Redetermination of the Zalantun Group in the ARong Qi Area of Da Hinggan Mountains (Northeastern China): Evidence from Petrology, Geochronology and Geochemistry

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Journal: Minerals
Manuscript ID: minerals-1518444

Article Title: Redetermination of the Zalantun Group in the ARong Qi area of Da Hinggan Mountains(Northeastern China): Evidence from petrology, geochronology and geochemistry by Datian WU et al.

General Comments:

1) Introduction needs rephrase. Some sentences are too long and not well connected properly with the next sentence.

2) Regional geology should elaborate. It looks like local geology and is not discussed on the Central Asian Orogenic belt as discussed in the first line in the abstract. The  Central Asian Orogenic belt problem must be covered in the introduction also and this article solves some problems here.

3) Geological events with field characteristics and rock types may be given in table form to easily understand its relations for international readers.

4) In the Geological map, kindly mark the sample numbers for geochronology and geochemical sample location.

5) Geochemical samples G1 to G9 belong to Upper Triassic Hadataulegai Formation (224.3 ± 0.71 Ma), with lithologic assemblages of (metamorphic) andesite, metamorphic pelitic siltstone, and silty mudstone and the Middle-Upper Jurassic Tamulangou Formation (158.58 ± 0.46 Ma), as given in figure 7 or it is Late Cambrian-Late Silurian volcanic rocks. This is a major mistake and needs very careful study. In this situation, it is difficult to make any more comments on its interpretations and conclusions. Therefore you need to resubmit it after major modifications.

6) For better interpretations you need more samples of chemical analysis. Secondly, the geochemistry should also be given of the samples used for geochronology for better interpretations and understanding of its tectonic setting.

7) Zhalantun pluton is the same as the Zalantun Group or it is different??

8) English editing is required by a native English speaker for clarity to international readers.

9) I also attached annotated files with some marks for rephrasing the paragraphs.

 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Thanks for your valuable advice.

1) The introduction was reorganized and revised with the help of native English speakers.

2) In the part of regional geology, the views of many scholars are added, and the different understandings of the assembly time of each plate in CAOB are listed (from line 76 to 85).

3) The location of geochemical and dating samples is marked in Figure 1, and the correlation between geochemical and dating samples is shown in Table 2.

4) We tried to solve this big mistake. By carefully combing the data again, the chronological samples and geochemical samples are corresponding, and a series of maps are made in three time periods to support our view (late Cambrian late Sirian volatile rocks).

5) According to the careful notes, it was revised uniformly, and an English native speaker was invited to edit the article in English

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear Author, I have read this text with attention. However, I have a number of objections to its content: 
1. reading this text one gets the impression that there is chaos in it. There are some results, some graphs and descriptions sometimes more related to author's intentions than to reliable discussion of data, which, by the way, are sometimes repeated in the table, graph and text.
Chapter 5.1 is very laconic and needs to be written again. There is basically only information that can be read from the added tables and figures. I miss showing pictures of zirconium crystals, more detailed descriptions of these crystals and their characteristics in connection with the processes indicated by the author.
3. chapter 5.2.1. is not written very precisely. The author basically rewrites the information given in the table in the text showing the same information in lines 223-229. And it is necessary to discuss these values rather than listing them again.
Similarly, chapter 5.2.2 contains collective information concerning all analyzed rocks and yet these are different rocks of different age. In fact, it is difficult to guess the evolution of magmatic rocks in this region. 
5. unnecessarily long tables in the text, better give them at the end in the appendix.
6. fig 1: I would reverse the description of fig 1 from the oldest to the youngest rocks, fig 2 should be separated, microphotographs separately, macrophotographs separately. Fig 2e and 2F is not quoted, in fig. 7. there is some kind of trend line, not too sure what it is related to. Fig 9. I propose to mark the trend of similar rocks on the background of the data with a grey zone so that the reader can better see the common parts and differences.
7. against the background of these remarks it is difficult for me to comment on the discussion and the results, especially that the author wants to show a new view on the evolution of the area and in fact this thread of the discussion is marginal. I do not see there any discussion with other works and only one sentence: "There are scholars measured the SHRIMP zircon U-Pb age of the Zalantun Group chlorite schist..." is a bit too little for such a discussion. 
I would like to point out to the author that writing these words of my review I do not judge negatively his work and contribution to the geology of this region. However, I would like to ask the author to put the text in order, to describe the results in a more complete way so that the text is clear and understandable. Then, in my opinion, this work will be much more interesting.

Author Response

Thanks for your valuable advice.

1. Rearrange the charts in the text, delete the original Fig.8, Fig.10, Fig.11 and Fig.12, optimize Fig.7 and Fig.9, and added 0. 0001 × Zr/TiO₂vs. Nb /Y diagram、Th vs. Co diagram、Sr/Y vs. Y diagram、K₂O/P₂O₅vs. SiO₂ diagram、K₂O/TiO₂ vs. SiO₂ diagram、 Th /Yb vs. Ba /La diagram, and supplemented the discussion of data.
2. CL images of representative zircons from the Late Cambrian-Late Silurian volcanic rocksin the A’Rong Qi areaare supplemented.
3. Reorganize 5.2.1 and 5.2.2, discuss the value of these data, and analyze the overall information of rocks in different ages.
4. The tables are attached at the end.
5. I optimized Figure 1. At the same time, I sorted out the rock data of different ages and re mapped them, so that readers can better see their similarities and differences.
6. In 6.2, I supplemented a large number of scholars' discussions on calc-alkaline andesite, and further discussed and explained the geochemical data

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

dear authors
the quality of the english is detrimental to the comprehension of your work which is undoubtedly of an interest for the comprehension of this area still very little known. I recommend that you have your text proofread by an English person and resubmit the article. 

Author Response

Thanks for your valuable advice.

According to the notes, a native English speaker was invited to edit the article in English.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 4 Report

As a result of a good study, the Manuscript has been prepared for publication and written in an understandable language. Some errors in the text are indicated on the text.

My opinions on the model:

• Do magmatics intruding into the Ergun block in the Early Cambrian crop out in or around your study area?
• Do the ophiolites formed in the back-arc basin crop out in the region?
• Are the Late Camrian-Late Silurian volcanic rocks formed continuously from the same magma? Did these volcanics also occur in the Ordovician?

The manuscript can be published after the errors mentioned in the text are corrected and questions about the model are properly explained in the text.

 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Thanks for your valuable advice.

1. Early Cambrian granites are reported in Erguna area. For details, see Zhao Zhi (2011) late Paleozoic magnetism and its tectonic significance in the northern Great Xing'an Range, northern China, in: Jilin University, Changchun

2.In fact, we think that the back arc basin should be in the north of this area. This area is located on the continental margin. At the same time, there is no ophiolite reported in this area.

3.The Paleozoic Daxinganling area developed arc magmatic rocks in different periods due to multi-stage subduction of the paleo Asian Ocean. Now there is no accurate evidence that they were formed continuously by the same magma. This paper only reports that there are volcanic rock associations in this study area during this period, and the specific relationship needs further research. Yes, the article also reports the Ordovician volcanic rocks. According to the collected samples, the Ordovician is the main stage of volcanic activity.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear Authors,

I am happy with the modifications made in the revised text which is acceptable.

Vinod Singh

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear authors, I read this text carefully, I see a lot of improvement in it. Thank you for following my comments.