proceedings of the geologists’ association · ahmada, sherif faroukb,*, mohamed w. abd el-moghnyc...

Proceedings of the Geologists’ Association xxx (2014) xxx–xxx

G Model

PGEOLA-360; No. of Pages 13

A regional stratigraphic correlation for the upper Campanianphosphorites and associated rocks in Egypt and Jordan

Fayez Ahmad a, Sherif Farouk b,*, Mohamed W. Abd El-Moghny c

a Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, The Hashemite University, Zarqa 13115, Jordanb Exploration Department, Egyptian Petroleum Research Institute, Nasr City 11727, Egyptc Geology Department, Al-Azahr University, Nasr City, Egypt

A R T I C L E I N F O

Article history:

Received 28 December 2013

Received in revised form 18 June 2014

Accepted 19 June 2014

Available online xxx

Keywords:

Egypt

Jordan

Phosphorites

Late Campanian

Facies types

A B S T R A C T

Facies analyses and a sequence stratigraphical framework with regional correlation of the upper

Campanian phosphate province are presented, based on three main sections located in Egypt (Gebel

Duwi and Abu Tartur sections) and north Jordan (Umm Qais section). Fifteen facies types were grouped

into: phosphate (FT1–5), carbonate (FT6–11) and siliciclastic (FT12–15) facies associations. The main

component of phosphate rocks is pellets in situ and common reworked biogenic debris, especially in the

upper phosphate beds (e.g. fish teeth and bones), which along with abundant Thalassinoides burrows

suggests that the skeletal material was the main source for phosphates in Egypt; in contrast the common

authigenic phosphatic grains (pristine) in Jordan reflect an upwelling regime. Based on age assignment

as well as stratigraphical position, the phosphorite beds show great similarity that may suggests a

similar origin and proximity during the period of deposition of the Duwi Formation of the Red Sea coast

of Egypt and its equivalent, the Al-Hisa Phosphorite Formation in Jordan, which represents an early

transgressive system tract of a depositional sequence. On the Abu Tartur plateau, the presence of sandy

pyritic phosphatic grainstone (FT1) and glauconitic quartz arenite (FT12) in the middle part of the

studied section, along with the absence of chert facies (FT14), reflects a more shallow marine

depositional environment with increased fluvial sediment supply compared to those along the Red Sea

coast and north Jordan.

� 2014 The Geologists’ Association. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Proceedings of the Geologists’ Association

jo ur n al ho m ep ag e: www .e ls evier . c om / lo cat e/p g eo la

1. Introduction

The Upper Campanian Duwi and Amman phosphate-richformations, deposited within shallow marine environments inEgypt and Jordan, have been intensely studied due to theireconomic interest. These deposits belonged to the giant Tethyanphosphorite belt extending from the Caribbean in the west,through North Africa to the Middle East in the east (Notholt, 1980).This province accounts for the greatest known accumulation ofmarine phosphorites, possibly in excess of 70 billion metric tons ofphosphate rocks (Glenn and Arthur, 1990).

Increased interest in the Mesozoic and Cenozoic phosphoritedeposits of the Middle East coincides with the discoveries of oil shaleand rare earth elements associated with the phosphate deposits (El-Kammar et al., 1979; Muhammad et al., 2011; Abed, 2011, 2013).

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +202 01281719573.

E-mail addresses: [email protected] (F. Ahmad), [email protected]

(S. Farouk), [email protected] (M.W. Abd El-Moghny).

Please cite this article in press as: Ahmad, F., et al., A regional stratassociated rocks in Egypt and Jordan. Proc. Geol. Assoc. (2014), http

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pgeola.2014.06.002

0016-7878/� 2014 The Geologists’ Association. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights re

The Campanian deposits were studied by several authors whodescribed their petrography, geochemistry and phosphogenesis (e.g.Hassan and El Kammar, 1975; Glenn and Arthur, 1990; Baioumy andTada, 2005) in Egypt and Jordan (e.g. Bandel and Mikbel, 1985; Abedand Ashour, 1987; Abed and Kraishan, 1991; Abed and Fakhouri,1996; Abed and Amireh, 1999; Abed et al., 2005, 2007; Abed, 2011,2013; Powell and Moh’d, 2011, 2012).

Sedimentation of the phosphorite, chert, oil shale andassociated sediments has been regarded as a function of upwellingcurrent influenced bioproductivity and palaeobathymetry of theepicontinental shelf floor (Kolodny and Garrison, 1994; Abed et al.,2005; Powell and Moh’d, 2011). The depositional setting causedrapid lateral variations in thickness and facies. The Egyptian andJordanian phosphates are shallow marine deposits of LateCretaceous (Campanian to Maastrichtian) age. The maximumphase of phosphorite sedimentation was associated with atransgressive shoreline of the Neo-Tethys Ocean that encroachedfrom north to south over the northern margin of Africa duringConiacian to Campanian times (Abed, 2013). The precise correla-tion of the major upper Cretaceous phosphate provinces in Egypt

igraphic correlation for the upper Campanian phosphorites and://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pgeola.2014.06.002

served.


mailto:[email protected]




http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00167878

www.elsevier.com/locate/pgeola


F. Ahmad et al. / Proceedings of the Geologists’ Association xxx (2014) xxx–xxx2

G Model


and Jordan, as well as the comparison between the local and globalsequences is still uncertain due to the controversy in ageassignments and strong lateral and vertical variation of lithofacies.

The aim of this paper is to present the results of an investigationof the age assignment, lithofacies, biofacies and the depositionalenvironments to determine the relative sea-level curve of theCampanian deposits in Egypt and Jordan. It provides correlations ofphosphorite sequences in an inner-ramp setting from south Egyptto north Jordan. Furthermore, the timing of causal factors such asglobal/regional sea-level changes are discussed.

2. Geological setting

In Mesozoic times, Egypt and Jordan were situated at thesouthern margin of the Neo-Tethys Ocean (Stampfli and Borel,2002). Sedimentation was controlled by the configuration of theTethys to the north and north-west as well as the intra-platetectonics of the Arabo-Nubian shield (Powell, 1989; Powell andMoh’d, 2011). The closure of Neo-Tethys during the convergence ofthe African–Arabian Craton and Europe caused the development ofbasins and swells, mainly related to the major tectonic formation ofthe ‘Syrian Arc’ fold belt during the Late Cretaceous (Krenkel, 1924;Bowen and Jux, 1987). This is reflected in a series of syn-depositional

Fig. 1. Location map of the study area showing the phosphorite


anticlines and synclines in north Sinai and the Negev, west of theDead Sea transform (Said, 1962; Bartov et al., 1972, 1980; Bartov andSteinitz, 1977; Garfunkel, 1978) and in the Palmyrides to thesoutheast of Syria (Al-Saad et al., 1992; Chaimov et al., 1992; Sawafet al., 1993).

Upper Campanian phosphate deposits in Egypt and Jordanoccur in basins that remained relatively tectonically undeformedrepresenting stable shelf areas (Fig. 1). In contrast, the Duwi area,at the northwestern margin of the Red Sea, can be considered astilted faulted blocks that are generally dissected by minor faults,especially in the northern and southern parts (Akkad and Dardir,1966). A major phosphogenic episode took place during the lateCampanian in the Levant and North Africa (Powell and Moh’d,2011). The Levant and North Africa were part of the broad, shallow,southern epicontinental shelf of the Tethys Ocean, situatedbetween 10 and 20 8N palaeo-latitudes (Sheldon, 1981) andprevailing winds were blowing to the west and southwest ontothe southern Neo-Tethys epicontinental shelf creating an upwell-ing regime from the deeper Neo-Tethys Ocean onto this shelf (Cookand McElhinny, 1979; Sheldon, 1987; Almogi-Labin et al., 1993;Kolodny and Garrison, 1994; Powell and Moh’d, 2011). Since thelate Turonian, the Levant epicontinental shelf was shallow marine,with water depth not more than 50 m (Powell and Moh’d, 2011). In

deposits and their facies associations in Egypt and Jordan.



F. Ahmad et al. / Proceedings of the Geologists’ Association xxx (2014) xxx–xxx 3

G Model


basins and on swells, oil shales and phosphorites were depositedacross the inner-shelf (Abed and Sadaqah, 1998; Abed et al., 2005).

The common association of phosphatic strata with chert andorganic-rich sediments in both the Middle East and Egypt has beeninterpreted as an indication that phosphorite accumulation wasassociated with highly productive surface waters possibly causedby upwelling (Reiss, 1988; Shemesh et al., 1988; Almogi-Labinet al., 1990, 1993; Kolodny and Garrison, 1994; Nathan et al.,1997).

3. Material and methods

Three surface sections were measured and sampled bed-by-bedand investigated sedimentologically in detail (Fig. 1). These are theAbu Tartur (2582503400 N and 3080500800 E) and Gebel Duwi sections(268060200 N and 3480501000 E) in Egypt, and the Umm Qais section(3283805000 N and 3584101300 E) in Jordan. Carbonate and siliciclasticrocks were analyzed in the field using a hand lens and classifiedaccording to their depositional fabrics as well as grain size andcomposition. Ninety samples were collected from characteristicmicrofacies recognized in the field in order to fully characterizethese by thin section analyses (Flugel, 2004). The classificationscheme used is that of Dunham (1962) with the modifications byEmbry and Klovan (1972). In addition, the most importantcalcareous nannofossil and planktonic foraminiferal taxa arediscussed to give an improved biostratigraphical correlationbetween Egypt and Jordan. The biostratigraphy and age estimatesfor the planktonic foraminiferal zonation are according toRobaszynski and Caron (1995), while the calcareous nannofossilzonation is according to Perch-Nielsen (1985).

4. Lithostratigraphy

4.1. The Duwi Formation (Youssef, 1957)

Description: This formation represents an economically valu-able phosphate belt concentrated mainly in southern Egypt. Thiseconomic phosphate belt occur south latitude 2780000. Toward thenorth of Egypt, the upper Campanian succession is represented bythe Gebel Thelmet Formation or the lower part of the SudrFormation contains no economic phosphate due to lateral facieschanges to a carbonate-dominated sequence (Fig. 1). The DuwiFormation is characterized by high rates of phosphate sedimenta-tion related to the Late Cretaceous sea-level rise reported frommany areas of the Arabian and African plates such as northernEgypt, Israel and Jordan. It unconformably overlies the fluvial shalesequence of the lower-middle? Campanian Quseir Variegatedshales and unconformably underlies the lower Maastrichtian–Upper Paleocene Dakhla Formation. A marked regional and localvariation in lithofacies of the Duwi Formation between the Red Sea,Nile Valley and Western Desert areas is noticed.

At Kharga Oasis as well as in the Nile Valley, the bulk of theeconomically important phosphorites occur in the lower part of theformation, reaching about 6 m at the Abu Tartur mine, decreasingin thickness to the El-Kharga and north El-Dakhla oases. Thisphosphate bed is followed by suboxic black shale and glauconiticsandstones overlain by shale intercalated with subordinatephosphate beds (Fig. 2A). The base of these phosphate beds ismarked by an intensive burrow system of Thalassinoides withsiliceous granules and pebbles. The Gebel Duwi section consists ofshale with phosphate, followed by oyster-rich limestone and marlintercalated with (0.5–1.0 m thick) phosphatic beds with a denseThalassinoides burrow system at the Duwi/Dakhla formationalboundary (Fig. 2B).

Age assignments: The precise age of the Duwi Formation is notexactly known (Baioumy and Tada, 2005). Previous studies


reached two different age assignments: Late Campanian (Issawi,1972; Abd El-Razik, 1979; Kassab and Hamma, 1991; Cherif andIsmail, 1991; Tantawy et al., 2001; Ismail, 2012; El-Azabi andFarouk, 2011) and Late Campanian/Maastrichtian (Glenn andArthur, 1990; Schrank and Perch-Nielsen, 1985; El-Beialy, 1995).

The ammonites Bostrychoceras polyplocum, recorded from theupper phosphate beds directly below the Dakhla Formation, andLibycoceras ismaeli occurring in the lowermost part of the DuwiFormation (Kassab and Hamma, 1991) in Gebel Abu Had, confirm aLate Campanian age for the Duwi Formation. This was alsoobserved by Reiss (1955) and El Naggar (1966) who correlated theammonite B. polyplocum with the Late Campanian planktonicforaminiferal zone of Globotruncanita calcarata, which confirmsthat the Duwi Formation is upper Campanian. Cherif and Ismail(1991) and Ismail (2012) mentioned that in the Esh El Mallahaarea, the Duwi Formation is devoid of index planktonic foraminif-era and its age is uncertain, but it could be Campanian as it isoverlain by chalk yielding G. calcarata of Late Campanian age.

In the present study, the mass occurrences of planktonicforaminifera and calcareous nannofossils in the lowermost beds ofthe Dakhla Formation indicate an Early Maastrichtian age. The firstoccurrence of Rugoglobigerina hexacamerata is considered a markerbioevent for the Campanian/Maastrichtian boundary (Li et al.,1999). Well-preserved, abundant and diverse assemblages includeRugoglobigerina rugosa and R. hexacamerata, Globotruncana bul-

loides, Globotruncana linneiana, Globotruncana aegyptica, Globo-

truncanela havanesis and Rosita fornicata. These assemblagesindicate the earliest Maastrichtian R. hexacamerata Zone CF8b,as suggested by the absence of Gansserina gansseri and thepresence of R. hexacamerata. The calcareous nannofossil assem-blages are represented by Aspidolithus parcus, Quadrum gothicus,Quadrum sissinghii, Quadrum trifidum, Tranolithus phacelosus,Reinhardtites levis, Eiffelithus turriseiffelii, Rhagodiscus angustus,Arkhangelskiella cymbiformis, Micula decussata and Prediscosphaera

cretacea. These assemblages indicate Zone CC23b, which spans theearliest Maastrichtian.

4.2. The Amman Silicified Limestone Formation (Masri, 1963)

Description: This formation is well-exposed in Jordan withindeep wadis where the lower part forms steep slopes, occasionallywith undulating beds. The Amman Silicified Limestone Formationrests with a major unconformity, on top of the underlying WadiUmm Ghudran Formation of Late Coniacian age. Santonian andlower Campanian deposits are missing (Al-Rifaiy et al., 1993); theupper boundary is marked by the increase of thick-bedded chertthat unconformably underlies the Al-Hisa Phosphorite Formation(Fig. 2C) (Powell, 1989). The formation has a thickness of about94 m at the Umm Qais section, and can be divided into thefollowing lithological units (from base to top).

Unit 1 consists of 20 m of thick grayish limestone with bivalvesand gastropods, intercalated with thinly discontinuous chert andchert concretions. A few beds of phosphatic limestone can be seen,especially at the base.

Unit 2 is ca. 22 m thick and composed of phosphaticargillaceous limestone intercalated with thick-bedded, dark brownpenecontemporaneous chert, ranging in thickness from 1 to 2 m.The phosphate particles are derived mainly from bone fragmentsand larger intraclasts. This interval is marked by Baculites sp. andthe larger-sized of Pycnodonte (Phygraea) vesicularis (Fig. 2D).

Age assignments: Large P. (Ph.) vesicularis and Baculites cf. ovatus

are considered the most characteristic megafossils of theCampanian in Jordan. P. (Ph.) vesicularis is recorded in Egyptwithin the Late Campanian calcareous nannofossil Zones CC21 andCC22 (Faris and Abu Shama, 2006). Haggart (2000) assigned theAmman Silicified Limestone Formation to the Late Campanian



Fig. 2. (A) Photograph showing the Abu Tartur section and its related facies types (circle = 1.5 m). (B) Intensive burrow system of bifarcuted Thalassinoides with siliceous

gravel and pebbles characterized the upper phosphate bed of the Gebel Duwi section. (C) Field photograph showing the Amman Silicified Limestone, Al-Hisa Phosphorite and

Muwaqqar Chalk Marl Formations exposed at Umm Qais section. (D) Phosphatic limestone rich in Pycnodonte (Ph.) vesicularis near the topmost part of the Amman Silicified

Limestone. (C) Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM) image that the phosphatic grains are composed of vertebrate fragments with pyrite. (D) Bioclastic phosphatic grainstone

(FT1) showing phosphatic pellets of different types: reworked(R) and pristine (P) at Umm Qais section.


G Model


based on the occurrence of B. cf. ovatus, which supports Wetzel andMorton’s (1959) assignment of the Amman Silicified LimestoneFormation to the Campanian. On the other hand, Ismail (2012)reported the disappearance of the P. vesicularis below marker indexplanktonic foraminifera of G. calcarata Zone. The Amman SilicifiedLimestone Formation yielded rare and sporadic planktonicforaminifera such as R. rugosa, Globotruncana arca, G. calcarata,R. fornicata, Heterohelix globulosa. The calcareous nannofossil


assemblages are represented by Watznaueria barnesae, M. decus-

sata, Micula concava, Reinhardtites anthophorus, A. cymbiformis,Eiffellithus gorkae, E. turriseiffelii, Gartnerago obliquum, P. cretacea, Q.

sissinghii, Ahmuellerella octoradiata, Calculites obscurus (Fig. 3). Thisassemblage is assigned to the CC22 Zone of Perch-Nielsen (1985).Al-Rifaiy et al. (1993), using the presence of R. rugosa suggests anage not older than Middle Campanian for the base of the AmmanSilicified Limestone Formation.



Fig. 3. (All photograph taken from late Campanian Amman Silicified Limestone Formation and Al-Hisa Phosphorite Formation at Umm Qais section): A–C Reinhardtites

anthophorus (Deflandre, 1959), sample 37; D–E Watznaueria barnesae (Black in Black & Barnes, 1959), sample 20; F–G Arkhangelskiella cymbiformis Vekshina 1959, sample 2; H

Lucianorhabdus cayeuxii Dellandre 1959, sample 20; I–J Zeugrhabdotus pseudanthophorus (Bramlette & Martini, 1964), sample15; K Stradneria crenulata (Bramlette & Martini,

1964), sample; L–M Micula decussata Vekshina 1959, sample 37; N Calculites obscurus (Deflandre, 1959), sample; O Eiffellithus turriseiffelii (Deflandre in Deflandre & Fert, 1954)

sample 37; P Microrhabdulus decoratus Deflandre 1959, sample 37.


G Model


4.3. Al-Hisa Phosphorite Formation (El-Hiyari, 1985)

Description: The Al-Hisa Phosphorite Formation consists ofthree units: the 25 m thick main phosphorite, the 2 m massivelimestone, and the upper phosphorite units (5 m thick). Thephosphate consists of massive granular, sand-grade phosphateembedded in calcareous cement and characterized by a lack of anysedimentary structures. The Al-Hisa Phosphorite Formation isoverlain conformably the Muwaqqar Chalk Marl Formation (Masri,1963), which is composed mainly of chalky limestone and marl(Fig. 2C).

Age assignments: Previous studies of the Al-Hisa PhosphoriteFormation reached three significant differences in age assignments


due to sparse biostratigraphic data. Previous authors (Powell, 1989;Powell and Moh’d, 2011) assigned a Late Campanian age, an Early-Middle Maastrichtian age (Abed and Ashour, 1987; Abed, 2011) anda Campanian/Maastrichtian age (Abed et al., 2005, 2007) have alsobeen proposed. Abed and Ashour (1987) gave a Maastrichtian age forthe Al-Hisa Phosphorite Formation based on the presence of theplanktonic foraminifera G. gansseri in the overlying sediment abovethe phosphate deposits. Different age determinations are obtainedin this current study, most notably the first appearance of G. gansseri

is higher in the Muwaqqar Chalk Marl Formation. In addition, thepresence of the reliable calcareous nannofossil bioevents of R.

anthophorus and Eiffellithus eximius indicates a Late Campanian agefor the Al-Hisa Phosphorite Formation in Jordan.




G Model


5. Lithofacies and microfacies

The dominance of a particular or group of lithofacies, indifferent locations allows the definition of a phosphate association(FT1–5), carbonate association (FT6–11), and siliciclastic associa-tion (FT12–15) as outlined below.

5.1. Phosphate associations (FT1–5)

Sandy pyritic phosphatic grainstone (FT1): This lithofacies isrecorded only in the lower phosphatic bed at Abu Tartur section. Itshows large-scale cross-bedding in two opposite directions, andconsists of massive, sandy, moderately sorted, coarse-grained,ferruginous, granular phosphorite intercalated with thin shalelaminae. In thin section, phosphatic pellets and bioclasts composeabout 20–35% of the rocks and size varies from 0.2 to 2 mm.Lithoclasts are up to 3 mm in diameter and their size decreasesupwards. These phosphatic grains are subrounded to well-roundedand oval to spherical shape. Phosphatic bioclastics are composed ofvertebrate fragments (bones and teeth). The carbonate hydroxy-apatite mineral (dahlite) of these biogenic fragments is partiallytransformed into silica minerals (especially chalcedony). Phos-phatic Thalassinoides have been developed in the lower phosphaticbed with a network-structure and they are filled with phosphaticgrains. Non-phosphate grains consist essentially of pyrite, detritalquartz, gypsum and haematite. Quartz grains (0.1–0.2 mm) arecharacterized by rounded to angular, elongated and sphericalshape. The percentage of quartz grains decreases upward. Darkgray to black pyrite crystals are dispersed within the cement infresh phosphatic samples. The yellowish brown weatheredphosphatic samples are cemented with iron oxide and gypsumwhich formed by the oxidation of pyrite (Fig. 2E).

Interpretation: The abundant detrital quartz, the presence ofmarine vertebrates (bone fragments) and the large-scale cross-bedding suggest a high-energy near-shore depositional environ-ment, with storm sediment deposited as lag deposits. The largeamounts of pyrite in the Abu Tartur phosphorites suggests anincreasingly abundant source of iron-bound phosphate associatedwith terrigenous sediment input to the continental margin.Common depositional environments for Thalassinoides includenot only shelves and epeiric embayments, but also littoral tosublittoral parts of certain estuaries, bays, lagoons, and tidal flats(Miller, 2007). Pufahl et al. (2003) mentioned that Thalassinoides

burrow networks are classic examples of condensed beds that canalso be interpreted as firm grounds associated with increasingaccommodation during transgression. Extensive high-energyconditions developed with elevated reworking intensity andupwelling and these phosphate deposits were transported andaccumulated in the intercontinental shallow basins. The associa-tion of sands and phosphorite may reflect fluvial supply that mayhave been according to Glenn and Arthur (1990) the major sourceof phosphorus for the formation of these deposits. This phosphoritefacies has been interpreted by Abed and Amireh (1999) as near-shore deposits and the lack of clay matrix is taken to indicatereworking and winnowing of the phosphorite deposits.

Calcareous bioclastic phosphatic grainstone (FT2): This lithofacieshas a wide distribution along the lowermost part of the economicphosphatic beds in Umm Qais section, while it occurs in the upperpart of Gebel Duwi section ranging in thickness from 2 to 5 m. It iscomposed of yellowish brown to light gray, massive, moderatelysorted, coarse-grained, granular phosphorite beds characterized bylack of any sedimentary structures.

Microscopically, it is made up of bioclasts, phosphatic pellets, aswell as lithoclasts. The bioclastic grains are represented byvertebrate fragments (bones and teeth, up to 25% of the rock) ofdifferent sizes (0.2–2 mm) with well-preserved original structure.


The replacement of phosphatic mineral (dahlite) by calcite can benoted in bone fragments. Partial decomposition of bone-formingminerals by bacteria is well developed. Phosphatic pellets andlithoclasts compose about 40–60% of the rock with different sizeand type. Granular phosphatic pellets range in size from 0.3 to1 mm with rounded to subrounded, spherical and oval shapes. Insitu phosphatic pellets (pristine) are characterized by theirirregular outer relief. The lithoclasts (e.g. composite phosphaticpellets) are characterized by their large grain size (up to 3 mm) andshape, and they mostly contain quartz and shell fragments of pre-existing rocks (Fig. 2F). In general, the cement material in thesephosphorites is macrocrystalline sparry calcite.

Interpretation: The main feature of this microfacies is theaccumulation of small, grain-supported, subrounded and sub-angular peloids. This microfacies is represented by peloidal grainsof different size and type (pristine and reworked), formingirregularly distributed grainstone fabrics. These sediments weredeposited in suboxic, protected-shallow basins with moderatewater circulation. The peloidal phosphates were formed authi-genically in oxic to suboxic zones, from phosphate-rich sedi-ments, followed by storm wave winnowing and storm-generated,shelf-parallel geostrophic currents and minor compaction (Glennet al., 1994; Pufahl et al., 2003; Brookfield et al., 2009). The lack oftidally generated sedimentary structures in other sectionsindicates a low tidal range, suggesting that tidal currents playeda minor role in transportation and sediment redistribution (Pufahlet al., 2003).

Biopeloidal dolomitic grainstone (FT3): This lithofacies existcommonly as intercalated, relatively thin (20–30 cm) beds withinthe black shale beds. This facies occurs in the lower part of bothGebel Duwi and Abu Tartur sections with sharp contacts with thesurrounding strata. It consists of light cream to yellowish brown,medium- to coarse-grained and well to moderately sortedphosphatic grainstone.

Petrographically, it is composed of bioclasts (bone and teeth,algae and oyster shell fragments) and phosphatic pellets. Algalfragments are sized from 0.3 to 6 mm, of different forms and theyact as traps of other phosphatic grains. Dolomite cementpredominates with generally medium to coarse, polymodal,euhedral crystalline fabric. Pyrite can be noted as fine-graineddark cubes within and/or around the phosphatic grains. In additionto dolomite, carbonate and gypsum cement have been observed.Well-developed dolomite crystals indicate partial dolomitizationof calcite (Fig. 3A and B).

Interpretation: These sediments were deposited in protected,intertidal to shallow subtidal, slightly reducing environments. Asalso indicated by the fossil assemblage of algae and bivalves, thismicrofacies was deposited under moderate-energy conditions inlagoonal or protected shelf environments.

The coarse fabric of dolomite content may suggests that it is latediagenetic in origin. As a diagenetic product, dolomite formed fromhigh concentrated Mg2+ solutions and also from solution with lesssalinity such as that associated with mixing between a brackishfluid and seawater. The Mg2+ may be leached from the overlyingshales by the meteoric water and penetrated into the phosphaticdeposits where the dolomite is crystallized (Tucker et al., 1990).Rifai and Shaaban (2007) mentioned that this dolomite cementwas formed from mixed hypo-saline fluids within a mixingmarine–meteoric zone in association with organic matter degra-dation.

Biopeloidal dolomitic rudstone (FT4): FT4 describes non-eco-nomic dolomitic phosphatic beds, made up of coarse lithoclasts ofgravel size (>3 mm). This lithofacies has been recorded in theuppermost phosphatic bed of Umm Qais and Abu Tartur sections,and also in the intercalated phosphatic beds in the middle part ofGebel Duwi section.



Fig. 4. (A) SEM image showing reworked phosphatic pellets and fragments of bone with their cellular structure (FT3). (B) SEM image showing teeth fragment and dolomite

crystals developing in clay matrix characterizing the higher phosphate beds at Gebel El-Duwi. Biopeloidal dolomitic rudstone (FT4). (C) Glauconitic phosphatic grainstone/

rudstone (FT5): Authigenic glauconite is well developed in between the phosphatic grains as diagenetic mineral. (D) Field photograph showing intercalated limestone and

chert near the upper part of the Amman Silicified Limestone Formation at Joradan. (E) Microscopic image showing bioclastic foraminiferal phosphatic packstone (FT8) with

reworked bone fragments and iron oxide patches in the Amman Silicified Limestone Formation. (F) Microscopic image showing oyster bio-pelloidal rudstone/floatstone

(FT11) with fibrous crystalline calcite in the oyster shell fragments.


G Model


Beds of FT4 have an average thickness of about 10 cm andconsist of massive, gypsiferous, poorly sorted phosphatic grainswith brownish red color due to the presence of iron oxides. Grainsize is decreases up-section. Few phosphorite beds with athickness less than 20 cm were recorded in the Amman SilicifiedLimestone Formation in Jordan; they are composed mainly ofreworked phosphatic bones and lithoclasts derived from pre-existing phosphate and differ completely from the overlyingphosphates of the Al-Hisa Phosphorite Formation.

Microscopically, the phosphatic pellets have a subrounded tosubangular, oval and lath shape. Some of these phosphatic pelletsare fractured due to compaction. Phosphatic grains are cementedby crystalline fibrous gypsum and dolomite (Fig. 4B).


Interpretation: Enrichment of poorly sorted gravel-sizedphosphatic lithoclasts reflects highly disturbance environmentmay be as lag deposits in tidal channels and on tidal flats.The corresponding carbonate–rudstone facies with coarselithoclasts and bioclasts are considered as a lag deposit in tidalchannels (Tucker et al., 1990). Dolomite cement was formedfrom mixed hypo-saline fluids within a mixing marine–meteoriczone.

Glauconitic phosphatic grainstone–rudstone (FT5): This lithofa-cies occurs as intercalated thin beds (10–20 cm) within the well-developed glauconitic sandstones in the upper part of the AbuTartur section. It consists of pale brown, moderately sorted,coarse- to very coarse-grained, semi-hard to friable glauconitic




G Model


phosphorite. Very thin gypsum veinlets and haematite patcheshave been noted.

Microscopically, this microfacies consists of well-developedphosphatic grains (up to 80%) ranging in size from 0.4 up to 3 mm(mean 0.6 mm). Phosphatized organic remains are common as wellas glauconite, pyrite microcrystals and minor amounts of quartzgrains (Fig. 4C). Authigenic glauconite, as well as dispersedglauconitic pellets, is well developed. All grains are cemented bygypsum. The original structure of bones is well preserved.

Interpretation: The combination of grainstone–rudstone faciescan reflect storm, lag/intertidal to shallow subtidal depositionalenvironment with Fe-enrichment (Flugel, 2004). These conditionsare followed by a post-depositional oxidation stage forming theglauconite cement. The oxidation of Fe-rich minerals (especiallypyrite) played a considerable role in the formation of authigenicglauconite, haematite and gypsum. The formation of authigenicglauconite occurs mainly during diagenesis of sediments bysynthesis from interstitial solutions and/or alteration of clayminerals (Logvinenko, 1982). Glauconite cement develops in Fe-rich, oxidized shallow marine environments (Odin and Matter,1981). The unusual glauconite–phosphate assemblage is typical ofsuboxic zones and may be related to sulphide oxidation (Coleman,1985). Removal of fine-grained sediment by strong winnowingoccurs in high-energy near-coast environments (Flugel, 2004).

5.2. Carbonate associations (FT6–11)

The carbonate associations are recorded mainly from the UmmQais and Gebel Duwi sections, but are completely absent in the AbuTartur plateau (Fig. 5). The observed facies types suggest a

Fig. 5. Sequence stratigraphic correlation and facies associations of the thr


depositional environment ranging from deep subtidal to intertidal,reflecting minor fluctuations in relative sea-level from tidal flat todeep subtidal environments.

Lime–mudstone (FT6): The lime mudstone lithofacies is wellrepresented in the Duwi Formation, at Gebel Duwi and in theAmman Silicified Limestone Formation. FT6 is brown, wellindurated, thick-bedded and argillaceous, intercalated withbedded chert (Fig. 4D). Microscopically, it consists of a denselime mud matrix with few foraminiferal tests and fine sands. Inthin section, it consists of fine dense and dark gray microcrystallinecalcite. Aggrading neomorphism into microsparry calcite isobserved.

Interpretation: Lime–mudstone was deposited in a restrictedlower intertidal regime shoreward of a quiet water lagoon on themarine shelf due to the absence of variable amount of skeletalparticles. Most of the lime mud may have been derived from theabrasion of skeletal particles, especially in the restricted areas.

Sandy foraminiferal packstone (FT7): This lithofacies is recordedin the lower part of the Amman Silicified Limestone Formation andmiddle part of the Al-Hisa Phosphorite Formation with a thicknessof about 3.0 m and 5.0 m, respectively. It is composed of yellowishgray argillaceous moderately hard, massive limestone, with somechert nodules and bands containing strongly fragmented bivalves.In thin section, the lithofacies consists essentially of low diversityand poorly preserved planktonic foraminiferal tests of Globotrun-

cana spp. and Heterohelix spp., well-sorted thin-shelled pelagicbivalves and a few corroded subangular quartz grains. Thedispersed quartz grains are fine- to medium-grained andmoderately sorted. All components are closely packed in a darklime–mud matrix. Some of these foraminiferal tests are susceptible

ee measured sections from Egypt and Jordan; for location see Fig. 1.




G Model


to change to microspar by aggrading neomorphism while theirinternal structure is still well preserved.

Interpretation: The sandy foraminiferal packstone (FT7) sug-gests a restricted lower intertidal regime of a quiet water lagoon,below normal wave base (Flugel, 2004). The presences of lowdiversity planktonic foraminiferal content with broken bivalvesand sand grains may be attributed to wave transportation, whilethe sand content may be attributed to episodes of wind-blownsands.

Ammonite/oyster-bearing planktonic foraminiferal packstone

(FT8): This lithofacies is recorded in the middle part of the AmmanSilicified Limestone Formation and reaches thickness of about20 m. The rock is yellowish brown, well indurated, thick-beddedand fossiliferous (Baculites and large P. vesicularis). Microscopically,it is composed of foraminifera (40–60%), yellowish pellets ofcollophane (10–20%), lithoclastic, large teeth and bone fragments(0.4–2 mm) that are randomly scattered. Few authigenic phos-phatic pellets (up to 3 mm) are recorded. All components areembedded in a calcitic matrix (Fig. 4E).

Interpretation: The occurrence of baculitid ammonite-bearingplanktonic foraminiferal packstone, interbedded with cherts andmicritic limestones, suggest open marine, deep subtidal environ-ments (i.e. distal outer ramp) with low-energy, below storm wavebase.

Foraminiferal wackestone (FT9): This facies marks the lower partof the Muwaqqar Chalk Marl Formation. It is composed of massivemarly chalk. Well-preserved Heterohelix foraminiferal assemblagesof medium diversity are the characteristic feature, forming about30% of the rock. They are loosely packed in a partially recrystallizedlime mud with rare phosphate pellets.

Interpretation: The increase of Heterohelix foraminiferal assem-blages, total absence of shallow-water indicators and absence ofbioturbation all point to deposition in a low-energy, shallowmiddle shelf regime under rapid sediment accumulation. Similardeposits in north Egypt, Libya, Negev and Syria indicated on majortransgressive phase with increase of carbonate productivity duringthe Maastrichtian age (e.g. Soudry et al., 2006; El-Azabi and Farouk,2011).

Foraminiferal phosphatic packstone (FT10): This lithofacies isrecorded from the upper part of the Duwi Formation at Gebel Duwiwith a thickness of about 5 m. It is a yellowish gray, massive,argillaceous limestone with worm tubes. Low diversity biserial andnon-keeled, biserial and trochospiral planktonic foraminifera, withthe presence of some benthonic foraminifera and bone fragmentsare important elements in this microfacies. All components areembedded in cryptocrystalline calcitic matrix.

Interpretation: The assemblage of fossil types that comprise thisfacies is indicative of a shallow-water marine environment. Thelow diversity assemblages of planktonic and benthonic foraminif-eral assemblages with bone fragments and shark teeth suggest thatthis facies was derived from more proximal shelf settings andtransported offshore during storms.

Oyster-bearing peloidal rudstone/floatstone (FT11): This lithofa-cies is recorded in the Duwi Formation at Gebel Duwi and in theAmman Silicified Limestone Formation. It has a yellowish gray tocreamy color, is hard and bedded, and thicknesses vary from 0.5 to20 m. The maximum thickness (20 m) of this facies is recorded atGebel Hamadat, south of Gebel Duwi. The thickness of this facies isdecreased northward (Safaga area) and it changes laterally intocalcareous mudstones. This limestone facies is characterized bylarge bioclasts in an essentially micritic matrix. The bioclastsinclude large shell fragments especially of pelecypods, which mostprobably were leached and the walls had seen filled by drusy sparycalcite. Low diversity echinoid and gastropod faunas are recordedin this facies. Oyster shells (0.1 to >3 mm) partially show theirinternal foliated microstructure packed in coarse drusy and


granular sparite (Fig. 4F). The rock is highly phosphatic withmany reworked bone fragments and subangular to roundedphosphatic pellets.

These facies are recorded in Upper Cretaceous stratigraphicsections (Ruseifa and northern portion of the Al Abiad/Al Hisadistrict) and reorganized into banks and isolated bioherms(Pufahl et al., 2003). Oyster banks in Jordan consist of a basal bedof fragmented oyster rudstone overlain by a set of mega-cross-bedded oyster rudstone that is truncated at its top by a bed ofchalk-rich fragmented oyster rudstone.

Interpretation: The oyster buildups are similar to other UpperCretaceous and Cenozoic oyster buildups that dominate (brackish/hypersaline) highly productive tropical marine environments(Pufahl et al., 2003). The presences of oysters shows shallowmarine influences and represent submarine carbonate skeletalshoals forming in a restricted shallow subtidal regime. Sea surfacewaters were generally enriched with respect to CaCO3. The lowfaunal diversity of bioclastic facies, the highly broken shellfragments and their parallel-to-bedding geometry may indicatereworking of adjacent oyster buildups and deposition in shallowsubtidal environments (Abed and Amireh, 1999; Powell andMoh’d, 2011). The enormous size, limited species diversity, andrapid community growth observed within banks and bioherms areattributable to reduced competition for space and nutrients (Glennand Arthur, 1990). Pufahl et al. (2003) suggested that these oysterbanks developed in more distal environments and progradedlandward during continued sea-level rise through the impact ofonshore-directed storm and fair-weather waves. The progradationof oyster buildups developed behind the distal banks in shallowerenvironments.

5.3. Siliciclastic association (FT12–15)

This facies association is characterized by glauconite, quartz,chert and shale as described below.

Glauconitic quartz arenite (FT12): This lithofacies is recordedonly at the Abu Tartur mine and is missing in other sections. It has athickness of 8 m (Fig. 2A). It is light yellowish-greenish in color andconsists of medium-grained glauconitic sandstone that containsgypsum-filled fractures. Terrigenous-allogenic (high relief, round-ed grains) and authigenic glauconite are the main component inthis microfacies. Glauconitic pellets are well developed formingabout 40% of the rock. The main glauconite morphologies areovoidal, spheroidal or lobate. Their size varies from 0.1 to 1 mmwith green to brown color. Fine to very fine quartz sand grains arecommon. The constituents are embedded in a clay matrix.

Interpretation: The majority of grains in this facies types arepredominantly glauconite grains with terrigenous supply repre-sented by fine-grained quartz. The morphology, mineralogy andsedimentary environment of the glauconites can be interpreted asautochthonous. Glauconite is one of the most sensitive indicatorsof low sedimentation rates in marine environments withincomparatively thin (less than 1–3 m) deposits (Glenn and Arthur,1990; Amorosi, 1997; El-Hassan and Tichy, 2000). The abundantdetrital quartz, the presence of glauconite, the absence ofcalcareous fossils, and the association with the carbonate faciessuggest near-shore depositional environments with fluvial sedi-ment supply (Glenn and Arthur, 1990).

Bioclastic phosphatic quartz arenite (FT13): This lithofacies isnoted in the middle part of Gebel Duwi and Abu Tartur sections. Itis made up of yellow to pale brown, coarse to very coarse,moderately to well-sorted phosphatic sandstones. The thicknessesof this unit reach about 1.7 m at Gebel Duwi section and 0.3 m atAbu Tartur section as thin intercalated beds. The phosphaticsandstone facies are friable to massive with no internal structuresor bioturbation. Some glauconite is recorded with oyster shell




G Model


fragments. Microscopically, skeletal grains are represented byoyster shell fragments, phosphatic particles and rarely by algaldebris. Phosphatic particles, up to 8% of the rock, are reworkedbone fragments, pellets and shark teeth. Simple phosphatic pelletsare subangular to rounded, elongate, oval and spherical in shapeand range in size from 0.2 to 0.7 mm, rarely reaching more than3 mm. Monocrystalline, angular to subrounded quartz grains arewell sorted and 0.1–0.3 mm size. Oyster fragments are welldeveloped and recrystallized to fibrous calcite. Longitudinal bonefragments can be recognized with and range from 0.1 to 1 mm.They are gray to black and composed of apatite minerals (mainlydahlite), which sometimes are replaced by silica, mostly chalce-dony. All components are embedded in clay and sometimes calciticmatrix.

Interpretation: The intensive siliciclastic supply as well as thelarge oyster shell fragments may reflect the deposition underintertidal conditions. The comparable size of quartz grains andphosphatic particles and subordinate mudstone matrix mayindicate reworking, winnowing of near-shore sediments and re-deposition of these facies.

Chert facies (FT14): Chert facies is recorded in Jordan, GebelDuwi section and in the Nile Valley in Egypt, while it is completelyabsent at Abu Tartur section. Three types of chert are recorded: (1)massive bedded chert; (2), discontinuous chert in the lowerAmman Silicified Limestone Formation; and (3) nodular chert.

Interpretation: Chert is biogenic in origin and derived mainlyfrom a low diversity assemblage of diatoms during early diagenesisand proceeded through various stages to produce the distinctivechert textures. These indicate a shallow near-shore environmentfor chert formation and are associated with upwelling on theepeiric shelf of the Tethys from the north (Abed and Amireh, 1999;Pufahl et al., 2003; Powell and Moh’d, 2012).

Shale FT15: Different types of shale are recorded in Egypt only.Non-marine shales (FT15a) recorded from the main part of theQussier Formation underlying the Duwi Formation. Black shales(FT15b) are recorded in large scale on the Abu Tartur plateau and atGebel Duwi. No foraminifera have been detected in this rock unit.Sediek and Amer (2001) interpreted the Abu Tartur black shales tohave been deposited under reducing conditions in a quiet (low-energy), suboxic marine setting. According to Glenn and Arthur(1990), the Western Desert shales exhibit lower Corg contents andHI values than the Eastern Desert shales, thus implying strongerterrigenous influence, sediment dilution and perhaps moreoxidizing bottom conditions. The foraminiferal shale (FT15c) isrecorded in the Dakhla Formation overlying the Duwi Formation ofmiddle shelf environment as indicated by the high diversity offoraminifera (Fig. 5).

6. Discussion

The petrographical studies revealed that biogenic phosphaticdebris (e.g. fecal pellets, fish teeth and bones) are the mainsource of phosphate minerals in Egypt. Thin sections of thepellets show two types: reworked granular and in situphosphatic grains (pristine). The alternation of intervals ofpristine phosphate and granular phosphorite is also recognizedin correlative deposits in southcentral Jordan (Abed andSadaqah, 1998; Pufahl et al., 2003), Iraq (Al-Bassam et al.,1983), Negev (Nathan et al., 1979; Soudry and Champetier,1983), and Egypt (El-Kammar et al., 1979; Glenn and Arthur,1990).

Reworked granular phosphatic pellets have been recorded in allthe samples of the studied localities and reflect local mechanicalaccretion and re-arrangement of peloids in a relatively high-energyenvironment. Peloids are homogeneous, rounded to subangular,spherical to ovular and nearly internally structureless. In all


studied phosphatic lithofacies, peloidal grain size decreasesupwards. In the studied sections the size of the pellets is largerin Umm Qais (Jordan) and Abu Tartur (Egypt) compared to thosealong the Red Sea coast. In general, the grain size of phosphaticrocks ranges from fine sand to coarse gravel with an average ofmedium sand.

Authigenic phosphatic grains (pristine) are very common in theJordanian phosphorites and have undifferentiated forms (FT1;Fig. 2F). The majority consist of intensive micropellets thataccumulated into larger phosphatic pellets. In general, thephosphatic pellets are more common in Jordan than in Egypt.

In contrast to phosphatic pellets, phosphatic lithoclasts aremuch more abundant in Egypt than in Jordan. The phosphaticlithoclasts are formed by multiple event concentration and areassociated with sediment transportation. These grains containdetrital and carbonate components, showing that they arereworked of pre-existing deposits.

Bone and teeth fragments are dominant in the investigatedphosphorites. Their abundance and size increase in the Abu Tartursection and the majority of these grains are fractured, reflecting ahigh degree of load-compaction on the sediments. The replace-ment of apatite minerals in vertebrate skeletal grains is welldeveloped in all the studied phosphorites. The main difference isthat the phosphatic minerals in the phosphorites of Abu Tartur aremostly transformed into silica minerals (chalcedony), while inother phosphorites they are often replaced by calcite.

Phosphatized algal clasts are better represented in the Egyptianthan in Jordanian sections. Some of these algal fragments acted astraps for small phosphatic grains and the majority are stained byiron oxide.

The cement material in phosphorites of both the Red Sea coast(Egypt) and Jordan is mainly calcite while, in the Abu Tartur area, itis represented mostly by gypsum and haematite. This may reflectthe difference in the chemical characteristics of intragranularfluids during early diagenesis.

The main phosphatic beds of the Campanian successions incentral and south Jordan lie in the Al-Hisa Phosphorite Formation,intercalated mainly with phosphatic chert and limestone, the latterincluding bedded coquina limestone and oyster buildups (Abedet al., 2007; Powell and Moh’d, 2011). Toward south and southwestJordan, there is abundant siliciclastic sedimentation in the innershelf in the Alia and Batn El Ghul areas, where phosphorites aremassive with no internal sedimentary structures or bioturbationexcept at the base (Abed and Amireh, 1999; Powell, 1989; Powelland Moh’d, 2011).

Along the Red Sea coast of Egypt as well as in the Nile Valley, theeconomically exploited beds occur in the upper part of the DuwiFormation, the middle part and occasionally in the lower part ofthis formation. In the Abu Tartur section, the phosphorites aredeveloped mainly in the lower part of the Duwi Formation. Thismay indicate that the depositional setting in some basins was moresuitable to a rapid accumulation rate of phosphates rather than inother localities. In these Red Sea coast and Umm Qais, thephosphate beds are associated with chert, marls, shales, silicifiedphosphate and oyster limestone. Baioumy and Tada (2005) showedthat the Egyptian phosphorites in the upper horizon in Gebel Duwiare similar in composition to the Jordanian phosphorites.Furthermore, the Upper Campanian stratigraphical units in Jordan,Red Sea and Nile Valley are similar. These facies accumulated inprotected inner shelf environments where the phosphorite bedswere deposited during storm events (Powell and Moh’d, 2011).Glenn and Arthur (1990) considered that the phosphate lithofacieson the Red Sea coast were deposited in shallow hemipelagicenvironments.

On the Abu Tartur plateau, the main phosphorite bed occurs inthe lower part of the formation followed by black shales and




G Model


glauconitic sandstones (Fig. 2A). The presence of quartz grains inthe lower part of phosphatic bed at Abu Tartur reflects fluvialsediment supply and shallower depositional environment in thesebasins than in those along Red Sea coast and Umm Qais, althoughsiliciclastic lithofacies have been reported close to the palaeo-shoreline in southwest Jordan (Powell, 1989). Soudry et al. (2006)mentioned that the Abu Tartur phosphorites are associated withterrigenous input (and perhaps some continental P supply) in theirformation. On the other hand, the Middle East (e.g. Jordan andSyria) phosphorites are characterized by little or no terrigenousinfluence during their deposition. The large amounts of pyrite andglauconite in the Abu Tartur phosphorites suggest an increasinglyabundant source of iron-bound phosphate associated withterrigenous sediment input to the continental margin. The LateCampanian Egyptian phosphorites deposits of Abu Tartur mayhave formed largely from remobilized iron-bound phosphatederived from local rivers (Glenn and Arthur, 1990; Glenn et al.,1994).

Enhanced fluvial supply of dissolved phosphorus sporadicallyinitiates phosphogenesis associated with intensive glauconitiza-tion in the presence of Fe, Al and Mg (Trappe, 1998). These grainsare commonly reworked.

Pufahl et al. (2003) mentioned that the bulk sedimentcomposition and the absence of Fe-bearing authigenic phasessuch as glauconite, pyrite (including pyrite molds), siderite andgoethite within Upper Cretaceous (Campanian) pristine phosphor-ites in Jordan suggests that deposition and authigenesis occurredunder conditions of detrital starvation and that ‘‘iron-pumping’’played a minimal role in phosphogenesis.

Based on the relative abundance of rare earth element in theEgyptian phosphorites, Hassan and El Kammar (1975) concludedthat the phosphorites in both the Red Sea and the Nile Valley aremore strongly enriched in U than the phosphate rocks on the AbuTartur plateau. On the other hand, the phosphate rocks at AbuTartur are enriched in Y, Yb and La. It can be concluded that therelatively deeper-water phosphate beds from the Red Sea Coastand Nile Valley are characterized by their low REE content due totheir precipitation from sea water. The high content of Y, Yb and Lareflects the relatively shallower origin of the phosphate deposits ofAbu Tartur plateau.

7. Sequence stratigraphy

Facies development of the Upper Campanian deposits is veryimportant for understanding the environmental changes and(relative) sea-level variations across the shallow marine shelf inEgypt and Jordan. Systems tracts, the building blocks ofdepositional sequence are packages of strata composed of age-equivalent depositional systems, and correspond to specific stagesof shoreline shifts (Brown and Fisher, 1977; Posamentier and Vail,1988). The Campanian phosphate province in Egypt and Jordan canbe subdivided into two 3rd-order depositional sequences.

Depositional sequence 1. This sequence comprises the lowerbeds of the Duwi Formation and Al-Hisa Phosphorite Formation.The base of the Late Campanian phosphatic beds in Egypt andJordan is marked by a well-known unconformity surface (sequenceboundary 1), separating the non-marine Quseir Variegated Shale(FT15a) from the main Phosphate facies (FT1 and FT2) of the DuwiFormation in Egypt and the Amman Silicified Limestone Formation(FT6 and FT14) from the phosphate facies (FT2) of Al-HisaPhosphorite Formation (Fig. 5). The contact between thisphosphorite facies and the underlying rocks is bioturbated andcharacterized by Thalassinoides burrow networks of irregularlyinclined to horizontal components and less scattered verticalcylindrical burrows. These Thalassinoides burrows are infilled withgranular phosphatic grainstone.


A well-marked global marine transgression caused frequentreworking and re-deposition, explaining the huge phosphoritedeposits followed by organic rich shales observed in the easternMediterranean and North Africa compared with southern Europe(Glenn et al., 1994).

At Eshidiyya area (south of Jordan), the Al-Hisa PhosphoriteFormation overlies Palaeozoic strata with a pronounced regionalerosional unconformity (Abed et al., 2007). This sequenceboundary is primarily related to regional tectonism of the ArabianPlate (Powell, 1989). The studied section at Umm Qais in northJordan lay in a more basinal setting and seems less affected bytectonism; the equivalent sequence boundary is recorded betweenstrong vertical facies changes at the formational boundary. Thisboundary was correlated with a eustatic sea-level fall between themiddle/late Campanian (Haq et al., 1987; Hardenbol et al., 1998;Gradstein et al., 2012). Sedimentation of the phosphorite, chert, oilshale, and associated sediments was a function of upwellingcurrents, relative sea level and palaeobathymetry of the epiconti-nental shelf floor (Kolodny and Garrison, 1994; Powell and Moh’d,2011).

The MFS is observed in whole studied sections characterized bya vertical facies change overlain by a pro-gradational highstandfacies indicated by the deposition of glauconite intercalated in thehigher part with coarse-grained dolomitic phosphate at the AbuTartur plateau, while in Gebel Duwi the equivalent is composed ofbioclastic phosphatic quartz arenite (FT13) followed upwards byoyster debris coquinoidal limestone intercalated with cherts (FT11and FT14) representing a sea-level highstand (HST) period.

In south Jordan, the latest Campanian highstand is representedby oyster debris coquinoidal limestone on the Eshidiyya platform(Abed et al., 2007). This oyster debris coquinoidal limestonelaterally changed in a more basinal setting at Umm Qais section,north Jordan to sandy foraminiferal packstone (FT7) representing acorrelative highstand system tract.

Depositional sequence 2. The second depositional sequence inthe Egypt and Jordan initiated the deposition of the upperphosphate beds which are placed in the latest Campanian/EarlyMaastrichtian age. The base of sequence 2, marked by siliciclasticgravel and Thalassinoides burrows at the base of the coarse-grainedupper phosphate beds, indicates aggradation, higher energy shelfenvironment with increasing accommodation during transgres-sion (Figs. 2B and 4). The granular phosphorites with Thalassinoides

burrow networks are classic examples of condensed beds that canalso be interpreted as firm grounds associated with increasingaccommodation during transgression (Pufahl et al., 2003). Atransgressive systems tract overlies these firm grounds, marking arise in relative sea level that resulted in the deposition of innerneritic hemipelagic chalk of the Muwaqqar Chalk Marl Formationin Jordan or foraminiferal shale of the Dakhla Formation in Egypt.These hemipelagic facies are characterized by variable abundancesof calcareous nannofossils and planktonic foraminifera depositedin open marine conditions. This major transgressive event isobserved in many parts of the Arabian and African plates duringthe early Maastrichtian (Soudry et al., 2006; El-Azabi and Farouk,2011).

8. Conclusions

Facies analysis of the Late Campanian succession of Egypt andJordan, including litho-, bio- and microfacies analyses, resulted inthe recognition of 15 characteristic lithofacies types grouped intophosphate (FT1–5), carbonate (FT6–11) and siliciclastic (FT12–15a–c) associations that have been used to characterize thedepositional environments.

The phosphate province in Egypt (Duwi Formation) and Jordan(Al-Hisa Phosphorite Formation) is represented by five lithofacies




G Model


types. The basal phosphate beds in Egypt and Jordan show thatmajor transgressive facies development occurred during the LateCampanian above strong facies changes from the non-marineQuseir Variegated Shale in Egypt, or equivalent marine carbonatefacies of the Amman Silicified Limestone Formation. The upperphosphate beds represent another transgressive facies character-ized by coarse-grained phosphate with siliciclastic gravel andThalassinoides burrows at the base.

Phosphatic pellets are represented by reworked granular and in

situ phosphatic grains (pristine). Granular phosphatic pellets havebeen recorded from all studied localities. Authigenic phosphaticgrains (pristine) are more common in the Jordanian phosphorites.Phosphatic lithoclasts are much more common in Egypt than inJordan. Bones and teeth fragments are dominant in the differentinvestigated phosphorites. Their abundance and size increase atthe Abu Tartur.

Bioactivity is well developed in the phosphatic grains (pelletsand bones) of the Egyptian phosphorites. These phosphatic grainsare microbially tunneled (by bacteria), commonly with a micriticcarbonate fluorapatite (francolite) filling the tunnels and graduallyreplacing the bone matrix. The re-deposition of francolite in thebored bone fragments is associated by dissolving hydroxyapatitemineral (dahlite).

The main phosphatic beds of the Campanian successions inJordan lie in the Al-Hisa Phosphorite Formation. Along the Red Seacoast of Egypt as well as in the Nile Valley, the thickest phosphaticbeds may be in the upper part, in the middle part and sometimes inthe lower part of the Duwi Formation that may indicate that somedepositional basins were more suitable and/or affected by rapidaccumulation of phosphates more than other localities. The UpperCampanian rock units in Jordan, the Red Sea area and the NileValley are similar to each other and suggest similar lithofaciesdevelopment in response to global/regional relative sea-levelchanges across the Nubo-Arabian Shield on the southern margin ofthe Neo-Tethys Ocean.

Phosphatic facies accumulated under protected inner shelfenvironments where the phosphorite beds were deposited duringslight storm currents. On the Abu Tartur plateau, the mainphosphorite bed occurs in the lower part of the formation followedby black shales and glauconitic sandstones. The presence of quartzgrains in the lower part of the phosphatic bed in Abu Tartur reflects(1) fluvial sediment supply and (2) a shallower depositionalenvironment in this basin than in those along Red Sea coast and innorth Jordan. The large amounts of pyrite and glauconite in the AbuTartur phosphorites suggest an increasingly abundant source ofiron-bound phosphate associated with terrigenous sediment inputto the near-shore depositional environment.

Acknowledgments

We are very thankful to Klaus Bandel (Germany) and Mark A.Wilson (The College of Wooster, USA) for discussion and readingthe early draft of this manuscript. Our regards extend to John H.Powell (British Geologic Survey), Haydon Bailey (President of theGeologists’ Association) for reviewing our paper and Jim Rose(Chief Editor of Proceedings of the Geologists’ Association) forediting support.

References

Abd El-Razik, T.M., 1979. Stratigraphical studies on the phosphate deposits betweenRiver Nile and Red Sea (South of Latitude 278 N). Cairo Univ. Fac. Sci. Bull. 42,299–324.

Abed, A.M., 2013. The eastern Mediterranean phosphorite giants: an interplaybetween tectonics and upwelling. GeoArabia 18 (2), 67–94.

Abed, A.M., 2011. Review of uranium in the Jordanian phosphorites: distribution,genesis and industry. Jordan J. Earth Environ. Sci. 4, 35–45.


Abed, A.M., Amireh, B.S., 1999. Sedimentology, geochemistry, economic potentialand paleogeography of an Upper Cretaceous phosphorite belt in the southeast-ern desert of Jordan. Cretaceous Res. 20, 119–133.

Abed, A.M., Arouri, K., Boreham, C., 2005. Source rock potential of the phosphorite–bituminous chalk–marl sequence in Jordan. Mar. Petrol. Geol. 22, 413–425.

Abed, A.M., Ashour, N., 1987. Petrography and age determination of the NW Jordanphosphorites. Dirasat 14, 247–263.

Abed, A.M., Fakhouri, K., 1996. On the chemical variability of phosphatic particlesfrom the Jordanian phosphorites. Chem. Geol. 131, 1–13.

Abed, A.M., Kraishan, G.M., 1991. Evidence for shallow-marine origin of a MontereyFormation type chert–phosphorite–dolomite sequence: Amman Formation(Late Cretaceous), Central Jordan. Facies 24, 25–38.

Abed, A.M., Sadaqah, R., 1998. Role of Upper Cretaceous oyster bioherms in thedeposition and accumulation of high-grade phosphortites in Central Jordan. J.Sediment. Res. 68, 1009–1020.

Abed, A.M., Sadaqah, R., Al-Jazi, M., 2007. Sequence stratigraphy and evolutionofEshidiyya phosphoriteplatform,southern Jordan. Sediment.Geol. 198, 209–219.

Akkad, S., Dardir, A., 1966. Geology and phosphate deposits of Wasif Safaga area,Egypt. Geol. Survey 36, 1–35.

Al-Bassam, K.S., Al-Dahan, A.A., Jamil, A.K., 1983. Campanian–Maastrichtian phos-phorite of Iraq-petrology, geochemistry, and genesis. Mineral. Depos. 18, 215–233.

Almogi-Labin, A., Bein, A., Sass, E., 1993. Late Cretaceous upwelling systems alongthe southern Tethys margin (Israel): inter-relationship between productivity,bottom water environment and organic matter preservation. Paleoceanography8, 671–690.

Almogi-Labin, A., Bein, A., Sass, E., 1990. Agglutinated foraminifera in organic-richneritic carbonates (Upper Cretaceous, Israel) and their use in identifying oxygenlevels in oxygen-poor environments. Paleoecol. Biostratigr. Palaeoceanogr.Taxon. Agglutinat. Foramin. 565–585.

Al-Rifaiy, I.A., Cherif, O.H., El-Bakri, B.A., 1993. Upper Cretaceous foraminiferalbiostratigraphy and paleobathymetry of the Al-Baqa area, North of Amman(Jordan). J. Afr. Earth Sci. 17 (3), 343–357.

Al-Saad, D., Sawaf, T., Gebran, A., Barazangi, M., Best, J., Chiamov, T., 1992. Crustalstructure of central Syria: the intercontinental palmyride mountain belt. Tec-tonophysics 207, 345–358.

Amorosi, A., 1997. Detecting compositional, spatial, and temporal attributes ofglaucony; a tool for provenance research. Sediment. Geol. 109, 135–153.

Baioumy, H., Tada, R., 2005. Origin of Late Cretaceous phosphorites in Egypt.Cretaceous Res. 26, 261–275.

Bandel, K., Mikbel, S.H., 1985. Origin and deposition of phosphate ores from theUpper Cretaceous at Ruseifa, Jordan. Universitat Hamburg. Geol.-Palaontol. Inst.Mitt. 57, 167–188.

Bartov, Y., Eyal, Z., Garfunkel, Z., Steinitz, G., 1972. Late Cretaceous and tertiarystratigraphy of southern Israel. Israel J. Earth Sci. 21, 69–97.

Bartov, Y., Lewy, Z., Steinitz, G., Zak, I., 1980. Mesozoic and Tertiary stratigraphy,palaeogeography and structures history of the Gebel Areif en Naqa area, easternSinai. Israel J. Earth Sci. 29, 114–129.

Bartov, Y., Steinitz, G., 1977. The Judea and Mount Scopus in the Negev and Sinaiwith trend surface analysis of the thickness data. Israel J. Earth Sci. 26, 119–148.

Bowen, R., Jux, U., 1987. Afro-Arabian Geology. Chapman and Hall, London, pp. 295.Brookfield, M.E., Hemmings, D.P., Van Straaten, P., 2009. Paleoenvironments and

origin of the sedimentary phosphorites of the Napo Formation (Late Cretaceous,Oriente Basin, Ecuador). J. S. Am. Earth Sci. 28, 180–192.

Brown, L.F., Fisher, W.L., 1977. Seismic stratigraphic interpretation of depositionalsystems: examples from Brazilian rift and pull apart basins. In: Payton, C.E.(Ed.), Seismic Stratigraphy—Applications to Hydrocarbon Exploration. Am.Assoc. Petrol. Geol. Mem., 26, pp. 213–248.

Chaimov, T.A., Barazangi, M., Al-Saad, D., Sawaf, T., Gebran, A., 1992. Mesozoic andCenozoic deformation inferred from seismic stratigraphy in the southwesternintracontinental palymyrid fold thrust belt, Syria. Geol. Soc. Am. Bull. 104,704–715.

Cherif, O.H., Ismail, A.A., 1991. Late Senonian-Tertiary planktonic foraminiferalbiostratigraphy and tectonism of the Esh-el-Mallaha and Gharamul areas,Egypt. Middle East Research Centre, Ain Shams University. Sci. Res. Ser. 5,146–159.

Coleman, M.L., 1985. Geochemistry of diagenetic non-silicate minerals: kineticconsiderations. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. A315, 39–56.

Cook, P.J., McElhinny, M.W., 1979. A re-evaluation of spatial and temporal distri-bution of sedimentary phosphate deposits in the light of plate tectonics. Econ.Geol. 74 (2), 315–330.

Dunham, R.J., 1962. Classification of carbonate rocks according to depositionaltexture. In: Ham, W.E. (Ed.), Classification of Carbonate Rocks. Am. Assoc.Petrol. Geol. Mem., 1, pp. 108–121.

El Naggar, Z.R., 1966. Stratigraphy and planktonic foraminifera of the UpperCretaceous–Lower Tertiary succession in the Esna-Idfu region, Nile Valley,Egypt, UAR. Br. Museum (Nat. History) Bull. (Suppl. 2), 279.

El-Azabi, M.H., Farouk, S., 2011. High-resolution sequence stratigraphy of theMaastrichtian-Ypresian succession along the eastern scarp face of the KhargaOasis, south Western Desert, Egypt. J. Int. Ass. Sediment. 58, 579–617.

El-Beialy, S.Y., 1995. Campanian–Maastrichtian palynomorphs from the Duwi(Phosphate) Formation of the Hamrawein and Umm El Hueitat mines, RedSea Coast, Egypt. Rev. Palaeobot. Palynol. 85, 303–317.

El-Hassan, A., Tichy, G., 2000. Geochemistry and origin of Glauconite of the El-Gedida Mines and Baharya Formation (Early Cenomanian), Baharya Oasis,Western Desert, Egypt. Geochem. Int. 38 (4), 374–387.


http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0016-7878(14)00043-1/sbref0005
































































































G Model


El-Hiyari, M., 1985. The Geology of Jabal Al-Mutarammil, Map Sheets No. 3252, III.Bulletin 1. NRA, Amman.

El-Kammar, A.M., Zayed, M.A., Amer, S.A., 1979. Rare earths of the Nile Valleyphosphorites, Upper Egypt. Chem. Geol. 24, 69–81.

Embry, A.F., Klovan, J.E., 1972. Absolute water depth limits of late Devonianpaleoecological zones. Geol. Rundsch. 61, 672–686, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01896340.

Faris, M., Abu Shama, A.M., 2006. Calcareous nannofossils of the Campanian–Maastrichtian Sudr Formation in Abu Zenima area, West Central Sinai, Egypt.Egypt. J. Paleontol. 6, 251–274.

Flugel, E., 2004. Microfacies of Carbonate Rocks, Analysis, Interpretation andApplication, second ed. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, pp. 984.

Garfunkel, Z., 1978. The Negev-Regional synthesis of sedimentary basins: proceed-ings of the 10th congress of the international Association of sedimentologists.In: Guide Book to pre Congress Excursions. pp. 35–110.

Glenn, C.R., Arthur, M.A., 1990. Anatomy and origin of a Cretaceous phosphorite-green sand giant. Egypt Sediment. 37, 123–148.

Glenn, C.R., Follmi, K.B., Riggs, S.R., Baturin, G.N., Grimm, K.A., Trappe, J., Abed, A.M.,Galli-Oliver, C., Garrison, R.E., Dyin, A., Jehl, C., Rohrich, V., Sadaquah, R.,Schiderlowski, M., Sheldon, R.E., Seigmund, H., 1994. Phosphorus and phos-phorites: sedimentology and environments of formation. Eclogae Geol. Helv. 87,747–788.

Gradstein, F.M., Ogg, J.G., Schmitz, M., Ogg, G. (Eds.), 2012. The Geologic Time Scale2012. Elsevier, 1144 pp.

Haggart, J.W., 2000. Report on Upper Cretaceous Fossils from the Amman Forma-tion, Jordan. Paleontological Report JWH-2000-06. Geological Survey of Canada,Vancouver.

Haq, B.U., Hardenbol, J., Vail, P.R., 1987. Mesozoic and Cenozoic chronostratigraphyand cycles of sea-level change. SEPM Spec. Publ. 42, 71–108.

Hardenbol, J., Thierry, J., Farley, M.B., Jacquin, T., de Graciansky, P.C., Vail, P.R., 1998.Mesozoic-Cenozoic sequence chronostratigraphy framework of Europeanbasins. In: de Graciansky, P.C., Hardenbol, J., Jacquin, T., Vail, P.R. (Eds.),Sequence stratigraphy of European basins. SEPM Spec. Publ., 60, pp. 3–14.

Hassan, F., El Kammar, A.M., 1975. Environmental conditions affecting the distri-bution of Uranium and Rare Earth Elements in Egyptian phosphorites. Egypt. J.Geol. 2, 169–178.

Ismail, A.A., 2012. Late Cretaceous-Early Eocene benthic foraminifera from Esh ElMallaha area, Egypt. Rev. Paleobiol. Geneve 31 (1), 15–50.

Issawi, B., 1972. Review of Upper Cretaceous–Lower Tertiary stratigraphy in centraland southern Egypt. Am. Assoc. Petrol. Geol. Bull. 56, 1448–1463.

Kassab, A.S., Hamma, H.H., 1991. Polymorphism in the Upper Cretaceous ammoniteLibycoceras ismaeli (Zittel). J. Afr. Earth Sci. 12, 437–448.

Kolodny, Y., Garrison, R., 1994. Sedimentation and diagenesis in paleo-upwellingzones of epeiric sea and basinal settings: a comparison of the CretaceousMishash Formation of Israel and the Miocene Monterey Formation of California.In: Iijima, A., Abed, A.M., Garrison, R. (Eds.), Siliceous, Phosphatic and Glauco-nitic Sediments in the Tertiary and Mesozoic. Proc. 29th Intern Geol Congr. PartC. VSP, The Netherlands, pp. 133–158.

Krenkel, E., 1924. Der Syriasche Bogen. Zent. Bull. Mineral. Geol. Palaontol. 9, 274–281, 10, 301–313.

Li, L., Keller, G., Stinnesbeck, W., 1999. The Late Campanian and Maastrichtian innorthwestern Tunisia: paleoenvironmental inferences from lithology, macro-fauna and benthic foraminifera. Cretaceous Res. 20, 231–252.

Logvinenko, N.V., 1982. Origin of glauconite in the recent bottom sediments of theocean. Sediment. Geol. 31 (1), 43–48.

Masri, M., 1963. Report on the Geology of the Amman– Zarqa area. (Unpublishedreport)Central Water Authority, , pp. 74.

Miller, W., 2007. Trace Fossils Concepts, Problems, Prospects. Elsevier, Amsterdam,Netherlands, pp. 611.

Muhammad, A.F., El Salmawy, M.S., Abdelaala, M., Sameah, S., 2011. El-Nakheil oilshale: material characterization and effect of acid leaching. Oil Shale 28, 528–547.

Nathan, Y., Shiloni, Y., Roded, R., Gal, I., Deutch, Y., 1979. The geochemistry of thenorthern and central Negev phosphorites. Israel Geol. Survey Bull. 73, 41.

Nathan, Y., Soudry, D., Levy, Y., Shitrit, D., Dorfman, E., 1997. Geochemistry ofcadmium in the Negev phosphorites. Chem. Geol. 142, 87–107.

Notholt, A.J., 1980. Economic phosphatic deposits, mode of occurrence and strati-graphical distribution. J. Geol. Soc. Lond. 137, 805–893.


Odin, G.S., Matter, A., 1981. De glauconiarum originae. Sedimentology 28, 611–641.Perch-Nielsen, K., 1985. Cenozoic calcareous nannofossils. In: Bolli, H.M., Saunders,

J.B., Perch-Nielsen, K. (Eds.), Plankton Stratigraphy. Cambridge University Press,Cambridge, pp. 422–454.

Posamentier, H.W., Vail, P.R., 1988. Eustatic controls on clastic deposition: sequenceand system tract models. In: Wilgus, C.K., Hastings, B.S., Kendall, C.G., Posa-mentier, H.W., Ross, C.A., Van Wagoner, J.C. (Eds.), Sea-level Changes. Spec. Publ.Soc. Econ. Palaeont. Miner., 42, pp. 109–124.

Powell, J.H., 1989. Stratigraphy and Sedimentation of the Phanerozoic Rocks inCentral and South Jordan, Part B: Kurnub, Ajlun and Belqa Groups. Bulletin 11.NRA, Amman.

Powell, J.H., Moh’d, B.K., 2011. Evolution of Cretaceous to Eocene alluvial andcarbonate platform sequences in central and south Jordan. GeoArabia 16 (4),29–82.

Powell, J.H., Moh’d, B.K., 2012. Early diagenesis of chalk-chert-phosphorite hard-grounds (Coniacian–Campanian) of central Jordan; implications for sedimen-tation on a Late Cretaceous shallow pelagic ramp. GeoArabia 17, 17–38.

Pufahl, P.K., Grimm, K.G., Abed, A.M., Sadaqah, R.M.Y., 2003. Upper Cretaceous(Campanian) phosphorites in Jordan: implications for the formation of a southTethyan phosphorite giant. Sediment. Geol. 161, 175–205.

Reiss, Z., 1955. Cretaceous and Tertiary stratigraphic unit. Bull. Res. Comm. Israel,Sect. B: Biol. Geol. 121–126.

Reiss, Z., 1988. Assemblages from a Senonian high-productivity sea. Rev. Paleobiol.2, 323–332 (special volume).

Rifai, I.R., Shaaban, M.N., 2007. Authigenic dolomite cementation in the UpperCretaceous Phosphate Formation, Western Desert, Egypt. Sediment. Geol. 202,702–709.

Robaszynski, F., Caron, M., 1995. Foraminiferes planctoniques du Cretace: com-mentaire de la zonation Europe-Mediterranee. Bull. Soc. Geol. Fr. 166, 681–692.

Said, R., 1962. The Geology of Egypt. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp. 377.Sawaf, T., Al-Saad, D., Gebran, A., Brazangi, M., Best, J.A., Chaimov, T.A., 1993.

Stratigraphy and structure of eastern Syria across the Euphrates depression.Tectonophysics 220, 267–281.

Schrank, E., Perch-Nielsen, K., 1985. Late Cretaceous palynostratigraphy in Egyptwith comments on Maastrichtian and Early Tertiary calcareous nannofossils.Newsl. Stratigr. 15, 81–99.

Sediek, K.N., Amer, A.M., 2001. Sedimentological and technological studies of AbuTartur Black Shales, Western Desert, Egypt. Physicochem. Problems Miner.Process. 35, 141–152.

Sheldon, R.P., 1981. Ancient marine phosphorites. Ann. Rev. Earth Planet. Sci. 9, 84–251.

Sheldon, R.P., 1987. Association of phosphatic and siliceous marine sedimentarydeposits. In: Hein, J.R. (Ed.), Siliceous Sedimentary Rock Hosted Ores andPetroleum. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, pp. 58–80.

Shemesh, A., Kolodny, Y., Luz, B., 1988. Isotope geochemistry of oxygen and carbonin phosphate and carbonate of phosphorite francolite. Geochim. Cosmochim.Acta 52, 2565–2572.

Soudry, D., Champetier, Y., 1983. Microbial processes in the Negev phosphorites(southern Israel). Sedimentology 30, 411–423.

Soudry, D., Glenn, C.R., Nathan, Y., Segal, I., Vonder Haar, D., 2006. Evolution ofTethyan phosphogenesis along the northern edges of the Arabian–Africanshield during the Cretaceous–Eocene as deduced from temporal variations ofCa and Nd isotopes and rates of P accumulation. Earth Sci. Rev. 78, 27–57.

Stampfli, G.M., Borel, G.D., 2002. A plate tectonic model for the Paleozoic andMesozoic constrained by dynamic plate boundaries and restored syntheticoceanic isochrones. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 196, 17–33.

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- andmacrofossil biostratigraphies. Cretaceous Res. 22, 795–827.

Trappe, J., 1998. Phanerozoic phosphorite depositional systems. A dynamic modelfor sedimentary resource system. Lect. Notes Earth Sci. 76, 316.

Tucker, M.E., Wright, V.P., Dickson, J.A.D., 1990. Carbonate Sedimentology. Black-well Science Ltd., , pp. 482.

Wetzel, R., Morton, D.M., 1959. Contribution a la geologie de la Transjordanie. In:Dubertret, L. (Ed.), Notes et Memoirs sur le Moyen Orient. pp. 95–191.

Youssef, M.I., 1957. Upper Cretaceous rocks in Kosseir area. Bull. Inst. Desert Egypt 7(2), 35–53.






http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01896340

http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01896340






























































































































proceedings of the geologists’ association · ahmada, sherif faroukb,*, mohamed w. abd el-moghnyc...

Documents