Support for an “A‐type” Pangea reconstruction from high‐fidelity Late Permian and Early to Middle Triassic paleomagnetic data from Argentina

A major disparity is observed between the late Paleozoic‐early Mesozoic apparent polar wander paths (APWPs) of Laurussia and Gondwana when the landmasses are re‐assembled in a conventional “A‐type” Pangea. This discrepancy has endured from the earliest paleomagnetic reconstructions of the supercontinent, and has prompted discussions of non‐dipole paleomagnetic fields and alternative paleogeographic models. Here we report on a joint paleomagnetic‐geochronologic study of Late Permian and Early to Middle Triassic volcanic and volcaniclastic rocks from Argentina, which demonstrates support for an A‐type model, without requiring modification to the geocentric axial dipole hypothesis. New SHRIMP U‐Pb and 40 Ar‐ 39 Ar isotopic dating has reinforced the inferred age of the sequences, which we estimate at ∼264 Ma (Upper Choiyoi Group) and ∼245 Ma (Puesto Viejo Group). Field‐stability tests demonstrate that the volcanic rocks are carrying early/primary magnetizations, which yield paleopoles: 73.7°S, 315.6°E, A 95 : 4.1°, N: 40 (Upper Choiyoi) and 76.7°S, 312.4°E, A 95 : 7.3°, N: 14 (Puesto Viejo). A comprehensive magnetic fabric analysis is used to evaluate structural restorations and to correct for magnetization anisotropy. The paleomagnetic results derived from volcaniclastic rocks are interpreted to be affected by inclination shallowing, and corrections are discussed. A comparison of these new results with the existing Permian‐Triassic paleomagnetic data from Gondwana suggests the presence of widespread bias in the latter. We contend that such bias can explain the observed APWP disparity, at least for Late Permian‐Middle Triassic time, and that alternative paleogeographic reconstructions or non‐dipole paleomagnetic fields do not need to be invoked to resolve the discrepancy.