Reply to the discussion paper by P. Sumegi and S. Guly acute accent as: Some notes on the interpretation and reliability of malacological proxies in paleotemperature reconstructions from loess- comments to Obreht et al.'s "A critical reevaluation of paleoclimate proxy records from loess in the Carpathian Basin"

被引：1

作者：

Obreht, Igor ^{[1
]}

Zeeden, Christian ^{[2
]}

Hambach, Ulrich ^{[3
]}

Veres, Daniel ^{[4
]}

Markovic, Slobodan B. ^{[5
]}

Lehmkuhl, Frank ^{[6
]}

机构：

[1] Univ Bremen, MARUM Ctr Marine Environm Sci, Organ Geochem Grp, Dept Geosci, Leobener Str 8, D-28359 Bremen, Germany

[2] Leibniz Inst Appl Geophys, LIAG, Stilleweg 2, D-30655 Hannover, Germany

[3] Univ Bayreuth, Bayceer Chair Geomorphol, D-95440 Bayreuth, Germany

[4] Romanian Acad, Inst Speleol, Cluj Napoca 400006, Romania

[5] Univ Novi Sad, Phys Geog, Fac Sci, Trg Dositeja Obradovica 3, Novi Sad 21000, Serbia

[6] Rhein Westfal TH Aachen, Dept Geog, Templergraben 55, D-52056 Aachen, Germany

来源：

EARTH-SCIENCE REVIEWS | 2021年 / 220卷

关键词：

Loess; Crvenka; Malacothermometry; Carpathian Basin; Reply;

D O I：

10.1016/j.earscirev.2021.103737

中图分类号：

P [天文学、地球科学];

学科分类号：

07 ;

摘要：

In their discussion paper, Sumegi & Guly'as (2021) expressed their concerns about our remarks regarding the reliability of malacothermometer-based July paleotemperature reconstructions for the Carpathian Basin as published in Obreht et al. (2019). We are content to see that our paper inspired the continuation of the discussion, however, we have some concerns about the criticism expressed by Sumegi and Guly ' as (2021), which we in this reply address.

引用

页数：3