GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA
, FEBRUARY 2019, 70, 1, 35–61
doi: 10.2478/geoca-2019-0003
www.geologicacarpathica.com
REVIEW PAPER
Linkage of the Manín and Klape units with the Pieniny
Klippen Belt and Central Western Carpathians:
balancing the ambiguity
DUŠAN PLAŠIENKA
Department of Geology and Palaeontology, Faculty of Natural Sciences, Comenius University, Mlynská dolina, Ilkovičova 6,
842 15 Bratislava, Slovakia; dusan.plasienka@uniba.sk
(Manuscript received October 11, 2018; accepted in revised form January 14, 2019)
Abstract: The paper deals with the structure and evolution of the Pieniny Klippen Belt in its classic area in western
Slovakia. The so-called Peri-Klippen Zone provides a transition from the Pieniny Klippen Belt s.s. built up by Jurassic to
Eocene Oravic units (Šariš, Subpieniny and Pieniny from bottom to top) to the outer margin of the Central Western
Carpathians composed of Triassic to mid-Cretaceous successions of the Fatric and Hronic cover nappe systems.
The Peri-Klippen Zone attains a considerable width of 15 km in the Middle Váh River Valley, where it is composed of
the supposedly Fatric Manín, Klape and Drietoma units, as well as their post-emplacement, Gosau-type sedimentary
cover. All these units are tightly folded and imbricated. The complex sedimentary and structural rock records indicate
the late Turonian emplacement of the frontal Fatric nappes in a position adjacent to or above the inner Oravic elements,
whereby they became constituents of an accretionary wedge developing in response of subduction of the South Penninic–
Vahic oceanic realm separating the Central Western Carpathians and the Oravic domain. Evolution of the wedge-top
Gosau depressions and the trench-foredeep basins of the foreland Oravic area exhibit close mutual relationships controlled
by the wedge dynamics. The kinematic and palaeostress analyses of fold and fault structures revealed only one dominating
stress system coeval with development of the accretionary wedge, which is characterized by the generally NW–SE
oriented main compression axis operating in a pure compressional to dextral transpressional regime, interrupted by
short-term extensional events related to the wedge collapse stages. Younger, Miocene to Quaternary palaeostress fields
correspond to those widely recorded in the entire Western Carpathians. Relying on the regional tectonostratigraphic and
structural data, the problematic issues of the palaeogeographic settings of the Manín and Klape units, presumably
affiliated with the Fatric cover nappe system, and of the provenance of numerous olistoliths occurring at different
stratigraphic levels are then discussed in a broader context.
Keywords: Western Carpathians, Peri-Klippen Zone, Fatric nappe system, sedimentary and structural rock record.
Introduction
The Middle Váh River Valley (Stredné Považie) is the tradi-
tional area, where the Manín Unit (Andrusov 1931) and later
also the Klape Unit (Scheibner 1968a; Marschalko & Kysela
1980) were defined. Although generally assigned to the Pieniny
Klippen Belt (PKB), due to some specific features these units
have been usually treated separately as the so-called Peri-
Klippen Zone. This was defined by Maheľ (1980) as a struc-
tural zone adjacent from SE to the “proper” PKB formed by
the Oravic units, such as the Czorsztyn and Kysuca–Pieniny.
In contrast, the Peri-Klippen Zone is built by units of an ambi-
guous tectonic affiliation: the Manín, Klape, Drietoma and
Haligovce units, and possibly also some other problematic
elements in other PKB parts.
Palaeogeographic and tectonic settings of the Manín Unit
and related elements (such as the Klape Unit, which was not
distinguished until 1960-ties, and the Drietoma Unit occurring
further to the SW) belong to the most controversial and widely
discussed issues of the Western Carpathian geology. The Manín
Unit has had a key place in interpretation of the structure and
evolution of the Western Carpathians starting from early
1930-ties when the first integrated concepts of tectonics of
the Klippen Belt, as well as of the central Carpathian zones
were formulated (Matějka & Andrusov 1931). In 50-ties
and 60-ties of the previous century, two contradictory opinions
were developed, which are described as the Andrusov´s and
Maheľ´s concepts below. Both views have had several relevant
arguments, hence no generally accepted solution of the Manín
controversy has been achieved yet.
In the ambiguous position between the PKB and the Central
Western Carpathians (CWC), the tectonic and/or palaeogeo-
graphic affiliation of the Manín Unit has remained contentious
until the recent times. In addition to the uncertain tectonic
position, the controversy results from the “Central Carpathian”
character of its Jurassic to Lower Cretaceous sedimentary suc-
cession, while the Upper Cretaceous and Palaeogene forma-
tions rather indicate the “Klippen Belt” connection. Moreover,
the structural style of the Manín Unit was also mostly com-
pared with the Klippen Belt, owing to the presence of large
36
PLAŠIENKA
GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA
, 2019, 70, 1, 35–61
rigid “klippen”, like the Manín and Butkov hills surrounded
by soft sedimentary formations. However, unlike most of other
similar structures in the Klippen Belt proper, these klippen are
structurally and stratigraphically closely related to their “klip-
pen mantle” and clearly represent cores of large brachyanti-
clines (Stur 1860; Andrusov 1938, 1968; Marschalko 1986;
Michalík & Vašíček 1987; Rakús 1997; Mello ed. 2005,
2011; Plašienka & Soták 2015; Plašienka et al. 2017, 2018a).
Consequently, from both the structural and lithostratigraphic
points of view, the Manín Unit has been for a long time con-
sidered as a kind of an intermediary, transitional element
between the PKB and CWC, but assigned either to the former
or to the latter according to different authors.
In this article, for the reasons discussed below, we consider
the units under question — namely the Manín, Klape and
Drietoma — as representing frontal elements of the Fatric
(Krížna) nappe system, i.e. units of the CWC origin that were
incorporated into the PKB structure. We also express our opi-
nion about the main ambiguity that stems from the presence of
Upper Cretaceous (Senonian) to Middle Eocene sediments
within or adjacent to the Peri-Klippen Zone. This problem
results from the fact that all CWC units are typically
Austroalpine-type thrust sheets that lack, due to the “pre-
Gosauian” tectogenesis, sediments younger than Turonian.
Never
theless, a possible exception was described from
the outer most Tatric cover sequence in the Považský Inovec
Mts. (Pelech et al. 2017).
There are several opinions regarding position of the Seno-
nian and younger strata in the Peri-Klippen Zone: (1) they are
generally in sequence with underlying mid-Cretaceous com-
plexes, which is a feature characteristic for the Klippen Belt
(Oravic) units, thus these units would be an integral part of
the PKB (e.g., Andrusov 1972, 1974); (2) they belong to
the Oravic Kysuca Unit, i.e. still belonging to the Oravic PKB,
and appear from below the Manín-Klape units in tectonic
windows (Rakús & Hók 2005; Mello ed. 2005); or (3) they
represent post-nappe, Gosau-type basins within the growing
Carpathian accretionary wedge on top of the frontal CWC
nappes (see discussion and references in the third chapter
below). We present some novel arguments supporting the third
interpretation (see also Plašienka & Soták 2015).
In general, the present paper aims at: (i) critical review of
older and existing views and concepts regarding the lithostra-
tigraphy and tectonics of the Manín and Klape units; (ii) eva-
luation of the regional structural data; (iii) complementary
interpretation of position of the Coniacian to Middle Eocene
sediments as overstepping, wedge-top complexes; (iv) presen-
tation of arguments in favour of the Fatric affiliation of
the Manín, Klape, Drietoma and analogous units.
Geological setting
The Western Carpathians form the northward-convex, W–E
trending segment of the Alpine–Carpathian mountain chain,
being linked to the Eastern Alps to the west and to the Eastern
Carpathians to the east. We are using the triple overall division
of the Western Carpathians into the southern Internal Western
Carpathians, the Central Western Carpathians and the northern
arc of the External Western Carpathians (for the reviews see
Plašienka et al. 1997a; Froitzheim et al. 2008 and Plašienka
2018a; Fig. 1). These three major Western Carpathian sections
are separated by narrow zones with extraordinary shortening
and intricate structure, partly recording also important along-
strike wrench movements in various time periods.
The Internal Western Carpathians (IWC), or Pelso Megaunit
in other terminology (see e.g., Kovács et al. 2011), is com-
posed of low-grade Palaeozoic and low-grade or non-meta-
morphic Mesozoic complexes showing affinities to the South
Alpine (Transdanubian Range) or to the Dinaridic (Bükk
Mountains) facies belts. The main tectogenesis of the IWC
units took place during the Late Jurassic and Early Cretaceous,
partially showing the southern vergency of principal thrust
structures, i.e. opposite to the other Western Carpathian zones.
The Central Western Carpathians (CWC) are separated from
the IWC by a belt of crustal-scale discontinuities (Rába–
Hurbanovo–Diósjenő fault zone) in the western part, which
is covered by thick Cenozoic sedimentary complexes of
the Danube and South Slovakian–North Hungarian basins, and
by the discontinuous belt of the ophiolite- and blueschists-
bearing complexes (Meliata Unit in a broader sense) in
the area of the Slovak–Aggtelek Karst Mts. (Fig. 1). The CWC
represent a pile of Cretaceous thick- and thin-skinned thrust
sheets. From bottom to top these are the outermost Tatric base-
ment/cover sheet, overlain by the Fatric and Hronic cover
nappe systems. The central and southern CWC zones are
occupied by the Veporic crustal-scale thrust wedge and
the Gemeric basement/cover nappe in the SE, both overridden
by the Silica cover nappe system (Fig. 1). The CWC units
largely correspond to the Austroalpine tectonic system of
the Eastern Alps (e.g., Schmid et al. 2008).
The Variscan high-grade metamorphic basement and grani-
toids of the Tatric thick-skinned sheet are overlain by the Upper
Palaeozoic and Mesozoic cover deposits, mainly composed of
Lower Triassic continental clastics and various Middle Triassic
to Lower Cretaceous carbonates. The youngest synorogenic
clastic sediments of the Tatric Superunit indicate the termina-
tion of the thrusting processes in the CWC during the Late
Turonian. The overlying Fatric (Krížna) cover nappe system
was detached along the Lower Triassic shales and evaporites
and includes Middle Triassic shelf carbonates, Upper Triassic
clastics and evaporites (Carpathian Keuper Fm.), various Jurassic
and Lower Cretaceous limestones and Albian–Cenomanian
synorogenic flysch deposits. Jurassic sediments used to be
subdivided into the comparatively shallow-marine Vysoká–
Belá succession, but the widespread Krížna Nappe is domi-
nated by deep-water pelagic sediments (Zliechov succession).
In the investigated area (Fig. 2), the frontal elements of
the Krížna Nappe were detached along the Upper Triassic
Keuper shales (Fig. 3). The Hronic Superunit (Choč nappe
sys tem in older terminology) is predominantly composed
of Middle–Upper Triassic platform carbonates. Condensed
37
LINKAGES OF THE MANÍN AND KLAPE UNITS
GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA
, 2019, 70, 1, 35–61
Jurassic to Lower Cretaceous limestone strata are confined to
the lowermost Homôľka partial nappe (Fig. 2), including
the Hauterivian siliciclastic turbidites (Fig. 3). The outer CWC
edge is followed by the PKB, a narrow zone with intricate
internal structure that provides a transition from the CWC to
the External Western Carpathians (EWC; Figs. 1 and 2).
The Klippen Belt forms a backbone of the Western
Carpathian orogen, it spreads for more than 700 km from
the Vienna area up to north-eastern Romania. However, if only
the characteristic Oravic units are considered, the PKB length
attains about 600 km from westernmost Slovakia to western
Ukraine. It is only a few kilometres wide zone with intricate
internal structure composed of several thrust units. These
were derived from an independent palaeogeographic ele-
ment known as the Czorsztyn Ridge, or Oravic domain in
the palaeo tectonic meaning. During the Middle–Late Jurassic
and Cretaceous, the Oravic continental ribbon separated two
branches of the Pennine oceanic zones (Alpine Atlantic) —
the northern Valais–Rhenodanubian–Magura and the southern
Piemont–Váh oceans. The Oravic Superunit (Oravicum) con-
sists of three basic thrust sheets, from bottom to top these are
the Šariš Unit, which is overridden by the Subpieniny Nappe
that underlies the Pieniny Nappe (e.g., Plašienka 2012a, b;
2018a, b, and references therein). All these three units include
strongly dismembered, but generally continuous sedimentary
successions detached from their pre-Jurassic substratum.
The Šariš Unit (known also as the Grajcarek or Hulina Unit in
the Polish Pieniny Mts.), which overthrusts the EWC Magura
elements, embraces a basinal, strongly condensed Jurassic–
Cretaceous succession passing into the Palaeocene–Middle
Eocene synorogenic flysch complex of calcareous turbidites
and huge olistostrome bodies carrying big olistoliths (sedi-
mentary klippen) derived from the overlying Oravic nappes.
The Subpieniny Unit (Uhlig 1907) is dominantly composed of
the swell-type, comparatively shallow-water Jurassic–Creta-
ceous Czorsztyn succession (e.g., Mišík 1994), but includes
also some “transitional” (with respect to the Pieniny basinal
unit), slope-derived elements like the Czertezik or Niedzica
successions (cf. Birkenmajer 1977). The structurally highest
Pieniny Nappe involves again basinal Jurassic–Cretaceous
sediments detached from the foots of the Czorsztyn Ridge at
the transition towards the Váh oceanic domain.
Beyond the PKB, the EWC are composed of the Flysch Belt
and the Carpathian foredeep covering the southern margin of
the North European Platform. The Flysch Belt corresponds to
the Cenozoic accretionary wedge of the Carpathians orogen
Fig. 1. Schematic map showing distribution of the principal tectonic units of the Western Carpathians. The rectangle A indicates position of
the study area depicted in Fig. 2, ellipses show locations of other parts of the PKB mentioned in the text: B — Drietoma Unit in the Myjava–
Trenčín sector; C — Haligovce Unit in the Pieniny Mountains.
38
PLAŠIENKA
GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA
, 2019, 70, 1, 35–61
consisting predominantly of the Cretaceous–Lower Miocene
deep marine clastics detached from the subducted oceanic
basement and intervening continental fragments of the Magura
(North Pennine) and Silesian realms. It includes the inner belt
of the Biele Karpaty and Magura superunits, which are con-
nected with the Rhenodanubian Flysch Belt to the west, but
are wedging out towards the Eastern Carpathians. The outer
Silesian–Krosno zone is linked with the Eastern Carpathian
Moldavides (see e.g., Picha et al. 2006; Oszczypko &
Oszczypko-Clowes 2009 and Oszczypko et al. 2015 for
the reviews).
The Alpidic tectonic evolution of the Central and External
Western Carpathians exhibits a distinct northward prograda-
tion of the principal compression events and nappe stacking
processes from the late Early Cretaceous to Miocene (e.g.,
Froitzheim et al. 2008; Kováč et al. 2016, 2017; Plašienka
2018a). In contrast, the IWC experienced the main defor-
mation during the “Neo-Cimmerian” (Middle Jurassic up to
Albian) orogenic movements related to closure of the Neo-
tethyan (Meliata) oceanic domains, while structure of the CWC
units was completed by the “Palaeo-Alpine” (Eo-Alpine), or
“pre-Gosauian” tectogenesis in mid-Cretaceous times (before
the Coniacian). Development of leading structures of the PKB
and adjacent zones took place during the Senonian to Eocene,
“Meso-Alpine” period. This was related to subduction-colli-
sion processes of the South Penninic–Vahic oceanic zone
between the Oravic domain and the northern Austroalpine
(CWC) margin. The final “Neo-Alpine” stage was governed
by complex movements generated by subduction of the Magura
Ocean and formation of its accretionary wedge (Flysch Belt)
associated with the Miocene opening of the Pannonian Basin
system in a back-arc position, extensive calc-alkaline volca-
nism, and the counter-clockwise rotation of the eastern
ALCAPA domain (cf. Kováč 2000; Kováč et al. 2016, 2017
and references therein).
The classic occurrence of the Manín Unit lies on the left side
of Middle Váh (Waag) River Valley (so-called Púchov sector
of the PKB; Scheibner 1968a), while the adjacent Klape Unit
occurs on both sides of the valley (Figs. 1 and 2). In a map view
of the Middle Váh Valley (Salaj 1995; Mello ed. 2005; Potfaj
ed. 2008), they together form a lozenge-shaped zone some
35 km long and up to 15 km wide (Fig. 2). From the geo-
graphic point of view, this area belongs to the NW part of
the Strážovské vrchy Mountains and southern part of
Fig. 2. Geological map of the studied area (simplified and modified after Mello ed. 2005 and Salaj 1995). Letters with numbers indicate partial
units and imbricates described in the text: M1–5 subunits of the Manín Unit (M1 — Súľov domain, M2 — Praznov–Jablonové slice,
M3 — Butkov domain, M4 — Skalica domain, M5 — Manín domain); K1–5 slices of the Klape Unit (K1 — Považská Bystrica slice,
K2 — Orlové slice, K3 — Nimnica–Uhry slice, K4 — Stupné–Hvozdnica slice, K5 — Hoštiná–Brvnište slice); H1–3 Hronic nappes
(H1 — Homôľka Nappe, H2 — Ostrá Malenica Nappe, H3 — Strážov (Považie) Nappe); G1–5 Senonian (Coniacian–Maastrichtian) Gosau
synclines (G1 — Lieskov–Praznov synform, G2 — Hlboké synform, G3 — Rašov synform, G4 — Udiča synform, G5 — Hoštiná synform);
P1–4 Palaeogene (Palaeocene–Lutetian) Gosau synclines (P1 — Hričov–Žilina sliced zone, P2 — Prečín–Súľov synform, P3 — Pružina–
Domaniža synform, P4 — Rajec synform). Cross-sections along the profile lines A, B and C are interpreted in Fig. 4.
39
LINKAGES OF THE MANÍN AND KLAPE UNITS
GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA
, 2019, 70, 1, 35–61
the Javor níky Mountains. Two large and steep, mostly forested
mountains dominate the area — the Mt. Butkov (765 m a.s.l.)
in the southern part and the Mt. Manín (891 m) in the middle
part of the Manín Unit. Both lens-shaped mountains are trans-
versally cut by deep and narrow antecedent valleys with cliffy
slopes exposing Jurassic to Lower Cretaceous limestone for-
mations. Only these provide good outcrop conditions, along
with several large quarries. On the right side of the Váh River,
the cliffy Mt. Klape (actual geographic name is Klapy,
654 m a.s.l.) rises above the Nosice Dam, giving name to
the surrounding Klape Unit (Fig. 2). It is considered to be
a mega olistolith (almost 1 km long) of Jurassic limestones
embedded in mid-Cretaceous deep marine clastic deposits
(e.g., Marschalko 1986). However, most of the region is
characte rized by mildly hilly relief (peaks around 500 m)
variably covered by woods, meadows and agricultural fields.
These areas are mostly composed of soft upper Lower and
Upper Cretaceous strata, where good outcrops are very rare.
Units with a similar position and composition occur also in
some other places along the PKB/CWC transitional zone
(areas B and C in Fig. 1); these will be briefly discussed as
well (see also Plašienka & Soták 2015).
Review of fundamental opinions regarding position
and origin of the Manín and Klape units
The Middle Váh Valley belongs, along with the Polish–
Slovak Pieniny Mountains, to the key areas where the most
important ideas about the structure, evolution and position of
the Carpathian Klippen Belt were invented. Initially it was stu-
died in detail by Stur (1860), who regarded the Manín–Rohatá
skala area as the third, innermost belt of klippen, in addition
to the external two, which were later known as the “Outer”
(Moravian–Silesian) and “Inner” (Pieniny) Klippen Belts. He
distinguished, stratigraphically determined and named several
type formation of the area (e.g., the Orlové sandstone, Púchov
marls, Praznov beds, Súľov conglomerate). He also correctly
depicted the structure of the Manín belt in two cross-sections
showing its steeply south-dipping thrust and fold structure.
Later on, this view was largely taken over by Uhlig (1903),
who considered the Manín–Rohatá skala zone as a special
transitional element between the Klippen Belt and the Central
Western Carpathian zones. Rohatá skala is a hill southeast of
Mt. Butkov (Fig. 2), where Jurassic to Lower Cretaceous
sediments fill in a syncline within Triassic carbonates, which
have been later affiliated with the Choč nappe system, i.e. with
the Hronic Homôľka Nappe in the current regional tectonic
terminology (Mello ed. 2005; Havrila 2011; cf. Figs. 2 and 3).
Starting from the late 1920-ties, the Middle Váh Valley and
the Orava region became the favourite research areas of
the dis tinguished Carpathian geologist and the ever-best
expert in the PKB geology, Dimitrij Andrusov. From the very
beginning of his investigations, Andrusov (1931; Matějka &
Andrusov 1931) correlated palaeogeographically the Manín
Unit with the High Tatra zone as the outermost CWC element.
This opinion was mainly based on the presence of some cha-
racteristic facies, such as the shallow-marine character of
Jurassic sequences and, particularly, the Aptian–Barremian
Urgon-type limestones occurring in both. On the other hand,
the Manín zone includes also Upper Cretaceous sediments of
the “Klippen Belt type”, which are absent in the CWC to
the SE, therefore the Manín unit would be a PKB element at
the same time. From the tectonic point of view, Andrusov
unified the currently separated Manín and Klape units into
the single Manín Nappe that overrides the Pienidic units:
Subpieniny–Czorsztyn, Pieniny–Kysuca and the transitional
ones, which are currently designated as the Oravic units
(Maheľ 1986). During his long-termed research, Andrusov
corrected several aspects of this conception, however. His
modifications concerned mainly the timing of the principal
thrusting events — initially he inferred the Late Aptian “Pieniny
(Austrian) phase” (later renamed as the “Manín phase”) as
the main nappe-forming tectonic event (with the Subpieniny,
Pieniny and Manín nappes — Andrusov 1931, 1938), after-
wards he stressed the role of the pre-Gosauian “Subhercynian”
folding (Andrusov & Scheibner 1960), and finally the end-
Cretaceous “Laramian” tectogenesis (Andrusov 1968, 1972,
1974). The latter view led Andrusov (1972) to affiliate the Manín
Unit with the PKB Pienidic units, it means to the “Laramian”
tectonic system of the PKB that is sharply separated from
the “Subhercynian” tectonic system of the CWC.
Andrusov´s model of the Manín–High Tatra “geanticlinal”
belt as the outermost palaeogeographical zone of the Central
Carpathian (Tatric) domain, which at the same time shows
close structural relationships to the PKB, has had a number of
supporters (e.g., Scheibner 1968a; Rakús 1975; Rakús &
Marschalko 1997; Rakús & Hók 2005). A remarkable corol-
lary of this model is that most of its advocates assumed an auto-
chthonous position of the Tatricum as a whole-crustal element
and underrated the degree of shortening along its outer edge.
As a result, they also doubted the prolongation of the Ligurian–
Piemont (South Penninic–Vahic) Ocean into the Western
Carpathian area (e.g., Rakús & Hók 2005).
In the second half of 20
th
century, the Andrusov´s concep-
tion has got a strong opposition from Michal Maheľ and his
followers. While Andrusov looked upon the Manín Unit as
a marginal and peculiar, but still integral component of the PKB,
Maheľ´s opinion was based strictly on a view from the Central
Carpathian side. In the western part of the Strážovské vrchy
Mountains, Maheľ (1978, 1986) identified a prolongation of
the Manín Unit (its Jurassic–Lower Cretaceous complexes)
farther to the south, where it is closely related to the Belá
Subunit of the Krížna Nappe, i.e. it would be clearly an alloch-
thonous element overriding the Tatric substratum. From
the palaeo geographical point of view, he still connected
the Manín Unit with the Tatric ridge area characterized by
prevalence of shallow-marine Jurassic and Early Cretaceous
facies, but located its sedimentary zone on the southern slopes
of this ridge that were flanking the large Zliechov Basin —
the main depositional area of the later Fatric Krížna Nappe.
In this conception, the Manín, Belá, or Vysoká subunits are all
40
PLAŠIENKA
GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA
, 2019, 70, 1, 35–61
Fig. 3.
Lit
hostratigraphic synopsis
of units forming the PKB
and adjacent
zones in the Middle
Váh
Valley
. Note that the Fatric units are arranged according to their present structural position and not
according
to
their
inferred
palispastic
settings.
Note also
that,
due
to a
space
problem,
not all
lithostratigraphic
units
mentioned
in
the
text
are
indicated
. G1–5 are
Gosau synforms (Senonian–Early
Eocene)
located
atop
the
Manín
and
Klape
units,
P1–3
are
Palaeocene–Lutetian
basins
(Myjava–Hričov
Group)
covering
mainly
the
frontal
CWC
units,
while
P4
is
the
CCPB
filled
with
Bartonian–
Oligocene deposits. Further details in the text.
41
LINKAGES OF THE MANÍN AND KLAPE UNITS
GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA
, 2019, 70, 1, 35–61
the frontal constituents of the large Krížna nappe system that
overthrust the Tatric Superunit in the outer CWC zones. This
opinion has also got numerous followers from both the litho-
stratigraphic–palaeogeographic (e.g., Borza et al. 1979; Borza
1980; Michalík & Vašíček 1987; Žítt & Michalík 1988;
Michalík 1994; Plašienka et al. 1997b; Michalík et al. 2012;
partially also Marschalko 1986), as well as from the structural–
palaeotectonic viewpoints (Plašienka 1995a, b; Prokešová et
al. 2012). According to Maheľ (1980, 1989) and Plašienka
(1995a, b), the Manín and related units (Klape, Drietoma,
Haligovce) form the so-called Peri-Klippen Zone along the inner
side of the Klippen Belt s.s., while the PKB proper with its
palaeogeographically independent Oravic units and with
a typical klippen “block-in-matrix” tectonic style build the outer,
rather narrow PKB periphery (Fig. 2). Thus the Peri-Klippen
Zone is composed of the Fatric units (Krížna nappe system),
which originated as thrust sheets in the Late Turonian.
Subsequently, in the latest Cretaceous and Palaeogene, they
were partly incorporated into the PKB structure, along with
superimposed Senonian to Eocene piggyback basins. The aban-
doned chronostratigraphic term “Senonian” (Coniacian to
Maastrichtian) is used throughout the following text for
the sake of simplicity when distinguishing between the pre-
Senonian sediments of the CWC units affected by pre-
Gosauian tectogenesis and the superimposed Senonian
through Middle Eocene deposits of the Gosau Supergroup.
Regarding the position of Senonian to Eocene deposits
occurring within the Peri-Klippen Zone, three variants have
been considered in general:
• Senonian sediments are an integral part of the Manín Unit
and lie in a stratigraphic continuity above the Cenomanian–
Turonian Praznov Fm. This view was hold for a long time by
numerous authors, e.g., Salaj & Began (1963), Salaj (1962,
1990, 1994a, b), and Kysela et al. (1982) who ranged all
Albian through Maastrichtian sediments to their continuous
Podmanín Group. However, this opinion was questioned
because of lack of Senonian sediments in the uppermost
structural levels of the Manín Unit, just at the contact with
the overlying Krížna Nappe (Rakús & Hók 2005).
• Senonian sediments do not belong to the Manín and/or
the Klape Unit at all, but they occur in tectonic windows
exposing the underlying Oravic units of the PKB (Rakús
1975). They were assigned to the special Podháj succession
of the Kysuca Unit (Rakús & Hók 2005; Mello ed. 2011).
Originally, Salaj (1990) defined the Podháj Unit as a transi-
tional element between the Klape and Manín units, strati-
graphically ranged to the Early Cretaceous; later on Salaj
(1995) redefined it as a partial Manín development
(Tithonian–Santonian). Thus the third redefinition by Rakús
& Hók (2005) has very little in common with the original
Salaj´s meanings of the Podháj Unit or succession.
Moreover, the Podháj Unit is shown in totally different areas
in the published maps of Salaj (1995) and Mello ed. (2005).
Therefore, the term Podháj Unit seems to be superfluous
and is not used in this paper — in sense of Salaj the Podháj
Unit is merely the innermost partial structure of the Klape
Unit at the contact with the Manín Unit (K1 in Fig. 2), while
the second concept is misleading in our view.
• Senonian sediments represent an independent sedimentary
cycle deposited after the tectonic emplacement of the Manín
Unit and its overthrusting by the Krížna Nappe (both events
should have happened during the Late Turonian — see e.g.,
Prokešová et al. (2012 and references therein). Hence they
would be elements of the Gosau Supergroup, i.e. fillings of
post-nappe, piggy-back basins (Plašienka 1995a, b, 2012a;
Plašienka & Soták 2015; Plašienka et al. 2018a). The gene-
rally transgressive character of all Senonian sediments within
the PKB was originally envisaged by Andrusov & Scheibner
(1960, their “second sedimentary cycle”) and Scheibner
(1968a), but this concept was abandoned later, since conti-
nuous Cretaceous successions were postulated in the Oravic
units of the PKB. Seemingly this applies also for the “non-
Oravic” Klape and Manín units in the Peri-Klippen Zone,
because of frequent contact of Turonian and Senonian strata
in the map view. Nevertheless, continuous stratigraphic
profiles across the Turonian/Coniacian boundary have never
been thoroughly documented there. In contrast, it was
declared from time to time that the Klape–Manín Senonian
deposits are akin to the “proper Gosau” of the Brezová
Group, distinguished from it by the clear transgressive
character of the latter only (Salaj & Began 1963; Began &
Salaj 1978). Others claimed that there is an Upper Turonian
hiatus present (Marschalko & Kysela 1980); there is a polar
change in palaeocurrent directions of the mid-Cretaceous
vs. Senonian turbidites (Marschalko 1986), or that there is
an abrupt boundary (unconformity?) between the Ceno ma-
nian–Turonian Praznov Fm. and Senonian deposits (Salaj
1994b). According to Maheľ (1980, 1981, 1986, 1989),
the Peri-Klippen Zone with its piggy-back, Gosau-type
basins (Brezová, Myjava–Hričov) represented the “upper
(Meso-Alpine) structural stage” above a “false accretionary
complex” (Plašienka 1995a, b) with respect to the subduc-
tion of the underlying South Penninic–Vahic oceanic litho-
sphere (cf. Plašienka 2012a and references therein). Finally,
Salaj (2006) regarded the Coniacian to Lower Eocene sedi-
ments of the Rašov and Udiča synclines in the southern
zones of the Klape Unit neighbouring the Manín Unit as
transgressive Gosau developments — the view accepted
here and applied also for the Senonian sediments occurring
in synclines within the Manín zone itself. This concept of
the wedge- top, Gosau-type basins located within the Peri-
Klippen Zone has been recently elaborated in detail by
Plašienka & Soták (2015).
There were also some other, occasionally somewhat strange
views on the Manín Unit. Salaj (1962) and Salaj & Samuel
(1963) supposed its facies transitions to the Zliechov (Krížna)
Unit on one side and to the Pienidic Kysuca Unit on the other.
This opinion was developed ad absurdum later (Salaj 1982;
Salaj & Began 1983) in the fixistic concept of an auto-
chthonous position of all units present at the Central/Outer
Carpathian transitional zones, including even the Hronic
(Choč) nappes. In contrast, some other authors (e.g., Rakús
42
PLAŠIENKA
GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA
, 2019, 70, 1, 35–61
1975) postulated a specific position of the Manín Unit, which
occurs in a particular Manín zone independent from both
the PKB and CWC. At last, we can mention Golonka et al.
(2015), who consider the Manín Unit as part of a huge
Cretaceous–Palaeogene olistostrome that originated in the fore-
arc basin (so-called Złatne Basin) on the inner PKB side loca ted
inside the subduction-related accretionary prism. Accor dingly,
the large Manín and Butkov klippen would also be megaolis-
toliths — however, this unsubstantiated view was not supported
by any field evidence and it is in a sharp contradiction with
the regional tectonic situation, therefore it has been profoundly
criticised by Plašienka et al. (2017).
Until 1980-ties, all units resting in a tectonic superposition
above the Kysuca–Pieniny Unit in the PKB were assigned to
the large-scale Manín Nappe that was, as a supposedly frontal
Tatric element, emplaced in pre-Senonian times (pre-Gosauian
or older Subhercynian phase — e.g., Andrusov & Scheibner
1960), or during the Laramian phase (Andrusov 1972, 1974).
Afterwards, the Klape Unit was differentiated first as a special
“Klape series” of the Manín Unit (Began et al. 1965; Salaj
& Samuel 1966; Scheibner 1968a; Began 1969). Later on,
the Klape Unit was defined as an independent element from
the point of view of lithostratigraphic content, sedimentolo-
gical features and tectonic position (Marschalko & Kysela
1980). At present, the Manín and Klape units are treated as
separate units with an equal order of importance. Consequently,
the tectonic affiliation of some units in other PKB regions had
to be redefined as well — for example the overthrust sheet
overriding the Kysuca Unit in the Varín (Kysuca) sector of
the PKB, which was originally described as the Manín Nappe
by Haško (1978), is now assigned to the Klape Unit (cf. Polák
ed. 2008).
In the modern tectonic map of Slovak Republic (Bezák ed.
2004), the Manín Unit is designated, along with the Klape and
Drietoma units, as the “Neoalpine structurally modified Palaeo-
alpine or Mesoalpine tectonic units of Klippen Belt”. Similarly,
in the legend and explanations to the Geological map of
the Middle Váh Valley 1:50,000 (Mello ed. 2005, 2011),
the Manín and Klape units are described as “units with
Central-Carpathian affinity”, but still ranged to the Klippen
Belt. In the legend to the general geological map of Slovakia
1:200,000 (sheet 25 — Bytča), the Manín and Klape units
are included in the Klippen Belt sensu lato, too (Potfaj ed.
2008).
Lithostratigraphy of the Manín and Klape units
and related Gosau deposits
The generalized lithostratigraphic content of the Manín Unit
in the Middle Váh Valley includes almost complete Jurassic to
Lower Cretaceous succession forming large anticlinal cores of
the Manín and Butkov “klippen” and several smaller lens-
shaped slices. These are composed mostly of relatively com-
petent, but usually well stratified limestone formations prone
to large-scale folding (cf. Plašienka et al. 2018a). From the Late
Albian onward, mostly incompetent marls, shales and flysch
deposits accumulated and form the so-called “klippen mantle”
in older concepts. A questionable occurrence of Rhaetian
dark limestones and shales was mentioned by Andrusov &
Scheibner (1960) from the Butkov klippe. However, this fin-
ding was not confirmed later. Despite of this, it might be infer-
red that in lower structural levels, not exposed on the current
surface, the Manín Unit was detached from its pre-Jurassic
substratum along some weak décollement horizon, presumably
formed by the Norian variegated shales and evaporites of
the Carpathian Keuper Fm., similarly as other frontal Fatric
elements (cf. Prokešová et al. 2012).
Relying on the earlier opinion of Matějka (1932), Maheľ
(1978, 1985, 1986) supposed the continuation of the Manín
Unit southwards in the surroundings of Trenčianske Teplice
and Soblahov in the eastern part of the Strážovské vrchy Mts.
and in the northern part of the Považský Inovec Mts. (Dubodiel
area). There, the inferred Manín Unit includes also the Middle
Triassic carbonates, Upper Triassic Carpathian Keuper Fm.
and Rhaetian fossiliferous limestones (Fatra Fm.; Fig. 3).
Nowadays, these occurrences are correlated with the Belá
Subunit of the Fatric Vysoká facies zone — e.g., Bezák ed.
(2004) in the Strážovské vrchy Mts. and Pelech et al. (2012) in
the Dubodiel area.
In the Manín and Butkov areas, the continuous Jurassic
sequence (Fig. 3) begins with dark grey to black sandy-crinoi-
dal, cherty limestones and marly shales of the early Hettangian
age (Holiak Fm. defined by Rakús & Hók 2005). Starting from
the Sinemurian, successions in these two areas differ to some
extent. The Manín klippe has a more shallow-water character
with sandy biodetrital limestones passing to coarse grained,
quartz-dolomitic sandstones and conglomerates, while the But-
kov succession is more basinal with grey sandy-crinoidal
lime stones with chert nodules (Late Hettangian–Pliensbachian
Trlenská Fm.) followed by pink and grey-green glauconitic,
cherty crinoidal limestones containing early Toarcian ammo-
nites (Tunežice Fm.). The overlying Toarcian–Aalenian grey
sandy-crinoidal, cherty limestones of the Brts Formation are
intercalated by dark shales in the upper part. The Middle–
Upper Jurassic sequence is characterized by red nodular lime-
stones (Klaus Fm.) ranging from the Toarcian (Manín area)
or from the Bajocian (Butkov) up to Tithonian, inserted by
a layer of the Bathonian, so-called “banana” radiolarites in
the Butkov domain (Rakús & Ožvoldová 1999).
The Lower Cretaceous sequence includes several forma-
tions (Fig. 3). According to Borza et al. (1987) and Michalík et
al. (2012, 2013; see also references therein), the Butkov suc-
cession consists of the maiolica-type Ladce Fm. (topmost
Berriasian–Early Valanginian), dark-grey marly limestones
(Mráznica Fm., Valanginian), cherty limestones (Kališčo Fm.,
Hauterivian), marly cherty, partly brecciated limestones
(Lúčkovská Fm., Early Barremian) and massive bioclastic,
Urgon-type limestones (Podhorie Fm., uppermost Aptian–
Early Albian). Much thicker (at least 100 m), massive Urgonian
limestones occur in the Manín succession (Manín Fm.; Fekete
et al. 2017). In smaller slices between the large Manín and
43
LINKAGES OF THE MANÍN AND KLAPE UNITS
GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA
, 2019, 70, 1, 35–61
Butkov anticlines (Skalica Subunit), the Late Aptian substage
is represented by mass-flow breccias composed of clasts of
Urgonian limestones (Skalica Breccia — Borza et al. 1979;
Michalík & Vašíček 1984) and the Early Albian substage by
grey cherty limestones (Jelenia skala Fm. — Rakús & Hók
2005; Mello ed. 2011). The latter limestones are partly also
brecciated and mixed with hyalobasanitic volcaniclastic mate-
rial (Hovorka & Spišiak 1988 and references therein). Both
the Manín and Butkov successions are terminated by the Lower
Albian hardground indicating a rapid drowning of the Urgo-
nian carbonate platform (Boorová & Salaj 1992). Originally,
Andrusov (1938) considered this drowning event as the main
nappe-forming “Pieniny folding phase” in the PKB and later
as the “Manín emersion phase” (Andrusov 1965). An analo-
gous drowning event following emersion affected also the Oravic
Czorsztyn Ridge (Aubrecht et al. 2006), but large Tatric and
Fatric palaeogeographic realm as well (Plašienka 2018a and
references therein).
The new, mid-Cretaceous sedimentary cycle is represented
by hemipelagic to deep-marine clastic deposits of the Podmanín
Group (Kysela et al. 1982; redefined by Rakús & Hók 2005;
Mello ed. 2011 and Plašienka & Soták 2015). The former
authors included in their Podmanín Group the entire
Albian–Maastrichtian succession of the Manín Unit, assuming
an uninterrupted sedimentation across the Turonian/Coniacian
boundary. On contrary, the latter authors correctly argued that
the Turonian sediments of the Manín Unit are tectonically
overridden by the Krížna Nappe, thus the Senonian sediments
in the Manín–Butkov area cannot be in a normal stratigraphic
continuity with the Turonian strata.
The Lower Albian hardground is covered by dark, biotur-
bated hemipelagic marlstones of the “Zementmergel” type,
Middle Albian to Early Cenomanian in age (Butkov Fm.,
Fig. 3). Upwards, the marlstones are intercalated by distal
calcareous turbidites of the Cenomanian to Middle Turonian
Praznov Fm. (Stur 1860; Scheibnerovci 1958; Mello ed. 2011;
Salaj 1994b). This shows a thickening-and-coarsening-upward
trend (Belušské Slatiny Member dominated by thick-bedded
sandstones), interfingering with more shallow-water sand-
stones rich in bioclastic material (including macrofauna like
oysters — Kvašov Mbr). Upper parts of the Praznov Fm. are
intercalated and terminated by boulder conglomerates and
pebbly mudstones with partially “exotic” pebble material
(Hradná Mbr.). The innermost structural zone of the Manín
Unit (Praznov–Jablonové slice according to Marschalko &
Kysela 1980) is composed of thick prisms of predominantly
Cenomanian flysch deposits containing chaotic boulder beds
and olistoliths of the Jurassic–Lower Cretaceous limestones,
which is known as the Kostolec Unit. Formerly these lime-
stone klippen, along with the Klape klippe, were interpreted as
outliers of some higher Central Carpathian unit, possibly
the Strážov Nappe (Andrusov 1938). However, later on Rakús
(1965), Borza (1970) and Rakús & Marschalko (1997) argued
that the strata succession of the Kostolec klippen are rather
similar to that of the Manín Unit, especially by the presence
of Urgon-type limestones and Lower Albian hardground
followed by Butkov-type marlstones. Being surrounded by
the mid-Cretaceous flysch, the Kostolec klippen are presently
considered to represent olistoliths, which opinion was corro-
borated also by some technical works (Rakús 1997; Rakús &
Marschalko 1997; Rakús in Mello ed. 2011).
The most important, and at the same time the most challen-
ging problem with the Manín Unit is the presence of Upper
Cretaceous (“Senonian”, i.e. Coniacian through Maastrichtian)
sediments and their relationships to the underlying mid-Creta-
ceous deposits (the Lieskov–Praznov G1 and Hlboké G2
synforms in Figs. 2 and 3). However, the situation is compli-
cated due to poor outcrop conditions and tectonic overprint,
therefore the contact of Turonian and Coniacian sediments has
never been directly exposed and documented. In the Manín
zone, the Senonian deposits of the Podmanín Group consist of
alternating deep- and shallow-marine clastics — neritic sand-
stones and shales containing sandy slump bodies with littoral
fauna (Coniacian–Santonian Žadovec Fm., see Kysela et al.
1982; Mello ed. 2011), hemipelagic variegated marls of
the “couches rouges” facies (Hrabové Fm., Early Campanian),
calcareous turbidites with exotic conglomerates (Hlboké Fm.,
Late Campanian–Maastrichtian), and Orbitoides-bearing bio-
clastic limestones, sandstones and conglomerates with local
rudist reef bodies (Hradisko Fm., Late Maastrichtian to
?Danian). Following the opinion of Plašienka & Soták (2015),
the Podmanín Group is assigned to the Gosau Supergroup,
which was deposited in the post-nappe, late synorogenic
wedge-top basins developed atop the growing accretionary
wedge prograding from the CWC toward the Oravic realm of
the future PKB. Propagation of this accretionary complex,
which included also the frontal CWC units, was associated
with and enhanced by subduction of the underlying Vahic
oceanic lithosphere below the outer CWC margin (Plašienka
2012a).
In the northern part of the Klape Unit, between Upohlav,
Brvnište and Hvozdnica villages, a narrow stripe of Jurassic to
Lower Cretaceous limestones amidst Cretaceous clastic for-
mations occurs (Fig. 2). This has been known as the Upohlav
tectonic window, even described as “protrusion diapirs” of
the underlying Kysuca Unit piercing though the overlying
flysch complexes of the Manín (Klape) Unit (Andrusov &
Scheibner 1960; Andrusov 1974). A similar window concept
has been adopted also in the modern geological map of
the area (Mello ed. 2005). On the other hand, Salaj (1994a)
included a part of these Jurassic and Lower Cretaceous rocks
into his Drietoma succession of the Drietoma Unit, which may
be correlated with the Klape Unit to some extent. Based on our
own field experience and the general structure of the area, we
adopt the Salaj´s interpretation for the whole “Upohlav win-
dow” (Fig. 2) with the exception that we range it to the Klape
Unit and not to the Drietoma Unit. Consequently, no windows
in the tectonic sense do exist in this area.
Taking this into consideration, the Klape Unit includes
a sedimentary succession from the Early Jurassic up to early
Late Cretaceous. The oldest recognized rocks are dark grey
spotted marlstones of the “Fleckenmergel” facies (Allgäu Fm.,
44
PLAŠIENKA
GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA
, 2019, 70, 1, 35–61
Pliensbachian–?Aalenian), followed by siliceous limestones
and calcareous radiolarites (Ždiar Fm.) and then by thin-bed-
ded dark-grey marly limestones with occasional chert nodules,
strongly bioturbated in the upper part (akin to the Mráznica
Fm, Tithonian to Barremian). This Jurassic–Lower Cretaceous
succession is very similar to the deep-water Zliechov succes-
sion of the Krížna Nappe. It is noteworthy that these Jurassic
sediments are considerably different from sediments of
the Mt. Klapy klippe that gave the name to the whole unit,
which is a blocky megaolistolith formed by a comparatively
shallow-marine Jurassic sequence of massive or thick-bedded,
variegated sandy-crinoidal, cherty and nodular limestones.
The lithostratigraphic succession of the Klape Unit conti-
nues with the mid-Cretaceous (Aptian–Turonian) clastic for-
mations that were included in the Šebešťanová succession of
the Klape Unit (Mello ed. 2005, 2011) and/or Hoštiná succes-
sion of the Drietoma Unit (Salaj 1994a). These include Aptian
to Lower Albian dark hemipelagic shales of the “sphero side-
ritic beds” (Nimnica Fm.) that are passing upwards into
coar sening- and thickening-upwards turbiditic sequence of
the Albian to Early Cenomanian age (Uhry Fm.) with huge
bodies of “exotic” conglomerates (Upohlav Fm.). This so-
called Klape Flysch (Lexa ed. 2000), altogether more than
thousand metres thick (Marschalko 1986), also includes
several olistoliths of Jurassic sandy-crinoidal and nodular
limestones, the largest of them builds up the Mt. Klapy klippe.
The Early Cenomanian shallowing is registered by calcareous
sandstones and sandy marls rich in orbitolinas (Považská
Bystrica Fm). The Upper Cenomanian to Lower Turonian strata
are represented by a terminal sequence of massive neritic to
littoral sandstones with oyster banks (Orlové Fm., Fig. 3).
There are three synclines filled with the Coniacian–
Lower Eocene sediments that separate individual Klape slices
(the Rašov G3, Udiča G4 and Hoštiná G5 synclines from SE
to NW in Fig. 2). They have been assigned to the Hoštiná suc-
cession, originally regarded as being in a continuous series
with underlying Cretaceous Šebešťanová or Drietoma succes-
sions of the Klape or Drietoma Unit, respectively (Salaj
1994a), but later as a new transgressive sedimentary cycle of
the Gosau Supergroup (Salaj 2006; Plašienka & Soták 2015).
In contrast, Mello ed. (2005, 2011) connected the Hoštiná suc-
cession (together with the Podháj succession, see above) with
internal parts of the Kysuca Unit, thus as appearing in tectonic
windows from below the Klape Unit. Consequently, they
would form anticlines, not synclines. However, according to
our investigations, this is not the case (see also Plašienka
2012a; Plašienka & Soták 2015).
The Hoštiná succession (synclines G3–5 in Fig. 3) embraces
basal polymict conglomerates and rudist reef bodies of
the Coniacian–Santonian Rašov Fm., overlain by a deepening-
and fining-upward sequence of calcareous turbidites (Upper
Santonian) and variegated marls of the couches rouges facies
(Púchov Fm., Lower Campanian). The Upper Campanian to
Maastrichtian Ihrište Fm. is composed of shallow-water cal-
careous sandstones and conglomerates, Inoceramus marls,
Orbitoides limestones and blocks of rudists-bearing bioherms
(Bezdedov Limestone of Salaj 1990). The Palaeocene–Ypresian
strata consist of shallow-water sandy-bioclastic limestones
with Thanetian algal-coral reef bodies (Kambühel Limestone
— e.g. Buček & Köhler 2017 and references therein) and car-
bonatic conglomerates (Šafranica Fm; Salaj 1990, 1994b;
Mello ed. 2005, 2011). The latter formation was also known as
the “Makovec development” in older literature (e.g., Began et
al. 1970).
The inner side of the Peri-Klippen Zone in the Middle Váh
Valley, at the transition to the outermost CWC, embraces also
Palaeocene to Middle Eocene strata deposited in partly inde-
pendent, highly mobile depressions. They were formerly
known as the “Peri-Klippen Palaeogene”, later defined as
the Myjava–Hričov–Haligovka zone (Scheibner 1968b),
Považie–Hanušovce zone (Samuel 1972) and newly as
the Myjava–Hričov Group (Mello ed. 2005, 2011). In the area
concerned, the Myjava–Hričov Group occurs in a zone
flan king the Manín Unit from the SE, named as the Hričov–
Žilina synclinal zone here (P1 in Figs. 2 and 3). Adjacent
to the Praznov–Jablonové slice and Senonian sediments of
the Hlboké syncline (G2), the Palaeocene sediments are com-
posed of variegated claystones and marlstones, sandstones and
conglomerates (Hričovské Podhradie Fm.). Large redeposited
blocks of Lower Thanetian bioherms and patch-reefs
(Kambühel Limestone) are very common (Buček & Köhler
2017). The Jablonové Fm. (Thanetian–Ypresian) includes
shallow marine biodetritic and sandy limestones overlain by
carbonatic breccias and conglomerates of the Lower–Middle
Eocene Súľov Fm. (Soták et al. 2017; P2-3 in Fig. 3).
Further to the SE, in the Prečín–Súľov and Pružina–
Domaniža synforms (P2 and P3 in Fig. 2, respectively),
the Súľov conglomerates are mostly resting directly over
the CWC units. Being composed of up to 800 metres of car-
bonatic, mainly dolomitic breccias and conglomerates derived
predominantly from Triassic carbonates of the Hronic units,
the Súľov Fm. represents a new transgressive cycle related
to an extensional collapse of the developing PKB–CWC
orogenic wedge (Plašienka & Soták 2015; Soták et al. 2017
and refe rences therein). Lutetian deepening of the Súľov Basin
is registered by an upward fining sequence of calcareous
sandstones and variegated pelagic shales of the Domaniža
For mation (Fig. 3).
Following the upper Lutetian compression and sedimentary
break, a new basin developed in a forearc position above
the CWC units — the Central Carpathian Palaeogene Basin
(CCPB; cf. Soták et al. 2001; Gross 2008; Plašienka & Soták
2015 and references therein). The basal member of the over-
stepping Podtatra Group of the CCPB is represented by trans-
gressive carbonate conglomerates and nummulitic limestones
of the Borové Fm. (Bartonian–Priabonian). Overlying deepe-
ning sequence is composed of grey and black shales with
occasional distal turbidite beds (Lower Oligocene Huty Fm.;
P4 in Fig. 3).
In the NE part of the Rašov synform, near village Vrtižer,
two small slices of steeply dipping dark-grey silty and clay
shales occur. According to the personal information by Ján
45
LINKAGES OF THE MANÍN AND KLAPE UNITS
GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA
, 2019, 70, 1, 35–61
Soták, they contain Oligocene microfauna. Hence the age and
lithology of these shales indicate that they might represent
the north-westernmost erosional remnants of the Huty Fm. in
western Slovakia.
Notwithstanding the Quaternary fluvial and slope deposits
and local, possibly Pliocene gravels, the youngest sediments
of the studied area are the Lower Miocene (Eggenburgian)
continental, brakish to shallow marine sandstones and fine-
grained conglomerates (Fig. 2). These were deposited in
a “wrench-fault furrow” type of basin (Kováč 2000), which
developed in the rear part of the growing External Carpathian
accretionary wedge. Scarce remnants of this basin are present
along the southern PKB margin in western and also in eastern
Slovakia.
Besides the above characterized region A (Fig. 1), the Manín
Unit was described also from the right side of the Váh Valley
in the Púchov sector, as well as in the more southern, Myjava–
Trenčín sector of the PKB (Began 1969) — area B in Fig. 1.
Being affiliated with the Kysuca or Pieniny Unit formerly
(e.g., Andrusov 1931; Andrusov & Scheibner 1960), the Manín
Unit in this area includes a sedimentary succession ranging
from the Upper Triassic Carpathian Keuper Fm, Rhaetian fos-
siliferous limestones, and rather deep-water Jurassic sequence
dominated by bioturbated limestones of the “Fleckenmergel”
facies (Allgäu Fm) and radiolarites, then Lower Cretaceous
maiolica-type and spotted marly limestones, and Albian to
Turonian marls and clastic flysch deposits (Began 1969).
However, presently this unit is redefined as the Drietoma Unit
differing from the Manín Unit especially by the deep-water
Jurassic sediments (see Hók et al. 2009 and references therein).
Nevertheless, some partial slices with shallow-water Jurassic
and Urgon-type limestones might be parallelized with the Manín
Unit (e.g., the Bošáca Subunit of Maheľ 1978 a.k.a. Belá
Subunit of Borza et al. 1980; or Urgonian limestones encoun-
tered by the deep borehole Lubina-1 in the Myjava part of
the Periklippen Zone — Leško et al. 1982). Recently,
the St. Veit Klippenzone north of Vienna has been tentatively
correlated with the Drietoma Unit, too (Wagreich et al. 2012).
In the eastern Slovakian Pieniny Mts, the Haligovce Unit
has been often connected with the Manín Unit (area C in
Fig. 1). The compound Haligovce succession includes Middle
Triassic limestones and dolomites, variegated Jurassic sandy-
crinoidal limestones, a few metres of greenish Oxfordian radio-
larites, cherty and nodular limestones, Tithonian to Hauterivian
maiolica-type, bedded cherty limestones and, most typically,
the Barremian–Aptian massive biogenic Urgonian limestones.
In our view, the Haligovce klippen represent large tectonic
blocks, possibly megaboudins, surrounded by siliciclastic
turbiditic sandstones containing Albian foraminifers (Štefan
Józsa, personal information). These flysch-type deposits are
correlated here with the Poruba Fm. of the Krížna Nappe, or
with the Praznov Fm. of the Manín Unit. They are conside-
rably different from the Palaeogene calcareous sandstones
associated with the Haligovce Unit (see below).
Based mainly on presence of Urgon-type limestones,
Andrusov (1968, 1974) affiliated the Haligovka klippe with
the Manín Unit, i.e. palaeogeographically with the outermost
Tatric zones of the CWC. This view was then followed by
a majority of Slovak researchers (e.g., Potfaj and Rakús in
Janočko ed. 2000). Maheľ (1986) ranged the Haligovce Unit,
as a constituent of the larger-scale Manín Unit, to the Krížna
nappe system (Fatricum). On contrary, Polish authors mostly
considered the Haligovce Unit as an integral part of the PKB,
palaeogeographically as its innermost element deposited on
the northern slopes of the “exotic” ridge dividing the PKB
basins from the CWC (e.g., Birkenmajer 1977, 1986).
Książkiewicz (1977) even supposed that the Haligovce Unit
represents a subunit of the Pieniny Nappe. Finally, Cieszkowski
et al. (2009) and Golonka et al. (2015) regarded the Haligovce
Unit as a group of sedimentary klippen — olistoliths resting
within flysch formations. However, the source of the Haligovce
sedimentary klippen was not specified and their olistolithic
nature was not properly documented. The “olistolithic con-
cept” would partly correspond to that of Nemčok (1980), who
regarded all klippen of the eastern Slovakian PKB as olisto-
liths. On the other hand, also Nemčok et al. (1990) took off
the Haligovce Unit from the PKB and supposed its post-
Eocene emplacement to the PKB vicinity. This opinion was
motivated by a considerably different type of Palaeogene
sediments resting on the Haligovka klippe (Myjava–Hričov
Group) compared to other Palaeogene deposits within the PKB
itself (Jarmuta–Proč Fm.; e.g., Plašienka 2012a and references
therein).
The Gosau-type succession of the Haligovce Unit includes
variegated marlstones, orbitoids- and algae-bearing sand-
stones of the Maastrichtian age (Köhler & Buček 2000; Buček
& Köhler 2017), biodetritic limestones with Thanetian large
foraminifers, and Palaeocene–Lower Eocene carbonatic con-
glomerates (Súľov Fm.) intercalated by calcareous sandstones
with nummulites and partially resedimented algal-coral patch
reefs (Matějka 1961; Scheibner 1968b; Janočko ed. 2000;
Köhler & Buček 2005). Banks and bedrock of the Lipník
Stream south of the Haligovka klippe, at the contact with
the CCPB formations, exposed a narrow slice dominated by
pelagic Senonian–Middle Eocene sediments. It was described
as the “southern Haligovce Palaeogene development” by
Matějka (1961). It is composed of variegated marls and clay-
stones, in places with olistostromes containing shallow-water
bioclastic material (Scheibner 1968b). Nowadays, Plašienka
& Soták (2015) differentiated this occurrence as an inde-
pendent unit named the Lipník Unit and correlated it with
the Maruszyna Unit occurring in the Polish PKB sector to
the west, and with the Šambron–Kričevo Unit toward the east.
Map-scale structures of the Peri-Klippen Zone in
the Middle Váh Valley
Manín Unit
The belt of the Manín Unit trends SW–NE, being truncated
by subparallel, but anastomozing in the map view, faults into
46
PLAŠIENKA
GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA
, 2019, 70, 1, 35–61
several strips and lenses with partially distinct composition
and internal structure. Along the NW margin, the Manín Unit
adjoins the Klape Unit, which is predominantly composed of
mid-Cretaceous deep-marine clastics of the Klape Flysch.
The westernmost part of this contact is covered by Lower
Miocene marine sandstones and Quaternary fluvial deposits of
the Váh River (Fig. 2). The SE boundary of the Manín belt is
followed by a complex imbricated zone composed of narrow
slices of mainly mid-Cretaceous flysch sediments assigned by
various authors either to the Manín Unit, or to the frontal
elements of the adjacent Krížna Nappe (Praznov–Jablonové
slice according to Marschalko & Kysela 1980; Nozdrovice
imbricates according to Michalík & Vašíček 1979; Maheľ
1983, 1985, 1986). Further SE-ward, the Palaeogene synclines
unconformably seal the Cretaceous thrust structures of
the under lying CWC nappe systems.
From SE to NW, five structural domains are differentiated
within the Manín Unit in the Middle Váh Valley: (1) the Súľov
domain (abridged as M1 in Figs. 2 and 4) in the north-eastern
part of the area; (2) the Praznov–Jablonové slice (M2) as a nar-
row strip rimming the Manín Unit from the SE; (3) the Butkov
pericline (M3) in the south-west; (4) the Skalica folded-
imbricated domain (M4) north of the Butkov pericline; and
(5) the Manín fold-thrust domain (M5) further north. From
the S and SE, the Manín Unit is put side by side by the frontal
Nozdrovice imbricated zone of the Krížna Nappe and the sli-
ced Hričov–Žilina synclinal zone filled with Palaeogene sedi-
ments in the NE (P1, Figs. 2 and 4). The M2 vs. M3 and
M4 vs. M5 zones are juxtaposed and partly interchanged in
a coulisse-like mode, along with intervening brachysynforms
G1 and G2.
On the surface, the Súľov domain M1 is cropping out
within the Súľov “window” in the NE part of the area (Fig. 2),
where it is surrounded by Palaeogene deposits of the Myjava–
Hričov Group. Despite lateral relationships to other Manín
subunits are obliterated by these deposits, the Súľov domain is
probably the most internal element of the Manín Unit (see
Fig. 4A). It is prevailingly composed of Albian–Cenomanian
“flysch” deposits including numerous bodies of exotic conglo-
merates (Hradná Mbr.) and several large, Kostolec-type olisto-
liths of Jurassic–Lower Cretaceous limestones (Vrchteplá,
Súľov — Borza 1970). Still within the Súľov window,
the Manín Unit is overthrust from the SE by the frontal ele-
ments of the Fatric Krížna Nappe.
The Praznov–Jablonové slice M2 is laterally connected
with the Butkov domain in the southwest and extends in
an about 0.5 km wide strip NE-ward. It is mainly composed of
mid-Cretaceous synorogenic deep-marine clastics (Praznov
Fm.). The zone is tightly imbricated and steeply SE-dipping
under the Krížna Nappe (Fig. 4). In the Kostolec area,
the Albian turbidites contain several huge blocks of Jurassic to
Lower Cretaceous limestones, which are presently considered
to be olistoliths (e.g., Marschalko & Kysela 1980; Rakús
1997; Rakús & Hók 2005). On the other hand, some other
authors (e.g., Maheľ 1985) regarded the Praznov–Jablonové
slice as a frontal element of the overriding Krížna Nappe.
The Butkov domain M3 is dominated by a large, 5 km long
and 1.5 km wide brachyanticline (pericline, i.e. doubly-plun-
ging anticline — see the detailed description by Plašienka et
al. 2018a) composed of the Jurassic to Lower Albian lime-
stone formations. The Butkov pericline is slightly asymmetric,
with steeply N-dipping to vertical northern limb and mode-
rately to steeply S-dipping southern limb, affected also by
S-dipping low-angle normal faults (e.g., Michalík et al. 2012).
The periclinal closures are indicated by moderately west- and
east-plunging fold axes. The anticline is transversally trun-
cated by a deep incised valley, apparently developed along
a vertical transfer fault (Plašienka et al. 2018a). The southern
limb of the Butkov pericline submerges to the south to south-
east below the frontal Nozdrovice imbricates of the Krížna
Nappe (Figs. 2 and 4).
North of the Butkov pericline, the complexly folded Skalica
domain M4 consists of two segments axially plunging
NE-ward, separated by the nearly isometric lens-shaped
Manín domain M5. The SW segment tightens NE-ward and
wedges out near Kostolec village. This is also the general
trend of the axial plunge of the whole domain — the SW part
exposes the deeper structural levels, which are composed of
tight antiforms and imbricates of Jurassic–Lower Cretaceous
limestones surrounded by mid-Cretaceous clastic formations,
while the tapering NE part is dominantly composed of
Senonian deposits filling the complicated Lieskov–Praznov
synform G1 (Figs. 2 and 4). According to Borza et al. (1979),
the Lower Cretaceous strata of this domain are akin to the Belá
Subunit of the Fatric Krížna Nappe. Marschalko & Kysela
(1980) described this area as the “Podmanín development”
with megabreccias of Urgonian limestones within the Lower
Albian pelagic marlstones and considered them as frontal
slices or olistoliths of the Fatric Belá Subunit. Structural
pattern of this domain and development of the Lieskov–
Praznov synform was presented in the paper by Plašienka et
al. (2018a).
The Manín domain M5 to the north of the Skalica domain
includes two large brachyanticlines (Veľký and Malý Manín
and Drieňovka and Kavčia hills incised by narrow gorges of
the Manínsky potok stream). The large Manín “klippe” is
an elongated (ca. 5 km long, 1.5 km wide) brachyantiform
with SW–NE trending axis and with strongly asymmetric
profile — its NW limb is reduced and truncated by a steep
reverse fault, which provides contact with the adjacent
Klape Unit (Figs. 2 and 4B). In contrast, the satellite Drieňovka
pericline to the east is a smaller (1.5 × 0.5 km on the surface),
sym metric upright open macrofold with moderately dipping
limbs (Plašienka et al. 2018a). Both antiforms are supported
by a thick competent layer of massive Urgonian limestones.
After an interruption by the anticlinal Manín domain, the syn-
clinal zone filled with Senonian sediments forms the NE seg-
ment of the Manín Unit (Hlboké synform G2; Figs. 2 and
4A). The synform is squeezed between the backthrust K1–2
slice of the Klape Unit to the NW and the steeply SE-dipping
Praznov–Jablonové slice M2 to the SE. It is tightened toward
NE, where it merges with the P1 Hričov–Žilina sliced zone
47
LINKAGES OF THE MANÍN AND KLAPE UNITS
GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA
, 2019, 70, 1, 35–61
affected by dextral strike-slipping along the W–E striking
Bytča–Varín fault zone.
Klape Unit
The Klape Unit consists of five subparallel, lozenge-shaped
imbrications that are gradually merging and wedging out
toward the north-east: (1) the southernmost Považská Bystrica
slice (K1 in Figs. 2 and 4) is adjacent to the Manín Unit;
(2) the Orlové slice (K2) occupies the central position within
the Klape Unit, but rapidly wedges out NE-ward; (3) the Nim-
nica–Uhry slice (K3) spreads across meanders of the Nosice
Dam and disappears underneath fluvial deposits of the Váh
Valley north-eastward; (4) the Stupné–Hvozdnica slice (K4)
widens eastward, but probably wedges out below the Váh
Valley as well; (5) the northernmost, rather wide and complexly
1
km
0
-1
-2
-3
-4
1
km
0
-1
-2
-3
-4
1
km
0
-1
-2
-3
-4
VÁH
JABLONOVÉ
SÚĽOV
Rajec
Basin
D.MARIKOVÁ
Klapy
VÁH
VÁH
Manín
H.LIESKOV
PRUŽINA
A
B
C
NW
SE
SE
SE
NW
NW
KN
KN
KN
H2
P4
P3
P1-2
P3
P2
P3
G2
G3
G4
G5
G5
G4
G3
G1
G1
M1
M2
M5
K1-2
K4
M2
M1
M5
M4
K1-2
K4
K3
K2
K1
K 5
K4
K2
K5
K1
M5
M4
M2
M3
10 km
N
KN
H1
H1
H2
H2
Fig. 4. Geological cross-sections of the area. For their location and legend see Fig. 2. Note that sections are vertically exaggerated.
48
PLAŠIENKA
GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA
, 2019, 70, 1, 35–61
imbricated Hoštiná–Brvnište zone (K5) also narrows east-
wards. These slices or imbricates may be treated as partial
units (subunits) of the Klape Unit at the same time, since they
embrace more-or-less complete lithostratigraphic successions.
They all join together somewhere below the Váh River depo-
sits between Bytča and Žilina (Fig. 4A) and then continue
eastward into the PKB Kysuca sector NE of Žilina as a single,
undifferentiated unit.
The Považská Bystrica slice K1, about 15 km long and
2 km wide, neighbours the NW margin of the Manín Unit and
approximates also its macrofold structural style. The southern
rim of this slice is moderately up to steeply NW-dipping, i.e.
opposite as a majority of strata dips in the Manín Unit. This
indicates backthrusting of the Klape Unit, which seems to
postdate development of NW-verging fold-and-thrust struc-
tures that are characteristic for the Manín Unit. Tight imbri-
cates of Lower Cretaceous marly limestones appear in the area
SW of Považská Bystrica town, but the K1 domain is predo-
minantly composed of the Klape Flysch deposits dipping
NW-ward in a normal position. The K1 Klape subunit corre-
sponds to the Podháj Unit in the original meaning of Salaj
(1995).
The fault-bounded Rašov synform G3 filled with Senonian–
Lower Eocene sediments occurs along the contact of
the Považská Bystrica slice with the Orlové slice to the NW.
The syncline is up to 4 km wide in the area SW of Považská
Bystrica, but rapidly wedges out towards the NE (Figs. 2
and 4). The Rašov syncline is the only of the area, to which also
the Oligocene and Lower Miocene deposits are confined.
The next Orlové slice K2 is ca 10 km long and up to 4 km
wide. Its pre-Senonian strata are overturned, with a steep
monoclinal dip to the NW. Considering their opposite facing
(younging) directions towards the central Rašov syncline,
the K1 and K2 slices are interpreted as limbs of a large-scale
syncline, i.e. they would represent only one partial unit of
the Klape Unit (Figs. 2, 4B, C).
The Nimnica–Uhry slice K3 is some 10 km long and
2.5 km wide. It contains steeply NW-dipping overturned strata
of the Klape Flysch, including megaolistolith of the Mt. Klapy.
From the next Stupné–Hvozdnica slice it is separated by
the narrow Udiča synform G4 filled with Senonian to Lower
Eocene sediments.
The Stupné–Hvozdnica K4 and Hoštiná–Brvnište K5
slices show en echelon arrangement and might be unified in
one belt, being separated by a narrow antiform exposing
the Jurassic to Lower Cretaceous strata of the Klape Unit.
The antiform trends obliquely to the general trend of the belt,
causing a lateral coulisse-like replacement of both slices,
which are together some 12 km long and 4 km wide. The wes-
tern Púchov–Brvnište slice carries also the wide Hoštiná syn-
form G5 with Senonian–Palaeogene infill, while the eastern
Stupné–Hvozdnica slice is attached to the Udiča synform G4
(Figs 2 and 4). Thus this outer Klape belt may be characterized
as a complex fold-thrust zone, unlike other Klape subunits
with typically steeply NW-dipping homoclines, though inter-
nally imbricated and overturned. Being affected by an oblique
backthrust to strike-slip fault to the NE and E, both K4 and K5
slices are probably wedging out somewhere near town Bytča.
The contact of the Manín-Klape zone with the External
Carpathian Flysch Belt is followed by a narrow discontinuous
zone with slices and lenses of the Oravic units of the PKB s.s.
(Fig. 2). Both the Subpieniny (Czorsztyn) and Pieniny (Kysuca)
units occur there with complex mutual relationships. The con-
tact zone appears to be nearly vertical or steeply N-dipping,
probably affected by important along-strike horizontal or
oblique movements (Fig. 2). Further to NW, small occurrences
of Oravic units occur within the Biele Karpaty and Magura
units. The most spectacular is the Dolná Mariková klippen
area (Figs. 2 and 4B), which has been interpreted as a nappe
outlier of the Oravic Kysuca and Czorsztyn units affected by
superimposed reverse faults and strike-slips (Plašienka et al.
2010).
Between Dolná Mariková and Hvozdnica villages, rock
complexes of the Šariš Unit as the outermost Oravic element
of the PKB occur (Brvnište slice of Potfaj in Mello ed. 2005,
2011). It is formed by the Maastrichtian to Ypresian Jarmuta–
Proč Formation — calcareous sandstones, breccias and seve-
ral olistoliths of Jurassic and Lower Cretaceous limestones
derived from the overriding Subpieniny Unit (cf. Plašienka
2012a). South-west of Hoštiná village, the Šariš Unit is late-
rally replaced by the eastward wedging out Javorina Nappe of
the Biele Karpaty Superunit composed of Campanian red
shales and Maastrichtian turbiditic sandstones. The underlying
Bystrica Unit of the Magura Superunit mostly includes calcite-
poor grey mudstones and siliciclastic turbidites of the Eocene
Zlín Formation.
Palaeogene synforms
The inner SE margin of the Manín–Klape Peri-Klippen Zone
is adjoined by several subparallel synclines filled exclusively
with Palaeogene sediments. In the north, the Hričov–Žilina
sliced zone P1 (Figs. 2, 3 and 4A) includes Palaeocene–Lower
Eocene, steeply NW- to N-dipping, often overturned and
strongly imbricated sediments of the Myjava–Hričov Group.
Together with the reduced Senonian Hlboké syncline, this
imbricated zone provides connection to analogous rocks in
the Varín (Kysuce) PKB sector towards the east (cf. Plašienka
& Soták 2015).
Southeast of the Praznov–Jablonové slice, the Prečín–
Súľov synform P2 is located (Figs. 2, 3 and 4B). It is 1 to 3 km
wide, asymmetric syncline filled with mostly massive carbo-
natic conglomerates of the Lower Eocene Súľov Fm. and
Middle Eocene pelagic shales of the Domaniža Fm. (Soták et
al. 2017). These transgressively, but in general conformably
overlie Lower Eocene sediments of the Hričov–Žilina imbri-
cated zone in the northern part of the syncline, where the strata
are overturned, steeply NW-dipping. Toward the SW, bedding
is subvertical, or steeply to moderately SE-dipping, uncon-
formably overlying steep structures of Cretaceous rocks of
the Praznov–Jablonové slice (Marschalko & Kysela 1980).
The south-eastern limb is moderately dipping to the NW, or
49
LINKAGES OF THE MANÍN AND KLAPE UNITS
GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA
, 2019, 70, 1, 35–61
truncated by NW-vergent reverse faults (Fig. 4A, B). In places
along this eastern limb, the coarse Súľov conglomerates
uncon
formably cover the Manín Unit (M1 domain) in
the northern part and the frontal elements of the Krížna Nappe
in the southern part (Fig. 2). Apparently, the SSW–NNE trend
of Palaeogene synclines is slightly oblique with respect to
the underlying Cretaceous SW–NE structures of the Manín
and Krížna units.
To the south, the Prečín synform is divided from the adja-
cent Pružina–Domaniža synform P3 by the NE-ward plun-
ging Malenica–Roháč antiform composed of the Fatric and
Hronic complexes. The southern periclinal closures of both
synforms display a coulisse-like arrangement (Figs. 2 and 4).
The Pružina–Domaniža synform is up to 5 km wide, gentle
and only slightly asymmetric, though partly fault-bounded
from the SE side.
The eastward located Rajec synform P4 is already a part of
the extensive CCPB filled with Bartonian–Oligocene sedi-
ments of the Podtatra Group. Its transgressive Borové Fm.
unconformably overlies Mesozoic complexes of the Fatric and
Hronic nappes (Figs. 2 and 4A). In the northern part, SW of
Žilina, the Podtatra Group covers discordantly younger forma-
tions of the northern parts of the P2 and P3 synforms (Fig. 2).
The CCPB synforms are wide, gentle and generally sym-
metric, but affected by younger normal faulting.
Tectonic evolution
The PKB proper and the Peri-Klippen Zone are located at
the backstop of the ancient accretionary wedge that developed
during the Senonian to Eocene. The wedge was buttressed by
the CWC basement/cover complexes reinforced by the grani-
toid plutons of the Tatric basement along its outer margin.
As the wedge grew by frontal accretion, the frontal CWC units
were gradually transferred from the wedge toe to its rear parts.
In the final backstop position, the Klape and Manín units were
strongly compressed and attained their current complicated
deformation structures.
Growth stages of the accretionary wedge as revealed by
evolution of the Senonian and Palaeogene wedge-top basins
In their synthesis of Cretaceous to Palaeogene syntectonic
deposits of the Manín and Klape units in the Middle Váh
Valley, Marschalko & Rakús (1997) distinguished three depo-
sitional megacycles: (1) Albian–Cenomanian progradational
proximal turbidites with olistoliths (Klape Flysch) terminated
by paracyclic shallow water sandstones (Orlové Fm) indica-
ting filling-up of the basin; (2) Coniacian–Santonian retrogra-
dational conglomerates and olistostromes with reef bodies;
and (3) Campanian–Palaeocene megacycle exhibiting progra-
dation from hemipelagic marls (Púchov Fm) into bioclastic
allodaps, tempestites and conglomerates with reef bodies.
Recently, Plašienka & Soták (2015) have differentiated up to
seven Senonian through Palaeogene sedimentary sequences
within the second and third megacycles of Marschalko &
Rakús (1997). At the same time, these sequences represent
evolutionary stages of the Gosau basins positioned above
the developing accretionary wedge (Fig. 3):
Stage 1: following the Late Turonian emplacement event of
the Fatric (Klape, Manín, Krížna) and later of the Hronic cover
nappe systems, the Coniacian–Early Santonian fining-upward
sequence includes basal polymict conglomerates with reef
bodies, overlain by calcareous sandstones, olistostromes with
littoral fauna and hemipelagic marls; these sediments are
interpreted as deposited in the piggyback wedge-top depres-
sions of the accretionary wedge composed of the frontal Fatric
units;
Stage 2: Late Santonian to Middle Campanian variegated
hemipelagic marlstones of the “couches rouges” facies
(CORB-type) record sudden deepening due to an extensional
collapse of the wedge;
Stage 3: sediments of the Middle Campanian to Cretaceous/
Palaeogene boundary age are represented by neritic marls,
shallow-water bioclastic limestones, tempestites, calcareous
sandstones and conglomerates with exotic pebbles and blocks
of rudists-bearing bioherms; this coarsening- and shallowing-
upward sequence registers shortening of the wedge by frontal
accretion of the Oravic units and internal out-of-sequence
thrusting;
Stage 4: Danian to Early Ypresian period is characterized by
sedimentary gaps and erosion of older deposits indicating
transient emersion of the overthickened wedge; terrestrial or
shallow-marine sediments rich in terrigenous material or olis-
toliths of Thanetian reefs were deposited in the wedge-top
basins;
Stage 5: the base of the new Late Ypresian–Lutetian trans-
gressive cycle involves coarse-grained carbonate breccias and
conglomerates (Súľov Fm.), which are followed by calcareous
turbiditic sandstones and bathyal variegated claystones; this
fining-upward sequence records a gravitational collapse of
the wedge;
Stage 6: Bartonian to Early Rupelian — after the Late
Lutetian gap caused by the renewed shortening and thickening
of the wedge, a new transgressive cycle is represented by
a sequence of continental to shallow-water calcareous clastics
and nummulitic limestones at the base of the extensive CCPB,
which covered most of the CWC area; then starved sedimenta-
tion of anoxic shales prevailed during the Late Priabonian–
Early Rupelian;
Stage 7: Late Rupelian to Aquitanian — the terrigenous
input into the CCPB increased gradually, but considerably and
the basin was probably overfilled during the earliest Miocene.
As inferred by Plašienka & Soták (2015), these depositional
cycles closely correspond to those recognized in the coeval
trench-foredeep basins of the Oravic units that were gradually
accreted to the wedge tip, despite of partial differences in
the sedimentary record (Fig. 3). Applying the critical taper
theory of accretionary wedges, the supercritical, overthickened
wedge states are recorded by shallow-water sedimentation in
the wedge-top areas, even with emergence and erosion of
50
PLAŠIENKA
GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA
, 2019, 70, 1, 35–61
older strata, especially when simultaneous global sea-level
lowstand occurred. Coeval foredeeps were filled mostly with
coarse-grained gravity deposits produced by increasing erosion
of the prograding wedge. This scheme concerns the stages
1, 3, 4 and 6 in particular. On the other hand, the subcritical
wedge generated by the extensional collapse of overthickened
wedge gave way to deposition of deep-water pelagic strata
and equalization of sedimentary environments in both
the trench-foredeep and wedge-top basins. The subcritical
wedge states are characteristic for the stage 2 with CORB-type
sediments, stage 5 with variegated pelagic shales in sedi-
ment-starved basins, and stage 7 characterized by a marked
subsidence and accumulation of thick clastic deposits in
the fore-arc CCPB with material derived from the elevated axial
orogenic zones and from rear parts of the EWC accretionary
wedge (Kováč et al. 2016). The transitional periods from
the subcritical to supercritical wedge are characterized by
the coarsening-upward sequences, while the fining and
dee pe ning-upward sequences are typical for the contrary
transitions.
Structural development
In this chapter a tentative correlation of tectono-sedimentary
cycles with development of macrostructures of the area and
mesoscopic deformation stages, which were distinguished on
the basis of the structural rock record (e.g., Bučová et al. 2010;
Prokešová et al. 2012; Bučová 2013; Šimonová & Plašienka
2017; Plašienka et al. 2018a), is attempted. Considering the wide
age span of various syn-tectonic sediments preserved in
the area (Albian–Early Miocene), at least the early stages of
the structural evolution of units present in the area should have
overlapped in time with the depositional phases obviously
controlled by tectonics to a great extent. Nevertheless, it is
problematic to relate the depositional cycles and correspon-
ding wedge states discerned above with the deformation stages
and their respective structural rock record, because of no direct
and unequivocal relationships can be postulated.
In general, the supercritical wedge stages would have been
connected with contractional deformation within the wedge,
whereas extensional structures are expected for periods with
the subcritically tapered wedge conditions. However, only
the uppermost structural levels of the accretionary wedge can
be analysed, where deformation took place in the brittle field
exclusively. Under such conditions, the overprinting criteria
are not always clear and the “absolute” timing of individual
deformation stages is only possible by precise dating of sedi-
ments affected, and by correlations with other neighbouring
regions. This was done for the brittle structural record and its
palaeostress interpretation, but merely from the Oligocene
onward at the appropriate level of confidence. We can only
hypothesize that the oldest discerned palaeostress states with
the generally NW–SE oriented main horizontal compression
axis might have corresponded to a rather long period of
the wedge deformation during the Senonian up to the Early
Miocene.
The Manín and Klape units, treated here as the frontal
elements of the CWC Fatric nappe system, were emplaced in
the present Peri-Klippen position supposedly in the Late Turo-
nian times. Thus they carry also their own pre- and syn-empla-
cement structural record attained during their detachment,
thrust stacking and final emplacement. This structural asso-
ciation, which can be grouped as the non-genetic D
0
deforma-
tion stage, can be correlated with the structural evolution of
the Krížna Nappe in the CWC areas (cf. Prokešová et al. 2012;
Plašienka et al. 2018a). In terms of deformation stages, which
were discerned based on overprinting criteria and changes in
the operating deformation mechanisms, Plašienka (2012b) and
Plašienka & Soták (2015) discriminated five main events that
affected the PKB units in post-emplacement times of the CWC
units:
• Deformation stage D
1
was related to detachment of the higher
Oravic units (Pieniny and Subpieniny) from the subducted
substratum and their accretion to the tip of the prograding
Western Carpathian orogenic wedge. On the basis of
the synorogenic sedimentary record, this process lasted
from the Coniacian stage (Vahic Belice Unit — cf. Plašienka
2012a) and from the Campanian (Pieniny Unit) up to
the Maastrichtian (Subpieniny Unit; Fig. 5). In the accre-
tionary wedge formed by the frontal CWC units and their
piggyback Gosau basins, the D
1
stage shortening was pro-
bably accommodated by synsedimentary large-scale folding
and out-of-sequence thrusting during the wedge taper states
growing from critical to supercritical, interrupted by occa-
sional extensional collapse events resulting in the subcriti-
cally tapered wedge.
Based on interpretation of the sedimentary record, exten-
sional events occurred three times during the Senonian–
Palaeogene times (Fig. 5). However, this was not really
recognized in the structural record of the investigated
region. Supposedly extensional structures of the first
Campanian event were mostly obliterated or reactivated
during the superimposed strong compressional deformation.
In general, the post folding/tilting extensional faults are
quite common in the investigated region, but they are inter-
preted as accompanying the late, Miocene–Pliocene exten-
sional events. In spite of the absence of good stratigraphic
markers, it is inferred that a part of these extensional faults
might have accompanied also older post-folding distension
phases. Considering data from the Middle Váh Valley, this
pre-Miocene extensional event can be related to the Lutetian
collapse in particular.
• The D
2
stage is represented by the so far poorly constrained
event with structures like minor folds with the NW–SE to
N–S trending axes and faults developed under the SW–NE
to W–E operating compression — i.e. the D2 structures
trend across the older and also younger structures, therefore
they are sometimes designated as the “cross-folding” event.
This event should have occurred still before development
of the dominant macrofold structures in the Manín zone
(Plašienka et al. 2018a). Its broad-scale kinematic meaning
remains unclear, however. Possible relationship with the PKB
51
LINKAGES OF THE MANÍN AND KLAPE UNITS
GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA
, 2019, 70, 1, 35–61
and outer CWC arc formation seems feasible. Tentatively,
it could have been associated with the incipient oblique col-
lision of the orogenic wedge front with the Oravic conti-
nental ribbon in present western Slovakia. This took place
around the Cretaceous/Palaeogene boundary, then the overall
NW–SE to N–S compression and shortening renewed.
Accordingly, the “cross-folding” D
2
stage might have repre-
sented a short-termed, collision-related event during the long-
time uniform progression of the orogenic wedge. This
inter pretation is to some extent corroborated by the likely
absence of these structures in the Šariš Unit accreted during
the Late Palaeocene–Early Eocene and in the coeval deposits
of the piggyback Myjava–Hričov Group. Vojtko et al. (2010)
and Sůkalová et al. (2011) indicated lack of structures gene-
rated by the W–E compression in the CCPB deposits, too.
• Deformation stage D
3
is defined as the main phase of
the NW–SE to N–S compression (Shmax). Although
the post-emplacement contraction could have been initiated
in the Senonian, the analysed structural record suggests that
the main shortening and development of the general imbri-
cated structural pattern of the area was reached during
the Palaeocene and Early Eocene. It was related to the accre-
tion of the Šariš Unit during the Palaeocene in western
Slovakia and to the subsequent enormous growth of
the EWC wedge during the Eocene–Oligocene times
(Fig. 5). In the Middle Váh Valley, this is recorded by pre-
and syn-tilting small-scale structures (Bučová 2013), and
then by development of the principal macrostructures such
as the Butkov, Manín and Drieňovka periclines and Lieskov
and Hlboké brachysynforms (Plašienka et al. 2018a).
The episodic growth of these synclinal basins was mirrored
by presumably contemporaneous intermittent growth of
adjacent periclinal elevations, as it is indicated by structural
analysis of the Butkov fold. After the maximum contraction
was achieved purely by folding, the subsequent horizontal
shortening and vertical lengthening was accomplished by
development of tight imbricates. Steeply SE-dipping reverse
faults are cutting preferably the northern limbs of slightly
asymmetric anticlines, like the Butkov and Manín periclines
(Fig. 4; deformation substage D
3a
).
Probably after the Lutetian extensional episode, prolonged
contraction resulted in backthrusting–backtilting, whereby
most of strata were steepened up to overturned towards
the south-east (deformation substage D
3b
). At the same time,
synforms P1–3 in the southerly adjacent Palaeocene–
Lutetian basin formed (Figs. 2 and 4). Both the backthrusts
Fig. 5. Synopsis of the main deformation stages with their respective palaeostress orientation and relationships to the accretionary wedge
growth. Palaeostresses are shown by circles with directions of Shmax (black triangles) and Shmin (empty triangles); general vergency of
syn-emplacement D
0
structures is indicated by arrows. Note that the presently measured palaeostress orientations (left column) are corrected
for the Middle Miocene counter-clockwise block rotation of the Western Carpathians.
52
PLAŠIENKA
GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA
, 2019, 70, 1, 35–61
and axes of these synforms are slightly oblique to older D
3a
structural trends. The deformation stage D
3b
culminated in
the Late Eocene–Early Oligocene by dextral transpression
along W–E trending wrench zones with eastward-increasing
manifestations in the northern and particularly in the eastern
PKB branch (cf. Ratschbacher et al. 1993; Plašienka 2012b).
After the next, Late Rupelian–Chattian extensional phase
with the subcritical wedge situation and marked subsidence
of the CCPB, the general NW–SE orientation of the maxi-
mum horizontal compression axis still persisted. This palaeo-
stress field controlled also the dextral transpression and
development of Eggenburgian (Early Burdigalian) basins of
the wrench-fault furrow type (Kováč 2000) in western
Slovakia. Remnants of Eggenburgian sediments are present
in the studied area, too, being confined to the underlying
Rašov syncline G3 (Figs. 2 and 4C).
• During the late Early and early Middle Miocene, the princi-
pal compression direction gradually rotated into the N–S
orientation. Deformation stage D
4
is characterized by sinis-
tral transpression–transtension along the western, SW–NE
trending PKB branch (Marko et al. 1995; Kováč & Hók
1996; Pešková et al. 2009; Bučová et al. 2010; Šimonová &
Plašienka 2011, 2017). This stage was largely coeval with
the post-Eggenburgian CCW block rotation of the Western
Carpathian domain (see e.g., Kováč 2000 and references
therein). It means that all the preceding palaeostress fields
also rotated CCW during this stage. Consequently, assu-
ming the 50° CCW block rotation of the entire Western
Carpathian domain (e.g., Márton et al. 2013), the original
position of the main compression axis was consistently
orien ted in the N–S direction for a long period from
the Senonian up to the Lower Miocene epoch (Fig. 5).
• After the CCW block rotation of the Western Carpathian
segment of ALCAPA was completed, its NW margin was
firmly attached to the SE edge of the Bohemian Massif, but
its NE front still progressed to fill up the space released by
the retreating subduction of the EWC oceanic lithosphere.
As a result, the early Middle Miocene period is characte-
rized by the overall N–S to SSW–NNE oriented principal
horizontal compression axis Shmax giving way to wide-
spread sinistral transtension in western Slovakia (Vienna
Basin, Blatné and Ilava basins) — stage D
5
(Fig. 5).
• The late Middle Miocene to Pliocene–Quaternary time is cha-
racterized by rifting and general extension (e.g., the Danube
Basin) with generally NW–SE oriented Shmin in the Middle
Váh Valley area (stage D
6
in Fig. 5).
Discussion
Present tectonic position of Fatric units in the Peri-Klippen
Zone and their tentative palinspastic arrangement
Taking apart the Senonian and younger formations, which
have been interpreted to represent the post-nappe, Gosau-type
cover (Plašienka & Soták 2015), the Manín and Klape units
could represent the integral, though distant frontal elements of
the Fatric cover nappe system of the CWC. However, the pre-
sent facies distribution of Jurassic to Lower Cretaceous for-
mations does not correspond to the expected palinspastic
arrangement in the original Fatric depositional area. In a majo-
rity of models going back to Biely & Fusán (1967) and
Andrusov (1968), the Fatric Krížna nappe system was derived
from a basinal sedimentary area located between the present
southern Tatric and northern Veporic margins. The basin
developed by Early Jurassic rifting of the epi-Variscan conti-
nental crust (e.g., Plašienka 2003a, b) and included the pre-rift
Permian and Lower Triassic continental clastics, Middle
Triassic carbonate platform and Upper Triassic clastics and
evaporites (Carpathian Keuper Formation), syn-rift Lower
Jurassic shallow marine carbonates with important terrigenous
input, then Middle Jurassic to Lower Cretaceous post-rift
sequence of mostly deep marine pelagic and slope deposits,
and finally mid-Cretaceous synorogenic “flysch” clastics
(Fig. 3). Orogenic progradation from the south seized the Fatric
realm in the Albian, when its southern margin against the nor -
t hern Veporic domain was inverted and the attenuated Fatric
crust was gradually underthrust below the Veporic basement
wedge during the Late Albian – Early Turonian. Simultaneously,
the basin fill was detached along the horizon of Lower Triassic
shales and evaporites and then thrust forward on the foreland
Tatric domain, until the whole Fatric crust was eliminated
from the surface and the northern Veporic and southern Tatric
margin came into collision along the so-called Čertovica Line.
The structural history and tectonic model of origin of the Fatric
nappes was presented in papers by Plašienka (1983, 1995c,
1997, 2003a), Plašienka & Prokešová (1996) and Prokešová et
al. (2012).
The original configuration of the Fatric domain and archi-
tecture of its sedimentary infill was reconstructed by analyses
of lithostratigraphic sections in various, presently allochtho-
nous parts of Fatric units, namely the Krížna Nappe, and its
former Tatric and Veporic margins (e.g., Michalík & Vašíček
1979; Michalík 1993, 2007; Plašienka 2003a; Prokešová et al.
2012 and references therein). In general, the central, up to 50 km
wide zone was occupied by the Zliechov Basin characterized
by deep marine pelagic sedimentation during the post-rift
stage, while its margins are outlined by various slope facies
grading into swell elevations. The cover sediments of the latter
remained solitary with their basements and currently they
occur in the northern Veporic (Veľký Bok Unit) and southern
Tatric zones (in the Tribeč, Tatry and Nízke Tatry Mts.).
Without going into details, this situation can be illustrated by
the distribution of some diagnostic formations. For example,
the Barremian–Aptian shallow water, Urgon-type platform
development can be followed from the autochthonous position
(in both depositional and tectonic aspects) in the Tatry Mts.
(Wysoka Turnia Formation of Lefeld et al. 1985) towards
the prograding platform edge (Manín and Skalica fms. already
detached and transported at the tip of the Fatric nappe system
in the Manín Unit), typical prograding delta and slope facies of
resedimented platform material (Lúčkovská and Podhorie fms.
53
LINKAGES OF THE MANÍN AND KLAPE UNITS
GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA
, 2019, 70, 1, 35–61
of the Butkov succession; Muráň Fm. of the Havran partial
nappe in the Belianske Tatry Mts. — Michalík et al. 1990), up
to slope-toe proximal to distal calciclastic turbidites occurring
in the frontal partial units of the Krížna Nappe (Vysoká Unit in
the Malé Karpaty and Belá Unit in the Strážovské vrch Mts.
— for the reviews see Michalík & Soták 1990, Michalík 1994
and Pečeňa & Vojtko 2011). On the other hand, the distinctive
eupelagic deposits like radiolarites (Ždiar Fm. in Fig. 3) are
typical for the Zliechov Basin bottom and are widespread in
the Krížna Nappe (Zliechov succession), whereas they dimi-
nish in thickness and become more calcareous towards the slope
Butkov succession and completely disappear in the Manín s.s.
succession (Fig. 6).
As can be seen in Figs. 2 and 3, the Klape Unit does not
respect this facies polarity, since it crops out in front of
the Manín Unit, which should otherwise be the outermost ele-
ment according to the above described rules. Despite scarce
surface occurrences, the Jurassic to Lower Cretaceous sequence
of the Klape Unit corresponds rather to the deep water Zliechov
succession, similarly as that of the Drietoma Unit further
SW-ward. A hypothetic explanation was provided by Plašienka
(1995a, 2003a), Plašienka & Prokešová (1996) and Prokešová
et al. (2012) by a diverticulation tectonic model — the Klape
Unit was derived as the first from the top of the growing Fatric
accretionary pyramid in the primary area and glided north-
wards over the unconstrained basinal Tatric foreland and
finally beyond the northern Tatric edge. Subsequently, but still
during the Late Turonian, the slope-derived Manín, Belá,
Havran and Vysoká units of the Krížna nappe system were
emplaced, followed by the main body of the Krížna Nappe
with its typical basinal Zliechov succession. This model of
the present and original palinspastic settings of the Klape and
other Fatric units is schematically depicted in Fig. 6.
The thick prisms of the Albian–Cenomanian, Upohlav-type
conglomerates of the Klape Flysch contain large quantities of
“exotic” pebble material derived from unrecognized sources,
traditionally interpreted as the (Ultra)Pieniny Cordillera a.k.a.
Andrusov Ridge (e.g., Mišík & Sýkora 1981; Birkenmajer
1988; Mišík & Marschalko 1988; see also the latest review by
Mišík & Reháková 2004 and references therein). However,
some characteristic rocks like Permian granitoids and bimodal
volcanic rocks with Early Cretaceous cooling ages (Uher &
Pushkarev 1994; Kissová et al. 2005; Poprawa et al. 2013;
Krobicki et al. 2018), Middle–Upper Triassic basinal carbo-
nates (Mišík et al. 1977; Birkenmajer et al. 1990), Upper
Jurassic shallow-water limestones (Mišík & Sýkora 1981),
glaucophanites and other HP/LP metamorphic rocks with
Late Jurassic isotopic ages (Šímová 1982; Dal Piaz et al. 1995;
Faryad & Schreyer 1997; Ivan et al. 2006), Urgonian lime-
stones with ophiolitic and blueschist detritus (Mišík &
Sýkora 1981; Plašienka et al. 2018b), as well as abundance of
Cr-spinels in heavy mineral fractions of sandstones (Mišík et
al. 1980; Jablonský et al. 2001; Bellová et al. 2018) all indicate
the provenance of this material in the southern Carpathian
zones, where such rocks are only known from the present
structure. An analogous pebble inventory occurs also in
the coeval conglomerates of the Fatric (Krížna Nappe) and
Tatric Poruba Fm. (Mišík et al. 1981). On the other hand, no
such rocks can be found in situ in zone adjacent to the PKB,
moreover the structure and evolution of the northern Tatric
margin, which should have neighboured the “exotic ridge”, is
completely different from what is recorded in the pebble mate-
rial. Therefore Plašienka (1995a, b, 2012a) proposed a model
of the Fatric affiliation of the Klape Unit, whereby the exotic
material was derived from the thrust stack in the southern
CWC zones (including the Meliata-type, ophiolite-bearing
units) and deposited in the adjacent trench basin filled with
synorogenic, coarse-grained clastics. This “wildflysch” basin
was most probably located in the southern part of the Zliechov
Basin that was gradually shortened and deformed in time of
synorogenic sedimentation (Albian–Cenomanian) due to under-
thrusting of its attenuated crust below the North Veporic
wedge tip (see also Plašienka & Prokešová 1996; Kissová et
al. 2005; Jeřábek et al. 2012; Plašienka 2018a). Another pos-
sible model by Rakús & Marschalko (1997) assumes a large-
scale sinistral strike-slipping along the outer CWC margin that
brought the Klape and related units to the present position
from the far eastern areas where the exotic sources were closer
to the present PKB. Nevertheless, since the latter model is not
supported by structural or regional tectonic evidence, we are
still maintaining the hypothetical concept of the southern Fatric
derivation of the Klape Unit and its Klape Flysch (Fig. 6).
Provenance of olistoliths and distribution of Urgon-type
carbonate platforms
Olistoliths are treated here as angular sedimentary slide
blocks, often solitary “klippen”, with dimensions exceeding
ca. 2–3 m, which are embedded in a much finer-grained matrix
of different character. Concerning the composition, there are
several different types of olistoliths existing in the investigated
area, but basically they occur in four stratigraphic and tectonic
settings in the Manín and Klape zones of the Middle Váh
Valley (see also Plašienka 2018a, b):
• The Palaeocene–Lower Eocene deposits of the Myjava–
Hričov Group contain several conspicuous, deca- to hecto-
metric blocks and numerous smaller boulders of Thanetian
Kambühel-type algal-coral bioherms (e.g., Buček & Köhler
2017 and references therein) that were derived from tempo-
rary, later completely destroyed marginal and patch reefs
(Fig. 3; see also Plašienka & Soták 2015 and references
therein). Blocks of Urgonian limestones, obviously derived
from the encircling Manín Unit, are also common.
• Senonian Gosau formations also include variously sized,
mostly allochthonous blocks of rudist and algal-coral reefs
of the same period. Clasts of Urgonian limestones are
particularly frequent in the Hlboké synform G2. North
of Púchov, the Coniacian–Santonian conglomerates of
the Rašov Fm. filling the most external Hoštiná synform
G5 contain also two decametric olistoliths and numerous
smaller blocks of Middle Triassic, Wetterstein-type plat-
form limestones. They could have originated only from
54
PLAŠIENKA
GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA
, 2019, 70, 1, 35–61
the Hronic units, although the possible sources are quite
remote at present (see Fig. 2). It is inferred that they were
torn off the advancing front of the overthrusting Hronic
nappes (e.g., the Strážov Nappe dominated by the massive
Wetterstein carbonates; cf. Havrila 2011) and transported
towards the foreground depressions.
• The Kostolec Unit (Súľov and Praznov–Jablonové slices
of the Manín Unit) is mainly composed of Cenomanian
Praznov Fm. that carries ten large olistoliths and a number
of smaller blocks of Jurassic to Lower Cretaceous lime-
stones (Rakús & Marschalko 1997; Rakús in Mello ed.
2011). Their lithology is similar to that of the Manín succes-
sion, therefore their local provenance from the Manín Unit
is very probable. However, unlike the above in situ Gosau
complexes, derivation and emplacement of the Kostolec
olistoliths must have occurred in the original sedimentary
area of the Manín Unit, i.e. far from its actual place, since
they are surrounded by early Late Cretaceous synorogenic
flysch deposits. Most probably they represent blocks
released from the edge of the Urgonian platform that slid
downslope into bathyal depths of the slope toe, or a mélange-
like complex developed in front of the Krížna Nappe (Belá–
Vysoká Subunit; Fig. 6).
• The Klape Unit contains only few, but big olistoliths of
variegated, mainly Jurassic limestones. The Mt. Klapy
klippe is the largest one with its long axis measuring almost
1000 metres. These olistoliths are typical solitary slide
blocks embedded in hemipelagic or distal turbiditic deposits
(lower Albian Nimnica and Uhry fms.). Their provenance is
unknown, a possible solution is proposed in Fig. 6B, based
MAGURA
BIELE KARPATY
ORAVIC
VAHIC
S
pie
ub
niny
Pieniny
Belá
Drietoma
Klape
Manín s.s.
Skalica
Butkov
Kostole
c
Krížna – Zliechov
Šariš
Kostolec
SYNOROGENIC
POST-RIFT
SYN-RIFT
PRE-RIFT
S T R
M A N Í N – V Y S O K Á S L O P E
Z L I E C H O V – K L A P E B A S I N
N V M
Manín s.s.
Skalica
Butkov
Belá
Havran
V
ysoká
Zliechov
Drietoma
Klape
Veľký Bok
mid-Cretaceous
often detached
Urgon
K1
J2-3
J1
T3
T2
T1
Pz
décollements
r
drowning
A
B
Fig. 6. The latest Cretaceous (post-D
1
) arrangement of individual Fatric units in the Peri-Klippen Zone (A) and their inferred palinspastic
position in the former Fatric sedimentary area (B) shown in approximately NW–SE trending, schematic sections. Not to scale (vertically
exaggerated). Notice the different types of olistoliths in the Klape and Kostolec units (A). Section (B) depicts a time slice at around 100 Ma
(Albian/Cenomanian boundary) with onset of shortening at the southern, Veporic margin of the Zliechov Basin. STR — South Tatric Ridge;
NVM — North Veporic margin; r — radiolarites (Ždiar Fm.). Note that the main part of the Zliechov Basin was much broader, approximately
50 km wide. Note also that considerable lateral variations occurred along strike the margins of the Zliechov Basin, which cannot be shown in
one section (cf. Michalík 2007).
55
LINKAGES OF THE MANÍN AND KLAPE UNITS
GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA
, 2019, 70, 1, 35–61
on the inferred southern position of the Klape succession in
the original Zliechov Basin and similarity of the Jurassic
olistoliths with the coeval deposits of the Lučatín succession
of the Veľký Bok cover unit of the northern Veporicum as
the potential source area (see Plašienka 1995c; Soták &
Plašienka 1996).
Assuming the proposed palinspastic arrangement of units
described above, we infer existence of three different domains
with Upper Barremian–Aptian to Lower Albian platform
limestones (Urgon-type) in the CWC: (1) the southern, totally
eroded platform that provided “exotic” pebbles of limestones
with ophiolitic and blueschist detritus occurring in the Upohlav
conglomerates of the Klape Flysch (cf. Méres et al. 2015;
Plašienka et al. 2018b); (2) the central platform was confined
to the South Tatric Ridge, which separated the Zliechov and
the northern Tatric Šiprúň basins, is largely preserved in
an autochthonous position in the Tatry (High Tatra) Mts.
(e.g., Masse & Uchman 1997) and its slope to slope-toe detri-
tus in the northern Fatric units (Manín–Belá–Havran–Vysoká,
see Fig. 6B); (3) existence of the independent, probably rather
small northern platform was related to the North Tatric Ridge,
as indicated by allodapic limestones and olistostromes with
northern sources occurring in the Tatric Šiprúň-type succes-
sions in the Malé Karpaty Mts. (Solírov Formation —
Jablonský et al. 1993).
Still more northern Urgonian platform was indicated in
the Orava sector of the PKB, where the Nižná Unit was distin-
guished mainly based on the presence of Urgon-like allodapic
limestones in otherwise deep-water, Kysuca-type succession
(Scheibner 1967; Mišík 1990; Józsa & Aubrecht 2008).
However, there are no signs of Barremian–Aptian allodaps
with shallow-water bioclastic detritus present in all other
Pieniny or Kysuca–Branisko successions of the PKB, even
more there is a general absence of Urgonian platforms on
flanks of the elevated Czorsztyn Ridge (see e.g., Birkenmajer
1977). The only exception might be the Beňatina klippe in
easternmost Slovakia (Schlögl et al. 2004), where Aptian
allodapic limestones with shallow-water detritus accompany
a Czorsztyn-like succession. However, it is only a small, tec-
tonically separated exposure with problematic relationship to
the surrounding formations. In light of this, there seems to be
no place for an independent Urgonian platform in the Oravic
domain. In our opinion, the Nižná succession is to a certain
extent comparable to some Fatric, more distal slope succes-
sions deposited at the foot of the Manín–Vysoká slope facing
the Zliechov Basin, like for example the Havran succession of
the Krížna Nappe (Fig. 6B).
Summing up, overview of the results presented in this arti-
cle basically confirms the conception of Michal Maheľ and his
supporters about the Fatric (Krížna) affiliation of the Manín
and analogous units and their interpretation as far-travelled
gliding nappes that were afterwards incorporated into struc-
tures along the northern Tatric edge. There, welded with
the subsequently accreted Oravic elements, these units attained
the present complex structural pattern within the Carpathian
Klippen Belt. Nevertheless, the distant palaeogeographic
provenance and pre-emplacement history of the Manín and
other Fatric units with respect to the “classic” PKB Oravic
units (or PKB s.s.) validate their affiliation to a special PKB
zone defined as the Peri-Klippen Zone by Maheľ (1980).
The author is aware that this terminology becomes a bit tricky,
therefore it was proposed to use only one unifying term for
both the Pieniny Klippen Belt s.s. and the Peri-Klippen Zone
— the Považie—Pieniny Belt (Plašienka in Froitzheim et al.
2008). This name combines two areas where the main ideas
about the lithostratigraphy, structure and evolution of the PKB
were developed — the Považie region in western Slovakia
(Váh River Valley) with dominating Peri-Klippen Zone, and
the Polish–Slovak Pieniny Mts. built up of widely and almost
completely preserved Oravic units.
Conclusions
Referring to the aims of this paper formulated in the intro-
duction, it is concluded that results of the field research, inter-
pretation of kinematics and evolution of observed deformation
structures, and analyses of sedimentary successions together
with an inevitable portion of generalization and hypothesizing
collectively indicate that:
• The Lower Jurassic to Cenomanian lithostratigraphic suc-
cessions of the Manín and Klape units largely correspond to
those of other Fatric units, being generally characterized
by (Fig. 3): (1) early Lower Jurassic syn-rift, mostly shal-
low-water sedimentation influenced by terrigenous input;
(2) late Early Jurassic up to Early Cretaceous (Hauterivian)
post-rift pelagic sedimentation controlled by the thermal
subsidence of a thinned continental lithosphere; (3) growth
of the Barremian–Aptian, Urgon-type carbonate platform in
the northern Manín domain and hemipelagic dysoxic
sedimentation in the southern Zliechov Basin (including
the Klape Unit); (4) deposition of syn-orogenic, coarsening-
upward deep marine clastics in mid-Cretaceous times
(Albian– Cenomanian) and common cessation of sedimenta-
tion in the Turonian due to commencing orogenic shorte-
ning and nappe thrusting. This evolution and timing of
the principal tectonostratigraphic events is very much dif-
ferent from those of the PKB Oravic units. Accordingly,
the palaeogeographic positions of the Fatric and Oravic
domains were different and remote throughout the Jurassic
and Early Cretaceous up to the Turonian stage.
• The Senonian to Lower Eocene formations within the Peri-
Klippen Zone are interpreted as having been deposited in
wedge-top basins developing in a piggyback position atop
the developing accretionary wedge composed of the frontal
Fatric units (Manín, Klape, Drietoma) as a response to sub-
duction of the underlying oceanic lithosphere of the Vahic
(South Penninic) Ocean. Hence they represent a post-nappe,
new sedimentary cycle of the Carpathian Gosau-type basins,
notwithstanding that the time lag between the youngest
sedi ments of the Manín and Klape units and the oldest over-
stepping sediments is very short, probably representing only
56
PLAŠIENKA
GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA
, 2019, 70, 1, 35–61
the latest Turonian time period (probably less than 1 Myr).
Coeval synorogenic sediments in the Oravic units form con-
tinuous successions with their underlying Jurassic and
Cretaceous strata and the late Turonian thrusting event is not
recorded at all (Fig. 3). Nevertheless, the Senonian to
Eocene evolution of the trench/foredeep Oravic and
wedge-top Gosau basins exhibit close mutual relationships
control led by the accretionary wedge dynamics, sub duc-
tion–accretion–collision processes and the global sea-level
changes (cf. Plašienka & Soták 2015).
• Analyses of macro- and mesostructural rock records reveal
the polystage structural evolution with the overall NW–SE
to N–S shortening (deformation stages D
1
and D
3
) during
the long Meso-Alpidic tectonic period lasting from
the Seno nian until the Lower Miocene. This period was
preceded by the D
0
stage related to the nappe emplacement
of the Manín and Klape units, and interrupted by the kine-
matically different D
2
stage. After the Lower-Middle
Miocene CCW block rotation, the western PKB branch and
adjacent zones were further affected by sinistral transten-
sion and extension (deformation stages D
4
, D
5
and D
6
,
respectively) controlled by the gradually clockwise rotation
of the palaeostress field.
• The newly proposed evolutionary tectonic model of
the inves tigated area assumes that the Manín, Klape and
other analogous units of the PKB represent frontal elements
of the Fatric nappe system. During the latest Turonian, these
nappes glided beyond the northern Tatric edge in a diver-
ticulation manner and reached position of a “false” accre-
tionary wedge above the Vahic oceanic crust that began
to subduct during the Early Senonian. In this position,
the Manín and Klape units suffered strong post-emplacement
deformation, both compressional and extensional triggered
by the supercritical vs. subcritical wedge taper dynamics.
Frontally accreted Oravic units (latest Cretaceous–Early
Eocene) and subsequently also units of the current Flysch
Belt (Biele Karpaty Superunit during the Middle Eocene;
the Magura units during the Late Eocene to Early Miocene)
brought about transfer of the Oravic and Manín–Klape units
from the wedge front to its rear accompanied by steepening
up to overturning of pre-existing structures, backthrusting
and wrench faulting. The PKB remained in this backstop
position also later, during the complex Miocene orogenic
movements, including the large-scale CCW rotation of
the whole Western Carpathian orogenic system with respect
to the North European Platform.
Acknowledgements and dedication: The authors are indeb-
ted to the Slovak Research and Development Agency for
the financial support (projects APVV-0212-12 and APVV-17-
0170). This paper is dedicated to Academicians Dimitrij
Andrusov (1897–1976) and Michal Maheľ (1920–1999), two
prominent Carpathian geologists, in honour of their outstan-
ding life-long works which have sown the seeds of our current
knowledge about the structure and evolution of the Carpathian
Klippen Belt, particularly in the Middle Váh River Valley.
Thanks are due to reviewers Edyta Jurewicz, Jozef Michalík
and Michał Krobicki for their valuable comments and sug-
gestions that substantially improved the earlier version of
the manuscript.
References
Andrusov D. 1931: Étude géologique de la zone des Klippes internes
des Carpathes Occidentales, I-iére partie: Introduction, II-iéme
partie: Stratigraphie (Trias et Lias). Rozpravy Státního geolo
gického ústavu ČSR 6, 1–167.
Andrusov D. 1938: Étude géologique de la zone des Klippes internes
des Carpathes Occidentales, IIIe partie: Tectonique. Rozpravy
Státního geologického ústavu ČSR 9, 1–135.
Andrusov D. 1965: Geologie der tschechoslowakischen Karpaten II.
Akademie Verlag, Berlin; Verlag der Slowakischen Akademie der
Wissenschaften, Bratislava, 1–443.
Andrusov D. 1968: Grundriss der Tektonik der Nördlichen Karpaten.
Verlag der Slowakischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Brati-
slava, 1–188.
Andrusov D. 1972: Sur l’ampleur de la nappe du Manín (Zone des
Klippes Piénines, Carpathes Occidentales, Slovaquie). Geolo
gický zborník — Geol. Carpath. 23, 227–234.
Andrusov D. 1974: The Pieniny Klippen Belt. In: Maheľ M. (ed.),
Tectonics of the Carpathian-Balkan regions. Dionýz Štúr
Geological Institute, Bratislava, 145–158.
Andrusov D. & Scheibner E. 1960: An outline of the present state of
knowledge about the geology of the Klippen Belt between River
Vlára and town Tvrdošín. Geologický sborník 11, 239–279
(in Slovak with English summary).
Aubrecht R., Krobicki M., Sýkora M., Mišík M., Boorová D.,
Schlögl J., Šamajová E. & Golonka J. 2006: Early Cretaceous
hiatus in the Czorsztyn succession (Pieniny Klippen Belt,
Western Carpathians): submarine erosion or emersion? Annales
Societatis Geologorum Poloniae 76, 161–196.
Began A. 1969: Geologische Verhältnisse des mittleren Waagtales.
Zborník geologických vied, rad ZK 11, 55–103 (in Slovak with
German summary).
Began A. & Salaj J. 1978: New paleogeographical knowledge in
the Upper Cretaceous and Paleogene of Western and Central
Slovakia. In: Vozár J. (ed.): Paleogeographical evolution of
the West Carpathians. Konferencie, Sympóziá, Semináre, Geo
logical Institute of D. Štúr, Bratislava, 161–174 (in Slovak with
English summary).
Began A., Borza K., Salaj J. & Samuel O. 1965: On the age of
Upohlava conglomerates. Geologické práce, Zprávy 36, 123–138.
Began A., Borza K., Köhler E. & Samuel O. 1970: Stratigraphical–
lithological characteristics of the well-log MS-1 (to the NW of
Považská Bystrica). Geologické práce, Správy 53, 131–143
(in Slovak with English summary).
Bellová S., Aubrecht R. & Mikuš T. 2018: First results of systematic
provenance analysis of the heavy mineral assemblages from the
Albian to Cenomanian exotic flysch deposits of the Klape Unit,
Tatricum, Fatricum and some adjacent units. Acta Geologica
Slovaca 10, 45–64.
Bezák V. (ed.) 2004: Tectonic map of Slovak Republic 1:500,000
+ Explanations. State Geological Institute of D. Stur,
Bratislava.
Biely A. & Fusán O. 1967: Zum Problem der Wurzelzonen der sub-
tatrischen Decken. Geologické práce, Zprávy 42, 51–64.
Birkenmajer K. 1977: Jurassic and Cretaceous lithostratigraphic units
of the Pieniny Klippen Belt, Carpathians, Poland. Studia
Geologica Polonica 45, 1–159.
57
LINKAGES OF THE MANÍN AND KLAPE UNITS
GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA
, 2019, 70, 1, 35–61
Birkenmajer K. 1986: Stages of structural evolution of the Pieniny
Klippen Belt, Carpathians. Studia Geologica Polonica 88, 7–32.
Birkenmajer K. 1988: Exotic Andrusov Ridge: its role in plate-tectonic
evolution of the West Carpathian Foldbelt. Studia Geologica
Polonica 91, 7–37.
Birkenmajer K., Kozur H. & Mock R. 1990: Exotic Triassic pelagic
limestone pebbles from the Pieniny Klippen Belt of Poland:
a further evidence for early Mesozoic rifting in West Carpathians.
Annales Societatis Geologorum Poloniae 60, 3–44.
Boorová D. & Salaj J. 1992: Remarks on the biostratigraphy on the
Butkov Formation in the Manín Sequence. Geol. Carpath. 43,
123–126.
Borza K. 1970: Neue Erkenntnisse über Stratigraphie der Súľov-
Klippe. Geologické práce, Správy 51, 135–147 (in Slovak with
German summary).
Borza K. 1980: Lithological–microfacial characteristic of Upper
Jurassic and Lower Cretaceous sediments of Belá Group
(Strážovské vrchy Mountains). Geologické práce, Správy 74,
33–56 (in Slovak with English summary).
Borza K., Köhler E. & Samuel O. 1979: New stratigraphic and tecto-
nic data on Skalica klippe. Geologické práce, Správy 72,
97–112 (in Slovak with English summary).
Borza K., Köhler E., Began A. & Samuel O. 1980: Belá Group west
of Bošáca. Geologické práce, Správy 74, 57–63 (in Slovak with
English summary).
Borza K., Michalík J. & Vašíček Z. 1987: Lithological, biofacial
and geochemical characterization of the Lower Cretaceous
pelagic carbonate sequence of Mt. Butkov (Manín Unit, Western
Carpathians). Geologický zborník — Geol. Carpath. 38,
323–348.
Buček S. & Köhler E. 2017: Palaeocene reef complex of the Western
Carpathians. Slovak Geological Magazine 17, 3–163.
Bučová J. 2013: Geological structure and structural evolution
of the western part of the Pieniny Klippen Belt. Unpublished
PhD Thesis, Comenius University in Bratislava, 1–147
(in Slovak).
Bučová J., Plašienka D. & Mikuš V. 2010: Geology and tectonics of
the Vršatec klippen area (Pieniny Klippen Belt, western Slova-
kia). In: Christofides G., Kantiranis N., Kostopoulos D.S. &
Chatzipetros A.A. (eds): Proceedings of the XIX Congress of the
CBGA, Thessaloniki, Greece. Scientific Annals, School of
Geology, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Special Volume
100, 197–207.
Cieszkowski M., Golonka J., Krobicki M., Ślączka A., Oszczypko N.,
Waśkowska A. & Wendorff M. 2009: The Northern Carpathians
plate tectonic evolutionary stages and origin of olistoliths and
olistostromes. Geodin. Acta 22, 101–126.
Dal Piaz G.V., Martin S., Villa I.M., Gosso G. & Marschalko R. 1995:
Late Jurassic blueschist facies pebbles from the Western Car-
pathian orogenic wedge and paleostructural implications for
Western Tethys evolution. Tectonics 14, 874–885.
Faryad S.W. & Schreyer W. 1997: Petrology and geological signifi-
cance of high-pressure metamorphic rocks occurring as pebbles
in the Cretaceous conglomerates of the Klippen Belt (Western
Carpathians, Slovakia). Eur. J. Mineral. 9, 547–562.
Fekete K., Soták J., Boorová D., Lintnerová O., Michalík J. &
Grabowski J. 2017: An Albian demise of the carbonate platform
in the Manín Unit (Western Carpathians, Slovakia). Geol.
Carpath. 68, 385–402.
Froitzheim N., Plašienka D. & Schuster R. 2008: Alpine tectonics of
the Alps and Western Carpathians. In: McCann T. (ed.): The
Geo logy of Central Europe. Volume 2: Mesozoic and Cenozoic.
Geol. Soc. Publ. House, London, 1141–1232.
Golonka J., Krobicki M., Waśkowska A., Cieszkowski M. & Ślączka
A. 2015: Olistostromes of the Pieniny Klippen Belt, Northern
Carpathians. Geol. Mag. 152, 269–286.
Gross P. 2008: Lithostratigraphy of Western Carpathians: Paleogene
— Podtatranská Group. State Geological Institute of D. Stur,
Bratislava, 1–78 (in Slovak with English summary).
Haško J. 1978: Tectonics of the Klippen Belt in the Kysucká vrcho-
vina Mts. Geologické práce, Správy 70, 123–128 (in Slovak with
English summary).
Havrila M. 2011: Hronicum: palaeogeography and stratigraphy (late
Pelsonian – Tuvalian), structuralization and tectonics. Geolo
gické práce, Správy 117, 7–103 (in Slovak with English sum-
mary).
Hók J., Pešková I. & Potfaj M. 2009: Lithostratigraphy and tectonic
position of the Drietoma Unit (Western part of the Pieniny Klip-
pen Belt, Western Carpathians). Mineralia Slovaca 41, 313–320
(in Slovak with English summary).
Hovorka D. & Spišiak J. 1988: Mesozoic volcanism of the Western
Carpathians. Veda Publ., Bratislava, 1–263 (in Slovak).
Ivan P., Sýkora M. & Demko R. 2006: Blueschists in the Cretaceous
exotic conglomerates of the Klape Unit (Pieniny Klippen Belt,
Western Carpathians): their genetic types and implications for
source areas. Geologia 32, 47–63.
Jablonský J., Michalík J., Plašienka D. & Soták J. 1993: Sedimentary
environments of the Solírov Formation and correlation with
Lower Cretaceous turbidites in Central West Carpathians, Slova-
kia. Cretaceous Res. 14, 613–621.
Jablonský J., Sýkora M. & Aubrecht R. 2001: Detritic Cr-spinels in
Mesozoic sedimentary rocks of the Western Carpathians (over-
view of the latest knowledge). Mineralia Slovaca 33, 487–498
(in Slovak with English summary).
Janočko J. (ed.) 2000: Explanations to the geological map of the
Spišská Magura Mts 1:50,000. Geological Survey of Slovak
republic, D. Štúr Publishers, Bratislava, 1–174 (in Slovak with
English summary).
Jeřábek P., Lexa O., Schulmann K. & Plašienka D. 2012: Inverse
ductile thinning via lower crustal flow and fold-induced doming
in the West Carpathian Eo-Alpine collisional wedge. Tectonics
31, TC5002.
Józsa Š. & Aubrecht R. 2008: Barremian-Aptian erosion of the
Kysuca–Pieniny trough margin (Pieniny Klippen Belt, Western
Carpathians). Geol. Carpath. 59, 103–116.
Kissová D., Dunkl I., Plašienka D., Frisch W. & Marschalko R. 2005:
The Pieninic exotic cordillera (Andrusov Ridge) revisited: new
zircon FT ages of granite pebbles from Cretaceous flysch con-
glomerates of the Pieniny Klippen Belt (Western Carpathians,
Slovakia). Slovak Geological Magazine 11, 17–28.
Köhler E. & Buček S. 2000: Occurrence of the Maastrichtian Jarmuta
Formation in the Haligovce succession (The Pieniny Klippen
Belt). Geologické Práce, Správy 104, 72–75 (in Slovak with En-
glish summary).
Köhler E. & Buček S. 2005: Paleocene reef limestones near Veľký
Lipník (Pieniny Mts., NE Slovakia): Facial environments and
biogenic components. Slovak Geological Magazine 11, 249–267.
Kovács S., Sudar M., Grădinaru E., Gawlick H.-J., Karamata S.,
Haas J., Péró Cs., Gaetani M., Mello J., Polák M., Aljinović D.,
Ogorelec B., Kolar-Jurkovšek T., Jurkovšek B. & Buser S.
2011: Triassic evolution of the tectonostratigraphic units of
the Circum-Pannonian region. Jahrb. geol. Bundes anst. 151,
199–280.
Kováč M. 2000: Geodynamic, palaeogeographic and structural evolu-
tion of the Carpathian-Pannonian region during the Miocene:
new view on the Neogene basins of Slovakia. Veda Publ.,
Bratislava, 1–202 (in Slovak).
Kováč M., Plašienka D., Soták J., Vojtko R., Oszczypko N., Less Gy.,
Ćosović V., Fügenschuh B. & Králiková S. 2016: Paleogene
palaeogeography and basin evolution of the Western Carpathians,
Northern Pannonian domain and adjoining areas. Global Planet.
Change 140, 9–27.
58
PLAŠIENKA
GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA
, 2019, 70, 1, 35–61
Kováč M., Márton E., Oszczypko N., Vojtko R., Hók J., Králiková S.,
Plašienka D., Klučiar T., Hudáčková N. & Oszczypko-Clowes M.
2017: Neogene palaeogeography and basin evolution of the
Western Carpathians, Northern Pannonian domain and adjoining
areas. Global Planet. Change 155, 133–154.
Kováč P. & Hók J. 1996: Tertiary development of the western part of
Klippen Belt. Slovak Geological Magazine 2, 96, 136–149.
Krobicki M., Poprawa P., Nejbert K., Armstrong R. & Pécskay Z.
2018: New geochemical and geochronological data of magmatic
and sub-volcanic exotic rocks from the Late cretaceous and
paleogene gravelstones (Pieniny Klippen Belt, Carpathians,
Poland). In Šujan M., Csibri T., Kiss P. & Rybár S. (eds): Envi-
ronmental, Structural and Stratigraphical Evolution of the Wes-
tern Carpathians. Abstract Book 11th ESSEWECA Conference,
November 29–30, 2018, Bratislava, 54–55.
Książkiewicz M. 1977: The tectonics of the Pieniny Klippes Belt. In:
Książkiewicz M., Oberc J. & Pożaryski W. (eds): Geology of
Poland, Volume 4 Tectonics. Publ. House Wydawnictwa geolo
giczne, Warsaw, 519–552.
Kysela J., Marschalko R. & Samuel O. 1982: Lithostratigraphical
classification of Upper Cretaceous sediments of the Manín Unit.
Geologické práce, Správy 78, 143–167 (in Slovak with English
summary).
Lefeld J., Gażdzicki A., Iwanow A., Krajewski K. & Wójcik K. 1985:
Jurassic and Cretaceous lithostratigraphic units of the Tatra
Mountains. Studia Geologica Polonica 84, 5–93.
Leško B., Babák B., Borovcová D., Boučková B., Dubecký K.,
Ďurkovič T., Faber P., Gašpariková V., Harča V., Köhler E.,
Kuděra L., Kullmanová A., Okénko J., Planderová E., Potfaj M.,
Samuel O., Slámová M., Slanina V., Summer J., Sůrová E.,
Štěrba L. & Uhman J. 1982: Basic borehole Lubina-1. Regio
nálna geológia Západných Karpát 17, 1–116 (in Slovak).
Lexa J. (ed.) 2000: Geological map of the Western Carpathians and
adjacent areas 1:500,000. Geological Institute of D. Štúr,
Bratislava.
Maheľ M. 1978: Manín tectonic unit; relations of the Klippen Belt
and Central West Carpathians. Geologický zborník — Geol.
Carpath. 29, 197–214.
Maheľ M. 1980: The Peri-klippen zone: nearer characterization and
significance. Mineralia Slovaca 12, 193–207 (in Slovak with
English summary).
Maheľ M. 1981: Island character of Klippen Belt; Vahicum — conti-
nuation of Southern Penninicum in West Carpathians. Geolo
gický zborník — Geol. Carpath. 32, 293–305.
Maheľ M. 1983: Krížna nappe, example of polyfacial and polystruc-
tural unit. Mineralia Slovaca 15, 193–216 (in Slovak with
English summary).
Maheľ M. 1985: Geological structure of the Strážovské vrchy Moun-
tains. Geological Institute of D. Štúr, Bratislava, 1–221 (in Slo-
vak with English summary).
Maheľ M. 1986: Geological structure of the Czechoslovak Carpathians.
Volume 1 Palaeoalpine units. Veda Publ., Bratislava, 1–503
(in Slovak).
Maheľ M. 1989: The Klippen Belt from the aspect of the geodynamic
model. Mineralia Slovaca 21, 99–108 (in Slovak with English
summary).
Marko F., Plašienka D. & Fodor L. 1995: Meso-Cenozoic tectonic
stress fields within the Alpine-Carpathian transition zone:
a review. Geol. Carpath. 46, 19–27.
Marschalko R. 1986: Evolution and geotectonic significance of the
Klippen Belt Cretaceous flysch in the Carpathian megastructure.
Veda Publ., Bratislava, 1–140 (in Slovak with English summary).
Marschalko R. & Kysela J. 1980: Geology and sedimentology of the
Klippen Belt and Manín Unit between Žilina and Považská
Bystrica. Západné Karpaty, séria Geológia 6, 7–79 (in Slovak
with English summary).
Marschalko R. & Rakús M. 1997: Development of the Cretaceous
flysch in the Klape unit and the recyclicity problem of the clastic
material. In: Plašienka, D., Hók, J., Vozár, J. & Elečko, M. (eds):
Alpine evolution of the Western Carpathians and related areas.
Geological Survey of Slovak Republic, Bratislava, 71–78.
Márton E., Grabowski J., Plašienka D., Túnyi I., Krobicki M., Haas J.
& Pethe M. 2013: New paleomagnetic results from the Upper
Cretaceous red marls of the Pieniny Klippen Belt, Western Car-
pathians: Evidence for general CCW rotation and implications
for the origin of the structural arc formation. Tectonophysics
592, 1–13.
Masse J.-P. & Uchman A. 1997: New biostratigraphic data on the
Early Cretaceous platform carbonates of the Tatra Mountains,
Western Carpathians, Poland. Cretaceous Res. 18, 713–729.
Matějka A. 1932: Contribution to the geology of the left Váh riverside
between Ilava and Trenčín. Věstník Státního geologického ústavu
8, 107–113 (in Czech).
Matějka A. 1961: On the Haligovce Mesozoic and Paleogene. Zprávy
o geologických výzkumech v roce 1959, ÚÚG Praha, 129–130
(in Czech).
Matějka A. & Andrusov D. 1931: Aperçu de la géologie des Carpathes
occidentales de la Slovaquie central et des régions avoisinantes.
Knihovna Státního geologického ústavu 13A, 19–163.
Mello J. (ed.) 2005: Geological map of the Middle Váh Valley
1:50,000. State Geological Institute of D. Stur, Bratislava.
Mello J. (ed.) 2011: Explanations to the geological map of the Middle
Váh Valley 1:50,000. State Geological Institute of D. Stur,
Bratislava, 1–378 (in Slovak with English summary).
Méres Š., Sýkora M., Plašienka D., Ivan P. & Lačný A. 2015: Two
stages of blueschists exhumation in the Western Carpathians
constrained by the sedimentary age of their erosional products
(Klape Unit, Pieniny Klippen Belt). Abstract Book, Internat. Conf.
CETEG 2015, Kadaň, Czech Republic, April 22–25, 2015, 60.
Michalík J. 1993: Mesozoic tensional basins in the Alpine–Carpathian
shelf. Acta Geol. Hung. 36, 395–403.
Michalík J. 1994: Lower Cretaceous carbonate platform facies,
Western Carpathians. Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol.
111, 263–277.
Michalík J. 2007: Sedimentary rock record and microfacies indicators
of the latest Triassic to mid-Cretaceous tensional development of
the Zliechov Basin (Central Western Carpathians). Geol.
Carpath. 58, 443–453.
Michalík J. & Soták J. 1990: Lower Cretaceous shallow marine build-
ups in the Western Carpathians and their relationship to pelagic
facies. Cretaceous Res. 11, 211–227.
Michalík J. & Vašíček Z. 1979: To the problems with palinspastic and
paleogeographic reconstruction of the Lower Cretaceous sedi-
mentary basin of Krížna-nappe in the Strážov Mountains. In:
Maheľ M. (ed.): Important problems of the geological evolution
and structure of Czechoslovakia; the key areas and methods of
their investigations. Geological Institute of D. Štúr, Bratislava,
265–290 (in Slovak with English summary).
Michalík J. & Vašíček Z. 1984: To the Early Mid Cretaceous West
Carpathian development: the age and environmental position of
the ”Skalica Breccia”. Geologický zborník — Geol. Carpath. 35,
559–581.
Michalík J. & Vašíček Z. 1987: Geology and stratigraphy of the But-
kov Lower Cretaceous limestone deposits, Manín Unit, Middle
Váh Valley (Western Slovakia). Mineralia Slovaca 19, 115–134
(in Slovak with English summary).
Michalík J., Soták J., Baráth I. & Vašíček Z. 1990: Remarks to the
lithology, stratigraphy and biofacies of the Muráň limestone for-
mation, its position both in the Lower Cretaceous sequence and
in the West Carpathian sedimentary area. In: Sýkora M., Jablonský
J. & Samuel O. (eds): Sedimentological problems of the Western
Carpathians. Konf. Symp. Sem., GÚDŠ, Bratislava, 31–43.
59
LINKAGES OF THE MANÍN AND KLAPE UNITS
GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA
, 2019, 70, 1, 35–61
Michalík J., Lintnerová O., Reháková D., Boorová D. & Šimo V.
2012: Early Cretaceous sedimentary evolution of a pelagic basin
margin (the Manín Unit, central Western Carpathians, Slovakia).
Cretaceous Res. 38, 68–79.
Michalík J., Vašíček Z., Boorová D., Golej M., Halásová E., Hort P.,
Ledvák P., Lintnerová O., Měchová L., Šimo V., Šimonová V.,
Reháková D., Schlögl J., Skupien P., Smrečková M., Soták J. &
Zahradníková B. 2013: The Butkov Hill – a stone archive of
Slovakian mountains and the Mesozoic sea life history. Veda
Publ., Bratislava, 1–164.
Mišík M. 1990: Urgonian facies in the West Carpathians. Knihov
nička Zemního plynu a nafty 9a, 25–54.
Mišík M. 1994: The Czorsztyn submarine ridge (Jurassic–Lower
Cretaceous, Pieniny Klippen Belt): An example of a pelagic
swell. Mitteilungen der Österreichischen Geologischen Gesell
schaft 86 (1993), 133–140.
Mišík M. & Marschalko R. 1988: Exotic conglomerates in flysch se-
quences: examples from the West Carpathians. In: Rakús, M.,
Dercourt, J. & Nairn, A.E.M. (eds): Evolution of the northern
margin of Tethys, Volume 1. Mémoires de la Société Géologique
de France, Nouvelle Série 154, 95–115.
Mišík M. & Reháková D. 2004: Psephitic rocks (gravels, breccias,
conglomerates) of the Western Carpathians. Veda Publ., Brati-
slava, 1–132 (in Slovak).
Mišík M. & Sýkora M. 1981: Der pieninische exotische Rücken,
rekonstruiert aus Geröllen karbonatischer Gesteine kretazischer
Konglomerate der Klippenzone und der Manín-Einheit. Západ
né Karpaty, sér. geológia 7, 7–111 (in Slovak with German sum-
mary).
Mišík M., Mock R. & Sýkora M. 1977: Die Trias der Klippenzone der
Karpaten. Geologický zborník — Geol. Carpath. 28, 27–69.
Mišík M., Jablonský J., Fejdi P. & Sýkora M. 1980: Chromian and
ferrian spinels from Cretaceous sediments of the West Carpa-
thians. Mineralia Slovaca 12, 209–228.
Mišík M., Jablonský J., Mock R. & Sýkora M. 1981: Konglomerate
mit exotischem Material in dem Alb der Zentralen Westkarpaten
– paläographische und tektonische Interpretation. Acta Geolo gica
et Geographica Universitatis Comenianae, Geologica 37, 5–55.
Nemčok J. 1980: Non-traditional view of East-Slovakian Klippen
Belt. Geologický zborník — Geol. Carpath. 31, 563–568.
Nemčok J., Zakovič M., Gašpariková V., Ďurkovič T., Snopková P.,
Vrana K. & Hanzel V. 1990: Explanations to the geological map
of Pieniny, Ľubovnianska vrchovina highland and Čergov Mts.
1:50,000. D. Štúr Institute of Geology, Bratislava, 1–132 (in Slo-
vak with English summary).
Oszczypko N. & Oszczypko-Clowes M. 2009: Stages in the Magura
Basin: a case study of the Polish sector (Western Carpathians).
Geodin. Acta 22, 83–100.
Oszczypko N., Ślączka A., Oszczypko-Clowes M. & Olszewska B.
2015: Where was the Magura Ocean? Acta Geologica Polonica
65, 319–344.
Pečeňa Ľ. & Vojtko R. 2011: New knowledge about the geological
setting of the Fatric Unit near Valaská Belá village (Strážovské
vrchy Mts., Western Carpathians). Mineralia Slovaca 43, 19–30
(in Slovak with English summary).
Pelech O., Soták J. & Hók J. 2012: Geological setting of the Patrovec
block in the Považský Inovec Mts., Western Carpathians.
Mineralia Slovaca 44, 231–240.
Pelech O., Hók J. & Józsa Š. 2017: Turonian–Santonian sediments in
the Tatricum of the Považský Inovec Mts. (Internal Western Car-
pathians, Slovakia). Austrian J. Earth Sci. 110, 21–35.
Pešková I., Vojtko R., Starek D. & Sliva Ľ. 2009: Late Eocene to
Quaternary deformation and stress field evolution of the Orava
region (Western Carpathians). Acta Geologica Polonica 59, 73–91.
Picha F.J., Stráník Z. & Krejčí O. 2006: Geology and hydrocarbon
resources of the Outer Western Carpathians and their foreland,
Czech Republic. In: Golonka J. & Picha F.J. (eds): The Carpa-
thians and their foreland: Geology and hydrocarbon resources.
AAPG Memoir 84, 49–175.
Plašienka D. 1983: Kinematic assessment of some structures of the
Northern Veporic in relation to the generation of the Krížna
nappe. Mineralia Slovaca 15, 217–231 (in Slovak with English
summary).
Plašienka D. 1991: Mesozoic tectonic evolution of the epi-Variscan
continental crust of the Western Carpathians — a tentative model.
Mineralia Slovaca 23, 447–457.
Plašienka D. 1995a: Mesozoic evolution of Tatric units in the Malé
Karpaty and Považský Inovec Mts.: Implications for the position
of the Klape and related units in western Slovakia. Geol.
Carpath. 46, 101–112.
Plašienka D. 1995b: Passive and active margin history of the northern
Tatricum (Western Carpathians, Slovakia). Geol. Rundsch. 84,
748–760.
Plašienka, D., 1995c. Cleavages and folds in changing tectonic
regimes: the Veľký Bok Mesozoic cover unit of the Veporicum
(Nízke Tatry Mts., Central Western Carpathians). Slovak
Geological Magazine 2, 95, 97–113.
Plašienka D. 1997: Cretaceous tectonochronology of the Central
Western Carpathians (Slovakia). Geol. Carpath. 48, 99–111.
Plašienka D. 2003a: Development of basement-involved fold and thrust
structures exemplified by the Tatric-Fatric-Veporic nappe sys-
tem of the Western Carpathians. Geodin. Acta 16, 21–38.
Plašienka D. 2003b: Dynamics of Mesozoic pre-orogenic rifting in
the Western Carpathians. Mitteilungen der Österreichischen
Geologischen Gesellschaft 94 (2001), 79–98.
Plašienka D. 2012a: Jurassic syn-rift and Cretaceous syn-orogenic,
coarse-grained deposits related to opening and closure of the
Vahic (South Penninic) Ocean in the Western Carpathians —
an overview. Geol. Quarterly 56, 601–628.
Plašienka D. 2012b: Early stages of structural evolution of the
Carpathian Klippen Belt (Slovakian Pieniny sector). Mineralia
Slovaca 44, 1–16.
Plašienka D. 2018a: Continuity and episodicity in the early Alpine
tectonic evolution of the Western Carpathians: How large-scale
processes are expressed by the orogenic architecture and rock
record data. Tectonics 37, 2029–2079.
Plašienka D. 2018b: The Carpathian Klippen Belt and types of its
klippen — an attempt at a genetic classification. Mineralia
Slovaca 49, 1–24.
Plašienka D. & Prokešová R. 1996: Towards an evolutionary tectonic
model of the Krížna cover nappe (Western Carpathians, Slova-
kia). Slovak Geological Magazine 3–4, 97, 279–286.
Plašienka D. & Soták J. 2015: Evolution of Upper Cretaceous —
Paleogene synorogenic basins in the Pieniny Klippen Belt and
adjacent zones (Western Carpathians, Slovakia): tectonic con-
trols over a growing orogenic wedge. Annales Societatis
Geologorum Poloniae 85, 43–76.
Plašienka D., Grecula P., Putiš M., Kováč M. & Hovorka D., 1997a:
Evolution and structure of the Western Carpathians: an over-
view. In: Grecula, P., Hovorka, D. & Putiš, M. (eds): Geological
evolution of the Western Carpathians. Mineralia Slovaca, Mono
graph, Bratislava, 1–24a-i.
Plašienka D., Havrila M., Michalík J., Putiš M. & Reháková D.
1997b: Nappe structure of the western part of the Central Car-
pathians, In: Plašienka D., Hók J., Vozár J. & Elečko M. (eds):
Alpine evolution of the Western Carpathians and related areas.
Geological Survey of Slovak Republic, D. Štúr Publishers,
Bratislava, 139–161.
Plašienka D., Sýkora M., Aubrecht R, Krobicki M. & Józsa Š. 2010:
Reinterpretation of the lithostratigraphy and tectonic position of
the Mariková Klippen (Middle Váh Valley, western Slovakia).
Acta Geologica Slovaca 2, 1–9.
60
PLAŠIENKA
GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA
, 2019, 70, 1, 35–61
Plašienka D., Michalík J., Soták J. & Aubrecht R. 2017: Discussion of
“Olistostromes of the Pieniny Klippen Belt, Northern Carpa-
thians”. Geol. Mag. 154, 187–192.
Plašienka D., Šimonová V. & Bučová J. 2018a: Nucleation and ampli-
fication of doubly-plunging anticlines: the Butkov pericline case
study (Manín Unit, Western Carpathians). Geol. Carpath. 69,
365–381.
Plašienka D., Méres Š., Ivan P., Sýkora M., Soták J., Lačný A.,
Aubrecht R., Bellová S. & Potočný T. 2018b: Meliatic blueschists
and their detritus in Cretaceous sediments: New data constrain-
ing tectonic evolution of the West Carpathians. Swiss J. Geosci.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00015-018-0330-7.
Polák M. (ed.) 2008: General geological map of the Slovak Republic
1:200,000. Map sheet 26 – Žilina. Ministry of Evironment of Slo
vak Republic, State Geological Institute of D. Stur, Bratislava.
Poprawa P., Krobicki M., Nejbert K., Armstrong R. & Pécskay Z.
2013: Exotic magmatic rocks from Cretaceous and Paleogene
pebbly mudstones of the Pieniny Klippen Belt — new geoche-
mical and geochronological data (U-Pb SHRIMP and K/Ar).
In Krobicki M. & Feldman-Olszewska A. (eds): V Polska Kon-
ferencja Sedymentologiczna POKOS 5´2013, 16–19.05.2013,
Żywiec, Abstracts, 211–214 (in Polish).
Potfaj M. (ed.) 2008: General geological map of the Slovak Republic
1:200,000. Map sheet 25 – Bytča. Ministry of Evironment of Slo
vak Republic, State Geological Institute of D. Stur, Bratislava.
Prokešová R., Plašienka D. & Milovský R. 2012: Structural pattern
and emplacement mechanisms of the Krížna cover nappe
(Western Carpathians, Slovakia). Geol. Carpath. 63, 13–32.
Rakús M. 1965: Zur biotratigraphie der Jura-Schichten in der
Kostelecer Klippe. Geologické práce, Správy 37, 163–177 (in
Slovak with German summary).
Rakús M. 1975: Variegated Upper Cretaceous “couches rouges”
in the Manín nappe. Geologické práce, Správy 63, 211–213
(in Slovak).
Rakús M. 1997: Stop 2 Manín klippe, In: Alpine evolution of the
Western Carpathians and related areas. International Conference
100th anniversary of Dimitrij Andrusov, Bratislava, Programme
and Excursion guide, 6–11.
Rakús M. & Hók J. 2005: The Manín and Klape units: Lithostratigra-
phy, tectonic classification, paleogeographic position and rela-
tionship to Váhicum. Mineralia Slovaca 37, 9–26 (in Slovak
with English summary).
Rakús M. & Marschalko R. 1997: Position of the Manín, Drietoma
and Klape units at the boundary of the Central and Outer Car-
pathians. In: Plašienka D., Hók J., Vozár J. & Elečko M. (eds):
Alpine evolution of the Western Carpathians and related areas.
Geological Survey of Slovak Republic, Bratislava, 79–97.
Rakús M. & Ožvoldová L. 1999: On the age of radiolarites from the
Manín Unit (Butkov Klippe, Middle Váh valley, Western Car-
pathians). Mineralia Slovaca 31, 79–86.
Ratschbacher L., Frisch W., Linzer H.-G., Sperner B., Meschede M.,
Decker K., Nemčok M., Nemčok J. & Grygar R. 1993: The
Pieniny Klippen Belt in the Western Carpathians of northeastern
Slovakia: structural evidence for transpression. Tectonophysics
226, 471–483.
Salaj J. 1962: Mikrobiostratigraphische Studien der Kreide in der
Krížna- und Manín-Einheit. Geologické práce, Zošit 62,
245–259 (in Slovak with German summary).
Salaj J. 1982: Mesozoic palaeogeographic development in the
north-western part of the West Carpathians of Slovakia. Palaeo
geogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol. 39, 302–229.
Salaj J. 1990: Geological structure of the Klippen and Periklippen
zones in the Middle Váh river valley and lithological classi-
fication of Cretaceous sediments from the newly defined
sequences. Mineralia Slovaca 22, 155–174 (in Slovak with
English sum mary).
Salaj J. 1994a: Geology of Middle Váh valley, Klippen and Periklip-
pen belt, Súľov Paleogene and Mesozoic of northern part of
Strážovské vrchy hills — part 1. Zemní plyn a nafta 39, 3,
195–291 (in Slovak with English summary).
Salaj J. 1994b: Geology of Middle Váh valley, Klippen and periklip-
pen belt, Súľov Paleogene and Mesozoic of northern part of
Strážovské vrchy hills — part 2. Zemní plyn a nafta 39, 4,
197–395 (in Slovak with English summary).
Salaj J. 1995: Geology of Middle Váh valley, Klippen and periklippen
belt, Súľov Paleogene and Mesozoic of northern part of
Strážovské vrchy hills — part 3. Zemní plyn a nafta 40, 1, 3–51
(in Slovak with English summary).
Salaj J. 2006: Microbiostratigraphy of the Gosau development in the
Klape Unit, Western Carpathian Paleoalpine accretionary belt.
Mineralia Slovaca 38, 1–6.
Salaj J. & Began A. 1963. Zur faziellen und mikrobiostratigra-
phischen Entwicklung der Oberkreide in der Klippenzone. Geo
logické práce, Zprávy 30, 113–120 (in Slovak with German
summary).
Salaj J. & Began A. 1983: Senonian and Paleogene palaeogeogra phic
and tectonic development of the Myjavská Pahorkatina Upland
(West Carpathians, Czechoslovakia). Zitteliana 10, 173–181.
Salaj J. & Samuel O. 1963: Contribution to the stratigraphy of Creta-
ceous of the Klippen Belt and Central West Carpathians.
Geologický sborník 14, 109–125.
Salaj J. & Samuel O. 1966: Foraminifera der Westkarpaten-Kreide.
Geological Institute of D. Štúr, Bratislava, 1–231.
Samuel O. 1972: Remarks on the lithological-facial and stratigraphi-
cal division of the Paleogene of the Klippen Belt. Geologické
práce, Správy 59, 285–299 (in Slovak with English summary).
Scheibner E. 1967: Nižná Subunit – new stratigraphical sequence of
the Klippen Belt (West Carpathians). Geologický sborník 18,
133–140.
Scheibner E. 1968a: Carpathian Klippen Belt. In: Maheľ M. & Buday
T. (eds): Regional geology of Czechoslovakia. Volume 2 Western
Carpathians. Akademie, Praha, 304–371.
Scheibner E. 1968b: Contribution to the knowledge of the Palaeogene
reef-complexes of the Myjava – Hričov – Haligovka zone (West
Carpathians). Mitteilungen der Bayerischen Staatssammlung für
Paläontologie und Historische Geologie 8, 67–97.
Scheibnerovci E. & V. 1958: Über das Alter der Praznowerschichten
im Waagtal. Geologický sborník SAV 9, 40–50 (in Slovak with
German summary).
Schlögl J., Rakús M., Krobicki M., Matyja B.A., Wierzbowski A.,
Aubrecht R., Sitár V. & Józsa Š. 2004: Beňatina Klippe —
lithostratigraphy, biostratigraphy, palaeontology of the Jurassic
and Lower Cretaceous deposits (Pieniny Klippen Belt, Western
Carpathians, Slovakia). Slovak Geological Magazine 10,
241–262.
Schmid S.M., Bernoulli D., Fügenschuh B., Matenco 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. 101, 139–183.
Soták J. & Plašienka D. 1996: Upper Triassic–Lower Jurassic sedi-
ments of the Lučatín unit in the Northern Veporicum: facial di-
versity and tectonic stacking. Slovak Geological Magazine 3–4,
96, 273–277.
Soták J., Pereszlényi M., Marschalko R., Milička J. & Starek D. 2001:
Sedimentology and hydrocarbon habitat of the submarine-fan
deposits of the central Carpathian Paleogene Basin (NE Slova-
kia). Mar. Petrol. Geol. 18, 87–114.
Soták J., Pulišová Z., Plašienka D. & Šimonová V. 2017: Stratigra phic
and tectonic control of deep-water scarp accumulation in Paleo-
gene synorogenic basins: a case study of the Súľov Conglomer-
ates (middle Váh Valley, Western Carpathians). Geol. Carpath.
68, 403–418.
61
LINKAGES OF THE MANÍN AND KLAPE UNITS
GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA
, 2019, 70, 1, 35–61
Stur D. 1860: Bericht über die geologische Uebersichts-Aufnahme
des Wassergebietes der Waag und Neutra. Jahrbuch der k.k.
geologischen Reichsanstalt 11, 17–151.
Sůkalová Ľ., Vojtko R. & Pešková I. 2011: Cenozoic deformation and
stress field evolution of the Kozie chrbty Mountains and the
western part of Hornád Depression (Central Western Carpa-
thians). Acta Geologica Slovaca 4, 53–64.
Šimonová V. & Plašienka D. 2011: Fault kinematics and palaeostress
analysis in the Butkov quarry (Manín Unit, Western Carpa-
thians). Acta Geologica Slovaca 3, 21–31 (in Slovak with
English summary).
Šimonová V. & Plašienka D. 2017: Stepwise clockwise rotation of the
Cenozoic stress field in the Western Carpathians as revealed by
kinematic analysis of minor faults in the Manín Unit (western
Slovakia). Geol. Quarterly 61, 252–265.
Šímová M. 1982: Eclogitoid rock in pebbles of Cretaceous conglo-
merates of Klippen Belt.
Geologické práce, Správy 77, 55–74
(in Slovak with English summary).
Uher P. & Pushkarev Y. 1994: Granitic pebbles of the Cretaceous
flysch of the Pieniny Klippen Belt, Western Carpathians: U/Pb
zircon ages. Geol. Carpath. 45, 375–378.
Uhlig V. 1903: Bau und Bild der Karpathen. In: Diener C., Hoernes
R., Suess F.E. & Uhlig V. (eds): Bau und Bild Österreichs.
F. Tempsky, Wien und G. Freytag, Leipzig, 649–911.
Uhlig V. 1907: Über die Tektonik der Karpathen. Sitzungsberichte der
Kaiserischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, matematischnatur
wissenschaftliche Klasse 116, part I, 871–982.
Vojtko R., Tokárová E., Sliva Ľ. & Pešková I. 2010: Reconstruction
of Cenozoic palaeostress fields and revised tectonic history in the
northern part of the Central Western Carpathians (the Spišská Magura
and Východné Tatry Mountains). Geol. Carpath. 61, 211–225.
Wagreich M., Pfersmann C., Aubrecht R. & Plašienka D. 2012:
The westernmost end of the Pieniny Klippen belt in Austria —
the St. Veit Klippenzone and its correlation into the Carpathians.
In: Józsa, Š., Reháková, D. & Vojtko, R. (eds): Environmental,
Structural and Stratigraphical Evolution of the Western Carpa-
thians. 8th ESSEWECA Confer
ence 2012, 6th–7th December,
Abstract Book, Bratislava, 53.
Žítt J. & Michalík J. 1988: Early Cretaceous phyllocrinids (Crinoidea,
Cyrtocrinida) in the Manín Unit (Mt. Butkov, Middle Váh Val-
ley, Central West Carpathians). Geologický zborník — Geol.
Carpath. 39, 353–368.