arth Science limatic hange 9..--.0-3061.1046,6506-0026 · 9..--.0-3061.1046,6506-0026 Research...

Volume 4 • Issue 2 • 1000137J Earth Sci Climate Change ISSN:2157-7617 JESCC, an open access journal

Research Article Open Access

Afghah and Ghiyasi, J Earth Sci Climate Change 2013, 4:2http://dx.doi.org/10.4172/2157-7617.1000137

Research Article Open Access

Earth Science & Climatic Change

*Corresponding author: M. Afghah, Geology Department, Azad Islamic University, Shiraz Branch, Shiraz, Iran, E-mail: [email protected]

Received March 28, 2013; Accepted April 26, 2013; Published May 05, 2013

Citation: Afghah M, Ghiyasi AA (2013) Biostratigraphy of Gurpi Formation (Late Cretaceous) in Interior Fars: Bavan Area, Central Zagros (Southwestern Iran). J Earth Sci Climate Change 4: 137. doi:10.4172/2157-7617.1000137

Copyright: © 2013 Afghah M, etal. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

AbstractThe Gurpi Formation is well exposed in the Bavan area (southwestern Iran). It consists of 160 m of marl with

intercalations of limy marl. Here, on the basis of foraminiferal studies, 78 species and 20 genera of planktonic foraminifera were identified. Based on the stratigraphic distribution of the well known foraminifers, three foraminiferal biozones were established. Generally the first appearance of Globotruncana falsostuarti has determined as lower biostratgraphic limit of the Gurpi Formation and the upper biostratigraphic limit of the Gurpi is marked by last occurrence of Abathomphalus mayaroensis which is synchronous of Late Maastrichtian in Bavan area. Foraminiferal investigations show that the biostratigraphic limits of the Gurpi Formation in Bavan stratigraphic section are assigned to the Middle Campanian through the Late Maastrichtian.

Biostratigraphy of Gurpi Formation (Late Cretaceous) in Interior Fars: Bavan Area, Central Zagros (Southwestern Iran)Massih. Afghah* and Ali Akbar Ghiyasi

Geology Department, Azad Islamic University, Shiraz Branch, Shiraz, Iran

Keywords: Gurpi formation; Biostratigraphy; Foraminifera; Iran

Introduction Gurpi Formation is one of the most important lithostratigraphic

units in the Zagros mountain ranges because of its stratigraphic position and its significance in the petroleum geology of Iran as source rock. It is generally sandwiched between the Sarvak limestone (at the base) and shale of Pabdeh (at the top) formations (Figure 1), while the lower lithostratigraphic limit of the Gurpi Formation is determined by sharp contact between the Ilam and Sarvak formations (Figure 1).

Gurpi formation is overlain by Pabdeh formation, except for some parts of the Fars area James and Wynd (1965) studied Gurpi for the first time. Type section of the Gurpi Formation was selected in the Lurestan area. On the basis of their study, the lithological characteristics of the Gurpi Formation comprise 320 m of dark blue shale with marly limestone. According to James and Wynd [1], Gurpi Formation is distributed in Fars and Khuzestan area. In some parts of Fars area, Gurpi Formation changes laterally to the Tarbur Formation (rudist limestone of the Upper Cretaceous) and finally, in the Interior Fars area, Tarbur Formation progradated on Gurpi Formation. Based on this study, Gurpi Formation is enveloped by Tarbur Formation in some parts of Interior Fars and is underlain by Pabdeh Formation in Coastal Fars, Khuzestan, Coastal Fars, some parts of Interior Fars and Lurestan regions.

Wynd [2] established biozones which determined the age and biostratigraphic limits of Gurpi Formation as Campanian to Maastrichtian in the Type section. Kalantari [3] carried out a biostratigraphic study of Gurpi Formation in the southeast of Shiraz (Interior Fars area). Wynd [2] has suggested biozones for Gurpi Formation in type section which is located in Lurestan area. He has generalized this biozonation for all subdivision of the Zagros basin as rule. It should be mentioned that Bolzz (1977) has presented some problem to Wynd’s biozonation particularly in Gurpi Formation. He has suggested biozonation of Gurpi requires study of more starigraphic sections in Zagros basin. However, this article is an attempt to clear biozonation of Gurpi Formation in Fars platform which determines biostratigraphic limits of this rock unit.

Geological and geographical setting

The studied stratigraphic section is located 120 km from the

northwest of Shiraz city in Bavan area. Geographical coordination of Gurpi stratigraphic section is described N 30° 06'47" and E 51°44'80" (Figure 2). Bavan region is close to Nurabad town in Fars Province southwestern Iran. Stocklin [4] has divided Iran into eight zones. The main of his classification has established on structural geology and stratigraphic aspect. He identified two geologic zones in Zagros mountain ranges which are simply folded and high Zagros (Thrust belt). Alavi [5] has supported two main structural zones in Zagros basin similar Stocklin [4]. Geologic studies of both Stocklin [4] and Alavi [5] have confirmed that Simply Folded Zone of the Zagros comprises simple anticline and syncline with north-west to south-east trend. Based on Alavi [5], the studied stratigraphic section is located in Zagros Simple Folded Zone. Actually stratigraphic section of Gurpi Formation is well exposed in the core of Bavan anticline (Figure 3). Regional stratigraphic study of Bavan area supports Interior Fars characteristics of stratigraphic succession. According to James and Wynd [1] Bavan stratigraphic section locality is assigned to Interior Fars.

Methods and Materials In addition, thickness of studied section was measured by detail

field work. Lithologic aspects were recorded by field observation carefully. 180 samples were collected from Gurpi Formation, the upper lithostratigraphic boundary of Sarvak Formation, and the lower part of Pabdeh. Samplings were carried out more accurately vertical changes in lithofacies and probable locations of both lower and upper lithostratigraphic limits. Thin sections were provided from collected samples and then microscopic photographs deposited in Azad Islamic University, Shiraz Branch. Recognition and identification of planktonic foraminiferal taxa were based on Loeblich and Tappan [6]. Cretaceous planktonic foraminifers were recognized by using Robaszynski and

http://dx.doi.org/10.4172/2157-7617.1000137


of 10


Caron [7], Caron and Odin [8], Caron [9] and Premoli Silva and Verga [10].

Stratigraphy

Thickness of the Gurpi Formation has measured 150 m which is sandwiched between light to dark grey massive limestone of Sarvak (Cenomanian) and light cream thin-bedded shale of pabdeh (Middle to Upper Paleocene) formations. The lower contact between Gurpi and Sarvak formations is marked by an erosional surface with iron nodules in the studied stratigraphic column as disconformity. The Bavan stratigraphic section of the Gurpi is underlined by the Pabdeh Formation; the lithostratigraphic boundary between Gurpi and Pabdeh formations is distinguished by purple shale which is Lower lithostratigraphic limit of the studied section comprises light gery silty shale with sandy intercalation. Generally field observations of the studied stratigraphic section implicate two separated lithostratigraphic parts in Gurpi Formation of Bavan. The lower part is mainly characterized of alternation of grey to cream thin-bedded silty shale with well dominant of Globotruncana falsostuarti, Heterohelix reussi, and Contusotruncana walfischensis and the upper part is consisted of pelagic medium to thick bedded limestone with dark to light grey shale. The mentioned lithostratigraphic part of studied section is extended about 90 m. The upper part is generally consisted of cream thick-bedded silty limestone that interbedded with light cream silty shale. Globotruncanita elevata, Pseudotextularia intermedia, Heterohelix

globulosa, Abathamphalus mayaroensis are well developed in this segment. The upper part of Gurpi Formation terminates to purple shale of basal part of Pabdeh formation which is Globorotalid and Globigerinid shale as sharp contact. The purple shale is a key bed which is described lithostratigraphic limit between Gurpi and Pabdeh formations along Zagros basin.

Biostratigraphy

There is no biostratigraphic data of Upper Cretaceous pelagic foraminifera of Interior Fars region. Actually biostratigraphy study of Bavan section is the first research which deals with vertical distribution of Upper Cretaceous plankton in this area. Based on the identified index taxa of planktonic foraminifera and their stratigraphic distribution in the studied stratigraphic section of Gurpi Formation, three biozones are established such as: 1) Globotruncana falsostuarti, Heterohelix globulosa, and Heterohelix reussi assemblage zone; 2) Contusotruncana walfischensis zone; and 3) Abathomphalus mayaroensis zone. The biozonation of the Gurpi stratigraphic column in Bavan is a great support for descripancy of biostratigraphic data in different parts of Zagros stratigraphic subdivision.

Biozone I (Globotruncana falsostuarti, Heterohelix globulosa, and H. reussi assemblage zone): This biozone consists of grey to cream colour shale, 48 m in thickness. This assemblage zone is marked by the first appearance of Globotruncana falsostuarti Sigal,

Era Periodsub Period

Epochsub Epoch Lurestan Khuzestan Coastal fars Interior Fars

Cambrian

Ordovician

Silurian

Devonian

Carboniterous

Permian

Triassic

Lower Jurassic

Middle Jurassic

Upper Jurassic

Salt Sandstone Shale

Dashtak

DalanFaraghan

Nar mbr

Aghar

Soltanieh Dol

Limestone Dolomite Evapohrite Coarse sandstone

Barut

Hormuz salt

SeyahouZard Kuh

llebeykMilaZaigun

Barut

Lalun

Sarchahan

Zakeen

Khaneh Kat

Neyriz

Sefidar

Soltanieh

PALE

OZO

ICM

ESO

ZOIC

CEN

OZO

IC

NEO

GEN

EPA

LEO

GEN

EC

REA

TAC

EOU

S

Quaternary

Pliocene

Micocene

Oligocene

Eocene

Paleocene

Maastrichtian

Campanian

SantonianConiacian

Toronian

Cinomanian

Albian Aptian

Neocomian

LahbariBakhyari

Razak

Kalhur

Pabdeh

Agha Jari

Gachsaran

Kashkan

Amiran

Mishan

Lahbari

SeymareGurpi

Garau

GotniaNajrnah

SargeluAlan/Mus/Adaiyah

Surgah

llam

Ahmadi

KazhdumiKazhdumi

Gadvan

Mauddud

Dariyan

Sarvak

Fahliyan

Surmeh

Gurpi

Jahrum

Razak

Pabdeh

Tarbur

Sachun

llam

Taleh Zang

Shahbazan

Asmari

Figure 1: Simplified lithostratigraphic chart of the Zagros (Ghavidel- Syooki et al., 2003).

http://dx.doi.org/10.4172/2157-7617.1000137


of 10


Kazerun

Nurabad

45 km

Shiraz

Bevan Area

Doshman zivari area

N

W

S

E

B

Nurabad Shiraz

200 km

Saudi Arabia

IRAQKW

Tehran

I R A N

Caspian Sea

Turkmenistan

Afghanistan

UZAZAM

A

35°

N30

°

55°50

PakistanPersian GulfRHOM

U.A.ETu

rkey

Figure 2: Location map of Iran (A) and studied stratigraphic column of the Gurpi Formation in Bavan.

Oligocene

Eocene-Palcocene

U.Cretaceous

Asmari Formation

Pabdeh Formation

Gurpi Formation

Sarvak Formation

Kazhdumi Formation

Pabdeh - Gurpi Formations

Rangestan Group

Land subjectto inundation

Kz

Sr

Gu

Pd

As

Pd-G

uBE

p

N

51°30’ 51°45’

30°00’30°00’

30°15’30°15’

Figure 3: Geologic map of studied area which represents succession of Sarvak formation (Cenomanian), Gurpi formation (U-Campanian) and Pabdeh formation (L- Paleocene)

Heterohelix globulosa (Ehrenberg), and H. reussi (Cushman). Biozone I is bounded by the first appearance of Contusotruncana walfischensis (Todd). The planktonic foraminiferal taxa which are associated with this zone include Globotruncana arca (Cushman), G. bulloides Vogler, G.ventricosa White, G.orientalis EL-Naggar, G.rosetta (Carsey),

G.sp., Globotruncanita stuartiformis (Dalbiez), Globigerinelloides blowi (Bolli), G.subcarinatus Broennimann Heterohelix reussi Cushman-Caron, H.globulosa Ehrenberg, H.navarroensis Loeblich, Archeoglobigerina blowi Pessagno, and A.bosquensis Pessagno, Pseudoguembelina costulata (Cushman), Hedbergella monmouthensis

http://dx.doi.org/10.4172/2157-7617.1000137


of 10


Olsson, Macroglobigerinelloides prairiehillensis (Pessagno), M. bollii (Pessagno), M.sp., M.alvarezi (Eternod Olvera), Pseudoplanomalina sp., Globotruncanella petaloidea (Gandolfi), G.sp., Rugoglobigerina rugosa (Plummer), R.hexacamerata Broennimann, R.pennyi Broennimann, Pseudotextularia elegans Rzehak. Sameeni et al. [11] have recoreded Globotruncana arca and G. ventricosa from Santonian through Middle Maastrichtian strata of North Pakistan. Chen et al. [12] have documented Globotruncana arca, G. bulloides, G.ventricosa from Middle Campanian succession of Tibet data as Globotruncana ventricosa Zone. Premoli Silva and Verga [10] have reflected Globotruncana falsostuarti as associated taxon in Globotrunca ventricosa Zone which is indicative of Middle Campanian. Grachev et al. [13] recorded these foraminiferal taxa from Middle Campanian sediments of the eastern Alps.

Actually, it is acceptable Globotruncana falsostuarti, Heterohelix globulosa, and H. reussi assemblage zone is comparable with Globotrunca ventricosa Zone which have described by Premoli Silva and Verga [10] and Chen et al. [12]. All mentioned biostratigraphic data implicate Middle Campanian age of this biozone (Figure 4 and Plates 1 and 2).

Biozone II (Contusotruncana walfischensis biozone): Biozone II consists of dark grey thin-bedded shale and cream to yellow sandy to argillaceous shale with iron nodules. The lower biostratigraphic limit of this biozone is distinguished by the first appearance of Contusotruncana walfischensis (Todd) and the upper biostratigraphic

limit is marked by the first appearance of Abathomphalus mayaroensis (Bolli). The other foraminiferal assemblage of this biozone consists of Globotruncanita stuartiformis (Dalbiez), G. elevata (Brotzen), G.conica White, G.angulata Tilev, Archaeoglobigerina cretacea (d’Orbigny), A.blowi Pessagno, A.cretacea (d'Orbigny), Globotruncana mariei Banner and Blow, G.orientalis ELNaggar, G.ventricosa White, G.arca (Cushman), G.bulloides Vogler, G.lapparenti Brotzen, G.rosetta Carsey, G.falsostuarti Sigal, G.sp., Pseudotextularia nuttalli (Voorwijk), P.elegans Rzehak, Rugoglobigerina rugosa (Plummer), R.hexacamerata Broennimann, R.pennyi Broennimann, R.macrocephala Broennimann.-Caron, Hedbergella holmdelensis Olsson, Contusotruncana fornicata (Plummer) , Globigerinelloides subcarinatus Broennimann, G.blowi (Bolli), G.sp., Gansserina gansseri (Bolli), and Heterohelix planata (Cushman), H.carinata (Cushman), H.striata (Ehrenberg, 1838), H.reussi Cushman, H.globulosa Ehrenberg, H.navarroensis Loeblich, Macroglobigerinelloides prairiehillensis (Pessagno), M. bollii (Pessagno).

Abramovich et al. [14] have been recorded Globotruncanella havanensis as Early Maastrichtian taxon. But Bilotte et al. [15] has been reported this taxon from Upper Campanian of Tercis Les Basin of France. According to Grachev et al. [13], Sari and Ozer [16], Sameeni et al. [11] and Tshakreen and Gasi Ski [17]. Sari [18] has documented Contusotruncana fornicata from Uppermost Campanian to Lower Maastrichtian. Since Premoli Silva and Verga [10] have established Gansserina gansseri as Early Maastrichtian biozone therefore it is applicable to Early Maastrichtian of Contusotruncana walfischensis

Foraminifera

Bio

zone

Syst

em

Stag

e

Form

atio

n

Thic

knes

s(m

)

Sam

ple

No.

Lith

olog

ical

colu

mn

III

II

I

Cre

tace

ous

Sa.

Pb.

Mid

. Cam

pani

anE

arly

Mae

stri

chtia

nL

ate

Mae

stri

chtia

n

Gur

pi

160

140

120

100

80

60

40

20

0

130

120

110

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

11 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77

Massive Limestone Silty Limestone Shale Limestone ShaleSilty Shale Shale Sa.: Sarvak Formation Pb.: Pabdeh Formation

1) Heterohelix globulosa

2) Heterohelix navarroensis

3) Heterohelix reussi

4) Hedhergella australis5) Globotruncana arca

6) Globotruncana bulloidse

7) Globotruncanita stuartiformis

8) Archaeoglobigerina blowi9) Archaeoglobigerina cretacea

10) Archaeoglobigerina beryyiensis

11) Heterohelix holmdelensis

12) Decarinella asymetrica

13) Decarinella sp.

14) Globotruncana cf. orientalis15) Globigerinelloides bollii16) Globotruncana ventricosa

17) Globotruncana orientalis

18) Globotruncana rosetta

19) Pseudoguembelina constulata

20) Globotruncanella havanensis

21) Hedbergella monmouthensis22) Globigerinelloides prairiehillensis

23) ) Pseudoplanomalina sp.24) Globotruncana falsostuarti25) Globotruncana sp.26) Macroglobigerinelloides bollii27) Macroglobigerinelloidessp.28) Macroglobigerinelloides alvarezi29) Macroglobigerinelloides sf. sub carinata30) Macroglobigerinelloides sp.

31) Globotruncanella petaloidea32) Rugoglobigerina pennyi33) Rugoglobigerina rugosa34) Rugoglobigerina hexacamerata35) Gansserina arca36) Pseudotextularia elegans37) Marginotruncana paraconcavata38) Marginotruncana marginata39) Globotruncanita elevata40) Globotruncanita cf. elevata

41) Globotruncana lapparenti42) Globotruncana linneiana43) Heterohelix carinata44) Heterohelix striata45) Contusotruncana mariei46) Globotruncana mariei47) Globigerinelloides sp.48) Laeviheterohelix glabrans49) Globotruncanita conica50) Globotruncanita angulata

51) Rugoglobigerina macrocephala52) Rugoglobigerina milamansis53) Pseudotextularia nuttalli54) Hedbergella sliteri55) Hedbergella sp.56) Contusotruncana walfisehensis57) Dicarinella imbricat58) Dicarinella concavata59) Marginotruncana cf. sinuousa60) Globotruncana aegyptiaca

61) Globotruncana hilli62) Archaeoglobigerina bulloides63) Contusotruncana fornicata64)Ventilabrella eggeri65)Globotruncana insignis66) Radotruncana subspinosa67) Globotruncana fornicata68) Macroglobigerinelloides pairiehillensis69) Globotruncanita sp.70) Globotruncanella cf. petaloidea

71) Rugoglobigerina sp.72) Rugoglobigerina recheli73) Gansserina gansseri74) Pseudotextularia intermedia75) Abathamphalus intermedius76) Trinitella scotti77) Abathamphalus mayarocnsis

Figure 4: Vertical distribution of planktons of the Gurpi Formation and established biozones in Bavan stratigraphic section (SW of Iran).

http://dx.doi.org/10.4172/2157-7617.1000137


of 10


biozone. Similar biostratigraphic data has documented from south east of Mexico by Omaña [19]. Some of associated foraminifer taxa have recoreded from Gansserina gansseri Zone of northern Oman mountain by Abdelghany [20]; whereas Spezzaferri and Caron [21] have obtained biostratigraphic data from Corminboeuf [22], Robaszynski and Caron [7] and Premoli Silva and Verga [10] which have support Gansserina gansseri Zone is extended from Upper Campanian to Lower Maastrichtian. However the first occurrence of Gansserina gansseri from Bavan stratigraphic section is close to biostratigraphic data of mention workers. It should be that taxon range zone of Gansserina gansseri is comparative with Kalantari’s [3] study remarkably.

Abdelghany [20] has also indicated Contusotruncana fornicata with long range zone of Upper Campanian through Maastrichtian. Common planktons of northern Oman mountain have not recognized in Contusotruncana walfischensis biozone of Bavan stratigraphic column; whereas there is similar biostratigraphic data between east of Mexico and Bavan stratigraphic section. Rugoglobigerina hexacamerata, Contusotruncana fornicata, Gansserina gansseri is close similar range zone in both Bavan and northern Mexico regions. Moreover, Georgescu and Huber [23] have obtained vertical distribution of Rugoglobigerina rogusa in Tethyan planktonic foraminiferal zonation that supports Upper Campanian age for this taxon. Discrepancy between biostratigraphic data of Australia is recognized in frequency of planktonic foraminifers remarkably which have been documented by Wonders [24]. It seems to be this discrepancy is related to local conditions which have not distinguished in Zagros area particularly

in Kalantari’s [3] recognition. However it is acceptable that Early Maastrichtian age for this biozone (Figure 4 and Plates 3 and 4).

Biozone III (Abathomphalus mayaroensis zone): Biozone III is composed of a succession of cream to grey thick bedded silty limestone and shaly limestone interbedded with calcareous shale with yellow sandy to argillaceous shale, 50 m in thickness. Recognition of planktons is investigated in wackestone, packstone and rarely mudstone lithofacies of Abathomphalus mayaroensis zone. This biozone is characterized by the first appearance of Abathomphalus mayaroensis (Bolli), and planktonic foraminiferal taxa associations include Pseudotextularia elegans (Rzehak), Globotruncanita conica (White), G. elevata (Brotzen), G.stuartiformis (Dalbiez), G.angulata Tilev, Abathomphalus intermedius (Bolli), Ventilabrella eggeri Cushman, Macroglobigerinelloides alvarezi (Eternod Olvera), M.bollii (Pessagno), M. prairiehillensis (Pessagno), Trinitella scotti Broennimann, Pseudoguembelina costulata Cushman, Globotruncana ventricosa White, G. rosetta (Carsey), G. insignis Gandolfi, and G. mariei Banner and Blow, G.arca (Cushman), G.orientalis EL-Naggar, G.aegyptiaca Nakkady, G.bulloides Vogler, G.hilli Pessagno, G.falsostuarti Sigal, G.sp., Heterohelix reussi Cushman, H.globulosa Ehrenberg, Archaeoglobigerina blowi Pessagno, Contusotruncana fornicata (Plummer), C.walfischensis (Todd), Globigerinelloides blowi (Bolli), Rodotruncana subspinosa (Pessagno), Globotruncanella petaloidea (Gandolfi), Rugoglobigerina rugosa (Plummer), R.hexacamerata Broennimann, R.pennyi Broennimann, R.sp,

0.2mm

0.6 mm

0.1mm

0.1mm

0.3 mm 6

4 5

321

0.4

Plate 1: 1- Globigerinelloides sp. (Pessagno 1967) 2-Macroglobigerinelloides bollii (Bolli 1959) 3-Pseudoguembelina cf. costulata (Cushman 1938) 4-Rugoglobigerina rugosa (Plummer 1926) 5- Globotruncana ventricosa White 1928 6- Heterohelix reussi (Cushman 1938)

0.3mm 0.3mm

0.1mm

0.3mm

0.2mm 5

3 4

2

1

Plate 2: 1- Globotruncana hilli (Banner & Blow, 1960) 2- Heterohelix globulosa (Ehrenberg, 1840) 3- Globotruncana lapparenti (Carsey, 1926) 4- Globigerinelloides bollii (Bolli, 1959) 5- Globotruncana bulloides Vogler 1941

http://dx.doi.org/10.4172/2157-7617.1000137


of 10


Gansserina gansseri (Bolli), Pseudotextularia nuttalli (Voorwijk), P.elegans Rzehak, P.intermedia De Klasz.

Sari and Ozer [16] recorded these foraminiferal taxa from Late Maastrichtian sediments of western Turkey. Biostratigraphic data from southern and Atlantic reflected Abathomphalus mayaroensis recognition is related to uppermost of Campanian to Late Maastrichtian succession. Dimitrova et al. [25] have also reported Abathomphalus mayaroensis from Late Maastrichtian East Balkan sediments. Grachev et al. [13] distinguished this taxon from Late Maastrichtian sediments of the eastern Alps (from Austria). Trinitella scotti have described as indicative late Maastrichtian of Hatian K/T boundary by Maurrasse et al. [26]. They confirmed recognition of stratigraphic distribution of planktons support well diversified pelagic foraminifera across Campanian to Maastrichtian. In addition, based on Robaszynski and Caron [7], Chungkham and Jafar [27], Maestas et al. [28], Nishi et al. [29], Petrizzo [30], Chacon et al. [31], Premoli Silva and Verga [10], it is logical to conclude that this biozone is suggested to the late Maastrichtian (Figure 4 and Plates 5-8).

Finally, Biozone III is bounded by the first appearance of

Globorotalia velascoensis Cushman, Globorotalia aequa Cushman, Globigerina triloculinoides Plummer, and Globigerina sp. The mentioned taxa have investigated in purple shale of basal part of Pabdeh formation which is clear in field observation. Purple shale comprises well developed Globorotalid and Globigerinid glouconitic shale assigned to the Middle Palaeocene.

DiscussionOther biostratigraphic data confirm Early Campanian age as lower

biostratigraphic limit of the Gurpi Formation in Fars platform [32]. Similar record have documented by Fazli et al. [33] in south Fars platform. The mentioned biostratigraphic data are similar to work of Kalantari [3]. Since stratigraphic section locality of Bavan is situated in the west of mentioned stratigraphic sections, there is obvious difference lower biostratigraphic limit of the Gurpi Formation along some parts of Fars area.

Hadavi and Senemari [34] have established biozones based on Calcareous Nanofossils in west part of Shiraz area which locates in range faulted zone. According to their study lower biostratigraphic limit of the Gurpi Formation is assigned to Lower Santonian. Based on their work Gurpi age determination is related to Lower Santonian- Maastrichtian age. Ghasemi-Nejad et al. [35] have recorded Gurpi age to Late Santonian- Maastrichtian in Coastal Fars area.

However variation of lower biostratigraphic limit of the Gurpi shale in Fars platform can be assigned to geologic factors which control transgression of Upper Cretaceous in Fars area. Many authors confirmed Late Maastrichtian age as upper biostratigraphic limit of

0.1mm

0.1mm

0.1mm

0.1mm

0.2mm

0.5mm

1

2

34

65

Plate 3: 1- Marginotruncana marginata ( Reuss 1845) 2-Globotruncanita cf. elevata (Brotzen, 1934) 3- Marginotruncana paraconcava (Porthault, 1970) 4- Globotruncana mariei Banner & Blow 1960 5- Globotruncanita elevata (Brotzen, 1934) 6-Globigerinelloides bollii (Bolli, 1959)

0.2mm

0.2mm

0.1mm

0.3mm

0.2mm

0.2mm

5

6

4

3

1 2

Plate 4: 1- Globotruncana rosetta (Marie 1941) 2- Globotruncanafalsostuarti Sigal, 19523- Globotruncana orientalis (El Naggar, 1966) 4- Globotruncana falsostuarti (Gandolfi, 1955) 5- Globotruncanella havanensis (Voorwijk, 1937) 6- Globotruncana aegyptiaca (Nakkady, 1950)

http://dx.doi.org/10.4172/2157-7617.1000137


of 10


0.3mm

0.3mm0.4mm

0.3mm

0.2mm

0.2mm

0.2mm

76

4 5

32

1

Plate 5: 1- Globotruncanita elevata (Brotzen 1934) 2- Globotruncana falsostuarti Sigal 1952 3- Globotruncanita sp. 4- Globotruncanita arca (Cushman 1926) 5- Macroglobigerinelloides alvarezi (Eterod Olvera1959) 6-Macroglobigerinelloides bollii (Pessagno 1967)7-Macroglobigerinelloides sp.

http://dx.doi.org/10.4172/2157-7617.1000137


of 10


the Gurpi Formation in Zagros basin [2,3,32]. Therefore it is approval clarity of upper biostratigraphic limit of Gurpi along Zagros region.

Conclusion Many researchers such as James and Wynd [1], Kalantari [3],

and Motiei [36] have emphasized that the lower biostratigraphic limit of the Gurpi Formation is assigned to the Lower Campanian in both the Coastal and Interior Fars regions. The biostratigraphy of the Gurpi Formation in the Bavan stratigraphic section reflects that the lower biostratigraphic limit of the Gurpi Formation is related to the Middle Campanian. Therefore, the lower biostratigraphy of the Gurpi Formation is not synchronous in the whole of Fars platform. Biostratigraphic investigations of the Gurpi Formation indicate that the established biozones are comparable to Wynd’s classification [2]. Based on biostratigraphic study of the Gurpi Formation in the Bavan stratigraphic section, Biozone I (Globotruncana falsostuarti, Heterohelix globulosa, and H. reussi assemblage zone) is comparative

to Biozone No. 33 of Wynd’s classification [2]. This biozone confirms the disconformity between the Gurpi and Sarvak formations in this area. The upper biostratigraphic limit of the Gurpi Formation in Bavan area is distinguished by the last appearance of Abathomphalus mayaroensis, which has been recorded in Lurestan area by Wynd [2]. However, Premoli Silva and Verga [10] have reported Abathomphalus mayaroensis zone from the Late Maastrichtian of western Tethyan realm sediments. Motiei [36] has suggested that Abathomphalus mayaroensis is recognizable in the Lurestan area. Principally, an Abathomphalus mayaroensis zone has not been recorded in either Coastal or Interior Fars by other researchers. This biozone is distinguished in the Bavan area for the first time. In addition there are some biostratigraphic descripancy between the Bavan stratigraphic section and other studied stratigraphic sections of the Zagros mountain range. The lower biostratigraphic limit of the Gurpi Formation in the Fars and Lurestan area is assigned to the Campanian [3], whereas this biostratigraphic limit is marked by Middle Campanian foraminifers. In order to determine the biostratigraphic limits of the Gurpi Formation in the Fars area, Kalantari [3] has suggested two biozones: the Globotruncana stuartiformis, Glt. Stuarti, Glt elevata assemblage zone and the Globotruncana gansseri and Glt. aegyptiaca assemblage zone. The first biozone is related to the Campanian and the second is assigned to the Early Maastrichtian. Therefore the Globotruncana falsostuarti, Heterohelix globulosa, and H.reussi assemblage zone (Biozone I in the studied section) is comparable with the upper part of the Globotruncana stuartiformis, Glt. Stuarti, Glt elevata assemblage

0.3mm 0.2mm

0.3mm

0.3mm

0.3mm

5

3 4

21

Plate 7: 1-Pseudotextularia elegans (Rzehak 1891) 2-Trinitella scotti (Broennimann 1952) 3- Rugoglobigerina pennyi Broennimann 1952 4- Rugotruncana subcircumnodifer (Gandolfi 1955) 5-Pseudotextularia nuttalli (Voorwijk 1937)

0.3mm

0.3mm

0.3mm

0.35m

0.3mm

0.2mm

1

2

43

6 70.25m

5

Plate 6: 1-Globotruncanita stuarti (de Lapparent 1918) 2- Globotruncanita angulata (Tilev 1951) 3- Globotruncanita angulata (Tilev 1951)4- Heterohelix navarroensis (Loeblich 1951) 5- Globotruncana arca (Cushman 1926) 6- Ventilabrella eggeri (Cushman 1926) 7- Contusatruncana contusa (Cushman 1926)

http://dx.doi.org/10.4172/2157-7617.1000137


of 10


[3] and Biozone No. 33 [2]. According to Wynd [2], Globotruncana stuarti and Palaeotextularia varians assemblage zone indicates the Maastrichtian. Also Globotruncana gansseri and Glt. aegyptiaca have been presented as a biozone which is related to the Early Maastrichtian in the Fars area by Kalantari [3]. The Contusotruncana walfischensis biozone corresponds with Kalantari’s biozone [3] and the lower part of Biozone No. 34 of Wynd’s biozonation [2]. The boundary between Cretaceous and Palaeocene sediments is recognizable as a disconformity between Gurpi and Pabdeh formations in the studied stratigraphic section of Bavan. The purple shale which overlies the Gurpi Formation in this area consists of Globootalia velascoensis, Globorotalia.aequa, and Globigerina triloculinoides, and Globigerina.sp. Therefore, it is assigned to the Middle Palaeocene. Finally it is logical to conclude that Gurpi Formation is bounded between two biostratigraphic disconformities in the Bavan stratigraphic section.

References

1. James GA, Wynd JG (1965) Stratigraphic nomenclature of the Iranian oil consortium agreement area. American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin 49: 2182-2245.

2. Wynd JG (1965) Biofacies of the Iranian oil consortium agreement area IOOC Report No 1082: 125 (Unpublished).

0.2mm

0.2mm

0.2mm

0.3mm

0.3m

m

0.2mm

0.2mm

1 2

34

7

5 6

Plate 8: 1- Globigerina sp. 2- Globigerina triloculinoides (Plummer 1926) 3- Globorotalia aequa Cushman & Renz 1942 4- Globorotalia velascoensis Cushman 1925 5- Abathomphalus mayaroensis (Bolli, 1951) 6- Globotruncana hilli (d'Orbigny, 1839) 7- Heterohelix navarroensis (Loeblich, 1951)

3. Kalantari A (1976) Microbiostratigraphy of Sarvestan Area. National Iranian Oil Co Publication, Tehran, Iran 129.

4. Stocklin J (1968) Structural history and tectonics of Iran: A review. AAPG Bulletin 52: 1229-1258.

5. Alavi M (2004) Regional stratigraphy of the Zagros fold-thrust belt of Iran and its proforeland evolution. American Journal of Science 304: 1-20.

6. Loeblich AR, Tappan H (1989) Foraminiferal Genera and Their Classification. Van Nostrand-Reinhold, New York, USA 1182.

7. Robaszynski F, Caron M (1995) Foraminifèresplanctoniques du Crétacé: Commentaire de la zonationEurope-Méditerranée. Bull Soc Geol France 6: 681-692.

8. Caron M, Odin GS (2001) Chapter C5a Report on a preliminary study of the planktonic foraminifera of the Campanian-Maastrichtian succession at Tercis (Landes, France). Developments in Palaeontology and Stratigraphy 19: 334-337.

9. Caron M (1985) Cretaceous planktic foraminifera. In: Bolli HM, Saunders JB, Perch-Nielsen K (Editors) Plankton Stratigraphy. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK 11-86.

10. Premoli Silva I, Verga D (2004) Practical manual of Cretaceous planktonic foraminifera. Universities of Perugia, Italy 283.

11. Sameeni SJ, Mirza K, Naz H (2007) Planktonic foraminifera from Upper Cretaceous Kawagarh Formation, Jabri area, Lora-Maqsood, Hazara, Northern Pakistan. Geol Bull Panjab Uni 42: 61-68.

12. Chen X, Wang C, Kuhnt W, Holbourn A, Huang Y (2011) Lithofacies, microfacies and depositional environments of Upper Cretaceous Oceanicred beds (Chuangde Formation) in southern Tibet. Sedimentary Geology 235: 100-110.

13. Grachev AF, Korchagin OA, Kollmann HA, Pechersky D, Mand Tsel’movich VA (2005) A new look at the nature of thetransitional layer at the K/T boundary near Gams, Eastern Alps, Austria, and the problem of the mass extinction of the biota. Russ J Earth Sci 7 ES600: 1- 45.

14. Abramovich S, Keller G, Stüben D, Berner Z (2003) Characterization of late Campanian and Maastrichtian planktonic foraminiferal depth habitats and vital activities based on stable isotopes. Paleogeography, Paleoclimatology, Paleoecology 202: 1-29.

15. Bilotte M, Odin GS, Vrielynck B (2001) Chapter A4 Geology and Late Cretaceous palaeogeography of the geological site at Tercis les Bains (Landes, France). Developments in Palaeontology and Stratigraphy 19: 47-59.

16. Sari B, Ozer S (2002) Upper Cretaceous Stratigraphy of the Bey DaUlar. Carbonate Platform, Korkuteli Area (Western Taurides, Turkey). Turkish J Earth Sci 11: 39-59.

17. Tshakreen SO, Gasi ski MA (2004) Cretaceous-Paleogene boundary problem in Libya: the occurrence of theforaminiferal species Abathomphalus mayaroensis (Bolli) in the Western Sirt Basin. Geological Quarterly 1: 77-82.

18. Sari B (2006) Upper Cretaceous planktonic foraminiferal biostratigraphy of the Bey Dag Lari Autochthon in the Korkuteli area, Western Taurides, Turkey. Journal of Foraminiferal Research 36: 241-261.

19. Omaña L (2006) Late Cretaceous (Maastrichtian) foraminiferal assemblage from theinoceramid beds, Ocozocoautla Formation, central Chiapas, SE Mexico. Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Geológicas 23: 125-132.

20. Abdelghany O (2003) Late Campanian-Maastrichtian foraminifera from the Simsima Formation on the western side of the Northern Oman Mountains. Cretaceous Research 24: 391-405.

21. Spezzaferri S, Caron M (2008) Revision of the planktonic foraminifera Pseudothalmanninella klausi (Lehmann, 1966) and Globotruncanella semsalensis (Corminboeuf, 1961) and first Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM) images of the holotypes. Revue de Paléobiologie, Genève 1: 81-88.

22. Corminboeuf P (1961) Association de Belemnitella et deGlobotruncanidae dans le Campanien supérieur desAlpettes (Préalpes externes fribourgeoises). Eclogae Geologicae Helvetiae 2: 491-500.

23. Georgescu MD, Huber BT (2007) Taxonomic revision of the late Campanian- Maastrichtian (Late Cretaceous) planktonic foraminiferal genus Rugotruncana Broennimann and Brown, 1956, and a new paleontological species concept for planktonic foraminifera. Journal of Foraminiferal Research 37: 150-159.

http://dx.doi.org/10.4172/2157-7617.1000137

http://archives.datapages.com/data/bulletns/1965-67/data/pg/0049/0012/2150/2182.htm



http://books.google.co.in/books/about/Microbiostratigraphy_of_the_Sarvestan_ar.html?id=L2NOAQAAIAAJ&redir_esc=y

http://books.google.co.in/books/about/Microbiostratigraphy_of_the_Sarvestan_ar.html?id=L2NOAQAAIAAJ&redir_esc=y

http://aapgbull.geoscienceworld.org/content/52/7/1229.abstract

http://aapgbull.geoscienceworld.org/content/52/7/1229.abstract

http://www.ajsonline.org/content/304/1/1.short

http://www.ajsonline.org/content/304/1/1.short

http://www.getcited.org/pub/102628622

http://www.getcited.org/pub/102628622

http://bsgf.geoscienceworld.org/content/166/6/681.extract



http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0920544601800364




http://books.google.co.in/books?id=Y888AAAAIAAJ&pg=PA80&dq=Cretaceous+planktonic+foraminifera&hl=en&sa=X&ei=n_CJUaf9H4fqrAfIkoDADg&ved=0CC8Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=Cretaceous planktonic foraminifera&f=false



http://books.google.co.in/books/about/Practical_Manual_of_Cretaceous_Planktoni.html?id=nz3QZwEACAAJ&redir_esc=y

http://books.google.co.in/books/about/Practical_Manual_of_Cretaceous_Planktoni.html?id=nz3QZwEACAAJ&redir_esc=y

http://pu.edu.pk/images/journal/geology/currentissue/f_Plank_p61.pdf







http://elpub.wdcb.ru/journals/rjes/doi/2005ES000189.html











http://baztech.icm.edu.pl/baztech/cgi-bin/btgetdoc.cgi?BAT3-0016-0030



http://jfr.geoscienceworld.org/content/36/3/241.short



http://scielo.unam.mx/pdf/rmcg/v23n2/v23n2a2.pdf



http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S019566710300051X



http://www.ville-ge.ch/mhng/paleo/paleo-pdf/27-1/pal-27-1-06.pdf




http://onlinebiblio.lneg.pt/plinkres.asp?Base=LNEGBD&Form=BIBLIO&StartRec=0&RecPag=5&NewSearch=1&SearchTxt=%22TI Association de Belemnitella et de Globotruncanidae dans le Campanien sup%E9rieur des Alpettes%2C Pr%E9alpes externe








of 10


24. Wonders AAH (1992) Cretaceous planktonic foraminiferal biostratigraphy, LEG 122, Exmouth Plateau, Australia. Proceedings of the Ocean Drilling Program, Scientific Results 122: 587-599.

25. Dimitrova E, Valchev B (2007) Attempt for Upper Cretaceous planktic foraminiferal zonation of the Srednogori and Eastern Balkan Zones (Bulgaria). Gelogica Balcanica 36: 1-2, Sofia Iun 55-63.

26. Maurrasse FJ-MR, Lamolda MA, Aguado R, Peryt D, Sen G (2004) Spatial and Temporal variations of the Haitian K/T Boundary record: implications concerning the event or events. Journal of Iberian Geology 31: 113-133.

27. Chungkham P, Jafar SA (1998) Late Cretaceous (Santonian-Maastrichtian) integrated coccolith-globotruncanid biostratigraphy of pelagic limestones from the accretionary prism of Manipur, Northeastern India. Micropaleontology 44: 69-83.

28. Maestas Y, MacLeod KG, Douglas R, Self-Trail J, Ward PD (2003) Late Cretaceous foraminiferal paleoenvironment and paleoceanography of the Rosario Formation, San Antonio del Mar, Baja California, Mexico. Journal of Foraminiferal Research 33: 179-191.

29. Nishi H, Takashima R, Hatsugai T, Saito T, Moriya K, et al. (2003) Planktonic foraminiferal zonation in the Cretaceous Yezo Group, Central Hokkaido, Japan. Journal of Asian Science 21: 536.

30. Petrizzo MR (2003) Late Cretaceous planktonic foraminiferal bioevents in the

Tethys and in the Southern ocean record: an overview. Journal of Foraminiferal Research 23: 330-337.

31. Chacon B, Martin-Chivelet J, Grafe KU (2004) Latest Santonian to latest Maastrichtian planktic foraminifera and biostratigraphy of the hemipelagic successions of the Prebetic Zone (Murcia and Alicante provinces, south-east Spain). Cretaceous Research 25: 585-601.

32. Vaziri Moghaddam H (2002) Biostratigraphic study of the Ilam and Gurpi formations based on planktonic Foraminifera in SE of Shiraz, Iran. Journal of Sciences, Islamic Republic of Iran 4: 339-356.

33. Fazli L, Daneshian J, Khosrow Tehrani K, Baghbani D (2010) Foramini Fera Biostratigraphy of the Gurpi Formation Southeast Jahrum. The 1st International Applied Geological Congress, Department of Geology, Islamic Azad University - Mashad Branch, Iran 943-947.

34. Hadavi F, Senemari S (2010) Calcareous Nannofossils from the Gurpi Formation. (Lower Santonian Maastrichtian), Faulted Zagros Range, Western Shiraz, Iran. Stratigraphy and Geological Correlation 18: 166-178.

35. Ghasemi-Nejad E, Hobbi M, Schiøler, P (2006) Dinoflagellate and foraminiferal biostratigraphy of the Gurpi Formation (upper Santonian-upper Maastrichtian), Zagros Mountains, Iran. Cretaceous Research 27: 828-835.

36. Motiei H (1992) Stratigraphy of Zagros. Geological Survey of Iran publication, Tehran, Iran 536 (In Persian).

Submit your next manuscript and get advantages of OMICS Group submissionsUnique features:

• Userfriendly/feasiblewebsite-translationofyourpaperto50world’sleadinglanguages• AudioVersionofpublishedpaper• Digitalarticlestoshareandexplore

Special features:

• 250OpenAccessJournals• 20,000editorialteam• 21daysrapidreviewprocess• Qualityandquickeditorial,reviewandpublicationprocessing• IndexingatPubMed(partial),Scopus,EBSCO,IndexCopernicusandGoogleScholaretc• SharingOption:SocialNetworkingEnabled• Authors,ReviewersandEditorsrewardedwithonlineScientificCredits• Betterdiscountforyoursubsequentarticles

Submityourmanuscriptat:www.omicsonline.org/submission


http://dx.doi.org/10.4172/2157-7617.1000137

http://www-odp.tamu.edu/publications/122_SR/VOLUME/CHAPTERS/sr122_35.pdf



https://www.geology.bas.bg/geolbal/05_Dimitrova.pdf



http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/1486085?uid=3737496&uid=2&uid=4&sid=21102176817331


















http://journals.ut.ac.ir/page/download-fzQcsa_9hSU.artdl



http://conference.khuisf.ac.ir/DorsaPax/userfiles/file/pazhohesh/zamin mashad/168.pdf







http://dx.doi.org/10.4172/2157-7617.1000137

arth Science limatic hange 9..--.0-3061.1046,6506-0026 · 9..--.0-3061.1046,6506-0026 Research...

Documents

Transcript of arth Science limatic hange 9..--.0-3061.1046,6506-0026 · 9..--.0-3061.1046,6506-0026 Research...