Submit a preprint


Calibrations without raw data - a response to "Seasonal calibration of the end-cretaceous Chicxulub impact event"use asterix (*) to get italics
Melanie A.D. During, Dennis F.A.E. Voeten, Per E. AhlbergPlease use the format "First name initials family name" as in "Marie S. Curie, Niels H. D. Bohr, Albert Einstein, John R. R. Tolkien, Donna T. Strickland"
<p>A recent paper by DePalma et al. reported that the season of the End-Cretaceous mass extinction was confined to spring/summer on the basis of stable isotope analyses and supplementary observations. An independent study that was concurrently under review reached a similar conclusion using osteohistology and stable isotope analyses. We identified anomalies surrounding the stable isotope analyses reported by DePalma et al. Primary data are not provided, the laboratory where the analyses were performed is not identified, and the methods are insufficiently specified to enable accurate replication. Furthermore, isotopic graphs for carbon and oxygen contain irregularities such as missing data points, duplicate data points, and identical-length error bars for both elements despite different scales, that appear inconsistent with laboratory instrument outputs. A close examination of such methodological omissions and data irregularities can help to raise the standards for future studies of seasonality and prevent inaccurate claims or confirmation bias.</p>
You should fill this box only if you chose 'All or part of the results presented in this preprint are based on data'. URL must start with http:// or https://
You should fill this box only if you chose 'Scripts were used to obtain or analyze the results'. URL must start with http:// or https://
You should fill this box only if you chose 'Codes have been used in this study'. URL must start with http:// or https://
Mass Spectrometry, Data, End-Cretaceous, Extinction, Seasonality
NonePlease indicate the methods that may require specialised expertise during the peer review process (use a comma to separate various required expertises).
Fossil calibration, Geochemistry, Methods, Vertebrate paleontology
Hubert Vonhof (, Thomas Tütken (, Henry Fricke (, Thomas Cullen suggested: Celina Suarez (, Thomas Cullen suggested: David Eberth (, Thomas Cullen suggested: Regan Dunn (, Thomas Tütken [] suggested: Dear editor, , Thomas Tütken [] suggested: I have already several reviews pending but foremost I think this technical critizism is more for a lab person expert that ideally should have experience with the Chicxulub event. You may contact Dr. Hubert Vonhof at MPIC Mainz or Jeroen van der Lubbe at Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam as potentiell reviewers., Thomas Tütken [] suggested: Kind regards, , Thomas Tütken [] suggested: Thomas Tütken, Scott Blumenthal suggested: Dr Sora Kim (, Scott Blumenthal suggested: Dr Gregory Henkes (, Scott Blumenthal suggested: Dr Emma Loftus (, Scott Blumenthal suggested: Dr Vincent Hare (, Sebastian Breitenbach [] suggested: Dear Cristina Belanger,, Sebastian Breitenbach [] suggested: thank you very much for entrusting me with this (seemingly not straight forward) review! Unfortunately, I currently have no time to help as I am just heading for the field and will be offline for the next weeks/months., Sebastian Breitenbach [] suggested: I hope you can find alternative experts to provide you fair and thorough reviews. Maybe get in touch with Prof Oster, Vanderbilt Uni, or Prof Denniston at Cornell College - both have the expertise to provide valuable feedback., Sebastian Breitenbach [] suggested: all the best, Sebastian Breitenbach [] suggested: Sebastian, Rebecca Totten [] suggested: I have a conflict with the authors of the manuscript on which comments are being made. I refer you to my colleagues Dr. Celina Suarez (, Dr. Marina Suarez (;, and Dr. Tom Tobin (, Thomas Cullen suggested: Celina Suarez (, Thomas Cullen suggested: David Eberth (, Thomas Cullen suggested: Regan Dunn ( No need for them to be recommenders of PCIPaleo. Please do not suggest reviewers for whom there might be a conflict of interest. Reviewers are not allowed to review preprints written by close colleagues (with whom they have published in the last four years, with whom they have received joint funding in the last four years, or with whom they are currently writing a manuscript, or submitting a grant proposal), or by family members, friends, or anyone for whom bias might affect the nature of the review - see the code of conduct
Robert Depalma, Phil Manning, Victoria Egerton, Roy Wogelius, David Burnhame.g. John Doe []
2023-06-22 10:43:31
Christina Belanger