Long-Term Event Stratigraphy of the Apulia Platform Margin (Upper Jurassic To Eocene, Gargano, Southern Italy)

JOURNAL OF SEDIMENTARY RESEARCH, VOL. 69, NO. 6, NOVEMBER, 1999, P. 1241–1252Copyright q 1999, SEPM (Society for Sedimentary Geology) 1073-130X/99/069-1241/$03.00

LONG-TERM EVENT STRATIGRAPHY OF THE APULIA PLATFORM MARGIN (UPPER JURASSIC TOEOCENE, GARGANO, SOUTHERN ITALY)

ALFONSO BOSELLINI, MICHELE MORSILLI, AND CLAUDIO NERIDipartimento di Scienze Geologiche e Paleontologiche, Universita di Ferrara, Corso Ercole I8 d’Este 32, 44100 Ferrara, Italy

e-mail: [email protected]

ABSTRACT: The Upper Jurassic to Eocene Apulia Platform marginand the eastward transition to the adjacent basinal deposits are wellexposed in the Gargano Promontory (southern Italy), a carbonateblock that is part of the slightly deformed foreland of the southernApennine thrust belt. The long-term stratigraphy of this margin andslope transect is punctuated by five major dynamic phenomena thatsubdivide the succession into six second-order sequences. These eventsinclude (1) a Valanginian drowning unconformity, (2) an early Aptian–Albian drowning and demise of the platform, (3) late Albian–Ceno-manian platform-margin failures, (4) a Santonian–Campanian retreatof the platform margin, and (5) Eocene uplift and platform-margincollapse. The first event is documented worldwide and is probably eu-static in origin. The second is concomitant with some oceanic anoxicevents (OAE). The last three processes are probably related to forelandreaction to subduction and collision in the Dinarides and Hellenidesthrust belts. The ultimate cause of the Albian–Cenomanian failures ismore problematic. A worldwide eustatic regression is documented atthis time, but regional geology seems to favor tectonic uplift.

INTRODUCTION

Since the first appearance of the famous Exxon cycle chart (Vail et al.1977; Haq et al. 1987), many geologists have accepted as a dogma theseeustatic ‘‘curves’’ and have tried to fit their own regional or local data tothem. On the other hand, there are so many Exxon sequence-boundaryevents from which to choose (Miall 1992), in many cases spacing closerthan any biostratigraphic resolution, that it is easy and tempting to find an‘‘ad hoc’’ boundary.

A different approach could be to elaborate local detailed stratigraphiesand construct local relative sea-level curves for many regions of the worldand then to compare the various charts. Only for those sequence boundariesdated accurately and precisely and occurring synchronously over large ar-eas of the globe, some kind of eustasy could be invoked for the dominantoperating mechanism.

In this report we present the long-term event stratigraphy of a transectof the Apulia Platform margin and slope exposed in the Gargano Prom-ontory of southern Italy (Fig. 1). The Apulia Platform was a relatively smallcarbonate bank, isolated in the middle of the western Tethys ocean, whichflourished throughout the Jurassic and the Cretaceous. The importance ofdocumenting the evolution of the Apulia Platform comes from its isolation.Because the rhythm of growth and decline in the life span of platformsystems is influenced by regional environmental and tectonic conditions(Follmi et al. 1994), it is clear that an isolated carbonate bank can easilyregister variations in large-scale oceanographic conditions, without anycontamination from hinterland processes: the Apulia carbonate platformhad a position beyond the reach of terrigenous sediments, and it was iso-lated and ‘‘clean’’. However, the Apulia Platform was presumably influ-enced by such major geologic phenomena as eustatic sea-level rises, oce-anic anoxic events, and intraplate response to distant subduction or collisionprocesses.

In this report we present for the first time the entire evolution of theplatform, from the Late Jurassic to the Middle Eocene, focusing on itsmargin and slope. In fact, along the margin and slope of a carbonate plat-form, flooding or lowstand events, tectonic episodes, demise of the system,

etc. are all amplified and quite often physically visible; in contrast, in theplatform interior or in the deep basin floor such events are in most casesbarely recorded and the sedimentary succession might appear monotonous.Finally, we document that classic sequence stratigraphic successions maybe the result of episodic failure of a carbonate platform margin or of re-gional tectonic events.

GEOLOGIC SETTING AND STRATIGRAPHIC FRAMEWORK

The Apulia carbonate platform was a major paleogeographic element ofthe southern margin of the Mesozoic Tethys Ocean (Fig. 2). It is one ofthe so-called peri-Adriatic platforms, which are comparable to the Bahamabanks in their carbonate facies, shape, size, and subsidence rate and alsoin the internal architecture (D’Argenio 1976; Eberli 1991; Eberli et al.1993).

The Apulia Platform, which is part of the stable and relatively unde-formed foreland of the Apennine thrust belt, is bounded on both sides bybasinal deposits; westward the margin is buried under the Apennine thrustsheets, to the east the adjacent paleogeographic domains are the vast IonianBasin to the south and the Umbria–Marche Basin to the north (Fig. 2). Tothe west, the Apulia Platform plunges downfaulted underneath the terrig-enous sediments of the Apennine foredeep; to the southeast, the Jurassic–Early Cretaceous margin lies 20–30 km offshore from the present Apuliacoastline (De Dominicis and Mazzoldi 1989; De Alteriis and Aiello 1993).

The Gargano Promontory and the Maiella Mountain, which now is partof the external Apennine thrust belt (Eberli et al. 1993), are the only areaswhere the transition from platform facies to basin facies are exposed onland (Fig. 2). In the Gargano area this transition has been investigatedextensively in the last decade (Luperto Sinni and Masse 1987; Masse andLuperto Sinni 1989; Bosellini and Ferioli 1988; Bosellini et al. 1993a,1993b, 1994; Bosellini and Morsilli 1997; Morsilli and Bosellini 1997;among others). As a matter of fact, since the mid 1960s AGIP geologistsand the Italian Geological Survey (Pavan and Pirini 1966; Martinis andPavan 1967; Cremonini et al. 1971) recognized that the western part of thepromontory is part of the shallow-water Apulia Platform, whereas the east-ern part is characterized by slope and basinal deposits (Fig. 3).

The backbone of the Gargano Promontory consists of a thick pile (3000–3500 m) of Jurassic and Cretaceous shallow-water carbonates. A smalloutcrop of Upper Triassic evaporite (Anidriti di Burano) and black lime-stone is present on the northern seashore (Punta delle Pietre Nere) (Fig. 1).These rocks have also been encountered in wells Gargano–1 (G.1–Conoco)and Foresta Umbra–1 (F.U.–Agip) (Fig. 1). The outcropping successioncomprises Upper Jurassic to Eocene carbonate rocks representing platform-to-basin settings (Martinis and Pavan 1967; Masse and Luperto Sinni 1989;Bosellini et al. 1993b). Minor scattered outcrops of Miocene sediments,unconformably overlying the Cretaceous and Jurassic platform, are presentin many parts of the promontory, mainly along the lowland border zones(Cagnano Varano, Sannicandro, Apricena, Manfredonia), and also one siteinland near S. Giovanni Rotondo (Fig. 1) (Cremonini et al. 1971).

On the basis of physical stratigraphic relationships and of the presenceof evident bounding surfaces, the Jurassic–Eocene succession can be sub-divided into six major packages of sediments, which can be classified assecond-order depositional sequences (Fig. 4).

The lower three sequences (Callovian to Albian) are represented by the

1242 A. BOSELLINI ET AL.

FIG. 1.—Location map of the GarganoPromontory with main roads. F.U. 5 ForestaUmbra well (Agip); G.1 5 Gargano 1 well(Conoco)

FIG. 2.—Restored distribution of platforms and basins in central–southern Italyduring the Jurassic–Cretaceous (from Zappaterra 1990; modified).

entire spectrum of sediments from platform to slope and basin, and theyounger ones (Cenomanian to Lutetian) largely by slope and basin deposits.

Probably the most typical and significant feature of the Gargano slopeand basin setting is the presence of huge megabreccia bodies, which, interms of sequence stratigraphic terminology, can be interpreted as typicallowstand wedges (Sarg 1988).

ARCHITECTURE AND SEQUENCE STRATIGRAPHY OF THE PLATFORM

MARGIN

In this section, a long-term event stratigraphy—as representing long-termdynamic phenomena including changes in climate, tectonics, and global sealevel—and a sequence stratigraphic organization of the platform margin arepresented. Geometries and types of unconformities (especially on the slope)and associated lithologies will be discussed.

During the last twenty years, the sequence stratigraphic approach hasbeen used largely to subdivide sedimentary successions. However, a livelydebate concerning primary causes, physical scale (thickness above all), and

time duration of depositional sequences still exists (Posamentier et al. 1988;Christie-Blick 1991; Schlager 1991, 1993, 1998; Bosellini et al. 1993b;Christie-Blick and Driscoll 1995). As is well known, the original definitionof depositional sequences (Mitchum et al. 1977, p. 53) and their boundingsurfaces does not imply any specific genetic mechanism or a time or phys-ical scale. The same can be said for the original definition of systems tracts(Brown and Fischer 1977).

However, in spite of the original definitions of depositional sequencesand systems tracts, many authors (Vail et al. 1977; Haq et al. 1987; Po-samentier et al. 1988; Van Wagoner et al. 1988, Jacquin et al. 1991; amongothers) gave to these stratigraphic units a specific genetic significance anda precise time duration—for example, the depositional sequences are third-order cycles (2–3 Myr), and systems tracts are confined within them. Vailet al. (1991) maintain that the depositional sequences and the associatedsystems tracts are generated by short-term relative sea-level fluctuations.This interpretation is a possible one but, as shown by Schlager (1992),Bosellini (1993), and Bosellini et al. (1993b), other mechanisms, includingecological demise and tectonic collapse, can operate as well in carbonatesystems.

Various terms (megasequence, supersequence, composite sequence) havebeen used to designate depositional sequences involving a longer time span(Hubbard 1988; Vail et al. 1991; Mitchum and Van Wagoner 1991; Bo-sellini 1992). However, the distinction between different orders is largelyarbitrary and often determined by goals and tools of the research (local vs.regional, seismic profile vs. outcrop analysis, etc.) (Christie-Blick 1991).According to our personal experience (e.g., Bosellini 1992), depositionalsequences and systems tracts show a self-similarity at different scales(Greenlee and Moore 1988; Mitchum and Van Wagoner 1991).

In conclusion, if we admit that depositional sequences, particularly incarbonate successions, can result not only from relative sea-level fluctua-tions but also from other mechanisms (carbonate system demise, tectoniccollapse) and that their definition is independent of time, then the definitionof their constituent systems tracts must also follow the same logic. In thisreport we use the term depositional sequence for unconformity-boundedstratigraphic units that are different in time scale with respect to the typicalthird-order sequences. However, they present the same internal organiza-tion, and systems tracts can be easily identified.

Monte Sacro Sequence

The lowermost sequence cropping out in the Gargano has been desig-nated the Monte Sacro Sequence (Morsilli and Bosellini 1997), and its age

MIKI

Highlight

1243EVENT STRATIGRAPHY OF THE APULIA PLATFORM MARGIN

FIG. 3.—Late Jurassic–Early Cretaceous faciesdistribution in the Gargano Promontory. 1) innerplatform (Sannicandro Formation); 2) internalmargin (Monte Spigno Formation); 3) externalmargin (Monte Sacro Limestone); 4) slope andbasinal deposits (Casa Varfone Formation andMaiolica); 5) fault of regional importance(Mattinata Fault). The right-lateral displacementof the platform margin is due to Neogene strike-slip movements along the Mattinata fault (afterMorsilli and Bosellini 1997).

FIG. 4.—Chronostratigraphic chart showing formations, second-order sequences, and ‘‘systems tracts’’ of the Gargano Promontory. 1) Inner platform facies; 2) marginfacies; 3) slope and base-of-slope facies; 4) basin facies; 5) megabreccia; 6) hiatuses; 7) bauxites. Time scale after Gradstein et al. (1995).

is Callovian–Valanginian p.p. (the lower boundary is not exposed). Theoutcropping part of the sequence (only the upper part, the Tithonian–Ber-riasian interval) shows an aggradational–progradational trend, interpretedas the highstand systems tract. The sequence is composed of five lithostrat-igraphic units (formations with several facies associations) (Fig. 4). Fromthe inner platform to the basin, they include the following.

(1) Sannicandro Formation. This unit crops out only in the western andcentral sector of the Gargano (Fig. 3) and consists of a thick succession ofmeter-scale (1–5 m) peritidal parasequences representing lagoonal to su-

pratidal environments. Common lithofacies include mudstone–wackestonerich in dasycladacean algae, ostracods, gastropods (Nerinea sp.), and pe-loidal and oolitic packstone–grainstone. Birdseye structures, fenestral fab-ric, and stromatolite layers associated with flat-pebble breccia are commonat the cycle tops.

(2) Monte Spigno Formation. This unit crops out in the central area ofthe Gargano promontory (Fig. 3) and consists mainly of oolitic and on-colitic grainstones. Sedimentary structures include current and wave ripplesand low-angle planar lamination (dune scale). Meniscus cements and key-


FIG. 5.—White basinal limestones (Maiolica) with thin chert layers. Several slumpfeatures are clearly visible (road cut east of Mattinata).

stone vugs are common features in thin section. This facies suggests ashallow-water high-energy setting, such as oolitic shoals with local zonesof emersion (small islands with beaches).

(3) Monte Sacro Limestone. This formation occurs in a narrow and ar-cuate belt from Monte d’Elio to Mattinata (Fig. 3) and consists of massivewackestone rich in Ellipsactinia, Sphaeractinia, and stromatoporoids.Boundstone rich in Tubiphytes, corals, and stromatactis are present in someareas (M. d’Elio). This facies association is interpreted to represent a spec-trum of environments from reef front to external margin (Morsilli and Bo-sellini 1997). The landward boundary with the Monte Spigno Formation isgradual with a zone of skeletal sands and scattered branching coral colonies(reef flat).

(4) Casa Varfone Formation. This consists of thick-bedded skeletal rud-stone, stromatoporoid breccias, and graded grainstones interfingering withcherty lime mudstones. Clasts are mainly fragments of Ellipsactinia,Sphaeractinia, stromatoporoids, and corals. The geometric relationships ob-servable in the field support the interpretation that this facies associationis a proximal to distal, clinostratified slope succession (dip between 10–158 and 25–288). It is the product of different types of gravity flows, fromhyperconcentrated flows to high-density turbidity currents (sensu Mutti1992). Upslope it passes into the Monte Sacro Limestone.

(5) Maiolica 1. This is the well known formation of the Mediterraneanbasinal sediments of Late Jurassic–Early Cretaceous age. It consists ofwhite, thin-bedded, micritic limestone with cherts, rich in calpionellids andNannoconus, and rich in slump features (intraformational folds, truncationsurfaces) (Fig. 5).

Upper Sequence Boundary.—Near the town of Mattinata and betweenForesta Umbra and Coppa dei Tre Confini, the inclined surface (20–288)of the platform slope is onlapped by a thick succession of white, thin-bedded micritic limestones (Maiolica 2). The physical stratigraphic rela-tionships, directly observable in the field (fig. 5 in Bosellini and Morsilli1997), are clearly unconformable and suggest the existence of a drowningunconformity (sensu Schlager 1989). Moreover, the horizontal to subhor-izontal onlap pattern of the Lower Cretaceous basinal sediments indicatesthat the platform margin had substantial vertical relief above the basin floorat the time of drowning. The age of the platform and of its coeval flankand basinal deposits (Monte Sacro Limestone, Casa Varfone Formation,Maiolica 1) is Late Jurassic–Valanginian p.p., whereas the age of the ad-

jacent onlapping succession (Maiolica 2) is Valanginian p.p.–Hauterivian.No evidence of impregnation of authigenic minerals, like phosphate, glau-conite, and Fe–Mn crusts, commonly found associated with drowning sur-faces in other areas of the Tethyan domain (Follmi et al. 1994), has beenobserved on the Monte Sacro unconformity surface. The lack of mineral-ization could be related to the isolation of the Apulia Platform with respectto continental influx.

Mattinata 1 Sequence

This sequence, which spans in age from Valanginian p.p. to early Aptian,is represented mainly by inner-platform facies and slope-to-basin sediments(Fig. 4). Margin-bioconstructed facies (rudists and stromatoporoids) occuronly at Monte degli Angeli. The progradational trend (highstand systemstract) of the sequence is documented by the superposition of the Mattinata1 Formation (slope facies) over the Maiolica 2 (basin facies). A brief de-scription of these different units follows.

(1) San Giovanni Rotondo Limestone. This is a thick succession (500–600 m) of shallow-water limestone that can be subdivided into three mem-bers (see Claps et al. 1996 for a more detailed description). Member 1consists of a monotonous and acyclic subtidal unit and represents (proba-bly) the transgressive systems tract of the sequence. Member 2 is repre-sented by a thick cyclic unit characterized by quasi-periodic alternation of‘‘loferitic’’ beds and centimeter-thick layers of green shales, deposited ina tidal-flat setting. Member 3 displays a variety of facies including subtidalhigh-energy thin-bedded calcarenites at the base of parasequences and dom-al stromatolites in the upper peritidal units. Members 2 and 3 represent themiddle and late highstand systems tract, respectively.

(2) Monte degli Angeli 1 Limestone. This represents the bioconstructedmargin of the platform and consists of skeletal sand and stromatoporoidboundstone and rudstone with scattered coral fragments. It is present onlyat the Monte degli Angeli (lower part), to the west of Monte S. Angelo(Fig. 6).

(3) Mattinata 1 Formation. This is a slope and base-of-slope carbonatesuccession, rich in gravity-displaced deposits (calciturbidites, breccias), in-terbedded with cherty micritic limestone, commonly slumped (Luciani andCobianchi 1994; Cobianchi et al. 1997). The type section is exposed nearthe town of Monte S. Angelo, along the road to Val Carbonara and S.Giovanni Rotondo (Fig. 6).

(4) Maiolica 2. Same facies of the Maiolica 1 described above.Upper Sequence Boundary.—There is a rather abrupt change in li-

thology in slope and basinal settings: both the Maiolica 2 and Mattinata 1Formation are overlain by a marly and shaly succession, the so-called Scistia Fucoidi Formation (Cobianchi et al. 1997), early Aptian–late Albian inage (see a more detailed description in the following sequence). At Coppadi Pila, south of Cagnano Varano, the transgressive systems tract of thefollowing sequence (Mattinata 2 Sequence) is exposed on the platformmargin. A few meters of lower Aptian pelagic limestone disconformablyonlap and overlie rudist mounds associated with oolitic grainstone of Ber-riasian age. These pelagics are in turn overlain by bioclastic rudstone richin orbitolinids and large rudist fragments. From the standpoint of physicalstratigraphy, the sequence boundary is clearly a drowning event: the plat-form and its bioclastic apron (Mattinata Formation) is abruptly backsteppedsome 5–10 km, suggesting that shallow deposition was terminated in ashort time.

Mattinata 2 Sequence

This sequence spans from early Aptian to late Albian and is representedlargely by slope and basin deposits. Equivalent shallow-water deposits arerare and are present only at Monte degli Angeli and Coppa di Pila and inthe area between Rignano and Manfredonia. The sequence, characterized


FIG. 6.—Geologic profile (from photograph) between Monte degli Angeli and the town of Monte S. Angelo, The paleoslope, its connection with the platform margins(Monte degli Angeli), and the thin wedge of Aptian black mudstone (Scisti a Fucoidi), subdividing the two Mattinata sequences are clearly visible. No tectonic tilting.

FIG. 7.—The deeply erosional contact between the Monte S. Angelo Megabrecciaand the underlying Scisti a Fucoidi formation (Superstrada road cut, near Ischitella).

in the upper part by its strong progradational trend (Fig. 6), is representedby the following formations.

(1) Masseria Quadrone Limestone. According to Merla et al. (1969), aninner-platform succession of Albian–Cenomanian? age crops out in thesouthern part of Gargano. This succession consists of thick beds of mud-stone–wackestone with peloidal packstone–grainstone intercalations. Re-cently, Luperto Sinni (1996b), described a thin succession (about 30 m) ofmudstone–packstone with late Albian orbitolinids in the same area; the topconsists of a Sellialveolina vialli–bearing limestone, early Cenomanian inage.

(2) Monte degli Angeli 2 Limestone. This is the late Aptian to middle–late Albian tract of the Lower Cretaceous margin of the Apulia Platform.It is grafted onto the underlying Hauterivian–early Aptian platform margin,but, in places, there may be 1–2 m of pelagic limestone (transgressivesystems tract). The Monte degli Angeli Limestone is rich in sponges, chae-tetids, corals, and rudists and represents the bioconstructed margin of thissequence. The age of the outcropping part of this formation is limited tothe late Aptian, whereas the Albian part is documented only in platform-derived breccia occurring in the Mattinata 2 Formation.

(3) Scisti a Fucoidi Formation. This lithological unit, rich in marls and

black shales deposited by episodic anoxic events (Cobianchi et al. 1997),has a maximum thickness of 120 m and overlies both the Maiolica 2 andMattinata 1 formations. It clearly represents a rather abrupt change in thebasin sedimentation and is associated with a standstill in the platform evo-lution. The Scisti a Fucoidi wedges out against the platform slope (Fig. 6)and is absent on the platform top, where a few meters of pelagic limestoneor an unconformity surface are present.

(4) Mattinata 2 Formation. This is the same slope and base-of-slopesuccession as the Mattinata 1 Formation, previously described, from whichit is separated by a wedge of pelagic limestone with thin beds of blackshale (Scisti a Fucoidi Formation) (Fig. 4). The Aptian–Albian MattinataFormation, rich in graded breccias and calciturbidites, represents the high-stand systems tract of the sequence. Upslope, it is physically correlatablewith the shallow-water platform of Monte degli Angeli (Fig. 6).

Upper Sequence Boundary.—This is a major erosional unconformityof regional extent. On the platform it corresponds to well known karst andbauxite horizons developed over the entire peri-Adriatic region (Crescentiand Vighi 1964; Accarie et al. 1988; D’Argenio and Mindszenty 1991;Carannante et al. 1992; Mindszenty et al. 1995). In the slope and base-of-slope settings, the Mattinata and Scisti a Fucoidi formations are uncon-formably overlain by a huge megabreccia; the boundary is clearly erosional(Fig. 7).

Monte S. Angelo 1 Sequence

This sequence (late Albian–Santonian) (Bosellini et al. 1993b; Neri andLuciani 1994) consists mainly of slope (Monte S. Angelo Megabreccia andMonte Acuto 1 Formation) and basinal, fully pelagic sediments (Scaglia 1)(Fig. 4). The shallow-water tract of the sequence is represented by a smalloutcrop in the western and southern part of the promontory. The sequenceconsists of the following formations.

(1) Casa Lauriola Limestone. This formation consists of shallow-water,subtidal to peritidal carbonates, and crops out in two zones, near S. Gio-vanni Rotondo and near Apricena. It unconformably overlies the mid-Cre-taceous bauxite horizon (Merla et al. 1969). In the S. Giovanni Rotondoarea it consists of mudstone–wackestone with thin intercalations of greenmarls of late Turonian?–Coniacian p.p. age (Luperto Sinni 1996b), whereasin the Apricena area the outcropping succession consists of meter-thickmudstone–wackestone beds with scattered bouquets or clusters of rudists


FIG. 8.—The marine onlap of the Peschici Formation (Lutetian) over the deeplyeroded Scaglia (left) of late Turonian–early Coniacian age (Vieste sea-cliff).

(radiolitids) and intercalated stromatolite layers, planar or LLH (laterallylinked hemispheroids, sensu Logan et al. 1964) (late Turonian–Senonian).

(2) Monte S. Angelo Megabreccia. This represents the base of the se-quence (lowstand systems tract) in the slope and base-of-slope settings. Inthe type area, it consists mainly of megabreccia lenses with boulders andclasts derived from the Lower Cretaceous carbonate platform margin. Inthe Ischitella–Vico area (northern Gargano), graded breccias and calcitur-bidites are intercalated with pelagic limestones. The thickness can be asmuch as 200 m. This unit, late Albian–Cenomanian in age (Neri and Lu-ciani 1994), represents the slope and base-of-slope accumulation derivedfrom large platform-margin failures.

(3) Monte Acuto 1 Formation. This is a succession deposited in slopeand base-of-slope settings (Neri 1993; Neri and Luciani 1994). It consistsof white, chalky and cherty lime mudstones, alternating with coarse bio-clastic calciturbidites, breccias, and megabreccias; clasts are both of plat-form and slope–basin derivation. The entire M. Acuto Formation (1 and 2)has been divided into five units (Neri 1993): (a) a basal condensed pelagicinterval (Unit 1), which may be interpreted as the transgressive systemstract; (b) two bodies of calciturbidites (Units 2 and 4) (highstand systemstract), separated by a Scaglia tongue (Unit 3), some 50 m thick, (Santonian–early Campanian in age), and (c) a pelagic interval on top of the succession(Unit 5). Facies associations of Units 2 and 4 are representative of a systemof laterally coalescing depositional lobes (Neri 1993). Only Units 1 and 2constitute the Monte Acuto 1 Formation.

(4) Scaglia 1. This is the basinal counterpart of the sequence and con-sists of thin-bedded, chalky and cherty white lime mudstones.

Upper Sequence Boundary.—Even if there is no control from the plat-form section, we consider the Scaglia tongue (Unit 3) as a possible trans-gressive systems tract of a younger depositional sequence of Santonian–early Danian age (Fig. 4). Moreover, this sequence boundary has also beenrecognized in offshore seismic profiles, with a marine onlap that probablyreflects a partial drowning of the Apulia Platform (De Alteriis and Aiello1993).

Monte S. Angelo 2 Sequence

This sequence comprises only slope and basin facies. Two formationsare present.

(1) Monte Acuto 2 Formation. This corresponds to units 3, 4, and 5 asdefined by Neri (1993). Unit 3, the Scaglia tongue previously described,consists of pelagic sediments with some breccia and turbidite layers, whichseem to be more common upslope. Unit 4 is a thick calciturbidite body,like unit 2. The last unit is represented by pelagic sediments with somethin bioclastic turbidite of Danian age (M. trinidanensis zone) (Bosellini etal. 1993b).

(2) Scaglia 2. Lithologically, this succession is the same as Scaglia 1and crops out extensively along the northeastern part of the Gargano.

Upper Sequence Boundary.—The Monte Acuto 2 and Scaglia 2 for-mations are overlain by the Grottone Megabreccia or by laterally equivalentcalciturbidites of the Peschici Formation (Bosellini et al. 1993a, 1993b) ofMiddle Eocene age. The contact is everywhere unconformable and deeplyerosional.

Monte Saraceno Sequence

The youngest depositional sequence of the Gargano succession is 250–300 m thick and entirely Middle Eocene (Lutetian) in age (Bosellini et al.1993a, 1993b) (Fig. 4). The Monte Saraceno Sequence is separated fromthe underlying Upper Cretaceous and Paleocene substratum (Monte AcutoFormation and Scaglia) by a pronounced unconformity, and is representedalmost entirely by slope and base-of-slope deposits. It is the result of themargin collapse of an Early Eocene carbonate platform and of its Creta-ceous–Paleocene ‘‘basement’’, followed by the installation and prograda-

tion of a nummulite platform over the adjacent basinal deposits. It consistsof the following formations.

(1) Grottone Megabreccia. The basal lowstand systems tract is a 50–60m thick megabreccia consisting of several channelized bodies separated byamalgamation surfaces. The Grottone Megabreccia records a series of cat-astrophic debris-flow episodes resulting from the dismantling of a Creta-ceous and Early Eocene platform (lowstand systems tract).

(2) Peschici Formation. This is a thick succession (350 m) of gradedbreccias and calciturbidites alternating with pelagic marlstone onlapping(marine onlap) a huge scar on the underlying Scaglia (Fig. 8), deeply erod-ed into the late Turonian–early Campanian strata (Bosellini et al. 1993b).This large hiatus has also been recognized offshore (De Alteriis and Aiello1993).

(3) Punta Rossa Limestone. This is the Eocene basinal (proximal) facies,consisting of chalky, whitish and thin-bedded lime mudstone. There areseveral 20–30 m thick calciturbidites within the succession, which appearsto be characterized by frequent truncation surfaces and discordances (slumpscars).

(4) Monte Saraceno Limestone. This is the uppermost unit of the se-quence and is represented by clinostratified, coarse calcarenites and rud-stones, consisting entirely of Nummulites and Dyscociclinidae. In places,floatstones rich in branching corals, gastropods, and bivalves occur. Thisunit can be interpreted as a proximal slope with small patch reefs growingon the deeper margin and is probably related to a forced regression (low-stand shelf edge); in fact, no progradation of the system is observed, as itshould be in case of depositional regression.

PROCESSES AND EVENTS CONTROLLING MARGIN ARCHITECTURE:DISCUSSION

In this section, the various geological processes and events (Fig. 9) thatpunctuated and gave rise to the sequence stratigraphic architecture of theplatform margin will be analyzed and discussed.

The Valanginian Drowning Unconformity

Physical relationships and age determination of the sedimentary succes-sion clearly document that the Apulia Platform, moderately prograding dur-ing the Late Jurassic–Valanginian p.p. interval, was stopped in its evolutionin the early Valanginian and then onlapped by basinal sediments (Maiolica2) (Bosellini and Morsilli 1997). According to all available paleontologicaldata (Chiocchini 1987; Barattolo and Pugliese 1987; De Castro 1987; Par-ente, personal communication), the age of the uppermost part of the shal-low-water carbonate platform in Apulia and southern Apennines is Berria-sian–earliest Valanginian, whereas the Gargano onlapping basinal succes-sion is early Valanginan at the toe of the slope (Calpionellites Zone) and


FIG. 9.—The various events that controlled thesequence stratigraphic architecture of the ApuliaPlatform margin along the Gargano transect.O.A.E. column after Jenkyns (1991).

progressively younger upward (latest Valanginian–early Hauterivian; sub-zone NC4a of Bralower 1987). We can therefore infer a hiatus from aminimum of less than 1 Myr at the slope toe to a maximum of 6 Myrtoward the top of the platform.

The Late Jurassic was a time of rapid subsidence and widespread plat-form growth on the margins of the central North Atlantic and of the Li-gurian Ocean (western Tethys). However, these carbonate platforms weredrowned and their growth suddenly interrupted during the Valanginian.This phenomenon and the associated drowning unconformities are wellknown in a large part of world, from the Caribbean to eastern Arabia. TheValanginian drowning is documented (see references in Bosellini and Mor-silli 1997) in: (1) the western continental margin of the Atlantic Ocean(Scotian Shelf, Baltimore Canyon, Caribbean); (2) the eastern continentalmargin of the Atlantic Ocean (Iberia, Morocco); (3) the western peri-Alpinedomain, i.e., the northern and western continental margin of the LigurianOcean and the margin of Iberia (southern France, Helvetic Alps, Estre-madura, eastern Prebetic and Betic areas); and (4) the margins of the AdriaPlate (Apulia Platform). Recently, additional data have been presented byStoll and Schrag (1996). According to these authors, strontium-isotope datafrom the deep ocean (Blake–Bahama Basin, off the eastern coast of UnitedStates) from an interval spanning 7 million years in the Berriasian–Valan-ginian would imply that global sea level fluctuated about 50 meters overtime scales of 200,000 to 500,000 years.

Interpretation of widespread episodic synchroneity in carbonate platformecologic behavior is controversial (Follmi et al. 1994). Besides eustasy,proposed mechanisms include widespread eutrophism (Hallock and Schla-ger 1986), globally increased tectonic movements (Eberli 1991), large-scaleoceanic anoxia (Vogt 1989; Schlager and Philip 1990; Jenkyns 1991;among others), and pulses in ocean-crust formation (Mullins et al. 1991).

As documented in other carbonate platform during the same time (Schla-ger 1991, 1998; Erlich et al. 1993; Follmi et al. 1994), the Valanginianrelative sea-level rise was associated with an environmental crisis that re-duced the potential growth of the previously healthy platform. However,the Apulia carbonate platform had a position beyond the reach of terrige-nous sediments; it was isolated and ‘‘clean’’, at least during Valanginiantime. In conclusion, the worldwide Valanginian drowning unconformitiesand sea-level fluctuations suggest some kind of eustatic mechanism (glacio-

eustatic, geoidal eustasy, pulses in ocean-crust formation, etc.), which canalso be invoked for the onlap geometry and associated drowning uncon-formity observed in the Gargano.

The Aptian–Albian Anoxia

The Apulia Platform and the adjacent slope suddenly became inactivateduring the early Aptian (Figs 4, 6). This event coincides with a relativelyabrupt change in open marine sedimentation: the pelagic (and cherty) coc-colith-rich, white lime mudstones of the Maiolica 2 Formation are overlainby marly and shaly sediments, the so-called Scisti a Fucoidi Formation.This pelagic unit is widespread along the southern continental margin ofthe Tethys ocean and is characterized by a well developed cyclicity ex-pressed by limestone–marlstone couplets and by redox rhythms (Erba 1992;Tornaghi et al. 1989; among others). In the Gargano, the Scisti a FucoidiFormation has a thickness of 100–120 m and consists mainly of marls andmarly limestone. Two organic-carbon-rich black shales are scattered withinthe Albian tract of this unit (Cobianchi et al. 1997; Cobianchi et al. 1999).Because the base of the Scisti a Fucoidi Formation is early Aptian, thereseems to be no hiatus in the slope-to-basin setting. The hiatus shown inFigure 4 on the platform top is inferred and not really detectable on abiostratigraphic basis.

The onset of deposition of the Scisti a Fucoidi Formation, so rich inmarls and with episodic organic-carbon-rich black shales, was clearly notrelated to the sedimentary dynamics of the Apulia Platform. Aptian–Albianunits equivalent to the Gargano Scisti a Fucoidi are well known from thesouthern Alps to the Apennines (the Umbria–Marche basin is the typelocality) (Arthur and Fischer 1977; Cresta et al. 1989; Bersezio 1992), andGreece (Skourtsis-Coroneou et al. 1995) and Cretaceous anoxia events oc-curred on a global scale, related to worldwide oceanographic and climaticconditions (Schlanger and Jenkyns 1976; Jenkyns 1980, 1991; Arthur etal. 1990; Bralower et al. 1994). During the Cretaceous five anoxic eventstook place in the ocean (Jenkyns 1991). Oceanic Anoxic Event 1 (O.A.E.1), subdivided into OAE 1A, 1B, and 1C, occurred during the late Barre-mian interval and continued through the Albian, O.A.E. 2 during the Cen-omanian–Turonian transition and O.A.E. 3 during the Coniacian–Santonianinterval (Arthur and Schlanger 1979; Jenkyns 1980, 1991; Bralower et al.


FIG. 10.—The amphitheater-like contactbetween the Monte S. Angelo Megabreccia andthe adjacent Lower Cretaceous platformcarbonates. 1) Monte Spigno Formation; 2)Monte Sacro Formation; 3) Monte degli AngeliFormation; 4) Mattinata Formation; 5) Scisti aFucoidi Formation; 6) Monte S. AngeloMegabreccia; 7) Monte Acuto Formation; 8)Monte Saraceno Sequence; 9) Quaternarydeposits; 10) erosional unconformities; 11)paraconformable sequence boundary; 12) faults.

1994). Large amounts of organic carbon were deposited and preserved inthe marine sediments as the result of the development of poorly oxygenatedwaters and the expansion of the oxygen-minimum zones.

As suggested by Jenkyns (1991), a particularly thick column of deoxy-genated water developed in the Umbria–Marche–Ionian deep-water basinand was carried onto the adjacent carbonate platforms during the variousCretaceous transgressions. This water lapped onto the Apulia Platform andfostered regional deposition of carbon-rich facies (Scisti a Fucoidi For-mation). Causal mechanisms of changes in atmospheric CO2 concentrationsand greenhouse intensity, globally increased carbon transfer rates into thesedimentary reservoirs, global positive d13C excursion, rise in nutrient in-put into the oceans etc., and concomitant sea-level rise are extensivelydiscussed by Follmi et al. (1994) and Drzewiecki and Simo (1997). How-ever, exact relationships between rising sea level and anoxia, and the sourceof oxygen-depleted waters, remain problematic (Jenkyns 1991). It is notour intention to solve this problem here: we present only data and it isreasonable to infer that the early Aptian drowning and retreat of the ApuliaPlatform might be associated with the deposition of the Scisti a FucoidiFormation. Because this unit appears to be the result of specific worldwideoceanographic and climatic conditions, we suggest a causal link betweenthe platform standstill and the Aptian–Albian poorly oxygenated marinewaters.

The Late Albian–Cenomanian Collapses

According to our field observations (Bosellini et al. 1993a, 1993b), theMonte S. Angelo Megabreccia is the result of major collapses of the plat-form margin that occurred in the late Albian–Cenomanian interval duringa time span of about 6 Myr (Neri and Luciani 1994). At least three super-imposed megabreccia bodies can be distinguished in the northern Garganoarea, whereas to the south there is a single amalgamated megabreccia unit.

As visible in plan view (Fig. 10), the geometry of the contact betweenthe megabreccia and the adjacent Lower Cretaceous platform carbonates isan amphitheater-like feature, and this rules out the presence of a paleofaultas suggested by previous authors. But this is not the only indentation ob-served along the edge of the Apulia carbonate platform; there are severalother scalloped features (Bosellini et al. 1993b, fig. 13). For example, alarge scallop that incises the almost rectilinear Apulia Platform margin, hasrecently been identified by Bosellini and Morsilli (1994). This reentrant,which grossly corresponds to the present-day Lake of Varano (Fig. 11), isin part sutured by Cretaceous breccias and megabreccias and by a thick

Miocene succession. Supported by detailed geologic mapping and by sev-eral stratigraphic data, Bosellini and Morsilli (1994) believe that the de-pression that accommodates the Lake of Varano originally was a submarineslide scar of Cretaceous age resulting from a large-scale platform collapse.

It is well known (Crescenti and Vighi 1964; D’Argenio and Mindszenty1991, 1992; Mindszenty et al. 1995) that pronounced exposures of theshallow-water platforms occurred over the entire southern Apennines andApulia during the mid-Cretaceous. Accarie et al. (1988) document a Cen-omanian unconformity in the Maiella Mountain, some 150 km northwestof Gargano, with karst cavities penetrating into the Lower Cretaceous sub-stratum for about 50 meters; hiatuses associated with the bauxite horizonsare included within the late Albian–early Cenomanian interval. In theMatese mountains, Ruberti (1993) documents two gaps, the lower one ex-tending from the middle Albian to the Cenomanian p.p., the upper onecorresponding to the lower–middle Turonian. Hiatuses extending from theAlbian p.p. to the early Cenomanian are also reported by Carannante et al.(1992) from various platform sections in the Campania region.

Recently, Mindszenty et al. (1995) reviewed the general problem of themid-Cretaceous emergences of the southern Apennine carbonate platformsand of the associated bauxite and paleokarst horizons and unconformities.Their conclusion is that the ‘‘rather monotonous story’’ of the Cretaceouscarbonate platforms is interrupted by two major regional unconformities,one of them Albian–Cenomanian, the other Turonian. According to Cres-centi and Vighi (1964), the age of the Gargano bauxites is Turonian, where-as the Gargano collapses and megabreccias are late Albian to Cenomanian(Neri and Luciani 1994). Therefore, they are coeval with the older bauxiteand paleokarst horizons. However, quite recently, it has been shown(Grotsch et al. 1993; Fernandez-Mendiola and Garcıa-Mondejar 1997) thata late Albian phase of global karstification is present in many carbonateplatforms of the world (Slovenia, Mid-Pacific guyots, Venezuela, Basco-Cantabrian basin, etc.). It should be ultimately related to a short-term re-gressive–transgressive cycle with an amplitude of more than 100 m.

General stratigraphy and geology demonstrate that the Gargano collapseevents were coeval with a general emergence of the southern Apenninesand Apulia and of many carbonate platforms around the world (Grotsch etal. 1993). Therefore, it is tempting to consider a relative sea-level lowstandas the triggering mechanism. The generalized mid-Cretaceous emersions ofthe southern Apennines and Apulia carbonate platforms have been inter-preted by many authors (D’Argenio et al. 1987; D’Argenio and Mindszenty1991, 1992; Bosellini 1989; Eberli 1991; Mindszenty et al. 1995) as the


FIG. 11.—The Varano Lake (A) is a morphological feature inherited from a largescallop (B) of the Cretaceous Apulia Platform edge (modified from Bosellini andMorsilli, 1994). 1) Monte Spigno Formation; 2) Monte Sacro Formation; 3) slopeand basin deposits; 4) depositional platform edge; 5) erosional margin.

FIG. 12.—The pelagic interval (‘‘transgressive systems tract’’) overlying the Mon-te S. Angelo Megabreccia and abruptly overlain by gravity-displaced debrites(‘‘highstand system tract’’). The erosional contact represents the downlap surface ofthe prograding depositional system of the Monte Acuto Formation (Monte S. An-gelo–Manfredonia road).

foreland reaction to distant plate collision (lithospheric bulge). We are alsoin favor of a tectonic origin for the Gargano megabreccias for severalreasons, including: (a) no major karst or bauxite horizon seems to be pres-ent in the platform interior during the late Albian to Cenomanian; (b) it iswell known that the Albian–Cenomanian emergence resulted in a karst-bauxite surface, and this dissolution process is not expected to generatesediment export to the basin; on the contrary, the adjacent basin should bein starved conditions (see Bosellini 1993); (c) the megabreccia boulders donot show any sign of previous exposure and karstification (vadose cements,red color, terra rossa, etc.); and (d) the Cenomanian–Turonian time is aperiod of enhanced sea-level rise and platform drowning all over the world(Haq et al. 1987; Schlager and Philip 1990).

We believe that the triggering mechanism of the Gargano collapses might

be related to seismic shocks associated with the incipient uplift of Apulia,which culminated with its generalized emersion in Cenomanian and Tu-ronian times.

In conclusion, the result of this story is that the classic sequence strati-graphic organization of a slope-to-basin succession can simply derive fromplatform dismantling. In fact, margin failure interrupts carbonate produc-tion by bioconstructors or by sedimentary processes (oolite and skeletalsands). After megabreccia accumulation (‘‘lowstand systems tract’’) andbefore the margin is recolonized, there necessarily follows a period of star-vation along the entire slope and base-of-slope tract: pelagic, thin-beddedsediment accumulates on the ‘‘lowstand’’ megabreccia, simulating thetransgressive systems tract and the associated condensed section (Fig. 12).Finally, once margin deposition resumes, sediment export starts and theentire system begins to prograde again (‘‘highstand systems tract’’).

Santonian–Campanian Retreat of the Platform Margin

The ‘‘highstand’’ deposits (coarse bioclastic calciturbidites forming pro-gradational lobe cycles) of the Monte S. Angelo 1 Sequence of the southernGargano area are overlain quite abruptly by pelagic cherty limestone (Scag-lia 2, Fig. 4). This is a wedge-shaped unit with a maximum thickness of50–60 m, thinning upslope and inserted as a ‘‘Scaglia 2 tongue’’ withinthe Monte Acuto Formation. On the basis respectively of planktonic fora-minifers and nannoplankton, this pelagic unit has been referred to the San-tonian–early Campanian by Neri and Luciani (1994) and to the late San-tonian by Laviano and Marino (1996). There seems to be no hiatus betweenthe sequences Monte S. Angelo 1 and 2 in the basin setting. Upslope,however, erosional hiatuses responsible for the omission of the whole G.elevata zone (about 3 Myr) locally occur.

The pelagics are characterized upslope by 1–5-m-thick platform-derivedmegabreccias, commonly deeply channelized, by isolated platform olisto-liths up to 4–5 m in size, by massive breccia and paraconglomerates derivedfrom cannibalization of slope-to-basin deposits (pelagic lime mudstone,chert, and calciturbidites), and by slumpings and slump scars, resulting insignificant hiatuses, recognizable biostratigraphically (Neri and Luciani1994).

The ‘‘Scaglia tongue’’ marks the base of the Monte S. Angelo 2 Se-quence and is overlain by a succession of coarse calciturbidites, about 150m thick, the base of which can be referred to the early Campanian p.p. Ittestifies to a retreat of the margin and a strong reduction in platform pro-ductivity, although the presence of bioclastic turbidites within the unit in-dicates that the carbonate factory did not stop entirely. Because impressive


gravity processes affected the slope and the platform margin, we tend tobelieve that a simple rise in sea level cannot completely account for them.

A significant landward retreat of the margin of the Apulia platform dur-ing early Campanian times is also recorded in the Fasano–Ostuni area,some 200 km to the southeast (Murge, Fig. 1) (Luperto Sinni and Borgo-mano 1989; Pieri and Laviano 1989; Guarnieri et al. 1990; Luperto Sinni1996a; Luperto Sinni and Reina 1996a, 1996b) and in the Adriatic offshore(De Alteriis and Aiello 1993). The pre-Campanian platform margin is lo-cated a few tens of kilometers offshore, whereas the Campanian margin isdocumented about 5–10 km inland of the present-day coastline.

It is not clear what kind of mechanism controlled such a transgression:tectonics or eustasy. According to Simo et al. (1993), a prominent sequenceboundary (seaward shift of the coastal onlap followed by fast transgression)is recorded at the Santonian–Campanian transition in carbonate successionsin a number of very different paleogeographic settings, such as the Carib-bean, Western Europe, Adria, and North Africa, thus suggesting a primaryeustatic control. However, the frequent occurrence in the discussed strati-graphic interval, both in Gargano and Murge areas, of megabreccia lenses,olistolith swarms, and significant gravity-displaced slope-to-basin depositssuggests that downfaulting and local tectonically induced collapses mayhave been important mechanisms in the platform retreat. Further data arerequired, especially from Murge, to solve the problem, but it seems rea-sonable that the intraplate stress controlling the Albian–Cenomanian col-lapses was still at work during Santonian–Campanian time.

The Middle Eocene Collapse

The last depositional sequence of the Gargano succession is the MonteSaraceno Sequence. It is separated from the underlying Upper Cretaceousand Paleocene substratum (Scaglia and Monte Acuto Formations) by apronounced unconformity associated with a major erosional hiatus (Fig. 4).The age of Eocene catastrophic event is bracketed between the Morozovellatrinidadensis zone (Danian; age of the youngest sample of the underlyingsequence) and the Morozovella lehneri zone (middle Lutetian; age of upperpelagic chalk). The presence of nummulites of probable Lutetian age in thematrix of the basal megabreccia confines its age to the initial Lutetian orthe top of the Ypresian, a time (between 49 and 45.5 Myr) of a majorlowstand event, according to Haq et al. (1987). We must admit, however,that the timing of the Grottone Megabreccia is based on the presence ofvery poorly preserved nummulites. Moreover, the biostratigraphic datingby this fossil group certainly does not allow resolution at the 0.5–1 Myrrange. The extent of the associated hiatus may vary from 12–15 to morethan 40 Myr in the eastern Gargano (see Fig. 4), where the Peschici For-mation, dated as mid-Lutetian, disconformably overlies the Scaglia For-mation, the uppermost part of which is Coniacian in age (Marginotruncanasigali zone) (Bosellini et al. 1993b).

The Eocene was a time of general uplift and subaerial exposure of Apuliaand present-day southern Adriatic Sea. A major unconformity at the top ofCretaceous carbonates is documented by outcrops, well data, and seismicdata (De Dominicis and Mazzoldi 1989; Colantoni et al. 1990; De Alteriisand Aiello 1993; Argnani et al. 1993). It is worth noting that this uncon-formity is present in all offshore wells of the Adriatic, suggesting that theuplift was associated with the foreland bulge of the west-verging Dinari-des–Hellenides thrust belts (Gambini and Tozzi 1996).

Once again, a classic sequence stratigraphic succession—the Monte Sar-aceno Sequence—is the result of a ‘‘tectonic’’ relative sea-level fluctuation.

CONCLUSIONS

The long-term event stratigraphy of the Apulia Platform margin andslope along the Gargano transect is punctuated by five major events. Theseevents subdivide the succession into six second-order sequences and con-stitute the framework of its stratigraphic architecture.

(1) Valanginian drowning unconformity. Physically visible as an onlapof basinal sediments onto the Jurassic–Berriasian platform slope, this abruptsea-level rise is documented worldwide, from the deep ocean to the Atlanticcontinental margins, Iberia, Alps, etc. It is reasonable to infer that somekind of eustatic mechanism (glacio-eustatic, geoidal eustasy, pulse in oceancrust formation, etc.) is responsible for the onlap geometry and the asso-ciated drowning unconformity observed in the Gargano.

(2) Early Aptian–Albian drowning and demise of the platform. Thisevent is coeval with the onset of deposition of the Scisti a Fucoidi For-mation in the basin. This unit, rich in organic deposits and black shales,records several global Cretaceous anoxia events. We suggest (cf. Jenkyns1991) that a particularly thick column of deoxygenated water lapped ontothe Apulia Platform and fostered regional deposition of carbon-rich facies.As a result, the carbonate platform factory was temporarily turned off,giving way to a substantial drowning and retreat of the platform system.

(3) Late Albian–Cenomanian collapse. The slope and base-of-slope set-tings of the Gargano are characterized by huge megabreccia bodies andother gravity-displaced deposits. According to detailed field work, thesemegabreccias are the result of major collapses of the platform margin andare coeval with a general emergence of the southern Apennines and Apuliaand of many carbonate platforms of the world (Grotsch et al. 1993; Fer-nandez-Mendiola and Garcıa-Mondejar 1997). Because no data indicativeof a previous exposure have been found in the megabreccia elements, how-ever, it is suggested that the triggering mechanism of the Gargano collapsescould be related to seismic shocks associated with the incipient uplift ofApulia, which culminated in its generalized emersion in Cenomanian andTuronian times. This uplift was the result of foreland reaction to distantplate collision (Mindszenty et al. 1995).

(4) Santonian–Campanian retreat of the platform margin. This is theless well documented event. A 50–60-m-thick pelagic tongue inserted intothe bioclastic calciturbidite and breccia slope succession testifies to a retreatof the margin and a strong reduction in platform productivity. A significantlandward retreat of the Apulia Platform margin, both in the Adriatic off-shore and in southern Apulia, is also documented.

(5) Eocene uplift and platform-margin collapse. A major erosional un-conformity separates the Middle Eocene (Lutetian) bioclastic turbiditesfrom the underlying Upper Cretaceous or Paleocene pelagics. The Eocenewas a time of general uplift and subaerial exposure of Apulia and thepresent-day southern Adriatic Sea, most probably related to the forelandarching of the west-verging Dinarides-Hellenides thrust belts.

We hope that our data on the Gargano stratigraphy will be regarded asa further contribution to construct a global stratigraphic template for Cre-taceous chronostratigraphic correlation.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors gratefully acknowledge reviewers Karl Follmi, Robert W. Scott, andHelmut Weissert for very helpful and constructive comments. The careful editorialwork by John B. Southard is very much appreciated. Financial support was providedby grants from the Italian Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche (CNR Grants 94.00170, 95.00 349, 96.00 273).

REFERENCES

ACCARIE, H., BEAUDOIN, B., CUSSEY, R., JOSEPH, P., AND TRIBOULET, S., 1988, Dynamique sedi-mentaire et structurale au passage plate-forme/basin, les facies carbonates Cretaces du Massifde la Maiella (Abruzzes, Italie): Societa Geologica Italiana, Memorie, v. 36 (1986), p. 217–231.

ARGNANI, A., FAVALI, P., FRUGONI, F., GASPERINI, M., LIGI, M., MARANI, M., MATTIETTI, G., AND

MELE, G., 1993, Foreland deformational pattern in the Southern Adriatic Sea: Annali diGeofisica, v. 36, p. 229–247.

ARTHUR, M.A., AND FISCHER, A.G., 1977, Upper Cretaceous–Paleocene magnetic stratigraphyat Gubbio, Italy. 1. Lithostratigraphy and sedimentology: Geological Society of America,Bulletin, v. 88, p. 321–479.

ARTHUR, M.A., AND SCHLANGER S.O., 1979, Cretaceous ‘‘Oceanic Anoxic Events’’ as casualfactors in development of reef-reservoired giant oil fields: American Association of Petro-leum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 63, p. 870–885.


ARTHUR, M.A., JENKINS, H.C., BRUMSACK, H.J., AND SCHLANGER, S.O., 1990, Stratigraphy, geo-chemistry, and paleoceanography of organic carbon-rich Cretaceous sequences, in Ginsburg,R.N., and Beaudoin, B. eds., Cretaceous resources, events and rhythms: Dordrecht, TheNetherlands Kluwer Academic Publishers, v. 304, p. 75–119.

BARATTOLO, F., AND PUGLIESE, A., 1987, Il Mesozoico dell’Isola di Capri: Quaderni AccademiaPontaniana, n. 8, p. 1–37.

BERSEZIO, R., 1992, La successione aptiano–albiana del Bacino Lombardo: Giornale di Geo-logia, v. 54, p. 125–146.

BOSELLINI, A., 1992, The continental margins of Somalia. Structural evolution and sequencestratigraphy, in Watkins, J.S., Zhiqiang, F., and McMillen, K.J., eds., Geology and Geo-physics of Continental margins: American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Memoir 56,p. 185–205.

BOSELLINI, A., 1993, Sequence stratigraphy in carbonate successions: some Italian examples:Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, Texas, 3–6 May, p. 249–255.

BOSELLINI, A., 1989, Dynamics of Tethyan carbonate platforms, in Crevello, P.D., Wilson, J.L.,Sarg, J.F., and Read, J.F., eds., Controls on Carbonate Platform and Basin Development:SEPM, Special Publication 44, p. 1–13.

BOSELLINI, A., AND FERIOLI, G.L., 1988, Sequenze deposizionali e discordanze nel Garganomeridionale: Societa Geologica Italiana, 748 Congresso, Sorrento, Irtaly, Atti, v. A, p. 49–54.

BOSELLINI, A., AND MORSILLI, M., 1994, Il Lago di Varano (Gargano, Puglia settentrionale): unanicchia di distacco da frana sottomarina cretacea: Universita di Ferrara, Annali (N.S.), Se-zione Scienze della Terra, v. 5, p. 39–52.

BOSELLINI, A., AND MORSILLI, M., 1997, A Lower Cretaceous drowning unconformity on theeastern flank of the Apulia Platform (Gargano Promontory, southern Italy): Cretaceous Re-search, v. 18, p. 51–61.

BOSELLINI, A., NERI, C., AND LUCIANI, V., 1993a, Guida ai carbonati cretaceo–eocenici di scarpatae bacino del Gargano (Italia meridionale): Universita di Ferrara, Annali, Sezione Scienzedella Terra, supplemento, v. 4, p. 1–77.

BOSELLINI, A., NERI, C., AND LUCIANI, V., 1993b, Platform margin collapses and sequence strati-graphic organization of carbonate slopes: Cretaceous–Eocene, Gargano Promontory, south-ern Italy: Terra Nova, v. 5, p. 282–297.

BOSELLINI, A., NERI, C., AND LUCIANI, V., 1994, Platform margin collapses and sequence stra-tigraphy of slopes carbonates (Cretaceous–Eocene, Gargano Promontory, southern Italy):International Association of Sedimentologists, 15th Regional Meeting, April 1994, Ischia,Italy, Excursion A7, p. 125–161.

BRALOWER, T.J., 1987, Valanginian to Aptian calcareous nannofossil stratigraphy and correla-tion with the upper M-sequence Magnetic Anomalies: Marine Micropaleontology, v. 11, p.293–310.

BRALOWER, T.J., ARTHUR, M.A., LECKIE, R.M., SLITER, W.V., ALLARD, D.J., AND SCHLANGER, S.O., 1994, Timing and paleoceanography of oceanic dysoxia/anoxia in the late Barremian toearly Aptian (Early Cretaceous): Palaios, v. 9, p. 335–370.

BROWN, L.F., AND FISCHER, W.L., 1977, Seismic-stratigraphy interpretation of depositional sys-tems: examples from Brazil rift and pull-apart basins, in Payton, C.E., ed., Seismic Stratig-raphy, Applications to Hydrocarbon Exploration, American Association of Petroleum Ge-ologists, Memoir 26, p. 213–248.

CARANNANTE, G., D’ARGENIO, B., DELLO IACOVO, B., FERRERI, V., MINDSZENTY, A., AND SIMONE,L., 1992, Studi sul carsismo cretacico dell’Appennino Campano: Societa Geologica Italiana,Memorie, v. 41 (1988), p. 733–759.

CHIOCCHINI, M., 1987, Il Giurassico in facies di margine della piattaforma carbonaticanell’Appennino centro-meridionale: breve sintesi dei dati paleontologici e stratigrafici: So-cieta Paleontologica Italiana, Bollettino, v. 26, p. 303–308.

CHRISTIE-BLICK, N., 1991, Onlap, offlap, and the origin of unconformity-bounded depositionalsequences: Marine Geology, v. 97, p. 35–56.

CHRISTIE-BLICK, N., AND DRISCOLL, N.W., 1995, Sequence stratigraphy: Annual Review of Earthand Planetary Sciences, v. 23, p. 451–478.

CLAPS, M., PARENTE, M., NERI, C., AND BOSELLINI, A., 1996, Facies and cycles of the S. GiovanniRotondo Limestones (Lower Cretaceous, Gargano Promontory, Southern Italy): the BorgoCelano Section: Universita di Ferrara, Annali, Sezione Scienze della Terra, supplemento, v.7, p. 1–35.

COBIANCHI, M., LUCIANI, V., AND BOSELLINI, A., 1997, Early Cretaceous nannofossils and plank-tonic foraminifera from northern Gargano (Apulia, southern Italy): Cretaceous Research, v.18, p. 249–293.

COBIANCHI, M., LUCIANI, V., AND MENEGATTI, A., 1999, The Selli level of the Gargano Prom-ontory, Apulia, southern Italy: foraminiferal and calcareous nannofossil data: CretaceousResearch, v. 20, p. 255–269.

COLANTONI, P., TRAMONTANA, M., AND TEDESCHI, R., 1990, Contributo alla conoscenzadell’avampaese apulo: struttura del Golfo di Manfredonia: Giornale di Geologia, v. 52, p.145–162.

CREMONINI, G., ELMI, C., AND SELLI, R., 1971, Note illustrative della carta geologica d’Italia,Foglio 156 ‘‘S. Marco in Lamis’’: Servizio Geologico d’Italia, Roma, 66 p.

CRESCENTI, U., AND VIGHI, L., 1964, Caratteristiche, genesi e stratigrafia dei depositi bauxiticicretacici del Gargano e delle Murge; cenni sulle argille con pisoliti bauxitiche del Salento:Societa Geologica Italiana, Bollettino, v. 83, p. 285–337.

CRESTA, S., MONECHI, S., AND PARISI, G., 1989, Stratigrafia del Mesozoico e Cenozoico nell’areaUmbro–Marchigiana, Itinerari geologici sull’Appennino Umbro–Marchigiano (Italia): Me-morie descrittive della Carta Geologica d’Italia, Ministero dell’Ambiente, Servizio Geolo-gico d’Italia, Roma, v. 39, p. 185.

D’ARGENIO, B., 1976, Le piattaforme carbonatiche periadriatiche. Una rassegna di problemi nelquadro geodinamico mesozoico dell’area mediterranea: Societa Geologica Italiana, Memorie,v. 13 (1974), p. 137–159.

D’ARGENIO, B., AND MINDSZENTY, A., 1991, Karst bauxites at regional unconformities and geo-

tectonic correlation in the Cretaceous of the Mediterranean: Societa Geologica Italiana, Bol-lettino, v. 110, P. 85–92.

D’ARGENIO, B., AND MINDSZENTY, A., 1992, Tectonic and climatic control on paleokarst andbauxites: Giornale di Geologia, v. 54, p. 207–218.

D’ARGENIO, B., MINDSZENTY, A., BARDOSSY, G. Y., JUHASZ, E., AND BONI, M., 1987, Bauxites ofsouthern Italy revisited: Societa Geologica Italiana, Rendiconti, v. 9 (1986), p. 263–268.

DE ALTERIIS, G., AND AIELLO, G., 1993, Stratigraphy and tectonics offshore of Puglia (Italy,southern Adriatic Sea): Marine Geology, v. 113, p. 239–253.

DE CASTRO, P., 1987, Le facies di piattaforma carbonatica del Giurassico italiano: diffusioneareale e lineamenti biostratigrafici: Societa Paleontologica Italiana, Bollettino, v. 26, p. 309–325.

DE DOMINICIS, A., AND MAZZOLDI, G., 1989, Interpretazione geologico-strutturale del margineorientale della Piattaforma Apula: Societa Geologica Italiana, Memorie, v. 38 (1987), p.163–176.

DRZEWIECKI, P.A., AND SIMO, J.A., 1997,. Carbonate platform drowning and oceanic anoxicevents on a mid-Cretaceous carbonate platform, south-central Pyrenees, Spain: Journal ofSedimentary Research, v. 67, p. 698–714.

EBERLI, G.P., 1991, Growth and demise of isolated carbonate platforms: Bahamian controver-sies, in Muller, D.W, McKenzie, J.A., and Weissert, H., eds., Controversies in ModernGeology: London, Academic Press, p. 231–248.

EBERLI, G.P., BERNOULLI, D., SANDERS, D., AND VECSEI, A., 1993, From aggradation to progra-dation: the Maiella Platform, Abruzzi, Italy, in Simo, T., Scott, R.W., and Masse, J.P., eds.,Cretaceous Carbonate Platforms: American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Memoir56, p. 213–232.

ERBA, E., 1992, Calcareous nannofossil distribution in pelagic rhythmic sediments (Aptian–Albian, Piobbico core, central Italy): Rivista Italiana di Paleontologia e Stratigrafia, v. 97,p. 445–484.

ERLICH, R.N., LONGO, A.P., JR., AND HYARE, S., 1993, Response of carbonate platform marginsto drowning: evidence of environmental collapse, in Loucks, R.G., and Sarg, J.F., eds.,Carbonate Sequence Stratigraphy: American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Memoir57, p. 241–265.

FERNANDEZ-MENDIOLA, P.A., AND GARCıA-MONDEJAR, J., 1997, Isolated carbonate platform ofCaniego, Spain: a test of the latest Albian worldwide sea-level changes: Geological Societyof America, Bulletin, v. 109, p. 176–194.

FOLLMI, K.B., WEISSERT, H., BISPING, M., AND FUNK, H., 1994, Phosphogenesis, carbon-isotopestratigraphy, and carbonate-platform evolution along the Lower Cretaceous northern Tethyanmargin: Geological Society of America, Bulletin, v. 106, p. 729–746.

GAMBINI, R., AND TOZZI, M., 1996, Tertiary evolution of the southern Adria microplate: TerraNova, v. 8, p. 593–602.

GRADSTEIN, F. M., AGTERBERG, F.P., OGG, J.G., HARDENBOL, J., VAN VEEN, P., THIERRY, J., AND

HUANG, Z., 1995, A Triassic, Jurassic and Cretaceous time scale, in Berggren, W.A., Kent,D.V., Aubry, M.P., and Hardenbol, J., eds., Geochronology, Time Scales and Global Strati-graphic Correlation: SEPM, Special Publication 54, p. 95–126.

GREENLEE, S.M., AND MOORE, T.C., 1988, Recognition and interpretation of depositional se-quences and calculation of sea-level changes from stratigraphic data: offshore New Jerseyand Alabama Tertiary, in Wilgus, C.K., Hastings, B.S., Kendall, C.G.St.C., Posamentier,H.W., Ross, C.A., and Van Wagoner, J.C., eds., Sea Level Changes: An Integrated Ap-proach: SEPM, Special Publication 42, p. 329–353.

GROTSCH, J., SCHRODER, R., NOE, S., AND FLUGEL, E., 1993, Carbonate platforms as recorders ofhigh-amplitude eustatic sea-level fluctuations: the late Albian appenninica-event: Basin Re-search, v. 5, p. 197–212.

GUARNIERI, G., LAVIANO, A., AND PIERI, P., 1990, Second International Conference on Rudists,Rome and Bari, 1/7/1990, Guide book, 49 p.

HALLOCK, P., AND SCHLAGER, W., 1986, Nutrient excess and the demise of coral reefs andcarbonate platforms: Palaios, v. 1, p. 389–398.

HAQ, B.U., HARDENBOL, J., AND VAIL, P.R., 1987, The chronology of fluctuating sea levels sincethe Triassic: Science, v. 235, p. 1156–1167.

HUBBARD, R.J., 1988, Age and significance of sequence boundaries on Jurassic and early Cre-taceous rifted continental margins: American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin,v. 72, p. 49–72.

JACQUIN, T., ARNAUD-VANNEAU, A., ARNAUD, H., RAVENNE, C., AND VAIL, P.R., 1991, Systemstracts and depositional sequences in a carbonate setting: a study of continuous outcrops fromplatform to basin at the scale of seismic lines: Marine and Petroleum Geology, v. 8, p. 122–139.

JENKYNS, H.C., 1980, Cretaceous anoxic events: from continents to oceans: Geological Societyof London, Journal, v. 137, p. 171–188.

JENKYNS, H.C., 1991, Impact of Cretaceous Sea Level Rise and Anoxic Events on the MesozoicCarbonate Platform of Yugoslavia: American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin,v. 75, p. 1007–1017.

LAVIANO, A., AND MARINO, M., 1996, Biostratigraphy and paleoecology of Upper Cretaceouscarbonate successions in the Gargano Promontory: Societa Geologica Italiana, Memorie, v.51, p. 685–701.

LOGAN, B.V., REZAK, R., AND GINSBURG R.N., 1964, Classification and environmental signifi-cance of algal stromatolites: Journal of Geology, v. 72, p. 68–83.

LUCIANI, V., AND COBIANCHI, M., 1994, Type section of the Mattinata Formation (Lower Cre-taceous, Gargano Promontory, southern Italy): new biostratigraphic data (calcareous nan-nofossils and planktonic foraminifers): Memorie di Scienze Geologiche, v. 46, p. 283–301.

LUPERTO SINNI, E., 1996a, Sintesi delle conoscenze biostratigrafiche del Cretaceo del Garganoe delle Murge: Societa Geologica Italiana, Memorie, v. 51, p. 995–1018.

LUPERTO SINNI, E., 1996b, Schema stratigrafico del Cretacico del Gargano basato su risultati direcenti ricerche: Societa Geologica Italiana, Memorie, v. 51, p. 1019–1036.

LUPERTO SINNI, E., AND BORGOMANO, J., 1989, Le Cretace superieur des Murges sud-orientales


(Italie meridionale): stratigraphie et evolution des paleoenvironnements: Rivista Italiana diPaleontologia e Stratigrafia, v. 95, p. 95–136.

LUPERTO SINNI, E., AND MASSE, J.P., 1987, Donnees nouvelles sur la stratigraphie et la micro-paleontologie des series carbonatees de talus et de bassin du Cretace inferieur du Gargano(Italie meridionale): Rivista Italiana di Paleontologia e Stratigrafia, v. 93, p. 347–378.

LUPERTO SINNI, E., AND REINA, A., 1996a, Gli hiatus del Cretaceo delle Murge: confronto condati offshore: Societa Geologica Italiana, Memorie, v. 51, p. 719–727.

LUPERTO SINNI, E., AND REINA, A., 1996b, Nuovi dati stratigrafici sulla discontinuita mesocre-tacea delle Murge (Puglia, Italia meridionale): Societa Geologica Italiana, Memorie, v. 51,p. 1179–1188.

MARTINIS, B., AND PAVAN, G., 1967, Note illustrative della carta geologica d’Italia, Foglio 157‘‘Monte S. Angelo’’: Servizio Geologico d’Italia, Roma, 56 p.

MASSE, J.P., AND LUPERTO SINNI, E., 1989, A platform to basin transitional model: the lowercretaceus carbonates of the Gargano Massif: Societa Geologica Italiana, Memorie, v. 40(1987), p. 99–108.

MERLA, G., ERCOLI, A., AND TORRE, D., 1969, Note illustrative della carta geologica d’Italia,Foglio 164 ‘‘Foggia’’: Servizio Geologico d’Italia, Roma, 22 p.

MIALL, A.W., 1992, Exxon global cycle chart: an event for every occasion?: Geology, v. 20,p. 787–790.

MINDSZENTY, A., D’ARGENIO, B., AND AIELLO, G., 1995, Lithospheric bulges recorded by regionalunconformities. The case of Mesozoic–Tertiary Apulia: Tectonophysics, v. 252, p. 137–161.

MITCHUM, R.M., AND VAN WAGONER, J.C., 1991, High-frequency sequences and their stackingpatterns: sequence-stratigraphic evidence of high-frequency eustatic cycles, in Biddle, K.T.,and Schlager, W., eds., The Record of Sea-Level Fluctuations: Sedimentary Geology, v. 70,p. 131–160.

MITCHUM, R.M., JR., VAIL, P.R., AND THOMPSON, S., 1977, Seismic stratigraphy and globalchanges of sea-level, part 2: the depositional sequences as a basic unit for stratigraphicanalysis, in Payton, C.E., ed., Seismic Stratigraphy, Applications to Hydrocarbon Explora-tion: American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Memoir 26, p. 53–62.

MORSILLI, M., AND BOSELLINI, A., 1997, Carbonate facies zonation of the Upper Jurassic–LowerCretaceous Apulia Platform margin (Gargano Promontory, southern Italy): Rivista Italianadi Paleontologia e Stratigrafia, v. 103, p. 193–206.

MULLINS, H.T., DOLAN, J., BREEN, N., ANDERSEN, B., GAYLORD, M., PETRUCCINONE, J.L., WELLNER,R.W., MELILLO, A.J., AND JURGENS, A.D., 1991, Retreat of carbonate platforms: response totectonic processes: Geology, v. 19, p. 1089–1092.

MUTTI, E., 1992, Turbidite sandstones: Agip (Agenzia Generale Italiana Petroli), San DonatoMilanese, 275 p.

NERI, C., 1993, Stratigraphy and sedimentology of the Monte Acuto Formation (Upper Cre-taceous–Lower Paleocene, Gargano Promontory, Southern Italy): Universita di Ferrara, An-nali (N.S.), Sezione Scienze della Terra, v. 4, p. 13–44.

NERI, C., AND LUCIANI, V., 1994, The Monte S. Angelo Sequence (Late Cretaceous–Paleocene,Gargano Promontory, southern Italy): physical stratigraphy and biostratigraphy: Giornale diGeologia, v. 56, p. 149–165.

PAVAN, G., AND PIRINI, C., 1966, Stratigrafia del Foglio 157 ‘‘Monte S. Angelo’’: ServizioGeologico Italiano, Bollettino, v. 86 (1965), p. 123–189.

PIERI, P., AND LAVIANO, A., 1989, Tettonica e sedimentazione nei depositi senoniani delle Murgesud-orientali (Ostuni): Societa Geologica Italiana, Bollettino, v. 108, p. 351–356.

POSAMENTIER, H.W., JERVEY, M.T., AND VAIL, P.R., 1988, Eustatic controls on clastic deposition:I—conceptual framework, in Wilgus, C.K., Hastings, B.S., Kendall C.G.St.C., Posamentier,H.W., Ross, C.A., and Van Wagoner J.C., eds., Sea Level Changes: An Integrated Approach:SEPM, Special Publication 42, p. 109–124.

RUBERTI, D., 1993, Le lacune stratigrafiche nel Cretacico del Matese centro-settentrionale: So-cieta Geologica Italiana, Bollettino, v. 111 (1992), p. 283–289.

SARG, J.F., 1988, Carbonate sequence stratigraphy, in Wilgus, C.K., Hastings, B.S., Kendall,C.G.St.C., Posamentier, H.W., Ross, C.A., and Van Wagoner, J.C., eds., Sea Level Changes:An Integrated Approach: SEPM, Special Publication 42, p. 155–181.

SCHLAGER, W., 1989, Drowning unconformities on carbonate platforms, in Crevello, P.D., Wil-son, J.L., Sarg, J.F., and Read, J.F., eds., Controls on Carbonate Platform and Basin De-velopment: SEPM, Special Publication 44, p. 15–25.

SCHLAGER, W., 1991, Depositional bias and environmental change—important factors in se-quence stratigraphy, in Biddle, K.T., and Schlager, W., eds., The Record of Sea-LevelFluctuations: Sedimentary Geology, v. 70, p. 109–130.

SCHLAGER, W., 1992, Sedimentology and sequence stratigraphy of reefs and carbonate platform:American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Short Course 34, 71 p.

SCHLAGER, W., 1993, Accommodation and supply—a dual control on stratigraphic sequences:Sedimentary Geology, v. 86, p. 111–136.

SCHLAGER, W., 1998, Exposure, drowning and sequence boundaries on carbonate platforms, inCamoin, G.I., and Davies, P.J., eds., Reefs and Carbonate Platforms in the Pacific and IndianOceans: International Association of Sedimentologists, Special Publication 25, p. 3–21.

SCHLANGER, S.O., AND JENKINS, H.C., 1976, Cretaceous oceanic anoxic sediments: causes andconsequences: Geologie en Mijnbouw, v. 55, p. 179–184.

SCHLAGER, W., AND PHILIP, J., 1990, Cretaceous carbonate platforms, in Ginsburg, R.N., andBeaudoin, B., eds., Cretaceous resources, events and rhythms: Dordrecht, The Netherlands,Kluwer Academic Publishers, v. 304, p. 173–195.

SIMO, J.A., SCOTT, R.W., AND MASSE, J.P., 1993, Cretaceous Carbonate Platforms: an overview,in Simo, J.A., Scott, R.W., and Masse, J.P., eds., Cretaceous Carbonate Platforms: AmericanAssociation of Petroleum Geologists, Memoir 56, p. 1–14.

SKOURTSIS-CORONEOU, V., SOLAKIUS, N., AND CONSTANTINIDIS, I., 1995, Cretaceous stratigraphy ofthe Ionian zone, Hellenides, western Greece: Cretaceous Research, v. 16, p. 539–558.

STOLL, H.M., AND SCHRAG, D.P., 1996, Evidence for glacial control of rapid sea level changesin the Early Cretaceous: Science, v. 272, p. 1771–1774.

TORNAGHI, M.E., PREMOLI SILVA, I., AND RIPEPE, M., 1989, Lithostratigraphy and planktonicforaminiferal biostratigraphy of the Aptian Albian ‘‘Scisti a Fucoidi’’ in the Piobbico core,Marche, Italy: background for cyclostratigraphy: Rivista Italiana di Paleontologia e Strati-grafia, v. 95, p. 223–264.

VAIL, P.R., MITCHUM, R.M., JR., TODD, R.G., WIDMIER, J.M., THOMPSON, S., SANGREE, J.B., BUBB,J.N., AND HATLELID, W.G., 1977, Seismic stratigraphy and global changes of sea level, inClayton, C.E., ed., Seismic Stratigraphy, Applications to Hydrocarbon Exploration: Amer-ican Association of Petroleum Geologists, Memoir 26, p. 49–212.

VAIL, P.R., AUDEMARD, F., BOWMAN, S.C., EISNER, P.N., AND PEREZ CRUZ, G., 1991, The strati-graphic signature of tectonics and sedimentation: an overview, in Einsele, G., Ricken, W.,and Seilacher, A., eds., Cycles and Events in Stratigraphy: Berlin, Springer-Verlag, p. 617–659.

VAN WAGONER, J.C., POSAMENTIER, H.W., MITCHUM, R.M., VAIL, P.R., SARG, J.F., LOUTIT, T.S.,AND HARDENBOL, J., 1988, An overview of the fundamentals of sequence stratigraphy andkey definitions, in Wilgus, C.K., Hastings, B.S., Kendall, C.G.St.C., Posamentier, H.W.,Ross, C.A., and Van Wagoner, J.C., eds., Sea Level Changes: An Integrated Approach:SEPM, Special Publication 42, p. 39–45.

VOGT, P.R., 1989, Volcanogenic upwelling of anoxic, nutrient rich water: A possible factor incarbonate bank/reef demise and benthic faunal extinctions?: Geological Society of America,Bulletin, v. 101, p. 1225–1245.

ZAPPATERRA, E., 1990, Carbonate paleogeographic sequence of the Periadriatic region: SocietaGeologica Italiana, Bollettino, v. 109, p. 5–20.

Received 1 June 1998; accepted 9 February 1999.

Long-Term Event Stratigraphy of the Apulia Platform Margin (Upper Jurassic To Eocene, Gargano, Southern Italy)

Documents