Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-2dmjx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-07T03:28:11.018Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Stratigraphy, composition and provenance of argillaceous marls from the Calcare di Base Formation, Rossano Basin (northeastern Calabria)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 April 2014

FRANCESCO PERRI*
Affiliation:
Dipartimento di Biologia, Ecologia e Scienze della Terra, Università della Calabria, 87036 Arcavacata di Rende (CS), Italy
ROCCO DOMINICI
Affiliation:
Dipartimento di Biologia, Ecologia e Scienze della Terra, Università della Calabria, 87036 Arcavacata di Rende (CS), Italy
SALVATORE CRITELLI
Affiliation:
Dipartimento di Biologia, Ecologia e Scienze della Terra, Università della Calabria, 87036 Arcavacata di Rende (CS), Italy
*
†Author for correspondence: francesco.perri@unical.it
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The Calcare di Base Formation is a part of the Rossano Basin characterizing the Foreland Basin System of northeastern Calabria. Messinian argillaceous marls from the Calcare di Base Formation have been studied to characterize the sedimentary evolution of this formation during the post-orogenic phases of the Calabria–Peloritani Arc. The mineralogical assemblage of the argillaceous marls is dominated by phyllosilicates (illite, chlorite, illite/smectite mixed layers and traces of kaolinite), carbonate minerals (calcite, aragonite and dolomite), quartz and traces of feldspars (both K-feldspars and plagioclase), gypsum and celestine. The palaeoweathering index records changes at the source, reflecting variations in the tectonic regime as shown in the A–CN–K plot, where the studied samples describe a trend typical of a source area in which active tectonism allows erosion of all zones within weathering profiles developed on source rocks. The studied samples are derived from an environment in which non-steady-state weathering conditions prevailed. This trend could record deformational events that affected the Mediterranean area during the Miocene. The Th/Sc versus Zr/Sc ratios and Al–Zr–Ti plot suggest that the samples likely record a recycling effect from their basement rocks. The geochemical proxies of these samples suggest a provenance from a mainly felsic source. The Messinian argillaceous marls record that deposition probably occurred in a semi-closed marine environment mainly subject to hypersalinity with local episodes of meteoric water influx, during a period characterized by persistent dry and warm/arid conditions alternating with relatively wet conditions.

Information

Type
Original Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2014 
Figure 0

Figure 1. Simplified geological map of the central-northern sector of the Calabria–Peloritani Arc with location of the mentioned basins and sites. 1 – Pliocene to Holocene sediments, and volcanic and volcaniclastic rocks; 2 – Upper Tortonian to Messinian clastic rocks and evaporites; 3 – Cilento Group (middle Miocene); 4 – San Donato, Verbicaro and Pollino units (Triassic to Miocene); 5 – Liguride Complex (Upper Jurassic to Upper Oligocene); 6 – Longobucco and Caloveto groups (Lower Jurassic to Lower Cretaceous) and Paludi Formation (Upper Oligocene); 7 – Sila, Castagna and Bagni basement units (Palaeozoic); 8 – Malvito, Diamante–Terranova, Gimigliano ophiolitiferous units (Upper Jurassic to Lower Cretaceous).

Figure 1

Figure 2. Geological sketch map of the Rossano Basin (northeastern Calabria). L1 and L2 are the sedimentological logs shown in Figure 4.

Figure 2

Figure 3. Schematic stratigraphic column of the studied area.

Figure 3

Figure 4. Sedimentological logs of the studied area showing the argillaceous marl samples studied in this work (L1 is the lower part of the stratigraphic succession, whereas L2 is the upper part). Sh – shale; SS – sandstone; Cgl – conglomerate; f – fine; m – medium; c – coarse; gr – gravel; pb –pebble; cb – cobble; bd – boulder.

Figure 4

Figure 5. Field photos of the facies associations. (a) Facies A consists of decimetre-thick massive limestone passing upwards to vacuolar mudstone. (b) Close-up view of a pocket characterized by evaporitic pseudomorphs of Facies A. (c) Facies B consists of decimetre-sized clay chips and rip-up clasts of argillaceous marls floating in a micritic matrix. (d) Green and orange argillaceous marls and centimetre-thick layers of graded calcilutite (Facies C). (e) Vadose and phreatic conduits affected the Calcare di Base Formation. (f) Close-up view of clastic facies formed by centimetre-thick graded calcarenites and decimetre-thick limestone gypsum breccias.

Figure 5

Table 1. Mineralogical composition of the bulk rock (weight per cent)

Figure 6

Table 2. Distribution of major and trace elements and ratios in the studied samples

Figure 7

Table 3. Means, standard deviations and ranges of elemental concentrations and ratios of the studied samples

Figure 8

Figure 6. Major and trace element compositional ranges normalized to the PAAS (Post-Archaean Australian Shale; Taylor & McLennan, 1985).

Figure 9

Figure 7. Rare earth element compositional ranges, chondrite-normalized (Taylor & McLennan, 1985). The plot of the Post-Archaean Australian Shale (PAAS) and the Upper Continental Crust (UCC; McLennan, Taylor & Hemming, 2006) is shown for comparison.

Figure 10

Figure 8. (a) Ternary A–CN–K and (b) A–N–K diagrams. Legend: Gr – granite; Ms – muscovite; Il – illite; Ka – kaolinite; Ch – chlorite; Gi – gibbsite; Sm – smectite; Bi – biotite; Pl – plagioclase; Ks – K-feldspar; A – Al2O3; CN – CaO+Na2O; K – K2O; CIA – Chemical Index of Alteration (Nesbitt & Young, 1982).

Figure 11

Table 4. Range of elemental ratios of studied samples compared to the ratios those of felsic and mafic rocks, Upper Continental Crust (UCC) and Post-Archaean Australian Shale (PAAS)

Figure 12

Figure 9. Th/Co versus La/Sc diagram for argillaceous marls (fields after Cullers, 2002).

Figure 13

Figure 10. La–Th–Sc diagram (after Bhatia & Crook, 1986). The studied samples fall in a region close to the PAAS and the UCC point that rules out important mafic supply.

Figure 14

Figure 11. V–Ni–La*10 ternary diagram, showing fields representative of felsic, mafic and ultramafic rocks plot separately (e.g. Bracciali et al. 2007; Perri, Muto & Belviso, 2011). The studied samples plot close to the felsic composition and to the Palaeozoic basement rocks analysed in this work.

Figure 15

Figure 12. Ternary 15Al2O3–300TiO2–Zr plot (Garcia, Coehlo & Perrin, 1991) showing possible sorting effects for the studied samples.

Figure 16

Figure 13. Th/Sc versus Zr/Sc plot (after McLennan, Hemming & Hanson, 1993). Samples depart from the compositional trend indicating zircon addition suggestive of a recycling effect. Rock average compositions (Rhyolite, Dacite and Andesite) are from Lacassie, Hervè & Roser (2006).