Jökull - 01.01.2016, Page 91

The Kleifakot geomagnetic instability event in NW-Iceland
Figure 5. The irregular pole path displayed in Fig. 7 of Kristjánsson (2015), composed from 28 flows in profiles
DX, DV, DT and DU of Figure 4, see text. Several VGPs from other profiles which lie far away from the poles
on this imaginary path, cannot be fitted into its time sequence with certainty. They are shown as isolated black
dots. Those from flows in profiles DE and DF (Kristjánsson and Jóhannesson,1996) are small, while the larger
dots are from units listed in Kristjánsson (2015) and the present study. – Ímyndaður ferill sýndar-segulskauts
í um 25 hraunlögum í þekktri tímaröð, þegar jarðsegulsviðið var óvenju lengi í óstöðugu ástandi. Á kortið
(Kristjánsson, 2015) hefur nú verið bætt staðsetningum segulskauta úr mörgum öðrum lögum í sniðunum á
Mynd 2b sem ekki er fullljóst hvar eigi að vera í tímaröðinni. Stærri punktarnir byggja á mæligögnum úr
söfnun 2012-2016, hinir á eldri mælingum.
Table 2. Angular differences (rounded off to the nearest degree) of remanence directions in 39 matched pairs of
excursion lava sites from Tables 1 in Kristjánsson and Jóhannesson (1996), Kristjánsson (2015) and the present
paper. Distances between the sites in each pair are from 0.2 kilometers to more than 4 kilometers, see Figs. 2b
and 4. These pairs whose visually estimated lithology is generally similar, can be used with some confidence
for correlations, cf. text. – Horn milli mældra segulstefna úr hraunum í þeim hlutum allra sýnatökusniða í
Mjóafirði og Ísafirði, þar sem sviðið er að breytast óreglubundið. Fjarlægð milli staðanna í hverju pari er frá
0,2 km upp í meira en 4 km.
DD 21 – DE 2 6◦ DD 22 – DE 4 5◦ DD 23 – DE 5 13◦a) DE 9 – DF 2 1◦
DE 14 – DF 8 7◦ DX 1 – DE 2 6◦ DX 3 – DE 3 6◦ DX 4- DE 4 3◦
DX 5 – DE 6,7 3◦ DT 4 – DU 1 1◦ DT 5 – DU 2 4◦ DT 6 – DU 3 6◦
DT 7 – DU 4 5◦ DT 9 – DU 5 6◦ DT 10 – DU 6 4◦ DT 12 – DU 8 2◦
DT13 – DU 9 2◦ DT 14 – DU 10 2◦ DV 7 – DT 1 6◦ DX 4 – DV 1 3◦
DX 5 – DV 3 4◦ DE 11 – DV 7A 5◦ DF 1 – DV 6 3◦ DV 8 – DT 3 1◦
DF 0 – DF 1 2◦ DW 1 – DU 2 3◦ DW 2 – DU 3 3◦ DW 5A – DT 8 5◦
DW 6 – DU 8 12◦ DW 7 – DU 9 9◦ DW 8 – DU 10 6◦ DQ 1 – DI 1 2◦
DQ 2 – DI 2 4◦ DI 2 – DV 4 9◦ DI 3 – DV 6A 4◦ DQ 2 – DP 1 6◦
DW 0 – DT 2 7◦ DF 2 – DW 0 1◦ DF 3- DT 3 3◦
a) Both sites have low remanence intensity and rather high α95.
samples measured with different procedures. It must
be kept in mind that such consistency is often absent,
even when advanced experimental methods are ap-
plied (Biggin and Paterson, 2014).
CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION
The paper briefly reviews various results from pre-
vious paleomagnetic research on polarity transitions
and excursions in Iceland and abroad, with empha-
JÖKULL No. 66, 2016 91