late cenozoic sedimentary evolution of the antalya...
TRANSCRIPT
Late Cenozoic Sedimentary Evolution of the Antalya Basin,Southern Turkey
ATT‹LA Ç‹NER1, MUSTAFA KARABIYIKO⁄LU2, OLIVIER MONOD3,MAX DEYNOUX4 & SEV‹M TUZCU5
1 Hacettepe University, Department of Geological Engineering, TR–06532 Ankara, Turkey(E–mail: [email protected])
2 Yüzüncü Y›l University, Department of Antropology, TR–65080 Van, Turkey3 ISTO–CNRS, Université d’Orléans, 45067 Orléans, France
4 CGS–EOST, CNRS–Université Louis Pasteur, 67084 Strasbourg, France5 The Mineral Research and Exploration Institute (MTA), Eskiflehir Yolu,
TR–6520–Ankara, Turkey
Abstract: The Late Cenozoic Antalya Basin developed unconformably on a foundered basement comprisingMesozoic autochthonous carbonate platform(s) overthrust by the Lycian Nappes, the Antalya Nappes and theAlanya Massif metamorphics within the Isparta Angle, southern Turkey. The present configuration of the basinconsists of three distinct parts, referred herein as the Aksu, Köprüçay and Manavgat sub-basins, respectively, whichare divided by the north–south-trending K›rkkavak Fault and the westward-verging Aksu Thrust.
The Miocene fill of each sub-basin is characterized by thick accumulations of non-marine to marine clastics withlocally developed coralgal reefs and reefal shelf carbonates. Based on lithostratigraphic and chronostratigraphicconsiderations, integrated with previously established data, the Miocene fill of the Antalya Basin is reorganized intonine formations and twelve members. A total of nineteen facies have been distinguished within this stratigraphicframework. The stratigraphic organization and the time and space relationships of these facies indicate contrastingstyles of sedimentation characterized by several facies associations representing deposition in colluvial and alluvialfan/fan delta with coralgal reefs, reefal shallow carbonate shelf, base of fault-controlled fore reef slope and clasticopen marine shelf environments in the tectonically active sub-basins. The coralgal reefs, which occur as small,isolated patch reefs developed on progradational alluvial fan/fan delta conglomerates, and the reefal shelfcarbonates represent small to large scale, transgressive-regressive cycles which are closely associated with thecomplex interaction between sporadic influxes of coarse terrigeneous clastics derived from the tectonically activebasin margins and/or related to the eustatic sea level changes during Late Burdigalian–Langhian and LateTortonian–Messinian times.
With regard to structural history, the Antalya Neogene basins exhibit contrasting behaviour according to theirposition within the Isparta Angle. West of Antalya, the Lycian Basin is linked to the eastwards advance of theoverlying Lycian Nappes up to the Burdigalian; in the centre of the Isparta Angle, the Aksu and Köprüçay sub-basinsare younger (Serravalian–Tortonian) and exhibit intense deformation, reflecting west-directed compressionalevents of Late Miocene to Lower Pliocene age. In contrast, the Manavgat sub-basin situated further east is onlyweakly deformed, and even farther east, the Ermenek and Mut basins are almost undeformed. Thus the evolutionof the Neogene Antalya basins highlights the fundamental structural asymmetry of the Isparta Angle.
Key Words: stratigraphy, basin analysis, facies, coralgal reefs, fan delta, tectonics, palaeoenvironment, IspartaAngle, Taurides, Turkey
Geç Senozoik Antalya Havzas›’n›n Çökel Dolgu Evrimi
Özet: Isparta Dirse¤i’nde yeralan Geç Senozoyik yafll› Antalya Havzas› Miyosen çökel dolgusunun stratigrafisi,fasiyes düzeni ve çökelme ortamlar›, tektonik olarak aktif bir bölgedeki havza oluflumunun, evriminin vedeformasyonunun anlafl›lmas›na katk› koymak amac›yla irdelenmifltir. Çal›flma özellikle havza çökel dolgusunuoluflturan çökelme ortamlar›n›n geliflimlerini denetleyen tektonik, iklimsel ve östatik kökenli etkenleri tart›flmay› vebunlar›n Isparta Dirse¤i’nin kapanmas›n›n son dönemlerinin aç›klanmas›na getirece¤i katk›lar bak›m›ndanönemlerini ortaya koymaya yönelik olarak gelifltirilmifltir.
Antalya Havzas›, Isparta Dirse¤i’nde Mesozoyik yafll› paraotokton karbonat platform(lar›) ile alloktonbirimlerden (Likya ve Antalya naplar› ile Alanya Metamorfik Masifi) oluflan bir temel üzerinde, geniflleme-s›k›flmatektonizmas› etkinli¤inde, uyumsuz olarak geliflmifl bir geç orojen sonras› havzad›r. Bu havzan›n Miyosen yafll› çökel
Turkish Journal of Earth Sciences (Turkish J. Earth Sci.), Vol. 17, 2008, pp. 1–41. Copyright ©TÜB‹TAKFirst published online 20 July 2007
1
SEDIMENTARY EVOLUTION OF THE ANTALYA BASIN
2
dolgusu, yerel olarak geliflmifl resifler ve resifal karbonatlar içeren, k›r›nt›l› egemen kal›n çökel birikimi ile temsiledilmektedir. Antalya Havzas›’n›n bu Miyosen çökel dolgusu, kronostratigrafik ve litostratigrafik bulgular›n dahaönceki çal›flmalar taraf›ndan ortaya konulmufl veriler ile birlikte de¤erlendirilmesi sonucu olarak dokuz formasyonve oniki üye kapsam›nda ele al›narak tan›mlanm›flt›r. Bu stratigrafik çat› kapsam›nda toplam ondokuz fasiyestan›mlanm›flt›r. Fasiyesler aras› yatay (mekan) ve düfley (zaman) iliflkileri koluviyal yelpaze, alüvyon yelpazesi, yamaresifleri içeren yelpaze deltas›, delta önü-aç›k k›r›nt›l› flelf, yamaç taban›-havza düzlü¤ü yelpazesi, resifal karbonatflelf ve fay-denetimli resif önü yamac› ortamlar›nda gerçekleflen çökelimi yans›tan de¤iflik fasiyes topluluklar›n›nvarl›¤›n› göstermektedir.
Antalya Havzas› Geç Miyosen fl›k›flma tektoni¤i deformasyonu nedeniyle parçalanarak üç alt havzadan oluflangünümüzdeki konumunu kazanm›flt›r. Birbirlerinden kuzey–güney uzan›ml› K›rkkavak Fay› ve bat› yönlü AksuBindirmesi ile ayr›lan alt havzalar, bu çal›flmada Aksu, Köprüçay ve Manavgat alt havzalar› olarak tan›mlanm›fllard›r.
Do¤uda yeralan kuzeybat›–güneydo¤u uzan›ml› Manavgat alt havzas›, Burdigaliyen–Langiyen yafll› alüvyonyelpazesi, yama resifleri içeren yelpaze deltas›, resifal karbonat flelfi, Geç Langiyen–Serravaliyen yafll› fay denetimliresif önü yamac› ve yamaç taban›-havza düzlü¤ü yelpazesi ve Tortoniyen–Messiniyen yafll› yelpaze deltas›ortamlar›na özgü çökeller ile temsil edilen bir çökel dolgu içermektedir. Hafif deformasyona u¤ram›fl bu alt havzaolas›l›kla Adana Havzas› ile ba¤lant›l›d›r.
Di¤er taraftan kuzey–güney uzan›ml› Köprüçay ve Aksu alt havzalar› yo¤un tektonizma geçirmifllerdir.Köprüçay alt havzas› egemen olarak Burdigaliyen–Langiyen yafll› koluviyal yelpaze, alüvyon yelpazesi, yama resifleriiçeren yelpaze deltas› ve delta önü-aç›k deniz çökelme ortamlar› ile resifal karbonat flelfi ortam›na özgü çökeldolgulardan oluflan bir istif ile temsil edilmektedir. Fasiyes iliflkileri ve yafl bulgular›, kuzeyden güneye do¤rualüvyon yelpazesinden, yelpaze deltas› ve sualt› fasiyeslerine do¤ru bir geçiflin varl›¤›n› ve K›rkkavak Fay›’na do¤rubir derinleflmenin gerçekleflti¤ini göstermektedir. Bu fay boyunca izlenen kaba taneli kireçtafl› brefli (k›smenLangiyen yafll›) çökelme ile eflzamanl› tektonik etkinli¤e iflaret etmektedir. Ayr›ca havzan›n bat› kenar›ndakiLangiyen ve daha genç yafll› yelpaze deltas› çak›ltafllar›n›n havza taban›ndaki resifal flelf karbonatlar›n›n (Oymap›narKireçtafl›) üzerine belirgin bir flekilde aflmal› olarak gelmesi, havza gelifliminin erken aflamas›nda e¤imlendi¤inigöstermektedir.
Aksu alt havzas› çökel dolgusu Serravaliyen–Tortoniyen yafll› alüvyon yelpazesi, yama resifleri içeren yelpazedeltas› ve delta önü-aç›k deniz ortamlar› ile Messiniyen–Erken Pliyosen yafll› resifal karbonat flelfi ortam› ile temsiledilen çökel istiflerden oluflmaktad›r. Geç Tortoniyen yafll› Aksu Bindirmesi’nin önünde bat›ya do¤ru geliflmiflbindirmeler bulunmaktad›r. Eskiköy yak›n›ndaki Pliyosen yafll› çak›ltafllar›nda izlenen bir genç bindirme IspartaDirse¤i’nin kapanmas›n›n son dönemini yans›tmaktad›r.
Algli mercan resifleri, her üç alt havzada da, Miyosen yafll› k›r›nt›l› çökel istifler içerisinde yayg›n olarakbulunmaktad›rlar. Bu resifler Akdeniz çevresi mercan faunas› ile oldukça benzerlik sunan mercan topluluklar› iletemsil edilmektedirler. Bu resiflerin bileflimleri ile fasiyes ve ortamsal konumlar›, Miyosen stratigrafisinin daha iyikavranmas›na ve tektonik olarak aktif bir havzadaki resiflerin zaman ve mekan içerisindeki geliflimlerininanlafl›lmas›na katk› koymak amac›yla ayr›nt›l› olarak irdelenmifllerdir. Masif, küçük boyutlu yama resifleri olarakbulunan bu resifler, Erken–Orta Miyosen (Burdigaliyen–Langiyen) ve Geç Miyosen (Tortoniyen–Messiniyen)dönemlerinde ilerleyen yelpaze deltas› çak›ltafllar› ve transgresif flelf karbonatlar› olmak üzere iki farkl› zamanaral›¤›nda ve çökelme ortam›nda geliflmifllerdir.
Bu alt havzalar›n oluflumlar› ve deformasyonlar› Anadolu mikrolevhas›n›n güneydo¤u Anadolu’da gerçekleflenMiyosen çarp›flmas›n› izleyen dönemdeki bat›ya do¤ru kaç›fl› ile ba¤lant›l› olarak aç›klanabilir. Isparta Dirse¤i,Burdigaliyen–Langiyen s›ras›nda halen tümüyle aç›k bulunmaktad›r ve bu dönemde burada gerçekleflen s›k›flmakökenli deformasyona iliflkin herhangi bir bulgu bulunamam›flt›r. Aksine bu dönemde, yeni oluflan Manavgat althavzas› ile K›br›s’› Anadolu karas›ndan ay›ran Mut ve Adana havzalar›n›n da aç›lmas› gerçekleflmifltir. Langiyen’deK›rkkavak Fay›’n›n yeniden harekete geçti¤i bu fay boyunca izlenen kireçtafl› brefllerinin varl›¤› ile kan›tlanmaktad›r.Bunun sonucu olarak Köprüçay alt havzas› asimetrik olarak derinleflmifltir. Taban birimini oluflturan Oymap›narKireçtafl›’n›n do¤uya do¤ru e¤imlenmesi ve bunun üzerine Langiyen–Serravaliyen yafll› k›r›nt›l› çökellerin aflmal›olarak gelmeleri bu olay›n di¤er kan›tlar›d›r. Bu deformasyon Serravaliyen s›ras›nda bat›ya do¤ru göç ederek IspartaDirse¤i’nin kapanmas›na ve Isparta Dirse¤i’nin ekseni boyunca bir s›k›flma havzas› olarak Aksu alt havzas›n›noluflmas›na neden olmufltur. Aksu alt havzas› güney kesiminde, günümüzde 100 km daha güneydo¤u’da bulunanAlanya Masifi’nden türemifl yüksek bas›nç-düflük s›cakl›k koflullar›na özgü metamorfik çak›llar bulunmaktad›r. AltTortoniyen s›ras›nda gerçekleflen son transgresif dönem, K›rkkavak Fay›’n›n normal aktivitesinin sona erdi¤inibelirtir. Tortoniyen sonunda Anadolu mikrolevhas›n›n, saatin ters yönünde rotasyona u¤rayan Likya Naplar›’nakarfl›, bat›ya do¤ru göç etmesi olas›l›kla Aksu alt havzas›ndaki Miyosen çökellerinin bindirmeler oluflturmas›na veK›rkavak Fay›’n›n ters fay olarak ifllemesine neden olmufltur. Isparta Dirse¤i günümüzdeki konumunu bu dönemdekazanm›flt›r. Pliyosen s›ras›nda Aksu alt havzas›ndaki Pliyosen akarsu çak›ltafllar› üzerine Miyosen çökellerininbindirmesi, Isparta Dirse¤i ekseninde bat›ya do¤ru yaflanan son s›k›flma dönemini göstermektedir. Bu olaysonras›nda Anadolu mikrolevhas›n›n genel yükselimi gerçekleflmifltir.
Anahtar Sözcükler: stratigrafi, havza analizi, fasiyes, mercan resifi, yelpaze deltas›, tektonik, paleoortam, IspartaAç›s›, Toros Da¤lar›, Türkiye
A. Ç‹NER ET AL.
3
Introduction
The Late Cenozoic Antalya Basin, represented by theAksu, Köprüçay and Manavgat sub–basins, is locatedwithin the Isparta Angle, a conspicuous syntaxis situatedbetween the Mid Miocene Aegean and Lycian arcs and theLate Eocene Taurus arc within the Alpine chain insouthern Turkey (Figure 1). The sedimentary fill of theAntalya Basin is characterized by a relatively thicksuccession of Miocene and Pliocene clastics, coralgal reefsand reefal shelf carbonates and extensive travertinedeposits, with locally developed internal deformation andintrabasinal unconformities, in a tectonically active regionin the Antalya Gulf.
Over the past decade the origin of the Antalya Basinhas been subject of considerable interest and severalworks have been directed (Flecker 1995; Flecker et al.1995, 1998, 2005; Glover 1995; Glover & Robertson1998; Karabıyıko¤lu et al. 2000, 2004, 2005; Poisson etal. 2003a; Deynoux et al. 2005; TPAO and NordyskResearch Teams) to investigate the formation, evolutionand deformation of the Late Cenozoic Antalya Basin.
This paper is a synthesis of previously publishedworks on Köprüçay and Manavgat sub-basins from ourgroup (Karabıyıko¤lu et al. 2000, 2005; Deynoux et al.2005) but also integrates additional data from the Aksusub-basin and a general discussion on the Antalya Basin.The aim is to evaluate stratigraphy, facies architectureand depositional systems of the Miocene sedimentary fillof the Antalya Basin in order to provide a synthesis thatcontributes towards a better understanding of basinformation, evolution and deformation within the contextof post-collisional tectonics and relative sea level changes.
Geological Setting and Stratigraphy
The Antalya Basin developed unconformably on afoundered basement, comprising Mesozoicautochthonous carbonate platforms (the Beyda¤larıplatform to the west and the Anamas-Akseki platform tothe east), overthrust by allochthonous units (LycianNappes, Antalya Nappes and Alanya Massif) during aninterval of time lasting from Late Cretaceous to Pliocene(Figure 1), within the Isparta Angle in the westernTaurides (Monod 1977; Akay et al. 1985; Dilek &Rowland 1993; Flecker 1995; Flecker et al. 1995, 1998,2005; Glover & Robertson 1998; Karabıyıko¤lu et al.2000, 2005; Monod et al. 2002; Robertson et al. 2003;Poisson et al. 2003a).
The present configuration of the Antalya Basinconsists of three distinct components, divided andbounded by the north–south-trending Kırkkavak Faultand Late Miocene Aksu Thrust (Dumont & Kerey 1975;Poisson 1977; Akay et al. 1985), which are here simplyreferred as the Manavgat, Köprüçay and Aksu sub-basins(Figure 1). Since the early work of Blumenthal (1951)much has become known about the Late Cenozoicstratigraphy of the Antalya Basin as a result of numerouslocal and regional geological studies (e.g., Brunn et al.1971; Bizon et al. 1974; Poisson 1977; Monod 1977;Poisson et al. 1983, 1984, 2003a, b; Akay et al. 1985;Robertson 1993; Flecker 1995; Flecker et al. 1995,1998, 2005; Glover 1995; Glover & Robertson 1998;Karabıyıko¤lu et al. 2000, 2005; Tuzcu & Karabıyıko¤lu2001; Deynoux et al. 2005; ‹fller et al. 2005). The LateCenozoic fill of the basin is represented by non-marine tomarine, clastic-dominated Miocene sediments withsubordinate coralgal reefs and reefal shelf carbonates,and Pliocene to Recent marine and terrestrial clastics, andtravertines.
Previously, Poisson et al. (1983, 1984) and Akay etal. (1985) have provided the most comprehensiveaccounts of the Antalya Basin. Based on the foraminiferaland nannoplankton biostratigraphy as well aslithostratigraphic considerations, they have divided theLate Cenozoic deposits broadly into ten formations: (1)Aksu Formation (Upper Oligocene–Tortonianconglomerates), (2) Oymapınar Limestone (Langhianshelf carbonates), (3) Çakallar Formation (Langhianlimestone breccias and marls), (4) Geceleme Formation(Serravalian marls), (5) Karpuzçay Formation (Tortonianshales, sandstones and conglomerates), (6) TafllıkFormation (Lower Messinian clayey limestone withlimestone and conglomerate blocks), (7) EskiköyFormation (Messinian sandstones and conglomerates),(8) Gebiz Limestone (Messinian reefal carbonates), (9)Yenimahalle Formation (Pliocene limely claystone andsandstone) and (10) Alakilise Formation (Upper Pliocenesandstone with volcanic tuffs and conglomerate).
Flecker (1995) and Flecker et al. (1995, 1998)provided additional biostratigraphic data and introducedstrontium isotope methods for dating the Oymapınarcarbonates and the overlying Geceleme marls, and thusproposed a revised stratigraphy for the Lower Mioceneformations of the Antalya Basin. In their stratigraphicrevision, the previous Aksu Formation was divided into
two new formations: the Kızılda¤ Formation (Burdigalianconglomerates) and the Aksu Formation (Tortonianconglomerates).
Recently particular attention has been directed to thecomposition and distribution of coral reefs and theassociated reefal fauna as well as the benthic-planktic
foraminiferal associations and ostracodas ascomplementary data to contribute towards developing aconstrained biostratigraphy (Karabıyıko¤lu et al. 2000,2005). Although the Miocene corals have a rather poorstratigraphical value, with some of them ranging fromOligocene to Pliocene, the composition of the coral
SEDIMENTARY EVOLUTION OF THE ANTALYA BASIN
4
ISPARTA
Manavgat Mediterranean Sea
AN
LN
0 50 m10 20 30 40
BD
KIR
KK
AVAK
FAU
LT
Q
AN
AN
Q
BD
AN
Q
AK
SU
SUB-BA
SIN
AN
Eynifova
AL
Tc
P
P
AN
Serik
Kasımlar Kelsu
Saraycık
Sarialan
AKSEKİ
Sütçüler
AA
BD
LN
ANAMAS DAĞ
Beyşehir Lake
ANTALYA
Recent / travertine
Pliocene
Tortonian Conglomerate
Karpuzçay Formation (Serravalian-Tortonian)
Köprüçay Conglomerate (Langhian-Serravalian)
Oymapınar Limestone (Burdigalian-Langhian)
Tepekli Conglomerate (Burdigalian)
(Aquitanian)
LN: Lycian Nappes (Langhian-Serravalian)
AN-AL: Antalya Nappes (Paleocene)
BD-AA: Beydağ/Anamas-Akseki autochthonous platforms
KÖ
PRÜ
ÇAY
SUB
-BA
SIN
MANAVGAT SUB-BASIN
P
Tc
AK
SU
TH
RU
ST
Kesme-Dökükdağ Breccias (Langhian p. parte)
AN
Gebiz Limestone (Messinian - L. Pliocene)
nappe boundary
Aksu Thrust
strike-slip fault
fault
AN
?
?
Figure 1. Geological and stratigraphical setting of the Antalya Basin. Inset shows the location of the study area. Modified from Deynoux etal. (2005).
assemblages of these reefs together with reef-associatedfauna, combined with complementary biostratigraphicaland lithostratigraphical findings, have provided a usefulproxy data base for establishing a reliable stratigraphy forthe conglomerate-dominated basin margin clasticscomprising coralgal reefs.
In this study, based on these lithostratigraphic andbiostratigraphic findings as well as the integration ofpreviously established data, the clastic-dominatedMiocene stratigraphy of the Antalya Basin is revised andreorganized into nine formations and twelve members(Figures 1 & 2), considered in more detail in thefollowing relevant sections. Here, a brief summary of thestratigraphy is outlined below.
The reorganization of the Miocene fill of theManavgat sub-basin consists of the Tepekli Conglomerate(Burdigalian–Early Langhian), Oymapınar Limestone (LateBurdigalian–Langhian), Geceleme Formation withÇakallar Member (Late Langhian) and KarpuzçayFormation (Serravalian Tortonian–Messinian).
The Miocene fill of the Köprüçay sub-basin comprisesthe Kesme Breccia (?Burdigalian), Oymapınar Limestone(Late Burdigalian–Langhian), Köprüçay Conglomeratewith ‹bifller, Yeflilba¤, Sarıkök, Yaka, Selge, Bozburunda¤members (Burdigalian–Langhian–?Serravalian),Karpuzçay Formation (Langhian/Serravalian), andSarıalan Formation (Lower Tortonian).
The Miocene fill of the Aksu sub-basin consists of theAksuçay Conglomerate with Kargı, Karada¤ and KapıkayaConglomerate members (?Tortonian), KarpuzçayFormation (Serravalian–Tortonian) and Gebiz Limestone(Upper Miocene–Lower Pliocene).
Facies Description and Interpretation
The clastic-dominated Miocene fill of the Antalya Basin isrepresented by a thick succession of non-marine tomarine breccia, conglomerate, sandstone, siltstone,mudstone and claystone with subordinate coralgal reefs,reefal shelf carbonates and marls. Several detailed clasticand carbonate facies and their environmentalinterpretations have already been advanced for theMiocene fill of the Manavgat, Köprüçay and Aksu sub-basins (for a comprehensive review, see Flecker 1995;Flecker et al. 2005; Karabıyıko¤lu et al. 2000, 2005;Deynoux et al. 2005).
In this study for the sake of simplicity, the Miocene fillof the entire Antalya Basin is considered in terms of atotal of nineteen facies on the basis of main sedimentarycharacteristics comprising lithology, geometry, texture,sedimentary structure, faunal content and colour (Figures3 to 6 and Table 1). The facies architecture in time andspace indicates small- to large-scale transgressive andregressive sequences characterized by six depositionalsystems representing deposition in (1) colluvialscree/colluvial fan, (2) coastal alluvial fan, (3) fan deltawith patch reefs, (4) reefal shallow carbonate shelf, (5)base of fault-generated fore reef slope, and (6) clasticshallow to deeper open marine environments in thetectonically active sub-basins. Each facies is nameddescriptively following the schemes developed by Miall(1978) and Pickering et al. (1986, 1989) for continentaland marine clastics, and Dunham (1962) and Wilson(1975) for carbonates.
Miocene Stratigraphy and Depositional Evolution ofthe Antalya Basin
Manavgat Sub-basin
Lithostratigraphy
In this study the Burdigalian–Messinian fill of theManavgat sub-basin is interpreted in terms of fourformations, which are designated as from base to top:Tepekli Conglomerate (Burdigalian, Early Langhian)composed of terrestrial to marine clastics, OymapınarLimestone (Late Burdigalian–Langhian) made up of reefalshelf carbonates, Geceleme Formation (Serravalian) andKarpuzçay Formation (Tortonian–Messinian) composedof deeper or shallower marine clastics. This stratigraphybroadly conforms to that of Akay et al. (1985) andFlecker et al. (1995, 2005). However, the ÇakallarFormation of Akay et al. (1985) is considered here, as inKarabıyıko¤lu et al. (2000), as a member within theGeceleme Formation, since it refers to lithological bodiesof limited local extent.
Facies Architecture and Depositional Environments
A large-scale deepening-upward to shallowing-upwardsequence representing transgressive and regressiveepisodes of sedimentation characterizes the sedimentarysuccession of the Manavgat sub-basin fill.
A. Ç‹NER ET AL.
5
SEDIMENTARY EVOLUTION OF THE ANTALYA BASIN
6
AK
SU S
UB
-BA
SIN
K
ÖPR
ÜÇ
AY S
UB
-BA
SIN
M
AN
AVG
AT S
UB
-BA
SIN
Aks
uçay
Con
glom
erat
es
Köp
rüça
y C
ongl
omer
ates
K
arpu
zçay
Fm
. K
apık
aya
mb.
Kar
gı m
b.
Kar
adağ
mb.
B
ozbu
run
mb.
Sel
ge m
b.
Ince
bel m
b.
. Yaka
mb.
K
esm
e m
b.
deb
ris fl
ows
turb
idite
s
Gec
elem
e Fm
. (L
angh
ian-
S
erra
valia
n)
Oym
apın
ar L
st.
Tepe
kli C
ong.
Kesm
e Br
eccia
R
R
R R
R
R R R
R
Geb
iz L
st.
Esk
iköy
Fm
.
A K S U T H R U S T
K I R K K A V A K F A U L T
Boz
buru
n m
b.
(?To
rtoni
an)
Upp
er S
elge
mb.
(?
Ser
rava
lian)
unco
nfor
mity
Low
er S
elge
mb.
(
Lang
hian
- ?S
erra
valli
an) K
arpu
zçay
Fm
. (L
angh
ian
an
d yo
unge
r)
Wes
t E
ast
Kar
puzç
ay F
m.
(Ser
rava
lian-
To
rtoni
an)
Ince
bel m
b.
. Yaka
mb.
(L
angh
ian)
Kes
me
mb.
(L
angh
ian
an
d yo
unge
r)
Köprüçay Conglomerates
Oym
apın
ar L
st.
Oym
apın
ar L
st.
Tepe
kli c
g.
Kar
puzç
ay F
m.
(Lan
ghia
n to
M
essi
nian
)
debr
is fl
ows
Kes
me
Bre
ccia
(?
Bur
diga
lian)
Aks
uçay
C
ongl
omer
ate
(Ser
rava
lian-
T
orto
nian
)
Kar
adağ
mb.
(?
Torto
nian
)
Kar
gi m
b.
(Plio
cene
th
rust
s)
AN
AN
AN
Çak
alla
r mb.
Gec
elem
e Fm
.
BD
A
A A
A
Esk
iköy
Fm
.
Bur
di-
galia
n Langhian Serravalian - Tortonian
Plio
cene
M
essi
nian
R
R
R
R
Taşd
ibi m
b.
Taşd
ibi m
b.
(Tor
toni
an in
par
t)
AG
E
R
reef
.
Figu
re 2
.Co
mpa
rativ
e M
ioce
ne s
trat
igra
phy
of t
he A
ntal
ya s
ub-b
asin
s.
A. Ç‹NER ET AL.
7
A
C
D
G
E
F
H
B
1 m1 m
Figure 3. (A) Limestone breccia facies (F1). (B) Matrix-supported conglomerate facies (F2) with a disorganized fabric. Poorlysorted, red, matrix-supported bouldery conglomerate of subaerial origin. (C) Clast-supported conglomerate facies(F3) characterized by poorly- to moderately-sorted, massive- to crudely-bedded, pebble-cobble conglomerate with(D) occasional disarticulated bivalves. (E) Parallel-stratified conglomerate facies (F4) characterized by laterallycontinuous tabular beds of pebble-cobble conglomerate. (F–H) Examples of large-scale tabular-planar cross-stratified conglomerate facies (F5) characterized by high-angle oblique-parallel foreset beds with angular lowercontacts and crudely developed pebble orientation. 2nd Century Roman bridge in picture (F). All pictures are fromKöprüçay Conglomerates in Köprüçay sub-basin.
SEDIMENTARY EVOLUTION OF THE ANTALYA BASIN
8
1 m1 m
10 cm10 cm
A
B
D
C
E
G H
F
Figure 4. (A) Graded conglomerate facies (F6) showing normal graded with erosive base and (B) reversegraded beds. (C) Massive to parallel-laminated gravelly sandstone (F7) characterized by thinlyinterbedded fine sandstone and (D) with stringers of well-rounded coarse gravels. (E) Wave rippledsandstone interbeded with conglomerates (F8). (F) Normal graded sandstone facies (F9) with a well-developed Bouma sequence. (G) Massive pebbly mudstone facies (F10) with well-rounded to sub-angular gravels and ripped-up mudstone clasts of various sizes floating randomly in a muddy matrix.(H) Graded siltstone and mudstone (F11) facies with bioturbations on top of the mudstone bed.Pictures A, B, C, D & E– Köprüçay Conglomerate in Köprüçay sub-basin; F– Aksuçay Conglomeratein Aksu sub-basin; G– Karpuzçay Formation in Manavgat sub-basin; H– Karpuzçay Formation inKöprüçay sub-basin.
The Tepekli Conglomerate: Burdigalian–Early LanghianAlluvial Fan/Fan-Delta Complex. The TepekliConglomerate is a pebble-cobble dominated clasticformation, which is exposed along the northwestern andsoutheastern margins of the basin. The spatialdistribution, overall geometry and the facies changeswithin the conglomerate bodies reflect two distinctdepositional environments: (1) stream-flow-dominatedcoastal alluvial fan(s), and (2) southward prograding fandeltas.
In the northwestern part of the basin, the TepekliConglomerate is characterized by a variable thickness,locally reaching up to 600 m (Figure 7). The dominantfacies consists of clast-supported pebble-cobble
conglomerate (F3) with well-rounded clasts. It occurs asa few meters thick, laterally extensive amalgamatedtabular units, or as thick channel fills intercalated withrelatively thin red mudstones (F12A). This succession isinterpreted as an alluvial fan environment characterizedby shallow braided streams. Up section and southward(e.g., 2.5 km southwest of Sırtköy, Figure 7) largecoralgal patch reefs (F19) embedded within winnowedclast-supported conglomerates (F3) indicate the passagefrom braided stream-dominated coastal alluvial fan towave-modified marine fan delta deposits.
In the southeastern part of the basin, a 180-m-thicksection is exposed below the Alarahan Castle andrepresents the upper part of the Tepekli Conglomerate
A. Ç‹NER ET AL.
9
1
2
0.1mm0.1mm
A
B
EDC
Figure 5. Massive to parallel-laminated siltstone-mudstone facies (F12) overlain by a reef core. (A) Gastropods- and (B) Ostrea-bearing greenmudstones. (C) Chaolically folded and brecciated facies (F13). (D) Photomicrograph of miliolid wackestones (F15) representingrestricted inner shelf/lagoon environment. (E) Photomicrograph of massive to well-bedded algal, benthic foraminiferal wackestone-packstone facies (F16) with angular fragments of coralline algae (1) and well-preserved Borelis melo (2). All pictures are fromKarpuzçay Formation in Köprüçay sub-basin.
that is truncated by the overlying transgressiveOymapınar Limestone. The Alarahan section is basicallycomposed of thickly-bedded low-angle clinoforms ofclast-supported polymict conglomerates (F3 and F5),
with coralgal patch reefs (F19) and rare foraminiferalwackestone/packstone (F16) interbeds, and represents acoarse clastic, stream-dominated fan delta.
SEDIMENTARY EVOLUTION OF THE ANTALYA BASIN
10
BB
PP
RR
1 m1 m
A B
D
FE
C
Figure 6. (A) Photomicrograph of algal, coral grainstone-rudstone facies (F18) representing lithoclast coral (Lithophyllia) rudstone. (B–C)Field characteristics of massive coral-algal boundstone facies (F19). Massive and mound-shaped coral-algal limestones developed oncoarse conglomerate beds representing isolated patch reefs. (D) General view of the transition from braided stream conglomerate(B) through benthic foraminiferal packstone (P) to reef core facies (R). (E–F) Details of the reef core facies comprising massive andthick finger-like forms of Porites and Tarbellastraea. Pictures A & B– Tepekli Conglomerate in Manavgat sub-basin; C– KöprüçayConglomerate in Köprüçay sub-basin; D, E & F– Aksuçay Conglomerate in Aksu sub-basin.
A. Ç‹NER ET AL.
11
Faci
esD
escr
ipti
onO
ccur
renc
e *
Sugg
este
d Pr
oces
ses
and
Env
iron
men
t of
Dep
osit
ion
F1:
limes
tone
bre
ccia
fine
to c
oars
e, p
oorl
y so
rted
, ve
ry a
ngul
ar t
o su
b-ro
unde
d ex
trac
last
Vc
in K
grav
ity-d
rive
n, s
ubae
rial
and
/or
suba
queo
us m
ass
tran
spor
t lim
esto
ne (
Figu
re 3
A).
Thin
- to
ver
y th
ick-
bedd
ed t
abul
ar u
nits
with
C
in M
incl
udin
g gr
ainf
low
s, r
ock
falls
/ava
lanc
hes
(deb
ris
falls
),
shar
ply
defin
ed f
lat
base
s an
d to
ps;
occa
sion
al n
orm
al g
radi
ng;
clas
t- t
o no
t ob
serv
ed in
sl
ides
and
hig
h co
ncen
trat
ed d
ebri
s flo
ws;
clim
atic
and
/or
mat
rix-
supp
orte
d w
ith r
ed m
ud o
r ca
rbon
ate
mat
rix
loca
lly c
ompr
isin
g Ak
sufa
ult-
gene
rate
d co
lluvi
al c
one
and/
or c
ollu
vial
fan
-del
ta
Mic
roco
dium
or
shal
low
mar
ine
faun
a co
mpr
isin
g m
ixed
ben
thic
for
amin
ifers
(B
lirka
& N
emec
199
8; N
emec
& K
azan
c› 1
999)
; re
d (i.
e. m
iliol
ids,
Am
phis
tegi
na, T
extu
lari
a),
cora
lline
alg
ae a
nd m
ollu
scan
bio
clas
ts,
mat
rix-
supp
orte
d an
d M
icro
codi
um-b
eari
ng b
recc
ias
repr
esen
t a
pello
ids,
min
or c
oral
fra
gmen
ts e
chin
oid
plaq
ues
and
spin
es.
Loca
lly
terr
estr
ial o
rigi
n, w
here
as t
he b
recc
ias
with
the
fos
silif
erou
s ca
rbon
ate
inte
rcal
ated
with
con
glom
erat
es a
nd p
ebbl
y sa
ndst
ones
mat
rix
indi
cate
dep
ositi
on in
a s
hore
line
envi
ronm
ent
resu
lting
fr
om r
ewor
ked
coas
tal c
ollu
vium
/scr
ees
F2:
mat
rix–
supp
orte
d m
assi
ve t
o th
ick
bedd
ed,
very
poo
rly
sort
ed,
sub-
angu
lar
to r
ound
ed
Vc in
Kgr
avity
-indu
ced
suba
eria
l and
/or
suba
queo
us m
ass
flow
dep
osits
fro
m
cong
lom
erat
epe
bble
-bou
lder
con
glom
erat
e w
ith o
utsi
zed
clas
ts u
p to
2 m
in d
iam
eter
Vc
in M
high
-vis
cosi
ty f
low
s (c
ohes
ive
debr
is f
low
s) (
Mid
dlet
on &
Ham
pton
197
6;
(Fig
ure
3B);
red
dish
, ye
llow
ish
or g
reyi
sh m
uddy
mat
rix
with
var
ying
C
in A
N
emec
& S
teel
198
4; N
emec
& P
ostm
a 19
93).
Rap
id s
edim
enta
tion
en
mix
ture
s of
gra
nule
to
clay
-siz
ed m
ater
ial;
diso
rgan
ized
gra
vel f
abri
c m
asse
in a
pro
xim
al a
lluvi
al f
an/f
an-d
elta
or
high
gra
dien
t br
aide
d st
ream
with
flo
atin
g/pr
otru
ding
cla
sts
at t
he t
op;
amal
gam
ated
tab
ular
and
le
ntic
ular
uni
ts w
ith s
harp
ly t
o fa
intly
def
ined
fla
t bo
undi
ng s
urfa
ces;
oc
casi
onal
sco
ured
bas
es
F3:
clas
t–su
ppor
ted
thin
to
very
thi
ck a
mal
gam
ated
bed
s w
ith m
assi
ve t
o cr
ude
stra
tific
atio
n;
Vc in
Ksu
baer
ial t
o su
baqu
eous
hyp
erco
ncen
trat
ed f
low
s su
ch a
s co
hesi
ve a
nd
cong
lom
erat
epo
orly
to
mod
erat
ely
sort
ed,
sub-
roun
ded
to r
ound
ed p
ebbl
e-bo
ulde
r Vc
in M
cohe
sion
less
deb
ris
flow
s an
d/or
tra
ctiv
e st
ream
flo
ws
(Mid
dlet
on &
co
nglo
mer
ate
with
out
size
d cl
asts
up
to 2
m d
iam
eter
(Fi
gure
3C)
; Vc
in A
Ham
pton
197
6; R
ust
1978
); d
epos
ition
in a
hig
h gr
adie
nt b
raid
ed s
trea
m
diso
rgan
ized
gra
vel f
abri
c w
ith o
ccas
iona
l wea
k im
bric
atio
n in
pla
ces;
an
d al
luvi
al f
an/s
ubae
rial
fan
-del
ta e
nvir
onm
ents
as
long
itidu
nal b
ars;
tabu
lar,
lent
icul
ar o
r ch
anne
l-fill
geo
met
ry w
ith s
harp
ly d
efin
ed,
foss
illife
reou
s co
nglo
mer
ates
indi
cate
wav
e-re
wor
ked
near
shor
e de
posi
tion
flat
to e
rosi
onal
bou
ndin
g su
rfac
es;
open
or
clos
ed f
ram
ewor
k w
ithre
d to
gre
y m
uddy
, sa
ndy
or g
ranu
lar
mat
rix;
occ
asio
nal c
oral
fra
gmen
tsan
d di
sart
icul
ated
biv
alve
s (F
igur
e 3D
)
F4:
para
llel
late
rally
con
tinuo
us t
hick
tab
ular
peb
ble-
cobb
le c
ongl
omer
ate
beds
Vc
in K
lam
inar
flo
ws
with
tra
ctiv
e be
d lo
ad in
a w
ave
mod
ified
st
ratif
ied
(0.5
–3 m
thi
ck)
with
sha
rp a
nd f
lat
base
s an
d to
ps (
Figu
re 3
E);
Vc in
Afa
n-de
lta f
ront
; w
ave
rew
orki
ng m
ight
hav
e al
so b
een
cong
lom
erat
eho
rizo
ntal
to
sub-
hori
zont
al p
aral
lel b
eds
char
acte
rise
d by
mod
erat
ly
R in
Mre
spon
sibl
e fo
r th
e de
velo
pmen
t of
gra
vel s
egre
gatio
n lo
cally
to w
ell s
orte
d, c
last
sup
port
ed,
wel
l seg
rega
ted,
sub
-rou
nded
to
very
wel
l ro
unde
d pe
bble
s w
ith c
alca
reni
tic in
terg
ranu
lar
mat
rix;
loca
lly w
ell d
evel
oped
pr
efer
red
imbr
icat
ions
with
max
imum
pro
ject
ion
plan
es d
own
dipp
ing
F5:
larg
e–sc
ale
so
litar
y or
sta
cked
, la
rge-
scal
e, p
ebbl
e-co
bble
con
glom
erat
e Vc
in K
unid
irec
tiona
l sub
aque
ous
flow
s an
d/or
ava
lanc
hes;
cr
oss–
stra
tifie
dco
mpr
isin
g si
gmoi
dal t
o ob
lique
par
alle
l for
eset
s (u
p to
30
m
R in
Mfa
n de
lta/G
ilber
t–ty
pe d
elta
for
eset
sco
nglo
mer
ate
high
clin
ofor
ms)
with
fin
e to
coa
rse
inte
rgra
nula
r sa
ndy
mat
rix;
R
in A
mod
erat
e to
wel
l sor
ted,
sub
- to
wel
l-rou
nded
cla
sts
show
ing
para
llel o
rien
tatio
n to
the
bed
ding
pla
ne m
ostly
with
imbr
icat
ions
(F
igur
e 3F
–H).
Ang
ular
to
tang
entia
l con
tact
s w
ith t
he u
nder
lyin
g be
ds m
ight
for
m d
ownl
ap g
eom
etri
es
F6:
grad
ed
norm
al-,
inve
rse-
, in
vers
e- t
o no
rmal
-gra
ded
Vc in
Kgr
avel
ly h
igh-
or
low
-den
sity
tur
bidi
ty c
urre
nts
cong
lom
erat
eco
nglo
mer
ate,
peb
bly
sand
ston
e an
d sa
ndst
one;
Vc
in M
(Bou
ma
1963
); c
ohes
ionl
ess
or c
ohes
ive
suba
queo
us d
ebri
s ta
bula
r, le
ntic
ular
or
chan
nelis
ed b
eds
(1 t
o 4
m t
hick
) Vc
in A
flow
s w
ith lo
cally
dev
elop
ed s
lope
tur
bidi
te c
hann
els
asso
ciat
ed
with
sha
rp o
r er
osiv
e ba
ses
and
flat
tops
; oc
casi
onal
to
fan
del
tas;
the
inve
rse
grad
ing
is t
he r
esul
t of
tur
bule
nt a
nd
rip-
up m
ud c
last
s, f
lute
and
gro
ove
cast
s, b
urro
ws
inte
nse
grai
n in
tera
ctio
n or
deb
ris
flow
in a
rel
ativ
ely
cohe
sive
mat
rix
and
mix
ed s
hallo
w a
nd d
eepe
r m
arin
e fa
una
(Fig
ure
4A,
B).
Wel
l-dev
elop
ed a
nd n
orm
ally
-gra
ded
cong
lom
erat
ic b
eds
with
mas
sive
bas
al p
arts
gra
ding
up
war
ds in
to p
ebbl
y sa
ndst
one/
sand
ston
e; in
vers
ely
grad
ed c
ongl
omer
ates
are
cla
st-
to m
atri
x-su
ppor
ted
with
mud
dy t
o sa
ndy
mat
rix
Tabl
e 1.
Des
crip
tion
and
sugg
este
d in
terp
reta
tion
of t
he f
acie
s of
the
Ant
alya
Bas
in.
SEDIMENTARY EVOLUTION OF THE ANTALYA BASIN
12
Faci
esD
escr
ipti
onO
ccur
renc
e *
Sugg
este
d Pr
oces
ses
and
Env
iron
men
t of
Dep
osit
ion
F7:
mas
sive
to
th
in-
to t
hick
-bed
ded,
mas
sive
to
para
llel l
amin
ated
, Vc
in K
mas
sive
bed
s pr
obab
ly r
esul
ted
from
hig
h- o
r pa
ralle
l str
atifi
edfin
e to
coa
rse
sand
ston
e/gr
avel
ly s
ands
tone
with
Vc
in M
low
-den
sity
tur
bidi
ty c
urre
nts
and/
or s
andy
deb
ris
grav
elly
san
dsto
neoc
casi
onal
gra
vel s
trin
gers
; la
tera
lly e
xten
sive
Vc
in A
flow
/gra
in f
low
(Lo
we
1982
), w
here
as p
aral
lel l
amin
ated
(u
p to
sev
eral
hun
dred
s m
eter
s lo
ng)
and
wel
l-def
ined
sa
ndst
one
repr
esen
ts d
epos
ition
fro
m t
ract
ive
curr
ents
in
tabu
lar
units
with
sha
rp f
lat
base
s an
d to
ps;
eros
ive-
base
d up
per
flow
reg
imes
; th
e st
ring
ers
of b
ould
ers
are
inte
rpre
ted
sand
ston
e in
terb
eds
(Fig
ure
4C,
D).
Occ
asio
nal r
ippl
e m
arks
, to
hav
e be
en r
olle
d in
to t
he s
ands
tone
wel
l-dev
elop
ed b
iotu
rbat
ion,
pla
nt d
ebri
s, b
ival
ves,
co
ral f
ragm
ents
and
ben
thic
for
amin
ifers
F8:
cros
s-st
ratif
ied
low
and
hig
h an
gle
tabu
lar-
plan
ar a
nd t
roug
h cr
oss-
stra
tifie
d,
C in
Klo
w-a
ngle
incl
ined
bed
s im
ply
depo
sitio
n by
sw
ash-
back
co
nglo
mer
ate
and
sand
ston
efin
e to
coa
rse,
mod
erat
ely
wel
l-sor
ted
sand
ston
e,
R in
Msw
ash
proc
esse
s re
pres
entin
g w
ave
mod
ified
bea
ch;
pebb
ly s
ands
tone
and
peb
ble
cong
lom
erat
e w
ith t
hin
para
llel f
ores
et b
eds;
R
in A
high
-ang
le t
abul
ar t
o tr
ough
cro
ss-s
trat
ified
bed
s ar
e oc
casi
onal
wav
e-ri
pple
d an
d hu
mm
ocky
cro
ss-s
trat
ified
fo
rmed
by
wav
e or
igin
ated
uni
dire
ctio
nal c
urre
nts
in t
he
sand
ston
e up
to
20 c
m t
hick
(Fi
gure
4E)
shor
efac
e; h
umm
ocky
cro
ss-s
trat
ified
san
dsto
nes
repr
esen
t st
orm
-gen
erat
ed f
low
s
F9:
norm
al
pebb
ly s
ands
tone
and
ver
y co
arse
to
fine
sand
ston
e Vc
in K
rapi
d de
posi
tion
from
hig
hly
conc
entr
ated
tur
bidi
ty c
urre
nts,
gr
aded
san
dsto
ne(F
igur
e 4F
) w
ith b
ed t
hick
ness
bet
wee
n 30
–50
cm a
nd
Vc in
Mfo
llow
ed b
y de
posi
tion
from
sus
pens
ion
fall-
out
duri
ng
up t
o 1m
. Fl
at t
o ir
regu
lar
base
s w
ith d
ecim
etri
c sc
ours
; a
Vc in
Ano
rmal
qui
et-w
ater
con
ditio
ns a
fter
the
den
sity
flo
w e
vent
(Bo
uma
1963
)fe
w c
m lo
ng f
lute
and
gro
ove
cast
s at
the
bas
e of
som
e of
th
e be
ds;
plan
ar t
o w
avy
bed
tops
; co
mm
on v
ertic
al a
nd
hori
zont
al b
urro
ws.
Typ
ical
nor
mal
gra
ding
with
Bou
ma
divi
sion
s of
Ta
and
Tb,
and/
or w
ith f
requ
ent
deve
lopm
ent
of T
c an
d Td
(a
com
plet
e Bo
uma
sequ
ence
(Ta
-Te)
is r
are)
. Ex
trab
asin
al a
nd/o
r in
trab
asin
al c
last
ics
incl
udin
g w
ell-r
ound
ed
bioc
last
ic f
ragm
ents
of
calc
areo
us a
lgae
, fo
ram
inife
rs,
biva
lves
and
cor
als
F10:
mas
sive
peb
bly
1 to
5 m
thi
ck,
late
rally
con
tinuo
us (
seve
ral h
undr
eds
of m
eter
s)
Vc in
Mco
hesi
ve s
ubaq
ueou
s m
uddy
deb
ris
flow
s (P
icke
ring
et a
l.19
86);
m
udst
one
tabu
lar
beds
con
sist
ing
of p
oorl
y so
rted
peb
bly
mud
ston
e w
ith s
harp
C
in K
rip-
up m
udst
one
clas
ts im
ply
eros
ion
of t
he lo
wer
mud
dy b
eds;
to
ero
sive
bas
es a
nd ir
regu
lar
tops
(Fi
gure
4G
); a
ngul
ar t
o w
ell-r
ound
ed
R in
Ath
e m
ixed
fau
na in
dica
te r
ewor
king
clas
ts a
nd r
ip-u
p m
udst
ones
ran
dom
ly f
loat
ing
in t
he c
lay-
rich
mud
dy m
atri
x;
vari
able
mat
rix
to p
ebbl
e ra
tio (
gene
rally
1:3
); s
helf
deri
ved
mix
ed f
auna
(b
enth
ic a
nd p
lank
tic f
oram
inife
rs a
nd c
oral
-alg
al f
ragm
ents
)
F11:
gra
ded
th
in-
to t
hick
-bed
ded,
late
rally
con
tinuo
us s
iltst
one/
mud
ston
e Vc
in K
low
-den
sity
tur
bidi
ty c
urre
nts
(Pic
keri
ng e
t al
.198
6, 1
989)
, si
ltsto
ne a
ndal
tern
atio
n (r
atio
aro
und
1:1)
; sh
arpl
y de
fined
fla
t ba
ses
and
tops
; Vc
in M
susp
ensi
on f
all o
ut a
nd/o
r os
cilla
ting
flow
s in
pro
-del
ta t
o sh
allo
w s
helf
mud
ston
elo
cally
org
anic
-ric
h m
ater
ial,
biot
urba
tion,
sta
rved
-rip
ples
, Vc
in A
wav
y be
ddin
g an
d ob
scur
e va
rve-
like
norm
al g
radi
ng f
rom
silt
y m
udst
one
to m
udst
one
(Fig
ure
4H).
F12:
mas
sive
to
A–
red
mud
ston
e: t
hin
to m
ediu
m (
up t
o 30
cm
),
Vc in
KA–
sub
aeri
al d
epos
ition
fro
m f
lood
-gen
erat
ed o
verb
ank
flow
spa
ralle
l lam
inat
edm
assi
ve t
o pa
ralle
l lam
inat
ed,
flat
bedd
ed,
Vc in
MB–
sus
pens
ion
depo
sitio
n in
a s
hallo
w s
tagn
ant
brac
kish
wat
er
silts
tone
-mud
ston
eta
bula
r to
lent
icul
ar b
eds
alte
rnat
ing
with
fin
e C
in A
body
to
low
ene
rgy,
nor
mal
sal
inity
sha
llow
she
lfsa
ndst
one/
silts
tone
incl
udin
g ra
re a
sym
met
rica
l rip
ples
C– s
edim
enta
tion
in a
rel
ativ
ely
deep
cla
stic
ope
n sh
elf
from
B–
mol
lusc
-ric
h m
udst
one:
gre
en t
o da
rk g
rey
colo
ured
and
su
spen
sion
fal
l-out
and
/or
low
-den
sity
tur
bidi
ty c
urre
nts
mas
sive
to
fain
tly la
min
ated
cla
yey
mud
ston
e in
clud
ing
thin
and
th
ick-
shel
led
gast
ropo
ds,
biva
lves
and
rar
e co
ral,
alga
l fra
gmen
ts
(Fig
ure
5A,
B);
allo
ctho
nous
thi
n co
al s
eam
s an
d ca
rbon
ised
pl
ant
frag
men
ts a
re c
omm
onC–
pla
nktic
for
amin
ifera
l mud
ston
e: la
tera
lly e
xten
sive
, th
inly
inte
rbed
ded
(1 t
o 10
cm
) gr
ey s
iltst
one
and
mud
ston
e w
ith v
aria
ble
carb
onat
e co
nten
t; s
harp
ly d
efin
ed b
ases
and
to
ps.
Shel
f de
rive
d m
ixed
fau
na a
nd/o
r in
-situ
plan
ktic
for
amin
ifers
, m
ainl
y gl
obig
erin
ids
and
pter
opod
s (t
hin
shel
led
gast
ropo
ds)
Tabl
e 1.
(Con
tinue
d)
A. Ç‹NER ET AL.
13
Faci
esD
escr
ipti
onO
ccur
renc
e *
Sugg
este
d Pr
oces
ses
and
Env
iron
men
t of
Dep
osit
ion
F13:
cha
otic
ally
th
ick
chao
tic m
ixtu
re o
f co
here
ntly
fol
ded
and
cont
orte
d Vc
in K
slum
p or
slid
e ge
nera
ted
hydr
opla
stic
def
orm
atio
n an
d/or
fo
lded
and
sa
ndst
one-
silts
tone
and
mud
ston
e be
ds (
Figu
re 5
C);
Vc in
Mde
bris
flo
ws
(Pic
keri
ng e
t al
.198
6, 1
989)
; co
here
ntly
fol
ded
and
brec
ciat
ed d
epos
itsbr
ecci
ated
and
bal
led
stra
ta a
nd r
ip-u
p cl
asts
ran
dom
ly
Vc in
Aco
ntor
ted
beds
impl
y hy
drop
last
ic d
efor
mat
ion;
bre
ccia
ted
and
float
ing
in a
mud
dy m
atri
x or
con
cent
rate
d at
the
upp
er le
vels
ri
p-up
cla
sts
indi
cate
ero
sion
of
the
unde
rlyi
ng b
eds
and
of t
he b
eds.
Ove
rlyi
ng a
nd u
nder
lyin
g de
posi
ts a
re g
ener
ally
co
nsid
erab
le in
tern
al d
efor
mat
ion
para
llel s
trat
ified
with
occ
asio
nal c
hann
el f
ills
F14:
ree
fal
fine-
to
very
coa
rse-
grai
ned,
ang
ular
to
roun
ded,
Vc
in K
reef
fla
nks;
fau
lt-ge
nera
ted,
ree
fal s
helf
deri
ved
debr
ites,
de
brite
s an
dcl
ast-
and
/or
mat
rix-
supp
orte
d re
efal
deb
rite
s w
ith
Vc in
Aol
isto
liths
and
cal
citu
rbid
ites
(Coo
k &
Mul
lins
1983
);
isol
ated
blo
cks
occa
sion
al is
olat
ed a
nd o
utsi
zed
bloc
ks (
up t
o 8
m)
C in
Mou
tsiz
ed b
lock
s re
pres
ent
rock
fal
ls r
ecog
nise
d by
the
em
bedd
ed in
a v
ery
fine-
grai
ned
and
para
llel-s
trat
ified
un
derl
ying
def
orm
ed b
eds
or r
ock
slid
es
depo
sit;
thi
n to
ver
y th
ick
beds
with
fla
t to
sco
ured
(P
icke
ring
et
al.1
986;
198
9)ba
ses
and
flat
tops
; m
assi
ve t
o no
rmal
gra
ded
F15:
pel
loid
al
thic
k, p
aral
lel b
edde
d, v
ery
fine-
grai
ned
and
mod
erat
ely
Vc in
Mlo
w e
nerg
y in
ner
shel
f/sh
elf
lago
on w
ith r
estr
icte
d w
ater
fo
ssili
fero
us li
me
wel
l-sor
ted,
fos
silif
erou
s lim
e m
udst
one-
wac
kest
one
(Fig
ure
5D);
Vc
in K
circ
ulat
ion;
car
boni
sed
grai
ns m
ay s
ugge
st t
rans
port
atio
n fr
om
mud
ston
e-w
acke
ston
eco
mm
only
pel
loid
al w
ith d
isar
ticul
ated
to
wel
l-pre
serv
ed
Vc in
Aa
near
by m
arsh
y (p
eat)
env
iron
men
t th
at m
ight
hav
e be
en
gast
ropo
ds,
biva
lves
, ec
hino
ids,
mili
olid
-Bor
elis
dom
inat
ed
subj
ecte
d to
pea
t de
velo
pmen
t; t
he c
lays
and
qua
rtz
grai
ns
bent
hic
fora
min
ifers
com
pris
ing
Bore
lis,
Arch
aias
, Elp
hidi
um,
mig
ht h
ave
been
intr
oduc
ed in
to t
he d
epos
ition
al s
ite b
y cu
rren
ts
Text
ular
ia,
Het
eros
tegi
na,
Amph
iste
gina
, Rot
alia
, M
iliol
id,
and/
or e
olia
n pr
oces
ses;
fro
mbo
idal
pyr
ite s
ugge
st r
educ
tive
envi
ronm
ent.
bryo
zoa
and
cora
lline
alg
ae f
ragm
ents
; ra
re t
o co
mm
on q
uart
z gr
ains
, ca
rbon
ised
pla
nt,
ligni
te f
ragm
ents
and
fro
mbo
idal
pyr
ite
F16:
alg
al,
po
orly
- to
mod
erat
ely-
sort
ed,
mas
sive
to
thic
kly
para
llel-b
edde
d,
Vc in
Mri
ch a
nd d
iver
se f
auna
of
bent
hic
fora
min
ifers
with
coa
ted,
be
nthi
c fo
ram
inife
ral
whi
te c
oral
line
alga
l, be
nthi
c fo
ram
inife
ral w
acke
ston
e-pa
ckst
one;
Vc
in K
abra
ded,
mic
ritiz
ed b
iocl
asts
and
rou
nded
intr
acla
sts
indi
cate
w
acke
ston
e-pa
ckst
one
rich
and
div
erse
bio
clas
ts c
ompr
isin
g bo
th s
mal
l (Bo
relis
, Tex
tula
ria,
Vc in
Alo
w t
o m
oder
ate
ener
gy,
norm
al s
alin
ity s
hallo
w s
helf
clos
e to
El
phid
ium
, Gyp
sina
, Rot
alid
and
Mili
olid
) an
d la
rge
bent
hics
w
ave-
base
; m
iliol
id-
and
Bore
lis-r
ich
wac
kest
one-
pack
ston
e (H
eter
oste
gina
, Ope
rcul
ina,
Ace
rvul
ina,
Mio
gyps
ina,
Am
phis
tegi
na,
repr
esen
t sh
elf
lago
on w
ith r
estr
icte
d w
ater
cir
cula
tion;
larg
e Ar
chai
as, P
ener
oplid
and
Vic
tori
ellid
), c
oral
line
alga
e (L
ithot
ham
nium
,be
nthi
c fo
ram
inife
r-be
arin
g w
acke
ston
e-pa
ckst
one
indi
cate
s Li
thop
hyllu
m, M
esop
hylli
um),
biv
alve
s, g
astr
opod
s, e
chin
oids
, br
yzoa
and
re
lativ
ely
deep
er w
ater
ope
n sh
elf;
onc
olith
s an
d rh
odol
iths
are
herm
atyp
ic c
oral
fra
gmen
ts;
wel
l-dev
elop
ed o
ncol
iths
and
rhod
olite
s,
limite
d to
pro
tect
ed s
helf
lago
ons
and
turb
ulen
t en
viro
nmen
ts
serp
ulid
(D
itrup
a) t
ubes
, D
asyc
lada
cean
alg
ae (
Hal
imed
a) (
Figu
re 5
E)on
the
mar
gin
of t
he o
pen
shel
f.
F17:
alg
al,
bent
hic
wel
l-sor
ted,
fin
e- t
o m
ediu
m-g
rain
ed p
acks
tone
-gra
inst
one;
Vc
in M
high
ene
rgy
beac
h an
d sh
oal e
nvir
onm
ent
of
fora
min
ifera
l fla
t to
low
-ang
le in
clin
ed a
ccre
tiona
ry b
eds
with
rar
e to
Vc
in K
an o
pen
shel
f w
ith a
nor
mal
sal
inity
pack
ston
e-gr
ains
tone
abun
dant
Cal
liana
ssa
burr
ows;
occ
asio
nal w
ave
ripp
les;
ric
h Vc
in A
and
dive
rsifi
ed b
enth
ic f
auna
com
pris
ing
Mili
olid
, Bo
relis
, Ar
chai
as, H
eter
oste
gina
with
rar
e Am
phis
tegi
na, T
extu
lari
a,
Rot
alid
and
rar
e pl
ankt
ic G
lobi
geri
nid;
som
e bi
ocla
sts,
in
clud
ing
frag
men
ts o
f bi
valv
es,
gast
ropo
ds,
Ost
rea
and
Pori
tes,
lit
hocl
asts
and
pel
oids
F18:
cor
al-a
lgal
th
in-
to t
hick
- be
dded
, po
or t
o m
oder
atel
y so
rted
, Vc
in M
high
ene
rgy,
ree
f fla
t to
off
-ree
f; e
xtra
clas
ts in
dica
te
grai
nsto
ne-r
udst
one
alga
l, co
ral g
rain
ston
e-ru
dsto
ne,
with
wel
l-rou
nded
Vc
in K
rew
orki
ng f
rom
a n
earb
y cl
astic
nea
rsho
re s
ettin
glim
esto
ne-
and
ophi
olite
-der
ived
ext
racl
asts
, Vc
in A
larg
e ov
ertu
rned
cor
als
and
roda
liths
(Fi
gure
6A)
F19:
mas
sive
cor
al-a
lgal
sm
all,
isol
ated
, m
assi
ve m
ound
-like
lim
esto
ne b
odie
s Vc
in M
deve
lopm
ent
of is
olat
ed c
oral
gal r
eef
grow
th (
patc
h re
efs)
bo
unds
tone
mad
e up
of
in s
ituco
ralg
al f
ram
ewor
k (F
igur
e 6B
–F)
cons
istin
g Vc
in K
in a
war
m,
wel
l aer
ated
sha
llow
mar
ine
shel
f (p
hotic
zon
e)
of h
igh
to lo
w d
iver
sity
her
mat
ypic
cor
al c
olon
ies
(mai
nly
Vc in
Aw
ith lo
w t
o m
oder
ate
ener
gy le
vel a
nd n
orm
al s
alin
ity in
Ta
rbel
last
raea
, Hel
iast
raea
, Fav
ites,
Fav
ia, C
aula
stra
ea, A
quita
nast
raea
, ge
nera
l; th
e lo
w-d
iver
sity
cor
al f
ram
ewor
k su
gges
ts s
tres
sed
Clad
ocor
a, A
cant
hast
raea
, Por
ites,
and
Sty
loph
ora)
, w
ith c
oral
line
envi
ronm
ent;
the
loca
l pre
senc
e of
sol
itary
cor
als
may
al
gae
(Lith
otha
mni
um, L
ithop
hyllu
m, M
esop
hyllu
m),
enc
rust
ing
repr
esen
t a
rela
tivel
y de
eper
bat
hym
etry
fora
min
ifera
Ace
rvul
ina,
and
min
or s
olita
ry c
oral
s (L
ithop
hylli
a,
Syzy
goph
yllia
, M
ussi
dae)
in p
lace
s. s
edim
ents
fill
ing
the
spac
es
betw
een
the
fram
e-bu
ilder
s lo
cally
var
ies
from
cla
yey
lime
mud
ston
e to
fin
e to
coa
rse-
grai
ned
bioc
last
ic w
acke
ston
e an
d pa
ckst
one
with
ove
rtur
ned
and
frag
men
ted
cora
ls
*Vc–
very
com
mon
; C–
com
mon
; R
–ra
re.
M,
K,
A–M
anav
gat,
Kar
puzç
ay a
nd A
ksu
sub-
basi
ns.
Tabl
e 1.
(Con
tinue
d)
The coralgal reefs in the fan delta deposits are mainlycharacterized by rich and diverse coral assemblages,mainly composed of massive domal, spherical andsubspherical coral frameworks, reflecting a relativelyshallow, moderate-energy, normal salinity marineenvironment. The coral framework is characteristicallycomposed of densely packed, in-situ coral assemblagesdominated by Tarbellastraea, Heliastraea, Porites andStylophora, with some large massive coral coloniesreaching up to 60 cm in size. Some broken andoverturned colonies are observed within the framework,which is bounded by encrusting coralline algae(Lithothamnium, Lithophyllum). The reef bodies are flat-based domal forms exhibiting flat, irregular to smoothconvex-up upper surfaces, without any distinct coralzonation (Figure 6).
A tentative reconstruction of the Manavgat sub-basinduring the deposition of the Tepekli Conglomerate isshown on Figure 9. Two fan delta complexes are present,separated by an elevated area (‘Alanya High’) attested bythe locally preserved terrestrial scree deposits extendingfrom Oymapınar Dam to the south of Fersin. In the NW,the alluvial fan recorded in the Sırtköy-Sevinç areaextends southwards into a large fan delta, with a narrowbranch coming from the area of Kepez village. In the SE,the Alarahan fan delta was mainly fed from the east andlocally from the north according to clast composition,current direction, and facies distribution (Karabıyıko¤lu etal. 2000).
The coarse-grained Tepekli Conglomerate,represented by southwards prograding coastal alluvialfan/fan delta deposits, indicates a marked increase in thesupply of coarse clastic sediments eroded from thenorthern/northeastern sources, implying that thenorthern margin of the Manavgat sub-basin wascharacterized by an area of considerably high reliefresulting from a regionally formed tectonic uplift (Monodet al. 2006).
The Oymapınar Limestone: Late Burdigalian–LanghianReefal Carbonate Shelf. The Oymapınar Limestone is bestobserved in the Manavgat sub-basin and outcrops as aNW–SE-trending narrow belt that onlaps the TepekliConglomerate and the Alanya Massif northwards (Figures7 & 8). It is a 20–150-m-thick, deepening-upwardshallow marine carbonate shelf succession and representsan initial extensive marine transgression in the basin.
At the southeastern end of the basin, the OymapınarLimestone overlies the Alarahan fan delta deposits with asharp flat contact. It is mainly composed of coarse-grained large benthic foraminiferal wackestone-packstone (F16) containing small isolated coral reefs(F19). The overall sequence suggests carbonatedeposition in a relatively deeper-water outer-shelfenvironment.
To the northwest along the road to Ahmetler village(Figure 7), the Oymapınar Limestone directly overlies themeta-carbonates of the Alanya Massif. Here, theOymapınar Limestone is dominated by a succession ofparallel bedded benthic foraminiferal wackestone-packstone (F16) and packstone-grainstone (F17) withshallow, mound-like stacked buildups of algal, benthicforaminiferal wackestone packstone and small coral reefpatches (F19), which grade laterally (basinwards) intomixed benthic-planktic foraminiferal wackestone-packstone and marl (F12C). The details of the beddingconfiguration and facies characteristics reveal thepresence of a shelf margin algal mound complex withwell-developed basin- and shelfward-dipping bedsinterfingering with horizontally stratified inter-moundbeds (Figure 10).
Further northwest, at the Oymapınar Dam site (Figure11), the Oymapınar Limestone overlies the metamorphicrocks of the Alanya Massif unconformably, where avertical sequence of up to 30-m-thick Microcodium-bearing basal breccia (F1) (see inset in Figure 11) gradesvertically through pebbly to sandy miliolid limestone toreefal shelf carbonate. This sequence represents a locallydeveloped subaerial slope scree or small colluvial coneevolving into shallow, wave-reworked coastal colluviumat the initial stage of the transgression of the carbonateshelf.
A tentative palaeoenvironmental reconstruction of theOymapınar Limestone and the Tepekli Conglomerate ispresented along a synthetic 2D view (Figure 12). In theNW, the Tepekli Conglomerate is represented as asubaerial alluvial fan filling deeply incised valleys, as seenin the Sevinç area. To the south, the conglomeratesprogressively pass into a fan delta environment indicatedby patch reefs. Silty clays (F12C) appear in the southeasternmost section (Örenflehir) and are interpreted as adeeper and distal facies of the Tepekli Conglomerate.Above, the distribution of patch reefs and algal mounds in
SEDIMENTARY EVOLUTION OF THE ANTALYA BASIN
14
A. Ç‹NER ET AL.
15
ME
DIT
ER
RA
NE
AN
SE
A
Fer
sin
Alar
a
R.
Manavgat R.
LE
GE
ND
Kar
puzç
ay F
m.
(Ser
rava
lian
to M
essi
nian
)
Gec
elem
e F
m. (
Lang
hian
- S
erra
valia
n) in
clud
ing:
Ç
akal
lar
Bre
ccia
Tepe
kli
Con
glom
erat
e (B
urdi
galia
n ?)
Tc
Ka
?
J-K
AN
Ge
Ka
Ka
AM
Ala
nya
Mas
sif
met
amor
phic
s
Ant
alya
Nap
pes
Mes
ozoi
c ca
rbon
ates
Tria
ssic
sha
les
AM
Op
Op
Op
İğde
li
Sid
e
Ala
raha
n Ç
akal
lar
Ts
Ka
Ge
Ça
AM
AN
J-K
Ça
Tc
Tc
A
Öre
nşeh
ir
N
Ge
Op
Plio
cene
-Hol
ocen
e
depo
sits
to K
onya
Ank
ara
Ispa
rta
İsta
nbul
Man
avga
t R
Late
Eoc
ene
thru
st
(sou
thw
ards
)
Late
Cre
tace
ous
thru
st
(nor
thw
ards
)
Gün
eyci
k
Ahm
etle
r
Kep
ez
31
37
3700
'
Ant
alya
Kar
puz
R.
Çen
ger R.
Gec
elem
e
A A
' cr
oss
sect
ion
(Fig
. 8)
Y.
Sır
tköy
Ac
MA
NA
VG
AT
to
Ant
alya
Ada
na
0 5
10 K
m
Sev
inç
AM
D
am
Erk
ibet
T.
Bel
en T
.
La
ke
Man
avga
t
sub
-bas
in
3130'
3130'
3700
'
Oym
apın
ar L
imes
tone
(B
urdi
galia
n-La
nghi
an)
Oym
apin
ar
K K F
KK
F: K
ırkk
avak
Fau
lt
30
Ts
A'
Fau
lt U
zunl
ar
Figu
re 7
.G
eolo
gica
l map
of
the
Man
avga
t su
b-ba
sin.
Mod
ified
fro
m K
arab
ıyık
o¤lu
et
al.
(200
0).
SEDIMENTARY EVOLUTION OF THE ANTALYA BASIN
16
AM
NA
AN
MC
50
0
1000
1500
B
elen
Tep
e
Kay
abaş
ı K
ocak
aya
Tepe
AN
Tc
Gec
elem
e m
arls
A
A'
SW
N
E
0 m
500
1000
1500
Ka
0 10
00 m
J-K
Erk
ibet
Tep
e
Tc
Tepe
kli C
ongl
omer
ate
(?B
urdi
galia
n)
Oym
apin
ar L
st.
(Bur
diga
lian-
Lang
hian
)
Oym
apın
ar
Lst.
Gec
elem
e Fm
. (L
angh
ian)
K
arpu
zçay
Fm
. (S
erra
valia
n-To
rtoni
an)
0 m
Tc
J-K
Ka
Ge
Ge
1401
m
505m
Figu
re 8
.R
epre
sent
ativ
e cr
oss-
sect
ion
from
the
Man
avga
t su
b-ba
sin.
Loc
atio
n in
Fig
ure
7. M
odifi
ed f
rom
Kar
abıy
ıko¤
lu e
t al
. (2
000)
.
A. Ç‹NER ET AL.
17
F
ersi
n
Oym
apın
ar
Ahm
etle
r
AM
Ala
raha
n
Tc
Gec
elem
e
Bel
en T
.
MA
NA
VG
AT
Hal
itağa
lar
AL
AR
AH
AN
F
AN
DE
LT
A
AL
AN
YA
HIG
H
Kep
ez
Ala
raha
n
fan
delta
ou
tcro
ps
cont
inen
tal r
ed
brec
cias
A
lany
a m
etam
orph
ics
mai
n flo
w
dire
ctio
ns
(infe
rred
)
Sır
tköy
FL
UV
IAL
T
O
AL
LU
VIA
L
FA
NS
(SL
OP
E
S
CR
EE
)
*
*
*
*
* *
* *
a a
a a
b b
Sev
inç
*
0 5
10 k
m
Bey
diği
n
*
SE
VİN
Ç
FA
N D
EL
TA
Dam
reef
s
Sırt
köy
allu
vial
fan
fan
delta
ou
tcro
ps
Erk
ibet
T.
?
(J-K
)
?
?
?
pala
eo-
Man
avga
t Riv
er
Ürü
nlü
Tc
Tc
Tc Tc
Tc
Tc
?
Tc
Figu
re 9
.Pr
obab
le d
istr
ibut
ion
of p
alae
oenv
iron
men
ts d
urin
g th
e de
posi
tion
of t
he T
epek
li Co
nglo
mer
ate
(Tc,
Bur
diga
lian)
. M
odifi
ed f
rom
Kar
abıy
ıko¤
lu e
t al
. (2
000)
.
the Oymapınar Limestone suggests a shallow marinecarbonate shelf deepening and thinning to the south andsoutheast (Örenflehir), with a relatively shallower innershelf characterized by algal, foraminiferal wackestone-packstone facies and rarer patch reefs in the north(Sevinç area).
The Geceleme Formation: Late Langhian–Serravalian Baseof Slope-Basin Floor Fan. The Geceleme Formation iscomposed of interbedded marl, mudstone, siltstone andvery fine sandstone, characterized by a rich plankticmicrofauna (F11 and F12C), occasional chaotic depositsand isolated reefal blocks (F13 and F14). It is exposed inthe central and eastern parts of the Manavgat sub-basinwhere it conformably overlies the Oymapınar Limestone(Figures 7 & 11). It is overlain by the coarser KarpuzçayFormation. Reef-derived breccias (F14) that are locallypresent in the lower portion of the Geceleme Formationform the Çakallar Member (see below). Abundantplanktic foraminifera belonging to the Orbulina universa
and Globigerina nepenthes biozones indicate Lower andUpper Serravalian, respectively.
The overall hemipelagic character of thesedimentation, with occasional calciturbidites, slumps androck falls as well as the local occurrence of the ÇakallarMember (see below) suggests deposition in a locally fault-bounded base of slope setting.
The Çakallar Member: Fault-Generated Breccia.Karabıyıko¤lu et al. (2000) considered locally occurringcoarse polymictic breccias as a member within thelowermost part of the Geceleme Formation, even thoughit was defined as the Çakallar ‘Formation’ by Akay et al.(1985) (Figure 7). Along the main road from Manavgatto Konya, about 2 km south of the Fersin village, theÇakallar Member is nearly 110 m thick and directlyoverlies the Oymapınar Limestone. It is represented by asuccession of sharp flat based or channelized, chaotic anddisorganized polymictic breccias containing metamorphic
SEDIMENTARY EVOLUTION OF THE ANTALYA BASIN
18
Figure 10. Field view of the basinward prograding (clinoformal) algal-mound complex of the Oymapınar Limestone (O) at Ahmetler. Note theonlapping relation of the Geceleme Formation (G) mudstone. Dotted lines represent large-scale bedding configurations. Thesection is approximately 30 m thick. From Karabıyıko¤lu et al. (2000).
A. Ç‹NER ET AL.
19
M a
n a
v g
a t
R
i v e
r
po
lym
icti
c
bre
ccia
c:
gre
en s
chis
ts
a: fr
agm
ente
d P
erm
ian
blo
cks
w
ith
(inse
t)
in
th
e m
atri
x (L
. Mio
cen
e)
Ala
nya
M
assi
f
scre
e
to M
anav
gat
coar
se
san
dst
on
e
0 20
0
Km
Oym
apın
ar
dam
to th
e da
m
b: b
recc
ia
P: P
erm
ian
met
alim
esto
ne
a
b
b
b
c
c
P
a
P P
M
M
M::
Oym
apın
ar L
imes
ton
e(L
ang
hia
n)
?Lo
wer
-Mid
dle
M
ioce
ne
Perm
ian
met
alim
esto
ne
Mic
roco
dium
Low
er M
ioce
ne
mud
ston
e
Mic
roco
dium
Figu
re 1
1.O
ymap
ınar
Dam
site
: fie
ld s
ketc
h sh
owin
g th
e tr
ansg
ress
ion
of t
he O
ymap
ınar
lim
esto
ne u
pon
Mic
roco
dium
-bea
ring
con
tinen
tal
brec
cias
ove
rlyi
ng t
he P
erm
ian
met
alim
esto
nes
of t
he A
lany
a M
assi
f. I
nset
: tw
o M
icro
codi
um s
ectio
ns in
the
Mio
cene
mud
ston
e fil
ling
the
frac
ture
s of
a m
etal
imes
tone
blo
ck.
Scal
e: 0
.25
mm
.
SEDIMENTARY EVOLUTION OF THE ANTALYA BASIN
20
Öre
nşeh
ir S
N
A
lara
han
Sev
inç
Ahm
etle
r
Gec
elem
e G
üney
cik
Kep
ez
Erk
ibet
T.
(AM
)
allu
vial
fan/
co
ntin
enta
l br
ecci
as
fan
delta
an
d pa
tch
reef
s
dist
al
silts
pa
tch
reef
al
gal
limes
tone
al
gal
mou
nd
deb
ris
flow
(AN
) T
riass
ic s
hale
s
(J-K
)
Sır
tköy
O
ymap
ınar
dam
İğ
deli
inci
sed
va
lley
(no
scal
e)
Figu
re 1
2.An
inte
rpre
tativ
e N
–S c
ross
-sec
tion
acro
ss t
he e
aste
rn p
art
of t
he M
anav
gat
sub-
basi
n sh
owin
g fa
cies
dis
trib
utio
n of
the
Tep
ekli
cong
lom
erat
e an
d th
e O
ymap
ınar
lim
esto
neas
a s
ynth
etic
2D
sec
tion,
rep
rese
ntin
g an
ove
rall
tran
sgre
ssiv
e su
cces
sion
fro
m a
lluvi
al f
an/f
an d
elta
com
plex
to
narr
ow r
eefa
l she
lf ca
rbon
ate
and
talu
s sl
ope.
Mod
ified
from
Kar
abıy
ıko¤
lu e
t al
. (2
000)
.
blocks up to 8 meters long (F1 and F14), interbeddedwith sandstones and mudstones (F9 and F11). Thesechaotic deposits thin out within a few km southwards intothe Geceleme Formation mudstones.
The northwestern boundary of the Çakallar Memberoutcrop is a conspicuous fault scarp, which can be tracedover 2.5 km south of Fersin village and offsets theOymapınar Limestone by more than 400 m. Thecontinuation of this fault loses displacement within theGeceleme mudstones, and the overlying KarpuzçayFormation is not affected (see map Figure 7). Furthersouth, on both sides of the Örenflehir anticline, theÇakallar Member thins out and disappears westwards.The limited extent of the Çakallar Member and thenorthward increase in size of the blocks towards the syn-sedimentary Fersin fault (Figure 13) are best interpretedas the result of the proximal redeposition of blocks fallenfrom the upthrown Oymapınar shelf and Alanya Massifbasement, during deposition of the Geceleme mudstones.
The Karpuzçay Formation: Serravalian–Tortonian–Messinian Fan-Delta Complex. The Karpuzçay Formationoutcrops as a large, continuous belt across the Manavgatsub-basin (Figure 7) and extends westwards into theKöprüçay sub-basin. It consists of almost 300 m ofinterbedded calciturbidites, mudstones and siltstones (F7,F9, F11 and F12C) commonly interrupted by erosive-based matrix- to clast-supported conglomeratic horizonsa few to several meters thick (F2 and F3), and occasionalchaotic deposits (F13 and F14). Plant debris, groovecasts and Bouma sequences are common in thesandstone-mudstone couplets. This formation representsthe final stage of filling in the Manavgat sub-basin duringthe Tortonian–Messinian. It is unconformably overlain bythe fluvial deposits and marine marls of the EskiköyFormation (Lower Pliocene).
The Karpuzçay Formation calciturbidites reflect along-ranging phase of tectonic activity, which causeduplift of the Taurus hinterland and the shelfal area northof the basin. The coarser facies encountered occasionallywithin the Karpuzçay Formation can be interpreted interms of tectonically generated mass-flow processes,including high-density turbidity currents, slumps anddebris flows in and around a fan delta environment.
Formation and Evolution of the Manavgat Sub-basin
The Tepekli Conglomerate represents the initial infill of apre-existing topography that marks a long period of upliftand subsequent erosion of the Western Taurus fromEarly Oligocene to earliest Miocene. Two major coastalalluvial fan/fan delta systems have been identified: theSevinç coastal alluvial fan-fan delta in the NW and theAlarahan fan delta complex in the SE. Between these twomajor drainage systems, a mountainous region is impliedby the discontinuous presence of red monomict brecciasof terrestrial origin (scree), implying steep slopes in theimmediate vicinity. According to the clast provenance, theSevinç and Alarahan fan deltas were the output of twomajor drainage systems tapping into source areas in thenewly created mountainous area to the N and NE, in thewestern Taurus (cf. Monod et al. 2006). The fan deltacomplexes prograded as conglomerate-dominated bodiesinto a shallow shelf area. Globigerinid-bearing mudstoneand siltstone beds (Burdigalian) accumulated as pro-deltadeposits in the deeper shelf area, indicating a gentlysouthward inclined ramp-like open marine system.
A sharp rise of relative sea level and a decreasing rateof sediment supply due to the progressive denudation ofrelief resulted in the deposition of the transgressiveOymapınar Limestone (Late Burdigalian to Langhian). Itonlaps the fan delta deposits and the basement, with agentle southward deepening trend documented by thedistribution of the reefs.
After this tectonically quiescent episode, a suddendeepening is documented by the onset of fine-graineddeposition of the Geceleme Formation (Langhian–Serravalian) with pelagic fauna overlying the patch-reefsof the Oymapınar shelf carbonates. The Çakallar Memberbreccias and debris flows that locally appear in the lowerpart of the Geceleme Formation substantiates the tectonicorigin of this sudden deepening. Syn-sedimentary faultingcan be documented in places (Fersin, Oymapınar Dam) byinterbedded fragments derived from the Oymapınar shelfcarbonates, by the distribution of the breccias and by theidentification of the fault planes themselves, all implyingthe fragmentation and sinking of the Oymapınarcarbonate shelf.
The succeeding sedimentation consists of the filling ofthe newly created accommodation space with an overallcoarsening-upward succession from the Geceleme to
A. Ç‹NER ET AL.
21
Karpuzçay formations. The gravity-induced character ofmost of the Karpuzçay Formation, the sharp passagefrom high-density currents and debris flows to turbulentcoarse-grained fan delta, suggests that the sedimentationwas largely controlled by repeated uplifts of thehinterland during Late Miocene. A differential uplift maybe inferred from clast composition of the debris flows,which implies strong erosion of the Alanya Massif and itsMiocene carbonate cover in the east (Alarahan area). Incontrast, Mesozoic limestone clasts predominate in thewest of the basin, reflecting a larger uplift in this part ofthe Taurus chain. Although discontinuous, the presence ofdebris flow deposits throughout the KarpuzçayFormation implies repeated influx of coarse material fromnearby sources, and suggests a persistent elevation inlanduntil the end of Miocene (Flecker et al. 1995; Monod etal. 2006). The filling of the Manavgat sub-basin ended
with Messinian (Bizon et al. 1974) and a weak N–Scompression subsequently produced large open folds inthe Miocene deposits before the deposition of theundeformed Pliocene fluvial conglomerates and marinemarls (Eskiköy Formation).
Köprüçay Sub-basin
Structural and Stratigraphic Setting
The Köprüçay sub-basin occupies a central position withinthe Antalya Basin. It is separated from the Aksu sub-basinby the promontory of the Late Miocene Aksu Thrust, butto the south it communicates openly with the Manavgatsub-basin. It is bounded by the Beyda¤ları autochthon tothe north, the Antalya Nappes to the west and theKırkkavak Fault (KKF) and the Anamas-Aksekiautochthon to the east (Monod et al. 2000, 2001)
SEDIMENTARY EVOLUTION OF THE ANTALYA BASIN
22
Fersin
Uzunlar
0 5 km
N
Ge
Alarahan
Örenşehir
Çakallar
(present shore line)
(probable Langhian shore) line)
present outcrop of the marls
present outcrop of the breccias
probable former extent of the Geceleme Fm.
probable former extent of the Çakallar mb.
Alanya Massif
synsedimentary fault
Geceleme
AM
Fault
Ge
Ge
Ge
Figure 13. Extension of the Çakallar breccias generated by the syn-sedimentary Fersin fault, within the Geceleme Formation. Modifiedfrom Karabıyıko¤lu et al. (2000).
(Figures 1 & 14). Blumenthal (1951) and Dumont &Kerey (1975) carried out local studies in the southern andnorthern parts of the basin. The stratigraphy andstructure of the southern part of the Köprüçay sub-basinwas first described in detail by Poisson et al. (1983), andAkay et al. (1985) provided a comprehensive study. Lateron, Flecker (1995) and Flecker et al. (1995) provided anaccount of the main sedimentary processes. Recently,Deynoux et al. (2005) gave a detailed description andinterpretation of the facies in the central and northernparts of the basin.
The sedimentary fill of the Köprüçay sub-basin ischaracterized by locally developed reefal shelf carbonates(Oymapınar Limestone), the mudstones and turbiditicsandstones of the Karpuzçay Formation, and theKöprüçay Conglomerate that formed along the northernand western rims of the basin (Çiner et al. 2003).According to the spatial distribution of the coarsesediments of the Köprüçay Conglomerate, three distinctsets of axially and transversally derived alluvial fan-fandelta complexes (AFD) are recognized, which aresubdivided into members (see Figure 14): (1) the SelgeAFD in the Beflkonak-Selge-Bozburun area; (2) the KesmeAFD in the Yeflilba¤-Kesme-‹bifller area; (3) the Yaka AFDin the ‹ncebel to ‹kizpınar area.
Facies Architecture and Depositional Environments
At the base, the Burdigalian–Tortonian fill of theKöprüçay sub-basin is represented by reefal shelfcarbonates (Oymapınar Limestone) which are overlain byfluvial to marine coarse basin margin clastics (KöprüçayConglomerate), followed by finer-grained marine clastics(Karpuzçay Formation) that filled up the deeper and distalparts of the basin.
The Oymapınar Limestone: Burdigalian–Langhian ReefalCarbonate Shelf. It is locally exposed along thenorthwestern rim as a NE–SW-trending narrow beltbetween Ballıbucak and De¤irmenözü (Figure 14). Thisformation dips eastwards (5 to 35°), toward the basincentre and rests westward on the limestones of theBeyda¤ları autochthon. In a 100–150-m-thick sectionnear Ballıbucak village, about 20–30 m of clast-supportedbreccia (F1) with red to yellow muddy matrix occursbetween the Mesozoic basement and the OymapınarLimestone. The breccia contact on the basement is sharp
and erosional, whereas the passage to the limestonesappears transitional. Between Bolasan and De¤irmenözü,the Oymapınar Limestone is directly overlain by the fine-grained sandstone-mudstone alternations of theKarpuzçay Formation. On the other hand, to thesoutheast of Bolasan, the Köprüçay Conglomerates locallyonlap onto the Oymapınar Limestone (Figure 15).
The reefs recognized within the shelf limestones aredeveloped on algal benthic foraminiferal wackestone-packstone (F16) and are composed of Porites,Tarbellastraea, Heliastraea, Aquitanastraea, Favites,Favia, Plesiastraea, Mussismilia, Turbinaria and Oxypora,indicating a shallow normal salinity carbonate shelf.However, near Ballıbucak, a local occurrence of solitarycorals (Lithophyllia and Syzygophyllia), suggests arelatively deeper marine environment, within thesubphotic zone.
The Karpuzçay Formation: Serravalian–?Tortonian OpenMarine Clastic Shelf. This formation consists of thinparallel-bedded to laminated mudstone and decimetrethick alternations of normally graded calcareoussandstone with sharp flat bases and occasional rippledtops (F9, F11 and F12C). Thickening-up successions ofsandstone beds wedging out laterally over hundreds ofmetres occur locally. These sandy alternations becomefrequent in the upper part of the formation, and someindividual beds show typical Bouma sequences. Large- tosmall-scale fold and slump structures (F13) as well asinternal unconformities suggest syn-sedimentaryinstability and post-depositional deformation (Figure 5C).
The Karpuzçay Formation indicates sedimentationmainly from suspension fall out in a quiet offshore marineenvironment, with sandy rippled intercalations,representing distal turbiditic flows. Samples contain shelfderived debris and in-situ planktic foraminifera, mainlyglobigerinids, indicate a pelagic environment.
The Köprüçay Conglomerate: Langhian–?TortonianAlluvial Fan/Fan-Delta Complex. All conglomeratic facies(F2 to F8) described in Table 1 are present in theKöprüçay Conglomerate. A more detailed description ofthe facies and their depositional environments is given byDeynoux et al. (2005). The conglomerates correspond tospecific subenvironments of three distinct alluvial fan-fandelta systems (AFDs) that developed along the tectonicallyactive northern and eastern margins of the basin.
A. Ç‹NER ET AL.
23
SEDIMENTARY EVOLUTION OF THE ANTALYA BASIN
24
0 5 km
KASIMLAR
SARP DAĞ
BEYDİLİ
2548
BESKONAK
(AN)
(TR)
(K)
(AN) (J-K)
(TR)
(TR)
BURMAHAN
KIZILCAKAYA
GEBETAŞ
INCEBEL PASS
Divlim Tepe
Düden Yayla
KESME
KIRK- KAVAK
KIR
KK
AVA
K F
AU
LT
(KK
F)
2268
2405
2181
2273
1980
R
KARTOZ
K Ö P R Ü
K Ö P R Ü ÇAY
DÖKÜK DAĞ
İKİZPINAR
EMERDİN PASS
DEĞİRMENÖZÜ
SARIALAN YAYLA
SARAYCIK YAYLA
III
I
ÇOBANİSA
(inferred flow direction)
R
R
R
R
R
PINARGÖZÜ
37° 07'30''
37° 40'
31°
00
31°
22'3
0''
F6
Altin Kaya (SELGE)
R R
SARIKÖK
R YAKA
Ankara
Isparta
T U R K E Y
İstanbul 31°
37° Antalya Adana
(inferred)
R
R
R
R
R
BOLASAN
YEŞİLBAĞ
İBİŞLER
T R
SultancıkT.
31°
II
Kesme-Dökükdağ breccias
Yeşilbağ mb.
Plio-Quaternary scree
Karpuzçay mudstones
Bozburun mb.
Upper Selge mb.
Lower Selge mb.
interbedded limestone breccia bed
reef
Sarıkök mb.
Mesozoic carbonates Antalya Units
conglomerates limestone breccias
flow direction:
İbişler-İncebel mb.
R
KÖ
PR
ÜÇ
AY
CO
NG
LO
ME
RA
TE
S
(J-K) (TR) (AN)
Oymapınar Limestone
Sarıalan-Saraycık mb.
Yaka mb.
P
P
fault
thrust
Ç A Y
BALLIBUCAK BOZBURUN
DAĞ 2505
Figure 14. Geological setting and Miocene facies map of the northern part of the Köprüçay sub-basin. Modified from Deynoux et al. (2005).
Facies represented by hyperconcentrated density flowand cohesive debris flow deposits were both encounteredat the transition between the Karpuzçay Formation andthe Köprüçay Conglomerate. They correspond to thelower reach of fan delta systems whose slopes and frontsare respectively represented by Gilbert-type subaqueousforesets, consisting of subaqueous water flow andcohesionless debris flow deposits. The superposition ofseveral fan delta systems forms the bulk of the KöprüçayConglomerate. Where preserved, the upper part of a fandelta system contains patch reefs mainly characterized byhermatypic colonies of Porites Tarbellastraea,Heliastraea, Heliastreopsis, Favites, Favia, Plesiastraea,Mussismilia, Stylophora, Leptastraea, Caulastraea, andAquitanastraea with rare solitary corals (Lithophyllia,Syzygophyllia and Leptomussa).
Formation and Evolution of the Köprüçay Sub-basin
The Köprüçay sub-basin evolution can be subdivided intothree main periods: the first period (pre-basin sequence)is represented by the transgressive Oymapınar Limestone(Upper Burdigalian to Lower Langhian), which overlies asubstratum that was tectonised during the emplacementof the Antalya Nappes in the Late Cretaceous. Thiscarbonate deposition is shelfal in facies with a roughlyconstant thickness around 100 m, indicating uniform butweak subsidence across the entire area.
The second period, corresponding to the main detritalinfilling of the basin, was preceded by a major eastwardtilting of the Oymapınar carbonate platform, resultingfrom a rapid and asymmetric subsidence of the basinalong the KKF. This is documented by the distribution of
A. Ç‹NER ET AL.
25
Figure 15. Onlap of Köprüçay Conglomerates onto the Oymapınar Limestones near Bolasan.
the shallow facies, mostly present in the northern and thewestern borders, whereas distal mudstones of theKarpuzçay Formation are thickest along the KKF. Mostsignificantly, this syndepositional tilting is demonstratedby the conspicuous onlap of the horizontal conglomeratesof the lower Selge Member upon the 10° to 20° eastwarddipping Oymapınar Limestone (Figures 15 & 16).
The syn-sedimentary activity of the KKF, at least forits normal component, is an essential characteristic of theKöprüçay sub-basin during the Middle Miocene (Monod etal. 2000). It is best demonstrated along the easternborder of the basin where massive carbonate brecciasoutcrop along the faulted boundary over 40 km, and areinterbedded with conglomerates and mudstonesbasinwards. These breccias indicate that in the Taurushinterland, a constantly rejuvenated ridge, due to tectonicactivity along the KKF, was shedding Mesozoic carbonatefragments into the basin, at least during the MiddleMiocene (cf. Langhian dating, east of Kesme).
Detrital infilling of the Köprüçay sub-basin probablypersisted into the Tortonian, although no sediments ofthat age have been identified in the central part of thebasin. However, along the eastern footwall of the KKF, inthe Sarıalan and Saraycık areas (Figure 14) thin pelagicmarls and associated conglomerates have been preciselydated as Early Tortonian by micro- and nanno-fossilassociations (Deynoux et al. 2005). This shows thatregional subsidence finally led to a large eastwardoverspill of the Köprüçay sub-basin during the Tortonian,possibly as far east as the Kelsu locality, where lagoonalostracods and large oysters are present in the Miocenemarls (Babinot 2002). Moreover, this locality exhibitsTriassic limestones perforated by conspicuous borings ofMiocene age, very similar to those recently describedfrom the Mut Basin (Uchman et al. 2002). Inside some ofthese the boring bivalve (Lithophaga or Teredo) is stillpreserved in living position (Figure 17), thanks to theLate Miocene muds (with globigerinids) which quicklyfilled the cavity and killed the trapped bivalve. Lastly, theabsence of breccias associated with the Lower Tortoniandeposits suggests that the relief was minor, and hencethat tectonic activity on the KKF had ceased by then.
The uppermost part of the Köprüçay sub-basin isrepresented by 500 m of undated conglomerates nowculminating at the summit of Bozburunda¤ (2505 m,Figure 14), which reflect a strong regional subsidence.These conglomerates lie unconformably upon the upper
Selge Member, tilted 5° to 10° westwards (Figures 16 &18). This implies that a former uplift and local erosion ofthe area had to occur before the deposition of theBozburun conglomerates. More precisely, the toplapsupon the upper Selge strata, dipping westwards awayfrom the Köprüçay sub-basin, indicate that tilting hadalready occurred before erosion started. We thereforeinterpret this uplift as reflecting a blind syn-sedimentaryramp produced at the inception of renewed convergence(Deynoux et al. 2005), possibly early in Tortonian times.Maximum convergence, however, occurred late in theTortonian, as demonstrated by movements on the AksuThrust (Poisson 1977), and led to the final closure of theIsparta Angle. This major compressive event is reflectedin the Köprüçay sub-basin by multiple folds, by theinversion of the KKF as a reverse fault in the north(‹ncebel Pass, Figures 14 & 16), and by several pop-uplike structures farther south (cf. Deynoux et al. 2005).
The Köprüçay sub-basin can be interpreted as a syn-tectonic fault-bounded basin, with a strongly asymmetricsubsidence centered along the KKF fault line. During theEarly Tortonian, activity on the KKF had already ceased,and a shallow-marine transgression covered much of thenearby Taurus chain. Along the eastern border,convergence in the Late Tortonian eventually inverted theKKF into a reverse fault, along with folding andimbrications within the Köprüçay sub-basin, as theIsparta Angle closed to its present shape.
Aksu Sub-basin
Structural and Stratigraphic Setting
The Aksu sub-basin is a north–south-extending basin thatlies obliquely in front of the northeast–southwest-trending Lycian Nappe and is bounded by the EarlyTortonian Aksu Thrust to the east (Figure 19). To thewest, a younger imbrication involves Plioceneconglomerates (Figure 16) near Eskiköy, indicating afurther stage of closure of the Isparta Angle (Poisson etal. 2003b).
The sedimentary fill of the basin is mainlycharacterized by coarse conglomerates, sandstones,mudstones and reefal carbonates which have beenpreviously described and interpreted in terms of threeformations, the Aksu Formation, the KarpuzçayFormation and the Gebiz Limestone, representing UpperMiocene and Lower Pliocene deposits (Akay et al. 1985;
SEDIMENTARY EVOLUTION OF THE ANTALYA BASIN
26
A. Ç‹NER ET AL.
27
3000
2000
1000
0 m
KÖ
PR
Ü R
IVE
R
un
con
form
ity
Sul
tanc
ık T
epe
BO
ZBU
RU
N D
AĞ
25
05
J - K
TR
KKF
AN
AN
?
1 km
x
xx
TR
(slu
mp
s)
W
E
SE
CTI
ON
I
Pın
argö
zü
(on
lap
)
S
elge
(A
ltınk
aya)
x
KÖ
PR
Ü R
IVE
R
Bey
dili
TR
J-K
TR
KKF
KKF
Plio
cen
e
1 K
m
DÖ
KÜ
K D
AĞ
24
05 m
0 km
2
J-K
W
E
SE
CTI
ON
II
2000
1000
0 m
Kes
me
Reef
Düd
en
yayl
a
KKF
Sar
ıala
n ya
yla
KÖ
PR
Ü R
IVE
R
TR
TRJ-
KJ-
K
Çob
anis
a
xx
km2
0
PC
SA
RP
DA
Ğ
2548
W
E
S
EC
TIO
N II
I
2000
1000
0 m
3000
2000
1000
0 m
2000
1000
0 m
2000
1000
0 m
Figu
re 1
6.Th
ree
sect
ions
acr
oss
the
Köp
rüça
y su
b-ba
sin
show
ing
the
dist
ribu
tion
of t
he m
ain
faci
es a
nd m
embe
rs o
f th
e Se
lge,
Kes
me
and
Yaka
allu
vial
fan
-fan
del
taco
mpl
exes
. Po
sitio
n of
sec
tions
in F
igur
e 14
. M
odifi
ed f
rom
Dey
noux
et
al.
(200
5).
Karabıyıko¤lu et al. 1997, 2005; Tuzcu et al. 1997).Flecker et al. (1995, 1998) and Glover & Robertson(1998) suggested a Tortonian age for the AksuFormation and a Tortonian–Messinian age for the GebizLimestone. Poisson et al. (2003a, b) consider the GebizLimestone to be Early Pliocene in age. The controversyconcerning the age of the Gebiz Limestone is furtherdiscussed below.
In this study the Aksu Formation has been designatedthe Aksuçay Conglomerate, comprising three Members:(1) Kapıkaya Conglomerate, (2) Karada¤ Conglomerate,and (3) Kargı Conglomerate. Above these units the Aksu
sub-basin includes a thick turbiditic formation, which isprobably equivalent to the upper part of the KarpuzçayFormation, as defined in the Manavgat and Köprüçay sub-basins.
To the north, the Kapıkaya Conglomerate (Cg1)overlies the Lycian Nappes units, as already proposed longago (Gutnic et al. 1979). Intercalated reefs within thehigher part of the conglomerates have been studied nearTaflyayla village. In these reefs, only a limited variety ofcoral genera are present (Porites, Tarbellastraea,Siderastrea), and this restricted faunal assemblage maybe attributed to Upper Miocene (?Tortonian), in global
SEDIMENTARY EVOLUTION OF THE ANTALYA BASIN
28
Triassic
host rock
Late Miocene
mudstone infill
with Globigerinidae
Mollusk shell
(?Teredo) in
living position
0 mm 2
Boring cavity
Figure 17. Transverse section of a Miocene boring in a Triassic limestone (Kelsu locality). The cavity is inhabited by its host (Lithophaga orTeredo) in living position, and was filled by Late Miocene mudstone with microfauna (Globigerinidae), which buried it.
agreement with microfaunas and nannos situated ininterbedded marls within the Kapıkaya Conglomerates,which yielded Serravalian to Tortonian ages west of Afla¤ıGökdere (Akay et al. 1985). On the map (Figure 19), thismember also includes the conglomerates situated alongthe road from the Aksu valley (Karacaören) to Bucak,which may have the same origin and age, although nospecific data are available.
Further south in the Aksu sub-basin, tectonicimbrications have disrupted and isolated severalconglomeratic bodies but precise correlations are notpossible, owing to the lack of sufficient stratigraphiccontrol within each of these sub-units. Nevertheless, twoconglomerate members have been distinguished on themap and sections (Figures 19 & 20).
The Karada¤ Conglomerate (Cg2) includes theconspicuous conglomeratic cliffs, over 500 m high, facingthe Kargı Dam lake, and extends up to the north ofÇandır on the one hand, but should also comprise thelarge conglomerate body west of Kozan village, 30 kmfarther east. Within the Karada¤ Conglomerate coralreefs are rare. A rapid sampling of one of the reefsexposed about 5 km south of Afla¤ı Gökdere includes
Stylophora, Tarbellastraea, Porites, Plesiastraea, whichare not diagnostic enough for precise dating.
The base of the Karada¤ unit is usually missing, owingto the Late Tortonian thrusting of this unit over theturbidites of the Karpuzçay Formation, as shown on themap (Figure 19). However, special attention was given toa very peculiar conglomerate facies, which containsabundant metamorphic pebbles and found at the base ofthe Karada¤ cliffs. These unusual conglomerates werefirst reported by Akay et al. (1985). In fact, theoutcropping area of this facies is quite large, and extendsabout 7 km south of the Kargı Lake forming an elongatedwedge, 500-m-thick at most (Tafldibi unit, Monod et al.2006). Metamorphic pebbles are abundant (up to 20%)and consist of white marble, quartzite, green schist andamphibolite. However, the most amazing feature is theabundance of pebbles and blocks (up to 50 cm) of highpressure-low temperature blueschist facies, with angularshapes, suggesting short transportation. Among variousHP–LT facies, A. Okay (in Monod et al. 2006) hasrecognized typical glaucophane calc-schists, with sodicamphibole, quartz, calcite, phengite, and garnetblueschists, deriving from former metabasites, such as
A. Ç‹NER ET AL.
29
D D
Bozburun Dağ conglomerates (? Tortonian)
Selge Conglomerates
upper member (Serravallian)
South
Figure 18. Angular unconformity (D) between upper Selge Member and Bozburun Member conglomerates at Bozburun Da¤ eastern side.
SEDIMENTARY EVOLUTION OF THE ANTALYA BASIN
30
AN
LN
(M)
AN
AN Tu
Ty
A B
D
C
Ty Ty
Q
Q
Q
Tu
AN
AN
AN
LN
R
R
R
R
AN
BD
Q (M)
Tu
Tu
R
Te
Ty
Çandır
Sütçüler
Gebiz
Bucak
BD
BD
Tv
Te
Te
R
Cg2
Cg2
Cg3
Cg3
Cg2
Cg2
Cg1
scree and Recent deposits
Antalya travertine
Yenimahalle Fm. (Lower Pliocene)
Alakilise Fm. (Upper Pliocene)
Eskiköy Fm. (Lower Pliocene) fluvial conglomerate and marine marls Gebiz Limestone (Messinian?-Lower Pliocene) neritic limestone with corals Lower-Middle Miocene inliersfrom the Köprüçay sub-basin
reefal limestone of probable Tortonian age Karpuzçay Fm. (Serravalian-Tortonian) turbidites overlying Cg1 and Cg2 Kargı Conglomerates and reefs (R) (Tortonian)
Karadağ Conglomerates Taşdibi member with metamorphic pebbles
Kapıkaya conglomerates (Serravalian to ?Tortonian)
Lycian Nappes units (undivided)
LN thrust (Serravalian)Lower Miocene (Lycian Basin)
Antalya Nappes units (undivided)
AN thrust (Paleocene)
Beydağ Carbonates(Jura-Cretaceous)(autochthonous unit)
Pliocene thrust
TPAO wells
Aksu Thrust (Late Tortonian)
Tal
Cg1?
Cg1
Aksu
Serik ANTALYA
Tal
0 10 km
A K S U T H R U S T
Tv
Eskiköy
Sillion
B. Kepez Tepe
Aksu R.
Aksuçay
Conglom
erates
Kargı
Taşdibi
?
?
?
Figure 19. Geological setting and distribution of the Miocene formations in the Aksu sub-basin. Complementary informationfrom Poisson (1977, 2003), Akay et al. (1985) and fienel (1997, 2002).
A. Ç‹NER ET AL.
31
a b BD
Tu
A W
E
B
Esk
iköy
Aks
u Va
lley
AK
SU
TH
RU
ST
Plio
cene
thru
sts
AN
TALY
A N
AP
PE
S
0 2
km
Cg2
Kar
gi
Tunn
el
Tu
Cg3
Mes
sini
an
Can
yon
Cg2
R
σ P
Cg2
σ
Taşd
ibi K
arad
ağ
Soy
ataş
Te
pe
2 1 0 km
1 2
C
D
Aks
u Va
lley
AK
SU
TH
RU
ST
Tu
LN
BD
A
N
AN
J-K
J-K
Cg2
1 2 0 km
LN
NW
E
W
S
E
2 1
Kap
ıkay
a
Süt
çüle
r B
. Aşa
r Tep
e
R
Cg1
R
0 2
4 km
Çam
ova
AN
AN
Figu
re 2
0.Tw
o sc
hem
atic
sec
tions
acr
oss
the
Aksu
sub
-bas
in s
how
ing
mul
tiple
im
bric
atio
ns o
f La
te M
ioce
ne a
nd E
arly
Plio
cene
age
. Se
e Fi
gure
19
for
loca
tion
and
litho
stra
tigra
phic
lege
nd.
(A–B
) Ak
su s
ub-b
asin
sec
tion
(sou
th)
and
(C–D
) Ak
su s
ub-b
asin
sec
tion
(nor
th).
those in the Sugözü Nappe of the Alanya Massif (Okay &Özgül 1984).
The probable origin of the metamorphic detritus isthe Alanya Massif, as previously suggested by Akay et al.(1985). This origin is most surprising since the presentoutcrop of the Alanya Massif is over 100 km to thesoutheast, and this is inconsistent with the proximalsource needed for the angular blocks. Moreover, theabundance of the blueschist pebbles compared with theother metamorphic facies of Barrovian type implies a verylarge erosional area of the HP–LT rocks. Finally, as seenabove, the nearest part of the Alanya Massif is normallyburied by marine conglomerates of Burdigalian age in theManavgat sub-basin, and this rules out fluvial transport ofthe Alanya material into another marine basin later in theMiocene. Facing these constraints, Monod et al. (2006)concluded that the metamorphic pebbles of the Aksu sub-basin could not have come from the present day AlanyaMassif, and suggested that, during Miocene times, theAlanya Unit extended westwards possibly as far asAntalya and was there predominantly made of high-pressure rocks. Remnants of this part of the AlanyaMassif have now been entirely eroded away, except fortwo small inliers as noted by Akay et al. (1985): one islocated 7 km north of Tafla¤ıl (siltstone and fossiliferousPermian metacarbonates), and the other one is 5 kmnorthwest of Gebiz. These inliers provide supportingevidence for the former extension of the Alanya Massif,although HP–LT rocks are not present at outcrop.
The Kargı Conglomerate (Cg3) forms a narrow unitof reddish conglomerates and mudstones, which is wellexposed along the Antalya-Isparta new road, and is cutthrough by the Kargı Tunnel, south of Kargı Lake (Figure21). In the upper part, the Kargı Conglomerate containswell-preserved patch-reefs, which have been studied indetail by Flecker (1995), Tuzcu & Karabıyıko¤lu (2001)and Karabıyıko¤lu et al. (2005). The corals are mostlyPorites and Tarbellastraea (including T. siciliae), and theage of the reefs is attributed to the Tortonian. Bothupper and lower boundaries of the Kargı Conglomerateare tectonic. The lower thrust is readily visible along themain Antalya-Isparta road, 1 km south of the Kargıtunnel: the red Miocene Kargı Conglomerates aretruncated by dark green serpentines up to 50 m thick,which are thrust upon the loose conglomerates of theEskiköy Formation (Pliocene). The upper limit of the unitalso is a thrust, passing 200 m east of the Kargı tunnelagainst the Tafldibi unit.
Facies Architecture and Depositional Environments
The Aksuçay Conglomerate: ?Serravalian–TortonianAlluvial Fan/Fan-Delta Complex. The KapıkayaConglomerate (Cg1) is interpreted as a coastal alluvial fanthat evolved into a fan delta. The reefal interbeds with alimited variety of coral genera that have been studiednear Afla¤ı Yumrutafl and Taflyayla villages suggest ashallow marine environment.
The thick (>1000 m) succession of Karada¤Conglomerate (Cg2) exposed in the central area, is mainlycomposed of polymict, thickly bedded subaqueous debrisflows (F2, F3, F7 and F9) with rare sandy beds, and marlintercalations at the top. Imbricated pebbles are veryrare, as well as oblique stratifications. Reworkedmaterials include mainly white and grey Mesozoiclimestones, dark sandstones, red and green radiolaritesand ophiolitic pebbles, and also include rare reeflimestone blocks with Burdigalian–Langhian corals(Stylophora, Heliastraea, Plesiastraea, Favia,Tarbellastraea, Porites) (Yukarı Çukur Yayla). Above, twolarge reefs (F19) concordantly overlie the Karada¤Conglomerate: one near Çandır and the other one 5 kmsouth of Afla¤ı Gökdere. These reefs are characteristicallyrepresented by low-diversity hermatypic corals, which arecommonly made up of finger-like branching forms and/orlamellar, plate-like and massive domal forms of Poritesand Tarbellastraea with subordinate Siderastraea, minorFavites, Plesiastraea and Platgyra and indicate normalsalinity shallow marine environment. Although the baseof the Karada¤ unit is not observed, owing to the LateTortonian thrust, the facies characteristics of the Karada¤Conglomerate indicate proximal alluvial fan-fan deltacomplex. The metamorphic clasts indicate that the lowerpart of the Tafldibi conglomerates was partly sourcedfrom the Alanya Massif prograding northwards.
The lower Kargı Conglomerate (Cg3) is characterizedby a succession of matrix- to clast-supported lenticularconglomerates (F2 and F3) with red mudstone (F12A)and sandstone interbeds (F7 and F8). The uppersuccession is composed of tabular, lenticular and tabularcross-stratified conglomerates (F4, F5 and F8) withlocally developed coral-algal reef and sandstone andmudstone interbeds. The Kargı Conglomerate initiallyappears to have been formed as shallow braided streamand overbank deposits that developed on a medial alluvialfan. The upper succession with patch reefs indicates asharp transgression over the alluvial fan, which in turn,
SEDIMENTARY EVOLUTION OF THE ANTALYA BASIN
32
A. Ç‹NER ET AL.
33
F F
KC
K
C
G
G M
M
R
R
B
B
R
R
Figu
re 2
1.Pa
nora
mic
vie
w o
f th
e K
argı
ree
fs (
R)
look
ing
wes
twar
ds.
Not
e th
e sh
arp
tran
sitio
n fr
om b
raid
ed s
trea
m d
epos
its (
B) t
o re
ef c
ore
(R)
inte
rbed
ded
with
fan
del
ta s
lope
depo
sits
(F)
, ree
f ta
lus
depo
sits
(M
) an
d ga
stro
pod
bear
ing
mud
ston
es (
G)
in b
etw
een
two
reef
cor
es. S
teep
bac
kgro
und
is t
he f
ront
al p
art
of K
arad
a¤ C
ongl
omer
ates
(Cg
2on
Fig
ure
19).
Tru
ck o
n th
e ri
ght
bott
om f
or s
cale
.
led to the development of a fan delta. Facies patternsindicate that the fan delta deposits prograded north–northeastwards (Flecker 1995).
The Karpuzçay Formation: Serravalian–Tortonian OpenMarine Clastic Shelf. The Karpuzçay Formation ischaracteristically composed of sandstone-mudstonealternations (F7, F9, F11 and F12C) forming small- tolarge-scale coarsening- to fining-upward sequences.Interbeds of muddy coarse conglomerates (F10) arelocally present. The sandstones are characterized bylaterally continuous thin to thick tabular units with sharplower and upper contacts. Plane-parallel and graded bedsare common sedimentary features. The mudstones aremassive to parallel laminated and form laterally extensiveunits with sharp and planar bases and tops. The faciescharacteristics of sandstones and mudstones are verysimilar to those of the Karpuzçay Formation exposed inthe Köprüçay sub-basin. Therefore, this formation is alsointerpreted as offshore marine sediments.
The Gebiz Limestone: Late Miocene–Early PlioceneFringing Reefal Carbonates. The Gebiz Limestone,situated to the east of the town of Gebiz in the southernAksu sub-basin, extends as a thin (20-m-thick onaverage), narrow NW–SE-trending belt at the easternbasin margin, unconformably overlying the AntalyaNappes and the Serravalian–Tortonian KarpuzçayFormation (Akay et al. 1985). It is mainly represented bya succession of reefal shelf carbonates, consisting ofisolated patches of low-diversity coral reefs, flat-beddedbioclastic limestones and subordinate marls and clays. Thereefal and the bioclastic limestones include mollusks,echinoids, benthic foraminifers (peneroplids, miliolids,rotalid, Borelis melo melo, Dendritina, Elphidium,Heterostegina, Textularia), bryozoa, corals and red algae(Tuzcu & Karabıyıko¤lu 2001; Karabıyıko¤lu et al.2005), whereas the overlying marls and clays containboth shallow and deep water fauna, including bothbenthic and planktic foraminifers and nannoplankton ofdeeper open marine conditions (Poisson et al. 2003b).
The reefal shelf carbonates are locally well exposed atthe Büyük Kepez Tepe and the Aflar Tepe (the ancient cityof Sillion) sections, about 8 and 10 km south of Gebiz.These sections, though two kilometers apart, arecommonly characterized by a lower and an upper facies
association. The lower facies association is represented byisolated patches of Tarbellastraea and Porites dominatedreefs (up to 6 m thick) (F19) comprising minorSideastraea, Plesiastraea, Favites and Platygyra (includingspecies of Porites calabricae and Siderastraea crenulata),associated with horizontal to gently inclined algal benthicforaminal lime mudstone (F15), wackestone andpackstone (F16). Symbiont-bearing foraminifera, Borelismelo melo and Dendritina, miliolids, large gastropods,echinoids, serpulid tubes, bioturbations and burrowingsare common within the reef frameworks and theassociated algal foraminiferal limestones. The overlyingfacies association is generally composed of westwards- tonorthwestwards-inclined, thin- to thick-bedded, algalbenthic foraminiferal wackestone, packstone (F16) andrare grainstone (F17) with moderate to rich shallowmarine fauna (Tuzcu & Karabıyıko¤lu 2001;Karabıyıko¤lu et al. 2005), which suggest a moderate tohigh energy open outer shelf environment. At bothsections, the lower facies association overlies the plankticforaminifera bearing fines of the Karpuzçay Formation(F12c). At the Büyük Kepez Tepe section, a sharp, flat toslightly erosive contact is revealed at the base of thereefal facies association, along an east–west-orientedexposure (about 300 m long) which runs almost parallelto the depositional dip. The planktic foraminifera contentof the uppermost 20 cm of the underlying KarpuzçayFormation exposed at this section yielded a faunaassociation indicative of Early to Middle Tortonian age,which consists of Globorotalia acostaensis, G. continuosa,G. obesa, G. bulloides, G. falconensis, Globigerinoidesruber seigliei, G. bulloides, G. obliquus obliquus, G.trilobus trilobus, G. quadrilobatus, Globoquadrinadehiscens dehiscens and Turborotalia quinqueloba (det. A.Hakyemez, in Tuzcu & Karabıyıko¤lu 2001). In contrastto the southeastern part, the northwestern extent of thereefal Gebiz Limestone rests directly on the radiolarites ofthe Antalya Nappes and is transitionally overlain by marlsand fine clastics rich in mollusks, benthic and planktonicforaminifers and nannoplankton, representing openmarine conditions (Poisson et al. 2003b). The reefs areconsidered to be fringing reefs developed along thehigher grounds of the eastern margin of the PlioceneAksu sub-basin (Poisson et al. 2003b).
Although the depositional setting of the GebizLimestone is well understood, the age of the GebizLimestone is controversial since it lacks precise
SEDIMENTARY EVOLUTION OF THE ANTALYA BASIN
34
biostratigraphic markers. A precise age for the GebizLimestone is needed to better constrain the timing of theAksu Thrust, and hence the closure of the Isparta Angle.Therefore, a further consideration is given here for abrief review of the stratigraphy of the Gebiz Limestone.
The Gebiz Limestone was initially recognized as LowerPliocene neritic limestones and marls representing post-thrust sedimentation (Poisson 1977). Later, based on thelithostratigraphic and biostratigraphic considerations,Akay et al. (1985) suggested a Messinian age, whereasGlover (1995) and Glover & Robertson (1998) inferred aTortonian age and Poisson et al. (2003b) proposed anEarly Pliocene age. A Late Tortonian to Messinian age hasalso been suggested by Tuzcu & Karabıyıko¤lu (2001)and Karabıyıko¤lu et al. (2005).
This suggestion is based on the large-scale correlationof the low-diversity coral genera and the associatedbenthic foraminifera assemblage of the reefal carbonateswith those of the Late Miocene Mediterranean reefs.Indeed, Porites and Tarbellastraea dominated lowdiversity coral reefs, in some cases associated withbenthic foraminifers Dendritina and Borelis melo melo,are common features in the Late Miocene sequencesthroughout the circum-Mediterranean (Esteban 1979;Dabrio et al. 1981; Grasso et al. 1982; Rouchy et al.1982; Martin & André 1992; Buchbinder et al. 1993;Bossio et al. 1996; Buchbinder 1996; Martin & Cornée1996; Betzler & Schmitz 1997). However, it should bepointed out that the low diversity may also result fromunfavorable palaeoecological factors and therefore doesnot necessarily indicate a particular age. Yet the coralspecies and the associated large benthic foraminiferaBorelis melo and Dendritina sp., suggest aTortonian–Messinian age. Furthermore, it should bepointed out that Tarbellastraea, one of the mainframework builders on Miocene Mediterranean reefs, hasa limited stratigraphic range (Chevalier 1961). This genusevolved from Oligocene and extended up to Late Miocenewith only a few wide-ranging species before it becameextinct prior to Pliocene (Budd et al. 1996), implying thatthe reefal Gebiz Limestone cannot be regarded asyounger than the Late Messinian in age. Yet Poisson et al.(2003b) presented detailed biostratigraphic data, basedon nannoplankton and planktic foraminifera content ofthe lower beds of the Gebiz Limestone exposed in theGebiz area and concluded an Early Pliocene age for thereefs in the Gebiz Limestone. The nannofossil content of
lowermost interbedded limestones and marls yielded anassemblage of the NN12 Zone (Amaurolithustricorniculatus Zone of Martini 1971), indicating thetransition from Messinian to Zanclean (Early Pliocene),whereas the marls immediately above the lower bedsbelong to the Globorotalia margaritae Zone of EarlyPliocene age (for further details see figure 3 and tables 1and 2 in Poisson et al. 2003b).
In short, we suggest that the Gebiz Limestonerepresents a westwards- to northwestwards-deepeningand younging sequence, mainly characterized by reefalshelf carbonates, with well-developed fringing reefs andpatch reefs, which are, in turn, transitionally overlain bythe Early Pliocene open marine marls and fine clastics.Alternatively, it may be suggested that the GebizLimestone represents a gently basinward (westwards tonorthwestwards) inclined carbonate ramp characterizedby reefal carbonates of inner ramp, distally overlain byopen marine carbonates and the fine clastics of mid-outerramp to deeper outer ramp (Early Pliocene).
Both models indicate that the southeastern margin ofthe Aksu sub-basin evolved from a locally developedshallow reefal carbonate shelf to a deeper open marineshelf with a fine siliciclastic input, during the time intervalof Messinian to Early Pliocene. The reefal carbonatessuggest an initial transgression following a Late Mioceneregression in the area, resulting from the sea level dropassociated with the Messinian crisis. This is followed by aninflux of finer clastics that finally drowned the reefalcarbonate shelf during Early Pliocene. The transgressionrepresents the onset of Pliocene flooding of theMediterranean.
Formation and Evolution of the Aksu Sub-basin
The Aksu sub-basin was probably initiated later than theKöprüçay sub-basin (Serravalian vs. Langhian) andrecords the final stages of the closure of the IspartaAngle. It was fed from the north and northwest resultingin the formation of a southward prograding coastalalluvial fan-fan delta complex (Kapıkaya Conglomerate,Serravalian–Tortonian), and also from the west,, leadingto the formation of an eastward to northeastwardprograding alluvial fan-fan delta complex (KargıConglomerate, ?Tortonian). In addition, the Karada¤Conglomerate, containing metamorphic detritus derivedfrom a distinct source area indicative of a former
A. Ç‹NER ET AL.
35
extension of the Alanya Massif to the west, represents analluvial fan-fan delta complex supplied from the east andsoutheast. A westward propagating Late Tortonian thrust(‘Aksu Thrust’) has probably reduced the basin width by30 to 50%, and was followed by a later westwardcompression locally affecting the Lower Pliocene deposits.
Conclusions
One of the aims of the present study was to provide adetailed description and interpretation of the variousclastic and carbonate facies associated in an alluvial fan-fan delta setting within a tectonically active basin.Interpretations are tentative owing to the complexinteractions and rapid lateral changes of physicalprocesses acting during transport and deposition of suchhighly heterogeneous materials. In many cases, theobserved sedimentary structures alone are not sufficientto unequivocally assert the mode of deposition, and inplaces comparison with models described in the literaturemay even be misleading. However, in spite of syn- andpost-sedimentary deformations, the relative position ofthe facies, and associated patch reefs or shelly fossils,could be traced along complete transects, from themudstones of the deepest part of the basin up to theproximal alluvial deposits and source areas. Sedimentswere transported by braided streams to the strand areawhere they accumulated as alluvial fans or fan deltas, insome cases forming Gilbert-type fan deltas. Thecoarseness of the delta foresets, and the recurrentintercalations of carbonate breccias, reflect the proximityof the source areas. When preserved, lagoonal depositsand associated patch reefs mark the stacking pattern ofsuccessive Gilbert-type deltas (a few meters up to 10’s ofmeters thick), suggesting stepwise relative sea levelchanges.
This study also provided an insight into thedepositional environments of the coralgal reefs in theAntalya Basin. The Miocene coral reefs developed assmall, isolated patch reefs in two contrasting depositionalsystems, progradational fan delta complexes and shallowmarine carbonate shelves, during time intervals of theLate Burdigalian–Langhian and Late Miocene to EarlyPliocene, representing the changing style of reefaccommodation from tectonically controlled, terrigeneousbasin margin clastics to transgressive shelf carbonates intime and space.
Another significant point concerns the formation andevolution of the entire Antalya Basin. Flecker et al.(1998) suggested that the load of the Lycian Nappesarriving in the western part of the Antalya Gulf may haveinduced flexural loading effects in the lithosphere. Sucheffects should have influenced the Neogene sedimentationin the three sub-basins situated in front of the LycianNappes (Aksu, Köprüçay and Manavgat), as is suggestedby contrasting drainage patterns in the first two sub-basins, although their orientation is oblique relative to theLycian Thrust front. The influence of the advancingnappes is clear and indisputable in the Lycian and Kasababasins situated along the thrust-front (Poisson 1977;Hayward 1984; Flecker et al. 2005), and it may beconsidered to some extent in the Aksu and Köprüçay sub-basins, some 30 to 60 km away.
However, the case of the Manavgat sub-basin is morequestionable, owing to its orthogonal orientation, and itsdistance to the front of the Lycian Nappes, presently morethan 100 km away. The Manavgat sub-basin is weaklydeformed, with a continuous deposition from Burdigalianto Messinian. The overall stratigraphy and the ages of themain formations as well as the depositional evolution ofthe Miocene fill of the Manavgat sub-basin are bestcompared with the northern part of the Adana Basinwhere a very similar evolution is reported (cf. Görür1992; Williams et al. 1993; Gürbüz 1999; Satur et al.2005).
In contrast, the Köprüçay and Aksu sub-basins arestrongly tectonised. In the Köprüçay sub-basin, faciesanalysis and dating show that the northern and westernparts of the Köprüçay sub-basin are occupied by ratherthick and extensive conglomerate-dominated alluvial fan-fan delta systems that prograded south to southeastwardand eastward and graded laterally (towards the KKF) intothicker pelagic mudstones representing deeper parts ofthe basin. The asymmetric facies distribution of the clasticsuccession in the Köprüçay sub-basin strongly indicatesdifferential subsidence and tectonic activity that wasmainly controlled by the KKF, along which sedimentthickness is the greatest. Furthermore, the conspicuousonlap of the Selge Conglomerates (Langhian and younger)upon the basal Oymapınar Limestones implies an earlyeastward tilting of the Oymapınar Limestone towards theKKF, whereas the subsequent Tortonian compressionswere directed westwards. The importance of the tectonicactivity of the KKF during the sedimentation of the
SEDIMENTARY EVOLUTION OF THE ANTALYA BASIN
36
A. Ç‹NER ET AL.
37
J-K
BHN
AM
AN
LN
a v
a: R
ecen
t v:
Plio
cene
vol
cani
cs
LN: L
ycia
n N
appe
s AM
: Ala
nya
Mas
sif
AN: A
ntal
ya N
appe
s BH
N: B
eyşe
hir-
Had
ım N
appe
s J-
K: M
esoz
oic
carb
onat
es
Tr
Tr: T
riass
ic
form
atio
ns
C-O
: Cam
bro-
O
rdov
icia
n fo
rmat
ions
4 3 2 1 0 km
1890
m
1300
m
MU
T B
ASI
N
AN
? ?
M
A B
HN
D
Mut
G
öksu
va
lley
Kar
aman
4 3 2 1 0
km
D'
?
a B
HN
C-O
Kon
ya
MA
NA
VGA
T SU
B-B
ASI
N A
N
AM
B 4 3 2 1 0
km
4 3 2 1 0 km
BH
N
B'
?
J-K
a
v
Suğ
la la
ke
Tr
Mio
cene
su
rface
Tr
A
B
C
D
0
200
km
LN AN
AN
AN
AM
BH
N
BD
Loca
tion
map
A
kşeh
ir
Kon
ya
Ispa
rta
Ant
alya
Man
avga
t
Sili
fke
Ana
mur
Kar
aman
Mer
sin
Bey
şehi
r
F K K
T A
B‘ A
‘
C‘
D‘
Erm
enek
Mut
Med
iterr
anea
n S
ea
mai
n th
rust
s
KKF:
Kırk
kava
k Fa
ult
AT: A
ksu
Thru
st
AA: A
nam
as-A
ksek
i &
BD: B
eyda
ğ ca
rbon
ates
(a
utoc
htho
nous
uni
ts)
AK
SU S
UB
-BA
SIN
AN
P
AN
AN KÖ
PRÜ
SU
B-B
ASI
N
Tr
J-K
A
KKF
AT
Bozb
urun
Dağ
D
ökük
Dağ
Be
y D
ağ
Lyci
an
Nap
pes
2468
m
4 3 2 1 0
km
BHN
A'
? J-
K J-
K C
-O
a v
Mio
cene
su
rface
Se
ydiş
ehir
Kony
a
C
2257
m
AN
AM
B
HN
J-
K
C-O
ERM
ENEK
BA
SIN
G
öksu
va
lley
Kız
ıldağ
A
nam
ur
BH
N
?
4 3 2 1 0
km
J-K
a
Mio
cene
su
rface
H
adım
Gök
su
valle
y C
' 4 3 2 1 0
km
Mio
cene
dep
osits
:
cong
lom
erat
es
sand
ston
es
mar
ls a
nd s
hallo
w-
mar
ine
limes
tone
s
?
?
? ?
-
?
?
4 3 2 1 0 km
P
AA
C-O
C-O
C-O
C
-O
C-O
C-O
C-O
C-O
2350
m
a
Kon
ya
Kon
ya
Mio
cene
su
rface
Plio
cene
mar
ls
Figu
re 2
2.Fo
ur s
ynth
etic
sec
tions
in t
he N
eoge
ne b
asin
s in
sou
ther
n Tu
rkey
. Th
is f
igur
e ill
ustr
ates
the
con
tras
ting
stru
ctur
al b
ehav
iour
of
the
Mio
cene
sub
-bas
ins
in t
he A
ntal
ya a
rea
and
the
stri
king
asy
mm
etry
of
the
Ispa
rta
angl
e: In
sec
tion
AA
’, on
the
wes
tern
sid
e of
the
Ispa
rta
Angl
e, t
he L
ycia
n N
appe
s la
rgel
y ov
erlie
the
Lyc
ian
Basi
n (A
quita
nian
–Bur
diga
lian)
on t
op o
f th
e Be
yda¤
ları
; in
the
cent
re, t
he A
ksu
sub-
basi
n (S
erra
valia
n–To
rton
ian)
whi
ch o
verl
ies
the
Lyci
an N
appe
s as
sho
wn
in F
igur
e 20
a, is
str
ongl
y im
bric
ated
wes
twar
dsby
the
Lat
e M
ioce
ne A
ksu
Thru
st (
AT)
and
Plio
cene
thr
usts
(se
e Fi
gure
20b
); n
ext
to it
, the
Köp
rü s
ub-b
asin
als
o w
as s
tron
gly
tect
onis
ed d
urin
g La
te M
ioce
ne, e
spec
ially
alo
ngth
e de
eply
roo
ted
Kır
kkav
ak F
ault
(KK
F, s
ee F
igur
e16)
. Bot
h su
b-ba
sins
are
situ
ated
in t
he c
entr
al p
art
of t
he Is
part
a An
gle
and
thei
r st
rong
def
orm
atio
ns r
efle
ct t
he in
tens
ityof
the
Lat
e M
ioce
ne a
nd L
ower
Plio
cene
wes
twar
d co
mpr
essi
ons
whi
ch le
d to
the
clo
sure
of
the
Ispa
rta
Angl
e. O
n th
e op
posi
te,
the
next
thr
ee s
ectio
ns s
ituat
ed f
arth
er e
ast
show
litt
le o
r no
def
orm
atio
ns o
f th
e M
ioce
ne c
over
. In
sect
ion
BB
’, th
e M
anav
gat
sub-
basi
n (B
urdi
galia
n to
Mes
sini
an)
is o
nly
flexu
red
alon
g its
eas
tern
bor
der
(see
Fig
ure
8),
but
the
Mio
cene
pal
aeos
urfa
ce e
xten
ds e
astw
ards
on
top
of t
he T
auru
s R
ange
and
is
alm
ost
unde
form
ed (
cf.
Mon
od e
t al
.20
06).
In
sect
ion
CC’,
the
Erm
enek
Bas
in(B
urdi
galia
n–Se
rrav
alia
n) is
muc
h th
inne
r an
d ex
tend
s ho
rizo
ntal
ly a
bove
200
0 m
on
top
of t
he T
auru
s na
ppes
(BH
N)
and
the
Alan
ya M
assi
f. I
t is
onl
y af
fect
ed b
y no
rmal
or
wre
nch
faul
ts o
f lim
ited
impo
rtan
ce (
cf.
Ilgar
& N
emec
200
5).
In s
ecti
on D
D’,
from
Sili
fke
to K
aram
an,
the
Mut
Bas
in (
Olig
ocen
e–Se
rrav
alia
n) is
muc
h th
icke
r bu
t al
so li
esho
rizo
ntal
ly, a
nd e
xhib
its o
nly
limite
d fa
ultin
g (fi
afak
et
al.2
005)
. The
thr
ee la
st s
ectio
ns d
emon
stra
te t
he o
vera
ll st
abili
ty o
f th
e Ta
urus
bel
t on
the
eas
tern
sid
e of
the
Ispa
rta
Angl
e du
ring
Neo
gene
.
Köprüçay sub-basin is directly evidenced by the carbonatebreccias that interfinger with the basin infill during theLanghian and Serravalian. Early in the Tortonian, activityon this fault ceased and a reduced subsidence rate allowedthe overspill of the basin upon the Taurus Range. Thestrongest deformations occurred in Late Tortonian, whenthe KKF motion was inverted into reverse faulting andwestward thrusting, possibly related to an earlywestward motion of the Anatolian block, which closed theIsparta Angle to its present shape.
Contrary to the expected timing of a flexural loadingresulting from the advancing Lycian Nappes, the Aksusub-basin is probably younger than the Köprüçay sub-basin (Serravalian vs. Langhian) and records the finalstages of the closure of the Isparta Angle, showingseveral west verging thrusts in front of the Aksu Thrust(Late Tortonian). Younger imbrications, involvingPliocene conglomerates and Lower Pliocene marls againmay tentatively be related to the westward escape of theAnatolian microplate due to the continental collisionoccurring in eastern Turkey.
It is also noted that the contrasting structures of thesethree Miocene sub-basins illustrate the asymmetry of thesyntaxis of the Isparta Angle, with a western branchstrongly deformed from Langhian to Pliocene, while theeastern side remains almost undeformed. This relativestability allowed preservation of an ancient topography inthe higher karstic areas, still visible between Beyflehir andAkseki (Monod et al. 2006).
Four structural sketches (Figure 22) illustrate thecontrasting position and structure of the Miocenedeposits in southern Turkey, from west to east: theLycian Basin (Aquitanian–Langhian) is a foreland basinlargely overthrust by the Lycian Nappes; in the centralpart of the Isparta Angle, the Aksu sub-basin and theKöprüçay sub-basin are strongly imbricated with theunderlying Antalya units and platform carbonates, in LateMiocene and Early Pliocene; farther east, the Manavgatsub-basin (Burdigalian–Messinian) is only flexured late inthe Miocene against the Taurus chain. Yet farther east,beyond the Isparta Angle, the Miocene rocks of theErmenek and Mut basins rest horizontally upon the
Central Taurus units and are almost deformation-freeexcept for minor normal or wrench faults (Bassant et al.2005; Ilgar & Nemec 2005).
In the broader context, the final deformation of theNeogene Antalya sub-basins may be understood in part asa consequence of the westward escape of the Anatolianmicroplate. In the earliest stage (Lower–Middle Miocene)there is no record of compression in southern Turkey: onthe contrary, extension prevailed from the Adana Basin tothe Mut and Manavgat basins, separating the Anatolianinterior from Cyprus. In contrast, furher west, the Lycianthrusts were already advancing southwards, thus creatingan initial, wide open, Isparta Angle. During the LateMiocene, southwards expansion in the Aegean Seainduced a further rotation of the Lycian Taurus, and thedeepening of the Aksu and Köprüçay sub-basins in theaxis of the Angle. The end of Miocene times was markedby jamming of the westward-displaced Anatolian blockagainst the rotated Lycian block: newly created thrusts(such as the Aksu Thrust) imbricated Miocene sedimentswith basement rocks and closed the Isparta Angle to itspresent shape. During the Pliocene and Quaternary, west-directed compression resumed, coincident with generaluplift of the Anatolian microplate.
Acknowledgments
This paper is a result of a joint project between MTA (TheMineral Research and Exploration Institute of Turkey),TÜB‹TAK (The Scientific and Technological ResearchCouncil of Turkey) and CNRS (Centre National de laRecherche Scientifique, France). The authors gratefullyacknowledge support provided by the above-mentionedinstitutions. The French Embassy in Ankara is alsoacknowledged for financial support. The authors alsoexpress their gratitude to E. Akay, M. fienel, A.H.F.Robertson and E. Koflun for providing most interestingdocuments and helpful discussions. Several reviewers, A.Poisson, G. Kelling, R. Flecker, T. Dreyer, F. van Buchem,C. Puigdefabregas and A. Ilgar made numerouscomments and helpful suggestions to improve variousparts of this manuscript. Gilbert Kelling edited the Englishof the final text.
SEDIMENTARY EVOLUTION OF THE ANTALYA BASIN
38
A. Ç‹NER ET AL.
39
ReferencesAKAY, E., UYSAL, S., POISSON, A., CRAVATTE, J. & MÜLLER, C. 1985.
Stratigraphy of the Antalya Neogene Basin. Geological Society ofTurkey Bulletin 28, 105–119.
BABINOT, J.F. 2002. Les ostracodes miocènes de séries annexes auxbassins de Köprüçay et de Manavgat, région d’Antalya(Sud–Turquie): Systématique–Implications stratigraphiques etpaléoenvironnementales. Revue de Paléobiologie 21, 735–757.
BASSANT, P., VAN BUCHEM, F.S.P., STRASSER, A. & GÖRÜR, N. 2005. Thestratigraphic architecture and evolution of the Burdigaliancarbonate-siliciclastic sedimentary systems of the Mut Basin,Turkey. In: KELLING, G., ROBERTSON, A.H.F. & VAN BUCHEM, F. (eds),Cenozoic Sedimentary Basins of South Central Turkey.Sedimentary Geology 173, 187–232.
BETZLER, C. & SCHMITZ, S. 1997. First record of Borelis melo andDendritina sp. in the Messinian of SE Spain (Cabo de Gata,Province Almeria). Palaontologische Zeitschrift 71, 211–216.
BIZON, G., BIJU-DUVAL, B., LETOUZEY, J., MONOD, O., POISSON, A., ÖZER, B.& ÖZTÜMER, E. 1974. Nouvelles précisions stratigraphiquesconcernant les bassins tertiaires du sud de la Turquie (Antalya,Mut, Adana). Paris, Revue de l’Institut Français du Pétrole 29,305–320.
BLIRKA, L.H. & NEMEC, W. 1998. Postglacial colluvium in westernNorway: depositional processes, facies and paleoclimatic record.Sedimentology 45, 909–959.
BLUMENTHAL, M. 1951. Recherches géologiques dans le Taurus occidentaldans l’arrière pays d’Alanya. Mineral Research and ExplorationInstitute of Turkey (MTA) Publication D5.
BOSSIO, A., ESTEBAN, M., MAZZANTI, R., MAZZEI, R. & SALVATORINI, G. 1996.Rosignano reef complex (Messinian) Livornesi Mountains,Tuscany, central Italy. In: FRANSEEN, E.K., ESTEBAN, M., WARD, W.C.& ROUCHY J.M. (eds), Models for Carbonate Stratigraphy fromMiocene Reef Complexes of Mediterranean Regions. SEPM SpecialPublications. Concepts in Sedimentology and Paleontology 5,277–295.
BOUMA, A. 1962. Sedimentology of Some Flysch Deposits. A graphicApproach to Facies Interpretation. Elsevier.
BRUNN, J.H., GRACIANSKY, P.C. DE, GUTNIC, M., JUTEAU, T., MARCOUX, T.,MONOD, O. & POISSON, A. 1971. Outline of the geology of thewestern Taurids. In: CAMPELL, A. (ed), Geology and History ofTurkey, 225–255.
BUCHBINDER, B. 1996. Miocene carbonates of the Eastern Mediterranean,the Red Sea and the Mesopotamian Basin: Geodynamic andeustatic controls, In: FRANSEEN, E.K., ESTEBAN, M., WARD, W.C. &ROUCHY J.M. (eds), Models for Carbonate Stratigraphy fromMiocene Reef Complexes of Mediterranean Regions. SEPM SpecialPublications, Concepts in Sedimentology and Paleontology 5,89–97.
BUCHBINDER, B., MARTINOTTI, G.M., SIMAN-TOV, R. & ZILBERMAN, E. 1993.Temporal and spatial relationships in Miocene reef carbonates inIsrael. Paleogeography, Paleoclimatology, Paleoecology 101,97–116.
BUDD, F.A., BOSSELINI, R.F. & STEMANN, A.T. 1996. Systematic of theOligocene to Miocene reef coral Tarbellastraea in the northernMediterannean. Paleontology 39, 515–560.
Ç‹NER, A., DEYNOUX, M., KARABıYıKO⁄LU, M., MONOD, O. & MANATSCHAL, G.2003. Depositional evolution of alluvial fan-fan delta complexes inthe Miocene Köprüçay Basin, southern Turkey. EGS-AGU-EUGJoint Assembly, (6–11 April), Nice–France, Geophysical ResearchAbstracts 5, 10561.
CHEVALIER, J.P. 1961. Recherches sur les Madreporaires et lesformations récifales Miocenes de la Mediterranée occidentale.Memoire de la Societé Géologique de France 40.
COOK, H.E & MULLINS, H.T. 1983. Basin Margin Environment. In:SCHOLLE, P.A., BEBOUT, D.G. & MOORE, C.H. (eds), CarbonateDepositional Environments. Memoir of American Association ofPetroleum Geologists 33, 540–617.
DABRIO, J., ESTEBAN, M. & MARTIN, J.M. 1981. The coral reef of Nijar,Messinian (uppermost Miocene), Almeria province, SE Spain.Journal of Sedimentary Petrology 51, 521–539.
DEYNOUX, M., Ç‹NER, A., MONOD, O., KARABıYıKO⁄LU, M., MANATSCHAL, G. &TUZCU, S. 2005. Facies architecture and depositional evolution ofalluvial fan to fan delta complexes in the tectonically activeMiocene Köprüçay Basin, Isparta Angle, Turkey. In: KELLING, G.,ROBERTSON, A.H.F. & VAN BUCHEM, F. (eds), Cenozoic SedimentaryBasins of South Central Turkey. Sedimentary Geology 173,315–343.
D‹LEK, Y. & ROWLAND, J.C. 1993. Evolution of a conjugate passive marginpair in Mesozoic southern Turkey. Tectonics 12, 954–970.
DUMONT, J.F. & KEREY, E. 1975. L’accident de Kırkkavak, undécrochement majeur dans le Taurus occidental. Bulletin SociétéGéologique de France 17, 1071–1073.
DUNHAM, R.J. 1962. Classification of carbonate rocks according todepositional texture. In: HAM, W.E. (ed), Classification ofCarbonate Rocks. Memoir of American Association of PetroleumGeologists, 108–121.
ESTEBAN, M. 1979. Significance of the Upper Miocene coral reefs of theWestern Mediterranean. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology,Palaeoecology 29, 169–188.
FLECKER, R. 1995. Miocene Basin Evolution of the Isparta Angle,Southern Turkey. PhD Thesis, Edinburg University [unpublished].
FLECKER, R., ROBERTSON, A.H.F., POISSON, A. & MÜLLER, C. 1995. Faciesand tectonic significance of two contrasting Miocene basins insouth coastal Turkey. Terra Nova 7, 221–232.
FLECKER, R., ELLAM, R.M., MÜLLER, C., POISSON, A., ROBERTSON, A.H.F. &TURNER, J. 1998. Application of Sr isotope stratigraphy andsedimentary analysis to the origin and evolution of the Neogenebasins in the Isparta Angle, southern Turkey. Tectonophysics 298,83–101.
FLECKER, R. POISSON, A. & ROBERTSON, A.H.F. 2005. Facies andpalaeogeographic evidence for the Miocene evolution of theIsparta Angle in its regional eastern Mediterranean context. In:KELLING, G., ROBERTSON, A.H.F. & VAN BUCHEM, F. (eds), CenozoicSedimentary Basins of South Central Turkey. SedimentaryGeology 173, 277–314.
GLOVER, P.G. 1995. Plio–Quaternary Sediments and Neotectonics of theIsparta angle, SW Turkey. PhD Thesis, Edinburg University[unpublished].
GLOVER, P.G. & ROBERTSON, A.H.F. 1998. Role of regional extension anduplift in the Plio–Pleistocene evolution of the Aksu Basin, SWTurkey. Journal of the Geological Society, London 155, 365–387.
GÖRÜR, N. 1992. A tectonically controlled alluvial fan which developedinto a marine fan delta at a complex triple junction: MioceneGildirli Formation at the Adana Basin, Turkey. SedimentaryGeology 81, 243–252.
GRASSO, M., LENTINI, F. & PEDLEY, H.M. 1982. Late Tortonian–LowerMessinian (Miocene) paleogeography of Sicily: information fromtwo new formations of the Sortino group. Sedimentary Geology32, 279–300.
GÜRBÜZ, K. 1999. Regional implications of structural and eustaticcontrols in the evolution of submarine fans: an example from theMiocene Adana Basin, southern Turkey. Geological Magazine 136,311–319.
GUTNIC, M., MONOD, O., POISSON, A. & DUMONT, J.-F. 1979. Géologie desTaurides occidentales (Turquie). Mémoire Société Géologique deFrance 137.
HAYWARD, A.B. 1984. Miocene clastic sedimentation related to theemplacement of the Lycian nappes and the Antalya Complex, SWTurkey. In: DIXON, J.E. & ROBERTSON, A.H.F. (eds), The GeologicalEvolution of the Eastern Mediterranean. Geological Society,London, Special Publications 17, 287–300.
ILGAR, A. & NEMEC, W. 2005. Early lacustrine deposits and sequencestratigraphy of the Ermenek Basin, central Taurides, Turkey. In:KELLING, G., ROBERTSON, A.H.F. & VAN BUCHEM, F. (eds), CenozoicSedimentary Basins of South Central Turkey. SedimentaryGeology 173, 233–275.
‹flLER, F.‹, AKSU, A.E., HALL, J., CALON, T.J. & YAflAR, D. 2005. Neogenedevelopment of the Antalya Basin, Eastern Mediterranean: anactive forearc basin adjacent to an arc junction. Marine Geology221, 299–330.
KARABıYıKO⁄LU, M., Ç‹NER, A., TUZCU, S. & DEYNOUX, M. 1997. Facies,depositional environments and evolution of a gravity inducedsubmarine fan sedimentation (Miocene) in the Aksu forelandbasin, Western Taurids, Turkey. European Union of Geoscientists(EUG 9), Strasbourg, France, Terra Nova 9, p. 325.
KARABıYıKO⁄LU, M., Ç‹NER, A., MONOD, O., DEYNOUX, M., TUZCU, S. & ÖRÇEN,S. 2000. Tectonosedimentary evolution of the Miocene ManavgatBasin, Western Taurids, Turkey. In: BOZKURT, E., WINCHESTER, J.A.& PIPER, J.D.A. (eds), Tectonics and Magmatism in Turkey and theSurrounding Area. Geological Society, London, SpecialPublications 173, 475–498.
KARABıYıKO⁄LU, M., Ç‹NER, A., DEYNOUX, M., MONOD, O., TUZCU, S. &MANATSCHAL, G. 2004. Miocene Tectonosedimentary Evolution ofthe Late Cenozoic Antalya Basin. Mineral Research andExploration Institute (MTA) of Turkey–CNRS (France)–TheScientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey(TÜB‹TAK) Co-Project Report [unpublished].
KARABıYıKO⁄LU, M., TUZCU, S., Ç‹NER, A., DEYNOUX, M., ÖRÇEN., S. &HAKYEMEZ, A. 2005. Facies and environmental setting of theMiocene coral reefs in the late-orogenic fill of the Antalya Basin,Western Taurids, Turkey. In: KELLING, G., ROBERTSON, A.H.F. & VAN
BUCHEM, F. (eds), Cenozoic Sedimentary Basins of South CentralTurkey. Sedimentary Geology 173, 345–371.
LOWE, D.R. 1982. Sediment gravity flows: Depositional models withspecial reference to the deposits of high density turbiditycurrents. Journal of Sedimentary Petrology 52, 279–297.
MARTIN, S.P.J. & ANDRÉ, P.J. 1992. Les constructions coralliennesMessinienne de Malte (Méditerannée Centrale). GéologieMediterranéenne 13, 145–165.
MARTIN, S.P.J. & CORNÉE, J.J. 1996. The Messinian reef complex ofMelilla, northeastern rif, Morocco. In: FRANSEEN, E.K., ESTEBAN,M., WARD, W.C. & ROUCHY, J.M. (eds), Models for CarbonateStratigraphy from Miocene Reef Complexes of MediterraneanRegions. SEPM Special Publications, Concepts in Sedimentologyand Paleontology 5, 227–239.
MARTINI, E. 1971. Standard Tertiary and Quaternary calcareousnannoplancton zonation. In: FARINACCI, A. (ed), First PlanktonicConference Proceedings, Rome 1970 2, 739–785.
MIALL, A.D. 1978. Lithofacies types and vertical profiles models inbraided river deposits. A summary. In: MIALL, A.D. (ed), FluvialSedimentology. Canadian Society of Petroleum Geologists Memoir5, 597–604.
MIDDLETON, G.V. & HAMPTON, M.A. 1976. Subaqueous sedimenttransport and deposition by sediment gravity flows. In: STANLEY,D.J. & SWIFT, D.J.P. (eds), Marine Sediment Transport andEnvironmental Management. Wiley, New York, 197–218.
MONOD, O. 1977. Recherches géologiques dans le Taurus occidental ausud de Beyflehir (Turquie). PhD Thesis, Université Paris Sud,Orsay [unpublished].
MONOD, O., DEYNOUX, M., KARABıYıKO⁄LU, M., Ç‹NER, A., KUZUCUO⁄LU, C.,MANATSHAL, G., TUZCU, S., HAKYEMEZ, A. & MOULLADE, M. 2000.Enregistrement sédimentaire de l’activité de la faille de Kırkkavakdans le bassin miocène du Köprü Çay (Turquie méridionale). 18eRéunion Annuelle des Sciences de la Terre Abstracts, Paris, p.199.
MONOD, O., MANATSCHAL, G., DEYNOUX, M., Ç‹NER, A., KARABıYıKO⁄LU, M.,TUZCU, S. & KUZUCUO⁄LU, C. 2001. Neogene morphotectonics inthe Köprü Basin (Isparta Angle, Southern Turkey). 11th EUGMeeting Abstracts, Strasbourg, Terra Nova, p. 524.
MONOD, O., KARABıYıKO⁄LU, M., DEYNOUX, M., Ç‹NER, A., MANATSCHAL, G.,TUZCU, S., KUZUCUO⁄LU, C., MOULLADE, M., HAKYEMEZ, A., JANIN,M–C. & BABINOT, J.-F. 2002. Les bassins Néogènes du golfed’Antalya (Sud Turquie): Essai de synthèse tectono–sédimentaireet géomorphologique. 19e Réunion annuelle des Sciences de laTerre Abstracts, Nantes, p. 182.
MONOD, O., KUZUCUO⁄LU, C. & OKAY, A.‹. 2006. A Miocene paleovalleynetwork in the western Taurus (Turkey). Turkish Journal ofEarth Sciences 15, 1–23.
SEDIMENTARY EVOLUTION OF THE ANTALYA BASIN
40
NEMEC, W. & STEEL, R.J. 1984. Alluvial and coastal conglomerates: Theirsignificant features and some comments on gravelly-mass-flowdeposits. In: KOSTER, E.H & STEEL, R.J. (eds), Sedimentology ofGravels and Conglomerates. Memoir Canadian Society ofPetroleum Geologists 10, 1–31.
NEMEC, W. & POSTMA, G. 1993. Quaternary alluvial fans in southwesternCrete: Sedimentation processes and geomorphic evolution. In:MARZO, M. & PUIGDFABREGAS, C. (eds), Alluvial Sedimentation.Special Publication International Association of Sedimentologists17, 235–276.
NEMEC, W. & KAZANCı, N. 1999. Quaternary colluvium in west–centralAnatolia: sedimentary facies and paleoclimatic significance.Sedimentology 46, 139–170.
OKAY, A.‹. & ÖZGÜL, N. 1984. HP/LT metamorphism and the structure ofthe Alanya Massif, southern Turkey: an allochthonous compositetectonic sheet. In: ROBERTSON, A.H.F. & DIXON, J.E. (eds), TheGeological Evolution of the Eastern Mediterranean. GeologicalSociety, London, Special Publications 14, 429–439
PICKERING, K.T., STOW, D.A.V., WATSON, M. & HISCOTT, R.N. 1986. Deep-water facies, processes and models: a review and classificationscheme for modern and ancient sediments. Earth Science Review22, 75–174.
PICKERING, K.T., HISCOTT, R.N. & HEIN, F.J. 1989. Deep MarineEnvironments: Clastic Sedimentation and Tectonics. UnwinHyman Publication.
POISSON, A. 1977. Recherches géologiques dans les Taurides occidentales(Turquie). PhD Thesis, Université Paris Sud-Orsay [unpublished].
POISSON, A., AKAY, E., CRAVATTE, J., MÜLLER, C. & UYSAL, S. 1983.Données nouvelles sur la chronologie de mise en place des nappesd’Antalya au centre de l’angle d’Isparta (Taurides occidentales,Turquie). Comptes Rendus de l’Académie des Sciences de Paris296, 923–926.
POISSON, A., AKAY, E., DUMONT, J.F. & UYSAL, S. 1984. The Isparta Angle:a Mesozoic paleorift in the Western Taurides. In: TEKEL‹, O. &GÖNCÜO⁄LU, M.C. (eds), Geology of Taurus Belt. Proceedings ofInternational Symposium on the Geology of Taurus Belt, MineralResearch and Exploration Institute of Turkey (MTA) Publication,11–26.
POISSON, A., YA⁄MURLU, F., BOZCU, M. & fiENTÜRK, M. 2003a. New insightson the tectonic setting and evolution around the apex of theIsparta Angle (SW Turkey). Geological Journal 38, 257–282.
POISSON, A., WERNLI, R., SA⁄ULAR, E.K. & TEM‹Z, H. 2003b. New dataconcerning the age of the Aksu Thrust in the south of the AksuValley, Isparta Angle (SW Turkey): consequences for the AntalyaBasin and the eastern Mediterranean. Geological Journal 38,311–327.
ROBERTSON, A.H.F. 1993. Mesozoic–Tertiary sedimentary and tectonicevolution of Neo-tethyan carbonate platform margins and smallocean basin in the Antalya complex of SW Turkey. SpecialPublication International Association of Sedimentologists 20,127–146.
ROBERTSON, A.H.F., POISSON, A. & AKıNCı, Ö. 2003. Developments inresearch concerning Mesozoic–Tertiary Tethys and neotectonicsin the Isparta Angle. Geological Journal 38, 195–235.
ROUCHY, J.M., CHAIX, C. & SAINT–MARTIN, J.P. 1982. Importance etimplications de l’existance d’un récif corallien messinien sur leflanc sud du Djebel Murdjadjo (Oranie, Algerie), Comptes Rendusde l’Académie des Sciences de Paris, II, 294, 813–816.
RUST, B.R. 1978. Depositional models for braided alluvium. In: MIALL,A.D. (ed), Fluvial Sedimentology. Canadian Society of PetroleumGeologists Memoir 5, 605–625.
fiAFAK, Ü., KELLING, G., GÖKÇEN, N.S. & GÜRBÜZ, K. 2005. Themid–Cenozoic succession and evolution of the Mut basin, southernTurkey, and its regional significance. In: KELLING, G., ROBERTSON,A.H.F. & VAN BUCHEM, F. (eds), Cenozoic Sedimentary Basins ofSouth Central Turkey. Sedimentary Geology 173, 121–150.
SATUR, N., KELLING, G., CRONIN, B.T., HURST, A. & GÜRBÜZ, K. 2005.Sedimentary architecture of a canyon-style fairway feeding adeep–water clastic system, the Miocene Cingöz Formation,southern Turkey: significance for reservoir characterization andmodeling. In: KELLING, G., ROBERTSON, A.H.F. & VAN BUCHEM, F.(eds), Cenozoic Sedimentary Basins of South Central Turkey.Sedimentary Geology 173, 91–119.
fiENEL, M. 1997. 1:250 000 Scale Geological Maps of Turkey, No: 4,Isparta Sheet; N°3, Antalya Sheet. Mineral Research andExploration Institute of Turkey (MTA) Publication, Ankara.
fiENEL, M. 2002. 1:500 000 Scale Geological Maps of Turkey, No: 14,Konya Sheet. Mineral Research and Exploration Institute ofTurkey (MTA) Publication, Ankara.
TUZCU, S. & KARABıYıKO⁄LU, M. 2001. Paleontology, Stratigraphy, Faciesand Depositional Environments of Miocene Coral Reefs in WesternTaurus Mountains. Mineral Research and Exploration Institute ofTurkey (MTA) Publication no: 10438 [in Turkish with Englishabstract].
TUZCU, S., KARABıYıKO⁄LU, M. & Ç‹NER, A. 1997. Miocene reefs in the Aksuforeland basin, Western Taurids, Turkey. European Union ofGeoscientists (EUG 9) Abstracts, Strasbourg, France, Terra Nova9, p. 284.
UCHMAN, A., DEM‹RCAN, H., TOKER, V., DERMAN, S., SEV‹M, S. & SZULC, J.2002. Relative sea level changes recorded in borings from aMiocene rocky shore of the Mut Basin, southern Tukey. AnnalesSocietatis Geologorum Poloniae 72, 263–270.
WILLIAMS, G.D., ÜNLÜGENÇ, U.C., KELLING, G. & DEM‹RKOL, C. 1993.Structural Controls on Stratigraphic Evolution of the Adana Basin,Turkey. Journal of the Geological Society, London 152, 873–882.
WILSON, J.L. 1975. Carbonate Facies in Geologic History. Springer-Verlag, New York.
A. Ç‹NER ET AL.
41
Received 12 October 2006; revised typescript received 15 February 2007; accepted 23 February 2007