The South China piece in the Rodinian puzzle: A reply to the comment by Munteanu and Wilson

Uncritical application of geochemical plots for granitic rocks, without full appreciation of the limitations of such plots, the broader geological constraints and information about coexisting other rock types, commonly lead to incorrect tectonic interpretations. We consider this to be the case for t...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Li, Zheng-Xiang, Li, X., Wang, Xuan-ce
Format: Journal Article
Published: Elsevier Science BV 2009
Subjects:
Online Access:http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/14546
_version_ 1848748651924422656
author Li, Zheng-Xiang
Li, X.
Wang, Xuan-ce
author_facet Li, Zheng-Xiang
Li, X.
Wang, Xuan-ce
author_sort Li, Zheng-Xiang
building Curtin Institutional Repository
collection Online Access
description Uncritical application of geochemical plots for granitic rocks, without full appreciation of the limitations of such plots, the broader geological constraints and information about coexisting other rock types, commonly lead to incorrect tectonic interpretations. We consider this to be the case for the arc interpretations of the 850-740Ma igneous rocks in South China. In this Reply, we counter-argue all four lines of evidence used by Munteanu and Wilson [Munteanu, M., Wilson, A., this volume]. The South China piece in the Rodinian puzzle. A comment on "Assembly, configuration, and break-up history of Rodinia: a synthesis" by Li et al. (2008) [Precambrian Res. 160 (2008) 179-210]. Precambrian Res.] for an arc model in the western South China Block between 850 and 740 Ma.
first_indexed 2025-11-14T07:08:26Z
format Journal Article
id curtin-20.500.11937-14546
institution Curtin University Malaysia
institution_category Local University
last_indexed 2025-11-14T07:08:26Z
publishDate 2009
publisher Elsevier Science BV
recordtype eprints
repository_type Digital Repository
spelling curtin-20.500.11937-145462017-09-13T15:59:27Z The South China piece in the Rodinian puzzle: A reply to the comment by Munteanu and Wilson Li, Zheng-Xiang Li, X. Wang, Xuan-ce Arc Rodinia South China Continental rift Mantle plume Neoproterozoic Uncritical application of geochemical plots for granitic rocks, without full appreciation of the limitations of such plots, the broader geological constraints and information about coexisting other rock types, commonly lead to incorrect tectonic interpretations. We consider this to be the case for the arc interpretations of the 850-740Ma igneous rocks in South China. In this Reply, we counter-argue all four lines of evidence used by Munteanu and Wilson [Munteanu, M., Wilson, A., this volume]. The South China piece in the Rodinian puzzle. A comment on "Assembly, configuration, and break-up history of Rodinia: a synthesis" by Li et al. (2008) [Precambrian Res. 160 (2008) 179-210]. Precambrian Res.] for an arc model in the western South China Block between 850 and 740 Ma. 2009 Journal Article http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/14546 10.1016/j.precamres.2009.01.010 Elsevier Science BV restricted
spellingShingle Arc
Rodinia
South China
Continental rift
Mantle plume
Neoproterozoic
Li, Zheng-Xiang
Li, X.
Wang, Xuan-ce
The South China piece in the Rodinian puzzle: A reply to the comment by Munteanu and Wilson
title The South China piece in the Rodinian puzzle: A reply to the comment by Munteanu and Wilson
title_full The South China piece in the Rodinian puzzle: A reply to the comment by Munteanu and Wilson
title_fullStr The South China piece in the Rodinian puzzle: A reply to the comment by Munteanu and Wilson
title_full_unstemmed The South China piece in the Rodinian puzzle: A reply to the comment by Munteanu and Wilson
title_short The South China piece in the Rodinian puzzle: A reply to the comment by Munteanu and Wilson
title_sort south china piece in the rodinian puzzle: a reply to the comment by munteanu and wilson
topic Arc
Rodinia
South China
Continental rift
Mantle plume
Neoproterozoic
url http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/14546