Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology xxx (2014) xxx–xxx

PALAEO-06792; No of Pages 10

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology

j ourna l homepage: www.e lsev ie r .com/ locate /pa laeo

Reconstructing Upper Cretaceous (Cenomanian) paleoenvironments inArmenia based on Radiolaria and benthic Foraminifera; implications forthe geodynamic evolution of the Tethyan realm in the Lesser Caucasus

Taniel Danelian a,⁎, Alexandra Zambetakis-Lekkas b, Ghazar Galoyan c, Marc Sosson d, Gayané Asatryan c,Benoit Hubert e, Araiyk Grigoryan c

a University Lille 1, Department of Earth Sciences, CNRS-UMR 8217 Géosystèmes, SN5, 59655 Villeneuve d'Ascq, Franceb University of Athens, Department of Geology & Geoenvironments, Panepistimiopolis-Zografou, 15784 Athens, Greecec Institute of Geological Sciences, National Academy of Sciences of Armenia, 24a Baghramian Av., Yerevan 375019, Republic of Armeniad University of Nice-Sophia Antipolis, CNRS-UMR Géoazur, Francee Catholic University of Lille, CNRS-UMR 8217 Géosystèmes, 59000 Lille, France

⁎ Corresponding author. Tel.: +33 3 20 33 61 08.E-mail address: taniel.danelian@univ-lille1.fr (T. Dane

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.palaeo.2014.03.0110031-0182/© 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Please cite this article as: Danelian, T., et al., Rand benthic Foraminifera; implications..., Pal

a b s t r a c t

a r t i c l e i n f o

Article history:Received 8 July 2013Received in revised form 5 February 2014Accepted 6 March 2014Available online xxxx

Keywords:ArmeniaAmasia ophioliteSouth Armenian BlockCenomanianRadiolariaForaminifera

Radiolarians extracted from the sedimentary cover member of the Amasia ophiolite (NW Armenia), Foraminif-era, and microfacies observed in the pre-obduction carbonate platform sequence of the South-Armenian Block(Vedi, SE of Yerevan) provide important time constraints for the geodynamic evolution of the Tethyan realmin the Lesser Caucasus.The radiolarian faunal assemblage extracted from radiolarites overlying basaltic lavas (Amasia) is characterizedby the presence of Pseudodictyomitra tiara (Holmes), pointing to a Cenomanian age; it establishes the youngestsubmarine volcanic event of the Tethyan realm preserved in the Lesser Caucasus.The Vedi area allows the detailed study of the obduction of ophiolites onto the South-Armenian Block (SAB), thecarbonate sequence ofwhich is overlain conformably by a siliciclastic flysch-type sequence. The last 160m of theSAB carbonate sequence has been studied during this study; they consist of alternating packstones andgrainstones with fragments of echinoderms, gastropods, dasycladale algae and frequent clasts of rudists. Thepresence of benthic Foraminifera such as Cuneolina gr. pavonia,Daxia cenomana and Pseudocyclammina rugosa ar-gues for a Cenomanian age. The analyzedmicrofacies and the foraminiferal assemblage suggest a back reef depo-sitional environment.Results from these two distinct geological and paleogeographic areas (the Tethyan oceanic realm preserved inNEArmenia/Amasia and the top of the carbonate sequence of the South-Armenian Block that crops out at Vedi/SE ofYerevan) point to a major geodynamic change that took place during the Cenomanian, involving both the latestage of submarine oceanic magmatic activity and the obduction of ophiolites onto the South-Armenian Block.

© 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

The remnants of a Mesozoic oceanic realm exist in the LesserCaucasus (Armenia andKarabagh); this realmwas once part of the Tethy-an oceanic branch positioned between Eurasia and the South-ArmenianBlock (SAB; Dercourt et al., 1986). SAB is a Gondwana-derived exoticterrane that can be considered as part of the Tauride–Anatolide plate(Fig. 1). The tectonostratigraphic study of the Lesser Caucasus is of keyimportance for understanding the paleogeography or geodynamics ofthis central part of the Alpine–Himalayan mountain belt. The existing

lian).

econstructing Upper Cretaceoaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Pal

Tethyan rocks of Lesser Caucasus are part of an over 2000 km long suturezone (the Izmir–Ankara–Amasia–Sevan–Hakari suture zone) runningthrough the northern part of Turkey towards Iran (Sosson et al., 2010).Biostratigraphic studies of the aforementioned rocks contribute vastly toget a better understanding of the geodynamic, paleogeographic andpaleoenvironmental evolution of this geologically complex area. Thispaper presents new data on Cenomanian Radiolaria and benthic Forami-nifera and their geological implications.

The importance of Radiolaria is now well-established for the studyof Tethyan oceanic basins (see Danelian and Goričan, 2012 for recentcase studies). In general, radiolarites are the sedimentary cover of sub-marine ophiolitic lavas and their dating provides important time con-straints for the opening and spreading of this complex Mesozoicoceanic realm.

us (Cenomanian) paleoenvironments in Armenia based on Radiolariaaeoecol. (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.palaeo.2014.03.011

East European Platform

Scythian Platform

Arabian Platform

Caspian Sea

Black Sea

PlatformsEuropean margin, including arc series

Pontides and Lesser Caucasus,

including ophiolitesMetamorphic massifs

Peri-Arabic units, including ophiolites

Possibly oceanic crust

Accreted terranes

45°N

40°N

35°N

25°E 30°E 35°E 40°E 45°E 50°E

45°N

IAES

SM

VR

GC

Strike slip fault

Thrust

Fig.2

SAB South Armenian

Block

SABSAB

Fig. 1. Simplified structural map of the Arabia–Eurasia collision area (modified after Avagyan et al., 2005; Sosson et al., 2010).

2 T. Danelian et al. / Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology xxx (2014) xxx–xxx

Previous studies of radiolarians have introduced a number of radio-larian data for the sedimentary cover of some of the ophiolitic units;some of these studieswere carried out during the time of the former So-viet Union (Belov et al., 1991; Vishnevskaya, 1995; Knipper et al., 1997);other data were generatedmore recently in the framework of a French–Armenian collaboration (Danelian et al., 2007, 2008, 2010, 2012;Asatryan, 2009; Asatryan et al., 2010, 2011, 2012). The radiolarianfaunas presented herein are the first to be reported from the Amasiaophiolite, situated in north-western Armenia, at the junction with theIzmir–Ankara suture zone of Northern Turkey. They also provide theyoungest age for oceanic submarine volcanic activity preserved in theLesser Caucasus which in turn is important for deeper understandingof the geodynamic evolution of the greater area between Eurasia andGondwana-detached microcontinents.

Constraining the timing of obduction of the Armenian ophiolitesis equally important; Vedi is a key area where the contact betweenthe obducted Armenian ophiolites and the flysch is well exposed.The flysch deposits overly the Cretaceous limestone sequence ofthe South-Armenian Block and calcareous nannofossils identified re-cently in the flysch suggest a late Cenomanian age (Sosson et al.,2010). The carbonate sequence was considered to be Cenomanian–Turonian in age (Eghoyan, 1955; Paffenholtz, 1959; Sokolov, 1977;Hakobyan, 1978), while the Foraminifera identified within thepresent study establish clearly a Cenomanian age. The microfaciesanalysis, biostratigraphic studies and reconstructions of depositionalenvironments in the present study argue for an inner platformenvironment just before the arrival of detrital material on thesouth Armenian platform.

Please cite this article as: Danelian, T., et al., Reconstructing Upper Cretaceoand benthic Foraminifera; implications..., Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Pal

2. Geological setting

Three main paleogeographic realms can be distinguished duringthe Mesozoic in the Lesser Caucasus (Armenia and Karabagh; Fig. 2):a) the South-Armenian Block, a Gondwana-derived terrane; b) theTethyan oceanic realm, represented essentially by basic-ultrabasicseries and basaltic lavas and their sedimentary cover; c) the Eurasianplate, which was an active margin for most of the Jurassic andCretaceous.

The exposed ophiolites in the Lesser Caucasus are organizedessentially in two zones:

1) The Sevan–Hakari (Akera) zone situated in the East and South-eastof Lake Sevan (Aslanyan and Satian, 1977; Sokolov, 1977; Adamiaet al., 1981; Galoyan et al., 2009; Galoyan and Melkonyan, 2011).The Amasia and Stepanavan ophiolites of north-western Armenia(Galoyan et al., 2007 and references therein) can be included inthis NW–SE oriented ophiolitic zone that extends for ca. 400 km,fromAmasia to Karabagh. It constitutes the suture zone of the Tethysocean in the Lesser Caucasus as a result of collision between the SABand Eurasia (Sosson et al., 2010).

2) The Vedi ophiolite (e.g., Knipper and Sokolov, 1976; Aslanyan andSatian, 1977; Sokolov, 1977; Knipper and Khain, 1980) crops outabout 50 km in the south-east of the capital city Yerevan (Fig. 2).Massive and pillowed lavas and their sedimentary cover occurwith-in a folded klippe which is thrust over Upper Cretaceous shallowwater carbonates and flysch of the South Armenian Block (Sokolov,1977; Galoyan, 2008; Sosson et al., 2010).

us (Cenomanian) paleoenvironments in Armenia based on Radiolariaaeoecol. (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.palaeo.2014.03.011

Thrust FaultNormal FaultStrike slip FaultVolcanic cone

Proterozoic series (gneisses-amphibolites)

Pliocene-Quaternary (volcanic and sedimentary rocks)Oligo-Miocene volcanogenic rocksUpper Jurassic, Cretaceous and Tertiary intrusionsPaleocene-Eocene volcanogenic rocks

Upper Cretaceous formations (mainly sedimentary rocks)Middle to Upper Jurassic volcanogenic seriesOphiolitesTriassic and Jurassic seriesPaleozoic platform series (Devonian to Permian)

SouthArmenianBlock

Eurasian Margin

DILIJAN

VANADZOR

STEPANAVAN

SPITAK

GANJA

GUMRI

GAVAR

MARTUNIVARTENIS

VQVQ

VQ VQ

YEREVAN

Vedi

Amasia

Dzarkuniatzmassif

(Fig. 3)

(Fig. 4)

Fig. 2. Geological map of the Lesser Caucasus (modified after Sosson et al., 2010).

3T. Danelian et al. / Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology xxx (2014) xxx–xxx

3. Material and methods

The Amasia ophiolite is exposed north of the village of Amasia(Figs. 2 and 3). Cherts and lavas crop out at places along a mountainroad, where radiolarian cherts were sampled from a relatively smalloutcrop, situated ca. 5 km north of Amasia (N 41°; E 43.75°; Fig. 3),which allows to observe a ca. 3 m-thick radiolarite sequence overlyingbasaltic lavas. Radiolaria were extracted in the Géosystèmes laboratoryof University Lille 1 following repetitive leaching of the chert samplewith 4–5% hydrofluoric acid. Radiolarians were dry picked from the res-idue and mounted on SEM stubs.

The Vedi area and especially the Khosrov natural reserve within thisarea (Fig. 4) is important because it is the most accessible location fordetailed study of the obduction of ophiolites onto the South-Armeniancarbonate sequence. The latter is overlain conformably by a 50–150 m-thick flysch series, composed of sandstones and siltstones,which ends with a 0–100 m-thick chaotic detrital formation that con-tains a large variety of ophiolite-derived blocks (Fig. 5).

At the Khosrov natural reserve, approximately 3.5 km to the ENE ofthe main entrance, the contact between the Vedi ophiolite and theUpper Cretaceous limestone sequence is exposed (Fig. 6). At this loca-tion, the Vedi ophiolite klippe has been thrust upon the Upper Creta-ceous massive limestones of the South-Armenian Block. The top 160m of the thick-bedded limestone was examined in two accessible

Please cite this article as: Danelian, T., et al., Reconstructing Upper Cretaceoand benthic Foraminifera; implications..., Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Pal

intervals (Fig. 7) and 14 samples were collected. Both biofacies andlithofacies of these samples were examined in this study.

4. Results

4.1. Radiolarian assemblage

The studied radiolarian-bearing sample (Am10-75), collected from a20 m-wide outcrop where ca. 3 m of radiolarian cherts can be observedoverlying conformably basaltic lavas, yielded a well preserved and di-verse assemblage of Radiolarians. The following taxa are identified(Fig. 8).

Archaeodictyomitra montisserei (Squinabol), Pseudodictyomitrapseudomacrocephala (Squinabol), Pseudodictyomitra tiara (Holmes),Rhopalosyringium mosquense (Smirnova and Aliev), Stichomitra (?)sp.cf. S. stocki (Campbell and Clark), Thanarla pulchra (Squinabol),Thanarla veneta (Squinabol), and Novixitus mclaughlini (Pessagno).

All identified species recovered from sample Am10-75 are knownfrom the Albian–Cenomanian interval (Thanarla spoletoensis andDactyliosphaera silviae zones according to the biozonation byO'Dogherty, 1994). Some of these species were initially thought to berestricted in the Cenomanian (i.e. Novixitus mclaughlini; Pessagno,1977), but they were subsequently recovered from Albian strata(O'Dogherty, 1994). The most important species in the identified

us (Cenomanian) paleoenvironments in Armenia based on Radiolariaaeoecol. (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.palaeo.2014.03.011

Fig. 3. Schematic geological map of the Amasia ophiolite, including location of the studied outcrop and a simplified stratigraphic column (top left). 1—Quaternary deposits; 2— Pliocene–Pleistocene, volcanic rocks; 3 — Middle Eocene, volcanic rocks and volcano-sedimentary deposits; 4 — Lower Eocene sedimentary deposits; 5 — Paleocene–Lower Eocene sedimentarydeposits; 6—Upper Cretaceous, mainly carbonate rocks; 7— Coniacian (?) siliciclastic sequences (base of the transgressive sequence covering the ophiolite); 8— Cretaceous (?)marbledlimestone intercalated within lavas; 9–12-ophiolitic rocks: 9 — basaltic lavas and tuffites with intercalations of radiolarian cherts and limestones; 10 — gabbros with diorites andplagiogranite veins; 11— Serpentinites and serpentinized ultrabasic rocks; 12— Amphibolites and garnet amphibolites; 13— Hydrothermalized zone; 14— undisturbed (stratigraphic)contact; 15— Thrust; 16 — Normal fault; 17 — Strike–slip fault; 18 — Road; 19 — River Akhurian.

4 T. Danelian et al. / Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology xxx (2014) xxx–xxx

assemblage is Pseudodictyomitra tiara, which is known only from theDactyliosphaera silviae zone of O'Dogherty,and therefore caracterizesthe Cenomanian.

4.2. Foraminifera

The uppermost part of the thick-bedded Cretaceous limestone se-quence of the South-Armenian Block was sampled.

Foraminiferal species recognized in the studied samples areCuneolina gr. pavonia d'Orbigny, Pseudocyclammina rugosa (d'Orbigny)and Daxia cenomana Cuvillier & Szakall (Fig. 9, Table 1).

Pseudocyclammina rugosa is the most abundant species determinedin the sequence; it is characteristic of Albian–Cenomanian inner carbon-ate platforms surrounding the Tethys ocean. It has been reported fromthe Albian “large Orbitolina zone” of the Zagros (Southwestern Iran,Sampò, 1969), the Albian–Cenomanian sequences of Spain (Cataloniaand Asturia, Saaverda and Gabaldon, 1979; Gonzalez Fernandez et al.,2004), Portugal (Berthou et al., 1979), from Cenomanian sequences inFrance (Moreau et al., 1978; Tronchetti, 1981; Moreau, 1996), formerYougoslavia (Radoicic, 1995; Velic, 2007), Syria (Mouty et al., 2003),and of Mexico (Hernadez-Romano et al., 1997; Aguilera-Franco, 2003;Aguilera-Franco and Hernandez Romano, 2004).

Cuneolina gr. pavonia ranges from the late Albian to Cenomanian(Arnaud-Vanneau and Slitter, 1995).

Daxia cenomana was first introduced from Cenomanian sequencesof the Aquitaine Basin (France; Cuvillier and Szakall, 1949). It isalso reported as a common species in the Cenomanian inner rampcarbonate sequences of the Basque–Cantabrian Basin (Gräfe, 2005).D. cenomana is only known from the Cenomanian interval of the Medi-terranean region (Schroeder and Neumann, 1985). Presence of the

Please cite this article as: Danelian, T., et al., Reconstructing Upper Cretaceoand benthic Foraminifera; implications..., Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Pal

mentioned species indicates a Cenomanian age for the studiedsequence.

4.3. Microfacies

Microfacies of the studied samples can be grouped into two maincategories (Fig. 10).

a) A bioclastic packstone and wackestone, in which the faunal as-semblage is composed of crinoid ossicles, agglutinated foraminifera,large pieces of rudist broken shells, punctate and semi-punctate bra-chiopods, ostracod shells, small and large gastropods, and differentalgae (Dasycladaceae, Udoteaceae). The above mentioned fauna aregenerally broken but valves of ostracods are still connected. The matrixis characterized by a brownish equigranular microsparite, locally andfinely dolomitized, and well-sorted peloidal endoclasts are sometimespresent; quartz and pyrite grains are rare; the matrix is also sometimesaffected by small cavities millimeter- to centimeter-sized, filled withbasal micritic cement, recrystallized coarse calcite, diverse bioclastsand coated grains.

b) A medium to coarse grained bioclastic grainstone and rarepackstone; the faunal assemblage is quite similar to the previous oneand is composed of gastropods, ostracods, abundant foraminifera, andrudist shells. The recrystallized cement constitutes the main part ofthe facies but locally the matrix is preserved and corresponds to a finebrownishmicrosparite;micritic coating layers are visible on fragmentedshells; grains are angular and rather well sorted.

5. Discussion

Fig. 11 presents a synthesis of all available age data from the LesserCaucasus for the oceanic magmatic sequences and their sedimentary

us (Cenomanian) paleoenvironments in Armenia based on Radiolariaaeoecol. (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.palaeo.2014.03.011

Quaternary sedimentary rocks

Plio-quaternary volcanic rocks

Eocene conglomerates, sandstones, silty-limestones)

Paleocene flysch and volcanic rocks

Santonian reef limestones

Santonian conglomerates, sandstones & siltstones

Flysch

Cenomanian platform limestones

Triassic (limestones and coal-bearing sandstones)

Permian limestones

Pillow lavas, volcanic rocks, radiolarites

Gabbros

Ultrabasic rocks

E 45°00E 44°55

N 39°58

N 40°00

N 39°56

Vedi OphioliteSouth Armenian Block (autochthon)

0 1 2Km

Obduction contact

Location of studied outcrop

Reverse fault

Anticline

Syncline

Mankouk

Vedi

Spita

kadj

ur

Kho

srov

(Fig. 6)

(Fig

. 5)

Fig. 4. Geological map of the Vedi area (modified after Galoyan, 2008; Sosson et al., 2010).

South ArmenianBlock

Fig. 5. Geological section of the Vedi ophiolite obducted westwards onto the Upper Cretaceous platform carbonates of the South-Armenian Block (after Sosson et al., 2010, modified).

5T. Danelian et al. / Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology xxx (2014) xxx–xxx

Please cite this article as: Danelian, T., et al., Reconstructing Upper Cretaceous (Cenomanian) paleoenvironments in Armenia based on Radiolariaand benthic Foraminifera; implications..., Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol. (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.palaeo.2014.03.011

Fig. 6. Photographic view of the obduction contact of the Vedi ophiolite onto the flysch series overlying conformably the shallow-water platform carbonates of the South-Armenian Block(modified after Sosson et al., 2010).

6 T. Danelian et al. / Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology xxx (2014) xxx–xxx

cover (see also Danelian et al., 2012 for the entire dataset). TheCenomanian radiolarians retrieved from the Amasia cherts indicatethe age of the youngest submarine event known so far in the Tethyanoceanic realm of the Lesser Caucasus.

Fig. 7. Stratigraphic column of the studied carbonate sequence at Vedi.

Please cite this article as: Danelian, T., et al., Reconstructing Upper Cretaceoand benthic Foraminifera; implications..., Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Pal

The Cenomanian age obtained from the uppermost part of the Creta-ceous pre-flysch carbonate sequence is equally of much interest. Theaforementioned thick limestone sequence was previously consideredas of Cenomanian–Turonian age, with the obduction of ophiolites asbeing initiated sometime during the late Coniacian–Santonian interval(see Sosson et al., 2010). Given the Cenomanian age of the uppermostpart of the carbonate sequence and the late Cenomanian calcareousnannofossils identified in Sosson et al. (2010) within the overlyingflysch, it is likely that the transition from a back-reef carbonate platformto a siliciclastic detrital slope environment took place during theCenomanian. It is likely that this facies transition (from inner platformcarbonates to terrigenous) reflects the initial stage of obduction of theArmenian ophiolites.

It is interesting to note in Fig. 11 that all dated gabbroic rocks in theliterature are either of Late Triassic or Early to Middle Jurassic age(Galoyan, 2008 and references therein). Submarine volcanic activity ap-pears to be extensive in the Middle to Late Jurassic interval, startingwith the Bajocian which is well dated now in both Sevan–Hakari(Vishnevskaya, 1995; Asatryan et al., 2010) and Vedi areas (Danelianet al., 2008; Asatryan, 2009). It is also important to emphasize that theexisting evidence for submarine volcanic activity during the Cretaceousis currently restricted to the late Barremian/Aptian–Cenomanian inter-val. More particularly, Aptian submarine volcanism is dated geochrono-logically at Vedi (Rolland et al., 2009) and indirectly in Karabagh(Asatryan et al., 2011). The single Cenomanian age available for subma-rine lavas is the one documented here from the Amasia ophiolite. TheAptian lavas from Vedi dated by Rolland et al. (2009) appear to havean alkaline (OIB-type) signature, which was interpreted as the resultof an extensive oceanic island/plateau, generated by a mantle plumeevent. Thus, although it remains to be proved in the future, it is possiblethat the Cenomanian aged lavas, dated here indirectly, were generatedon the Tethyan seafloor as an oceanic plateau that was formed duringthe Aptian to Cenomanian interval.

Both radiolarian and foraminiferal ages may thus argue thatthe obduction of Armenian ophiolites was initiated during orshortly after the end of an extensive oceanic volcanic activity, whichprobably facilitated the obduction of a still hot oceanic crust as thiswas suggested by Rolland et al. (2009), although this would havehappened during the Cenomanian and not during the Coniacian (assuggested previously).

6. Conclusions

1) The radiolarian assemblage extracted from radiolarites overlyingmafic volcanic rocks of the Amasia ophiolite point to a Cenomanianage based essentially on the presence of species Pseudodictyomitratiara. This is so far the youngest available age for the Lesser Caucasus.

us (Cenomanian) paleoenvironments in Armenia based on Radiolariaaeoecol. (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.palaeo.2014.03.011

Fig. 8. Scanning electronmicrographsof Radiolaria extracted from sample Am10-75. 1)Archaeodictyomitramontisserei (Squinabol); 2) Pseudodictyomitra pseudomacrocephala (Squinabol);3–5) Pseudodictyomitra tiara (Holmes); 6) Stichomitra (?) sp.cf. S. stocki (Campbell and Clark); 7) Thanarla pulchra (Squinabol); 8–9) Thanarla veneta (Squinabol); 10) Rhopalosyringiummosquense (Smirnova and Aliev); 11) Novixitus mclaughlini (Pessagno).

Table 1Foraminifera, other fossils or bioclasts and texture of the studied limestone sequence fromthe top of the South-Armenian Block.

Texture&

fossils

Samples Gra

inst

one

Wac

kest

one

Pack

ston

e

Pelle

ts

Biva

lves

Rudi

sts

Ost

raco

ds

Echi

node

rms

Gas

trop

ods

Bryo

zoan

s

Das

ycla

dace

ans

Ter

qu

emel

la

Bo

uei

na

Pse

ud

ocy

cla

mm

ina

rug

osa

KH12–7 + + +KH12–6 + +KH12–5 + + + + + + + +KH12–4 + + + + + +KH12–3 + + + +KH12–2 + + + + +KH12–1 + +AG–9 + + + + + + +AG–7 + + + + +AG–6 + + +AG–5 + + + +AG–4 + +AG–2 + + + + + +AG–1 + + + + + + +

Oph

thal

mid

iids

Pse

ud

ote

xtu

lari

ella

sp.

Cu

neo

lin

a g

r. p

av

on

ia

Da

xia

cen

om

an

a

7T. Danelian et al. / Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology xxx (2014) xxx–xxx

This age provides a valuable latest constraint for submarine volcanicactivity and radiolarian ooze accumulation in the Tethyan realm ofthe Lesser Caucasus.

2) Benthic Foraminifera andmicrofacies analysis of the upper part of theCretaceous transgressive sequence of the South Armenian Block es-tablishes that the upper part of this sequence accumulated duringthe Cenomanian in an inner back-reef depositional environment.Combinedwith the late Cenomanian calcareous nannofossil age iden-tified by Sosson et al. (2010) in marls of the overlying flysch, it sug-gests that the sedimentary and paleoenvironmental switch fromback-reef/carbonate to slope/siliciclastic sedimentation took placeduring the Cenomanian, in connection with the beginning of theobduction process in the Lesser Caucasus.

3) Our micropaleontological results from both the oceanic andadjacent carbonate platform margins of Tethys in Armenia suggestthat a major geodynamic turning point was reached duringthe Cenomanian, involving both oceanic magmatic activity andobduction (of the still hot?) ophiolites onto the SouthArmenian Block.

Acknowledgments

Financial support was received from the DARIUS program and theCNRS (GDRI “Sud Caucase”). Philippe Recourt helped with the SEMand Sylvie Regnier with thin section preparation. Constructive remarks

Please cite this article as: Danelian, T., et al., Reconstructing Upper Cretaceoand benthic Foraminifera; implications..., Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Pal

by Špela Goričan and an anonymous reviewer improved the initialmanuscript.

us (Cenomanian) paleoenvironments in Armenia based on Radiolariaaeoecol. (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.palaeo.2014.03.011

Fig. 9. Foraminifera identified in the sampled Cenomanian carbonate sequence. 1: Cuneolina gr. pavonia d'Orbigny (axial section) 2: Right: Daxia cenomana Cuvillier & Szakall (axial sec-tion), Left: Cuneolina gr pavonia d'Orbigny (oblique section). 3–6: Pseudocyclammina rugosa (d'Orbigny) (3, 4, 5: subaxial sections passing through the uniserial stage of growth. 6: Trans-verse section). The Algae Terquemella is observed in Fig. 4 among the agglutinated elements of the foraminifer's wall.

8 T. Danelian et al. / Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology xxx (2014) xxx–xxx

References

Adamia, S., Chkhotua, T., Kekelia, M., Lordkipanidze, M., Shavishili, I., Zakariadze, G., 1981.Tectonics of the Caucasus and the adjoining regions: implications for the evolution ofthe Tethys ocean. J. Struct. Geol. 3, 437–447.

Aguilera-Franco, N., 2003. Cenomanian–Coniacian zonation (foraminifers and calcareousalgae) in the Guerrero–Morelos basin, southernMexico. Revista Mexicana de CienciasGeologicas. , 20, pp. 202–222.

Aguilera-Franco, N., Hernandez Romano, U., 2004. Cenomanian–Turonian facies suc-cession in the Guerrero–Morelos Basin, Southern Mexico. Sediment. Geol. 170,135–162.

Arnaud-Vanneau, A., Slitter, W.V., 1995. Early Cretaceous shallow-water foraminifers andfecal pellets from Leg 143 comparedwith coeval faunas from the Pacific Basin, CentralAmerica, and the Tethys. In: Winterer, E.L., Sager, W.W., Firth,, J.V., Sinton, J.M. (Eds.),Proc. ODP, Sci. Results, 143: College Station, TX (Ocean Drilling Program), pp. 537–564.

Aslanyan, A.T., Satian, M.A., 1977. On the geological features of Transcaucasian ophioliticzones. Izvestia Acad. Sci. Armenian SSR, Nauki o Zemle. , 4-5, pp. 13–26 (in Russian).

Asatryan, G., 2009. New data about the age of ophiolites in the Vedi zone on the basis ofRadiolarian assemblages. Proceedings National Academy of Sciences of Armenia,Earth Sciences. , 62, pp. 16–28 (in Armenian).

Asatryan, G., Danelian, T., Sosson, M., Sahakyan, L., Person, A., Avagyan, A., Galoyan, G.,2010. Radiolarian dating of the sedimentary cover of Sevan ophiolite (Armenia,Lesser Caucasus). Ofioliti 35, 91–101.

Asatryan, G., Danelian, T., Sosson, M., Sahakyan, L., Galoyan, G., 2011. Radiolarian evidencefor Early Cretaceous (late Barremian–early Aptian) submarine volcanic activity in theTethyan oceanic realm preserved in Karabagh (Lesser Caucasus). Ofioliti 36, 117–123.

Please cite this article as: Danelian, T., et al., Reconstructing Upper Cretaceoand benthic Foraminifera; implications..., Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Pal

Asatryan, G., Danelian, T., Seyler, M., Sahakyan, L., Galoyan, G., Sosson, M., Avagyan, A.,Hubert, B., Person, A., Vantalon, S., 2012. Latest Jurassic–Early Cretaceous Radiolarianassemblages constrain episodes of submarine volcanic activity in the Tethyan oceanicrealm of the Sevan ophiolites (Armenia). In: Danelian, T., Goričan, S. (Eds.), Radiolar-ian biochronology as a key to tectono-stratigraphic reconstructions. Bulletin de laSociété géologique de France, 183, pp. 319–330.

Avagyan, A., Sosson, M., Philip, H., Karakhanian, A., Rolland, Y.A., Melkonyan, R., Rebai, S.,Davtyan, V., 2005. Neogene to Quaternary stress field evolution in Lesser Caucasusand adjacent regions using fault kinematics analysis and volcanic cluster data.Geodin. Acta 18, 401–416.

Belov, A., Bragin, N., Vishnevskaya, V., Satian, M., Sokolov, S., 1991. New data on the age ofVedi ophiolite (Armenia). Proceedings Academy of USSR. , 321, pp. 784–787 (inRussian).

Berthou, P.Y., Ferreira Soares, A., Lauverjat, J., 1979. Mid Cretaceous events. Iberian FieldConference 77. Guide 1st Part, Portugal. Cuadernos Geologia Ibérica 5, 31–124.

Cuvillier, J., Szakall, V., 1949. Foraminifères d'Aquitaine. Pt.I. Reophacidae à Nonionidae.Societé Nationale des Pétroles d'Aquitaine, Paris.

Danelian, T., Galoyan, G., Rolland, Y., Sosson, M., 2007. Palaeontological (Radiolarian) LateJurassic age constraint for the Stepanavan ophiolite (Lesser Caucasus, Armenia). Bull.Geol. Soc. Greece 40, 31–38.

Danelian, T., Asatryan, G., Sosson, M., Person, A., Sahakyan, L., Galoyan, G., 2008. Dis-covery of Middle Jurassic (Bajocian) Radiolaria from the sedimentary cover ofthe Vedi ophiolite (Lesser Caucasus, Armenia). Comptes Rendus PalEvol 7, 327–334.

Danelian, T., Asatryan, G., Sahakyan, L., Galoyan, G., Sosson, M., Avagyan, A., 2010. Newand revised radiolarian biochronology for the sedimentary cover of ophiolites inthe Lesser Caucasus (Armenia). In: Sosson, S., Kaymakci, N., Stephenson, R.,Bergerat, F., Starostenko, V. (Eds.), Sedimentary Basin Tectonics from the Black Sea

us (Cenomanian) paleoenvironments in Armenia based on Radiolariaaeoecol. (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.palaeo.2014.03.011

Fig. 10.Microfacies observed in the studied Cenomanian carbonate sequence.

1. Fine-grained peloid–bioclastic wackestone to packstone (MF-1). Matrix consists of an argillaceous microspar showing fragments of rudist (head arrow). Sample AG-5.Scale bar = 1 mm.

2. Micro-bioclastic wackestone (MF-1). Matrix is a fine and slightly argillaceous micrite. Cavities with texture of grainstone are common and filled with numerousbioclastic fragments. Sample AG-9. Scale bar = 1 mm.

3. Bioclastic packstone (MF-2). Main bioclasts are gastropods (black head arrow), ostracods (connected valves, white head arrow), and crinoids. Matrix is a fine micriticmicroparite. Sample AG-4. Scale bar = 1 mm.

4. Rather well sorted bioclastic packstone to grainstone (MF-2). Cement is sparite. Bioclastic assemblage is mainly composed of fragments of echinoderms (head arrow)and gastropods. Sample AG-7. Scale bar = 1 mm.

5. Foraminiferal (head arrow) packstone (MF-1). Sample AG-2. Scale bar = 500 μm.6. Fragments of dasycladacean algae (head arrows). Sample KH-12.2. Scale bar = 500 μm.

9T. Danelian et al. / Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology xxx (2014) xxx–xxx

and Caucasus to the Arabian Platform. Geological Society of London, Special Volume,340, pp. 383–391.

Danelian, T., Goričan, S., 2012. Radiolarian biochronology: key to tectono-stratigraphic re-constructions. Bull. Soc. Geol. Fr. 183, 269–271.

Danelian, T., Asatryan, G., Galoyan, G., Sosson, M., Sahakyan, L., Caridroit, M., Avagyan, A., 2012.Geological history of ophiolites in the Lesser Caucasus and correlation with the Izmir–Ankara–Erzincan suture zone: insights from radiolarian biochronology. In: Danelian, T.,Goričan, S. (Eds.), Radiolarian Biochronology as a Key to Tectono-stratigraphic Reconstruc-tions. Bulletin de la Société Géologique de France, 183, pp. 331–342.

Dercourt, J., Zonenshain, L.P., Ricou, L.E., Kazmin, V.G., Le Pichon, X., Knipper, A.L., Grandjacquet,C., Perchersky, D.H., Boulin, J., Sibuet, J.C., Savostin, L.A., Sorokhtin, O., Westphal, M.,Bashrov, M.L., Lauer, J.P., Biju-Duval, B., 1986. Geological evolution of the Tethys beltfrom the Atlantic to the Pamirs since the Lias. Tectonophysics 123, 241–315.

Eghoyan, V.L., 1955. The Upper-Cretaceous deposits of the South-Western Part ofArmenian SSR. Izdatelstvo National Academy of Sciences of Armenian SSR, Yerevan(270 pp. (in Russian)).

Galoyan, G., 2008. Petrologic, Geochemical and Geochronological Studies on theOphiolites of the Lesser Caucasus (Armenia). (PhD thesis,) University of Nice-Sophia Antipolis (287 pp. (in French)).

Please cite this article as: Danelian, T., et al., Reconstructing Upper Cretaceoand benthic Foraminifera; implications..., Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Pal

Galoyan, G., Melkonyan, R., 2011. Ophiolitic association. In: Djrbashyan, R.T., Gabrielyants,G.A. (Eds.), Geology andMineral Resources of the Republic of Nagorno–Karabagh, pp.99–112 (in Russian).

Galoyan, G., Rolland, Y., Sosson, M., Corsini, M., Melkonyan, R., 2007. Evidence for super-posed MORB, oceanic plateau and volcanic arc series in the Lesser Caucasus(Stepanavan, Armenia). Compt. Rendus Geosci. 339, 482–492.

Galoyan, G., Rolland, Y., Sosson, M., Corsini, M., Billo, S., Verati, C., Melkonyan, R.,2009. Geology, geochemistry and 40Ar/39Ar dating of Sevan ophiolites (LesserCaucasus, Armenia): evidence for Jurassic Back-arc opening and hot spotevent between the South Armenian Block and Eurasia. J. Asian Eart Sci. 34,135–153.

Gonzalez Fernandez, B., Menendez Casares, E., Guitererez Claverol, M., Carcia-Ramos, J.C.,2004. Lithostratigraphy of thewestern sector of the Cretaceous sequences of Asturias.Travajos de Geologia Univ De Oviedo 24, 43–80 (in Spanish).

Gräfe, K.-U., 2005. Late Cretaceous benthic foraminifers from Basque-Cantabrian Basin,Northern Spain. J. Iber. Geol. 31, 277–298.

Hakobyan, V.T., 1978. Biostratigraphy of the Upper Cretaceous deposits of Armenian SSR.Izdatelstvo National Academy of Sciences of the Armenian SSR, Yerevan (285 pp. (inRussian)).

us (Cenomanian) paleoenvironments in Armenia based on Radiolariaaeoecol. (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.palaeo.2014.03.011

Fig. 11. Synthesis of all known data on the age of ophiolites in the Lesser Caucasus (see Danelian et al., 2012, for details) and the top of the South-Armenian Block.

10 T. Danelian et al. / Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology xxx (2014) xxx–xxx

Hernadez-Romano, U., Aguilera-Franco, N., Martinez-Medrano, M., Barcelo-Duarte, J.,1997. Guerrero–Morelos Platform area, Geerrero State, Southern Mexico. Cretac.Res. 18, 661–686.

Knipper, A.L., Khain, E.V., 1980. The structural position of ophiolites of the Caucasus.Ofioliti 2, 297–314 (Special Issue).

Knipper, A.L., Sokolov, S.D., 1976. Vedi ophiolites (Armenia): autochthon or allochthon?Geophys. J. R. Astron. Soc. 4, 54–66 (in Russian).

Knipper, A.L., Satian, M.A., Bragin, N.Yu., 1997. Upper Triassic–Lower Jurassic volcanogenicand sedimentary deposits of the old Zod Pass (Transcaucasia). Stratigr. Geol. Correl. 3,58–65 (in Russian).

Moreau, P., 1996. Analysis of the Cenomanian transgression on the north-western borderof the Aquitaine Basin. Géol. Fr. 1, 3–16 (9 figs (in French)).

Moreau, P., Neumann, M., Tronchetti, G., 1978. The main Cenomanian benthic Foraminif-era of Charente-Maritime and of Provence: comparative distribution. Géol.Méditerannéene 137–146 (in French).

Mouty, M., Al-Maleh, A.K., Laban, H.A., 2003. The middle Cretaceous of the Palmyrides(centrl Syria). Geophys. J. R. Astron. Soc. 25, 429–443.

O'Dogherty, L., 1994. Biochronology and paleontology of Mid-Cretaceous radiolariansfrom Northern Apennines (Italy) and Betic Cordillera (Spain). Mémoires de Géologie(Lausanne) 21, 411.

Paffenholtz, K.N., 1959. Geological History of the Caucasus. Izdatelstvo National Academyof Sciences of the Armenian SSR (506 pp. (in Russian)).

Pessagno, E.A., 1977. Lower Cretaceous radiolarian biostratigraphy of the Great ValleySequence and Franciscan Complex, California Coast Ranges. Cushman Foundation,Special Publication. , 15, pp. 1–87.

Radoicic, R., 1995. Contribution to the study of Cretaceous biostratigraphy of ZlatiborMountain. Radovi Geoinstituta 31, 17–30 (in Serbian, with English summary).

Please cite this article as: Danelian, T., et al., Reconstructing Upper Cretaceoand benthic Foraminifera; implications..., Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Pal

Rolland, Y., Galoyan, G., Bosch, D., Sosson,M., Corsini,M., Fornari,M., Verati, C., 2009. Juras-sic back-arc and Cretaceous hot-spot series in the Armenian ophiolites— implicationsfor the obduction process. Lithos 112, 163–187.

Saaverda, J.L., Gabaldon, V., 1979. Las facies catalanas y su ambito paleogeográfico: (síntesisde proyecto Magna). Memoria del Instituto Geologico y Minero de Espana 177.

Sampò, M., 1969. Microfacies and microfossils of the Zagros area, Southwestern Iran(from Pre-Permian to Miocene). Int. Sed. Petro. Series 12, 102.

Schroeder, R., Neumann, M., 1985. Les grands foraminifères du Crétacé moyen de la ré-gion Méditerranéenne. Géobios. Mem. Spec. 7.

Sokolov, S.D., 1977. The olistostrome suites and ophiolitic nappes of the Lesser Caucasus.Izdatelstvo Nauka, Moscow (92 pp. (in Russian)).

Sosson, M., Rolland, Y., Muller, C., Danelian, T., Melkonyan, R., Kekelia, S., Adamia, S.,Babazadeh, V., Kangarli, T., Avagyan, A., Galoyan, G., Mosar, J., 2010. Subductions,obduction and collision in the Lesser Caucasus (Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia),new insights. In: Sosson, S., Kaymakci, N., Stephenson, R., Bergerat, F., Starostenko,V. (Eds.), Sedimentary Basin Tectonics from the Black Sea and Caucasus to the ArabianPlatform. Geological Society of London, Special Volume, 340, pp. 329–352.

Tronchetti, G., 1981. Les Foraminifères crétacés de Provence (Apotien–Santonien).Systématique, Biostratigraphie, Paléoécologie, Paléogéographie. Travaux duLaboratoire de Géologie Historique et de Paléontologie, 12 559 p (49 pl.).

Velic, I., 2007. Stratigraphy and palaeobiogeography of Mesozoic Benthic Foraminifera ofthe Karst Dinarides (SE Europe). Geol. Croat. 60, 1–113 (18 Figs., 26 Pls.).

Vishnevskaya, V., 1995. Jurassic and Cretaceous radiolarians from the lesser Caucasus(Zod Pass, Mount Karawul and site 22 in the Koshuni River Basin). In:Baumgartner, P.O., O'Dogherty, L., Gorican, S., Urquhart, E., Pillevuit, A., De Wever,P. (Eds.), Middle Jurassic to Lower Cretaceous Radiolaria of Tethys: Occurences, Sys-tematics, Biochronology. Mémoires de Géologie (Lausanne), 23, pp. 701–708.

us (Cenomanian) paleoenvironments in Armenia based on Radiolariaaeoecol. (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.palaeo.2014.03.011