GeolCarp_Vol63_No6_463

www.geologicacarpathica.sk

GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA

, DECEMBER 2012, 63, 6, 463—479 doi: 10.2478/v10096-012-0036-0

Tectonic control on the sedimentary record of the central

Moldavidian Basin (Eastern Carpathians, Romania)

FRANCESCO GUERRERA

, MANUEL MARTÍN MARTÍN

, JOSÉ A. MARTÍN-PÉREZ

IVÁN MARTÍN-ROJAS

, CRINA MICLĂU

and FRANCISCO SERRANO

Dipartimento di Scienze della Terra, della Vita e dell’Ambiente (DiSTeVA), Universit

degli Studi di Urbino “Carlo Bo”, Campus

Scientifico, 61029 Urbino, Italy

Departamento de Ciencias de la Tierra y del Medio Ambiente, Universidad de Alicante, Campus San Vicente, San Vicente del Respeig,

03080 Alicante, Spain

Departamentul de Geologie, Universitatea “Al. I. Cuza”, B-dul Carol I, Nr. 20A, 700505 Ia i, Romania; crina_miclaus@yahoo.co.uk

Departamento de Ecología y Geología, Universidad de Malaga, Campus de Teatinos, 29071 Malaga, Spain

(Manuscript received November 9, 2011; accepted in revised form June 13, 2012)

Abstract: The sedimentary record of the Tarcău and Vrancea Nappes, belonging to the flysch accretionary zone of the
Eastern Carpathians (Eastern Carpathian Outer Flysch), registered Cretaceous-Miocene events during the evolution of
the Moldavidian Basin. Our biostratigraphic data indicate that the deposits studied are younger than previously re-
ported. The comparison of sedimentary record studied with the Late Cretaceous—Early Miocene global eustatic curve
indicates that eustatic factor played a secondary role, after the tectonic one. Four main stages of different processes influ-
enced by tectonics are recognized in the sedimentary record: (1) Campanian—Maastrichtian—earliest Paleocene; (2) latest
Ypresian—Lutetian; (3) late Chattian—earliest Aquitanian, and (4) late Aquitanian-early Burdigalian. The late Chattian—
earliest Aquitanian and late Aquitanian-early Burdigalian records indicate a high tectonic influence. The first event was
related to the foredeep stage of the sedimentary domain studied, and the second one to the deformation stage of the same
domain. The sedimentary records of tectonic influence recognized during these stages are useful tools for geodynamic
reconstructions. The stratigraphic correlation of Tarcău and Vrancea sedimentary records are used to propose some
constraints in the timing of the deformation for the central Moldavidian Basin and close domains.

Key words: Cretaceous-Miocene stratigraphy, central Moldavidian Basin, Tarcău and Vrancea Nappes (Romanian
Eastern Carpathians), paleogeography, geodynamic constraints, tectono-sedimentary processes, calcareous nannoplankton,
planktonic foraminifera.

Introduction

This research seeks to characterize the Vrancea (or Marginal
Folds  Nappe)  and  Tarcău  Nappes,  representing  the  external
tectonic  units  of  the  Outer  Moldavidian  domain  of  the  Ro-
manian Carpathians. The Tarcău Nappe crops out in the Piatra
Neam   area  in  an  internal  tectonic  position  in  comparison
with the Vrancea Nappe. In the same area the latter crops out
in  tectonic  half-window  named  Bistri a  (Băncilă  1958),  the
second  one  of  the  four  half-windows  –  Putna,  Bistri a,
Oituz, and Vrancea, from the north to the south – where the
Vrancea  Nappe  is  exposed  along  the  Eastern  Carpathian
front  (Ma enco  &  Bertotti  2000;  Belayouni  et  al.  2007,
among others). Our study of Vrancea Nappe was conducted
in the Bistri a half-window, in the Piatra Neam -Bacău area,
while  the  study  of  Tarcău  Nappe  both  in  the  Piatra  Neam
area and in the Gura Humorului area in the northern part of
Eastern  Carpathians  (Belayouni  et  al.  2007).  According  to
previous  literature  (Dumitrescu  1952;  Băncilă  1958;  Ionesi
1971; Săndulescu 1984, 1988; Grasu et al. 1988, among others)
the Tarcău and Vrancea Nappe’s successions range from the
Early Cretaceous to the Early Miocene, the deposits showing
a marked vertical and lateral lithofacies variability. The suc-
cessions register four main stages of different tectonic activi-
ties proved by stratigraphic evidence of great interest for the

knowledge of the Moldavidian Basin evolution. We use the
term  Moldavidian  Basin  to  designate  the  basin  where  the
Cretaceous-Early  Miocene  sedimentary  succession  was  de-
posited, then deformed, detached and thrusted over the fore-
land  as  the  thin-skinned  (NW-SE  oriented  and  NE  faced)
Moldavide  Nappes  (Teleajen  or  Convolute  Flysch,  Macla,
Audia,  Tarcău,  Vrancea  or  Marginal  Folds,  and  Pericar-
pathian Nappes, from the internal to external ones).

Therefore, the aim of the present study is to provide new

litho- and bio-stratigraphic data in order to better define the
Late  Cretaceous-Early  Miocene  periods  with  large  terrige-
nous supply in the Moldavidian Basin. The lithostratigraphic
study of the sedimentary successions and the better dating of
the  large  terrigenous  supply  events  give  information  on
when the source rocks were unroofed in response to tectonics
of  rising  areas  by  folding  and  nappe  piling.  Finally,  this
stratigraphic approach can advance the understanding of the
geodynamic evolution of the central Moldavidian Basin.

The successions analysed from Vrancea and Tarcău Nappes

in  the  central  part  of  the  former  Moldavidian  Basin  (Fig. 1)
have broadened our perspective of the entire basin. Our study
includes: (a) field lithostratigraphic analysis and correlations,
and  sampling  of  the  units  involved;  (b)  integrated  (foramini-
fers and nannoplankton) biostratigraphic dating; (c) statement
and  interpretation  of  tectono-sedimentary  processes;  (d)  con-

465

THE SEDIMENTARY RECORD OF THE CENTRAL MOLDAVIDIAN BASIN (EASTERN CARPATHIANS, ROMANIA)

GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA

GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA, 2012, 63, 6, 463—479

Log 3: the succession, 30 m thick, crops out along the

Cuejdi  River  (Cuejdi  Village  area  near  the  town  of  Piatra
Neam ;  UTM  coordinates: 5204359/35445725;  samples:
109—115).  In  this  outcrop,  only  the  lower  member  of  the
Sărata Formation is exposed.

Log 4: the succession, 889 m thick, was studied along the

Cuejdi (Cuejdi Village area) and Runcu Rivers (UTM coordi-
nates: 5204774/35445217; sample: 116; 5204562/3544100,
sample: 134). In this outcrop the succession from the middle
member of Sărata Formation to the top of the Bisericani For-
mation is exposed.

Log 5: the succession, 20 m thick, crops out along the Runcu

River (UTM coordinates: 5204774/35445217; sample: 135;
5204485/3544034, sample: 144). In this stratigraphic section,
the “Globigerina marls member” and Lingure ti Brown Marls
of the “lower menilites member” are exposed.

Log 6: the succession, 1280 m thick, crops out along the

Tărcu a Creek (UTM coordinates: 5174538/441207; samp-
les: T-1 to T-72) a tributary of the Tarcău River. In this strati-
graphic section, the Tarcău Sandstone Fm, Unit A (Podu Secu
and Ardelu a Mbs), Unit B (“lower menilites”, “bituminous
marls” and “lower dysodilic shales mbs”), and the Fusaru Fm
are exposed.

Log 7: the succession, 230 m thick, crops out along the

Răchiti Creek, a tributary of the Tărcu a Creek (UTM coor-
dinates: 5171958/425994; samples: T-73 to T-76). In this
stratigraphic section, only the Vine i u Fm is exposed.

On the basis of the main characteristics of the persistent

lithofacies, we reconstructed the vertical stratigraphy of the
central Moldavidian Basin (Tarcău and Vrancea sedimentary
domains: Fig. 3), as described below.

The oldest deposits cropping out in the Bistri a half-win-

dow,  Late  Cretaceous  in  age  according  to  our  data  (see  be-
low),  belong  to  the  Sărata  and  Lep a  Fms  (stratigraphic
sections 3, 4). This stratigraphic interval begins with black
and  silicified  shale  and  black  chert  beds  (5—10 cm  thick)
deposited  in  pelagic  sedimentary  realms  followed  by  well-
stratified calcarenites (locally coarse and dolomitized), prob-
ably  deposited  on  an  external  platform.  Upward,  coarse
deposits occur, consisting of polygenic breccias/conglomer-
ates (5—30 cm thick; with limestone and green-schist clasts),
turbiditic sandstone (2—20 cm thick) and slump deposits (up
to 15 m thick). This interval ends with another slumped body
(20 m thick), involving black shale from the Sărata Fm mid-
dle member, probably deposited on a slope.

The succession continues with Putna Fm (stratigraphic sec-

tion 4),  which  consists  of  dark-greyish  clays,  turbiditic  cal-
carenites  (rare),  limestones  (4—5 m  thick),  silty  shale  and
arenites  with  green-schist  microrudites  and  algae  fragments
(Melobesiae) and some polygenic breccias (with green-schist
clasts up to 2 cm in diameter). The Putna Fm could have been
deposited  in  a  deeper  pelagic  sedimentary  realm.  The  Putna
Fm is followed in column by the Piatra Uscată Fm, the contact
being of gradational type. The latter consists of greyish-green
pelites with calcarenite interlayers and some thin arenite beds
(with  green-schist  clasts;  stratigraphic  section 2).  The  Piatra
Uscată Fm was sedimented in the same realm as the Putna Fm.
The succession continues with the Jgheabu Mare Fm, of bluish
spongolitic limestones (5—50 cm thick) and thin (2—5 cm) in-

tions of the tectonic lineaments with a NE facing); (3) rem-
nant embayment to the southeast after Tisia collided against
the  Eastern  European  plate-Moesian  platform  involving  the
larger  part  of  the  Moldavidian  Basin;  (4)  new  docking  and
clockwise  rotation  reaching  a  southeastward  convergence
from  the  Middle  Miocene  onward,  contemporaneous  with
the  westward  movement  and  pushing  of  Anatolia  block
which  caused  the  double-arched  shape  of  the  southern  loop
of the Carpathian Belt (Mann 1997).

As a consequence of the above-exposed geodynamic evo-

lution, from Late Cretaceous onward, the Moldavidian Basin
developed as a foreland basin. From the Early Miocene on-
ward, the foredeep stage (sensu Guerrera et al. 1993) started
in the Moldavidian Basin, whose deposits were structured in
several overthrusted units: the Moldavide units.

The evolution of the Moldavide units stacking is considered

well documented (Săndulescu 1984, 1988; Roure et al. 1993;
Ellouz & Roca 1994; Ma enco & Bertotti 2000). According to
the afore-mentioned authors, the Moldavidian Basin under-
went three compressional episodes during the Early, Middle,
and Late Miocene (early Styrian, late Styrian, and Moldavian
tectonic episodes, respectively). The Pericarpathian Nappe
was also locally folded in the Pleistocene (Wallachian tectonic
event in Carpathian Bend Area; Săndulescu 1988).

Stratigraphy of the central Moldavidian Basin

Lithostratigraphy

In this section, we present the most important lithostrati-

graphic successions reconstructed in the field. The Vrancea
Nappe was studied in five stratigraphic sections (logs 1 to 5)
while the succession from the Tarcău Nappe was studied in
two stratigraphic sections (logs 6 and 7) cropping out in the
Piatra Neam -Bacău area (Fig. 1). It is important to mention
that, in this area, only the internal “lithofacies” of the Tarcău
Nappe is preserved, the mixed and external ones have been
eroded. The mixed and external “lithofacies” were studied in
the Gura Humorului area situated toward the north (Belayouni
et al. 2007). The terminology for stratigraphic units, main
lithofacies, thickness, samples, and stratigraphic sections of
the Vrancea and Tarcău Nappes are summarized in Tables 1
and 2, respectively, while detailed lithostratigraphy is reported
in Figure 2.

Log 1: this is exposed along the Tazlău River (UTM coor-

dinates: 5174128/35458011,  5174358/35458861;  samples:
1—69).  The  exposed  stratigraphic  succession  (680 m  thick)
spans from the Bisericani Formation p.p. to the Gura  oimului
Formation.  The  succession  is  deformed,  ending  in  tectonic
contact with the “salted breccia and gypsum formation”, be-
longing to the Pericarpathian Nappe.

Log 2: the succession, 440 m thick, crops out near Piatra

oimului village, along the Calu River (UTM coordinates:

5187169/35454002; samples: 70—91) and along the Dracului
tributary; (5187315/35452061; samples 92—108). The strati-
graphic succession consists of deposits from the uppermost
part of the Piatra Uscată Formation up to “upper dysodilic
shales member”.

466

GUERRERA, MARTÍN MARTÍN, MARTÍN-PÉREZ, MARTÍN-ROJAS, MICLĂU and SERRANO

GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA

GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA, 2012, 63, 6, 463—479

terstratified bluish clays. Over the spongolitic limestones, a
slump deposit 30 m thick occurs (stratigraphic section 2). The
spongolitic limestones and as well as the slump deposit were
probably deposited on a slope. Upwardly, greyish limestones,
calcarenites, and marls of Doamna Limestone Fm occur. This
formation was deposited on an outer platform.

Table 1: Stratigraphic nomenclature, main lithofacies, samples, thickness, and estimated age of the Vrancea Nappe succession (Moldavidian
Basin, External Carpathian Chain) reconstructed by five measured logs.

Overlying the Doamna Limestone Fm, the Bisericani Fm

occurs. The lower part of this formation (“green and red shale
member”) is not exposed in logged sections, the middle part
(“greenish-grey mudstone member”) consisting of micaceous
greenish to reddish clay-silty/mudstones (with no carbonate),
greenish to blackish mudstones with thin laminated sandy

V R A N C E A N A P P E

Stratigraphic nomenclature

Lithofacies and their main characteristics

Sample Log Estimated ages

SALTED BRECCIAS Fm

(Pericarpathian Nappe)

breccias with gypsum

---

GURA ŞOIMULUI Fm

(220 m)

chaotic polygenic breccias with metamorphic clasts

(up

to 1.5 m):

garnet schists, gneiss, white and blackish

quartzites, phyllites, amphibolites?;

sedimentary clasts:

fossiliferous, oolithic limestones, green-greyish arenites,

black shales, limestone breccias, greyish pelites, lidites and

clasts from dysodilic shales

49÷69 1

Aquitanian

p.p.–

Burdigalian

Upper dysodilic shales mb

(34–110 m)

laminated black shales, thin siltites, quartzarenites

(2–30 cm thick), sub-arkoses, thin bentonitic clay beds

(1–2 cm thick)

34÷48

106÷108

1
2

Aquitanian

p.p.

Transitional interval (5 m)

laminated black shales, thin quartzarenites

(5–30 cm thick)

31÷33 1

Lower dysodilic shales mb

with Kliwa Sst.

(126–205 m)

black sandy-silt shales, thin quartzarenite beds of

Kliwa type, (up to 25 m thick), greenish shales, disorganized

polygenic conglomerates with green schist, arenitic and

metamorphic clasts

15÷30

93÷105

1–2

Bituminous marls mb

(28–66 m)

laminated bituminous marls, chert (beds and lens),

thin quartzarenites (2–15 cm thick), marls with metamorphic

clasts up to 30 cm in diameter

8÷14

1–2

Compact menilites

(2–4 m)

silicified shales, black chert beds

6÷7

eni

lites

–32

)

Lingureşti Brown Marls

(>8 m)

black shales, quartzarenites, brownish marls,

black chert (frequent fish fragments)

143÷144 5–2

lian

–Ch

tia

orre

tio

n wi

Tar

că

u G

LUCĂCEŞTI Fm and

a part of Lingureşti Brown Marls

not exposed in studied logs

---

Globigerina marls mb

(12–20 m)

creamy marls, greyish marly clays,

thin limestone beds

4–5

135÷142

1–5

Greenish-grey mudstone mb

(50 m)

marls, micaceous greenish-grey mudstones, sideritic

limestones in lens (5–20 cm), thin siltites (2–5 cm thick),

limestones in lens up to 50–60 cm in diameter

83÷91

1÷3

2–1

early

Rupelian

I F

–40

0 m

)

Green and red shales mb

(50–100 m ?)

not exposed in studied logs

---

2–4

DOAMNA LIMESTONE Fm

(25–75 m)

whitish limestones, calcarenites, marls

80÷82

2–4

Lutetian p.p.

JGHEABU MARE Fm

(40–125 m)

bluish spongolitic limestones (5–50 cm thick) thin

(2–5 cm) bluish shales, slump up to 30 m thick

73÷79

2
4

latest Ypresian–

Lutetian p.p.

PIATRA USCATĂ Fm

(> 20 m)

greyish greenish silty shales, calcarenites,

arenites with green schist clasts

70÷72 2

PUTNA-PIATRA USCATĂ Fms

(180 m)

greyish clays, rare calcarenites, limestones
(4–5 m thick), arenites, polygenic breccias

with green schist clasts up to 2 cm in diameter

129÷134 4

early

Paleocene–

latest Ypresian

LEPŞA Fm

(70 m)

grey sandy marls, olistostrome of black shale with

black chert up to 15 m thick at the top

122÷128 4

absent

absent in studied logs

Upper Mb

(130 m)

sandy marls with green-schists clasts, marls, polygenic

breccias with green schists and clasts up to 20 cm,

calcarenites with green schists

120÷121

Middle Mb

(> 110 m)

silicified black shales, black chert beds (5–10 cm thick), thin

stratified calcarenites and breccias with limestones and

green-schist clasts, slump up to 4 m thick

116÷119

SĂ

–30

0 m

)

Lower Mb p.p.

(> 30 m)

black shales with turbiditic arenites (2–20 cm thick) and

conglomerates (5–30 cm thick), slump up to 13 m thick

109÷115

Ear

ly Cr

ace

s–

ric

n–

Dan

ian

467

THE SEDIMENTARY RECORD OF THE CENTRAL MOLDAVIDIAN BASIN (EASTERN CARPATHIANS, ROMANIA)

GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA

GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA, 2012, 63, 6, 463—479

turbiditic layers (2—5 cm thick), sideritic limestone in lenses
(2—20 cm), rare carbonate clasts, up to 50—60 cm in diameter,
and brownish marls (stratigraphic section 2). The upper mem-
ber of the Bisericani Fm (“Globigerina marls mb”) consists of
marly clays, limestone and greyish marly pelites (stratigraphic
section 5). The deposits of the Bisericani Fm could be related
to a hemipelagic ramp to external platform realm. The Biseri-
cani Fm of the Vrancea Nappe is correlatable with the Unit A
(Podu Secu and Ardelu a Mbs) of the Tarcău Nappe (log 6).

Putna—Piatra Uscată, Jgheabu Mare, Doamna Limestone,

and Bisericani Fms were deposited during the Paleocene to
Early Oligocene (see below).

Overlying the Bisericani Fm, an episode of organic-matter-

rich  deposits  was  registered,  during  which  the  “lower  meni-
lites”, “bituminous marls”, and the “lower and upper dysodilic
shales members” (stratigraphic sections 1, 2, 5) were accumu-
lated in the external Moldavidic Basin. The above-mentioned
lithostratigraphic units were grouped in a single informal unit
(see Figs. 2 and 3) with rank of formation, consequently being
considered  members  and  not  formations  as  they  were  previ-
ously  (Grasu  et  al.  1988).  Since  this  unit  can  be  correlated
with  an  analogous  one  defined  by  Belayouni  et  al.  (2007)  in
the  Tarcău  Nappe,  we  will  use  the  same  informal  name,
Unit B.  This  unit  (200—400 m  thick  from  Fig. 2)  is  Late  Oli-
gocene  to  Early  Miocene  in  age.  The  “lower  menilites  mb”
(stratigraphic  sections 1  and  5)  is  made  up  of  black  shale,
quartzarenites,  brownish  marls,  silicified  black  shale,  and
black chert with fish-fossil fragments (deposited in pelagic en-
vironments).  This  member  is  followed  by  the  “bituminous

marls  mb”  (stratigraphic  sections 1,  2),  consisting  of  bitumi-
nous  marls,  chert  beds,  silexites  and  quartzarenites.  These
lithofacies also point to a deposition in the pelagic-hemipelag-
ic  realm.  The  lower  part  of  the  “lower  dysodilic  shales  mb”
(stratigraphic  sections 1,  2)  is  made  up  of  sandy-silty  black
shale  (with  quartzarenitic  dykes,  also  present  in  the  “bitumi-
nous marls mb”), thin quartzarenites, greenish shale, disorga-
nized  polygenic  conglomerates  with  “green  clasts”  and
limestone clasts up to 1 m in diameter (log 2). The lithofacies
mentioned  seem  to  indicate  a  hemipelagic  depositional  envi-
ronment. The upper part of the “lower dysodilic shales mb”
consists  of  laminated  black  shale,  thin  ( < 10 cm)  siltstone
beds and thin (2—30 cm) laminated turbiditic quartzarenites.
A  pebbly  mudstone  bed  with  some  “green  clasts”  has  also
been  recognized.  Two  upwardly  thickening  beds  of  white
quartzarenites  (up  to  15—20 m  thick),  the  Kliwa  Sandstone,
characterize  this  sub-unit,  too.  The  “upper  dysodilic  shales
mb”  (stratigraphic  sections 1,  2)  consists  of  laminated  black
shale, quartzarenites, sub-arkoses and thin (1—2 cm thick) ben-
tonitic  beds.  In  the  Tarcău  Nappe,  the  equivalent  succession
(log 6) is made up of Unit B, consisting of “lower menilites”,
“bituminous marls”, and “lower dysodilic shales mbs”, as re-
ported in Belayouni et al. (2007).

The Vrancea Nappe succession ends with Gura oimului

Fm (log 1), Early Miocene (Aquitanian p.p.—Burdigalian p.p.)
in age. The basal bounding surface of this formation is ero-
sive. The Gura  oimului Fm consists of a mega-olistostrome
deposit  made  up  of  disorganized  polygenic  conglomerates
with  a  matrix  of  green-greyish  arenites  and  greyish  pelites.

* after Belayouni et al. (2007).

Table 2: Stratigraphic nomenclature, main lithofacies, samples, thickness, and estimated age of the internal Tarcău Nappe succession (Mol-
davidian Basin, External Carpathian Chain) reconstructed by two measured logs.

T A R C Ă U N A P P E

Stratigraphic nomenclature

Lithofacies and their main characteristics

Sample Log Estimated ages*

VINEŢIŞU Fm

(> 230 m)

bituminous shales, siltstones, thin convolute sandstones

(5÷20 cm thick) with some red shales (up to 10 cm) and two

slumps (2 and 40 m); tectonized and reworked beds in the

upper part of the succession

T73÷T76 7

dig

Pelitic-arenitic mb

(485 m)

micaceous pelites and litharenites, bituminous shales

(in the lower part), marls and marly limestones

T61÷T72

Upper dysodilic shales mb

(90 m)

well stratified thin brownish and bituminous shales

(dysodilic type)

T56÷T60

FUSAR

Arenitic mb

(170 m)

coarse micaceous litharenites, microconglomerates

(up to 2–3 m thick) and rare pelites

T53÷T55

Lower dysodilic shales mb

(264 m) with Jaslo Lmst. marker-

bed and arenites in the upper part

well-stratified and laminated thin brownish and bituminous

shales (3÷15 cm thick) (dysodilic type) and litharenites in the

upper part (Fusaru type)

T18÷T52

Bituminous marls mb

(20–25 m)

silicified lithofacies, laminated bituminous shales, marls,

arenites, etc. (menilites s.s. type)

T15÷T17

t o

lde

lat

e Ch

tian

UNIT

Lower menilites mb

(70–80 m)

silicified lithofacies, laminated bituminous shales (2÷6 cm

thick); marls and micaceous litharenites (up to 1 m thick);

(menilites s.s.)

T10÷T14

Ardeluţa Mb

(40 m)

blackish bituminous shales in the lower part; marls, marly

limestone (rich in foraminifers), limestone, silicified arenites

and micaceous laminated litharenites (up to 2 m thick)

T6÷T9

UNIT

Podu Secu Mb

(130 m)

bituminous, limonitic shales, micaceous pelites, micaceous

laminated litharenites (0.2÷1 m thick)

T1÷T5

t o

lde

Lat

e R

eli

a r

TARCĂU SANDSTONES Fm

(> 50 m)

massive arenites (0.5÷2 m thick)

with some conglomeratic beds

---

Eoc

469

THE SEDIMENTARY RECORD OF THE CENTRAL MOLDAVIDIAN BASIN (EASTERN CARPATHIANS, ROMANIA)

GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA

GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA, 2012, 63, 6, 463—479

Most of the polygenic clasts are metamorphic (garnet schists,
gneisses,  white  quartzites,  blackish  quartzites,  phyllites  and
amphibolites?) but there are sedimentary clasts (fossiliferous
limestones,  oolithic  limestones,  greenish-greyish  arenites,
black shale, limestone breccias with Fe mineralization, greyish
pelites,  lidites,  and  polygenic  breccias),  also.  Black-shale
bodies are also included in the olistostrome. This mega-olis-
tostrome  deposit  was  probably  sedimented in a slope realm.
In  the  upper  part  of  Gura  oimului  Fm,  a  thick  (40—50 m)
slumped  deposit  and  olistostrome  occur.  The  slumped  body
includes contorted beds of menilite and dysodilic shales with
Kliwa-type  sandstone  interlayers  as  well  as  large  blocks  of
white limestone and “green schists”.

With the Gura oimului Formation, the succession of

Vrancea Nappe in the Bistri a half-window ends. The Vrancea
Nappe is in tectonic contact with the “salted breccia and gyp-
sum  formation”  of  the  Pericarpathian  Nappe.  In  the  Tarcău
Nappe, the equivalent succession consists of the Fusaru Fm
(log 6)  and  Vine i u  Fm  (log 7),  both  correlatable  with  the
Gura  oimului Fm from the Vrancea Nappe.

Bio- and chronostratigraphy

The age of the former central Moldavidian Basin formations

(of Tarcău and Vrancea sedimentary domains) have been de-
termined by means of a biostratigraphic study based both on
planktonic  foraminifers  and  on  calcareous  nannoplankton
(Ionesi  1957;  Dumitrescu  1963;  Mirău ă  &  Mirău ă  1964;
Lebenzon  1973a,b;  Ion  et  al.  1982;  Micu  &  Ghe a  1986;
Bombi ă 1986; Ionesi & Meszaros 1989; Juravle et al. 2008;
Figs. 3, 4 and 5). The data listed below come from the 7 sec-
tions logged in the Vrancea Nappe (Sărata to Bisericani Forma-
tions) and Tarcău Nappe (Units A and B, Fusaru and Vine i u
Formations). The biostratigraphy based on the planktonic fora-
minifers  was  carried  out  using  the  zonation  of  Berggren  &
Pearson (2005) for the Paleogene and of Berggren et al. (1995)
for the Aquitanian as reference. For the calcareous nannoplank-
ton  biostratigraphy,  the  standard  zones  of  Martini  (1971)  and
Okada & Bukry (1980) were used. These analyses gave the
results presented in the next paragraphs and in Tables 1 and 2.

The oldest deposit in the study area is the Sărata Formation

which has formerly been considered Early Cretaceous (Băncilă
1958;  Mirău ă  &  Mirău ă  1964)  and  Valanginian—Albian
(Melinte  et  al.  2007)  in  age.  In  the  Cuejdi  River  section,  the
lower  member  of  this  formation  (samples  109—115;  log 3)
yielded only some agglutinated foraminifers and echinoderm
remains. In sample 109, three small conical foraminifers were
identified as Patellina sp. This taxon appears in the Early Cre-
taceous  but  survives  through  younger  ages.  The  siliceous
black shales composing the middle member of the Sărata For-
mation (samples 116—119; log 4) are almost barren, except for
some  agglutinated  foraminifers.  Only  in  sample 119  was  a
very poorly preserved specimen found, probably belonging to
Globotruncana  sp.,  suggesting  a  Campanian-Maastrichtian
age. The sandy marls of the upper member of the Sărata For-
mation  (samples 120—121;  log 4)  contain  a  scarce  and  poorly
preserved but typical Senonian planktonic foraminiferal assem-
blage.  Globotruncana  ventricosa  (White)  recognized  in  sam-
ple 120 indicates a Late Campanian-Early Maastrichtian age.

The marls and clays of the Lep a Formation, previously dated

Late  Cretaceous—Paleocene  (Dumitrescu  1963;  Ion  et  al.
1982) (samples 122—128; log 4), include Senonian planktonic
foraminiferal assemblages, too. In this formation, Globotrun-
canita  stuarti  (De  Lapparent),  Abathomphalus  mayaroensis
(Bolli),  and  Racemiguembelina  fructicosa  (Egger)  appear
(sample 124; Fig. 4.1—3), these being characteristic of the Late
Maastrichtian  (Caron  1985;  Robaszynski  et  al.  2000).  More-
over,  Heterohelicidae  predominate  in  most  of  the  samples
from the Lep a Formation; this is a common event observed at
the top of the Cretaceous (although it can also be interpreted
as  related  to  local  paleo-environmental  features).  Regarding
the  calcareous  nannoplankton,  only  some  poorly  preserved
Late Cretaceous forms were found. In the uppermost sample
(128) of this formation, no planktonic foraminifers or calcare-
ous nannoplankton occur, and the microfauna consists only of
scarce  agglutinated  foraminifers.  These  biotic  features  could
be related to the Cretaceous-Paleocene transition (Danian), but
no  detailed  biostratigraphic  monitoring  is  possible,  because
the upper part of the Lep a Formation (samples 127 and 128)
is a mega-slump, according to field observations.

Above the Lep a Formation, the dark grey to greenish-grey

shale  of  the  Putna—Piatra  Uscată  Formations  occur  (sam-
ples 129—134; log 4, Figs. 2 and 3). These formations, formerly
dated as Middle—Late Paleocene (Ion et al. 1982), yielded mi-
crofauna  made  up  mainly  of  agglutinated  foraminifers  (As-
trorhizidae). Regarding the planktonic foraminifers, the lower
levels  (up  to  sample 132)  contain  only  some  earliest  Paleo-
cene small globigerinids such as Subbotina cancellata Blow.
However,  the  presence  of  Praemurica  uncinata  (Bolli)  in
sample 133 (Fig. 4.4—6) characterizes Zone P2 of Berggren et
al.  (1995),  dated  as  late  Early  Paleocene  in  age.  In  the  Calu
River  (log 2)  the  green  silty  shale  of  the  uppermost  Piatra
Uscată  Formation  contains  mainly  agglutinated  foraminiferal
microfauna (samples 70—72). In the rare and poorly preserved
assemblages of planktonic foraminifers, Morozovella arago-
nensis (Nuttal),  Morozovella  lensiformis  (Subbotina),  Subbo-
tina linaperta (Finlay), S. inaequispira (Subbotina), Acarinina
soldadoensis  (Brönnimann),  Acarinina  angulosa  (Bolli),  A.
pentacamerata  (Subbotina),  and  A.  pseudotopilensis  (Subbo-
tina)  have  been  identified  (Fig. 4.7—10).  These  assemblages
match with a biostratigraphic interval ranging between E5—E7
Zones  of  the  late  Ypresian.  Some  suppositions  of  such  age
were previously made by Ion et al. (1982) based on some ben-
thonic foraminifers which evolved up to earliest Ypresian.

The shale interlayers in the overlying Jgheabu Mare For-

mation, considered latest Paleocene—Eocene (Grasu et al.
1988), are practically barren (samples 73—79; log 2, Figs. 2
and 3) except for very rare agglutinated foraminifers. How-
ever, the age of the overlying formation leads us to propose a
latest Ypresian—Lutetian p.p. age.

A marly bed (sample 82) belonging to the overlying

Doamna Limestone Formation, formerly considered Middle
Eocene  (Juravle  et  al.  2008  and  references  within),  yielded
some flattened and very poorly preserved planktonic foramini-
fers,  most  of  them  unidentifiable.  However,  Acarinina  and
Morozovella  species,  Turborotalia  gr.  frontosa  (Subbotina)-
pomeroli  (Tourmakine  &  Bolli)  and  probably  Truncorota-
loides  sp.  and  Hantkenina  sp.  were  recognized,  indicating

472

GUERRERA, MARTÍN MARTÍN, MARTÍN-PÉREZ, MARTÍN-ROJAS, MICLĂU and SERRANO

GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA

GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA, 2012, 63, 6, 463—479

the Middle Eocene, so that the formation can be considered
Lutetian p.p.

The Bisericani Formation, formerly dated as Late Eocene

(Bombi ă 1986; Micu & Ghe a 1986 and references within),
overlies the Doamna Limestone Formation. The lower mem-
ber of this formation (“red and green shale member”) is not
exposed, a stratigraphic gap being possible between the two
formations in the Middle—Late Eocene p.p. (Bartonian p.p.—
Priabonian p.p.) time span. In the log 2 (samples 83—91), the
middle  member  of  the  Bisericani  Formation  yielded  very
scarce microfauna composed of some agglutinated foramini-
fers  and  Nodosaridae  (Nodosaria  ssp.,  Lenticulina  ssp.)
while  only  two  globigerinid  specimens  reminiscent  of  the
Oligocene  age  were  identified.  Regarding  the  calcareous
nannoplankton, despite its scarcity, R. umbilica (Fig. 4.21—22)
R.  bisecta  (Fig. 4.23),  I.  recurvus  (Fig. 4.24—26),  and  E.  for-

mosa (Fig. 4.27) were observed in the samples 83—85 (log 2).
This  assemblage  characterizes  interval  NP19—NP22  of  the
standard  calcareous  nannoplankton  zonation  by  Martini
(1971), ranging between the latest Eocene and the early Ru-
pelian.  The  absence  of  Discoaster  barbadiensis  Tan  Sin
Hok,  and  Discoaster  saipanensis  Bramlette  &  Riedel  could
restrict  the  age  to  the  early  Rupelian  (Zone  NP21).  In  the
log 1, the middle member of the Bisericani Formation (sam-
ples 2—3) showed the presence of I. recurvus in combination
with Ericsonia formosa (Kamptner) Haq, while D. saipanen-
sis and D.  barbadiensis are absent. According to this situa-
tion, these levels could plausibly be assigned to Zone NP21
of the early Rupelian.

The “Globigerina marls member” (upper member of the

Bisericani Formation) was previously considered latest
Eocene—earliest Rupelian (Micu & Ghe a 1986; Bombi ă

Fig. 5. Significant calcareous nannoplankton and
planktonic  foraminifers  identified  in  some  for-
mations of the Tarcău Nappe. Calcareous nan-
nofossils (all specimens  2,500). Podu Secu Mb
(Unit A; log 6): 1, 2, 3, 4 – Sphenolithus distentus
(Martini), sample T2. Lower dysodilic shales mb
(log 6): 5, 6, 7, 8 – Triquetrorhabdulus carinatus Martini, sample T52. Planktonic foraminifers (all specimens  75). Ardelu a Mb (Unit A;
log 6): 9a,b,c – Globigerina ampliapertura Bolli, sample T9; 10a,b,c – Turborotalia increbescens Bandy; 11a,b,c – Paragloborotalia opima
(Bolli), sample T9. Fusaru Sst. Fm (log 6): 12a,b,c – Globoquadrina dehiscens (Chapman, Parr & Collins), sample T66.

473

THE SEDIMENTARY RECORD OF THE CENTRAL MOLDAVIDIAN BASIN (EASTERN CARPATHIANS, ROMANIA)

GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA

GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA, 2012, 63, 6, 463—479

1986).  This  unit  is  known  throughout  the  former  Carpathian
Basin,  its  age  being  considered  middle Late  Eocene,  latest
Eocene,  latest  Eocene—Early  Oligocene  (Leszczynski  1997;
Soták 2010, and references within). From the study area pre-
sented  in  this  paper  it  yielded  abundant  planktonic  foramini-
fers in the log 5 (samples 135—142), indicating a Rupelian age.
The  assemblage  consists  of  Globigerina  galavisi  Bermúdez,
G.  tripartita  Koch,  G.  venezuelana  Hedberg,  G.  eocaena
Gumbel  (Fig. 4.11),  G.  corpulenta  Subbotina  (Fig. 4.12),
G.  angiporoides  Hornibrook  (Fig. 4.13),  G.  ampliapertura
Bolli  (Fig. 4.14),  T.  increbescens  Bandy  (Fig. 4.15—16),  C.
unicavus Bolli, Loeblich & Tappan (Fig. 4.18), G. suteri Bolli
(Fig. 4.19), G. ouachitaensis Howe & Wallace, G. ciperoensis
Bolli and G. praebulloides Blow. Moreover, sample 137 con-
tains  Pseudohastigerina  cf.  micra  (Cole)  (Fig. 4.20),  which
can restrict the interval corresponding to the samples 135—137
to  the  early  Rupelian  Zone  O1  (Berggren  &  Pearson  2005).
The presence of Paragloborotalia cf. opima (Bolli) (Fig. 4.17)
in the sample 141 without G. ampliapertura or T. increbescens
suggests that the deposition of the “Globigerina marls mem-
ber” lasted until the late Rupelian. Calcareous nannoplankton
assemblages  from  the  same  levels  contain  poorly  preserved
E.  formosa  (Fig. 4.21—27),  R.  umbilica,  and  Helicosphaera
compacta  Bramlette  &  Wilcoxon,  whereas  I.  recurvus,  D.
barbadiensis and D. saipanensis were not recorded. These as-
semblages correspond to an early Rupelian age.

Unit A (Podu Secu and Ardelu a Members) belonging to the

internal part of the Tarcău Nappe, the equivalent of the Biseri-
cani  Formation  of  the  Vrancea  Nappe,  was  considered  latest
Eocene—earliest  Rupelian  (Ionesi  1957;  Lebenzon  1973a,b).
We  dated  Podu  Secu  Member  (log 6)  as  not  older  than  late
Rupelian  (NP23—24  Zones)  by  calcareous  nannoplankton:
S.  distentus  (sample T2;  Fig. 5.1—3)  and  Ardelu a  Member
(stratigraphic section 6) as the first part of the late Rupelian by
planktonic foraminiferal assemblages with: G. ampliapertura,
T.  increbescens,  P.  cf.  opima  (sample T9;  Fig. 5.17—19)  to-
gether with G. eocaena, G. corpulenta, G. tripartita, G. vene-
zuelana,  G.  euapertura,  G.  ouachitaensis,  G.  praebulloides,
and G. ciperoensis.

Above the “Globigerina marls member”, the deposits of

the Vrancea Nappe rich in organic matter are devoid of fossils
although  three  thin  interlayers  of  white  limestone  (Tylawa,
Jasło, and Zagórz) containing rich coccolith assemblages are
used as regional markers (Hackzewski 1996, and references
within;  Švábenická  et  al.  2007).  Ionesi  (1986)  recognized
two  of  these  in  the  Tarcău  and  Vrancea  Nappes  based  only
on  lithological  features,  the  Lower  Jasło  “Member”  in  the
“lower  dysodilic  shales  member”  and  the  Upper  Jasło
“Member”  in  the  Kliwa  and  Fusaru  Sandstone.  Melinte
(2005) recognized and dated three of these, Tylawa (NP23)
in  the  basal  part  of  the  “lower  dysodilic  shales  member”,
Jasło and Zagórz (NP24) in the Fusaru and Kliwa Sandstones.
The  internal  part  of  the  overlying  Tarcău  Nappe,  Unit  B
(“lower  dysodilic  shales  member”),  considered  Early  Oli-
gocene  (Băncilă  1958;  Ionesi  1971;  Săndulescu  &  Micu
1989),  is  dated  here  at  the  bottom  (log 6)  as  not  older  than
latest  Chattian  (NP25/CP19b  Zone)  by  the  presence  of  H.
recta  and  T.  carinatus  (sample T52;  Fig. 5.5—8).  These  data
match  the  above-mentioned  chronostratigraphic  results  and

indicate  an  onset  of  the  deposition  of  the  “Cenozoic  Black
Shales”  (comprising  the  “lower  menilites”,  “bituminous
marls”,  and  “dysodilic  shales  members”)  towards  the  Rupe-
lian/Chattian transition. Consequently, an Aquitanian p.p. age
can be suggested for the “upper dysodilic shales member”.

The Fusaru Formation of the internal Tarcău Nappe was

dated for the first time (log 7) as not older than Aquitanian
by the presence of Globoquadrina dehiscens (sample T66;
Fig. 5.20).

The Vine i u Formation, characterizing the internal and

median part of the Tarcău Nappe, contains frequent radiolarian
skeletons  (sample T76).  An  early  Burdigalian  attribution
may be consistent with its stratigraphic position. In addition,
this  peak  of  radiolarians  appears  to  be  consistent  with  the
silexites  marker-bed  known  in  the  Mediterranean  region
(Guerrera et al. 1992, and references within).

The Gura oimului Formation of the Vrancea Nappe, a lat-

eral equivalent of the Fusaru—Vineti u Formations of the
Tarcău Nappe, was considered Burdigalian (NN2—NN3;
Popescu 2005) and may be provisionally considered Aquita-
nian to early Burdigalian.

Discussion

Stratigraphic analysis of the tectono-sedimentary processes

The sedimentation in the central Moldavidian Basin was

controlled  mainly  by  tectonic  processes  and  secondly  by
eustatic  sea-level  changes.  In  fact,  the  sedimentation  oc-
curred in a foreland basin (Moldavidian Basin) with tecton-
ized  realms  (active  margin  of  the  Dacide  and  forebulge  of
the  passive  margin  Moesian-Scythian-East  European  Plat-
forms)  representing  the  source  areas  of  coarse  sediment
(Amadori  et  al.  2011,  and  references  within).  The  succes-
sions studied (prevalently flysch-like deposits) do not allow
the  application  of  the  conventional  theoretical  sequence-
stratigraphy  criteria.  Therefore,  the  target  of  a  sequential
analysis  of  flysch-like  successions  should  be  to  determine
tectonic-activity markers. In fact, several indicators of conti-
nental  erosion  and  tectonic  instability  processes  (slumps,
olistostromes,  coarse  sandy  levels,  upwardly  thickening  se-
quences)  alternating  with  quiescent  periods  recorded  as  pe-
lagic deposits (organic-siliceous, black shale, marly and clay
beds, etc.) can be recognized. The ratio between the indica-
tors of tectonic activity and tectonic quiescence can be used
to  define  tectonic-influence  intervals  in  the  successions,
contrasting  with  the  system  tracts  of  the  classic  sequence
stratigraphy  (Martín-Martín  et  al.  2001;  Martín-Martín  &
Martín-Algarra 2002; Guerrera et al. 2006).

The sedimentary record studied can be divided into two

main sedimentary cycles (SC-1 and SC-2) based on the sig-
nificant amounts of terrigenous supply (Fig. 6):

SC-1

(Late Cretaceous to Early Oligocene), recording pe-

lagic to hemipelagic conditions with sporadic development
of external platform conditions, is related to prevalently tec-
tonic quiescence. Based on surfaces interpreted as sequence
boundaries and the recognized trends SC-1 can be divided
into three stratigraphic units with the character of depositional

475

THE SEDIMENTARY RECORD OF THE CENTRAL MOLDAVIDIAN BASIN (EASTERN CARPATHIANS, ROMANIA)

GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA

GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA, 2012, 63, 6, 463—479

sequences.  The  first  depositional  sequence,  Cretaceous  to
earliest Paleocene in age, consists of Sărata and Lep a For-
mations which show a regressive-transgressive (progradation-
al-retrogradational)  trend.  This  trend  reflects  an  evolution
from  pelagic  (slope  with  slumps)  to  hemipelagic  (external
platform  carbonates  and  marls)  and  again  to  pelagic  (slope
with slumps) sedimentary realms. The second depositional se-
quence, Paleocene p.p.—Middle Eocene in age, consists of the
Putna, Piatra Uscată,  Jgheabu  Mare,  and  Doamna  Limestone
Formations, showing a regressive (progradational) trend. This
sequence  evolves  from  a  pelagic  basinal  environment  (Put-
na—Piatra  Uscată  Formations  greyish  to  greenish  shale  with
distal turbiditic sandstone) to slope (slumped siliceous facies
at the base of the Jgheabu Mare Formation) and finally to ex-
ternal  platform  realms  (the  calcarenites  and  limestones  of
Jgheabu Mare and Doamna Limestone Formations). The rela-
tion of the second sequence to the third one is not clear due
to lack of exposure between the Doamna and Bisericani For-
mations, a stratigraphic gap being possible. The third deposi-
tional  sequence,  Late  Eocene—Early  Oligocene  in  age,  is
made  up  of  the  Bisericani  Formation  recording  hemipelagic
rhythmic conditions (red and green shale, greenish-grey, spo-
radic  dark  shale  with  distal  turbiditic  sandstone  and  sideritic
limestone  intercalations)  going  upwards  in    the  Early  Oli-
gocene  “Globigerina  marls  member”,  which  could  indicate
hemipelagic to external platform realms.

Only two stages indicate significant terrigenous supply

and  tectonic  related  instability  processes:  (1)  Campanian—
Maastrichtian—earliest Paleocene (sandstone, conglomerates,
and  slumped  deposits  during  the  sedimentation  of  Sărata-
Lep a Formations); (2) latest Ypresian-Lutetian (slumps and
terrigenous  supply  during  the  sedimentation  of  the  Jgheabu
Mare-Doamna Limestone and Tarcău Sandstone Formation).

SC-2

(Late Oligocene to Early Miocene), deeper and with

hemipelagic  conditions  in  a  regressive-like  (progradational-
like) trend, records a large terrigenous supply and a greater
tectonic instability. SC-2 consists of several regressive (pro-
gradational) stratigraphic units with the character of a depo-
sitional  sequence,  including  frequent  tectofacies-levels
related to compressional tectonic activity. Based on surfaces
interpreted  as  sequence  boundaries  and  the  recognized
trends,  SC-2  can  also  be  subdivided  into  three  depositional
sequences. The first, Rupelian in age, consists of the “lower
menilites”,  “bituminous  marls”  and  “lower  dysodilic  shales
members”,  recording  a  regressive  (progradational)  trend
from  pelagic  (“lower  menilites”  and  “bituminous  marls
members”  fine-grained  lithofacies)  to  hemipelagic  deposi-
tional  environments  (“lower  dysodilic  shales  member”
coarse  lithofacies).  The  second,  Aquitanian  in  age,  consists
of the “upper dysodilic shales member”, recording a regres-
sive (progradational) trend, also, with an evolution from pe-
lagic  (basal  black  shale)  to  hemipelagic  environments
(coarse  facies  in  the  upper  part  of  the  member).  The  third,
Burdigalian  in  age,  consists  of  Gura  oimului  Formation,
made  up  of  thick  conglomerates  with  rounded  clasts,  and
sandstone,  followed  by  an  olistostromic  deposit  involving
deformed Late Oligocene-like deposits without trending rec-
ognized. The lower contact of this sequence is an unconfor-
mity related to a channelized area of a slope.

Two stages with high influence of tectono-sedimentary

processes can be highlighted:

(1) late Chattian—earliest Aquitanian, which is marked by a

large amount of turbiditic arenites, conglomerates, and
slumps (Unit B);

(2) late Aquitanian—early Burdigalian characterized mainly

by olistostromic polygenic conglomerates and sandstones
from the Gura oimului Formation on the external margin of
the basin and the Fusaru and Vineti u Formations on the inter-
nal sedimentary domain of the Tarcău Nappe.

The correlation between sedimentary trends and eustatic

curve (Haq et al. 1987) excludes the eustatic control (falls)
on the terrigenous supplies (Fig. 6). In fact, the main eustatic
falls (depth less than 50 m) occur both during the interpreted
quiescence intervals and at the boundary between quiescence
and tectonic-influence intervals. Moreover, the tectonic-in-
fluence intervals (see interval II, III and IV) are usually con-
temporary with eustatic rising periods.

Geodynamic constraints

The post-Cretaceous geodynamic evolution of the study

area should be closely related to the post-Cretaceous Africa-
Europe convergence, to the direction of transport of tectonic
units (usually embayment or tectonic escapes with a progres-
sive reorientation from NE-ward until reaching the SE-ward),
and to the NW-SE orientation of the tectonic lineaments af-
ter  the  first  eastward  tectonic  escape  due  to  the  Cretaceous
docking  in  the  northern  part  of  the  European  plate  (Morley
1996;  Bădescu  1997;  Mann  1997;  Mason  et  al.  1998;  Hip-
polyte  et  al.  1999;  Sanders  et  al.  1999;  Ma enco  &  Bertotti
2000;  Gibson  2001;  Seghedi  et  al.  2004;  Golonka  et  al.
2006; Gröger et al. 2008; Schmid et al. 2008; Ma enco et al.
2010; Merten et al. 2010; Márton et al. 2011). The progres-
sive reorientation of convergence and the NW-SE orientation
of  the  tectonic  lineaments  should  give  a  local  geodynamic
framework in the Moldavidian Basin, varying from transpres-
sive dextral strike-slip to sinistral strike-slip passing through
a purely compressive strike-slip as will be exposed in detail
below by correlation with the tectonic-influence intervals de-
tected in the sedimentary record (Fig. 7).

The four stages of significant tectonic activity indicated by

the  sedimentary  record  should  be  correlated  with  periods  of
tectonic rising and exhumation of source areas during the geo-
dynamic  evolution  of  the  Moldavidian  Basin,  in  particular,
and the Eastern Carpathians, in general (Mann 1997; Ma enco
&  Bertotti  2000;  Csontos  &  Vörös  2004).  Miclău   et  al.
(2009) consider that fragmentation of the forebulge, raised as
a result of basin shortening, can explain the increasing supply
of coarse sediment toward the Vrancea sedimentation area re-
corded at least in the Eocene—Oligocene time span.

In detail, the tectonic indicators are less pronounced in the

two older stages and much more significant in the two recent
ones. In these latter, the indicators consist of a high amount of
coarse clastic material, probably related to the proximity of the
exhumed areas and to the orientation of the tectonic transport
of the tectonic units involved (Fig. 7). Thus, during the SC-1,
the tectonic transport would have been oblique to the paleo-
geographic axis of the Moldavidian Basin, which underwent

477

THE SEDIMENTARY RECORD OF THE CENTRAL MOLDAVIDIAN BASIN (EASTERN CARPATHIANS, ROMANIA)

GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA

GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA, 2012, 63, 6, 463—479

the  Ceahlău  area  (Outer  Dacide)  but  also  the  internal  part  of
the Moldavidian Basin (Teleajen sedimentary domain) with a
northward  tectonic  transport.  Our  approach,  based  on  litho-
stratigraphic  and  biostratigraphic  data,  seems  to  indicate  that
this  phase  can  be  correlated  with  the  first  tectonic-influence
interval we defined in the sedimentary record, although slightly
younger, reaching at least the earliest Paleocene (Fig. 7).

Another phase, at the late Ypresian, is cited by Ma enco et

al. (2003) affecting the internal (mainly Teleajen, but also
Audia-Macla sedimentary domains) which could correspond to
the second tectonic-influence period proposed here, when the
Moldavidian Basin evolved as a foreland basin. Consequently,
according to our biostratigraphic data, this phase would also
be younger, namely latest Ypresian—Lutetian in age (Fig. 7).

The late Chattian—early Aquitanian defined tectonic-influ-

ence  interval  is  also  mentioned  by  Linzer  et  al.  (1998)  and
Ma enco et al. (2003) during the Oligocene. The large amount
of  terrigenous  supply  suggests  that  the  Moldavidian  Basin
reached the foredeep stage (sensu Guerrera et al. 1993), affect-
ing  mainly  the  Audia-Macla  but  also  the  Tarcău  domains
(Fig. 7). Miclău  et al. (2009) consider that Vrancea sedimen-
tary  area  was  on  the  partly  emerged  forebulge,  supplying
coarse  material  consisting  of  quartzose  sand  and  “green
schist” clasts.

The Aquitanian-Burdigalian boundary age deformative

phase  (early  Styrian)  in  the  central  Moldavidian  Basin  of
Ma enco & Bertotti (2000) and Ma enco et al. (2003) can be
correlated  with  our  latest  Aquitanian—early  Burdigalian  tec-
tonic-influence interval. This also coincides with the construc-
tive wedge phase indicated by Sanders et al. (1999), as well as
with the deformation of the Tarcău and Vrancea sedimentary
domains  and  corresponding  formation  of  nappes  (Zweigel  et
al. 1998; Gibson 2001) during the end of the foredeep stage of
the Moldavidian Basin (Fig. 7). The thick Gura  oimului con-
glomerates with slumps are related to this event. Middle—late
Miocene and younger deformation phases (late Styrian, Mold-
avian,  Wallachian)  are  reported  in  the  literature  (Săndulescu
1988; Ellouz et al. 1996; Ma enco & Bertotti 2000; Ma enco
et al. 2003; Merten et al. 2010, among others), progressively af-
fecting more external and southward areas of the basin (Fig. 7).

Conclusions

This study of the sedimentary record of the central Molda-

vidian Basin (Romanian Outer Carpathian Domain) provides
new  data  on  lithostratigraphy,  bio-  and  chronostratigraphy,
and  stratigraphic  analysis  of  the  tectono-sedimentary  pro-
cesses.  Based  on  the  analysis  of  tectono-sedimentary  pro-
cesses  and  on  age  results,  the  geodynamic  evolution  of  the
basin  was  better  constrained.  The  main  results  and  conclu-
sions are summarized below.

(a) The sedimentary successions of the Tarcău and Vran-

cea Nappes were correlated based on the detailed lithostrati-
graphic study and, consequently, were used to reconstruct
the stratigraphic architecture of their sedimentary domains in
the central Moldavidian Basin (Fig. 2).

(b) The integrated biostratigraphic data (planktonic fora-

minifers and calcareous nannoplankton; Fig. 2; Tables 1, 2)

indicate that all the formations studied are younger in age than
previously reported in the literature, consequently all events
during the basin evolution should be younger than considered.
Two main time spans could not be confirmed by biostrati-
graphic analysis – Middle Paleocene p.p.—Early Eocene p.p.,
and Late Eocene p.p. – a situation that might be explained
either by non-deposition or as unrecorded (Fig. 3).

stratigraphic records studied were integrated in two synthetic
columns, based on which two main sedimentary cycles, sev-
eral minor sedimentary sequences and four main stages of
tectonic influence were distinguished in the Moldavidian Ba-
sin (Fig. 6).

(d) After removing the eustatic interferences and consider-

ing the new established ages of deposits, the comparison of
the four main stages of tectonic influence with the accepted
geodynamic evolution of the Moldavidian Basin allowed
better constraints of the main events (Fig. 7):

The classic tectonic Laramian phase (Late Creta-

ceous in the literature) after which the Outer Dacide were
structured, could be slightly younger, reaching at least the
earliest Paleocene;

The late Ypresian tectonic phase cited in literature,

affecting the internal basin (mainly Teleajen but also Au-
dia-Macla sedimentary domains), could correspond to the
second tectonic stage proposed here since the Moldavidian
Basin evolved as a foreland basin. According to our bio-
stratigraphic data, this phase would be latest Ypresian—
Lutetian in age;

The Oligocene tectonic phase mentioned in literature

could correspond to the third tectonic-influence interval
defined in this paper (late Chattian to early Aquitanian),
younger than previously reported, when a great amount of
terrigenous material was supplied both on internal, and ex-
ternal domains studied in the Moldavidian Basin. We con-
sider that Tarcău-Vrancea sedimentary domain reached the
foredeep stage within this time span;

The Aquitanian-Burdigalian boundary age deforma-

tion phase (early Styrian) in the central Moldavidian Ba-
sin  from  literature  can  be  correlated  with  the  latest
Aquitanian—early  Burdigalian  tectonic-influence  interval
defined  in  this  paper,  also  coinciding  with  the  construc-
tive wedge phase during the end of the foredeep stage.

Acknowledgments:  The  author  wishes  to  thank  to  Ján
Soták,  András  Nagymarosy,  and  Dušan  Plašienka  for  their
valuable  comments  which  improved  the  earlier  draft  of  the
paper  manuscript.  Research  supported  by  MIUR-Urbino
University Grant (responsible F. Guerrera); CGL2009-09249,
CGL2011-30153-CO2-02  and  CGL2012-32169  Research
Project  (Spanish  Ministry  of  Education  and  Science),  Re-
search  Groups  and  Projects  of  the  Generalitat  Valenciana
from  Alicante  University  (CTMA-IGA)  and  Research
Group 146  of  the  Junta  de  Andalucía.  The  geological  and
stratigraphic  results  are  from  F.G.,  M.M-M.  and  C.M.;  the
biostratigraphy from F.S. (foraminifers) and J.A.M-P. (nan-
nofossils); F.G., M.M-M. I.M-R. and C.M. are responsible of
the  field  data;  the  conclusions  belong  to  all.  David  Nesbitt
corrected the English version of the manuscript.

478

GUERRERA, MARTÍN MARTÍN, MARTÍN-PÉREZ, MARTÍN-ROJAS, MICLĂU and SERRANO

GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA

GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA, 2012, 63, 6, 463—479

References

Amadori L., Belayouni H., Guerrera F., Martín-Martín M., Martín-

Rojas I., Miclău C. & Raffaeli G. 2011: New data on the
Vrancea Nappe (Moldavidian Basin, Outer Carpathian Domain,
Romania): paleogeographic and geodynamic reconstructions.
Int. J. Earth Sci. (Geol. Rundsch.)101, 1599—1623.

Bădescu D. 1997: Tectono-thermal regimes and lithosphere behav-

iour in the External Dacide in the Upper Triassic and Jurassic
Tethyan opening (Romanian Carpathians). Tectonophysics 282,
167—188.

Băncilă I. 1958: Geology of Eastern Carpathians. Editura tiin ifică,

Bucure ti, 1—368 (in Romanian).

Belayouni H., Di Staso A., Guerrera F., Martín-Martín M., Miclău

C., Serrano F. & Tramontana M. 2007: Stratigraphic and
geochemical study of the organic-rich black shales in the
Tarcău Nappe of the Moldavidian Domain (Carpathian Chain,
Romania). Int. J. Earth Sci. (Geol. Rundsch.) 98, 157—176.

Berggren W.A. & Pearson P.N. 2005: A revised tropical to subtrop-

ical Paleogene planktonic foraminiferal zonation. J. Foram.
Res. 35, 279—298.

Berggren W.A., Kent D.V., Swisher C.C. & Aubry M. 1995: A re-

vised Cenozoic geochronology and chronostratigraphy. In:
Berggren W.A., Kent D.V., Swisher C.C., Aubry M. & Harden-
bol J. (Eds.): Geochronology, time scales and global stratigraphic
correlation. SEPM Spec. Publ. 54, 129—212.

Bombi ă G. 1986: Eocene-Oligocene boundary in Romania. Present-

day state of investigations. In: Pomerol Ch. & Premoli-Silva I.
(Eds.): Terminal Eocene events. Developments in Paleontology
and Stratigraphy 9, 121—127.

Caron M. 1985: Cretaceous planktic foraminifera. In: Bolli H.M.,

Saunders J.B. & Perch Nielsen K. (Eds.): Plankton stratigraphy.
Cambridge University Press, 17—86.

Csontos L. & Vörös A. 2004: Mesozoic plate tectonic reconstruc-

tion of the Carpathian region. Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol.
Palaeoecol. 210, 1—56.

Deflandre G. & Fert C. 1954: Observations sur les Coccolitho-

phorides actuels et fossiles en microscopie ordinaira et electro-
nique. Ann. Paleont. 40, 115—176.

Dumitrescu I. 1952: Etude géologique de la région comprise entre

l’Oituz et la Coza. Ann. Com. Geol. XXIV, 195—270.

Dumitrescu I. 1963: New data about the miogeosynclinal flysch

structure in Vrancea Mountains (East Carpathians). The 5

Con-

gress of the Carpathian-Balkan Geological Association, 4—19
September 1961, Bucharest. Tectonica 4, 65—84 (in Romanian).

Ellouz N. & Roca E. 1994: Palinspastic reconstructions of the Car-

pathians and adjacent areas since the Cretaceous: a quantitative
approach. In: Roure F. (Ed.): Peri-Tethyan platforms. Éditions
Technip, Paris, 51—78.

Ellouz N., Roure F., Săndulescu M. & Bădescu D. 1996: Balanced

cross sections in the Eastern Carpathians (Romania): a tool to
quantify Neogene dynamics. In: Roure F., Ellouz N., Shein
V.S. & Skvortsov I.I. (Eds.): Geodynamics evolution of sedi-
mentary basins. Éditions Technip, Paris, 305—325.

Gibson R.G. 2001: Neogene kinematic developments of the East

Carpathian bend area, Central Romania. Mar. Petrol. Geol. 18,
149—159.

Golonka J., Gahagan L., Krobicki M., Marko F., Oszczypko N. &

Ślączka A. 2006: Plate-tectonics evolution and paleogeography
of the Circum-Carpathian Region. In: Golonka J. & Picha F.J.
(Eds.): The Carpathians and their foreland: geology and hydro-
carbon resources. A.A.P.G. Mem. 84, 11—46.

Grasu C., Catană C. & Grinea D. 1988: Carpathian flysch. Petrogra-

phy and economic considerations. Editura Tehnică, 1—208 (in
Romanian).

Gröger H.R., Fügenschuh B., Tischler M., Schmid S.M. & Foeken

J.P.T. 2008: Tertiary cooling and exhumation history in the
Maramure area (internal Eastern Carpathians, Northern Ro-
mania): thermochronology and structural data. Geol. Soc. Lon-
don, Spec. Publ. 298, 169—195.

Guerrera F., Loiacono F., Puglisi D. & Moretti E. 1992: The Nu-

midian Nappe in the Maghrebian chain: State of the Art. Boll.
Soc. Geol. Ital. 111, 217—253.

Guerrera F., Martin-Algarra A. & Perrone V. 1993: Late Oli-

gocene—Miocene syn-/-late-orogenic successions in Western
and Central Mediterranean Chains from the Betic Cordillera to
the Southern Apennines. Terra Nova 5, 525—544.

Guerrera F., Estévez A., López-Arcos M., Martín-Martín M., Martín-

Pérez J.A. & Serrano F. 2006: Paleogene tectono-sedimentary
evolution of the Alicante trough (external Betic zone, SE Spain)
and its bearing in the timing of deformation of the sud-Iberian
Margin. Geodinamica Acta 19, 2, 87—101.

Haczewski G. 1996: Oligocene laminated limestones as a high-reso-

lution correlator of palaeoseismicity, Polish Carpathians. In:
Kemp A.E.S. (Ed.): Palaeoclimatology and palaeoceanography
from laminated sediments. Geol. Soc. Spec. Publ. 116, 209—220.

Haq B.U. 1971: Paleogene calcareous nannoflora. Part 4. Paleogene

nannoplankton biostratigraphy and evolutionary rates in Ceno-
zoic calcareous nannoplankton. Stockholm Contr. Geol. 25,
129—158.

Haq B.U., Hardenbol J. & Vail P.R. 1987: Chronology of fluctuat-

ing sea levels since the Triassic. Science 235, 1156—1167.

Hay W.W., Mohler H. & Wade M.E. 1966: Calcareous nannofossils

from Nal’chik (Northwest Caucasus). Eclogae Geol. Helv. 59,
379—399.

Hippolyte J.-C., Bădescu D. & Constantin P. 1999: Evolution of the

transport direction of the Carpathian belt during its collision
with the east European Platform. Tectonics 18, 1120—1138.

Ion J., Antonescu E. & Micu M. 1982: On the Paleocene of the

Bistri a Half-window (East Carpathians). Dări de Seamă ale
Inst. Geol. Geofiz. LXIX/4 (1982), 117—136.

Ionesi L. 1957: Contributions to the knowledge of the Paleogene de-

posits in the Upper Tarcău River. Analele

tiin ifice ale

Universită ii “Al. I. Cuza” III, sect. II, 376—386 (in Romanian).

Ionesi L. 1971: Paleogene flysch from Moldova River Drainage basin.

Editura Academiei Române, Bucure ti, 1—250 (in Romanian).

Ionesi L. 1986: Signification lithostratigraphique du Calcaire de

Jaslo dans le flysch externe carpathique. Analele tiin ifice ale
Unversită ii “Al. I. Cuza” XXXIII, s Iib. Geologie-Geografie,
17—22.

Ionesi L. & Meszaros N. 1989: Le nannoplancton de la Formation

d’Ardelu a et sa signification biostratigraphique. In: Petrescu I.
(Ed.): The Oligocene from Transylvanian Basin Romania.
Univ. Cluj-Napoca, Geology-Mineralogy Department, Spec.
Issue 2, 149—156.

Juravle D.-T., Florea F.F. & Bogatu L. 2008: The importance of

calcareous nannoplankton in establishing the lithostratigraphic
landmarks in the Eocene column of the Tarcău Nappe in
Suceava River Basin (Obcina Mare). Acta Palaeont. Romaniae
6, 145—172.

Lebenzon C. 1973a: Calcareous nanoplankton of the Podu Secu

Beds and lower horizon of the Fusaru Sandstone in Tărcu a
Valley (upper Tarcău drainage basin). Dări de Seamă ale Inst.
Geol. Geofiz. LIX/4 (1972), Bucure ti, 89—100 (in Romanian).

Lebenzon C. 1973b: Calcareous nanoplankton of the Oligocene and

Early Miocene deposits in upper drainage basin of Tarcău River
(Tărcu a and Răchiti Creeks). Dări de Seamă ale Inst. Geol.
Geofiz. LIX/4 (1972), 101—112 (in Romanian).

Leszczyński S. 1997: Origin of the sub-menilite Globigerina Marls

(Eocene-Oligocene Transition) in the Polish Outer Carpathians.
Ann. Soc. Geol. Pol. 67, 367—427.

Linzer H.-G., Frisch W., Zweigel P., Gîrbacea R., Hann H.-P. &

479

THE SEDIMENTARY RECORD OF THE CENTRAL MOLDAVIDIAN BASIN (EASTERN CARPATHIANS, ROMANIA)

GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA

GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA, 2012, 63, 6, 463—479

Moser F. 1998: Kinematic evolution of the Romanian Car-
pathains. Tectonophysics 297, 133—156.

Mann P. 1997: Model for the formation of large, transtensional ba-

sins in zones of tectonic escape. Geology 25, 211—214.

Martín-Martín M. & Martín-Algarra A. 2002: Thrust sequence and

syntectonic sedimentation in a piggy-back basin: the Oligo-
Aquitanian Mula-Pliego Basin (Internal Betic Zone, SE Spain).
C.R. Geosci. 334, 363—370.

Martín-Martín M., Rey J., Alcalá-García F.J., Tosquella J., Dera-

mond J., Lara-Corona E., Duranthon F. & Antoine P.O. 2001:
Tectonic controls on the deposits of a foreland basin: an exam-
ple of the Eocene Corbi

res-Minervois Basin, France. Basin

Research 13, 419—433.

Martini E. 1971: Standard Tertiary and Quaternary calcareous nan-

noplankton zonation. In: Farinacci A. (Ed.): Proceedings of the
2nd Int. Conf. Plaktonic Microfossils Roma, 1970. Edizioni
Tecnoscienza, Rome, 739—785.

Martini E. & Ritzkowski S. 1968: Die Grenze Eozän/Oligozän in

der Typus region des Unteroligozäns (Helmsted-Egeln-Lat-
dorf). Colloq. sur l’Eoc

ne, 1968, t. III. Mém. B.R.G.M. 69,

233—237.

Márton E., Tokarski A.K., Krejčí O., Rauch M., Olszewska B.,

Petrová P.T. & Wójcik A. 2011: ‘Non-European’ paleomag-
netic directions from the Carpathian Foredeep at the southern
margin of the European plate. Terra Nova 23, 134—144.

Mason P.R.D., Seghedi I., Szakacs A. & Downes H. 1998: Magmatic

constraints on geodynamic models of subduction in the East
Carpathians, Romania. Tectonophysics 297, 157—176.

Ma enco L. & Bertotti G. 2000: Tertiary tectonic evolution of the

external East Carpathians (Romania). Tectonophysics 316,
255—286.

Ma enco L., Bertotti G., Cloetingh S. & Dinu C. 2003: Subsidence

analysis and tectonic evolution of the external Carpathian-
Moesian Platform region during Neogene times. Sed. Geol.
156, 71—94.

Ma enco L., Krézsek C., Merten S., Schmid S., Cloetingh S. & An-

driessen P. 2010: Characteristics of collisional orogens with
low topographic build-up: an example from the Carpathians.
Terra Nova 22, 155—165.

Melinte M.C. 2005: Oligocene palaeoenvironmental changes in the

Romanian Carpathians, revealed by calcareous nannofossils.
Stud. Geol. Pol. 124, 341—352.

Melinte M.C., Brustur T., Jipa D.C. & Szobotka S.A. 2007: Upper Cre-

taceous marine red beds in the Romanian Carpathians: response
to oceanic/climate change. Editura Eikon, Cluj-Napoca, 1—141.

Merten S., Ma enco L., Foeken J.P.T., Stuart F.M. & Andriessen

P.A.M. 2010: From nappe stacking to out-of-sequence postcol-
lisional deformations: Cretaceous to Quaternary exhumation
history of the SE Carpathians assessed by low-temperature
thermochronology. Tectonics 29, 1—28 (TC3013).

Miclău C., Loiacono F., Puglisi D. & Baciu D.S. 2009: Eocene-Oli-

gocene sedimentation in the external areas of the Moldavide Ba-
sin (Marginal Folds Nappe, Eastern Carpathians, Romania):
sedimentological, paleontological and petrographical approaches.
Geol. Carpathica 60, 5, 397—417.

Micu M. & Ghe a N. 1986: Eocene-Oligocene boundary in Romania

on calcareous nannoplankton. Dări de Seamă ale edin elor Insti-
tutului de Geologie i Geofizică 70—71/4 (1983—1984), 289—307.

Mirău ă O. & Mirău ă E. 1964: The stratigraphy of the Cretaceous

and Paleogene flysch from Cuejdi and Horai a Valleys. Dări
de Seamă ale edin elor Comitetului Geologic (1962—1963) L/1,
131—145 (in Romanian).

Morley C.K. 1996: Models for relative motion of crustal blocks

within the Carpathian region, based on restorations of the outer
Carpathian thrust sheets. Tectonics 15, 885—904.

Okada H. & Bukry D. 1980: Supplementary modification and intro-

duction of code numbers to the low-latitude Coccolith bio-
stratigraphic zonation. Mar. Micropaleont. 5, 3, 321—325.

Popescu L.Gh. 2005: Geological study of the Gura oimului For-

mation of Vrancea Nappe (Moldova Valley-Tazlău Valley).
Editura Sedcom Libris, Iasi, 1—120 (in Romanian).

Robaszynski F., González Donoso J.M., Linares D., Amédro F., Ca-

ron M., Dupuis C., Dhondt A.V. & Gartner S. 2000: Le Cre-
tacé Supérieur de la region de Kalaat Senan, Tunisie Centrale.
Litho-biostratigraphie integrée: zones d’ammonites, de fora-
minif

res planctoniques et de nannofossiles du Turonien

supérieur au Maastrichtien. Bull. Centres Rech. Explor.-Prod.
Elf-Aquitaine 22, 359—490.

Roth P.H. 1970: Oligocene calcareous nannoplankton biostratigra-

phy. Eclogae Geol. Helv. 63, 799—881.

Roure F., Roca E. & Sassi W. 1993: The Neogene evolution of the

outer Carpathians flyschs units (Poland, Ukrainia and Roma-
nia): Kinematics of a foreland/fold-and-thrust belt system.
Sed. Geol.

86, 177—201.

Sanders C., Andriessen P. & Cloetingh S. 1999: Life cycle of the

East Carpathian Orogen: erosion history of a doubly vergent
critical wedge assessed by fission track thermochronology. J.
Geophys. Res. 104, 29,095—29,112.

Săndulescu M. 1984: Geotectonics of Romania. Editura Tehnică,

Bucure ti, 1—336 (in Romanian).

Săndulescu M. 1988: Cenozoic history of the Carpathians. In: Roy-

den L.H. & Horvath F. (Eds.): The Pannonian Basin: a study of
basin evolution. A.A.P.G. Mem. 45, 17—25.

Săndulescu M. & Micu M. 1989: Oligocene paleogeography of the

East Carpathians. In: Petrescu I. (Ed.): The Oligocene from
Transylvanian Basin Romania. Univ. Cluj-Napoca, Geology-
Mineralogy Department, Spec. Issue 2, 49—86.

Schmid S.M., Bernoulli D., Fügenschuh B., Ma enco L., Schefer S.,

Schuster R., Tischler M. & Ustaszewski K. 2008: The Alpine-
Carpathian-Dinaridic orogenic system: correlation and evolu-
tion of tectonic units. Swiss J. Geosci. Birkhäuser Verlag,
Basel, 1—48.

Seghedi I.H., Downes A., Szakács P.R.D., Mason M.F., Thirlwall

E., Ro u Z., Pécskay E., Márton C. & Panaiotu C. 2004: Neo-
gene-Quaternary magmatism and geodynamics in the Car-
pathian-Pannonian region: A synthesis. Lithos 72, 117—146.

Soták J. 2010: Paleoenvironmental changes across the Eocene-Oli-

gocene boundary: insights from the Central-Carpathian Paleo-
gene Basin. Geol. Carpathica 61, 5, 393—418.

Švábenická L., Bubík M. & Stráník Z. 2007: Biostratigraphy and

paleoenvironmental changes on the transition from Menilite to
Krosno lithofacies (Western Carpathians, Czech Republic).
Geol. Carpathica 58, 3, 237—262.

Zweigel P., Ratschbacher L. & Frisch W. 1998: Kinematics of an

arcuate fold-thrust belt: the southern Eastern Carpathians (Ro-
mania). Tectonophysics 297, 177—207.