Whole-Rock Analyses of Core Samples from the 1988 

Drilling of Kilauea Iki Lava Lake, Hawaii

By Rosalind Tuthill Helz and Joseph E. Taggart, Jr.

Open-File Report 2010–1093

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey
ii

U.S. Department of the Interior

KEN SALAZAR, Secretary

U.S. Geological Survey

Marcia K. McNutt, Director

U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia 2010

For product and ordering information:

World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod

Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS

For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth,

its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment:

World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov

Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS

Suggested citation:

Helz, R.T., and Taggart, J.E., Jr., 2010, Whole-rock analyses of core samples from the 1988 drilling of Kilauea Iki lava 

lake, Hawaii: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2010–1093, 47 p.

Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply 

endorsement by the U.S. Government.

Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual 

copyright owners to reproduce any copyrighted material contained within this report.
iii

Contents

Introduction...................................................................................................................................................................................... 1

Background and Previous Work ...................................................................................................................................................... 1

Sampling Procedures – 1988 Core.................................................................................................................................................. 4

Analytical Methods .......................................................................................................................................................................... 5

Description of the Analytical Tables................................................................................................................................................. 5

Quality of the Analyses.................................................................................................................................................................... 7

Cross-Check with Classical Analyses.......................................................................................................................................... 7

Coherence of the New Analyses: Summations ......................................................................................................................... 11

Coherence of the New Analyses: Element Ratios ..................................................................................................................... 14

Chemical Variations in Kilauea Iki Samples .................................................................................................................................. 16

Results for CO2 and H2O±......................................................................................................................................................... 21

Discussion ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 22

Foundered Crust Versus the Vertical Zonation Pattern ............................................................................................................. 26

Summary ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 27

References Cited........................................................................................................................................................................... 28

Figures

1. Index map of the summit area of Kilauea Volcano............................................................................................................ 2

2. Plan view of the post-1959 surface of Kilauea Iki lava lake............................................................................................... 2

3. Cross section of Kilauea Iki lava lake taken along the north-south line of closely spaced 

leveling stations shown in figure 2.............................................................................................................................. 3

4. (a–j) Whole-rock classical values of major oxides plotted against XRF values for each oxide, 

for data in table A4..................................................................................................................................................... 9

5. Frequency distribution of summations for XRF analyses of drill core from Kilauea Iki 

from tables A1–A3.................................................................................................................................................... 13

6. Frequency distribution of summations for classical (gravimetric) analyses of drill core 

from Kilauea Iki lava lake ......................................................................................................................................... 13

7. Analytical summations plotted against bulk MgO content for Kilauea Iki data in tables A1–A3...................................... 14

8. (a) Whole-rock P2O5 plotted against TiO2 for analyses in tables A1–A3. (b) Whole-rock P2O5 plotted 

against K2O for analyses in tables A1–A3................................................................................................................ 15

9. (a–l) Oxide–oxide plots showing the compositional variation of samples described in this report 

as a function of their MgO contents.......................................................................................................................... 17

10. MgO content (weight percent) of olivine-phyric core versus depth below the surface of Kilauea Iki 

lava lake, after figure 3 in Helz (2009)...................................................................................................................... 25

Tables

1. Kilauea Iki samples for which the classical analysis was rechecked by XRF for cause, 

with suspect elements indicated................................................................................................................................. 7

2. Comparison of the limits of error for classical analysis, average difference and range observed

between XRF and classical analyses in cross-check batch, with reproducibility of XRF 

major-element analyses for rock standard BHVO-1................................................................................................... 8

3. Differentiation processes in Kilauea Iki lava lake (after table 1 in Helz, 2009) ................................................................ 23
iv

Appendix Tables

A1. X-ray fluorescence analyses of core from Kilauea Iki drill hole KI88-1................................................................................... 30

A2. X-ray fluorescence analyses of core from Kilauea Iki drill hole KI88-2................................................................................... 35

A3. X-ray fluorescence analyses of samples from drill hole KI79-1, plus the 1959 and 1960 

eruptions of Kilauea.......................................................................................................................................................... 38

A4. X-ray fluorescence analyses of core compared with gravimetric analyses:

a. Drill hole KI67-1 ............................................................................................................................................................ 39

b. Drill hole KI67-2 and K179-5 ........................................................................................................................................ 40

c. Drill hole KI67-3 ............................................................................................................................................................ 41

d. Drill hole KI75-1 ............................................................................................................................................................ 42

e. Drill hole KI79-1 ............................................................................................................................................................ 43

f. Drill hole KI79-3 ............................................................................................................................................................ 45

g. Drill hole KI81-1 and KI81-2 ......................................................................................................................................... 47
Whole-Rock Analyses of Core Samples from the

1988 Drilling of Kilauea Iki Lava Lake, Hawaii

By Rosalind Tuthill Helz and Joseph E. Taggart, Jr.

Introduction

This report presents and evaluates 64 major-element analyses of previously 

unanalyzed Kilauea Iki drill core, plus three samples from the 1959 and 1960 eruptions of 

Kilauea, obtained by X-ray fluorescence (XRF) analysis during the period 1992 to 1995. All 

earlier major-element analyses of Kilauea Iki core, obtained by classical (gravimetric) 

analysis, were reported and evaluated in Helz and others (1994). In order to assess how well 

the newer data compare with this earlier suite of analyses, a subset of 24 samples, which had 

been analyzed by classical analysis, was reanalyzed using the XRF technique; those results 

are presented and evaluated in this report also. The XRF analyses have not been published 

previously. This report also provides an overview of how the chemical variations observed in 

these new data fit in with the chemical zonation patterns and petrologic processes inferred in 

earlier studies of Kilauea Iki.

Background and Previous Work

Kilauea Iki lava lake formed during the 1959 eruption of Kilauea Volcano, when lava 

ponded in the previously existing Kilauea Iki pit crater, located just east of the summit caldera 

(fig. 1). The eruption was closely observed and has been extensively documented (Richter and 

others, 1970; Eaton and others, 1987). Many samples of lava and pumice were collected 

during the eruption, and 23 samples of this material were analyzed and described by Murata 

and Richter (1966). Wright (1973) and Helz (1987a) have looked at the role of magma mixing 

during this eruption, using the bulk chemical data of Murata and Richter (1966) and Helz and 

others (1994), plus phase chemistry obtained using the electron microprobe.

Kilauea Iki lava lake remained accessible throughout the period of its cooling and 

crystallization (from 1959 to the mid-1990s) and so has been drilled repeatedly. The earliest 

core, recovered in 1960–1962, was described by Richter and Moore (1966), who presented 20 

major-element analyses of the core, plus petrographic and modal data. Subsequent drilling 

was carried out in 1967, 1975, 1976, 1979, 1981, and 1988. The locations of the resulting drill 

holes are shown in plan view in figure 2 and in cross section in figure 3. Further details on the 

drilling, plus petrographic logs of the cores, are given in Helz and others (1984) for the 1967–

1979 cores, in Helz and Wright (1983) for the 1981 cores, and in Helz (1993) for the 1988 

cores.
2

Figure 1. Index map of the summit area of Kilauea Volcano. All historic lava lakes are shown in black.

The prehistoric Makaopuhi lava lake is shown in a stippled pattern. The historic lava lakes in Aloi, Alae,

and Makaopuhi pit craters are now covered by lavas from the Mauna Ulu satellite shield, the summit of 

which is indicated by the “X.”

 

Figure 2. Plan view of the post-1959 surface of Kilauea Iki lava lake. The lake surface has a network 

of leveling stations, shown by the small dots. Larger dots indicate the locations of holes drilled from 

1967 to 1981. The stars mark the locations of the two holes drilled in 1988.
3

Figure 3. Cross section of Kilauea Iki lava lake taken along the north-south line of closely spaced 

leveling stations shown in figure 2. The present surface of the lava lake and two pre-eruption profiles are 

shown. The two pre-eruption profiles are taken from two different topographic maps: one (at 1:2000) is 

based on air photos taken in 1948; the other (at 1:5000) is based on air photos taken in 1955, as 

indicated. Both maps were prepared by R. Jordan, USGS, Flagstaff, AZ. The present position of the 

lake bottom has been intersected only at the location of drill hole KI79-5 and lies 20–23 m deeper here 

and across the flat central floor than the pre-eruptive topography would suggest (see discussion in Helz, 

1993). Vertical exaggeration is 4:1.

The drill holes are shown as vertical lines projected onto this cross section. Several of the drilling 

locations have been reoccupied more than once; spacing between closely spaced holes is not to scale 

in this figure. Only the deepest hole in each cluster has been labeled, for clarity. The arrows mark the 

position of the thermal maximum (TMAX) in 1979, 1981, and 1988 as determined by analyzing glass in 

quenched, partially molten drill core using the glass geothermometer of Helz and Thornber (1987).
4

These cores have been studied extensively, using petrography and microprobe analysis 

of individual phases, as well as chemical analysis of bulk samples. The results of studies 

based on the 1967–1981 cores were reported in Helz (1980; 1987a, b), Helz and Thornber 

(1987), Helz and others (1989), Helz and others (1994), and Barth and others (1994). More 

recently, Kilauea Iki samples have been used in a range of isotopic and trace element studies, 

including Teng and others (2007, 2008) and Pitcher and others (2009). The first paper to make 

use of the analytical results for the 1988 core is Helz (2009).

Sampling Procedures – 1988 Core

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) drilled two holes in 1988, as shown in figures 2 

and 3. Because Kilauea Iki lava lake had reached an advanced state of crystallization by that 

time, it was possible to drill completely through the partially molten lens in the middle of the 

lake and into the lower crust (Helz, 1993), although neither hole passed through the entire 

lake. These cores extend to greater depths than any obtained earlier and provide the first 

significant sampling of the lower crust (as defined by the position of the maximum 

temperature encountered, see fig. 3) of the lava lake.

The 1988 drill core was sampled for analysis, generally at intervals of 10 feet (ft; 

3.0 meters (m)), to supplement analytical coverage obtained and reported by Helz and others 

(1994). Accordingly, core KI88-1, from 30 ft (8.8 m) south of a location previously drilled in 

1967 and 1975 (cores KI67-1 and KI75-2), was extensively sampled from 40 ft down to the 

bottom of the hole at 376 ft (12.2 to 114.6 m), and 38 samples were analyzed.

KI88-2 (see fig. 3 for location) was drilled at the hottest known part of the lake in 

order to sample the widest possible partially molten interval available in 1988. This hole is 

near a cluster of earlier holes that was shown by glass geothermometry (Helz and Thornber, 

1987) to be hotter than any other section sampled. Earlier cores from this cluster were 

examined petrographically and by microprobe analysis but were not submitted for whole-rock 

chemical analysis. Core from KI88-2 was sampled to supplement analytical data available 

from the main cluster (KI67-3, KI75-1, KI79-3, KI81-1) 104 ft (31.7 m ) to the south and 

from the single drill hole KI79-1, 93 ft (28.3 m) to the north. Sampling of KI88-2 began at 

about 150 ft (45.7 m) and continued to the bottom of the hole at 355 ft (108.2 m) with a total 

of 24 samples analyzed.

Analytical samples were cut from the core with a diamond saw blade, using water as 

the coolant. All subsequent sample preparation (grinding, splitting) was performed in the 

analytical laboratories of the USGS in Reston, VA, as described in Taylor and Theodorakos 

(2002). The material selected was in most cases intended to be representative of the 10-ft 

interval from which it came. In places where the core was visibly heterogeneous, containing 

internal differentiates [segregation veins, vorbs (vertical, olivine-rich bodies), and melt 

chimneys or speckled-rock plumes (see discussion in Helz, 1993)], care was taken that the 

analytical sample be uniform in character, either completely normal or consisting only of the 

variant rock type.
5

Analytical Methods

The new analyses presented here were obtained by X-ray fluorescence (XRF) analysis in 

the USGS analytical laboratory in Denver, CO, between 1992 and 1995, using the method 

described in Taggart and others (1987) and Taggart and Siems (2002). The analyses presented 

here for jobs CJ12 and CJ13 include the complete “X-ray support package” consisting of 

determinations for FeO, CO2 and H2O±, obtained following the methods outlined in Jackson and 

others (1987). The results for job WC69 include FeO but not determinations of CO2 and H2O±.

In addition to the above, the analyses include determinations for Cl, F, and Cr. Cl was 

analyzed using the selective ion electrode (SIE) method outlined in Jackson and others (1987), 

while F was analyzed using the SIE method of Kirschenbaum (1988). The Cr analyses in jobs 

CJ12 and CJ13 were obtained by inductively coupled plasma-atomic emission spectrometry (ICPAES) following the method described in Lichte and others (1987), while Cr in job WC69 was 

obtained by XRF. Analytical results for these three elements were obtained in laboratories in 

Reston, VA, and Menlo Park, CA. 

Many analytical chemists of the USGS contributed to the three jobs that make up this 

dataset. The major-element XRF data were produced by J.S. Mee and D.F. Siems. The “X-ray 

support package” work plus the Cl and F determinations were performed by M.G. Kavulak, C.J. 

Skeen, J.R. Gillison, H. Smith, T.R. Peacock, and J.H. Bullock. The Cr analyses were done by 

M.W. Doughten and J. Kent. 

As mentioned above, all earlier whole-rock analyses for core samples from Kilauea Iki or 

pumices from the 1959 eruption were analyzed by classical, gravimetric techniques (Peck, 1964; 

Kirschenbaum, 1983). When it became necessary to switch to the XRF method for the 1988 core, 

there was some concern that the new data might not be consistent with the 176 analyses in the 

earlier dataset. An attempt to cross-check the results of the newer technique against the old, to see 

if there were any offsets or biases between the two, was made in early 1992. At that time a 

selection of 24 previously analyzed powders, from many earlier jobs and including the work of all 

of the chemists involved in the classical analyses, was submitted to J.E. Taggart, Jr., for 

redetermination of the major elements by XRF. These samples were not reanalyzed for FeO, CO2, 

H2O∀, Cl, F, and Cr, as the sole purpose of the resubmission was to cross-calibrate the XRF and 

gravimetric major element data.

Description of the Analytical Tables

The analytical tables are presented at the end of this report. Tables A1 and A2 contain all 

analyses from cores KI88-1 and KI88-2, respectively. Table A3 contains analyses of two fill-in 

samples from drill core KI79-1, intended to supplement earlier sampling, plus a few eruption 

samples. Of these, Iki-3 from the 1959 eruption has never been analyzed before, while Iki-14 was 

represented in Murata and Richter (1966) by a “rapid-rock” analysis. The last sample included is 

KP-16, which erupted on January 29, 1960, and was analyzed to fill in a gap in the time series for 

the 1960 Puna eruption at Kilauea. The results of cross-checking the XRF major-element analyses 

with earlier classical analyses are shown in tables A4a–g, which include both analyses side by 

side, to facilitate comparison.
6

In all tables, core samples are identified by a field number of the form “KI88-1-41.4”.

This example designates a sample from core KI88-1, from a depth of 41.4 ft (12.52 m) below 

the surface of the lava lake. The “lab number” is an individual number assigned to the sample 

for purposes of sample control within the USGS analytical laboratory system. The job number 

shows which batches of samples were analyzed as a group. The three analytical jobs presented 

here are CJ12, CJ13, and WC69. Other job numbers indicate older analyses for various 

samples that are included in these tables for purposes of comparison with the new data.

The major-element data in tables A1–A3 are reported to three significant figures, and 

the results on additional minor elements are reported to two decimal places, as given in the 

analytical reports. A dash in the table indicates that the particular element was not determined 

for that sample. Where an element was analyzed for but not detected, the amount is indicated 

to be less than some limit (typically <0.01). In table A4, the classical analyses are reported as 

they were in Helz and others (1994), and the data for the 24 XRF rechecks are reported to the 

same number of decimal places, as given in that report.

XRF analysis cannot determine the different oxidation states of iron and customarily 

reports all iron as Fe2O3, regardless of the actual oxidation state of iron in the samples. The 

“support package” includes an independent determination of FeO in the samples, which 

permits calculation of the actual Fe2O3 content of the samples and allows calculation of a 

summation for the analysis. This is important as the analytical summation is a fairly basic 

indicator of the quality of an analysis (Taggart and Siems, 2002). Accordingly, in tables A1–

A3, the results of the XRF majors and support package have been merged. The results for Cl, 

F, and Cr have also been added, with Cr recalculated as Cr2O3. All concentrations shown in 

plain type in tables A1–A3 have been included in the summations presented. Because no CO2

or H2O contents were obtained for analytical job WC69, these components have not been 

included in any of the summations, in order to make the results comparable for all three jobs. 

In table A4, by contrast, all iron in the classical analyses has been recalculated to 

Fe2O3, in order to facilitate direct comparison with the XRF results. In this table, summations 

have been omitted because the minor elements were not redetermined and because total iron 

as Fe2O3 produces summations that are systematically too high, as most iron in these iron-rich 

samples is ferrous.

Additional information on each sample is provided below the analyses. Most samples 

of 1988 core were selected to be typical of the 10-ft interval in which they are found. Specific 

designations indicate whether (1) the sample is interpreted to be foundered crust (see 

discussion in Helz, 1993) or adjacent to foundered crust, (2) the sample is the one closest to 

the observed thermal maximum in the core, (3) the sample lies immediately above or below 

an overnight stop in the drilling, or (4) the sample is a sample of cross-cutting diapirs (“vorb” 

or speckled-rock plume). In addition, most samples have been assigned a zone number, based 

on the chemical zonation developed in Helz and others (1989) and discussed later in this 

report. In table A4, special sample designations are those used in Helz and others (1994) and 

are explained in that reference.

The tables also note whether the sample analyzed contains glass (quenched melt) or 

not. Finally the core has been put into one of three categories, depending on its pre-quenching 

temperature. "High" samples are those quenched from temperatures above the solidus, which 

lies at 970–980 degrees Celsius (

o

C); these contain glass interpreted as having been a stable 
7

melt phase prior to quenching. "Medium" samples are those quenched from temperatures 

below the solidus but above the boiling point of water (approximately 110 oC for the 

geothermal system in the lake, as the water contains some dissolved salts). "Low" temperature 

samples are those that were quenched from 110 o

C and, hence, had been in contact with liquid 

water prior to drilling. This information is included because it bears on the freshness of the 

material analyzed, though all Kilauea Iki core is pristine by normal geologic standards. 

Quality of the Analyses

Cross-Check with Classical Analyses

As noted above, 24 samples previously analyzed by classical techniques were 

resubmitted for XRF majors in early 1992, in order to cross-calibrate the two techniques; the

data are reported in table A4a–g. The samples chosen covered all older analytical jobs and all 

analysts, and most appeared to be excellent analyses (Helz and others, 1994). However, three 

samples were included because there seemed to be one or more problems with the original 

analyses. Based on the XRF major-element results for those three samples, which confirmed

the problems suspected, an additional five samples were resubmitted as part of job CJ13, in 

order to check their analyses as well. All samples rechecked “for cause” are listed in table 1,

and the results are included in table A4a–g.

Table 1. Kilauea Iki samples for which the classical analysis was rechecked by XRF for cause, with 

suspect elements indicated.

Sample First job New job Element checked

KI67-2-0.5 BR98 cross-check Al high, Fe low

KI67-2-17.0 BD25 CJ13 Ti low

KI67-2-40.4 BD25 cross-check Ti low

KI67-2-59.8 BD25 CJ13 Ti, Fe for consistency with 

 previous three samples

KI79-1-141.0 BK52 cross-check Si high, sum high

KI79-1-160 BK52 CJ13 Si high, sum high

KI79-1-170 BK52 CJ13 Si high, sum high

KI79-5-180.9 BD25 CJ13 Ti low
8

Table 2 compares the limits of error for each oxide in the classical analyses 

(Kirschenbaum, 1983; Flanagan and Kirschenbaum, 1984) and the reproducibility of XRF 

results for BHVO-1 (Thornber and others, 2002) with the average difference between the 

XRF and classical analyses in the cross-check set. The complete range of deviation is also 

given for each oxide (excluding the oxides in the few samples rechecked “for cause,” as noted 

in table 1). The results show that in general the average difference between the XRF and 

classical analyses is similar in size to the limit of error of the classical analysis. Note, 

however, that the range is not always symmetrical around the classical values. 

Table 2. Comparison of the limits of error for classical analysis, average difference and range 

observed between XRF and classical analyses in cross-check batch, with reproducibility of XRF 

major-element analyses for rock standard BHVO-1. All quantities in weight percent.

Component 

oxide

Limits of error 

(Kirschenbaum, 

1983)

Average 

deviation

Range 

(XRF– classical)

BHVO-1 

(Thornber and 

others, 2002)

SiO2 ±0.10 +0.08 –0.47 to + 0.42 ±0.14

TiO2 ±0.03 +0.03 –0.04 to + 0.07 ±0.011

Al2O3 ±0.15 –0.17 –0.45 to + 0.14 ±0.05

Fe2O3 ±0.08 +0.15 –0.04 to + 0.29 ±0.03

MgO ±0.05 +0.10 –0.13 to + 0.32 ±0.06

CaO ±0.05 –0.09 –0.24 to + 0.02 ±0.03

Na2O ±0.03 –0.04 –0.14 to + 0.07 ±0.06

K2O ±0.03 +0.006 –0.03 to + 0.08 ±0.004

P2O5 ±0.01 +0.02 –0.04 to + 0.05 ±0.011

The results of these cross-checks are shown graphically in figures 4a–j, one for each of 

the 10 elements determined by XRF. The values from the classical analyses are on the 

abscissa and the new XRF values on the ordinate; the diagonal (1:1) line shows where the 

results would be exactly equal. Two subsets are distinguished: the 21 “good” analyses are 

designated as “standards” and the 8 rechecks are identified separately. Comparison of the size 

of the symbols in figure 4 with the limits of error and average differences in table 2 shows 

that the symbols used in these figures are larger than the uncertainties.

Figure 4a shows that the agreement between the two methods for MgO is very good, 

without any systematic offset from the 1:1 line. This is important, as MgO varies in these 

samples by an order of magnitude and is used as the abscissa in most chemical variation 

diagrams for Hawaiian basalts (see for example Wright, 1971, or Wright and Fiske, 1971, in 

addition to the papers on Kilauea Iki cited earlier). By contrast, the results for CaO (fig. 4b) 

show that the XRF determinations run slightly lower (by 0.09 on average, table 2) than the 

classical CaO values. 
9

Figure 4. (a–j) Whole-rock classical values of major oxides plotted against XRF values for each oxide, 

for data in table A4. Samples rechecked for cause are flagged by arrows in the plot for the element at 

issue. All quantities are in weight percent. 
10
11

The agreement between the two methods for SiO2 is generally quite good. Three 

samples where the classical value was suspected of being high (based in part on a high 

summation) do indeed lie below the 1:1 line in figure 4c. The only other analysis that falls on 

the low side is that for KI81-2-88.6, an extreme differentiate with MgO = 2.4 percent, with a 

bulk composition quite different from the rest of the samples from Kilauea Iki. The results for 

TiO2 (fig. 4d) are similar to those for SiO2: most samples fall very near the 1:1 line, and the 

three samples suspected of having low classical TiO2 values fall distinctly above the 1:1 line, 

suggesting that the classical results were indeed somewhat low for those three samples.

Figures 4e (Al2O3) and 4f (Fe2O3) are paired because in the classical separation 

process, the “R2O3” group is precipitated together, with Fe2O3 and Cr2O3 determined 

separately and subtracted, and Al2O3 determined by difference (Peck, 1964; Kirschenbaum, 

1983). Thus, an error in the Fe2O3 determination will generate the opposite error in Al2O3. For 

one sample (KI67-2-0.5), the cross-check results suggest that this did indeed happen, with the 

original Fe2O3 determination being too low. That sample aside, the Al2O3 values for the two 

methods agree very well below about 10 percent Al2O3, but veer below the 1:1 line at higher 

Al2O3 contents. The average difference is not large, but it is not random. Al2O3 in the classical 

analyses has been corrected for Cr2O3 (Helz and others, 1994), so its variation is not 

contributing to the pattern seen in figure 4e. 

Fe2O3 (fig. 4f) does not show such a pattern but runs high in all the XRF analyses 

relative to the classical determinations by an amount that is twice the expected limit of error 

in the classical analyses (table 2). Given that the patterns of deviation for these two oxides are 

distinct, the offsets cannot be explained as reciprocal “R2O3” errors in the classical analyses.

Corresponding values for Na2O (fig. 4g) and K2O (fig. 4h) generally lie near the 1:1 

correspondence line, with the standards and rechecks being similarly distributed. The XRF 

determination of K2O in the extreme sample (KI81-2-88.6), which is 0.1 percent higher than 

the earlier analysis, lies farthest from the 1:1 line in figure 4h.

XRF values for P2O5 (fig. 4i) run higher than those obtained by classical methods, 

although the differences are small. MnO data are shown in figure 4j; because many analyses 

have the same limited range of values for MnO (0.16 to 0.20) by both methods, many samples 

plot on top of each other, giving the false impression that only eight samples exist. The two 

methods have produced comparable results for MnO.

In summary, for 6 (of 10) elements analyzed (MgO, SiO2, TiO2, Na2O, K2O, and 

MnO) the two types of analyses are closely comparable. CaO runs slightly low in the XRF 

analyses, while Fe2O3 and P2O5 run somewhat high. Al2O3 shows a variable trend distinct 

from the offset in Fe2O3 determinations. However, it appears from the cross-check data that 

XRF major and gravimetric analyses are close enough to form a coherent dataset for Kilauea 

Iki.

Coherence of the New Analyses: Summations

Moving now to evaluate the new XRF data in tables A1–A3, there are several ways to 

assess the overall coherence of the new analyses. The first and simplest is to look at the 

summations for the analyses, to see how they fall relative to the ideal summation of 

100 percent, as discussed in Taggart and Siems (2002). Figure 5 shows the range of 

summations for the analyses in tables A1–A3. Because H2O± was not determined for job 
12

WC69, those concentrations have been omitted from the summations for all analyses, both in 

the tables and in figure 5.

The two histograms in figure 5 are very different from that for the 176 classical 

(gravimetric) analyses (Helz and others, 1994), reproduced here in figure 6. First, the 

histograms for the XRF analyses do not have the symmetrical bell shape seen in the collection 

of classical analyses. Second, neither histogram is distributed around 100 percent: the 

summations mostly lie either above or below that value. Third, the batches are inconsistent, 

with the analyses in the first two batches (CJ12, CJ13) running systematically high in one or 

more components. It is suspected that this was caused by an inhomogeneity in the lithium 

tetraborate sample fusion discs. The portions of the flux containing higher concentrations of 

sample would have a greater density and would have settled to the bottom of the mold, 

causing the analytical surface of the disc to be more concentrated in all elements of the 

sample.

The off-center distributions in figure 5 may reflect the fact that the various analysts 

who contributed to the new analyses could not know the FeO and Fe2O3 concentrations in the 

sample and so did not have the information needed to see a complete total. For the classical 

gravimetric analyses, however, the analysts were mindful of the summations as they moved 

through the analytical procedure. Also, for the “R2O3” subset, the final component (Al2O3) 

was determined by difference (Kirschenbaum, 1983).

It is evident from the offset patterns and larger ranges of summations in figure 5 

compared with figure 6 that the new analyses, though acceptably precise when compared 

oxide by oxide with the gravimetric analyses (as was done in the preceding section), may not 

be as accurate as the classical analyses.
13

Figure 5. Frequency distribution of summations for XRF analyses of drill core from Kilauea Iki from 

tables A1–A3. H2O± has been omitted from all summations, as noted in the text. 

 

Figure 6. Frequency distribution of summations for classical (gravimetric) analyses of drill core from 

Kilauea Iki lava lake (Helz and others, 1994).
14

Figure 7 shows the summations from tables A1–A3 plotted against whole-rock MgO 

content, with the three analytical batches identified separately. The positive correlations 

between summation and MgO content suggest that there is some bias toward high MgO in the 

most MgO-rich samples. However, the range in MgO contents for jobs CJ12 + CJ13 versus 

WC69 is the same. Given that the range is similar and that the summations run about 

0.5 percent higher across the entire range, it seems that MgO is not the only component that 

runs high, thus supporting the inhomogeneous fusion disc suggestion. At present it is not clear 

what has produced the 0.5 percent offset in summations, but it seems unlikely that this can be 

attributed to any one component in the analyses. Whatever the problem, it was not 

experienced by the analyst who ran job WC69.

Figure 7. Analytical summations plotted against bulk MgO content for Kilauea Iki data in 

tables A1–A3.

Coherence of the New Analyses: Element Ratios

Another standard way of evaluating the coherence of a set of basalt analyses from 

Kilauea is to examine ratios that should be constant or nearly constant during hightemperature fractionation, as was discussed in Wright (1971). Useful ratios include P2O5/K2O 

and P2O5/TiO2, as the elements P, K, and Ti are largely absent from the early crystallizing 

minerals olivine ± chromite + augite + plagioclase. Figure 8 shows how these ratios vary for 
15

the XRF data presented in tables A1–A3. Note that the correlations are consistent across all 

three analytical jobs, further supporting the suggestion of the increased, but proportional, 

concentration of sample on the analytical surface of the fusion discs.

The results in figure 8, when compared with those in figures 5 and 6 of Helz and 

others (1994), show that the XRF and gravimetric analyses are similar. In both sets of 

analyses, the data fall on a line with a 1:10 slope for P2O5/TiO2 and a 1:2 slope for P2O5/K2O.

These plots confirm that (1) fractionation of TiO2 by crystallization of augite and of K2O by 

crystallization of plagioclase have not affected the bulk compositions of these samples and 

(2) the XRF results are consistent with the earlier gravimetric analyses for these elements.

Figure 8. (a) Whole-rock P2O5 plotted against TiO2 for analyses in tables A1–A3. (b) Whole-rock P2O5

plotted against K2O for analyses in tables A1–A3.
16

Chemical Variations in Kilauea Iki Samples

The range and character of the chemical variations in drill core from Kilauea Iki lava 

lake can be displayed most effectively on a series of magnesia variation diagrams for several 

reasons, as discussed in Helz and others (1994). The most basic consideration is that MgO 

shows the largest range of concentrations of any major oxide, varying by an order of 

magnitude (from 2.4 to 27.4 percent by weight) for samples from Kilauea Iki. The range 

observed for analyses in this report is narrower (7.74 to 25.0 percent by weight), as no internal 

differentiates such as segregation veins were selected for analysis from the 1988 drill core.

The range found here lies within the range where MgO content reflects variation in the 

amount of phenocrystic olivine in the rocks, as discussed in Helz (1987a) and Helz and others 

(1989). 

Accordingly, figure 9 shows the variation of 10 major- and minor-element oxides, plus 

F and Cl, for MgO = 7.7 to 25.0 percent, for the analyses in tables A1–A3. In addition, the 

limits of composition of the 1959 eruption samples (as given in Wright, 1973) are shown for 

the eight major oxides. These limits outline the range of bulk compositions that would exist in 

the lake if variation in the amount of inherited olivine phenocrysts (Fo86.5-87.0; as discussed in 

Murata and Richter, 1966; Wright, 1973; Helz, 1987b; Helz and others, 1989) were the only 

process affecting the samples.

In figure 9a (SiO2 versus MgO) almost all samples fall within the range of the 1959 

eruption samples. That is, they lie on a well-defined “olivine control line” (Wright, 1971) that 

reflects the composition of the original, inherited olivine phenocrysts. This was also true for 

all of the classical analyses with MgO > 7.0 percent. [The sole exception in either dataset is 

sample KI88-1-41.4, which runs low in SiO2 (and high in total iron), for reasons that are not 

clear. This sample, in hand specimen and thin section, looks no different from adjacent core.] 

Thus olivine redistribution in the lake occurred prior to any significant reequilibration of 

olivine to more iron-rich compositions. This in turn means that olivine redistribution was an 

early process and occurred at temperatures close to original eruption temperatures (Helz, 

2009). The variation of Cr2O3 with MgO (fig. 9c) is also controlled by this early process, 

because almost all Cr2O3 is present in chromite, found mostly as inclusions in the olivine 

phenocrysts, which then move with the olivine.

Concentrations of the other major oxides, including Al2O3, CaO, FeO, and TiO2, have 

all been affected by one or more additional differentiation processes occurring in Kilauea Iki.

The most important of these is diapiric melt transfer, in which a minimum-density melt, 

which is produced near the temperature where plagioclase begins to crystallize, migrates from 

the base of the partially molten core of the lake to the base of the upper crystallization front. 

This process was first proposed and documented in Helz and others (1989). Its effect on the 

concentration of the platinum group elements and Re in Kilauea Iki was discussed in Pitcher 

and others (2009), and the interactions between this process and other styles of differentiation 

that occur in the lava lake are explored in Helz (2009).
17

Figure 9 (a-l). Oxide–oxide plots showing the compositional variation of samples described in this 

report as a function of their MgO contents. The first three symbols correspond to the three analytical 

batches in tables A1–A3. The boxes labeled “1959” outline the compositional range of the 1959 eruption 

samples, as given in Wright (1973). The 1959 field is not defined for the minor components Cr2O3, MnO, 

F, and Cl. All quantities are in weight percent.
18
19
20
21

In accordance with prior observations (Helz and others, 1989), the migration of the 

minimum-density liquid has little effect on Al2O3 concentrations, because very little 

plagioclase has crystallized from the migrating liquid. Thus, in figure 9b most samples fall 

within or very near the field of olivine-controlled 1959 eruption compositions.

The effect on CaO is that the deeper, more olivine-rich (and hence more magnesian) 

regions of the lava lake, which have lost liquid by this process, are enriched in CaO relative to 

the array of 1959 eruption compositions, while samples from the upper parts of the lake (the 

receiving zone for the minimum-density liquid) are generally lower in CaO than eruption 

samples with comparable MgO contents. This is because the minimum-density liquid has 

crystallized significant augite, in addition to olivine (Helz and others, 1989). Hence the array 

of analyses in figure 9d cuts across the 1959 field, at a lower slope.

The effects of the melt-migration process on FeO (total) and TiO2 are somewhat 

paradoxical, compared with classical models for tholeiitic fractionation, under which Fe and 

Ti both increase in the melt as fractionation proceeds. Because of reequilibration of olivine 

phenocrysts in the lower parts of the lake as temperature decreases (from an initial value of 

1190 oC to ~1160 o C at plagioclase-in, as discussed in Helz and others, 1989; Helz, 2009), 

the migrating melt is depleted in FeO while being enriched in TiO2, relative to eruption 

samples. These effects can be seen in figures 9e (total Fe as FeO) and 9f (TiO2). The olivinerich samples lie at higher FeO contents than the 1959 array and at lower TiO2 contents. The 

low-MgO receiving zone shows the opposite signature. Variation in MnO (fig. 9g) tends to 

follow that of FeO, as manganese substitutes readily in olivine, especially as olivine becomes 

more iron-rich.

The various incompatible elements (Na2O, K2O, and P2O5) have patterns similar to 

that observed for TiO2, as anticipated by Helz and others (1989). F and Cl follow P2O5, as the 

only phases in the basalt that can accommodate these three components are the melt and 

apatite. In general the concentrations of these elements are similar to those found by classical 

analysis (Helz and others, 1994). One peculiarity of the new results is that the F content for 

samples from job WC69 runs high relative to the other two analytical batches and the array of 

classical analyses (see fig. 7e in Helz and others, 1994).

Results for CO2 and H2O± 

Analytical results for CO2 show that its concentration is below the limit of detection 

(0.01 percent) in jobs CJ12 and CJ13, for all except two samples. The two exceptions 

(KI88-1-130.0 and KI88-1-138.4) were recovered from within the geothermal system in 

Kilauea Iki and may contain very minor carbonate. As discussed in Helz and others (1994), 

CO2 is lost in pre- and syn-eruptive degassing. Therefore, samples from the lava lake, 

especially from this latest (1988) drilling, would be expected to contain no detectable 

magmatic CO2, as was true for the analyses of earlier drill core.

The only phase in Kilauea Iki samples that can accommodate significant H2O+ 

(structurally bound water) is the melt. Helz and others (1994) reported H2O+ concentrations 

of 0.0–0.33 percent for H2O+ in drill core, with over 70 percent of the samples having 

H2O+ > 0.02 percent by weight. Although many of the samples in tables A1–A2 were 

quenched from high temperatures, and contain glass (quenched melt), few samples contain 
22

more than 20 percent melt. The maximum glass content in the 1988 core is ~25 percent by 

weight (in sample KI88-2-267.2, based on observed concentrations of K2O and P2O5 in the 

interstitial glass), comparable to many earlier samples. The fact that H2O+ was not detected in 

this or any other 1988 sample suggests that the H2O+ content of the interstitial melt was lower 

in 1988 than the 0.05–0.15 percent by weight observed in the glassiest samples from 1967–

1979 (Helz and others, 1994). Some samples in table A3 were quenched earlier and contain 

far more glass than the 1988 core; they might have significant H2O+ , but neither CO2 nor 

H2O+ was determined for job WC69.

Determinations of H2O– (adsorbed water) are very different in these analyses from the 

results for the classical analyses. Helz and others (1994) reported a range of 0.0–0.17 percent 

for H2O–, with most samples having <0.02 percent by weight. By contrast, H2O– values 

reported for samples from CJ12 range from 0.05–0.37 percent and in CJ13 range from 0.23–

0.58 percent. Given that the summations for these batches exceed 100 percent even without 

the H2O–, the H2O– determinations would appear to be meaningless.

Discussion

The main purpose of this report is to show that the XRF data are sufficiently close to 

the classical analyses that the two sets can be treated as a unified body in evaluating

fractionation in Kilauea Iki. Given that the two datasets are closely comparable, it is now 

possible to (1) describe the chemical variations of the 1988 drill core in the context of 

previously developed models for the differentiation of Kilauea Iki and (2) describe the 

chemical variations in the deeper parts of the lava lake, sampled only in 1988.

Most samples in tables A1–A3 were selected to be typical of their interval. The results 

in figures 9a–l show that the new analyses are broadly consistent with analyses of earlier 

(1960–1981) drill core and 1959 eruption samples. They are also consistent with the vertical 

chemical zonation described in Helz and others (1989). This chemical zonation is cryptic, 

with no mineralogical expression that can be seen in hand specimen, and overlays the gross 

zonation in olivine content discussed in Helz (1987a, 2009). Based on the 1960–1981 drill 

core, the lava lake was divided into five zones of different chemical character, depending on 

how core in the zones had been affected by processes other than olivine redistribution. Most 

samples in tables A1–A3 have been assigned to one or another of these five zones, as they 

show the same chemical characteristics as earlier core at the corresponding depths. 

The two differentiation processes, each of which involves melt extraction and 

migration, are summarized in table 3 below. The first process (diapiric melt transfer) has 

grossly affected most of the lake between 40 and 310 ft (13 to 94 m). The receiving zone lies 

below 40 and above 160–170 ft (13 to ~50 m), while the source zone for this liquid begins at 

190+ ft and extends to 310 ft (58–94 m), based on all available data. The “dead zone” that lies 

between these two regions, which was designated zone IV in Helz and others (1989), neither 

gave up nor received the minimum-density liquid.

The second process involves extraction of the Fe- and Ti-enriched ferrodiabasic liquid 

that forms the segregation veins. These veins occur as distinct internal differentiates within 

the upper crust, so there is no cryptic “receiving zone” as there is for the diapiric melt transfer 
23

Table 3. Differentiation processes in Kilauea Iki lava lake (after table 1 in Helz, 2009). Depths rounded 

to whole meters.

Differentiation Process Depth range

affected (meters)

Temperature

range (

oC)

Processes occurring in 

molten core of lake, 

before formation of 

coherent crystal mush

Olivine settling

Lateral convection

Diapiric melt transfer of 

minimum-density melt

 

 10 to 97+

 20 to 43

 13 to 94

 >1180

 1165 – 1170

 1150 – 1160 

Processes occurring 

within coherent crystal 

mush zones 

Formation of ferrodiabasic 

segregation veins (coarse grained, 

sill-like, internal differentiates)

Formation of vertical olivine-rich 

bodies (diapir tracks) that carried 

segregation vein melts through 

the lower part of the upper crust

Formation of melt chimneys and 

speckled-rock plumes that carried 

differentiated melts upward from 

within lower mush zone in the 

lower crust

 18 to 56

18 to 58

78 to 95 

 1100 – 1135

<1140

<1140

process. The chemical signature for extraction of this liquid occurs locally through much of 

the lake, especially in core below segregation veins: many samples in zone III and zone IV 

have lost some ferrodiabasic liquid (Helz and others, 1989) by this sort of local extraction.

The extraction process itself is cryptic. However, most stages of migration of the lowertemperature, ferrodiabasic liquid leave discernible petrographic marks in the drill core, as 

summarized in table 3. These cross-cutting bodies are visibly enriched in differentiated, 

ferrodiabasic liquid relative to the adjacent matrix.

As anticipated in a note added to Helz and others (1989) in proof, results of the 1988 

drilling allow the cryptic chemical stratigraphy of Kilauea Iki to be extended to greater 

depths. The deepest analyzed sample from the main body of the lake was formerly 

KI81-1-306.7, from 93.5 m (see fig. 3). However, tables A1 and A2 each contain eight 

analyses of samples recovered from below 300 ft and so offer insight into the deeper chemical 

stratigraphy of the main body of Kilauea Iki. 

The overlapping effects of these two melt redistribution processes on Kilauea Iki, as 

sampled in the 1988 core, have produced a vertical chemical zonation, illustrated in figure 10, 

which can be summarized as follows:
24

(1) Relatively shallow samples from KI88-1 fall into zones II and III, which are 

enriched in minimum-density (1160 oC) liquid, with variable depletion in the ferrodiabasic 

liquid. As discussed in Helz (2009), core from KI88-1 is strongly enriched in the minimumdensity liquid between the base of a block of foundered crust and the base of the olivinedepleted layer at 146 ft (44.5 m). The contact between zones II and III is at 146–147 ft in both 

1988 cores (tables A1 and A2), consistent with its position in KI79-1 but somewhat deeper 

than in KI81-1. 

(2) Zone IV, with samples either depleted in ferrodiabasic liquid or falling within the 

1959 eruption compositional range, begins at 160–170 ft (49–52 m) in the 1988 cores, as in 

KI79-1, though deeper than found in KI81-1. Its base varies, lying at 195–205 ft (59–62 m) in 

the 1988 cores (tables A1–A2), which is somewhat deeper than observed in cores from 

KI79-1 and KI81-1.

(3) Zone V, depleted in only the minimum-density (1160 o

C) liquid, was extensively 

discussed in Helz and others (1989) on the basis of data from cores KI81-1 and KI79-1. It has 

the same chemical character in cores KI88-2 and KI88-1; however, the top and base of this 

zone occur at somewhat greater depths in the 1988 cores (195–205 to 270 ft, or 58 to 82 m; 

see tables A1–A2) than in the earlier cores.

(4) Zone VI is depleted in both liquids. The existence of this zone was anticipated in 

Helz and others (1989) and was suggested by the character of the deepest samples from 

KI81-1. Samples from ~270 to 310 ft (82 to 94 m) in cores KI88-2 and KI88-1 also have this 

chemical signature, which suggests that this is indeed a lake-wide zone, with a lateral extent 

of at least 600 ft (see figs. 3 and 10).

(5) Zone VII, depleted in only the ferrodiabasic liquid, is intersected only in the 1988 

cores. This zone is found in both KI88-2 and KI88-1 between 310 and 330 ft (94 to 99 m).

Samples from this zone are some of the most extremely residual material in the lava lake, 

falling well outside the 1959 array in FeO (fig. 9e), TiO2 (fig. 9f), and K2O (fig. 9i); some are 

also unusually enriched in Al2O3 (fig. 9b) and CaO (fig. 9d) for their MgO contents.
25

Figure 10. MgO content (weight percent) of olivine-phyric core versus depth below the surface of 

Kilauea Iki lava lake, after figure 3 in Helz (2009). Zone boundaries, as defined by the results of Helz 

and others (1994) and this report, are shown and the enclosed areas labeled as described in text.

Although zones VI and VII are depleted in ferrodiabasic liquid, there are no 

significant segregation veins at those depths. However, the 1988 cores locally contain melt 

chimneys and plumes of speckled rock [as described in Helz (1993) and indicated in table 3] 

over much of this depth range. These structures are interpreted as escape channels for 

differentiated liquid + bubbles; thus they are the lower-crust equivalent of the vertical olivinerich bodies (“vorbs”) that served as conduits for the ferrodiabasic liquid + bubbles in the 

upper crust (Helz, 1980; 1987a; Helz and others, 1989). Comparison of the depth intervals in 

table 3 with the zone assignments in tables A1–A2 shows that the plumes of speckled rock

extend 3–10 ft (1–3 m) into zone V, beyond the top of zone VI. Similarly, most of zone VII 

lies below the region where there are well-developed plumes. Here, the core contains small 

irregular pods of segregation-vein material that did not coalesce into bodies large enough to 

rise. This offset in depth of plumes versus source zone for the melts is consistent with the 

inferred upward transport of ferrodiabasic liquid + bubbles.

The deepest samples from the 1988 cores fall within the 1959 eruption field in all 

components. Petrographically, they have moderate concentrations of olivine phenocrysts in a 

featureless, very dense groundmass. Samples from 260 to 300 ft in KI79-5 (just above the 

base of the lake at 313 ft; see fig. 3) also have moderate olivine phenocryst contents, a dense, 

featureless groundmass, and undifferentiated bulk chemistry. In that core, they are clearly 

samples of the lower chill zone of the lake. Given the similarity of the deepest 1988 samples, 

I

II

III

IV

V

VI

VII
26

it appears that the 1988 holes also bottomed in the lower chill zone of Kilauea Iki. Based on 

the position of the maximum temperature in the 1988 holes, Helz (1993) estimated a 

minimum thickness for Kilauea Iki as ~427 ft (130 m). Because KI88-1 bottomed at 376 ft 

and KI88-2 at 355 ft, we are at least 55–75 ft (15–23 m) short of the lower contact of the 1959 

lava lake. Nevertheless, the character of the deepest 1988 core samples suggests that the 

missing section will not be significantly differentiated. If this is true, we now have complete 

sections of the chemically differentiated central volume of Kilauea Iki.

Foundered Crust Versus the Vertical Zonation Pattern

The zone classification developed in Helz and others (1989) and extended here applies 

only to olivine-phyric “matrix rock,” including the thin-bedded, highly variable “upper crust 

complex” (Helz, 1993) when it is found at 0–40 ft (0–12 m) in the lava lake. All internal 

differentiates having distinct boundaries with the matrix rock are excluded, as are some 

samples from blocks of foundered crust and their associated sheaths of undercooled material.

In this report, samples of internal differentiates include two “vorbs” and one sample of a 

speckled-rock plume (all in table A1); they fall outside the overall zonation pattern and are 

not included in figure 10. Foundered crust and related samples are present in both 1988 cores, 

and such samples are identified in tables A1 and A2.

The locations of all major blocks of foundered crust encountered in drilling were first 

shown in Helz (1993) and are summarized here in figure 10. The most extensively sampled 

block is the material encountered in all cores from KI88-1 to the northernmost holes, 

interpreted to be a continuous wedge of foundered crust (Helz, 1993). This wedge thickens to 

the north with its base sloping down from 70 ft (21 m) in KI88-1 to 98 ft (30 m) in the KI79-5 

cluster, as discussed in Helz (2009). This block was not affected by the longer range 

differentiation processes active in the rest of the lava lake (table 3).

By contrast, most samples from the three deep-seated blocks of foundered crust, found 

in cores from KI81-1 and KI81-5, in KI88-2, and in KI88-1, as shown in figure 10, have 

residual compositions appropriate to their depths. That is, they have lost the minimum-density 

liquid, the ferrodiabasic liquid, both, or neither, as follows:

(1) Most analyzed samples from the block intersected in the KI81-1 and KI81-5 cores 

have the doubly depleted signature of zone VI. Two of the denser samples within the block 

have zone V signatures, however; this suggests that the entire block participated in the higher 

temperature melt extraction, but only parts of the block subsequently lost the lower 

temperature ferrodiabasic liquid.

(2) Most samples from the block of foundered crust in KI88-2 have the chemical 

signatures of zone VI and VII (table A2; fig. 10). The sample immediately below the 

foundered crust has undifferentiated (1959) chemistry but is distinct in texture from the 

deepest samples, which are interpreted as lower chill zone. 
27

(3) In KI88-1 (table A1; fig. 10), the foundered crust lies deeper than in the other two 

locations. In this core, the upper marginal sample has zone VII characteristics, but the rest of 

the block has undifferentiated (1959) chemistry.

Summary

This report presents 64 new major-element analyses for drill core from Kilauea Iki 

lava lake plus some related samples, obtained by X-ray fluorescence analysis during the 

period 1992 to 1995. Because earlier major-element data for the lava lake were gravimetric 

analyses (Helz and others, 1994), this report attempts to assess how well the two methods 

compare with each other, first by evaluating the results from samples that have been analyzed 

by both methods (tables A4a-g, figs. 8a-j). Then the new XRF analyses (tables A1-A3) have 

been evaluated as a group, using analytical summations and selected element ratios (figs. 5-8).

These various evaluation methods suggest that the two sets of data are sufficiently close that 

they can be treated as a unified body in evaluating fractionation in Kilauea Iki.

Finally the new analyses have been plotted on magnesia variation diagrams (figs. 9a-l) 

and their variations compared with the field of 1959 eruption compositions (in itself a crosscheck with earlier gravimetric data). The results show that the chemical variation of the 1988 

core is consistent with that observed previously (Helz and others, 1989). Because the 1988 

drilling recovered samples from greater depths than previous efforts, it has been possible to 

describe the chemical variations of the deeper parts of the lava lake and to extend the 

chemical zonation developed in Helz and others (1989) to greater depths. Lastly, the deepest 

samples from both 1988 drill cores appear, in olivine content, texture, and composition, to be 

like the lower chill zone samples from core KI79-5 (Helz and others, 1994). If they are 

samples of the lower chill zone in the center of the lava lake, then we now have two complete 

sections through the chemically differentiated part of Kilauea Iki lava lake.
28

References Cited

Barth, G.A., Kleinrock, M.C., and Helz, R.T., 1994, The magma body at Kilauea Iki lava 

lake, Potential insights into mid-ocean ridge magma chambers: Journal of Geophysical 

Research, v. 99, p. 7199–7217.

Eaton, J.P., Richter, D.H., and Krivoy, H.L., 1987, Cycling of magma between the summit 

reservoir and Kilauea Iki lava lake during the 1959 eruption of Kilauea Volcano, Chap. 48,

in Decker, R.W., Wright, T.L., and Stauffer, P.H., eds., Volcanism in Hawaii: U.S. 

Geological Survey Professional Paper 1350, p. 1307–1336.

Flanagan, F.J., and Kirschenbaum, H., 1984, The precision of classical rock analysis: 

Geostandards Newsletter, v. 8, p. 7–11.

Helz, R.T., 1980, Crystallization history of Kilauea Iki lava lake as seen in drill core 

recovered in 1967–1979: Bulletin Volcanologique, v. 43–44, p. 675–701.

Helz, R.T., 1987a, Differentiation behavior of Kilauea Iki lava lake, Kilauea Volcano, 

Hawaii, An overview of past and current work, in Mysen, B.O., ed., Magmatic processes—

Physicochemical principles: Geochemical Society Special Publication 1, p. 241–258. 

Helz, R.T., 1987b, Diverse olivine types in lava of the 1959 eruption of Kilauea Volcano and

their bearing on eruption dynamics, Chap. 25, in Decker, R.W., Wright, T.L., and Stauffer, 

P.H., eds., Volcanism in Hawaii: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1350, p. 691–

722.

Helz, R.T., 1993, Drilling report and core logs for the 1988 drilling of Kilauea Iki lava lake, 

Kilauea Volcano, Hawaii, with summary descriptions of the occurrence of foundered crust 

and fractures in the drill core: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 93–15, 57 p.

Helz, R.T., 2009, Processes active in mafic magma chambers, The example of Kilauea Iki 

lava lake, Hawaii: Lithos v. 111, p. 37–46.

Helz, R.T., Banks, N.G., Casadevall, T.J., Fiske, R.S., and Moore, R.B., 1984, A catalogue of 

drill core recovered from Kilauea Iki lava lake from 1967 to 1979: U.S. Geological Survey 

Open-File Report 84–484, 72 p.

Helz, R.T., Kirschenbaum, H.K., and Marinenko, J.W., 1989, Diapiric transfer of melt in 

Kilauea Iki lava lake, Hawaii—A quick, efficient process of igneous differentiation:

Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 101, p. 578–594.

Helz, R.T., Kirschenbaum, H.K., Marinenko, J.W., and Qian, Rachel, 1994, Whole-rock 

analyses of core samples from the 1967, 1975, 1979 and 1981 drillings of Kilauea Iki Lava 

Lake, Hawaii: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 94–684, 65 p.

Helz, R.T., and Thornber, C.R., 1987, Geothermometry of Kilauea Iki lava lake: Bulletin of 

Volcanology, v. 49, p. 651–668.

Helz, R.T., and Wright, T.L., 1983, Drilling report and core logs for the 1981 drilling of 

Kilauea Iki lava lake (Kilauea Volcano, Hawaii), with comparative notes on earlier (1967–

1979) drilling experiences: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 83–326, 66 p.

Jackson, L.L., Brown, F.W., and Neil, S.T., 1987, Major and minor elements requiring 

individual determination, classical whole rock analysis, and rapid rock analysis, in

Baedecker, P.A., ed., Methods for geochemical analysis: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 

1770, p. G1–G23. 
29

Kirschenbaum, Herbert, 1983, The classical chemical analysis of silicate rocks—The old and the new:

U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1547, 55 p.

Kirschenbaum, Herbert, 1988, The determination of fluoride in silicate rocks by ion-selective electrode, 

An update: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 88–588, 5 p. 

Lichte, F.D., Golightly, D.W., and Lamothe, P.J., 1987, Inductively coupled plasma-atomic emission 

spectrometry, in Baedecker, P.A. ed., Methods for geochemical analysis: U.S. Geological Survey 

Bulletin 1770, p. B1–B10. 

Murata, K.J., and Richter, D.H., 1966, Chemistry of the lavas of the 1959–60 eruption of Kilauea 

Volcano, Hawaii: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 537–A, 26 p.

Peck, L.C., 1964, Systematic analysis of silicates: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1170, 89 p.

Pitcher, L., Helz, R.T., Walker, R.J., and Piccoli, P., 2009, Fractionation of the platinum-group elements 

and Re during crystallization of basalt in Kilauea Iki lava lake, Hawaii:. Chemical Geology, v. 260, 

p. 196–210. 

Richter, D.H., Eaton, J.P., Murata, K.J., Ault, W.U., and Krivoy, H.L., 1970, Chronologic narrative of 

the 1959–1960 eruption of Kilauea Volcano, Hawaii: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 537–

E, 73 p.

Richter, D.H., and Moore, J.G., 1966, Petrology of the Kilauea Iki lava lake, Hawaii: U.S. Geological 

Survey Professional Paper 537–B, 26 p.

Taggart, J.E., Jr., Lindsey, J.R., Scott, B.A., Vivit, D.V., Bartell, A.J., and Stewart, K.C., 1987, Analysis 

of geologic materials by wavelength dispersive X-ray fluorescence spectrometry, in Baedecker, P.A.,

ed., Methods for geochemical analysis: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1770, p. E1–E19.

Taggart, J.E., Jr., and Siems, D.R., 2002, Major element analysis by wavelength dispersive X-ray 

fluorescence spectrometry, Chap. T, in Taggart, J.E., Jr., ed., Analytical methods for chemical 

analysis of geologic and other materials: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 02–0223–T, 9 p. 

Taylor, C.F., and Theodorakos, P.M., 2002, Sample preparation, in Taggart, J.E., Jr., ed., Analytical 

methods for chemical analysis of geologic and other materials: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File 

Report 02–0223–A1, 5 p.

Teng, F.-Z., Dauphas, Nicolas, and Helz, R.T., 2008, Iron isotope fractionation during magmatic 

differentiation in Kilauea Iki Lava Lake: Science, v. 320, p.1620–1622.

Teng, F.-Z., Wadhwa, M., and Helz, R.T., 2007, Investigation of magnesium isotope fractionation 

during basalt differentiation: Implications for a chondritic composition of the terrestrial mantle: Earth 

and Planetary Science Letters, v. 261, p. 84–92.

Thornber, C.R., Sherrod, D.R., Siems, D.F., Heliker, C.C., Meeker, G.P., Oscarson, R.L., and 

Kauahikaua, J.P., 2002, Whole-rock and glass major-element geochemistry of Kilauea Volcano, 

Hawaii, near vent eruptive products, September 1994 through September 2001: U.S. Geological 

Survey Open-File Report 2002–017, 9 p.

Wright, T.L., 1971, Chemistry of Kilauea and Mauna Loa lava in space and time: U.S. Geological 

Survey Professional Paper 735, 40 p. 

Wright, T.L., 1973, Magma mixing as illustrated by the 1959 eruption, Kilauea Volcano, Hawaii:

Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 84, p. 849–858. 

Wright, T.L., and Fiske, R.S., 1971, Origin of the differentiated and hybrid lavas of Kilauea Volcano, 

Hawaii: Journal of Petrology, v. 12, p. 1–65.
30

Table A1. X-ray fluorescence analyses of core from Kilauea Iki drill hole KI88-1, in weight percent. Numbers in italics not included in totals. Sample 

annotations as discussed in text.

 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Field No. KI88-1-41.4 KI88-1-60.4 KI88-1-66.9 KI88-1-73.4 KI88-1-84.3 KI88-1-94.1 KI88-1-102.2 KI88-1-111.9

Lab no. D-571891 D-571892 D-571893 W-256752 W-256753 W-256754 W-256755 W-256756

Job no. WC69 WC69 WC69 CJ13 CJ13 CJ13 CJ13 CJ13

SiO2 47.8 46.1 49.4 48.5 49.8 48.9 49.3 50.4

Al2O3 11.7 8.88 12.8 11.6 13.0 11.9 12.3 13.2

Fe2O3 4.75 0.95 1.85 1.57 2.29 1.98 2.30 2.27

FeO 8.24 11.3 9.59 10.2 9.1 9.2 9.0 8.4

MgO 10.4 20.6 8.91 12.8 8.36 12.1 10.3 8.24

CaO 10.3 8.25 11.1 10.2 10.8 10.1 10.3 10.5

Na2O 2.13 1.43 2.23 1.87 2.30 2.06 2.19 2.44

K2O 0.55 0.31 0.55 0.49 0.60 0.53 0.58 0.69

H2O+ -- -- -- <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01

H2O- -- -- -- (0.51) (0.34) (0.26) (0.25) (0.41)

TiO2 3.00 1.47 2.63 2.49 3.09 2.61 2.89 3.03

P2O5 0.28 0.18 0.31 0.26 0.30 0.28 0.31 0.36

MnO 0.18 0.18 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.16

CO2 -- -- -- <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01

Cl <.01 <.01 <.01 .015 .013 .016 .016 .018

F 0.06 0.04 0.07 .030 .040 .034 .020 .031

Cr2O3 0.06 0.18 0.04 0.10 0.05 0.11 0.09 0.07 

______ _______ _______ _______ _______ _______ _______ _______

Subtotal 99.45 99.87 99.65 100.29 99.92 99.99 99.76 99.81

Less O=Cl,F .02 .01 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 

______ _______ _______ _______ _______ _______ _______ _______

Total 99.43 99.86 99.63 100.27 99.90 99.97 99.74 99.79

Type of adjacent to foundered adjacent to adjacent to

sample (zone) foundered crust crust foundered crust foundered crust (II) (II) (II) (II)

Contains no no no no no no no no

glass?

Temperature low low low low low low low low

before quench
31

Table A1. Analyses of core from drill hole KI88-1 (continued).

 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Field no. KI88-1-123.6 KI88-1-130.0 KI88-1-138.4 KI88-1-146.4 KI88-1-156.4 KI88-1-156.7 KI88-1-164.3

Lab. no. W-256757 W-256758 W-256759 W-256760 D-571894 W256761 W-256762

Job no. CJ13 CJ13 CJ13 CJ13 WC69 CJ13 CJ13

SiO2 50.3 50.5 50.0 49.0 46.8 46.7 48.3

Al2O3 13.3 13.1 12.8 11.7 9.33 9.48 11.6

Fe2O3 2.58 2.70 2.67 2.17 1.31 1.83 1.82

FeO 8.3 8.1 8.4 9.3 10.70 10.5 8.8

MgO 7.74 7.82 8.64 11.9 18.5 19.3 14.7

CaO 10.7 10.4 10.4 10.1 8.84 8.62 10.5

Na2O 2.44 2.51 2.38 2.07 1.53 1.38 1.67

K2O 0.67 0.72 0.66 0.53 0.38 0.36 0.38

H2O+ <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 -- <0.01 <0.01

H2O- (0.43) (0.58) (0.48) (0.33) -- (0.32) (0.29)

TiO2 3.22 3.34 3.30 2.64 1.84 1.67 1.98

P2O5 0.35 0.37 0.35 0.29 0.22 0.19 0.21 

MnO 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.17 0.17 0.18 0.16

CO2 <0.01 0.08 0.02 <0.01 -- <0.01 <0.01

Cl .016 .018 .022 .016 <.01 .008 .008

F .040 .043 .041 .030 0.05 .024 .022

Cr2O3 0.06 0.06 0.07 0.12 0.15 0.18 0.16 

_______ ______ ______ _______ _______ _______ _______

Subtotal 99.88 99.93 99.91 100.03 99.82 100.42 100.32

Less O=Cl,F .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .01 .01

______ ______ ______ _______ _______ _______ _______

Total 99.86 99.91 99.89 100.01 99.80 100.41 100.31 

Type of 

sample (zone) (II) (II) (II) (II/III) vorb vorb (IV)

Contains no no no no no no no

glass?

Temperature low low low low low low low

before quench
32

Table A1. Analyses of core from drill hole KI88-1 (continued).

 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

Field no. KI88-1-165.0 KI88-1-172.2 KI88-1-182.3 KI88-1-190.7 KI88-1-198.6 KI88-1-205.4 KI88-1-213.7 KI88-1-222.5

Lab. no. D-571895 D-571896 W-256763 W-256764 W-256765 W-256766 W-256736 W-256767

Job no. WC69 WC69 CJ13 CJ13 CJ13 CJ13 CJ12 CJ13

SiO2 48.1 46.4 46.7 46.4 45.9 45.8 45.5 45.2

Al2O3 11.2 9.07 9.57 8.86 8.34 8.30 8.20 7.63

Fe2O3 1.42 1.21 1.99 1.65 1.07 1.72 1.18 1.45

FeO 9.07 10.7 10.0 10.4 11.1 10.6 11.0 11.3

MgO 14.5 19.3 19.2 21.2 22.8 22.8 22.9 24.3

CaO 10.5 9.15 9.11 8.52 8.17 8.12 8.10 7.36

Na2O 1.78 1.36 1.34 1.24 1.12 1.09 1.08 1.04

K2O 0.41 0.29 0.31 0.30 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.25

H2O+ -- -- <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01

H2O- -- -- (0.45) (0.57) (0.32) (0.27) (0.18) (0.36)

TiO2 2.02 1.56 1.62 1.48 1.48 1.35 1.35 1.31

P2O5 0.23 0.18 0.17 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.15 0.15

MnO 0.16 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.19

CO2 -- -- .01 .01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01

Cl <.01 <.01 .015 .010 .010 .015 .005 .009

F 0.05 0.04 .021 .014 .020 .020 .006 .020

Cr2O3 0.14 0.16 0.20 0.24 0.26 0.23 0.25 0.23 

______ ______ ______ _______ _______ _______ ______ ______

Subtotal 99.58 99.60 100.44 100.66 100.76 100.65 100.16 100.44

Less O=Cl,F .02 .01 .01 .01 .01 .01 .00 .01

______ ______ ______ _______ _______ _______ ______ ______

Total 99.56 99.59 100.43 100.65 100.75 100.64 100.16 100.43

Type of

sample (zone) (IV) (IV) (IV) (IV) (V) (V) (V) (V)

Contains no no no no no no no no

glass?

Temperature low low low low low low low low

before quench
33

Table A1. Analyses of core from drill hole KI88-1 (continued).

 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

Field no. KI88-1-234.4 KI88-1-249.1 KI88-1-260.0 KI88-1-268.5 KI88-1-277.8 KI88-1-288.6 KI88-1-298.3

Lab. no. W256737 W-256738 W-256739 W-256740 W-256741 W-256768 W-256742

Job no. CJ12 CJ12 CJ12 CJ12 CJ12 CJ13 CJ12

SiO2 45.5 45.2 45.1 45.7 45.5 46.5 47.2

Al2O3 8.06 7.81 7.62 8.22 8.23 9.38 9.88

Fe2O3 0.96 1.58 1.58 1.90 1.50 1.98 1.45

FeO 11.2 11.0 11.0 10.8 10.8 10.1 10.4

MgO 23.8 24.1 25.0 23.2 23.2 19.5 18.2

CaO 8.10 7.93 7.27 7.10 8.22 8.74 8.93

Na2O 1.04 0.95 0.99 1.24 1.03 1.33 1.52

K2O 0.23 0.22 0.24 0.32 0.23 0.32 0.39

H2O+ <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01

H2O- (0.16) (0.20) (0.13) (0.15) (0.20) (0.23) (0.11)

TiO2 1.22 1.17 1.17 1.55 1.18 1.63 1.88

P2O5 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.18 0.13 0.19 0.21

MnO 0.18 0.19 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18

CO2 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01

Cl <.004 <.004 .005 .008 .008 .015 .009 

F .012 .010 .010 .020 .008 .030 .020

Cr2O3 0.25 0.27 0.26 0.22 0.27 0.20 0.19

_______ ______ ______ _______ ______ ______ ______

Subtotal 100.69 100.57 100.56 100.64 100.48 100.09 100.46

Less O=Cl,F .00 .00 .01 .01 .01 .02 .01

_______ ______ ______ _______ ______ ______ ______

Total 100.69 100.57 100.55 100.63 100.47 100.07 100.45

Type of speckled nearest

sample (zone) (V) (V) (V) rock body Tmax (V) (VI) (VI)

 

Contains no yes yes yes yes yes yes

glass?

Temperature medium high high high high high high

before quench
34

Table A1. Analyses of core from drill hole KI88-1 (continued).

 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38

Field no. KI88-1-311.6 KI88-1-317.7 KI88-1-329.1 KI88-1-347.3 KI88-1-358.2 KI88-1-362.5 KI88-1-371.2 KI88-1-375.8

Lab. no. W-256743 D-571897 W-256744 W-256745 W-256746 W256747 W-256748 W-256749

Job no. CJ12 WC69 CJ12 CJ12 CJ12 CJ12 CJ12 CJ12

SiO2 47.0 47.7 48.2 48.2 46.3 47.8 47.1 47.0

Al2O3 9.72 11.1 11.6 11.5 8.98 11.3 9.82 9.76

Fe2O3 1.35 1.46 1.06 1.45 1.75 2.27 1.46 1.99

FeO 10.4 9.76 10.3 10.4 10.4 9.3 10.3 10.0

MgO 18.7 15.2 14.1 13.9 21.0 14.7 18.4 18.3

CaO 8.61 9.94 10.1 9.97 7.79 9.84 8.77 8.68

Na2O 1.52 1.77 1.77 1.75 1.38 1.72 1.55 1.51

K2O 0.39 0.35 0.40 0.43 0.37 0.41 0.40 0.39

H2O+ <.01 -- <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01

H2O- (0.09) -- (0.37) (0.29) (0.27) (0.31) (0.19) (0.21)

TiO2 1.85 1.82 2.03 2.09 1.81 2.13 1.92 1.98

P2O5 0.23 0.21 0.21 0.23 0.20 0.23 0.22 0.22

MnO 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.18 0.18 0.17 0.17 0.17

CO2 <0.01 -- <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01

Cl .012 .01 .013 .007 .009 .013 .010 .009

F .022 .07 .022 .022 .012 .020 .011 .030

Cr2O3 0.20 0.12 0.13 0.13 0.23 0.15 0.20 0.20

_______ ______ ______ ______ ______ ______ ______ _______

Subtotal 100.17 99.68 100.11 100.25 100.41 100.05 100.33 100.24

Less O=Cl,F .01 .00 .02 .01 .01 .02 .01 .01

_______ ______ ______ ______ ______ ______ ______ _______

Total 100.16 99.68 100.09 100.24 100.40 100.03 100.32 100.23

Type of adjacent to foundered foundered adjacent to chill deepest

sample (zone) (VII) (VII) foundered crust crust crust foundered crust core - chill

(VII) 

Contains yes yes yes no no no no no

glass?

Temperature high high high medium medium medium medium medium

before quench
35

Table A2. X-ray fluorescence analyses of core from Kilauea Iki drill hole KI88-2, in weight percent. Numbers in italics not included in totals. Sample 

annotations discussed in text.

 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Field no. KI88-2-147.4 KI88-2-160.5 KI88-2-170.2 KI88-2-177.2 KI88-2-186.7 KI88-2-197.7 KI88-2-205.2 KI88-2-215.8

Lab. no. W-256718 W-256750 W-256719 D-571898 W-256720 W-256721 W-256751 W-256722

Job no. CJ12 CJ13 CJ12 WC69 CJ12 CJ12 CJ13 CJ12

SiO2 48.0 47.3 46.7 46.8 47.1 46.5 46.7 45.3

Al2O3 11.0 10.1 9.54 10.1 10.1 9.21 9.45 7.83

Fe2O3 2.06 2.76 1.87 1.29 1.26 1.45 1.62 1.70

FeO 9.4 9.4 10.2 10.0 10.3 10.4 9.7 10.8 

MgO 14.8 17.7 18.9 17.6 17.9 20.4 19.8 24.3

CaO 9.85 9.16 8.99 9.55 9.61 8.94 9.35 7.76

Na2O 1.71 1.53 1.40 1.52 1.54 1.28 1.28 1.01

K2O 0.43 0.37 0.34 0.33 0.36 0.30 0.31 0.24

H2O+ <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 -- <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01

H2O- (0.10) (0.43) (0.12) -- (0.11) (0.21) (0.36) (0.18)

TiO2 2.25 1.90 1.70 1.68 1.70 1.53 1.54 1.21

P2O5 0.23 0.20 0.19 0.20 0.19 0.17 0.17 0.14

MnO 0.17 0.18 0.18 0.17 0.17 0.18 0.17 0.18

CO2 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 -- <0.01 <0.01 0.01 <0.01

Cl .007 .011 .010 .02 .085 < .004 .008 < .004

F .013 .020 .020 .05 .020 .011 .012 .008

Cr2O3 0.14 0.16 0.19 0.14 0.19 0.21 0.21 0.26

_______ _______ _______ ______ ______ _______ ______ ______

Subtotal 100.06 100.79 100.23 99.45 100.52 100.58 100.32 100.74

Less O=Cl,F .01 .01 .01 .00 .04 .00 .01 .00

_______ _______ _______ ______ ______ _______ ______ ______

Total 100.05 100.78 100.22 99.45 100.48 100.58 100.31 100.74

Type of (II/III) (III) (III/IV) (IV) (IV) (IV) (IV) (V)

sample (zone)

Contains no no no no no no no no

glass?

Temperature low low low low low low low medium

before quench
36

Table A2. Analyses of core from drill hole KI88-2 (continued).

 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

Field no. KI88-2-224.3 KI88-2-231.8 KI88-2-242.1 KI88-2-249.7 KI88-2-256.4 KI88-2-267.2 KI88-2-276.3 KI88-2-287.6

Lab. no. D-571899 W-256723 D-571900 W-256724 W-256725 W-256726 W-256727 W-256728

Job no. WC69 CJ12 WC69 CJ12 CJ12 CJ12 CJ12 CJ12

SiO2 45.0 45.6 45.9 45.2 45.4 46.1 46.1 46.3

Al2O3 7.39 8.25 8.85 7.92 8.26 9.00 9.37 9.39

Fe2O3 1.23 1.40 1.33 1.28 1.57 1.70 1.19 1.55

FeO 11.4 10.8 10.5 11.0 11.1 10.8 10.9 10.4 

MgO 24.5 22.8 21.4 24.6 23.4 20.91 20.8 21.1

CaO 7.33 8.22 8.64 8.07 7.73 7.97 8.53 8.61

Na2O 1.06 1.07 1.22 0.92 1.09 1.35 1.28 1.24

K2O 0.24 0.26 0.26 0.29 0.25 0.33 0.27 0.27

H2O+ -- <0.01 -- <0.01 <.01 <.01 <0.01 <.01

H2O- -- (0.18) -- (0.07) (0.18) (0.14) (0.07) (0.06)

TiO2 1.24 1.31 1.28 1.00 1.24 1.62 1.35 1.34

P2O5 0.15 0.15 0.16 0.12 0.15 0.19 0.15 0.15

MnO 0.18 0.18 0.17 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18

CO2 -- <0.01 -- <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01

Cl <.01 <.004 <.01 <.004 <.004 .007 .006 .006

F .03 .007 .04 .005 .007 .013 .008 .010

Cr2O3 0.21 0.25 0.18 0.26 0.23 0.20 0.21 0.22

_______ _______ _______ _______ _______ _______ _______ ______

Subtotal 99.96 100.30 99.93 100.75 100.60 100.28 100.35 100.76

Less O=Cl,F .01 .00 .01 .00 .00 .01 .00 .01

_______ _______ _______ _______ _______ _______ _______ ______

Total 99.95 100.30 99.92 100.75 100.60 100.27 100.35 100.75

Type of at T(max)

sample (zone) (V) (V) (V) (V) (V) (V) (VI) (VI)

 

Contains no no yes yes yes yes yes yes

glass?

Temperature medium medium high high high high high high

before quench
37

Table A2. Analyses of core from drill hole KI88-2 (continued).

 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

Field no. KI88-2-301.7 KI88-2-309.2 KI88-2-316.2 KI88-2-322.3 KI88-2-336.3 KI88-2-343.7 KI88-2-348.5 KI88-2-354.9

Lab. no. W-256729 W-256730 D-571901 W-256731 W-256732 W-256733 W-256734 W-256735

Job no. CJ12 CJ12 WC69 CJ12 CJ12 CJ12 CJ12 CJ12

SiO2 45.8 46.3 49.1 48.0 49.7 47.5 47.7 47.1

Al2O3 8.98 8.66 13.5 11.7 12.5 10.6 10.7 9.83

Fe2O3 1.07 1.32 1.73 1.15 1.81 2.53 1.67 1.55

FeO 11.1 10.6 7.53 9.5 8.9 9.6 10.2 10.4 

MgO 22.1 22.5 10.7 15.6 9.49 16.2 15.7 18.2

CaO 8.45 7.17 12.3 10.6 11.7 9.09 9.23 8.75

Na2O 1.19 1.38 2.01 1.69 2.03 1.67 1.73 1.54

K2O 0.18 0.40 0.32 0.25 0.53 0.44 0.44 0.40

H2O+ <0.01 <0.01 -- <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01

H2O- (0.08) (0.08) -- (0.06) (0.08) (0.07) (0.05) (0.05)

TiO2 1.10 1.53 1.64 1.44 2.74 2.12 2.22 1.96

P2O5 0.11 0.22 0.17 0.14 0.27 0.23 0.23 0.22

MnO 0.18 0.17 0.15 0.16 0.16 0.18 0.16 0.18

CO2 <0.01 <0.01 -- <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01

Cl <.004 .011 <.01 .004 .019 .013 .010 .007

F .006 .020 .04 .011 .030 .020 .030 .013

Cr2O3 0.24 0.20 0.07 0.18 0.08 0.15 0.14 0.19

______ ______ ______ ______ ______ ______ _____ ______

Subtotal 100.51 100.48 99.26 100.42 99.96 100.35 100.17 100.34

Less O=Cl,F .00 .01 .00 .00 .02 .01 .01 .01

______ ______ ______ ______ ______ ______ ______ ______

Total 100.51 100.47 99.26 100.42 99.94 100.34 100.16 100.33

Type of adjacent to foundered foundered foundered adjacent to chill chill deepest

sample (zone) foundered crust crust (VI) crust (VII) crust (VII) foundered crust core - chill

 (VI)

Contains yes yes yes yes yes no no no

glass?

Temperature high high high high high medium medium medium

before quench
38

Table A3. X-ray fluorescence analyses of samples from drill hole KI79-1, plus the 1959 and 1960 eruptions of Kilauea, in weight percent. 

 1 2 3 4 5 6 

Field no. KI79-1-183.4 KI79-1-187.4 Iki-3 Iki-14 Iki-14 KP-16

Lab. no. D-571902 D-571903 D-571889 D-571888 In PP537-A D-571890

Job no. WC69 WC69 WC69 WC69 WC69

Analysis type XRF XRF XRF XRF rapid-rock XRF

SiO2 46.3 46.3 47.2 46.9 46.7 49.6

Al2O3 8.80 9.32 9.87 9.65 10.0 12.8

Fe2O3 1.40 1.20 2.41 1.60 1.5 1.79

FeO 10.8 10.6 9.44 10.2 10.4 9.91

MgO 19.8 19.3 17.2 18.1 18.2 8.71

CaO 8.67 8.60 8.95 8.48 8.3 10.0 

Na2O 1.40 1.46 1.67 1.63 1.9 2.40

K2O 0.33 0.34 0.41 0.41 0.40 0.61

H2O+ -- -- -- -- -- -- 

H2O- -- -- -- -- -- --

TiO2 1.65 1.66 2.01 1.99 1.9 2.88 

P2O5 0.20 0.20 0.24 0.23 0.22 0.35

MnO 0.18 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17

CO2 -- -- -- -- -- -- 

Cl .01 .01 .01 <.01 -- .01 

F .04 .04 .04 .05 -- .09

Cr2O3 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 -- 0.05

______ ______ ______ ______ _____ _____

Subtotal 99.74 99.36 99.78 99.57 99.69 99.37

Less O=Cl,F .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .04

______ ______ ______ ______ _____ _____

Total 99.72 99.34 99.76 99.55 99.67 99.35

Type of above overnight below overnight 1959 1959 1959 1960 

sample stop (184.4) stop (184.4) phase 1 phase 5 phase 5 late hybrid

 

Contains yes yes yes yes yes yes

glass?

Temperature high high high high high high 
39

Table A4a. X-ray fluorescence analyses of core from drill hole KI67-1 compared with gravimetric analyses, all in weight percent. Sample annotations 

as in Helz and others (1994).

 1 2 3 4 5 6 

Field no. KI67-1-9.5 KI67-1-9.5 KI67-1-17.1 KI67-1-17.1 KI67-1-54.9 KI67-1-54.9

Lab. no. W-232722 W-232722 W-232723 W-232723 D-102044 D-102044

Job no. BR98 BR98 955(DCS)

Analysis type XRF gravimetric XRF gravimetric XRF gravimetric

SiO2 46.39 46.42 45.22 45.24 48.93 49.05

Al2O3 9.38 9.37 7.95 7.90 11.73 11.95

Fe2O3 (total) 13.01 12.89 13.35 13.20 12.83 12.80 

FeO -- -- --

MgO 19.77 19.63 24.28 24.14 11.85 11.73 

CaO 7.99 8.23 6.78 6.89 9.34 9.41 

Na2O 1.51 1.47 1.21 1.23 2.09 2.19 

K2O 0.38 .35 0.31 0.29 0.69 0.69 

H2O+ -- .07 -- .01 -- .21 

H2O- -- .07 -- .10 -- .00 

TiO2 1.89 1.89 1.51 1.51 2.66 2.69 

P2O5 0.20 .19 0.16 0.16 0.36 0.32 

MnO 0.17 .17 0.18 0.17 0.17 0.17

CO2 -- .01 -- .01 -- .01 

Cl -- .005 -- .008 -- .026 

F -- .023 -- .024 -- .038 

Cr2O3 -- 0.19 -- 0.21 -- --

Type of leopard leopard

sample rock rock

Contains no no no no no no

glass?

Temperature low low low low medium medium

before quench
40

Table A4b. X-ray fluorescence analyses of core from drill holes KI67-2 and KI79-5, compared with gravimetric analyses, all in weight percent. Sample 

annotations as in Helz and others (1994). “XRF recheck” indicates sample re-analyzed for cause, as discussed in text.

 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 

Field no. KI67-2-0.5 KI67-2-0.5 KI67-2-17.0 KI67-2-40.4 KI67-2-40.4 KI67-2-59.8 KI79-5-180.9

Lab. no. W-232721 W-232721 W-256769 W-214300 W-214300 W-256770 W-256771

Job no. BR98 CJ13 BD25 CJ13 CJ13

Analysis type XRF gravimetric XRF recheck XRF wet chem. XRF recheck XRF recheck

SiO2 48.20 48.23 46.9 45.96 45.71 47.7 46.2

Al2O3 11.64 12.32 9.96 8.92 8.94 10.7 9.05

Fe2O3 (total) 12.57 12.20 13.1 13.40 13.19 12.6 12.9

FeO -- -- -- -- --

MgO 12.68 12.58 18.5 21.65 21.77 16.7 20.8

CaO 10.20 10.37 8.56 7.66 7.64 9.11 8.55

Na2O 1.89 1.85 1.55 1.36 1.50 1.70 1.29

K2O 0.48 0.44 0.38 0.31 0.32 0.43 0.31

H2O+ -- .08 -- -- .00 -- -- 

H2O- -- .10 -- -- .04 -- -- 

TiO2 2.32 2.30 1.87 1.64 1.49 2.06 1.57

P2O5 0.24 0.26 0.21 0.17 0.14 0.23 0.18

MnO 0.17 0.17 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.17 0.17

CO2 -- <0.01 -- -- .01 -- -- 

Cl -- .011 -- -- .003 -- --

F -- .030 -- -- .021 -- -- 

Cr2O3 -- 0.12 -- -- 0.19 -- --

Type of

sample

Contains no no no no no no yes

glass?

Temperature low low low medium medium medium high

before quench
41

Table A4c. X-ray fluorescence analyses of core from drill hole KI67-3 compared with gravimetric analyses, all in weight percent. Sample annotations 

as in Helz and others (1994).

 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Field no. KI67-3-74.0 KI67-3-74.0 KI67-3-76.2 KI67-3-76.2 KI67-3-78.3 KI67-3-78.3 KI67-3-83.8 KI67-3-83.8

Lab. no. D-103982 D-103982 D-102053 D-102053 D-103983 D-103983 D-103986 D-103986

Job no. PH48 955(DCS) PH48 PH48

Analysis type XRF gravimetric XRF gravimetric XRF gravimetric XRF gravimetric

SiO2 49.98 49.81 50.77 50.82 49.67 49.66 50.17 49.93

Al2O3 13.25 13.60 12.30 12.72 13.14 13.32 13.24 13.61

Fe2O3 (total) 11.69 11.55 14.11 14.15 12.19 12.19 12.15 12.12

FeO -- -- -- --

MgO 8.36 8.27 5.15 5.14 8.03 7.90 7.63 7.54

CaO 11.23 11.37 9.17 9.34 10.86 11.00 10.77 10.80

Na2O 2.29 2.40 2.82 2.90 2.33 2.43 2.43 2.46

K2O 0.59 0.60 0.99 1.00 0.60 0.60 0.66 0.67

H2O+ -- .12 -- .20 -- .12 -- .14

H2O- -- .01 -- .00 -- .01 -- .01

TiO2 2.87 2.82 4.40 4.34 3.09 3.06 3.06 2.99

P2O5 0.30 0.30 0.54 0.58 0.31 0.33 0.34 0.36

MnO 0.16 0.16 0.19 0.20 0.16 0.17 0.16 0.16

CO2 -- .02 -- .01 -- .01 -- .03

Cl -- -- -- .022 -- -- -- .018

F -- .029 -- .061 -- .030 -- .037

Cr2O3 -- .05 -- -- -- <0.02 -- <0.02

Type of segregation segregation

sample vein vein

Contains yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes

glass?

Temperature high high high high high high high high

before quench
42

Table A4d. X-ray fluorescence analyses of core from drill hole KI75-1 compared with gravimetric analyses, all in weight percent. Sample annotations 

as in Helz and others (1994).

 1 2 3 4 

Field no. KI75-1-50.8 KI75-1-50.8 KI75-1-125 KI75-1-125

Lab. no. D-103843 D-103843 W-214316 W-214316

Job no. PE74 BD25

Analysis type XRF gravimetric XRF gravimetric

SiO2 49.68 49.52 50.41 50.62

Al2O3 12.69 12.91 12.31 12.51

Fe2O3 (total) 12.35 12.28 13.71 13.61

FeO -- --

MgO 8.94 9.07 5.96 5.94

CaO 10.44 10.54 9.46 9.52

Na2O 2.30 2.33 2.70 2.78

K2O 0.65 0.62 0.93 0.94

H2O+ -- .17 -- .10

H2O- -- .02 -- .05

TiO2 3.09 3.11 4.26 4.21

P2O5 0.32 0.30 0.47 0.45

MnO 0.17 0.17 0.18 0.18

CO2 -- .03 -- .01

Cl -- .008 -- .017 

F -- .031 -- .062

Cr2O3 -- .06 -- <0.01

Type of segregation segregation

sample vein vein

Contains no no yes? yes?

glass?

Temperature low low medium medium

before quench
43

Table A4e. X-ray fluorescence analyses of core from drill hole KI79-1 compared with gravimetric analyses, all in weight percent. Sample annotations 

as in Helz and others (1994). “XRF recheck” indicates sample re-analyzed for cause, as discussed in text.

 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Field no. KI79-1-141.0 KI79-1-141.0 KI79-1-150.3 KI79-1-150.3 KI79-1-160 KI79-1-170 KI79-1-175.0 KI79-1-175.0

Lab. no. W-223014 W-223014 W-223013 W-223013 W-256772 W-256773 W-223010 W-223010

Job no. BK52 BK52 CJ13 CJ13 BK52

Analysis type XRF gravimetric XRF gravimetric XRF recheck XRF recheck XRF gravimetric

SiO2 49.24 49.60 47.92 47.74 48.4 47.7 47.29 47.07

Al2O3 12.44 12.84 10.94 11.30 11.6 10.9 10.22 10.27

Fe2O3 (total) 12.00 11.69 12.70 12.41 11.9 12.2 12.97 12.66

FeO

MgO 10.45 10.42 14.86 14.75 13.7 15.0 17.16 17.08

CaO 10.57 10.70 9.79 9.84 10.5 10.1 9.32 9.47

Na2O 2.15 2.19 1.77 1.88 1.79 1.64 1.60 1.63

K2O 0.56 0.57 0.43 0.46 0.45 0.41 0.40 0.41

H2O+ -- .06 -- .05 -- -- -- .11

H2O- -- .02 -- .02 -- -- -- .01

TiO2 2.76 2.77 2.20 2.23 2.20 2.01 1.92 1.96

P2O5 0.28 0.26 0.23 0.19 0.24 0.22 0.21 0.18

MnO 0.16 0.16 0.17 0.17 0.16 0.17 0.17 0.17

CO2 -- .02 -- .01 -- -- -- .012

Cl -- .017 -- .020 -- -- -- .039

F -- .03 -- .030 -- -- -- .030

Cr2O3 -- .10 -- .14 -- -- -- 0.18

Type of equivalent to equivalent to

sample KI79-1-159.5 KI79-1-170.2

Contains no no no no yes yes yes yes

glass?

Temperature medium medium medium medium high high high high

before quench
44

Table A4e. X-ray fluorescence and gravimetric analyses of core from drill hole KI79-1 (continued).

 9 10 11 12 

Field no. KI79-1-189.0 KI79-1-189.0 KI79-1-203.7 KI79-1-203.7 

Lab. no. W-210876 W-210876 W-210878 W-210878

Job no. BA56 BA56

Analysis type XRF gravimetric XRF gravimetric

SiO2 46.04 45.85 45.64 45.55

Al2O3 8.94 8.93 8.33 8.19

Fe2O3 (total) 13.94 13.75 13.53 13.37

FeO -- --

MgO 20.84 20.72 22.98 22.68

CaO 7.99 8.05 8.10 8.17

Na2O 1.36 1.36 1.16 1.17

K2O 0.32 0.32 0.26 0.25

H2O+ -- .06 -- .04

H2O- -- .01 -- .00

TiO2 1.61 1.52 1.30 1.27

P2O5 0.17 0.16 0.15 0.12

MnO 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.17

CO2 -- .01 -- .01 

Cl -- .008 -- .012

F -- .022 -- .018 

Cr2O3 -- 0.16 -- 0.22

Type of deepest deepest

sample core core

Contains yes yes yes yes

glass?

Temperature high high high high

before quench
45

Table A4f. X-ray fluorescence analyses of core from drill hole KI79-3 compared with gravimetric analyses, all in weight percent. Sample annotations 

as in Helz and others (1994). 

 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Field no. KI79-3-145.1 KI79-3-145.1 KI79-3-150.3 KI79-3-150.3 KI79-3-160.3 KI79-3-160.3 KI79-3-166.1 KI79-3-166.1

Lab. no. W-210495 W-210495 W-210496 W-210496 W-210497 W-210497 W-210498 W-210498

Job no. BA23 BA23 BA23 BA23

Analysis type XRF gravimetric XRF gravimetric XRF gravimetric XRF gravimetric

SiO2 44.08 43.94 48.40 48.44 47.46 47.37 43.56 43.40

Al2O3 6.54 6.59 11.52 11.72 10.72 10.82 5.76 5.88

Fe2O3 (total) 15.89 15.70 11.87 11.72 12.81 12.68 16.74 16.55

FeO -- -- -- --

MgO 26.35 26.16 13.58 13.51 16.11 16.05 27.73 27.41

CaO 5.81 5.84 10.70 10.77 9.28 9.35 5.15 5.21

Na2O 1.03 1.08 1.78 1.82 1.72 1.74 0.94 0.97

K2O 0.23 0.23 0.43 0.44 0.43 0.43 0.24 0.24

H2O+ -- .04 -- .04 -- .07 -- .05

H2O- -- .00 -- .01 -- .02 -- .01

TiO2 1.38 1.34 2.14 2.07 2.14 2.07 1.29 1.24

P2O5 0.12 0.10 0.22 0.19 0.21 0.18 0.14 0.10

MnO 0.20 0.20 0.16 0.16 0.17 0.17 0.21 0.20

CO2 -- .01 -- .01 -- .01 -- .01

Cl -- .005 -- .007 -- .012 -- .007

F -- .014 -- .026 -- .027 -- .016

Cr2O3 -- 0.18 -- 0.14 -- 0.13 -- 0.20

Type of vorb vorb vorb vorb

sample

Contains trace trace no no yes yes yes yes

glass?

Temperature medium medium medium medium high high high high

before quench
46

Table A4f. X-ray fluorescence and gravimetric analyses of core from drill hole KI79-3 (continued).

 9 10 11 12 13 

Field no. KI79-3-169.1 KI79-3-169.1 KI79-3-172.8 KI79-3-172.8 KI79-3-172.8

Lab. no. W-210499 W-210499 W-210500 W-210500 W-256774

Job no. BA23 BA23 CJ13

Analysis type XRF gravimetric XRF gravimetric new XRF

SiO2 46.88 46.67 46.79 46.58 47.0

Al2O3 9.84 10.07 9.66 9.86 9.73

Fe2O3 (total) 13.03 12.83 12.99 12.85 13.0

FeO -- -- (10.1) 

MgO 18.37 18.21 18.80 18.71 18.8

CaO 8.96 9.04 8.87 8.97 8.92

Na2O 1.50 1.52 1.48 1.49 1.41

K2O 0.36 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.37

H2O+ -- .05 -- .05 <0.01

H2O- -- .01 -- .01 .21

TiO2 1.80 1.73 1.77 1.70 1.77

P2O5 0.19 0.16 0.19 0.16 0.20

MnO 0.18 0.17 0.18 0.17 0.18

CO2 -- .01 -- .01 .01

Cl -- .010 -- .010 .018

F -- .022 -- .022 .30

Cr2O3 -- 0.16 -- 0.17 0.18

 

Type of coarse

sample split

Contains yes yes yes yes yes

glass?

Temperature high high high high high

before quench
47

Table A4g. X-ray fluorescence analyses of core from drill holes KI81-1 and KI81-2 compared with gravimetric analyses, all in weight percent. Sample 

annotations as in Helz and others (1994).

 1 2 3 4 

Field no. KI81-1-250.0 KI81-1-250.0 KI81-2-88.6 KI81-2-88.6 

Lab. no. W-214110 W-214110 W-232725 W-232725

Job no. BD02 BR98

Analysis type XRF gravimetric XRF gravimetric

SiO2 44.81 44.66 56.60 57.07

Al2O3 7.43 7.40 12.41 12.86

Fe2O3 (total) 14.12 13.91 13.15 12.90

FeO -- --

MgO 25.63 25.43 2.45 2.37

CaO 7.06 7.14 5.90 6.08

Na2O 1.00 1.02 3.62 3.55

K2O 0.22 0.21 1.98 1.90

H2O+ -- .03 -- .11 

H2O- -- .02 -- .07

TiO2 1.12 1.05 2.60 2.59 

P2O5 0.12 0.10 1.01 0.96

MnO 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18

CO2 -- .01 -- <.01 

Cl -- .008 -- .028 

F -- .016 -- .11

Cr2O3 -- 0.24 -- <0.01

Type of vein-in- vein-insample vein vein

Contains yes yes no no

glass?

Temperature high high low low 

before quench