IN THE ESNA-IDFU REGION, NILE VALLEY, EGYPT 53 



4. The Caryostnilia garnosa Zone. 



5. The Ostrea hypoptera Zone. 



6. A non-megafossiliferous zone. 



7. The Lucina thebaica Zone. 



In view of the restricted geographical distribution of most of these macrofossils, 

 the above-mentioned zones may be regarded as of local importance only. Neverthe- 

 less, analysis of previously described Upper Cretaceous-Lower Tertiary successions 

 in Egypt, North Africa and the Middle East points to the possible existence of these 

 zones at corresponding horizons all over this region. Some of the index fossils of 

 these zones, e.g., Lopha villei and Libycoceras spp. (L. ismaeli Zittel, L. chargense 

 Blanckenhorn and possibly L. phosphaticus Awad & Naiem and L. berisensis Awad & 

 Naiem) are known to flood corresponding horizons in North Africa, (Laffitte 1934, 

 1939), while the same species, in addition to Pecten (Chlamys) mayereymari Bullen- 

 Newton and Terebratulina gracilis Schlotheim, are recorded in abundance in similar 

 formations in Palestine (Parnes 1956). Thus, although it is understood that these 

 macrofossil zones are not of the world-wide importance of the corresponding plank- 

 tonic foraminiferal zones, they may be successfully applied in North Africa and the 

 Middle East. The value of these zones is now enhanced by the fact that they have 

 been defined in the light of the corresponding planktonic foraminiferal zonation, 

 and can thus be used in the absence of planktonic Foraminifera. 



B. The Planktonic Foraminifera 



The Foraminifera of the Upper Cretaceous and Lower Tertiary rocks of Egypt 

 have been dealt with by Nakkady (1949, 1950, 1951a, 1952, 1955, 1957, 1959). 

 Nakkady & Osman (1954), Osman (1954, 1955a, b, c), Le Roy (1949, 1953), Omara 

 (1954, 1955, 1956), Said & Kenawy (1956), Said (i960) and Said & Kerdany (1961). 

 However, very little has been published on the planktonic Foraminifera in spite of 

 their abundance, and reliance on the benthonic Foraminifera in stratigraphical 

 zonation has led to a great deal of discrepancy and confusion. In this connection 

 Bolli (1957a : 62) stated that " The complete change of the planktonic foraminiferal 

 fauna between the Upper Cretaceous Guayaguayare formation and the Paleocene- 

 Lower Eocene Lizard Springs formation, is not followed by the benthonic Foramin- 

 ifera . . ., as many as about two-thirds of the benthonic species known in the Upper 

 Cretaceous continue into the Paleocene-Lower Eocene. In cases where only 

 benthonic Foraminifera are present, it may become difficult, therefore, to determine 

 whether a fauna is of Upper Cretaceous or Paleocene age ". The same is true in 

 Egypt, where it has been found essential to establish the stratigraphy of the Upper 

 Cretaceous-Lower Tertiary period on the basis of planktonic Foraminifera which 

 were only briefly dealt with before, and were very much confused and misidentified. 



Although Nakkady (1951a) was one of the earliest micropalaeontologists to 

 emphasize the value of planktonic Foraminifera in the zonation of the Cretaceous- 

 Tertiary transition period, he only discussed them very briefly in his study on the 

 Foraminifera of the Esna shale. Nakkady (1950, 1951a) recorded the occurrence of 

 the following planktonic Foraminifera from the Maestrichtian-Lower Eocene 



