New data on facies development and micropaleontology of the eastern margin of the Getic Carbonate Platform (South Carpathians, Romania): case study of Mateiaş Limestone

Abstract

ABSTRACT. The Mateiaş Limestone is a lithostratigraphic unit in the Braşov Series, a component of the eastern part of the Getic Nappes' cover (the Getic carbonate platform). Four main facies and their associated microfacies are identified in the Mateiaş Limestone in the Hulei-Mateiaş-Măgura area. A Kimmeridgian (possibly also Early Tithonian) age is assigned to the Mateiaş Limestone, based on the microfossil association identified in thin sections. The regional setting, as well as sedimentological and micropaleontological features, indicates deposition of these limestones in shelf margin and slope environments. The succession in the area studied corresponds to the lower-mid part of the carbonate succession developed in the more internal part of the eastern sector of the Getic carbonate platform (e.g. Piatra Craiului Mountains).

Depositional characteristics and constraints on the mid-Valanginian demise of a carbonate platform in the intra-Tethyan domain, Circum-Rhodope Belt, northern Greece

“…4) is consistent with in situ formation of skeletal buildups and their subsequent destruction. This particular MFT association implies depositional environments at the margin of a carbonate platform, i.e., reef and fore-reef settings Bucur et al, 2010;Lanfranchi et al, 2011;Rusciadelli et al, 2011;Ples¸et al, 2013) (Fig. 4).…”

“…The dominant role of Bacinella, Lithocodium and Crescentiella microencrusters is conspicuous and the presence of other rare species such as Koskinobullina socialis and Thaumatoporella parvovesiculifera is a typical characteristic (Schlagintweit and Ebli, 1999;Bucur and S as aran, 2005;Radoi ci c, 2005;Ivanova et al, 2008;Krajewski, 2008;Kaya and Altiner, 2014;Pleş et al, 2013). Furthermore, the recognized here microencrusting taxa Radiomura cautica and Perturbatacrusta leini are known only from Late Jurassic to Early Cretaceous carbonate platforms developed across the intra-Tethyan area (S as aran, 2006;Gawlick, 2006, 2011;Ivanova et al 2008;Bucur et al, 2010;Kaya and Altiner, 2014;Pleş et al, 2013;Pleş and Schlagintweit, 2014). While the defined chronostratigraphic range of P. leini from occurrences in a few countries (Austria, Bulgaria, FYR Macedonia, Romania, Greece, Turkey) is Kimmeridgian to Berriasian (Carras, 1995;S as aran, 2006;Ivanova et al, 2008;Schlagintweit and Gawlick, 2011;Kaya and Altiner, 2014;Fig.…”

Biostratigraphy and magnetostratigraphy of the uppermost Tithonian–Lower Berriasian in the Theodosia area of Crimea (southern Ukraine)

“…Mixed pe lagic sed i ments al ter nate with beds of eroded shal low-wa ter allochems, re garded as grav ity de bris flows, depos ited mainly in slope fa cies (Einsele, 1991;Flügel, 2004). Exam ples of grav ity-flow de pos its as so ci ated with pe lagic and hemipelagic lime stones have been re ported in the Up per Ju rassic-Lower Cre ta ceous se quences in many Eu ro pean coun tries (Matyszkiewicz and S³omka, 1994;Schlagintweit and Gawlick, 2007;Auer et al, 2009;Bucur et al, 2010;Guzhikov et al, 2012;Kukoè et al, 2012;Petrova et al, 2012;Wimble don et al, 2013).…”

Biostratigraphy and tectonic significance of lowermost Cretaceous carbonate rocks of the Circum-Rhodope Belt (Chalkidhiki Peninsula and Thrace region, NE Greece)

“…The most important species in terms of stratigraphic value and abundance in the samples are given with their stratigraphic and geographic distribution based on the following papers: Charollais et al (1966), Hottinger (1967, Neagu (1968Neagu ( , 1970aNeagu ( ,b, 1979Neagu ( , 1984Neagu ( , 1985Neagu ( , 1986Neagu ( , 1999, Septfontaine (1974Septfontaine ( , 1980Septfontaine ( , 1988, Darsac (1983), Loeblich and Tappan (1985), Bucur (1988Bucur ( , 1993Bucur ( , 1997, Chiocchini et al (1994Chiocchini et al ( , 2012, Bucur et al (1995Bucur et al ( , 2004aBucur et al ( , 2004bBucur et al ( , 2010Bucur et al ( , 2013, Ivanova (1999), Schlagintweit and Ebli (1999) Rigaud et al (2013). The ordering of species is consistent with the classification scheme of Loeblich and Tappan (1987) and the reclassification of agglutinated foraminifera proposed by Kaminski (2004).…”