Premium
Reply to Comments on “the Cenozoic Fold‐and‐Thrust Belt of Eastern Sardinia: Evidences from the Integration of Field Data With Numerically Balanced Geological Cross Section” by Arragoni et al. (2016)
Author(s) -
Salvini F.,
Arragoni S.,
Cianfarra P.,
Maggi M.
Publication year - 2017
Publication title -
tectonics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.465
H-Index - 134
eISSN - 1944-9194
pISSN - 0278-7407
DOI - 10.1002/2017tc004573
Subject(s) - geology , tectonics , cenozoic , paleontology , outcrop , fold (higher order function) , geologic map , bedding , fold and thrust belt , seismology , section (typography) , geomorphology , foreland basin , structural basin , mechanical engineering , advertising , horticulture , engineering , business , biology
Abstract The comment by Berra et al. (2017) on the evidence of Alpine tectonics in Eastern Sardinia proposed by Arragoni et al. (2016) is based on the sedimentological interpretations of few local outcrops in a marginal portion of the study area. The Cenozoic Alpine fold‐and‐thrust setting, which characterizes this region, presents flat‐over‐flat shear planes acting along originally stratigraphic contacts, where stratigraphic continuity is obviously maintained. The ramp sectors present steeply dipping bedding attitudes, and there is no need to invoke and to force prograding clinoforms with unrealistic angles to justify them. The balanced geological cross section proposed by Arragoni et al. (2016) is fully supported by robust newly collected structural data and is compatible with the overall tectonic setting, while the interpretation proposed by Berra et al. (2017) lacks a detailed structural investigation. We believe that the partial application of the techniques available to modern geology may lead to incorrect interpretations, thus representing an obstacle for the progress of knowledge in the Earth sciences.