JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH, VOL. 117, B05201, doi:10.

1029/2011JB009048, 2012

The 7 September 2008 Vulcanian explosion at Stromboli volcano:

Multiparametric characterization of the event
and quantification of the ejecta
Sonia Calvari,1 Ralf Büttner,2 Antonio Cristaldi,1 Pierfrancesco Dellino,3
Flora Giudicepietro,4 Massimo Orazi,4 Rosario Peluso,4 Letizia Spampinato,1
Bernd Zimanowski,2 and Enzo Boschi1
Received 24 November 2011; revised 12 March 2012; accepted 16 March 2012; published 2 May 2012.
[1] On 7 September 2008 a major ash explosion occurred from the SW summit crater of
Stromboli volcano. This explosive event lasted 2 min and consisted of three discrete
eruptive pulses, forming an eruptive ash cloud 500–600 m high and 300 m wide,
rising with speed of 20–27 m s 1. The event was recorded by our camera and
seismic networks, as well as by two electric stations installed at a 500 m mean
distance from the SW crater. The electric signals recorded by the two stations during
this event were 106 times greater than signals recorded during the persistent
Strombolian activity, and the seismic trace had a bigger amplitude and a longer
duration. Camera image analysis allowed us to infer that a partial obstruction took
place at the SW crater three days before the explosive event, suggesting that a
constriction within the upper conduit could have likely led to magma overpressure.
Data analysis, combined with previous experimental investigations, revealed that the
higher energy output of the ash explosion, when compared to the persistent
Strombolian activity, resulted in a greater magma fragmentation and erupted mass.
Integration of the different parameters allowed us to classify the event as a Vulcanian
type, and electric signal analysis enabled retrieval of the total volume of erupted ash
and of the amounts of the juvenile, phreatomagmatic, and lithic components.
Citation: Calvari, S., R. Büttner, A. Cristaldi, P. Dellino, F. Giudicepietro, M. Orazi, R. Peluso, L. Spampinato, B. Zimanowski,
and E. Boschi (2012), The 7 September 2008 Vulcanian explosion at Stromboli volcano: Multiparametric characterization of the
event and quantification of the ejecta, J. Geophys. Res., 117, B05201, doi:10.1029/2011JB009048.

1. Introduction steady state supply from the source region during the last
two millennia [Rosi et al., 2000], combined with paucity of
[2] Stromboli is an island less than 4 km wide and 924 m
local tectonic earthquakes [Falsaperla and Spampinato,
high characterized by persistent, mild explosive activity
1999]. Only the number and size of vents and their temper-
from the summit craters, which are located at 750 m ele-
ature have varied with time, and this is apparently due to
vation within a depression 300 m long, 50 m wide, 50 to
changing magma level within the conduit [Calvari et al.,
100 m deep, and elongated toward NE-SW. The position of
2005a, 2005b; Burton et al., 2008]. Following Patrick
the summit craters has been remarkably constant over the
[2007] and Patrick et al. [2007], persistent explosions at
years [Washington, 1917], resulting probably from the Stromboli can generally be classified into two groups: the
normal Strombolian activity (or Type 1), and ash-rich
1 explosions (Type 2). The former are dominated by rhythmic
Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia, sezione di Catania
“Osservatorio Etneo” (INGV-OE), Catania, Italy. gas bubble bursts and in-flight ductile magma fragmentation
2
Physikalisch-Vulkanologisches Labor, Universitaet Wuerzburg, [Walker and Croasdale, 1971; Wright et al., 2007] that emit
Wuerzburg, Germany.
3
coarse ballistic particles, whereas the latter generate optically
CIRISIVU, Dipartimento di Scienze della Terra e Geoambientali, thick, ash-rich plumes with (Type 2a) or without (Type 2b)
Università di Bari, Bari, Italy.
4
Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia, sezione di Napoli
ballistic particles that can display plume rise rates covering
“Osservatorio Vesuviano” (INGV-OV), Napoli, Italy. both gas thrust (>15 m s 1) and buoyant (<15 m s 1) regimes
[Patrick, 2007].
Corresponding Author: S. Calvari, Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e
Vulcanologia, sezione di Catania, Piazza Roma 2, I-95125 Catania, Italy.
[3] At a mean rate of twice per year until 2002, more
(sonia.calvari@ct.ingv.it) powerful “major” explosions occur [Bertagnini et al., 1999;
Corsaro et al., 2005; Andronico et al., 2008; Landi et al.,
Copyright 2012 by the American Geophysical Union. 2008; Andronico and Pistolesi, 2010], with ejection of
0148-0227/12/2011JB009048

B05201 1 of 17
B05201 CALVARI ET AL.: VULCANIAN EXPLOSIONS AT STROMBOLI B05201

Figure 1. (a) Location of the Aeolian Volcanic Arc (AVA) and Stromboli in Southern Italy. (b) Island of
Stromboli with the Sciara del Fuoco (SdF) depression and the position of the seismic stations (blue dots).
The area enlarged in Figure 1c is also located. (c) The NE-SW summit crater depression, with the location
of the SPI (Stromboli Infrared thermal camera at Il Pizzo) and SQV (Stromboli Visible camera at 400 m
elevation) cameras. (d) The position of the active vents within the crater terrace as could be seen from the
SPI camera located at Il Pizzo, where S area, C area and N area represent the SW, Central and NE craters,
as of August 2008. Figures 1a–1c are courtesy of M. Neri [modified after Neri and Lanzafame, 2009].

lithic and juvenile material well outside the crater terrace
[Calvari and Pompilio, 2001]. Much more powerful explo-
sions, named “paroxysms,” occurred several times during
the last century [Rittmann, 1931; Barberi et al., 1993], and
recently in 2003 and 2007 [Calvari et al., 2006; D’Auria
et al., 2006; Rosi et al., 2006; Harris et al., 2008;
Calvari et al., 2010, 2011], often causing severe damage
to the settled area. Compared to the general extent of
explosive events in volcanology, the scale of major explo-
sions and paroxysms at Stromboli is quite small, and even in
the case of paroxysms the volume of erupted pyroclasts
rarely exceeds 106 m3 [Bertagnini et al., 1999; Pistolesi et al.,
2008]. However, given that the short distance between craters
and villages is less than 2 km, and that between craters and
the Il Pizzo summit viewpoint is less than 300 m (Figure 1),
and considering the thousands of tourists climbing the
summit of the island every month for at least 7 months per
year, it is crucial to raise a prompt alarm in case of strong
explosions. Although a number of studies focused on the
distinction between major explosions and paroxysms at this
volcano, the nature of their diversity is still a matter of
debate [e.g., Bertagnini et al., 1999; Calvari et al., 2006;
Andronico et al., 2008]. From a volcanological point of view,
the main difference is the involvement/non-involvement of
the gas-rich, low-porphyritic (LP) magma during paroxysms,
rising fast from 6–10 km depth. This is erupted commonly
during paroxysms, whereas only gas-poor, high-porphyritic
(HP) magma, residing in the upper part of the conduit, is
normally erupted during major explosions [Métrich et al.,
2005, 2010; Calvari et al., 2011]. Major explosions and
paroxysms also differ by the size of the eruptive column,
which reaches a few hundred meters during major explo-
sions, and a few kilometers during paroxysms [e.g., Calvari
et al., 2006; Andronico et al., 2008; Harris et al., 2008;
Andronico and Pistolesi, 2010; Calvari et al., 2010, 2011]. A
Vulcanian eruption style was recognized for the two most
recent paroxysms at Stromboli in 2003 and 2007 [Calvari
et al., 2006, 2010], based essentially on the high exit velocity
of the eruption plume, on the size of the lithic components,
and on the obstruction of the crater before the explosive event
[Morrissey and Mastin, 2000; Formenti et al., 2003].
[4] Major explosions and paroxysms, at Stromboli, gen-
erally produce volcanic convective plumes. These are three-
phase mixtures composed of variable proportions of solid
particles (comprising fragments of rock, crystals, glassy
shards and vesicular particles), volcanic gases, aerosols, and
droplets of condensed volcanic gases and atmospheric water
vapor [Sparks et al., 1997]. The presence of large electric
potential gradients in volcanic plumes is well known [Sparks

2 of 17
B05201 CALVARI ET AL.: VULCANIAN EXPLOSIONS AT STROMBOLI
et al., 1997; James et al., 1998], especially for plumes rich in
solid silicate particles [James et al., 2008], and is often
demonstrated by the occurrence of spectacular lightning
[Anderson et al., 1965; Porarinsson, 1976]. Certain electri-
cal effects during volcanic explosions can be qualitatively
and quantitatively explained by fragmentation processes
occurring in the melt [Büttner et al., 1997; James et al.,
1998]. Low-viscosity basaltic magmas do not generally
produce large plumes because they allow exsolving gases to
escape easily and less explosively than high-viscosity silicic
magmas. Thus, basalt fragmentation is often considered
similar to a ductile liquid spray process rather than of brittle
failure, producing mostly relatively large liquid clots instead
of ash [James et al., 2008]. However, violent explosive
basaltic explosions can occur when the ascending magma
encounters water (either from the sea, or an aquifer, ice,
etc.), giving rise to violent phreato-magmatic eruptions
[Büttner and Zimanowski, 1998; Zimanowski, 1998], or even
when the conduit is obstructed, causing Vulcanian explo-
sions [Morrissey and Mastin, 2000; Calvari et al., 2006,
2010]. Phreato-magmatic eruptions generate significant
electrification, by fine ash brittle fragmentation that is
caused by an increased strain rate and water cooling on the
magma [Büttner and Zimanowski, 1998; James et al., 2008].
However, laboratory and field experiments carried out at
Stromboli volcano during Strombolian-type explosions have
shown that effective electric charge generation, related to
fragmentation of magma and generation of pyroclasts, can
be detected and measured on a short timescale [Büttner et al.,
1997, 2000]. The surface area that is generated during frag-
mentation can be estimated with the use of grain-size particle
analysis, and increases linearly with explosion intensity
[Büttner et al., 1997]. Büttner et al. [2000] found that the
voltage-time ratio of electrostatic field gradients reflects dif-
ferent physical mechanisms of magma fragmentation and
expansion. Measurements of the electrostatic potential gra-
dient (i.e., maximum voltage) have been found to be inde-
pendent on the shape and position of the array, provided that
an upwind position is chosen, in order to avoid any interfer-
ence with the eruption cloud [Büttner et al., 1997]. The
maximum voltage Umax varies with the distance D, and can be
described by Umax  1/D [Büttner et al., 2000]. Comparison
of experimental data showed that the typical and reproducible
delay time between the onset of electric signals and onset of
seismic signals ranges between 2 and 3.5 ms for the phreato-
magmatic type explosions, and between 12 and 14 ms for
Strombolian-type bursts, where fragmentation is delayed as
it follows the expansion process [Büttner et al., 2000].
[5] With the aim of monitoring Stromboli’s summit
explosive activity also during poor weather conditions, i.e.,
when the craters are completely obscured by clouds and
even the fixed thermal cameras are blind, on 4 September
2008 we installed two 5 m-spaced-electric stations on the
volcano summit at a 500 m mean distance from the western
crater rim and close to the STR9 seismic station (Figure 1).
These devices were built for Stromboli following the pro-
cedure described by Büttner et al. [2000], and were installed
a few days before the occurrence of a major explosive event
on 7 September 2008, for which also time-lapse images
collected by the camera network, and seismic data, were
available. Thus, we classify this ash explosion on the basis
of data gained from a multiparametric monitoring system,
3 of 17
B05201
including (i) real-time recording of explosive activity by
videos from two view points, (ii) broadband seismic data,
and (iii) traces of the two electric stations (Figure 1). For
comparison purposes, we also use data that were collected
during the volcano typical persistent Strombolian activity,
and also retrospectively, with the available data of the
5 April 2003 and 15 March 2007 paroxysms [Calvari et al.,
2006, 2010, 2011; D’Auria et al., 2006]. Additionally,
using results from experimental investigations on magma
fragmentation and transport mechanisms during explosive
eruptions [Dellino et al., 2010], we classify the 7 September
explosion as a major explosive event displaying a Vulcanian-
like behavior. Finally, we provide quantification of the vol-
ume of the erupted material and its relative components, and
tentatively assess the fragmentation processes driving ash
explosions at Stromboli.
2. The Monitoring Network
[6] The Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia
(INGV) monitoring system on Stromboli has been greatly
improved after the 2002–03 effusive eruption [e.g., Martini
et al., 2007; Bertolaso et al., 2008; De Cesare et al., 2009;
Salerno et al., 2009; Zanon et al., 2009]. In addition, on
4 September 2008 two electric stations for the measurement
of atmospheric electrical potential gradient were installed
close to the summit craters in order to monitor the summit
explosive activity.
[7] In this paper, we use data from the monitoring
camera and seismic networks, and the electric stations.
The camera network is maintained by INGV - Osserva-
torio Etneo and consists of four cameras: one installed at
Il Pizzo at 918 m a.s.l., one of the topographic highs of
Stromboli 170 m above the summit craters, and three
located along the eastern margin of the Sciara del Fuoco
(SdF; Figure 1). For this study we used images from the
summit infrared camera (SPI) located at Il Pizzo, and from a
visual (SQV) camera located at 400 m (Figure 1). The SPI
infrared camera field-of-view (FOV) covers the entire crater
terrace from South and from an inclined distance of 250–
300 m, depending on the elevation of the crater floor
(Figure 1). It enables imaging of the explosive vents and
tracking of the height reached by the products up to a max-
imum of 160 m above the vents, as well as discrimination
between the predominant types of ejecta (ash, lapilli, bombs
or blocks). SPI is an OPGAL EYE-M320B thermal camera
sensitive to the 8 to 14 mm wave band. The detector consists
of an uncooled microbolometer recording a 320  240 pixel
frame every 2 s. The camera has a 60  45 FOV, corre-
sponding to a targeted pixel size of 0.9 m over a distance
of 250 m. This camera is not calibrated for temperature
retrieval. The visual SQV camera gives an oblique view of
the NE flank of the summit cone from below and from
1 km distance (Figure 1). It has a favorable position, cov-
ering all the eruptive fissures that opened after 1985 and
breached the NE flank of the crater terrace [De Fino et al.,
1988; Calvari et al., 2005a, 2005b, 2010]. The SQV camera
allows observation of the eruptive plume from a greater dis-
tance (1 km) and a different perspective (from NE rather
than from South) when compared to SPI, thus enabling
detection of the eruptive cloud up to a maximum height of
350 m above the vents. Video sequences are recorded
B05201 CALVARI ET AL.: VULCANIAN EXPLOSIONS AT STROMBOLI B05201

Figure 2. Graph of explosive activity. (a) Mean total daily number of explosions h 1 between January
and September 2008, obtained from SPI infrared camera located at Il Pizzo, with a two-point running
mean (red line). The 7 September point is displayed in yellow. (b) Details of the mean daily number of
explosions h 1 between January and September 2008 for each of the three crater zones, North (N, red),
South (S, blue), and Central (C, green).

with a 2 s time interval, and transferred to the INGV
monitoring room, where they are visualized and stored
[e.g., Andò and Pecora, 2006; Behncke et al., 2009]. Each
of the cameras provides continuous, real-time monitoring
of the eruptive activity. Images recorded from the cameras
show date (dd/mm/yy) and time (hh:mm:ss) expressed in
UTC, and are synchronized through a Global Positioning
System time-code.
[8] The seismic network is maintained by INGV - Osser-
vatorio Vesuviano and consists of 13 telemetric broadband
stations (Figure 1). Data are acquired and analyzed at the
Napoli and Catania recording centers [De Cesare et al.,
2009]. This network allows monitoring of the seismicity
associated with the eruptive activity of the volcano and of
the landslides that affect the cliffs of the island. Usually, the
network records a few hundred seismic events per day
related to the persistent Strombolian explosions [Martini
et al., 2007]. These events contain a Very Long Period
(VLP) component with a frequency in the range 0.05–
0.50 Hz, which relate to the migration of gas slugs in the

4 of 17
B05201 CALVARI ET AL.: VULCANIAN EXPLOSIONS AT STROMBOLI B05201

Figure 3. (a) Grain-size distribution and (b) electric calibration used for the recalculation of the ash mass
erupted. MFCI = melt fuel coolant interaction. Voltage represents the horizontal electrical potential gradi-
ent. The calibration factors result from the voltage measured in the fragmentation regimes. See text for fur-
ther explanations.

conduit, and is consistent with volumetric components within
the seismic source of the VLP signals [Chouet et al., 2003,
2008; James et al., 2006]. During Strombolian activity, the
location of VLP is clustered in a small volume below the
shallow portion of the SdF (Figure 1) at a surface elevation of
450–550 m a.s.l. When effusive phases occur, the location
of the VLP sources undergoes small but significant spatial
changes both laterally and vertically [Martini et al., 2007;
Giudicepietro et al., 2009].
[9] In order to characterize the explosive activity and its
products, on 4 September 2008 two permanent electric sta-
tions were installed at the summit of Stromboli. They were
located at 5 m distance between each other, 500 m West of
the SW crater, and close to the STR9 seismic station
(Figure 1). Each electric station consists of a calibrated
electrometer, recording the local electrical potential gradient
between a sensor grid mounted on a 2 m high pole and the
local ground, and a linear dc signal amplifier [Büttner et al.,
2000, 2002]. The analog signals of the electrostatic sensors
are recorded at a rate of 250 sps (samples per second) by a
high resolution (24-bit), low power (below 850 milliwatts)
data logger (GILDA) [Orazi et al., 2006]. Data are trans-
mitted to a collection hub using the WiFi infrastructure
deployed since 2005 to improve the monitoring systems of
Stromboli [De Cesare et al., 2009]. The collection hub is
located at the Observatory of S. Vincenzo, which is the
Centro Operativo Avanzato (COA) of the Italian Civil Pro-
tection. From there, data are transmitted to the INGV
recording centers of Napoli and Catania.
3. Methods
[10] The SPI camera allows a 24 h, complete view from
South of the summit crater zone. From this view point, we
distinguish three sectors (Figure 1d): the NE crater zone (N
area), the Central crater zone (C area), and the SW crater
zone (S area). Using images from the SPI camera, we have
manually counted the daily number of explosions occurred
at the whole summit zone and obtained the averaged daily
values per hour (Figure 2a), as well as the averaged daily
number of explosions occurring at each of the three crater
areas from January to the end of September 2008
(Figure 2b). The values are approximated to the next integer,
and variability is 20%.
[11] For the electric signals, we found that at Stromboli the
short-time fluctuations of the atmospheric electric field are
caused by the formation and ejection of ash and produce a
strong signal (signal-to-noise ratio S/N > 106). This is
because, on explosion, the formation and rapid decoupling
of new solid surfaces perturb the charge distribution of the
electrostatic field [Büttner et al., 1997]. The extent of per-
turbation is proportional to the new surface that generates
per time, and thus it is proportional to the size, amount, type,
and kinetic energy of the particles. The electric signal pro-
vides therefore information on the nature of the eruptive
mechanism responsible for ash emission (either magmatic,
phreato-magmatic, or by passive collapse), on the release of
mechanical energy, and on the amount of ash produced
[Büttner et al., 2000]. For a first approximation, data from
experiments using basaltic melts are used as references to
estimate the amount of charged surface that formed the
eruptive column. Measurements during fragmentation
experiments showed that kinetic energy release, new surface
area, and electrical potential gradient are linearly correlated
[Büttner et al., 1997]. Data obtained from the fragmentation
experiments by phreato-magmatic fragmentation, magmatic
fragmentation, and passive ejection of ash from a conduit
result in three linear ratios, which can be used to derive the
kinetic energy release and total new surface area from the
reconstructed horizontal electrical potential gradient within
the eruption cloud (Figure 3 and Table 1). The partitioning
of the total surface area into phreato-magmatic (MFCI, melt
fuel-coolant interaction), magmatic, and passively ejected
pre-existing particles can be estimated (if data from particle
analysis by Scanning Electron Microscope is not available)
by extracting the value of the potential gradient at the char-
acteristic voltage-time ratio, thus estimating the partial sur-
face area and finally the partial kinetic energy release. To
approximate energy and mass of ash, in the case of the
7 September 2008 explosion, a typical grain-size distribu-
tion for ash erupted from Stromboli was used [Andronico
et al., 2008]. The calculated particles surface was distributed

5 of 17
B05201 CALVARI ET AL.: VULCANIAN EXPLOSIONS AT STROMBOLI B05201

Table 1. Parameters of Electrical Signals at Stromboli on 7 during most of the period, and that the N and S zones
September 2008a displayed generally contrasting behavior, with the explosive
Total Kinetic
activity at the N zone having greater variability (average of
Parameter Value Energy 1–13 events h 1, Figure 2b) than that at the S zone (average
of 3–10 events h 1, Figure 2b). From early July to early
Explosive Event at 07:49:00
Voltage time ratio 600 V/s
August, the explosive activity increased at both the N and
Local field gradient 1.8 kV/m S areas, then showed an opposite trend until 19 August.
0.8 kg MFCI-particles 750 kJ From this date onward and for about one week, explosions at
80 kg juvenile magmatic ash
3
3,500 kJ the N and S crater areas displayed both pulsating decreasing
7.5 10 kg lithic ash 15,000 kJ trends (Figure 2b). In early September, the explosive activity
Total kinetic energy 19.25 103 kJ 4.6 kg TNT
at the S area climaxed prior to the 7 September event with a
Explosive Event at 11:53:00 peak of 10 events h 1. Conversely, the N crater area activity
Voltage time ratio 76 V/s declined to a minimum of 4 explosions h 1 (Figure 2b). The
Local field gradient 0.3 kV/m 7 September event occurred from the S area while the
MFCI-particles N zone was characterized by a decreasing explosive activity.
13 kg juvenile magmatic ash 560 kJ
1.2 103 kg lithic ash 2,400 kJ It is worth noting that a few days after the 7 September
Total kinetic energy 3.0 103 kJ 0.7 kg TNT explosion, the C area, that had a quite rare explosive activity
before this date on the timescale of the observations, showed
Explosive Event at 12:25:00 an increasing trend in the mean daily number of explosions
Voltage time ratio 76 V/s
Local field gradient 0.25 kV/m (Figure 2b).
MFCI-particles [13] In early September, when the average daily rate of the
11 kg juvenile magmatic ash 480 kJ total explosive events was 14 events h 1 (Figure 2a), the
1.03 103 kg lithic ash 2,070 kJ volcanic tremor was within the typical value of Stromboli,
Total kinetic energy 2.55 103 kJ 0.6 kg TNT and six vents were active within the summit depression, two
Explosive Event at 19:17:00 for each of the summit crater zones (Figure 4a). The eruptive
Voltage time ratio 182 V/s activity was characterized by puffing from the two central
Local field gradient 0.76 kV/m vents (bC1 and bC2, Figure 4a); ballistic coarse scoria
MFCI-particles ejection (Type 1 Strombolian explosions of Patrick et al.
34 kg juvenile magmatic ash 1,470 kJ
3.2 103 kg lithic ash 6,300 kJ [2007]) from vents at the N crater zone (bN1 and bN2,
Total kinetic energy 7.8 103 kJ 1.6 kg TNT Figure 4a), where the height of explosions was up to 60 m
from the crater rim; and by sporadic explosions, producing
The estimated particle mass and energy values are in the order of 10%.
a

MFCI = melt fuel coolant interaction.

to cubes of 125 mm3, and a density of 3  103 kg m 3 (for non-
vesicular magma) was assumed. On this basis we obtained the
values reported in Table 1.
4. The Explosive Activity Prior to the 7 September
Event
[12] The graph in Figure 2a shows the variability in the
number of explosions at the three crater areas from January
to late September 2008. The values reported are daily aver-
age approximated to the next integer, and variability is
20%. The explosive activity general pattern is character-
ized by marked fluctuations describing cycles of increasing
and decreasing of the intensity of the eruptive activity. These
fluctuations over time scales of tens of minutes and vertical
distances of tens of meters are common at Stromboli, and are
related to changes in the magma free surface level or in the
gas jet velocity [e.g., Ripepe et al., 2002; Burton et al.,
2008]. In detail, from January until mid-March the number
of events ranged between 14 and 5 events h 1; then, it
rapidly declined down to a minimum of 3 explosions h 1 on
23 March. This was followed by a new trend that increased
until mid-August and reached 18–19 events h 1. Between 15
and 22 August, the trend of explosions decreased again
fluctuating from 7 to 14–15 events h 1. Figure 2b shows
the number of events at each of the three crater areas pro-
viding details on the relationship between the three sites. In
particular, the graph reveals that the C zone was not active
ash (Type 2a and 2b Strombolian explosions) [Patrick et al.,
2007], from the S vents (bS1 and bS2, Figure 4a), where
ash plumes were rising a few tens of meters from the vent
rim. Small morphological changes occurred within the crater
depression starting from 28 August, when small rockfalls
from the NW crater wall occurred, and an explosion from
the N cinder cone widened the bN2 vent (Figures 4a and 4b).
On 29 August, explosions from the S vents were mostly of
Type 1, and their height increased to 50 m, with small
amount or no ash involved. Puffing from the central vents
moved toward the southernmost one. At the southern vents,
the increase of height of ejecta, which reached 100 m from
the vent rim, together with a better collimation of ejecta,
suggested increasing magma surface depth within the upper
conduit [Taddeucci et al., 2012]. On the early morning
(02:00:00–03:00:00 A.M.; all times here reported are in UTC)
of 30 August, a new decrease of the ejecta height sug-
gested an uprise of the magma level. This upward migration
of the magma level produced a change in the eruptive style
observable at the C vents, with an increasingly brighter
(hotter) puffing that eventually evolved to a mild, continuous
spattering. The rising of the magma column resulted also in
a transition of activity at the S crater zone, where explo-
sions passed initially from Type 2b to Type 2a Strombolian
types, and then from Type 2a to Type 1 [Patrick et al.,
2007]. Additionally, a new vent (bS3) opened at the tip of
the cinder cone where bS1 was located (Figure 4c). This
was characterized by mild spattering. In the meanwhile, the
number of explosions at the N crater zone decreased.
[14] On 31 August puffing was observed at vents bC2
and bS1, and at bC1 in the second half of the day, whereas

6 of 17
B05201 CALVARI ET AL.: VULCANIAN EXPLOSIONS AT STROMBOLI B05201

Figure 4. (a–e) Images taken from the SPI camera looking at the crater terrace from South-East and from
a distance of 250–300 m, showing the whole crater area. NE is on the right, SW on the left (see Figure 1
for orientation). The active vents within each crater zone are shown, with bN1 and bN2 belonging to the N
area, bC1 and bC2 indicating the two closely spaced vents of the C area, and bS1 and bS2 the active vents
in the S area. Figures 4a and 4b show erosion of vent bN2 due to explosions blowing out the western upper
flank. In Figure 4c bS3 appeared in the afternoon of 30 August between bS1 and bS2 in the S area.
(f ) Thermal image collected from Il Pizzo with a portable thermal camera showing the map of tempera-
tures within the summit craters as on 4 September 2008, and (g) corresponding visible photo taken from
the same position and on the same date.

Type 1 Strombolian explosions were produced by bS2,
bN1 and bN2. Vent bS1 showed the most variable intensity
and eruptive regime, passing, over a time-span of minutes,
from no activity to weak, passive degassing, puffing, mild
spattering, and Type 1 explosions. Increases in the activity
at bS1 were usually accompanied by high puff frequency at
vents bC2 and bC1, suggesting a shallow connection between
them. On the morning of 1 September, ash explosions of
Type 2a resumed at bS2 with high frequency of the events,
while Type 1 explosions were occurring at the other vents.
The variable level of the eruptive activity, and thus the
amount of erupted volumes of pyroclasts at individual vents,
resulted in a different height of the cinder cones, that on early
September were higher on the N zone, where the rim of
bN2 was 20 m higher than the rim of bS2, and with the
lowest bC vents 10 m below the S vents (Figure 4d).
This resulted in a difference in elevation between bN2 and
bC rims of 30 m. Mild spattering and Type 1 explosions
started by noon of 1 September at bS1 and bS3, accom-
panied by puffing and sometimes by mild spattering also

7 of 17
B05201 CALVARI ET AL.: VULCANIAN EXPLOSIONS AT STROMBOLI B05201

Figure 5. Explosive sequence on 7 September 2008 recorded by the (a–f) SPI camera, and by the (g–l)
SQV camera located on the east flank of the SdF.

from bC1 and bC2. In the afternoon of the same day,
Type 2a explosions were sometimes occurring also at bN1,
while Type 1 events were observed at bN2, and puffing at
bC1, bC2, bS1 and bS3, alternating to spattering at the last
three vents. Type 1 explosions and spattering increased on
early 2 September at the bC and bS vents (Figure 2b), with
almost vertical jets of spatter and two additional vents
(bS4 and bS5) opened in the S crater zone (Figure 4d). The
gradual opening of a great number of small vents suggested
deepening of magma level within the conduit [Spampinato
et al., 2008]. During the afternoon of the same day, magma
level became shallower, with very frequent and intense
spattering at bS1 and bS3 accompanied by ash emissions,
suggesting erosion and widening of the vents [Spampinato
et al., 2008]. This activity caused the merging of bS1 and
bS3, forming a wider bS1 (bS1+3, Figure 4e) vent, and was
punctuated by Type 1 explosions, with bombs reaching
50–70 m in height from bS1, and up to 150 m at bS2.
Later on the same day also bS4 and bS5 merged together
(Figures 4d and 4e).
[15] Images between 06:30:00 of 3 September and
08:15:00 of 4 September are lacking because of a failure in
the transmission system of the camera network. The first
images available on 4 September showed that the three S
vents had widened, with the previously merged bS1+3
(Figure 4e) and a new vent (bS6) opened to the NW of bS2
(Figure 4e). This latter vent did not show any explosion.
After noon on the same day, spattering became increasingly
more common at bS1 with ejecta up to 50 m in height,
spreading all around the vent (Figures 4f and 4g) and caus-
ing a wide dispersion of products and producing the fast
growth of the S cinder cone. In the meantime, also bC2 fed
spattering, while bS2 and bS5 were displaying Type 2
explosions up to 100 m in height, suggesting erosion of the
conduit and deeper magma level. The explosive activity
increased between the evening of 4 September and early

8 of 17
B05201 CALVARI ET AL.: VULCANIAN EXPLOSIONS AT STROMBOLI
Figure 6. Photos courtesy of Tullio Ricci (INGV-Rome),
taken from Il Pizzo, and comparing the crater morphology
(a) before and (b) after the 7 September explosive event.
The dotted yellow line shows the rim of bS1 vent. Note in
Figure 6b the much wider vent depression, and the accumu-
lation of pale rocks (lithics) around bC2, which became also
higher than bC1 by deposition of fallout from the 7 Septem-
ber explosion.
5 September at all vents, and especially at bC2 and bS1,
with Type 1 explosions producing fast cinder cone growth.
Activity decreased again by the end of 5 September. On
6 September, explosions at the S crater zone did not rise
vertically but were inclined eastward, thus having a greater
horizontal component and expanding toward the inner crater,
leading to a fast accumulation of spatter on the slope between
bC2 and bS1. Spatter accumulation resulted in a partial
obstruction of the bS1 vent, whose diameter decreased sig-
nificantly between 3 and 6 September, as observed directly
via the camera network (Figures 4c–4e). The change of
eruptive jet spreading direction, although observed on other
occasions [e.g., Zanon et al., 2009], is rather unusual, and did
not occur during the previous days, when the explosion jets
were always directed outwards from the center of the crater
depression. This change thus suggested modifications of the
inner structure of the S shallow conduit or partial obstruction
of the vent. The camera network did not transmit between
9 of 17
B05201
12:30:00 of 6 September and 06:11:00 of 7 September, when
bS1 looked widened toward bC2 (Figure 5a).
5. The 7 September Explosive Event
[16] On 7 September 2008 at 07:49:10 a strong ash
explosion started at the S area of Stromboli (Figures 5a–5l).
This was recorded by SPI and SQV. The cameras’ FOV
allowed description of the event from both a close-up and
frontal perspective (SPI, Figures 5a–5f), and from a 1 km
distance and inclined view (SQV, Figures 5g–5l). The view
from SPI permitted the characterization of the initial phases
of the explosive event. At 07:49:02, bS1 fed a low-energy
spattering, and suddenly, at 07:49:10 two diverging explo-
sive jets made of hot, juvenile material (Figure 5a) origi-
nated from bS1 and from bS3, the new vent just-opened
between bS1 and bC (Figure 4c). The jet from bS1 was
inclined toward SW, whereas the jet from bS3 was inclined
toward NE, with the latter slightly bigger than the former
(Figure 5a). The two jets expanded outwards the crater with
maximum estimated speeds of 20 m s 1 for the SW jet,
and 27 m s 1 for the NE jet, calculated on the basis of the
time-lapse frames (Figure 5b). The eruption cloud from bS3
spread also laterally, and 2 s later (Figure 5c) displayed
convective movements and formed a vigorous vortex ring
giving rise to a “rooted thermal” plume [Patrick, 2007]. A
few seconds later, the ring appeared also at the top of the
eruption column developed above bS1 (Figures 5d–5f ). The
dark color (in the infrared image) of this cloud suggested
that it consisted essentially of lithic (cold) ash. The two
plumes became cold where diverging (dark portion in
Figures 5c–5f), implying likely fragmentation to ash size and
involvement of lithic, cold, country rock material, with the
juvenile, hot (white in Figures 5a–5f) portions confined to
the initial and outer parts of the spreading clouds. Two
seconds after the blast, coarse ballistics were evident
(Figures 5b–5e), being more abundant and bigger from the
cloud spreading NE (Figure 5d, right).
[17] The view provided by SQV showed that the explosive
episode consisted of three major pulses (Figures 5g–5l). The
first corresponded to the sequence just described as observed
from SPI and occurred 1 min earlier, then the ash cloud
obscured the sight from SPI. The second was at first visible
from SQV at 07:50:03 and became more evident a few
seconds later (Figure 5j). The third pulse started at 07:50:27
and formed a plume that expanded after a few seconds
(Figure 5k). By 07:51:07 the eruption cloud was already
rising up and detaching from the crater (Figure 5l) forming a
thermal plume [Patrick, 2007]. Overall, the explosive event
lasted 2 min, and formed an ash plume that merged the two
initial jets (Figure 5j), slowed down to an average rise rate of
18 m s 1, and reached an estimated maximum height of
500–600 m and width of 300 m. The ash cloud drifted
SW with the wind, and disappeared from SPI camera view at
07:50:20, and at 07:51:11 from that of SQV.
[18] A few minutes later, mild Type 1 explosions resumed
from bN2, while bS2 fed Type 2b events, and bC produced
puffing. Direct field observations made at the summit crater
zone (T. Ricci, personal communication, 2008) reported that
no golden pumice (gas-rich, LP magma) [Bertagnini et al.,
1999] were erupted, and that visible morphological chan-
ges at the summit vents had occurred (Figures 6a and 6b)
B05201 CALVARI ET AL.: VULCANIAN EXPLOSIONS AT STROMBOLI B05201

Figure 7. Images recorded on 7 September 2008 by the SPI camera at (a) 07:49:10, (b) 07:49:36, and
(c) 07:50:02. (d) Electric (red and black lines) records of the eruption. (e) Comparison between the seis-
mic (green line) signal, and seismic filtered signal for highlighting the VLP component (blue), and the
electric signals (red and black lines). The intensity for the electric signals is rescaled by 6 E10 3 and
6 E10 1 for a better comparison with the seismic signal.

10 of 17
B05201 CALVARI ET AL.: VULCANIAN EXPLOSIONS AT STROMBOLI B05201

Figure 8. Comparison between (a) the location of the seismic source of the VLP event associated with
the 7 September 2008 major explosion (red diamond: Latitude 38 47′47.32″; Longitude 15 12′35.97″; ele-
vation 502 m a.s.l.) and (b) the locations of the VLP events recorded on the same day (red area, comprising
360 events). The blue dots indicate the positions of the INGV-OV broadband seismic stations.

with significant widening of the bS1 vent within the S cone,
heightening of bC2 by fallout accumulation, and involving
also lithic material from the conduit walls still visible around
the base of the bC cinder cone (Figure 6b). No blocks or
coarse ejecta reached the Il Pizzo zone, and most of the
fallout material fell inside the crater depression, with only
ash being drifted west by the wind.
6. Signals Recorded During the 7 September
Explosive Event
[19] Our observations of the 7 September event are sum-
marized in Figure 7, where: in Figures 7a–7c we report three
SPI images representing the main important phases of the
eruptive cloud development; in Figures 7d and 7e the elec-
tric signals (red and black), and in Figure 7e the seismic
signal (blue) filtered at 0.05–0.50 Hz, highlighting the VLP
event associated with the explosion (light blue line). The
timing of the electric signals can be accurately linked to the
optical detection of the eruption cloud, because no electrical
effects are recorded before the ash explosion (Figures 7a–
7e). This was also observed during previous electrical mea-
surements carried out at Stromboli [Büttner et al., 2000];
thus, we can exclude the effect of the electrical variations in
the soil, possibly connected to the presence of a shallow
aquifer [Finizola et al., 2003, 2009], especially given that
these signals display a different shape [Crespy et al., 2008].
Over the whole trend of the electrical signals, at least four
main high-amplitude, short-lasting spikes are superimposed
(Figure 7d). Considering the high amplitude and short
duration, we tentatively interpret these as possibly due to
lightning discharges produced within the ash cloud [e.g.,
Lane and Gilbert, 1992; Hoblitt, 1994; Bennett et al., 2010].
[20] The electrical potential gradient generated within the
eruption cloud during the major explosion of 7 September
2008 was recalculated using data from both laboratory
(fragmentation experiments using remelted volcanic rock)
and field (using volcanic ash) experiments on a larger scale
[e.g., Zimanowski et al., 1997; Zimanowski, 1998; Büttner
and Zimanowski, 1998; Büttner et al., 2006; Dellino et al.,
2007, 2010]. The decay of the horizontal potential gradient
with distance from the source was determined, and a model
of the electrical field was obtained. In detail, the best fit for
the geometry of the field is a line charge model, and the
decrease of the potential gradient Umax with distance D is
well approximated by Umax  1/D [Büttner et al., 2000].
Thus, in the case of the ash explosion, considering a distance
of 500 m from the source, and a Umax measured at the site
of 3.6 V/m, the maximum horizontal potential gradient in
the eruption column of 1.8 kV/m is obtained. The overall
voltage-time ratio that was found to characterize the main
eruption mechanism is 600 V/s. This value is still in the
range of magmatic fragmentation (102 V/s). However, during
small increments of time, maximum local voltage time ratio
values of 7 kV/s can be detected, approaching the typical
range found for phreato-magmatic fragmentation (104 V/s)
[Büttner et al., 2000].
[21] Using the estimated horizontal potential gradient of
1.8 kV/m and the voltage/surface area diagram of Figure 3,
three total surface areas can be calculated for MFCI
(11.3 m2), magmatic (1.06  103 m2), and lithic parti-
cles (3.0  105 m2). These are distributed to the model
grains (cubes), and result in the masses reported in Table 1.
The calculations on particle surface using a grain-size dis-
tribution typical for Stromboli, as earlier described, result in
0.8 kg of MFCI particles (produced by phreato-magmatic
fragmentation), 80 kg of juvenile ash (produced by mag-
matic fragmentation), and 7.5  103 kg of passively ejected,
lithic ash-sized particles. Although the estimated mass of
MFCI particles is small, due to the small grain-size and the
high specific surface, it contributes to the energy of the
eruption. From specific energy-surface ratios taken from
fragmentation experiments also the kinetic energy release
can be calculated, being 19.25  103 kJ - i.e., 4.6 kg TNT
equivalent (Table 1). By comparison, the same calculations
have been performed on the electric signals recorded during
three of the strongest events belonging to the persistent
Strombolian activity, which occurred at 11:53:00, 12:25:00
and 19:17:00 on the same day (Table 1). They show a range
of total kinetic energy between 0.6 and 1.6 kg TNT. These

11 of 17
B05201 CALVARI ET AL.: VULCANIAN EXPLOSIONS AT STROMBOLI B05201

Figure 9. Seismic trace recorded during the major explosion occurred at Stromboli on 7 September 2008,
and a typical VLP waveform that occurred 10 min before. Counts (arbitrary units, y axis) versus time in
sec (x axis), starting from 07:30:00. The recording seismic station is STR9, see Figures 1b and 1c for
location.

explosive events occurred at the S area and involved short-
lasting ash clouds. It is interesting to observe that each
explosive event included 1% of juvenile material, with
most of the ejecta consisting of lithics. This is also evidenced
by the low temperature (dark color) of the eruptive clouds
detected from SPI camera (Figures 5c–5f). Only the major
explosive event occurred at 07:49:00 erupted a small amount
of MFCI particles, resulting in 0.01% of the total erupted
mass (Table 1).
[22] The correlation between the seismic and electrical
signals is shown in Figure 7e. Comparison between electric
and seismic signals is essential to distinguish electric signals
produced by weather clouds from those produced by volca-
nic plumes. This comparison encouraged us to elaborate the
data further, in order to interpret the mechanisms of major
explosions and compare them with other explosion catego-
ries at Stromboli. Thus, given that the 5 April 2003 parox-
ysm displayed a deeper source origin when compared to the
persistent explosions [D’Auria et al., 2006], in order to
compare the seismic signal of the 7 September major ash
explosion with that of the persistent Strombolian activity, we
have located the source of 360 VLP events recorded on
7 September 2008 by using the semblance technique
[Martini et al., 2007]. This exploits the polarization proper-
ties of the signal (Figure 8a), with a particle motion pointing
in the direction of the source. The comparison between the
7 September major event (red diamond in Figure 8a and
yellow star in Figure 8b) and the persistent Strombolian
activity (red area in Figure 8b) recorded on the same day is
shown in Figure 8b by the red area around the yellow star.
It is worth noting that the major event associated with the
ash explosion, similarly to the other events of the persistent
Strombolian activity, is located along the SdF slope at an
elevation of 500 m a.s.l. On the other hand, by comparing
the waveform of the VLP associated with the major ash
explosion with that of a common VLP event that occurred a
few seconds earlier (Figure 9), it is evident that the wave-
form of the major ash explosion is more complex, being
characterized by a greater amplitude and a longer oscilla-
tion duration. This is indicative of a difference of both the
time history of the source mechanism, and the energy of the
signal. Major explosions occur frequently at Stromboli [e.g.,
Corsaro et al., 2005; Métrich et al., 2005; Andronico and
Pistolesi, 2010], and show a seismic waveform similar to
that of paroxysms, suggesting similar eruptive mechanisms,
although their intensity is much lower [D’Auria et al., 2006].
In addition, paroxysms display also an Ultra-Long-Period
(ULP) signal that has never been recorded during the per-
sistent summit activity [D’Auria et al., 2006].
7. Discussion and Comparison With Paroxysms
Data
[23] The 7 September 2008 major explosion at Stromboli
occurred after several months of increasing explosive activ-
ity observed at the summit craters since the first half of
March (Figure 2a). This general growing trend was essen-
tially produced by increasing explosivity at the N area
(Figure 2b), displayed at least until the end of June. There-
after, the N and S areas showed an opposite behavior, with
reduced explosivity at the N area being balanced by a
corresponding increase at the S area. A few days before the
major event, a sudden drop in the number of explosions at
the N area was followed by a relative increase at the S area
(Figure 2b). This opposite behavior at the two crater zones
has been observed also in the temperature of the erup-
tive plumes measured during the 5 April 2003 paroxysm
[Calvari et al., 2006], and was interpreted as revealing upper
conduit instability, as well as shallow connection between
the vents. A few days before the 7 September 2008 major

12 of 17
B05201 CALVARI ET AL.: VULCANIAN EXPLOSIONS AT STROMBOLI
event, some important morphology changes occurred at the
summit vents, leading to a visible reduction of the diameter
of the S area vents (Figures 4a–4g) suggestive of partial
obstruction of the S area. Many papers [e.g., Harris and
Stevenson, 1997; Chouet et al., 2003; Burton et al., 2008]
have already pointed to a very shallow connection among
the Stromboli summit vents. Thus, it is possible that a
decrease in the activity at one of the summit zones (in this
case, the N area) might have resulted in the formation of a
cooler crust that reduced vent diameter and acted as a partial
obstruction of the upper feeder conduit. As a consequence,
considering that Stromboli is a steady state system, to re-
equilibrate the total mass eruption rate of the system, eruptive
activity increased at one of the other summit crater zones
(i.e., bS1). However, the increased explosive frequency was
too high to be sustained by only a small vent, which was
then affected by inner collapses. These were displayed by
changes in the ejecta direction [e.g., Cannata et al., 2009;
Zanon et al., 2009], which spread inside the crater on
6 September. The vent constriction increased gas pressure
within the magma column, until this was eventually sud-
denly released through a major explosion, blowing out part
of the crater rim, as happened during the 7 September major
explosive event (Figures 6a and 6b), and also during other
previous strong explosions at Stromboli [e.g., Bertagnini
et al., 1999; Andronico et al., 2008]. The fragmentation
of cold crusted material during the 7 September event is
revealed by the growing dark ash cloud visible between
the two eruption plumes in the infrared images recorded by
the SPI camera (Figures 5c–5f), and by the accumulation of
lithic material around the base of the bC vents (Figure 6b).
The contribution of lithic material to the formation of the
ash cloud is supported by the results obtained from the
electric signals (Figure 5 and Table 1). The same proportion
between juvenile and lithic material is maintained during
the persistent, mild explosive activity, the only difference
with the major explosion being the total amount of ash
erupted (Table 1), and the involvement of a small amount
of MFCI ash by the major Vulcanian event.
[24] The removal of the cold plug obstructing the crater
during the initial phase of the explosive event (Figures 5c–
5f), as well as the ejection of lithic material deposited around
the vent (Figure 6b) and the erosion of the vent rim, are
consistent with a Vulcanian-like eruption mechanism [Cas
and Wright, 1988; Morrissey and Mastin, 2000; Formenti
et al., 2003], that was invoked also for the 5 April 2003
paroxysm [Calvari et al., 2006]. Like previous major
explosions [Bertagnini et al., 1999; Andronico and Pistolesi,
2010] and paroxysms [Calvari et al., 2006, 2010], also the
7 September event was characterized by an eruption column
consisting of several pulses, although in this case only the
S area was interested by the blast rather than the whole crater
area. When compared to recent paroxysms, the 7 September
2008 event displayed lower muzzle velocity (20–30 versus
170 m s 1), smaller eruption plume (500–600 versus
2000–3000 m high), shorter duration (2 versus 7 min), and
did not involve eruption of the deep-seated LP magma
commonly erupted during paroxysms [Métrich et al., 2005;
Calvari et al., 2006, 2010; Rosi et al., 2006; Harris et al.,
2008]. The different scale of major explosions and paroxys-
mal events relates also to the different volume of erupted
ejecta (104 versus 106 m3, respectively), that during
13 of 17
B05201
paroxysms produces lava fountains and pyroclastic flows
[Calvari et al., 2006, 2010]. In addition, paroxysms cause
ULP seismic events recorded several minutes before erup-
tion onset, likely produced by the deformation of the vol-
canic edifice during magma ascent and eruption [D’Auria
et al., 2006; Martini et al., 2007; Casagli et al., 2009].
In addition, before paroxysms, a high frequency seismic
signal is recorded and apparently related to magma frag-
mentation, but this was never observed during major erup-
tions [D’Auria et al., 2006]. All these data together point out
to a different source for paroxysms and major explosions,
with the much deeper and fast rise of LP magma triggering
paroxysms, whereas a shallow, partial vent obstruction is
causing major explosive events. An alternative explanation
is given by Del Bello et al. [2012], who suggest that par-
oxysms result from slug flow, occurring just on a much
larger scale than the “normal,” persistent Strombolian
activity. In this context, the rise of LP magma might increase
the size of rising slugs, promoting paroxysms rather than
mild Strombolian explosions.
[25] It seems also possible that there is a major difference
in the fragmentation process and gas decoupling style
between paroxysms and major explosions. In fact in parox-
ysms, the presence of LP magma suggests that some gas was
coupled with the magma as it rose, and fragmentation was
internal. In addition, recent experiments have proved that the
LP magma is more prone to explosively fragment than is the
HP magma [Dürig et al., 2012]. In the 7 September 2008
major explosion instead, where apparently only HP magma
was involved (T. Ricci, personal communication, 2008), the
gas accumulated at the top of the conduit and was then
decoupled from magma, thus suggesting again some kind of
upper conduit obstruction or morphology change. Therefore,
any fragmentation of magma in the conduit was probably
driven by gas near, but not within, the magma.
[26] The analysis of video sequences of the 7 September
eruptive activity clearly shows that the ash explosion, and
the associated plume, is to be attributed to a Type 2a event,
which has a much smaller grain size when compared to the
Type 1 persistent activity [Patrick et al., 2007]. This is
clearly visible by the dark cloud developing in between the
two jets of Figures 5c–5e, which is produced by lithic (cold)
ash due to the strong fragmentation of the bS1 rim blown
away during the explosion (cfr. Figures 6a and 6b). Inter-
estingly, a recent petrologic analysis of the erupted ejecta by
the different summit vent zones of Stromboli has revealed
that the material erupted by the S vent zone is normally
10 C cooler and 6–8 wt% more crystallized than that
erupted by the C vents, whereas the N vents display features
that are intermediate between the two, and variable in dif-
ferent times [Landi et al., 2011]. The S area is also the one
that commonly displays ash-dominated Type 2b eruptions,
and it is thus possible that a cooler and more crystallized
magma erupted by this site is also more prone to give rise to
brittle rather than plastic fragmentation, resulting in a greater
amount of ash released during the explosive activity with
respect to coarse ballistic ejecta [Dürig et al., 2012].
[27] By combining seismic and electric data with obser-
vations, it is therefore evident that the major explosion of
7 September (occurred at 07:49:00), although not associated
with the emission of a large amount of pyroclasts, is char-
acterized by a smaller particle grain-size and a much higher
B05201 CALVARI ET AL.: VULCANIAN EXPLOSIONS AT STROMBOLI
release of mechanic energy when compared to the persistent
Strombolian activity. Seismic data reveal that the source area
of the 7 September event is similar to that of the persistent
explosive activity (Figure 6), although its intensity is much
greater (Figure 7). This is consistent with higher intensity of
the explosion revealed by electric data (Table 1) and with a
Vulcanian-like mechanism. Unfortunately we do not have
samples collected during the 7 September explosive episode,
but ashes collected in the same period and erupted by the
whole crater area during mild explosive activity showed that
lithics, dense and “recycled” clasts account for between 12
and 51% of the erupted ejecta [D’Oriano et al., 2011]. In
addition, the same authors found small amount of the LP
magma among the products of the persistent summit activity,
suggesting that fresh, newly erupted LP magma possibly
associated with small, deep bubble plumes can reach the
surface without significantly interacting with the upper HP
magma body.
[28] It is worth noting the suggested involvement of a
minor amount of MFCI material during the 7 September
major event, which was undetected in the other explosions
recorded on the same day (Table 1). This is probably the
result of a subordinate, minor interaction with the shallow
aquifer existing within the upper crater area [Finizola et al.,
2003, 2009; Revil et al., 2004, 2011]. Pressure build-up by
gas accumulation below the partial obstruction of the crater
might have caused ground fracturing and thus interaction
with the shallow aquifer, thus increasing the strength of the
explosion and causing the release of MFCI material
(Table 1).
[29] After the 7 September major explosive event, the
explosive activity at the C vents, that was extremely rare
(less than 1%) during the whole 2008, became more com-
mon (Figure 2b), confirming the release of the accumulated
stress in the uppermost portion of the conduit, and the return
to the persistent, mild Strombolian eruptive activity. This
episode suggests that the phases showing high variability of
explosive activity, and sudden decrease at one zone com-
pensated by increased activity at one of the others, must be
carefully considered in terms of hazard for the potential of
leading to major explosive events [e.g., Andronico and
Pistolesi, 2010] or Vulcanian eruptions, dominated by brit-
tle fragmentation and formation of large ash columns [e.g.,
Calvari et al., 2006, 2010; Pistolesi et al., 2011].
[30] If we apply the same proportions as those obtained by
the electric signals of the major explosion of 7 September
2008 to the event of 5 April 2003, a total mechanical energy
in the range of 2  109 kJ results for the latter, which is quite
high for a Strombolian activity, and points to a Vulcanian
type [Calvari et al., 2006; Pistolesi et al., 2011], being
driven by brittle fragmentation mechanisms. The overpres-
sure with respect to atmosphere that forms when the eruptive
gas-particle mixture exits from the vent causes the radially
expanding column simulated during conduit flow experi-
ments [Dellino et al., 2010] and observed during Vulcanian
explosions having both intensity of paroxysmal or major
explosions.
[31] What has been just described shows that fragmenta-
tion type can shift from brittle to ductile and vice versa as a
function of the development of a cool crust on the upper
conduit [Taddeucci et al., 2002, 2004; Patrick et al., 2007].
A decrease in the frequency of explosions at one of the crater
14 of 17
B05201
zones, although compensated by an increase in one of the
others, can thus result in a greater possibility of occurrence
of major explosive events. This is also consistent with recent
laboratory experiments that connected different degassing
regimes to the non-Newtonian rheology of magmas [Divoux
et al., 2011]. An important issue is that during major
explosions brittle fragmentation is due to the presence of
cooler material due to crust (obstruction) formation and
fragmentation, whereas the fragments typical of Strombo-
lian-type explosions, commonly observed at Stromboli, are
produced by ductile fragmentation. Wilson [1980] simulated
these eruptions by considering what would happen in an
open-vent system in which magma was rising slowly or was
static. Cooling at the top of the magma column causes the
development of a “skin” with a finite strength. The skin
strength will depend on how much cooling occurs before the
arrival of large gas bubbles. If the interval between bubbles
is short enough, each bubble will updome the thin skin and
burst through the top of the magma column with minimal
delay. If the interval between bubbles is longer, then the skin
will cool and thicken, and more than one bubble may have to
arrive and become trapped before sufficient pressure is built
up in an accumulating gas pocket to break through the skin.
In either case, the short time interval between explosions
suggests that the strength of this skin is never very large.
Repeated cycles of cooling and gas accumulation followed
by bubble bursting lead to the series of transient explosions
characteristic of Strombolian eruptions.
[32] The different processes involved in triggering major
explosions and paroxysms have important hazard implica-
tions. Whether the sudden rise of a gas-rich magma batch
along the conduit can be hypothetically detected by strain-
meters with several minutes of advance [e.g., Martini et al.,
2007], it is much more difficult to detect the partial
obstructions of the summit vents. The growing use of fixed
thermal cameras, as well as automatic routines for real time
data analyses, and a more in depth study of past strong
explosive sequences, will help us improve the possibility to
predict also this kind of events.
8. Concluding Remarks
[33] The 7 September 2008 major ash explosion at
Stromboli is the first event of this category for which a
number of geophysical parameters have been measured in
combination. These include seismic records, as well as
infrared and visual images recorded by a network of fixed
cameras, and electric signals from two stations installed at a
500 m distance from the volcano SW crater, where the
explosion occurred. The camera images allowed us to char-
acterize the explosive episode, which consisted of three main
pulses and involved the disruption of the upper part of the
cinder cone built up around the explosive vent by spatter
accumulation. The explosion occurred during a phase of
generally increasing explosive activity at the summit craters,
but followed a period of a few days when one of the summit
crater areas showed reduced activity. This might have
caused an increase of the upper cold crust thickness, which
in turn produced a shallow blockage in the conduit, allowing
accumulation of a gas pocket below the crust. Once the
pressure of the gas below the crust reached the limit of rock
and magma strength, it caused magma fragmentation and
B05201 CALVARI ET AL.: VULCANIAN EXPLOSIONS AT STROMBOLI
crust disruption, resulting in a significant widening of the
vent rim. This process is confirmed by direct observations
(Figure 5) and by the images recorded by the camera system
(Figure 4), and is in agreement with the electric data
(Figure 6 and Table 1), which show that lithic material made
up most of the ash released by the explosive event (Table 1).
The removal of the cold crust from the vent rim allowed a
gradual re-activation of the central area (Figures 2a and 2b),
which showed an increasing number of daily explosive
events. In this paper we dealt simply with the processes
occurring in the uppermost portion of Stromboli’s conduit
system that lead to major explosions. It is to note that the
input of a significant amount of a gas-rich magma (LP) from
the deeper region of the volcano feeding system is another
process that could lead to major explosions and/or parox-
ysms, which in the major explosion of 7 September 2008 did
not release fragmental material at the vent, but could not be
ruled out as a trigger of higher intensity activity at Stromboli.
[34] Acknowledgments. This paper was partially supported by a
research project (project INGV-DPC Paroxysm V2/03, 2007–2009) funded
by Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia and by the Italian Civil
Protection. We wish to thank the Italian Civil Protection for significant sup-
port to the INGV monitoring activities and especially Chiara Cardaci, who
has very efficiently organized the helicopter time for the installation of the
electric sensors. Special thanks also to the helicopter pilot Salvo Princiotta
and to his team for having safely carried out the monitoring surveys and
to Mario Zaia and Mario Pruiti for their invaluable field assistance. We
are indebted with Salvatore Inguaggiato for making available the meteoro-
logical data from his “Database geochimico monitoraggio continuo flussi di
CO2 Stromboli –INGV Palermo- 31 December 2008” and with Tullio Ricci,
who kindly provided the photographs of the summit craters taken immedi-
ately before and after the 7 September event. Reviews on a previous version
of this manuscript by Mike James, Steve Lane, Matthew Patrick, an anony-
mous reviewer, and the Associate Editor Andre Revil significantly
improved the quality of the paper.
References
Anderson, R., S. Gathman, J. Hughes, S. Björnsson, S. Jónasson, D. C.
Blanchard, C. B. Moore, H. J. Survilas, and B. Vonnegut (1965), Electric-
ity in volcanic clouds, Science, 148, 1179–1189, doi:10.1126/science.
148.3674.1179.
Andò, B., and E. Pecora (2006), An advanced video-based system for mon-
itoring active volcanoes, Comput. Geosci., 32, 85–91, doi:10.1016/j.
cageo.2005.05.004.
Andronico, D., and M. Pistolesi (2010), The November 2009 paroxysmal
explosions at Stromboli, J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res., 196, 120–125,
doi:10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2010.06.005.
Andronico, D., R. A. Corsaro, A. Cristaldi, and M. Polacci (2008), Character-
izing high energy explosive eruptions at Stromboli volcano using multidis-
ciplinary data: An example from the 9 January 2005 explosion, J. Volcanol.
Geotherm. Res., 176, 541–550, doi:10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2008.05.011.
Barberi, F., M. Rosi, and A. Sodi (1993), Volcanic hazard assessment at
Stromboli based on review of historical data, Acta Vulcanol., 3, 173–187.
Behncke, B., S. Falsaperla, and E. Pecora (2009), Complex magma dynam-
ics at Mount Etna revealed by seismic, thermal, and volcanological data,
J. Geophys. Res., 114, B03211, doi:10.1029/2008JB005882.
Bennett, A. J., P. Odams, D. Edwards, and P. Arason (2010), Monitoring of
lightning from the April–May 2010 Eyjafjallajokull volcanic eruption
using a very low frequency lightning location network, Environ. Res.
Lett., 5, 044013, doi:10.1088/1748-9326/5/4/044013.
Bertagnini, A., M. Coltelli, P. Landi, M. Pompilio, and M. Rosi (1999),
Violent explosions yield new insights into dynamics of Stromboli vol-
cano, Eos Trans. AGU, 80(52), 633–636, doi:10.1029/99EO00415.
Bertolaso, G., A. Bonaccorso, and E. Boschi (2008), Scientific community
and civil protection synergy during the Stromboli 2002–2003 eruption, in
The Stromboli Volcano: An Integrated Study of the 2002-2003 Eruption,
Geophys. Monogr. Ser., vol. 182, edited by S. Calvari et al., pp. 387–397,
AGU, Washington, D. C.
Burton, M., S. Calvari, L. Spampinato, L. Lodato, N. A. Pino, E. Marchetti,
and F. Murè (2008), Volcanic and seismic activity at Stromboli preceding
the 2002–03 eruption, in The Stromboli Volcano: An Integrated Study of
15 of 17
B05201
the 2002–2003 Eruption, Geophys. Monogr. Ser., vol. 182, edited by
S. Calvari et al., pp. 93–104, AGU, Washington, D. C.
Büttner, R., and B. Zimanowski (1998), Physics of thermohydraulic explo-
sions, Phys. Rev. E, 57, 5726–5729, doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.57.5726.
Büttner, R., H. Röder, and B. Zimanowski (1997), Electrical effects gen-
erated by experimental volcanic explosions, Appl. Phys. Lett., 70,
1903–1905, doi:10.1063/1.118726.
Büttner, R., B. Zimanowski, and H. Röder (2000), Short time electrical
effects during volcanic eruptions: Experiments and field measurements,
J. Geophys. Res., 105, 2819–2827, doi:10.1029/1999JB900370.
Büttner, R., P. Dellino, L. La Volpe, V. Lorenz, and B. Zimanowski,
(2002), Thermohydraulic explosions in phreatomagmatic eruptions as
evidenced by the comparison between pyroclasts and products from
Molten Fuel Coolant Interaction experiments, J. Geophys. Res., 107(B11),
2277, doi:10.1029/2001JB000511.
Büttner, R., P. Dellino, H. Raue, I. Sonder, and B. Zimanowski (2006),
Stress induced brittle fragmentation of magmatic melts: Theory and
experiments, J. Geophys. Res., 111, B08204, doi:10.1029/2005JB003958.
Calvari, S., and M. Pompilio (2001), Rapporto del sopralluogo a Strom-
boli del 5 novembre 2001, internal report, 5 pp., Ist. Naz. di Geofis.
e Vulcanol., Catania, Italy.
Calvari, S., L. Spampinato, L. Lodato, A. J. L. Harris, M. R. Patrick,
J. Dehn, M. R. Burton, and D. Andronico (2005a), Chronology and
complex volcanic processes during the 2002–2003 flank eruption at
Stromboli volcano (Italy) reconstructed from direct observations and
surveys with a handheld thermal camera, J. Geophys. Res., 110, B02201,
doi:10.1029/2004JB003129.
Calvari, S., L. Spampinato, L. Lodato, A. J. L. Harris, M. R. Patrick,
J. Dehn, M. R. Burton, and D. Andronico (2005b), Correction to
“Chronology and complex volcanic processes during the 2002–2003
flank eruption at Stromboli volcano (Italy) reconstructed from direct
observations and surveys with a handheld thermal camera”, J. Geophys.
Res., 110, B04201, doi:10.1029/2005JB003723.
Calvari, S., L. Spampinato, and L. Lodato (2006), The 5 April 2003 Vulca-
nian paroxysmal explosion at Stromboli volcano (Italy) from field obser-
vations and thermal data, J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res., 149, 160–175,
doi:10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2005.06.006.
Calvari, S., L. Lodato, A. Steffke, A. Cristaldi, A. J. L. Harris, L. Spampinato,
and E. Boschi (2010), The 2007 Stromboli eruption: Event chronology and
effusion rates using thermal infrared data, J. Geophys. Res., 115, B04201,
doi:10.1029/2009JB006478.
Calvari, S., L. Spampinato, A. Bonaccorso, C. Oppenheimer, E. Rivalta, and
E. Boschi (2011), Lava effusion: A slow fuse for paroxysms at Stromboli
volcano?, Earth Planet. Sci. Lett., 301, 317–323, doi:10.1016/j.
epsl.2010.11.015.
Cannata, A., P. Montalto, E. Privitera, and G. Russo (2009), Character-
ization and location of infrasonic sources in active volcanoes: Mount
Etna, September–November 2007, J. Geophys. Res., 114, B08308,
doi:10.1029/2008JB006007.
Cas, R. A. F., and J. V. Wright (1988), Volcanic Successions Modern and
Ancient, 528 pp., Unwin Hyman, London.
Casagli, N., A. Tibaldi, A. Merri, C. Del Ventisette, T. Apuani, L. Guerri,
J. Fortuny-Guasch, and D. Tarchi (2009), Deformation of Stromboli
Volcano (Italy) during the 2007 eruption revealed by radar interferometry,
numerical modelling and structural geological field data, J. Volcanol.
Geotherm. Res., 182, 182–200, doi:10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2009.01.002.
Chouet, B., P. Dawson, T. Ohminato, M. Martini, G. Saccorotti,
F. Giudicepietro, G. De Luca, G. Milana, and R. Scarpa (2003), Source
mechanisms of explosions at Stromboli Volcano, Italy, determined from
moment-tensor inversions of very-long-period data, J. Geophys. Res.,
108(B1), 2019, doi:10.1029/2002JB001919.
Chouet, B., P. Dawson, and M. Martini (2008), Shallow-conduit dynamics
at Stromboli Volcano, Italy, imaged from waveform inversion, in Fluid
Motions in Volcanic Conduits: A Source of Seismic and Acoustic Signals,
edited by S. J. Lane and J. S. Gilbert, Geol. Soc. Spec. Publ., 307, 57–84,
doi:10.1144/SP307.5.
Corsaro, R. A., L. Miraglia, and V. Zanon (2005), Petrologic monitoring of
glasses in the pyroclastites erupted in February 2004 by the Stromboli
Volcano, Aeolian Islands, southern Italy, J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res.,
139, 339–343, doi:10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2004.08.002.
Crespy, A., A. Revil, N. Linde, S. Byrdina, A. Jardani, A. Bolève, and
P. Henry (2008), Detection and localization of hydromechanical dis-
turbances in a sandbox using the self-potential method, J. Geophys.
Res., 113, B01205, doi:10.1029/2007JB005042.
D’Auria, L., F. Giudicepietro, M. Martini, and R. Peluso (2006), Seismo-
logical insight into the kinematics of the 5 April 2003 Vulcanian explo-
sion at Stromboli volcano (southern Italy), Geophys. Res. Lett., 33,
L08308, doi:10.1029/2006GL026018.
B05201 CALVARI ET AL.: VULCANIAN EXPLOSIONS AT STROMBOLI
De Cesare, W., et al. (2009), The broadband seismic network of Stromboli
Volcano, Italy, Seismol. Res. Lett., 80(3), 435–439, doi:10.1785/
gssrl.80.3.435.
De Fino, M., L. La Volpe, S. Falsaperla, G. Frazzetta, G. Neri, L. Francalanci,
M. Rosi, and A. Sbrana (1988), The Stromboli eruption of December 6,
1985 – April 25, 1986: Volcanological, petrological and seismological
data, Rend. Soc. It. Min. Pet., 43, 1021–1038.
Del Bello, E., E. W. Llewellin, J. Taddeucci, P. Scarlato, and S. J. Lane
(2012), An analytical model for gas overpressure in slug-driven explo-
sions: Insights into Strombolian volcanic eruptions, J. Geophys. Res.,
117, B02206, doi:10.1029/2011JB008747.
Dellino, P., B. Zimanowski, R. Büttner, L. LaVolpe, D. Mele, and R.
Sulpizio (2007), Large-scale experiments on the mechanics of pyroclas-
tic flows: Design, engineering and first results, J. Geophys. Res., 112,
B04202, doi:10.1029/2006JB004313.
Dellino, P., et al. (2010), Conduit flow experiments help constraining the
regime of explosive eruptions, J. Geophys. Res., 115, B04204,
doi:10.1029/2009JB006781.
Divoux, T., V. Vidal, M. Ripepe, and J.-C. Geminar (2011), Influence of
non-Newtonian rheology on magma degassing, Geophys. Res. Lett., 38,
L12301, doi:10.1029/2011GL047789.
D’Oriano, C., A. Bertagnini, and M. Pompilio (2011), Ash erupted during
normal activity at Stromboli (Aeolian Islands, Italy) raises questions on
how the feeding system works, Bull. Volcanol., 73, 471–477,
doi:10.1007/s00445-010-0425-0.
Dürig, T., F. Dioguardi, R. Büttner, P. Dellino, D. Mele, and B. Zimanowski
(2012), A new method for the determination of the specific kinetic energy
(SKE) released to pyroclastic particles at magmatic fragmentation: Theory
and first experimental results, Bull. Volcanol., doi:10.1007/s00445-011-
0574-9, in press.
Falsaperla, S., and S. Spampinato (1999), Tectonic seismicity at Stromboli
volcano (Italy) from historical data and seismic records, Earth Planet.
Sci. Lett., 173, 425–437, doi:10.1016/S0012-821X(99)00246-0.
Finizola, A., F. Sortino, J. F. Lénat, M. Aubert, M. Ripepe, and M. Valenza
(2003), The summit hydrothermal system of Stromboli: New insights
from self-potential, temperature, CO2 and fumarolic fluids measure-
ments, with structural and monitoring implications, Bull. Volcanol.,
65, 486–504, doi:10.1007/s00445-003-0276-z.
Finizola, A., M. Aubert, A. Revil, C. Schutze, and F. Sortino (2009), Impor-
tance of structural history in the summit area of Stromboli during the
2002–2003 eruptive crisis inferred from temperature, soil CO2, self-
potential, and electrical resistivity tomography, J. Volcanol. Geotherm.
Res., 183, 213–227, doi:10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2009.04.002.
Formenti, Y., T. H. Druitt, and K. Kelfoun (2003), Characterisation of the
1997 Vulcanian explosions of Soufrière Hills Volcano, Montserrat, by
video analysis, Bull. Volcanol., 65, 587–605, doi:10.1007/s00445-003-
0288-8.
Giudicepietro, F., L. D’Auria, M. Martini, T. Caputo, R. Peluso, W. De
Cesare, M. Orazi, and G. Scarpato (2009), Changes in the VLP seismic
source during the 2007 Stromboli eruption, J. Volcanol. Geotherm.
Res., 182, 162–171, doi:10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2008.11.008.
Harris, A. J. L., and D. S. Stevenson (1997), Magma budgets and steady-
state activity of Vulcano and Stromboli, Geophys. Res. Lett., 24(9),
1043–1046, doi:10.1029/97GL00861.
Harris, A. J. L., M. Ripepe, S. Calvari, L. Lodato, and L. Spampinato
(2008), The 5 April 2003 explosion of Stromboli: Timing of eruption
dynamics using thermal data, in The Stromboli Volcano: An Integrated
Study of the 2002–2003 Eruption, Geophys. Monogr. Ser., vol. 182,
edited by S. Calvari et al., pp. 305–316, AGU, Washington, D. C.
Hoblitt, R. P. (1994), An experiment to detect and locate lightning associ-
ated with eruptions of Redoubt volcano, J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res.,
62, 499–517, doi:10.1016/0377-0273(94)90049-3.
James, M. R., S. J. Lane, and J. S. Gilbert (1998), Volcanic plume monitor-
ing using atmospheric electric potential gradients, J. Geol. Soc., 155,
587–590.
James, M. R., S. J. Lane, and B. A. Chouet (2006), Gas slug ascent through
changes in conduit diameter: Laboratory insights into a volcano-seismic
source process in low-viscosity magmas, J. Geophys. Res., 111,
B05201, doi:10.1029/2005JB003718.
James, M. R., L. Wilson, S. J. Lane, J. S. Gilbert, T. A. Mather, R. G.
Harrison, and R. S. Martin (2008), Electrical charging of volcanic
plumes, Space Sci. Rev., 137(1–4), 399–418, doi:10.1007/s11214-008-
9362-z.
Landi, P., N. Métrich, A. Bertagnini, and M. Rosi (2008), Recycling
and “re-hydration” of degassed magma inducing transient dissolution/
crystallization events at Stromboli (Italy), J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res.,
174, 325–336, doi:10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2008.02.013.
Landi, P., E. Marchetti, S. La Felice, M. Ripepe, and M. Rosi (2011),
Integrated petrochemical and geophysical data reveals thermal
16 of 17
B05201
distribution of the feeding conduits at Stromboli volcano, Italy, Geophys.
Res. Lett., 38, L08305, doi:10.1029/2010GL046296.
Lane, S. J., and J. S. Gilbert (1992), Electric potential gradient changes dur-
ing explosive activity at Sakurajima volcano, Japan, Bull. Volcanol., 54,
590–594, doi:10.1007/BF00569942.
Martini, M., et al. (2007), Seismological monitoring of the February
2007 effusive eruption of the Stromboli volcano, Ann. Geophys., 50(6),
775–788.
Métrich, N., A. Bertagnini, P. Landi, M. Rosi, and O. Belhadj (2005),
Triggering mechanism at the origin of paroxysms at Stromboli (Aeolian
Archipelago, Italy): The 5 April 2003 eruption, Geophys. Res. Lett., 32,
L10305, doi:10.1029/2004GL022257.
Métrich, N., A. Bertagnini, and A. Di Muro (2010), Conditions of magma
storage, degassing and ascent at Stromboli: New insights into the volcano
plumbing system with inferences on the eruptive dynamics, J. Petrol.,
51(3), 603–626, doi:10.1093/petrology/egp083.
Morrissey, M. M., and L. G. Mastin (2000), Vulcanian eruptions, in
Encyclopedia of Volcanoes, edited by H. Sigurdsson et al., pp. 463–475,
Academic, San Diego, Calif.
Neri, M., and G. Lanzafame (2009), Structural features of the 2007 Strom-
boli eruption, J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res., 182, 137–144, doi:10.1016/j.
jvolgeores.2008.07.021.
Orazi, M., M. Martini, and R. Peluso (2006), Data acquisition for vol-
cano monitoring, Eos Trans. AGU, 87(38), 385–392, doi:10.1029/
2006EO380002.
Patrick, M. R. (2007), Dynamics of Strombolian ash plumes from thermal
video: Motion, morphology, and air entrainment, J. Geophys. Res., 112,
B06202, doi:10.1029/2006JB004387.
Patrick, M. R., A. J. L. Harris, M. Ripepe, J. Dehn, D. A. Rothery, and S.
Calvari (2007), Strombolian explosive styles and source conditions:
Insights from thermal (FLIR) video, Bull. Volcanol., 69, 769–784,
doi:10.1007/s00445-006-0107-0.
Pistolesi, M., M. Rosi, L. Pioli, A. Renzulli, A. Bertagnini, and D.
Andronico (2008), The paroxysmal event and its deposits, in The Strom-
boli Volcano: An Integrated Study of the 2002–2003 Eruption, Geophys.
Monogr. Ser., vol. 182, edited by S. Calvari et al., 317–330, AGU,
Washington, D. C.
Pistolesi, M., D. Delle Donne, L. Pioli, and M. Ripepe (2011), The 15
March explosive crisis at Stromboli volcano, Italy: Assessing physical
parameters through a multidisciplinary approach, J. Geophys. Res., 116,
B12206, doi:10.1029/2011JB008527.
Porarinsson, S. (1976), Surtsey–The New Island in the North Atlantic,
64 pp., Almenna Bokafelagid, Reykjavik.
Revil, A., A. Finizola, F. Sortino, and M. Ripepe (2004), Geophysical inves-
tigations at Stromboli volcano, Italy: Implications for ground water flow
and paroxysmal activity, Geophys. J. Int., 157, 426–440, doi:10.1111/
j.1365-246X.2004.02181.x.
Revil, A., et al. (2011), Hydrogeology of Stromboli volcano, Aeolian Islands
(Italy) from the interpretation of resistivity tomograms, self-potential, soil
temperature and soil CO2 concentration measurements, Geophys. J. Int.,
186, 1078–1094, doi:10.1111/j.1365-246X.2011.05112.x.
Ripepe, M., A. J. L. Harris, and R. Carniel (2002), Thermal, seismic and
infrasonic evidences of variable degassing rates at Stromboli volcano,
J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res., 118, 285–297, doi:10.1016/S0377-
0273(02)00298-6.
Rittmann, A. (1931), Der ausbruch des Stromboli am 11 September 1930,
Z. Vulkanol., 14, 47–77.
Rosi, M., A. Bertagnini, and P. Landi (2000), Onset of the persistent activity
at Stromboli volcano (Italy), Bull. Volcanol., 62, 294–300, doi:10.1007/
s004450000098.
Rosi, M., A. Bertagnini, A. J. L. Harris, L. Pioli, M. Pistolesi, and M.
Ripepe (2006), A case history of paroxysmal explosion at Stromboli:
Timing and dynamics of the April 5, 2003 event, Earth Planet. Sci. Lett.,
243, 594–606, doi:10.1016/j.epsl.2006.01.035.
Salerno, G. G., M. R. Burton, C. Oppenheimer, T. Caltabiano, V. I. Tsanev,
and N. Bruno (2009), Novel retrieval of volcanic SO2 abundance from
ultraviolet spectra, J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res., 181, 141–153,
doi:10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2009.01.009.
Spampinato, L., S. Calvari, C. Oppenheimer, and L. Lodato (2008), Shal-
low magma transport for the 2002–03 Mt. Etna eruption inferred from
thermal infrared surveys, J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res., 177, 301–312,
doi:10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2008.05.013.
Sparks, R. S. J., M. I. Bursic, S. N. Carey, J. S. Gilbert, L. S. Glaze, H.
Sigurdsson, and A. W. Woods (1997), Volcanic Plumes, 574 pp., John
Wiley, Chichester, U. K.
Taddeucci, J., M. Pompilio, and P. Scarlato (2002), Monitoring the explo-
sive activity of the July–August 2001 eruption of Mt Etna (Italy) by ash
characterization, Geophys. Res. Lett., 29(8), 1230, doi:10.1029/
2001GL014372.
B05201 CALVARI ET AL.: VULCANIAN EXPLOSIONS AT STROMBOLI B05201

Taddeucci, J., M. Pompilio, and P. Scarlato (2004), Conduit processes
during the July–August 2001 explosive activity of Mt Etna (Italy):
Inferences from glass chemistry and crystal size distribution of ash
particles, J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res., 137, 33–54, doi:10.1016/j.
jvolgeores.2004.05.011.
Taddeucci, J., D. M. Palladino, D. Bernini, G. Sottili, D. Andronico, and
A. Cristaldi (2012), Constancy and variability of Strombolian eruptive
activity: Long-term analysis of infrared surveillance videos from Stromboli
Volcano, Geophys. Res. Abs., 14, 9179.
Walker, G. P. L., and R. Croasdale (1971), Characteristics of some basaltic
pyroclastics, Bull. Volcanol., 35, 303–317, doi:10.1007/BF02596957.
Washington, H. S. (1917), Persistence of vents at Stromboli and its bearing
on volcanic mechanism, Geol. Soc. Am. Bull., 28, 249–278.
Wilson, L. (1980), Relationships between pressure, volatile content and
ejecta velocity in three types of volcanic explosion, J. Volcanol.
Geotherm. Res., 8, 297–313, doi:10.1016/0377-0273(80)90110-9.
Wright, H. M. N., K. V. Cashman, M. Rosi, and R. Cioni (2007), Bread-
crust bombs as indicators of vulcanian eruption dynamics at Guagua
Pichincha volcano, Ecuador, Bull. Volcanol., 69, 281–300, doi:10.1007/
s00445-006-0073-6.
Zanon, V., M. Neri, and E. Pecora (2009), Interpretation of data from the
monitoring thermal camera of Stromboli volcano (Aeolian Islands, Italy),
Geol. Mag., 146(4), 591–601, doi:10.1017/S0016756809005937.
Zimanowski, B. (1998) Phreatomagmatic explosions, in From Magma to
Tephra: Modelling Physical Processes of Explosive Volcanic Eruptions,
Dev. in Volcanol., vol. 4, edited by A. Freundt and M. Rosi, pp. 25–54,
Elsevier, Amsterdam.
Zimanowski, B., R. Büttner, V. Lorenz, and H.-G. Häfele (1997), Fragmen-
tation of basaltic melt in the course of explosive volcanism, J. Geophys.
Res., 102, 803–814, doi:10.1029/96JB02935.

17 of 17