Magnetic polarity stratigraphy of late Oligocene to middle Miocene mammal-bearing continental deposits in Central Anatolia (Turkey)

Aragonian stratigraphy reconsidered, and a re-evaluation of the middle Miocene mammal biochronology in Europe

“…However, the magnetostratigraphy consists of two successive polarity intervals only, and their correlation to the GPTS is based on the MN4 assignment of the mammal fauna. The magnetostratigraphy of the Turkish Gemerek section (showing two reversed zones separated by a normal zone only) with the Korlak and Gemerek tie points is criticized by Krijgsman et al [12], who conclude that no reliable correlation to the GPTS can be made for the Gemerek section. Furthermore the correlations of the mammal faunas to the MN zonation are not firmly established [13], in spite of claims otherwise [9].…”

Paleomagnetic constraints on the timing and distribution of Cenozoic rotations in Central and Eastern Anatolia

“…3). In addition, samples from 102 levels were collected from an 800 m long section of redbeds in the Yeniköy locality by Krijgsman et al (1996). We have reinterpreted their data for rotation analysis.…”

“…3, Table 1). Additionally, several published magnetostratigraphic sites from the western part of the basin were reinterpreted (Krijgsman et al, 1996;Langereis et al, 1990). One locality of three sites was sampled on the Kırşehir Block, northwest of the basin.…”

“…The Inkonak locality consists of an upper Oligocene series of fluvial and lacustrine sediments sampled by Krijgsman et al (1996) for magnetostratigraphic purposes. It was sampled ∼ 50 km south of Sivas (Fig.…”

“…3) and analyzed by Krijgsman et al (1996) for magnetostratigraphic purposes and was collected from a continuous stratigraphic section of 200 m consisting of middle Miocene (∼ 15 Ma) fluvial and lacustrine sediments. We have reanalyzed their data.…”