BLTN09135 PDF
BLTN09135 PDF
BLTN09135 PDF
ABSTRACT
The Levant margin, in the subsurface of the eastern Mediterranean area, formed during the early Mesozoic following
rifting and subsequent opening of the southern Tethys Ocean.
This work describes the stratigraphic evolution of the shelf
edge and slope for this margin in southwestern Israel and in
the adjacent Mediterranean Sea. The study is based on the
interpretation of 27 wells and 92 seismic reflection lines totaling 2000 km (1243 mi). Depositional sequences and sequence boundaries of the Jurassic and the Cretaceous age inferred from seismic reflection terminations, wireline-log stacking
patterns, lithofacies, and biostratigraphic data. Six low-order
and 22 high-order depositional cycles were identified. Their
stratigraphic architecture reflects shifts of depocenters from
the basin to its margin, controlled by eustasy and regional subsidence. Aggrading and backstepping of carbonate platforms in
the Levant shelf is associated with relative rises in sea level.
Progradation of siliciclastic and carbonate slopes toward the
basin is related to relative drops in sea level. The stratigraphic
framework of the Levant margin presented here is in accordance with recently published Mesozoic sequence stratigraphy of the Arabian platform, therefore, it may be used as a
working model for reconstructing other rifted Tethyan margins in the region. This study further emphasizes the reservoir
potential of Jurassic and Cretaceous deep-water lowstand
wedges offshore Israel, where extensive exploration efforts are
currently occurring.
Copyright 2011. The American Association of Petroleum Geologists. All rights reserved.
Manuscript received August 4, 2009; provisional acceptance November 4, 2009; revised manuscript
received October 18, 2010; final acceptance February 8, 2011.
DOI:10.1306/02081109135
1763
OCTOBER
SEARCH
AUTHORS
Michael Gardosh Oil and Gas Unit, Israel
Ministry of Infrastructures, 234 Jaffa St., Jerusalem 36148, Israel; gardoshim@gmail.com
Michael Gardosh received his Ph.D. in geophysics from Tel Aviv University. He worked for the
Israel National Oil Company from 1990 to 1997
and for the Geophysical Institute of Israel from
1997 to 2010. Presently, he is the director of
the Geophysical Section in the Israel Ministry
of Infrastructure. His research interests are the
stratigraphy, structure, tectonic evolution, and
petroleum systems of the eastern Mediterranean region.
Paul Weimer Energy and Minerals Applied
Research Center, Department of Geological
Sciences, Colorado University, Boulder, Colorado 80309-0399; paul.weimer@colorado.edu
Paul Weimer holds the Benson Endowed Chair
of the Department of Geological Sciences and
serves as the director of the Energy and Minerals
Applied Research Center. He is the president
of AAPG in 20112012.
Akiva Flexer Department of Geophysics
and Planetary Sciences, Tel-Aviv University,
Tel-Aviv 69978, Israel; akiva@terra.tau.ac.il
Akiva Flexer is professor (emeritus) of geology
in Tel Aviv University. For more than 40 yr,
he has studied the geology of Israel and adjacent
areas. His areas of interests are stratigraphy
and basin analysis, Cretaceous research, geology of the Middle East and eastern Mediterranean, geohydrology, and environmental studies.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We thank S. Baker, Y. Druckman, I. Bruner, and
U. Frieslander for their help and useful comments during various stages of this study. Thanks
are due to the Geophysical Institute of Israel
staff and in particular to J. Steinberg, R. Gafso,
and Y. Menachem for technical assistance. The
continuous support of N. Silverman is greatly
appreciated. Comments by AAPG reviewers Nick
Fryer, George T. Bertram, and an anonymous
reviewer clarified many aspects of this work.
The AAPG Editor thanks the following reviewers
for their work on this paper: George T. Bertram,
Nick Fryer, and an anonymous reviewer.
5
4
3
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
The continental shelf and slope of the Mesozoic is
found in the subsurface of the eastern Mediterranean Sea, along the southwestern edge of the Levant region: a geographic area that encompasses
western Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Israel, and northern
Sinai (Figure 1A). This Mesozoic shelf and slope
that formed part of the southern continental margins
of the Tethys Ocean (Bein and Gvirtzman, 1977;
Garfunkel and Derin, 1984) are termed in this study
the Levant margin (LM). The evolution of the LM
followed continental breakup, rifting, and subsequent opening of the Tethys north of the Gondwana supercontinent (Figure 1B) (Garfunkel, 1998;
Robertson, 1998). Cenozoic plate collision resulted
with closure of the Tethys Ocean and widespread
destruction of Mesozoic marine basins. The southwestern Levant region remained, however, several
hundred kilometers south of the Africa-Eurasia collision front (Figure 1A) and was only mildly deformed. Because of its relatively shallow burial depth
(16 km) and the available extensive exploration
database, this area is an ideal location for studying
the Levant part of the Tethyan rifted margins.
The Mesozoic shelf edge of the Levant underlies the southeastern Mediterranean coastal area
(Figure 2A). Mesozoic rocks that crop out east
and south of the coast (Figure 2A) are composed
of coarse-grained siliciclastic and carbonate strata
of continental to shallow-marine origin (Figure 3).
In contrast, Jurassic and Cretaceous strata that were
penetrated by wells in the southeastern Mediterranean Sea are dominated by fine-grained deepwater deposits (Figure 3) (Bein and Gvirtzman,
1977). Most previous works provide descriptions
of either the shallow-marine (Arkin and Braun,
1965; Flexer, 1968; Druckman, 1974; Goldberg and
Friedman, 1974) or the deep-marine lithostratigraphic units (Cohen, 1971, 1976; Derin, 1974; Bein
and Weiler, 1976; Flexer et al., 1986). A systematic stratigraphic summary of the Mesozoic shelf
edge and slope environment in the Levant region
is, however, not yet available. The purpose of this
article is to present an integrated study of well and
seismic data that places previous lithostratigraphic
interpretation of the LM into a modern sequence1764
OCTOBER
SEARCH
DATA SET
The study covers an area of 100 100 km (62
62 mi) on the coastal plain and adjacent Mediterranean Sea, extending from central Israel to
northern Sinai (Figures 1A, 2A). Hydrocarbon exploration activity resulted in acquisition of a dense
seismic grid and about 150 wells in this area. Part
of this extensive data set was used in the present
analysis (Gardosh, 2002). The seismic data include
92 land and marine two-dimensional seismic reflection lines totaling 2000 km (1243 mi), acquired
during the 1970s to early 1990s. Borehole data
include 23 onshore wells and four offshore wells.
Most of the studied wells reached the Lower to
Upper Jurassic stratigraphic levels. The Helez
Deep-1 well (Figure 2B) penetrated the entire
Mesozoic succession. Well and seismic data were
integrated on an interpretation workstation through
synthetic seismograms and time-converted wireline logs (Gelbermann et al., 1980). Lithologic descriptions and biostratigraphic information were
taken from previously published composite logs,
well completion reports, and related studies.
5
4
3
CONTENTS
OCTOBER
SEARCH
1765
5
4
3
CONTENTS
OCTOBER
SEARCH
Figure 2. (A) Schematic geologic map showing the distribution of Mesozoic strata in outcrops (modified from Sneh et al., 1998) and
location of study area. (B) Map of studied seismic lines and wells. The approximate position of the shelf edges during 1 = Middle Jurassic
(Jr2); 2 = Late Jurassic (Jr3); 3 = Barremian to Aptian (Cr1); and 4 = Cenomanian to Turonian (Cr2) are marked in dashed lines. The
locations of Figures 4, 5, 7, 8, 10, 11, 13, and 14 are shown. Well abbreviations are ASD3 = Ashdod-3; ASQ2 = Asqelon-2; ASQ3 =
Asqelon-3; BA1 = Barnea-1; BV1 = Bravo-1; BW1 = Beeri West-1; GV1 = Givati-1; GY4 = Gan Yavne-4; H22 = Helez-22; HAS1 = Hof
Ashdod-1; HD1 = Helez Deep-1; K1 = Kissufim-1; KD1 = Kefar Darom-1; L1 = Lior-1; MY1 = Massout Yitzhaq-1; N7 = Negba-7; NI1 =
Nirim-1; NIS1 = Nissanit-1; NM4 = NirAm-4; P1 = Palmachim-1; S1 = Sadot-1; SH1 = Shuva-1; T1 = Til-1; TY4 = Talme Yafe-4; Y1 =
Yinnon-1; Y2 = Yam-2; YW1 = Yam West-1. Note the location of the Helez and Ashdod oil fields and the Sadot gas field along the Jurassic
Cretaceous shelf edge.
SEQUENCE-STRATIGRAPHIC ANALYSIS
Methodology
The sequence-stratigraphic study of the Mesozoic
succession in the LM integrates seismic and well
1766
5
4
3
CONTENTS
OCTOBER
5
4
3
SEARCH
Figure 3. Stratigraphic summary of the Levant margin showing depositional sequences that are described in this study. Chronostratigraphic ages are taken from Hardenbol et al. (1998), and global eustatic curve and supercycles are from Haq et al. (1988), calibrated
to the Hardenbol et al. (1998) time frame. Lithostratigraphic units for the Levant basin and shelf are adapted from the stratigraphic table
of Fleischer and Varshavsky (2002).
terpretation is mostly unavailable, although several studies of Lower Cretaceous ostracods were
used to interpret paleowater depths.
The sequence analysis of the JurassicCretaceous shelf and slope shows two levels of cyclicity
Gardosh et al.
1767
CONTENTS
OCTOBER
SEARCH
(Figure 3). Following sequence-stratigraphic conventions, these are correlated with low-order cycles that reflect global tectonoeustatic sea level
changes of 10 to 40 m.y. time spans; and highorder cycles that are associated with environmental and tectonic events of 1 to 10 m.y. time spans
(Haq et al., 1988). The alphanumeric system used
here for low-order cycles (Figure 3) is a modified
version of time-stratigraphic units of Fleischer
and Varshavsky (2002). Cretaceous stratigraphic
units are referred to in this article by the terms
lower for the NeocomianAptian, middle for the
AlbianTuronian, and upper for the Coniacian
Maastrichtian (Figure 3). This informal subdivision
that is commonly used by local geologists (Flexer
1768
5
4
3
CONTENTS
OCTOBER
5
4
3
SEARCH
Figure 5. Regional geologic section across the study area from the onshore to the offshore showing the structure, lithology, and
proposed low-order depositional sequences of the LM. The section illustrates the change in depositional setting from a TriassicEarly
Jurassic platform to Middle JurassicLate Cretaceous marine basin. A JurassicCretaceous carbonate shelf developed on the edge of the
basin that filled with fine-grained carbonate and siliciclastic strata. Folds and reverse fault are associated with the inversion of early
Mesozoic rift structures. The section is constructed from well and seismic data presented in Figure 4; see Figure 2B for location.
1769
CONTENTS
1770
OCTOBER
SEARCH
5
4
3
CONTENTS
OCTOBER
SEARCH
Figure 6. Stratigraphic summary of the Helez Deep-1 well, located near the JurassicCretaceous shelf edge, showing from left to right:
wireline logs (gamma ray, spontaneous potential [SP], resistivity, and sonic), interpreted lithology, proposed sequence-stratigraphic framework, chronostratigraphy (from Derin, 1979, and Druckman, 1984), and lithostratigraphic units (from Fleischer and Varshavsky, 2002).
The Jurassic depositional sequences in this well (Jr13) are dominated by shallow-marine carbonate strata. Funnel-shaped wireline-log
trends are interpreted as upward coarsening of the carbonate facies during highstands. Shale breaks overlying postulated sequence
boundaries are interpreted as lowstand to transgressive systems tracts. See location of well in Figure 2B. T.D. = total depth; K.B. = kelly
bushing.
Gardosh et al.
1771
5
4
3
CONTENTS
OCTOBER
SEARCH
5
4
3
CONTENTS
OCTOBER
SEARCH
Gardosh et al.
1773
Figure 8. Regional stratigraphic section from the Helez Deep-1 well onshore, to the Bravo-1 well offshore, showing interpreted high-order depositional sequences of the Jurassic
Cretaceous shelf and upper slope area. Alternating progradational and onlapping stratal patterns within the Mesozoic sequences are projected from nearby seismic profiles. See Figure 2B
for the location of the profile and Figure 5 for the key. M.S.L. = mean sea level; V/H = vertical/horizontal.
5
4
3
CONTENTS
OCTOBER
SEARCH
Figure 9. Stratigraphic summary of the Yam West-1, located in the JurassicCretaceous marine basin, showing from left to right:
wireline logs (gamma ray, spontaneous potential [SP], resistivity, and sonic) and interpreted lithology, proposed sequence-stratigraphic
framework, chronostratigraphy (from Gill et al., 1995), and lithostratigraphic units (from Fleischer and Varshavsky, 2002). The Mesozoic
depositional sequences in this well (Jr13, Cr13) are dominated by fine-grained siliciclastic and carbonate strata that accumulated on
the lower slope and deep-marine basin. Cretaceous high-order sequence boundaries are correlated to the bases of bell-shaped wirelinelog trends interpreted as fining-upward turbidite systems. See Figure 2B for the location of the profile and Figure 6 for the key to log
trends and lithology. LST = lowstand systems tract; HST = highstand systems tract; TST = transgressive systems tract.
5
4
3
CONTENTS
OCTOBER
5
4
3
SEARCH
Figure 10. Stratigraphic section from the Yam-2 to Yam West-1 well showing interpreted high-order depositional sequences of the
JurassicCretaceous deep-marine basin. Note the similarity in wireline-log stacking patterns between the two wells. The reverse faulting
and folding in the eastern part of the section is associated with the Late Cretaceous Syrian arc folding phase. See Figure 2B for the
location of the profile and Figure 3 for a lithology key.
Deep-1 well (Derin, 1979), supporting the paleogeographic interpretation. High-order sequence
boundaries are interpreted at the base of shale or
argillaceous limestone beds that separate the carbonate intervals of Jr2.12.3 (Figure 6). Regional
facies distribution indicates a regressive interval of
early Bathonian age that likely corresponds to the
base of Jr2.3 (Hirsch et al., 1998). Foraminifer biozones indicate an Aalenian to Bajocian or Bathonian
age for the Jr2.1 and Jr2.2 strata and Bathonian
age for the Jr2.3 strata (Figure 6) (Derin, 1974,
1979).
On seismic profiles, the Jr2.12.3 sequences
comprise parallel alternating high- and low-amplitude
reflection packages that show minor incision and
downlapping of mounded reflections (Figures 7, 11).
The three units terminate westward near the mod-
1775
CONTENTS
OCTOBER
SEARCH
Figure 11. Seismic profile, (A) uninterpreted or (B) interpreted, in the southeastern part of the study area showing
proposed high-order depositional sequences
of the JurassicCretaceous margin and
wireline logs of the Beeri West-1 well. Sequence boundaries (white lines) are interpreted from onlapping and downlapping
reflection terminations (black arrows) and
well ties. See Figure 2B for the location
of the profile. TWT = two-way traveltime.
5
4
3
CONTENTS
(Figure 6) corresponds, respectively, to the Karmon and Zohar formations (Derin, 1974); and in
Jr3.2 (Figure 12), with the Kidod and Beer Sheva
formations (Derin, 1974). In the Ashdod-3, Beeri
West-1, and Helez Deep-1 wells (Figure 2B), the
Jr3.1 strata contain the Bathonian to Callovian
foraminifer T. palastiniensis (Derin, 1974, 1979);
in the Kissufim-1 and Sadot-1 wells (Figure 2B),
OCTOBER
SEARCH
1777
5
4
3
CONTENTS
OCTOBER
SEARCH
Figure 13. Seismic profile, (A) uninterpreted or (B) interpreted, showing proposed high-order depositional sequences
of the JurassicCretaceous shelf and upper
slope, correlated to time-based wireline
logs of the Lior-1 and Masout Yizhaq-1
wells. Sequence boundaries (white lines)
are interpreted from onlapping and downlapping reflection terminations (black arrows) and well ties. The Mesozoic margin
shows a transition from aggradation
(Jr2.23.2, Cr1.31.5, Cr2.32.6) to progradation (Cr1.2, Cr2.12.2). See Figure 2B
for the location of the profile.
Jurassic succession in Yam West-1 is less well defined. The upper Delta-type dark shale (Figure 9)
is likely of deep-marine origin. The lower part is
composed of shale and alternating oolitic, pelletoidal, and spiculitic limestone beds, as much as to
100 m (328 ft) thick (Figure 9). Gill et al. (1995)
describe this carbonate lithofacies as similar to the
MiddleUpper Jurassic shallow-marine platformal
strata found east of the modern coastline. Wireline logs display, however, cylindrical and bellshaped patterns (Figure 9) that may be interpreted
5
4
3
CONTENTS
OCTOBER
SEARCH
1779
5
4
3
CONTENTS
characterized by parallel discontinuous to hummocky reflections that onlap the slopes and shelf
edges of MiddleUpper Jurassic carbonate platforms (Figures 7, 8). The lower sequence boundaries of these two units correlate to the bottoms of
bell-shaped fining-upward patterns of wireline logs
(Figures 9, 10) interpreted as deep-water gravity
flows. The ages of these units are constrained by
microfauna. In the Yam-2 well, Cr1.1 contains the
foraminifer T. elongate of the Berriasian to Valanginian (Derin et al., 1990), and Cr1.2 contains
the foraminifers E. caracoalla and E. Epistomina of
the HauterivianBarremian (Derin et al., 1990).
The same biostratigraphic age is estimated for the
Cr1.2 strata in the Yam West-1 well (Figure 9)
(Gill et al., 1995).
The Cr1.3 to Cr1.5 high-order sequences at
the upper part of Cr1 has wider distribution. East
of the modern coastline, these units comprise mixed
carbonate-siliciclastic platforms of the Neocomian
to Aptian (Figures 3, 5). On seismic profiles, these
units appear as series of parallel high-amplitude
reflections that downlap westward and terminate
in moderate- to steep-angle slopes (Figures 11, 13).
In well logs, the high-order sequences display funnelshaped wireline log patterns that are associated
with upward transition from sandstone and shale
to limestone (Figures 6, 12). The lower boundaries
for each sequence are correlated to the bases of
the siliciclastic intervals presumed to have been
deposited during relative drops of sea level. The
foraminifer Ch. Decipien, found in the Cr1.3 and
Cr1.4 strata, indicates the Hauterivian to Barremian age, whereas the Orbitulina species, found
in the Cr1.5 strata, indicate Aptian to Albian age
(Figure 12) (Derin et al., 1983). The lithostratigraphic equivalent of Cr1.5, the Telamim Formation (Figure 12), contains the shallow-marine Aptian ostracod Cythereis btaterensis (Rosenfeld et al.,
1998).
In the offshore area, the Cr1.31.5 cycles
comprise a 300- to 500-m (984- to 1640-ft)-thick
fine-grained siliciclastic interval that overlies the
Cr1.2 strata (Figures 8, 10). The Barremian to Aptian
foraminifers Ch. decipien and G. barremiana are
found within this interval in the Bravo-1, Yam-2,
and Yam West-1 wells (Derin et al., 1988b, 1990;
1780
OCTOBER
SEARCH
5
4
3
CONTENTS
OCTOBER
5
4
3
SEARCH
Figure 14. Stratigraphic section from Massout Yzhaq-1 to the Barnea-1 well, showing high-order depositional sequences and systems
tracts in the shelf and upper slope of the lower to middle Cretaceous margin. Alternating progradational and onlapping stratal patterns
that are projected from nearby seismic profiles reflect the internal composition of the Cr1.2, Cr2.1, and Cr2.2 sequences. See Figure 2B
for the location of the profile and Figure 6 for the key to lithology and systems tracts. M.S.L. = mean sea level; V/H = vertical/horizontal;
HST = highstand systems tract; LST = lowstand systems tract.
1781
CONTENTS
OCTOBER
SEARCH
MARGIN EVOLUTION
The Cr3 Sequence (SenonianMaastrichtian)
The Cr3 low-order sequence is a 100- to 700-m
(328- to 2297-ft)-thick Upper Cretaceous succession dominated by marl and chalk (Figure 3).
Stratigraphic units of this age crop out in southern,
central, and northern Israel (Figure 2A). The Cr3
strata are found in the offshore but are missing in the
eastern part of the study area onshore (Figures 4, 5),
where they were deposited and later eroded during the Tertiary. The lower sequence boundary
of Cr3 is correlated to a regional unconformity
found in outcrops throughout Israel, between the
middle Cretaceous carbonate of the Judea Group
and the Upper Cretaceous chalk of the Mount
Scopus Group (Figure 3) (Flexer, 1968). On seismic profiles, the boundary is characterized by onlapping of the Cr3 chalk on the Cr2 slope carbonate (Figures 4, 5). In the offshore Yam West-1 and
Yam-2 wells, the lithologic transition from Albian
marl and shale to Senonian chalk corresponds to a
pronounced change of wireline-log stacking patterns (Figures 9, 10).
Two high-order sequences, Cr3.1 and Cr3.2,
are recognized offshore (Figure 3). The Cr3.1 strata
contain the foraminifer species Globotruncana of
the Santonian to the Campanian, whereas Cr3.2
contains the Maastrichtian foraminifer species A.
mayaroensis (Figure 10) (Derin et al., 1988b, 1990).
A high-order sequence boundary between these
units is interpreted in the Yam-2 and Bravo-1 at
the base of a chalky bed containing chert fragments (Figures 8, 10). East of the study area, the
Campanian-Maastrichtian chert-rich Mishash For1782
5
4
3
CONTENTS
OCTOBER
SEARCH
1783
5
4
3
CONTENTS
1784
OCTOBER
SEARCH
5
4
3
CONTENTS
OCTOBER
SEARCH
Figure 15. Depositional and systems tract models for the high-order sequences of the LM during the Middle to Late Jurassic, Jr23
(A) latest Jurassic to lower Cretaceous Jr4.1Cr1.2 (B) and middle Cretaceous, Cr2.12.2 (C). The models, which are based on well and
seismic data, reconstruct the varying paleogeography of the Tethyan margin ranging from aggrading carbonate shelf (A), prograding
siliciclastic slope (B), to prograding carbonate slope (C). See discussion in text.
Gardosh et al.
1785
5
4
3
CONTENTS
OCTOBER
SEARCH
5
4
3
CONTENTS
OCTOBER
SEARCH
1787
5
4
3
CONTENTS
DISCUSSION
Several large-scale stratal stacking trends are present for the Jurassic and Cretaceous LM, alternating between aggradation, progradation, and backstepping (Figure 17A). The edge of the platform
margin for the Jr1.2 to Jr3.2 and Cr1.3 to Cr1.5
sequences shows an aggradational and backstepping pattern (Figure 17A). Concomitant to that
pattern is the overall onlap and infilling within the
slope and basinal deposits coeval to the Jr23 to
Cr1.3 to Cr1.5 platform deposits. Distinct progradation in the carbonate margin occurred in the
Cr2.1 to Cr2.2 sequences (Figure 17A). The geometry of this margin, in cross section, is markedly dif1788
OCTOBER
SEARCH
5
4
3
CONTENTS
OCTOBER
SEARCH
1789
5
4
3
CONTENTS
OCTOBER
SEARCH
5
4
3
CONTENTS
OCTOBER
SEARCH
as the dominant control over the long-term depositional trends. The stratigraphic framework
presented here for the Tethyan shelf and slope is
in accordance with the recently published Mesozoic sequence stratigraphy of the Arabian platform. Therefore, the Levant margin may be taken
as a model for reconstructing the evolution of
other Tethyan margins in the region. The results
further predicts the depositional setting of reservoirs rocks in the Levant shelf and highlight the
potential for Jurassic and Cretaceous lowstandtype stratigraphic traps on the Levant slope offshore
Israel, where extensive exploration efforts are currently occurring.
REFERENCES CITED
CONCLUSIONS
Early Mesozoic breakup was followed by opening
of the southern Tethys Ocean and the development of continental margins along the northern
edge of Gondwana. The Mesozoic strata of the
proximal margin area, found in the Levant interior, have been previously extensively studied. This
study describes the shelf edge and slope of the
Tethyan marine basin in the subsurface of southwestern Israel and the adjacent Mediterranean Sea.
The JurassicCretaceous margins are characterized by a distinct hierarchy of low-order and highorder depositional cycles. Sequence boundaries
are inferred from seismic reflection terminations,
wireline-log stacking patterns, lithofacies data, and
correlation to regional unconformities recognized
inland. The architecture of depositional sequences
demonstrates periodic shifts of depocenters associated with relative changes in sea level. Aggradation and backstepping of carbonate platforms
characterize the MiddleLate Jurassic, late Early
Cretaceous, and late middle Cretaceous margin.
Progradation of siliciclastic and carbonate slopes
characterizes the latest JurassicEarly Cretaceous
and middle Cretaceous margin. Long periods of
shelf exposure and erosion are recognized in the
latest Jurassic and late middle Cretaceous. Eustasy,
combined with regional subsidence, is considered
Arkin, Y., and M. Braun, 1965, Type sections of Upper Cretaceous formations in the northern Negev, southern Israel:
Jerusalem, Israel, Israel Geological Survey stratigraphic
section no. 2a, p. 119.
Bein, A., 1976, Rudistid fringing reefs of Cretaceous shallow carbonate platform of Israel: AAPG Bulletin, v. 60,
p. 258272.
Bein, A., and G. Gvirtzman, 1977, A Mesozoic fossil edge of
the Arabian plate along the Levant coastline and its bearing on the evolution of the eastern Mediterranean, in B.
Biju-Duval and L. Montadert, eds., Structural history
of the Mediterranean basins: Paris, Editions Technip,
p. 95110.
Bein, A., and Y. Weiler, 1976, The Cretaceous Talme Yafe
Formation: A contour shaped sedimentary prism of calcareous detritus at the continental margin of the Arabian
craton: Sedimentology, v. 23, p. 511532, doi:10.1111
/j.1365-3091.1976.tb00065.x.
Brady, M., 1990, Petrographic description and interpretation
of cuttings from the Yam-2 well (52805325 m) offshore Israel: Colorado, Harme and Brady Geological
Consultants Inc., 4 p., 7 plates.
Braun, M., and F. Hirsch, 1994, Mid-Cretaceous (Albian
Cenomanian) carbonate platforms in Israel: Madrid,
Spain, Cuadernos de Geologia Iberica, v. 18, p. 5981.
Buchbinder, B., 1986, Sedimentology, diagenesis and genetic
subdivision of the Nirim Formation (Lower Jurassic) in
the Helez Deep 1A well: Jerusalem, Israel, Geological
Survey of Israel report GSI/23/86.
Buchbinder, B., and M. Price, 1987, Sedimentology and genetic subdivision of the Lower Jurassic Nirim Formation
(part) in the Talme Yafe 4 borehole: Jerusalem, Israel,
Geological Survey of Israel report GSI/6/87.
Buchbinder, L. G., 1979, Facies, environment of deposition
and correlation of the Zohar (Brur Calcarenite) Karmon
and Shderot formations in the Ashdod area, prepared for
Gardosh et al.
1791
5
4
3
CONTENTS
1792
OCTOBER
SEARCH
Gardosh, M. A., 2002, The sequence stratigraphy and petroleum systems of the Mesozoic, southeastern Mediterranean continental margin: Ph.D. thesis, Tel Aviv University, Israel, 159 p.
Gardosh, M., and Y. Druckman, 2006, Seismic stratigraphy,
structure and tectonic evolution of the Levantine Basin,
offshore Israel, in A. H. F. Robertson and D. Mountrakis,
eds., Tectonic development of the eastern Mediterranean region: Geological Society (London) Special Publication 260, p. 201227.
Garfunkel, Z., 1998, Constraints on the origin and history of
the eastern Mediterranean Basin: Tectonophysics, v. 298,
p. 535, doi:10.1016/S0040-1951(98)00176-0.
Garfunkel, Z., and B. Derin, 1984, Permianearly Mesozoic
tectonism and continental margin formation in Israel
and its implications for the history of the eastern Mediterranean, in J. E. Dixon and A. H. F. Robertson, eds.,
The geological evolution of the eastern Mediterranean:
Geological Society (London) Special Publication 17,
201 p.
Gelbermann, E., P. Thacker, and U. Amitai, 1980, Deep well
velocity data, review and interpretation: Holon, Israel,
Institute for Petroleum Research and Geophysics report 5/501/78.
Gilboa, Y., H. Fligelman, and B. Derin, 1990, Heletz-BrurKokhav field, Israel, southern coastal plain, in E. A.
Beaumont and N. H. Foster, eds., Structural traps IV:
Tectonic and nontectonic fold traps: AAPG Treatise of
Petroleum Geology, Atlas of Oil and Gas Fields, p. 319
345.
Gill, D., B. H. Conway, Y. Eshet, S. Lipson, L. PerelisGrossowicz, A. Rosenfeld, and R. Siman-Tov, 1995, The
stratigraphy of the Yam West 1 borehole: Jerusalem, Israel, Geological Survey of Israel report GSI/13/95,
43 p.
Goldberg, M., and G. M. Friedman, 1974, Paleoenvironments and paleogeographic evolution of the Jurassic system in southern Israel: Geological Survey of Israel Bulletin, no. 61, 44 p.
Gvirtzman, G., and Z. Reiss, 1965, Stratigraphic nomenclature in the coastal plain and Hashefela regions: Jerusalem,
Israel, Geological Survey of Israel report OD/1/65, 14 p.
Gvirtzman, G., A. Almogi-Labin, S. Moshkovitz, Z. Lewy,
A. Honigstein, and Z. Reiss, 1989, Upper Cretaceous
high resolution multiple stratigraphy, northern margin
of the Arabian platform, central Israel: Cretaceous Research, v. 10, p. 107135, doi:10.1016/0195-6671(89)
90001-3.
Handford, C. R., and R. G. Loucks, 1993, Carbonate depositional sequences and systems tracts: Responses of carbonate platforms to relative sea level changes, in R. G. Loucks
and J. F. Sarg, eds., Carbonate sequence stratigraphy recent developments and application: AAPG Memoir 57,
p. 341.
Haq, B. U., and A. M. Al-Qahtani, 2005, Phanerozoic cycles
of sea level change on the Arabian platform: GeoArabia,
v. 10, no. 2, p. 127160.
Haq, B. U., J. Hardenbol, and P. R. Vail, 1988, Mesozoic and
Cenozoic chronostratigraphy and cycles of sea level
changes, in C. K. Wilgus, B. S. Hastings, C. G. St. C.
5
4
3
CONTENTS
OCTOBER
SEARCH
Robertson, A. H. F., 1998, MesozoicTertiary tectonic evolution of the easternmost Mediterranean area: Integration
of marine and land evidence, in A. H. F. Robertson, K. C.
Eneis, C. Richter, and A. Camerlenghi, eds., Proceedings
of the Ocean Drilling Program, scientific results, no. 160,
p. 723782.
Rosenfeld, A., F. Hirsch, A. Honigstein and M. Raab, 1998,
The paleoenvironment of Early Cretaceous ostracods in
Israel: Bulletin du Centre de Recherches Elf Exploration
Production Mmoire 20, p. 179195.
Sarg, J. F., 1988, Carbonate sequence stratigraphy, in C. K.
Wilgus, B. S. Hastings, C. G. St. C. Kendall, H. W.
Posamentier, C. A. Ross and J. C. Van Wagoner, eds., Sealevel changes: An integrated approach: SEPM Special
Publication 42, p. 155181.
Sass, E., and A. Bein, 1982, The Cretaceous carbonate platform in Israel: Cretaceous Research, v. 3, p. 135144,
doi:10.1016/0195-6671(82)90014-3.
Sharland, P. R., D. M. Casey, R. B. Davies, M. D. Simmons,
and O. E. Sutcliffe, 2004, Arabian Plate sequence stratigraphy: GeoArabia, v. 9, no. 1, p. 199214 and 2 posters.
Shenhav, H., 1971, Lower Cretaceous sandstone reservoirs,
Israel: Petrography, porosity, permeability: AAPG Bulletin, v. 55, p. 21942224.
Sneh, A., Y. Bartov, T. Weisbrood, and M. Rosensaft, 1998,
Geological map of Israel: Israel Geological Survey,
1:2,000,000, 4 sheets.
Watts, N. L., J. F. Lapre, F. S. Van Schijndel-Goester, and A.
Ford, 1980, Upper Creataceous and lower Tertiary
chalks of the Albuskjell area, North Sea: Deposition in
a slope and a base-of-slope environment: Geology, v. 8,
p. 217221, doi:10.1130/0091-7613(1980)8<217
:UCALTC>2.0.CO;2.
Gardosh et al.
1793
5
4
3