12
ISSN 01458752, Moscow University Geology Bulletin, 2010, Vol. 65, No. 6, pp. 343–354. © Allerton Press, Inc., 2010. Original Russian Text © E.A. Lygina, L.F. Kopaevich, A.M. Nikishin, I.V. Shalimov, E.V. Yakovishina, 2010, published in Vestnik Moskovskogo Universiteta. Geologiya, 2010, No. 6, pp. 11–22. 343 INTRODUCTION The deposits of the Simferopolskoe regional stage (Upper Ypresian–Lower Lutetian) are widely pre sented throughout the territory of the Crimea. Within the Steppe Crimea they have been traced in the Tarkhankutskaya, Sivashskaya, Northeast, and Indol skaya facial areas [Astakhova et al., 1984]. Moreover, the deposits of the Simferopolskoe regional stage are widely presented throughout most of Piedmont Crimea, where they are presented by facies of num mulitic limestones. They are well exposed and traced continuously from Inkerman in the west to the Nasyp koyskaya Balka in the east. Nummulitic facies are widely distributed within the whole Northern and par tially in the southern PeriTethys, from the Pyrenees to the TransCaspian region. They provide a well rep resented material for study of the deposits of carbonate platforms, and, moreover, they are characterized by good collector features. Therefore, these deposits are of high interest for geologists. This work is aimed at restoration of the conditions of sedimentogenesis in the Crimea during the Late Ypresian–Early Lutetian period. The work is based on our sedimentological studies of deposits of Piedmont Crimea, as well as the sections of wells and an analysis of the published literature about the deposits of the Steppe Crimea. In this case, the data of a microscopic study of thin sections and roentgenstructural and chemi cal analyses were taken into consideration. STRATIGRAPHY The Eocene nummulitic facies of the Crimea has been studied since the Late 18th century–early 19th century. A review of studies of the 19th century– first half of the 20th century is presented in “Geologiya USSR,” vol. 8 [Voloshina, Nemkov, 1969]. A summary of the current understanding of the zonal stratigraphy of the Eocene deposits of the Crimea are presented in Fig. 1. This scheme is accepted in this work. DESCRIPTION OF THE EOCENE DEPOSITS OF THE STEPPE CRIMEA Within the Crimea ten facial zones of the Eocene stage of development are distinguished; five of them are located in the Steppe Crimea and five are in the territory of Piedmont Crimea [Astakhova et al., 1984] (Fig. 2). The deposits of the Late Ypresian–Lutetian form an extended lithological body or a nummulitic bank, which is represented mainly by nummulitic lime stones. Throughout most of the Crimea these deposits are considered as the Simferopolskoe regional stage [Kopaevich et al., 2008]. The stratotype of this stage is distinguished in the Bakhchisaraysky reference sec tion. At the same time, the lithological composition of deposits varies from nummulitic limestones and marls within the western and central areas of the Crimea to argillitelike deposits in the Kerchensky Peninsula. The thickness of the deposits varies significantly, from Lower–Middle Eocene Formations of the Crimea: Facial Peculiarities and Forming Conditions E. A. Lygina, L. F. Kopaevich, A. M. Nikishin, I. V. Shalimov, and E. V. Yakovishina Moscow State University, Moscow, 119992 Russia email: [email protected] Received May 17, 2010 Abstract—This work considers the structure and conditions of the formation of deposits of the Simferopol skoe regional stage of the Crimea. The deposits of this stage include planktonic foraminifera zones Morozo vella aragonensis and Acarinina bullbrooki and nanoplaktonic zones Marthasterites tribrachiatus (the upper part), Discoaster lodoensis, Discoaster sublodoensis (lower part). The deposits of this interval throughout most of the Crimea represent a nummulitic bank, which formed in shallow warmwater basin and was isolated carbonate platform. The distribution of rocks of this regional stage, the facial change, and a number of inter ruptions are shown in the chronostratigraphic profile. The facial transitions within the carbonate platform point to variations in the basin’s depth, as well as periodical changes in the relative sea level, which were not only of a eustatic nature, but were determined by the periodic rise of the Simferopol Uplift. Keywords: Crimea Peninsula, Eocene, nummulitic facies, sequences, system tracts, paleogeography, tectonic events. DOI: 10.3103/S0145875210060025

Lower-middle Eocene formations of the Crimea: Facial peculiarities and forming conditions

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Lower-middle Eocene formations of the Crimea: Facial peculiarities and forming conditions

ISSN 0145�8752, Moscow University Geology Bulletin, 2010, Vol. 65, No. 6, pp. 343–354. © Allerton Press, Inc., 2010.Original Russian Text © E.A. Lygina, L.F. Kopaevich, A.M. Nikishin, I.V. Shalimov, E.V. Yakovishina, 2010, published in Vestnik Moskovskogo Universiteta. Geologiya, 2010,No. 6, pp. 11–22.

343

INTRODUCTION

The deposits of the Simferopolskoe regional stage(Upper Ypresian–Lower Lutetian) are widely pre�sented throughout the territory of the Crimea. Withinthe Steppe Crimea they have been traced in theTarkhankutskaya, Sivashskaya, Northeast, and Indol�skaya facial areas [Astakhova et al., 1984]. Moreover,the deposits of the Simferopolskoe regional stage arewidely presented throughout most of PiedmontCrimea, where they are presented by facies of num�mulitic limestones. They are well exposed and tracedcontinuously from Inkerman in the west to the Nasyp�koyskaya Balka in the east. Nummulitic facies arewidely distributed within the whole Northern and par�tially in the southern Peri�Tethys, from the Pyreneesto the Trans�Caspian region. They provide a well rep�resented material for study of the deposits of carbonateplatforms, and, moreover, they are characterized bygood collector features. Therefore, these deposits areof high interest for geologists.

This work is aimed at restoration of the conditionsof sedimentogenesis in the Crimea during the LateYpresian–Early Lutetian period. The work is based onour sedimentological studies of deposits of PiedmontCrimea, as well as the sections of wells and an analysisof the published literature about the deposits of theSteppe Crimea. In this case, the data of a microscopicstudy of thin sections and roentgenstructural and chemi�cal analyses were taken into consideration.

STRATIGRAPHY

The Eocene nummulitic facies of the Crimea hasbeen studied since the Late 18th century–early19th century. A review of studies of the 19th century–first half of the 20th century is presented in “GeologiyaUSSR,” vol. 8 [Voloshina, Nemkov, 1969]. A summaryof the current understanding of the zonal stratigraphyof the Eocene deposits of the Crimea are presented inFig. 1. This scheme is accepted in this work.

DESCRIPTION OF THE EOCENE DEPOSITS OF THE STEPPE CRIMEA

Within the Crimea ten facial zones of the Eocenestage of development are distinguished; five of themare located in the Steppe Crimea and five are in theterritory of Piedmont Crimea [Astakhova et al., 1984](Fig. 2).

The deposits of the Late Ypresian–Lutetian forman extended lithological body or a nummulitic bank,which is represented mainly by nummulitic lime�stones. Throughout most of the Crimea these depositsare considered as the Simferopolskoe regional stage[Kopaevich et al., 2008]. The stratotype of this stage isdistinguished in the Bakhchisaraysky reference sec�tion. At the same time, the lithological composition ofdeposits varies from nummulitic limestones and marlswithin the western and central areas of the Crimea toargillite�like deposits in the Kerchensky Peninsula.The thickness of the deposits varies significantly, from

Lower–Middle Eocene Formations of the Crimea: Facial Peculiarities and Forming Conditions

E. A. Lygina, L. F. Kopaevich, A. M. Nikishin, I. V. Shalimov, and E. V. YakovishinaMoscow State University, Moscow, 119992 Russia

e�mail: [email protected] May 17, 2010

Abstract—This work considers the structure and conditions of the formation of deposits of the Simferopol�skoe regional stage of the Crimea. The deposits of this stage include planktonic foraminifera zones Morozo�vella aragonensis and Acarinina bullbrooki and nanoplaktonic zones Marthasterites tribrachiatus (the upperpart), Discoaster lodoensis, Discoaster sublodoensis (lower part). The deposits of this interval throughoutmost of the Crimea represent a nummulitic bank, which formed in shallow warm�water basin and was isolatedcarbonate platform. The distribution of rocks of this regional stage, the facial change, and a number of inter�ruptions are shown in the chronostratigraphic profile. The facial transitions within the carbonate platformpoint to variations in the basin’s depth, as well as periodical changes in the relative sea level, which were notonly of a eustatic nature, but were determined by the periodic rise of the Simferopol Uplift.

Keywords: Crimea Peninsula, Eocene, nummulitic facies, sequences, system tracts, paleogeography, tectonicevents.

DOI: 10.3103/S0145875210060025

Page 2: Lower-middle Eocene formations of the Crimea: Facial peculiarities and forming conditions

344

MOSCOW UNIVERSITY GEOLOGY BULLETIN Vol. 65 No. 6 2010

LYGINA et al.

48

49

50

Ma

C21

n

C21r

C21n

C22r

C23n

Zones of planktonicP

aleo

mag

net

ic

Ser

ies

Su

bser

ies

Sta

geS

ub�

stag

e

Berggen et al.,2005

E8Guembelitrioides

nuttalli

E7

Acarininacuneicamerata

E6 Acarininapentacamerata

1* 2*

PP11

Aca

rin

ina

bullb

rook

iG

lobo

rota

lia

arag

on

ensi

s

Eo

cen

e

Mid

dle

Low

erY

pre

sian

Lu

teti

anL

ower

Upp

er

PP10

b

a

c

b

a

Aca

rin

ina

bullb

rook

iM

oro

zove

lla

arag

on

ensi

s

NP14 CP12b b

a a

Zones of calcareous

Martini, 1971Bukry, 1973,

1975

Dis

coas

ter

subl

od

oen

sis

Dis

coas

ter

subl

od

oen

sis

NP13Discoasterlodoensis

CP11Discoasterlodoensis

CP10NP12Marthasteritestribrachiatus

Tribrachiatusorthostylus

Kapellos1975SW

Crimea

Zones of small

Dis

coas

ter

subl

od

oen

sis

Dis

coas

ter

lod

oen

sis

Bugrova

SW of Crimea1988a

Pse

ud

oga

ud

ryin

a p

seu

do

nav

arro

ana

1988 b

Tur

kmen

ella

nin

ikae

Bul

imin

a m

itga

rzia

na

Complex

Pseudogaudryina

pseudonavarroana

Co

mp

lex

wit

h C

ibic

ido

ides

dis

jun

ctu

s

Complex withAsterigenia

stellingera

Zones of large benthic

SBZ 13

SBZ 12

SBZ 11

SBZ 10

?

Dis

cocy

clin

ase

lla

Assilinaplana

Nu

mm

uli

tes

dis

tan

s m

ino

r

Nu

mm

uli

tes

dis

tan

s

Nemkov,Barkhato�va, 1961

Zakrevs�

1993

Port�naya,1974

Sierra�Kielet al., 1998

Zakrevskaya, 2005

Astakhova

Local

Ass

ilin

a la

xisp

ira

Ass

ilin

am

aio

r

Nu

mm

uli

tes

po

lygy

ratu

s

Ass

ilin

asp

ira

abra

rdi

Su

bzo

ne

wit

hD

isco

cycl

ina

pra

tti

Sim

fero

po

lska

ya s

uit

e

scal

eforamifera nanoplankton benthic

foraminifera

with

foraminifera

kaya,

stratigra�phic divisi�

ons, CWCrimea

et al.,1984

Fig. 1. Stratigraphic scheme of Lower–Middle Eocene formation of the Crimea. The zonation based on planktonic foramifera isshown by a star: 1, [Postanovleniya…, 1989, 1998; Prakticheskoe rukovodstvo…, 2005]; 2, [Beniamovsky, 2001].

100

50

50? 50

5055?

120?

50

90

100

33° 34° 35° 36° 37°

Azov Sea

150

<100

99

30

27

45

49

90

>130

54

44

40?

50

69

132226

50

50

50

50

00100

100

150

250200

10050

75

4 6

3

I

II

III

IV

VVI

46°

VII

VIIa

VIIb

VIIcVIId VIIe

Black Sea

3

150

30

1234

5

6

7

Fig. 2. The lithological–facial map of the Crimea of the Lower–Middle Eocene period (scale 1 : 2000000). The facial areas:I, Tarkhankutsky; II, Central; III, Sivashsky; IV, Northeast; V, Indolsky; VI, Kerchensky; VII, Mountain and Piedmont Crimea(VIIa, southwest, VIIb, Simferopolskoe, VIIc, Belogorsky, VIId, Kursky, VIIe, eastern). Legend: 1, a line of comparison scheme,the number of the image with the scheme is in a circle; 2, isopachytes, m; 3, locality of wells, a number is a thickness of the Lower–Middle Eocene formation in a well; 4, locality of the section in the area of the Piedmont Crimea; 5–7, paleogeographic environ�ments: 5, basin, 6, deep�water shelf, 7, shallow shelf.

Page 3: Lower-middle Eocene formations of the Crimea: Facial peculiarities and forming conditions

MOSCOW UNIVERSITY GEOLOGY BULLETIN Vol. 65 No. 6 2010

LOWER–MIDDLE EOCENE FORMATIONS OF THE CRIMEA 345

20 m in the central area of the Crimea to more than250 m on the Tarkhankutsky Peninsula [Astakhovaet al., 1984]. The detailed geological structure of theEocene deposits of the Steppe Crimea is shown inFigs. 3–6.

The Simferopolskoe regional stage is distinguishedin the Sivashsky area of the Steppe Crimea within thestratotypical southwest area, in the Simferopolskoe,Belogorsky, and Kursky areas of Piedmont Crimea.This stage is composed of nummulitic limestones andrarely marls with nummulitides. In Piedmont Crimeanummulites are considered as rock�forming fauna; inthe Sivashsky and Northeast areas the sections isbecoming sandy. Coccoliths found in the rocks of theSimferopolskoe regional stage made it possible to referthem to the NP13–NP14 zones [Andreeva�Grigoro�vich, 1973]. Within the Strelkovaya area the section of

the Simferopolskoe regional stage is reduced due tothe absence in the section of the layers with Morozo�vella aragonenensis.

The Tarkhankutskaya zone occupies the territory ofthe Tarkhankutsky Peninsula. The deposits of theUpper Ypresian–Lutetian are represented here byrocks of the Rodnikovskaya suite, the stratotype ofwhich was recorded in well no. 222, drilled within theKarkinitskaya area. The suite is composed of greenish�grey and light�grey marls and limestones with a richcomplex of planktonic and benthic foraminifera, aswell as radiolarian and ostracods. The upper part of thesuite (the upper sub�stage of the Lutetium) compara�ble to the section of the Novopavlovsky horizon. Thetotal thickness of the deposits of the Rodnikovskayasuite is up to 280 m.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

mSW NE

P22�3~

P22�3~

P2i2�l1~

226

P2i2�l1~

132

P2i1~

110

P12~

P2i1~

128

P12~

N1s2

K2m

N1s2

P1d~

P2i1~

40

P12~

P2i2�l1~

90

P22�3~

Olenevskaya Tarkhankutskaya

Melovaya

Oktyabr’skaya Zadornenskaya 1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

Fig. 3. The correlation scheme of the Lower–Middle Eocene Formations of the Tarkhankutsky area: 1, nummulitic clay lime�stones; 2, nummulitic limestones; 3, detrital limestones; 4, sandy marls with spongolites; 5, dolomitized limestones; 6, sandymarls; 7, clays with small nummulites; 8, clays and marls with nummulites; 9, limestones; 10, marls; 11, marls with nummulites;12, shallow�water clays, sands, conglomerates; 13, marls, limestones, and clays; 14, marls, nummulitic limestones and sand�stones; 15, marls, limestones and sandstones; 16, clay schists, marls and clay limestones; 17, clay marls; 18, clays and marls;19, sandy and clay marls; 20, sandstones and nummulitic limestones; 21, calcareous aleuritic clays; 22, calcareous sandstoneswith isolations of mollusk shells; 23, isolations of nummulitides shells (a size of a mark corresponds to a size of a shell)l; 24, glau�conite; 25, worm trails; 26, unconformity surface.

Page 4: Lower-middle Eocene formations of the Crimea: Facial peculiarities and forming conditions

346

MOSCOW UNIVERSITY GEOLOGY BULLETIN Vol. 65 No. 6 2010

LYGINA et al.

The Indolskaya zone in the stratigraphic intervaldescribed is characterized by the suite of argillite�likeclays and marls, which belong relatively to the Lower–Middle Eocene, according to the conditions of sedi�mentation and poor fauna of planktonic foraminifera.The thickness of this zone is up to 70 m [Astakhovaet al., 1984] (Fig. 2).

Within the Kerchenskaya zone a section with alter�nation of argillites, limestones and marls is distin�guished, which contain complexes of small benthicand planktonic foraminifera in the upper part. Thesection with a thickness ranging from 40 to 300 m doesnot occur everywhere. The stratigraphic volume of thesection most likely corresponds to zones of Morozo�vella aragonensis and Acarinina bullbrooki.

A DESCRIPTION OF THE SECTIONS OF THE EOCENE FORMATIONS

OF PIEDMONT CRIMEA

The well�exposed outcrops of the Eocene depositsare located in the Piedmont Crimea. The nummuliticEocene facies occur in the southwest, Simferopolskoe,Belogorsky, Kursky facial areas. The coeval deposits of

the Nasypkoyskaya Balka are composed mainly ofclays and marls without large foraminifera (Figs. 7, 8).

The stratum of Eocene nummulitic limestones isone of the most continuous horizons of the Paleogenedeposits in the Crimea. It forms the cuesta surface andin the middle part of the stratum forms of erosion aspillars, “idols,” and towers occur. The deposits of theSimferopolskoe regional stage do not change in theircomposition and structure along the strike, from thetown of Inkerman to the city of Belogorsk. They arewell characterized faunistically and three zones basedon findings of large foraminifera are clearly distin�guished here [Nemkov, Barkhatova, 1961]. The thick�ness of deposits decreases slightly from the southwestto the east, from 40–45 m near the town of Inkerman[Golev, Andreeva�Grigorovich, 1982; Zakrevskaya,1993] to 15–30 m in the valleys of the Beshterek andZuya rivers. In spite of the absence of interruptions inthe section of the Belogorsky area the thickness of thesection is only 10 m. In the area of NasypkoyskayaBalka the section of the deposits of the Simferopolskoeregional stage is 75 m after [Nemkov, Barkhatova,1961] and less than 45 m after [Shutskaya, 1970].

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

m

S NP22~

P2i2�l1~

K2m

Simferopol’skaya Zuyskaya Gvardeyskaya Armyanskaya Chaplinka

P22~ P2

2~

P22~

P22~

69 49P2i2�l1~ P2i2�l1~ P2i2�l1~

P2i2�l1~

45 54

81

P2i1~

6

P2i1~

37

P2i1~

26

P2i1~

5P2i1~

21

K1al

K2m

P1~

Fig. 4. The correlation scheme of the Lower–Middle Eocene Formations of the central and Sivashsky areas of the Crimea. Leg�end is the same as in Fig. 3.

Page 5: Lower-middle Eocene formations of the Crimea: Facial peculiarities and forming conditions

MOSCOW UNIVERSITY GEOLOGY BULLETIN Vol. 65 No. 6 2010

LOWER–MIDDLE EOCENE FORMATIONS OF THE CRIMEA 347

The described Eocene deposits are as follows(Fig. 7): in the southwest area they are found in thetown of Inkerman, the villages of Krasny Mak andSkalistoe (the Bodrak river), and Mt. Suvlu�Kaya; inthe Simferopolskoe area they are found in the settle�ments of Marino and Litvinenkovo (the Zuya River),the village of Donskoe (the Beshterek River); in theBelogorsky area: Mt. Akkaya and the village of Pro�lom; in the Kursky area the Eocene sediments werenot sampled; near the Nasypkoyskaya Balka they arefound in a small quarry on the southern outskirts of thevillage of Nasypnoe. A description of the types of thesections of different facial areas is given below.

THE SOUTHWEST AREA

The section of Mt. Suvlu�Kaya, considered to be astratotype of the Paleogene in the south of the SovietUnion (Reshenie.., 1963] is considered as a typicalsection of the southwest area. The section of the Sim�feropolskoe regional stage begins in the upper reachesof a large gully on the southeast slope of Mt. Suvlu�

Kaya (the Bakhchisaraysky area on the right side of theChuruksu River). Here, a gradual transition betweendark�gray calcareous clays of the Bakhchisarayskyregional stage and nummulitic limestones of the Sim�feropolskoe regional stage is observed. In sediments ofthe Bakhchisaraysky stage rare Discocyclina, Opercu�lina, small bivalves of Pycnodonte and Spondylus occur.The Simferopolskoe regional stage begins at the slopeturn, and then it is recorded on an overhanging verticalprecipice with a few shallow caverns at the bottom.The stage is represented by:

(1) bioclastic nummulitic clay yellowish�gray lime�stones (15–20% clay component, 30–40% calcitemicrite, 45–55% coarse�grained, shelly, organic�detrital component, with fragments of large foramin�ifera shells (30–50%, 0.7–1 mm) of Nummulites, Dis�cocyclina, rare Operculina, rare crinoids, bryozoans,bivalves, small benthic foraminifera, red algae) withinterbeds of organic�detrital marls with nummulites(25–40% clay component, 20–25% calcite micrite,10–30% coarse�grained, shelly, bioclastic compo�nent, containing shells of Nummulitides (10–12%, up

P22~

P2i2�l1~

W

69

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100m

Simferopol’skaya Indol’skaya Zhuravskaya Goncharovskaya Moshkarevskaya

P22~

P22~

P22~

P2i2�l1~

30 P2i2�l1~

44

P2i2�l1~

89

N1

P2i1~

26

K2m P2i2�l1~

59

P2i1~

48

P2i1~

21

K2m

P1~

P1~

P1~

Fig. 5. The correlation scheme of the Lower–Middle Eocene Formations of the central and eastern areas of the Crimea. Legendis the same as in Fig. 3.

Page 6: Lower-middle Eocene formations of the Crimea: Facial peculiarities and forming conditions

348

MOSCOW UNIVERSITY GEOLOGY BULLETIN Vol. 65 No. 6 2010

LYGINA et al.

to 10–12 mm) and their fragments (5–15%), raresmall foraminifera (1%), fragments of brachiopods,bivalves, echinoderms). The bench contains large (3–5 cm) rounded marcasite concretions, and accumula�tions of varied fauna (large foraminifera (25–30 mm),brachiopods, bivalves Chlamys, echinoderms). Poros�ity does not exceed 3–5%; dolomitization is 2–3%.The thickness of the bench is about 7 m;

(2) massive, bioclastic, nummulitic, yellow lime�stones with the fauna of randomly oriented large fora�minifera (30–35%), whose size becomes larger (30–35 mm), as well as crinoids.

The rocks are composed of 10–15% calcitemicrite, 4% clay admixture, 15–20% cement as porefilling; the shelly component (20–30%) is representedby Nummulites (15–20%), Discocyclina (about 5%),poorly preserved, rare small benthic foraminifera, bio�clastic medium�coarse component (25–55%) repre�sented by fragments of large foraminifera shells (35–40%; from 4 to 0.7–0.5 mm in size) of Nummulites,Discocyclina, as well as rare echinoderms, bivalves,and brachiopods. The porosity is 3–5%; dolomitiza�tion is 1–2%. The thickness is 7–8 m

(3) bioclastic nummulitic yellowish�white ferrugi�nous limestones, which are similar to those of benchno. 2, but they contain rarer and smaller nummulitesthan the underlying bench. In relief they form a well�defined cornice over the precipice and weatheringforms “stone idols.” Limestones contain 15–20%large foraminifera shells of Nummulites, Operculina,Discocyclina and rare Assilina, which reach 3–15 mm

in size. In addition, there are bivalves, brachiopods;the shells of foraminifera are often filled with authi�genic glauconite. In limestones the abundance ofglauconite (30–40%) is noted [Voronina, 1989].Higher in the succession the foraminifera shellsbecome larger again (30–35 mm).

At 12 m from the basement of the bench flints ofirregular shape appear in limestones and inherited fos�sil traces. In thin sections one can observe 1% of theshells of radiolarians (rounded, up to 0.3 mm, alteredby radial fibrous chalcedony), the occurrence ofwhich, apparently, was a cause of the formation of thenodules. The thickness of the section is 16–18 m;

(4) massive, bioclastic, nummulitic, pinkish fer�ruginous limestones with a clay admixture are identi�cal to those from bench no. 2. They form a gentlestepped slope above the stone idols. The limestonescontain large foraminifera of Discocyclina up to80 mm in size. The thickness is more than 10 m.

The thickness of the section described is more than40 m. The total thickness of the deposits of the Simf�eropolskoe regional stage for the area described in theliterature is 45 m [Maslakova, Lipnick, 1971;Zakrevskaya, 1993, etc.]. Limestones of bench no. 1are conventionally referred to the nannoplanktoniczone of Marthasterites tribrachiatus and the zone ofNummulites distans minor based on findings of largeforaminifera; limestones of bench no. 2 are referred tothe top of the nannoplanktonic zone of Marthasteritestribrachiatus, the zone of Discoaster lodoensis (lowerpart), and the zone of Nummulites distans (lower part).

S N

P23~

P3�N1~

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500mGornostaevskaya Moshkarevskaya Shubinskaya Ust�Salgirskaya Strelkovaya Genichenskaya

P3�N1~

P3�N1~

P2i2�l1~

407

P2i2�l1~

89

P2i2�l1~

276

P2i2�l1~

325

P2i2(?)�l1~

505

P23~

P3�N1~

P2i2�l1~

403

P1~ P2i1~ P2i1~ P1~ P2�1~ P1~

Fig. 6. The correlation scheme of the Eocene Formations of eastern Crimea. Legend is the same as in Fig. 3.

Page 7: Lower-middle Eocene formations of the Crimea: Facial peculiarities and forming conditions

MOSCOW UNIVERSITY GEOLOGY BULLETIN Vol. 65 No. 6 2010

LOWER–MIDDLE EOCENE FORMATIONS OF THE CRIMEA 349

48 49 50

Ma

Paleomagnetic

Series

Subseries

Stage

Sub�stage1*

Mar

tin

i,19

71

Zones of

Nem

kov,

C21n

C21

r

C22

n

C22

r

C23

n

Eocene

Middle

Lower

LutetianLower

Upper

Ypresian

Globorotalia aragoensisAcarinina bullbrooki

NP

14

b a

Discoastersublodoensis

NP

13

Discoasterlodoensis

NP

13

Marthasteritestribrachiatus

Nummulitesdistans minor

Nummulitesdistans

Nummulites polygyratus

P3

~

P2i

2~

P2i

1~

P2i

1~

P2i

1~

N22

Inke

rman

Kra

sny

Mak

P2i

2~

P2i

2~

Su

vlu

�Kay

aS

kali

sto

e P2i

1~

K1

K1

K2

P2i

1~

P2i

2~

P2i

2~

Mar

’in

o

Do

nsk

oe

Lit

vin

enko

vo

P2i

2~

Nas

ypn

oe

Akk

aya

Pro

lom

01020304050mscale

large benthicforaminifera

Bar

kah

a�to

va,

1961

Fig

. 7. T

he

corr

elat

ion

sch

eme

of t

he

Eoc

ene

For

mat

ion

s of

Pie

dmon

t C

rim

ea. L

egen

d is

th

e sa

me

as in

Fig

. 3.

Page 8: Lower-middle Eocene formations of the Crimea: Facial peculiarities and forming conditions

350

MOSCOW UNIVERSITY GEOLOGY BULLETIN Vol. 65 No. 6 2010

LYGINA et al.

Bench no. 3 belongs to the Discoaster lodoensis zoneand the nummulitic zone of Nummulites distans[Andreeva�Grigorovich, 1973; Muzylev, 1980, Voron�ina, 1989]. Bench no. 4 belongs to the nummuliticNummulites polygyratus zone [Maslakov, Lipnick,1971; Portnaya, 1974; Zakrevskaya, 1993] and the Dis�coaster lodoensis zone (the upper part) [Kapellos,1975]. Although at the upper part of bench no.4 someresearches distinguish the Discoaster sublodoensis zone[Andreeva�Grigorovich, 1973], we have not sampledthese deposits. Thus, the deposits of the Simferopol�skoe regional stage of the Suvlu�Kaya section are pre�sented only within the deposits of the Upper Ypresian.

The Eocene deposits in other sections studied ofthis facial area are similar to those described above.The differences are as follows. Nummulitic limestonesin the middle part of the Mt. Inkerman section arecharacterized by the presence of layers with a predom�inance of an medium�and fine�grained organic–detri�tal component (85–90%) and very rare preservedshells of large foraminifera. In contrary, the deposits ofthe lower part of this section in the village of KrasnyMak consist of detrital�micrite sandy glauconitic�quartz limestones with 80–90% calcite micrite bulk,single preserved shells of nummulitides, and 10%medium� and coarse�grained organic�detrital compo�nent.

THE SIMFEROPOLSKOE AREA

The section near the settlement of Mar’ino, themost western of the sections studied in the Simfer�

opolskoe facial area, is located on the southeasternoutskirts of the city of Simferopol. In the relief rocksform a steep cliff with a stepped structure. Rocks of theSimferopolskoe area are presented by dense organic�detrital crinoidal�nummulitic yellowish limestoneswith 5–15% micrite, organic fragments (from 40% to80%), fragments of large foraminifera shells (30–35%), echinoderms (20%), ostracods, bivalves, andbryozoans), and 10–15% preserved shells of large for�aminifera (2–15 mm in size). The terrigenous admix�ture is less than 2–3%; authigenous glauconite occursin the chambers of shells of nummulitides. The orien�tation of the fragments is clearly visible. In the lowthick (15–20 cm) layers of massive limestones accu�mulations of nonoriented nummulitides shells arecommon. They represent numerous condensationhorizons, which reflect an active hydrodynamic envi�ronment within the sedimentation basin. The thick�ness of the deposits is about 38 m [Zakrevskaya, 1993].

The geological structure of the section of thedeposits of the Simferopolskoe area is similar to thatwithin the southwest area [Portnaya, 1974; Zakrevskaya,1993]. The thickness of the deposits of the Bakhchisa�raysky regional stage near the settlement of Mar’ino is9–12 m; further to the east, they wedge out. At thebasement of the section of the Simferopolskoeregional stage marls with glauconite of the Nummulitesdistans minor zone with a thickness of 4 m occur.Higher in the succession, marls are changed by num�mulitic limestones with zones of Nummulites distans(19 m) and Nummulites polygyratus (15–17 m).

Sea level Sea level[Haq et al., 1987]

Tectonic

−+

Up

lift

of

the

Sim

fero

po

l ris

e

100 150 200 m

?

?

Early

Late

Early

Geochronological scale[Ogg et al., 2008] West East

Piedmont Crimea

Lutetian

Eo

cen

eP

aleo

cen

e

Pal

eoge

ne

Cre

tace

ou

s

Up

per

Late

?

Ypresian

Thanetian

Zelandian

Dacian

Maastricht

48.6

55.8

58.7

61.1

65.5

events

Fig. 8. The chronostratigraphic profile for the Late Maastricht–Early Lutetium in Piedmont Crimea.

Page 9: Lower-middle Eocene formations of the Crimea: Facial peculiarities and forming conditions

MOSCOW UNIVERSITY GEOLOGY BULLETIN Vol. 65 No. 6 2010

LOWER–MIDDLE EOCENE FORMATIONS OF THE CRIMEA 351

The next two sections are located near the village ofDonskoe and the settlement of Litvinenkovo. Thesesequences are similar in their structure, thickness, andthe structural–textural characteristics of limestones.These are light yellow, yellowish�grey massive lime�stones with many small lens�shaped (5–8 mm) andrare large (20 mm) shells of nummulitides. The shellsare concentrated in lenses and interbeds and are ori�ented randomly. Rocks hardly contain calcite micriteand cement; the porosity is 10–15% in the upper partof the section. The medium�grained (from 0.2–0.3 to2–3 mm) bioclastic component (70–95%), consists offragments of large foraminifera of Nummulites (55–60%), Discocyclina (5–10%), and Alveolina (5%),concentrated in the middle part of the section, as wellas small benthic foraminifera (less than 1%), bivalves,echinoderms, and bryozoans. The terrigenous admix�ture is negligible (<1%) and is represented by quartzand allothigenic glauconite. Layers of massive lime�stone are separated by horizons with burrows ofThalassinoids; these are considered as formations ofthe “hardground” type. In the western section near thevillage of Donskoe the thickness of such horizonsreaches 0.3–0.45 m and increases to the east (to thesettlement of Litvinenkovo) up to 1–1.2 m.

It should be noted that rare large Actinocyclina for�aminifera occur in the lower part of the Litvinenkovosection, as well as large Alveolina foraminifera in bothsections. The latter occurred in the shallowest coastalshelf zones or on the shallow shoals.

A marl layer, which characterizes the Nummulites,distans minor zone, does not occur in the section nearLitvinenkovo. Near the village of Donskoe this part ofthe section is probably represented on a grassy gentleslope. The deposits described can be conditionallyreferred to the Nummulites distans zone with a thick�ness of 12 m [Zakrevskaya, 1993]. The deposits of theNummulites polygyratus zone with a thickness of 15 m,which were not sampled, add to the section[Zakrevskaya, 1993].

THE BELOGORSKY AREA

In this area we consider the section of Mt. Akkayaand the section near the village of Prolom, which havesimilar geological structures. The first 10 m sectionwas described on the southern slope of Mt. Akkaya inthe sequence of nummulitic limestones and in anabandoned quarry on the top of the mountain. TheMaastricht sandstones rested erosively on the basalhorizon of rounded and subrounded pebbles of bed�rocks, surrounded by a yellowish�green to dark�greenglauconite rim. At the upper part of the Maastrichtsands, large cracks filled with Eocene sandy unconsol�idated glauconitic limestones were noted. At the bot�tom of the limestone section unconsolidated highlyglauconitic detrital limestones with a thickness of 1.5–2 m with glauconite and phosphorite pebbles occur.Higher in the succession, they disappear gradually; the

deposits are represented by glauconitic organic–detri�tal nummulitic limestones and clean unconsolidatednummulitic limestones. The latter contains no micrite(rarely up to 5%) and cement; the porosity reaches7.5% (in the section near the village of Prolom it is25%). The bioclastic, shelly, coarse�grained (in aver�age of 0.6–1 mm) well�sorted component (80–90%) isrepresented by the remnants of shells of large foramin�ifera (60–65%, 0.7–0.3 mm in size), echinoderms(20%), bryozoans, rare algae, and bivalves. Among thepreserved large shells of foraminifera (10%) are Num�mulites (6–7%, 3–6 mm in size), Discocyclina (up to3%, 3–7 mm in size), poorly preserved, and rare smallbenthic foraminifera (up to 0.3 mm). Authigenousoutwash in situ glauconite occurs in the lower part ofthe section (5–7%); its quantity decreases rapidlyupward in the section. The Eocene limestones are over�lapped by clay with gypsum layers of the Maykop series ofan Oligocene age.

Here, as in sections near Donskoe and Litvinenk�ovo, there are a large number of hardground surfaceswith crayfish trails; the size and a number of largeshells of foraminifera increases to the next erosion sur�face. The average size of shells is 25–40 mm; the max�imum is 70–80 mm.

The Lower Ypresian deposits are probably absent inthis area, although in the lower 1.5–2 m part of thesection bridging nummulitides occur, which is charac�teristic both for the Bakhchisaraysky regional stageand the lower part of the Simferopolskoe regionalstage [Portnaya, 1974; Zakrevskaya, 1993]. Accordingto the literature data published, the first 2–2.5 m of theSimferopolskoe regional stage correspond to the Num�mulites distans minor zone, where rare shells of zonal spe�cies, as well as A. placentula (Desh.), A. gigantean Mayer[Zakrevskaya, 1993], numerous discocyclines D. sella(d’Arch.) [Portnaya, 1974]. Above, N. distans Desh.,N. murchisoni Rut., and rare A. laxispira (de la Harpe)appear. This part of the section corresponds to theNummulites distans zone and has a thickness of about3 m. The thickness of the Nummulites polygyratus zoneis less than 4–5 m; in this zone large A. maior (Heim)and A. spira abrardi Schaub occur; in the upper part ofthe zone D. pratti (Mich.) and Actinocyclina munieri(Schium.) are common.

THE EASTERN AREA

The section of the Nasypkoyskaya Balka is a typicalcross�section of the Indolskaya structural�facial zoneof eastern Crimea [Nemkov, Barkhatova, 1961;Shutskaya, 1970; Bugrova et al., 2002], which differssignificantly from the structure of the coeval depositsof the western regions. The section of the Eocenedeposits here is represented mainly by silty and marlysediments with rare benthic fauna. In this area threesubdivisions of the Eocene are distinguished, but theboundaries between them are relative, because of the

Page 10: Lower-middle Eocene formations of the Crimea: Facial peculiarities and forming conditions

352

MOSCOW UNIVERSITY GEOLOGY BULLETIN Vol. 65 No. 6 2010

LYGINA et al.

lithological uniformity of the rocks [Nemkov,Barkhatova, 1961].

Until recently, the biostratigraphic division of theEocene of the eastern Crimea has been carried out onthe basis of findings of planktonic foraminifera[Shutskaya, 1970]. The Eocene deposits of easternCrimea are calcareous black shales and siltstones withinterbeds of detrital limestones with a thickness of upto 10 meters (the Bakhchisaraysky regional stage).Higher, calcareous clays with interbeds of nummuliticlimestones lie, which, according to their range of largeand small foraminifera, is similar to the upper part ofthe Bakhchisaraysky regional stage (the Bakhchisaray�sky district of the Crimea) [Nemkov, Barkhatova,1961; Shutskaya, 1970]. Above, suite of dark�gray cal�careous shales and marls of the Simferopolskoeregional stage with a thickness of about 75 m lie [Nem�kov, Barkhatova, 1961], where the zones of Globorota�lia aragonensis and Acarinina bullbrooki are distin�guished on the planktonic foraminifera [Shutskaya,1970]. The first 12 meters of the sequence contain onlyplanktonic foraminifera and only higher in the succes�sion do benthic fauna appear. E.K. Shutskaya [I970]estimated the total thickness of the deposits of theSimferopolskoe regional stage as 40–45 m; theremainder of the clays and marls are referred to theBodraksky regional stage.

E.Yu. Zakrevskaya [1993] studied nummuliticlimestone and the suite of calcareous shales with inter�beds of nummulitic limestones and found foraminiferaof Operculina karreri Penecke, Nummulites irregularisDesh., N. murchisoni Rut., which indicate a higherstratigraphic level of these deposits than was thoughtpreviously by Nemkov and Barkhatova [1961].

This allowed E.Yu. Zakrevskaya to attribute a partof the alternation sequence of thick calcareous claysand nummulitic limestones to the Upper Ypresian;that is, to the bottom of the Simferopolskoe regionalstage. In addition, limestones include Late Cretaceousand Paleocene redeposited foraminifera, amongwhich there are species that are characteristic of boththe Lower and the Upper Ypresian. All this indicatesthe presence at the basement and inside the bench of afew interruptions that are associated with transgressiveevents in the Early Eocene [Bugrova et al., 2002].

This work presents a description of the 5–6 mbench of the alternation of calcareous clays and num�mulitic limestones that were described in a smalldeserted quarry on the southern outskirts of the settle�ment of Nasypnoe. Sandy glauconitic�quartz lime�stones with greenish calcareous clay contain preservedshells of well�sorted lens�shaped large foraminifera(2.4 mm in an average). In calcareous clays small lens�shaped nummulites occur as well, but their content ismuch lower (3–5%). E.Yu. Zakrevskaya [Bugrovaet al., 2002] noted the large variety and widespreadoccurrence of asterocyclinids, the poor diversity ofnummulitic species, and the almost complete absenceof species of microspherical generation The latter

fact suggests that sediments were moved from theplace of their original accumulation [Aigner, 1985],so large shells of microspherical generation remainedin situ.

According to the literature data, higher in the suc�cession light�gray calcareous silty clays with a thick�ness of about 20 m lie, which belong to the Morozo�vella aragonensis zone; then, light gray marls at thebottom of the Acarinina bullbrooki zone (18–20 m)[Shutskaya, 1970; Bugrova, Zakrevskaya, 2002]. Thescheme of the section is shown in Fig. 7.

At the level of the Acarinina bullbrooki zone thebenthic foraminifera complex changes; the taxono�metric diversity is higher, however, the number ofspecimens of each species is reduced.

In the marl part the content of organic residueswith flint skeletons increases: radiolarians and spiculesof sponges. The latter indicates an increase in thedepth of the sedimentation basin and/or cooling.

SEQUENCE STRATIGRAPHY, PALEOGEOGRAPHY AND MAIN EVENTS

IN PALEOCENE–EOCENE IN PIEDMONT CRIMEA

The Eocene deposits rest erosively on differenthorizons from the Paleocene to Lower Cretaceous,between the Paleocene and Eocene an angular uncon�formity existed in the Crimea. The vertical tectonicmovements began in the second half of the Paleocene,probably in Late Danian [Kopaevich et al., 2010] andended before the accumulation of facies of nummu�litic limestones. These movements are related to aregional compression phase that was synchronous intime with the main phase of folding and thrusting inthe Pontides in northern Turkey [Nikishin et al.,2006].

As the result of tectonic movements during theThanetian–Ypresian in the area of the modernCrimean Mountains an isolated carbonate platformformed. These tectonic movements were preceded bya tectonic event during the second half of the Danianin central Crimea and the rise of the Simferopolskoeuplift [Kopaevich et al., 2010]. During the Thanetiantransgressive–regressive cycle, marl suite formed,which is common within the southwest, Kursky andthe Nasypkoyskaya Balka areas of the PiedmontCrimea [Astakhova et al., 1980]. The Simferopolskoeuplift in the Thanetian apparently continued to rise.Clays of the Lower Ypresian accumulated during a newEocene transgression. From the Thanetian depositsthey are separated by a subaqueous erosion surface,which was formed during at least two nannoplanktoniczones–NP9, NP10 [Naydin, Benyamovsky, 1994]. Alow�thickness transgressive tract in the southwesternCrimea is presented by clay deposits, which do notcontain coarse�grained terrigenous admixture andmacrofauna [Voronina, 1989]. Higher in the succes�sion clays becomes more carbonate; the benthic fauna

Page 11: Lower-middle Eocene formations of the Crimea: Facial peculiarities and forming conditions

MOSCOW UNIVERSITY GEOLOGY BULLETIN Vol. 65 No. 6 2010

LOWER–MIDDLE EOCENE FORMATIONS OF THE CRIMEA 353

appears (suppressed nummulitides, bivalves), whichindicates the beginning of the highstand systems tract(HST). The maximum flooding surface is notrecorded in the sections, as it is located within thecommonly poorly exposed sediments of the Bakh�chisaraysky regional stage represented by clays. In thewest (Inkerman) micrite limestones with a significantshare of primary dolomitization accumulated. At thistime, the Simferopol uplift was apparently an erodedunderwater area and only at the end of Early Ypresianwas it flooded (Early Ypresian and Late Ypresian num�mulitides were found in a basal layer in the section ofMt. Akkaya [Zakrevskaya, 1993]. Sea�level highstandand the subsequent regression are recorded in sectionsby the appearance of progradational sequence of layersat the upper part of the Bakhchisaraysky (so�calledtransitional layers) and Simferopolskoe regional stagesin southwestern and central Crimea. It should benoted that in central Crimea, this part of the section isseverely reduced and is represented by the basal layerof sandy limestones with glauconite and a bench ofclastic limestones with a thickness of about 10 m. Ineastern Crimea the Paleocene sediments are concor�dant with a 10 m overlying thick stratum of carbon�aceous black shales and aleurolites with interbeds ofdetritus limestones (0.1–0.15 m), which belongs to theGloborotalia aequa zone. Deposits of this zone in thesouthwestern Crimea are presented by a 2�m layer ofclays, which completely narrows towards the Simfer�opolskoe Uplift [Shutskaya, 1970]. These depositscorrespond to the most deep�sea environment insouthwestern and eastern Crimea and record thebeginning of the Eocene transgression. The bench ofalternation of clays and nummulitic limestones, con�taining redeposited Cretaceous and Paleocene speciesof planktonic foraminifera belongs to the upper part ofthe Bakhchisaraysky regional stage [Shutskaya, 1970],or to the border between the Bakhchisaraysky andSimferopolskoe regional stages [Bugrova and et al.,2002]. This may indicate the erosion of the area of theSimferopolskoe uplift, which was covered by the seaduring further transgression. The overlying bench ofsilty calcareous clays, containing only planktonic for�aminifera in the lower part and benthic deep�sea spe�cies in the upper part, was likely to have accumulatedat a stable high sea level and the start of regression.

As mentioned above, paleogeographically, thefacies of nummulitic limestones in Piedmont Crimearepresents a nummulitic bank [Kopaevich et al.,2008], within which one can distinguish the most shal�low�water setting in its central part, a shoal with abso�lute paleodepths of less than 10 m (the village ofLitvinenkovo, Mt. Akkaya, the village of Prolom). It isconfined to the eastern wing of the Simferopolskoeuplift and the southern continuation of theNovoselovskoe Uplift and probably extends north tothe central facial zone of the Steppe Crimea. Rocksare characterized by good porosity and could be theo�retically considered as potential hydrocarbon reser�

voirs. Relatively deep deposits near the village of Don�skoe and the city of Simferopol accumulated undershallow water conditions on the slope of the shoal at adepth of less 50 m, at which periodic currentsoccurred. Poorly washed micrite limestones with asmall number of nummulitic shells in a carbonatematrix (the section near the village of Skalistoe,Mt. Suvlu Kaya, the village of Krasny Mak, and thetown of Inkerman) accumulated on the shelf plains ata depth of 50–70 m. In the area of the NasypkoyskayaBalka, the conditions were compatible with a deepslope environment of a nummulitic bank. The depthof the formation of deposits could reach 120 m, whichis a limited value for such facial conditions.

CONCLUSIONS

Most of the limestones in the Crimea are depositsof the nummulitic bank that are well�defined along thestrike. Within this bank the following sites are distin�guished: the central part of the nummulitic bank, theshoal (Mt. Akkaya and the village of Prolom); theslope of the nummulitic bank (the villages of Litvinen�kovo and Donskoe and the city of Simferopol); theshelf plain in the rear part of the bank (the southwest�ern part of Piedmont Crimea between the town ofInkerman and the village of Skalistoe); the relativelydeep slope of the nummulitic bank with predomi�nantly terrigenous sedimentation (the area of theNasypkoyskaya Balka).

The Eocene nummulitic bank was an isolated car�bonate platform, which was formed under the influ�ence of fluctuations of relative sea level and the tec�tonic Uplift of the Simferopolskoe Rise during theLate Danian–Thanetian.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We are grateful to A.S. Alekseev, V.N. Benya�movsky, and E.Yu. Zakrevskaya for their valuableadvice during the preparation of this article. This workwas supported by the Russian Foundation for BasicResearch, projects no. 08�05�00283a and 08�05�00588�a.

REFERENCES

1. Aigner, T., Biofabrics as Dynamic Indicators in Num�mulite accumulations, Journ. of Sediment. Petrol.,1985, vol. 55, no. 1, pp. 131–134.

2. Andreeva�Grigorovich, A.S., Zonal Division of thePaleogene Deposits of the Bakhchisarai, Based onNanoplankton, Dokl. AN USSR, ser. B, 1973, no.3,pp. 195–197.

3. Astakhov, T., Horak S.T., Craeva, E.Y., et al., GeologiyaShelfa USSR. Startigrafiya (Shelf I Poberezhiya Cher�nogo Morya) (Geology of the Shelf of Ukraine. Stratig�raphy (Shelf and the Black Sea Coasts), Kiev: NaukovaDumka, 1984.

Page 12: Lower-middle Eocene formations of the Crimea: Facial peculiarities and forming conditions

354

MOSCOW UNIVERSITY GEOLOGY BULLETIN Vol. 65 No. 6 2010

LYGINA et al.

4. Benyamovsky, V.N., The Grounds for the DetailedStratigraphic Scheme of Lower Paleogene Deposits ofthe Crimean�Caucasian Region in Puti DetalizatsiiStratigraphicheskoi Skhem I PaleogeographicheskikhReconstruktsii (Fundamentals of Detalization of Strati�graphic Schemes and Paleogeographic Reconstruc�tions), Moscow: GEOS, 2001, pp. 210–223.

5. Berggren, W.A. and Pearson, P.N., A Revised Tropicalto Subtropical Paleogene Planktonic Foraminiferalzonation, Journ. Foraminiferal Res., 2005, vol. 35,no. 4, pp. 279–298.

6. Bugrova, E.M., Zakrevskaya, E.Yu. and Tabachni�kova, I.P., New data on Biostratigraphy of the Paleo�gene of the eastern Crimea, Stratigraphy. Geol. Corr.,2002, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 83–93. Bukry, D., Low�lati�tude Coccolith Biostratigraphic Zonation, InitialReport. of the Deep Sea Drilling Project 15, Washington:U.S Government Printing Office, 1973. pp. 685–703.

7. Bukry, D., Coccolith and Silicoflagellate Stratigraphy,Northwestern Pacific Ocean, Initial Report. of the DeepSea Drilling Project 32, Washington: U.S. GovernmentPrinting Office, 1975, pp. 677–701.

8. Catuneanu, O., Abreu, V., Bhattacharya, J.P., et al.,Towards the standardization of sequence Stratigraphy,Earth Scien. Rev., 2009, no. 92, pp. 1–33.

9. Kapellos, Ch. and Schaub, H., L’llerdien dans lesAlpes, dans les Pyrenees et en Crimee. Correlation dezones a grands Foraminiferes et a Nannoplancton, Bull.Soc. Geol. France., 1975, issue 7, vol. 17, no. 2,pp. 148–161.

10. Golev, B.T. and Andreeva�Grigorovich, A.S., Nummu�litides and Nanoplankton of the Paleogene Section ofthe Town of Belokamensk (Inkerman) in the Crimea,Paleont. Sbornik., 1982, no. 19, pp. 97–106.

11. Kopaevich, L.F., Alisova, E.A., Nikishin, A.M., andYakovishina, E.V., The Eocene Nummulitic Bank inthe Crimea, Vestn. Mosc. Un�ta, 2008, no.3, issue 4(Geologiya), pp. 64–66.

12. Kopaevich, L.F., Lygina, E.A., Yakovishina, E.V., andShalimov, I.V., The Danish deposits of the Crimea:Facial Characteristics and Conditions of Sedimenta�tion, Vestn. Mosc. Un�ta, 2010, no. 4, issue 4(Geologiya), [in press].

13. Martini, E., Standard Tertiary and Quaternary calcare�ous nannoplankton zonation in Proceed. of the SecondPlanktonic Conference, Roma, 2., Rome: EdizioniTechnoscienza, 1971, pp. 739–785.

14. Nemkov, G.K. and Barkhatova, N.N., Nummulitides,Assilines and Operculines of the Crimea, in Proc. Geol.Museum of the USSR, 1961, vol. 5, pp. 7–22.

15. Nikishin, A.M., Alekseev, A.S., Baraboshkin, E.Yu.,et al., Geologicheskaya Istoriya BakhchisaraiskogoRaiona Kryma (The History of the Geological Develop�ment of the Bakhchisaraysky region of the Crimea),Moscow: Izd�vo Mosc. Un�ta, 2006.

16. Portnaya, V.L., Diskotsikliny Eocenovykh OtlozheniiKryma i ikh Biostratigraphicheskoe Znachenie (The Dis�cocyclines of the Eocene Deposits of the Crimea andtheir Biostratigraphic Significance), Moscow: Izd�voMosc. Un�ta, 1974.

17. Practical Guide to Microfauna. Cenozoic foraminifera.,ed. by E.M. Bugrova, vol. 8, Saint�Petersburg: Izd�voVSEGEI, 2005.

18. Shutskaya, E.K., Stratigraphy, Foraminifera and Paleo�geography of Late Paleogene of the Crimea, Pre�Cau�casian Region and the Western Area of the central Asia,Proc. VNIIGRI, 1970, vol. 70.

19. Voloshin, A.M. and Nemkov, G.I., Eocene in Geology ofthe USSR. Crimea. Geological description, vol. 8, issue 1,Moscow: Nedra, 1969, pp. 208–223.

20. Zakrevskaya, E.Yu., Assiliny, Operkuliny and Raniko�talii Kryma I ikh Biostratigraphicheskoe Znachenie(Assilines, Operculines and Ranikotalii of the Crimeaand Their Biostratigraphic significance), Moscow:Nauka, 1993.