NE ANATOLIAN OPHIOLITES

Geological Society, London, Special Publications Online First

published October 8, 2012; doi 10.1144/SP372.7 v.372, firstGeological Society, London, Special Publications

Nail Yildirim, Aytekin Türkel and Ilhan OdabasiOsman Parlak, Aydin Çolakoglu, Cahit Dönmez, Hüseyin Sayak, northeastern Anatolia

Erzincan Suture Zone in−Ankara−along the IzmirGeochemistry and tectonic significance of ophiolites

serviceEmail alerting

new articles cite this article to receive free e-mail alerts whenhereclick

requestPermission

part of this article to seek permission to re-use all orhereclick

Subscribe

Collection London, Special Publications or the Lyell

to subscribe to Geological Society,hereclick

How to citeFirst and how to cite articles

for further information about Onlinehereclick

Notes

© The Geological Society of London 2012

10.1144/SP372.7 Geological Society, London, Special Publications published online October 8, 2012 as doi:

http://www.lyellcollection.org/cgi/alerts

http://www.geolsoc.org.uk/gsl/publications/page417.html

http://sp.lyellcollection.org//site/subscriptions/

https://www.geolsoc.org.uk/page10899.html

Geochemistry and tectonic significance of ophiolites along the

Izmir–Ankara–Erzincan Suture Zone in northeastern Anatolia

OSMAN PARLAK1*, AYDIN COLAKOGLU2, CAHIT DONMEZ2, HUSEYIN SAYAK2,

NAIL YILDIRIM3, AYTEKIN TURKEL4 & ILHAN ODABASI2

1Cukurova Universitesi, Muhendislik-Mimarlık Fakultesi,

Jeoloji Muhendisligi Bolumu, 01330 Balcalı, Adana, Turkey2MTA Genel Mudurlugu, Maden Etut ve Arama Dairesi, Ankara, Turkey

3MTA Genel Mudurlugu, Malatya Bolge Mudurlugu, Malatya, Turkey4MTA Genel Mudurlugu, Ege Bolge Mudurlugu, Izmir, Turkey

*Corresponding author (e-mail: [email protected])

Abstract: The Ankara–Erzincan suture zone includes large bodies of ophiolite and ophioliticmelange in northeastern Anatolia. The ophiolitic bodies are (1) Refahiye (Erzincan), (2) Sahvelet(Erzurum), (3) Karadag (Erzurum) and (4) Kırdag (Erzurum). The ophiolite-related unitsinclude well-preserved sections of oceanic lithospheric and accretionary melanges with localblueschist assemblages. The ophiolite-related units in NE Anatolia are unconformably overlainby Campanian–Maastrichtian-aged sediments that were later imbricated with the ophioliticrocks. Geochemical data for the individual ophiolite sections indicate a tholeiitic composition,depletion in Nb, enrichment in large ion lithophile elements, parallel to slightly depleted highfield strength element patterns (compared with normal-mid ocean ridge basalt), and slightlylight rare earth element-depleted to parallel rare earth element trends. These features suggest pro-gressive source depletion towards island arc tholeiites and finally boninites. A fore-arc setting isproposed for the generation of the ophiolites. In contrast, the volcanic rocks from the melangeunits exhibit tholeiitic to alkaline compositions and either depletion or enrichment of rare earthelement and high field strength elements. Seamount-type alkaline and subduction-related tholeiiticbasaltic rocks were apparently juxtaposed during subduction/accretion. Models involving either asingle north-dipping subduction zone or two north-dipping subduction zones may be applicable.Both models involve the generation of supra-subduction zone-type ophiolites in a forearcsetting, an accretionary prism (with blueschists) and a volcanic arc during the Late Cretaceous.The ophiolites, ophiolitic melange and related blueschists were emplaced either northwards ontothe Pontide margin or southwards over the passive margin of the Tauride platform.

Northeastern Anatolia is characterized by two largetectonic units, namely the Eastern Pontides and theEastern Taurides (Fig. 1). The Eastern Pontidesare interpreted as being part of the Sakarya Zone(Okay & Sahinturk 1997) and represent part of theactive continental margin of Eurasia that wasformed as a result of northward subduction of Neo-tethys during the Late Cretaceous (Sengor &Yılmaz 1981; Akıncı 1984; Okay & Sahinturk 1997).In contrast, the Taurides to the south, represented bythe Tauride Carbonate Platform, are envisaged asone, or several, microcontinents that rifted fromGondwana during Early Mesozoic time (Sengor &Yılmaz 1981; Robertson & Dixon 1984; Robertsonet al. this volume, in review). The Tauride unitsdisplay intact successions ranging from Late Pre-cambrian to Early Cenozoic. The Pontides andTauride tectonic units are separated by the UpperCretaceous–Lower Palaeogene Izmir–Ankara–Erzincan suture zone (Fig. 1). This suture zone

includes Late Cretaceous ophiolites and ophioliticmelanges, as exposed in northeastern Anatolia(Sengor & Yılmaz 1981; Robertson & Dixon 1984;Okay & Sahinturk 1997; Yılmaz et al. 1997; Riceet al. 2006, 2009; Colakoglu et al. 2008, in press;Ozen et al. 2008; Sarıfakıoglu et al. 2009; Fig. 2).The Tauride–Anatolide block is separated fromthe Central Anatolian Crystalline Complex by theinferred Inner Tauride ocean (Gorur et al. 1984,1998; Dilek et al. 1999; Okay & Tuysuz 1999;Robertson et al. 2009; Pourteau et al. 2010). Thisoceanic basin was consumed as a result of north-dipping subduction and closed during the latestCretaceous to early Cenozoic time.

In the Eastern Pontides there is no consensusabout: (1) the timing of northward subduction –since Jurassic (Adamia et al. 1981; Hess et al.1995; Nikishin et al. 2003; Galoyan et al. 2009;Rolland et al. 2010; Ustaomer & Robertson 2010;Celik et al. 2011), Cenomanian–Turonian (Okay

From: Robertson, A. H. F., Parlak, O. & Unlugenc, U. C. (eds) 2012. Geological Development of Anatolia and theEasternmost Mediterranean Region. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 372,http://dx.doi.org/10.1144/SP372.7 # The Geological Society of London 2012. Publishing disclaimer:www.geolsoc.org.uk/pub_ethics

10.1144/SP372.7 Geological Society, London, Special Publications published online October 8, 2012 as doi:

& Sahinturk 1997; Yılmaz et al. 1997) or Albian(Okay et al. 2006); and (2) the timing of terminationof subduction and continental collision – by the endof Eocene (Peccerillio & Taylor 1976; Sengor &Yılmaz 1981; Robinson et al. 1995) by the MiddleEocene (Yılmaz et al. 1997) or by the Paleocene(Okay & Sahinturk 1997). Alternative tectonic mod-els have been proposed (Okay & Sahinturk 1997;Rice et al. 2006, 2009; Rolland et al. 2009a, b)that need to be tested with new data.

The Eastern Pontides is a critical area in termsof: (1) the general geology and geodynamic evol-ution of the Izmir–Ankara–Erzincan suture zoneand its continuation into the Lesser Caucasus (Okay1984; Evans & Hall 1990; Okay & Sahinturk 1997;Yılmaz et al. 1997, 2000; Okay & Tuysuz 1999;Hakyemez & Konak 2001; Konak et al. 2001; Topuzet al. 2004; Okay et al. 2006; Rice et al. 2006, 2009;Konak & Hakyemez 2008; Rolland et al. 2009a, b;Ustaomer & Robertson 2010; Ustaomer et al.2012); (2) the origin of the Late Cretaceous mas-sive sulphide deposits (Kraeff 1963; Hirst & Egin1979; Cagatay & Boyle 1980; Akıncı 1984); (3)the formation and emplacement of the ophiolitesalong the Izmir–Ankara–Erzincan suture zone inTurkey (Rice et al. 2006, 2009; Ozen et al. 2008;Colakoglu et al. 2008, in press; Sarıfakıoglu et al.2009) and in the Lesser Caucasus (Galoyan et al.2007, 2009; Rolland et al. 2009b, 2010; Sossonet al. 2010).

The eastern part of the eastern Pontides has beentectonically subdivided into four NE–SW trendingzones based on lithostratigraphy and structuralarchitecture (Ustaomer & Robertson 2010). Theseare, from north to south, the Eastern Pontide Auto-chthon, the Lower Slice Complex, the Upper SliceComplex and the Upper Cretaceous ophiolites.The Upper Cretaceous ophiolites of the Izmir–Ankara–Erzincan suture zone (i.e. the Erzurum–Kars ophiolite zone of Konak et al. 2001) are seenat higher structural levels and are representedby ophiolites, ophiolitic melanges, related highpressure–low temperature metamorphic rock as-semblages (e.g. blueschists) and latest Cretaceous–Paleocene sedimentary rocks. The continuation ofthis zone to the east is termed the Sevan–Akerazone (Okay & Sahinturk 1997). Some of the ophio-lites (i.e. Kırdag and Karadag ophiolites) discussedin this paper are located within this zone. In addi-tion, the Refahiye (Erzincan) and Sahvelet (Erzu-rum) ophiolites further west are important for theLate Cretaceous evolution of the Izmir–Ankara–Erzincan suture in the eastern Pontides (Fig. 2).

The objectives of this paper are: (1) to outline theinternal stratigraphy and the field relations of theRefahiye, Sahvelet, Karadag and Kırdag ophiolitesand the related units; (2) to present information onthe geochemistry and petrology of the ophiolitecrustal rocks; (3) to compare the ophiolites and therelated units with equivalent units in the Tethyan

Fig. 1. Tectonic map of the eastern Black Sea region (after Okay & Sahinturk 1997). Lines with black triangles indicateNeotethyan sutures with the original subduction polarity. Lines with open triangles are major post-Eocene thrusts.

O. PARLAK ET AL.10.1144/SP372.7

Geological Society, London, Special Publications published online October 8, 2012 as doi:

sutures of Anatolia and the Lesser Caucasus; and (4)to test alternative tectonic models and propose a newmodel based on the existing field and petrologicaldata.

Regional geology

The ophiolitic units in the NE of Izmir–Ankara–Erzincan suture zone are located in four areas(Fig. 2). These are, from west to east: (1) Refahiye(Erzincan); (2) Sahvelet (Erzurum); (3) Karadag(Erzurum); and (4) Kırdag (Erzurum) (Fig. 3).

The Refahiye ophiolite

The units beneath the ophiolite in the Refahiye areaare characterized by Palaeozoic to Mesozoic meta-morphic rocks and platform-type lithologies (Figs3 & 4; Ozgul 1981; Ozgul & Tursucu 1984; Ozen

et al. 2008). The Refahiye ophiolitic melange,which tectonically overlies the Munzur limestone,is observed in the south and southeastern part ofthe area studied (Fig. 4). It comprises altered pillowlavas, ophiolitic rock fragments, mudstone, pelagiclimestone, blocks of diabase dykes, limestone andvolcanogenic sandstone (Figs 3 & 5g). The bestexposures of the melange are seen along theErzincan–Erzurum road section, where blocks ofthe different lithologies are enveloped in a highlysheared and mylonitized, serpentinitic matrix(Fig. 4). The Refahiye ophiolite overlies the ophioli-tic melange with a tectonic contact (Fig. 3). TheRefahiye ophiolite was first described as the Refa-hiye ophiolitic melange by Yılmaz (1985) and laterdifferent parts of an ophiolitic body were mappedby Ozen et al. (2008). All of the units of an ophiolitepseudostratigraphy are present, except for a volcanicsection (Fig. 3). The contact between the ophio-litic subunits is tectonic. Mantle tectonites form the

Fig. 2. Simplified geological map of the Eastern Pontides (after Okay & Sahinturk1997). Numbers indicate theophiolites studied (I, Refahiye; II, Sahvelet; III, Karadag; and IV, Kırdag).

NE ANATOLIAN OPHIOLITES10.1144/SP372.7


Fig. 3. Tectonostratigraphy of the ophiolites and the related units in the study area. Data are from Aktimur et al. (1990, 1995), Bozkus (1990), Colakoglu et al. (2008, in press),Konak & Hakyemez (2008), Konak et al. (2001), Ozen et al. (2008), Yılmaz et al. (1986, 1988a, b, 1989).

O.

PA

RL

AK

ET

AL

.10.1144/SP372.7

Geological Society, L

ondon, Special Publications published online October 8, 2012 as doi:

Fig. 4. Geological map of the Refahiye (Erzincan) ophiolite (Aktimur et al. 1995; Ozen et al. 2008).

NE

AN

AT

OL

IAN

OP

HIO

LIT

ES

10.1144/SP372.7 G

eological Society, London, Special Publications published online O

ctober 8, 2012 as doi:

Fig. 5. Field views of rock units in the Refahiye (Erzincan) ophiolite.



base of the Refahiye ophiolite and crop out in differ-ent regions along a NW–SE trending lineament(Fig. 4). The mantle tectonites display foliation pat-terns dipping to the NE and north (Ozen et al. 2008).Lisvenite and laterite are observed along the tectoniccontacts within the mantle tectonites. The main rocktypes of the mantle tectonites are harzburgite withlesser amounts of dunite and chromite mineraliz-ation. The mantle tectonites are intruded by diabaseand pyroxenite dykes (Fig. 3). The ultramafic andmafic cumulates crop out in the central part of theophiolite body and rest tectonically on the mantletectonites (Figs 3 & 4). These rocks display well-preserved cumulate textures and are characterizedby a thick dunite layer, followed by dunite, pyroxe-nite, wehrlite and gabbro alternations (Fig. 5a–c).Disseminated banded chromite levels are observedwith the ultramafic cumulates. A large outcrop ofisotropic gabbroic rocks is seen between Yanlızbagand Tunacayırı, to the NNE of Erzincan. Anotherexposure is observed to the west of Mirpet Dagı(Fig. 4). The latter displays a smooth topographyand can easily be differentiated in the field by itslight grey to white alteration colour. Sheeted dykesmade up of diabase crop out east of Uzumlu intectonic contact with mantle tectonites, cumulatesand isotropic gabbros (Figs 4 & 5d). The contactbetween the sheeted dykes and the isotropic gab-bros is intruded by small plagiogranite intrusions(Figs 3 & 5e, f).

The Refahiye ophiolite is unconformablycovered by the Upper Maastrichtian–PalaeoceneCerpacindere Formation (Aktimur et al. 1990),which comprises alternations of conglomerate,sandstone, claystone, clayey limestone and sandylimestone, as seen in that the Mirpet Dagı region(Figs 3 & 4). The formation gradually passes intothe Lower-Middle Eocene Gulandere Formation(Aktimur et al. 1990) that includes conglomerate,sandstone, claystone, tuff, andesitic and basalticvolcanic rocks, as seen at Tanyeri, Esenyurt andGuzyurdu (Fig. 4).

The Sahvelet ophiolite

The underlying units in the study area are character-ized by medium to low-grade metamorphic rocks.The age of these rocks is reported to be Mesozoicbased on stratigraphic relations and fossil content(Fig. 3; Erdogan 1972; Yılmaz et al. 1986, 1988a, b).The melange unit (Bozyokustepe Melange) reststectonically on metamorphic rocks to the south ofthe area studied (Fig. 6). The melange, as first des-cribed by Yılmaz et al. (1988b), comprises schist,marble, limestone blocks, volcanics, gabbro, dia-base, peridotite and serpentinite (Fig. 7a–g). Mylo-nitization and shearing are pronounced at the edges

of the blocks. The volcanics are highly altered andexhibit a blueschist facies imprint (Yılmaz et al.1988b). Clastic sediments that form the matrix of themelange display weak foliation patterns, suggestingthe effects of metamorphism. Fossils obtained fromlimestone blocks have yielded ages ranging fromTriassic to Cenomanian (Yılmaz et al. 1989).

The melange unit is tectonically overlain by theSahvelet ophiolite (Yılmaz et al. 1989), which isprincipally serpentinized harzburgite with chromite-rich levels within dunitic zones and layered gab-bros (Figs 3 & 7c). The mantle tectonites are intrudedby numerous isolated diabase dykes at differentlevels of the ophiolite section (Fig. 7d). Wehrliticultramafic cumulates, gabbros and pegmatitic gab-broic rocks are also present within the layeredplutonics (Fig. 7e–g). All of these ophiolitic unitsare intruded by the granitic rocks (TozluyaylaGranitoids of Yılmaz et al. 1989; Fig. 3), which arerepresented by diorite, quartz-diorite and monzo-diorite. The age of the granitoid body was assumedto be Late Cretaceous by Yılmaz et al. (1989).

The oldest transgressive unit resting on theophiolitic rocks is the Aziziye Group, which con-sists of sandstone, sandy limestone, claystone andshale, ranging in age from Maastrichtian to Eocene.The Aziziye Group is conformably overlain by theEocene andesitic volcanics (Alibaba Volcanics ofYılmaz et al. 1989; Figs 3 & 6).

The Karadag ophiolite

The Karadag ophiolite is a part of the ‘Erzurum–Kars Ophiolite Zone’ of Konak et al. (2001). Thisrests tectonically on the Oligo-Miocene NarmanVolcanics (Figs 3 & 8) as a result of post-emplacement thrusting towards the south. TheKaradag ophiolite starts with highly serpentinizedmantle tectonites that are represented by harzburgiteand dunite. Podiform chromite occurences areobserved within the dunitic zones. Lisvenitic zones,50–70 m thick, are a conspicuous feature of the tec-tonic contacts within the Karadag ophiolite (Figs 8& 9a, b). A gabbroic section is sliced into the man-tle tectonites with a tectonic contact. This is repre-sented by gabbro and gabbronorite with rare bandsof anorthosite (Figs 8 & 9c). Cumulate gabbros passinto isotropic gabbro. The sheeted dyke complexand the volcanic section of the Karadag ophiolitewere mapped together in the field (Figs 8 & 9d, f).The sheeted dyke complex is characterized bysheeted diabase dykes that are locally intruded byplagiogranites, ranging in thickness from 10 cm toa few metres (Fig. 9e). The volcanic rocks are rep-resented by basaltic pillow lavas that displayprimary contact relationships with the underlyingsheeted dykes (Figs 3 & 9f). The ophiolitic rocks



Fig. 6. Geological map of the Sahvelet (Erzurum) ophiolite (Yılmaz et al. 1986; Colakoglu et al. 2008).

O.

PA

RL

AK

ET

AL

.10.1144/SP372.7



Fig. 7. Field photographs of rock units from the Sahvelet (Erzurum) ophiolite and the Bozyokustepe melange.



are covered by Upper Cretaceous to Eocene sedi-ments with a tectonic contact (Figs 3 & 8; Bozkus1990; Konak et al. 2001).

The Kırdag ophiolite

The Kırdag ophiolite is the easternmost of the oph-iolites studied (Fig. 2). The Kırdag ophiolite alsoforms part of the ‘Erzurum–Kars Ophiolite Zone’ ofKonak et al. (2001). The substratum of the Kırdagophiolite section (Figs 3 & 10) is represented by agabbroic unit made up of two-pyroxene gabbros(Konak et al. 2001). The gabbroic rocks are uncon-formably overlain by the Bardızcayı Formation(Konak et al. 2001), starting with 50 cm-thickbasal conglomerates that pass into sandy limestone,sandstone, mudstone, shale, siltstone and radiol-arite (Figs 3 & 10). Blocks of limestone and ophioli-tic fragments are present in the upper parts of the

succession. This unit displays phacoidal structuresand has been interpreted as trench sedimentsformed during subduction/accretion during Campa-nian to Maastrichtian time (Konak et al. 2001). Thisunit is tectonically overlain by a melange unit thatincludes a chaotic mixture of blocks of serpentinite,gabbro, microgabbro, diabase, volcanics, trondje-mite/tonalite, limestone, cherty-limestone, sand-stone, tuff and siltstone (Konak et al. 2001; Fig. 3).An ultramafic body, comprising serpentinized harz-burgite, dunite and pyroxenite, tectonically overliesthe melange unit (Fig. 3). Disseminated chromitesare observed in dunite-rich zones within the harzbur-gites of this thrust sheet. This ultramafic body isintruded by rare pyroxenitic, gabbroic and diabasicdykes (Konak et al. 2001). Tectonically overlyinglow-grade metamorphic rocks consist of alternationsof basic volcanics, volcaniclastics and sedimentaryrocks that are intruded by a Late Cretaceous grani-toid body (Konak et al. 2001; Konak & Hakyemez

Fig. 8. Geological map of the Karadag (Erzurum) ophiolite (Konak et al. 2001; Colakoglu et al. in press).



2008). The low-grade rocks exhibit a metamor-phic fabric and are regionally comparable to theAgvanis Metamorphics (Okay 1984), suggesting aTriassic age (Konak et al. 2001). A slice of themelange unit overlies the the low-grade metamor-phics and is represented by a chaotic mixture ofglaucophane-bearing greenish to blue metagabbros,metavolcanics, metaultrabasics, metagreywackes,

metasiltstones and metacherts (Figs 3 & 10). Themelange also includes lenses of recrystallized lime-stone, calcschist, metacalciturbidites and a meta-olistostrome (Konak et al. 2001). The existence ofglaucophane-bearing metabasics suggests highpressure–low temperature metamorphism within asubduction/accretion complex (Fig. 11a). The meta-basic rocks exhibit nematoblastic to lepidoblastic

Fig. 9. Field views of rock units from the Karadag (Erzurum) ophiolite. (a) Lisvenite occurence in a tectoniczone; (b) ultramafic cumulates; (c) gabbroic rocks; (d) cross-cutting relations in sheeted dyke complex; (e) plagiograniteintrusion in sheeted dykes; (f) altered basaltic pillow lavas.



Fig. 10. Geological map of the Kırdag (Erzurum) ophiolite (Konak et al. 2001; Colakoglu et al. in press).

O.

PA

RL

AK

ET

AL

.10.1144/SP372.7



Fig. 11. Photomicrographs of different rock types from the studied ophiolites.



texture and are mainly represented by tremolite, acti-nolite, glaucophane, albite, epidote, calcite andchlorite (Konak & Hakyemez 2008). The cover sedi-ments in the Kırdag region are characterized byEocene sedimentary rocks passing upwards intoandesitic volcanics (Konak et al. 2001; Konak &Hakyemez 2008; Figs 3 & 10).

Petrography of ophiolitic rocks

The Refahiye and Karadag ophiolites exhibit a com-plete ophiolite pseudostratigraphy other than for vol-canic rocks. In contrast, the Sahvelet sectionpreserves only the lower part of an ophiolite thatwas intruded by isolated dykes at different structurallevels. The most characteristic petrographical fea-tures of the ophiolitic units studied are summarizedbelow.

The mantle tectonites are represented by vari-ably serpentinized harzburgites and dunites. Theharzburgites show granular to mesh texture andcontain subhedral to anhedral olivine (50–60%)with a grain size of 0.5–1.2 mm, anhedral orthopyr-oxene (30–40%) with a grain size of 0.5–2.2 mm,clinopyroxene (3–5%) with a grain size of ,1.0 mmand chromite (1–2%) with a grain size of ,0.7 mm.The orthopyroxenes are kink-banded and generallytransformed to bastite lamels owing to plastic defor-mation (Fig. 11b). The dunites display mesh texture,reflecting a high degree of serpentinization. Anhe-dral serpentinized olivines are observed withinthe mesh texture. Minor orthopyroxene grains aredeformed and folded. Anhedral chromites (,5%)are present as elongate grains. The mantle tectonitesare intruded by numerous isolated dykes. These arelight grey to greenish in the field and range in thick-ness from a few centimetres to a few metres. Thediabase dykes exhibit intergranular to ophitic tex-tures (Fig. 11f ) and are composed mainly of plagio-clase (50–55%) and amphibole (35–40%). Thesubhedral to anhedral plagioclase exhibits saussuriti-zation. The amphiboles, which are mostly anhedral,are thought to have formed owing to alteration ofclinopyroxenes. Secondary phases include epi-dote and chlorite, quartz and calcite. The ultramaficcumulates are characterized by alternations ofdunite, wehrlite and clinopyroxenite near the baseof the section. The dunites exhibit an adcumulatetexture, but owing to serpentinization, they alsoexhibit a mesh texture. These rocks are characterizedby serpentinized olivine (90–95%) and anhedralchromite (5–10%) that both exhibit a pull-aparttexture. The wehrlites display a granular textureand are represented by olivine (65–75%), clinopyr-oxene (20–25%) and chromite (1–2%). The olivinesand the pyroxenes in the wehrlites are serpentinizedto variable degrees. The clinopyroxenites exhibit

adcumulate to mesocumulate texture and consist ofclinopyroxene (.90%) with a grain size of 0.6–4 mm and orthopyroxene (,10%) with a grain sizeof 0.5–3.5 mm, together with anhedral olivine(,2%; Fig. 11c). Mafic cumulates are representedby gabbro and gabbronorite. The gabbros displaygranular to poikilitic textures (Fig. 11d) and com-prise plagioclase (50–80%) with a grain size of0.5–2 mm, clinopyroxene (20–40%) with a grainsize of 0.5–3 mm, orthopyroxene (,5%) with agrain size of 0.4–1 mm and Fe–Ti oxide minerals.Chlorite, epidote and amphibole are secondaryphases. The gabbronorite displays granular to poiki-litic textures and is characterized by clinopyroxene(20–30%) with a grain size of 0.5–2 mm, orthopyr-oxene (10–15%) with a grain size of 0.5–2 mm, pla-gioclase (50–60%) with a grain size of 0.5–3 mmand opaque (Fe–Ti oxide) minerals. The isotropicgabbro section is represented by gabbros (Fig. 11e).These display a non-cumulus granular texture, andare characterized by subhedral to anhedral pla-gioclase (60–70%), clinopyroxene (20–25%) andopaque minerals (Fe–Ti oxide). Secondary phasesare amphibole, chlorite, epidote and prehnite. Thesheeted dykes are characterized by diabase, as wellexposed in the Refahiye and Karadag ophiolites.Individual dykes exhibit variable thicknesses rang-ing from 15–20 cm to 1 m, without obvious chilledmargins. The dykes display intergranular, subophiticand microgranular textures (Fig. 11f ). The mainmineral phases are plagioclase, pyroxene, amphi-bole, quartz and magnetite. The sheeted dykes arecommonly associated with secondary calcite, amphi-bole, chlorite and epidote. Plagiogranite intrusionscharacterize the Refahiye and Karadag ophiolitesnear the contact between isotropic gabbro and thesheeted dykes. The plagiogranite displays a fine tomedium-grained hypidiomorphic granular textureand is composed of subhedral to anhedral plagio-clase (45–50%), subhedral to interstitial quartz(c. 40%) and minor amounts (,10%) of amphibole(Fig. 11g). Accessory minerals are zircon, spheneand apatite. The plagioclase is often altered to saus-surite. The amphiboles are altered to chlorite, opaqueminerals and rarely to epidote in their rims. Aco-genetic volcanic section is only observed in theKaradag ophiolite section. The ophiolitic volcanicrocks are dominated by plagioclase- and pyroxene-phyric basalt lavas that display amygdaloidal,intersertal, hyalomicrolitic porphyritic to microliticporphyritic textures. Secondary phases are calcite,chlorite, quartz and zeolite (Fig. 11h).

Analytical methods

A total of 80 samples from the different parts of theRefahiye (35), Sahvelet (20) and Karadag (25)



ophiolites were analysed for major and trace ele-ments, including rare earths, at the Acme AnalyticalLaboratories Ltd, Canada. Major element contentswere determined from a LiBO2 fusion by ICP-ESby using 5 g of sample pulp. Trace element contentswere determined from an LiBO2 fusion by ICP-MSusing 5 g of sample pulp. The representative resultsare presented in Tables 1 and 2.

Geochemistry

The representative major, trace and rare earthelement contents of the different lithologies of theRefahiye, Sahvelet and Karadag ophiolites are givenin Tables 1 and 2. Loss on ignition values reach 9.4%in the volcanics, 2.6% in the sheeted dykes, 3.2% inthe isotropic gabbros and 2.7% in the isolated dykes.The loss on ignition values reflect variable second-ary alteration as indicated by the presence ofseveral mineral phases (e.g. epidote, calcite, chlor-ite), as summarized above. The mobility of manyelements during low-grade submarine alteration iswell known from a number of studies (e.g. Hartet al. 1974; Humphris & Thompson 1978). For thisreason, relatively immobile elements are used here,such as Ti, Zr, Y, Nb, Ta, Th, V and rare earth ele-ments (REE) to designate rock groups, petrogenetictrends and tectonic environments (Pearce & Cann1973; Floyd & Winchester 1975, 1978; Pearce &Norry 1979).

Except for two volcanic rocks (B-15 and B-16)from the Refahiye ophiolite, the Nb–Y ratios ofthe volcanics (0.03–0.55), the sheeted dykes (0.02–0.09), the isotropic gabbros (0.02–0.09) and the iso-lated dykes (0.03–0.07) suggest that all of the rocksanalysed were derived from a tholeiitic magma(Fig. 12). The Nb–Y ratios of the two volcanic rocks(1.09–1.32) indicate their derivation from an alka-line magma (Pearce 1982; Fig. 12). The rock classi-fication of the Refahiye, Sahvelet and Karadagophiolites is based on the Zr–Ti v. Nb–Y diagramof Pearce (1996) (Fig. 12). All of the rock types (vol-canics, sheeted dykes, isotropic gabbros and iso-lated dykes) plot exclusively in the basaltic field,whereas the two samples of volcanic rocks fromthe Refahiye ophiolite lie in the alkaline basalt field.

The TiO2 contents of the crustal rocks of theRefahiye ophiolite range from 0.4 to 2.69%. Thiscompares with 0.95–2.42% for the crustal rocksof the Karadag ophiolite and 0.66–1.73% for theisolated dykes of the Sahvelet ophiolite (Table 1).The Y content ranges from 6.3 to 44.1 ppm for thecrustal rocks of the Refahiye ophiolite, from 19.3to 50.3 ppm for the crustal rocks of the Karadagophiolite ophiolite and from 16.9 to 42 ppm for theisolated dykes of the Sahvelet ophiolite (Table 1).The Zr content ranges from 9.6 to 180.1 ppm for

the crustal rocks of the Refahiye ophiolite, from35.9 to 90.6 ppm for the crustal rocks of theKaradag ophiolite and from 32.4 to 97.4 ppm forthe isolated dykes of the Sahvelet ophiolite (Table 1).The V content ranges from 158 to 603 ppm for thecrustal rocks of the Refahiye ophiolite, from 256to 481 ppm for the crustal rocks of the Karadagophiolite and from 262 to 403 ppm for the isolateddykes of the Sahvelet ophiolite (Table 1).

Immobile element variations are shown inFigure 13. The Zr v. Y diagrams for the crustalrocks of the Refahiye, Karadag and Sahvelet ophio-lites display characteristic linear positive relation-ships, suggesting a co-magmatic origin for theserocks (Fig. 13). The plots of the two alkaline sam-ples (B-15 and B-16) in Figure 13 suggest distinctmagma source for their origin. The Zr v. Ti dia-grams for the same rocks exhibit positive corre-lations, consistent with a crystallizing assemblageof olivine, clinopyroxene and plagioclase (Pearce& Norry 1979; Pearce 1982). In contrast, the dataplotted on the Zr v. V diagrams (Fig. 13) display morescattered patterns for the same rocks. The inter-element relationships based on immobile elementssuggest that all of the ophiolitic crustal rocks fromthe eastern part of the Izmir–Ankara–Erzincansuture zone exhibit similar geochemical features,consistent with co-magmatic relationships duringthe formation of this oceanic crust.

The ratios of pairs of elements exhibiting differ-ent degrees of incompatibility (Ce–Y v. Zr–Nb) areshown in Figure 14. The extent of melting increasesfrom the upper left to lower right on this plot. As aresult, the alkaline basaltic rocks of the Refahiyeophiolite are thought to have been formed as a resultof smaller degrees of melting compared with thetholeiitic rocks of the other ophiolites studied thathave undergone higher degrees of melting (Fig. 14).Ce–Sm v. Sm–Yb ratios are plotted in Figure 14together with ocean island basalt (OIB) and mid-ocean ridge basalt (MORB) to characterize the mag-matic sources of the ophiolitic crustal rocks studied.The high Sm–Yb and Ce–Sm ratios of the alkalinebasaltic rocks from the Refahiye ophiolite suggestthat they were derived from melting of an OIB-likeenriched mantle source, whereas the low Sm–Yband Ce–Sm ratios of the tholeiitic crustal rocks inthe different ophiolites suggest derivation from amore depleted MORB-like mantle source (Fig. 14).

Chondrite normalized REE and normal midocean ridge basalt (N-MORB)-normalized spiderdiagrams for the volcanic rocks of the Refahiye andKaradag ophiolites are shown in Figure 15. The REEconcentrations of the volcanic rocks in the Refahiyeophiolite display two distinct patterns. The firstgroup varies from 4.22 to 33.33 times that of chondri-tic abundance. This group exhibits slightly light rareearth element (LREE)-depleted and LREE-enriched



Table 1. Representative major and trace element contents of the crustal rocks from the ophiolites

Volcanic rocks Sheeted dykes Isotropic gabbros Isolated dykes

Sample Refahiye Karadag Refahiye Karadag Refahiye Karadag Sahvelet

B-3 B-16 NV-4 NV-5 NV-9 D-8 D-16 D-18 ND-5 ND-6 ND-8 A-5 A-11 NG-2 NG-4 NG-5 NY-61 NY-63 NY-75

SiO2 45.03 44.96 52.86 51.67 51.18 56.85 52.06 48.52 57.25 51.00 55.90 51.00 48.16 50.73 49.45 50.59 51.47 50.89 56.45TiO2 0.66 2.69 1.78 1.32 2.12 1.43 0.40 2.60 1.25 2.42 1.04 2.08 0.73 0.95 1.10 1.45 1.68 0.66 1.73Al2O3 14.69 14.59 13.19 14.47 14.31 14.58 17.44 13.95 14.78 13.50 15.00 14.87 17.63 14.07 15.56 15.01 14.39 15.07 14.49FeO* 7.40 11.54 12.57 11.40 13.23 11.48 8.60 16.67 10.58 15.63 11.69 13.37 11.05 11.56 11.04 12.36 12.65 9.46 12.88MnO 0.13 0.15 0.12 0.16 0.25 0.17 0.15 0.26 0.15 0.20 0.17 0.21 0.17 0.19 0.18 0.18 0.20 0.15 0.19MgO 7.47 6.34 4.72 5.29 3.19 3.41 6.89 4.79 3.45 4.68 4.44 4.85 7.66 4.35 7.26 6.15 4.83 7.67 3.16CaO 13.63 9.56 4.29 5.20 5.91 5.04 9.24 6.67 5.27 6.75 5.77 8.53 10.71 9.47 10.70 8.60 8.32 10.78 6.11Na2O 3.29 3.72 4.52 3.56 3.72 5.32 3.37 4.65 5.24 3.07 3.59 3.64 2.13 5.02 2.77 3.46 4.14 3.12 4.08K2O 0.09 1.10 0.16 0.62 0.11 0.47 0.36 0.26 0.03 0.28 0.37 0.28 0.17 0.16 0.13 0.33 1.03 0.48 0.91P2O5 0.05 0.40 0.15 0.10 0.17 0.13 ,0.01 0.18 0.10 0.23 0.08 0.17 0.02 0.07 0.08 0.15 0.16 0.06 0.17Cr2O3 0.06 0.02 ,0.002 0.00 ,0.002 ,0.002 0.01 ,0.002 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 ,0.002 0.03 0.02 0.01 0.02 ,0.001LOI 7.20 4.60 5.50 6.00 5.70 0.90 1.30 1.20 1.80 2.00 1.80 0.80 1.30 3.20 1.40 1.40 1.80 2.10 0.50

Total 99.75 99.66 99.84 99.80 99.83 99.84 99.81 99.74 99.88 99.80 99.85 99.80 99.79 99.82 99.68 99.76 100.68 100.47 100.67

Ba 10 298 18 28 99 48 64 31 8 24 33 48 29 11 29 45 101.9 199.7 143.8Co 35.6 42.2 24.7 33.9 46 23.8 31 42.8 26 36.9 31.6 35.5 45.6 36.4 41.3 42.1 32.6 36.5 27.8Cs ,0.1 0.1 ,0.1 0.4 0.2 ,0,.1 0.2 ,0.1 ,0.1 ,0.1 0.1 ,0.1 0.2 ,0.1 ,0.1 0.1 2.7 1 0.9Ga 11.6 20.2 16.5 16.2 18.6 16.7 11.9 18.4 15.5 18 16.1 19.1 14.6 14.7 17 18.8 16.9 11.4 16.6Hf 1.1 4.9 3 2.1 3.4 2.4 0.6 3 2.7 4 1.5 3.8 0.3 1.4 1.6 2.7 2.8 0.9 2.7Nb 0.6 33.3 2.3 1.6 2.8 2.6 0.2 3.3 1.5 3.3 0.9 3.3 0.3 0.7 1.2 1.8 2.7 0.6 1.9Rb 1.2 16.4 1 5.6 0.8 4.4 4.9 1.7 0.1 1.7 2.5 2 2.9 2.3 1.1 3.2 18.5 8.9 16.3Sr 278.2 498.6 93.9 97.1 102 137.8 147.6 142 74.8 123.6 115.8 149.2 129.6 27 148.5 192.4 487.7 764.5 563.2Ta ,0.1 2.1 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.1 ,0.1 0.2 0.1 0.2 ,0.1 0.3 ,0.1 ,0.1 ,0.1 ,0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1Ni 110.9 60.9 2.1 19.9 18.1 2.1 2.8 8.2 4.4 10.7 8.6 8.6 4.4 6.2 28.1 14.8 9.1 23.9 2.5Sc 29 27 34 34 38 29 36 40 32 37 37 37 48 37 41 39 36 39 32Th ,0.2 2.7 0.5 0.3 0.4 ,0.2 ,0.2 ,0.2 0.3 0.6 0.2 0.3 ,0.2 ,0.2 ,0.2 0.6 0.8 0.2 0.4Pb 441.7 6 0.4 0.5 0.5 11.1 6.4 2.8 0.4 0.1 0.4 1.7 10.8 0.3 0.2 ,0.1 1.4 8.1 0.9U ,0.1 1.3 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.1 ,0.1 ,0.1 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 ,0.1 0.1 ,0.1 ,0.1 0.2 0.1 0.2V 195 287 297 355 481 158 221 603 302 414 344 363 383 345 304 331 303 265 290Zr 30.7 180.1 91.7 68.2 112 80.8 13.7 111.4 77.1 134.3 48.8 125.7 9.6 40.3 58.6 90.6 97.4 32.4 89.7Y 17.5 25.2 46.9 29.4 34.6 36.6 9.6 39.3 32.4 50.3 24.4 43.7 6.3 19.3 22.4 31 38.1 17.6 42Ti–Y 226.10 639.94 227.53 269.16 367.32 234.23 249.79 396.62 231.29 288.43 255.52 285.35 694.66 295.09 294.40 280.41 264.35 224.81 246.94Nb–Y 0.03 1.32 0.05 0.05 0.08 0.07 0.02 0.08 0.05 0.07 0.04 0.08 0.05 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.03 0.05Zr–Ti 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01

LOI, Loss on ignition.

O.

PA

RL

AK

ET

AL

.10.1144/SP372.7



Table 2. Representative rare earth element contents of the crustal rocks from the ophiolites

Volcanic rocks Sheeted dykes Isotrope gabbros Isolated dykes

Sample Refahiye Karadag Refahiye Karadag Refahiye Karadag Sahvelet

B-3 B-16 NV-4 NV-5 NV-9 D-8 D-16 D-18 ND-5 ND-6 ND-8 A-5 A-11 NG-2 NG-4 NG-5 NY-61 NY-63 NY-75

La 1.00 28.10 5.10 3.50 5.10 4.90 0.50 4.90 3.20 6.50 2.00 5.9 0.5 1.9 2.7 4.1 6.4 1.8 4Ce 3.20 63.10 14.70 9.70 14.00 14.20 1.20 15.20 9.30 19.00 5.90 16.6 1.4 5.4 8 12.3 17 4.5 12Pr 0.61 7.65 2.51 1.58 2.34 2.31 0.24 2.52 1.60 3.06 1.04 2.76 0.2 0.81 1.19 1.82 2.38 0.73 1.94Nd 3.50 34.90 14.00 8.50 12.40 11.90 1.50 13.80 9.00 15.70 6.10 14 1.4 4.4 7 10.4 12 3.9 10.4Sm 1.37 6.56 4.29 2.69 3.79 3.73 0.65 4.52 2.93 4.94 2.08 4.49 0.47 1.7 2.15 3.19 3.55 1.37 3.49Eu 0.60 2.17 1.47 1.05 1.34 1.38 0.32 1.56 1.14 1.66 0.77 1.54 0.27 0.64 0.89 1.21 1.4 0.68 1.29Gd 2.19 6.20 5.83 3.71 4.82 5.00 1.15 5.61 4.13 6.65 3.01 5.81 0.73 2.37 3.09 4.28 4.8 2.13 4.96Tb 0.45 0.97 1.16 0.76 0.94 1.00 0.24 1.13 0.84 1.32 0.62 1.15 0.15 0.51 0.62 0.88 1 0.44 1.02Dy 2.75 4.99 7.01 4.61 5.67 6.26 1.51 6.87 5.26 8.02 3.97 6.93 1 3.49 3.91 5.53 5.45 2.46 5.74Ho 0.60 0.87 1.57 1.04 1.23 1.34 0.37 1.49 1.19 1.77 0.88 1.54 0.22 0.69 0.9 1.23 1.18 0.55 1.27Er 1.79 2.20 4.60 3.15 3.42 4.02 1.08 4.34 3.52 5.44 2.66 4.37 0.68 2.26 2.69 3.62 3.66 1.66 3.81Tm 0.28 0.29 0.67 0.49 0.54 0.60 0.15 0.66 0.54 0.79 0.42 0.68 0.11 0.33 0.39 0.55 0.53 0.25 0.55Yb 1.75 1.84 3.99 3.04 3.35 4.01 1.16 4.19 3.41 5.00 2.57 4.4 0.7 2.16 2.33 3.34 3.52 1.62 3.89Lu 0.25 0.26 0.59 0.46 0.49 0.58 0.16 0.61 0.54 0.77 0.39 0.63 0.1 0.35 0.38 0.53 0.53 0.26 0.58La–Yb 0.57 15.27 1.28 1.15 1.52 1.22 0.43 1.17 0.94 1.30 0.78 1.34 0.71 0.88 1.16 1.23 1.82 1.11 1.03

NE

AN

AT

OL

IAN

OP

HIO

LIT

ES

10.1144/SP372.7 G



patterns (LaN–YbN ¼ 0.41–2.10; Fig. 15). In con-trast, the second group varies from 10.23 to 118.57times chondritic abundance (Fig. 15) and hasLREE-enriched patterns (LaN–YbN ¼ 7.25–11;Fig. 15). The spider diagram of the first group exhi-bits features such as negative Nb and Ta anomalies,positive Pb anomalies and also flat patterns of highfield strength (HFS) elements relative to N-MORB(Fig. 15). There is also an enrichment in Th.

Th (within the large ion lithophile element group)is a relatively stable and reliable indicator of asubduction zone component (Wood et al. 1979;Pearce 1983). In addition, the negative Nb anomalyis taken to indicate a subduction-related tectonic set-ting for the first group of volcanic rocks (Arculus &Powel 1986; Yogodzinski et al. 1993; Wallin &Metcalf 1998). In contrast, the second group ofvolcanic rocks exhibits enrichment in large ion

Fig. 12. (a) Ti–Y v. Nb–Y (after Pearce 1982) and (b) Zr–Ti v. Nb–Y (after Pearce 1996) diagrams for the crustalrocks of the ophiolites in Erzincan–Erzurum region.



Fig. 13. Variations of selected trace elements for the crustal rocks of the ophiolites in Erzincan–Erzurum region.

NE

AN

AT

OL

IAN

OP

HIO

LIT

ES

10.1144/SP372.7 G



lithophile (LIL) elements and also in Nb–Ta(Fig. 15). The second volcanic group in the Refahiyeophiolite shows close similarities to OIB. The REEconcentrations of the volcanic rocks from theKaradag ophiolite vary from 14.76 to 31.01 timesthat of chondrite. These elements exhibit nearly flatREE patterns (LaN–YbN ¼ 0.83–1.09). A spiderdiagram of the volcanic rocks of the Karadag ophio-lite displays the typical trends of volcanic rocksformed in a supra-subduction zone setting, notablystrong Nb depletion. These rocks show similaritieswith the first group of volcanic rocks of the Refahiyeophiolite (Fig. 15).

The chondrite-normalized REE and N-MORB-normalized spider diagrams of the sheeted dykerocks of the Refahiye and Karadag ophiolites areshown in Figure 16. The sheeted dykes of the Refa-hiye ophiolite exhibit two distinct REE patterns.The first group varies from 9.3 to 31.6 times thatof chondritic abundance. This group exhibits flatREE patterns (LaN–YbN ¼ 0.6–1.0; Fig. 16). Thespider diagram of the first group (Fig. 16) displayssimilarities to the first group of volcanic rocks in theKaradag ophiolite, again suggesting its formation in

a subduction-related setting. In contrast, the secondgroup of sheeted dykes in the Refahiye ophiolitevaries from 1.96 to 6.8 times that of chondrite.This group exhibits spoon-shaped REE patterns,typical of boninites (Fig. 16), with an LaN–SmN

ratio of 0.5 and an SmN–YbN ratio of 0.62. TheN-MORB-normalized multi-element diagram ofthe second group of sheeted dykes indicates thatthey are generally depleted in both HFS and lowfield strength (LFS) elements (Fig. 16). The REEand multi-element patterns of the second groupof sheeted dykes in the Refahiye ophiolite indi-cate their similarity to boninitic magma compo-sitions as in forearc regions of oceanic island arcs(Crawford et al. 1989; Fallon & Crawford 1991).The REE patterns of the sheeted dykes from theKaradag ophiolite vary from 8.4 to 35.3 timesthat of chondritic abundance. These dykes exhibitnearly flat REE patterns (LaN–YbN ¼ 0.56–0.93;Fig. 16). A spider diagram of the sheeted dykesdisplays LIL element enrichment, strong Nb–Tadepletion and flat HFS elements compared withN-MORB, again suggesting formation in a subduc-tion-related setting (Fig. 16).

Fig. 14. (a) Zr–Nb v. Ce–Y and (b) Ce–Sm v. Sm–Yb ratio–ratio plots for the crustal rocks of the ophiolites inErzincan–Erzurum region.



Chondrite-normalized REE and N-MORB-normalized spider diagrams of the isotropic gab-broic rocks of the Refahiye and Karadag ophiolites

are shown in Figure 17. The isotropic gabbros ofthe Refahiye ophiolite exhibit two distinct REE pat-terns. The first group varies from 22.04 to 30.75

Fig. 16. Chondrite normalized REE and N-MORB normalized spider diagrams for the sheeted dyke rocks of theRefahiye and Karadag ophiolites (normalizing values are from Sun & McDonough 1989).

Fig. 15. Chondrite normalized rare earth element (REE) and normal mid ocean ridge basalt (N-MORB) normalizedspider diagrams for the volcanic rocks of the Refahiye and Karadag ophiolites (normalizing values are from Sun &McDonough 1989).



times that of chondritic abundance. This group hasflat REE patterns (LaN–YbN ¼ 0.96–1.18; Fig. 17).A spider diagram of the first group displays simi-larities to the first group of volcanic rocks and thesheeted dykes in the Refahiye ophiolite, suggestingits formation in a subduction-related setting(Fig. 17). In contrast, the second group of isotropicgabbros in the Refahiye ophiolite exhibits moredepleted REE (LaN–YbN ¼ 0.48–0.62), positiveEu anomalies and spoon-shaped LREE patterns.The N-MORB-normalized multi-element diagramof the second group of isotropic gabbros exhibitsstrong Nb depletion and a general depletion inHFS and LFS elements compared with MORB(Fig. 17). The REE and multi-element patterns ofthe second group of isotropic gabbros in the Refa-hiye ophiolite suggest derivation from a relativelydepleted mantle source in a supra-subduction zonesetting. In contrast, the REE patterns of the isotropicgabbros of the Karadag ophiolite display less vari-ation than the isotropic gabbros of the Refahiyeophiolite, which vary from 7.6 to 23.5 times that ofchondritic abundance. These gabbros have slightlyLREE-depleted patterns (LaN–YbN ¼ 0.53–0.88;Fig. 17). A spider diagram of the isotropic gabbrosdisplays LIL element enrichment, strong Nb–Tadepletion and flat HFS element patterns comparedwith N-MORB (Fig. 17), again suggesting forma-tion in a subduction-related setting, co-magmatic

with the volcanics and sheeted dykes in the samesuite.

Chondrite-normalized REE and N-MORB-normalized spider diagrams of the isolated dykesof the Sahvelet ophiolite are shown in Figure 18.The dykes vary from 6.8 to 27.8 times that of chon-dritic abundance. The dykes exhibit slightly LREE-enriched and LREE-depleted patterns (LaN–YbN ¼0.6–1.3; Fig. 18). Several features stand out in aspider diagram of the isolated dykes; that is, enrich-ment in LIL (i.e. Rb, Ba, Th, K) elements, positiveSr and Pb anomalies, negative Nb anomalies andflat patterns of HFS elements relative to N-MORB(Fig. 18). All of these features of the isolated dykessuggest formation in a subduction-related tectonicsetting (Arculus & Powel 1986; Yogodzinski et al.1993; Wallin & Metcalf 1998).

The Th–Yb v. Ta–Yb ratio-ratio plot can beused to discriminate between depleted mantle(MORB) and enriched mantle (intraplate) sources(Pearce 1982). The addition of a subduction chemi-cal component via slab-derived fluids/melts resultsin an increase in Th–Yb in the mantle source, asshown by the arrow in Figure 19. On these plotsmost of the crustal rocks of the Refahiye ophioliteplot near the depleted mantle source region,enriched by subduction zone fluids. In contrast, thetwo volcanic rocks from the Refahiye ophioliteplot within the enriched mantle source/intraplate

Fig. 17. Chondrite normalized REE and N-MORB normalized spider diagrams for the isotropic gabbroic rocks of theRefahiye and Karadag ophiolites (normalizing values are from Sun & McDonough 1989).



basalt region (Fig. 19) without any subduction zoneinfluence. The crustal rocks of the Karadag ophioliteand also the isolated dykes of the Sahvelet ophioliteplot exclusively within the depleted mantle source

region, consistent with derivation from a MORB-type depleted mantle source, enriched in subductionzone fluids (Fig. 19).

Discussion

The geochemistry of the ophiolites studied in theeastern part of the Izmir–Ankara–Erzincan suturezone in NE Anatolia suggests that they formed ina supra-subduction zone (SSZ) tectonic settingduring the Late Cretaceous, possibly in a forearcor incipient arc above a northward-dipping intra-oceanic subduction zone. Magmas that are eruptedin modern SSZ settings have distinctive chemical,isotopic and mineralogic characteristics, comparedwith N-MORB or OIB. SSZ-type ophiolites are com-monly characterized by boninites and island arcseries rocks, whereas ophiolites from backarc basinsare predominantly formed from rocks similar tomid-ocean ridge basalts (Hawkins 2003). The ageof the ophiolites studied is not well constrainedbecause of the lack of published radiometric dating.A Late Cretaceous age has been suggested for theRefahiye ophiolite to the east of Erzincan, basedon stratigraphic relationships (Yılmaz 1985; Kocyi-git 1990; Aktimur et al. 1995; Okay & Sahinturk1997; Rice et al. 2009). However, Jurassic ophioliticages have been reported from the Ankara melange tothe west (Dilek & Thy 2006; Celik et al. 2011) andin the Caucasus to the east of the area studied(Galoyan et al. 2009). Two of the ophiolites studied,namely the Refahiye and Karadag ophiolites, displaymore or less intact ophiolite successions (Fig. 3),whereas the Sahvelet and Kırdag ophiolites are

Fig. 18. Chondrite normalized REE and N-MORBnormalized spider diagrams for the isolated dykes of theSahvelet ophiolite (normalizing values are from Sun &McDonough 1989).

Fig. 19. Ta–Yb v. Th–Yb diagrams (after Pearce 1982) for the crustal rocks of the ophiolites in the Erzincan–Erzurum region.



mainly represented by a subduction–accretion com-plex. The lower part of the ophiolites in the region ischaracterized by harzburgitic tectonites with smallamounts of dunites and pyroxenites, as seen in othersuture zones in Anatolia (Parlak 1996; Goncuogluet al. 2000; Parlak et al. 2000, 2002, 2004, 2009;Vergili & Parlak 2005; Rice et al. 2006; Rızaogluet al. 2006; Uysal et al. 2007, 2009; Sarıfakıogluet al. 2009). These ultramafic bodies are intrudedby numerous diabase/microgabbroic, to pyroxeniticisolated dykes at different structural levels. Sim-ilar isolated dykes are reported from the Mersin,Pozantı–Karsantı, Beysehir, Tekirova, Lycian,Pınarbası and Divrigi ophiolites (Parlak & Delaloye1996; Collins & Robertson 1998; Dilek et al. 1999;Parlak 2000; Celik & Delaloye 2003; Vergili &Parlak 2005; Parlak et al. 2006; Celik & Chiaradia2008; Bagcı & Parlak 2009; Robertson et al. 2009).These dykes are chemically similar to island arc tho-leiites and are interpreted as the products of incipi-ent arc magmatism. In terms of crystallization orderof the cumulus phases (Pearce et al. 1984) and thewhole rock chemistry (Sarıfakıoglu et al. 2009),the ultramafic to mafic cumulates of the ophiolitesstudied are suggestive of formation in an SSZsetting. These rocks are similar to the cumulates ofthe Mersin, Pozantı–Karsantı, Kızıldag (Hatay),Tekirova (Antalya), Goksun, Komurhan (Elazıg)ophiolites (Parlak et al. 1996, 2000, 2002, 2004;Bagcı et al. 2005, 2006; Rızaoglu et al. 2006).The isotropic gabbros in the Refahiye and Karadagophiolites indicate variable degree of partial melt-ing within the depleted mantle source region in asubduction-related tectonic setting. The first groupof isotropic gabbros of the Refahiye ophiolite andthe isotropic gabbros of the Karadag ophioliteformed as a result of smaller degrees of partialmelting (Zr ¼ 35–125 ppm, Y ¼ 19–43 ppm) com-pared with the second group of isotropic gabbros inthe Refahiye ophiolite (Zr ¼ 10–15 ppm, Y ¼ 6–13 ppm). The isotropic gabbros of the ophiolitesstudied are similar to those of the Tekirova (Antalya),Kızıldag (Hatay), Goksun (Kahramanmaras) andSarıkaraman (Central Anatolia) (Yalınız & Goncuo-glu 1999; Parlak et al. 2004; Bagcı et al. 2008;Bagcı & Parlak 2009) ophiolites. The geochemistryof the sheeted dykes of the Refahiye and Karadagophiolites in the Erzincan–Erzurum region suggeststhat these rocks underwent progressive sourcedepletion to form island arc tholeiites and finallyboninites. A fore-arc tectonic setting, therefore,seems appropriate for the generation of the sheeteddykes in the Izmir–Ankara–Erzincan Ocean duringthe Late Cretaceous. Similar rocks have beenreported from other ophiolites including Tekirova(Antalya) (Bagcı & Parlak 2009), Kızıldag (Hatay)(Bagcı et al. 2008), the Troodos (Malpas &Langdon 1984), the Albanide–Hellenide ophiolite

belt, including the Pindos ophiolites in Greece (e.g.Beccaluva et al. 1984, 2004; Beccaluva & Serri1988; Pe-Piper et al. 2004; Saccani & Photiades2004, 2005). The first group of volcanic rocks inthe Refahiye ophiolite and the volcanic rocks ofthe Karadag ophiolites are chemically similarto island arc tholeiites formed during incipient arcmagmatism in a supra-subduction zone setting.These volcanic rocks are also very similar to ophio-lite-related volcanic rocks throughout the easternMediterranean region (Pearce et al. 1984; Yalınızet al. 2000; Robertson 2002; Dilek & Flower 2003;Parlak 2006; Parlak et al. 2009). In contrast, thesecond group of volcanic rocks of the Refahiyeophiolite differs from the others and is thought tohave been derived from an enriched mantle sourcewithout a subduction zone influence. These rocksare observed within the ophiolitic melange and aresimilar to within-plate alkaline basaltic rocks, asdocumented by Rice et al. (2006, 2009) to the westof Erzincan. The within-plate alkali basalts areUpper Jurassic to Lower Cretaceous in age andhave also been reported from the several other partsof the Neotethyan oceanic domain, including theMersin ophiolite melange (Parlak 1996; Parlak &Robertson 2004), the Ankara melange (Floyd 1993;Rojay et al. 2001, 2004), the Dagkuplu melangein Eskisehir area (Goncuoglu et al. 2006), the Ana-tolide melanges of central Anatolia (Robertsonet al. 2009) and the Taurdide melanges (Andrew& Robertson 2002; Mackintosh & Robertson 2012).

The ophiolitic rocks in the study area are com-parable with those in the central and eastern Pon-tides (Rice et al. 2006, 2009; Sarıfakıoglu et al.2009) as well as many other Neotethyan ophiolitesin Turkey. In contrast, the ophiolitic rocks of theSevan–Akera part of the Lesser Caucasus displaycontrasting features in terms of tectonic setting, agesetting and ophiolite lithology. The ophiolitic rocksin the Sevan–Akera zone display structural featuresreminiscent of a slow-spreading ridge segment (e.g.western Alpine ophiolites) and are inferred to haveformed in a backarc basin setting during Lower–Middle Jurassic time. These ophiolites include calc-alkaline volcanics but lack a sheeted dyke complex(Galoyan et al. 2009; Rolland et al. 2009a, b). Incontrast, the ophiolites of the Erzincan–Erzurumregion possess a more complete oceanic lithosphericsection and are made up of tholeiitic–boninitic vol-canic, to sheeted dyke rocks, which are geochemi-cally consistent with a fore-arc tectonic setting.These ophiolites include well-developed cumulatesand sheeted dyke complex, suggesting a similarityto a fast-spreading ridge segment.

Several models have been proposed for the LateCretaceous tectonic development of the EasternPontides and its continuation to the Lesser Caucasus(Okay & Sahinturk 1997; Rice et al. 2006, 2009;



Rolland et al. 2009a, b; Ustaomer & Robertson2010; Ustaomer et al. 2012). Okay & Sahinturk(1997) suggested south-dipping intraoceanic sub-duction during the Neocomian and the emplacementof an ophiolitic melange onto the southern conti-nental margin of the Eastern Pontides during theCenomanian–Turonian. This was followed by aninferred flip in subduction polarity and the develop-ment of a volcanic arc during Turonian to Daniantime zone in the Eastern Pontides above a north-dipping subduction zone. Rice et al. (2006, 2009)suggested several alternatives, including a singlenorth-dipping subduction zone, two north-dippingsubduction zones (relatively fixed in space), and amobile north-dipping subduction zone (migratingsouthwards with time). The prefered model of Riceet al. (2009) suggests that a single north-dippingsubduction zone was activated beneath the Eurasianmargin forming the Eastern Pontide magmatic arcprior to Campanian. The authors suggested amigration of the subduction zone to the south andthe generation of a SSZ-type ophiolite above anorth-dipping intraoceanic subduction zone. Thiswas associated with the construction of an oceanicarc (Karadag formation: Rice et al. 2009). Thearc-related magmas intruded the SSZ ophioliteafter its formation. The northward emplacement ofthe ophiolite at the southern margin of the Eurasiain the Pontides was then explained by subductionroll-forward, activated by the approaching Tauridecontinental margin (Rice et al. 2009). Screens ofmetamorphic rocks within the sheeted dykes weresuggested to represent rifted fragments of thePontide basement/cover, which suggested a near-continental margin setting for the early stages ofSSZ spreading (Rice et al. 2009).

On the other hand, Rolland et al. (2009a) docu-mented Late Cretaceous blueschist assemblages inthe Amassia–Stepanavan suture zone in Armeniaand suggested the existence of two synchronoussubduction zones, the first one beneath the Eurasianforming the active continental margin in the northand the second one within the ocean to the south.They applied this model to northern Armenia andits westward extension into the Izmir–Ankara–Erzincan suture zone of northern Turkey. Rollandet al. (2009b) and Galoyan et al. (2009) reported aJurassic age for the gabbros of the Sevan ophiolitesand inferrred that a double subduction zone modelwas applicable since the Jurassic. In addition,Ustaomer and Robertson (2010) have proposed atectonic model that involves long-lived, but episo-dic, northward subduction of Tethys since Early–Middle Jurassic time. In this interpretation, supra-subduction zone-type ophiolites were createdduring the Upper Cretaceous within the TethyanOcean. Ophiolites, ophiolitic melange and relatedblueschists were emplaced northwards onto the

distal edge of the Pontide margin, eroded and thentransgressed by terrigenous sediments, locally byMaastrichtian time.

The geological, geochemical data obtained fromthe ophiolites and related units in the Erzincan–Erzurum region, as well as their correlation withthe neighbouring tectonic units, could be consistentwith two of the above alternative tectonic models,namely the single north-dipping subduction zonemodel (near the Pontide margin), as proposed byRice et al. (2009), or the two north-dipping subduc-tion zones model, one beneath the Pontide mar-gin to generate the Pontide arc and a secondintraoceanic subduction zone further south to gener-ate the SSZ-type ophiolites in a arc-forearc setting(Rolland et al. 2009a). The single north-dipping sub-duction zone model requires roll-back of the sub-ducting slab towards the south, which could havegenerated the SSZ-type ophiolites in a forearcsetting, coupled with an accretionary prism with ablueschist assemblage and a volcanic arc duringthe Late Cretaceous. This was followed by eithersouthward emplacement of ophiolites onto theTauride carbonate platform (Munzur Massif) as aresult of trench-passive margin collision or north-ward emplacement of arc and backarc basin crustonto the Pontide margin. The two north-dippingsubduction zone model requires two trench-accretionary melanges, one continental margin anda second ocean. Several accretionary melangesexist along the suture zone in the eastern Pontidesand as a result this model remains open to futureconsideration.

As indicated above, the ophiolites of the LesserCaucasus display distinctive structural features,geochemistry and age. These ophiolites were radio-metrically dated as Jurassic and are seen as formingin a backarc tectonic setting. However, there are stillno published radiometric ages for the ophiolites inthe eastern Pontides. A minimum Late Paleocene–Eocene age for the formation and emplacement ofthe ophiolites is given by the oldest unconformablyoverlying sediments (Yılmaz 1985; Kocyigit 1990;Aktimur et al. 1995; Okay & Sahinturk 1997; Riceet al. 2009). The Campanian–Maastrichtian intra-oceanic arc unit (Karadag Formation) could be ofbroadly similar age to the ophiolites in the region.More data are needed to test the applicability ofthe different tectonic models.

Conclusions

(1) The geochemistry of the ophiolites studied inthe eastern part of the Izmir–Ankara–Erzincansuture zone in NE Anatolia suggests thatthese ophiolites formed in a subduction-relatedtectonic setting, possibly a forearc-incipient arc



above a north-dipping intraoceanic subductionzone during the Late Cretaceous.

(2) The Refahiye ophiolite exhibits a completesection of oceanic lithosphere, from themantle tectonites to the sheeted dykes exceptfor volcanic rocks. The crustal rocks suggestarc–forearc origin for their tectonic setting.Volcanics are only observed within themelange associated with the Refahiye ophio-lite and display the geochemical features ofocean island basalts and volcanic arc basalts.

(3) The Karadag ophiolite displays a more or lessintact ophiolite pseudostratigraphy. The geo-chemistry is relatively constant in contrast tothe Refahiye ophiolite and has affinities withisland arc tholeiites of a suprasubductionzone environment.

(4) The Sahvelet ophiolite to the south of Erzu-rum displays only the lower section of theoceanic lithosphere, underlain by melange.The mantle rocks are intruded by numerousisolated dykes at different structural level.The geochemistry of the dykes suggests thatthey formed in a subduction-related tectonicsetting and indicate their derivation fromisland arc tholeiites.

(5) A single north-dipping subduction zone or twonorth-dipping subduction zone models may beapplicable to the geodynamic evolution of theregion. Both models may explain the gener-ation of the SSZ-type ophiolites in a forearcsetting, coupled with an accretionary prismwith blueschist assemblage and a volcanicarc during the Late Cretaceous.

This project was funded by MTA (General Directorateof Mineral Research and Exploration) and CukurovaUniversity Scientific Research Unit (Project No:MMF2011BAP13). We are grateful to Yann Roland andAlastair Robertson for their valuable suggestions thatimproved the quality of the manuscript. Osman Parlakgratefully acknowledges the financial support of TUBA(Turkish Academy of Sciences) in the frame of theYoung Scientist Award Programme TUBA-GEBIP/2003-111).

References

Adamıa, S. A., Chkhotua, T., Kekelıa, M., Lordkıpa-

nıdze, M., Shavıshvılı, I. & Zakarıadze, G. 1981.Tectonics of the caucasus and adjoining regions –implications fort he evolution of the Tethyan oceans.Journal of Structural Geology, 3, 437–447.

Akıncı, O. T. 1984. The eastern Pontide volcanosedimen-tary belt and associated massive sulphide deposits. In:Dixon, J. E. & Robertson, A. H. F. (eds) The Geo-logical Evolution of the Eastern Mediterranean. Geo-logical Society, London, Special Publications, 17,415–428.

Aktimur, H. T., Tekirli, M. E. & Yurdakul, M. E. 1990.Geology of Sivas–Erzincan Tertiary Basin [Sivas–Erzincan Tersiyer havzasının jeolojisi]. Maden Tetkikve Arama Dergisi, 111, 25–36.

Aktimur, H. T., Yurdakul, M. E., Sarıaslan, M.,Goksel, M., Kecer, M., Yıldırım, T. & Akkus, I.1995. Geology of Erzincan region and petrology ofQuaternary volcanic rocks. In: Erler, A., Ercan, T.,Bingol, E. & Orcen, S. (eds) Geology of the BlackSea Region. General Directorate of Mineral Researchand Exploration and Chamber of Geological Engin-eers, Ankara, 82–90.

Andrew, T. & Robertson, A. H. F. 2002. The Beysehir–Hoyran–Hadim Nappes: genesis and emplacement ofMesozoic marginal and oceanic units of the northernNeotethys in southern Turkey. Journal of the Geologi-cal Society, London, 159, 529–543.

Arculus, R. J. & Powel, R. 1986. Source componentmixing in the regions of arc magma generation.Journal of Geophysical Research, 91, 5913–5926.

Bagcı, U. & Parlak, O. 2009. Petrology of Tekirova(Antalya) ophiolite (southern Turkey): evidence fordiverse magma generations and their tectonic impli-cations during Neotethyan-subduction. InternationalJournal of Earth Sciences, 98, 387–405.

Bagcı, U., Parlak, O. & Hoeck, V. 2005. Whole rock andmineral chemistry of cumulates from the Kızıldag(Hatay) ophiolite (Turkey): clues for multiple magmageneration during crustal accretion in the southernNeotethyan ocean. Mineralogical Magazine, 69,53–76.

Bagcı, U., Parlak, O. & Hoeck, V. 2006. Geochemicalcharacter and tectonic environment of ultramaficto mafic cumulates from the Tekirova (Antalya) ophio-lite (Southern Turkey). Geological Journal, 41,193–219.

Bagci, U., Parlak, O. & Hock, V. 2008. Geochemistryand tectonic environment of diverse magma gener-ations forming the crustal units of the Kızıldag(Hatay) ophiolite, Southern Turkey. Turkish Journalof Earth Sciences, 17, 43–71.

Beccaluva, L. & Serrı, G. 1988. Boninitic and low-Tisubduction-related lavas from intraoceanic arc-backarcsystems and low-Ti ophiolites: a reappraisal of theirpetrogenesis and original tectonic setting. Tectonophy-sics, 146, 291–315.

Beccaluva, L., Ohnenstetter, D., Ohnenstetter, M.& Paupy, A. 1984. Two magmatic series with islandarc affinities within the Vourinos ophiolite. Contri-butions to Mineralogy and Petrology, 85, 253–271.

Beccaluva, L., Coltortı, M., Gıunta, G. & Sıena, F.2004. Tethyan vs. Cordilleran ophiolites: a reappraisalof distinctive tectonomagmatic features of suprasub-duction complexes in relation to the subductionmode. Tectonophysics, 393, 163–174.

Bozkus, C. 1990. Stratigraphy of the northeastern part ofOltu–Narman (Erzurum) Tertiary basin [Oltu–Narman (Erzurum) Tersiyer havzası kuzeydogusunun(Komurlu) stratigrafisi]. Turkiye Jeoloji Bulteni, 33,2, 47–56.

Cagatay, M. N. & Boyle, D. R. 1980. Geology, geochem-istry and hydrothermal alteration of the Madenkoymassive-sulphide deposits, Eastern Black Sea region,Turkey. In: Ridge, J. D. (ed.) International Association



of the Genesis of Ore Deposits (IAGOD). 5th Sym-posium Proceedings, E. Schweizerbartsche Verlags-buchhandlung, Stuttgart, 653–678.

Celik, O. F. & Chiaradia, M. 2008. Geochemicaland petrological aspects of dike intrusions in theLycian ophiolites (SW Turkey): a case study for thedike emplacement along the Tauride Belt Ophiolites.International Journal of Earth Sciences, 97,1151–1164.

Celik, O. F. & Delaloye, M. 2003. Origin of meta-morphic soles and their post kinematic mafic dykeswarms in the Antalya and Lycian ophiolites, SWTurkey. Geological Journal, 38, 235–256.

Celik, O. F., Marzoli, A., Marschik, R., Chiaradia,M., Neubauer, N. & Oz, I. 2011. Early–Middle Jur-assic intra-oceanic subduction in the Izmir–Ankara–Erzincan Ocean, Northern Turkey. Tectonophysics,509, 120–134.

Colakoglu, O. A., Ozen, H., Turkel, A., Sayak, H.,Donmez, C. & Odabası, I. 2008. Report of Cr–Niprospection around Tekman–Pasinler–Karayazı(Erzurum) [Tekman–Pasinler–Karayazı (Erzurum)yoreleri Cr–Ni prospeksiyon raporu]. General Direc-torate of Mineral Research and Exploration (MTA),Report 11117.

Colakoglu, O. A., Donmez, C., Turkel, A. & Sayak, H.(in press). Report of Cr–Ni prospection around Oltu–Narman–Horasan (Erzurum) [Oltu–Narman–Horasan (Erzurum) yoreleri Cr–Ni prospeksiyonraporu]. General Directorate of Mineral Researchand Exploration (MTA).

Collıns, A. & Robertson, A. H. F. 1998. Processes ofLate Cretaceous to Late Miocene episodic thrust-sheettranslation in the Lycian Taurides, southwesternTurkey. Journal of the Geological Society, 155,759–772.

Crawford, A. J., Falloon, T. J. & Green, D. H. 1989.Classification, petrogenesis and tectonic setting ofboninites. In: Crawford, A. J. (ed.) Boninites andRelated Rocks. Unwin Hyman, London, 1–49.

Dilek, Y. & Flower, M. F. J. 2003. Arc-trench rollbackand forearc accretion: 2. A model template for ophio-lites in Albania, Cyprus, and Oman. In: Dilek, Y. &Robinson, P. T. (eds) Ophiolites in Earth History. Geo-logical Society, London, Special Publications, 218,43–68.

Dilek, Y. & Thy, P. 2006. Age and petrogenesis of plagi-ogranite intrusions in the Ankara melange, centralTurkey. The Island Arc, 15, 44–57.

Dilek, Y., Thy, P., Hacker, B. & Grundvık, S. 1999.Structure and petrology of Tauride ophiolites andmafic dyke intrusions (Turkey): implications for theNeotethyan ocean. Geological Society of AmericaBulletin, 111, 1192–1216.

Erdogan, T. 1972. Geology of Erzurum–Karayazı regionand its petroleum potential [Erzurum–Karayazı bolge-sinin jeolojisi ve petrol imkanları]. General Directorateof Mineral Research and Exploration (MTA), Report4845.

Evans, I. & Hall, S. A. 1990. Palaeomagnetic constraintson the tectonic evolution of the Sakarya continent,northwestern Anatolia. Tectonophysics, 182, 357–372.

Falloon, T. J. & Crawford, A. J. 1991. The petrogenesisof high-Ca boninite lavas dredged from the northern

Tonga ridge. Earth Planetary Science Letters, 102,375–394.

Floyd, P. A. 1993. Geochemical discrimination and petro-genesis of alkalic basalt sequences in part of theAnkara melange, central Turkey. Journal of Geologi-cal Society, London, 150, 541–550.

Floyd, P. A. & Winchester, J. A. 1975. Magma type andtectonic setting discrimination using immobile ele-ments. Earth Planetary Science Letters, 27, 211–218.

Floyd, P. A. & Winchester, J. A. 1978. Identificationand discrimination of altered and metamorphosedvolcanic rocks using immobile elements. ChemicalGeology, 21, 291–306.

Galoyan, G., Rolland, Y., Sosson, M., Corsını, M. &Melkonyan, R. 2007. Evidence for superposedMORB, oceanic plateau and volcanic arc series in theLesser Caucasus (Stepanavan, Armenia). ComptesRendus Geosciences, 339, 482–492.

Galoyan, GH., Rolland, Y., Sosson, M., Corsini, M.,Billo, S., Verati, C. & Melkonyan, R. 2009.Geology, geochemistry and 40Ar/39Ar dating ofSevan ophiolites (Lesser Caucasus, Armenia): evidencefor Jurassic Back-arc opening and hot spot eventbetween the South Armenian Block and Eurasia.Journal of Asian Earth Sciences, 34, 135–153.

Goncuoglu, M. C., Turhan, N., Senturk, K., Ozcan,A. & Uysal, S. 2000. A geotraverse across NWTurkey: tectonic units of the Central Sakarya regionand their tectonic evolution. In: Bozkurt, E.,Winchester, J. A. & Piper, J. D. (eds) Tectonicsand Magmatism in Turkey and the Surrounding Area.Geological Society, London, Special Publications,173, 139–162.

Goncuoglu, M. C., Yalınız, M. K. & Tekin, U. K. 2006.Geochemistry, tectono-magmatic discrimination andradiolarian ages of basic extrusives from the Izmir–Ankara suture belt (NW Turkey): time constraints forthe Neotethyan evolution. Ofioliti, 31, 25–38.

Gorur, N., Oktay, F. Y., Seymen, I. & Sengor, A. M. C.1984. Paleotectonic evolution of Tuz Golu Basincomplex, central Turkey. In: Dixon, J. E. & Robert-

son, A. H. F. (eds) The Geological Evolution of theEastern Mediterranean. Geological Society, London,Special Publications, 17, 81–96.

Gorur, N., Tuysuz, O. & Sengor, A. M. C. 1998.Tectonic evolution of the central Anatolian basins.International Geology Review, 40, 831–850.

Hakyemez, H. Y. & Konak, N. 2001. Tectonic evolutionand stratigraphy of Eocene basins in the easternmostpart of the Pontides. In: Proceedings of the 2ndInternational Symposium on the Petroleum Geologyand Hydrocarbon Potential of the Black Sea Area.Turkish Association of Petroleum Geologists,Ankara, Special Publications, 4, 19–25.

Hart, S. R., Erlank, A. J. & Kable, E. J. D. 1974. Seafloor basalt alteration: some chemical and Sr isotopiceffects. Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology,44, 219–230.

Hawkıns, J. W. 2003. Geology of supra-subductionzones – implications for the origin of ophiolites. In:Dilek, Y. & Newcomb, S. (eds) Ophiolite Conceptand the Evolution of Geological Thought. GeologicalSociety of America, Boulder, CO, Special Papers,373, 227–268.



Hess, J. C., Aretz, J., Gurbanov, A. G., Emmermann, R.& Lıppolt, H. J. 1995. Subduction related Jurassicandesites in the northern Great Caucasus. GeologischeRundschau, 84, 319–333.

Hırst, D. M. & Egin, D. 1979. Localization of massive,polymetallic sulphide ores in the northern HarsitRiver area, Pontide Volcanic Belt, NortheasternTurkey. Annales de la Societe Geologique de Belgique,102, 465–484.

Humphris, S. E. & Thompson, G. 1978. Trace elementmobility during hydrothermal alteration of oceanicbasalts. Geochimica Cosmochimica Acta, 42,127–136.

Kocyigit, A. 1990. Structural relationships of three suturezones to the west of Erzincan (NE Turkey): Karakaya,Inner Tauride and Erzincan sutures. In: 8th PetroleumCongress of Turkey. Turkish Association of PetroleumGeologists, UCTEA Chamber of Petroleum Engineers,Ankara, 152–161.

Konak, N. & Hakyemez, H. Y. 2008. 1/100 000 scaleTurkis geology map series, Kars-G48 sheet [1/100 000 olcekli Turkiye jeoloji haritaları serisi,Kars-G48 paftası]. Maden Tetkik ve Arama GenelMudurlugu, Jeoloji Etutleri Dairesi, 104, 69s.

Konak, N., Hakyemez, H. Y., Bilgic, T., Bilgin, R.,Hepsen, N. & Ercan, T. 2001. Geology of northeastPontides (Oltu–Olur–Senkaya–Narman–Uzundere–Yusufeli) [Kuzeydogu Pontidlerin (Oltu–Olur–Senkaya–Narman–Uzundere–Yusufeli) Jeolojisi].General Directorate of Mineral Research and Explora-tion (MTA), Report 10489.

Kraeff, A. 1963. Geology and mineral deposits oft heHopa–Mugrul region. Bulletin of the MineralResearch and Exploration Institute of Turkey, 60,44–59.

Mackintosh, P. W. & Robertson, A. H. F. 2012. Sedi-mentary and structural evidence for two-phase UpperCretaceous and Eocene emplacement of the Tauridethrust sheets in central southern Turkey. In: Robert-

son, A. H. F., Parlak, O. & Unlugenc, U. C. (eds)Geological Development of Anatolia and the Eastern-most Mediterranean Region. Geological Society,London, Special Publications, 372.

Malpas, J. & Langdon, G. 1984. Petrology of upperpillow lava suite, Troodos ophiolite, Cyprus. In:Gass, I. G., Lıppard, S. J. & Shelton, A. W. (eds)Ophiolites and Oceanic Lithosphere. GeologicalSociety, London, Special Publications, 13, 155–167.

Nıkıshın, A. M., Korotaev, M. V., Ershov, A. V. &Brunet, M. F. 2003. The Black Sea Basin: tectonichistory and Neogene–Quaternary rapid subsidencemodelling. Sedimentary Geology, 156, 149–168.

Okay, A. I. 1984. The geology of the Agvanis meta-morphic rocks and neighbouring formations. Bulletinof the Mineral Research and Exploration Institute ofTurkey, 99/100, 16–36.

Okay, A.I. & Sahinturk, O. 1997. Geology of the EasternPontides. In: Robınson, A. G. (ed.) Regional and Pet-roleum Geology of the Black Sea and SurroundingRegion. American Association of Petroleum Geol-ogists, Tulsa, OK, Memoirs, 68, 291–311.

Okay, A. I. & Tuysuz, O. 1999. Tethyan sutures of north-ern Turkey. In: Durand, B., Jolivet, L., Horvath, F.& Seranne, M. (eds) The Mediterranean Basins:

Tertiary Extensions within the Alpine Orogen. Geo-logical Society, London, Special Publications, 156,474–515.

Okay, A. I., Tuysuz, O., Satır, M., Ozkan-Altıner, S.,Altıner, D., Sherlock, S. & Eren, R. H. 2006. Cre-taceous and Triassic subduction-accretion, highpressure–low temperature metamorphism, and conti-nental growth in the Central Pontides, Turkey. Geo-logical Society of America Bulletin, 118, 1247–1269.

Ozen, H., Colakoglu, A. O., Sayak, H., Donmez, C.,Turkel, A. & Odabası, I. 2008. Report of Cr–Ni pro-spection and ophiolite geology of Erzincan–Tercan–Cayırlı region [Erzincan–Tercan–Cayırlı yoresiofiyolit jeolojisi ve krom–nikel prospeksiyon raporu].General Directorate of Mineral Research and Explora-tion (MTA), Report 11055.

Ozgul, N. 1981. Geology of the Munzur mountains[Munzur Daglarının Jeolojisi]. General Directorateof Mineral Research and Exploration (MTA), Report6995.

Ozgul, N. & Tursucu, A. 1984. Stratigraphy of theMesozoic carbonate sequence of the Munzur moun-tains (Eastern Taurides). In: Tekeli, O. & Goncuo-

glu, M. C. (eds) Geology of the Taurus Belt.Maden Tetkik ve Arama Enstitusu Dergisi, Ankara,173–180.

Parlak, O. 1996. Geochemistry and geochronology of theMersin ophiolite within the eastern Mediterraneantectonic frame. PhD thesis, Terre Environnement, 6,University of Geneva.

Parlak, O. 2000. Geochemistry and significance of maficdyke swarms in the Pozantı–Karsantı ophiolite(Southern Turkey). Turkish Journal of Earth Sciences,9, 29–38.

Parlak, O. 2006. Petrology of Neotethyan ophiolites inTurkey: distinct magma generations and their tectonicsignificance. In: Gerzina, N., Resımıc-Sarıc, K.,Karamata, S., Sudar, M. & Hrvatovıc, H. (eds)Mesozoic ophiolite belts of northern part of the BalkanPeninsula. International Symposium, Belgrade-BanjaLuka, 31 May to 6 June, 106–109.

Parlak, O. & Delaloye, M. 1996. Geochemistry andtiming of post-metamorphic dike emplacement in theMersin ophiolite (southern Turkey): new age con-straints from 40Ar/39Ar geochronology. Terra Nova,8, 585–592.

Parlak, O. & Robertson, A. H. F. 2004. Theophiolite-related Mersin melange, southern Turkey:its role in the tectonic-sedimentary setting of theTethys in the eastern Mediterranean region. GeologicalMagazine, 141, 257–286.

Parlak, O., Delaloye, M. & Bingol, E. 1996. Mineralchemistry of ultramafic and mafic cumulates as an indi-cator of the arc-related origin of the Mersin ophiolite(southern Turkey). Geologische Rundschau, 85,647–661.

Parlak, O., Hoeck, V. & Delaloye, M. 2000. Suprasub-duction zone origin of the Pozanti–Karsanti ophiolite(southern Turkey) deduced from whole-rock andmineral chemistry of the gabbroic cumulates. In:Bozkurt, E., Wınchester, J. A. & Pıper, J. D. A.(eds) Tectonics and Magmatism in Turkey and the Sur-rounding Area. Geological Society, London, SpecialPublications, 173, 219–234.



Parlak, O., Hoeck, V. & Delaloye, M. 2002. Thesuprasubduction zone Pozantı–Karsantı ophiolite,southern Turkey: evidence for high-pressure crystalfractionation of ultramafic cumulates. Lithos, 65,205–224.

Parlak, O., Hoeck, V., Kozlu, H. & Delaloye, M.2004. Oceanic crust generation in an island arc tectonicsetting, SE Anatolian Orogenic Belt (Turkey). Geo-logical Magazine, 141, 583–603.

Parlak, O., Yılmaz, H. & Boztug, D. 2006. Geo-chemistry and tectonic setting of the metamorphicsole rocks and isolated dykes from the Divrigi ophio-lite (Sivas, Turkey): evidence for melt generationwithin an asthenospheric window prior to ophioliteemplacement. Turkish Journal of Earth Sciences, 15,25–45.

Parlak, O., Rızaoglu, T., Bagcı, U., Karaoglan, F. &Hoeck, V. 2009. Tectonic significance of the geo-chemistry and petrology of ophiolites in southeastAnatolia. Tectonophysics, 473, 173–187.

Pearce, J. A. 1982. Trace element characteristics of lavasfrom destructive plate boundaries. In: Thorpe, R. S.(ed.) Andesites. Wiley, New York, 525–548.

Pearce, J. A. 1983. Role of the sub-continental lithospherein magma genesis at active continental margins. In:Hawkesworth, C. J. & Norry, M. J. (eds) Continen-tal Basalts and Mantle Xenoliths. Shiva, Nantwich,230–249.

Pearce, J. A. 1996. A users guide to basalt discriminationdiagrams. In: Wyman, D. A. (ed.) Trace Element Geo-chemistry of Volcanic Rocks: Applications for MassiveSulphide Exploration. Geochemistry Short CourseNotes. Geological Association of Canada, St John’s,Newfoundland, 12, 79–113.

Pearce, J. A. & Cann, J. R. 1973. Tectonic setting ofbasaltic volcanic rocks determined using traceelement analysis. Earth Planetary Science Letters,19, 290–300.

Pearce, J. A. & Norry, M. J. 1979. Petrogenetic impli-cations of Ti, Zr, Y, and Nb variations in volcanicrocks. Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology,69, 33–47.

Pearce, J. A., Lıppard, S. J. & Roberts, S. 1984. Charac-teristics and tectonic significance of supra-subductionzone ophiolites. In: Kokelaar, B. P. & Howells,M. F. (eds) Marginal Basin Geology: Volcanic andAssociated Sedimentary and Tectonic Processes inModern and Ancient Marginal Basins. GeologicalSociety, London, Special Publications, 16, 77–89.

Peccerıllıo, A. & Taylor, S. R. 1976. Geochemistry ofEocene calc-alkaline volcanic rocks from the Kasta-monu area, northern Turkey. Contributions to Mineral-ogy and Petrology, 58, 63–81.

Pe-Pıper, G., Tsıkouras, B. & Hatzıpanagıotou, K.2004. Evolution of boninites and island-arc tholeiitesin the Pindos ophiolite, Greece. Geological Magazine,141, 455–469.

Pourteau, A., Candan, O. & Oberhansli, R. 2010.High-pressure metasediments in central Turkey: con-straints on the Neotethyan closure history. Tectonics,29, TC5004. http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2009TC002650

Rıce, S. P., Robertson, A. H. F. & Ustaomer, T. 2006.Late Cretaceous–Early Ceneozoic tectonic evolution

of the Eurasian active margin in the Central andEastern Pontides, northern Turkey. In: Robertson,A. H. F. & Mountrakıs, D. (eds) Tectonic Develop-ment of the Eastern Mediterranean Region. Geologi-cal Society, London, Special Publications, 260,413–445.

Rıce, S. P., Robertson, A. H. F., Ustaomer, T., Inan, N.& Taslı, K. 2009. Late Cretaceous–Early Eocene tec-tonic development of the Tethyan suture zone in theErzincan area, Eastern Pontides, Turkey. GeologicalMagazine, 146, 567–590.

Rızaoglu, T., Parlak, O., Hock, V. & Isler, F. 2006.Nature and significance of Late Cretaceous ophioliticrocks and its relation to the Baskil granitoid in Elazıgregion, SE Turkey. In: Robertson, A. H. F. & Moun-

trakıs, D. (eds) Tectonic Development of the EasternMediterranean Region. Geological Society, London,Special Publications, 260, 327–350.

Robertson, A. H. F. 2002. Overview of the genesis andemplacement of Mesozoic ophiolites in the EasternMediterranean Tethyan region. Lithos, 65, 1–67.

Robertson, A. H. F. & Dıxon, J. E. D. 1984. Introduction:aspects of the geological evolution of the Eastern Med-iterranean. In: Dixon, J. E. D. & Robertson, A. H. F.(eds) The Geological Evolution of the Eastern Mediter-ranean. Geological Society, London, Special Publi-cations, 17, 1–74.

Robertson, A. H. F., Parlak, O. & Ustaomer, T. 2009.Melange genesis and ophiolite emplacement relatedto subduction of the northern margin of the Tauride–Anatolide continent, central and western Turkey.In: van Hınsbergen, D. J. J., Edwards, M. A. &Govers, R. (eds) Collision and Collapse at the Africa–Arabia–Eurasia Subduction Zone. Geological Society,London, Special Publications, 311, 9–66.

ROBERTSON, A. H. F., PARLAK, O. & USTAOMER, T. Inreview. Mesozoic-Early Cenozoic palaeogeographicdevelopment of Southern Turkey and the easternmostMediterranean region: evidence from the inter-relations of continental and carbonate platform units.In: ROBERTSON, A. H. F., PARLAK, O. & UNLUGENc, U.C. (eds) Geological Development of Anatolia and theEastern Mediterranean Region. Geological Society,London, Special Publications, 372.

Robinson, A., Spadını, G., Cloetınhg, S. & Rudat, J.1995. Stratigraphic evolution of the Black Sea: infer-ences from basin modelling. Marine and PetroleumGeology, 12, 821–835.

Rojay, B., Yalınız, M. K. & Altıner, D. 2001. Tectonicimplications of some Cretaceous pillow basalts fromthe northern Anatolian ophiolitic melange (CentralAnatolia–Turkey) to the evolution of Neotethys.Turkish Journal of Earth Science, 10, 93–102.

Rojay, B., Altıner, D., Ozkan-Altıner, S., Onen,P. A., James, S. & Thırlwall, M. W. 2004. Geody-namic significance of the Cretaceous pillow lavasfrom North Anatolian Ophiolitic Melange Belt(Central Anatolia, Turkey): geochemical and paleonto-logical constraints. Geodynamica Acta, 17, 349–361.

Rolland, Y., Bıllo, S., Corsını, M., Sasson, M. &Galoyan, G. 2009a. Blueschists of the Amassia–Ste-panavan suture zone (Armenia): linking Tethyssubduction history from E-Turkey to W-Iran. Inter-national Journal of Earth Sciences, 98, 533–550.



http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2009TC002650

http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2009TC002650

http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2009TC002650

Rolland, Y., Galoyan, G., Bosch, D., Sosson, M.,Corsini, M., Fornari, M. & Verati, C. 2009b. Juras-sic Back-arc and hot-spot related series in the Arme-nian ophiolites – Implications for the obductionprocess. Lithos, 112, 163–187.

Rolland, Y., Galoyan, G., Sosson, M., Melkonyan, R.& Avagyan, A. 2010. The Armenian Ophiolite:insights for Jurassic back-arc formation, Lower Cretac-eous hot spot magmatism and Upper Cretaceousobduction over the South Armenian Block. In:Sosson, M., Kaymakcı, N., Stephenson, R. A., Ber-

gerat, F. & Starostenko, V. (eds) SedimentaryBasin Tectonics from the Black Sea and Caucasus tothe Arabian Platform. Geological Society, London,Special Publications, 340, 353–382.

Saccanı, E. & Photıades, A. 2004. Mid-ocean ridge andsupra-subduction affinities in the Pindos Massif ophio-lites (Greece): implications for magma genesis in aproto-forearc setting. Lithos, 73, 229–253.

Saccanı, E. & Photıades, A. 2005. Petrogenesis and tec-tonomagmatic significance of volcanic and subvolca-nic rocks in the Albanide–Hellenide ophioliticmelanges. Island Arc, 14, 494–516.

Sarıfakıoglu, E., Ozen, H. & Wınchester, J. A. 2009.Petrogenesis of Refahiye ophiolite and its tectonic sig-nificance for Neotethyan ophiolites along the Izmir–Ankara–Erzincan Suture zone. Turkish Journal ofEarth Sciences, 18, 187–207.

Sengor, A. M. C. & Yılmaz, Y. 1981. Tethyan evolutionof Turkey: a plate tectonic approach. Tectonophysics,75, 181–241.

Sosson, M. & Rolland, Y. et al. 2010. Subductions,obduction and collision in the Lesser Caucasus(Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia), new insights. In:Sosson, M., Kaymakci, N., Stephanson, R., Ber-

garat, F. & Storatchenoko, V. (eds) SedimentaryBasin Tectonics from the Black Sea and Caucasus tothe Arabian Platform. Geological Society, London,Special Publications, 340, 329–352.

Sun, S. S. & Mcdonough, W. F. 1989. Chemical and iso-topic systematics of ocean basalts: implications formantle composition and processes. In: Saunders,A. D. & Norry, M. J. (eds) Magmatism in the OceanBasins. Geological Society, London, Special Publi-cations, 42, 313–345.

Topuz, G., Alther, R., Satır, M. & Schwartz, W. H.2004. Low-grade metamorphic rocks from the Pulurcomplex, NE Turkey: implications for the pre-Liassicevolution of the Eastern Pontides. InternationalJournal of Earth Sciences, 93, 72–91.

Ustaomer, T. & Robertson, A. H. F. 2010. Late Paleo-zoic–Early Cenozoic tectonic development of theeastern Pontides (Artvin area), Turkey: stages ofclosure of Tethys along the southern margin ofEurasia. In: Sosson, M., Kaymakcı, N., Stephenson,R. A., Bergerat, F. & Starostenko, V. (eds) Sedi-mentary Basin Tectonics from the Black Sea and Cau-casus to the Arabian Platform. Geological Society,London, Special Publications, 340, 281–327.

Ustaomer, T., Robertson, A. H. F., Ustaomer, P. A.,Gerdes, A. & Peytcheva, I. 2012. Constraints onVariscan and Cimmerian magmatism and metamorph-ism in the Pontides (Yusufeli–Artvin area), NE Turkeyfrom U–Pb dating and granite geochemistry. In:

Robertson, A. H. F., Parlak, O. & Unlugenc,U. C. (eds) Geological Development of Anatolia andthe Easternmost Mediterranean Region. GeologicalSociety, London, Special Publications, 372. FirstPublished online November 1, 2012, http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1144/SP372.13

Uysal, I., Kaliwoda, M., Karslı, O., Tarkian, M. &Sadıklar, M. B. 2007. Compositional variations as aresult of partial melting and melt-peridotite interaction inan upper mantle section from the Ortaca area, southwes-tern Turkey. Canadian Mineralogist, 45, 1471–1493.

Uysal, I., Tarkian, M., Sadıklar, M. B., Zaccarini, F.,Meisel, T., Garuti, G. & Heidrich, S. 2009. Petrol-ogy of high-Cr and high-Al ophiolitic chromititesfrom the Mugla, SW Turkey: implications from com-position of chromite, solid inclusions of Platinum-group mineral (PGM), silicate, and base-metalmineral (BMM), and Os-isotope geochemistry. Contri-butions to Mineralogy and Petrology, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00410-009-0402-9

Vergili, O. & Parlak, O. 2005. Geochemistry and tec-tonic setting of metamorphic sole rocks and maficdikes from the Pınarbası (Kayseri) ophiolite, CentralAnatolia. Ofioliti, 30, 37–52.

Wallın, E. T. & Metcalf, R. V. 1998. Supra-subductionzone ophiolites formed in an extensional forearc:Trinity terrane, Klamath mountains, California.Journal of Geology, 106, 591–608.

Wood, D. A., Joron, J. L. & Treuil, M. 1979. A reapprai-sal of the use of trace elements to classify and discrimi-nate between magma series erupted in differenttectonic settings. Earth Planetary Science Letters, 45,326–336.

Yalınız, M. K. & Goncuoglu, M. C. 1999. Clinopyrox-ene compositions of the isotropic gabbros from the Sar-ıkaraman ophiolite: new evidence on suprasubductionzone type magma genesis in central Anatolia. TurkishJournal of Earth Sciences, 8, 103–111.

Yalınız, M. K., Floyd, P. A. & Goncuoglu, M. C. 2000.Geochemistry of volcanic rocks from the Cicekdag,ophiolite, central anatolia, Turkey, and their inferredtectonic setting within the Northern branch of the neo-tethyan ocean. In: Bozkurt, E., Winchester, J. A. &Piper, J. D. A. (eds) Tectonics and Magmatism inTurkey and the Surrounding Area. GeologicalSociety, London, Special Publications, 173, 171–182.

Yılmaz, A. 1985. Structural evolution and geology of theregion between the Kelkit river and Munzur mountains(in Turkish). Turkiye Jeoloji Kurumu Bulteni, 28,79–92.

Yılmaz, A., Terlemez, I. & Uysal, S. 1986. Erzurumguneydogusunda yer alan Hınıs, Tekman ve Karayazıarasının jeolojisi. General Directorate of MineralResearch and Exploration (MTA), Report 8089.

Yılmaz, A., Terlemez, I. & Uysal, S. 1988a. Some stra-tigraphic and tectonic characteristics of the area aroundHınıs (southeast of Erzurum). Bulletin of the MineralResearch and Exploration, 108, 1–22.

Yılmaz, A., Terlemez, I. & Uysal, S. 1988b. Geologicalcharacteristics and structural evolution of the ophioliticunits around Sakaltutan Dagı (Erzurum). METUJournal of Pure and Applied Sciences, 21, 221–235.

Yılmaz, A., Terlemez, I. & Uysal, S. 1989. Geologyof Sakaltutan region to the southeast of Erzurum



http://dx.doi.org/10.1144/SP372.13



http://dx.doi.org/

http://dx.doi.org/

http://dx.doi.org/

[Erzurum guneydogusu Sakaltutan Dagı yoresinin jeo-lojisi]. General Directorate of Mineral Research andExploration (MTA), Report 8903.

Yılmaz, Y., Tuysuz, O., Yigitbas, E., Genc, S. C. &Sengor, A. M. C. 1997. Geology and tectonic evolutionof the Pontides. In: Robinson, A. G. (ed.) Regional andPetroleum Geology of the Black Sea and SurroundingRegions. American Association of Petroleum Geol-ogists, Tulsa, OK, Memoirs, 68, 183–226.

Yılmaz, A., Adamıa, S., Chabukıanı, A., Chkhotua, T.,Erdogan, K., Tuzcu, S. & Karabıyıkoglu, M. F.

2000. Structural correlation of the southern Trans-caucasus (Georgia)-eastern Pontides (Turkey). In:Bozkurt, E., Winchester, J. A. & Piper, J. D. A.(eds) Tectonics and Magmatism in Turkey and theSurrounding Area. Geological Society, London,Special Publications, 173, 171–182.

Yogodzınskı, G. M., Volynets, O. N., Koloskov, A. V.,Selıverstov, N. I. & Matvenkov, V. V. 1993.Magnesian andesites and the subduction componentin strongly calc-alkaline series at Piip volcano, farwestern Aleutians. Journal of Petrology, 35, 163–204.



NE ANATOLIAN OPHIOLITES

Documents

Transcript of NE ANATOLIAN OPHIOLITES