Jump to Main Content
Reply to: Comment on ‘Geophysical approach to the study of a periglacial blockfield in a mountain area (Ztracené kameny, Eastern Sudetes, Czech Republic) by Stan et al. (2017). Geomorphology 293, 380‐390
- Stan, D., Stan-Kłeczek, I.
- Geomorphology 2019 v.328 pp. 238-240
- altitude, geophysics, ice, permafrost, quartz, quartzite, Czech Republic
- The authors present the answer to the discussion paper presented by Uxa et al. (2018). The remarks provided will explain ambiguities regarding the use of geophysical methods used to detect ice in typically nonconducive environments that are potentially unfavourable to its occurrence, namely the quartzite block cover Ztracené kameny (1245 m asl). The authors discuss the most important remarks regarding ice formation and preservation. Discussion points focus on the following: (1) permafrost in low altitude blockfields and related environmental settings, (2) geophysical interpretation, (3) extreme quartz/quartzite resistivities hypotheses, and (4) additional comments.