In their comment, Labails and Roest have raised several points against the kinematic model of Schettino and Turco for the central Atlantic region, which requires the existence of an independent Moroccan Plate during the Oligocene and the early Miocene. We thank these authors for giving us the opportunity to clarify some controversial points, but disagree with most of their objections and show that they are based either on a different interpretation of existing data or a distortion of the facts presented by Schettino and Turco.

Reply to comments by C. Labails and W. Roest on ‘Breakup of Pangaea and plate kinematics of the central Atlantic and Atlas regions’

SCHETTINO, Antonio;TASSI, LUCA;TURCO, Eugenio
2010

Abstract

In their comment, Labails and Roest have raised several points against the kinematic model of Schettino and Turco for the central Atlantic region, which requires the existence of an independent Moroccan Plate during the Oligocene and the early Miocene. We thank these authors for giving us the opportunity to clarify some controversial points, but disagree with most of their objections and show that they are based either on a different interpretation of existing data or a distortion of the facts presented by Schettino and Turco.
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: http://hdl.handle.net/11581/216656
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 2
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 2
social impact