USGS Science⌕ Search

Geology topics

Research about Shishaldin volcano

Source-linked reports with geographic coverage including Shishaldin volcano.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

When does eruption run-up begin? Multidisciplinary insight from the 1999 eruption of Shishaldin volcano

During the run-up to eruption, volcanoes often show geophysically detectable signs of unrest. However, there are long-standing challenges in interpreting the signals and evaluating the likelihood of eruption, especially during the early stages of volcanic unrest. Considerable insight can be gained from combined geochemical and geophysical studies. Here we take such an approach to better understand the beginning of eruption run-up, viewed through the lens of the 1999 sub-Plinian basaltic eruption of Shishaldin volcano, Alaska. The eruption is of interest due to its lack of observed deformation and its apparent long run-up time (9 months), following a deep long-period earthquake swarm. We evaluate the nature and timing of recharge by examining the composition of 138 olivine macrocrysts and 53 olivine-hosted melt inclusions and through shear-wave splitting analysis of regional earthquakes. Magma mixing is recorded in three crystal populations: a dominant population of evolved olivines (Fo 60-69 ) that are mostly reversely zoned, an intermediate population (Fo 69-76 ) with mixed zonation, and a small population of normally zoned more primitive olivines (Fo 76-80 ). Mixing-to-eruption timescales are obtained through modeling of Fe-Mg interdiffusion in 78 olivines. The large number of resultant timescales provides a thorough record of mixing, demonstrating at least three mixing events: a minor event ~9 months prior to eruption, coincident with the onset of deep long-period seismicity; a major event ~50 days before eruption, coincident with a large (M5.2) shallow earthquake; and a final event about a week prior to eruption. Shear-wave splitting analysis shows a change in the orientation of the local stress field about a month after the deep long-period swarm and around the time of the M5.2 event. Earthquake depths and vapor saturation pressures of Raman-reconstructed melt inclusions indicate that the recharge magma originated from depths of at least 20 km, and that mixing with a shallow magma or olivine cumulates occurred in or just below the edifice (<3 km depth). Deformation was likely outside the spatial and temporal resolution of the satellite measurements. Prior to eruption magma was stored over a large range of depths (~0-2.5 km below the summit), suggesting a shallow, vertical reservoir that could provide another explanation for the lack of detectable deformation. The earliest sign of unrest (deep long-period seismicity) coincides temporally with magmatic activity (magma mixing and a change in the local stress state), possibly indicating the beginning of eruption run-up. The more immediate run-up began with the major recharge event ~50 days prior to eruption, after which the signs of unrest became continuous. This timescale is long compared to the seismic run-up to other basaltic eruptions (typically hours to days). Other volcanoes classified as open-system, based on their lack of precursory deformation, also tend to have relatively long run-up durations, which may be related to the time required to fill the shallow reservoir with magmas sourced from greater depth.

Alaska↗

Basaltic thermals and Subplinian plumes: Constraints from acoustic measurements at Shishaldin volcano, Alaska

The 1999 basaltic eruption of Shishaldin volcano (Alaska, USA) included both Strombolian and Subplinian activity, as well as a “pre-Subplinian” phase interpreted as the local coalescence within a long foam in the conduit. Although few visual observations were made of the eruption, a great deal of information regarding gas velocity, gas flux at the vent and plume height may be inferred by using acoustic recordings of the eruption. By relating acoustic power to gas velocity, a time series of gas velocity is calculated for the Subplinian and pre-Subplinian phases. These time series show trends in gas velocity that are interpreted as plumes or, for those signals lasting only a short time, thermals. The Subplinian phase is shown to be composed of a thermal followed by five plumes with a total expelled gas volume of &#x2248; 1.5 &#x00D7; 10 7 m 3 "> ≈ 1.5 × 10 7 m 3 . The initiation of the Subplinian activity is probably related to the arrival of a large overpressurised bubble close to the top of the magma column. A gradual increase in low-frequency (0.01–0.5 Hz) signal prior to this “trigger bubble” may be due to the rise of the bubble in the conduit. This delay corresponds to a reservoir located at ≈3.9 km below the surface, in good agreement with studies on other volcanoes. The presence of two thermal phases is also identified in the middle of the pre-Subplinian phase with a total gas release of &#x2248; 4.3 &#x00D7; 10 6 m 3 "> ≈ 4.3 × 10 6 m 3 and &#x2248; 3.6 &#x00D7; 10 6 m 3 "> ≈ 3.6 × 10 6 m 3 . Gas velocity at the vent is found to be &#x2248; 82 m . s &#x2212; 1 "> ≈ 82 m . s − 1 and &#x2248; 90 m . s &#x2212; 1 "> ≈ 90 m . s − 1 for the Subplinian plumes and the pre-Subplinian thermals respectively. The agreement is very good between estimates of the gas flux from modelling the plume height and those obtained from acoustic measurements, leading to a new method by which eruption physical parameters may be quantified. Furthermore, direct measurements of gas velocity can be used for better estimates of the S O 2 "> S O 2 flux released during the eruption.

Alaska↗