Brigantian and Middle Triassic remagnetizations in Lower Carboniferous carbonates, Northern Ireland: Role of diagenesis and fluid flow

Paleomagnetism (18 sites, 231 specimens) of Lower Carboniferous carbonates in Northern Ireland reveals three characteristic remanent magnetization (ChRM) components. Six sites from Brigantian limestones have a Middle Triassic (239 ± 7 Ma) secondary chemical remanent magnetization (CRM) in hematite, likely from alteration of the limestones by oxidizing meteoric fluids when continental red beds were deposited immediately above. Twelve sites from early Asbian limestones retain ChRM directions residing in pyrrhotite and magnetite. Their paleopoles are statistically indistinct, but suggest that the pyrrhotite remanence (326 ± 4 Ma) is about a million years younger than the magnetite remanence (327 ± 3 Ma). More importantly, the primary ChRM in these limestones was reset 3 or 4 Ma after deposition, probably by fluids involved in their diagenesis, giving secondary CRMs that are 8 Ma younger than those observed in the Lower Carboniferous carbonates that host the Navan Zn–Pb deposit in the Irish Midlands, suggesting two unrelated fluid histories.     

Comment on “First Record of Hindeodus–Isarcicella Population in Lower Triassic of Slovenia” by Tea Kolar-Jurkov?ek and Bogdan Jurkov?ek in Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, 252: 72–81

Some conodonts described by Tea Kolar-Jurkovsek and Bogdan Jurkovsek (2007) from the Permian-Triassic boundary section in the ?iri area of western Slovenia are revised in this paper. One specimen that they assigned to Hindeodus parvus is tentatively regarded as Hindeodus cf. scalaris Wu 2005. Two specimens that they assigned to Isarcicella sp. A is changed to Hindeodus parvus. One specimen that they described as Isarcicella lobata Perri and Farabegoli is changed to Hindeodus crenatus Wu (2006). One specimen that they assigned to Isarcicella turgida (Kozur, Mostler and Rahimi-Yazd) is changed to Hindeodus cf. parvus. Since these revisions, the three conodont zones that they defined have been correspondingly revised. Their first zone may belong to Hindeodus parvus zone, but it is not certain. Their second zone is changed to the Hindeodus parvus zone, and their third one remains as is.