Reply to the comment on “Terrestrial Permian-Triassic boundary in southern China: New stratigraphic, structural and palaeoenvironment considerations” by H. Zhang, Z. Feng, J. Ramezanik, S-Z Shen

Sylvie Bourquin (1) , Camille Rossignol (1) , Marc Jolivet (1) , Marc Poujol (1) , Jean Broutin (2) , Jianxin Yu (3)

1 GR - Géosciences Rennes
2 CR2P - Centre de recherche sur la Paléobiodiversité et les Paléoenvironnements
3 Key Laboratory of Biogeology and Environmental Geology

In their comment, Zhang et al. (2018) question the existence of the deformation structures that we report for the upper part of the Chahe Permian-Triassic Boundary reference section. These authors further suggest that this deformation contradicts the regional litho, bio- and chemostratigraphic results. Here again, and based on the outcrop picture provided by Zhang et al. (2018), we present new arguments attesting for a major tectonic deformation in the upper part of the Chahe section. We argue that the color pattern of the outcrop, the flora description, the δ13Corg isotope profile showing a negative excursion and the lack of coal bed in the upper part of series cannot be used as definitive arguments for a continuous succession. In consequence, we maintain that, above Bed 66, the succession is affected by numerous fold-accommodation faults, preventing any continuous logging and coherent stratigraphic analysis in the Kayitou and Dongchuan formations along that section.

Keywords: Deformation; Chahe section; South China; Permian-Triassic transition

Domains: Stratigraphy; Geochemistry; Tectonics

Sylvie Bourquin, Camille Rossignol, Marc Jolivet, Marc Poujol, Jean Broutin, et al.. Reply to the comment on “Terrestrial Permian-Triassic boundary in southern China: New stratigraphic, structural and palaeoenvironment considerations” by H. Zhang, Z. Feng, J. Ramezanik, S-Z Shen. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, 2018, 506, pp.257-259. ⟨10.1016/j.palaeo.2018.02.021⟩. ⟨insu-01717253⟩