Testing sea-level and carbonate production effects on stratal architecture of a distally steepened carbonate ramp (Upper Miocene, Menorca): A 3D forward modelling approach

Lower Eocene carbonate ramp clinoforms of the southern Tethys; Zagros Foreland Basin, SW Iran: Sequence stratigraphy architecture, basin physiography and carbonate factory controlling parameters

“…This carbonate factory, at an estimated water depth of approximately 20-40 m, produced the highest volume of carbonate production/accumulation compared to the deeper and shallower zones (Figure 10a Based on lateral facies heterogeneities and depositional geometry, this association is interpreted to have accumulated in a lagoonal shallow-water back-bank setting (Beavington-Penney et al, 2006;Jorry, 2004;Jorry et al, 2006;Racey, 2001). In general, a high percentage of porcelaneous foraminifera in FA.IV reflects a shallow-water, euphotic zone of the inner ramp setting (platform top; Allahkarampour Dill et al, 2018;Janson et al, 2010;Pomar, 2001aPomar, , 2001bPomar et al, 2012;Tella et al, 2022), adapted to sea grass meadows (Brandano, Frezza, Tomassetti, Pedley et al, 2009;Pomar et al, 2014). Such shallow water, vegetation-covered substrates have been documented based on indirect evidence provided by the 6.5 | FA.V: Allochthonous-dominated high-energetic inner ramp FA.V occurs in tabular cm-to-dm-thick limestone to sandy limestone beds (Figures 12a,b and 13a,b), dominated by well-sorted and well-rounded allochthonous components such as ooids, small miliolids, peloids and skeletal detritus (bivalves and gastropods; Figures 13c and 15a,c).…”

“…The high diversity and abundance of flat rotaliids such as Discocyclina and Actinocyclina , Nummulites , Assilina and Operculina , together with a small proportion of planktonic foraminifera, place this facies under low‐light and deeper‐water conditions (oligophotic zone; Allahkarampour Dill et al, 2018; Bassi et al, 2007; Beavington‐Penney & Racey, 2004; Brandano & Corda, 2002; Buxton & Pedley, 1989; Corda & Brandano, 2003; Janson et al, 2010; Mateu‐Vicens et al, 2012; Pomar, 2001b; Pomar et al, 2012, 2014; Romero et al, 2002). Fragmented, unsorted and poorly preserved tests of such rotaliids within a mud‐dominated matrix, the scarce shallow‐water components and bedding geometry (the slope clinoforms) reflect this FA to have mainly accumulated in the lower ramp slope setting (Beavington‐Penney & Racey, 2004; Mateu‐Vicens et al, 2008; Pomar, 2001a, 2001b; Racey, 2001; Tella et al, 2022) under an active sediment transport mechanism, which was presumably induced by both internal waves (IWs) and the bathymetric gradient (Mateu‐Vicens et al, 2012; Pomar, 2020). Downslope, the frequency of these large rotaliids diminishes at the profit of well‐preserved planktonic foraminifera, where wackestone‐packstone with lower proportions of reworked debris of fine‐grained large rotaliids dispersed in a mud‐dominated content (F.3; Figure 11a,b,d,e,f), that suggest the toe of the ramp slope (Mateu‐Vicens et al, 2008; Racey, 2001; Scheibner et al, 2003), concerning the start of the bottomset segment of the clinoforms.…”

“…This carbonate factory, at an estimated water depth of approximately 20–40 m, produced the highest volume of carbonate production/accumulation compared to the deeper and shallower zones (Figure 10a–c). Slightly downdip, flat Nummulites and Discocyclin , and the abundance of mud and nummulithoclast in the matrix along with the absence of sediment sorting increased, reflecting accumulation below the storm wave base (Mateu‐Vicens et al, 2012) in the meso‐oligophotic zone (upper ramp slope; Pomar, 2001b; Tella et al, 2022; Figure 10).…”

“…Based on lateral facies heterogeneities and depositional geometry, this association is interpreted to have accumulated in a lagoonal shallow‐water back‐bank setting (Beavington‐Penney et al, 2006; Jorry, 2004; Jorry et al, 2006; Racey, 2001). In general, a high percentage of porcelaneous foraminifera in FA.IV reflects a shallow‐water, euphotic zone of the inner ramp setting (platform top; Allahkarampour Dill et al, 2018; Janson et al, 2010; Pomar, 2001a, 2001b; Pomar et al, 2012; Tella et al, 2022), adapted to sea grass meadows (Brandano, Frezza, Tomassetti, Pedley et al, 2009; Brandano, Frezza, Tomassetti, et al, 2009; Pomar et al, 2014). Such shallow water, vegetation‐covered substrates have been documented based on indirect evidence provided by the disc‐shaped soritid Orbitolites , as strong evidence of sea grass (Beavington‐Penney & Racey, 2004), together with alveolinids, miliolids and peneroplids (Allahkarampour Dill et al, 2018; Beavington‐Penney et al, 2006; Beavington‐Penney & Racey, 2004; Jorry, 2004; Pomar et al, 2014).…”

“…This Nummulitic-dominated FA with rare deep-water components (i.e. Operculina, Discocyclina, Actinocyclina) and a packstone-grainstone matrix indicates the mesophotic zone (the middle ramp; Pomar, 2001b;Tella et al, 2022) above the base of wave action (Mateu-Vicens et al, 2012), in which an optimal condition for Nummulitidae was provided because of sufficient light for photosynthesis; however, it was too low to cause photo-oxidative stress (Hallock, 1985). This carbonate factory, at an estimated water depth of approximately 20-40 m, produced the highest volume of carbonate production/accumulation compared to the deeper and shallower zones (Figure 10a Based on lateral facies heterogeneities and depositional geometry, this association is interpreted to have accumulated in a lagoonal shallow-water back-bank setting (Beavington-Penney et al, 2006;Jorry, 2004;Jorry et al, 2006;Racey, 2001).…”