A palynostratigraphic approach to the SW Anatolianmolasse basin: Kale–Tavas molasse and Denizli

molasse

Funda Akgün*, Hasan Sözbilir

Department of Geological Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Dokuz Eylül University, 35100 Bornova-I˙zmir,Turkey

Received 15 January 1999; accepted 14 June 1999

Abstract – The study, explains stratigraphy of the Oligo-Miocene molasse around the Denizli province (SWAnatolia), basedon the palynology which is also supported by the detailed mappingand correlation of the measured sections from the coal-bearingsequences of the molasse deposits. For this purpose, two hugedepressions named as the Kale–Tavas molasse and Denizli molassebasins were examined. The Kale–Tavas molasse deposits has a basalunconformity with the underlying pre-Oligocene basement andbegins with the Chattian Karadere and Mortuma formations whichare covered unconformably by the Aquitanian Yenidere formation.An angular unconformity between the Chattian and the Burdiga-lian is only observed in the middle part of the basin, around Kale.In the Tavas section, the Aquitanian and the Burdigalian are absent.The Denizli molasse is characterized by Chattian–Aquitaniansequence consisting of distinctive sedimentary facies, alluvial fanand deltaic-shallow marine deposits with carbonate patch reefs.Palynostratigraphic studies, which have given the Chattian age, havebeen carried out from the coal lenses of alluvial fan and delta plaindeposits. In addition to the palynological determinations, coral andforaminiferal content of the carbonate patch reefs which rest con-formably on the coal-bearing sequences have yielded the Chattian–Aquitanian age. Two different palynomorph associations have beendetermined from the molasse deposits. The first palynomorph asso-ciation which is established in the samples from the Sag˘dere andMortuma formations, corresponds to the Chattian age, whilst thesecond is of theAquitanian age. The Late Oligocene–Early Miocenewhich is claimed as the time of N–S-extensional tectonics in west-ern Turkey, is related to the depositional time of the molassesequences in the study area. Thus, the molasse is older than thebasal deposits of the Gediz and Büyük Menderes grabens. © 2001Éditions scientifiques et médicales Elsevier SAS

palynostratigraphy / Oligo-Miocene / molasse / SW Anatolia

1. Introduction

There are numerous studies for dating of the molassedeposits of SW Anatolia. These age datings, however, arecommonly diverse and contradictory. Age assignmentschanged from the Eocene to the Burdigalian. The main rea-son for the diversity of dating molasse deposits is related tothe lack of completed geological maps and detailed mea-sured stratigraphic sections, and randomly collected samplesexcept for the studies of [1–6].

Molasse deposits that have been examined for the firsttime in the Kale–Denizli region were initially accepted asthe Eocene aged flysch [7]. First Philippson [8], then Altınlı[9] and later Nebert [10] have distinguished the two sepa-rate sedimentary sequences represented in the Kale–Tavasregion: Aquitanian flysch at the base followed by theBurdigalian–Helvetian marine-lagoonal sediments. Based onthe molluscan fauna from marine equivalents in the Çuku-rköy (Denizli) region of the Kale–Tavas molasse, Erentözand Öztemur [11]stated that these terrestrial molasses, whichare thought to be of the Aquitanian previously, are dated asOligocene. Comparing it with the flysch from Kale, Becker-Platen [12] placed the flysch from Mortuma Çayı in the LateOligocene to Early Miocene. According to Luttig and Stef-fens [13], sedimentation of terrestrial molasses with fluvial-lacustrine characteristics continued in the region betweenDenizli and Mugla at the end of the Oligocene. On the otherhand, Gökçen [14] suggested an Early Aquitanian age basedon ostracoda and foraminifera of the N1 lithological zone,which was defined in the Yenis¸ehir–Kale region. Hakyemezand Örçen [1], and Hakyemez [2] examined the Cenozoic

* Correspondence and reprints.E-mail address: funda.akgun@deu.edu.tr (F. Akgün).

Geodinamica Acta 14 (2001) 71–93© 2001 Éditions scientifiques et médicales Elsevier SAS. All rights reserved

S0985311100010548/FLA

— 71 —

sediments between Mugla and Denizli, and determined theage of this formation as the Late Oligocene based on gas-tropods and pollen from the Mortuma formation.

The southwestAnatolian molasse is accepted as a sequenceof continental and shallow marine sediments of the transi-tion period between the Paleotectonic and Neotectonic peri-ods in western Turkey [15]. In this region stratigraphic rela-tionships between different formations of the molasse

sequence are well exposed, and they are suitable for pollenanalysis because of their coal contents. For this reason, theKale–Tavas molasse and Denizli molasse basin are selectedto study palynostratigraphy of the coal-bearing molassedeposits (figure 1). The stratigraphic, sedimentologic,palynologic and paleontologic data, obtained from both fieldand laboratory studies, were then used to evaluate the datingand depositional environment of the molasse.

Figure 1. Location map of the studied areas and main basement structures in southwest Anatolia (simplified from Konak et al. [66]; Sqengörand Yılmaz [17]; Sqengör et al. [18]; Bingöl [67]; Seyitoglu and Scott [68]). Note the Oligo-Miocene molasse basins lying along the tectoniccontact between the Menderes Massif and the Lycian nappes.

F. Akgün, H. Sözbilir / Geodinamica Acta 14 (2001) 71–93

— 72 —

2. Stratigraphy

2.1. Pre-Oligocene basement

The pre-Oligocene rocks are the Mesozoic Menderesmetamorphics, the Triassic–Upper Cretaceous Lyciannappes, the Upper Cretaceous ophiolitic mélange, the UpperPaleocene–Lower Eocene Alakaya group, and the UpperEocene Kocaali formation [5].

Lycian nappes at the base of the basins proposed in thisstudy have a tectonic contact to the underlying Menderesmetamorphics [16–18]. In the Kale–Tavas basin, this con-tact is covered unconformably by the molasse deposits [19,20].

2.2. Oligo-Miocene rocks

It was found possible to assign the rocks of the molasseinto two basins: 1) Kale–Tavas molasse and 2) Denizlimolasse basins which, is separated by the Honaz Mountain(hightest mountain in the Aegean region), comprise approxi-mately 3 000 m of clastics-carbonates.

2.2.1. Kale–Tavas molasse

The deposits of the Kale–Tavas molasse crop out betweenYemisendere (Mugla) and Çukurköy (Denizli) in the depres-sion having SW–NE orientation (figures 2a, b and c).

The Oligo-Miocene sequence of the Kale–Tavas molassebasin was named as the Akçay group by Hakyemez [2]. TheAkçay group begins with the Karadere formation represent-ing the alluvial fan deposits with coal lenses on some of theflood plains (see sections MS-1 and MS-2 in figure 3). Theunit has an unconformable contact with the underlying pre-Oligocene basement, and is gradationally overlain by theMortuma formation. Palynological determinations from theMortuma formation yielded the Chattian age. The same agewas obtained by using foraminiferal, ostracoda and gas-tropoda contents of the formation in previous studies [1, 2,14]. The coal lenses have formed in the flood plains andlagunar part of the formation (see sections MS-3, MS-4,MS-5, MS-6, MS-7 in figure 3). The Mortuma formation isunconformably overlain by the Yenidere formation whichhas been dated as the Aquitanian age with respect to its gas-tropoda, pelecypoda and palynomorph contents [2 (and thisstudy) ]. The Akçay group is unconformably overlain by thecontinental deposits of the Mugla group. The Mugla groupwas divided into three formations, from bottom to top,Sekköy, Yatagan, and Milet formations [2].According to ver-tebrate fauna, the Sekköy unit was dated as the Late Asta-racian (Middle Miocene) and the conformably overlyingYatagan formation as the Turolian (Late Miocene) by Ata-lay [21].

Due to the younger sedimentary cover, the Kale–Tavasmolasse has investigated under three regions, namely Tavas,

Figure 2a. Detailed geological maps of the studied areas (modified from Hakyemez and Örçen [1] and Hakeyenez [2]). a. Geological map ofthe Yemisendere region). b. Geological map of the Kale region. c. Geological map of the Tavas region, (See figure 1 for location of the studiedareas, and figure 4 for explanation of the units).

F. Akgün, H. Sözbilir / Geodinamica Acta 14 (2001) 71–93

— 73 —

Kale and Yemisendere regions to make stratigraphic corre-lation possible (see figure 1 for location of the regions).

In the Tavas region, the northern part of the basin, themolasse is represented only by the Karadere and Mortumaformation of the Chattian age, but the Aquitanian and Bur-digalian are absent (see Tavas section in figures 2c and 4).

An angular unconformity between the Mortuma forma-tion of the Chattian age and Kale formation of the Burdiga-lian age is only observed in the middle part of the basin,around Kale. In the region, around the Müslügüme Yaylası

and Kurbalık village, the contact between the Aquitanianand the Burdigalian is a conformable contact which is theonly contact showing the stratigraphic relationships of theAquitanian–Burdigalian deposits in the study area (see Kalesection in figures 2b and 4).

In the region of Yemisendere, the molasse is representedby the Chattian Karadere and Mortuma formation which iscovered unconformably by the Aquitanian Yenidere forma-tion without the overlying Burdigalian deposits (seeYemisendere section in figures 2a and 4). As observed in

Figure 2b.

F. Akgün, H. Sözbilir / Geodinamica Acta 14 (2001) 71–93

— 74 —

figures 2b and c, there is a clear angular unconformitybetween the strata of the Mortuma and the overlying Yenidereformations.

2.2.2. Denizli molasse

The Denizli molasse extending in the NE of Denizli city,from Honaz Mountain to Çökelez Mountain, has good expo-sures around Karatepe (figure 5).

The stratigraphy of the Denizli molasse has been carriedout in detail by Sözbilir [5]. According to the author, thebasin has a transgressive sequence resting on the pre-Oligocene basement and unconformably overlain by the lateMiocene to the Pliocene Belevi group. The sequence com-mences with the alluvial fan deposits and grades upwardinto fan delta-shallow marine deposits including lenses ofcoal and carbonate deposition as patch reefs [6, 22]. Althoughthe name Acıdere formation was applied to this sequence byNebert [10] and Becker-Platen [12], it is here raised to groupstatus to permit additional subdivisions into formations thatapparently facilitate descriptions, mapping works and cor-relations. The basal part of theAcıdere group has been namedas the Çaykavustu formation, conformably overlain by theSagdere formation. The Çaykavustu formation is a reddish-

brown conglomerate intercalated with lithic sandstones. Theformation is regarded as lithologically similar to the ‘Karad-ere formation’ of the Kale–Tavas basin (see figure 4 for cor-relations of the units). The name Sagdere formation is usedfor a thick deltaic-shallow marine sequence with lenses ofreef carbonates and coal. The formation is partly similar tothe Mortuma formation of Kale–Tavas basin. The Sagdereformation consists of massive to cross-bedded conglomer-ates, planar cross-bedded and wave-rippled sandstones, bio-turbated and fossilliferous mudstones, coal-bearing mud-shales, lenses of reef limestones and sandstone–mudstonealternations.

Coal lenses have formed on the delta plain, terrestrial partof the fan-delta (see MS-8, MS-9 in figure 3), while theorganic accumulation forming patch reefs have beenobserved as individual lenses on the delta front-slope envi-ronment. Foraminiferal and coral content of the carbonatepatch reefs which rest conformably on the coal-bearing del-taic deposits have yielded the Chattian–Aquitanian age [6](figure 6). However, palynostratigraphic studies, which havebeen carried out in the coal-bearing strata have yielded theChattian age. This result indicates that the transitional con-tact between the coal-bearing sequence and the overlying

Figure 2c.

F. Akgün, H. Sözbilir / Geodinamica Acta 14 (2001) 71–93

— 75 —

Figure 3. Measured sections including sedimentological characteristics of the coal-bearing molasse sequences and locations of the palyno-logical samples (see figures 2 and 5 for location of the measured sections).

F. Akgün, H. Sözbilir / Geodinamica Acta 14 (2001) 71–93

— 76 —

carbonate patch reef sequence marks the Chattian–Aquitanian boundary.

3. Palynostratigraphy

3.1. Methods used

Field studies were carried out along selected transects inwhich coal-bearing sequences were included. 192 sampleswere collected from the Karadere, Mortuma, Yenidere andSagdere formations outcropped in the Kale–Tavas molasseand Denizli molasse, respectively (see the geological mapsfor location of the samples).

25 samples were taken from the Karadere formation inthe MS-1, -2 sections and 37 samples from the Mortumaformation along MS-3–7 sections in Kale–Tavas molasse,and 34 samples from the Sagdere formation along MS-8, -9sections in Denizli molasse (figure 3). Some samples were

collected as point samples (see figures 2a, b, c and 5). Allthe samples were processed following laboratory tech-niques. Palynological techniques involved chemical extrac-tion with the application of HCl (∼ 33 %), HF (∼ 38 %),HNO3 (∼ 50 %), intermittent washings and a final 10-µmsieving. A comparison of sieved and unsieved residuesshowed the former to be much richer in palynomorphs thanthe latter. Much of the amorphous organic matter had beenremoved after the sieving but the palynomorph yield wasnot very high in several samples. Systematic investigationsand photographic documentation of generally well-preserved palynomorphs were carried out by means of lightmicroscopy (LM).

3.2. Palynological associations

As a result of the palynological study, only 24 sampleswere found suitable for the qualitative and quantitative pol-

Figure 4. Generalized columnar sections showing stratigraphical correlations of the Oligo-Miocene deposits in the Kale–Tavas and Denizlimolasse basins.

F. Akgün, H. Sözbilir / Geodinamica Acta 14 (2001) 71–93

— 77 —

len analysis. The other samples were determined to containonly a few pollen and spores and therefore have not beenincluded in the palynological diagrams because they are notappropriate for statistical evaluations.

Ten different genera and 16 species of spores, 20 generaand 47 species of pollen, and 4 genera and a species ofdinoflagellates were determined in this study. Palynologicaldiagrams for each of the formations in four basins depict therelative frequencies of the taxa in the samples (table I, platesI-III). When these palynological diagrams are compared, thespecies having a large stratigraphic range (see table I) arerepresented in the palynomorph composition of three forma-tions. But when this comparison is made in terms of somespore and pollen species (the species that are hatched in tableI) that can be interpreted as the characteristics of the Eocene

and Oligocene taxa; Leiotriletes microadriennis and L. adri-ennis are abundant or frequent in the samples from Denizli–Sagdere f., Tavas–Mortuma f., Yemisendere–Mortuma f. andare common in the samples from Kale–Yenidere f.. L. doro-gensis are common in the samples from Denizli–Sagdere f.,Tavas–Karadere and Mortuma f., Kale–Mortuma f. and arerare in the samples from Kale–Yenidere f.

Verrucatosporites scutulum, Polypodiaceoisporites marx-heimensis in the samples from Denizli–Sagdere f. and Tavas–Mortuma f. are common or sporadically observed.

Baculatisporites primarius ssp oligocaenicus are abun-dant and Leiotriletes sp as well as Ischyosporites asolidusare rare or sporadically represented in the samples fromKale–Mortuma f.

Figure 5. Geological map of the Denizli molasse (see figure 1 for location of the studied area, and figure 4 for explanation of the units).

F. Akgün, H. Sözbilir / Geodinamica Acta 14 (2001) 71–93

— 78 —

Polypodiaceoisporites verruspeciosus, Verrucatosporitessp. are common or have been sporadically observed in thesamples from Denizli–Sagdere f. Undulatisporites conca-vus, Echinatisporites cf bockwitzensis occur sporadicallyonly in the samples from Yemisendere–Mortuma f.

Dicolpopollis kalewensis is observed frequently in thesamples from Denizli–Sagdere f. and Yemisendere–Mortuma f, is common in the samples from Tavas–Mortumaf. and Kale–Mortuma f. and is rare in the samples from Kale–Yenidere f. I. emmaensis, S. intraconstans, Monocolpopol-lenites tranquillus are common or rare in the samples fromDenizli–Sagdere and Yemisendere–Mortuma f..

Diagrams of comparison of relative percentage of the char-acteristic species and the relative percentage of the specieswith a large stratigraphical range prove the difference inpalynomorph content of the samples of Kale–Tavas andDenizli molasse basin (table I). Two different palynomorphassociations have been distinguished by the quantitative andqualitative contents of the samples;

The first palynomorph association, which is recognizedin the samples of Denizli–Sagdere f., Mugla–Yemisendere(Mortuma f.), Denizli–Kale (Mortuma f.), Denizli–Tavas(Mortuma f.) is of the Late Oligocene (Chattian) age.

The second palynomorph association, which is recog-nized in the samples of Denizli-Kale (Yenidere f.) is of theEarly Miocene (Aquitanian) age.

3.3. Correlation of the palynologicalassociations with the other Tertiary basins

Studies conducted till now in Turkish Tertiary show thatthe Lower Tertiary is rich in spores and the Upper Tertiary is

rich in pollen [23–32]. When this is taken into account, thefirst palynomorph association is richer in spores and the sec-ond palynomorph association is richer in pollen, we can inter-pret the first taxon in the Lower Tertiary and the second onein the Upper Tertiary (figure 7).

The absence of characteristic Eocene species such asMicrofoveolatosporites pseudodentatus (KRUTZSCH)KEDVES, Cicatricososporites pseudodorogensis (R. POTO-NIE) PFLUG in THOMSON & PFLUG and Punc-tatosporites paleogenicus KRUTZSCH is an expression ofthe fact that the first palynomorph association, which is inter-preted in the Lower Tertiary, is not older than the Oligoceneage.

Turkish terrestrial Oligocene deposits are rich in terms ofcharacteristic spores and pollen types. We can include intothe pollen spectrum of the early Oligocene Leiotriletes doro-gensis, Monocolpopollenites zievelensis PFLUG in THOM-SON & PFLUG and Triatriopollenites excelsus (R. POTO-NIE) THOMSON & PFLUG, which have existed since theEocene. The genus Extratriporopollenites, which is abun-dant in the Paleocene and Eocene times is exclusively rep-resented in the Oligocene by E. pompekji (R. POTONIE)PFLUG in THOMSON & PFLUG. The Middle Oligocenedeposits are rich in terms of laevigate spores and monoletespores with verrucae. On the other hand, during the LateOligocene, the Middle Oligocene taxa can be seen in verylow frequency, which are accompanied by Miocene types[23, 33, 34].

An Early Oligocene age of the Istanbul–Sqile Oligocenedeposits [23] is indicated by the dominance of Dicolpopolliskalewensis, Triatriopollenites coryphaeus, T. rurensisi, Tri-colporopollenites cingulum pollen and the occurrence ofLeiotriletes dorogensis, Baculatisporites gemmatus, various

Figure 6. Cross-section showing coral and foraminiferal contents of the Sagdere formation. Note the carbonate patch reefs as lenses in clasticdeposits.

F. Akgün, H. Sözbilir / Geodinamica Acta 14 (2001) 71–93

— 79 —

Table I. Palynogical Diagrams Indicating Palynomorph Contents of the Studied Areas.

a) Palynomorph Contents of the Denizli Molasse.

b) Palynomorph Contents of the Tavas Area.

F. Akgün, H. Sözbilir / Geodinamica Acta 14 (2001) 71–93

— 80 —

Table I. Palynogical Diagrams Indicating Palynomorph Contents of the Studied Areas.

c) Palynomorph Contents of the Kale Area. d) Palynomorph Contents of the Yemisendere Area.

F. Akgün, H. Sözbilir / Geodinamica Acta 14 (2001) 71–93

— 81 —

Plate I. (All photomicrographs × 500)

Fig. 1–3 Leiotriletes microadriennis KRUTZSCH4–6 Leiotriletes adriennis (R. POTONIE & GELLETICH) KRUTZSCH ssp. pseudomaximus KRUTZSCH7–10 Leiotriletes adriennis (R. POTONIE & GELLETICH) KRUTZSCH ssp. adriennis KRUTZSCH11 Triplanosporites sinomaxoides KRUTZSCH12, 13 Leiotriletes dorogensis KEDVES14, 15 Undulatisporitesconcavus KEDVES16a, b Stereisporites minor (RAATZ) KRUTZCH17 Echinatisporites cf. bockwitzensis KRUTZSCH18 Apiculatisporites sp.19 Baculatisporites primarius (WOLLF) THOMSON & PFLUG ssp. oligocaenicus KRUTZSCH20 Baculatisporites gemmatus KRUTZSCH21 Trilites multivallatus (PFLUG) KRUTZSCH22, 23 Trilites corruvallatus KRUTZSCH24, 25 Ischyosporites asolidus (KRUTZSCH) KRUTZSCH26 Polypodiaceoisporites marxheimensis (MÜRRIGER) KRUTZSCH27 Polypodiaceoisporites cf. seidewitzensis KRUTZSCH28 Polypodiaceoisporites verruspecious KRUTZSCH29 Polypodiaceoisporites gracillimus NAGY ssp. granoverruvatus KRUTZSCH

F. Akgün, H. Sözbilir / Geodinamica Acta 14 (2001) 71–93

— 82 —

Plate I.

F. Akgün, H. Sözbilir / Geodinamica Acta 14 (2001) 71–93

— 83 —

Plate II. (All photomicrographs × 500)

Fig. 1a, b Polypodiaceoisporites gracillimus NAGY ssp. semiverruvatus KRUTZSCH2 Laevigatosporites gracilis WILSON & WEBSTER3–5 Laevigatosporites haardti (R. POTONIE & VENITZ) KRUTZSCH6 Laevigatosporites discordatus PFLUGin THOMSON & PFLUG7 Extrapunctatosporites miocaenicus KRUTZSCH8a, b Verrucatosporites favus (R. POTONIE) THOMSON & PFLUG ssp. favus KRUTZSCH9 Verrucatosporites scutulum NAKOMAN10, 11 Pityosporites microalatus (R. POTONIE) THOMSON & PFLUG12 Pityosporites cedrisacciformis KRUTZSCH13, 14 Pityosporites strobipites (WODEHOUSE) KRUTZSCH15 Pityosporites pristinipollinius (TRAVERS) KRUTZSCH16–18 Cupressacites insulipapillatus (TREVISAN) KRUTZSCH19, 20 Inaperturopollenites concedipites (WODEHOUSE) KRUTZSCH21, 22 Inaperturopollenites emmaensis (MÜRRIGER& PFLUG) THOMSON & PFLUG23 Echigraminidites sp.24 Sparganiaceaepollenites magnoides KRUTZSCH25–28 Sparganiaceaepollenites polygonalis (THIERGART) KRUTZSCH29, 30 Cyperaceaepollis piriformis THIELE-PFEIFER31, 32 Monocolpopollenites tranquillus (R. POTONIE) THOMSON & PFLUG33 Cycadopites cf. lusaticus KRUTZSCH34 Cycadopites intrastructus KRUTZSCH35 Cycadopites bagyakaensis NAKOMAN36, 37 Cycadopites sp.38a, b Arecipites symmetricus KRUTZSCH39–45 Dicolpopollis kalewensis PFLANZL46a, b, 47 Porocolpopollenites vestibulum (R. POTONIE) THOMSON & PFLUG48–51 Triatriopollenites rurensis THOMSON & PFLUG52–55 Triatriopollenites bituitus (R. POTONIE) THOMSON & PFLUG56–58 Triatriopollenites myricoides (KREMP) THOMSON & PFLUG59–64 Triatriopollenites coryphaeus (R. POTONIE) THOMSON & PFLUG ssp. punctatus (R. POTONIE) THOMSON

& PFLUG65, 66 Triatriopollenites coryphaeus (R. POTONIE) THOMSON & PFLUG ssp. microcoryphaeus (R. POTONIE)

THOMSON & PFLUG

F. Akgün, H. Sözbilir / Geodinamica Acta 14 (2001) 71–93

— 84 —

Plate II.

F. Akgün, H. Sözbilir / Geodinamica Acta 14 (2001) 71–93

— 85 —

Plate III. (All photomicrographs × 500)

Fig. 1–3 Triatriopollenites plicatus (R. POTONIE) THOMSON & PFLUG4 Platycaryapollenites miocaenicus NAGY5a, b, 6 Subtriporopollenites anulatus PFLUG & THOMSON in THOMSON & PFLUG ssp. nanus PFLUG & THOM-

SON in THOMSON & PFLUG7a, b, 8 Subtriporopollenites intraconstans PFLUG in THOMSON & PFLUG9, 10 Subtriporopollenites simplex (R. POTONIE & VENITZ) THOMSON & PFLUG ssp. simplex (R. POTONIE &

VENITZ) THOMSON & PFLUG11–13 Subtriporopollenites simplex (R. POTONIE & VENITZ) THOMSON & PFLUG ssp. circulus R. POTONIE in

THOMSON & PFLUG14 Polyvestibulopollenites verus (R. POTONIE) THOMSON & PFLUG15, 16 Polporopollenites undulosus (WOLFF) THOMSON & PFLUG17 Polyporopollenites stellatus (R. POTONIE & VENITZ) THOMSON & PFLUG18–20 Polyporopollenites carpinoides PFLUG in THOMSON & PFLUG21–24 Tricolpopollenites henrici (R. POTONIE) THOMSON & PFLUG25–28 Tricolpopollenites densus PFLUG in THOMSON & PFLUG29–33 Tricolpopollenites microhenrici (R. POTONIE) THOMSON & PFLUG34, 35 Tricolpopollenites liblarensis (THOMSON in POTONIE, THOMSON & THIERGART) THOMSON & PFLUG

ssp. liblarensis (THOMSON in POTONIE, THOMSON & THIERGART) THOMSON & PFLUG36–40 Tricolpopollenites retiformis PFLUG & THOMSON in THOMSON & PFLUG41a, b Polycolpopollenites hexaradiatus NAKOMAN42a, b Tricolporopollenitespseudocingulum (R. POTONIE) THOMSON & PFLUG43a, b Tricolporopollenites cf. pseudocingulum (R. POTONIE) THOMSON & PFLUG44, 45 Tricolporopollenites cingulum (R. POTONIE) THOMSON & PFLUG ssp. fusus (R. POTONIE) THOMSON &

PFLUG46–49 Tricolporopollenites cingulum (R. POTONIE) THOMSON & PFLUG ssp. pusillus (R. POTONIE) THOMSON &

PFLUG50 Tricolporopollenites cingulum (R. POTONIE) THOMSON & PFLUG ssp. oviformis (R. POTONIE) THOMSON

& PFLUG51–55 Tricolporopollenites megaexactus (R. POTONIE) THOMSON & PFLUG ssp. brühlensis (THOMSON in POTO-

NIE, THOMSON & THIERGART) THOMSON & PFLUG56, 57 Tricolporopolleniteskruschi (R. POTONIE) THOMSON & PFLUG ssp. analepticus (R. POTONIE) THOMSON

& PFLUG58a, b Tricolporopolleniteskruschi (R. POTONIE) THOMSON & PFLUG ssp. roddorensis (THIERGART) THOMSON

& PFLUG59, 60 Tricolporopolleniteskruschi (R. POTONIE) THOMSON & PFLUG ssp. contortus PFLUG & THOMSON in

THOMSON & PFLUG61 Tricolporopolleniteskruschi (R. POTONIE) THOMSON & PFLUG ssp. pseudolaesus (R. POTONIE) THOMSON

& PFLUG62, 63 Tricolporopollenites porasper PFLUG in THOMSON & PFLUG64–66 Tricolporopollenites microreticulatus PFLUG & THOMSON in THOMSON & PFLUG67–69 Tricolporopollenites margaritatus (R. POTONIE) THOMSON & PFLUG70a, b, 71a, b Rhuspollenitesornatus THIELE-PFEIFER72 Tricolporopollenites sp. (tubuliflorae type)73, 74 Tetracolporopollenites obscurus PFLUG & THOMSON in THOMSON & PFLUG75 Tetracolporopollenites abditus PFLUG in THOMSON & PFLUG76a, b Tetracolporopollenites microellipsus PFLUG in THOMSON & PFLUG77, 78 Tetracolporopollenites microrhombus PFLUG in THOMSON & PFLUG79, 80 Tetracolporopollenites manifestus (R. POTONIE) THOMSON & PFLUG81 Deflandrea sp82 Spiniferites pseudofurcatus SARJEANT83 Polysphaeridium sp.84 Areoligera sp.

F. Akgün, H. Sözbilir / Geodinamica Acta 14 (2001) 71–93

— 86 —

Plate III.

F. Akgün, H. Sözbilir / Geodinamica Acta 14 (2001) 71–93

— 87 —

Figure 7. A comparison of relative abundances of species characterising Chattian age and the species with a large stratigraphical range. Notehatched forms (A) and the other forms (B) are shown in the palyonological diagrams.

F. Akgün, H. Sözbilir / Geodinamica Acta 14 (2001) 71–93

— 88 —

Verrucatosporites species and E. pompekji . Among these,D. kalewensis has lower frequency values in the first palyno-morph association defined in our study and Leiotriletes doro-gensis occur in relatively higher frequencies in this associa-tion. L. adriennis, L. microadriennis and Baculatisporitesprimarius, Polypodiaceoisporites marxheimensis whichappeared in this association in higher and lower frequen-cies, respectively, are totally absent in Sqile samples. E. pom-pekji is absent in our samples. On the basis of this palyno-logical data, coal seams of Sqile seem to have differentpalynomorph association than our samples and these coalsmust be older than our samples as it was indicated by Akyol[23].

In the Istanbul–Agaçlı lignite, the dominant occurence ofLaevigatosporites haardti, Tricolporopollenites cingulum,Triatriopollenites coryphaeus species, and lower frequen-cies of Dicolpopollis kalewensis, Leiotriletes dorogensis,Verrucatosporites scutulum, V. favus and Monocolpopolle-nites tranquillus has been interpereted as the Latest Oli-gocene or the Early Miocene age [34]. T. cingulum and T.coryphaeus have been observed to be common in the wholeTertiary period. The main difference between Agaçlı and ourfirst palynomorph association is the lower relative frequen-cies of D. kalewensis and the absence of Leiotriletes adri-ennis, L. microadriennis and Polypodiaceoisporites marx-heimensis in the palynomorph association of Agaçlı lignites.These data indicate that the Agaçlı lignites are slightlyyounger than the first palynomorph association defined inour study. On the other hand, D. kalewensis, Leiotriletes,Baculatisporites, Verrucatosporites, Polypodiaceoisporitesand Monocolpopollenites spore and pollen species have moreor less similar relative frequencies in Agaçlı and the secondpalynomorph assemblage defined in our study. Finally, thesepalynomorph assemblages must be Early Miocene in age.

Many authors studied the coal seams of the Thrace basin(NW Turkey) palynologically [27, 35–43] and different ageassignments were made ranging from the Early Oligoceneto the Early Miocene. However, most of the recent palyno-logical studies carried out directly on the Thrace basin coalsshow that these coals are of the Late Oligocene (Chattian)age [30, 42, 44]. The frequency of Dicolpopollis kalewensiswhich reaches up to 20 % in the Middle–Late Oligocenedeposits of Thrace basin coals has been determined as char-acteristic species [27]. In these samples, Inaperturopolleni-tes emmaensis, I. dubius, Tricolpopollenites microhenrici,Polyvestibulopollenites verus and Laevigatosporites haardti-compose other dominant forms, and a decrease has beenobserved in the number of monolete spores with verrucaedating from the Eocene, and other spore forms encounteredin the Oligocene in comparison with the Sqile coals. The abun-dance of the other species except for I. emmaensis has nostratigraphic importance. For this reason, undoubtedly thefirst palynomorph association identified in our samples andthose defined by Nakoman [36, 27]and Corsin and Nako-man [37] seem to be quite correlatable.

Schuler and Sittler [45] made a palynological study in theOligo-Miocene formations in Forez Plain (Central France).Seven palynologic associations were defined by the authors.Laevigatosporites haardti, Baculatisporites primarius, Ver-rucatosporites favus, Leiotriletes adriennis, L. microadrien-nis, L. variabilis, Trilites solidus, Cicatricosisporites costa-tus are the most abundant spore taxa in these associations.On the other hand, Pityosporites microalatus, Inaperturopol-lenites dubius, Monocolpopollenites tranquillus, Monopo-ropollenites sparganioides, Triatriopollenites coryphaeus,Polyvestibulopollenites verus and Ephedripites eocenipitesare the abundant pollen taxa. Additionaly, Monoporopolle-nites gramineoides, Tsugaepollenites vermiculatus andMonocolpopollenites trachycarpoides occur in lower rela-tive frequencies in their assemblages. These assemblages, towhich a Late Oligocene to Early Miocene age was assignedby these authors, seem to be closely correlative with ourpalynomorph associations on the basis of the taxa listedabove most of which occur in our samples almost in thesame abundance. However, spore genera Cicatricosisporiteswhich are mostly found in the Eocene sediments of Turkishcoal basins [24, 46] and pollen genera like Tsugaepollenitesand Monoporopollenites (Gramineae forms) which aremostly found abundantly in the Turkish Miocene and expe-cially in the Upper Miocene–Pliocene sediments [33, 44, 47,48]. But they were never been observed in our samples.

Dicolpopollis kalewensis has been reported as character-istic for the Late Oligocene ‘Kölner Schichten’ in the lowerRhein region, Germany, and other forms like Inaperturopol-lenites emmaensis, Tricolpopollenites microhenrici, Tri-colporopollenites cingulum, Sapotaceaepollenites sp. (Tet-racolporopollenites sp.) and Periporopollenites stigmosus(R. POTONIE) THOMSON & PFLUG and Polyporopopol-lenites stellatus dating from the Paleogene are widespreadin time span [49]. The close similarity between the palyno-morph assemblage identified by Takahashi and Jux [49] andthat of the first palynomorph assemblage also support theLate Oligocene age.

Kirchner [50] studied fossil pollen and spores of the south-ern Bavarian coals of the Late Oligocene age. Assemblagefrom the samples is characterized by some spores (e.g. Leiot-riletes, Punctatisporites, Retitriletes, Stereisporites, Bacu-latisporites, Pustechinosporis, Polypodiaceoisporites, Lae-vigatosporites and Verrucatosporites) and pollen (e.g.Pityosporites, Piceapollis, Podocarpidites, Zonalapolleni-tes, Inaperturopollenites, Sequoiapollenites, Graminidites,Cyperaceaepollis, Arecipites, Monogemmites, Dicolpopol-lis, Triatriopollenites, Momipites, Platycaryapollenites,Pterocaryapollenites, Polyporopollenites and Rhuspolleni-tes) and believed to show that the deposits are of the LateOligocene age. Most of these taxa except for Zonalapolle-nites, Graminidites, Arecipites, Piceapollenites and Podocar-pidites occur more or less with the same relative frequencyvalues in the newly defined first palynomorph association ofDenizli and Kale–Tavas molasse. The similarity between the

F. Akgün, H. Sözbilir / Geodinamica Acta 14 (2001) 71–93

— 89 —

palynomorph assemblages by Kirchner [50] and this studysupports the reliability of the Late Oligocene age assign-ment to the first palynomorph association.

As mentioned above, the species of the genus Dicolpopol-lis are encountered frequently in the Eocene and commonlyin the Oligocene deposits [23, 30, 46, 51–57]. As it was notedby Wilkinson et al. [58] the form-genus Dicolpopollis,although not restricted to the Oligocene, occur together withsuch regularity only in the NW European Oligocene depos-its. D. kalewensis forms an acme zone in the Late Oligocene(Chattian) rocks in the northern Thrace basin [23, 27, 30,37, 44]. In the light of the above mentioned data, an addi-tional variety of the Neogene species (The species that arenot hatched in table I, Mortuma and Sagdere formations)with high percentage dominance of D. kalewensis, Leiotri-letes adriennis and L. microadriennis, rarely existing L. doro-gensis, Polypodiaceoisporites, Verrucatosporites and Mono-colpopollenites species and sporadically occuringInaperturopollenites emmaensis, Subtriporopollenites intra-constans, Undulatisporites concavus, Echinatisporites cf.bockwitzensis is pointing to a Late Oligocene (Chattian) agein the first palynomorph association. Lower Tertiary sporeforms determined in this study are poor in variety and abun-dance, D. kalewensis is observed sporadically and other Neo-gene species (The species that are not hatched in table I,Yenidere formation) are represented in high percentage, sothe second palynomorph association must be younger thanthe others and be of Early Miocene (Aquitanian) in age.

Benda [26] recognized 7 sporomorph associations, theso-called ‘Pollen Bilder’ , which cover a time span fromsomewhere in the Oligocene until the Late Pliocene fromthe Turkish Cenozoic deposits. As discussed later in thisstudy, palynomorph content of the first palynomorph asso-ciation correlates with the ‘Pollen Bild von Kurbalık’ whichwas dated as the Late Oligocene [12, 59, 60]. Benda [25,26] reported that Triatriopollenites myricoides – bituitus –rurensis group, microcoryphaeus – punctatus group, Quer-coidites microhenrici – henrici, Cyrillaceaepollenites mega-exactus and exactus, Caprifoliipites microreticulatus andInaperturopollenites emmaensis are the dominant speciesappearing in this characteristic association. These specieshave been observed in low percentages in the first palyno-morph association. But in fact, these species except I.emmaensis can be observed in high percentages in all stagesof the Miocene Period. The existence and frequency of thesespecies is an important indicator for the proximity to theMiocene because they are not typical for the Oligocene. Thefact that Dicolpopollis kalewensis has not been mentionedin the Kurbalık association is an important characteristic ofour association and reduces the similarity between these twoassociations. In short, the first palynomorph associationdefined in our samples seems to be quite different from Ben-da’s Kurbalık sporomorph association in having higher rela-tive frequencies of the taxa belonging to the spores, diver-sity of the indivudial spore taxon and the abundance of the

index Late Oligocene pollen species Dicolpopollis kalewen-sis. Samples which we collected from Benda’s Kurbalık loca-tion were taken from the Yenidere formation of Denizli–Kale section (figure 2b) Under these conditions, Benda’sKurbalık association must have been Aquitanian and notChattian in age.

On the other hand, the list of characteristic species of theKale association defined by Benda [26], which is placed inthe Early Miocene (early Burdigalian), covers only specieswith broad vertical distribution. Samples of the Mortumaformation in the Denizli–Kale basin (figure 2b), examinedin this study, correspond to the Kale location (2.5 km south-east of Kale) of Benda’s study [26]. For this reason, it wouldbe evaluated correctly if and only if the Kale association wasidentified by the first palynomorph association and aged asthe Late Oligocene (Chattian).

4. Discussion and conclusion

The Oligo-Miocene molasse of southwestern Turkey, isaccepted as a sequence of late to early-post orogenic depos-its that contain both continental and shallow marine sedi-ments [15] similar to the other molasse basins which arecharacterized by fan delta deposits [61, 62]. The landwardmargins of the fan-delta in the Denizli molasse are faultbounded with the poximal subareal fan deposits that uncon-formably overlies the pre-Oligocene basement [5].

In the study area, the depositional time of the molasse isrestricted to the Oligocene–Lower Miocene time with respectto the palynological and paleontological data as summer-ized in table II. However, there are some palynostratigraphi-cal contradictions between the previous studies and thisstudy. First, as seen in table II, the N1 zone of Gökçen [14],which is stratigraphicaly located in the middle part of theMortuma formation, corresponds to the first palynologicalassociation in our study. Second, the Kurbalık associationwhich was claimed as the Late Oligocene in age by Bendaand Meulenkamp [59] and Seyitoglu and Scott [68], has beendetermined as the second palynomorph association in ourstudy. In addition, the Yenidere formation including secondpalynomorph association rests unconformably on the Mor-tuma formation of Chattian age. Thus the Kurbalık associa-tion must be Lower Miocene (Aquitanian) in age.

The deposits of both Kale–Tavas molasse and Denizlimolasse start at the bottom, with the terrestrial Karadere andÇaykavustu formations, respectively. These formations arebarren of fossils except the upper part of the Karadere for-mation, which has given the Chattian age. Aquitanian agecould only be obtained from the Yenidere formation whichcrops out in the sections of Kale and Yemisendere. Accord-ing to palynological data, the angular unconformity betweenthe Chattian and the Aquitanian has been discovered in theYemisendere and Kale sections. The unconformity could notbe observed in the section of Tavas and Denizli molasse.

F. Akgün, H. Sözbilir / Geodinamica Acta 14 (2001) 71–93

— 90 —

The presence of unconformities between the Chattian–Aquitanian and Aquitanian–Burdigalian deposits areexplained as internal unconformities. These unconformitiesmay be related to the advancing times of the Lycian ophio-lites above the Menderes carbonate platform.

The Denizli molasse is characterized by Chattian–Aquitanian sequence without any discontinues. The lowerpart of the Sagdere formation in which coal bearing deltaplain deposits have formed is Chattian in age. The EarlyMiocene has only been obtained from the carbonate reefdeposits which conformably overly the coal bearingsequence. Organic accumulations embedded in fan deltadeposits have been recognized in the Almanzora basin [63],in the Paleocene succession of central Anatolia [64], and inthe Miocene clastic basin of southwestern Turkey [65].

According to Seyitoglu and Scott [68], Late Oligocene–Early Miocene is accepted as the onset of N–S extensionalcollapse in western Turkey. However, this age interval cor-

responds to the depositional time of the Kale–Tavas andDenizli molasse in the present study. The younger MiddleMiocene deposits form the basal sequence of the Büyük Men-deres graben [31]. For that reason, the Late Oligocene–EarlyMiocene molasse deposits should be older than the grabenformation in western Anatolia. Thus the beginning of theneotectonic period in western Anatolia should be younger,at least Middle Miocene.

Acknowledgements. Authors are grateful to Yücel Yıl-maz and J.E. Meulenkamp whose suggestions have greatlyimproved the earlier version of this manuscript. Specialthanks are due to Engin Meriç, Sefer Örçen, Mehmet Sakınçand Sevim Tuzcu for their help in the identification of coraland foraminiferal species that made the stratigraphic corre-lation possible.

Table II. Palynostratigraphical correlation of the Oligo-Miocene Sections in Southern Turkey (from Gökçen [14], Benda and Meulenkamp[59], Akgün and Sözbilir [69], and Dewey [70]).

F. Akgün, H. Sözbilir / Geodinamica Acta 14 (2001) 71–93

— 91 —

References

[1] Hakyemez H.Y., Örçen S., Mugla Denizli arasındaki (GBAnadolu) Senozoyik yaslı çökel kayaların sedimentolojik vebyostratigrafik incelenmesi, Report 7311, Min. Res. Expl. Inst.Ankara (1982).[2] Hakyemez H.Y., Kale–Kurbalık (Güney Batı Denizli)Bölgesindeki Senozoyik Yaslı Çökel Kayaların Jeolojisi veStratigrafisi, Bull. Min. Res. Expl. Inst. Turkey 109 (1989) 9–21.[3] Sözbilir H., Stratigraphy and provenance of the Paleocene–Eocene Alakaya basin in the Denizli province, southwesternTurkey, in: Piskin Ö., Ergün M., Savasçin M.Y., Tarcan G. (Eds.),Proceedings, International Earth Sciences Congress on AegeanRegions, Vol 1, Dokuz Eylül University, Izmir-Turkey, 1995,pp. 309–329.[4] Sözbilir H., Stratigraphy and sedimentology of the synorogenicflysch (Alakaya basin) and post-orogenic sequence (Denizlimolasse), around Denizli Province, southwestern Turkey,Abstracts Book, 17th regional African European meeting ofSedimentology, IAS, Sfax-Tunisia, 1996, pp. 258–259.[5] Sözbilir H., Stratigraphy and sedimentology of the Tertiarysequences in the northeastern Denizli province (southwestTurkey), PhD Thesis, Dokuz Eylül University, Izmir, 1997.[6] Sözbilir H., Oligo-Miyosen Denizli molas havzasına aitalüvyal yelpaze-yelpaze delta ve sıg deniz çökellerinin stratigrafisive sedimentolojisi, güneybati Türkiye 20, Yıl JeolojiSempozyumu, Abstracts Book, Selçuk University, Konya-Turkey,1997, pp. 123–124.[7] Tchihatchef L., Asie Mineure Description Physique de cettecontrée, 8, Geologie, Paris, 1869.[8] Philippson A., Reisen und Forschungun im westlichenKleinasien, Petermanns Mitt. Erdk. 2. Berlin, H.183, JuliusPerthes, Gotha, 1915.[9] Altınlı E., The, Geology of Southern Denizli, Rev. Fac. Sci.Univ. Istanbul Ser. B 20 (1–2) (1955) 1–47.[10] Nebert K., Tavas–Kale bölgesine ait yeni müsahedeler, Bull.Min. Res. Expl. Inst. Turkey 57 (1961) 57–64.[11] Erentöz L., Öztemur C., Aperçu général sur la stratigraphie duNéogéne de la Turquie et observations sur ses limites inférieure etsupérieure, Institute ‘Lucas Maldada’ C.S.I.C. (Espana) CursillesConferencias 9 (1964) 259–266.[12] Becker-Platen J.D., Lithostratigraphische Untersuchungen imKänozoikum Südwest-Anatoliens (Türkei), Beih. Geol. Jb. 97(1970) 244 p.[13] Luttig G., Steffens P., The paleogeographie atlas of Turkeyfrom the Oligocene to the Pleistocene, Bundesanstalt f.Geowissenchaften und Rohstoffe, 1976.[14] Gökçen N., Denizli ve Mugla çevresi Neojen istifininOstrakod Biostratigrafisi, Hacettepe Univ. Earth Sci. Enst. 9(1982) 111–131.[15] Koçyigit A., Güneybatı Türkiye ve yakın dolayında levha içiyeni tektonik gelisim, Bull. Geol. Soc. Turkey 27 (1984) 1–16.[16] Graciansky P.C., Recherches géologiques dans le TaurusLycien ocidental, These doct. d’etat, université Paris-Sud, Orsay,1972.[17] Sqengör A.M.C., Yılmaz Y., Tethyan evolution of Turkey: Aplate tectonic approach, Tectonophysics 75 (1981) 181–241.[18] Sqengör A.M.C., Görür N., Sqaroglu F., Strike-slip deformation,basin formation and sedimentation: Strike-slip faulting and relatedbasin formation in zones of tectonic escape: Turkey as a casestudy, in: Biddle K.T., Christie-Blick N. (Eds.), Strike-slip faultingand basin formation, Soc. Econ. Paleontol. Mineral. Spec. Publ.,37, 1985, pp. 227–264.

[19] Bernoulli D., Graciansky P.C., Monod O., The extension ofthe Lycian nappes (SW Turkey), in to the Southeastern AegeanIslands, Eclog. Geol. Helv. 67 (1974) 39–90.

[20] Poisson A., Recherches géologiques dans les TauridesOccidentales (Turquie), thèse doct. d’État, université Paris-Sud,Orsay, 1977.

[21] Atalay Z., Mugla–Yatagan ve yakın dolayı karasalNeojen’ inin stratigrafi arastırması, Bull. Geol. Soc. Turkey 23(1980) 93–99.

[22] Sözbilir H., Oligo-Miocene fan-delta complex and associatedcoral reefs in the Denizli molasse basin, western Anatolia–Turkey,18th Regional European Meeting of Sedimentology, Heidelberg,1997, p. 319.

[23] Akyol E., Microflore de l’Oligocène inférieur récoltée dansun sondage près d’Avcıkoru, Sqile–Istanbul, Pollen Spores 13(1971) 117–134.

[24] Akyol E., Bayat (Çorum) Eosen’ inin palinolojik incelenmesive Karakaya–Emirsah kömürleri arasında denestirme denemesi,Bull. Min. Res. Expl. Inst. Turkey 91 (1980) 39–53.

[25] Benda L., Principles of the palynologic subdivision of theTurkish Neogene (Känozoikum und Braunkohlen der Türkei. 3),Newsl. Stratigr. 1 (1971) 23–26.

[26] Benda L., Grundzüge einer pollenanalytischen Gliederungdes türkischen Jungtertiärs (Känozoikum und Braunkohlen derTürkei. 4.), Beih. Geol. Jb. 113 (1971) 46.

[27] Nakoman E., Contribution à l’étude palynologique desformations tertiaires du Bassin de Thrace, II.– Etude qualitative,Ann. Soc. Geol. Du Nord. T. LXXXVI (1966) 65–107.

[28] Nakoman E., Microflore des dépots tertiaires du Sud-Ouestde I’Anatolia, Pollen Spores IX (1) (1967) 121–142.

[29] Nakoman E., Contribution a l’etude de la microflore tertiairesdes lignites de Seyitömer (Turquie), Polen Spores 10 (1968)521–556.

[30] Ediger V.Sq., Batı Z., Alisan C., Paleopalynology andPaleoecology of Calamus- like disulcate pollen grains, Rev.Paleobot. Palynol. 62 (1990) 97–105.

[31] Akgün F., Akyol E., Palynostratigraphy of the coal bearingNeogene deposits in Büyük Menderes Graben, Western Anatolia,Geobios 32 (3) (2000) 367–383.

[32] Akgün F., Olgun E., Kusçu I., Toprak V., Göncüoglu M.C.,New data on the age and startigraphy of Neogene cover of centralAnatolian crystalline complex, Turkish Ass. Petr. Geo. Bull. V(6/1) (1995) 51–68.

[33] Akyol E., Palinoloji ders notları, Ege Univ. Publ., Izmir,1978.

[34] Nakoman E., Agaçlı linyitlerinin mikroflorasının etüdü, Bull.Geol. Soc. Turkey XI (1968) 51–57.

[35] Akyol E., Türkiye Tersiyer kömürleri palinolojik etüdlerinedair baslangıç, Bull. Min. Res. Expl. Inst. Turkey 63 (1964) 29–42.

[36] Nakoman E., Étude palynologique de quelques échantillonsde lignite provenant du Bassin de Thrace (Turquie), Ann. Soc.Geol. Du Nord. LXXIV (1964) 298–303.

[37] Corsin P.M., Nakoman E., Contribution à l’étudepalynologique des formations tertiaires du Bassin de Thrace, II.-Etude quantitative, Ann. Soc. Geol. Du Nord LXXXVII (1967)39–53.

[38] Ediger V.Sq., Fossil fungal and algal bodies from ThraceBasin, Turkey, Palaeontolographica Abt. B. 179 (1981) 87–102.

[39] Ediger V.Sq., Some Tertiary dinoflagellate cysts from ThraceBasin, Turkey, and their usage in paleoenvironmental analysis,Rev. Espanola Micropaleont. 13 (1981) 89–103.

F. Akgün, H. Sözbilir / Geodinamica Acta 14 (2001) 71–93

— 92 —

[40] Ediger V.Sq., Batı Z., Morphological examination ofPediastrum (Chlorophyta) from the Tertiary strata of the ThraceBasin (NW Turkey), Pollen Spores 30 (1988) 203–222.[41] Ediger V.Sq., Alisan C., Tertiary fungal and algal palynomorphbiostratigraphy of the nothern Thrace basin, Turkey, Rev. Paleobot.Palynol. 58 (1989) 139–161.[42] Elsik W.C., Ediger V.Sq., Batı Z., Fossil fungal spore:Anatolinites gen.nov., Palynology 14 (1990) 91–103.[43] Akyol E., Akgün F., Age determinations on the TertiaryTrakya continental deposits, Symposium on the Geology of theThrace Basin, Lüleburgaz–Kırklareli, 30 May–3 June 1995, 1995,pp. 28–29.[44] Batı Z., Palynostratigraphy and coal petrography of the UpperOligocene lignites of the Northern Thrace Basin, NW Turkey, TheMiddle East Technical Univ., Ph. D Thesis, Ankara, 1996.[45] Schuler M., Sittler C., Étude palynologique et écologique desséries Tertiaires du bassin de Montbrison (Massif CentralFrançais), Bull. Serv. Carte. Géol. Als. Lorr. 22 (1969) 159–184.[46] Nakoman E., Analyse sporopollinique des charbons deSorgun (Yozgat–Turquie), Bull. Min. Res. Expl. Inst. Turkey 67(1966) 68–88.[47] Akyol E., Akgün F., Bigadiç, Kestelek, Emet ve Kırka BoratlıNeojen tortullarının palinolojisi ve karsılastırılması, Bull. Min.Res. Expl. Inst. Turkey 11 (1992) 165–173.[48] Ediger V.Sq., Batı Z., Kozlu H., Tortonian–Messinianpalynomorphs from the Easternmost Mediterranean region aroundIskenderun, Turkey, Micropaleontology 42 (1996) 189–205.[49] Takahashi K., Jux U., Sporomorphen aus dem paralischenOberoligozän der südöstlichen Niederrheinischen Bucht (West-Deutschland), Bull. Faculty Liberal Arts, Nagasaki Univ. (NaturalSciences) 26 (1986) 27–303.[50] Kirchner M., Die oberoligozäne Mikroflora dessüdbayerischen Pechkohlenreviers, Palaeontographica Abt. B. 192(1984) 85–162.[51] Roche E., Schuler M., Analyse palynologique (pollen etspores) de diverse gisements du Tongrien de Belgique, Serv. Geol.Belg. Prof. Pap. 11 (1976) 1–58.[52] Hochuli P.A., Palynologische Untersuchungen im Oligozänund Untermiozän der zentralen und westlichen Paratethys, Beitr.Paläontol. Östereich. 4 (1978) 1–132.[53] Boulter M.C., Craig D.L., A Middle Oligocene pollen andspore assemblage from the Bristol Channel, Rev. Palaeobot.Palynol. 28 (1979) 259–272.[54] Frederiksen N.O., Paleogene sporomorphs biostratigraphy,Northeastern Virginia, Palynology 3 (1979) 129–167.[55] Frederiksen N.O., Paleogene sporomorphs from SouthCarolina and quantitative correlations with the Gulf Coast,Palynology 4 (1980) 125–179.[56] Nagy E., Palynological evaluation of the holostratotype of theEgerian, Acta Biol. Szeged. 25 (3–4) (1979) 45–52.

[57] Bande M.B., Prakash U., The Tertiary flora of southeast Asiawith remarks on its paleoenvironmental and phytogeography ofthe Indo–Malayan region, Rev. Paleobot. Palynol. 28 (1986)259–272.

[58] Wilkinson G.C., Bazley R.A.B., Boulter M.C., The geologyand palynology of the Oligocene Lough Neagh Clays, NorthernIreland, J. Geol. Soc. London 137 (1980) 65–75.

[59] Benda L., Meulenkamp J.E., Biostratigraphic correlations inthe Eastern Mediterranean Neogene 9. sporomorph associationsand event stratigraphy of the Eastern Mediterranean Neogene,Newsl. Stratigr. 23 (1) (1990) 1–10.

[60] Benda L., Meulenkamp J.E., Schmidt R.R., Steffens P.,Zachariasse J.W., Biostratigraphic correlations in the EasternMediterranean Neogene 2. Correlation between sporomorphassociations and marine microfossils from the Upper Oligocene–Lower Miocene of Turkey, Newsl. Stratigr. 6 (1977) 1–22.

[61] Miall A.D., Lithofacies types and vertical profile models inbraided river deposits: a summary, in: Miall A.D. (Ed.), FluvialSedimentology 5, Can. Soc. Petrol. Geol. Mem., Calgary, 1978,pp. 597–604.

[62] Massari F., Colella A., Evolution and types of fan deltasystems in some major tectonic settings, in: Nemec W., Stell R.J.(Eds.), Fan Deltas, Sedimentology and Tectonic Settings, Blackie,Colasgov, 1988.

[63] Dabrio C.J., Polo M.D., Late Neogene fan delta andassociated coral reefs in the Almanzora basin, Almeria Province,southeastern Spain, in: Nemee W., Stell R.J. (Eds.), Fan Deltas:Sedimentology and Tectonic Settings, Blackie, Colasgov, 1988.

[64] Kazancı N., Varol B., Development of a mass flow-dominatedfan-delta complex and associated carbonate reefs within atransgressive Paleocene succession, central Anatolia, Turkey,Sediment. Geol. 68 (1990) 261–278.

[65] Hayward A.B., Sedimentation and basin formation related toophiolite emplacement, Miocene, SW Turkey, Sediment.Geol. 40(1984) 105–129.

[66] Konak N., Akdeniz N., Öztürk E.M., Geology of the south ofMenderes Massif, Guide book for the field excursion alongwestern Anatolia, IGCP project no. 5, 1987, pp. 42–53.

[67] Bingöl E., 1:2 000 000 scale geological map of Turkey, Min.Res. Exp. Ins. Press, Turkey, 1989.

[68] Seyitoglu G., Scott B., The cause of N–S-extensionaltectonics in Western Turkey: Tectonic escape vs. back-arcspreading vs orogenic collapse, J. Geodyn. 22 (1996) 145–153.

[69] Akgün F., Sözbilir H., A palynostratigraphic approach to theSW Anatolian molasse basin: Kale–Tavas and Denizli molasses,Third International Turkish Geology Symposium, 31 August–4September, Abstracts Book, Middle-East Technical University,Ankara, 1998, p. 217.

[70] Dewey J.F., Extentional collapse of orogens, Tectonics 7(1988) 1123–1139.

F. Akgün, H. Sözbilir / Geodinamica Acta 14 (2001) 71–93

— 93 —