Reply to "A comment on early Jurassic palaeomagnetic study of lower Jurassic marine strata from the Neuquén basin, Argentina: A new Jurassic apparent polar wander path for South America"
We acknowledge Taylor and Roperch for their interest in our paper and welcome their comment which provides us the opportunity to further clarify some aspects related to methodology and interpretation. The scope of the paper by Iglesia Llanos and Riccardi (2000) was the construction of the first Jura...
| Autores: | , , |
|---|---|
| Formato: | artículo |
| Estado: | Versión publicada |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2008 |
| País: | Argentina |
| Recursos: | Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas |
| Repositorio: | CONICET Digital (CONICET) |
| Idioma: | inglés |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/75671 |
| Acesso em linha: | http://hdl.handle.net/11336/75671 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palavra-chave: | Palaeomagnetism Neuquen Basin Jurassic Apw Path https://purl.org/becyt/ford/1.5 https://purl.org/becyt/ford/1 |
| Resumo: | We acknowledge Taylor and Roperch for their interest in our paper and welcome their comment which provides us the opportunity to further clarify some aspects related to methodology and interpretation. The scope of the paper by Iglesia Llanos and Riccardi (2000) was the construction of the first Jurassic magnetostratigraphic scale in South America and there demagnetisation paths were largely used to recognise magnetic polarities. Conversely, in the new study (Iglesia Llanos et al. 2006) remagnetisation circles were discarded for calculation of directions and the most favourable lithologies resampled to improve the overall quality of the data. |
|---|