Paleo–climatic and paleo–environment implication

of clay mineral across Upper Cretaceous–Lower

Eocene deposits from Gafsa Basin
Abdel Majid Messadi (  messadiabdelmajid1@gmail.com )
University of Sfax

Research Article

Keywords: Clays, Late cretaceous, K–Pg, Paleocene–Eocene, climate, Tethyan margin

Posted Date: May 18th, 2022

DOI: https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-1623282/v1

License:   This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Read Full License

Page 1/36
Abstract
An integrated study of clay paragenesis has been conducted in the Gafsa Basin, southern Tunisia, during
the Late Cretaceous–Lower Eocene. Six lithostratigraphic sections were logged in the Tamerza, Oued
Thelja, Ong, and Chamsi. The Upper Maastrichtian Haria Formation is dominated by smectite, indicating
a semi-arid climate with distinct seasons. A colder and drier climate, favoring physical alteration, is
observed in the first Paleogene deposits. Danian deposits, show a decrease in smectite in favor of illite
and kaolinite, indicating a period of intensified detritus under a hot and humid climate with a contrasting
season. The abundance of smectite and the low percentages of kaolinite in the Thelja (Thanetian)
Formation suggest a warm and arid climate. The late Thanetian–early Eocene deposits were influenced
by a warm and seasonal climate, or probably, they were an alternation between dry and humid seasons
and warm climatic conditions in the Lower Eocene corresponding to the Late Paleocene–early Eocene
deposits outlining the Paleocene–Eocene Thermal Maximum (PETM). The consequence of this warm
climate is sea level rise, which corresponds to the Paleocene– Eocene transgression.

Introduction
According to the clay–mineral distribution trends in ocean sediments, the variations in the vertical clay–
mineral distribution patterns in deep–sea sediment cores have been interpreted in terms of shifts in the
climatic conditions prevailing in the continental source areas of the detrital clay minerals (Singer, 1984).
Thiry (2000) pointed out that clay minerals in sediments can be a useful indicator of paleoclimatic
conditions. Concentrations of smectite are taken (Chamley et al., 1999) as an indication for the
prevalence of warm climates with fairly dry conditions and chemical weathering dominance (Singer,
1984). An abundance of illite and chlorite in the sediments indicates a cold and dry environment in the
source area with dominant physical weathering (Singer, 1984). Robert & Chamely (1991) used clays in
sediments to interpret climate change. More recently, Robert & Kennett (1992, 1994) used the abundance
of smectite (70–100%) in the early Paleogene deposits of Antarctica to indicate seasonal changes in an
arid climate. In contrast, the occurrence of kaolinite is interpreted by Robert & Kennett (1992) indicate
high runoff with warm climate (Bolle et al., 1999; khozyem et al., 2013, 2015). In marine sediments, clays
are inherited from continental runoff or flocculated. Their abundances provide abiotic proxy data, which
may be useful to decipher climatic changes. The Upper Cretaceous–Lower Eocene interval containing the
Cretaceous–Paleogene and Paleocene–Eocene boundaries was characterized by global extinction and
climate change (Kennett & Stott, 1991; Zachos et al., 1993; Zachos et al., 1994, 2001, 2003). Clay
fractions of this interval show different compositions (Zachos et al., 1994, 2001, 2003). The clay
paragenesis of the studied deposits brings out precious information concerning climate conditions on
adjacent continents and unravels the mechanisms involved in weathering, transport, and sedimentation
(Robert & Chamely, 1991; Jamoussi et al., 2003; El Ayyat, 2013). In this paper, clay mineral assemblages
of the sediments from the Gafsa Basin were investigated to determine paleoclimate and
paleoenvironment conditions across Upper Cretaceous–Lower Eocene deposits.

Geological Setting
Page 2/36
The Gafsa Basin is part of the southern Atlas Mountains, corresponding to a vast structural area that
extends from the Gulf of Gabes in the east to the Algerian border in the west, and it corresponds to a set
of relief which is located north of the Chott Jerid and Chotts chain (Burollet, 1956). The Gafsa Basin is
controlled by several faults, the main ones trending E–W and NW–SE. These faults controlled Ypresian
sedimentation (Zargouniet al., 1985; Zaier et al., 1998). The sections were lifted in four areas: Tamerza,
Oued Thelja, Jebel Ong, and Jebel Chamsi (Figure. 1). The Tamerza region is bounded to the north and
west by the Tunisian–Algerian border, to the east by the Redeyef mining sector, and to the south by Chott
El Gharssa (34 ° 23 '35'' N, 7 ° 56 '45'' E). This region is located in the western part of the Gafsa chain. The
city of Tamerza, which is part of the governorate of Tozeur, is located in the southwest of Tunisia. It is
located about 450 km from Tunis and 70 km from Tozeur (Figure. 1). The Oued Thelja section is located
30 km west of the town of Gafsa. The typical section of the Metlaoui Formation was lifted in the gorge of
Oued Thelja, which is located 5km west of the city of Metlaoui (34 ° 09 '00'' N, 8 ° 16' 59'' E ). The Jebel
Ong area is found in the southern Tunisian atlas range (34 ° 19 '37'' N, 9 ° 06' 04'' E), which corresponds to
a system of foreland folds and overlaps bordered in the east by the Gafsa fault oriented NW–SE
(Zargouni, 1985). The study area in Jebel Chamsi was located 30 km west of the town of Gafsa. It
occupies the central part of the map of El Ayacha at 1/100,000 and it is limited by the meridians 7G 40'
and 7G 90' respectively to the west and the east and by the parallels 38G 20' to the north and 38G 0' to
the south. The studied sections cover three formations, corresponding to Haria Formation, Thelja
Formation, and Chouabine Formation (Figure. 2).

Haria Formation

Defined by Burollet (1956) and, it encompasses the transition from the Mesozoic to the Cenozoic (K/Pg).
The Haria Formation corresponds to dark clays and marls with thin intercalations of marly limestone. In
the Gafsa Basin, this Formation shows a particular enrichment in carbonate levels. This Formation is
dated from the upper Maastrichtian–Danian (Adatte et al., 2002; Ayachi et al., 2016).

Thelja Formation

Defined by Fournié (1978), this formation overlies the Haria Formation and has been assigned a
Thanetian age (Fournié, 1978; El Ayachi et al., 2016; Messadi et al., 2016, 2018). It corresponds to an
evaporitic series, and its particular richness in dolomites and gypsum reflects a regressive trend (El
Ayachi et al., 2016; Messadi et al., 2016, 2018).

Chouabine Formation

Defined by Fournié (1978), and assigned to the Late Paleocene–Ypresian. This unit corresponds to a
phosphate series intercalating marls and limestones (El Ayachi et al., 2016; Messadi et al., 2016, 2018).

Materials And Methods

Page 3/36
Six lithostratigraphic sections were logged in the Tamerza, Oued Thelja, Ong, and Chamsi (Messadi,
2021). Two sections were raised in the region of Tamerza and Midés, constituting the western part of the
basin, including two sections: section M covers the Haria Formation (35 samples covering 100m) and
two other sections cover the Thelja (Figure. 3) and Chouabine formations, Petite cluse (14 samples
covering 123 m) and the Wday section (23 samples covering 149 m) (Figure. 3). In the center of the
Basin, a section was measured at Oued Thelja (39 samples covering 210 m). In the eastern part of the
Basin, two sections were raised, Jebel Ong (25 samples covering 275 m) and Jebel Chamsi section (36
samples covering 215 m) (Figure. 3).

The clay fractions of these samples were subjected to X–Ray diffraction analysis (XRD) (scanned
between 2 and 40 2θ) to identify their clay mineral composition following the method described by Carroll
(1970). Semi-quantitative determination of the identified clay minerals was undertaken based on the
method adopted by Pierce & Siegel 1969; Brindley & Brown, 1980. Mineralogical analyses of the clays
was carried out at four institutions: (1) Biomineralization and Sedimentary Environments (BES) in the
University of Pierre and Marie Curie (Paris–France) using the diffractometer "SCINTAG XDS 2000", (2) the
Faculty of Sciences of Bizerte, (3) in the company of phosphate of Gafsa, and (4) the materials
laboratory of the National School of Engineers of Sfax using Philips X–ray diffractometer with CuKα
radiation, 45 kV and 35 mA.

Results
In the study area, the sampled series attributed to the Upper Cretaceous–Lower Eocene interval show
variations in terms of thickness and litho–facies which can be essentially controlled by syn–sedimentary
tectonism (Messadi et al., 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020; Messadi, 2021). Deposits and lithofacies on the
ground made it possible to characterize the succession of the following lithostratigraphic units and
formations (Table 1).

Page 4/36
 Table 1
Distributions of principal’s lithofacies and units in the studied series.
Lithostratigraphy Tamerza Oued Thelja Jebel Chamsi
-location Ong

Haria Unit 0 Alternation of marls,

phosphates and
lumachellic
limestones

Unit 1 marls

Unit 2 Marls and micritic limestones

Unit 3 It consists of alternating micritic limestone, and lumachellic limestones

fossilizing channels and marls

Thelja and its T1:Lumachellic T1:lumachellic T1:lumachellic lumachellic

equivalent limestone limestones limestones limestones
fossilizing channels fossilizing fossilizing
T2:Marls- channels channels
limestones

T3:Marls- T2:Glauconitic
limestones-gypsum limestone-marls-
lumachellic
T4:Marls- limestone-gypsum T2:Marls-
limestones lumachellic
limestone-
T5:Marls- T3:Phosphatic gypsum
limestones-slumps limestone-marls

T6:Marls-
limestones

Chouabine and C1:Marls-nodular C1: Marls C1: Marls Marls

its equivalents limestone
C2: marls-
lumachellic
limestone-phosphate

C2:Marls- C3: phosphate-marls- C2: lumachellic

limestone- cherts- lumachellic limestone
phosphate limestone Limestones- fossilizing
phosphate channels
C4: phosphate-marls-
lumachellic
limestone

Haria Formation

Clay mineralogical analysis of Upper Cretaceous–Paleocene successions revealed the predominance of

smectite, illite, and kaolinite as main clay minerals associated with calcite, quartz, and dolomite.

Page 5/36
Midés section

The unit H0 is characterized by a particular richness in calcite 67–89% and quartz 8–23% at its lower part
associate with the presence of kaolinite 1–6% and the absence of smectite. The upper part is
characterized by the presence of smectite, quartz with a maximum of 17% and kaolinite at 3% (Table 2).

Table 2
Relative abundances of the identified major’s minerals in the Haria
Formation
Haria Formation

Unit Carbonates minerals Clays minerals Accessory minerals

H0 Calcite : 70–89% Smectite : 0–15% Quartz : 5–23%

Ankerite : 2–11% Kaolinite : 1–6% Feldsprs : 1–4%

Glauconite : 0–2%

The lowermost part of unit H1 is characterized by a relative enrichment in kaolinite (16% of the bulk rock)
associated with a high percentage of quartz (54%), and the absence of calcite and smectite with the
appearance of a low percentage of dolomite (5–13%). However, the lower part is characterized by the
presence of smectite (10–38%), kaolinite (2–16%), and a low percentage of calcite and glauconite. In the
upper part of this unit, calcite and smectite correspond to the major minerals with (0–42% and 5–42%
respectively) associated with a low percentage of illite (3–9%), quartz (4–27%), and the absence of
kaolinite (Table 3). Unit H2 is characterized by the dominance of opal-CT minerals (43%), a low
percentage of illite (2–8%), quartz (1–2%), the absence of kaolinite, and a low appearance of smectite in
the upper part. Carbonate minerals are present with a medium percentage (40%) of calcite and a low
percentage of dolomite (0–4%) (Table 4). Unit H3 is characterized by a high percentage of calcite (72%)
compared to the lower part (24%), a decrease in smectite (16–3%), and the appearance of gypsum (70%)
(Table 5).

Page 6/36
 Table 3
Relative abundances of the identified major’s minerals in the Haria Formation
Haria Formation

Unit Section Carbonates minerals Clays minerals Accessory minerals

H1 Tamerza Calcite : 0–80% Smectite : 10–43% Quartz : 3–54%

Dolomite : 4–23% Kaolinite : 2–16% Feldspars : 1–4%

Ankerite : 0–45% Illite : 2–9%

Oued Thelja Calcite : 0–47% Smectite : 0% Quartz : 2–50%

Dolomite : 0–4% Kaolinite : 3–48% Phosphate : 1–11%

Ankerite : 2–82% Sepiolite : 0–35%

Jebel Ong Calcite : 9–88% Smectite : 0% Quartz : 5–19%

Ankerite : 6–88% Kaolinite : 1–19% Phosphate : 0–12%

Illite : 0–16% Clinoptilolite : 0–2%

Palygorskite : 0–8% Opal CT : 0–5%

Jebel Chamsi Calcite : 19–58% Smectite : 4–20%% Quartz : 4–33%

Dolomite : 0–3% Kaolinite : 6–52% Phosphate : 0–17%

Ankérite : 0–4% Illite : 0–1% Clinoptilolite : 0–15%

Palygorskite : 0–7% Glauconie : 0–17

Sepiolite : 0–6%

Page 7/36
 Table 4
Relative abundances of the identified major’s minerals in the Haria Formation
Haria Formation

Unit Section Carbonates minerals Clays minerals Accessory minerals

H2 Tamerza Calcite : 12–40% Smectite : 0% Quartz : 1–4%

Dolomite : 0–4% Kaolinite : 0% Opal CT : 43–59%

Ankerite : 0–4% Illite : 2–8%

Oued Thelja Calcite : 12–94% Smectite : 0% Quartz : 1–7%

Ankerite : 3–34% Kaolinite : 2–6% Opal CT : 0–7%

Sepiolite : 3–40% Phosphate : 0–4%

Illite : 0–1% Clinoptilolite : 0–4%

Jebel Ong Calcite : 9–62% Smectite : 0% Quartz : 2–10%

Ankerite : 9–72% Kaolinite : 6–11% Clinoptilolite : 0–2%

Illite : 5–16% Opal CT : 0–5%

Jebel Chamsi Calcite : 6–93% Smectite : 0–29%% Quartz : 0–6%

Dolomite : 2–31% Kaolinite : 0–3% Clinoptilolite : 0–6%

Ankerite : 1–68% Illite : 0–2% Opal CT : 0–8%

Palygorskite : 0–2%

Sepiolite : 0–11%

Page 8/36
 Table 5
Relative abundances of the identified major’s minerals in the Haria Formation
Haria Formation

Unit Section Carbonates minerals Clays minerals Accessory minerals

H3 Tamerza Calcite : 24–74% Smectite : 16% Quartz : 7%

Dolomite : 0–4% Kaolinite : 3%

Ankérite : 0–11%

Oued Thelja Calcite : 72–94% Illite : 0–1% Quartz : 1–2%

Ankerite : 0–3% Opal CT : 0–11%

Dolomite : 0–10% Phosphate : 0–1%

Clinoptilolite : 0–4%

Feldspars : 0–1%

Jebel Ong Ankerite : 88% Illite : 9% Quartz : 0–2%

Jebel Chamsi Calcite : 72–99% Smectite : 0–4%% Quartz : 1–4%

Dolomite : 65–93% Kaolinite : 0–1% Glauconite : 0–3%

Ankérite : 56–92% Palygorskite : 1–11% Opal CT : 1–9%

Sepiolite : 0–1% Feldspars : 1%

Oued Thelja section

In unit H1 smectite is absent, and kaolinite is present throughout this unit with values varying from 3–
48% in the lower part and 4–11% in the upper part (Table 3). Sepiolite appears in the top part of this unit
with varying percentages ranging from 28–35%. Interstratified were encountered in the middle part of this
unit with percentages varying between 2–16%. Quartz is present at all levels of this unit except the basal
part with values between 19 and 50% in the lower part and 2–6% in the upper part (Table 3). The various
calcite ranged from 0–47% in the lower part and 43–93% in the upper part of this unit. Dolomite is
observed in one level (OT93) in the middle part of the unit with a value of 4%. Ankerite is abundant in the
lower part of this unit with varying percentages between 7–82% with an absence in the middle part and
scanty occurrence in the uppermost part with values from 2–10%. Phosphate appears in the lower and
upper parts with values ranging from 1–11% (Table 3). The clay minerals present in unit H2 are
represented by kaolinite with values varying between 2–6%, illite at 1% in the upper part, and sepiolite
with values ranging between 3–40% in the lower and middle parts. Quartz is detected in all levels of this
unit with values varying between 1 and 7%. Calcite is present in all levels of this unit with percentages
varying between 12 and 94%. Ankerite shows contents varying between 3 and 34%. The confinement

Page 9/36
minerals are represented by clinoptilolite and phosphate with values varying between 1 and 4%. The opal-
CT is present with values around 7% (Table 4).

In unit H3, illite is observed with minimum percentages around 1%. Quartz is present throughout the unit
with percentages in the range of 1–2%. Calcite represents the most abundant mineral with varying
percentages between 72 and 94%. Dolomite is observed at the base of this unit with a content of 10%.
Ankerite appears in the upper part of this unit with values of around 3%. This unit shows the presence of
CT opal (11%) and feldspar (1%) in addition to the confinement minerals represented by phosphates (1%)
and clinoptilolite (1–4%) (Table 5).

Jebel Ong Section

Smectite is absent in the H1 unit. Kaolinite is present throughout the unit with varying percentages
between 10 and 19% in the lower part, 5 and 11% in the middle part and 1 to 9% in the top part. The illite
appears in the middle and upper part with values varying between 5 and 16%. Palogyrskite is observed in
two levels of the middle part of this unit with values of around 8%. Quartz is present with percentages in
the range of 5–11% with a peak of 19% in the middle part. Calcite represents the most abundant mineral
with values varying between 50 and 88% except in the top part with values between 9 and 19%. Ankerite
is encountered in the lower and upper part of this unit with values ranging from 6–19% and 40–88%
respectively. Phosphates are present in the lower part with values in the range of 5–12%. The presence of
clinoptilolite at the JO 131 level is noted with a value around of 2% and the presence of opal-CT (5%)
(Table 3). The clay minerals present in the H2 unit are represented by kaolinite with percentages ranging
from 6–11% and illite with values varying from 5–16%. Quartz is observed throughout this unit with
percentages varying between 2–10%. Carbonate minerals are represented by calcite (9–62%) and
ankerite (9–72%) (Table 4). The confinement minerals are observed in the upper part with the detection of
clinoptilolite (2%). With these minerals, we noticed the presence of the CT opal (5%) in the top part of this
unit (Table 4). The H3 unit analysis shows the presence of illite (9%), quartz (2%), and ankerite (88%)
(Table 5).

Jebel Chamsi section

The smectite shows a content varying between 4 and 20% in the lower and middle part of unit H1.
Kaolinite is present throughout this whole unit with values between 6 and 52%. Illite is detected in two
levels at the base (1%) and in the middle part (27%). Palygorskite is encountered in the level (JC 76) in the
middle part of this unit. Sepiolite appears in the middle part of the level (JC 84) with a value of 6%. The
interstratified are observed in the upper part of this unit with values varying between 5 and 32%. Quartz is
present throughout this unit with values varying between 4 and 33%. Calcite characterizes all the levels of
this unit with values varying between 19 and 58%. Dolomite appears in the upper part of this unit with a
value of (3%). Ankerite is detected in the upper part of this unit with values of around 4%. Containment
minerals are present in the lower part of this unit. They are represented by glauconite, clinoptilolite–
hollandite and phosphate. These minerals are present with contents varying between 3 and 17% (Table
3).
Page 10/36
In unit H2 Smectite is present in the upper part with percentages 18–29%. Kaolinite is detected in the
lower and upper parts of this unit with values in the range of 2–3%. The illite is described in a level in the
lower part of this unit with a value of around 2%. The palygorskite is also observed in the middle part of
this unit with proportion of 2%. Sepiolite is present in the lower and upper parts of this unit ranging from
1–11%. Quartz is observed in the lower and upper part of this unit with values varying between 3 and 6%.
Carbonate minerals are represented by calcite (6–93%), dolomite (2–31%) and ankerite (1–68%). The
upper part of this unit is characterized by the appearance of clinoptilolite with values (3–6%). Note the
presence of the opal CT (8%) in the upper part of this unit (Table 4). In unit H3, smectite is present with
contents varying between 2 and 4%. Kaolinite appears in the middle part of this unit with a value of 1%.
Palygorskite is observed in the middle and upper parts of this unit with percentages varying between 1–
11%. Sepiolite occurs in the lower and upper parts of this unit with values approaching 1%. Quartz is
observed along with this unit with grades varying from 1 to 4%. Carbonate minerals are represented at the
base and in the middle part by the presence of calcite (72–99%) and the upper part is dominated by
dolomites (65% − 93%) with the appearance of ankerite toward the top with a percentage accounting for
92%. In this unit we note the presence of glauconite (3%) in the middle part, the opal-CT (1%– 9%) in the
middle and upper parts, and feldspar at the highest point (1%) (Table 5).

Thelja Formation

Tamerza section

X–ray diffraction shows two distributions. The basal part, while the enrichment in calcite is observed in
Unit 1, the predominance of dolomite characterizes the other units (Table 6). The evolution of the
percentages of dolomites compared to those of calcite can be related to confinement. Indeed, from the
end of Unit 1, the percentages of calcite decrease to have low values in Unit T3 and the percentages of
dolomite increase from those observed in Unit T2 to reach over 70% in the T4 Unit (Table 6).

Page 11/36
 Table 6
Relative abundances of the identified major’s minerals in the TheljaFormation
Thelja Formation: Tamerza section

units Carbonates Clay minerals Accessory minerals

minerals

TTTTT Calcite:15–70% Smectite:20–35% Clinoptilolite : 0% Opal CT : 0–5%

T1
Dolomite:0–5% Illite: 2–7% Quartz : 4–25% Feldspars : 0–
5%
Kaolinite: 0–10%
Phosphate : 0–
3%

T2 Calcite: 5–20% Smectite: 2–5% Gypsum : 10% Opal CT : 0–4%

Dolomite:60–80% Illite: 2–15% Quartz : 0–2% Feldspars : 0–

5%

T3 Calcite: 5–15% Smectite:20–35% Gypsum : 20– Opal CT : 0–4%

30%
Dolomite:40–65% Illite: 5–10% Feldspars : 0–
Clinoptilolite : 0% 5%
Quartz : 3–5%

T4 Dolomite: 67–88 Smectite: 8–15% Gypsum : 20– Opal CT : 2–5%

% 30%
Illite: 5–12% Feldspars : 2–
Quartz : 2–5% 5%

T5 Calcite: 0% Smectite:20–30% Gypsum : 0% Opal CT : 0–4%

Dolomite:50–55% Illite: 5–10% Clinoptilolite : 6% Feldspars : 0–
5%
Kaolinite: 0% Quartz : 3–5%
Phosphate : 0–
4%

T6 Calcite:0–5% Smectite:10–25% Illite: 5– Gypsum : 20– Opal CT : 2–

10% 30% 15%
Dolomite:45–70%
Clinoptilolite : 0– Feldspars : 0–
7% 5%
Quartz : 3–10% Phosphate : 0–
3%

Oued Thelja section

Levels of units T2 and T3 of the Oued Thelja section are the subjects of X-ray diffraction analyses (XRD)
since the T1 unit is completely formed of lumachellic limestone (Table 7). The T2 unit reveals the

Page 12/36
presence of smectite observed in the lower part of this unit with values around 23%. Kaolinite is present
at all levels of this unit with contents varying between 1 and 5%. The illite is described in the middle and
upper part with percentages around of 1%. Quartz is observed in at levels of this unit with contents
varying between 1 and 12% with the maximum values in the middle part. Carbonate minerals are
represented in the lower and middle part by calcite (2–28%) and ankerite (56–95%), and by the presence
of dolomite (56–95%) in the upper part. Unit 3 shows richness in smectite (63%), kaolinite (24%)
associated with quartz (8%) and phosphate (5%) (Table 7).

Table 7
Relative abundances of the identified major’s minerals in the Thelja
Formation
Thelja Formation : Oued Thelja Section

Unit Carbonates minerals Clays minerals Accessory minerals

Th 2 Calcite : 2–28% Smectite : 15–23% Quartz : 1–12%

Dolomite : 56–95% Kaolinite : 1–5%

Ankerite : 56–90% Illite : 0–1%

Th3 Ankerite : 0–3% Smectite : 63% Quartz : 1–8%

Dolomite : 0–10% Kaolinite : 24% Phosphate : 0–5%

Jebel Ong section

The T1 unit is composed of illite (9%), quartz (3%), 42 dolomite and 45% ankerite.

The T2 unit shows the presence of illite (5%), quartz (2%), 91% dolomite and 2% CT opal.

The T3 unit reveals the presence of kaolinite (3%), illite (7%), quartz (3%), dolomite (83%) and 3% of CT
opal (Table 8).

Page 13/36
 Table 8
Relative abundances of the identified major’s minerals in the Thelja
Formation
Thelja Formation : Jebel Ong Section

Unit Carbonates minerals Clays minerals Accessory minerals

Th 1 Dolomite : 42% Illite : 9% Quartz : 1–3%

Ankerite : 45%

Th 2 Dolomite : 91% Illite : 5% Quartz : 1–2%

Opal CT : 2%

TH 3 Calcite : 0% Smectite : 15–23% Quartz : 3%

Dolomite : 83% Kaolinite : 3% Opal CT : 3%

Illite : 7%

Chouabine Formation

Tamerza section

The C1 Unit is characterized by a particular richness in smectites at its lowermost part. Furthermore, the
decrease in smectite relative abundance from the lower part (66% of the bulk rock) toward the top part
(17%) of this unit. Unit C2 is characterized by a relative enrichment is smectites (25% of the bulk rock) as
well as the the presence of clinoptololite (40%), sepiolite (15%), palygorskite (13%) and dolomite (7%)
(Table 9).

Page 14/36
 Table 9
Relative abundances of the identified major’s minerals in the Chouabine Formation
Chouabine Formation: Tamerza Section

Unit Carbonates minerals Clays minerals Associated minerals

Unit C1 Lower Part Calcite : 0% Smectite : 45% Quartz : 4%

Ankerite : 0% Kaolinite : 6% Opal CT : 1%

Illite : 3% Feldspars :10%

Sepiolite : 22% Clinoptilolite : 2%

Palygorskite : 1%

Upper Part Calcite : 27% Smectite : 5% Quartz : 1%

Ankerite : 0% Kaolinite : 0% Opal CT : 8%

Illite : 0% Feldspars : 1%

Palygorskite : 2% Phosphate: 56%

Unit C2 Lower Part Calcite : 7–17% Sepiolite : 31–45% Quartz : 2%

Dolomite : 0–44% Palygorskite : 5% Opal CT : 5%

Clinoptilolite : 2%

Phosphate: 7%

Upper Part Calcite : 4% Sepiolite : 17% Quartz : 1%

Dolomite : 62% Palygorskite : 3% Opal CT : 7%

Ankerite : 0% Phosphate: 4%

Unit C3 Lower Part Calcite : 16% Palygorskite : 28% Quartz : 0%

Dolomite : 44% Sepiolite : 44% Feldspars : 0%

Glauconite : 0%

Upper Part Calcite : 16% Palygorskite : 28% Quartz : 0%

Dolomite : 44% Sépiolite : 44% Feldspars : 0%

Ankerite : 66% Glauconite : 0%

Unit C4 Lower Part Calcite : 2% Smectite : 8% Quartz : 3%

Dolomite : 76% Palygorskite : 4% Feldspars : 3%

Phosphate: 66%

Page 15/36
 Chouabine Formation: Tamerza Section

Upper Part Calcite : 12% Smectite : 8% Quartz : 7%

Dolomite : 4% Palygorskite : 2% Feldspars : 3%

Ankerite : 50% Phosphate: 7%

Oued Thelja section

Unit C1 is characterized by a richness in smectite at its base, confirming the transgressive trend of the
Chouabine deposits. Furthermore, the decrease in smectite relative abundance from the lower part (45%
of the bulk rock) towards the top part (5%) of this unit reflects the upward slight sea level fall (Table 10).
The regressive trend is also evidenced by the drop in planktonic foraminifera and the frequent
intercalation of coquina beds within the uppermost part of the afore-described unit and the lower part of
the Unit 2 (Table 10).

Page 16/36
 Table 10
Relative abundances of the identified major’s minerals in the Chouabine Formation
Chouabine Formation: Oued Thelja Section

Unit Carbonates minerals Clays minerals Accessory minerals

Unit C1 Lower part Kaolinite : 6% Quartz : 4%

Illite : 3% Opal CT : 1%

Sepiolite : 72% Feldspars :10%

Palygorskite : 1% Clinoptilolite : 2%

Upper part Calcite : 27% Smectite : 5% Quartz : 1%

Kaolinite : 0% Opal CT : 8%

Illite : 0% Feldspars : 1%
Palygorskite : 2% Phosphate: 56%

Unit C2 Lower part Calcite : 7–17% sepiolite : 31–45% Quartz : 2%

Dolomite : 0–44% Palygorskite : 5% Opal CT : 5%

Clinoptilolite : 2%
Phosphate: 7%

Upper part Calcite : 4% Palygorskite : 3% Quartz : 1%

Dolomite : 62% Sepiolite : 17% Opal CT : 7%

Phosphate: 4%

Unit C3 Lower part Calcite : 16% Palygorskite : 28%

Dolomite : 44% Sepiolite : 44%

Upper part Calcite : 16% Palygorskite : 28%

Dolomite : 44% Sepiolite : 44%

Ankerite : 66%

Unit C4 Lower part Calcite : 2% Smectite : 8% Quartz : 3%

Dolomite : 76% Palygorskite : 4% Feldspaths : 3%
Phosphate: 66%

Upper part Calcite : 12% Smectite : 8% Quartz : 7%

Dolomite : 4% Palygorskite : 2% Feldspars : 3%

Ankerite : 50% Phosphate: 7%

Page 17/36
Units C2 and C3 are characterized by the absence of smectite, kaolinite, and illite. The presence of
sepiolite (17–45%), palygorskite (3–5%), dolomite (0–44%), and clinoptololite (2%).

Unit C4 is characterized by the presence of smectite (8%) in its upper part with a low percentage of
palygorskite (2–4%) and the absence of sepiolite (Table 10).

Jebel Ong section

Unit C1 shows a richness in smectite (36%), 6% palygorskite, quartz (3%), calcite (16%), dolomite (19%),
and 20% clinoptilolite (Table 11).

Table 11
Relative abundances of the identified major’s minerals in the Chouabine Formation
Chouabine Formation : Jebel Ong Section

Unit Carbonates minerals Clays minerals Accessory minerals

Unit C1 Lower part Kaolinite : 6% Quartz : 4%

Illite : 3% Opal CT : 1%
Sepiolite : 72% Feldspars :10%

Palygorskite : 1% Clinoptilolite : 2%

Upper part Calcite : 27% Smectite : 5% Quartz : 1%

Palygorskite : 2% Opal CT : 8%
Feldspars : 1%

Phosphate: 56%

Unit C2 Lower part Calcite : 7–17% Sepiolite : 31–45% Quartz : 2%

Dolomite : 0–44% Palygorskite : 5% Opal CT : 5%

Clinoptilolite : 2%

Phosphate: 7%

Upper part Calcite : 4% Palygorskite : 3% Quartz : 1%

Dolomite : 62% Sepiolite : 17% Opal CT : 7%

Phosphate: 4%

The lower part of the Unit C2 is rich in phosphate (80%) in association with substantially lower
proportions of calcite (6%), quartz (2%), associated with kaolinite (3%) and illite (7%) (Table 11).
Page 18/36
The upper part is characterized by a richness in phosphate (33%), palygorskite (27%), and (22%) sepiolite
is associated with kaolinite (3%), illite (7%), and quartz (5%) (Table 11).

Thelja and Chouabine equivalent at Jebel Chamsi section

Clay samples of the upper Paleocene lower Eocene argillaceous rocks demonstrate that they have
different compositions. The mineralogical analysis of the samples revealed the presence of five types of
clay minerals: smectite, illite, kaolinite, sepiolite, and palygorskite. The associated minerals are
represented by calcite, quartz, phosphate, opal CT, clinoptilolite, feldspars, and dolomite.

The lower term shows a richness in dolomite at its base (95–97%) associated with illite (1%), kaolinite
(1%), feldspars (1%) and opal-CT (1%). Its middle part shows a richness in dolomite associated with the
appearance of smectite (Table 12). The upper part is characterized by the presence of 37% smectite, 38%
dolomite, 9% quartz, 8% calcite, 3% kaolinite, and 1% palygorskite. However, the highest portion is rich in
dolomite (95%) associated with smectite (1%), illite (1%), calcite (1%) and feldspars (1%) (Table 12).

Table 12
Relative abundances of the identified major’s minerals in the Thelja equivalent
Formation
Equivalent Thelja :Lower Term: Jebel Chamsi Section

Unit Carbonates minerals Clays minerals Accessory minerals

Lower part Dolomite : 95–97% Illite : 1% Opal CT : 1%

Feldspars : 1%

Middle part Calcite : 8% Smectite : 37% Quartz : 9%

Dolomite : 38% Kaolinite : 3% Feldspars : 1%

Palygorskite : 1% Glauconie : 0–5%

Upper part Calcite : 1% Illite : 1% Quartz : 3%

Dolomite : 95% Feldspars : 1%

The middle term shows the presence of calcite at its base (40%), dolomite (21%), and phosphate (20%)
associated with smectite (8%) and kaolinite (3%), quartz (8%), feldspars (4%) and opal CT (3%)
suggesting a warm and arid climate (Table 13). The rest of the medium–term shows a wealth in ankerite
(69–86%), smectite (2–8%), kaolinite (2–8%), palygorskite (1–4%), quartz (2–8%) associated with
feldspars (0–4%) and opal CT (0–2%) (Table 13). The upper term reveals a richness in ankerite (> 70%),
smectite (0–3%), kaolinite (0–2%), palygorskite (12–13%) and quartz (3–5%) (Table 13).

Page 19/36
 Table 13
Relative abundances of the identified major’s minerals in the Chouabine equivalent Formation
Equivalent Chouabine :Middle and upper Term: Jebel Chamsi Section

Unit Carbonates minerals Clays minerals Accessory minerals

Middle Term Lower part Calcite : 40% Smectite : 2% Quartz : 8%

Dolomite : 21% Kaolinite : 3% Opal CT : 3%

Feldspars :4%
Phosphate: 20%

Upper part Ankerite : 69–86% Smectite : 2–8% Quartz : 2–8%

Kaolinite : 2–8% Opal CT : 0–2%

Palygorskite : 1–4% Feldspars : 0–4%

Upper Term Lower part Calcite : 4% Sepiolite : 2% Quartz : 55%

Dolomie : 6% Palygorskite : 3% Phosphate: 26%

Feldspars : 5%

Upper part Calcite : 2% Palygorskite : 4% Quartz : 1%

Dolomie : 88% Sepiolite : 1% Feldspars : 2%

Opal CT : 2%

Discussion
The clay paragenesis of the studied deposits provides information concerning climate conditions and
paleoenvironment sedimentation.

Haria Formation (upper Maastrichtian–lower Paleocene deposit

The calcite contents are very important throughout all sections but seem to decrease above the K/T and
toward the summit of the Haria Formation. The phyllosilicate contents show an inverse image and
appear with average contents in all the units, indicating contributions of continental runoff. These
contributions of clastic material can come from the approximate emerged zones. A marine regression
beginning at the end of the Cretaceous (Hallam et al., 1991; Hallam, 1991) may also play a role in this
increase in continental outflow. The appearance of quartz in the petrographic study in the basal part of
the lifted section as well as above the K/Pg boundary of Haria Formation, is marked in the washing
refusals and also noted in the mineralogical study.

The samples studied around the K/Pg boundary appear to be poor in calcite and relatively rich in quartz
and phyllosilicates. Ultimately, the calcite content decreases sharply. As the main sources of this mineral

Page 20/36
are limestone, nannoplankton, and foraminifera, a biological crisis may be suggested at the K/Pg
boundary, thereby reducing carbonate production (Millot, 1964; Slansky, 1980; Singer, 1984; Thiry, 2000;
Jamoussi et al., 2003; El–Ayyat, 2013).

The smectite content is very high in all of the studied sections, but a fall in favor of kaolinite and illite is
observed a few meters around the boundary while a slight decrease is observed in the middle part of
deposits considered to be of Maastrichtian age (lower part of the Haria Formation). The smectite
indicates a warm climate with contrasting seasons. Its fine, flake-like structure renders it conducive to
distal transport. This clay is therefore concentrated in the center of ocean Basins and is representative of
a deep depositional environment.

A slight increase in interstratified and illite contents is observed in the middle part of the Haria Formation
and above the K/Pg boundary indicating paleoclimatic conditions, favoring mechanical rather than
chemical alteration. The high content of these minerals therefore indicates a colder climate with less
precipitation, thus promoting physical deterioration. The effect of a drop in sea level (Hallam et al., 1991;
Hallam, 1992) or a rapprochement of the coasts can thus be observed across the Maastrichtian–Danian
transition (Hallam et al., 1992).

Kaolinite requires more intense precipitation, favoring chemical alteration. Climate change may therefore
explain the increase in the levels of this mineral in the lower part of this formation until the Cretaceous–
Paleogene transition. Kaolinite seems to increase quite gradually throughout the Maastrichtian–Danian
transition, suggesting increasing humidification of the climate. In summary, the first zone with a hot and
humid climate with contrast seasons can be defined from the base of the Haria Formation to the K/Pg
boundary.

Throughout the Maastrichtian–Danian interval, the assembly of clay minerals highlights the transition
from a hot and humid climate with a marked seasonality alternating between wet and dry periods,
associated with a dominance of smectite, to a drier and cooler climate, favoring mechanical alteration
and kaolinite formation. A few meters above the K/Pg boundary, the simultaneous supply of illite and
kaolinite in large quantities indicates significant terrigenous contributions, revealing a greater erosion of
continental relief.

A colder and drier climate is established from the first centimeters of the Danian deposits (middle part of
Haria Formation), favoring an increase in physical alteration. A significant increase in kaolinite and illite
at the expense of smectite in the basal part of Paleogene deposits shows the possibility of significant
terrigenous contributions, indicating a more significant alteration of continental relief and perhaps a
decrease in distance from the coast.

The upper part of the Haria Formation shows richness in smectite and illite with little kaolinite, which
seems to show a proximal and stable environment again dominated by a semi–arid climate with
alternating dry and humid periods, favoring the formation of smectite.

Page 21/36
Finally, the mineralogical assemblages generally go in the direction of a hot and humid climate with a
season contrasted with the Upper Cretaceous, which becomes colder and drier at the beginning of the
Paleogene.

Spatial distribution of mineralogical assemblages

The mineralogical profiles of the sections located in the center of the Gafsa Basin (OT section) generally
contain less smectite than those studied in the east (JO and JC section) and west (M Tamerza section).
Correlatively, the proportion of illites increases very strongly in the Jebel Ong section. The interstratified
terms of the transformation from smectite to illite, are observed in eastern sectors (OJ and JC sections)
while they are absent in the sections of the western region (Tamerza). This difference indicates that the
transformation from smectite to illite is more complete in the eastern sectors. This succession must be
compared with the increasing influence of bathymetry and depositional environment according to an
east–west oriented gradient. In summary, the clay assemblages of the Haria Formation have undergone
increasing diagenesis toward the east. This is marked by a clear transition from smectite to interstratified
illite in the marl.

In the study area, smectite are probably of pedogenetic origin, since there are no known volcanic
influences in the region during the Cretaceous and clay minerals are deposited in an open marine
environment, not subject to chemical containment. Pedogenetic smectite is currently formed in hot
climates with strong seasonal contrasts in humidity and the lower parts of poorly drained watersheds
with little accentuated morphology (Millot, 1964; Paquet, 1970; Slansky, 1980; Singer, 1984; Thiry, 2000).
The abundance of these minerals in the upper Maastrichtian reflects a warm climate with contrasting
seasonal humidity as well as great stability of the continental margins allowing active pedogenesis. The
relay of smectite via illite through the upper Maastrichtian–lower Danian suggests active erosion of the
emerged areas since the illite characterizes deep rocks of the continental substrate. Moreover, this
resumption of erosion marked by local presence of conglomerates would be linked to major tectonic
movements in the internal zones.

In the Tamerza region, kaolinite is practically absent. The rarity of this mineral does not seem to be due to
the diagenetic imprint, since abundant smectite is more sensitive than kaolinite to increases in pressure
and temperature (Messadi et al., 2016). The very low proportions of kaolinite are most relatable to
unfavorable climatic conditions at significant distance from the terrigenous sources, since this mineral is
deposited preferentially near the shores and on carbonate platforms.

The deposition of marls from the upper Maastrichtian–lower Danian interval (Haria Formation) takes
place in an open sea environment, in a distal marine or oceanic setting with low hydrodynamic energy
and where the grains of clay are gradually deposited. The depositional environment was probably quite
deep, of the circalittoral type evolving to lagoonal.

The relative abundance of smectite during the upper Maastrichtian, indicates stability of the emergent
lands subjected to an active pedogenesis developed in hot climates with strong seasonal contrasts of
Page 22/36
humidity. However, the decrease of smectite in favor of illite and kaolinite in the upper Maastrichtian–
lower Danian, reflects a significant resumption of erosion, coinciding with active tectonism and leading to
numerous resedimentation phenomena.

The lower part of the Haria Formation “Maastrichtian” (Adatte et al., 2002) shows the presence of
kaolinite in all the central sections with the eastern basin record suggestive of a hot and humid climate at
that time.

The virtual absence of kaolinite in the Haria Formation in the Tamerza section suggests that the coastline
was very far from this area of the Basin. The abundance of smectite in the two adjacent sections of the
study area (Tamerza and JC sections) is explained by the deepening of the environment. In the other two
sections (OT and JO), the presence of interstratified illite is noted, suggesting the diagenetic influence
confirmed by the large percentages of ankerite (> 50%). The spatial distribution of the mineralogical
assemblages shows that the depositional environment in the two sections—those of Tamerza and Jebel
Chamsi are the deepest, which has already been confirmed by the study of the collected faunistic
associations (Messadi et al., 2016).

In conclusion, the K/Pg boundary, the mineralogical associations show richness in kaolinite, enrichment
in quartz, and the absence of other clay minerals suggestive of a hot and humid climate and a regressive
trend which continues throughout the lower Danian with the presence of minerals of confinement
(palygorskite and sepiolite) in the central Basin section (OT).

The upper part of Danian is characterized by the presence of kaolinite and illite which suggests a hot and
humid climate with the intensification of erosion. The presence of smectite in the western part is
explained by the deepening environment of deposition.

The summit of the Haria Formation (considered to be of upper Danian or Selandian) is characterized by
the dominance of smectite, decrease in illite, and the appearance of kaolinite in low grades. This
indicates a seasonality or possibly an alternation between dry and wet seasons.

The combination of clay minerals from upper Maastrichtian shows dominance of smectite, reflecting a
semi–arid climate with contrasting seasons. A colder and drier climate, favoring physical alteration, is
observed in the first deposits of the Paleogene. The Danian deposits show a decrease in smectite in favor
of illite and kaolinite, which could indicate a period of intensified detritus.

Thelja Formation and its equivalent in Chamsi section

The presence of significant levels of kaolinite at the base of the Thelja Formation indicates a climatic
change compared to the Haria Formation and can therefore explain the increase in the contents of this
mineral in the lower part of this unit toward a wetter climate with more intense precipitation, favoring
chemical alteration.

Page 23/36
The middle part shows smectite and illite enrichment indicating a hot and arid climate. However, the
presence of smectite indicates a hot climate with contrasting seasons. The presence of the smectite-
kaolinite association in the uppermost part of this formation indicates the appearance of the colder and
wetter seasons in the Thanetian deposits.

The spatial distribution of the mineralogical assemblages of the Thelja Formation shows the richness in
smectite in the Tamerza section in comparison with the other sections, which suggests that this locality
represents the deepest part of the Basin while these features may be linked to the confinement of the
environment in the middle and upper part of the regional succession.

The illite is present in all sections the minimal occurrence percentage in Jebel Ong and Jebel Chamsi
sections indicates a location close to the source of sediment supply. The increase in these percentages
follows regressive sedimentary evolution. On the other hand, intervals particularly rich in smectite
underline a tendency to toward a deepening marine setting. Its fine structure, in flakes allows distal
transport. Smectite-rich clay is therefore concentrated in the center of ocean Basins and is representative
of a deep depositional environment. This is also attested by a relative enrichment in planktonic
organisms (Adatte et al., 2002; Messadi et al., 2016).

The study of the vertical evolution of the Thelja Formation with the preponderance of illite over smectite
reveals that from the middle part to the top of this formation, illite becomes increasingly abundant. The
enrichment levels in illite are accompanied by the abundance of gypsum, but also by the depletion of
smectite and fossil deposits reflecting difficult conditions for the development of organisms. This clear
regressive character confirms the evolution of the facies, already observed in the field. Furthermore, the
presence of smectite and the absence of kaolinite, at least at the base of this unit, provides information
on an arid climate (Slansky, 1980; Singer, 1984; Thiry, 2000; Jamoussi et al., 2003, ElAyyat, 2013, Messadi
et al, 2016).

The enrichment of smectite within the upper levels of the Thelja Formation with smectites indicates
deepening. Furthermore, the presence of clinoptilolite also suggests environmental containment
conditions (Sassi, 1974). This confinement which took place in a deep environment translates into the
dwarfism of the planktonic microfauna (Messadi et al, 2016). The presence of quartz indicates a detrital
origin of these clays (Millot, 1964).

Chouabine Formation and its equivalent in the Jebel Chamsi

Mineralogical analysis of the samples from the upper Paleocene–lower Eocene interval from sections of
the Chouabine Formation reveals the presence of five types of clay minerals: smectite, illite, kaolinite,
sepiolite, and palygorskite. Associated minerals are represented by calcite, quartz, phosphate, CT opal,
clinoptilolite, feldspars, and dolomite. Depending on the clay and non–clay mineral distribution, four
distinct mineral zones can be defined.

Zone 1, lower part of the Chouabine Formation

Page 24/36
The clay fraction in this zone shows dominance of smectite, a low level of illite and kaolinite. However,
the absence of kaolinite in the Tamerza section and the absence of smectite in the Oued Thelja section
with rates high in sepiolite, suggest to a very arid climate.

Zone 2, lower part of the Chouabine Formation (excluding basal 2 m)

This zone is marked by an increase in the smectite content but lower than at the base of the formation
and the absence of kaolinite and illite except in the Tamerza section. The absence of smectite in the Oued
Thelja section, and replaced by large percentages of sepiolite, suggests a hot and humid climate with
contrasting seasons.

Zone, 3 middle part of the Chouabine Formation

This zone is marked by the richness in sepiolite and palyorskite and the absence of smectite and kaolinite
in the Tamerza and Oued Thelja sections but with these minerals present in low concentrations in the two
other sections (OJ and JC). The illite is present in Tamerza and Jebel Ong with low values indicative of a
very arid climate.

Zone 4, upper part of the Chouabine Formation

Sepiolite and palygorskite are always abundant in association with illite in the Tamerza section and
smectite in the Oued Thelja section as well as with kaolinite in the Jebel Ong and Chamsi sections
suggest a hot and humid climate with mixed seasons. The presence of high percentages of sepiolite and
palygorskite require periods of tectonic latency which are essential to avoid a supply of coarse detrital
elements. However, a progressive depression of subsidence favors the confinement. The distribution of
the clay fraction shows a predominance of smectite, sepiolite, and palygorskite along the sections. We
note the appearance of kaolinite in the base of the Oued Thelja section and the top and basal part of the
Chamsi and Jebel Ong sections at low concentrations. The associated minerals are mainly represented
by calcite, quartz, phosphate, CT opal, clinoptilolite, and feldspar, and are present throughout all sections.
The dolomite appears only at the top of unit C1 of the Jebel Ong section, the top of unit C2 of the Oued
Thelja section, and at the top of unit C1 of the Tamerza section.

The vertical distribution shows that this formation is characterized by a particular richness in smectite at
its base, indicating a significant environment deepening which confirm the major marine transgression at
the base of the Chouabine Formation. In addition, we noted a paucity this mineral from the base to the
top implying changes in terms of depositional environment more than hose otherwise due to climatic
variance. The smectite decreased in favor of illite and palygorskite reflecting a relative decrease in the
water deepening. This is also evidenced by the decrease in the percentages of benthic foraminifera and
the presence of lumachellic limestone deposits toward the summit (Messadi et al., 2019). In addition, the
presence of clinoptilolite reflects the slightly anoxic character of marine waters required for the genesis of
phosphates (Slansky, 1980).

Page 25/36
Laterally (west to east), the base of the Chouabine Formation is characterized by the richness of smectite
with percentages that decrease and its absence in the center of the basin which is characterized by high
levels of sepiolite. These two minerals are associated with illite in the Tamerza section, with kaolinite in
the Oued Thelja section, Jebel Ong, and Chamsi sections with increasing in its percentages toward Jebel
Chamsi. In the lower part of the Chouabine Formation, smectite and sepiolite remain dominant, but with
lower percentages than at the base, which is marked by the absence of kaolinite except in the Chamsi
section. The middle part shows the re–appearance of high smectite value, but it is characterized by
richness in sepiolite and palygorskite with maximum values in the central part of the Basin (OT section)
and, decreasing in the Tamerza section. This part of the basin wide succession is characterized by the
presence of smectite associated with palygorskite in the Jebel Ong section and associated with kaolinite
in Jebel Chamsi section.

The decrease in kaolinite and illite in the middle part of this formation is linked to climate change from
wetter to arider conditions lending to the transformation of smectite into illite in supratidal environments
following the alternation of dry and wet periods (Singer, 1984; De Coninck et al., 1985). The illite comes
from recycling of the substratum, whereas the kaolinite results from the reorganization of the lands (De
Coninck et al., 1985). The increase of erosion during periods of low sea level can involve an increase in
illite content compared to kaolinite. The reappearance of kaolinite in the middle and top part of this
formation is probably linked to arid-to-wetter climate change, and / or to the reworking of the kaolinite
stored in the most proximal environments of the platform during the flooding of the second transgressive
cycle of the lower Ypresian (Messadi et al., 2019). Therefore, the reworking of kaolinite stored in the most
proximal depositional environments of the platform during major flooding remains the most likely
solution. The increase in kaolinite is generally associated with an increase in the amount of quartz. In this
case, the quantity of quartz remains low and relatively constant. Indeed, the Gafsa Basin Ypresien is
characterized by a strong increase in the available space and significant carbonate production in its
central portion. The upper part of the Chouabine Formation is marked by the re–appearance of smectite
in the sections of Tamerza and Oued Thelja associated with palygorskite. There the two other sections
show the presence of palygorskite and sepiolite, which is associated with kaolinite in the Jebel Chamsi
section.

In the top part of this formation, the relative enrichment in smectite reflects a slight deepening of the
marine environment. Its association with dolomite and, above all, sepiolite indicates that the environment
was still slightly reduced. Kaolinite is generally characteristic of hot and humid regions, while illite
indicates a temperate and arid climate (Singer, 1985; Chamley, 1989). Consequently, the increase in
kaolinite in the Chamsi section is probably linked to the change in the depositional environment more
than an instance of climate change from drier to wetter. In general, the mineralogical association shows
the richness of the Tamerza section in smectite and associated illite and sepiolite showing an evolution
in a deep marine environment in the form of two transgressive cycles. The Oued Thelja section shows the
richness in smectite at the base and progressing to high values in sepiolite and palygorskite with an
evolution reflecting two transgressive cycles in a confined environment representing the deepest part of
the Basin (Oued Thelja section). The Jebel Ong section shows the presence of smectite in the basal and
Page 26/36
middle parts, highlighting the limits of two transgressive cycles. This mineral is associated with Kaolinite
and illite. The Jebel Chamsi section shows a similar evolution to that of the Jebel Ong, but with the
absence of the illite constituting the shallowest part while deeper still than at Jebel Ong.

Comparison with worldwide paleoclimate

Climatic conditions were caused by an overall change in the mode of ocean circulation reflected in
patterns of clay deposition. Indeed, until the Upper Cretaceous–Lower Eocene, the Tethys had a major
role in the global ocean circulation and sediment input. Global warming constitutes a potential source of
deep water masses, as well as head and salinity, during the brief episode of reversal of ocean circulation.
In addition, the southern Tethyan margin was located in the northern tropical zone and was subject to
upwelling episodes under a warm climate (Bolle et al., 1999). Constituting a part of the southern Tethyan
margin, Tunisia was under the control of synsedimentary tectonics and climatic conditions. Several
authors (Salaj, 1980; Marie et al., 1982; Amiri et al., 2005) have reported that during the Paleocene
interval, synsedimentary tectonics were activated since the Campanian in both central and northeastern
areas, leading to complex paleotopography where horsts limit subsidence areas. These features advocate
for an evident change in climate as compared to previous works carried out on the southern Tethyan
margin (Scheibner and Speijer, 2008). These substantial changes were noticed overall in the world
(Scheibner and Speijer, 2008). Since the pioneering work of Shackleton & Kennett (1975), the Cenozoic
and more particularly the Paleogene, has been a period in which the paleoclimatic evolution has been,
particular focus of study. The Paleogene experienced almost continuous cooling which, was in all
environments, interrupted by only occasional warming (Tivollier & Létolle, 1968; Shackleton & Kennett,
1975; Buchardt, 1978; Miller et al., 1987; Zachos et al., 1993, 1994, 2001, 2003; Lear et al., 2000). The first
climatic anomaly known in the Paleogene occurred at the Paleocene–Eocene boundary known as the
PETM (Paleocene–Eocene Thermal Maximum ~ 55 Ma, Zachos et al., 2008). This occured during the
warming phase initiated from the climax of the EECO (Early Eocene Climatic Optimum), which constitutes
the hottest period of the Paleogene with ocean temperatures between 10 and 12°C. During this period, the
ice is supposed to be absent or very reduced on Earth, and we therefore speak of the 'Greenhouse' period
(Zachos et al., 2001). The temperatures were not only high, but the climatic bands, especially the tropic
zones, extended to higher latitudes than today. These climatic characteristics of the Paleocene and lower
Eocene were not only highlighted from studies of isotopic geochemistry (Saito & Van Donk, 1974; Barnet
et al., 2019). Tropical type vegetation has been observed up to 45° N, along with assemblages of tropical
planktonic Foraminifera. Alligator fossils have also been identified on Ellesmere Island in west Greenland
(Estes, 1975; 78 ° N). Finally, the mineralogical assemblages also go in the direction of a hot and humid
climate at the beginning of the Cenozoic with kaolinite found in the sediments around Antarctica and
latitude up to 45 ° N (Robert & Chamley, 1991). The cooling that followed this climatic optimum was
accompanied by a 7 ° C decrease in bottom water temperatures, which led to the glaciation of the Eocene-
Oligocene boundary (~ 34 Ma), marking the start of the, Icehouse period that we still know today (Zachos
et al., 2001). Between these two climatic extremes, cooling takes place is still little understood and poorly
documented, even if recent studies have brought significant constraints on the climatic evolution of the

Page 27/36
middle and upper Eocene (Lear et al., 2000; Bohaty & Zachos, 2003; Tripati et al., 2005; Burgess et al.,
2008; Bohaty et al., 2009).

During the Paleocene, marine limestone and shale accumulated in much of the Sahara, and the African
plate was located approximately 10–20 ° N of latitude south of its modern position. The climate in the
Sahara at this time is thought to have been generally hot and humid (Bellion, 1989), although studies of
Paleocene strata in southern Tunisia suggest that there was variability from a warm and humid climate
during the early Paleocene to a warm and arid climate during the Paleocene–Eocene transition (Keller et
al., 1998; Bolle et al., 1999). Other studies cite evidence for a major transgression in the Sahara that
culminated in a sea level highstand during the late Paleocene (Reyment, 1980; Bellion, 1989). This
transgression would be coincident with a global warming trend that began during the late Paleocene and
ended during the early Eocene (Miller et al., 1987; Zachos et al., 2001). In addition, a very abrupt and brief
episode of global warming during the LPTM (Late Paleocene Thermal Maximum) occurred near the
Paleocene–Eocene boundary, superimposed on the general Paleocene–Eocene warming trend (Zachos et
al., 1993, 2001).

Conclusion
The Clay paragenesis of the studied deposits brings out valuable information about climate and
paleoenvironment conditions. Six lithostratigraphic sections were logged in the areas of Tamerza, Oued
Thelja, Ong and Chamsi. An initial zone showing a hot and humid climate with contrasting seasons can
be defined from the base of the succession toward the K/Pg boundary generating clay sequences with
mineralogical assemblages rich in smectite in the eastern part reflect the distances from the sources
more than the climatic conditions. During the Maastrichtian–Danian transition, the assembly of clay
minerals highlights the transition from a hot and humid climate with a marked seasonality alternating
between wet and dry periods, characterized by a dominance of smectite, to a cooler climate favoring
mechanical alteration and kaolinite formation. A few meters from above the K/Pg boundary, the
simultaneous influx of illite and kaolinite in large quantities indicates significant terrigenous input,
revealing a greater erosion of continental relief generating thick sedimentary sequences. The upper part
of the Danian interval shows richness in smectite and illite, although little kaolinite. This profile seems to
indicate a proximal and stable environment again dominated by a semi–arid climate with alternating dry
and humid periods, favoring the formation of smectite-generating highly developed depositional
sequences. Finally, the mineralogical assemblages also go point toward of a hot and humid climate with
a contrasting seasonality during the Late Cretaceous, become colder and drier at the beginning of the
Cenozoic.

The presence of kaolinite at the base of the Thelja Formation, dated as Thanetian indicates that climatic
change can therefore explain the increase in the contents of this mineral in the lower part of this unit
toward a more humid climate with more intense precipitation, favoring chemical alteration generating
carbonate. The middle and top part of the Thelja Formation shows smectite and illite enrichment
indicating a hot and arid climate generating evaporitic sequences. Mineralogical analysis of samples
Page 28/36
from the Paleocene/Eocene passage intervals from the section of the Chouabine Formation. Deposits of
Chouabine Formation are dominated by smectite and sepiolite suggesting a hot and arid climate
generating phosphatic sequences. Indeed, the abundance of clinoptilolite, sepiolite, palygorskite, and the
rarity of smectites reflect a semi–confined marine environment. These analyses confirm the results
obtained by microscopic examinations of the facies. Microfossil associations indicate shallow infratidal
to circatidal environments.

Declarations
Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the personnel of the Civil Engineering department at National Engineering
School of Sfax (ENIS), the Physics Department of the Faculty of Science of Bizerte and the personnel of
the Higher Institute of Biotechnology of Sfax for their technical support.

Data availability

This paper is written purely for academic research purposes and the author have no commercial or
financial conflicts of interest. Data will be made available upon reasonable request for academic use and
within the limitations of the provided informed consent by the corresponding author upon acceptance.
Every request will be reviewed by the institutional review board.

AUTHORS' CONTRIBUTIONS

The authors confirm sole responsibility for the following:

Data collection, analysis and interpretation of results, and manuscript preparation

Declaration of interests

This paper is written purely for academic research purposes and the author have no commercial or
financial conflicts of interest.

References
1. Adatte, T., Gerta, K., & Wolfgang, S. (2002). Late Cretaceous to early Paleocene climate and sea–level
fluctuations: the Tunisian record. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, 2754, 1-32.
2. Amri, A., Ben Youssef, M., & Ghanmi, M. (2005). Enregistrement de phénomènes de resedimentation
au cours du Maastrichtien supérieur et du Paléocène supérieur (J. Serj, Tunisie atlasique) : apport
micropaléontologique et signature tectono–eustatique. Comptes rendus Geosciences, 1525-1531.
3. Barnet, J.S.K., Littler, K., Westerhold, T., Kroon, D., Leng, M.J., Bailey, I., Röhl, U., & Zachos, J.C. (2019).
A High-Fidelity Benthic Stable Isotope Record of Late Cretaceous–Early Eocene Climate Change and
Carbon-Cycling. Paleoceanography and Paleoclimatology, 34: 672-691
Page 29/36
 4. Bellion, Y.J.C. (1989). Histoire géodynamique post–Paléozoïque de l’Afrique de l’Ouest d’après l’étude
de quelques bassins sédimentaires (Senegal, Taoudenni, Iullemmeden, Tchad). Centre International
pour la Formation et les Échanges Géologiques (CIFEG), Publication Occasionnelle 1989/17. 302 p.
5. Bohaty, S.M., & Zachos, J.C. (2003). Significant Southern Ocean warming event in the late middle
Eocene. Geology, 31, 1017-1020.
6. Bohaty, S.M., Zachos, J.C., Florindo, F., & Delaney, M.L. (2009). Coupled greenhouse warming and
deep–sea acidification in the middle Eocene. Paleoceanography, 24,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2008PA001676.
7. Bolle, M.P., Adatte, T., Keller, G., Von Salis, K., & Burns, S. (1999). The Paleocene–Eocene
transition in the southern Tethys (Tunisia): climatic and environmental fluctuations. Bulletin de la
Societe Geologique de France, 170, 661-680.
8. Buchardt, B. (1978). Oxygen isotope palaeotemperatures from the Tertiary period in the North Sea
area. Nature, 275, 121,123.
9. Burgess, C.E., Pearson, P.N., Lear, C.H., Morgans, H.E.G., Handley, L., Pancost, R.D., & Schouten, S.
(2008). Middle Eocene climate cyclicity in the southern Pacific: Implications for global ice
volume. Geology, 36, 651-654.
10. Burollet, P.F. (1956). Contribution à l‟étude stratigraphique de la Tunisie centrale. Ph.D. Thesis Paris.
Annales des Mines et de la Géologie, Tunis, n°18,350"p."
11. Brindley, G.W., & Brown, G. (1980). Crystal structures of Clay Minerals and Their X-ray
Identification (first ed.), Mineralogical Society, London, 411-438
12. Carroll, D., (1970). Clay minerals: a guide to their X–Ray identification. Geological Society of
America. Special paper (126), 80"p."
13. Chamley, H., De Coninck, J.F., & Millot, G. (1999). Sur l’abondance des minéraux smectitiques dans
les sédiments marins communs, déposés lors des périodes de haut niveau marin du Jurassique
supérieur au Paléogène, Compte Rendus Académie de Sciences. Paris, Ser. II 311, 1529-1536.
14. De Coninck, J., Chamley, H., Beaudoin, B., Accarie, H., & Renard, M. (1985). Paleoenvironmental and
diagnostic significance of Aptian to Eocene clay mineral successions of the Umbria Marche Basin
(northern Apennines, Italy). In: Abstract International Conférence. Association Internationale Pour
l'Etude des Argiles, Strasbourg, 23–28 August.
15. EL–Ayyat, A.M. (2013). Sedimentology, sequential analysis and clay mineralogy of the lower Eocene
sequence at Farafra Oasis, Western Desert of Egypt. Journal of African Earth Sciences, 78: 28-50.
16. El Ayachi, M.S., Zagrarni, M.F., Snoussi, A., Bahrouni, N., Gzam, M, Ben Assi, I., Hammami, K., Abdelli,
H., & Ben Rhaiem, H. (2016). The Paleocene–lower Eocene series of the Gafsa Basin (South–Central
Tunisia): integrated stratigraphy and paleoenvironments. Arabian Journal of Geosciences. 9.
10.1007/s12517–016–2403–0.
17. Estes, R., (1975). Lower vertebrates from the Fort Union Formation, late Paleocene, Big Horn
680 Basin, Wyoming: Herpetologica, v. 31, 365-385.

Page 30/36
18. Fournie, D. (1978). Nomenclature lithostratigraphique des séries du crétacé supérieur au
tertiaire de Tunisie. Bulltin Centre de Recherche production Elf Aquitaine, 2, 1, 97-148.
19. Hallam, A. (1991). Phanerozoic sea–level changes. New York, Columbia University Press,
266 "p."
20. Hallam, A., Grose, J.A., & Ruffel, A.H. (1991). Palaeoclimatic significance of changes in clay
mineralogy across the Jurassic–Cretaceous boundary in England and France. Palaeogeography.
Palaeoclimatology. Palaeoecology. 81, 173-187.
21. Jamoussi, F., Bédir,M., Boukadi, N., Kharbachi, S., Zargouni, F., López–Galindo, A., & Paquet, H.
(2003). Clay mineralogical distribution and tectono–eustatic control in the Tunisian margin Basins;
Comptes Rendus Geoscience 335, 175-183.
22. Keller, G., Adatte, T., Stinnesbeck, W., Stüben, D., Kramar, U., Berner, Z., Li, L., & Salis
Perch–Nielson, K. (1998). The Cretaceous–Tertiary transition on the shallow Saharan Platform of
southern Tunisia. Geobios, 30, 951-975.
23. Khozyem, H., Adatte, T., Spangenberg, J., Tantawy, A., & Keller, G. (2013). Paleoenvironmental and
climatic changes during the PaleoceneEocene Thermal Maximum (PETM) at the Wadi Nukhul
Section, Sinai, Egypt. Journal of Geology Society of London 170,341-352.
24. Khozyem, H., Adatte, T., Spangenberg, J. E., Keller, G., Tantawy, A. A., & Ulianov, A. (2015). New
geochemical constraints on the Paleocene–Eocene thermal maximum: Dababiya GSSP,
Egypt. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, 429, 117-135.
25. Kennett, J.P., & Stott, L. D. (1991). Abrupt deep–sea–warming, paleoceanographic changes and
benthic extinctions at the end of the Paleocene. Nature, 353, 319-322.
26. Lear, C.H., Elderfield, H., & Wilson, P.A. (2000). Cenozoic deep–sea temperatures and global ice
volumes from Mg/Ca in benthic foraminiferal calcite. Science, 287, 269-272.
27. Marie, J., Trouve, P., Desforges, G., & Dufaure, P. (1982). Nouveaux éléments de la
paléogéographie du Crétacé de la Tunisie. In: Notes Mémoires. 19, CFP–total, Paris, 1982, 6-37
28. Messadi, A. M., Mardassi, B., Ouali, J. A., & Touir, J. (2016). Sedimentology, diagenesis, clay
mineralogy and sequential analysis model of Upper Paleocene evaporite–carbonate ramp
succession from Tamerza area (Gafsa Basin: Southern Tunisia), Journal of African Earth Sciences,
18, 205-230, ISSN 1464–343X.
29. Messadi, A. M., Mardassi, B., Ouali, J. A., & Touir, J. (2017). Sedimentology, diagenesis, and
sequential analysis of a carbonate series in shallow marine environments of the Middle Eocene
deposits from Gafsa basin (Southern Tunisia). In 1st Atlas georesources international congress,
Hammamet-Tunisia (Vol. 3, p. 2017).
30. Messadi, A. M., Mardassi, B., Ouali, J. A., & Touir, J. (2018). Diagenetic process as tool to diagnose
paleo–environment conditions, bathymetry and oxygenation during Late Paleocene–Early Eocene in
the Gafsa Basin. Carbonates and evaporites. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13146–018–0424–3.
31. Messadi, A. M., Mardassi, B., Ouali, J. A., & Touir, J. (2019). Sedimentology, sequential analysis and
paleoclimate associations of the upper Paleocene–lower Eocene Chouabine Formation at the Oued
Page 31/36
 Thelja section, Gafsa Basin, Southern Tunisia. Stratigraphy, 16, 4, 265-277.
32. Messadi, A. M., Touir, J., Mardassi, B., & Ouali, J. A. (2020). Factors controlling sedimentation and
sequence stratigraphy evolution in shallow marine (carbonates) platform: example of Middle Eocene
deposits from Gafsa Basin. Carbonates and Evaporites, 35(2), 1-24.
33. Messadi, A. M. (2021). Sédimentologie et stratigraphie séquentielle des dépôts de l’intervalle
Maastrichtien supérieur Eocène dans le bassin de Gafsa. Thèse de doctorat, université Sfax 278"p."
34. Miller, K.G., Fairbanks, R.A., & Mountain, G.S. (1987). Tertiary oxygen isotope synthesis, sea–level
history and continental margin erosion. Paleoceanography, 2, 1-19.
35. Millot, G., (1964). Géologies des Argiles. Masson and Cie. Paris, 498p.
36. PAQUET, H., (1970). Evolution géochimique des minéraux argileux dans les altérations et les sols des
climats méditerranéens et tropicaux ~ saisons contrastées. Mdm. Sev. Carte Gdol. Alsace Lorraine,
30, 212.
37. Pierce, J.W. & Siegel, F.R. (1969). Quantification in clay mineral studies of sediments and
sedimentary rock. Journal Sedimentary Petrology, 39: 187-193.
38. Reyment, R.A. (1980). Biogeography of the Saharan Cretaceous and Paleocene epicontinental
transgressions. Cretaceous Research 1, 299-327.
39. Robert, C. & Chamley, H. (1991). Development of early Eocene warm climates, as inferred from clay
mineral variations in oceanic sediments. Global and Planetary Change, 89, 315-332.
40. Saito, T., & Van Donk, J. (1974). Oxygen and Carbon Isotope Measurements of Late Cretaceous and
Early Tertiary Foraminifera. Micropaleontology, 20(2), 152–177.
41. Salaj, J. (1980). Microbiostratigraphie du Crétacé et du Paléogène de la Tunisie septentrionale et
orientale (Hypostratotypes tunisiens), p. 238. Inst. Geol. Dionyz Stur, Bratislava, 1980.
42. Sassi, S. (1974). La sédimentation phosphatée au Paléocène dans le Sud et le Centre Ouest de la
TUNISIE. Thèse d’Etat, Paris
43. Scheibner, C., & Speijer, R.P. (2008). Decline of Coral Reefs during Late Paleocene to Early Eocene
Global Warming. Earth, 3, 19-26. http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/ee-3-19-2008
44. Shackleton, N.J. & Kennett, J.P. (1975). Paleotemperature history of the Cenozoic and the initiation of
Antarctic glaciation: Oxygen and carbon isotope analyses in DSDP sites 277, 279 and 281. In: Initial
Reports of the Deep Sea Drilling Project, 29. US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC, 743-
755.
45. Singer, A. (1984). The paleoclimatic interpretation of clay minerals in sediments – a review. Earth
Sciences Reviews. 21, 251-293.
46. Slansky, M. (1980). Géologie des phosphates sédimentaires–. Mémoire du B.R.G.M, n°92p
47. Thiry, M. (2000). Palaeoclimatic interpretation of clay minerals in marine deposits: an outlook from
the continental origin. Earth–Science Reviews. 49, 201-221
48. Tivollier, J. & Létolle, R. (1968). Résultats et interprétation d’analyses isotopiques de faunes
malacologiques du Tertiaire parisien. In: Pomerol C. (ed.) Colloque sur l’Eocène. Mémoires du Bureau

Page 32/36
 de Recherches Géologiques et Minières, 58, 346-357.
49. Tripati, A., Backman, J., Elderfield, H., & Ferretti, P. (2005). Eocene bipolar glaciation associated with
global carbon cycle changes. Nature, 436, 341-346.
50. Zachos, J., Lohmann, K., Walker, J.C.G., & Wise, S. (1993). Abrupt climate change and transient
climates during the Paleogene: A marine perspective. Journal Geology, 101, 191-123.
51. Zachos, J., Stott, L., & Lohmann, K. (1994). Evolution of early Cenozoic marine temperatures.
Paleoceanography, 9 (2), 353-387.
52. Zachos, J.C., Pagani, M., Sloan, L., Thomas, D.J., & Billups, K. (2001). Trends, rhythms, and
aberrations in global climate 65 Ma to present. Science, 292, 686-693.
53. Zachos, J.C., Wara, M.W., Bohaty, S., Delaney, M.L., Petrizzo, M.R., Brill, A., Bralower, T.J., & Premoli–
Silva, I. (2003). A transient rise in tropical sea surface temperature during the Paleocene–Eocene
Thermal Maximum. Science, 302, 1551-1554.
54. Zachos, J.C., Dickens, G.R., & Zeebe, R.E. (2008). An early Cenozoic perspective
on greenhouse warming and carbon–cycle dynamics. Nature, 451, 279-283
55. Zaier, A., Beji–Sassi, A., Sassi, & S. Moody, R.T.J. (1998). Basin evolution and deposition during the
Early Paleogene in Tunisia. In: Maggregor D.S., R.T.J. Moody & D.D. Clark–Lowes (Eds), and
Petroleum Geology of North Africa. Geologica Society, London, Special Publication, 123, 375-393.
56. Zargouni. F., Laatar. S., Chaouchi. A., & Regaya, K. (1985). Carte géologique de la région de Metlaoui.
Service géologique, ONM, 120 p.

Figures

Page 33/36
Figure 1

Legend not included with this version.

Page 34/36
Figure 2

Legend not included with this version.

Page 35/36
Figure 3

Legend not included with this version.

Page 36/36