Socompa

Coordinates: 24°23′45.24″S 068°14′45.59″W / 24.3959000°S 68.2459972°W / -24.3959000; -68.2459972
This is a good article. Click here for more information.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Socompa
Ultra,
Coordinates24°23′45.24″S 068°14′45.59″W / 24.3959000°S 68.2459972°W / -24.3959000; -68.2459972[1][2]
Geography
LocationArgentina – Chile
Parent rangeAndes
Geology
Mountain typeStratovolcano
Last eruption5250 BCE (?)
Climbing
First ascent1908 - Friedrich Reichert (Germany)[3][4]
Easiest routeglacier/snow

Socompa is a large stratovolcano at the border of Argentina and Chile with an elevation of 6,051 metres (19,852 ft) metres. Part of the Chilean and Argentine Andean Volcanic Belt (AVB), it is within the Central Volcanic Zone, one of the various segments of the AVB. This part of the Andean volcanic belt begins in Peru and runs first through Bolivia and Chile, and then through Argentina and Chile, and contains about 44 active volcanoes. Socompa lies close to the pass of the same name, where the Salta-Antofagasta railway crosses the border.

Socompa is known for its large

lava flows
and much of the scar is now filled in.

Socompa is also noteworthy for the high-altitude biotic communities that are bound to fumaroles on the mountain and form well above the regular vegetation in the region. The climate on the mountain is cold and dry.

Geography and geomorphology

Socompa is situated on the border between

Inca constructions have been reported either from its slopes[13][14] or from its summit.[15][14] The name comes from the Kunza language and may be related to socke and sokor, which mean "spring" or "arm of water".[16]

The volcano is part of the

monogenetic volcanoes and silicic caldera volcanoes. A number of older inactive volcanoes are well preserved owing to the dry climate of the region. Many of these systems are in remote regions and thus are poorly studied, but pose little threat to humans. The largest historical eruption in the Central Volcanic Zone occurred in 1600 at Huaynaputina in Peru, and the recently most active volcano is Lascar in Chile.[17]

Socompa is a 6,051-metre (19,852 ft) high

summit crater at an altitude of 5,850 metres (19,190 ft),[30] and four additional craters occur northeast of the summit at altitudes of 5,600 to 5,800 metres (18,400–19,000 ft).[31] Northwest of the summit, a dacitic lava dome is the source of a 500-metre (1,600 ft) high talus slope. [30] The summit area is surrounded by an inwards-dropping scarp that opens to the northwest and whose southern margin is buried by lava flows. Pyroclastic flows crop out beneath lava flows in the northwestern segment of the volcano, within the scarp. On the southern and eastern side the scarp is 5 kilometres (3.1 mi) long and 200–400 metres (660–1,310 ft) high,[26] while the southern side is about 9 kilometres (5.6 mi) long.[30] A large wedge-shaped scar is recognizable on the northwestern flank,[32] delimited by prominent scarps running through the western and northern flanks of the edifice.[33] The existence of a lake in the summit area within the scarps at an elevation of 5,300 metres (17,400 ft) has been reported.[18]

On the northeastern flank a

Magnetotelluric investigation has identified a structure at 2–7 kilometres (1.2–4.3 mi) depth[37] that may be Socompa's magma chamber.[38]

Sector collapse

Socompa suffered a major sector collapse during the Holocene,[5] forming one of the largest terrestrial collapse deposits.[39] The deposit left by the collapse was first discovered on aerial photography in 1978 but it was correctly identified as a landslide in 1985;[27] at first, it was interpreted as a form of moraine,[40] then as a large pyroclastic flow[41] and the collapse scar as a caldera.[42]

The collapse removed about 70° (about 12 kilometres (7.5 mi)[43]) of Socompa's circumference on its northwestern side, descended over a vertical distance of about 3,000 metres (9,800 ft) and spread over distances of over 40 kilometres (25 mi),[27] at a modelled speed of c. 100 metres per second (220 mph).[44] As it descended, the landslide had sufficient energy that it was able to override topographic obstacles and climb over an elevation of about 250 metres (820 ft); secondary landslides occurred on the principal deposit[43] and there is evidence that the landslide was reflected back from its margins.[45] The collapse occurred in several steps, with the first parts to fail ending up at the largest distances from the volcano;[46] it is not established whether the collapse happened in a single event or as several separate failures.[47] The total volume of material removed was about 19.2 cubic kilometres (4.6 cu mi), which was dilated as it flowed and eventually ended up as a deposit with a volume of 25.7 cubic kilometres (6.2 cu mi);[48] thorough mixing of the avalanche material occurred as the landslide progressed.[49] The summit of the volcano was cut by the collapse and some lava domes embedded within the volcano were exposed in the rim of the collapse amphitheatre;[26] before the collapse the volcano was about 6,300 metres (20,700 ft) high.[50]

The collapse left a triangle-shaped collapse scar,

lava flows and pyroclastic flows – some of which emerge from the western rim of the collapse scar – filled up the scar left by the collapse.[27] A structure in the scar, named Domo del Núcleo, may either be a remnant of the pre-collapse volcano, or collapse debris.[29]

A similar collapse took place in the 1980 eruption of Mount St. Helens.[5] The occurrence of the large landslide at Mount St. Helens probably aided in the subsequent identification of the Socompa deposit as a landslide remnant.[53] Other volcanoes have suffered from large scale collapses as well; this includes Aucanquilcha, Lastarria and Llullaillaco.[54] In the case of Socompa, the occurrence of the collapse was probably influenced by a northwest tilt of the basement the volcano was constructed on; it caused the volcano to slide downward in its northwestern sector and made it prone to a collapse in that direction.[55]

The collapse happened about 6180+280
−640 years ago,[56] it was not witnessed in historical records.[5] This event probably lasted only 12 minutes, based on simulations.[41] The growth rate of the volcano increased after the collapse, probably due to the mass removal unloading the magmatic system.[57]

There is evidence in the collapse deposit that a lava flow was being erupted on the volcano when the landslide occurred,[58] which together with the presence of pyroclastic fallout on the southwestern side of Socompa implies the collapse may have been started by volcanic activity. The quantity of water in the edifice rocks was probably minor.[59][60] Another theory assumes that the volcanic edifice was destabilized by ductile and mechanically weak layers beneath Socompa; under the weight of the volcano these layers can deform and "flow" outward from the edifice, causing the formation of thrusts at its foot.[61] Evidence of such spreading of the basement under Socompa has been found.[62]

The collapse generated a large amount of energy, about 380 petajoules (1.1×1011 kWh).[48] Some evidence in the form of tephra suggests that the collapse was accompanied by a lateral blast,[63] but other research found no such evidence.[33] Such sector collapse events are catastrophic phenomena, and the debris avalanches associated with them can reach large distances from the original volcano.[64] The fragmentation of rocks during the landslide and the fine material generated during this process might enhance the fluidity of the avalanche, allowing it to spread far away from the source.[54]

Landslide deposit

A number of tongue-like protrusions expand radially from a central point
Socompa from space, the sector collapse deposit lies on the upper side

The collapse deposit covers a surface area of 490 square kilometres (190 sq mi),

Nevado de Colima collapse.[65] It forms the Negros de Aras surface northwest of the volcano and the El Cenizal surface due north, where it has a hook-like surface distribution;[66] the name "Negros de Aras" was given to the deposit before it was known that it had been formed by a landslide.[67] The thickness of the deposit varies, with thin segments in the extreme southeastern and southwestern parts being less than 10 metres (33 ft) thick and the central parts reaching 90 metres (300 ft).[68]

The deposit spreads to a maximum width of 20 kilometres (12 mi) and is bounded by levees higher than 40 metres (130 ft), which are less prominent on the eastern side.[67] As later parts of the collapse overrode the earlier segments, they formed a northeast-trending scarp in the deposit, across which there is a striking difference in the surface morphology of the collapse.[69] The landslide deposit has been stratigraphically subdivided into two units, the Monturaqui unit and the El Cenizal unit. The first unit forms most of the surface and consists itself of several subunits, one of which includes basement rocks that were integrated into the collapse as it occurred.[58] Likewise, the El Cenizal unit entrained basement rocks such as playa deposits.[70] The amount of basement material is noticeably large and might form as much as 80% of the landslide volume;[41] the topography of the northwestern side of the volcano may have prevented the mass failure from being localized along the basement-edifice surface area, explaining the large volume of basement involved.[71] Further, the basement-derived material was probably mechanically weak and thus allowed the landslide to move over shallow slopes.[72] This basement material forms part of the white surfaces in the landslide deposit; other bright areas are formed by fumarolically altered material.[73] The basement material was originally considered to be pumice.[52]

The landslide deposit contains large blocks, so called toreva blocks, which were torn from the mountain and came to a standstill unmodified, forming ridges up to several 100 metres (330 ft) high;[58] the largest such blocks are 2.5 kilometres (1.6 mi) long and 1 kilometre (0.62 mi) wide,[43] and their total volume is about 11 cubic kilometres (2.6 cu mi).[72] These blocks form an almost closed semicircle at the mouth of the collapse amphitheatre and in part retain the previous stratigraphy of the volcano.[74] Such toreva blocks are far more frequent in submarine landslides than subaerial ones and their occurrence at Socompa may reflect the relatively non-explosive nature of the collapse and material properties of the collapsed mass.[71] Aside from the toreva blocks, individual blocks with sizes of up to 25 metres (82 ft) occur in the deposit and form large boulder fields. In addition to the blocks, the surface of the landslide deposit contains hummock-like hills and small topographic depressions.[43] Part of the landslide deposit was later covered by pyroclastic flows, and this covered area is known as the Campo Amarillo. As it descended, the landslide deposit filled a shallow valley that previously existed northwest of the volcano,[27] as well as a larger northeast-striking depression.[72] A lava flow was rafted on the avalanche to the El Cenizal area and ended up there almost unmodified.[75]

The collapse deposit is well preserved by the

arid climate, among the best preserved such deposits in the world.[5] However, because of its sheer size,[27] its structure and stratigraphy were only appreciated with the help of remote sensing.[5] Pleistocene lava flows and a northwest-striking drainage were buried by the landslide but can still be discerned from aerial imagery; apart from these and some hills most of the area covered by the landslide was relatively flat.[68] At La Flexura, part of the basement beneath the avalanche crops out from the ground.[41]

Geology

Socompa as seen from nearby railway station Socompa

Regional

Volcanism in the Central Volcanic Zone of the Andes is caused by the

Peru-Chile Trench at a rate of 7–9 centimetres per year (2.8–3.5 in/year). Volcanism does not occur among the entire length of the trench; where the slab is subducting beneath the South America Plate at a shallow angle there is no recent volcanic activity.[17]

The style of subduction has changed over time. About 27 million years ago, the Farallon Plate which hitherto had been subducting beneath South America broke up and the pace of subduction increased, causing increased volcanism. Around the same time, after the Eocene, the subduction angle increased beneath the Altiplano and caused the development of this plateau either from magmatic underplating and/or from crustal shortening; eventually the crust there became much thicker.[17]

Local

A few black tongues in the middle between orange rocks left and white powdery-appearing rocks right
El Negrillar volcano just north of Socompa; the white area to the right is part of the Socompa landslide deposit

Socompa forms a northeast-trending alignment with neighbouring volcanoes such as

lava flows.[78] One of these centres is El Negrillar just north of the collapse deposit,[79] which was active during the Pleistocene and formed andesite-basaltic andesite lavas unlike the eruption products of Socompa itself.[80]

A 200-kilometre (120 mi) long

Cordon de Puntas Negras and the rim of the large La Pacana caldera farther north are also influenced by this lineament.[81] A north-south trending lineament called the Llullaillaco Lineament is also linked to Socompa and to the Mellado volcano farther south.[77]

To the west Socompa is bordered by the Sierra de Alameida (or Almeida), which farther north merges into the

glacial activity unlike the younger Socompa.[83]

Basement

A multicoloured landscape of Chile taken from space
A spaceborne image of the region northwest of Socompa, which is recognizable in the lower right tip

The

formations and by Quaternary sedimentary and volcanic rocks. The former crop out in the Sierra de Alameida and Alto del Inca west of Socompa and the latter as the 250-metre (820 ft) thick Quebrada Salin Beds east of the volcano. Part of these beds were taken up into the avalanche as it collapsed and form the Flexura inliner,[79] others appear in the Loma del Inca area north and the Monturaqui area due west of Socompa.[66] The basement rocks are subdivided into three named formations, the Purilactis Formation of Paleozoic-Mesozoic age, the San Pedro and Tambores formations of Oligocene-Miocene age and the Miocene-Pliocene Salin formation;[36] part of the latter formation may have been erupted by Socompa itself.[80] The volcano is situated at the point where the Sierra de Alameida meets the Puna block.[6]

During the

potassium-argon dating, respectively[36]) which also crop out west of Socompa; Socompa is probably constructed on top of these ignimbrites.[78] The Arenosa ignimbrite is about 30 metres (98 ft) thick while the Tucucaro reaches a thickness of 5 metres (16 ft).[36]

Some

Pajonales: The Loma del Inca, Loma Alta and La Flexura.[61]

Composition

Socompa has erupted

hydrothermal alteration took place,[85] and clay, silt and sulfur bearing rocks are also found.[18]

Climate and ecology

There are few data on climate at Socompa. The area is windy and dry given that the volcano lies in the Desert Puna, with frequent

Periglacial landforms indicate that in the past the area was wetter, possibly thanks to the Little Ice Age.[12] There is, however, no evidence for Pleistocene glaciation including no cirques, which may be due to the volcano's young age.[91]

Socompa features

heterotrophic species.[96] Such heterotrophs include ascomycota and basidiomycota, the latter of which have noticeable similarity to Antarctic basidiomycota.[97]

The

black-headed lizard and its relative Liolaemus porosus live on its slopes,[103] and mice have been observed in the summit area.[104]

Eruptive history

Activity at Socompa commenced with the extrusion of andesites, which were followed later by dacites.

before present.[80][f]

The absence of moraines on Socompa suggests that volcanic activity occurred during post-glacial time.[27] The volcano also has a young appearance, similar to historically active Andean volcanoes such as San Pedro, implying recent volcanic activity.[53]

There is no evidence for historical activity at Socompa

fumarolic activity and the emission of CO
2 have been observed.[111] The fumarolic activity occurs at at least six sites[112] and is relatively weak;[90] anecdotal reports indicate a smell of sulfur on the summit.[9] Ongoing uplift of the edifice began in[35] November 2019 and is ongoing as of October 2021,[113] and could be caused by the arrival of new magma.[114] As of 2023 there is no ground-based monitoring of the volcano.[113] Socompa is considered to be Argentina's 13th most dangerous volcano out of 38.[115] Apart from the Socompa railway station and mining camps west of the volcano, there is little infrastructure that could be impacted by future eruptions. Large explosive eruptions during summer may result in pyroclastic fallout west of the volcano, while during the other seasons fallout would be concentrated east of it.[76]

geothermal power plant on Socompa to supply energy;[119] the Argentine Servicio Geológico Minero agency started exploration work in January 2018 for geothermal power production.[120]

See also

Notes

  1. ^ On the Argentine side known as the General Manuel Belgrano Railway.[7]
  2. ALOS 5,998 metres (19,678 ft)[22] and TanDEM-X 6,066 metres (19,902 ft).[23]
  3. parent peak is Ojos del Salado and the Topographic isolation is 302.2 kilometres (187.8 mi).[25]
  4. ^ Also spelled Socompa Caipe[82] or Caipis. Caipi in Quechua means "here".[16]
  5. ^ The moss Globulinella halloyi was discovered on Socompa.[98]
  6. BCE rather than 5250 BP[110]

References

  1. ^ a b c "Argentina and Chile North Ultra-Prominences" Peaklist.org. Retrieved 25 February 2013.
  2. ^ "Socompa". Andes Specialists. Retrieved 12 April 2020.
  3. ^ Jorge González (2011). Historia del Montañismo Argentino.
  4. ^ Federico Reichert (1967). En la cima de las montañas y de la vida.
  5. ^ a b c d e f g h Wadge, Francis & Ramirez 1995, p. 309.
  6. ^ a b c d van Wyk de Vries et al. 2001, p. 227.
  7. ^ Zappettini et al. 2001, p. 1.
  8. ISSN 0716-324X
    .
  9. ^ a b c d e "Socompa". volcano.oregonstate.edu. Retrieved 20 July 2017.
  10. ISSN 0717-7356
    .
  11. ^ Fundación Miguel Lillo 2018, p. 436.
  12. ^ a b Halloy 1991, p. 249.
  13. S2CID 134428867
    .
  14. ^
    S2CID 229210166
    .
  15. ISSN 0718-1043
    .
  16. ^
    ISSN 2250-7132
    .
  17. ^
    ISSN 0716-0208
    .
  18. ^ a b c d e f Halloy 1991, p. 248.
  19. OCLC 4875122
    .
  20. ^ USGS, EROS Archive. "USGS EROS Archive - Digital Elevation - SRTM Coverage Maps". Retrieved 12 April 2020.
  21. ^ a b "ASTER GDEM Project". ssl.jspacesystems.or.jp. Retrieved 14 April 2020.
  22. ^ "ALOS GDEM Project". Retrieved 14 April 2020.
  23. ^ TanDEM-X, TerraSAR-X. "Copernicus Space Component Data Access". Retrieved 12 April 2020.
  24. ^ "Andean Mountains - All above 5000m". Andes Specialists. Retrieved 12 April 2020.
  25. ^ "Socompa". Andes Specialists. Retrieved 12 April 2020.
  26. ^ a b c d e f Wadge, Francis & Ramirez 1995, p. 313.
  27. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k Wadge, Francis & Ramirez 1995, p. 310.
  28. ^ Favetto et al. 2018, p. 2.
  29. ^ a b c Grosse et al. 2022, p. 2.
  30. ^ a b c Wadge, Francis & Ramirez 1995, p. 314.
  31. ^ Wadge, Francis & Ramirez 1995, pp. 314, 315.
  32. ^ van Wyk de Vries et al. 2001, p. 229.
  33. ^ a b van Wyk de Vries et al. 2001, p. 230.
  34. ^ Grosse et al. 2022, p. 7.
  35. ^ a b Guevara, Apaza & Favetto 2023, p. 1.
  36. ^ a b c d van Wyk de Vries et al. 2001, p. 228.
  37. ^ Guevara, Apaza & Favetto 2023, p. 5.
  38. ^ Guevara, Apaza & Favetto 2023, p. 6.
  39. ^ van Wyk de Vries et al. 2001, p. 225.
  40. S2CID 128824938
    .
  41. ^ a b c d Doucelance et al. 2014, p. 2284.
  42. ^ Deruelle 1978, p. 176.
  43. ^ a b c d e Francis et al. 1985, p. 601.
  44. ^ Kelfoun & Druitt 2005, p. 12.
  45. ^ Davies, McSaveney & Kelfoun 2010, p. 941.
  46. ^ Wadge, Francis & Ramirez 1995, p. 334.
  47. ^ Wadge, Francis & Ramirez 1995, p. 335.
  48. ^ a b Wadge, Francis & Ramirez 1995, p. 329.
  49. ^ Doucelance et al. 2014, p. 2293.
  50. ^ Wadge, Francis & Ramirez 1995, p. 326.
  51. ^ Wadge, Francis & Ramirez 1995, p. 315.
  52. ^ a b van Wyk de Vries et al. 2001, p. 226.
  53. ^ a b c Francis et al. 1985, p. 600.
  54. ^ a b Doucelance et al. 2014, p. 2283.
  55. ISSN 0091-7613
    .
  56. ^ Grosse et al. 2022, p. 11.
  57. ^ Grosse et al. 2022, p. 14.
  58. ^ a b c Wadge, Francis & Ramirez 1995, p. 319.
  59. ^ Grosse et al. 2022, p. 13.
  60. ^ a b Wadge, Francis & Ramirez 1995, p. 331.
  61. ^ a b van Wyk de Vries et al. 2001, p. 239.
  62. ^ van Wyk de Vries et al. 2001, p. 242.
  63. ^ Francis et al. 1985, p. 603.
  64. ^ Doucelance et al. 2014, p. 2282.
  65. ^ Davies, McSaveney & Kelfoun 2010, p. 933.
  66. ^ a b Wadge, Francis & Ramirez 1995, p. 312.
  67. ^ a b Wadge, Francis & Ramirez 1995, p. 318.
  68. ^ a b Wadge, Francis & Ramirez 1995, p. 327.
  69. ^ Wadge, Francis & Ramirez 1995, pp. 318, 319.
  70. ^ Wadge, Francis & Ramirez 1995, p. 320.
  71. ^ a b Wadge, Francis & Ramirez 1995, p. 332.
  72. ^ a b c Kelfoun & Druitt 2005, p. 2.
  73. ^ Francis et al. 1985, p. 602.
  74. ^ Wadge, Francis & Ramirez 1995, p. 316.
  75. ^ van Wyk de Vries et al. 2001, p. 234.
  76. ^
    ISSN 0717-7305. Archived from the original
    (PDF) on June 29, 2021. Retrieved 20 August 2021.
  77. ^ a b Conde Serra et al. 2020, p. 10.
  78. ^ a b Wadge, Francis & Ramirez 1995, p. 311.
  79. ^ a b Wadge, Francis & Ramirez 1995, pp. 310–312.
  80. ^ a b c Rissmann et al. 2015, p. 166.
  81. S2CID 129372984
    .
  82. ^ Zappettini et al. 2001, p. 21.
  83. ^ van Wyk de Vries et al. 2001, pp. 227, 228.
  84. ^ Deruelle 1978, p. 178.
  85. ^ Conde Serra et al. 2020, p. 14.
  86. ISSN 1523-0430
    .
  87. ^ Schmidt, Naff & Lynch 2012, p. 444.
  88. ^ Halloy 1991, p. 251.
  89. ^ Halloy 1991, p. 252.
  90. ^ a b c Costello et al. 2009, p. 735.
  91. ISSN 0022-1430
    .
  92. ^ Halloy 1991, p. 247.
  93. ^ a b Costello et al. 2009, p. 736.
  94. ^ Costello et al. 2009, p. 741.
  95. ^ Costello et al. 2009, p. 744.
  96. ^ Costello et al. 2009, p. 745.
  97. ^ Schmidt, Naff & Lynch 2012, p. 447.
  98. S2CID 84535943
    .
  99. ^ Fundación Miguel Lillo 2018, p. 160.
  100. ^ Halloy 1991, p. 255.
  101. ^ Halloy 1991, p. 260.
  102. ^ Schmidt, Naff & Lynch 2012, p. 445.
  103. ^ Fundación Miguel Lillo 2018, p. 220.
  104. PMID 36118797 – via ResearchGate
    .
  105. ^ Deruelle 1978, p. 182.
  106. Tucuman
    : 20th Chilean Geological Congress. p. 503. Retrieved 20 January 2018.
  107. ^ Grosse et al. 2022, p. 10.
  108. ^ a b Grosse et al. 2022, p. 4.
  109. ^ Grosse et al. 2022, p. 3.
  110. ^ "Socompa". Global Volcanism Program. Smithsonian Institution.
  111. ^ Halloy 1991, p. 254.
  112. S2CID 4056499
    .
  113. ^ a b Liu et al. 2023, p. 2.
  114. ^ Liu et al. 2023, p. 8.
  115. S2CID 240436373
    .
  116. ^ Rissmann et al. 2015, p. 172.
  117. S2CID 146490531
    .
  118. ^ Favetto et al. 2018, p. 3.
  119. ISSN 0718-235X. Archived from the original
    on 23 April 2018.
  120. ^ Townley, Richard (9 January 2018). "Geothermal volcano exploration moves ahead in Argentina – BNamericas". BNamericas. Retrieved 20 January 2018.

References

External links

Wikimedia Commons has media related to Socompa.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Socompa&oldid=1213997090"