|Paper No. 162-0|
|SAMPLING AND STATISTICS IN PALEOMAGNETIC STUDIES OF SEDIMENTARY ROCKS|
RAUB, Timothy D. and KIRSCHVINK, Joseph L., California Institute Technology, 1201 E California Blvd MC 170-25, Pasadena, CA 91125-0001, email@example.com|
Common paleomagnetic practice for determining pole positions from sedimentary units involves collecting and demagnetizing a suite of samples from a spatially-limited stratigraphic location, averaging the suite's individual sample directions, and then averaging site-mean directions from an appropriate number of these sampling localities. The theory behind this 'two-tier' practice makes assumptions about depositional and preservation conditions that are appropriate for volcanic and intrusive rocks but rarely valid for sediments. Use of this site-mean technique on sediments may exclude valid data and limits the resolution of magnetostratigraphic inference. Because many random events affect the natural remanent magnetization of sedimentary rocks, the most parsimonious sampling method is to sample densely through many layers in a vertical stratigraphic interval rather than across a horizontal exposure or bedding layer. For most sediments, the Central Limit Theorem of the calculus of probabilities applied directly to the principal magnetic components determined from demagnetization experiments justifies calculation of the mean direction of magnetization and associated errors in a 'one-tier' approach. Application of two-tier statistics in calculating poles may bias results by variable amounts in random directions, introducing unnecessary ambiguity into tectonic reconstructions.
Additionally, a minor problem exists with the McFadden and McElhinny (1988) technique for combination of linear and planar data in paleomagnetic analyses. When using samples with variable tilt corrections, the population of maximum likelihood directions from circle samples chosen before and after tilt correction will not be the same, minimizing the difference in dispersion statistics and potentially leading to a Type-II statistical error. Examples from the paleomagnetic literature will be examined to show differences in tectonic conclusions reached by changing these methodologies
GSA Annual Meeting, November 5-8, 2001
General Information for this Meeting
|Session No. 162|
Tectonics III: Wrench Systems- Oceanic and Global Tectonics
Hynes Convention Center: 210
8:00 AM-12:00 PM, Thursday, November 8, 2001
© Copyright 2001 The Geological Society of America (GSA), all rights reserved. Permission is hereby granted to the author(s) of this abstract to reproduce and distribute it freely, for noncommercial purposes. Permission is hereby granted to any individual scientist to download a single copy of this electronic file and reproduce up to 20 paper copies for noncommercial purposes advancing science and education, including classroom use, providing all reproductions include the complete content shown here, including the author information. All other forms of reproduction and/or transmittal are prohibited without written permission from GSA Copyright Permissions.