New Permian Aliyak and Kariz Now formations, Alborz Basin, NE … · 2014-10-21 · New Permian...

New Permian Aliyak and Kariz Now formations, Alborz Basin, NE Iran:correlation with the Zagros Mountains and Oman

SAKINEH AREFI FARD1* and VLADIMIR I. DAVYDOV2,3

1Geology and Geophysics Department, TAMU, College Station, Texas, USA2Permian Research Institute, Department of Geosciences, BSU, Boise, Idaho, USA

3Kazan (Volgan region) Federal University, Kazan, Russia

Two new Permian-aged formations ‘Kariz Now Formation’ and ‘Aliyak Formation’ are proposed for a 65–150m-thick succession in theKariz Now area, with the type section for both (79.5m thick) located 9 km northeast of Aliyak village ca. 100km southeast ofMashhad city, north-eastern Iran. The lower Kariz Now Formation is composed of siliciclastics. The age of this Formation is poorly constrained but its correlation withthe Shah Zeid Formation in the Central Alborz suggests a possible Asselian-Hermagorian age for the Kariz Now Formation, which implies a hiatusof Yakhtashian–mid Midian (Artinskian–mid Capitanian) age between the siliciclastics of the Kariz Now Formation and carbonates of thedisconformably overlying Aliyak Formation. There is also the possibility of a potential correlation of this Formation with the Kungurian FaraghanFormation in the Zagros area. The succeeding Aliyak Formation is mostly composed of carbonate rocks capped by a thin basaltic lava flow. TheAliyak Formation is unconformably overlain by dolostones that are correlated with theMiddle Triassic Shotori Formation. Samples were collectedfrom the Kariz Now and Aliyak formations, but fossils were only recovered from the Aliyak Formation. These include calcareous algae, smallforaminiferans, fusulinids, crinoid stems and brachiopods. The recovered fusulinid assemblage from the Aliyak Formation is consistent with thatof the upper CapitanianMonodiexodina kattaensis–Codonofusiella erki andAfghanella schencki–Sumatrina brevis zones of the ZagrosMountainsand with the upper part of the Ruteh Fm in the Alborz Mountains. Although not radiometrically dated, the basaltic lava flow most probablycorresponds to similar basaltic lava flows occurring in the uppermost part of the Ruteh Formation in Central Alborz. Thus, the Permian in thestudied region developed in a basin that extended westward as far as the Central Alborz. A late Capitanian age for the Aliyak Formation impliesit correlates with the Capitanian KS5 in Al Jabal Al-Akhdar in Oman, with Aliyak Unit 5 potentially representing the Permian maximum floodingsurface MFS P25. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Received 17 May 2014; accepted 11 July 2014

KEY WORDS lithostratigraphy; fusulinids; taxonomy; biostratigraphy; palaeogeography; microfacies; depositional environment; northeastern Alborz; Iran

1. INTRODUCTION

The E–W-trending Alborz Mountains extends laterally forabout 2000 km in northern Iran, from the lesser Caucasusof Armenia and Azerbaijan in the northwest, to theParopamisus Mountains of northern Afghanistan to theeast (Fig. 1). These mountains contain the tectono-stratigraphic record of the Alborz Terrane, also known asthe ‘Alborz Block’ or ‘NW Iran Terrane’ (Fig. 1; Sengör,1990; Alavi, 1991, 1996; see review in Ruban et al.,2007). The Alborz Terrane lies at the intersection of severalregional tectonic sutures and its boundaries and palaeo-tectonic history are complicated (Afshar-Harb, 1970,1994; Alavi Naeini, 1972; Berberian et al., 1996; Zanchiet al., 2009).

We have studied the succession in the Kariz Now area,located near the easternmost tectonic boundary of the AlborzTerrane, with the Sabzevar, Farah and Turan terranes(Fig. 1). It has been considered a part of the Alborz orSabsevar terranes (Alavi, 1991; Aghanabati, 1993, 2004)located south of the Palaeotethys Suture. In this study, wedescribe the stratigraphy of the Permian deposits and pro-pose a palaeogeographic model of this poorly known regionwithin the context of the surrounding regions.

This paper focuses on the Permian deposits in the KarizNowarea, which we propose to divide into two lithostratigraphicunits: a lower siliciclastic unit named the Kariz Now Formationand the upper carbonate unit named the Aliyak Formation. Wedocument for the first time the details of the sedimentary andvolcanic rocks and precise taxonomy of calcareous algae andforaminiferans recovered in the limestones of the AliyakFormation, and compare them to those in the Central AlborzMountains, Zagros, Oman and other regions.

*Correspondence to: S. Arefifard, Geology and Geophysics Department,TAMU, College Station, TX, USA. E-mail: [email protected]

Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

GEOLOGICAL JOURNALGeol. J. (2014)Published online in Wiley Online Library(wileyonlinelibrary.com). DOI: 10.1002/gj.2599

Figure 1. (a) Main tectono-stratigraphic units of Iran, Caucasus and Afghanistan (adapted from Alavi, 1991; Aghanabati, 1993; Bagheri and Stampfli, 2008).Ag =Aghdarband tectonic window; Bb=Band-e-Bayan; BFTB=Baluchestan Fold Thrust Belt; Bj =Birjand ophiolitic mélange; BM=Binalud Mountains;DF =Doruneh Fault; EO=Erevan-Ordoband; Fa = Fariman; GS=Gorgan Schist; Jm= Jazmouriam; Kr =Kermanshah ophiolite; Ma =Masouleh; MZT=MainZagros thrust belt; Na =Nain Ophiolitic mélange; Nz =Neyriz ophiolite; Pb = Posht-e-Badam Terrane; PBB=Posht-e-Badam Block; Sz = Sabzevar zone;UD=Uromieh-Dokhtar volcanic belt; YB=Yazd Block. (b) Enlarged map showing location of the Aliyak section, Kariz Now area. This figure is available

in colour online at wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/gj

S. AREFI FARD AND V. I. DAVYDOV

Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Geol. J. (2014)DOI: 10.1002/gj

2. LITHOSTRATIGRAPHY OF THE ALIYAK ANDKARIZ NOW FORMATIONS

The Permian deposits at the Aliyak section in the Kariz Nowarea begin with quartz sandstones and are followed bycarbonate deposits including limestone and dolostone, andterminate with a thin basaltic lava flow. Based on the lithologiccharacteristics of these deposits and their stratigraphicrelations, two lithostatigraphic units were recognized: thelower siliciclastic unit defined as the Kariz Now Formationand the upper carbonate unit defined as the Aliyak Formation.

2.1. ‘Kariz Now Formation’

Name: The proposed ‘Kariz Now Formation’ is named afterthe Kariz Now Village, located 151 km southeast ofMashhad City (Figs. 1 and 2).

Locality and type section: The type section of this Formationis sandstone beds in the Aliak Section located at latitude 35°19′45″N and longitude 60°03′37″E (Figs. 1 and 2).

Lithology and thickness: The thickness of the Kariz NowFormation varies from northwest to southeast in the study areafrom 30 to 60m. In the type section, it is 39m thick and con-sists of the following two units, from the base upwards (Fig. 3):

• Unit 1 (29m thick) Red, medium-bedded (12–14),medium- to coarse-grained quartz sandstone withsmall-scale cross-bedding and laminations.

• Unit 2 (10m thick) Red to orange,medium-bedded (12–15),medium- to fine-grained quartz sandstone with carbonatecement, small-scale cross-bedding and laminations.

Lower boundary and underlying formation: In thestudied area, the Kariz Now Formation overlies an undiffer-entiated Proterozoic–Lower Cambrian unit with an angular

Figure 2. Geological map of the Kariz Now area exhibiting the main structural features. This figure is available in colour online at wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/gj

NEW LOWER AND MIDDLE PERMIAN FORMATIONS, NE IRAN


unconformity boundary (Figs. 4a, 4b and 4c). In the Alborzarea, this undifferentiated unit is divided into the Proterozoic–Lower Cambrian thick-bedded to massive, chertystromatolite-bearing dolostone with a few intercalations of

micaceous shales of the Soltanieh Formation and the LowerCambrian cherty, stromatolite-bearing recrystallized dolostoneinterbedded with micaceous shales of the Barut Formation(Figs. 3 and 4).

Figure 3. Stratigraphic log of the Aliyak Formation in Aliyak Section, Kariz Now area, NE Iran with some key foraminiferal taxa, A = undifferentiatedSoltanieh–Barut formations, B =Proterozoic–Lower Cambrian, Sh. = Shotori Formation, Tr. = Triassic. This figure is available in colour online at

wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/gj



Upper boundary and overlying formation: The contact ofthe Kariz Now Formation with the overlying Aliyak Formationis most probably disconformable. No biostratigraphic informa-tion is available to constrain the age of the Kariz Now Forma-tion, but correlation of these siliciclastic units with theirequivalent siliciclastics in Alborz, Zagros and east-central Iransuggests that there is no continuous succession between theKariz Now and the Aliyak formations.

2.2. ‘Aliyak Formation’

Name: The proposed ‘Aliyak Formation’ is named afterAliyak Village, located 103 km southeast of Mashhad City(Figs. 1 and 2).

Locality and type section: The type section is proposed atAliyak Section where the type section of the underlyingKariz Now Formation is located (Figs. 1 and 2).

Lithology and thickness: The thickness of the Aliyak For-mation varies from northwest to southeast across the studyarea, from 35 to 90m, based on the geological map reportof the Kariz Now area (Boubee de Gramont et al., 1979).The maximum thickness (90m) is an estimate in an areaaffected by structural complication. In the type section, itis 40.5m thick and consists of the following seven units,from the base upwards (Fig. 3):

• Unit 1 (1m thick) Grey, medium-bedded sandy dolostone.• Unit 2 (11m thick) Dark grey, medium-bedded partlycrystallized limestone with small foraminiferans, algae,brachiopods, crinoid ossicles and ostracods.

• Unit 3 (11m thick) Grey, medium- to thick-bedded,medium to coarse crystalline dolostone.

• Unit 4 (2m thick) Grey, medium-bedded limestone(wackestone–packstone) with fusulinids, smallforaminiferans, algae, crinoid stems and/or ossicles,and brachiopods (Fig. 3, sample K30).

• Unit 5 (1m thick) Grey, medium-bedded algal lime-stone (wackestone).

• Unit 6 (14m thick) Dark grey, medium- to thick-bedded medium crystalline dolostone.

• Unit 7 (0.5m thick, Fig. 4d) Dark green basaltic lavaflow that laterally extends for 6 km. The thicknessvaries from 0.2 to 1.5m.

Lower boundary and underlying formation: In the stud-ied area the Aliyak Formation has an unconformable contactwith the Kariz Now Formation.

Upper boundary and overlying formation: The AliyakFormation is unconformably overlain by massive dolostonesthat are correlated to the Middle Triassic Shotori Formationas reported in the geologic map report of the Kariz Now(Boubee de Gramont et al., 1979).

3. MICROFACIES DESCRIPTION ANDINTERPRETATION

A total of 42 thin sections were prepared from collected samplesin the Aliyak section, Kariz Now area and studied formicrofacies analyses. The result of the petrographic studiesand microfacies analyses was the recognition of 5 microfaciesfor the Kariz Now and Aliyak formations. These microfaciescan be arranged into two palaeoenvironmental belts. Theseinclude tidal flat sediments (quartz sandstone, sandy dolo-mudstone, dolosparite) and lagoon sediments (bioclasticwackestone–packstone, algal wackestone, bioclastic fusulinidpackstone–grainstone).

3.1. Tidal flat sediments

The tidal flat facies in the Aliyak Formation are composed ofquartz sandstone, sandy dolomudstone and dolosparite.

Figure 4. Aliyak Section, Kariz Now area, NE Iran, outcrop details: (a) and(b) quartz sandstones of the Kariz Now Formation, carbonates of the AliyakFormation and dolostones of the undifferentiated Soltanieh–Barut forma-tions looking towards the west and east, respectively; (c) dolostone of theundifferentiated Soltanieh–Barut formations; (d) dark grey basaltic lavaflow at the top of the Aliyak Formation and overlying Triassic rocks ofthe Shotori Formation. This figure is available in colour online at




3.1.1. Quartz sandstoneThis facies is typified by red to orange, medium-bedded(12–15 cm thick), medium- to coarse-grained quartz arenitewith occasional lithoclasts (chert). Quartz grains occur asmonocrystallinewith rare polycrystalline grains.Monocrystallinequartz grains mainly show unit extinction. Quartz grains are gen-erally moderately to well-sorted, rounded to sub-rounded andshow straight to concavo-convex grain contacts. Quartz grainsform 90% of this facies. This facies encompasses units 1 and 2of the Kariz Now Formation of the studied section (Fig. 5a).From the base to the top of this clastic unit, the sandstone cementchanges, as it begins with siliceous overgrowth cement and thenchanges to a carbonate cement (Figs. 5b, c).

3.1.2. Sandy dolomudstoneGrey, medium beds (14 cm thick) of dolostone are characteris-tic for this facies in the field. Dolostone crystals are fully

dense; i.e. with no porosity. Medium- to fine-grained, mode-rate to well-sorted, sub-rounded to rounded mono-crystallinequartz grains represent about 10% to 15% of the rock. No relicof the original fabric is present in this facies. The size of thedolomite rhombs ranges between 5 and 16μm (with a meanof 11μm). This facies occurs in Unit 1 of the AliyakFormation in the studied section (Fig. 5d).

3.1.3. DolospariteThis facies consists of grey to dark grey, medium- to thickbeds (25–35 cm thick) and includes anhedral dolostone crys-tals with non-planar faces which have a xenotopic fabric.The size of the dolomite crystals ranges from 62 to 270μm(with a mean of 170μm). Although in some rare thinsections relics of original allochems (including rare crinoidstems and brachiopod shell fragments) are present, the orig-inal sedimentary textures in the dolosparites of the AliyakFormation are not preserved in most cases. This facies isobserved in units 3 and 6 of the Aliyak Formation of thestudied section (Fig. 5e).

3.1.3.1. Interpretation. The dominance of monocrystallinequartz grains in quartz sandstone indicates that the sedimentsmay have been derived from a granitic source (Basu et al.,1975; Suttner et al., 1981) or from older quartzitic depositsthat were exposed as the result of the uplift in the interiorpart of the craton (Potter, 1986). According to preliminarypetrographic evidence of these quartz sandstones, such asthe absence of unstable grains (feldspars) and presence ofwell-rounded quartz grains, it can be suggested thatrecycling of sedimentary successions had led to the maturityof these sandstones. The high compositional and texturalmaturity in these quartz arenites, as well as cross-beddingand laminations indicate a high-energy depositional environ-ment for this facies. Vertical grading of the quartz arenite toherringbone cross-bedding, and a vertical association of theclastic facies with carbonate tidal facies, point to sedimenta-tion in a shallow supratidal to an upper intertidal environ-ment. Considering the texture and size of crystals indolomudstones and the presence of more than 10% to 15%quartz grains, the dolostones of the Aliyak Formation wereformed under near-surface low temperature conditions(Gregg and Shelton, 1990; Hopkins, 2004; Machel, 2004).The absence of skeletal grains and the presence of quartzgrains imply a landward position of this facies. Thedolosparites probably formed at relatively high temperatures(80–120 °C) (see Narkiewicz, 2009) and replace limestones(Gregg, 1988; Gregg and Shelton, 1990; Dorobek et al.,1993; Reinhold, 1998). Based on the presence of scatteredquartz grains and rare relics of skeletal grains, as well asits position below lagoonal facies, a tidal flat setting is likelyfor this facies.

Figure 5. Photomicrographs of facies types of the Kariz Now Formation(a–c) and Aliyak Formation (d–h): (a) quartz sandstone, sample K-1;(b and c) carbonate-cemented quartz sandstone, samples K-7, K-11; (d) sandydolomudstone, sample K-15; (e) dolosparite, sample K-26; (f) bioclasticwackestone–packstone, sample K-17; (g) algal wackestone, sample K-31;(h) bioclastic fusulinid packstone–grainstone, sample K-30. This figure is

available in colour online at wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/gj



3.2. Lagoonal sediments

The lagoonal sedimentary deposits are composed of a bioclasticfusulinid packstone–grainstone and an algal wackestone.

3.2.1. Bioclastic wackestone–packstoneThis facies contains dark grey, medium-bedded (15–17 cmthick) limestones with skeletal grains including small fora-miniferans (Agathammina, Hemigordius and Baisalina),dasycladacean algae, brachiopods, crinoid stems and ostra-cods. There is quartz, which is a minor allochem (less than5% presence). Recrystallization is observable in some skele-tal grains. Allochems were cemented by micrite and havepartially micritized boundaries. This facies occurs in Unit 2of the Aliyak Formation of the studied section (Fig. 5f).

3.2.2. Algal wackestoneGrey, medium beds (12–13 cm thick) mark this facies in thefield. This mud-rich microfacies includes only gymno-codiacean algae which are cemented by micrite. The algalgrains are relatively intact. This facies occurs in Unit 5 ofthe Aliyak Formation of the studied section (Fig. 5g).

3.2.3. Bioclastic fusulinid packstone–grainstoneThis facies is composed of grey, medium-bedded (14–16 cmthick) limestones and includes diverse fauna dominated byfusulinids, brachiopods, crinoid stems/ossicles, dasycladalgae and small foraminiferans. Peloids represent a minorconstituent. This facies is observed in Unit 4 of the AliyakFormation of the studied section (Fig. 5h).

3.2.3.1. Interpretation. The bioclastic wackestone–packstonewas deposited in a lagoonal environment that was protectedfrom the waves. Shallow near-shore and lagoonal environ-ments down to a depth of 50m are characterized by miliolidforaminifers (Flügel, 2010). The relatively low diversity ofnormal marine fauna and the high proportion of micriticmud of the algal wackestone suggest that deposition wasin a quiet water and lagoonal environment (Nichols,1999). During the Late Permian, gymnocodiaceans wereimportant sediment producers in shallow, low to moderateenergetic shelf seas (Flügel, 2010). The coarse grain sizeand relatively high biodiversity in bioclastic fusulinidwackestone–packstone indicate that it was deposited mainlyin a sheltered lagoonal environment near shoals with anopen marine circulation under low to moderate energy.

4. DEPOSITIONAL MODEL

The depositional setting of the Kariz Now Formation can bedescribed as a shoreline. The only lithofacies recognized inthis Formation is quartz sandstone that represents

sedimentation in a shallow supratidal to an upper intertidal en-vironment. In these sandstones as the rate of siliciclastic inputin the depositional environment decreased, and conditions forthe deposition of the carbonates increased, carbonate cementreplaced siliceous overgrowth cement between quartz grains.According to the microfacies distribution of the Aliyak For-mation in the Kariz Now area, the inner portion of ahomoclinal ramp (Read, 1985; Einsele, 1992; Burchette andWright, 1992; Ahr, 1998) is suggested for its depositional en-vironment. The inner ramp comprises the zone above the fair-weather wave-base (FWWB). Inner ramp lagoon and sabkhadeposits comprise evaporites and a wide range of mud-,wacke- and packstone with a restricted faunal spectrum(Burchette and Wright, 1992). The Aliyak Formation is com-posed of five lithofacies types. The tidal flat facies shows rarebioclastic allochems suggestive of the restricted environmentduring the deposition of sandy dolomudstones anddolosparites. As sea level rose it increased carbonate input.The transgressive carbonate facies is composed of bioclasticwackestone–packstone, algal wackestone and bioclastic fusuli-nid wackestone–packstone representing restricted and semi-restricted lagoonal environments.

5. BIOSTRATIGRAPHY OF THE ALIYAKFORMATION

We collected and studied 27 samples from the AliyakFormation in the Aliyak Section (Fig. 3). The fossil contentin the Aliyak Formation includes calcareous algae (samplesK-16, K-27, K-30 and K-31), small foraminiferans (samplesK-16, K-20 and K-30), fusulinids (sample K-30), brachio-pods and crinoid stems. The fusulinid fauna was recoveredfrom only one stratigraphic level at 64m above the base ofthe section. The fusulinid-bearing bed is a bioclasticpackstone–grainstone that yielded 26 algal, fusulinid andsmall foraminiferan taxa, recovered from 61 thin-sectionsidentified at generic and species level. The thin sections con-taining the figured specimens of fusulinids, algae and smallforaminiferans are housed in the University of Iowa Paleon-tology Repository, USA (collection SUI 132563-132613).

For the chronostratigraphy, we have adopted in this paperthe Tethyan Time Scale, as it is the most applicable to thestudy area, and also shows the approximate correlation tothe Global Time Scale (Wardlaw et al., 2005). The identifiedalgae, small foraminiferans and fusulinids are shown inFigs. 6 and 7.

5.1. Calcareous algae

Dacycladacean and gymnocodiacean algae found in theAliyak Formation (samples K16, K27, K30 and K31)include Epimastopora sp. (Figs. 6.1 and 6.2), Mizzia sp.



(Figs. 6.3–6.5), Pseudovermiporella? sp. (Fig. 6.6),Permocalculus sp. (Fig. 6.7), Permocalculus? sp. (Fig. 6.10),and Gymnocodium sp. (Figs. 6.8 and 6.9). The depth rangeof dacycladacean algae normally extends from just belowlow tide to about 30m (Wray, 1977). Gymnocodiaceansare often associated with dasycladaceans and presumablyoccupied a similar shelfal environment (Elliott, 1958).

5.2. Small foraminiferans

The small foraminiferans in the Aliyak Formation arerelatively few compared to the Central Alborz and Zagros re-gions (Gaetani et al., 2009; Davydov and Arefifard, 2013).The eight genera are Globivalvulina (Figs. 6.11, 6.12and 6.21), Agathammina (Figs. 6.13–6.15), Pseudomidiella(Fig. 6.16), Hemigordius (Figs. 6.17 and 6.18), Tansilites?(Figs. 6.19 and 6.20),Baisalina (Figs. 6.22–6.23),Postendothyra(Fig. 6.24), and Langella (Fig. 6.29). The stratigraphic distribu-tion of important species of small foraminiferans and fusulinidsare described below.

Figure 6. Middle Permian fusulinids, small foraminiferans and calcareousalgae from the Aliyak Section in Kariz Now area. The collection stored inthe University of Iowa Paleontology Repository (SUI); (1–2) Epimastoporasp., ×0.5, (1) K30-40b, SUI 132562, (2) K30-28a, SUI 132563; (3-5)Mizziasp., ×1, (3) K30-34a, SUI 132564, (4) K30-26a, SUI 132565, (5) K30-6a,SUI 132566; (6) Pseudovermiporella? sp., ×0.5, K30-40a, SUI 132567;(7) Permocalculus sp., ×1, K31-1, SUI 132568; (8 and 9) Gymnocodiumsp., ×0.2, (8) K-16-12, SUI 132569, (9) K-16-8, SUI 132570; (10)Permocalculus? sp., ×1, K-27-1, SUI 132571; (11–12 and 21)Globivalvulina sp., (11) ×0.5, K-20-1, SUI 132572, (12) ×0.1, K-16-9,SUI 132573, (21) ×0.1, K-30-40c, SUI 132582; (13–15) Agathamminasp., (13) ×0.1, K-16-1, SUI 132574, (14) ×0.1, K-30-42a, SUI 132575,(15) ×0.5, K-30-58a, SUI 132576; (16) Pseudomidiella sp., ×0.1 K-16-2,SUI 132577; (17) Hemigordius planus Pronina, 1988, ×0.1, K-30-16-1-2a, SUI 132578; (18) Hemigordius sp., ×0.1, K-16-1-1, SUI 132579; (19and 20) Tansilites? sp., (19) 0.1 K-16-6, SUI 132580, (20) ×0.1, K-16-11,SUI 132581; (22 and 23) Baisalina pulchra Reitlinger, 1965, ×0.1, (22)K30-48a, SUI 132583, (23) K30-5b, SUI 132584; (24) Postendothyra sp.,×0.1, K30-40, SUI 132585; (25–28) Staffella suborientalis Rozovskaya,1963, ×0.5, (25) K30-55a, SUI 132586, (26) K30-14a, SUI 132587, (27)K30-43a, SUI 132588, (28) ×1, K-30-4a, SUI 132589; (29) Langella sp.,×0.1, K-30-2-2a, SUI 132590. This figure is available in colour online at


Figure 7. Fusulinids from the Kariz Now Formation, Aliyak Section, KarizNow area, NE Iran. (1) Pseudokahlerina implexa Sosnina, 1968, ×0.1, K30-25a, SUI 132591; (2-3) Pseudokahlerina sp., ×0.1, (2) K30-52a, SUI132592, (3) K30-48b, SUI 132593; (4) Kahlerina sp., ×1, K30-24a, SUI132594; (5–6) Dunbarula sp., ×0.1, (5) K30-28a, SUI 132595, (6) K30-47a, SUI 132596; (7–8) Dunbarula kitakamiensis Choi, 1970, (7) ×0.5,K30-56a, SUI 132597, (8) ×0.1, K30-48c, SUI 132598; (9–10) Ogbinellaavushensis (Chedija)(in Kotlyar et al., 1983), (9) ×0.5, K30-26b, SUI132599, (10) ×1, K30-27a, SUI 1322600; (11) Toriyamaia laxiseptataKanmera, 1956, ×1, K30-7a, SUI 132601; (12–16) Codonofusiella erkiRauser-Chernousova, 1965, ×0.5, (12) K30-56b, SUI 132602, (13) ×01,K30-23, SUI 132603, (14) ×0.5, K30-25a, SUI 132604, (15) ×0.5,K30-42b, SUI 132605, (16) ×0.5, K-30-2a, SUI 132606; (17–18)Pseudodunbarula dzhagadzurensis (Chedija, 1983), (17) ×0.5, K-30-47a,SUI 132607, (18) K-30-23b, SUI 132608; (19–22) Verbeekina heimiThompson and Foster, 1937, ×1, (19) K30-6a, SUI 132609, (20) K30-20a,SUI 132610, (21) K30-34a, SUI 132611, (22) K30-55a, SUI 132612;(23–24) Sumatrina annae Volz, 1904, ×1, K30-44a, SUI 132613. Thisfigure is available in colour online at wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/gj



Baisalina pulchraReitlinger, 1965 (p. 65, pl. 1, Figs. 15–18) wasidentified in sample K30. This species has been reported from theHemigordius–Discospirella assemblage zone in the Permian suc-cessions in NW Iran (Shabanian et al., 2006), in theMidian lime-stone in Crimea (Kotlyar et al., 1989), in Upper Permaincarbonates of Saudi Arabia (Hughes, 2009), and in the DerbentLimestone in Turkey (Turhan et al., 2004). It is suggestive of aMidian (lateWordian–Capitanian) age. The studiedmaterial con-sists of one subaxial and one axial section (Figs. 6.22 and 6.23).

Hemigordius planus Pronina, 1988 (p. 55–56, Fig. 2.10): Thebeds below and above the fusulinid-bearing horizon in theAliyakFormation Section are dolostone and dolomitic limestone thatonly bear remnants of brachiopods and crinoid stems. In onesample (K16), rare smaller foraminifers occur, for instanceHemigordius sp. and Hemigordius planus Pronina. The latterspecies is also known from the Transcaucasus and indicates aGuadalupian (middle Permian) age. The studiedmaterial consistsof one axial section (Fig. 6.17).Postendothyra sp. was described from upperMaokou inGuangxi,S. China (Lin, 1984) and from the Yabeina globosa Zone in theKaize, Central Japan (Kobayashi, 2006). It is also reported fromthe top of KS6 in Oman (Forke et al., 2012) (Fig. 6.24).

5.3. Fusulinids

Staffella suborientalisRozovskaya, 1963 (p. 137, pl. 1, Figs. 6and 7) is known from the Guadalupian (Middle Permian) inNE Iran, Afghanistan (Leven, 1997) and South China (Sheng,1956). The studied material consists of several nearly axialsections (Figs. 6.25–6.28).

Dunbarula kitakamiensis Choi, 1970 (p. 314–316, pl. 8,Figs. 1–6) was originally described from the Midian (upperWordian–Capitanian) uppermost portion of limestone of thesouthern Kitakami Mountains, northeast Japan. It was laterreported from the upper Midian (Capitanian) Lepidolinamultiseptata Zone in the Kitakami Mountains, Japan (Minatoet al., 1978), and from theMidian (upperWordian–Capitanian)in central and northern Afghanistan (Leven, 1997). The studiedmaterial consists of two axial sections of Dunbarulakitakamiensis Choi (Figs. 7.7 and 7.8) and Dunbarula sp.(Figs. 7.5 and 7.6).

Pseudokahlerina implexa Sosnina, 1968 (in B.P. Markovski,p. 107, pl. 26, Figs. 1 and 2) is known in NE Iran and easternRussia. It is indicative of theMidian (upperWordian–Capitanian).The studied material consists of one axial section (Fig. 7.1).

Pseudokahlerina sp. It has been reported from Midian lime-stones of Bulola, zone of Bamian, North Afghanistan (Leven,1997) and also Midian carbonates in theWestern Sakarya Com-posite Terrane, Geyve Area, Turkey (Turhan et al. 2004). Thestudiedmaterial consists of two axial sections (Figs. 7.2 and 7.3).

Ogbinella avushensis (Chedija) (in Kotlyar et al., 1983,p. 130–131, pl. 2, Figs. 4–6) is known from the upperMidian–Dzhulfian (Capitanian–Wuchiapingian) in NE Iranand Transcaucasia. The studied material consists of onesubaxial and one axial section (Figs. 7.9 and 7.10).

Toriyamaia laxiseptata Kanmera, 1956 (p. 252–255, pl. 36,Figs. 1–14) was first described from uppermost Permianlimestone in Japan. It is also known to occur in the lowerYakhtashian (Artinskian–lower Kungurian) MotomuraFormation of Japan (Ueno, 1992), Yakhtashian–Bolorian(Artinskian–Kungurian) of south Afghanistan (Leven, 1997),Kubergandian (lower Roadian) of north Afghanistan (Leven,1997), and Yakhtashian–Bolorian (Artinskian–Kungurian)Bagh-e Vang Formation in east-central Iran (Leven and VaziriMoghaddam, 2004). The studied material consists one subaxialsection (Fig. 7.11).Codonofusiella erki Rauser-Chernousova, 1965 wasdescribed from lower Dzhulfian (lower Wuchiapingian) inTranscaucasia (Rosovskaya and Rauser-Chernouzova, 1965,p. 141–142, pl. 3, Figs. 16 and 17; pl. 5, Figs. 3–5), and theMidian (upperWordian–Capitanian) limestone (Unit 6) inKhojaMurod in south Afghanistan (Leven, 1997). It has also beenrecovered from the upper Midian (Capitanian) Monodiexodinakattaensis Biozone in the Il-e Beyk section in the Zard Kuharea, Iran (Davydov and Arefifard, 2013), in the Sa’ad andArqov formations in the Levant (Orlov-Labkovsky, 2004),and from the sixth fusulinid assemblage zone in the Crimealimestone of probable Dzhulfian (Wuchiapingian) age (Kotlyaret al., 1999). The studied material consists of five subaxialsections (Figs. 7.12 to 7.16).

Pseudodunbarula dzhagadzurensis (Chedija) (in Kotlyaret al., 1983, p. 133–134, pl. 5, Figs. 7, 10, 14–16, 18) isknown from the upper Midian–Dzhulfian (Capitanian–Wuchiapingian) of NE Iran and the Transcaucasus. Thestudied material consists of one oblique and one subaxialsection (Figs. 7.17 and 7.18).

Verbeekina heimi Thompson and Foster, 1937 (p. 137,pl. 23, Figs. 1–3; pl. 24, Fig. 4; pl. 25, Figs. 5 and 6) isone of the most age-diagnostic species recovered in thesection and it was originally described from the upper partof the Middle Permian Yanghshin Limestone in Sichuan,China. This species is also reported from Middle Permianlimestones in Chios, Greece (Kahler, 1987), from the middleto upper Murgabian (lower Wordian) Afghanella schenckiZone in the Surmaq Formation in Abadeh, Iran (Kobayashiand Ishii, 2003), and Murgabian (upper Roadian–lowerWordian) Verbeekina heimi Sub-Zone in the Akiyoshi lime-stones in Japan (Minato et al., 1978).

In the Yangshin limestones of China, Verbeekina heimiThompson and Foster is associated with Sumatrina annae



Volz, Schubertella simplex Lange and Schwagerina sp.(Thompson and Foster, 1937). In the Afghanella schenckiZone in Abadeh other fusulinid species such as Afghanellasumatrinaeformis (Gubler), Sumatrina annaeVolz, Skinnerellaabadehensis Kobayashi and Ishii and Parafusulina taraziKobayashi and Ishii, along with Verbeekina heimi Thompsonand Foster have been reported (Kobayashi and Ishii, 2003).Afghanella schencki Thompson has been found from the upperMidian (Capitanian) in the Zagros region (Davydov andArefifard, 2013) and was also recovered from the AkiyoshiLimestone as one of the associations of Verbeekina heimi(Minato et al., 1978). The studied material consists of threeparallel sections and one subaxial section (Figs. 7.19 to 7.22).

Sumatrina annae Volz, 1904 (p. 182, Fig. 28) is widespreadin the upper Neoschwagerina to Yabeina Zone of China andJapan (Ozawa, 1925; Chen, 1956; Xiao et al., 1986; Leven,1993), and in the upper Murgabian–Midian (Wordian–Capitanian) strata of NE Iran, Turkey and Afghanistan(Kahler and Kahler, 1979; Leven, 1997; Kobayashi andIshii, 2003). It has recently been reported from the Midian(upper Wordian–Capitanian) limestone of the southernBaoshan Block, China (Huang et al., 2009). Sumatrina annaeVolz is widely known from upper Murgabian–Midian(Wordian–Capitanian) of the entire Tethys (Volz, 1904;Minato et al., 1978; Leven, 1997; Kobayashi and Ishii,2003; Turhan et al., 2004). The studied material consists ofone subaxial section (Figs. 7.23 and 7.24).

6. CORRELATIONS OF THE ALIYAK AND KARIZNOW FORMATIONS

6.1. Kariz Now Formation: Units 1 and 2

Our studies suggest close proximity of the Permian depositsin the Kariz Now region with Permian successions in CentralAlborz (Fig. 8). In the latter region, the Ruteh Formationoverlies the uppermost Carboniferous (Gzhelian) and LowerPermian (Asselian-Hermagorian) Dorud Group. The Groupis divided, from the base-up, into the Toyeh, Emarat,Ghosnavi and Shah Zeid formations (Gaetani et al., 2009).The youngest Shah Zeid Formation is of particular interestas a possible correlative to the Kariz Now Formation. Itconsists mainly of reddish, whitish and vari-colouredsiliciclastics that overlie the carbonates of the GhosnaviFormation. The siliciclastics attain a thickness of 97.5m atthe Dorud locality, and exceed 160m at the Emarat section.In the latter area, the topmost white quartz-arenites includedark-grey mudstones, 10m-thick, and contain a smallbrachiopod fauna including Acosarina aff. juresanensis(Chernyshev) and Cancrinella cancriniformis (Chernyshev).At Dorud, only Neochonetes (Neochonetes) sp. is present

(Gaetani et al., 2009). It was considered (Gaetani et al., 2009)that these taxa broadly indicate an Asselian-Hermagorian age.No biostratigraphic information is available to constrain

the age of the Kariz Now Formation.Because of its palaeogeographic position within the same

basin as Alborz, the Kariz Now most probably correlateswith Shah Zeid in Central Alborz. This correlation suggestsa disconformity between the Kariz Now and Aliyakformations that corresponds to the interval between theYakhtashian- to mid Midian (Artinskian to mid Capitanian).Alternatively, the Kariz Now Formation could be a lateralequivalent of the lower part of the Ruteh Formation, imply-ing that it is of Murgabian (Upper Roadian–Upper Wordian)age and correlates with KS6 (Khuff sequence 6, the MiddlePermian to Lower Triassic Khuff Formation in the ArabianPlatform and its time equivalent, the Saiq Formation andthe lower part of the Mahil Formation in Oman can besubdivided into six or seven third-order sequences). Inaddition, a possible correlation of the Kariz Now Formationwith the Kungurian Faraghan Formation (Fig. 8) in theZagros region (Ghavidal-Syooki, 1988, 1993) implies adisconformity between the Kariz Now and Aliyak formationsand the existence of a hiatus of Kubergandian to mid Midian(Roadian to mid Capitanian) age.Further studies in regard to the dating of the Kariz Now

Formation and sedimentological analyses to determine theprovenance of these sandstones are necessary to fully under-stand the geologic history of this important region.

6.2. Aliyak carbonates: Units 1 to 6

Gaetani et al. (2009) presented a comprehensive study of thePennsylvanian (late Carboniferous) to Early Triassic forma-tions in the outcrops of the Central Alborz Mountainsbetween 51°E and 55°E (Fig. 1). The Guadalupian (middlePermian) is represented by the Ruteh Limestone Formation(Assereto, 1963) (Figs. 8 and 9). It consists of a relativelyuniform blanket of packstones and wackestones, typically150–250m thick, and attains a thickness of 300–600m nearthe Caspian Sea (Sussli, 1976; Gaetani et al., 2009). Crippaand Angiolini (2012) documented the brachiopod fauna ofthe Ruteh Formation and concluded that the formation isWordian–Capitanian (late Murgabian–Midian). The RutehFormation thus correlates with Guadalupian KS6 and KS5in: (1) the lower part of the Dalan Formation in the Il-e BeykSection in the High Zagros (Davydov and Arefifard, 2013),and (2) the Wordian–Capitanian limestones of the upper partof the Saiq Formation in Al-Jabal al-Akhdar, Oman(Koehrer et al., 2010; Al-Husseini and Koehrer, 2013).Gaetani et al. (2009) noted that fusulinids are scarce in the

Ruteh Formation whereas small foraminiferans are common,in contrast to our observations in the studied region. In the TalarRud and Qezelqaleh sections in Central Alborz (Fig. 10), the



upper part of the Ruteh Formation yielded upper Murgabian–Midian (Wordian–Capitanian) Chusenella padangensis(Lange) together with Yangchienia haydeniThompson. In otherAlborz sections of the Ruteh Formation, fusulinids such asSchubertella sp., Minojapanella sp., Codonofusiella sp.,Nankinella sp. and Staffella sp. were also reported (Gaetaniet al., 2009). The presence of Yangchienia hydeni andCodonofusiella sp. definitely establishes a Midian age for theformation (Kotlyar et al., 1989; Leven, 1998).The fusulinid assemblage recovered from sample K30 in

Unit 5 of the Aliyak Formation is consistent with an assign-ment to the Monodiexodina kattaensis–Codonofusiella erki

and Afghanella schencki–Sumatrina brevis zones of theZagros region of late Capitanian age (Davydov andArefifard, 2013). This assignment implies a correlation ofthe carbonates of the Aliyak Formation to upper KS5(MFS P25) in the High Zagros (Davydov and Arefifard,2013) and in Al-Jabal al-Akhdar in Oman (Koehrer et al.,2010; Al-Husseini and Koehrer, 2013).

The fusulinid assemblages in the Ruteh Formation in theCentral Alborz generally differ from those in the AliyakFormation. Just a few taxa are common, such asMinojapanella sp., Codonofusiella sp., advanced Yangchieniaand rare staffellids. The dissimilarity may be due to significant

Figure 8. Correlation of Guadalupian and Lopingian (middle and upper Permian) sections in Iran. Tabas Block (Leven and Vaziri Moghaddam, 2004), CentralAlborz (Gaetani et al., 2009), Kariz Now (this study), Zagros (Davydov and Arefifard, 2013), northeast Oman (Koehrer et al., 2010; Forke et al., 2012).



variations in palaeobathymetry and/or palaeoenvironmentacross the Alborz region (Fig. 9). The depositional setting ofthe Ruteh Formation was deeper water, as reflected by itsmicritic to wackestone facies, and includes sparse colonialrugose corals in life position (Gaetani et al., 2009). Thedeeper-water setting may have been associated with coldertemperatures, which would explain the poor occurrence offusulinids. In contrast, the Aliyak Formation was depositedin shallow and warmer waters as indicated by abundant fusu-linids. Lithologically, the Aliyak Formation is composedmainly of limestone, dolostone and dolomitic limestones witha few beds of fusulinid-bearing packstone–grainstone near itsupper part. This kind of lithology has not been reported for theRuteh Formation in any of its known exposures from theAlborz area (Fig. 10).

Another possible difference between the Ruteh andAliyak formations may be related to the chronostratigraphicrange of the Guadalupian (middle Permian) transgression innorthern Iran. The deposition of the Ruteh Formation mayhave started earlier in the Central Alborz with KS6(Wordian third-order sequence in the upper part of the SaiqFormation). In contrast, the late Capitanian Aliyak Forma-tion may only correlate with upper KS5 (Capitanian third-order sequence in the upper part of the Saiq Formation).Aliyak Unit 5 may correspond to a Capitanian maximum

flooding interval, potentially denoted as Permian MFS P25(Sharland et al., 2004) in Al-Jabal al-Akhdar in Oman(Koehrer et al., 2012; Al-Husseini and Koehrer, 2013).The late Murgabian–Midian (Wordian–Capitanian) Rutehcarbonates in Central Alborz may therefore represent amore complete succession with a longer duration than thatof the relatively thin upper Capitanian carbonates of theAliyak Formation. The carbonates underlying and overly-ing Aliyak Unit 5 are not dated but are probably ofGuadalupian (middle Permian) age based on their strati-graphic position and regional correlation with the RutehFormation in the Central Alborz Mountains.

6.3. Aliyak basaltic lava flows: Unit 7

In the area to the north of the Elika–Nesen Belt in the AlborzMountains (Figs. 9 and 10), tuffaceous layers and basalticlava flows are intercalated with sedimentary rocks in theuppermost part of the Ruteh Formation,biostratigraphically dated as late Midian (Capitanian)(Gaetani et al., 2009). The basaltic lava rocks are up to150m thick and become much thinner eastwards. They oc-cur above Unit 5 of this formation. However, it seems thatthey occupy the same stratigraphic position as basaltic lavaflows in Central Alborz. The basaltic lava flows (Unit 7) in

Figure 9. Middle to Late Permian stratigraphic correlation from Central and Eastern Alborz to Kariz Now along a NW–NE transect, emphasizing the differencebetween lithological units of the Ruteh and Aliyak formations. Green line indicates the rifting event that has been evidenced by basaltic lava flows in both theAlborz and Kariz Now regions. See Fig. 3 for explanation of facies. Vertical lines indicate a hiatus. This figure is available in colour online at wileyonlinelibrary.

com/journal/gj



Kariz Now may therefore be latest Capitanian, based oncorrelation with basaltic lava flows in the Central AlborzMountains. Correlation of the Ruteh and Aliyak volcanicsimplies a regional latest Guadalupian tectonic eventextended along the northern margin of the Alborz Terrane,possibly related to rifting of the Iranian terranes across thePalaeotethys Ocean (Muttoni et al., 2009; Fig. 9).Precisely constraining the age of the basaltic lava flowswill require radiometric dating. However, in previousworks it has been mentioned that the Iranian microplatewas already drifting far from Gondwana prior to theCapitanian (Muttoni et al., 2009; Gaetani et al., 2009).Recently, Angiolini et al. (2013) in their palaeogeographicreconstruction and interpretation of the mid-Permiansuccessions suggested that Iran seems to have not movedmuch in the Middle Permian relative to its large

displacement in the Late Permian–Early Triassic. Thelarge flood basalts are also reported from the top of theCapitanian Maokou Formation in Sichuan province andconsidered as a possible factor in the extinction event ofthe end-Guadalupian (Lai et al., 2008). More investigationsare needed to understand the main cause of these basalticlava flows.

7. LATE PERMIAN–EARLY TRIASSIC HIATUS ATKARIZ NOW

In the Central Alborz Mountains, above the Ruteh Forma-tion, the Lopingian (upper Permian) is represented by thecontinental sediments of the Qeshlaq Formation to the eastand southeast, and limestones and shales of the Nesen

Figure 10. Middle Permian palaeogeographic map for Central Alborz and most eastern extensions of the Alborz Terrane showing localities with recordedWordian–Capitanian Ruteh and Aliyak formations outcrops (adopted from Gaetani et al., 2009, with some modifications), Do =Dorud; El-Ne =Elika–Nesen;Qe =Qezelqaleh; Ru =Ruteh; TaR=Talar Rud. Enlarged map (zoom-in) shows the NE-part of the NW-Iran Terrane (modified from Ruban et al., 2007, Fig. 11).

This figure is available in colour online at wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/gj



Formation to the northwest (Gaetani et al., 2009; Fig. 9). Inthe type area, near Bear Gully, the Nesen Formation isnearly 130m thick. The lower part of the formation consistsof shale interbedded with marly limestone, ca. 70m thick,and the upper part is dominantly bioclastic wackestone(Gaetani et al., 2009). The formation thins towards thesouth. The Qeshlaq Formation consists of arenite andsiltstone, and attains a maximum thickness of approxi-mately 80m. The Qeshlaq and Nesen formations are over-lain by the Lower and Middle Triassic Elika Formation,which consists of alternating limestone, dolostone and do-lomitic limestone. In the Kariz Now area, the uppermostCapitanian is overlain by the Middle Triassic Shotori For-mation, and the hiatus between these two formations corre-sponds to the Lopingian (Late Permian) and Early Triassicand correlates to the Nesen and Qeshlaq formations in theCentral Alborz.

8. CONCLUSIONS

Permian deposits in the Kariz Now region are divided intotwo lithostratigraphic units. The lower one is a 35–90mthick succession of siliciclastics comprising the newlyestablished Kariz Now Formation. The Formation isassumed to be of possible Asselian-Kungurian age basedon its correlation either with the Shah Zeid Formation inthe Central Alborz or Faraghan Formation in Zagros. Basedon these ages, there is a possible hiatus between the siliciclasticsof the Kariz Now Formation and the overlying carbonates(Unit 1) of the Aliyak Formation that could be as large as30Ma (Yakhtashian–Murghabian or Artinskian–upperWordian) in the case of correlation with the Shah Zeid Forma-tion in the Central Alborz or about 10Ma if it corresponds to theKungurian Faraghan Formation in Zagros. The upper car-bonate part of the Permian succession in the Kariz Now areais proposed as the new Aliyak Formation. Abundant fossilsin the upper Aliyak Formation clearly indicate a lateCapitanian age. The formation is a likely correlative with up-per KS5 in the Dalan Formation in the Zagros Mountains(Davydov and Arefifard, 2013) and in the upper part of theSaiq Formation in Al-Jabal al-Akhdar in Oman (Koehreret al., 2010; Al-Husseini and Koehrer, 2013). The uppermostpart of the formation consists of a basaltic lava flow unit (0.5mthick) of probable latest Guadalupian (late Capitanian) age thatcorresponds to similar volcanic rocks in the upper part of theRuteh Formation in the Central Alborz. The Aliyak Formationis tentatively correlated to the upper Capitanian part of theGuadalupian (Middle Permian) Ruteh Limestone Formation ofthe Central Alborz. The data presented herein support our inter-pretation of the Kariz Now area being the easternmostexpression of a Capitanian transgression over the northern partof the Alborz Terrane. The Kariz Now region and Central Alborz

were parts of the same large basin that extended at least fromCentral Alborz in the west to the Kariz Now region in the east.The basaltic lavaflows in both regions probably indicate awidelyexhibited rifting event near the post-Capitanian tectonic event.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We acknowledge the support of the U.S. National ScienceFoundation grants EAR-1004079 and EAR-0746107.We deeply appreciate the input of Dr Al-Husseini who pro-vided important references and made many valuable com-ments and suggestions. We are indebted to Dr ThomasOlszewski for discussing stratigraphic problems in Iran andfor improving the English in our manuscript. The authorsthank the reviewers Dr Lucia Angiolini and Dr DanielVachard for their constructive comments on this paper. Fur-ther, we wish to thank editor Prof. Ian D. Somerville for thevery careful editing of the final draft.

REFERENCES

Afshar-Harb, A. 1970. Geology of Sarakhs area and Khangiran gas field.National Iranian Oil Company. Paper presented at 8th session of ECAFEworking party of senior geologists, Bandung.

Afshar-Harb,A. 1994.Geology ofKopet-Dagh, Geological Survey Iran, 109–124.Aghanabati, A. 1993. Geological Map of the Middle East, 1:5,000,000.Geological Survey of Iran, Tehran, Iran.

Aghanabati, A. 2004. Geology of Iran. Geological Survey of Iran, 586.Ahr, W.M. 1998. Carbonate ramps, 1973–1996: a historical review. In:Carbonate Ramps, Wright, V.P., Burchette, T.P. (eds). Geological Society,London, Special Publications 149, 7–14.

Alavi, M. 1991. Tectonic map of the Middle East, Geological Survey of Iran.Alavi, M. 1996. Tectonostratigraphic synthesis and structural style of the Alborzmountain system in northern Iran. Journal of Geodynamics 21(1), l–33.

Alavi-Naeini, M. 1972. Etude géologique de la région de Djam, GeologicalSurvey of Iran, Report no. 23, 288.

Al-Husseini, M.I., Koehrer, B. 2013. Chrono- and sequence-stratigraphyof the Mid-Permian to Early Triassic Khuff sequences of the ArabianPlate. GeoArabia 18(3), 103–130.

Angiolini, L., Crippa, G., Muttoni, G., Pignatti, J. 2013. Guadalupian(Middle Permian) paleobiogeography of the Neotethys Ocean. Gond-wana Research 24, 173–184.

Assereto, R. 1963. The Paleozoic formations in central Elburz (Iran): prelim-inary note. Rivista Italiana di Paleontologia i Stratigrafia 69, 503–543.

Bagheri, S., Stampfli, G.M. 2008. The Anarak, Jandaq and Posht-e-Badammetamorphic complexes in central Iran: new geological data, relation-ships and tectonic implications. Tectonophysics 451, 123–155.

Basu, A., Young, S.W., Suttner, L.J., James, W.C., Mack, G.H. 1975.Re-evaluation of the use of undulatory extinction and polycrystallinityin detrital quartz for provenance interpretation. Journal of SedimentaryPetrology 45, 873–882.

Berberian, M., Ghareshi, M., Talebian M., Shojae-Taheri, J. 1996.Research on Neo-tectonic, Geoseismic and hazards of earthquake-faulting in Semnan area, Geological Survey of Iran, Report no. 63, 266.

Boubee de Gramont, X., Guillou, Y., Maurizot, P., Vaslet, D., de laVilleon, H. 1979. Geological map of Kariz Now, Scale: 1:100000.

Burchette, T.P.,Wright, V.P. 1992. Carbonate ramp depositional systems.Sedimentary Geology 79, 3–57.

Chen, X. 1956. Fusulinidae of South China, Pt. II. Palaeontologia Sinica.New Series B 6; 1–71.



Choi, D.R. 1970. On some Permian fusulinids from Iwaizaki, N.E. Japan. Jour-nal of the Faculty of Science, Hokkaido University, Series 4 14, 313–325.

Crippa, G., Angiolini, L. 2012. Guadalupian (Permian) brachiopods fromthe Ruteh Limestone, North Iran. GeoArabia 17(1), 125–176.

Davydov, V.I.,Arefifard, S. 2013. Middle Permian (Guadalupian) fusulinidtaxonomy and biostratigraphy of the mid-latitude Dalan Basin, Zagros,Iran and their applications in paleoclimate dynamics and paleogeography.GeoArabia 18(2), 17–62.

Dorobek, S.L., Smith, T.M., Whitsitt, P.M. 1993. Microfabrics and geo-chemistry of meteorically altered dolomite in Devonian and Mississip-pian carbonates, Montana and Idaho. In: Carbonate Microfabrics, R.Rezak, D.L. Lavoie (eds). Frontiers in Sedimentary Geology. Springer-Verlag: N.Y. Berlin-Heidelberg; 205–235.

Einsele, G. 1992. Sedimentary Basin, Evolution, Facies and Sediment Bud-get. Springer Verlag: Berlin; 628.

Elliott, G.F. 1958. Algal debris facies in the Cretaceous of the Middle East.Palaeontology 1(3), 254–259.

Flügel, E. 2010. Microfacies of Carbonate Rocks: Analysis, Interpretationand Application, 2nd Edition. Springer-Verlag: Berlin; 984.

Forke, H.C., Pöppelreiter, M., Aigner, T., Koehrer, B., Walz, L.,Bendias, D., Haase M. 2012. Integrated biostratigraphy of the Saiq For-mation (Al Jabal al-Akhdar, Oman Mountains) and its implication for theregional correlation of Khuff time-equivalent deposits. In: Third ArabianPlate Geology Workshop, Part I The Permo–Triassic Sequence of theArabian Plate. GeoArabia 17(1), 230–234.

Gaetani, M., Angiolini, L., Ueno, K., Nicora, A., Stephenson, M.H.,Sciunnach, D., Rettori, D.R., Price G.D., Sabouri, J. 2009. Pennsylva-nian–Early Triassic stratigraphy in the Alborz Mountains (Iran). In: SouthCaspian to Central Iran Basins, Brunet, M.F., Wilmsen, M., Granath, J.W. (eds). Geological Society, London, Special Publications 312; 79–128.

Ghavidal-Syooki, M. 1988. Palynostratigraphy and Paleoecology ofFaraghan Formation of South-East Iran, Ph.D. Thesis, Michigan StateUniversity; 279.

Ghavidal-Syooki, M. 1993. Palynological study of Paleozoic sediments ofthe Chal-I-Sheh area, southwestern Iran, Islamic Republic of Iran.Journal of sciences 4(1), 32–46.

Gregg, J.M. 1988. Regional epigenetic dolomitization in the BonneterreDolomite (Cambrian), southeastern Missouri. Geology 13, 503–506.

Gregg, J.M., Shelton, K.L. 1990. Dolomitization and dolomiteneomorphism in the back reef facies of the Bonneterre and DaviesFormation (Cambrian), southeastern Missouri. Journal of SedimentaryPetrology 60, 495–562.

Hopkins, J.C. 2004. Geometry and origin of dolomudstone reservoirs:Pekisko Formation (Lower Carboniferous), western Canada. In: TheGeometry and Petrogenesis of Dolomite Hydrocarbon Reservoirs,Braithwaite, C.J.R., Rizzi, G., Darke, G. (eds). Geological Society,London, Special Publications 235, 349–366.

Huang, H., Jin, X., Shi, Y., Yang, X. 2009. Middle Permian westernTethyan fusulinids from southern Baoshan Block, western Yunnan,China. Journal of Paleontology 83(6), 880–896.

Hughes, G.W. 2009. Micropaleontology and Paleoenvironments of SaudiArabian Upper Permian Carbonates and Reservoirs. In: Geologic Prob-lem Solving with Microfossils: A Volume in Honor of Garry D. Jones,Demchuk, T.D., Gary, A.C. (eds). Society of Economic Paleontologistsand Mineralogists Special Publication: Tulsa; 93, 111–126.

Kahler, V.F. 1987. Fusuliniden-faunen auf Chios, Kalymnos undKos in der Ägäis.Mitteilungen der Österreichischen Geologischen Gesellschaft 80, 287–323.

Kahler, F., Kahler, G. 1979. Fusuliniden (Foraminifera) aus dem Karbonund Perm von Westanatolien und dem Iran. Mitteilungen.Österreichische Geologische Gesellschaft 70, 187–269.

Kanmera, K. 1956. Toriyamaia, a new Permian fusulinid genus from theKuma Massif, Kyushu, Japan. Transactions and Proceedings of thePalaeontological Society of Japan. New Series 24, 251–257.

Kobayashi, F. 2006. Middle Permian foraminifers of Kaize, southern partof the Saku Basin, Nagano prefecture, central Japan. PaleontologicalResearch 10(3), 179–194.

Kobayashi, F., Ishii, K.I. 2003. Permian fusulinacean of the SurmaqFormation in the Abadeh region, central Iran. Rivista Italiano diPaleontologia Stratigrafia 109(2), 307–337.

Koehrer, B., Aigner, T., Pöppelreiter, M., Forke, H. 2012. The Permian-Triassic Khuff Formation: results of a three year outcrop study in theOman Mountains. DGMK/ÖGEW-Frühjahrstagung. FachbereichAufsuchung und Gewinnung Celle 19/20, 1–5.

Koehrer, B., Zeller, M., Aigner, T., Poeppelreiter, M., Milroy, P.,Forke, H., Al-Kindi, S. 2010. Facies and stratigraphic framework of aKhuff outcrop equivalent: Saiq and Mahil formations, Al Jabal al-Akhdar, Sultanate of Oman. GeoArabia 15(2), 91–156.

Kotlyar, G.V., Zakharov, Y.D., Kochirkevich, B.V., Kropacheva, G.S.,Rostovcev, K.O., Chedija, I.O., Vuks G.P., Guseva, E.A. 1983.Pozdnepermskij etap evolutsii organicˇeskogo mira. Džulfinskij i Dorašamskijjarusy SSSR. (Evolution of the latest Permian biota. Dzhulfian andDorashamian regional stages in the USSR.) Nauka, Leningrad, (In Russian).

Kotlyar, G.V., Zakharov, Y.D., Kropatcheva, G.S., Pronina, G.P.,Chedija I.O., Burago, V.I. 1989. Evolution of the latest Permian biota,Midian regional stage in the USSR, Nauka, Leningrad, 185 (In Russianwith English summary).

Kotlyar, G.V., Baud, A., Pronina, G.P., Zakharov, Y.D., Vuks, V.J.,Nestell, M.K., Belyaeva, G.V.,Marcoux, J. 1999. Permian and Triassicexotic limestone blocks of the Crimea, Geodiversitas 1(3), 299–323.

Lai, X., Wang, W., Wignall, P.B., Bond, D.P.G., Jiang, H., Ali, J.R.,John, E.H., Sun, Y. 2008. Palaeoenvironmental change during theend-Guadalupian (Permian) mass extinction in Sichuan, China.Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 269, 78–93.

Leven, E.J. 1993. The range and diagnostic features of Neoschwagerinacraticulifera (Schwager, 1883) (Fusulinida). PaleontologicheskiyZhurnal 27(2), 127–129, Moscow (In Russian).

Leven, E.J. 1997. Permian stratigraphy and Fusulinida of Afghanistan withtheir paleogeographic and paleotectonic implications. Geological Societyof America, Special Paper 316, 1–133.

Leven, E.J. 1998. Permian fusulinid assemblages and stratigraphy of the Trans-caucasia, Rivista Italiana di Paleontologia e Stratigrafia 104(3), 299–328.

Leven, E.J., Vaziri Moghaddam, H. 2004. Carboniferous–Permianstratigraphy and fusulinids of eastern Iran. The Permian in the Bagh-e-Vang section (Shirgesht area). Rivista Italiana di Paleontologia eStratigrafia 110(2), 441–465.

Lin, J. 1984. Order Foraminiferida. In: Biostratigraphy of the YangtzeGorge Area (3) Late Paleozoic Era. Geological Publishing House:Beijing; 110–177, (in Chinese).

Machel, H.G. 2004. Concepts and models of dolomitization: a critical reap-praisal. In: The Geometry and Petrogenesis of Dolomite HydrocarbonReservoirs, Braithwaite, C.J.R., Rizzi, G., Darke, G. (eds). GeologicalSociety, London, Special Publications 235, 7–63.

Minato, M., Kato, M., Nakamura, K., Hasegawa, Y., Choi, D.R.,Tazawa, J.-I. 1978. Biostratigraphy and correlation of the Permian ofJapan. Journal of the Faculty of Science 18(1-2), Series IV, HokkaidoUniversity, 11–47.

Muttoni, G.,Mattei, M., Balini, M., Zanchi, A.,Gaetani M., Berra F. 2009.The drift history of Iran from the Ordovician to the Triassic. In: SouthCaspian to Central Iran Basins, Brunet, M.F., Wilmsen, M., Granath, J.W.(eds). Geological Society, London, Special Publications 312, 7–29.

Narkiewicz, M. 2009. Late burial dolomitization of the Devonian carbon-ates and a tectonothermal evolution of the Holy Cross Mts area (CentralPoland). Mineralogia Special Papers 35, 51–59.

Nichols, G. 1999. Sedimentology and Stratigraphy. Blackwell Science:Oxford; 355.

Orlov-Labkovsky, O. 2004. Permian fusulinids (foraminifera) of the sub-surface of Israel: Taxonomy and Biostratigraphy. Revista Española deMicropaleontología 36(3), 389–406.

Ozawa, Y. 1925. Palaeontological and stratigraphical studies on the Permo-Carboniferous limestone of Nagato, Pt. II, Palaeontology. Journal ofCollege of Science, Imperial University of Tokyo 45(6), 1–90.

Potter, P.E. 1986. South America and a few grains of sand: Part 1—beachsands. Journal of Geology 94, 301–319.

Pronina, G.P. 1988. Pozdnepermskie Miliolyaty Zakavkazya (LatePermian Miliolata of Transcaucasia). Trudy Zoologicheskogo Instituta,Akademiya Nauk SSSR 184, 49–63 (in Russian).

Read, J.F. 1985. Carbonate platform facies models. American Associationof Petroleum Geologists Bulletin 69, 1–21.



Reinhold, C. 1998. Multiple episodes of dolomitization and dolomite re-crystallization during shallow burial in Upper Jurassic shelf carbonates:eastern Swabian Alb, southern Germany. Sedimentary Geology 121,71–95.

Reitlinger, E.A. 1965. Razvitie foraminifer v Pozdnepermskuyu Irannetriasovuyu epokhi na territorii Zavkavkazya (On the developmentof the foraminifera of the Upper Permian and Lower Triassic in Transcau-casia), Voprosy Mikropaleontologii 9, 45–70 (in Russian).

Rozovskaya, S.E. 1963.The earliest fusulinids and their ancestors[in Russian]. Trudy Paleontologicheskogo Instituta, Akademiya NaukSSSR 97, 1–127.

Rosovskaya, S.E., Rauser-Chernousova, D.M. 1965. Fusulinida order.Razvitie i smena morskihk orgamizmov na rubezhe paleozoya imezozoya. The evolution marine orgamism at the Paleozoic–Mesozoictransition. Transactions of Paleontological Institute of Academy ofSciences of SSSR. Nauka: Moscow; 137–147 (in Russian).

Ruban, D.A., Al-Husseini, M.I., Iwasaki, Y. 2007. Review of Middle EastPaleozoic plate tectonics, GeoArabia 12(3), 35–56.

Sengör, A.M.C. 1990. A new model for the late Palaeozoic–Mesozoictectonic evolution of Iran and implications for Oman. In: The Geologyand Tectonics of the Oman Region, Robertson, A.H.F., Searle, M.P.,Ries, A.C. (eds). Geological Society, London, Special Publications49, 797–831.

Shabanian, R., Khosrow Tehrani K., Momeni, I. 2006. Stratigraphy andmicropaleontology of the Permian Rocks in NW Iran. GeosciencesJournal, Geological Survey of Iran 63, 1–12.

Sharland, P.R., Casey, D.M., Davies, R.B., Simmons, M.D., Sutcliffe,O.E. 2004. Arabian Plate sequence stratigraphy. GeoArabia 9(1),199–214.

Sheng, J.Z. 1956. Permian fusulinids from Liangshan, Hanchung, southernShensi, Acta Palaeontologica Sinica 4(2), 175–227.

Sosnina, M.I. 1968. Novye pozdnepermskie fuzulinidy Sikhote-Alkinya.The New late Permian fuslinids of Sikhote-Alin, Far East of USSR. In:

Novye vidy drevnykh rastenyi i bespozvonochnykh SSSR, Markovsky,B.P. (ed). Issue 2, part 1 (New species of ancient plants and invertebratesof the USSR). Nedra Publishing House; 99–128 (in Russian).

Sussli, P.R. 1976. The geology of the lower Haraz Valley area, CentralAlborz, Iran. Geological Survey of Iran, Report no. 38, 116.

Suttner, L.J., Basu, A., Mack, G.M. 1981. Climate and the origin ofquartz arenites, Journal of Sedimentary Petrology 51, 1235–1246.

Thompson, M.L., Foster, C.L. 1937. Middle Permian fusulinids fromSzechuan, China. Journal of Paleontology 11(2), 126–144.

Turhan, N.,Okuyucui, C.,Göncüoğlu, M.C. 2004. Autochthonous UpperPermian (Midian) Carbonates in the Western Sakarya CompositeTerrane, Geyve Area, Turkey: preliminary data. Turkish Journal of EarthSciences 13, 215–229.

Ueno, K. 1992. Permian foraminifers from the Takakurayama Group of thesouthern Abukuma mountains, northern Japan. Transactions and Proceed-ings of the Palaeontological Society of Japan. New Series 168, 1265–1295.

Volz, W. 1904. Zur geologie von Sumatra, Beobachtungen und studien.Anhang II. Einige neue Foraminiferen und korallen sowie hydrokorallenaus dem Obercarbon Sumatrias. Geologie und Paläontologie,Abh. neueFolge 6(2), 93–112.

Wardlaw, B.R., Davydov, V.I., Gradstein, F.M. 2005. The PermianPeriod. In: A Geologic Time Scale 2004, Gradstein, F.M., Ogg, J.G.,Smith, A.G. (eds). Cambridge University Press: Cambridge; 249–270.

Wray, J.L. 1977. Calcareous Algae. Elsevier Scientific PublishingCompany: Amsterdam; 185.

Xiao, W.M.,Wang, H.D., Zhnag, L.X., Dong, W.L. 1986. Early PermianStratigraphy in Southern Guizhou. Guizhou People’s Publishing House:Guiyang; 364.

Zanchi, A., Zanchetta, S., Berra, F., Mattei, M., Garzanti, E.,Molyneux, S., Nawab, A., Sabouri, J. 2009. The Eo-Cimmerianorogeny in north Iran. In: South Caspian to Central Iran Basins, Brunet,M.F., Wilmsen, M., Granath, J.W. (eds). Geological Society, London,Special Publications 312, 31–55.



New Permian Aliyak and Kariz Now formations, Alborz Basin, NE … · 2014-10-21 · New Permian...

Documents

Transcript of New Permian Aliyak and Kariz Now formations, Alborz Basin, NE … · 2014-10-21 · New Permian...