Stratigraphy and depositional history of the Cretaceous carbonate successions in the Spil Mountain (Manisa, W Turkey

Page 1

lable at ScienceDirect

Cretaceous Research 53 (2015) 1e18

Contents lists avai

Cretaceous Research

journal homepage: www.elsevier .com/locate/CretRes

Stratigraphy and depositional history of the Cretaceous carbonatesuccessions in the Spil Mountain (Manisa, W Turkey)

Cemile Solak a, *, Kemal Taslı a, Bilal Sarı b

a Department of Geological Engineering, Mersin University, 33343 Mersin, Turkeyb Department of Geological Engineering, Dokuz Eylül University, _Izmir, Turkey

a r t i c l e i n f o

Article history:Received 7 June 2014Accepted in revised form 22 October 2014Available online

Keywords:CretaceousCarbonate successionMicrofaciesPaleoenvironmentBornova Flysch ZoneW Turkey

* Corresponding author. Tel.: þ90 536 984 43 39.E-mail address: [email protected] (C. Solak

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cretres.2014.10.0080195-6671/© 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

a b s t r a c t

The Bornova Flysch Zone (western Turkey) consists of huge Mesozoic limestone and ophiolite blocksembedded into sheared siliciclastic sedimentary rocks of Maastrichtian�Paleocene age. The limestoneblocks, which range in age from Late Triassic to Cretaceous, are considered to be olistoliths or deformedand sliced platform parts. In the Spil Mountain, two successions of Cretaceous carbonates are tecto-nostratigraphically differentiated: (1) a Lower Cretaceous and Campanian(?)�Maastrichtian relativelyautochthonous succession showing sedimentary transition to the Bornova Flysch, and (2) a Cen-omanian(?)�lower Campanian allochthonous succession overthrusted to the flysch. These successionsrepresent separate parts of the same platform. The autochthonous succession bears Lower Cretaceousperitidal carbonates at its base and is named Unit 1. The succession is often composed of fenestralmudstone and algal wackestone microfacies. Unit 2 disconformably overlies Unit 1 and consists ofplatform-derived litho and bioclastic packstones of Campanian(?)�Maastrichtian age. This unit reveals atypical thinning and fining upward sequence, finally passing into pelagic wackestones of Unit 3. The twoaforementioned units record a platform drowning event, which occurred rapidly based on the presenceof planktonic foraminifera within matrix of basal breccia. Carbonate deposition ceased due to the input ofsiliciclastic sediments during the late Maastrichtian�Paleocene. The allochthonous succession consists oftwo vertically superimposed units: (1) Cenomanian(?)�Santonian rudistid limestones (Unit 4) depositedin restricted platform environments and (2) Santonian�lower Campanian pelagic limestones (Unit 5)indicating open platform to slope conditions. The Spil Mountain Cretaceous carbonate sequences arecorrelated with those in peri-Mediterranean platforms. They show close similarities to the Bey Da�gları(western Taurides) carbonate sequences in stratigraphy and facies. Paleontological and sedimentologicalanalyses and the microfacies enable us to reconstruct a paleoenvironment evolution and a facies modelfor the Spil Mountain carbonate deposits during the Cretaceous period.

© 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

The Spil Mountain is situated in the southwestern part of theBornova Flysch Zone (BFZ), which is a regional olistostrome-m�elange belt (Fig. 1A). Mesozoic carbonate sequences in the SpilMountain are interpreted by Erdo�gan (1985, 1990a,b) and Erdo�ganet al. (1990) as blocks, locally ranging up to 20 km across, derivedfrom the Mesozoic platform carbonate sequence in the KaraburunPeninsula and Chios Island. On the contrary, Verdier (1963),

).

Marengwa (1968) and Konuk (1977) considered them as in situsequences, which were sliced and deformed. Recognition of theirspatial setting and sequential relationships is important to under-stand their origins and the geologic evolution of the BFZ. Althoughdetailed paleontological data regarding the ages of the carbonatesequences in the BFZ exist, studies related to their stratigraphy andfacies characteristics are rare (€Ozer and _Irtem, 1982). Becausedetailed stratigraphy and microfacies characteristics of the SpilMountain carbonate rocks have not been known until now, it wasnot possible to make a correlation with the sedimentary rocks inthe Karaburun Peninsula and the other carbonate sequences in theBFZ.

The purpose of this paper is to describe the different lithologicalunits of the Spil Mountain Cretaceous successions by means ofmicrofacies analysis, benthic-planktonic foraminifera, rudists, algae

Page 2

Fig. 1. A, Location map of the study area and the main tectonic units of western Anatolia and eastern Greece (after G€orür and Tüysüz, 2001). B, Simplified geological map of the SpilMountain (modified after Güng€or, 1986) showing the location of the measured stratigraphic sections.

C. Solak et al. / Cretaceous Research 53 (2015) 1e182

and cyanobacteria, and reconstruct the tectonic and sedimentaryhistory of these strata. Correlations with other coeval Mediterra-nean platforms are also presented.

2. Geological setting

The BFZ, which is located between the Menderes Massif of theAnatolide�Tauride platform and the _Izmir�Ankara Suture Zone,forms a 50�90 km wide and approximately 230 km long tectoniczone (Okay and Altıner, 2007) (Fig. 1A). This zone, which is locatedon the western end of the Anatolide�Tauride Block, includes adensely deformed matrix and blocks of Mesozoic limestone, maficvolcanic rocks, radiolarian cherts and serpentinites (Erdo�gan,1990a,b; Okay and Siyako, 1993). The matrix of the BFZ iscomposed of predominantly flysch-type sedimentary rocks, whichconsist of alternating sandstones and shales. These rocks includelocally calcareous shales with planktonic foraminifera and micritic

limestone lenses, suggesting Campanian�Paleocene (Konuk, 1977;Ya�gmurlu, 1980; €Ozer and _Irtem, 1982; Erdo�gan, 1990a) and lateMaastrichtian�late Paleocene ages (Sarı, 2013).

Okay et al. (2012) differentiated two types of Mesozoic lime-stone blocks in the BFZ as platform and platformmargin sequences.The platform limestones deposited in shallow marine environ-ments are restricted to the _Izmir-Manisa region in the south-western part of the BFZ. Their age ranges from Triassic to LateCretaceous (€Ozer and _Irtem, 1982; €Ozer, 1989; Erdo�gan, 1990a,b;Erdo�gan et al., 1990; _Isintek et al., 2000; Okay and Altıner, 2007).The platform margin sequences, which are known only from northof Manisa, are represented by Jurassic to Cretaceous pelagic lime-stones overlying Upper Triassic shallow marine carbonate rocks.

The Spil Mountain carbonate rocks occur in two successionsdiffering tectonostratigraphically (Figs. 2 and 3). The relativelyautochthonous succession shows a sedimentary transition from asequence of platform carbonates to the Bornova Flysch. The

Page 3

Fig. 2. Stratigraphic framework of the Spil Mountain Cretaceous carbonate successions and the ranges of the measured sections.

C. Solak et al. / Cretaceous Research 53 (2015) 1e18 3

allochthonous succession is overthrusted to the Bornova Flysch orthe underlying carbonate sequence. The deformation age of theBornova Flysch is given as Maastrichtian�Paleocene (Okay et al.,2012) based on the presence of the undeformed lower Eoceneshallow-marine limestones, which unconformably overlie thematrix and blocks of the BFZ. The Neogene to recent tectonics ischaracterized by EeW trending horsts and grabens, which makes itdifficult to reconstruct the original spatial relationships amongdifferent rock units.

3. Materials and methods

The present study is based on fifteen measured stratigraphicsections throughout the Spil Mountain (Fig. 1B). Two hundred forty

samples, representing all units, were systematically collected fromthese sections. The general succession of the Spil Mountain Creta-ceous carbonates (Fig. 2) and two composite stratigraphic columns(Figs. 4 and 5) of the relatively autochthonous and allochthonoussuccessions are based on an integration of the local stratigraphicsections. Detailed micropaleontological and microfacies analyseswere performed on two hundred eighty thin sections studied underan optical microscope. The microfacies' descriptions use a combi-nation of Dunham (1962), Folk (1962) and Embry and Klovan's(1971) descriptions. A semi-quantitative method based upon acomparison of microfacies observations under an optical micro-scope with reference tables (Folk, 1951; Terry and Chilingar, 1958;Fediaevsky, 1963; Bacelle and Bosellini, 1965; Sch€afer, 1969) isused for the percentage estimation of various sedimentary

Page 4

Fig. 3. Schematic cross-section showing the relationship between the relatively autochthonous and allochthonous successions of the Spil Mountain (XeY cross section line, seeFig. 1B).

C. Solak et al. / Cretaceous Research 53 (2015) 1e184

components. Energy classification and interpretation are based onPlumpley et al.'s (1962) “Energy Index Classification of Limestones”.We used the definitions of standard microfacies types (SMF) andfacies zones (SFZ) according to Flügel (2004). Biostratigraphicdating is based on stratigraphic ranges of benthic foraminifera(Ramírez del Pozo and Lopez�Martinez, 1988; Sartorio andVenturini, 1988; Banner et al., 1991; Schlagintweit, 1991; CvetkoTe�sovi�c et al., 2001; Veli�c, 2007), planktonic foraminifera(Robaszynski and Caron, 1995; Premoli Silva and Verga, 2004) anddasycladacean algae (Chiocchini et al., 1979; Granier and Deloffre,1993; Soka�c, 1996) in peri-Tethyan platforms.

4. Lithostratigraphy

Five units (Unit 1�Unit 5) are distinguished in the Cretaceouscarbonate successions of Spil Mountain based on their superposi-tional relationships as observed in the field and sedimentarycharacteristics. Three of them are part of the relatively autochtho-nous succession, Early Cretaceous and Campanian(?)�Maas-trichtian in age, and the two others are observed in theallochthonous succession, Cenomanian(?)�early Campanian inage.

4.1. Unit 1

This unit forms the lowermost part of the relatively autoch-thonous successionwhich crops out along the Kayraklı and Kızılbelcreeks (Fig. 6A, B). It is represented by approximately 120 m thick,dark grey to black coloured, bituminous limestones, which aremedium to thick bedded and locally laminated (stromatolith?) withsporadic dolomite interbeds. Macrofossils are very rare (gastro-pods) or absent. The microfossils are dominated by dasycladacean

algae Salpingoporella dinarica, Salpingoporella annulata (Fig. 7E),charophyte oogonias (Fig. 7F) and ostracods. Benthic foraminiferaare sparse and represented by Praechrysalidina infracretacea(Fig. 7A, B), Belorussiella sp. (Fig. 7C, D) and miliolids. This micro-fossil assemblage is indicative of an Early Cretaceous age. The rangeof S. annulata, which occurs in the lower parts of Unit 1, does notovercome the Barremian (Granier and Deloffre, 1993). The upperpart of unit can be assigned to a Barremian�Aptian age based onthe co�occurrence of S. dinarica and P. infracretacea.

Microfacies: Three microfacies types (MFT 1�MFT 3) are recognisedwithin Unit 1. Laminated wackestone-mudstone microfacies (micrite)(MFT 1) (Fig. 8A) has a mud-supported texture with scatteredbioclasts (10�20%) and algal undulated lamination. In decreasingorder of abundance, the microfacies contains thin and thick shelledostracods, small benthic foraminifera, rare gastropods, dasyclada-cean algae, Thaumatoporella sp. (subspherical to cylindrical shapes),and abundant microbial tubes (Aeolisaccus sp.) in some thin sec-tions, which are often oriented parallel to the bedding, giving rise toa slight lamination. Algal wackestone microfacies (biomicrite) (MFT2) (Fig. 8B) is characterized by the presence of mostly dasyclada-cean algae (40�45%), which represent more than 50�60% of somethin sections and are mostly fragmented. These algal fragments areoften oriented parallel to the stratification and occur locally inmm�scale bands or laminae. MFT 3, peloidal�fenestral wack-estone�mudstone (pelmicrite) (Fig. 8C, D) is the most commonmicrofacies in Unit 1. It is characterized by irregular fenestrae-birdeyes, which are spar-filled and generally abundant peloids(20�30%). In addition to peloids, intraclasts (5�10%), pellets (5%),Thaumatoporella sp., sparse benthic foraminifera (3%) and rareostracod fragments (2%) characterize this microfacies. Scatteredeuhedral dolomite crystals are observed in some parts of the thin

Page 5

Fig. 4. Generalized stratigraphic column of the relatively autochthonous succession of the Spil Mountain and the stratigraphic distribution of selected microfossils and microfaciestypes.

C. Solak et al. / Cretaceous Research 53 (2015) 1e18 5

sections. Locally, micrite is washed out and replaced by a sparitecement.

Paleoenvironmental interpretation: The low ratio of allochems tomatrix and algal lamination suggests that MFT 1 was deposited in alow-energy inner platform environment. MFT 1 and MFT 2 can becorrelated with SMF-20, which corresponds to peritidal environ-ments (SFZ-7 and SFZ-8) (platform interior) and deposited in low oroccasionally moderate energy waters. MFT 3 corresponds to SMF-16 and SFZ-9 and was deposited in low energy conditions in aperitidal environment, as indicated by large amounts of carbonatemud, numerous peloids, pellets, micritic intraclasts and fenestrae-birdeyes.

4.2. Unit 2

The Lower Cretaceous platform succession is disconformablyoverlain by Unit 2, which is composed of thick bedded to massivecarbonate breccias-conglomerates at the base and carbonate

sandstones with Orbitoides and rudistid bioclasts at the top. Itsthickness varies between 15 and 30m. This is a typical thinning andfining upward sequence; thus, coarse grains progressively decreaseupwards. Unit 2 is comparable to “allodapic limestones”(Meischner, 1964). The carbonate breccias overlying the discon-formity surface consist of platform-derived clasts and their matrixcontains globotruncanids (Fig. 8E, E1). The co-occurrence of Side-rolites calcitrapoides (Fig. 7H) and Orbitoides media (Fig. 7G) in themiddle part of Unit 2 suggests a Maastrichtian age. The lower partof unit may be dated as a probable Campanian age.

Microfacies: Three microfacies types (MFT 4�MFT 6) are differen-tiated within Unit 2. Lithoclastic grainstone microfacies (lithosparite)(MFT 4) (Fig. 8E) includes poorly sorted (1 mme5 cm), angular tosubangular limestone clasts, which are mainly composed ofostracod wackestones-mudstones derived from Unit 1 and subor-dinately of wackestones and packstones with Aeolisaccus barattoloiand Pseudocyclammina sphaeroidea of late Turonian�Santonian agederived from Unit 4 in the allochthonous succession. The matrix is

Page 6

Fig. 5. Generalized stratigraphic column of the allochthonous succession of the Spil Mountain and the stratigraphic distribution of selected microfossils and microfacies types.

C. Solak et al. / Cretaceous Research 53 (2015) 1e186

composed of sparite and finer grains of platform-derived clasts, andcontains a few planktonic foraminifera. Benthic foraminifera aresparsely scattered in the matrix. Locally, irregular stylolites markthe boundary between large lithoclasts. Bioclastic-foraminiferalpackstone-grainstone microfacies (biomicrite-biosparite) (MFT 5)(Fig. 8F) is characterized by abundant and coarse rudist fragments(40%), and larger benthic foraminifera (25�30%), especially Orbi-toides media and Siderolites calcitrapoides. The most dominanttexture of MFT 5 is packstone. MFT 5 also contains allochemsincluding locally abundant Thaumatoporella sp., intraclasts (mostlyplaced in grainstone textures), echinoderm debris, and rare redalgae. Microborings are infrequently present on rudistid shells.Intraclastic-bioclastic packstone-grainstone microfacies (bio-intrasparite-biointramicrite) (MFT 6) (Fig. 8G) differs fromMFT 5 bythe predominance of intraclasts (40�50%) (mostly black pebbles).The most dominant texture of this microfacies is grainstone. Theintraclasts are composed of grains derived from mudstones andwackestones with ostracods, miliolids, microbial tubes and spic-ules. These grains are mainly rounded and fine-grained, but locallythey become very coarse-grained. Rudist fragments (10%) are larger

and sparser than in MFT 5. Pellets (8%), small benthic foraminifera(5%) and echinoderm debris (3%) are other components in themicrofacies.

Paleoenvironmental interpretation: After an emerged platformphase spanning the late Aptian�Campanian, the sharp transition topelagically influenced redeposited carbonates (MFT 4) fromrestricted platform sediments (Unit 1), indicates a rapid, tectoni-cally induced subsidence of the platform. MFT 4 was deposited inouter-platform to slope environments representing high-energyfacies and is correlated with SMF-4, which corresponds to SFZ-3and SFZ-4 (slope and toe-of-slope). Upwards platform-derivedlithoclasts decrease while bioclasts increase. Coarse rudist frag-ments, larger benthic foraminifera, and abundant carbonate mudsuggest that MFT 5 was deposited in an outer platform to slopeenvironment under low energy conditions. Locally, the presence ofsparite cement is indicative of occasionally dominant high-energyconditions. MFT 6 is deposited in high-energy slope environ-ments. MFT 5 and MFT 6 can be correlated with SMF-5 and corre-spond to SFZ-4 (slope).

Page 7

Fig. 6. Field photographs of the Spil Mountain Cretaceous carbonates. A, The relatively autochthonous succession showing the sedimentary transition to the flysch (Kızılbel Derevalley). B, Transitional facies to the flysch from the platform carbonates (Kayraklı creek). C, Rudistid limestone (Unit 4) in the allochthonous succession. D, Vaccinites cf. inferus. E,Uneven contact between the rudistid limestone (Unit 4) and laminated pelagic limestone (Unit 5) in the allochthonous succession. F, Laminated pelagic limestone (Unit 5).

C. Solak et al. / Cretaceous Research 53 (2015) 1e18 7

4.3. Unit 3

The gradual transition to the overlying Unit 3 (Figs. 3 and 4) iscomposed of medium to thin bedded, grey to pinkish (uppermost

parts) coloured pelagic limestones. It bears a rich planktonic fora-miniferal assemblage comprising Contusotruncana fornicata(Fig. 7J), C. patelliformis, C. walfischensis (Fig. 7K), Globotruncanaarca, G. dupeublei, G. esnehensis, G. mariei, G. orientalis,

Page 8

Fig. 7. Microfossils from Unit 1, Unit 2 and Unit 3 in the relatively autochthonous succession. A�F, The Lower Cretaceous platform carbonates (Unit 1). A and B, Praechrysalidinainfracretacea, Sample SP 154. C and D, Belorussiella sp., Samples SP 44 and 81. E, Salpingoporella annulata, Sample SP 80. F, Charophyte oogonia, Sample SP 85. G and H, Carbonatesandstones (Unit 2). G, Orbitoides media, Sample SP 120. H, Siderolites calcitrapoides, Sample SP 118. IeN, Pink pelagic limestones (Unit 3). I, Globotruncanita sp., Sample SP 97. J,Contusotruncana fornicata, Sample SP 97. K, Contusotruncana walfischensis, Sample SP 97. L, Globotruncanita pettersi, Sample SP 97. M, Globotruncanita stuarti, Sample SP 168. N,Racemiguembelina cf. R. fructicosa, Sample SP 98. Scale bars: 0.25 mm.

C. Solak et al. / Cretaceous Research 53 (2015) 1e188

Page 9

Fig. 8. Microfacies types (MFT) of Unit 1 (AeD), Unit 2 (EeG) and Unit 3 (H) in the relatively autochthonous succession. A, MFT 1, Laminated wackestone-mudstone, O: ostracod, pf:planktonic foraminifera, Sample SP 83. B, MFT 2, Algal wackestone (with dasycladacean algae), m: micrite, da: Salpingoporella dinarica, Sample SP 173. C and D, MFT 3, Peloidal-fenestral wackestone-mudstone (with birdeyes), if�b: irregular fenestrae-birdeyes, pf�b: laminoid fenestrae-birdeyes, Sample SP 160 and SP 162. E, MFT 4, Lithoclastic grain-stone, l: lithoclast, E1, planktonic foraminifera, Sample SP 153. F, MFT 5, Bioclastic-foraminiferal packstone-grainstone, Orb.: Orbitoides sp., Sample SP 94. G, MFT 6, Intraclastic-bioclastic packstone-grainstone, i: intraclast, bio: bioclast, sb: Gaudryna sp., Sample SP 151. H, MFT 7, Pelagic wackestone, pf: planktonic foraminifera (Heterohelix sp.), SampleSP 97. Scale bars: 0.25 mm.

C. Solak et al. / Cretaceous Research 53 (2015) 1e18 9

Page 10

C. Solak et al. / Cretaceous Research 53 (2015) 1e1810

Globotruncanella cf. havanensis, Globotruncanita pettersi (Fig. 7L),Gta. Stuarti (Fig. 7M), Racemiguembelina cf. R. fructicosa (Fig. 7N),Radotruncana subspinosa, and Rugoglobigerina rugosa, indicating aMaastrichtian age.

Unit 3 passes upward into the siliciclastic sediments of theBornova Flysch (Fig. 6B), which shows at the base a 5 m thickconglomerate, followed by an alternation of marls, siltstones andsandstones. Shally limestone lenses and interbeds contain Sub-botina sp. and Chiloguembelina sp. indicating a Paleocene age.

Microfacies: Pelagic wackestone microfacies (biomicrite) (MFT 7)(Figs. 8H and 11F) is the most dominant microfacies in Unit 3. It hasa mud-supported texture with abundant planktonic foraminifera(20%), calcispheres (5�10%), reworked benthic foraminifera (5%),and silt-sized bioclasts (5%). Unit 3 represents the post-drowningfacies.

Paleoenvironmental interpretation: MFT 7 represents outer-platformdeeper-shelf environments, with low energy facies (low hydro-dynamism) and corresponds to SMF-3 and SFZ-1�SFZ-3 (deepershelf).

4.4. Unit 4

It corresponds to the first unit of the allochthonous carbonatesuccession (Figs. 3 and 5). Unit 4 starts with grey-dark grey col-oured, medium-thick bedded (20�50 cm), unfossiliferous (macro)limestones and dolomitized limestones, which outcrop in Kayraklıcreek and Sivrida�g Hill (Fig. 1B). The lower part of Unit 4 is assignedto a probable Cenomanian age, based on the presence of a benthicforaminiferal assemblage, including Cuneolina pavonia (Fig. 9A),Nezzazata simplex (Fig. 9B, C) and Pseudonummoloculina regularis.The upper part of Unit 4 consists of rudist-bearing limestones(Fig. 6C), which is the most prominent lithological unit of the SpilMountain carbonate successions. The rudistid limestones are80e120 m thick, dark grey coloured, poorly bedded or massive, andoutcrop in Ç€orç€or Hill, Büyükkır Hill and Merdivencik (Figs. 1B and6C). Rudists mainly occur as fragments and specimens in life po-sition (Fig. 6D) are very rare. The benthic foraminiferal assemblagecomprises Biconcava cf. B. bentori, Dicyclina schlumbergeri, Kera-mosphaerina sarda (Fig. 9H),Moncharmontia apenninica (Fig. 9G),M.compressa, Nezzazatinella picardi, Nummoloculina regularis, Pseu-docyclammina sphaeroidea (Fig. 9I, J), Rotorbinella scarsellai, Scan-donea samnitica (Fig. 9D, E), and Spiroloculina sp. This assemblageindicates an age ranging from late Turonian to early Santonian(Fig. 10) as recorded in other peri-Mediterranean platforms; onlyKeramosphaerina sarda represents a Coniacian (Cherchi andSchroeder, 1990) or lower Santonian (Veli�c, 2007) age. The rudistsare represented by Biradiolites cf. angulosus, Distefanella salmojra-ghii, Distefanella sp., Hippurites socialis, Vaccinites cf. inferus(Fig. 6D), and Sauvagesia sp. In the uppermost part of Unit 4, thereare approximately 10e20 m thick, light grey coloured, poorlybedded bioclastic limestone beds. These beds crop out in theKırgebeoluk gedi�gi and Yanyurt Hill area (Fig. 1B).

Microfacies: Four microfacies are differentiated in Unit 4. Benthicforaminiferal packstone-grainstone microfacies (biosparite-bio-micrite) (MFT 8) (Fig. 11A) is dominated by benthic foraminifera(50�60%), especially miliolids. In the matrix, other allochems (10%)are intraclasts, sparse Thaumatoporella sp., pellets and bivalviafragments. Benthic foraminiferal wackestone microfacies (biomicrite)(MFT 9) (Fig. 11B) has a mud-supported texture with miliolids andCuneolina pavonia (18%), and rare ostracods (3%). Foraminiferalwackestone also contains abundant micro fissures and irregularstylolites. Algal wackestone microfacies with Aeolisaccus (biomicrite)

(MFT 10) (Fig. 11C) is characterized by the presence of abundantAeolisaccus kotori (30�40%). This microfacies also contains Thau-matoporella sp., intraclasts, pellets-clotted peloids, and benthicforaminifera including miliolids, discorbids and sparse ostracodfragments. Peloids and algal mud form the micro-scale laminaeobserved in some thin-sections. Inter-peloids have cavities similarto fenestral fabrics, which are filled by sparite cements and raregeopetal fabrics in fissures. Rudistid packstone microfacies (bio-micrite) (MFT 11) (Fig. 11D, E) is mainly composed of abundantrudist fragments, which cover more than 60% of thin sections.These fragments have intense bioturbation. MFT 11 also containsThaumatoporella sp., echinoderm debris, pellets, intraclasts, veryrare microbial tubes and sparsely Dicyclina schlumbergeri, miliolids,discorbids. In some thin sections, red coloured irregular stylolitesare very common, especially intergranular stylolites. MFT 11 is themost common microfacies type of the Spil Mountain carbonaterocks and especially of Unit 4.

Paleoenvironmental interpretation: The main lithological character-istics of Unit 4 are the high amount of carbonate mud, and thepresence of microbial tubes and Thaumatoporella sp. (Fig. 11AeE),alongside significant rudist shell concentrations, which suggest aninner platform environment with variable hydrodynamic condi-tions. MFT 8 and MFT 9 can be correlated with SMF-18 and SFZ-7and SFZ-8 (platform interior). The microbial fossil Aeolisaccuskotori, recently assigned to the new genus Decastronema (Golubi�cet al., 2008), is indicative of peritidal environments. MFT 10 cor-responds to SMF-21 and can be correlated with SFZ-8 and SFZ-9(platform interior). The chaotically deposited abundant rudistshell concentrations, bioturbation structures, Thaumatoporella sp.and benthic foraminifera suggest that MFT 10 was deposited in aninner-shelf environment of a ramp-like depositional setting (Caffauand Pleni�car, 2004). MFT 11 can be correlated with a foraminiferal-rudist packstone microfacies of late Turonian�Santonian age,reflecting a shelf lagoonal environment (€Ozer and _Irtem,1982) fromthe Isıklar�Altında�g area and corresponding to SMF-10 and SFZ-7(shelf lagoon).

4.5. Unit 5

The contact between Unit 4 and the overlying Unit 5 is abruptand locally uneven (Fig. 6E). Unit 5 starts with 4 m thick, light grey-beige coloured, micritic, medium to thick-bedded limestones. Itcontinues with laminated pelagic limestones consisting of alter-nating dark and light coloured laminae in mm-scale (Fig. 6F). Alongan approximately 45 m thick succession, the sequence continueswith of black coloured, bituminous, medium-thick and poorlybedded rudist-bearing limestone with variable thickness(30 cme12 m thick beds) alternating with laminated pelagiclimestone. Upwards, laminated beds become rare and medium tothick-bedded cherty limestones become dominant. Planktonicforaminiferal assemblage comprising Dicarinella asymetrica(Fig. 9K, L), M. coronata, Marginotruncana marginata (Fig. 9M),M. pseudolinneiana, M. paraconcavata, M. renzi, M. sigali, M. sinuosa(Fig. 9N), and M. tarfayaensis (Fig. 9O) indicates a Santonian age forthe lower part of Unit 5. Its upper parts yielded Globotruncana hilli,Globotruncanita elevata, and G. stuartiformis which are indicative ofan early Campanian age.

Microfacies: Unit 5 contains pelagic wackestone (MFT 7) and lami-nated pelagic wackestone microfacies (alternating mudstone andwackestone) (biomicrite) (MFT 12) (Fig. 11G, H). The dark colouredlaminae are composed of bituminous, microbioclastic wackestones,while the light coloured laminae are mudstones-wackestones withplanktonic foraminifera and calcispheres. The bioclasts of the dark

Page 11

Fig. 9. Microfossils from Unit 4 and Unit 5 in the allochthonous succession. A�J, rudistid limestones (Unit 4). A, Cuneolina pavonia, Sample SP 137. B and C, Nezzazata simplex, SampleSP 135. D and E, Scandonea samnitica, Sample SP 60. F and G, Moncharmontia apenninica, Samples SP 54 and 19. H, Keramosphaerina sarda, Sample SP 77. I and J, Pseudocyclamminasphaeroidea, Samples SP 60 and 119. KeO, pelagic limestones (Unit 5). K and L, Dicarinella asymetrica, Samples SP 3 and 64. M, Marginotruncana marginata, Sample SP 64. N,Marginotruncana sinuosa, Sample SP 64. O, Marginotruncana tarfayaensis, Sample SP 64. Scale bars: 0.25 mm.

C. Solak et al. / Cretaceous Research 53 (2015) 1e18 11

Page 12

Fig. 10. Stratigraphic distribution of benthic foraminifera and dasycladacean algae identified from the Spil Mountain carbonate successions. 1: (Banner et al., 1991), 2: (Veli�c, 1988),3: (Sartorio and Venturini, 1988), 4: (Veli�c, 2007), 5: (Chiocchini et al., 1979), 6: (Granier and Deloffre, 1993), 7: (Soka�c, 1996), 8: (Fu�cek et al., 1990), 9: (Ramírez del Pozo and Lopez-Martinez, 1988), 10: (Cvetko Te�sovi�c et al., 2001), 11: (Schlagintweit, 1991).

C. Solak et al. / Cretaceous Research 53 (2015) 1e1812

laminaes dominantly consist of rudist fragments and reworkedbenthic foraminifera.

Paleoenvironmental interpretation: The fine grained mudstones-wackestones with variable amounts of planktonic foraminiferaand calcispheres, small-sized calcitic debris and reworked smallbenthic foraminifera indicate that the inner platform was floodedand open-sea conditions dominated. These conditions correspondto pelagic sedimentation on an outer platform to a slope environ-ment with low energy. The laminated pelagic microfacies corre-lated to SMF-3 and SFZ-3.

5. Correlation with coeval deposits of the Mediterraneanrealm

The sedimentary characteristics and microbiota of the LowerCretaceous (Hauterivian�Aptian) inner platform carbonates (Unit1) are comparable to those described for the Neocomian limestones

in the Nald€oken sections (Erdo�gan, 1990b) located in the south-western part of the Spil Mountain (Fig. 12). These sections alsoinclude Albian to Senonian rudistid limestones correlating withUnit 4 as described here, which is overlain by pelagic limestoneswith Marginotruncana coronata and Dicarinella concavata of San-tonian age, corresponding to the lower part of Unit 5 in this work. Inthe Karaburun Peninsula, the Albian rudistid limestones showingan upwards deepening trend (_Isintek, 2002) do not correlate withUnit 1 as described here in terms of both facies and stratigraphy.

Units 2 and 3 as described here fit well to the “transitional zoneto the flysch” (Verdier, 1963) composed of limestone breccias andmarly limestones in the Kemalpasa Mountain (south of the SpilMountain) (Fig. 12). Units 4 and 5 correlate well, both for stratig-raphy and facies, with the “Cretaceous fossiliferous limestone” ofVerdier (1963) and Turonian�Santonian lagoonal rudistid lime-stones and Santonian�early Campanian pelagic limestones of €Ozerand _Irtem (1982) in the east of _Izmir. The bioclastic packstonelithofacies in the Isıklar-Altında�g area described by €Ozer and _Irtem

Page 13

Fig. 11. Microfacies types (MFT) of Unit 4 (AeE) and Unit 5 (FeH) in the allochthonous succession. A, MFT 8, Benthic foraminiferal packstone-grainstone, Sample SP 56. B, MFT 9,Benthic foraminiferal wackestone with C: Cuneolina pavonia and M: miliolid, Sample SP 137. C, MFT 10, Algal wackestone with Aeolisaccus kotori (mt) and Thaumatoporella sp.,Sample SP 50. D and E, MFT 11, Rudistid packstone, rf: rudist fragment, Sample SP 67 and SP 18. F, MFT 7, Pelagic wackestone, c: calcisphere, pf: planktonic foraminifera, Sample SP25. G and H, MFT 12, Laminated pelagic wackestone (alternating mudstone and wackestone), ws: wackestone, ms: mudstone, mbf: reworked benthic foraminifera, Sample SP 6.Scale bars: 0.25 mm.

C. Solak et al. / Cretaceous Research 53 (2015) 1e18 13

Page 14

Fig. 12. Stratigraphic correlations of the Spil Mountain Cretaceous carbonate successions with those in adjacent areas and the Karaburun Peninsula.

C. Solak et al. / Cretaceous Research 53 (2015) 1e1814

(1982) (Fig. 12) corresponds to the upper part of Unit 2 as describedhere in the relatively autochthonous succession. Coeval carbonaterocks with similar facies are not known from the Chios-KaraburunMesozoic sequence. However, the Campanian�Maastrichtian suc-cession in the Karaburun Peninsula, known as the Balıklıova For-mation, is similar to units 2 and 3 as described here because of thepresence of redeposited carbonates and pelagic limestones passinginto the flysch upwards (_Isintek, 2002).

Coniacian�Santonian rudistid limestones, which correlate withUnit 4 in the Spil Mountain, were also recorded from the CentralTaurides, South Turkey (Taslı et al., 2006). In the Bey Da�gları Au-tochthon, western Taurides (Turkey), the Bey Da�gları Formationconsists of Cenomanian�Turonian rudistid limestones and Con-iacian�Santonian hemipelagic limestones with Dicarinella con-cavata and D. asymetrica, which are overlain by the midCampanian�Maastrichtian cherty pelagic limestones of the Akda�gFormation (Farinacci and Yeniay, 1986; Sarı et al., 2004; Sarı, 2006;Sarı, 2009; Sarı et al., 2009). Thus, even if the carbonate successionsin the southwestern part of the BFZ occur as blocks, their

Cretaceous stratigraphy and sedimentology show close similarity tothat in the Bey Da�gları in the western Taurides.

In terms of the microfacies characteristics and foraminiferalassemblage, rudistid limestones (Unit 4) can be correlated withthose in the southern Apennines (Carannante et al., 2000), NanosMountain in western Slovenia (Caffau and Pleni�car, 2004), Cilentoarea (Ruberti and Toscano, 2002) of Italy and Northern Adriatic,Croatia (Moro and Jeleska, 1994; Cvetko Te�sovi�c et al., 2001; Korbarand Husinec, 2003). The pelagic and laminated pelagic limestonesof late Turonian�Santonian age in the Adriatic carbonate platform,Croatia (Moro and �Cosovi�c, 2013) can be correlated with Unit 5based on the presence of the Dicarinella asymetrica Zone, which isassigned to the Santonian (Robaszynski and Caron, 1995; PremoliSilva and Verga, 2004).

6. Platform evolution

The paleontological and sedimentological analysis of theCretaceous carbonate deposits in the Spil Mountain and their

Page 15

Fig. 13. Paleogeographic evolution of the Cretaceous carbonate platform in the southwestern part (Spil Mountain and adjacent areas) of the BFZ (for the legend see Figs. 3e5).

C. Solak et al. / Cretaceous Research 53 (2015) 1e18 15

Page 16

C. Solak et al. / Cretaceous Research 53 (2015) 1e1816

correlationwith those in the southwestern part of the BFZ, allow usto reconstruct the platform evolution (Fig. 13). The Triassic toCretaceous carbonate rocks in the BFZ represent part of the Ana-tolideeTauride Platform (Okay et al., 2012). The Early Cretaceouswas a period when shallow-water restricted platform conditionsprevailed, as also recorded in the Nald€oken area in the south-western part of the Spil Mountain (Erdo�gan, 1990b). The platformemerged at the end of the Early Cretaceous, probably due to globalsea-level fall during the late Aptian (Haq et al., 1987, 1988) asindicated by the presence of bauxites (Erdo�gan, 1990b) (Fig. 13A).Although the lower contact of the Cenomanian(?)�Santonianrudistid limestones (Unit 4) is not observed in the Spil Mountainarea, equivalent carbonate sediments are widely distributed in thesouthwestern part of the BFZ and disconformably overlie the LowerCretaceous platform carbonates (Fig. 12, Nald€oken sections). Thus,the carbonate platform regime was re-established during a prob-able Cenomanian age in the southwestern part of the study area(Fig. 13B). The rudistid limestones (Unit 4) are characterized bypredominantly mud-rich microfacies with Aeolisaccus kotori,Thaumatoporella sp. and low-diversified benthic foraminiferal as-sociations, suggesting deposition on a shallow-carbonate platformwith low to medium hydrodynamism and restricted circulation.The overlying pelagic limestones (Unit 5) document a deepening ofthe depositional environment; thus, the restricted platform envi-ronment changed into an outer-platform to slope environmentduring the Santonian (Fig. 13C), as indicated by the presence of theDicarinella asymetrica Zone.

In the Spil Mountain, the contacts between the flysch and theallochthonous succession, including the Cenomanian(?)�Santo-nian rudistid limestones (Unit 4) and Santonian�early Campanianpelagic limestones (Unit 5), are tectonic, whilst the time-equivalentlimestones in adjacent areas show a sedimentary transition to theBornova Flysch (Fig. 12) (Verdier, 1963; Ya�gmurlu, 1980). Thus, theSpil Mountain allochthonous and autochthonous successionsrepresent two distinct parts of the same platform, which wassubsequently affected by tectonics. The absence of units 4 and 5 inthe autochthonous succession, which comprises a hiatus spanningat least the Albian to Campanian, may be explained by two sce-narios: (1) The platform part in the Spil Mountain was a non-depositional area during this time interval until the drowning ofthe platform that occurred in the Maastrichtian; (2) These unitswere also deposited in the Spil Mountain as in adjacent areas, butsubsequently they were truncated by tectonic events affecting theplatfom, such as tilting and gravity sliding. The first scenario seemsto be more likely, because these units are not recorded in the SpilMountain and surrounding areas.

The sharp transition from Lower Cretaceous peritidal carbonatesto redeposited carbonates is related to an abrupt deepening of thedepositional environment that changed from an emerged to asubsiding platform during the Campanian(?)�Maastrichtian(Fig. 13D). Unit 2, which indicates platform drowning represents aphase of strong calciclastic input. The clasts are derived from theLower Cretaceous inner platform carbonates (Unit 1) and upperTuronian�Santonian limestones (Unit 4). The presence of plank-tonic foraminifera within the matrix of carbonate breccias imme-diately above the disconformable surface of the Early Cretaceousperitidal carbonates (Unit 1) indicates a rapid subsidence of theplatform.

The continuous record of the carbonate platform deposits endedwith the occurrence of the dominant siliciclastic sediments of theBornova Flysch during the late Maastrichtian (Fig. 13E). The pelagiclimestone intercalations within the flysch consist of Subbotinawackestones indicating a Paleocene age. After the flysch deposition,the carbonate successions are chaotically deformed and tectoni-cally sliced. Moreover, post�Miocene large-scale block faultings

complicated the stratigraphical relationships among the differentrock units, giving rise to the appearance of large olistoliths to thecarbonate successions.

7. Conclusions

The stratigraphical, micropaleontological and microfacies anal-ysis of the Spil Mountain Cretaceous carbonate successions showthat the Lower Cretaceous (Hauterivian�Aptian) and Cen-omanian(?)�Coniacian are represented by restricted facies depos-ited in low-energy, inner platform settings, while theSantonian�lower Campanian and Campanian(?)�Maastrichtianare characterized by pelagic facies deposited in outer platform toslope settings. Our primary results are as follows:

� The Lower Cretaceous peritidal carbonate sequence (Unit 1) isrecorded and described for the first time from the Spil Mountainarea.

� Twelve different microfacies types are distinguished anddescribed.

� Their comparisons with coeval carbonate sequences in peri-Mediterranean platforms are made. These show close similar-ities between the studied carbonates and the Bey Da�gları(western Taurides) carbonate sequences in terms of both stra-tigraphy and facies.

� The occurrence of a sedimentary transition from the LowerCretaceous inner platform carbonates (Unit 1) to the Maas-trichtian�Paleocene Bornova Flysch throughout the redepositedcarbonates (Unit 2) and pelagic limestones (Unit 3) indicatesthat all the Mesozoic limestones recorded in the BFZ can not beconsidered as blocks.

Acknowledgements

This work is a part of MSc thesis undertaken by Cemile Solak atthe Institute of Sciences, Mersin University, Turkey. This researchwas supported by the Mersin University Research Foundation(project number: MEU-BAP-JMB (CS) 2012-2 YL). We are grateful toDr. Hayati Koç (Mersin University, Mersin, Turkey) for his contri-butions to the field works and to Dr. Sacit €Ozer (Dokuz Eylül Uni-versity, _Izmir, Turkey) for rudist determinations.

References

Bacelle, L., Bosellini, A., 1965. Diagrammi per la stima visiva della composizionepercentuale nelle rocce sedimentarie. Annali dell'Universit�a di Ferrara, SezioneIX, Science Geology Paleontology 1 (3), 59e62.

Banner, F.T., Simmons, M.D., Whittaker, J.E., 1991. The Mesozoic Chrysalidinidae(Foraminifera, Textulariacea) of the Middle East: the Redmond (Aramco) taxaand their relatives. Bulletin of British Museum of Natural History (Geology) 47,101e152.

Caffau, M., Pleni�car, M., 2004. Rudist and foraminifer assemblages in the Santo-nian�Campanian sequence of Nanos Mountain (Western Slovenia). Geologija47 (1), 41e54.

Carannante, G., Ruberti, D., Sirna, M., 2000. Upper Cretaceous ramp limestones fromthe Sorrento Peninsula (southern Apennines, Italy): micro- and macrofossilassociations and their significance in the depositional sequences. SedimentaryGeology 132, 89e123.

Cherchi, A., Schroeder, R., 1990. Keramosphaerina sarda n sp, large foraminiferMiliolacea from the Coniacian of Sardinia. Comptes Rendus de l'Academie desSciences, Serie 2, Mecanique, Physique, Chimie, Sciences de l'Univers. Sciencesde la Terre 310 (11), 1567e1572.

Chiocchini, M., Mancinelli, A., Molinari-Paganelli, V., Tilia-Zuccari, A., 1979.R�epartition stratigraphique des algues dasycladales et codiac�ees dans les suc-cessions M�esozoïques de plate-forme carbonat�ee du Lazio centrem�eridional(Italie). Bulletin. Descentres de Recherches Exploration-Production Elf-Aqui-taine 3, 525e535.

Cvetko Te�sovi�c, B., Gu�si�c, I., Jelaska, V., Buckovic, D., 2001. Stratigraphy andmicrofacies of the Upper Cretaceous Pu�ci�s�ca Formation, Island of Bra�c, Croatia.Cretaceous Research 22, 591e613.

Page 17

C. Solak et al. / Cretaceous Research 53 (2015) 1e18 17

Dunham, R.J., 1962. Classification of carbonate rocks according to depositionaltexture. In: Ham, W.E. (Ed.), Classification of carbonate rocks. American Asso-ciation of Petroleum Geologists Memoir 1, pp. 108e121.

Embry, A.F., Klovan, J.E., 1971. A Late Devonian reef tract on northeastern BanksIsland. Northwest Territories. Canadanian Society of Petroleum GeologistsBulletin 33, 730e781.

Erdo�gan, B., 1985. Bornova Karması�gının bazı stratigrafik ve yapısal €ozellikleri(Stratigraphic and structural characteristics of Bornova Complex). Türkiye Jeo-loji Kurultayı. Bildiri €Ozetleri (Geological Congress of Turkey, Ankara, Abstracts),pp. 14 (in Turkish).

Erdo�gan, B., 1990a. _Izmir-Ankara Zonu ile Karaburun Kusa�gının tektonik iliskisi(Tectonic relations between _Izmir-Ankara Zone and Karaburun Belt). TürkiyeMaden Tetkik ve Arama Dergisi (Bulletin. Mineral Research and ExplorationInstitute (Turkey) 110, 1e15 (in Turkish).

Erdo�gan, B., 1990b. _Izmir-Ankara Zonu’nun _Izmir ile Seferihisar arasındaki b€olgedestratigrafik €ozellikleri ve tektonik evrimi (Stratigraphy and tectonic evolution of_Izmir-Ankara Zone between _Izmir and Seferihisar). Türkiye Petrol JeologlarıDerne�gi Bülteni (Turkish Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin ) 2, 1e20(in Turkish).

Erdo�gan, B., Altıner, D., Güng€or, T., €Ozer, S., 1990. Karaburun yarımadasının strati-grafisi (Stratigraphy of the Karaburun Peninsula). Türkiye Maden Tetkik veArama Dergisi (Bulletin. Mineral Research and Exploration Institute (Turkey)110, 1e20 (in Turkish).

Farinacci, A., Yeniay, G., 1986. Biostratigraphy and event-analysis of the Cen-omanianeMaastrichtian carbonates of the Bey Da�gları (Western Taurus,Turkey). Geologica Romana 25, 257e284.

Fediaevsky, A., 1963. M�ethode d’�etude quantitative des microfaci�es calcaires. Revuede Micropal�eontologie 6 (3), 175e182.

Flügel, E., 2004. Microfacies of carbonate rocks: analysis, interpretation and appli-cation. Springer, 976 p.

Folk, R.L., 1951. A comparison chart for visual percentage estimation. Journal ofSedimentary Petrology 21 (1), 32e33.

Folk, R.L., 1962. Spectral subdivision of limestone types. In: Ham, W.E. (Ed.), Clas-sification of Carbonate Rocks-A Symposium. American Association of PetroleumGeologists Memoir 1, pp. 62e84.

Fu�cek, L., Gu�si�c, I., Jelaska, V., Korolija, B., O�stri�c, N., 1990. Stratigrafija gornjokrednihnaslaga jugoisto�cnog dijela Dugog otoka i njihova korelacija s istovremenimnaslagama otoka Bra�ca. (Upper Cretaceous stratigraphy of the SE part of Dugiotok Island and its correlation with the corresponding deposits of the Bra�c Is-land, Adriatic Carbonate Platform). Geolo�ski Vjesnik 43, 23e33.

Golubi�c, S., Radoi�ci�c, R., Seong-Joo, L., 2008. Decastronema kotori gen. nov.,comb. nov.; a mat-forming cyanobacterium on Cretaceous carbonate plat-forms and its modern counterpart. Bollettino. Della Societa Geologica Ital-iana (Italian Journal of Geosciences) 127, 285e297.

G€orür, N., Tüysüz, O., 2001. Cretaceous to Miocene palaeogeographic evolution ofTurkey: Implications for hydrocarbon potential. Journal of Petroleum Geology24, 1e28.

Granier, B., Deloffre, R., 1993. Inventaire critique des algues dasycladales fossiles: II.Partie-les algues dasycladales du Jurassique et du Cretace. Revue dePal�eobiologie 12, 19e65.

Güng€or, T., 1986. Manisa Güneyinin Jeolojisi (Geology of south of Manisa). GraduateThesis, Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi, p. 27 (unpublished) (in Turkish).

Haq, B.U., Hardenbol, J., Vail, P.R., 1987. Chronology of fluctuating sea levels since theTriassic. Science 235, 1156e1167.

Haq, B.U., Hardenbol, J., Vail, P.R., 1988. Mesozoic and Cenozoic chronostratigraphyand cycles of sea-level change. In: Wilgus, C.K., Hastings, B.S., Kendall, C.G.St.C.,Posamentier, H.W., Ross, C.A., Van Wagoner, J.C. (Eds.), Sea-level changes: anintegrated approach. Society of Economic Paleontologists and Mineralogists,Special Publication 42, pp. 71e108.

_Isintek, _I., Masse, J.P., Altıner, D., Isın, B., 2000. Age of a bauxite-bearing limestoneblock in the Bornova wild flysch zone of the Taurides. International Earth Sci-ence Colloquium on Aegean Regions, Abstracts, p. 67.

_Isintek, _I., 2002. Foraminiferal and algal biostratigraphy and petrology of theTriassic to Early Cretaceous carbonate assemblages in the Karaburun Penin-sula (Western Turkey). PhD thesis, Dokuz Eylül University, p. 263(unpublished).

Konuk, T., 1977. Bornova flisinin yası hakkında (About the age of the Bornova flysch).Ege Üniversitesi Fen Fakültesi Dergisi (Ege University, Journal of the Faculty ofScience) Seri B 1 (1), 65e74 (in Turkish).

Korbar, T., Husinec, A., 2003. Biostratigraphy of Turonian to (?) Coniacian platformcarbonates: A case study from the island of Cres (Northern Adriatic, Croatia).Geologia Croatica 56 (2), 173e185.

Marengwa, B.S., 1968. Geologie des Gebietes zwischen Isıklar und Buca €ostlich _Izmir(Turkei). Diplomarbeit, Vorgelegt der Matematich-Naturwissenchaftlichen,Fakultat der Universitat Hamburg, 48 p.

Meischner, K.D., 1964. Allodapische Kalke, Turbidite in riff-nahen Sedimentations-becken. In: Bouma, A., Brouwer, A. (Eds.), Turbidites. Developments in Sedi-mentology, 3, pp. 156e191.

Moro, A., Jelaska, V., 1994. Upper Cretaceous peritidal deposits of Olib and Ist Islands(Adriatic Sea, Croatia). Geologia Croatica 47 (1), 53e65.

Moro, A., �Cosovi�c, V., 2013. Upper TuronianeSantonian slope limestones of theIslands of Premuda, Ist and Silba (Adriatic Coast, Croatia). Geologia Croatica 66(1), 1e82.

Okay, A.Y., Siyako, M., 1993. The new position of the _Izmir-Ankara Neo-Tethyansuture between _Izmir and Balıkesir. In: Turgut, S. (Ed.), Tectonic and

Hydrocarbon Potential of Anatolia and Surrounding Regions, Proceedings of theOzan Sungurlu Symposium, Ankara, pp. 333e355.

Okay, A.Y., Altıner, D., 2007. A condensed Mesozoic succession North of _Izmir: Afragment of the Anatolide-Tauride platform in the Bornova Flysch Zone. TurkishJournal of Earth Sciences 16, 1e23.

Okay, A.Y., _Isintek, _I., Altıner, D., €Ozkan-Altıner, S., Okay, N., 2012. An olistostromm�elange belt formed along a suture: Bornova Flysch Zone, Western Turkey.Tectonophysics 568e569, 282e295.

€Ozer, S., 1989. Sur une faune d'Hippuritid�es des calcaires du Cr�etac�e sup�erieur de lazone d'_Izmir-Ankara (Anatolie occidentale). Inter�et pal�eontologique et strati-graphique. Revue de Pal�eobiologie 8 (2), 335e343.

€Ozer, S., _Irtem, O., 1982. Isıklar-Altında�g (Bornova-_Izmir) alanı Üst Kretasekireçtaslarının jeolojik konumu, stratigrafisi ve fasiyes €ozellikleri (Geologicalsetting, stratigraphy and facies characteristics of the Upper Cretaceous lime-stones in the Isıklar-Altında�g (Bornova-Izmir) area). Türkiye Jeoloji KurumuBülteni (Bulletin. Geological Society of Turkey) 25, 41e47 (in Turkish).

Plumpley, W.J., Risley, G.A., Graves, R.W., Kaley, M.E., 1962. Energy index for lime-stone interpretation and classification. American Association of PetroleumGeologists Memoir 1, 85e107.

Premoli Silva, I., Verga, D., 2004. Practical manual of Cretaceous planktonic fora-minifera. In: Verga, D., Rettori, R. (Eds.), International school on PlanktonicForaminifera. Universities of Perugia and Milano. Tipografia Pontefelcino,Perugia (Italy), p. 283.

Ramírez del Pozo, J., Lopez-Martínez, J., 1988. Estratigrafia del cretacico superior enlas cabeceras de los valles de anso y roncal (Pirineo Occidental) (Upper Creta-ceous stratigraphy in the headwaters of the Ans�o and Roncal valleys (WesternPyrenees)). Revista. Sociedad Geologica de Espa~na 1 (1e2), 37e52.

Robaszynski, F., Caron, M., 1995. Foraminif�eres planctoniques du Cr�etac�e: com-mentaire de la zonation Europe-M�editerran�ee. Bulletin de la Soci�et�e G�eologiquede France 166, 681e692.

Ruberti, D., Toscano, F., 2002. Microstratigraphy and taphonomy of rudist Shellconcentrations in Upper Cretaceous limestones, Cilento area (Central-SouthernItaly). Geobios 35, 228e240.

Sarı, B., 2013. Late Maastrichtian�Late Paleocene planktic foraminiferal biostratig-raphy of the matrix of the Bornova Flysch Zone around Bornova (_Izmir, WesternAnatolia, Turkey). Turkish Journal of Earth Sciences 22, 143e171.

Sarı, B., 2009. Planktonic foraminiferal biostratigraphy of the Con-iacian�Maastrichtian sequences of the Bey Da�gları Autochthon, western Taur-ides, Turkey: Thin section zonation. Cretaceous Research 30 (5), 1103e1132.

Sarı, B., Taslı, K., €Ozer, S., 2009. Benthonic foraminiferal biostratigraphy of the UpperCretaceous (Middle Cenomanian�Coniacian) sequences of the Bey Da�glarıCarbonate Platform, western Taurides, Turkey. Turkish Journal of Earth Sciences18 (3), 393e425.

Sarı, B., 2006. Upper Cretaceous planktonic foraminiferal biostratigraphy of the BeyDa�gları autochthon in the Korkuteli area, Western Taurides, Turkey. Journal ofForaminiferal Research 36 (3), 241e261.

Sarı, B., Steuber, T., €Ozer, S., 2004. First record of Upper Turonian rudists (Mollusca,Hippuritoidea) in the Bey Da�gları carbonate platform, Western Taurides(Turkey): taxonomy and strontium isotope stratigraphy of Vaccinites praegi-ganteus. Cretaceous Research 25 (2), 235e248.

Sartorio, D., Venturini, S., 1988. Southern Tethys biofacies. Agip S.p.A. S. Donato,Milanese, p. 235.

Sch€afer, K., 1969. Vergleichs-Schaubilder zur bestimmung des allochemgehaltsbioklastischer karbonatgesteine. Neues Jahrbuch für Geologie undPal€aontologie Monatshefte 1969 (3), 173e184.

Schlagintweit, F., 1991. On the occurrence of the genus Permocalculus ELLIOTT, 1955(Calcareous algae, Gymnocodiaceae) in the Upper Cretaceous of the NorthernCalcareous Alps (Branderfleck Formation, Gosau Formation) with the descrip-tion of Permocalculus gosaviensis n. sp. Revue de Pal�eobiologie 10, 37e46.

Soka�c, B., 1996. Taxonomic rewiev of some Barremian and Aptian calcareous algae(dasycladales) from the Dinaric and Adriatic Karst Regions of Croatia. GeologiaCroatica 49, 1e79.

Taslı, K., €Ozer, E., Koç, H., 2006. Benthic foraminiferal assemblages of the Cretaceousplatform carbonate succession in the Yavca area (Bolkar Mountains, S Turkey):biostratigraphy and paleoenvironments. Geobios 39, 521e533.

Terry, R.D., Chilingar, G.V., 1958. Summary of “Concerning some additional aids instudying sedimentary formations” by Shvetsov, M.S. Journal of SedimentaryPetrology 25, 229e234.

Veli�c, I., 1988. Lower Cretaceous benthic foraminiferal biostratigraphy of theshallow water carbonates of the Dinarides. Revue de Pal�eobiologie, vol. spec.no. 2, Benthos'86, 467e475.

Veli�c, I., 2007. Stratigraphy and paleobiogeography of Mesozoic benthic forami-nifera of the Karst Dinarides (SE Europe). Geologia Croatica 60 (1), 1e113.

Verdier, J., 1963. Kemalpasa Da�gı etüdü (_Izmir ili) (Investigation of KemalpasaMountain). Türkiye Maden Tetkik ve Arama Enstitüsü Dergisi (Bulletin. MineralResearch and Exploration Institute (Turkey) 61, 23e40 (in Turkish).

Ya�gmurlu, F., 1980. Bornova (_Izmir) güneyi flis topluluklarının jeolojisi (The Geologyof the flysch assemblages in Southern Bornova (_Izmir). Türkiye Jeoloji KurumuBülteni (Bulletin. Geological Society of Turkey) 23 (2), 141e152 (in Turkish).

Appendix

Author and date of all the species mentioned in the textBenthic Foraminifera

Page 18

C. Solak et al. / Cretaceous Research 53 (2015) 1e1818

Biconcava bentori HAMAOUI 1965Cuneolina pavonia D’ORBIGNY 1846Dicyclina schlumbergeri MUNIER-CHALMAS 1887Keramosphaerina sarda CHERCHI and SCHROEDER 1990Moncharmontia apenninica (DE CASTRO) 1968Moncharmontia compressa (DE CASTRO) 1968Nezzazatinella picardi HENSON 1948Nezzazata simplex OMARA 1956Nummoloculina regularis PHILIPPSON 1887Orbitoides media D’ARCHIAC 1902Praechrysalidina infracretacea LUPERTO-SINNI 1979Pseudocyclammina sphaeroidea GENDROT 1968Rotorbinella scarsellai TORRE 1966Scandonea samnitica DE CASTRO 1971Siderolites calcitrapoides LAMARCK 1801Planktonic ForaminiferaContusotruncana fornicata (PLUMMER) 1931Contusotruncana patelliformis (GANDOLFI) 1955Contusotruncana walfischensis (TODD) 1970Dicarinella asymetrica (SIGAL) 1952Dicarinella concavata (BROTZEN) 1934Globotruncana arca (CUSHMAN) 1926Globotruncana dupeublei CARON, GONZALEZ DONOSO, ROBASZYNSKI, WON-

DERS 1984Globotruncana esnehensis NAKKADY 1950Globotruncana hilli PESSAGNO 1967Globotruncana mariei BANNER and BLOW 1960

Globotruncana orientalis EL NAGGAR 1966Globotruncanella havanensis (VOORWIJK) 1937Globotruncanita elevata (BROTZEN) 1934Globotruncanita pettersi (GANDOLFI) 1955Globotruncanita stuarti (DE LAPPARENT) 1918Globotruncanita stuartiformis (DALBIEZ) 1955Marginotruncana coronata (BOLLI) 1945Marginotruncana marginata (REUSS) 1845Marginotruncana paraconcavata PORTHAULT 1970Marginotruncana pseudolinneiana PESSAGNO 1967Marginotruncana renzi (GANDOLFI) 1942Marginotruncana sigali (REICHEL) 1950Marginotruncana sinuosa PORTHAULT 1970Marginotruncana tarfayaensis (LEHMANN) 1963Racemiguembelina fructicosa (EGGER) 1899Radotruncana subspinosa (PESSAGNO) 1960Rugoglobigerina rugosa (PLUMMER) 1926RudistsBiradiolites angulosus D’ORBIGNY 1847Distefanella salmojraghii PARONA 1901Hippurites socialis DOUVILLE 1890Vaccinites inferus DOUVILLE 1890Algae and cyanobacteriaSalpingoporella annulata GRANIER and DELOFFRE 1993Salpingoporella dinarica RADOI�CI�C 1959Aeolisaccus barattoloi DE CASTRO 1989Aeolisaccus kotori RADOI�CI�C 1959