Reply to the Discussion by Maravelis and Zelilidis on “Unravelling provenance from Eocene–Oligocene sandstones of the Thrace Basin, North-east Greece” by Caracciolo et al. (2011), Sedimentology, 58, 1988–2011.

Largely on the basis of data from the island ofLimnos, Maravelis & Zelilidis (2012) criticizethe interpretation of Caracciolo et al. (2011)concerning the provenance of Tertiary sandstonesof the western Thrace basin, in NortheastGreece. Their main concern is thatCaracciolo et al. (2011) over-emphasize deliveryfrom the Circum-Rhodope Belt at the expenseof a southern source of turbidites duringthe Palaeogene. Maravelis & Zelilidis (2012)construct an argument against our interpretationbased on the following points: (i) palaeocurrentdata from Limnos indicate a northwardpalaeoflow direction; (ii) landward migration ofthe basin depocentre is towards the north-east;(iii) there is higher ophiolite influence from asouthern outer arc ridge as displayed by pureophiolitic layers; (iv) stratigraphic architectureindicates an ophiolitic source rock identifiedon the island of Lesvos; and (v) sedimentologicalsignatures indicate a proximal source feedingthe Limnos basin. This reply contests a numberof these points and focuses on five keyissues: (i) misinterpretation of the conclusionof Caracciolo et al. (2011); (ii) failure toconsider key regional and geodynamic events;(iii) misinterpretation of their results fromcompositional analyses; (iv) inappropriate useof geochemical and tectonic settingdiscrimination diagrams; and (v) disregard ofstratigraphic and compositional data providedby Caracciolo et al. (2011) for the island ofLimnos.