GeolCarp_Vol70_No5_405

GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA

, OCTOBER 2019, 70, 5, 405–417

doi: 10.2478/geoca-2019-0023

www.geologicacarpathica.com

Biostratigraphic constraints for a Lutetian age of

the Harrersdorf Unit (Rhenodanubian Zone): Implication

for basement structure of the northern Vienna Basin (Austria)

MATTHIAS KRANNER



, MATHIAS HARZHAUSER

, FRED RÖGL

STJEPAN ĆORIĆ

and PHILIPP STRAUSS

Geological–Paleontological Department, Natural History Museum Vienna, Burgring 7, 1010 Vienna, Austria;



matthias.kranner@nhm-wien.ac.at, mathias.harzhauser@nhm-wien.ac.at, roegl.fred@aon.at

Geological Survey of Austria, Neulinggasse 38, 1030 Vienna, Austria; stjepan.coric@geologie.ac.at

OMV Exploration & Production GmbH, Trabrennstraße 6-8, 1020 Vienna, Austria; philipp.strauss@omv.com

(Manuscript received October 17, 2018; accepted in revised form June 26, 2019)

Abstract: The formations underlying the Neogene infill of the Vienna Basin are still poorly documented. Until now

correlation of subsurface lithostratigraphic units with those of the Rhenodanubian nappe system and the Magura

nappe system, outcropping at the basin margins, has been based on extrapolations. A recent drilling campaign in

the Bernhardsthal oil field of the northern Vienna Basin in Austria reached the pre-Neogene basement and provided

cuttings for biostratigraphic and paleoecological analyses. Based on these data, acquired by using detailed micro- and

nanno-paleontological analyses, a Lutetian age (middle Eocene) and a bathyal depositional environment for the Flysch of

the Harrersdorf Unit was documented. The lithological similarity of the drilling with the Steinberg Flysch Formation

of the Greifenstein Nappe and its Lutetian age suggests, that the middle Eocene part of the Harrersdorf Unit represents

a continuation of the Greifenstein Nappe of the Rhenodanubian Flysch, rather than a frontal part of the Rača Nappe of

the Magura Flysch as previously thought.

Keywords: Eocene, Vienna Basin, Rhenodanubian Flysch, Harrersdorf Unit, biostratigraphy.

Introduction

During recent hydrocarbon prospection in the northern Vienna

Basin, the Austrian oil company OMV drilled explorative

boreholes in the Bernhardsthal oilfield in NW Austria close to

the Czech border (Fig. 1) (see Harzhauser et al. 2018a for

a geological overview and description of the Neogene depo-

sits). Wessely et al. (1993) interpreted the pre-Neogene base-

ment of the Bernhardsthal oilfield as Cretaceous to Eocene

flysch. This interpretation was based solely on unpublished

internal reports of the OMV and by extrapolation of drilling

data from the Steinberg area. Within the current drilling cam-

paign, the Bernhardsthal 11 borehole (Be 11) reached these

pre-Neogene units, which have not been described so far in

terms of biostratigraphy.

Neogene deposits are documented in the Bernhardsthal 11

borehole down to ~2745 m (own data). Deep-water deposits of

the lower Miocene Lužice Formation (Kováč et al. 2004)

represent these basal Neogene units. Below this level, down to

3140 m, the pelitic facies of the Lužice Formation is replaced

by an about 400-m-thick succession of flysch-type deposits of

grey to dark grey marly shales alternating with glauconitic

sandstone. The first thin sections were produced already

during the drilling campaign and pointed to the presence of

pre-Neogene foraminifera, but a more precise age assignment

was impossible at the time. Therefore, OMV initiated

detailed paleontological analyses of the microfauna and

the calcareous nannoplankton to clarify the age and deposi-

tional setting of this enigmatic interval.

Geographical and geological setting

The Bernhardsthal 11 borehole (48°41’18.45” N, 16°50’

53.25” E) is situated in the northern Vienna Basin, which is

an about 200 km long and 55 km wide, rhomboid pull-apart

basin (Royden 1985; Wessely 1988, 2006), covering large

parts of eastern Austria and extending into the Czech Republic

in the North and Slovakia in the East (see Kováč et al. 2004

and Wessely 2006 for description). Due to complex fault

systems, the basin was internally subdivided into a series of

horst and graben systems (Kröll & Wessely 1993; Vass 2002).

Due to these structural elements, its Neogene basin-fill is

an impor tant target for hydrocarbon exploration (Hamilton

et al. 1999). One of the major oil and gas fields in the Vienna

Basin is the Bernhardsthal oil field in NE Austria close to

the Czech Republic border (Harzhauser et al. 2018a).

Within the Bernhardsthal oil field, the Miocene basin fill is

in the direct vicinity and sphere of influence of the Steinberg

fault (Fig. 1), roughly striking in a SSW–NNE direction

with the Bernhardsthal field in the NNW. Due to their eco-

nomic importance, numerous boreholes have penetrated

the Neogene deposits (Kröll & Wessely 1993; Harzhauser et

al. 2018a).

406

KRANNER, HARZHAUSER, RÖGL, ĆORIĆ and STRAUSS

GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA

, 2019, 70, 5, 405–417

Material and methods

Sixteen cutting samples from the Bernhardsthal Be 11 core

interval from 2745 to 3140 m were analysed (see Fig. 2 for

sample position). The sedimentological analysis is based on

on-site logging, visual analysis of core samples and cuttings.

Core samples and cuttings from the core interval above

2745 m contained early Miocene microfaunas (Harzhauser et

al. 2018b) and are not discussed here. Cuttings were taken and

cleaned on-site. To widen the sampling interval of the cuttings,

four consecutive cutting samples with a standard sample

distance of 2.5 m were washed and sieved together (e.g.

2747.5, 2750, 2752.5, 2755 m). Each sample was treated with

diluted H

(12 %) for several hours and washed afterwards

with tap water and sieved through a set of standard sieves.

The samples were dried at 40 °C and then split with a micro-

splitter (as described in Rupp 1986). The specimens were

picked and counted for size fractions 500–250 µm,

250–125 µm and 125–63 µm. For identification of forami-

nifers several different publications were used (e.g., Papp et al.

1973; Loeblich & Tappan 1987; Cicha et al. 1998; Rögl &

Spezzaferii 2003; Bubík & Kaminski 2004; Bindiu-Haitonic

et al. 2017).

In addition, cutting samples from 2855 m, 2930 m, 2945 m,

3040 m, 3070 m and 3100 m were analysed for calcareous

nannoplankton, following standard preparation methods as

described in Perch-Nielsen (1985). The standard nannoplank-

ton zonation of Martini (1971) was used for biostratigraphic

attribution of investigated material. All samples are barren of

macrofossils. SEM (scanning electron microscope) micro-

graphs were taken at the Natural History Museum Vienna.

All illustrated foraminifers are stored in the micropaleonto-

logical collection of the Natural History Museum Vienna;

nannoplankton samples are stored in the Geological Survey,

Vienna. Lists of all recorded calcareous nannoplankton and

fora miniferal taxa are given in Tables 1 and 2, including authors

and years of description. To warrant readability, authors and

years of descriptions are not repeated in the following text.

Sedimentological data were logged on-site during drilling

by OMV. In addition, wire-log data were provided by

OMV for analysis (GR = natural gamma radiation, RES =

resistivity).

Fig. 1. A — Geographical and geological

setting of the study area at the Austrian–Czech

boundary; B — position of the Be 11 bore-

hole; C — Subsurface distribution of the

Rhenodanubian and Magura flysch units in

the northern Vienna Basin, compiled from

Rammel (1989) and Wessely et al. (1993).

The location of Be 11 is shown in the red

insert. Note that the boundary between Grei-

fenstein und Rača Nappe nappes as proposed

by Wessely et al. (1993) is hypothetical and

the Harrersdorf Unit might rather represent

a continuation of the Greifenstein Nappe.

407

PALEOGENE BIOSTRATIGRAPHY OF THE HARRERSDORF UNIT (VIENNA BASIN)

GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA

, 2019, 70, 5, 405–417

Results

Lithology and wire-log pattern

Grey to dark grey marly shales, intercalated by thin glauco-

nitic sandstone layers characterize the studied part of the Be 11

core (2745–3140 m) (Fig. 2). This lithological alternation is

expressed in wire-logs by serrated shale-line intervals alterna-

ting with cylinder-shaped or funnel shaped sand bodies (e.g.

2990–3120 m, 3000–3025 m). No trends or cyclicities can be

seen and a spectral analysis failed to detect any significant

periods. The wire-log patterns differ considerably from those

of the overlying Miocene deposits, which display a strikingly

cyclic succession of bell-shaped intervals (Fig. 3).

Micropaleontological data

Calcareous nannoplankton: The samples yield a mode-

rately diverse assemblage of 51 taxa; individual samples con-

tained 11 to 23 taxa (Table 1; Fig. 4A–R). The Neogene is

represented by typical lower Miocene taxa (4 in total) Helico

sphaera ampliaperta, Helicosphaera carteri, Helicosphaera

scissura and Reticulofenestra excavata. Paleogene nanno-

fossils are represented by 37 and Cretaceaous by 5 taxa

(Arkhangelskiella cymbiformis, Cribrosphaerella ehrenbergii,

Micula staurophora, Prediscosphaera cretacea, Watznaueria

barnesiae) whereas 5 taxa have long stratigraphical ranges

(Braarudosphaera bigelowii, Coccolithus pelagicus, Cycli

cargolithus floridanus, Reticulofenestra minuta, Sphenolithus

moriformis).

Coccolithus formosus (Fig. 4D), Coccolithus pelagicus

(Fig. 4E), Reticulofenestra dictyoda and Cyclicargolithus

floridanus (Fig. 4F–G) occur in all samples. Nannotetrina

alata (Fig. 4Q–R), Discoaster distinctus (Fig. 4P), Chiasmo

lithus solitus, Reticulofenestra umbilicus, Lophodolithus

nascens and Sphenolithus spiniger are present taxa as well.

Other species, documented from the lowermost sample

(3100 m) to the top sample (2885 m) are Sphenolithus mori

formis (Fig. 4M), Chiasmolithus grandis, Zygrhablithus biju

gatus, Chiasmolithus oamaruensis and Discoaster kuepperi.

Foraminifera: The core interval 2745–3140 m provided

only moderately to poorly preserved foraminifers. In total,

42 foraminiferal taxa have been identified (Table 2, Figs. 5A–L,

6A–L, 7A–L). The maximum diversity ranges around 21–15

taxa in samples 2922.5–2930 m, 2935–2940 m and 2957.5–

2965 m; all other samples display a very low diversity ranging

from 3 to 10 taxa. Planktic foraminifera are more frequent and

represented by small sized specimens of Subbotina eocaena

(Fig. 5D–G), Igorina salisburgensis (Fig. 5C), Igorina broe

dermanni (Fig. 5B), Acarinina bullbrooki (Fig. 5A), Turbo

rotalia frontosa (Fig. 5L), Pseudohastigerina wilcoxensis

(Fig. 5H), Globorotaloides eovariabilis (Fig. 5J), Para sub

botina inaequispira (Fig. 5K) and Pseudohastigerina sp.

(Fig. 5I). The most abundant benthic taxa are Glomospira

charoides (Fig. 6D–E), Glomospira gordialis (Fig. 6F),

Ammodiscus peruvianus (Fig. 6B), Ammodiscus tenuissimus,

Ammodiscus cretaceous (Fig. 6C), Lituotuba lituiformis

(Fig. 6A), Psammosphaera irregularis (Fig. 6G–H), Karre

rulina conversa (Fig. 6J), Bathysiphon saidi and Bathysiphon

sp. and are accompanied by Melonis pompilioides (Fig. 7C–D),

Cibicides westi (Fig. 7G), Cibicidoides sp. (Fig. 7F), Pullenia

sp. (Fig. 7I), Anomalinoides sp. (Fig. 7H), Rhabdammina sp.

(Fig. 7J), Psammosiphonella sp. (Fig. 7K) and Caucasina

coprolithoides (Fig. 6K).

Discussion

Biostratigraphy and paleoecology

Calcareous nannoplankton: Assemblages are characte-

rized by the high number of species which display a strati-

graphic overlap during the middle Eocene. Nannotetrina alata

and Discoaster distinctus are restricted to the Lutetian and are

Fig. 2. The Eocene part of Be 11 with sample positions. The occurrences of important foraminiferal taxa (A) and calcareous nannoplankton

taxa (B) correlated with the lithological log.

408

KRANNER, HARZHAUSER, RÖGL, ĆORIĆ and STRAUSS

GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA

, 2019, 70, 5, 405–417

typical for the standard Calcareous Nannoplankton Zone

NP15 (Martini 1971). Lophodolithus nascens appears already

during the Selandian Zone NP6 and has its last occurrence

during the Lutetian Zone NP15 (Perch-Nielsen 1985) and

Sphenolithus spiniger ranges from the latest Ypresian

NP14 zone to the Bartonian Zone NP17 (Perch-Nielsen

1985; Fornaciari et al. 2010). Similarly, the occurrence of

Chiasmolithus solitus, ranging from the Thanetian Zone

NP9 to the Lutetian Zone NP16 (Perch-Nielsen 1985; Vanden-

berghe et al. 2012), does not contradict a Lutetian age

(Bramlette & Sullivan 1961).

At first sight, a Priabonian age might be assumed based

on the occurrences of Chiasmolithus oamaruensis (2855,

3040, 3100 m depth), Isthmolithus recurvus (3040 m depth),

Species

2855

2930

2945

3040

3070

3100

Arkhangelskiella cymbiformis Vekshina, 1959

Blackites sp.

Braarudosphaera bigelowii (Gran & Braarud 1935) Deflandre, 1947

Campylosphaera dela (Bramlette & Sullivan, 1961) Hay & Mohler, 1967

Chiasmolithus grandis (Bramlette & Riedel, 1954) Radomski, 1968

Chiasmolithus oamaruensis (Deflandre, 1954) Hay et al., 1966

Chiasmolithus solitus (Bramlette and Sullivan, 1961) Locker, 1968

Chiasmolithus sp.

Coccolithus formosus (Kamptner, 1963) Wise, 1973

Coccolithus pelagicus (Wallich 1877) Schiller, 1930

Cribrocentrum erbae Fornaciari, Agnini, Catanzariti and Rio in Fornaciari et al. 2010

Cribrosphaerella ehrenbergii (Arkhangelsky, 1912) Deflandre in Piveteau, 1952

Cyclagelosphaera margerelii Noël, 1965

Cyclicargolithus floridanus (Roth & Hay, in Hay et al., 1967) Bukry, 1971

Dictyococcites hesslandii Haq 1971 1

Discoaster barbadiensis Tan, 1927

Discoaster deflandrei Bramlette & Riedel, 1954

Discoaster distinctus Martini, 1958

Discoaster kuepperi Stradner, 1959

Discoaster lodoensis Bramlette & Riedel, 1954

Helicosphaera ampliaperta Bramlette and Wilcoxon, 1967

Helicosphaera bramlettei (Müller, 1970) Jafar & Martini, 1975

Helicosphaera euphratis Haq, 1966

Helicosphaera seminulum Bramlette & Sullivan, 1961

Isthmolithus recurvus Deflandre in Deflandre and Fert, 1954

Lophodolithus mochlophorus Deflandre in Deflandre & Fert, 1954

Lophodolithus nascens Bramlette & Sullivan, 1961

Micrantholithus sp.

Micula staurophora (Gardet, 1955) Stradner, 1963

Nannotetrina alata (Martini, in Martini & Stradner 1960) Haq and Lohmann, 1976

Neochiastozygus sp.

Pontosphaera exilis (Bramlette & Sullivan, 1961) Romein, 1979

Pontosphaera sp.

Reticulofenestra dictyoda (Deflandre in Deflandre & Fert, 1954) Stradner in Stradner & Edwards, 1968

Reticulofenestra hillae Bukry & Percival, 1971

Reticulofenestra minuta Roth, 1970

Reticulofenestra sp.

Reticulofenestra umbilicus (Levin, 1965) Martini & Ritzkowski, 1968

Sphenolithus dissimilis Bukry and Percival, 1971

Sphenolithus editus Perch-Nielsen in Perch-Nielsen et al., 1978

Sphenolithus moriformis (Brönnimann & Stradner, 1960) Bramlette & Wilcoxon, 1967

Sphenolithus radians Deflandre in Grassé, 1952

Sphenolithus spiniger Bukry, 1971

Thoracosphaera saxea Stradner, 1961

Toweius callosus Perch-Nielsen, 1971

Toweius rotundus Perch-Nielsen in Perch-Nielsen et al., 1978

Toweius sp.

Tribrachiatus orthostylus Shamrai, 1963

Watznaueria barnesiae (Black in Black & Barnes, 1959) Perch-Nielsen, 1968

Watznaueria fossacincta (Black, 1971) Bown in Bown & Cooper, 1989

Zygrhablithus bijugatus (Deflandre in Deflandre and Fert, 1954) Deflandre, 1959

Table 1: Calcareous Nannoplankton taxa from the Be 11 borehole (1/0 = presence/absence).

409

PALEOGENE BIOSTRATIGRAPHY OF THE HARRERSDORF UNIT (VIENNA BASIN)

GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA

, 2019, 70, 5, 405–417

Reticulofenestra. umbilicus (2945, 3040, 3070 m depth) and

Cribrocentrum erbae (3040 m depth) (Perch-Nielsen 1985;

Vandenberghe et al. 2012). These Priabonian taxa, however,

are scarce and are contrasted by a large number of nanno-

plankton specimens of Lutetian age. Moreover, a Priabonian

age would be in conflict with the foraminiferal data (see

below). Therefore, several cuttings from the overlying

Miocene deposits have been checked for Priabonian species,

which indeed were frequently found (Harzhauser et al. 2018b).

This suggests major reworking of upper Eocene nannoplank-

ton during the Miocene. Consequently, the scarce Priabonian

taxa are interpreted as borehole contamination due to downfall

during the drilling process.

Aside from Priabonian contamination, the assemblages also

yield Cretaceous and lower Eocene nannoplankton. Reworking

of Mesozoic nannoplankton (especially from Upper Cretaceous

units) is documented throughout the core interval by the

occurrence of species, such as Arkhangelskiella cymbiformis,

Cribrosphaerella ehrenbergii, Cyclagelosphaera margerelii,

Micula staurophora, Watznaueria barnesiae and Watznaueria

fossacincta (e.g., Bown & Cooper 1998; Lees & Bown 2005).

Similarly, lower Eocene strata became eroded, as indicated by

the occurrence of Discoaster kuepperi, Discoaster lodoensis,

Toweius rotundus and Sphenolithus editus (Perch-Nielsen

1985; Vandenberghe et al. 2012). The uppermost samples from

2855 and 2930 m contain scarce Helicosphaera ampliaperta

Species

2747.5 – 2755

2782.5 – 2790

2817

2845 – 2850

2852.5 – 2860

2887.5 – 2895

2905 – 2910

2922.5 – 2930

2935 – 2940

2957.5 – 2965

2992.5 – 3000

3075.5 – 3035

3050 – 3055

3062.5 – 3070

3097.5 – 3105

3132.5 – 3140

Acarinina bullbrooki (Bolli, 1957)

Ammobaculites sp.

Ammodiscus cretaceus (Reuss, 1845)

Ammodiscus peruvianus (Berry, 1928)

Ammodiscus tenuissimus Grzybowski, 1898

Anomalinoides sp.

Bathysiphon saidi (Anan, 1994)

Bathysiphon sp. 1

Bathysiphon sp. 2

Caucasina coprolithoides (Andreae, 1884)

Cibicides westi (Howe, 1939)

Cibicidoides pseudoungerianus (d'Orgigny, 1846)

Cibicidoides sp.

Cibicidoides ungerianus (d'Orgigny, 1846)

Dentalina sp.

Globocassidulina oblonga (Reuss, 1850)

Globorotaloides eovariabilis Huber & Pearson, 2006

Glomospira charoides (Jones and Parker, 1860)

Glomospira gordialis (Jones and Parker, 1860)

Gonatosphaera inflata Bermúdez, 1949

Gyroidinoides sp.

Haplophragmoides walteri (Grzybowski, 1898)

Heterolepa dutemplei (d'Orbigny, 1846)

Hormosina veloscoensis (Cushman, 1926)

Igorina broedermanni (Cushman & Bermúdez, 1949)

Igorina salisburgensis (Gohrbandt, 1967)

Karrerulina conversa (Grzybowski, 1901)

Lenticulina cf. inornata (d'Orbigny, 1846)

Lituotuba lituiformis (Brady, 1879)

Melonis pompilioides (Fichtel & Moll, 1798)

Parasubbotina inaequispira (Subbotina, 1953)

Pleurostomella alazanensis Cushman, 1925

Psammosiphonella sp.

Psammosphaera irregularis (Grzybowski, 1896)

Pseudohastigerina sp.

Pseudohastigerina wilcoxensis (Cushman & Ponton, 1932)

Pullenia bulloides (d'Orbigny, 1826)

Pullenia sp.

Rhabdammina sp.

Subbotina eocaena (Guembel, 1868)

Tuborotalia frontosa (Subbotina, 1953)

Uvigerina eocaena Gümbel, 1868

Table 2: Foraminifera taxa from the Be 11 borehole (1/0 = presence/absence).

410

KRANNER, HARZHAUSER, RÖGL, ĆORIĆ and STRAUSS

GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA

, 2019, 70, 5, 405–417

and Sphenolithus dissimilis, which are lower Miocene taxa

(Young 1998; Raffi et al. 2006; Bergen et al. 2017), indicating

further downhole contamination from lower Miocene sedi-

ments (Harzhauser et al. 2018b).

Foraminifera: The foraminiferal assemblages from core

interval 2745–3140 m contain mainly taxa, which are restricted

to the Ypresian and Lutetian. Species, such as Igorina

salisburgensis, Igorina broedermanni, Acarinina bullbrooki,

Turbo rotalia frontosa, Pseudohastigerina wilcoxensis and

Parasubbotina inaequispira, characterize the plankton bio-

zones E7–E8 (Berggren & Pearson 2005; Berggren et al. 2006;

Olsson & Hemleben 2006; Pearson et al. 2006). Strati gra-

phically wider ranges are covered by the planktic Subbotina

eocaena (highest occurrence 2782.5–2790 m), which ranges

from the Ypresian to the Chattian (Wade et al. 2018),

the agglutinated foraminifer Psammosphaera irregularis

(highest occurrence: cuttings 2747.5–2755 m), which ranges

from the Cretaceous to the Priabonian (Kaminski & Gradstein

2005; Kaminski & Ortiz 2014; Benedetti 2017) and by the

planktic Globorotaloides eovariabilis, which ranges from

the Ypresian to the Chattian (Pearson & Wade 2009) or even

to the Aquitanian (Coxall & Spezzaferri 2018). Therefore,

the stratigraphic ranges of the foraminifera species display

a distinct overlap during the Lutetian.

In terms of ecological requirements, the assemblage is typi-

cal for deep-water sedimentary successions as described by

Golonka & Waśkowska (2012). Especially the high abundance

of planktic and agglutinated foraminifera is a clear indicator

for bathyal to lower bathyal water conditions (Armstrong &

Brasier 2005). Additionally, the abundance of Psammosphaera

irregularis, Ammodiscus and Glomospira indicate upper to

lower bathyal environments with reduced oxygen levels

(Murray 1991, 2006; Kaminski & Gradstein 2005; Cimerman

et al. 2006; Grunert et al. 2013; Kaminski & Ortiz 2014;

Benedetti 2017).

Correlation with Eocene subsurface units in the northern

Vienna Basin

Based on data from internal OMV reports, Rammel (1989),

Wessely et al. (1993) and Wessely (1993, 2006) extrapolated

the distribution of subsurface units of the Rhenodanubian

and Magura nappe systems in the northern Vienna Basin.

According to these maps, borehole Be 11 is situated on the

Harrersdorf unit, which is correlated by the above mentioned

authors with the Rača nappe of the Magura nappe system

(Fig. 1). South of this unit, the Rhenodanubian nappe system

is represented, especially by the Greifenstein Nappe, which

stretches from the area of the Vienna Basin and the Korneuburg

Basin in a NE direction up to the Steinberg region (Wessely

1993, 2006). Numerous drillings around the Steinberg and

along the Steinberg Fault reached this nappe and allowed

a lithostratigraphic subdivision. The subsurface extension of

the Greifenstein Nappe is unknown. Nevertheless, Hamilton

et al. (1990) and Picha et al. (2006) assumed a separation from

the Rača Nappe, which is part of the Magura Nappe System,

by a thrust in the area of the northern Vienna Basin. On their

subsurface map of the Vienna Basin, Wessely et al. (1993)

placed the boundary between these nappes along a line run-

ning from north of the Steinberg in the east to the Mistelbach

area in the west (Fig. 1). No seismic data or surveys on

the structural geology, however, have been published so far to

support this hypothesis.

Greifenstein Nappe (Rhenodanubian nappe system):

In its easternmost distribution area, the Rhenodanubian nappe

system consists of the Greifenstein and Laab nappes (note that

the “Kahlenberg nappe” was recognized as equivalent of the

Greifenstein Nappe by Egger 2013). The sedimentary succes-

sion of the Greifenstein Nappe has been lithostratigraphically

formalized as the Greifenstein Group by Egger (2013) with

Fig. 3. Wire-logs (GR = natural gamma radiation, RES = resistivity)

of Be 11.

411

PALEOGENE BIOSTRATIGRAPHY OF THE HARRERSDORF UNIT (VIENNA BASIN)

GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA

, 2019, 70, 5, 405–417

the Greifenstein Formation as the youngest unit. In surface

outcrops, the Greifenstein Formation terminates within the

Ypresian standard nannoplankton Zone NP13 (Egger 2013;

Egger & Wessely 2014; Egger & Ćorić 2017).

The assumed equivalents of the Greifenstein Nappe in the

Steinberg area are united in the Zistersdorf Group, which

comprises the Upper Cretaceous Altlengbach Formation and

the Paleogene Glauconitic Sandstone and the Steinberg-Flysch

formations (Rammel 1989; Wessely 2006). The up to

750-m-thick Glauconitic Sandstone formation (GSf) com-

prises several thick units of light grey to greenish grey glau-

conite-bearing sandstone, partly with nummulitids and polymict

pebbles, subdivided by thinner intercalations of variegated

shales and marly shales (Grill 1968; Hekel 1968). Rammel

(1989) subdivided the GSf into three main sandstone-domi-

nated subunits separated by two pelite-dominated intercala-

tions. The correlation of these units with biostratigraphic data

of Hekel (1968) revealed a Thanetian to Ypresian age for

the GSf. Similarly, the analysis of the foraminiferal assem-

blages by Küpper (1961) pointed to a late Paleocene to early

Eocene age. The depositional environment was interpreted by

Rammel (1989) as deep sea fans system with numerous chan-

nels. A correlation of the GSf with the unit drilled in Be 11

(2745–3140 m depth) can be excluded based on the biostrati-

graphic data and also by the wire-log pattern of the GFS,

which is characterized by up to 200-m-thick, cylinder-shaped

units (representing the sandstone packages).

The GSf is overlain by the Steinberg-Flysch formation

(SFf), which comprises an up to 1500-m-thick succession of

dark grey and greenish grey shales and marly shales with sub-

ordinate intercalations of thin layers of glauconitic sandstones

(Grill 1968; Wessely 2006). According to the few available

data, the basal parts of the SFf contain Ypresian foraminifera

(Grill 1968), whereas the upper part ranges into the Lutetian

(Hekel 1968; Rammel 1989). The depositional environment

is interpreted as a distal deep-sea fan system (Wessely 2006).

Consequently, the Be 11 record (2745–3140 m depth) is

a time-equivalent of the SFf and has a similar lithology.

North of the Steinberg, the up to 2500-m-thick Harrersdorf

Unit (Wessely 2006) is either interpreted as the frontal part of

the Rača Nappe in Austria (Hamilton et al. 1990) or as a con-

tinuation of the Greifenstein Nappe (Rammel 1989). Drillings,

Fig. 4. Calcareous Nannoplankton from Be 11. A — Tribrachiatus orthostylus Shamrai, 1963 (3100 m); B — Reticulofenestra umbilicus

(Levin, 1965) Martini & Ritzkowski, 1968 (3040 m); C — Chiasmolithus solitus (Bramlette & Sullivan, 1961) Locker, 1968 (3100 m);

D — Coccolithus formosus (Kamptner, 1963) Wise, 1973 (3100 m); E — Coccolithus pelagicus (Wallich 1877) Schiller, 1930 (3040 m);

F–G — Cyclicargolithus floridanus (Roth & Hay, in Hay et al., 1967) Bukry, 1971 (3040 m); H — Braarudosphaera bigelowii (Gran &

Braarud, 1935) Deflandre, 1947 (2855 m); I — Isthmolithus recurvus Deflandre in Deflandre & Fert, 1954 (3040 m); J — Campylosphaera

dela (Bramlette & Sullivan, 1961) Hay & Mohler, 1967 (3100 m); K — Helicosphaera ampliaperta Bramlette & Wilcoxon, 1967 (2855 m);

L — Discoaster kuepperi Stradner, 1959 (2945 m); M — Sphenolithus moriformis (Brönnimann & Stradner, 1960) Bramlette & Wilcoxon,

1967 (3100 m); N — Helicosphaera seminulum Bramlette & Sullivan, 1961 (3100 m); O — Micrantholithus flos Deflandre in Deflandre &

Fert, 1954 (3040 m); P — Discoaster distinctus Martini, 1958 (3070 m); Q–R — Nannotetrina alata (Martini, in Martini & Stradner 1960)

Haq and Lohmann, 1976 (2945 m); scale bar = 5 μm.

412

KRANNER, HARZHAUSER, RÖGL, ĆORIĆ and STRAUSS

GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA

, 2019, 70, 5, 405–417

which reached the Harrersdorf Unit are Harrersdorf 1 (5136 m),

Maustrenk Uet1a (6563 m), Linenberg 2 (4711 m) and

St. Ulrich 290 (3000 m) (Fig. 1) (Wessely et al. 1993), but no

sedimentological and paleontological data have been pub-

lished so far. Rammel (1989) documented a continuation of

the GSf into the Harrersdorf Unit based on well-log correla-

tions of Harrersdorf 1 with drillings from the Steinberg area.

This suggests a close relation of the Harrersdorf Unit with

the Zistersdorf Group of the Greifenstein Nappe.

Rača Nappe (Magura nappe system): In its south-western

most distribution area, the Magura nappe system is divided

into the Rača, Bystrica and Biele Karpaty nappes (Picha et al.

2006). Of these, only the Rača Nappe stretches in the south

into the Austrian part of the Vienna Basin (Wessely et al. 1993;

Wessely 2006). Although the tectonic affiliation of the

Harrersdorf Unit with the Rača Nappe remains ambiguous,

the lithostratigraphic correlation between the Greifenstein and

Rača nappes is roughly established. Eliáš et al. 1990; Adamová

& Schnabel (1999) and Picha et al. (2006) provided detailed

summaries of the geology and lithostratigraphy of the Rača

Nappe in the Western Carpathian Flysch belt (see Picha et al.

2006, fig. 17 for a scheme of the Rača Nappe). The mostly

Paleocene Soláň Formation yields the oldest post Cretaceous

deposits. This nearly 3000-m-thick formation comprises

Fig. 5. Planktic Eocene foraminifera from Be 11. A — Acarinina bullbrooki (Bolli, 1957) (2935–2940 m); B — Igorina broedermanni

(Cushman & Bermúdez, 1949) (2935–2940 m); C — Igorina salisburgensis (Gohrbandt, 1967) (2935–2940 m); D–G — Subbotina eocaena

(Guembel, 1868) (2935–2940 m) (3062.5–3070); H — Pseudohastigerina wilcoxensis (Cushman & Ponton, 1932) (2935–2940 m);

I — Pseudohastigerina sp. (2935–2940 m); J — Globorotaloides eovariabilis Huber & Pearson, 2006 (2922.5–2930 m); K — Parasubbotina

inaequispira (Subbotina, 1953) (3062.5–3070 m); L — Turborotalia frontosa (Subbotina, 1953) (2935–2940 m); scale bar = 100 µm.

413

PALEOGENE BIOSTRATIGRAPHY OF THE HARRERSDORF UNIT (VIENNA BASIN)

GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA

, 2019, 70, 5, 405–417

shales and sandstones with a general coarsening upward trend

(Picha et al. 2006). According to Rammel (1989), the Soláň

Formation can be correlated with the Altlengbach Formation

and Thanetian parts of the GSf of the Greifenstein Nappe.

The Soláň Formation is overlain by the 300-m-thick Eocene

Beloveža Formation, which comprises greenish grey to red-

dish shales with sandstone intercalations. Its stratigraphic

interval is assumed to range from the Paleocene to middle

Eocene (Picha et al. 2006), but seems to be mainly of Lutetian

age (see Golonka & Waśkowska 2012 for its equivalent in

the Polish Flysch Carpathians). Rammel (1989) correlated

this formation with the upper part of the GSf and assumed

an Ypresian age. The uppermost unit of the Rača Nappe is

the 2500-m-thick Zlin Formation (including the underlying

sandy Luhačovice Member) of the middle to late Eocene and

early Oligocene age. The formation is dominated by sand-

stones and conglomerates, which formed as proximal parts of

turbiditic fans and by calcareous shales (Picha et al. 2006).

Tectonic affiliation: Rammel (1989) correlated the

Steinberg-Flysch formation of the Greifenstein Nappe with

the Zlin formation. The age of the Be 11 record (2745–3140 m

depth) would allow a comparison of both formations. The peli-

tic lithology of Be 11, however, makes a direct correlation

with the Zlin formation rather unlikely. Thus, leads to

Fig. 6. Benthic Eocene foraminifera from Be 11. A — Lituotuba lituiformis (Brady, 1879) (2957.5–2965 m); B — Ammodiscus peruvianus

(Berry, 1928) (3062.5–3070 m); C — Ammodiscus cretaceus (Reuss, 1845) (2817 m); D–E — Glomospira charoides (Jones and Parker, 1860)

(2957.5–2965 m); F — Glomospira gordialis (Jones and Parker, 1860) (2957.5–2965 m); G — Psammosphaera irregularis (Grzybowski,

1896) (2782.5–2790 m); H — Psammosphaera irregularis (Grzybowski, 1896) (2817 m); I — Pullenia bulloides (d’Orbigny, 1826) (2922.5–

2930 m); J — Karrerulina conversa (Grzybowski, 1901) (2922.5–2930 m); K — Caucasina coprolithoides (Andreae, 1884) (2817 m);

L — Bulimina sp. (2782.5–2790 m); scale bar = 100 µm.

414

KRANNER, HARZHAUSER, RÖGL, ĆORIĆ and STRAUSS

GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA

, 2019, 70, 5, 405–417

the assumption that the Lutetian units of Be 11 represent

a continuation of the Steinberg Flysch formation in the

Harrersdorf Unit. In consequence, this unit must be regarded

as a continuation of the Greifenstein Nappe of the Rheno-

danubian nappe system rather than as part of the Rača Nappe

of the Magura nappe system. Some paleontological similari-

ties of the Be 11 record can be stated with the middle Eocene

Beloveža Formation from the Polish and Slovak part of the

Rača Nappe as described by Golonka & Waśkowska (2012).

Most of the genera and five species (Ammodiscus tenuisimus,

A. peruvianus, Glomospira charoides, H Haplophragmoides

walteri, Karrerulina conversa) described by Golonka &

Waśkowska (2012) also appear in Be 11. Both assemblages

indicate identical bathyal depositional environments (Murray

1991, 2006; Kaminski & Gradstein 2005). These biotic simi-

larities, however, are rather an expression of similar age and

near-identical paleoecological conditions and are not a strong

support to affiliate the Harrersdorf Unit with the Rača Nappe.

A relationship with the Waschberg–Ždánice Unit is unlikely

due to the geographical distance of the surface distribution of

the Waschberg–Ždánice Unit outcrops (see maps in Grill

1968; Schnabel 2002). Subsurface data revealed the presence

of the isolated Waschberg–Ždánice Unit below the Flysch

nappes as seen along the escarpment Steinberg fault (Wessely

et al. 1993). Within the Waschberg–Ždánice Unit Paleocene

and Eocene formations, such as the Paleocene glauconitic

and marly sands of the Bruderndorf beds, the lower Eocene

Waschberg-Limestone, the ferruginous middle Eocene

Fig. 7. Benthic Eocene foraminifera from Be 11. A–B — Lenticulina cf. inornata (2922.5–2930 m); C–D — Melonis pompilioides Römer,

1838 (3032–3140 m), (2957.5–2965 m); E — Heterolepa dutemplei (d’Orbigny, 1846) (2782.5–2790 m); F — Cibicidoides sp. (3062.5–

3070 m); G — Cibicides westi (Howe, 1939) (3032–3140 m); H — Anomalinoides sp. (2922.5–2930 m); I — Pullenia sp. (2957.5–2965 m);

J — Rhabdammina sp. (2922.5–2930 m); K — Psammosiphonella sp. (2922.5–2930 m); scale bar = 100 µm.

415

PALEOGENE BIOSTRATIGRAPHY OF THE HARRERSDORF UNIT (VIENNA BASIN)

GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA

, 2019, 70, 5, 405–417

sandstones of the Haidhof beds and the glauconitic and calca-

reous sand of the upper Eocene Reingrub Formation have

been documented (Krhovsky et al. 2001). Larger foraminifera

from Eocene units, studied by Torres-Silva & Gebhardt (2015),

confirmed the occurrence of Ypresian to basal Lutetian,

Bartonian and Priabonian assemblages, which point to a depo-

sitional environment in the inner to middle shelf between 70 to

200 m water depth (Torres-Silva & Gebhardt 2015). Deeper

marine offshore facies, comparable to Be11, is confined to

small occurrences of Lutetian marls (Egger et al. 2007) and

Priabonian Globigerina marls (Grill 1968; Wessely 2006).

None of these lithological units can be directly correlated with

the shales of Be 11, either because of their completely dif-

ferent litho-facies and/or because of their different age.

The Lutetian marls of Niederhollabrunn, described by Egger

et al. (2007), would be the most similar unit in the surface

Waschberg–Ždánice Unit, but they do not represent a turbi-

ditic depositional system. Finally, a flysch cover of subsurface

Waschberg–Ždánice Unit units must be expected in the study

area.

Conclusions

The Be 11 borehole in the northern part of the Vienna Basin

reached the pre-Neogene units at a depth of about 2745 m,

indicated by a strong change in wire log patterns from highly

cyclic bell-shaped Neogene GR and RES logs to a succession

of cylinder- and funnel-shaped wire-log patterns, lacking any

cyclicity. In addition, the predominant lithology changes from

silty-sandy clays to marly shales. The drilled virtual thickness

of the pre-Neogene unit attains nearly 400 m.

The shales and glauconitic sandstones lack any macrofauna

and the microfauna is moderately to poorly preserved and of

low diversity. Both, foraminifers and calcareous nannoplank-

ton are clearly indicative for an Eocene age. The nanno-

plankton assemblage yields two distinct species (N. alata and

D. distinctus) which have not been found in the Miocene sam-

ples of the borehole and therefore represent autochthonous

species which allow a correlation with the Lutetian standard

nannoplankton Zone NP15 spanning over an interval from

43.6 to 47.4 Ma. Nannoplankton assemblages representing

reworked taxa were found throughout the succession that indi-

cates reworking of older strata during the middle Eocene and

downfall during drilling resulting in borehole contamination.

Similarly, a large part of the foraminifera indicate a Lutetian

age and are representative for the plankton biozones E7–E8 as

defined by Berggren & Pearson (2005), spanning an interval

from 45.8–50.4 Ma. Therefore, the stratigraphic overlap of

these biozones allows a restriction of the depositional time of

the turbidites of the Harrersdorf Unit to an interval ranging

from 45.8–47.4 Ma.

The Flysch of the Harrersdorf Unit was variously inter-

preted as the front of the Rača Nappe of the Magura Flysch

(Wessely et al. 1993; Hamilton et al. 1999) or as continuation

of the Rhenodanubian Greifenstein Nappe (Rammel 1989).

Our results might support the latter interpretation as the lower

Eocene Glauconitic Sandstone formation can be traced from

the Greifenstein Nappe in the Steinberg area up to the

Harrersdorf Unit (Rammel 1989) and due to the lithological

similarities of the Be 11 record with that of the coeval Steinberg

Flysch formation. Nevertheless, an unambiguous correlation

is missing, as the Lutetian age of the Steinberg Flysch forma-

tion contrasts with the Ypresian age of the uppermost parts

of the Greifenstein Formation in the surface distribution of

the Greifenstein Nappe.

Acknowledgements: We thank Godfrid Wessely (Vienna) for

support and discussions on subsurface geology of the northern

Vienna Basin. We also thank Patrick Grunert (University of

Cologne, Germany) for taxonomic discussions and comments

on an early draft of this paper. Iris Feichtinger (NHMW)

greatly helped during sample preparation. Many thanks to

the OMV Exploration & Production working group and espe-

cially to Wolfgang Hujer for their cooperation and open-minded

policy. This project was financed by the OMV. Finally we

want to thank an anonymous reviewer and Lilian Švábenická

(Czech Geological Survey) for professional and helpful remarks

to improve this work. Special thanks also to reviewer Hans

Egger (Geological Survey, Austria) for his help and recom-

mendations of literature concerning the geological setting.

References

Adamová M. & Schnabel G.W. 1999: Comparison of the East Alpine

and West Carpathian Flysch Zone - A Geochemical Approach.

Abh. Geol. Bundesanst. 56, 567–584.

Armstrong H.A. & Brasier M.D. 2005: Foraminifera. Microfossils,

Second Edition, Blackwell Publishing, Cornwall, 1–304.

Benedetti A. 2017: Eocene/Oligocene deep-water agglutinated fora-

minifers (DWAF) assemblages from the Madonie Mountains

(Sicily, Southern Italy). Palaeontologia Electronica 20.1.4A,

1–66.

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

Paleogene planktonic foraminiferal zonation. The Journal of

Foraminiferal Research 35, 4, 279–298.

Berggren W.A., Olsson R.K. & Premoli Silva I. 2006: Taxonomy, bio-

stratigraphy and phylogenetic affinities of Eocene Astrorotalia,

Igorina, Planorotalites, and Problematica (Praemurica?

lozanoi). In: Pearson P.N., Olsson K.O., Huber B.T,

Hem leben C. & Berggren W.E. (Eds.): Atlas of Eocene Plank-

tonic Foraminifera. Cushman Foundation Special Publication

41, 377–400.

Bergen J.A., de Kaenel E., Blair S.A., Boesiger T.M. & Browning E.

2017: Oligocene-Pliocene taxonomy and stratigraphy of the

genus Sphenolithus in the circum North Atlantic Basin: Gulf of

Mexico and ODP Leg 154. Journal of Nannoplankton Research

37, 77–112.

Bindiu–Haitonic R., Niculici S., Filipescu S., Bălc R. & Aroldi C.

2017: Biostratigraphy and palaeoenvironments of the Eocene

deep-water deposits of the Tarcău Nappe (Eastern Carpathians,

Romania) based on agglutinated foraminifera and calcareous

nannofossil assemblages. In: Kaminski M.A. & Alegret L.

(Eds.): Proceedings of the Ninth International Workshop on Ag

glutinated Foraminifera Grzybowski Foundation Special Publi

cation 22, 17–37.

416

KRANNER, HARZHAUSER, RÖGL, ĆORIĆ and STRAUSS

GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA

, 2019, 70, 5, 405–417

Bown P.R. & Cooper M.K.E. 1998: Jurassic. In: Bown P.R. (Ed.):

Calcareous nannofossil biostratigraphy. British Micro

palaeontological Society Publication Series, Chapman & Hall,

34–85.

Bramlette M.N. & Sullivan F.R. 1961: Coccolithophorids and related

nannoplankton of the Early Tertiary in California. Micropaleon

tology 7, 129–188.

Bubík M. & Kaminski M.A. (Eds.). 2004: Proceedings of the Sixth

International Workshop on Agglutinated Foraminifera. Grzy

bowski Foundation Special Publication 8, 1–486.

Cicha I., Rögl F., Rupp C. & Čtyroký J. 1998: Oligocene–Miocene

foraminifera of the Central Paratethys. Abhandlungen der

sencken bergischen naturforschenden Gesellschaft 549, 1–325.

Cimerman F., Jelen B. & Skaberne D. 2006: Late Eocene benthic

foraminiferal fauna from clastic sequence of the Socka–Dobrna

area and its chronostratigraphic importance (Slovenia). Geologija

49, 7–44.

Coxall H.K. & Spezzaferri S. 2018: Taxonomy, biostratigraphy, and

phylogeny of Oligocene Catapsydrax, Globorotaloides, and

Protentelloides. In: Wade B.S., Olsson R.K., Pearson P.N.,

Huber B.T. & Berggren W.A. (Eds.): Atlas of Oligocene Plank-

tonic Foraminifera. Cushman Foundation for Foraminiferal

Research Special Publication 46, 79–125.

Egger H. 2013: Zur Lithostratigrafie der Laab-Decke im Rhenodanu-

bischen Deckensystem des Wienerwaldes. Arbeitstagung der

Geologischen Bundesanstalt, 1–20.

Egger H. & Wessely G. 2014: Wienerwald. Sammlung geologischer

Führer 59, 3, 1–202.

Egger H. & Ćorić S. (Eds.) 2017: Erläuterungen zur Geologischen

Karte der Republik Österreich 1:50,000 Blatt 56 St.Pölten.

Geologische Bundesanstalt, Wien, 1–168.

Egger H., Rögl F. & Stradner H. 2007: Kalkiges Nannoplankton und

Foraminiferen aus der Chiasmolithus gigas-Subzone (Mittel-

eozän) von Niederhollabrunn (Waschbergzone, Niederösterreich).

Jahrb. Geol. Bundesanst. 147, 379–386.

Eliáš M., Schnabel W. & Stránik Z. 1990: Comparison of the Flysch

Zone of the Eastern Alps and the Western Carpathians based on

recent observations. In: Minaříková D. & Lobitzer H. (Eds.):

Thirty years of geological cooperation between Austria and

Czechoslovakia. Federal Geological Survey, Vienna & Geolo

gical Survey, Prague, 37–45.

Fornaciari E., Agnini C., Catanzariti R., Rio D., Bolla E.M. &

Valvasoni E. 2010: Mid-Latitude calcareous nannofossil biostra-

tigraphy and biochronology across the middle to late Eocene

transition. Stratigraphy 7, 229–264.

Golonka J. & Waśkowska A. 2012: The Beloveža Formation of the

Rača Unit in the Beskid Niski Mts. (Magura Nappe, Polish

Flysch Carpathians) and adjacent parts of Slovakia and their

equivalents in the west ern part of the Magura Nappe; remarks

on the Beloveža Formation–Hieroglyphic Beds controversy.

Geol. Quarterly 1, 56, 821–832.

Grill R. 1968: Erläuterungen zur geologischen Karte des nordöstli-

chen Weinviertels und zu Blatt Gänserndorf. Flyschausläufer,

Waschbergzone mit angrenzenden Teilen der flachlagernden

Molasse, Korneuburger Becken, Inneralpines Wiener Becken

nördlich der Donau. Geologische Bundesanstalt, Wien, 1–155.

Grunert P., Hinsch R., Sachsenhofer R.F., Bechtel A., Ćorić S.,

Harzhauser M., Piller W.E. & Sperl H. 2013: Early Burdigalian

infill of the Puchkirchen Trough (North Alpine Foreland Basin,

Central Paratethys): Facies development and sequence strati-

graphy. Mar. Petrol. Geol. 39, 164–186.

Hamilton W., Jiřiček R. & Wessely G. 1990: The Alpine–Carpathian

floor of the Vienna Basin in Austria and ČSSR. In: Minaříková

D. & Lobitzer H. (Eds.): Thirty years of geological cooperation

between Austria and Czechoslovakia. Federal Geological Sur

vey, Vienna & Geological Survey, Prague, 46–56.

Hamilton W., Wagner L. & Wessely G. 1999: Oil and Gas in Austria.

Mitt. Österr. Geol. Ges. 82, 235–262.

Harzhauser M., Grunert P., Mandic O., Lukeneder P., García Gallardo

Á., Neubauer T.A., Carnevale G., Landau B.M., Sauer R.,

Strauss P. 2018a: Middle and Late Badenian palaeoenviron-

ments in the northern Vienna Basin and their potential link to the

Badenian Salinity Crisis. Geol. Carpath. 69, 129–168.

Harzhauser M., Kranner M., Mandic O., Rögl F., Ćorić S., Grunert P.

& Strauss P. 2018b: Miocene stratigraphy of the borehole Bern-

hardsthal 11 (northern Vienna Basin). Internal OMV report

(unpublished), 1–16.

Hekel H. 1968: Nannoplanktonhorizonte und tektonische Strukturen

in der Flyschzone nördlich von Wien (Bisambergzug). Jahrb.

Geol. Bundesanst. 111, 293–338.

Kaminski M.A. & Gradstein F.M. 2005: Atlas of Paleogene cosmo-

politan deep-water agglutinated foraminifera. Grzybowski Foun

dation Special Publication 10, 1–547.

Kaminski M.A. & Ortiz S. 2014: The Eocene-Oligocene turnover of

Deep-Water Agglutinated Foraminifera at ODP Site 647, Southern

Labrador Sea (North Atlantic). Micropaleontology 60, 53–66.

Kováč M., Baráth I., Harzhauser M., Hlavatý I. & Hudáčková N.

2004: Miocene depositional systems and sequence stratigraphy

of the Vienna Basin. Courier des ForschungsInstituts Sencken

berg 246, 187–212.

Krhovsky J., Rögl F. & Hamrsmid B. 2001: Stratigraphic correlation

of the Late Eocene to Early Miocene of the Waschberg Unit

(Lower Austria) with the Zdanice and Pouzdrany Units (South

Moravia). In: Piller W.E. & Rasser M.W. (Eds.): Paleogene of

the Eastern Alps. Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften,

Vienna, 225–254.

Kröll A. & Wessely G. 1993: Strukturkarte — Basis der tertiären

Beckenfüllung 1:200.000. Erläuterung zu den Karten über den

Untergrund des Wiener Beckens und der angrenzenden Gebiete.

Geologische Bundesanstalt, Wien.

Küpper I. 1961: Alttertiäre Foraminiferenfaunen in Flyschgesteinen

aus dem Untergrund des nördlichen Inneralpinen Wiener

Beckens (Österreich). Jahrb. Geol. Bundesanst. 104, 239–271.

Lees J.A. & Bown P.R. 2005: Upper Cretaceous calcareous nannofos-

sil biostratigraphy, ODP Leg 198 (Shatsky Rise, Northwest

Pacific Ocean). Proceedings of the Ocean Drilling Program.

Scientific Results 198, 1–60.

Loeblich A.R. & Tappan L. 1987: Foraminiferal genera and their

classification. Van Nostrand Reinhold Company Inc., New York,

2 vols, 847 plates, 1–970.

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

plankton zonation. Proceedings of the II Planktonic Conference.

Ed. Tecnoscienza, Roma, 739–785.

Murray J.W. 1991: Ecology and Palaeoecology of Benthic Forami-

nifera. Longman Scientific & Technical, Harlow, Essex, 1–397.

Murray J.W. 2006: Ecology and Applications of Benthic Forami-

nifera. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1–426.

Olsson R.K. & Hemleben C. 2006: Taxonomy, biostratigraphy, and

phylogeny of Eocene Globanomalina, Planoglobanomalina n. gen

and Pseudohastigerina. In: Pearson P.N., Olsson K.O., Huber

B.T, Hemleben C. & Berggren W.E. (Eds.): Atlas of Eocene

Planktonic Foraminifera. Cushman Foundation Special Publica

tion 41, 413–432.

Papp A., Rögl F. & Seneš J. 1973: Chronostratigraphie und Neostra-

totypen: Miozän der zentralen Paratethys. M2 Ottnangien: Die

Innviertler, Salgótarjáner, Bántapusztaer Schichtengruppe und

die Rzehakia Formation. Verlag der Slowakischen Akademie der

Wissenschaften, 1–841.

Pearson P.N. & Wade B.S. 2009: Taxonomy and stable isotope paleo-

ecology of well-preserved planktonic foraminifera from the

uppermost Oligocene of Trinidad. Journal of Foraminiferal

Research 39, 191–217.

417

PALEOGENE BIOSTRATIGRAPHY OF THE HARRERSDORF UNIT (VIENNA BASIN)

GEOLOGICA CARPATHICA

, 2019, 70, 5, 405–417

Pearson P.N., Olsson R.K., Huber B.T., Hemleben C. & Berggren

W.A. 2006: Atlas of Eocene Planktonic Foraminifera. Cushman

Foundation Special Publication 41, 1–513.

Perch-Nielsen K. 1985: Cenozoic calcareous nannofossils. In: Bolli

H.M., Saunders J.B. & Perch-Nielsen K. (Eds.): Plankton stra-

tigraphy. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 427–555.

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 Car-

pathians and their foreland: Geology and hydrocarbon resources.

AAPG Memoir 84, 49–175.

Raffi I., Backman J., Fornaciari E., Palike H., Rio D., Lourens L.J. &

Hilgen F.J. 2006: A review of calcareous nannofossil astrobio-

chronology encompassing the past 25 million years. Quaternary

Science Reviews 25, 3113–3137.

Rammel M. 1989: Zur Kenntnis der Flyschzone im Untergrund des

Wiener Beckens. Die Glaukonitsandsteinseries. Unpublished

PhD Thesis, University of Vienna, Vienna, 1–149.

Royden L.H. 1985: The Vienna basin: a thin skinned pull apart basin.

In: Biddle K. T. & Christie-Blick N. (Eds.): Strike-slip deforma-

tion, basin formation and sedimentation. SEPM Special Publica

tion 37, 319–339.

Rögl F. & Spezzaferri S. 2003: Foraminiferal paleoecology and bio-

stratigraphy of the Mühlbach section (Gaindorf Formation,

Lower Badenian), Lower Austria. Ann. Naturhist. Mus. Wien,

104A, 23–75.

Rupp C. 1986: Paläoökologie der Foraminiferen in der Sandschaler-

zone (Badenien, Miozän) des Wiener Beckens. Beiträge zur

Paläontologie von Österreich 12, 1–180.

Schnabel W. 2002 (Ed.): Geologische Karte von Niederösterreich

1:200.000. Legende und kurze Erläuterung. Geologische

Bundes anstalt, Wien.

Torres-Silva A.I. & Gebhardt H. 2015: Eocene Larger Benthic

Foraminifera (Nummulitids, Orthophragminids) Waschberg–

Ždánice Unit, Lower Austria. Jahrb. Geol. Bundesanst. 155,

109–120.

Vandenberghe N., Hilgen F.J. & Speijer R.P. 2012: The Paleogene

Period. In: Gradstein F.M., Ogg J.G., Schmitz M.D. &

Ogg G.M. (Eds.): The Geologic Time Scale 2012, 2. Elsevier,

855–921.

Vass D. 2002: Lithostratigraphy of Western Carpathians: Neogene

and Buda Paleogene [Litostratigrafia Západných Karpát: neogén

a budínsky paleogén]. Štátny geologický ústav Dionýza Štúra,

Bratislava, 1–204.

Wade B.S., Olsson R.K., Pearson P.N., Huber B.T. & Berggren W.A.

2018: Atlas of Oligocene Planktonic Foraminifera. Cushman

Foundation for Foraminiferal Research Special Publication 46,

1–524.

Wessely G. 1988: Structure and Development of the Vienna Basin in

Austria. In: Royden L.H. & Horvath F. (Eds.): The Pannonian

System. A study in basin evolution. Amer. Assoc. Petrol. Geol.

Mem. 45, 333–346.

Wessely G. 1993: Der Untergrund des Wiener Beckens. In: Brix F. &

Schultz O. (Eds.): Erdöl und Erdgas in Österreich. Naturhis

torisches Museum, Wien, 249–280.

Wessely G. 2006: Niederösterreich. Geologie der Österreichischen

Bundesländer. Geologische Bundesanstalt Wien, Wien, 1–416.

Wessely G., Kröll A., Jiříček R. & Němec F. 1993: Wiener Becken

und angrenzende Gebiete. Geologische Einheiten des präneo-

genen Beckenuntergrundes. Geologische Bundesanstalt Wien,

Wien, 1 map.

Young J.R. 1998: Neogene. In: Bown P.R. (Ed.): Calcareous Nanno-

fossil Biostratigraphy. British Micropalaeontological Society

Publications Series, Chapman & Hall, London, 225–265.