中新世古姆地层(伊朗):重新审查萨南达季-锡尔詹和伊朗中部盆地(泰提安海道东北缘)的生物地层学和年代解释

Pub Date : 2024-07-01 DOI:10.61551/gsjfr.54.3.202
Ebrahim Mohammadi
{"title":"中新世古姆地层(伊朗):重新审查萨南达季-锡尔詹和伊朗中部盆地(泰提安海道东北缘)的生物地层学和年代解释","authors":"Ebrahim Mohammadi","doi":"10.61551/gsjfr.54.3.202","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n The depositional history of the Qom Formation, along the northeastern margin of the Tethyan Seaway, is recognized as essential to understanding the connection between the Eastern Tethys (the proto-Indian Ocean) and the Western Tethys regions (the proto-Mediterranean Sea). This paper re-examines the Qom Formation’s biostratigraphy and age interpretations of four stratigraphic sections (Abadeh, Zefreh, Chalheghareh, and Qom) and proposes revisions. These sections were previously studied within a project dealing with the palaeogeographic and palaeobiogeographic reconstruction of the Tethyan Seaway during the Late Oligocene to Early Miocene. Those biostratigraphic interpretations subdivided the time interval for deposition of the Qom Formation into Rupelian, Chattian, Aquitanian, and Burdigalian. However, some age-based interpretations were inconsistent with the confirmed age ranges of seven planktic foraminiferal species, as well as with the last occurrence of true-Nummulites spp. and the first appearance of Borelis melo curdica. These revised interpretations show that: a) the basal 38 m of the Abadeh section must be attributed to Rupelian; b) in the Qom section, 500 m of deposits previously interpreted as Burdigalian, must be attributed to the Aquitanian; and c) in the Zefreh section, the lower 30 m likely were deposited in the Chattian, and all deposits (107 m) previously interpreted as Burdigalian can be attributed to the Aquitanian.","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Oligo-Miocene Qom Formation (Iran): Re-examination of biostratigraphy and age interpretations in the Sanandaj–Sirjan and Central Iran basins (NE margin of the Tethyan Seaway)\",\"authors\":\"Ebrahim Mohammadi\",\"doi\":\"10.61551/gsjfr.54.3.202\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n The depositional history of the Qom Formation, along the northeastern margin of the Tethyan Seaway, is recognized as essential to understanding the connection between the Eastern Tethys (the proto-Indian Ocean) and the Western Tethys regions (the proto-Mediterranean Sea). This paper re-examines the Qom Formation’s biostratigraphy and age interpretations of four stratigraphic sections (Abadeh, Zefreh, Chalheghareh, and Qom) and proposes revisions. These sections were previously studied within a project dealing with the palaeogeographic and palaeobiogeographic reconstruction of the Tethyan Seaway during the Late Oligocene to Early Miocene. Those biostratigraphic interpretations subdivided the time interval for deposition of the Qom Formation into Rupelian, Chattian, Aquitanian, and Burdigalian. However, some age-based interpretations were inconsistent with the confirmed age ranges of seven planktic foraminiferal species, as well as with the last occurrence of true-Nummulites spp. and the first appearance of Borelis melo curdica. These revised interpretations show that: a) the basal 38 m of the Abadeh section must be attributed to Rupelian; b) in the Qom section, 500 m of deposits previously interpreted as Burdigalian, must be attributed to the Aquitanian; and c) in the Zefreh section, the lower 30 m likely were deposited in the Chattian, and all deposits (107 m) previously interpreted as Burdigalian can be attributed to the Aquitanian.\",\"PeriodicalId\":0,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"89\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.61551/gsjfr.54.3.202\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.61551/gsjfr.54.3.202","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

沿特提斯海道东北缘的库姆地层的沉积历史被认为对了解东特提斯(原印度洋)和西特提斯地区(原地中海)之间的联系至关重要。本文重新研究了库姆地层的生物地层学和四个地层剖面(Abadeh、Zefreh、Chalheghareh 和 Qom)的年龄解释,并提出了修订建议。这些地层段以前曾在一个项目中进行过研究,该项目涉及晚渐新世至中新世早期的泰提安海道古地理和古生物地理重建。这些生物地层学解释将库姆地层的沉积时间区间细分为鲁佩尔期、夏特期、阿奎坦期和布尔迪加里期。然而,一些基于年龄的解释与七个浮游有孔虫物种已确认的年龄范围不一致,也与真-有孔虫属(true-Nummulites spp.)的最后出现和 Borelis melo curdica 的首次出现不一致。修订后的解释表明:a) 阿巴德断面基底 38 米必须归属于鲁佩尔期;b) 在库姆断面,先前被解释为布迪加利期的 500 米沉积必须归属于阿基坦期;c) 在泽夫雷赫断面,较低的 30 米可能沉积于夏特期,先前被解释为布迪加利期的所有沉积(107 米)可归属于阿基坦期。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
The Oligo-Miocene Qom Formation (Iran): Re-examination of biostratigraphy and age interpretations in the Sanandaj–Sirjan and Central Iran basins (NE margin of the Tethyan Seaway)
The depositional history of the Qom Formation, along the northeastern margin of the Tethyan Seaway, is recognized as essential to understanding the connection between the Eastern Tethys (the proto-Indian Ocean) and the Western Tethys regions (the proto-Mediterranean Sea). This paper re-examines the Qom Formation’s biostratigraphy and age interpretations of four stratigraphic sections (Abadeh, Zefreh, Chalheghareh, and Qom) and proposes revisions. These sections were previously studied within a project dealing with the palaeogeographic and palaeobiogeographic reconstruction of the Tethyan Seaway during the Late Oligocene to Early Miocene. Those biostratigraphic interpretations subdivided the time interval for deposition of the Qom Formation into Rupelian, Chattian, Aquitanian, and Burdigalian. However, some age-based interpretations were inconsistent with the confirmed age ranges of seven planktic foraminiferal species, as well as with the last occurrence of true-Nummulites spp. and the first appearance of Borelis melo curdica. These revised interpretations show that: a) the basal 38 m of the Abadeh section must be attributed to Rupelian; b) in the Qom section, 500 m of deposits previously interpreted as Burdigalian, must be attributed to the Aquitanian; and c) in the Zefreh section, the lower 30 m likely were deposited in the Chattian, and all deposits (107 m) previously interpreted as Burdigalian can be attributed to the Aquitanian.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1