Journals / Maden Tetkik ve Arama Dergisi / 2004 / Cilt: 128 - Sayı: 128

Stratigraphic and Structural Features of The Yeşilbarak Nappe in Western Taurus Range and İts Comparison With The Similar Units in SE Anatolia and North Cyprus

Pages
1–26
Publication Date
2004-09-01
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

All these data indicate that the results of large-scale nappe tectonics in southern Turkey reveal the occurrence of more or less similar structural styles.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The Yeşilbarak nappe is situated in between the Lycian nappes and Beydağları autochthon in southeast Turkey; it is a continuous unit for long distance and has an intermediate zone character.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The Gömbe unit is represented by two formations: a) Upper Lutetian- Lower Miocene Elmalı formation which comprises sandstone with limestone intercalations, siltstone and claystone, and b) Upper Burdigalian-Lower Langhian Ucarsu formation which is made up of sandstone with limestone bands and lenses, and conglomerates.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:All these data indicate that the results of large-scale nappe tectonics in southern Turkey reveal the occurrence of more or less similar structural styles.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Yesilbarak Nappe · Stratigraphy · Correlation

Abstract

The Yeşilbarak nappe is situated in between the Lycian nappes and Beydağları autochthon in southeast Turkey; it is a continuous unit for long distance and has an intermediate zone character. It is generally made up of turbiditic elastics of Upper Lutetian-Lower Miocene age and comprises of more or less different structural units such as Gömbe and Yavuz units. The latter is observed as overlying the former unit and in many places it is overturned. At the base of the Gömbe unit, the Gebeler formation which is made up of Upper Cretaceous neritic carbonates takes place. The Gömbe unit is represented by two formations: a) Upper Lutetian- Lower Miocene Elmalı formation which comprises sandstone with limestone intercalations, siltstone and claystone, and b) Upper Burdigalian-Lower Langhian Ucarsu formation which is made up of sandstone with limestone bands and lenses, and conglomerates. The second structural unit of the Yeşilbarak nappe, the Yavuz unit is represented by Yavuz formation which comprises limestone-interbedded sandstone, siltstone and claystone of Upper Lutetian-Priabonian age. The Gebeler and Uçarsu formations of Gömbe unit are observed only in limited locations. The Yeşilbarak nappe has undergone intensive deformation related to the southward movement of the Lycian nappes at the end of the Lower Miocene that resulted in a structure of folded, fractured and overthrusted. The unit has been thrusted along a distance of tens of kilometers southward together with the Lycian nappes on the Beydağları autochthone. In southeast Anatolia, in between the Bitlis-Pötürge-Malatya nappes and Southeast Anatolian autochthone, Eocene-Lower Miocene Çüngüş-Hakkari nappe, bearing the features of turbiditic character, is observed in a long distance continuously, with an intermediate zone character. This nappe, as well as in the case of the Yeşilbarak nappe in Western Taurus range comprises of two structural units, the Çüngüş formation and the Hakkari complex. The Eocene-Lower Miocene Çüngüş formation is the lower unit which is made up of sandstone with occasional blocks, siltstone and claystone and has similarities with the Elmalı formation of the Gömbe unit in the west. The Hakkari complex, on the other hand, is the upper structural unit and is composed of two more or less different structural units; the Urşe formation of Eocene-Oligocene age made up of sandstone, claystone, limestone, and the Durankaya formation of Lower-Middle Eocene age made up of sandstone with occasional blocks, shale and conglomerate. These formations that belong to the Hakkari complex may, even if partially, be correlated with the Yavuz formation in the west. These above-mentioned formations of the Çüngüş-Hakkari nappe have undergone intensive deformation related to the southward movement of the Bitlis-Pötürge-Malatya nappes in Miocene and have been thrusted on the Southeast Anatolian autochthone for tens of kilometers. Similar formations with that of the Yeşilbarak nappe and the Middle Eocene- Lower Miocene clastic rocks of the Çüngüş-Hakkari nappe can be observed widespreadly in northern Cyprus. Allochthonous masses have been emplaced on these clastic rocks in Cyprus during Miocene. The Middle Eocene-Lower Miocene elastics have been thrusted by the Ovgos fault southward in the region, however, no large-scale thrusting as observed in Anatolia has not occurred here, in Cyprus. All these data indicate that the results of large-scale nappe tectonics in southern Turkey reveal the occurrence of more or less similar structural styles.

🔖

Cite This Article

ŞENEL, M. (2004). Stratigraphic and Structural Features of The Yeşilbarak Nappe in Western Taurus Range and İts Comparison With The Similar Units in SE Anatolia and North Cyprus. Maden Tetkik ve Arama Dergisi, Cilt: 128 - Sayı: 128, 1–26. https://ajindex.com/articles/54165

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (8)

  1. Akay, E. and Uysal, S., 1985, Orta Toroslar'ın batısındaki (Antalya) Neojen çökellerinin stratigrafisi ve yapısal jeolojisi. General Directorate of Mineral Research and Exploration, Rep. no: 7799, (unpublished), Ankara.;; Poisson, A.; Crevette, J. and Müller, C., 1985, Antalya Neojen havzasının stra- tigrafisi. Bulletin of the Geological Society of Turkey, 26/2, 26-29.
  2. Akbulut, A., 1977, Etude geologiquie d'une parte du Taurus occidental au sud d'Eğridir (Turquie). These 3 cycle, Universite de Paris-Sud, Faculte des Sciences d'Orsay, 203s. 1980, Eğridir Gölü güneyinde Çandır (Süt- çüler-lsparta) yöresindeki Batı Toroslar'ın jeolojisi. Bulletin of the Geological Society of Turkey, 23/1, 1-10.
  3. Aktaş, G. and Robertson., A.H.F., 1984,
  4. Maden complex, SE Turkey: Evolution of a Neotethyan active magrin, The Geological Evolution of the East Mediterranean, Dixson. J.E. and Robertson, A.H.E. (ed). The Special Publication Geological Society No: 17, Blackwell Scientific Publication, 375-402,
  5. Edinburg. Altunsoy, M., 1999, Isparta güneyinde yer alan Miyosen yaşlı Yazır kireçtaşlarının organik jeokimyasal özellikleri. Geological Bulletin of Turkey, 42/2, 51-62.
  6. Ayhan, A. and Bilgin, A.Z., 1986, 1/100 000 Ölçekli Açınsama Nitelikli Türkiye Jeoloji Haritalar Serisi, Kozan-K21 paftası. General Direc- torate of Mineral Research and Exploration. Ankara. A.; Papak, İ. and Bilgin, A.Z., 1988, Kozan- Ceyhan-İmamoğlu (Adana) civarının jeolojisi. General Directorate of Mineral Research and Exploration, Rep. no: 8357, (unpublished). Ankara.
  7. Baroz, F., 1979, Etude geologique dans le Penta- daktylos et la Mesaoria (Chypre Sertren- trionale). Thesis, Universite de Nancy, 365p. Bassaget, J.P., 1967, Contribution de la region au Sud du Massif du Menderes entre Fethiye et Sandras Dağ (Province de Mugla, Turquie). These, 3 cycle, A la Faculte des Sciences de Grenoble. Becker-Platen, Y.D., 1970, Lithostratigraphische Un- tersuchungen im Kanozoikum Sudwest-Ana- toliens (Turkei). Beihefte zum Geologishes Jahrbuch, 97, 224s. Bonneau, M., 1984, Correlation ot the Hellenide nappes in the south-east Aegean and their tectonic reconstrution, The Geological Evo- lution of the Eastn Mediterranean. Dixson. J.E. and Robertson, A.H.E. (ed). The Special Publication Geological Society No: 17, Blackwell Scientific Publication., 517-528,
  8. Edinburg. Bilgin, A.Z.; Elibol, E.; Bilgin, Z.R. and Beğenilmiş, S., 1981, Ceyhan-Karataş-Yumurtalık-Osmani- ye-Haruniye-Kadirli dolayının jelojik raporu. General Dire