Hide/Show Apps

Campanian-Maastrichtian planktonic foraminiferal investigation and biostratigraphy (Kokaksu section, Bartın, NW Anatolia) : remarks on the cretaceous paleoceanography based on quantitative data

Download
2006
Güray, Alev
The aim of this study is to delineate the Campanian-Maastrichtian boundary by using planktonic foraminifers. In this manner, Kokaksu Section (Bartın, NW Anatolia) was selected and the Akveren Formation, characterized by a calciturbiditic-clayey limestone and marl intercalation of Campanian-Maastrichtian age, was examined. 59 samples were emphasized for position of boundary. Late Campanian-Maastrichtian planktonic foraminifers were studied in thin section and by washed samples. Two different biostratigraphical frameworks have been established. Globotruncanid zonation consists of Campanian Globotruncana aegyptiaca Zone, Upper Campanian-Middle Maastrichtian Gansserina gansseri Zone and Upper Maastrichtian Abathomphalus mayaroensis Zone, whereas heterohelicids biozonation includes Campanian Pseudotextularia elegans Zone, Lower Maastrichtian Planoglobulina acervuloinides Zone, Middle Maastrichtian Racemiguembelina fructicosa Zone and Upper Maastrichtian Pseudoguembelina hariensis Zone. Campanian-Maastrichtian boundary was determined as the boundary between Pseudotextularia elegans and Planoglobulina acervuloinides zones and Cretaceous-Tertiary boundary was designated by total disappearance of Late Cretaceous forms. Heterohelicid biozonation has been established in this study for the first time in Turkey. Collecting 300 individuals from each sample, diversity and abundance of assemblages were analyzed in terms of genus and species. ir evaluation of are important in observation of evolutionary trends and ecological changes. Moreover, evolution of different morphotypes is important in this evaluation. Such a study is new in Turkey in terms of examination of responses of planktonic foraminifers to environmental changes. Taxonomic framework has been constructed to define each species and differences of comparable forms have been discussed. Both scanning electron microscope (SEM) photographs and thin section photographs were used in order to show se distinctions.