4.4 Article

Upper Palaeocene-lower Eocene succession of the Kharga Oasis, Western Desert, Egypt: Foraminiferal biostratigraphy and sequence stratigraphy

Journal

GEOLOGICAL JOURNAL
Volume 55, Issue 6, Pages 4375-4397

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/gj.3674

Keywords

foraminiferal biostratigraphy; Kharga Oasis; Palaeocene; Eocene boundary; relative sea-level changes; sequence stratigraphy

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The present study provides a better understanding of the nature of the upper Palaeocene-lower Eocene succession within the framework of the sequence stratigraphy. It is based on the qualitative and quantitative analyses of the foraminiferal assemblages of the Esna and El-Rufuf formations at the Kharga Oasis, Western Desert. Seven planktonic foraminiferal zones were recognized; P4c and P5 zones of the late Palaeocene (Thanetian) age and E1-E5 zones of the early Eocene (Ypresian) age. The Palaeocene/Eocene (P/E) boundary is recorded at the base of the Dababiya Quarry Member of the Esna Formation that coincides with the P5/E1 zonal boundary. A minor hiatus has been documented across this boundary equivalent to the missing lowermost part of the Dababiya Quarry Member. The foraminiferal investigations (e.g., planktonic percentage, benthic foraminifera cluster analyses, diversity, and abundance) as well as field work and the lithofacies examination have been integrated to subdivide the studied succession into five third-order depositional sequences separated by five sequence boundaries. These sequences are primarily formed in response to the greater impact of the global sea-level oscillations, as well as the partial effect of the regional tectonics, which may be related to the influence of the Syrian Arc system. The regional tectonics led to occasional discrepancies in the timing and extent of some changes in the relative sea-level and mismatching of some boundaries.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available