DO GLOBAL CLIMATE AND EARTHQUAKE INDICATORS EXPLAIN YEAR-TO-YEAR VARIATION IN GREAT-EARTHQUAKE ACTIVITY? A STATISTICAL ASSESSMENT OF WORLDWIDE M ≥ 7.0 EARTHQUAKES, 1984–2020

Surface loading by water, ice and the atmosphere can perturb crustal stress, and regional studies report that seismicity responds to such loading. Whether global climate indicators are statistically related to the annual occurrence of great earthquakes remains unresolved. We compiled annual counts and annual maximum magnitudes of worldwide earthquakes of magnitude ≥ 7.0 from the USGS catalogue. We related these to annual atmospheric pressure anomalies, air temperature, and sea surface temperature (SST) anomalies for 1984–2020 (n = 37 years). Five geomagnetic and solar indices were examined. We used Pearson and Spearman correlations, ordinary least squares and Poisson regression, and tested for robustness by extending the window, excluding influential years, adjusting for a linear trend and differencing the series. The three climate indicators jointly accounted for 28% of the variance in annual maximum magnitude (adjusted R2 = 0.21; F3,33 = 4.27, p = 0.012), with a positive SST coefficient and a negative pressure coefficient, but not for annual earthquake count (R2 = 0.12, p = 0.22; Poisson likelihood-ratio p = 0.24). The SST association vanished once a linear time trend was included (p = 0.84) and in first-differenced data; the pressure association survived detrending but not differencing. None of the 16 bivariate correlations remained significant after multiple-comparison correction. The data show co-varying long-term tendencies but no robust year-to-year relationship between global climate indicators and great-earthquake activity. The apparent association with SST is most parsimoniously explained by shared trends in short series, and the analysis cannot support causal inference. Spatially resolved, physically motivated designs are needed to test climate–seismicity coupling

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Published
2026-10-13
DOI
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.23345813
Primary Topic
earthquake and tectonic studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

DO GLOBAL CLIMATE AND EARTHQUAKE INDICATORS EXPLAIN YEAR-TO-YEAR VARIATION IN GREAT-EARTHQUAKE ACTIVITY? A STATISTICAL ASSESSMENT OF WORLDWIDE M ≥ 7.0 EARTHQUAKES, 1984–2020

Lukman Ayobami Sunmonu, Racheal Foluke Oloruntola, Adedamola Julius Agbelemoge, Oludare Olukayode Babalola et al.
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
earthquake and tectonic studies
article

DO GLOBAL CLIMATE AND EARTHQUAKE INDICATORS EXPLAIN YEAR-TO-YEAR VARIATION IN GREAT-EARTHQUAKE ACTIVITY? A STATISTICAL ASSESSMENT OF WORLDWIDE M ≥ 7.0 EARTHQUAKES, 1984–2020

Lukman Ayobami Sunmonu, Racheal Foluke Oloruntola, Adedamola Julius Agbelemoge, Oludare Olukayode Babalola, Emmanuel Adekola, Ilugbo,, Stephen Oluwabusayo, Olaniyi Ganiyu Akanji, Hammed Olalekan Bakare
article en

Abstract

Surface loading by water, ice and the atmosphere can perturb crustal stress, and regional studies report that seismicity responds to such loading. Whether global climate indicators are statistically related to the annual occurrence of great earthquakes remains unresolved. We compiled annual counts and annual maximum magnitudes of worldwide earthquakes of magnitude ≥ 7.0 from the USGS catalogue. We related these to annual atmospheric pressure anomalies, air temperature, and sea surface temperature (SST) anomalies for 1984–2020 (n = 37 years). Five geomagnetic and solar indices were examined. We used Pearson and Spearman correlations, ordinary least squares and Poisson regression, and tested for robustness by extending the window, excluding influential years, adjusting for a linear trend and differencing the series. The three climate indicators jointly accounted for 28% of the variance in annual maximum magnitude (adjusted R2 = 0.21; F3,33 = 4.27, p = 0.012), with a positive SST coefficient and a negative pressure coefficient, but not for annual earthquake count (R2 = 0.12, p = 0.22; Poisson likelihood-ratio p = 0.24). The SST association vanished once a linear time trend was included (p = 0.84) and in first-differenced data; the pressure association survived detrending but not differencing. None of the 16 bivariate correlations remained significant after multiple-comparison correction. The data show co-varying long-term tendencies but no robust year-to-year relationship between global climate indicators and great-earthquake activity. The apparent association with SST is most parsimoniously explained by shared trends in short series, and the analysis cannot support causal inference. Spatially resolved, physically motivated designs are needed to test climate–seismicity coupling

Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Cornerstone University (US), Federal University Oye Ekiti (NG), Ladoke Akintola University of Technology (NG), Lead City University (NG)
Openalex Percentile: Top 16%
earthquake and tectonic studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.