Palaeoecology, palaeobiogeography and analysis of carbonate grain association from the Tarbur Formation of SW Iran

Abstract

In this research Palaeoecological implications related to the carbonates of the Tarbur Formation located at the Semirom section, Interior Fars of the Zagros Basin, SW Iran, are discussed. Based on faunal association analysis with emphasize on larger benthic foraminifera and calcareous algae communities, the following Palaeoecological factors are defined for deposition of the Tarbur Formation at the studied section: water salinity low to normal of >33 to about 40 ppm, depth >50 m, water temperature <22 °C in tropical water and lower latitudes in an oligotrophic to eutrophic zone, light condition was probably euphotic in the inner shelf and oligophotic to mesophotic in middle shelf, grain association communities including chlorozoan, chloralgal and foramol or entirely photozoan. Presence of rudists indicates a photozone assemblage and suggests a tropical condition and paucity of corals, sponges, bryozoans while abundance and variety of foraminifers, existence of rudists can show eutrophic condition that is suitable for rudists and unsuitable for corals.

Key words: Tarbur Formation, Semirom, Palaeoecology, Photozoan, Late Maastrichtian, Eutrophic.

1- Introduction

Tarbur Formation is a predominately carbonate lithostratigraphic unit that outcrops along the margin of High Zagros between the Main Zagros fault and the High Zagros fault (Rajabi et al., 2011). This formation extends across the Interior Fars and Lurestan. The Tarbur Formation in the Semirom section (Fig. 1C) mainly consists of carbonate and terrigenous rocks (limestones, shales and sandstones) and composed from three litholigical units with a total thickness of 462 m (e.g. Amiri Bakhtiar, 2007; Maghfouri-Moghadam et al., 2009; Azizi, 2012; Asgari Pirbaluti et al., 2013, Vaziri-Moghaddam et al., 2013; Afghah, 2009, 2010, 2014; Abyat et al., 2014; Azizi et al., 2015; Schlagintweit et al., 2016).

2- Materials and Methods

Systematic sampling was conducted and over of 110 samples was collected from the selected section. Thin sections were prepared and studied with morphometric analysis on benthic foraminifers and calcareous algae. The identification of benthic foraminifera, palaeoenvironment larger foraminifera and calcareous algae are performed according to Gollesstanaeh, 1966; Hottinger, 1983; Caus, 1988; Loeblich and Tappan, 1998; Goldbeck, 2007; Boudagher-Fadel, 2008; Flugle, 2010; Meriç et al., 2010; Abyat & Lari, 2015.

Figure 1. (A): Paleogeographical map of the latest Cretaceous with distribution of tropical shallow-water carbonate platforms (Schlüter, 2008), (B): Paleofacies of Late Cretaceous to Early Paleocene in Zagros (modified of Ziegler, 2001), (C): Location map of the studied section from the Tarbur Formation at near Semirom in the central part of the Zagros Mountains, SW Iran (modified of Alavi, 1996).

3- Palaeoecology of the Tarbur Formation

The study of living larger foraminifera shows that they occur abundantly in the shelf regions of most tropical and subtropical shallow marine, especially in carbonate rich, environments. All larger benthic foraminifera are marine and neritic, living largely in oligotrophic reef and carbonate shoal environments (Boudagher-Fadel, 2008). The minimum water temperature tolerated by living larger foraminifera is 18°C, while the maximum water depth at which they live is 35 m (Murray, 1973) and is related to the photic zone.

Hottinger (1983) analyzed the test morphology of larger foraminifera in relation to the depth of the habitat and postulated the following succession with increasing depth: conical agglutinated => discoidal porcelaneous => fusiform porcelaneous => thickly lenticular perforate => flat lenticular or discoidal perforate types.

Caus (1988) four basic assemblages of larger foraminifera were distinguished:

1) Restricted shelf with abnormal salinity (lagoons and intertidal zones), Laffitteina in lagoonal facies types.

2) Protected shelf with normal salinity (carbonate and terrigenous facies): two different assemblages on the protected carbonate shelf.

2a) a shallower one, 0-40 m; discoidal agglutinated larger foraminifera, porcelaneous foraminifera (predominance of complex Miliolidae and thick walled, evolute Meandropsinidae), rotaliids; Lacazina compressa.

2b) increasing depth, 40-60 m; conical forms; Dictyopsella, Lacazina elongata.

3) Reefs, shoals and bars; larger foraminifera are adapted to high energy; Siderolitinae, thick orbitoids.

4) Open marine shelf; perforate larger foraminifera; Lepidorbitoides, Clypeorbis, Sirtina, Siderolitinae.

In this investigation using fossils content, we will study influences of different environment agents like: salinity, hydrodynamic energy, temperature, depth, oxygen, nutrients, bed floor, light and symbiont bearing processes that affect on the distribiution of them for the Tarbur Formation in Semirom section; to analysis and reconstruct the palaeoenvironment of deposition (Tab. 1 and Fig. 7).

Table 1. Reconstruction of depositional conditions of the Tarbur Formation using fossils content at the Semirom section (İnan, 1996; Hottinger, 1997; Goldbeck, 2007; Meriç et al., 2010).

Species PalaeoecologyPseudedomia indicate a lagoonal or back reefal environment

Loftusia indicate a shallow water of coastal and reefal environment with low to high energetic at down to a depth of 30 m and mostly oligotrophic conditions

Cuneolina mainly interpreted to be a shallow marine carbonate with low water energy

Orbitoidesmostly interpreted as being open marine environment with some terrigenous input, in the upper photic zone at depths of about 40-80 m, thick lenticular test and presence of lateral chambers indicate a high energetic environments

Siderolitesreported from open platform environments, it occurs in shallow marine water of the upper photic zone down to about 40 m, have large spines, which are a tool for attachment to hard substrate in areas of high water energy

Omphalocyclusindicate a shallow warm water environment in the upper photic zone with depth of between 40-80 m, also reported from reefal facies or in a depressed area with poorly oxygenated conditions, discoidal shape of test is epiphytic

Sulcoperculinainterprets as an environment exposed to high water energy at hard substrate where often a heterogeneous silty limestone with some terrestrial components

Sirtinainterpreted as a open marine shelf in the lower photic zone between 80 mand 120-140 m depth, also reported from reefs, shoals and bars (40-60 m) or deep marine grades into a turbidity zone

Laffitteina

restricted of shelf area and mainly occurred in lagoonal facies, as well as in subtidal-tidal areas in the upper photic zone, the amount of canals in the test hints to a meso-eutrophic environment in estuaries of tropical shelf, it is adapted to somewhat colder conditions, geographically to the northern part of the Neo-Tethys, between 15 and 30° north

Lepidorbitoidesmainly occurs between subtropical and tropical latitudes with average minimum temperature of above 18° C, on the open marine shelf somewhat deeper than Orbitoides, depth ranges between 40-80 m in the upper photic zone and 80-140 m in the lower photic zone

Pseudomphalocyclus indicate a very shallow marine environments at clastic carbonate sediments

Factors like local tectonic (by affecting the depth of sub-basins), temperature and type of existing sediments (clastic or carbonate) might affect the variety of the species (Abyat & Lari, 2015). Analysis of foraminifer-algae association and rudist communities of the Tarbur Formation in order to better understand of palaeoecology conditions them in Semirom area, to cause given in distribution models for calcareous algae (Fig. 2), rudist communities (Fig. 4), benthic foraminifera and other microfossils (Fig. 3). Also, shape of test changes in Lepidorbitoides showing (Fig. 5) based on increasing water energy and light intensity in different depths. Lepidorbitoides is from symbiont-bearing larger foraminifera and often associated with calcareous algae (Goldbeck, 2007).

On the basis of the mode of foraminiferal distribution: larger benthic foraminifera with thin hyaline wall as large Lepidorbitoididae and Orbitoididae that bearing algal symbiont (from base of section to 40 meters thickness). This is due to increase in water depth, low light, low energy, normal salinity and prevailing of open marine environment. The test of benthic foraminifera (with hyaline wall) in sediments of shallow water open marine indicates a decrease in water depth and increase in light and energy; therefore they become small in size (Fig. 5). In shallower open marine environment foraminifera’s wall (with hyaline wall) become thicker and smaller in size (from 41 to 137 meters thickness) that represents decrease in water depth, and increase in light and energy. In shallow water restricted environment benthic foraminifera with porcelaneous wall and agglutinated foraminifera are associated (from 138 meters thickness to top of section) that represents a decrease in water depth and increase in light, salinity and energy.

Figure 3. Schematic diagram from distribution of benthic foraminifera and other microfossils of the studied Tarbur Formation at the Semirom section (modified of Carannante et al., 2000).

Figure 4. Schematic diagram from distribution of rudist communities together microfossils in the carbonate platform (modified of Sanders & Baron-Szabo, 1997).

Figure 2. Distribution model of calcareous algae in the carbonate platform (modified of Flugel, 2010); (A): Cymopolia from Dasycladacea algae, (B): Charophyte algae together miliolids (white symbol).

On the other hand absent and paucity of corals, sponges, bryozoans while abundance and variety of foraminifers, existence of rudists can show eutrophic condition that is suitable for rudists and unsuitable for corals. Therefore, the results indicate that the Tarbur Formation in the studied area is deposited in tropical water and lower latitudes in an oligotrophic to eutrophic and almost mesotrophic zone. The light condition (Fig. 6) during deposition of this section was probably euphotic in the inner shelf and oligophotic to mesophotic in middle shelf. Also, it is mostly placed in a low to normal salinity environment (Fig. 7). Corals, larger foraminifera and some bivalves harbor endosymbionts that require light and are therefore limited to water depths of only a few meters (Flugle, 2010).

Figure 5. Shape of test changes in Lepidorbitoides based on increasing water energy and light intensity in different depths; (A): Lepidorbitoides cf. minor, (B): Lepidorbitoides cf. socialis, (C): Lepidorbitoides socialis.

Figure 7. Stratigraphic column of the Tarbur Formation in the studied section reflecting sub-environmental sedimentary, relative sea-level changes and palaeoecological parameters.

Figure 6. Distribution of selected larger benthic foraminifera based on light conditions in the Tarbur Formation of the Semirom section; (A): Loftusia, (B): Charophyte algae & Pseudomphalocyclus, (C): Gyroconulina, (D): Quinqueloculina, (E): Idalina, (F): Omphalocyclus, (G): Sulcoperculina, (H): Pseudedomia, (I): Elphidiella, (J): Cymopolia, (K): Coral fragment, (L): Lepidorbitoides (with thick lenticular test), (M): Orbitoides, (N): Siderolites, (O): Sirtina, (P): Nezzazata, (Q): Nezzazatinella, (R): Lepidorbitoides (with flattened lenticular test), (S): Bryozoan, (T): Echinoderms plate, (U): Planktonic foraminifera, (V): textularids, (W): miliolids.

Besides geochemical analysis by Amiri Bakhtiar (2007), based on trace element and oxygen and carbon isotopes, on the rudists shell and mud matrix indicate that carbonate of Tarbur Formation were deposited in a shallow brackish water with a temperature between minimum 22.2 °C to maximum of about 27.4 °C (see Tab. 2).

Table 2. Comparison of palaeoecological features of Zagros Basin and Kope-Dagh Basin based on geochemical analysis in the Maastrichtian (Adabi et al., 2006; Amiri Bakhtiar, 2007).

Palaeoecological factors Zagros Basin Kope-Dagh Basinwater salinity low salinity to brakish water brakish water to normal salinity

water temperature 22.2-27.4 22.5-27water depth relatively shallow water relatively shallow water

mineralogy rudists low Mg calcite (LMC) low Mg calcite (LMC)

4- Palaeobiogeography of the Tarbur Formation

Global geographical distribution map for identification of larger benthic foraminifera with agglutinated and porcelaneous walls (Fig. 8) and hyaline wall showing (Fig. 9) from Tarbur Formation in Semirom section. The distribution of larger benthic foraminifera in various types of sedimentary environments points to a wide range of ecological preferences for their genera. Such as the association Lepidorbitoides and Orbitoides shows a great range in depth preferences, as Orbitoides usually occurs in shallower regions than Lepidorbitoides (see Tab. 1). Also, Siderolites and Sulcoperculina usually occurs in environments of high water energy while Omphalocyclus is restricted to sheltered shelf areas (Azizi et al., 2016). Overall, this points to a distinct adaptational flexibility (Goldbeck, 2007).

Figure 8. Palaeogeographic situation in the Maastrichtian and global geographical distribution map of the agglutinated and porcelaneous walls benthic foraminifer’s genera identification from Tarbur Formation (Goldbeck, 2007; Azizi, 2016b; Schlagintweit et al., 2016). (1: Cuba, 2: Florida, 3: Chiapas, 5: Texas, 6: Jamaica, 7: Haiti, 10: Venezuela, 11: Colombia, 12: Puerto Rico, 13: Dutch Westindies, 15: Morocco, 16: Algeria, 17: Tunisia, 18: Libya, 19: Mauritania, 20: Egypt, 22: Saudi Arabia, 23: Oman, 24: Qatar, 25: Yemen, 26: Somalia, 27: Iraq, 28: Syria, 29: Madagascar, 30: Belgium, 31: France, 32: Spain, 34: Sicily, 35: Italy, 36: Greece, 37: Yugoslavia, 38: Turkey, 39: , 41: Romania, 44: , 45: N-India, 46: Pakistan, 47: Indonesia, 48: Tibet, 49: Line Islands, 50: Nauru, 51: Papua New Guinea, 52: NE-Mexico, 55: Kuwait, 56: Iran, 57: Netherlands, 59:

Austria, 64: Malaysia, 65: Philippines, 66: United Arab Emirates, 67: Hawaii, 68: Mexico, 69: Cyprus, 70: Birma, 71: Slovakia, 72: Sardinia, 73: China, 80: Belgium-Netherlands, 81: philistine-Lebanon, 82: Germany-Switzerland-Austria, 83: Greece-Macedonia-Albania, 84: Yugoslavia-Croatia-Slovenia-former Yugoslavia).

Figure 9. Palaeogeographic situation in the Maastrichtian and global geographical distribution map of the hyaline wall benthic foraminifer’s genera identification from Tarbur Formation (Goldbeck, 2007; Azizi, 2016a).

5- Analysis of carbonate grain association of the Tarbur Formation

James (1997) accentuating the light dependence/independence of benthic carbonate-producing organisms introduced two major association categories including photozoan and heterozoan association (see Tab. 3). The photozoan and heterozoan concept is useful in tracing major and prolonged paleoclimate trends and or paleolatitudinal shifts (Flugle, 2010). The photozoan association is characterized by an association of benthic carbonate grains including skeletons of light-dependent organisms (algae, invertebrates, scleractinian corals and foraminifera, containing photosymbionts),

and or non-skeletal grains (ooids, peloids and others), and skeletons from the heterozoan association. The term replaces the term chlorozoan association and covers the chloralgal as well as many association types based on ancient limestones (see Tab. 3). It reflects the existence of shallow, warm-water, benthic calcareous communities and their resulting sediments, today mostly confined to tropical and subtropical settings. Modem low-latitude tropical and mid to high-latitude non-tropical shelf carbonates (see Tab. 4 and Fig. 10) differ in the overall composition of abundant and dominating skeletal grains (Flugle, 2010).

Carbonate Light- Latitude-association Descriptive- related relatedsensu Lees term Dominant or Additional biota term term & Buller association characteristic biota (James, (Nelson, 1988; (1972) 1997) Schlager, 2000) Chlorozoan Zooxanthellate corals Benthic foraminifers, (Lees & and calcareous green branching coralline algae Buller, 1972) algae mollusks, non-skeletalChlorozoan grains Photozoan Tropical Chloralgal Calcareous green Benthic foraminifers, (Lees, 1975) algae branching coralline algae mollusks Echinoderms, bryozoans, Foramol Benthic foraminifers branacles, ostracods Non-tropical Foramol (Lees & and mollusks sponge spicules, worm Heterozoan or Buller, 1972) tubes, ahermatypic corals cool-water and calcareous algae

Sub-division Latitudinal Sea-water Sub-division Latitudinal Sea-water range temperature range temperature Cold water Polar >600N and S <50CPolar >500 N and S <5-100C (mean) (to >700N)carbonates -1.5 to 160C (range) Subpolar >500 to <600 N and S 5-100C Cool water Cool-temperate 300 to 500N and S 5-100C Tepmperate 300-500 (600) ~10-180C (mean) 250 to >300Ncarbonates N and S >10 to 250C (range) Warm-temperate 250 to 300S 10-180C Warm water Subtropical 18-220CTropical 300N to 300S 18 to 220C (mean) 300N to 300SCarbonates 18 to 300C (range) Tropical >220C

Common constituents in tropical warm-water settings are calcareous green algae, benthic foraminifera, mollusks and hermatypic corals (Flugle, 2010). The tropical carbonate shelves of the earliest Cretaceous up to the latest Early Cretaceous were dominated by the chlorozoan-chloralgal biota (Carannante et al., 1995) with only minor mollusks and foraminifers. In the Late Cretaceous the rudists became together with larger benthic foraminifers the dominant shallow-water carbonate producers (Steuber, 2002). Those benthic communities are best described as foraminifer-mollusk assemblages (‘foramol’; Carannante et al., 1995). Presence of rudists indicates a photozone assemblage and suggests a tropical condition for deposition of the carbonate sediments (Azizi, 2015).

Regarding the type of fauna and location of the study section at lower latitude in that period of time, the chlorozoan and chloralgal carbonate assemblages can be considered as part of the Tarbur Formation. The occasional presence of foramol assemblage can be due to the increase of nutrient influx by the surface run-off.

Table 3. Some of grain association type of warm-water and cool-water shelf carbonates (Flugle, 2010).

Table 4. Latitudinal distribution and critical sea-water temperatures of modern tropical carbonates and temperate and polar carbonate settings (Flugle, 2010).

Figure 10. Distribution of carbonate association based on temperature, nutrients and Latitudes (Kabanov, 2009).

6- Conclusions

Tarbur Formation in the studied section is deposited in tropical water and lower latitudes in an oligotrophic to eutrophic and almost mesotrophic zone to water salinity low to normal and low depth in shallow marine environment. The suitable environmental conditions for diversity, frequency and increase in size of some fossils such as Loftusia and in contrary the absence of some other fossils such as Orbitoides and Lepidorbitoides (from 41 meters thickness to top of section) in this region can be related to augmentation of nutrients and entering the detrital and silica sediments due to river injection and runoff and consequently to the eutrophic conditions formed in the basin. Investigation of carbonate associations in the study section led to identification of three grain associations including chlorozoan, chloralgal and foramol or entirely photozoan.

References

Abyat, A., Afghah, M., Feghhi, A. 2014. Biostratigraphy and lithostratigraphy of Tarbur Formation (Upper Cretaceous) in southwest of Khorram Abad (southwest Iran). Carbonates Evaporites, (in press).

Abyat, A, Lari, A.R. 2015. Paleoecology & Paleobiogeography of Orbitoides Genus in Zagros Basin (South West Iran). Journal of Earth Science and Climatic Change, 6 (1): 1000247.

Adabi, M.H., Moussavi Harami, R., Mahboubi, A., Shemirani, A. 2006. Petrography, elemental and isotopic variation of rudist biostorm of Maastrichtian platform in east Kope-Dagh basin, northeast Iran. Journal geological society of Iran, 1: 1–10.

Afghah, M. 2009. New Investigations of the Tarbur Formation Lithostratigraphy in the Review of Type Section and its Correlation with Kuh-e Tir Section. Journal of Islamic Azad University, 19 (73): 183–196.

Afghah, M. 2010. Biozonation and Biostratigraphic limits of the Tarbur Formation around Shiraz (SW of Iran). PhD dissertation, Universität Münster, Münster, 171 p.

Afghah, M. 2016. Biostratigraphy, facies analysis of Upper Cretaceous-Lower Paleocene strata in south Zagros basin (southwestern Iran). Journal of African Earth Sciences, 119: 171–184.

Alavi, M. 1996. Geological map of Borujen (1: 250000), Geological Survey of Iran. Amiri Bakhtiar, H. 2007. Lithostratigraphy and Biostratigraphy of the Tarbur Formation in Fars area. Ph.D.

Thesis, Shahid Beheshti University of Tehran, 439 p.Asgari Pirbaluti, B., Mirzaie Ataabadi, M., Djafarian, M.A., Khosrow Tehrani, K., Afghah, M., Davoudi Fard,

Z. 2013. Biostratigraphy and regional aspects of the Tarbur Formation (Maastrichtion) in Central Zagros, Southwest Iran. Rivista Italiana di Paleontologia e stratigrafia, 119 (2): 215–227.

Azizi, R. 2012. Biostratigraphy, microfacies and sedimentary environments of the Tarbur Formation in Semirom area (South-western Isfahan). M.Sc. Thesis, University of Isfahan, 206 p.

Azizi, R., Safari, A., Vaziri-Moghaddam, H. 2015. Biostratigraphy and palaeoecology of the Tarbur Formation in Semirom area, southwest of Isfahan. Sedimentary Facies: Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, 8 (1): 85–106 (in Persian).

Azizi, R., 2016a. Discussion on Orbitoides concavatus Rahaghi 1976, Praeomphalocyclus concavatus Meriç and Çoruh 1991, Postomphalocyclus meriçi İnan 1992 and Pseudomphalocyclus blumenthali Meriç 1980. Journal of Tethys, Payam-e-Noor University of Tehran, 4 (4): 325–334.

Azizi, R., 2016b. New findings of Loftusia species (Foraminifera) based on morphometric analysis from the Tarbur Formation in Iran. Journal of Tethys, Payam-e-Noor University of Tehran, 4 (3): 256–272.

Azizi, R., Safari, A., Vaziri-Moghaddam, H., Mossadegh, H. 2016. Introduction of three species of Omphalocyclus from Tarbur Formation in Semirom section (southwest of Isfahan) by comparison of morphometric data of this genus in the Tethys area. New Findings of Applied Geology, Bu–Ali Sina University of Hamedan, 10 (19): 105–115 (in Persian).

Boudagher-Fadel, M.K. 2008. Evolution and geological significance of larger benthic foraminifera. Developments in Palaeontology & Stratigraphy, 21, Elsevier, 540 p.

Carannante, G., Cherchi, A., Simone, L. 1995. Chlorozoan versus foramol lithofacies in Upper Cretaceous rudist limestones. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, 119: 137–154.

Caus, E. 1988. Upper Cretaceous larger foraminifera: paleoecological distribution. Revue de Paléobiologie Special 2 (Benthos 86): 417–419.

Flugel, E. 2010. Microfacies of carbonate rocks: analysis, interpretation and application. 2nd edition, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 984 p.

Goldbeck E.J. 2007. Faunal Provinces and Patterns of Diversity in Late Cretaceous (Santonian-Maastrichtian) Larger Foraminifera. Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität Bonn, Institutfür Paläontologie, Nussallee 8, 53115 Bonn, 276 p.

Gollesstanaeh, A. 1966. An introduction to the stratigraphic distribution of fossil calcareous algae in Southern Iran (agreement area). Iranian oil operating companies geological and exploration division, 1106: 393 p.

Hottinger, L. 1983. Processes determining the distribution of larger foraminifera in space and time. Utrecht Micropaleontological Bulletin, 30: 239–253.

Hottinger, L. 1997. Shallow benthic foraminiferal assemblages as signals for depth of their deposition and their limitations. Bulletin de la Société Géologique de France, 168(4): 491–505.

İnan, N. 1996. The geographic extension and stratigraphic distribution of Laffitteina species in Turkey. Geological Bulletin of Turkey, 39 (1): 41–51.

James, N.P. 1997. The cool-water carbonate depositional realm, In: James, N.P., and Clarke, A.D. (eds.): Cool-water carbonates. SEPM Special Publications, 56: 1–20.

Kabanov, P.B. 2009. Benthic carbonate cacies of the phanerozoic: Review and example from the Carboniferous of the Russian Platform. Stratigraphy and geological Correlation, 17(5): 493–509.

Loblich, A.R. Tappan, H. 1998. Foraminiferal genera and their classification. Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, New York, 970 p.

Maghfouri-Moghadam, I., Zarei-Sahamieh, R. Ahmadi-Khalaji A., Tahmasbi, Z. 2009. Microbiostratigraphy of the Tarbur Formation, Zagros basin, Iran. Journal of Applied Science, 9 (9): 1781–1785.

Meriç, E., Görmüş, M., Luger, P., İnan, N., Çoruh, T. 2010. Palaeogeographical distribution of Pseudomphalocyclus blumenthali Meriç (Foraminiferida) in the Maastrichtian of the eastern central Tethys with a short taxonomical review of some orbitoidid Foraminifera. Revista Espanola de Micropaleontologia, 42 (2): 119–127.

Murray, J.W. 1973. Distribution and Ecology of Living Benthic Foraminiferids. Heinemann, London, 274 p.Rajabi, P., Safizadeh, M., Noroozpour, H. 2011. Microbiostratigraohy and Microfacies of Tarbur Formation in

Makhmal-kuh (North East of Khorram Abbad-Iran). Journal of Basic and Applied Scientific Research, 1 (10): 1724–1731.

Sanders, D., Baron-Szabo, R. 1997. Coral-rudist bioconstructions in the Upper Cretaceous Haidach section (Northern Calcareous Alps, Austria). Facies, 36: 69–90.

Schlagintweit, F., Rashidi, K., Barani, F. 2016. First record of Gyroconulina columellifera Schroeder & Darmoian, 1977 (larger benthic foraminifera) from the Maastrichtian Tarbur Formation of SW Iran (Zagros Fold–Thrust–Belt). Geopersia: University of Tehran, 6 (2): 169–185.

Schlüter, M. 2008. Late Cretaceous (Campanian-Maastrichtian) rudist-bearing carbonate platforms of the Mediterranean Tethys and the Arabian Plate. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Bochum, 98 p.

Steuber, T. 2002. Plate tectonic control on the evolution of Cretaceous platform-carbonate production. Geology, 30: 259–262.

Vaziri-Moghaddam, H., Safari, A., Shahriari, S., Khazaei, A., Taheri, A. 2013. Biostratigraphy and Palaeoecology of the Maestrichtian Deposits (Tarbur and Gurpi Formations) at Gardbishe Area (South of Borojen). Geosciences: Geological Survey of Iran-Tehran, 22 (87): 143–162.

Ziegler, M.A. 2001. Late Permian to Holocene Paleofacies Evolution of the Arabian Plate and its Hydrocarbon Occurrences. GeoArabia, 6: 60.