|
Discussion |
1 1 University of East Anglia, School of Environmental Sciences, Norwich NR4 7TJ, UK (e-mail: j.andrews{at}uea.ac.uk)
2 2 University of East Anglia, School of Environmental Sciences, Norwich NR4 7TJ, UK (e-mail: j.andrews{at}uea.ac.uk)
3 3 University of East Anglia, School of Environmental Sciences, Norwich NR4 7TJ, UK (e-mail: j.andrews{at}uea.ac.uk)
4 4 University of East Anglia, School of Environmental Sciences, Norwich NR4 7TJ, UK (e-mail: j.andrews{at}uea.ac.uk)
5 5 University of East Anglia, School of Environmental Sciences, Norwich NR4 7TJ, UK (e-mail: j.andrews{at}uea.ac.uk)
6 6 Department of Geography and Earth Sciences, Brunel University, Kingston Lane, Uxbridge UB3 8PH, UK (e-mail: stephen.kershaw{at}brunel.ac.uk)
7 7 CASP, Department of Earth Sciences, Cambridge University, 181a Huntingdon Road, Cambridge CB3 0D, UK
 |
Introduction |
|---|
 TOP Introduction Behaviour of barriers.Mound levels, faults and...Coincidences.Mounds, faults and caves.Other structures.History and alteration of...Referencing of abstracts.Conclusion.AcknowledgementsReferences |
|---|
In the vicinity of Cape Heraion (Perachora peninsula) uplifted Pleistocene shorelines of marine isotope stage (MIS) 5a/c, MIS 5e, MIS 7a/c and MIS 7e age have been mapped (Leeder et al. 2005), and where possible U/Th dated using coral aragonite (Vita-Finzi 1993; Dia et al. 1997; Leeder et al. 2005). The upper part of a prominent terrace, at c. +25 to +30 m above modern sea level, is composed of marine bioclastic marls and carbonates of proven MIS 5e age (Vita-Finzi 1993; Leeder et al. 2005). However, directly below these sediments is a horizon of spectacular bioherms, up to 10 m high (Fig. 1) constructed by calcified cyanobacteria (Rivularia haematites) and coralline algae (Lithophyllum pustulatum). There is controversy regarding the age, stratigraphic relations and environment of formation of these bioherms. They have variously been interpreted as brackish lake deposits forming immediately before the Palaeotyrrhenian (i.e. just before MIS 7; Richter et al. 1979); as brackish water deposits forming in shallow seawater during MIS 5e (Portman et al. 2005); or as freshwater structures forming in an MIS 6 lowstand ‘Lake Corinth’ (Kershaw & Guo 2003, 2006). Attempts to date the bioherms directly by the U–Th method, and therefore corroborate these age speculations, have been problematic. However, the combined dataset assembled by Portman et al. (2005) most strongly supports formation of this horizon of bioherms early in MIS 5e.
|
Our interpretation of the stratigraphy has a major bearing on the required uplift rates discussed by Kershaw & Guo (2006), because their preferred non-marine interpretation for the bioherms leaves them with the impossible dilemma of having lacustrine bioherms far too high for deposition in the waters of lowstand (MIS 6) Lake Corinth. Their only escape from this is to speculate that uplift rates were two or three times the widely published rates, carefully worked out by accurate mapping and radiometric dating in this western part of the Perachora peninsula (Leeder et al. 2005, fig. 6 and table 2). Regardless of any subsidence of the Rion sill controlling the lowstand level of pre MIS 3 glacial Lake Corinth episodes, they ignore the independently mapped shoreline data at +40 m for the MIS 7a/c highstand. If the MIS 6 lowstand (Lake Corinth) was –60 m and the MIS 7a/c highstand deposits are now at c. +40 m it is impossible to uplift the bioherms at a greater rate than the highstand shoreline of MIS 7a/c without an unproven system of faults that must have been uplifting the bioherms relative to the shoreline deposits. Also, in unfaulted areas, for example, the Heraion car park area west of the prominent NW–SE-trending fault that dissects the tip of the peninsula (Leeder et al. 2005, fig. 6a), the MIS 7 shoreline would have to be >50 m above the tops of the lower bioherms at +20 to +25 m, requiring MIS 7a/c shoreline deposits at +70 to +75 m. As the MIS 7a/c highstand deposits are proven here at c. +40 m (Leeder et al. 2005) we are forced to conclude that their uplift model is wrong. Recognition that the mounds at +40 m are likely to be of MIS 7 age resolves all of these problems and allows uplift to occur at published rates calculated from dated mapped shorelines.
If Kershaw & Guo accept our interpretation that there are two stratigraphic levels of bioherms, and if they stick with their interpretation that the bioherms formed in Lake Corinth during lowstands, they would presumably propose that the lower mounds formed during MIS 6 and the upper mounds during MIS 8? This poses more difficulties with their suggestion that uplift rates were two or three times those calculated from mapped and dated palaeoshorelines. For example, an uplift rate of 0.6 mm a–1 would put the tops of the lower (their MIS 6) bioherms at the observed modern elevation of +24 m, but would also put the tops of the upper (their MIS 8) bioherms at about +155 m, much higher than the observed elevations of about +35 to +45 m. The only way they can avoid this problem and explain the stratigraphy we have mapped without a series of huge and unproven faults (>100 m downthrow) is to have highly variable uplift rates; that is, uplift rates before MIS 6 at about 0.3 mm a–1, which then double after MIS 6, to uplift the whole two-level bioherm stratigraphy as a single block. We find such an uplift history highly implausible.
We also have difficulty with the new suggestion by Kershaw & Guo (2006) that all of the conglomerate–breccia fabrics seen in these bioherms are part of a cave-fill stratigraphy that is genetically associated with faulting of the bioherms during growth. In their interpretation, caves are excavated in the bioherms only where faults have cut through the bioherm framework to expose a softer, erodible core. We are not aware of a single field locality where evidence for this interpretation is available: nowhere have we seen an unequivocal fault plane cutting bioherm framework and being draped by later bioherm growth. Further, no coherent fault structures cutting bioherms were mapped by Kershaw & Guo, who took their structural data directly from Morewood & Roberts (1999). We do agree that at some localities there are boulders and cobbles, some of which are well rounded (Fig. 2) presumably by wave action, and some of which are clearly part of a cave-fill stratigraphy. However, there is no compelling evidence that these caves were anything other than either growth cavities between bioherm framework or, in some cases, sea caves excavated on the coast as part of the complex sea-level changes that these sediments preserve. Indeed, at some of the upper bioherm localities (MIS 7a/c age in our interpretation) well-rounded boulders of former bioherm framework are clearly banked against the bases of the bioherms and associated with small sea-cave notches. We interpret these as wave-modified peri-mound talus in the intertidal to shallow subtidal zone. Moreover, contrary to comments by Kershaw & Guo (2006), there is clear field evidence (Fig. 2) that some of the breccia–conglomerate facies formed by collapse of bioherm framework in the early stages of bioherm growth (Portman et al. 2005) and that the main phase of Rivularia growth, to form the giant bioherms, followed on. We do, however, concede that this breccia–conglomerate facies is local and not widespread as implied by Portman et al. (2005).
|
The main objection that Kershaw & Guo (2006) have about the lower bioherms forming in an MIS 5e near-coastal setting (Portman et al. 2005) is that Rivularia haematites is known to grow only in freshwater or brackish conditions today. We do not see the dilemma here: Portman et al. (2005) stated very clearly that Rivularia calcification requires at least 60% freshwater input from submarine springs, and that makes the water salinity during bioherm calcification not more than 15 p.s.u.: brackish by anybody's standards. Neither did Portman et al. (2005) interpret the stable oxygen isotope values as ‘marine’: they interpreted them, in conjunction with other geochemical data, as disequilibium values, caused by the rapid degassing of CO2 from the spring water. Perhaps Kershaw & Guo (2006) have misled themselves about marine indicators by quoting from conference abstracts that represented unfinished, in-progress work by a graduate student? Portman et al. (2005), is a peer reviewed paper that represented, in 2005, our most up-to-date interpretation, and one that clearly superseded any earlier unpublished interpretations.
What we, and others (Richter et al. 1979), find much more difficult to accept, in the non-marine model of Kershaw & Guo (2003, 2006), is the requirement that the marine (albeit euryhaline) coralline alga Lithophyllum pustulatum penetrated metres into the dark interiors of a pre-existing bioherm framework. Lithophyllum growth and photosynthesis in a gloomy submarine cave is one thing, but inside a dark bioherm framework quite another. As far as we can see, Kershaw & Guo (2006) have no answer to this problem either. We prefer the much simpler explanation (Richter et al. 1979; Portman et al. 2005) that the coralline algae within the bioherm framework encrusted crypts in the growing bioherms. With a marine alga as part of the growing framework the bioherms had to form in a coastal setting, albeit of low salinity because of submarine spring discharge.
Although we are pleased that Clive Portman's in-progress conference presentations, where he first suggested that the bioherms contain a history of sea-level changes during marine isotope stage 5e, have been taken up by Kershaw & Guo (2006), there is not yet any hard evidence that the regressive events occurred during the sustained highstand of MIS 5e, and this is why we refrained from asserting this in our earlier study (Portman et al. 2005). Chronology, combined with stratigraphic evidence, is critical to a correct interpretation of events, and the alpha spectrometric U-series date of 127.1 +13.6/–12.2 ka (1
) (Portman et al. 2005) from the speleothem-flowstones that coat the outer surfaces of Kershaw & Guo's ‘pendant coralline dripstones’ strongly suggests (although it does not prove) formation early in MIS 5e, before the sustained MIS 5e highstand (Portman et al. 2005). We are currently following this up with high-precision U/Th dating and strongly suspect that the sea-level history recorded in these sediments occurred early in MIS 5e as described, for example, by Esat et al. (1999) and Thompson & Goldstein (2005). We are pleased to note that Kershaw & Guo (2006) find two horizons of dripstone speleothem, an observation confirmed by our own fieldwork, and one that might imply two regressive events, potentially consistent with the early MIS 5e Barbados coral data (Thompson & Goldstein 2005). In our opinion, the highstand sediment package is the rather friable bioclastic sediment with coralline–algal and serpulid mounds (Richter et al. 1979) that clearly postdates the bioherms, cave fills and speleothems (above a minor discontinuity; Portman et al. 2005, fig. 6). We have not yet found any evidence for regressive events within this highstand sediment package.
Finally, Kershaw & Guo (2006) have no evidence or credible model to contest the geochemical data presented by Portman et al. (2005). They are forced to explain the unusually high Mg and oxygen isotope values in the bioherm framework as due to some unusual form of diagenesis that ‘inherited’ marine values from the basement limestones, even though this should result in lower Mg values and negative oxygen isotope values (Veizer 1983; James & Choquette 1990). Failing this, they invoke diagenesis caused by seawater immersion of the bioherms during the subsequent MIS 5e highstand. This is testable, because marine aragonite cements, which clearly formed from MIS 5e highstand seawater, are not found within the bioherm frameworks, but occur only as late-stage cavity fills that post-dated both bioherm and speleothem-flowstone formation (Richter et al. 1979; Portman et al. 2005). There is no evidence that a substantial volume of highstand seawater penetrated into the bioherms. Even if pervasive seawater diagenesis had occurred, the geochemical constraints would require total neomorphism of the framework to reset elemental and stable isotope data to high values, without affecting the Sr-isotope composition. This we cannot accept. We know that neomorphism of the bioherm frameworks occurred, but we contend that it was mostly syndepositional or very early diagenetic (Portman et al. 2005). Kershaw & Guo (2006) apparently see a more substantial alteration, an observation incompatible with the geochemical data. A possible explanation is perhaps that they have mixed up observations from the two levels of bioherms. We certainly agree that in the older (in our opinion MIS 7a/c) bioherms, cementation of void space and more extensive neomorphism and alteration of primary fabrics has occurred, but in our paper (Portman et al. 2005) we described fabrics and made geochemical analyses only from the lower, younger, better preserved bioherms.
In conclusion, we see no new information or argument in the study by Kershaw & Guo (2006) that precludes formation of the (stratigraphically lower) bioherms during MIS 5e in shallow seawater associated with submarine freshwater spring flow from faults. Indeed, all of the available evidence assembled so far is consistent with this interpretation, with the added advantage that the uplift rates require no special pleading. We agree that freshwater flow would need to be sustained during bioherm growth, but we do not know how fast these structures calcified. Kershaw & Guo (2003) suggested a 2000 year growth history, but we have no concrete evidence; calcification and growth could have been much faster and without the spring water chemistry data it is impossible to be certain. We have to be prepared to accept that highly unusual circumstances allowed construction of these giant bioherms by Rivularia haematites, structures that may be, in Kershaw & Guo's (2006) own words, ‘unique in the Phanerozoic record’.
12 December 2006
Steve Kershaw & Li Guo reply: The discussion by Andrews et al. of our work on cyanobacterial mounds (which they call bioherms) in the Perachora Peninsula (Figs 1–4) provides a further demonstration of the complexity of these interesting deposits. Andrews et al. begin by reference to our ‘fair and balanced account’, but afterwards seem to ignore our extensive discussion of an MIS 5e age for the mounds. Instead, they focus a robust criticism on the alternative interpretation of an MIS 6 age. Their statements about an ‘impossible dilemma’ and ‘only escape’ in relation to variable uplift rates simply reiterate the discussion by Kershaw & Guo (2006). However, since the publication of our study (Kershaw & Guo 2006) we have realized that the variable uplift problem may be resolved if the behaviour of both the Rion Sill and the Isthmus of Corinth (at the western and eastern ends of the Gulf of Corinth respectively; see Fig. 5) are considered, as discussed below. Also, in our view there is poor evidence for two levels of mounds invoked by Andrews et al., but there is evidence of a higher and possibly older mound level. Therefore we address their discussion, with additional observations.
|
|
Behaviour of barriers. |
|---|
|
TOPIntroductionBehaviour of barriers.Mound levels, faults and...Coincidences.Mounds, faults and caves.Other structures.History and alteration of...Referencing of abstracts.Conclusion.AcknowledgementsReferences |
|---|
The Isthmus of Corinth uplifted through the Late Quaternary approximately along the lines plotted in Figure 5. Deposits dated at c. 205 ka on the Gulf of Corinth side of the Isthmus are currently at a maximum of c. +60 m and rising at a minimum uplift rate of 0.3 mm a–1, according to Collier (1990). Figure 5 suggests that this rate of uplift would not quite permit flooding of the Gulf during MIS 5e and 7, but if the uplift rate was slightly higher, then the Isthmus would have been overtopped during MIS 5e. In fact, corals were found by McNeill & Collier (2004, table 1) in the Gulf of Corinth at 230 ka and older; also, Collier & Thompson (1991) recorded 205 ka oolitic sediments at +100 m. Therefore, if the Rion Sill was a land barrier before MIS 5e, the uplift rate of the Isthmus of Corinth must have been at least 0.5 mm a–1, plotted in Figure 5. Thus, during at least the later part of MIS 6, the Isthmus was a land barrier and the Gulf of Corinth was a lake.
Thus Figure 5 shows that the surface of Lake Corinth during MIS 6 can have been higher than previously interpreted, governed by the Isthmus of Corinth, and allowed lacustrine growth of Rivularia mounds. This interpretation removes the need for a variable uplift rate and negates the criticism by Andrews et al. However, fluctuations in lake level towards the end of MIS 6 would be required to generate the caves in Rivularia mounds prior to MIS 5e flooding.
|
Mound levels, faults and shorelines. |
|---|
|
TOPIntroductionBehaviour of barriers.Mound levels, faults and...Coincidences.Mounds, faults and caves.Other structures.History and alteration of...Referencing of abstracts.Conclusion.AcknowledgementsReferences |
|---|
We did not ignore uplifted shorelines, but did not recognize any in the study area (Figs 3 and 4), where breaks of slope are vegetation-covered. For example, the +25 m terrace on the northern side of the peninsula tip is backed by a tree-covered slope that we assumed covered a fault (Fig. 3). On the ground, a palaeoshoreline is not recognizable, and this line was mapped as a fault by Morewood & Roberts (1999). Also, the ‘MIS 7a/c’ age of the upper terrace seems to be based on a few uranium-series dated corals near Vouliagmeni Lake, c. 1.6 km east of the end of the Heraion road (Leeder et al. 2005, table 2). One sample, from Dia et al. (1997), was collected at +30 m, yet corals were inferred by Leeder et al. (2005) to relate to a possible MIS 7a/c shoreline at +35–42 m; the terrace itself does not have a confirmed MIS 7a/c age. Furthermore, in the absence of precise biological sea-level indicators, terraces with a notch at their apparent inner margin do not necessarily record past sea levels; terraces can store debris that may be used by turbulent water to erode a notch below sea level, as observed in modern settings (e.g. Antonioli et al. 2003). This raises a question about the reliability of the use of notches to define the ‘MIS 7a/c’ terrace as a sea-level indicator.
|
|
|
Coincidences. |
|---|
|
TOPIntroductionBehaviour of barriers.Mound levels, faults and...Coincidences.Mounds, faults and caves.Other structures.History and alteration of...Referencing of abstracts.Conclusion.AcknowledgementsReferences |
|---|
It is remarkable that caves in both ‘MIS 7a/c’ and ‘5e’ mounds contain two sets of deposits in the same order; these are of variable thickness up to c. 50 cm, and some are represented by only shelly encrustations on hard surfaces. The two generations of pendent corallines in caves on the north coast (Kershaw & Guo 2006, fig. 6) lie just above the cut terrace of Heraion marl, c. 10 m below the depositional MIS 5e terrace at +25 m. The base of ‘MIS 7a/c’ mounds is a further 15 m higher (at +40 m), so that sea-level variations would have needed to be at least 25 m, prior to the MIS 5e peak, to flood both sets of caves at the same time. The lower three of four lines plotted with an uplift rate of 0.23 mm a–1 in Figure 5 show that this probably did not occur, but confirmation of two different episodes of caves and cave fills will require dating the fills, and perhaps faunal analysis of shell debris. If dating reveals similar ages, then it follows that ‘MIS 5e’ and ‘7a/c’ mounds were the same age and have been displaced by faulting, as interpreted by Kershaw & Guo (2006). We repeat that there are no confirmed MIS 7a/c dates on the terrace attributed to that age by Leeder et al. (2005).
|
Mounds, faults and caves. |
|---|
|
TOPIntroductionBehaviour of barriers.Mound levels, faults and...Coincidences.Mounds, faults and caves.Other structures.History and alteration of...Referencing of abstracts.Conclusion.AcknowledgementsReferences |
|---|
Andrews et al. also noted that ‘there is no evidence that these caves were anything other than... growth cavities between bioherm framework‘. We have not observed any cavities that can be confidently interpreted as growth cavities, but many mounds have large central hollows. In our opinion these are secondary, and curved roofs following the growth banding would be expected if roof-collapse followed weakness lines defined by banding (see photographs in the paper by Kershaw & Guo 2006).
If Rivularia mounds grew on a single level, then it is possible that some faults became active before completion of the mound phase. The large rounded boulder of Rivularia conglomerate shown by Andrews et al. (Fig. 2, arrow A) may have rolled down from the upfaulted part of the mound field and then been used as a substrate by the later part of mound growth, at least partly consistent with one interpretation by Portman et al. (2005, p. 458). The other boulder (Fig. 2, arrow B) is a later addition derived either from cave fill (of a mound that has since completely collapsed), or could also have rolled down (it is difficult to be sure for an inaccessible item high on a cliff). Hence there is no need to invoke two separate mound levels.
|
Other structures. |
|---|
|
TOPIntroductionBehaviour of barriers.Mound levels, faults and...Coincidences.Mounds, faults and caves.Other structures.History and alteration of...Referencing of abstracts.Conclusion.AcknowledgementsReferences |
|---|
Terraces with marine deposits are well known to have formed in response to the c. 100 ka Milankovitch eccentricity cycle that drove eustatic sea-level changes throughout the Quaternary. Figure 5 shows that the MIS 5e terrace was flooded by the sea during only the peak portion of the curve. The other two Milankovitch cyclicities, which forced smaller-scale sea-level changes (obliquity, 41 ka; precession, 19–23 ka) are both too long-ranging to account for water-level changes leading to the complex deposits in this peak part of the curve. Therefore sub-Milankovitch-scale sea-level changes may be interpreted if the sequence was completed before the MIS 5e highstand. However, if the mounds grew in a lake during MIS 6, then the problem of time constraints is removed; but if two levels of mounds exist (which would therefore need two lakes at different times), then earlier mounds in an MIS 8 lake can be accommodated in Figure 5, but depend on the uplift rates in the Isthmus of Corinth and Perachora Peninsula in earlier times (not constructed in Fig. 5).
|
History and alteration of mound fabric. |
|---|
|
TOPIntroductionBehaviour of barriers.Mound levels, faults and...Coincidences.Mounds, faults and caves.Other structures.History and alteration of...Referencing of abstracts.Conclusion.AcknowledgementsReferences |
|---|
Micrite and encrusting coralline alga L. pustulatum are apparently not altered, in contrast to Rivularia, reinforcing the interpretation of Kershaw & Guo (2003) that alteration was early. Andrews et al. strongly reject any later recrystallization of the fabric. However, we wish we could share their conviction that a carbonate system, composed of a diverse and intricate assemblage of calcified organic and inorganic elements, subjected to an unusual geochemical environment, would be unquestionable for secure geochemical investigation. We emphasize that the Perachora mounds have two unique components: giant Rivularia mounds, and pendent coralline algae composed of a single (euryhaline) species. Also, strontium isotope ratios in the Gulf of Corinth are lower than those of normal seawater in the Late Quaternary (Dia et al. 1997; see McArthur et al. 2001). Dia et al. (1997) suggested that one reason for low Sr ratios is incomplete connection between the Gulf of Corinth and the open ocean during the last few highstands. However, they preferred a model of diagenetic alteration, and emphasized apparent alteration of visibly and mineralogically pristine coral aragonite. Overall, any arguments about diagenesis involving strontium isotopes are suspect and cannot be safely applied to these sediments.
|
Referencing of abstracts. |
|---|
|
TOPIntroductionBehaviour of barriers.Mound levels, faults and...Coincidences.Mounds, faults and caves.Other structures.History and alteration of...Referencing of abstracts.Conclusion.AcknowledgementsReferences |
|---|
|
Conclusion. |
|---|
|
TOPIntroductionBehaviour of barriers.Mound levels, faults and...Coincidences.Mounds, faults and caves.Other structures.History and alteration of...Referencing of abstracts.Conclusion.AcknowledgementsReferences |
|---|
|
Acknowledgements |
|---|
|
TOPIntroductionBehaviour of barriers.Mound levels, faults and...Coincidences.Mounds, faults and caves.Other structures.History and alteration of...Referencing of abstracts.Conclusion.AcknowledgementsReferences |
|---|
29 March 2007
|
References |
|---|
|
TOPIntroductionBehaviour of barriers.Mound levels, faults and...Coincidences.Mounds, faults and caves.Other structures.History and alteration of...Referencing of abstracts.Conclusion.AcknowledgementsReferences |
|---|
Antonioli, F., Kershaw, S., Rust, D. & Verrubbi, V. 2003. Holocene sea-level change in Sicily, and its implications for tectonic models: new data from the Taormina area, northeast Sicily. Marine Geology, 196, 53–71.[CrossRef][ISI][GeoRef]
Collier, R.E.Ll., 1990. Eustatic and tectonic controls upon Quaternary coastal sedimentation in the Corinth Basin, Greece. Journal of the Geological Society, London, 147, 301–314.
Collier, R.E.Ll. & Thompson, J. 1991. Transverse and linear dunes in an Upper Pleistocene marine sequence, Corinth Basin, Greece. Sedimentology, 38, 1021–1040.[CrossRef][ISI][GeoRef]
Dia, A.N., Cohen, A.S., O'Nions, R.K. & Jackson, J.A. 1997. Rates of uplift investigated through 230Th dating in the Gulf of Corinth (Greece). Chemical Geology, 138, 171–184.[CrossRef][ISI][GeoRef]
Esat, T.M., McCulloch, M.T., Chappell, J., Pillans, B. & Omura, A. 1999. Rapid fluctuations in sea level recorded at Huon Peninsula during the penultimate deglaciation. Science, 283, 197–201.[CrossRef][ISI][GeoRef]
Houghton, S., Roberts, G., Papanikolaou, I., McArthur, J. and Gilmour, M. 2003. New 234U–230Th coral dates from the western Gulf of Corinth: implications for extensional tectonics. Geophysical Research Letters, 30, 2013, doi:10.1029/2003GL018112.
James, N.P. & Choquette, P.W. 1990. Limestones—the meteoric diagenetic environment. In: McIlreath, I.A. & Morrow, D.W. (eds) Diagenesis. Geoscience Canada Reprint Series, 4, 35–73.
Kershaw, S. & Guo, L. 2003. Pleistocene cyanobacterial mounds in the Perachora Peninsula, Gulf of Corinth, Greece: structure and applications to interpreting sea-level history and terrace sequences in an unstable tectonic setting. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, 193, 503–514.[CrossRef][GeoRef]
Kershaw, S. & Guo, L. 2006. Pleistocene calcified cyanobacterial mounds, Perachora Peninsula, central Greece: a controversy of growth and history. In: Pedley, H.M. & Carannante, G. (eds) Cool-Water Carbonates: Depositional Systems and Palaeoenvironmental Control. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 255, 53–69.
Kershaw, S., Guo, L. & Braga, J.C. 2005. A Holocene coral–algal reef at Mavra Litharia, Gulf of Corinth, Greece: structure, history and applications in relative sea-level change. Marine Geology, 215, 171–192.[CrossRef][ISI]
Leeder, M.R., Portman, C., Andrews, J.E. , ET AL., 2005. Normal faulting and crustal deformation, Alkyonides Gulf and Perachora peninsula, eastern Gulf of Corinth rift, Greece. Journal of the Geological Society, London, 162, 549–561.
Leeder, M.R., Andrews, J.E., Collier, R.E.Ll., Gawthorpe, R.L., McNeil, L., Portman, C. & Rowe, P.J. 2007. The Gulf of Corinth Rift. A field guide to Quaternary tectonics, sedimentation, geomorphology and sea level change in an active rift basin. Classic Geology in Europe 11, Terra Publishing, London.
McArthur, J.M., Howarth, R.J. & Bailey, T.R. 2001. Strontium isotope stratigraphy: LOWESS Version 3: best fit to the marine Sr-isotope curve for 0–509 Ma and accompanying look table for deriving numerical age. Journal of Geology, 109, 155–170.[CrossRef][ISI][GeoRef]
McNeill, L.C. & Collier, R.E.Ll. 2004. Uplift and slip rates of the eastern Eliki fault segment, Gulf of Corinth, Greece, inferred from Holocene and Pleistocene terraces. Journal of the Geological Society, London, 161, 81–92.
Morewood, N.C. & Roberts, G.P. 1999. Lateral propagation of the surface trace of the South Alkyonides normal fault segment, central Greece, inferred from Holocene and Pleistocene terraces. Journal of Structural Geology, 21, 635–652.[CrossRef][ISI][GeoRef]
Portman, C., Andrews, J.E., Rowe, P.J., Leeder, M.R. & Hoogewerff, J. 2005. Submarine-spring controlled calcification and growth of spectacular Rivularia bioherms: Late Pleistocene (MIS 5e), Gulf of Corinth, Greece. Sedimentology, 52, 441–465.[CrossRef][ISI][GeoRef]
Richter, D.K., Herforth, A. & Ott, E. 1979. Pleistozäne, brackische Blaugrünalgenriffe mit Rivularia haematites auf der Perachorahalbinsel bei Korinth (Griechenland). Neues Jahrburch für Geologie und Paläontologie, Abhandlungen, 159, 14–40.
Thompson, W.G. & Goldstein, S.L. 2005. Open-system coral ages reveal persistent suborbital sea-level changes. Science, 308, 401–404.
Veizer, J., 1983. Chemical diagenesis of carbonates: theory and application of the trace element technique. In: Arthur, M.A., Anderson, T.F., Kaplan, I.R., Veizer, J. & Land, L.S. (eds) Stable Isotopes in Sedimentary Geology. Society of Economic Paleontologists and Mineralogists, Short Course Notes, 10, 3.1–3.100.
Vita-Finzi, C., 1993. Evaluating Late Quaternary uplift in Greece and Cyprus. In: Pritchard, H.M., Alabaster, T., Harris, N.B.W. & Neary, C.R. (eds) Magmatic Processes and Plate Tectonics. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 76, 417–424.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
