Skip to main content
Log in

Reply to: Clusters of flowstone ages are not supported by statistical evidence

  • Matters Arising
  • Published:

From Nature

View current issue Submit your manuscript

The Original Article was published on 16 June 2021

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

References

  1. Hopley, P., Vermeesch, P., Parrish, R. & Latham, A. Clusters of flowstone ages are not supported by statistical evidence. Nature, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-021-03586-0 (2021).

  2. Pickering, R. et al. U–Pb-dated flowstones restrict South African early hominin record to dry climate phases. Nature 565, 226–229 (2019).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Vermeesch, P. On the visualisation of detrital age distributions. Chem. Geol. 312–313, 190–194 (2012).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  4. Vermeesch, P. & Garzanti, E. Making geological sense of ‘Big Data’ in sedimentary provenance analysis. Chem. Geol. 409, 20–27 (2015).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

R.P. coordinated the team effort, and all authors equally contributed to the drafting and reviewing of this Reply.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Robyn Pickering.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Pickering, R., Herries, A.I.R., Woodhead, J.D. et al. Reply to: Clusters of flowstone ages are not supported by statistical evidence. Nature 594, E11 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-021-03587-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-021-03587-z

  • Springer Nature Limited

Navigation