Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research 276 (2014) 10–21

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jvolgeores

The three-dimensional structure beneath the Popocatépetl volcano

(Mexico) based on local earthquake seismic tomography
P.Y. Kuznetsov a,⁎, I. Yu Koulakov a,b
a
Trofimuk Institute of Petroleum Geology and Geophysics SB RAS, Prospekt Koptyuga, 3, 630090 Novosibirsk, Russia
b
Novosibirsk State University, Pirogova Street 2, 630090 Novosibirsk, Russia

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: This paper presents a new seismic velocity model (P- and S-wave velocities and Vp/Vs ratio) beneath the
Received 24 July 2013 Popocatépetl volcano to a depth of ~4 km below sea level (bsl). This model is based on the tomographic inversion
Accepted 21 February 2014 of P- and S-wave arrival time data from earthquakes in the region of the volcano. These data were recorded by the
Available online 5 March 2014
15 stations of a temporary seismic network that was deployed on the volcano in 1999 and 2000. The recording
period was during a relatively quiet period between two strong eruptions, which occurred before and after the
Keywords:
Popocatépetl
experiment. This period is characterized by low levels of volcano-related seismicity. Most of the recorded events
Seismic tomography occurred across an area much larger than the network. In this study, we conducted several synthetic tests, which
Earthquakes validate the use of the out-of-network events to improve the resolution of the tomographic inversion beneath the
Magma conduits stations. In the resulting model, we see that the main volcanic edifice is associated with high velocities that have a
mushroom shape and that these high velocities are most prominent in the P-wave model. This feature may indi-
cate the presence of overpressured solidified igneous rocks, which comprise the edifice of Popocatépetl. Below
the summit of the volcano, we observe a prominent high Vp/Vs anomaly, which reaches a value of 1.9. This
anomaly probably indicates the existence of cracks and pores filled with melts and fluids, and it may represent
a fracture zone that serves as a conduit feeding the volcano. This model characterizes the interior structure of
the Popocatépetl volcano prior to the strong September 2000 eruption, which occurred a few months after the
termination of the experiment.
© 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction 2002), including the monitoring of temporal variations of the seismic

Studying volcanoes has been a challenging task since ancient times
for many generations of scientists. Volcanoes display extremely power-
ful natural forces, which may bring destruction and death to the people
living around them. Some huge eruptions may affect human life globally
by changing the climate throughout the world. At the same time, volca-
noes are considered “windows” into the Earth's interior; the erupted
rocks bring to the surface important information about processes occur-
ring at great depths. To understand the mechanisms driving volcanic
processes, it is important to investigate the deep structure in the area
of the volcanoes. Seismic tomography based on data from natural
sources, earthquakes, is one of the most powerful tools for this purpose.
The magmatic structures beneath volcanoes have been studied using
passive tomography by many researchers for decades. A few examples
of the successful application of this method can be found in the reviews
by Lees (2007) and Koulakov (2013). One such successful example is
that of the study of Mt. Etna (e.g., Cardaci et al., 1993; Aloisi et al.,
⁎ Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: kuznecov.p.u@gmail.com (P.Y. Kuznetsov),
ivan.science@gmail.com (I.Y. Koulakov).
properties during an eruption process (Patanè et al., 2006). Continuous
seismological observations in Kamchatka have made it possible to com-
pute seismic models for the Klyuchevskoy volcano group area (e.g.,
Koulakov et al., 2011, 2013). Some volcanic areas, mainly surrounded
by ocean, have been successfully studied using active source experi-
ments (for example, Vesuvius (Di Stefano and Chiarabba, 2002; Zollo
et al., 2002), Deception Island (Zandomeneghi et al., 2009), Montserrat
Island (Paulatto et al., 2010) and Tenerife Island (García-Yeguas et al.,
2012)). However, active source experiments are not possible for all
places due to various reasons, and passive source monitoring still
remains the main source of information on the deep structure of volca-
noes. Unfortunately, for most volcanoes, the number of seismic stations
is too small to use them for tomographic inversion. Even for relatively
well-studied volcanoes, the number of seismic stations is usually less
than 10–15. This small number produces ray coverage at the lowest
limit of the tomographic resolution capacity. Therefore, in each individ-
ual case, it is important to perform careful verification and resolution
analysis to assess the realistic features that can be retrieved from the
limited amount of data available.
In this study, we present a tomographic model for the Popocatépetl
volcano (Mexico), which is one of the most famous volcanoes

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2014.02.017
0377-0273/© 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
 P.Y. Kuznetsov, I.Y. Koulakov / Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research 276 (2014) 10–21
worldwide. The volcano's elevation is 5452 m above sea level (asl),
making it one of the highest active volcanoes in the world. It is often
called one of the 100 Greatest Wonders of the World. Popocatépetl is lo-
cated in the Trans-Mexican volcanic belt within a series of several large
volcanoes, and it exhibits a fairly strong eruption activity. This volcano is
potentially very dangerous because it is located between the state cap-
itals of Puebla to the east, Tlaxcala to the north-east and Mexico city to
the north-west, with a total population of over 20 million people (e.g.,
Cadoux et al., 2011). There is some radiocarbon-based evidence of
strong eruptions of Popocatépetl (VEI 4–5) in prehistoric times (e.g.,
Robin and Boudal, 1987; Boudal and Robin, 1989; Siebe et al., 1996;
Espinasa-Perena and Martin-del Pozzo, 2006). The most powerful vol-
canic eruption of Popocatépetl (a VEI 4) during human occupation of
the area occurred in 823. Since then, the Popocatépetl volcano has pro-
duced moderate eruptions of VEI 1–3. The strongest recent periods of
unrest occurred in 1925–1927 (VEI 2), in 1994–1995 (VEI 2) and in
1996–2003 (VEI 3). During the last few years, the Popocatépetl volcano
has exhibited a moderate activity. For example, in April 18, 2012, there
was a significant release of gases, and in May 11–12, 2013, a relatively
small eruption caused ash falls on some surrounding cities. In this
paper, we consider the data corresponding to the activation period
around the year 2000. Unfortunately, the network was deployed in a
relatively quiet pause between two significant periods of unrest: the
first of them ended in the beginning of 1999 (Zobin and Martinez,
2010) and the next one started in September 2000 (Martin-Del Pozzo
et al., 2003). Therefore, no considerable seismic activity beneath the vol-
cano was detected by this network.
Taking into account the location of the volcano in a highly populated
area, the investigation of the feeding mechanisms of the magma sources
beneath Popocatépetl is an important task for the assessment of the vol-
canic hazard in this region. Popocatépetl has been studied by many sci-
entists from several domains of the geosciences. A review of different
studies of the Popocatépetl volcano by different methods was made by
De la Cruz-Reyna et al. (1995). Most of the geophysical investigations
relate to studying the seismicity beneath the volcano. The analysis of
the long-period events in this volcano performed by Arciniega-
Ceballos et al. (2003) revealed that the most typical tremors have a
range of dominating periods of 0.3–2 s, which may be related to gas fluc-
tuations in the magma system below the volcano. The temporal and
spectral characteristics of the seismicity (Arciniega-Ceballos et al.,
2000) indicate that the tremor activation is periodic. For example,
after 1995, 7 long-period events occurred daily, and the length of each
tremor was approximately 5 min. The temporal and spatial variations
of stresses in the area of Popocatépetl were studied in Arámbula
Mendoza et al. (2010). The parameters of the explosions in Popocatépetl
were estimated by Cruz‐Atienza et al. (2001) from the inversion of seis-
mic waveforms recorded by the regional network. Some information on
the structure of the magmatic system was also obtained from the anal-
ysis of the attenuation patterns on selected seismograms recorded by
permanent stations (Shapiro et al., 2000). They found that rays passing
below Popocatépetl are strongly attenuated compared to those travel-
ing outside the volcano. This observation was explained by the presence
of magma reservoirs. The information on the 1D distribution of shear
velocity was based on the surface wave dispersion by De Barros et al.
(2008).
The three-dimensional P-wave velocity seismic structure has
already been studied by Berger et al. (2011). They used the data of the
permanent seismic network that has monitored the activity of
Popocatépetl for more than ten years. Berger et al. (2011) used a larger
dataset than that used in our study, but in their case, the number of
stations was smaller. As a result, the ratio of picks/event was only
9624/1412 = 6.81, whereas in our case, this ratio was almost twice as
large (6090/504 = 12.1). The ratio is a critical parameter to resolve
the trade-off between source parameters and velocity distributions
and to improve the quality of the source locations. Indeed, in the case
of using only 6–7 picks per event, at least 4 parameters are used for
11
the source location, and there are only 2–3 parameters left for the veloc-
ity reconstruction, which are too few for high-resolution solutions.
When using the noisy data (which is always the case in seismological
observations), a stable source location requires more than four picks,
which would leave no data for the velocity model. In addition, we find
that using only P-wave data, such as in the study by Berger et al.
(2011), causes additional problems for the stability of the inversion.
The existence of both P- and S-wave picks produces a constraint on
the distance to the source, whereas in the case of using only the P-
wave data, the distance is estimated from the curvature of travel–time
curve, which is much less stable. Thus, we believe that the velocity
model reported by Berger et al. (2011) can be improved by using
more stations and adding the S-wave picks.
In this study, we analyze the data of a temporary portable network
deployed by GeoForschungsZentrum-Potsdam on Popocatépetl in
1999–2000. Initially, this network was designed to record concentrated
clusters of seismic events beneath the volcano, which were expected
after a very explosive stage between November 1998 and January
1999 (Arámbula Mendoza et al., 2010). However, the seismicity within
the volcanic edifice dramatically weakened shortly before the deploy-
ment of the stations in December 1999. The quiescent phase of the vol-
cano finished just after removing the stations in July 2000. A new period
of volcanic unrest started in September 2000, which resulted in a strong
eruptive stage in December 2000 (Arámbula Mendoza et al., 2010). As a
result, the network did not detect much seismicity within the volcanic
edifice, and it mostly recorded a large number of events dispersed
over a wide area considerably exceeding the coverage area of the net-
work. The network on the volcano had a relatively small aperture of ap-
proximately 10 km, which is not an optimal configuration for recording
regional seismicity. For this reason, the data from this network have
never been used for any tomographic inversion. This study is the first at-
tempt to analyze these data after more than 13 years.
The aim of this paper is to calculate the seismic model beneath the
volcano based on the available data provided by this network and to as-
sess the resolution limitations of the results. A novel feature of our
study, compared to that of Berger et al. (2011), is the presentation of
both P- and S-wave velocity models, which provide much more infor-
mation on the petrophysical state of the rocks below the volcano. It is
important that this model corresponds to the period of time preceding
a strong eruption of Popocatépetl, which started in September 2001
Fig. 1. Locations of temporary seismic stations (blue squares) and seismic events (red
dots) recorded during the experiment. Background is the elevation map, in meters.
 12
P.Y. Kuznetsov, I.Y. Koulakov / Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research 276 (2014) 10–21
Fig. 2. Screenshot of the recorded waveforms (three components for three stations) and an example of P and S arrival time picking corresponding to a moderate magnitude event located at a distance of ~40 km from the network.
 P.Y. Kuznetsov, I.Y. Koulakov / Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research 276 (2014) 10–21
and lasted until 2003, and thus our 3D velocity model of the volcano just
before the eruption can provide a key to understanding the mechanism
that triggered this unrest.
2. Data and algorithms
In this work, we used the open access waveform data from the
Geofon network managed by GeoForschungsZentrum-Potsdam. In the
period of time from December 1999 to July 2000, GFZ scientists main-
tained a temporary seismological network on Popocatépetl, which
consisted of 22 portable stations (Fig. 1). The stations included various
data loggers (DM24, REFTEK 72-A, Orion, PDAS 100/LG) and seismome-
ters (CMG-3ESP/120, STS-2/N, CMG-40T/30) from the GFZ instrument
pool. The three-component continuous records of the seismograms
with the discretization frequency of 100 Hz are stored in SEED format.
In total, 15 stations were installed directly on the volcano, and the re-
maining 7 stations were deployed in various cities to the northeast of
the volcano (Fig. 1). In this study, the data from the volcano network
were primarily used because the records from the urban stations were
unsuitable for the registration of local seismic events due to the high
levels of noise.
We have performed the picking of the arrival times for the local and
regional seismic events. The waveforms were normalized and filtered
with a band pass filter of 0.5–2 Hz, which removed most of the anthro-
pogenic noise and any signal from teleseismic events. At this stage, we
used the DIMAS open source software (Display, Interactive Manipula-
tion and Analysis of Seismograms), which was developed by Dmitry
Droznin (pers. communication, 2009) in the Kamchatkan Branch of
the Geophysical Survey and was specially adapted for processing the
volcano seismicity. At the picking stage, we calculated the preliminary
locations of the sources and rejected the outliers having residuals of
more than 0.6 s. A screenshot of the seismograms with picking results
is shown in Fig. 2.
As a result of processing, we have obtained 6089 arrival times (2830
P-waves and 3259 S-waves) corresponding to 504 events located
within an area with a radius of 50 km around the network. The larger
number of the S-wave picks is due to a relatively strong background
noise that often hides the lower-amplitude first arrival of the P-wave;
on the contrary, the much stronger S-wave signal, which is above the
noise level, can be reliably picked. As a result, we have a quite unusual
situation where the average accuracies of P- and S-wave picks are
similar and estimated as 0.1–0.15 s.
For this study, we selected the data that include only events having
at least 6 picks and initial residuals of less than 0.6 s. Note that the epi-
centers of most events are largely dispersed, and there are a relatively
few events located within the network perimeter. If we used a GAP
b 180 criterion, which is often applied for data selection in tomography
studies, we would not have enough data to achieve satisfactory resolu-
tion in tomographic inversion. However, as was shown by Koulakov
(2009b), the data from out-of-network events can be of great use for
improving the resolution of the tomographic inversion. In this case,
we cannot ensure the accuracy of the locations of the events, but the
relative residuals recorded by the stations provide the important infor-
mation on the seismic anomalies beneath the network, which can help
to stabilize the solution for the seismic velocity model. We explored dif-
ferent criteria of data selection and found that the best resolution is
achieved when all events in a radius of 50 km are used in the inversion.
More details on this analysis can be found in the next section.
Unfortunately, we could not gain access to the data of the permanent
network that were used to build the previous tomography model
of Popocatépetl by Berger et al. (2011). Thus, the present study is
completely independent of that study both in terms of data used and
the inversion algorithm.
To perform the tomographic inversion, we used the LOTOS code by
Koulakov (2009a), which enables the simultaneous iterative inversions
13
of arrival time data to P and S velocity distributions and source
parameters.
The calculations start with rough source locations using a grid search
method and a simple linear representation of rays. Then, the iterative
processing contains the steps of source relocation and inversion. The re-
locations of the sources in the 3D model are executed using the bending
ray tracer, based on the general principle proposed by Um and Thurber
(1987). The located sources are limited by the topographic surface;
thus, they can be located above sea level. This is important for the con-
sidered area because it has large topographic variations. The velocity
models were parameterized with nodes distributed in areas with suffi-
cient numbers of rays. Between the nodes, the velocity was linearly in-
terpolated. In the horizontal directions, the nodes were regularly spaced
(1 km in our case), but in the vertical direction the grid spacing in-
creased in cases of low density of rays (the minimal vertical spacing in
our case was 0.5 km). To reduce any grid dependency upon the result,
we performed the inversions for several grids with different basic orien-
tations (in our case 0, 22, 45 and 67°) and then averaged the results. The
inversion was performed simultaneously for the P- and S-wave models
and source parameters (three coordinates and origin time). Although
the LOTOS code allows for including station corrections as independent
parameters, we did not use this feature in this case. In fact, the resulting
model does not reveal any features that can be related to local station-
related delays; hence, including station corrections appears to be not
necessary. The regularization of the inversion was performed by adding
additional equations with two non-zero elements of equal values and
opposite signs, which correspond to neighboring nodes in the parame-
terization mesh. The data vector for these equations is zero. Increasing
the values of these equations leads to decreasing the difference between
velocity anomalies in neighboring nodes and causes general smoothing
of the resulting model. The inversion parameters, such as weights of dif-
ferent parameters and damping values, were estimated according to the
results of synthetic testing. When performing the modeling, we con-
ducted many trials with different values for the inversion parameters
and selected ones that enable the best recovery of the true synthetic
patterns. These parameters were then used for the inversion of the ob-
served data. In all presented cases of real and synthetic data inversions,
we used three iterations.
All the results of the synthetic modeling and observed data inversion
can be repeated by anyone using the full structure of the LOTOS code
(www.ivan-art.com/science/LOTOS/popo_lotos12.zip), which includes
all the computing programs and files with the initial data, free parame-
ters, and definitions of the models corresponding to the Popocatépetl
dataset. One can run the calculations using the simple instructions in
the supporting documentation.
3. Testing and inversion results
Before presenting the main results of data inversion, we will de-
scribe a number of different tests, which were used to assess the resolu-
tion limitations and to give estimates of the reliability of the computed
structures. We have performed several synthetic tests that were de-
signed to simulate as close as possible the data processing workflow.
Using the LOTOS code, we can create different types of synthetic models,
such as checkerboard and free-shaped anomalies defined in the hori-
zontal or vertical sections. For the synthetic modeling, we used the
same source–receiver pairs as in the case of the data inversion. To com-
pute synthetic data, we executed a 3D ray tracing which is based on the
bending algorithm. After computing the synthetic times, we “forget” the
locations of the sources and repeat the full processing procedure, which
is identical to the case of the real data experiment. Because of the trade-
off between the source and velocity parameters, the reconstruction re-
sults are strongly smeared, but in this case, they represent the realistic
capacity of tomography to resolve velocity structures.
The first problem that can be checked by synthetic modeling relates
to the selection of data. As it was stated in the previous section, the
14 P.Y. Kuznetsov, I.Y. Koulakov / Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research 276 (2014) 10–21
 P.Y. Kuznetsov, I.Y. Koulakov / Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research 276 (2014) 10–21 15

Fig. 4. Examples of observed data inversion results based on four criteria of data selection according to the maximal source–receiver distance: 50 km, 20 km, 10 km and 5 km. P-velocity
anomalies are presented in two depth levels: 2 km asl and 2 km bsl. Color scale range is 20% for the upper section and 10% for the lower section. Blue triangles depict the locations of sta-
tions; yellow triangle is the volcano summit. Contour lines show the topography. Areas outside the network where the resolution is low are shaded.

events in our dataset are strongly dispersed over a large area, which
considerably exceeds the aperture of the network. To check the effect
of including the out-of-network events, we performed the checker-
board tests using different criteria for data selection. Instead of the
GAP b 180 criterion, we selected the data according to the distance
from an event to the nearest recording station, which roughly represents
the radius of the source location area around the network. For each of the
four cases, the events were categorized by distances less than 5 km,
10 km, 20 km and 50 km. The numbers of events/picks in the corre-
sponding datasets were as follows: 71/732, 98/1156, 223/2682, and
504/6090. We used the same checkerboard model with 0.7 km sized
anomalies, with 1.3 km of empty space between them. In this case, we
merely explore the horizontal resolution; thus the anomalies do not
change with depth. The amplitudes of the anomalies were ± 5%. The
signs for the P-wave and S-wave anomalies were opposite to ensure
large variations in the Vp/Vs ratio. The results of restoring this model
using the four selection criteria presented in Fig. 3 show that the best re-
construction is achieved for the case of using the data within the 50 km
radius area. This fully confirms the conclusions made by Koulakov
(2009b) about the importance of using the out-of-network events for
the tomographic inversions. Therefore, for the main result, we have
selected the case of using all available data within a radius of 50 km.
Note that in the checkerboard test the resulting features are only re-
covered in the central part, but appear to be strongly smeared outside
the network. This reflects an integral trade-off effect between the veloc-
ity and source parameters, and it shows that the results outside the net-
work perimeter should be considered with prudence. Therefore, when
presenting the main results, we mask the areas outside the network as
not representing robust structures. For the vertical sections, we show
the results only in a confidence area where there are rays crossing
from different directions.
In Fig. 4, we also present the results of observed data inversion based
on the same data subsets. It can be seen that the general features in the
central part of the model remain similar in all cases. However, in mar-
ginal areas, the differences are important. For example, for selection
areas within 50 km and 20 km, the “blue” anomalies appear surrounded
by low-velocity “red” anomalies, whereas for the 5 km area the “blue”
pattern covers the entire NE half of the study area. Based on the results
of the synthetic tests, we can select the case of the 50 km selection area
as the preferred one.
In all previous tests, the synthetic patterns did not change with
depth. It is known that in passive tomography, the vertical resolu-
tion is usually considerably poorer than the horizontal resolution.
This is mostly related to the trade-off between the origin times,

Fig. 3. Checkerboard tests with the use of different criteria of data selection. Reconstruction results are presented for P-, S-anomalies and Vp/Vs ratio. The size of the out-of-network area is
controlled by the minimal distance to a nearest station which is indicated above each row. The shapes of the synthetic patterns are indicated with black lines. Blue triangles depict the
seismic stations; yellow triangle marks the summit of Popocatepetl. All sections correspond to the sea level.
16 P.Y. Kuznetsov, I.Y. Koulakov / Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research 276 (2014) 10–21
coordinates of events (especially depth) and absolute seismic
velocities. To estimate the capacity of resolving the vertical
patterns, we considered nine synthetic models with various
configurations of anomalous blocks defined in a vertical section
(Fig. 5). The reconstruction results reveal some vertical smearing,
which becomes stronger for deeper areas. Notably, the recovered
amplitude of the deeper anomalies is weaker than that of the
shallower ones (e.g., Models 7 and 8). In the case of the existence
of multiple depth layers (e.g., Model 5), the images of the lower
anomalies are strongly perturbed by the smearing of the shallower
ones and are often not detectable. These tests show that vertical
variations of velocity structures should be interpreted with
caution.
In addition to the resolution estimates, the aforementioned synthetic
tests were also used to define most appropriate values of the free
parameters for the inversion (e.g., smoothing, grid spacing, number of
iterations, etc.).
Fig. 5. Synthetic tests with nine models defined along sections A2–B2 (see Fig. 6). Plots with resulting Vp/Vs ratio are presented. The locations of the synthetic patterns are indicated with
black lines.
The experimental data processing started with estimates of the
reference velocity model. We used a simple representation for the 1D
velocity model by defining the P-wave velocities at several depth
levels and linearly interpolating the velocity between the layers. In
this particular case, the S-wave velocity is derived based on a constant
Vp/Vs ratio. To find an optimal starting velocity distribution, we made
full inversions for dozens of different models. When selecting the best
model, we considered the final average deviations of the residuals and
the number of data used for inversion (where the residuals are less
than 0.6 s). Another criterion for the best reference model determina-
tion, which was also taken into account, is the balance between positive
and negative anomalies in the inversion results. The final reference
model has a fixed Vp/Vs ratio equal to 1.8 and P-wave velocity values
of 3.2 km/s at 6 km asl, 4 km/s at 5 km bsl, and 5.5 km/s at 30 km bsl.
The velocities between the indicated levels were computed by linear in-
terpolation. These values are relatively low compared to the other re-
gions we explored earlier but can be explained by heavy fracturing,
 P.Y. Kuznetsov, I.Y. Koulakov / Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research 276 (2014) 10–21 17

the presence of fluids and heterogeneities in the rocks beneath the ac-
tive volcano. Our reference velocities appear to be different than the
1D models estimated by Cruz‐Atienza et al. (2001) and De Barros et al.
(2008). We propose that these differences might be due to the location
of the temporary network used in this study, which was located directly
on the relatively soft volcaniclastic rocks of the flanks of the volcano,
whereas all the previous estimates were based on permanent stations
located at greater distances from the volcano.
In total, the inversions ran for three iterations. The variance reduc-
tion was approximately 20%. Such a low reduction of residuals can be
explained by the small size of the study area. The seismic rays cannot ac-
cumulate large residuals due to anomalies along their paths; thus, the
signal/noise ratio for this dataset is fairly low, which enables the low
variance reduction. After the final inversion, the average deviations of
the residuals for the P- and S-wave data were equal to 0.14 s. It is
unusual, but for this particular case, the final average deviations of the
P- and S-wave residuals were approximately the same, and they rough-
ly represent the accuracy of picking. Due to the high level of background
noise in seismograms, the weak amplitudes of the first arrival P-waves
are often difficult to detect, whereas the much stronger S-wave arrivals
are clearer for some cases. As a result, for some events, the S-wave
arrival is detected more precisely, and the total average accuracy of
the P- and S-wave data is similar.
The main results of this study are presented in Figs. 6, 7 and 8 in a set
of horizontal and vertical sections. In Figs. 6 and 7, we show the anom-
alies of P- and S-wave velocities with respect to the optimal 1D starting
model, and the Vp/Vs ratio, which was computed by subdivision of the
resulting P- to S-wave velocities. As was shown in a number of the syn-
thetic tests presented in this paper, this method of computing the Vp/Vs
ratio provides fairly stable results. In the horizontal sections, we mask

Fig. 6. Resulting anomalies of P- and S-velocities and Vp/Vs ratio in four horizontal sections. For the shallowest level the anomalies range in 20%; in other sections contours correspond to
the 10% bar. Areas outside the network where the resolution is lower are masked. Contour lines depict the smoothed topography. Blue triangles indicate the seismic stations; Yellow
triangle marks the summit of Popocatepetl. Locations of two profiles presented in Fig. 7 are shown in plots corresponding to 4 km depth.
18 P.Y. Kuznetsov, I.Y. Koulakov / Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research 276 (2014) 10–21
Fig. 7. Anomalies of P- and S-velocities and Vp/Vs ratio computed as a result of data inversion in two vertical sections. The locations of the profiles are presented in Fig. 6. Areas outside the
network where the resolution is lower are masked. Dots indicate the locations of seismicity at less than 5 km distance from the profile. The location of the intersection of the profiles at
19.0398°N, 98.6197°W is indicated with black line.
the results outside the network perimeter because these areas cannot
be resolved due to the smearing problems and the trade-off effects
between the source and velocity parameters.
In shallow sections, we observe very strong velocity variations, which
exceed ±20%. For example, in the summit area at 2 km above sea level
(asl), we observe a P-wave velocity of approximately 4.2 km/s, whereas
below the SW flank of the volcano, we observe a P-wave velocity lower
than 2.6 km/s. It is unusual that the variations in the S-wave anomalies
appear to be not as strong as those of the P-wave velocities. The negative
anomalies beneath the SW flank are similar in the P- and S-wave models,
but the summit-related high-velocity anomaly appears to be less prom-
inent in the S-wave model. This difference leads to the existence of high
values for the Vp/Vs ratio beneath the summit.
In the vertical sections, the results are presented as relative anomalies
(Fig. 7) and absolute velocities (Fig. 8). The most prominent high-velocity
anomaly is observed below the summit and has a mushroom shape. The
head of the “mushroom” is located above sea level and it forms the body
of the volcanic edifice. The absolute velocities within this body are
approximately 4.1 km/s and 2.2 km/s for the P- and S-wave models, re-
spectively. These velocities appear to be similar to the reference velocities
at a depth of 4 km bsl. Notably, the general shape of this “mushroom”
anomaly is similar for the P- and S-wave models computed independent-
ly, which proves the robustness of this finding.
The fact that we do not observe any clustering of seismicity beneath
the volcano is an unexpected result. All the seismicity recorded during
the experiment appears highly scattered over a large area. For the out-
of-network events, we cannot provide accurate coordinates and origin
times. The errors in the source locations increase with greater distances
from the network. Therefore, the presented source locations should be
considered with prudence, and they are not the key finding of this
study. However, as discussed above, using these earthquakes does not
prevent performing seismic tomography for the network area because
we use the relative residuals for these events, similar teleseismic
studies, which are not strongly affected by errors in the source locations.
4. Discussion
The main seismic model is presented in Figs. 6, 7 and 8 in a set of hor-
izontal and vertical sections. As we stated in the previous paragraph, in
sections above 0 km in depth, we clearly observe that a large high-
velocity anomaly slightly shifted to the north-east in respect to the
main edifice of Popocatépetl, which is surrounded by low-velocity
anomalies. This feature is especially clear for the P-wave velocity
model and is less prominent for the S-wave anomalies, which results
in high Vp/Vs ratios. At depths of 2 and 4 km bsl, we observe an isolated
isometric positive anomaly centered below Popocatépetl, which ap-
pears smaller in the S-wave model. In the map of the Vp/Vs ratios, we
see a prominent anomaly, whose value exceeds 1.9, located just beneath
the volcano.
The high-velocity mushroom-shaped body, which is seen below the
main edifice at all considered depth levels, might be the signature of the
solidified magmatic rocks that comprise the edifice of the volcano, and
the body has the shape of the vertical column down to approximately
4 km bsl. Additionally, the elevation of the volcano is more than
5000 m; therefore, the rocks at shallower depths are much more strong-
ly affected by the high lithostatic pressure than in surrounding areas
where the elevation is much lower. This should strongly increase the
seismic velocity (especially the P-wave velocity) below the volcano.
The presence of low velocities in the surrounding areas around the vol-
cano might be explained by soft pyroclastic deposits accumulated dur-
ing the eruption history of the Popocatépetl volcano. The observed
strong P- and less strong S-wave positive anomalies beneath the main
edifice of the volcano can be explained by mechanical factors that de-
crease the shear elastic modulus in the volcanic rocks but do not affect
 P.Y. Kuznetsov, I.Y. Koulakov / Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research 276 (2014) 10–21 19

Fig. 8. Absolute values of P- and S-velocities computed as a result of data inversion in two vertical sections. The locations of the profiles are presented in Fig. 6. Areas outside the network
where the resolution is lower are masked. Dots indicate the locations of seismicity at less than 5 km distance from the profile. The location of the intersection of the profiles is indicated with
black line.

the compressional elastic modulus. The most probable candidate for this
effect might be the presence of cracks and pores filled with fluids and
melts. If the total number of cracks and pores is not very high, this factor
is not strong enough to affect the P-velocity but is sufficient to reduce
the S-wave velocity. Note that a similar feature (strong, high P- and
lower S-wave velocities) is observed beneath other active volcanoes,
such as Mt. Spurr in Alaska (Koulakov et al., 2013) and the Kluchevskoy
volcano in Kamchatka (Koulakov et al., 2011, 2013). In contrast, for dor-
mant volcanoes, where the presence of fluids and melts is less probable,
the prominent positive anomalies are observed in the crust for both P
and S-wave velocities (see, for example, the structure beneath the dor-
mant volcanoes around Merapi in Koulakov, 2009b).
Based on the results of tomography, we can conclude that the seismic
velocities, and especially the Vp/Vs ratio, reveal the presence of fracture
zones beneath the active Popocatépetl volcano that may serve as
conduits, bringing liquid material from deep sources to the surface.
Many experimental studies (e.g., Takei, 2002) and field experiments
(e.g., Chatterjee et al., 1985) indicate that variations in the Vp/Vs ratio
are strongly dependent on the presence of cracks and pores, as well as
on the pore content. An increase in the Vp/Vs ratio is thought to be asso-
ciated with the presence of liquid phases, while lower values of Vp/Vs in-
dicate the existence of gas phases. This relationship was proved by
several tomography studies in volcanic areas (e.g., De Siena et al.,
2010). Based on studying the properties of melts and fluids in the lavas
of Popocatépetl, Atlas et al. (2006) concluded that the melt evolution oc-
curred in conduits or inter-fingered dykes rather than a large magma
chamber. This hypothesis is confirmed by our results, which may testify
that the medium beneath the volcano is composed of a solid crystalline
frame, probably corresponding to igneous rocks brought from deeper
levels, which are indicated by a higher P-wave velocity. However, be-
neath the volcano, these rocks behave as sponge with some content of
fluids and melt, which affect the P-wave velocity little, but drastically
lower the S-velocity.
It should also be noted that the structure beneath active volcanoes
might change considerably with time, especially during periods of un-
rest (see, for example, Patanè et al., 2006 for Mt. Etna and Koulakov
et al., 2013 for the volcano Klyuchevskoy). This may explain some in-
consistencies that are observed between our results and those of
Berger et al. (2011). In the latter study, the derived images represent
an average structure over several years of observations. Our experiment
corresponds to a relatively short period of time between two active
phases, and this period might be unique in terms of the deep structure
and might have different seismic distributions compared to other
periods.
20 P.Y. Kuznetsov, I.Y. Koulakov / Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research 276 (2014) 10–21
5. Conclusions
In this study, we analyze the seismic data recorded using a porta-
ble seismic network on the Popocatépetl volcano during a relatively
quiet period of time (from December 1999 to July 2000) between
two strong eruptions. Previously, no significant results were pro-
duced based on these data because of the relatively small aperture
of the network and the strongly scattered distribution of the seismic
events over a large area. However, the advantage of this dataset com-
pared to the data of the permanent network is a much larger ratio of
the number of picks per events, which is a critical parameter to sep-
arating the source and velocity parameters in passive-source tomog-
raphy. Despite the unfavorable distributions of seismic stations and
recorded earthquakes, we have constructed in this study a seismic
model beneath the Popocatépetl volcano that appears to be robust.
Based on a variety of synthetic tests, we have shown that the existing
data distribution (most of seismic sources located outside the net-
work) can provide satisfactory resolution for a seismic model of the
region beneath the volcano.
We have found a large high-velocity anomaly beneath the main
volcanic edifice, which can be explained by solidified magmatic rocks
forming the body of the volcano. In addition, the high velocities could
be due to the strong lithostatic pressure beneath the highly elevated
volcano summit. The most interesting feature of this model is that the
P-wave anomaly beneath the summit appears to be more prominent
than the S-wave anomaly. This can be explained by the existence of
cracks and pores filled with fluids and melts, which more strongly affect
the shear wave elastic parameters. We propose that the areas with high
Vp/Vs ratios directly beneath the volcano indicate the location of a fault
zone that may serve as a conduit for transporting fluids and melts to the
surface. The strong low-velocity anomalies around the volcano can be
explained by the existence of relatively soft deposits of pyroclastic
materials from previous volcanic eruptions.
Another important conclusion follows from the distribution of the
earthquakes recorded during the experiment. Unexpectedly, they
were highly scattered in an area with a 50 km radius around the
Popocatépetl volcano. Based on the existing network, we cannot pre-
cisely locate these events. However, the fact that they occurred over a
very broad area is an indicator that the entire area around Popocatépetl,
which also includes the volcanoes Iztaccihuatl and Matlalcueye, is tec-
tonically active. The recorded seismicity might also be caused by pro-
cesses in a common feeding system for all these volcanoes. This feeder
system may have the potential to awaken the dormant volcanoes. How-
ever, to study this activity, we would need the information from a much
larger network, which should be installed around the Popocatépetl
volcano.
This study should obviously be continued. First, the dataset of the
temporary network should be combined with the data from the perma-
nent network, which were not available to us. We hope that this will
greatly improve the resolution of the seismic model of the region be-
neath the volcano. It would also be useful to implement alternative
methods of seismic imaging, such as surface wave and ambient noise to-
mography. This would provide independent images, which could be
compared with the model presented in this paper and used to verify
our findings.
Acknowledgments
We are grateful to the scientists from GeoForschungsZentrum-
Potsdam, who deployed the seismic stations on Popocatépetl and
made the recorded data publicly available through the GEOFON data ar-
chive. We also thank the anonymous reviewer for detailed analysis of
our paper and rigorous critical comments. This study was supported
by the Ministry of Education and Science of Russia (SB RAS VIII.70.2),
as well as by the research grants IP SB RAS #20 and ONZ-7.3.
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at http://dx.
doi.org/10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2014.02.017.
References
Aloisi, M., Cocina, O., Neri, G., Orecchio, B., Privitera, E., 2002. Seismic tomography of the
crust underneath the Etna volcano, Sicily. Phys. Earth Planet. Inter. 134 (3), 139–155.
Arámbula Mendoza, R., Valdés González, C., Martínez Bringas, A., 2010. Temporal and
spatial variation of the stress state of Popocatépetl volcano, Mexico. J. Volcanol.
Geotherm. Res. 196, 156–168.
Arciniega-Ceballos, A., Valdes-Gonzales, C., Dawson, P., 2000. Temporal and spectral char-
acteristics of seismicity observed at Popocatépetl volcano, central Mexico. J. Volcanol.
Geotherm. Res. 102, 207–216.
Arciniega-Ceballos, A., Chouet, B., Dawson, P., 2003. Long-period events and tremor at Po-
pocatépetl volcano (1994–2000) and their broadband characteristics. Bull. Volcanol.
65, 124–135.
Atlas, Z.D., Dixon, J.E., Sen, G., Finnya, M., Martín del Pozzo, A.L., 2006. Melt inclusions from
Volcán Popocatépetl and Volcán de Colima, Mexico: melt evolution due to vapor-
saturated crystallization during ascent. J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res. 153, 221–240.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2005.06.010.
Berger, P., Got, J.L., González, C.V., Monteiller, V., 2011. Seismic tomography at Popocatépetl
volcano, Mexico. J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res. 200 (3), 234–244.
Boudal, C., Robin, C., 1989. Volcano Popocatépetl: recent eruptive history, and potential haz-
ards and risks in future eruptions. In: Latter, J.H. (Ed.), Volcanic Hazards — Assessment
and Monitoring. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, pp. 110–128.
Cadoux, A., Missenard, Y., Martinez Serrano, R.G., Guillou, H., 2011. Trenchward Plio-
quaternary volcanism migration in the Trans-Mexican volcanic belt: the case of the
Sierra Nevada range. Geol. Mag. 148, 494–506.
Cardaci, C., Coviello, M., Lombardo, G., Patanè, G., Scarpa, R., 1993. Seismic tomography of
Etna volcano. J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res. 56 (4), 357–368.
Chatterjee, S.N., Pitt, A.M., Iyer, H.M., 1985. Vp/Vs ratios in the Yellowstone National Park
region. I. J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res. 26, 213–230.
Cruz‐Atienza, V.M., Pacheco, J.F., Singh, S.K., Shapiro, N.M., Valdés, C., Iglesias, A., 2001.
Size of Popocatépetl volcano explosions (1997–2001) from waveform inversion.
Geophys. Res. Lett. 28 (21), 4027–4030.
De Barros, L., Pedersen, H.A., Métaxian, J.P., Valdés-Gonzalez, C., Lesage, P., 2008. Crustal struc-
ture below Popocatépetl Volcano (Mexico) from analysis of Rayleigh waves. J. Volcanol.
Geotherm. Res. 170 (1), 5–11.
De la Cruz-Reyna, S., Quezada, J.P., Pena, C., Zepeda, O., Sanchez, T., 1995. Historia de la
actividad reciente del Volcan Popocatépetl. Volcan Popocatépetl Estudios Realizados
durante la Crisis de 1994–1995. SINAPROC-CENEPRED-UNAM, Mexico City, pp. 3–22.
De Siena, L., Del Pezzo, E., Bianco, F., 2010. Seismic attenuation imaging of Campi Flegrei:
evidence of gas reservoirs, hydrothermal basins, and feeding systems. J. Geophys. Res.
115, B09312. http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2009JB006938.
Di Stefano, R., Chiarabba, C., 2002. Active source tomography at Mt. Vesuvius: constraints
for the magmatic system. J. Geophys. Res. 107, 2278. http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/
2001JB000792.
Espinasa-Perena, R., Martin-del Pozzo, A.L., 2006. Morphostratigraphic evolution of
Popocatépetl volcano, Mexico. In: Siebe, S., Macias, J.-L., Aguirre-Diaz, G.J. (Eds.),
Neogene–Quaternary Continental Margin Volcanism: A Perspective From Mexico.
Geol. Soc. Amer. Spec. Pap., 402, pp. 115–137.
García-Yeguas, A., Koulakov, I., Ibáñez, J.M., Rietbrock, A., 2012. High resolution 3D P wave
velocity structure beneath Tenerife Island (Canary Islands, Spain) based on tomo-
graphic inversion of active-source data. J. Geophys. Res. 117, B09309. http://dx.doi.
org/10.1029/2011JB008970.
Koulakov, I., 2009a. LOTOS code for local earthquake tomographic inversion. Benchmarks
for testing tomographic algorithms. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 99 (1), 194–214. http://dx.
doi.org/10.1785/0120080013.
Koulakov, I., 2009b. Out-of-network events can be of great importance for improving re-
sults of local earthquake tomography. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 99 (4), 2556–2563.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1785/0120080365.
Koulakov, I., 2013. Studying deep sources of volcanism using multiscale seismic tomogra-
phy. J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res. 257, 205–226. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jvolgeores.
2013.03.012.
Koulakov, I., Gordeev, E.I., Dobretsov, N.L., Vernikovsky, V.A., Senyukov, S., Jakovlev, A.,
2011. Feeding volcanoes of the Kluchevskoy group from the results of local earth-
quake tomography. Geophys. Res. Lett. 38, L09305. http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/
2011GL046957.
Koulakov, I., Gordeev, E.I., Dobretsov, N.L., Vernikovsky, V.A., Senyukov, S., Jakovlev, A.,
Jaxybulatov, K., 2013. Rapid changes in magma storage beneath the Klyuchevskoy
group of volcanoes inferred from time-dependent seismic tomography. J. Volcanol.
Geotherm. Res. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2012.10.014 (available online).
Lees, J.M., 2007. Seismic tomography of magmatic systems. J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res.
167, 37–56.
Martin-Del Pozzo, A.L., Cifuentes, G., Cabral-Cano, E., Bonifaz, R., Correa, F., Mendiola, I.F.,
2003. Timing magma ascent at Popocatépetl volcano, Mexico 2000–2001. J. Volcanol.
Geotherm. Res. 125, 107–120.
Patanè, D., Barberi, G., Cocina, O., De Gori, P., Chiarabba, C., 2006. Time-resolved seismic
tomography detects magma intrusions at Mount Etna. Science 313 (5788), 821–823.
Paulatto, M., Minshull, T.A., Baptie, B., Dean, S., Hammond, J.O.S., Henstock, T., Kenedi, C.L.,
Kiddle, E.J., Malin, P., Peirce, C., Ryan, G., Shalev, E., Sparks, R.S.J., Voight, B., 2010.
 P.Y. Kuznetsov, I.Y. Koulakov / Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research 276 (2014) 10–21
Upper crustal structure of an active volcano from refraction/reflection tomography,
Montserrat, Lesser Antilles. Geophys. J. Int. 180–2, 685–696.
Robin, C., Boudal, C., 1987. A gigantic Bezymianny-type event at the beginning of modern
Volcan Popocatépetl. J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res. 31, 115–130.
Shapiro, N.M., Singh, S., Iglesias-Mendoza, A., Cruz-Atienza, V., Pacheco, J., 2000. Evidence
of low Q below Popocatépetl volcano, and its implication to seismic hazard in Mexico
City. Geophys. Res. Lett. 2753–2756.
Siebe, C., Abrams, M., Macias, J.L., Obenholzner, J., 1996. Repetitive volcanic disasters in
Prehispanic time at Popocatépetl, central Mexico: past key to the future? Geology
24, 399–402.
Takei, Y., 2002. Effect of pore geometry on Vp/Vs: from equilibrium geometry to
crack. J. Geophys. Res. 107 (B2), 2043. http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2001JB000522.
21
Um, J., Thurber, C.H., 1987. A fast algorithm for two-point seismic ray tracing. Bull.
Seismol. Soc. Am. 77, 972–986.
Zandomeneghi, D., Barclay, A.H., Almendros, J., Ibáñez, J.M., Wilcock, W.S.D., Ben-Zvi, T.,
2009. Crustal structure of Deception island volcano from p-wave seismic tomogra-
phy: tectonic and volcanic implications. J. Geophys. Res. 114, B06310.
Zobin, V.M., Martinez, A., 2010. Quantification of the 1998–1999 explosion sequence at
Popocatépetl volcano, Mexico. J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res. 194, 165–173.
Zollo, A., D'Auria, L., De Matters, R., Herrero, A., Virieux, J., Gasparini, P., 2002. Bayesian es-
timation of 2D P-velocity models from active seismic arrival time data: Imaging of
the shallow structure of Mt. Vesuvius (southern Italy). Geophys. J. Int. 151,
566–582.