Carbonates and Evaporites (2020) 35:32

[Link]

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Biostratigraphic correlation of Santonian‑Maastrichtian calcareous

nanofossil biozones with planktonic foraminifera zonation, Interior
Fars region of the Zagros, southwest Iran
Saeedeh Senemari1 · Massih Afghah2

Accepted: 10 February 2020

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2020

Abstract
Received data considered the stratigraphic distribution of nanofossils and compared with planktonic foraminifera in the
Sepidan section. The Gurpi Formation is well exposed in the Sepidan section, Interior Fars, southwest Iran. It consists of
358 m of shale and argillaceous limestone with lime shale. Thirty-nine calcareous nannofossils species from 19 genera were
identified in the Sepidan section. According to the distribution of calcareous nannofossil assemblages, the Upper Cretaceous
succession was subdivided into 12 biostratigraphic zones, suggesting the late early Santonian to latest Maastrichtian age.
Also, the examination of the studied samples resulted in the identification of 20 planktonic foraminifer taxa, assigned to seven
genera. Based on the stratigraphic distribution of the planktonic foraminifera, nine foraminiferal biozones were determined.
Foraminiferal investigations show that the age of the Gurpi Formation is assigned to the Santonian to late Maastrichtian.
Both established nanofossil and planktonic foraminifera biozones were correlated.

Keywords Biostratigraphy · Calcareous nannofossils · Cretaceous · Planktonic foraminifera · Zagros · Zone

Introduction subsidence of the basin started at the Santonian which is

synchronous with global sea level rise (James and Wynd
The Zagros Basin is a section of the Alpine–Himalayan 1965; Motiei 1994; Alavi 2004). The Gurpi Formation is
system formed along the Arabian–Eurasia collision (Ber- one of the lithostratigraphic units of the upper Cretaceous
berian and King 1981). The Zagros Mountains consists of deposits and is exposed throughout most of the Agreement
more than 10,000 m of Mesozoic–Cenozoic strata, com- Area. For the first time, James and Wynd (1965) studied the
posed of a folded rock succession, with northwest–south- Gurpi Formation as pelagic facies of Zagros upper Creta-
east trend (Setudehnia 1978). So tectonically, this basin is ceous sequence which is composed of shale and limy shale.
part of a foreland basin, deposited dominantly with a thick Generally, the lower lithologic contact of this rock unit is
sedimentary sequence of carbonate and clastic sediments, marked by an obvious disconformity (oxidized zone) with
which was formed in the late Triassic. In fact, the men- underlying formations (Ilam or Sarvak formations) and the
tioned sediments were deposited in a subsiding trough in upper lithostratigraphic limit is covered by Pabdeh Forma-
the late Triassic. The Zagros folded belt is divided into four tion in the coastal and interior Fars regions. The Gurpi For-
stratigraphic zones which are Lurestan, Khuzestan, Coastal mation laterally changes to shallow water carbonates of the
and Interior Fars zones (James and Wynd 1965; Motiei Tarbur Formation in some parts of the interior Fars area
1995; Kamali et al. 2006). In coastal and interior Fars, the (Afghah 2010). Most of the studies on the Gurpi Forma-
tion have predominantly focused on stratigraphy, microfauna
and sedimentology in various stratigraphic sections of the
* Saeedeh Senemari Zagros (e.g., Ghasemi-Nejad et al. 2006; Darvishzadeh et al.
senemari2004@[Link]; [Link]@[Link] 2007; Khosrowtehrani 2008; Hemmati-Nasab et al. 2008;
1
Faculty of Engineering, Imam Khomeini International Afghah and Ghiyasi 2013; Beiranvand and Ghasemi-Nejad
University, Qazvin, Iran 2013; Beiranvand et al. 2014; Darabi and Sadeghi 2017;
2
Department of Geology, Shiraz Branch, Islamic Azad Esmaeilbeig 2018). In recent years, the biozonation of Gurpi
University, Shiraz, Iran Formation was provided by the calcareous nannofossils

13
Vol.:(0123456789)
 32 Page 2 of 12 Carbonates and Evaporites (2020) 35:32

(Hadavi et al. 2007; Senemari and Azizi 2012; Senemari the collected samples. Identification and determination of
and Sohrabi Molla Usefi 2012; Senemari 2017). But few Cretaceous planktonic foraminifera and biozones was based
studies deal with the correlation and comparison of calcar- on the global standard biostratigraphic zonation of Caron
eous nannofossil biozones and foraminiferal biozonation (1985); Sliter (1989); Premoli Silva and Verga (2004), as
(e.g., Senemari et al. 2008). For biostratigraphic study of well as regional zonation of Esfandyari Bayat and Rameh
the Gurpi Formation (based on calcareous nannofossils and (2016). Finally, calcareous nannofossil zonation was com-
planktonic foraminiferal assemblage), the Sepidan section pared with the results of planktonic foraminifer zonation.
was investigated in interior Fars, SW of Iran. Vertical distri-
bution of calcareous nannofossils and foraminifers supported Stratigraphy
different zones, ranging from Santonian to Maastrichtian for
the Gurpi Formation. The main goal of the present study The Gurpi Formation is encompassed between limestone of
is investigation of calcareous nannofossils’ biostratigraphic Sarvak formation as underlaying formation and shale of Pab-
zonation and correlation with the foraminiferal assemblage deh formation which covers the Gurpi Formation (Fig. 3).
in the Sepidan section. The Gurpi Formation of the Sepidan section consists of a
sedimentary succession with a thickness of 358 m, which is
composed of shale, argillaceous limestone and limy shale.
Geological and geographical setting Actually, in terms of lithology, it is divided into three dis-
tinct parts: the Santonian to early Campanian limy shale with
The studied stratigraphic section is located in the Fars Prov- iron nodules in the lower part (111 m thick), Campanian
ince, about 108 km NW of Shiraz, which covers the area to early Maastrichtian argillaceous limestone interlayered
between longitudes 51° 50′–51° 55′ E and latitudes 30° with limy shale of the middle part (192 m thick), and late
25′–30° 30′ N (Fig. 1). Based on Alavi (2004), the Sepi- Maastrichtian shale interbedded with argillaceous limestone
dan stratigraphic section is located in the folded zone of (55 m thick) in the upper part.
the Zagros. The studied section represents an NW–SE trend
similar to the Zagros trend. As mentioned before, the stud-
ied section is referred to as the interior Fars zone (James Results
and Wynd 1965) (Fig. 2). Cretaceous through Oligo-Mio-
cene sequences [Sarvak (Cenomanian), Gurpi (Santonian- Thirty-nine calcareous nannofossil species from 9 genera
Maastrichtian), Pabdeh (Paleocene–Oligocene) and Asmari were identified in the Sepidan section. Based upon the ver-
(Oligo-Miocene)] are well exposed in the Sepidan section. tical distribution of the identified nannofossils, biozonation
The mentioned succession previously recorded in this area was established. Additionally, 12 biozones are described.
by Afghah and Fadaei (2015). Additionally, the Gurpi The received biostratigraphic data were compared with
Formation consists of sequence shale, argillaceous lime- planktonic foraminiferal zonations of the Tethyan Santo-
stone and limy shale, which overlies the Sarvak Formation nian to Maastrichtian succession. The examination of the
(Cenomanian) disconformity and is disconformity covered studied samples resulted in the identification of 20 plank-
by the shale of the Pabdeh Formation (Figs. 3, 4, 5). tonic foraminiferal species belonging to seven genera.
Based on the stratigraphic distribution of the foraminifers,
nine foraminiferal biozones (Dicarinella asymetrica Zone
Materials and methods to Abathomphalus mayaroensis Zone) were determined.
The results are consistent with the general trend of plank-
The lithostratigraphic characteristic was determined by tonic foraminifera and calcareous nannofossils in the Gurpi
detailed field work. 180 samples were collected from the Formation.
Gurpi Formation and analyzed for fossiliferous assem-
blages. Samples of the calcareous nannofossils were pro-
cessed following the smear slide technique of Bown and Discussion
Young (1998). Calcareous nannofossils were studied using
an Olympus BH2 under cross-polarizer and plain polar- Biostratigraphy based on calcareous nannofossils
izer light (XPL and PPL) microscope at magnification of
1000 ×. The biostratigraphic zonation of the studied sec- The identification of paleoenvironment is determined by
tion was performed and compared with the global stand- biofacies (Al-Wosabi and Alaug 2012). Biozonation of the
ard biostratigraphic zonation, such as Sissingh (1977) and studied section is based on the stratigraphic distribution
Burnett (1998). The study of planktonic taxa was provided of calcareous nannofossils and planktonic foraminifera.
through thin sections. The thin sections were prepared from The calcareous nannofossils were investigated as a useful

13
Carbonates and Evaporites (2020) 35:32 Page 3 of 12 32

Fig. 1  Location of the studied section, northwest Shiraz (SW Iran)

tool for biostratigraphic zonation (Sissingh 1977; Perch- distribution is influenced by the seawater conditions in
Nielsen 1985; Thierstein and Young 2004). The presence which they live (Eshet and Almogi-Labin 1996). The
of calcareous nanofossils in collected samples confirms stratigraphic ranges of the taxa and biozones are shown
that the favorable environment is seawater. Therefore, in the distribution chart (Fig. 6). According to Creta-
calcareous nannofossils are valuable indicators, as their ceous Coccoliths (CC) of Sissingh zonation (1977),

13
 32 Page 4 of 12 Carbonates and Evaporites (2020) 35:32

Fig. 2  Distribution of different formations in the Zagros Basin (James and Wynd 1965)

Fig. 3  The boundary between

Sarvak, Gurpi and Pabdeh for-
mations in the studied section

Upper Cretaceous (UC) of Burnett zonation (1998) and (Reinhardtites anthophorus nannofossil Zone/CC15) to
Nannofossils Cretaceous (NC) of Roth zonation (1978), the latest Maastrichtian (Nephrolithus frequens nannofos-
the calcareous nannofossil zonation is provided in the sil Zone/CC26). The taxa in this study are illustrated in the
present study. Based on our biostratigraphic data, the plate (Fig. 7). The identified biozones are described from
Sepidan section is assigned from the late early Santonian the base to top as follows:

13
Carbonates and Evaporites (2020) 35:32 Page 5 of 12 32

zone is equivalent to the subzone UC11c of Burnett zona-

tion (1998).

CC17 zone

This zone is marked by the first occurrence (FO) of Cal-

culites obscurus to the FO of Aspidolithus parcus parcus
(= Broinsonia parca parca), equivalent to zone NC17 of
Roth zonation (1978), which is related to the late Santo-
nian–early Campanian. The first occurrence of Arkhangel-
skiella cymbiformis to the FO of Aspidolithus parcus parcus
coincides with UC13 of Burnett zonation (1998). Due to
the presence of species Arkhangelskiella cymbiformis, this
Fig. 4  The boundary between Sarvak and Gurpi formations in the zone is also equivalent to UC13 of Burnett zonation (1998).
studied section The thickness of the zones CC15, CC16 and CC17 is 46 m.

CC18 zone

The next biozone is defined as the interval from the FO of

Aspidolithus parcus to the last occurrences (LO) of Mar-
thasterites furcatus and corresponds to the early Campa-
nian. This zone is equivalent to the lower part of NC18
of Roth zonation (1978) and UC14 ­(UC14aTP, ­UC14bTP,
­UC14cTP and lower part of ­UC14dTP) of Burnett zonation
(1998). ­Burnett´ zoning markers including: Aspidolithus par-
cus parcus (Broinsonia parca parca), A. parcus constric-
tus (= Broinsonia parca constricta), and C. verbeekii are
observed in this zone. The thickness of this zone is 30 m.

CC19 zone

The next zone is distinguished as the interval from the LO of

Fig. 5  The boundary between Gurpi and Pabdeh formations in the
studied section Marthasterites furcatus to the FO of Ceratolithoides aculeus
which corresponds to the late early Campanian. This zone is
due to the first occurrence of Ceratolithoides aculeus equiv-
CC15 zone
alent to the upper part of the zone of NC18 of Roth zonation
(1978) and the lower part of the zone UC15 (­ UC15aTP) of
The first biozone spans the interval from the FO of Rein-
Burnett zonation (1998). Also, the first appearance of Mis-
hardtites anthophorus to the FO of Lucianorhabdus
ceomarginatus pleniporus at the beginning of zone UC15
cayeuxii, equivalent to NC16 of Roth zonation (1978). The
was not recorded. The thickness of this zone is measured to
age of this zone is referred to as late early Santonian.
be approximately 35 m.

CC16 zone CC20 zone

The next biozone in the studied section spans the interval The Ceratolithoides aculeus Zone is distributed from the
from the FO of Lucianorhabdus cayeuxii to the FO of Cal- interval from the FO of Ceratolithoides aculeus to the FO of
culites obscurus, which is assigned to early late Santonian Quadrum sissinghii (= Uniplanarius sissinghii). This zone
and equivalent to the upper part of zone NC16 of Roth is equivalent to the lower part of NC19 of zonation of Roth
zonation (1978). The first occurrence of Lucianorhabdus (1978) and ­UC15bTP subzone of Burnett zonation (1998).
cayeuxii to the FO of Calculites obscurus defines the lower The age determination of this zone confirms late early Cam-
part of subzone UC11c of Burnett zonation (1998). So this panian and this zone extended about 45 m.

13
 32 Page 6 of 12 Carbonates and Evaporites (2020) 35:32

Fig. 6  Biostratigraphy based on calcareous nannofossils of Gurpi Formation, Sepidan section

CC21 zone which refers to the latest Campanian and equivalent to the
lower part of zone NC20 of Roth zonation (1978). Also, this
This zone is described by the FO of Quadrum sissinghii to zone is equivalent to the upper part of UC15 zone (­ UC15dTP
the FO of Quadrum trifidum (= Uniplanarius trifidus) that and ­UC15eTP) of Burnett zonation (1998). In this zone, the
referred to the early late Campanian. The Uniplanarius siss- first occurrence (FO) of Reinhardtites levis was recorded.
inghii Zone is equivalent to the upper part of NC19 of Roth The thickness of this zone is measured to be about 95 m.
zonation (1978) and ­UC15cTP subzone of Burnett zonation
(1998). The thickness of this zone is 22 m. CC23 zone

CC22 zone The mentioned zone is extended toward the top of the Gurpi
Formation. It is described by LO of Reinhardtites anthopho-
The next zone in the argillaceous limestone of the Gurpi rus to the LO of Tranolithus phacelosus (= Tranolithus orio-
Formation is from the first occurrence (FO) of Quadrum tri- natus) and is assigned to the latest Campanian to early Maas-
fidum to the last occurrences of Reinhardtites anthophorus, trichtian. This zone is equivalent to the upper part of NC20

13
Carbonates and Evaporites (2020) 35:32 Page 7 of 12 32

Fig. 7  Plate: All figures in

light microghraphs × 1000; the
taxa considered in the present
figure are referenced in Perch-
Nielsen (1985); 1, Rhagodiscus
angustus (Stradner, 1963)
Reinhardt (1971) (XPL); 2,
Arkhangelskiella cymbiformis
Vekshina (1959); 3, Quadrum
trifidum (Stradner) Prins &
Perch-Nielsen 1977, (XPL);
4, Reinhardtites levis Prins &
Sissingh in Sissingh (1977);
5, Tranolithus orionatus
(Reinhardt. 1966a) Reinhardt.
1966b. (XPL); 6, Reinhardtites
anthophorus (Deflandre, 1959)
Perch-Nielsen (1968), (XPL); 7,
Microrhabdulus decoratus Def-
landre (1959); 8, Aspidolithus
parcus parcus (Stradner, 1963)
Noel (1969); 9, Marthasterites
furcatus (Deflandre in Deflandre
& Fert, 1954) Deflandre, 1959
(PPL); 10, Micula decussata
Vekshina (1959); 11, Quad-
rum sissinghii Perch-Nielsen
(1984b), (XPL); 12, Calculites
obscurus (Deflandre, 1959)
Prins and Sissingh in Sissingh
(1977); 13, Lucianorhabdus
cayeuxii Deflandre, 1959,
(XPL); 14, Ceratolithoides
aculeus (Stradner, 1961) Prins
& Sissingh in Sissingh (1977);
15, Micula praemurus (Bukry,
1973) Stradner & Steinmetz
(1984); 16, Micula prinsii
Perch-Nielsen, 1979

of the Roth zonation (1978) and U ­ C16TP–UC17TP zones of from the interval of the LO of Reinhardtites levis to the first
Burnett zonation (1998). The last occurrence of Aspidolithus occurrence of Nephrolithus frequens. In the present study,
parcus constrictus ­(UC16TP and ­UC17TP zones boundary) Nephrolithus frequens is not recognizable. Therefore, the
and Quadrum trifidum (upper part of U ­ C17TP zone) was upper boundary of this zone is determined by the first occur-
recorded. This zone is approximately extended by 30 m. rences of Micula murus. Some of the species in this zone are
Lithraphidites quadratus, Micula murus and Micula prae-
CC24 zone murus. This zone is equivalent to the upper part of NC21
and NC22 of Roth zonation (1978) and ­UC19TP, ­UC20aTP
The Reinhardtites levis Zone is determined from the interval of Burnett zonation (1998). The age of zone is late Maas-
of the LO of Tranolithus orionatus to the last occurrence trichtian. The thickness of this zone is 28 m.
of Reinhardtites levis. The age of the zone is early Maas-
trichtian. This zone is equivalent to the lower part of NC21 CC26 zone
of Roth zonation (1978) and ­UC18TP of Burnett zonation
(1998). The thickness of this zone is 9 m. The last bioevents recorded from gray shale of upper Cre-
taceous/latest Maastrichtian is the zone CC26, defined as
CC25 zone the interval from the first occurrences to last occurrences of
Nephrolithus frequens. However, in low latitudes (including
The next recorded unit of Sepidan is described as CC25 Iran), Nephrolithus frequens is not recognizable but here the
zone. The Arkhangelskiella cymbiformis Zone appears FO of Micula murus and then Micula prinsii can be used to

13
 32 Page 8 of 12 Carbonates and Evaporites (2020) 35:32

determine the approximate boundary of the CC25–CC26 of the Zagros Basin. Planktonic foraminifera are diverse
biozones of the late Maastrichtian–latest Maastrichtian. in samples of the Gurpi Formation at the studied section
Some of the species in this zone are Micula murus, Micula (Fig. 8). As previously mentioned, these zonal schemes
prinsii, and Thoracosphaera operculata. This zone is equiv- are compared with the Tethyan nannofossil standard zona-
alent to zone NC23 of Roth zonation (1978) and ­UC20bTP tion (e.g., Sissingh 1977) and other biozonation (Figs. 9,
and ­UC20dTP of Burnett zonation (1998). The first appear- 10). The presented zonal scheme consists of the global and
ance of Ceratolithoides kamptneri at the beginning of sub- regional standard zonation (Premoli Silva and Verga 2004;
zone ­UC20cTP was not recorded. Therefore, in the present Esfandyari Bayat and Rameh 2016) (Fig. 10). The taxa in
study ­UC20cTP is not recognizable. The age of the zone is this study are illustrated in the plate (Fig. 8). According to
latest Maastrichtian. The thickness of this zone is 18 m. biostratigraphic data, the determined biozones are described
as follows.
Biostratigraphy based on planktonic foraminifera
and correlation with calcareous nannofossils Dicarinella asymetrica Zone

There is no correlative data of interior Fars upper Cretaceous The Dicarinella asymetrica Taxon Range Zone (TRZ) is
pelagic foraminifera and calcareous nannofossil region. distinguished by the total range of Dicarinella asymet-
Actually, biostratigraphic study of the Sepidan section is rica. So, the lower boundary is indicated with the FO of
the first data which deals with stratigraphic distribution of Dicarinella asymetrica and the upper boundary of this
the upper Cretaceous foraminifera and calcareous nanno- zone is marked by the LO of Dicarinella asymetrica. In
fossils in this area. The correlation between foraminifera fact, the upper boundary of this zone coincides with the
and nannofossils in the Gurpi Formation in Sepidan is an extinction of dicarinellids. The age of this zone is referred
applicable proof for other biocorrelations in different parts to as early Santonian to earliest Campanian (Caron 1985;

Fig. 8  Plate: the taxa consid-

ered in the present figure are
referenced in Loeblich and
Tappan (1989); 1, Globotrun-
canita elevata (Brotzen, 1934);
2, Globotruncana ventricosa
(White, 1928); 3, Globotrun-
canella havanensis (Voorwijk,
1937); 4, Globotruncana
falsostuarti (Gandolfi, 1955); 5,
Globotruncanita arca (Cush-
man, 1926); 6, Globotruncanita
stuarti (de Lapparent, 1918); 7,
Abathomphalus mayaroensis
(Bolli, 1951); 8, Globotruncana
aegyptiaca (Nakkady, 1950); 9,
Globotruncana lapparenti (Car-
sey, 1926); 10, Globotruncana
bulloides (Vogler, 1941); 11,
Globotruncana lapparenti (Car-
sey, 1926); 12, Globotruncana
hilli (Banner & Blow, 1960)

13
Carbonates and Evaporites (2020) 35:32 Page 9 of 12 32

Globotruncanita elevata Partial Range Zone

The Globotruncanita elevata Partial Range Zone (PRZ)

determines the stratigraphic interval with Globotruncanita
elevata, from the LO of Dicarinella asymetrica which is
coeval with the FO of Globotruncana ventricosa and cor-
responds to the early Campanian age. The diagnosed plank-
tonic foraminifers of this biozone are composed of Glo-
botruncanita elevata, Globotruncana arca, Globotruncana
lapparenti, Globotruncana bulloides, Globotruncana linnei-
ana, and Globotruncanita stuartiformis. The thickness of the
biozone is measured to be about 33 m. Similar to Dicarinella
asymetrica Zone, this zone was previously recorded from
Zagros (James and Wynd 1965; Vaziri Moghaddam 2002;
Rahimi et al. 2015; Solgi et al. 2015; Esfandyari Bayat and
Rameh 2016) and Tethyan realms (Caron 1985). According
to calcareous nannofossils, this zone lies in the CC18 zone.

Globotruncana ventricosa Interval Range Zone

This zone is marked by the interval from the FO of Glo-

botruncana ventricosa to the FO of Radotruncana calcarata
and corresponds to the late early Campanian to early late
Campaninan. Premoli Silva and Verga (2004) have con-
firmed Globotruncana falsostuarti as an associated taxon
in the Globotruncana ventricosa Zone which represents
mid-Campanian. The thickness of the biozone is measured
to be approximately 71 m. The planktonic foraminiferal taxa
which are associated with this zone include Globotruncana
lapparenti, Globotruncana arca, Globotruncana linneiana,
Globotruncanita elevata, Globotruncana ventricosa, Glo-
botruncanita stuarti, Globotruncanita stuartiformis, Glo-
botruncana bulloides, and Globotruncana hilli. This zone
was recorded from the Zagros Basin (James and Wynd 1965;
Vaziri Moghaddam 2002; Rahimi et al. 2015; Solgi et al.
2015; Esfandyari Bayat and Rameh 2016). According to bio-
zonation of calcareous nannofossils, this zone is referred to
in the CC19 and lower part of CC20.
Fig. 9  Biostratigraphy of Gurpi Formation and comparison with
global standard zonation and regional zonation

Radotruncana calcarata Total Range Zone

This zone is identified by the TRZ of Radotruncana cal-

carata. The lower boundary is indicated with the FO of
Sliter 1989; Premoli Silva and Verga 2004). The lithologi- Radotruncana calcarata and the upper boundary with
cal aspect of this biozone is composed of calcareous shale the last occurrence of the Radotruncana calcarata spe-
which is extended approximately 38 m. This biozone was cies. The age of this zone is indicated as the mid-Cam-
recorded from Zagros previously (James and Wynd 1965; panian in this section. The thickness of the biozone is
Vaziri Moghaddam 2002; Rahimi et al. 2015; Solgi et al. 20 m. This zone is characterized by the most important
2015; Esfandyari Bayat and Rameh 2016). According to species: Globotruncana lapparenti, Globotruncanita
calcareous nannofossils, this zone lies in the CC15, CC16 stuarti, Globotruncana arca, Globotruncana linneiana,
and CC17 zones. Globotruncana bulloides, Globotruncanita stuartiformis,

13
 32 Page 10 of 12 Carbonates and Evaporites (2020) 35:32

Fig. 10  Correlation of some of the worldwide standard biozonation based on planktonic foraminifera with the studied section based on calcare-
ous nannofossils

Globotruncanita elevata, and Globotruncana hilli. Globotruncana aegyptica Interval Range Zone
According to calcareous nannofossils, this zone is equal
to the upper part of the CC20 zone and the lower part of The Globotruncana aegyptica Zone is recognized in
CC21. argillaceous limestone. The lower biostratigraphic limit
of this biozone is distinguished by the first occurrence of
Globotruncana aegyptica and the upper biostratigraphic
Globotruncanella havanensis Partial Range Zone limit is marked by the first occurrence of Gansserina
gansseri which refers to the late Campaninan. The thick-
The mentioned zone is established by the interval from ness of the biozone is 50 m. This zone was described
the last occurrence of Radotruncana calcarata to the from Tethys (Caron 1985; Sliter 1989) and is character-
first occurrence of Globotruncana aegyptica, which cor- ized by planktonic foraminiferal taxa: Globotruncana
responds to the late Campaninan. The thickness of the falsostuarti, Globotruncanita stuarti, Globotruncanella
biozone is measured to be approximately 56 m. Bilotte havanensis, Globotruncana bulloides, Globotruncanita
et al. (2001) have recorded Globotruncanella havanensis stuartiformis, Globotruncana orientalis, Globotruncana
from the upper Campanian sequence of Tercis Les Basin rosetta, Globotruncana ventricosa, Globotruncana arca,
of France. Established biozones of calcareous nannofossils and Globotruncana lapparenti. Based on the received
confirm that this zone corresponds with the upper part of biostratigraphic data of calcareous nannofossils, this zone
the CC21 zone and lower part of CC22. is comparable with the CC22 zone.

13
Carbonates and Evaporites (2020) 35:32 Page 11 of 12 32

Gansserina gansseri Interval Range Zone provincialism characteristic in the studied area. However,
the established biozones confirm the paleobiogeographic
This zone is defined by the first occurrence of Gansserina distribution of both taxa of nannofossils and planktic
gansseri to the first occurrence of Contusotruncana Contusa foraminifers. It is necessary to note that the reconstruc-
which is assigned to the latest Campanian to early Maastrich- tion of paleogeographic distribution of both Upper Creta-
tian. The thickness of the biozone is measured to be about ceous calcareous nannofossils and planktons needs more
46 m. The Gansserina gansseri Interval Range Zone was biostratigraphic data of other stratigraphic sections along
previously described from Tethys (Caron 1985; Sliter 1989), both coastal and interior Fars regions. The investigated
which was described as Gansserina gansseri Zone by the nannofossils such as Micula murus, Micula prinsii, and
mentioned studies, and the age of upper Campanian to lower Thoracosphaera operculata are coeval with Abathompha-
Maastrichtian was confirmed. Therefore, the latest Campanian lus mayaroensis which indicate the late Maastrichtian age.
to early Maastrichtian age is acceptable for this biozone. The Calcareous nannofossils and planktonic foraminifera are
common foraminiferal assemblage of this biozone consists useful in determining the relative age of the Cretaceous
of Globotruncanita stuarti, Globotruncanita angulata, Glo- strata. By evaluation of the calcareous nannofossils and
botruncana insignis, Globotruncana bulloides, Globotruncana planktic foraminifera in the Sepidan stratigraphic section
falsostuarti, Globotruncana arca, Globotruncana aegyptica, and investigation of biozones, it is possible to examine
Globotruncana orientalis, Globotruncanita stuartiformis, and the Gurpi Formation deposits. Based on the stratigraphic
Globotruncana lapparanti. The determined biozones of cal- distribution of late Cretaceous planktons, the Gurpi For-
careous nannofossils in this section support that this zone lies mation includes nine biozones with the age of Santonian
in the upper part of CC22, CC23 and CC24. to Maastrichtian. The interpretation of calcareous nanno-
fossil biostratigraphic data enables the subdivision of the
Contusotruncana contusa Total Range Zone studied succession into 12 biozones at the more accurate
age of late early Santonian to latest Maastrichtian. There-
This zone is distinguished by the TRZ of Contusotruncana fore, the biostratigraphy of the Gurpi Formation in the
contusa which refers to the late early Maastrichtian to early Sepidan section reflects that the lower biostratigraphic
late Maastrichtian. This zone is extended approximately limit of the Gurpi Formation is related to the late early
28 m. The common foraminifers of this biozone are com- Santonian (Reinhardtites anthophorus Zone), equiva-
posed of: Globotruncanita stuartiformis, Globotruncana lent to Dicarinella asymetrica Zone which is an index
lapparanti, Globotruncana arca, Globotruncana bulloides, taxon of the Santonian. The upper biostratigraphic limit
Globotruncanita angulata, Globotruncana falsostuarti, Glo- of the Gurpi Formation is marked by the last occurrence
botruncanita stuarti, and Globotruncana insignis. This zone of Abathomphalus mayaroensis (Abathomphalus mayar-
is synchronous with CC25 zone of the identified calcareous oensis Interval Range Zone/late Maastrichtian), equiva-
nannofossils. lent with Nephrolithus frequens Zone (CC26), which is
synchronous with the latest Maastrichtian in the Sepidan
Abathomphalus mayaroensis Interval Range Zone section. As can be seen, the results are consistent with the
general trend of planktonic foraminifera and calcareous
This biozone is described in the Sepidan section for the first nannofossils of the Gurpi Formation. Therefore, biostrati-
time. This zone is defined by the first occurrence of Abath- graphic investigations of the Gurpi Formation indicate
omphalus mayaroensis to the disappearance of all genera of that the established calcareous nannofossil biozones are
Globotruncanidae and corresponds to the late Maastrichtian. comparable to planktonic foraminiferal biozones. The
The thickness of the biozone is 18 m. The upper biostrati- paleogeographic distribution of planktic foraminifers sup-
graphic limit of the Gurpi Formation in the Sepidan section ports discrepancy of provincialism data in the Zagros area
is distinguished by the last occurrence of Abathomphalus because of the presence of Abathomphalus mayaroensis.
mayaroensis, which has been recorded in the Lurestan area As mentioned before, this taxon has not been recorded
by Wynd previously (1965). The CC26 zone of calcareous from Fars area. Therefore, it is required to study other
nannofossils is coeval with the mentioned zone. exposures of the Gurpi Formation along the interior Fars
region.

Conclusions Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank the anonymous

reviewers for their comments that helped to improve the manuscript.

Received biostratigraphic data remarkably indicate paleo- Funding The present study has been supported by a research grant of
geographic implication. Actually, the investigated taxa of the Imam Khomeini International University under Contract Number
both nannofossils and planktic foraminifers reflect faunal 751541.

13
 32 Page 12 of 12 Carbonates and Evaporites (2020) 35:32

References James GA, Wynd JC (1965) Stratigraphy nomenclature of Iranian

Oil consortium agreement area. Am Assoc Petrol Geol Bull
49(12):2182–2245
Afghah M (2010) Biozonation and biostratigraphic limits of the Tarbur
Kamali MR, Fathi Mobarakabad A, Mohsenian E (2006) Petroleum
Formation around Shiraz (SW of Iran), Ph.D. thesis, Muenster
geochemistry and thermal modeling of Pabdeh Formation in Dez-
University, p 171
ful Embayment. J Sci Univ Tehran JUST 32:1–11
Afghah M, Fadaei HR (2015) Biostratigraphy of Cenomanian succes-
Khosrowtehrani K (2008) Applied micropaleontology. Tehran Univer-
sion in Zagros area (south west of Iran). Geosci J 19:257–271
sity Press, Tehran
Afghah M, Ghiyasi AA (2013) Biostratigraphy of Gurpi Formation
Motiei H (1994) Geology of Iran: stratigraphy of Zagros. Geological
(Late Cretaceous) in Interior Fars: Bavan Area, Central Zagros
Survey of Iran Publications, Tehran
(Southwestern Iran). J Earth Sci Climate Change 4:137–147
Motiei H (1995) Petroleum Geology of Zagros. Geological Survey of
Alavi M (2004) Regional stratigraphy of the Zagros fold-thrust belt of
Iran, Tehran
Iran and its pro foreland evolution. Am J Sci 304:1–20
Perch-Nielsen K (1985) Mesozoic calcareous nannofossils. In: Bolli
Al-Wosabi KA, Alaug AS (2012) Calcareous nannofossils biostratig-
HM, Saunders JB, Perch-Nielsen K (eds) Plankton stratigraphy.
raphy of the Late Campanian–Early Maastrichtian Age, Block
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 329–426
16, Jiza’-Qamar Basin, Eastern Yemen. Arab J Geosci 6(9):1–14.
Premoli Silva I, Verga D (2004) Practical manual of Cretaceous plank-
https​://[Link]/10.1007/s1251​7-012-0642-2
tonic foraminifera. Universities of Perugia, Perugia
Beiranvand B, Ghasemi-Nejad E (2013) High resolution planktonic
Rahimi S, Sadeghi A, Partoazar MR (2015) Biostratigraphy of the
foraminiferal biostratigraphy of the Gurpi Formation, K/Pg
Gurpi Formation in Kuh-e-Sefid section, East of Ramhormoz.
boundary of the Izeh Zone, SW Iran. Revista Brasileira de Pale-
Geosciences 94:3–10
ontologia 16:5–26
Roth PH (1978) Cretaceous nannoplankton biostratigraphy and ocean-
Beiranvand B, Ghasemi-Nejad E, Kamali MR, Ahmadi A (2014)
ography of the northwestern Atlantic Ocean. Init Rep Deep Sea
Sequence stratigraphy of the late Cretaceous–Paleocene Gurpi
Drilling Proj 44:731–760
formation in southwest Iran. GeoArabia 19(2):89–102
Senemari S (2017) Calcareous nannofossils biostratigraphy of the
Berberian M, King GCP (1981) Towards a paleogeography and tec-
Gurpi Formation at Kalchenar section in northwest of Izeh. Geo-
tonic evolution of Iran. Can J Earth Sci 18:210–265
sciences 26:287–294
Bilotte M, Odin GS, Vrielynck B (2001) Chapter A4 Geology and Late
Senemari S, Azizi M (2012) Nannostratigraphy of Gurpi Formation
Cretaceous palaeogeography of the geological site at Tercis les
(Cretaceous–Tertiary Boundary) In Zagros Basin, Southwestern
Bains (Landes, France). Dev Palaeontol Strat 19:47–59
Iran. World Appl Sci J 17:205–210
Bown PR, Young JR (1998) Technique. In: Bown PR (ed) Calcare-
Senemari S, Sohrabi Molla Usefi M (2012) Evaluation of Cretaceous–
ous nannofossil Biostratigraphy. Kluwer Academic Publishing,
Paleogene boundary based on calcareous nannofossils in sec-
Dordrecht, pp 16–28
tion of Pol Dokhtar, Lorestan, southwestern Iran. Arab J Geosci
Burnett JA (1998) Upper cretaceous. In: Bown PR (ed) Calcareous nan-
6:3615–3621
nofossil biostratigraphy. Chapman and Hall, London, pp 132–199
Senemari S, Fazli L, Omrani M (2008) The study of correlation of
Caron M (1985) Cretaceous planktic foraminifera. In: Bolli HM, Saun-
calcareous nannofossils and foraminifera planktonic of Gurpi For-
ders JB, Perch-Nielsen K (eds) Planktonic stratigraphy. Cam-
mation in East of Behbahan. Geosciences 19:119–126
bridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 17–87
Setudehnia A (1978) The Mesozoic sequence in south-west Iran and
Darabi G, Sadeghi A (2017) The Gurpi Formation (Upper Santonian–
adjacent areas. J Pet Geol 1:3–42
Upper Maastrichtian, Marun Oil Field) biostratigraphy and paleo-
Sissingh W (1977) Biostratigraphy of Cretaceous calcareous nanno-
ecology investigation. Geopersia 7(2):169–198
plankton. Geol en Minjbouw 56:37–65
Darvishzadeh B, Ghasemi-Nejad E, Ghourchaei S, Keller G (2007)
Sliter W (1989) Biostratigraphic zonation for Cretaceous planktonic
Planktonic foraminiferal biostratigraphy and faunal turnover
foraminifers examined in thin section. J Foramin Res 19:1–19
across the Cretaceous-Tertiary boundary in Southwestern Iran.
Solgi Z, Magfori Moghadam I, Darabi G.H (2015) Biostratigraphy
J Sci 18:139–149
of Gurpi Formation in southwest Koramabad. In: International
Esfandyari Bayat MJ, Rameh H (2016) Biostratigraphy of the Gurpi
applied geological congress, p 209
Formation in Sepidan section, Interior Fars basin based on plank-
Thierstein HR, Young JR (2004) Coccolithophores: from molecular
tonic foraminifera. Geopersia 6:211–221
processes to global impact. Springer, Berlin
Eshet Y, Almogi-Labin A (1996) Calcareous nannofossils as paleopro-
Vaziri Moghaddam H (2002) Biostratigraphic study of the Ilam and
ductivity, indicators in Upper Cretaceous organic-rich sequences
Gurpi Formations based on planktonic foraminifera in SE of Shi-
in Israel. Mar Micropaleontol 29:37–61
raz (Iran). J Sci 13:339–356
Esmaeilbeig MR (2018) Biostratigraphy of the Gurpi Formation (San-
Wynd JG (1965) Biofacies of the Iranian Oil Consortium Agreement
tonian–Maastrictian) by using Globotruncanidae, Zagros Moun-
area. Iranian Oil Operating Companies, Geological and Explora-
tains, Iran. Carbonates Evaporites 33(1):133–142
tion Division, Report, p 1082
Ghasemi-Nejad E, Hobbi MH, Schioler P (2006) Dinoflagellate and
foraminiferal biostratigraphy of the Gurpi Formation (Upper San-
Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to
tonian–Upper Maastrichtian), Zagros Mountains, Iran. Cretac Res
jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
27:828–835
Hadavi F, Khosrowtehrani K, Senemari S (2007) Biostratigraphy of
calcareous nannofossils of Gurpi Formation in North Gachsaran.
J Geosci 64:14–23
Hemmati-Nasab M, Ghasemi-Nejad E, Darvishzadeh B (2008) Paleo-
bathymetry of the Gurpi Formation based on benthic and plank-
tonic foraminifera in Southwestern Iran. J Sci 34:157–173

13