, LIANG S M, et al., 2021. Coseismic displacement and slip distribution of the 2021 May 21, M_S6.4, Yangbi Earthquake derived from GNSS observations[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 64(7): 2253-2266. (in Chinese with English abstract) doi: 10.3389/fenvs.2022.857739
[41]	ZHANG P Z, DENG Q D, ZHANG G M, et al., 2003. Active tectonic blocks and strong earthquakes in the continent of China[J]. Science in China Series D: Earth Sciences, 46(2): 13-24. doi: 10.1360/03dz0002
[42]	ZHAO B, GAO Y, MA Y L, 2022. Relocations, focal mechanisms and stress inversion of the May 21th 2021 Yangbi M_S6.4 earthquake sequence in Yunnan, China[J]. Chinese Journal of Geophysics, 65(3): 1006-1020. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[43]	ZHAO L, LUO Y, LIU T Y, et al., 2013. Earthquake focal mechanisms in Yunnan and their inference on the regional stress field[J]. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 103(4): 2498-2507. doi: 10.1785/0120120309
[44]	ZHOU Y J, REN C M, GHOSH A, et al., 2022. Seismological characterization of the 2021 Yangbi foreshock-mainshock sequence, Yunnan, China: more than a triggered cascade[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 127(8): e2022JB024534. doi: 10.1029/2022JB024534
[45]	地震科学国际数据中心. 2021年漾濞MS 6.4地震序列宽频地震台站数据[DS/OL]. 北京: 地震科学国际数据中心, 2021. International Data Center for Earthquake Science. Broadband Seismic Station Data of the 2021 Yangbi MS 6.4 Earthquake Sequence[DS]. Beijing: International Data Center for Earthquake Science, 2021.
[46]	李传友, 张金玉, 王伟, 等, 2021. 2021年云南漾濞6.4级地震发震构造分析[J]. 地震地质. 43(3): 706. LI C Y, ZHANG J Y, WANG W, et al. The seismogenic fault of the 2021 Yunnan Yangbi MS 6.4 earthquake [J]. Seismology and Geology, 43(3): 706— 721.
[47]	常祖峰, 常昊, 臧阳, 等, 2016. 维西-乔后断裂新活动特征及其与红河断裂的关系[J]. 地质力学学报, 22(3): 517-530. International Data Center for Earthquake Science. Broadband Seismic Station Data of the 2021 Yangbi MS 6.4 Earthquake Sequence[DS]. Beijing: International Data Center for Earthquake Science, 2021.
[48]	邓起东, 2007. 中国活动构造图(1: 400万)[M]. 北京: 地震出版社.
[49]	段梦乔, 赵翠萍, 周连庆, 等, 2021. 2021年5月21日云南漾濞M_S6.4地震序列发震构造[J]. 地球物理学报, 64(9): 3111-3125. doi: 10.11939/jass.20210036
[50]	樊文杰, 崔效锋, 赵小艳, 2022. 滇西北地区现今构造应力状态及其与地震的关系[J]. 地震学报, 44(4): 632-643. doi: 10.14075/j.jgg.2023.01.015
[51]	樊文杰, 2023. 漾濞M_S6.4地震前震源机制一致性参数演化特征[J]. 大地测量与地球动力学, 43(1): 82-88. doi: 10.6038/cjg2022P0354
[52]	高家乙, 李永华, 王志铄, 等, 2022. 青藏高原东南缘地壳速度结构及云南漾濞M_S6.4地震深部孕震环境[J]. 地球物理学报, 65(2): 604-619.
[53]	胡景, 赵韬, 白超英, 等, 2021. 2021年5月21日漾濞M_S6.4地震震源区三维P和S波速度结构与地震重定位研究[J]. 地球物理学报, 64(12): 4488-4509.
[54]	纪志伟, 陈学良, 张波, 2022. 漾濞M_S6.4地震长周期强地震动的有限差分初步模拟[J]. 地球与行星物理论评, 53(1): 85-91. doi: 10.11939/jass.20210100
[55]	雷兴林, 王志伟, 马胜利, 等, 2021. 关于2021年5月滇西漾濞M_S6.4地震序列特征及成因的初步研究[J]. 地震学报, 43(3): 261-286. LI C Y, ZHANG J Y, WANG W, et al. The seismogenic fault of the 2021 Yunnan Yangbi MS 6.4 earthquake [J]. Seismology and Geology, 43(3): 706— 721.
[56]	李大虎, 丁志峰, 吴萍萍, 等, 2021. 2021年5月21日云南漾濞M_S6.4地震震区地壳结构特征与孕震背景[J]. 地球物理学报, 64(9): 3083-3100.
[57]	李心怡, 李抒予, 高原, 等, 2024. 青藏高原东部深部构造与动力学机制研究进展: 来自第9届与第10届WTGTP研讨会的启示[J]. 地球与行星物理论评, 55(2): 205-216.
[58]	龙锋, 祁玉萍, 易桂喜, 等, 2021. 2021年5月21日云南漾濞M_S6.4地震序列重新定位与发震构造分析[J]. 地球物理学报, 64(8): 2631-2646.
[59]	秦刘冰, 陈伟文, 倪四道, 等, 2014. 基于相对质心震中的地震破裂方向性测定方法研究: 以2008年云南盈江M_S6.0地震为例[J]. 地球物理学报, 57(10): 3259-3269. doi: 10.6038/cjg20141014
[60]	孙庆山, 张伟恒, 郭忻怡, 等, 2023. 2021年5月云南漾濞M_S6.4地震序列发震构造及破裂过程初探[J]. 地质学报, 97(2): 349-363. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0001-5717.2023.02.004
[61]	王光明, 吴中海, 彭关灵, 等, 2021. 2021年5月21日漾濞M_S6.4地震的发震断层及其破裂特征: 地震序列的重定位分析结果[J]. 地质力学学报, 27(4): 662-678. doi: 10.12090/j.issn.1006-6616.2021.27.04.055
[62]	王月, 胡少乾, 何骁慧, 等, 2021. 2021年5月21日云南漾濞6.4级地震序列重定位及震源机制研究[J]. 地球物理学报, 64(12): 4510-4525. doi: 10.6038/cjg2021P0401
[63]	徐锡伟, 张培震, 闻学泽, 等, 2005. 川西及其邻近地区活动构造基本特征与强震复发模型[J]. 地震地质, 27(3): 446. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0253-4967.2005.03.010
[64]	杨九元, 温扬茂, 许才军, 2021. 2021年5月21日云南漾濞M_S6.4地震: 一次破裂在隐伏断层上的浅源走滑事件[J]. 地球物理学报, 64(9): 3101-3110. doi: 10.6038/cjg2021P0408
[65]	杨苗, 王宏伟, 温瑞智, 等, 2023. 2021年漾濞地震序列破裂方向性研究[J]. 地震学报, 45(5): 836-848.
[66]	张克亮, 甘卫军, 梁诗明, 等, 2021. 2021年5月21日M_S6.4漾濞地震GNSS同震变形场及其约束反演的破裂滑动分布[J]. 地球物理学报, 64(7): 2253-2266. doi: 10.6038/cjg2021O0524
[67]	张培震, 邓起东, 张国民, 等, 2003. 中国大陆的强震活动与活动地块[J]. 中国科学(D辑), 33(S1): 12-20. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-7240.2003.z1.002
[68]	赵博, 高原, 马延路, 2022. 2021年5月21日云南漾濞M_S6.4地震序列重新定位、震源机制及应力场反演[J]. 地球物理学报, 65(3): 1006-1020. doi: 10.6038/cjg2022P0497