Reply to the comment by J. E. T. Channell and J. S. Stoner on ‘Magnetostratigraphy of the Hettangian Langmos section (Adnet, Austria): evidence for time-delayed phases of magnetization’

Yves Gallet (1) , Didier Vandamme (2) , Leopold Krystyn (3)

1 IPGP - Institut de Physique du Globe de Paris
2 CEREGE - Centre européen de recherche et d'enseignement des géosciences de l'environnement
3 Institut für Paläontologie

In our paper, we have considered that the early origin of haematite in the reddish wackestones from the Langmoos section was questionable for several reasons: (1) no clear reversal test (antipodal directions) is available in this lithology; (2) we have evidence for remagnetization at least in parts of the sequence; and, (3) only one site was studied. The comparison (i.e. a fold test) between the characteristic component obtained from the reddish samples and the ones obtained from the Adnet Formation (Channell et al. 1990, 1992) does not provide a clear answer (the fold test is negative) because the bedding attitude is rather flat in this area. Therefore, no direct comparison can be made between the results from the Langmoos section, which does not belong to the Adnet Formation, and those obtained from the sites near by Adnet. Considering this point, we have only proposed that the magnetization in our samples was acquired before the large rotation of the NCA.

Domains: Geophysics [physics.geo-ph]; Stratigraphy

Yves Gallet, Didier Vandamme, Leopold Krystyn. Reply to the comment by J. E. T. Channell and J. S. Stoner on ‘Magnetostratigraphy of the Hettangian Langmos section (Adnet, Austria): evidence for time-delayed phases of magnetization’. Geophysical Journal International, 1994, 119 (3), pp.1008. ⟨10.1111/j.1365-246X.1994.tb04033.x⟩. ⟨insu-02303841⟩