Paterae cover approximately 2% of the surface of Io, Jupiter’s volcanically active moon. To understand the formation of these volcano-tectonic depressions we created a geologic map of a key region and compared this map with experimental models for Io paterae. Our mapping region is Tupan Patera, a patera that has experienced recent activity and is a detected hot spot. We identified four primary types of geologic materials: plains, patera floors, flows, and diffuse deposits. We constructed an experimental model to test previous suggestions that paterae may form as volatiles in the silicate crust are vaporized by rising magma, creating instability, and subsequent collapse. The apparatus is a scaled model that uses sand (silicate crust analog), ice or snow (volatile analog), a hotplate (magma chamber analog), and a moveable paddle (to simulate extension). Our experimental collapse features exhibit many characteristics of paterae on Io, such as “islands,” terraces, straight margins, and steep scarps. Our model suggests that the role of volatiles in Io’s crust is a significant part of paterae formation.Comparative studies between our map and model show it is possible Tupan is an emerging lava lake or one in a state of quiescence. Our studies have also culminated in the completion of a theoretical cross section for the geologic history of Tupan Patera. This cross section displays a sequence of events including the rise of magma as it preferentially volatilizes sulfurous layers in the crust, subsequent thinning, instability, and collapse, the likelihood of the patera floor sinking as a stoped block, and the more recent flow and diffuse deposits. This study gives some insight to the general formation of paterae on Io.

Malea Planum is a volcanic plain on the southern rim of Hellas Planitia, the largest impact basin on Mars. Four large circular structures on Malea Planum have traditionally been identified as paterae, or low relief, central vent volcanoes (Plescia and Saunders, 1979). A geologic map was constructed and new crater counts made to explore the ages and origins of the paterae. Amphitrites and Peneus Paterae have radial patterns of wrinkle ridges on their flanks and distinct summit calderas (95 km and 130 km across) with arcuate bounding scarps. In contrast, Malea and Pityusa Paterae are broad depressions with diameters greater than 400 km. In some ways Pityusa and Malea Paterae resemble old, filled impact craters (Plescia, 2003) but they also have characteristics of volcanic subsidence features (Roche et al., 2000). A very strong positive gravity anomaly is centered over Amphitrites and smaller positive anomalies are associated with Peneus and Malea Paterae. A slight annular positive anomaly is associated with Pityusa. The geology of the Malea Planum Region has been influenced by impact cratering, volcanic, tectonic, fluvial, and most recently, eolian processes. The Noachian was dominated by impact cratering, the formation of Hellas Basin, and the eruption of flood lavas. Malea Planum formed during the mid- to late-Noachian, likely the result of sills liquefying the volatile-rich crust. Malea and Pityusa Paterae formed during the late Noachian. The Hesperian was marked by the formation of Peneus and Amphitrites and complex valley networks. During the mid-Hesperian, southern Malea Planum may have been covered by a very thick polar mantle deposit that melted and sublimated during the late Hesperian. Smaller episodes of polar mantle deposition continued through the Amazonian to the present. The Amazonian is also characterized by eolian activity creating dune fields, etched surfaces, and dust devil tracks. Based on the topographic and geophysical evidence, Amphitrites and Peneus are typical highland paterae. We conclude that a mid-crustal sill complex similar to that thought to exist beneath the eastern Snake River Plain in Idaho may be the best explanation for the formation of Malea and Pityusa Paterae. A lack of associated flow features on the surface suggests that the loads are the result of an accumulation of dense intrusions. A surficial load (e.g., lava flows) is insufficient to cause the amount of subsidence observed. A mid-crustal mafic or ultra-mafic sill or a dense network of sills and dikes may have contributed to the subsidence.