LETTERS

PUBLISHED ONLINE: 30 JUNE 2013 | DOI: 10.1038/NGEO1855

Subsidence at southern Andes volcanoes induced

by the 2010 Maule, Chile earthquake
M. E. Pritchard1 *, J. A. Jay1 , F. Aron1 , S. T. Henderson1 and L. E. Lara2

Large earthquakes provoke unrest in volcanic areas hundreds 33

of kilometres away from their epicentre. For example, earth- Coseismic
Santiago
quakes can induce ground deformation1 , thermal anomalies2 , slip (m) Ref. 23
20
additional earthquakes1 , hydrological changes3 or eruptions48
in volcanic regions. Two earthquakes in the Chilean subduction 34 0
zone, in 1906 and 1960, triggered eruptions in the Andean
southern volcanic zone within one year9 , yet no significant Caldera del Atuel* a

eruptions in the past three years are clearly associated with Tinguiririca*
b

Latitude ( S)
the 2010 Mw 8.8 Maule, Chile earthquake. We use satellite 35
PlanchonPeteroa c
Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar (InSAR) and night-
time thermal infrared data to analyse subtle changes in ground Cerro Azul*
Calabozos*

deformation and thermal activity at volcanoes in the south- 2010 Mw 8.8

ern volcanic zone since 2010. We document unprecedented
subsidence of up to 15 cm in five volcanic areas within weeks
of the earthquake, but no detectable thermal changes. We
suggest that the deformation is related to coseismic release
of fluids from hydrothermal systems documented at three of
the five subsiding regions10,11 . The depth and shape of these
hydrothermal reservoirs can also be constrained by our de-
formation data, implying that coseismic volcano subsidence
could be used to prospect for geothermal resources. Similar
subsidence observed at Japanese volcanoes following the 2011
Tohoku earthquake12 suggests this phenomenon is widespread.
We have processed Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar
(InSAR) images, primarily from the Advanced Land Observing
Satellite (ALOS) satellite, as well as nighttime thermal infrared data
from Advanced Spaceborne Thermal Emission and Reflection Ra-
diometer (ASTER) and Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectrometer
(MODIS) sensors spanning the Maule earthquake for all of the
stratovolcanoes in the Andean Southern Volcanic Zone active in
the past 10,000 years (about 65; refs 11,13,14). We remove the
deformation effects of the 2010 earthquake from the interferograms
to concentrate on local deformation near the volcanoes. With the
small number of usable scenes due to snow cover, ionospheric, and
tropospheric noise, we estimate that we could detect deformation
>5 cm in single interferograms.
We observe consistent patterns of ground subsidence from mul-
tiple independent interferograms in five volcanic areas (Figs 13),
within the 400 km long latitude range spanned by the rupture of the
Maule earthquake. The areas are, from north to south11,13 : Caldera
del Atuel, in Argentina, and Tinguiririca, Calabozos Caldera, Cerro
Azul, and Nevados de Chilln, all in Chile. Three of these volcanoes
have had historic eruptions and all of them have either documented
fumaroles10,11 , hot springs, or thermal anomalies15 . Deformation
is only observed in interferograms that span the earthquake and
no deformation is observed at these volcanoes during the years
before or after the earthquake (dates of available interferograms
San Pedro-Pellado
36 Laguna del Maule
Nevado de Longavi
LOS displacement
d
Nevados de Chillan* (cm)
37
15 0 15
75 74 73 72 71 70 69
Longitude ( W)
Figure 1 | Slip from the Maule earthquake23 and several interferogram
stacks showing ground subsidence in volcanic areas. Black boxes labelled
a-d are shown in close-up in Fig. 2. Signals in the interferograms outside of
the volcanic areas (for example, near Santiago) could be due to residual
atmospheric effects, incomplete removal of the earthquake signal or other
localized signals from coseismic shaking or anthropogenic effects. The red
barbed line is the trench and the red triangles show volcanoes active in the
Holocene11 . LOS, line of sight.
are shown in Supplementary Information). We do not observe
any temporal evolution in the subsidence in the few SAR images
available after the earthquake.
The deformation zones are all oriented approximately north
south, are 1530 km long and 1015 km wide, and involve a
maximum of about 15 cm of displacement in the satellite line-of-
sight (Supplementary Information). For Tinguiririca, Calabozos,
and Cerro Azul, the centre of deformation is offset from Holocene
eruptive vents. Yet, at least at Calabozos, the deformation pattern
is similar to the shape of the Pleistocene collapse caldera with
the maximum deformation near the Colorado hotsprings10 . No
measurable localized coseismic deformation is found at numerous
other volcanoes that are known to be currently or recently active
(Supplementary Information).
We examined satellite nighttime thermal infrared data from the
MODIS and ASTER instruments at the five subsiding volcanoes
during the weeks before and after the earthquake. Although

1 Departmentof Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York 14853, USA, 2 Servicio Nacional de Geologa y Minera, Volcano
Hazards Program, Santiago 8320119, Chile. *e-mail: pritchard@cornell.edu

NATURE GEOSCIENCE | ADVANCE ONLINE PUBLICATION | www.nature.com/naturegeoscience 1

2013 Macmillan Publishers Limited. All rights reserved.
LETTERS NATURE GEOSCIENCE DOI: 10.1038/NGEO1855

a 34.5 b
Caldera del Atuel LOS Tinguiririca
displacement (cm)

10 5 0 5
S
LO B
A
34.8

34.6
Latitude ( S)

Latitude ( S)
A 34.9
B

34.7

35.0
10 km S
10 km LO

70.1 70.0 69.9 70.5 70.4 70.3

Longitude ( W) Longitude ( W)

c d
Calabozos and Cerro Azul Nevados de Chillan

35.3
36.8

E
35.4
Latitude ( S)

Latitude ( S)

36.9
C D E
35.5

S
35.6 LO
37.0
LO
S 10 km
10 km

70.8 70.7 70.6 70.5 71.5 71.4 71.3

Longitude ( W) Longitude ( W)

Figure 2 | Volcanic ground subsidence observed in interferogram stacks spanning the earthquake (with earthquake effects removed). We assume the
ground displacement is of short duration compared to the interferogram time span, so we compute the stack by summing the interferograms and dividing
by the number of measurements in the stack for each pixel. a, Caldera del Atuel is listed as a caldera in catalogues11,13 , but is not well documented, except
for potentially active volcanoes such as Overo11,13 . Four interferograms from path 110 (see dates in Supplementary Information). b, Tinguiririca and
c, Calabozos and Cerro Azul from a five interferogram stack from path 112. d, Nevados de Chilln from a three interferogram stack of path 114.

this thermal analysis is limited by the infrequency of ASTER
acquisitions and the low spatial resolution of MODIS, we do not
find any enhancement in thermal activity using these datasets
(Supplementary Information).
Unlike after the 1960 Chile earthquake16 , there is no evidence
for multiple volcanic eruptions in the weeks to months after the
2010 earthquake. The best case for minor triggered eruptions is
Planchn-Peteroa, which since late 2010 has had weak vulcanian
activity11 . On the other hand, new non-eruptive fumarolic
activity was documented three days after the earthquake at
Nevados de Chilln17 (although this activity is not obvious in
available satellite thermal images, see Supplementary Information).
Increased seismic and fumarolic activity was also noted at the
two most active volcanoes in Chile (Llaima and Villarrica18 , even
though they are outside the rupture zone), as well as at Uturuncu
volcano 1,600 km away19 .
Some have classified eruptions within three years and less than
1,500 km of an earthquake as triggered if that volcano erupted rarely
during the 50 years before the earthquake7,8 . By this criteria, the
eruptions of Cordn Caulle (which started in June 2011, about
500 km away at 40.5 S) and Cerro Hudson (in October 2011,
approximately 900 km distant at 45.9 S; ref 11) would be triggered.
We find a region of possible uplift at Cordn Caulle, spanning about
5 km, with a magnitude of 10 cm triggered by the earthquake, but no
other measurable deformation between the earthquake and March
2011 (Supplementary Information). The relation between this uplift
and the eruption is unclear because they occurred in different
locations and there was a 15 month time separation between the
deformation and eruption. There is no evidence for new surface
deformation at Cerro Hudson in response to the earthquake
or changes in thermal activity at either volcano (Supplementary
Information). Both Cordn Caulle and Cerro Hudson were

2 NATURE GEOSCIENCE | ADVANCE ONLINE PUBLICATION | www.nature.com/naturegeoscience

2013 Macmillan Publishers Limited. All rights reserved.
NATURE GEOSCIENCE DOI: 10.1038/NGEO1855 LETTERS
Caldera del Atuel profile AA Tinguiririca profile BB
5,000 4,000
4
4 3,500
2
2

LOS deformation (cm)

LOS deformation (cm)
0 3,000
4,000 0

Elevation (m)
Elevation (m)
2 2,500
4 2
2,000
6 4
Topography Topography 1,500
8 100402100215 (p110) 3,000 6 100321100203 (p112)
101003080210 (p110) 101020080227 (p111)
101020080227 (p111)
8 100321080129 (p112) 1,000
10 101003080327 (p110) 101222080315 (p112)
100304080227 (p111) 100304080227 (p111)
12 100402080210 (p110) 10 101020080413 (p111) 500
101020080413 (p111) 101222080430 (p112)
110120080413 (p111) 101222100203 (p112)
14 2,000 12 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Distance along profile AA (km) Distance along profile BB (km)

Cerro Azul profile CC Calabozos profile DD

4 3,000 3,000
4
2
2 2,800
LOS deformation (cm)

LOS deformation (cm)

0 0

Elevation (m)
Elevation (m)
2
2 2,600
4
2,500
4 6
2,400
8
6 10 Topography
100321080129 (p112)
Topography
100321080129 (p112) 12 100321100203 (p112)
101222080315 (p112)
2,200
8 100321100203 (p112) 100407100220 (p113)
101222080315 (p112) 14 101222080430 (p112)
100407100220 (p113) 101222100203 (p112)
10 2,000 2,000
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 0 5 10 15 20 25
Distance along profile CC (km) Distance along profile DD (km)

Nevados de Chillan profile EE

4 4,000
2
0
LOS deformation (cm)

2 3,000
Elevation (m)

4
6
8 2,000
Topography
100410100130 (t261)
10 100424080303 (p114)
100309070301 (p114)
12 100326080203 (p115)
100326100208 (p115)
110312080418 (p114)
14 1,000
0 5 10 15 20
Distance along profile EE (km)

Figure 3 | Interferogram and elevation profiles from the five subsiding volcanic areas. Dotted lines represent interferograms and dashed lines represent
elevation profiles. Location of profiles shown in Fig. 2.

deforming before the 2010 earthquake occurred, and the former was tension in the vicinity of the subsiding volcanoes (Fig. 4). The
seismically active11,20,21 , so any suggestion of triggering is equivocal. amount and spatial pattern of the tension depends on the particular
Before the Maule earthquake, the only volcano known to be model of earthquake slip that is used (Supplementary Information).
deforming in the latitude range of the earthquake rupture was However, several models show two loci of enhanced slip (Fig. 1)23,24 ,
the geothermally active Laguna del Maule21,22 . This is globally with a local minimum of tension near the Laguna del Maule system
one of the fastest deforming volcanoes without a recent eruption, (Fig. 4), perhaps consistent with the absence of response to the 2010
accumulating nearly 1 m of uplift between 2007 and 2011. Yet, no earthquake from this fast deforming system.
coseismic deformation is observed (Supplementary Information), Surface deformation triggered by distant earthquakes
nor did the deformation rate change as a result of the earthquake (>400 km) that is not obviously related to fault slip, has only been
between March 2010 and January 2011 (the date of the last reported at one volcanic area: Long Valley Caldera, California1 . The
acquired ALOS data in this region). Assuming a constant uplift Long Valley deformation was different from that observed in Chile
rate of 20 cm yr1 in the radar line of sight (LOS), a 46-day in several respectsthe magnitude was only tenths of a microstrain
interferogram (the shortest available for Laguna del Maule spanning and the spatial extent, although not well constrained, was probably
the earthquake) would show 2.5 cm of uplift. This uplift is not significantly smaller1 .
sufficient to cancel 5 cm to 15 cm of coseismic subsidence as Several mechanisms have been proposed to explain the earth-
seen at the other five subsiding volcanoes. Therefore, if Laguna quake triggered deformation at Long Valley and elsewhere. Of these,
del Maule had responded similarly to the earthquake, a subsidence we think that the most likely explanation in Chile is that coseismic
signal would have been detected. shaking and static stress change cause the release of hydrothermal
One possible explanation for the lack of deformation at Laguna fluids3 , increased streamflow3 and ground deformation (Fig. 5).
del Maule is the changing along-strike orientation of the coseismic To explain the observed subsidence, a reservoir in each volcanic
stress field. The Maule earthquake caused a region of eastwest area at 310 km depth would have to lose a volume of the order

NATURE GEOSCIENCE | ADVANCE ONLINE PUBLICATION | www.nature.com/naturegeoscience 3

2013 Macmillan Publishers Limited. All rights reserved.
LETTERS NATURE GEOSCIENCE DOI: 10.1038/NGEO1855

31 0 km
Normal stress ( n)
250 km
10
1 km 15 3
10
5
0
lts
l fau
iona
Reg
33
~3
0 km n
3 igratio
Caldera Fluid m
del Atuel

Tinguiririca
35
Latitude ( S)

1
MPa
Calabozos
Figure 5 | Conceptual diagram of the favoured mechanism of the
Laguna observed volcanic deformation triggered by the Maule earthquake. A
del Maule northsouth oriented magmatic/hydrothermal reservoir (blue) is beneath
Nevados the volcanic arc (black triangles) with primarily northsouth oriented faults
de Chilln
37 (black lines)28 . The reservoir empties as a result of the static or dynamic
stress from the earthquake and releases fluids or gas, causing subsidence
of the surface.

but the expected post-seismic response in Chile is uplift, not

3
39
Modelled
extensional
structure
76 74 72 70
Longitude ( W)
Figure 4 | Static normal stress change (1n ) from the modelled coseismic
slip23 calculated on optimally oriented extensional structures at 2.5 km
depth. The strike of these structures is orthogonal to the tensional or
minimum principal stress change vector (13 ) at each 30 30 km grid
element. The extensional structures could be a Mode I crack and/or a
normal fault (Supplementary Information). Areas of observed coseismic
ground subsidence are green triangles. The yellow triangle is Laguna del
Maule, which was deforming before and after the earthquake, but not
coseismically. Other volcanoes are black triangles11 and the trench is shown
as a barbed line.
of magnitude of 0.01 km3 (Supplementary Information), which is
not implausible considering the volume of increased streamflow
observed after other earthquakes3 . Streamflow is observed to in-
crease in rivers within the rupture area of the 2010 earthquake (Sup-
plementary Information), although the fluid contribution from
the volcanoes is not the only, or necessarily the primary source25 .
The lack of similar deformation at about twenty other volcanoes
within the latitude range of the earthquake rupture zone could
be related to having fewer hydrothermal fluids, the heterogeneous
nature of the coseismic stress field, or deformation below our
sensitivity threshold.
There are several other mechanisms that might have contributed
to the deformation, but that would require additional data or
modelling to confirm. Coseismic shaking could provoke the sudden
release of gas from a magma chamber, reducing its pressure
and causing surface subsidence. Such gas release should cause
enhanced fumarolic activity and elevated surface temperatures,
but no such elevated temperatures were detected by ASTER
or MODIS. But, with higher spatial and temporal resolution
thermal data, an enhanced thermal output might have been
detected. Poro-elastic deformation is observed after earthquakes26 ,
subsidence (Supplementary Information), and is not observed in
Chile or Japan12 . Alternatively, enhanced elastic deformation in
fluid-filled or mechanically weak volcanic zones (as seen in fault
zones27 ) could cause increased subsidence in volcanic areas. But
the magnitude of the deformation predicted using reasonable
elastic properties in a finite element model is smaller than
that observed by almost an order of magnitude (Supplementary
Information). Deformation from compaction and subsidence of
surficial volcanic deposits and induced aseismic fault slip is unlikely
(Supplementary Information).
A key observation for understanding the mechanism of
deformation is the approximately NS orientation. Although this
orientation is consistent with near vertical cracks being opened by
the earthquake or closed owing to the release of fluids (Fig. 4), the
deformation pattern is not caused primarily by this type of motion
on a single large crack (for example, a dyke opening or closing).
Instead, we hypothesize that the NS deformation orientation is
a long-term featurethe shape of the underlying hydrothermal
and/or magmatic system (Fig. 5) that may be controlled by the
primarily NS oriented faults in the region28 . These existing NS
volatile reservoirs were disturbed by the static and dynamic stress
change of the earthquake through the formation of numerous small
cracks suitably oriented with respect to the coseismic stress field or
increased permeability3 , allowing fluids to escape and causing NS
oriented subsidence. The deviations in the deformation patterns
from that predicted by the coseismic stress change could also be
controlled by these faults.
Although there are no Global Positioning System (GPS) or seis-
mic networks near the five volcanic regions in Chile, these networks
exist near some of the five volcanic regions in Japan that deformed
after the 2011 Mw 9.0 earthquake12 . The characteristic shapes and
magnitudes of the deformation in both South America and Japan
are comparable12 , such that similar processes may be occurring.
GPS observations close to two of the Japanese deforming volcanic
regions show that the deformation seems to be coseismic (and
only coseismic)12 . No increase in fumarolic activity was observed
in Japan12 , making gas release as the cause of deformation unlikely.
An increase in seismicity was seen only at one of the deforming
Japanese areas (unlike episodes of increased seismicity coincident
with ground deformation at Long Valley1 ) and other areas with
enhanced seismicity did not deform12 . Thus, the deformation was

4 NATURE GEOSCIENCE | ADVANCE ONLINE PUBLICATION | www.nature.com/naturegeoscience

2013 Macmillan Publishers Limited. All rights reserved.
NATURE GEOSCIENCE DOI: 10.1038/NGEO1855
mostly aseismicalthough an earthquake at Caldera del Atuel is
seen in the InSAR data (Supplementary Information).
The lack of clear triggered eruptions following the 2010
earthquake is not surprisingless than 1% of all explosive eruptions
are triggered in this way6 and other large earthquakes (1964
Alaska, 2004 Sumatra, and 2011 Japan12 ) had an absence of
triggered eruptions6 . Triggered eruptions are rare because the
volcanoes must be in a special, perhaps transient, metastable state
before the earthquake to provoke an eruption6,9 . Some of our
proposed mechanisms for the observed ground subsidence might
actually stabilize a volcano to eruption (for example, degassing
would reduce pressurization in a magma chamber), whereas others
might promote eruption (for example, emptying a hydrothermal
system would reduce the confining pressure below, enhancing
dyke formation29 ). Both cases require the presence of large NS
oriented magmatic and hydrothermal systems (some not previously
identified)a hypothesis that could be tested with the collection of
ground geophysical datasets.
Methods
Full details on the sources of data, as well as analysis and modelling methods are
included in the Supplementary Information.
Received 6 November 2012; accepted 16 May 2013;
published online 30 June 2013
References
1. Hill, D. & Prejean, S. in Treatise on Geophysics Vol. 4 (ed. Kanamori, H.)
257291 (Elsevier, 2007).
2. Donne, D. D., Harrris, A. J. L., Ripepe, M. & Wright, R. Earthquake-induced
thermal anomalies at active volcanoes. Geology 38, 771774 (2010).
3. Manga, M. & Wang, C-Y. in Treatise on Geophysics Vol. 4 (ed. Kanamori, H.)
293320 (Elsevier, 2007).
4. Darwin, C. R. On the connexion of certain volcanic phenomena in South
America: And on the formation of mountain chains and volcanos, as the effect
of the same power by which continents are elevated. Trans. J. Geol. Soc. Lond.
5, 601631 (1840).
5. Linde, A. T. & Sacks, I. S. Triggering of volcanic eruptions. Nature 395,
888890 (1998).
6. Manga, M. & Brodsky, E. Seismic triggering of eruptions in the far field:
Volcanoes and geysers. Ann. Rev. Earth Planet Sci. 34, 263291 (2006).
7. Walter, T. R. & Amelung, F. Volcanic eruptions following M 9 megathrust
earthquakes: Implications for the SumatraAndaman volcanoes. Geology 35,
539542 (2007).
8. Eggert, S. & Walter, T. R. Volcanic activity before and after large tectonic
earthquakes: Observations and statistical significance. Tectonophysics 471,
1426 (2009).
9. Watt, S. F. L., Pyle, D. M. & Mather, T. A. The influence of great earthquakes
on volcanic eruption rate along the Chilean subduction zone. Earth Planet. Sci.
Lett. 277, 399407 (2009).
10. Grunder, A. L., Thompson, J. M. & Hildreth, W. The hydrothermal system
of the Calabozos caldera, central Chilean Andes. J. Volc. Geotherm. Res. 32,
287298 (1987).
11. Siebert, L. & Simkin, T. Volcanoes of the world: An illustrated catalog of
Holocene volcanoes and their eruptions, www.volcano.si.edu (accessed 29
April 2013).
12. Takada, Y. & Fukushima, Y. Volcanic subsidence triggered by the 2011 Tohoku
earthquake in Japan. Nature Geosci. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/ngeo1857 (2013).
13. Gonzlez-Ferrn, O. Volcanes de Chile (Instituto Geografico Militar, 1995) (in
Spanish).
14. Lara, L. E., Orozco, G., Amigo, A. & Silva, C. Peligros Volcnicos de Chile
(Servicio Nacional de Geologa y Minera, Carta Geolgica de Chile, Serie
Geologa Ambiental, No. 13, p. 1 mapa escala 1:2.000.000, Santiago, 2011).
NATURE GEOSCIENCE | ADVANCE ONLINE PUBLICATION | www.nature.com/naturegeoscience
2013 Macmillan Publishers Limited. All rights reserved.
LETTERS
15. Jay, J. A. et al. in Remote Sensing of Volcanoes and Volcanic Processes: Integrating
Observation and Modelling (eds Pyle, D., Mather, T. A. & Biggs, J.) (Geological
Society of London, 2013) (in the press).
16. Lara, L. E., Moreno, H. & Naranjo, J. Rhyodacitic fissure eruption in southern
Andes, Chile (40.5 S) after the 1960 (Mw 9.5) Chilean earthquake: A structural
interpretation. J. Volcan. Geotherm. Res. 138, 127138 (2004).
17. Lupi, M. et al. Response of the Nevados de Chillan and Peteroa volcanoes,
Chile, to the 2010 M8.8 Maule earthquake (abstract). EGU Gen. Assem. 14,
EGU20121 (2012).
18. Mora-Stock, C. et al. Comparison of seismic activity for Llaima and Villarrica
volcanoes prior to and after the Maule 2010 earthquake. Int. J. Earth Sci. (in the
press, 2013).
19. Jay, J. A. et al. Shallow seismicity, triggered seismicity, and ambient noise
tomography at the long-dormant Uturuncu volcano, Bolivia. Bull. Volcanol.
74, 817837 (2012).
20. Pritchard, M. E. & Simons, M. An InSAR-based survey of volcanic deformation
in the southern Andes. Geophys. Res. Lett. 31, L15610 (2004).
21. Fournier, T., Pritchard, M. E. & Riddick, S. N. The frequency, duration, and
magnitude of subaerial volcano deformation events: New results from Latin
America and a global synthesis. Geochem. Geophys. Geosys. 11, Q01003 (2010).
22. Hildreth, W., Godoy, E., Fierstein, J. & Singer, B. Laguna del Maule Volcanic
Field: Eruptive History of a Quaternary Baslat to Rhyolite Distributed Volcanic
Field on the Rangecrest in Central Chile (Servicio Nacional de Geologa y
Minera Chile, 2010).
23. Lorito, S. et al. Limited overlap between the seismic gap and coseismic slip of
the great 2010 Chile earthquake. Nature Geosci. 4, 173177 (2011).
24. Vigny, C. et al. The 2010 Mw 8.8 Maule megathrust earthquake of central Chile,
monitored by GPS. Science 332, 14171421 (2011).
25. Mohr, C. H., Montgomery, D. R., Huber, A., Bronstert, A. & Iroum, A.
Streamflow response in small upland catchments in the Chilean coastal range
to the Mw 8.8 Maule earthquake on 27 February 2010. J. Geophys. Res. 117,
F02032 (2012).
26. Peltzer, G., Rosen, P. A., Rogez, F. & Hudnut, K. Poroelastic rebound
along the Landers 1992 earthquake surface rupture. J. Geophys. Res. 103,
3013130145 (1998).
27. Hearn, E. H. & Fialko, Y. Can compliant fault zones be used to measure
absolute stresses in the upper crust? J. Geophys. Res. 114, B04403 (2009).
28. Cembrano, J. & Lara, L. The link between volcanism and tectonics in the
southern volcanic zone of the Chilean Andes: A review. Tectonophysics 471,
96113 (2009).
29. Jellinek, A. M., Manga, M. & Saar, M. O. Did melting glaciers cause volcanic
eruptions in eastern California? Probing the mechanics of dike formation.
J. Geophys. Res. 109, B09206 (2004).
Acknowledgements
ALOS data were provided by JAXA, with access provided from the Alaska Satellite Facility
and NASA. ERS and ENVISAT SAR imagery was acquired as a Category 1 research
project from the European Space Agency. This work was partly supported by NASA grant
NNX08AT02G, issued through the Science Mission Directorates Earth Science Division.
J.A.J. and S.T.H. are supported by NASA graduate fellowships and F.A. is supported
by CONICYT Beca Chile. We thank M. Welch, A. K. Melkonian and N. Button for
help with data analysis and Y. Fukushima, P. Sruoga, J. A. Naranjo, J. Clavero, C. Mohr,
C-Y. Wang, E. Brodsky, M. Manga, B. Barnhart and F. Delgado for comments.
Author contributions
M.E.P. oversaw the InSAR data analysis and wrote the paper with input from all authors.
J.A.J. analysed the thermal and streamflow data and modelled the InSAR data, F.A. did
the coseismic stress change modelling, S.T.H. did finite element modelling, and L.E.L.
contributed field observations.
Additional information
Supplementary information is available in the online version of the paper. Reprints and
permissions information is available online at www.nature.com/reprints. Correspondence
and requests for materials should be addressed to M.E.P.
Competing financial interests
The authors declare no competing financial interests.
5