Facies (2004) 50:77–105DOI 10.1007/s10347-004-0004-y

O R I G I N A L A R T I C L E

Adam TomaÐov�ch

Microfacies and depositional environmentof an Upper Triassic intra-platform carbonate basin:the Fatric Unit of the West Carpathians (Slovakia)

Received: 4 April 2003 / Accepted: 18 January 2004 / Published online: 12 March 2004� Springer-Verlag 2004

Abstract Facies associations of the Rhaetian Fatra For-mation from the Velk� Fatra Mts. (West Carpathians)were deposited in a storm-dominated, shallow, intra-platform basin with dominant carbonate deposition andvariable onshore peritidal and subtidal deposits, with 21microfacies types supported by a cluster analysis. Thedeposits are formed by bivalves, gastropods, brachiopods,echinoderms, corals, foraminifers and red algae, ooids,intraclasts and peloids. A typical feature is the consider-able variation in horizontal direction. The relative abun-dance and state of preservation of components as wellas the fabric and geometric criteria of deposits can becorrelated with depth/water energy-related environmentalgradients. Four facies associations corresponding to fourtypes of depositional settings were distinguished: a)peritidal, b) shoreface, above fair-weather wave base(FWWB), c) shallow subtidal, above normal storm wavebase and d) above maximum storm wave base. Thedepositional environment can be characterized as a mo-saic of low-relief peritidal flats and islands, shorefacebanks and bars, and shallow subtidal depressions. Thedistribution and preservation of components were mainlycontrolled by the position of base level (FWWB), stormactivity and differences in carbonate production betweensettings. Poorly or moderately diverse level-bottom mac-robenthic assemblages are dominated by molluscs andbrachiopods. The main site of patch-reef/biostrome car-bonate production was located below the fair-weatherwave base. Patch-reef/biostrome assemblages are poorlydiverse and dominated by the branched scleractinian coralRetiophyllia, forming locally dm-scale autochthonous ag-gregations or more commonly parautochthonous assem-blages with evidence of storm-reworking and substantialbioerosion by microborings and boring bivalves.

Facies types and assemblages are comparable in someaspects to those known from the Upper Triassic of theEastern and Southern Alps (Hochalm member of theK�ssen Formation or Calcare di Zu Formation), pointingto similar intra-platform depositional conditions. Theabsence of large-scale patch-reefs and poor diversity oflevel-bottom and patch-reef/biostrome assemblages withabundance of eurytopic taxa indicate high-stress/unstableecological conditions and more restricted position of theFatric intra-platform setting from the open ocean than theintra-platform habitats in the Eastern or Southern Alps.

Key words Upper Triassic · Rhaetian · WestCarpathians · carbonate sedimentology · facies analysis ·benthic assemblages · coral patch-reefs

Introduction

The Upper Triassic epoch represents the start of themodern coral-reef community type (Wood 1999) and theonset of coral-zooxanthellae symbiosis (Stanley 1988;Stanley and Swart 1995), the establishment of first Meso-zoic epibiont communities (Lescinsky 2001), the ap-pearance of abundant bivalve macroborers (Perry andBertling 2000), and the Norian and Rhaetian stages cor-respond to the global reef bloom (Fl�gel 2002). However,the end-Triassic mass extinction event represents a peri-od of significant paleobiological and paleoenvironmentalchange, when nearly 40% of invertebrate genera did notsurvive into the Jurassic (Raup and Sep-koski 1982, 1986)and reef ecosystems were affected by a significant dropin the global carbonate production (Fl�gel and Kiessling2002).

In the Fatric Unit of the West Carpathians, relativelywell-preserved Rhaetian-Hettangian marine successionsoccur (Gadzicki et al. 1979; Michal�k and Gadzicki 1983).Although the precise position of the Rhaetian-Hettangianboundary is questionable in these sections due to absenceof biostratigraphic-valuable taxa, the reconstruction of theRhaetian depositional environment of the Fatric Unit can

A. TomaÐov�ch ())Institut f�r Pal�ontologie, W�rzburg Universit�t,Pleicherwall 1, 97070 W�rzburg, Germanye-mail: adam.tomasovych@mail.uni-wuerzburg.deTel.: +49-931-312512Fax: +49-931-31 25 04

be very useful in understanding the nature of pre-ex-tinction benthic associations on local and regional scales.

Sedimentological features and paleontologic content ofthe uppermost Triassic strata of the Fatric Unit are rel-atively well-documented (Michal�k 1973, 1974, 1977,1979, 1980, 1982; Michal�k and Jendrej�kov� 1978;Gadzicki 1974, 1983), with some detailed information onbrachiopods (Michal�k 1975), corals (Roniewicz andMichal�k 1991a, 1991 b, 1998), bivalves (Kochanov�1967; Gadzicki 1971) and vertebrates (Duffin and Gadz-icki 1977). The results of these studies show a highvariation in the composition and preservation of thedeposits. However, detailed microfacies and paleoenvi-ronmental analyses on a small-scale level are rare anddepositional models are mostly absent.

Paleoenvironmental reconstruction of the whole depo-sitional setting of the Fatric Unit was performed byMichal�k (1977) who recognized ten facies areas on anapproximately 300-km-long transect through the WestCarpathians. The scale of observation in this study in-cludes only a small portion of this intra-platform depo-sitional setting, which is now preserved in a 25-km-longtransect in the Velk� Fatra Mountains (central Slovakia).This area is characterized by the presence of relativelywell-exposed sections and was therefore chosen for thisstudy.

The goals of this study are a) to define particularmicrofacies types, based on 5 lithologic sections, theirspatial and temporal distribution and the relationshipbetween components, and b) to interpret of the deposi-tional setting and its comparison with coeval settings onthe NW-Tethyan carbonate platforms. The first aspect isnecessary as it provides high-resolution framework forunderstanding the horizontal facies variation. These de-posits contain fossil assemblages with abundant taxa likecorals, bivalves and brachiopods that were substantiallyaffected by the end-Triassic extinction (Hallam 1996,2002; Hallam and Wignall 1997) and can thereforeprovide important information about distribution patternsand habitats of these fossil groups at the end of theTriassic.

Geologic Setting

During the Upper Triassic, the West Carpathians weresituated on the extensive epeiric carbonate platform onthe northwestern margin of the Tethys Ocean in thesubtropical climatic belt (Michal�k 1994; Gawlick 2000)(Fig. 1). The Upper Triassic carbonate platform of theWest Carpathians had been subdivided into several shore-parallel depositional settings, now preserved in variouspaleotectonic units. In a simplified scheme, the mostproximal nearshore zone was formed by extremelyshallow or continental deposits, followed seaward byintra-platform mixed carbonate-siliciclastic or predomi-nantly carbonate basins (this is the position of the FatricUnit), a Dachstein carbonate platform and finally rim-ming Dachstein-reefs (Haas et al. 1995). The Rhaetian

Fatra Formation was deposited in a shallow-water intra-platform, marine, predominantly carbonate setting of theFatric Unit (West Carpathians) (Michal�k 1982) (Fig. 2).Only in the southernmost part of the Fatric Unit de-positional area, restricted peloidal bars/shoals of theSv�t� Jakub Formation were deposited (TomaÐov�ch andMichal�k 2000). In the Fatra Formation, the Rhaetian ageis confirmed by the first appearance of foraminifersTriasina hantkeni and Glomospirella friedli (Gazdzicki1983) and brachiopod Austrirhynchia cornigera.

Carbonate deposition took place under a low subsi-dence regime. The proportion of siliciclastic admixture ismostly very limited. The studied area of the Fatric Unitwas most probably connected with the Tethys Oceaneither via the shallow Dachstein platform top, or perhapsthrough a system of deeper intra-platform basins formedby the depositional settings of the Hronic (West Car-pathians), Bajuvaric and Tirolic Unit (Eastern Alps). Atthe beginning of the Jurassic, the depositional regime inthe Fatric Unit was abruptly replaced by the terrigenoussedimentation of the Kopienec Formation (Hettangian-Early Sinemurian, Fig. 2). In the overlie of the basalclastic member of the Kopienec Formation, ammonitesPsiloceras psilonotum (Quenstedt) and Caloceras cf. torus(d’Orbigny), equivalent to the Early Hettangian Psilocerasplanorbis Zone, were documented (Rakffls 1993). There-fore, the age of lowermost part of the Kopienec Formation,

Fig. 1 General paleogeographic position of the Fatric Unit (CentralWest Carpathians) in the Upper Triassic (Norian/Rhaetian). AfterMichal�k (1994), modified

78

formed by approximately 5- to 20-m-thick barren silt-stones/claystones, is unknown.

Methods

The database includes 5 stratigraphic key sections of the FatraFormation (Figs. 3, 4, 7, 10). In addition, 8 sections exposing onlyparts of the Fatra Formation were studied for comparative purposes(Fig. 3). Sedimentologic, taphonomic and paleobiologic featuresat the bed level were described in the field. Sections have beenmeasured bed-by-bed and numbered from bottom to top. Samples

for thin sections have been obtained from 2-m-distant intervals. Inaddition, denser sampling of up to 20-cm-distant intervals wasperformed in segments which exhibit high facies variation. In thelower part of DedoÐova – Frckov locality, several parallel sectionswere measured in horizontal direction in order to map a spatialvariation of the patch reef/biostrome facies (Fig. 15A). The texturalclassification of Dunham (1962) and Embry and Klovan (1972) wasused with modifications for the description of microfacies types.

The term “biostrome” is used for dm-scale, sheet-like autoch-thonous or parautochthonous deposits with relatively high propor-tion of constructors, bafflers and binders (corals, algae and/orsponges). The term “patch-reef” is used for meter-scale, mound-

Fig. 2 Basic lithostratigraphic scheme of the uppermost Triassic-lowermost Jurassic strata in the Fatric Unit, Central West Carpathi-ans. The subdivision of the Fatra Formation into four intervalscorresponds to four large-scale sequences bounded by threeunconformities

Fig. 3 A. Overview map with the study area. B. Geographiclocation of studied lithologic sections of the Fatra Formation in theVelk� Fatra Mts., Slovakia. 1 – DedoÐova, 2 – Sviniarka, 3 –Belianska-BoriÐov, 4 - Bystr� potok, 5 – R�ztoky, 6 – Kr�na, 7 –Revfflcky Mlyn, 8 - Balcierovo, 9 – BoriÐov-farm, 10 – Mal�Ramin�, 11 – arnovka, 12 - Zelen�-Brnovsk�, 13 – �opron

79

like or flat-topped deposits consisting of autochthonous or pa-rautochthonous remains of constructors, bafflers and binders thatcan be composed of several stacked biostromes. All together, 209thin sections were studied. Relative abundance of 14 components(bivalves, gastropods, brachiopods, echinoderms, ostracods, corals,calcareous sponges, red algae, green algae, foraminifers, sessileforaminifers, ooids, intraclasts, and peloids) was estimated usingcomparative chart method of Bacelle and Bosellini (1965) andSch�fer (1969). These quantitative data formed the basis of a datamatrix for a Q-mode cluster analysis using the squared Euclideandistance and the Ward method as the clustering technique (seeAppendix). Individual clusters were named after the dominatingcomponents.

As the composition of samples is described by percentagevalues that represent dependent parts (Reyment and Savazzi 1999),standard exploratory multivariate techniques prone to the unit-sumconstraint (e.g. PCA) cannot be used. In order to reduce the overallcomplexity of the data by extracting hypothetical variables (di-mensions) accounting for the maximum correlation between sampleand component scores, correspondence analysis can be used forpercentage data (Kowalewski et al. 2002). Correspondence analysisallows observing the simultaneous representation of samples andtaxa within the same system of coordinate axes. The arch effect andcompression of the ends of the gradient were eliminated byapplying a detrended correspondence analysis (DCA, Hill andGauch 1980).

In order to decrease data heterogeneity and exclude outliers,samples with allochem content below 10% were excluded fromdata analysis. This data matrix (exhaustive data set) for DCAcomprises 14 components as variables and 152 thin sections asobjects. In order to see a primary ecological relationship betweenindividual organism groups, the data matrix was minimized byexcluding microfacies types with evidence of high alteration (high-proportion fragmentation, disarticulation and abrasion) and trans-port/reworking (good sorting, presence of intraclast and ooids).This data matrix (reduced data set) for DCA contains 11 bioclasttypes and 78 thin sections as the objects. The reduced data setcontains seven microfacies types (MF 4 - bio-wackestone, MF 5 -brachiopod floatstone, MF 6 - gastropod floatstones/packstone, MF7 - solenoporacean framestone, MF 8 - coral framestone, MF 9 -bio-floatstone with micritized corals and MF 18 - bivalve float-stone).

Results

Sections

Five lithologic sections of the Fatra Formation arepresented in Figures 4, 7–10. The meter-scale spatialvariation in coral patch-reef/biostrome facies types inDedoÐova-Frckov section is shown in Fig. 15A. As theFatra Formation in the Velk� Fatra Mts. can be subdi-vided into four main intervals (large-scale sequences)bounded by laterally extensive unconformities (TomaÐo-

Fig. 4 Lithologic section of the Fatra Formation in DedoÐova -Frckov. Explanations: See Fig. 8

Fig. 5 Coral patch-reef/biostrome facies types: 1. Massive coralAstraeomorpha sp., strongly bored with bivalves (1), and encrustedby oysters (2). Some free spaces are occupied by small terebratulids(3). Sample DD4.4. Scale: 1 cm 2. Coral colony of Retiophylliaparaclathrata, with terebratulid Rhaetina gregaria (arrow) betweencorallites. Sample S82. Scale: 1 cm 3. Small branching bush-shapedsolenoporacean alga, bored with bivalves (arrow). Sample DD5.2.Scale: 1 cm 4. Stacked, 10–20 cm thick coral colonies ofRetiophyllia gosaviensis. DedoÐova – Frckov A (beds 4.15–4.18).Scale: 10 cm 5. Toppled coral colony of Retiophyllia gosaviensis.DedoÐova – Frckov E (bed 5). Scale: 10 cm

80

81

82

v�ch 2002), the following description of the sections isbased on this subdivision. The correlation of the firstlarge-scale sequence and spatial variation of coral-patchreef/biostrome facies types on km-scale is presented inFigure 15B.

1. DedoÐova – Frckov (Fig. 4) represent outcrops in theforest which are situated on the steep SW slope of theFrckov hill (1585 m), in the closure of the DedoÐovadolina valley, NW of the Kr�na (1574 m). The FatraFormation is completely exposed together with upper-most part of the underlying “Carpathian KeuperFormation”. The upper boundary is observable onlyat some places because of tectonization and weatheringof the basal siltstones and claystones of the KopienecFormation.In the lowermost 11.5 m thick interval of the Fa-tra Formation (1st large-scale sequence), small-scalecoarsening-upward sequences are preserved (beds 1–3). Limestones are characterized by a complex internalstructure formed by cm-scale alternation of poorlysorted floatstones with well-preserved bivalves (Pla-cunopsis alpina, Atreta intusstriata, Chlamys valonien-sis) and well-sorted packstones/grainstones with ero-sional bases and poorly preserved bioclasts. Thesebeds are abruptly replaced by brachiopod floatstoneswith Rhaetina gregaria and bioclastic packstones withbivalve, echinoderm, brachiopod and coral fragments(bed 4). In detail, horizontal and vertical distribution ofindividual facies types and benthic taxa is variable inthis part of the section (Fig. 4). Locally, isolated coralcolonies of massive (Astraeomorpha) and branching(Retiophyllia) corals or solenoporacean algae arepresent in life or overturned/toppled position (Fig.5–5) and form meter-scale aggregations. Both massiveand branching corals and algae in these beds arestrongly encrusted with oysters (Atreta) and bored bybivalves (Fig.5–1, 3, Fig.6–6, 7). Upwards, they arereplaced by a 2-m-thick patch-reef/biostrome complexformed by coral framestones with complete colonies ofRetiophyllia gosaviensis (beds 5–6) with rare interca-lations of intraclastic limestones. 10–50 cm high fan ordome-shaped Retiophyllia coral colonies, with diam-

eters between 20 and 100 cm (Fig. 5–4), are stillpreserved in growth position, with corallites (5–10 mmin diameter) radiating in upward direction. The pro-portion of borings and encrustations is relatively low.

Fig. 7 Lithologic section of the Fatra Formation in Sviniarka –Mal� Zvolen valley. The section is tectonically disrupted. Expla-nations: See Fig. 8

Fig. 6 Shallow subtidal facies types, above normal storm wavebase: 1. Gastropod packstone with foraminifers and algae (MF 6).Sample DD7.7. Scale: 5 mm 2. Framestone with solenoporaceans(MF 7). Sample DD5.2. Scale: 5 mm 3. Coral framestone (MF 8)with Retiophyllia gosaviensis (corallites with local dark automi-critic coatings and encrusting bivalve - arrow). Sample DD5.12.Scale: 5 mm 4. Floatstone with micritized corals (MF 9) containgR. paraclathrata and abundant involutinid foraminifers. SampleDD19.2. Scale: 5 mm 5. Floatstone with micritized corals (MF 9)(R. paraclathrata with bioerosions and encrustations of Baccinellasp. and Lithocodium sp. and calcareous sponge). Sample DD18.10.Scale: 5 mm 6. Bivalve macroboring with recrystallized valves inthe retiophyllid coral (MF 9). Sample DD5.8. Scale: 1 mm 7.Bivalve macroboring in solenoporacean alga (MF 7). SampleDD5.2. Scale: 1 mm 8. Bacinella sp., boring and encrustingrecrystallized coral fragment (MF 9). Sample DD18.10. Scale:1 mm

83

Coral framestones are capped by laminated bindstoneswith an erosional unconformity at the top.In the middle 9.7-m-thick interval (2nd large-scalesequence), thick packstones with intraclasts occur(bed 7), passing upwards into gastropod floatstones(bed 8) and capped by laminated bindstones (bed 11),at the top with an erosional unconformity with wellsorted grainstone (bed 12). Above this unconformity,a 14.7-m-thick interval (3rd large-scale sequence) con-sisting of dolomites with fenestral pores and sheetcracks and well- or bimodally sorted grainstones,packstones and rudstones with brachiopods, bivalvesand gastropods is preserved (beds 14–18), passing intobrachiopod floatstones (bed 16), ooidic packstones(bed 17) and well-sorted intraclastic grainstone (bed18). Upwards, bioclastic floatstones with Retiophylliacoral fragments (beds 19–20) are capped by laminatedbindstones (bed 24).In the uppermost 2.7 m thick interval of the FatraFormation (4th large-scale sequence), bioclastic pack-stones and rudstones with bivalves (Rhaetavicula con-torta, Placunopsis alpina, Chlamys sp., Modiolus min-utus, Palaeocardita austriaca) and bioclastic-ooliticlimestones with calcitic, chamositic and ferrigenousooids, and coral, echinoderm, bivalve and brachiopod(Rhaetina gregaria) fragments are preserved. Isolatedcoral colonies (Retiophyllia sp.) are locally present.

2. Svinarka - Mal� Zvolen (Fig. 7) represent outcrops inthe creek in the Svinarka valley and smaller exposuresin the forest east of the creek, SE of the Mal� Zvolenhill (1372 m). In the creek, the lower and upperboundary of the Fatra Formation is exposed; themiddle part is tectonically disrupted. The correlationwith the forest exposures allowed to discern a com-plete stratigraphic column of the Fatra Formation atthis locality. In the lowermost, 9.4-m-thick interval ofthe Fatra Formation (1st large-scale sequence), metre-scale coarsening-upward sequences prevail, consistingof dark claystones, coquinal floatstones with bivalves(Rhaetavicula contorta, Placunopsis alpina) and well-sorted packstones/grainstones (beds 77–79). Thesebeds pass into coquinal floatstones with abundantbrachiopods (Rhaetina gregaria, Zugmayerella unci-nata) and bivalves (Plagiostoma punctatum, Modiolusminutus, Pteria sp., Antiquilima sp., Atreta intusstri-ata, Chlamys sp.) (beds 80–81) and small dm-scalecoral framestones with Retiophyllia paraclathrata (bed82, Fig. 5–2). Here, 30- to 40-cm-high coral colonieswith corallites 5 mm in diameter are mostly toppled.These beds are overlain by fenestral and cryptalgalbindstones with a capping erosional unconformity. Inthe middle 12-m-thick interval of the Fatra Formation(2nd large-scale sequence), thick-bedded bioclastic andgastropod limestones are preserved, capped by lami-nated limestone with rip-up clasts, fenestral poresand sheet cracks (bed 87). In the upper 11.5-m-thickinterval (3rd large-scale sequence) consisting of ooidicgrainstones and packstones, bio-rudstones and crinoidfloatstones is present (beds 88–96), capped by mud-

stones and dolomudstones (beds 97–98) with an un-conformity at the top. In the uppermost, about 3-m-thick interval of the Fatra Formation (4th large-scalesequence), rudstones, grainstones and packstones withmicritized bivalves, echinoderms and coral fragmentsare preserved. Biomicritic wackestone with in-situcorals is present as a 15-cm-thick interbed. The up-permost bed of the Fatra Formation is formed by well-sorted grainstone with strongly micritized bivalves andcrinoids.

3. Belianska – BoriÐov (Fig. 8) represent exposures in theforest pathway leading from the Havranovo to thecottage below BoriÐov hill, 300 m below the cottage,east of the BoriÐov hill (1509 m). The upper part of the“Carpathian Keuper Formation” and lower and middleparts of the Fatra Formation are exposed here. Theuppermost part of the “Carpathian Keuper Formation”is formed by light grey thick-bedded dolomudstones.In the first large-scale sequence of the Fatra Formation(12 m), small-scale shallowing-upward sequencesoccur (beds 1–11). In their lower part, they are formedby bioclastic limestones with complex internal strat-ification (mm- or cm-scale alternation of floatstoneswith packstones) and bivalves (Bakevellia praecursor,Placunopsis alpina) and laminated mudstones (beds1–6). In their upper part, bioclastic floatstones arereplaced by well-sorted packstones/grainstones (beds7–10). Upwards, these beds pass into bioclastic wacke-stones/floatstones with brachiopods (beds 13–15) andhigher-up into well sorted packstones and grainstoneswith erosional boundaries (beds 16–17). These areoverlain by thick packstones/floatstone with coralfragments and intraclasts (bed 18). In the middle6-m-thick interval (2nd large-scale sequence), laminat-ed dolomites are capped by an erosional unconformity,with well sorted packstones (bed 23). Up-section,brachiopod floatstones with internal stratification,well-sorted packstones and oo-grainstones are pre-served (beds 27–30).

4. 4. Bystr� potok – Ruomberok (Fig. 9) represent ex-posures in the road cut from Ruomberok to Martin,between the village Cernov� and Hubov�, near theentry of the Bystr� potok creek into the V�h River. Thelocality had been mentioned by Stur (1859) andpartially described by Michal�k (1985) and TomaÐo-v�ch (2000). The middle and upper part of the FatraFormation are exposed. In the lower part of the section(7.5 m), two shallowing-upward sequences capped bylaminated mudstones/bindstones are preserved (beds1–6). The second one is capped by an unconformityand overlain by well-sorted packstones with intraclastsand micritized bioclasts. This forms the base of acoarsening-upward sequence and passes upward intothick packstones with megalodonts, brachiopods, al-gae, coral fragments and echinoderms and oobio-grainstones at the top (beds 7–9). In the middle partof the section (4 m), alternation of coquinal lime-stones with marls with abundant brachiopods (Rhae-tina gregaria, Zugmayerella uncinata, Austrirhynchia

84

cornigera, Discinisca suessi) and bivalves (Actinos-treon haidingerianum, Atreta intustriata, Modiolusminutus, Plagiostoma punctatum, Chlamys sp., An-tiquilima sp., Pteria sp., Liostrea sp.) occur (beds 9–10). They pass into dm-scale alternations of packstoneswith mudstones (beds 11–16). In the upper part of thesection (3.7 m), packstones and grainstones with ooids,

intraclasts and bioclasts prevail (beds 18–23), passinginto dolomitic mudstones in the uppermost part of thesection.

5. R�ztoky – Nolcovo (Fig. 10) represents exposureswhich are situated in the forest pathway on the leftslope of the valley above the R�ztoky creek, south ofthe Ostr� hill (786 m), above the Nolcovsk� dolinavalley. This section was described by Michal�k andS�kora (1979). In the first large-scale sequence of theFatra Formation (12 m), metre-scale shallowing-up-ward sequences (beds 1–3) are overlain by brachiopodand crinoid floatstones (beds 4–7). Higher, a corallimestone with Retiophyllia (bed 8) passes into thickgrainstones and packstones (beds 9–10). In the secondlarge-scale sequence of the Fatra Formation (11.5 m),an alternation of dolomites with bioclastic limestonesis preserved, finally capped by laminites with anerosional unconformity at the top (beds 21–22). In thethird large-scale sequence (11.5 m), three small-scaleshallowing-upward sequences occur (beds 32–40).They consist of laminated limestones with foraminifersand ostracods, well-sorted intraclastic grainstones, co-quinal floatstones with brachiopods (Rhaetina gre-garia, R. pyriformis) and floatstones with bored/en-crusted coral fragments (Retiophyllia paraclathrata)and are capped by a dolomite (bed 40). In the up-permost, fourth large-scale sequence, about 1 m ofmudstone interval (bed 45) is overlain by floatstoneswith abundant megalodonts, gastropods and foramini-

Fig. 9 Lithologic section of the Fatra Formation at the Bystr�potok locality near Ruomberok. Explanations: See Fig. 8

Fig. 8 Lithologic section of the Fatra Formation in Belianska-BoriÐov

85

fers. The uppermost bed of the Fatra Formation isformed by coquinal biointra-rudstone with well-sorted,concordantly oriented and strongly micritized frag-ments of bivalves, brachiopods and echinoderms (bed48).

Microfacies types

In the Q-mode cluster analysis performed at the samplelevel and based on relative frequencies of components, 20cluster types have been recognized (see Appendix).However, the final distinction of microfacies types wasalso based on fabric criteria (sorting, packing and orien-tation), bed geometry and internal stratification and doesnot strictly reflect the results of the cluster analysis.Therefore, some clusters were subdivided and all together21 microfacies types are described in the following part.The samples within the first cluster were subdivided intomudstones (MF 1) and laminated bindstones (MF 3).Clusters 7 and 8 were fused in one MF type (MF 9 - bio-floatstone with micritized corals). Clusters 9–11 wereassigned to MF 10 and 12 according to the dominatingsize of components. In spite of the drawbacks due tosubjective assignment of some samples, it is suggestedthat a cluster analysis can be useful as a first step inmicrofacies types demarcation in settings with high faciesvariation. Mean values with standard deviations of rel-ative abundances of components are summarized foreach microfacies type in histograms (Fig. 11). The DCAordination of the exhaustive and reduced data set is shownin Fig. 16.

MF 1 – Mudstone

This type (Fig. 12–2) is represented by light grey, thick-bedded (25–60 cm) dolomudstones and dolomitizedmudstones, spatially associated with laminites or intra-clastic limestones. They often display fenestral fabric andinternal sediment filling. Fenestral pores form discontin-uous, concordant, irregularly-shaped sparitic laminae,locally passing into continuous sheet cracks. In somebeds, agglutinated foraminifers (Glomospirella), ostra-cods and calcarenous green algae (Halicoryne) are com-mon.

MF 2 – Intraclastic breccia (floatstone)

This facies type (Fig. 12–1) is characterized by abioturbated matrix and dark angular and irregular micriticintraclasts (several mm to 2–3 cm). Fenestral pores withinternal sediment may be locally present. Ostracod shellsand disarticulated valves may occur, along with smallfragments of echinoderms and bivalves.

Fig. 10 Lithologic section of the Fatra Formation in R�ztoky -Nolcovo. Explanations: See Fig. 8

86

Fig. 11 Histograms of microfacies types showing mean values andstandard deviations of individual components. The first threemicrofacies types are not shown because of rare or absentcomponents. Explanations: 1–Bivalves, 2–Gastropods, 3–Bra-

chiopods, 4–Echinoderms, 5–Ostracods, 6–Corals, 7–Calcareoussponges, 8–Ooids, 9–Intraclasts, 10–Peloids, 11–Foraminifers, 12–Sessile foraminifers, 13–Micritized bioclasts, 14–Green algae, 15–Red algae, 16–Microbialites

87

Fig. 12 Peritidal facies types: 1. Intraclastic breccia (MF 2).Sample S87. Scale: 5 mm 2. Mudstone with foraminifers (Glomo-spirella) (MF 1). Sample R32. Scale: 1 mm 3. Cryptalgal bind-stone (MF 3). Sample DD11. Scale: 1 mm 4. Pel-packstone with

foraminifers (MF 14). Sample BP5. Scale: 1 mm 5. Fenestralbindstone (MF 3). Sample NR8. Scale: 5 mm 6. Fenestral bindstone(MF 3). Sample S11.2. Scale: 5 mm 7. Fenestral bindstone (MF 3).Sample NR8. Scale: 5 cm

88

MF 3 – Laminated bindstone

1. Fenestral bindstone (Fig. 12–5–7) with millimetre-scalewavy horizontal lamination formed by micritic laminaeand more or less continuous or discontinuous fenestralsparitic laminae with irregular lower and upper bound-aries.

2. Cryptalgal bindstone (Fig. 12–3) with finely ormoderately crinkled horizontal lamination consisting ofalternation of calcilutitic laminae and very well-sortedcalcisiltic bioclastic-microintraclastic laminae, locallywith micrograding.

3. Planar or low-angle cross-stratified, mm-scale lam-ination formed by less regular alternation of micriticlaminae with dispersed bioclastic debris and calcisiltic tocalcarenitic laminae with densely packed fragments offoraminifers, bivalves and crinoids, often with concordantorientation.

MF 4 – Bio-wackestone

This type shows the presence of moderately sorted,ran-domly oriented, and mostly poorly preserved bi-valve fragments, gastropods, echinoderm ossicles andbrachiopods. Complete macroscopic remains are veryscarce. Microfossils are represented by ostracods, no-dosariid and glomospirellid foraminifers, globochaetes,dasycladacean algae (Halicoryne) and holothurian scle-rites.

MF 5 – Brachiopod floatstone/packstone

This type (Fig. 13–7) is preserved in dark grey, thin-bedded (5–25 cm) limestone beds. It commonly displaysbioturbated and pelletized micritic matrix and containspredominantly well-preserved terebratulid brachiopods(Rhaetina gregaria), with very rare traces of micritizationor bioerosion. In some beds, shells with geopetal infillingsare frequent. The biofabric is dispersed or loosely packed,less commonly densely packed, with poor sorting andmostly random orientation of brachiopods.

Fragments of bivalves, crinoid ossicles, echinoidspines, juvenile gastropods, ostracods and sessile for-aminifers are common. Nodosariid, glomospirellid andtrochamminid foraminifers, serpulids, corals, cyanobac-teria (Cayeuxia) and fragments of calcareous red (Soleno-poraceae) or green (Codiaceae) algae may be locallypresent. In some cases, stratification formed by alterna-tion of brachiopod floatstones with 5–10 mm thick,redeposited, well-sorted, calcarenitic laminae with basalerosional surfaces is recognizable.

MF 6 – Gastropod floatstone/packstone

This type (Fig. 6–1) is dominated by poorly/moderatelysorted, non-micritized, well-preserved, complete or frag-

mented gastropods (5–30%), usually with geopetal struc-tures. Involutinid (Aulotortus communis and A. tumidus),glomospirellid and nodosariid (Frondicularia woodwardi)foraminifers (2.5–10%), green calcareous algae (Codi-aceae), cyanobacteria (Cayeuxia), bioeroded and mi-critized fragments of megalodonts and other bivalvesand fragmented or complete, non-micritized echinodermossicles are common. The microfossils are additionallyrepresented by Halicoryne, Globochaete, ostracods andophiuroid fragments, and microproblematic Earlandia(Fl�gel 1972; Borza 1975).

MF 7 – Solenoporacean framestone

It forms dark grey, 20–50 cm thick lensoidal patchesin the limestone beds in the lower part of the FatraFormation (DedoÐova-Frckov and Kr�na). This type (Fig.5–2, Fig. 6–2) contains predominantly well-preservedsolenoporacean algae that are not affected by fragmen-tation and micritization. They are often bored by bivalvesand endolithic microborers (Fig. 6–7). Apart from redalgae, the diversity of frame builders is very poor,calcareous sponges are only locally present. Brachiopods,bivalves and crinoid ossicles are commonly dispersed inthe matrix in the interspaces between algae.

MF 8 - Coral framestone

This type is characterized by the dominance of branchingcorals (Retiophyllia gosaviensis, R. paraclathrata, and R.fenestrata) which represent primary framework builders(Fig. 6–3). They are commonly encrusted by oysters (Fig.6–3), calcareous sponges, sessile foraminifers and ser-pulids. In the micritic matrix, fragments of brachiopods,bivalves, crinoids, algae, ostracods and microbial intra-clasts and peloids are commonly dispersed in spacesbetween corals. Tabular corals (Astraeomorpha) are rare,forming only locally small-scale, 30–50 cm thick mono-typic aggregations. Two basic types of micritic matrix arepresent. The more common is gravity-controlled allomi-crite, it has a grey colour and locally unhomogenousstructure (pelletized or bioturbated) in thin sections. Itforms infillings of cavities and interspaces between com-ponents. The second type is represented by automicrite,which includes gravity-defying deposits in the form ofcoatings, crusts, layers on the surfaces and in the internalcavities of bioclasts. In the thin sections, automicriticcoatings are dark brown to black, homogenous and most-ly structureless. Allochems are absent in these gravity-defying automicritic coatings, in contrast to allomicritictype with diverse assemblage of bioclasts.

MF 9 – Bio-floatstone with micritized corals

This type is characterized by the presence of degradedretiophyllid corals (Fig. 6–4, 5, 6). Bioclasts are randomly

89

Fig. 13 Shallow subtidal facies types, above normal storm wavebase: 1. Floatstone with micritized bioclasts (MF 19). SampleDD2.7. Scale: 5 mm 2. Floatstone with micritized bioclasts (MF19). Sample B12. Scale: 5 mm 3. Packstone/wackestone withmicritized bioclasts (MF 20). Sample DD5. Scale: 5 mm 4.Packstone/wackestone with micritized bioclasts (MF 20). Sample

DD5.3. Scale: 5 mm 5. Storm-reworked deposit – in the basal partwith bivalve floatstone (MF 18), in the upper part with bio-rudstone(MF 10). Sample K2.10. Scale: 5 mm 6. Packstone/wackestonewith micritized bioclasts (MF 20). Sample DD5a. Scale: 5 mm 7.Brachiopod floatstone (MF 5). Sample DD4.2. Scale: 5 mm

90

oriented and poorly sorted. Fragments of coral colonies orisolated corallites (Retiophyllia paraclathrata) are com-monly strongly destructively micritized, microbored andencrusted (common sessile foraminifers, Thaumatoporel-la sp., Baccinella, Lithocodium, (Fig. 6–8), cf. Kołodziej1997) and/or covered with automicritic coatings. Bi-valve macroborings are common (Fig. 5–1, Fig. 6–6).Calcareous (nodosariids, involutinids, Ophthalmidium)and agglutinated (Glomospirella, Trochammina, Tetra-taxis) foraminifers, ostracods, globochaetes, cyanobac-teria (Cayeuxia sp.), sponges, fragments of bivalves,gastropods, brachiopods and echinoderm ossicles arecommon.

MF 10 – Well-sorted bio-rudstonewith micritized bioclasts

10–40 cm thick beds of this type commonly display goodsorting, dense packing and concordant, edgewise/nestedor random orientation of bioclasts (Fig. 14–7, 8). Gradingin the proportion of matrix and size and density ofallochems is locally preserved. High proportions of frag-ments of bivalves, echinoderms, gastropods and bra-chiopods are degraded (abraded, micritized and bioerod-ed). In several cases, certain proportions of bioclasts are,in contrast, relatively well preserved, without traces ofbioerosion and abrasion. Encrustations by sessile forami-nifers are rare.

MF 11 – Bimodally sorted bio-rudstone/grainstonewith micritized bioclasts

This type (Fig. 14–5, 6) consists of concordantly oriented,convex-up bivalves with drusy sparitic shelters and localmud-infiltrations, and well-sorted calcarenitic debris (upto 2 mm). Rudite-size bivalve fragments with micriticrims are mostly encrusted by sessile foraminifers, boredand abraded. Bio- and oomicritic intraclasts, peloidsand radial ooids (with fragments of bivalves, crinoids,foraminifers and peloids as nuclei) are common.

MF 12 – Bio-grainstone with micritized bioclasts

This type (Fig. 14–2) is characterized by well-sorted anddensely packed fabric, only locally with micrite, andusually contains abraded, fragmented and strongly bio-eroded bioclasts with micritic rims and sessile foramini-fers (Tolypammina, Planiinvoluta). Debris of bivalves,gastropods with exotic micritic infillings, echinodermossicles (locally with syntaxial rims) and brachiopods areabundant. Fragments of corals and calcareous algae canoccur locally. Bio- and oomicritic intraclasts, peloids andradial ooids are present.

MF 13 – Oo-grainstone

10–50 cm thick beds of this type are characterized bygood sorting of ooids (approximate diameter: 1–1.5 mm),with oval, circular or elongate outline and radial structureshowing several cortical layers (Fig. 14–1). Intraclastsand micritized and abraded bioclasts are less common(2.5–5%). Ooid nuclei consist of recrystallized bivalvefragments, brachiopods, crinoids, foraminifers, micriticand biomicritic intraclasts or peloids.

MF 14 – Pel-packstone

This type (Fig. 12–4) is characterized by the dominantpresence of well-sorted peloids (maximum size 1 mm)and agglutinated foraminifers (Glomospirella), and lesscommon fragments of echinoderms, micritized bivalves,and ostracods.

MF 15 – Intra-packstone

This facies type typically occurs in dark grey massive andthick-bedded limestones (50–200 cm) in the middle partof the Fatra Formation. They display bimodal sortingconsisting of well-sorted intraclastic-peloidal debris andpoorly sorted rudite-size bioclasts, with no preferredorientation. A micritic matrix may be locally absent.Ooids can also be present. Bioclasts are abraded, en-crusted (Tolypammina, Planinvoluta, Thaumatoporella)and bored/micritized (endolithic microborings). Somebioclasts are in contrast relatively well preserved withoutsigns of bioerosion and abrasion. Recrystallized bivalvefragments are dominant, gastropods, corallite fragmentsor fragments of coral colonies and solenoporacean algae,echinoderm ossicles and brachiopod valves are common.The microfauna is characterized by a relatively diverseassemblage of foraminifers (Triasina hantkeni, Tetra-taxis inflata, Trochammina alpina, Frondicularia wood-wardi, Glomospirella), globochaetes, Earlandia, greenalgae (Halicoryne), and ostracods.

MF 16 – Oobio-packstone

Beds of this type contain calcarenitic debris with abun-dant well-sorted ooids (0.5–1 mm) with radial structureand oval outline. The ooid nuclei are formed by fragmentsof bivalves, crinoids, intraclasts or peloids. Micritizedbivalve fragments and micritic intraclasts are common;gastropods, brachiopod fragments, echinoderm ossiclesand green algae (Halicoryne) are present in varying pro-portions. In general, bioclasts are mostly poorly pre-served. In one subtype, components (1–1.5 mm) com-pletely encrusted by sessile foraminifers (Tolypammina)are very common.

91

92

MF 17 – Intrabio-packstone/grainstone

Beds of this type usually display a basal erosional surface,good sorting (below 1 mm) and dense packing of angularor oval microintraclasts and micritized/bored or abradedbioclasts (bivalves, echinoderms). Calcareous (Triasina,Aulotortus) and agglutinated (Glomospirella) foramini-fers, globochaetes, green algae (Halicoryne) and thick-shelled ostracods are locally abundant. Mostly they occurin the direct overlie of mudstones (MF 1) or laminites(MF 3).

MF 18 – Bivalve floatstone

Dark grey, 5–10 cm thick beds of this type (Fig. 13–5)commonly alternate with 1–10 cm thick bio-floatstones(MF 19) or bio-wackestones/packstones with micritizedbioclasts (MF 20). They contain poorly sorted and dis-persed/loosely packed, complete or fragmented bivalves(Placunopsis alpina, Rhaetavicula contorta, Bakevel-lia praecursor, Gervillaria inflata, Chlamys valoniensis),mostly randomly or less commonly concordantly oriented/nested. Sparitic shelters or geopetal textures are scarce orabsent. Valves are commonly encrusted by sessile for-aminifers. However, the proportion of bioerosion and mi-critization due to activity of microborers is much lower incomparison to floatstones and wackestones/packstones ofthe MF 22 and 23.

MF 19 – Bio-floatstone with micritized bioclasts

5–20 cm thick beds of this type are characterized by theabundance of bivalves and high degree of destructivemicritization and bioerosion (Fig. 13–1, 2). They areusually associated with a complex internal structureconsisting of alternation of thin cm-scale intervals withdifferent sorting and packing density. Internal erosionalsurfaces are locally present. The typical feature is aloosely/densely packed bio-fabric, poor or moderatesorting (with maximum size mostly not exceeding 10–20 mm), and concordant (both convex-up and down),nested or random orientation of bivalves, locally withsparitic shelters under convex-up valves. Other compo-nents are represented by micritic intraclasts and radial

ooids. Ooids are frequently encrusted by sessile forami-nifers.

MF 20 – Bio-wackestone/packstonewith micritized bioclasts

This type is characterized by moderate or good sortingand loose/dense packing of bioclasts, mostly dominatedby bivalves (Fig. 13–3, 4, 6, Fig. 14–3, 4) and by acomplex internal microstratigraphy. In the fossil assem-blages characterized by high degree of taphonomicalternation, fragments of recrystallized bivalves, echino-derm ossicles (sometimes with syntaxial rims), juvenilegastropods, corals, solenoporacean red algae and bra-chiopods are abundant. In general, micritic rims are verycommon. The microfauna is represented by sessile (Toly-pammina), nodosariid or glomospirellid foraminifers,serpulids, green algae (Acicularia), globochaetes (Globo-chaete alpina, G. tatrica) and ostracods.

MF 21 – Crinoid wackestone/packstone

This type is characterized by the abundance of completeor fragmented crinoid ossicles, locally still articulated,with microborings and locally with micritic envelopes.The biofabric is densely/loosely packed and moderatelysorted. Fragments of brachiopods, bivalves, ostracods,echinoid spines are less common.

Discussion

Facies interpretation

In the following discussion , particular microfacies typesare interpreted in terms of paleoenvironment and com-pared with coeval facies types known from otherUpper Triassic Tethyan carbonate settings. Fenestral andcryptalgal bindstones (MF 3) can be interpreted as algalor microbial mat deposits that are typical mainly ofperitidal flats (Shinn 1983). In the Upper Triassic car-bonate environments, they typically represent an intertidalmember of the Lofer sequences (Schwarzacher 1948;Fischer 1964; Fl�gel 1981; Enos and Samankassou 1998).In addition, they commonly occur in shallow restrictedlagoonal settings of the K�ssen and Calcare di ZuFormation (Kuss 1983; Lakew 1990). Fenestral fabric ismainly formed by desiccation and shrinkage or air andgas bubble formation, and is often preserved withinstromatolites due to irregular growth processes (Shinn1968). Algal mat lamination is not limited only to supra-intertidal environment, but it is mostly not preserved dueto bioturbation and gastropod grazing in subtidal envi-ronments (Garrett 1970), although it may be preserved ina hypersaline environment. The absence of bioturbationand body fossil fauna thus indicates unfavourable condi-tions for metazoan life. Regular, mm-scale alternation of

Fig. 14 Shallow subtidal - nearshore facies types (above fair-weather wave base): 1. Oo-grainstone (MF 13). Sample S92.3.Scale: 1 mm 2. Bio-grainstone with micritized bioclasts (MF 12).Sample DD5.1. Scale: 5 mm 3. Bio-packstone with micritizedbioclasts (MF 20). Sample DD 13.5. Scale: 5 mm 4. Bio-packstonewith micritized bioclasts (MF 20). Sample DD17.2. Scale: 5 mm 5.Bimodally sorted rudstone/grainstone with micritized bioclasts (MF11). Sample B7.3. Scale: 5 mm 6. Bimodally sorted rudstone/grainstone with micritized bioclasts (MF 11). Sample DD15.5.Scale: 5 mm 7. Bio-rudstone with micritized bioclasts (MF 10).Sample DD26.3. Scale: 5 mm 8. Bio-rudstone with micritizedbioclasts (MF 10). Sample DD14.5. Scale: 5 mm

93

micritic and calcisiltic laminae in MF 3c indicatesalternating bedload and suspension transport. Micriticintraclasts in breccia (MF 2) have been probably derivedfrom disrupted stromatolitic laminae, which were ex-humed and buried again in the same type of sediment.

Mudstones (MF 1) often occur in the upper partof shallowing upward, lagoonal-peritidal sequences andhave comparable equivalents in the K�ssen Formation(Kuss 1983; Ehses and Leinfelder 1988; Stanton andFl�gel 1989). The fenestral fabric and close associationwith laminated types indicate a peritidal origin (Bystr�potok and R�ztoky sections). A low diverse fauna ofagglutinated foraminifers (Glomospirella) (Gadzicki1983) and ostracods indicates high-stress habitat in avery shallow restricted environment, where great fluctu-ations in salinity and temperature are probable.

Good taphonomic preservation of brachiopods inbrachiopod floatstones/packstones (MF 5) and associatedsedimentologic data (micritic matrix, absence of ooids orintraclasts) point to an environment below the fair-weather wave base with low-energy background condi-tions. Complex internal structure formed by the alterna-tion of interbeds with different packing density, variousproportions of disarticulated valves and different orien-tations (nested or concordant) suggests episodic high-energy influence of storm wave and currents (Aigner et al.1978; T�r�k 1993). The deposition of gastropod float-stones/packstones (MF 6) probably took place in a low-energy photic environment with a low net rate ofsedimentation and low turbidity, with good conditionsfor algal growth and herbivorous gastropods. Solenopo-racean framestones (MF 7) are characterized by preser-vation of autochthonous small-scale algal banks, deposit-ed in a setting below the fair-weather wave base. It isinteresting to note that benthic assemblages dominated bysolenoporaceans in the Eastern Alps (Stanton and Fl�gel1987) are characterized by a different type of matrixfabric (packstones/grainstones).

Coral framestones (MF 8) represent in-situ preservedcoral colonies. Automicritic deposits have probably beenproduced by microbial processes (Kazmierczak et al.1996). The main evidence is formed by a) gravity-defyingorientation (mucus matrix allows the accumulation), b)differences in the comparison with the second type ofmicrite (absence of other bioclasts, colour, structure) andc) common presence in cavities. In the “Oberrh�tkalk” inthe Eastern and “Calcare di Zu” in the Southern Alps,dark homogenous microbial coatings similarly occur andare limited mainly to the interspaces between the branch-es of retiophyllid corals and sponges (Stanton and Fl�gel1989; Lakew 1990). Comparable poorly diverse coralassemblages dominated by high-growing Retiophyllia arewell known from the intra-platform K�ssen basin andmarginal parts of the Dachstein platform (Sch�fer 1979;Piller 1981; Kuss 1983; Stanton and Fl�gel 1987).According to Roniewicz & Stolarski (1999), life strategyof epithecal phaceloid growth forms, to which Retiophyl-lia belongs, is comparable to the mudsticker strategyof secondary soft-bottom dwelling bivalves (Seilacher

1984). Such growth forms were well-adapted for life in anenvironment with a relatively high rate of sedimentationand turbidity. Growth forms of retiophyllid corals arecorrelatable with water energy (Stanton and Flgel 1987).In analogy to the distribution of R. clathrata A and Bmorphotypes in the Eastern Alps, recognized according tocorallite diameter and robustness of colonies, branchedcorals in the samples are mostly robust and closelypacked, although variation in morphotypes is high insome cases. This can partially point to a less protectedhabitat of the Retiophyllia assemblage in the FatraFormation with relatively higher water energy. However,as interstices between coral branches are filled withmicrite and the proportion of sparite cement and bioclas-tic debris is low, their habitat was probably situated belowthe fair-weather wave base. Low species diversity ofpatch-reef/biostrome assemblages, in contrast to somehighly diverse assemblages with corals, sponges, hydro-zoans and tabuluzoans from the Northern Calcareous Alps(Zankl 1969; Sch�fer 1979; Dullo 1980; Wurm 1982;Stanton and Fl�gel 1987, TurnÐek et al. 1999) or WesternNorth America (Stanley 1979) can be most likely relatedto the short-term environmental instability of habitats in avery shallow, intra-platform setting (Stanton and Fl�gel1987). An uneven patchy distribution of coral aggrega-tions can point to a high spatial variation in environmentalconditions or chance aspects of larval dispersion, firstrecruitment and subsequent success (e.g. competitionexclusion) in survival.

Bio-floatstones with micritized corals (MF 9) arecharacterized by higher alteration in comparison to coralframestones, due to higher intensity of bioerosion/mi-critization and episodic influence of high-energy stormevents (intraclasts, packing, thin well-sorted interlayers).It represents a parautochthonous fossil assemblage. Pri-mary sparitic cement is lacking, indicating primarily alow-energy environment between the fair-weather andnormal-storm wave base.

Fabric criteria of rudstones with micritized bioclasts(MF 10) indicate an environment above the fair-weatherwave base, with a long-term high-energy current (con-cordant orientations) or wave activity (edgewise orienta-tions). High degrees of taphonomic damage point to aprolonged exposure time on the sediment/water interface(Kidwell and Bosence 1991; Perry 1998). However,variation in preservation and the presence of grains ofdifferent origin (peloids, ooids, intraclasts) indicate acomplex burial/exhumation history. In some cases,episodically storm-reworked, rapidly deposited beds canmimic fabric pattern indicative of a long-term high-energy environment. The biofabric of bimodally-sortedrudstones/grainstones (MF 11) indicates that the mostimportant process was probably a high-energy currentevent which controlled the preferred orientation of bi-valves. High levels of taphonomic alteration were prob-ably mainly influenced by former long-term depositionalhistory. Bio-grainstones (MF 12) occur in the uppermostpart of the coarsening-upward cycles, or they formintercalations in the successions with low-energy de-

94

posits. Fabric criteria point to the deposition of small-scale skeletal banks/shoals under long-term high-energyconditions caused by fair-weather wave activity or fre-quent episodic storm activity (Ball 1967; Hine et al.1981). A high proportion of abrasion indicates influenceof wave activity and a high degree of micritization andencrustation indicates long residence time on the sea-floorand, therefore, reduced net rate of sedimentation (Koblukand Risk 1977).

The sedimentary features typical of inter- or subtidaloolite shoals, beaches or bars such as large bed thicknessand cross-bedding (Wilson 1975; Hine 1977; Inden andMoore 1983) are lacking in oo-grainstones (MF 13). Inthe recent, aragonitic radial ooids were reported fromrelatively lower-energy environments, while in the high-est-energy conditions (the crests of bars) the crystalsbecome flattened and are broken into a tangential orien-tation (Simone 1981; Gaffey 1983; Strasser 1986; Tuckerand Wright 1990). Ooids with comparable microstructurefrom Purbeckian limestones originated in intermittentlyagitated water (Strasser 1986). Low-Mg calcitic radialdelicate microstructure is probably primary (Kuss 1983;MiÐ�k 1997) Although it is assumed that the “aragonitesea” was typical of the whole Triassic (Sandberg 1983;Hardie 1996; Stanley and Hardie 1998), the Late Triassicis characterized by the dominance of originally calciteooids, in contrast to the Early and Middle Triassic(Wilkinson et al. 1985).

In pel-packstones (MF 14), restricted diversity ofbioclasts and dominance of peloids indicate deposition ina low-energy, perhaps peritidal, environment with poorconnection with the open basin. Intra-packstone type (MF15) is comparable to the coated-grain facies from theK�ssen Formation (Kuss 1983), which passes laterallyinto the coral biostrome and mound facies. The samesituation is also preserved in the Fatra Formation, wherethis type (e.g. DedoÐova, BoriÐov) laterally passes into thecoral limestones with autochthonous coral thickets (Re-vfflcky Mlyn section). In general, this type has beenattributed to the “reef-detritus mud facies” by Fl�gel(1981), typical of a protected reef-slope. On the basis ofthe sedimentologic (well-sorted bioclastic-intraclasticmatrix, local winnowing of micrite, absence of primarysedimentary structures) and high variation in taphonomicalteration, it is possible to imagine an unstable exposedshallow subtidal environment above the storm wave basewith higher rates of environmental changes (with periodswith higher water energy) leading to a complex burial/exhumation history of particles. The particles are pre-dominantly derived from the patch-reef/biostrome facies.Poor sorting of ruditic shell material, variations intaxonomic composition in the horizontal direction andpresence of large coral colonies indicate a local pa-rautochthonous origin affected by storm activity, exclud-ing extensive lateral transport.

The composition and preservation of components inoobio-packstones (MF 16) indicate a complex origin,probably related both to out-of-habitat transport and time-averaging. Ooids can be deposited in depressions adjacent

to oolithic banks/bars or can represent residual in-situcomponents when local setting changes from high- tolow-energy conditions. Subtypes with a high proportionof components encrusted by foraminifers are mostlytypical of relatively protected back-barrier areas withmoderate water energy.

A high degree of taphonomic alteration, fabric criteriaand stratigraphic position immediately above peritidaldeposits indicate that intrabio-packstones/grainstones(MF 17) represent a lag deposit originating under a muchreduced rate of sedimentation related to long-term win-nowing and particle reworking.

The relatively good taphonomic preservation of bi-valves in bivalve floatstones (MF 18), low proportion ofbioclastic debris and absence or scarcity of microintra-clasts and ooids indicate a protected low-energy environ-ment with poor storm reworking. Macrobenthic assem-blages dominated by bivalves are preserved in-situ andare comparable to those from the lower part of the K�ssenFormation (Placunopsis-Bakevellia biofacies, Golebiows-ki 1991).

Bio-floatstones (MF 19) and bio-wackestones/pack-stones (MF 20) with micritized bioclasts are typicallyassociated with an internal complex stratification, indi-cating high-energy episodic storm-reworking and com-plex taphonomic pathways. The two types differ basicallyin the degree of sorting and packing, suggesting differentdegrees of storm overprint. A high degree of micrization/bioerosion on both external and internal surfaces suggestsa long post-mortem residence time on the sediment/waterinterface. The presence of encrusted and coated, locallyalso fragmented, ooids, the occurrence of similar-sizedallochems without ooidic layers, and the variable preser-vation of co-occuring bioclasts points to their complexorigin caused by transport or by environmental conden-sation due to rapid changes in environmental factors.Higher water energy could have been caused by episodicstorm events or long-term fair-weather wave activity,which led to the accumulation and sorting of al-lochthonous material together with carbonate mud in anadjacent depression near the subtidal skeletal banks.Crinoid wackestones/packstones (MF 21) were depositedin the environment around the storm wave base. Crinoidossicles are probably parautochthonous.

Facies associations

Facies types were subdivided according to their environ-mental interpretation, vertical and lateral transitions intofour basic types of facies associations (facies groupsdeposited in the same general environment with localdifferences): 1. peritidal (or perimarine) environment, 2.shallow subtidal environment, above fair-weather wavebase, 3. above normal storm wave base and 4. abovemaximum storm wave base.

The peritidal environment includes supratidal andintertidal flats, tidal islands and restricted depressions.These deposits are characterized by the presence of

95

96

biolaminites, the scarcity and poor diversity of benthicfauna, evidence of dessication or shrinkage and short-term high-energy events. This facies association com-prises 4 basic microfacies types: mudstones (MF 1),breccias (MF 2), laminated bindstones (MF 3) and pel-packstones (MF 14).

The shallow subtidal environment above the fair-weather wave base is characterized by the presence of afacies association showing signs of long-term wateragitation (packing, sorting, poor taphonomic preservation,ooids). They were deposited in subtidal skeletal andoolithic banks, incipient shoals and bars and adjacentback-barrier depressions. 5 microfacies types involve bio-rudstones (MF 10), bio-rudstones/grainstones (MF 11)and grainstones with micritized bioclasts (MF 12), oo-grainstones (MF 13) and oobio-packstones (MF 16).

An environment above the normal storm wave basecan be compared to open lagoons with normal salinityand coral patch-reef/biostrome development, or restrictedlagoons with abnormal salinity. This facies association ischaracterized by features pointing to low-energy back-ground conditions (micritic matrix-supported fabric, rel-atively good preservation of bioclasts) and by presence ofpoorly or moderately diverse level-bottom and patch-reefmacrobenthic assemblages with bivalves, gastropods,brachiopods, echinoderms, corals, sponges and red algae(Fig. 15A). Typically, facies types are characterized by acomplex internal stratification on the bed scale and showevidence of short-term high-energy overprint, which isattributable to episodic storm events. This facies associ-ation includes floatstones/packstones with brachiopods(MF 5), gastropods (MF 6), floatstones with micritizedcorals (MF 9), micritized bioclasts (MF 19) and wacke-stones/packstones with micritized bioclasts (MF 20).

Below the normal storm wave base, deposits show noevidence of substantial reworking or erosion, althoughtraces of storm-induced winnowing (pavements withskeletal concentrations) or deposition from seawardflowing storm-surge currents (thin packstone interbeds)were preserved. Benthic assemblages are typically au-tochthonous. Microfacies types can overlap with thosefrom the preceding facies association, with definitiveassignment based mostly on subtle taphonomic differ-ences in the degree of storm-reworking (MF 4, 5, 6, 7, 8,9, 18, and 21).

Environmental gradients

Although the DCA ordination of the exhaustive data set(Fig. 16A) is obviously affected by data heterogeneity

(Shi 1993), a continuous variation between microfaciestypes is apparent and some basic trends are visible. Alongthe first dimension, the samples representing shallowsubtidal setting below the fair-weather wave base, repre-sented by framestones and floatstones with corals (MF 8and 9) on the right, pass into the mixture of samples withvarious degrees of high-energy overprint. However,oobio-packstones (MF 16) and oo-grainstones (MF 13)are situated on the left and are isolated from the rest.Therefore, the first dimension can be possibly correlatedwith the long-term wave activity gradient. Ordination ofthe reduced data set in the coordinate system of the firsttwo dimensions shows relatively distinct separation offacies types (Fig. 16B). In this data set, including onlymicrofacies types with benthic assemblages unaffected bytransport or strong condensation (Fig. 15B), there is agradational relationship among microfacies types whichare well-defined and mostly non-overlapping. The firstdimension can perhaps be related to a gradient in thesubstrate stability/water turbidity, with coral thicketsliving in a generally muddy environment (cf. Roniewiczand Stolarski 1999). Although the interpretation of thesecond axis in DCA is less clear (Kenkel and Orloci1986), along the second dimension, there is a continuousgradation from poorly diverse bivalve- and gastropod-dominated microfacies with rare euhaline taxa in thelower part, to facies types with red algae, echinoderms,corals in the middle part, and brachiopod floatstones (MF5) in the upper part of the plot. This dimension mayreflect a salinity gradient.

Based on the correlation of the individual sections(TomaÐov�ch 2002, see above), there are three relativelywell-defined unconformities, subdividing the stratigraphiccolumn of the Fatra Formation in four large-scaledepositional sequences (see description of sections above,Fig. 4, 7–10). Although an interpretation of the sequencestratigraphy is beyond the scope of this paper, in order tointerpret and understand spatial facies relationships, apreliminary assessment of their temporal distributionpatterns is discussed here. Within the depositional se-quences that are defined according to these unconformi-ties, vertical distribution of facies associations show acharacteristic repetitive pattern. Therefore, in a simplifiedscheme, the distribution of microfacies types/facies asso-ciations in the lowermost large-scale sequence (Fig. 15B)of the Fatra Formation is used as the reference forreconstruction of the depositional environment (Fig. 17)here. Vertical changes in facies types enable us tointerpret lateral shifts in the depositional environment(Walther‘s Law). It is important to note that this recon-struction does not include the complicated bottom topo-graphy, but is primarily focused on lateral relationship offacies types (Fig. 17).

1. In the lower part of the large-scale depositionalsequence, MF types 18 (bivalve floatstones), 19 (bio-floatstones with micritized bioclasts) and 20 (bio-packstones/wackestones with micritized bioclasts) al-ternate with grainstones and bivalve rudstones (MF 10-

Fig. 15 A Spatial variation in the facies development of coralpatch-reef/biostrome facies in DedoÐova – Frckov. The distancebetween A and E section is 30 m. B. The correlation of the firstlarge-scale sequence with coral patch-reef/biostrome facies (lowerpart of the Fatra Formation). The distance between R�ztoky-Nolcovo (NW part) and Sviniarka-Mal� Zvolen (SE part) is about25 km

97

12), often forming shallowing-upward lagoonal-skele-tal bank sequences. One of the most typical features isthe presence of small-scale structures related to storm-reworking in MF 19 and 20, which are thereforeusually characterized by a complex small-scale strati-graphic architecture. Although DCA based on compo-nent frequencies in microfacies types revealed anenvironmental gradient related to wave/water energy,incorporation of fabric/geometric and taphonomiccriteria allows recognizing a depth-related environ-mental gradient with higher confidence (Fig. 17A).Areas lying above the fair-weather wave base subject-ed to long-term high-energy influence or multiplestorm events are characterised by the presence of well-

sorted bio-grainstones, oo-grainstones and bivalverudstones, commonly with amalgamation. Belowthe fair-weather wave base, simple or multiple-eventstorm-reworked deposits occur, with a bivalve-domi-nated assemblage. Variation in the degree of bioero-sion/micritization points to the complex history relatedto the rate of burial/residence time on the sea-floor.Towards the more protected environment below nor-mal storm wave base, intensity of storm event de-creases and relatively undisturbed bivalve floatstonesare preserved. In depressions lying in adjacent posi-tions to high-energy ooid-skeletal banks, oobio-pack-stones were deposited. In landward direction, low-energy peritidal flats have been formed. In summary,

Fig. 16 A Detrended corre-spondence analysis of all sam-ples showing ordination ofsamples and components usingdimensions 1 and 2. B. De-trended correspondence analy-sis of reduced data matrixshowing ordination of samplesand bioclasts using dimensions1 and 2. Numbered points re-present individual samples. Ex-planations: Biv—bivalves,Gpd—gastropods, Bpd—bra-chiopods, Ech—echinoderms,Ost—ostracods, Cor—corals,Spo—calcareous sponges,For—foraminifers, Ssf—sessileforaminifers, Ral – red algae,Gal – green algae, Oo – ooids,Int – intraclasts, Pel – peloids

98

this stage can be termed as a shallow lagoon with tidalflats and skeletal banks and poorly diverse bivalve-dominated assemblages.

2. In the middle part of the large-scale sequence, float-stones, packstones and framestones with poorly ormoderately diverse macrobenthic assemblages (MF 5,

7, 8, 9) are dominant. Coral assemblages are repre-sented by dm-scale biostromes or by small-scale, 2-mthick patch-reefs composed of several stacked coralcolony aggregations (Fig. 15A, Fig. 5). The dominanceof a matrix-supported fabric and the presence ofstenohaline taxa indicate the deposition in an open

Fig. 17 Schematic reconstruction of lateral facies relationship in anenvironmental gradient in three different stages, developed withinone large-scale sequence. A. Shallow lagoon with tidal flats/

skeletal banks and poorly diverse bivalve-dominated assemblagesB. Deeper lagoon below FWWB with euhaline assemblages C.Restricted peritidal environment

99

lagoon below the fair-weather wave base (Fig. 17B).The horizontal dimension of 1 to 2-m-thick coralpatch-reef/biostrome between DedoÐova-Frckov andMal� Zvolen-Sviniarka attains about 10 km (Fig. 15B).In the marginal, NW part, high-energy skeletal bankswere deposited. The evidence of storm-reworkingpoints to a relatively shallow environment abovenormal storm wave base. Most exposed habitats arerepresented by bio-wackestones/packstones with mi-critized bioclasts (MF 20) and bio-floatstones withmicritized corals (MF 9). In areas characterized bylower intensity of storm activity and/or lower inten-sity of taphonomic alteration, undisturbed brachiopodfloatstones and monotypic coral aggregations (Retio-phyllia framestones) were preserved. This stage istermed as a deeper lagoon below FWWB with benthicassemblages dominated by stenohaline taxa.Patch-reef and biostrome-like areas played severalroles in the carbonate production. They trapped and/orstabilized mostly fine-grained sediments, formed thesites of automicrite precipitation, and hosted a rela-tively diverse spectrum of carbonate-secreting organ-isms. On the one hand, taphonomic processes leadingto precipitation of automicritic crusts probably stabi-lized and enhanced preservation potential of coralcolonies. The presence of automicrite and encrusta-tions (foraminifers) in intra-skeletal coral cavitiesindicates their post-mortem origin. On the other hand,corals are commonly preserved in parautochthon-ous deposits (MF 9) with signs of storm reworking(Fig. 175) and substantial bioerosion. It is not easy todistinguish between these two interrelated destruction-al factors and evaluate which was more important indestroying coral thickets. In some beds, there isevidence of extensive degradation of in-situ corals bybivalve macroborings (Fig. 51, Fig. 66). There is apositive correlation between the intensity of bioerosionand the degree of fragmentation of corals. In frame-stones (MF 8) with a low proportion of fragmentedcorals, the intensity of bioerosion is low in contrast tobio-floatstones with micritized corals (MF 9). It ispossible that the higher activity of bioeroders related tolocal fluctuations in nutrient supply or turbidity madecorals more susceptible to the destruction by stormactivity (Hallock and Schlager 1986; Hallock 1988;Perry 1999). This can be confirmed by the fact that theregeneration potential of epithecate corals (Roniewiczand Stolarski 1999) is relatively low due to a lack of anedge-zone (tissue covering the external surface andrepairing injuries).

3. In the upper part of the large-scale sequence, imme-diately below the terminal unconformity, mudstonesand stromatolitic mudstones are dominant amongvarious facies types (Fig. 15B). At this time, overmost of the area, mudstones, laminated mudstones andmudstones with poorly diverse microfauna (ostracods,foraminifers) prevailed (Fig. 17C). However, it hasbeen established that typical peritidal features (e.g.fenestrae, desiccation, evaporates) can also develop in

non-tidally influenced environments, e.g. fluctuationsin sea level may be caused by wind activity orseepages in back-barrier lagoons (Tucker and Wright1990).

Depositional environment

The spatial arrangement of facies types along the depth-related environmental gradients points to the importanceof water energy as one of the main control factorsinfluencing their distribution patterns. Long-term waveenergy and possibly tidal currents influenced sedimentcomposition and fabric in skeletal and oolithic banksabove the fair-weather wave base. However, the absenceof large-scale barrier-bank complexes and small thick-nesses are indicative of a relatively shallow depth level ofthe FWWB. During episodic storm events, in addition ofsubstantial overprint of shoreface setting, areas below thefair-weather wave base were influenced by erosion, rapidburial and redeposition of sediment by storm waves andcurrents. The main biologic carbonate production tookplace below the fair-weather wave base, where coralpatch-reef/biostrome assemblages and level-bottom bent-hic assemblages were living. The distribution of macro-benthic taxa can be correlated similarly with depth in asimplified scheme. This pattern is visible in the ordinationof samples and taxa in the DCA, where trends related towater energy level, substrate stability and salinity can beinferred. This view about the position of coral-patch reefsdiffers from that in the depositional model of Michalik(1982), where coral patch-reefs are situated in the area ofmain wave activity. However, phaceloid growth mor-phology, sedimentologic (mud baffling, structures indi-cating storm activity) and taphonomic data (preservationstate) are indicative that low-energy conditions in thevicinity of the storm wave base were their main preferredhabitat.

On this spatial scale of analysis, facies patterns aretherefore typical of ramp morphologies, where energygradients are a consequence of gradual depth changes andhigher production is limited to low-energy setting belowFWWB in mid-ramp position (Burchette and Wright1992). This can be a consequence of several factorsrelated to the dominance of destructive taphonomicprocesses (high rate of degradation due to bioerosionand storm activity, e.g. Kuss 1983; Bernecker et al. 1999),perhaps the ecology of frame-building organisms (ac-cording to Stanton and Fl�gel 1987, branching retiophyl-lid corals mostly did not build rigid wave-resistantframework that could withstand the highest wave activity,but there are contradictory opinions, see Piller 1981;Sch�fer 1984; Sch�fer and Senowbari-Daryan 1981),environmental restriction/instability of Fatric intra-shelfsetting leading to poor species richness (Michal�k 1982),and/or slow subsidence or slow eustatic sea level rise(limited accommodation space). A comparable deposi-tional model was developed for the lower part of theK�ssen Formation (Kuss 1983). However, due to the

100

increase of the accommodation potential with relative sealevel rise in the Upper Rhaetian, large-scale patch-reefsdeveloped at distally-steepened ramps at the K�ssenBasin margin or formed isolated structures within theK�ssen Basin (Stanton and Fl�gel 1995). This is incontrast to the Fatric Unit, where the thickness of coralpatch-reefs/biostromes attains maximally 4–5 m.

Given the abundant evidence of storm-reworking inthe Fatra Formation, this intra-platform setting can beinterpreted as storm-dominated. Although a typical tem-pestitic succession (Aigner 1982, 1985), including hori-zontal, hummocky-cross and ripple stratification, is most-ly not preserved, several consistent features, such aserosional boundaries and grading associated with micriticfabric are indicative of storm origin. The evaluation oftidal activity is problematic and remains inconclusive atthis point. Due to well-known low preservation potentialof inter-supratidal deposits in modern seas, the absenceof some typical tidal structures (e.g. herringbone cross-stratification) cannot be directly taken at face value. Ina traditional model, the depositional setting of shallowepeiric seas is supposed to be essentially tideless due tobottom friction dampening tidal range. However, Prattand James (1986) developed a model of a tide-dominatedcarbonate platform, based on assumptions that tidal heightincreases with increasing continental shelf area (Klein andRyer 1978; Cram 1979); bottom friction is important onlyif there is substantial turbulence in the bottom layer andtidal currents themselves directly create the sea-floortopography.

In general, high variation in distribution of shallowwater facies types and paleogeographic data (relativelyrestricted intra-shelf position) indicate that environmentalconditions in respect to water energy, salinity or waterturbidity were relatively unstable and ecologically re-stricted. This is supported by low or moderate diversity ofboth level-bottom and patch-reef/biostrome assemblagesin comparison to those in the Eastern Alps (Golebiowski1991) or dominance of eurytopic taxa (Michal�k 1979,1982).

Conclusions

21 microfacies types of the Rhaetian Fatra Formationsupported by a cluster analysis represent a storm-domi-nated shallow environment. Main components are bi-valves, gastropods, brachiopods, echinoderms, corals,foraminifers and red algae, ooids, intraclasts and peloids.The typical feature is the considerable lateral faciesvariation. Thus the depositional environment consisted ofa wide spectrum of facies types, from peritidal flats/islands with algal or microbial mats, skeletal and ooliticbanks and bars, open or restricted lagoons to small-scalecoral biostromes and patch-reefs. Along the depth-relatedenvironmental gradient primarily linked to water energy,they form 4 facies associations corresponding to a peri-tidal setting, high-energy shoreface (above fair-weatherwave base), shallow subtidal setting above normal storm

wave base and shallow subtidal setting above maximumstorm wave base.

The distribution and preservation of components weremainly influenced by the position of base level (FWWB),storm activity and differences in rate of biogenic carbon-ate production between individual settings. Water depthsobviously remained very shallow throughout the deposi-tion of the Fatra Formation. The main site of coral patch-reef/biostrome carbonate production was situated belowthe fair-weather wave base. Poorly diverse Retiophyllia-dominated coral assemblages form locally autochthonousseveral dm-thick colony aggregations or more commonlyparautochthonous assemblages with evidence of thestorm-reworking and substantial bioerosion by boringbivalves and microborings. Ordination methods indicatethat changes in water energy, substrate stability/turbidityand salinity had substantial effects on the distribution ofbenthic groups.

The reconstruction of the depositional environmentinvolves three stages, differing in the position of relativesea level, namely a) shallow lagoon with tidal flats/skeletal banks and poorly diverse bivalve-dominatedassemblages, b) deeper lagoon below FWWB witheuhaline level-bottom and patch-reef/biostrome assem-blages and c) restricted peritidal environment.

Facies types and assemblages are closely comparableto those known from the uppermost Triassic of theEastern and Southern Alps (Hochalm Member of theK�ssen Formation or Calcare di Zu Formation), pointingto similar intra-shelf depositional conditions. The absenceof large-scale patch-reefs and the poor diversity of level-bottom and patch-reef/biostrome assemblages indicate theFatric intra-platform setting was more restricted from theopen ocean than intra-shelf habitats in the Eastern orSouthern Alps at the end of the Triassic.

Acknowledgements This project had started at the Department ofGeology and Paleontology of the Comenius University (Bratislava)and Geological Institute of Slovak Academy of Sciences (Bratisla-va). I am very indebted to J. Michal�k and R. Aubrecht for theirsupervising. I thank also M. MiÐ�k, M. Kov�c, M. Rakffls, J. Schl�gl(Bratislava), J. Sot�k, A. Bend�k (Bansk� Bystrica) and J. FarkaÐ(Ottawa) for their help and encouragement. I am indebted to W.Kiessling (Berlin) and W. Piller (Graz) for critical reviews. I thankF. T. F�rsich and M. Wilmsen (W�rzburg) for discussions andcritical comments on the manuscript and E. Roniewicz (Warszawa)for help with determination of corals. This study has been fundedby the AAPG Grant in Aid 2001 and is a contribution to the IGCPProject 458 - Triassic-Jurassic boundary events.

Appendix

The appendix consists of Fig. 18.

101

102

References

Aigner T (1982) Calcareous tempestites: storm-dominated stratifi-cation in Upper Muschelkalk limestones (Middle Trias, SW-Germany). In: Einsele G, Seilacher A (eds) Cyclic and eventstratification. Berlin-Heidelberg-New York, pp 180–198

Aigner T (1985) Storm depositional systems. Dynamic stratigraphyin modern and ancient shallow marine sequences. LectureNotes Earth Sc 3: 1-174

Aigner T, Hagdorn H, Mundlos R (1978) Biohermal, biostromaland storm-generated coquinas in the Upper Muschelkalk.N Jahrb Geol Pal�ont, Abh 157:42–52

Bacelle L, Bosellini A (1965) Diagrammi per la stime visiva dellacomposizione percentuale nelle rocce sedimentaire. Ann UnivFerrara, Sci Geol Paleont 1:59–62

Ball MM (1967) Carbonate sand bodies of Florida and theBahamas. J Sedim Petrol 37: 556–591

Bernecker M, Weidlich O, Fl�gel E (1999) Response of Triassicreef coral communities to sea-level fluctuations, storms andsedimentation: evidence from a spectacular outcrop. Facies40:229–280

Borza K (1975) Mikroproblematika aus der oberen Trias derWestkarpaten. Geol Zb Geol Carpath 26: 199–236

Burchette TP, Wright VP (1992) Carbonate ramp depositionalsystems. Sedim Geol 79:3-57

Cram JM (1979) The influence of continental shelf width on tidalrange: paleoceanographic implications. J Geol 87:441–447

Duffin CJ, Gadzicki A (1977) Rhaetian fish remains from the TatraMountains. Acta Geol Polon 27: 333–348

Dullo WC (1980) Pal�ontologie, Facies und Geochemie derDachsteinkalke (Obertrias) im s�dwestlichen Ges�use, Steier-mark, sterreich. Facies 2:55–122

Dunham RJ (1962) Classification of carbonate rocks according todepositional texture. Mem AAPG 1:108–121

Ehses HH, Leinfelder RR (1988) Laterale und vertikale Fazies-entwicklung der Rh�t/Unterlias-Sedimentation im Wallberg-Blankenstein-Gebiet (Tegernsee, Nrdliche Kalkalpen). MainzGeowiss Mitt 17: 53–94

Enos P, Samankassou E (1998) Lofer cyclothems revisited (LateTriassic, Northern Alps, Austria). Facies 38: 207–228

Embry AF, Klovan JE (1972) Absolute water depth limits of LateDevonian paleoecological zones. Geol Rund 61:672–686

Fischer AG (1964) The Lofer cyclothems of the alpine Triassic.Kansas Geol Surv Bull 169: 107–149

Fl�gel E (1972) Mikroproblematika in D�nnschliffen von Trias-Kalken. Mitt Ges Geol Bergbaustud 21:957–988

Fl�gel E (1981) Paleoecology and facies of Upper Triassic reefs inthe Northern Calcareous Alps. In: Toomey DF (ed) Europeanfossil reef models. SEPM Spec Publ 30: 291–359

Fl�gel E (2002) Triassic reef patterns. In: Kiessling W, Fl�gel E,Golonka J (eds) Phanerozoic reef patterns. SEPM Spec Publ72:391–463

Fl�gel E, Kiessling W (2002) Patterns of Phanerozoic reef crises.In: Kiessling W, Fl�gel E, Golonka J (eds) Phanerozoic reefpatterns. SEPM Spec Publ 72:691–733

Gaffey SJ (1983) Formation and infilling of pits of marine ooidsurfaces. J Sedim Petrol 53: 193–208

Garrett P (1970) Phanerozoic stromatolites – non-competitiveecologic restriction by grazing and burrowing animals. Science169:171–173

Gawlick, HJ (2000) Pal�ogeographie der Ober-Trias Karbonattplat-form in den Nordlichen Kalkalpen. Mitt Ges Geol Bergbaustud sterr 44: 45–95

Gadzicki A (1971) Megalodon limestones in the subtatric Rhaetianof the Tatra Mts. Acta Geol Polon 21:387–398

Gadzicki A (1974) Rhaetian microfacies, stratigraphy and facialdevelopment in the Tatra Mts. Acta Geol Polon 24: 17–96

Gadzicki A (1983) Foraminifers and biostratigraphy of UpperTriassic and Lower Jurassic of the Slovakian and PolishCarpathians. Palaeont Polon 44: 109–169

Gadzicki A, Michal�k J, Planderov� E, S�kora M (1979) An UpperTriassic—Lower Jurassic sequence in the Kr�na nappe (WestTatra Mountains, West Carpathians, Czechoslovakia). Z�pKarp, Geol 5: 119–148

Golebiowski R (1991) Becken und Riffe der alpinen Obertrias—Lithostratigraphie und Biofazies der Kossener Formation.Exkursionen Jungpal�ozoikum und Mesozoikum, sterr, sterrPal�ont Gesell, pp 79–119

Haas J, Kov�cs S, Krystyn L, Lein R (1995) Significance of LatePermian-Triassic facies zones in terrane reconstructions in theAlpine-North Pannonian domain. Tectonophysics 242:19–40

Hallam A (1996) Recovery of the marine fauna in Europe after theend-Triassic and early Toarcian mass extinctions. In: Hart MB(ed) Biotic recovery from mass extinction events. Geol SocLond Spec Publ 102: 231–236

Hallam A (2002) How catastrophic was the end-Triassic massextinction? Lethaia 35:147–157

Hallam A, Wignall PB (1997) Mass extinctions and their aftermath.Oxford Univ Press, Oxford, 320 pp

Hallock P (1988) The role of nutrient availability in bioerosion:consequences to carbonate buildups. Palaeogeogr, Palaeocli-matol, Palaeoecol 63:275–291

Hallock P, Schlager W (1986) Nutrient excess and the demise ofcoral reefs and carbonate platforms. Palaios 1:389–398

Hardie LA (1996) Secular variation in seawater chemistry: anexplanation for the coupled secular variation in the mineralo-gies of marine limestones and potash evaporites over the past600 m.y. Geology 24:279–283

Hill MO, Gauch HG Jr (1980) Detrended correspondence analysis:an improved ordination technique. Vegetatio 42:47–58

Hine AC (1977) Lily Bank, Bahamas: history of an active oolitesand shoal. Journal Sedim Petrol 47:1-25

Hine AC, Wilber RJ, Neumann AC (1981) Carbonate sand bodiesalong contrasting shallow bank margins facing open seaways inNorthern Bahamas. AAPG Bull 65:261–290

Inden RF, Moore CH (1983) Beaches. In: Scholle PA, Bebout DG,Moore CH (eds) Carbonate depositional environments. AAPGMemoir 33:211–265

Kazmierczak J, Colemn ML, Gruszczynski M, Kempe S (1996)Cyanobacterial key to the genesis of micritic and peloidallimestones in ancient sea. Acta Palaeont Polon 41:319–388

Kenkel NC, Orl�ci L (1986) Applying metric and nonmetricmultidimensional scaling to ecologic studies. Some new results.Ecology 67:919–928

Kidwell SM, Bosence DWJ (1991) Taphonomy and time-averagingof marine shelly faunas. In: Allison PA, Briggs DEG (eds)Taphonomy: Releasing the data locked in the fossil record.Plenum Press, New York, pp 115–129

Klein G De V, Ryer TA (1978) Tidal circulation patterns inPrecambrian, Paleozoic, and Cretaceous epeiric and mioclinalshelf seas. Geol Soc Am Bull 89:1050–1058

Kobluk DR, Risk MJ (1977) Micritization and carbonate-grainbinding by endolithic algae. AAPG Bull 61:1069–1082

Kochanov� M (1967) Zur Rhaet-Hettang-Grenze in den West-karpaten. Sb Geol Vied, Z�p Karpaty 7:7-102

Kołodziej B (1997) Boring Foraminifera from exotics of the�tramberk-type limestones (Tithonian-Lower Berriasian, PolishCarpathians). Ann Soc Geol Polon 67:249–256

Kowalewski M, G�rs K, Nebelsick JH, Oschmann W, Piller WE,Hoffmeister AP (2002) Multivariate hierarchical analyses ofMiocene mollusk assemblages of Europe: paleogeographic,

Fig. 18 Dendrogram of Q-mode cluster analysis including samplenumbers and microfacies types. Microfacies types 2 (intraclasticbreccia) and 11 (Bio-rudstones/grainstones with bimodal sorting)were recognized additionally according to fabric criteria. Explana-tions of the symbols: The capital letter designates the locality (D –DedoÐova—Frckov, S – Sviniarka – Mal� Zvolen, B – Belianska –BoriÐov, BP – Bystr� potok – Ruomberok, R – R�ztoky –Nolcovo) and the number designated the bed number

103

paleoecological, and biostratigraphic implications. Geol SocAm Bull 114: 239–256

Kuss J (1983) Faziesentwicklung in proximalen Intraplatform-Becken: Sedimentation, Pal�kologie und Geochemie derK�ssener Schichten (Ober-Trias, N�rdlichen Kalkalpen). Facies9:61–172

Lakew T (1990) Microfacies and cyclic sedimentation of the UpperTriassic (Rhaetian) Calcare di Zu (Southern Alps). Facies 22:187–232

Lescinsky HL (2001) Epibionts. In: Briggs DEG, Crowther PR(eds) Palaeobiology II. Blackwell Sc, Oxford, pp 460–464

Michal�k J (1973) Pal�ogeographische Studie des R�ts der Kr�na-Decke des Str�ov-Gebirges und einiger anliegender Gebiete.Geol Zb Geol Carpath 24: 123–140

Michal�k J (1974) Zur Pal�ogeographie der Rh�tische Stufe desweslichen Teiles der Kr�na-Decke in der West-Karpaten. GeolZb Geol Carpath 25: 257–285

Michal�k J (1975) Genus Rhaetina Waagen, 1882 (Brachiopoda) inthe Uppermost Triassic of the West Carpathians. Geol Zb GeolCarpath 26: 47–76

Michal�k J (1977) Pal�ogeographische Untersuchungen der Fatra-Schichten (Kossen - Formation) des nordlichen Teiles desFatrikums in der Westkarpaten. Geol Zb Geol Carpath 28:71-94

Michal�k J (1979) Paleobiogeography of the Fatra-Formation of theUppermost Triassic of the West Carpathians. Paleont Konf 77,Charles University, Prague, pp 25–39

Michal�k J (1980) A paleoenvironmental and paleoecologicalanalysis of the West Carpathian part of the Northern Tethyannearshore region in the Latest Triassic time. Riv Ital Paleont 85:1047–1064

Michal�k J (1982) Uppermost Triassic Short-Lived Bioherm Com-plexes in the Fatric, Western Carpathians. Facies 6: 129–146

Michal�k J (1985) Bystr� Potok. Litofaci�lny v�voj r�tskehosfflvrstvia. In: Samuel O, Franko O (eds) Sprievodca k XXV.celoÐt�tnej geologickej konferencii Slovenskej geologickejspolocnosti. Geol. �stav. D. �tfflra, pp 168–170

Michal�k J (1994) Notes on the paleogeography and paleotectonicsof the Western Carpathian area during the Mesozoic. Mitt sterr Geol Gesell 86:101–110

Michal�k J, Gadzicki A (1983) Stratigraphic and environmentalcorrelations in the Fatra- and Norovica Formation (UpperTriassic, Western Carpathians). Schrift Erdwiss Komm 5: 267–276

Michal�k J, Jendrej�kov� O (1978) Organism communities andbiofacies of the Fatra Formation (Uppermost Triassic, Fatric) inthe West Carpathians. Geol Zb Geol Carpath 29: 113–137

Michal�k J, S�kora M (1979) Fatra- und Kopienec-Schichten indem Profil R�ztoky des Nolcovo-Tales in der Grossen FatraGebirge (h�chste Trias-untere Jura des Kr�na-Decke, West-karpaten). Kmetianum, 5:113–133

MiÐ�k M (1997) Stratigraphical and spatial distribution of lime-stones with calcite, chamosite, hematite and illite ooids in theWestern Carpathians. Miner Slov 29: 83–112 (in Slovak withEnglish summary)

Perry CT (1998) Grain susceptibility to the effects of microboring:implications for the preservation of skeletal carbonates. Sedi-mentology 45:39–51

Perry CT (1999) Reef framework preservation in four contrastingmodern reef environments, Discovery Bay, Jamaica. J CoastRes 15:796–812

Perry CT, Bertling M (2000) Spatial and temporal patterns ofmacroboring within Mesozoic and Cenozoic coral reef systems.In: Insalaco E, Skelton PW, Palmer TJ (eds) Carbonateplatform systems: components and interactions. Geol Soc LondSpec Publ 178:33–50

Piller W (1981) The Steinplatte reef complex, part of an UpperTriassic carbonate platform near Salzburg, Austria. In: ToomeyDF (ed) European fossil reef models. SEPM Spec Publ 30: 261–290

Pratt BR, James NP (1986) The St George Group (LowerOrdovician) of western Newfoundland: tidal flat island model

for carbonate sedimentation in shallow epeiric seas. Sedimen-tology 33: 313–343

Rakffls M (1993) Lias ammonites of the West Carpathians. ZapKarpaty Paleont 17:7-40

Raup DM, Sepkoski JJ Jr (1982) Mass extinctions in the marinefossil record. Science 215:1501–1503

Raup DM, Sepkoski JJ Jr (1986) Periodic extinction of families andgenera. Science 231:833–836

Reyment RA, Savazzi E (1999) Aspects of multivariate statisticalanalysis in geology. Elsevier, Amsterdam, 285 pp

Roniewicz E, Michal�k J (1991a) A new Triassic scleractinian coralfrom the High Tatra Mountains (Western Carpathians, Czecho-Slovakia). Geol Carpath 42: 157–162

Roniewicz E, Michal�k J (1991b) Zardinophyllum (Scleractinia)from the Upper Triassic of the Central Western Carpathians(Czecho-Slovakia). Geol Carpath 42: 361–363

Roniewicz E, Michal�k J (1998) Rhaetian scleractinian corals in theWestern Carpathians. Geol Carpath 49:391–399

Roniewicz E, Stolarski J (1999) Evolutionary trends in theepithecate scleractinian corals in the Western Carpathians.Acta Palaeont Polon 44:131–166

Sandberg PA (1983) An oscillating trend in Phanerozoic nonskele-tal carbonate mineralogy. Nature 305:19–22

Sch�fer K (1969) Vergleichs-Schaubilder zur Bestimmung desAllochemgehalts bioklastischer Karbonatgesteine. N JahrbGeol Pal�ont, Monatshefte 1969: 173–184

Sch�fer P (1979) Fazielle Entwicklung und pal�kologische Zo-nierung zweier obertriadischer Riffstrukturen in den N�rdlichenKalkalpen (“Oberrh�t”-Riffkalke, Salzburg). Facies 1: 3–45

Sch�fer P (1984) Development of ecological reefs during the latestTriassic (Rhaetian) of the Northern Limestone Alps. Palaeon-togr Amer 54:210–218

Sch�fer P, Senowbari-Daryan B (1981) Facies development andpaleoecologic zonation of four Upper Triassic patch-reefs,Northern Calcareous Alps near Salzburg, Austria. In: ToomeyDF (ed) European fossil reef models. SEPM Spec Publ 30: 241–259

Schwarzacher W (1948) �ber sediment�re Rhytmik des Dach-steinkalkes am Lofer. Verh Geol Bundes, 10–12: 176–188

Seilacher A (1984) Constructional morphology of bivalves: evo-lutionary pathways in primary versus secondary soft-bottomdwellers. Palaeontology 27:207–237

Shi GR (1993) Multivariate data analysis in palaeoecology andpalaeobiogeography—a review. Palaeogeogr, Palaeoclimatol,Palaeoecol 105: 199–234

Shinn EA (1968) Practical significance of birdseye structures incarbonate rocks. J Sedim Petrol 38: 215–223

Shinn EA (1983) Birdseyes, fenestrae, shrinkage pores, andloferites: a reevaluation. J Sedim Petrol 53:619–628

Simone L (1981) Ooids: a review. Earth Sc Rev 16:319–355Stanley GD (1979) Paleoecology, structure, and distribution of

Triassic coral build-ups in Western North America. UnivKansas Paleont Contr 65: 1–58

Stanley GD Jr (1988) The history of Early Mesozoic reefcommunities: a three-step process. Palaios 3:170–183

Stanley GD Jr, Swart PK (1995) Evolution of the coral-zooxan-thellae symbiosis during the Triassic: a geochemical approach.Paleobiology 21:179–199

Stanley MS, Hardie LA (1998) Secular oscillations in the carbonatemineralogy of reef-building and sediment-producing organismsdriven by tectonically forced shifts in seawater chemistry.Palaeogeogr, Palaeoclimatol, Palaeoecol 144:3-19

Stanton RJ Jr, Fl�gel E (1987) Paleoecology of Upper Triassic reefsin the Northern Calcareous Alps: reef communities. Facies 16:157–186

Stanton RJ Jr, Fl�gel E (1989) Problems with reef models: The LateTriassic Steinplatte “reef” (Northern Alps, Salzburg/Tyrol,Austria). Facies 20: 1–138

Stanton RJ Jr, Fl�gel E (1995) An accretionary distally steepenedramp at an intra-shelf basin margin: an alternative explanationfor the Upper Triassic Steinplatte “reef” (Northern CalcareousAlps). Sedim Geol 95: 269–286

104

Strasser A (1986) Ooids in Purbeck limestones (lowermost Creta-ceous) of the Swiss and French Jura. Sedimentology 33: 711–727

Stur D (1859) �ber die K�ssener Schichten in nord-westlichenUngarn. Sitzungsber Akad Wiss, math-nat Kl 38:1006–1024

TomaÐov�ch A (2000) Lagoonal-peritidal sequences in the FatraFormation (Rhaetian): an example from the Velk� FatraMountains (Western Carpathians). Slovak Geol Mag 6:256–259

TomaÐov�ch A (2002) Benthic assemblages and depositionalenvironment in the uppermost Triassic (Rhaetian) of the WestCarpathians (Fatric Unit, Velk� Fatra Mts.). Master of ScienceThesis, Comenius University, Bratislava, pp 1–136

TomaÐov�ch A, Michal�k J (2000) Rhaetian/Hettangian passagebeds in the carbonate development in the Kr�na Nappe (centralWestern Carpathians). Slovak Geol Mag 6:241–249

T�r�k A (1993) Brachiopod beds as indicators of storm events: anexample from the Muschelkalk of southern Hungary. In: P�lfyJ, Vrs A (eds) Mesozoic brachiopods of Alpine Europe.Budapest, pp 161–172

Tucker ME, Wright VP (1990) Carbonate sedimentology. Black-well Sc Publ, Oxford London, 482 pp

TurnÐek D, Dolenec T, Sibl�k M, Ogorelec B, Ebli O, Lobitzer H(1999) Contributions to the fauna (corals, brachiopods) andstable isotopes of the Late Triassic Steinplatte reef/basincomplex, Northern Calcareous Alps, Austria. Abh Geol Bun-desanstalt 56:121–140

Wilkinson BH, Owen RM, Carroll AR (1985) Submarine hy-drothermal weathering, global eustasy, and carbonate polymor-phism in Phanerozoic marine oolites. J Sedim Petrol 55:171–183

Wilson JL (1975) Carbonate facies in geologic history. Springer,Berlin, 471 pp

Wood R (1999) Reef evolution. Oxford Univ Press, 414 ppWurm D (1982) Mikrofazies, Pal�ontologie und Pal�kologie der

Dachsteinriffkalke (Nor) des Gosaukammes, sterreich. Facies6:203–296

Zankl H (1969) Der Hohe G�ll: Aufbau und Lebensbild einesDachsteinkalk-Riffes in der Obertrias des N�rdlichen Kalk-alpen. Abh Senckenberg Naturforsch Ges 519:1–123

105