Upper Carboniferous--Permian stratigraphy and fusulinids from the Anarak region, central Iran

Leven, E. Ja.; Gorgij, M. N.

doi:10.2205/2006es000200

Cited by 40 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…3). The sequence shows features similar to other Palaeozoic exposures described in North and Central Iran (Wendt et al 2005;Leven & Gorgij 2006). The AMC trends E -W and is sharply juxtaposed westward against the 'Coloured Mélange' of the Nain -Baft Mesozoic ophiolites (Ghasemi & Talbot 2006) by the western termination of the Great Kavir Fault.…”

Section: The Anarak Metamorphic Complex and The Metamorphic Units Of supporting

confidence: 76%

“…In addition, Leven & Gorgij (2006) and Gaetani et al (2009) show a striking similarity between the PermoCarboniferous stratigraphic evolution of North and Central Iran, suggesting the absence of biotic barriers and thus their contiguity. Minor differences occur in the Abadeh region, located along the eastern border of the Sanandaj-Sirjan Zone.…”

Section: How Many Blocks Form Iran?mentioning

confidence: 97%

“…These are typical cool-water low-diversity peri-Gondwana assemblages, which are distributed from Oman to Karakoram, Central Pamir and the Baoshan block in China. This might indicate that the block lay far south during the Early Permian with respect to North and Central Iran, which show typical warmwater tropical fusulinids (Leven & Gorgij 2006;Angiolini et al 2007).…”

Section: How Many Blocks Form Iran?mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The Cimmerian evolution of the Nakhlak–Anarak area, Central Iran, and its bearing for the reconstruction of the history of the Eurasian margin

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

New structural, sedimentological, petrological and palaeomagnetic data collected in the region of Nakhlak-Anarak provide important constraints on the Cimmerian evolution of Central Iran. The Olenekian-Upper Ladinian succession of Nakhlak was deposited in a forearc setting, and records the exhumation and erosion of an orogenic wedge, possibly located in the present-day Anarak region. The Triassic succession was deformed after Ladinian times and shows south-vergent folds and thrusts unconformably covered by Upper Cretaceous limestones following the Late Jurassic Neo-Cimmerian deformation. Palaeomagnetic data obtained in the Olenekian succession suggest a palaeoposition of the region close to Eurasia at a latitude around 208N. In addition, the palaeopoles do not support large anticlockwise rotations around vertical axes for central Iran with respect to Eurasia since the Middle Triassic, as previously suggested.The Anarak Metamorphic Complex (AMC) includes blueschist-facies metabasites associated with discontinuous slivers of serpentinized ultramafic rocks and Carboniferous greenschistfacies 'Variscan' metamorphic rocks, including widespread metacarbonates. The AMC was formed, at least partially, in the Triassic. Its erosion is recorded by the Middle Triassic Bāqoroq Formation at Nakhlak, which consists of conglomerates and sandstones rich in metamorphic detritus. The AMC was repeatedly deformed during post-Triassic times, giving origin to a complex structural setting characterized by strong tectonic fragmentation of previously formed tectonic units.Based on these data, we suggest that the Nakhlak-Anarak units represent an arc-trench system developed during the Eo-Cimmerian orogenic cycle. Different tectonic scenarios that can account for the evolution of the region and for the occurrence of this orogenic wedge in its present position within Central Iran are critically discussed, as well as its relationships with a presumed 'Variscan' metamorphic event.

show abstract

Section: The Anarak Metamorphic Complex and The Metamorphic Units Of supporting

confidence: 76%

Section: How Many Blocks Form Iran?mentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: How Many Blocks Form Iran?mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Cimmerian evolution of the Nakhlak–Anarak area, Central Iran, and its bearing for the reconstruction of the history of the Eurasian margin

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Several recent papers deal with the Carboniferous -Permian stratigraphy of central Iran and its fusulinid content. They include in their discussion interesting correlations to the Alborz (Baghbani 1993(Baghbani , 1997Leven & Taheri 2003;Leven & Vaziri 2004;Leven & Gorgij 2006;Boncheva et al 2007;Davydov & Arefifard 2007). …”

Section: Eastern Alborzmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pennsylvanian–Early Triassic stratigraphy in the Alborz Mountains (Iran)

Gaetani

Angiolini

Ueno

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

New fieldwork was carried out in the central and eastern Alborz, addressing the sedimentary succession from the Pennsylvanian to the Early Triassic. A regional synthesis is proposed, based on sedimentary analysis and a wide collection of new palaeontological data. The Moscovian Qezelqaleh Formation, deposited in a mixed coastal marine and alluvial setting, is present in a restricted area of the eastern Alborz, transgressing on the Lower Carboniferous Mobarak and Dozdehband formations. The late Gzhelian–early Sakmarian Dorud Group is instead distributed over most of the studied area, being absent only in a narrow belt to the SE. The Dorud Group is typically tripartite, with a terrigenous unit in the lower part (Toyeh Formation), a carbonate intermediate part (Emarat and Ghosnavi formations, the former particularly rich in fusulinids), and a terrigenous upper unit (Shah Zeid Formation), which however seems to be confined to the central Alborz. A major gap in sedimentation occurred before the deposition of the overlying Ruteh Limestone, a thick package of packstone–wackestone interpreted as a carbonate ramp of Middle Permian age (Wordian–Capitanian). The Ruteh Limestone is absent in the eastern part of the range, and everywhere ends with an emersion surface, that may be karstified or covered by a lateritic soil.The Late Permian transgression was directed southwards in the central Alborz, where marine facies (Nesen Formation) are more common. Time-equivalent alluvial fans with marsh intercalations and lateritic soils (Qeshlaq Formation) are present in the east. Towards the end of the Permian most of the Alborz emerged, the marine facies being restricted to a small area on the Caspian side of the central Alborz. There, the Permo-Triassic boundary interval is somewhat similar to the Abadeh–Shahreza belt in central Iran, and contains oolites, flat microbialites and domal stromatolites, forming the base of the Elikah Formation. The P–T boundary is established on the basis of conodonts, small foraminifera and stable isotope data. The development of the lower and middle part of the Elikah Formation, still Early Triassic in age, contains vermicular bioturbated mudstone/wackestone, and anachronostic-facies-like gastropod oolites and flat pebble conglomerates.Three major factors control the sedimentary evolution. The succession is in phase with global sea-level curve in the Moscovian and from the Middle Permian upwards. It is out of phase around the Carboniferous–Permian boundary, when the Dorud Group was deposited during a global lowstand of sealevel. When the global deglaciation started in the Sakmarian, sedimentation stopped in the Alborz and the area emerged. Therefore, there is a consistent geodynamic control. From the Middle Permian upwards, passive margin conditions control the sedimentary evolution of the basin, which had its depocentre(s) to the north. Climate also had a significant role, as the Alborz drifted quickly northwards with other central Iran blocks towards the Turan active margin. It passed from a southern latitude through the aridity belt in the Middle Permian, across the equatorial humid belt in the Late Permian and reached the northern arid tropical belt in the Triassic.

show abstract

“…In the Gzhelian, Montiparus evolves into Carbonoschwagerina in the peri-Gondwana realm (Ozawa et al, 1990). The precise position of the CarboniferousPermian boundary has long been the subject of debate (Leven and Gorgij, 2006;Ozawa et al, 1990). However, many studies agree that the Carboniferous-Permian boundary in the East European Basin is defined on the first appearance of Pseudoschwagerina (see Fig.…”

Section: The Fusulinides and Related Ordersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evolution and Geological Significance of Larger Benthic Foraminifera

BouDagher‐Fadel¹

2008

Developments in Palaeontology and Stratigraphy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Upper Carboniferous--Permian stratigraphy and fusulinids from the Anarak region, central Iran

Cited by 40 publications

References 1 publication

The Cimmerian evolution of the Nakhlak–Anarak area, Central Iran, and its bearing for the reconstruction of the history of the Eurasian margin

The Cimmerian evolution of the Nakhlak–Anarak area, Central Iran, and its bearing for the reconstruction of the history of the Eurasian margin

Pennsylvanian–Early Triassic stratigraphy in the Alborz Mountains (Iran)

Evolution and Geological Significance of Larger Benthic Foraminifera

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About