INTRODUCTION

Granorotalia ‌sublobata ‌Benedetti, Di Carlo & Pignatti, 2011 has been accepted as a foraminifer, characteristic for the lower Eocene marine deposits of Tethys region so far. Benedetti et al. (2011) has introduced this small rotaliid from Cuisian marine deposits of Sicily (Italy), then it has been identified in the Çayraz limestone (Turkey) by Sirel & Deveciler (2017) at the same stratigraphic position. However, the close resemblance to Neorotalia ‌alicantina ‌Colom, 1954 of Lutetian by its outer characteristics, created a suspicion if it also exists in the middle Eocene or not. In this context, the shallow marine limestone at Memlik area (North of Ankara, Turkey) in Orhaniye basin were taken into account for good examples of the mentioned taxon.

GEOLOGICAL SETTING

The Orhaniye basin is located at the collision suture of three continents called Eurasia, Gondwana and Sakarya, respectively (Şengör & Yılmaz 1981; Okay & Tüysüz 1999; Fig. 1A). This collision, which began in the Late Cretaceous, has formed the Orhaniye forearc basin as the northern margin of Haymana-Polatlı basin in Central Anatolia (Koçyiğit 1991). The stratigraphic units in the Orhaniye basin can be divided into two parts such as the basement made up of crystalline complexes, olistostromes and ophiolitic melanges of pre-Campanian, and the sedimentary deposits of Late Cretaceous-Tertiary period (Kazancı & Gökten 1986; Gökten et al. 1988; Koçyiğit 1991; Okay et al. 2019).

Memlik area is located eastern part of Orhaniye basin situated at the North of Ankara (Fig. 1B). Triassic greywacke, Jurassic conglomerate successions, nodular red-grey limestone, pelagic limestone and the ophiolite represent the oldest outcrops in the study area. The Campanian-Maastrichtian marine turbidites are the first sedimentary units filling the basin (Sağurlar & Toker 1990; Koçyiğit 1991; Okay et al. 2019) (Fig. 2). Mostly reddish terrestrial mudstone and conglomerate of Late Paleocene-early Middle Eocene (Lich et al. 2017; Métais et al. 2017; Okay et al. 2019) cover the Cretaceous units. Middle Eocene very shallow/shallow water marine argillaceous limestones represent the youngest Paleogene outcrops in the area (Gökten et al. 1988; Acar 1995; Sirel & Acar 2008; Deveciler 2014; Sirel & Deveciler 2018). Neogene carbonates containing andesite, chert and remnant of the basement rock pebbles cover the preceding successions (Fig. 2). The boundaries between the lithostratigraphic units has partly been affected by various faults caused by the collision tectonics (Figs 2; 3).

The larger foraminifera of Gölbayırı section near Memlik vicinity were previously studied by Deveciler (2014) (Fig. 2). The limestones were attributed to Bartonian stage depending on Alveolina ‌callosa ‌Hottinger, 1960, A. ‌fragilis ‌Hottinger, 1960, A. ‌fusiformis ‌Sowerby, 1850, A. ‌kieli ‌Sirel & Acar, 2008, A. ‌nuttalli ‌(Davies, 1940), A. ‌stercusmuris ‌Mayer-Eymar, 1886 and Nummulites ‌malatyaensis ‌Sirel, 2003 respectively. Regarding to the similar foraminiferal content, Erdoğdu et al. (2021) was reported the same unit from Karyağdı hill in late Lutetian-Bartonian. The equivalent deposits in Orhaniye village were studied by Acar (1995), Sirel & Acar (2008) and Harmandalı (2014) as well. The association here composed by Alveolina ‌tenuis ‌Hottinger, 1960, A.cf.stipes ‌Hottinger, 1960, A. ‌callosa, A. ‌kieli, A. ‌orhaniyensis ‌Acar, 1995, A.aff. violae ‌Checchia-Rispoli, 1905, A. ‌stercusmuris and A. ‌nuttalli indicates an early-middle Eocene period.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This study was carried out from argillaceous limestone samples of Karyağdı Hill, North of Memlik Village (Northern Ankara; Turkey) (Fig. 1B). From bottom to top, limestone color turns into yellow-white from light grey due to the detritic content increase and the bottom has a weak fossilization for having an intense clay deposition (Fig. 3). Three spot samples labeled 20/K1 (40°05’52.4”N, 32°45’26.5”E), 20/K2 (40°05’57.9”N, 32°45’08.6”E) and 20/K3 (40°06’05.8”N, 32°44’50.0”E) were collected from the slope, which had good examples of Granorotalia ‌sublobata with co-existing species of middle Eocene. The paleontological descriptions were based on 82 oriented hard rock thin sections and free samples obtained from the study field. The thin sections and free samples were studied and photographed by stereo and compound binocular microscopes. All the thin sections and free samples described and figured herein are preserved in the MTA, Department of Geological Researches, Ankara,Türkiye.

SYSTEMATIC PALEONTOLOGY

The suprageneric classification adopts Benedetti (2015) and Holzmann & Pawloski (2017). The morphological descriptions are based on Colom (1954), Loeblich & Tappan (1987), Hottinger (2006, 2014), Benedetti et al. (2011), and Sirel & Deveciler (2017). The shallow benthic zones (SBZ) follow Serra-Kiel et al. (1998).

Order‌ ROTALIIDA Delage & Hérouard, 1896Superfamily ‌ Rotalioidea ‌Ehrenberg, 1839Family ‌ Calcarinidae ‌d’Orbigny, 1826Subfamily ‌ Ornatorotaliinae ‌Benedetti, 2015

Genus Granorotalia ‌Benedetti, Di Carlo & Pignatti, 2011d1e479d1-e479-4d1e-879d-1e479d1e479

Granorotalia ‌Benedetti, Di Carlo & Pignatti, 2011: 710. — Benedetti, Di Carlo & Pignatti inSirel & Deveciler 2017: 70.

Neorotalia ‌BermúdezinHottinger, 2014: 154.

Type species

Granorotalia ‌sublobata ‌Benedetti, Di Carlo & Pignatti, 2011 by monotypy.

Description

Test is asymmetric biconvex, much swollen and ornamented on ventral side (Figs 4K, M; 6C, D; 7C, E; Benedetti et al. 2011: figs 14b2, e2, g). Test surface is covered by coarse beads and small papillas on both dorsal and ventral side (Figs 4I-M; 6B-D; 7C-E; Benedetti et al. 2011: figs 14a-g). Small pseudospines may appear at the periphery (Figs 6C, E, J, K; 7D, F, G, J, L; Benedetti et al. 2011: fig. 11a, figs 13d-e). Chambers are arranged involute low trochospiral and may become evolute at the last whorl on the dorsal side (Figs 4I, L; 6B, E, M; 7F, J, L, N; Benedetti et al. 2011: figs 11a, c, 14b1, e1). Sutures on the last whorl are slightly depressed and generate interlocular space leading to a simple intraseptal canal (Figs 6A, H; 7A, G, I, O; Benedetti et al. 2011: figs 11b, d-e). Solid pillars are pierced by vertical canals (funnels) (Figs 6E-G, I-N; 7B, F, H, J-N; Benedetti et al. 2011: figs 11a, c, 13a-f). Tooth plate covers the base of the chamber lumen, also it produces spiral canal (Figs 6H; 7I). Wall calcareous, perforate and lamellar in pillars, aperture interiomarginal. Connection between chambers is provided by single intercameral foramina (Fig. 6H).

Discussion

Granorotalia is a simple rotaliid with asymmetric biconvex test, granulated surface on both dorsal and ventral side, small pseudospines emerging from the periphery. It was first described by Benedetti et. al. (2011) with Ornatorotalia (type species: O. ‌spinosa ‌Benedetti, Di Carlo & Pignatti, 2011 [Benedetti et al. 2011: 705]; Fig. 4G, H) from Cuisian deposits of Monte Bosco formation. Both are common in some generic charateristics, yet Ornatorotalia has spines with spinal canals (only see in O. ‌spinosa), well developed radial and bifurcate intraseptal canals connected to the marginal openings (canal orifices) (Benedetti et al. 2011: figs 4.g-h, 7.a1-2-d; Sirel & Deveciler 2017: 69-70, figs 5A, C, pl. 2, figs 4-7, 9, 11, pl. 3, figs 1, 5). Also it differs from Neorotalia ‌Bermúdez, 1952 (type species: Rotalia ‌mexicana ‌Nuttall, 1928, synonym of ?Rotalia ‌burdigalesis ‌d’Orbigny, 1852 in Hayward et al. 2022; Fig. 4A-C) and Pararotalia ‌Le Calvez, 1949 species (type species: Pararotalia ‌inermis ‌(Terquem, 1882) inLe Calvez [1949: 32]; Fig. 4D-F) by having granules (papillas and beads) on both dorsal and ventral sides.

Hayward et al. (2024) have transferred Granorotalia and Ornatorotalia to Pararotaliinae subfamily under Calcarinidae family. Calcarinidae mostly represents well-developed canaliculated spine bearing taxa with elaborated canal system (Loeblich & Tappan 1987; Holzmann & Pawlowski 2017). Granorotalia and Ornatorotalia can be related to Calcarinidae for having pustulated surface, true spine with canals or hallow pseudospines, pillars pierced by funnels, spiral and interseptal canals, but they are different from the members of Pararotalinae due to their generic elements. Therefore, Ornatorotaliinae subfamily has been adopted for low trochospiral coiling with coarse pustules, and the other mentioned characteristics.

Granorotalia ‌sublobata ‌Benedetti, Di Carlo & Pignatti, 2011d1e806d1-e806-4d1e-806d-1e806d1e806

(Figs 4I-S; 6A-N; 7A-O; 9G[1]; 10L; 11C)

Granorotalia ‌sublobata ‌Benedetti, Di Carlo & Pignatti, 2011: 715, figs 11a-e, 12a-b, 13a-f, 14a-h. — Benedetti et al. 2018: 86, figs 7.H-7.K, 8.A-8.C. — Sirel & Deveciler 2017: 70, pl. 2, fig. 15, pl. 3, figs 10-17.

Pararotalia ‌viennoti – Reiss & Merling 1958: pl. 3, fig. 5.

Rotalia sp. 8 – Samuel et al. 1972: pl. XLVII, figs 1-4.

Neorotalia ‌alicantina – Hottinger 2014: pl. 8.1, figs 1-12, 16-27.

Description

Test is much convex on ventral side than the dorsal side (Figs 6D; 7C). Diameter is between 0.65-1.146 mm and the axial thickness is 0.43-0.7 mm. The ratio of (d/t-diameter/thickness) ranges from 1.51 to 1.63. Small spheric proloculus (0.0147-0.0265 mm in diameter) is followed by subrectangular chambers arranging in three (in a 0.65 mm diameter) and four (in a 1.04 mm diameter) regular coiled whorls (Figs 6A; 7A, G, O). There are 12-13 chambers at the last whorl of grown specimens (Figs 6A; 7A; Benedetti et al. 2011: figs 11b, d-e). Both dorsal and ventral sides filled with pillars (Figs 6E-H, I-N; 7B, F-O). It has intraseptal, spiral and vertical canals (funnels) (Figs 6A, E-N; 7A-B, F-O).

Remarks

One specimen in Reiss & Merling (1958: pl. 3, fig. 5) resembles to G. ‌sublobata rather than Pararotalia ‌viennoti ‌(Greig) owing to the mentioned generic characteristics above. Pararotalia supposed to have smooth dorsal and ventral surface with a solid and undivided umbilical plug unlike the specimens in Reiss & Merling (1958).

Four specimens from Ovčiarsko village (Žilina/Slovakia) in (Samuel et al. 1972; Fig. 6K-N) defined as Rotalia sp. 8, are identical to G. ‌sublobata for their pseudospine, pillars and funnels.

Neorotalia ‌alicantina ‌Colom, 1954 in Hottinger (2014) are not close to Neorotalia possessing different generic characteristics (also see in Benedetti et al. [2018: 86]). However, they are very close to G. ‌sublobata related to the similar lateral, equatorial and axial features.

Additionally, one isolated specimen in Benedetti (2015: text-fig. 1, figs 1-3) was left out from the synonym because of the well-developed spines seeing in Ornatorotalia ‌spinosa (Fig. 4G-H). The axial sections of G. ‌sublobata in Samuel et al. (1972: pl. XLVII, fig. 1), Benedetti et al. (2011: fig. 11a, 13e), Sirel & Deveciler (2017: pl. 3, fig. 13), and Benedetti et al. (2018: fig. 8A) were illustrated short spine-like (pseudospine) structures rather than a canaliculate true spine.

Stratigraphic distribution

G. ‌sublobata was created first in Cuisian limestone deposits in Monte Bosco formation, Sicily-Italy and it was identified in the same stratigraphic position from Haymana-Turkey (Benedetti el al. 2011; Sirel & Deveciler 2017). However, it was previously figured under different names in Middle Eocene of Nitzana, Israel (Reiss & Merling 1958) and West Carpatian from Slovakia (Samuel et al. 1972). Although 27 figures in pl. 8.1 in (Hottinger 2014) are identical to G. ‌sublobata, the stratigraphic position and locality of the samples were left unclear.

In this study, G. ‌sublobata has been found in early Lutetian (SBZ 13) together with Nummulitescf. malatyaensis (Fig. 8A, B), N. ‌praediscorbinus ‌Schaub, 1981 (Fig. 8C-H), N.praeaturicus ‌Schaub, 1962 (Fig. 8I-K), Nummulites ‌somaliensis ‌Nuttall & Brighton, 1931 (Fig. 8L), Alveolina cf. stipes (Fig. 9A, B), A. ‌stercusmuris (Fig. 9C, D), A. ‌kieli (Fig. 9E, F1, G2), A.cf.levantina ‌Hottinger, 1960 (Fig. 11A, B), Orbitolites ‌cotentinensis ‌Lehmann, 1961 (Fig. 10A-H), Pseudochrysalidina ‌alva ‌(Silvestri, 1939) (Fig. 10J, K), Asterigerina ‌rotula ‌(Kaufmann, 1867) (Fig. 11C-E), Sphaerogypsina ‌globulus ‌(Reuss, 1848) (Fig. 11F), Gyroidinella ‌magna ‌Le Calvez, 1949 (Fig. 11G-I) and Fabiania ‌cassis ‌(Oppenheim, 1896) (Fig. 11J).

BIOSTRATIGRAPHIC AND PALEONTOLOGIC IMPLICATIONS

Serra-Kiel et al. (1998) were first to establish shallow benthic zones (SBZ) for Tethyan Paleocene and Eocene. Serra-Kiel et al. (2016) and Silva-Casal et al. (2021) have recently rearranged the ranges of some taxa between SBZ 10 and 20 by the help of magneto stratigraphy and nannofossil correlations providing from Pyrenean Basin (Spain), Dhofar (Oman) and Socotra Island (Yemen). Also Rodríguez-Pintó et al. (2022) have recalibrated Ypresian-Lutetian boundary by elevating SBZ 12 to bottom of the early Lutetian. The reference distribution of the foraminiferal species for SBZ 13 and SBZ 14 (Fig. 5) has been compiled from the foregoing studies and Schaub (1981), Sirel (2003, 2015), Sirel & Acar (2008), Deveciler (2010, 2014), Sirel & Deveciler (2018), Hadi et al. (2020, 2024).

A.stercusmuris, A. ‌rotula, G. ‌magna and F. ‌cassis was accepted as a typical association for Bartonian by Sirel (2003, 2015) and Sirel & Acar (2008). However, this fauna was offered for an early to late Eocene range after Silva-Casal et al. (2021). Therefore, the biostratigraphic position of the studied samples was determined as middle Eocene (SBZ 13) by the last appearance of N. ‌praediscorbinus, and the first appearance of A. ‌munieri ‌Hottinger, 1960, A. ‌fusiformis, A. ‌nuttalli (Fig. 5). On the other hand, Deveciler (2014) identified the same limestones as Bartonian by describing A. ‌fragilis, A. ‌fusiformis and N. ‌malatyaensis from Gölbayırı.

Hottinger (1960) was created four elongated fusiform species A. ‌stipes, A. ‌tenuis from lower Lutetian, A. ‌munieri from middle Lutetian and A. ‌fragilis from Bartonian respectively. Three samples illustrated in Deveciler (2014: pl. I, fig. 3, pl. 2, figs 2, 5) clearly resemble to A. ‌munieri of SBZ 14 rather than A. ‌fragilis for their index of elongation, slightly elongated spherical proloculus and whorls count in the same diameter. Also the results in Silva-Casal et al. (2021) support the presence of A. ‌fusiformis in the middle Lutetian (SBZ 14). A. ‌nuttalli appears in the lower boundary of middle Lutetian (SBZ14) at Gölbayırı section together with A. ‌munieri and A. ‌fusiformis. A. ‌nuttalli was defined in Bartonian with N. ‌perforatus by Deveciler (2010) before, and it was found in lower Lutetian outcrops of Suçınak section (Dinar, Turkey) by Bozkurt et al. (2023) recently. The presence of A. ‌callosa (Deveciler 2014: pl. 3, figs 1-4) with the forgoing SBZ 14 association in Gölbayırı section is also noteworthy, because it was identified only in SBZ 13 from a stratigraphic section near Orhaniye village (Acar 1995; Sirel & Acar 2008). Moreover, N. ‌malatyaensis in Deveciler (2014) was left open since it doesn’t completely match with the original figures and the type description in (Sirel 2003). As a consequence, the samples illustrated in (Deveciler 2014) was evaluated as belonging to lower middle Lutetian (SBZ 14).

The two alveolinid species found together with G. ‌sublobata is discussed as follow. Two alveolinid samples in (Fig. 9A, B) are similar to A. ‌stipes ‌ (Hottinger 1960: 163) with their axial diameter, index of elongation and tight coiling but have an ovoid proloculus just as A. ‌fragilis. Bozkurt et al. (2023: fig. 8c-e) illustrated the same specimens in lower Lutetian from Dinar vicinity. The samples are left open herein since they don’t have a typical spherical proloculus like A. ‌stipes. Also two other incomplete axial sections in Figure 11A, B are defined as A.cf. levantinafor having large proloculus and tight coiling.

The major issue encountered in this study regarding Granorotalia is to examine two identical species in Lutetian. Granoro­­talia sublobata is comperable with Neorotalia alicantinaColom (1954: pl. 6, figs 8-12; Fig. 4N-S) for similar asymmetric biconvex test with spiny periphery (Colom 1954: 165), equatorial and axial diameters, numerous small and coarse granules (beads and papillas) on both dorsal and ventral side and evolute planispiral coiling on the dorsal side of the last whorl. On the other hand, N. ‌alicantina doesn’t carry the generic characteristics of Neorotalia such as smooth dorsal and ornamented ventral side with one solid umbilical plug (Fig. 4A-C). This issue arises a question mark on the validity of N. ‌alicantina.

There is an enigma over earlier defined rotaliids because of the inadequate internal material. They can only be divided into the groups by their external structures. In this context, G. ‌sublobata and N. ‌alicantina are similar regarding their test coiling, ventral, dorsal and peripheral characteristics. This similarity may even have led Serra-Kiel et al. (1998: 289) to illustrate the stratigraphic distribution of N. ‌alicantina between SBZ10-13? However, due to the foregoing issue they can not be combined under one taxon for now. An emendation to N. ‌alicantina depending on the type locality is needed to make a reasonable comparison for further studies.

Although the Cuisian specimens from Çayraz section in (Sirel & Deveciler 2017) are overly smaller in size than those of Samuel et al. (1972) and Benedetti et al. (2011) there are no significant differences in terms of the test shape, count of whorls and subrectangular chambers. The geographic distribution seems limited to western and central Tethys, however it may have spread over a wider area in the Eocene shallow marine strata.

CONCLUSION

Granorotalia ‌sublobata is discussed regarding its biostratigraphy and the systematic paleontology. It was detected in Cuisian deposits from Italy and Turkey initially. For the first time, it was found in the early Lutetian (SBZ 13) limestones of Karyağdı Hill with the associated fauna such as N.cf. malatyaensis, N. ‌praediscorbinus, N.praeaturicus, N. ‌somaliensis, A. cf. stipes, A. ‌stercusmuris, A. ‌kieli, A.cf.levantina, O. ‌cotentinensis, P. ‌alva, A. ‌rotula, S. ‌globulus, G. ‌magna, F. ‌cassis. The upper boundary corresponds to lower middle Eocene (SBZ 14) with A. ‌munieri, A. ‌fusiformis and A. ‌nuttalli from Gölbayırı section. On the other hand, G. ‌sublobata and Neorotalia ‌alicantina share common characteristics like asymmetric biconvex test, much swollen ventral side, spiny (pseudospine) periphery, their diameters and numerous granules (beads and papillas) all over the test surface. It is also clear that N. ‌alicantina doesn’t have a smooth dorsal side and a solid plug filled the umbilical cavity just as in Neorotalia. It is possible that these two species would be the synonyms of each other, but the inadequate description of N. ‌alicantina prevents such a new combination. As the final consequence, G. ‌sublobata has a range from Cuisian to early Lutetian around Mediterranean province, however it hardly needs a investigation regarding the taxonomic controversies with N. ‌alicantina.

Acknowledgements

This study was carried out as a part of the final graduation project of two undergraduate students. A poster presenting some results was exibited in 73. Geological Congress of Turkey. In this regard the author would like to thank Ecem Erdoğdu and Nida Kılıç for their valuable contribution to laboratory and field studies. Also the author sincerely thanks to Emmanuel Côtez, Dr Antonino Briguglio and Dr Elena Zakrevskaya for their valuable comments to improve the manuscript.

Fig. 1. — The tectonic map of Turkey (A, modified from Okay & Tüysüz 1999) and location map of the investigation area, Ankara-Türkiye (B).

Fig. 2. — Geological map around Memlik area (it was drawn during the Ankara University Department of Geological Engineering geological mapping field trips). Map: Ali Deveciler and others.

Fig. 3. — The cross-section from Dedeçamı hill to North of the investigation area, showing the boundary relations between Cretaceous and Paleogene units (not to scale). Photo: Ali Deveciler.

Fig. 4. — Type figures of: A-C, Neorotalia ‌mexicana ‌(Nuttall, 1928), lectotype in Loeblich & Tappan (1964); D-F, Pararotalia ‌inermis ‌(Terquem, 1882), hypotype in Loeblich & Tappan (1957); G-H, Ornatorotalia ‌spinosa ‌Benedetti, Pignatti & Di Carlo, 2011, holotype in Benedetti et al. (2011); I-M, Granorotalia ‌sublobata ‌Benedetti, Pignatti & Di Carlo, 2011; I-K, holotype; L, M, paratype in Benedetti et al. (2011); N-S, Neorotalia ‌alicantina ‌Colom, 1954, syntypes in Colom (1954). Scale bar: 0.5 mm.

Fig. 5. — General biostratigraphic distribution of the studied species in Karyağdı Hill and Gölbayırı section from Memlik Village. The grey area represents the stratigraphic position of the studied samples according to the assemblage biozone. Dotted lines show the suggested distribution of the species in the studied area.

Fig. 6. — Granorotalia ‌sublobata ‌Benedetti, Di Carlo & Pignatti, 2011: A, complete equatorial section (20/K1/is/1); B, lateral view of dorsal side (20/K1/is/2); C, later view of ventral side (20/K1/is/2); D, side view of the isolated specimen (20/K1/is/2i); E, axial section (20/K3/B/1); F, axial section (20/K2/1/1); G, axial section (20/K2/2/1); H, transversal section showing tooth plate, interseptal canal-interlocular space and aperture (20/K3/4/1); I, axial section (20/K1/is/4); J, complete axial section (20/K1/is/12). The figures belong to the lower Lutetian limestone of Karyağdı Hill, NE Memlik Village, North of Ankara. K-N were taken from (Samuel et al. 1972), representing lower Lutetian limestone of West Carpatian, Slovakia. Abbreviations: bd, bead; ch, chamber; fn, funnel; fr, foramen; ils, interlocular space; isc, intraseptal canal; pap, papilla; pl, pillar; pr, proloculus; psp, pseudospine; sc, spiral canal; sep, septum; tp, tooth plate. Scale bar: 0.5 mm.

Fig. 7. — Granorotalia ‌sublobata ‌Benedetti, Di Carlo & Pignatti, 2011: A, complete equatorial section (20/K1/is/3); B, axial section (20/K3/A/1); C, side view of the isolated specimen (20/K1/iss/2); D, lateral view of dorsal side (20/K1/iss/2); E, lateral view of ventral side (20/K1/iss/2). The figures belong to the lower Lutetian limestone of Karyağdı Hill, NE Memlik Village, North of Ankara. F, axial section (B.5/6-1); G, centered equatorial section (B.6-5a); H, axial section (B.1/2-5); I, section tangent to the equatorial plane (B.3/4-7); J, axial section (B4/1-2); K, axial section (Ç.8-9); L, axial section (B.6-6); M, axial section (B.6-3a; also see in Sirel & Deveciler [2017: pl. 3, fig. 12]); N, axial section (B.3/4-5; also see in Sirel & Deveciler [2017: pl. 2, fig. 15]); O, oblique equatorial section (B.5/1-2). The figures belong to the Cuisian limestone of Çayraz Section, North of Haymana, South of Ankara (associated fauna were described and figured in Sirel & Deveciler 2017). Abbreviations: bd, bead; ch, chamber; fn, funnel; ils, interlocular space; isc, intraseptal canal; pap, papilla; pl, pillar; pr, proloculus; psp, pseudospine; str, suture; tp, tooth plate. Scale bar: 0.5 mm.

Fig. 8. — A, B, Nummulitescf. malatyaensis ‌Sirel, 2003: A, axial section (20/K3/3/1); B, axial section (20/K3/B/9). C-H, Nummulites ‌praediscorbinus ‌Schaub, 1981: C, axial section (20/K1/7/1); D, axial section (20/K1/4/1); E, axial section (20/K3/1/1); F, complete equatorial section (20/K1/N/15); G, equatorial section (20/K1/N/16); H, lateral view showing radial septal filaments on the surface (20/K1/N/15). I-K, Nummulites ‌praeaturicus ‌Schaub, 1962: I, equatorial section (20/K1/N/11); J, axial section (20/K1/N/5); K, complete equatorial section (20/K1/N/3). L, Nummulites ‌somaliensis ‌Nuttall & Brighton, 1931, equatorial section (20/K1/N/24). All figures from lower Lutetian limestone of Karyağdı Hill, NE Memlik Village, North of Ankara. Scale bar: A-H, 1 mm; I-L, 4 mm.

Fig. 9. — A, B, Alveolinacf. stipes ‌Hottinger, 1960: A, axial section (20/K1/Al/9); B, axial section (20/K1/5/1). C, D, Alveolina ‌stercusmuris ‌Mayer-Eymar, 1886: C, axial section (20/K1/Al/6); D, axial section (20/K1/Al/7). E, Alveolina ‌kieli ‌Sirel & Acar, 2008, almost axial section (20/K2/3/2). F, Alveolina ‌nuttalli ‌(Davies, 1940) (1) with Alveolina ‌munieri ‌Hottinger, 1960 (2), mostly axial sections of the species (M/4/28/1-2). G, Floatstone (according to Dunham 1962) with Alveolina ‌kieli, Granorotalia ‌sublobata ‌Benedetti, Di Carlo & Pignatti, 2011, Alveolina sp., globotextularid type, miliolids and various fossil fragments, axial section of Granorotalia ‌sublobata (1), axial section of Alveolina ‌kieli (2), chyrisalidinid type, and various fossil fragments (20/K2/1/1). A-E, G, from lower Lutetian limestone of Karyağdı Hill; F, collected by Deveciler (2014) from Gölbayırı section NE Memlik Village, North of Ankara. Scale bar: A-E, G, 1 mm; F, 2 mm.

Fig. 10. — Orbitolites ‌cotentinensis ‌Lehmann, 1961: equatorial section showing embryonic stage with protoconch and deuteroconch and sub­rectangular chamberlets (A) and the lateral view of the same specimen (B) (20/K1/is/14); C, transversal section showing the embryonic stage (20/K3/3/1); D, axial section (20/K2/4/2); E, axial section (20/K1/7/5); F, axial section (20/K2/4/5); G, transversal section showing embryonic stage (20/K1/A/4); H, axial section (20/K1/4/2). Stomatorbinid type: I, axial section (20/K1/4/4). J, K, Pseudochrysalidina ‌alva ‌(Silvestri, 1939): J, longitudinal section (20/K1/A/3); K, longitudinal section (20/K1/4/3). L, Floatstone (according to Dunham 1962) with Middle Eocene benthic foraminifera, Granorotalia ‌sublobata ‌Benedetti, Di Carlo & Pignatti, 2011 with Orbitolites sp., miliolid and alveolinid fragments (20/K3/1/1a). All figures from lower Lutetian limestone of Karyağdı Hill, NE Memlik Village, North of Ankara. Scale bar: A-G, I-K, 0.5 mm; H, L, 1 mm.

Fig. 11. — A, B, Alveolinacf. levantina ‌Hottinger, 1960: A, almost axial section (20/K1/6/1); B, transversal section (20/K2/4/7). C-E, Asterigerina ‌rotula ‌(Kaufmann, 1867): C, equatorial section with stellate chambers around umbilicus, and axial section of Granorotalia ‌sublobata ‌Benedetti, Di Carlo & Pignatti, 2011 (20/K3/3/1a); D, axial section (20/K2/4/1); E, axial section (20/K1/1/2). F, Sphaerogypsina ‌globulus ‌(Reuss, 1848), transversal section showing globular test shape (20/K1/C/3). G-I, Gyroidinella ‌magna ‌(Le Calvez, 1949): G, transversal section (20/K3/1/2); H, nearly axial section (20/K3/A/6); I, transversal section (20/K2/2/3). J, Fabiania ‌cassis ‌(Oppenheim, 1896), axial section (20/K1/3/1). K, L, unidentified miliolids: K, centered longitudinal section (20/K1/A/2); L, centered longitudinal section (20/K1/A/5). All figures from lower Lutetian limestone of Karyağdı Hill, NE Memlik Village, North of Ankara. Scale bar: A, B, 1 mm; C-L, 0.5 mm.