Testing less-conventional methods to date a late-pleistocene to Holocene eruption: Radiocarbon dating of paleosols and 36Cl exposure ages at Pelado volcano,Sierra Chichinautzin,Central Mexico

Despite their significance for estimating hazards and forecasting future activity, dating young volcanic deposits and landforms (<50,000 yrs old) remains a challenge due to the limitations inherent to the different isotopic chronometers used. The Trans-Mexican Volcanic Belt is one of the most active and populated continental arcs worldwide, yet its temporal pattern of activity is poorly constrained. Such deficiency is particularly problematic for the Sierra Chichinautzin Volcanic Field (SCVF) that is located at the doorstep of Mexico City and Cuernavaca and is hence a major source of risk for these cities. Existing ages for this area derive mostly from either radiocarbon on charcoal, which is rare and may be contaminated, or ⁴⁰Ar/³⁹Ar on rock matrix, which is poorly precise for this time period and rock type. Here, we focus on the Pelado monogenetic volcano, which is located in the central part of the SCVF and erupted both explosively and effusively, producing a large lava shield and a widespread tephra blanket. This unique eruptive event was previously dated at ∼12 calibrated (cal) kyrs BP, using radiocarbon dating on charcoal from deposits related to the eruption. To test alternative dating approaches and confirm the age of this significant eruption, we applied two less conventional techniques, radiocarbon dating of bulk paleosol samples collected below the complete tephra sequence at nine sites around the shield, and in-situ ³⁶Cl exposure dating of two samples of an aphyric lava from the base of the shield. Radiocarbon paleosol ages span a continuous time interval from 13.2 to 20.2 cal kyrs BP (2σ), except for one anomalously young sample. This wide age spread, along with the low organic contents of the paleosols, may be due to erosive conditions, related to the sloping topography of the sampling sites and the cool and relatively dry climate of the Younger Dryas (11.7–12.9 ka), during which the Pelado eruption probably occurred. The two ³⁶Cl-dated lava samples have consistent ages at 1σ analytical errors of 15.5 ± 1.4 ka and 13.2 ± 1.2 ka, respectively, yielding an average age of 14.3 ± 1.6 ka for this lava flow. The high full uncertainty in ³⁶Cl ages (24%) is due to high rock Cl content. We conclude that paleosol radiocarbon dating is useful if numerous samples are analyzed and climatic and relief conditions at the time of the eruption and at the sites of tephra deposition are considered. The ³⁶Cl dating technique is an alternative method to date volcanic eruptions, as it gave consistent results, but in the specific case of Pelado volcano, the high Cl content in the analyzed rocks increases the age uncertainties.