Table 1: Physical characteristics of selected basaltic volcanic fields

Volcanic field Basaltic vents Silicic vents and vent complexes Area km2 Age range Ma lt

vents/yr

Data Sources
Eifel Volcanic Field, Germany 323 7 phonolite centers 1000 0.7-0.01 5 x 10-4 Schminke, et al., 1983, in: Plateau Uplift, K. Fuchs, ed., Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 139-150.
Camargo, Mexico 308 0 2500 4.5-1.6 1 x 10-4 Luhr et al., 1997, Eos, Trans. Am. Geophys. Un., 78: F843.
TransMexican Volcanic Belt, Mexico 1096 120 shields and stratovolcanoes 40000 3.5-0 3 x 10-4 Hasenaka and Carmichael, 1987, J. Petrol., 28:241-269; Connor, 1990, J. Geophys. Res. 95: 19,395-19,405.
Kluycheskoy Group, Russia 300 12 composite

volcanoes

2500 Quaternary 2 x 10-4 Fedotov et al., 1991, in: Active Volcanoes of Kamchatka, S.A. Fedotov and Yu. P. Masurenkow, ed., Nauka Press: 275-279.
Springerville, AZ, USA (Figure 1) 409 0 3000 2.1-0.3 2 x 10-4 Condit and Connor, 1996, Geol. Soc. Am., Bull. 108:1,225-1,241.
San Francisco, AZ, USA (Figure 8) 606 8 large dome complexes 5000 5.6-0 1 x 10-4 Tanaka et al.,1986, Geol. Soc. Am., Bull. 97: 129-141; Conway et al. ,1998, Geol., 26: 655-658.
Coso, CA, USA 54 38 small domes 1200 2.0-0 3 x 10-5 Duffield et al., 1980, J. Geophys. Res.85: 2,381-2,404; Bacon, 1982, Geol., 10: 65-69.
Pancake, NV, USA

(Figure 6)

75 0 2500 6-0.3 1 x 10-5 Foland and Bergman, 1992, Third Intl. Conf. High-Level Radioactive Waste Manage. Am. Nucl. Soc., 2,366-2,371; Scott and Trask, 1971, U.S. Geol. Sur. Prof. Pap. 599-I. 22pp.
Big Pine, CA, USA (Figure 7) 24 1 small dome 500 1.2-0.1 2 x 10-5 Omerod et al., 1991, Contrib. Mineral. Petrol. 108: 305-317; Turrin and Gillespe, 1986, Geol. Soc. Am., Abs. With Prog.18(6): 414.
Cima, CA, USA (Figure 3) 70 0 150 4.5-0.01 8 x 10-5 Dohrenwend et al., 1986, Geol. Soc. Am., Bull. 97: 421-427; Turrin et al., 1985, Isochron/West 44: 9-16.
Yucca Mountain, NV, USA (Figure 2) 30 0 1200 3.4-0.1 1 x 10-5 Connor and Hill, J. Geophys. Res., 100: 10,107- 10,125.