Response to the Discussion by B. Robins and F. Chiodoni of “Geochemistry of cumulates from the Bjerkreim–Sokndal Intrusion (S. Norway). Part I: Constraints from major elements on the mechanism of cumulate formation and on the jotunite liquid line of desce

Merging our data with those of Robins and Chiodoni [Robins, B., Chiodoni, F., 2007. Poles apart: A discussion of the « Geochemistry of cumulates from the Bjerkreim–Sokndal layered intrusion (S. Norway). Part I: Constraints from major elements on the mechanism of cumulate formation and on the jotunite liquid line of descent ». Lithos doi:10.1016/j.lithos.2007.03.007], we examine the major-element compositions of 135 samples of so-called phi-C cumulates of the Bjerkreim–Sokndal layered intrusion. We show the limits of the TiO2/MgO ratio vs. Al2O3 diagram in order to ascertain the proportions of cumulus minerals (ilmenite and orthopyroxene) in the ilmenite leuconorite mafic pole. We also discard anomalous samples as we did in the previous paper. The rest of the samples (124 phi-C, i.e. 92% of the whole population) are then used to confirm the existence of plagioclase and mafic poles. It is shown that the mafic pole is indeed a mixture of ilmenite and orthopyroxene, not induced by “spurious correlation”.