ELSEVIER Contents lists avalable at ScorcaDirct Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology journal homepage: www.elsevier.comilocate/palaco Foraminiferal biofacies and depositional environments of the Burdigalian mixed carbonate and siliciclastic Dam Formation, Al-Lidam area, Eastern Quem Province of Saudi Arabia Septriandi A. Chan **, Michael A. Kaminski *, Khalid Al-Ramadan°, Lameed O, Babalola® * ceases Departmen Rach Coupon Reserva Chartrand testy Peele & Mera, alr 3125, Soa ra > come fie ane Role React King ah Unies fete & Mier eon 326, Arie eee 1 uc 2016 valde one 28 December 016 ere Morphoeoups stem sa ria Fourouteops along 3 west to eas transect inthe Al Liam escarpment of Saud Arabia were investigated to un- derstand the vertical and lsteral istribution of foraminiferal assemblages for paleoenvronmiental reconstruc- ‘on. The samples were processed using the tandaré acetic aid method, which extracts foraminifera from lithe caroonate rocks without cestoying the fossil conten. Te foamcieral assemblages rm the Dam For- ‘maton are dominated by calcareous prcelaneods Millina (Quingeloslia, Pnerpl, Troculna, Commis Semin, Coscinospir, pirating, Pre, Bore) followed by hyaline genera (Eiphidm sp, mona bce Decobiele) and a mince percentage of autre fora, og. Textarea The igh percentage of alcareusporcelaneous axa and he absence of planktonic foraminifera indicate tat the Dam Formation was eposted in restcted carbonate platform envronment very sallow hypersaline shallow ‘marine. ently sloping ramp (iner ramp toni amp) whic ranges from supratia to subtidal wi loa ee! Ditches towards the basin. The formation was deposited nan aid subtropical cma envionment with water fempeatures ranging fom 20 to 35° Based onthe observed assemblage composition, the present day Arabian Gulf can be considered 3s. 2 modem analogue fo the Dam Farman dung Mowe cies {©2016 Elsevier BY. Al cghs reserved 1. Introduction ‘The shallow marine successions of mixed carbonate and silccasties ofthe Miocene Dam Formation are well exposed inthe eastemn past of Saudi Arabia, especially in the Al Lidam area which is considered as the type locality (Powers etal, 1966). In this area, rapid vertical and lat- eral changes of carbonate and sicilasti rocks are observed within the Dam Formation. The significant changes within this formation are con- trolled by sea-level changes, sediment supply, climate, and tectonics during the time of deposition (Powers et al, 1965; Zigler, 2001) “The study of foraminifera from Tertiary formations in Eastern Saud Arabia isnot entirely established, and ther taxonomy is relatively paor- ly known compared with the Mesozoic carbonate and silicclasticfor- ‘mations (Hughes, 1997, 2000, 2005) The latter have been extensively investigated in outcrops as well as fom cored subsurface samples due to ther great economic and strategic significance, being the largest hy- Arocarbon-producing area in the world (Al-Husseini, 1997; Hughes, 2000; Cantell et al, 2014). Recently, the Tertiary formations have be- come an important aspect ofthe Saudi Arabian petroleum system, as they produce hydrocarbons in offshore fields from the Hasbah, ‘mat eds epndiyshencon (SA Ch hpi do.org0. 1015) palaeo2016:2081 01826 2016 Er BV Al hs ese Haruki, and Dam Reservoirs (Hughes et al, 2012) n adition, many ‘ofthe cortelative formations with Dara Formation in other marginal o- cations ofthe Neo-Tethys, suchas th lower Fars Formation in SE Iraq and Kuwait are also known to be hydrocarbon reservoirs (Al-juboury land Mecan, 2008), ‘A number of investigations (eg, Tleel, 1973; Hewaidy, 1991, Al-Saad and Ibrahim, 2002; Al-Ener, 2006) have been conducted on the Miocene Dam Formation in Saudi Arabia and Qatar, Most of the studies dealt wth of focused on lithostratigraph,sedimentology, and sequence stratigraphy. Few studies have ever examined the foramiif- cra in the Dar Formation in particular, no recent study has ever de- tailed the eistribution of foraminifera in the Al-Lidam area, Powers et al. (1966) remains the only study that reported the occurrence of fora- 'minifera from the carbonates ofthe Dam Formation in the Jabal Al- {Lidar area. The original study by Powers etl. (1965) was a preliminary survey for mapping purposes - these authors dd not describe the fora- miniferalspeciesin deta or report their distribution. A detailed study of foraminifera therefore, needs to be conducted in order to ave better ‘understanding of the depositional history and environment, and to as- sist in establishing three-dimensional depositional models of the Dam Formation in the study area, Therefore, the main objectives of tis study are: (1) identification and documentation ofthe foraminiferal axa and foraminiferal biofaciesA hon ea sorry Pecan Peso 458 (2017) 122-137 ‘of the Dam Formation at its type locality (2) analyses of foraminiferal assemblages using morphogroups with the objective of interpreting paleobathymetric and paleoenvironmental changes that prevailed at the time of deposition, and (3) tounderstand the vertical and lateral dis- tribution of foraminiferal taxa and morphogroups in response to lithofacies and palevenvironmental changes. The poor preservation of the recovered foraminifera specimens (occurring mainly as molds) in the analyzed samples, limited their identification to the genus level 2. Study area, “The study area is located in the Al-idam escarpment area ofthe Eastern Province of Saudi Arabia located between 26°15'30° N to '49°28/30" E and 26°14'15" N to 49°31'30" (Fig. 1). The escarpment ‘whichis approximately 80 km west of Dhahran, can be easily acessed via Dammam-Riyadh highway. The exposure examined inthe current suey is located south-southwest ofthe lower and upper par type sec- tions ofthe Dam Formation (Fg. 1B), which were previously reported by Powers etal, (1955), Mixed carbonate and silcicastic facies ofthe Dam Formation (Fig. 2) ate very well exposed in the study area, with ‘outcrop directions trending mostly NW-SE (Fig. 3) 3, Geological framework ‘Thelargest outcrops of Miocene rocks are exposed intheeastern and northeastern parts of the Arabian Peninsula (Ziegler. 2001). The ‘Miocene formations are distributed from the western United Atab Emirates (UAE), the south of Qatar, eastern province of Saudi Arabia, tw the southeast of Kuwait and Iraq (Fig. 1A) Geologically, the study area is situated within the Miocene and Pliocene sedimentary rock terrain (Pig. 1A). Miocene and Pliocene rocks in eastern Saudi Arabia cansist of three formations. From the coldest ro youngest (Fig. 2), these are: (1) the Lower Miocene Hadrukh Formation, (2) the Lower Miocene (Burdigalian) Dam Formation, and (3) the Upper Miocene to Lower Pliocene Hofuf Formation. In general, the lithology suggests deposition in continental to shallow marine environments Generic Geoloic Map ‘tthe Artin Penta de 3P Fg. 1() Genre poo ofthe Abia ein (moeied rom Powe 1966), showing te Moree and Poe ek sein he easter pat of Sa Abi (8) ‘et pntogaph or Carle ath stow the oalop ty leton( o).vs SA chan etl Polar, oan, ese 49 (2017) 122-137 fpenion crock] ace [Ma] osPosiion | recrome a 7] ae | = perme | |_solanind | zoucamn se 3 z Teton G) w na 3) § [moan g) 3 Gols | 2 mere — aa] "4 Gerkepare | orca | cme | | Baan | my z| | 8 es eet z| | 8 ree | | 3 | mmm van & 88 # ae y as a Bortonion etree & Siu &| Fig.2 Teconosrasgrapic column of Cenoae formation in Ester Saul Abia (reed rom Wer 1298) ‘The Dam Formation lies disconformably on the Lower Miacene Hadrukh Formation (calcareous to silty sandstone and sandy lime- stone), and isin turn disconformably overlain by the sanéstone ofthe Hofuf Formation (Fg. 2). Ths, however, depends upon the location, be- cause in the Dammam Dome aea, the Dam Formation uncoaformably ‘overlies ether the Rus ar the Darnmam formations (Weljermars, 1999), ‘Asa consequence ofa major Early Mlocene transgression over uncon formity surfaces, produced by a pre-Neogene episode of eresion and non- Aepostion, the Dam Formation was deposited ina restricted carbonate platform environment (Ziegler, 2001). This took place ina sein within he Zagros foreland and foredcep basin during the colisian between the Arabian plate and Eurasian plates along the Zagros Thrust Zone due to the separation of the Arabian plate with African plate (Fig. 2) which began in Oligocene time (30 Ma, Sharland et al, 2001). The deposition of the Dam Formation took place in a very shallow ida flat setting under warm cimatie hypersaline conditions, as suggested bythe predominance of shallow marine, warm-waterfossis suchas stomatolites, benthic far rminifera corals, and mollusks (Powers etal, 1965; Tlee, 1973; Inem, 1985), Te collision between the Arabian and Eurasian plats led to the Uplft ofthe region and caused the deposition ofa huge amount of conti- ental supply within the foredeep and foreland basin (Ziegler, 2001), 4. Methodology ln total, 80 samples from four outcrop exposures ($8, $23, $1, and 2) along a west-east transect direction in the Al-Lidam area were processed and analyzed in this study (Fig, 3), The main lithology of the samples consists of carbonate, mar, clay, and sandstone. In this study, the same set of samples that have been collected from the field fora sedimentological investigation (Bashi, 2015) was used. The stud- ied samples were collected fom every bed respectively. The sample col- ection depends upon the bedding thickness, one sample was collected {rom a tin bed (10 to 30cm) and three samples were collected from a thick bed (70 cm) which represents the lower, middle, and upper parts ofthe bed respectively. The collected samples were processed using standard micropaleon- {ological techniques Perographic thin sections were studied in order to determine the lthotacies and bofacies within the carbonate rocks. An ‘optical petrographic microscope equipped with digital camera was used for qualitative identification of microfossils from the thin sections. For {quantitative identification, the specimens extracted from the carbonate and silcclasic residues were examined under a binocular stereoscopic ‘microscope, Examining foraminifera i thin section ha imitations. For ‘example, it only allows a one dimensional view ofthe specimens, thus ‘making proper taxonomical identification very dificult 2011, 2015; Coccini and Premol-siva, 2015), This is duet the dificuiky in ienifying and distinguishing the species and even some genera (Reold and Herero, 2004). Therefore, we also used acetic acid treatment ‘wextact mcrofssl from tified carbonate without destroying the mi- «toossl content (Lier, 2000; Reold and Herrero, 2004), ‘The microfosils were sorted into faunal-type micropaleontological slides and enumerated, The slides were propetly labelled with sample hhames and sample codes, The well-preserved specimens were photographed using a digital camera mounted om a Nikon 1500 ste- ‘teo-microscope in the Geosciences Department at King Fahd University Petroleum & Minerals, 5. Results 5:1. Lithofacies ‘The Dam Formation in Al-Lidam area showed cyclic sedimentation and significant vertical and lateral changes between the studied out- ‘rops (Fig, 3) Seven lithfacies have been determined from the studied sections. The lithotacies determination was based on the field descrip- tion reported by Basiri (2015) and petrographic thin section desc tion (Fig. 4) The carbonate lithofacies which account for about 85% are the mast abundant lithofacies in this formation Siliciclastic lithofaces account for 15% and are mostly located in the western part ofthe studied section (Fig. 3), 5.14. Mudstone and evaporites (ME) The lihofaces found altos in all the studied sections (Fig, 3) iscam- posed of carbonate mudstone and evaporites. tis mainly characterized ‘by massive, thinly laminated locally 05~1 thick greenish to red mud- stone, The lithofaies is weathered, showing some desiecation cracks. The mineralogy consists of dalomite and anhydrite (Fig 4A). No orami- niferal are observed in this ithofaces 5.12, Sandstone and mudstone (SM) ‘This lithofacies is encountered in exposures 8 and 23 in the western partof studied area. eis absent in exposures 1 and 2in the eastern part (Fig. 3). The lthofacies is composed of calcareous quart sandstone and ‘thinly bedded mudstone (Fig. 4B). Its characterized by yellow, reddish, silty to fine grains, the presence of trace fosis(Rhizoiths), wavy bed- ding, mud drapes, tidal bundles, and climbing ripples. The thickness reaches about 3.5 m. No foraminiferal assemblage was found in this lichfaces. 5.14, Stomatol limestone (SL) This lithofaies is obsecved in all stdled outerap exposures with di- ferent thickness. The thicknesses ranging from 0.20 to 050 m,A hon eto orgy PlrcimasingPbewaog 458 (2017) 122-137 ms Section 23 Fg, 2. Lnaton of tated aterpsin the Aida es vec and ater bon fitch he std so (sks 2015. “Morphologically, three types of stromatalites were scribed from this formation: laterally linked hemispheroid (LLE), discrete spheroids (SS), discrete vertical spheroids (SH), and combination forms (Fig. 4C). ‘The stromatolites cap the heteroithic beds ofboth the carbonate and ciclastc facies, and are also found within the trough cross-bedded oidal grainstone layers in the upper pat ofthe section suchas in expo- sutes 1, and 2 (Fig. 3). 5.14, Skeletal peloidal ~ooidal grainstone (StOG) ‘Thisithofaces is mostly found inthe lower part ofexposures 8, and 23 (Fig. 3). Ithas a creamy to white color with an average thickness of “40 cm, and is internally laminated, Petrographic thin sections show a _grainstone texture, wich is composed of peloids, micritized oot, and skeletal grains (foraminifera and bivalve) (Fg. 4D). The foraminif- eral assemblage is characterized by an abundance of species Peneropis and Elphidum, followed by Quingueloculina,Triloculina, Coscinospra, (ibicides, Discorbinell, and Cormuspira. Gastropods and bivalves also present asa minor constituent, 5.15, Skeletal oodalgrainstone (SOG) ‘This Iithoacies was found only in two exposures, exposures 23, and 2 (Fig. 3) Itconsits of yellow to white color, medium to coarse grained (gtainstone) The lithotaces is predominantly characterized by ooids, skeletal fragments (benthic foraminifera, bivalve, gastropods), and ‘quartz grains (Fig 4E). The thickness of this lithotacies ranges fram 10 cm to 60 em. The sedimentary structures consist of herringbone «ross bedding, trough cross bedding and planar cross bedding, The fora- _minifra are represented by a rare, accurrenees of milolids,Elphidium, and Peneropis 5.16. Skeletal packstone- grainstone (SPG) ‘This lithofaces with an average thickness of 40 cin is well developed. Inall studied exposures. I has yellow to brown, medium to very coarse grained, skeletal fragments ne fo medium peloids and angular to subangular quartz grains (ig 4F). The foraminifera assemblages chat- acterized by an abundances of mililids (Quingueloculina,Trloculina), followed by Elphiium, Peneropls, Coscinospra, Operculina, Cormuspira, and Cibicids. The occurrences of reworked larger foraminifera (Fig 44H) indicate the likely presence ofa patch reef adjacent tothe study 5.17. Quartz skeletal wackestone ~packstone (QSWP) Thisithofaces found inal the stucied exposures, is one ofthe most dominant ithofaces (Fig. 3). The thickness ranges from 1 to 35m. The litnofacess characterized by massive, white to creamy color wackestone tw packstone fabric with well-rounded muddy intraformational pebbles (2-5 cm). Thin section shows that this lithofaies is dominated by fine ‘Quast gran, and few skeletal grains (foraminifera and bivalves) (Fig. 4G). The foraminifera assemblage is represented by rare presence of three to five specimens of Elphidium sp, milioids, nodosarlé, and Textularia sp.6 SA ch etl Polaron, Poa, ese 49 (2017) 22-137 Fig. thts cepreseatve af heDan Formation the Aidan ate (4) Mudsone and evap (8) Sunstone an mute ()Stomastinestene () Seta peda fs grnstone (Felt sol rnstone (lta paso 52. Foraminifera morphogroups ‘The main objective of determining morphotypes and morphogroups inthis study isto attempt co reveal the paleoenvironmental changes reflected by the foraminiferal assemblages for each lithofaces. The ‘main idee of using morphotypes and morphogroups was orginally de- rived from the agglutinated and calcareous benthic foraminiferal ‘morphogroups established by Jones and Charnock (1985), Corliss and Chea (1988), Nagy (1992), Nagy et al. (1995), Van den Aker et al (2000), etean et al. (2011), Setoyama etal (2011), and Murray etal. (2011) ender a. (2008) applied morphogroup analysis to the Mio= cene benthic foraminiferal assemblages from the Congo fan, offshore ‘Angola. Although the genera present in the Dam Formation ae cifer- ent, we can still use the main idea from previous morphogroup studies to construct a morphogroup classification for the Miocene of Saudi stan wth rere re rarer and (6) Guts acetone poke ‘Arabia, This approach has only been applied in Saudi Arabia to the Shuiaiba Formation by Hughes (2005), ‘Murray (2006) defined morphogroups/morphotypes as a group of {orm having similar test morphologies rather than taxonomic simiar- ty. Corliss and Chen (1988) established morphotypes as groups of fora- ‘miniferal species on the basis of thei test shape. The idea of combining foraminiferal taxa into morphotypesbased on their general morphology ‘ests on the assumption that there is a relationship betweea “oem and “funetion” of te foraminiferal test (Nagy etal, 1995). Inthis study, four morphogroups were determined and are desig nated alphabetically from A to D (Fig 5). Each ofthese groups, A,B and D are further subdivided into four, two, three, and’ two ‘morphotypes respectively. The combination of morphotypes into 'morphogroup categories is mainly based on the test morphology in- uding chamber arrangement, and general outline, inferred if habitatSA chon ea organ Plecina ola Peace 459 (2017) 122-197 wy Morpho Life 5 References of Morphotype Main Genera ithofacie groups eres Test Form | position Living Specimens _|tithofacies Biconvex avato (1981, 1988) swe pina co vida al Panipat | spatow intial | P*% | urck and Muray (1981) | $99; (6.7, 90.1-3) Corliss and Chen 988) | _SPG Ftened depresed Penerplis | Kioto (1981, 1988) $06 a Pansy Fpitaunal — | Qpercfina | Sumroc and Muray (1981) | SPOG A (6, 7.0046) sro Uncoing Spioina a Plnpic Erion) Cascinospina | Muay (1991) seoc (8. 7,007 -10) se Tubular Cormspira Ad Plaga pitaunat | COPPA | uray (2006) src (shoo) Biconvex ibis BI ‘Trochospia pital Rotalia (ty eee ammonia | Karte sroc B ie. » Kitzato (1981 1988) ao aoe Swick and Niray (1981) Be “roca Epifaunal | Picornell ig. 8002) Mi ca Quinguclocutina | Epitiunal to | Ovindueloctina “loctina | Shalow faunal | Icing ig. 81038) Mita janes | Corts and chen (1988) C je Prero siclowinnat | 27" | GoriscandFasd930)” | Sec ar ‘Murray (2000) Mio 3 Fusiform Epinal erls " Spherical Peed | cae 7 (Ge 8209) Cytingcal | rece pitas © | Sifosomella bt Uniserat | Shallow infaunal | “Nodbartd (Gg. 800.1012) Kitano (1981, 1988) D Stock nd Muay 9st] OSWP Murray (1991) Agztintad D2 Biserial Infaunal Textularia (fg. 890.1314) Fe. cacanous enh foramina mphogrupe and mophnype irene according sel mophology. -ither living onthe surface ofthe sediments or within the sediments (epifaunal or infaunal) (Fig, 6). Examples of each morphotype are summarized in Figs. 5,7, and 8 along with references of living specimens for each morphotype by Kitazato (1981, 1988), Sturrock and Murray (1981) In general, the total assemblages are dominated by the epifaunal tana (Fig. 6). The dominance of epifaunal assemblages is typical of shallow matine environment (Corliss and Fots, 1960). The three main, ‘orphotypes that dominate the studied formation are comprised of the Mililid-Quingueloculina (C1), fattened depressed planispiral (42), and biconvex planispiral (A1), which represent 40%, 26%, and 192 respectively (Fig 9). The other eight morphotypes (43, A4 BI, B2, (©, ©3, DI, and D2) occur as minor constituents ofthe assemblages each amounting between 1% and 8% 53. Foraminifera idenicaion ‘The reslts of foraminiferal analysis rom acetic acid treated samples and thin sections fom the Dam Formation inthe Al-Lidam area ident- fied 45 species of benthic foraminifera belonging to 24 genera, 16 famn- ilies, and three suborders (Table 1). The samples were dominated only by benthic foraminiferal genera whereas the planktonic foraminifera are completely absentva A Gan ea beget Plecimasing Peso 458 (2017) 122-137 Epifaunal Sea tere ig 6 Cleaeoas beth rail merpogoup ie ait pening above the sre epaulets fauna) ‘The taxonomy used in this study is based on the Loeblch and Tappan (194) monograph and previous studies on the Miocene from the Indo Pacific, Paratethys, and Mediterranean regions by Drooger and Kaasschieter (1955), Bhatia and Mohan (1959), Mohan and Bhatt (1968), Popescu (1979), Cicha et al. (1998), ALSaad and Ibrahim (2002), Reuter et al. (2008), Gonera (2012), and Hughes (2014) Due to the preservation state, most of the micrfossl specimens in the samples occur as molds with their outer walls dissolved duting dia- genesis (Figs. 7 and 8)-Thereore itis dificult to identify some generato the species level. Hence, most of the identification cartied out in this study is mastly limited to the generic level (Table 1) “The assemblages recovered from the Dam Formation inthe A-Lidam area are characterized by the dominance of Miliolina species (Quinqueloculina, Peneroplis, Trloculina, Cornuspira, Sigmoilnita, Coscinospita Spirlia, Pyrgo. Borelis), which prevail over the Rotaliina (Flphiium, Ammonia, Cbicides, Dscorbinella) and Textularina (Table 1), The foraminifera encountered in this study are listed in Table {and selected identified specimens ae illustrated in Figs 7 and 8 Fig. 10 shows the percentage of dominant suborders and genera ‘within the studied formation In total, the foraminiferal assemblage is composed of three main suborders of which 75% are accounted for by calcareous porcelaneous (Miliolina), 24% are calcareous hyaline (Rotaliina). and Vhave an agglutinated wall (Fig. 10A)-The most abun- dant genera from the Miliolina (Fig. 108) includes Quingueloculina (27%), Peneroplis (22%), Trlaculina (13%), Cescinospra (98), and Sigmoitnita (5%). The suborder Rotaliina, epresented by Elphidium (178), Ammonia (5%), Abicides, and Discorbinella (1%) (Fig. 10C). 6.Discussion 61. The age of the Dam Formation Biostratigraphic calibration forthe age of the Dam Formation is if- cult due to the lack of identified age-diagnostic microfossils such as planktonic foraminifera, and als the fact that the Dam Formation is un- ferlain and overlain by silcclastic Hofuf and Hadruki formations ‘which have no age-constraining microfosis, Selected carbonate sam- ples fom the Dam Formation were aso sent out forthe study of alear- ous nannofossils for age determination, however, the calcareous rnannofossl samples did not yield any recovery. Powers eal (1966) and Powers (1968) dated the Dam Formation in Saudi Arabia as a Middle Miocene age based on the occurence of Ostrea laximarginata, Echinocyamus sp. and the benthic foraminifer Archaias angulatus Cavelier (1970) assigned 2 Middle to Late Miocene age to the Dam Formation in Qatar based on the presence of Archaias angufats. Hewaidy (1991), and Khalifa and Malmoud (1983) also re- ported the age of the Dam Formation as Early to Middle Miocene (Burdigalian-Langhan) from two studied sections in Qatar. Recent studies conducted from the southwestern Qatar (AL-Saad and Ibrahim, 2002) and from Jabal Midra Al-Junubi in eastern Saudi Arabia (Al- LEnezi, 2005), used the occurrence of Borelis melo melo to assign a ‘Burdigalian (late Early Miocene). Although te stratigraphic range of Borels melo is much wider (Jones tal, 2006), the presence ofthe benthic foraminifera Borels melo melo provides evidence ofa late Early Miocene to early Middle Miocene age, ané has been reported by studies carried out on shallow marine, and lagoonal carbonates from the Mediterranean region and Indo- Pacific Province (Adams, 1976, 1984 and Jones etal, 2006), the Qo Formation in ran (Daneshian and Dana, 2007; Reuter et al, 2009), from the Asmari Formation in the northwest of the Zagras Basin (Vaziri-Moghaddam etal, 2010; Shabafroazet al, 2015), from the SE 7Zagros Basin in south Iran (Heidari ct al, 2014), the Dam Formation in (Qatar by Al-Saad and Ibrahim (2002), the Dam Formation in UAE (Peebles, 1999) and the Wadi Waqb member in nortnwest Saudi Arabia (Hughes, 2014), ‘The Dam Formation inthe Al-Lidam escarpment therefore is assigned. .Burdigalian to Langhian late Early Miocene-early Middle Miocene) age based on the presence of Borels melo melo Fig 1) found in one ample (sample 4A) in Outerop 23 (Fig. 3). According to Fawwaz AL-Khald (per- ‘onal communication, 2016) te outrops inthe Al-Lidam area represent ‘the middle part of the Dam Formation in general. This statement is also supported by the existence of Borls melo melo in the studied samples. ‘The suecessin in the Al-Lidam atea was likely deposited in a relatively shallower paleoenvironment compared to the Dam Formation reported {rom southwest Qatar and the Daramam Dame area, 62, Depositional environment The high percentage of porcelaneous Milolina fauna which prevail, ‘over the hyaline Rotaliina taxa, followed by a minor percentage of ag- slutinated Textularina (Fig. 10A), the absence of planktonic foraminil era, and all of the dominant genera present in this study (Table 1) reveal that the Dam Formation was deposited ona restriced carbonate platform (Fig. 12), very shallow marine hypersaline environment on a gently sloping ramp (inner samp) (Fig 12). The Miliolina (porcelaneous) are the dominant suborder found ‘within the studied samples, and ae present in almost al lithfacies ex- cept in the ME, SM, and SL ithofaces. The abundance of Millia is an indication of warm to temperate inner shelf shallow water. They nor- ‘mally thrive in both normal and high saline environments (Brasir,A chon eta orgy Plies Pbewaoy 458 (2017) 122-137 a cM Bae Oo 2%_2% 1% 1% 1%_O% O% 26% ig 9. Percentage fhe tl ase fo ech morpho 1975; Hottinger et al, 1993; Haunold etal, 1997; Cheri etal, 1997; GGonera, 2012), Peneroplis, Quinqueloculina,Trilculina, Eiphiaivm, and the rotalild Ammonia are widely developed within lagoonal environ- iment in the Arabian Gulf eg, Murray, 1991; Amao tal, 2016), ‘The abundance of Quingueloculina and Trifaculina which are domi- nantly found in the SPG, SPOG, SOG, and QSWP lithofacies indicate that the Dam Formation was deposited ina very hypersaline environ- ‘ment, with salinity ranging from 37 to 70%. and water temperatures varying from 16 to 40 °C (Musray, 1991). and water depths ranging fom 12 to 18 m (Murray, 2006; Parker and Gischler, 2015). The distri bution of peneroplids especially in the SOG, SPOC, and SPC ithofaces is related tothe presence of vegetation within the very shallow marine or lagoonal envionment astheir living behaviors usually epifaunal onthe substrate, and epiphytic on seagrass of seaweeds (Murray, 2006). Seagrass normally occurs ina shallow, subtidal environment tothe in- tertidal zone because they are strongly influenced by light, which is needed for photosynthesis. The occurrence of Elphidium inthe faunal as- semblage also indicates that the environment is very shallow ~ not deeper than afew to a dozen of meters. The green algae present inthe canal system of Ephidium shells have alight requirement which is Tablet locene foraminers ofthe Dam Forman Suber Ay eau Wallsotare “eatulina— Texueae Teulrie agit Naloina Aol ore Exes Pm egaroratne Satins Penrose Cousnoine Sprane otaling——Amphisteginése——_nphiseina aeons ‘des Dicridse Deore pclae ‘rbrepiden phn Noni Padeie Nutnmuliiewe Operate Pineraindse ——Plnreina Slestomelidae Sutra Sytem seceding ach a Tapp (1960, ‘obtainable within few meters of water depth (Leutenegger, 1984). Parker and Gischier (2015) reported Peneropis-Elphidium assemblages are typical ofthe nner ramp environment with water depths <5 m.Am- ‘moniasa common genus found in shallow-racksh-lagoonal envion- ‘ments (Martin, 1952; Murray, 1981). “Most ofthe genera present inthe recovered foraminiferal assem- Dlages are typical of high-energy environments characterized by strong currents and tidal movements. n their living habitats, foraminifers suc as miliolids (Miliolina), elphidids (SIphidiidae). Ammonia, Nonion, Cibicides, and Borelis are free-living forms, mobile, and have a strong test form asa survival strategy for extremely agitated water conditions (Gonera, 2012). During deposition time, the study area was affected by ‘idal currents ranging from 1 to 2 m and strong waves from persistent [NW shamal winds that generate waves several meters high (Parker and Gischler, 2015). ‘The presence of reworked coral ef fragments and large framinit- crasuch as alveolinis,lepidocyinids, and opercalinids (Fig. 13H) sug- gests the likely existence ofa small patch ref in a shallow carbonate setting towards the basin. Teel (1973) in his study of the Dammam Dome area described the Dam Formation in Jabal Urim Er Rus asa refal limestone (coral algal faces) and interpreted it asa pinnacte reef envi- ronment. The absence of large and laterally continuous coral reefs and the low percentage of larger foraminifera might be attributed to ex- {reme salinity and the influx of silicilastics, which are not favorable concitions for the development of coral reefs (Rieg] eta, 2010}. The existence of stromatolites within the Dam Formation (SL lithofaces) supports this depositional environment interpretation Algal stromatolites are typically formed under warm climatic conditions ina shallow subtidal to lower intertidal envigonment (Irtem, 1985). ‘They normally developed when the deposition of detrital sediment to the coastal area was low or absent, and the occurrence of stromatolites inthe sequence might have been enhanced either by hypersalinity or hgh current action in normal salinity conditions (Reid et al, 1995), ‘Based on the sedimentological descriptions andthe absence of fra- sminifera within the Mudstone and Evaporites (ME), Sandstone and ‘Mudstone (SM), and Stromatoltic limestone (Si lthofacies (Fig 3) these three lithofaces are interpreted as deposited in a continental area (supratidal co shallow intertidal) (Fig. 13A, B,C), The skeletal peloigal-ooidal grainstone (SPOG) and skeletal ovidal grainstone (SOG) i characterized by abundant Peneropi,Eiphidivm, and lower percentages of miliolés (Quingueloculin and Triloculina), which ingi- cates that this Iithofacies was deposited in a subtidal environment {rom inner ramp to ooltie shoal (Fig. 13D, E)-The dominance of peloids and ood is common ina shallow intertidal to subtidal carbonate sys- ‘em (Fugel, 2010)-The percentage of mills increases in the Skeletal Peloidal packstone-grainstone (SPC) lthofaces which reveal 2 more ‘open matine environment (middle ramp) (Fig. 13F). Additionally, the presence of reworked coral fragments and larger foraminifera within this lithofacies indicates the presence of a patch reef (Fig. 13H). The (Quartz skeletal wackestone-packstone (QSWP) lithofacies charaeter- ‘ed by fine textures, structureless and massive layers, suggests alow energy environment (Fig, 13G). The foraminifera ae rae, and repre- sented only by three to five taxa; Elphdium sp. milolids, nadosarids, and Textularia, The presence of nodosarids and Textuaria indicates a {eeper environment, lower middle ramp to auter ramp (Parker and ‘ischler, 2015). The interpretation ofthe depositional environment is als supported by a comparison between the Miocene Dam Formation and the present day Arabian Gif as discussed below. 663, Modern analogue ‘Based on the observed foraminiferal assemblage composition from. te Miocene Dam Formation, the present day Arabian Gulf canbe con- sidered as a modetn analogue for the formation. The ecological and li ‘matic conditions have not changed significantly since the deposition of the Dam Formation inthe late Early Miocene. In the modern Arabiani auinguetocuna Tiloestina coscinosira Sigmelinta c phim é Sites 0 5 1 15 2 2 30 Fi. 10. quae of frame aenblaes ate Da Farman. (A Pecenag of Cull, the waves currents range ftom 4 to 6 m (Loughland e al, 2072), tidal currents 04 to 42 m (Al-Zamel eta, 2008), and water tempera~ tute ranges from 20 to 40°C (Rieg etal, 2010). The salinity ranges from 40 to 50% (Arslan etal, 2015) and reaches up to 70% in some re- stricted lagoons. The average rainfalls = 80 mmiyear and the evapora- tion rates range from 140 t0 500 mmyear (Reynolds, 1983), The Arabian Gulf adjacent tothe Arabian sie (Fig. 14), called the ‘Arabian shallow shelf or Arabian Homocline (Purser and Seibold, 1973), shows a complex interplay between carbonate silccastic and evaporite sedimentation (Strohmengeret a, 2011). Iti also fequently cited as an example ofa mixed carbonateslcclastc environment, and shallow sea carbonate ramp formed in a aid, subtropical climate en- vironment, Regionally, the Arabian Gulf has been used as an analogue for other formations such as the Oigocene-Miocene Asmar Formation in SW tran (Purser, 2012), and the Cretaceous Shu’aiba Formation in the Arabian Peninsula (Hughes, 1997) The present day Arabian Homocline is characterized by a gently sloping ramp, very shallow marine restricted hypersaline environment, and the development of sabkhas in supratidal setting, microbial tidal flats, tidal lagoons, and tidal channels that prograde from intertidal into the shallow subtidal area Its characterized by the presence of high energy skeletal-ooidal sand shoals in the subtidal area, and scattered coal reefs tawarés the asin (Loreau and Purser, 1973; Rie ‘etal, 2010) (Fi, 13). The foraminiferal fauna found inthis study area are typical of a shallow intertidal to subtidal environment. Inthe ‘upratidsl environments the foraminifera were absent (Fig. 13), ‘Strong and persistent NW Shamal winds often generate several me- ters high waves especially during the summer between June ang August (Riegl etal, 2010). These waves are among one of the mechanisms ‘iil ave responsible for supplying abundant sicilastic materials to the sea, mixed with the deposition of carbonate (Koeshidayatullah et al, 2016), Another mechanism that contnbutes to the existence of elas- {ic content is coastal dunes and beach sands reworked inthe foreshore environment (Wilson, 1975; ALRamadan, 2014) Several authors have investigated modern foraminifera from diffe cent parts of the Arabian shallow shelf. These studies include those from the southern Arabian margin (Murray, 1965, 1966ab.c; Hughes Clarke and kei, 1973, and Cheri etal, 1997), from Tarat Bay Saud ‘Arabia (Ahmed, 1991), from the foreshore and small lagoon in eastern Bahrain (Basson and Murray, 1995; Arslan etal, 2015, and Amao et 1, 2016), fom Qatar (Hitm and Hit, 2000), The foraminiferal ditri- bution froma Kuwait Bay was studied by Parker and Gischler (2015), The above listed studies reported foraminiferal assemblages dominated by porcelaneous taxa (Quinqulocutina, rilocutina, Peneropls,Coscinospra) {rom shallow waters (<18 m dept) ofthe Arabian Gull. Hyalne forami- nifera increase basinwards, and dominate at water depths >18 m (Fig 15). All of the foraminiferal faunas reported indicate a hypersaline environment, The morphotype analysis of the current study shows that >70% planispiral morphotypes dominate at depths ranging from 0 to 5 m, ‘while milioline mosphotypes are predominant from 5 to 18 m water depth. A mix of trochospiral,planispiral, and milioline morphotypes Fig 1. Mio Brel lo oom ee a pega Sake: 100) (A and ares lo rel presence in thin eto (B)A hon eta orgy PlrcimatsingPbeowao 459 (2017) 122-137 1 ae found at water depths »18 m, eifaunal tata are dominant at water depths <5 m, whereas infaunal taxa are abundant in the deeper waters ranging from 5 to 16 m (Parker and Gischler, 2015) (Fg. 15) 7.Conelusions Eleven foraminiferal morphotypes were determined inthis study and are designated alphabetically: (At) Biconvex Panispital,(A2) Flat tened Depressed Planispiral,(A3) Uncoling Planispral, (A4) Tubular Planispiral,(B1) Biconvex Pianspiral, (82) Planoconvex Tochospial, (C1) Miliolid-Quingueloculina-Trileculina, (C2) Mililid-Pyrgo, (C3) Agglutinated Bisrial. Overall the total assemblages are dominated by epifaunal taxa, and interpreted as indicating a shallow marine environ= ‘ment. Three main morphotypes dominate the studied formation: these are (CI) Miliolid-Quinquelculina-Trilculina, (A2) Flattened depressed Planispiral and (AL) biconvex planispiral, which represent 40%, 26%, and 19% ofthe assemblage, respectively. The other eight morphotypes ‘remain minor constituents ofthe assemblages, each amounting to be- ‘ween 1% and 8% ‘Atotal of 46 species of benthic foraminifera that belong to24 genera, ‘epresenting 16 families, and three suborders was identified from the Dam Formation. The asserablages recovered from the studied formation Miloldtusform spherical, (D1) Cylindrical Uniseil, and (D2) are dominated by calereousporclancns forms which acount for 75 Inner Ramp Mid Ramp satel — aon et oe | Stromatoites at Q Peneroplis ee se Q erin canis en ® QY Ammonia — a @ Triloculina ct @ Quinqueloculina ry © Borelis melo — ve @ Textularia a Soraecrae on ssa | Porceleneous oe eee eee Hyaline 1 Hypersatine (HI Normal Marine BBE Hyposatine Aggiutinated Flot rotaina and Pranktonie forms Fig. 12.(A) Modes ofthe epostiona ensitnmen of carbonate ramps characterized bythe éamananceoffxaminera 8) Wall sruures agaist eminent, which ndcates2 Iypersaineeaveonment ter ray 200) (C) Tera lt sed on the percentage of lina a tli vss panko rar, showing the Dam oration Was posed an este carsoute puta Mey, 1)a SA.Chn et Polar, Poa ese 49 (2017) 22-137 Fig. 12.50 depestonal mode af te Da Ferman fe ea hoc, Character by bre alert te west ia aisate by poclanees frre athe Ine amp ang me rap. (A) ME (8) sv (c) t(D) SPO (E) 0G. (FPG (6) QSWP (1) Large lramuieral Faget ound a sample TO which plea oor et tienen (1 aban (23) Ippon ae (4) opens BS ees o A Fig. 14 (A) Baye pote Abana soning the slowest pt cent the Abu ean deeper awards the aan ener Stoenge etl. 201) 8) Ce ‘ew of reser ay Arabian Cus been See Arabia Baan Shown the epson osha the cnet area supatea, cole ard n sublines, an he “isrntin of ath refs inthe open marine rronmen, Te essen ofthe northwest Shama winds uppiy abundant silastic mater and depot them i the mache turret: gre miedo eeu ed Pus 187A hon eta orgy PlrciatsingPbewaog 458 (2017) 122-137 135 meron, Md Ramp Outer Ramp A Sm 6.5m 18m B Backstone to Granstone Porcelaneous dominated old skootat granstone ‘Sea Level malsk Taine doiiod Fg. 15Disrbtonoferamines slang te sasher Ashen ane The poling onan te shallows prt wheresthe yan fre abun st opine 18 (ose om ater ane Goel 213). ofthe assemblage (Quingueloculina, enerops,iloculina,Cormspio, ‘Sigmotnta, escinospia, Spiraling, Pyrgo, Bore), The Rotana account {or24% (Eiphiium, Ammonia, Cicdes, Discorbinella) are only othe assemblage consists of agglutinated Textlarina taxa Based on the presence of Borlis melo mel, the age of the Dam For- mation in the Al-Lidam escarpment was assigned as Burdigalian- Langhian (late Early Miocene to early Midle Miocene). The species Borels melo melo has been reported by several authors in deposits of late Early Miocene to eariy Middle Miocene age ‘The high percentage of porcelaneous Miliolina foraminifera which prevail over hyaline Rotaliina taxa, followed by a minor percentage of “Textulaina the absence of planktonic foraminifera andallofthe dom- inant genera presenti te studied sections reveal thatthe Dam Forma- tion was deposited in avery shallow marine hypersaline environment ‘ona gently sloping ramp (inner ramp), Based on the observed foraminiferal assemblage composition from the Miocene Dam Formation the present day Arabian Gulf canbe cn- sidered as a modern analogue. The cutent depositional environmental conditions have not changed significantly since the deposition ofthe Dam Formation inate Early Miocene time ‘Acknowledgements ‘We wish to thank Dr. Wyn Hughes, Prof Tadeusz Pery, and Prof Sorin Filipescu for their constructive reviews, We thank Abduljamiu ‘Amao and Eiichi Setoyama for helpful comments, and Micropress Europe (krakéw) forthe use offalities. We thank the Geosciences De- partment, King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals (KFUPM), and the Research Institute (Center of lategrative Petroleum Research) at KFUPM for providing the opportunity an laboratory facilities to carty ‘ut this esearch, We are grateful fr the support provided by the Dean- ship of Scientific Research (KFUPM) under their Research: Group pro- gram (Grants RC1401 and IN12028). References As 1976 Lag fis an ee on sty he Meee “cpr humor uracil Pol 20 (1 4-68 ca ln gee are rrr ewoan ysl el vts nthe ‘ova of atu pines hi, WT ds), Pc Neogene ath ip etn bays ne chao ren ae es vd ABS. a, Reco bent runes tom Tat ay, Aaln Calcot ot ‘SoA | Mtopaaenal 101) 3-58 ‘Ase 520 Cpt een hoc FrminesFomase Sal ab Cuba Manet em ese Rn ab Uery esse Mess ‘vsti 97h sequence arp ofthe wes abd sae abe cu cesar 9 (9 atm ‘usa, Al Meta 2008. The Wile Mee Ft Lowes ars Frain, om cots 3 3). toh ‘Sin atin, M202 Satay. mropseosor a paleoesory ofthe ‘Mie bu aman Gar teanaba 8 ‘stan a014 Digs Hole Bex cmpartive oy between the Aan Co and te Cl of Ag abe) abla, cot 7 Ct. zie Az, AS MA Nes, SR, ALRIGH,A, 2008 Becta om aia tcc ao yon evo Ment hoe ‘anu. Kari MA. Stay, 2016 Dest ofa aslo ce Sted gona Ban Matopacentaogy 52) 57-1 ‘san, Kt MLA Towabla Biya M, Sabo, onal 2018. Sana varatansenionmeialptametr, she sanding op asset ot Bence orominecs near bri slam Gall eae sate 3 ied ah MAA. 208 High Reson Faces At and Soquene utirapy of Mace “seb Dpto crs formsson op lL ea ae {enrwiore ose Abin Upshaw of soe es King oe ‘Sat fee savinee Sasa, aay) 995m inn er pec oil r= ‘rata Abin al Meeps, 01 ‘shat SR Moan 1058 Moe [argo fmf fom Kahin ese teaser, D175 Morplogy so aia of ing benthic mines ‘Cie carte tonents Re ip Niepatont 7 (3) 37-578 Cane Di Ncboan Fe Hughes, CW Mil, A, Dbl, AC. bah ST ‘Notion AK. 2014 Tetiyan peiaum syste of Sue aka ren Sse he ety Region Mem). 18 pp 12-0016 SA Can ea begat PlecinasingPbewsog 458 (2017) 122-137 aver, C1970. Geno esrnion athe ate Penna (Rabin Gl. Gover Theo a ubetion Depainent of elem As 389) ‘cetean Cie R aia ME, pes, 201 iterate istairspy and lesen of an pe Sutos-aper Capua soe to oe Suthep ofthe Laser Capa oman Crear es 32 (3), 575380 ‘Ces ALChaban AN, AL-RIAY LA 857, Daibatn of oars ne hn Gl necopacontiogy 1,253 780. cena oat Fp © Tok Ogee cee lami of he Cenc ocd, PremaleSva 2018 Rese Upper Aa Mandan plaka fa ‘ner besatigaphy and nagetatatgaphy othe cal ejay GBD ‘ecto aly News Seat 484-50 ons BH, Cenc, 188 Morpatype pats of Norwegian ea dep benthic fo anna an ecolgkalImpleatons. col 16,7171. ‘cons Fl, 1990 Merphetyp aralsse dep scat Ferrera fom he st fo Men PALA 3 85-05 Donen Dana 8 2807 ary Knee Sete famines a erage of tie am ormstan, Den Namen) Assn ay et 8 (5), 948 brooger€ We Kans PH 195 he persion fhe Agana risa of “hmm ane Ne 2) NolsnaPabthng Conny Fogel E2010 Mirai of Carton eck: aaj eres Apes seco e Sprige (884 ‘Goer Me 2012 Psrorcloy of he Mie Nicene amines ofthe Nowy Sa sin sh Cae Capa) Col Qua $51), 107-16 aun al Pale, WE 1997 Benicar saan ihe none Thy of Sieg Ro eu yt Mat Misopdcontl 29,2) 165-210, ei 8 Maina A Mose ia Canale, Modem SA 2014 Bost geass apy td pues oe awe ie Meo er fanaa Abas, Southeast Zars tas a south! Wan. Aah} Geos 7 (ysis eval A, 191 Canton tthe statsrapy of Mlcene edents in ata Ni “Betas esac Cnet, A Sas Une) egype tah ee, 190-170 aur A Hare 200 scene ent frainera sth cl water ar A ey cll Qatar Unt sf 20 167-19. otuge HB es. Z Drove K 1983, Rees Framinis rom te ut of bh ede 5 hws Modena Unto Det (179 2309) ogee GW, 199 The pest pear bsiburer ne aba Cass pose ha bs spin ead 2 27008 Hoge C, 200 Sd eta Lte frase arty rterusashsie oa nik towcisons weds apie Gr ue azoerrommecal cape enact, andthe Coma ane age CW, 208 Mr aleotlgcal dissection the taba ese Sud A es seceitDevacpncnts i Appted Bestatigpty. The Micopusanieged So. ty. Gage Soy, andon 9p. E50 Spec uses nughee iv 3814 Mezopacotoloy and palavenvzonen of he Mice Wadi ‘ag bat of th orn Se can Red ea Cea 19 (4), 3-108 mugs Che, MW. al A 1573 Orns as proces of rbot semen td nda fevonmen the son Pets Cue Per 8 (ed) Te Pe ‘Sin uf gene Carona Sedentton and Dagens na Show Epconi= ental ea pene Hein pp. 35.35, ues CW. nay, RF angel DL NaN. 2012. soc nd secmetaloy of the Dammam borne, Sud aban G02 Ven Wl Ee evens oe ference nd Fenton kas, tem 1 Woven il fs rma ofthe Dam Formation Se Arb Ard Tieng 12 2 tet, ones RW, Chara MA, 185, Morhogroups fagptated foraminifera ie Pontons ad eng haben aa prea spp in plea) loa aes fev. falta 431-200 Jones RW. Simmons MO, Whitaker, JE, 2006. On the sestaraphicl and usebiogeogaal gnfcanc rh meta mis (cae Ma Pa) nd Eiffel end 5 Kami, MA. Jones, RW, 2008. Fay oie Miocene frais en the dope Conga Fn esore Angola Miropaleonloy 34 «77-328 ula ann, 1003 New ecrente fag strats nd enon fo Taner om te Morne of APs ts, suthwet Qtr Pena: pl. tao atthe palsaentenental mean fia) Calf) Sa Res 11 (3), 325-358 ‘oraz, 1661 Osevaons of achatour an rods of ef bene anaes ina Taboratry. Cosience eps of Sates Une 5 9p 61-7 azz, H, 1988, Locomotion a ome bent foramina and on selves Toramiler es West eeshayalah Ache. A-ha M, AKT lama, , 2016 Disc on finan cont des neater Se ba every spre Irom ate ae rx parsetr variations) Af athe 1710213 Leaner 884 Symons bernie frmnser fps) apd os Sapa Tramiie e110, ‘igo Micopscontooy 86) 368 lodich AR, Tappa HN. 1954 Formers he Sats and Tino Sea Cushnsn Tous oan Reseach 9 (519). tore JP Parser, 157. Dstt atts of Hoe ci es Gul The Pesan Cl Spger Be eleers. p70. Loughlin RA. Wyle, A Burwell 30, alabduhaes, A, 2012 Aatopogenc “ced Geosorpeloial Change along the Western aban Gal Cont INTEC ‘pen cess ase Matin L185. Some zee faints rama pono ofthe ln Ange Bain, Mra cman Food Res Contib 3 (2-3) 07-14 ‘Man Mt, DX 1908 areal foraminrs am Ke nin 34 Neal tt of Seen nda Peeing p. 158-180, Maray 1865 The Francia the Persan Gl 2. The Abu Dab ein, Paleogog Pama Pleoec 307-132 Maroy W166 The oar ote Ptsn Gol 3. The a Abang, PaloengcogPaixeacinaatPaeoc! 2, 55-68 uray. W195, The Framers ofthe Pesan Gu & Kor Al asa PalengeogPasacnatal Paseo 2, 155-159 ‘uray, 185¢ Te frais he Pesta Gu 5. The shel ofthe Trl ons PahegeogPccnte Pages 2, 257-278 ‘uray, J 1991 Ecology apd Fleoeclgy of enh Foramnere Rowsege (341 oo Mura, 205. Eslogy and Appin Bn Frainia Cabri Unie Sty es (225 ray J, Ave anes A, 2011, Ane kt der apt bee fr "teal mrphapeps: thr val pleco inept Paleo rog Passe Pro 09,2254, Nagy} 1982 Envonmena signees of framers merphorrous in ase Nach Ss asas FascogsprPaseetmss Paseo 181-18 Nagy, Ie Gratin, FAG Kamins, MA, Holbour, A. 1585. Fearne Tiaptgrctselccrowsent cl sew ta fea ect Craconssata ‘Tha, Nepal bs Kamil MA, Cea Case WA (es) occ ‘ibe Touts inerolonal Welsh on Aggunatd Porn: Cnybowsts Fount pec Pueaton vl 3p. 1-208 she J Cher, , 20 Medes abd ie aie oles ona aboate Za aor Kuve tnt: Pesan gu Fucks 8 (3), 12 Paranal MA Coco Kamei MA psc, 5,211, gga ‘Brana tm te popesed CSP stato rhe Sela in gan bone 2y(Gorg a Crara Unb Nabe bash aly, Poceedgs of eighth tera {tna Wershep on AgggnatedFramilera Book Sees. Gzybowst Funeaon Spel Penton vo 18 pp. 8-214 Patra 5, artaphyow Mi Erba. Diniza, MD. BoC. Kamins MA. 2015, ‘he Bireman ane pan sepuis developmen: oe -ocanc anos event (One ty ess: erated Benne and plane Mp=esolton palaeeeoes slong the Gorgo a Cerbara sate ston (Ubca-Marche Bsn Fay. Bansgony Pascal Paleo 25, 157-182 Peele Re, 968 Sabie ape snes ane dag ofthe Mice of he Emirate of "ou Oba, Ute ra Eater For Vertebrate fab th Epa 08 epee 1878. Kosova fran oman Int Cel Gps. 285-64 oes 1968 Ate Sede Lagu Staph emone, (1), Powis RW. Raniex LE, Redenea, CD. tbe EL, 19656, Cology of the Arabian Penns sedentary geology of aud aval US Gel Sur. Mal Pap. 50- carp) ure (Ed, 2012. Te san ut Holocene Catonte Sedmenation an Dag ‘isin a talon Eionsneatl ea. Sprige saence @ sie Mee (370 Pst, BH seb 1973 The pice etonmel ato infer Holecene Sedmestscan and engeness in he Pest Cu Pus 8H) The Pes i Fee Conte edinetaon ard ies Sa pena ‘Speer Brin, -8 foe Mar brome KM. Sec RS, Mlle 965, Modern acne ‘trmaaites inthe ura Cay Hakama nesmmeny conan, Fes) ea Nt, Herr, C, 2004 easton of those rer lamin rm int "edna spleaian athe urssonpalic etre Whe he Prete Zane (Soh Spal) Mexopscontley 803), 307312 eater lb, WE. HarzeM Mae ei BR F Kio, A by, ‘MP Wieland Ses. Hamdan, 2008 The Oger Men am Fema {as evdence oat cat Budgauan resco fhe Teyan Seay td co Sue of ara gatewas ne Eth S98 (3), 627-650. eyed RM, 190 Py ocanotapy oe Gall Sai ol ecru an he Clot ‘mabetesls han the Me Mtcel expan Ma Plt Bal 27,330. ‘eg Piz A Janson X. erga KI 2010 The gas bel, pyc chee alan opel parseterf edencatn on canna ap. Cabeate De Dsienal systems: Assessing Dimensions ane ConcolingPaameters Senge Reternds 9.195215. stoyama, E- Kaminski. MA, Tysia, J, 2011 The late Cretaceous-aty Paleocene ‘lene ends ine southoesera Barets Sexpascoeonmeel eh cons of benthic fear assebiage analyse Paeopog Pale ase 307 (1,448. ‘Staton R Mata A Vzé-Mopiaam ,Chbesha A, Mousa Haram 1.2015, Deposition arveture and sequen sat graphy othe Oligo iner= ‘amar par Southeastern eh ae apron ana Faces 8 (1) 112, Shstand PR Archer Casey, DA, Davi, Hal Si, Hear, AP, Herb. Spe MSZ cn par atp crine sp Stelter C} Shae, ALMunseo A, ALM K AJedan 0, Aon 1 A ‘Samy, A, Ae S201. Tacs tang pats in meta i exon {ae sy the A Dhaba iyo ALG ln Used Aad Eas uatermary Cabot and Epo Seelnenty Faces and Tc eat ‘Ataoges A Tat to Dugas janes Sharan, pp. M182A chan ea orgy Plrcinasing Peasy 458 (2017) 122-137 ww “rock, Mata, 183, Comparison of owenecey mile she frais Tanase ea and wesen Ens chanel In Nee JW Basie MD.) Micofrse Frm event an Toso Shel Sse Elit Horwooe Chiheste, pp 0-250 ‘el 197, Src geology of Dammam éome, extern prvi, Sd Arabia "APE Bl 57 (3), 55270. ‘an den Aer, TJHA. Karns MA, ras. FM, Word}. 2000, Campanian o asco sesrigapty and pascoerenmens inthe Pua bine OF the Sheng sands) Miepaearal 1,238. Vaio Meghaddar H. Seyi, A Moti 2010, Of gcee-moene amp ‘yrtm (hema Formato) inthe NW ofthe faze basin, a miata, Daleensonment and épostonal sequence Rev Mex Cene Gel 27 (1 56-7 Wetermarn R199. Srfacepolonyiherengaphy and Teriong arth 9 the ‘Sammam Dome Sol robs ne ei pad, Cone (2), 162138 ico Jo, 195 Carbonate aes in Gelog History. Springs cence & Basins Ne ‘ieper MA. 20%. |e Permian to Haoene pleas evoiton a the Abin pte anit droon erences CeaAaba (3) 45808