No abstract

We present and use the chronostratigraphy of 13 field logs and detailed mapping to constrain the evolution of the early Zagros foreland basin, in NW Iran. Large foraminifera, calcareous nannofossil, palynological and 87 Sr/ 86 Sr analysis supplied ages indicating a Campanian–early Eocene age of the basin infill, which is characterizd by a diachronous, southwestward migrating, shallowing upwards, mixed clastic–carbonate succession. Growth synclines and local palaeoslope variations indicate syndepositional folding from Maastrichtian to Eocene time and suggest forelandward migration of the deformation front. We also illustrate the basin architecture with a synthetic stratigraphic transect. From internal to external areas, time lines cross the formation boundaries from continental Kashkan red beds to Taleh Zang mixed clastic–carbonate platforms, Amiran slope deposits and basinal Gurpi–Pabdeh shales and marls. The foreland basin depocentres show a progressive migration from the Campanian to Eocene ( c . 83–52.7 Ma), with rates of c . 2.4 mm a −1 during the early–middle Palaeocene ( c . 65.5–58.7 Ma) increasing to c . 6 mm a −1 during the late Palaeocene–earliest Eocene ( c . 58.7–52.8 Ma). Coeval subsidence remained at c . 0.27 mm a −1 during the first 12.7 Ma and decreased to c . 0.16 mm a −1 during the last 4.2 Ma of basin filling. Finally, we integrate our results with published large-scale maps and discuss their implications in the context of the Zagros orogeny. Supplementary material: Tables with dating results are available at http://www.geolsoc.org.uk/SUP18439 .

Amenability to radiometric dating. Unknown, but absolute cyclostratigraphic dating is possible. Amenability to magnetostratigraphy. Yes, chrons C22n, C21r, C21n and C20r have been identified. Amenability to chemostratigraphy. Yes, but work is still in progress. Accessibility. Excellent. Free access. Yes, the section is located in a public beach. Permanent protection of the site. Yes. The whole coast is protected by the Spanish Littoral Law (22/1988, July 28); the Gorrondatxe beach is specially protected in order to preserve the endangered Natterjack toad (Epidalea calamita) from regional extinction. Local institutions (town and regional councils, University of the Basque Country) are willing to cooperate. Possibility to fix a permanent marker. Yes. Once the GSSP is approved, a permanent marker (a metal plate) will be fixed. Local institutions (town and regional councils, University of the Basque Country) are willing to cooperate.

Thirteen Lower–Middle Eocene (Ypresian–Lutetian) successions, including the Gorrondatxe section in the western Pyrenees, show biomagnetostratigraphic correlation schemes that do not agree with the current standard framework. The main discrepancy concerns the position of the boundary between planktonic foraminiferal Zones P9 (=E7, approximately) and P10 (=E8, approximately), which was thought to occur within calcareous nannofossil Subzone CP12a and at the boundary between magnetic polarity Chrons C22n and C21r. However, in the differing correlation scheme the boundary between Zones P9 (=E7) and P10 (=E8) occurs close to the base of Subzone CP13a and to the boundary between Chrons C21n and C20r. An attempt at a new Ypresian–Lutetian boundary biomagnetochronology is made based on data from the Gorrondatxe section, which shows that the boundary between Zones P9 (=E7) and P10 (=E8) is 3.1 Myr younger than hitherto considered. Therefore, the duration of the Early Eocene, most commonly defined according to this planktonic foraminiferal zonal boundary, has generally been underestimated over the last four decades.

No abstract