Geoscience Frontiers 7 (2016) 125e140

HOSTED BY Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

China University of Geosciences (Beijing)

Geoscience Frontiers

journal homepage: www.elsevier .com/locate/gsf

Research paper

Benthic foraminifera as biostratigraphical and paleoecologicalindicators: An example from Oligo-Miocene deposits in the SW ofZagros basin, Iran

Asghar Roozpeykar*, Iraj Maghfouri MoghaddamDepartment of Geology, Faculty of Sciences, University of Lorestan, Lorestan, Iran

a r t i c l e i n f o

Article history:Received 29 September 2013Received in revised form26 February 2015Accepted 17 March 2015Available online 8 May 2015

Keywords:BiostratigraphyAsmari FormationIranOligo-MioceneOligotrophyMesotrophy

* Corresponding author. Janbazan Avenue, DehdashAhmad Province, 7579111548, Iran. Tel.: þ98 9179428E-mail address: asghar.roozpeikar@gmail.com (A. RooPeer-review under responsibility of China University

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gsf.2015.03.0051674-9871/� 2015, China University of Geosciences (BND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-n

a b s t r a c t

The Asmari Formation is a predominantly carbonate lithostratigraphic unit that outcrops in the ZagrosBasin. Micropaleontological studies of the Asmari Formation in the Dehdasht area led to the identifi-cation of 51 species of foraminifera taxa. Among the foraminifera, Nummulites cf. vascus, Operculin sp.,Operculina complanata, Eulepidina dilatata, Eulepidina elephantine, Ditrupa sp., Miogypsina sp., Elphidiumsp. 14, and Borelis melo curdica are the most important. The Lepidocyclina-Operculina-Ditrupa assemblagezone represents the RupelianeChattian age. The Aquitanian age is also defined by co-occurrence ofMiogypsina sp. and Elphidium sp. 14, and finally, the first occurrence of Borelis melo curdica represents theBurdigalian. Based on faunal assemblages, the following paleoenvironmental settings are determined forthe deposition of the study section: (1) the deep, offshore settings in the aphotic zone dominated bypelagic and small benthic foraminifera; (2) the low energy, turbid and low light parts of the oligophoticzone characterized by large and flat lepidocyclinids (Eulepidina) and Nummulitidae; (3) the low turbidity,deeper part of the inner ramp dominated by Miogypsinoides, Neorotalia, Lepidocyclina, Operculina andArchias; (4) the shallow, marginal marine environment exposed to salinity fluctuations (short-termsalinity fluctuations or fully marine conditions) dominated by small benthic Foraminifera (Ammonia andElphidium); (5) highly translucent, shallowest part of the inner ramp dominated by representatives ofBorelis, Meandropsina and Peneroplis. The biotic assemblages represent warm tropical waters witholigotrophic to slightly mesotrophic conditions.

� 2015, China University of Geosciences (Beijing) and Peking University. Production and hosting byElsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/

licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

1. Introduction

In most carbonate depositional environments, the bulk ofsediment consists of skeletal fragments produced by different typesof organisms with particular ecological requirements (Meteu-Vicens et al., 2008). Oligocene carbonate platforms are character-ized by the re-establishment of shallow water marine benthiccommunities following major change at the Eocene/Oligoceneboundary (e.g. Berggren and Prothero, 1992; Ivany et al., 2000;Prothero, 2003). During the Neogene, large benthic foraminifera(LBF) were still active carbonate producers, though not as prolific asduring the Eocene. Heterostegina, Amphistegina, Cycloclypeus, and

t City, Kohgiluyeh va Bouyer793.zpeykar).of Geosciences (Beijing).

eijing) and Peking University. Produc-nd/4.0/).

Lepidocyclina are common in packstones and grainstones of the lateOligocene through Miocene (e.g., Chapronière, 1984; Betzler, 1997;Hallock et al., 2006). Coralline red algae increased in diversityduring the Oligocene (e.g., Manker and Carter, 1987; Buxton andPedley, 1989; Pedley, 1998; Rasser and Piller, 2004), especially theshallow, warm-water lithophylloid and mastophoroid taxa, exhib-iting their greatest species richness (Aguirre et al., 2000) andglobally becoming dominant carbonate producers (Halfar andMutti, 2005) during the early and middle Miocene. Larger forami-nifera have arisen many times in the geological record fromordinary-sized ancestors (Lee et al., 1979). Their appearance is oftenrelated to periods of global warming, relative drought, raised sealevels, expansion of tropical and subtropical habitats, and reducedoceanic circulation (Hallock and Glenn, 1986).

The main factor limiting the latitudinal distribution ofsymbiont-bearing foraminifera is temperature (e.g. Hottinger,1983; Langer and Hottinger, 2000) because persistent

ction and hosting by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-

A. Roozpeykar, I.M. Moghaddam / Geoscience Frontiers 7 (2016) 125e140126

temperatures below 14 �C in the winter months seem to hindertheir survival. Larger foraminifera are thus restricted to the tropicswith the exception of a few species that can also survive in thewarm temperate zone (e.g. Betzler et al., 1997; Hohenegger, 2000;Langer and Hottinger, 2000). Further factors influencing the dis-tribution of larger foraminifera are light intensity, water energy andsubstrate conditions (Hottinger, 1983; Bassi et al., 2007). LBF andcorallinacean are the most important biotic assemblages in theAsmari Formation. In the present work, we use the foraminiferalassemblages to determine the age of the Asmari Formation fromthe studied region and to interpret the paleoenvironmental set-tings and paleoecological conditions.

2. Geological setting

The Zagros mountains are a fold and the thrust belt that ex-tends from southeastern Turkey through northern Syria and Iraqto western and southern Iran (Alavi, 2004). This orogenic belt issituated in the middle part of the Alpine Range. This belt isconsidered to be a passive eastern margin of the Arabian Shield(Stocklin, 1968; Farhoudi, 1978; Berberian and King, 1981). TheZagros Basin was a part of the stable supercontinent of Gondwanain the Paleozoic, became a passive margin during the Mesozoic,and then a convergent orogen in the Cenozoic (Barhroudi andKoyi, 2004). The Zagros mountains consist of three zones: (1)the simply folded Zagros; (2) the imbricate thrust zone; (3) theKhuzestan Plain (Motiei, 1993). Based on the sedimentary historyand structural style, Falcon (1961) divided the simply folded

Figure 1. (A) General map of Iran showing eight geologic provinces. The study area is locatefolded Zagros belt (after Falcon, 1961).

Zagros into several zones: Fars, Lurestan, the Dezful Embayment,the Izeh Zone, the Abadan Plain, the thrust zone, the Bandar AbbasHinterland and the complex structure with metamorphic rocks(Fig. 1A). The study area is located at the southwestern flank of theKuh-e Siah Anticline, next to the Zargham Abad Village, about80 km northeast of Behbahan and 15 km north of Dehdasht. Thesection was measured in detail at 30�520 N and 50�380 E (Fig. 1B).The study area is located in the folded thrust zone of the ZagrosBasin (Izeh Zone).

3. Materials and methods

Field observations were complemented with the petrographicexamination of 157 thin sections for the identification of largebenthic foraminifera and other skeletal components. The supra-specific classification of foraminifera mainly follows Loeblich andTappan (1988) criteria. Large benthic foraminifera are photo-symbiontic organisms (Leutenegger, 1984; Reiss and Hottinger,1984) that require light, which restricts these taxa to live in thephotic zone. Changes in foraminiferal assemblages can indicatefluctuations in light level, providing information valuable forinterpretation of palaeoenvironments (Hallock and Glenn, 1986;Hottinger, 1997; Hohenegger et al., 1999).

4. Results

The Asmari Formation outcrops with 318 m thickness in thestudy area, and consists of thin to thick bedded and massive

d in Zagros Province (adopted from Heydari et al., 2003). (B) Subdivisions of the simply

A. Roozpeykar, I.M. Moghaddam / Geoscience Frontiers 7 (2016) 125e140 127

limestones, nodular limestones, and rarely, marls. Biogenic com-ponents are dominated by benthic foraminifera and coralline redalgae. The existing benthic foraminifera correspond to aggluti-nated small foraminifera, porcellaneous and perforated largerbenthic foraminifera (LBF) and smaller benthic foraminifera (SBF).Coralline red algae are dominated by Lithothamnion sp., Lith-ophyllum sp., Mesophyllum sp., Sporolithon sp., Lithoporella mello-besioides, Titanoderma sp. and Lithoporella sp. Subordinatecomponents are ostrea, pectinid bivalves, corals (Porites sp.,Favosites sp., Tarbellastraea sp., Thegioastraea sp. and Hydnophorasp.), gastropoda, bryozoan, ostracoda and echinoids. Ooid andpeloid are the most common abiotic components. The AsmariFormation overlies the Pabdeh Formation and is overlain byGachsaran Formation.

4.1. Biostratigraphy

Planktonic foraminifera are rare in the Asmari Formation,making correlation with the planktonic zonation difficult. There-fore, biostratigraphic zonation is mainly based on the larger benthicforaminifera which are very abundant and have high diversity inthe study section. The identified foraminifera fall into the followingcategories: LBF, smaller benthic foraminifera and pelagic forami-nifera. The biostratigraphy of Asmari Formation was described byJames andWynd (1965), Wynd (1965), and reviewed by Adams andBourgeois (1967). Adams and Bourgeois (1967) divided the AsmariFormation into three biozones (Fig. 2). Ehrenberg et al. (2007) andLaursen et al. (2009) applied strontium isotope dating to the AsmariFormation (Fig. 2). In order to date the age of Asmari Formation, thepresent research used the results of Sr analysis.

It is worth noting that in older publications, such as those ofWynd (1965) and Adams and Bourgeois (1967), microfossilsascribed to the “Aquitanian” may in fact refer to the late Oligocene,that we today call Chattian. Aside from these problems with thedetermination of chronostratigraphy of the foraminifera-basedzones, facies are specific to particular zones, and thus theycomplicate the basin-wide stratigraphic correlations. One way tosolve this dating problem is to calibrate the ranges of index fossilswith an independent dating method such as the Sr-isotope stra-tigraphy, which is not sensitive to depositional environments(Laursen et al., 2009).

From base to top, three foraminiferal assemblages were deter-mined in the study area.

Figure 2. Comparison of biozonation of Adams and Bourg

4.1.1. Assemblage IThis assemblage begins at the basal part of the Asmari Forma-

tion and extends upward with a thickness of 141 m. The mostimportant fauna are: Operculina complanata, Operculina spp., Het-erostegina spp., Nummulites vascus, Eulepidina spp., Eulepidinaelephantine, Nephrolepidina tournoueri, Spiroclypeus spp., Spi-roclypeus blankenhorni and Ditrupa. Additional species includeAustrotrillina howchini, Austrotrillina asmariensis, Rotalia viennoti,Miogypsinoides complanatus and Archaias sp.

These foraminifera correspond to the LepidocyclinaeOperculinaeDitrupa assemblage zone of Laursen et al. (2009). This zone rangesin age from Rupelian to Chattian.

4.1.2. Assemblage IIThis assemblage was recorded from 141 to 214 m. Most of the

fauna in this assemblage are Miogypsina sp., Elphidium sp. 14,Peneroplis evolutus, Valvulinid sp., Spirulina sp., Schlumbergerina sp.,Meandropsina iranica, Dendritina rangi, Austrotrillina sp., Austro-trillina asmaricus, Peneroplis sp., Peneroplis evolotus, Triloculinatrigonula, Discorbis sp., and Peneroplis thomasi.

These microfauna correspond to the Miogypsina-Elphidium sp.,Peneroplis farsensis assemblage zone of Laursen et al. (2009), andthey indicate an Aquitanian age.

There are very fossil poor limestones from 214 to 234 m, inbetween the assemblage zone II and assemblage zone III. This hasbeen named the “indeterminate zone” by Laursen et al. (2009), andit is mainly associated with the Aquitanian age.

4.1.3. Assemblage IIIThis assemblage was recorded from 234 to 318 m. The most

important foraminifera are: Borelis melo curdica, Borelis sp.,P. evolotus, D. rangi,M. iranica, Discorbis sp. and Rotalia sp. The faunaassociation represents the B. melo curdica-B. melo melo assemblagezone of Laursen et al. (2009) which indicates a Burdigalian age.

4.2. Comparison with other regions of Zagros Basin

The biostratigraphy of the Asmari Formation in various regionsof the Zagros Basin has been proposed by many researchers. In thispaper, we compared the Asmari Formation in the study area withsome sections in other regions of the Zagros Basin (Fig. 3). Vaziri-Moghaddam et al. (2010) studied the depositional environment,biostratigraphy and the sequence stratigraphy of several sections inthe NW of the Zagros Basin. In the Kabir Kuh section (southern

eois (1967), Laursen et al. (2009) and studied section.

Figure 3. Correlation of Asmari Formation at studied area with some sections in other regions of Zagros Basin.

A. Roozpeykar, I.M. Moghaddam / Geoscience Frontiers 7 (2016) 125e140128

Lurestan Basin), the Asmari Formation was deposited in the lateOligocene (Chattian)eearly Miocene (AquitanianeBurdigalian) age.In the Mamulan and Sepid Dasht areas (central Lurestan Basin), theAsmari Formation was only in the Burdigalian age. Sadeghi et al.(2009) reported that the Asmari Formation, southeastern of theZagros folded belt (Fars Province), was deposited in the Oligocene(RupelianeChattian) age. This age was also reported by Soltanianet al. (2011) for the Asmari Formation at the Naura Anticline inFars area. In these areas, the middle and upper parts of the AsmariFormation were replaced by Gachsaran and Razak formations. Inthe Gachsaran area (Mish Anticline), according to Van Buchem et al.(2010), the age of Asmari Formation is Oligoceneeearly Miocene(AquitanianeBurdigalian). Research results show that the age ofthe Asmari Formation changes fromOligocene (RupelianeChattian)

to Oligoceneeearly Miocene age from the SE to the middle parts ofthe Zagros Basin. In other words, the age of the Asmari Formationbecomes younger from the SE to themiddle parts of the basin. Fromthe central parts to the NW of the basin, the age of the AsmariFormation changes from late Oligoceneeearly Miocene to earlyMiocene (Burdigalian) age. These changes of the Asmari Forma-tion’s age are related to paleoenvironmental conditions.

During the Paleogene period, the Zagros Basin was completelycovered by a transgressive sea (Fig. 4). In that time, three sub basinsexisted in the Zagros Basin: (1) Lurestan Province (northwesternparts), (2) Khuzestan Province (central parts) and (3) Fars Province(southern parts). During the Paleoceneeearly Eocene, the SachunFormation was deposited in the coastal parts (western Fars Prov-ince), the Jahrum Formation in the shallow parts (eastern Fars

Figure 4. Cenozoic stratigraphic correlation chart of the Zagros Basin (after Jams and Wynd, 1965).

A. Roozpeykar, I.M. Moghaddam / Geoscience Frontiers 7 (2016) 125e140 129

Province), and the pelagic Pabdeh Formation in the deep parts ofthe basin. During the middle Eocene, the shallow platform partsemerged from water due to the Pyrenean orogenic phase and theglobal sea level drop. The deposition of the Pabdeh Formationcontinued only in the central parts. These conditions continued upto the late EoceneeOligocene in the northeastern and southernparts of the basin. As the sea level continued to fall during the earlyOligocene, in the central parts of the basin the Asmari Formationwas replaced by the Pabdeh Formation (Figs. 4 and 5). At the end ofthe late Oligocene, the transgressive sea caused the remainingexposed regions to become submerged. This, in turn, caused thedeposition of the Asmari Formation in these regions although thenorthern parts of the basin were still exposed. These conditionscontinued for the northern parts up to the end of Aquitanian age. Atthe beginning of the Burdigalian, the transgressive sea caused theAsmari Formation to be deposited in every region of the Zagrosmountains (Motiei, 1993) (Figs. 4 and 5).

4.3. Paleoecological interpretation

Foraminifera are the most abundant marine protozoa in theepipelagic and the upper mesopelagic realms. Because of thecomplexity and diversity of habitats, especially in the shallowbenthic realm, foraminifera show high biodiversity resulting fromtheir different ecological requirements (Barbeiri et al., 2006).

Based on the type of distribution and paleoecological condi-tions, the faunas were grouped into five assemblages (Table 1,Figs. 6 and 7). Assemblage 1 is dominated by planktonic forami-nifera along with shallow water benthic foraminifera as Elphidium,Rotalia and Textularia. Their rock texture is wackestone-packstone(Fig. 6A and B). Assemblage 2 is represented by Lepidocyclinidswith large and discoidal tests (Eulepidina) and Nummulitids (Het-erostegina sp.,Nummulites cf. vascus, Spiroclypeus sp.,O. complanata,S. blankenhorni, Operculina sp.). The LBF skeletons are mostly morethan 3 cm in diameter. The texture is wackestone to packstone(Fig. 6CeF). Assemblage 3 is characterized by co-occurrence oflarger hyaline and imperforated forms (Fig. 7AeD). Hyaline fora-minifera were dominated by Miogypsinoides formosensis, M. com-planatus, Lepidocyclina sp., Amphistegina sp., Operculina sp.,Asterigerina sp., Miogypsina sp., Elphidium sp. 14., Sphaerogypsinasp., Discorbis sp., and Neorotalia viennoti together with Neorotaliasp. Porcellaneous foraminifera were dominated by A. howchini,Austrotrillina sp., Archaias sp., Planorbolina sp., Triloculina trigonola,Pyrgo sp., Triloculina tricarinata, P. evolutus, Peneroplis sp.,M. iranica,Meandropsina sp. and P. thomasi.

Assemblage 4 is dominated by small benthic foraminifera(Fig. 7E and F). The diversity of fauna is very low in some samples,

but it is very high in other samples. Ammonia spp. and Ammoniabeccarii are the only biota elements in samples with low diversity.The samples with high diversity fauna are characterized byAmmonia spp., A. beccarii, Elphidium sp., Discorbis sp. and miliolids.Bryozoan, echinoids, mollusks and corallinacean are also present.Texture ranges from wackestone to packstone. Finally, assemblage5 is characterized by larger imperforated foraminifera including(Fig. 7G and H) D. rangi, P. evolutus, Peneroplis sp., M. iranica,Meandropsina sp., P. thomasi, B. melo curdica, Borelis sp., T. trigonola,Pyrgo sp., T. tricarinata. Textularia sp., Discorbis sp., Spirulina sp. andElphidium sp. are present but not common.

In Assemblage 1, abundant pelagic foraminifera represent amore pelagic, deep offshore environment (Mateu-Vicens et al.,2008). The absence of light-dependent biota such as corallinaceaand LBF indicates that these fauna developed under aphotic con-ditions in an outer ramp setting (Pomar et al., 2004). The highmuddy matrix indicates low turbulence water (Nebelsick et al.,2000). Assemblage 2 is characterized by the dominance of largediscoidal tests of Lepidocyclinids (Eulepidina) and Nummulitids.Fine siliciclastic particles are also present in the texture. The largesized lepidocyclinids and discoidal flat tests (Eulepidina) are typicalfor a low energy environment with a low light on the outer ramp(Hallock, 1985; Hallock and Glenn, 1986). The predominance oflarge foraminifera may indicate a highly oligotrophic palae-oenvironment dominated by K-strategists (Bassi, 2005).

The sediments of Assemblage 3 suggest that different degrees ofwater turbulence were involved in the creation of the packstone-grainstone texture. Abundance of larger benthic foraminifera sug-gests shallow, well-illuminated, warm, oligotrophic waters withsuitable substrate (Hottinger, 1983; Murray, 1991; O’Connell et al.,2012) and normal marine salinity. The mixture of large rotalidsand the sea grass associated bioclasts (porcellaneous forms andsmall rotalids) indicates meso-euphotic conditions (Pomar et al.,2014). The grainstones represent a higher degree of turbulencewith mobile substrate and fauna indicating well-lit conditions(Nebelsick et al., 2000), which is also shown by robust and thicktests of foraminifera (Fournier et al., 2004). In shallow waters,where light limitation is not problematic, LBF can produce thicktests, which protect the test from mechanical damage due to theincreased hydrodynamic energy in shallow waters (Hohenegger,2000).

In Assemblage 4, the predominance of Ammonia and ostrea in-dicates a eutrophic environment with normal marine conditionsthat were only exposed to short-term salinity fluctuations (Reuterand Brachert, 2007). The presence of bryozoans together withmicrofossil assemblages with their relatively high diversity in somesamples might suggest that the environmental conditions changed

Figure 5. Correlation of depositional environments for Asmari Fm. in the studied area (Khuzestan Province) with other areas of Zagros Basin. (A) Lorestan Province (adopted fromVaziri-Moghaddam et al., 2010), (B) Khuzestan Province (adopted from Van Buchem et al., 2010, with some modification) and (C) Fars Province.

A. Roozpeykar, I.M. Moghaddam / Geoscience Frontiers 7 (2016) 125e140130

from unstable with salinity fluctuations to more stable conditionsand the normal salinity (Filipescu et al., 2014). The abundance ofAmmonia and the occurrence of Textularia and heterotrophic or-ganisms in the microfacies may indicate increased nutrient input(Sen Gupta, 1999; Mateu-Vicens et al., 2008). The dominance ofporcellaneous larger foraminifera in Assemblage 5 indicates high-energy conditions in the well-lit, highly translucent, shallow partof the photic zone (Bassi and Nebelsick, 2010). The low turbidity isascribed to the high diversity of the porcelaneous foraminiferalfauna, which develops inmeso-to-oligotrophic settings at a shallowdepth (Hallock, 1984, 1988; Reiss and Hottinger, 1984; Buxton and

Pedley, 1989; Romero et al., 2002; Barattolo et al., 2007). Thedominance of imperforate foraminiferal tests may indicate aslightly hypersaline depositional environment (Brandano et al.,2009). Based on the occurrence and morphology of foraminifera,our paleoecological interpretation shows a gradient change fromdeep offshore, low energy conditions in aphotic zones dominatedby planktonic foraminifera to a deep, turbid, low-light setting in theoligophotic zone dominated by Eulepidina (elephantine, dilatata, sp.)and Nummulitids (Heterostegina sp., Operculina sp., O. complanata,Spiroclypeus sp., S. blankenhorni). Following this, the conditionschange again to deeper parts of the inner ramp dominated by M.

Table 1Distinctive characteristics of fauna association and interpreted ecological conditions.

Facies Dominant components Subordinate components Paleoecological interpretation

Assemblage A Pelagic foraminifera (50e60%)small benthic foraminifera(15e20%)

Serpulid, sponge spiculeechinoid, bryozoa, mollusks(15e25%)

Calm, deep, offshore setting with aphotic condition in outer rampto basin

Assemblage B Eulepidina-NepherolepidinaOperculina, HeterosteginaAmphistegina, Spiroclypeus(75e90%)

Coralline red algae, bryozoansechinoid, mollusks, coralpelagic foraminifers(25e10%)

Low energy, turbid, low light with oligophotic condition inmiddle-outer ramp

Assemblage C1 Coralline red algae, mollusks,Miogypsinoides, Neorotalia(75e85%)

Amphistegina, Dendritina,echinoid, miliolid(15e25%)

High energy, well lit, euphotic zone in inner ramp

Assemblage C2 Miogypsinoides, Operculina,Neorotalia, Archaias, miliolidcoralline red algae, Nepherolepidina(55e70%)

Amphistegina, DendritinaAustrotrilina, Peneroplismollusks, bryozoans, coralechinoid, mollusks, Miogypsina(45e30%)

Low energy, well lit, normal salinity, euphotic-mesophotic zone ininner ramp

Assemblage D Ammonia beccarii, Ammonia spp,Mollusks(20e100%)

Bryozoans, echinoid, Elphidiumcoralline red algae, miliolids(0e80%)

Low energy, well lit, short-term salinity fluctuations or fully marineconditions in inner ramp

Assemblage E Borelis, Dendritina, PeneroplisMeandropsina, miliolids(75e85%)

Mollusks, Elphidium, DiscorbisSpirulina(25e15%)

Well lit, highly translucent shallowest part of the euphotic zone withhypersaline condition

A. Roozpeykar, I.M. Moghaddam / Geoscience Frontiers 7 (2016) 125e140 131

complanatus, N. viennoti, Lepidocyclina sp., operculina sp. andArchaias sp., then to Assemblage 4 with a shallow, marginal marineenvironment exposed to salinity fluctuations (brackish or closemarine value) dominated by small benthic foraminifera (Ammoniaspp. and Elphidium sp.), and finally to the near shore, well-lit, highlytranslucent, high energy conditions in an inner ramp settingdominated by B. melo curdica, M. iranica and P. evolotus (Fig. 8).

4.4. Paleolatitude, paleoclimate and nutrient level

The existence of aragonite components such as corals (Poritessp.) in the ChattianeAquitanian, ooids in the Aquitanian, and finallythe persistent occurrence of Lithoporella melobesioides and Lith-oporella sp. in the red algal assemblages (Braga and Aguirre, 2001)of the Asmari Formation suggest that carbonate sedimentation tookplace in the warm waters of the tropical zone. According to theOligo-Miocene paleogeographic maps developed by Heydari(2008), the Zagros mountains were located at about 29� N, con-firming that the Asmari deposition took place in warm waters.

The Oligocene saw global climates show an initial cooling as aconsequence of the formation of the first ice-sheets in Antarcticathat persisted until the latest part of the Oligocene, followed by awarming trend that reduced the extent of Antarctic ice (Zachoset al., 2001). This global climatic cooling and Antarctic glaciationinfluenced sedimentation worldwide during the middle Eocene toearly Miocene that is documented in marine and terrestrial faunaland floral changes, seismic interpretations and oxygen and carbonisotope analyses (e.g. Miller et al., 1991, 2005; Prothero,1994; Abreuand Haddad, 1998; Clarke and Jenkyns, 1999; Zachos et al., 2001).The study section did not reveal the Oligocene cooling events.

Warmer global climates prevailed during the Miocene thanthose either of the preceding Oligocene or of today. During thistime, the modern pattern of ocean circulation was established andthe mixing of warmer tropical water and cold polar water wasgreatly reduced. This led to well-defined climatic belts that stretchfrom Poles to Equator (Pomar and Hallock, 2008).

During the Aquitanian, there is evidence for a cooling event(Miller et al., 2005). This cooling event caused the eustatic sea-leveldrops during the Aquitanian, which twice caused the isolation fromthe Neo-Tethys and led to the precipitation of subaqueous anhy-drites from the oversaturated seawater through evaporation in itscentre (the ‘Basal Anhydrite’ and ‘Middle Anhydrite’). The faunal

assemblage in the Aquitanian was influenced by this isolation fromthe open ocean, which caused an increase in the salinity of theintrashelf basin. The resultant specific environmental conditionsled to a restricted, stressed environment: ooids, peloid andimperforate foraminifers became an important biotic and abioticassociation in the depositional system (Van Buchem et al., 2010).

Zooxanthellate corals and LBF assemblages, such as Lep-idocyclina, Miogypsinoides, Operculina, Heterostegina, Borelis, Arch-aias of the Asmari Formation argue against high nutrients, as theseassemblages thrive in oligotrophic (Langer and Hottinger, 2000) orpossibly slightly mesotrophic (Halfar et al., 2004) waters.

5. Conclusions

The large benthic foraminiferal assemblages are rich in theAsmari Formation. The most important faunas are Nummulitescf.vascus, E. elephantine, Archaias sp., M. complanatus, S. blanken-horni,Miogypsina sp., Elphidium sp. 14 and B. melo curdica. Based onthe distribution of foraminifera assemblages, the Asmari Formationin the studied section is Oligocene (RupelianeChattian)eearlyMiocene (AquitanianeBurdigalian) in age. The biotic assemblagesof the Asmari Formation suggest that carbonate sedimentation tookplace in tropical warm waters under oligotrophic or slightlymesotrophic conditions. The paleoenvironmental setting is inter-preted as a shallow ramp environment ranging from deep, offshoresettings in the aphotic zone dominated by pelagic and smallerbenthic foraminifera, to low-energy, turbid and low light condi-tions characterized by large and flat lepidocyclinids (Eulepidina)and Nummulitids, to the deeper parts of the inner ramp dominatedbyMiogypsinoides, Neorotalia, Lepidocyclina, Operculina and Archias,to the shallow, marginal marine environment exposed to salinityfluctuations (brackish or hemirestricted marine) dominated bysmall benthic foraminifera (Ammonia and Elphidium), and finally towell-lit, highly translucent shallow parts of the inner ramp domi-nated by Borelis, Meandropsina and Peneroplis.

6. Systematic paleontology

6.1. Systematic of foraminifera

Larger foraminifera are the most important components of theOligoceneeearly Miocene succession. They allow the biostrati

Figure 6. Biota associations in Asmari Formation. (A and B) Assemblage 1, pelagic foraminifera and shallower benthic foraminifera in wackestone, packstone. (CeF) Assemblage 2,Operculina, Spiroclypeus, Lepidocyclina, Amphistegina, Heterostegina in wackestone, packstone matrix.

A. Roozpeykar, I.M. Moghaddam / Geoscience Frontiers 7 (2016) 125e140132

graphic subdivision of the studied section. A total number of 51species of foraminifers taxa have been identified. These forami-nifera correspond to agglutinated small foraminifera, porcellaneousand perforate larger benthic foraminifera (LBF) and smaller benthicforaminifera (SBF) (Figs. 9e11).

Superfamily Asterigerinacea (d’Orbigny, 1839)Family Lepidocyclinidae (Scheffen, 1932)Subfamily Lepidocyclininae (Scheffen, 1932)Genus Lepidocyclina (Gumbel, 1870)Eulepidina dilatata (Michelloti, 1861, Fig. 11J and H)Remarks: Adams and Bourgeois (1967) as well as Laursen et al.(2009) reported two species of Eulepidina from the AsmariFormation within the Rupelian and Chattian.Description: This species of Eulepidina is characterized by thesmaller size (<3 cm) and regular pillars between the chambersthat become evenly distributed over the surface of the test. Theother species is named dilatata (Michelotti), which is distinctfrom elephantine by its too-large size and a size of more than

10 cm in diameter, and is characterized by giant embryon,extraordinarily large equatorial chamberlets and the generalabsence of regular pillars which penetrate to the surface.Superfamily Asterigerinacea (d’Orbigny, 1839)Family Lepidocyclinidae (Scheffen, 1932)Subfamily Lepidocyclininae (Scheffen, 1932)Genus Lepidocyclina (Gumbel, 1870)Lepidocyclina (Nephrolepidina) tournoueri (Lemoine andDouvillé, 1904, Fig. 11C)Remarks: Adams and Bourgeois (1967) as well as Laursen et al.(2009) recorded this from the late Rupelian and Chattian inthe Asmari limestones.Description: This species possesses a strongly biconvex test. Theembryonic chambers consist of a protoconch and a deuter-oconch with relatively equal size and without any embrace. Thelateral chambers have relatively large sizes, and the pillars be-tween them are absolutely distinct and obvious.Superfamily Nummulitacea (De Blainville, 1827)Family Nummulitidae (De Blainville, 1827)

Figure 7. Biota association in Asmari Formation. (A) Assemblage 3, Neorotalia, Miogypsinoides, in grainstone matrix. (BeD) Assemblage 4, Neorotalia, Miogypsinoides, Operculina andLepidocyclina, in wackestone-packstone matrix. (E and F) Assemblage 4, small benthic foraminifera in wackestone-packstone matrix. (G and H) Assemblage 5, Borelis, Meandropsina,Dendritina, Peneroplis and miliolids in grainstone, packstone.

A. Roozpeykar, I.M. Moghaddam / Geoscience Frontiers 7 (2016) 125e140 133

Genus Operculina (d’Orbigny, 1826)Operculina complanata (Defrance, 1822, Fig. 11D)Remarks: Adams and Bourgeois (1967) as well as Laursen et al.(2009) reported Operculina complanata from the Rupe-lianeChattian age. It was also found by Bassi et al. (2007) in theupper Oligocene of the Venetian area, Northeast Italy.Description: Test bilaterally symmetrical, evolute, planispiral,flattened; with little or no thickening at the poles. Its marginsare always rounded and the septa are gently recurved.Superfamily Nummulitacea (De Blainville, 1827)Family Nummulitidae (De Blainville, 1827)Genus Nummulites (Lamarck, 1804)Nummulites vascus (Joly and Leymerie, 1848, Fig. 10J)Remarks: This species was reported from southwest of Iran byAdams and Bourgeois (1967) and Laursen et al. (2009). It was

also described by Bassi et al. (2007) in the upper Oligocene ofthe Venetian area, Northeast Italy.Description: The test is lenticular, wall calcareous hyaline, andplanispirally coiled with four whorls. The thickness of wall andchambers are relatively equal.Superfamily Nummulitacea (De Blainville, 1827)Family Nummulitidae (De Blainville, 1827)Subfamily CycloclypeinaeGenus Spiroclypeus (Douvillé, 1905)Spiroclypeus blankenhorni (Henson, 1937, Fig. 11F and G)Remarks: Adams and Bourgeois (1967) recorded Spiroclypeusblankenhorni from the Aquitanian of Asmari Formation. ButEhrenberg et al. (2007) and Laursen et al. (2009) reported itfrom Chattian of the Asmari Formation. It was also described byÖzcan et al. (2009) in the lower Miocene of central Turkey.

Figure 8. Lithology, biostratigraphy and vertical distribution of biota associations (microfacies) for the Asmari Formation at the studied area.

A. Roozpeykar, I.M. Moghaddam / Geoscience Frontiers 7 (2016) 125e140134

Description: This form is characteristically elongate-compressed,non-reticulate, with relatively fine later chamberlets.Genus Austrotrillina (Parr, 1942)Genus Austrotrillina asmariensis (Adams, 1968, Fig. 9C)Remark: Adams (1968) obtained the type specimens ofA. asmariensis from the post-nummulititic Asmari limestone.

Adams and Bourgeois (1967) and Laursen et al. (2009) recordedthis species from the RupelianeAquitanian. It was also describedby Bassi et al. (2007) in the upper Oligocene of the Venetianarea, Northeast Italy.Description: This species is characterized by its narrow, closelypacked alveoles, which were present in a single series and did

Figure 9. Photomicrographs of some microfossils that recognized in studied area at Dehdasht area. (A) Austrotrilina sp., sample No. 80; (B) Austrotrillina howchini (Schlumberger,1974), sample No. 80; (C) Austrotrilina asmariensis (Adams, 1868), sample No. 80; (D) Dendritina rangi (d’Orbigny, 1904) sample No. 59; (E) Textularia sp., sample No. 6; (F) Pyrgo sp.,sample No. 80; (G) Miogypsinoides formosensis (Yabe and Hanzawa, 1928), sample No. 36; (H) Miogypsina sp., sample No. 70; (I) Planorbolina sp., sample No. 21; (J) Sphaerogypsinasp., sample No. 27; (K) Lithoporella melobesioides (Foslie, 1909), sample No. 124; (L) Titanoderma sp., sample No. 42; (M) Austrotrillina howchini (Schlumberger, 1974), sample No. 80;(N) Neorotalia viennoti (Greig, 1935), sample No. 64; (O) Valvulinid sp., sample No. 80.

A. Roozpeykar, I.M. Moghaddam / Geoscience Frontiers 7 (2016) 125e140 135

not bifurcate peripherally. Open chamber lumen, quinquelocu-line nepionic stage consists of spherical proloculus followed bythree chambers, and by later chambers arranged in triloculinemanner. Nepionic stage walls are very thick and non-alveolate.Superfamily Miliolacea (Ehrenberg, 1839)Family Austrotrillinidae (Loeblich and Tappan, 1986)Genus Austrotrillina (Parr, 1942)Austrotrillina howchini (Schlumberger, 1893, Fig. 9B and M)

Remark: A. howchini was first described from the Tertiary ofAustralia. Adams and Bourgeois (1967) and Laursen et al. (2009)reported this species from the RupelianeAquitanian age ofAsmari Formation.Description: This species has chambers which are triangular intransverse section and also has alveoles which bifurcate,trifurcate, the interior alveoles being divided peripherally intosmaller alveolus.

Figure 10. Photomicrograph of some microfossils that recognized in study area at Dehdasht area. (A) Neorotalia viennoti (Greig, 1935), sample No. 64; (B) Ditrupa sp., sample No. 9;(C) Bigenerina sp., sample No. 67; (D) Lithotamnion sp., sample No. 42; (E) Borelis melo (Fichtel and Moll, 1798), curdica (Reichel, 1937) sample No. 122; (F) Asterigerina sp., sample No.43; (G) Amphistegina sp., sample No. 22; (H)Miogypsinoides deharti (Van Der Vlerk, 1924), sample No. 55; (I) Spirulina sp., sample No. 99; (J) Nummulites cf. vascus (Joly and Leymerie,1848), sample No. 10; (K) Peneroplis sp., sample No. 99; (L) Peneroplis thomasi (Henson, 1950), sample No. 75.

A. Roozpeykar, I.M. Moghaddam / Geoscience Frontiers 7 (2016) 125e140136

Superfamily Alveolinacea (Ehrenberg, 1839)Family Alveolinidae (Ehrenberg, 1839)Genus Borelis (Montfort, 1808)Borelis mello (Fichtel and Moll, 1798) curdica (Reichel, 1937,Fig. 10E)Remark: This species was recorded by Adams and Bourgeois(1967) and Laursen et al. (2009) from the Burdigalian ofAsmari Formation.Description: The test is small, porcelaneous and has spherical tosubspherical shape with flattened Polar regions. The septulas oftwo surrounding chambers are seen alternatively small andlarge; therefore, the resulting chamberlets are alternativelysmall and large.Superfamily Soritacea (Ehrenberg, 1839)Family Peneroplidae (Schultze, 1854)

Genus Dendrita (d’Orbigny, 1826)Dendritina rangi (d’Orbigny emend. Fornasini, 1904, Fig. 9D)Remark: This species recorded by Adams and Bourgeois (1967)from AquitanianeBurdigalian in Asmari Formation.Description: The test is lenticular, planispirally coiled anddeveloped in umbilicus area. In equatorial section, the test isovate to spherical, the number of whorls is 2.5e3 and themaximum chambers per whorl are 11e14. The septum is curvedand is convex to the aperture. In the cross section, the test iselongated with a rounded- to actuated- periphery and theaperture is dendritic. The wall is calcareous and porcellaneous.Superfamily Soritacea (Ehrenberg, 1839)Family Peneroplidae (Schultze, 1854)Genus Peneroplis (Montfort, 1808)Peneroplis thomasi (Henson, 1950, Fig. 10L)

Figure 11. Photomicrograph of some microfossils that recognized in study area at Dehdasht area. (A) Marginopora sp., sample No. 64; (B) Meandropsina iranica (Henson, 1950),sample No. 132; (C) Lepidocyclina (Nephrolepidina) tournori (Lemioln and Douville, 1904), sample No. 22; (D) Operculina cf. complanata (Defrance, 1822), sample No. 22; (E)Quinqueloculina sp., sample No. 70; (F) Spiroclypeus blankenhorni (Henson, 1937), sample No. 22; (G) Spiroclypeus blankenhorni (Henson, 1937), sample No. 22; (H) Eulepidina dilatata(Michelloti, 1861), sample No. 10; (I) Eulepidina sp., sample No. 10; (J) Eulepidina dilatata (Michelloti, 1861), sample No. 10.

A. Roozpeykar, I.M. Moghaddam / Geoscience Frontiers 7 (2016) 125e140 137

Remark: This species was recorded by Adams and Bourgeois(1967) from Rupelian to Aquitanian of Asmari Formation.Description: The test is planispirally coiled in the early stage,which becomes opening in the next stage, and the height ofchambers increases. In the cross section, the central part of testis picked and run shape.Superfamily Rotaliacea (Ehrenberg, 1839)Family Rotalidae (Ehrenberg, 1839)Subfamily Rotalinae (Ehrenberg, 1839)Genus Rotalia (Lamarck, 1804)Rotalia viennotti (Greig, 1935, Figs. 9N and 10A)

Remark: Adams and Bourgeois (1967) and Laursen et al. (2009)recorded this species from the Rupelian to Aquitanian.Description: The test is unequally biconvex, and the ventral sideis more convex. In the cross section, the test is trochospirallycoiled and thickened, and the height of dorsal side is lowand themargin is rounded. In the ventral side, the V-shaped plug ismarked. In the equatorial section, the number of whorl stages islow in a way that the maximum number of whorls becomes 3.The chambers are triangular, and the septum is multiple. Thewall is calcareous and hyaline.Superfamily Ataxophragmiacea (Schwager, 1877)

A. Roozpeykar, I.M. Moghaddam / Geoscience Frontiers 7 (2016) 125e140138

Family Valvulinidae (Berthelin, 1880)Subfamily Valvulininae (Berthelin, 1880)Genus Valvulina (d’Orbigny, 1826)Valvulina sp. 1 (Adams and Bourgeois, 1967, Fig. 9O)Remark: This species was recorded by Adams and Bourgeois(1967) from RupelianeAquitanian of Asmari Formation.Description: The test is agglutinated. In the cross section, the testis conical, and in the equatorial section, it is close to spherical.This genus is characterized by its high spire, large size andregularly rounded growth pattern. The separated walls ofchambers are thick and elongated from themargin to the centralpart of test.Superfamily Textulariacea (Ehrenberg, 1838)Family Textularidae (Ehrenberg, 1838)Subfamily Textulariinae (Ehrenberg, 1838)Genus Bigenerina (d’Orbigny, 1826)Bigenerina sp., Fig. 10CRemarks: This species was reported from southwest of Iran byAdams and Bourgeois (1967) from Rupelian to Burdigalian.Description: The test is agglutinated. In the cross section, thechambers are initially biserial, and then, they become uniserial.The general shape of chambers is flat, and in margin, it is turgid.The number of chambers in biserial stage is 5e6 paired, and inthe uniserial stage, it is 5e3.Superfamily Textulariacea (Ehrenberg, 1838)Family Textularidae (Ehrenberg, 1838)Subfamily Textulariinae (Ehrenberg, 1838)Genus Textularia (Defrance, 1824)Textularia sp., Fig. 9ERemarks: This species was reported from southwest of Iran byAdams and Bourgeois (1967) from Rupelian to Burdigalian.Description: The test is agglutinated, biserial and the sutures aredistinct. The number of chambers is 8 pairs, and the size ofchambers gently increased. The aperture is like a slit, and it isplaced in the aperture surface.Superfamily Soritacea (Ehrenberg, 1839)Family Peneroplidae (Schultze, 1854)Genus Meandropsina (Munier-Chalmas, 1882)Meandropsina iranica (Henson, 1950, Fig. 11B)Remark: This species was recorded by Laursen et al. (2009) fromChattian to Burdigalian of Asmari Formation.Description: The test is porcellaneous. Chambers are numerousand tabular whosewidth and height gently increase towards theoutside, 2 mm radial, and 26 chambers exist.

6.2. Systematic of coralline algae

Family Corallinaceae (Lamouroux, 1812)Subfamily Melobesioideae (Bizzozero, 1885)Lithoporella melobesioides, Fig. 9KRemark: This species is present from Chattian to Burdigalian ofAsmari Formation.Description: This genus is characterized by its unistratose thalluswith large palisade cells and multiple overgrowth of cellfilaments.Family Corallinaceae (Lamouroux, 1812)Subfamily Melobesioideae (Bizzozero, 1885)Lithotamnion sp., Fig. 10DRemark: This species was recorded from Rupelian to Burdigalianof the Asmari Formation.Description: Core filaments are non-coaxial. Cell fusions arepresent. The branched thallus with central core of filamentspredominantly is bent towards the surface of the protuberance.Family Corallinaceae (Lamouroux, 1812)

Subfamily Lithophylloideae (Setchell, 1943)Titanoderma sp., Fig. 9LRemark: This species recorded from ChattianeAquitanian inAsmari Formation.Description: This genus is characterized by its thallus with thepalisade cells of the primigenous filament and tetra-bisporangial conceptacle with cylindrical pore canal.

Acknowledgement

We are thankful to Prof. Marco Brandano and Prof. David Bassifrom Roma and Ferrara Universities for their valuable suggestionsand Kazem Sherafati for his help during field work. Also, thanks toProf. Xiaoqiao Wan and Miss Lily Wang and to the reviewers fortheir constructive comments on this manuscript.

References

Abreu, V.S., Haddad, G.A., 1998. Glacioeustatic variations: the mechanism linkingstable isotope events and sequence stratigraphy from the early Oligocene tomiddle Miocene. SEPM Special Publication 60, 245e260.

Adams, C.G., 1968. A revision of the foraminiferal genus Austrotrillina Pan. Bulletinof the British Museum (Natural History) Geology 16, 71e97.

Adams, T.D., Bourgeois, F., 1967. Asmari Biostratigraphy: Iranian Oil OperatingCompanies. Geological and Exploration Division, Report No. 1074, unpublished.

Aguirre, J., Riding, R., Braga, J.C., 2000. Diversity of coralline red algae: originationand extinction patterns from the Early Cretaceous to the Pleistocene. Paleobi-ology 26, 651e667.

Alavi, M., 2004. Regional stratigraphy of the Zagros fold-thrust belt of Iran and itsproforeland evolution. American Journal of Science 304, 1e20.

Barattolo, F., Bassi, D., Romero, R., 2007. Upper Eocene larger foraminiferal-corallinealgal facies from the Klokova Mountain (south continental Greece). Facies 53,361e375.

Barbeiri, R., Hohenger, J., Puglies, N., 2006. Foraminifera and environmentalmicropaleontology. Marine Micropaleontology 26, 1e3.

Barhroudi, A., Koyi, H.A., 2004. Tectono-sedimentary framework of the GachsaranFormation in the Zagros foreland basin. Marine Petroleum Geology 21,1295e1310.

Bassi, D., 2005. Larger foraminiferal and coralline algal facies in an Upper Eocenestorm-influenced, shallow water carbonate platform (Colli Berici, north-easternItaly). Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 226, 17e35.

Bassi, D., Nebelsick, J.H., 2010. Components, facies and ramps: redefining UpperOligocene shallow water carbonates using coralline red algae and larger fora-minifera (Venetian area, northeast Italy). Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology,Palaeoecology 295, 258e280.

Bassi, D., Hottinger, L., Nebelsick, J.H., 2007. Larger foraminifera from the upperOligocene of the Venetian area, north-east Italy. Paleontology 50, 845e868.

Berberian, M., King, G.C.P., 1981. Towards a palaeogeography and tectonic evolutionof Iran. Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences 18, 210e265.

Berggren, W.A., Prothero, D.R., 1992. EoceneeOligocene climatic and biotic evolu-tion: an overview. In: Prothero, D.R., Berggren, W.A. (Eds.), EoceneeOligoceneClimatic and Biotic Evolution. Princeton University Press, Princeton, pp. 1e28.

Berthelin, G., 1880. Mémoire sur les Foraminiféres Fossiles de ÍEtage Albien deMoncley (Doubs). Memoires de la société Geologique de france, ser. 3 1 (5),1e84.

Betzler, C., 1997. Ecological control on geometries of carbonate platforms: Miocene/Pliocene shallow-water microfaunas and carbonate biofacies from theQueensland Plateau (NE Australia). Facies 37, 147e166.

Betzler, C., Brachert, T.C., Nebelsick, J., 1997. The warm temperate carbonate prov-ince, a review of the facies, zonations and delimitations. Courier Forschungs-Institut Senckenberg 201, 83e99.

Bizzozero, G., 1885. Flora Veneta Crittogramica. Parte II. Seminario, Padova, 255 pp.Blainville, H.-M.D., 1827. Mémoire sur les Bélemnites, considérées zoologiquement

et géologiquement. Nabu Press, Levrault, Paris, 136 pp.Braga, J.C., Aguirre, J., 2001. Coralline algal assemblages in Upper Neogene reef and

temperate carbonates in Southern Spain. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology,Palaeoecology 175, 27e41.

Brandano, M., Frezza, V., Tomassetti, L., Cuffaro, M., 2009. Heterozoan carbonates inoligotrophic tropical waters: the Attard member of the lower coralline lime-stone formation (Upper Oligocene, Malta). Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology,Palaeoecology 274, 54e63.

Buxton, M.W.N., Pedley, H.M., 1989. A Standardized Model for Tethyan TertiaryCarbonates Ramps. Journal of the Geological Society, London 146, pp. 746e748.

Chapronière, G.C.H., 1984. Oligocene and Miocene larger foraminiferida fromAustralia and New Zealand. Bulletin-Australia Bureau of Mineral Resources,Geology and Geophysics 188, 1e60.

Clarke, L.J., Jenkyns, H.C., 1999. New oxygen isotope evidence for long-term Creta-ceous climatic change in the Southern Hemisphere. Geology 27, 699e702.

A. Roozpeykar, I.M. Moghaddam / Geoscience Frontiers 7 (2016) 125e140 139

Defrance, M.J.L., 1822. Lenticulites. In: Cuvier, M.F. (Ed.), dictionnaire des Sciencesnaturelles, 25 (1aa-1eo). Levrault F.G., Strasbourget LeNormant, Paris, pp. 425e453.

Defrance, M.J.L., 1824. Dictionnaire des Sciences Naturelles 32. Moll-Morf. Stras-burge, F. G. Levrault. d’Orbigny, A., 1826. Tableau methodique de la classe des.Céphalopods: Annales des Sciences Naturelles, Paris 7 (1), 245e314.

d’Orbigny, A., 1839. Foraminiferes, in Roman de la Sagra. Histoire Physique Politiqueet Naturelle de l’ile Cuba. Arthus Bertrand, Paris.

Douvillé, H., 1905. Les foraminifers dans le tertiare de Borneo. Bulletin GéologiqueSociety de France 5, 435e464.

Ehrenberg, C.G., 1838. Über dem blossen Auge unsicchtbare Kalkthierchen undKieselthierchen als Hauptbestandtheile de Kreidegebirge. Bericht über die zuBekanntmachung geeigneten Verhandlungen der Königlichen preussischenAkademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin 1838, 192e200.

Ehrenberg, C.G., 1839. Uber die Bildung der Kreidefelsen und des Kreidemergelsdurch unsichtbare Organismen. PhysikalischeAbhandlungender KoniglichenAkademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin 1838, 59e147.

Ehrenberg, S.N., Pickard, N.A.H., Laursen, G.V., Monibi, S., Mossadegh, Z.K.,Svana, T.A., Aqrawi, A.A.M., McArthur, J.M., Thirlwall, M.F., 2007. Strontiumisotope stratigraphy of the Asmari Formation (Oligoceneelower Miocene), SWIran. Journal of Petroleum Geology 30, 107e128.

Falcon, N.L., 1961. Major earth-Xexturing in the Zagros Mountain of southwest Iran.Journal of the Geological Society, London 117, 367e376.

Farhoudi, G., 1978. A comparison of Zagros geology to Island Arcs. Geology 86,323e334.

Fichtel, L., Moll, J.P.C., 1798. Testacea microscopica, aliaque minuta ex generibusArgonauta et Nautilus, ad naturam picta et descripta (Microscopische undandere klein Schalthiere aus den geschlechtern Argonaute und Schiffer).Camesina, Vienna.

Filipescu, s., Miclea, A., Gross, M., Harzhauser, M., Zagorsek, K., Jipa, C., 2014. EarlySarmatian paleoenvironments in the easternmost Pannonian Basin (BorodDepression, Romania) revealed by the micropaleontological data. GeologicaCarpathica 65, 67e81.

Fornasini, C., 1904. Illustrazione di specie orbignyane di Foraminiferi institute nel1826. Memoire della Reale Accademia della Scienze dell Instituto di Bologna 6(1), 1e17.

Foslie, M.H., 1909. Algologiske natiser VI. Det Kongelige norske videnskabus selskalsskrifter 1909, pp. 1e63.

Fournier, F., Montaggioni, L., Borgomano, J., 2004. Paleoenvironments and high-frequency cyclicity from Cenozoic South-East Asian shallow-water carbon-ates: a case study from the Oligo-Miocene buildups of Malampaya, OffshorePalawan, Philippines. Marine Petroleum Geology 21, 1e21.

Greig, D.A., 1935. Rotalia viennotti, an important foraminiferal species from AsiaMinor and Western Asia. Journal of Paleontology 9, 523e526.

Gumbel, C.W., 1870. Beitrage zur Foraminiferenfauna der nordalpinen Eocangebilde.Abhandlungen der K. Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. CI, II (1868)10 (2), 581e730.

Halfar, J., Mutti, M., 2005. Global dominance of coralline red-algal facies: a responseto Miocene oceanographic events. Geology 33, 481e484.

Halfar, J., Godinez-Orta, L., Mutti, M., Valdez-Holguin, J., Borges, J., 2004. Nutrientand temperature controls on modern carbonate production: an example fromthe Gulf of California, Mexico. Geology 32, 213e216.

Hallock, P., 1984. Distribution of larger foraminiferal assemblages on two Pacificcoral reefs. Journal of Foraminiferal Research 14, 250e261.

Hallock, P., 1985. Why are larger foraminifera large? Paleobiology 11, 195e208.Hallock, P., 1988. The role of nutrient availability in bioerosion: consequences to

carbonate buildups. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 63,275e291.

Hallock, P., Glenn, E.C., 1986. Larger foraminifera: a tool for paleoenvironmentalanalysis of Cenozoic carbonate depositional facies. Palaios 1, 55e64.

Hallock, P., Sheps, K., Chaproniere, G.C.H., Howell, M., 2006. A larger benthic fora-minifers of the Marion Plateau, NE Australia (ODP Leg 194): comparison offaunas from bryozoan (Site 1193, 1194) and red-algal (Site 1196e98) dominatedcarbonate platforms. Proceedings of the Ocean Drilling Program Scientific Re-sults 194, 1e31.

Henson, F.R.S., 1937. Larger foraminifera from Aintab, Turkish Syria. Eclogae Geo-logicae Helvetiae 30, 45e57.

Henson, F.R.S., 1950. Middle Eastern Tertiary Peneroplidae (Foraminifera) with re-marks on the phylogeny and taxonomy of the family. Ph.D. thesis, Leiden(Wakefield), England, 70 pp (unpublished).

Heydari, E., 2008. Tectonics versus eustatic control on supersequences of the ZagrosMountains of Iran. Tectonophysics 451, 56e70.

Heydari, E., Hassanzadeh, J., Wade, W.J., Ghazi, A.M., 2003. PermianeTriassicboundary interval in the Abadeh section of Iran with implications for massextinction. Part 1. Sedimentology. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Paleo-ecology 193, 405e423.

Hohenegger, J., 2000. Coenoclines of larger foraminifera. Micropaleontology 46(Suppl. 1), 127e151.

Hohenegger, J., Yordanova, E., Nakano, Y., Tatzreiter, F., 1999. Habitats of largerforaminifera on the upper reef slope of Sesoko Island, Okinawa, Japan. MarineMicropaleontology 36, 109e168.

Hottinger, L., 1983. Processes determining the distribution of larger foraminifera inspace and time. Utrecht Micropaleontological Bulletins 30, 239e253.

Hottinger, L., 1997. Shallow benthic foraminiferal assemblages as signals for depthof their deposition and their limitations. Bulletin de la Société Géologique deFrance 168, 491e505.

Ivany, L.C., Patterson, W.P., Lohmann, K.C., 2000. Cooler winters as a possiblecause of mass extinctions at the Eocene/Oligocene boundary. Nature 407,887e890.

James, G.A., Wynd, J.G., 1965. Stratigraphic nomenclature of Iranian oil consortiumagreement area. American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin 49 (2),94e156.

Joly, N., Leymerie, A., 1848. Meémoire sur les Nummulites considérés zoologique-ment et géologiquement. Mémoires de l’Academie des Sciences de Toulouse 4,1e170.

Lamarck, J.B., 1804. Suite des memoires surles fossils des environs de Paris. AnallesMuseum National d’Histoire Naturelle 5, 237e245.

Lamouroux, J.V.F., 1812. Classification des Ploipyiers coralligenes. Nouveau BulletinDes sciences, Par La Société Philomatique 3, 181e188.

Langer, M., Hottinger, L., 2000. Biogeography of selected “larger” foraminifera.Micropaleontology 46, 57e86.

Laursen, G.V., Monibi, S., Allan, T.L., Pickard, N.A.H., Hosseiney, A., Vincent, B.,Hamon, Y., Van Buchem, F.S.P.V., Moallemi, A., Druillion, G., 2009. The AsmariFormation Revisited: Changed Stratigraphic Allocation and New Biozonation,Shiraz. First International Petroleum Conference & Exhibition, European Asso-ciation of Geoscientists and Engineers.

Lee, J.J., McEnery, M.E., Kahn, E.G., Schuster, F., 1979. Symbiosis and the evolution oflarger foraminifera. Micropaleontology 25, 118e140.

Lemoine, P., Douvillé, R., 1904. Sur le genre Lepidocyclina Gümbel. Memoires de laSociété géologique de France (n.s.) 12, 1e41.

Leutenegger, S., 1984. Symbiosis in benthic foraminifera: specificity and host ad-aptations. Journal Foraminiferal Research 14, 16e35.

Loeblich Jr., A.R., Tappan, H., 1986. Suprageneric classification of the foraminiferida(Protozoa). Micropaleontology 30 (1), 1e70.

Loeblich, A.R., Tappan, H., 1988. Foraminiferal Genera and Their Classification. VanNostrand Reinhold International Company Limited, New York, 2115 pp.

Manker, J.P., Carter, B.D., 1987. Paleoecology and paleogeography of an extensiverhodolith facies from the lower Oligocene of south Georgia and north Florida.Palaios 592, 181e188.

Mateu-Vicens, G., Hallock, P., Brandano, M., 2008. A depositional model andpaleoecological reconstruction of the lower Tortonian distally steepened rampof Menorca (Balearic Islands, Spain). Palaios 23, 465e481.

Miller, K.J., Kominz, M.A., Browning, J.V., Wright, J.D., Mountain, G.S., Katz, M.E.,Sugarman, P.J., Cramer, B.S., Christie-Blick, N., Pekar, S.F., 2005. The Phanerozoicrecord of global sea-level change. Science 310, 1293e1298.

Miller, K.G., Wright, J.D., Fairbanks, R.G., 1991. Unlocking the Icehouse: Oligoce-neeMiocene oxygen isotopes, Eustacy, and margin erosion. Journal ofGeophysical Research 96 (B4), 6829e6848.

Montfort, D, de, 1808. Conchyliologie Systmatique et Classification Methodique desCoquilles. F. Schoell, Paris, no.1.

Motiei, H., 1993. Stratigraphy of Zagros. Geological Survey of Iran, 583 pp.Munier-Chalmas, E., 1882. La Structure Triloculines et des Quinqueloculines. Bulletin

de la Société Géologique de France (1881e1882), Series 3 (10), 424e425.Murray, J.W., 1991. Ecology and Paleontology of Benthic Foraminifera. Longman

Group, UK.Nebelsick, J.H., Bassi, D., Drobne, K., 2000. Microfacies analysis and palae-

oenvironmental interpretation of Lower Oligocene, shallow-water carbonates(Gornji Grad Beds, Slovenia). Facies 43, 157e176.

O’Connell, L.G., James, N.P., Bone, Y., 2012. The Miocene Nullarbor Limestone,Southern Australia; deposition on a vast subtropical epeiric platform. Sedi-mentary Geology (253e254), 1-16.

Özcan, E., Less, Gy., Baldi-Beke, M., Kollanyi, K., Acar, F., 2009. Oligo-Miocene fora-miniferal record (Miogypsinidae, Lepidocyclinidae and Nummulitidae) from theWestern Taurides (SW, Turkey): biometry and implications for the regionalgeology. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences 34, 740e760.

Parr, W.J., 1942. Foraminifera and a tubicolous worm from the Permian of the north-west Division of Western Australia. Journal of the Royal Society of WesternAustralia (1940e1941) 2, 97e115.

Pedley, M., 1998. A review of sediment distributions and processes in Oligo-Miocene ramps of southern Italy and Malta (Mediterranean divide). In:Wright, V.P., Burchette, T.P. (Eds.), Carbonate Ramps, Geological Society, London,Special Publications 149, pp. 163e179.

Pomar, L., Hallock, P., 2008. Carbonate factories: a conundrum in sedimentary ge-ology. Earth-Science Reviews 87, 134e169.

Pomar, L., Brandano, M., Westphal, H., 2004. Environmental factors influencingskeletal grain sediment associations: a critical review of Miocene examplesfrom the western Mediterranean. Sedimentology 51, 627e651.

Pomar, L., Mateu-Vicens, G., Morsilli, M., Brandano, M., 2014. Carbonate rampevolution during the Late Oligocene (Chattian), Salento Peninsula, southernItaly. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 404, 109e132.

Prothero, D.R., 1994. The EoceneeOligocene TransitioneParadise Lost. In: CriticalMoments in Paleobiology and Earth History Series. Columbia University Press,New York.

Prothero, D.R., 2003. Pacific coast EoceneeOligocene marine chronostratigraphy: areview and an update. In: Prothero, D.R., Ivany, L.C., Nesbitt, E.A. (Eds.), FromGreenhouse to Icehouse: The Marine EoceneeOligocene Transition. ColumbiaUniversity Press, New York, pp. 1e13.

Rasser, M., Piller, W., 2004. Crustose algal frameworks from the Eocene Alpineforeland. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 206, 21e39.

Reichel, M., 1937. Étude sur les Alveolines. Schweizerische PaläontologischeAbhandlungen 59 (3), 95e147.

A. Roozpeykar, I.M. Moghaddam / Geoscience Frontiers 7 (2016) 125e140140

Reiss, Z., Hottinger, L., 1984. The Gulf of Aqaba: Ecological Micropaleontology.Springer, Berlin, Carbonates Evaporites (2010) 25, pp. 145e160.

Reuter, M., Brachert, T.C., 2007. Freshwater discharge and sediment discharge-control on growth, ecological structure and geometry of Late Mioceneshallow water coral ecosystems (early Tortonian, Crete/Greece). Palae-ogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 25, 308e328.

Romero, J., Caus, E., Rossel, J., 2002. A model for the palaeoenvironmental distri-bution of larger foraminifera based on late Middle Eocene deposits on themargin of the south Pyrenean basin (NE Spain). Palaeogeography, Palae-oclimatology, Palaeoecology 179, 43e56.

Sadeghi, R., Vaziri-Moghaddam, H., Taheri, A., 2009. Biostratigraphy and Palae-oecology of the Oligo-Miocene succession in Fars and Khuzestan areas (ZagrosBasin, SW Iran). Historical Biology 21, 17e31.

Scheffen, W., 1932. Zur morphologie und morphogenese der Lepidocyclinen. Pal-äntologische Zeitchrift 14, 233e256.

Schultze, M.S., 1854. Uber den Organismus der Polythalamien (Foraminiferen),nebst Bermerkungen uber die Rhizopoden im Allgemeinen. Wilhelm Engel-mann, Leipzig.

Schwager, C., 1877. Quadro del proposto sistema di classificazione dei foraminifericon guscio. Bolletino Reale Comitato Geologico d’Italia 8, 18e27.

Sen Gupta, B.K., 1999. Foraminifera in marginal marine environments. In: SenGupta, B.K. (Ed.), Modern Foraminifera. Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp. 141e159.

Setchell, W.A., 1943. Mastophora and the Mastophoreae: genus and subfamily ofCorallinaceae. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, USA 29,127e135.

Soltanian, Z., Seyrafian, A., Vazziri-Moghaddam, H., 2011. Biostratigraphy and paleo-ecological implications in microfacies of the Asmari Formation (Oligocene),Naura anticline (Interior Fars of the Zagros Basin), Iran. Carbonates and Evap-orites 26, 1e13. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13146-011-0053-6.

Stocklin, J., 1968. Structural history and tectonics of Iran: a review. American As-sociation Petroleum Geological Bulletin 52, 1229e1258.

Van Buchem, F.S.P., Allan, T.L., Laursen, G.V., Lotfpour, M., Moallemi, A., Monibi, S.,Motiei, H., Pickard, N.A.H., Tahmasbi, A.R., Vedrenne, V., Vincent, B., 2010.Regional stratigraphic architecture and reservoir types of the Oligo-Miocenedeposits in the Dezful mbayment (Asmari and Pabdeh Formations) SW Iran.Geological Society, London, Special Publications 329, 219e263.

Vaziri-Moghaddam, H., Seyrafian, A., Taheri, A., 2010. OligoceneeMiocene rampsystem (Asmari Formation) in the NW of the Zagros basin, Iran: microfacies,paleoenvironment and depositional sequence. Revista Mexicana de CienciasGeológicas 27, 56e71.

Vlerk, I.M.van der, 1924. Miogypsina dehaartii, nov. species de larat (Moluques):Eclogae Geologia Helvetiae 18, pp. 429e432.

Wynd, J., 1965. Biofacies of the Iranian Consortium Agreement Area. Iranian OilOffshore Company Report 1082, Unpublished.

Yabe, H., Hanzawa, S., 1928. Tertiary foraminiferous rocks of Taiwan (Formosa).Proceedings of the Imperial Academy of Japan 4, 533e536.

Zachos, J., Pagani, M., Sloan, L., Thomas, E., Billups, K., 2001. Trends, rhythms andaberrations in global climate 65 Ma to present. Science 292, 686e693.