The largest of the recorded historic eruptions at Irazú volcano began on February 16, 1723 and lasted until at least December 11. We here critically examine deposits of this eruption exposed on the summit of Irazú. Our reconstruction of the eruption is based on the unique chronicle of the Spanish governor Diego de la Haya. The eruption began with a < 10 cm thick surge deposit of phreatic origin showing block sag structures. The deposit is overlain by 6 m-thick ]]>
2) bombs comprise plagioclase (6.1-21.6 vol.%, An52-35), clinopyroxene (2.5-10 vol.%), orthopyroxene (0.7-2 vol.%), olivine (0.1-2.2 vol.%; Fo76-88) and Fe/Ti-oxides (0.1-1%), in a groundmass (66.5-90.3 vol. %), dominated by plagioclase ]]>
69-54), clinopyroxene and opaques in brown and black glass with the same range of chemical composition (SiO2=57-64 wt.%). Rare white pumiceous lapilli in the scoria deposits are high-K, hornblende andesite (SiO2: 58-60 wt.%), geochemically unrelated to the scoria deposits. Thus, two different magmas co-existing in the magma chamber were mingled shortly before, and during, the eruption, suggesting that the eruption was triggered by magma mingling between hornblende ]]>
Keywords: Strombolian/phreatomagmatic eruptions, proximal lithophacies, volcano-tectonic seismicity, magma mingling, Irazú volcano, Costa Rica.
]]>
Resumen
La erupción histórica más grande registrada en el Irazú, se inició el 16 de febrero de 1723 y se extendió por lo menos hasta el 11 de diciembre de ese año. El presente trabajo analiza críticamente los depósitos expuestos en la cima del Irazú, y se comparan con el relato del gobernador español, don Diego de la Haya, la ]]>
2:~53-55 wt.%) ]]>
52-35), clinopiroxeno (2,5-10 vol. %), ortopiroxeno (0,7-2 vol. %), olivino (0,1-2,2 vol. %; Fo76-88) y óxidos de Fe-Ti (0,1-1%), en una matriz (66,5-90,3 vol. %), dominada por plagioclasa (An69-54), clinopiroxeno, opacos y vidrios café y negro con el mismo rango de composición química (SiO2: 57-64 wt.%). Las pómez casuales de lapilli blancas, presentes dentro del depósito de escorias negras, corresponden con andesitas hornbléndicas (SiO2: 58-60 wt. %) ricas en K, ]]>
Palabras clave: Erupciones strombolianas y freatomagmáticas, litofacies proximales, sismicidad volcano-tectónica, mezcla de ]]>
Introduction
Description of historic violent “strombolian” eruptions, involving relatively viscous magma, repeated clogging of the vent, or the influence of groundwater, are rarely described (Macdonald, 1972; ]]>
The case of the 1723 violent eruption of Irazú is particularly interesting to better understand this type of eruption because of the ]]>
et al., 1988; Houghton & Schmincke, 1989).
]]>
Finally, a comparison of the contrasting styles of the 1723 eruption compared with the predominantly phreatomagmatic eruptions at Irazú in the past century (Alvarado, 1993; Alvarado and Schmincke, 1994), allows to better understand the behavior of this volcano helping to constrain its hazard potential.
General geologic and geographic aspects S
Irazú volcano, the highest (3 432 m a.s.l.) and one of the largest volcanoes (~600 km3) at the southern end of the Central American Volcanic Front, is a shield volcano located in the Cordillera Central of Costa Rica), 150 km NW of the Middle America Trench (Fig. 1). Large lava flows, strombolian and phreatomagmatic (vulcanian) ]]>
th century (1917-1921, 1924, 1928, 1930, 1933, 1939-1940 and 1963-1965). The volano is notorious for its most recent vulcanian eruption (1963-1965), characterized by the production of copious very fine ash that affected several towns of the Central Valley, the heartland of Costa Rica. One of the largest cities in its ]]>
et al. (2006).
Methods
Stratigraphically controlled granulometric analyses of tephra samples in the interval -6 to 6.50 phi (64 mm-10 μm) were performed first with a set of sieves with half phi intervals in the range from -6 to +3 phi (64-125 mm). After desiccation, the coarser material was hand-sieved to prevent breakage of vesicular fragments. The grain size analyses of the fraction finer than 125 μm were carried out using a Coulter Counter Ta IIº particle size counter instrument which provides data in volume and not in weight %. Since the size classes < 125 μm have a constant density (the quantity between the different component is quite constant) an equivalent of % in weight and % in volume exists. The data obtained using the two different analytical techniques were integrated to form a complete grain size distribution with half phi intervals. The conventionally used statistical parameter Md phi and sorting were calculated. Using these two parameters, one need to be aware that these two are significant only in the case of Gaussian distribution and this is not the case in many samples of Irazú. However, to interpret the grain size, one has to use these parameters combined with a visual study of the distribution form which provides useful information in the case of non-ideal Gaussian samples. The terminologies of the parameter of skewness in grain size distribution, the class intervals suggested by Fisher & Schmincke (1984) for tephras in grade scales (millimeters or in phi units), and the range of classification of sorting in pyroclastic deposits (Cas & Wright, 1987, p. 473) were applied. Representative samples of the different types of deposits were selected for microscopic study. Following the method of Sheridan and Marshall (1983), the most representative grain size classes were first examined by stereomicroscope to distinguish glass, lithics, and crystals, and subsequently were cleaned by a weak 30 second ultrasonic treatment in distilled water, which did not modify the original features of the clasts. Finally, particles were analyzed by scanning electron microscope (SEM), using a Cambridge Stereoscan 360 system joined with an energy dispersive system (EDS) device. Scoriaceous lithic ash, for example, was distinguished from juvenile glassy ash on the base of EDS analyses. Tephra samples were selected for thin section and modal analysis. Modal compositions were determined by count pointing. The number of points in each sample ranged from 300 to 1000 depending on grain size and relative proportion of phenocrysts; the size boundary between phenocrysts and microphenocrysts was taken at 0.3 mm (Wilcox, 1954). The data base used for this study includes 11 new chemical analyses of the 1723 tephra deposits (hereafter referred to as ‘1723 scoria’) obtained by X-ray fluorescence (XRF) analysis on glass pellets with a Philips PW 1480 spectrometer measured in Bonn and Kiel. The analytical program is Oxiquant with a calibration program for geological samples based on 270 standards with synthetic standards and International Certified standards (cf. Govindaraju, 1989). Data are given in files located at M.J. Carr´s Web site, www-rci.rutgers.edu/~carr/index.html.
Narrative of the eruption and previous work
The 1723 eruption of Irazú has been almost completely neglected in the scientific literature although it was the first recorded historic eruption in Costa Rica. This violent eruption took place from February 16, 1723 to at least December 1723. The Spanish governor Diego de la Haya wrote a remarkably detailed record of the seismic and volcanic phenomena of this eruption in his diary (the first volcanological historic record in Costa Rica). The chronicle was reproduced by the Official Newspaper of Costa Rica, “La Gaceta”, in 1852. De la Haya correlated the violent explosions with the lunar phases, but he did not record the end of the eruption. Montessus de Ballore (1888) mentioned eruptions of scoria in May, 1726. Pedro Nolasco, during the XX century, mentioned eruptions and earthquakes between 1723 and 1726 at Irazú; and those large earthquakes occurred between September 1723 and February 1724 (González, 1910; Díaz, 1930). González (1910), Tristán (1923), and Peraldo & Montero (1994) did not find any primary data or specific documents in Costa Rica or Spain concerning the last presumable volcanic phase between 1724 and 1726. Sapper (1925, 1926) concluded that the 1723 eruption occurred in the Diego de la Haya crater based on the size of large bombs. A complete reproduction of De la Haya’s letter is included in González (1910), Tristán (1924), Mata (1930), and Alvarado (2000), and translated also into English in Alvarado (2005).
According to the diary of Diego de la Haya, the eruption started at 3 p.m. (all data local time, LT+6 hours= GMT) on February 16, 1723 with the formation of an eruption column. Ash fell southwest and west of the volcano on the towns of Curridabat, 22 km to the SSW and Barba, 32 km to the WNW; explosions began at 5 p.m. (“thunder every half hour”) [for localities see Fig. 2]. At 4 a.m. in the morning of February 17, a strong explosion (“thunder”) was followed by flames,...and the rumbling continued ever louder, one clap of thunder following close on another. ]]>
Afterwards, the “thunders” became more frequent. A first expedition to the area surrounding the volcano reported ash and finer scoria. During the night of the same day, there were strong explosions with large incandescent bombs, continuing to 4 a.m. of the next day (see also Tristán, 1924):
At nightfall flames were seen shooting up from the highest part of the mountain, and within the flames large balls of fire and other burning fragments, all accompanied by great blasts, thunder and rumbling which continued to be heard until four in the morning of the 18th when, at dawn, the flames subsided but not the columns of smoke, which continued.
On this day (February 18) the observers (perhaps located between Cartago and Curridabat) saw that a new cone (?) may have been built on the summit (Fig. 3). At the end of this day, the eruptive activity was intense, and continued to February 20:
We could all see that on the summit of the plateau great quantities of ash and sand had been spewed creating a hill there, and as we were watching, listening to the stupendous thunder and crackling, we saw, around three in the afternoon,an arc about a yard [as seen from Cartago] wide appearing amid the smoke seemingly made up of cotton or snow balls such was their whiteness, and about four fingers thick and about two pike-lengths in height; it went straight up separating itself from the smoke where it remained for a moment then continued upward, decreasing in size, throwing off from time to time the material of which it was made until it disintegrated. A similar arc of vapor was observed at 6 p.m. on February 19.
De la Haya (1852) thought that perhaps the crater grew in size:
…but ]]>
During this time, an incessant roaring sound (explosive quakes and tremor) was felt and heard in Cartago:
The ]]>
th till the morning of the 20th the dull roar under the earth continued throughout the city which, putting one’s ear to ground, sounded like rivers rushing through its veins, which caused great terror in everyone; from time to time the said volcano threw out great balls and burning stones in greater abundance than heretofore.
During the morning on February 20 (4 a.m.) the volcano was shaken by ]]>
At four o’clock in the morning of the 20th there was an earthquake felt in the entire city, its valleys and surrounding areas, which was quite ]]>
At one o’clock in the morning of the 21 there was an earthquake greater ]]>
During February 23 to 26, the explosive volcanic activity was more or less constant. On the morning of February 27, heavy ash fall on Cartago delayed the daylight until 10 a.m. and extensive sediment-water flooding of the rivers was reported:
From one o’clock in the morning of the 27th great amounts of ash began to fall on this city and its surrounding area, and at four o’clock a great explosion was heard throughout the region, and it was not until ten o’clock that the sun was seen on account of the rain of ash; this ash was so fine that it got into the eyes, nose and mouth, causing people to sneeze and cough. The water of the rivers and streams was turned to mud. ]]>
The morphology of the summit at Irazú at the start of the 1723 eruption or before is unknown. On March 3 a second expedition went to the summit (De la Haya, 1852) and:
..., they reported that they had gone up the mountain to a plateau on the north slope of about one quarter league where it faces the western ]]>
]]>
This expedition found a large composite crater of “two leagues in circumference”. Because one league is about 5.5 km, the diameter should be about 3.5 km. The diameter was probably overestimated by the frightened Spaniards, completely lacking experience with volcanic eruptions. It could represent the present Playa Hermosa “caldera” rim, with a constructed diameter of about 1.2 km, in which the Diego de la Haya crater and the ‘new’ active crater (Cráter Principal ?) was located in the western part with a lava lake (Fig. 2).
The ashfall, accompanied by small earthquakes, continued during March, affecting Curridabat and Barba. On April 3, a strong earthquake (between 10 and 11 p.m.) was followed by violent explosions with high projection of incandescent bombs:
On the ]]>
]]>
The activity continued until 2 a.m. on April 4 but ended abruptly. The third and last expedition to the summit on April 8, 1723 reported abundant ash covering the rocks and no “sands” like in previous reports that suggests a continuously high degree of fragmentation since March 27:
On April 8 I sent Lieutenant Marcos Chinchilla, Sergeant Manuel Barboza and Cayetano Orozco to explore the volcano. They returned and informed ]]>
volcano was continuously throwing up fire and ash in such quantities that all the rocks in the surrounding area were covered with it.
Finally, De la Haya concluded:
Since ]]>
The 1723 eruption ]]>
We now attempt to correlate and interpret the deposits with the narrative of the 1723 eruption. According to Diego de la Haya, the 1723 eruption lasted at least ten months with the projection of “large balls of fire” and “burning stones” during the first days, followed by fine ashfall, bombs and lahars, suggesting a more efficient fragmentation. Sapper (1925, 1926) concluded ]]>
Fig. 4). This ]]>
century (i.e. 1917-1921, 1939-1940, and specially 1963-1965) in the southwestern part of the Cráter Principal. This scoria bomb deposit, however, is thinner (< 1 m) surrounding the Diego de la Haya crater. Other eruptions reported between 1723 and 1917 are doubtful (Tristan, 1923), and they have no stratigraphic record (Alvarado, 1993). Additionally, no report of the eruptions between 1561 and 1723 exists. ]]>
The remains of the 1723 scoria deposits in the inner wall of the Cráter Principal have been intensely oxidized due to post-depositional alteration. The scoria bomb and lapilli deposits may correspond to the 1723 volcanic eruption. Furthermore, a comparison between the historic documents, the tephrostratigraphic record, the increasing thickness of tephra deposits toward the WSW part of Cráter Principal, the size of blocks
and bombs and the orientation of asymmetric ballistic impact sags, all indicate that Cráter Principal was the source. The scoria cone “La Laguna” on the eastern part of the summit was not the source of the 1723 eruption because the second expedition (March 3, 1723) did not mention anything about an active pyroclastic cone (Fig. 2).
Other strombolian deposits ]]>
Fig. 3). These photographs ]]>
et al., 2006). Other thick strombolian deposits, called the Tristán unit, exposed in the south wall of the Cráter Principal, are overlain in the photographs by a thick sequence of light colored tephra deposits, correlated to the Alfaro unit. Thus, the Tristán unit cannot be correlated with the 1723 eruption. All this evidences strongly suggest ]]>
not the Diego de la Haya crater as proposed by Sapper, was the vent of the 1723 eruption, and further supports the hypothesis that the scoria fall and the phreatomagmatic deposits exposed on the SW part of the Cráter Principal represent the 1723 eruption deposits.
Stratigraphic ]]>
The most complete stratigraphic section is exposed in the upper southern part of the Cráter Principal and in some small outcrops in the summit at 3432 m high. The principal tephra units are listed below (Figs. 5 and 6) with their maximum thicknesses found in the ]]>
Set I (9 cm): Unit A, a pink to violet fine ash and lapilli deposit showing block sag structures between parallel-laminated, hydrothermally altered coarse to fine ash.
Set II (6 m): Three coarse-grained, highly vesiculated bomb and lapilli-bearing subunits B, C and E.
Unit B (3.6 m): Black, ungraded, scoriaceous bomb-bearing lapilli (without ash) with rare pumiceous andesite (< 1%) and few (1-4%) hydrothermally altered lapilli.
Unit C (1.5 m): Deposits of black bombs with lapilli matrix and few hydrothermally altered lapilli (1-3%). The lower part, 30 cm thick, ]]>
Unit D (24 cm): Brown scoriaceous bombs and lapilli with crude reverse grading, and an irregular horizon of hydrothermally altered lithics and small brown scoria (3-10 mm).
Unit E (70 cm): Brown lapilli-bearing coarse ash and some pumice ]]>
Set III (≤ 1.2 m): This unit includes phreatomagmatic subunits F, G and H:
Unit F (94 cm) Deposit of gray laminated lapilli-bearing coarse ash layers showing plastic deformation, numerous block sags, and few scoriaceous bombs (< 5%). ]]>
Unit G (< 5 cm): Scoriaceous lapilli, laterally grading into 4 thin layers of lapilli-bearing-ash at some locations.
Unit H (< 30 cm): Laminated layer of lapilli and ash without plastic deformation.
]]>
Set IV (< 59 cm): Defined by subsets I and J:
Unit I (5 cm): Normally graded medium- to fine-laminated beige ash and lapilli.
Unit J (< 24 cm): Massive tephra layer with blocks (<15 cm diameter), scoriaceous bombs (15-25 diameter) and lapilli-bearing ]]>
Unit K: Deposits of scoriaceous lapilli and medium sized ash, rich in bombs, blocks and scoriaceous lapilli.
Set I (< 10 cm) is a ]]>
A finely laminated lapilli-bearing gray ash (set III, ≤1.2 m in thickness) overlies the strombolian deposits and shows plastic bedding-deformation (contorted stratification) and sag structures. The overlying 1.15 m consists of scoria lapilli lenses, ash layers and bomb and blockbearing coarse ash layers (sets IV and V). Set IV consists of a scoria lapilli bed with normal and reverse grading overlain by fine ash with crosslamination. The fine ash beds are poorly sorted cohesive ash overlain by well-sorted fine lapilli with some lamination, sandwave and truncation structures forming thin layers composed of unconsolidated, well stratified beds. The coarse ash bands following the cohesive wave morphology, with variations in bed thickness orthogonal to strike, fill the trough part of the thin cohesive deposits.
Features that suggest a phreatomagmatic origin for the sets III, IV, and V include: high degrees of fragmentation, good bedding, abundant cohesive ash, large cauliflower-shaped bombs, penecontemporaneous deformation (cf. Fisher and Schmincke 1984). Sedimentation from turbulent depositional mechanisms (surges) of several fine-tephra layers is indicated by: (1) common wave-like and planar bedforms; (2) flat upper surface and an irregular lower surface of some beds, and; (3) bedding sags in cross-bedding layers. The fine ash beds are interpreted as “wet” surge deposits, based on cohesive ash, internal structure and post-depositional alteration features (cf. Sheridan & Wohletz, 1983; Dellino et al., 1990). Well-sorted ash deposits with subordinate lamination, sandwave and truncation structures, are interpreted as “dry” surge deposits (sensu Fisher & Waters, 1970), and they form thin layers composed of unconsolidated, wellstratified beds.
Grain size analyses
The deposits resulting from the 1723 eruption vary widely in grain sizes (Fig. 6, Table 1). Since all samples were collected near the rim of the Cráter Principal, this variability may be due to the different type of fragmentation and transportation processes. A total of 8 representative tephra samples (bombs, lapilli, ash, rare lithics) from set II were analyzed for grain size distribution. All samples are coarse-grained and well sorted (1.27-2.00 phi). The grain size distributions are asymmetric with respect to the Gaussian distribution (positive skewness). The coarse bomb and lapilli juvenile deposits may have an irregular (bimodal) distribution. These can be attributed to the fact that the strata were sampled at proximal locations where the selection of the ballistic trajectories is not effective. A similar situation has been observed for the deposits of other volcanic areas (e.g. Mt. Pilato sequence at Lipari, Italy; Dellino, 1991).
The data show that the low-angle laminated (pyroclastic surge) deposits are typically finergrained and better sorted (usually between 0.88 and 0.98 phi) than the coarse juvenile deposits (1.27-2 phi). This could suggest that at least in near vent locations, a tractive transport is more effective in selecting the grain size with respect to a ballistic fallout process. The poor sorting (1.82- 2.59) of some samples taken from cross-laminated deposits, probably result from the presence of some scoria lapilli due to contemporaneous fallout deposits. Some poorly sorted pyroclastic surge deposits (1.82-2.59 phi) result from the incorporation of some fallout lapilli scoria which were deposited contemporaneously. The “dry” surge deposits show a well developed Gaussian form (normal to negative skeweness), due to the effective granulometric selection during the tractional movement. In fact, the grain size in a single “dry” surge bed varies with distance from the vent (samples ira 1/13, 14, and 15; Fig. 6), constraining an effective selection during transportation. Instead, “wet” surge deposits have a more abundant finer fraction and some show bimodal distribution. The “wet” surge deposits have a finer grain size in respect to the “dry” ones; they are bimodal and have a higher sorting parameter. This could be due to the presence of condensing water during the transport, which has inhibited an effective tractional process, so preventing a selective transport.
SEM observations
Among the tephras, five major types of ash were distinguished from SEM images: (1) hydrothermally altered scoria lithics; (2) blocky lithic grains, with more or less equant shapes showing variable proportion of vesicles, small microlites and signs of hydrothermal alteration; (3) non-vesicular juvenile blocky grains; (4) weakly-vesicular blocky pyroclasts; and (5) vesicular blocky grains (angular shaped) or irregularly shaped scoria grains (Fig. 7). The differences between the various types of deposits comprise the different proportions of the five type of ash. The first two types of ash are dominant in set I (pyroclastic surge) that represents the beginning of the 1723 eruption. SEM images and EDS analyses show that the ash from this deposit consist of hydrothermally altered scoria (lithic blocky grains) some with evidence of mechanical abrasion.
Highly vesicular juvenile fragments are abundant in set II, some with linear and short cracks. The abundant vesicle surfaces with thin vesicular walls represent the remnants of exploded bubbles; irregular ]]>
Sets III, IV, and V are consisting of cohesive and non-cohesive ash and lapilli beds with parallel and low angle lamination, in which ash 3, 4 and 5 types are prevalent. At SEM images, the surge deposits show clear evidence of magma/water interaction, for example, poorly vesicular blocky grains and abundant hydration cracks (
Fig. 7). Blocky fragments were produced by brittle deformation during quenching and solidification (Wohletz 1983) and the hydration cracks mark the contact between a hot clast with external fluids, probably in a superheated state (a typical situation of phreatomagmatic phenomena). Some grains in the “dry” surge deposits show impact structures, which supports transport in the tractional or saltation zone of a turbulent medium. In general, however, the juvenile components of the “wet” and ]]>
Petrography and petrology
The basaltic andesite bombs of the 1723 eruption contain 9.7-23.5 vol% phenocrysts (modal analyses expressed vesicle-free) with phenocrysts of ]]>
52-35), clinopyroxene (2.5-10 vol.%), orthopyroxene (0.7-2 vol.%), olivine (0.1-2.2 vol.%; Fo76-88), opaques (0.1-1%), in an interstitial groundmass (66.5-90.3 vol.%). Zoned (normal or reverse) and unzoned phenocrysts coexist with resorbed, anhedral and perfectly euhedral phenocrysts in the same rocks. The groundmass is dominantly plagioclase (An69-54), clinopyroxene and opaques occur in brown and black glass, both with the ]]>
2= 57-64 wt.%).
The 1723 scorias are all similar in composition with ~53-55 wt.% SiO2 and ~16.7-17.6 wt.% Al2O3. Incompatible trace element abundances are relatively high, and LREE elements are enriched. The stratigraphically located samples come from the basal 6 m (set II) ]]>
SiO2, Na2O, K20, Cr and Rb and slightly decreasing TiO2, FeOt, CaO, Al2O3, Sr and V with respect to its stratigraphic position. The white pumiceous lapilli are high-K andesite (SiO2: 58-60 wt. %) included in ]]>
2O3 (16.8-17 vs. 17.1- 17.6 wt.%), CaO (7.7-7.8 wt.% vs. 8.3-8.6 wt.%), and Sr (765-767 ppm vs. 789-823 ppm) than the lower scoriaceous units (set II: unit B to E) but together they define the same petrochemical trend of fractionation (see Alvarado et al., 2006). ]]>
Major and trace element trends of the 1723 scoria provide additional evidence for crystal fractionation. Plagioclase, pyroxene and magnetite are the most abundant phenocrysts controlling fractionation. The linear decrease in FeOt with increase in silica can be explained by the fractionation of magnetite and clinopyroxene. Magnetite fractionation is suggested by the linear decrease in V. The occurrence of magnetite phenocrysts, and especially the existence of magnetite inclusions in plagioclase and clinopyroxene phenocrysts shows that magnetite is in ]]>
2O3 with increasing silica can be explained by removal of calcic plagioclase and lesser calcic clinopyroxene. The decrease of Sr with increasing SiO2 reflects plagioclase removal at low pressure levels. Using the least-squares technique of Bryan et al. (1969), it is possible to show that the 1723 scoria can be derived from MgO-TiO2 rich basalts present at Irazú by a moderate degree of fractional crystallization (~28%: 2.1% cpx + 3.6% ol + 0.6% mt + 3.5% plag) ]]>
The subordinate white pumice lapilli of andesite composition (Fig. 8a), present in the 1723 basaltic andesite scoria deposits, cannot be derived by fractionation from the host basaltic andesite. They can, however, be formed by about 16.5% of fractionation (~ 4.5% opx + 2% opx + 0.3% mt + 9.2 % plag) from their basaltic andesite of the ]]>
et al., 2006). Xenocrysts in the 1723 scoria are unrimmed euhedral hornblende crystals, indicating a rapidly ascended magma of a few days or hours (Fig. 8b; cf. Rutherford, 1993). The contrasting density and temperature of the two magmas (olivinebasaltic andesite and hornblende-andesite: 53-55 vs. 59-60% SiO2) was probably large. ]]>
Seismicity
The strong “resound” or subterranean sounds of the quakes suggest a shallow source (< 15 km) with a maximum intensity MM (Modified Mercalli scale) of VI at Cartago city and possible VII at Irazú. The local magnitude (ML) can be estimated from empirical relation ]]>
ML = 1 + (2/3) Io (Gutenberg & Richter, 1956) or ML= 1.85 + 0.49 Io (Toppozada, 1975).
Assuming that Io was VII in the epicenter for the event on February 21, ]]>
L ~ 5.6 or 5.28, respectively. It is also possibly to obtain the magnitudes ML (local magnitude scale), mb (body wave magnitude) and Ms (surface wave magnitude) using:
Thus, the largest volcano-tectonic earthquake could have had a ML ~ 4.8-5, mb ~ 5.3 and Ms ~5.5. Therefore, the magnitude of the principal earthquakes of this seismic swarm that was felt in Cartago city could have had a Ms between 3.5 and <5.5. Numerous volcano-tectonic earthquakes of smaller magnitude were also presented. The subterranean ]]>
The potential role of earth tidal stress as a potential triggered the 1723 volcanic explosions and earthquakes was tested, but no clear correlation was found (Alvarado, 1993).
]]>
Recontruction of the volcanic activity in 1723
The various phases of the volcanic activity of the 1723 eruption and the fragmentation and transport processes, resulting in the pyroclastic sequence are reconstructed from the narrative, field observations and laboratory data.
The ]]>
The eruption of Irazú started on February 16, 1723 with a brief phase that is now represented in set I, consisting of a thin (< 10 cm thick) fine grained breccia and phreatic pyroclastic surge deposits with block sag structures, reflecting the opening of the crater by explosions generated due to interactions of magma (heat?) with external water. The initial phreatic phase was followed by a dominantly ]]>
The eruptive column of ash was more or less constant in height and shape during the first days of the eruption in 1723. The extraneous whitesteam arc which formed from the active crater, as observed on ]]>
During this strombolian phase, a scoria cone was rapidly built at the summit of Irazú during the first two days of the eruption. Part of this cone can be seen in old photographs (1897-1962) and in the cartoons of Tristán (1923) and Sapper (1926). Later, this cone was destroyed by the last large and prolonged eruptive period between ]]>
et al., 1988; D’ Oriano et al., ]]>
The phreatomagmatic phase
A finely laminated phreatomagmatic lapillibearing gray ash overlying the strombolian deposits shows plastic bedding-deformation (contorted ]]>
(cf. Eichelberger & Koch, 1979). Ballistic and turbulent mechanisms ]]>
]]>
The reworked tephra deposits and contorted stratification interbedded between primary fallout and ballistic blocks (Figs. 5 and 6) confirm episodes of rainfall during the eruption (sometime between May and December, 1723).
]]>
Discussion and Conclusion
The 1723 mafic magma erupted as scoria can be derived from MgO-TiO2 rich basalts presented at Irazú by a moderate degree of fractional crystallization (~28%) consistent with the relatively high- Ti content of the 1723-magma. The subordinate andesite inclusions (felsic pumice) in 1723 basaltic andesite scoria ]]>
et al., 2006). The occurrence of pumice inclusions indicate that compositionally distinct magmas (basaltic andesite and andesite) co-existed at different levels in the chamber and were only in part physically mingled shortly before and during the eruption (Figs. 8 and ]]>
9).
The eruption resulted from the rise of a small batch of basaltic andesite magma into a small andesitic magma chamber leading to rapid initial contact and final eruption. Because the contrasting density and temperature of the two magmas (53-55 vs. 59-60 wt.% SiO2) was probably large, the mixing was incomplete. The presumed length of dormancy ]]>
et al., 1989) is likely and physically an additional mechanism for triggering this eruption. In fact, the structure at Irazú is ]]>
A pyroclastic deposit located in the southern part of the Cráter Principal is associated for the first time with the 1723 eruption at Irazú volcano. Its areal distribution, stratigraphy, grain ]]>
finally phreatomagmatic activity. The strombolian activity built an ephemeral scoria cone in the inner part of the Cráter Principal (Fig. 9).
Stratigraphic, historic and laboratory data indicate the final ]]>
caused influx of water into the shallow magma chamber, resulting in the implosion of the chamber roof and walls, generating the phreatomagmatic explosions. The scoria cone was partially destroyed in this phase by a series of collapses and vent-clearing explosions. This phase was possibly linked to the eruption period that started on February 27, ]]>
et ]]>
, 1991), such as low- and high-frequency volcano-tectonic events, permitting the periodic interaction of magma with water. A nice example for this was probably the phase on April 3, 1723 when volcanic explosions followed a strong earthquake.
The final eruptive stage is unknown (1724-1726?), but possibly consisted of drastic changes in the appearance of the crater terrace, ]]>
Magma composition did not change during the eruption. This implies that the main controls on the eruptive style of Irazú are the magmatic gas content, and the interaction between magma and water. Magma/water interaction (i.e. phreatomagmatic eruption) only occurred when discharge rates were low and the fragmentation surface was below the water table (Houghton & Schmincke, 1989) and when the magma was primarily fragmented (Barberi et al., 1988). At Irazú, however, the abrupt change between “dry” to “wet” deposits could also be favored by the continued occurrence of earthquakes.
The lithostratigraphy of the tephra sequence at the summit of Irazú suggests that, commonly, the principal eruptive phases at Irazú began with magmatic or “dry” eruption -in this case as strombolian style- followed by phreatomagmatic eruptions.
Therefore, although of very small magnitude (Volcanic Explosivity Index, VEI ~ 3; cf. Newall & Self, 1982), if a similar eruption occurs again it may cause serious losses in agriculture, industry and damage to infrastructure, but also severely affected the international aircraft flying.
Acknowledgements
This work is part of G.E.A.’s Ph.D. thesis at the Christian-Albrechts-Universitätzu Kiel. Discussions with G. Soto, L. La Volpe, P. Dellino, and M.J. Carr, and financial support by Deutscher Akademischer Austauschdienst (DAAD), Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad (ICE) to G.E.A., the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) Leibniz grant to H.-U. S., and Dipartimento Geomineralogico at Bari are gratefully acknowledged. W. Rojas and W. Montero provided also valuable comments. F. Arias helped in the field and S.M. Garro in the figures. Steffen Kutterolf makes helpful comments on the text. References
ALVARADO, G.E., 1993: Volcanology and Petrology of Irazú Volcano, Costa Rica.-261 pp. Univ Kiel, Ph.D. thesis. [ Links ]
ALVARADO, G.E., 2005: Costa Rica: Land of Volcanoes.- xxviii + 309 pp. EUNED, San José [ Links ].
ALVARADO, G.E. & SCHMINCKE, H.-U., 1994: Stratigraphic and Sedimentological aspects of the rain-trigged lahares of the 1963-1965 Irazú eruption, Costa Rica.- Zbl. Geol. Paläont. I, 1993(1/2): 513-530. [ Links ]
ALVARADO, G.E., CARR, M.J., TURRIN, B.D., SWISHER, C., SCHIMINCKE, H.- U. & HUDNUT, K.W., 2006: Recent volcanic history of Irazú volcano, Costa Rica: Alternation and mixing of two magma batches, implying at least tow intracrustal chambers.- In: W.I. ROSE, W.I.,BLUTH, G.J.S., CARR, M.J., EWERT, J., PATINO, L.C. & VALLANCE, J. (eds): Natural Hazards in Central America. Geol. Soc. Am. Spc. Paper, 412: 259-276, DOI: 10.1130/2006.2412(14). [ Links ]
BARBERI, F., NARARRO, J.M., ROSI, M., SANTACROSE, R. & SBRANA, A., 1988: Explosive interaction of magma with ground water: insights from xenoliths and geothermal drillings.- Rendicotidella Soc. Italiana Min. Petrol. 43: 901-926. [ Links ]
BEHNCKE, B. & NERI, M., 2003: The July- August 2001 eruption of Mt. Etna (Sicily).- Bull. Volcanol. 65: 461-476. [ Links ]
BLAKE, S., 1984: Volatile oversaturation during the evolution of silicic magma chamber as an eruption trigger.- J. Geopys. Res. 89 (B10): 8237-8244. [ Links ]
CAS, R.A.F. & WRIGHT, J.V., 1987: Volcanic successions: Modern and ancient: A geological approach to processes, products and successions.- xviii + 528 pp. Unwin Hyman Inc., London. [ Links ]
DE LA HAYA, D., 1852: La actividad del Volcán Irazú en 1723.- La Gaceta [Diario Oficial de Costa Rica], 175-177. [ Links ]
DELLINO, P., FRAZZETTA, G. & LA VOLPE, L., 1990: Wet surge deposits at La Fossa di Vulcano: depositional and eruptive mechanisms.- J. Volcanol. Geother. Res. 43: 215- 233. [ Links ]
DÍAZ, V.M., 1930: Conmociones terrestres en la América Central 1469-1930.- 268 pp. Tipografía El Santuario, Ciudad de Guatemala. [ Links ]
D’ORIANO, c., POGGIANTI, E., BERTAGININI, A., CIONI, R., LANDI, P. POLACCI, M. & ROSI, M., 2005:Changes in eruptive style during the A.D. 1538 Monte Nuevo eruption (Phlegrean Fields, Italy: the role of syneruptive crystallization.- Bull. Volcnol. 67:601-621. [ Links ]
EICHELBERGER, J.C. & KOCH, F.G., 1979: Lithic fragments in the Bandelier tuff, Jemez Mountains, New Mexico.- J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res. 5: 115-134. [ Links ]
FISHER, R.V. & WATERS, A.C., 1970: Base surge bed forms in maar volcanoes.- Am. J. Sci. 268: 157-180. [ Links ]
FORHANG, W.F. & GONZÁLEZ, J., 1956: Birth and Development of Paricutín Volcano, Mexico.- Geol. Surv. Bull. 965- D: 355-489. [ Links ]
GOVINDARAJU, K., 1989: Compilation of Working Values and Sample Description for 272 Geostandards.- Geostandards Newsletter, 13: 1-113. [ Links ]
GONZÁLEZ, C., 1910: Temblores, terremotos, inundaciones y erupciones volcánicas en Costa Rica; 1608-1910.- iv + 200 pp. Tipogr. Avelino Alsina, San José [ Links ].
GUTENBERG, B. & RICHTER, C.F., 1956: Earthquake magnitude, intensity, energy and acceleration (second paper).- Bull. Seismol. Soc. Amer. 46: 105-145. [ Links ]
HOUGHTON, B.F. & WILSON, C.J.N., 1989: A vesicularity index for pyroclastic deposits.- Bull. Volcanol. 51: 451-462. [ Links ]
KOKELAAR, B.P., 1986: Magma-water interactions in subaqueous and emergent basaltic volcanism.- Bull. Volcanol. 48: 275-290. [ Links ]
MATA, J., 1930: Monografía de Cartago.- 802 págs., Imprenta El Heraldo. San José [Reimpresión por la Ed. Tecnológica de Costa Rica, Cartago 1999]. [ Links ]
MIYAMURA, S., 1980: Sismicidad de Costa Rica.- 190 pp. Ed. Univ. Costa Rica, San José [ Links ].
MONTESUS DE BALLORE, F., 1888: Temblements de terre et éruptions volcaniques au Centre Amérique.- 293 pp. Soc. Sci. Nat. Saone et Loire, Dijon. [ Links ]
NEWHALL, C.G. &, SELF, S., 1982: The Volcanic Explosivity Index (VEI): An Estimate of Explosive Magnitude for Historical Volcanism.- J. Geophys. Res. 87 (C2): 1231-1238. [ Links ]
PERALDO, G. & MONTERO, W., 1994: Temblores del periodo colonial de Costa Rica.- 162 pp. Ed. Tecnológica de Costa Rica, Cartago. [ Links ]
PERRET, F.A., 1950: Volcanological Observations.- 162 pp. Carnegie Inst. of Washington, Publ. 449. [ Links ]
RICHTER, C.F., 1958: Elementary Seismology.- 768 pp. Ed. W. H. Freeman & Co., San Francisco. [ Links ]
SAPPER, K., 1925: Los volcanes de la América Central.- 144 pp. Max Niemayer Halle (Salle). [ Links ]
SAPPER, K., 1926: Die vulkanische Tätigkeit in Mittelamerika im 20. Jahrhundert. II. Teil. Zeitschr. Vulkanologie, IX(5): 231-270. [ Links ]
SEGERSTROM, K., 1950: Erosion studies at Paricutín, state of Michoacan, Mexico.- U.S. Geol. Surv. Bull. 965-A: 1-164. [ Links ]
SHERIDAN, M.F, & MARSHALL, J.R., 1983: Interpretation of pyroclast surface features using SEM images.- J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res. 16:153-159. [ Links ]
SHERIDAN, M.F. & WOHLETZ, K.H., 1983: Hydrovolcanism: Basic considerations and review.- J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res. 17: 1-29. [ Links ]
SOTO, G.J. & ALVARADO, G.E., 2006: Eruptive history of Arenal Volcano, Costa Rica, 7 ka to present.- J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res. 157: 254-269. [ Links ]
TAIT, S., JAUPART, C. &VERGNIOLLE, S., 1989: Pressure, gas content and eruption periodicity of a shallow crystallising magma chamber.-Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 92: 107-123. [ Links ]
TAZIEFF, H., 1988: Ätna, der Berg-seine Gefahren-seine Zukunft.- 262 pp. Busse Seewald. [ Links ]
TOPPOZZADA, T.R., 1975: Earthquake magnitude as a function of intensity data in California and Western Nevada.- Bull. Seism. Soc. Am. 65: 1223-1238. [ Links ]
TRISTÁN, J.F., 1923: The activity of the volcano Irazú in Costa Rica.- Zeitschr. Vulkanologie, 7(2): 93-104. [ Links ]
TRISTÁN, J.F., 1924: Reproducción del Documento original de don Diego de La Haya Fernández sobre la erupción en el año de 1723.- Liceo de Costa Rica, Imprenta Lehmann, Publicaciones II: 3-28. [ Links ]
WALKER, G.P., 1973: Explosive volcanic eruptions - a new classification scheme.- Geol. Rundschau, 62: 431-446. [ Links ]
WALKER, G.P., 1982: Eruptions of andesitic volcanoes.- In: THORPE, R.S. (ed.): Andesites.- John Wiley & Sons: 403-433. [ Links ]
WILCOX, R.E., 1954: Petrology of Paricutín Volcano, México. U.S. Geol. Surv. Bull. 965-B: 165-279. [ Links ]
WOHLETZ, K.H., 1983: Mechanisms of hydrovolcanicpyroclast formation: grain-size, scanning electron microscopy, and experimental studies.- J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res. 17: 31-63. [ Links ]
ZIMANOWSKI, B., FRÖHLICH, G. & LORENZ, V., 1991: Quantitative experiments on phreatomagmatic explosions.- J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res. 48: 341-358. [ Links ]
*Correspondencia a: Guillermo E. Alvarado. Área de Amenazas y Auscultación Sísmica y Volcánica, ICE, Apdo. 10032 San José, Costa Rica Hans-Ulrich Schmincke. Geomar, Wishhofstrass. 1-4, Kiel, D-24148 Kiel, Germany. Autor para contacto: galvaradoi@ice.go.cr 1. Área de Amenazas y Auscultación Sísmica y Volcánica, ICE, Apdo. 10032 San José, Costa Rica 2. Geomar, Wishhofstrass. 1-4, Kiel, D-24148 Kiel, Germany. Autor para contacto: galvaradoi@ice.go.cr