Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Article
  • Published:

Shifting melt composition linked to volcanic tremor at Cumbre Vieja volcano

Nature Geoscience volume 18, pages 175–183 (2025)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Forecasting the onset, evolution and end of volcanic eruptions relies on interpretation of monitoring data—particularly seismic signals, such as persistent volcanic tremor—in relation to causative magmatic processes. Petrology helps establish such links retrospectively but typically lacks the required temporal resolution to directly relate to geophysical data. Here we report major and volatile element compositions of glass from volcanic ash continuously sampled throughout the 2021 Tajogaite eruption of Cumbre Vieja volcano, La Palma, Canary Islands. The data reveal the evolving chemistry of melts supplied from depth at a daily temporal resolution. Erupted melt compositions become progressively more primitive until the tenth week of activity, but a sharp reversal of this trend then marks the decline of mantle magma supply and a precursory signal to the eruption end. We find that melt SiO2 content is positively correlated with the amplitude of narrow-band volcanic tremor. Tremor characteristics, inferences from simulations and model calculations point to melt viscosity-controlled degassing dynamics generating variations in tremor amplitude. Our results show promise for a monitoring and forecasting tool capable of quickly identifying rejuvenated and waning phases of volcanic eruptions and illustrate how subtle changes in melt composition may translate to large shifts in geophysical signals.

Access through your institution
Buy or subscribe

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Access through your institution

Buy this article

  • Purchase on SpringerLink
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: Lava flows and vents of the 2021 Tajogaite eruption at Cumbre Vieja volcano.
Fig. 2: Temporal evolution of melt composition at Tajogaite.
Fig. 3: Comparison with monitoring data.
Fig. 4: Normalized time series.
Fig. 5: Effects of melt viscosity.
Fig. 6: Conceptual model.

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The datasets generated during this study are available in the EarthChem data repository, https://doi.org/10.60520/IEDA/113537, and in the Supplementary Information.

References

  1. Bebbington, M. S. & Jenkins, S. F. Intra-eruption forecasting. Bull. Volcanol. 81, 34 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Poland, M. P. & Anderson, K. R. Partly cloudy with a chance of lava flows: forecasting volcanic eruptions in the twenty‐first century. J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 125, e2018JB016974 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Benoit, J. P., McNutt, S. R. & Barboza, V. Duration–amplitude distribution of volcanic tremor. J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 108, 2146 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Chouet, B. Excitation of a buried magmatic pipe: a seismic source model for volcanic tremor. J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 90, 1881–1893 (1985).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Girona, T., Caudron, C. & Huber, C. Origin of shallow volcanic tremor: the dynamics of gas pockets trapped beneath thin permeable media. J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 124, 4831–4861 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Konstantinou, K. I. & Schlindwein, V. Nature, wavefield properties and source mechanism of volcanic tremor: a review. J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res. 119, 161–187 (2003).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Fee, D. et al. Volcanic tremor and plume height hysteresis from Pavlof Volcano, Alaska. Science 355, 45–48 (2017).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. McNutt, S. R. Volcanic tremor amplitude correlated with eruption explosivity and its potential use in determining ash hazards to aviation. In Volcanic Ash and Aviation Safety: Proc. First International Symposium on Volcanic Ash and Aviation Safety (ed. Casadevall, T. J.) 377–385 (US Geological Survey, 1994).

  9. Salerno, G. G., Burton, M., Di Grazia, G., Caltabiano, T. & Oppenheimer, C. Coupling between magmatic degassing and volcanic tremor in basaltic volcanism. Front. Earth Sci. 6, 157 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Alparone, S., Andronico, D., Lodato, L. & Sgroi, T. Relationship between tremor and volcanic activity during the Southeast Crater eruption on Mount Etna in early 2000. J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 108, 2241 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Battaglia, J., Aki, K. & Ferrazzini, V. Location of tremor sources and estimation of lava output using tremor source amplitude on the Piton de la Fournaise volcano: 1. Location of tremor sources. J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res. 147, 268–290 (2005).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Soubestre, J., Chouet, B. & Dawson, P. Sources of volcanic tremor associated with the summit caldera collapse during the 2018 east rift eruption of Kīlauea Volcano, Hawai’i. J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 126, e2020JB021572 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Journeau, C. et al. Tracking changes in the co-eruptive seismic tremor associated with magma degassing at Piton de la Fournaise volcano. J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res. 444, 107936 (2023).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Costa, F., Shea, T. & Ubide, T. Diffusion chronometry and the timescales of magmatic processes. Nat. Rev. Earth Environ. 1, 201–214 (2020).

  15. Kahl, M., Chakraborty, S., Costa, F. & Pompilio, M. Dynamic plumbing system beneath volcanoes revealed by kinetic modeling, and the connection to monitoring data: an example from Mt. Etna. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 308, 11–22 (2011).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Pankhurst, M. J., Morgan, D. J., Thordarson, T. & Loughlin, S. C. Magmatic crystal records in time, space, and process, causatively linked with volcanic unrest. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 493, 231–241 (2018).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Cashman, K. V., Sparks, R. S. J. & Blundy, J. D. Vertically extensive and unstable magmatic systems: a unified view of igneous processes. Science 355, eaag3055 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Ganne, J., Bachmann, O. & Feng, X. Deep into magma plumbing systems: interrogating the crystal cargo of volcanic deposits. Geology 46, 415–418 (2018).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Longpré, M.-A., Klügel, A., Diehl, A. & Stix, J. Mixing in mantle magma reservoirs prior to and during the 2011–2012 eruption at El Hierro, Canary Islands. Geology 42, 315–318 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Gansecki, C. et al. The tangled tale of Kilauea’s 2018 eruption as told by geochemical monitoring. Science 366, eaaz0147 (2019).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Halldórsson, S. A. et al. Rapid shifting of a deep magmatic source at Fagradalsfjall volcano, Iceland. Nature 609, 529–534 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Pankhurst, M. J. et al. Rapid response petrology for the opening eruptive phase of the 2021 Cumbre Vieja eruption, La Palma, Canary Islands. Volcanica 5, 1–10 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Re, G., Corsaro, R. A., D’Oriano, C. & Pompilio, M. Petrological monitoring of active volcanoes: a review of existing procedures to achieve best practices and operative protocols during eruptions. J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res. 419, 107365 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Carracedo, J. C. et al. The 2021 eruption of the Cumbre Vieja volcanic ridge on La Palma, Canary Islands. Geol. Today 38, 94–107 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Longpré, M.-A. Reactivation of Cumbre Vieja volcano. Science 374, 1197–1198 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Copernicus Emergency Management Service. EMSR546: volcano eruption in La Palma, Spain. European Commission https://emergency.copernicus.eu/mapping/list-of-components/EMSR546 (2021).

  27. Castro, J. M. & Feisel, Y. Eruption of ultralow-viscosity basanite magma at Cumbre Vieja, La Palma, Canary Islands. Nat. Commun. 13, 3174 (2022).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Day, J. M. et al. Mantle source characteristics and magmatic processes during the 2021 La Palma eruption. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 597, 117793 (2022).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Di Fiore, F. et al. Experimental constraints on the rheology of lavas from 2021 Cumbre Vieja eruption (La Palma, Spain). Geophys. Res. Lett. 50, e2022GL100970 (2023).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Scarrow, J. H. et al. Decoding links between magmatic processes and eruption dynamics: whole-rock time series petrology of the 2021 Tajogaite eruption, La Palma. Volcanica (in the press).

  31. Taddeucci, J. et al. The explosive activity of the 2021 Tajogaite eruption (La Palma, Canary Islands, Spain). Geochem. Geophys. Geosyst. 24, e2023GC010946 (2023).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Birnbaum, J. et al. Temporal variability of explosive activity at Tajogaite volcano, Cumbre Vieja (Canary Islands), 2021 eruption from ground-based infrared photography and videography. Front. Earth Sci. 11, 1193436 (2023).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Bonadonna, C. et al. Physical characterization of long‐lasting hybrid eruptions: the 2021 Tajogaite eruption of Cumbre Vieja (La Palma, Canary Islands). J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 127, e2022JB025302 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Romero, J. E. et al. The initial phase of the 2021 Cumbre Vieja ridge eruption (Canary Islands): products and dynamics controlling edifice growth and collapse. J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res. 431, 107642 (2022).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Civico, R. et al. High-resolution digital surface model of the 2021 eruption deposit of Cumbre Vieja volcano, La Palma, Spain. Sci. Data 9, 435 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. D’Auria, L. et al. Rapid magma ascent beneath La Palma revealed by seismic tomography. Sci. Rep. 12, 17654 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. De Luca, C. et al. Pre‐and co‐eruptive analysis of the September 2021 eruption at Cumbre Vieja volcano (La Palma, Canary Islands) through DInSAR measurements and analytical modeling. Geophys. Res. Lett. 49, e2021GL097293 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Del Fresno, C. et al. Magmatic plumbing and dynamic evolution of the 2021 La Palma eruption. Nat. Commun. 14, 358 (2023).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Román, A. et al. Unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) as a tool for hazard assessment: the 2021 eruption of Cumbre Vieja volcano, La Palma Island (Spain). Sci. Total Environ. 843, 157092 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Walter, T. R. et al. Late complex tensile fracturing interacts with topography at Cumbre Vieja, La Palma. Volcanica 6, 1–17 (2023).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Weisz, E. & Menzel, W. P. Monitoring the 2021 Cumbre Vieja volcanic eruption using satellite multisensor data fusion. J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 128, e2022JD037926 (2023).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Ubide, T. et al. Discrete magma injections drive the 2021 La Palma eruption. Sci. Adv. 9, eadg4813 (2023).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Dayton, K. et al. Deep magma storage during the 2021 La Palma eruption. Sci. Adv. 9, eade7641 (2023).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Zanon, V., D’Auria, L., Schiavi, F., Cyrzan, K. & Pankhurst, M. J. Toward a near real-time magma ascent monitoring by combined fluid inclusion barometry and ongoing seismicity. Sci. Adv. 10, eadi4300 (2024).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. White, J. D. L. & Houghton, B. F. Primary volcaniclastic rocks. Geology 34, 677–680 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. D’Oriano, C., Pompilio, M., Bertagnini, A., Cioni, R. & Pichavant, M. Effects of experimental reheating of natural basaltic ash at different temperatures and redox conditions. Contrib. Mineral. Petrol. 165, 863–883 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. D’Oriano, C., Bertagnini, A., Cioni, R. & Pompilio, M. Identifying recycled ash in basaltic eruptions. Sci. Rep. 4, 5851 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Tramontano, S. Untangling the Nature and Timescales of Magmatic Processes Driving Eruptions at Quiescent Volcanoes: Examples from Momotombo, Nicaragua, and Cumbre Vieja, Canary Islands. PhD thesis, City Univ. New York (2023).

  49. McNutt, S. R. in Monitoring and Mitigation of Volcano Hazards (eds Scarpa, R. & Tilling, R. I.) 99–146 (Springer, 1996).

  50. Roman, D. C. & Cashman, K. V. The origin of volcano-tectonic earthquake swarms. Geology 34, 457–460 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. González, P. J. Volcano-tectonic control of Cumbre Vieja. Science 375, 1348–1349 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Ripepe, M. & Gordeev, E. Gas bubble dynamics model for shallow volcanic tremor at Stromboli. J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 104, 10639–10654 (1999).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Palma, J. L., Calder, E. S., Basualto, D., Blake, S. & Rothery, D. A. Correlations between SO2 flux, seismicity, and outgassing activity at the open vent of Villarrica volcano, Chile. J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 113, B10201 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. ES: Spanish Digital Seismic Network. FDSN https://doi.org/10.7914/SN/ES (1999).

  55. Ripepe, M. et al. Seismic and infrasonic evidences for an impulsive source of the shallow volcanic tremor at Mt. Etna, Italy. Geophys. Res. Lett. 28, 1071–1074 (2001).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Spina, L., Cannata, A., Morgavi, D. & Perugini, D. Degassing behaviour at basaltic volcanoes: new insights from experimental investigations of different conduit geometry and magma viscosity. Earth Sci. Rev. 192, 317–336 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Spina, L., Morgavi, D., Cannata, A., Campeggi, C. & Perugini, D. An experimental device for characterizing degassing processes and related elastic fingerprints: analog volcano seismo-acoustic observations. Rev. Sci. Instrum. 89, 055102 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Spina, L., Cannata, A., Morgavi, D., Privitera, E. & Perugini, D. Seismo-acoustic gliding: an experimental study. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 579, 117344 (2022).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  59. Plank, S. et al. Combining thermal, tri-stereo optical and bi-static InSAR satellite imagery for lava volume estimates: the 2021 Cumbre Vieja eruption. La Palma Sci. Rep. 13, 2057 (2023).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  60. Global Sulfur Dioxide Monitoring (NASA, 2021); https://so2.gsfc.nasa.gov/

  61. Burton, M. et al. Exceptional eruptive CO2 emissions from intra-plate alkaline magmatism in the Canary volcanic archipelago. Commun. Earth Environ. 4, 467 (2023).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Dayton, K. et al. Magmatic storage and volatile fluxes of the 2021 La Palma eruption. Geochem. Geophys. Geosyst. 25, e2024GC011491 (2024).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  63. La Palma (Toulouse Volcanic Ash Advisory Centre, 2021); http://vaac.meteo.fr/volcanoes/la-palma/

  64. Lesher, C. E. & Spera, F. J. in The Encyclopedia of Volcanoes (eds Sigurdsson, H. et al.) 113–141 (Elsevier, 2015).

  65. Giordano, D., Russell, J. K. & Dingwell, D. B. Viscosity of magmatic liquids: a model. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 271, 123–134 (2008).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  66. Beattie, P. Olivine-melt and orthopyroxene-melt equilibria. Contrib. Mineral. Petrol. 115, 103–111 (1993).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  67. Gisbert, G. et al. Reported ultra-low lava viscosities from the 2021 La Palma eruption are potentially biased. Nat. Commun. 14, 6453 (2023).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  68. Shamloo, H. & Kent, A. An appraisal of the observed crystallinities of volcanic materials. Volcanica 7, 105–115 (2024).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. James, M. R., Lane, S. J. & Corder, S. B. Modelling the rapid near-surface expansion of gas slugs in low-viscosity magmas. Geol. Soc. Lond. Spec. Publ. 307, 147–167 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. James, M. R., Lane, S. J., Wilson, L. & Corder, S. B. Degassing at low magma-viscosity volcanoes: quantifying the transition between passive bubble-burst and Strombolian eruption. J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res. 180, 81–88 (2009).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  71. Del Bello, E., Llewellin, E. W., Taddeucci, J., Scarlato, P. & Lane, S. J. An analytical model for gas overpressure in slug-driven explosions: insights into Strombolian volcanic eruptions. J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 117, B02206 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Przeor, M. et al. Geodetic imaging of magma ascent through a bent and twisted dike during the Tajogaite eruption of 2021 (La Palma, Canary Islands). Sci. Rep. 14, 212 (2024).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  73. Corsaro, R. A. & Miraglia, L. Near real-time petrologic monitoring on volcanic glass to infer magmatic processes during the February–April 2021 paroxysms of the South-East Crater, Etna. Front. Earth Sci 10, 828026 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Cooper, K. M. et al. Coordinating science during an eruption: lessons from the 2020–2021 Kīlauea volcanic eruption. Bull. Volcanol. 85, 1–13 (2023).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Steiner, A. E., Conrey, R. M. & Wolff, J. A. PXRF calibrations for volcanic rocks and the application of in-field analysis to the geosciences. Chem. Geol. 453, 35–54 (2017).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  76. Gonnermann, H. M. & Manga, M. in Modeling Volcanic Processes: The Physics and Mathematics of Volcanism (eds Fagents, S. A. et al.) Ch. 4 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2013).

  77. Stix, J., Gauthier, G. & Ludden, J. N. A critical look at quantitative laser-ablation ICP-MS analysis of natural and synthetic glasses. Can. Mineral. 33, 435–444 (1995).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  78. Jochum, K. P. et al. GeoReM: a new geochemical database for reference materials and isotopic standards. Geostand. Geoanal. Res. 29, 333–338 (2005).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  79. Longpré, M.-A., Stix, J., Klügel, A. & Shimizu, N. Mantle to surface degassing of carbon- and sulphur-rich alkaline magma at El Hierro, Canary Islands. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 460, 268–280 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  80. Longpré, M.-A., Tramontano, S. & Pankhurst, M. J. Daily Time Series of Matrix Glass Composition from Tephra Samples from the 2021 Tajogaite Eruption at Cumbre Vieja Volcano (La Palma, Canary Islands) Version 1.0 (IEDA, accessed 12 November 2024); https://doi.org/10.60520/IEDA/113537

  81. Roman, D. C. & Cashman, K. V. Top–down precursory volcanic seismicity: implications for ‘stealth’magma ascent and long-term eruption forecasting. Front. Earth Sci. 6, 124 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  82. Klügel, A., Longpré, M.-A., García-Cañada, L. & Stix, J. Deep intrusions, lateral magma transport and related uplift at ocean island volcanoes. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 431, 140–149 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  83. Mezcua, J. & Rueda, J. Seismic swarms and earthquake activity b-value related to the September 19, 2021, La Palma volcano eruption in Cumbre Vieja, Canary Islands (Spain). Bull. Volcanol. 85, 32 (2023).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  84. Yang, Y., Liu, C. & Langston, C. A. Processing seismic ambient noise data with the continuous wavelet transform to obtain reliable empirical Green’s functions. Geophys. J. Int. 222, 1224–1235 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  85. Seydoux, L., Shapiro, N. M., de Rosny, J., Brenguier, F. & Landès, M. Detecting seismic activity with a covariance matrix analysis of data recorded on seismic arrays. Geophys. J. Int. 204, 1430–1442 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  86. Soubestre, J. et al. Network‐based detection and classification of seismovolcanic tremors: example from the Klyuchevskoy volcanic group in Kamchatka. J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 123, 564–582 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  87. Soubestre, J. et al. Depth migration of seismovolcanic tremor sources below the Klyuchevskoy volcanic group (Kamchatka) determined from a network‐based analysis. Geophys. Res. Lett. 46, 8018–8030 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  88. Putirka, K. D. Thermometers and barometers for volcanic systems. Rev. Mineral. Geochem. 69, 61–120 (2008).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  89. Ghiorso, M. S. & Gualda, G. A. R. An H2O–CO2 mixed fluid saturation model compatible with rhyolite-MELTS. Contrib. Mineral. Petrol. 169, 53 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  90. Iacovino, K., Matthews, S., Wieser, P. E., Moore, G. M. & Bégué, F. VESIcal part I: an open‐source thermodynamic model engine for mixed volatile (H2O–CO2) solubility in silicate melts. Earth Space Sci. 8, e2020EA001584 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank the PEVOLCA committee for providing field access during the 2021 eruption and B. Black, T. Plank, E. Lev, J. Birnbaum, J. Crozier, C. Journeau and Z. Duputel for stimulating discussions and comments. C. Martin and K. Hammond provided technical support during electron microprobe work. Financial support for this research was provided by US National Science Foundation Award # 1944723 and the Paula and Jeffrey Gural Endowed Professorship in Geology to M.-A.L.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, Queens College, City University of New York, New York, NY, USA

    Marc-Antoine Longpré, Samantha Tramontano & Franco Cortese

  2. Earth and Environmental Sciences, The Graduate Center, City University of New York, New York, NY, USA

    Marc-Antoine Longpré, Samantha Tramontano & Franco Cortese

  3. Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, American Museum of Natural History, New York, NY, USA

    Samantha Tramontano

  4. Instituto Volcanológico de Canarias, Puerto de la Cruz, Spain

    Matthew J. Pankhurst, Fátima Rodríguez, Beverley Coldwell, Alba Martín-Lorenzo, Olivia Barbee & Luca D’Auria

  5. Gaiaxiom, Copenhagen, Denmark

    Matthew J. Pankhurst

  6. Earth and Planets Laboratory, Carnegie Institution for Science, Washington, DC, USA

    Diana C. Roman

  7. Department of Geosciences, Gutenberg University of Mainz, Mainz, Germany

    Miriam C. Reiss

  8. Lancaster Environment Centre, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK

    Mike R. James

  9. Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia, Sezione di Roma1, Rome, Italy

    Laura Spina

  10. Instituto Tecnológico y de Energías Renovables, Granadilla de Abona, Spain

    Beverley Coldwell, Alba Martín-Lorenzo & Luca D’Auria

  11. School of Environmental Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK

    Katy J. Chamberlain

  12. Departamento de Mineralogía y Petrología, Universidad de Granada, Granada, Spain

    Jane H. Scarrow

Authors
  1. Marc-Antoine Longpré
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Samantha Tramontano
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Matthew J. Pankhurst
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Diana C. Roman
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Miriam C. Reiss
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Franco Cortese
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Mike R. James
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Laura Spina
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Fátima Rodríguez
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Beverley Coldwell
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Alba Martín-Lorenzo
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Olivia Barbee
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  13. Luca D’Auria
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  14. Katy J. Chamberlain
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  15. Jane H. Scarrow
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

M.-A.L., S.T. and M.J.P. conceptualized the study. Fieldwork was carried out by M.J.P., S.T., F.C., F.R., B.C., A.M.-L., O.B., J.H.S., K.J.C. and M.-A.L. Sample preparation and EPMA data collection were performed by S.T., while F.C. conducted image analysis and prepared Extended Data Fig. 3. L.D’A. collected and curated the seismic data from the INVOLCAN network. D.C.R. and M.C.R. analysed tremor data and drafted Extended Data Figs. 4 and 6–9. M.J.P. prepared Fig. 1. Data analysis was undertaken by M.-A.L. and S.T., with M.R.J. and L.S. contributing to data interpretation. M.-A.L. drafted the remaining figures and wrote the manuscript, with contributions from S.T and all authors.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marc-Antoine Longpré.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Peer review

Peer review information

Nature Geoscience thanks Christian Huber and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work. Primary handling editor: Alison Hunt, in collaboration with the Nature Geoscience team.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Extended data

Extended Data Fig. 1 Glass composition time series.

(a) TiO2, (b) Al2O3, (c), MgO, (d) Na2O, (e) K2O, (f) P2O5, (g) S and (h) Cl concentrations as a function of time. Bulk rock data are from Day et al.28 and lava matrix data are from Ubide et al.42. Note the strong decoupling of glass and bulk rock data for some elements (for example, Ti, Mg, Na), particularly in the first week and last two weeks of the eruption. Vertical grey error bars show one standard deviation based on 3–13 analyses on at least two ash clasts per sample, whereas horizontal error bars indicate the ash sampling time span. Error bars are not shown when smaller than symbol size. Black error bars for lava matrix data are one standard deviation from 7–10 analyses42.

Extended Data Fig. 2 Volatile elements.

(a) Sulfur and (b) chlorine concentrations (ppm) vs. SiO2 in our tephra glass samples, compared with published data on melt inclusions, embayments, and tephra glasses61,62. Data from this work are presented as means of 3–13 analyses on at least two ash clasts per sample, with grey error bars displaying one standard deviation. Sulfur in tephra glasses (280–640 ppm S) is much lower than in melt inclusions due to extensive degassing, whereas chlorine (620–1290 ppm) shows incompatible behavior and little to no degassing. (c) H2O and (d) total (glass + bubble) CO2 contents in melt inclusions and tephra glasses. Data from Dayton et al.62. A sample from the first few days of the eruption shows higher H2O (but similar CO2) than a late-stage sample approximately dated to December 2021. Solubility at 0.1 MPa (1 bar) is shown as a red line. (e) H2O and (f) CO2 solubility as a function of pressure for low- and high-SiO2 melt endmembers. All volatile solubility calculations were performed using MagmaSat89 via VESIcal90, assuming a mole fraction of H2O in the fluid of 0.4 (ref. 61) (Methods).

Extended Data Fig. 3 Image analysis example for crystallinity and vesicularity estimates.

(a) Backscattered electron image of a representative Type A ash clast from sample CAN-TLP-0212. (b–f) Traced amounts of vesicles, clinopyroxene, olivine, plagioclase, and Fe-Ti oxides used to calculate vesicularity and crystallinity. For this sample, we obtain a vesicularity of 11.0 vol% and a vesicle-free crystallinity of 25.6 vol% (Cpx: 11.2 vol%; Plag: 9.5 vol%; Ol: 2.9 vol%; Ox: 2.0 vol%).

Extended Data Fig. 4 Spectral width for seismic stations from the IGN network.

Panel (a) shows the whole eruption period, whereas (b) and (c) respectively focus on the onset and end of the tremor signal on 19 September and 13 December.

Extended Data Fig. 5 Regression analysis and supplementary monitoring data.

Regression analysis for resampled (daily averages) and normalized time series of tremor amplitude at station PLPI in the (a) 1–3 Hz and (b) 0.35–1 Hz bands versus melt SiO2 content, and 1–3 Hz versus (c) number of discrete earthquakes in the crustal cluster36, (d) SO2 mass60, (e) TADR59, and (f) ash plume height63. Panels (g–i) respectively show SO2 mass, TADR, and ash plume height against SiO2 content. Solid black lines are linear best-fits through the data, with associated correlation coefficient (r) and p-value in black font. Data analysis is based on the two-sided t-test. Dashed grey lines are fits forced through the origin, with associated r in grey font.

Extended Data Fig. 6 Single solution for a tremor location for the onset of the eruption on 19 September 2021, 13:50.

Blue triangles show seismic stations that were utilized. Colors denote the network response (white to dark red showing small to large values). The white diamond corresponds to the highest network response, which we infer is the location of the tremor, and the black star is the eruption site.

Extended Data Fig. 7 Tremor locations for 17–24 September 2021.

Cyan circles indicate tremor density, where the size of the circle corresponds to the number of tremors (n) locating at that grid point. Yellow triangles show seismic stations and the black star shows the eruption site.

Extended Data Fig. 8 Tremor locations for 15–21 October 2021.

Symbols as in Extended Data Fig. 7.

Extended Data Fig. 9 Tremor locations for 21–27 November 2021.

Symbols as in Extended Data Fig. 7.

Extended Data Fig. 10 Experimental evidence for the effects of liquid viscosity.

(a) Amplitude of analogue acoustic signal as a function of gas flux in laboratory experiments56. Symbols mark the average 75th percentile values for three experiments (230–525 observations per experiment, over 46–105 s using a 0.2 s sliding window) conducted with different conduit roughness, with downward error bars showing the average interquartile range. Symbols are color-coded according to liquid viscosity (η) of the experiments and symbol shape indicates the observed flow regime (bubbly, slug, or annular, see Fig. 5a). (b) Recurrence rate of gas slug burst events vs. gas flux. (c) Slug ascent velocity against liquid viscosity. Both (b) and (c) show experiments in the slug regime only, with data presented as means ± one standard deviation (not shown when smaller than symbol) of three experimental runs conducted with varying conduit roughness.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Tables

Table S1: Sample metadata. Table S2: Standard data. Table S3: Raw EPMA data. Table S4: Corrected EPMA data. Table S5: Crystallinity and vesicularity data. Table S6: Tremor amplitude data. Table S7: Monitoring data and model calculations. Table S8: Normalized daily time series for regression analysis, with regression statistics.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Longpré, MA., Tramontano, S., Pankhurst, M.J. et al. Shifting melt composition linked to volcanic tremor at Cumbre Vieja volcano. Nat. Geosci. 18, 175–183 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-024-01623-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-024-01623-x

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing