Reply to Castro et al. 2018 on “Holocene paleo-sea level changes along the coast of Rio de Janeiro, southern Brazil”.

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: ANGULO,RODOLFO J.
Data de Publicação: 2018
Outros Autores: GIANNINI,PAULO C.F., SOUZA,MARIA CRISTINA DE, LESSA,GUILHERME C.
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Anais da Academia Brasileira de Ciências (Online)
Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0001-37652018000401377
Resumo: ABSTRACT Discussions are useful to the advance of science, and we appreciate the opportunity to discuss the paper by Castro et al. (2014) for the second time. Here we maintain the interpretations presented in our discussion paper (Angulo et al. 2016). In the discussion paper we emphasized that the vertical position of a paleo-sea level indicator is not the position of the paleo-sea level. We pointed out that: (1) to reconstruct paleo-sea levels it is crucial to determine the vertical distance between the indicators to their present homologous one; (2) margin of errors can only be established if considering the indicator’s intrinsic characteristics and (3) the interpretation of a sea level 3.0 to 4.5 m below the present one at 11.9 to-11.1 ka BP is in strong contradiction with worldwide established data and would require a detailed discussion. We consider that Castro et al. (2018) do not properly address or answer the comments we made in the discussion paper. More work and discussions are necessary to elucidate several questions that still remain about the sea level behavior in the Holocene.
id ABC-1_071d2e224b79661eb28a25e08bea594b
oai_identifier_str oai:scielo:S0001-37652018000401377
network_acronym_str ABC-1
network_name_str Anais da Academia Brasileira de Ciências (Online)
repository_id_str
spelling Reply to Castro et al. 2018 on “Holocene paleo-sea level changes along the coast of Rio de Janeiro, southern Brazil”.beachrockvermetidsrelative sealevel indicatorsmethod of relative sealevel reconstructionABSTRACT Discussions are useful to the advance of science, and we appreciate the opportunity to discuss the paper by Castro et al. (2014) for the second time. Here we maintain the interpretations presented in our discussion paper (Angulo et al. 2016). In the discussion paper we emphasized that the vertical position of a paleo-sea level indicator is not the position of the paleo-sea level. We pointed out that: (1) to reconstruct paleo-sea levels it is crucial to determine the vertical distance between the indicators to their present homologous one; (2) margin of errors can only be established if considering the indicator’s intrinsic characteristics and (3) the interpretation of a sea level 3.0 to 4.5 m below the present one at 11.9 to-11.1 ka BP is in strong contradiction with worldwide established data and would require a detailed discussion. We consider that Castro et al. (2018) do not properly address or answer the comments we made in the discussion paper. More work and discussions are necessary to elucidate several questions that still remain about the sea level behavior in the Holocene.Academia Brasileira de Ciências2018-04-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0001-37652018000401377Anais da Academia Brasileira de Ciências v.90 n.2 2018reponame:Anais da Academia Brasileira de Ciências (Online)instname:Academia Brasileira de Ciências (ABC)instacron:ABC10.1590/0001-3765201820180376info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessANGULO,RODOLFO J.GIANNINI,PAULO C.F.SOUZA,MARIA CRISTINA DELESSA,GUILHERME C.eng2018-06-08T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S0001-37652018000401377Revistahttp://www.scielo.br/aabchttps://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.php||aabc@abc.org.br1678-26900001-3765opendoar:2018-06-08T00:00Anais da Academia Brasileira de Ciências (Online) - Academia Brasileira de Ciências (ABC)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Reply to Castro et al. 2018 on “Holocene paleo-sea level changes along the coast of Rio de Janeiro, southern Brazil”.
title Reply to Castro et al. 2018 on “Holocene paleo-sea level changes along the coast of Rio de Janeiro, southern Brazil”.
spellingShingle Reply to Castro et al. 2018 on “Holocene paleo-sea level changes along the coast of Rio de Janeiro, southern Brazil”.
ANGULO,RODOLFO J.
beachrock
vermetids
relative sealevel indicators
method of relative sealevel reconstruction
title_short Reply to Castro et al. 2018 on “Holocene paleo-sea level changes along the coast of Rio de Janeiro, southern Brazil”.
title_full Reply to Castro et al. 2018 on “Holocene paleo-sea level changes along the coast of Rio de Janeiro, southern Brazil”.
title_fullStr Reply to Castro et al. 2018 on “Holocene paleo-sea level changes along the coast of Rio de Janeiro, southern Brazil”.
title_full_unstemmed Reply to Castro et al. 2018 on “Holocene paleo-sea level changes along the coast of Rio de Janeiro, southern Brazil”.
title_sort Reply to Castro et al. 2018 on “Holocene paleo-sea level changes along the coast of Rio de Janeiro, southern Brazil”.
author ANGULO,RODOLFO J.
author_facet ANGULO,RODOLFO J.
GIANNINI,PAULO C.F.
SOUZA,MARIA CRISTINA DE
LESSA,GUILHERME C.
author_role author
author2 GIANNINI,PAULO C.F.
SOUZA,MARIA CRISTINA DE
LESSA,GUILHERME C.
author2_role author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv ANGULO,RODOLFO J.
GIANNINI,PAULO C.F.
SOUZA,MARIA CRISTINA DE
LESSA,GUILHERME C.
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv beachrock
vermetids
relative sealevel indicators
method of relative sealevel reconstruction
topic beachrock
vermetids
relative sealevel indicators
method of relative sealevel reconstruction
description ABSTRACT Discussions are useful to the advance of science, and we appreciate the opportunity to discuss the paper by Castro et al. (2014) for the second time. Here we maintain the interpretations presented in our discussion paper (Angulo et al. 2016). In the discussion paper we emphasized that the vertical position of a paleo-sea level indicator is not the position of the paleo-sea level. We pointed out that: (1) to reconstruct paleo-sea levels it is crucial to determine the vertical distance between the indicators to their present homologous one; (2) margin of errors can only be established if considering the indicator’s intrinsic characteristics and (3) the interpretation of a sea level 3.0 to 4.5 m below the present one at 11.9 to-11.1 ka BP is in strong contradiction with worldwide established data and would require a detailed discussion. We consider that Castro et al. (2018) do not properly address or answer the comments we made in the discussion paper. More work and discussions are necessary to elucidate several questions that still remain about the sea level behavior in the Holocene.
publishDate 2018
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2018-04-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0001-37652018000401377
url http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0001-37652018000401377
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 10.1590/0001-3765201820180376
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv text/html
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Academia Brasileira de Ciências
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Academia Brasileira de Ciências
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Anais da Academia Brasileira de Ciências v.90 n.2 2018
reponame:Anais da Academia Brasileira de Ciências (Online)
instname:Academia Brasileira de Ciências (ABC)
instacron:ABC
instname_str Academia Brasileira de Ciências (ABC)
instacron_str ABC
institution ABC
reponame_str Anais da Academia Brasileira de Ciências (Online)
collection Anais da Academia Brasileira de Ciências (Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Anais da Academia Brasileira de Ciências (Online) - Academia Brasileira de Ciências (ABC)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv ||aabc@abc.org.br
_version_ 1754302865623482368