Search USGS⌕ Search

Geology topics

Kristi L. Wallace

Publications and source records attributed to Kristi L. Wallace.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
USGS2026

Constraining sources of mid-Pleistocene to present explosive volcanism in the Gulf of Alaska using machine learning and compositional data analysis

The long-term eruptive record of a region helps better elucidate magmatic processes at depth as well as volcanic hazards at the surface. Typically, reconstructing such records is done using proximal tephrostratigraphy and linking individual tephras to source volcanoes. These records, however, can only be accurately constructed if they are both well preserved and correctly linked to source volcanoes—not a trivial task, especially in areas such as Alaska that have experienced numerous glaciation events since the Pleistocene. This ultimately necessitates another way of assessing the long-term volcanic record such that these histories may be better discerned. Here we present data from 70 marine core tephras from the Gulf of Alaska, which have a virtually uninterrupted depositional record going back through the mid-Pleistocene. We utilize compositional data analysis techniques to quantify 37 eruptions over the span of eight cores, machine learning classification and conformal prediction algorithms to assign the most probable volcanic source(s) to each eruption, and multivariate distance-based metrics when machine learning classification algorithms are inappropriate. We find that the Mount Katmai magmatic system is the most probable volcanic source for analyzed tephras and that large volcanic centers such as Mount Katmai, Fisher Caldera, and Emmons Lake volcanic center have produced nearly invariant incompatible trace element ratio magmas, allowing for them to be confidently identified in long-term tephra records. This highlights the utility of trace elements for tephra studies, especially when paired with compositional data analysis, multivariate statistical tests, and petrologically informed discriminants.

Alaska↗
USGS2026

Examples of eruption response teams from the Alaska Volcano Observatory

During times of eruption response, volcano observatories need to organize themselves differently than during normal operations. The number of formal operational roles grows to ensure that critical responsibilities are covered, including management of all activities at the observatory as well as increased staffing to ensure proper surveillance of data and issuance of timely notices and warnings. The scope and approach differ for each observatory and, in fact, for different eruptions. The Alaska Volcano Observatory (AVO) maintains an extensive monitoring program and issues forecasts and warnings about volcanic eruptions and unrest in Alaska. Since 2000, AVO has used formal roles to perform these duties and has implemented a variety of team approaches to respond to larger eruptions. For the Augustine (2006) and Redoubt (2009) eruptions, management scaled from 3 up to ~ 8 people in a command team to cover all aspects of the response. During these and other eruptions (e.g., Okmok, 2008), an operations room was staffed continuously to cover real-time responsibilities pertaining to monitoring and issuing alerts while the command team focused on overall management. More recently, such as for Bogoslof in 2016–2017 and Shishaldin in 2019 and 2023, AVO used a virtual real-time response team to handle warning tasks and variations of an Observatory Volcanic Event Response Team (OVERT; Moran et al. 2024) to manage overall observatory response activities. In 2025, AVO employed a formal OVERT for the first time to oversee its response to unrest at Mount Spurr. Frequent implementation, nimble scaling, constant evaluation, flexibility, and good communication make the team approach effective. We present examples of several response teams used over the last 25 years, and lessons learned from them, in the hope that these will be helpful to other observatories facing crisis responses. These examples may also allow stakeholders and the public to better understand how observatories work.

Alaska↗
USGS2025

Cryptic ice wedge networks in Holocene peat, Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta, Alaska

The Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta (YKD), covering ~75,000 km 2 of Alaska's discontinuous permafrost zone, has a historic (1902–2023) mean annual air temperature of ~−1°C and was previously thought to lack ice wedge networks. However, our recent investigations near Bethel, Alaska, revealed numerous near-surface ice wedges. Using 20 cm resolution aerial orthoimagery from 2018, we identified ~50 linear km of ice wedge troughs in a 60 km 2 study area. Fieldwork in 2023 and 2024 confirmed ice wedges up to ~1.5 m wide and ~2.5 m in vertical extent, situated on average 0.9 m below the tundra surface ( n = 29). Ground-penetrating radar (GPR) detected additional ice wedges beyond those visible in the remote sensing imagery, suggesting an underestimation of their true abundance. Coring of polygonal centers revealed late-Quaternary deposits, including thick early Holocene peat, late-Pleistocene ice-rich silts (reworked Yedoma), charcoal layers from tundra fires, and the Aniakchak CFE II tephra (~3600 cal yrs BP). Stable water isotopes from Bethel's wedge ice (mean δ 18 O = −15.7 ‰, δ 2 H = −113.1 ‰) indicate a relatively enriched signature compared to other Holocene ice wedges in Alaska, likely due to warmer temperatures and maritime influences. Expanding our mapping across the YKD using high-resolution satellite imagery from 2012 to 2024, we estimate that the Holocene ice wedge zone encompasses ~30% of the YKD tundra region. Our findings demonstrate that ice wedge networks are more widespread across the YKD than previously recognized, emphasizing both the resilience and vulnerability of the region's warm, ice-rich permafrost. These insights are crucial for understanding permafrost responses to climate change and assessing agricultural potential and development in the region.

Alaska↗
USGS2024

From field station to forecast: Managing data at the Alaska Volcano Observatory

The Alaska Volcano Observatory (AVO) uses multidisciplinary data to monitor and study dozens of active and potentially active volcanoes. Here, we provide an overview of internally and externally generated data types, tools and resources used in their management, and challenges faced. Data sources include the following: (1) a multiparameter (seismic, infrasound, GNSS, web cameras) ground-based monitoring network that spans 3000 km and transmits data in real time; (2) a variety of satellite-borne sensors that provide information about surface change and volcanic emissions; (3) geologic and gas field campaigns; and (4) other external data products that provide situation awareness. Each data type requires distinct acquisition, processing, storage, visualization, and archiving approaches. AVO uses a variety of externally and internally developed tools to handle individual data types as well as multidisciplinary volcanological data. A primary tool is the Geologic Database of Information on Volcanoes in Alaska (GeoDIVA), which stores detailed, searchable information on more than 140 volcanoes and over 1000 eruptions and unrest events, including images, eruption descriptions, and geologic station and sample data, metadata, and analyses. It interacts with other internal tools that store monitoring reports and other operational records. Additional data management resources used by AVO assist with alarms and alerts, state-of-health monitoring, and multiparameter visualization. Requirements for 24/7 accessibility, the ever-expanding portfolio of data, and transitioning new tools from development to operations are all challenges faced by AVO and other volcano observatories. AVO strives to meet FAIR data practices and ensure that data are available to national and international community efforts using external repositories as well as those hosted by AVO and its parent institutions.

Alaska↗
USGS2023

Probabilistic source classification of large tephra producing eruptions using supervised machine learning: An example from the Alaska-Aleutian arc

Alaska contains over 130 volcanoes and volcanic fields that have been active within the last 2 million years. Of these, roughly 90 have erupted during the Holocene, with many characterized by at least one large explosive eruption. These large tephra-producing eruptions (LTPEs) generate orders of magnitude more erupted material than a “typical” arc explosive eruption and distribute ash thousands of kilometers from their source. Because LTPEs occur infrequently, and the proximal explosive deposit record in Alaska is generally limited to the Holocene, we require a method that links distal deposits to a source volcano where the correlative proximal deposits from that eruption are no longer preserved. We present a model that accurately and confidently identifies LTPE volcanic sources in the Alaska-Aleutian arc using only in situ geochemistry. The model is a voting ensemble classifier comprised of six conceptually different machine learning algorithms trained on proximal tephra deposits that have had their source positively identified. We show that incompatible trace element ratios (e.g., Nb/U, Th/La, Rb/Sm) help produce a feature space that contains significantly more variance than one produced by major element concentrations, ultimately creating a model that can achieve high accuracy, precision, and recall on predicted volcanic sources, regardless of the perceived 2D data distribution (i.e., bimodal, uniform, normal) or composition (i.e., andesite, trachyte, rhyolite) of that source. Finally, we apply our model to unidentified distal marine tephra deposits in the region to better understand explosive volcanism in the Alaska-Aleutian arc, specifically its pre-Holocene spatiotemporal distribution.

Alaska↗
USGS2023

2018 Volcanic activity in Alaska—Summary of events and response of the Alaska Volcano Observatory

The Alaska Volcano Observatory responded to eruptions, considerable and minor volcanic unrest, and seismic events at 15 volcanic centers in Alaska during 2018. The most notable volcanic activity came from Mount Cleveland, which had continuing intermittent dome growth and ash eruptions, and Mount Veniaminof, Great Sitkin Volcano, and Semisopochnoi Island, the three of which had minor eruptions. This report also documents landslides at Iliamna Volcano; resuspended ash from the 1912 Novarupta-Katmai eruption; anomalous seismicity and heightened degassing at Pavlof Volcano; seismic unrest at Shishaldin Volcano; long-term inflation at Westdahl volcano, Akutan Volcano, and Mount Okmok; steam plumes, anomalous seismicity, and anomalous gas measurements at Makushin Volcano; elevated seismicity at Mount Gareloi; seismic signals possibly related to icequakes at Mount Spurr; and new mud flows at Shrub mud volcano.

Alaska↗
USGS2023

Estimates of volcanic mercury emissions from Redoubt Volcano, Augustine Volcano, and Mount Spurr eruption ash

Ash is a potential sink of volcanically sourced atmospheric mercury (Hg), and the concentration of particle-bound Hg may provide constraints on Hg emissions during eruptions. We analyze Hg concentrations in 227 bulk ash samples from the Mount Spurr (1992), Redoubt Volcano (2009), and Augustine Volcano (2006) volcanic eruptions to investigate large-scale spatial, temporal, and volcanic-source trends. We find no significant difference in Hg concentrations in bulk ash by distance or discrete eruptive events at each volcano, suggesting that in-plume reactions converting gaseous Hg 0 to adsorbed Hg 2+ are happening on shorter timescales than considered in this study (minutes) and any additional in-plume controls are not discernable within intra-volcanic sample variability. However, we do find a significant difference in Hg concentration of ash among volcanic sources, which indicates that volcanoes may emit comparatively high or low quantities of Hg. We combine our Hg findings with total mass estimates of ashfall deposits to calculate minimum, first-order Hg emissions of 8.23 t Hg for Mount Spurr (1992), 1.25 t Hg for Redoubt Volcano (2009), and 0.16 t Hg for Augustine Volcano (2006). In particular, we find that Mount Spurr is a high Hg emitting volcano, and that its 1992 particulate Hg emissions likely contributed substantially to the global eruptive volcanic Hg budget for that year. Based on our findings, previous approaches that use long-term Hg/SO 2 mass ratios to estimate eruptive total Hg under-account for Hg emitted in explosive events, and global volcanogenic Total Hg estimates need revisiting.

Alaska↗
USGS2022

Community established best practice recommendations for tephra studies— From collection through analysis

Tephra is a unique volcanic product with an unparalleled role in understanding past eruptions, long-term behavior of volcanoes, and the effects of volcanism on climate and the environment. Tephra deposits also provide spatially widespread, high-resolution time-stratigraphic markers across a range of sedimentary settings and thus are used in numerous disciplines (e.g., volcanology, climate science, archaeology). Nonetheless, the study of tephra deposits is challenged by a lack of standardization that inhibits data integration across geographic regions and disciplines. We present comprehensive recommendations for tephra data gathering and reporting that were developed by the tephra science community to guide future investigators and to ensure that sufficient data are gathered for interoperability. Recommendations include standardized field and laboratory data collection, reporting and correlation guidance. These are organized as tabulated lists of key metadata with their definition and purpose. They are system independent and usable for template, tool, and database development. This standardized framework promotes consistent documentation and archiving, fosters interdisciplinary communication, and improves effectiveness of data sharing among diverse communities of researchers.

Scientific Data↗
USGS2022

Guidelines for volcano-observatory operations during crises: Recommendations from the 2019 Volcano Observatory Best Practices meeting

In November 2019, the fourth meeting on Volcano Observatory Best Practices workshop was held in Mexico City as a series of talks, discussions, and panels. Volcanologists from around the world offered suggestions for ways to optimize volcano-observatory crisis operations. By crisis, we mean unrest that may or may not lead to eruption, the eruption itself, or its aftermath, all of which require analysis and communications by the observatory. During a crisis, the priority of the observatory should be to acquire, process, analyze, and interpret data in a timely manner. A primary goal is to communicate effectively with the authorities in charge of civil protection. Crisis operations should rely upon exhaustive planning in the years prior to any actual unrest or eruptions. Ideally, nearly everything that observatories do during a crisis should be envisioned, prepared, and practiced prior to the actual event. Pre-existing agreements and exercises with academic and government collaborators will minimize confusion about roles and responsibilities. In the situation where planning is unfinished, observatories should prioritize close ties and communications with the land and civil-defense authorities near the most threatening volcanoes. To a large extent, volcanic crises become social crises, and any volcano observatory should have a communication strategy, a lead communicator, regular status updates, and a network of colleagues outside the observatory who can provide similar messaging to a public that desires consistent and authoritative information. Checklists permit tired observatory staff to fulfill their duties without forgetting key communications, data streams, or protocols that need regular fulfilment (Bretton et al. 2018; Newhall et al. 2020). Observatory leaders need to manage staff workload to prevent exhaustion and ensure that expertise is available as needed. Event trees and regular group discussions encourage multi-disciplinary thinking, consideration of disparate viewpoints, and documentation of all group decisions and consensus. Though regulations, roles and responsibilities differ around the world, scientists can justify their actions in the wake of an eruption if they document their work, are thoughtful and conscientious in their deliberations, and carry out protocols and procedures developed prior to volcanic unrest. This paper also contains six case studies of volcanic eruptions or observatory actions that illustrate some of the topics discussed herein. Specifically, we discuss Ambae (Vanuatu) in 2017–2018, Kīlauea (USA) in 2018, Etna (Italy) in 2018, Bárðarbunga (Iceland) in 2014, Cotopaxi (Ecuador) in 2015, and global data sharing to prepare for eruptions at Nyiragongo (Democratic Republic of Congo).

Hawaii↗
USGS2021

From anecdotes to quantification: Advances in characterizing volcanic eruption impacts on the built environment

Over the past 20 years, our understanding of volcanic eruption impacts on the built environment has transformed from being primarily observational with small datasets to one grounded in field investigations, laboratory experiments, and quantitative modeling, with an emphasis on stakeholder collaboration and co-creation. Here, we summarize key advances and knowledge gaps of impacts across volcanic hazards and built environment types from the past 20 + years. Studies have concentrated on impacts from tephra fall (ash) and to buildings, with less examination of other hazards’ impacts to critical infrastructure. As we look to the next decade, we speculate on likely research directions, including the increasing role of new technologies, higher resolution modeling, transdisciplinary collaborations, and evidence-based mitigative solutions.

Bulletin of Volcanology↗
USGS2021

Glacial dust surpasses both volcanic ash and desert dust in its iron fertilization potential

The subarctic Pacific Ocean and Bering Sea comprise the second-largest high nitrate, low chlorophyll region in the world, where primary production is limited by the availability of iron (Fe). To estimate the potential impact of different terrestrial aerosol Fe sources on marine ecosystems, we performed a suite of laboratory assessments following established protocols, including: (1) leaching with Milli-Q water, (2) sequential extractions, (3) complete acid digestions, (4) X-ray diffraction, and (5) grain size analysis. Measurements were performed on 20 fine-grained (<5 μm) glacier-derived sediments from Alaska and the Yukon, two fresh, never-wetted volcanic ashes (Redoubt 2009 and Pavlof 2016), and six weathered ashes (Redoubt and Augustine) which span the past ~8,700 years. We compared results to published data on Asian desert-derived sediments, finding that the glacier-derived sediments have five times higher easily reducible Fe (median 2.3 ± 0.6 wt.%) than desert-derived samples (0.49 ± 0.1 wt.%) and fourteen times higher easily reducible Fe than fresh ash (0.16 ± 0.1 wt.%). In addition, fractional Fe solubility was higher in glacial sediment (median cumulative 0.31 ± 0.11% FeS) than volcanic ash (0.04 ± 0.02% FeS). Glacial sediments contained higher concentrations of other bioactive metals including Co, Ni, Cu, Zn, Mo, Cd, and Pb. Results suggest that glacier-derived dust may provide the subarctic Pacific with more bioavailable iron per unit mass than either volcanic ash or Asian desert-derived dust.

Alaska↗
USGS2021

The Independent Volcanic Eruption Source Parameter Archive (IVESPA, version 1.0): A new observational database to support explosive eruptive column model validation and development

Eruptive column models are powerful tools for investigating the transport of volcanic gas and ash, reconstructing past explosive eruptions, and simulating future hazards. However, the evaluation of these models is challenging as it requires independent estimates of the main model inputs (e.g. mass eruption rate) and outputs (e.g. column height). There exists no database of independently estimated eruption source parameters (ESPs) that is extensive, standardized, maintained, and consensus-based. This paper introduces the Independent Volcanic Eruption Source Parameter Archive (IVESPA, ivespa.co.uk), a community effort endorsed by the International Association of Volcanology and Chemistry of the Earth’s Interior (IAVCEI) Commission on Tephra Hazard Modelling. We compiled data for 134 explosive eruptive events, spanning the 1902-2016 period, with independent estimates of: i) total erupted mass of fall deposits; ii) duration; iii) eruption column height; and iv) atmospheric conditions. Crucially, we distinguish plume top versus umbrella spreading height, and the height of ash versus sulphur dioxide injection. All parameter values provided have been vetted independently by at least two experts. Uncertainties are quantified systematically, including flags to describe the degree of interpretation of the literature required for each estimate. IVESPA also includes a range of additional parameters such as total grain size distribution, eruption style, morphology of the plume (weak versus strong), and mass contribution from pyroclastic density currents, where available. We discuss the future developments and potential applications of IVESPA and make recommendations for reporting ESPs to maximize their usability across different applications. IVESPA covers an unprecedented range of ESPs and can therefore be used to evaluate and develop eruptive column models across a wide range of conditions using a standardized dataset.

Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research↗
USGS2021

U–Pb zircon eruption age of the Old Crow tephra and review of extant age constraints

Eruption of the Old Crow tephra deposited ~200 km 3 of volcanic ash throughout Alaska and the northwestern Yukon (eastern Beringia), providing an isochronous marker across the region on a scale unique in the Pleistocene. The Old Crow tephra represents a critical temporal piercing point used extensively to link geographically disparate stratigraphic sections and the paleo-environmental records they contain. Although the canonical age of the Old Crow suggests eruption during the transition between the glacial and interglacial periods of Marine Isotope Stages (MIS) 5 and 6 at ~125 ka, recent U–Th–Pb and (U–Th)/He zircon dating of the tephra suggests eruption at ~200 ka, within MIS 7. If accurate, this revised eruption age begets significant change to existing models describing the geologic and biotic evolution of Beringia in the Pleistocene. Thus, confidently knowing the age of the tephra is critical to its time-stratigraphic utility and for past and future work in the region where the tephra has been found. With this contribution, we review existing Old Crow age constraints and present an eruption age for the tephra determined via high spatial resolution ion microprobe U–Pb surface analysis on zircon crystals isolated from source-proximal (<500 km from plausible source) pumiceous pyroclasts of the tephra. By dating only glass-mantled crystals isolated from discrete pumice clasts, we limit the potential for sample contamination from exotic crystals and resulting age bias. The young population of dates from this dataset corroborate previous radiometric dates and confirm Old Crow eruption within late MIS 7 at 207 ± 13 ka.

Alaska↗
USGS2020

2017 Volcanic activity in Alaska—Summary of events and response of the Alaska Volcano Observatory

The Alaska Volcano Observatory responded to eruptions, significant and minor volcanic unrest, and seismic events at 16 volcanic centers in Alaska during 2017. The most notable volcanic activity consisted of a major eruption at Bogoslof Island, continuing intermittent dome growth and ash eruptions from Mount Cleveland, the end of the Pavlof Volcano eruption, volcanic unrest at Shishaldin Volcano, and significant earthquake activity at Tanaga and Great Sitkin Islands. This report also documents reports of degassing at Redoubt Volcano, Makushin Volcano, Mount Gareloi, and Kiska Volcano, anomalous seismicity at Mount Spurr, Augustine Volcano, Akutan Peak, and Makushin Volcano, landslides at Iliamna Volcano, resuspended ash from the 1912 Novarupta-Katmai eruption, and continuing inflation at Okmok Caldera.

Alaska↗