Marine carbonate systems in the Sarmatian (Middle Miocene) of …kazmer.web.elte.hu/pubs/Cornee_etal_2009_marine... · 2009. 3. 26. · Sarmatian carbonates of Hungary 3 2009 The

Marine carbonate systems in the Sarmatian (Middle Miocene) ofthe Central Paratethys: the Zsambek Basin of Hungary

JEAN-JACQUES CORNEE*, PIERRE MOISSETTE� , JEAN-PAUL SAINT MARTIN� ,MIKLOS KAZMER§, EM }OKE TOTH§, AGNES GOROG§, ALFRED DULAI– andPAL MULLER***UMR 5243 CNRS, Geosciences Montpellier, Universite Montpellier II, CC 60, pl. Eugene Bataillon, 34095Montpellier Cedex 05, France (E-mail: [email protected])�UMR 5125 PEPS CNRS, Universite Lyon I, Campus de la Doua, 69622 Villeurbanne Cedex, France�UMR 5143 CNRS, Departement Histoire de la Terre, Museum National d’Histoire Naturelle, 8 rueBuffon, 75005 Paris, France§Department of Palaeontology, Eotvos University, H-1518 Budapest, P.O. Box 120, Hungary–Department of Geology and Palaeontology, Hungarian Natural History Museum, H-1431 Budapest, P.O.Box 137, Hungary**Hungarian Geological Institute, H-1143 Budapest, Stefania ut 14, Hungary

Associate Editor: Dave Mallinson

ABSTRACT

The study of eight stratigraphic sections at the margin of the semi-enclosed

Zsambek Basin (Hungary) allows the sedimentary anatomy of oolitic–

bioclastic systems in the Sarmatian of the Central Paratethys to be

reconstructed. The mollusc, foraminiferal and ostracod associations indicate

that the carbonate systems are Latest Badenian to Late Sarmatian in age. The

Lower–Upper Sarmatian deposits are organized in superimposed subaqueous

dunes prograding towards the basin on a low-angle ramp. During the Late

Sarmatian, the ramp underwent subaerial erosion linked to a moderate relative

fall in sea-level. Lagoonal deposits were later formed and microbial–

nubeculariid–bryozoan–serpulid buildups were emplaced. The ‘abnormal’

marine conditions of the Sarmatian, conducive to the development of a poorly

diversified flora and fauna and dominant non-skeletal grains, are linked to

fluctuating salinities, mesotrophic to eutrophic conditions and perhaps high

alkalinity.

Keywords Buildups, carbonates, Hungary, Miocene, oolites, Paratethys.

INTRODUCTION

Around the Eocene/Oligocene transition, theancient Tethys Ocean had vanished and wasreplaced in its western part by two relict seas, theMediterranean and the Paratethys (Rogl & Stein-inger, 1983; Rogl, 1998a, 1999). The Paratethyswas an enclosed sea that suffered repeated isola-tion episodes, with narrow seaways connecting itnot only to the Mediterranean but also to theIndo-Pacific and even to the Boreal Ocean (Rogl &Steininger, 1983; Rogl, 1998a,b, 1999; Steininger& Wessely, 2000; Meulenkamp & Sissingh, 2003;Popov et al., 2006).

During the Miocene, the Central Paratethysdeveloped within and around the Carpathianswhere thick marine to continental deposits accu-mulated, particularly in its central and largestpart, the Pannonian Basin (Fig. 1). The Panno-nian Basin comprises several sub-basins betweenemerged lands; among them is the Zsambek Basinwest of Budapest (Fig. 2).

Because of episodic isolation from the Medi-terranean, the chronostratigraphy of the Parate-thys is based on regional stages, with thegenerally accepted correlations between the twosystems as follows: Badenian = Langhian toEarly Serravallian; Sarmatian = Late Serravallian;

Sedimentology (2009) doi: 10.1111/j.1365-3091.2009.01055.x

� 2009 The Authors. Journal compilation � 2009 International Association of Sedimentologists 1

and Pannonian = Tortonian + Messinian (Rogl,1998b). Most of the Badenian deposits areinterpreted as fully marine, while the Sarmatiandeposits have traditionally been considered asbrackish, transitional towards the freshwaterenvironments of the Pannonian (Papp, 1956;Papp et al., 1974).

Numerous papers have been devoted to theSarmatian, but they mainly deal with the palaeon-tological and stratigraphic aspects, a notableexception being that by Krezsek & Filipescu(2005) on the Transylvanian Basin where somesedimentological studies were conducted. TheSarmatian deposits of Austria, however, werestudied intensively and numerous papers havedocumented their lithology, stratigraphy, palae-ontology, palaeoecology and, more recently, geo-chemistry (Friebe, 1994; Harzhauser & Kowalke,2002; Kosi et al., 2003; Harzhauser & Piller,2004a,b, 2007; Kovac et al., 2004; Latal et al.,2004; Piller & Harzhauser, 2005; Gross et al.,2007b; Harzhauser et al., 2007; Piller et al., 2007;Schutz et al., 2007).

In Hungary, much attention has been dedicatedto the palaeontological content (including the

biostratigraphy) but sedimentological informationis relatively rare. Moreover, many of the papersdealing with the Sarmatian are written in Hun-garian (some of them unpublished in theses orpreliminary reports) and thus are not easilyaccessible.

The best-exposed Sarmatian deposits of thePannonian Basin are located in the region aroundBudapest, especially near Zsambek (Boda, 1974a)(Fig. 2). A number of key outcrops/sections werevisited in this basin and their study allows, forthe first time, a general reconstruction of thesedimentary organization. Information from theliterature and a comparison with data fromseveral boreholes drilled in the same region willalso improve the understanding of the sedimen-tary dynamics and palaeoceanography of theCentral Paratethys.

GEOLOGICAL AND STRATIGRAPHICALSETTING

The Zsambek Basin is located 30 km west ofBudapest (Fig. 2). It is a Middle Miocene

Fig. 1. Palaeogeographical map ofthe Mediterranean–Paratethys areaduring the Sarmatian showing thelocation of the studied basin (fromPopov et al., 2004).

Fig. 2. Distribution of the Sarma-tian deposits in the Zsambek Basinwith transport directions (after Jam-bor, 1967, 1974; Fodor et al., 2000).

2 J.-J. Cornee et al.

� 2009 The Authors. Journal compilation � 2009 International Association of Sedimentologists, Sedimentology

semi-enclosed basin, 30 km long and 20 km wide,which opened to the west. The Miocene se-quences comprise Badenian to Pannonian depos-its (Jambor, 1967, 1969). The Sarmatiancarbonates crop out along a 2 to 5 km wide beltfringing the emerged lands or on shoals (Fig. 2).In the basin, underlying the Pannonian lacustrinedeposits, boreholes (Perbal, Many and Budajen}o)revealed 80 to 180 m of marl-dominated se-quences, with some carbonate and evaporiteinterbeds in Budajen}o (Jambor, 1974; Gorog,1992).

The precise age of the Sarmatian limestones isuncertain. The biostratigraphy of the Sarmatianmarl-dominated deposits of the Zsambek Basinwas established by Gorog (1992) who distin-guished three foraminiferal zones: the Elphidiumreginum and the Elphidium hauerinum zones(Early Sarmatian) and the Spirolina austriacazone (Late Sarmatian). This zonation correlateswell with other bio(eco)stratigraphic subdivisionsthat have been used in Hungary and more gener-ally in the Paratethys (Gorog, 1992). Thesesubdivisions are based on nannoplankton(Nagymarosy, 1982; Schutz et al., 2007), diatoms(Hajos, 1976, 1986), molluscs (Boda, 1971;Kojumdgieva et al., 1989; Harzhauser & Piller,2004b; Gross et al., 2007b) or ostracods (Zelenka,1990). Oolitic interbeds are reported from theEarly Sarmatian (Kozard Formation) of this region(unpublished borehole logbooks, HungarianGeological Institute, Budapest) but the massivecarbonate deposits of the margins classically areattributed to the Late Sarmatian Tinnye Forma-tion (Boda, 1954, 1974c; Jambor, 1971; Fodoret al., 2000).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Research in the field was carried out on eightstratigraphic sections situated in six localities.These sections, exposed mostly in quarries, weremeasured and photographs taken. Seventy-eightsediment samples were collected from the out-crops for petrographical and palaeontologicalanalyses. Additional observations and samplingwere made on two small outcrops near Budapest(Diosd and Rakos).

In the laboratory, loose sediment samples weresoaked in water-diluted hydrogen peroxide(about 30%) to facilitate disaggregation and werethen wet-sieved through strainers with meshes offive different sizes: 2, 1, 0.5, 0.25 and 0.125 mm.The residues were dried and studied with the aid

of a stereomicroscope to identify the genera orspecies present and estimate the number ofindividuals or fragments. Polished slabs and thinsections of indurated rock samples were preparedto document the lithological, biogenic and petro-graphic characteristics of the limestones. Corre-lations were later made between outcrops, andbetween outcrops and boreholes, on the basis ofsedimentological and palaeontological character-istics.

DESCRIPTION OF THE SECTIONS

From north to south, eight stratigraphic sectionswere studied. These include sections at Tinnye,Zsambek, Paty, Biatorbagy, Soskut and Gyuro(Fig. 2).

Tinnye village

This section (Fig. 3A) is located near the base-ment (metamorphic rocks) in the north-easternpart of the village. It comprises about 6 m of fine-grained and argillaceous sandstones with somescattered ooids in coarser-grained deposits. In thesandy beds near the base, the foraminifera(diverse and abundant miliolids, among themwell-preserved Borelis sp.) and the great abun-dance of ostracods (Xestoleberis sp.) pointtowards normal saline to even slightly hyper-saline conditions (van Morkhoven, 1963), proba-bly in lagoonal settings subjected to siliciclasticinputs. Small-scale hummocky cross-stratifica-tions (Ricci Lucchi, 1995) and ripple marksbelow sample 1 and accumulations of molluscs(Venerupis, Ervilia, Granulolabium) in sample 2suggest a protected shoreface setting. The pres-ence of S. austriaca in sample 2 indicates a LateSarmatian age. Sample 3 contains an assemblagesuggesting slightly brackish conditions: forami-nifera (predominantly Ammonia beccarii andElphidium macellum), ostracods (Aurila notataand Hemicytheria omphalodes) and some charo-phyte oogonia (van Morkhoven, 1963; Cernajsek,1972; Murray, 1991). At the top (samples 4 and 5)an oolitic limestone with red and green algae,gastropods (mostly Granulolabium) and nube-culariid foraminifera is present.

Tinnye-Perbal

The S}oreg quarry section (Fig. 3B) was consid-ered to be the type locality for the Late Sarmatian(= Bessarabian) Tinnye Formation (Boda,

Sarmatian carbonates of Hungary 3


1974b,c). The foraminifera and molluscs of thisquarry were described briefly by Meznerics(1930). The sedimentary succession of this smallabandoned quarry consists of two units, frombottom to top as follows:

• Unit A is formed of an oolitic grainstone, 2 mthick, with large-scale cross-bedding (Ricci Luc-chi, 1995) and cross-trough stratification. Non-skeletal grains are mainly concentric ooids,associated with some mixed concentric–radialooids. The grainstone also contains some oncoids,micritic aggregates and oolitic lithoclasts. Skele-tal grains are benthonic foraminifera (dominantmiliolids), bivalves (Obsoletiforma, Venerupis)and gastropods (abundant Potamides). This faciesis interpreted as deposited in an inner ramp ooidbar setting. Unit A is truncated by an erosionalsurface.

• Unit B begins with a 0.3 m thick laminatedclayey layer intercalated with thin oolitic beds.Above this layer are 2 m of oolitic limestones. Thesilty layer contains well-preserved benthonicforaminifera, gastropods (such as Granulolabiumbicinctum), bivalves and ostracods. Poorly diver-sified, the foraminifera are represented by domi-nant (90%) A. beccarii, Elphidium macellum andElphidium obtusum. The ostracods are relativelydiverse (eight species), with numerous Cyprideispokorny and Euxinocythere sp. among them; theycharacterize the Hemicytheridea hungarica–Leptocythere cejcensis Assemblage zone of theuppermost Sarmatian (Zelenka, 1990). The faunalassociations suggest a warm-water brackishenvironment (van Morkhoven, 1963; Puri et al.,

1969; Murray, 1991). The intercalated thin car-bonate beds are oolitic packstones containingmicritic fragments and nubeculariids. Micriticfragments or benthonic foraminifera form thenucleus in many ooids. The skeletal grains aremainly benthonic foraminifera (miliolids), gastro-pods and some bryozoans in a peloidal matrix.The faunal content and the sedimentologicalfeatures of the silty bed are typical of depositionin a relatively warm-water, normal or evenhypersaline lagoonal environment (Haig, 1988).The overlying oolitic grainstones to packstonescontain an assemblage of peloids, rare proto-ooids, benthonic foraminifera (miliolids) andabundant molluscs (notably Obsoletiforma,Sarmatimactra, Venerupis, Solen and Granulo-labium) which also indicates a lagoonal setting(Koutsoubas et al., 2000).

Zsambek

This abandoned quarry, 8 m high, displays twosedimentary units separated by a well-definedplanar surface (Fig. 4):

• Unit A consists of oolitic grainstones orga-nized in east/south-eastward prograding beds. Thegrainstones contain peloids, rare aggregates andproto-ooids, benthonic foraminifera, molluscs(rare Venerupis, Modiolus, Mytilaster, Gibbulaand Potamides) and red algae, corresponding to aninner bar depositional environment.

• Unit B consists of 6 m of bioclastic–ooliticlimestones containing proto-ooids, abundant

A B

Fig. 3. Sarmatian successions inthe Tinnye area: (A) Tinnye villagesection. (B) Tinnye-Perbal section.



peloids, ostracods, benthonic foraminifera(among them S. austriaca, nubeculariids, domi-nant miliolids and E. macellum) and fragments ofserpulids, bryozoans and molluscs. The occur-rence of S. austriaca indicates a Late Sarmatian

age. Among the ostracods, very frequent Xestole-beris spp., together with the foraminiferal fauna,suggests marine to hypersaline conditions (vanMorkhoven, 1963). The bivalves are representedby numerous infaunal elements (Plicatiforma,Inaequicostata, Obsoletiforma, Ervilia, Veneru-pis, Tapes, etc.) and rare, bysally attached epi-zoans (Modiolus and Musculus). Most of thegastropods are marine herbivores (Gibbula,Hydrobia, Potamides and Granulolabium) butsome are carnivores (Acteocina) or scavengers(Duplicata) and a number of freshwater forms alsooccur (Valvata, Gyraulus). Carbonate buildupsoccur within the grainstones as small lens-likemicrobial, red algal and serpulid bodies, deci-metre to metre long and decimetre high; they aresometimes associated with encrusting bryozoansbelonging to three species (Cryptosula pallasiana,Conopeum reticulum and Tubulipora sp.). Unit Bis interpreted as deposited in a lagoonal envi-ronment with possible salinity changes and sub-aerial exposure (calcrete and stalactitic cements:Fig. 5A and B).

Paty

This quarry (Mezes Hill quarry) reveals a sectionabout 150 m in width and 40 m in verticalthickness (Fig. 6). The lithofacies is composedlargely of graded bioclastic grainstones to rud-stones with abundant mollusc shells and redalgae, but lesser amounts of oolites. At the top,the facies is more micritic and contains nub-eculariid foraminifera.

Twelve south-west prograding units were iden-tified; they correspond to large-scale subaqueousdunes 3 to 5 m in thickness and at least severaltens of metres in width, limited by reactivationsurfaces. The internal beds of the dunes aresouth-westward dipping (5� to 15�), indicating ageneral basinward progradation. The microfaciesanalysis of the dominant grainstones revealedconcentric proto-ooids, peloids, some aggregates,gastropods, bivalves and benthonic foraminifera(miliolids) (Fig. 7A and B). Detrital grains (quartz,micas and quartzite) are always present, dis-persed in the sediment. The morphology andcomposition of the dunes indicate an inner rampdepositional environment. Several hemisphericalbioherms, about 50 cm thick and 1 m wide, areobservable on the quarry wall (Fig. 6); theyconsist almost exclusively of encrusting bryozoancolonies (Schizoporella unicornis) with minorquantities of serpulid tubes.

Fig. 4. Zsambek quarry section. Palaeosols correspondto calcrete structures.



Biatorbagy

This natural section (K}ogomba section) is about25 m thick (Fig. 8). From bottom to top, itdisplays:

• Sandy limestones with a rich fauna of fora-minifera, gastropods, bivalves (among thempectinids like Crassodoma multistriata indicatinga Badenian age) and echinoids (Strausz, 1923;Csepreghy-Meznerics, 1960). The most abundantconstituents identified in thin sections are micri-tized fragments, bivalves, red algae, diverse ben-thonic foraminifera, bryozoans and some ooids(concentric ooids and proto-ooids), indicating ashoreface setting.

• The contact between the Badenian and theSarmatian is unclear because it occurs on thegrass slope (Fodor et al., 2000). The Sarmatiandeposits are represented by about 10 m of bio-clastic–oolitic limestones with some gravels andcommon coquina beds. Metre-high and deca-metre-long, south-westward dipping, low-anglesubaqueous dunes were observed in these sedi-ments, indicating a basinward progradation. Thebioclastic–oolitic limestones are grainstones topackstones with variable amounts of concentricooids, micritized ooids, proto-ooids, peloids,benthonic foraminifera and mollusc fragments.Detrital grains, such as quartz and feldspars, arealways present in minor quantities. Near the topof the section, two ‘pebbly’ layers were identified.The lower layer contains centimetre-size to deci-metre-size large nodules composed of serpulids,coralline algae and nubeculariids. The upperlayer is a conglomeratic bed with basement-derived fragments indicating a sequence bound-ary which separates an underlying Unit A and an

A B

Fig. 5. (A) Calcrete structure delineated by iron concentrations (Unit B, Zsambek). (B) Dissolution cavities in nub-eculariid-microbialite boundstones. The cavities are partly filled with: ‘1’ transparent calcite rimming the cavitywalls; ‘2’ iron-rich coating; ‘3’ stalactitic calcite; ‘4’ iron-rich coating (Unit B, Zsambek).

Fig. 6. Paty quarry section. Upper part: sketch of thewestern part of the Paty quarry showing six super-imposed subaqueous dunes and a bryozoan buildup;lower part: field view of a bryozoan buildup (hammerfor scale is approximately 0.3 m long).



overlying Unit B (Fig. 9). The conglomeratic bedis composed of reworked oolitic blocks, centi-metre to decimetre in diameter, and of isolatedsmaller dark quartzite pebbles. The oolitic blocksare encrusted by red algae (dominant), serpulids,nubeculariids and microbialites. These coatingsare a few centimetres thick and occur on allsurfaces of the blocks indicating that they wereepisodically overturned (Fig. 10). Units A and Bwere deposited in an inner ramp or platformsetting, sometimes in lagoons. No index fossilwas found in these deposits.

Soskut

Soskut is the most representative carbonate plat-form in the studied basin and is exposed alongthe banks of the Benta river. On the western flank,the Soskut quarry (ancient Roman quarry) isabout 250 m long and 20 m high (Fig. 11). Theoutcrop can be subdivided into two units sepa-rated by a major erosional surface identifiedacross the whole Soskut area:

• Unit A can be subdivided into five sedimen-tary sub-units. The older sub-units are formed ofgrainstones and packstones with abundant pe-loids, part of them being identified as micritizedconcentric ooids, benthonic foraminifera (Elphi-dium, miliolids), bivalves (Venerupis, Modiolusand Sarmatimactra), gastropods (Potamides,

Gibbula and Clavatula) and serpulids (Fig. 12A).Among the gastropods, abundant and well-pre-served Mohrensternia suggest an Early Sarmatianage. The younger sub-units are composed ofgrainstones with concentric oolites, oolitic litho-clasts, proto-oncoids, bivalves and benthonicforaminifera (miliolids) (Fig. 12B). Detrital grains(mostly quartzite) are rare but always present. Thesub-units correspond to subaqueous dunes, sev-eral tens to hundreds of metres long, separated bylocal reactivation surfaces, sometimes delineatedby greenish, sandy argillaceous beds. Sub-unit 1is a 20 m high dune with tabular foresets dipping20� towards the west. Sub-units 2 to 5 are metre-thick and their foresets dip 5� to 10� towards thesouth. Unit A thus is constituted of inner rampmaterial transported basinward in an outer rampsetting.

• Unit B rests on the different sub-units of UnitA (no. 5 to the east and no.1 to the west; Fig. 11).Unit B is composed of some 5 m of oolitic lime-stones with clinoforms prograding west/north-westward. The oolitic limestones are grainstoneswith peloids, micritized oolites, oncoidal litho-clasts, benthonic foraminifera (miliolids) andfragments of bivalve shells (Fig. 12C). Unit B alsodisplays a number of small cauliflower-like orcolumnar buildups made of abundant serpulidtubes and encrusting bryozoan colonies (mostlyS. unicornis). The buildups are associated withgastropod-rich wackestone beds. Unit B is inter-

A B

Fig. 7. (A) Recrystallized grainstone with aggregates ‘Ag’, nubeculariids ‘Nu’, ooids and proto-ooids on aggregates orquartz grains ‘Pr’ (Unit A, Paty). (B) Sandy oolitic grainstone with bivalve ‘B’ and gastropod ‘G’ fragments. Ooids areoften proto-ooids with nuclei composed of quartz grains ‘Pr’. (Unit A, Paty).



preted as deposited in a lagoonal setting underhigh-energy conditions and basinward transportof material.

The erosional surface is characterized by acontinuous pebbly deposit that truncates Unit A.This horizon contains early-cemented limestoneblocks of Unit A, from a centimetre to up to ametre across, embedded in the oolitic limestonesof Unit B (Fig. 11). The blocks generally arecoated with composite crusts composed mainly

of nubeculariids associated with red algae, ser-pulids and peloidal microbialite. This surfaceclearly is erosional as it transects several sub-units of Unit A, sometimes forming palaeocliffsseveral metres high. Direct evidence for subaerialerosion is not observed in the Soskut quarry, butearly lithification of the deposits of Unit A isdocumented by blocks of various sizes embeddedin Unit B, suggesting that subaerial erosionoccurred after the deposition of Unit A. Moreover,

Fig. 8. Badenian–Sarmatiansuccession at Biatorbagy. Short-termand long-term sequences areshown on the right.



the deposits of Unit B often display stalactiformcalcitic cements indicating meteoric vadosecementation (Fig. 5B).

On the eastern Calvary Hill above the village ofSoskut a 35 m thick natural section was firststudied by Fodor et al. (2000) and is re-investi-gated in this study. It shows bioclastic and ooliticlimestones with some gravel beds (Fig. 13). Fodoret al. (2000) interpreted the depositional environ-ments as back-barrier lagoons to submarine slopeswith south-westward to southward transportdirections. The succession is composed of sixlithostratigraphic sub-units. Sub-unit 2 showsdome-shaped, decametre-long structures. Thetop of these structures is obscured by a levelerosional surface and younger beds often onlapthe bedding planes of older beds. Such dome-shaped structures are typical of spillover lobes(Ball, 1967), here transected perpendicularly tothe south-westward transport direction. Othersub-units are subaqueous dunes (e.g. sub-unit 3)or sub-horizontal deposits (e.g. within sub-units1, 4, 6). In the uppermost part of the section,subaqueous channels and isolated dunes occur(sub-unit 5). Petrographic investigations in sub-units 2 and 3 reveal a rather similar carbonatecomposition; they consist of grainstone withdiverse amounts of peloids, micritized concentricooids, micritic and oolitic lithoclasts, aggregates,rare proto-oncoids and radial ooids, bivalves,gastropods, ostracods, benthonic foraminifera(dominated by miliolids and elphidiids), somebryozoans, serpulids and, at the top, nubecular-

Fig. 9. Outcrop photograph of the upper part of theBiatorbagy section. White arrows indicate encrustedoolitic blocks.

Fig. 10. Detail of one of the encrusted oolitic blocksoccurring at the boundary between Unit A and B in theBiatorbagy section.

Fig. 11. Soskut quarry section. Upper part: general sketch of the quarry. Lower left part: detailed field views of UnitsA and B; lower right part: erosional surface delineated by carbonate blocks (arrows).



iids (Fig. 14). Typically, this association indicatesinner ramp to lagoonal deposits incorporated intothe dunes. The presence of sparse detrital grainsoriginated in a metamorphic basement, withquartz, quartzite, muscovite and mica-schist

grains is noticeable in all samples. In the lowerpart of the section, sample 6 contains numerouscharophyte oogonia, well-preserved gastropodshells, an ostracod fauna with dominant largeAurila cf. merita and an assemblage of foramin-ifera (mainly Elphidium hauerinum, E. macellumand E. aculeatum) indicative of the Early Sarma-tian. In the uppermost part of the section, theoccurrence of S. austriaca indicates a LateSarmatian age. Neither buildups nor majorunconformity were observed in this section, thusthe different sub-units probably belong to a singlelithostratigraphic unit composed of super-imposed prograding–aggrading sub-units.

East of Soskut, near Budapest, two smallisolated Sarmatian outcrops were sampled atRakos (a railway cut) and on a hillside at Diosd(Fig. 2). Their deposits bear a strong resemblanceto the carbonates described above: they are com-posed of grainstones and packstones and containmicritized concentric ooids, peloids, someaggregates, bryozoans, bivalves and benthonicforaminifera (miliolids, elphidiid and rare nube-culariids).

Gyuro

This ancient quarry (Szent Gyorgy Puszta quarry)was first studied by Katay (1983). Two units wereidentified on the outcropping 10 m high wall(Fig. 15). The erosive surface between units isirregular and weakly marked, sometimes evenplanar.

• Unit A, made of oolitic grainstone and occa-sional mollusc rudstone, comprises at least fourlarge-scale subaqueous dunes, separated byweakly pronounced erosion and reactivationsurfaces. Each dune is about 1 to 4 m thick and100 m long and progrades to the east/south-east.The molluscs are represented by abundantbivalves (mostly Obsoletiforma and Venerupis,but also Inaequicostata, Sarmatimactra andMusculus) and rarer gastropods (Duplicata,Gibbula and Potamides). The frequent occurrenceof S. austriaca (Fig. 16A and B) in the uppermostpart of Unit A (second dune) indicates a LateSarmatian age.

• Unit B, 3 to 4 m thick, is formed mainly ofoolitic grainstone and, near the top, containssmall hemispherical buildups (Fig. 15); they weredescribed by Katay (1983) as stromatolites, but arein fact made up principally of numerous stackedbryozoan crusts. The oolitic grainstones representeast/south-eastward prograding local conditions.

A

B

C

Fig. 12. (A) Oolitic grainstone. Nuclei are micriticgrains, quartz grains or miliolids. Notice some aggre-gates ‘Ag’ (Soskut quarry, upper part of Unit A.). (B)Oolitic grainstone with miliolids ‘Mi’ and centimetre-large intraclast ‘In’ (Soskut quarry, Unit A). (C) Ooliticgrainstone with ooid intraclasts ‘In’.



DISCUSSION

Sedimentary organization

In six of the investigated sections the sedimen-tary organization is rather similar, with two mainunits separated by an erosional unconformity.Unit A generally comprises basinward prograd-ing subaqueous dunes and the overlying Unit Bis composed of lagoonal deposits. These con-stant features suggest that Units A and B aresimilar throughout the Zsambek Basin. Thissuggestion is confirmed by stratigraphic studies:at the base, Unit A has been dated from the EarlySarmatian in the Soskut quarry and Calvary Hilland at the top from the Late Sarmatian in Gyuro

and Calvary Hill. Unit B belongs to the LateSarmatian S. austriaca zone in Tinnye Village,Tinnye-Perbal and Zsambek quarry. The ero-sional surface is consequently a regional indexsurface (within the Late Sarmatian S. austriacazone) that can be used for correlations. TheSarmatian carbonate deposits thus are composedof two main sequences above the Badeniandeposits (Fig. 8): an Early–Late SarmatianSequence A (= Unit A) and a Late SarmatianSequence B (= Unit B). The main erosionalsurface between Units A and B belongs to theLate Sarmatian S. austriaca zone.

The distribution of the studied Sarmatian car-bonates was mapped by Jambor (1967) and Fodoret al. (2000). These carbonates surround theZsambek Basin. To the west and the east theyrest on basement rocks, but their initial extensionis unknown because of subsequent erosion. Tothe south, the carbonates constitute a semi-isolated shoal. Observations presented in thispaper, together with those of Fodor et al. (2000),have been integrated into a sedimentary model(Fig. 17) which shows that the prevailing direc-tions of transport in Sequence A vary stronglyfrom one place to another in the Zsambek Basin.Large-scale subaqueous dunes, spillovers, sub-aqueous channels and oblique tabular beds indi-cate transport of material towards the centre ofthe basin, approximately perpendicular to theslope directions. Despite the suggestion that tidalcurrents may have been active in the CentralParatethys during the Sarmatian (Mandic et al.,2008a,b), the action of tides in the investigatedarea was not recorded clearly: (i) no evidence

Fig. 13. Soskut Calvary Hill section. Field view of the northern side of the Calvary Hill showing spillover lobes andsubaqueous channels.

Fig. 14. Grainstone with molluscs ‘M’ and peloids ‘P’.Notice intensive recrystallization of sparite (CalvaryHill, Unit A, sub-unit 3).



typical of tidal structures was found (argillaceousdrapings, reverse flow directions, tidal channels,etc.); and (ii) during the Sarmatian, the Paratethyswas almost isolated from the Mediterranean andconsequently was far from oceanic influences(Rogl, 1998b). The centripetal organization ofsediment transport is thus better coupled withwind and wave action and eventual downslopegravity control.

The size and organization of the metre-scale todecametre-scale sedimentary structures and thecomposition of the deposits provide informationpermitting a broad estimate of the palaeobathy-metric changes. The depth of formation of sub-aqueous dunes generally is estimated as four tofive times their maximum thickness (see reviewin Anastas et al., 1997):

• Sequence A. In Tinnye the dunes are 1 to 2 mthick; in Paty, Biatorbagy and Gyuro they reach 3to 5 m; and in Soskut they are about 10 m high.Consequently, the reconstructed organization ofthe outcrops is a ramp system with water depthsfrom a few metres in proximal areas to around 40to 50 m in distal zones. The presence of spilloversand the highest dunes in the Soskut area isnoticeable, further attesting to the presence of aslope deepening at the margin of the ramp. Thetop of Sequence A is a mostly flat, erosional sur-face, with locally reworked Sarmatian carbonateblocks and pebble-size basement rocks.

• Sequence B. Marine, lagoonal and brackishdeposits occur in Tinnye. In Biatorbagy, the sed-iments are marine lagoonal carbonates with smallnubeculariid–bryozoan buildups. In the Zsam-bek, Soskut and Gyuro areas, the oolitic–peloidallimestones are associated with metre-sized nub-

eculariid–bryozoan–microbial buildups and somecalcrete levels (Figs 4 and 5A), indicating shallowlagoonal settings. Presence of decimetre-thick tometre-thick subaqueous dunes indicates a maxi-mum depth of a few metres. Sequence B is awidely extending, lagoonal carbonate platformcapping the underlying ramp system.

From the general sedimentary organizationproposed here, Sequence A is interpreted asdeposited during a sea-level highstand. Thedeposits of Sequence B are transgressive, butwere deposited mainly during a second high-stand, near the boundary with the Pannoniandeposits. Between these two sequences a sub-aerial exposure probably occurred, during whichthe top of Sequence A was eroded. The sea-leveldrop associated with the subaerial exposure wasof limited amplitude as the erosive event createdcomparatively low-relief structures of a fewmetres. A precise estimation of the time gaplinked to subaerial erosion is presently impossi-ble. Subaerial exposure occurred during the LateSarmatian S. austriaca zone. This situation is notknown from other basins of the Central Parate-thys. For instance, in Austria, the main unconfo-rmities are located at the base and at the top of theSarmatian deposits and another one was identi-fied between the Early and the Late Sarmatian(Harzhauser & Piller, 2007). In Austria, the LateSarmatian carbonate deposits of the Prosononiongranosum zone lasted about 500 kyr, between12Æ1 and 11.6 Ma (Harzhauser & Piller, 2004b).The Late Sarmatian unconformity of the ZsambekBasin may be related to the minor unconformitythat occurred in Austria during the P. granosumzone, between the deposits of the upper Ervilia

Fig. 15. Field view of part of theGyuro quarry showing Units A and B.



mollusc zone and the Sarmatimactra vitalianamollusc zone (Harzhauser & Piller, 2004b). How-ever, S. austriaca was found below and above theerosional unconformity, while in Austria thisforaminifera occurs only in the uppermost part ofthe carbonates, far above the unconformity. Con-sequently, a detailed correlation of the studied

sections with those from other basins is hazard-ous. In any case, the gap evidenced in the studiedbasin must not exceed a few hundreds kyr(duration of the Late Sarmatian), probably muchless.

Based on the study by Gorog (1992), a regionalcorrelation is proposed here between the rampcarbonates and the neighbouring basinal deposits.The boreholes drilled in the Zsambek Basinindicate that the Sarmatian deposits are 120 to180 m thick; they are composed mainly of sand-stones, clays and marls with some limestoneinterbeds. Sequence A is correlated with the EarlySarmatian deposits (E. reginum and E. hauerinumzones) and the lower part of the Late Sarmatian(S. austriaca zone). In the boreholes, these depos-its are interpreted as shallow-marine (with amaximum depth of about 100 m), with variationsin oxygenation and salinity and an upwardshallowing trend. Sequence B is correlated withthe uppermost Sarmatian deposits of the S.austriaca zone. These sediments, in the basin aswell as on the margins, were formed in warm,shallow-water marine lagoons. In the cores, theboundary between sequences A and B is difficultto locate as it probably corresponds to a deposi-tional surface. This observation indicates that therelative sea-level drop recorded on the marginswas limited to some tens of metres at maximum,before the subsequent marine transgression (Se-quence B); this is also in accordance with fieldobservations:

• on the margins of the Zsambek basin there isno major sedimentological change between Earlyand Late Sarmatian deposits, which are all rep-resented by oolites, coquina beds and bryozoan-rich buildups;

• the erosive event between Units A and Bcreated comparatively low-relief structures of afew metres.

The Sarmatian carbonate platforms are wide-spread throughout the Paratethys: Austria, Roma-nia, Moldavia, Poland, Ukraine and Crimea(Pisera, 1996). West of the Zsambek Basin, theVienna Basin was studied intensively (Harzhaus-er & Piller, 2004a,b; Piller & Harzhauser, 2005;Harzhauser et al., 2006; Gross et al., 2007a;Schreilechner & Sachsenhofer, 2007; Sopkovaet al., 2007). The Sarmatian deposits have beensubdivided into two main formations:

• The Early Sarmatian Holic Formation, con-tinental in the north and changing into marinedeposits in the south. It is composed mainly of

A

B

Fig. 16. (A) Grainstone with peloids ‘P’, ooids ‘Oo’ andbenthonic foraminifera ‘Mi’, miliolids; ‘Sp’, Spirolinaaustriaca) (Gyuro, Unit B). (B) Grainstone with peloids‘P’, ooids (Oo), miliolids ‘Mi’ and oncoids ‘On’ withintraclast nuclei (Gyuro, Unit B).



calcareous clays and marls, changing laterallyalong the margins into bryozoan–algal–micro-bialite buildups, limestones and conglomerates.

• The Late Sarmatian Skalica Formation, withvarious lithologies such as marls, siltstones,sandstones, bioclastic limestones and ooliticlimestones (Kosi et al., 2003) associated withstromatolitic and foraminiferal buildups.

The Sarmatian stage has been considered as theTB 2Æ5 third-order cycle of Haq et al. (1988),between 13Æ6 and 12Æ7 Ma (Vakarcs et al., 1998).This age was revised by Harzhauser & Piller(2004b). These authors consider that the Sarma-tian stage was a third-order eustatic cycle,between 11Æ6 and 12Æ7 Ma (Cycle TB 2Æ6 of Haqet al., 1988). This third-order cycle can itself besubdivided into two fourth-order cycles (400 kyreccentricity components). In the proximal areas,Cycle LS-1 (E. reginum and E. hauerinum zones)comprises siliciclastic deposits and bryozoan–serpulid buildups, whereas Cycle US-2 is com-posed of mixed siliciclastic–oolitic deposits withnubeculariid buildups. In the Zsambek Basin thesituation is somewhat different: the proximalareas show abundant oolitic deposits from theLatest Badenian to the Latest Sarmatian. Thisstudy does not, however, document the upperand lower sequence boundaries of the Sarmatiandeposits. The abundant siliciclastic sediments ofAustria are a result of the Alps and the Carpathi-ans being in the vicinity during their uplift

(Harzhauser & Piller, 2004b; Harzhauser et al.,2006). Conversely, the Zsambek Basin was farfrom the Alpine mountain belt and carbonatesedimentation consequently prevailed. In Austriaas well as in Hungary, the Sarmatian deposits areorganized in two major sedimentary cycles: thefirst is Early Sarmatian in age and the second isreferred to as the ‘uppermost Sarmatian’. With thecurrent state of knowledge, it is not possible toknow without doubt whether the cycles arestrictly coeval in both basins because of the lackof precise chronostratigraphic data, scarce infor-mation regarding the base and the top of thedeposits in the Zsambek Basin and potentialtectonic control.

Sediment composition

General featuresThe most significant characteristics of the studiedSarmatian deposits are: (i) the conspicuousabsence of pelagic fauna, especially planktonicforaminifera; (ii) the dominance of non-skeletalgrains (peloids, micritized ooids, proto-oncoidsand oncoids, aggregates and lithoclasts); (iii) thepresence in Sequence A of a shallow-waterbenthonic fauna containing a limited number offoraminiferal genera (mostly miliolids and elph-idiids) associated with bryozoans and relativelydiverse ostracods and molluscs; (iv) the presencein Sequence B of a rather similar association, but

Fig. 17. Idealized reconstruction of the Sarmatian ramp (Unit A) and platform (Unit B) systems of the ZsambekBasin. The succession in the basinal area is from Gorog (1992, simplified). Long-term sequences are shown in grey onthe left.



with buildups composed of variable amounts ofnubeculariids, bryozoans, microbialites, serpu-lids and red algae; (v) despite tropical to subtrop-ical conditions, as suggested by ooids, peloidsand foraminiferal assemblages (Boda, 1974b;Gorog, 1992; Harzhauser & Piller, 2007), herma-typic corals, molluscs typical of coral reef envi-ronments and echinoids are conspicuously absentand red algae and larger benthonic foraminiferaare rare (except S. austriaca and Borelis sp.); and(vi) minor amounts of detrital material occur inall sections. These features indicate that thecarbonate factory was restricted to coastallagoons, shoals and inner ramp. The ensuingcarbonate grains were later transported andre-deposited towards the basin, onto the mid-ramp and the outer ramp.

According to Harzhauser & Piller (2007), theupper Sarmatian oolites are the only Mioceneoolites in the entire Central Paratethys. However,in the Zsambek Basin oolites already occur in theLate Badenian, as demonstrated by the Biatorbagysection, and in the Early Sarmatian.

Skeletal contentAs in other Sarmatian basins, the organismsoccurring in the Zsambek Basin are limited to asmall number of groups and species, but these areoften represented by numerous individuals. Cor-alline (Lithoporella sp., Lithophyllum sp.) anddasycladacean (Acicularia spp., Cymopolia sp.)calcareous algae are relatively common (Boda,1954, 1974c; Katay, 1983).

Sixty-three species of benthonic foraminiferahave been identified by Gorog (1992) in threeboreholes. The most abundant groups in the

studied limestones are the miliolids, either asbioclasts or nuclei of oolites, and the nubecular-iids which may even form sediments (Boda,1979). Other genera (Elphidium, Spirolina, Rosa-lina and Ammonia) occur in variable amountsand Borelis shells are sometimes relativelynumerous (Boda, 1959, 1970).

Bivalves and gastropods are the dominantgroups of invertebrates, both in number of species(22 and 23, respectively) and volume (Boda,1959), and accumulations of mollusc shells oftenoccur within the bioclastic deposits. However, inthe mostly calcareous facies of the samplesstudied, the relatively poor quality of preserva-tion (moulds) of these predominantly primaryaragonitic shells often precluded a more specificidentification.

The serpulid worms, although not diverse(three species), are often abundant (Boda, 1959).The same is true for the bryozoans (four species),occurring mostly in small buildups. The ostra-cods are relatively common and diverse (Toth,2004, 2008). Rare fish remains (teeth and otoliths)have also been found.

BuildupsBuildups have been found in Sequences A and B.In Sequence A they are rare and were observedonly in the Paty and Gyuro sections. Thesebuildups are dome-shaped with a flat base, abouta decimetre high and up to 1 m wide (Fig. 18);they are composed almost exclusively of theencrusting bryozoan S. unicornis. Buildups arefrequent in Sequence B (Fig. 19); they essentiallydeveloped in the distal part of the platform. In theproximal areas, as in the Biatorbagy section, they

Fig. 18. Bryozoan–serpulid buildup (Paty quarry). The upper crust is made only of calcareous red algae, whereas thelower part consists mostly of bryozoan colonies ‘B’ with a small number of serpulid tubes ‘Sp’, accompanied bymicrobialites and bioclasts.



are limited to centimetre-wide to decimetre-widenodules or bindstones around pebbles. In thedistal parts, as in the Zsambek, Soskut and Gyurosections, they generally form centimetre-thickcarpets and centimetre-thick to metre-thickdomes. The buildups are built predominantly byserpulid worms and bryozoans, although some ofthem are formed by serpulid tubes only. Corallinealgae and encrusting foraminifera (nubeculariids:Sinzowella novorossica) are sometimes associatedand the presence of microbialite is often observed(Fig. 20A to C). Three species of serpulid worms(Hydroides pectinata, Spirorbis heliciformis andSerpula gregalis) and one species of encrustingbryozoans (S. unicornis) generally make up the

bulk of the framework. Together, these inverte-brates constitute mazes of tangled crusts leavingonly rare and tiny cavities (Figs 18 and 19). Threeother encrusting bryozoan species (Conopeumreticulum, Cryptosula pallasiana and Tubuliporasp.) occasionally participate in the constructionprocess but they are never abundant. It has beennoted that species of Schizoporella often developmultilamellar colonies thus forming small build-ups (e.g. in the present-day Mediterranean; Cocitoet al., 2000).

Carbonate buildups have often been reportedfrom the Sarmatian of the Paratethys basins ofAustria, Ukraine, Poland, Romania and Moldavia(Andrusov, 1936; Buge & Calas, 1959; Ghiurca,1968; Kulichenko, 1972; Ghiurca & Stancu, 1974;Friebe, 1994; Pisera, 1996; Saint Martin &Pestrea, 1999; Boiko, 2001, 2004; Jasionowskiet al., 2002; Sholokhov & Tiunov, 2003;Harzhauser & Piller, 2004a,b; Harzhauser et al.,2006). The main framework builders are serpulidworms, bryozoans, coralline algae and microbialcrusts, along with subordinate encrusting nube-culariid foraminifera. The associated biota isusually fairly diverse, including bivalves, for-aminifera, ostracods and rare gastropods. Thebioclastic material is also relatively abundant.Piller & Harzhauser (2005) distinguished twomain types of carbonate bioconstructions. TheLower Sarmatian (= Volhynian for the EasternParatethys) buildups are characterized mainly byabundant serpulid agglomerates, dense micro-bialitic masses, numerous Rissoidae (Mohrenster-nia) and oligospecific bivalve accumulations(Obsoletiforma, Musculus, etc.). Buildups fromthe Upper Sarmatian beds (= Bessarabian forthe Eastern Paratethys) generally form smallhemispherical lenses or extensive crusts withnubeculariids, red algae and bryozoans, associ-ated with diversified mollusc shell accumula-tions. The carbonate buildups of the ZsambekBasin are close to the second type.

A seagrass originated material?Present-day seagrasses are common shallow-water components on the continental platformof most oceans. These marine phanerogams occurin a wide range of coastal environments, intemperate to warm waters. Most species arestenohaline, whereas others are either euryhaline,euhaline or polyhaline (Larkum & den Hartog,1989; Jernakoff et al., 1996). The existence ofseagrasses in the fossil record is, however, diffi-cult to prove because of the scarcity of directevidence. Nevertheless, their former presence can

Fig. 19. Bryozoan buildup. The limestone is mademostly of encrusting bryozoans ‘B’, the other constitu-ents are bioclasts and miliolids (Tunderkert, Paty S;J. Boda’s collection, Eotvos University, Budapest).



sometimes be deduced from the occurrence ofcharacteristic organisms such as calcareous algae,foraminifera, molluscs and ostracods (Brasier,1975; Beavington-Penney et al., 2004; James &Bone, 2007; Moissette et al., 2007b).

Although the buildup-forming Sarmatian nube-culariids (Fig. 20B and C) are not seagrass indi-cators, the cosmopolitan encrusting miliolidNubecularia is a common epiphytic foraminifera,especially in the Mediterranean and around Aus-tralia (Langer, 1993; James & Bone, 2007; Mois-sette et al., 2007b). The modern Nubecularialucifuga is most prolific in seagrass beds at depthsshallower than 10 m (Cann et al., 1988, 2002). Inthe material studied, frequent hooked and ring-like forms (Fig. 21) of the fossil endemic encrust-ing nubeculariid S. novorossica suggest thatseagrasses may have been present (Friebe, 1994;Beavington-Penney et al., 2004). Specimens de-tached from their macrophyte substrates aresometimes accumulated in rock-forming quantitythroughout the Paratethys (Gillet & Derville, 1931;Papp, 1974; Boda, 1979). It is possible to con-clude, based on common occurrences of thisnubeculariid, that seagrass communities wereubiquitous members of the shallow-water Sarma-tian ecosystem.

Another typical epiphyte on seagrass leaves isthe larger, disc-shaped, sessile foraminifera Sori-tes (Wright & Murray, 1972) found in Sarmatianmarls west of the Zsambek Basin (Korecz-Laky,1966). Although elphidiids, miliolids and cibi-cidids (Gorog, 1992) do not live exclusively onseagrass leaves, their presence in the studiedsediments is also indirect evidence of a fossilseagrass community (Semeniuk, 2001). The abun-dance of small grazer gastropods such as Gibbulaand Hydrobia (mostly feeding on diatom films)

A

B

C

Fig. 20. (A) Boundstone with serpulids ‘Sp’ encrustedfirst by Sinzowella (nubeculariid, ‘Nu’) then by red al-gae ‘Ra’. Note the presence of mixed radial–concentricooids ‘Oo’ and of miliolids ‘Mi’ in the matrix (Zsambek,Unit B). (B) Boundstone with nubeculariids ‘Nu’ anddark microbialite ‘Mb’ (Zsambek, Unit B). (C) Bound-stone with microbialite ‘Mb’, bryozoans ‘B’ and nube-culariids ‘Nu’ (Erd, Unit B; J. Boda’s collection, EotvosUniversity, Budapest).

Fig. 21. Hook-like structure formed by nubeculariids‘Nu’, ‘B’: bryozoan (J. Boda’s collection, Eotvos Uni-versity, Budapest).



may also be used as indicators for the existence ofseaweeds or seagrasses (Mazzella & Russo, 1989;Jernakoff et al., 1996). In addition, the occurrencein the studied material of frequent epiphyticostracod genera like Loxoconcha, Xestoleberisand Aurila may suggest the existence of seagrass-es in the Sarmatian sea (Puri et al., 1969; Iryuet al., 1995; Saint Martin et al., 2000; Stone et al.,2000). The presence of seagrass meadows in theregion may have played an important role in thestabilization of ooid shoals (Hine, 1977).

Palaeoenvironments

Even if oolitic deposits are associated generallywith a sparse flora and fauna (Ball, 1967; Halleyet al., 1977; Hine, 1977; Burchette et al., 1990;Ginsburg, 2005), prevailing conditions are nor-mal marine and a typical tropical biota can befound in lateral equivalents (e.g. in the PersianGulf: Evans, 1966; Gischler & Lomando, 2005).In the Zsambek Basin this biota is either uncom-mon or absent, implying that anomalous envi-ronmental conditions may have been present.Factors likely to influence carbonate productionin sea water include oxygen availability, tem-perature, alkalinity, salinity, nutrient levels andlight intensity (Mutti & Hallock, 2003; Halfaret al., 2006).

Few data concerning sea water temperaturesand alkalinity are available for the studied basin.An elevated alkalinity was proposed by Pisera(1996) to explain the widespread development ofmicrobial buildups during the Sarmatian. Basedon geochemical investigations, temperatures ofabout 15 �C were estimated for the Early Sarma-tian and between 15 and 21 �C for the LateSarmatian. Tropical conditions correspond to amean annual temperature of at least 22 �C andsubtropical temperatures generally range between18 and 22 �C (Mutti & Hallock, 2003). Neverthe-less, in Recent analogues, such as for example thePersian Gulf, temperatures were recorded in the13 to 32 �C interval and salinity fluctuatesbetween 37& and 42.5& (Gischler & Lomando,1997). In the Gulf of California coral reefs developin areas where temperatures range from 18 to31 �C, with average salinities of 35.25& and lowchlorophyll a levels (Halfar et al., 2006). In theTengelic-2 borehole of Central Hungary, palyno-logical investigations concluded that a progres-sive cooling occurred during the Sarmatian, withmean annual temperatures decreasing fromaround 20 �C in the Badenian to 16 �C in theSarmatian and mean annual precipitations drop-

ping from about 1550 to 1100 mm year)1 (Jime-nez-Moreno et al., 2005). These results are inaccordance with the study of Erdei et al. (2007)on fossil plant assemblages. This informationsuggests that sea water temperatures during theSarmatian were around the lowest limit for coralgrowth, in accordance with a palaeolatitudinalposition around 45� N (Popov et al., 2004).According to Tucker (1985) and Piller & Harzha-user (2002), the development of calcrete crustsindicates a semi-arid climate.

Only ooids and peloids were formed, as duringthe Holocene, in limited settings like the warmtemperate waters of the Mediterranean coast ofEgypt (El-Sammak & Tucker, 2002), Tunisia,Libya (Fabricius & Berdau, 1970) and Greece(Richter, 1976; Milan et al., 2007). The conditionsgenerally required for the formation of ooids,especially tangential ones, are calcium carbonatesupersaturation and sea water agitation (Davieset al., 1978; Hearty et al., 2006). Seasonal changesfrom saline to hypersaline conditions and in-creased water energy produced by restriction offlow through narrow passages between shoals canalso favour the formation of ooids (Hearty et al.,2006; Pedley et al., 2007; Cadjenovic et al., 2008).In the outcrops studied, lagoonal settings withtemporally and spatially fluctuating salinities areindicated by ostracod and foraminiferal associa-tions but these are restricted to Sequence B insome of the sections. In the boreholes of theZsambek Basin, salinities of 18& to 25& wereinferred by Gorog (1992) or calculated between15& and 43&. Even though the Sarmatiandeposits classically are regarded as formed inbrackish-water environments (Papp, 1956; Boda,1974a; Gorog, 1992), both sedimentary and bio-logical compositions (Spirolina, Borelis, bryozo-ans, Cnestocythere, etc.) indicate dominantmarine conditions, as also demonstrated for theVienna Basin by Harzhauser & Piller (2007) or forthe whole Paratethyan area by Pisera (1996).Fluctuating salinities reveal the evolution of acomplex oceanographic domain. Evidence formarine influx during the Sarmatian comes fromfrequent diatomite deposits containing richassemblages of marine diatoms and silicoflagel-lates in Austria (Schutz et al., 2007), Croatia(Galovic & Bajraktarevic, 2006), Romania (SaintMartin & Saint Martin, 2005) and Hungary (Hajos& Rehakova, 1974; Hajos, 1976, 1986). Episodes ofrelative isolation alternate with periods of oce-anic incursions.

The preserved biological content, among whichis scarce red algae, together with the absence of



corals and echinoids also suggests nutrient-richwaters, generally considered as detrimental toskeletal-dominated carbonate platform develop-ment (Hallock & Schlager, 1986; Mutti & Hallock,2003; Chazottes et al., 2008). Indeed, opportunis-tic foraminifera (miliolids, Elphidium, nubecular-iids) and suspension-feeding invertebrates aredominant, with molluscs such as Modiolus (Offi-cer et al., 1982; Peterson & Heck, 1999, 2001)associated with bryozoans and serpulid worms.This nutrient-rich water hypothesis is in accordwith the: (i) presence of constant continent-derived siliciclastics in the carbonate sediments;(ii) semi-enclosed character of the basin, isolatedfrom the open sea, thus favouring the accumula-tion of nutrients originating from the hinterland;(iii) poorly diversified fauna found in the materialfrom boreholes drilled in the central part of thebasin (Jambor, 1974; Gorog, 1992), suggesting thatthe whole water column (0 to 100 m deep) wasaffected by the same trophic conditions; (iv)elevated precipitations (Jimenez-Moreno et al.,2005); (v) frequent occurrence of sponge spicules(Schutz et al., 2007), diatoms and silicoflagellates(Hajos & Rehakova, 1974; Hajos, 1976, 1986;Galovic & Bajraktarevic, 2006; Schutz et al.,2007) and alginite levels (Bohn-Havas, 1983), allindicative of enhanced primary productivity; (vi)abundance of organic-rich facies in several bore-holes of the region; and (vii) frequent microbialcrusts in many buildups. Nevertheless, othertypical features of nutrient-rich waters, such asmacroalgae or bioeroders, have not been found(Mutti & Hallock, 2003; Halfar et al., 2006;Chazottes et al., 2008).

It has also been suggested that widespreadooids (together with microbialites) may be aresponse to biological mass extinction events(Calner, 2005). In the Paratethys, the normal-marine Badenian deposits contain a diverse faunaand flora (Harzhauser & Piller, 2007; Moissetteet al., 2007a). A sharp transition to the Sarmatiandeposits that display a strongly impoverishedfauna and flora is seen above (Boda, 1974a; Gorog,1992; Harzhauser & Piller, 2007). The impover-ished marine fauna and flora of the Sarmatianmay thus be explained by a combination ofseveral factors: a global sea water cooling, apronounced isolation from the Mediterranean,promoting the accumulation of nutrients in shal-low and semi-enclosed basins, and variable salin-ity conditions (from brackish to hypersaline). Insuch a setting, oolitic production could developbecause of calcium carbonate supersaturation,sufficient warm sea water temperatures and wave

agitation, but not the distinctive tropical tosubtropical faunal and floral assemblages.

CONCLUSION

The Sarmatian deposits of the proximal areas ofthe Zsambek Basin are composed of carbonateswith a minor amount of siliciclastics. This featureis unique, as in other basins of the CentralParatethys carbonates developed only during theLate Sarmatian. The dominant components arenon-skeletal grains and ubiquitous molluscs andbenthonic foraminifera. These carbonate rocks areorganized into two major depositional sequencesseparated by a regional erosional surface:

• An Early to Late Sarmatian sequence (Elphi-dium reginum, Elphidium hauerinum and lowerpart of the Spirolina austriaca zones) composedof aggrading–prograding ooid and bioclastic sub-aqueous dunes, deposited on a low-angle ramp;the material was issued mainly from lagoons andinner ramp zones, then redistributed from themid-ramp to the basin; rare bryozoan buildupsalso occur.

• A Late Sarmatian sequence (upper part of theSpirolina austriaca zone) composed of progradingooid deposits with abundant serpulid–microbial–bryozoan–nubeculariid buildups, deposited inlagoonal settings with fluctuating salinity; windsand waves controlled the sedimentation.

Even if the palaeoenvironmental conditionshave changed in detail through time in theZsambek Basin, the prevailing conditions duringthe deposition of the Sarmatian carbonates weresupersaturation in carbonate content, wave agita-tion, warm temperate sea waters, fluctuatingsalinities, possible nutrient concentrations lead-ing to mesotrophic to eutrophic conditions andperhaps high alkalinity. The ‘abnormal’ marineconditions leading to such peculiar carbonatedeposits during the Sarmatian are coeval with adramatic isolation of the Paratethys from theIndian Ocean and the Mediterranean.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The field research connected with this study wasfunded by common grants from the French CNRS/Hungarian Academy of Sciences, from the FrenchMinistry of Foreign Affairs/Hungarian Ministry ofEducation and from the Hantken Foundation,Budapest. At the University of Lyon, UMR 5125,



Paula Desvignes prepared most of the loosematerial for this study. At the Natural HistoryMuseum of Paris, UMR 5143, thin sections weremade by Michel Lemoine. During fieldwork,Simona Saint Martin helped us collect some ofthe palaeontological specimens. Mathias Harzha-user, an anonymous reviewer and Sedimentologyeditors David J. Mallinson and Peter K. Swart arethanked for their constructive comments on anearlier version of this paper.

REFERENCES

Anastas, A.S., Dalrymple, R.W., James, N.P. and Nelson, C.S.(1997) Cross-bedded calcarenites from New Zealand: sub-

aqueous dunes in a cool-water Oligo-Miocene seaway.

Sedimentology, 44, 869–891.

Andrusov, N. (1936) Vergleich der fossilen Bryozoenriffe der

Halbinseln Kertsch und Taman mit anderen riffartigen

zoogenen Bildungen. Bull. Assoc. Russe Rech. Scient. Pra-gue, 4, 113–123.

Ball, M.M. (1967) Carbonate sand bodies of Florida and the

Bahamas. J. Sed. Petrol., 37, 556–591.

Beavington-Penney, S.J., Wright, V.P. and Woelkerling, W.J.(2004) Recognising macrophyte-vegetated environments in

the rock record: a new criterion using ‘hooked’ forms of

crustose coralline red algae. Sed. Geol., 166, 1–9.

Boda, J. (1954) Biostratonomiai megfigyelesek hazai szarmata

kepz}odmenyekben (Biostratonomische Beobachtungen an

einheimischen sarmatischen Bildungen). Fold Kozl, 84,225–227 (in Hungarian, German abstract).

Boda, J. (1959) A magyarorszagi szarmata emelet es gerinctelen

faunaja (Das Sarmat in Ungarn und seine Invertebraten-

Fauna). Ann. Inst. Geol. Public. Hung., 47, 567–862 (in

Hungarian and German).

Boda, J. (1970) A magyarorszagi szarmata ritka }osmaradvanyai

(Rare fossils from the Sarmatian of Hungary). Fold Kozl, 100,397–398 (in Hungarian).

Boda, J. (1971) A magyarorszagi szarmata emelet taglalasa a

gerinctelen fauna alapjan (Gliederung des Sarmats von

Ungarn auf Grund der Invertebraten-Fauna). Fold Kozl, 101,107–113 (in Hungarian, German abstract).

Boda, J. (1974a) Die Entwicklung des Sarmats in Ungarn. In:

Chronostratigraphie und Neostratotypen, Miozan der

Zentralen Paratethys. M5 Sarmatien, Vol. 4 (Eds A. Papp,

F. Marinescu and J. Senes), pp. 90–94. Slowakischen

Akademie der Wissenschaften, Bratislava.

Boda, J. (1974b) Faziostratotypus S}oreg. In: Chronostratigra-

phie und Neostratotypen, Miozan der Zentralen Paratethys.M5 Sarmatien, Vol. 4 (Eds A. Papp, F. Marinescu and

J. Senes), pp 199–202. Slowakischen Akademie der

Wissenschaften, Bratislava.

Boda, J. (1974c) A magyarorszagi szarmata emelet retegtana

(Stratigraphie des Sarmats in Ungarn). Fold Kozl, 104, 249–

260 (in Hungarian, German abstract).

Boda, J. (1979) Nubecularia-felek (Foraminifera) k}ozetalkoto

mennyisegben a hazai szarmataban (Sediment-forming

Nubecularia (Foraminifera) in the Sarmatian of Hungary).

Fold Kozl, 109, 288–293 (in Hungarian).

Bohn-Havas, M. (1983) Uj tıpusu szarmata Cardiumok a

Zsambeki-medenceb}ol (New Sarmatian Cardium types from

the Zsambek Basin). Annu. Rep. Hungar. Geol. Inst., 1981,335–367 (in Hungarian).

Boiko, N.I. (2001) Lithofacies features and formation condi-

tions of Meotian rocks in the Azov–Kuban region. Lithol.Mineral Resour., 36, 156–159.

Boiko, N.I. (2004) Titanium–zirconium placers of the Stavro-

pol region. Lithol. Mineral Resour., 39, 523–529.

Brasier, M.D. (1975) An outline history of seagrass commu-

nities. Palaeontology, 18, 681–702.

Buge, E. and Calas, P. (1959) Biohermes et biostromes a Bry-

ozoaires du Miocene d’Europe. Bulletin de la SocieteGeologique de France, 1, 396–397.

Burchette, T.P., Wright, V.P. and Faulkner, T.J. (1990) Oolitic

sandbody depositional models and geometries, Mississip-

pian of southwest Britain: implications for petroleum explo-

ration in carbonate ramp settings. Sed. Geol., 68, 87–115.

Cadjenovic, D., Kilibarda, Z. and Radulovic, N. (2008) Late

Triassic to Late Jurassic evolution of the Adriatic Carbonate

Platform and Budva Basin, Southern Montenegro. Sed.Geol., 204, 1–17.

Calner, M. (2005) Silurian carbonate platforms and extinction

events-ecosystem changes exemplified from Gotland, Swe-

den. Facies, 51, 584–591.

Cann, J.H., Belperio, A.P., Gostin, V.A. and Murray-Wallace,C.V. (1988) Sea-level history, 45,000 to 30,000 yr B.P., in-

ferred from benthic foraminifera, Gulf St Vincent, South

Australia. Quatern. Res., 29, 153–173.

Cann, J.H., Harvey, N., Barnett, E.J., Belperio, A.P. and

Bourman, R.P. (2002) Foraminiferal biofacies eco-succes-

sion and Holocene sealevels, Port Pirie, South Australia.

Mar. Micropaleontol., 44, 31–55.

Cernajsek, T. (1972) Zur Paleookologie der Ostrakodenfaunen

am Westrand des Wiener Beckens. Verhand. Geol. Bund., 2,237–246.

Chazottes, V., Reijmer, J.J.G. and Cordier, E. (2008) Sediment

characteristics in reef areas influenced by eutrophication-

related alterations of benthic communities and bioerosion

processes. Mar. Geol., 250, 114–127.

Cocito, S., Ferdeghini, F., Morri, C. and Bianchi, C.N. (2000)

Patterns of bioconstruction in the cheilostome bryozoan

Schizoporella errata: the influence of hydrodynamics and

associated biota. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser., 192, 153–161.

Csepreghy-Meznerics, I. (1960) Pectinides du Neogene de la

Hongrie et leur importance stratigraphique. Mem. Soc. Geol.

Fr., Nouvelle Serie, 39/92, 1–58.

Davies, P.J., Bubela, B. and Ferguson, J. (1978) The formation

of ooids. Sedimentology, 25, 703–730.

El-Sammak, A. and Tucker, M.E. (2002) Ooids from Turkey

and Egypt in the Eastern Mediterranean and a Love-story of

Antony and Cleopatra. Facies, 46, 217–228.

Erdei, B., Hably, L., Kazmer, M., Utescher, T. and Bruch, A.A.(2007) Neogene flora and vegetation development in the

Pannonian domain in relation to palaeoclimate and palaeo-

geography. Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol., 253,131–156.

Evans, G. (1966) The Recent sedimentary facies of the Persian

Gulf Region. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. London A Math. Phys. Sci.,

259, 291–298.

Fabricius, F.H. and Berdau, D. (1970) Early Holocene ooids in

modern littoral sands reworked from a coastal terrace,

southern Tunisia. Science, 169, 757–760.

Fodor, L., Lelkes, Gy., Muller, P. and Palotas, K. (2000) El}ozetes

jelentes a Budai-hegyseg-Gerecse-hegyseg-Vertes-hegyseg

kozotti terulet badeni es szarmata }osfoldrajzi, szin- es poszt-



tektonikai viszonyairol [Preliminary report on the palaeo-

geographical, syn and posttectonic conditions of the region

between the Buda, Gerecse and Vertes mountains during the

Badenian and Sarmatian]. Unpublished report, Geological

Institute of Hungary, Budapest, 1–18 (in Hungarian).

Friebe, J.G. (1994) Serpulid-bryozoan-foraminiferal biostro-

mes controlled by temperate climate and reduced salinity:

Middle Miocene of the Styrian Basin, Austria. Facies, 30,51–62.

Galovic, I. and Bajraktarevic, Z. (2006) Sarmatian biostratig-

raphy of the Mountain Medvenica at Zagreb based on sili-

ceous microfossils (North Croatia, Central Paratethys). Geol.

Carpath., 57, 199–210.

Ghiurca, V. (1968) Le biotope recifal a bryozoaires du Miocene

de la Roumanie. In: Proceedings of the 1st IBA InternationalConference on Bryozoa, Vol. 108 (Ed. E. Annoscia), pp. 165–

173. Atti della Societa italiana di Scienze naturale. Museo

civico di Storia naturale, Milano.

Ghiurca, V. and Stancu, J. (1974) Les Bryozoaires sarmatiens

du Paratethys Central. In: Chronostratigraphie und Neos-

tratotypen. Miozan des Zentralen Paratethys. M5 Sarmatien

(Eds A. Papp, F. Marinescu and J. Senes), 4, pp. 298–310.

Slowakischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Bratislava.

Gillet, S. and Derville, H. (1931) Nouveau gisement d’un recif

a Nubecularia a Cricov, pres de Chisinau (Bessarabie). Bull.

Soc. Geol. Fr., 721–738.

Ginsburg, R.N. (2005) Disobedient sediments can feedback on

their transportation, deposition and geomorphology. Sed.

Geol., 175, 9–18.

Gischler, E. and Lomando, A.J. (1997) Holocene cemented

beach deposits in Belize. Sed. Geol., 110, 277–297.

Gischler, E. and Lomando, A.J. (2005) Offshore sedimentary

facies of a modern carbonate ramp, Kuwait, northwestern

Arabian-Persian Gulf. Facies, 50, 443–462.

Gorog, A. (1992) Sarmatian foraminifera of the Zsambek Basin,

Hungary. Ann. Univ. Sci. Budap., Sect. Geol., 29, 31–153.

Gross, M., Fritz, I., Piller, W.E., Soliman, A., Harzhauser, M.,Hubmann, B., Moser, B., Scholger, R., Suttner, T.J. and

Bojar, H.P. (2007a) The Neogene of the Styrian Basin-Guide

to excursions. Joannea Geol. Palaont., 9, 117–193.

Gross, M., Harzhauser, M., Piller, W.E. and Rogl, F. (2007b) A

stratigraphic enigma: the age of the Neogene deposits of

Graz (Styrian Basin; Austria). Joannea Geol. Palaont., 9,195–220.

Haig, D.W. (1988) Miliolids foraminifera from inner neritic

sand and mud facies of the Papua lagoon, New Guinea.

J. Foramin. Res., 18, 203–236.

Hajos, M. (1976) A Kozeps}o Paratethys szarmatien diatomainak

korrelacioja (Korrelation der sarmatischen Diatomeen der

Zentralen Paratethys). Annu. Rep. Hungar. Geol. Inst. 1974,321–330 (in Hungarian, German abstract).

Hajos, M. (1986) A magyarorszagi miocen diatomas kepz}od-

menyek retegtana (Stratigraphy of Hungary’s Miocene dia-

tomaceous earth deposits). Geol. Hung. Ser. Palaeont., 49,1–339 (in Hungarian and English).

Hajos, M. and Rehakova, Z. (1974) Fossile Diatomeen des

Sarmats s. str. aus der Tschechoslovakei und Ungarn. In:

Chronostratigraphie und Neostratotypen. Miozan des

Zentralen Paratethys. M5 Sarmatien, Vol. 4 (Eds A. Papp,



Halfar, J., Godinez-Orta, L., Mutti, M., Valdez-Holguin, J.E.and Borges, J.M. (2006) Carbonates calibrated against

oceanographic parameters along a latitudinal transect in the

Gulf of California, Mexico. Sedimentology, 53, 297–320.

Halley, R.B., Shinn, E.A., Hudson, J.H. and Lidz, B.H. (1977)

Pleistocene barrier bar seaward of ooid shoal complex near

Miami, Florida. AAPG Bull., 61, 519–526.

Hallock, P. and Schlager, W. (1986) Nutrient excess and the

demise of coral reefs and carbonate platforms. Palaios, 1,389–398.

Haq, B.U., Hardenbol, J. and Vail, P.R. (1988) Mesozoic and

Cenozoic chronostratigraphy and cycles of sea-level change.

In: Sea Level Changes: an Integrated Approach (Eds C.K.

Wilgus, B.J. Hastings, H. Posamentier, J.C. van Wagoner,

C.A. Ross and C.G.St.C. Kendall), Soc. Econ. Paleontol.Mineral. Spec. Publ., 42, 71–108

Harzhauser, M. and Kowalke, T. (2002) Sarmatian (Late

Middle Miocene) gastropod assemblages of the Central

Paratethys. Facies, 46, 57–82.

Harzhauser, M. and Piller, W.E. (2004a) The Early Sarmatian-

hidden seesaw changes. Cour. Forsch.-Inst. Senckenberg,

246, 89–111.

Harzhauser, M. and Piller, W.E. (2004b) Integrated stratigra-

phy of the Sarmatian (Upper Middle Miocene) in the wes-

tern Central Paratethys. Stratigraphy, 1, 65–86.

Harzhauser, M. and Piller, W.E. (2007) Benchmark data of a

changing sea-Palaeogeography, Palaeobiogeography and

events in the Central Paratethys during the Miocene.

Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol., 253, 8–31.

Harzhauser, M., Wagreich, M. and Piller, W.E. (2006) Vienna

Basin Excursion. In: EGU Meeting 2006, Universities of

Vienna and Graz, Vienna, pp. 1–13.

Harzhauser, M., Piller, W.E. and Latal, C. (2007) Geodynamic

impact on the stable isotope signatures in a shallow

epicontinental sea. Terra Nova, 19, 324–330.

Hearty, P., O’Leary, M., Donald, A. and Lachlan, T. (2006)

The enigma of 3400 years BP coastal oolites in tropical

northwest Western Australia… why then, why there? Sed.

Geol., 186, 171–185.

Hine, A.C. (1977) Lily Bank, Bahamas: history of an active

oolite sand shoal. J. Sed. Res., 47, 1554–1581.

Iryu, Y., Nakamori, T., Matsuda, S. and Abe, O. (1995) Dis-

tribution of marine organisms and its geological significance

in the modern reef complex of the Ryukyu Islands. Sed.

Geol., 99, 243–258.

Jambor, A. (1967) A Budapest kornyeki neogen facies-es}osfoldrajzi vazlatai (Fazies- und palaogeographische Kar-

tenskizze des Neogen der Umgebung von Budapest). 1:200

000 map. Magyar Allami Foldtani Intezet, Budapest.

Jambor, A. (1969) A Budapest kornyeki neogen kepz}odmenyek}osfoldrajzi vizsgalata (Palaogeographische untersuchung

der Neogenablagerungen in der Umgebung von Budapest).

Annu. Rep. Hungar. Geol. Inst., 1967, 135–142 (in Hungar-

ian, German abstract).

Jambor, A. (1971) A magyarorszagi szarmata (Das Sarmat in

Ungarn). Foldtani Kozlony, 101, 102–106 (in Hungarian,

German abstract).

Jambor, A. (1974) Uledekes kentelep a zsambeki-medence

szarmata sorozataban (Sedimentary sulfur deposit in the

Sarmatian sequence of the Zsambek Basin (Transdanubia,

Hungary)). Annu. Rep. Hungar. Geol. Inst., 1972, 301–303

(in Hungarian, English abstract).

James, N.P. and Bone, Y. (2007) A late Pliocene-early Pleis-

tocene, inner-shelf, subtropical, seagrass-dominated car-

bonate: Roe Calcarenite, Great Australian Bight, Western

Australia. Palaios, 22, 343–359.

Jasionowski, M., Studencka, B. and Poberezhskyy, A. (2002)

Early Sarmatian serpulid-microbialite carbonate buildups of

the Miodobory region (western Ukraine). In: Proceedings of



the XVII Congress of the Carpathian-Balkan Geological

Association, Bratislava (Eds J. Michalık, L. Simon and

J. Vozar), Geol. Carpath., 53, 3 pp.

Jernakoff, P., Brearley, A. and Nielsen, J. (1996) Factors

affecting grazer-epiphyte interactions in temperate seagrass

meadows. In: Oceanography and Marine Biology: An

Annual Review (Eds A.D. Ansell, R.N. Gibson and

M. Barnes), 34, pp. 109–162.

Jimenez-Moreno, G., Rodriguez-Tovar, F.J., Pardo-Iguzquiza,E., Fauquette, S., Suc, J.P. and Muller, P. (2005) High-res-

olution palynological analysis in late early-middle Miocene

core from the Pannonian Basin, Hungary: climatic changes,

astronomical forcing and eustatic fluctuations in the Central

Paratethys. Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol., 216,73–97.

Katay, D. (1983) A gyuroi szarmata meszk}o mikrofacies vizsga-

lata (Microfacies analysis of the Sarmatian limestone of

Gyuro). Unpublished MSc Thesis, Eotvos University,

DepartmentofPalaeontology,Budapest,64pp(inHungarian).

Kojumdgieva, E.I., Paramonova, N.P., Belokrys, L.S. and

Muskhelishvili, L.V. (1989) Biostratigraphic subdivision of

the Sarmatian after molluscs. Geol. Carpath., 40, 81–84.

Korecz-Laky, I. (1966) Sorites nemzetseg a manyi szarmataban

(The genus Sorites in the Sarmatian of Many). Annu. Rep.

Hungar. Geol. Inst. 1964, 179–185 (in Hungarian, English

abstract).

Kosi, W., Sachsenhofer, R.F. and Schreilechner, M. (2003)

High resolution sequence stratigraphy of Upper Sarmatian

and Pannonioan units in the Styrian Basin, Austria. In:

Stratigraphia Austriaca, Vol. 16 (Ed. W.E. Piller), pp.

63–86. Osterreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften,

Wien.

Koutsoubas, D., Arvanitidis, Ch., Dounas, C. and Drummond,L. (2000) Community structure and dynamics of the

molluscan fauna in a Mediterranean lagoon (Gialova lagoon,

SW Greece). Belg. J. Zool., 130(Suppl. 1), 135–142.

Kovac, M., Barath, I., Harzhauser, M., Hlavaty, I. and

Hudackova, N. (2004) Miocene depositional systems and

sequence stratigraphy of the Vienna Basin. Cour. Forsch.-

Inst. Senckenberg, 246, 187–212.

Krezsek, C. and Filipescu, S. (2005) Middle to late Miocene

sequence stratigraphy of the Transylvanian Basin (Roma-

nia). Tectonophysics, 410, 437–463.

Kulichenko, V.G. (1972) (On the age of the bryozoan reefs of

the Kerch Peninsula). Geol. Zhur., 32, 121–126. (in Rus-

sian).

Langer, M.R. (1993) Epiphytic foraminifera. Mar. Micropale-

ontol., 20, 235–265.

Larkum, A.W.D. and den Hartog, C. (1989) Evolution and

biogeography of seagrasses. In: Biology of Seagrasses. A

Treatise on the Biology of Seagrasses with Special Reference

to the Australian Region (Eds A.W.D. Larkum, A.J. McComb

and S.A. Shepherd), Aquatic Plant Studies 2, pp. 112–156.

Elsevier, Amsterdam.

Latal, C., Piller, W.E. and Harzhauser, M. (2004) Palaeoenvi-

ronmental reconstructions by stable isotopes of Middle

Miocene gastropods of the Central Paratethys. Palaeogeogr.

Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol., 211, 157–169.

Mandic, O., Harzhauser, M. and Roetzel, R. (2008a) Evidence

for tidal currents and benthic mass-mortality events in the

Sarmatian Paratethys Sea (middle Miocene; North Alpine

Foredeep Basin). In: Geophysical Research Abstracts,

Vol. 10, EGU, Vienna, pp. 2.

Mandic, O., Harzhauser, M., Roetzel, R. and Tibuleac, P.(2008b) Benthic mass-mortality events on a Middle Miocene

incised-valley tidal-flat (North Alpine Foredeep Basin).

Facies, 54, 343–359.

Mazzella, L. and Russo, G.F. (1989) Grazing effect of two

Gibbula species (Mollusca, Archaeogastropoda) on the epi-

phytic community of Posidonia oceanica leaves. Aquat.

Bot., 35, 357–373.

Meulenkamp, J.E. and Sissingh, W. (2003) Tertiary palaeoge-

ography and tectonostratigraphic evolution of the Northern

and Southern Peri-Tethys platforms and the intermediate

domains of the African-Eurasian convergent plate boundary

zone. Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol., 196, 209–

228.

Meznerics, I. (1930) Az Uny-Tinnye videki fiatal harmadkoru

uledekek foldtani es }oslenytani viszonyai [Geology and

palaeontology of young Tertiary sediments around Uny-Tinnye]. Unpublished MSc Thesis, Peter Pazmany Univer-

sity, Budapest, 43 pp (in Hungarian).

Milan, J., Bromley, R.G., Titschack, J. and Theodorou, G.(2007) A diverse vertebrate ichnofauna from a Quaternary

eolian oolite, Rhodes, Greece. In: Sediment–Organism

Interactions: A Multifaceted Ichnology. SEPM Spec. Publ.,

88, 333–343.

Moissette, P., Dulai, A., Escarguel, G., Kazmer, M., Muller, P.and Saint Martin, J.P. (2007a) Mosaic of environments

recorded by bryozoan faunas from the Middle Miocene

of Hungary. Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol.,252, 530–556.

Moissette, P., Koskeridou, E., Cornee, J.J., Guillocheau, F. and

Lecuyer, C. (2007b) Spectacular preservation of seagrasses

and seagrass-associated communities from the Pliocene of

Rhodes, Greece. Palaios, 22, 200–211.

van Morkhoven, F.P.C.M. (1963) Post-Palaeozoic Ostracoda:

Their Morphology, Taxonomy, and Economic use. Vol. II:Generic Descriptions. Elsevier, Amsterdam, 478 pp.

Murray, J.W. (1991) Ecology and Palaeoecology of Benthic

Foraminifera. Longman Scientific & Technical, John Wiley,

Essex, 365 pp.

Mutti, M. and Hallock, P. (2003) Carbonate systems along

nutrient and temperature gradients: some sedimentological

and geochemical constraints. Int. J. Earth Sci. (Geol. Run-

dsch.), 92, 465–475.

Nagymarosy, A. (1982) A Tengelic 2. sz. furas badeni-szarmata

nannofloraja (Badenian-Sarmatian nannoflora of the

Tengelic-2 borehole). Magyar Allami Foldtani Intezet

Evkonyve, 65, 139–149 (in Hungarian).

Officer, C.B., Smayda, T.J. and Mann, R. (1982) Benthic filter

feeding: A natural eutrophication control. Mar. Ecol. Prog.

Ser., 9, 203–210.

Papp, A. (1956) Fazies und Gliederung des Sarmats im Wiener

Becken. Mitteil. Geol. Ges. Wien, 47, 1–97.

Papp, A. (1974) Die Nubecularien des Sarmatien s. str. In:

Chronostratigraphie und Neostratotypen, Miozan derZentralen Paratethys. M5 Sarmatien, Vol. 4 (Eds A. Papp,



Papp, A., Marinescu, F. and Senes, J. (Eds) (1974) M5 Sar-matien, Chronostratigraphie und Neostratotypen, Miozan

der Zentralen Paratethys, Vol. 4. Slowakischen Akademie

der Wissenschaften, Bratislava, 707 pp.

Pedley, H.M., Grasso, M., Maniscalco, R. and Esu, D. (2007)

The Monte Carrubba Formation (Messinian, Sicily) and its

correlatives: New light on basin-wide processes controlling

sediment and biota distributions during the Palaeomedi-

terranean–Mediterranean transition. Palaeogeogr. Palaeo-

climatol. Palaeoecol., 253, 363–384.



Peterson, B.J. and Heck, K.L. Jr (1999) The potential for sus-

pension feeding bivalves to increase seagrass productivity.

J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol., 240, 37–52.

Peterson, B.J. and Heck Jr, K.L. (2001) Positive interactions

between suspension-feeding bivalves and seagrass-a facul-

tative mutualism. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser., 213, 143–155.

Piller, W.E. and Harzhauser, M. (2002) Reinterpretation of

Sarmatian environments and climatic constraints in the

Central Paratethys. In: 16. Internationale Senckenberg Kon-

ferenz. The Middle Miocene Crisis, Forschungsinstitut und

Naturmuseum Senckenberg. EEDEN-Programm), pp. 91–92.

Piller, W.E. and Harzhauser, M. (2005) The myth of the

brackish Sarmatian Sea. Terra Nova, 17, 450–455.

Piller, W.E., Harzhauser, M. and Mandic, O. (2007) Miocene

Central Paratethys stratigraphy–current status and future

directions. Stratigraphy, 4, 151–168.

Pisera, A. (1996) Miocene reefs of the Paratethys: a review. In:

Models for Carbonate Stratigraphy from Miocene Reef

Complexes of Mediterranean Regions (Eds E.K. Franseen,

M. Esteban, W.C. Ward and J.-M. Rouchy), SEPM Concepts

Sedimentol. Paleontol., 5, 99–104.

Popov, S.V., Rogl, F., Rozanov, A.Y., Steininger, F.F.,Shcherba, I.G. and Kovac, M. (Eds) (2004) Lithological-

Paleogeographic maps of Paratethys. 10 maps Late Eocene

to Pliocene, Vol. 250. Courier Forschungs-Institut, Senc-

kenberg, 1–46.

Popov, S.V., Shcherba, I.G., Ilyina, L.B., Nevesskaya, L.A.,Paramonova, N.P., Khondkarian, S.O. and Magyar, I.(2006) Late Miocene to Pliocene palaeogeography of the

Paratethys and its relation to the Mediterranean. Palaeo-geogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol., 238, 91–106.

Puri, H.S., Bonaduce, G. and Gervasio, A.M. (1969) Distribu-

tion of Ostracoda in the Mediterranean. In: The Taxonomy,Morphology and Ecology of Recent Ostracoda (Ed J.W.

Neale), pp. 358–411. Oliver et Boyd, Edinburgh.

Ricci Lucchi, F. (1995) Sedimentographica: A Photographic

Atlas of Sedimentary Structures, 2nd edn. Columbia Press

University, New York, 255 pp.

Richter, D.K. (1976) Gravitativer Meniskuszement in einem

holozanen Oolith bei Neapolis (Sud-Peloponnes, Grie-

chenland). Neues Jb. Geol. Palaontol. Abh., 151, 192–223.

Rogl, F. (1998a) Das Werden der Zentralen Paratethys im

Tertiar. In: Tertiarfossilien Osterreichs (Ed O. Schultz),

pp. 13–16. Goldschneck-Verlag.

Rogl, F. (1998b) Palaeogeographic considerations for Medi-

terranean and Paratethys seaways (Oligocene to Miocene).

Ann. Naturhist. Mus. Wien, 99A, 279–310.

Rogl, F. (1999) Mediterranean and Paratethys. Facts and

hypotheses of an Oligocene to Miocene paleogeography

(short overview). Geol. Carpath., 50, 339–349.

Rogl, F. and Steininger, F.F. (1983) Vom Zerfall der Tethys zu

Mediterran und Paratethys. Die neogene Palaogeographie

und Palinspastik des zirkum-mediterranen Raumes. Anna-

len des Naturhistorischen Museums in Wien, 85A, 135–163.

Saint Martin, J.P. and Pestrea, S. (1999) Les constructions a

serpules et microbialites du Sarmatien de Moldavie. ActaPalaeont. Rom., 2, 463–469.

Saint Martin, S. and Saint Martin, J.P. (2005) Enregistrement

par les diatomees des variations paleoenvironnementales

durant le Sarmatien dans l’aire paratethysienne (Roumanie).

C. R. Palevol, 4, 191–201.

Saint Martin, J.P., Neraudeau, D., Lauriat-Rage, A., Goubert,E., Secretan, S., Babinot, J.F., Boukli-Hacene, S., Pouyet, S.,Lacour, D., Pestrea, S. and Conesa, G. (2000) La faune

interstratifiee dans les gypses messiniens de Los Yesos

(bassin de Sorbas, SE Espagne): implications. Geobios, 33,637–649.

Schreilechner, M.G. and Sachsenhofer, R.F. (2007) High

resolution sequence stratigraphy in the Eastern Styrian

Basin (Miocene, Austria). Austrian J. Earth Sci., 100, 164–

184.

Schutz, K., Harzhauser, M., Rogl, F., Coric, S. and Galovic, I.(2007) Foraminiferen und Phytoplankton aus dem unteren

Sarmatium des sudlichen Wiener Beckens (Petronell,

Niederosterreich). Jahrb. Geol. Bund., 147, 449–488.

Semeniuk, T.A. (2001) Epiphytic Foraminifera along a

climatic gradient, Western Australia. J. Foramin. Res., 31,191–200.

Sholokhov, V.V. and Tiunov, K.V. (2003) Coastal-marine

accumulative forms in Neogene carbonate sediments with

the Transcaspian region as example. Lithol. Mineral

Resour., 38, 242–251.

Sopkova, B., Skulova, A., Hlavata, J. and Kovac, M. (2007)

Sequence stratigraphy of the Late Badenian & Sarmatian

(Serravallian) of the eastern part of the Vienna Basin –

deltaic to tidal flats environments. Joannea Geol. Palaont.,

9, 101–103.

Steininger, F.F. and Wessely, G. (2000) From the Tethyan

Ocean to the Paratethys Sea: Oligocene to Neogene strati-

graphy, paleogeography and paleobiogeography of the

circum-Mediterranean region and the Oligocene to Neogene

basin evolution in Austria. Mitteil. Osterr. Geol. Gesell., 92,95–116.

Stone, J.R., Cronin, T.M., Brewster-Wingard, G.L., Ishman,S.E., Wardlaw, B.R. and Holmes, C.W. (2000) A paleo-ecologic reconstruction of the history of Featherbed Bank,

Biscayne National Park, Biscayne Bay, Florida. Open-File

Report 00-191, United States Geological Survey, Reston,

VA, 41 pp.

Strausz, L. (1923) A biai Miocen (the Miocene of Bia). Foldtani

Kozlony, 53, 53–58 (in Hungarian).

Toth, E. (2004) Sarmatian ostracods from Budapest (Hungary).

Hantkeniana, 4, 129–159.

Toth, E. (2008) Sarmatian (Middle Miocene) ostracod fauna

from the Zsambek Basin, Hungary. Geologica Pannonica,

36, 101–151.

Tucker, M.E. (1985) Shallow-marine carbonate facies and

facies models. In: Sedimentology: Recent Developments and

Applied Aspects (Eds P.J. Brenchley and B.P.J. Williams),

Geol. Soc. Spec. Publ., 18, 147–169. .

Vakarcs, G., Hardenbol, J., Abreu, V.S., Vail, P.R., Varnai, P.and Tari, G. (1998) Oligocene-middle Miocene depositional

sequences of the Central Paratethys and their correlation

with regional stages. In: Mesozoic and Cenozoic Sequence

Stratigraphy of European Basins (Eds P.C. de Graciansky,

J. Hardenbol, T. Jacquin and P.R. Vail), SEPM Spec. Publ.,

60, 209–231.

Wright, C.A. and Murray, J.W. (1972) Comparisons of modern

and Palaeogene foraminiferid distributions and their envi-

ronmental implications. Colloque sur la geologie de la

Manche, 79, 87–95. Memoires BRGM.

Zelenka, J. (1990) A review of the Sarmatian Ostracoda of the

Vienna Basin. In: Ostracoda and Global Events (Eds

R. Whatley and C. Maybury), pp. 263–270. British Micro-

palaeontological Society Publication Series, Chapman and

Hall, London.

Manuscript received 2 June 2008; revision accepted 19January 2009



Marine carbonate systems in the Sarmatian (Middle Miocene) of …kazmer.web.elte.hu/pubs/Cornee_etal_2009_marine... · 2009. 3. 26. · Sarmatian carbonates of Hungary 3 2009 The

Documents