Reply to Comment of Finger et al. (2013) on: ‘Evidence for an Early-Middle Miocene age of the Navidad Formation (central Chile): Paleontological, paleoclimatic and tectonic implications’ of Gutiérrez et al. (2013, Andean Geology 40 (1): 66-78)
Reply to Comment of Finger et al. (2013) on: ‘Evidence for an Early-Middle Miocene age of the Navidad Formation (central Chile): Paleontological, paleoclimatic and tectonic implications’ of Gutiérrez et al. (2013, Andean Geology 40 (1): 66-78)
| dc.contributor | es-ES | |
| dc.contributor | en-US | |
| dc.creator | Le Roux, Jacobus P. | |
| dc.creator | Gutiérrez, Néstor M. | |
| dc.creator | Hinojosa, Luis F. | |
| dc.creator | Pedroza, Viviana | |
| dc.creator | Becerra, Juan | |
| dc.date | 2013-09-10 | |
| dc.identifier | http://www.andeangeology.cl/index.php/revista1/article/view/V40n3-a11 | |
| dc.identifier | 10.5027/andgeoV40n3-a11 | |
| dc.description | We thank Finger et al. (2013) for their discussion of our paper and appreciate their honesty in retracting the proposed Late Miocene-Pliocene age for the Navidad Formation, due to misidentification of the foraminifer index species in question. In fact, although we suspected all along that these species may have been misidentified, such an allegation seemed improper to us in view of the recognized expertise of Dr. Finger as a micro-paleontologist, whereas none of us can claim such knowledge. That left us with no other option but to suggest the earlier appearance of these species in the southeastern Pacific Ocean than elsewhere. Finger et al. (2013) summarize most of the pertinent information on the Navidad Formation mentioned in our paper, reiterating their interpretation of the depositional environment as a middle bathyal (at least 1,500 m depth; Encinas, 2006), continental slope in contrast to our proposal of a continental shelf. While we agree on most of the facts, it seems to us that Finger et al. (2013) have a tendency to turn a blind eye to the latter. | es-ES |
| dc.description | We thank Finger et al. (2013) for their discussion of our paper and appreciate their honesty in retracting the proposed Late Miocene-Pliocene age for the Navidad Formation, due to misidentification of the foraminifer index species in question. In fact, although we suspected all along that these species may have been misidentified, such an allegation seemed improper to us in view of the recognized expertise of Dr. Finger as a micro-paleontologist, whereas none of us can claim such knowledge. That left us with no other option but to suggest the earlier appearance of these species in the southeastern Pacific Ocean than elsewhere. Finger et al. (2013) summarize most of the pertinent information on the Navidad Formation mentioned in our paper, reiterating their interpretation of the depositional environment as a middle bathyal (at least 1,500 m depth; Encinas, 2006), continental slope in contrast to our proposal of a continental shelf. While we agree on most of the facts, it seems to us that Finger et al. (2013) have a tendency to turn a blind eye to the latter. | en-US |
| dc.format | application/pdf | |
| dc.language | eng | |
| dc.publisher | Servicio Nacional de Geología y Minería | en-US |
| dc.relation | http://www.andeangeology.cl/index.php/revista1/article/view/V40n3-a11/pdf | |
| dc.relation | http://www.andeangeology.cl/index.php/revista1/article/downloadSuppFile/V40n3-a11/902 | |
| dc.relation | http://www.andeangeology.cl/index.php/revista1/article/downloadSuppFile/V40n3-a11/903 | |
| dc.relation | http://www.andeangeology.cl/index.php/revista1/article/downloadSuppFile/V40n3-a11/904 | |
| dc.source | Andean Geology; Vol 40, No 3 (2013); 580-588 | es-ES |
| dc.source | Andean Geology; Vol 40, No 3 (2013); 580-588 | en-US |
| dc.source | 0718-7106 | |
| dc.source | 0718-7092 | |
| dc.title | Reply to Comment of Finger et al. (2013) on: ‘Evidence for an Early-Middle Miocene age of the Navidad Formation (central Chile): Paleontological, paleoclimatic and tectonic implications’ of Gutiérrez et al. (2013, Andean Geology 40 (1): 66-78) | es-ES |
| dc.title | Reply to Comment of Finger et al. (2013) on: ‘Evidence for an Early-Middle Miocene age of the Navidad Formation (central Chile): Paleontological, paleoclimatic and tectonic implications’ of Gutiérrez et al. (2013, Andean Geology 40 (1): 66-78) | en-US |
| dc.type | info:eu-repo/semantics/article | |
| dc.type | info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion | |
| dc.type | es-ES | |
| dc.type | en-US |
This item appears in the following Collection(s)
-
Andean Geology
[0-9]{4}