F. Fürsich, Suraj Bhosale, Matthias Alberti, Dhirendra K. Pandey
{"title":"中新世而非侏罗纪:完善的野外工作对古生物学数据分析的重要性--答复","authors":"F. Fürsich, Suraj Bhosale, Matthias Alberti, Dhirendra K. Pandey","doi":"10.1017/jpa.2024.2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In their detailed comments, Das et al. (2023) try to discount our arguments that the strata cropping out at the so-called Jhura pond locality are not Late Jurassic in age but Miocene. We wrote this paper (Fürsich et al., 2023) because of the far-reaching conclusions that have been drawn from the molluscan fauna at that locality, in particular with respect to the evolution of turritellid gastropods and the evolution of drilling predation by naticid gastropods. We still maintain that the beds containing abundant turritellids are not Jurassic but Neogene, most probably Miocene, in age. In no way do we contest the various analyses on the material collected from the outcrop by the authors, but just the erroneous age assignment of the strata. In order to keep this reply short, we support our point by referring to just to two aspects: the position of the outcrop and the composition of the fauna. Rather than refuting each of the other arguments of Das et al. (2023), we think that a joint visit to the locality would be more productive for arriving at a consensus on the origin and age of the fauna of the Jhura pond locality.","PeriodicalId":507883,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Paleontology","volume":"73 8","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Miocene instead of Jurassic: the importance of sound fieldwork for paleontological data analysis—a reply\",\"authors\":\"F. Fürsich, Suraj Bhosale, Matthias Alberti, Dhirendra K. Pandey\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/jpa.2024.2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In their detailed comments, Das et al. (2023) try to discount our arguments that the strata cropping out at the so-called Jhura pond locality are not Late Jurassic in age but Miocene. We wrote this paper (Fürsich et al., 2023) because of the far-reaching conclusions that have been drawn from the molluscan fauna at that locality, in particular with respect to the evolution of turritellid gastropods and the evolution of drilling predation by naticid gastropods. We still maintain that the beds containing abundant turritellids are not Jurassic but Neogene, most probably Miocene, in age. In no way do we contest the various analyses on the material collected from the outcrop by the authors, but just the erroneous age assignment of the strata. In order to keep this reply short, we support our point by referring to just to two aspects: the position of the outcrop and the composition of the fauna. Rather than refuting each of the other arguments of Das et al. (2023), we think that a joint visit to the locality would be more productive for arriving at a consensus on the origin and age of the fauna of the Jhura pond locality.\",\"PeriodicalId\":507883,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Paleontology\",\"volume\":\"73 8\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Paleontology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/jpa.2024.2\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Paleontology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/jpa.2024.2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
在他们的详细评论中,Das 等人(2023 年)试图否定我们的论点,即所谓的朱拉池塘地点出现的地层并非晚侏罗世,而是中新世。我们之所以撰写这篇论文(Fürsich 等人,2023 年),是因为我们从该地点的软体动物群中得出了意义深远的结论,尤其是关于腹足类涡虫的演化和腹足类钻孔捕食的演化。我们仍然认为,含有大量涡虫的海床年代不是侏罗纪,而是新近纪,很可能是中新世。我们绝不质疑作者对从露头采集的材料所做的各种分析,而只是质疑对地层年龄的错误划分。为了简明扼要,我们仅从露头位置和动物组成两个方面来支持我们的观点。我们认为,与其逐一驳斥 Das 等人(2023 年)的其他论点,不如共同考察该地点,以便就朱拉池地点动物群的起源和年龄达成共识。
Miocene instead of Jurassic: the importance of sound fieldwork for paleontological data analysis—a reply
In their detailed comments, Das et al. (2023) try to discount our arguments that the strata cropping out at the so-called Jhura pond locality are not Late Jurassic in age but Miocene. We wrote this paper (Fürsich et al., 2023) because of the far-reaching conclusions that have been drawn from the molluscan fauna at that locality, in particular with respect to the evolution of turritellid gastropods and the evolution of drilling predation by naticid gastropods. We still maintain that the beds containing abundant turritellids are not Jurassic but Neogene, most probably Miocene, in age. In no way do we contest the various analyses on the material collected from the outcrop by the authors, but just the erroneous age assignment of the strata. In order to keep this reply short, we support our point by referring to just to two aspects: the position of the outcrop and the composition of the fauna. Rather than refuting each of the other arguments of Das et al. (2023), we think that a joint visit to the locality would be more productive for arriving at a consensus on the origin and age of the fauna of the Jhura pond locality.