52 UPPER CRETACEOUS-LOWER TERTIARY FORAMINIFERA 



Thus, it is evident that the Thebes limestone and calcareous shale formation 

 is of Lower Eocene age. However, the controversy about the stratigraphical 

 relationship between the Ypresian and Cuisian stages, necessitates the avoidance of 

 the use of these terms in Lower Eocene stratigraphy, until their chronological 

 relationship is clarified. 5 For example, while some authors tended to use the Ypre- 

 sian followed by the Cuisian within the Lower Eocene, Hottinger & Schaub (i960) 

 used the Cuisian as the Lower Eocene, and Feugueur (1962) equated the Cuisian 

 with the Upper Ypresian. 



IV. PALAEONTOLOGY 



A. The Macrofauna 



Systematic studies of the macrofossils of the Upper Cretaceous-Lower Tertiary 

 rocks of Egypt were carried out by Zittel (1883), Quass (1902), Wanner (1902), 

 Oppenheim (1902), Fourtau (1899-1921), Peron & Fourtau (1904), Stefano (1912- 

 1919), Priem (1914) Greco (1915-1918), Stefanini (1918-1919) 6 and Abbass (1962). 



In the present study, macrofossils are used for correlation with similar successions 

 previously zoned on the basis of macrofossils alone. However, most of these fossils 

 are unknown outside the Tethyan region and their ranges have been much disputed 

 in the past. Study of the associated planktonic Foraminifera in the Esna-Idfu 

 region has helped to define the ranges of the macrofossils in terms of the foraminiferal 

 zonation, and has thus cleared up some of the confusion. 



One hundred and forty two macrofossil species are identified and their ranges 

 considered (Text-fig. 17). However, no attempt has been made to carry out a 

 systematic study of these macrofossil species which are only listed alphabetically 

 within their respective phyla (Text-fig. 17). 



Consideration of the ranges of these macrofossils, has led to the recognition of five 

 major faunal zones and three subzones, in addition to a non-fossiliferous zone at the 

 base, and a zone devoid of macrofossils towards the top of the succession (Text-figs. 

 5, 8 and 17). These zones and subzones are correlated with the corresponding 

 planktonic foraminiferal zones and subzones in Text-fig. 5 ; they are arranged from 

 the base upwards as follows : 



1. A non-fossiliferous zone. 



2. The Lopha villei Zone. 



3. The Pecten (Chlamys) mayereymari Zone. 



(a) The Terebratulina gracilis Subzone. 



(b) The Pecten (Chlamys) mayereymari Subzone. 



(c) The Libycoceras berisensis Subzone. 

 oox\a^\a^/v'\a^wvvv\a^^vvv\a^/v\A/ Disconformity wuwwwv^wwv 



6 See footnote 2 

 • See Keldani 1941 



