2020
DOI: 10.1029/2020jb020034
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Late Cretaceous‐Eocene Geomagnetic Polarity Timescale (MQSD20) That Steadies Spreading Rates on Multiple Mid‐Ocean Ridge Flanks

Abstract: Magnetic anomalies over mid‐ocean ridge flanks record the history of geomagnetic field reversals, and the width of magnetized crustal blocks can be combined with absolute dates to generate a Geomagnetic Polarity Timescale (GPTS). We update here the current GPTS for the Late Cretaceous‐Eocene (chrons C33–C13, ~84–33 Ma) by extending to several spreading centers the analysis that originally assumed smoothly varying spreading rates in the South Atlantic. We assembled magnetic anomaly tracks from the southern Paci… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
4
1

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 94 publications
(129 reference statements)
1
4
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The extreme values for spreading rates that are estimated from stage angular velocities that depend on the C17n.1 rotations for all three plate pairs are also another likely artefact (Section 4.5), which we attribute to a likely error in the GTS20 reversal age estimate for C17n. Alternative spreading rates that we derived using reversal ages from GTS12 (Ogg 2012) and MQSD20 (Malinverno et al 2020) exhibited ≈50 per cent less variation for stages whose young or old limits included C17n.1, thereby supporting our contention. Notably, the GTS20 ages for C15 through C19 are all from Westerhold et al's (2014) astronomically tuned age sequence.…”
Section: Limitations and Next Stepssupporting
confidence: 76%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The extreme values for spreading rates that are estimated from stage angular velocities that depend on the C17n.1 rotations for all three plate pairs are also another likely artefact (Section 4.5), which we attribute to a likely error in the GTS20 reversal age estimate for C17n. Alternative spreading rates that we derived using reversal ages from GTS12 (Ogg 2012) and MQSD20 (Malinverno et al 2020) exhibited ≈50 per cent less variation for stages whose young or old limits included C17n.1, thereby supporting our contention. Notably, the GTS20 ages for C15 through C19 are all from Westerhold et al's (2014) astronomically tuned age sequence.…”
Section: Limitations and Next Stepssupporting
confidence: 76%
“…Although other features of the three stage spreading histories are likely to be artefacts of errors in the GTS20 reversal timescale, we found that alternative spreading rate histories that we estimated with the GTS12 timescale (Ogg 2012) or more recent MQSD20 timescale (Malinverno et al 2020) were not sufficiently different to alter any of our interpretations. The primary features in the stage spreading histories, including the rapid rate slowdown and recovery from 42-37 Ma (Fig.…”
Section: Timing Of Motion Changes From Bayesian and Plate Kinematic R...contrasting
confidence: 58%
“…We note that recent two geomagnetic polarity time scales that include reassignment of the Eocene chron boundaries (Boulila et al., 2018; Malinverno et al., 2020) slightly differ from each other and the GPTS from Gradstein et al. (2012) that was used by Li et al.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 69%
“…We note that recent two geomagnetic polarity time scales that include reassignment of the Eocene chron boundaries (Boulila et al, 2018;Malinverno et al, 2020) (Gradstein et al, 2012). Red dots indicate samples measured additionally to the number of samples recorded in Li et al (2018).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 77%
“…The geomagnetic field direction or polarity is reversed depending on whether the mantle rotates relative to the core fast or slow, which is called the geomagnetic field reversal. In the geological history of the Earth, the geomagnetic field has been inverted many times [19]. Geomagnetic inversion was recorded in sediments distributed parallel on both sides of the mid-ocean ridge [20] [21].…”
Section: Particles Produced By the Sun And The Earthmentioning
confidence: 99%