Bull Volcanol (2013) 75:774

DOI 10.1007/s00445-013-0774-6

RESEARCH ARTICLE

40
Ar/39Ar dating, geochemistry, and isotopic analyses
of the quaternary Chichinautzin volcanic field, south
of Mexico City: implications for timing, eruption rate,
and distribution of volcanism
J. L. Arce & P. W. Layer & J. C. Lassiter & J. A. Benowitz &
J. L. Macías & J. Ramírez-Espinosa

Received: 24 February 2013 / Accepted: 19 October 2013 / Published online: 17 November 2013
# Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Abstract Monogenetic structures located at the southern and
western ends of the Chichinautzin volcanic field (Trans-
Mexican Volcanic Belt, Central Mexico) yield 40Ar/39Ar ages
ranging from 1.2 Ma in the western portion of the field to
1.0–0.09 Ma in the southern portion, all of which are older
than the <0.04 Ma age previously established for the entire
volcanic field. These new ages indicate: (1) an eruption rate of
0.47 km3/kyr, which is much lower than the 11.7 km3/kyr
previously estimated; (2) that the Chichinautzin magmatism
coexisted with the Zempoala (0.7 Ma) and La Corona
(1.0 Ma) polygenetic volcanoes on the southern edge of Las
Cruces Volcanic Range (Trans-Mexican Volcanic Belt); and
confirm (3) that the drainage system between the Mexico and
Editorial responsibility: P. Wallace
J. L. Arce (*)
Instituto de Geología, UNAM, Cd. Universitaria Coyoacan, México,
DF 04510, Mexico
e-mail: jlarce@geologia.unam.mx
Cuernavaca basins was closed during early Pleistocene
forming the Texcoco Lake. Whole-rock chemistry and Sr,
Nd, and Pb isotopic data indicate heterogeneous magmatism
throughout the history of Chichinautzin activity that likely
reflects variable degrees of slab and sediment contributions
to the mantle wedge, fractional crystallization, and crustal
assimilation. Even with the revised duration of volcanism
within the Chichinautzin Volcanic Field, its eruption rate is
higher than most other volcanic fields of the Trans-Mexican
Volcanic Belt and is comparable only to the Tacámbaro-
Puruaran area in the Michoacán-Guanajuato Volcanic Field
to the west. These variations in eruption rates among different
volcanic fields may reflect a combination of variable subduc-
tion rates of the Rivera and Cocos plates along the Middle
America Trench, as well as different distances from the trench,
variations in the depth with respect to the subducted slab, or
the upper plate characteristics.
Keywords Chichinautzin volcanic field . 40Ar/39Ar dating .
Eruption rate . Heterogeneous magmatism

P. W. Layer : J. A. Benowitz
Department of Geology and Geophysics and Geophysical Institute,
University of Alaska, Fairbanks, AK, USA
Introduction

J. C. Lassiter
Department of Geological Sciences, Jackson School of Geosciences,
University of Texas, Austin, TX, USA
J. L. Macías
Instituto de Geofísica, UNAM, Campus Morelia, Michoacán
Mexico, Mexico
J. Ramírez-Espinosa
Unidad Académica de Ciencias de la Tierra, Universidad Autónoma
de Guerrero, Taxco el Viejo, Guerrero, Mexico
40
Ar/39Ar geochronology is a commonly used and useful tool
in dating low-K volcanic rocks. The method has a wide range
of applicability from the Archean to the Quaternary. At the
young end, the method overlaps the range of traditional radio-
carbon methods (Arce et al. 2008; Matchan and Phillips
2011). For example, 40Ar/39Ar ages as young as 30 and 4 ka
have been reported for Santa María volcano (Guatemala) and
Stromboli (Italy), respectively (Escobar-Wolf et al. 2010;
Wijbrans et al. 2011). Thus, the 40Ar/39Ar method provides
774, Page 2 of 25 Bull Volcanol (2013) 75:774

a powerful tool to examine both the spatial and temporal
extent of Quaternary volcanic fields. In many instances, the
40
Ar/39Ar method is preferable to radiocarbon even at the
younger range because organic material associated with some
volcanic products (lava domes and lava flows) may not be
available or accessible, particularly in arid regions. The
40
Ar/39Ar method also allows for dating of material outside
the range of radiocarbon, allowing for better constraint of the
age of onset of Quaternary volcanism.
Although the Chichinautzin volcanic field is one of the
most studied areas in the Trans-Mexican Volcanic Belt
(TMVB; Fig. 1), most work on this volcanic field has con-
centrated on the composition and genesis of the magmas
erupted (Márquez et al. 1999a; Wallace and Carmichael
1999; Meriggi et al. 2008; Siebe et al. 2004a), with few studies
documenting the timing of volcanic inception and evolution
through time (Bloomfield 1975; Martin del Pozzo, 1982;
Siebe et al. 2004b, 2005; Agustin-Flores et al. 2011).
Approximately 76 radiocarbon dates have been published
from the volcanic centers or lava flows of Chichinautzin
(summarized in García-Palomo et al. 2002; Siebe et al.
2004b; Agustin-Flores et al. 2011). The oldest reported date
of 38,590 ka belongs to Coaxusco volcano located in the
Upper Lerma Basin side of the volcanic field (Bloomfield
1975).
This study integrates 40Ar/39Ar data, geochemistry and
isotopic results, and geologic mapping of previously unstud-
ied sites located in the southern and western ends of
Chichinautzin volcanic field (Fig. 2), thereby complementing
previous radiocarbon ages. Our new results constrain the
beginning of magmatism in the Chichinautzin volcanic field.
The older age determined for the onset of volcanism in the
field requires a significant downward revision of the estimated
eruption rate, and also has implications for the timing of
drainage changes into the Mexico basin (Texcoco Lake).
Geologic setting
The Chichinautzin volcanic field is located at the southern
front of the TMVB, which is an E–W, 1,000 km long volcanic
arc, running from the Pacific Ocean to the Gulf of México
(Fig. 1). Volcanism along the TMVB is related to subduction
of the Rivera and Cocos plates beneath the North American
plate (Pardo and Suárez 1995; Ferrari et al. 1999, Gómez-
Tuena et al. 2007). The heterogeneous calcalkaline–alkaline
composition of the Chichinautzin magmas has led to a variety
of tectonic models including: (1) a rift–plume model
(Márquez et al. 1999a), (2) rifting associated with upwelling
mantle (Verma 2000; Sheth et al. 2002), and (3) a combination
of subduction of the Cocos plate beneath the North American
plate, upwelling of enriched (ocean island basalt (OIB) type)
mantle from behind the arc to regions beneath the arc (Wallace
and Carmichael 1999).
Although many monogenetic centers in the Chichinautzin
volcanic field are aligned along E–W trends (Mooser et al.
1974; Bloomfield 1975; Alaniz-Alvarez et al. 1998; Siebe
et al. 2004a), there are two subordinate systems trending
NE–SW and NW–SE, which have been related to a N–S

Fig. 1 Tectonic map of the

Trans-Mexican volcanic belt North 250 km
(TMVB). MAT Middle America American Plate
Trench, RP Rivera plate, EPR Mascota
22°N

East Pacific Rise, OFZ Orozco Volcanic Field

Fracture Zone. The solid lines are Michoacán-Guanajuato Chichinautzin
Volcanic Field Volcanic Field
isodepth contours of the
subducting slab from Pardo and
Rive

Suárez (1995) and dashed lines Trans Mexican Volcanic Be Xalapa Volcanic
lt Field
are extrapolated contours. Arrows
ra

Guadalajara
are relative convergence rates of
the subducted plates (DeMets
Plat

Mexico
City
et al. 1990). Volcanic fields—
100
e

MVF Mascota, MGVF 80 Puebla

Michoacán-Guanajuato, CVF 23 60
18°

Chichinautzin, and XVF Xalapa

40
38 Mid
ific Rise

dle
Am 20
eric
a Tr
55 enc Oaxaca
East Pac

h
e
Zon
ault
59

oF
Pacific Orozc
64

Plate Cocos Plate

68

104°W 100° 96°

Bull Volcanol (2013) 75:774 Page 3 of 25, 774

19°20' N
Toluca Mexico City
in

Basin
Bas

SIER
co
M exi

RA
a
Tlacotepec SM Xochimilco fa

Lerm
ult

SIER
DE L
Milpa Alta Iztaccíhuatl

RA
Nevado NT-40 (0.87 Ma)

AS C
19°10'

de Toluca

NEVA
RUCE
Tenango fault LC

DA
La Pera fault

S
Cuescontepec
Popocatépetl
19°00'

NT-06 (0.27 Ma) ZEM

SCH-01 (1.1 Ma) Tenancingo

SCH-04 Cuernavaca
Villa Guerrero (0.83 Ma)
PA-04 (0.21 Ma)
SCH-06 (1.2 Ma)
18°50'

Ixtapan Palpan PA-05 (0.26 Ma)

de la Sal

JU-01 (0.89 Ma) At-1 (1.0 Ma)

Atlacholoaya <10 ka
Juchimilpa
18°40'

10 - 40 ka
> 40 ka
20 km Normal fault
Pueblo Viejo At-3 (0.08 Ma)

99°40' W 99°30' 99°20' 99°10' 99°00' 98°40' 98°40'

Fig. 2 Distribution of the Chichinautzin volcanic field products (modi- work. SM San Miguel, LC La Corona, ZEM Zempoala volcanoes form
fied from Bloomfield (1975) and Márquez et al. (1999b)) showing the the Sierra de las Cruces range. Normal faults—La Pera (Siebe et al.
radiocarbon ages summarized in previous works (Márquez et al. 1999b; 2004a, 2005), Tenango (García-Palomo et al. 2000), and Xochimilco
Siebe et al. 2004a), as well as the new 40Ar/39Ar ages reported in this (García-Palomo et al. 2008)

extensional regime (Márquez et al. 1999b), with minor lateral
displacements (García-Palomo et al. 2000). Furthermore, the
Chichinautzin volcanic field has been considered as an E–W
trending horst (Siebe et al. 2004a) bounded by normal faults
dipping to the north (in the basin of Mexico side) and dipping
to the south (in the Cuernavaca side; García-Palomo et al.
2008). These faults are considered still active (e.g., a shallow
earthquake occurred in 1995 in Milpa Alta region, in the
Chichinautzin Volcanic Field; UNAM and CENAPRED
Seismology Group 1995).
The oldest rocks around the Chichinautzin volcanic field
are represented by a thick sequence of folded Cretaceous
marine sediments (Fries 1960). The oldest volcanic rocks
reported in the area are dacitic lava flows, informally named
the Temixco Dacite (Fig. 3; Arce et al. 2008). The Miocene
volcaniclastic Tepoztlán Formation (Fries 1960; De Cserna
et al. 1988; Fig. 3) is composed of debris flows and fluviatile
deposits, interbedded with pyroclastic density currents, and
minor lava flows and pyroclastic fall deposits with ages
varying from 19 Ma (García-Palomo et al. 2002) to
22.8 Ma (Lenhardt et al. 2010). Following the Tepoztlán
Formation, there is a series of dark gray, basaltic andesite
lava flows dated at 7.5 Ma (García-Palomo et al. 2000). The
stratigraphic sequence ends with three coeval volcanic
units: (1) Sierra de las Cruces rocks (Fig. 3), composed of
porphyritic andesite and dacite lava flows and pyroclastic
deposits ranging in age from 3.7 to 1.8–0.7 Ma (Osete et al.
2000; Mejia et al. 2005; García-Palomo et al. 2008; Arce
et al. 2008); (2) Cuernavaca Formation, a volcaniclastic
sequence made of interbedded debris flows, fluviatile, and
debris avalanche deposits that have been interpreted as the
product of the erosion of Sierra de las Cruces volcanoes
(Arce et al. 2008); and (3) the Chichinautzin volcanic field
products, composed of monogenetic volcanoes with a het-
erogeneous composition (basalt, trachybasalt, andesite, and
dacite; ages are discussed later).
774, Page 4 of 25
Fig. 3 General stratigraphy of
the Chichinautzin volcanic field
area. Data compiled from
previous work is indicated
Sampled sites
The distribution of the Chichinautzin volcanic field products
was first described and delimited by Bloomfield (1975) based
on radiocarbon dating and the morphologic characteristics of
the volcanoes. More recently, Márquez et al. (1999b) modified
these limits by including the Palpan and Tenancingo areas to
the southwest. In this study, we add five new volcanic sites
(Pueblo Viejo, Juchimilpa, Villa Guerrero, Cuescontepec, and
Tlacotepec sites) that expand the spatial and temporal distri-
bution of the Chichinautzin volcanic field deposits (Fig. 2)
Bull Volcanol (2013) 75:774
based on field descriptions; whole-rock chemistry; Sr, Nd, and
Pb isotopic data; and 40Ar/39Ar dating. These new sampling
sites are located in the extended southern and western ends of
the Chichinautzin volcanic field area that totals 2,680 km2
(Fig. 2), which we briefly describe below and in more detail in
Appendix I.
The Atlacholoaya site consists of four NE-trending scoria
cones composed of black scoria and fallout ash (Fig. 4a, b),
and subordinate lava flows (see Appendix I for more details).
The Pueblo Viejo site comprises a fissure-related, massive,
olivine-rich, dark gray lava flow, proposed here to be part of
Bull Volcanol (2013) 75:774
Fig. 4 a Panoramic view of an
Atlacholoaya scoria cone and b a
representative outcrop of the
scoria cone in a. c Panoramic
view of a Tenancingo scoria cone
and d outcrop of scoria fallout,
from the scoria cone in c
Chichinautzin volcanic field. The Palpan site is composed of
three scoria cones and associated lava flows. Both lavas and
scoria fragments contain olivine crystals. The Juchimilpa site
consists of an isolated scoria cone with associated lava flows,
containing plagioclase, two pyroxenes, and minor olivine
crystals. The Villa Guerrero site comprises two N–S aligned
scoria cones, with a smooth topography, and associated lava
flows, with aphanitic texture, containing small phenocrysts of
olivine. The Tenancingo site comprises four well-defined
scoria cones roughly aligned E–W, in a 12 km2 area (Fig. 2),
and associated lava flows. Scoria fallout deposits show com-
paction structures (Fig. 4). Cuescontepec is an isolated, an-
desitic lava cone with a steep crater open to the north. Lavas
from Cuescontepec contain crystals of plagioclase,
orthopyroxene, and amphibole. Tlacotepec is an isolated ba-
saltic–andesite scoria cone, open to the east, and associated
lava flows, with aphanitic texture.
Samples and analytical methods
Whole-rock chemical analysis
In this paper, we report 23 new whole-rock analyses from the
southern and western Chichinautzin volcanic field monoge-
netic volcanoes (Table 1). X-ray fluorescence analysis of
major and some trace elements (Rb, Sr, Ba, Y, Zr, Nb, V, Cr,
Co, Ni, Cu, Zn, Th, and Pb), with precisions of <1 % for all
elements were carried out at the Laboratorio Universitario de
Geoquímica Isotópica (LUGIS) at UNAM, México following
the methodology described in Lozano et al. (1995). Additional
Page 5 of 25, 774
trace elements, including rare earth elements, were analyzed at
LUGIS, UNAM, by the inductively coupled plasma mass
spectrometry method using the procedures described in
Eggins et al. (1997) and using BHVO-1, RGM-1, GSR-2,
and SDO-1 as reference materials (Govindaraju 1994), as well
as the Andesite IGLa-1 (Lozano-Santacruz and Bernal 2005)
for reproducibility and quality control.
40
Ar/39Ar analysis
Ten samples (dense lavas and dense, fresh bombs) were
dated by the 40Ar/39Ar method (Table 2) at the University
of Alaska Fairbanks geochronology laboratory by laser step
heating of phenocryst-free groundmass chips (1–0.5 mm
size fraction) following the procedures outlined in Layer
(2000) and Layer et al. (2009; see Appendix II). The mineral
TCR-2 with an age of 28.6 Ma (Renne et al. 2010) was used
to monitor neutron flux and calculate the irradiation param-
eter, J , for all samples. The measured argon isotopes were
corrected for system blank and mass discrimination, and for
the irradiated samples, calcium, potassium, and chlorine
interference reactions, following procedures outlined in
McDougall and Harrison (1999). Ages were calculated
using the constants of Renne et al. (2010) and are reported
at the 1-sigma level. Typical full system, 15-min laser blank
values (in moles) were generally 6×10−16 mol 40Ar, 3×
10−18 mol 39Ar, 3×10−18 mol 38Ar, and 1×10−17 mol 36Ar,
which are 10–50 times smaller than the sample/standard
volume fractions. Mass discrimination was monitored by
running calibrated air shots. The mass discrimination during
this method was 1.0 % per mass unit.
Table 1 Whole-rock chemistry of Southern and Western Cichinautzin

Sample At-1 At-3 At-4 At-7 At-8 At-9 At-11 At-13 FV-A FV-C FV-D PA-03 PA-04 PA-05 JU-01
Cone Atlach PV Atlach Atlach Atlach Atlach Atlach Atlach Pal Pal Pal Pal Pal Pal Juchi
Latitude 18°42′37″ 18°31′33″ 18°42′45″ 18°41′21″ 18°43′44″ 18°44′47″ 18°41′25″ 18°42′3″ 18°49′50″ 18°50′47″ 18°51′38″ 18°50′28″ 18°50′31″ 18°50′31″ 18°42′45″
774, Page 6 of 25

Longitude 99°12′34″ 99°11′45″ 99°13′15″ 99°14′1″ 99°13′15″ 99°12′9″ 99°12′36″ 99°11′26″ 99°23′53″ 99°25′03″ 99°25′51″ 99°27′28″ 99°27′33″ 99°27′33″ 99°42′33″

SiO2 54.62 51.34 55.58 50.54 53.81 54.20 54.54 55.30 57.14 58.90 58.95 57.14 54.73 55.18 56.02
TiO2 0.85 1.83 0.92 1.97 0.96 0.87 0.98 0.96 1.16 1.37 1.37 1.13 1.28 1.28 0.81
Al2O3 15.74 15.96 15.52 15.53 16.02 15.89 16.11 15.99 15.85 15.41 15.66 16.28 16.53 15.99 16.01
Fe2O3a 7.35 9.55 7.02 9.79 7.39 7.40 7.39 7.06 7.05 7.10 7.11 6.84 7.67 7.69 6.43
MnO 0.11 0.14 0.10 0.15 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.10 0.10 0.11 0.11 0.12
MgO 8.16 7.60 7.63 7.76 8.27 8.05 7.59 7.42 5.83 4.66 4.24 5.64 7.09 7.08 7.81
CaO 8.09 7.73 8.09 8.28 8.06 8.44 8.12 7.98 6.63 5.78 5.79 6.45 6.91 6.90 7.11
Na2O 3.51 3.95 3.55 3.87 3.67 3.50 3.67 3.63 4.08 4.05 4.17 3.76 3.82 3.87 3.77
K2O 1.33 1.31 1.32 1.36 1.38 1.32 1.20 1.28 1.80 2.22 2.17 2.30 1.49 1.53 1.66
P2O5 0.24 0.59 0.27 0.74 0.32 0.24 0.29 0.27 0.37 0.42 0.42 0.36 0.36 0.37 0.26
LOI 0.16 0.21 0.68 0.08 0.56 0.22 0.26 0.30 0.45 0.30 0.54 0.93 0.23 0.20 −0.11
Total 99.92 100.31 100.30 99.50 99.76 98.96 99.98 100.50 100.03 100.24 99.32 100.03 100.40 99.73 99.89
Rb 29 21 29 23 27 28 25 27 30 45 46 41 45 38 27.5
Sr 600 534 665 525 719 611 718 698 811 644 649 728 580 545 686.6
Ba 555 377 454 394 493 524 653 456 589 741 633 579 459 429 528.9
Y 23 29 23 30 23 23 26 22 23 29 34 26 48 34 16.7
Zr 151 233 174 258 171 148 167 175 232 271 268 240 214 214 121.3
Nb 3 21 3 21 3 3 4 4 8 13 13 9 18 17 3.8
V 182 141 172 141 201 192 184 168 122 106 105 123 153 149 124.9
Cr 443 255 418 206 461 440 392 307 249 131 126 237 301 303 297.8
Co 37 36 41 35 39 41 40 34 29 25 25 30 95 61 28.4
Ni 183 127 226 100 186 194 175 144 127 75 86 115 254 195 198.0
Zn 80 86 84 101 82 81 78 74 79 89 97 95 173 117 65.7
Th 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 6 5 4 3 3 3.4
Pb 8 5 5 7 5 5 6 6 7 8 10 10 7 5 6.9
Be 0.9 1.7 1.1 1.8 1.1 1.0 1.2 1.1 1.6 2.1 2.8 1.7 1.6 1.5 1.1
Sc 18.3 18.0 17.5 18.4 19.6 19.7 20.6 18.4 13.6 12.5 13.5 13.9 16.4 14.9 14.5
Cs 1.1 0.6 1.1 0.8 1.0 0.9 1.2 1.1 1.1 1.7 1.2 1.6 1.0 1.0 1.1
Pr 5.6 7.4 6.3 8.7 7.3 5.9 7.8 6.4 8.5 9.3 12.0 8.1 7.0 6.5 6.1
Tb 0.65 1.00 0.70 1.16 0.76 0.69 0.87 0.71 0.83 0.99 1.28 0.85 0.86 0.81 0.6
Ho 0.67 1.07 0.69 1.20 0.75 0.71 0.89 0.73 0.79 0.98 1.28 0.83 0.86 0.82 0.6
Tm 0.28 0.43 0.29 0.48 0.30 0.30 0.35 0.30 0.31 0.39 0.51 0.34 0.35 0.32 0.2
Hf 3.1 5.4 3.6 6.3 3.5 3.3 3.8 3.7 4.7 6.2 6.0 5.1 5.0 4.7 3.5
Ta 0.2 1.4 0.3 1.5 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.6 0.9 0.9 0.7 0.8 0.7 0.2
U 0.9 0.7 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.9 1.4 1.6 1.5 1.5 0.9 0.9 1.1
La 17.6 24.6 19.7 28.7 23.2 18.7 24.9 20.2 26.9 32.8 42.6 27.0 22.8 21.2 19.2
Ce 41.6 57.8 46.3 53.6 54.7 43.9 57.1 47.6 55.0 57.0 63.1 48.8 53.9 49.9 45.6
Nd 21.8 28.6 24.2 33.7 27.7 23.1 29.9 24.6 32.3 34.8 44.7 30.6 27.1 25.0 24.0
Sm 4.7 6.4 5.1 7.4 5.9 5.1 6.4 5.3 6.7 7.2 9.1 6.4 6.0 5.5 5.1
Eu 1.4 2.0 1.5 2.3 1.7 1.5 1.9 1.5 1.9 1.9 2.5 1.8 1.7 1.6 1.5
Gd 3.9 5.7 4.2 6.6 4.7 4.2 5.2 4.4 5.1 6.0 7.5 5.2 5.0 4.7 4.0
Dy 3.46 5.49 3.61 6.22 3.89 3.70 4.63 3.78 4.20 5.15 6.73 4.37 4.55 4.26 3.2
Bull Volcanol (2013) 75:774
Table 1 (continued)

Sample At-1 At-3 At-4 At-7 At-8 At-9 At-11 At-13 FV-A FV-C FV-D PA-03 PA-04 PA-05 JU-01
Cone Atlach PV Atlach Atlach Atlach Atlach Atlach Atlach Pal Pal Pal Pal Pal Pal Juchi
Latitude 18°42′37″ 18°31′33″ 18°42′45″ 18°41′21″ 18°43′44″ 18°44′47″ 18°41′25″ 18°42′3″ 18°49′50″ 18°50′47″ 18°51′38″ 18°50′28″ 18°50′31″ 18°50′31″ 18°42′45″
Longitude 99°12′34″ 99°11′45″ 99°13′15″ 99°14′1″ 99°13′15″ 99°12′9″ 99°12′36″ 99°11′26″ 99°23′53″ 99°25′03″ 99°25′51″ 99°27′28″ 99°27′33″ 99°27′33″ 99°42′33″

Er 1.90 3.00 1.98 3.34 2.10 2.07 2.47 2.02 2.20 2.74 3.56 2.33 2.41 2.26 1.6
Yb 1.84 2.74 1.86 3.07 1.97 1.99 2.25 1.94 2.02 2.52 3.20 2.14 2.20 2.09 1.5
Bull Volcanol (2013) 75:774

Lu 0.27 0.41 0.27 0.47 0.28 0.29 0.33 0.29 0.29 0.38 0.48 0.32 0.33 0.31 0.2

Sample JU-02 NT0906 NT0940 SCH-06 SCH-05 SCH-0902 SCH-03 SCH-04 IGLa-1 RGM1 STM1
Cone Juchi Cuesc Tlaco VG VG Ten Ten Ten Cert. Meas. Cert. Meas.
Latitude 18°43′19″ 19°03′10″ 19°13′34″ 18°53′38″ 18°54′24″ 18°56′24″ 18°56′13″ 18°56′28″
Longitude 99°42′03″ 99°40′36″ 99°40′49″ 99°38′43″ 99°38′46″ 99°35′29″ 99°35′27″ 99°34′38″

SiO2 56.28 61.96 56.35 58.62 57.46 58.65 54.67 56.22

TiO2 0.85 0.73 1.07 0.85 0.85 0.86 0.88 0.86
Al2O3 15.64 17.53 15.84 15.85 16.40 15.56 16.50 16.37
Fe2O3a 6.64 5.10 6.82 6.60 6.69 6.29 7.60 7.05
MnO 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.09 0.10 0.10 0.11 0.11
MgO 7.09 3.21 5.35 6.18 6.49 7.21 7.37 6.94
CaO 7.43 5.23 6.66 6.36 6.30 6.05 7.21 6.66
Na2O 3.77 4.25 4.66 3.91 3.75 3.55 3.80 3.97
K2O 1.89 1.70 2.43 1.34 1.74 1.55 1.57 1.58
P2O5 0.32 0.19 0.76 0.19 0.23 0.18 0.29 0.25
LOI −0.04 1.01 0.30 0.2 0.54 0.39 0.37 −0.01
Total 99.96 101.01 100.30 100.21 99.61 100.12 99.85 99.83
Rb 35.4 19.66 32.32 26.9 36 33 30 34 154 149 124 118
Sr 867.4 668.97 1,345.45 554.1 519 540 633 556 104 108 665 700
Ba 696.2 508.65 849.15 461.0 405 350 423 466 842 827 603 580
Y 21.2 14.66 15.45 18.9 21 21 21 21 36 30 37 46
Zr 155.1 119.57 175.88 129.4 177 169 169 175 239 219 1,226 1,210
Nb 4.6 4.84 13.67 4.6 3 3 4 4 8 9 237 258
V 146.4 89.49 136.61 111.2 137 134 156 156 47 41 48 39
Cr 281.1 56.41 228.86 260.7 348 418 420 404 12 8 0 4
Co 30.9 12.42 23.69 27.8 32 37 36 32 8 5 2 1
Ni 200.3 7.26 180.93 295.5 157 258 181 161 8 6 6 3
Zn 78.0 66.12 130.15 70.6 88 91 100 89 36 32 229 235
Th 4.1 3.26 4.26 2.5 2.96 2.59 3.13 3.18 14 15 35 31
Pb 8.0 9.00 11.67 6.1 7 6 7 6 24 24 16 18
Page 7 of 25, 774
Table 1 (continued)

Sample JU-02 NT0906 NT0940 SCH-06 SCH-05 SCH-0902 SCH-03 SCH-04 IGLa-1 RGM1 STM1
Cone Juchi Cuesc Tlaco VG VG Ten Ten Ten Cert. Meas. Cert. Meas.
Latitude 18°43′19″ 19°03′10″ 19°13′34″ 18°53′38″ 18°54′24″ 18°56′24″ 18°56′13″ 18°56′28″
774, Page 8 of 25

Longitude 99°42′03″ 99°40′36″ 99°40′49″ 99°38′43″ 99°38′46″ 99°35′29″ 99°35′27″ 99°34′38″

Be 1.3 1.1 1.45 1.21 1.37 1.59 2.09 (0.11)

Sc 17.1 11.69 12.88 14.0 16.46 14.99 18.29 18.62 13.28 (0.82)
Cs 1.2 0.75 1.10 0.9 1.58 1.28 1.18 1.54 0.64 (0.03)
Pr 8.2 4.04 13.32 4.7 4.96 4.25 6.10 5.84 7.32 (0.25)
Tb 0.8 0.55 0.68 0.61 0.65 0.63 0.70 0.74 0.92 (0.02)
Ho 0.7 0.52 0.54 0.63 0.63 0.61 0.68 0.66 0.96 (0.02)
Tm 0.3 0.21 0.17 0.26 0.26 0.25 0.27 0.29 0.40 (0.01)
Hf 4.2 3.55 4.91 3.5 4.08 3.81 3.93 4.20 6.09 (0.16)
Ta 0.3 0.37 0.78 0.3 0.34 0.34 0.32 0.38 1.29 (0.03)
U 1.3 1.11 1.29 0.8 0.95 0.76 0.92 1.03 1.01 (0.03)
La 25.5 13.92 42.62 14.6 17.59 14.62 22.43 20.24 29.35 (0.92)
Ce 60.6 32.68 111.00 34.2 37.18 31.86 46.17 43.37 59.67 (2.04)
Nd 32.0 17.55 46.01 18.3 21.52 18.61 25.72 25.11 30.04 (0.92)
Sm 6.7 3.81 7.33 4.1 4.65 4.13 5.27 5.27 6.17 (0.18)
Eu 1.9 1.30 1.94 1.3 1.43 1.30 1.59 1.56 1.75 (0.05)
Gd 5.1 3.35 5.26 3.6 4.11 3.84 4.59 4.58 5.74 (0.17)
Dy 3.9 2.83 2.94 3.24 3.35 3.30 3.64 3.72 4.92 (0.13)
Er 1.9 1.47 1.37 1.76 1.79 1.78 1.92 1.99 2.80 (0.08)
Yb 1.7 1.41 1.26 1.64 1.68 1.69 1.80 1.74 2.64 (0.07)
Lu 0.3 0.20 0.18 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.26 0.25 0.40 (0.01)

Values are reported in weight percent (major) and parts per million (trace) elements
LOI loss on ignition; Cones—Atlach Atlacholoaya; PV Pueblo Viejo; Pal Palpan; Juchi Juchimilpa; Cuesco Cuescontepec; Tlaco Tlacotepec
a
Total Fe as Fe+2
Bull Volcanol (2013) 75:774
Bull Volcanol (2013) 75:774 Page 9 of 25, 774

Table 2 40Ar/39Ar analyses of the southern and western Chichinautzin Volcanic Field sites

Sample Integrated age (Ma) Plateau age (Ma) Plateau information Isochron Age (Ma) Isochron information

SCH-06 1.15±0.05 1.20 ±0.05 6 of 8 fractions 1.25±0.06 6 of 8 fractions

96 % 39Ar release 40
Ar/36Ari =284±15
MSWD=0.23 MSWD=0.10
SCH-01 1.08±0.19 1.09 ±0.19 9 of 11 fractions 0.93±0.15 9 of 11 fractions
98 % 39Ar release 40
Ar/36Ari =298±5
MSWD=0.17 MSWD=0.03
SCH-04 0.77±0.04 0.83 ±0.04 5 of 8 fractions 0.88±0.09 5 of 8 fractions
92 % 39Ar release 40
Ar/36Ari =288±15
MSWD=0.32 MSWD=0.32
AT-1 1.02±0.16 1.02 ±0.16 7 of 7 fractions 1.13±0.24 7 of 7 fractions
100 % 39Ar release 40
Ar/36Ari =293±7
MSWD=0.10 MSWD=0.07
AT-3 0.08±0.02 0.08 ±0.02 7 of 8 fractions 0.10±0.04 7 of 8 fractions
99 % 39Ar release 40
Ar/36Ari =291±12
MSWD=0.15 MSWD=0.14
PA-04 0.15±0.03 0.21 ±0.03 4 of 8 fractions 0.27±0.03 4 of 8 fractions
82 % 39Ar release 40
Ar/36Ari =277±13
MSWD=1.08 MSWD=0.05
PA-05 0.25±0.02 0.26 ±0.02 6 of 8 fractions 0.28±0.03 6 of 8 fractions
98 % 39Ar release 40
Ar/36Ari =289±10
MSWD=0.16 MSWD=0.06
JU-01 0.89±0.15 0.89 ±0.15 9 of 10 fractions 1.06±0.16 9 of 10 fractions
99.7 % 39Ar release 40
Ar/36Ari =290±7
MSWD=0.30 MSWD=0.20
NT-40 0.82±0.09 0.87 ±0.06 5 of 7 fractions 0.87±0.10 5 of 7 fractions
92 % 39Ar release 40
Ar/36Ari =299±7
MSWD=0.20 MSWD=0.23
NT-06 0.34±0.05 0.27 ±0.05 4 of 7 fractions 0.24±0.06 4 of 7 fractions
83 % 39Ar release 40
Ar/36Ari =297±3
MSWD=0.08 MSWD=0.02

Ages run against TCR-2 sanidine with an age of 28.619 Ma (Renne et al. 2010). Constants (McMaster University): 39 Ar/37 ArCa =0.000706;
36
Ar/37 ArCa =0.000279; 40 Ar/39 ArK =0.0297; 40 Ar/36 Arair =295.5. Ages reported at ±1 sigma. Bold are preferred ages for each sample. Note that
for all samples, the initial 40 Ar/36 Ar ratio is within 2 sigma of the present-day atmospheric value (295.5)
MSWD mean square weighted deviates

Sr, Nd, and Pb isotopic analysis
Ten new Sr, Nd, and Pb isotopic analyses of selected samples
(Table 3) from the southern and western Chichinautzin volca-
nic field monogenetic volcanoes were carried out at the
Jackson School of Geosciences, University of Texas at
Austin, USA, using a Thermo Triton TI thermal ionization
mass spectrometer, following standard procedures. In brief,
Sr, Nd, and Pb isotopes were measured on whole-rock chips.
Groundmass chips that lacked visible alteration or pheno-
crysts were handpicked under a binocular microscope. Chips
were first leached in hot 6 N HCl to remove any caliche or
weathering, and then digested in HF:HNO3. Sr, Nd, and Pb
were extracted and purified following standard procedures
similar to Lassiter et al. (2003) and Carlson and Irving
(1994). Sr-Spec, rare earth elements (REE)-spec/HDEHP,
and AG1-X8 resins were used to separate Sr, Nd, and Pb,
respectively.
Measurements were carried out in manual and pro-
grammed modes, and included two total procedural blanks
and two sample duplicate analyses. Sr was loaded on single
Re filaments with Ta2O5 87Sr/86Sr ratios were corrected for
mass fractionation using 88Sr/86Sr=8.375209. Neodymium
was run as a metal on double Re filaments. 143Nd/144Nd ratios
were corrected for mass fractionation using 146Nd/144Nd=
0.7219. During the course of this study, 32 analyses of Sr
774, Page 10 of 25 Bull Volcanol (2013) 75:774

Table 3 Sr, Nd, and Pb isotopic ratios of southern and western Chichinautzin Volcanic Field volcanoes

Sample Cone 87
Sr/86Sr ±2σ 143
Nd/144Nd ±2σ ε-Nd 206
Pb/204Pb ±2σ 207
Pb/204Pb ±2σ 208
Pb/204Pb ±2σ

At-3 PV 0.703713 5 0.512806 4 3.28 18.7761 59 15.602 7 38.518 24

At-7 Atla 0.704029 5 0.512777 4 2.71 18.7783 28 15.604 3 38.525 11
FV-A Pal 0.704359 6 0.512824 4 3.63 18.6947 15 15.589 2 38.429 6
JU-1 Juchi 0.703858 5 0.512910 4 5.31 18.6168 13 15.570 2 38.306 5
PA-03 Pal 0.704316 6 0.512818 5 3.51 18.6968 17 15.592 2 38.439 7
PA-05 Pal 0.704100 5 0.512790 4 2.97 18.7224 16 15.597 2 38.484 6
NT-06 Cuesc 0.703797 4 0.512875 6 4.62 18.563 8 15.565 7 38.270 25
NT-40 Tlaco 0.704331 4 0.512783 3 2.82 18.642 3 15.590 3 38.419 11
SCH-03 VGT 0.704240 5 0.512858 4 4.29 18.639 41 15.551 4 38.277 14
SCH-06 VGT 0.703939 6 0.512858 4 4.29 18.622 33 15.556 3 38.270 9

±2σ refers to the last digits of the absolute value measured. During the analyses the NBS 981 standard was measured. Pb ratios and 2σ errors were
obtained following the procedures described in Hamelin et al. (1985) and Todt et al. (1993, 1996). CHUR value for epsilon Nd is 0.512638
Cones—PV Pueblo Viejo, Atla Atlacholoaya, Pal Palpan, Juchi Juchimilpa, Cuesc Cuescontepec, Tlaco Tlacotepec, VGT Villa Guerrero-Tenancingo

standard NBS 987 yielded a value of 0.710263±9 (2σ). An in-
house UT Ames Nd standard yielded a 143Nd/144Nd=0.512069
±6 (2σ). Pb isotope analyses were corrected for mass fraction-
ation using a double-spike technique modified from Hamelin
et al. (1985) and Housh and McMahon (2000). Seven double-
spiked fractionation-corrected NBS 981 analysis analyzed dur-
ing the course of this study have mean Pb isotopic ratios of
206
Pb/204Pb=16.9336±0.0048, 207Pb/204Pb=15.4887±0.0063,
and 208Pb/204Pb=36.6907±0.0207.
Results
Geochemistry and isotopic analyses
The 23 new whole-rock chemical analyses reveal significant
compositional heterogeneity in Chichinautzin volcanic
products, with compositions ranging from trachybasalt to
andesite (50.5–61.9 wt.% SiO 2 on an anhydrous basis;
Fig. 5). Most samples are calc–alkaline, but a few have
alkaline affinities indicated by high K contents. The
Atlacholoaya and Pueblo Viejo rocks are the most mafic of
the sample suite (Table 1 and Fig. 5), whereas the most
evolved cone is Cuescontepec, which has a calc–alkaline
affinity. The Tlacotepec sample is notable for having the
highest K, Ba, Pb, and Na contents (Figs. 5 and 6), in addition
to strong enrichment in Sr (>1,300 ppm). The new major
element data presented here largely overlap the fields defined
by previous data from the entire Chichinautzin volcanic field
(Fig. 6).
Although some samples have alkaline major element
compositions, all samples have trace element patterns
characteristic of magmas generated in a suprasubduction
zone environment (Table 1 and Fig. 7), with the exception
of the Pueblo Viejo rocks, which show no negative Nb
and Ta anomalies and therefore could be comparable to

Fig. 5 Chichinautzin samples 10

(normalized on an anhydrous Phono-
basis) plotted on total alkalies Tephrite Trachy- Trachydacite
versus silica diagram (Le Bas andesite Rhyolite
8 Basaltic
et al. 1986). Alkaline versus trachy-
subalkaline fields are separated by Tephrite andesite
Dacite
the Macdonald and Katsura Basanite Trachy-
Na2O+K2O

6
(1964) line basalt Cuescontepec
Juchimilpa
4 Tlacotepec
Basalt Andesite Atlacholoaya
Basaltic
andesite Pueblo Viejo
2 Picro- Palpan
basalt
Villa Guerrero-
Tenancingo
0
45 50 55 60 65 70 75
SiO2
Bull Volcanol (2013) 75:774 Page 11 of 25, 774

Fig. 6 Chemical variation 18 9

Cuescontepec
diagrams for southern and Al2O3 Juchimilpa
western Chichinautzin volcanic 8 Tlacotepec
field samples. Major elements in Atlacholoaya
weight percent (normalized on an 17 Pueblo Viejo
7
anhydrous basis); trace elements Palpan
are in parts per million. Gray area Villa Guerrero-
represents data from previous 6 Tenancingo
16
works
5

CaO
15 4
5
10
Na2O

4 6

2 MgO
3
3 1400

K2O Sr
1200

2
1000

800
1

600

0 400
12

800
Pb
Ba 10

600 8

6
400

4
50 55 60 65 50 55 60 65
SiO2 SiO2

the so-called OIB type arc magmas (Wallace and
Carmichael 1999; Straub et al. 2013). In general, the
samples are depleted in high-field-strength elements
(HFSE; e.g., Nb and Ta) relative to large ion lithophile
elements (e.g., K), as is characteristic of most arc-related
lavas, although Tlacotepec cone has a different behavior.
Slight differences exist between samples, such as the wide
range in Ba contents, especially for andesitic samples
(Fig. 6), although there are some mafic samples with high
Ba contents (900 ppm; Cervantes and Wallace 2003;
Siebe et al. 2004a). The characteristic depletion of some
HFSE, such as Nb and Ta (Fig. 7), has been explained as
a result of previous partial melting of the mantle wedge
before subduction components are added to the wedge
(Cervantes and Wallace 2003). Atlacholoaya, Juchimilpa,
and Villa Guerrero–Tenancingo cones have the largest Nb
depletions, and therefore likely had the most water-rich
magmas (∼3–5 wt.%), comparable to Jumiltepec, Las
774, Page 12 of 25 Bull Volcanol (2013) 75:774

Fig. 7 a Trace element a

concentrations in whole-rock 1000
samples from the Chichianutzin Cuescontepec
volcanic field normalized to Juchimilpa
primitive mantle (Sun and Tlacotepec
McDonough 1989). H2O contents Atlacholoaya
were estimated based on results of Pueblo Viejo
Cervantes and Wallace (2003). b 100
Chondrite-normalized (Sun and Palpan

Rock/Primitive Mantle
McDonough 1989) rare earth Villa Guerrero-
element concentrations for the Tenancingo
Chichinautzin volcanic field
samples. Previously analyzed
samples are those summarized in
Agustin-Flores et al. (2011) 10
3.2 wt.% H2O

5.2 wt.% H2O

1
CsRbBaTh U NbTa K LaCePbPr Sr P NdZrSmEu Ti Dy Y YbLu

100
Rock/Chondrites

10

1
La Ce Pr Nd Pm Sm Eu Gd Tb Dy Ho Er Tm Yb Lu

Tetillas, and Tuxtepec cones (Cervantes and Wallace
2003). Tlacotepec cone is a trachyandesite and displays
anomalously high Ba, Sr, and K contents (849 ppm, 1,
345 ppm, and 2.43 wt.%, respectively; Fig. 7) as well as a
steep slope in the REE pattern (Fig. 7).
Sr and Nd isotope data from the southern and western
Chichinautzin volcanoes lie within or just outside (for one
Pueblo Viejo sample) the field defined by previously
published data for the Chichinautzin volcanic field
(Fig. 8). In addition, the Palpan and Tenancingo samples
seem to be isotopically more enriched on average than the
Atlacholoaya rocks, which may reflect minor crustal con-
tamination or melt generation from an enriched mantle
source (Fig. 8). Our new Pb isotope data overlap with
those previously published for Chichinautzin rocks and
extend to slightly less radiogenic values and are similar
to values reported for Popocatépetl rocks (Fig. 8)
(Schaaf et al. 2005; Agustin-Flores et al. 2011). In
general, the Chichinautzin rocks are more radiogenic,
overlapping the isotopic composition of marine sedi-
ments of the Cocos Plate, suggesting an important con-
tribution from these sediments in the generation of
Chichinautzin magmas. The general Pb isotope trend
of samples also points to the East Pacific Rise field
suggesting a possible contribution from the subducted
slab during the generation of magmas in the mantle
wedge.
In summary, the chemical and isotopic similarity of the
new volcanic centers examined here with previously pub-
lished data from the Chichinautzin volcanic field support
Bull Volcanol (2013) 75:774 Page 13 of 25, 774

Fig. 8 Sr–Nd–Pb isotopic ratios

for the new Chichinautzin
volcanic field samples compared
with previous results
(summarized in Agustin-Flores
et al. (2011)). MA Mantle array,
EPR East Pacific Rise (data from
Zindler et al. (1984)), SED
marine sediments from the Cocos
Plate (Verma 2000), NHRL
Northern Hemisphere Reference
Line (from Zindler and Hart
(1986))

the extension of this volcanic field to the south and west to and Tlacotepec; Table 2), suggesting possible episodicity in
include these centers (Fig. 2). the eruption history.

40
Ar/39Ar dating results
In our 40Ar/39Ar analyses, no excess argon or argon loss was
detected, and thus we interpret the plateau ages as represen-
tative of the eruption ages of these samples (Table 2). Our
results suggest that the oldest Chichinautzin product is
found at Villa Guerrero with an age of 1.20±0.05 Ma (sam-
ple SCH-06; Table 2 and Fig. 9a). Two other sites indicate
volcanism older than 1 Ma: Tenancingo (sample SCH-01,
1.09 ± 0.19 Ma) and Atlacholoaya (sample AT-1, 1.02 ±
0.16 Ma). Thus, the initial stages of magmatism of
Chichinautzin occurred prior to 1 Ma, rather than at ∼40,
000 year BP as previously published (Bloomfield 1975;
García-Palomo et al., 2002; Siebe et al. 2004a; Agustin-
Flores et al. 2011).
The youngest sample we dated was at Pueblo Viejo (0.08±
0.02 Ma; sample AT-3), the most southern structure of the
volcanic field (Fig. 9b and Table 2). The remaining samples
fall into two age groups at 0.21–0.27 Ma (Palpan and
Cuescontepec) and 0.83–0.89 Ma (Tenancingo, Juchimilpa,
Discussion
Based on our new 40Ar/39Ar geochronology, whole-rock
chemistry, isotopic analyses, and field data, we suggest that
volcanism in the Chichinautzin volcanic field started at least
1.2 Ma (Table 2) with volcanic activity at 0.8, 0.2, and
0.08 Ma (Fig. 2 and Table 2). These new results indicate
that volcanism of the Chichinautzin volcanic field oc-
curred contemporaneously with the polygenetic volca-
nism at the southern end of Sierra de las Cruces (San
Miguel, La Corona, and Zempoala volcanoes) rather
than subsequent to it as has been previously proposed
(De Cserna et al. 1988).
Monogenetic versus polygenetic volcanism
The new 40Ar/39Ar results of the Chichinautzin volcanic
field overlap with the 0.7 Ma Zempoala and 1 Ma La
Corona volcanoes (Arce et al. 2008), which are the
774, Page 14 of 25 Bull Volcanol (2013) 75:774

0.1
.004

Cl/K
e atmos
e
0 20
SCH-06

Ca/K
36Ar/40Ar
0
2.5

plateau age: 1.20 +/- 0.05 Ma

Age in Ma
isochron age: 1.25 +/- 0.06 Ma
initial 40Ar/36Ar: 284 +/- 15
0 0
0 0.2 .05
.004

Cl/K
e
e atmos
0 10
SCH-01

C a /K
36Ar/40Ar

2.5 0
plateau age: 1.09 +/- 0.19 Ma

Age in Ma
isochron age: 0.93 +/- 0.15 Ma
initial 40Ar/36Ar: 298 +/- 5 0
0
0 0.2 0.1
.004
Cl/K
atmos

AT -1 0 20

Ca/K
36Ar/40Ar

0
2.5
plateau age: 1.02 +/- 0.16 Ma
Age in Ma

isochron age: 1.13 +/- 0.24Ma

initial 40Ar/36Ar: 293 +/- 7
0
0 0.5 0
.05
.004
Cl/K

e atmos
e
0 2.5
NT-40 C a /K
36Ar/40Ar

2.0 0

plateau age: 0.87 +/- 0.06 Ma

Age in Ma

isochron age: 0.87 +/- 0.10 Ma

initial 40Ar/36Ar: 299 +/- 7 0
0
0 0.2 0.1
.004
Cl/K

atmos
e 0 10
JU-01
Ca/ K
36Ar/40Ar

0
2.5
plateau age: 0.89 +/- 0.15 Ma
Age in Ma

isochron age: 1.06 +/- 0.16 Ma

initial 40Ar/36Ar: 290 +/- 7
0 0
0 0.2 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
39Ar/40Ar Fraction of 39Ar Released

Fig. 9 a–b 40Ar/39Ar age spectra, Ca/K, Cl/K, and inverse isochron Appendix II). On the isochron diagrams, e denotes fractions excluded
diagrams for the 10 samples of the southern and western Chichinautzin from calculation of isochron ages
volcanic field cones. Ages are quoted at the 1-sigma level (see Table 2 and
Bull Volcanol (2013) 75:774 Page 15 of 25, 774

.004 e .05

atmos

Cl/K
e

e SCH-04 0 10

Ca/ K
36Ar/40Ar
2.5 0

Age in Ma
plateau age: 0.83 +/- 0.04 Ma

isochron age: 0.88 +/- 0.09 Ma

initial 40Ar/36Ar: 288 +/- 15
0
0 0.2 0
.05

Cl/K
.004

atmos 0 10
ee

C a/ K
e

NT-06 2.0 0
36Ar/40Ar

Age in Ma
plateau age: 0.27 +/- 0.05 Ma

isochron age: 0.24 +/- 0.06 Ma 0

initial 40Ar/36Ar: 297 +/- 3 0.1
0
0 0.2 Cl/K
.004

e
e atmos 0 20

C a/K
P A-05
0.5 0
36Ar/40Ar

plateau age: 0.26 +/- 0.02 Ma

Age in Ma

isochron age: 0.28 +/- 0.03 Ma 0

initial 40Ar/36Ar: 289 +/- 10 0.1
0
0 0.5
Cl/K

.004
e
e
atmos 0 20
Ca/ K
e
PA-04
36Ar/40Ar

0.5 0
plateau age: 0.21 +/- 0.03 Ma
Age in Ma

isochron age: 0.27 +/- 0.03 Ma

initial 40Ar/36Ar: 277 +/- 13 0
0 0.1
0 0.5
Cl/K

.004
e
atmos 0 20
Ca/ K
36Ar/40Ar

AT -3 0.5 0
Age in Ma

plateau age: 0.08 +/- 0.02 Ma

isochron age: 0.10 +/- 0.04 Ma

initial 40Ar/36Ar: 291 +/- 12 0
0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
0 0.5 Fraction of 39Ar Released
39Ar/40Ar
Fig. 9 (continued)
774, Page 16 of 25 Bull Volcanol (2013) 75:774

a b
0.6

9
LC-02A(xenolith)
0.5
a tion
ion 7
fract tio
n
Cpx a

K2O/P2O5
in
m
CaO/Al2O3

0.4 ta Cuescontepec
n
Co
5 Juchimilpa
Tlacotepec
Atlacholoaya
0.3 Pueblo Viejo
3
Palpan
Villa Guerrero-
Tenancingo
0.2 1
50 55 60 65
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
SiO2
MgO
c 50

d
30
40
K/Sr
K/Ba

30
20

20 Sample LC-02A
AFC Contaminant
Mixing
Sample C2-04 r = 0.4
r = 0.4 Start composition FC

10
10
100 1000 10000 100 1000 10000

Ba
Fig. 10 a MgO versus CaO/Al2O3 and b SiO2 versus K2O/P2O5 varia-
tion diagrams of Southern and Western Chichinautzin samples. For
reference, a tonalite (xenolith, sample LC-02A) reported in Delgado-
Martínez (2012) is shown. c, d Fractional crystallization (FC), mixing,
and assimilation fractional crystallization (AFC) modelling (DePaolo
1981; Ersoy and Helvaci 2010) (K/Ba versus Ba and K/Sr versus Sr) of
the Southern and Western Chichinautzin volcanic field samples. We used
Sr
r values (degree of assimilation/degree of fractionation) of 0.4, and bulk
distribution coefficients of D Ba =0.06; D K =0.038, and D Sr =0.458. We
used a mafic sample from Guespalapa volcano (C2-04; Siebe et al.
2004b) as starting composition (Ca), and a xenolith (tonalite) found at
Tabaquillo lava flow (sample LC07-02A; Delgado-Martínez 2012) as the
contaminant (c)

southernmost and youngest structures of the Sierra de las
Cruces Volcanic Range. The Sierra de las Cruces volca-
noes are aligned north–south and consist of polygenetic
structures (stratovolcanoes and domes of andesitic to
dacitic composition).
Volcanic lineaments of monogenetic structures suggest
the presence of an important E–W fault system. E–W
trending normal faults are also observed in the central
part of the Chichinautzin volcanic field (Siebe et al.
2004a) and E–W trending normal–sinistral oblique faults
are associated with fissure-fed lava flows in the western
part (García-Palomo et al. 2000). This faulting may have
facilitated the ascent of magmas to form Chichinautzin
monogenetic volcanoes. In contrast, the large polygenetic
volcanoes in the region are affected by three fault sys-
tems: (a) the youngest E–W system, (b) a NE–SW system,
and (c) probably an older N–S system of faults (Arce
et al. 2008). The intersection of these faults may have
played an important role in the development of long-lived
reservoir systems, leading to large stratovolcanoes, as
proposed for other volcanic systems such as Nevado de
Toluca (García-Palomo et al. 2000).
The Chichinautzin volcanic field stands at a topographic
high dividing the basins of Mexico and Cuernavaca (Fig. 2).
Bull Volcanol (2013) 75:774
Based on morphological features and paleomagnetic polar-
ities, Mooser (1963) suggested that the drainage system
connecting the Mexico and Cuernavaca basins was closed
in Pleistocene times during the formation of the
Chichinautzin volcanic field. Our new 40Ar/39Ar data con-
firm that volcanism may have blocked this drainage con-
nection during the early Pleistocene (ca. 1.2 Ma), resulting
in initiation of sedimentation in the Mexico basin (Texcoco
Lake) at this time. The most recent volcanism has been
concentrated in the highest central part of the
Chichinautzin volcanic field, where the Chichinautzin vol-
cano has been dated at ∼1,835 year BP, with a recurrence
every <1,250 years during the Holocene (Siebe et al. 2005).
The distribution of the >40 ka volcanic structures is discon-
tinuous and scattered through the volcanic field (Fig. 2) and
they outcrop at some locations because they are not covered
by younger deposits, most likely therefore suggesting that
extensive volcanism has not taken place or there exists a
cover of young volcanics. On the other hand, the most
recent and recurrent volcanism has occurred along the main
axis of the Chichinautzin volcanic field, probably related to
tectonism represented by the E–W normal faults (Márquez
et al. 1999b; Siebe et al. 2004a; García-Palomo et al. 2008).
Although our work represents the first successful set of
40
Ar/39Ar data reported for Chichinautzin products, more
volcanic structures, with similar ages to those reported here
or even older, could be present.
Fractional crystallization versus assimilation at Chichinautzin
volcanic field
There are many papers dealing with the genesis and
evolution of the heterogeneous magmatism of the
Chichinautzin volcanic field (Márquez et al. 1999a, b;
Wallace and Carmichael 1999; Siebe et al. 2004b;
Meriggi et al. 2008; Agustin-Flores et al. 2011; Straub
et al. 2013). These authors have invoked a heterogeneous
mantle wedge to produce the variability of rocks at
Chichinautzin volcanic field. Heterogeneity of the mantle
wedge beneath central Mexico has been explained by
several processes, such as slab-induced convection (Luhr
1997; Wallace and Carmichael 1999), extensive subduc-
tion (since 100 Ma) in central Mexico producing batho-
liths, and various periods of plate reorganization (Schaaf
et al. 2005), and partial melting of a heterogeneous
amphibole-bearing mantle (Meriggi et al. 2008).
The systematic variations of major and trace elements
of many monogenetic Chichinautzin volcanoes have been
explained by polybaric fractional crystallization (Schaaf
et al. 2005) or fractional crystallization plus assimilation
(Meriggi et al. 2008). However, recent investigations have
proposed that the increase of SiO2 in some Chichinautzin
lavas are not necessarily related to crustal assimilation or
Page 17 of 25, 774
fractional crystallization but due to preferential melting of
“reaction pyroxenites” contained in peridotitic mantle
(Straub et al. 2013).
Despite on the many studies of Chichinautzin volcanic
rocks, it is still not a straightforward task to reconcile the
variations in major elements (basalts to dacites), trace
elements, and isotopic ratios of Sr, Nd, and Pb (Schaaf
et al. 2005; Meriggi et al. 2008; Agustin-Flores et al.
2011), with field observations, specifically the presence
of xenoliths in some Chichinautzin lavas (Meriggi et al.
2008; Delgado-Martínez 2012). Variations in MgO versus
CaO/Al2O3 (Fig. 10a) suggest clinopyroxene fractionation
(Walker 1981), whereas SiO2 versus K2O/P2O5 variations
(Fig. 10b) suggest crustal contamination (Carlson and
Hart 1988). The presence of crustal xenoliths has been
reported in volcanic rocks from many parts of the
Chichinautzin volcanic field including diorites (Meriggi
et al. 2008) and tonalites (Delgado-Martínez 2012). The
composition of an analyzed tonalitic xenolith is appropri-
ate to explain some of the compositional variations as a
result of crustal contamination (Fig. 10b–d). Additionally,
xenocrystic quartz is common in Chichinautzin lavas and
scoria fragments all over the field, suggesting assimilation
of crustal rocks (e.g., Wallace and Carmichael 1999).
In order to decipher the process or processes responsi-
ble for the compositional variations recorded in our sam-
ples, we applied models of assimilation–fractional crys-
tallization (AFC) and fractional crystallization (FC)
(DePaolo 1981; Ersoy and Helvaci 2010). Because we
did not have a mafic sample, we used a lava from
Guespalapa volcano (C2-04 with 8.4 wt.% MgO and
48 wt.% SiO2; Siebe et al., 2004b) as the starting compo-
sition (C a ), and a tonalite (LC07-02A, with 58.9 wt.%
SiO 2 ; Delgado-Martínez 2012) as the contaminant
(Fig. 10c, d). The results suggest that neither AFC nor
FC processes can reproduce the entire range of variability
displayed by the analyzed samples. A combination of
AFC, FC, and bulk assimilation can explain most of the
variation in Chichinautzin magmas, but a range in con-
taminant composition is suggested by the highest K/Ba
values (Fig. 10c). More detailed studies of individual
volcanoes would be required to distinguish potential var-
iations related to mantle melting processes from those
created during crustal-level differentiation (e.g., Straub
et al. 2013).
Eruption rates at Chichinautzin volcanic field
Márquez et al. (1999b) estimated a very high eruption rate
of 11.7 km 3 /kyr (2.9 km 3 /kyr per 100 km 2 ) for the
Chichinauzin volcanic field, which was consistent with a
rift–plume model for Chichinautzin magmatism proposed
by these authors. However, they assumed that the
774, Page 18 of 25
Chichinautzin volcanic field began at ∼40,000 ka. In
addition, we estimated a new volume including the new
areas proposed in this work. We constructed a digital
elevation model with ArcGis/ArcMap software to elabo-
rate a Triangulated Irregular Network (TIN) file, by
rasterizing the 10 m contour levels from the 1:50,000
scale topographic map of INEGI. Then, a “Shapefile”
was created with the limits of the Chichinautzin volcanic
field, followed by an interpolation in the TIN file to create
another Shapefile. From the delimited area and the topog-
raphy within this area, we calculated the volume and area
with the 3D Analyst tool. The total volume of the field
was obtained by subtracting the topography located above
the altitudes of Chichinautzin volcanic field limits.
Our estimations yielded a volume of 515 km3, within an
area of 2,680 km2, and assuming that the initiation of the
Chichinautzin volcanic field was ∼1.2 Ma, we obtain a
much lower eruption rate of 0.016 km3/kyr per 100 km2,
compared to the Márquez et al. (1999b) result. A similar
equivalent eruption rate of 0.6 km3/kyr has been estimated
by Siebe et al. (2005) for the Holocene volcanism within the
Chichinautzin volcanic field, assuming an average erupted
volume of ∼1 km3 per cone. Therefore, the previously
estimated high eruption rate for the Chichinautzin volcanic
field (Márquez et al. 1999b) is unlikely. Comparing our new
Chichinautzin volcanic field eruption rate with other volca-
nic fields in the TMVB, it is similar to the Tacámbaro–
Puruarán area in the Michoacan–Guanajuato volcanic field,
which has an eruption rate of 0.058 km3/kyr per 100 km2
(Guilbaud et al. 2012). The eruption rate within the
Michoacan–Guanajuato volcanic field, however, appears
to be variable, based on a value of ∼0.009 km3/kyr per
100 km2 for the Tancítaro area (Ownby et al. 2011). The
lowest eruption rates for volcanic fields in the TMVB were
recorded in the Mascota volcanic field, in western Mexico,
and in the Xalapa volcanic field at the eastern end of the
TMVB. Mascota has a rate of ∼0.00015 km 3 /kyr per
100 km 2 (Ownby et al. 2008), while Xalapa yields an
eruption rate of ∼0.00029 km 3 /kyr per 100 km 2
(Rodríguez-Elizarrarás et al. 2010).
These variations in eruption rates could be correlated
with different velocities and ages of the subducted slab
(Wadge 1984) because at higher convergent rates, more
water is released from the subducting slab into the mantle
wedge, lowering the melting point. As a result, more melt
can be generated and eruption rate can also increase
(Huang and Lundstrom 2007). At the Mascota volcanic
field in western TMVB, the subduction of the Rivera
Plate beneath the North American Plate occurs at a rate
of 23 mm/year (DeMets et al. 1990), whereas in the
central portion of the TMVB (Michoacán–Guanajuato
and Chichinautzin volcanic fields), the subducted Cocos
Plate records higher rates of 55 and 59 mm/year,
Bull Volcanol (2013) 75:774
respectively (DeMets et al. 1990). For the Xalapa region,
however, the Cocos Plate is subducted at a rate of 64 mm/
year, although the eruption rate estimated here is low. A
possible explanation for this latter case may be the long
distance between the volcanic field and the trench, as well
as the possibility of the slab depth being >100 km based
on a lack of seismicity in this region (Pardo and Suárez
1995). This may led to low melt production underneath
the Xalapa volcanic field due to limited delivery of
subducted volatiles to the mantle wedge in this region.
Although it is not easy to distinguish the fore arc and
back arc portions in the TMVB, an alternative explanation
for low eruption rates in the Mascota volcanic field could
be its likely position in the fore arc region, whereas the
Chichinautzin and Michoacán–Guanajuato volcanic fields
(the highest eruption rates), are located in the main axis of
the arc. In addition, we could not discard the role of the
upper plate structure, extensional faulting, and the nature
of the basement rocks underneath the TMVB, to control
the eruption rates.
Concluding remarks
The Chichinautzin volcanic field is composed of more than
120 monogenetic structures. This volcanic field forms a
topographic high dividing the basins of Mexico and
Cuernavaca that closed the drainage system connecting the
Mexico and Cuernavaca basins. The 40Ar/39Ar data report-
ed here suggest that volcanism may have blocked this drain-
age connection during the early Pleistocene (ca. ∼1.2 Ma)
and therefore, sedimentation in the Mexico basin (Texcoco
Lake) would have begun at this time. This paper presents the
first 40Ar/39Ar ages reported for Chichinautzin eruptive
products and significantly revises the timing of initiation
of the Chichinautzin volcanic field to older ages than pre-
viously reported. Although previous analyses of the
Chichinautzin volcanic field revealed that much of the ex-
posed portions of the field are <40 ka, it is probable that
older structures within the central portions of the field may
be co ver ed b y y oun ge r C hic hina utz in p rod uct s.
Furthermore, it is possible that volcanism within the field
has been episodic since ∼1.2 Ma, based on the ages reported
here, and has been characterized through its duration by
heterogeneous magmatism similar to the younger eruptive
products (i.e., Xitle, Guespalapa, Pelado, Tuxtepec).
Additionally, the occurrence of chemically and isotopically
heterogeneous magmatism in the Chichinautzin volcanic
field and the contemporaneous eruption of both alkaline
and calc–alkaline products, seem to be a characteristic of
this volcanic field since its inception some 1.2 Ma ago.
Finally, the southern boundary of the Chichinautzin volca-
nic field must be extended 20 km to the south of the
Bull Volcanol (2013) 75:774
currently accepted border of the volcanic field, up to the
town of Pueblo Viejo and the Juchimilpa scoria cone.
Acknowledgments 40Ar/39Ar dating was carried out at the Geochro-
nology Laboratory, University of Alaska, Fairbanks. We are indebted to
R. Torres-Orozco for his work in the isotopic analysis at the UT, Jackson
School of Geosciences, Austin, TX. P. Girón performed X-ray fluores-
cence analysis at LUGIS, UNAM, and E. Lounejeva carried out ICP-MS
analysis at LUGIS, UNAM. This research was supported by PAPIIT-
IN107409 and CONACYT 98772 grants (to J.L. Arce). Thanks to J.E.
Gardner and J.D. Keppie for their suggestions on the first draft of the
manuscript. We are grateful to B. Jicha and R. Lange for their constructive
reviews.
Appendix I
Studied sites in this work
The distribution of Chichinautzin volcanic field products
are presented in Fig. 2 that includes the studied and sampled
sites in this work. The Atlacholoaya site (18°42′21″N;
99°12′45″W; 1,018 m asl): Lies 25 km to the SW of the city
of Cuernavaca (Fig. 2) and consist of four NE trending
scoria cones composed of black scoria and ash fallouts
(Fig. 4a, b), and subordinate lava flows. In hand samples,
these products contain phenocrysts of plagioclase, oliv-
ine, clinopyroxene, and minor orthopyroxene. Whole-
rock chemistry of these samples yielded calc-alkaline,
basaltic andesite compositions (53.8–55.6 wt.% SiO2;
Table 1), although one sample is alkaline (trachybasalt)
with 50.54 wt.% SiO2 and 5.23 wt.% alkalies (Table 1).
The Atlacholoaya scoria cones show smooth topogra-
phy, with well-developed drainages, suggesting they
are older than most other cinder cones.
The Pueblo Viejo site (18°31′36″N; 99°11′50″W;
836 m asl) is a massive, olivine-rich, black lava flow
outcropping 55 km SW of Cuernavaca, and is here con-
sidered to be part of Chichinautzin volcanic field, despite
the fact that it is 9 km south of the previous southern
limit of the volcanic field (Fig. 2). Samples of this lava
are aphanitic, with small phenocrysts of plagioclase, ol-
ivine, and clinopyroxene set in a fine matrix. Whole-rock
chemical analysis of this lava yielded a trachybasaltic
composition (51.34 SiO 2 wt.% and 5.26 alkalies;
Table 1) similar to the alkaline Atlacholoaya sample.
We did not identify any volcanic structure around the
Pueblo Viejo lava, suggesting that it is a fissure-related
lava flow.
The Palpan site (18°50′54″N; 99°25′13″W; 1,626 m
asl) is composed of three scoria cones and associated lava
flows, located 22 km to the SW of Cuernavaca (Fig. 2).
The scoria and ash fall deposits are altered and
compacted. Hand specimens of both scoria fragments
Page 19 of 25, 774
and lavas are black and aphanitic with plagioclase,
clinopyroxene, and olivine set in a fine matrix. Seven
whole-rock chemical analyses of these structures show
calc–alkaline, basaltic andesite to andesite compositions
(54.73 to 58.95 wt.% SiO2; Table 1).
The western Chichinautzin sites include Juchimilpa,
Villa Guerrero Cuescontepec and Tlacotepec. Juchimilpa
(18°42′44″N; 99°42′33″W; 1,800 m asl) is an isolated
scoria cone with associated lava flows located 20 km to
the south of the city of Ixtapan de la Sal (Fig. 2). Hand
specimens of both scoria and lava flow are typical of
basaltic andesite rocks, represented by plagioclase,
clinopyroxene, and olivine, set in a fine matrix. Whole-
rock chemical analysis shows a basaltic andesite compo-
sition (56 wt.% SiO2; Table 1).
The Villa Guerrero site (18°53′45″N; 99°38′43″W; 1,
952 m asl) comprises two N–S aligned scoria cones and
associated lava flows, located 5 km to the NE of the city
of Ixtapan de la Sal (Fig. 2). The Tenancingo site (18°56′
35″N; 99°34′58″W; 2,200 m asl) includes four scoria
cones, located about 12 km to the NE of Ixtapan de la
Sal (Fig. 2). Hand samples from Villa Guerrero and
Tenancingo cones have a typical mineralogy of basaltic
andesite composition, represented by plagioclase,
clinopyroxene, and minor orthopyroxene and olivine, in
a fine matrix. Whole-rock chemistry data shows a com-
positional range from basaltic andesite to andesite (54.67–
58.65 wt.% SiO2; Table 1). Villa Guerrero cones are
smooth and have a low topographic profile, suggesting
they are older than the neighboring Tenancingo structures.
Tenancingo scoria cones have well-defined cone shapes,
although the fallout deposits show compaction structures
(Fig. 4).
The Cuescontepec (19°03′15″N; 99°40′42″W; 3,272 m
asl) and Tlacotepec (19°13′28″N; 99°40′42″W; 2,974 m
asl) sites are represented by isolated monogenetic cones.
Cuescontepec is a lava cone with a steep crater open to the
north. Hand samples show crystals of plagioclase,
orthopyroxene, and amphibole and represent the most
evolved structure analyzed in this study. They have an
andesitic composition (61.96 wt.% SiO2; Table 1). On
the other hand, Tlacotepec is a scoria cone associated
with lava flows emplaced towards the east, has a crater
open to the east, and is overlain by the 21.7 ka old
Lower Toluca Pumice (Capra et al. 2006), which pro-
vides a younger limit. Hand specimens of scoria and
lava flows from Tlacotepec cone contain phenocrysts of
plagioclase, clinopyroxene, orthopyroxene, and olivine,
and have an alkaline composition (56 wt.% SiO2; 7.09
alkalies; Table 1). Cuescontepec and Tlacotepec are
located 26 and 8 km to the south of the city of
Toluca, respectively (Fig. 2), and east and northeast of
Nevado de Toluca stratovolcano.
Appendix II

Table 4 Samples dated by the 40Ar/39Ar method at the University of Alaska Fairbanks geochronology laboratory
774, Page 20 of 25

40 37 36 40
Laser (mW) Cum. 39Ar Ar/39Ar ± Ar/39Ar ± Ar/39Ar ± % Atm. 40Ar ± Ca/K ± Cl/K ± Ar*/39ArK ± Age (ka) ± (ka)
meas. meas. meas.

SCH-06 whole rock Weighted average of J from standards=1.124e-04±6.735e-07

250 0.0085 163.2560 7.7882 1.3227 0.0674 0.5746 0.0365 104.0 6.5 2.4292 0.1238 0.0095 0.0026 −6.471 10.494 −1,312 2,128
500 0.0429 75.7256 2.2268 1.2226 0.0385 0.2470 0.0122 96.3 4.8 2.2452 0.0707 0.0048 0.0009 2.812 3.691 570 748
1,000 0.2050 14.6697 0.4509 1.5424 0.0470 0.0302 0.0017 60.1 3.4 2.8332 0.0864 0.0019 0.0002 5.840 0.578 1,183 117
1,500 0.5094 9.0585 0.2982 1.2921 0.0384 0.0100 0.0007 31.7 2.3 2.3730 0.0706 0.0012 0.0001 6.176 0.325 1,251 66
2,000 0.7737 8.5653 0.3532 1.2121 0.0456 0.0091 0.0007 30.2 2.6 2.2260 0.0837 0.0021 0.0002 5.960 0.371 1,207 75
3,000 0.9582 11.0672 0.4971 1.4714 0.0606 0.0182 0.0010 47.7 2.8 2.7025 0.1115 0.0066 0.0005 5.775 0.486 1,170 98
5,000 0.9923 38.9429 1.9927 3.5179 0.1573 0.1171 0.0075 88.2 6.0 6.4710 0.2900 0.0242 0.0015 4.620 2.446 936 495
9,000 1.0000 81.7176 4.8376 6.7860 0.3427 0.2649 0.0233 95.1 8.7 12.5113 0.6349 0.0297 0.0032 3.992 7.266 809 1,472
Integrated 15.3956 0.2439 1.4611 0.0232 0.0332 0.0008 63.0 2.2 2.6837 0.0427 0.0037 0.0001 5.697 0.264 1,154 54
40
Ar/39Ar geochronology data appendix for Arce et al.
250 0.0023 572.8061 30.9150 0.4499 0.1376 1.9582 0.1393 101.0 7.1 0.8258 0.2527 0.0317 0.0104 −5.839 40.749 −1,184 8,263
500 0.0166 249.6266 10.9856 0.4662 0.0253 0.8388 0.0357 99.3 4.5 0.8557 0.0464 0.0312 0.0033 1.782 11.330 361 2,295
1,000 0.0741 48.7528 2.2940 0.6842 0.0301 0.1477 0.0074 89.5 4.6 1.2560 0.0553 0.0296 0.0017 5.132 2.381 1,040 482
1,500 0.1516 24.3810 1.2878 1.0015 0.0660 79.7 6.0 1.8389 0.0889 0.0289 0.0016 4.937 1.585 1,000 321
2,000 0.2393 18.6961 1.0218 1.2541 0.0609 0.0470 0.0034 73.9 5.5 2.3032 0.1120 0.0282 0.0017 4.878 1.158 988 235
2,500 0.3359 17.5123 0.9417 1.4395 0.0711 0.0438 0.0031 73.3 5.2 2.6439 0.1307 0.0273 0.0016 4.674 1.039 947 210
3,000 0.4420 160.1285 3.8670 1.5407 0.0337 0.5232 0.0125 96.5 2.5 2.8301 0.0619 0.0279 0.0010 5.639 4.075 1,142 825
4,000 0.6760 65.8284 1.6856 1.7583 0.0440 0.2066 0.0049 92.6 2.3 3.2303 0.0810 0.0271 0.0009 4.899 1.559 992 316
4,500 0.8263 194.3965 4.6492 1.8098 0.0350 0.6325 0.0119 96.1 2.0 3.3251 0.0644 0.0266 0.0010 7.626 4.111 1,545 832
5,000 0.9213 80.1886 2.4732 1.7814 0.0568 0.2548 0.0087 93.7 2.9 3.2728 0.1044 0.0270 0.0013 5.017 2.356 1,016 477
9,000 1.0000 31.7824 1.6136 1.9571 0.0925 0.0922 0.0050 85.3 4.6 3.5960 0.1702 0.0268 0.0015 4.690 1.593 950 323
Integrated 84.6228 1.0328 1.5440 0.0179 0.2688 0.0030 93.7 2.5 2.8361 0.0329 0.0275 0.0004 5.305 0.926 1,075 188
SCH-04 whole rock Weighted average of J from standards=1.124e-04±6.735e-07
250 0.0252 40.2312 1.5452 1.3337 0.0471 0.1376 0.0074 100.9 5.6 2.4494 0.0866 0.0126 0.0008 −0.348 2.249 −71 456
500 0.1135 31.6114 0.8958 0.8358 0.0252 0.0955 0.0039 89.1 3.7 1.5345 0.0463 0.0134 0.0006 3.429 1.204 695 244
750 0.3035 16.1552 0.4342 0.5798 0.0156 0.0404 0.0016 73.8 3.0 1.0643 0.0286 0.0137 0.0005 4.230 0.531 857 108
1,000 0.5259 11.8098 0.3027 0.8454 0.0229 0.0263 0.0012 65.5 3.0 1.5521 0.0420 0.0129 0.0004 4.069 0.400 824 81
1,500 0.7690 10.8335 0.2906 1.4794 0.0363 0.0222 0.0009 59.5 2.4 2.7174 0.0668 0.0118 0.0004 4.381 0.321 888 65
Bull Volcanol (2013) 75:774
Table 4 (continued)
40 37 36 40
Laser (mW) Cum. 39Ar Ar/39Ar ± Ar/39Ar ± Ar/39Ar ± % Atm. 40Ar ± Ca/K ± Cl/K ± Ar*/39ArK ± Age (ka) ± (ka)
meas. meas. meas.

3,000 0.9459 10.1197 0.3002 2.6570 0.0767 0.0215 0.0011 60.9 3.3 4.8844 0.1413 0.0107 0.0004 3.951 0.392 800 79
5,000 0.9902 11.3696 0.4704 5.0328 0.1805 0.0354 0.0029 88.7 7.5 9.2674 0.3336 0.0132 0.0007 1.286 0.867 260 176
9,000 1.0000 14.5951 0.7522 4.9052 0.2086 0.0676 0.0111 134.4 22.7 9.0316 0.3854 0.0161 0.0013 −5.027 3.278 −1,019 665
Bull Volcanol (2013) 75:774

Integrated 14.5692 0.1674 1.5070 0.0182 0.0369 0.0007 74.1 3.0 2.7681 0.0335 0.0125 0.0002 3.774 0.214 765 44
AT-1 whole rock Weighted average of J from standards=1.124e-04±6.735e-07
500 0.1074 231.7571 5.3454 0.9943 0.0187 0.7747 0.0142 98.8 2.1 1.8257 0.0344 0.0427 0.0012 2.895 4.898 587 992
1,000 0.3235 77.6337 1.7584 1.3940 0.0235 0.2458 0.0045 93.5 2.0 2.5603 0.0432 0.0339 0.0008 5.082 1.661 1,030 336
1,500 0.5322 56.0277 1.3454 1.4269 0.0282 0.1713 0.0038 90.2 2.2 2.6209 0.0519 0.0255 0.0006 5.493 1.295 1,113 262
2,000 0.6680 51.8528 1.5773 1.5624 0.0428 0.1572 0.0045 89.4 2.6 2.8700 0.0788 0.0212 0.0007 5.495 1.444 1,113 292
3,000 0.8335 41.5085 1.3240 2.3728 0.0698 0.1223 0.0038 86.6 2.8 4.3611 0.1284 0.0213 0.0008 5.550 1.262 1,124 255
5,000 0.9388 32.7012 1.2950 4.0714 0.1444 0.0956 0.0044 85.4 4.1 7.4919 0.2665 0.0250 0.0011 4.771 1.422 966 288
9,000 1.0000 28.7807 1.3020 3.5997 0.1416 0.0812 0.0053 82.4 5.7 6.6217 0.2611 0.0272 0.0014 5.062 1.744 1,025 353
Integrated 72.4579 0.8263 1.9603 0.0210 0.2286 0.0022 93.1 2.2 3.6019 0.0386 0.0279 0.0003 5.032 0.771 1,019 156
AT-3 whole rock Weighted average of J from standards=1.124e-04±6.735e-07
250 0.0044 118.7068 6.3283 1.3756 0.0703 0.4321 0.0240 107.5 6.1 2.5265 0.1292 0.0611 0.0041 −8.909 7.063 −1,806 1,433
500 0.0379 27.0052 0.8422 1.6439 0.0534 0.0924 0.0042 100.7 4.7 3.0198 0.0982 0.0429 0.0014 −0.187 1.254 −38 254
1,000 0.2131 5.1562 0.1450 2.0280 0.0566 0.0164 0.0007 91.4 3.9 3.7264 0.1041 0.0199 0.0006 0.444 0.204 90 41
1,500 0.4095 3.3270 0.1279 1.5367 0.0531 0.0100 0.0005 85.8 4.5 2.8227 0.0977 0.0071 0.0003 0.469 0.156 95 32
2,000 0.5618 3.2951 0.1508 1.0385 0.0437 0.0100 0.0006 88.2 5.6 1.9069 0.0803 0.0033 0.0003 0.386 0.189 78 38
3,000 0.7191 4.8058 0.2306 1.0754 0.0476 0.0150 0.0008 91.0 5.0 1.9747 0.0875 0.0046 0.0003 0.431 0.249 87 50
5,000 0.9426 7.5455 0.3132 2.5540 0.0946 0.0244 0.0010 93.1 4.0 4.6948 0.1743 0.0101 0.0005 0.516 0.311 105 63
9,000 1.0000 6.2245 0.3433 2.6564 0.1312 0.0212 0.0015 97.8 7.1 4.8833 0.2417 0.0100 0.0007 0.139 0.447 28 91
Integrated 6.2834 0.1029 1.7692 0.0278 0.0204 0.0004 94.0 4.8 3.2502 0.0512 0.0107 0.0002 0.375 0.113 76 23
PA-04 whole rock Weighted average of J from standards=1.124e-04±6.735e-07
250 0.0117 77.8027 3.0497 0.5409 0.0236 0.2746 0.0160 104.3 6.1 0.9928 0.0433 0.0433 0.0022 −3.314 4.718 −672 956
500 0.0891 14.3499 0.5521 0.4577 0.0158 0.0477 0.0029 98.1 6.2 0.8401 0.0290 0.0424 0.0018 0.273 0.892 55 181
1,000 0.4796 3.2328 0.1134 0.8878 0.0289 0.0070 0.0005 62.2 4.8 1.6299 0.0531 0.0378 0.0013 1.210 0.171 245 35
1,500 0.8179 3.1852 0.1003 1.3732 0.0426 0.0071 0.0005 63.3 4.6 2.5220 0.0784 0.0324 0.0011 1.159 0.159 235 32
2,000 0.9258 4.7022 0.1663 2.2346 0.0728 0.0147 0.0014 88.8 9.1 4.1067 0.1340 0.0325 0.0012 0.526 0.428 107 87
3,000 0.9674 9.8086 0.4219 3.7170 0.1425 0.0364 0.0027 106.8 8.2 6.8381 0.2628 0.0423 0.0018 −0.665 0.796 −135 161
5,000 0.9935 19.7213 0.9109 9.8312 0.4108 0.0756 0.0047 109.3 7.1 18.1649 0.7643 0.0441 0.0024 −1.839 1.379 −373 280
9,000 1.0000 27.4990 1.5401 10.2276 0.4863 0.1334 0.0150 140.4 16.4 18.9028 0.9053 0.0433 0.0026 −11.183 4.411 −2,268 895
Integrated 5.9694 0.0963 1.5737 0.0250 0.0180 0.0005 87.3 4.5 2.8907 0.0460 0.0362 0.0007 0.756 0.143 153 29
Page 21 of 25, 774
Table 4 (continued)
40 37 36 40
Laser (mW) Cum. 39Ar Ar/39Ar ± Ar/39Ar ± Ar/39Ar ± % Atm. 40Ar ± Ca/K ± Cl/K ± Ar*/39ArK ± Age (ka) ± (ka)
meas. meas. meas.

PA-05 whole rock Weighted average of J from standards=1.124e-04±6.735e-07

774, Page 22 of 25

250 0.0103 71.9637 2.4417 0.3780 0.0182 0.2498 0.0138 102.6 5.8 0.6938 0.0334 0.0395 0.0020 −1.857 4.170 −376 845
500 0.0590 20.8195 0.7966 0.3609 0.0133 0.0664 0.0034 94.2 5.1 0.6623 0.0243 0.0386 0.0014 1.206 1.071 244 217
1,000 0.3090 4.4932 0.1458 0.6842 0.0180 0.0108 0.0006 70.3 4.3 1.2560 0.0331 0.0368 0.0010 1.324 0.209 268 42
1,500 0.6642 3.4930 0.1009 1.1220 0.0292 0.0075 0.0004 61.0 3.2 2.0604 0.0537 0.0349 0.0010 1.351 0.128 274 26
2,000 0.8635 4.4182 0.1279 1.7375 0.047 0.0111 0.0006 71.7 4.4 3.1920 0.0864 0.0355 0.0010 1.241 0.206 252 42
3,000 0.9600 8.4899 0.2453 2.8998 0.0822 0.0255 0.0012 86.3 4.1 5.3317 0.1515 0.0424 0.0013 1.165 0.362 236 73
5,000 0.9922 22.5571 0.7667 8.1991 0.2448 0.0759 0.0031 96.6 4.2 15.1317 0.4544 0.0472 0.0017 0.773 0.968 157 196
9,000 1.0000 23.7157 0.9979 9.6575 0.3506 0.0873 0.0086 105.6 10.9 17.8418 0.6521 0.0467 0.0022 −1.335 2.589 −271 525
Integrated 6.7339 0.0887 1.5585 0.0196 0.0190 0.0004 81.8 4.0 2.8629 0.0360 0.0370 0.0005 1.225 0.117 248 24
JU-01 whole rock Weighted average of J from standards=1.124e-04±6.735e-07
250 0.0027 173.0853 13.7720 0.1136 0.1647 0.5792 0.0987 98.9 17.2 0.2085 0.3023 0.0394 0.0116 1.901 29.770 385 6,031
500 0.0213 33.7489 2.2832 0.4606 0.0380 0.0896 0.0147 78.4 13.1 0.8454 0.0698 0.0341 0.0028 7.290 4.574 1,477 926
1,500 0.1837 19.8883 1.0079 0.8832 0.0416 0.0523 0.0039 77.5 5.9 1.6216 0.0765 0.0285 0.0017 4.474 1.267 906 257
2,200 0.3213 16.4347 0.9005 1.1977 0.0620 0.0383 0.0030 68.4 5.6 2.1995 0.1140 0.0275 0.0016 5.188 1.050 1,051 213
3,000 0.4653 32.2242 1.5983 1.3357 0.0653 0.0967 0.0056 88.4 5.2 2.4531 0.1200 0.0279 0.0017 3.749 1.761 760 357
3,500 0.5996 42.6944 1.9490 1.4100 0.0617 0.1302 0.0069 89.9 4.9 2.5898 0.1134 0.0277 0.0016 4.323 2.168 876 439
4,000 0.7228 27.4650 1.4604 1.4722 0.0748 0.0770 0.0050 82.5 5.3 2.7041 0.1375 0.0270 0.0017 4.814 1.590 975 322
4,500 0.8724 125.8937 3.1795 1.6004 0.0431 0.4140 0.0104 97.1 2.2 2.9399 0.0793 0.0266 0.0010 3.653 2.867 740 581
5,000 0.9576 59.8874 2.8588 1.5575 0.0707 0.1915 0.0099 94.3 4.9 2.8610 0.1300 0.0273 0.0018 3.398 2.992 689 606
9,000 1.0000 16.6966 1.1723 1.9268 0.1145 0.0357 0.0054 62.4 9.9 3.5402 0.2107 0.0280 0.0023 6.277 1.823 1,271 369
Integrated 44.9929 0.7194 1.3341 0.0218 0.1377 0.0025 90.2 3.5 2.4502 0.0400 0.0277 0.0006 4.397 0.721 891 146
NT-40 whole rock Weighted average of J from standards=9.523e-05±2.539e-07
500 0.0157 464.9692 14.1575 0.4439 0.0235 1.6037 0.0540 101.9 3.6 0.8147 0.0431 0.0301 0.0031 −8.914 16.709 −1,661 3,116
1,000 0.0850 226.4720 3.9911 0.5595 0.0103 0.7526 0.0150 98.2 1.9 1.0270 0.0189 0.0214 0.0014 4.094 4.372 762 814
1,500 0.2569 30.2936 0.9808 0.6988 0.0217 0.0869 0.0024 84.6 2.6 1.2829 0.0399 0.0125 0.0005 4.657 0.886 867 165
2,000 0.4531 17.7015 0.6159 0.7381 0.0239 0.0450 0.0021 74.9 3.5 1.3551 0.0440 0.0116 0.0005 4.436 0.689 826 128
3,000 0.7112 14.9810 0.4141 0.7724 0.0200 0.0345 0.0009 67.8 1.8 1.4181 0.0367 0.0152 0.0006 4.818 0.364 897 68
5,000 0.9084 36.1458 0.6764 0.7985 0.0164 0.1074 0.0026 87.7 2.0 1.4660 0.0301 0.0224 0.0005 4.437 0.767 826 143
9,000 1.0000 41.7436 0.6644 1.1427 0.0201 0.1240 0.0026 87.6 1.8 2.0984 0.0369 0.0313 0.0008 5.177 0.791 964 147
Integrated 46.4912 0.5047 0.7722 0.0089 0.1425 0.0017 90.5 1.5 1.4177 0.0163 0.0176 0.0003 4.408 0.489 821 91
NT-06 whole rock Weighted average of J from standards=9.523e-05±2.539e-07
500 0.0945 86.2874 0.5309 0.2700 0.0057 0.2908 0.0034 99.6 1.0 0.4955 0.0105 0.0031 0.0008 0.355 0.905 61 155
Bull Volcanol (2013) 75:774
Bull Volcanol (2013) 75:774 Page 23 of 25, 774

Age (ka) ± (ka)

1,816
References

175
154

288
73
56
Agustin-Flores J, Siebe C, Guilbaud MN (2011) Geology and geochem-

4,726
1,117
istry of Pelagatos, Cerro del Agua, and Dos Cerros monogenetic

337
261
254
279

48
volcanoes in the Sierra Chichinautzin Volcanic Field, south of
México City. J Volcanol Geotherm Res 201:143–162

10.598
1.675
0.423
0.325
0.898
1.021
Alaniz-Alvarez S, Nieto-Samaniego AF, Ferrari L (1998) Effects of strain

341
Ar*/39ArK ±

rate in the distribution of monogenetic and polygenetic volcanism in

the Trans-Mexican Volcanic Belt. Geology 26:591–594
Arce JL, Macías R, García-Palomo A, Capra L, Macías JL, Layer P,
27.543 Rueda H (2008) Late Pleistocene flank collapse of Zempoala
6.506
1.519
1.479
1.623
1.962

0.281 Volcano (Central Mexico) and the role of fault reactivation. J

40

Volcanol Geotherm Res 177:944–958

Bloomfield K (1975) A Late-Quaternary monogenetic volcano field in
0.0009
0.0001
0.0002
0.0004
0.0005

0.0072
1.983

central Mexico. Geologische Rundschau 64:476–497

±

Carlson RW, Hart WK (1988) Flood basalt volcanism in the northwestern

United States. In: Macdougall JD (ed) Continental flood basalts.
0.0339
0.0013
0.0052
0.0158

0.0240
0.0001
0.0011
Cl/K

Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp 35–61

Carlson RW, Irving AJ (1994) Depletion and enrichment history of sub-
continental lithospheric mantle: Os, Sr, Nd, and Pb evidence for xeno-
0.0049
0.0099
0.0303

0.0744
0.0356

0.2587
0.0056

liths from the Wyoming Craton. Earth Planet Sci Lett 126:457–472
Cervantes P, Wallace P (2003) Role of H2O in subduction-zone
±

magmatism: new insights from melt inclusions in high-Mg basalts

0.7425
1.6679
3.2015

8.5134

0.0068
5.4716
4.7242

from central Mexico. Geology 31:235–238

Ca/K

De Cserna Z, Aranda-Gómez JJ, Mitre-Salazar LM (1988) Estructura

geológica, gravimetría, sismicidad y relaciones neotectónicas
regionales de la cuenca de México. Boletín del Instituto de
2.1203

Geología, UNAM, México 104:1–71

1.2
2.4
4.1

0.7
2.8
0.9
% Atm. 40Ar ±

Delgado-Martínez NE (2012) Evidencias de contaminación cortical en la

dacita Tabaquillo, Campo Volcánico Chichinautzin. Undergraduate
thesis, Universidad Autónoma de Guerrero, México, 99 p
DeMets C, Gordon RG, Argus DF, Stein S (1990) Current plate motions.
Geophys J Int 101:425–478
95.8
88.9
92.5

97.4
92.6
98.3

0.8

DePaolo DJ (1981) Trace element and isotopic effects of combined

wallrock assimilation and fractional crystallization. Earth Planet
0.0015

0.0030

0.0078
0.0601
0.0040
0.0011

Sci Lett 53:189–202

96.6

Eggins SM, Woodhead JD, Kinsley LPJ, Mortimer GE, Sylvester P,

Ar/39Ar ±

McCulloch MT, Hergt JM, Handler MR (1997) A simple method

for the precise determination of >=40 trace elements in geological
0.0403
0.0685
0.3884

1.1651
0.0010
0.1166

0.8115
meas.

samples by ICPMS using enriched isotope internal standardisation.

36

Chem Geol 134:311–326

Ersoy Y, Helvaci C (2010) FC-AFC-FCA and mixing modeler: a
0.0027
0.0054
0.0165
0.0193
0.0403
0.1404
0.1915

Microsoft’s Excel and spreadsheet program for modeling geochem-

ical differentiation of magma by crystal fractionation, crustal assim-
Ar/39Ar ±

ilation and mixing. Comput Geosci 36:383–390

Escobar-Wolf RP, Diehl JF, Singer BS, Rose WI (2010) 40Ar/39Ar and
0.4046
0.9084
1.7426
2.5700
4.6247
2.9758
0.0037
meas.

paleomagnetic constraints on the evolution of Volcán de Santa

María, Guatemala. Geol Soc Am Bull 122:757–771
37

Ferrari LM, López-Martínez G, Aguirre-Díaz G, Carrasco-Nuñez G

15.9640
0.1299
0.0976
0.2497
0.6799
1.6963

1.1546

(1999) Space-time patterns of Cenozoic arc volcanism in central

Mexico: from Sierra Madre Occidental to the Mexican Volcanic
Ar/39Ar ±

Belt. Geology 27:303–306

Fries C (1960) Geología del Estado de Morelos y de partes adyacentes de
245.9191
371.5538
116.5444
35.9706
13.3338
21.7409

0.1257

México y Guerrero. Región central meridional de México. Boletín

meas.

del Instituto de Geología, UNAM 60: 234.

40

García-Palomo A, Macias JL, Garduño VH (2000) Miocene to recent

structural evolution of Nevado de Toluca volcano region, Central
Cum. 39Ar

Integrated 58.4916

México. Tectonophysics 318:218–302

0.4962
0.7267
0.8267
0.9272
0.9921
1.0000
Table 4 (continued)

García-Palomo A, Macias JL, Arce JL, Capra L, Garduño VH, Espíndola

JM (2002) Geology of Nevado de Toluca volcano and surrounding
areas, central Mexico. Geological Society of America Map Series 1–48
Laser (mW)

García-Palomo A, Zamorano JJ, López-Miguel C, Galván-García A,

1,000
1,500
2,000
3,000
5,000
9,000

Carlos-Valerio V, Ortega R, Macías JL (2008) El arreglo

morfoestructural de la Sierra de las Cruces, México Central.
Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Geológicas 25:158–178
774, Page 24 of 25
Gómez-Tuena A, Langmuir CH, Goldstein SL, Straub SM, Ortega-
Gutiérrez F (2007) Geochemical evidence for slab melting in the
Trans-Mexican Volcanic Belt. J Petrol 48:537–562
Govindaraju K (1994) Compilation of working values and sample de-
scription for 383 standard reference materials. Geostandards
Newsletter 18:331
Guilbaud MN, Siebe C, Layer PW, Salinas S (2012) Reconstruction of
the volcanic history of the Tacámbaro-Puruarán area (Michoacán,
México) reveals high frequency of Holocene monogenetic erup-
tions. Bull Volcanol 74:1187–1211
Hamelin B, Manhes G, Albarede F, Allegre CJ (1985) Precise lead
isotope measurements by the double spike technique: a reconsider-
ation. Geoch Cosmoch Acta 49:173–182
Housh T, McMahon TP (2000) Sr, Nd and Pb isotopic characteristics of
Late Miocene–Pleistocene collision-related igneous rocks in west-
ern New Guinea (Irian Jaya, Indonesia). Lithos 50:217–239
Huang F, Lundstrom CC (2007) 231Pa excess in arc volcanic rocks:
constraint on melting rates at convergent margins. Geology 35:
1007–1010
Lassiter JC, Blichert-Toft J, Hauri EH, Barsczus HG (2003) Isotope and
trace element variations in lavas from Raivavae and Rapa, Cook
Austral islands: constraints on the nature of HIMU- and EM-mantle
and the origin of mid-plate volcanism in French Polynesia. Chem
Geol 202:115–138
Layer PW (2000) 40Ar/39Ar age of the El’gygytgyn impact event,
Chukotka, Russia. Meteoritic and Planetary Science 35:591–599
Layer PW, Garcia-Palomo A, Jones D, Macias JL, Arce JL, Mora JC
(2009) El Chichon volcanic complex, Chiapas, Mexico: stages of
evolution based on field mapping and 40Ar/39Ar geochronology.
Geofisica Internacional 48:33–54
Le Bas MJ, Le Maitre RW, Streckaisen A, Zanettin B (1986) A chemical
classification of volcanic rocks based on the total alkali-silica dia-
gram. J Petrol 27:745–750
Lenhardt N, Böhnel H, Wemmer K, Torres-Alvarado IS, Hornung J,
Hinderer M (2010) Petrology, magnetostratigraphy and geochronol-
ogy of the Miocene volcaniclastic Tepoztlán formation: implications
for the initiation of the Transmexican Volcanic Belt (Central
Mexico). Bull Volcanol 72:817–832
Lozano R, Verma SP, Girón P, Velasco F, Morán-Zenteno D, Viera F,
Chávez G (1995) Calibración preliminar de Fluorescencia de Rayos-
X para análisis cuantitativos de elementos mayores en rocas ígneas.
Actas INAGEQ 1:203–208
Lozano-Santacruz R, Bernal JP (2005) Characterization of a new set of
eight geochemical reference materials for XRF major and trace
element analysis. Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Geológicas 22:
329–344
Luhr JF (1997) Extensional tectonics and diverse primitive volcanic rocks
in the western Mexican Volcanic Belt. Can Mineral 35:473–500
Macdonald GA, Katsura T (1964) Chemical composition of Hawaiian
lavas. J Petrol 5:82–133
Márquez A, Oyarzu R, Doblas M, Verma SP (1999a) Alcalic (ocean-
island basalt type) and calc-alkaline volcanism in the Mexican
Volcanic Belt: a case for plume-related magmatism and propagating
rifting at an active margin? Geology 27:51–54
Márquez A, Verma SP, Anguita F, Oyarzun R, Brandle JL (1999b)
Tectonics and volcanism of Sierra Chichinautzin: extension at the
front of the Central Trans-Mexican Volcanic Belt. J Volcanol
Geotherm Res 93:125–150
Martin Del Pozzo AL (1982) Monogenetic volcanism in Sierra
Chichinautzin, Mexico. Bull Volcanol 45:9–24
Matchan E, Phillips D (2011) New 40Ar/39Ar ages for selected young
(<1 Ma) basalt flows of the Newer Volcanic Province, southeastern
Australia. Quaternary Geochronology 6:356–368
McDougall I, Harrison TM (1999) Geochronology and
thermochronology by the 40Ar/39Ar method, 2nd ed. Oxford
University Press, New York, 269 pp
Bull Volcanol (2013) 75:774
Mejia V, Böhnel H, Opdyke ND, Ortega-Rivera MA, Lee JKW, Aranda-
Gómez JJ (2005) Paleosecular variation and time-averaged field
recorded in late Pliocene-Holocene lava flows from Mexico.
Geochem Geophys Geosyst 6:1–19
Meriggi L, Macías JL, Tommasini S, Capra L, Conticelli S (2008)
Heterogeneous magmas of the Quaternary Sierra Chichinautzin
volcanic field (central Mexico): the role of an amphibole-bearing
mantle and magmatic evolution processes. Revista Mexicana de
Ciencias Geológicas 25:197–216
Mooser F (1963) Historia tectónica de la Cuenca de México. Boletin de la
Asociación Mexicana de Geólogos Petroleros 15:239–245
Mooser F, Nairn AEM, Negendank JFW (1974) Paleomagnetic investi-
gations of the Tertiary and Quaternary igneous rocks: VIII. A
Paleomagnetic and petrologic study of volcanics of the Valley of
Mexico. Geologische Rundschau 63:451–483
Osete ML, Ruíz-Martínez VC, Caballero MC, Galindo C, Urrutia-
Fucugauchi J, Tarling HD (2000) Southward migration of continen-
tal volcanic activity in the Sierra de Las Cruces, Mexico: paleomag-
netic and radiometric evidence. Tectonophysics 318:201–215
Ownby SE, Lange RA, Hall CM (2008) The eruptive history of the
Mascota volcanic field, western Mexico: age and volume constraints
on the origin of andesite among a diverse suite of lamprophyric and
cal-alkaline lavas. J Volcanol Geotherm Res 177:1077–1091
Ownby SE, Lange RA, Hall CM, Delgado-Granados H (2011) Origin of
andesite in the deep crust and eruption rates in the Tancítaro-Nueva Italia
region of the central Mexican arc. Geol Soc Am Bull 123:274–294
Pardo M, Suárez G (1995) Shape of the subducted Rivera and Cocos
plates in southern Mexico: seismic and tectonic implications. J
Geophys Res 100:12357–12373
Renne PR, Mundil R, Balco G, Min K, Ludwig K (2010) Joint determi-
nation of 40K decay constants and teh 40Ar*/40K for the Fish Canyon
sanidine standard and improved accuracy for 40Ar/39Ar geochronol-
ogy. Geochim Cosmochim Acta 74:5349–5367
Rodríguez-Elizarrarás SR, Morales-Barrera W, Layer PW, González-
Mercado E (2010) A quaternary monogenetic volcanic field in the
Xalapa region, eastern Trans-Mexican volcanic belt: geology, dis-
tribution, and morphology of the volcanic vents. J Volcanol
Geotherm Res 197:149–166
Schaaf P, Stimac J, Siebe C, Macías JL (2005) Geochemical evidence for
mantle origin and crustal processes in volcanic rocks from
Popocatépetl and surrounding monogenetic volcanoes, central
Mexico. J Petrol 46:1243–1282
Sheth HC, Torres-Alvarado IS, Verma SP (2002) What is the “Calc-
alkaline rock series”? International Geology Review 44:686–701
Siebe C, Rodríguez-Lara V, Schaaf P, Abrams M (2004a) Geochemistry,
Sr-Nd isotope composition, and tectonic setting of Holocene Pelado,
Guespalapa, and Chichinautzin scoria cones, south of Mexico City. J
Volcanol Geotherm Res 130:197–226
Siebe C, Rodríguez-Lara V, Schaaf P, Abrams M (2004b) Radiocarbon
ages of Holocene Pelado, Guespalapa, and Chichinautzin scoria
cones, south of Mexico City: implications for archaelogy and future
hazards. Bull Volcanol 66:203–225
Siebe C, Arana-Salinas L, Abrams M (2005) Geology and radiocarbon
ages of Tláloc, Tlacotenco, Cuauhtzin, Hijo del Cuauhtzin, Teuhtli,
and Ocusacayo monogenetic volcanoes in the central part of the
Sierra Chchicnautzin, México. J Volcanol Geotherm Res 141:225–
243
Straub SM, Gómez-Tuena A, Zellmer GF, Espinasa-Perena R, Stuart FM,
Cai MY, Langmuir CH, Martin Del Pozzo AL, Mesko GT (2013)
The processes of melt differentiation in arc volcanic rocks: Insights
from OIB-type arc magmas in Central Mexican Volcanic Belt. J
Petrol 54:665–701
Sun S, McDonough W (1989) Chemical and isotopic systematics of
oceanic basalts: implications for mantle compositions and processes.
In: Saunders, A., Norry, M., (Eds.), Magmatism in ocean basins:
Geological Society of London, Special Publication 42:313–345
Bull Volcanol (2013) 75:774
Todt W, Cliff RA, Hanser A, Hofmann AW (1993) Evaluation of
202
Pb–205Pb double spike for high-precision lead isotope analysis.
In: Basu A, Hart S (eds) Earth processes: reading the isotopic code.
American Geophysical Union, Washington, D.C.. doi:10.1029/
GM095p0429
Todt W, Cliff RA, Hanser A, Hofmann AW (1996) Evaluation of a
202
Pb–205Pb double spike for high-precision lead isotope analysis.
In: Basu A. and Hart S. (eds), Earth processes: reading the isotopic
code. American Geophysical Union geophysical Monograph, 95,
429–437
UNAM, CENAPRED Seismology Group (1995) The Milpa Alta earth-
quake of January 21, 1995. Geofisica Internacional 34:335–362
Verma SP (2000) Geochemistry of the subducted Cocos plate and the
origin of subduction-unrelated mafic volcanism at the volcanic front
of the central Mexican Volcanic Belt. In: Delgado, H., Aguirre-Díaz,
G., Stock, J.M., (Eds), Cenozoic tectonics and volcanism of Mexico:
Geological Society of America, Special Publication 334:195–222
Page 25 of 25, 774
Wadge G (1984) Comparison of volcanic production rates and subduction
rates in the Lesser Antilles and Central America. Geology 12:555–558
Walker JA (1981) Petrogenesis of lavas from cinder cone fields behind the
volcanic front of Central America. Journal of Geology 89:721–739
Wallace PJ, Carmichael ISE (1999) Quaternary volcanism near the Valley
of Mexico: implications for subduction zone magmatism and the
effects of crustal thickness variations on primitive magma compo-
sitions. Contribution to Mineralogy and Petrology 135:291–314
Wijbrans J, Schneider B, Kuiper K, Calvari S, Branca S, De Beni E,
Norini G, Corsaro RA, Miraglia L (2011) 40Ar/39Ar geochronolo-
gy of Holocene basalts; example from Stromboli, Italy. Quaternary
Geochronology 6:223–232
Zindler A, Hart SR (1986) Chemical geodynamics. Annu Rev Earth
Planet Sci 14:493–571
Zindler A, Staudigel H, Batiza R (1984) Isotope and trace element
geochemistry of young Pacific seamounts: implications for the scale
of upper mantle heterogeneity. Earth Planet Sci Lett 70:175–195