The Microfaunistical and Palynological Characteristic of Middle Sarmatian Deposits of Eastern Georgia (Kartli)

Abstract

The section of Sarmatian deposits near village Nadarbazevi (Kartli) from paleontological point of view is one of more interesting on the territory of Eastern Georgia. The complex investigation of the section is realized at first by microfaunistical and palynological methods. The description of associations of foraminifers is given and their change in time is traced. The list of flora is composed according to palynological data and data of study of large remains of plants publish in literature. Three diagrams are given: one microfaunistical and two palynological. The microfaunistical diagram reflects the quantitative distribution of genera of foraminifers in layers of section. One of palynological diagrams is built by landscape-phytocenological method and gives the possibility to trace the changes of area of main vegetational formations in dependence of climatic fluctuations.

Full text

Proc. Georgian Acad. Sci. Biol. Ser. B
Vol. 6, No. 1-2, 2008 Paleobiology
- 57 -
THE MICROFAUNISTICAL AND PALYNOLOGICAL
CHARACTERISTIC OF MIDDLE SARMATIAN DEPOSITS OF
EASTERN GEORGIA (KARTLI)
MAISSURADZE L.1, KOIAVA K.2, SPEZZAFERRI S.3, SHATILOVA I.1, MCHEDLISHVILI
N.1, SHUBITIDZE L.2, STRASSER A. 3
1
Georgian National Muzeum, Institute of Paleobiology,
2
Djanelidze Institute of Geology, koiava_ka@yahoo.com
3
University of Fribourg, Departament of Geosciences, Ch. du Musee 6, 1700 Fribourg,
Switzerland, silvia.spezzaferri@unifr.ch; andreas.strasser@unifr.ch
(Received February 11, 2008)
Abstract
The section of Sarmatian deposits near village Nadarbazevi (Kartli) from
paleontological point of view is one of more interesting on the territory of Eastern Georgia.
The complex investigation of the section is realized at firs by microfaunistical and
palynological methods. The description of associations of foraminifers is given and their
change in time is traced. The list of flora is composed according to palynological data and
data of study of large remains of plants publish in literature. Three diagrams are given: one
microfaunistical and two palynological. The microfaunistical diagram reflects the
quantitative distribution of genera of foraminifers in layers of section. One of palynological
diagram is built by landscape-phytocenological method and gives the possibility to trace
the changes of area of main vegetational formations in dependence of climatic fluctuations.
Key words: Eastern Georgia, Sarmatian, foraminifers, pollen and spores.
Introducltion
On the territory of Eastern Georgia the Sarmatian deposits are widely distributed. They are
represented by three parts: Volynian substage (Lower Sarmatian), Bessarabian substage (Middle
Sarmatian) and Khersonian substage (Upper Sarmartian). The Lower Sarmatian is divided into two
parts and Middle Sarmatian on three parts. On the territory of Eastern Georgia the Lower and
Middle
Sarmatian are built by marine deposits, but Upper Sarmatian, except some regions, is
represented by continental sediments. The mollusks from Eastern Georgia Sarmatian deposits are
learned in details, unlike microfauna, which was investigated sporadically. The works (Koiava
2006,
2006a), devoted to results of micropaleontological study of Sarmatian deposits of Eastern
Georgia were published not long ago. The distribution of foraminifers in time was traced by author,
who used the regularity of this process for stratigraphy.
Till today our knowlege about flora and vegetation of Eastern Georgia of Sarmatian were
founded on data about imprints of leaves (Uznadze, 1965; Chelidze, 1987). From palynological
point
of view they are practically not study. There is only one work of Mtchedlishvili (1953) who
learned the samples from Central part of Eastern Georgia. 28 forms were determined, out of them 3
belonged to cryptogamous plants, 7 – to conifers and 18-to angiosperms. We also have seen all
these
forms in new materials.

Proc. Georgian Acad. Sci. Biol. Ser. B
Vol. 6, No. 1-2, 2008 Paleobiology
- 58 -
Material and Methods
The work is devoted to the results of complex investigation of representatives of marine
(foraminifers) and terrestrial (flora) Sarmatian bios. The samples from Middle Sarmatian deposits
of gorge Nadarbazevi, near station Metekhi (Eastern Georgia, Kartli, region of Kaspi) were
analyzed.
The list of foraminifers from these deposits is given below (Tab.I).
Table 1. The List of Sarmatian Foraminifers
Family Genera Species, subspecies
Elphidiidae
Galloway, 1933
Elphidium
Montfort, 1808
Elphidium macellum (Ficht et Moll.)
Elphidium crispum (Linne)
Elphidium aff. rugosum (d’Orbigny)
Elphidium fichtelianum (d’Orbigny)
Elphidium aculeatum (d’Orbigny)
Elphidium aff. flexuosum (d’Orbigny)
Elphidium aff. mirandum Krash.
Elphidium angulatum (Egger)
Elphidium ukrainicum Krash.
Elphidium reginum (d’Orbigny)
Elphidium hauerinum (d’Orbigny)
Elphidiella,Cushman, 1936 Elphidiella artifex Serova
Nonionidae
Schultze, 1854
Nonion
Montfort, 1808
Nonion bogdanowiczi Voloshinova
Nonion aff. tumidulus Pishvanova
Nonion sp.(1)
Nonion sp.(2)
Porosononion
Putrja in Voloshinova,1958
Porosononion subgranosum (Egger)
Porosononion subgranosum umboelatum
(Bogdanowicz)
Porosononion granosum (d’Orbigny)
Porosononion martkobi (Bogdanowicz)
Porosononion hyalinum (Bogdanowicz)
Porosononion aragviensis (O.Djanelidze)
Miliolidae
Ehrenberg,1939
Cycloforina
Luczkowska,1972
Cycloforina complanata (Gerke et Issaeva)
Cycloforina aff.hauerina (d’Orbigny)
Cycloforina latelacunata (Venglinski)
Sinuloculina
Luczkowska,1972
Sinuloculina consobrina (d’Orbigny)
Sinuloculina consobrina sarmatica (Gerke)
Sinuloculina aff.mayeriana (d’Orbigny)
Varidentella
Luczkowska,1972
Varidentella reussi (Bogdanowicz)
Miliolinella Wiesner,1931 emend.
Luczkowska,1972
Miliolinella sp.
Articulina
d’Orbigny, 1826
Articulina sarmatica (Karrer)
Articulina problema (Bogdanowicz)
Articularia
Luczkowska,1974
Articularia articulinoides (Gerke et Issaeva)
Meandroloculina Bogdanowicz, 1935
Meandroloculina conicocamerale Bogdanowicz
Meandroloculina sp.
Sarmatiella
Bogdanowicz, 1952
Sarmatiella sp.
Ellipsolagenidae
A.Silvestri,1923
Fissurina Reuss,1850 Fissurina sp.1
Fissurina sp.2
From palynological points of view the Nadarbazevi section turned out to be very rich and
interesting. Bellow is given the common lists of flora (Tab. 2), composed by palynological data and
the data of study of large remains of plants of Sarmatian deposits of Kartli (Chelidze, 1979, 1987).
The quantitative composition of separate taxon is given on Tab. 3.

Proc. Georgian Acad. Sci. Biol. Ser. B
Vol. 6, No. 1-2, 2008 Paleobiology
- 59 -
Table 2. The list of taxa of Sarmatian flora determined by macro-remains of plants (m) and
by palynological data (p)
Class Family Species m p
1 2 3 4 5
Briopsida Sphagnaceae Sphagnum sp. p
Lycopodiopsida Lycopodiaceae Lycopodium serratum Tunb. p
Isoetopsida Selaginellaceae Selaginella sp. p
Ophyoglossopsida Ophyoglossaceae Bothrychium sp. p
Polypodiopsida
Osmundaceae Osmunda sp. m p
Schizaeaceae Schizaea sp. p
Anemiaceae Anemia sp. p
Mohria sp. p
Lygodiaceae Lygodium sp. p
Pteridaceae
Cryptogramma sp. p
Pteridacidites longifoliiformis Sh., St. p
Pteris sp.* p
Marsileaceae Marsilea sp. p
Adiantaceae
Anogramma sp. p
Onychium sp. p
Pityrogramma sp. p
Gleicheniaceae
Clavifera sp. p
Gleichenia sp. p
Gleicheniaceae gen.indet. p
Polypodiaceae
Polypodium aureum L. p
Polypodium pliocenicum Ram. p
Polypodium verrucatum Ram. p
Polypodium sp.1-7 p
Polypodium sp. (aff.Cyclophorus sp.) p
Verrucatosporites histiopteroides W.Kr. p
Pyrossia sp. p
Polypodiaceae gen.indet.* p
Hymenophyllaceae Hymenophyllum sp. p
Thyrsopteridaceae Cibotium sp. p
Dicksoniaceae Dicksonia sp p
Cyatheaceae
Alsophyla sp. p
Cyathea sp. p
Hemitelia sp. p
Leiotriletes Naum.* p
Aspleniaceae Asplenium sp. p
Aspidiaceae Cystopteris sp. p
Davalliaceae Microlepia sp p
Filicales fam.indet. p
Ginkgoopsida Ginkgoaceae Ginkgo sp. p
Pinopsida
Podocarpaceae Dacrydium sp. p
Podocarpus sp.* p
Phyllocladaceae Phyllocladus sp. p
Araucariaceae Araucaria sp. p
Pinaceae
Pinaceae
Abies ciliticaeformis N.Mtchedl. p
Abies nordmanniana (Stev.) Spach. p
Abies sp.* p
Cathaya sp. p
Cedrus sauerae N.Mtchedl. p
Cedrus sp.* p

Proc. Georgian Acad. Sci. Biol. Ser. B
Vol. 6, No. 1-2, 2008 Paleobiology
- 60 -
Pinopsida
Keteleeria caucasica Ram. p
Picea minor N.Mtchedl. p
Picea sp.* p
Pinus sp.* m p
Pseudolarix sp. p
Pseudotsuga sp. p
Tsuga aff. canadensis (L.) Carr. p
Tsuga aff. pattoniana Engelm. p
Tsuga sp.* p
Pinaceae gen.indet.* p
Sciadopityaceae Sciadopitys sp. p
Taxodiaceae
Cryptomeria sp. p
Cunninghamia sp. p
Sequoia sp. p
Sequoiadendron sp. p
Taxodium sp. p
Taxodiaceae gen.indet. p
Cupressaceae
Libocedrus salicornioides (Ung.)Heer m
Libocedrus sp. p
Juniperus sp. p
Cupressaceae gen.indet. p
Ephedropsida Ephedraceae Ephedra sp. p
Dicotyledoneae
Myricaceae
Comptonia sp. p
Myrica laevigata (Heer) Sap. m
Myrica sp.1 (cf.M.acuminata Ung.) m
Myrica sp.2 (cf.M.lignitum (Ung.)Sap.) m
Myrica sp. p
Myricaceae gen.indet.* p
Juglandaceae
Carya sp.* p
Engelhardia sp. p
Platycarya sp. p
Pterocarya sp.* p
Juglans sp.* p
Salicaceae Salix sp. m
Betulaceae
Alnus subcordata C.A.M. m
Alnus sp.* m p
Betula sp. p
Carpinus sp.* p
Corylus sp.* p
Fagaceae
Castanea sp. p
Castanopsis sp. (cf. C. echidnocarpa A.DC) m
Castanopsis sp. p
Lithocarpus sp. p
Fagus sp. p
Quercus neriifolia A.Br. m
Quercus sp.* m p
Ulmaceae
Ulmaceae
Celtis sp. p
Ulmus sp.* p
Zelkova sp. p
Ulmaceae gen.indet.* p
Eucommiaceae Eucommia sp. p
Moraceae Moraceae gen.indet p

Proc. Georgian Acad. Sci. Biol. Ser. B
Vol. 6, No. 1-2, 2008 Paleobiology
- 61 -
Dicotyledoneae
Polygonaceae Polygonaceae gen.indet. p
Caryophyllaceae Caryophyllaceae gen.indet. p
Chenopodiaceae Artemisia sp. p
Chenopodiaceae gen.indet.* p
Magnoliaceae
Liriodendron sp. p
Magnolia megafigurata (Krutsch) comb. nov.
Ram. p
Magnolia dianae Ung. m
Magnolia dzundzeana (Pal.) Takht. m
Magnolia sp.1,2* p
Annonaceae Annona sp. p
Lauraceae
Cinnamomum lanceolatum (Ung.) Heer m
Cinnamomum sp. m
Laurus sp. m
Ocotea sp. m
Lauraceae gen.indet. p
Ranunculaceae Ranunculus sp. p
Menispermaceae Menispermum sp. p
Nymphaeaceae
Nuphar sp. p
Nymphaea sp. p
Nymphaeaceae gen.indet p
Cruciferae Cruciferae gen.indet. p
Papaveraceae Papaver sp. p
Platanaceae Platanus sp. p
Hamamelidaceae
Corylopsis sp. p
Disanthus sp. p
Hamamelis sp. p
Fothergilla sp. p
Parrotia sp. p
Sycopsis sp. p
Liquidambar sp. p
Cercidiphyllaceae Cercidiphyllum sp. p
Rosaceae Rosaceae gen.indet. m p
Caesalpiniaceae
Cassia ambigua Ung. m
Cassia sp. m
Podogonium knorrii Heer m
Fabaceae Sophora europaea Ung. m
Fabaceae gen.indet. m p
Geraniaceae Geranium sp. p
Anacardiaceae Rhus sp. p
Hippocastanaceae Aesculus sp. p
Aquifoliaceae Ilex falsani Sap.et Mar. m
Ilex sp.* p
Celastraceae Euonymus sp. p
Staphyleaceae Staphylea sp. p
Rhamnaceae Rhamnus sp.(cf.R.winogradowii) m
Zizyphus sp. m
Vitaceae Parthenocissus sp. p
Tiliaceae Tilia sp.* p
Sterculiaceae Sterculia sp. p
Violaceae Viola sp. p
Myrtaceae Myrtus sp.1,2 m
Myrtaceae gen.indet. m p

Proc. Georgian Acad. Sci. Biol. Ser. B
Vol. 6, No. 1-2, 2008 Paleobiology
- 62 -
Dicotyledoneae
Alangiaceae Alangium sp. p
Nyssaceae Nyssa sp. p
Cornaceae Thelycrania (Cornus) sanguinea (L.)Fourr. m
Cornaceae gen.indet. p
Araliaceae
Aralia sp. p
Dendropanax sp. p
Araliaceae gen.indet. p
Apiaceae Apiaceae gen.indet.* p
Sapotaceae Sapotaceae gen.indet. p
Ebenaceae Diospyros sp. (cf.D.brachysepala A.Br.) m
Symplocaceae Symplocos sp. m p
Apocynaceae Apocynophyllum linearifolium Kol. m
Apocynophyllum sp. m
Oleaceae Fraxinus sp. p
Oleaceae gen.indet. p
Caprifoliaceae Lonicera sp. p
Labiatae Labiatae gen.indet. p
Plantaginaceae Plantago sp. p
Asteraceae Achillea sp.* p
Asteraceae gen.indet. p
Monocotyledoneae
Liliaceae Liliaceae gen.indet. p
Poaceae Poaceae gen.indet.* p
Arecaceae Nypa sp. p
Arecaceae gen.indet. p
Sparganiaceae Sparganium sp. p
Typhaceae Typha sp. p
Artificial taxon Tricolporopollenites wackersdorfensis Thiele-
Pfeiffer. p
* These forms were determined also by Mtchedlishvili (1953).
Table 3. Number of taxons in Sarmatian flora of Eastern Georgia, determined by palynology
(p) and by macro-remains of plants (m)
Systematic
units
The common composition of flora Cryptogamous Gymnosperms Angiosperms
p m p m p m p m
Form 164 35 40 1 32 2 88 32
Genus 116 23 29 1 23 2 64 20
Family 81 19 20 1 9 2 52 16
Class 10 3 5 1 3 1 2 1
As it can be seen from the tables 2, 3 between palynological data and data about the
large remains of plants are big differences. The macrofloras are nearly devoid of ferns and conifers.
At whole the large remains of plants don’t give the correct idea about the composition of these
groups of plants and their part in forest communities. By number of forms the angiosperms
determined by pollen grains also prevail over the number of plants determined by imprints of
leaves. The differences are traced as in composition of deciduous plants and grasses, which pollen
grains are the constant components of palynocomplex, so in composition of some subtropical forms
(
Hamamelidaceae, Alangiaceae
and others). In the same time the large remains of plants give more
full impression about systematic composition of some taxa. Especially about the family
Lauraceae,
whose pollen grains are bad preserved in fossil materials. At whole the data of both

Proc. Georgian Acad. Sci. Biol. Ser. B
Vol. 6, No. 1-2, 2008 Paleobiology
- 63 -
methods added each other, giving possible full idea about character of flora, vegetation and
climate.
Results and Discussion
In section Nadarbazevi the Sarmatian deposits are represented by clays, clayey sandstones
and marls, with interleyers of oolitic sandstones and lumachell full by mollusk fauna. The
sratigraphy and macrofauna were learned by Buleishvili (Buleishvili, 1960) and Siradze (Siradze,
1958). Nevertheless the analysis of all layers of section by help of micropaleontological methods,
newly illustrated the chronology and paleobiological history of development of marine and
terrestrial biocenosis.
The description of section and complexes of foraminifers (from lower part to up) is given
below.
1. The strata of sandstones and sandy clays. In complex of foraminifers are dominated
Elphidium crispum
(L.) 27% and
E.macellum
(F.et M.) 24%, with thick walls of test. Other species
of foraminifers
E.reginum
5%,
E.aff.flexuosum
8%,
E.hauerinum
2%,
Е.aff.rugosum
2%,
Nonion
bogdanowiczi
4% are also big and are rare components of complex. In composition of complex in
equal correlation are
Porosononion subgranosum
15% and
Ostracodae
13%. They have thick
rough, large, but smooth (very rounded) wall of tests (sample 10).
2. Oolitic sandstones with numerous fragments of shells of several species of mollusks.
With big number of specimens is represented the family
Miliolidae
45% (genera:
Cycloforina
12%,
Varidentella
14%,
Sinuloculina
10%,
Miliolinella
9%) and nearly by equal quantity
Elphidium
20% (
E.macellum
8%,
E.aculeatum
5%,
E.aff.flexuosum
2%,
E.hauerinum
3%,
E.aff.rugosum
2%)
and
Porosononion
26% (
P.subgranosum
20% and
P.subgranosum umboelata
6%). In complex
Nonion bogdanowiczi
and
Ostracodae
are represented by 4
% and 5%
(sample 9).
3. The strata of dark-gray sandstones with shell detritus, is characterized by scanty fauna of
foraminifers, in which composition are single
Elphidium macellum, Porosononion subgranosum,
Nonion sp.(1), Nonion sp.(2)
and
Ostracodae
(sample 8).
4. The blue weakly-sandy clays. In composition of complex are
Porosononion
40%
(
P.subgranosum
22%,
P.subgranosum umboelata
10%,
P.martkobi
7%,
Porosononion sp
. 1%),
Elphidium
28% (
E.macellum
8%,
E.fichtelianum
5%,
E.aculeatum
5%.
E.aff.rugosum
6%,
E.reginum
4%),
Nonion
10% (
N.bogdanowiczi
6%,
Nonion sp.(1)
4%) and
Ostracodae
(4-5
species). In complex nearly all species are represented by big number of specimens and in spite of
clayey character of deposits the big tests are dominated, although it is known, that in clays the
fauna
is smaller and more delicate (sample 7).
5. The strata of clay-marl and clayey sandstones with interlayers of lumachell. In complex
of foraminifers are dominated
Porosononion
32% (
P.subgranosum
16%,
P.granosum
7%,
P.martkobi
6%,
Porosononion sp. Nonion
22% (
N.bogdanowiczi
7%,
N.aff.tumidulus
6%,
Nonion
sp.(1
) 4%,
Nonion sp.(2)
5%).The representatives of genus
Elphidium
composed 18%, that is
somewhat less in comparison with mentioned about genera. The species
E.fichtelianum
5%,
E.aff.rugosum
5%,
E.crispum
4% and
E.hauerinum
4% are equally distributed. The big place in
complex is occupied by
Elphidiella artifex
5% and several species of
Ostracodae
22%. The
complex is characterized by: the abundance of specimens of dominate genera
Porosononion
and
Nonion
, their high intraspecific changeability, the diversity of
Ostracodae,
the big sizes of
Elphidium
and
Nonion,
especially of
E.fichtelianum, E.crispum, N.bogdanowiczi, N.aff.tumidulus
(sample 5).
6. The clays with interleyers of sandstones. In complex of foraminifers, in comparison
with previous one, is observed the following peculiarity: the correlation between genera
Elphidium
38% (
E.crispum
10%,
E.macellum
10%,
E.aff.flexuosum
4%,
E.ukrainicum
2%,
E.aff.mirandum

Proc. Georgian Acad. Sci. Biol. Ser. B
Vol. 6, No. 1-2, 2008 Paleobiology
- 64 -
2%,
E.fichtelianum
1%,
E.angulatum
1%) and
Porosononion
24% (
P.subgranosum
10%,
P.subgranosum umboelata
8%,
P.granosum
6%) is changed. The genus
Nonion
composed 8%
which is 1.5 times smaller than in strata 5, beside it is somewhat poorer by species.
Elphidium
artifex
preserved its position also as the big forms of
Ostracodae
(sample 4).
7. Gray-blue sandstone clays. The complex of foraminifers composed from big number of
specimens of
Elphidium
33% (
E.crispum
11%,
E.macellum
10%,
E.aff.rugosum
4%,
E.reginum
2%,
E.aff.flexuosum
2%,
E.fichtelianum
1%,
E.aculeatum
1%),
Porosononion
29%
(
P.subgranosum
14%,
P.subgranosum
umboelata
8%,
P.hyalinum
3%,
P.granosum
2%,
P.martkobi
2%),
Nonion
12% (
N.bogdanowiczi
4%,
N.aff.tumidulus
3%,
Nonion sp.(1)
2%,
Nonion
sp.(2)
1%) and
Elphidiella
6% (
E.artifex
).
Ostracodae
, which composed 20% of complex, are
characterized by abundance of specimens, by diversity of their specific composition and also big
sizes of tests. At whole foraminifers preserved all peculiarities, characteristic for Middle Sarmatian
representatives of
Elphidium
,
Porosononion
and
Nonion
(the sizes, changeability, the abundance of
specimens). The complex also is enriched by new species (sample 3).
8. The sandy clays with interlayers of oolitic sandstones. In complex of foraminifers, in
comparison with preceding one, is enriched by typical Middle Sarmatiam species, as are
Porosononion hyalinum
,
P.aragviensis
,
Articularia
articulinoides
and
Meandroloculina
conicocamerale
. In this complex foraminifers are distributed by following way:
Porosononion
36%
(
P.subgranosum umboelata
13%,
P.subgranosum
11%,
P.hyalinum
10%,
P.aragviensis
2%),
Elphidium
25% (
E.crispum
12%,
E.macellum
5%,
E.fichtelianum
3%,
E.aff.flexuosum
3%,
E.aff.mirandum
2%),
Nonion
14% (
N.bogdanowiczi
4%,
N.aff.tumidulus
4%,
Nonion sp.(1)
3%,
Nonion sp.(2)
3%),
Miliolidae
8% (
Cycloforina latelacunata
3%,
Articularia articulinoides
3%,
Meandroloculina conicocamerale
2%),
Elphidiella artifex
5% and
Ostracodae
12%. The big
number of forms are contained in kernel of oolits and can’t be determinate (sample 2).
9. Blue-gray sandy clays with enclosing of oolits, without fauna. The complex of
foraminifers contains:
Elphidium
38% (
E.crispum
18%,
E.macellum
9%,
E.aff.rugosum
4%,
E.fichtelianum
6%,
E.reginum
1%),
Porosononion
25% (
P.subgranosum umboelata
10%,
P.subgranosum
8%,
P.hyalinum
5%,
P.aragviensis
2%),
Miliolidae
14% (
Cycloforina
latelacunata
5%,
Articularia articulinoides
6%,
Meandroloculina conicocamerale
2%,
Meandroloculina sp
. 1%,
Sarmatiella sp
.1%),
Nonion
6% (
N.bogdanowiczi
2%,
N.aff.tumidulus
2%,
Nonion sp.(1)
2%,
Nonion sp.(2)
2%),
Elphidiella artifex
1% and
Ostracodae
15% (sample 1).
The composition of foraminifers and lithologic peculiarity of deposits of section, indicate
on coastal-shallow character of this plot of Sarmatian basin, in which more eurofaciale and
eurohaline foraminifers (
Elphidium, Porosononion, Nonion, Miliolidae)
and
Ostracodae
were
lived.
The analysis of complexes shows, that the small changes of lithologic composition of
deposits are reflected mainly on the percentage correlation of genera and groups of species and in
small degree on the specific composition of complex (Fig.1). Such nuance is very significant as for
ecology, so for detail subdivision of Sarmatian deposits, which were formed in shallow conditions.
Take into account the character and ecology of species of foraminifers, distributed in this
section it is possible to distinguish following complexes.
Complex A probably was formed near from the coast, in the plot of deposition of coast-grained
sediments. In complex
E.macellum
and
E.crispum
, are dominated, with participation also of
E.fichtelianum
and
E.reginum
. The study of recent (Myers, 1943; Phleger, 1960; Murray, 1973;
Boltovskoy, Wright, 1976; Hansen and Lykke-Andersen, 1976, etc.) and fossil (Bogdanovich,
1947; Krasheninnikov, 1960; Voloshinova, Kuznetsova, 1964, etc.)
Elphidiidae
shows, that the test
of
Elphidium
has delicate, but strong and light construction, which is adapted to shallow conditions.
The
Elphidium
are able to accustom the marine bottom with mobile, not fasten ground, which
underwent the hydrodynamic activity of water. Such conditions were not favorable for other
foraminifers, which formed the zone nearly devoid of competitors.

Proc. Georgian Acad. Sci. Biol. Ser. B
Vol. 6, No. 1-2, 2008 Paleobiology
- 65 -
Complex B had occupied also the coast zone, but somewhat far from mentioned above
zone, where the hydrodynamics activity of water is lower and terrigenous material is better
assorting. Here was arisen the environment favorable for formation the other complex, in which
Porosononion
are dominated, although
Elphidium
are also numerous. The test of
Porosononion
is
less strong, as of
Elphidium,
but the numerous pseudopodiums help to hold on sand bottom and not
bury in ground.
Fig.1.
Genera composition of Foraminifers in Nadarbasevi section.
The durability of
Porosononion
test is reached by formation of additional skeleton either
in
umbilical area (
P.subgranosum umboelata
and
P.hyalinum
) or on whole surface of test
(
P.aragviensis
).
The representatives of
Elphidium
and
Porosononion
nearly fully accustomed the coastal
line of Sarmatian
Sea, because their tests are more stable for living in active zone, where the
competition with other forms is minimum. It is not excepting, that together with mentioned above
factors, the fresh-water character of coastal zone disturbed the distribution of other groups of
microorganisms. By Krasheninnikov (1960) in Sarmatian deposits of Podolya in analogous
conditions the competitors of
Elphidium
are
Cibicides
and
Rotalia.
Complex C was formed farther from coast as previous, in fine-grained sediments, formed
in
quiet
situation.
Porosononion
and
Elphidium,
are dominated again, but the big place in complex
is occupied by the representatives of
Nonion
and
Elphidiella,
which number varies in 13-27%.
Nonionidae
in Middle Sarmatian are changeable. For them the increasing of sizes and number of
chambers on the last whorl is usual. The quantity of specimens, as in all other species, is increased.
Complexes D1, D2 were formed in the condition of oolite-formation and was distributed
in Lower and Middle Sarmatian basins. In this complex together with main genera
Elphidium,
Porosononion, Nonion
, the significant position occupied
Miliolidae
. In Lower Sarmatian complex
D1 they composed 45% and are represented by genera:
Varidentella, Cycloforina, Sinuloculina,
Miliolinella
. The complex D2 was distributed in Middle Sarmatian, where 8% was composed of
Miliolidae
, which are represented by other association (Fig.2). In it composition are genera:
Articularia, Meandroloculina, Sarmatiella
,
Cycloforina,
with very bed preserved big rough thick-
walled tests. Many specimens of foraminifers are covered with white carbonate pellicle, which hide
the details of morphological structure of test. In sediments of sample the remains of
Bryozoa
and
Algae
are seen. The representatives of genera
Articularia, Meandroloculina, Sarmatiella
, were
attached on them.

Proc. Georgian Acad. Sci. Biol. Ser. B
Vol. 6, No. 1-2, 2008 Paleobiology
- 66 -
Complex D1
Complex D2
Fig.2.
The cyclograms for complexes D1, D2.
The big attention attracted the complex of
Ostracodae.
They are presented in all samples,
but in same - in very great number (20-25%). The generic and specific variability of
Ostracodae,
the big number of specimens, between which very large forms with thick walls were dominated,
allows to suppose, that the conditions in Sarmatian basin in studied region were enough favorable,
25% Elphidium:
crispum 12%
fichtelianum 3%
aff.mirandum 2%
macellum 5%
aff.flexuosum 3%
36%
Porosononion:
subgranosum 14%
subgranosum
umboelatum 8%
hyalinum 3%
aragviensis 2%
14% Nonion:
bogdanowiczi 4%
aff. tumidulus 4%
N.sp.(1) 3%
N.sp.(2) 3%
12%
Ostracoda
5%
Elphidiella :
artifex
8% Miliolida :
Cycloforina latelacunata 3%
Meandroloculina sp. 2%
Articularia articulinoides 3%
1%
Elphidiella :
14% Miliolida: Cycloforinalatelacunata 5%;
Meandroloculina sp. 1%; M.conicocamerale
2%;Sarmatiella sp. 1%; Articularia articulinoides
6%;Articulina sarmatica
38% Elphidium:
crispum 18%
macellum 9%
aff.rugosum 4%
fichtelianum 6%
reginum 1%
15%
Ostracoda
6% Nonion:
bogdanowiczi 2%
aff.tumidulus 2%
N.sp.(1) 2%
25%
Porosononion:
subgranosum 8%
subgranosum
umboelatum 10%
hyalinum 5%
aragviensis 2%

Proc. Georgian Acad. Sci. Biol. Ser. B
Vol. 6, No. 1-2, 2008 Paleobiology
- 67 -
may be optimal in Middle Sarmatian, that promoted the violent flourish of
Ostracodae.
The
favorable conditions were connected with absence of competitors, among which by our opinion the
main representatives were higher
Crustacea - Mysidae
. As it is known in Sarmatian basin of
Paratethys the fossil statoliths of
Mysidae
are present in great quality (Voicu, 1974; Maissuradze
and Popescu, 1987). By Bagdasarjan (1983) in Sarmatian basin
Mysidae
composed the main part of
zooplankton and had big role in trophic chain of many inhabitant of Sarmatian Sea.
In complex described by us the statoliths of
Mysidae
were not seen, because the
conditions probably were not favorable for this group of
Crustacea
, in contrast to ostracods.
Although the abundance of foraminifers created the good trophic resource for ostracods and
mollusks, which in big numbers are presented in the complex.
The character of morphological peculiarity of tests of foraminifers and ostracods
(thickness of walls, the intensive of sculpture, big sizes, abundance of specimens) allows us to suppose
that they were living in shallow warm basin, saturated by CaCO
3
in which it was not deficiency of
phytoplankton – the single source of food for foraminifers. Such warm basin can be existed only in
conditions of warm climate that is confirmed by data of paleobotanical investigations.
Before the description of vegetation and climate we want to touch briefly the method,
which was use for reconstruction of the paleoclimatic conditions. This is so-called landscape-
phytocenological or zonal method. It doesn’t give the exact climatic parameters, but allows enough
good to restore the displacement of boundaries of landscape-climatic zones. By data of Borzenkova
(1992) such zonal communities are tundra, forest and steppe, which in the plain territories occupied
the large spaces and their change in time by themselves indicates on fluctuation of climate. Much
complicated situation was in southern mountain regions, where on comparable small area existed
simultaneously some altitudinal belts, with different climatic conditions. So, for reconstruction of
the paleoclimate of Georgia by use of landscape-phytocenological method we offer to restore the
conditions of every altitudinal belt separately, in dependence with character of vegetation
(Shatilova et al., 2004).
Via landscape-phytocenological method the diagram was built, which curves correspond
to main vegetation formations distributed on different levels on mountain relief (Fig.3). In
Sarmatian such formations were subtropical and warm-temperate polydominant forests of plains,
lower and middle mountain belts, the temperate forests of upper belt. Separately on diagram the
curve of pine is given – of intrazonal plant and indicator of humidity. The part of separate taxa in
composition of these communities is given on Fig.4, which was built on base of more number of
samples that diagram on Fig.3.
Nadarbazevi
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
2345678
No of samples
Perc.compos.of pollen
Temperate forests
Subtropical and warm-
temperate forests
Pine forests
Fig.3.
The diagram reflected the changes of area of separate vegetational formations.

Proc. Georgian Acad. Sci. Biol. Ser. B
Vol. 6, No. 1-2, 2008 Paleobiology
- 68 -
Fig.4. The pollen diagram of Sarmatian deposita of Eastern Georgia (Nadarbazevi section)

Proc. Georgian Acad. Sci. Biol. Ser. B
Vol. 6, No. 1-2, 2008 Paleobiology
- 69 -
The polydominant forests consisted of evergreen and deciduous plants (representatives of
families
Myricaceae, Juglandaceae, Betulaceae, Fagaceae, Ulmaceae, Magnoliaceae, Lauraceae,
Hamamelidaceae, Altingiaceae, Arecaceae)
and warm-require conifers (
Podocarpus, Dacrydium,
Keteleeria, Phyllocladus, Cathaya,
some
Pinus, Cedrus, Cryptomeria, Sequoia
, representatives of
family
Cupressaceae).
In mixed forests the ferns were represented by great number of forms,
among which the genera of families
Polypodiaceae, Gleicheniaceae, Schizaeaceae, Cyatheaceae
.
predominated. Along rivers and on flooding places existed the riparian and swamp forests, main
components of which were
Taxodium, Carya, Pterocarya, Ulmus, Liquidambar
and
Nyssa.
On plain and lower mountain belt the climate was subtropical. Hypsometrical higher
subtropical climate was changed by warm-temperate and by temperate in upper mountain belt.
Here
dark-coniferous formation
dominated
, which were growing far from the accumulation basin.
Main components of forests were
Abies, Picea, Tsuga
and some
Pinus.
The above described picture of altitudinal distribution of vegetational formations was
characteristic for early stretches of Middle Sarmatian (palynocomplexes of strata 3 in description of
section; on Fig.3, 4 – sample 8, 8a), when the polydominant forests had the biggest area and the
pine, probably, didn’t form yet the separate cenosis. Than the situation was changed and judging by
diagram (Fig.3, 4) during the following stretches of Middle Sarmatian the dynamics of vegetation
was expressed mainly in periodical domination either of polydomonant forests or of pine forests and
sometimes in possession by both formations the equal areas. These changes were connected with
fluctuations of temperature and humidity.
At whole the development of vegetation on territory of Kartli was gone under influence of
common paleogeographical changes, which had place at the end of Middle Sarmatian, one of
turning-point in Neogene history of Caucasus. In this time as a result of orogenic movements the
water area of sea decreased, which bay (so-called Rionian) was preserved only in western part of
Georgia.
Conclusion
The Sarmatian deposits of Eastern Georgia were studied by two methods of
micropaleontology (foraminifers, pollen and spores) for the firs time.
The detail analysis of microfaunistical material allows to trace the changes of association
of foraminifers during the Middle Sarmatian and to conclude about bionomical conditions and
ecology of Middle Sarmatian basin on the territory of Eastern Georgia.
The results of our investigations can be used while studying the other sections of
Sarmatian deposits formed in same shallow conditions.
The comparison of palynological data with data of study of large remains of plants
revealed definite differences in list of flora. The quantitative differences can be seen in all groups
of
plants, but especially in composition of ferns and conifers.
The use of landscape-phytocenological method allows the reconstruction the common
direction in development of vegetation and climate.
In the early stretches of Middle Sarmatian, when the polydominant forests were dominated
on the largest part of territory of Kartli the humid subtropical climate, transitive into warm-
temperate and temperate with increasing level of relief prevailed. Later the role of pine increased
and the territory of polydominant forests reduced, which area no longer reached the former sizes. It
can be traced the succession of two main formation – polydomonant forests and pine forests,
among which
one of them occupied periodically the dominant position.
So, in early stretches of Middle Sarmatian the climate was subtropical, which further was
changed by conditions with lower indexes of temperature and humidity. This process was not even

Proc. Georgian Acad. Sci. Biol. Ser. B
Vol. 6, No. 1-2, 2008 Paleobiology
- 70 -
and expressed in often fluctuation, which had place on territory of Kartli during the whole Middle
Sarmatian.
Acknowledgments:
The authors thank the Swiss National Science Foundation SCOPES
Project Ref.IB7320-11069/1 and the European Union INTAS Project N.1000017-8930 that made
the collaboration between Georgia and Switzerland possible. Thanks also to all members of the two
projects for fruitful discussions.
References
phytocenological method for the restoration of vegetation and climate of mountain
of Crimea-Caucasus region
.
In: The microfauna of oilfields of Caucasus. Emba and Middle
Bagdasarjan K.G. 1983.
The ecologic systems of Sarmatian sea.
Joural of Paleontology of Acad.
Bogdanovich A.K. 1947.
On the results of investigation of foraminifers from Miocene deposits
Asia, Proceedings of VNIGRI, pp. 5-55. (in Russian)
Sci. USSR, 4, pp. 3-11. (in Russian)
246 p. (in Russian)
Boltovskoy E, Wright R. 1976.
Recent
Foraminifera
. The Hague, 515 p.
Borzenkova I.I. 1992.
The change of climate in Cenozoic.
St. Peterburg “Gidrometeoizdat”,
Buleishvili D.A. 1960.
Geology and oil-and-gas content intermountain trough of Eastern
Georgia. Leningrad ”Gostoptekhizdat”, 238 p. (in Russian)
Chelidze L.T. 1987.
The Late Miocene flora and vegetation of Transcaucasus.
Tbilisi, “Metsniereba”,
112 p. (in Russian)
(in Russian)
Chelidze L.T. 1979.
The Sarmatian flora of Karthli.
Bullet. Georgian Acad. Scien,
95
, 2, pp. 473-475.
Hansen H.J., Lykke-Andersen A.L. 1976.
Wall structure and classification of fossil and recent
elphidiid and nonionid Foraminifers.
In: Fossils and Strata, Oslo,
10
, pp. 1-37.
Koiava K.P. 2006. The Biostratigraphy of Sarmatian Deposits of Eastern Georgia Based on Foraminfera.
Krasheninnikov V.A. 1960.
The Elphidiids of Miocene deposits of Podolye.
Transsec
. Geological
Inst. Acad. Sci. USSR,
21
, pp. 3-133. (in Russian)
Sediments of Kakheti.
Georgian Oil and Gas,
19
, pp. 50-62. (in Georgian)
PhD Thesis, Alexandre Djanelidze Institute of Geology, Tbilisi, pp. 1-163. (in Georgian)
Maissuradze L.S., Popescu G. 1987.
Carpatho-Caucasian comparative study of Sarmatian Mysids.
“Dari de Seama”. Inst.Geol.Geophysics,
72-73
, 3, pp. 75-80.
Maissuradze L., Koiava K.P. 2006.
New Data on Distribution of Sarmatian Foraminifera in the
Mchedlishvili P.A., Mchedlishvili N.D. 1953.
The study of development of flora of Eastern Georgia
ser.,
XCI
, 3, pp. 621-623. (in Russian)
Murray J.W. 1973.
Distribution and ecology of living benthic foraminiferids.
London, 274 p.
Soc., 86
, 3, pp. 439-580.
Myers E.H. 1943.
Life activites of Foramimnifera in relation to marine ecology.
Proc. Amer. Phil.
in Sarmatian Age by data of palynological analysis.
Proceedings of Acad.Scien.USSR, new
Phleger F.B. 1960.
Ecology and distribution of recent Foraminifers.
The Johns Hopkins Press,
Baltimore, 297 p.
Shatilova I., Rukhadze L., Mchedlishvili N., Makharadze N. 2004.
On the use of the Landscape-
regions (on the example of Colchis).
Bull.Georg.Acad.Scien.,
169
, 3, pp. 623-625.
Siradze K. 1958.
The Atlas of leading fossils of Sarmatian deposits of oil-bearing regions of Georgia.
VNIGNI, the Report of theme No 273, Tbilisi.
Uznadze M.D. 1965.
The Neogene flora of Georgia.
Tbilisi, “Metsniereba”, 180 p. (in Russian)

Proc. Georgian Acad. Sci. Biol. Ser. B
Vol. 6, No. 1-2, 2008 Paleobiology
- 71 -
aRmosavleT saqarTvelos (qarTli) Suasarmatuli
naleqebis mikrofaunisturi da palinologiuri daxasiaTeba
maisuraZe l.
1
, qoiava k.
2
, spizaferi s.
3
, Satilova i.
1
,
mWedliSvili n.
1
, SubiTiZe l.
2
, straseri a.
3
1
saqarTvelos erovnuli muzeumi, paleobiologiis institute
2
janeliZis sax. Geologiis institute
3
friburgis universiteti, geologiur mecnierebaTa departamenti
(miRebulia 11.02.2008)
reziume
sofel nadarbazevTan (qarTli) Suasarmatuli naleqebis Wrili
pirveladaa Seswavlili mikrofaunisturi da palinologiuri meTodebis
gamoyenebiT. mocemulia foraminiferebis asociaciaTa aRwera da maTi
cvalebadoba droSi. floris sia Sedgenilia palinologiuri monacemebisa
da literaturaSi gamoqveynebuli mcenareTa msxvili naSTebis Seswavlis
Sedegebis mixedviT. landSaftur-fitocenologiuri meTodis gamoyenebiT
dadgenilia ZiriTad mcenareul formaciaTa arealebis cvlilebebi da maTi
damokidebuleba klimatur fluqtuaciebze.
Voicu G. 1974.
Identification des mysides fossils dans les deports du Miocene Superieur geographique.
Geol.zborn. “Geol.Carpathica”, Bratislava,
25
, 2, pp. 231-239.
Voloshinova N.A., Kuznetsova V.N. 1964.
New data of morphology and evolutional development some
representatives of family Elphidiidae.
Problems of Micropaleontology, Geol. Inst. Acad.
Scien. USSR,
8
, pp. 138-149. (in Russian)