Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorWieser, PE
dc.contributor.authorIacovino, K
dc.contributor.authorMatthews, S
dc.contributor.authorMoore, G
dc.contributor.authorAllison, CM
dc.date.accessioned2022-02-24T21:00:03Z
dc.date.available2022-02-24T21:00:03Z
dc.date.issued2022
dc.date.submitted2021-07-25
dc.identifier.issn2333-5084
dc.identifier.otheress21063
dc.identifier.other2021ea001932
dc.identifier.urihttps://www.repository.cam.ac.uk/handle/1810/334437
dc.description.abstractAbstract: Accurate models of H2O and CO2 solubility in silicate melts are vital for understanding volcanic plumbing systems. These models are used to estimate the depths of magma storage regions from melt inclusion volatile contents, investigate the role of volatile exsolution as a driver of volcanic eruptions, and track the degassing path followed by a magma ascending to the surface. However, despite the large increase in the number of experimental constraints over the last two decades, many recent studies still utilize an earlier generation of models which were calibrated on experimental datasets with restricted compositional ranges. This may be because many of the available tools for more recent models require large numbers of input parameters to be hand‐typed (e.g., temperature, concentrations of H2O, CO2, and 8–14 oxides), making them difficult to implement on large datasets. Here, we use a new open‐source Python3 tool, VESIcal, to critically evaluate the behaviors and sensitivities of different solubility models for a range of melt compositions. Using literature datasets of andesitic‐dacitic experimental products and melt inclusions as case studies, we illustrate the importance of evaluating the calibration dataset of each model. Finally, we highlight the limitations of particular data presentation methods, such as isobar diagrams, and provide suggestions for alternatives, and best practices regarding the presentation and archiving of data. This review will aid the selection of the most applicable solubility model for different melt compositions, and identifies areas where additional experimental constraints on volatile solubility are required.
dc.languageen
dc.publisherAmerican Geophysical Union (AGU)
dc.subjectCRYOSPHERE
dc.subjectThermodynamics
dc.subjectGEOCHEMISTRY
dc.subjectMagma chamber processes
dc.subjectAlteration and weathering processes
dc.subjectReactions and phase equilibria
dc.subjectMINERALOGY AND PETROLOGY
dc.subjectVOLCANOLOGY
dc.subjectReview Article
dc.subjectigneous petrology
dc.subjectvolatile solubility
dc.subjectmelt inclusions
dc.subjectopen‐source
dc.subjectPython3
dc.subjectmagmatic systems
dc.titleVESIcal: 2. A Critical Approach to Volatile Solubility Modeling Using an Open-Source Python3 Engine
dc.typeArticle
dc.date.updated2022-02-24T21:00:03Z
prism.issueIdentifier2
prism.publicationNameEarth and Space Science
prism.volume9
dc.identifier.doi10.17863/CAM.81852
dcterms.dateAccepted2021-11-22
rioxxterms.versionofrecord10.1029/2021EA001932
rioxxterms.versionAO
rioxxterms.versionVoR
rioxxterms.licenseref.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.contributor.orcidWieser, PE [0000-0002-1070-8323]
dc.contributor.orcidIacovino, K [0000-0002-2461-7748]
dc.contributor.orcidMoore, G [0000-0002-1556-6432]
dc.identifier.eissn2333-5084
pubs.funder-project-idNERC (NE/L002507/1)
cam.issuedOnline2022-02-24


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record