Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research, 52 ( 1992 ) 231-246 231

Elsevier Science Publishers B.V., Amsterdam

A review on phreatic eruptions and their precursors

F. Barberi a, A. Bertagnini a, P. Landi a and C. Principeb

a GNV, Dipartimento di Scienze della Terra Universit&di Pisa, Via S. Maria, 53, 56126 Pisa, Italy
b GNV, Istituto di Geocronologia e Geochimica Isotopica-CNR, Pisa, Italy
(Received 11 July 1991; revised version accepted 16 January 1992 )

ABSTRACT

Barberi, F., Bertagnini, A., Landi, P. and Principe, C., 1992. A review on phreatic eruptions and their precursors. J. Vol-
canol. Geotherm. Res., 52: 231-246.

An analysis of the reported information on 132 historical phreatic events indicates that most of these ( 115 ) were not
followed by a magrnatic or phreatomagmatic eruption. Only in 18 cases precursory phenomena are reportedly lacking,
whereas they are recognized for the majority (72) of the considered cases. These precursors have been analyzed as a
function of the kind of phreatic event and of its possible triggering mechanism. Unfortunately, the quality of the available
information is poor. However, data suggest that anomalous seismicity, ground deformation, changes in the output, chem-
istry and temperature of fumaroles and thermal springs are potential mid-term precursors, whereas seismic tremor is a
common short-term precursor.

Introduction 1979:2 victims). Moreover, because of the

weak energy involved and since they can be
triggered merely by perturbations of the shal-
Phreatic eruptions are local phenomena that
low geothermal system, phreatic eruptions
only affect a limited area surrounding the ex-
might escape detection by conventional vol-
plosive vent(s). In densely populated zones,
cano monitoring systems, which are generally
however, they can constitute highly dangerous
aimed at sensing deeper magma movements.
events. Aside from the hazard from falling solid
These are the reasons that have inspired our
blocks from the explosions (Etna, 1 9 7 9 : 9
research on phreatic eruptions, which is aimed
deaths; Etna, 1987:2 deaths, Agua Shuca (El
to investigate the mechanisms involved, and to
Salvador), 1990:26 deaths), the major dan-
establish whether or not precursor phenomena
gers connected with phreatic eruptions are: ( 1 )
exist.
the discharge of clouds of toxic or paralyzing
gases (Larderello, 1282: uncertain number of
General remarks on phreatic eruptions
deaths; Dieng, 1979:149 casualties; Nyos,
1986: over 1700 casualties); and (2) the pro-
duction of base surges, lahars and directional
Terminology
blasts, sometimes accompanied by debris ava-
Some confusion exists in the literature on the
lanches (Bandai, 1888:461 victims; Karkar,
use of the term phreatic eruption. The adjec-
Correspondence to: F. Barberi, GNV, Dipartimento di tive phreatic (from the Greek "phrear" =
Scienze della Terra-Universith di Pisa, Via S. Maria, 53, well) refers to the shallowest aquifer which is,
56126, Pisa, Italy. in some way, connected to the surface. Taken

0377-0273/92/$05.00 © 1992 Elsevier Science Publishers B.V. All rights reserved.

232
literally, phreatic eruption would thus indicate
an eruption caused by the violent expansion of
steam generated from groundwater, without
the emission of any juvenile material. This
rather restrictive definition has led to the use
of various modifying terms referring to
phreatic eruptions, each with some specific
particularities. On the other hand, the rigid ap-
plication of the concept of phreatic as defined
above implies the involvement of groundwater
steam only, without the involvement not only
of magma, but also even of magmatic gases.
Such a situation is not only often hard to ascer-
tain but also does not seem to have much sci-
entific or practical importance.
Below we summarize some of the commonly
used terms for the various types of phreatic
eruptions; each of them was coined to focus on
one or more specific aspect dealing either with
the hydrogeological configuration of the natu-
ral system in which the eruption occurs or with
the eruption trigger.
Hydro-explosion: a generic term that in-
cludes all cases of eruption driven by steam
generated by the boiling of non-magmatic
water (groundwater, lakes, sea-water). This
category includes subglacial explosion, sub-
marine eruption, littoral eruption, phreatic ex-
plosion (or eruption), and phreatomagmatic
explosion (or eruption). Phreatomagmatic
eruption is caused by the explosive interaction
of the magma with external water. For some
authors, such as Schmincke (1977), phreato-
magmatic is synonymous with Vulcanian; for
a critique see Barberi et al. (1988). Juvenile
magmatic fragments must be present in the
products of phreatomagmatic activity.
Steam-blast eruption: this is a generic term
used by Jaggar (1949) for explosions pro-
duced by the violent expansion of hot fluid
medium, whatever the mechanism.
Hydrothermal explosion (or eruption): a term
chiefly used by New Zealand (Lloyd, 1959;
Hedenquist and Henley, 1985) and North
American authors (Muffler et al., 1971) for
explosions in a confined hydrothermal-geo-
v. BARBERI ET AL.
thermal system (and, hence, already in deli-
cate thermal equilibrium) without the in-
volvement of magma. Unfortunately, some
authors use the term phreatic for the eruptions
that we defined earlier as phreatomagmatic.
To avoid any confusion, in this paper we
shall use the following terminology:
- hydromagmatic eruption, when there is ex-
plosive interaction between magma and sur-
face water (sea, lake, glacier);
-phreatomagmatic eruption, when the explo-
sive interaction with magma occurs with un-
derground aquifers, phreatic or not, geother-
mal or not;
- phreatic eruption (or explosion ), for all cases
of explosion of a confined pocket of steam and
gas with no direct involvement of magma (all
ejecta are fragments of pre-existing rocks), in-
dependent of the source of the steam (phreatic
or hydrothermal system) and of the involve-
ment or not of juvenile fluids.
In this work, we shall consider only phreatic
eruptions as defined above, which in reality
covers a large variety of phenomena. The main
ones are the following:
(a) Explosions of confined geothermal sys-
tems with or without the direct action of mag-
matic fluids (these are the hydrothermal ex-
plosions of the literature). The accumulation
of steam under the impervious cap-rocks can
be due: ( 1 ) to a pressure drop caused by earth-
quakes or landslides that break up or reduce
the cover; (2) to progressive self-sealing of the
cover (Marinelli, 1969); and (3) to the rise of
isotherms by increasing heat flow;
(b) Explosions caused by the vaporization
of surface fluids percolating into the temporar-
ily plugged hot conduit of an active volcano.
Such a broad use of the term phreatic explo-
sion is certainly open to debate and possible
revising in the future. Nonetheless, to be con-
sistent wich c o m m o n usage around the world,
we thought it necessary to retain the term, at
least in the initial stage of our literature
research.
A REVIEW ON PHREAT1C ERUPTIONS AND THEIR PRECURSORS
Phreatic landforms and products
The morphological structures generated by
phreatic eruptions are phreatic explosion cra-
ters or maars. The term maar derives from
German and is the name given to numerous
crater lakes of this type present in the Eifel vol-
canic field (Oilier, 1967 ). Indeed, according to
the original user of the term, a maar crater by
definition must have a lake formed inside it
(due to clay alteration of the material at the
bottom). Nowadays, the term maar is used for
all craters cut into pre-existing rocks that fea-
ture a very low rim and a high ratio of crater
diameter to the thickness of the brecciated ma-
terial accumulated around it, whether it con-
tains a lake or not (Lorenz, 1986).
Only a limited number of phreatic eruptions
are actually capable of generating a maar; in
fact, most maars are generated by phreatomag-
matic explosions. Frequently a phreatic erup-
tion generates an explosion crater with a di-
ameter ranging from a few tens of metres to
over 1 km (Muffler et al., 1971 ) with accu-
mulation on the rim of angular fragments of
pre-existing rocks.
The main products of phreatic eruptions are
phreatic breccias with a muddy matrix. Lim-
ited base-surge episodes occur only rarely,
whereas they are very frequent in hydromag-
matic and phr'eatomagmatic eruptions. A base-
surge produced during a phreatic eruption is
obviously devoid of magma fragments (Cas
and Wright, 1986 ). A phreatic breccia is a pyr-
oclastic deposit of ballistic projectiles, devoid
of juvenile material and therefore entirely
composed of lithics of various dimensions de-
rived from the pre-existing solidified rocks in
which the crater was excavated by the explo-
sion. It has a modest extension (limited to the
radius of the ballistic trajectory of the prod-
ucts) and, like base surges, an areal distribu-
tion almost perfectly centered on the vent. The
ballistic blocks are immerged into a muddy
matrix, corresponding to mixture of fine dust
and condensed steam. Eye witnesses (Le Guern
233
et al., 1980) have described phreatic eruptions
as jets of saturated steam charged with mud
and solid fragments.
In the case of involvement of geothermal
aquifers, the lithic ejecta display evidence of
hydrothermal alteration whose mineralogical
paragenesis may allow the estimation of the
thermal conditions that existed in the involved
aquifer prior to the explosion (Hedenquist and
Henley, 1985).
Literature data analyzed
In addition to the volcanological journals
and the specific bibliography of the Depart-
ment of Earth Science of the University of Pisa,
the following literature sources were carefully
examined for reports of phreatic events: Bul-
letin of Volcanic Eruptions (appendix to the
Bulletin Volcanologique), Smithsonian Insti-
tution's SEAN Bulletin (beginning 1990 called
Global Volcanism Network Bulletin), Histor-
ical Unrest at Large Calderas of the World
(U.S. Geol. Surv. Bull., no.1855), Volcanoes
of the World (Smithsonian Institution). In ad-
dition, specific information was requested and
received from volcanological observatories in
Japan, New Zealand, Philippines, Indonesia
and United States.
Information was collected on a total of 132
phreatic eruptions, 115 of which were not fol-
lowed by a magmatic or phreatomagmatic
eruption. This number is far lower than the one
that one would obtain by simply leafing
through the Volcanoes of the World Catalog.
The difference stems from the fact that we have
ignored all the eruptions for which informa-
tion was insufficient to decide whether the
event was purely phreatic or phreatomag-
matic. Moreover, because the main aim of our
work was to identify the precursor phenomena
and the trigger mechanism, the literature search
was limited to historical eruptions. The list of
the historic phreatic eruptions considered is
given in Tables 1 and 2.
234
For each eruption the following information
sheet was compiled:
(a) Volcano identification. The identifying
serial number is taken from the Smithsonian
Institution 1981 catalog (Simkin et al., 1981 ).
(b) Eyewitness accounts and monitoring. By
eyewitness accounts we mean information
supplied by "non-experts"; under the heading
"monitoring", it is indicated whether any in-
strumental monitoring system (which may
consist merely of a regional seismic network)
was in operation at the time of the eruption or
whether at least a reliable description by
trained observers exists.
(c) Possible precursors. For the most com-
mon ones (seismicity, geochemistry of fuma-
roles and springs, ground deformations) spe-
cific spaces were reserved; under the heading
"others", anomalies of rarely monitored pa-
rameters (e.g., the intensity of the magnetic or
gravimetric field and geoelectrical changes) are
described. The heading "lake" was included to
distinguish those volcanoes having a crater
lake.
(d) Damage and products. They are indi-
cated in order to give a qualitative estimate of
the eruption energy.
(e) The bibliographic source is given under
the heading "Reference".
Results
Phreatic eruptionsfollowed by magmatic or
phreatomagmatic eruptions
In our bibliographic research, we identified
only 17 phreatic eruptions followed by an
eruption with a magmatic component (Table
1). Surely this number represents a mini-
m u m ~l), because it is expectable that most of
large magmatic eruptions are preceded by a
phreatic activity. This low number very likely
reflects the fact that the magmatic eruptions
~Two new cases in 1991 add to this list: U n z e n ( J a p a n )
and P i n a t u b o (Philippines).
V BARBERI ET AL.
distracted the reporters' attention from the
comparatively very minor phreatic phenom-
ena that preceded them, which were therefore
neglected or overlooked in the descriptions. In
5 cases, there is no reported information on
precursors; in the others, precursors are re-
ported (seismic activity, variation of fuma-
roles, ground deformation, etc.) but most
probably they are related to the uprise of the
magma rather than to the phreatic event itself.
However, it should be stressed that, in some
cases, seismic tremor was reported a few days
to a few hours prior to the phreatic eruption
and it can be identified as a possible precursor
to that event.
Phreatic eruptions not followed by magmatic
or phreatomagmatic eruptions
115 historic examples were found of isolated
phreatic eruptions, that is, not followed by
magmatic or phreatomagmatic events (Table
2).
Most of the information refers to well-stud-
ied volcanoes in Japan and New Zealand;
phreatic eruptions of various type were also re-
ported in Indonesia, Philippines and Papua
New Guinea, but most of these are poorly doc-
umented. The information is even scarcer on
the volcanoes of Central and South America,
and practically no information is available on
Kamchatka, the Aleutians and Africa.
Of the 115 eruptions slightly more than half
are single explosive events (examples: Ku-
chinoerabu, 1933; Suoh, 1933; Las Pilas, 1952;
Bandai, 1888; Yake-Yama, 1974; etc. ). The re-
maining cases are characterized by repeated
explosive events over periods ranging from a
few weeks to several months (examples: Kar-
kar 1979, 6 months; Gaua Island 1973, 4
months; La Soufri6re 1976-77, 10 months; Aso
1978, 6 months; Akan 1955-56, 8 months). In
76 cases, the eruptions occurred at volcanoes
where some kind of monitoring existed; in 24
cases the information derives only from eyew-
itness accounts of non-experts; in the remain-
A REVIEW ON PHREATIC ERUPTIONS AND THEIR PRECURSORS 235

TABLE 1

Selected phreatic eruptions followed by magmatic and/or phreatomagmatic events.

Country or Volcano CAVW Date E S P Reference

region number

Colombia Nevado del Ruiz 1501-02 11/9/1985 P E ; 1 3 / I 1 / 1 9 8 5 M E Y Y Y 88,89

Costa Rica Rincon De La 1405-12 1965-1970 N N N.d. 62
Vieja
Costa Rica Rincon De La 1405-12 1983-1987 N N N.d. 62
Vieja
Japan Aso 0802-11 24/10/1984 PE; 21/1/1985 ME N Y N.d. 87
Japan Tokachi 0805-05 24/5/1926-4/12/1928 Y N Y 58
Japan Tokachi 0805-05 29/6/1962 PE; 30/6/1962 ME Y Y Y 58, 107
Indonesia Cole 0606-01 18, 20/7/1983 PE; 23/7/1983 ME Y Y Y 40
Indonesia Lokon-Empung 0606-10 22/3/1986-13/5/1987 N Y N.d. 89, 90
Indonesia Marapi 0601-14 21/1/1978-11/9/1979 Y N Y 11, 12
Indonesia Papandajan 0603-10 1923-1925 N Y Y 61, 95
Italy Etna 0101-06 19, 25/7/1890 PE; 5/8/1890 PME Y Y Y 3, 22
New Guinea Ulawun 0502-12 11 / 1-3/9/1984 PE; 4/9/1984 ME N Y Y 16
Nicaragua Tel•ca 1404-04 Feb, 1981-Mar. 1982 N Y N.d. 14, 15
USA Mr. St. Helens 1201-05 27/3/1980 PE; 18/5/1980 PME Y Y Y 13
USSR Bezymianny 1000-25 22/10-Nov.1955 PE; 30/3/1956 ME Y Y Y 32, 74
W. Indies Montagne Pel6e 1600-12 Apr.-May 1902 PE; 8/5/1902 ME Y N Y 42
W. indies Montagne Pel6e 1600-12 Sep,-Nov. 1929 PE; 20/11/1929 ME Y N Y 42

E: eyewitness; S: some kind of instrumental surveillance in operation; P: precursors; Y = yes; N = no; N.d. = no data. PE =
phreatic eruption; ME = magmatic eruption; PME = phreatomagmatic eruption. When an acronym is not indicated, the related
time span was characterized by a dense sequence of eruptive events. CAVW: catalog of active volcanoes of the world (Simkin et
al., 1981 ). Date: day/month/year. Reference number is that given in square brackets at the end of each bibliographic entry in
the References.

ing 15 cases no information at all is supplied Total 76 events

(Fig. 1 ). (66% of sample)
Figure 2, which refers to the 76 events at
monitored volcanoes, shows the kind of mon- [] Seismicityonly
itoring in operation at the time of the event. • Geochemistryonly
[] Geodeticsand magnetometry
Seismic monitoring lacked in only 5% of the [] Seism~cityand geochemistry
cases, although it must be noted that data often [] Seismicityand geodetics
derive from regional networks generally una- [] Seismicity,geochemistryand geodetics
• Seismicity,geodeticsand magnetometry

1%

Total sample:
115 events

11%
[] From permanent
instrumental surveillance
• From eyewitness
• Nodata

1% 4%
Fig. 1. Source of information collected on historical Fig. 2. Parameters that were monitored on the site of the
phreatic eruptions. event.
236 F. BARBERIET AL.

TABLE 2

Phreatic eruptions not followed by magmatic events through 1990

Country or Volcano/geo- CAVW Date E S P Reference

Region thermal area number

Aleutian Islands Makushin 1101-31 Spring?1980 N Y N.d. 13

Cameroun Lake Nyos 21/8/1986 Y N N 6,75,96,97
Colombia Galeras 1501-08 23/2/1989 Y N Y 17
Costa Rica lrazu' 1405-06 2/3/1974-7/3/1974 N N N.d. 9
Costa Rica Poas 1405-04 1910 N N N.d. 62
Costa Rica Poas 1405-04 21/6/1972 N N N.d. 78
Costa Rica Poas 1405-04 21/6/1976-Nov. 1976 Y N N tO
Costa Rica Poas 1405-04 1978-1980 N Y Y 62,81,82,83
Costa Rica Poas 1405-04 1987-1988 N Y Y 91
Ecuador Guagua Pichincha 1502-02 Aug. 1981-Nov. 1982 Y Y Y 14,15,84,85
Ecuador Guagua Pichincha 1502-02 15/4/1990 Y Y Y 93
El Salvador Agua Shuca 1403-01 13/10/1990 Y N N 93
Japan Akan 0805-07 Nov. 1955-Jul. 1956 Y N Y 69,71
Japan Akan 0805-07 6/1/1988 N Y Y 62
Japan Aso 0802-11 3/1/1978-2/6/1978 N Y N.d. 12
Japan Aso 0802-11 26/1/1980-24/9/1980 N Y N 13
Japan Aso 0802-11 15/6/1981 N Y N 84
Japan Azuma 0803-18 19/5/1893-Jun. 1893 Y N Y 54,65
Japan Azuma 0803-18 Feb. 1950 Y N N 54
Japan Azuma 0803-18 7/12/1977 N Y Y 11,39
Japan Bandai 0803-16 15/7/1888 Y N Y 29,54,73,74
Japan Iwo-Jima 0804-12 28/3/1957 Y N Y 21
Japan Iwo-Jima 0804-12 Jan. 1976 N Y Y 62
Japan lwo-Jima 0804-12 11/12/1978 N Y Y 12
Japan lwo-Jima 0804-12 13/3/1980 Y Y N 13
Japan lwo-Jima 0804-12 9/3/1982-10/3/1982 N Y N 85
Japan Kirishima 0802-09 17/2/1959 N Y N 62
Japan Kirishima 0802-09 5/8/1971 Y Y Y 62
Japan Komagatake 0803-23 Ju1.1932 Y N Y 66
Japan Kuchinoerabu 0802-05 24/12/1933-11/1/1934 Y N Y 68
Japan Kuchinoerabu 0802-05 5/11/1973-19/11/1973 N Y Y 8
Japan Kuchinoerabu 0802-05 3/6/1974 N Y N.d. 9
Japan Kuchinoerabu 0802-05 2/4/1976 N Y Y 10
Japan Kuchinoerabu 0802-05 28/9/1980 N N N.d. 13
Japan Kusatu-Shirane 0803-12 6/8/1882 N N N.d. 98
Japan Kusatu-Shirane 0803-12 8/7/1897 Y N Y 98
Japan Kusatu-Shirane 0803-12 31/12/1927-Mar. 1928 Y N Y 98
Japan Kusatu-Shirane 0803-12 1/10/1932 Y Y Y 98
Japan Kusatu-Shirane 0803-12 27/11/1937-Oct. 1938 Y Y Y 52,55
Japan Kusatu-Shirane 0803-12 2/3/1976 N Y N.d. 10
Japan Kusatu-Shirane 0803-12 26/10/1982-Apr. 1983 N Y N,d. 85,86
Japan Ontake 0803-04 28/10/1979-1981 Y Y Y 2
Japan Tarumai 0805-04 14/5/1978-11/5/1979 N Y Y 12
Japan Tarumai 0805-04 Feb. 1981 N Y Y 14
Japan Tokachi 0805-05 19/6/1985-20/6/1985 N Y Y 62
Japan Tyokai (Chokai) 0803-22 1/3/1974-30/4/1974 Y Y Y 9,100
Japan Usu (Toya) 0805-03 25/7/1910 N Y Y 53,62,63
Japan Usu (Toya) 0805-03 23/6/1944-Oct. 1944 Y Y Y 62
Japan Yake-Dake 0803-07 6/6/1915-Aug. 1915 N N N.d. 67
Japan Yake-Dake 0803-07 17/6/1962 Y Y Y 57
Japan Yake-Yama 0803-09 5/2/1949 N Y N.d. 70
Japan Yake-Yama 0803-09 28/7/1974 N Y Y 9
Grcece Nisyros 0102-05 1871-1873 Y N Y 30,31
Guatemala Volcan de Pacaja 1402-11 Feb. 1976-May 1976 N N N.d. 10
Hawaii Kilauea 1302-01 18/5/1924-29/5/1924 Y Y Y 24,25,94,
Indonesia Dempo 0601-23 26/2/1974-20/10/1974 N N N.d. 9
Indonesia Dieng 0603-20 1786 (?) Y N Y 61
A REVIEWON PHREATICERUPTIONSAND THEIR PRECURSORS 237

Country or Volcano/geo- CAVW Date E S P Reference

Region thermal area number

Indonesia Dieng 0603-20 1928 Y Y Y 62

Indonesia Dieng 0603-20 13/12/1939 Y Y Y 62
Indonesia Dieng 0603-20 4/12/1944 Y Y Y 62, 102
Indonesia Dieng 0603-20 13 / 12/1964 N Y Y 62
Indonesia Dieng 0603-20 20/2/1979 Y Y Y 45, 62
Indonesia Galunggung 0603-14 9/1/1984-31/1/1984 N Y N 16
Indonesia Gamkonara 0608-04 4/3/1981-25/7/1981 Y N Y 14
Indonesia ljen 0603-35 1917 Y Y Y 62
Indonesia Marapi 0601-14 15/11/1984 N Y N 16
Indonesia Sunda 0603-09 1952 Y N Y 62
Indonesia Sunda 0603-09 1969 Y N Y 62
Indonesia Suoh 0601-27 10/7/1933-5/8/1933 Y Y Y 62, 101,106
Italy Etna 0101-06 17/10/1890 N Y N 3
Italy Etna 0101-06 2/8/1929 N Y N.d. 41
Italy Etna 0101-06 12/9/1979 Y Y N 12, 33, 59, 82
Italy Etna 0101-06 8/4/1987-17/4/1987 Y Y N 90
Italy Larderello 0101-001 1282 Y N N 49
Mexico Colima 1401-04 2/7/1987 N N N.d. 91
Mexico Tacana' 1401-13 8/5/1986 Y Y Y 89
Nicaragua Las Pilas 1404-08 23 Oct. 1952 Y N N 50
Nicaragua Telica 1404-04 3/11/1976-Jan. 1978 N Y N.d. 10, 11
New Guinea Karkar 0501-03 12/1 / 1979-Jun. 1979 N Y Y 51
New Zealand Echo Crater 0401-06 22/2/1973 N Y Y 8
New Zealand Raoul 0403-03 1870 N N N.d. 47
New Zealand Raoul 0403-03 21/11/1964 N Y Y 1, 34, 103
New Zealand Ruapehu 0401-10 22/6/1969 Y Y Y 23, 28, 35, 43
New Zealand Ruapehu 0401-10 Mar. 1971-Apr. 1971 N Y Y 26, 28, 77
New Zealand Ruapehu 0401-10 4/1/1973-30/11/1973 N Y Y 8
New Zealand Ruapehu 0401-10 24/4/1975 Y Y Y 43, 60
New Zealand Ruapehu 0401-10 7/1 / 1979-Jul. 1979 N Y Y 12
New Zealand Ruapehu 0401-10 Jan. 1980-May 1980 N Y N 83
New Zealand Ruapehu 0401-10 Sep. 1981-Mar. 1982 N Y Y 84, 85
New Zealand Ruapehu 0401-10 21/5/1985-9/7/1985? Y Y Y 37, 88
New Zealand Ruapehu 0401-10 20/3/1988-May 1988 N Y Y 91
New Zealand Ruapehu 0401-10 8/12/1988 N Y Y 91, 92
New Zealand Ruapehu 0401-10 27/l/1989-Feb. 1989 N Y Y 92
New Zealand Ruapehu 0401-10 1/7/1989 N Y Y 92
New Zealand Ruapehu 0401-10 7/1/1990-1/2/1990 N Y Y 93
New Zealand White Island 0401-04 Aug. 1974 N Y Y 9, 19, 20
New Zealand White Island 0401-04 25/1 / 1987 N Y Y 90
New Hebrides Gaua Island 0507-02 Oct. 1973-Dec. 1973 N Y Y 62
New Hebrides Gaua lsland 0507-02 21/1/1974 N Y Y 61
New Hebrides Gaua Island 0507-02 Jan. 1980-Oct. 1980 N N N.d. 13
Philippines Bulusan 0703-01 28/7/1978-14/8/1978 N N N.d. 12, 81
Philippines Bulusan 0703-01 27/12/1979-28/9/1980 N Y N.d. 62, 83
Philippines Bulusan 0703-01 9/4/1981-27/4/1981 N Y N.d. 62, 84
Philippines Bulusan 0703-01 8/6/1983 Y Y Y 62, 86
Philippines Malinao 0703-04 29/7/1980 Y Y Y 13
Philippines Mayon 0703-03 4/12/1980-14/12/1980 N Y Y 13
USA Lake City 1/3/1951 Y N N 56, 105
West Indies Micotrin 1600-10 4/1/1880 N N N.d. 42
West Indies Montagne Pelee 1600-10 22/1/1792 N N N.d. 4, 42
West Indies Montagne Pelee 1600-12 5/8/1851-1852 Y N Y 4, 42
West Indies Soufriere Guadeloupe 1600-06 29/9/1797-25/4/1798 Y N Y 104
West Indies Soufriere Guadeloupe 1600-06 1809 N N N.d. 104
West Indies Soufriere Guadeloupe 1600-06 3/12/1837-12/2/1838 Y N Y 4, 104
West Indies Soufriere Guadeloupe 1600-06 19/10/1956-17/12/1956 Y Y y 4
West Indies Soufriere Guadeloupe 1600-06 8/7/1976-May 1977 Y Y Y 10, 79, 80
E: eyewitness; S: surveillance; P: precursors; Y = yes; N = no; N.d.--- no data. Date: day/month/year. Reference number is that given in
square brackets at the end of each bibliographic entry in the References.
238 F. BARBERI ET AL.

plete or entirely certain. In 7 cases the infor-

Total
115
[ ] Withprecursors
[ ] No data
• Withoutprecursors
Fig. 3. P h r e a t i c e r u p t i o n s a n d t h e r e p o r t e d p r e c u r s o r s .
ble to record local low-energy volcanic seism-
icity. A satisfactorily complete monitoring
(seismic, geochemical and geodetic) was op-
erating in only 17% of the cases. Moreover it
must also be stressed that in the great majority
of the cases, the reported geochemical infor-
mation is qualitative; precise temperature data
a n d / o r chemical analyses of the thermal fluids
are only rarely reported.
Analysis of precursors
sample: mation is based only on accounts of people who
events
might have overlooked, or were unaware of
some of the phenomena. An example is the l
Sept. 1932 eruption of Kusatu-Shirane (which
we classified in the "with precursors" cate-
gory), where it is reported that the population
did not notice seismic phenomena, while a se-
ismic tremor was recorded (although only one
hour before ) by a station 25 km away from the
volcano.
In 5 cases, only seismic activity was moni-
tored; we thus do not have information on any
possible geochemical and geodetic precursory
anomalies. Finally, in one case the eruption
occurred at a volcano in continuous activity,
thus making it difficult to identify any distinct
precursor phenomena (Table 3 ).
As far as the type of eruption is concerned,
the Las Pilas event was caused, according to
the author (McBirney, 1955), by water infil-
tration during the rainy season. The three Etna
eruptions occurred following a lowering of the

Of the 115 examined events, no information

TABLE 3
on precursors is given for 25, precursor phe-
nomena are reported for 72 events, and pre- Phreatic e r u p t i o n s without apparent precursors: type o f m o n -
cursors apparently did not occur for the re- itoring in operation at the t i m e of the event
maining 18 (Fig. 3). Eruption E S Gc Gd M

No information on precursors Agua Shuca 1990 o

The eruptions for which there is no infor- Asp 1980 o o o
mation on precursors are generally those lack- Asp 1981 o o
A z u m a - S a n 1950 o
ing any type of instrumental monitoring and Etna 1890 o
where there were no eyewitnesses. Actually in Etna 1979 o o o
9 of the 25 cases, a seismic monitoring system Etna 1987 o o o
G a l u n g g u n g 1984 o
was operating, and in one case (Asp, 1978) K i r i s h i m a 1959 o
there was also geodetic monitoring, but the re- lwo-Jima 1980 o o o
suits are not reported. lwo-Jima 1982 o
Lake City 1951 o
Larderello 1282 o
Eruptions without precursors Las Pilas 1952 o
Marapi 1984 o
In 18 cases, it is deduced from the biblio- Nyos 1986 o
graphic source that no physical nor chemical Poas 1976 o
anomalies were observed before the phreatic R u a p e h u 1980 o o o
eruption. However, for many of these reports E: eyewitness; S: seismicity; Gc: geochemistry; Gd: geodetics;
the information cannot be considered com- M: m a g n e t o m e t r y .
A REVIEW ON PHREATIC ERUPTIONS AND THEIR PRECURSORS 239

level of magma in the chimney and its plugging 60

due to gravitational collapse of the walls. In 50

four cases the explosions occurred at the bot-
tom of a crater lake (Pogts, Aso, Ruapehu, 40
Nyos). The Larderello, Lake City and Agua
30
Shuca eruptions belong to the category of the
so-called hydrothermal explosions (Lloyd, d 20
1959). For the others we have no information. z
10
However, these are rather low-energy mani-
festations whose effects remained limited to a 0
restricted zone immediately surrounding the
60
crater. An exception is the Larderello erup-
tion, during which "petre e sassi" (stones) 5O
were ejected to distances of 3 km and red ash
up of 150 km, according to the account of Ris- •1 40

toro d'Arezzo (Marinelli, 1969). Another ex-

ception is that of lake Nyos, which discharged
a gas cloud, mainly composed of CO2, which
reached distances of 10-15 km from the vent.
The Nyos catastrophe is attributed by several
authors (Sigurdsson, 1987; Giggenbach, 1989 )
to a "limnic" event; see Barberi et al. (1989 )
for a "phreatic" interpretation).
Eruptions with precursors
In this category we have assembled all the
events for which there is evidence of some kind
of unrest of the system prior to the event. No
distinction could be made between long-, me-
dium- and short-term precursors, because the
time of eruption onset is not generally given in
the information source.
Only few events are well described. In 17
cases, only eyewitness accounts exist, whereas
some kind of instrumental monitoring system
was operative in 56 cases. In some cases, the
poor quality of the information does not allow
to link with certainty the described phenome-
non to the phreatic eruption. Often, as it fre-
quently happens in these cases, the possible
precursors were noted in hindsight.
The different types of precursors and their
frequency are shown in Figure 4a. Seismic and
geochemical anomalies are the most often re-
ported; by "geochemical" we mean any sort of
information relating to fumaroles, springs or
~ 3O
,~ Seismicity
2o
Z
Geochemistry
lO
Ground deformation
o . ~ . r""----~ .
Fig. 4. (a) Frequency of reported precursors. (b) Precur-
sors that were reportedly lacking.
surface waters (lakes). In a few cases, the pres-
ence of a certain precursor and the absence of
another is reported (Fig. 4b). It is clear that
the information from gravimetry, magneto-
merry and ground deformations greatly suffers
from the lack of instrumental monitoring,
much more than the seismic and geochemical
information, which may also be gained by
witnesses.
The seismic precursors were subdivided into
isolated shocks, clusters and sustained tremors.
Isolated shocks are reported in 34 cases and in
29 there is some chronological information.
Some of this information looses value under
close scrutiny: reported as "precursors" are
isolated shocks that preceded the eruption by
periods ranging from a few days to months (up
to 4 months). At many active volcanoes, it is
of course difficult not to encounter isolated
earthquakes in a 4-month time span. These
events are usually of low magnitude and have
240
shallow focal depth; in a few cases deep shocks
(deep as 100-200 k m ) have been reported,
from 3 months to 15 days before the event with
magnitudes between 5 and 7, and rather arbi-
trarily interpreted as the p h e n o m e n o n trigger-
ingthe eruption (Ijen, 1917; Suoh, 1933).
Seismic clusters are reported in 23 cases and
there is some chronological information for 18
of them. Like the isolated shocks, they precede
the eruption by a time period varying from a
few days to several months. In 24 cases, vol-
canic tremor is reported a few days to just be-
fore the eruption.
The variations in the fumaroles are reported
from a few years to a few days before. These
variations consist of an increase of the flow rate
a n d / o r temperature. The data on the chemical
composition of fumarolic gases are very scarce.
A remarkable exception is the 1990 Guagua
Pichincha event, where geochemical changes of
gas fumaroles indicative of a T-P increase in
the confined aquifer were recorded several
months prior to the event (Barberi et al., 1991 )
The indications on springs are even scarcer.
Except for one case (2 years before), the vari-
ations occur from a few weeks to a few days
prior to the event and nearly always regard the
flow rate and temperature; information on the
chemical composition is rarely supplied. Gen-
erally the flow rate and temperatures increase;
only in one case a sharp decrease in flow rate
has been recorded (Komagatake, 1932 ).
Within the surveyed events, it is useful to
distinguish the eruptions occurred at volcan-
oes with a crater lake ( 19 events) because the
lake water may play an important role in the
phreatic phenomenon. In these cases, too, the
variations are reported from several weeks to
a few days before the event. They consist es-
sentially of an increase of lake temperature and
of a rise of the water level; a lowering of the
lake level is reported in only two cases. In prac-
tice, only for the lake of Ruapehu in New Zea-
land there is some pre-event chemical
information.
For only a few events, some information ex-
F. B A R B E R I E T AL.
ists for other phenomena: in 13 cases, ground
deformations are reported (from a few months
to a year before); other reported precursors are
magnetic anomalies and increases in the
ground temperature.
Remarks on the products
The products of the phreatic eruptions are
usually fall deposits (ash, m u d and blocks)
whose distribution is limited to the immediate
vicinity of the crater (a few hundred metres).
In rare cases the blocks may be thrown to a dis-
tance as far as 1-1.5 km (example: Kilauea,
1924), while in a limited number of events ash
shower up to 5-7 km away is reported (exam-
ple: Aso, 1980). Lahars are often reported
among the deposits of these eruptions and can
reach considerable distances depending on the
morphology downslope from the phreatic vent.
In some cases, different kinds of mecha-
nisms, such as directeds blasts (Karkar, 1979;
Kuchinoerabu, 1 9 3 3 ) o r base surges (Raoul,
1964), are involved. The distribution of the
products is limited in these eruptions also (no
more than 1 km from the vent), except for the
1933 Kuchinoerabu eruption whose products
covered an area of 3X20 km. According to
Glicken and Nakamura ( 1988 ) a directed blast
occurred during the 1888 Bandai eruption,
which can be considered the biggest phreatic
eruption in historical time. The blast deposits
cover an area of 13 km 2 with a volume of0.011
km 3. The greatest damage was produced, how-
ever, by a debris avalanche with an estimated
volume of about 1.2-1.5 km 3 which affected
an area of 34 km 2.
Aside from this last case, the phreatic erup-
tions fall within the categories IV to 0 in the
classification proposed by Tsuya and Mori-
moto (1963), with m a x i m u m volumes of the
order of 106 to 107 m 3. Some phreatic events
consist mostly of the emission of dangerous
clouds of toxic a n d / o r paralyzing gases, mainly
CO2. Examples are the eruptions of Dieng
A REVIEW ON PHREATIC ERUPTIONS AND THEIR PRECURSORS
(1979, 149 casualties) and lake Nyos (1986,
over 1700 casualties).
Discussion
An obvious finding from our analysis is that
the available information is scarce and of poor
quality. Unfortunately only few of the world's
active volcanoes have a permanent monitor-
ing system in operation, capable of recording
various parameters (seismicity, ground defor-
mations, fluid geochemistry, etc.). This sad
situation reduces the quantity and quality of
the information o n the precursor phenomena
of any kind of eruption, including the phreatic
ones. As a matter of fact, the phreatic events
that occurred on volcanoes where seismic, geo-
chemical and geodetic monitoring was being
carried out ( 17% of the events in the diagram
of Fig. 2) refer to just 3 volcanoes (Ruapehu
and White Island, New Zealand and Iwo-Jima,
Japan). In general, the information is very in-
complete, and even where a monitoring sys-
tem existed, the reported data are often frag-
mentary and qualitative. The lack of
information may also be partly due to little at-
tention paid in reporting phenomena linked to
a phreatic eruption which, excepting rare spe-
cial cases, represents a minor event in the
eruptive history of the volcano.
Besides the incompleteness of the informa-
tion, it is very hard to obtain a general picture
of the phenomena associated with phreatic
eruptions because of the great diversity of geo-
logical and hydrogeological conditions of the
trigger mechanisms. Although the cases sur-
veyed suggest that a few phreatic eruptions may
have occurred without precursors, considera-
ble uncertainty remains as to the nature, dura-
tion and significance of these precursors.
The most frequently reported precursors are
anomalous seismicity and variations in fuma-
roles, springs or surface waters (of crater lake,
for instance). However, there are at least 7
documented cases of phreatic eruptions with-
out seismic precursors (Poas, 1987-88; Bulu-
241
san, 1983 ). Some of these cases correspond to
situations where magma is already present at
the top of the volcano (Ruapehu, 1979).
There are cases of increase (Raoul, 1964;
Ruapehu, 1972 ) or decrease (Ruapehu, 1975 )
of the crater-lake water temperature, and of the
upflow of hot gases from depth (indicative of
systems fractured or closed at the bottom). The
fumarolic gases often contain high-tempera-
ture components such as SO2 and HE of mag-
matic and/or geothermal origin (Nisyros,
187 l - 1873; La Soufri~re of Guadaloupe, 1976;
Ontake, 1979; Guagua Pichincha, 1990).
A few examples of ground deformation prior
to a phreatic eruption without associated
earthquakes have been found (26 m m of ex-
tension across in the crater area in the month
preceding the 1975 phreatic eruption of Rua-
pehu) and reflect a pressure increase in the
confined aquifer.
As short- and very short-term precursors the
appearance of seismic tremor (examples: Ku-
satu-Shirane, 1932, l hour before; Ruapehu,
1969, half an hour before) has been often re-
ported and differential geomagnetic anomalies
attributed to piezometric effects (La Soufri~re
of Guadaloupe, 1976 ) have been observed.
Despite these difficulties, by referring to the
best documented cases, a few types of phreatic
eruptions can be identified which differ both
regard to the trigger mechanism and the pre-
cursor phenomena.
(a) Fracturing phenomena following seismic
events
The increase of steam production in the con-
fined aquifer can be due to the reduction of the
lithostastic load by fracturing of the cover and/
or by increase of the heat flux by hot fluid up-
rise through the fractured basement.
( a l ) Regional: Examples of the first cate-
gory are the eruptions of Suoh (1933) and
Gaua island (1973-74). In this type of erup-
tion, a high-energy ( M = 6-7.5 ) seismic event
occurs, 1-2 weeks before on average, followed
almost immediately (in some cases in a matter
242
of hours) by an increase in fumarolic activity.
Sometimes, volcanic tremor, occurring a few
days to shortly before the phreatic eruption, is
also reported.
(a2) Local: Among the eruptions of the sec-
ond type La Soufri~re of Guadaloupe ( 1976-
77 ) and Ontake (1979) can be quoted. Anom-
alous seismicity is registered since 1 to 3 years
before, followed by variations in the fumaroles
(presence of gases at high temperatures). The
onset of ground deformation is not totally cer-
tain. Seismic tremor before the eruption, ac-
companied by magnetic effects in the case of
La Soufri~re, is again often reported. The
phreatic crises are often of long duration, with
numerous explosive events.
(b) Heating of shallow aquifers following
magma rise
The precursors are those expected for an as-
cending magma body (e.g., type b earth-
quakes, tremor, widespread uplift, physico-
chemical variations in fumaroles and hot
springs) and can last for a long period of time.
Before the phreatic event, a partial attenuation
of the phenomena is reported in the best doc-
umented examples. Volcanic tremor just be-
fore the eruption is registered in these cases as
well. The Karkar (1979) and Raoul (1964)
eruptions fall into this category.
(c) Phreatic explosions at volcanoes with
magma located high in the edifice
( c l ) The eruption occurs following the
plugging of the chimney caused by wall col-
lapses following sinking of the magma column
(Etna; Kilauea, 1924). In particular, with re-
gard to Etna, the precursors are absent or of
dubious interpretation (seismic tremor shortly
before the event?); we can only say that any
collapse obstructing the conduit and allowing
pressure to build-up in the confined fluid, cre-
ates a potential for phreatic explosions.
(c2) Eruptions following the infiltration of
surface water down to very hot fractured rocks
(thermometamorphic halo in the proximity of
F. B A R B E R I E T AL.
the magmatic melt). The presence of a crater
lake can be an important factor (examples:
Ruapehu, 1969, 1975).
Conclusions
The main aim of this study was to establish
whether phreatic eruptions have precursor
phenomena. In general, the answer is defi-
nitely affirmative. However, it is very difficult,
on the basis of the available data, to single out
the specific precursors of phreatic eruptions.
One example of this difficulty is encountered
in phreatic eruptions triggered by magma-rise
processes (type b), whose precursors cannot be
distinguished from those of phreatic eruptions
followed by magmatic events or of magmatic
eruptions without a "phreatic" precursor. In
these cases it is likely that the only real precur-
sor of the phreatic event be represented by the
volcanic tremor that occurs shortly before it
(phreatic eruption: Karkar, 1979; phreatic
eruption followed by magmatic eruption: St.
Helens, 1980; Nevado del Ruiz, 1985). How-
ever, the tremor is also a frequent precursor of
all other kinds of explosive eruptive activity
(strombolian, hawaiian, plinian, etc. ) and its
appearance is certainly not sufficient for con-
sidering a phreatic event to be impending.
Furthermore, on the basis of the precursor
information, it is not always possible to dis-
criminate between the different types of
phreatic eruptions, especially between types a2
(fracturing following local seismicity) and b
(heating from magma rise). It should be pos-
sible to distinguish phreatic eruptions without
magma movements (a2) because of the shal-
lower depth of the source (hydrothermal aqui-
fer): the ground deformations should be less
marked and should affect a small area; the se-
ismicity should be very shallow and without
focus migration.
The phreatic eruptions of type cl (such as
the ones reported for Etna) have dubious or
no precursors. The magma is already high in
the conduit and the thermal conditions in the
A REVIEW ON PHREAT1C ERUPTIONS AND THEIR PRECURSORS
conduit region are already primed for produc-
ing vapour. It is even questionable whether
these events ought to be called phreatic at all,
even though this usage is widespread.
The most frequently reported phenomenon,
seismic tremor, is a very short-term precursor
(a few hours) and is, therefore, of little use for
the purposes of civil defence in zones where
permanent settlements are present in areas at
risk. It can, however, be extremely helpful for
the protection of people staying or working in
the proximity of craters or threatened zones
(volcanologists and/or tourists). For the
phreatic eruptions as well as for the magmatic
ones, it is necessary to gain more knowledge of
the physics of the processes and succeed in
elaborating deterministic models, if we want to
better predict the event.
Acknowledgments
The authors wish to thank D. Dzurisin, C.
Newhall (US Geological Survey), J.H. Latter
(D.S.I.R., Geophysics Division, New Zea-
land), R.S. Punongbayan (Philippine Instute
of Volcanology and Seismology), Y. Sawada
(Seismological and Volcanological Depart-
ment, Japan Meteorological Agency) and the
Hawaiian Volcano Observatory for having
contributed papers, technical reports and other
scientific material for this study. The authors
are indebted to R.I. Tilling for the useful re-
view of the manuscript.
This work was supported by GNV-Gruppo
Nazionale per la Vulcanologia (CNR), Italy.
References
Adams, R.D. and Dibble, R.R., 1967. Seismological stud-
ies of the Raoul Island eruption, 1964. N.Z.J. Geol.
Geophys., 10: 1348-1361. [1 ]
Aramaki, S. and Ossaka, J., 1983. Report on volcanic ac-
tivities and volcanological studies in Japan for the pe-
riod from 1979 to 1982. IUGG 18 Gen. Assembly,
Hamburg, Germany 15-27 Augusto. [ 2 ]
Areidiacono, S., 1900. Sul periodo eruttivo dell'Etna dal
19 Luglio al 5 Agosto 1899. Atti Acc. Gioenia Sci. Nat.,
243
Catania, anno LXXVII, s.4a, V. 13, Mem., 17: 1-42.
[3]
Barat, A., 1986. Etude du r61e des eaux souterraines dans
le m6canisme des 6ruptions phr6atiques. Doc. BRGM,
no. 115. France. [ 4 ]
Barberi, F., Bertagnini, A., Chiodini, G., Cioni, R., Cov-
ieUo, M., Landi, P., Martini, M. and Scarpa, R., 1991.
Phreatic activity of Guagua Pichincha volcano (Ec-
uador) on April 1990. Volcanological Research in It-
aly ( 1987-1990). IUGG Assembly, Vienna, 1991, pp.
451-458. [5]
Barberi, F., Chelini, W., Marinelli, G. and Martini, M.,
1989. The gas cloud of Lake Nyos (Cameroon, 1986 ):
Results of the italian technical mission. J. Volcanol.
Geotherm. Res., 39: 125-134. [6]
Barberi, F., Navarro, J.M., Rosi, M., Santacroce, R. and
Sbrana, A., 1988. Explosive interaction of magma with
ground water: insights from xenoliths and geothermal
drillings. Rend. Soc.Ital. Mineral. Petrol., 43 (4):901-
926. [7]
Bulletin of Volcanic Eruption, 1975. Bull. Volcanol. 39.
[8]
Bulletin of Volcanic Eruption. 1976-1977. Bull. Vol-
canol., 40. [ 9 ]
Bulletin of Volcanic Eruption, 1978. Bull. Volcanol. 41.
[10]
Bulletin of Volcanic Eruption, 1980. Bull. Volcanol. 43.
[ll]
Bulletin of Volcanic Eruption, 1981. Bull. Volcanol., 44.
[121
Bulletin of Volcanic Eruption, 1982. Bull. Volcanol. 45.
[131
Bulletin of Volcanic Eruption, 1983. Bull. Volcanol. 46.
[14]
Bulletin of Volcanic Eruption, 1984. Bull. Volcanol. 47.
[15]
Bulletin of Volcanic Eruption, 1987. Bull. Volcanol. 49.
[16]
Bulletin of Volcanic Eruption, 1989. Bull. Volcanol. 51.
[171
Cas, R.R.F. and Wright, V.J., 1986. Volcanic Succession,
Modern and Ancient. Allen and Unwin. London. [ 18 ]
Clark, R.H., 1982. Surveillance of White Island volcano
1972-77: volcanic events and deformation of the cra-
ter floor. N.Z.J. Geol. Geophys., 25:317-324. [ 19 ]
Clark, R.H. and Cole, J.W., 1976. Prediction studies on
White Island volcano, Bay of Plenty, New Zealand. In:
R.W. Johnson (Editor), Volcanism in Australia. Else-
vier, Amsterdam, pp. 375-384. [20]
Corwin, G. and Foster, H., 1959. The 1957 explosive
eruption of lwo-Jima, volcano Island, Japan. Am. J.
Sci., 257: 161-171. [21]
De Fiore, O., 1912. II periodo di riposo dell'Etna 1893-
1907. Rend. Mere. R. Acc. Sci., Lett. ed Arti degli Ze-
lanti, Acireale, s.3 a, V. 6, 1908-1911, Mere. Classe Sci.:
57-128. [22]
244
Dibble, R.R., 1974. Volcanic Seismology and accompa-
nying activity of Ruapehu volcano, New Zealand. In:
L. Civetta, P. Gasparini, G. Luongo and A. Rapolla
(Editors), Physical Volcanology. Elsevier, Amster-
dam, pp. 49-85. [23]
Finch, R.H., 1924. Seismic sequences of the explosive
eruption of K_ilauea in May, 1924. Bull. Seismol. Soc.
Am., 14(4): 217-222. [24]
Finch, R.H., 1925. The earthquakes at Kapoho, island of
Hawaii, April 1924. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am., 15:122-
127. [25]
Giggenbach, W.F., 1974. The chemistry of Crater Lake,
Mt. Ruapehu (New Zeland ) during and after the 1971
active period. N.Z.J. Sci., 17: 33-45. [26]
Giggenbach, W.F., 1989. Water and gas chemistry of Lake
Nyos and its bearing on the eruptive process. J. Vol-
canol. Geotherm. Res., 42: 337-362. [27]
Giggenbach, W.F. and Glover, R.B., 1975. The use of
chemical indicators in the surveillance of volcanic ac-
tivity affecting the crater lake on Mt. Ruapehu, New
Zealand. Bull. Volcanol., 39:70-81. [ 28 ]
Glicken, H. and Nakamura, Y., 1988. Restudy of the 1888
eruption of Bandai volcano, Japan. Proc.Kagoshima
International Conference on Volcanoes 1988. [ 29 ]
Gorceix, H., 1873. Lettere sull'attivita' vulcanica e fu-
marolica a Nysiros nell'anno 1873. Comptes rendus,
tome LXXVII, pp. 597 and 1473, tome LXXVIII, p.
444. [ 30 ]
Gorceix, H., 1874. Etude des fumarolles de Nisyros et de
quelques-uns des produits des 6ruptions dont cette ile
fi 6t6 le siege en 1872-73. Ann. Chim. Phys., 5a series,
Tome II. [31]
Gorshkov, G.S., 1959. Gigantic eruption of the volcano
Bezymianny. Bull. Volcanol., 21: 71-109. [ 32 ]
Guest, J.E., Murrai, J.B., Kilburn, C.R.J., Lopes, R.M.C.
and Fidczuk, P., 1980. An eye witness account of the
Bocca Nuova explosion of 12 September 1979. United
Kingdom Research on Mount Etna 1977-79. The
Royal Society, London, pp. 44-46. [33]
Healy, J., Lloyd, E.F., Banwell, C.J. and Adams, R.D.,
1965. Volcanic eruption on Raoul island, November
1964. Nature, 205: 743-745. [ 34 ]
Healy, J., Lloyd, E.F., Rishworth, D.E.H., Wood, C.P.,
Glover, R.B. and Dibble, R.R., 1969. The eruption of
Ruapehu, New Zealand, on June 1969. N.Z. Dep. Sci.
Ind. Res., DSIR Bull. [35]
Hedenquist, J.W. and Henley, R.W., 1985. Hydrothermal
eruptions in the Waiotapu geothermal system, New
Zealand: their origin, associated breccias, and relation
to precious metal mineralization. Econ. Geol., 80:
1640-1668. [36]
Houghton, B.F., Latter, J.H. and Hackett, W.R., 1987.
Volcanic hazard assessment for Ruapheu composite
volcano, Taupo volcanic zone, New Zealand. Bull.
Volcanol., 49:737-751. [ 37 ]
Jaggar T.A., 1949. Steam blast volcanic eruptions. 4th
F. BARBERIET AL.
Special Report of the Hawaiian volcano observatory.
U.S. Geol. Surv. and the Hawaiian Volcano Research
Association. [ 38 ]
Kagiyama, T. and Hagiwara, M., 1980. Geothermal sur-
vey in and around O-ana crater and Jodo-daira fiat,
the volcanoes Azuma. Bull. Earthq. Res. Inst., 55: 681-
703. [ 39 ]
Katiti, J. and Sudradjat A., 1984. The devastating 1983
eruption of Colo Volcano, Una-Una island, Central
Sulawesi, Indonesia. Geol. Jb., 75: 27-47. [40]
Kieffer, G., 1981: Les explosions phr6atiques et phr6ato-
magmatiques terminales ~ l'Etna. Bull. Volcanol.,
44(4): 655-660. [41 ]
Lacroix, A., 1904. La Montagne Pel6e et ses l~ruptions.
Masson et Cie, Paris, 662 pp. [42]
Latter, J.H., 1981. Volcanic earthquakes and their rela-
tionship to eruptions at Ruapehu and Ngauruhoe vol-
canoes. J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res., 9(4): 293-309.
[43]
Le Guern, F., Bernard, A. and Chevrier, R.M., 1980.
Soufriere of Guadeloupe 1976-77 eruption-mass and
energy transfer and volcanic health hazards. Bull. Vol-
canol., 43(3): 577-593. [44]
Le Guern, F., Tazieff, H. and Faivre-Pierret, R., 1982. An
example of health hazard: people killed by gas during
a phreatic eruption: Dieng Plateau (Java, Indonesia),
Feb. 20 1979. Bull. Volcanol., 45: 153-156. [45]
Lloyd, E.F., 1959. The hot springs and hydrothermal
eruptions of Waiotapu. N.Z.J. Geol. Geophys., 2:141-
176. [46]
Lloyd, E.F. and Nathan, S. ( 1981 ). Geology and tephro-
chronology of Raoul island. Kermadek group, New
Zealand. N.Z. Geol. Surv. Bull., 95. [47]
Lorenz, U., 1986. On the growth of maars and diatremes
and its relevance to the formation of tuff ring. Bull.
Volcanol., 48: 265-274. [48 ]
Marinelli, G., 1969. Some geological data on the geother-
mal areas of Tuscany. Bull. Volcanol., 33: 319-334.
[49]
McBirney, A.R.. 1955. Thoughts on the eruption of the
Nicaraguan Volcano Las Pilas. Bull. Volcanol., 17:113-
117. [50]
McKee, C.O., Wallace, D.A., Almond, R.A. and Talai, B.,
1981. Fatal hydro-eruption of Karkar volcano in 1979:
development ofa maar-like crater. Cooke-Ravian Vol-
ume Volcanic Papers, Geol. Surv. Papua New Guinea
Mere., 10: 63-84. [ 51 ]
Minakami, T., 1938. Explosive activity of volcano Ku-
satu-Sirane during 1937 and 1938 (part 1). Bull.
Earthq. Res. Inst., 17: 590-623. [ 52 ]
Minakami, T., 1947. Recent activities of volcano Usu
(III). Earthquakes at the stage of paroxysmal erup-
tion. Bull. Earthq. Res. Inst., 25: 65-71. [53]
Minakami, T. and Hiraga, S., 1951. The minor activity of
volcano Azuma in February 1950. Bull. Earthq. Res.
Inst., 29: 383-395. [54]
A REVIEWON PHREATICERUPTIONSANDTHEIRPRECURSORS
Minakami, T., Matusita, K. and Utibori, S., 1942. Explo-
sive activities of volcano Kusatu-Sirane during 1938
and 1942 (part II). Bull. Earthq. Res. Inst., 20: 505-
526. [551
Muffler, L.J.P., White, D.E. and Truesdell, A.H., 1971.
Hydrothermal explosion craters in Yellowstone Na-
tional Park. Geol. Soc. Am. Bull., 82: 723-740. [ 56]
Murai, I., 1962. A brief note on the eruption of the Yake-
Dake volcano of June 17, 1962. Bull. Earthq. Res. Inst.,
40: 805-814. [57]
Murai, I., 1963. A brief note on the eruption of the Toka-
chi-Dake volcano of June 29 and 30, 1962. Bull. Earthq.
Res. Inst., 41: 185-208. [58]
Murray, J.B., 1980. The Bocca Nuova: its history and
possible causes of the September 1979 explosion.
United Kingdom Research on Mount Etna 1977-79.
The Royal Society, London, pp. 46-50. [ 59]
Nairn, I.A., Wood, C.P. and Hewson, A.Y., 1979. Phreatic
eruptions of Ruapehu: April 1975. N.Z.J. Geol. Geo-
phys., 22, 2. [60]
Neumann Van Pandang, M., 1929. Goenoeng Papanda-
jan. Fourth Pacific Science Congress, Java. [61 ]
Newhall, C. G. and Dzurisin, D., 1988. Historical unrest
at large calderas of the world. U.S. Geol. Surv., Bull.
[62]
Okada, H., 1982. Earthquake swarm activity of Usu vol-
cano in 1910. Geophys. Bull. Hokkaido Univ., Sap-
poro, Jpn., 41: 53-63. [63]
Ollier, C.D., 1967. Maars, their characteristic varieties and
definition. Bull. Volcanol., 31: 45-73. [ 64 ]
Omori, F., 1894. The eruption of Azuma-san. Seismol. J.
Jpn., 19: 1-22. [65]
Otuka, Y., 1932. Recent activity of the long-dormant Ak-
ita-Komagatake volcano in North-East Japan. Bull.
Earthq. Res. Inst., 10. [661
Powers, S., 1915. The eruption of Yake-dake, central Ja-
pan, 1915. Z. Vulkanol., Band 3. [67]
Richard, J.J., 1934. Notes sur l'6ruption du volcan japon-
ais Kuchinoerabu en 1933/34. Z. Vulkanol., Band 16.
[68]
Sakuma, S., 1957. Volcanic tremor of Meakan-dake. J. Fac.
Sci., Hokkaido Univ., Japan, 1. [ 69]
Sakuma, S. and Minakami, T., 1949. Minor activity of
volcano Yake-yama in 1949. Bull. Earthq. Res. Inst.,
27. [70]
Sakuma, S. and Murase, T,, 1957. Recent activity of vol-
cano Meakan-dake. J. Fac. Sci., Hokkaido Univ., Ja-
pan, ser. 7, vol. 1. [ 71 ]
Schmincke, H.U., 1977. Phreatomagmatische phasen in
quartaren Vulkanen der Osteifel. Geol. Jahrb., 39: 3-
45. [72]
Sekiya and Kikuchi, 1890. The eruption of Bandai-san.
Jour. Coll. Sci. Imp. Univerity, Tokio, 3: 91-172. [73]
Siebert, L., Glicken, H. and Ui, T., 1987. Volcanic haz-
ards from Bezymianny- and Bandai-type eruptions.
Bull. Volcanol., 49: 435-459. [74]
245
Sigurdsson, H., 1987. Lethal gas bursts from Cameroon
crater lakes. EOS, Trans. Am. Geophys. Union, 68:
570-573. [75]
Simkin, T., Siebert, L., McClelland, L., Bridge, D., Ne-
whall, C. and Latter, J.H., 1981. Volcanoes of the
World. Smithsonian Institution, Hutchinson Ross,
Stroudsburg, Penn. [ 76 ]
Smithsonian Institution CSLP Cards. no. 1180 (1971).
[77]
Smithsonian Institution CSLP Cards. no. 1451 (1972).
[78]
Smithsonian Institution SEAN Bulletin (1976). [79]
Smithsonian Institution SEAN Bulletin (1977). [80]
Smithsonian Institution SEAN Bulletin (1978). [81]
Smithsonian Institution SEAN Bulletin (1979). [82]
Smithsonian Institution SEAN Bulletin (1980). [83]
Smithsonian Institution SEAN Bulletin ( 1981 ). [84]
Smithsonian Institution SEAN Bulletin (1982). [85]
Smithsonian Institution SEAN Bulletin (1983). [86 ]
Smithsonian Institution SEAN Bulletin (1984). [ 87 ]
Smithsonian Institution SEAN Bulletin (1985). [88]
Smithsonian Institution SEAN Bulletin (1986). [ 89 ]
Smithsonian Institution SEAN Bulletin ( 1987). [ 90 ]
Smithsonian Institution SEAN Bulletin ( 1988 ). [ 91 ]
Smithsonian Institution SEAN Bulletin (1989). [ 92 ]
Smithsonian Institution SEAN Bulletin (1990). [93]
Stearns, H.T., 1925. The explosive phase of Kilauea vol-
cano, Hawaii, in 1924. Bull. Volcanol., I U G G , 5-6:
193-208. [941
Taverne, N.J.M., 1925. Merkawaardige uitbarstingen van
den Papandajan. Geol. Mijnbouwk. Genootschap,
Verh. Geol. Ser., 8: 481-482. [95]
Tazieff, H., 1989. Mechanisms of the Nyos carbon diox-
ide disaster and of so-called phreatic steam eruptions.
J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res., 39:109-116. [96]
Tazieff, H., Chevrier, R.M., Faivre Pierret, R.X. and Le
Guern, F., 1986. La catastrophe de Nyos, R6publique
du Cameroun. 21 Aofit 1986 Report. Minist~re de la
Coop6ration, Paris. Contribution C.F.R. no. 811,
CNRS-CEA, Gif Sur Yvette, 79 pp. [ 97 ]
Tsuya, H., 1932. Explosive activity of volcano Kusatu-
Shirane in October, 1932. Bull. Earthq. Res. Inst., 10.
[98]
Tsuya, H. and Morimoto, R., 1963. Types of volcanic
eruptions in Japan. Bull. Volcanol., 26; 209-222. [99]
Ui, T., Nakamura, K. and Shibahashi, K., 1976-77. 1974
activity of Chokai volcano, Japan. Bull. Volcanol., 40.
[100l
Van Bemmelen, R. W., 1949. The geology of Indonesia,
Vol. 1A. Special Edition of the Bureau of Mines in In-
donesia, pp 732. [ 101 ]
Van Bemmelen, R. W., 1949. Report on the volcanic ac-
tivity and volcanological research in Indonesia during
the period 1936-1948. Bull. Volcanol., 9: 3-29. [ 102]
Weissberg, B.G. and Sarbutt, J., 1966. Chemistry of the
hydrotermal waters of the volcanic eruption on Raoul
246
island, November 1964. N.Z.J. Sci., 9. [103]
Westerkamp, D., 1980. Une m6thode d'6valuation et de
zonation des risques volcaniques h la Soufri~re de la
Guadeloupe, Antilles Frangaises. Bull. Volcanol., 43:
431-452. [104]
White, D.E., 1955. Violent mud-volcano eruption of Lake
F. B A R B E R I E T AL.
City hot springs, northeastern California. Bull. Soc.
Geol. Am., 66:1109-1130. [ 105]
Williams, H. and McBirney, A., 1979. Volcanology. Free-
man and Cooper. San Francisco, Calif. [ 106]
Yokoyama, I., 1964. Seismometrical observation of the
1962 eruption of volcano Tokati, Hokkaido, Japan.
Bull. Volcanol., 27. [ 107 ]