Articles | Volume 3, issue 1
Research article
16 Apr 2021
Research article |  | 16 Apr 2021

An evaluation of Deccan Traps eruption rates using geochronologic data

Blair Schoene, Michael P. Eddy, C. Brenhin Keller, and Kyle M. Samperton


Interactive discussion

Status: closed
Status: closed
AC: Author comment | RC: Referee comment | SC: Short comment | EC: Editor comment
Printer-friendly Version - Printer-friendly version Supplement - Supplement

Peer-review completion

AR: Author's response | RR: Referee report | ED: Editor decision
ED: Publish subject to revisions (further review by editor and referees) (15 Oct 2020) by Darren Mark
AR by B. Schoene on behalf of the Authors (14 Dec 2020)  Author's response   Author's tracked changes   Manuscript 
ED: Referee Nomination & Report Request started (15 Dec 2020) by Darren Mark
RR by Courtney Sprain (23 Jan 2021)
ED: Publish subject to minor revisions (further review by editor) (24 Jan 2021) by Darren Mark
AR by B. Schoene on behalf of the Authors (22 Feb 2021)  Author's response   Author's tracked changes   Manuscript 
ED: Publish as is (23 Feb 2021) by Darren Mark
ED: Publish subject to technical corrections (23 Feb 2021) by Klaus Mezger (Editor)
AR by B. Schoene on behalf of the Authors (01 Mar 2021)  Manuscript 
Short summary
We compare two published U–Pb and 40Ar / 39Ar geochronologic datasets to produce eruption rate models for the Deccan Traps large igneous province. Applying the same approach to each dataset, the resulting models agree well, but the higher-precision U–Pb dataset results in a more detailed eruption model than the lower-precision 40Ar / 39Ar data. We explore sources of geologic uncertainty and reiterate the importance of systematic uncertainties in comparing U–Pb and 40Ar / 39Ar datasets.