Please note that this is an author-produced PDF of an article accepted for publication following peer review. The definitive publisher-authenticated version is available on the publisher Web site
Earth-Science Reviews
December 2010, Volume 103, Issues 3-4, Pages 197-198
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.earscirev.2010.10.001
© 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Archimer
http://archimer.ifremer.fr
Corrigendum to “A new starting point for the South and Equatorial
Atlantic Ocean” [Earth Science Reviews 98 (2010), 1–37]
Maryline Moulina, *and Daniel Aslaniana
a
Ifremer Centre de Brest, DRO/Géosciences Marines, B.P. 70, 29280 Plouzané Cedex, France
*
Corresponding author : Maryline Moulin, IDL-LATTEX, Instituto Dom Luiz, Laboratorio de
Tectonofisica e Tectonica Experimental, Faculdade de Ciências da Universidade de Lisboa, Edificio
C6, Campo Grande, 1749-016 Lisboa, Portugal. Tel.: + 351 21 7500000x26269; fax: + 351 21
7500119, email address : [email protected]
Daniel Aslanian, [email protected]
Recent debates around our paper (Aslanian & Moulin, 2010, Torsvik et al., 2010) led us to
realise that our figure 1 was printed with missing names and explanations leading to
misunderstandings of our results. To avoid further confusion we wish to reproduce here
figure 1 with all appropriate and detailed explanations.
In Moulin et al. (2010), all reconstructions, and therefore all figures, represent the motion of
plates and sub-plates relative to a specific plate, which is considered as the fixed reference.
All finite rotations given in the table 2 therefore describe relative movements respect to the
fixed West African block. Defining absolute movement for plates is a strong matter of debate
and the resolution of absolute movement is one or two order of magnitude greater. It is
therefore both convenient and sensible to work first on relative movements between plates or
sub-plates, with well constrained fracture zones, magnetic anomalies, and intraplate
deformation: a precision of 30-40 km can be reached. With such precise reconstructions, we
can then apply, in order to describe the absolute movements, an additional rotation obtained
with more debatable and less precise methods (paleomagnetism, fixed plumes: see the
debate on the website: http://www.mantleplumes.org/ or the debate between Pangea A et
Pangea B).
The main purpose of this picture is to emphasize, whatever is the right position of the
Pangea relative to the earth axis, 1) the link between old sutures and break-up 2) the
dislocation of Pangea in three main episodes separated by about 60 My: Triassic (200-190
Ma), Early Cretaceous (133-120 Ma) and Tertiary (60-40 Ma), which can be also recognized
in the first order magnetic inversions pattern changes (Fig 1B). This 60Ma interval seems to
be an important periodicity for the earth geodynamic, which can be, indeed, a good starting
point to understand the geodynamic of our planet.
1
Please note that this is an author-produced PDF of an article accepted for publication following peer review. The definitive publisher-authenticated version is available on the publisher Web site
Figure 1: A) Reconstruction at Permo-triassic time (~250 Ma) (Olivet & Aslanian, pers. comm.) just
before the break-up of the mega-continent Pangea. This break-up occurred in three main episodes
separated by about 60 Ma. The Upper Triassic episode (in blue, about 200-190 Ma) separated the
Pangea in three equivalent blocks (Laurentia, Baltica and Angara, Africa and South America,
Madagascar, India, Antarctica and Australia). The second episode (in green) occurred during the Early
Cretaceous (about 133-120 Ma), and the last episode (in red) during the Tertiary (60-40Ma). Note that
we describe the first movement between two plates for instance India and Madagascar (about 120 Ma)
and not the first oceanic crust (80-90Ma for this part of Indian Ocean). Note the almost general
coincidence between the different break-ups and older orogenic belts. The block is considered as the
fixed plate. Hammer Projection.
B) Magnetic anomalies inversions. Note the change of the pattern around the Cretaceous and
Cenozoic Break-ups.
Aslanian, D. & Moulin, M., Comments on « A new scheme for the opening of the south Atlantic Ocean
and the dissection of an Aptian salt Basin » from Torsvik et al, 2009, Geophys. J. Int , 183, 20–28.
doi:10.1111/j.1365-246X.2010.04727.x.
Moulin Maryline, Aslanian Daniel, and Unternehr Patrick, A new starting point for the history of the
South Atlantic Ocean, Earth Science Reviews, 98, 1-37, 2010, doi:10.1016/j.earscirev.2009.08.001..
Torsvik, T., Rousse, S. and Smethurst, M., Reply to Comments on « A new scheme for the opening of
the south Atlantic Ocean and the dissection of an Aptian salt Basin » from Torsvik et al, 2009,
Geophys. J. Int , 183, 29–34. doi:10.1111/j.1365-246X.2010.04728.x.
2