Post on 11-Mar-2023
www.elsevier.com/locate/margeo
Marine Geology 221
Editorial
Miocene to Recent tectonic evolution of the eastern Mediterranean:
New pieces of the old Mediterranean puzzle
Ali E. Aksu a,T, Jeremy Hall a, Cenk YaltVrak b
aDepartment of Earth Sciences, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John’s, Newfoundland, Canada A1B 3X5bIstanbul Technical University, Faculty of Mines, Department of Geological Engineering, Ayazaga, Istanbul 80626, Turkey
Received 5 October 2004; received in revised form 17 March 2005; accepted 17 March 2005
1. Introduction
The Mediterranean Sea and its surrounding land
mass (Fig. 1) have long been recognized as an
excellent bnatural laboratoryQ for the study of funda-
mental plate tectonic processes, including rifting,
passive margin development, contraction and associ-
ated subduction, ophiolite emplacement and orogene-
sis, and as such it is one of the most extensively studied
regions of the World (e.g., Hsu et al., 1975; Dixon and
Robertson, 1984; Kastens et al., 1990; Emeis et al.,
1996; Comas et al., 1996; Robertson, 1998; McClusky
et al., 2000). The Late Cretaceous to Holocene tectonic
evolution of the eastern Mediterranean region is
extremely complex and controversial, and several
commonly conflicting hypotheses have been pro-
posed. The scope of this special issue does not permit
a full discussion of these hypotheses: we refer the
reader to Robertson (1998) for a review. However,
there is general agreement that the eastern Mediterra-
nean evolved as a small ocean basin during the Late
Triassic (Robertson and Dixon, 1984; Robertson et al.,
1991). This embryonic ocean achieved its maximum
0025-3227/$ - see front matter D 2005 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.margeo.2005.03.014
T Corresponding author.
E-mail address: aaksu@sparky2.esd.mun.ca (A.E. Aksu).
width during the mid-Cretaceous. At this time, several
separate Neotethyan strands were active, creating east–
west trending basins and their intervening continental
fragments (i.e., Sakarya, Pelagonian, KVrYehir, east
Tauride and Menderes–Tauride, Puturge and Bitlis
blocks). A major change in the relative motion of
Eurasian and African Plates occurred in the Late
Cretaceous from slow sinistral shear and separation
(rifting) to rapid north–south convergence, which
caused the active spreading ridges to collapse (Rob-
ertson and Dixon, 1984). During the Late Cretaceous
to Early Tertiary, several internally parallel subduction
zones developed, which led to the development of
intra-oceanic arcs and their subsequent emplacement
as ophiolites as convergence ensued. Progressive
convergence of African and Eurasian Plates in the
Tertiary resulted in a protracted and complex terrain
accretion, closing the northern strands of the Neo-
tethyan Ocean, leaving only the southernmost strand.
Thus, the present-day eastern Mediterranean Sea is
the last remnants of the Neotethys Ocean, which
evolved through a complex rifting that took place in
the Cretaceous (Moores et al., 1984; Robertson, 1998).
There is general agreement that the eastern Mediterra-
nean has been in a state of diachronous collision since
the Late Cretaceous. Although a number of divergent
(2005) 1–13
Fig. 1. Simplified tectonic map of the eastern Mediterranean Sea and surrounding regions, compiled from Xengfr and YVlmaz (1981), Hancock
and Barka (1981), Jongsma et al. (1985, 1987), Dewey et al. (1986), Mascle et al. (2000), Zitter et al. (2003) and Salamon et al. (2003). Note
that the position of several plate boundaries and the origin of particular structures are still controversial.
A.E. Aksu et al. / Marine Geology 221 (2005) 1–132
hypotheses exists in the details of this protracted
history of contraction, there is also agreement that the
contraction is associated with the consumption of the
Neotethyan oceanic crust in a series of north- and
south-directed subduction zones throughout the Cen-
ozoic, leading to the development of the Alpine
Mountains across southeastern Europe, and the evo-
lution of the small, elongated land-locked basin, the
eastern Mediterranean Sea. The present-day tectonic
framework of the eastern Mediterranean is controlled
by the latest phase of this protracted diachronous
collision between the African and Eurasian plates, and
the displacements of the smaller Arabian and Aegean–
Anatolian Microplates (Fig. 1). The final collision of
the Arabian Microplate with the Eurasian Plate in the
Late Miocene along the Bitlis–Zagros fold–thrust belt
initiated the west-directed tectonic escape of the
Aegean–Anatolian Microplate along two intra-conti-
nental transform faults: the North Anatolian and East
Anatolian Transform Faults (Xengfr et al., 1985;
Dewey et al., 1986). The North Anatolian Transform
Fault moves dextrally, while the East Anatolian
Transform Fault shows a complementary sinistral
motion (Fig. 1). To the west, the Aegean–Anatolian
Microplate is colliding with the Apulia–Adriatic plat-
form (Underhill, 1989), which forced the microplate to
progressively rotate toward the free face along the
Hellenic Arc (Taymaz et al., 1991; Mann, 1997). Thus
the westward displacement of the Aegean–Anatolian
Microplate and its counterclockwise rotation is driven
by both the north–northwest pushing of the Arabian
Microplate as well as the pulling of the subducting
African Plate beneath the Hellenic Arc (Reilinger et
al., 1997; McClusky et al., 2000). Plate tectonic studies
A.E. Aksu et al. / Marine Geology 221 (2005) 1–13 3
based on global seafloor spreading and earthquake slip
vectors show that the African Plate is presently moving
in a north–northeast direction relative to the Eurasian
Plate at a rate of 10 mm/yr, whereas the Arabian
Microplate is moving in a north–northwest direction at
a rate of ~18–25 mm/yr (Jestin et al., 1994; McClusky
et al., 2000, 2003). The differential motion between the
African Plate and the Arabian Microplate is accom-
modated by the sinistral, transpressional Dead Sea
Transform Fault. The boundary between the African
Plate and the Aegean–Anatolian Microplate (as
defined by the edge of the overriding plate) is
delineated by the Hellenic Arc and the Pliny–Strabo
Trenches in the west and the Florence Rise, Cyprus
Arc and the Tartus Ridge in the east (Fig. 1). The
western and central segments of the two arcs are nearly
perpendicular to the relative motion of the African and
Anatolian Plate, forming the subduction sutures,
whereas the Pliny and Strabo Trenches and Tartus
Ridge are sub-parallel to the slip vector, with a
predominantly sinistral transform motion.
The eastern Mediterranean region is a one of the
greatest geological jig-saw puzzles. Despite extensive
local and regional studies, significant controversies
still exist about the Late Miocene–Recent kinematic
Fig. 2. Simplified bathymetry of the eastern Mediterranean Sea from the
showing locations indicated in text. MKFZ=Misis–Kyrenia Fault Zone, A
evolution of the region, particularly the timing and
style of deformation, and the temporal and spatial
distribution of strain, as well as the nature and
thickness of the crust across the floor of the eastern
Mediterranean Sea. Lack of space precludes a full-
scale discussion of these controversies, and only a few
examples will be given. The exact position of the
boundary between the African Plate and the Aegean–
Anatolian Microplate remains controversial. Vidal et
al. (2000) suggested that the eastern segment of the
Anatolian–African plate boundary is situated between
Cyprus and Eratosthenes Seamounts, running along
the junction of the Hecateus Ridge and the Levantine
Basin. Vidal et al. (2000) suggested that further to the
east the plate boundary is not a sharp discontinuity,
but it is delineated by two northeast-trending linea-
ments: the Latakia and Larnaka Ridges in the south
and north, respectively (Figs. 1 and 2). Others have
suggested that the eastern portion of the Anatolian–
African plate boundary is delineated by a single zone,
represented by the east–west trending bathymetric
escarpment east of the Hecateus Ridge which links the
arcuate Latakia Ridge its northeast trending continu-
ation, the Tartus Ridge (Fig. 2; Kempler and
Garfunkel, 1994; Ben-Avraham et al., 1995; Robert-
International Bathymetric Chart of the Mediterranean (IOC, 1981),
LR=Amanos–Larnaka Ridge, HR=Hecataeus Ridge.
A.E. Aksu et al. / Marine Geology 221 (2005) 1–134
son, 1998). In a recent study, Mascle et al. (2000)
showed the presence of a belt of N1458E trending,
crustal-scale right-lateral transtensional faults offshore
Egypt that bound thick-sediment-filled graben, and
extend southward to obliquely transect the eastern Nile
deep-sea fan. They speculated the presence of north-
trending relays that connect this fault system with the
Gulf of Suez rift zone. Mascle et al. (2000) suggested
that this fault zone probably defines the western
boundary of a newly delineated Sinai–Levantine
Microplate which represents the northeastern segment
of the African craton disconnected from the African
plate as a consequence of the collision between the
Eratosthenes Seamount and the Island of Cyprus. They
showed that this microplate moves independently from
the surrounding African Plate, and the Arabian and
Anatolian–Aegean Microplates, along the Dead Sea
Transform Fault to the east, the Cyprus Arc to the north
and the Suez Rift System in the west–southwest. The
position of the plate boundary along the western
segment of the Cyprus Arc (i.e., Florence Rise) is also
controversial. Robertson (1998) placed this boundary
along the Florence Rise and linked it with the Cyprus
Arc. However, Papazachos and Papaioannou (1999)
documented the presence of a major north–northeast
striking right-lateral transform fault with a thrust
component offshore western Cyprus, and suggested
that this fault defines a relay between the Florence Rise
and the Cyprus Arc.
Similarly, the nature and thickness of the crust
beneath the eastern Mediterranean Sea remains con-
troversial. For example, Makris et al. (1983) showed
that the continental crust is N25 km-thick, with P-
wave velocities of 6.0F0.2 km s�1 beneath the Island
of Cyprus and the Eratosthenes Seamount. They
showed that the Levantine Basin contains ~12 km
of sedimentary fill, overlying a ~12 km of crustal
material with velocities of 6.7 km s�1, and suggested
that the crust here is either oceanic or attenuated
continental in character. Similarly, de Voogd et al.
(1992) used refraction data to show that the crust in
the Herodotus Basin is ~10 km-thick, which is
overlain by an approximately 10 km-thick sedimen-
tary succession. They interpreted the crust as oceanic
or thinned continental in character. However, Hirsch
et al. (1995) suggested that the crust in the eastern
Mediterranean Sea south of the Eratosthenes Sea-
mounts is continental in character.
Large convergent margins, such as the eastern
Mediterranean region consist of chains of arcs (e.g.
Hellenic and Cyprus Arcs and Florence Rise; Fig. 1).
Many studies have concentrated on the development
of the arcs themselves rather than on the links between
them (e.g., Kenyon et al., 1982; Ben-Avraham et al.,
1995; Bohnhoff et al., 2001; Laigle et al., 2002;
Papazachos et al., 2002; Ten Veen and Kleinspehn,
2003). However, the links or corners between the arcs
are of fundamental importance to the evolution of
these systems because they are the focus of changes in
plate kinematics and stress field, thus providing likely
sites for the development of triple junctions, changes
in polarity of subduction and possibly ophiolite
obductions. Excessive strain at these locations may
result in extreme topographic features some of which
may be complementary, such as deep depressions (e.g.
Rhodes and Finike Basins), tilted blocks and struc-
tural highs (e.g. Anaximander Mountains). At the
final stages of ocean closure, the corners become
embayments preserved in outline during continental
collision. Our understanding of ancient orogens such
as the Appalachians (Williams, 1979), in which the
embayments are preserved as reentrants, thus depends
on a knowledge of how such reentrants evolve in
currently active systems. Recent studies on the
Anaximander Mountains and the Rhodes Basin
situated around the junction between the Hellenic
Arc and the Florence Rise reveal a complicated
structural framework (Woodside et al., 2002; Zitter
et al., 2003). For example, Woodside et al. (2002)
suggested that the Anatolian and African Plates along
the Florence Rise are more or less sutured, and that a
~15 km-wide arc-parallel dextral wrench zone and its
associated positive flower structures are the predom-
inant structural elements of the central and western
Florence Rise. They further noted that there is no
evidence for any typical subduction along the arcuate
trend of the Florence Rise. However, the well defined
Benioff zone delineated across the Florence Rise by
Papazachos and Papaioannou (1999) suggests that the
subduction of the African Plate beneath the Aegean–
Anatolian Microplate must have slowed-down or
stopped only recently. Zitter et al. (2003) showed that
the eastern Anaximander Mountains have affinity
with the Florence Rise, where the tectonic framework
is characterized by an anastomosing network of faults,
pop-ups, and positive flower structures. They pointed
A.E. Aksu et al. / Marine Geology 221 (2005) 1–13 5
out that the western Anaximander Mountains are
related to the opening of the Rhodes and Finike
Basins, associated with the transtensional regime (i.e.,
Pliny–Strabo Trenches, and their onland extension the
Fethiye–Burdur Fault Zone) that dominated the region
since the Pliocene. Zitter et al. (2003) pointed out
similarities between the Hellenic Arc and the Cyprus
Arc, and proposed that dextral wrench faults occupy
the western margins of these arcs, whereas sinistral
strike-slip faults occupy their eastern limbs. Finally, in
a recent study Poisson et al. (2003) showed that the
Aksu Thrust along the eastern margin of the Isparta
Angle is a prominent Late Miocene–Mid-Pliocene
fault system with a notable dextral strike-slip compo-
nent. They indicated that the Aksu Thrust is a
complex imbricate fan consisting of several large
thrust sheets and pointed out the occurrence of
ophiolitic slivers within at least one thrust panel to
suggest that the system is deep rooted.
2. Special issue
2.1. Marine studies
This special issue is dedicated to the Miocene to
Recent tectonic evolution of the eastern Mediterra-
nean Sea and its surrounding landmasses. It aims to
provide new pieces to the continuously evolving old
geological puzzle of the Mediterranean, through
interpretation of new data from regions that were
least studied in previous years. The issue consists of
two parts: Part 1 includes 13 papers which describe
the morphological, tectonic and sedimentary architec-
ture of various specific regions using marine geo-
physical and geological data, whereas Part 2 includes
2 papers which describe the geology of the Isparta
Angle (Fig. 2).
Hall et al. (a) use high-resolution multi-channel
seismic reflection profiles to show that the Latakia
Basin evolved in two distinct tectonic stages: a
Miocene phase of southeast-directed contraction
culminated in the latest Miocene, and a progressive
transition to a phase of partitioned contraction and
extension related to the initiation of strike slip along
marine extensions of the eastern Anatolian Transform
Fault in the early-middle Pliocene (Fig. 2). They
further document that the Miocene fold–thrust belt
comprises two arcuate culminations enclosing a
Miocene piggy back depocentre situated on the
backlimb of the Amanos–Larnaka ramp anticline. In
the early-middle Miocene, this piggy-back basin was
part of a much wider foredeep that also encompassed
the Miocene successions of the Cilicia–Adana Basin
complex to the north (Fig. 3). The Misis–Kyrenia
fold–thrust belt evolved in the Tortonian, effectively
dividing the foredeep into two large piggy-back
basins. Their data demonstrate that a fundamental
change in kinematic regime occurred during the
Messinian to early Pliocene involving the onset of
strike-slip movements resulting in transtension along
the northeast-trending portion of the main lineaments
bounding the Latakia Basin and continued contraction
across the east-trending portion of the lineaments. In
the northeastern portion of the Latakia Basin south-
east-directed thrusting ceased in the early Messinian
and was followed in the early Pliocene by the
development of horst and graben structures, bounded
by faults linking onland with the strands of the East
Anatolian Transform Fault.
Calon et al. (a) examine the Neogene stratigraphic
and structural evolution of the eastern Mesaoria Basin
using multi-channel seismic reflection profiles from
the eastern marine extension of the basin into the
Outer Latakia Basin (Figs. 2 and 3). They show that
the region includes three major tectonic elements: (1)
the Troodos–Larnaka culmination is a large ophiolite-
cored ramp anticline developed above a deep-seated
S-verging thrust, complemented by a footwall imbri-
cate fan system extending into the Cyprus Basin; (2)
the Outer Latakia Basin is a large piggy-back basin,
carried on the northern flank of the Troodos–Larnaka
culmination and (3) the Kyrenia fold–thrust belt is
developed as a S-verging trailing imbricate fan
system. They further show that these three tectonic
elements form part of a crustal-scale, south-directed,
linked thrust system, which has a protracted tectonic
history with major pulses of contraction in the Eo-
Oligocene, the late Miocene and the middle Plio-
Quaternary, and that this system extends southward
well into the Cyprus Basin and probably links with the
subduction zone between the African plate and the
Anatolian microplate. Patterns of thrust activity in this
linked thrust system exclude models of southward-
migration of the plate boundary from mid-Tertiary to
Recent. Instead, the upper plate is viewed as a broad
Fig. 3. Map of the Eastern Mediterranean Sea and environs showing the areas discussed by different authors in this volume. 1—Hall et al., a;
2—Calon et al., a; 3—Calon et al., b; 4—Aksu et al., a; 5—Aksu et al., b; 6—Burton-Ferguson et al.; 7—Bridge et al.; 8—Hall et al., b; 9—IYler
et al.; 10—Tibor and Ben-Avraham; 11—Ergun et al.; 12—Ben-Gai et al.; 13—Ulug et al.; 14—Innocenti et al; and 15—SakVnc and YaltVrak
(includes the Aegean and Marmara Seas).
A.E. Aksu et al. / Marine Geology 221 (2005) 1–136
zone of diffuse convergence, distributed across a
number of active fold–thrust zones.
Calon et al. (b) study the Neogene stratigraphic and
structural evolution of the Mesaoria Basin and
Kyrenia Range using multi-channel seismic reflection
profiles from their western and eastern marine
extensions (Figs. 2 and 3). They show that the region
north of the front of the Troodos–Larnaka culmination
constitutes a crustal-scale S-verging, thick-skinned
linked imbricate thrust system comprising most of the
forearc region north of the present-day Cyprus Arc. In
the Eocene, thrust activity gave rise to the prominent
growth of the Troodos–Larnaka culmination and
concurrent imbrication further north in the forearc
region, creating the root of the Kyrenia fold–thrust
belt. Northward retreat of the active thrust front in the
Oligocene–Miocene led to the development of a
foredeep across the root of the Kyrenia fold–thrust
belt with a prominent depositional foredeep ramp
situated at the current front of this belt. They further
note that crustal contraction continued in the Miocene
along the front of the Troodos–Larnaka culmination
leading to the progressive shoaling of the basin,
carried on the backlimb of this culmination, and that
in the late Miocene, thrust activity became widespread
in the forearc region with structural contraction being
focussed on the Kyrenia fold–thrust belt. Pliocene
thrust activity in the forearc region is primarily
focussed on the Kyrenia fold–thrust belt with much
uplift occurring in the mid-late Pliocene, but continu-
ing to the present. The Mesaoria Basin evolved in the
Miocene to Pliocene as a piggy-back basin. Their data
A.E. Aksu et al. / Marine Geology 221 (2005) 1–13 7
negate earlier models that postulate a phase of crustal
extension in the forearc region during the Oligocene
to mid-late Pliocene.
Aksu et al. (a) use high-resolution multi-channel
seismic reflection profiles to show that the deposition
of the Miocene successions in the Cilicia–Adana basin
complex occurred within a foredeep, south of the
arcuate Tauride fold–thrust belt, which delineated a
broad syntaxis, and that the Misis–Kyrenia fault zone
defined the northernmost of a number of smaller
thrust culminations developed within this foredeep
(Figs. 2 and 3). They suggest that the Adana and Inner
Cilicia Basins became emergent during the Tortonian,
when the western portion of the piggy-back basin
retained a marine connection. The entire region
became emergent during the Messinian salinity crisis,
when a thick succession of evaporites were deposited
in Cilicia and southern Adana Basins. They indicate
that the late Plio-Quaternary Cilicia–Adana Basin
complex evolved as an asymmetric piggyback basin
on the hanging-wall of the large south-verging Misis–
Kyrenia thrust culmination. They document that on
the Misis–Kyrenia segment of the culmination thrust
activity ceased in early Messinian, whereas on the
Kyrenia segment it continued to the present, and that
this shift in kinematics is expressed by the develop-
ment of the NE–SW trending steep faults with
extensional separations bounding the Plio-Quaternary
depocentre in Adana and Inner Cilicia Basins. They
show that these basement-rooted faults are incompat-
ible with the contractional regime that existed in this
part of the basin complex during the Miocene, and
that in the Outer Cilicia Basin the incompatibility
between a domain of continued south-directed fold–
thrust activity and uplift on the Kyrenia Range and a
domain of extension associated with the development
of Plio-Quaternary depocentre indicates that plate
strains are strongly partitioned across the E–W
trending southern basin-bounding fault system along
the southern margin of the Outer Cilicia Basin. They
suggest that the progressive westward displacement of
the Tauride block within the Anatolian microplate
created a localised transtensional regime within the
Inner Cilicia and Adana Basins, suggesting the
presence of hard intra-plate fault boundaries centred
along the Misis–Kyrenia horst block and the southern
basin-bounding fault system. The northern basin-
bounding fault systems, including the Kozan fault in
Cilicia Basin are large antithetic structures linked to
the master faults. The westward pull-out of the
Tauride block is related to the overall westward
escape of the Anatolian microplate during the latest
Miocene to early Pliocene, whereas the continued
contraction south of the basin complex across Cyprus
is related to the evolving collision and under-plating
of the continental micro-fragment, the Eratosthenes
Seamount. They propose that the southern master
fault of the Outer Cilicia Basin primarily functions
now as a strike-slip boundary, separating a contrac-
tional microplate domain to the south from a trans-
tensional microplate domain to the north.
Aksu et al. (b) use multi-channel seismic reflec-
tion profiles and biostratigraphic data from explora-
tion wells to show that the Iskenderun Basin evolved
as a broad depocentre during the early Miocene
between the tectonically active front of the Taurides
in the west and northwest and the uplifted Kzldag–
Hatay ophiolite complex in the south and southeast
(Figs. 2 and 3). The eastern portion of this large
Miocene basin is represented by a seismic strati-
graphic unit characterized by two westerly dipping
tilted wedges which display progressive onlap to the
east over the ophiolitic basement. This suggests that
the unit developed as a growth-stratal wedge in a
piggy-back basin on the trailing limb of a large
easterly transported ophiolite thrust sheet. The well
data show that the emplacement of this thrust sheet
occurred progressively from the Serravallian to the
late Messinian. In the eastern portion of the
Iskenderun Basin, the presence of the lower subunit
in the footwall of the ophiolite-cored thrust culmi-
nation and the presence of a growth strata wedge of
the upper subunit onlaping the forelimb of the thrust
culmination, show that the main phase of thrust
activity initiated later in the Serravallian with uplift
continuing to the Tortonian. The absence of Messi-
nian evaporites over the crest of the culmination
demonstrates that the structure was an erosive
paleohigh in the Messinian. The absence of lower-
most Pliocene strata in eastern Iskenderun Basin
suggests that this region remained emergent at that
time, whereas deposition occurred without significant
interruption in the west over the backlimb portion of
the culmination. They show that contractional
deformation in the Iskenderun Basin had ceased
prior to the development of the M-reflector (inferred
A.E. Aksu et al. / Marine Geology 221 (2005) 1–138
as Messinian in age) as an erosional unconformity,
and that the transition between the late Miocene
fold–thrust structures and the thick Plio-Quaternary
succession along the northwestern margin of the
Iskenderun Basin is defined by a fundamental
angular unconformity, developed by deep erosion
of the leading edge of the fold–thrust belt, repre-
sented by the M-reflector. They show that the Plio-
Quaternary forms a thick, relatively undisturbed
wedge which shows east- and south-directed onlap
over the northwestern flank of the KVzVldag–Hatay
ophiolitic basement high and the southeastern flank
of the Misis fold–thrust belt. They infer that the
Iskenderun Basin was primarily a Miocene intra-
montane depression that was passively filled during
the Plio-Quaternary by predominantly deltaic sed-
imentation, with extensional faults providing minor
accommodation space.
Burton-Ferguson et al. use multichannel seismic
reflection profiles from the Adana Basin to show that
a south-verging linked imbricate thrust stack existed
across the northern portion of the Adana Basin prior
to the deposition of lower Miocene sedimentary
successions (Figs. 2 and 3). Following the develop-
ment of the basement-cored fold–thrust belt the
region was irregularly denuded (B2 unconformity)
with paleohighs and lows at least in part delineating
the axis of hanging wall culminations and intervening
structural depressions between forelimbs and back-
limbs of the stacked sheets, with residual topographic
relief locally reaching 1500 m. The stratigraphic and
structural architecture of the lower to middle Mio-
cene successions in the Adana Basin, records a
significant phase of tectonic subsidence that initiated
in the early Miocene, followed by deposition of a
thick deepwater succession in an under-filled basin
and then by relatively rapid uplift giving rise to basin
inversion and erosion prior to or during the early
Tortonian. The late Miocene is a period of global
eustatic sea-level fall, initiating in the Tortonian. The
well-documented rapid transition from middle Mio-
cene deep water deposits to Tortonian fluvio-deltaic
and terrestrial deposits in the Adana Basin can in part
be accounted for by global sea-level fall. They show
that the transition from deep water to fluvio-deltaic
sedimentation in the early Tortonian recorded the
combined effects of a global eustatic sea-level fall
and regional tectonic uplift, presumably related to
renewed activity in the Tauride orogen to the north. It
led to widespread erosion giving rise to a smooth
unconformity surface in most of the Adana Basin.
The stratigraphic and structural relationships suggest
that the onset of the east-directed thrusting in the
trailing portion of the Misis fold–thrust belt occurred
sometime during the lower Tortonian, coinciding
with the switch from marine to terrestrial sedimenta-
tion. Truncation of the folded–thrusted successions of
two seismic stratigraphic units across the trailing
thrust sheets marks the effect of progressive erosion
as the thrust sheets were uplifted above base level.
This portion of the unconformity is thus the
structurally higher portion of a syntectonic uncon-
formity that falls from the region of main thrust
culminations westward into the depocentre sited on
the main backlimb of the Misis fold–thrust belt.
Much of the Tortonian deposition took place within
this trailing piggy-back basin and the easterly onlap
and the westerly tilt of this succession mark the
progressive uplift of the fold–thrust belt during the
remainder of the Tortonian. Terrestrial and fluvio-
deltaic deposition in the Tortonian evolved in the
Messinian with the deposition of mixed evaporite–
carbonate–clastics succession in the Adana Basin. A
local unconformity across the Tortonian succession
marks the cessation of the fold–thrust activity in the
east and ensuing erosion across the fill of the
Tortonian piggy-back basin. A subcrop marks the
edge of deposition of the Messinian succession in a
paleotopographic depression situated between the
Tortonian Misis fold–thrust belt in the east and the
paleoslope over the front of the reactivated Tauride
fold–thrust belt in the north. Structural and strati-
graphic relationships along the western margin of
Adana Basin suggest that the edge of deposition of
the evaporite succession was probably controlled by
the development of the Kozan Fault zone. Plio-
Quaternary subsidence created the accommodation
space that allowed rapid delta progradation.
Bridge et al. use high-resolution seismic reflection
profiles from the Adana–Cilicia and Iskenderun–
Latakia Basins to show the presence of a salt-involved
linked extensional–contractional fault system,
detached at the base of the evaporite unit (Figs. 2
and 3). The extensional domain is developed within
the thick proximal part of the Plio-Quaternary delta
succession in each basin. It is characterized by an
A.E. Aksu et al. / Marine Geology 221 (2005) 1–13 9
imbricate fan of listric normal faults which cut the
entire delta succession, and delineate two turtle-back
growth anticlines and their intervening syncline. The
faults sole into a gently southwesterly dipping detach-
ment surface, which lie within the Messinian evapor-
ite succession. In the inner basins, salt is largely
evacuated toward the outer basins, but occurs as
rollers in the lower part of the footwalls of listric
extensional faults, and as small subdued pillows
beneath turtle-back growth anticlines. A large salt
wall is developed at the toe of the delta complex in
both basins. The narrow synclines between the two
turtle back growth anticlines record a more compli-
cated history of rise and fall of the salt related to the
switch in vergence of the extensional fault fan. Two
wide marginal synclines are present within the
Pliocene and Quaternary units on both flanks of the
salt wall, and represent peripheral sinks with complex
growth histories associated with a complicated history
of rise and fall of the salt. Locally, small segments of
salt welds are present near the base of the salt wall.
The contractional domain is characterized by a
relatively thin Plio-Quaternary cover overlying a
relatively uniform, 500–800 m-thick salt substrate,
with a series of salt-cored folds which are commonly
associated with thrusts. The salt-related growth anti-
clines include symmetrical folds as well as highly
asymmetrical thrust-related folds with vergence to
either north or south. In other examples, symmetrical
anticlines are clearly broken by two oppositely
verging thrusts which climb up-section from the salt
crest. They further show that the halokinetic structures
in the Cilicia and Latakia Basins not only display a
remarkable resemblance to detached and linked
systems of extensional and contractional fault fans
as documented in classical salt provinces, but also
display significant similarities to scaled experiments
with analogue materials simulating the flow of a
brittle overburden on top of a ductile substrate with
synchronous development of extensional and contrac-
tional fault systems detached in the ductile substrate.
However, a number of differences also exist, which
may arise from several factors, including the nature of
ductility contrast between the ductile portion of the
evaporite layer and the supra-salt succession, the
thickness ratio of overburden to evaporite unit and the
rate of progradation and the nature of sediment
distribution during the evolution of the delta complex.
Hall et al. (b) use high-resolution seismic reflection
profiles from the Cyprus Basin and Tartus Ridge to
show that the active deformation front between the
African and Anatolian Plates is delineated by the
northeast–southwest trending Cyprus Arc (Figs. 2 and
3). They show that the Cyprus Arc is characterized by
three morphologically different structures. The defor-
mation front is dominated by the Latakia Ridge, a
steep narrow high, which merges gradually with the
lower slope of the broad Hecataeus Rise in the west
and extends to the northern Levantine coast in the east
where the expression of the ridge changes to a number
of narrow, northeast-trending ridges and basins. They
document the timing of deformation using growth
stratal architectures on the flanks of the major
structures and delineated two main phases of defor-
mation: a compressional regime dominated from
Eocene to latest Miocene, whereas a strike-slip regime
dominated in the Pliocene–Quaternary.
IYler et al. use high-resolution seismic reflection
profiles from the Antalya Basin to document a two
phase kinematic history in the region (Figs. 2 and 3).
The first phase of deformation occurred in the
Miocene, and is characterized by five northwest-
trending, southwest-directed fold–thrust structures.
They show that a fundamental change in the kine-
matic regime occurred during the transition from the
late Miocene to Pliocene, when the strain was strongly
partitioned geographically. They document that the
second phase of deformation occurred in the middle-
late Pliocene to Recent and it was restricted to two
distinct domains. A northwest-trending extensional–
transtensional fault fan involving the Plio-Quaternary
succession occupies the northern portion of the
Antalya Basin, and a northwest-trending transpres-
sional domain, involving the middle-upper Plio-
Quaternary succession, occupies the southwestern
portion of the deep Antalya Basin. They argue that
the extensional domain developed in response to the
westward displacement of the Tauride block associ-
ated with the westward escape of the eastern segment
of the Aegean–Anatolian Microplate in the latest
Miocene to early Pliocene, whereas the transpres-
sional domain developed in response to the collision
of the Eratosthenes Seamount with Cyprus.
Tibor and Ben-Avraham use paleodepth recon-
structions of the late Tertiary Levantine continental
margin off Israel through one- and two-dimensional
A.E. Aksu et al. / Marine Geology 221 (2005) 1–1310
quantitative basin analysis, to indicate tilting of the
deep basin in north–south and east–west directions, as
well as westward progradation of the continental shelf
in the southern Levantine margin (Figs. 2 and 3).
They note that the variation in style of deposition
along the Levantine margin may be the result of the
decreasing influence of the Nile to the north and the
increasing influence of the nearby plate boundaries.
They show that, in general, the bathymetry of the
Levantine margin from the deep basin to the base of
slope has become shallower since early Neogene.
They ascribe this general filling of the Eastern
Mediterranean to a time when the sediment supply
from the continental margin exceeds subsidence. They
show that a deep basin existed in pre-Messinian time,
implying that the deposition of the evaporites during
the Messinian desiccation of the Mediterranean Sea
occurred in a deep basinal setting.
Ergun et al. used existing gravity data to show that
the Bouguer gravity anomaly reaches its maximum
values over the Island of Cyprus, which probably
reflects the high-density rocks of the Troodos Com-
plex (Figs. 2 and 3). High Bouguer anomalies across
the Eratosthenes Seamount are ascribed to the uplift of
the oceanic crust in this region. Interpretation of the
gravity data suggested that the crust beneath the
Herodotus and Rhodes Basins is probably oceanic in
character, and that the Anaximander Mountains and
Eratosthenes Seamount represent continental frag-
ments, similar to the Island of Cyprus. There are no
linear magnetic anomalies in the Mediterranean, but
those over the Eratosthenes Seamount, across the zone
extending from the Island of Cyprus to the Antalya
Basin probably indicate the presence of ophiolitic
bodies.
Ben-Gai et al. use seismic reflection profiles, well
data and two-dimensional forward stratigraphic
simulation to determine the evolution of the south-
eastern Levantine Basin since the Messinian salinity
crisis (Figs. 2 and 3). They assume that the thick
Messinian evaporite sequence was deposited in a
shallow-water environment, albeit a topographically
deep basin. They show that sea-level dropped at least
800 m below its present level and may have been as
low as �1300 m, the latter value representing the
reconstructed depth of the top Messinian in the deep
part of the basin. They show that the top of the
evaporite sequence in that part of the basin was
virtually horizontal at the end of the Messinian and
thus, may be used as a regional datum. Subsidence
rates measured for the shelf and coastal plain of
Israel indicate a reduction of these rates for the
Pleistocene when compared to the Pliocene. During
the Pleistocene subsidence rates for the base slope
increased and dictated the modem physiography of
the margin. They show that in the Middle to Late
Pliocene, small scale salt movements occurred in the
deep basin, producing the fragmented and irregular
shape of the "M" horizon, which marks the top of
the evaporite sequence. The simulated rate of sedi-
ment supply indicates a constant increase over time
for the Pliocene and the Pleistocene, probably in
response to an increased influx of Nile-derived
sediments.
Ulug et al use 3.5 kHz and single channel airgun
profiles from the southeastern Aegean Sea off Turkey
to show that the continental shelf of the northeastern
Gulf of Gfkova is formed by numerous superimposed
deltaic successions (depositional sequences), separa-
ted by major erosional unconformities (Figs. 2 and 3).
During times of lowered sea-level associated with late
Quaternary glaciations, deltas prograded more than 40
km seaward from their present positions. Foreset
progradation terminated with the rise of sea level in
interglacial and post-glacial times and deltas were
relocated far inland. These major transgressions
resulted in unconformities that are correlated with
the beginning of oxygen isotope stages 9, 7, 5 and l,
and provide chronostratigraphic markers for a detailed
analysis of sedimentation patterns in the late Quater-
nary. All seismic lines show that the topset to foreset
transition of the youngest Pleistocene delta system
developed around 130–150 m below present sea-level.
Thus, the maximum Pleistocene sea-level lowering
(18 000 yr BP) was about �95 to �100 m. The
lowstand of sea-levels for isotopic stages 6, 8 and 10
was determined as 145, 190 and 235 m below present
sea-level, respectively. Paleo-shoreline positions dur-
ing isotopic stages 2, 6 and 8 suggest an overall
gradual longer-term rise of sea level, during the last
0.5 Ma in the southeastern Aegean Sea. Chronology
suggests that the Gfkova Basin is subsiding at less
than 0.2 m/1000 yr and the absolute level of the 18 ka
low-stand deposits at 105 m provides no evidence for
significant subsidence in the northeastern shelf of the
Gulf of Gfkova. Seismic reflection profiling shows
A.E. Aksu et al. / Marine Geology 221 (2005) 1–13 11
that three main directions of faults bound the Gulf of
Gfkova Basin. Subsidence rates are greatest in the
southern center of the basin and decrease northward,
so that the northern area is being tilted southward.
2.2. Related studies from onland Turkey
Innocenti et al. use geochemical data on volcanic
successions to show that in western Anatolia the
Miocene-to-present day magmatism evolved from
calc-alkaline and shoshonitic rocks (21–16 Ma) to
lamproites (16–14 Ma), and eventually into OIB-type
magmas (2–0 Ma) represented by the Kula volcanics
(Figs. 2 and 3). In the calc-alkaline and shoshonitic
association, Sr and Nd isotopic ratios and trace-
element variations suggest that the interaction with the
crust was moderate, so that the geochemistry of these
rocks is considered to reflect the heterogeneous
chemical nature of their mantle source. The ultra-
potassic and lamproitic rocks are characterized by a
high Sr and low Nd isotopic composition and are
strongly enriched in K and Rb with respect to Ba,
indicating a phlogopite-bearing lithospheric source.
The low Sr and high Nd isotopic compositions,
together with low LILE/HFSE ratios, reveal the
OIB-type nature of the Kula volcanics. The switch
from supra-subduction orogenic suites to volcanics
comes from sub-slab asthenospheric mantle. The
evolution is interpreted as being due to a dhorizontalTstretching of the slab (no slab pull break-off)
generated by different velocities in the subduction
hanging wall lithosphere. They suggested that this
triggered the extensional movement between Greece
and Turkey and the stretching into two slabs of the
NE-directed African subduction, due to the faster
southwestward slab rollback of Africa underneath
Greece relative to the slab segment below Cyprus and
Anatolia.
SakVnc and YaltVrak show that the effects of the
severing of the Atlantic–Mediterranean connection
during the ~400,000 yr Messinian event were also
observed around the northern Aegean. The suggested
that during this time, a brackish-water sea (Egemar)
developed between Paratethys in the north and the
Mediterranean in the south, which was mainly fed by
the surrounding rivers and the Paratethyan waters
that entered the sea via a connection through the Sea
of Marmara, then a bay of the Paratethys. They
showed that the sedimentary sequence deposited in
Egemar is principally formed of limestones contain-
ing brackish-water fauna (Paratethyan). They further
pointed out that there are five intercalations of
Mediterranean character within the sedimentary
sequence of the Egemar, indicating the re-establish-
ment of an Atlantic–Mediterranean connection from
time to time and, thus, replenishment of marine
waters. The Turolian is represented by continental
clastics which interdigitate with the brackish-water
cycles, implying a number of regressions. They
suggested that the Egemar became part of the eastern
Mediterranean during the transgression in early
Pliocene.
3. Concluding remarks
Where are we in our quest of better understanding
of the Mediterranean jigsaw puzzle? A review of the
published studies dealing with the Neogene and
Quaternary tectonic and kinematic evolution of the
eastern Mediterranean, including the papers in this
special issue, reveal the following salient points:
- We have a reasonably good understanding of the
styles of deformation affecting the uppermost
portion of the sedimentary pile in the eastern
Mediterranean,
- We have mapped showing the structural trends and
associations and have documented that strain is
partitioned both temporally and spatially across the
Miocene to Recent successions in the eastern
Mediterranean,
- We have successfully correlated many of the large
structures mapped in the marine areas to their
counterparts on land,
- We have used the recent advances in the global
positioning systems to determine the current motion
of the plates, microplates and crustal fragments.
What is the most important scientific problem for
the next decade dealing with the Neogene and
Quaternary tectonic and kinematic evolution of the
eastern Mediterranean? Despite a very large shallow-
penetrating (1–4 s) seismic reflection data set, it is
striking that we know very little about the nature and
thickness of the crust and the total thickness of the
A.E. Aksu et al. / Marine Geology 221 (2005) 1–1312
sedimentary successions above the crystalline base-
ment across the entire eastern Mediterranean Sea. We
believe that the next phase of scientific efforts in the
eastern Mediterranean must include (a) deep-penetra-
ting (i.e. 9–12 s) multi-channel seismic reflection
profiling along several transects extending from the
north African margin across the Hellenic and Cyprus
Arcs into the Aegean Sea in the west and the Rhodes,
Antalya, Cyrus and Latakia Basins in the east, and (b)
wide-angle seismic experiments using ocean-bottom
seismographs across the same transects to determine
the depth of Moho and the nature of the crustal
basement and uppermost mantle.
Acknowledgments
Critical evaluation of the scientific papers published
in this special volume was no small task. We are much
indebted to the following reviewers for their construc-
tive criticisms, and many suggestions which undoubt-
edly improved the manuscripts in this volume: Ali E.
Aksu (Memorial University of Newfoundland); Bedri
Alpar (Istanbul University); Joaquina Alvarez-Marron
(Institut de Ciencies de la Terra dJaume AlmeraT,Spain); Daniele Babbucci (Universita di Siena, Italy);
Zvi Ben Avraham (Tel Aviv University); Erdin Bozkurt
(Middle East Technical University); Judith Bunbury
(DurhamUniversity); Ibrahim Cemen (Oklahoma State
University); Cierd Cloetingh (Free University);
Michael Enachescu (Husky Resources); Zvi Garfunkel
(The Hebrew University of Jerusalem); Cem Gazioglu
(Istanbul University); Mario Grasso (University of
Catania); Jeremy Hall (Memorial University of New-
foundland); Richard N. Hiscott (Memorial University
of Newfoundland); M.P.A. Jackson (University of
Texas at Austin); George Jenner (Memorial University
of Newfoundland); E. John W. Jones (University
College London); Phil Kearey (University of Bristol);
Gilbert Kelling (Keele University); Jean Letouzey
(Institut Francais du Petrol); John G. Malpas (Hong
Kong University); Jean Mascle (Observatoire Ocean-
ologique de Villefranche sur mer, France); Rudi Meyer
(Memorial University of Newfoundland); Boris Nata-
lin (Istanbul Technical University); Roland Oberh7nsli(Universit7t Potsdam); David J.W. Piper (Geological
Survey of Canada-Atlantic); Andrew Pulham (Nautilus
World, Houston, USA); Muharrem Satr (Eberhard
Karls Universit7t Tubingen); Tuncay Taymaz (Istanbul
Technical University); Uri ten Brink (Woods Hole
Oceanographic Institution); Brian Whiting (Central
Washington University, USA); John Woodside (Free
University, The Netherlands); Oz YVlmaz (Anatolian
Geophysical).
References
Ben-Avraham, Z., Tibor, G., Limonov, A.F., Leybov, M.B.,
Ivanov, M.K., Torkarev, M.Y., Woodside, J.M., 1995. Structure
and tectonics of the eastern Cyprean Arc. Mar. Pet. Geol. 12,
236–271.
Bohnhoff, M., Makris, J., Papanikolaou, D., Stavrakakis, G., 2001.
Crustal investigation of the Hellenic subduction zone using wide
aperture seismic data. Tectonophysics 343, 239–262.
Comas, M.C., Zahn, R., Claus, A., et al., 1996. Proceedings of the
Ocean Drilling Program, Results, vol. 161. College Station, TX,
1023 pp.
de Voogd, B., Truffert, C., Chamot-Rooke, N., Huchon, P.,
Lallemant, S., Le Pichon, X., 1992. Two-ship deep seismic
soundings in the basins of the Eastern Mediterranean Sea
(Pasiphae cruise). Geophys. J. Int. 109, 536–552.
Dewey, J.F., Hempton, M.R., Kidd, W.S.F., Xaroglu, F., Xengfr,A.M.C., 1986. Shortening of continental lithosphere: the neo-
tectonics of eastern Anatolia—a young collision zone. In:
Coward, M.P., Ries, A.C. (Eds.), Collision Tectonics, Geo-
logical Society Special Publication, vol. 19, pp. 3–36.
Dixon, J.E., Robertson, A.H.F., 1984. The geological evolu-
tion of the Eastern Mediterranean. Spec. Publ.-Geol. Soc. 17
(824 pp.).
Emeis, K.-C., Robertson, A.H.F., Richter, C., et al., 1996.
Proceedings of the Ocean Drilling Program, Results, vol. 160.
College Station, TX, 972 pp.
Hancock, P.L., Barka, A.A., 1981. Opposed shear senses inferred
from neotectonic mesofractures systems in the North Anatolian
fault zone. J. Struct. Geol. 3, 383–392.
Hirsch, F., Flexer, A., Rosenfeld, A., Yellin-Dror, A., 1995.
Palinspastic and crustal studies of the Eastern Mediterranean.
J. Pet. Geol. 18, 149–170.
Hsu, K.J., Montadert, L., et al., 1975. Initial Reports of the Deep
Sea Drilling Project, Volume 42, Part I. U.S. Government
Printing Office, Washington. 1249 pp.
IOC International Oceanographic Commission, 1981. International
Bathymetric Chart of the Mediterranean (1:1000000 scale).
Head Department of Navigation and Oceanography, Leningrad,
USSR, 10 sheets.
Jestin, F., Huchon, P., Gaulier, J.M., 1994. The Somalia plate and
the East African rift system: present-day kinematics. Geophys. J.
Int. 116, 637–654.
Jongsma, D., van Hinte, J.E., Woodside, J.M., 1985. Geological
structure and neotectonics of the north African continental
margin south of Sicily. Mar. Pet. Geol. 2, 156–179.
Jongsma, D., Woodside, J.M., King, G.C.P., van Hinte, J.E., 1987.
The Medina Wrench: a key to the kinematics of the central and
A.E. Aksu et al. / Marine Geology 221 (2005) 1–13 13
eastern Mediterranean over the past 5 Ma. Earth Planet. Sci.
Lett. 82, 87–106.
Kastens, K.A., Mascle, J., et al., 1990. Proceedings of the Ocean
Drilling Program, Results, vol. 107. College Station, TX, 772 pp.
Kempler, D., Garfunkel, Z., 1994. Structures and kinematics in the
northeastern Mediterranean: a study of an irregular plate
boundary. Tectonophysics 234, 19–32.
Kenyon, N.H., Belderson, R.H., Stride, A.H., 1982. Detailed
tectonic trends on the central part of the Hellenic Outer Ridge
and in the Hellenic Trench System. In: Leggett, J.K. (Ed.),
Trench-Forearc Geology: Sedimentation and Tectonics on the
Modern and Ancient Active Plate Margins, Geological Society
Special Publication, vol. 10, pp. 334–343. 582 pp.
Laigle, M., Hirn, A., Sachpazi, M., Clement, C., 2002. Seismic
coupling and structure of the Hellenic subduction zone in
the Ionian Islands region. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 200 (3–4),
243–253 (30 Jun).
Makris, J., Ben-Abraham, Z., Behle, A., Ginzburg, A., Giesse, P.,
Steinmetz, L., Whitmarsh, R.B., Eleftheriou, S., 1983. Seismic
refraction profiles between Cyprus and Israel and their
interpretation. Geophys. J. R. Astron. Soc. 75, 575–591.
Mann, P., 1997. Model for the formation of large, transtensional
basins in zones of tectonic escape. Geology 25, 211–214.
Mascle, J., Benkhelil, J., Bellaiche, G., Zitter, T., Loncke, Prismed II
Scientific Party, 2000. Marine geologic evidence for a Levan-
tine–Sinai plate, a new piece of the Mediterranean puzzle.
Geology 28, 779–782.
McClusky, S.C., Balassanian, S., Barka, A., Demir, C., Ergintav, S.,
Georgiev, I., Gurkan, O., Hamburger, M., Hurst, K., Kahle, H.,
Kastens, K., Kekelidze, G., King, R., Kotzev, V., Lenk, O.,
Mahmoud, S., Mishin, A., Nadariya, M., Ouzounis, A.,
Paradissis, D., Peter, Y., Prilepin, M., Reilinger, R., Sanli, I.,
Seeger, H., Tealeb, A., Toksfz, M.N., Veis, G., 2000. Global
positioning system constraints on plate kinematics and dynam-
ics in the eastern Mediterranean and Caucasus. J. Geophys. Res.
105 (B3), 5695–5719.
McClusky, S., Reilinger, R., Mahmoud, S., Ben Sari, D., Taeleb, A.,
2003. GPS constraints on Africa (Nubia) and Arabia plate
motions. Geophys. J. Int. 155, 126–138.
Moores, E.M., Robinson, P.T., Malpas, J., Xenophontos, C., 1984.
Model for the origin of the Troodos massif, Cyprus and other
Mideast ophiolites. Geology 12, 223–226.
Papazachos, B.C., Papaioannou, Ch.A., 1999. Lithospheric boun-
daries and plate motions in the Cyprus area. Tectonophysics
308, 193–204.
Papazachos, C.B., Karakaisis, G.F., Savvaidis, A.S., Papaza-
chos, B.C., 2002. Accelerating seismic crustal deformation
in the southern Aegean area. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 92,
570–580.
Poisson, A., Wernli, R., Sagular, E.K., Temiz, H., 2003. New data
concerning the age of the Aksu Thrust in the south of the Aksu
valley, Isparta Angle (SW Turkey): consequences for the
Antalya Basin and the Eastern Mediterranean. Geol. J. 38,
311–327.
Reilinger, R.E., McClusky, S.C., Oral, M.B., King, R.W., Toksfz,M.N., 1997. Global positioning system measurements in the
Arabia–Africa–Eurasia plate collision zone. J. Geophys. Res.
102 (B5), 9983–9999.
Robertson, A.H.F., 1998. Mesozoic–Tertiary tectonic evolution of
the easternmost Mediterranean area: integration of marine and
land evidence. In: Robertson, A.H.F., Emeis, K.C., Richter, C.,
Camerlenghi, A. (Eds.), Proceeding of the Ocean Drilling
Program, Scientific Results, vol. 160, pp. 723–782.
Robertson, A.H.F., Dixon, J.E., 1984. Introduction: aspects of the
geological evolution of the Eastern Mediterranean. In: Dixon,
J.E., Robertson, A.H.F. (Eds.), The Geological Evolution of the
Eastern Mediterranean, Geological Society Special Publication,
vol. 17, pp. 1–74.
Robertson, A.H.F., Clift, P.D., Degnan, P., Jones, G., 1991.
Paleogeographic and paleotectonic evolution of the Eastern
Mediterranean Neotethys. Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palae-
oecol. 87, 289–344.
Salamon, A., Hofstetter, A., Garfunkel, Z., Hagai, R., 2003.
Seismotectonics of the Sinai subplate–eastern Mediterranean
region. Geophys. J. Int. 155, 149–173.
Xengfr, A.M.C., YVlmaz, Y., 1981. Tethyan evolution of Turkey: a
plate tectonic approach. Tectonophysics 75, 181–241.
Xengfr, A.M.C., Gfrur, N., Xaroglu, F., 1985. Strike-slip faulting
and related basin formation in zones of tectonic escape: Turkey
as a case study. Society of Economic Paleontologists and
Mineralogists, Special Publication, vol. 37, pp. 227–264.
Taymaz, T., Jackson, J., McKenzie, D., 1991. Active tectonics of the
north and central Aegean Sea. Geophys. J. Int. 106, 433–490.
Ten Veen, J.H., Kleinspehn, K.L., 2003. Incipient continental
collision and plate-boundary curvature; late Pliocene–Holocene
transtensional Hellenic forearc, Crete, Greece. J. Geol. Soc.
(Lond.) 160, 161–181.
Underhill, J.R., 1989. Late Cenozoic deformation of the Helle-
nide foreland, western Greece. Geol. Soc. Amer. Bull. 101,
613–634.
Vidal, N., Klaeschen, D., Kopf, A., Docherty, C., Von Huene, R.,
Krasheninnikov, V.A., 2000. Seismic images at the convergence
zone from south of Cyprus to the Syrian coast, eastern
Mediterranean. Tectonophysics 329, 157–170.
Williams, H., 1979. Appalachian orogen in Canada. Can. J. Earth
Sci. 16, 792–807.
Woodside, J.M., Mascle, J., Zitter, T.A.C., Limonov, A.F., Ergun,
M., Volkonskaia, A., 2002. The Florence Rise, the western bend
of the Cyprus Arc. Mar. Geol. 185, 177–194.
Zitter, T.A.C., Woodside, J.M., Mascle, J., 2003. The Anaximander
Mountains: a clue to the tectonics of southwest Anatolia. Geol.
J. 38, 375–394.