4.1 Article

Middle Miocene trace fossils from the Tenes area (NW Algeria) and their palaeoenvironmental implications

期刊

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s12549-023-00594-y

关键词

Ichnology; Tenes; Lower Chelif Basin; Shallow-marine; Storm influence

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study analyzes the trace fossils of the Miocene succession in the northwest of the Lower Chelif Basin in Algeria. The presence of different types of burrows provides insights into the environmental conditions and sedimentation processes during that time. The findings also highlight the importance of paleogeomorphology in determining the impact of storms on the coastline.
The Miocene succession (Allala River Sandstones and Tenes Blue Marls Formation) that crops out in the Tenes area, situated in the northeast of the Lower Chelif Basin in NW-Algeria, contains a low-diversity assemblage of trace fossils. Fifteen (15) ichnogenera were identified: Arenicolites, Beaconites, Cylindrichnus, Diplocraterion, Macaronichnus, Ophiomorpha, Palaeophycus, Parahaentzschelinia, Planolites, Rosselia, Skolithos, Taenidium, Teichichnus, Thalassinoides and Zoophycos. Ethologically, these ichnogenera chiefly display dwelling and feeding activities. The presence of thick, deep-tier, scattered, mainly vertical dwelling burrows attributed to the Skolithos ichnofacies indicates high energy conditions, normal oxygenation and soft substrate. Moreover, elements of the Cruziana ichnofacies show more varied behavioural strategies and higher inchnodiversity with the dominance of horizontal burrows of deposit-feeders. This ichnological study supports the palaeoenvironmental interpretation based on sedimentological analysis of a wave-dominated siliciclastic platform (backshore to offshore), allowing a more precise zonation of the shoreface zone (middle/upper and lower shoreface). In addition, this study allows evaluation of variable degrees of storm influence in response to the contrasting palaeogeomorphology of the coastline.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据