Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download Pressures of Crystallization of Icelandic Magmas
Document related concepts
no text concepts found
Transcript
JOURNAL OF PETROLOGY VOLUME 49 NUMBER 3 PAGES 465^492 2008 doi:10.1093/petrology/egm089 Pressures of Crystallization of Icelandic Magmas DANIEL F. KELLEY* AND MICHAEL BARTON DIVISION OF EARTH AND PLANETARY DYNAMICS, SCHOOL OF EARTH SCIENCES, THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY, COLUMBUS, OH 43210, USA RECEIVED FEBRUARY 20, 2007; ACCEPTED DECEMBER 14, 2007 Iceland lies astride the Mid-Atlantic Ridge and was created by seafloor spreading that began about 55 Ma. The crust is anomalously thick (20^40 km), indicating higher melt productivity in the underlying mantle compared with normal ridge segments as a result of the presence of a mantle plume or upwelling centered beneath the northwestern edge of the Vatnajo« kull ice sheet. Seismic and volcanic activity is concentrated in 50 km wide neovolcanic or rift zones, which mark the subaerial Mid-Atlantic Ridge, and in three flank zones. Geodetic and geophysical studies provide evidence for magma chambers located over a range of depths (15^21km) in the crust, with shallow magma chambers beneath some volcanic centers (Katla, Grimsvo« tn, Eyjafjallajo« kull), and both shallow and deep chambers beneath others (e.g. Krafla and Askja). We have compiled analyses of basalt glass with geochemical characteristics indicating crystallization of ol^plag^cpx from 28 volcanic centers in the Western, Northern and Eastern rift zones as well as from the Southern Flank Zone. Pressures of crystallization were calculated for these glasses, and confirm that Icelandic magmas crystallize over a wide range of pressures (0001 to 1 GPa), equivalent to depths of 0^35 km. This range partly reflects crystallization of melts en route to the surface, probably in dikes and conduits, after they leave intracrustal chambers. We find no evidence for a shallow chamber beneath Katla, which probably indicates that the shallow chamber identified in other studies contains silica-rich magma rather than basalt. There is reasonably good correlation between the depths of deep chambers (417 km) and geophysical estimates of Moho depth, indicating that magma ponds at the crust^mantle boundary. Shallow chambers (571km) are located in the upper crust, and probably form at a level of neutral buoyancy. There are also discrete chambers at intermediate depths (11km beneath the rift zones), and there is strong evidence for cooling and crystallizing magma bodies or pockets throughout the middle and lower crust that might resemble a crystal mush. The results suggest that the middle and lower crust is relatively hot and porous. It is suggested that crustal accretion occurs over a range of depths similar to those in recent models for accretionary processes at mid-ocean ridges. *Corresponding author. Telephone: (614)-292-2721. Fax: (614)-292-7688. E-mail: [email protected] The presence of multiple stacked chambers and hot, porous crust suggests that magma evolution is complex and involves polybaric crystallization, magma mixing, and assimilation. KEY WORDS: Iceland rift zones; cotectic crystallization; pressure; depth; magma chamber; volcanic glass I N T RO D U C T I O N There is considerable interest in the depths of magma chambers beneath active volcanoes in Iceland (e.g. Soosalu & Einarsson, 2004; Sturkell et al., 2006) for four main reasons. First, knowledge of the depths of magma chambers is important for interpreting precursory activity (seismic, deformation, gas emissions, etc.) to volcanic eruptions, and therefore for forecasting eruptions (e.g. Marti & Folch, 2005). Second, knowledge of the depths of chambers provides constraints on models for magma evolution, because phase relationships and melt compositions vary as a function of pressure (e.g. O’Hara, 1968; Thy, 1991; Grove et al., 1992; Yang et al., 1996). Third, knowledge of the distribution of magma bodies is important to understand thermal gradients, which affect variations in density and seismic velocity in the crust (e.g. Kelley et al., 2005). Fourth, knowledge of the locations and sizes of magma chambers is essential to understand mechanisms of crustal accretion and differentiation (e.g. Pan & Batiza, 2002, 2003). Various methods have been used to estimate magma chamber depths in Icelandic crust (Table 1). Most recent studies utilize geodetic techniques (see Sturkell et al., 2006), and yield results that in many cases (e.g. Krafla, Grimsvo«tn, Katla, possibly Torfajo«kull) agree with those estimated using geophysical methods (see Table 1), although a magma chamber identified at a depth of 7 km beneath Hengill^Hro¤mundartindur from geodetic data ß The Author 2008. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@ oxfordjournals.org JOURNAL OF PETROLOGY VOLUME 49 NUMBER 3 MARCH 2008 Table 1: Summary of estimates of magma chamber depth Center Method Depth (km) Krafla Seismology 3–57 Einarsson, 1978 Geodesy/gravity 3 Bjornsson et al., 1979 Geodesy 3 Tryggvason, 1980 Magnetotelluric 3, 5–7 Björnsson, 1985 Tryggvason, 1986 Geodesy 3, 5–10, 420 Geodesy 3 Ewart et al., 1991 Seismology 3 Brandsdottir et al., 1997 Geodesy 3 Sigmundsson et al., 1997 Geodesy 3, 45 Arnadottir et al., 1998 Geodesy/gravity 25 Rymer et al., 1998 Geodesy 24, 21 de Zeeuw-van Dalfsen et al., 2004 Geodesy/gravity 28, 21 de Zeeuw-van Dalfsen et al., 2006 424, 21 Depth range Theistareykir Petrology 30 Slater et al., 2001 Petrology 10–31 Maclennan et al., 2001 Depth range Bláfjall 10–31 Petrology 7–10, 14 Schiellerup, 1995 Petrology 2–7, 14–26 Schiellerup, 1995 42, 26 Depth range Askja Geodesy 15–35 Tryggvason, 1989 Geodesy 15–35 Rymer & Tryggvasson, 1993 Geodesy 15–35 Sturkell & Sigmundsson, 2000 Geodesy/gravity 3, 16 de Zeeuw-van Dalfsen et al., 2005 Geodesy 3, 20 Pagli et al., 2006 Geodesy 3, 16 Sturkell et al., 2006 415, 20 Depth range Grimsvötn Reference Gravity/magnetics 15–4 Gudmundsson & Milsom, 1997 Geodesy 416 Sturkell et al., 2003 Teleseismic P-wave delays 3–4 km Alfaro et al., 2007 415, 4 Depth range Kistufell Petrology 435 Breddam, 2002 Torfajökull Magnetotelluric 10–15, 15–25 Eysteinsson & Hermance, 1985 Gudmundsson, 1988 Magnetotelluric, geotherm 43 Seismology 8 Soosalu & Einarsson, 1997 Petrology 47 Gunnarsson et al., 1998 Seismology 8, 415 Soosalu & Einarsson, 2004 Seismology 514 Soosalu et al., 2006a Geodesy 8 Sturkell et al., 2006 43, 25 Depth range (continued) 466 KELLEY AND BARTON CRYSTALLIZATION PRESSURE OF ICELANDIC MAGMAS Table 1: Continued Center Method Depth (km) Hekla Geodesy 8 Kjartansson & Grönvold, 1983 Magnetotelluric 8 Eysteinsson & Hermance, 1985 Geodesy 9 Sigmundsson et al., 1992 Geodesy 65 Linde et al., 1993 Geodesy 50–60 Tryggvason, 1994a,b Geodesy 465 Jónsson et al., 2003 Seismic ?14 Soosalu & Einarsson, 2004 Geodesy 11 Sturkell et al., 2006 45, 414 Depth range Katla Seismology 3 Gudmundsson et al., 1994 Geodesy 47 Sturkell et al., 2003 Seismology 2 Soosalu et al., 2006b 42, 47 Depth range Eyjafjallajökull Geodesy 35 Sturkell et al., 2003 Geodesy 63 Pedersen & Sigmundsson, 2004, 2006 435, 63 Depth range Vestmannaeyjar Einarsson & Bjornsson, 1980 Seismology 15–25 Seismology 10–15 Gebrande et al., 1980 Petrology 18–28, 28–35 Furman et al., 1991 Petrology 10–17 Thy, 1991 410, 35 Depth range Hengill–Hrómundartindur Reference Petrology 8–11 Hansteen, 1991 Geodesy 7 Sigmundsson et al., 1997 Geodesy 7 Feigl et al., 2000 Depth range 7–11 Króksfjördur Petrology 55 Thingmuli Petrology 35 Jónasson et al., 1992 Frost and Lindsley, 1992 Snaefell Petrology 13 Hards et al., 2000 Austerhorn Petrology 2 Furman et al., 1991 Estimated from Schiellerup (1995, fig. 4). has not been identified from seismic data (Soosalu & Einarsson, 2004). There are shallow chambers beneath Katla, Grimsvo«tn and Eyjafjallajo«kull, deep chambers beneath Vestmannaeyjar, both shallow and deep chambers beneath Krafla and Askja, and intermediate depth chambers beneath Hekla and Torfajo«kull. These data, along with evidence for lateral transport of magma along fissures and mixing of magmas from different centers (Sigurdsson & Sparks, 1978, 1981; McGarvie, 1984; Mrk, 1984; Fagents et al., 2001), suggest extremely complex magma dynamics. Geodetic and geophysical methods are most useful for locating chambers beneath active volcanoes, whereas petrological methods allow the depths of magma chambers beneath both active and inactive volcanic centers to be determined. Various petrological techniques are used to determine the pressure, and hence depth, of crystallization 467 JOURNAL OF PETROLOGY VOLUME 49 (Table 1), but some of the results reported for Icelandic magmas (Table 1) are only qualitative. Nevertheless, petrological estimates agree well with those obtained using other methods when direct comparison is possible (e.g. Hengill, Torfajo«kull, and Vestmannaeyjar). In this paper we report new estimates of the pressures of crystallization of Icelandic magmas and use these to determine the depths of magma chambers. Pressures of crystallization are determined from experimentally established phase equilibrium constraints using the method described by Yang et al. (1996). The results differ from those obtained in previous studies in two respects. First, quantitative pressure estimates were obtained using the compositions of glasses, which unambiguously represent pre-eruptive liquid compositions. Second, pressures were determined using glasses from 28 localities so that the results are applicable to a wide geographical area, and can be interpreted in terms of crustal thickness. We discuss the implications of the results for the structure and accretion of the crust, for geothermal gradients, and for magma evolution. G E O L O G I C A L B AC KG RO U N D Iceland lies astride the Mid-Atlantic Ridge (MAR) and is characterized by crust that is 20^40 km thick (Bjarnason et al., 1993; Darbyshire et al., 1998, 2000a, b; Menke et al., 1998; Kaban et al., 2003; Foulger et al., 2003; Leftwich et al., 2005) compared with the 71 09 km thick normal MAR crust (White et al., 1992; Bown & White, 1994). The anomalously thick crust indicates higher melt productivity in the underlying mantle compared with normal ridge segments (White & McKenzie, 1995). The higher melt productivity, together with geochemical differences between Icelandic basalts and normal mid-ocean ridge basalt (N-MORB; e.g. Schilling, 1973), provides evidence for a mantle plume or upwelling centred beneath the northwestern edge of the Vatnajo«kull ice sheet (Breddam et al., 2000; Darbyshire et al., 2000a; Leftwich et al., 2005; Fig. 1). Alternative hypotheses to account for high melt productivity in the sub-Icelandic mantle have been discussed by Foulger & Anderson (2005) and Foulger et al. (2005). The full spreading rate for Iceland is 18^20 mm/year (LaFemina et al., 2005). The subaerial ridge forms 50 km wide neovolcanic or rift zones characterized by abundant seismic and volcanic activity (Fig. 1). The Western Volcanic Zone (WVZ) and the Northern Volcanic Zone (NVZ) formed at 7 Ma following eastward relocation of the spreading axis from the Snaefellsnes area (Hardarson et al., 1997). The WVZ can be traced across the Reykjanes Peninsula extensional leaky transform to the Reykjanes Ridge (RR), whereas the NVZ is offset from the Kolbeinsey Ridge (KR) by the 120 km long right-lateral Tjo«rnes Transform Fault. Propagation of the NVZ to the SW at 3 Ma (Steinthorsson et al., 1985) formed the Eastern Volcanic Zone (EVZ), so that spreading is NUMBER 3 MARCH 2008 partitioned between the WVZ and EVZ in southern Iceland. These rift zones are connected by the complex South Iceland Seismic Zone (SISZ), which accommodates left-lateral transform motion, and by the Mid-Iceland Belt (MIB), which may be a leaky transform (Oskarsson et al., 1985; LaFemina et al., 2005) or a non-transform relay zone (Sinton et al., 2005). The neovolcanic zones are mostly covered by basalt flows younger than 08 Ma. About 30 en echelon volcanic systems have been recognized, which mostly consist of central shield or composite volcanoes transected by fissure swarms. Eruptions from both volcanoes and fissure systems occur in the WVZ and NVZ, but central volcanoes are lacking in the EVZ. Many central volcanoes have calderas with typical dimensions of 3 km 4 km, whereas fissure swarms are 5^20 km wide and 40^150 km long, and are often characterized by crater rows formed by scoria and spatter. Other volcanic features include small lava shields, tuff rings and maars, as well as hyaloclastite ridges, hyaloclastite cones and table mountains (tuyas) produced by sub-glacial and sub-aqueous eruptions. Olivine tholeiites and tholeiites dominate the volcanic products, but intermediate and acid volcanic rocks are also erupted, especially at central volcanoes. Volcanic activity also occurs in three off-rift flank zones (Fig. 1): the Western Flank Zone (WFZ), the Southern Flank Zone (SFZ), and the Eastern Flank Zone (EFZ). Eruptions occur at large shield or composite volcanoes with calderas, and at small lava shields, tuff rings and scoria cones. However, the extensive fissure swarms characteristic of the rift zones are absent, and eruptions produce transitional and alkaline basalts along with intermediate and silicic compositions (Meyer et al., 1985; Oskarsson et al., 1985). Volcanic products along the NVZ, EVZ and SFZ change from tholeiitic basalts in northern and central Iceland to Fe^Ti-rich transitional basalts in southern Iceland and alkali basalts in Vestmannaeyjar. M E T H O D S A N D DATA Method for determining pressure of crystallization Various petrological techniques can be used to estimate the pressure (P) and hence depth (z) of crystallization of magmas (Table 1). The most appropriate method for use with a large number of samples is based on comparing the compositions of erupted melts with those of liquids lying along P-dependent phase boundaries. Many basalt magmas crystallize olivine (ol), plagioclase (plag), and clinopyroxene (cpx), and their compositions can be compared with those of liquids lying along the ol^plag^cpx cotectic boundary. The effect of pressure on the latter has been determined experimentally (e.g. O’Hara, 1968; Grove et al., 1992), and can be seen by recasting melt 468 KELLEY AND BARTON CRYSTALLIZATION PRESSURE OF ICELANDIC MAGMAS Fig. 1. Location of important geological features of Iceland. RR, Reykjanes Ridge; KR, Kolbeinsey Ridge; NVZ, Northern Volcanic Zone; EVZ, Eastern Volcanic Zone; WVZ, Western Volcanic Zone; WFZ, Western Flank Zone; SFZ, Southern Flank Zone; EFZ, Eastern Flank Zone; RP, Reykjanes Peninsula; TFZ, Tjornes Fracture Zone, SISZ, South Iceland Seismic Zone, MIB, Mid Iceland Belt; SP, Snaefjellsnes Peninsula; V, Vatnajo«kull Glacier; L, Langjo«kull Glacier, and sample localities; Th, Theistareykir; Hb, Herdubreid; Bu, Burfell; Bf, Bla¤fjall Ridge; Ha, Halar; Se, Seljahjalli; As, Askja; Hr, Hrimalda; Gi, Gigoldur; Sp, Sprengisandur; Ki, Kistufell; Kv, Kverkfjoll; Ba, Bardabunga; Gr, Grimsvo«tn; Vd, Veidivo«tn; Lk, Laki; La, Langjo«kull; Hl, Hlodufell; Ra, Raudafell; E, Efstadalsfjall; Kf, Kalfstindar; Tg, Thingvellir; T, Torfajokull; He, Hengill (includes Midfell and Maelifell); Ka, Katla; Hk, Hekla; Ge, Geitafell. Shaded areas indicate volcanically active regions. It should be noted that samples from Sprengisandur were collected to the NW of the Tungnafellsjo«kull volcanic system (Meyer et al., 1985), but are believed to originate from this center. In addition, pressures have been calculated for two samples from unspecified localities in the NVZ (NE) and the Reykjanes Peninsula (Rk) (Meyer et al., 1985). compositions into normative mineral components and projecting phase relations onto pseudoternary planes in the system CaO^MgO^Al2O3^SiO2. Projection of phase relationships from plag onto the plane ol^cpx^qtz using the recalculation procedure of Walker et al. (1979) clearly shows the shift of the ol^plag^cpx cotectic towards ol with increasing P (Fig. 2). Crystallization pressure can be estimated by comparing the projected compositions of natural samples with the locations of cotectics on such diagrams, and this method has been used to estimate crystallization pressures for Hengill by Trnnes (1990), for Bla¤fjall Table Mountain by Schiellerup (1995), for Kistufell by Breddam (2002), and for Theistareykir by Maclennan et al. (2001). The shift of the ol^plag^cpx cotectic towards ol and plag (see O’Hara, 1968; Grove et al., 1992) reflects the different pressure dependences of cpx^liq, ol^liq and plag^liq equilibria, with higher pressure favouring earlier crystallization of cpx. This results in the development of a trend of decreasing CaO with decreasing MgO in liquids at an earlier stage of crystallization. Weaver & Langmuir (1990), Langmuir et al. (1992), Danyushevsky et al. (1996), Yang et al. (1996), and Herzberg (2004) have proposed models to quantitatively estimate the crystallization pressure based on such relationships. These models are all calibrated with experimental data, and we have elected to use that of Yang et al. (1996), who presented equations that describe the composition of liquids along the ol^plag^cpx cotectic as a function of P and T. Hence, the composition of the liquid is used to predict the P (and T) of saturation with ol, plag and cpx, as illustrated in Fig. 3 using two glass analyses from Bla¤fjall Table Mountain (Schiellerup, 1995). A series of liquid compositions that lie on the ol^plag^cpx cotectic have been calculated from each glass analysis at increments of 100 MPa. These predicted liquid compositions have been converted to normative mineral 469 JOURNAL OF PETROLOGY VOLUME 49 Fig. 2. Position of the ol^plag^cpx cotectic at different pressures projected from plagioclase onto the pseudoternary plane Ol^Cpx^Qtz using the method described by Walker et al. (1979). Pressures of cotectic given in GPa. Locations of cotectics based on experimental data from Bender et al. (1978), Walker et al. (1979), Grove & Bryan (1983), Spulber & Rutherford (1983), Baker & Eggler (1987), Sack et al. (1987), Tormey et al. (1987), Juster et al. (1989), Kinzler & Grove (1992), Shi (1993), Thy & Lofgren (1994) and Yang et al. (1996). LOPC, liquid-olivineplagioclase-clinopyroxene cotectic. components assuming that Fe ¼ FeO and projected from plag onto the plane ol^cpx^qtz using the procedure of Tormey et al. (1987) as modified by Grove et al. (1993). Comparison of observed glass compositions and predicted liquid compositions indicates crystallization at 100 MPa for sample 1.8.5 and 670 MPa for sample 1.8.1. These pressures agree with those estimated by Schiellerup (1995) for crystallization of units BII and BI at this locality. Rather than use graphical methods, we have calculated pressures using the procedure described in Appendix A. An assessment of the accuracy (110 MPa, 1s) and precision (80 MPa, 1s) of the calculated pressures is given in Appendix B. Herzberg (2004) noted that pressures obtained with his method can differ significantly (up to 300 MPa) from those obtained using the method of Yang et al. (1996). The methods were calibrated with different sets of experimental data, but even so the reason for this discrepancy is not clear. We believe that the method used in this paper yields reliable results for the following reasons: (1) Yang et al. (1996) obtained results for MORB and Hawaiian samples that are consistent with those obtained by other methods; (2) pressures estimated by Maclennan et al. (2001) for basalts from Krafla and Theistareykir using the Yang et al. (1996) method agree with those obtained from clinopyroxene geobarometry; (3) pressures calculated for samples from Midfell in this work agree to better than 60 MPa NUMBER 3 MARCH 2008 Fig. 3. Comparison of predicted melt compositions saturated with ol^plag^cpx at pressures between 0001 and 1GPa and observed glass composition for two samples (1-8-1 and 1-8-5) from Bla¤fjall Table Mountain (Schiellerup, 1995). *, Predicted melt compositions at increments of 01GPa for each sample; , analyzed composition of glass in sample 1.8.1; g, analyzed composition of glass in sample 1.8.5. Melt compositions have been converted to normative mineral components and projected from plag onto the pseudoternary plane ol^cpx^qtz using the procedure of Tormey et al. (1987). Comparison of predicted and observed melt compositions indicates crystallization at 067 GPa for sample 1.8.1 and 01GPa for sample 1.8.5. with results obtained by Gurenko & Sobolev (2006) using the method of Danyushevsky et al. (1996), and to better than 80 MPa with results obtained by these workers using clinopyroxene geobarometry; (4) the results obtained in the present study yield estimates of the depths of magma chambers that are consistent with those obtained using geodetic, geophysical, or other petrological methods. In addition, we find that Herzberg’s (2004) method yields negative and therefore unrealistic pressures for 22% of the samples used to constrain the depth of magma crystallization in this paper. Nevertheless, it is apparent that more experimental data are needed to refine petrological methods used for the geobarometry of magmas. In particular, there is need for additional experiments to more closely establish the composition of liquids along the ol^plag^cpx cotectics for a range of basalt compositions over the pressure range 100^1000 MPa. The implications of using the Herzberg (2004) method to calculate crystallization pressures for Icelandic magmas are briefly discussed below in the section ‘Interpretation of pressure’. Samples Volcanic activity on Iceland produces about 012 km3/year of fresh lava, hyaloclastite, scoria and spatter. Many recently erupted samples contain glass; especially those erupted in sub-glacial and sub-aqueous environments. Glass analyses are preferable to whole-rock 470 KELLEY AND BARTON CRYSTALLIZATION PRESSURE OF ICELANDIC MAGMAS analyses for calculating the crystallization pressure, because glasses represent samples of quenched melts. Therefore, glasses formed from liquids in equilibrium with ol, plag and cpx should have compositions that lie exactly on the cotectic at the pressure of crystallization. Some whole-rock samples represent melts, but others represent mixtures of crystals and melt. It cannot be assumed that the latter formed by closed-system crystallization, because the crystals may be of accumulative origin or may represent xenocrysts (e.g. Trnnes, 1990; Hansteen, 1991; Re¤villon et al., 1999; Hansen & Gro«nvold, 2000). In such cases, the whole-rock samples do not represent melts and this explains why many whole-rock compositions are displaced from glass compositions in pseudoternary projections (Fig. 4). The erroneous assumption that whole-rock samples represent melts can lead to large errors in pressure estimates (up to 1000 MPa for the examples shown in Fig. 4). We have compiled 524 published glass analyses from localities listed in the Supplementary Data (available for downloading at http://www.petrology.oxfordjournals.org) and shown in Fig. 1. Most glasses are from localities in the NVZ, WVZ, and EVZ, but 44 are from Hekla and Katla in the SFZ. We also compiled 201 analyses of glasses in melt inclusions. The compositions of melt inclusions can be modified by post-entrapment crystallization and diffusive re-equilibration with the host mineral (e.g. Danyushevsky et al., 2002). Therefore, we used only those inclusion glasses with compositions that plot along and within arrays defined by groundmass glasses on variation diagrams. Using this criterion, 64 glass inclusion analyses were selected and used to supplement data for groundmass glasses. Compositional data for samples from each locality are summarized in Table 1 of the Supplementary Data. Detailed discussion of chemical variations shown by the glasses is beyond the scope of this paper, and we describe only the general compositional characteristics along with evidence that these characteristics are consistent with crystallization of ol, plag and cpx. Based on their SiO2 to Na2O þ K2O ratios, 584 out of 588 samples can be classified as basalts (Fig. 5a). The remaining samples are basaltic andesites (two from Hengill and two from Askja). In addition, most glasses (553) are tholeiitic (subalkaline) according to the criterion proposed by Macdonald (1968) for Hawaiian lavas (Fig. 5b), and range in composition from olivine tholeiites (normative Ol up to 18 wt %) to quartz tholeiites (normative Q up to 8 wt %). The remaining 35 glasses plot in the alkaline field but only two of these (from Hekla) contain normative nepheline [CIPW norms were calculated with Fe2O3 and FeO contents fixed assuming log fO2 ¼ FMQ 1 (McCann & Barton, 2004), where FMQ is the fayalite^magnetite^quartz buffer] and we therefore consider all of these samples to represent transitional Fig. 4. Comparison of whole-rock and glass analyses for samples from Herdubreid, Geitafell, and Hlodufell in projections from plag onto the pseudoternary plane ol^cpx^qtz using the procedure of Tormey et al. (1987). , Glass analyses; *, whole-rock analyses. All analyses from Moore & Calk (1991). (a) Samples 336, 338, 347 and 350 from Herdubreid. The whole-rock samples have compositions very similar to those of glasses from the same sample and may represent liquids that crystallized at similar pressure to the liquids represented by the glasses. (b) Samples 85T37 and 85T31 from Geitafell. The compositions of the whole-rock samples differ from those of glasses in the same sample and do not represent liquids that crystallized at the same pressure as the liquids represented by the glasses. (c) Samples 85T3 and 85T12 from Hlodufell. The whole-rock composition of 85T3 is different from that of the glass in the same sample and does not represent a liquid that crystallized at the same pressure as the liquid represented by the glass. The whole-rock composition of 85T12 is similar to thatof the glass in the same sample may represent a liquid that crystallized at about the same pressure as the liquid represented by the glass. basalts. All glasses show strong enrichment in FeO as MgO decreases (Fig. 5c). Chemical variations shown by the glasses can be qualitatively explained by crystallization of ol^plag^cpx (spinel) (Figs 5 and 6). Quantitative mass-balance models confirm 471 JOURNAL OF PETROLOGY VOLUME 49 Fig. 5. General chemical characteristics of Icelandic glasses. (a) Total alkalis vs SiO2 (wt %) with boundaries between magma types from LeBas et al. (1986). B, basalt; BA, basaltic andesite; TB, trachybasalt; BTA, basaltic trachyandesite. (b) Total alkalis vs SiO2 showing the boundary between sub-alkaline (SA) or tholeiitic and alkaline (A) compositions proposed by Macdonald (1968) for Hawaiian lavas. (c) MgO vs FeO (wt % total Fe as FeO) illustrating the strong ironenrichment trend developed during differentiation. NUMBER 3 MARCH 2008 Fig. 6. MgO vs Al2O3, CaO, and CaO/Al2O3 (wt %) illustrating chemical variations produced by differentiation. Variations of Al2O3, CaO, and CaO/Al2O3 with MgO allow identification of the mineral phases that crystallized during magma evolution. The decrease in Al2O3 with decreasing MgO (Fig. 7a) is consistent with crystallization of ol þ plag spinel, and many Icelandic basalts contain phenocrysts or microphenocrysts of these minerals (e.g. Meyer et al., 1985). However, the strong decrease in CaO and slight decrease in CaO/ Al2O3 with decreasing MgO (Fig. 7b and c) requires crystallization of cpx (see also Michael & Cornell, 1998; Herzberg, 2004). 472 KELLEY AND BARTON CRYSTALLIZATION PRESSURE OF ICELANDIC MAGMAS that removal of these three phases accounts for majoroxide variations at many localities (e.g. Meyer et al., 1985; Schiellerup, 1995; Maclennan et al., 2001, 2003), but this does not necessarily mean that all glasses represent liquids lying along ol^plag^cpx cotectics. The scatter shown on variation diagrams (Figs 5c and 6) indicates that the basalts do not evolve along a single liquid line of descent (LLD). This might indicate crystallization along ol^plag^cpx cotectics at different pressures (polybaric crystallization), but other explanations are also possible, as described in a later section of this paper (see also Herzberg, 2004). This requires that results for the various localities are evaluated in the context of geochemical and petrographic data. Some samples (24) from the Hengill^Hro¤mundartindur volcanic complex in the WVZ, as well as from Hrimalda, Gigoldur, and Sprengisandur in the NVZ, have anomalously high CaO contents as a result of clinopyroxene assimilation (CaO/Al2O341; see Fig. 6) as discussed by Trnnes (1990). These compositions lie outside the range of those used by Yang et al. (1996) to calibrate the method for pressure calculation. Therefore, we do not report pressures for glasses with anomalously high CaO/Al2O3. R E S U LT S Equilibration pressures Pressures were calculated for all glasses, but some results are unrealistic and others are considered unreliable. The average uncertainty in P calculated for nearly all samples is 5120 MPa, and is similar to that estimated from experimental data (Appendix B). In contrast, uncertainties calculated for 24 of the samples are substantially greater (up to 180 MPa). We consider these pressures to be unreliable, and exclude most of them from further consideration. This has no effect on the conclusions, because similar but more reliable estimates of P are obtained for other samples from the same localities. We made an exception for results obtained for three samples from Kverkfjoll (Hoskuldsson et al., 2006). Pressures calculated for these samples (790^860 160 MPa) are much higher than those obtained for other samples from this locality (490 MPa), and may provide insight into the evolution of magmas at this volcanic center. Pressures calculated for 55 samples lie between 0 and ^100 MPa and can be interpreted as indicating crystallization at 01MPa if uncertainties are taken into account, and indeed positive pressures close to 01MPa are obtained for other samples from these localities. Nevertheless, we exclude all samples that yield negative pressures from further consideration. The results demonstrate that Icelandic magmas crystallize over a wide range of P, from 01MPa to 1000 MPa (Table 2), indicating that magmas evolve over a range of depths in the crust and, perhaps, upper mantle. Few pressures exceed 600 MPa, and the majority of magmas appear to have crystallized at P 300^400 MPa (Fig. 7a). It is important to note that results obtained using the method of Herzberg (2004) also indicate that Icelandic magmas crystallize over a wide range of P, from 01MPa to 750 MPa, although the majority of magmas are predicted to crystallize at 200 MPa rather than the 300^400 MPa found here. There is no correlation between calculated P and MgO (Fig. 7b), and this is unusual in light of the positive correlation between P and MgO demonstrated for MORB glasses by Michael & Cornell (1998). Again, it is important to note that there is also no correlation between MgO and values of P calculated using the method of Herzberg (2004). This indicates that the lack of correlation between P and MgO is not an artifact of our method of calculation. However, for glasses from most localities there is a positive correlation between P and MgO, whereas for glasses from the Hengill complex there is a negative correlation between P and MgO. The unusual negative correlation for the Hengill complex samples is attributed to the effects of crustal assimilation (see discussion below). The apparent lack of correlation between P and MgO in Fig. 7b is therefore the consequence of plotting results for a relatively large number of samples (120) from the Hengill complex together with those for samples from other localities on the same diagram. Magma temperatures were calculated using the method of Yang et al. (1996) (Table 2). Yang et al. (1996) noted that their geothermometer reproduces temperatures to better than 208C for most samples. The range of temperatures obtained for Iceland glasses is 1232^11348C, and is similar to that shown by MORB glasses. A similar range in T (1254^10998C) is obtained using the olivine^melt geothermometer of Sugawara (2000). As expected, there are positive correlations betweenTand P (Fig. 7c) and, with the exception of Hengill (see discussion below), betweenTand MgO. Examples of results from four localities Representative results obtained for samples from four localities are shown in Fig. 8. Results obtained for some localities suggest magma evolution at one pressure, for example, 140 80 MPa at Gigoldur and 750 40 MPa at Kalfstindar (Fig. 8a). Results for other localities such as Bla¤fjall Table Mountain (Fig. 8b) indicate magma evolution at two distinct pressures (590 70 MPa and 100 50 MPa), whereas results for most localities indicate magma evolution over a relatively wide range of pressure rather than at one or two distinct pressures. This is illustrated by results from Laki (380 100 MPa) and Hengill (260 170 MPa) shown in Figs 8c and 9d. The results for Hengill are unusual in that many calculated pressures are close to 01MPa (negative pressures were calculated for 36% of glasses from this locality) and, as described above, there is a negative correlation between P and MgO. 473 JOURNAL OF PETROLOGY VOLUME 49 NUMBER 3 MARCH 2008 Table 2: Summary of calculated pressures and temperatures Zone and locality Pressure (kbar) n Average Temperature (8C) Maximum Minimum Average Maximum Minimum NVZ Theistareykir 17 3201 5551 1314 12099 12182 12000 Herdubreid 22 3957 6574 1734 11914 12129 11735 3 3098 3240 2949 11747 11871 11501 19 3292 6950 172 11938 12152 11728 Halar 5 5111 5834 4206 12049 12129 11970 Seljahjalli 4 7756 9494 7019 12187 12321 12123 Askja 8 2728 5424 1248 11602 11807 11344 Hrimalda 2 1760 2400 1120 11982 12022 11942 Gigoldur 7 1704 2278 814 11965 12027 11903 Sprengisandur 7 3572 5927 538 11802 12046 11647 Kistufell 10 4014 5182 1432 12086 12145 11966 Kverkfjoll 6 5077 8594 895 11778 12007 11494 Northeastern 1 3313 – – 11997 Bardabunga 17 2707 8417 649 11753 12098 11640 Grimsvötn 11 3081 5123 977 11751 11922 11492 Bardabunga–Grimsvötn 28 2842 8417 649 11751 12098 11492 Veidivötn 24 2099 6225 354 11715 11948 11500 Laki 67 3793 7655 1446 11714 11925 11615 Katla 17 4267 6563 1993 11838 12124 11598 Hekla 17 6262 10325 4251 12086 12275 11668 Hekla–Katla 34 5265 10325 1993 11962 12275 11598 Burfell Bláfjall Ridge – – EVZ SFZ WVZ Langjökull 3 2534 6515 347 11934 12168 11787 Hlodufell 19 3566 5234 1682 11835 11985 11702 Raudafell 12 5167 7216 3129 11997 12106 11839 Efstadalsfjall 30 4769 8134 1981 11981 12222 11805 Kalfstindar 10 7450 7711 6509 12171 12189 12109 Thingvellir 10 3746 6274 2206 11940 12057 11819 Midfell 29 998 3694 04 11869 12014 11768 Maelifell 1 140 – – 11892 Hengill 90 3148 7539 175 11824 12176 11422 120 2603 7539 04 11836 12176 11422 12 3999 5360 2814 11851 11977 11784 1 2017 – 462 3496 Hengill Complex – – RP Geitafell Reykjanes All data 10325 – 11846 04 11860 – 12321 Samples from Meyer et al. (1985). Average, maximum, and minimum values based on results obtained for all samples from each locality. 474 – 11344 KELLEY AND BARTON CRYSTALLIZATION PRESSURE OF ICELANDIC MAGMAS Fig. 7. Summary of results obtained for all glasses excluding those considered unrealistic or unreliable (see text for discussion). (a) Histogram indicating range of calculated pressures. (b) Plot of calculated pressure in GPa vs MgO. (c) Plot of T (8C) calculated using the method of Yang et al. (1996) vs P (GPa). DISCUSSION Interpretation of pressure The calculated pressures reflect the pressure of crystallization only for glasses that represent liquids lying along ol^plag^cpx cotectics. Glass analyses from some localities show compositional variations (e.g. increasing CaO and CaO/Al2O3 with decreasing MgO) that are consistent with crystallization of ol^plag rather than of ol^plag^cpx. Glasses from other localities have compositions consistent with ol^plag^cpx crystallization but occur in samples that lack phenocrysts or microphenocrysts of cpx. In other words, petrographic data provide no evidence for ol^plag^ cpx crystallization for these glasses. This is the ‘pyroxene paradox’ recognized for many MORB and other lava suites (e.g. Dungan & Rhodes, 1978; Fisk et al., 1982; Grove et al., 1992; Elthon et al., 1995). There are several possible explanations for this paradox, including: cotectic crystallization of ol^plag^cpx followed by crystallization of ol and plag (with dissolution of cpx) during ascent, magma mixing and crystallization accompanied by assimilation of gabbroic crust (Meyer et al., 1985; Trnnes, 1990; Hansteen, 1991; Schiellerup, 1995; Hansen & Gronvo«ld, 2000; Breddam, 2002; Maclennan et al., 2003; Gurenko & Sobolev, 2006). In principle, the results for each locality can be filtered to identify those melts in equilibrium with ol plag spinel. Most of these provide no constraints on crystallization pressure, but some can be used to place limits on the pressure(s) of ol^plag^cpx cotectic crystallization as illustrated in Fig. 9. (see also Michael & Cornell, 1998; Herzberg, 2004). Melts lying along path a^b in Fig. 9a crystallize ol þ plag and have compositions that do not carry a signature of cpx crystallization. Nominal pressures calculated for these melts do not accurately reflect the pressure of magma evolution, but the lowest calculated pressure (for melts with compositions close to b) represents an upper limit for cotectic crystallization. Melts plotting along the path c^d^e in Fig. 9b isobarically crystallize ol^plag^cpx along the cotectic and then crystallize ol þ plag during ascent. Melts saturated in ol þ plag with compositions between d and e carry a signature of cpx crystallization, but calculated nominal pressures do not accurately reflect the pressure of magma evolution. In this case, the highest pressure (for melts with compositions close to d) represents a lower limit for cotectic crystallization. Mixing of ol plag saturated melts with ol^plag^cpx saturated cotectic melts (Fig. 9c, path f^g^h) will produce hybrids (e.g. path f^h) with the compositional signature of cpx crystallization (Langmuir, 1989). The lowest pressure calculated for the hybrid melts represents an upper limit for cotectic crystallization. There is petrographic evidence that some Icelandic magmas, notably those from the Hengill complex, evolve by crystallization of ol þ plag combined with assimilation of cpx rather than by cotectic crystallization of ol^plag^cpx (Trnnes, 1990; Hansteen, 1991; Gurenko & Sobolev, 2006). If assimilation occurs after melts leave the ol^plag^cpx cotectic and ascend towards the surface (Fig. 9d, path 475 JOURNAL OF PETROLOGY VOLUME 49 NUMBER 3 MARCH 2008 Fig. 8. Histograms illustrating raw (unfiltered) results obtained for samples from various localities. (a) Results for Gigoldur (diagonal shading) indicate crystallization at low pressure, whereas those from Kalfstindar (grey shading) indicate crystallization at high pressure. (b) Results for Bla¤fjall Table Mountain indicate crystallization at two distinct pressures. (c) Glasses from Laki indicate crystallization over a wide range of pressure. (d) Results for the Hengill complex (Hengill, Maelifell, Midfell) indicate crystallization over a wide range of pressure, although many samples appear to have crystallized at P502 GPa. j^k), as appears to be the case at Hengill, the highest calculated pressure represents a lower limit for cotectic crystallization. It should be noted, however, that it is extremely difficult to discriminate between magmas that evolve via ol^plag^cpx cotectic crystallization and those that evolve via ol þ plag crystallization accompanied by assimilation of cpx if petrographic or other (e.g. isotopic) evidence for assimilation is lacking. Indeed, it is possible that the high CaO contents and high CaO/Al2O3 ratios of some glasses reflect assimilation of cpx. Consequently, the estimated pressure of cotectic crystallization may be too low if all samples from one locality (e.g. Hrimalda) have these characteristics (see Fig. 9d). However, the glasses from most localities show a range of CaO and CaO/Al2O3, and it is likely that the highest pressures calculated for these glasses provide a reasonably accurate estimate of the pressure of cotectic crystallization. Plots of P vs MgO for samples from four localities are shown in Fig. 10 to illustrate interpretation of the results in light of the relationships described above. For each locality, plots of CaO and CaO/Al2O3 vs MgO, together with available petrographic data, were used to discriminate between ol þ plag þ cpx saturated melts and ol plag spinel saturated melts. For both Herdubreid and Hlodufell (Fig. 10a and b), there is a positive correlation between P and MgO for glasses in equilibrium with ol plag spinel whereas there is no correlation between P and MgO for glasses in equilibrium with ol þ plag þ cpx. Calculated pressures for ol^plag^cpx saturated melts from Herdubreid (Fig. 10a) define two arrays parallel to the MgO axis that are interpreted to indicate cotectic crystallization at 480 30 MPa and 310 20 MPa. The low pressure calculated for one sample could be an aberrant result, possibly caused by analytical error, or could indicate crystallization along an even lower pressure cotectic (170 MPa). This interpretation is preferred because results obtained for other localities (Hlodufell, Grimsvo«tn, Efstadalsfjall, Askja, Hrimalda, Kverkfjoll, Theistareykir, Thingvellir) also provide evidence for lowpressure (90^200 MPa) cotectic crystallization. 476 KELLEY AND BARTON CRYSTALLIZATION PRESSURE OF ICELANDIC MAGMAS Fig. 9. Possible interpretations of calculated pressures illustrated using phase relationships projected from plag onto the pseudoternary plane ol^cpx^qtz with the procedure of Tormey et al. (1987). Continuous lines mark the positions of the ol^plag^cpx cotectic (P in GPa). POP, pressure of crystallization of ol^plag assemblages; POPC, pressure of crystallization of ol^plag^cpx assemblages; PMax, maximum pressure of crystallization; PMin, minimum pressure of crystallization; PUL, upper limit for pressure of crystallization; PLL, lower limit for pressure of crystallization. Arrows indicate changes in melt composition. (a) Melts evolve from a to b by polybaric crystallization of ol^plag. (b) Melts evolve from c to d by isobaric crystallization of ol^plag^cpx and from d to e by polybaric crystallization of ol^plag. (c) Melts evolve from f to g by polybaric crystallization of ol^plag and from g to h by isobaric crystallization of ol^plag^cpx. The dashed line shows mixing between primitive melt f and evolved melt h. (d) Melts evolve from i to j by isobaric crystallization of ol^plag^cpx and from j to k by polybaric crystallization of ol^plag accompanied by assimilation of cpx. Pressures calculated for ol^plag^cpx saturated melts from Hlodufell (Fig. 10b) define a single broad array parallel to the MgO axis, and could be interpreted to indicate cotectic crystallization between maximum (PMax ¼ 380 MPa) and minimum (PMin ¼ 290 MPa) pressures. However, the range in pressure is about equal to the expected precision of the results, and therefore, the results are interpreted as indicating cotectic crystallization at 340 40 MPa. As with Herdubreid, the low pressure (170 MPa) calculated for one glass is interpreted to indicate crystallization along a lower pressure cotectic. Calculated pressures for ol^plag^cpx saturated melts from Grimsvo«tn (Fig. 10c) show more scatter than those from Hlodufell, and the range is greater than estimated precision.The results are interpreted to indicate cotectic crystallization between maximum (PMax ¼ 510 MPa) and minimum (PMin 100 MPa) pressures, but there is clear evidence for cotectic crystallization at intermediate pressures (see below). A more realistic estimate of the pressure of lowpressure cotectic crystallization is obtained by averaging the results for samples that crystallized at similar pressures. Four samples yield pressures between 100 and 200 MPa, whereas other samples yield pressures 4300 MPa (Fig. 11c). The average pressure for the four samples is 150 60 MPa and is the preferred value for low-pressure cotectic crystallization. Preferred values for low-pressure cotectic crystallization have been calculated for Theistreykir, Bardabunga, Grimsvo«tn,Veidivo«tn, Katla, Hekla, and Thingvellir. Likewise, results for samples that crystallized at similar high pressures can be averaged and used to calculate preferred values for high-pressure cotectic crystallization at some localities (e.g. Hengill). Finally, glasses from Kalfstindar represent melts saturated with ol þ plag, and the lowest calculated pressure provides an upper limit (PUL ¼ 650 MPa) for cotectic crystallization (Fig. 10d). It should be noted that pressures calculated for some ol^plag saturated melts from Herdubreid and Hlodufell are also higher than those calculated for ol^plag^cpx saturated melts from these localities (Fig. 11a and b). 477 JOURNAL OF PETROLOGY VOLUME 49 NUMBER 3 MARCH 2008 Fig. 10. Interpretation of results for selected localities illustrated by plots of pressure P vs MgO. *, Melts in equilibrium with ol plag spinel assemblages; , melts in equilibrium with ol^plag^cpx assemblages. PC, pressure of cotectic crystallization; PMax, maximum pressure of crystallization; PMin, minimum pressure of crystallization; PUL, upper limit for pressure of cotectic crystallization. (See text for further discussion.) We have noted that results from the Hengill complex are anomalous compared with those obtained from other volcanic centers. Plots of CaO and CaO/Al2O3 vs MgO are consistent with crystallization of ol þ plag þ cpx. Nominal pressures calculated for 120 glasses range from 04 to 754 MPa (Table 2), and the simplest interpretation is that cotectic crystallization occurred over a range of pressures between these values. However, detailed studies byTrnnes (1990), Hansteen (1991), and Gurenko & Sobolev (2006) indicate that this interpretation is oversimplified. Trnnes (1990) has divided Hengill glasses into four groups based primarily on MgO and CaO content. We have followed his subdivision for Groups I and II, but have combined glass analyses from his two other groups into a single group (Group III). Nominal pressures for MgO-rich samples from Group I range from 01 to 311MPa (Fig. 11). These samples contain Al- and Cr-rich endiopside as resorbed phenocrysts and as components of partly disaggregated gabbroic nodules, suggesting that the MgO-rich Group I magmas have assimilated crustal material. The highest calculated pressure for these samples (311MPa) represents the lower limit for cotectic crystallization (e.g. Fig. 9d). On the other hand, nominal pressures for MgO-poor Group III samples range from 340 to 613 MPa (Fig. 11). Some of these samples contain augite microphenocrysts, suggesting that the MgO-poor Group III magmas have crystallized ol þ plag þ cpx along cotectics between a maximum (613 MPa) and minimum (340 MPa) pressure. The lower limit of cotectic crystallization for Group I glasses and the minimum pressure of cotectic crystallization for Group III glasses are virtually identical (Fig. 11) and provide a tight constraint on lowpressure cotectic crystallization (325 MPa). Pressures calculated for Group II glasses encompass values obtained for Group I and Group III glasses (Fig. 11). Crystallization of MgO-rich Group I melts at lower pressure than the MgO-poor Group III melts produces the unusual negative correlations between P and MgO and P and T observed for Hengill samples. The strong evidence that Group I magmas have interacted with gabbroic crust suggests that the negative correlation between P and MgO for Hengill samples results from assimilation combined with crystallization as magmas ascend beneath this volcanic complex. 478 KELLEY AND BARTON CRYSTALLIZATION PRESSURE OF ICELANDIC MAGMAS Pressures of ol^plag^cpx cotectic crystallization for all localities are listed in Table 3. A striking feature of the results (Fig. 12) is the large number of samples (85%) that have crystallized along either low-P (40^220 MPa) or relatively high-P (430^1030 MPa) cotectics. This near-bimodal distribution of pressures contrasts strongly with the distribution of nominal pressures obtained using unfiltered results (Fig. 7a), and illustrates the importance of evaluating geochemical and petrographic data for samples from the various localities to identify melts that lie along ol^plag^cpx cotectics. It is also clear that some melts crystallized along ol^plag^cpx cotectics at pressures between 220 and 430 MPa (Table 3). Effect of H2O Fig. 11. Interpretation of results for glasses from the Hengill complex. (a) Histogram of results obtained for MgO-rich (Gp I) and MgOpoor (Gp III) samples. The Gp I samples evolve via polybaric crystallization of ol^plag accompanied by assimilation of cpx, which allows the lower limit of cotectic crystallization to be determined (PLL). The Gp III samples evolve via polybaric crystallization of ol^plag^cpx, which allows the minimum pressure of cotectic crystallization to be determined (PMin). (b) Plot of P vs MgO (wt %) *, Gp I samples; , Gp III samples. PMax, maximum pressure of cotectic crystallization; PMin, minimum pressure of cotectic crystallization; PLL, lower limit for pressure of cotectic crystallization. In summary, melts that lie along ol^plag^cpx cotectics can be identified allowing crystallization pressures to be established. Similarly, melts in equilibrium with ol plag can be identified and used to place upper limits (PUL) and/or lower limits (PLL) on crystallization pressures. Finally, melts that provide no constraints on crystallization pressure can be identified and filtered out of the results. The method used to calculate pressure is based on experiments carried out under nominally anhydrous conditions, and it is important to assess the possible effect of water on the results. Experimental studies show that addition of H2O leads to expansion of the stability field of olivine and contraction of the stability field of plagioclase (Kushiro, 1969; Nicholls & Ringwood, 1973; Baker & Eggler, 1987; Sisson & Grove, 1993), so that the location of the ol^plag^cpx cotectic will shift with increasing water content at constant pressure. However, relatively high water contents are required to produce large shifts in the position of the cotectic, and the water contents of Icelandic magmas are probably too low to have much effect. Measured water contents range from 01 to 1 wt % (Jamtveit et al., 2001; Nichols et al., 2002), and agree with water contents calculated for 88 Icelandic glasses using the method of Danyushevsky et al. (1996) and Danyushevsky (2001) (average 018 wt %, range 0^094 wt %). Herzberg (2004) found no correlation between calculated pressures and H2O for MORB with 01^08 wt % H2O. Additional evidence that calculated pressures have not been significantly affected by water is provided by the close agreement (40 40 MPa) between pressures calculated for single samples using two projections (see Appendix A), one from plag onto the plane ol^cpx^qtz, the other from ol onto the plane plag^cpx^qtz. Addition of water causes the ol^plag^cpx cotectic to shift towards cpx (away from ol) in the plag projection and away from cpx (towards plag) in the ol projection. In other words, water affects the stability fields of ol, plag and cpx differently and has a different effect on the positions of the ol^plag^cpx cotectic in these two projections. Accordingly, pressures calculated for hydrous melts will be associated with large uncertainties reflecting large differences between pressures calculated from the two projections (see Appendix A, Table A1). We noted in a preceding section that the uncertainty in calculated pressure for most samples is similar to that estimated from anhydrous experimental data, and it is concluded that the results reported in Tables 2 and 3 closely reflect the pressures of crystallization. Indeed, pressures 479 JOURNAL OF PETROLOGY VOLUME 49 NUMBER 3 MARCH 2008 Table 3: Pressures and depths of cotectic crystallization Zone and P locality (MPa) Range Comment Range z (km) Range P Comment (MPa) Range z (km) Range P Comment (MPa) Range z (km) NVZ Theistareykir 555 – Max. Theistareykir 555 – Max. Herdubreid 484 30 195 – – – – – – – – 131 – 149 27 173 – 170 11 3080 19 109 066 – – 3100 15 109 051 – – 186 – – – – – 175 – Min. – – Preferred 53 1 Min. 61 – – – Min. 62 – – Burfell – – Bláfjall Ridge 529 – Halar 511 76 180 23 – – – – – – – Seljahjalli 717 25 253 089 – – – – – – – Askja 536 9 189 032 – – – – 185 56 65 199 Hrimalda – – – – – – – – 176 90 62 23 Gigoldur – – – – – – – – 170 90 60 26 Sprengisandur 593 – Max. 209 – – – – – 54 – Min. 19 – Kverkfjoll 859 – Max. 289 12 – – – – 90 – Min. 32 – Kverkfjoll 822 033 – – – 90 – Min. Kistufell 518 – Northeastern – – Bardabunga 842 – Max. Bardabunga 842 – Max. Grimsvötn 512 – Max. Grimsvo¨tn 512 – Max. Max. Preferred Max. 182 – 3250 – – – 3310 – 296 – Min. – 114 – 143 – 50 – 117 – – – – – EVZ Veidivötn 622 – Max. Veidivo¨tn 622 – Max. Laki 766 – Max. 180 219 269 – – – – – – – 65 – – – – – 177 62 – – – – 97 – – – – – 154 58 – – – – 35 – – – – – 141 64 – – – – 145 – 164 16 1993 – – – 177 17 Min. Preferred Min. Preferred Min. – 62 – 54 – – 22 – 20 – Preferred 50 23 Min. 51 – – 70 – – – – – – – – – SFZ Katla 656 Max. 231 4663 45 Hekla 1032 Max. 363 – 4250 – Hekla 956 Preferred 340 26 5017 48 Max. 74 Preferred Min. Preferred WVZ Langjökull 652 – 229 – – Hlodufell – – – – 3350 37 Raudafell – – – – 3130 – Efstadalsfjall 5170 34 182 126 3220 36 Kalfstindar 6510 – Upper limit 229 – – Thingvellir 6270 – Max. 221 – 2210 – Thingvellir 6270 – Max. – – 2570 33 – – 3110 – Max. – – – – 196 088 – – – – 74 – Min. 26 118 13 1680 – Min. 59 – 110 – – – – – 113 13 1980 – 70 – – – – – – – Min. – – – – – – Preferred 91 12 – – 109 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – Upper limit Hengill Gp I – – Hengill Gp II 5920 – Hegill Gp II 5560 025 Hengill Gp III 6130 – – – 3400 – Min. 120 – – – Hengill Gp III 5030 086 Preferred 177 301 3400 – Min. – – – – 5070 26 Preferred 178 091 3460 32 122 114 – – – – – – – – – – – 2020 – 71 – Preferred Max. Lower limit Min. RP Geitafell Reykjanes – See text for discussion of preferred values of pressures (italics). 480 KELLEY AND BARTON CRYSTALLIZATION PRESSURE OF ICELANDIC MAGMAS Depths of magma chambers and magma plumbing systems Fig. 12. Histograms showing averaged results for the pressure of cotectic crystallization at various volcanic centers. (a) Cotectic crystallization at relatively high pressure. (b) Cotectic crystallization at relatively low pressure. Results indicating cotectic crystallization at intermediate pressures (P4022 GPa, 5043 GPa) are omitted for clarity. associated with large uncertainties have been filtered out of the results. It is unlikely that these samples crystallized at higher water contents than most Icelandic magmas, because water contents calculated using the method of Danyushevsky et al. (1996) and Danyshevsky (2001) (average 028 wt %, range 0^085 wt %) are similar to those obtained for other Icelandic glasses. Use of this method also indicates that samples that yield nominally anhydrous pressures between 0 and ^100 MPa did not crystallize from magmas containing unusually high water contents, supporting the interpretation that these samples crystallized at 01MPa taking uncertainties into account. The pressures reported in Table 3 are those at which melts are last saturated with ol, plag, and cpx. Ascending magmas must pause and crystallize for a sufficiently long period of time to reach multiple saturation, and this most probably occurs in magma chambers. The melt is then rapidly erupted from the chamber and quenched to form glass. The depths of magma chambers may therefore be calculated from pressures of cotectic crystallization using an appropriate value for crustal density. We have used a value of 2900 kg/m3 to calculate the depths listed in Table 3. Preferred values for the pressure of cotectic crystallization were used in the calculations wherever possible. Comparison with results obtained using geodetic and/or geophysical methods (see Table 1) reveals agreement for the depths of chambers beneath Askja (65 and 189 km vs 13^35 and 16^20 km) and Grimsvo«tn (54 km vs 15^4 km), and reasonable agreement for the depth of a chamber beneath Hengill (115 km vs 7 km). Our estimate of a minimum depth of 175 km for a chamber beneath Hekla is greater than the recent estimate of 11km based on strain data (see Sturkell et al., 2006), but is consistent with recent analysis of seismic data (Soosalu & Einarsson, 2004), which provide no evidence for a significant magma body at depths 514 km. However, we find no evidence for the shallow chamber (2^5 km) identified beneath Katla in geophysical and geodetic studies. This probably indicates that this chamber does not contain basalt, because Soosalu et al. (2006b) suggested that a cryptodome containing relatively viscous (silica-rich) magma occurs at shallow (2 km) depths beneath Katla. Comparison with results obtained in other petrological studies (see Table 1) reveals excellent agreement in the case of Bla¤fjall Table Mountain (62 and 186 km vs 2^7 and 14^26 km) and the Hengill volcanic complex (11^12 km vs 8^12 km). However, the depths obtained for crystallization at Kistufell (518 km) are much lower than those obtained by Breddam (2002) (430 km), and the reason for this discrepancy is unclear. Our results clearly suggest that magma chambers are located at different depths in the Icelandic crust (Figs 13^15), and this is corroborated by geodetic and geophysical studies. There is evidence for only one chamber located in the shallow (Hrimalda and Gigoldur in the NVZ), middle (Burfell in the NVZ, Raudafell in the WVZ), or deep (Kalfstindar in the WVZ) crust beneath some centers, but there is clear evidence for two or more stacked chambers beneath most centers (Figs 13 and 15). Shallow and deep chambers occur beneath Askja, Bla¤fjall Table Mountain (including Halar and Seljahalli; see Schiellerup, 1995) and Langjo«kull (Fig. 15a), whereas shallow, intermediate and deep chambers occur beneath Herdubreid and Efstadalsfjall (Fig. 15b). Dikes presumably 481 JOURNAL OF PETROLOGY VOLUME 49 NUMBER 3 MARCH 2008 Fig. 14. Depths of intermediate depth magma chambers along the rift zones. Error bars show uncertainty in estimated depth. Full versions for abbreviations for volcanic centers are given in the Supplementary Data and Fig. 1 caption. Volcanic centers are arranged from south to north along the y-axis. The shaded grey bands show the range of depth of shallow and deep chambers along the NVZ and WVZ. Fig. 13. Depths of shallow and deep magma chambers along the rift zones. Error bars show uncertainty in estimated depth. Full versions for abbreviations for volcanic centers are given in the Supplementary Data and Fig. 1 caption. Volcanic centers are arranged from south to north along the y-axis. The shaded grey bands show the range of depth of shallow and deep chambers along the NVZ and WVZ. The greater depths of chambers beneath Kverkfjoll, Hekla, Grimsvo«tn-Laki, and Bardabunga^Veidivo«tn, and the lack of evidence for shallow chambers beneath Katla and Hekla, should be noted. connect chambers located at different depths, and provide conduits for magmas to reach the surface. Results for Theistareykir, Sprengisandur, Kverkfjoll, Bardabunga^Veidivo«tn, Grimsvo«tn^Laki, Langjo«kull, Thingvellir, and Hengill are consistent with the presence of both shallow and deep chambers, and magmas also appear to have crystallized at intermediate depths although there is no evidence that this occurred in a discrete chamber (see Fig. 10c). As discussed above, it is possible that these magmas evolved by high-pressure cotectic crystallization of ol þ plag þ cpx followed by crystallization of ol þ plag (with partial or complete resorption of cpx) during ascent. However, petrographic data indicate that at least some glasses are from magmas that evolved via ol þ plag þ cpx crystallization, which suggests the presence of cooling and crystallizing magma bodies or pockets throughout the middle and lower crust. Multiple, stacked, discrete chambers might exist beneath some volcanoes as shown in Fig. 15c. However, it is also possible that crystallization occurs in extensive crystal mush zones as suggested by Hansen & Gro«nvold (2000). In addition, crystallization probably occurs at various depths in feeder dikes and conduits during lulls in eruptive activity. Recent work suggests that MORBs partially crystallize over a range of pressure from 1 to 1000 MPa (Michael & Cornell, 1998; Le Roex et al., 2002; Herzberg, 2004). The average crustal thickness along mid-ocean ridges is 71 09 km (White et al., 1992; Bown & White, 1994), so that crystallization of MORB must begin in the upper mantle. Some Icelandic magmas may also crystallize in the mantle. The glasses have chemical characteristics of 482 KELLEY AND BARTON CRYSTALLIZATION PRESSURE OF ICELANDIC MAGMAS Fig. 15. Schematic representation of plumbing systems beneath Icelandic volcanoes. There is evidence for two or more chambers beneath most volcanic centers (see also Gudmundsson, 2000). (a) Shallow (a) and deep chambers (b) linked by a system of conduits and dikes (c). A plumbing system similar to this may exist beneath Askja, Bla¤fjall Table Mountain and, possibly, Langjo«kull. (b) Shallow (a), intermediate (b) and deep chambers (c) linked by a system of conduits (d) and dikes (e). A plumbing system similar to this may exist beneath Herdubreid and Efstadalsfjall. (c) Shallow (a) and deep chambers (b) with a plexus of small chambers or magma bodies in the lower crust (c) linked by a system of conduits and dikes (d). This type of plumbing system probably exists beneath Theistareykir, Sprengisandur, Kverkfjoll, Bardabunga^Veidivo«tn, Grimsvo«tn^Laki, Langjo«kull, Thingvellir, and Hengill. The plumbing systems beneath Katla and Hekla in the SFZ may also be similar to the middle^lower crustal section. evolved magmas and must have formed from primary magmas by crystallization in the deep crust or mantle. Conclusive evidence for crystallization in the mantle is lacking, but the high pressures (up to 800 MPa) obtained for ol plag saturated melts from Herdubreid, Efstadalsfjall, and Kalfstindar (Table 2) are consistent with crystallization at upper mantle depths. Thickness and structure of Icelandic crust The factors that determine the depth at which magma chambers form are complex and are poorly understood, but include the buoyancy force (reflecting the density contrast between melt and surrounding rocks), any excess pressure over the buoyancy force, and local variations in stress conditions in the crust (Gudmundsson, 2000). It can be assumed to a first approximation that variations in the buoyancy force, excess pressure and stress conditions are negligible for magmas entering the base of the crust along the rift zones. Therefore, the main control of the location of deep chambers is likely to be a lithological boundary associated with a density discontinuity. These chambers occur over a remarkably small range of depths for volcanic centers in the NVZ (195 26 km, excluding Kverkvjoll) and WVZ (209 23 km, including samples from Geitafell) (Fig. 13b). The small range of depths for the rift zones (201 25 km) suggests that the deep chambers occur at or near the crust^mantle boundary (Kelley et al., 2004; Kelley & Barton, 2005). There is excellent agreement between magma chamber depth beneath Theistareykir and crustal thickness inferred from seismic data (Brandsdo¤ttir et al., 1997; Staples et al., 1997) beneath nearby Krafla (195 vs 19 km). Likewise, there is very good agreement between magma chamber depths and crustal thickness inferred from seismic data (Bjarnason et al., 1993; Weir et al., 2001) for Geitafell (178 09 vs 16 km), Hengill (189 18 vs 175^24 km), Hekla (34 26 vs 30^35 km), and Katla (231 16 vs 20^25 km). Seismic data do not provide reliable estimates of the depth of the crust^mantle transition beneath other centers, and crustal thickesses must be estimated from gravity data (Darbyshire et al., 1998, 2000a; Allen et al., 2002; Kaban et al., 2002; Fedorova et al., 2005; Leftwich et al., 2005) and from the relationship between Moho depth and height above sea level given by Gudmundsson (2003). These methods do not allow small-scale variations in crustal thickness to be resolved, and there is considerable uncertainty in the estimated crustal thickness beneath most volcanoes. In addition, the crust^mantle boundary may represent a transition zone 5 3 km thick (Foulger et al., 2003). Despite this, there is reasonable agreement between estimated magma chamber depth and the base of the crust beneath Kverkfjoll (29 vs 30^35 km) and beneath Bardabunga^Veidivo«tn and Grimsvo«tn^Laki (27^29 km vs 30^40 km) given that absolute uncertainties in calculated magma chamber depths are 39 km. These volcanic centers are located on or near the Vatnajo«kull ice cap (Fig. 1) in a region of thicker crust above the thermal and/ or compositional anomaly in the mantle (Darbyshire et al., 2000a; Kaban et al., 2002; Fedorova et al., 2005; Leftwich et al., 2005). Also, depths estimated for magma chambers and the base of the crust are similar for the Bla¤fjall complex (25 km), Thingvellir (22 km vs 20^25 km), and Kalfstindar (23 km vs 20^25 km). The agreement between magma chamber depths and Moho depths provides strong evidence that magmas pond at the base of the crust beneath most volcanic centers in Iceland. However, there is poor correlation between 483 JOURNAL OF PETROLOGY VOLUME 49 Moho depth and magma chamber depth for some centers, and it is possible that the true, maximum depth of chambers beneath these centers is greater than that reported in Table 3. As noted above, some ol^plag-saturated melts from Herdubreid and Efstadalsfjall appear to have crystallized at higher pressure than the maximum value calculated for cotectic melts. Also, we are not confident that the maximum depth of chambers has been established for Langjo«kull, Sprengisandur and Askja, because of the relatively small number of samples available for study. The depth of shallow chambers is also relatively constant for volcanic centers along the rift zones (Fig. 13a). The average depths are 52 16 km for the NVZ, 61 21km for the WVZ (including samples from the Reykjanes Peninsula), and 54 06 km for the EVZ. The average depth for all three rift zones is 55 16 km, indicating that the chambers are located in upper crust that has an average thickness of 5^7 km (Darbyshire et al., 2000b; Foulger et al., 2003). [Various workers use different definitions of upper, middle and lower crust for Iceland (see Foulger et al., 2003). For this paper, we arbitrarily define upper crust as that 57 km, middle crust as that from 7 to 15 km, and lower crust as that 415 km.] The upper crust is a heterogeneous mixture of flows, hyaloclastites, and intrusive rocks that have been metamorphosed under greenschist- to amphibolite-facies conditions. The observed rapid increase in seismic velocity with depth probably reflects a decrease in the proportion of hyaloclastites and decrease in porosity and permeability (Foulger et al., 2003, and references therein). It seems likely that shallow chambers form at a level of neutral buoyancy at or near the base of the upper crust, although the exact depth may be controlled by local variations in lithology and/or stress conditions (Gudmundsson, 2000). Additional petrological studies to refine estimates of magma chamber depth are desirable to provide tighter constraints on the thickness of the whole crust and of the upper crust, as well as to define regional variations in these thicknesses. The occurrence of discrete chambers located at intermediate depths (Fig. 14) also has important implications for models of crustal structure. Those in the NVZ and WVZ occur at a relatively constant depth (114 04 km). There is no convincing evidence for a seismic discontinuity at this depth, and it seems likely that these chambers are located at a phase transition (amphibolite^granulite facies?), and/or at a rheological boundary. Fedorova et al. (2005) suggested that the base of the elastic lithosphere beneath Vatnajo«kull is 15 km deep, and is underlain by relatively ‘soft’ lower crust. The ‘intermediate depth’ chambers beneath Katla and Hekla are significantly deeper (16^18 km) than the intermediate depth chambers in the active rift zones, which may indicate a different lithological structure or stress regime in the crust of the SFZ. NUMBER 3 MARCH 2008 The evidence for cooling and crystallizing magma bodies or pockets throughout the middle and lower crust is consistent with results obtained by Tryggvason (1986) for Krafla and by Maclennan et al. (2001) for Theistareykir (Table 1). The presence of multiple magma chambers at different depths beneath many volcanic centers implies high geothermal gradients in the crust (see also Meyer et al., 1985; Bjarnason et al., 1993; Maclennan et al., 2001; Kelley et al., 2005; Leftwich et al., 2005). Petrological data therefore strongly suggest that the middle and lower crust is relatively hot and porous, in contrast to the relatively cool, rigid crust proposed in some geophysical studies (e.g. Bjarnason et al., 1993; Menke & Sparks, 1995). However, receiver function data (Darbyshire et al., 2000b), combined surface- and body-wave constraints (Allen et al., 2002), combined results from explosion seismology and receiver functions (Foulger et al., 2003), and combined results from seismic, topography, and gravity data (Fedorova et al., 2005) all provide evidence for low-velocity zones (LVZs) in the crust. These may reflect variations in temperature or lithology, and/or the presence of melt. Most workers favor an explanation involving both high temperatures and the presence of small amounts of melt. Darbyshire et al. (2000b) suggested that a prominent LVZ at 10^15 km reflects the presence of partially molten sills in the lower crust beneath Krafla (see Fig. 15c), whereas Fedorova et al. (2005) proposed that crust deeper than 15 km beneath Vatnajo«kull contains melt. Allen et al. (2002) identified LVZs in both the upper (0^15 km) and lower (415 km) crust. The former are thought to reflect regions of high temperature and possible melt, whereas the latter (beneath Vatnajo«kull) are thought to reflect the thermal halo associated with the fluxing of magma from the mantle to the upper crust. Although detailed correlation of LVZs with the occurrence of magma chambers is not possible, these results suggest that seismic and petrological data can be reconciled to develop an internally consistent model for Icelandic crust. Crustal accretion models There is no doubt that some crustal accretion occurs at shallow depths in Iceland by eruption of lavas and hyaloclastites that are buried beneath the products of later eruptions, and by crystallization of gabbros in shallow chambers. Shallow accretion is one of the models proposed for the formation of oceanic crust. Melt is supplied directly from the mantle to a shallow axial melt lens (Sinton & Detrick, 1992). Some of this melt is erupted whereas the rest crystallizes to form gabbros that subside to form oceanic crust. However, it is highly unlikely that the thick (20^40 km) crust in Iceland forms solely by crystallization in shallow chambers to form gabbroic crust that subsides in response to plate extension. It is probable that accretion also results from crystallization in chambers located at Moho depths (underplating), and by crystallization in 484 KELLEY AND BARTON CRYSTALLIZATION PRESSURE OF ICELANDIC MAGMAS Fig. 16. Petrological model for Icelandic crust. Shallow chambers are located near the base of the upper crust, and magma is fed to the surface via dike systems. Crustal accretion occurs by eruption of lavas and hyaloclastites, and by crystallization of gabbro in the chamber. The middle and lower crust consists of smaller chambers, pockets of magma, and conduits within a mush zone extending to the Moho. A chamber at the Moho feeds magma to the shallower chambers and directly to the surface. The mush zone may extend to shallower depths than shown (i.e. to the base of the upper crust). Crustal accretion occurs by crystallization of magma within the mush zone and at the base of the crust to form gabbros. Magma chambers or pockets of magma may also occur in the underlying mantle. (See text for details.) dikes, melt pockets, or discrete chambers at various depths in the crust (intracrustal accretion). A model for accretion of Icelandic crust is shown in Fig. 16, and is consistent with recent seismic reflection and petrological data for midocean ridges (e.g. Pan & Batiza, 2002, 2003; Maclennan et al., 2004; Singh et al., 2006). These data indicate that lower crust in axial regions is at least locally porous on an intergranular scale, and suggest that accretion occurs by crystallization of small pockets of melt over a range of depths between the shallow melt lens and the Moho. Petrological implications The results of this study are consistent with complex models of magma evolution that involve polybaric crystallization, magma mixing, and assimilation. Polybaric crystallization is expected in plumbing systems with two or more chambers located at different depths, and supporting evidence is provided by detailed mineral chemical studies of lavas that reveal the presence of different generations of minerals that formed at different pressure (e.g. Hansteen, 1991; Hansen & Gro«nvold, 2000; Maclennan et al., 2001). High-pressure crystallization yields residual melts that are compositionally different from those produced by low-pressure crystallization (e.g. Kinzler & Grove, 1992), so that polybaric crystallization will produce liquids lying along different liquid lines of descent (see Figs 6c and 7). It is also likely that these magmas will mix prior to and during sequential eruptive episodes, because magmas that pond and partially crystallize in chambers, dikes, and conduits after one eruptive episode will be flushed out and mix with fresh batches of magma rising from deep chambers or from the mantle during subsequent eruptive episodes. Evidence for mixing has been described by Sigurdsson & Sparks (1981), McGarvie (1984), Mrk (1984), and Fagents et al. (2001). Moreover, crystal aggregates formed by partial crystallization of magma in the plumbing system in an early eruptive phase can be disrupted and incorporated into later batches of magma rising from deep chambers or from the mantle. This yields magmas with complex crystal cargoes derived from different magma batches, such as those described by Hansen & Gro«nvold (2000). Interaction between ascending melts and the crystalline products of earlier eruptive episodes can lead to complex variations in melt composition (Kvassnes et al., 2003; Danyushevsky et al., 2003), and interaction between ascending melts and clinopyroxene appears to explain the unusual chemical characteristics (e.g. high MgO, CaO, CaO/Al2O3) of some magmas erupted in the Hengill complex and elsewhere along the rift zones (e.g. Trnnes, 1990; Hansen & Gro«nvold, 2000; Gurenko & Sobolev, 2006). Oxygen isotope studies provide strong evidence for assimilation of hydrothermally altered crust by Icelandic magmas (e.g. Condomines et al., 1983; Hemond et al., 1988, 1993). Assimilation may be extensive if the middle and lower crust is hot, as suggested above, because less energy is required for a fixed mass of magma to assimilate hot crustal material. Moreover, frequent replenishment with new batches of magma during mixing events leads to thermal buffering in magma chambers, which also facilitates assimilation (Cribb & Barton, 1996). Certainly, the high temperature of basaltic magma emplaced into Icelandic crust [average 11868C using the method of Yang et al. (1996) or 11778C using the method of Sugawara (2000)], together with the relatively small temperature range of magmas erupted at single volcanic centers (average 348C), suggests that abundant heat is available to drive assimilation processes. High geothermal gradients coupled with high magma temperatures will also facilitate melting of crustal lithologies to form silicic magmas, which are relatively abundant on Iceland (Gunnarsson et al., 1998). Our results suggest that silicic magmas can be generated over a relatively wide depth range in the middle and lower crust, and this prediction can be tested by additional studies of appropriate compositions. CONC LUSIONS A method to calculate pressures of crystallization of melts lying along ol^plag^cpx cotectics based on the procedure 485 JOURNAL OF PETROLOGY VOLUME 49 described by Yang et al. (1996) yields results that are accurate to 110 MPa (1s) and are precise to 80 MPa (1s). Pressures calculated for Icelandic glasses from 28 volcanic centers in the Western, Northern and Eastern rift zones as well as from the Southern Flank Zone indicate crystallization range from 1 to 1000 MPa, equivalent to depths of 0^35 km. Magma chamber depths estimated from these results agree well with those estimated using other methods for Askja, Bla¤fjall Table Mountain, Grimsvo«tn, Hengill, and Hekla. Deep chambers (417 km) occur beneath most volcanic centers and appear to be located at the Moho, indicating that magma ponds at the crust^mantle boundary. Shallow chambers (571km) also occur beneath most volcanic centers. These are located in the upper crust, and probably form at a level of neutral buoyancy. There is good evidence for cooling and crystallizing bodies and pockets of magma throughout the middle and lower crust, which probably resembles a crystal mush. This strongly suggests that the middle and lower crust is relatively hot and porous, and that crustal accretion occurs over a range of depths as inferred in recent models for crustal accretion at midocean ridges. The presence of multiple, stacked chambers and hot, porous crust suggests that magma evolution is complex and involves polybaric crystallization, magma mixing, and assimilation. AC K N O W L E D G E M E N T S We thank Wendy Panero, Ralph von Frese, Hal Noltimier and Tim Leftwich for their interest and for helpful discussions. Peter Meyer and Haraldur Sigurdsson kindly provided information about sample localities. Thoughtful comments by David Elliot, Wendy Panero, Ingi Bjarnason, Claude Herzberg, John Maclennan, and an anonymous reviewer significantly improved the manuscript. We are also grateful to Colin Devey and Marjorie Wilson for their editorial efforts. Financial support from the Ohio State University and from the Friends of Orton Hall is gratefully acknowledged. S U P P L E M E N TA RY DATA Supplementary data for this paper are available at Journal of Petrology online. R EF ER ENC ES Alfaro, R., Brandsdo¤ttir, B., Rowlands, D. P., White, R. & Gudmundsson, M. T. (2007). Structure of the Gr|¤ msvo«tn central volcano under the Vatnajo«kull icecap, Iceland.. Geophysical Journal International 168, 863^876. Allen, R. M., Nolet, G., Morgan, W. J., Vogfjord, K., Nettles, M., Ekstrom, G., Bergsson, B. H., Erlendsson, P., Foulger, G. R., Jokobsdottir, S., Julian, B. R., Pritchard, M., Ragnarsson, S. & Stefansson, R. (2002). Plume-driven plumbing and crustal formation in Iceland. Journal of Geophysical ResearchçSolid Earth 107, No. B8, 2163, doi:10.1029/2001JB000584. NUMBER 3 MARCH 2008 Arnadottir, T., Delaney, P. T. & Sigmundsson, F. (1998). Sources of crustal deformation associated with the Krafla, Iceland, eruption of September 1984. Geophysical Research Letters 25, 1043^1046. Baker, D. R. & Eggler, D. H. (1987). Compositions of anhydrous and hydrous melts coexisting with plagioclase, augite, and olivine or low-Ca pyroxene from 1atm to 8 kbar; application to the Aleutian volcanic center of Atka. American Mineralogist 72, 12^28. Bender, J. F., Bence, A. E. & Hodges, F. N. (1978). Petrogenesis of basalts from the Project FAMOUS area; experimental study from 0 to 15 kbars. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 41, 277^302. Bjarnason, I. T., Caress, D., Flovenz, O. G. & Menke, W. (1993). Tomographic image of the Mid-Atlantic plate boundary in southwestern Iceland. Journal of Geophysical Research, B, Solid Earth and Planets 98, 6607^6622. Bjo«rnsson, A. (1985). Dynamics of crustal rifting in NE Iceland. Journal of Geophysical Research 90, 10151^10162. Bjornsson, A., Johnsen, G., Sigurdsson, S., Thorbergsson, G. & Tryggvason, E. (1979). Rifting of the plate boundary in north Iceland 1975^1978. Journal of Geophysical Research 84, 3029^3038. Bown, J. W. & White, R. S. (1994). Variation with spreading rate of oceanic crustal thickness and geochemistry. Earth and Planetary Science Letters. Amsterdam: Elsevier 121, 435^449. Brandsdottir, B., Einarsson, P., Menke, W., Staples, R. K. & White, R. S. (1997). Faroe^Iceland Ridge experiment; 2, Crustal structure of the Krafla central volcano. Journal of Geophysical Research, B, Solid Earth and Planets 102, 7867^7886. Breddam, K. (2002). Kistufell; primitive melt from the Iceland mantle plume. Journal of Petrology 43, 345^373. Breddam, K., Kurz, M. D. & Storey, M. (2000). Mapping out the conduit of the Iceland mantle plume with helium isotopes. Earth and Planetary Science Letters. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 176, pp. 45^55. Condomines, M., Groenvold, K., Hooker, P. J., Muehlenbachs, K., O’Nions, R. K., Oskarsson, N. & Oxburgh, E. R. (1983). Helium, oxygen, strontium and neodymium isotopic relationships in Icelandic volcanics. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 66, 125^136. Cribb, J. W. & Barton, M. (1996). Geochemical effects of decoupled fractional crystallization and crustal assimilation. Lithos 37, 293^307. Danyushevsky, L. V. (2001). The effect of small amounts of H2O on crystallisation of mid-ocean ridge and backarc basin magmas. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research 110, 265^280. Danyushevsky, L. V., Dmitriev, L. V. & Sobolev, A. V. (1996). Estimation of the pressure of crystallization and H2O content of MORB and BABB glasses. Mineralogy and Petrology 57, 185^204. Danyushevsky, L. V., McNeill, A. W. & Sobolev, A. V. (2002). Experimental and petrological studies of melt inclusions in phenocrysts from mantle-derived magmas; an overview of techniques, advantages and complications. Chemical Geology 183, 5^24. Danyushevsky, L. V., Eggins, S. M., Falloon, T. J. & Perfit, M. R. (2003). Crustal origin for coupled ‘ultra-depleted’ and ‘plagioclase’ signatures in MORB olivine-hosted melt inclusions; evidence from the Siqueiros transform fault, East Pacific Rise. Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology 144, 619^637. Darbyshire, F. A., Bjarnason, I. T., Flovenz, O. G. & White, R. S. (1998). Crustal structure above the Iceland mantle plume imaged by the ICEMELT refraction profile. Geophysical Journal International 135, 1131^1149. Darbyshire, F. A., Gudmundsson, G. B., Jakobsdottir, S. S., Priestley, K. F., Stefansson, R. & White, R. S. (2000a). Central structure of central and northern Iceland from analysis of teleseismic receiver functions. Geophysical Journal International 143, 163^184. Darbyshire, F. A., Priestley, K. F. & White, R. S. (2000b). Structure of the crust and uppermost mantle of Iceland from a combined 486 KELLEY AND BARTON CRYSTALLIZATION PRESSURE OF ICELANDIC MAGMAS seismic and gravity study. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 181, 409^428. de Zeeuw-van Dalfsen, E., Pagli, C., Pedersen, R. & Sigmundsson, F. (2004). Satellite radar interferometry 1993^1999 suggests deep accumulation of magma near the crust^mantle boundary at the Krafla volcanic system, Iceland. Geophysical Research Letters 31, 5. de Zeeuw-van Dalfsen, E., Rymer, H., Sigmundsson, F. & Sturkell, E. (2005). Net gravity decrease at Askja Volcano, Iceland; constraints on processes responsible for continuous caldera deflation, 1988^2003. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research 139, 227^239. de Zeeuw-van Dalfsen, E., Rymer, H., Williams-Jones, G., Sturkell, E. & Sigmundsson, F. (2006). Integration of micro-gravity and geodetic data to constrain shallow system mass changes at Krafla Volcano, N. Iceland. Bulletin of Volcanology 68, 420^431. Dungan, M. A. & Rhodes, J. M. (1978). Residual glasses and melt inclusions in basalts from DSDP Legs 45 and 46; evidence for magma mixing. Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology 67, 417^431. Einarsson, P. (1978). S-wave shadows in the Krafla Caldera in NE Iceland, evidence for a magma chamber in the crust. Bulletin Volcanologique 41, 187^195. Einarsson, P. & Bjo«rnsson, S. (1980). Earthquakes in Iceland. Jo« kull 29, 37^43. Elthon, D., Meen, J. K. & Ross, D. K. (1995). Composition variations of basaltic glasses from the Mid-Cayman Rise spreading center. Journal of Geophysical Research, B, Solid Earth and Planets 100, 12497^12512. Ewart, J. A., Bjornsson, A. & Voight, B. (1991). Elastic deformation models of Krafla Volcano, Iceland, for the decade 1975 through 1985. Bulletin of Volcanology 53, 436^459. Eysteinsson, H. & Hermance, J. F. (1985). Magnetotelluric measurements across the Eastern Neovolcanic Zone in South Iceland. Journal of Geophysical Research, B 90, 10093^10103. Fagents, S. A., McGarvie, D. W. & Greely, R. (2001). Dynamics of the Ljotipollur phreatomagmatic eruption, S. central Iceland. EOS Transactions, American Geophysical Union, 82 (Fall Meeting Supplement, Abstract) V52A^1044. Falloon, T. J., Danyushevsky, L. V. & Green, D. H. (2001). Peridotite melting at 1GPa; reversal experiments on partial melt compositions produced by peridotite^basalt sandwich experiments. Journal of Petrology 42, 2363^2390. Fedorova, T., Jacoby, W. R. & Wallner, H. (2005). Crust^mantle transition and Moho model for Iceland and surroundings from seismic, topography, and gravity data. Tectonophysics 396, 119^140. Feigl, K. L., Gasperi, J., Rigo, A. & Sigmundsson, F. (2000). Crustal deformation near Hengill Volcano, Iceland 1993^1998; coupling between magmatic activity and faulting inferred from elastic modeling of satellite radar interferograms. Journal of Geophysical Research, B, Solid Earth and Planets 105, 25655^25670. Fisk, M. R., Bence, A. E. & Schilling, J. G. (1982). Major element chemistry of Galapagos rift zone magmas and their phenocrysts. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 61, 171^189. Ford, C. E., Craven, J. A., Fisk, M. R. & Russell, D. G. (1983). Olivine^liquid equilibria; temperature, pressure and composition dependence of the crystal/liquid cation partition coefficients for Mg, Fe2þ, Ca and Mn. Journal of Petrology 24, 256^265. Foulger, G. R. & Anderson, D. L. (2005). A cool model for the Iceland hotspot. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research 141, 1^22. Foulger, G. R., Du, Z. & Julian, B. R. (2003). Icelandic-type crust. Geophysical Journal International 155, 567^590. Frost, B. R. & Lindsley, D. H. (1992). Equilibria amount Fe^Ti oxides, pyroxenes, olivine, and quartz: Part II. Application. American Mineralogist 77, 1004^1020. Furman, T., Frey, F. A. & Park, K. (1991). Chemical constraints on the petrogenesis of mildly alkaline lavas fromVestmannaeyjar, Iceland; the Eldfell (1973) and Surtsey (1963^1967) eruptions. Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology 109, 19^37. Gebrande, H., Einarsson, P. & Miller, H. (1980). Seismic structure of Iceland along RRISP-Profile I. Zeitschrift fu«r Geophysik 47, 239^249. Grove, T. L. & Bryan, W. B. (1983). Fractionation of pyroxene-phyric MORB at low pressure; an experimental study. Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology 84, 293^309. Grove, T. L., Kinzler, R. J. & Bryan, W. B. (1993). Fractionation of Mid-Ocean Ridge Basalt (MORB). In: Phipps-Morgan, J. et al. (eds) Mantle Flow and Melt Migration at Mid-Ocean Ridges, American Geophysical Monograph 71, 281^311. Grove, T. L., Gerlach, D. C., Sando, T. W. & Baker, M. B. (1993). Origin of calc-alkaline series lavas at medicine lake volcano by fractionation, assimilation and mixingçcorrections and clarifications (vol 82, pg 407, 1983). Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology 114, 422^424. Gudmundsson, A. (1988). Effect of tensile stress concentration around magma chambers on intrusion and extrusion frequencies. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research 35, 179^194. Gudmundsson, A. (2000). Dynamics of volcanic systems in Iceland: Example of tectonism and volcanism at juxtaposed hot spot and mid-ocean ridge systems. Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences 28, 107^140. Gudmundsson, O. (2003). The dense root of the Iceland crust. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 206, 427^440. Gudmundsson, M. T. & Milsom, J. (1997). Gravity and magnetic studies of the subglacial Grimsvo«tn Volcano, Iceland; implications for crustal and thermal structure. Journal of Geophysical Research, B, Solid Earth and Planets 102, 7691^7704. Gudmundsson, O., Brandsdottir, B., Menke, W. & Sigvaldason, G. E. (1994). The crustal magma chamber of the Katla volcano in South Iceland revealed by 2-D seismic undershooting. Geophysical Journal International 119, 277^296. Gunnarsson, B., Marsh, B. D. & Taylor, H. P., Jr (1998). Generation of Icelandic rhyolites; silicic lavas from the Torfajo«kull central volcano. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research 83, 1^45. Gurenko, A. A. & Sobolev, A. V. (2006). Crust^primitive magma interaction beneath neovolcanic rift zone of Iceland recorded in gabbro xenoliths from Midfell, SW Iceland. Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology 151, 495^520. Hansen, H. & Gro«nvold, K. (2000). Plagioclase ultraphyric basalts in Iceland; the mush of the rift. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research 98, 1^32. Hansteen, T. H. (1991). Multi-stage evolution of the picritic Maelifell rocks, SW Iceland; constraints from mineralogy and inclusions of glass and fluid in olivine. Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology 109, 225^239. Hardarson, B. S., Ellam, R. M., Fitton, J. G. & Pringle, M. S. (1997). Rift relocation; a geochemical and geochronological investigation of a paleo-rift in Northwest Iceland. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 153, 181^196. Hards, V. L., Greenwood, P. B., Kempton, P. D. & Thompson, R. N. (2000). The magmatic evolution of the Snaefell volcanic centre; an example of volcanism during incipient rifting in Iceland. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research 99, 97^121. Hemond, C., Alle'gre, C. J., Condomines, M., Fourcade, S., Javoy, M. & Oskarsson, N. (1988). Thorium, strontium and oxygen isotopic 487 JOURNAL OF PETROLOGY VOLUME 49 geochemistry in Recent tholeiites from Iceland; crustal influence on mantle-derived magmas. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 87, 273^285. Hemond, C., Arndt, N. T., Hofmann, A. W., Lichtenstein, U., Oskarsson, N. & Steinthorsson, S. (1993). The heterogeneous Iceland plume; Nd^Sr^O isotopes and trace element constraints. Journal of Geophysical Research, B, Solid Earth and Planets 98, 15833^15850. Herzberg, C. (2004). Partial crystallization of mid-ocean ridge basalts in the crust and mantle. Journal of Petrology 45, 2389^2405. Hoskuldsson, A., Sparks, R. S. J. & Carroll, M. R. (2006). Constraints on the dynamics of subglacial basalt eruptions from geological and geochemical observations at Kverkfjoll, NE Iceland. Bulletin of Volcanology 68, 689^701. Jamtveit, B., Brooker, R., Brooks, K., Larson, L. M. & Pederson, T. (2001). The water content of olivines from the North Atlantic Volcanic Province. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 186, 401^415. Jo¤nasson, K., Holm, P. M. & Pedersen, A. K. (1992). Petrogenesis of silicic rocks from the Kro¤ksfjo«rdur central volcano, NW Iceland. Journal of Petrology 33, 1345^1369. Jo¤nsson, S., Bjornsson, G., Pedersen, R. & Segall, P. (2003). Post-earthquake ground movements correlated to pore-pressure transients. Nature 424, 179^183. Juster, T. C., Grove, T. L. & Perfit, M. R. (1989). Experimental constraints on the generation of FeTi basalts, andesites, and rhyodacites at the Galapagos spreading center, 858W and 958W. Journal of Geophysical Research, B, Solid Earth and Planets 94, 9251^9274. Kaban, M. K., Flovenz, O. G. & Palmason, G. (2002). Nature of the crust^mantle transition zone and the thermal state of the upper mantle beneath Iceland from gravity modelling. Geophysical Journal International 149, 281^299. Kaban, M. K., Artemieva, I. M., Mooney, W. D. & Schwintzer, P. (2003). Density of the continental roots; compositional and thermal contributions. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 209, 53^69. Kelley, D. F. & Barton, M. (2005).Thickness, composition, and physical properties of crust in Iceland’s neovolcanic zone. EOS Transactions, American Geophysical Union 86(52), Fall Meeting Supplement, V13E-0591. Kelley, D. F., Kapostasy, D. D. & Barton, M. (2004). Depths of magma chambers in the Icelandic crust. EOS Transactions, American Geophysical Union 85(17), Joint Assembly Supplement, V54A-02. Kelley, D. F., Leftwich, T. E. & Barton, M. (2005). Petrologic constraints on Iceland’s lower crust. EOS Transactions, American Geophysical Union 86(18), Joint Assembly Supplement, V13A-02. Kinzler, R. J. & Grove, T. L. (1992). Primary magmas of mid-ocean ridge basalts; 1, Experiments and methods. Journal of Geophysical Research, B, Solid Earth and Planets 97, 6885^6906. Kjartansson, E. & Gro«nvold, K. (1983). Location of a magma reservoir beneath Hekla Volcano, Iceland. Nature 301, 139^141. Kushiro, I. (1969). The system forsterite^diopside^silica with and without water at high pressures. American Journal of Science 267-A, 269^294. Kvassnes, H. J., Dick, J. B. & Grove, T. L. (2003). The Atlantis Bank gabbro-suite was not a ‘normal’ magma-chamber that produced basalts. Geophysical Research Absracts 5, 12203. LaFemina, P. C., Arnadottir, T., Dixon, T. H., Einarsson, P., Malservisi, R., Sigmundsson, F. & Sturkell, E. (2005). Geodetic GPS measurements in south Iceland; strain accumulation and partitioning in a propagating ridge system. Journal of Geophysical Research 110, 21. NUMBER 3 MARCH 2008 Langmuir, C. H. (1989). Geochemical consequences of in situ crystallization. Nature 340, 199^205. Langmuir, C. H., Klein, E. M. & Plank, T. (1992). Petrological systematics of Mid-Ocean Ridge Basalts: Constraints on melt generation beneath ocean ridges. In: Phipps-Morgan, J. et al. (eds) Mantle Flow and Melt Migration at Mid-Ocean Ridges, American Geophysical Monograph 71, 183^280. Le Bas, M. J., Le Maitre, R. W., Streckeisen, A. & Zanettin, B. (1986). A chemical classification of volcanic rocks based on the total alkalisilica diagram. Journal of Petrology 27, 745^750. Le Roux, P. J., Le Roex, A. P. & Schilling, J. G. (2002). Crystallization processes beneath the southern Mid-Atalantic Ridge (40^508S), evidence for high-pressure initiation of crystallization. Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology 142, 582^602. Leftwich, T. E., von Frese, R. R. B., Potts, L. V., Kim, G. R., Roman, D. R., Taylor, P. T. & Barton, M. (2005). Crustal modeling of the North Atlantic from spectrally correlated free-air gravity and terrain gravity. Journal of Geodynamics 40, 23^50. Linde, A. T., Agustsson, K., Sacks, I. S. & Stefansson, R. (1993). Mechanism of the 1991 eruption of Hekla from continuous borehole strain monitoring. Nature 365, 737^740. Macdonald, G. A. (1968). Composition and origin of Hawaiian lavas. In: Coats, R. R., Hay, R. L. & Anderson, C. A. (eds) Studies in Volcanology: A Memoir in Honor of Howel Williams, Geological Society of America. Memoir 116, 477^522. Maclennan, J., Gronvold, K. & McKenzie, D. (2001). Plume-driven upwelling under central Iceland. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 194, 67^82. Maclennan, J., Eiler, J. M., Gronvold, K., Kitchen, N., McKenzie, D. & Shimizu, N. (2003). Melt mixing and crystallization under Theistareykir, northeast Iceland. Geochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems 4, doi:10.1029/2003GC000558. Maclennan, J., Hulme, T. & Singh, S. C. (2004). Thermal models of oceanic crustal accretion: Linking geophysical, geological and petrological observations. Geochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems 5, doi: 10.1029/2003GC000605. Marti, J. & Folch, A. (2005). Anticipating volcanic eruptions. In: Ernst, G. G. J. (ed.) Volcanoes and the Environment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 90^120. McCann, V. & Barton, M. (2004).Oxygen fugacities of lavas from Iceland and implications for mantle redox states. EOS Transactions, American Geophysical Union 85(17), Joint Assembly Supplement, U53A-06. McGarvie, D. W. (1984). Torfajoekull; a volcano dominated by magma mixing. Geology 12, 685^688. Menke, W., Brandsdottir, B., Sparks, D. & West, M. (1998). Compressional and shear velocity structure of the lithosphere in Northern Ireland. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 88, 1561^1571. Menke, W. & Sparks, D. (1995). Crustal accretion model for Iceland predicts ‘cold’ crust. Geophysical Research Letters 22, 1673^1676. Meyer, P. S., Schilling, J. & Sigurdsson, H. (1985). Petrological and geochemical variations along Iceland’s neovolcanic zones. Journal of Geophysical Research, B 90, 10043^10072. Michael, P. J. & Cornell, W. C. (1998). Influence of spreading rate and magma supply on crystallization and assimilation beneath midocean ridges; evidence from chlorine and major element chemistry of mid-ocean ridge basalts. Journal of Geophysical Research, B, Solid Earth and Planets 103, 18325^18356. Moore, J. G. & Calk, L. C. (1991). Degassing and differentiation in subglacial volcanoes, Iceland. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research 46, 157^180. 488 KELLEY AND BARTON CRYSTALLIZATION PRESSURE OF ICELANDIC MAGMAS Mrk, M. B. E. (1984). Magma mixing in the post-glacial Veidivoetn fissure eruption, Southeast Iceland; a microprobe study of mineral and glass variations. Lithos 17, 55^75. Nicholls, I. A. & Ringwood, A. E. (1973). Effect of water on olivine stability in tholeiites and the production of silica saturated magmas in the island arc environment. Journal of Geology 81, 285^300. Nichols, A. R. L., Carroll, M. R. & Hoskuldsson, A. (2002). Is the Iceland hot spot also wet? Evidence from the water contents of undegassed submarine and subglacial pillow basalts. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 202, 77^87. O’Hara, M. J. (1968). Are ocean floor basalts primary magma? Nature 220, 683^686. Oskarsson, N., Sigvaldason, G. E. & Steinthorsson, S. (1985). Iceland geochemical anomaly; origin, volcanotectonics, chemical fractionation, and isotope evolution of the crust. Journal of Geophysical Research, B 90, 10011^10025. Pagli, C., Arnadottir, T., Einarsson, P., Sigmundsson, F. & Sturkell, E. (2006). Deflation of the Askja volcanic system; constraints on the deformation source from combined inversion of satellite radar interferograms and GPS measurements. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research 152, 97^108. Pan, Y. & Batiza, R. (2002). Mid-ocean ridge magma chamber processes; constraints from olivine zonation in lavas from the East Pacific Rise at 9830’N and 10830’N. Journal of Geophysical Research, B, Solid Earth and Planets 107, 13. Pan, Y. & Batiza, R. (2003). Magmatic processes under mid-ocean ridges; a detailed mineralogic study of lavas from East Pacific Rise 9830’N, 10830’N, and 11820’N. Geochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems 4, doi:10.1029/2002GC000309. Pedersen, R. & Sigmundsson, F. (2004). InSAR based sill model links spatially offset area of deformation and seismicity for the 1994 unrest episode at Ejyafjallajo«kull Volcano, Iceland. Geophysical Research Letters 31, 5. Pedersen, R. & Sigmundsson, F. (2006). Temporal developement of the 1999 intrusive episode in the Eyjafjallajo«kull volcano, Iceland, derived from InSAR images. Bulletin of Volcanology 68, 377^393. Re¤villon, S., Arndt, N. T., Hallot, E., Kerr, A. C. & Tarney, J. (1999). Petrogenesis of picrites from the Caribbean Plateau and the North Atlantic magmatic province. Lithos 49, 1^21. Rymer, H. & Tryggvason, E. (1993). Gravity and elevation changes at Askja, Iceland. Bulletin of Volcanology 55, 361^371. Rymer, H., Cassidy, J., Locke, C. A. & Sigmundsson, F. (1998). Posteruptive gravity changes from 1990 to 1996 at Krafla Volcano, Iceland. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research 87, 141^149. Sack, R. O., Carmichael, I. S. E. & Walker, D. (1987). Experimental petrology of alkalic lavas; constraints on cotectics of multiple saturation in natural basic liquids. Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology 96, 1^23. Schiellerup, H. (1995). Generation and equilibration of olivine tholeiites in the northern rift zone of Iceland; a petrogenetic study of the Bla¤fjall table mountain. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research 65, 161^179. Schilling, J. G. (1973). Iceland mantle plume. Nature 246, 141^143. Shi, P. (1993). Low-pressure phase relationships in the system Na2O^CaO^FeO^MgO^Al2O3^SiO2 at 11008C, with implications for the differentiation of basaltic magmas. Journal of Petrology 34, 743^762. Sigmundsson, F., Bilham, R. & Einarsson, P. (1992). Magma chamber deflation recorded by the Global Positioning System; the Hekla 1991 eruption. Geophysical Research Letters 19, 1483^1486. Sigmundsson, F., Einarsson, P., Foulger, G. R., Hodgkinson, K. M., Rognvaldsson, S. T. & Thorbergsson, G. (1997). The 1994^1995 seismicity and deformation at the Hengill triple junction, Iceland; triggering of earthquakes by minor magma injection in a zone of horizontal shear stress. Journal of Geophysical Research, B, Solid Earth and Planets 102, 15151^15161. Sigurdsson, H. & Sparks, R. S. J. (1978). Rifting episode in North Iceland in 1874^1875 and the eruptions of Askja and Sveinagja. Bulletin Volcanologique 41, 149^167. Sigurdsson, H. & Sparks, R. S. J. (1981). Petrology of rhyolitic and mixed magma ejecta from the 1875 eruption of Askja, Iceland. Journal of Petrology 22, 41^84. Singh, S. C., Harding, A. J., Kent, G. M., Sinha, M. C., Combier, V., Bazin, S., Tong, C. H., Pye, J. W., Barton, P. J., Hobbs, R. W., White, R. S. & Orcutt, J. A. (2006). Seismic reflection images of the Moho underlying melt sills at the East Pacific Rise. Nature 442, 287^290. Sinton, J. M. & Detrick, R. S. (1992). Mid-ocean ridge magma chambers. Journal of Geophysical Research, B, Solid Earth and Planets 97, 197^216. Sinton, J., Gronvold, K. & Saemundsson, K. (2005). Postglacial eruptive history of the Western volcanic zone, Iceland. Geochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems 6, doi:10.1029/2005GC001021. Sisson, T. W. & Grove, T. L. (1993). Temperatures and H2O contents of low-MgO high-alumina basalts. Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology 113, 167^184. Slater, L., Gronvold, K., McKenzie, D. & Shimizu, N. (2001). Melt generation and movement beneath Theistareykir, NE Iceland. Journal of Petrology 42, 321^354. Soosalu, H. & Einarsson, P. (1997). Seismicity around the Hekla and Torfajo«kull volcanoes, Iceland, during a volcanically quiet period, 1991^1995. Bulletin of Volcanology 59, 36^48. Soosalu, H. & Einarsson, P. (2004). Seismic constraints on magma chambers at Hekla and Torfajo«kull volcanoes, Iceland. Bulletin of Volcanology 66, 276^286. Soosalu, H., Jonsdottir, K. & Einarsson, P. (2006a). Seismicity crisis at the Katla volcano, Icelandçsigns of a cryptodome? Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research 153, 177^186. Soosalu, H., Lippitsch, R. & Einarsson, P. (2006b). Low-frequency earthquakes at the Torfajo«kull volcano, south Iceland. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research 153, 187^199. Spulber, S. D. & Rutherford, M. J. (1983). The origin of rhyolite and plagiogranite in oceanic crust; an experimental study. Journal of Petrology 24, 1^25. Staples, R. K., Brandsdottir, B., Maguire, P. K. H., McBride, J. H., Menke, W. & White, R. S. (1997). Faroe^Iceland Ridge experiment; 1, Crustal structure of northeastern Iceland. Journal of Geophysical Research, B, Solid Earth and Planets 102, 7849^7866. Steinthorsson, S., Oskarsson, N. & Sigvaldason, G. E. (1985). Origin of alkali basalts in Iceland; a plate tectonic model. Journal of Geophysical Research, B 90, 10027^10042. Sturkell, E. & Sigmundsson, F. (2000). Continuous deflation of the Askja Caldera, Iceland, during the 1983^1998 noneruptive period. Journal of Geophysical Research, B, Solid Earth and Planets 105, 25671^25684. Sturkell, E., Einarsson, P. & Sigmundsson, F. (2003). Recent unrest and magma movements at Eyjafjallajo«kull and Katla Volcanoes, Iceland. Journal of Geophysical Research, B, Solid Earth and Planets 108, 13. Sturkell, E., Einarsson, P., Freysteinn, S., Holldor, G., Olafsson, O., Pedersen, R., de Zeeuw-van Dalfsen, E., Linde, A. T., Sacks, I. S. & Stefansson, R. (2006). Volcano geodesy and magma dynamics in Iceland. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research 150, 14^34. Sugawara, T. (2000). Empirical relationships between temperature, pressure, and MgO content in olivine and pyroxene saturated 489 JOURNAL OF PETROLOGY VOLUME 49 liquid. Journal of Geophysical Research, B, Solid Earth and Planets 105, 8457^8472. Thy, P. (1991). High and low pressure phase equilibria of a mildly alkalic lava from the 1965 Surtsey eruption; experimental results. Lithos 26, 223^243. Thy, P. & Lofgren, G. E. (1994). Experimental constraints on the low-pressure evolution of transitional and mildly alkalic basalts; the effect of Fe^Ti oxide minerals and the origin of basaltic andesites. Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology 116, 340^351. Tormey, D. R., Bryan, W. B. & Grove, T. L. (1987). Experimental petrology of normal MORB near the Kane fracture zone; 228^258N, Mid-Atlantic Ridge. Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology 96, 121^139. Trnnes, R. (1990). Basaltic melt evolution of the Hengill Volcanic System, SW Iceland, and evidence for clinopyroxene assimilation in primitive tholeiitic magmas. Journal of Geophysical Research 95, 15893^15910. Tryggvason, E. (1980). Observed ground deformation during the Krafla eruption of March 16, 1980. Nordic Volcanological Institute, University of Iceland, Series: Nordic Volcanological Institute 0258^7718, 80^05. Tryggvason, E. (1986). Multiple magma reservoirs in a rift zone volcano; ground deformation and magma transport during the September 1984 eruption of Krafla, Iceland. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research 28, 1^44. Tryggvason, E. (1989). Ground deformation in Askja, Iceland; its source and possible relation to flow of the mantle plume. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research 39, 61^71. Tryggvason, E. (1994a). Surface deformation at the Krafla Volcano, North Iceland, 1982^1992. Bulletin of Volcanology 56, 98^107. Tryggvason, E. (1994b). Observed ground deformation at Hekla, Iceland prior to and during the eruptions of 1970, 1980^1981 and 1991. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research 61, 281^291. Walker, D., DeLong, S. E. & Shibata, T. (1979). Abyssal tholeiites from the Oceanographer fracture zone; II, Phase equilibria and mixing. Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology 70, 111^125. Weaver, J. S. & Langmuir, C. H. (1990). Calculation of phase equilibrium in mineral^melt systems. Computers & Geosciences 16, 1^19. Weir, N. R. W., Brandsdottir, B., Darbyshire, F., Einarsson, P., Gunnarsson, G., Hjorleifsdottir, V., Jonsdottir, K., Mochizuki, M., Nakanishi, A., Shimamura, H., Shiobara, H., Smallwood, J., Staples, R. & White, R. S. (2001). Crustal structure of the northern Reykjanes Ridge and Reykjanes Peninsula, Southwest Iceland. Journal of Geophysical Research, B, Solid Earth and Planets 106, 6347^6368. White, R. S. & McKenzie, D. (1995). Mantle plumes and flood basalts. Journal of Geophysical Research, B, Solid Earth and Planets 100, 17543^17585. White, R. S., McKenzie, D. & O’Nions, R. K. (1992). Oceanic crustal thickness from seismic measurements and rare earth element inversions. Journal of Geophysical Research, B, Solid Earth and Planets 97, 19683^19715. Yang, H. J., Grove, T. L. & Kinzler, R. J. (1996). Experiments and models of anhydrous, basaltic olivine^plagioclase^augite saturated melts from 0001 to 10 kbar. Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology 124, 1^18. A P P E N D I X A : C A L C U L AT I O N OF PR ESSU R E Yang et al. (1996, table 3) presented three equations that allow direct calculation of pressure. These equations are NUMBER 3 MARCH 2008 used to calculate a series of liquid compositions (LP) lying along the ol^plag^cpx cotectic for the sample of interest at increments of 100 MPa (see Table A1). The liquid compositions are converted to normative mineral components using the procedure described by Grove et al. (1993) assuming that Fe ¼ FeO, and projected from plag onto the plane ol^cpx^qtz and from ol onto the plane plag^cpx^qtz. The pressure dependence of each normative mineral component in the predicted liquids (LP) is found by regression, and the pressure of crystallization is found from the regression equations using the projected normative mineral components for the original sample (LS). Thus for the projection from plag, values of P are calculated from predicted and observed ol, cpx and qtz, whereas for the projection from ol, values of P are calculated from predicted and observed plag, cpx and qtz. We have used these two projections because most basalt melts are saturated with plag and ol, and obtain six values of P for each sample. The average value is taken as the pressure of crystallization, and all values are used to calculate the uncertainty (1s) associated with the calculated pressure. An Excel spreadsheet to perform these calculations is available as Supplementary Data at http://www.petrol ogy.oxfordjournals.org/. The approach described above uses all three of the equations given by Yang et al. (1996) to calculate pressure. In contrast, Michael & Cornell (1998) used one of the equations of Yang et al. [1996, equation (2)] to calculate the pressures of crystallization of MORB. Results obtained using the two methods are compared in Appendix B. A P P E N D I X B : AC C U R AC Y A N D PRECISION In principle, accuracy can be determined by comparing pressures calculated for glasses produced in experiments with the reported run pressure. A problem with this approach is that experimental glass compositions show considerable variability, much greater than that expected from analytical uncertainties, which reflects problems inherent in experimental studies (e.g. Ford et al., 1983; Yang et al., 1996; Falloon et al., 2001). These include uncertainties in measurement of pressure and temperature, unknown amounts of volatiles in nominally anhydrous experiments, loss of Fe2þ and alkalis from the charge during the experiment, modification of melt compositions by quench crystallization, and run durations too short for the attainment of equilibrium. It appears that some experimental glasses reported to be in equilibrium with ol, plag, and cpx do not have compositions that represent liquids lying on the ol^plag^cpx cotectic. Accordingly, large differences are expected between calculated and experimental pressures, leading to poor estimates of accuracy. 490 KELLEY AND BARTON CRYSTALLIZATION PRESSURE OF ICELANDIC MAGMAS Table A1: Example of method used to calculate pressure Sample 1.7.41 Content (wt %) SiO2 Al2O3 TiO2 Fe2O3 FeO MnO MgO CaO Na2O K2O P2O5 Total 476 159 123 0 1008 017 918 129 18 01 011 99070 P (kbar) Plag projection Ol Ol projection Cpx Qtz Plag Cpx Qtz Sample2 4278 5189 533 6866 2843 292 Predicted3 2893 7145 038 6107 3914 021 1 3080 6883 037 6226 3754 020 2 3271 6615 114 6347 3591 062 3 3467 6341 192 6469 3427 104 4 3667 6061 272 6593 3261 146 5 3871 5775 354 6718 3092 190 6 4080 5482 438 6846 2921 233 7 4294 5182 524 6974 2748 278 8 4513 4875 612 7105 2572 323 9 4738 4561 701 7237 2394 368 10 4967 4239 793 7371 2214 414 11 5203 3910 888 7507 2031 461 12 5444 3572 984 7645 1846 509 047 034 117 078 058 227 1336 2425 070 4749 2286 062 0001 Slope4 Intercept4 R2 09985 09985 09985 09995 09995 09995 P calc.5 677 682 695 606 636 723 Results: average P ¼ 670 kbar (1s ¼ 042 kbar, range ¼ 117 kbar); the average, 1s, and range were calculated from six pressures obtained by regression. iPlag–Ol ¼ 030 (where iPlag–Ol is the difference between average P calculated for Plag projection and average P calculated for Ol projection). 1 Glass analysis from Schiellerup (1995). 2 Projected mineral components for sample 1.7.4 calculated using procedure of Tormey et al. (1987). 3 Projected mineral components calculated at the pressures listed in Column 1 using procedure of Tormey et al. (1987). 4 Slope and intercept from regression of projected mineral components (Columns 3–8) vs P (Column 1). 5 Pressures calculated from regressions and projected mineral components for sample 1.7.4. The experimental glass compositions used to construct Fig. 2 are taken from the sources listed in the figure caption. Glass compositions from experiments on natural samples were combined with glass analyses from experiments by Shi (1993) in the system CaO^MgO^Al2O3^SiO2^ FeO^Na2O and used to map the likely positions of the cotectic at different pressures (samples with anomalous compositions, that plot off the main data array at a given pressure, were discarded). The actual positions of the cotectic were located using a subset of these glasses that have compositions that form tightly defined arrays in projections such as those shown in Fig. 2, and therefore appear to anchor the positions of the cotectic at different pressures. The glass compositions in both datasets (excluding alkaline compositions and glasses from Shi’s experiments) were used to test the accuracy of pressures calculated for sub-alkaline and transitional compositions. For the extended dataset (91 glasses), calculated pressures agree with experimental pressures to 120 MPa (1s), which is about the same as uncertainties for pressures calculated by similar methods (Herzberg, 2004). For the smaller dataset (59 glasses), calculated pressures agree with experimental pressures to 90 MPa (1s). These results suggest that reported pressures are accurate to 110 MPa. Pressures were also calculated using the method described by Michael & Cornell (1998). For the extended dataset (91 glasses), pressures calculated using equation (2) of Yang et al. (1996) agree with experimental pressures to 160 MPa (1s), whereas for the smaller dataset (59 glasses), calculated pressures agree with experimental 491 JOURNAL OF PETROLOGY VOLUME 49 pressures to 120 MPa (1s). These results indicate that pressures calculated using the method used here are more accurate than those estimated using the method described by Michael & Cornell (1988). Yang et al. (1996) estimated the uncertainty in pressure estimates (precision) from the standard deviation of the NUMBER 3 MARCH 2008 mean of replicate electron microprobe analyses, and obtained a value of about 50 MPa (2s). The uncertainties in calculated pressures for the experimental datasets determined as described in Appendix A are somewhat larger than this value, 60^80 MPa (1s). 492
Related documents