Abstract
Diverse and well-preserved terrestrial palynomorphs occur in the Padeha, Khoshyeilagh, and Mobarak formations in the Khoshyeilagh area, northeastern Alborz, northern Iran. The spore assemblages consist of 36 species belonging to 24 genera. The vertical distribution of index spores allows the erection within these strata of five local biozones (BT, FF, LE, LN, and VI). The data show that assemblages recorded from the Khoshyeilagh section can be correlated with the VCo, LE, LN, and VI Miospore biozones of Europe, Canada, and USA. Many of the palynomorph species, such as Archaeoperisaccus ovalis, Ancyrospora ampulla, Diducites mucronatus, D. versabilis, Grandispora cornuta, G. echinata, Indotriradites explanatus, Retispora lepidophyta, Retusotriletes incohatus, R. phillipsii, Rugospora flexuosa, Teichertospora torquata, Tumulispora malevkensis, Vallatisporites pusillites, Verrucosisporites bulliferus, and Verrucosisporites nitidus, are closely comparable with coeval assemblages recorded from Belgium, Portugal, Canada, North Africa, South America, and North America. This indicates the close relationship of the Iranian Platform to other parts of the northern Gondwana and southern Laurentian domain during this time interval. Moreover, parent plants of the Late Devonian miospores in the Khoshyeilagh area generally belong to herbaceous Class Rhyniopsida (orders: Rhyniales, Trimerophytales), Zosterophyllopsida, and various classes such as, Lycopsida (herbaceous order: Isoetales, Selaginellales, Protolepidodendrales), Progymnospermopsida (Order Archaeopteridales and Aneuropthytales), and Filicopsida. The presence of marine shelly macrofauna (brachiopods and corals) suggest a nearshore depositional environment comprising rivers, fluvial deltas, tidal flats, and lagoons for the Upper Devonian and lowermost Carboniferous deposits studied herein.
Highlights
Major CommentsThe authors have put in an appreciable amount of work to strengthen the original manuscript
The major comment 3 from my original review still remains
I suggested including figures detailing the counts per sample, but again the authors summed the totals per taxon over all the samples. This led to figures 3, 4 and 6 which are not suitable for the paleo-environmental interpretation of the section; they are just bar charts of the total counts of genera, species and botanical affinity respectively
Summary
The authors have put in an appreciable amount of work to strengthen the original manuscript. I suggested including figures detailing the counts per sample, but again the authors summed the totals per taxon over all the samples. This led to figures 3, 4 and 6 which are not suitable for the paleo-environmental interpretation of the section; they are just bar charts of the total counts of genera, species and botanical affinity respectively. Do the same for Lycopsida, Sphenopsida, Rhyniopsida and Filicopsida etc This would be helpful in the assignment of the biozones where the authors rely on parent plant identification (e.g. line 155 and line 173). I made additional comments in the annotated pdf which is attached
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
