Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T20:57:01.376Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Major Recent Tectonic Uplift in Iskenderun Bay, Turkey

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 July 2016

H Koral ,
J Kronfeld ,
N Avsar ,
V Yanko  and
J C Vogel
H Koral
Affiliation:
Department of Geology, Istanbul University, Avcilar 34850, Istanbul, Turkey
J Kronfeld
Affiliation:
Department of Geophysics and Planetary Sciences, Tel-Aviv University, Ramat-Aviv 69978, Israel
N Avsar
Affiliation:
Department of Geological Engineering, Cukurova University, Balcali 01330, Adana, Turkey
V Yanko
Affiliation:
Avalon Institute for Applied Sciences, Winnipeg, MB, R3P 2G9, Canada
J C Vogel
Affiliation:
Quaternary Dating Research Unit, CSIR, POB 395, Pretoria, 0001, South Africa
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Radiocarbon dating was carried out in the sediment profiles of four marine sediment cores taken from Iskenderun Bay, Turkey. The bay is quite shallow in the present day, and a previous tectonic study had considered that the bay floor might have been subsiding. However, this cannot be so, for the 14C ages would thereby lead to the apparent paradox of normal marine sedimentation having taken place during times when glacio-eustatic sea level lowering would have exposed the bay floor. Rather, we conclude that the floor of Iskenderun Bay on the whole has been experiencing rapid uplift since the end of the Last Glacial, due to a combination of tectonic factors linked to the compression between the Anatolian and African plates.

Type
II. Our ‘Wet’ Environment
Information
Radiocarbon , Volume 43 , Issue 2B: Proceedings of the 17th International Radiocarbon Conference (Part 2 of 3), Conference Editors: Israel Carmi, Elisabetta Boaretto , 2001 , pp. 957 - 963
Copyright
Copyright © 2001 by the Arizona Board of Regents on behalf of the University of Arizona 

References

Aksu, AE, Ulug, A, Piper, DYP, Konuk, YT, Turgut, S. 1992. Quaternary sedimentary history of Adana, Cilicia and Iskenderun basins: northeast Mediterranean Sea. Marine Geology 104:55–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fairbanks, RG. 1989. A 17,000-year glacio-eustatic sea-level record: influence of glacial melting rates on the Younger Dryas event and deep-ocean circulation. Nature 42:637–42.Google Scholar
Gorur, N. 1985. Depositional history of Miocene sediments of the NW flank of the Adana Basin. In: Izdar, E, Nakoman, E, editors. Sixth colloquium of geology of the Aegean region. Dokuz Eylul University: Piri Reis Institute Contribution Series. p 185–208.Google Scholar
Koral, H. 1996. Sedimentological study of the cores in Iskenderun Bay: evidence of depositional conditions during the Holocene. In: Yanko, V, editor. Annual Report, Benthic foraminifera as indicators of heavy metal pollution-a new kind of biological monitoring for the Mediterranean Sea. p 101–14.Google Scholar
Oral, MB, Reilinger, RE, Toksoz, MN, King, RW, Barka, AA, Kinik, I, Lenk, O. 1995. Global positioning system offers evidence of plate motions in Eastern Mediterranean. EOS, Transactions, American Geophysical Union 76:9–11.Google Scholar
Schmidt, GC. 1961. Stratigraphic nomenclature for the Adana region: Petroleum District VII. Petroleum Administration Bulletin 24:39–50.Google Scholar
Skelton, RA. 1969. Claudius Ptolemacas, Geographica, Venice, 1511. Theatrvm Orbis Terrarvm. Amsterdam MCMLXIX.Google Scholar
Uffenorde, H, Lund, JJ, Georgi, K-H. 1990. Biostratigraphy of the Neogene in the Iskenderun Basin. 8th Petroleum Congress of Turkey, Turkish Association of Petroleum Geologists, UCTEA Chamber of Petroleum Engineers. p 363–70.Google Scholar
Vogel, JC, Marais, M. 1971. Pretoria radiocarbon dates I. Radiocarbon 13(3): 378–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woodside, JM. 1977. Tectonic elements and the crust of the eastern Mediterranean Sea. Marine Geophysical Researches 5:317–54.Google Scholar
Yalçin, MN, Gorur, N. 1984. Sedimentological evolution of the Adana Basin. In: Tekeli, O, Goncuoglu, MC, editors. Geology of the Taurus Belt. MTA Ensititusu. p 165–72.Google Scholar
Yanko, V. 1990a Quaternary, foraminifera of the genus Ammonia of the Pontian- Caspian region. Paleontological Journal 1:18–26.Google Scholar
Yanko, V. 1990b Stratigraphy and paleogeography of the marine Pleistocene and Holocene deposits of the southern seas of the USSR. Memorie della Societa Geologica Italiana 44:167–87.Google Scholar
Yanko, V. 1994. Benthic foraminifera as indicators of heavy metals pollution - a new kind of biological monitoring for the Mediterranean Sea. AVICENNE Annual Report. 42 p.Google Scholar
Yanko, V. 1995. Benthic foraminifera as indicators of heavy metals pollution - a new kind of biological monitoring for the Mediterranean Sea. AVICENNE Annual Report. 270 p. Contract Number AVI CT92–0007.Google Scholar
Yanko, V, Kronfeld, J, Flexer, A. 1994. The response of benthic foraminifera to various pollution sources: implications for pollution monitoring. Journal of Foraminiferal Research 24:1–17.Google Scholar
Yilmaz, Y, Gurer, F. 1996. The geology and evolution of the Misis-Andirin Belt, around Andirin (Kahramanmaras). Turkish Journal of Earth Sciences 5:39–56.Google Scholar