English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Jones and Crowe (1) raise issues already addressed in our article (2) based on an inaccurate grasp of the literature and several logical misconceptions. The authors suggest that inputs we chose in our kinetic calculations are unsuitable because we used values only from the Black Sea. As described, we made an extremely conservative estimate because the Black Sea is the most rapid Mn-oxidizing environment in the literature. Other locations have oxidation rates orders-of-magnitude lower (3). Jones and Crowe also propose sedimentation rates in our Mn-oxidation calculations were too high, citing a reference for incorrect rocks: different lithologies, environments, process sedimentology, geodynamic setting, and age. The paper they cite estimated long-term rates for the 2642–2521 Ma Campbellrand Subgroup, deposited >100 …

Reply to Jones and Crowe: Correcting mistaken views of sedimentary geology, Mn-oxidation rates, and molecular clocks