GeolCarp_Vol65_No1_67

www.geologicacarpathica.com

GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA

, FEBRUARY 2014, 65, 1, 67—81 doi: 10.2478/geoca-2014-0005

Introduction

The Borod Depression represents an eastern extension of the
larger  Pannonian  Basin  (Fig. 1),  developed  on  the  western
slopes of the Apuseni Mountains (Istocescu & Istocescu 1974;
Györfi  &  Csontos  1994;  Papaianopol  &  Macale   1998).  Its
evolution was quite similar to the development of other small
basins ( imleu, Beiu , and Zarand) near the uplifted structures
of the Apuseni Mountains and other older structures in the vi-
cinity (Mese  and Preluca Massifs). The basin’s fill consists of
Neogene and Quaternary siliciclastic deposits with local inter-
calations  of  coal,  which  unconformably  cover  the  Mesozoic
(sedimentary)  and  Paleozoic  (metamorphic)  basement.  Sev-
eral studies already highlighted the particular macro- and mi-
crofossil  contents  of  the  Neogene  formations  (Givulescu
1957,  1991;  Istocescu  et  al.  1970;  Nicorici  &  Istocescu
1970;  Nicorici  1971;  uraru  &  uraru  1973;  Bucur  et  al.
1993;  Popa  et  al.  1998;  Filipescu  et  al.  2000;  Popa  2000;
Filipescu & Popa 2001; Miclea et al. 2011). However, paleo-
environmental  interpretations  and  their  relation  to  a  wider
paleogeographical context are missing until now.

The studied section is located near Vârciorog (Vi inilor

Stream,  46°58’42” N;  22°15’57” E;  Fig. 2)  and  belongs  to
the  Sarmatian  (Middle  Miocene)  Corni el  Formation  (Popa
2000).  Nine  outcrops  (D1—D9)  were  sampled,  but  this  study
refers mainly to outcrop D9, which has been considered as the

Early Sarmatian paleoenvironments in the easternmost

Pannonian Basin (Borod Depression, Romania) revealed by

the micropaleontological data

SORIN FILIPESCU

ANGELA MICLEA

, MARTIN GROSS

, MATHIAS HARZHAUSER

, KAMIL

ZÁGORŠEK

and CĂTĂLIN JIPA

“Babe -Bolyai” University, Department of Geology, Kogălniceanu str. 1 M., 400084 Cluj-Napoca, Romania;

sorin.filipescu@ubbcluj.ro; angela.miclea@ubbcluj.ro

Universalmuseum Joanneum, Geology & Paleontology, Weinzöttlstrasse 16, A-8045 Graz, Austria; martin.gross@museum-joanneum.at

Natural History Museum Vienna, Burgring 7, A-1014 Vienna, Austria; mathias.harzhauser@nhm-wien.ac.at

National Museum, Department of Paleontology, Václavské náměstí 68, 115 79 Praha 1, Czech Republic; kamil_zagorsek@nm.cz

“Babe -Bolyai” University, Faculty of Environmental Science, Fântânele str. 30, 400294 Cluj-Napoca, Romania; catajipa12@yahoo.com

(Manuscript received March 13, 2013; accepted in revised form October 16, 2013)

Abstract: The Sarmatian sedimentary record of the Borod Depression (eastern Pannonian Basin) consists of a marine
sequence with continental influence. The investigated section, located near Vârciorog, was biostratigraphically and
paleoenvironmentally analysed. The micro- and macrofossil assemblages include dasycladaceans, characeans, foramin-
ifera, molluscs, polychaetes, ostracods, crabs, bryozoans, fish and vertebrate remains, which are characteristic for a
shallow marine setting with local transitions to continental facies. The microfossil assemblages are characteristic for
the Elphidium reginum Zone and Mohrensternia Zone of the early Sarmatian (Serravallian). The succession of popula-
tions correlates with the sedimentological trend, allowing the separation of several genetic units. The relative sea-level
changes and the progradational trend from the top of the section suggest active tectonics in the hinterland (Apuseni
Mountains). The shallow seas surrounding the emerging islands (Apuseni Mountains) provided the connections be-
tween the Pannonian and Transylvanian basins during the early Sarmatian.

Key words: Sarmatian (late Middle Miocene), Borod Depression (NW-Romania), paleoenvironments, paleogeography,
sequence stratigraphy, molluscs, bryozoans, foraminifera, ostracods.

most  representative.  Here,  we  document  the  micropaleonto-
logical  record  and  discuss  the  detected  paleoenvironmental
changes  in  order  to  restore  a  part  of  the  paleogeographical
evolution at the eastern border of the Pannonian Basin.

Material and methods

Forty-three samples were collected from fine-grained si-

liciclastic intervals along the  ~ 9 m thick section, at distances
between 5 to 20 cm (Fig. 2). All the samples were processed
by standard micropaleontological methods. The microfossils
were recovered from the 63 µm sieve fraction after washing
250 g of dried sediment from each sample. Identification of
taxa  was  followed  by  quantitative  analyses  of  foraminifera
based on percentage distribution of different groups  (Fig. 4).
Representative  taxa  are  documented  by  stereomicroscope
and  the  scanning  electron  microscope  (SEM)  photographs
inserted in Figures 5 to 10.

Results

The microfossil assemblages were interpreted from the

biostratigraphic and paleoecological points of view, trying to
point out their relationship to the relative sea-level changes

FILIPESCU, MICLEA, GROSS, HARZHAUSER, ZÁGORŠEK and JIPA

GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA

GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA, 2014, 65, 1, 67—81

generated by regional events and consequently their poten-
tial for stratigraphic dating and correlation.

Biostratigraphy

The recorded foraminiferal species are characteristic for the

early  Sarmatian  (Elphidium  reginum  Zone  –  Grill,  1941  –
Fig. 3)  and  are  very  similar  to  other  assemblages  described
from  the  Central  Paratethys  (Grill  1941;  Brestenska  1974;
Görög 1992; Popescu 1995; Filipescu et al. 2000; Schütz et
al. 2007; Toth & Görög 2008; Koubová & Hudáčková 2010;
Toth et al. 2010).

Several ostracod taxa are also indicative for an early Sarma-

tian  age,  namely  Cytheridea  hungarica—Aurila  mehesi  Zone
(NO11) of the Central Paratethys (Jiříček & Říha 1991): Cal-
listocythere  tokajensis  Pietrzeniuk,  1973,  Callistocythere
pantoi  Pietrzeniuk,  1973,  C.  maculata  Pietrzeniuk,  1973,
Cytheridea hungarica Zalányi, 1913, Aurila mehesi (Zalányi,
1913),  A.  merita  (Zalányi,  1913),  Tenedocythere  cruciata
Bonaduce,  Ruggieri  &  Russo,  1986  (e.g.  Kollmann  1960;
Pietrzeniuk  1973;  Jiříček  1974;  Zelenka  1990;  Fordinál  &
Zlinská 1994; Szczechura 2000; Tóth 2004, 2008; Fordinál et
al.  2006;  Gross  2006;  Tóth  et  al.  2010).  Miocyprideis  sar-
matica  (Zalányi,  1913)  is  characteristic  for  the  early  Sarma-
tian Elphidium reginum Zone but also occurs in the Elphidium
hauerinum Zone (Jiříček 1974; Tóth 2004, 2008). Hemicypri-
deis dacica (Héjjas, 1895) ranges from the Late Oligocene to
the Sarmatian but is frequently found in lower Sarmatian de-
posits of the Central Paratethys (Kollmann 1960; Jiříček 1974;
Gebhardt  et  al.  2009;  Schäfer  2011).  Hemicytheria  ompha-
lodes (Reuss, 1850) is known from the Late Badenian to the
Early Pannonian, however, predominantly from the Sarmatian
(Cernajsek  1974;  Gross  2006;  Gross  et  al.  2007).  Senesia

vadaszi (Zalányi, 1913) is documented from the Karpatian but
is particularly common in lower Sarmatian sediments (Jiříček
1974; Zelenka 1990; Gross 2006). Loxoconcha kochi Mehes,
1908  (sensu  Cernajsek,  1974)  occurs  during  Late  Badenian
and Sarmatian times (Cernajsek 1974; Gross 2006). Morpho-
types  resembling  Xestoleberis  aff.  tumida  (Fordinál  et  al.,
2006)  and  Xestoleberis  ex  gr.  dispar  (Tóth,  2004,  2008)  are
known from Sarmatian strata. Heterocypris sp. seems to be re-
lated  to  Heterocypris  steinheimensis  (Lutz,  1965)  of  Janz
(1994)  as  well  as  Ilyocypris  sp.  is  close  to  Ilyocypris  sp.  in
Janz (1994), both from Middle Miocene deposits of the South
German Steinheim Basin.

The presence of the genus Mohrensternia allows a clear

correlation of the mollusc fauna with the early Sarmatian
Mohrensternia Zone (Papp, 1956), equivalent to the fora-
miniferal zonation.

The bryozoan assemblages display a low diversity (5—7

taxa) and are dominanted by opportunistic cyclostomatous
“Tubulipora” and Crisia. Other species of Cryptosula and
Schizoporella are typical for Sarmatian assemblages (Ghiurcă
& Stancu 1974; Vávra 1977; Zágoršek 2007).

Microfossil assemblages and paleoenvironments

Microfossil assemblages along the sampled section pro-

vided valuable information on the paleoenvironmental evo-
lution. Our interpretations are based on the estimated
autecology of several taxa:

a. Among foraminifera (Figs. 5—7), the opportunistic Am-

monia species are detritivorous and able to dwell in very un-
stable nearshore environments with fluctuating salinities
(Zaninetti 1982; Walton & Sloan 1990), eutrophic condi-
tions, and short term dysoxia (Murray 2006). Elphidium spe-

Fig. 1. Position of
the

investigated

area in the Pan-
nonian Basin.

SARMATIAN PALEOENVIRONMENTS REVEALED BY MICROPALEONTOLOGICAL DATA (PANNONIAN BASIN)

GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA

GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA, 2014, 65, 1, 67—81

Fig. 2. Sedimentary log, sequence
stratigraphic markers, and location
of the Vârciorog section (simpli-
fied geological map based on Isto-
cescu & Istocescu 1974).

Fig. 3. Chrono- and biostratigraphic correlation table for the Middle
Miocene (after Harzhauser et al. 2008).

cies (keeled epifaunal herbivorous and rounded infaunal de-
tritivorous  morphotypes  –  Murray  1991;  Langer  1993)  are
indicators of almost normal marine conditions and quite stable
environments.  Miliolid  foraminifera  (epifaunal  detritivorous
and/or herbivorous) are characteristic for very shallow waters
with  normal  marine  to  hypersaline  conditions  (Łuczkowska
1972,  1974;  Murray  1991).  The  rotaliids  are  represented
by  opportunistic  epifaunal  or  infaunal  dwellers,  while  bu-
liminids document deeper and less oxygenated environments
(Corliss  1985;  Corliss  &  Fois  1990;  Murray  1991;  Jorissen
et al. 1995).

b. Ostracod assemblages (Table 1, Fig. 8), which are dom-

inated  by  Miocyprideis  and  Hemicyprideis,  refer  to  highly
fluctuating  salinities,  as  suggested  by  the  comparison  with
modern  Cyprideis.  Frequently  these  dominate  in  marginal
marine, brackish waters (Kollmann 1960; Morkhoven 1963;
Gebhardt  et  al.  2009;  Pirkenseer  &  Berger  2011;  Schäfer
2011).  Hemicytheria omphalodes (Reuss, 1850) is frequently
found  in  sandy,  brackish  water  deposits  (Cernajsek  1974).
The euryhaline Aurila occurs preferably in epineritic, sandy
coastal settings (Hartmann 1975). Xestoleberidids with well

developed  eyespots  dwell  typically  in  littoral  to  sublittoral,
sandy  and  phytal  habitats  of  marine  and  brackish  waters
(Athersuch  1976;  Bonaduce  &  Danielopol  1988).  Senesia
and  Loxoconcha  are  considered  as  marginal  marine  taxa
(Morkhoven, 1963; Gross, 2006), while Ilyocypris and Hete-
rocypris  are  typical  freshwater  dwellers.  A  deepening  trend
in the euphotic zone can be documented by Cytherella (a lit-
toral  to  epibathyal,  marine  filter  feeder;  Gross  2006,  cum
Lit.) and by Tenedocythere (an infralittoral element of warm
seas; Breman 1976; Bonaduce et al. 1976).

c. Poorly preserved Bryozoa (Fig. 9), are dominated by cy-

clostomatous colonies of “Tubulipora” (possibly belonging to
genus  Oncousoecia)  and Crisia,  which  prefer  unstable  (shal-
low, high energy) environments and usually belong to pioneer
assemblages. This is also supported by the few specimens of
Nelia. The identified “Tubulipora” specimens are very similar
to  Tubulipora  cumulus  (Sinzow,  1892)  as  described  by
Zágoršek  &  Fordinál  (2006).  At  least  two  species  of  Crisia
were  identified:  Crisia  haueri  Reuss,  1847  and  Crisia  ro-
manica Zágoršek, Silye & Szabó, 2008. Among cheilostomes,
which  are  common  in  more  stable  conditions,  Schizoporella
tetragona (Reuss, 1848) and/or S. dunkeri (Reuss, 1848) and
Hippopleurifera cf. semicristata (Reuss, 1848) and/or Crypto-
sula  terebrata  (Sinzov,  1892)  are  present.  Better  preserved
specimens  are  needed  for  more  detailed  determination.  The
assemblages are similar to those described from the Danube
Basin (Zágoršek & Fordinál 2006) with elements from Cerna-
Strei Depression (Zágoršek et al. 2008).

d. Among molluscs (Table 2, Fig. 10), Tropidomphalus

sp. and clausiliids derived from the adjacent woodland. The
coastal  mudflats  were  inhabited  by  large  populations  of
Agapilia  picta  (Ferussac,  1825),  Granulolabium  bicinctum
(Brocchi,  1814)  and  Cerithium  rubiginosum  (Eichwald,
1830).  Harzhauser  &  Kowalke  (2002)  and  Lukeneder  et  al.
(2011)  described  comparable  mudflat  assemblages  through-
out the Sarmatian Paratethys Sea. Various species of Mohren-
sternia, the carnivorous Clavatula doderleini (Hörnes, 1856)
and  the  byssate  bivalve  Musculus  sarmaticus  (Gatujev,
1916)  might  have  preferred  the  transition  towards  the  very
shallow  sublittoral  zone.  Duplicata  duplicata  (Sowerby,
1832) represented a scavenging nassariid.

FILIPESCU, MICLEA, GROSS, HARZHAUSER, ZÁGORŠEK and JIPA

GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA

GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA, 2014, 65, 1, 67—81

e. Fragments of fossil tetrapods indicate the proximity of

continental environments. The most representative groups
are the rodents (Muridae), insectivores (Gliridae), and omni-
vores (Erinaceidae) – Molnar (2011).

The lowermost part of the section (samples V1—2 in

Fig. 2) was deposited under continental influence. This was
suggested  by  the  presence  of  terrestrial  gastropods,  such  as
apex  fragments  of  unidentified  clausiliids  and  fragments  of
the  helicid  Tropidomphalus  sp.  The  latter  indicates  moist
woodland  and  wetlands  (Binder  2004;  Harzhauser  et  al.
2008), which is consistent with the amphibian and mammal
remains occurring in the same samples. Likewise, abundant
plant debris document significant terrestrial input.

Coastal marine conditions established with samples V3—4,

which  are  moderately  abundant  in  the  gastropods  Agapilia
picta, Granulolabium nodosoplicatum (Hörnes, 1856), Staja
tholsa  (Jekelius,  1944),  Cornirostra  moesiensis  (Jekelius,
1944)  and  the  bivalve  Loripes  niveus  (Eichwald,  1853).
Ostracods are rare in V3—4 and dominated by Miocyprideis
sarmatica (Zalányi, 1913), which is accompanied by Hemi-
cyprideis  dacica  (Héjjas,  1895),  Hemicytheria  omphalodes,
and  a  few  Aurila  mehesi  (Zalányi,  1913),  and  Xestoleberis
aff.  tumida  (Reuss,  1850).  The  dominant  foraminifera
(Fig. 4)  are  Ammonia  beccarii  (Linné,  1758),  A.  tepida
(Cushman, 1926), associated with rare specimens of Elphidium
crispum (Linné, 1758) and E. flexuosum (d’Orbigny, 1846),
which  are  able  to  tolerate  low  and  fluctuating  salinities
(Walton  &  Sloan  1990;  Murray  1991).  Accordingly,  shal-
low,  marginal  marine  (brackish)  depositional  environments
with  considerable  fluctuations  in  salinity  are  indicated  for
the interval V3—4.

Conditions change with sample V5, which yielded more di-

verse microfossil assemblages. The foraminifera reach a rela-
tively high diversity (Fisher  = 9) in V7: Elphidium crispum,
E. aculeatum (d’Orbigny, 1846), E. grilli Papp, 1963, E. regi-
num  (d’Orbigny,  1846),  E.  josephinum  (d’Orbigny,  1846),
E.  fichtelianum  (d’Orbigny,  1846)  –  more  than  60 %  of
the  assemblage – Nonion  commune  (d’Orbigny,  1825),  N.
bogdanowiczi  Voloshinova,  1952,  Porosononion  granosum
(d’Orbigny,  1846),  Lobatula  lobatula  (Walker  &  Jacob,
1798),  Rosalina  brady  (Cushman,  1915),  and  rare  miliolids:
Varidentella  reussi  (Bogdanowich,  1952),  Quinqueloculina
hauerina  (d’Orbigny,  1846),  Q.  seminula  (Linné,  1758),
Pseudotriloculina  consobrina  (d’Orbigny,  1846),  Articulina
problema  Bogdanowich  1952,  A.  sarmatica  (Karrer,  1877).
The  ostracods  diversified  as  well,  but  are  still  dominated  by
Miocyprideis sarmatica. Hemicytheria omphalodes and Sene-
sia vadaszi (Zalányi, 1913) which co-occur with some speci-
mens of Aurila merita (Zalányi, 1913), Loxoconcha sp. 1, and
a few valves of Ilyocypris sp. and Heterocypris sp. The faunal
spectrum is quite similar to the previous one (V3-4), but sev-
eral marginal marine taxa such as Senesia and Loxoconcha are
also  present.  Nevertheless,  the  occurrence  of  rare  freshwater
ostracods (Ilyocypris, Heterocypris) documents some terres-
trial (fluvial) input. Probably, the dominance of Aurila in V7
indicates  somewhat  more  stable  (salinity)  conditions  and  a
slight  transgressive  trend.  Cytheridea  hungarica  Zalányi,
1913,  another  epineritic,  brackish  to  normal  marine  mussel
shrimp (Gross 2006, cum Lit.) was found only in V7, associ-
ated with M. sarmatica. Subordinately H. dacica, H. ompha-
lodes,  S.  vadaszi  and  rare  specimens  Loxoconcha  and
Xestoleberis  occur.  The  mollusc  assemblage  is  also  diverse

Fig. 4. Quantitative distribution (no. of specimens per sample) of the main foraminiferal groups identified at Vârciorog. Particular abun-
dances of taxa characteristic to low salinity (Ammonia), normal salinity (Elphidium, Nonion, Porosononion), high salinity/shallow environ-
ments (Miliolids), and lower oxygenation/deeper environments (Buliminids) can be observed. Highest diversities (Fisher index) are related
to normal marine conditions.

SARMATIAN PALEOENVIRONMENTS REVEALED BY MICROPALEONTOLOGICAL DATA (PANNONIAN BASIN)

GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA

GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA, 2014, 65, 1, 67—81

Fig. 5. Foraminifera from Vârciorog (SEM pictures): 1 – Cycloforina badenensis (d’Orbigny, 1846), sample V7; 2—3 – Quinqueloculina
hauerina d’Orbigny, 1846, sample V16; 4 – Pseudotriloculina consobrina (d’Orbigny, 1846), sample V22; 5 – Varidentella reussi
(Bogdanowicz, 1952), sample V21; 6 – Quinqueloculina akneriana d’Orbigny, 1846, sample V16; 7 – Quinqueloculina bogdanowiczi
(Serova, 1955), sample V16; 8 – Quinqueloculina buchiana d’Orbigny, 1846, sample V17; 9 – Varidentella latelacunata (Venglinski,
1953), sample V43; 10—11 – Articulina sarmatica (Karrer, 1877), sample V36; 12 – Articularia articulinoides Gerke & Issaeva, 1952,
sample V32; 13 – Articulina problema Bogdanowicz, 1952, sample V31; 14—15 – Bolivina moldavica Didkowski, 1959, sample V30;
16—17 – Bolivina nisporenica Maissuradze, 1988, samples V14 and V16; 18 – Bolivina pseudoplicata Heron-Allen & Earland, 1930,
sample V14; 19 – Bolivina sarmatica Didkowski, 1959, sample V30.

FILIPESCU, MICLEA, GROSS, HARZHAUSER, ZÁGORŠEK and JIPA

GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA

GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA, 2014, 65, 1, 67—81

Fig. 6. Foraminifera from Vârciorog (SEM pictures): 1—2 – Ammonia beccarii (Linné, 1758), sample V5; 3 – Ammonia tepida (Cush-
man, 1926), sample V16; 4 – Ammonia beccarii (Linné, 1758), twin test, sample V4; 5—6 – Lobatula lobatula (Walker & Jacob, 1798),
sample V7; 7 – Nonion commune (d’Orbigny, 1825), sample V19; 8 – Eponides sp.(?), sample V34; 9 – Rosalina bradyi (Cushman,
1915), sample V34; 10 – Caucasina schichkinskye (Samoylova, 1947), sample V7; 11 – Fursenkoina sarmatica (Venglinski, 1958),
sample V32; 12 – Fursenkoina pontoni (Cushman, 1932), sample V31; 13 – Buliminella elegantissima (d’Orbigny, 1839), sample V31;
14—15 – Schackoinella imperatoria (d’Orbigny, 1846), sample V17.

SARMATIAN PALEOENVIRONMENTS REVEALED BY MICROPALEONTOLOGICAL DATA (PANNONIAN BASIN)

GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA

GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA, 2014, 65, 1, 67—81

Fig. 7. Foraminifera from Vârciorog (SEM pictures): 1—2 – Elphidium grilli Papp, 1963, sample V4; 3 – Elphidium crispum (Linné,
1758), sample V13; 4, 5 – Elphidium crispum (Linné, 1758), sample V24; 6 – Elphidium fichtelianum (d’Orbigny, 1846), sample V7;
7 – Elphidium obtusum (d’Orbigny, 1846), sample V15; 8, 9 – Elphidium hauerinum (d’Orbigny, 1846), sample V17; 10 – Elphidium
josephinum (d’Orbigny, 1846), sample V28); 11—12 – Elphidium reginum (d’Orbigny, 1846), sample V23.

FILIPESCU, MICLEA, GROSS, HARZHAUSER, ZÁGORŠEK and JIPA

GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA

GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA, 2014, 65, 1, 67—81

Table 1: Distribution of ostracods along the Vârciorog section.

yther

ella

pris

s sp

toc

her

e t

toc

her

e pa

i P

ietr

zen

lli

e macu

zen

iuk

, 1973

Cyt

gar

Zal

án

i, 1

icy

eis

(Héj

)

ioc

(

án

)

icy

ss,

)

rila

meh

i (

alá

)

rila

(

án

)

ene

a va

i (

án

yi,

13)

e cr

adu

, Ru

198

i Mé

rna

ek,

)

. 1

. 2

Xes

tol

eris

ff.

mid

ss,

)

Xest

eris

dis

Mü

, 18

Remarks on the assemblage

V43

–

x x

rare, badly preserved

V42

–

x – x

rare, badly preserved

V41

x rare, badly preserved

V39

x – –

–

+ + + x x x x moderately rich

V38

– x x

– –

rare

V37

–

+ moderately rich, badly preserved

V36

x – + x x

moderately rich, very badly preserved

V33

– x – x – – rare

V32

x x

x x +

–

x x

moderately rich

V31

x x x x + + + x x x x

rich

V30

x x + + + + x x – moderately rich

V29

x x + x + + + x x x

moderately rich

V28

–

rare

V22

–

very rare

V21

–

x x –

rich

V20

– +

+ x

+ x x

rich, very badly preserved

V19

–

very rare

V18

–

rare, badly preserved

V17

+ + x

x x

rich

V16

– x + + + + x x

moderately rich

V15

rich, badly preserved

V14

– – + + + + – –

very rich, well preserved

V13

–

very rare

V12

–

x –

rare

–

x - x x – –-

–

– rare

–

+ x

+ x –

rich

–

x –

–

rare

–

x –

–

rare

and suggests a mixture of different habitats: coastal mudflats
(large populations of Agapilia picta, Granulolabium bicinc-
tum,  and  Cerithium  rubiginosum)  and  transition  to  the  very
shallow sublittoral zone (Mohrensternia angulata (Eichwald,
1830),  Clavatula  doderleini  (Hörnes,  1856),  Musculus  sar-
maticus  (Gatujev,  1916),  and  Duplicata  duplicata  (Sowerby,
1832)). Pioneer bryozoans with Tubulipora and Crisia can be
observed  in  V7.  The  assemblage  became  more  diverse  after-
wards.  Microfossil  assemblages  identified  in  samples  V5—7
and relatively high values of diversity point to water salinities,
close to normal marine values.

The gradual disappearance of typical marine taxa and a

coarsening of the sediment in samples V8—9 suggests an al-
teration of the marine environment due to a higher terrestrial
influence.

The re-establishment of marine conditions is documented in

sample V12  by  the  presence  of  shallow  marine  foraminifera
(Ammonia  beccarii  and  Elphidium  hauerinum  (d’Orbigny,
1846)),  molluscs  (outstanding  predominance  of  Duplicata
duplicata,  occurring  along  with  Granulolabium  bicinctum
and  Agapilia  picta),  and  rare  ostracods  (Miocyprideis  sar-
matica, Hemicytheria omphalodes, Aurila merita).

The proportions of Elphidium become higher in samples

V13—16 (E. grilli, E. flexuosum, E. crispum, E. rugosum
(d’Orbigny, 1846), E. obtusum (d’Orbigny, 1846)). Miliolids
are particularly abundant in sample V17 (Varidentella reussi,
Quinqueloculina akneriana d’Orbigny, 1846, Q. bogda-
nowiczi (Serova, 1955), Q. seminula (Linné, 1758), Cyclofo-
rina contorta (d’Orbigny, 1846), C. badenensis (d’Orbigny,
1846), Pseudotriloculina consobrina, Miliolonella sp., Sinu-

SARMATIAN PALEOENVIRONMENTS REVEALED BY MICROPALEONTOLOGICAL DATA (PANNONIAN BASIN)

GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA

GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA, 2014, 65, 1, 67—81

Fig. 8. Ostracoda from Vârciorog (SEM pictures – all in external view; L = left, R = right valve): 1 – Cytherella sp. (L), sample 39; 2 – Ilyo-
cypris sp. (L), sample 5; 3 – Heterocypris sp. (L), sample 5; 4 – Callistocythere tokajensis Pietrzeniuk, 1973 (R), sample 39; 5 – Callisto-
cythere pantoi Pietrzeniuk, 1973 (L), sample 39; 6 – Callistocythere maculata Pietrzeniuk, 1973 (L), sample 39; 7 – Cytheridea hungarica
Zalányi, 1913 (L), sample 7; 8 – Hemicyprideis dacica (Héjjas, 1895) (L), sample 7; 9 – Miocyprideis sarmatica (Zalányi, 1913) (L), sam-
ple 21; 10 – Hemicytheria omphalodes (Reuss, 1850) (L), sample 21; 11 – Aurila mehesi (Zalányi, 1913) (L), sample 7; 12 – Aurila merita
(Zalányi, 1913) (L), sample 5; 13 – Senesia vadaszi (Zalányi, 1913) (L), sample 5; 14 – Tenedocythere cruciata Bonaduce, Ruggieri & Russo,
1986 (L), sample 39; 15 – Loxoconcha kochi Méhes, 1908 (sensu Cernajsek, 1974) (R), sample 39; 16 – Loxoconcha sp. 1 (R), sample 39;
17 – Loxoconcha sp. 2 (R), sample 21; 18 – Xestoleberis aff. tumida (Reuss, 1850) (L), sample 5; 19 – Xestoleberis ex gr. dispar Müller,
1894 (L), sample 7.

FILIPESCU, MICLEA, GROSS, HARZHAUSER, ZÁGORŠEK and JIPA

GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA

GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA, 2014, 65, 1, 67—81

Fig. 9. Bryozoa from Vârciorog (SEM pictures): 1 – Oncousoecia cf. biloba (Reuss, 1847) from *sample showing large gonozooecium
with small oeciopore (left margin of the colony); the specimen differs from Reuss species in having much larger pseudopores on gonozoo-
ecium (sample V7); 2 – Annectocyma sp. – large gonozooecium with centrally situated oeciopore on short peristome; very similar is Re-
cent species A. arcuata (Harmelin, 1976) growing, however, in narrower colonies (sample D2-30); 3 – Cryptosula? sp. – enlarged
*peristomail part of each zooecium carrying small oral avicularia; the development of avicularia on each zooecium is uncommon in true
Cryptosula (sample D7-31); 4 – Inner view of Cryptosula? showing perforation of the frontal shield and large condyles in the aperture
(sample D7-02); 5 – Crisia romanica Zágoršek, Silye & Szabó, 2008 showing well developed gonozooecium; note the longitudinal
pseudopores and dented proximal of the gonozooecium (sample D7-30); 6 – encrusting base of Schizoporella indicate algal meadow on
the spot (sample D8-11); 7 – Schizoporella sp. – encrusting colony with ovicells and avicularia; the specimen is similar to Schizoporella
dunkeri (Reuss, 1847) but differs in having much wider sinus and larger avicularia (sample D8-11); 8 – Nelia sp. showing only one avicu-
larium on the gymnocyst of each zooecium; the specimen is similar to Recent Nelia tenella (Lamarck, 1816), which however usually has
two avicularia on gymnocyst of entire zooecium (sample V7).

SARMATIAN PALEOENVIRONMENTS REVEALED BY MICROPALEONTOLOGICAL DATA (PANNONIAN BASIN)

GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA

GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA, 2014, 65, 1, 67—81

Table 2: Distribution of diagnostic gastropods along the Vârciorog section.

Specimens per sample

Environment Family Taxon

Mar. — Paratethys Sea Acmaeidae

Tectura aff. zboroviensis Friedberg, 1928 (sp. nov.)

0 0

0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Mar. — Paratethys Sea Neritidae

Agapilia picta (Ferussac, 1825)

0 1 18 1 718 0 40 1 1 1 0 0 0 4 0 0

Mar. — Paratethys Sea Trochidae

Gibbula cf. guttenbergi (Hilber, 1897)

0 0

0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Mar. — Paratethys Sea Batillariidae

Granulolabium bicinctum (Brocchi, 1814)

0 0

1 7 350 2 59 1 1 1 3 1 0 0 0 0

Mar. — Paratethys Sea Batillariidae

Thericium rubiginosum (Eichwald, 1830)

0 0

0 1 50 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Mar. — Paratethys Sea Batillariidae

Potamides nodosoplicatum (Hörnes, 1855)

0 0 27 1 5 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Mar. — Paratethys Sea Hydrobiidae

Hydrobia sp. 1

0 0

1 1 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Mar. — Paratethys Sea Hydrobiidae

Hydrobia soceni Jekelius, 1944

0 0

0 0 4 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Mar. — Paratethys Sea Hydrobiidae

Hydrobia cf. subprotractra Jekelius, 1944

0 0

0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Mar. — Paratethys Sea Hydrobiidae

Staja tholsa (Jekelius, 1944)

0 0 78 2 1 1 22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Mar. — Paratethys Sea Hydrobiidae

Staja immutata (Hoernes, 1856)

0 0 17 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Mar. — Paratethys Sea Hydrobiidae

Staja depressa (Jekelius, 1944)

0 0

0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Mar. — Paratethys Sea Rissoidae

Rissoa banatica Jekelius, 1944

0 0

0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Mar. — Paratethys Sea Rissoidae

Mohrensternia hydrobioides Hilber, 1897

0 0

0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Mar. — Paratethys Sea Rissoidae

Mohrensternia angulata (Eichwald, 1830)

0 0

0 1 38 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Mar. — Paratethys Sea Rissoidae

Mohrensternia pseudoangulata Hilber, 1897

0 0

0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Mar. — Paratethys Sea Rissoidae

Mohrensternia inflata (Andzejowski, 1835)

0 0

0 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Mar. — Paratethys Sea Rissoidae

Mohrensternia sarmatica Friedberg, 1923

0 0

0 0 7 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Freshwater Bithyniidae

Bithynia sp. (operculum)

0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0

Terrestrial Pomatiidae

Pomatias cf. conicus (Klein, 1853) (operculum)

0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0

Mar. — Paratethys Sea Nassariidae

Duplicata duplicata (Sowerby, 1832)

0 0

0 0 32 0 89 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Mar. — Paratethys Sea Clavatulidae

Clavatula doderleini (Hörnes, 1856)

0 0

0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Mar. — Paratethys Sea Acteonidae

Acteocina lajonkaireana (Basterot, 1825)

0 0

0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1

Mar. — Paratethys Sea Cornirostridae

Cornirostra moesiensis (Jekelius, 1944)

0 0

6 2 10 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Terrestrial Clausilidae

Clausiliidae

indet.

0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Terrestrial Helicidae

Tropidomphalus sp.

2 3

0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Mar. — Paratethys Sea Mytilidae

Musculus sarmaticus (Gatujev, 1916)

0 0

0 0 17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Mar. — Paratethys Sea Lucinidae

Loripes niveus (Eichwald, 1853)

0 0

2 3 33 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0

Mar. — Paratethys Sea Semelidae

Ervilia dissita (Eichwald, 1830)

0 0

0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 2

Mar. — Paratethys Sea Cardiidae

Cardiidae indet

0 0

0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0

loculina  consobrina  (d’Orbigny,  1846))  occurring  together
with buliminids (Bolivina sarmatica Didkovski, 1959, B. mol-
davica  Didkowski,  1959,  B.  pseudoplicata  Heron-Allen  &
Earland, 1930, B. nisporenica Maissuradze, 1988, Caucasina
schichkinskye  (Samoylova,  1947),  Buliminella  elegantissima
(d’Orbigny, 1839), Fursenkoina sarmatica (Venglinski, 1958),
F.  pontoni Döderlein,  1884)  and  rotaliids  (Rosalina  bradyi,
Nonion  commune,  Schackoinella  imperatoria  (d’Orbigny,
1846)). At the level of sample V17, the diversity reaches the
highest value of the section (Fisher

α=13.63). Together with

the composition of the foraminiferal assemblage, this points
to  more  stable  salinity  conditions  and  probably  slightly
deeper environments. Less stressful conditions are also sug-
gested  by  increasing  ostracod  abundances  within  samples
V14—17 (Hemicytheria omphalodes, Aurila spp. and Senesia
vadaszi  became  important  elements,  while  the  amounts  of
Miocyprideis sarmatica relatively decrease). The presence of
Nelia and Crisia together with rich assemblages of cyclosto-
tate  bryozoan  “Tubulipora”  may  indicate  a  normal  saline
environment.

Ammonia specimens (A. beccarii, A. tepida) are associated

with  keeled  Elphidium  (E.  crispum,  E.  aculeatum,  E.  fich-
telianum,  E.  grilli),  Nonion,  Porosononion  and  very  rare
Bolivina  in  the  shallow  environments  documented  by  sam-
ples  V18—22.  The  trend  continues  up  to  sample  V25,  with
assemblages containing varying proportions of foraminifera,
ostracods (abundant only in samples V20 and V21), and fish
remains,  suggesting  unstable  shallow  marine  environments.
This change is also suggested by the decreasing diversity of

foraminifera (Fisher

α: 1.74—4.77 in Fig. 4) between samples

V18 to V25.

Another flooding event is documented in the marshy envi-

ronments from samples V26—27. Opportunistic shallow ma-
rine foraminifera assemblages with Elphidium and Ammonia
occur in sample V28. Stable environments, indicated by rela-
tively  high  values  of  diversity  in  samples  V29—32  (Fisher
α=5.48—9.48),  allowed  the  diversification  of  assemblages,
which  contain  rotaliids  (Elphidium  grilli,  E.  reginum,  E.
crispum,  Ammonia  beccarii,  Nonion  commune),  miliolids
(Varidentella  reussi,  Cycloforina  badenensis,  Articulina
problema,  Sinuloculina  consobrina),  and  buliminids  (Bo-
livina  moravica,  B.  sarmatica,  Buliminella  elegantissima,
Fursenkoina sarmatica). A deepening trend, but still within
the euphotic zone, can also be documented by the first occur-
rence  of  the  ostracod  Cytherella  in  V29  and  by  Tene-
docythere  in  V30,  followed  by  the  last  occurrence  of
Miocyprideis  sarmatica  in  V31.  Bryozoans  show  another
acme in V32, which may suggest salinity levels close to nor-
mal marine values.

Diversity decreases gradually in samples V33—43 (Fisher

α=8.26—4.83) due to the shallowing trend and progradation
of tide-influenced deltas, as shown by foraminifera (rare and
poorly preserved miliolids and rotaliids), ostracods (Aurila
spp., Senesia vadaszi and Tenedocythere sulcata, which pre-
fer sandy substrates), and fish remains. Molluscs are only
represented by rare and poorly preserved remains of Agapilia
picta and by Acteocina lajonkaireana (Basterot, 1825) in the
uppermost sample V42. The topmost part of the section con-

FILIPESCU, MICLEA, GROSS, HARZHAUSER, ZÁGORŠEK and JIPA

GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA

GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA, 2014, 65, 1, 67—81

Fig. 10.  Molluscs  from  Vârciorog  (stereomicroscope  pictures):  1  –  Tectura  aff.  zboroviensis  Friedberg,  1928  (sp.  nov.),  sample V5;
2 – Agapilia picta (Férussac, 1825), sample V12; 3 – Therithium rubiginosum (Eichwald, 1830), sample V5; 4 – Granulolabium bicinctum
(Brocchi,  1814),  sample V5;  5  –  Potamides  nodosoplicatus  (Hörnes,  1855),  sample V3;  6  –  Duplicata  duplicata  (Sowerby,  1832),
sample V12; 7 – Clausiliidae indet., sample V5; 8 – Hydrobia soceni Jekelius, 1944, sample V5; 9 – Mohrensternia hydrobioides Hilber,
1897,  sample V7;  10  –  Mohrensternia  angulata  (Eichwald,  1830),  sample V5;  11  –  Mohrensternia  sarmatica  Friedberg,  1923,
sample V7; 12 – Mohrensternia inflata (Andzejowski, 1835), sample V7; 13 – Rissoa banatica Jekelius, 1944, sample V7; 14 – Acteocina
lajonkaireana  (Basterot,  1825),  sample V42;  15  –  Cornirostra  moesiensis  (Jekelius,  1944),  sample V7;  16  –  Tropidomphalus  sp.,
sample V5; 17 – Pomatias cf. conicus (Klein, 1853), sample V29; 18 – Loripes niveus (Eichwald, 1853), sample V5.

SARMATIAN PALEOENVIRONMENTS REVEALED BY MICROPALEONTOLOGICAL DATA (PANNONIAN BASIN)

GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA

GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA, 2014, 65, 1, 67—81

tains frequently reworked microfossils, due to the stronger
erosion driven by the fluvial incision.

Sea-level changes and regional paleogeography

A transgressive trend was observed throughout the Para-

tethys during the Elphidium reginum Zone of the Sarmatian.
It  caused  flooding  of  incised  valleys  in  the  North  Alpine
Foredeep (Mandic et al. 2008)  and  of  marginal  areas  in  the
Vienna  and  Styrian  Basins  (Harzhauser  &  Piller  2004a,b;
Kováč  et  al.  2008),  as  well  as  the  Transylvanian  Basin
(Krezsek & Filipescu 2005).

At Vârciorog, the sea-level trend is recorded by the parase-

quences (Fig. 2) formed mainly in shallow marine, with rela-
tively  high-energy  environments  (beach  to  shoreface).
Changes in sedimentary facies correlate with changes in the
diversity  and  taxonomic  composition  of  the  microfossil  as-
semblages (Fig. 4); very shallow unstable settings were char-
acterized by opportunistic taxa (e.g. Ammonia) while diverse
assemblages  (with  rotaliids,  buliminids,  and  miliolids)  in-
habited deeper and more stable environments.

The lower parasequences (samples V1—11 in Fig. 2) prob-

ably represent the early stage of a sea-level rise, when the
sedimentary input was still higher than the accommodation
space (lowstand systems tract – LST in Fig. 2). The micro-
fossils identified in this interval show a continental influence
in the beginning, but turn gradually into marine assemblages.

The main phase of sea-level rise (transgressive systems

tract – TST) was recorded in the following interval (sam-
ples V12—18), based on the sedimentological trend and on
the deeper and more diversified microfossil assemblages (the
offshore taxa suggest the maximum flooding in sample V18).

The highstand systems tract (HST), related to the late stage

of the relative sea-level rise can be documented by samples
V19—43. Dominant aggradation (V29—31), which created
quite stable conditions on the substrate, stimulated diversifica-
tion. Subsequent progradation of delta systems developed tide
influenced channels and coal marshes (samples V32—43).

The progradational trend from the top of the section is re-

lated to the high sediment input from the hinterland, which
produced regression and diversity decrease.

Regional tectonics was probably the cause for the se-

quence  development.  This  is  supported  by  the  biostrati-
graphic  position  of  the  Vârciorog  section  relative  to  the
global cycles chart of Haq et al. (1988), sequences described
from  the  Transylvanian  Basin  (Krezsek  &  Filipescu  2005),
and  by  the  particular  paleogeography  in  the  Paratethyan
area. Beside the relative sea-level changes, the active tecton-
ics generated a chain of islands during the early Sarmatian,
populated  in  the  marginal  areas  by  shallow  marine  assem-
blages.  Such  shallow  marine  assemblages  were  described
from other sites on the eastern margin of the Pannonian Ba-
sin  and  in  the  vicinity  of  the  Apuseni  Mountains  (Paucă
1954; Istocescu et al. 1965; Clichici 1971, 1972; Istocescu &
Gheorghian  1971;  Nicorici  1971;  Rado  1972;  Chintăuan  &
Nicorici 1976; Chintăuan 1977; Popa 1998, 2000; Filipescu
et al. 2000; Zágoršek et al. 2008). This paleoenvironmental
setting demonstrates that, during the Sarmatian, the shallow
seas  in  the  vicinity  of  the  rising  Apuseni  Mountains  repre-

sented the connections between the Pannonian Basin and the
deep areas of the Transylvanian Basin.

Conclusions

The microfossil assemblages identified at Vârciorog are

characteristic for the early part of the Sarmatian (Elphidium
reginum Zone). These are similar to other assemblages iden-
tified in the Pannonian Basin and on the border of the Apuseni
Mountains.

Paleoenvironments suggested by the micropaleontological

assemblages  are  mainly  marginal  to  shallow  marine,  with
fairly high energy and fluctuating salinity. Specific microver-
tebrates,  molluscs,  and  ostracods  demonstrate  the  proximity
of continental paleoenvironments. Cyclic successions of mi-
crofossil  assemblages  follow  the  sedimentological  trend  in
the  parasequences  and  fit  into  the  characteristic  systems
tracts of almost an entire stratigraphic sequence.

Shallow marine paleoenvironments on the borders of

the  Apuseni  Mountains  (easternmost  Pannonian  Basin),  as
described  herein,  document  marine  seaways  between  the
Pannonian  Basin  and  the  Transylvanian  Basin.  Our  paleo-
environmental  interpretation  demonstrated  repeated  sea-level
changes and a progradational trend suggesting an uplifting in
the source area. This could be the early stage of an important
uplift  in  the  Apuseni  Mountains  during  the  late  Sarmatian
(Krézsek & Filipescu 2005).

Acknowledgments:  This work was funded by the Sectorial
Operational  Program  for  Human  Resources  Development
2007—2013, co-financed by the European Social Fund, under
the  Project  POSDRU/107/1.5/S/76841  entitled  “Modern
Doctoral  Studies:  Internationalization  and  Interdisciplin-
arity”. Part of the work was supported by the Project GAČR
205/09/0103. Authors are grateful to Prof. Johann Hohenegger,
Dr.  Natália  Hudáčková,  Prof.  Michal  Kováč,  and  Dr.  Jozef
Michalík  for  their  valuable  suggestions  during  the  review
process.

Reference

Athersuch J. 1976: The genus Xestoleberis (Crustacea: Ostracoda)

with particular reference to Recent Mediterranean species.
Pubblicazioni della Stazione Zoologica di Napoli 40, 282—343.

Binder H. 2004: Terrestrial, freshwater and brachyhalin Gastropoda

from the Lower Miocene deposits of Oberdorf (Steiermark,
Österreich). Ann. Naturhist. Mus. Wien 105A, 189—229.

Bonaduce G. & Danielopol D.L. 1988: To see and not to be seen:

The evolutionary problems of the Ostracoda Xestoleberididae.
In: Hanai T., Ikeya N. & Ishizaki K. (Eds.): Evolutionary bio-
logy of ostracoda. Developments in paleontology and strati-
graphy 11, 375—398.

Bonaduce G., Ciampo G. & Masoli M. 1976: Distribution of Ostra-

coda in the Adriatic Sea. Pubblicazioni della Stazione Zoologica
di Napoli, Suppl. 1, 40, 1—154.

Breman E. 1976: The distribution of ostracodes in the bottom sedi-

mentes of the Adriatic Sea. Krips Repro Meppel I—XIII, 1—165.

Brestenská E. 1974: Die Foraminiferen des Sarmatien s. str. In:

Brestenská E. (Ed.): Chronostratigraphie und Neostratotypen –

FILIPESCU, MICLEA, GROSS, HARZHAUSER, ZÁGORŠEK and JIPA

GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA

GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA, 2014, 65, 1, 67—81

Miozän der Zentralen Paratethys, M5 Sarmatien. Verlag
Slowak. Akad. Wissenschaft., Geol. Inst., Bratislava 4, 243—293.

Bucur I.I., Nicorici E. & uraru N. 1993: Sarmatian calcareous al-

gae from Romania. Boll. Soc. Paleont. Ital., Modena 1, 81—91.

Cernajsek T. 1974: Die Ostracodenfaunen der Sarmatischen Schich-

ten in Österreich. In: Papp A., Marinescu F. & Seneš J. (Eds.):
Chronostratigraphie und Neostratotypen, Miozän der Zentralen
Paratethys, (M5). VEDA, Bratislava 4, 458—491.

Chintăuan I. 1977: Study of the ostracods from the Neogene sedi-

ments from Delureni (Borod Basin). Nymphaea, Oradea 5,
63—69 (in Romanian).

Chintăuan I. & Nicorici E. 1976: Miocene ostracods from the

southern imleu Basin. D.S. edin elor, Bucure ti LXII/3
(1974—1975), 3—23 (in Romanian).

Clichici O. 1971: Macrofauna of the Sarmatian deposits from the

eastern imleu Basin. Stud. Univ. “Babe -Bolyai”, Geologia—
Mineralogia, Cluj-Napoca XVI/2, 43—53 (in Romanian).

Clichici O. 1972: Microfaunal study of the Sarmatian deposits from

the imleu Basin. Stud. Univ. “Babe -Bolyai”, Geologia—Min-
eralogia, Cluj-Napoca 2, 49—56 (in Romanian).

Corliss B.H. 1985: Microhabitats of benthic foraminifera within

deep-sea sediments. Nature 314, 435—438.

Corliss B.H. & Fois E. 1990: Morphotype analysis of deep-sea

benthic foraminifera from the Northwest Gulf of Mexico.
Palaios 5, 589—605.

Filipescu S. & Popa M. 2001: Biostratigraphic and palaeoecologic

significance of the macro- and microfossils assemblages in the
Borod Formation (Eastern Borod Depression, North-West Ro-
mania). Acta Palaeont. Romaniae 3, 135—148.

Filipescu S., Popa M. & Wanek F. 2000: The significance of the

Sarmatian faunas from the south-western part of the Pădurea
Craiului Mountains (Romania). Acta Palaeont. Romaniae
2(1999), 163—169.

Fordinál K. & Zlinská A. 1994: Sarmatian fauna from Stretavy and

Kochanovice formation from surrounding of Sečovce (Albinov
hill, East Slovakian Basin) – in Slovakian. Geol. Práce, Spr.
99, 77—82.

Fordinál K., Zágoršek K. & Zlinská A. 2006: Early Sarmatian biota

in the northern part of the Danube Basin (Slovakia). Geol. Car-
pathica 57, 2, 123—130.

Gebhardt H., Zorn I. & Roetzel R. 2009: The initial phase of the early

Sarmatian (Middle Miocene) transgression. Foraminiferal and
ostracod assemblages from an incised valley fill in the Molasse
Basin of Lower Austria. Austrian J. Earth Sci. 102, 2, 100—119.

Ghiurcă V. & Stancu J. 1974: Les Bryozoaires sarmatiens du Para-

tethys Central. In: Papp A., Marinescu F. & Seneš J. (Eds.):
Sarmatien. Chronostratigraphie und Neostratotypen M5. VEDA,
Bratislava 4, 298—317.

Givulescu R. 1957: Geological research in the Neogene Borod Ba-

sin (Oradea Region). Stud. Cerc. Geol.-Geogr., Cluj-Napoca
VIII/1—2, 99—158 (in Romanian).

Givulescu R. 1991: Fossil plants in the Well 3153 from Borod, Bihor

county. Stud. Cerc. Geol., Bucure ti 36, 73—76 (in Romanian).

Görög Á. 1992: Sarmatian Foraminifera of the Zsámbék Basin, Hun-

gary. Ann. Univ. Sci budapestinensis Rolando Eötvös, Sect.
Geol. 29, 31—153.

Grill R. 1941: Stratigraphische Untersuchungen mit Hilfe von Mik-

rofaunen im Wiener Becken und den benachbarten Molasse-
Anteilen. Oel und Kohle 37, 595—602.

Gross M. 2006: Mittelmiozäne Ostracoden aus dem Wiener Becken

(Badenium/Sarmatium, Österreich). Österr. Akad. Wissen-
schaft., Schriftenreihe der Erdwissenschaftlichen Kommissionen,
Sonderband 1, 1—224.

Gross M., Harzhauser M., Mandic O., Piller W.E. & Rögl F. 2007: A

stratigraphic enigma: the age of the Neogene deposits of Graz
(Styrian Basin; Austria). Joannea Geol. Paläont. 9, 195—220.

Györfi I. & Csontos L. 1994: Structural evolution of SE Hungary

and Neogene Basins of the Apuseni Mountains (Romania). Ro-
manian J. Tectonics and Regional Geol., Bucure ti 75, Suppl.
1, Abstracts, 19—20.

Haq B.U., Hardenbol J. & Hardenbol P.R. 1988: Mesozoic and Cen-

ozoic chronostratigraphy and cycles of sea level changes. In:
Wilgus C.K., Hastings B.S., Kendall C.G.St.C., Posamentier
H.W., Ross C.A. & Van Wagooner J.C. (Eds.): Sea-level chang-
es – An integrated approach. SEPM Spec. Publ. 42, 71—108.

Hartmann G. 1975: Ostracoda. Dr. H.G. Bronns Klassen und Ord-

nungen des Tierreichs, 5, 1. Abteilung, 2. Buch, 4. Teil, 4.
Lieferung, VEB Gustav Fischer Verlag, Jena, 569—786.

Harzhauser M. & Kowalke T. 2002: Sarmatian (Late Middle Mio-

cene) Gastropod Assemblages of the Central Paratethys. Fa-
cies 46, 57—82.

Harzhauser M. & Piller W.E. 2004a: The Early Sarmatian – hidden

seesaw changes. Cour. Forsch.-Inst. Senckenberg 246, 89—111.

Harzhauser M. & Piller W.E. 2004b: Integrated stratigraphy of the

Sarmatian (Upper Middle Miocene) in the western Central
Paratethys. Stratigraphy 1, 65—86.

Harzhauser M., Gross M. & Binder H. 2008: Biostratigraphy of

Middle Miocene (Sarmatian) wetland systems in an Eastern
Alpine intramontane basin (Gratkorn Basin, Austria): the ter-
restrial gastropod approach. Geol. Carpathica 59, 1, 45—58.

Istocescu D. & Gheorghian M.D. 1971: Micropaleontological data

on the Upper Miocene from the Cri ului Alb Basin. D.S.
Sedin elor LVII/3 (1969—1970), 77—83 (in Romanian).

Istocescu D. & Istocescu F. 1974: Geological considerations on the

Neogene deposits of the Cri urilor Basin. Stud. Cerc. Geol.
Geofiz. Geogr. (Geol.), Acad. RSR, Bucure ti 19, 115—127 (in
Romanian).

Istocescu D., Diaconu M. & Istocescu F. 1965: Contributions to the

knowledge of the Upper Miocene from the north-eastern border
of the Beiu Basin. D.S. Comitetului Geol. 5l, l(1963—1964),
251—256 (in Romanian).

Istocescu D., Mihai A., Diaconu M. & Istocescu F. 1970: Geologi-

cal study of the area between Cri ul Repede and Cri ul Negru.
D.S. Inst. Geol., Bucure ti LV/5 (1967—1968), 89—106 (in Ro-
manian).

Janz H. 1994: Zur Bedeutung des Schalenmerkmals “Marginalrip-

pen” der Gattung Ilyocypris (Ostracoda, Crustacea). Stuttgar-
ter Beitr. Naturkunde, B 206, 1—19.

Jiříček R. 1974: Biostratigraphische Bedeutung der Ostracoden des

Sarmats s. str. In: Papp A., Marinescu F. & Seneš J. (Eds.):
Chronostratigraphie und Neostratotypen, Miozän der Zentralen
Paratethys (M5). Verlag Slowak. Akad. Wissenschaft., Bratislava
4, 434—457.

Jiříček R. & Říha J. 1991: Correlation of Ostracod Zones in the

Paratethys and Tethys. Saito Ho-on Kai Spec. Publ. (Proceed-
ings of Shallow Tethys) 3, 435—457.

Jorissen F.J., De Stigter H.C. & Widmark J.G.V. 1995: A conceptual

model explaining benthic foraminiferal microhabitats. Mar.
Micropaleont. 26, 3—15.

Kollmann K. 1960: Cytherideinae und Schulerideinae n. subfam.

(Ostracoda) aus dem Neogen des östl. Österreich. Mitt. Geol.
Gesell. Wien 51(1958), 89—195.

Koubová I. & Hudáčková N. 2010: Foraminiferal successions in the

shallow water Sarmatian sediments from the MZ 93 borehole
(Vienna Basin, Slovak part). Acta Geol. Slovaca 2, 1, 47—58.

Kováč M., Sliva ., Sopková B., Hlavatá J. & Škulová A. 2008:

Serravallian sequence stratigraphy of the Vienna Basin: high
frequency cycles in the Sarmatian sedimentary record. Geol.
Carpathica 59, 6, 545—561.

Krézsek C. & Filipescu S. 2005: Middle to late Miocene sequence

stratigraphy of the Transylvanian Basin (Romania). Tectono-
physics 410, 437—463.

SARMATIAN PALEOENVIRONMENTS REVEALED BY MICROPALEONTOLOGICAL DATA (PANNONIAN BASIN)

GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA

GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA, 2014, 65, 1, 67—81

Langer M.R. 1993: Epiphytic foraminifera. Mar. Micropaleont. 20,

235—265.

Lukeneder S., Zuschin M., Harzhauser M. & Mandic O. 2011: Mol-

lusc-based statistics in an endemic marine system as tool in pa-
leoecology and stratigraphy. Acta Paleont. Pol. 56, 767—784.

Łuczkowska E. 1972: Miliolidae (Foraminiferida) from Miocene of

Poland. Part I. Revision of the classification. Acta Paleont.
Pol. 17, 3, 341—377, 2 pls.

Łuczkowska E. 1974: Miliolidae (Foraminiferida) from the Mio-

cene of Poland. Part II. Biostratigraphy, palaeoecology and
systematics. Acta Paleont. Pol. 19, 1—176.

Mandic O., Harzhauser M., Roetzel R. & ibuleac P. 2008: Benthic

mass-mortality events on a Middle Miocene incised-valley tidal-
flat (North Alpine Foredeep Basin). Facies 54, 343—359.

Miclea A., Jipa C., Bucur I.I. & Filipescu S. 2011: The dasycla-

dacean Halicoryne morelleti from Borod Basin (Romania) and
its paleoecologic significance. 10th International Symposium
on Fossil Algae, Cluj-Napoca, Romania, 12—18 September
2011. Abstracts volume, 1—56.

Molnar D.G. 2011: Middle Miocene micromammal assemblage

from Vârciorog (Bihor). Graduation Thesis, Babe -Bolyai
Univ., Cluj-Napoca, 1—58 (in Romanian).

Morkhoven van F.P.C.M. 1963: Post-Palaeozoic Ostracoda, their

morphology, taxonomy, and economic use. Vol. 2. Generic de-
scriptions. Elsevier, 1—478.

Murray J.W. 1991: Ecology and paleoecology of benthic foramin-

ifera. John Longman Scientific & Technical, Essex, 1—397.

Murray J.W. 2006: Ecology and applications of benthic foramin-

ifera. Cambridge University Press, 1—426.

Nicorici E. 1971: The Sarmatian fauna from Vârciorog (Vad Basin).

Stud. Cerc., Geol. Geofiz. Geogr. (Geol.), Bucure ti 16, 1,
215—232 (in Romanian).

Nicorici E. & Istocescu D. 1970: Biostratigraphic investigations on

the Sarmatian from Vârciorog (Vad Basin). Stud. Univ.
“Babe -Bolyai”, Geol.-Mineralogie, Cluj-Napoca 2, 49—55 (in
Romanian).

Papaianopol I. & Macale R. 1998: La lithostratigraphie et la bio-

stratigraphie du Sarmatien du golfe du Borod (Bassin Panno-
nique, Roumanie). An. tiin . Unive. “Al. I. Cuza”, Geol., Ia i
XLIV, 151—166.

Papp A. 1956: Fazies und Gliederung des Sarmats im Wiener Becken.

Mitt. Geol. Gesell. Wien 47, 1—97.

Paucă M. 1954: The Neogene from the external basins of the Apuseni

Mountains. An. Com. Geol., Bucure ti XXVII, 259—336 (in
Romanian).

Pietrzeniuk E. 1973: Neue Callistocythere-Arten (Ostracoda) aus

dem Unteren Sarmat des Tokajer Gebirges (nördliche Un-
garische VR). Z. Geol. Wiss. 1, 6, 703—733.

Pirkenseer C. & Berger J.P. 2011: Paleogene Ostracoda from the

southern Upper Rhine Graben: Taxonomy, palaeoecology and
palaeobiogeography. Palaeontographica, A 295(1—6), 1—152.

Popa M. 1998: Biostratigraphy of the Neogene deposits from the

eastern part of the Vad-Borod Basin (in Romanian). PhD Thesis,
Babe -Bolyai Univ., Cluj-Napoca 1—248, 31 pls.

Popa M. 2000: Lithostratigraphy of the Miocene deposits in the

eastern part of Borod Basin (North-Western of Romania).
Stud. Univ. Babe -Bolyai, XLV(2), 93—103.

Popa M., Cociuba I. & Filipescu S. 1998: The occurrence of Sarma-

tian deposits close to the springs of Vida Valley (Apuseni
Mountains, Romania). Stud. Univ. “Babe -Bolyai”, Geol.,
Cluj-Napoca XLIII/2, 57—64.

Popescu G. 1995: Contribution to the knowledge of the Sarmatian

Foraminifera of Romania. Romanian J. Paleont. 76, 85—98.

Rado G. 1972: Biostratigraphic study of the Sarmatian from Bucu-

roaia-Calea Mare—Mierlău area (Beiu Basin). An. Univ.
Bucure ti, Geol. XXI, 117—125 (in Romanian).

Schäfer P. 2011: Beiträge zur Ostracoden- und Foraminiferen-Fauna

der Unteren Süßwassermolasse in der Schweiz und in Savoyen
(Frankreich). 3. Das Findreuse-Profi l (Département Haute-
Savoie, Frankreich). Zitteliana, A 51, 255—283.

Schütz K., Harzhauser M., Rögl F., Ćorić S. & Galovic I. 2007:

Foraminiferen und Phytoplankton aus dem unteren Sarmatium
des südlichen Wiener Beckens (Petronell, Niederösterreich).
Jb. Geol. Bundesanst. 147, 449—488.

Szczechura J. 2000: Age and evolution of depositional environ-

ments of the supra-evaporitic deposits in the northern, marginal
part of the Carpathian Foredeep: micropalaeontological evi-
dence. Geol. Quart. 44, 1, 81—100.

uraru N. & uraru M. 1973: On the presence of the Lower Miocene

in the Borod Basin (Bihor). Stud. Unive. “Babe -Bolyai”, Geol.
Mineral., Cluj-Napoca XVIII/2, 29—38 (in Romanian).

Tóth E. 2004: Sarmatian ostracods from Budapest (Hungary). Hant-

keniana 4, 129—159.

Tóth E. 2008: Sarmatian (Middle Miocene) ostracod fauna from

Zsámbék Basin, Hungary. Geol. Pannonica 36, 101—151.

Tóth E. & Görög Á. 2008: Sarmatian foraminifera fauna from

Budapest (Hungary). 125th Anniversary of the Department of
Palaeontology at Budapest University –A jubilee volume.
Hantkeniana 6, 187—217.

Tóth E., Görög Á., Lécuyer C., Moissette P., Balter V. & Monostori

M. 2010: Palaeoenvironmental reconstruction of the Sarmatian
(Middle Miocene) Central Paratethys based on palaeontological
and geochemical analyses of foraminifera, ostracods, gastro-
pods and rodents. Geol. Mag. 147, 2, 299—314.

Vávra N. 1977: Bryozoa tertiaria. Catalogus Fossilium Austriae,

Heft Vb/3, 1—189.

Walton W.R. & Sloan B.J. 1990: The genus Ammonia Brünnich,

1772: its geographic distribution and morphologic variability.
J. Foram. Res. 20, 2, 128—156.

Zaninetti L. 1982: Les foraminiféres des marais salants de Salins de

Giraud (Sud de la France): milieu de vie et transport dans le sa-
lin, comparaison avec les microfaunes marines. Géol. Méditer-
ranéenne 9, 447—470.

Zágoršek K. 2007: A new Miocene Bryozoa from the Sarmatian of

the Danube basin. Neu. Geol. Paleont. 243, 2, 299—303.

Zágoršek K. & Fordinál F. 2006: Lower Sarmatian Bryozoa from

brackish sediment in the northern part of the Danube Basin
(Dubová, Slovakia). Linzer Biol. Beitr. 38, 1, 93—99.

Zágoršek K., Silye L. & Szabo B. 2008: New Bryozoa from the Sar-

matian (Middle Miocene) deposits of the Cerna-Strei Depres-
sion, Romania. Stud. Univ. Babe -Bolyai, Geol. 53, 1, 25—29.

Zelenka J. 1990: A review of the Sarmatian Ostracoda of the Vienna

Basin. In: Whatley R. & Maybury C. (Eds.): Ostracoda and
global events. Chapman & Hall, London, 263—270.