UPPER CRETACEOUS PLANKTONIC FORAMINIFERAL BIOSTRATIGRAPHY OF THEBEY DAGLARI AUTOCHTHON IN THE KORKUTELI AREA, WESTERN

TAURIDES, TURKEY

BILAL SARI*

Dokuz Eylul Universitesi, Muhendislik Fakultesi, Jeoloji Muhendisligi Bolumu, 35100 Bornova-Izmir, TURKEY

ABSTRACT

The Upper Cretaceous sequence of the Korkuteli area(Western Taurides) comprises two formations. The BeyDagları Formation lies at the base and can be divided intotwo parts. A 600-m-thick neritic lower part is capped withthin, massive, hemipelagic limestones. The Akdag Formationdisconformably overlies different stratigraphic levels of theBey Dagları Formation along a prominent erosional surfaceand consists of thin-bedded, cherty, pelagic, clayey lime-stones. Paleogene marls form the base of the Tertiarysequence and disconformably overlie different stratigraphiclevels of the Upper Cretaceous succession. This studyidentifies from thin sections and analyzes the Late Cretaceousplanktonic foraminifera.

Identification of forty-five species belonging to the generaContusotruncana, Dicarinella, Gansserina, Globotruncana,Globotruncanella, Globotruncanita, Marginotruncana andRadotruncana has led to the recognition of five biostrati-graphic zones, in ascending order: Dicarinella concavataInterval Zone (IZ), Dicarinella asymetrica Total Range Zone(TRZ), Radotruncana calcarata TRZ, Globotruncana falso-stuarti Partial Range Zone (PRZ) and Gansserina gansseriIZ, from the Senonian succession of the Bey Daglarıautochthon. The Dicarinella concavata IZ and Dicarinellaasymetrica TRZ have been identified from the massivehemipelagic limestones of the Bey Dagları Formation andindicate a Coniacian-Santonian age. The Radotruncanacalcarata TRZ, Globotruncana falsostuarti PRZ and Gans-serina gansseri IZ have been recognized from the pelagiclimestones of the Akdag Formation and suggest a lateCampanian-early Maastrichtian age.

The identified planktonic foraminiferal biozones indicatethat the Bey Dagları carbonate platform drowned after thelate Turonian; the Upper Cretaceous (Coniacian-earlyMaastrichtian) pelagic succession includes two stratigraphicgaps in the Korkuteli area corresponding to lower-middleCampanian and upper Maastrichtian. Slight drowning of theplatform after the late Turonian may have been related to theregional extension which affected peri-Mediterranean alpinebelts. The regional hiatuses in the pelagic succession are alsoascribed to the tectonic events, as the Late Cretaceous isa time of great tectonic activity in this critical area of Tethys.Eustatic sea-level changes may have had a secondary effecton the Upper Cretaceous carbonate succession of the BeyDagları autochthon.

INTRODUCTION

The great abundance and wide distribution of planktonicforaminifera in marine sediments and their rapid evolutionduring Mesozoic time make them a powerful biostrati-graphic tool for global biostratigraphy and precise regionaland interregional correlation. They are especially usefulwhen intercalibrated with other important groups likenannoplankton and ammonites.

The biostratigraphic importance of Cretaceous plank-tonic foraminifera became more widely realized after thepapers of Viennot (1930) and Thalmann (1934; Caron,1985), and there was an enormous increase in therecognition of their importance during the 1940’s and1950’s (Pessagno, 1962). Middle and Late Cretaceousbiostratigraphic zonations were revised and reconciled bythe European Working Group on Cretaceous PlanktonicForaminifera (Robaszynski & Caron, coordinators, 1979;Robaszynski and others, 1984) and by Caron (1985) toreduce the complexity caused by the multitude of previouslyestablished taxa. Robaszynski & Caron (1995) and Robas-zynski (coordinator, 1998) calibrated the planktonic fora-miniferal biozones with the time scale of Gradstein andothers (1994).

The study of planktonic foraminifera from thin sectionsof indurated carbonate rocks has had a rich history (e.g., deLapparent, 1918; Renz, 1936; Vogler, 1941; Bolli, 1945;Postuma, 1971). More recent papers containing illustrationsof planktonic foraminifera in thin section are by Wonders(1979), Fleury (1980), Weidich (1987), Sliter (1989), Sliterand Leckie (1993), Premoli Silva and Sliter (1994),Simmons and others (1996), Sliter (1999), Robaszynskiand others (2000) and Premoli Silva and Verga (2004).Ozkan (1985), Farinacci and Yeniay (1986), Ozkan andKoyluoglu (1988), Ozkan-Altıner and Ozcan (1999), Yakar(1993), Sarı (1999) and Sarı and Ozer (2002) are studies ofspecimens from Turkey, containing illustrations of thinsections of planktonic foraminifera.

Many studies over nearly four decades have been carriedout on the Bey Dagları autochthon. Although pelagiclimestones have a wide geographic distribution throughoutthe Bey Dagları autochthon, the planktonic foraminiferalbiostratigraphy of the Upper Cretaceous pelagic limestoneshas been the subject of only a few detailed studies, includingFarinacci and Yeniay (1986), Ozkan and Koyluoglu (1988),Sarı (1999) and Sarı and Ozer (2002). These studies haveshown that the Upper Cretaceous pelagic sequence ischaracterized by important sedimentary gaps.

The lithostratigraphic and microfacies characteristics ofthe neritic and pelagic limestones of the Bey Dagları andAkdag formations were documented in detail elsewhere(Sarı, 1999; Sarı and Ozer, 2001; Sarı and Ozer, 2002; Sarı* Email: bilal.sari@deu.edu.tr

Journal of Foraminiferal Research, v. 36, no. 3, p. 241–261, July 2006

241

and others, 2004). The purpose of this paper is to presentthe biostratigraphic zonation of the planktonic foraminiferaexamined in thin section from the Late Cretaceous(Coniacian-early Maastrichtian) of the Bey Dagları autoch-thonous unit.

Documentation of the planktonic foraminiferal biozona-tion is important because the history of pelagic sedimen-tation in the Late Cretaceous provides a critical record ofplatform drowning, tectonic events, fluctuations in sea leveland erosional events. Four stratigraphic sections werestudied after detailed geological mapping to establish theplanktonic foraminiferal biostratigraphy of the Korkuteliarea, which corresponds to the middle part of the BeyDagları autochthon (Figs. 1, 2).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

One hundred sixty-eight closely spaced samples werecollected from four stratigraphic sections, which weremeasured from southwest of Korkuteli (Fig. 2). Thesamples were taken from the massive hemipelagic lime-

stones of the Bey Dagları Formation and thin- to medium-bedded, clayey, pelagic limestones of the Akdag Formation.Because it was very difficult to disaggregate the limestonesand process them with normal washing, thin sections wereprepared to analyze the planktonic foraminifera.

The position of apertures and the presence of supple-mentary and accessory structures that are used to distin-guish genera are not identifiable in thin section (Caron,1985). However, most of the diagnostic criteria, includingthe size and shape of the test; thickness of the wall; size,shape, number and arrangement of chambers; form andposition of the aperture; and ornamentation such as ridges,spines, and position and number of peripheral thickeningsor keels, can be recognized in axial and subaxial sections(passing through or parallel to the axis of coiling; Sliter,1989; Fig. 3).

A large number of specimens was encountered in the thinsections, but most of them were of no use for identificationbecause of partial or oblique cuts through the tests. Hence,axially oriented forms were picked to identify most taxawith a high degree of confidence. The atlases of theEuropean Working Group on Cretaceous PlanktonicForaminifera by Robaszynski and Caron (coordinators,1979) and Robaszynski and others (1984), and the studiesof Caron (1985) and Premoli Silva and Sliter (1994) arethe bases of the identifications in this study. In addition,Postuma (1971), Wonders (1979), Fleury (1980), Ozkan andKoyluoglu (1988), Sliter (1989), Robaszynski and others(2000) and Premoli Silva and Verga (2004) are usefulreferences as they include illustrations of thin sections ofplanktonic foraminifera.

REGIONAL GEOLOGICAL SETTING

The Bey Dagları autochthon, which is approximately150 km long, is oriented NE-SW and extends from Kas toIsparta (Fig. 1). The autochthon represents a segment ofa Mesozoic Tethyan platform on which carbonate accu-mulation persisted from the Triassic to the early Miocene.This segment was overthrust by the Antalya nappes in theeast and by the Lycian nappes in the northwest, and ispartially exposed in the Gocek window (Ozgul, 1976;Poisson, 1977; Farinacci and Koyluoglu, 1982; Naz andothers, 1992; Robertson, 1993; Fig. 1). During the Meso-zoic, the autochthonous unit was part of a larger crustalfragment of the African paleomargin which can be traced inthe Taurides and Zagrides to the east, and the Hellenides,Dinarides and Apennines to the west (Sengor and Yılmaz,1981; Farinacci and Koyluoglu, 1982; Poisson and others,1983; Ozgul, 1984; Robertson and Dixon, 1984; Robertsonand Woodcock, 1984; Farinacci and Yeniay, 1986; Robert-son, 1993, 1998; Robertson and others, 2003).

The Bey Dagları autochthon was affected by differenttectonic regimes during the Late Cretaceous, a time ofintense tectonic movements in this critical area of theeastern Mediterranean. Late Cretaceous tectonic activitiesare thought to be responsible for the drowning of carbonateplatforms, opening of small oceanic basins and collision ofdifferent tectonic units. Many studies have shown that theUpper Cretaceous sequences are characterized by breaks indeposition and important facies variations in both neritic

FIGURE 1. Simplified geological map showing the main tectonicbelts of the western Taurides (after Poisson and others, 1983).a) Tertiary-Quaternary formations, b) Bey Dagları autochthon,c) Antalya nappes, d) Lycian nappes, e) Section locations of previousresearchers. Also shown are the locations of the study area and 32stratigraphic sections, which were sampled for previous studies:1. Demre Cayı, 2. Salır, 3. Gokcebelen, 4. Kofu Tepe, 5. Gedikbası,6. Cehennem Tepe, 7. Zumrutova, 8. Tekkekoy, 9. Kocapınar,10. Buyuksoyle, 11. Gilevgi, 12. Imeciksusuz, 13. Taraklı Tepe,14. Mullakdere, 15. Kucuk Tepe, 16. Bozcalar, 17. Kargalıkoy,18. Koca Kopru, 19. Katran Dag, 20. Kızıloru, 21. Yalım Tepe,22. Bademagacı, 23. Demirci Dere, 24. Kızılagac, 25. Koparan Tepe,26. Demirli, 27. Kapu Bogazı, 28. Ergenliburun, 29. Susuzkoy,30. Aladag, 31. Kuzkoy, 32. Eren Dagı. See Figure 8 for correlationof the sections.

242 SARI

FIGURE 2. Geological map of the Korkuteli area.

FIGURE 3. Principal sections through a planktonic foraminiferal test. a) Axial section: section passing through the axis of coiling. b) Subaxialsection: section passing parallel to the axis of coiling but not passing through the proloculus. c) Transverse section: section passing perpendicular tothe axis of coiling. d) Oblique section: section passing neither parallel nor perpendicular to the axis of coiling.

PLANKTONIC FORAMINIFERA OF TURKEY 243

and pelagic carbonates (Poisson, 1977; Gutnic and others,1979; Farinacci and Koyluoglu, 1982; Farinacci andYeniay, 1986; Ozkan and Koyluoglu, 1988; Naz and others,1992; Sarı and Ozer, 2001, 2002; Sarı and others, 2004).

LITHOSTRATIGRAPHY

The Upper Cretaceous sequence of the Bey Daglarıautochthon comprises two formations in the Korkuteliarea. The Cenomanian-Santonian Bey Dagları Formationlies at the base and is disconformably overlain along anerosional surface by the upper Campanian-lower Maas-trichtian Akdag Formation. Paleogene pelagic marls formthe base of the Tertiary sequence and disconformablyoverlie different stratigraphic levels of the two UpperCretaceous formations.

Bey Dagları Formation can be divided into two parts, asfollows. Neritic limestones of Cenomanian-late Turonianage are approximately 600 m thick and constitute most ofthe sequence. The uppermost part of the neritic limestonesis characterized by a 20-m-thick rudistid level, which isdominated by the rudist bivalve Vaccinites praegiganteus(Toucas, 1904). A late Turonian age (mean age: 89.11–90.10) was indicated by 87Sr/86Sr values of well-preserved,low-Mg calcite from the shells of V. praegiganteus (Sarı andothers, 2004). The neritic limestones are capped withmassive hemipelagic limestones, which form the upper partof the formation. The hemipelagic limestones are massive,cream-colored and fractured, and contain sparse planktonicforaminifera and abundant spheroidals. The neritic andhemipelagic limestones are similar in appearance andcannot be differentiated from each other in the field. Themaximum thickness of the hemipelagic level was mea-sured from the northwest of Kargalıkoy as about 14 m(Fig. 4).

The limestones, in which the planktonic foraminifera firstappear, are arguably considered the transitional zonebetween the neritic and hemipelagic facies. Rudist frag-ments, echinoids, bryozoans, rare bivalves and abundantspheroidals accompany the foraminiferal assemblage,which indicates a late Turonian-Santonian age accordingto the zonal scheme of Robaszynski and Caron (1995). Asthe hemipelagic limestones overlie the late Turonianrudistid neritic limestones, the oldest age assignable to thehemipelagic limestones is Coniacian. Two planktonicforaminiferal biozones have been established for thehemipelagic limestones: the Dicarinella concavata IntervalZone and Dicarinella asymetrica Total Range Zone (Fig. 4).

The upper Campanian-lower Maastrichtian Akdag For-mation disconformably overlies different stratigraphiclevels of the Bey Dagları Formation along a prominentsurface (? hardground). The surface is characterized by ironoxidation, silicification and bioturbation, indicative ofa later period of low rates of sedimentation due to relativestarvation (Rosales and others, 1994). The Akdag Forma-tion is composed of thin- to medium-bedded (8–10 cm),planktonic foraminifera-bearing, cream-colored, cherty-clayey limestones (‘scaglia’ of Italian authors). Theformation has a 75-m maximum thickness that varieslaterally. These limestones are distinctly bedded, particu-larly at the base of the formation. They include brown iron

oxide spots that gradually disappear upward. The middleand upper parts of the formation lack this strong beddingbecause of the fractured nature of the limestones, especiallyat the Cakmak Kertigi locality. Brown and gray chertnodules, sometimes coated with white chalk, are abundantin these levels. These nodules are irregular in shape, andtheir diameters range from 3–20 cm up to 120 cm near theSavran Ekinligi locality (Fig. 5). The limestones of theAkdag Formation are a planktonic foraminifera-bearingbiomicrite texture. Examination of the planktonic forami-niferal fauna of the pelagic limestones of the AkdagFormation has yielded three biozones, in ascending order,Radotruncana calcarata Total Range Zone, Globotruncanafalsostuarti Partial Range Zone and Gansserina gansseriInterval Zone (Fig. 5).

The presence of two erosional surfaces in the UpperCretaceous pelagic sequence of the Bey Dagları autochthonis obvious. During post-Santonian regression, hemipelagiclimestones of the Bey Dagları Formation were partially ortotally eroded and a prominent erosional surface wasformed. Latest Campanian pelagic limestones disconform-ably overlie the pre-upper Turonian and uppermostTuronian-lowermost Coniacian neritic limestones of theBey Dagları Formation in sections 3 and 4 (Figs. 6–7,respectively). A second erosional phase occurred after theearly Maastrichtian. Blocks and large pebbles of the AkdagFormation are observed at the base of the Paleogene at theBozcalar dere locality (Fig. 6, section 3). At the MeydanduzTepe locality, the Paleogene disconformably overlies thehemipelagic limestones (Fig. 2). A rather extreme case isencountered at the Savran Ekinligi locality, where thePaleogene lies directly on the neritic limestones of the BeyDagları Formation (Fig. 2).

PLANKTONIC FORAMINIFERAL BIOZONES

Examination of forty-five species belonging to eightgenera has resulted in the recognition of five planktonicforaminiferal biozones in the Upper Cretaceous (Conia-cian-lower Maastrichtian) sequence of the Bey Daglarıautochthon. Two of the zones are interval zones (IZ), theDicarinella concavata IZ and Gansserina gansseri IZ,between a first appearance datum (FAD) and a lastappearance datum (LAD). Two zones are total range zones(TRZ), the Dicarinella asymetrica TRZ and Radotruncanacalcarata TRZ, defined by the first and last appearance(total range) of the nominate taxon. One is a partial rangezone (PRZ), the Globotruncana falsostuarti PRZ, betweenthe LAD of Radotruncana calcarata (Cushman) and FADof Gansserina gansseri (Bolli). The range of the nominatetaxon (G. falsostuarti) exceeds the lower and upper limits ofthe zone. The biozones identified in this study are brieflydescribed below in ascending order:

Dicarinella concavata Interval Zone (pro-parte)

The Dicarinella concavata IZ, of Coniacian-early Santo-nian age, has been described by many authors, includingRobaszynski and others (1984), Caron (1985), Sliter (1989),Robaszynski and Caron (1995), Robaszynski (coordinator,1998), Premoli Silva and Sliter (1994), Robaszynski andothers (2000) and Premoli Silva and Verga (2004). The zone

244 SARI

is defined as the interval from the first appearance datum(FAD) of Dicarinella concavata (Sigal) to the FAD of D.asymetrica (Brotzen).

In this study, the appearance of the globotruncanids,together with Dicarinella concavata in the transition zonebetween the neritic and hemipelagic limestones, areaccepted as the beginning of the zone in a local sense.The lower limit of this zone corresponds to the Turonian-Coniacian boundary, because these hemipelagic limestonesgrade into the upper Turonian rudistid neritic limestonestowards the base (Fig. 4).

The planktonic foraminiferal assemblage accompanyingDicarinella concavata is rather poor in diversity. It containsMarginotruncana coronata (Bolli), M. pseudolinneiana

Pessagno – Globotruncana linneiana (d’Orbigny) group,and Hedbergella sp. Besides abundant spheroidals, a fewbenthonic foraminifera (Rotalina sp. and Goupillaudina sp.),bryozoans, bivalves and rudist fragments are also encoun-tered (Fig. 4).

The Dicarinella concavata IZ is the oldest zone identifiedin the present study and corresponds to the lower part ofthe hemipelagic limestones of the Bey Dagları Formation. Itranges from sample 31 to sample 27 and represent a 5-m-thick interval (Fig. 4).

Dicarinella asymetrica Total Range Zone

This zone (Fig. 4) is characterized by the FAD and LADof the nominate taxon, and corresponds to the middle-late

FIGURE 4. Vertical distribution of planktonic foraminiferal species at section 1 in the northeastern part of the study area. See Figure 2 for locationof the section.

PLANKTONIC FORAMINIFERA OF TURKEY 245

FIGURE 5. Vertical distribution of planktonic foraminiferal species at section 2 in the northeastern part of the study area. See Figure 2 for locationof the section and Figure 4 for explanation.

246 SARI

Santonian (Robaszynski and others, 1984; Caron, 1985;Sliter, 1989; Robaszynski and Caron, 1995; Robaszynski,coordinator, 1998; Premoli Silva and Sliter, 1994; Robas-zynski and others, 2000; Premoli Silva and Verga, 2004).

The foraminiferal assemblage consists of Archaeoglobi-gerina blowi Pessagno, A. cretacea (d’Orbigny), Contuso-truncana fornicata (Plummer), Dicarinella asymetrica, D.canaliculata (Reuss), D. concavata, Marginotruncana cor-onata, M. marginata (Reuss) - Globotruncana bulloidesVogler group, M. pseudolinneiana – G. linneiana group, M.schneegansi (Sigal), M. sigali (Reichel), M. sinuosaPorthault, M. undulata (Lehmann), Rugoglobigerina rugosa(Plummer), Whiteinella baltica Douglas and Rankin andHedbergella sp. Abundant spheroidals, rare bivalves, rarebenthonic foraminifera (Rotalina sp., Goupillaudina sp,

miliolids) and rudist fragments also occur. Contusotruncanafornicata makes its first appearance in this zone. Dicarinellaasymetrica, D. concavata and many Coniacian-Santonianplanktonic foraminifera became extinct by the end of thiszone (Figs. 4–7).

Dicarinella asymetrica TRZ is the last zone of thehemipelagic limestones of the Bey Dagları Formation. Itranges from sample 27 to sample 17 and forms theuppermost 9 m of the massive limestones (Fig. 4).

Radotruncana calcarata Total Range Zone

The Radotruncana calcarata TRZ (Fig. 5) is defined asthe interval from the FAD to the LAD of the nominatetaxon, and corresponds to the early late Campanian(Robaszynski, coordinator, 1998; Premoli Silva and Sliter,

FIGURE 6. Vertical distribution of planktonic foraminiferal species at section 3 in the southwestern part of the study area. See Figure 2 forlocation of the section and Figure 4 for explanation.

PLANKTONIC FORAMINIFERA OF TURKEY 247

1994; Robaszynski and others, 2000; Premoli Silva andVerga, 2004).

In the Korkuteli sequence, the beginning of theCampanian is marked by a distinct faunal turnover of theplanktonic foraminifera. Many Coniacian-Santonian spe-cies became extinct at the boundary, and many new single-and double-keeled species appeared by the beginning of theCampanian. However, some species such as Contusotrun-cana fornicata cross the Santonian-Campanian boundary.The predominant species of the zone are Archaeoglobigerinablowi, A. cretacea, C. fornicata, C. patelliformis (Gandolfi),Globotruncana arca (Cushman), G. arca-orientalis, G.bulloides, G. falsostuarti, G. (?) insignis Gandolfi, G.linneiana, G. mariei Banner and Blow, G. orientalis ElNaggar, G. rosetta (Carsey), G. pseudoconica Solakius, G.ventricosa White, Globotruncanita conica (White) - G.atlantica (Caron) group, G. elevata (Brotzen), G. stuarti-

formis (Dalbiez), Radotruncana calcarata and R. subspinosa(Pessagno) – R. calcarata group. All of the taxa in theassemblage, with the exception of C. fornicata, make theirfirst appearance in this zone.

The extinction of Radotruncana calcarata had long beenused to draw the Campanian-Maastrichtian boundary(Robaszynski and others, 1984; Caron, 1985; Almogi-Labinand others, 1986; Sliter, 1989). However, Robaszynski andCaron (1995) noted that an accurate calibration had notbeen published. They also stated that R. calcaratadisappeared before the base of the Nostoceras (Nostoceras)hyatti Zone (ammonite zone dating of uppermost Campa-nian), so the R. calcarata zone might be a little older. Asnoted by Premoli Silva and Sliter (1994), the Campanian-Maastrichtian boundary was equated to the chron 32N/chron 31R boundary and shifted to 71.3 Ma by Lommerz-heim and Hambach (1992) and Gradstein and others

FIGURE 7. Vertical distribution of planktonic foraminiferal species at section 4 in the southwestern part of the study area. See Figure 2 forlocation of the section and Figure 4 for explanation.

248 SARI

(1994). That means the Radotruncana calcarata TRZ doesnot correspond to the uppermost part of the Campanian;moreover, the Globotruncanella havanensis and Globotrun-cana aegyptiaca Zones, and even the lower part of theGansserina gansseri Zone, are all late Campanian in age aswell. This placement was accepted by subsequent bio-stratigraphic studies (Robaszynski and others, 2000; Pre-moli Silva and Verga, 2004).

This is the first zone of the Campanian in the study areawhere the lower and middle Campanian were not depositedor eroded. The Globotruncanita elevata IZ and Globotrun-cana ventricosa IZ are absent in all measured stratigraphicsections. The Radotruncana calcarata TRZ corresponds tothe base of the Akdag Formation. It ranges from sample 109to sample 143, and represents a 42-m-thick interval (Fig. 5).

Globotruncana falsostuarti Partial Range Zone

The Globotruncana falsostuarti PRZ represents thestratigraphic interval that includes G. falsostuarti betweenthe LAD of Radotruncana calcarata and FAD of Gansser-ina gansseri, and corresponds to the middle late Campanian(Robaszynski, coordinator, 1998). Robaszynski and others(1984 and 2000) used this zone, whereas Caron (1985),Sliter (1989), Robaszynski and Caron (1995), Robaszynski(coordinator, 1998), Premoli Silva and Sliter (1994) andPremoli Silva and Verga (2004) used the Globotruncanellahavanensis and Globotruncana aegyptiaca zones. Because ofthe rather sporadic occurences of Globotruncanella hava-nensis (Voorwijk) and Globotruncana aegyptiaca Nakkady,the G. falsostuarti PRZ is used in this study.

Gansserina wiedenmayeri (Gandolfi), Globotruncana ae-gyptiaca, G. dupeublei Caron and others, G. esnehensisNakkady, G. falsostuarti, Globotruncanita pettersi (Gan-dolfi) and G. stuarti (de Lapparent) make their firstappearance in this zone. Other characteristic taxa includeContusotruncana fornicata, G. arca, G. bulloides, G. (?)insignis, G. linneiana, G. mariei, G. orientalis, G. pseudoco-nica, G. rosetta, G. ventricosa, Globotruncanita conica - G.atlantica group, G. stuartiformis and Radotruncana sub-

spinosa – R. calcarata group. Globotruncana falsostuartisporadically occurs in the limestones of the AkdagFormation.

This zone corresponds to the middle parts of the AkdagFormation. It ranges from sample 144 to sample 52, andrepresents a 25-m-thick interval (Fig. 5).

Gansserina gansseri Interval Zone (pro-parte)

The Gansserina gansseri IZ has been defined by manyauthors (Robaszynski and others, 1984; Caron, 1985; Sliter,1989; Robaszynski and Caron, 1995; Robaszynski co-ordinator, 1998; Premoli Silva and Sliter, 1994; Robas-zynski and others, 2000; Premoli Silva and Verga, 2004) asan interval between the FAD of the nominate species andthe FAD of Abathomphalus mayaroensis (Bolli). In thisstudy, the upper limit of the zone is characterized by thedisappearance of the nominate species together with allUpper Cretaceous planktonic foraminifera near the end ofthe early Maastrichtian.

The Gansserina gansseri IZ is only partly represented dueto the truncation of the Upper Cretaceous pelagiccarbonates. The upper part of the G. gansseri IZ andAbathomphalus mayaroensis TRZ (upper Maastrichtian) areabsent in all measured stratigraphic sections in theKorkuteli area.

The predominant planktonic foraminifera are Archae-oglobigerina blowi, A. cretacea, Contusotruncana fornicata,C. patelliformis, C. plicata (White), Gansserina wieden-mayeri, Globotruncana aegyptiaca, G. arca, G. bulloides, G.dupeublei, G. esnehensis, G. falsostuarti, G. (?) insignis, G.linneiana, G. mariei, G. orientalis, G. pseudoconica, G.rosetta, G. ventricosa, Globotruncanita pettersi, G. stuarti, G.stuartiformis, Radotruncana subspinosa – R. calcarata groupand Rugoglobigerina rugosa. In addition, C. contusa (Cush-man), C. plummerae (Gandolfi), C. walfischensis (Todd), G.gansseri, Globotruncanella havanensis, G. angulata (Tilev),G. conica - G. atlantica group and Gublerina sp. first occurin this zone. The presence of C. fornicata, G. arca, G.bulloides, G. linneiana, G. mariei, G. orientalis, G. ventricosa

FIGURE 8. Upper Cretaceous stratigraphic gaps from the previous works carried out in the Bey Dagları autochthon and correlation of these gapsto the present study. (See Fig. 1 for the locations of the sections).

PLANKTONIC FORAMINIFERA OF TURKEY 249

and R. subspinosa – R. calcarata group in the G. gansseri IZindicates that the upper part of the G. gansseri IZ is absentin all measured stratigraphic sections. Thus, the youngestLate Cretaceous limestones cannot be younger than theearly Maastrichtian. This is the youngest zone andcorresponds to the early Maastrichtian in the studiedinterval. It ranges from sample 223 to sample 243, andforms a 13.5-m-thick interval (Fig. 7).

TAXONOMIC REMARKS

Planktonic foraminifera observed in the hemipelagiclimestones of the Bey Dagları Formation (Dicarinellaconcavata IZ and D. asymetrica TRZ) are generally scarceand have low diversity. By contrast, the planktonicforaminiferal assemblages from the Akdag Formation(Radotruncana calcarata TRZ, Globotruncana falsostuartiPRZ and Gansserina gansseri IZ) are diverse. The specimensare large, thick-walled and complex morphotypes (K-selection) which dominate in open oceans, mainly duringthe onset of high stands of sea level (Robaszynski andCaron, 1995).

Forty-five planktonic foraminiferal species belonging toeight genera have been identified from the Upper Creta-ceous (Coniacian-early Maastrichtian) sequence of the BeyDagları autochthonous unit. Two dimensional, axial viewsof some species have similar features and cannot beseparated from each other in thin section. These specieshave been grouped together into the four groups: theGlobotruncanita conica-G. atlantica group, the Margin-otruncana marginata-Globotruncana bulloides group, theM. pseudolinneiana-G. linneiana group and the Radotrun-cana subspinosa-R. calcarata group.

All of the species are illustrated in three plates (pl. 1–3).Primary or nominate species and secondary, stratigraphi-cally important species are described below. The species arediscussed and figured in the order of genera in alphabeticalorder.

Genus Contusotruncana KORCHAGIN, 1982

Contusotruncana contusa (CUSHMAN, 1926)

Pl. 1, Fig. 2

Pulvinulina arca CUSHMAN var. contusa CUSHMAN, 1926, p. 23,no type figure.

Rosita contusa (CUSHMAN).- ROBASZYNSKI and others, 1984,p. 246–248, pl. 35, figs. 6, 9; pl. 36, figs. 1, 2; pl. 37, figs. 1–3.

Rosita contusa (CUSHMAN).- OZKAN and KOYLUOGLU, 1988,p. 384, pl. 4, figs. 3, 4.

Contusotruncana contusa (CUSHMAN).- PREMOLI SILVA andSLITER, 1994, pl. 17, fig. 6; pl. 23, fig. 8.

Description: Test very high trochospiral; profile asymmetrical due tostrong convexity of spiral side; umbilical side flat to concave; twoclosely-spaced keels but the umbilical keel is generally less developed orabsent on the last chambers; keel band strongly tilted towards theumbilical side and especially perpendicular to the coiling axis; chambersurface on the spiral side undulated, sutures raised; adumbilical ridgespoorly developed.

Remarks: Contusotruncana contusa differs from C. patelliformis inhaving a more strongly convex spiral side, in a more undulatingchamber surface on the spiral side, and in a larger size. It differs fromC. plicata in having a larger number of whorls, a much larger size andraised sutures. It also differs from C. walfischensis in its large size,undulating but not inflated chamber surface on the spiral side and

raised sutures. The species also differs from Globotruncanita conica – G.atlantica group in having two closely spaced keels and in a moreundulating chamber surface on the spiral side.

Occurrence: This form occurs rarely in the uppermost part of theAkdag Formation. It is found in the Gansserina gansseri IZ.

Genus Dicarinella PORTHAULT, 1970

Dicarinella asymetrica (SIGAL, 1952)

Pl. 1, Fig. 8

Globotruncana asymetrica SIGAL, 1952, p. 34–35, fig. 35.Dicarinella asymetrica (SIGAL).- CARON, 1985, p. 43, figs. 17 (3–4).Dicarinella asymetrica (SIGAL).- SLITER, 1989, p. 11, pl. 3, fig. 1.Dicarinella asymetrica (SIGAL).- PREMOLI SILVA and SLITER,

1994, pl. 12, fig. 11.

Description: Test low to flat trochospiral, spiral side slightly convexto flat, umbilical side strongly convex; two closely spaced distinct keelson the edge of the spiral side; well-developed periumbilical ridges onumbilical side; umbilicus wide and deep; early chambers globular, finalchambers generally trapezoidal and umbilical margin angular.

Remarks: It differs from Dicarinella concavata in having an angularchamber profile on the umbilical side and in the presence of a generallywell-developed periumbilical ridge throughout the last whorl.

Occurrence: This form is common in the upper part of thehemipelagic limestones of the Bey Dagları Formation. It is restrictedto the Dicarinella asymetrica TRZ.

Dicarinella concavata (BROTZEN, 1934)

Pl. 1, Fig. 10

Rotalia concavata BROTZEN, 1934, p. 66, pl. 3, fig. b.Dicarinella concavata (BROTZEN).- CARON, 1985, p. 45, figs. 17 (7–8).Dicarinella concavata (BROTZEN).- SLITER, 1989, p. 11, pl. 2, fig. 11.Dicarinella concavata (BROTZEN).- PREMOLI SILVA and SLITER,

1994, pl. 12, fig. 1.

Description: Test low to flat trochospiral; spiral side flat, slightlyconvex to slightly concave; umbilical side strongly convex; two closelyspaced keels on the edge of the spiral side, keels distinct on the lastchambers and indistinct on the first chambers of the last whorl andprobably in the inner whorls; early chambers globular; chambershemispherical and chamber surface sometimes pustulose on umbilicalside; adumbilical ridge generally absent but sometimes slightlydeveloped.

Remarks: It differs from Dicarinella asymetrica in having hemi-spherical chambers and in not having well-developed periumbilicalridges on the umbilical side, at least on the first chambers of the lastwhorl.

Occurrence: This form occurs commonly throughout the hemi-pelagic limestones of the Bey Dagları Formation. It is found in theDicarinella concavata IZ and D. asymetrica TRZ.

Genus Gansserina CARON, GONZALES DONOSO,ROBASZYNSKI and WONDERS, 1984

Gansserina gansseri (BOLLI, 1951)

Pl. 1, Fig. 12

Globotruncana gansseri BOLLI, 1951, p. 196–197, pl. 35, figs. 1–3.Gansserina gansseri (BOLLI).- ROBASZYNSKI and others, 1984,

p. 294, 296, pl. 52, figs. 1–5; pl. 53, figs. 1–5.Gansserina gansseri (BOLLI).- SLITER, 1989, p. 11, pl. 3, fig. 7.Gansserina gansseri (BOLLI).- PREMOLI SILVA and SLITER, 1994,

pl. 20, figs. 5,7.

Description: Test very low trochospiral; profile strongly asymmet-rical due to a very slightly concave, sometimes convex to flat spiral sideand strongly convex umbilical side; staircase aspect on the spiral sideresults from imbricated chambers that sometimes developed; single keelthroughout; chamber profile hemispherical; sutures on the spiral sideraised; chamber surface smooth but sometimes slightly inflated;chamber surface of the umbilical side inflated and pustulose, lastchamber surface less pustulose or smooth; adumbilical ridges absent.

250 SARI

Remarks: It differs from Gansserina wiedenmayeri in its single keelthroughout the last whorl. It differs from Globotruncanita angulata andG. pettersi in not having an adumbilical ridge and in having a morepustulose chamber surface on the umbilical side.

Occurrence: This form is common in the uppermost part of theAkdag Formation. It is found in the Gansserina gansseri IZ.

Gansserina wiedenmayeri (GANDOLFI, 1955)

Pl. 1, Fig. 13

Globotruncana (Globotruncana) wiedenmayeri wiedenmayeri GAN-DOLFI, 1955, p. 7, figs. 4a–c.

Gansserina wiedenmayeri (GANDOLFI).- ROBASZYNSKI andothers, 1984, p. 298, pl. 54, figs. 1–6.

Gansserina wiedenmayeri (GANDOLFI).- OZKAN and KOYLUO-GLU, 1988, p. 384, pl. 2, fig. 9.

Description: Test very low to flat trochospiral; profile distinctlyasymmetrical due to a flat, slightly convex to slightly concave spiralside and a convex umbilical side; last chamber sometimes highlydeveloped; two keels very closely spaced, but sometimes umbilical keelless-developed or absent on the last chamber; chamber surface on thespiral side flat to slightly inflated, sutures raised; chamber surface onthe umbilical side pustulose; adumbilical ridges absent.

Remarks: Gansserina wiedenmayeri differs from G. gansseri in havingclosely spaced double keels. It differs from Globotruncana aegyptiaca inits flatter chamber surface on the spiral side and in the absence ofadumbilical ridges. It is also distinguished from G. ventricosa by havingtwo very closely spaced keels and by the absence of adumbilical ridges.

Occurrence: This form occurs rarely in the uppermost part of theAkdag Formation. It is found in the Gansserina gansseri IZ.

Genus Globotruncana CUSHMAN, 1927

Globotruncana aegyptiaca NAKKADY, 1950

Pl. 1, Fig. 14

Globotruncana aegyptiaca NAKKADY, 1950, p. 690, pl. 90, fig. 20.Globotruncana aegyptiaca NAKKADY.- ROBASZYNSKI and others,

1984, p. 178, 180, pl. 2, figs. 1–6; pl. 3, figs. 1–4.Globotruncana aegyptiaca NAKKADY.- OZKAN and KOYLUO-

GLU, 1988, p. 383, pl. 1, figs. 1–3.Globotruncana aegyptiaca NAKKADY.- SLITER, 1989, p. 13, pl. 3,

figs. 8,9.Globotruncana aegyptiaca NAKKADY.- PREMOLI SILVA and

SLITER, 1994, pl. 15, fig. 10.

Description: Test low trochospiral; profile asymmetrical, spiral sideflat to slightly convex with localized inflation of the chambers,umbilical side moderately to strongly convex; two keels on allchambers, umbilical keel sometimes less well developed; keel bandvery narrow to wide. Sutures on the spiral side raised and beaded;surface of the early chambers of the last whorl on the umbilical sidepustulose; adumbilical ridges moderately developed, sometimes absenton the last chamber.

Remarks: Globotruncana aegyptiaca differs from Gansserina wieden-mayeri in having a less pustulose chamber surface and adumbilicalridges on the umbilical side, and inflated chamber surface on the spiralside. It differs from G. rosetta in the more inflated chamber surface onthe spiral side, more flattened spiral side, more globular chambers onthe umbilical side, and wider peripheral band and narrower umbilicus.It also differs from G. ventricosa in having an inflated chamber surfaceon the spiral side and globular chamber on the umbilical side.

Occurrence: This form occurs rarely in the upper part of the AkdagFormation. It is found in the Gansserina gansseri IZ.

Globotruncana arca (CUSHMAN, 1926)

Pl. 1, Fig. 15

Pulvinulina arca CUSHMAN, 1926, p. 23, pl. 3, figs. 1a–c.Globotruncana arca (CUSHMAN).- ROBASZYNSKI and others,

1984, p. 182, 184, pl. 1, figs. 2–3; pl. 4, figs. 1–3.Globotruncana arca (CUSHMAN).- OZKAN and KOYLUOGLU,

1988, p. 381, pl. 1, figs. 4, 6.

Description: Test moderately high trochospiral; profile nearlysymmetrical, moderately convex on both spiral and umbilical sides,but spiral side especially more convex; two distinct keels separated bya large peripheral band, equally developed and parallel throughout thelast whorl; keel band tilted towards the umbilical side. Sutures on thespiral side raised and beaded; adumbilical ridges well developed;umbilicus wide and deep.

Remarks: Globotruncana arca differs from G. mariei in its twogenerally widely spaced and well-marked keels. It differs from G.rosetta in generally having a more convex spiral side and in thepresence of two widely spaced distinct keels on all chambers. Thespecies differs from G. falsostuarti in the presence of two widelyseparated keels throughout the last whorl. It differs from G. orientalisin the presence of two widely spaced keels on all chambers. It is alsodistinguished from Contusotruncana fornicata by having less elongatedand less undulating chambers on the spiral side.

Occurrence: This form occurs abundantly throughout the AkdagFormation, from the R. calcarata TRZ to the lower part of theGansserina gansseri IZ.

Globotruncana dupeublei CARON, GONZALES DONOSO,ROBASZYNSKI and WONDERS, 1984

Pl. 2, Fig. 2

Globotruncana dupeublei CARON and others, 1984, p. 188,190 pl. 1,figs. 1,5; pl. 7, figs. 1,2; pl. 8, figs. 1–3.

Globotruncana dupeublei CARON and others.- ALMOGI-LABIN andothers, 1986, p. 861, pl. 5, figs. 1–3.

Globotruncana dupeublei CARON and others.- CHUNGKHAM andCARON, 1996, p. 510, pl. 2, figs. 1–2.

Description: Test moderately high trochospiral; profile symmetricalor asymmetrical due to higher convexity of the umbilical side; onebeaded peripheral keel throughout the last whorl; sutures on the spiralside raised; adumbilical ridges generally well developed; umbilicus deepand wide.

Remarks: Robaszynski and others (1984) proposed Globotruncanadupeublei as a new species, because the holotype of G. falsostuarti isa double-keeled form whereas the specimen figured as G. falsostuarti byDupeuble (1969) is a single-keeled form with a strongly convexumbilical side, slightly convex spiral side and lobate outline withpetaloid chambers. According to Robaszynski and others (1984), by itsphylogenetic links it is a Globotruncana, although it is single-keeled inthe last whorl. It differs from G. orientalis and G. falsostuarti in havingone keel. It differs from G. esnehensis in having a more convexumbilical side and a generally larger size. It is also distinguished fromG. ? insignis in having more chambers in the last whorl and a generallylarger size.

Occurrence: This form occurs rarely in the Akdag Formation. It isfound in the G. falsostuarti PRZ and in the Gansserina gansseri IZ.

Globotruncana esnehensis NAKKADY, 1950

Pl. 2, Fig. 3

Globotruncana arca (CUSHMAN) var. esnehensis NAKKADY, 1950,p. 690, pl. 90, figs. 23–26.

Globotruncana esnehensis NAKKADY.- ROBASZYNSKI and others,1984, 192, 301, pl. 9, figs. 1–4.

Globotruncana esnehensis NAKKADY.- OZKAN and KOYLUO-GLU, 1988, p. 384, pl. 1, figs. 9,10.

Description: Test moderately high trochospiral; profile sometimessymmetrical but generally asymmetrical with more convex spiral sideand very slightly convex umbilical side; one keel throughout the lastwhorl; sutures raised on the spiral side; adumbilical ridges generallywell developed.

Remarks: Globotruncana esnehensis differs from G. dupeublei andothers in higher convexity of the spiral side and a generally smaller sizewith often less numerous chambers. It differs from G. ? insignis in itsmore convex spiral side and from Globotruncanita conica - G. atlanticagroup in its less spiroconvex profile.

Occurrence: This form is quite common in the uppermost part ofthe Akdag Formation. It is found from the upper part of theGlobotruncana falsostuarti PRZ to the Gansserina gansseri IZ.

PLANKTONIC FORAMINIFERA OF TURKEY 251

PLATE I1- Globotruncana lINNEIANA (d’ORBIGNY); axial section; sample 231; Gansserina gansseri interval zone; latest Campanian-early Maastrichtian. 2-

Contusotruncana contusa (CUSHMAN); axial section; sample 238; Gansserina gansseri interval zone; latest Campanian-early Maastrichtian. 3-Contusotruncana fornicata (PLUMMER); subaxial (nearly axial) section; sample 53; Gansserina gansseri interval zone; latest Campanian-early Maastrichtian. 4- Contusotruncana patelliformis (GANDOLFI); subaxial (nearly axial) section; sample 237; Gansserina gansseri interval zone;latest Campanian-early Maastrichtian. 5- Contusotruncana plicata (WHITE); subaxial (nearly axial) section; sample 197; Gansserina gansseri interval

1- Globotruncana linneiana (d’ORBIGNY); axial section; sample 231; Gansserina gansseri interval zone; latest Campanian-early Maastrichtian. 2-Contusotruncana contusa (CUSHMAN); axial section; sample 238; Gansserina gansseri interval zone; latest Campanian-early Maastrichtian. 3-Contusotruncana fornicata (PLUMMER); subaxial (nearly axial) section; sample 53; Gansserina gansseri interval zone; latest Campanian-early Maastrichtian. 4- Contusotruncana patelliformis (GANDOLFI); subaxial (nearly axial) section; sample 237; Gansserina gansseri interval zone;latest Campanian-early Maastrichtian. 5- Contusotruncana plicata (WHITE); subaxial (nearly axial) section; sample 197; Gansserina gansseri interval

252 SARI

Globotruncana falsostuarti SIGAL, 1952

Pl. 2, Fig. 4

Globotruncana falsostuarti SIGAL, 1952, p. 43, tf. 46.Globotruncana falsostuarti SIGAL.- ROBASZYNSKI and others,

1984, p. 194, pl. 10, figs. 1–3.Globotruncana falsostuarti SIGAL.- OZKAN and KOYLUOGLU,

1988, p. 383, pl. 2, fig. 1.

Description: Test moderately high trochospiral; profile symmetricalto asymmetrical because of a higher convexity of either side; two keels,but umbilical keel less developed and generally absent towards the endof the last whorl; keels typically closer in the middle of each chamber;keel band tilted towards the umbilical side; sutures on the spiral sideraised; adumbilical ridges well developed.

Remarks: Globotruncana falsostuarti differs from G. arca and G.orientalis in having closely spaced double keels on the first chambers ofthe last whorl and a single keel throughout the last chambers of the lastwhorl. It differs from G. rosetta in having closely spaced keels anda generally more convex spiral side and less convex umbilical side. Itdiffers from G. esnehensis and G. dupeublei in having double keels andfrom Globotruncanita stuarti in having a double-keeled profile.

Occurrence: This form is not common in the Akdag Formation. It isfound rarely in the uppermost part of the Globotruncana falsostuartiPRZ and is relatively common in the Gansserina gansseri IZ.

Globotruncana rosetta (CARSEY, 1926)

Pl. 2, Fig. 9

Globigerina rosetta CARSEY, 1926, p. 44, pl. 5, figs. 3a–b.Globotruncana rosetta (CARSEY).- ROBASZYNSKI and others,

1984, p. 210, 301, pl. 18, figs. 1–5.Globotruncana rosetta (CARSEY).- OZKAN and KOYLUOGLU,

1988, p. 381, pl. 2, figs. 5,6.

Description: Test generally low trochospiral; profile rarely symmetricalto asymmetrical due to higher convexity of umbilical side; spiral side flatto slightly convex; two closely spaced keels, generally a single keel on thelast chambers; sutures on the spiral side raised; chamber surface on theumbilical side smooth; adumbilical ridges generally well developed.

Remarks: Globotruncana rosetta differs from G. ? insignis in havingdouble keels. It differs from G. mariei in having closely spaced keels ora single keel on final chambers, and in having a less convex spiral sideand more convex umbilical side. It is distinguished from G. orientalis byits less convex spiral side, and more convex umbilical side.

Occurrence: This form is common in the Akdag Formation. It is foundfrom the Radotruncana calcarata TRZ to the Gansserina gansseri IZ.

Globotruncana ventricosa WHITE, 1928

Pl. 2, Fig. 10

Globotruncana canaliculata (REUSS) var. ventricosa WHITE, 1928,p. 284, pl. 38, figs. 3a–c.

Globotruncana ventricosa WHITE.- ROBASZYNSKI and others,1984, p. 214, 216, pl. 20, figs. 1–3; pl. 21, figs. 1–4.

Globotruncana ventricosa WHITE.- OZKAN and KOYLUOGLU,1988, p. 381, pl. 2, fig. 7.

Globotruncana ventricosa WHITE.- SLITER, 1989, p. 13, pl. 3, figs.5,6.

Globotruncana ventricosa WHITE.- PREMOLI SILVA and SLITER,1994, pl. 15, figs. 2,4,6.

Description: Test very low to flat trochospiral; profile asymmetricaldue to higher convexity of umbilical side; spiral side flat to slightlyconvex; equally developed, generally two widely spaced keelsthroughout; chambers triangular in outline; sutures on the spiral sideraised; adumbilical ridges generally developed on all chambers exceptlast ones.

Remarks: Globotruncana ventricosa differs from G. aegyptiaca inhaving widely spaced keels and in the absence of localized inflation ofthe chambers on the spiral side. It differs from G. linneiana in its muchmore convex umbilical side. It also differs from G. rosetta in havingmore widely spaced keels which are present throughout, and in havinga slower increase in chamber size. The species is distinguished fromDicarinella asymetrica by its more widely spaced keels, and in nothaving globular chambers in earlier whorls.

Occurrence: This form occurs abundantly in the Akdag Formation.It is found from the Radotruncana calcarata TRZ to the Gansserinagansseri IZ.

Genus Globotruncanita REISS, 1957

Globotruncanita angulata (TILEV, 1951)

Pl. 2, Fig. 12

Globotruncana lugeoni TILEV var. angulata TILEV, 1951, p. 46–50,fig. 13, pl. 3, fig. 1.

Globotruncanita angulata (TILEV).- ROBASZYNSKI and others,1984, p. 220, pl. 23, figs. 1–5.

Globotruncanita angulata (TILEV).- OZKAN and KOYLUOGLU,1988, p. 383, pl. 2, fig. 10.

Description: Test very low to flat trochospiral; profile asymmetrical;spiral side flat to slightly convex, umbilical side distinctly convex; oneperipheral keel throughout; peripheral angle of about 90u; sutures onspiral side raised; adumbilical ridges generally well developed;umbilicus wide and deep.

Remarks: Globotruncanita angulata differs from G. pettersi in havinga right-angled periphery rather than an acute angle, and in having a lessconical profile on the umbilical side. It differs from Gansserina gansseriin having well-developed adumbilical ridges, and by its less pustuloseumbilical chamber surface.

Occurrence: This form occurs rarely in the uppermost part of theAkdag Formation. It is only found in the Gasserina gansseri IZ.

Globotruncanita conica (WHITE) - Globotruncanita atlantica(CARON) group

Pl. 2, Fig. 13

Globotruncanita conica (WHITE).- OZKAN and KOYLUOGLU,1988, p. 384, pl. 3, figs. 1,2.

Globotruncanita conica / atlantica.- ROBASZYNSKI and others, 2000,pl. 20, fig. 8.

Description: Test high trochospiral; profile asymmetrical withstrongly convex spiral side and very slightly convex to especially flatumbilical side; one peripheral keel throughout; sutures on the spiralside raised; adumbilical ridges moderately developed.

r

zone; latest Campanian-early Maastrichtian. 6- Contusotruncana cf. plummerae (GANDOLFI); axial section; sample 2; Gansserina gansseri intervalzone; latest Campanian-early Maastrichtian. 7- Contusotruncana walfischensis (TODD); subaxial (nearly axial) section; sample 235; Gansserinagansseri interval zone; latest Campanian-early Maastrichtian. 8- Dicarinella asymetrica (SIGAL); subaxial (nearly axial) section; sample 17;Dicarinella asymetrica total range zone; middle-late Santonian. 9- Dicarinella canaliculata (REUSS); subaxial (nearly axial) section; sample 93;Dicarinella asymetrica total range zone; middle-late Santonian. 10- Dicarinella concavata (BROTZEN); subaxial section; sample 24; Dicarinellaasymetrica total range zone; middle-late Santonian. 11- Dicarinella cf. primitiva (DALBIEZ); subaxial (nearly axial) section; sample 95; Dicarinellaasymetrica total range zone; middle-late Santonian. 12- Gansserina gansseri (BOLLI); subaxial (nearly axial) section; sample 243; Gansserina gansseriinterval zone; latest Campanian-early Maastrichtian. 13- Gansserina wiedenmayeri (GANDOLFI); subaxial (nearly axial) section; sample 239;Gansserina gansseri interval zone; latest Campanian-early Maastrichtian. 14- Globotruncana aegyptiaca NAKKADY; subaxial section; sample 224;Gansserina gansseri interval zone; latest Campanian-early Maastrichtian. 15- Globotruncana arca (CUSHMAN); subaxial (nearly axial) section;sample 235; Gansserina gansseri interval zone; latest Campanian-early Maastrichtian.16- Globotruncana arca-orientalis axial section; sample 117;Radotruncana calcarata total range zone; early late Campanian.

PLANKTONIC FORAMINIFERA OF TURKEY 253

PLATE II

254 SARI

Remarks: The species having a highly convex spiral side, flat orslightly convex umbilical side and one peripheral keel are grouped as‘Globotruncanita conica-G. atlantica group’ because G. conica and G.atlantica have the same features in two-dimensional view and cannot beseparated in thin section. The species differs from Globotruncanaesnehensis in its more convex spiral side and large number of chambers.It differs from G. pseudoconica in always having one keel throughout. Itis also separated from G. stuarti by its asymmetrical profile withstrongly convex spiral side and generally flat umbilical side, and lesswell-marked adumbilical ridges.

Occurrence: This form is common in the uppermost part of theAkdag Formation. It occurs in the Gansserina gansseri IZ.

Globotruncanita elevata (BROTZEN, 1934)

Pl. 2, Fig. 14

Rotalia elevata BROTZEN, 1934, p. 66, pl. 3, fig. c.Globotruncanita elevata (BROTZEN).- ROBASZYNSKI and others,

1984, p. 228, 230, pl. 27, figs. 1–3; pl. 28, figs. 1–3.Globotruncanita elevata (BROTZEN).- OZKAN and KOYLUOGLU,

1988, p. 381, pl. 3, figs. 3,4.Globotruncanita elevata (BROTZEN).- SLITER, 1989, p. 15, pl. 3, figs.

3,4.Globotruncanita elevata (BROTZEN).- PREMOLI SILVA and SLI-

TER, 1994, pl. 18, figs. 5,7.

Description: Test very low trochospiral; profile asymmetrical due toflat to slightly concave spiral side and strongly convex umbilical side;early whorls slightly convex, forming central cone on the spiral side;last whorl slightly convex to generally concave; highly developed lastchamber generally with right to obtuse peripheral angle; one keelthroughout but sometimes weak double keel on the first chambers ofthe last whorl; sutures on the spiral side raised; adumbilical ridgesdeveloped on all chambers except last one.

Remarks: Globotruncanita elevata differs from Globotruncana ?insignis in having a prominent central cone on the spiral side, well-developed last chamber and more highly vaulted umbilical side. It isdistinguished from G. angulata and G. pettersi by its pronouncedcentral cone and highly developed last chamber with right to obtuseperipheral angle. Globotruncanita angulata and G. pettersi also differfrom G. elevata in having a smaller, narrower umbilicus. It differs fromG. stuartiformis in its planoconvex profile, larger umbilicus, andgenerally concave chamber surface on the spiral side.

Occurrence: This form occurs very abundantly in the lowermost partof the Akdag Formation. It is abundant in the lower part of theRadotruncana calcarata TRZ and represented by only one specimen inthe lower part of the Globotruncana falsostuarti PRZ (Fig.4, sample36).

Globotruncanita pettersi (GANDOLFI, 1955)

Pl. 2, Fig. 15

Globotruncana (Globotruncana) rosetta (CARSEY) subsp. pettersiGANDOLFI, 1955, p. 68, pl. 6, figs. 3a–c, 4a–c.

Globotruncanita pettersi (GANDOLFI).- ROBASZYNSKI and others,1984, p. 232, pl. 29, figs. 1–5.

Globotruncanita pettersi (GANDOLFI).- OZKAN and KOYLUO-GLU, 1988, p. 383, pl. 3, figs. 5,6.

Description: Test very low trochospiral; profile asymmetrical due toslightly convex to flat spiral side and strongly convex umbilical side;one peripheral keel throughout; acute peripheral angle; sutures on thespiral side raised; adumbilical ridges less developed; umbilicus wide anddeep.

Remarks: Globotruncanita pettersi differs from Globotruncana ?insignis and G. stuartiformis in having an almost flat spiral side and inits more rapidly developed last chamber. It differs from G. angulata inits more conical profile of the umbilical side and in more tightly coiledspire. It is distinguished from G. elevata by not having a central cone onthe spiral side, by its more conical profile on the umbilical side, and itsacute peripheral angle. The species also differs from Gansserinagansseri in its more conical profile on the umbilical side and in havingadumbilical ridges.

Occurrence: This form is common in the uppermost part of theAkdag Formation. It is found in the Gansserina gansseri IZ.

Globotruncanita stuarti (de LAPPARENT, 1918)

Pl. 3, Fig. 1

Rosalina stuarti de LAPPARENT, 1918, p. 11, tf. 4, lower 3 figs.Globotruncanita stuarti (de LAPPARENT).- ROBASZYNSKI and

others, 1984, p. 234, pl. 22, figs. 1–3; pl. 30, figs. 1–3; pl. 31, figs. 1–3.Globotruncanita stuarti (de LAPPARENT).- OZKAN and KOYLUO-

GLU, 1988, p. 383, pl. 3, figs. 7,8.Globotruncanita stuarti (de LAPPARENT).- PREMOLI SILVA and

SLITER, 1994, pl. 18, figs. 2,10.

Description: Test moderately high trochospiral; profile symmetricalto asymmetrical due to higher convexity of umbilical side; single keelthroughout; sutures on the spiral side raised; adumbilical ridgesdeveloped on all chambers; umbilicus wide and deep.

Remarks: Globotruncanita stuarti differs from G. conica - G. atlanticagroup in having a biconvex profile, in its more convex umbilical sideand more well-marked adumbilical ridges. It differs from Globotrun-cana dupeublei in its biconvex profile and more convex spiral side. Itdiffers from G. elevata in its biconvex test and in the absence of a centralcone on the spiral side. It also differs from G. stuartiformis in its moreconvex spiral side and its less rapid increase of the last chamber.

Occurrence: This form occurs abundantly in the upper part of theAkdag Formation. It is common in the G. falsostuarti PRZ andabundant in the Gansserina gansseri IZ.

Genus Marginotruncana HOFKER 1956

Marginotruncana coronata (BOLLI, 1945)

Pl. 3, Fig. 3

Globotruncana lapparenti BROTZEN subsp. coronata BOLLI, 1945,p. 233, fig. 1/21, pl. 9, fig. 14.

r

1- Globotruncana bulloides VOGLER; subaxial (nearly axial) section; sample 121; Radotruncana calcarata total range zone; early late Campanian.2- Globotruncana dupeublei CARON and others; subaxial (nearly axial) section; sample 185; Gansserina gansseri interval zone; latest Campanian-early Maastrichtian. 3- Globotruncana esnehensis NAKKADY; sample 195; Gansserina gansseri interval zone; latest Campanian-early Maastrichtian.4- Globotruncana falsostuarti SIGAL; subaxial (nearly axial) section; sample 229; Gansserina gansseri interval zone; latest Campanian-early Maastrichtian. 5- Globotruncana (?) insignis GANDOLFI; subaxial section; sample 233; Gansserina gansseri interval zone; latest Campanian-early Maastrichtian. 6- Globotruncana mariei BANNER & BLOW; subaxial (nearly axial) section; sample 234; Gansserina gansseri interval zone; latestCampanian-early Maastrichtian. 7- Globotruncana orientalis EL NAGGAR; axial section; sample 120; Radotruncana calcarata total range zone; earlylate Campanian. 8- Globotruncana pseudoconica SOLAKIUS; axial section; sample 17; Radotruncana calcarata total range zone; early late Campanian.9- Globotruncana rosetta (CARSEY); subaxial section; sample 237; Gansserina gasseri interval zone; latest Campanian-early Maastrichtian. 10-Globotruncana ventricosa WHITE; subaxial (nearly axial) section; sample 239; Gansserina gasseri interval zone; latest Campanian-early Maastrichtian.11- Globotruncanella havanensis (VOORWIJK); axial section; sample 242; Gansserina gansseri interval zone; latest Campanian-early Maastrichtian.12-Globotruncanita angulata (TILEV); subaxial (nearly axial) section; sample 240; Gansserina gansseri interval zone; latest Campanian-early Maastrichtian. 13- gr. Globotruncanita conica-Globotruncanita atlantica; axial section; sample 233; Gansserina gasseri interval zone; latestCampanian-early Maastrichtian. 14- Globotruncanita elevata (BROTZEN); subaxial (nearly axial) section; sample 115; Radotruncana calcarata totalrange zone; early late Campanian. 15- Globotruncanita pettersi (GANDOLFI); subaxial section; sample 235; Gansserina gansseri interval zone; latestCampanian-early Maastrichtian.

PLANKTONIC FORAMINIFERA OF TURKEY 255

PLATE III

256 SARI

Marginotruncana coronata (BOLLI).- ROBASZYNSKI and CARON(coord.)., 1979, p. 103–106, pl. 62, figs. 1,2.

Marginotruncana coronata (BOLLI).- ALMOGI-LABIN and others,1986, p. 856, pl. 2, figs. 5–8, pl. 11, figs. 7–9.

Marginotruncana coronata (BOLLI).- PREMOLI SILVA and SLI-TER, 1994, pl. 14, fig. 9.

Description: Test low trochospire, profile almost symmetrical. Twonarrowly spaced keels separated by a narrow peripheral band. Outlineof the chambers of the last whorl typically compressed.

Remarks: Marginotruncana coronata differs from M. pseudolinneiana– Globotruncana linneiana group by its narrow peripheral band andcompressed profile.

Occurrence: This form occurs abundantly in the hemipelagiclimestones of the Bey Dagları Formation. It is found in the upperpart of the Dicarinella concavata IZ and throughout the D. asymetricaTRZ.

Genus Radotruncana EL-NAGGAR 1971

Radotruncana calcarata (CUSHMAN, 1927)

Pl. 3, Fig. 10

Globotruncana calcarata CUSHMAN, 1927, p. 115, pl. 23, fig. 10a–b.Globotruncanita calcarata (CUSHMAN).- ROBASZYNSKI and

others, 1984, p. 224, pl. 22, fig. 4; pl. 25, figs. 1–3.Globotruncanita calcarata (CUSHMAN).- OZKAN and KOYLUO-

GLU, 1988, p. 382, pl. 2, figs. 11,12.Globotruncanita calcarata (CUSHMAN).- SLITER, 1989, p. 13, pl. 3,

fig. 2.Radotruncana calcarata (CUSHMAN).- PREMOLI SILVA and

SLITER, 1994, pl. 18, figs. 8,9.

Description: Test low to flat trochospiral; profile asymmetrical withflat to slightly convex spiral side and convex umbilical side; in somespecimens early whorls on the spiral side generally strongly convex andlater ones convex to concave; one peripheral keel throughout formingtubulospinate extensions; acute peripheral angle especially on theearly chambers of the last whorl; height of the chambers generallydoubling at the end of the last whorl; adumbilical ridges more or lessdeveloped.

Remarks: Radotruncana calcarata is an important species forrecognizing the lowermost part of the late Campanian. It can be easilyrecognized by its tubulospines; nonetheless, these tubulospines cannotbe observed in many of the thin sections because of randomly orientedcuts. Instead, only small tubulospine-like extensions are encountered.It differs from all other Globotruncanita species in having tubulospines.In the absence of tubulospines, it is distinguishable by its very acuteperipheral angle on the early chambers of the last whorl, generallyhighly developed last chamber and small tubulospine-like extensions.Without observation of tubulospines the species cannot be separatedfrom R. subspinosa. Globotruncanita calcarata and G. subspinosa havebeen referred to genus Radotruncana, which was validated by Loeblichand Tapan (1988) and has been widely recognized by the scientificcommunity.

Occurrence: This form occurs abundantly in the lowermost part ofthe Akdag Formation. It is restricted to the Radotruncana calcarataTRZ.

Radotruncana subspinosa (PESSAGNO)- Radotruncana calcarata(CUSHMAN) group

Pl. 3, Fig. 11

Globotruncanita subspinosa (PESSAGNO).- ROBASZYNSKI andothers, 2000, pl. 19, fig. 7; pl. 22, fig. 15; pl. 24, fig. 2.

Radotruncana subspinosa (PESSAGNO) – R. calcarata (CUSFMAN)(transitional form).- PREMOLI SILVA and SLITER, 1994, pl. 18,fig. 1.

Description: Test low to flat trochospiral; profile asymmetrical withslightly convex to flat spiral side and strongly convex umbilical side;single distinct keel throughout; chambers generally elongated nearperiphery; sutures on the spiral side raised; adumbilical ridgesdeveloped on all chambers.

Remarks: The only criteria to separate Radotruncana calcarata fromR. subspinosa in thin section is the presence of tubulospines. Otherwise,the two species cannot be distinguished. Hence, the species havingelongated chambers near the periphery or a tubulospine-like peripheralkeel are grouped as ‘R. subspinosa-R. calcarata group’. The speciesdiffers from Globotruncanita elevata and G. stuartiformis in havingelongated chambers near the periphery, in the more distincttubulospine-like peripheral keel, and in its polygonal-like outline.

Occurrence: This form occurs rarely throughout the AkdagFormation. It is found from the Radotruncana calcarata TRZ to theGansserina gansseri IZ.

PALEOTECTONIC AND PALEOGEOGRAPHICINFERENCES OF HIATUSES

Carbonate platforms of the Tethyan ocean passedthrough the entire geodynamic spectrum of the Wilsoncycle (rifting, drifting, transtension, transpression andcollision). Hence, tectonics is a primary control on theirevolution, with eustatic sea-level oscillations being onlya secondary control (Bosellini, 1989). The easternmostMediterranean area was represented by many carbonateplatforms surrounded by small Neotethyan oceanic basinsduring Late Cretaceous time. The evolution of thesecarbonate platforms and the overlying pelagic depositswas dominantly controlled by tectonic events such asrifting, spreading and collision (Poisson, 1977; Gutnic andothers, 1979; Sengor and Yılmaz, 1981; Poisson and others,1983; Ozgul, 1984; Robertson and Dixon, 1984; Robertsonand Woodcock, 1984; Robertson, 1993, 1998; Robertsonand others, 2003).

The platform persisted under shallow waters until the endof the late Turonian in the Korkuteli part of the BeyDagları autochthon. Then in the Coniacian-Santonian, theplatform subsided and was capped with massive, hemi-pelagic limestones. Turonian-lower Senonian regionalextension, which affected the peri-Mediterranean alpine

r

1- Globotruncanita stuarti (de LAPPARENT); subaxial (nearly axial) section; sample 232; Gansserina gansseri interval zone; latest Campanian-early Maastrichtian. 2- Globotruncanita stuartiformis (DALBIEZ); subaxial (nearly axial) section; sample 241; Gansserina gansseri interval zone; latestCampanian-early Maastrichtian. 3- Marginotruncana coronata (BOLLI); axial section; sample 94; Dicarinella asymetrica total range zone; middle-late Santonian. 4- gr. Marginotruncana marginata-Globotruncana bulloides; subaxial (nearly axial) section; sample 94; Dicarinella asymetrica totalrange zone; middle-late Santonian. 5- gr. Marginotruncana pseudolinneiana-Globotruncana linneiana; axial section; sample 106; Dicarinella asymetricatotal range zone; middle-late Santonian. 6- Marginotruncana cf. schneegansi (SIGAL); subaxial section; sample 109; Dicarinella asymetrica total rangezone; middle-late Santonian. 7- Marginotruncana cf. sigali (REICHEL); oblique section passing through the proloculus; sample 23; Dicarinellaasymetrica total range zone; middle-late Santonian. 8- Marginotruncana sinuosa PORTHAULT; axial section; sample 105; Dicarinella asymetricatotal range zone; middle-late Santonian. 9- Marginotruncana undulata (LEHMANN); subaxial section; sample 109; Dicarinella asymetrica total rangezone; middle-late Santonian. 10- Radotruncana calcarata (CUSHMAN); subaxial section; sample 115; Radotruncana calcarata total range zone; earlylate Campanian. 11- gr. Radotruncana subspinosa-Radotruncana calcarata; subaxial (nearly axial) section; sample 230;Gansserina gansseri intervalzone; latest Campanian-early Maastrichtian. 12- Rugoglobigerina rugosa (PLUMMER); axial section; sample 237; Gansserina gansseri interval zone;latest Campanian-early Maastrichtian.

PLANKTONIC FORAMINIFERA OF TURKEY 257

FIGURE 9. Lithostratigraphic column of the Upper Cretaceous sequence of the Korkuteli area, plotted against the planktonic foraminiferalbiozonation of Robaszynski (coordinator, 1998), time scale of Gradstein and others (1994) and sea-level curve of Haq and others (1987). Note the twohiatuses corresponding to the lower-middle Campanian and Upper Maastrichtian.

258 SARI

belts, was thought to be responsible for platform drowningevents after the Cenomanian throughout the WesternTaurides (Poisson and others, 1983; Robertson, 1993).

The hiatuses in the Bey Dagları autochthon arediachronous. Local and widespread regional hiatuses weredetected in the pelagic sequence of the Bey Daglarıautochthon in a few previous biostratigraphic studies(Fig. 8 ). These hiatuses correspond to the ?late Turonian-middle Campanian in Katran Dag (Bignot and Poisson,1974), the interval between lower and upper Senonianthroughout the middle and northern part of the BeyDagları autochthon (Poisson, 1977), lower-middle Seno-nian throughout the Taurus shelf (Farinacci and Koyluo-glu, 1982), lower Turonian-upper Coniacian throughoutthe Bey Dagları autochthon (Farinacci and Yeniay, 1986)and Turonian-Campanian and upper Maastrichtian-Tertiary in the Bey Dagları autochthon (Ozkan andKoyluoglu, 1988).

Detailed geological mapping and measured stratigraphicsections show that the hiatuses in the Korkuteli part of theBey Dagları autochthonous unit occur in the lower-middleCampanian and upper Maastrichtian. The hiatuses repre-sent breaks in the stratigraphic sequence caused by erosion,dissolution, or nondeposition.

The major control for the early-middle Campanian andlate Maastrichtian hiatuses may have been regionaltectonics. The Maastrichtian was the closure time for theArabo-African and Eurasiatic plates in this area of Tethys(Farinacci and Yeniay, 1986). It was also the time of theonset of collision (Poisson and others, 1983) and the initialstages of emplacement of the Antalya complex in theKatran Dag area (Robertson, 1993). The variations inrelative sea level given in Figure 9 are the result of changingpaleoceanographic conditions and may have accompaniedthe tectonic effect as a secondary control on the UpperCretaceous sequence of the Bey Dagları autochthon.

CONCLUSIONS

Planktonic foraminiferal assemblages of the hemipelagiclimestones of the Bey Dagları Formation and the pelagiclimestones of the Akdag Formation have been analyzed indetail and the following conclusions have been drawn:

1. Forty-five planktonic foraminiferal species belonging toeight genera have yielded five biozones. They are, inascending order: Dicarinella concavata IZ, Dicarinellaasymetrica TRZ, Radotruncana calcarata TRZ, Globotrun-cana falsostuarti PRZ and Gansserina gansseri IZ.

2. Massive hemipelagic limestones form the upper part ofthe Bey Dagları Formation and overlie the neritic lime-stones of a drowned Cenomanian-Turonian carbonateplatform. Planktonic foraminifera assemblages accompa-nied by abundant spheroidals indicate the Dicarinellaconcavata IZ and Dicarinella asymetrica TRZ, whichsuggest a Coniacian-Santonian age.

3. Pelagic ‘scaglia’ limestones of the Akdag Formationdisconformably overlie different stratigraphic levels of theBey Dagları Formation along a prominent erosionalsurface. Planktonic foraminifera assemblages are verydiverse, consisting of large, thick-walled and complex

morphotypes, which dominate in open oceans. Examina-tion of planktonic foraminifera has led to the recognition ofthree biozones: Radotruncana calcarata TRZ, Globotrun-cana falsostuarti PRZ and Gansserina gansseri IZ, whichindicate a late Campanian-early Maastrichtian age.

4. Two major sedimentary gaps have been detected inUpper Cretaceous pelagic sequence. The lower-middleCampanian and upper Maastrichtian are absent in allmeasured stratigraphic sections.

5. The presence of Contusotruncana fornicata, Globotrun-cana arca, G. bulloides, G. linneiana, G. mariei, G. orientalis,G. ventricosa and Radotruncana subspinosa – R. calcaratagroup in the Gansserina gansseri IZ indicates that the upperpart of the Gansserina gansseri IZ is absent in all measuredstratigraphic sections. Thus, the youngest Late Cretaceouslimestones cannot be younger than early Maastrichtian.

6. Drowning of the platform after the late Turonianproduced a hemipelagic environment that would persistuntil the end of the Santonian. This drowning event is likelylinked to regional crustal extension, which may have beenthe driving force for subsidence of the carbonate platformafter Cenomanian times.

7. The lower-middle Campanian and upper Maastrichtianhiatuses in the pelagic sequence are ascribed to the regionaltectonics, as the easternmost Mediterranean area wassubjected to important tectonic events during the lateCretaceous. The Upper Maastrichtian hiatus may havebeen related to compressional tectonics, as the Maastrich-tian was the time of closure for the Arabo-African andEurasiatic plates and of the initial stages of emplacement ofthe Antalya complex in this particularly critical area of theTethys. Eustatic sea-level changes may have had a second-ary effect on the Upper Cretaceous carbonate succession ofthe Bey Dagları autochthon.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

A part of the fieldwork was financially supported byDokuz Eylul University Research Foundation projectno. 0922.97.01.32. Sacit Ozer, Akif Sarı and Murat Yıldızare gratefully acknowledged for their help during theintense field work. Reviewers Michele Caron and DanGeorgescu, Associate Editor Mark Leckie and EditorLaurel S. Collins are thanked for their constructivecriticisms of the manuscript.

REFERENCES

ALMOGI-LABIN, A., REISS, Z., and CARON, M., 1986, SenonianGlobotruncanidae from Israel: Eclogae Geologicae Helvetiae,v. 79, no. 3, p. 849–895.

BIGNOT, G., and POISSON, A., 1974, Le Cenomanien du flanc orientaldu Katran Dag (Sam dag) pres d’Antalya (Turquie): MineralResearch and Exploration Institute Of Turkey (MTA) Bulletin,v. 82, p. 71–77.

BOLLI, H., 1945, Zur stratigraphie der Oberen Kreide in den hoherenhelvetischen Decken: Eclogae Geologicae Helvetiae, v. 37, no. 2,p. 217–329.

———, 1951, The genus Globotruncana in Trinidad, B. W. I.: Journalof Paleontology, v. 25, no. 2, p. 187–199.

BOSELLINI, A., 1989, Dynamics of Tethyan carbonate platforms, inCrevello, P. D., Wilson, J. L., Sarg, J. F., and Read, J. F. (eds.),Controls on Carbonate Platform and Basin Development: Society

PLANKTONIC FORAMINIFERA OF TURKEY 259

of Economic Paleontologists and Mineralogists, Special Publica-tion, v. 44, p. 3–13.

BROTZEN, F., 1934, Foraminiferen aus dem Senon Palastinas:Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palastina-Vereins, v. 57, p. 28–72.

CARON, M., 1985, Cretaceous planktic foraminifera, in Bolli, H. M.,Saunders, J. B., and Perch-Nielsen, K. (eds.), Plankton Stratigra-phy: Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, p. 17–86.

CARSEY, D. O., 1926, Foraminifera of the Cretaceous of Central Texas:Texas University Bulletin, no. 2612, p. 1–56.

CHUNGKHAM, P., and CARON, M., 1996, Comparative study of a LateMaastrichtian (A. mayaroensis zone) foraminiferal assemblagefrom two distant parts of the Tethys Ocean: Semsales WildflyschZone, Switzerland and Ukhrul Melange Zone, India: Revue dePaleobiologie, v. 15, no. 2, p. 499–517.

CUSHMAN, J. A., 1926, Some Foraminifera from the Mendez Shale ofeastern Mexico: Contributions from the Cushman Laboratory forForaminiferal Research, v. 2, no. 1, p. 16–26.

———, 1927, An outline for a re-classification of the foraminifera:Contributions from the Cushman Laboratory for ForaminiferalResearch, v. 3, no. 2, p. 1–105.

DUPEUBLE, P. A., 1969, Foraminiferes planctoniques (Globotrunca-nides et Heterohelicidae) du Maestrichtien Superieur en Aquitaineoccidentale, in Bronnimann, P., and Renz, H. H. (eds.),Proceedings of the First International Conference on PlanktonicMicrofossils, Geneva: E. J. Brill, Leiden, v. 2, p. 153–161.

FARINACCI, A., and KOYLUOGLU, M., 1982, Evolution of the Jurassic-Cretaceous Taurus Shelf (southern Turkey): Bolletino DellaSocieta Paleontologica Italiana, v. 21, p. 267–276.

———, and YENIAY, G., 1986, Biostratigraphy and event-analysis ofthe Cenomanian-Maastrichtian carbonates of the Bey Dagları(Western Taurus, Turkey): Geologica Romana, v. 25, p. 257–284.

FLEURY, J. J., 1980, Les zones de Gavrovo-Tripolitza et du Pinde-Olonos (Grece continentale et Peloponnese du Nord). Evolutiond’une plate-forme et d’une bassin dans le cadre alpin: SocieteGeologique du Nord, v. 4, p. 1–648.

GANDOLFI, R., 1955, The Genus Globotruncana in NortheasternColombia: Bulletins of American Paleontology, v. 36, no. 155,p. 1–118.

GRADSTEIN, F. N., AGTERBERG, F. P., OGG, J. G., HARDENBOL, J.,VAN VEEN, P., THIERRY, J., and HUANG, Z., 1994, A MesozoicTime Scale: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 99,p. 24,051–24,074.

GUTNIC, M., MONOD, O., POISSON, A., and DUMONT, J. F., 1979,Geologie des Taurus occidentales (Turquie): Memoires de laSociete Geologique de France, v. 58, p. 1–112.

HAQ, B. U., HARDENBOL, J., and VAIL, P. R., 1987, Chronology offluctuting sea levels since Triassic: Science, v. 235, p. 1156–1167.

LAPPARENT, J., DE., 1918, Etude lithologique des terrains cretacees dela region d’Hendaye: Memoire Pour Servir a l’Explication de laCarte Geologique de la France, 153 p.

LOEBLICH, A. R., JR., and TAPPAN, H., 1988, Foraminiferal Generaand Their Classification: Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, NewYork, 970 p.

LOMMERZHEIM, A. J., and HAMBACH, U., 1992, Cephalopod andmagnetostratigraphy of the Campanian of the MuensterlandBasin, NW Germany: Cretaceous Symposium, Hamburg, 1992,Abstracts, 3p, 3 figs., Hamburg.

NAKKADY, S. E., 1950, A new foraminifera fauna from the Esna shalesand Upper Cretaceous Chalk of Egypt: Journal of Paleontology,v. 24, no. 6, p. 675–692.

NAZ, H., ALKAN, H., and ERK, S., 1992, Facies and sequencecharacteristics of the Late Cretaceous-Paleocene drowning onthe West Taurus Carbonate Platform, S. W. Turkiye: Proceedingsof the 9th Petroleum Congress of Turkey, Ankara, p. 121–134.

OZGUL, N., 1976, Torosların bazı temel jeoloji ozellikleri: Bulletin ofGeological Society of Turkey (in Turkish, English abstract), v. 14,p. 75–87.

———, 1984, Stratigraphy and Tectonic evolution of the centralTaurus, in Tekeli, O., and Goncuoglu, M. C. (eds.), Geology ofthe Taurus Belt: Proceedings, p. 77–90.

OZKAN, S., 1985, Maastrichtian Planktonic Foraminifera and Stratig-raphy of the Germav Formation, Gercus Area, Southeast Turkey:unpublished M.Sc. Thesis, Middle East Technical University,Ankara, Turkey, 219 p.

———, and KOYLUOGLU, M., 1988, Campanian-Maastrichtian plank-tonic foraminiferal biostratigraphy of the Beydagları Autochtho-nous Unit, Western Taurids, Turkey: Middle East TechnicalUniversity, Journal of Pure and Applied Sciences, v. 21,p. 377–388.

OZKAN-ALTINER, S., and OZCAN, E., 1999, Upper Cretaceousplanktonic foraminiferal biostratigraphy from NW Turkey:calibration of the stratigraphic ranges of larger foraminifera:Geological Journal, v. 34, p. 287–301.

PESSAGNO, E. A., JR., 1962, The Upper Cretaceous Stratigraphy andMicropaleontology of South-central Puerto Rico: Micropaleon-tology, v. 8, no. 1, p. 349–368.

POISSON, A., 1977, Recherches geologiques dans les Tauridesoccidentals (Turquie): unpublished Ph. D. dissertation, Universitiede Paris-Sud, Orsay, 795 p.

———, AKAY, E., DUMONT, J. F., and UYSAL, S., 1983, The Ispartaangle: a Mesozoic paleorift in the Western Taurides, in Tekeli, O.,and Goncuoglu, M. C. (eds.), Geology of the Taurus Belt:Proceedings, p. 11–26.

POSTUMA, J. A., 1971, Manual of Planktonic Foraminifera: ElsevierPublishing Company, Amsterdam, 420 p.

PREMOLI SILVA, I., and VERGA, D., 2004, Practical manual ofCretaceous planktonic foraminifera. International School onplanktonic foraminifera, 3rd Course: Cretaceous, in Verga, D.,and Rettori, R. (eds.), Universities of Perugia and Milan,Tiporafia Pontefelcino, Perugia (Italy), 283 p.

———, and SLITER, W. V., 1994, Cretaceous planktonic foraminiferalbiostratigraphy and evolutionary trends from the Bottacionesection, Gubbio, Italy: Palaeontographia Italica, v. 82, p. 1–89.

RENZ, O., 1936, Stratigraphie und mikropalaeontologische Untersu-chung der Scaglia (Ober Kreide-Tertiar) im Zentralen Apennin:Eclogae Geologicae Helvetiae, v. 29, p. 1–149.

ROBASZYNSKI, F. (coordinator)., 1998, Planktonic foraminifera-UpperCretaceous, Chart of Cretaceous Biochronostratigraphy, in deGraciansky, P. C., Hardenbol, J., and Vail, P. R. (eds.), Mesozoicand Cenozoic Sequence Stratigraphy of European Basins: SocietyFor Sedimentary Geology (SEPM), Special Publication, no. 60,782 p.

———, and CARON, M. (coordinators), 1979, Atlas de Foraminiferesplanctoniques du Cretace moyen. Parts 1–2: Cahiers de Micro-paleontologie, v. 1 and 2, p. 1–185, 1–181.

———, and CARON, M., 1995, Cretaceous planktonic foraminifera:comments on the Europe – Mediterranean zonation: Bulletin de laSociete Geologique de France, v. 166, p. 681–692.

———, CARON, M., GONZALES DONOSO, J. M., and WONDERS, A. A.H. (eds.) 1984, Atlas of Late Cretaceous Globotruncanids: Revuede Micropaleontologie, v. 26, no. 3–4, p. 145–305.

———, GONZALES DONOZO, J. M., LINARES, D., AMEDRO, F., CARON,M., DUPUIS, C., DHONDT, A. V., and GARTNER, S., 2000, LeCretace superieur de la region de Kalaat Senan, Tunisie centrale.Litho-biostratigraphie integree: zones d’ammonites, de foramini-feres planctoniques et de nannofossiles du Turonien superieur auMaastrichtien: Bulletin des Centres de Recherches Exploration-Production, Elf-Aquitaine, v. 22, p. 359–490.

ROBERTSON, A. H. F., 1993, Mesozoic-Tertiary sedimentary andtectonic evolution of Neotethyan carbonate platforms, marginsand small ocean basins in the Antalya Complex, southwestTurkey: International Association of Sedimentologists, SpecialPublication, no. 20, p. 415–465.

———, 1998, Mesozoic-Tertiary tectonic evolution of the EasternmostMediterranean area: integration of marine and land-basedevidence, in Robertson, A. H. F., Emeis, K-C., Richter, C., andCamerlenghi, A. (eds.), Proceedings of the Ocean DrillingProgram, Scientific Results, v. 160, p. 723–782.

———, and DIXON, J. E., 1984, Introduction: aspects of the geologicalevolution of the Eastern Mediterranean, in Dixon, J. E., andRobertson, A. H. F. (eds.), The Geological Evolution of theEastern Mediterranean: Geological Society, London, SpecialPublication, v. 17, p. 1–74.

———, and WOODCOCK, N. H., 1984, The SW segment of the AntalyaComplex, Turkey as a Mesozoic-Tertiary Tethyan continentalmargin, in Dixon, J. E., and Robertson, A. H. F. (eds.), TheGeological Evolution of the Eastern Mediterranean: GeologicalSociety, London, Special Publication, v. 17, p. 251–272.

260 SARI

———, POISSON, A., and AKINCI, O., 2003, Developments in researchconcerning Mesozoic-Tertiary Tethys and neotectonics in theIsparta Angle, SW Turkey: Geological Journal, v. 38, p. 195–234.

ROSALES, I., FERNANDEZ-MENDIOLA, P. A., and GARCIA-MONDEJAR,J., 1994, Carbonate depositional sequence development on activefault blocks: the Albian in the Castro Urdiales area, northernSpain: Sedimentology, v. 41, p. 861–882.

SARI, B., 1999, Biostratigraphy of the Upper Cretaceous Sequences inthe Korkuteli Area (Western Taurides): unpublished M.Sc. Thesis,Dokuz Eylul University, Izmir, 162 p.

———, and OZER, S., 2001, Facies characteristics of the Cenomanian-Maastrichtian sequence of the Beydagları carbonate platform inthe Korkuteli area (western Taurides): International GeologyReview, v. 43, p. 830–839.

———, and OZER, S., 2002, Upper Cretaceous stratigraphy of theBeydagları carbonate platform, Korkuteli area (Western Taurides,Turkey): Turkish Journal of Earth Sciences, v. 11, p. 39–59.

———, STEUBER, T., and OZER, S., 2004, First record of UpperTuronian rudists (Mollusca, Hippuritoidea) in the BeyDagları carbonate platform, Western Taurides (Turkey): taxo-nomy and strontium isotope stratigraphy of Vaccinites praegi-ganteus (Toucas, 1904): Cretaceous Research, v. 25, no. 2,p. 235–248.

SIGAL, J., 1952, Apercu stratigraphique sur la micropaleontologie duCretace: 19th Congres Geologique International, Monographiesregionales, ser. 1, Algerie, no. 26, p. 1–47.

SIMMONS, M. D., WILLIAMS, C. L., and HANCOCK, J. M., 1996,Planktonic foraminifera across the Campanian/Maastrichtianboundary at Tercis, south-west France: Newsletters on Stratigra-phy, v. 34, no. 2, p. 65–80.

SLITER, W. V., 1989, Biostratigraphic zonation for Cretaceousplanktonic foraminifers examined in thin section: Journal ofForaminiferal Research, v. 19, no. 1, p. 1–19.

———, 1999, Cretaceous planktonic foraminiferal biostratigraphy ofthe Calera Limestone, Northern California, USA: Journal ofForaminiferal Research, v. 29, no. 4, p. 318–339.

———, and LECKIE, R. M., 1993, Cretaceous planktonic foraminifersand depositional environments from the Ontong Java Plateau withemphasis on Sites 803 and 807: Proceedings of the Ocean DrillingProgram, Scientific Results, v. 130, p. 63–84.

SENGOR, A. M. C., and YILMAZ, Y., 1981, Tethyan evolution ofTurkey: a plate tectonic approach: Tectonophysics, v. 75,p. 181–241.

THALMANN, H. E., 1934, Die regional-stratigraphische Verbreitugn deroberkretazischen Foraminiferen-Gattung Globotruncana Cush-man 1927: Eclogae Geologicae Helvetiae, v. 27, p. 413–441.

TILEV, N., 1951, Etude des Rosalines Maestrichtiennes (GenreGlobotruncana) du Sud-Est de la Turquie (Sondage de Raman-dag): Maden Tetkik ve Arama Enstitusu Yayınları, ser. B, no. 16,p. 1–101.

VIENNOT, P., 1930, Sur la Valeur Stratigraphique des Rosalines:Comptes Rendus Soom. Societe Geologique de France, v. 7,p. 60–62.

WHITE, M. P., 1928, Some index Foraminifera of the Tampicoembayment area of Mexico, part 2: Journal of Paleontology, v. 2,no. 4, p. 280–313.

VOGLER, J., 1941, Ober-Jura and Kreide Von Misoi, in Boehm, G., andWagner, J. (eds.), Breitrage Zur Geologie Von Niederlandisch-Indien, Paleontolographica, Supp., v. 4, no. 5, p. 243–293.

YAKAR, H., 1993, Late Campanian-Early Paleocene Planktic Forami-niferal taxonomy and biostratigraphy in the Adıyaman Region(SE Anatolia): unpublished M.Sc. Thesis, Middle East TechnicalUniversity, Ankara, 290 p.

WEIDICH, K. F., 1987, Das Ultrahelvetikum von Liebenstein (Allgau)und seine Foraminiferenfauna: Zitteliana, v. 15, p. 193–217.

WONDERS, A. A. H., 1979, Middle and Late Cretaceous pelagicsediments of the Umbrian sequence in the Central Apennines:Koniklijke Nederlandse Akademie Van Wetenshappen Proceed-ings, ser. B, v. 82, p. 171–205.

Received 21 September 2004Accepted 24 January 2006

PLANKTONIC FORAMINIFERA OF TURKEY 261