Reply to comments by Henry N. Pollack and David S. Chapman on “Spherical harmonic analysis of Earth’s conductive heat flow”

Pollack and Chapman, hereafter referred to as P&C, argue that: (1) errors arising from lack of quality control in the IHFC database are not important and not properly documented, (2) resolution of spatial patterns in global heat flux distribution should not be represented by spherical harmonics and (3) heat flow in young oceanic crust and global heat loss are better represented by a contested 1-D cooling model than by the data. We disagree and provide additional information that may help clear up such misunderstandings. We also mention briefly the results of a new improved thermal model of the lithosphere that satisfactorily reproduces the main features identified in observational data sets of heat flow and ocean floor bathymetry. Thus, there is no reason to invoke the ad hoc hypothesis of large-scale hydrothermal circulation in the ocean crust.     

Reply to comment on “dynamic topography in South America” by Hechenleitnera,Fiorelli, Larrovere,Grellet-Tinnera,and Carignano

This is a Reply to Hechenleitner and collaborators Comment, who proposed a Cretaceous age for the whole Llanos Formation (central Argentina, Sierras Pampeanas Province), based on neosauropod fossils, instead of Miocene as originally proposed by Ezpeleta et al. (2006) and Dávila et al. (2007). However, red beds that underlay the thick paleosoils of the Llanos Formation provided nine detrital U–Pb Paleogene (62 Ma, earliest Cenozoic) ages on zircon grains (Astini et al., 2009, Ezpeleta, 2009). On the base of this evidence, and other mammal remnant within the Sierras Pampeanas (where the Llanos Formation develops), we proposed this is a condensed unit with Mesozoic ages at the bottom and Mio-Pliocene (likely younger) to the top.     

Reply to comments by L.J. Cabri on “Changes in sulfides and platinum-group minerals with the degree of alteration in the Roby, Twilight, and High Grade Zones of the Lac des Iles Complex, Ontario, Canada”

Dr. Cabri has a number of criticisms of Djon and Barnes (2012). Some of the criticisms are valid and are the result of what we consider to be minor errors and omissions that can occur when an M.Sc. is converted to a paper. However, none of these change our conclusions, and we stand by our interpretations.     

Reply to “Reply to comments on defining biominerals and organominerals: Direct and indirect indicators of life [Perry et al., Sedimentary Geology, 201, 157–179]” by R.S. Perry and M.A. Sephton: [Sedimentary Geology 213 (2009) 156]

This is a reply to R.S. Perry and M.A. Sephton's “Reply to comments on defining biominerals and organominerals: direct and indirect indicators of life [Perry et al., Sedimentary Geology, 201, 157–179]” [Sedimentary Geology 213 (2009) 156].     

Comment on: ‘High-temperature dehydration melting and decompressive P–T path in a granulite complex from the Eastern Ghats India’ by S. Bhattacharya and R. Kar

Thermodynamic and chemographic modelling of complex reaction textures observed in Mg-Al-rich pelitic granulites is an important tool to unravel the P–T evolutionary history of high-grade rocks. In the Eastern Ghats Belt, India, several studies have been carried out on these fascinating aluminous granulites, and the results of these studies have revealed complex P–T–t histories (Dasgupta and Sengupta 1995; Sengupta et al. 1999; Rickers et al. 2001a, 2001b; Gupta et al. 1999; Dobmeier and Simmat 2002; Dobmeier and Raith 2003). In recent communication, Bhattacharya and Kar (2002) reported reaction textures from a suite of Mg-Al granulites from the Paderu area of the Eastern Ghats Belt. Combining the textural relations and thermodynamic calibration of some construed reactions, the authors have put forward a single phase metamorphic evolution of the area along a clockwise pressure–temperature trajectory. Combining the petrological features from the Paderu area with those reported from the Chilka Lake complex, the authors proposed a general tectonic model for the entire Eastern Ghats Belt. Incidentally, the rocks in and around Paderu have been studied in some detail by several other workers (Lal et al. 1987; Mohan et al. 1997; Sengupta et al. 1997). The purpose of this comment is to demonstrate that the conclusions made in the paper are inconsistent with the petrological features described in the text. Further, the thermodynamic treatment used in the paper has serious errors in many places, and hence, is often in complete disagreement with the existing experimental data and theoretical analyses on the Mg-Al-rich assemblages. There are also significant problems arising from the poor quality of the analytical database. Unfortunately, the authors cite only a few published works (mostly their own) ignoring many other relevant studies from this belt (cited above). Our observations are organised according to the sections of the paper.Editorial responsibility: T.L. Grove     

Reply to discussion of “Permian—Triassic vertebrate footprints from South Africa: Ichnotaxonomy,producers and biostratigraphy through two major faunal crises” by Marchetti,L., Klein,H., Buchwitz,M., Ronchi,A., Smith,R.M.H., DeKlerk,W.J., Sciscio,L., and Groenewald,G.H. (2019)

Our recent comprehensive review of the Permian-Early Triassic tetrapod tracksites from South Africa includes a revision of the ichnotaxonomy and the incorporation of a large quantity of new material. The paper also discusses, in light of the revised ichnotaxonomy and palaeontology of several sites, trackmaker attribution and the biostratigraphy of Permian-Early Triassic tetrapod tracks. Precise information about the fossiliferous localities was provided where possible and when sites were relocated. Three footprint associations were described (FA I-III) and highlight their potential stratigraphic value. The youngest (FA III) was recognized at four different localities and is likely Induan in age. A recent comment by Gastaldo and Neveling (2019) regarded one of these FA III localities, the Bethel tracksite, which received criticism for its unclear geographic placement and its stratigraphic position. Further comments included a discussion of the possible palaeoecological interpretation of this tracksite. In replying to these queries, we provided more precise geographic and stratigraphic information, confirming the occurrence of this tracksite ~15 m above the faunal transition which we consider to be currently coinciding with the Permian-Triassic boundary (PTB). Palaeoecological inferences are herein further clarified.