Rock magnetic (magnetic hysteresis data), scanning electron microscopy and paleointensity data for 2054 Ma (Paleoproterozoic) feldspars versus 591 Ma (Ediacaran) feldspars. Data for 2054 Ma crystals are from pyroxenites of the Bushveld Complex and are as follows: (a) magnetic hysteresis loop, (b) first-order reversal curve, (c) energy dispersive spectroscopy with the inset showing the magnetic particle. Data for 591 Ma crystals (d–f) from the Passo da Fabiana gabbro; plots follow the conventions in (a–c). (g) Paleointensity data for the 2054 Ma feldspar; crystal measured is shown in the inset. Natural remanent magnetization (NRM) lost versus thermoremanent magnetization (TRM) gained (circles) with partial thermoremanent magnetization checks shown by triangles. Best fit line shown; gray circles are data used in the fit. Orthogonal vector plot of field off steps shown in the inset; red/blue portions used in the paleointensity fit. Here |${\rm B}_{\rm {lab}}$| is the applied field, |${\rm B}_{\rm {anc}}$| is the calculated ancient value. (h) Paleointensity data for the 591 Ma feldspar following the conventions in (g). Despite nearly identical recording properties, the Ediacaran crystal yields a paleointensity |$>\!30$| times weaker than the Paleoproterozoic feldspar. Figure panels from Huang et al. [78], licensed under CC BY 4.0.