Crustal deformation associated with the 1996 Gjálp subglacial eruption, Iceland: InSAR studies in affected areas adjacent to the Vatnajökull ice cap

Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Toulouse, France
Earth and Planetary Science Letters (Impact Factor: 4.72). 05/2007; 259(1). DOI: 10.1016/j.epsl.2007.04.019

ABSTRACT Crustal deformation signals associated with the September 30–October 13, 1996 Gjálp subglacial eruption, Vatnajökull ice cap, Iceland, have been identified using interferometric analysis of Synthetic Aperture Radar images (InSAR) in areas outside the ice cap. On September 29, 1996 an M w 5.6 earthquake occurred at the nearby Bárdarbunga volcano and on September 30 seismicity propagated 20 km southwards where the Gjálp eruption occurred. Analysis of interferograms spanning different times from 1992 to 2000 allows us to separate two distinct co-eruptive deformation periods in areas outside the ice cap. Diking at the Bárdarbunga caldera rim appears to be responsible for deformation during the first week of eruption while significant deflation occurred at Bárdarbunga only after October 6 when most of the magma had already been erupted at Gjálp. A pressure connection between the Bárdarbunga volcano and the Gjálp eruptive fissure is inferred. Fault slip in three areas up to 30 km from the center of the Bárdarbunga volcano was triggered by the deflation. Local deformation signals there are consistent with small fault movements.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Crust at many divergent plate boundaries forms primarily by the injection of vertical sheet-like dykes, some tens of kilometres long1. Previous models of rifting events indicate either lateral dyke growth away from a feeding source, with propagation rates decreasing as the dyke lengthens2, 3, 4, or magma flowing vertically into dykes from an underlying source5, 6, with the role of topography on the evolution of lateral dykes not clear. Here we show how a recent segmented dyke intrusion in the Bárðarbunga volcanic system grew laterally for more than 45 kilometres at a variable rate, with topography influencing the direction of propagation. Barriers at the ends of each segment were overcome by the build-up of pressure in the dyke end; then a new segment formed and dyke lengthening temporarily peaked. The dyke evolution, which occurred primarily over 14 days, was revealed by propagating seismicity, ground deformation mapped by Global Positioning System (GPS), interferometric analysis of satellite radar images (InSAR), and graben formation. The strike of the dyke segments varies from an initially radial direction away from the Bárðarbunga caldera, towards alignment with that expected from regional stress at the distal end. A model minimizing the combined strain and gravitational potential energy explains the propagation path. Dyke opening and seismicity focused at the most distal segment at any given time, and were simultaneous with magma source deflation and slow collapse at the Bárðarbunga caldera, accompanied by a series of magnitude M > 5 earthquakes. Dyke growth was slowed down by an effusive fissure eruption near the end of the dyke. Lateral dyke growth with segment barrier breaking by pressure build-up in the dyke distal end explains how focused upwelling of magma under central volcanoes is effectively redistributed over long distances to create new upper crust at divergent plate boundaries.
    Nature 12/2014; DOI:10.1038/nature14111 · 42.35 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Plate boundaries are the most active, unstable and hazardous areas on Earth. The aim of this study is twofold. 1) Provide an overview of the main structural features along divergent and convergent plate boundaries and their relationships to volcanism. The considered divergent plate boundaries include the continental East African Rift System (EARS), the transitional Afar Rifts and slow (Iceland) and fast (East Pacific Rise) oceanic ridges. The analysis of the convergent plate boundaries refers to the extensional (Taupo Volcanic Zone, New Zealand), strike-slip (Sumatra), contractional (NE Japan) and more complex (Central Andes) volcanic arcs. 2) Propose an original and innovative frame to understand tectono-magmatic processes along plate boundaries, based on two major points. a) Magmatism may effectively control the development of plate boundaries. At immature continental divergent plate boundaries (as the non-magmatic portions of the EARS), regional extension plays a major role in extending the upper crust; however, along mature continental and oceanic rifts magmatism is most effective in spreading plates apart through dikes. At convergent plate boundaries, the possibility to develop extensional, strike-slip, contractional and oblique systems along the volcanic arc provides highly variable structural conditions controlling magmatism. At least three magmatic processes (diking, sill emplacement, heat-induced strain localization) may control the development of volcanic arcs. In addition, megathrust earthquakes may induce transient extension, enhancing volcanism. Therefore, the evolution of both divergent and convergent plate boundaries is significantly magma-controlled and magmatic processes seem largely self-sustained, requiring limited direct tectonic contribution. b) Magmatism along divergent and convergent plate boundariesold usually focuses in magmatic systems, associated with a dominant volcano. Magmatic systems provide a convenient framework to relate the geometric and compositional features of a magmatic plate boundary to its tectonic setting. In particular, the larger the opening rate, the lower is the aspect ratio A (A = width W/length L) of the magmatic system. Therefore, the linear magmatic accretion of divergent plate boundaries and extensional arcs is replaced by a punctiform accretion in contractional arcs. Several aspects (magmatic rates, lateral vs. vertical dike propagation along divergent plate boundaries, structural control on volcanism along strike-slip arcs) are still poorly defined and should be the target of future research.
    Earth-Science Reviews 09/2014; 136. DOI:10.1016/j.earscirev.2014.05.006 · 7.14 Impact Factor
  • Source
    Geophysical Research Letters 01/2008; 35. · 4.46 Impact Factor