See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/283635657

Egyptian Tethyan margin in the Mesozoic: Evolution of a mixed carbonate-

siliciclastic shelf edge (from Western Desert to Sinai)

Article in Marine and Petroleum Geology · October 2015

DOI: 10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2015.10.011

CITATIONS READS

51 9,811

6 authors, including:

Aurélie Tassy Christian Gorini

Akkodis Sorbonne Université
42 PUBLICATIONS 157 CITATIONS 362 PUBLICATIONS 6,819 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Jean‐Loup Rubino Jean-Luc Bouroullec

TOTAL TOTAL
196 PUBLICATIONS 2,546 CITATIONS 10 PUBLICATIONS 200 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Aurélie Tassy on 22 March 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Marine and Petroleum Geology xxx (2015) 1e17

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Marine and Petroleum Geology

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/marpetgeo

Review article

Egyptian Tethyan margin in the Mesozoic: Evolution of a mixed

carbonate-siliciclastic shelf edge (from Western Desert to Sinai)
Aure
lie Tassy a, *, Emmanuel Crouzy b, Christian Gorini a, Jean-Loup Rubino b,
Jean-Luc Bouroullec b, François Sapin b
a
Universit

e Pierre et Marie Curie (UPMC), Institut des Sciences de la Terre Paris (iSTeP) e CNRS UMR 7193, Laboratoire Evolution et Mod

elisation des
Bassins S

edimentaires, 4 Place Jussieu e Case 117, Tour 56-66, 5 eme
etage, 75252 Paris Cedex 05 France
b
TOTAL CST JF, Avenue Larribau, 64000, Pau, France

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: During the Mesozoic the Egyptian margin was an oblique margin with NWeSE oriented transform fault
Received 30 July 2015 system. In the Eastern Mediterranean basin, Mesozoic margins were characterized by mixed carbonate-
Received in revised form siliciclastics platforms where subsidence and eustasy were the main parameters controlling the facies
3 October 2015
distribution and geometries of the platform-to-basin transition. Geometries and facies on the platform
Accepted 9 October 2015
Available online xxx
eslopeebasin profile, are today well constrained on the Levant side, but are still poorly known on the
Egyptian side. Geometries and stratigraphic architecture of the Egyptian margin have been mapped,
thanks to a regional seismic and well data-base provided by a joint industrial-academic group (UPMC-
Keywords:
Shelf edge paleotopography
Total). This study brings new understandings on the seismo-stratigraphic architecture of the platform
Platform-basin transition eslopeebasin system in a key area from Western Desert to Nile Delta and the Levant margin. Mapping of
Mixed carbonate-siliciclastic depositional the top Jurassic and top Cretaceous horizons shows the seismic geomorphology of the margin and the
system hinge line from Western Desert to Sinai. During the Jurassic, carbonate platforms were prograding with a
Mesozoic distal thickening of the external platform with gentle slope profiles, paleo-valleys and embayments.
Oblique margin Since the Cretaceous, the margin shows an aggrading and retrograding mixed carbonate-siliciclastic
Egypt platform succession with abrupt NWeSE trending paleo-shelf-edges (affected by large gravity slide-
scars) and distally steepened segments. This structure of the platform edges is strongly controlled by
the inherited Tethyan transform fault directions. Along the hinge line, embayments are interpreted as
megaslides. The basin filling is characterized by an alternation of chaotic seismic facies and high
amplitude reflectors onlapping the paleoslopes. Mass Transport Complex (MTC) deposits are charac-
terized by the mobilization of thick sedimentary sections (up to 3500 m in thickness) as a mixed
amalgamation of debris flows, internally preserved blocks, and/or compressively-deformed distal
allochthonous masses. Transported materials have been sourced from the dismantling of the Mesozoic
mixed carbonate-siliciclastic platform and they can spread down slope over areas as large as 70,000 km2.
Based on stratigraphic correlations with global sea-level changes, platform instability could have been
triggered by the gravitational collapse of the carbonate-siliciclastic platform under its own weight after
successive subaerial exposures periods which were able to enable karstification processes.
© 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Contents

1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
2. Geological setting of the Egyptian continental margin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
2.1. Regional geology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
2.2. Lithofacies and depositional environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
2.3. Tectono-stratigraphic architecture of the margin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00

* Corresponding author. Present address: Apulia Geosciences, 04340 Le Lauzet-Ubaye, France.

E-mail address: auretassy@gmail.com (A. Tassy).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2015.10.011
0264-8172/© 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Please cite this article in press as: Tassy, A., et al., Egyptian Tethyan margin in the Mesozoic: Evolution of a mixed carbonate-siliciclastic shelf
edge (from Western Desert to Sinai), Marine and Petroleum Geology (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2015.10.011
2 A. Tassy et al. / Marine and Petroleum Geology xxx (2015) 1e17

3. Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
3.1. Seismostratigraphic architecture of the Jurassic platformeslopeebasin transition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
3.2. Seismic mapping of the top Jurassic shallow-water carbonate platform . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
3.3. Seismostratigraphic architecture of the Cretaceous platformeslopeebasin profile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
3.4. Mapping of Cretaceous mixed carbonate-siliciclastic platformeslopeebasin transition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
3.4.1. Mapping of the shallow water platform . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
3.4.2. 3D geomorphology and sedimentary environments of the Egyptian margin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
3.4.3. Paleogeography of the Upper Cretaceous Egyptian margin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
4. Controlling factors of the margin architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
4.1. Tectonic setting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
4.2. Carbonate systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
4.3. Architecture of the slope deposits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
4.4. Paleogeography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
4.5. Sea-level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
4.6. Geomorphology of the platformeslopeebasin transition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
5. Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00

1. Introduction edge and the stratigraphic architecture of the Egyptian margin can
be illustrated thanks to a large onshore-offshore seismic and well
In the Mediterranean region, the evolution of Peri-Tethyan data base provided by a joint industrial-academic group (UPMC and
Jurassic-Cretaceous margin-slope-basinfloor systems have been Total). The seismic stratigraphic interpretation is calibrated with
studied in recent decades for the stratigraphic architecture of base- industrial wells allowing a detailed paleogeography of the Egyptian
of slope depositional system at outcrop sections (e.g., Provence margin to be established for the Cretaceous and Jurassic, inte-
margin: Floquet and Hennuy, 2001; Apulia margin: Borgomano, grating the stratigraphic evolution, tectonic setting and carbonate-
2000; Eberli et al., 2004; Santantonio et al., 2013; Hairabian et al., siliciclastic mixed depositional systems.
2014; Moroccan margin: Verwer et al., 2009; Della Porta et al.,
2013) and on offshore 2D seismics (Moroccan margin: Heyman, 2. Geological setting of the Egyptian continental margin
1989; Levant margin; Gardosh et al., 2006; Hawie et al., 2013). All
of these studies highlighted a dominant tectonic control on the 2.1. Regional geology
geometry and stratigraphic architecture and discontinuities within
sedimentary systems at the platformebasin transition. In Egypt, The Mesozoic Egyptian margin was the southern margin of the
Mesozoic platformebasin transition has been indicated on regional Eastern Mediterranean basin, at the northern African plate bound-
paleogeographic maps (e.g. Stampfli et al., 1991; Thierry, 2000), ary. It inherited its position following a continental breakup phase
without information about stratigraphic architecture. Our main from the Late Triassic to Middle-Jurassic times (Dercourt et al., 1993;
objective is to characterize the geometry and spatial-temporal Garfunkel, 1998; Guiraud et al., 2005; Bosworth et al., 2008). Many
evolution of the sedimentary systems at the platformebasin tran- authors considered the Egyptian segment as a passive margin of the
sition and its main controlling factors within a key area for hy- Eastern Mediterranean basin with a NEeSW rifting (Bein and
drocarbon exploration from Western Desert to Nile Delta and Sinai Gvirtzman, 1977; Robertson and Dixon, 1984; Stampfli et al., 1991;
margins, both onshore and offshore. Dercourt et al., 1993; Stampfli and Borel, 2002; Gerdes et al.,
The Western Desert that covers two-thirds of Egypt, is bordered 2010), but an alternative interpretation (Garfunkel, 1998, 2004;
in its northern part by coastal basins (Matruh, Shushan, Alamein Frizon de la Motte et al., 2011; Tari et al., 2012a,b) implied that
and Natrun) characterized by important oil and gas accumulations NW Egypt was an oblique margin, with a NWeSE opening direction
and oil production (e.g. Dolson et al., 2001). Recent offshore dis- (Fig. 1AeB). We follow this interpretation in our study. It is impor-
coveries of light oil accumulations in the Lower Cretaceous car- tant to notice the Levant margin was affected by two major tectono-
bonate platform (recent Zvor gas discovery), base-of-slope magmatic plume periods during Permo-Triassic stage and Late
turbidites offshore Sinai (Ziv-1 and Mango-1) and Israel (Helez oil TriassiceJurassic stage (Segev et al., 2011). By the Early Jurassic
field) (Gardosh et al., 2006, 2011) and various oil shows (Marakia- times the northwestwardethinning Levant margin was established
1X; Ghaly et al., 2002) on the Cretaceous external platform play (Garfunkel, 1998; Segev, 2002; Segev and Rybakov, 2010). Although
offshore Western Desert indicates that the Mesozoic platform-to- not specifically related to the studied area, these events could have
basin transition has significant hydrocarbon potential. In the some impact on the thermal and mechanical evolution of the
Eastern Mediterranean, Mesozoic continental shelves are charac- margin during the post-rift phase. From Middle-Jurassic to Middle-
terized by mixed carbonates-siliciclastic depositional systems Cretaceous, post-rift subsidence was responsible for the formation
(Levant margin: e.g. Gardosh et al., 2006; Hawie et al., 2013; of a shallow-marine shelf roughly parallel to the present-day
Egyptian margin: e.g. Dolson et al., 2001) where facies and geo- coastline from Western Desert to Levant margin, and deep marine
metric architecture are mainly controlled by subsidence and environment in the Eastern Mediterranean basin.
eustasy. So far Mesozoic depositional facies and geometries along The present-day Egyptian margin (Fig. 2) can be divided into
Egyptian margin platformeslopeebasin profile have remained three onshore geological areas, from west to east: The Western
poorly described and interpreted. The characterization of the ge- Desert shaped by Mesozoic intra-shelf basins (e.g. Meshref, 1990),
ometry and spatio-temporal evolution of the sedimentary systems the Nile Delta with its large Tertiary sedimentary clastic accumu-
presented in this paper is based on seismo-stratigraphic interpre- lation (e.g. Gaullier et al., 2000; Loncke et al., 2002), and the North
tation. For the first time, the Mesozoic 3D morphology of the shelf- Sinai, characterized by inverted folds and faults formed during

Please cite this article in press as: Tassy, A., et al., Egyptian Tethyan margin in the Mesozoic: Evolution of a mixed carbonate-siliciclastic shelf
edge (from Western Desert to Sinai), Marine and Petroleum Geology (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2015.10.011
Fig. 1. 1A: Location of Egyptian platform on a paleotectonic map of North Africa and Arabia during the Callovian (modified after Frizon de la Motte et al., 2011). 1B: Approximate
extent of carbonate depositional environments illustrated by paleogeographic map of middle Jurassic (Late Toarcian-Early Oxfordian) modified after Gerdes et al., 2010, Ziegler
1990; Dercourt et al., 2000; Simmons et al., 2007.

Please cite this article in press as: Tassy, A., et al., Egyptian Tethyan margin in the Mesozoic: Evolution of a mixed carbonate-siliciclastic shelf
edge (from Western Desert to Sinai), Marine and Petroleum Geology (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2015.10.011
4 A. Tassy et al. / Marine and Petroleum Geology xxx (2015) 1e17

Fig. 2. Structural sketch of the East Mediterranean (present day). Offshore, African plate is formed by Mediterranean Ridge, Herodotus and Levant Basins, Eratosthenes Seamount,
Nile Delta sedimentary pile and Rosetta Fault systems. Onshore is characterized by Egyptian and Levantine coastlines. Northern Egypt is subdivided into three main areas: Western
Desert, Nile Delta and North Sinai.

“Syrian Arc” Late Cretaceous transpressive deformation phase
whose origin is still a subject of discussion (Krenkel, 1925; Picard,
1959; Freund et al., 1975; Neev and Ben-Avraham, 1977; Eyal,
1996; Buchbinder and Zilberman, 1997; Garfunkel, 1998; Bosworth
et al., 1999; Walley, 2001).
Offshore, from west to east, the seafloor morphology of the East
Mediterranean basin is shaped by the Mediterranean Ridge, Her-
odotus Basin, Nile Deep Sea Fan, Eratosthenes Seamount and the
Levant Basin (Fig. 2). Mediterranean ridge corresponds to a major
morpho-structural domain corresponding to an accretionary prism
along the subduction zone between Africa and Europe (Korrat et al.,
2005), and Nile Deep Sea Fan is the largest modern turbidite system
within the Eastern Mediterranean area (Gaullier et al., 2000). The
offshore Nile Delta is affected by many subsurface structural trends
(e.g. Dolson et al., 2001). The NEeSW direction is the dominant
trend, related to the Rosetta Fault system. It defines the eastern
limit of the sub-oceanic to oceanic Herodotus Basin and the aborted
rifting domain of the Levant Basin. This trend shows a large-scale
structural topography formed by transpressional movement
controlled by deep basement faults (Gamal, 2013). The present-day
continental shelf is narrow (10e20 km on average) and steep along
the Western Desert and the Levant margin, and becomes wider in
the Nile Delta and North Sinai areas (more than 60 km).
2.2. Lithofacies and depositional environment
The stratigraphic summary chart of the Western Desert coastal
area is based on onshore and offshore well data from the Western
Desert to the Nile Delta (Figs. 3 and 4). The Egyptian margin is
characterized by a Paleozoic to Cenozoic mixed carbonate-
siliciclastic sedimentation. From Permian to Early Jurassic,
Western Desert and Nile Delta onshore sedimentation is conti-
nental. Opening of the Neo-Tethys to the north of the Egyptian
margin allowed the development of a wide Jurassic to Cretaceous
carbonate platform attached to the continental system on the south
from Western Desert to Sinai. This platform was frequently invaded
by terrigenous sediments sourced from the south in the Western
Desert area (Parisot et al., 1996), and south and east from the Sinai
area (Gardosh et al., 2006), mainly during the Cretaceous. Paleo-
climate reconstructions indicate that the Levant Margin was situ-
ated in the humid equatorial belt during the Cretaceous (Wendler
et al., 2015) implying high run off, and that the climate condi-
tions during the Aptian were more arid (Hendriks and Schrank,
1990). This could affect the nature of the carbonate platform
especially in the restricted environments. During the Jurassic the
Levant Margin was exposed to a warm tropical climate according to
global reconstructions (Holz, 2015).
2.3. Tectono-stratigraphic architecture of the margin
On the neighboring Levantine divergent margin, the Jurassic
carbonate platform shows aggradational to retrogradational
trends, and the Cretaceous platform back-steps above the Jurassic
series (Gardosh et al., 2006; Hawie et al., 2013). Resedimented
gravity-flow deposits detached from the platform interior onlap
the platform edges and slopes. The sedimentary prism of lime-
stone breccia outcropping onshore in Israel corresponds to the
Albian-Turonian Talme Yafe reservoir formation (Bein and Weiler,
1976). Egyptian margin is characterized by Mesozoic to Eocene
mixed carbonate-siliciclastic platform with a fault-bounded shelf
edge. Transition from platform to basin is poorly understood due
to lack of wells located on the slope and in the basin. The thick Nile

Please cite this article in press as: Tassy, A., et al., Egyptian Tethyan margin in the Mesozoic: Evolution of a mixed carbonate-siliciclastic shelf
edge (from Western Desert to Sinai), Marine and Petroleum Geology (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2015.10.011
 A. Tassy et al. / Marine and Petroleum Geology xxx (2015) 1e17 5

Fig. 3. Regional onshore tectono-stratigraphic chart of the margin from Western Desert to Nile Delta showing the main lithologies drilled from Lower Jurassic to Pleistocene,
stratigraphic hiatuses, and interpreted depositional environments and major geodynamic events.

Please cite this article in press as: Tassy, A., et al., Egyptian Tethyan margin in the Mesozoic: Evolution of a mixed carbonate-siliciclastic shelf
edge (from Western Desert to Sinai), Marine and Petroleum Geology (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2015.10.011
6 A. Tassy et al. / Marine and Petroleum Geology xxx (2015) 1e17

Fig. 4. Lithostratigraphic and gamma-ray logs for three wells located on the Mesozoic inner shelf (A), outer shelf (B) and continental slope (C).

Please cite this article in press as: Tassy, A., et al., Egyptian Tethyan margin in the Mesozoic: Evolution of a mixed carbonate-siliciclastic shelf
edge (from Western Desert to Sinai), Marine and Petroleum Geology (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2015.10.011
 A. Tassy et al. / Marine and Petroleum Geology xxx (2015) 1e17 7

Delta Tertiary pile of sediments above downgrades the quality of
the seismic signal at the great burial depth (up to 6s two-way
travel time on seismic sections). The Mesozoic platform edge
from Western Egypt to Levantine margin corresponds to a
tectono-stratigraphic boundary between the shallow-water car-
bonate and clastic deposition on the platform and the pelagic
sedimentation on the basin. This limit corresponds to a hinge-
zone on a transform margin and is controlled by deep crustal
faults inherited from the Early Mesozoic rifting phase (Tari et al.,
2012a,b) (Figs. 3 and 5). This lithological and geomorphologic
transitional area exerted a major structural control to the Tertiary
sedimentation. Beginning in the Oligocene, fluvio-deltaic sedi-
mentation dominated the present-day Nile Delta. The hinge-zone
formed a paleo-topography in which the delta sediments accu-
mulated. Listric faults detached within decollement levels at the
latest Cretaceous-Eocene basinal argillaceous strata along the
hinge-zone, leading to gravitational instability within the pre-
Messinian Oligo-Miocene strata. These normal faults affect the
whole Tertiary series with throws sometimes exceeding 400 m,
and may have generated fluid leakage on the seafloor. On the
offshore Nile Delta area, another gravity sliding system is
described affecting the Plio-Pleistocene strata, above the Messi-
nian salt decollement level (Fig. 5).
3. Results
3.1. Seismostratigraphic architecture of the Jurassic
platformeslopeebasin transition
Wells for proper calibration of the Jurassic platform edge off the
Western Desert area are lacking but seismic profiles allow us to
interpret stratigraphic sequences and depositional systems (Fig. 6).
Top Jurassic and top Cretaceous seismic reflectors are constrained
by three onshore wells located between 15 km and 30 km distance
from the platform edge in the Matruh area (Fig. 6).
S1 sequence shows prograding clinoforms with downlaping
reflectors that can be attributed to the mid-Jurassic Wadi Natrun
Limestone formation (Norton, 1967). These seismic reflectors are
discordant above high amplitude seismic reflectors interpreted to
be the top of the Paleozoic series.
Above S1 sequence, S2 is also characterized by prograding cli-
noforms and may correspond to the Middle Jurassic Khatatba for-
mation, described by Norton (1967). This 430 m thick formation,
which has been drilled in an onshore well is characterized by a
mixed lithology, with dolomites and limestones at the bottom and
sandstones near the top.
S2 sequence is overlain by an aggrading and retrograding
sequence S3, corresponding to the Upper Jurassic Massajid car-
bonate platform. The Massajid formation is an extensive unit
developed along the northern African shelf from Western Desert to
Sinai and far into Arabia, and represents continuous sedimentation
and transgression on the southern margin of the Tethys (Schutz,
1994). S3 sequence corresponds to a 200 ms TWT thick
mounded-shape structure on the platform edge.
Above it, S4 sequence is a 600 ms TWT retrograding sequence
that corresponds to the upper part of Massajid formation.
Retrogradation can be correlated to the platform drowning due
to subsidence of the margin (Campbell and Stafleu, 1992;
Blomeier and Reijmer, 1999).
Based on onshore wells, the Jurassic-Cretaceous limit is char-
acterized by a long stratigraphic gap of 10e15 Ma, from Late
Oxfordian to Berriasian and/or Valanginian. This hiatus probably
correspond to a tectono-eustatic discontinuity resulting in the
end of carbonates sedimentation. Discontinuous high amplitude
to transparent seismic reflectors are onlapping the platform edge.
These reflectors correspond to gravity-flow carbonates resedi-
mented from the dismantling of the platform on the slope and
basin. The destabilization of the platform is probably related to
subaerial exposures of the platform edge and its erosion and
karstification as observed further east in Lebanon (Ferry et al.,

Fig. 5. Schematic geological cross-section showing the general tectono-stratigraphic architecture of the Egyptian margin: syn-rift to post-rift Mesozoic platform edges, slope and
basin develop above tilted blocks inherited from the rifting period. Tertiary sedimentation is characterized by an Oligo-Miocene deep gravity cell on Upper Cretaceous-Eocene
shales, and a Pliocene shallow gravity cell on Messinian salt.

Please cite this article in press as: Tassy, A., et al., Egyptian Tethyan margin in the Mesozoic: Evolution of a mixed carbonate-siliciclastic shelf
edge (from Western Desert to Sinai), Marine and Petroleum Geology (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2015.10.011
8 A. Tassy et al. / Marine and Petroleum Geology xxx (2015) 1e17

Fig. 6. SWeNE offshore seismic profile showing the seismo-stratigraphic architecture of the Jurassic mixed shelf edge and slope. Seismic interpretation is calibrated by three
industrial onshore wells located between 15 km and 30 km distance from the platform edge southwards and onshore. Four stratigraphic sequences are interpreted for the Jurassic
interval: S1 and S2 prograding sequences correspond to mixed deposits of Wadi Natrun and Khatatba Formations. S3 and S4 sequences are retrograding and correlated to oolitic
limestones of the Massajid Formation. Discontinuous seismic reflectors on the slope onlap the shelf edge.

2007) where an outcrop analog shows incised valleys or karstic
features such as dolines and polje eroding the Jurassic limestone
platform and filled with Cretaceous volcano-clastics (Ferry et al.,
2007).
3.2. Seismic mapping of the top Jurassic shallow-water carbonate
platform
Onshore and offshore 2D and 3D seismic data allowed isochron
mapping of the top Jurassic along the Egyptian margin from
Western Desert to Nile Delta and North Sinai (Fig. 7). In the offshore
domain underneath the Nile Delta, the great thickness of Tertiary
sediments prevented a coherent seismic interpretation of the
Jurassic reflectors, creating a gap in the time structure map. How-
ever, many morphological features of the Jurassic platform edge are
still apparent:
- Jurassic shelf edge corresponds to a hinge line. Its direction
moves from WNW-ESE on the western part of the Nile Delta
(Western Desert area) to WSW-ENE on the eastern part of the
Delta (North Sinai area). This transition area which is localized
onshore Nile Delta, had not been entirely imaged because it is
not fully covered by seismic data.
- Tethyan transform directions are apparent on the top Jurassic
maps and it appears that the Jurassic margin is composed by
two EeW oblique margin segments: “Western Desert oblique
segment” and “North Sinai oblique segment”. These two seg-
ments are separated by one shorter NWeSE “Nile Delta trans-
form segment”, with a shelf edge controlled by transform fault
direction.
- Offshore Western Desert, Jurassic shelf edge shows three paleo-
valleys with NEeSW trends. Two are localized offshore Matruh
and are approximately 50  20 km in dimension. Another is

Please cite this article in press as: Tassy, A., et al., Egyptian Tethyan margin in the Mesozoic: Evolution of a mixed carbonate-siliciclastic shelf
edge (from Western Desert to Sinai), Marine and Petroleum Geology (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2015.10.011
 A. Tassy et al. / Marine and Petroleum Geology xxx (2015) 1e17 9

Fig. 7. Time structure map (in s TWT) of the top Jurassic carbonate platform (top S4 sequence) from onshore-offshore seismic interpretation along the Egyptian margin. Red dots:
Jurassic shelf break; pink dots: Tethyan transform faults; white arrows: sedimentary transfer axis; blue line: maximum southward extension of the Jurassic carbonate platform;
black arrows: clastic inputs; beige: emerged lands. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)

localized offshore Alexandria and shows a larger size,
100  40 km in dimension. These morphologies correspond to
preferential sediment transfer axis. In Matruh area, one had
been interpreted as a canyon incising the shelf edge that
developed along an aborted Jurassic syn-rift basin (Tari et al.,
2012a,b). Our interpretation considers this embayment having
been initiated by a huge gravity sliding of 30 km width.
- Offshore North Sinai, Jurassic shelf edge is located along the
present-day coastline. Top Jurassic isochron map shows
NEeSW anticlines inherited from Upper Cretaceous “Syrian
Arc” compressive tectonics (Picard, 1959; Freund et al., 1975;
Neev and Ben-Avraham, 1977; Eyal, 1996; Buchbinder and
Zilberman, 1997; Garfunkel, 1998; Bosworth et al., 1999; Wal-
ley, 2001) that caused an inversion of Early Mesozoic normal
faults into sets of asymmetric folds present near the Levant
margin.
- During the Jurassic, sedimentary profile of the Western Desert
margin shows a SeN depositional distribution with the car-
bonate platform on the north, which is attached to the North
African continental system on the south and west.
3.3. Seismostratigraphic architecture of the Cretaceous
platformeslopeebasin profile
The top Cretaceous shelf edge is constrained by offshore-
onshore 2D seismic and several wells. External platform shows a
retrograding to aggrading stratigraphic architecture. The slope and
basin infilling is characterized by an alternation of chaotic seismic
facies and high amplitude reflectors onlapping the paleoslopes
(Fig. 8). MTC deposits can represent thick sedimentary series (up to
3500 m interpreted on seismic profiles) as a mixed combination of
debris flows, internally preserved blocks, and/or compressively-
deformed distal allochthonous masses. Transported material were
sourced from the dismantling of the Mesozoic mixed carbonate-
siliciclastic platform. According to stratigraphic correlations with
global sea levels, and outcrops analogs in Apulia (Borgomano,
2000; Eberli et al., 2004) platform instability could have been
triggered by the gravitational collapse of the carbonate-siliciclastic
platform under its own weight after successive subaerial exposures
and subsequent karstification processes.
3.4. Mapping of Cretaceous mixed carbonate-siliciclastic
platformeslopeebasin transition
3.4.1. Mapping of the shallow water platform
Top Cretaceous time-structure map (Fig. 9) was constructed
based on seismic interpretation of the continuous seismic re-
flectors, constrained by onshore and offshore well data. This map
represents a diachronous envelope of the successive Cretaceous
carbonate shelf edges (Lower and Upper Cretaceous) that is mate-
rialized by a continuous seismic reflector with strong amplitude.
Although it does not correspond to a 3D sedimentary surface, it
allows a coherent 3D geomorphological representation of the
platform-to-basin transition during the Cretaceous. Location and
seismic morphology of the Cretaceous shelf edge is constrained by
the hinge zone location. Since the Cretaceous, the aggrading and
retrograding mixed carbonate-siliciclastic platform shows an
alternation of steep NWeSE oblique segments and distally-
steepened segments. Along the hinge zone, embayments are
interpreted as megaslides. Seismic geomorphology of the platform
is different from west to east:
- In the Matruh area, off the Western Desert, Cretaceous shelf
edge shows an embayment with two nearly perpendicular shelf
edge directions, N170 and N100. Topographic profiles are
asymmetrical. N170 edge shows a convex distally steepened
profile and open slope, and the southern edge shows a straight
abrupt profile. In this area, shelf edge is probably affected by
gravity sliding with a NWeSE direction. These structures of the
platform edge must be strongly controlled by the inherited
Tethyan transform directions.
- Matruh “canyon” (Tari et al., 2012a,b) partly infilled with
Cretaceous sediments is no longer visible. A NWeSE faulting

Please cite this article in press as: Tassy, A., et al., Egyptian Tethyan margin in the Mesozoic: Evolution of a mixed carbonate-siliciclastic shelf
edge (from Western Desert to Sinai), Marine and Petroleum Geology (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2015.10.011
10 A. Tassy et al. / Marine and Petroleum Geology xxx (2015) 1e17

Fig. 8. NWeSE offshore seismic profile showing the Jurassic and Cretaceous platform edges and slope deposits, and Tertiary strata above it. Seismic interpretation for Tertiary and
Cretaceous is calibrated by offshore wells. Cretaceous external platform is characterized by a retrograding to aggrading architecture. Lower Cretaceous is dominated by a dolomitic
interval and clastics and Upper Cretaceous is dominated by carbonates. Hinge zone corresponds to the limit formed by Cretaceous and Jurassic shelf edges. This tectono-
stratigraphic limit controls the Tertiary gravity sliding within the Nile Delta.

caused the platform edge to slide down slope. A NWeSE fault
cuts through the shelf edge with a slide scar morphology.
- The eastern part of the offshore Western Desert shows a convex,
distally steepened continental slope, which is incised by SWeNE
gullies.
- On the Nile Delta, Cretaceous shelf edge is influenced by a di-
rection shifting from NWeSE to SWeNE, as for the Jurassic shelf
edge.
- On the North Sinai area, transition from platform to basin is
situated along the present-day coastline, onshore from Nile
Delta to Bardawil Lake, and offshore from Bardawil Lake to
Israel. The platform shows a flat-topped morphology on this
area.
3.4.2. 3D geomorphology and sedimentary environments of the
Egyptian margin
Top Cretaceous 3D isochron map (Fig. 10) shows seismic geo-
morphology of the platformeslopeebasin system along the Egyp-
tian margin. Seismic geomorphology varies from west to east.
Platform to basin transition is narrow and marked by strike-slip
faults off Western Desert (abrupt margin or flat-topped platform).
In the Nile Delta area, platform shows a distally steepened profile,
with a wide platform to basin transitional area. In the North Sinai
area, where the Mesozoic margin is affected by compressional
tectonics, the platformeslopeebasin system shows a flat-topped
profile.
Upper slope and basin deposits correspond to Cretaceous

Fig. 9. Time structure map (in s TWT) of the top Cretaceous platform from onshore-offshore seismic interpretation along Egyptian margin. Black dots: Cretaceous shelf break
showing different morphologies with enclosed slope and abrupt margin vs open slope and convex margin; red dots: Jurassic shelf break; pink dots: Tethyan transform faults. (For
interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)

Please cite this article in press as: Tassy, A., et al., Egyptian Tethyan margin in the Mesozoic: Evolution of a mixed carbonate-siliciclastic shelf
edge (from Western Desert to Sinai), Marine and Petroleum Geology (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2015.10.011
 A. Tassy et al. / Marine and Petroleum Geology xxx (2015) 1e17 11

Fig. 10. 3D view in time (s TWT) of the Egyptian margin at the top Cretaceous, representing seismic geomorphology from platform to basin. Circles represent wells with their
lithology for the end of Cretaceous period. Inner platform rudists outcrops are also shown.

resedimented breccias that are onlapping the paleoslopes and
basinal series further north. They spread out down slope over areas
as large as 70,000 of km2. The slope is deepening basinwards except
in the Nile Delta zone, where the Rosetta isolated high makes a
noticeable topographic anomaly. This large structure (60  60 km)
is bounded by a NEeSW normal fault on the west and overlain by
SantonianeMaastrichian pelagic chalk of the Khoman formation
(Samir, 1994; Tantawy et al., 2001), drilled in an offshore well. From
a tectono-stratigraphic and paleogeographic point of view, this
structure is analogous with the Eratosthenes Seamount situated
further north in the Levant basin and where ODP 967 well drilled
shallow water Aptian carbonates (Fig. 2) (Robertson, 1998; Mart
and Robertson, 1998).
The combination of sedimentological data from wells and out-
crops aids in the geomorphological and paleoenvironmental in-
terpretations of the platform-to-basin transition along the Egyptian
margin for the Late Cretaceous interval.
During the Early Cretaceous, Western Desert sedimentation is
dominated by coastal shales and sandstones of the Alam el Bueb
(HauterivianeBarremian), Alamein (Aptian) and Abu Subeiha
(Albian-Lower Cenomanian) formations (Fig. 3). An Isolated car-
bonate platform developed on the western edge of Western Desert,
at the present-day coastline during Hauterivian and Barremian
(according to two onshore wells on the Matruh area) but was
progressively drowned and covered by clastic sediments sourced
from the South (Parisot et al., 1996). Deep-water marine sediments
(marls and marly-limestones) accumulated in the Matruh topo-
graphic depression (Parisot et al., 1996; Tari et al., 2012a,b). During
the Aptian, upper Alamein formation was deposited, dominated by
dolomite and limestone facies in the entire Western Desert area. In
the Nile Delta and North Sinai area, Lower Cretaceous sedimenta-
tion is characterized by shallow-water limestone on the external
platform (according to onshore wells close to the North Sinai and
Nile Delta coastlines). On the paleoslopes, sedimentary facies are
marls and limestones (according to wells data located offshore
North Sinai) and turbiditic sandstones (well C, Fig. 4).
During Late Cretaceous (Fig. 10), Egyptian margin is character-
ized by mixed silliciclastic-carbonate sedimentation dominated by
carbonates. During Early Cenomanian, Upper Abu Subeiha
formation (Fig. 3), located in the Western Desert, is characterized by
a shallow water carbonate interval (bioclastic limestone, oolitic
limestone, and dolomite in onshore wells located in Matruh area).
In the Cenomanian to Coniacian interval, Abu Roash formation is
dominated by shallow-water rudists limestone. This well-
preserved formation in southern outcrops (Zakhera, 2010) was
deposited during the development of wide carbonate platforms all
along the circum-Tethys (Philip, 2003) and has outcrop analogs on
other Tethyan margins (i.e., Provence margin, Gari, 2008; Apulia
margin, Borgomano, 2000; Hairabian et al., 2014). In the North Sinai
area, Arc Syrian compressive tectonics is responsible for erosion
and/or non-deposition of a large part of Upper Cretaceous strata.
For example, Campanian series are discordant onto the Jurassic
platform, and the whole Upper Cretaceous series are absent in
some wells of the North Sinai coastal area. During Santo-
nianeMaastrichian interval pelagic chalky limestones were trans-
gressive all along the Egyptian margin and recorded in majority of
wells and outcrops.
3.4.3. Paleogeography of the Upper Cretaceous Egyptian margin
A paleogeographic map of the Upper Cretaceous Egyptian
margin, based on onshore-offshore seismic mapping and wells data
is proposed (Fig. 11). This map shows sedimentological deposits
subdivided from Cenomanian to Coniacian across the present-day
Egyptian coastline, just before the SantonianeMaastrichian trans-
gression. Inner shelf facies are localized in the south, mostly
onshore. They are characterized by argillaceous limestones, green
shales, dolomites, oolitic and reefal limestones and fine-grained
sandstones and siltstones. Outer shelf is large in the Nile Delta
area, and narrower offshore Western Desert and the North Sinai
areas, limited by normal faults and/or slide scars. Outer shelf de-
posits are localized in the offshore part of the Western Desert, and
onshore Nile Delta and North Sinai areas. Well data indicate sedi-
mentological facies dominated by mudstone, wackestone and
gypsum. The slope had been drilled in the onshore Nile Delta and
onshore-offshore North Sinai. Sediments are dominated by inter-
bedded limestones and shales, sandstone turbidites, quartz grains,
pyrite, cherts, planktonic and benthic foraminifers, echinoid spines
and ostracods. At the northern part of the margin, the basin

Please cite this article in press as: Tassy, A., et al., Egyptian Tethyan margin in the Mesozoic: Evolution of a mixed carbonate-siliciclastic shelf
edge (from Western Desert to Sinai), Marine and Petroleum Geology (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2015.10.011
12 A. Tassy et al. / Marine and Petroleum Geology xxx (2015) 1e17

Fig. 11. Paleogeographic map for the Late Cretaceous interval of the Egyptian and Levantine margins based on seismic geomorphology and sedimentological ponctual data. This map
represents the geographical limits of inner shelf, outer shelf to upper slope, lower slope and basin. Isolated platforms such as Eratosthenes are present in the basin. Schematic
sketches show the two different sedimentary profiles present along the Egyptian margin.

deposits are mostly localized offshore, except on the Nile Delta area,
where the transition from slope to basin is on land. Pelagic basinal
deposits had been drilled on the Rosetta high on top of the Creta-
ceous strata. Deposits correspond to chalky limestones of the
SantonianeMaastrichian transgression (Fig. 3).
This paleogeographic map, based on seismic geomorphology
and sedimentological data, allows sedimentary facies prediction
along the Egyptian margin, where well data are limited. This map
indicates that during Upper Cretaceous, platform to basin transition
is characterized by two different sedimentary profiles (Figs. 11 and
12): a distally steepened platform (Read, 1982) is localized on the
middle of the margin (from the eastern part of Western Desert to
Nile Delta), and abrupt slope profiles along the western and eastern
boundaries (Western Desert and North Sinai). In the Levant Margin,
the position of the major break in slope relative to the inferred high
energy shelf break could be an indicator of the tectonic controls.
and terrigeneous) and similar tropical and microbial carbonate
factories (Schlager, 2005) For the Cretaceous period, these three
platform margins can be compared in terms of tectonic setting,
paleogeography, stratigraphic architectures, slope geometry and
the carbonate systems. High Atlas and North American Jurassic
margins have been intensively studied in the outcrop sections
(Moroccan margin of High Atlas: Bloomeier and Reijmer, 1999,
2002; Della Porta et al., 2013; Amour et al., 2013. Nova Scotia
continental margin: Eliuk, 1978; Ellis et al., 1985; Weissenberger
et al., 2006; Canadian and Moroccan margins: Jansa and
Wiedmann, 1982). These margins were located at the northern
edge of the opening Atlantic Ocean (Nova Scotia) and High Atlas rift
basin (Morocco) (Fig. 1AeB), almost 3000 km westwards from
Egyptian margin. These Jurassic margins are potential analogs that
can help us better understand the Egyptian continental margin of
the Jurassic.

4. Controlling factors of the margin architecture 4.1. Tectonic setting

Paleogeographic maps of the Neo-Tethys (Gerdes et al., 2010;
Ziegler, 1990; Dercourt et al., 2000; Simmons et al., 2007) show
that during the Mid Jurassic, Egyptian, Levantine and Apulian
platforms were located near each other, separated by narrow basins
10e40 km wide (Fig. 1B). This common paleogeographic setting
favored similar paleoenvironments with identical climatic and
oceanographic conditions (tropical dry, Leinfelder et al., 2002),
resulting in similar sedimentary fluxes on the platform (carbonates
Continental margins of Nova Scotia, High Atlas, and Tethys were
influenced by marked subsidence resulting from Jurassic rifting of
the Atlantic and Tethys Oceans, leading to a passive margin setting
(Nova Scotia continental margin, Weissenberger et al., 2006; High
Atlas margin, Lachkar et al., 2009) or an oblique margin (Egyptian
continental margin, Frizon de Lamotte et al., 2011) from Mid
Jurassic through today. On the High Atlas platform, Verwer et al.
(2009) indicate backstepping of the shallow-water carbonate

Please cite this article in press as: Tassy, A., et al., Egyptian Tethyan margin in the Mesozoic: Evolution of a mixed carbonate-siliciclastic shelf
edge (from Western Desert to Sinai), Marine and Petroleum Geology (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2015.10.011
 A. Tassy et al. / Marine and Petroleum Geology xxx (2015) 1e17 13

Fig. 12. Schematic cross-sections across the Mesozoic continental slopes showing two different architecture profiles, distally steepened and abrupt. Cross sections locations are
presented on Fig. 11 (Distally steepened on profile 1, abrupt slope on profile 2).

environments as a consequence of an increase in accommodation
and fault-block movement in the subsurface that generated pro-
gressively more subsidence in the basinal direction and thus
exceeded the carbonate sedimentary fluxes. In Italy, Zempolich
(1993) worked on the drowning of the South Trento Platform
during Mid-Late Jurassic. Egyptian Jurassic margin, showing an
aggrading and retrograding profile on the platform and resedi-
mented deposits on the slope, must have been affected by a sub-
sequent differential subsidence along a crustal profile inherited
from the rifting. During Late Cretaceous, Egyptian margin (North
Sinai area) and Levantine margin were affected by Syrian Arc
transpressive tectonics that produced a set of asymmetric folds on
the platform and slope (Krenkel, 1925; Picard, 1959; Freund et al.,
1975; Neev and Ben-Avraham, 1977; Eyal, 1996; Buchbinder and
Zilberman, 1997; Garfunkel, 1998; Bosworth et al., 1999; Walley,
2001) and subsequent erosion of emerged lands. All these Tethyan
carbonate margins are marked by overall backstepping-agrading
trends that post-date the rifting phase and are interpreted to be
controlled by tectonic subsidence. Most of these data set along the
Tethyan carbonate margins do not illustrate the non-cylindrical
patterns in 3D of both the tectonic dynamics of these passive
margins (Basile, 2015) and their carbonate architectures (Bosence,
2005). In the case of an oblique passive such Levant Margin,
strongly influenced by transform faults (Fig. 2), the nature of the
lithospheric crust in the vicinity of the transform faults could have
important impact of the local vertical movement of the lithosphere
(positif or negatif) and on the resulting subsidence gradients in 3D
(cf Braun et al., 2015) that will influence the carbonate systems.
Data and publications on the deep structure of the Levant Margin
lithosphere are rare and not in agreements. A transition between
continental and oceanic crusts is advocated by Segev et al. (2011) on
the basis of regional gravity data and isostatic models whereas a
thin continental crust is interpreted between the Levant Margin
and the Erathosthenes SeaMount on the basis of seismic velocity
models. These two opposite models could have significant impacts
on the subsequent evolution of the post-rift carbonate systems.
4.2. Carbonate systems
During Jurassic, on the Tethyan and NortheAtlantic margins, the
climate was dry, tropical to subtropical (Golonka et al., 1994;
Scotese, 1997; Leinfelder et al., 2002). The Upper Jurassic period
was the onset of expansion of Mesozoic coral reefs, siliceous sponge
mounds and carbonate buildups (Leinfelder et al., 2002). Nova

Please cite this article in press as: Tassy, A., et al., Egyptian Tethyan margin in the Mesozoic: Evolution of a mixed carbonate-siliciclastic shelf
edge (from Western Desert to Sinai), Marine and Petroleum Geology (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2015.10.011
14 A. Tassy et al. / Marine and Petroleum Geology xxx (2015) 1e17
Scotia margin is dominated by oolitic massive to cross-bedded
grainstones and corals wackestone to packstones on the outer
shelf (Weissenberger et al., 2006). Verwer et al. (2009) shows that
environments deposition on the High Atlas Basin were character-
ized by shallow water platform carbonates with grainstones and
coral patch reefs, microbial boundstones and slumped blocks on
the slope, basinal turbidite lobes on the base of slope and basinal
sediments on the basin. These environments deposition are most
likely analogous with Egyptian Massajid Formation (S3eS4, Fig. 3)
that correspond to a thick aggrading and retrograding carbonate
platform with oolitic grainstones shoaling upward successions, and
a continental slope which is onlapped by resedimented deposits,
such as slumped blocks and breccia inferred from the chaotic and
contoured seismic facies (see Eberli et al., 2004).
4.3. Architecture of the slope deposits
Offshore Egypt, from our seismic interpretation of the conti-
nental slope and basin, the Upper Cretaceous infilling consists of
MTC deposits composed by mixed carbonate-siliciclastic deep-
water sediments onlapping the paleo-slope (Fig. 8). On the
Levantine margin, this formation architecture can be compared to
the Albian-Turonian Talme Yafe reservoir Formation outcropping
onshore Israel (Bein and Weiler, 1976) that correspond to a sedi-
mentary prism of deep-water carbonate turbidites onlapping the
Levant Mesozoic slope. On the Apulian margin, this formation can
be interpreted as analogous with deep-water gravity flow carbon-
ates of Upper Cretaceous outcropping in the Gargano Peninsula
(Monte Sant’Angelo, Nevarra, Caramanica Formations, Borgomano,
2000; Hairabian et al., 2014), and the Maiella Mountain (Eberli
et al., 2004). This interpretation is essentially based on the pro-
gressive onlapping of the base-of-slope units on the retrograding
carbonate platforms.
4.4. Paleogeography
The main difference between these three Tethyan margins is the
evolution of the sedimentological environments during the Creta-
ceous: Apulian platform remains exclusively carbonate, whereas
Egyptian and Levantine platforms show mixed carbonate-
siliciclastic environments. This difference was the result of their
respective paleogeographic settings. Egyptian and Levantine plat-
forms are attached to the African and Arabic continents and are
regularly invaded by clastic input, sourced from the south in Egypt
(Parisot et al., 1996) and south and east in Lebanon (Hawie et al.,
2013). Apulian platform was isolated (as were Apennine and
Adriatic platforms), separated by epicontinental basins (Adriatic
basin, Umbria-Marche basin, Bosnian basin, e.g. Thierry, 2000) and
detached from continental influence. On Levantine basin and
offshore Nile Delta, Eratosthenes and Rosetta Highs may corre-
spond to such isolated platforms during the Mesozoic. This hy-
pothesis is at least valid for the Eratosthenes block where shallow
water carbonates deposited during Aptian (Robertson, 1998; Mart
and Robertson, 1998).
Another major difference between Egyptian margin and other
Tethyan margins is exemplified by the HauterivianeBarremian in-
terval: in most of peri-Tethys areas, wide Urgonian carbonate
platforms developed far from terrigenous influence over thousands
of kilometers square (Simo et al., 1993). In Egypt, the shallow ma-
rine carbonate environments were influenced by terrigenous
sources: Onshore Nile Delta, well A (Fig. 4) indicates an area
dominated by limestones from Barremian to Late Cretaceous, most
likely far from continental sources. On the contrary, in the Western
Desert, only sparse isolated carbonate platforms of a few kilometers
square developed during Hauterivian and were progressively
Please cite this article in press as: Tassy, A., et al., Egyptian Tethyan margin in the Mesozoic: Evolution of a mixed carbonate-siliciclastic shelf
edge (from Western Desert to Sinai), Marine and Petroleum Geology (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2015.10.011
drowned and covered by littoral clastic sediments sourced from
west and south during the end of Barremian to mid-Cenomanian
(well B, Fig. 4). This higher clastic sedimentation flux indicates
that the core of the Egyptian margin is regularly exposed, probably
affected by a phase of uplift similar to that occurred during the Late
Cretaceous and Eocene to Miocene times (Walgenwitz et al., 1990,
1992; Gallagher and Brown, 1999).
4.5. Sea-level
During Cenomanian, Tethyan margins recorded a major global
sea-level transgression with amplitude of more of 225e250 m
above present-day sea level (Haq et al.,, 1987; Haq, 2014). This
eustatic event corresponds to the onset of wide rudist-dominated
carbonate platforms on the circum-Tethys area (Philip, 2003).
From Santonian to early Maastrichian, a general eustatic trans-
gression (Haq, 2014) caused the drowning of the Egyptian platform
and deposition of basinal chalks and chalky limestones of the
Khoman Formation (In Egypt) overlaying the shallow water car-
bonate sediments on the platform (Fig. 3), and deepwater turbidites
present on the North Sinai continental slopes (Mango field). This
transgressive unit is analogous with Lebanon Chekka Formation,
from Coniacian to Maastrichian (Walley, 2001), and Italian Scaglia
Formation (Bosellini and Winterer, 1975).
4.6. Geomorphology of the platformeslopeebasin transition
Geomorphology of the platform to basin transition is a critical
parameter controlling local development and preservation of
resedimented carbonates systems. In modern Bahamas Reijmer
et al. (2015) show that the geomorphology of the slope drives the
centrifugal dispersion or centripetal convergence of the shallow
marine carbonate export to the deeper water domain. Horizontal
convex platform margin geometry results in dispersion of shallow-
marine carbonates, and horizontal concave margin geometry, with
enclosed slope, will result in concentration and stacking of calci-
turbidites lobes (Hairabian et al., 2014). In Egypt our study re-
veals that topographic profiles of the Cretaceous shelf edge vary
along the margin: off Western Desert, a convex, open slope profile
is juxtaposed onto a straight abrupt to concave profile (Figs. 9 and
10). This geomorphology of the slope could lead to a pattern similar
to the modern Bahamas or ancient Gargano (Borgomano, 2000;
Hairabian et al., 2014) with possible presence of great thickness
of resedimented lobes stacked over a base of slope area, facing the
concave slope profile. During Late Jurassic, Egyptian shelf edge
morphology is convex and incised by three canyons that drained
the Western Desert plateau (Fig. 7). Possible distal calciturbidites
fans could develop at the mouth of these canyons.
The 3D geomorphological patterns of the carbonate platform
margins, as illustrated in Fig. 10, are the results of the interplay
between the sedimentary system dynamics, the accommodation
and the paleotopography inherited from the rifting. An important
characteristic of the platform margin is the lateral and gradual
evolution of the slope angle and platformebasin transition profile
without apparent simple relationship with the regional transform
fault systems (Figs. 10 and 11). This is not the case of the Mesozoic
carbonate platform in the Gargano area where the regional fault
system controls directly the position of the slope and shelf break
resulting in an erosive carbonate margin (Borgomano, 2000;
Hairabian et al., 2014). The Egyptian carbonate platform margins
and slopes developed obliquely to the main transform faults
(Fig. 11). The slope steepness is apparently increasing with
decreasing distance between the shelf break and the transform
fault. Conversely, this trend is reflected by the lateral evolution of
the sedimentary profile from abrupt platformebasin transition to
 A. Tassy et al. / Marine and Petroleum Geology xxx (2015) 1e17
distally steepened slope. These gradual lateral changes of the slope
geometry are associated to the overall retrogradation of the plat-
form and are not directly controlled by deeply rooted faults
(Fig. 12). These trends are most likely reflecting the sedimentary
compensation by the platform systems of differential subsidence
rates increasing dipwise towards the transform faults in the basin.
In the geodynamic classification of carbonate platforms by Bosence
(2005) the Mesozoic Egyptian carbonate platform correspond
clearly to the “subsiding margin platform” and not to the “fault-
block platform” generally associated to rifting process. In such
oblique margin, irregular evolution of the accommodation can be
controlled by complex 3D flexural deformations of the subsiding
lithosphere in the vicinity of the transform faults as modeled by
Braun et al., 2015.
5. Conclusions
Egyptian Mesozoic margin was a part of the southern margin of
the Neo-Tethys Ocean, characterized by oblique and transform
segments inherited from the NWeSE early Mesozoic rifting
orientation. Environmental deposits are controlled by the presence
of mixed siliciclastic-carbonate platform attached to the northern
African continent, and crustal highs in the basin (such as Eratos-
thenes High) inherited from the rifting history of the Herodotus
oceanic basin and Levant sub-oceanic basin. Thanks to onshore-
offshore seismic interpretation calibrated by industrial wells,
time-structure maps of top Jurassic and top Cretaceous have been
produced for the first time along the entire Egyptian margin. These
maps allow a better understanding of the stratigraphic architecture
and geomorphology of the platformeslopeebasin system.
New sedimentological data show that Cretaceous platform is
retrograding above the Jurassic platform, which is comparable to
the Levant margin (Gardosh et al., 2006; Hawie et al., 2013). Car-
bonate platforms coexisted with siliciclastic littoral deposits typi-
cally during Early Cretaceous, where alternation of carbonate and
clastic sedimentary fluxes was controlled by erosional pulses
within the hinterland domain, thus more sensitive to higher fre-
quency climate and eustatic fluctuations. During period of high
erosion rates, siliciclastics drowned carbonate platforms and were
bypassed into the basin along the margin, especially in the offshore
North Sinai and Western Desert. Late Cretaceous period was
dominated by transgressive phase and the onset of wide carbonate
platforms along the whole margin.
The Mesozoic basin is infilled by MTC deposits onlapping the
paleoslopes with thick sedimentary series (up to 3500 m). It cor-
responds to a combination of debris flows, internal preserved
blocks, and/or compressively-deformed distal allochthonous
masses.
Hinge zone location is now well constrained from Western
Desert to North Sinaï. This tectono-stratigraphic limit controls
Tertiary gravity sliding on the Nile Delta. Geomorphological data
shows that Cretaceous shelf edge morphology varies from west to
east, and shows alternation from straight abrupt margin segments
with enclosed slopes to convex distally-steepened margin seg-
ments with open slope. Geomorphology of the slope controls the
dispersion or convergence of shallow marine deposits and export to
the deep basin (Reijmer et al., 2015). In Western Desert, the
embayment formed by the Cretaceous abrupt slope is interpreted
as a megaslide and probably concentrates turbidites lobes at its
mouth. On the contrary, the open slope forming the eastern part of
Western Desert and Nile Delta margins may drive dispersion of
turbidites.
In the basin, top Cretaceous time structure map provides
detailed geometry of topographic highs offshore along the Egyptian
platform edge. On these blocks, isolated carbonate platforms could
Please cite this article in press as: Tassy, A., et al., Egyptian Tethyan margin in the Mesozoic: Evolution of a mixed carbonate-siliciclastic shelf
edge (from Western Desert to Sinai), Marine and Petroleum Geology (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2015.10.011
15
have developed during much of Jurassic to Cretaceous, before the
regional-scale drowning during SantonianeMaastrichian (Samir,
1994) following the Cyprus subduction (Robertson, 1998), sedi-
ment loading of the Nile Delta and eustatic control.
Acknowledgments
Thanks to Total, and the South Tethys GRI (Groupe Recherche
Industrie) coordinated by D. Schnapper, for the funding and sup-
port of this project. Thanks also to the other members of the
Egyptian team (Rosa-Maria Campo, Heba Hamdi, Mahmoud Khalil
and Anicet Bini) and people from the Sedimentary and Structural
Departments of Total for their advice and help during my post-
doctorate period. Thanks to Bilal Haq for his reading and advises.
Thanks to Gabor Tari and an anonymous reviewer for improving the
quality of discussion.
References
Amour, F., Mutti, M., Christ, N., Immenhauser, A., Benson, G.S., Agar, S.M., Toma
s, S.,
Kabiri, L., 2013. Outcrop analog for an oolitic carbonate ramp reservoir: a scale-
dependent geologic modeling approach based on stratigraphic hierarchy. AAPG
Bull. 97 (5), 845e871.
Basile, C., 2015. Transform continental margins e Part 1: concepts and models.
Tectonophysics. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tecto.2015.08.034.
Bein, A., Gvirtzman, G., 1977. A Mesozoic fossil edge of the Arabian plate along the
Levant coastline and its bearing on the evolution of the eastern Mediterranean.
In: Biju-Duval, B., Montadert, L. (Eds.), Structural History of the Mediterranean
Basins. Editions Technip, Paris, pp. 95e110.
Bein, A., Weiler, 1976. The Cretaceous Talme Yafe Formation: a contour current
shaped sedimentary prism of calcareous detritus at the continental margin of
the Arabian craton. Sedimentology 23, 511e532.
Blomeier, D.P.G., Reijmer, J.J.G., 1999. Drowning of a lower jurassic carbonate plat-
form: Jbel Bou Dahar, high atlas, Morocco. Facies 41, 81e110.
Blomeier, D.P.G., Reijmer, J.J.G., 2002. Facies architecture of an early jurassic car-
bonate platform slope (Jbel Bou Dahar, high atlas, Morocco). J. Sediment. Res. 72
(3), 462e475.
Borgomano, J.R., 2000. The upper Cretaceous carbonates of the Gargano-Murge
region, southern Italy: a model of platform-to-basin transition. AAPG Bull. 84,
1561e1588.
Bosence, D., 2005. A genetic classification of carbonate platforms based on their
basinal and tectonic settings in the Cenozoic. Sediment. Geol. 175 (2005),
49e72.
Bosworth, W., Guiraud, R., Kessler, L.G., 1999. Late Cretaceous (ca. 84) compressive
deformation of the stable platform of northeast Africa (Egypt): far-field stress
effects of the “Santonian event” and origin of the Syrian arc deformation belt.
Geology 27 (7), 633e636. http://dx.doi.org/10.1130/0091-7613.
Bosworth, W., El-Hawat, A.S., Helgeson, D.E., Burke, K., 2008. Cyrenaican “shock
absorber” and associated inversion strain shadow in the collision zone of
northeast Africa. Geology 36, 695e698. http://dx.doi.org/10.1130/G24909A.1.
Braun, J., Deschamps, F., Rouby, D., Dauteuil, O., 2015. Flexure of the lithosphere and
the geodynamical evolution of non-cylindrical rifted passive margins: results
from a numerical model incorporating variable elastic thickness, surface pro-
cesses and 3D thermal subsidence.
Buchbinder, B., Zilberman, E., 1997. Sequence stratigraphy of MioceneePliocene
carbonatee siliciclastic shelf deposits in the eastern Mediterranean margin
(Israel): effects of eustasy and tectonics. Sediment. Geol. 112, 7e32.
Bosellini, A., Winterer, E.L., 1975. Pelagic limestone and radiolarite of the Tethyan
Mesozoic: a genetic model. Geology 3, 279e282.
Campbell, A.E., Stafleu, J., 1992. Seismic modeling of an early jurassic, drowned
carbonate platform: Djebel Bou Dahar, high atlas, Morocco. Am. Assoc. Petrol.
Geol. Bull. 76, 1760e1777.
Della Porta, G., Merino-Tome
, O., Kenter, J., Verwer, K., 2013. Lower Jurassic Mi-
crobial and Skeletal Carbonate Factories and Platform Geometry (Djebel Bou
Dahar, High Atlas, Morocco). SEPM, pp. 237e263.
Dercourt, J., Ricour, L.E., Vrielynck, B., 1993. In: Atlas Tethys Paleoenvironmental
Maps: Paris. Gauthier-Villars, Paris, p. 307.
Dercourt, J., Gaetani, M., et al. (Eds.), 2000. Atlas Peri-tethys Paleoegeographical
Maps. CCGM/CGMW, Paris.
Dolson, J.C., Shann, M.V., Matbouly, S., Harwood, C., Rashed, R., Hammouda, H.,
2001. The petroleum potential of Egypt. In: Downey, M.W., Threet, J.C.,
Morgan, W.A. (Eds.), Petroleum Provinces of the 21st Century. American As-
sociation of Petroleum Geologists Memoirs, 95, pp. 453e482.
Eberli, G.P., Anselmetti, F.S., Betzler, C., Van Konijnenburg, J.-H., Bernoulli, D., 2004.
Carbonate platform to basin transitions on seismic data and in outcrops: great
Bahama Bank and the Maiella Platform margin, Italy. In: Seismic Imaging of
Carbonate Reservoirs and Systems. AAPG Memoir 81, pp. 207e250.
Eliuk, L.S., 1978. The Abenaki formation, Nova Scotia shelf, Canadad Depositional
and diagenetic model for a mesozoic carbonate platform. Bull. Can. Pet. Geol.
16 A. Tassy et al. / Marine and Petroleum Geology xxx (2015) 1e17
26, 424e514.
Ellis, P.M., Crevello, P.D., Eliuk, L.S., 1985. Upper jurassic and lower cretaceous deep-
water buildups, Abenaki formation, Nova scotian shelf. In: Crevello, P.D.,
Harris, P.M. (Eds.), Deep-water Carbonates. SEPM Core Workshop 6,
pp. 212e248.
Eyal, Y., 1996. Stress field fluctuations along the Dead sea rift region since the Late
Cretaceous based on mesostructures. Tectonics 2, 167e185.
Ferry, S., Merran, Y., Grosheny, D., Mroueh, M., 2007. The cretaceous of Lebanon in
the middle east (Levant) context. In: Bulot, L.G., Ferry, S., Grosheny, D. (Eds.),
Relations between the Northern and Southern Margins of the Tethys Ocean
during the Cretaceous Period, Notebooks on Geology, Brest, Memoir 2007/02.
Abstract 08 (CG2007_M02/08).
Floquet, M., Hennuy, J., 2001. Anatomy of resedimented carbonates in the latest
turonian - Earliest coniacien south-Provencal Basin. In: Floquet, M., Hennuy, J.,
Masse, J.-P. (Eds.), Anatomy of Carbonate Bodies e International Meeting,
Ge
ologie Me
diterrane
enne, vol. 28(1e2), pp. 67e71.
Freund, R., Goldberg, M., Weissbrod, T., Druckman, Y., Derin, B., 1975. The Triassic-
Jurassic structure of Israel and its relation to the origin of the Eastern Medi-
terranean. Isr. Geol. Survey Bull. 65, 1e26.
Frizon De Lamotte, D., Raulin, C., Mouchot, N., Wrobel-Daveau, J.-C., Blanpied, C.,
Ringenbach, J.-C., 2011. The southernmost margin of the Tethys realm during
the Mesozoic and Cenozoic: initial geometry and timing of the inversion pro-
cesses. Tectonics 30, TC3002. http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2010TC002691.
Gallagher, K., Brown, R., 1999. The Mesozoic denudation history of the Atlantic
margins of southern Africa and southeast Brazil and the relationship to offshore
sedimentation. In: Cameron, N.R., Bate, R.H., Clure, V.S. (Eds.), The Oil and Gas
Habitats of the South Atlantic. The Geological Society, London, pp. 41e53.
Gamal, M.A., 2013. Truthfulness of the existence of the Pelusium megashear fault
system, east of Cairo, Egypt. Int. J. Geosci. 2013 (4), 212e227.
Gardosh, M., Druckman, Y., Buchbinder, B., Rybakov, M., 2006. The Levant Basin
offshore Israel: stratigraphy, structure, tectonic evolution and implications for
hydrocarbon exploration. Geophys. Inst. Isr. 1e119.
Gardosh, M., Weimer, P., Flexer, A., 2011. The sequence stratigraphy of Mesozoic
successions in the Levant margin southwestern Israel: a model for the evolution
of southern Tethys margins. AAPG Bull. 95, 1763e1793.
Garfunkel, Z., 1998. Constrains on the origin and history of the eastern Mediterra-
nean basin. Tectonophysics 298, 5e35. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0040-
1951(98)00176-0.
Garfunkel, Z., 2004. Origin of the Eastern Mediterranean basin: a reevaluation.
Tectonophysics 391, 11e34.
Gari, J., 2008. De
veloppements en ge
ologie nume
rique d'affleurement et mode
li-
sation stratigraphique 3D : exemple de la marge carbonate
e du Bassin Sud-
Provençal au Cre
tace
supe
rieur (SE, France). These de Doctorat. Universite

de
Provence, p. 284.
Gaullier, V., Mart, Y., Bellaiche, G., Mascle, J., Vendeville, B., Zitter, T., 2000. The
second Leg PRISMED II scientific Party, salt tectonics in and around the nile
deep-sea fan: insights from PRISMED II cruise. In: Vendeville, B., Mart, Y.,
Vigneresse, J.-L. (Eds.), Salt, Shale and Igneous Diapirs in and Around Europe,
Special Publications, vol. 174. Geological Society, London, pp. 111e129.
Gerdes, K.D., Winefield, P., Simmons, M.D., Van Oosterhout, C., 2010. The influence
of basin architecture and eustacy on the evolution of Tethyan Mesozoic and
Cenozoic carbonate sequences. In: Van Buchem, F.S.P., Gerdes, K.D., Esteban, M.
(Eds.), Mesozoic and Cenozoic Carbonate Systems of the Mediterranean and the
Middle East: Stratigraphic and Diagenetic Reference Models. Geological Society,
London, Special Publications, 329, pp. 9e41.
Ghaly, A.I., Bedingfield, J.R., Phelps, D.W., Arazik, M., Allard, D.M., 2002. Offshore
potential of the shallow-water Portion of Apache's west mediterranean
concession. In: Abstract of AAPG International Convention. Search and Dis-
covery #90005, Cairo, Egypt. October 27-30, 2002.
Golonka, J., Ross, M.I., Scotese, C.R., 1994. Phanerozoic paleogeographic and paleo-
climatic modeling maps. In: Embry, A.F., Beauchamp, B., J.Glass, D. (Eds.), Pan-
gaea, Global Environments and Resources. Canadian Society of Petroleum
Geologists Memoir 17, pp. 1e47.
Guiraud, R., Bosworth, W., Thierry, J., Delplanque, A., 2005. Phanerozoic geological
evolution of Northern and Central Africa: an overview. J. Afr. Earth Sci. 43,
83e143.
Hairabian, A., Fournier, F., Borgomano, J., Nardon, S., 2014. Depositional facies, pore
types and Elastic properties of deep-water gravity flow carbonates. J. Pet. Geol.
37 (3), 231e250.
Haq, B.U., 2014. Cretaceous eustacy revisited. Glob. Planet. Change 113, 44e58.
Haq, B.U., Hardenbol, J., Vail, P.R., 1987. Chronology of fluctuating sea levels since the
Triassic (250 million years ago to present). Science 235, 1156e1167.
Hawie, N., Deschamps, R., Nader, F.H., Gorini, C., Müller, C., Desmares, D., Hoteit, A.,
Granjeon, D., Montadert, L., Baudin, F., 2013. Sedimentological and stratigraphic
evolution of northern Lebanon since the Late Cretaceous: implications for the
Levant margin and basin. Arab. J. Geosci. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12517-013-
0914-5.
Hendriks, F., Schrank, E., 1990. The marine Abu Ballas formation of southern Egypt:
a clay.mineralogic and microfloral reconstruction of the Aptian paleoclimate.
J. Afr. Earth Sci. I0 (3), 471e481.
Heyman, M.A.W., 1989. Tectonic and depositional history of the moroccan Conti-
nental margin. In: Tankard, A.J., Balkwill, H.R. (Eds.), Extensional Tectonics and
Stratigraphy of the North Atlantic Margins. AAPG Memoir 46, pp. 323e340.
Holz, M., 2015. Mesozoic paleogeography and paleoclimates - a discussion of the
diverse greenhouse and hothouse conditions of an alien world. J. S. Am. Earth
Please cite this article in press as: Tassy, A., et al., Egyptian Tethyan margin in the Mesozoic: Evolution of a mixed carbonate-siliciclastic shelf
edge (from Western Desert to Sinai), Marine and Petroleum Geology (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2015.10.011
Sci. 61, 91e107.
Jansa, L.F., Wiedmann, J., 1982. MesozoiceCenozoic development of the eastern
North American and northwest African continental marginsd A comparison.
In: Von Rad, U., Hinz, K., Sarnthein, M., Seibold, E. (Eds.), Geology of the
Northwest African Continental Margin. Springer-Verlag, New York,
pp. 215e269.
Korrat, I.M., El Agami, N.L., Hussein, H.M., El-Gabry, M.N., 2005. Seismotectonics of
the passive continental margin of Egypt. J. Afr. Earth Sci. 41, 145e150.
Krenkel, E., 1925. Geologie Afrikas. Verlag von, Gebruder, Borntraeger, Berlin, p. 461.
Lachkar, N., Guiraud, M., El Harfi, A., Dommergues, J.-L., Dera, C., Durlet, C., 2009.
Early Jurassic normal faulting in a carbonate extensional basin: characterization
of tectonically driven platform drowning (High Atlas rift, Morocco). J. Geol. Soc.
Lond. 166, 413e430. http://dx.doi.org/10.1144/0016-76492008-084.
Leinfelder, R.R., Schmid, D.U., Nose, M., Werner, W., 2002. Jurassic reef pat-
ternsdthe expression of a changing globe. In: Kiessling, W., Flügel, E.,
Golonka, J. (Eds.), Phanerozoic Reef Patterns, Special Publication, vol. 72. SEPM
Society for Sedimentary Geology, Tulsa, OK, pp. 465e520.
Loncke, L., Gaullier, V., Mascle, J., Vendeville, B., 2002. Shallow structure of the Nile
Deep sea Fan: Interactions between structural heritage and salt tectonics;
consequences on sedimentary dispersal. In: CIESM Workshop Meditteranean
and Black Sea Turbidite Systems and Deep Sea Fans, Bucharest, 5e8 June 2002.
Mart, Y., Robertson, A.H.F., 1998. Eratosthenes seamount: an oceanographic yard-
stick recording the late MesozoiceTertiary geological history of the Eastern
Mediterranean. In: Robertson, A.H.F., Emeis, K.-C., Richter, C., Camerlenghi, A.
(Eds.), Proceedings of the Ocean Drilling Program, Scientific Results, vol. 160.
Meshref, W.M., 1990. Tectonic framework of Egypt. In: Said, R. (Ed.), Geology of
Egypt. A.A. Balkema Publisher, Netherland, pp. 113e153.
Neev, D., Ben-Avraham, Z., 1977. The Levantine countries: the Israeli coastal region.
In: Nairn, E.M., Kanes, W.H. (Eds.), The Ocean Basins and Margins. The Eastern
Mediterranean, 4A. Plenum Press, New York, United States, pp. 355e377.
Norton, P., 1967. Rock-stratigrraphic Nomenclatures of the Western Desert, Egypt.
Egypt Petrol. Corp.
Parisot, T., Verdier, P., Amaral, J., Mounoury, M., 1996. Egypte Western Desert. Elf
Aquitaine Production.
Philip, J., 2003. Peri-Tethyan neritic carbonate areas: distribution through time and
driving factors. Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol. 196, 19e37.
Picard, L., 1959. Geology and oil exploration of Israel. Bull. Res. Counc. Isr. G8, 1e30.
Read, J.F., 1982. Carbonate platforms of passive (extensional) continental margins:
types, characteristics and evolution. Tectonophysics 81, 195e212.
Reijmer, J., Mulder, T., Borgomano, J., 2015. Carbonate slopes and gravity deposits.
Sediment. Geol. 317, 1e8.
Robertson, A.H.F., 1998. Lithofacies evidence for the cretaceousepaleogene sedi-
mentary history of Eratosthenes seamount, Eastern Mediterranean, in its
regional tectonic context (sites 966 and 967). In: Robertson, A.H.F., Emeis, K.-C.,
Richter, C., Camerlenghi, A. (Eds.), Proceedings of the Ocean Drilling Program,
Scientific Results, vol. 160.
Robertson, A.H.F., Dixon, J.E., 1984. Introduction: aspects of the geological evolution
of the eastern Mediterranean. In: Dixon, J.E., Robertson, A.H.F. (Eds.), The
Geological Evolution of the Eastern Mediterranean. Geological Society, London,
Special Publications, 17, pp. 1e74.
Samir, A.M., 1994. Biostratigraphy and paleoecology of the khoman formation
(Upper cretaceous) between the Bahariya and the Farafra oases, western desert,
Egypt. Neues Jahrb. Geol. Pala €ontologie Abh. 191, 271e297.
Santantonio, M., Scrocca, D., Lipparini, L., 2013. The Ombrina-Rospo plateau (Apu-
lian platform): evolution of a carbonate platform and its margins during the
jurassic and cretaceous. Mar. Pet. Geol. 42, 4e29.
Schlager, 2005. Carbonate Sedimentology and Sequence Stratigraphy. In: SEPM,
Concepts in Sedimentology and Paleontology, vol. 8. Society for Sedimentary
Geology (SEPM).
Schutz, K.I., 1994. Structure and stratigraphy of the Gulf of Suez, Egypt. In:
Landon, S.M. (Ed.), Interior Rifts Basins. AAPG Memoir 59, Tusla, Oklahoma USA,
pp. 57e199.
Scotese, C.R., 1997. Paleogeographic Atlas: PALEOMAP Progress Report 90-0497.
University of Texas at Arlington, p. 20.
Segev, A., 2002. Flood Basalts, Continental Breakup and the Dispersal of Gondwana:
Evidence for Periodic Migration of Upwelling Mantle Flows (Plumes). Euro.
Geosci. Uni., Stephan Mueller Spec. Publ., Ser., 2, pp. 171e191.
Segev, A., Rybakov, M., 2010. Effects of Cretaceous plume and convergence, and
Early Tertiary tectonomagmatic quiescence on the central and southern Levant
continental margin. J. Geol. Soc. Lond. 167, 731e749.
Segev, A., Schattner, U., Lyakhovsky, V., 2011. MiddleeLate Eocene structure of the
southern Levant continental margin d Tectonic motion versus global sea-level
change. Tectonophysics 499, 165e177.
Simmons, M.D., Sharland, P., Casey, D.M., Davies, R.B., Sutcliffe, O., 2007. Arabian
plate sequence stratigraphy e potential implications for global chronostratig-
raphy. GeoArabia 12, 101e130.
Simo, T.J.A., Scott, R.W., Masse, J.P., 1993. Cretaceous Carbonate Platforms, vol. 56.
American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Science, p. 479.
Stampfli, G.M., Borel, G.D., 2002. A plate tectonic model for the Paleozoic and
Mesozoic constrained by dynamic plate boundaries and restored synthetic
oceanic isochrones. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 196, 17e33.
Stampfli, G.M., Marcoux, J., Baud, A., 1991. Tethyan margins in space and time. In:
Channel, J.E.T., Winterer, E.L., Jansa, L.F. (Eds.), Paleogeography and Paleo-
ceanography of Tethys, Palaeogeography Palaeoclimatology Palaeoecology, 87,
pp. 373e410.
 A. Tassy et al. / Marine and Petroleum Geology xxx (2015) 1e17 17

Tantawy, A.A., Keller, G., Adatte, T., Stinnesbeck, W., Kassab, A., Schulte, P., 2001.
Maastrichtian to Paleocene depositional environment of the Dakhla Formation,
Western Desert, Egypt: sedimentology, mineralogy, and integrated micro- and
macrofossil biostratigraphies. Cretac. Res. 22, 795e827. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1006/cres.2001.0291.
Tari, G., Hussein, H., Novotny, B., Hannke, K., Kohazy, R., 2012a. Play types of the
deep-water Matruh and Herodotus basins. NW Egypt Pet. Geosci. 18, 443e455.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1144/petgeo2012-011.
Tari, G., Kohazy, R., Hannke, K., Hussein, H., Novotny, B., Mascle, J., 2012b. Examples
of deep-water play types in the Matruh and Herodotus basins of NW Egypt.
Lead. Edge 31 (7), 816e823.
Thierry, J., 2000. Early Kimmeridgian. In: Dercourt, J., Geatini, M., Vrielynck, B.,
Barrier, E., Biju-Duval, B., Brunet, M.F., Cadet, J.P., Crasquin, S., Sandulescu, M.
(Eds.), Atlas Peri-tethys, Paleogeographical Maps. Paris, Map. 10.
Verwer, K., Merino-Tome
, O., Kenter, J., Della Porta, G., 2009. Evolution of a high-
relief carbonate platform slope using 3d digital outcrop models: lower
jurassic Djebel Bou Dahar, high atlas, Morocco. J. Sediment. Res. 79, 416e439.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2110/jsr.2009.045.
Walgenwitz, F., Pagel, M., Meyer, A., Maluski, H., Monie
, P., 1990. Thermo-chrono-
logical approach to reservoir diagenesis of the offshore Angola basin: a fluid
inclusion, 40Ar-39Ar and K-Ar investigation. Am. Assoc. Pet. Geol. Bull. 74 (5),
547e563. South Atlantic margins of Africa. p. 17.
Walgenwitz, F., Richert, J.P., Charpentier, P., 1992. Southwest African plate margin;
thermal history and geodynamical implications. In: Poag, C.W., de
Graciansky, P.C. (Eds.), Geologic Evolution of Atlantic Continental Rises. Van
Nostrand Reinhold, New York, pp. 20e45.
Walley, C.D., 2001. The Lebanon passive margin and the evolution of the Levantine
Neo-Tethys. In: Ziegler, P.A., Cavazza, W., Robertson, A.H., Crasquin-Soleau, S.D.
(Eds.), Peri-tethyan Rift e Wrench Basins and Passive Margins IGCP 369 Results.
Me
moires du Muse
um National d’Histoire Naturelle, Paris. Peri-Tethys
Me
moire, 6, pp. 407e439.
Weissenberger, J.A.W., Wierzbicki, R.A., Harland, N.J., 2006. Carbonate sequence
stratigraphy and petroleum geology of the Jurassic deep Panuke field, offshore
Nova Scotia, Canada. In: Harris, P.M., Weber, L.J. (Eds.), Giant Hydrocarbon
Reservoirs of the World: from Rocks to Reservoir Characterization and
Modeling. AAPG Memoir 88/SEPM Special Publication, pp. 395e431.
Wendler, J.E., Wendler, I., Vogt, C., Kuss, K., 2015. Link between cyclic eustatic sea-
level change and continental weathering: evidence for aquifer-eustasy in the
Cretaceous.
Zakhera, M.S., 2010. Distribution and abundance of rudist bivalves in the cretaceous
platform sequences in Egypt: time and space. Turk. J. Earth Sci. 19, 745e755.
Zempolich, W.G., 1993. The drowning succession in Jurassic carbonates of the
Venitian Alps, Italy: a record of supercontinent breakup, gradual eustatic rise,
and eutrophication of shallow-water environments. AAPG Memoir 57,
pp. 63e105.
Ziegler, P.A., 1990. Geological Atlas of Western and Central Europe. Shell Interna-
tional Maatschappij, The Hague.

Please cite this article in press as: Tassy, A., et al., Egyptian Tethyan margin in the Mesozoic: Evolution of a mixed carbonate-siliciclastic shelf
edge (from Western Desert to Sinai), Marine and Petroleum Geology (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2015.10.011
View publication stats