loading page

Parameters controlling the eruption frequency of long-lived felsic magmatic systems: an example from the Milos volcanic field (Greece).
  • +1
  • Xiaolong Zhou,
  • Klaudia F. Kuiper,
  • Jan R. Wijbrans,
  • Pieter Vroon
Xiaolong Zhou
Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam

Corresponding Author:z.x.l.zhou@vu.nl

Author Profile
Klaudia F. Kuiper
Vrije Universiteit
Author Profile
Jan R. Wijbrans
VU University Amsterdam
Author Profile
Pieter Vroon
Vrije Universiteit
Author Profile


The observation that individual volcanic centres have their own eruption frequencies has been known for a long time but is as yet poorly understood. The key to a better understanding of the mechanisms controlling the eruption frequency comes from integrating accurate geochronology and geochemical data with numerical models. In many silicic volcanic systems, the eruption frequency is studied for short timescales of <1 Ma. Here, we combine two published numerical models to improve our understanding of the eruption frequency in a long-lived (>3 Ma) felsic magmatic system, the Milos volcanic field. From these two models, we interpret the time intervals between magma pulses into the subvolcanic reservoir (ti), the rates of magma supply (Qav) and chamber growth rates (Gmc) as the key parameters controlling the eruption frequency. During the time intervals of 1.5-1.04 Ma and 0.97-0.63 Ma the ti is longer than 500 years and the volcanic quiescence periods are longer than 350 ka. Furthermore, these periods are characterized by low values for Qav (≤ 0.001 km3·yr-1) and for Gmc (<0.0008 km3·yr-1). In contrast, during the time intervals of 3.3-1.5 Ma and 0.60-0.06 Ma, the ti is shorter (<0.5 ka) and the values for Qav (> 0.001 km3·yr-1) and for Gmc (> 0.001 km3·yr-1) are higher corresponding to frequent eruptions. The parameters ti, Qav, and Gmc appear to determine the eruption frequency of a volcanic system. Changes in one or more of these three parameters of the Milos volcanic field correlate with changes in the tectonic stress field.
Mar 2022Published in Geochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems volume 23 issue 3. 10.1029/2021GC009839