Reply to the discussion by Granier of Vincent et al., (2018) (Marine and Petroleum Geology, 91, 639-657)

Vincent S. J., BouDagher-Fadel M. K., Guo L., Flecker R., Ellam R. M., KANDEMİR R.

MARINE AND PETROLEUM GEOLOGY, vol.112, 2020 (SCI-Expanded) identifier

  • Publication Type: Article / Editorial Material
  • Volume: 112
  • Publication Date: 2020
  • Doi Number: 10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2019.08.024
  • Journal Indexes: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Scopus, Academic Search Premier, PASCAL, Aerospace Database, Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA), Artic & Antarctic Regions, Communication Abstracts, Compendex, Geobase, INSPEC, Metadex, Civil Engineering Abstracts
  • Recep Tayyip Erdoğan University Affiliated: Yes


Granier (2019) questioned the identification of a number of foraminifer species within the study of Vincent et al. (2018). We dispute his findings and provide supporting evidence for our original identifications. Our biostratigraphic work was carried out to support the strontium isotope stratigraphy study of an Upper Jurassic - Lower Cretaceous carbonate succession in the eastern Pontides, northeast Turkey. This was undertaken to constrain the age and duration of a number of hiatal surfaces within the succession that we proposed have geodynamic significance for the Black Sea region. Even if Granier's identifications are correct, they do not impact upon the conclusions of our study. Thus, rather than being a 'disappointing application of [a] geochemical tool', our study illustrates the utility of the powerful strontium isotope stratigraphy approach.