A strontium isotopic, petrographic, and Ostracoda biostratigraphic study of Middle-Late Miocene sequences: implications of record in the Silifke–Erdemli/Mersin, southern Turkey

Original Paper
  • 11 Downloads

Abstract

In this paper, we present new data on Ostracoda micropaleontology, strontium isotopic ages, and petrology of the Miocene sequences in the Silifke–Erdemli area (Mersin/S. Turkey). Ostracods were investigated in the Middle and Late Miocene units, which are composed of clayey limestone and marl levels, reef limestones, and clay. Fifty-six ostracod species were identified, and a total of two initial levels were defined, one beginning in the Langhian stage, and the second at the end of the Serravallian and beginning of the Tortonian stage. The initial level of the Langhian stage is represented by the Carinocythereis, and the end of the Serravallian–beginning of the Tortonian stage is characterized by the initial level of Cyprideis. These levels have also been compared with other regions in the same stratigraphic levels in Turkey (Adana, Antakya, Mut, Denizli, and Antalya regions) and in areas around Turkey (Egypt, Italy, Greece, Croatia, and other Tethys–Paratethys regions). In addition, the levels identified in this study were also correlated to the planktonic foraminiferal zones identified for this region. The ostracod species identified are Carinocythereis at the initial level and subsequently, Cytherella postdenticulata Oertli, Grinioneis haidingeri minor (Ruggieri), Pokornyella deformis minor (Moyes), Carinocythereis antiquata (Baird), and Paracypris polita Sars; also, the other ostracod species are an initial level of Cyprideis followed by Cyprideis seminulum (Reuss), C. torosa (Jones), Cytheridea acuminata acuminata Bosquet, Miocyprideis sarmatica (Zalanyi), Neomonoceratina interiecta Bonaduce, Ruggieri, Russo and Bismuth, Schneidrella dromas (Schneider), and Krithe monosteracensis (Sequenza). Detailed petrographic analyses were carried out on the studied units. This analysis revealed that the reef limestones are composed of sandy intraclast-biomicrites, intra-packed biosparite, intra-packed biomicrite, microintra-packed micrite, and bioclastic-intramicrites; clayey limestones were rare clayey biomicrites and clayey intraclast-biomicrites. The main purpose of the study was to evaluate micropaleontological samples from the Miocene sequence based on ostracods and strontium dating to determine the precise age ranges. The 87Sr/86Sr ratios obtained from three samples of the limestones range between 0.708849 and 0.708902 and between 0.708868 and 0.708902, respectively. The Miocene sequences have been calibrated to range in age from 9.7 to 11.4 Ma via the strontium isotope ratio.

Keywords

South Turkey Ostracod Biostratigraphy Petrography Strontium isotopes Mersin 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank two anonymous reviewers for their comments and enhancing this paper. Thanks go to Dr. Köksal for the strontium isotopic analyses.

References

  1. Akarsu İ (1960) Mut Bölgesinin Jeolojisi. Maden Tetkik Arama Enstitüsü Dergisi 54:36–45 Ankara (in Turkish with English abstract)Google Scholar
  2. Atabey E, Atabey N, Hakyemez A, İslamoğlu Y, Sözeri Ş, Özçelik NN, Saraç G, Ünay E, Babayiğit S (2000) Mut-Karaman arası Miyosen havzasının litostratigrafisi ve sedimantolojisi (Orta Toroslar). Maden Tetkik Arama Enstitüsü Dergisi 122:53–72 Ankara (in Turkish with English abstract)Google Scholar
  3. Bassiouni MA (1979) Brackische und marine Ostrocoden (Cytherideinae Hemicytherinae Trachyleberidinae) aus dem Oligozaen und Neogen der Turkei. Geol Jb Reihe B Heft Hannover 31:1–200Google Scholar
  4. Bassiouni MA and Elewa AMT (2000) Miocene ostracods of the southern Mediterranean: a first record from Wadi Um Ashtan Mersa Matruh Western Desert Egypt. Neu Jb Geol Paläont Mh 449–466Google Scholar
  5. Blumenthal M (1956) Karaman-Konya havzası güneybatısında Toros kenar silsileleri ve şist-radyolarit formasyonu stratigrafi meselesi. Maden Tetkik Arama Enstitüsü Dergisi 48:1–36 AnkaraGoogle Scholar
  6. Broeker WS and Peng TH (1982) Tracers in the Sea Eldigio Pallisades New YorkGoogle Scholar
  7. Burke WH, Denison RE, Hetherington EA, Koepnick RB, Nelson HF, Otto JB (1982) Variation of 87Sr/ 86Sr throughout Phanerozoic time. Geology 10:516–519CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Carbonnel G, Jiricek R (1977) Super-zones et datums â Ostracodes dans le Neogene de la Tethys (bassin du Rhone) et de la Paratethys. Newsl Startigr 6:123–129Google Scholar
  9. Çiçek İ (2001) Mut ve yakın çevresinin jeomorfolojisi Fırat Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi. Cilt: 11;2:1–20 ElazığGoogle Scholar
  10. Dall’Antonia B (2003) Miocene ostracods from the Tremiti Islands and Hyblean Plateau: biostratigraphy and description of new and poorly known species. Geobios 36:27–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Doruk N (1979) Neogene and quaternary Ostracoda of Adana and Antakya Basins (Turkey) Proceedings of the VII International Symposium on Ostracodes Beograd. pp 165–172 (in Turkish with English abstract)Google Scholar
  12. Faranda C, Cipollari P, Cosentino D, Gliozzi E, Pipponzi G (2008) Late Miocene ostracod assemblages from eastern Mediterranean coral reef complexes (central Crete Greece). Rev Micropaleontol 51:287–308CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gedik A, Birgili Ş, Yilmaz H, Yoldaş R (1979) Mut-Ermenek-Silifke Yöresinin Jeolojisi ve Petrol Olanakları Türkiye Jeoloji Kurumu Bülteni. 22:7-26 Ankara (in Turkish with English abstract)Google Scholar
  14. Gökçen N (1979) Denizli-Muğla Çevresi Neojen istifinin stratigrafisi ve paleontolojisi Hacettepe Üniversitesi Doçentlik Tezi 154. (in Turkish with English abstract)Google Scholar
  15. Gökçen N (1982) Denizli-Muğla Çevresi Neojen istifinin ostrakod biyostratigrafisi. Yerbilimleri 9:111–131 (in Turkish with English abstract)Google Scholar
  16. Gökçen N (1984) Neomonoceratina helvetica superzone and Carinocythereis datumplane in Neogene sequences of the Turkey. Newsl Strt 13(2):94–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gökten E (1976) Silifke Yöresinin Temel Kaya Birimleri ve Miyosen Stratigrafisi. Türkiye Jeoloji Kurumu Bülteni Sayı 19(2):117–126 Ankara (in Turkish with English abstract)Google Scholar
  18. Grossi F, Gliozzi E, Cosentino D (2011) Paratethyan ostracod immigrants mark the biostratigraphy of the Messinian Salinity Crisis. Joannea Geologie und Palaeontologie 11:66–68Google Scholar
  19. Gül M, Eren M (2003) The sedimentary characteristics of Dagpazari patch reef (Middle Miocene mut-içel/Turkey). Carbonates Evaporites 18:51 (in Turkish with English abstract)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hartmann G, Puri H (1974) Summary of neontological and paleontological classification of Ostracoda. Mitteilungen aus dem hamburgischen Zoologischen Museum und Institut 70:7–73Google Scholar
  21. Jiricek R (1983) Redefinition of the Oligocene and Neogene ostracod zonation of the Paratethys. Knihovnicka Zemniho plynu a nafyt (Nr4) pp 195;236/6Google Scholar
  22. Koçyiğit A (1976) Karaman-Ermenek (Konya) bölgesinde ofiyolitli melanj ve diğer oluşuklar. Türkiye Jeoloji Kurumu Bülteni Cilt 19:103–116 Ankara (in Turkish with English abstract)Google Scholar
  23. Koçyiğit A (1978) Sarıkaya-Üçbaş (Karaman) yöresinin jeolojisi. TJK Bülteni 21:77–87 (in Turkish with English abstract)Google Scholar
  24. Koepnick RB, Burke WH, Denison RE, Hetherington EA, Nelson HF, Otto JB, Waite LE (1985) Construction of the seawater 87Sr/86Sr curve for the Cenozoic and Cretaceous: supporting data. Chem Geol (Isotope Geosci Section) 58:55–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Köksal S, Göncüoğlu C (2008) Sr and Nd isotopic characteristics of some S- I- and A-type granitoids from Central Anatolia. Turk J Earth Sci 17:111–127Google Scholar
  26. Korkmaz A (2002) Huzurkent (Tarsus) civarı Neojen istifinin mikropaleontolojik incelenmesi ve ortamsal yorumu. ÇÜ Fen Bilimleri Ens Yüksek Lisans Tezi 146. (in Turkish with English abstract)Google Scholar
  27. Led İM, İsmail AS (2016) Middle Miocene ostracods from Wadi Sudr westcentral Sinai Egypt: systematic biostratigraphy and palaeobiogeographic affinity with the Mediterranean realm. Arab J Geosci 9:406CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Mcarthur JM (1994) Recent trends in strontium isotope stratigraphy. Terra Nova 6:331–358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. McArthur JM, Howarth RJ, Bailey TR (2001) Strontium isotope stratigraphy: LOWESS version 3: best fit to the marine Sr-isotope curve for 0–509 Ma and accompanying look-up table for deriving numerical age. J Geol 109:155–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Morkhoven FPCMVan (1962) Post-Paleozoic Ostracoda their morphology taxonomy and economic use part 1. Elsevieer Published Company, pp 124Google Scholar
  31. Morkhoven FPCMVan (1963) Post-Paleozoic Ostracoda their morphology taxonomy and economic use, vol II. Elsevieer Published Company, 478 ppGoogle Scholar
  32. Nazik A (1993) Gözne (Mersin) yöresi kırıntılı istifinin ostrakod biyostratigrafisi ve ortamsal yorumu. Doğa-Türk Yerbilimleri Dergisi 2:167–173 Ankara (in Turkish with English abstract)Google Scholar
  33. Niehoff W (1960) Mut 126/1 numaralı harita paftasının revizyon neticeleri hakkında rapor. MTA Derleme rapor no: 339Google Scholar
  34. Özdoğan M (2004) Cevrimsel dizilime bir örnek: Mut havzasının Miyosen stratigrafisi Adana havzası ile ilişkisi ve paleocoğrafik gelişimi. Yerbilimleri 29:77–95 (in Turkish with English abstract)Google Scholar
  35. Özer B, Biju-Duval B, Courrier P, and Letouzey J (1974) Antalya-Mut-Adana Neojen Havzaları Jeolojisi. Türkiye ikinci Petrol Kongresi Tebliğleri 57-84 (in Turkish with English abstract)Google Scholar
  36. Özkale O, Yetiş C, İbilioğlu D (2007) Kozlar (Mut-Mersin) dolayının stratigrafisi. ÇÜMühMimFakDergisi Cilt 22 Sayı 2:261–273 Adana (in Turkish with English abstract)Google Scholar
  37. Özkan T (1999) Mut HavzasI (Mersin) Neojen istifinin planktik foraminifer biyostratigrafisi. Doktora Tezi İstanbul Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü 212 s (in Turkish with English abstract)Google Scholar
  38. Özkan T (2000) Mut havzas Miyosen istifinin planktik foraminifer zonları. İstanbul Üniversitesi Yer Bilimleri Dergisi 13:49–61 (in Turkish with English abstract)Google Scholar
  39. Özkan- Köksoy T (2004) Catapsydrax Globorotalia Globigerinoita’nın (planktik foraminifer) Mut havzası denizel Miyosen istifindeki biyostratigrafisi ve sistematik paleontolojisi. Yerbilimleri 29:11–27Google Scholar
  40. Şafak Ü (1993a) Antakya Havzası ostrakod biyostratigrafisi. Türkiye Jeoloji Bülteni 36:115–137 Ankara (in Turkish with English abstract)Google Scholar
  41. Şafak Ü (1993b) Işıktepe-Dalakdere (KB Mersin) civarının Miyosen biyostratigrafisi. ÇÜ Geosound Dergisi sayı 30:255 (in Turkish with English abstract)Google Scholar
  42. Şafak Ü (1993c) Karsantı yöresinde (K/KD Adana) yüzeyleyen Tersiyer istifinin ostrakod dağılımı ve ortamsal özellikleri. T J K Bülteni Cilt 36:95–113 (in Turkish with English abstract)Google Scholar
  43. Şafak Ü (1997) Karaman yöresi Üst Miyosen-Pliyosen istifinin ostrakod faunası ve ortamsal yorumu. M T A Dergisi No 119:89–102 Ankara (in Turkish with English abstract)Google Scholar
  44. Şafak Ü (1999) Damlama Dolayı (Tarsus-Mersin) Alt-Orta Miyosen İstifinin Mikropaleontolojik (Planktik Foraminifer ve Ostrakod) İncelemesi. Süleyman Demirel Üniv Müh Mim Fak 11 Müh Haftası Yerbilimleri Sempozyumu Bildirileri 1:101–112 Isparta (in Turkish with English abstract)Google Scholar
  45. Şafak Ü, Gökçen N (1991) Planktik Foraminifer Zonlamasına Doğu Akdeniz Provensinden Bir Örnek: Mut Havzası Tersiyer İstifi. T J K Bülteni 34:27–35 (in Turkish with English abstract)Google Scholar
  46. Şafak Ü, Heybeli D (2008) Huzurkent (Tarsus) Civarındaki Kuzgun Formasyonu’nun Ostrakod Toplulukları ve Ortamsal Özellikleri. Yerbilimleri (Geosound) Prof Dr Servet Yaman Özel Sayısı 52:225–247 Adana (in Turkish with English abstract)Google Scholar
  47. Şafak Ü and Nazik A (1994) Eshab-I Kehf (Tarsus-Mersin) dolayı Neojen istifinin ortamsal yorumu. Ç Ü Müh Mim Fak 15 Yıl Sempozyumu Bildirileri Special Issue pp 291–301 (in Turkish with English abstract)Google Scholar
  48. Şafak Ü, Ünlügenç UC (1992) Kozoluk Solaklı ve Kevizli (Adana K’I) civarında yüzeyleyen Oligosen-Orta Miyosen yaşlı istiflerin ostrakod faunası ve biyostratigrafisi. Yerbilimleri (Geosound) Sayı 21:117–139 (in Turkish with English abstract)Google Scholar
  49. Şafak Ü, Kelling G, Gökçen N, Gürbüz K (2005) The mid-Cenozoic succession and evolution of the Mut basin southern Turkey and its regional significance. Sediment Geol 173(1):121–150Google Scholar
  50. Sezer S (1970) The Miocene stratigraphy of Mut region southern Turkey. PhD thesis Birkbeck College London UniversityGoogle Scholar
  51. Sissingh W (1972) Late Cenozoic Ostracoda of the South Aegean Island. Arc Bull Utrecht Micropaleont 6:1–187Google Scholar
  52. Tadesse VH, Prtoljan B (2011) Badenian Ostracoda from the Pokupsko area (Banovina, Croatia). Geologıca Carpathıca 62:447–461Google Scholar
  53. Tanar Ü (1989) Mut Havzası Tersiyer istifinin stratigrafik ve mikropaleontolojik (ostrakod ve foraminifer) incelemesi. Doktora Tezi Çukurova Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü 199s Adana (in Turkish with English abstract)Google Scholar
  54. Tanar Ü, Gökçen N (1990) Mut-Ermenek Tersiyer istifinin stratigrafisi ve mikropaleontolojisi. M T A Dergisi 110:175–180 (in Turkish with English abstract)Google Scholar
  55. Trenkwalder S, Violanti D, d’Atri A, Lozar F, Dela Pierre F, Irace A (2008) The Miocene/Pliocene boundary and the Early Pliocene micropaleontological record: new data from the Tertiary Piedmont Basin (Moncucco quarry, Turin Hill, Northwestern Italy). Boll Soc Paleontol Ital 47(2):87–103Google Scholar
  56. Tunoğlu C, Bilen C (2001) Burdigalian-Langhian (Miocene) ostracod biostratigraphy and chronostratigraphy of the Kasaba Basin (Kas/Antalya) SW Turkey. Geol Carpathica 52:247–258Google Scholar
  57. Veizer J, Compston W (1974) S7Sr/86Sr composition of seawater during the Phanerozoic. Geochim Cosmochim Acta 38:1461–1484CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Wickman FE (1948) Isotope ratios: a clue to the age of certain marine sediments. J Geol 56:61–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Yıldız A, Toker V, Demircan H, Sevim S (2003) Mut Havzası Pliyosen-Pleyistosen nannoplankton planktik foraminifera iz fosil bulguları ve paleoortam yorumu. Yerbilimleri 28:123–144 (in Turkish with English abstract)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Saudi Society for Geosciences 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Mühendislik-Mimarlık Fakültesi, Jeoloji Mühendisliği BölümüÇukurova ÜniversitesiAdanaTurkey

Personalised recommendations