lable at ScienceDirect

Cretaceous Research 31 (2010) 130–146

Contents lists avai

Cretaceous Research

journal homepage: www.elsevier .com/locate/CretRes

Stratigraphic re-assessment of the Seewen Formation in the classic Helvetic keylocality ‘‘An der Schanz’’ quarry, Burgberg (Bavarian Alps; Turonian, Coniacian):biostratigraphy and d13C correlations

Frank Wiese a,b

a Georg-August-Universitat Gottingen, Courant Research Centre Geobiology, Goldschmidtstr. 3, 37077 Gottingen, Germanyb FR Palaontologie, Freie Universitat Berlin, Malteserstr. 74-100, D-12249 Berlin, Germany

a r t i c l e i n f o

Article history:Received 14 July 2009Accepted in revised form22 September 2009Available online 30 September 2009

Keywords:HelveticSeewen FormationTuronianConiacianBiostratigraphyd13C correlations

E-mail address: frwiese@snafu.de

0195-6671/$ – see front matter � 2009 Elsevier Ltd.doi:10.1016/j.cretres.2009.09.006

a b s t r a c t

The ‘‘An der Schanz quarry’’ near Burgberg exhibits parts of the Helvetic Seewen Formation. Its base isdated as Cenomanian, its top as Late Santonian by planktonic foraminifera by previous authors. Are-sampling of the section for inoceramid and d13C stratigraphy gave an Early Coniacian age for theuppermost parts of the Seewen Formation. A literature review suggests that the top of Seewen Formationof the Allgau (Bavaria) and Vorarlberg (Austria) is never younger than the Middle or terminal MiddleConiacian. d13C data confirm the biostratigraphic dating by inoceramids. Furthermore, although only28 m thick, the section exhibits all important d13C events for interbasinal correlation previously recog-nized in sections of England and northwestern Germany. The d13C calibration of the LO of H. helvetica isshown to be diachronous and not of value for isochronous zonations. The Caburn d13C event is suggestedas a marker for the Middle-Upper Turonian boundary due to the concomitant FO of I. perplexus. There-dating of the facies turnover from a calcareous biosedimentary system towards a marl dominatedsystem (succeeding Amden Formation) is briefly compared with the situation observed in northwesternGermany, where comparable trends are mapable.

� 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

The Cenomanian transgression is considered to be one of thelargest in the Phanerozoic, in the cause of which wide areas ofthe European shelf were flooded. Although there is still somedisagreement about its magnitude (Hay, 2008; Jarvis et al., 2006;Sahagian et al., 1996), all palaeogeographic reconstructions showa progressive and severe drowning of previously emergent areas fromthe Cenomanian onwards (Ziegler,1988). In the cause of this sea-levelrise, the shelf break front appeared to be collapsed (Hay, 2008), asoligotrophic oceanic bluewater systems swept onto the Eurasian shelfseas north and south of the Mid-European Island (MEI; Fig. 1). Thisresulted in the progressive establishment of widespread pelagicbiosedimentary systems and the deposition of calcareous nanno-plankton oozes with calcareous dinoflagellate cysts, planktonicforaminifera and, sometimes, inoceramid debris or microcrinoids asthe main biogenic components from the Ce-nomanian onwards (e.g.Chalk Group of England and Planerkalk Group of northwesternGermany north of the MEI, Seewen Formation in the Helvetic units ofthe Alps south of the MEI; see Follmi,1986; Gale et al., 2000; Hay, 2008

All rights reserved.

and Wilmsen et al., 2005 for discussion). North and south of the MEI,this system progressively collapsed inpost-Turonian times, and it wasrapidly succeeded by marl sedimentation. In northwestern Germany(Subhercynian, Lower Saxony, Munsterland Cretaceous Basins), thisfacies turnover from distal shelf limestones towards dark marls(turnover Planerkalk Group to Emscherian Marls: Emscher Forma-tion, see Riedel,1942 and Hiss et al., 2007 for details) can be accuratelydated by macrofossils (ammonites, inoceramids) as Lower/MiddleConiacian boundary interval. Its lithologic equivalent south of the MEI– the Seewen Formation – deposited from the terminal Abian/earliestCenomanian on the structurally differentiated and synsedimentarilymobile Helvetic shelf (Richter, 1960; for details on lithology, sedi-mentology and microfacies see Hagn, 1955; Follmi, 1986 and Hil-brecht, 1991). Micropalaeontological data suggest that the SeewenFormation persisted until Santonian (e.g. Bolli, 1944; Weidich, 1984)or even Campanian times (Follmi and Gainon, 2008) on the distalHelvetic shelf, until it collapsed and was diachronously substituted bydark marls of the Amden Formation (see discussion below).

The stratigraphic framework thus suggests that the collapse ofthe two pelagic biosedimentary systems north and south of the MEIwas stratigraphically disjunct and experienced genetically detachedhistories. However, the micropalaeontologic dating of the Seewen

Fig. 1. Simplified palaeogeographic sketch of parts of Europe during Turonian/Coniacian times. FS: Fennoscandia, MEI: Mid-European Island, AM: Armorican Massif, MC: MassifCentral, EM: Ebro Massif, IM: Iberian Meseta; hs: Helvetic Shelf, uh: Ultrahelvetic, p: Penninic) (adopted from Ziegler 1988).

F. Wiese / Cretaceous Research 31 (2010) 130–146 131

Formation stands in contrast to the few macropalaeontological dataobtainable from the literature, which suggest an age not youngerthan the Middle Coniacian for the top of the Seewen Formation atleast in the Allgau of the Bavarian and Vorarlberg of the Austrian Alps(Riedel, 1940). This discrepancy can be exemplified by a classicHelvetic key locality exposing the Seewen Formation in the BavarianAlps, the abandoned quarry ‘‘An der Schanz’’ quarry near Burgberg,Allgau. There, the uppermost Seewen Formation is dated as UpperSantonian by planktonic foraminifera (Weidich et al., 1983), but inthe same publication inoceramids with Lower Coniacian affinitieswere figured. Therefore, as a case study, the Burgberg section wasrevisited and sampled for invertebrate macrofossils (inoceramids,echinoids) and d13C stratigraphy in order to develop a precise ma-crobiostratigraphic and d13C stratigraphic framework. The scope ofthis study is the establishment of a high-resolution interbasinalcorrelation of the Burgberg section with areas precisely subdividedby inoceramid biostratigraphy and d13C correlations in order toclarify the stratigraphic range of the Seewen Formation in thequarry. The results will be discussed in the light of the dating ofthe facies turnovers north and south of the MEI from a fully bio-sedimentary system (Seewen Limestone/Planerkalk Group) towardsa system strongly influenced by siliciclastics (Emscher Formation/Amden Formation) based on the macropalaeontological dataobtainable from the literature.

2. Palaeogeographic setting and tectonic framework

The Helvetic facies unit (Helvetic) incorporates Cretaceous rocksthat were deposited on the north Tethyan shelf between the MEI inthe north and the Penninic Ocean in the south (Fig. 1). Due todistinct lithological developments, the Helvetic can be subdividedinto north, middle and south Helvetic depositional domains.Intermittent between the Helvetic in the North and the Penninic in

the South, the Ultrahelvetic reflects the gradation from the shelftowards the deep sea. In context with the Alpide orogeny, thesefacies belts were compressed and stacked into a pile of nappes(Fig. 2A; see Risch, 1995; Herm, 2000 and Voigt et al., 2008 fora tectonosedimentary overview on the Helvetic).

The Helvetic occurs in four nappes, of which the Hohenems andHindelang nappes are known from boreholes only (Risch, 1995). InSwitzerland, Voralberg of Austria and parts of the Allgau, most ofthe Helvetic successions occur in the Allgau-Santis Nappe. TheGrunten Nappe is developed exclusively in the Allgau, and it isregarded to derive from the southern Allgau-Santis Nappe due tothe facies development of the Lower Cretaceous successions (Heim,1916; Richter, 1984).

3. Lithostratigraphic overview: Upper Albian to?UpperSantonian

Traditionally, the Cretaceous successions of the Helvetic havebeen subdivided into a confusing large number of local and morewidely applied lithostratigraphic units, which in part date back tothe 19th century. The ‘‘Schweizerisches Komitee fur Stratigraphie’’(Swiss Committee for Stratigraphy) made the attempt to re-defineand formalize these units, and the current progress is only availableonline (http://fm.stratigraphie.ch/stratigraphie/helveticum/index_D.html). A synthesized overview over the Cretaceous lithostrati-graphic units in the Allgau Helvetic is given in 2B. In this work, onlythe uppermost part of the Garschella Formation (Selun Member:Aubrig Beds) to the Amden Formation were considered.

3.1. Aubrig Beds (Selun Member, Garschella Formation)

In the Allgau, the Garschella Formation (‘‘Helvetic Gault’’)consists of sandstones (Brisi Member) and glauconitic sandstones

Fig. 2. A, Tectonic units of the Bavarian Alps. a: Falkensteiner Zug, b: Randschuppe (after Risch, 1995). B, Generalized lithostratigraphic and chronostratigraphic overview over theHelvetic succession in the Allgau Alps. 1: Diphyoideskalk, 2: Hachauer Schichten, 3: Dreiangelserie, 4: Oberstdorfer Grunsandstein (compiled after Kohler and Haussler, 1978 andFreudenberger and Schwerd, 1996).

F. Wiese / Cretaceous Research 31 (2010) 130–146132

with phosphorites, calcareous levels and fossiliferous omissionsurfaces (Selun Member). Its top is characterized by the AubrigBeds, which is a succession of stratiform calcareous nodules ina glauconitic mixed siliciclastic calcareous host rock with belem-nites and inoceramids as stratigraphic index fossils. It is describedin detail by Follmi and Ouwehand (1987) and Hilbrecht (1991).

3.2. Seewen Formation

The Seewen Formation overlies the Garschella Formationdiachronously with a more or less sharp contact. The turnover fromthe Garschella to the Seewen Formation reflects the rapid estab-lishment of a pelagic calcareous biosedimentary system with greyand red pelagic limestones and intercalated intra- and extra-formational lithoclastic beds (see below). Here, the Seewen For-mation is used as a unit that incorporates three members, theSeewen Limestone, the Gotzis and the Choltal members. Biostrati-graphically, the base of Seewen Formation appears to be stronglydiachronous (Albian/Cenomanian to Middle Turonian) due tostructural control during deposition (Follmi, 1986). However, theSeewen limestone biosedimentary system established in theterminal Albian to Lower Cenomanian. Its upper limits, defined bythe top of the last Seewen limestone like bed (marking the base ofthe Amden Formation) is given to range from the Turonian to theLower Campanian in the literature (see below). For the Bavarian

Helvetic, an Late Santonian age is suggested for the top of theSeewen Formation (Fig. 2B).

3.2.1. Seewen Limestone Member (SLM)The SLM represents grey, well-bedded to flasery and marly,

splintery pelagic limestones, traditionally referred to as SeewenLimestone (Seewerkalk, Seewer Kalk, Seewener Kalk) in theliterature. The microfacies is dominated by planktonic forami-nifera, calcareous dinoflagellate cysts and, sometimes, inoceramiddebris in a micritic matrix. Locally and in variable stratigraphiclevels, intraformational reworking in the form of debris flows,pebble beds or even slumping occurs. Tectonism during deposi-tion and erosion of uplifted areas is indicated by the allochthonousGotzis Member in the Cenomanian/Turonian (see below) andintraformational truncation and Turonian/Coniacian boundaryinterval (Follmi, 1989, p. 71, Fig. 40), respectively. In some areas,the SLM is informally subdivided into a lower and upper part. ForVorarlberg (Austria) and the southern part of the Swiss Helvetic,the boundary between the two is taken at the base of the GotzisMember (see below) by Follmi (1986). In the Grunten and otherareas, a red variation of the SLM occurs, which has been used asa boundary (Bolli, 1944, Heim, 1910). It can reach a thickness up toseveral metres and intercalates repeatedly in Upper Cenomanian(with Rotalipora alpina Bolli¼ Rotalipora cushmani Morrow; comp.Bolli, 1944 and Caron, 1985) to Middle Turonian (indicated by

Fig. 3. Simplified geological situation in the working area (after Kohler and Haussler,1978).

F. Wiese / Cretaceous Research 31 (2010) 130–146 133

Inoceramus cuvieri) parts of the SLM (Heim, 1910). Locally,a presumably Upper Cenomanian interval of an alternation ofmarls with thin Seewen Limestone-like beds is intercalated, whichis sharply overlain by red Seewen limestones (e.g. Schaub, 1936).

3.2.2. Gotzis Member (Follmi and Ouwehand, 1987)The Gotzis Member consists of allochthonous glauconitic

sediments that mainly incorporate reworked extraformationalmaterial. Reworked glauconite and phosphorite clasts from theGarschella Formation, debris flows, conglomeratic beds, slumpingsand phacoidal intervals are common, and intraformational trun-cation surfaces can occur. A first main occurrence is located in theCenomanian/Turonian boundary interval; a second main occur-rence is dated as Turonian/Coniacian boundary interval. Both levelsreflect severe synsedimentary structural disintegration of theHelvetic shelf and the development of isolated uplifted blocks(Follmi, 1986, 1989). It occurs in the entire Allgau-Santis Nappe,showing some lateral facies differentiation with distal areas moredominated by greensand sheets. A detailed description is given byFollmi and Ouwehand (1987). In the treated section, the GotzisMember is not developed, but the ‘‘Fugenschicht’’ of Heim and Seitz(1934) (Seewen limestone with glauconitic, siliciclastic and phos-phatic components; see Hilbrecht, 1991 for details) might – due tothe occurrence of glauconite – be regarded as an equivalent here. Inother parts of the Grunten, patchy occurrences of the GotzisMember are recorded by Heim (1910), and Salomon (1989) andHilbrecht (1991) record the Gotzis Member from the Allgau part ofthe Allgau-Santis Nappe.

3.2.3. Choltal MemberThe Choltal Member (Choltal-Schichten of Oberhansli-Langen-

egger, 1978) represents a gradual lithological shift from the SLMinto the succeeding Amden Formation (see below). It consists of analternation of Seewen limestone-like beds and brown to grey marlbeds. The base of the member is taken at the first thick marl.

3.3. Amden Formation

The Amden Formation reflects the final facies turnover from theCholtal Member towards marly and clayey sediments. The faciesshift is gradual and the base of the Amden Formation is best takenat the disappearance of the last well-defined Seewen limestone-like bed. In the Allgau, Vorarlberg and in eastern Switzerland, theAmden Formation is informally subdivided into the lower, calca-reous Leiboden-Mergel which still yields thin light limestone layersand the succeeding Leistmergel, which reflects a more or lesshomogenous unit of brownish-greenish marls (Alexander et al.,1965; Bohm and Heim, 1909; Herb, 1962, 1965; Hilbrecht, 1991;Mehl, 1989; Riedel, 1940). There is a confusing lithostratigraphicnomenclature which is related to the Amden Formation:

‘‘Seewerschiefer p.p. (Kaufmann, 1877), Seewermergel, See-wenmergel, Seewenermergel (Quereau, 1893), unt. Kornchen-schiefer (Arn. Heim, 1905), . Leibodenmergel (Arn. Heim andOberholzer, 1907), Leistmergel (Arn. Heim and Oberholzer,1907), obere Leistschiefer mit Leistmergeln (Rollier, 1923),Leistmergel (Vorarlberg) (Oberhauser, 1958), Amdener-Forma-tion (Oberhansli-Langenegger, 1978) (Schweizerisches Komiteefur Stratigraphie, AG Helvetikum, 2009)’’

Due to synsedimentary disintegration of the Helvetic shelfduring deposition of the Amden Formation, the latter can rest witha sharp erosional contact on older strata with highly variable agesbut not older than the Brisi Member of the Garschella Formation(Fig. 2B). As a result, large (up to 10s of metres) blocks of reworkedSeewen Formation can locally occur (Hilbrecht and Liedholz, 1989).

The Amden Formation has been described by Oberhansli-Langen-egger (1978) and for the Allgau by Hilbrecht (1991) in detail.

4. The ‘‘An der Schanz’’ quarry at Burgberg:lithology and macrofauna

The abandoned ‘‘An der Schanz’’ quarry near Burgberg is locatedat the Weinberg in the westernmost part of the Grunten (Fig. 3). Itexposes a north-west vergent anticline with steep flanks, theBurgberghorn Gewolbe of Heim (1919). Tectonically, it is part of theGrunten Nappe (Fig. 2A). The successions were repeatedlydescribed by von Gumbel (1856), Heim (1919), Hilbrecht (1991),Weidich (1984) and Weidich et al. (1983), and it has also beenbriefly mentioned by Boden (1935) and Schwerd et al. (1983).Lithostratigraphically, the southern flank of the BurgberghornAnticline exposes an undisturbed succession from the Upper AptianBrisi Member (Garschella Formation to the top of the SeewenFormation (Weidich et al., 1983). The contact between the SeewenFormation and the succeeding Amden Formation is marked bya tectonic gap in the succession. In its northern flank, remnants ofthe Choltal Member were temporarily exposed, and Weidich et al.(1983) gave a thickness of several metres. In this work, we focus onthe uppermost Garschella Formation to the Amden Formation, anda section with details on lithology and fauna is given in Fig. 4.

4.1. Garschella Formation (Selun Member: Aubrig Beds)

The Aubrig Beds are overlain by the Seewen Formation witha sharp unconformable contact (Fig. 5A–D). It has a thickness ofonly ca. 250 cm, which is, compared to other areas (average 4–5 m,max. 10 m, Follmi, 1986) low. In its lower parts, it consists of green,glauconitic and calcareous sandstones, in part with phosphaticclasts, in which stratiform calcareous nodules occur (Fig. 5B).Towards the top, it grades into a more massively light greenishlimestone bed with sharply rimmed calcareous nodules and threedimensionally preserved Thalassinoides burrows that pipe down

Fig. 4. Lithologic column of the Seewen working quarry (Upper Albian to Lower/?Middle Coniacian) with details on lithology and tentative biostratigraphic subdivision as suggestedby the range of selected organisms groups (inoceramids, echinoids and planktonic foraminifera); white rectangles: estimated range as deduced from loose material; asterisks:stratigraphy as given in Weidich et al. (1983). AB: Aubrig Beds (terminal Selun Member, Garschella Formation). The Choltal Member is tectonically surpressed, the Gotzis Member isnot developed in the section but present in neighbouring outcrops (Heim, 1910).

F. Wiese / Cretaceous Research 31 (2010) 130–146134

Fig. 5. A, Panorama view of the quarry. 1. Garschella Formation, 2. Seewen Formation, 3. Amden Formation. B, Contact between the Aubrig Beds and the Seewen Formation. 1.Glauconitic sandstone with stratiform nodules (burrow networks). Note the diffuse contact between host rock and nodules, 2. Sharply defined burrow infills with glauconiticSeewen limestone-like material, 3. Burrow fills with Seewen limestones, 4. Seewen Limestone Member. C, same as B, 1. Glauconitic burrow infill with truncated top, 2. Verticalinfilled burrow (left) and part of horizontal Thalassinoides network. D, Same as B and C, 1. Close-up of a glauconitic burrow infill with sharp contact to the surrounding strata andtruncation at the top. E, Beds 1–11 forming a conspicuous rib. F, View at the interval around beds 20–30. G, middle part of the section with increased number of separating marls (ca.Bed 33 to the base of Bed 54). H, view at the top of the SLF with beds 54–66.

F. Wiese / Cretaceous Research 31 (2010) 130–146 135

F. Wiese / Cretaceous Research 31 (2010) 130–146136

from the contact to the Seewen Formation (Fig. 5C, D). Previously,these nodules were interpreted to represent ‘‘ball and pillow’’structures (Weidich et al., 1983). Field observations rather showthat the nodules reflect a complex history of repeated excavationand infill of extensive Thalassinoides burrow systems withina glauconitic sandstone, which served as the host rock. This led toa gradual obliteration of the original lithology towards a burrow-infill generated facies sensu Tedesco and Wanless (1991) witha number of burrow generations of various ages. Grossly, twomodes of nodules can roughly be subdivided. Nodules witha diffuse marginal contact to the glauconitic sandstones in thelower part of the member (Fig. 5B) indicate burrowing in non-consolidated sediment and must be considered to be quasi-contemporaneous with sedimentation. Those limestone nodulesthat show sharply defined margins (Fig. 5B–D) indicate burrowingafter sediment consolidation and early diagenesis. As it consist ofgreenish glauconite-bearing Seewen limestone-like rocks (Fig. 5D),these nodules are best regarded to represent a ‘‘tubular’’ SeewenLimestone and must be excluded from the Aubrig Beds. From theBurgberg section, no inoceramids were collected, but Birostrinasulcata (Parkinson), B. concentrica (Parkinson) und I. anglicus(Woods) are recorded from other localities in the Allgau (Hilbrecht,1991) from the host rock (not the infill).

4.2. Seewen Formation: Seewen Limestone Member

The Seewen Limestone Member (Fig. 5A) reaches a thickness ofca. 27 m (Fig. 4), and it rests on the Aubrig Beds with a sharperosional contact (Fig. 5B–D). This contact incorporates at least twophases of reworking and subsequent burrow penetration. In a firststep, greenish Seewen Limestone was (repeatedly?) infilled intoopen Thalassinoides burrow systems that pipe down tens of centi-metres into the Aubrig Beds (2 on Fig. 5B). Burrow contact to thehost rock is sharp. The basal Seewen Formation erosion surface cutsboth infill and host rock (2 on Fig. 5D), and from the surface, deepburrow systems were piped down (2 on Fig. 5C), which later wereinfilled with Seewen Limestone (‘‘tubular Seewen Limestone’’). Thesection consists of alternations of grey hard and splintery openmarine limestones, separated by marl seams and flasery limestoneintervals (see overview on Fig. 5A). The microfacies is comparativelymonotonous and depleted in components. It is mainly dominated bycalcareous dinoflagellate cysts (c-dinocysts) and variable amountsof planktonic foraminifera. Echinoderm debris (mainly micro-crinoids) is common especially in the lowermost part of the section.Inoceramid debris can be frequent in some intervals. Rarely, radio-larian, benthic foraminifera, ostracod and bryozoan fragmentsoccur. In terms of microfacies types, it represents c-dinocyst wacketo packestones and c-dinocysts/planktonic foraminifera wacke-stones. Although microfacies shows only moderate variations, theSLM shows more lithologic details in its weathering profile as shownby Weidich et al. (1983). It can roughly be subdivided into five units(a – e), which can readily be recognized and aid orientation on thedifferent levels in the vertically extended quarry.

4.2.1. Beds 1–11 (ca. 3.50 m)This interval (Fig. 5E) consists of massive and hard grey lime-

stones separated by thin marl seams. In the lower few cm, someglauconite and coarse siliciclastics can occur, which may be theequivalent of the Gotzis Member (see above). Already at the top ofBed 1 (compare Fig. 4), glauconite is extremely scarce, and no sili-ciclastics occur. Characteristic in the lowermost part of the unit isthe occurrence of pyrite accumulations. The biostratigraphicindicative planktonic foraminifera H. helveticva enters ca. 50 cmabove the base of Bed 1; its last occurrence is located in Bed 10, ca.300 cm above the base of the section.

4.2.2. Beds 12–16 (ca. 3.70 m)The interval is characterized by a rapid increase of marl, or

a decrease in carbonate production, respectively, leading to thegenesis of dark grey flasery limestones, in which the marly flaserssometimes weather with a grey turquoise colour (Fig. 5E, 6A). Bed15 marks the marl peak in the entire section and it is easy todetect in the exposure. Intercalated are several undulating erosionsurfaces, causing a relief of few cm (Fig. 6B). Lithoclastic intervalsare common (Fig. 6F). In some levels, debris of inoceramids isenriched, and entire, comparatively thin-shelled inoceramids canreach sizes up to several tens of cm (Fig. 6C). I. lamarcki lamarckiParkinson (Fig. 7D), I. lamarcki stuemckei (Heinz), I. apicalis Woods(Fig. 7E) and I. cuvieri Sowerby occur in Bed 15. One specimen of I.cf. perplexus Whitfield (Fig. 7J) comes from the top of Bed 15.Between beds 13 and 15, Infulaster excentricus (Forbes) and Ster-notaxis plana (Mantell) were collected in situ. They often showa pyritized or secondarily limonitized shell. As this mode ofpreservation is restricted to this level, also loose finds exhibitingthis feature such as I. excentricus (Fig. 7K, L), S. plana (Fig. 7H, I),Sternotaxis icaunensis (Goldfuss), Echinocorys gravesi Desor andConulus subrotundus (Mantell) can be unequivocally be referred tothis level.

4.2.3. Beds 17–32 (ca. 7.80 m)The base of this unit is somewhat arbitrary, as it is a progressive

decrease from bed 15 on, which leads to the development of wellbedded limestone with thicknesses of few to several dm (Fig. 5F).From beds 17 to 18, 2 specimens of Micraster leskei (Desmoulins)were collected.

4.2.4. Beds 33–56 (ca. 8.60 m)The interval weathers as a unit of dm thick limestones, which

are separated by well developed marls seams (Fig. 5G), and given aconsiderable amount of compaction during Alpide nappe tectonics,beds 33–56 most likely was a well developed marl/limestonealternation. From beds 16 to 52, no entire inoceramids werecollected, but debris is common throughout.

4.2.5. Bed 56– top of the section (ca. 2.70 m)The terminal part of the section weathers again more compact,

marl seams are thinner and the limestones are lighter (Fig 5H). Asin other intervals, Thalassinoides burrows are often preserved atthe base of the limestones (Fig. 6E), where visible. Intraclasticbeds (Fig. 6G) are common as are lenses with accumulation ofinoceramid debris (Fig. 6D). With Bed 59, inoceramids becomevery frequent to abundant, but it is almost impossible to extractthem in situ from the hard rocks. Finds from fallen blocks suggestand abundance peak of Cremnoceras ex gr. deformis (Meek) and itssubspecies. From Bed 60, Cremnoceramus denselammelatus(Kociubynskij) was collected (Fig. 7F). One specimen of Cr. den-selamellatus (Fig. 7G) and Tethyoceramus sp. (Fig. 7A) werecollected loosely and derived from an interval between Bed 61and the top of the Seewen Limestone. The specimen figured byWeidich et al. (1983, pl. 4, fig. 7) as Inoceramus constans is mostlikely also a C. denselammelatus.

4.3. Seewen Formation: Choltal Member

As already mentioned, the Choltal Member was only developedin few metres thickness in the northern flank of the anticline andbriefly described by Weidich et al. (1983) as Seewen limestone-likebeds with marly intercalations. It yielded C. waltersdorfensis(Fig. 7B) and C. denselammellatus, found in the collection of theBayerische Staatssamlung (Munich) without further information.

Fig. 6. A, Flasery interval Bed 15. B, undulating erosion surface within Bed 15. C, large fractured inoceramid bivalve with imbricated shell fragments, scale (1 Euro cent coin ca. 1 cm).D, abundant inoceramids and debris loose from the interval around beds 54–66. E, horizontal Thalassinoides galleries at the base of a limestone bed, loose but presumably from thetop of the section. F, Lithoclastic interval in Bed 60. G, Lithoclastic interval in Bed 17.

F. Wiese / Cretaceous Research 31 (2010) 130–146 137

F. Wiese / Cretaceous Research 31 (2010) 130–146138

F. Wiese / Cretaceous Research 31 (2010) 130–146 139

5. Biostratigraphy

Biostratigraphy of the Garschella Formation is mainly based onmacrofauna (ammonites, inoceramids; e.g. Heim and Seitz, 1934,Follmi, 1986,), and there is an overall agreement concerning theages of its members. Biostratigraphic subdivision of the SeewenFormation is traditionally based on planktonic foraminifera (e.g.Bolli, 1944; Follmi and Gainon, 2008; Hilbrecht, 1991; Weidichet al., 1983). Numerous microbiostratigraphic zonations attainablefrom the literature date the stratigraphic range of the SeewenFormation highly variable: while its base is given as Upper Albian toLower Cenomanian, the dating of the upper limits of the SeewenFormation varies from Upper Turonian (Richter, 1960), to Coniacian(Freudenberger, 1996; Oberhauser, 1963), Upper Santonian (Herm,2000; Weidich et al., 1983) or even Lower Campanian (Follmi andGainon, 2008) in the various regions.

For the Burgberg section, or the Grunten, respectively, a strati-graphic range from the Upper Cenomanian to the Upper Santonian(Dicarinella asymetrica foraminiferal zone) was given by Hilbrecht(1991) and Weidich (1984) for the interval from the Aubrig Beds tothe Choltal Member. However, literature data show that alsobiostratigraphic indicative macrofossils (mainly inoceramids) inthe Seewen Formation are not uncommon (e.g. Knauer, 1928;Vacek, 1879), but their stratigraphic potential has not yet beenexploited, except the works of Heim (1910) and Riedel (1940),which present the first and up to now the last more detailedattempt for a macrobiostratigraphic subdivision of Helvetic UpperCretaceous successions.

5.1. Inoceramid biostratigraphy

Inoceramids are frequently listed in the literature (e.g. Escher,1878; Heim, 1910, 1919; Heim and Seitz, 1934, Knauer, 1928). Theynever have seriously been used for stratigraphic subdivision. This issurprising, as almost in every work treating the Seewen Formation,the occurrence of (abundant) inoceramid fragments is recorded.Inoceramids from the Aubrig Beds of the Allgau – B. sulcata,B. concentrica and I. anglicus – indicate a Late Albian age (Hilbrecht,1991). In the lowermost part of the SLM, no inoceramids werecollected. The first inoceramid fauna from beds 8 to 15 withI. lamarcki, I. cuveri and I. apicalis suggests a Mid-Turonian age forthis interval, equivalent to the I. apicalis/cuvierii/lamarcki Assem-blage Zone of northwestern Germany as observed e.g. in the Salz-gitter-Salder quarry of northwestern Germany (Wood and Ernst,1998; Fig. 8). The occurrence of I. perplexus Whitfield, the indextaxon for the base of the Upper Turonian (Walaszczyk and Cobban,2000) in the top of Bed 15 indicates a Late Turonian age for thislevel. The sudden flood occurrence of in part large Cr. ex gr. defor-mis, Cr. denselamellatus together with Tethyoceramus sp. is sugges-tive of the Lower Coniacian hannovrensis Zone (Walaszczyk andWood, 1999). Cr. denselamellatus and Cr. waltersdorfensis hannov-rensis from the Choltal Member of the northern flank of the anti-cline indicate still an Early Coniacian age. The field data confirmRiedel (1940), who stated that it is easily possible to recognize thetypical north German inoceramid zonation in the Seewen Lime-stone. He was even able to distinguish a middle Upper Turonianinterval with Mytiloides striatoconcenticus (comp. Fig. 8) in Vorarl-berg. In the Burgberg section, the rocks representing this interval

Fig. 7. Inoceramids and echinoids from the Seewen Formation, all in natural size (abbreviafrom the top of the SLF, Lower Coniacian (leg. Alex Muller) (MB.M.8008). B, Cremnoceramusthe Burgberg Anticline, Lower Coniacian (Staatliche Sammlung f. Palaontologie und HistoBerlin), loose, Lower Coniacian? (MB.M.8014). D, I. lamarcki lamarcki (Parkinson), Bed 15, UpF, Cremnoceramus denselamellatus (Kociubynskij), bed 60, Lower Coniacian (MB.M.8012). G,Sternotaxis plana (Mantell), loose around Bed 15; Upper Turonian (leg. A. Muller) (MB.E.65excentricus (Forbes), loose around Bed 15, Upper Turonian (leg. Alex Muller) (MB.E.6571).

are preserved, but no M. striatoconcentricus were found so far. Ofpaleontological interest is an unidentified specimen (Fig. 7C),which was collected loosely and donated by H. Keupp (Berlin). Itcould represent a new species, as is cannot be safely included intoany of the known Middle Turonian to Lower Coniacian formsdescribed from Europe so far. Judging from the acute ribbing, thecrushed specimens figured of Fig. 6D may also belong to this form,which then is Early Coniacian in age.

5.2. Echinoid biostratigraphy

The stratigraphic potential of irregular echinoids is – at least inthe Turonian – limited, not to say poor (Ernst, 1970). The echinoidassemblage between beds 13 and 15 (I. excentricus, S. plana,E. gravesi, C. subrotundus) may be carefully seen as at least MiddleTuronian in age due to the first occurrence of S. plana in the MiddleTuronian lata Zone in the British sense (Smith and Wright, 2003).However, it easily can be found also in the Upper Turonian. A goodechinoid stratigraphic landmark is the occurrence of large M. leskeiin beds 17–18. Morphologically identical material has beencollected by the author in numbers from the upper part of theUpper Turonian S. neptuni Zone in northern Spain, where large M.leskei succeed small M. leskei (Wiese, 1997). This event succession isdescribed from England (Mortimore, 1986), and it is considered tobe stratigraphically significant (Wiese, 1997). Therefore, the recordsof large M. leskei from Burgberg are stratigraphically interpreted toindicate an upper neptuni zonal age. Advanced Micraster ex gr.normanniae first occur in the basal M. scupini Zone (Ernst andWood, 1995; Mortimore, 1986), but its occurrence together withCremnoceramus safely dates the find as Lower Coniacian.

5.3. Planktonic foraminifera

Range data of planktonic foraminifera from the Burgberg sectionare mainly taken from the literature (Hilbrecht, 1991; Weidich et al.,1983; Weidich, 1984) together with own identifications based onthin-sections. The calcareous nodules of the Aubrig Beds yieldednumerous planktonic foraminifera [e.g.. Rotalipora appenninica(Renz), R. cushmani (Morrow)], giving an age from the Late Albian tothe Middle/Late Cenomanian (Hilbrecht, 1991; Weidich et al., 1983).The last occurrence of R. cushmani is located still below the erosionsurface at the base of the SLM (Weidich et al., 1983).

In the lowermost cm of the SLM, Helvetoglobotruncana prae-helvetica Trujillo occurs together with Dicarinella imbricata (Mornod),Dicarinella hagni (Scheibnerova) and Praeglobotruncana stephani(Gandolfi) and related forms. The occurrence of H. praehelveticawithout R. cushmani or H. helvetica in the lowermost beds of the SLMsuggests the Whiteinella archaeocretacea Zone (D. imbricata Zone ofWeidich et al.,1983; Upper Cenomanian to lowermost Turonian), andit is not possible to decide whether or not the base of the SWL in thesection is Cenomanian or Turonian in age. The FO of H. helvetica islocated ca. 50 cm above the base of the SLM, and it is indicative of thelowermost part of the upper Lower Turonian Mammites nodosoidesammonite Zone (Caron et al., 2006). The event succession of a firstmarginotruncanid peak (Fig. 4) and the LO of H. helvetica in Bed 10 canbe seen elsewhere (e.g. Spain: Wiese, 1997; Tunisia: Robaszynskiet al., 1990).

tion of depository: MB.¼Museum fur Naturkunde Berlin). A, Tethyoceramus sp, loosewaltersdorfensis hannovrensis (Heinz) from the Choltal Member of the northern flank ofrische Geologie, Munchen, 1963/I275-a), C, undet. inoceramid bivalve (leg. H. Keupp,per Turonian (MB.M.8009). E, I. apicalis Woods, Bed 15, Upper Turonian (MB.M.8010).I. denselammelatus, loose from the top of the SLF, Lower Coniacian (MB.M.8013). H, I,

70); J), I. perplexus Whitfield, top Bed 15, Upper Turonian (MB.M.8015). K, L, Infulaster

Fig. 8. d13C correlation between Salzgitter-Salder and the Burgberg section and the adoption of the biostratigraphic framework of the Salzgitter-Salder section to the Burgbergsection (data from Salzgitter-Salder after Ernst and Wood, 1995; Niebuhr et al., 2007; Voigt and Hilbrecht, 1997); the terminology of the d13C events with auxiliary marker as used inJarvis et al. (2006). A: lithostratigraphic units, B: stage, substage, C: biozonation, D: meter.

F. Wiese / Cretaceous Research 31 (2010) 130–146140

The base of the concavata Zone (Fig. 4) is dated as Coniacian byWeidich et al. (1983). Here, the base of the concavata Zone falls intothe Upper Turonian, below the Navigation Event (comp. Fig. 4, 8).Stoll and Schrag (2000) gave a similar level at the d13C curve

(although erroneously suggesting an Early Coniacian age, comp.Jarvis et al., 2006). In Tunisia, Robaszynski et al. (2000) located theFO of D. concavata in the Upper Turonian, where it co-occurs withUpper Turonian index-ammonites. Finally, Wendler et al. (2009)

F. Wiese / Cretaceous Research 31 (2010) 130–146 141

used the base of the concavata Zone to define a stratigraphic levelsomewhere in the (?)Upper Turonian.

The FO of D. asymetrica ca. 2 m below the top of the SeewenFormation was interpreted as higher Santonian by Weidich et al.(1983). Here, the conjunction of inoceramids and the position on thed13C curve above the Beeding Event indicates an Early Coniacianage for this level. On the other hand, Robaszynski et al. (2000) datedits FO as Coniacian/Santonian boundary interval based on theco-occurring macrofauna. Lamolda et al. (2007) showed that D.asymetrica is well documented already in the Coniacian, and Ion andSzasz (1994) showed that its FO correlates with the FO of LowerConiacian index ammonite Peroniceras tridorsatum, which is knownfrom the upper Lower Coniacian of Westphalia (Kaplan and Ken-nedy, 1996). This dating correlates perfectly with the stratigraphicdata presented here.

6. The d13C curve and its interbasinal correlation

The macrobiostratigraphic re-assessment provides a soundstratigraphic background for the application of d13C stratigraphy andits interbasinal correlation. Sampling distance for the isotope curvewas 10 cm, resulting in a total number of 271 samples. Analyses weredone at the University of Erlangen with a Thermo Finnigan 252masspectrometer. All values are given in & relative to the V-PDB byassigning a d13C value ofþ1.95& to NBS19. The reproducibility of thedata was controlled by replicate measurements and is better than0.04 &. Values range between ca. 1.5 & and 3.0 &.

For the treated interval, d13C curves are available from feweasternTethyan areas (Himalaya: Li et al., 2006; Wendler et al., 2009)and from various European Cretaceous basins (Gale, 1996; Stoll andSchrag, 2000; Voigt and Hilbrecht, 1997; Wiese, 1999; Wiese andKaplan, 2001). These were used by Jarvis et al. (2006), together witha number of new Upper Cretaceous reference curves from the UK, tocompile a standard reference d13C curve with an introduction ofa number of isotope events with interbasinal correlation potential.This event nomenclature is applied here. Additionally, a number ofsubsidiary d13C markers were discriminated (labelled f-i in theinterval treated; Jarvis et al., 2006, p. 579, fig. 8). In order to avoidexhausting descriptions of the Burgberg curve, the isotope- andbiostratigraphically well-founded Salzgitter-Salder curve of Voigtand Hilbrecht (1997) – exhibiting the same stratigraphic range –with the most relevant d13C events was directly plotted againstBurgberg curve (Fig. 8). At first sight, the overall fit of the two curvesis striking, although absolute values are at a magnitude of 1 & lowerin the Burgberg section with max. values around 2.7 &–2.8 & andmin. values around 1.5 &. Especially the Pewsey and Bridgewickevents can safely be identified, providing the framework for therecognition of the event succession Lower Southerham, UpperSoutherham, and Caburn events. Also the Hitch Wood event canunequivocally be recognized together with the subsidiary markerh1–h4 and correlated (Fig. 8). In the upper Upper Turonian, abovethe Hitchwood Event, the d13C curves of Salzgitter-Salder, Liencres(Wiese,1999) and Burgberg exhibit a comparable complete record ofthe d13C history compared to less expanded sections such as Dover(southern England) and Trunch (eastern England, Jarvis et al., 2006;comp. Fig. 9A), permitting the recognition and definition of a furtherwell-confined positive event, here named Burgberg Event, located inthe Upper Turonian scupini Zone (Peak þ3 of Wiese, 1999). In thesection, its top equates with the top of Bed 35, a well-definedlimestone between marly and flasery intervals. It may be alsopresent in Trunch, but it cannot be recognized at Dover, where thisinterval is too reduced in thickness (Fig. 9A). Between the Hitchwoodand Burgberg events, subsidiary marker i1–i3 can tentatively berecognized. A further marker, i4, is marked here, also considered byJarvis et al. (2006) but not labelled therein.

The interval above the Burgberg Event, when approaching thepotential Turonian/Coniacian boundary interval, shows more detailsin the Burgberg section than at Salzgitter-Salder, pointing at a poten-tial hiatus in Salzgitter-Salder (Wiese,1999). This is also confirmed byinoceramid data from the latter locality (Walaszczyk and Wood,1999).The base of the Lower Coniacian is located around the NavigationEvent (Burgberg Bed 49). It is readily distinguishable in the exposureas an incipient double limestone overlain by conspicuous marl (Fig. 4).In the Lower Coniacian, correlation between Salzgitter-Salder, Burg-berg and Liencres becomes less evident, but the datum lines (Beedingand Light Point events) suggested in Figs. 8 and 9A are not in conflictwith inoceramid biostratigraphy.

7. Discussion

The integrated application of macrofauna and d13C correlationpermits a precise stratigraphic re-assessment of the Burgbergsection, which deviates from previously published interpretations,based exclusively on foraminifera. The Aubrig Beds were dated asCenomanian (Hilbrecht, 1991; Weidich et al., 1983), but biostrati-graphic data obtainable from the literature are contradictory.Inoceramids from neighboring sections of the Allgau (Hilbrecht,1991) give an Albian age, planktonic foraminifera indicate an Albianto Late Cenomanian age. Although diachronism is possible, it issuggested here that a part of the burrow-infills in Seewenlimestone facies (tubular Seewen Limestone, from where theforaminifera samples derived; Weidich et al., 1983) are Cenomanianin age, reflecting a complex history of repeated phases of burrowingand burrow-infilling throughout the Cenomanian in an Albian hostrock. This dating is in accordance with the general stratigraphicunderstanding of the Aubrig Beds of the Selun Member in the restof the Allgau-Santis Nappe (Follmi and Ouwehand, 1987). Thus,a Cenomanian interval of the Seewen Formation as observed else-where and well-dated by foraminifera and macrofossils (Heim,1910, Knauer, 1928) is not developed here as a distinctive column ofsediment. Instead, it is preserved exclusively in burrow systems.

It is not possible to decide whether or not the sharp erosionsurface at the base of the SLF is terminal Cenomanian or EarlyTuronian in age. It postdates the Upper Cenomanian cushmani Zone(preserved as burrow infill in Seewen Limestone facies below theerosion surface) and predates the entry of H. helvetica ca. 50 cmabove its base (Fig. 4). Thus, an Early Turonian age might be likelyfor the onset of sedimentation after a severe period of non-depo-sition. It is also impossible to fix precisely the position of theMiddle/ Upper Turonian boundary by means of macrofossils so fardue to the few finds. It needs to be located between the LO of H.helvetica in Bed 10 and the FO of I. perplexus in Bed 15, leavinga certain amount of macrobiostratigraphic fuzziness for thisinterval. However, when consulting the d13C curve, the boundaryinterval can tightly be delimited: the top of the Pewsey Eventaround Bed 4 (Fig. 9B) marks a good proxy for the base of the UpperTuronian: it equates with the FO of the ammonite Subprionocyclusneptuni in England. The Caburn Event around Bed 10 marks analternative level for the base of the Upper Turonian by means ofinoceramid stratigraphy: it equates with the entry of Inoceramusperplexus in northwestern Germany (Fig. 9B; see Wiese and Kaplan,2001 for detailed discussion). Within the d13C framework itbecomes clear that the LO of H. helvetica is not an ideal biostrati-graphic datum as it is diachronous in the various regions. In theContessa quarry, Italy (Stoll and Schrag, 2000), and the Liencressection, Spain (Wiese, 1999), the top of the H. helvetica total rangezone is located around the Pewsey Event, which approximates theMiddle/Upper Turonian boundary interval by means of ammonites.In the Burgberg section, the LO of H. helvetica appears to besignificantly later, around the Caburn Event (Figs. 4, 8, 9B). Thus,

Fig. 9. Interbasinal d13C correlation between Salzgitter-Salder (northwestern Germany), Burgberg (S Germany), Liencres (northern Spain) and Trunch and Dover (England), afterdata from Jarvis et al. (2006), Voigt and Hilbrecht (1997) and Wiese (1999). The newly established Burgberg Event can only be recognized in stratigraphically complete sectionsirrespective of its thickness.

F. Wiese / Cretaceous Research 31 (2010) 130–146142

any zonations considering the last occurrence of the taxon shouldbe avoided as it creates possibly diachronous upper limits of thezone.

Biostratigraphically, the Upper Turonian and Lower Coniacianyielded only few macrobiostratigraphic data such as the level withlarge M. leskei (upper S. neptuni Zone) and the Lower Coniaciancremnoceramid assemblages in the upper Seewen Limestone andthe Choltal members. Precise biostratigraphic zonations are notpossible, but an overall reliable date for the calibration of thebiostratigraphy against the d13C curves is obtained, which is then beused to draw zonal and substage boundaries into the Burgbergsection (comp. Fig. 8).

As inoceramids are apparently frequent in the SLM throughoutthe Helvetic, they bear stratigraphic potential for future strati-graphic fine-tuning. Therefore, it might be reasonable to define thebase of the Upper Turonian with the Caburn Event (as a proxy forthe FO of I. perplexus) in the Burgberg section (ca. Bed 10). It like-wise marks the base of the perplexus/inaequivalvis/stuemckei/cuvierii Assemblage Zone. The base of the labiatoidiformis Zonecorrelates roughly with the top of subsidiary marker h3, and the

base of the scupini Zone is located shortly above subsidiary markeri1 (Burgberg section Bed 19). For the base of the Coniacian, theNavigation Event provides a good proxy for the recognition of theboundary (around beds 48/49), however, it does not provide a strictdatum line (Wood et al., 2004). The precise stratigraphic re-assessment shows that the top of the Seewen Limestone Member isEarly Coniacian in age and that at least lower parts of the CholtalMember have at least a Lower Coniacian interval in the GruntenNappe. This in accordance with Salomon (1989), who was not ableto confirm the Late Santonian age of the upper Seewen Formationin nearby sections from the Allgau-Santis Nappe of the Allgau. Fromother areas, further macrobiostratigraphic data of this interval areattainable: from the upper part of the Choltal Member of the All-gau-Santis Nappe (Churfursten-Mattstock Group, Switzerland) andfrom Vorarlberg, Volviceramus involutus, a Middle Coniacian indexinoceramid, is recorded (Heim, 1910, p. 199, fig. 59; Riedel, 1940).There are no records of younger inoceramids from the SeewenFormation in the literature. On the other hand, Volviceramus andInoceramus (Magadiceramus) subquadratus are recorded from thebasal Amden Formation of Vorarlberg (Riedel, 1940), and further

Fig. 11. Comparison of lithologic trends north and south of the Mid-European Island.Note the overall good correlation of biosedimentary trends except the timing of thefinal turnover towards the Amden Formation, which occurs ca. 200–300 ky later thanthe Emscher Formation. The white nodules (right column) represent the ‘‘tubular’’Seewen Limestone Member.

F. Wiese / Cretaceous Research 31 (2010) 130–146 143

inoceramid records from the Allgau are described from marlswithout typical Seewen Limestone-like characteristics (Riedel,1940; Salomon, 1989). This dates the final facies turnover from theSeewen to the Amden Formation presumably as upper MiddleConiacian (high Volviceramus involutus inoceramid Zone: high ino-ceramid zone 22 of Troger, 1989). This interval equates with theuppermost part of the Gauthiericeras margae ammonite Zone ofKaplan and Kennedy (1996), which is high Mid-Coniacian in age.

The biostratigraphic reinterpretation permits also a slight modi-fication of the lithostratigraphic framework from the literature data(Fig. 2B). In a modified sketch for the Seewen Formation (Fig. 10),the reviewed biostratigraphic data together with the previouslyneglected Gotzis Member and red Seewen limestone modificationsare compiled for the Grunten Nappe. The position of the Burgbergquarry on an intra-shelf swell (Cenomanian interval of the SLM notdeveloped) is marked on Fig. 10.

The high-resolution template also enables a comparative viewon the evolution of similar biosedimentary systems north andsouth of the MEI. Judging from the microfacies and macrofauna,the Seewen Limestone Member of the Burgberg section iscompositionally de facto identical with the Turonian to LowerConiacian Upper Planerkalk Group with the Sohlde (white and redcalcareous nannofossil limestones with intercalated marls, flaserylimestones and griottes), Salder (massively bedded white calca-reous nannofossil limestone) and Erwitte formations (alternationof thick marls and beds of calcareous nannfossil limestones) ofnorthwestern Germany, north of the MEI (Niebuhr et al., 2007, p.27, Fig. 5; Fig. 11). Both systems reflect a distal shelf calcareousbiosedimentary system with nannoplankton ooze as a matrix and– compositionally depleted – variable amounts mainly of inocer-amid debris, c-dinocysts and planktonic foraminifera. Othercomponents such as echinoderm debris or benthic foraminiferaare underrepresented to very rare. Both systems share alsoa peculiarity: geographically and stratigraphically patchy Creta-ceous oceanic red beds of a terminal Cenomanian to MiddleTuronian age (Wiese, 2009). The onset of the red bed develop-ment follows in both areas a significant phase of tectonicdisruption in the Upper Cenomanian, the Santander Phase ofWiese and Wilmsen (1999), in the Helvetic expressedby unconformities and the first phase of sediment reworking(Gotzis Member). The lithostratigraphic development of the See-wen Limestone Member in the Burgberg section shows – at leastin its higher parts – surprisingly good accordance with the

Fig. 10. Generalized lithostratigraphic subdivision of the Grunten area, consideringalso the red Seewen Limestones (Cretaceous oceanic red beds, CORBs) and the GotzisMember (GM). Note the stratigraphic re-interpretation (comp. Fig. 2B). Due to thehiatus throughout the Cenomanian and?lowermost Turonian, the Burgberg section ispositioned on an intrashelf-swell (circle with x). The true amount of diachronism ofthe top of the Seewen Limestone Formation still needs to be elaborated precisely bymacrofauna and is still uncertain.

lithostratigraphic development of the Salzgitter-Salder sectionof northwestern Germany. The d13C correlation (Fig. 8) demon-strates that the base of a well-developed marl-limestone alter-nation at Salzgitter-Salder (Grey and White Alternation Memberof the Erwitte Formation; Fig. 11), below the Burgberg Event,correlates perfectly with the entry of marlier intervals and thickerseparating marls between individual limestones in the Burgbergsection (base Bed 33, indicated by a black triangel on Fig. 8). As inSalzgitter-Salder, this marl/limestone alternation is terminated bya short interval of thicker limestones with marl measures (UpperLimestone Unit Member of the Erwitte Formation in Salzgitter-Salder, beds above Bed 49 in Burgberg). Finally, this is succeededby the progressive input of clay or decrease in calcareous bio-productivity and the establishment of a marl dominated system(Emscher Formation in northwestern Germany, Amden Formationin the Grunten Helvetic) via the Choltal Member or the ‘‘Transi-tional Unit‘‘(top Erwitte-Formation) of northwestern Germany,respectively (Fig. 11). However, in a direct north-south compar-ison, the Amden Formation appears to have developed ca. 200–300 ky later than the Emscher Formation (Gradstein et al., 2004).This north-south long-range correlation of inferred quasi-isochronous lithostratigraphic units – crossing boundaries ofseveral tectonosedimentary domains inclusive the MEI – mightappear conceptually heretical. However, the precise stratigraphiccontrol and the demonstrably almost synchronous responses ofremote but biosedimentologially identical systems points ata common triggering mechanism for cyclic variation in carbonateexport to the sea floor as seen in the Grey and White Alternationand beds 33–49, respectively. Although the reasons for this areunknown so far, a positive correlation with a major sea level riseduring Late Turonian times (latest Turonian peak of Hancock,1989; Wiese and Wilmsen, 1999) is remarkable.

Finally it needs to be highlighted that the excellent interbasinalcorrelation between the Burgberg section with those of Salzgitter-Salder and Liencres shows that – for the Middle/Upper Turonianboundary interval to the Lower Coniacian –ca. 22–27 isotope markers

F. Wiese / Cretaceous Research 31 (2010) 130–146144

are available for correlation and stratigraphic fine-tuning betweenstratigraphically expanded sections. For the Upper Turonian asdefined here,14 isotopic marker are available for a period of ca.1.5 my(Gradstein et al., 2004), providing a chronostratigraphic resolution ofca. 100 ky, which falls into the time span of the short excentricity.Small-scale d13C fluctuations were suggested to be triggered by localminor sea-level oscillations (Voigt, 2000), but the occurrence inwidespread areas (central European shelf seas, Bay of Biscay, Helveticshelf) rather points at orbital forcing controlled productivity andcarbon export to the sediment (Voigt et al., 2006). Thus, the observedd13C oscillations bear significant potential for cyclostratigraphicrefinement of the global time scale in the Upper Turonian.

8. Conclusions and perspectives

The stratigraphic re-assessment of the Burgberg section – basedon macrofauna and interbasinal d13C correlations – provides analternative chronostratigraphic framework for the upper Garschellato Seewen Formation of the abandoned ‘‘An der Schanz’’ quarry,a classic Helvetic key locality of southern Germany. The mainconclusions are listed below:

1. The Aubrig Beds appear to be Late Albian in age. The ‘‘Knollen’’(nodules) in Seewen limestone facies represent multiplegenerations of periodically excavated and infilled Thalassinoidesburrows, yielding Lower to Upper Cenomanian foraminifera(‘‘tubular Seewen limestone’’).

2. For the Burgberg quarry, the uppermost parts of the SeewenFormation can firmly dated as Early Coniacian by inoceramidbivalves. An Upper Santonian age as previously describedcannot be confirmed. Macrofaunal data from the literaturesuggest a terminal Mid-Coniacian age for the final decay of theSeewen Formation and the establishment of the AmdenFormation.

3. Literature data likewise indicate that inoceramids arecomparatively frequent in the Seewen Formation. Thus thereappears to be a very high potential for future inoceramidbiostratigraphic works and a much more refined biostrati-graphic subdivision of the Seewen Formation, enabling aprecise mapping of the history and geographic distribution ofdifferential subsidence on the Turonian and Lower ConiacianHelvetic shelf.

4. The d13C curve indicates a stratigraphically complete UpperTuronian of the Burgberg section as can be seen from theprecise interbasinal correlation of the main isotopic events. TheBurgberg Event is newly introduced, and elsewhere it occurs inexpanded sections only. In expanded sections, a d13C strati-graphic resolution of ca. 100 ky can be achieved in the case ofthe Upper Turonian, which suggests a triggering by the shortexcentricity.

5. The LO of H. helvetica can be shown to be diachronous on aninterbasinal scale. Any zonations using its LO, therefore, shouldbe avoided.

6. The bio- and chemostratigraphic re-assessment in the contextof a literature review on planktonic foraminifera ranges suggestthat the considerable stratigraphic offset between macro-biostratigraphy within the d13C framework in the Burgbergsection is artificial and results from lacking revision of plank-tonic foraminifera stratigraphy in the light of more recentliterature in the working area.

7. The Caburn Event correlates with the FO of I. perplexus. There-fore, it is recommended here to take it as a well-recordedpossible Middle/Upper Turonian boundary marker intoconsideration. Problems with stratigraphic accuracy arisingwhen exclusively relying on macrofossils are well-known but

again nicely demonstrated here by the stratigraphic offsetbetween the FO of I. perplexus as fixed by the Caburn Event (Bed10) and its first appearance in the section (top Bed 15).

The stratigraphic conclusions drawn here show that theBurgberg quarry represents an important reference sectionserving as a stratigraphic gateway to the north Tethyan shelf in theform of the Helvetic Seewen Formation due to its complete setof isotopic marker at least for the Middle Turonian to the LowerConiacian. Finally, it needs to be emphasized that – as it is now –the Seewen Formation forms a lithologic block, lithostrati-graphically subdivided into variable facies types, but given thepotential of Turonian stratigraphic resolution, there appearsa somewhat fuzzy knowledge how these different facies typesrelate geographically and stratigraphically to each other due to thediscrepancies between macro and microbiostratigraphy high-lighted in this text, and the poor macrobiostratigraphic data ingeneral. In the Planerkalk Group of northwestern Germany, theapproximate biosedimentary counterpart of the Seewen Forma-tion north of the MEI, a high-resolution stratigraphic framework(bio-, event, sequence, stable isotope stratigraphies; see Niebuhret al., 2007 for an overview, with further readings) permitsa precise dating of synsedimentary tectonosedimentary events asindicated by the onset of differential subsidence, rotational slumpsand unconformities (Hilbrecht, 1988; Mortimore et al., 1998).Although synsedimentary tectonism is well recorded and in partmapped (Follmi, 1986; Hilbrecht, 1991), it is impossible to directlycompare the depositional history of both sedimentary realmsdirectly due to the stratigraphic conflicts of micro- and macro-biostratigraphy. This is inasmuch relevant, as the triggering forthis tectonism on the European Shelf seas has been related tothe collision of Africa, Iberia and Europe (Kley and Voigt, 2008).In that article, the Helvetic shelf is considered not to be affected bythese Turonian to Campanian compressional movements. How-ever, judging from the massive lateral thickness variations and theextensive hiati at the base of the Seewen Formation in conjunctionwith the occurrence of lithoclasts even from the SchrattenkalkFormation (Barremian, Aptian; Fig. 2B) in the Gotzis Member ofVorarlberg (Follmi, 1981), compressional tectonics most likely alsoaffected the Helvetic shelf massively. Its precise macrofaunaldating, d13C correlation and comparison with areas north of theMEI still is open to discussion.

Acknowledgements

The author is indebted to Maike Glos and Marc Barlage (FUBerlin) for sample preparation and cleaning the fossils. Thanks toW. Werner (Munich) for loaning some types from the Burgbergsection. The work was supported by the DFG Wi 1656/5–1. I amespecially grateful to the late Alexander Muller, who enabled thestudy of his collection from the Helvetic Cretaceous of the Gruntenarea. He also provided valuable field advices. K. Follmi (Lausanne)and G. Price (Plymouth) are very much thanked for their reviewsand their constructive comments.

References

Alexander, K., Bloch, P., Sigl, W., Zacher, W., 1965. Helvetikum und ‘‘Ultra-helvetikum’’ zwischen Bregenzer Ache und Subersach (Vorarlberg). Zeitschriftder Deutschen Geologischen Gesellschaft 116, 390–402.

Boden, K., 1935. Geologisches Wanderbuch fur die Bayerischen Alpen. 2 Auflage.Enke Verlag, Stuttgart, 458 pp.

Bohm, J., Heim, A., 1909. Neuere Untersuchungen uber die Senonbildungen der ostli-chen Schweizeralpen. Memoires de la Societe paleontologique de la Suisse 36,1–56.

Bolli, H.M., 1944. Zur Stratigraphie der oberen Kreide in den hoheren helvetischenDecken. Eclogae Geologicae Helvetiae 37, 217–328.

F. Wiese / Cretaceous Research 31 (2010) 130–146 145

Caron, M., 1985. Cretaceous planktic foraminifera. In: Bolli, H.M., Saunders, J.B.,Perch-Nielsen, K. (Eds.), Plankton stratigraphy. Cambridge University Press,Cambridge, pp. 17–86.

Caron, M., Dall’agnolo, S., Accarie, H., Barrera, E., Kauffman, E.G., Amedro, F.,Robaszinski, F., 2006. High-resolution stratigraphy of the Cenomanian-Turonianboundary interval at Pueblo (USA) and Wadi Bahloul (Tunisia): stable isotopeand bio-events correlation. Geobios 39, 171–200.

Ernst, G., 1970. The stratigraphical value of the echinoids in the Boreal UpperCretaceous. Newsletters on Stratigraphy 1, 19–34.

Ernst, G., Wood, C.J., 1995. Die tiefere Oberkreide des subherzynen Niedersachsens.Terra Nostra 5/95, 41–84.

Escher, von der Linth, A, 1878. Geologische Karte des Sentis. Beitrage zur geo-logischen Karte der Schweiz 13.

Follmi, K.B., 1981. Sedimentare Hinweise auf oberkretazische Tektonik im Vor-arlberger Helvetikum. Eclogae Geologica Helvetiae 74, 175–187.

Follmi, K.B., 1986. Die Garschella-und Seewerkalkformation (Aptian-Santonian) imVoralberger Helvetikum und Ultrahelvetikum. Mitteilungen aus dem Geo-logischen Institut der eidgenossischen Hochschule und der Universitat Zurich.Neue Folge 262, 1–391.

Follmi, K.B., 1989. Evolution of the Mid-Cretaceous triad. Lecture Notes in EarthSciences 23, 1–153.

Follmi, K.B., Gainon, F., 2008. Demise of the northern Tethyan Urgonian carbonateplatform and subsequent transition towards pelagic conditions: the sedimen-tary record of the Col de la Plaine Morte area, Central Switzerland. SedimentaryGeology 205, 142–159.

Follmi, K.B., Ouwehand, P.J., 1987. Garschella-Formation und Gotzis-Schichten(Aptian-Coniacian): neue stratigraphische Daten aus dem Helvetikum derOstschweiz und des Vorarlbergs. Eclogae Geologicae Helvetiae 80, 141–191.

Freudenberger, W., Schwerd, K., 1996. Erlauterungen zur Geologischen Karte vonBayern 1:500000. 4. neubearbeitete Auflage. Bayerisches Geologisches Land-esamt, Munchen, 329 pp.

Gale, A.S.,1996. Turonian correlation and sequence stratigraphy of the Chalk insouthern England. In: Hesselbo, S.P., Parkinson, D.N. (Eds.), Sequence stratig-raphy in British geology. Geological Society, Special Publication, London 102,177–195.

Gale, A.S., Smith, A.B., Monks, N.E.A., Young, J.A., Howard, A., Wray, D.S., Huggett, J.M.,2000. Marine biodiversity through the Late Cenomanian-Early Turonian: palae-oceanographic controls and sequence stratigraphic biases. Journal of theGeological Society 157, 745–757.

Gradstein, F.M., Ogg, J.G., Smith, A.G., 2004. A geologic time scale 2004. CambridgeUniversity Press, Cambridge, 610 pp.

Gumbel, C.W., 1856. Der Grunten. Eine geognostische Skizze. Palm, Munchen. 20pp.Hagn, H., 1955. Fazies und Mikrofauna der Gesteine der bayerischen Alpen. Inter-

national Sedimentary Petrographical Series 1, 1–174.Hancock, J.M., 1989. Sea-level changes in the British region during the Late Creta-

ceous. Proceedings of the Geologist’s Association 100, 565–594.Hay, W.W., 2008. Evolving ideas about the Cretaceous climate and ocean circula-

tion. Cretaceous Research 29, 725–753.Heim, A., 1905. Das Santisgebirge. Beitrage zur geologischen Karte der Schweiz.

Neue Folge 16, 1–32.Heim, A., 1910. Monographie der Churfirsten-Mattstock-Gruppe. I Teil: Einleitung

und Stratigraphie vom Tertiar bis zur mittleren Kreide. Beitrage zur geo-logischen Karte der Schweiz. Neue Folge 20, 1–272.

Heim, A., 1916. Uber Abwicklung und Facieszusammenhang in den Decken der nor-dlichen Schweizer Alpen. Vierteljahresschrift der Naturforschenden Gesellschaftin Zurich 61, 474–487.

Heim, A., 1919. Zur Geologie des Grunten im Allgau. Vierteljahresschrift derNaturforschenden Gesellschaft in Zurich 64, 458–486.

Heim, A., Oberholzer, J., 1907. Geologische Karte der Gebirge am Walensee,1:25.000. Geologische Kommission der Schweizerischen naturforschendenGesellschaft. Spezial-Karte 44.

Heim, A., Seitz, O., 1934. Die mittlere Kreide in den helvetischen Alpen von Rheintalund Vorarlberg und das Problem der Kondensation. Denkschriften derSchweizerischen Naturforschenden Gesellschaft 69, 185–310.

Herb, R., 1962. Geologie von Amden. Beitrage zur geologischen Karte der Schweiz.Neue Folge 144, 1–130.

Herb, R., 1965. Die Oberkreide des Helvetikums von Amden (Kt. St. Gallen). Bulletinder Schweizerischen Vereinigung von Petroleum-Geologen und -Ingenieuren31, 152–159.

Herm, D., 2000. 4.10 Kreide in den deutschen Alpen. In: Stratigraphische Kom-mission Deutschlands (Ed.), Stratigraphie von DeutschlandIII. Die Kreide derBundesrepublik Deutschland. Courier Forschungsinstitut Senckenberg 226,147–162.

Hilbrecht, H., 1988. Hangfazies in pelagischen Kalken und synsedimentare Tektonikin Beispielen aus dem Mittel-Turon (Oberkreide) von NW-Deutschland. Zeit-schrift der deutschen Geologischen Gesellschaft 139, 83–109.

Hilbrecht, H., 1991. Die fazielle und strukturelle Entwicklung der helvetischenOberkreide im Allgau und Kleinwalsertal und ihre Beziehung zu Meeress-piegelschwankungen und Palaozeanographie. Berliner geowissenschaftlicheAbhandlungen A 139, 1–180.

Hilbrecht, H., Liedholz, J., 1989. Redeposited blocks of Seewen Limestone and faciesdifferentiation in the Helvetic Amden Formation (Santonian-Campan), GermanAlps. In: Wiedmann, J. (Ed.), Cretaceous of the Western Tethys. Schweizerbart,Stuttgart, pp. 453–463.

Hiss, M., Niebuhr, B., Voigt, T., 2007. Emscher-Formation. In: Niebuhr, B., Hiss, M.,Kaplan, U., Troger, K.-A., Voigt, S., Wiese, F., Wilmsen, M. (Eds.), Lithostrati-graphie der norddeutschen Oberkreide. Schriftenreihe der Deutschen Gesell-schaft fur Geologische Wissenschaften 55, 81–84.

Ion, J., Szasz, L., 1994. Biostratigraphy of the Upper Cretaceous of Romania. Creta-ceous Resarch 15, 59–87.

Jarvis, I., Gale, A.S., Jenkyns, H.C., Pearce, M.A., 2006. Secular variation in LateCretaceous carbon isotopes: a new d13C carbonate reference curve for theCenomanian-Campanian (99.6–70.6 Ma). Geological Magazine 143, 561–608.

Kaplan, U., Kennedy, W.J., 1996. Upper Turonian and Coniacian ammonite stratig-raphy of Westphalia, NW-Germany. Acta Geologica Polonica 46, 305–352.

Kaufmann, F., 1877. Kalkstein- und Schiefergebirge der Kte. Schwyz und Zug und desBurgenstocks bei Stanz. Beitrage zur geologischen Karte der Schweiz 14, 1–180.

Kley, J., Voigt, T., 2008. Late Cretaceous intraplate thrusting in central Europe: Effectof Africa-Iberia-Europe convergence, not Alpine collision. Geology 36, 839–842.

Knauer, J. 1928. Abriß der Geologie von Bayern r. d. Rh in sechs Abteilungen.Abteilung II: Geologischer Uberblick uber die Alpen zwischen Bodensee unddem Tegernsee und ihr Molassevorland. Verlag von R. Oldenbourg und Pilotyand Loehle, Munchen, pp 1–184.

Kohler, E.E., Haussler, H., 1978. Zur Entstehung von Phosphorit- und Glauko-nitvorkommen der Mittlel- und Oberkreide im Helvetikum des Allgaus. Geo-logisches Jahrbuch, A 46, 69–91.

Li, X., Jenkyns, H.C., Wang, C., Hu, X., Chen, X., Wie, Y., Huand, Y., Cui, J., 2006. UpperCretaceous carbon- and oxygen-isotope stratigraphy of hemipelagic carbonatefacies from southern Tibet, China. Journal of the Geological Society, London 163.375–382.

Mehl, D., 1989. Sedimentare Entwicklung und Stratigraphie der helvetischen mit-tleren und oberen Kreide (Spat-Apt bis Maastricht) im Bereich der Gottesack-erwande (Allgau/Vorarlberg). Berliner geowissenschaftliche Abhandlungen A106, 385–407.

Mortimore, R.N., 1986. Stratigraphy of the Upper Cretaceous White Chalk of Sussex.Proceedings of the Geologist’s Association 97, 97–139.

Mortimore, R., Wood, C.J., Pomerol, B., Ernst, G., 1998. Dating the phases of theSubhercynian tectonic epoch: Late Cretaceous tectonics and eustatics in theCretaceous basins of northern Germany compared with the Anglo-Paris Basin.Zentralblatt fur Geologie und Palaontologie, Teil1 11, 1349–1401.

Niebuhr, B., Hiss, M., Kaplan, U., Troger, K.-A., Voigt, S., Wiese, F., Wilmsen, M., 2007.Lithostratigraphie der norddeutschen Oberkreide. Schriftenreihe der DeutschenGesellschaft fur Geologische Wissenschaften 55, 1–136.

Oberhansli-Langenegger, H., 1978. Mikropalaontologische und sedimentologischeUntersuchungen in der Amdener Formation (Oberkreide, Helvetische Deckender Schweizer Alpen). Beitrage zur geologischen Karte der Schweiz. Neue Folge150, 1–83.

Oberhauser, R., 1958. Neue Beitrage zur Geologie und Mikropalaontologie vonHelvetikum und Flysch im Gebiet der Hoghen Kugel. Verhandlungen der geo-logischen Bundesanstalt, fur 1958, 176–183.

Oberhauser, R., 1963. Die Kreide im Ostalpenraum Osterreichs in mikropalaonto-logischer Sicht. Jahrbuch der Geologischen Bundesanstalt 106, 1–88.

Quereau, E.C., 1893. Die Klippenregion von Iberg (Sihlthal). Beitrage zur geo-logischen Karte der Schweiz. Neue Folge 3, 1–158.

Richter, D., 1984. Allgauer Alpen. 3. Auflage. Sammlung geologischer Fuhrer 77,1–253.

Richter, M., 1960. Ergebnisse neuer Untersuchungen im Helvetikum des Vorarlbergund Allgau. Abhandlungen der deutschen Akademie der Wissenschaften, KlasseIII, 1960 Heft 1, 76–94.

Riedel, L., 1940. Zur Stratigraphie der Oberkreide in Vorarlberg. Zeitschrift derDeutschen Geologischen Gesellschaft 92, 69–107.

Riedel, L., 1942. Das Mesozoikum in Niedersachsen 5. Abteilung: Obere Kreide. Prov-inzial-Institut fur Landesplanung. Landes- und Volkskunde von Niedersachsen ander Universitat Gottingen Reihe A1 2, 1–53.

Risch, H. (Ed.), 1995, Die Tiefbohrung Hindelang 1 (Allgauer Alpen), 100. GeologicaBavarica, pp. 1–286.

Robaszynski, F., Caron, M., Dupuis, C., Amedro, F., Gonzales Donoso, J.M., Linares, D.,Hardenbol, J., Gartner, S., Calandra, F., Deloffre, R., 1990. A tentative integratedstratigraphy in the Turonian of Central Tunisia: Formationes, zones andsequential stratigraphy in the Kalaat Senan area. Bulletin des Centres deRecherches Exploration-Production Elf-Aquitaine 14, 213–384.

Robaszynski, F., Gonzales Donoso, J.M., Linares, D., Amedro, F., Caron, M., Dupuis, C.,Dhondt,., A.V., Gartner, S., 2000. Le Cretace superieur de la region de KalaatSenan, Tunesie centrale. Litho-biostratigraphie integree: zones d’ammonites, deforaminiferes planctoniques et de nannofossils du Turonien superieur auMaastrichtien. Bulletin du Centre de Recherches Elf Exploration-Production 22,359–490.

Rollier, L., 1923. Supracretacique et nummulitique dans les Alpes suisses orientales.Beitrage zur geologischen Karte der Schweiz. Neue Folge 53, 1–51.

Sahagian, D., Pinous, O., Olfreiev, A., Zhakarov, V., 1996. Eustatic curve for theMiddle Jurassic–Cretaceous based on Russian Platform and Siberian stratig-raphy: zonal resolution. AAPG Bulletin 80, 1433–1458.

Salomon, D., 1989. Sedimentare Entwicklung und Stratigraphie der helvetischenmittleren und oberen Kreide (Spat-Apt-Maastricht) im Bereich der Gottesack-erwande (Allgau/Vorarlberg). Berliner geowissenschaftliche Abhandlungen, A106, 385–407.

Schaub, H.P., 1936. Geologie des Rawilgebietes (Topogr. Atlas, Blatt 472, Lenk, SE-Ecke). Eclogae Geologicae Helvetiae 29, 337–407.

F. Wiese / Cretaceous Research 31 (2010) 130–146146

Schweizerisches Komitee fur Stratigraphie, AG Helvetikum, 2009. Lithostrati-graphisches Lexikon der Schweiz, Helvetikum. http://fm.stratigraphie.ch/stratigraphie/helveticum/index_D.html [cited 2009-07-13].

Schwerd, K., Ebel, R., Jerz, H., Bader, K., Dohr, G., Hagn, H., Risch, H., Hohenstatter, E.,Laforce, W., Muller, M., Haussler, H., Wrobel, J.-P., 1983. Erlauterungen zurGeologischen Karte 1:25000, Blatt 8427 Immenstadt i. Allgau. Bayerischesgeologisches Landesamt, Munchen, 258 pp.

Smith, A.B., Wright, C.W., 2003. British Cretaceous Echinoids, Part 7, Atelostomata, 1.Holasteroida. Palaeontographical Society Monographs 156 (619), 440–568.

Stoll, H.M., Schrag, D.P., 2000. High resolution stable isotope records from the UpperCretaceous rocks of Italy and Spain: Glacial episodes in a greenhouse planet?Geological Society of America Bulletin 112, 308–319.

Tedesco, L.P., Wanless, H.R., 1991. Generation of sedimentary fabrics and facies byrepetitive excavation and storm infilling of burrow networks. Holocene of SouthFlorida and Caicos Platform, B.W.I. Palaios 6, 326–343.

Troger, K.-A., 1989. Problems of Upper Cretaceous inoceramid biostratigraphy andpaleobiogeography in Europe and western Asia. In: Wiedmann, J. (Ed.), Creta-ceous of the Western Tethys. Proceedings of the 3rd International CretaceousSymposium, Tubingen 1987. Schweizerbart, Stuttgart, pp. 911–930.

Vacek, M., 1879. Ueber Vorarlberger Kreide. Jahrbuch der kaiserlich-koniglichenGeologischen Reichsanstalt 29, 659–758.

Voigt, S., 2000. Cenomanian-Turonian composite d13C curve for Western and centralEurope: the role of organic and inorganic carbon fluxes. Palaeogeography,Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 160, 91–104.

Voigt, S., Aurag, A., Leis, F., Kaplan, U., 2006. Late Cenomanian to Middle Turo-nian high-resolution carbon isotope stratigraphy: New data from the Mun-sterland Cretaceous Basin, Germany. Earth and Planetary Science Letters,196–210.

Voigt, S., Wagreich, M., Surlyk, F., Walaszczyk, I., Ulicny, D., �Cech, S., Voigt, T.,Wiese, F., Wilmsen, M., Reich, M., Funk, H., Michailik, J., Jagt, J.W.M., Felder, P.J.,Schulp, A., 2008. 15. Cretaceous. In: Maccann, T. (Ed.), Geology of CentralEurope. Mesozoic and Cenozoic, vol. 2. Geological Society, London, pp. 923–997.

Walaszczyk, I., Cobban, W.A., 2000. Inoceramid faunas and biostratigraphy of theUpper Turonian-Lower Coniacian of the Western Interior of the United States.Special Papers in Palaeontology 64, 1–118.

Walaszczyk, I., Wood, C.J., 1999. Inoceramids and biostratigraphy at the Turonian/Coniacian boundary; based on the Salzgitter-Salder quarry, Lower Saxony,

Germany, and the Slupia Nadbrzezna section, central Poland. Acta GeologicaPolonica 48, 395–434.

Weidich, K.F., 1984. Neue stratigraphische Erkenntnisse aus der suddeutschen Kreide.Neues Jahrbuch fur Geologie und Palaontologie. Abhandlungen 169, 187–224.

Weidich, K.F., Schwerd, K., Immel, H., 1983. Das Helvetikum-Profil im Steinbruch"An der Schanz" bei Burgberg/Allgau. Lithologie, Stratigraphie und Makrofauna.Zitteliana 10, 555–573.

Wendler, I., Wendler, J., Grafe, K.-U., Lehmann, J., Willems, H., 2009. Turonian toSantonian carbon isotope data from the Tethys Himalaya, southern Tibet.Cretaceous Research 30, 261–279.

Wiese, F., 1997. Das Turon und Unter-Coniac im Nordkantabrischen Becken (ProvinzKantabrien, Nordspanien): Faziesentwicklung, Bio-, Event- und Sequenzstrati-graphie. Berliner Geowissenschaftliche Abhandlungen E 24, 1–131.

Wiese, F., 1999. Stable isotope data (d 13C, d 18O) from the Middle and Upper Turonian(Upper Cretaceous) of Liencres (Cantabria, northern Spain) with a comparison tonorthern Germany (Sohlde and Salzgitter-Salder). Newsletters on Stratigraphy37, 37–62.

Wiese, F., 2009. The Sohlde Formation (Cenomanian, Turonian) of NW Germany:shallow marine pelagic red beds. SEPM Special Publication 91, 153–170.

Wiese, F., Kaplan, U., 2001. The potential of the Lengerich section (Munster Basin,northern Germany) as a possible candidate Global boundary Stratotype Sectionand Point (GSSP) for the Middle/Upper Turonian boundary. Cretaceous Research22, 549–563.

Wiese, F., Wilmsen, M., 1999. Sequence stratigraphy in the Cenomanian to Cam-panian of the North Cantabrian Basin (Cantabria, N-Spain). Neues Jahrbuch furGeologie und Palaontologie. Abhandlungen 212, 131–173.

Wilmsen, M., Niebuhr, B., Hiss, M., 2005. The Cenomanian of northern Germany: faciesanalysis of a transgressive biosedimentary system. Facies 51, 242–263.

Wood, C.J., Ernst, G., 1998. C 2.9 Turonian-Coniacian of Salzgitter-Salder. In: Mut-terlose, J., Bornemann, A., Rauer, S., Spaeth, C.,Wood, C.J. (Eds.), Key localities ofthe northwest European Cretaceous. Bochumer Geologische und GeotechnischeArbeiten 48, 94–102.

Wood, C.J., Walaszczyk, I., Mortimore, R.N., Woods, M.A., 2004. New observations onther inoceramid biostratigraphy of the higher part of the Upper Turonian and theTuronian-Conician transition in Poland, Germany and the UK. Acta GeologicaPolonica 54, 541–549.

Ziegler, P.A., 1988. Evolution of the Arctic North Atlantic and the western Tethys.American Association of Petroleum Geologists Memoir 43, 1–198.