Biostratigraphy Study of Tarbur Formation

Journal of Earth Science, Vol. 25, No. 2, p. 263–274, April 2014
Printed in China
DOI: 10.1007/s12583-014-0431-9
ISSN 1674-487X
Biostratigraphy Study of Tarbur Formation (Upper Cretaceous) in Tang-E Kushk and East of Sarvestan (SW of Iran)
Massih Afghah*, Shohreh Yaghmour
Geology Department of Islamic Azad University, Shiraz Branch, Shiraz, Iran
ABSTRACT: In this study, 465 m of Tarbur Formation in Tang-e Kushk and east of Sarvestan area
stratigraphic sections are studied and 185 thin sections are provided and analyzed. Based on
lithostratigraphic studies, Tarbur Formation in these two stratigraphic sections is divided into upper
and lower parts. Lower part includes medium-bedded rudist limestones which is consist of iron nodules with Gastropoda. Upper part is made of light grey massive organodetrital limestone. Identified
foraminifers of both studied sections are comprised of: Orbitoides media, Orbitoides triangularis, Orbitoides tissoti, Orbitoides orientalis, Orbitoides apiculata, Antalyna korayi, Rotalia skourensis, Dicyclina
schlumbergeri, Nezzazatinella sp., Omphalocyclus macroporus, Trochospira sp., Siderolites calcitrapoides,
Broeckinella sp., Lepidorbitoides socialis, Gavelinella pertusa, are detected, and also it has Dasycladacea
of Salpingoporella dinarica, Salpingoporella turgida, Salpingoporella sp.. According to diagnosed foraminifera, the age determination of Tarbur Formation is assigned to Upper Maastrichtian.
KEY WORDS: Maastrichtian, Tarbur Formation, biostratigraphy, foraminifera, Zagros, Iran.
1 INTRODUCTION
Upper Cretaceous succession of the Zagros Basin is so
significant because of variation of litho and biofacies. Discrepancy between lithostratigraphic data and biostratigraphic limit
in various stratigraphic sections have been recorded in Fars
Platform before (Afghah and Farhoudi, 2012). Upper Cretaceous succession was described in Zagros Basin, Fars area as
Tarbur Formation by James and Wynd (1965) which is composed rudist limestone. The age determination of Tarbur Formation is assigned to Campanian-Maastrichtian by their work.
It should emphasize that the age determination of the Tarbur
Formation has been provided by rudists. Actually rudist fragments are well distributed in Tarbur limestone which are associated with foraminifers. Askari et al. (2012) identified rudist
taxa in Central Zagros region. According to Askari et al. (2012),
Praeradiolites plicatus, Sauvagesia cf. somalica, Bornonia
anatolica, Hippurites cornucopiae have recorded from Tarbur
Formation. Based on their study, the Tarbur Formation is assigned to Maastrichtian. Other studies support that the Tarbur
limestone is related to different ages in various stratigraphic
sections (Afghah and Farhoudi, 2012; Afghah, 2005; Khosrow
and Afghah, 2004). Then various biostratigraphic limits of the
Tarbur outcrops have great support for reconstruction of paleogeographic interpretation of studied area during Upper Cretaceous. However foraminifer biostratigraphy is common method
to determine biostratigraphic limits of Zagros rock units
*Corresponding author: [email protected]
© China University of Geosciences and Springer-Verlag Berlin
Heidelberg 2014
Manuscript received April 23, 2013.
Manuscript accepted November 12, 2013.
particularly in Tarbur Formation. Since Tarbur Formation is well
distributed in narrow line which is parallel to Zagros main thrust
fault (Afghah, 2010), therefore establishment of biozones so
significant for completely biostratigraphic data of Tarbur rudist
limestone. Tarbur rudist is distinguished between Gurpi (at the
base) and Marl of Sachun (on the top) formations. Many workers
have documented an iron nodule zone between Tarbur and Sachun formations as erosional period (Khosrow and Afghah, 2004;
James and Wynd, 1965). The upper limit of this formation is
usually selected from the anhydrite horizon base or marly limestone sequence of Sachun Formation basal part (Arzaghi et al.,
2012). Evaporites of Sachun is not common in all exposures
along Fars Platform, generally marls and limy marls are observed
in eastern of Shiraz area.
Importance of biostratigraphic study of the Tarbur Formation in Tang-e Kushk and east of Sarvestan stratigraphic sections
supports regional aspect of geologic setting and paleogeographic
reconstruction of Upper Cretaceous strata along study area. Furthermore comparison of biostratigraphic data of mentioned area
with other stratigraphic section which are located in other part of
Zagros led us to interpret paleoenvironmental condition of the
Tarbur Formation.
2 GEOGRAPHICAL AND GEOLOGIC SETTING
The studied stratigraphic sections are located between geographical coordination such as: 53°N to 54°N and 22°30'E to
29°00'E which are located in eastern Shiraz City (Fig. 1). Geographic coordination of Tang-e Kushk stratigraphic section is
related to 29°23'8''N and 53°21'34''E and Sarvestan stratigraphic
section locality is situated at geographic coordination
(29°17'45''N and 53°15'15''E). Based on Iran structural division
(Stoecklin, 1968), the studied stratigraphic sections are located
within Zagros folded zone. Alavi (2004) have confirm tectonic
Afghah, M., Yaghmour, S., 2014. Biostratigraphy Study of Tarbur Formation (Upper Cretaceous) in Tang-E Kushk and East of
Sarvestan (SW of Iran). Journal of Earth Science, 25(2): 263–274, doi:10.1007/s12583-014-0431-9
264
Massih Afghah and Shohreh Yaghmour 29o28'N
Caspian Sea
N
Shiraz
52o54'E
29o38'
Dariyan
Iran
Kherameh
Shiraz
Tang-e Kushk
rs
ia
n
G
ul
f
Sarvestan
0
8.6 km
53o12'E
Pe
Figure 1. Location map of the studied stratigraphic sections, each stratigraphic section is represented by star.
zonal classification similar Stoecklin (1968). Based on James
and Wynd (1965) both stratigraphic sections are located in
interior Fars area.
2.1 History of Tarbur Formation Studies
Tarbur Formation was firstly studied by James and Wynd
(1965) have selected type section of the Tarbur Formation. A
collection of rich-rudist deposits have been expanded in the
south east of Tethys during Campanian–Maastrichtian time,
which is called Tarbur Formation in Zagros zone (Motiei,
1992).
Based on Kalantari (1976) the Tarbur Formation has comprised of a row of dark gray or brown crystalline limestone
along with argilltic and organodetrital limestone with intercalation gray calcareous silty shales, and finally, grey organodetrital dolomites. His biostratigraphic study has been reflected
Maastrichtian age of Tarbur Formation. Moosavi and Askari
(2008) had studied biostratigraphgy of Tarbur Formation in
Dorahan (Charmahal & Bakhtiyari Province).
Afghah and Khosrow (2004) had studied and analyzed
lithostratigraphic units and depositing environment of Tarbur
Formation in the northeast and southeast of Shiraz. Based on
their study, Tarbur limestone is divided into two distinct
lithostratigraphic units. They believe that the reefs of Tarbur
Formation in the interior Fars with regard to their bedding in
sedimentary basin are tidal continental margin reef.
Also, microbiostratigraphy, microfacies, and sedimentary
environment of Tarbur Formation in the south east of Shiraz
have been analyzed by Afghah and Yousefzadeh (2006).
Lithostratigraphic subdivisions of the Tarbur Formation was
finalized in Fars area by Afghah (2009).
3 METHODS AND MATERIALS
In order to biostratigraphy study in eastern Shiraz two
stratigraphic columns were selected. Lithostratigraphic limits
of both sections were determined by field work. Over 250
samples were collected. Stratigraphic distribution of lithofacies
are marked. By 1 : 250 000 map of National Iranian Oil Co.
tectonic setting and other lithostratigraphic units are studied
particularly trend of major faults. Thin sections are provided
from collected samples. In order to identification of foraminifers, we used Afghah and Farhoudi (2012), Dieni (2010),
Çaglar (Kaya) and Önal (2009), Georgescu and Almogi-Labin
(2008), Khosrow and Afghah (2004), Permoli and Verga
(2004), Abdelghany (2003), Permoli et al. (1995), Kalantari
(1994, 1976) and Rahaghi (1976).
4 LITHOSTRATIGRAPHY
As mentioned before, Tarbur Formation is marked as rudist limestone between shaly Gurpi and marly Sachun formations. Field investigations are great support of lower and upper
lithostratigraphic boundary of Tarbur limestone in Tang-e
Kushk stratigraphic section whereas lower contact of Sarvestan
Tarbur stratigraphic column is not exposed. The Tarbur Formation of both stratigraphic sections are divided into two separated lithostratigraphic parts which are composed lower wellbedded rudist limestone and upper massive organodetrital
limestone. Field measurement of Tarbur lower part is reflected
130 m thickness of brown to green well-bedded limestone with
iron nodules. Organic constituents of this part are consisted of
Gastropoda, rudist, and foraminifers. Lower contact of Tarbur
Formation has developed discontinuously Gurpi Formation in
Tang-e Kushk Section. Upper portion of the Tarbur limestone
is mainly consisted of grey to milky rudist massive limestone
which is covered by marly limestone of Sachun Formation.
Whole thickness of Tarbur Formation is measured 365 m in
this stratigraphic column (Fig. 2). The lower contact of Tarbur
Formation of Sarvestan stratigraphic section is not exposed, but
similar Tang-e Kushk Section, two separated lithostratigraphic
portions are distinguishable which are described as lower and
upper parts. The lower part is generally composed cream,
brown to grey medium-bedded rudist limestone. Recognized
iron nodules are rarely detected in this portion. Additionally the
lower part is extended 32 m. The upper part is mainly consisted
of light grey, cream to grey massive rudist limestone which is
underlain by evaporites of Sachun Formation (Fig. 3). It should
be notice the rudists are observable as crushed fragments in
both stratigraphic sections, but rarely uncrushed rudists are
investigated.
4.1 Biozonation of Tarbur Formation in Tang-e Kushk
Stratigraphic Section
Stratigraphic distribution of well known foraminifers have
supported one biozone in each stratigraphic column of Tarbur
Formation. The established biozone of Tang-e Kushk stratigraphic section is nominated as Orbitoides media and Omphalocyclus macroporus assemblage zone and described biozone
of Sarvestan stratigraphic column is named Orbitoides media
Biostratigraphy Study of Tarbur Formation (Upper Cretaceous)
265
zone.
Lower biostratigraphic limit of the Tang-e Kushk Tarbur
Formation is marked by disappearance of Early Maastrichtian
planktonic foraminifers of Gurpi Formation which is synchronous with appearance of benthic foraminifers of Tarbur Formation. Diagnosed planktonic Foraminifers of uppermost Gurpi
Formation are including Globotruncana ventricosa and Globotruncana arca.
assemblage zone. Actually this biozone is marked by the first
occurrence of Orbitoides media and Omphalocyclus macroporus. The common foraminifer taxa which are associated with
both of mentioned Foraminifera are comprised by Dicyclina
schlumbergeri, Antalyna korayi, Rotalia skourensis, Orbitoides
tissoti, Orbitoides sp., Dicyclina sp., Minouxia sp., Nezzazatinella sp., Rotalia sp., Lepidorbitoides socialis, Trochospira sp.
Rotalia skourensis, Orbitoides triangularis, Orbitoides orientalis, Dictyoconella sp., Broeckinella sp., Trochospira sp.,
Loftusia minor, Siderolites sp., Siderolites calcitrapoides, and
dasycladacea are including Salpingoporella dinarica, Salpingoporella turgida, Salpingoporella sp.. Rahaghi (1976)
4.2 Tang-e Kushk Biozone
As mentioned before, established biozone of this section is
named as Orbitoides media and Omphalocyclus macroporus
Figure 2. Lithostratigraphic diagram of Tang-e Kushk stratigraphic section.
Thickness (m)
Stratigraphical column
Member
Stage
Danian
Formation
Series
Lower
Massive limestone, cream and grey weathered color,
with rudist fragment
Massive limestone, cream and grey weathered color
60
Tarbur Formation
Maastrichtian
Upper
Upper
90
Cretaceous
Field description
Sachun Formation
System
Massih Afghah and Shohreh Yaghmour Paleocene
266
Massive limestone, milky and grey weathered color
with rudist fragment
Massive limestone, milky and grey weathered color
30
Lower
Medium-bedded limestone, grey and brown weathered color
Medium-bedded limestone, cream and brown weathered color
with iron nodules
Medium-bedded limestone, cream and brown weathered color
0
Massive limestone
Medium-bedded limestone
Hormoz salt
Marly limestone
5.5 m
0
?
Figure 3. Lithologic column of Tarbur Formation at east Sarvestan section.
has been recorded Orbitoides orientalis from Maastrichtian
strata of western Iran. Zambetakis and Kemeridou (2004) have
recognized Omphalocyclus macroporus, Loftusia minor, Orbitoides media, Orbitoides apiculata, and Siderolites calcitrapoides from Maastrichtian succession of eastern Greece
platform. The stratigraphic section of Tang-e Kushk has diversity and abundance of different species. Lepidorbitoides socialis, Trochospira sp. and also rarely Salpingoporella turgida
are recognized in the lower portion of the stratigraphic section
of Tang-e Kushk. Rotalia skourensis, Rotalia sp., Orbitoides
media, Orbitoides triangularis, Orbitoides tissoti, Orbitoides
orientalis, Orbitoides sp., Antalina korayi, Dicyclina schlumbergeri, Dicyclina sp., Minouxia sp., Nezzazatinella sp., Dictyoconella sp. are common in packstone and grainstone lithofacies of upper part of this stratigraphic section of Tarbur Formation. Miliolids and other imperforate foraminifers are associated with orbitoids as faunal assemblage particularly in upper
portion of Tang-e Kushk stratigraphic section of Tarbur limestone.
Antalyna korayi have been recorded from Late Maastrichtian strata of Iran and Turkey by many authors (Afghah,
2010; Khosorow and Afghah, 2004). The first appearance of
Biozone
Species
Salpingoporella dinarica
Salpingoporella sp.
Nezazzatinella sp.
Lepidorbitoides sp.
Dicyclina sp.
Loftusia minor
Orbitoides sp.
Orbitoides media
Thickness (m)
Stratigraphical column
Member
Formation
Stage
Danian
Sachun Formation
Series
Maastrichtian age (Permoli and Verga, 2004).
Biostratigraphic data of uppermost of Gurpi and lowermost of Tarbur formations have supported disconformity between these rock units during Middle Maastrichtian age which
is different from the other biostratigraphy study of Tarbur in
this area (Afghah and Yousefzadeh, 2006).
Lower
Antalyna korayi is synchronous with lower contact of the Tange Kushk Tarbur Formation, therefore it is approval Late Maastrichtian age of Tarbur limestone in this stratigraphic section.
Gurpi Formation collected samples have comprised of Globotroncana ventricosa, Globotroncana arca, Globotroncana
orientalis, and Heterohelix sp., which are indicative of Early
System
267
Paleocene
Biostratigraphy Study of Tarbur Formation (Upper Cretaceous)
60
Orbitoides media zone
Tarbur Formation
30
Lower
Maastrichtian
Upper
Cretaceous
Upper
90
0
Massivelimestone
Medium-bedded limestone
Hormoz salt
Marly limestone
?
Figure 4. Vertical distribution of Tang-e Kushk stratigraphic section index foraminifers and established biozone.
4.3 Biozonation of Tarbur Formation in East Sarvestan
Stratigraphic Section
The East Sarvestan stratigraphic section as compared with
Tang-e Kushk stratigraphic section, is of few and rare variation
from the point of view of frequency and variability of well
known foraminifers.
Microscopic investigations have reflected distributed
dolomitization of basal part of this section. Also lower contact
268
Massih Afghah and Shohreh Yaghmour of the Sarvestan stratigraphic section is not exposed. The first
taxon which have been identified in this stratigraphic section
was Orbitoides media. Generally one biozone is established in
this stratigraphic column which is named Orbitiodes media
biozone.
4.4 Orbitoides media Biozone
This biozone is described by the first occurrence of Orbitoides media. It is comprised of medium to massive grey rudist
limestone which is measured 95 m in thickness. As mentioned
before, the basal part of Tarbur Formation is dolomitized.
Hence, there is no evidence of foraminiferal biofacies. Orbitoides media taxon range zone is associated with Nezzazatinella sp., Orbitoides sp., Lepidorbitoides sp., Loftusia minor,
Dicyclina sp., Caskinolina sp., and dasycladacea Salpingoporella dinarica and Salpingoporella sp. (Fig. 5). There are
many documents that confirm Maastrichtian age of each identified foraminifer of this biozone. Afghah and Farhoudi (2012)
Figure 5. Biostratigraphic diagram as of East Sarvestan stratigraphic section.
5 CONCLUSION
Biostratigraphic data of this article confirm different age
determination of Tarbur Formation studied outcrops. Vertical
distribution of the diagnosed foraminifers reflects the diversity
of foraminiferal genus and species studied in these two sections
particularly in Tang-e Kushk stratigraphic section. Faunal
assemblage of both studied sections are the same as previous
biostratigraphic data (Afghah and Farhoudi, 2012; Khosrow
and Afghah, 2004). Upper biostratigraphic limit of both stratigraphic columns are similar, therefore it acceptable boundary
between Upper Cretaceous and Lower Paleocene as synchronous in both stratigraphic sections. Stratigraphic distribution of
index foraminifers confirms Upper Maastrichtian age of the
Tarbur Formation in Tang-e Kushk stratigraphic column
whereas there is no biostratigraphic data of separable of Maastrichtian strata in east of Sarvestan stratigraphic section. There
are many documents which confirm continuous sedimentation
between Gurpi and Tarbur Formations (Afghah and Farhoudi,
2012; Khosrow and Afghah, 2004; James and Wynd, 1965).
Occurrence of Early Campanian pelagic foraminifers of upper
parts of Gurpi Formation approved obvious disconformity
between Gurpi and Tarbur formations in studied area. It is
necessary to note that Kalantari’s study (1976) did not distinguish this disconformity. Since Sarvestan fault affected this
area, it is logic to conclude Tang-e Kushk section biozone was
controlled by this fault during Maasrtichtian. Biostratigraphic
data of upper lithostratigraphic limit of Gurpi and lower Tarbur
formations are a proof of a stratigraphic gap in Middle Maastrichtian period.
The lower limit of Tang-e Kushk stratigraphic section is
discontinuous with Gurpi Formation. Also, the lower limit of
the East Sarvestan stratigraphic section has been limited with
salt dome, while upper limit of Tarbur Formation in both sections comprises of evaporites of Sachun Formation.
Although there is a difference between the lower limit of
Tarbur Formation in both sections under study, the upper limit
of which is upper Maastrichtian and the datum line could be
considered as the end of Maastrichtian (Fig. 6).
Maastrichtian
Tarbur Formation
Cretaceous
Upper
have recorded Loftusia minor from Maastrichtian succession of
eastern Shiraz (SW of Iran). Zambetakis and Kemeridou (2004)
documented Loftusia minor from Maastrichtian sediment of
Greece.
Based on Wynd’s (1965) biozonation which confirm Orbitoides media as Campanian taxon in interior Fars area whereas it is
recognizable with Masstrichtian foraminifer taxa. Khosrow and
Afghah (2004), Afghah and Yousefzadeh (2006) and Afghah and
Farhoudi (2012) documented association of Orbitoides media with
index Maastrichtian foraminifer taxa such as: Lepidorbitoides sp.
Loftusia minor. Therefore the age of this biozone is assigned to
Maastrichtian age. Globotruncana ventricosa, Globotruncana
arca, Heterohelix sp., Globotruncana stauriformis, Globotruncana orientalis species have all been distinguished according to
the studies carried out on Gurpi Formation which is, actually,
the lower stratigraphic section to have been studied, based on
which all Gurpi formation age in this zone is Early Maastrichtian (Fig. 5)
269
Paleocene
Lower
Danian
Sachun Formation
Biostratigraphy Study of Tarbur Formation (Upper Cretaceous)
20 m
0
Datum line
Limestone
Shale
Well-bedded limestone
Marly limestone
Covered
Hormoz salt
Figure 6. Correlation of both studied sections of the Tarbur
Formaion.
REFERENCES CITED
Abdelghany, O., 2003. Late Campanian-Maastrichtian Foraminifera from the Simsima Formation, on the Western
Side of the Northern Oman Mountains. Cretaceous Research, 24(4): 391–405
Afghah, M., 2005. Microbiostratigraphic Study of Tarbur Formation in Khan-E Kat & Chehelcheshmeh. 9th Iranian
Geology Society, Tehran. 354–367
Afghah, M., 2009. New Investigations of the Tarbur Formation
Lithostratigraphy in the Review of Type Section and Its
Correlation with Kuk-E Tir Section. Journal of Science Islamic Azad University, 19(73): 183–196
Afghah, M., 2010. Biozonation and Biostratigraphic Limits of
the Tarbur Formation around Shiraz (SW of Iran): [Dissertation]. Westefaelische Wilhelms Universitaet, Muenster.
171
Afghah, M., Farhoudi, G., 2012. Boundary between Upper
Cretaceous and Lower Paleocene in the Zagros Mountain
Ranges of Southwestern Iran. Acta Geologica Sinica,
86(2): 325–338
Afghah, M., Khosrow, T. K., 2004, Lithostratigraphic Units of
Tarbur Formation in North East and South East of Shiraz.
Journal of Science Islamic Azad University, 14(53): 1–30
Afghah, M., Yousefzadeh, E., 2006. Microfacies and Sedimentary Environment of Carbonate Deposits of Tarbur Formation in Kherameh Section, the South East of Shiraz. Applied Geology Publication, 3(2): 1–6
Alavi, M., 2004. Regional Stratigraphy of the Zagros FoldThrust Belt of Iran and Its Proforeland Evolution. American Journal of Science, 304: 1–20
Arzaghi, S., Khosrow Tehrani, K., Afghah, M., 2012. Sedimentology and Petrography of Paleocene–Eocene Evaporites:
the Sachun Formation, Zagros Basin, Iran. Carbonates
270
and Evaporites, 27(1): 43–53
Askari, B., Khazaei, A. R., Jafarian, K. T, K., et al., 2012.
Biostratigraphy of Sabz Kuh (West of Broojen). Journal
of Researches of Stratigraphy and Sedimentology, 27(4):
49–64
Çaglar (Kaya), M., Önal, M., 2009. Systematic Paleontology,
Biostratigraphy, Paleobiogeography of Loftusia (Foraminifera) and Rudist Assemblage in a Regressive Sequence in the Hekimhan-Malatya Area (Eastern Anatolia)
Turkey. Journal Geological Society of India, 74: 329–342
Checchia-Rispoli, G., 1911. La Serte Nummulitica di Dontorni
di Bagher in Provinc Palermo. Giorn. Sci. Nat. bocon, 28:
168
Cushman, J. A., 1926. Some foraminifera from the Mendez
Shale of Eastern Mexico. Contributions from the Cushman Foundation for Foraminiferal Research. 2: 16–28
d’Archiac, A. D., 1837. Mémoire Sur la Formation Crétacé du
Sud-Ouest de la France, Mémoires de la Société
Géologique de France, 2(7):157–192
Dieni, I., 2010. Maastrichtian and Selandian Decapod Crustaceans from Sardinia. Bullettino della Societá Paleontologica Italiana, 49(2): 135–144
Ehrenberg, G. C., 1840. Über Die Bildung der Kreidefelsen
und des Kreidemergels Durch Unsichtbare Organismen.
Abhandlungen der Königliche Akademie der Wissenschaften Zu Berlin, 1838: 59–147
Farinacci, A., Köylüoglu, M., 1985. Antalyna korayi n.sp., in
the Phyletic Lineage of the Nezzazatidae (Foraminifera),
Revue de Micropaléontologie, 6: 19–22
Geogescu, M. D., Almogi-Labin, A., 2008, New Data to Support the Phylogenetic Relationship between the Serial
Planktonic Foraminifera (Family Heterohelicidae Cushman, 1972) and Some Large-Sized Benthic Foraminifera
(Family Orbitoididae Schwager, 1876) of the Late Cretaceous. Revue de Paléobiologie, 27(1): 15–24
Henson, F.R.S., 1948. Larger Imperforate Foraminifera of
South-Western Asia. Brit. Mus. (Nat. Hist.), London. 127
James, G. A., Wynd, J. G., 1965. Stratigraphic Nomenclature
of Iranian Oil Consortium Agreement Area. American Association Petroleum Geologists Bull., 49(12): 2182–2245
Kalantari, A., 1976. Microbiostratigraphy of Sarvestan Area.
National Iranian Oil Co., Iran. 5: 129
Kalantari, A., 1994. Zagros Lithostratigraphy & Microfacies.
National Iranian Oil Company, Geological Lab, Zagros.
421
Khosrow, T. K., Afghah, M., 2004. Microbiostratigraphic
Study of Tarbur Formation in the North, North East and
South East of Shiraz. Geology Survey of Iran, Geosciences,
53(12): 76–85
Lamark, J. B., 1816. Historie Naturelle des Animaux sans
Vertebres, vol.2, Paris, verdiere. 1–568
Marsson, T., 1878. Die Foraminiferen der Weissen
Schreibkreide der Inseln Ruegen, Mitteilungen des
Massih Afghah and Shohreh Yaghmour Naturwissenschaftlichen Vereins fuer Neu-Vorpommern
und Rugen in Greiswald, 10: 115–196
Moosavi, M. H., Askari, P. B., 2008. Microfacies and Sedimentary Environment of Tarbur Formation in Dorahan
Area. (East Lordegan). Journal of Applied Geology, 4(3):
195–206
Motiei, H., 1992. Iran’s Geology, Zagros Stratigraphy. Geological Survey of Iran, Iran. 525
Munier-Chalmas, E., 1887. Sur la Cyclolina et Trios Nouveaux
Geners de de Couches á Rudistes: Cyclopsina , Dicyclina
et Spirocyclina, Compte Rendu des Séances, Société
Géologique de France, xxx-xxxi
Permoli, S. I., Nicora, A., Vanneau, A. A., 1995. Upper Cretaceous Larger Foraminifer Biostratigraphy from Wodejebato Guyot, Sites 873 through 877. Proceeding of Ocean
Drilling Program, 144: 1–27
Permoli, S. I., Verga, D., 2004. Practical Manual of Cretaceous
Planktonic Foraminifera, Course 3. In: Verga, D., Rettori,
R., eds., International School on Planktonic Foraminifera:
Universities of Perugia and Milano, Tipografiadi di
Pontefekcino, Perugia. 283
Pessagno, E. A., 1967. Upper Cretaceous Planktonic Foraminifera from Western Gulf Coastal Plain. Paleontographica Americana, 5: 245–445
Radoičić, R., 1959. Salpingoporella Dinarica n. sp. dans les
Sédiments Crétacés Inférieurs des Dinarides. Geolles
Glasnik, 3: 33–43
Radoičić, R., 1965. Pianella turgida n. sp. from the Cenomanian of the Outer Dinarids. Geol. Vjesnik, 18(1): 195–
1999
Rahaghi, A., 1976. Contribution à l’Étude de Quelques Grands
Foraminifères de L’Iran. Parts 1–3. National Iranian Oil
Co. Publication, Tehran. 6: 79
Schlumberger, C. H., 1901. Premiiere Note sur les Orbitoïdes
I-IV, Extracts Bull. Soc. Géol. France, (4): 459–467
Schlumberger, C. H., 1902. Premiiere Note sur les Orbitoïdes,
Bulletin de la Sociéte Géologique de France, Sér. 42:
255–261
Stoecklin, J., 1968. Structural History and Tectonics of Iran: A
Review. American Association Petroleum Geologists Bull.,
52(7): 1229–1258
Wynd, J. G., 1965. Biofacies of Iranian Oil Consortium
Agreement Area. IOOC Report No. 1082, Tehran (unpublished)
White, M. P., 1928. Some Index Foraminifera of the Tampico
Embayment of Mexico, Part 2, Journal of Paleontology
2(4): 280–313
Zambetakis, L. A., Kemeridou, A., 2004. Loftusia cf. anatolica
in Upper Maastrichtian of the Eastern Greece Platform
(Mount Ptoon, Boeotia, Greece): Paleogeo-Graphical Remarks, Proceedings of the 10th International Congress.
Thessaloniki, Bull. Geol. Soc. Greece, 36(2): 792–794
Biostratigraphy Study of Tarbur Formation (Upper Cretaceous)
Plate I
1. Orbitoides triangularis Checchia-Rispoli, 1911, longitudinal section, Tang-e Kushk Section.
2. Orbitoides orientalis Rahaghi, 1976, longitudinal section,Tang-e Kushk Section.
3. Orbitoides media (d’Archic, 1873), longitudinal section, Tang-e Kushk Section.
4. Lepidorbitoides socialis Schlumberger, 1901, sub longitudinal section, Sarvestan Section.
5. Orbitoides apiculata Schlumberger, 1902, longitudinal section, Tang-e Kushk Section.
6. Gavelinella pertusa (Marsson, 1878), axial section, Tang-e Kushk Section.
271
272
Plate II
1. Salpingoporella dinarica Radoicic, 1959, Tang-e Kushk Section.
2. Coskinollina sp. sub axial section, Sarvestan Section.
3. Dicyclina shlumbergeri (Munier-Chalmas 1887), longitudinal Section, Sarvestan Section.
4. Acordiella sp., sub axial section, Tang-e Kushk Section.
5. Nezzazatinella sp. sub axial section, Sarvestan Section.
6. Antalyna korayi Farinacci and Köylüoglu, 1985, axial section, Tang-e Kushk Section.
Massih Afghah and Shohreh Yaghmour Biostratigraphy Study of Tarbur Formation (Upper Cretaceous)
Plate III
1. Salpingoporella turgida (Radoičić, 1965), Sarvestan Section.
2. Dicyclina shlumbergeri (Munier-Chalmas 1887), longitudinal section, Tang-e Kushk Section.
3. Omphalocyclus macroporus (Lamark, 1816), sub longitudinal section, Tang-e Kushk Section.
4. Loftusia sp., axial section, Tang-e Kushk Section.
5. Minouxia sp., sub longitudinal section, Sarvestan Section.
6. Rotalia skourensis Henson, 1948, sub axial section, Tang-e Kushk Section.
273
274
Plate IV
1. Globotruncana arca (Cushman, 1926), Gurpi Formation, Tang-e Kushk Section.
2. Globotruncana ventricosa White, 1928, Gurpi Formation, Tang-e Kushk Section.
3. Heterohelix globulosa (Ehrenberg, 1840), Gurpi Formation, Tang-e Kushk Section.
4. Macroglobigerinelloides bollii (Pessagno, 1967), Gurpi Formation, Tang-e Kushk Section.
Massih Afghah and Shohreh Yaghmour