4.4 Article

Ostracode faunas of bottom sediments from the continental shelf, south Marmara Sea, NW Turkey, and their comparison with other shelf environments in the Mediterranean and Aegean regions

期刊

GEOLOGICAL JOURNAL
卷 36, 期 2, 页码 111-123

出版社

JOHN WILEY & SONS LTD
DOI: 10.1002/gj.886

关键词

ostracoda; bottom sediments; correlation; Mediterranean; Marmara sea; Turkey

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study describes the ostracode faunal composition and distribution on the continental shelf of the southern Marmara Sea in Turkey. Twenty-three bottom samples were collected from the shelf. These samples are characterized by silt-clay (mud), sand and gravel in the studied area. A total of 46 species belonging to 32 genera were determined from these samples. Seven species were dominant from 46 ostracode species. Three assemblages were identified by their dominant species. These are characterized by: Costa edwardsii (Roemer); a mixed assemblage which consists of Cytheridea neapolitana Kollmann, Pterygocythereis ceratoptera (Bosquet), Tegmenia rugosa (Costa), Acanthocythereis hystrix (Reuss) and Xestoleberis communis (G.W. Muller); and Aurila convexa (Baird). The relations between the dominant species, lithology and CaCO3 concentration have been investigated, and the results are compared with other shelf environments within the Mediterranean and Aegean regions. Pterygocythereis, Costa, Tegmenia and Cytheridea are abundant in muddy substrates; Aurila and Acanthocythereis are abundant in sandy substrates. Acanthocythereis hystrix (Reuss), Aurila convexa (Baird), Buntonia subulata Ruggieri, Carinocythereis antiquata (Baird), Carinocythereis carinata (Roemer), Costa batei (Brady), Costa edwardsii (Roemer), Cytheridea neapolitana Kollmann, Celtia quadridentata (Baird), Loxoconcha rhomboidea (Fischer), Pterygocythereis jonesii (Baird) and Semicytherura acuticostata (Sars) are common, and similar species are recorded from other continental shelves of the Mediterranean. Copyright (C) 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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

4.4
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