Continental Rift Driven by Asthenosphere Flow and Lithosphere Weakening by Flood Basalts: South America and Africa Cenozoic Rifting
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authorsthe paper is well written but it doesn’t contain new idea or new data. Therefore, I don’t think it deserve to be published
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe manuscript is a review of ideas about dynamic forces and mechanisms of lithospheric plate movement. The authors chose the Poiseuille flow model (i.e. plume spreading) to explain the effect of continental mass movement. The list of references is impressive, but for some unknown reason it does not include several recent works concerning this problem [Rychertet al., 2021, 2023; Cathles et al., 2023].
The results of the conducted research are interesting and relevant. The authors tried to analyze cases in which the plume implementations and the Poiseuille flow do not lead to a rupture of the lithosphere and the drift of its fragments. However, a number of uncertainties still remained after reading the manuscript. For example, it remained unclear why the African plate remained relatively stationary compared to the South American plate? What is the nature of the plume flow force? Is it some kind of bang? The lateral plume spreading model is becoming increasingly popular, but how is the possibility of spreading over tens of thousands of kilometers substantiated? Or does the plume only provide the initial impulse, and the plate then moves by inertia? I think if the authors touched upon these issues, the article would be more valuable.
A number of minor typos and uncertainties are noted in the PDF file, but they do not affect the significance of the work.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe Ms Title is clear- cut and its theme is appropriate for a Minerals journal publication.
The Abstract provides a well- proportioned account of the geological features that are contained in the study and developed in the progress and conduct of the study. The Keywords, however, need to include the term 'mafic dykes', as a key component in the Ms.
The Introduction initially focuses on the historic studies of several scientists who pursued ideas of similarity in the east coast of South America and west coast of Africa, as former geometric fits of the Atlantic Ocean coasts. The citied references for these studies include pioneers such as Wegener, 1929, and Bullard, et al.1989 {1,2}. Another relevant pioneer is also suggested for citation and Reference by the Authors, after Wegener,1929,as interest for readers, Ref. [1a]. Carey, S.W,1955, Wegener's South African Assembly, Fit or Misfit? Geol.Mag., 92, pp,196- 200.
Further minor aspects in the Introduction wording need attention, as listed in following line Nos.
Line 14 - 16. Needs a reference to support suggestion, after "riftinitiation".
Line 16 - 18. Needs a reference to support the indication after "Cretaceous".
Line 49. "Australiad" should be "Australian".
Figure 1. Caption, Line 4. "according to Mueller", is probably best given as "after Mueller et al.'
Page 3. Line 60, "Indian" is best given as "India".
Line 134. "Whit" should be "with".
Line 152. Suggest insert "time of" for " pf", to make better sense.
Page 8. Line 234. Suggest " increasing" as better term.
Line 235. Suggest "Argue" is better given as "suggest".
Figure 4. Mueller (199). 199. Dubrovine et al. (81), 2012.
Figure 5. In Caption, Heine et al. (50) is shown with green and yellow spots. (should be "stars").
Page 12. Line 387. "(See?, for an overview"). What does this mean? It needs explanation of where the overview is in the Ms.
Line 389. "Initiaterifting". This needs a space between" initiate" and "rifting".
Line 392. Needs a citation/ reference, after "together". Suggest, Carey, S,W. 1958, The tectonic approach to continental drift. Continental Drift Symposium, Univ. of Tasmania, pp 177 - 355.
Figures. Figs1-5, and Ref-005-M93, with their captions are informative and clear for readers' comprehension, apart for the minor correction noted between caption and Figure 5. Figures 1 - 5 and Ref - 005 - M93, and captions are generally informative and well- presented, readers' comprehension, apart from an error noted between caption and Fig.5, All Figures seem necessary for supporting the text.
The scientific information in the study is well organised in its explanations and presentations. The English writing is clear and is easily comprehended. Small sporadic errors noted in the text, for Authors' attention. It is well-supported by a relevant array of citations and listed references. A few further literature citations are suggested for Authors' considerations, as work including in the text, as points of interest for the readership. These are given in the Introduction.
Synthesis. The Authors' Ms has delivered a well-thought-out study on its continental lithospheric rifting history that facilitated mafic intrusions from underlying asthenosphere that culminated in flood basalt genesis. The thermal and other parameters involved are clearly shown in the text. The topic treatment represents an important documentation of a major feature in Geological tectonism.
Overall, the Study is recommended for acceptance after minor revision.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsI am a field geologist and this MS seems to be too theorical. Please,provide a geological scheme of the Atlantic rifting with mantle plumes on both sides of the Atlantic ocean.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
I am not a specialist of the english language
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 4 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThis MS has been largely improved but, However the conclusion should be more extended with respect to the data and to the large discussion. Recall in conclusion what is the poiseuille flow (combination of the plume flow and subduction flow). If possible give another exemple than the western Gondwana break-up.
Author Response
We sincerely thank the reviewer for their time and effort in evaluating our manuscript. We are pleased that the reviewer is satisfied with the revisions made during the first round of review.
In response to the latest suggestions, we have further expanded the conclusion to ensure it aligns more effectively with the rest of the manuscript. These changes are detailed in the attached document with tracked revisions.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
