Original scientific paper	Received: October 7, 2014
Accepted: October 15, 2014
Composition and importance of Upper Triassic (Upper Ladinian - Lower Carnian) breccia in stratigraphy of External Dinarides
Sestava in pomen zgornje triasnih (zgornje ladinijskih -spodnje karnijskih) breč v stratigrafiji Zunanjih Dinaridov
Luka Gale1, 2 *, Dragomir Skaberne2
1Faculty of Natural Sciences and Engineering, Department of Geology, Privoz 11, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia 2Geological Survey of Slovenia, Dimičeva ul. 14, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia Corresponding author. E-mail: luka.gale@ntf.uni-lj.si, luka.gale@geo-zs.si
Abstract
A sequence of boulder breccia, separated by several emersion horizons is recognized as part of the Upper Ladinian - Lower Carnian Cassian Dolomite and Limestone Formation in the area of Medvedica (central Slovenia). The composition of clasts, determined from thin sections in the context of Late Ladinian - Early Carnian platform models suggests their origin in the transition between the inner platform/lagoon and the back-reef area, alternatively in the internally differentiated lagoon with swells. The emergence of the platform is suggested to correspond to the upper sequence boundary of the Carl depositional sequence from the Southern Alps. The platform growth subsequently continued until the uppermost Julian, when the second emergence (upper sequence boundary of the Car2 depositional sequence) finally terminated the growth of the Cassian platform.
Key words: Dinaric Carbonate Platform, Southern Alps, »Cordevolian limestone and dolomite«, Cassian platform, sequence stratigraphy
Izvleček
Na območju Medvedice (osrednja Slovenija) smo v zgornje ladinijski - spodnje karnijski formaciji kasi-janskega dolomita in apnenca prepoznali zaporedje blokovnih breč, ločenih z več emerzijskimi površinami. Sestava klastov, določena na podlagi zbruskov ob upoštevanju modelov zgornje ladinijskih - spodnje karnijskih karbonatnih platform kaže na sedimentacijo apnenca na prehodu iz notranje platforme/lagune v za-grebensko območje ali na notranje diferencirano lagun-sko okolje z lokalnim reliefom. Emerzija platforme bi se lahko skladala z zgornjo sekvenčno meje depozicijske sekvence Carl Južnih Alp. Rast platforme se je nadaljevala do konca jula, ko je bila dokončno prekinjena z drugo emerzijo, ki ustreza zgornji meji depozicijske sekvence Car2 v Južnih Alpah.
Ključne besede: Dinarska karbonatna platforma, Južne Alpe, »cordevolski apnenec in dolomit«, Cassianska platforma, sekvenčna stratigrafija
Introduction
A substantial amount of the carbonate sequence of the External Dinarides and Southern Alps belongs to carbonate platforms established after the cessation of Ladinian volcanism[1, 2]. Until the Early Julian, up to 600 m of limestone deposited, later mostly transformed to do-lomite[2]. In terms of lithostratigraphy, these carbonates are known in the Slovenian literature as the »Cordevolian limestone and dolo-mite«[3-5] or the Diplopora Limestone[6, 7]. The term Cassian Dolomite and Limestone Formation (CDLF) is used herein (see also[8-12]). The debate about the correct interpretation of age of the CDLF mostly revolved around the correct determination of dasycladacean algae[10, 13]. During geological mapping of a smaller area south-west of Grosuplje (central Slovenia], a sequence of breccia with up to 2 m large boulders was noted inside the CDLF along the newly cut forest road. The scope of this paper is to describe and interpret the origin of breccia.
Previous research of the studied area
The first geological mapping of this area was carried out by M. V. Lipold and G. Stache[14]. Their work, however, remained in the form of a manuscript map[15]. Stache[16] and Vetters[17, 18] later produced less detailed maps. In the scope of geological mapping of Yugoslavia, geological mapping was carried out by Buser and co-work-ers[19, 20]. The area around Županova jama, east of Medvedica, was re-ambulated in the 1980s. The results were published by Gospodarič[21]; however, the supplemented geological map is too general for the purposes of this study. Buser[22] later gave a short description of the geological structure between Št. Jurij and Velike Lipljene. Especially notable is his mention of Ladinian volcanoclastics in Medvedica. The stratigraphy of the wider area south and east of Grosuplje has recently been investigated by Dozet[3-5 23-26].
Geological setting
Medvedica is a largely forested low hilly area situated on the SW brink of the Grosuplje karst basin (Fig. 1). According to Placer[27, 28], this area structurally belongs to External Dinarides, during the Triassic and Early Jurassic situated on the southern passive continental margin of the Neotethys (Meliata) Ocean[29, 30]. The evolution of this area was strongly affected by the Middle Triassic extension, and, after cessation of tectonic activity, by a gradual recovery of carbonate production and levelling of topography[31, 32]. The following description of lithological units is based on author's personal observations. Reader may further refer to descriptions by Buser[20, 22] and Dozet[23]. The studied area is situated between two major NW-SE directed faults, namely the Dobrepolje fault to the east and the Ortnek fault to the west (Fig. 2). Numerous minor faults create a complex picture of fault-bound blocks. This, however, is in contrast with interpretation made by Buser[19], showing a generally undisturbed Lower to Upper Trias-sic succession.
The oldest succession belongs to the Lower Triassic Werfen Formation (Fig. 3). The lower part of the formation is missing, while the rest of it consists of light brown or reddish cal-cisiltite and dark grey silty marlstone, and medium bedded oolite. Small flakes of mica are
Figure 1: Position of the studied area. The rectangle represents position of Figure 2.
I I Predole beds (Lower Jurassic) I I Main Dolomite (Upper Tuvalian?-Norian-Rhaetian) I I Moho-jd Formation (Upper Julian-Tuvalian) I I Cassian Limestone (Upper Ladinian-Lower Julian) I I Cassian Dolomite (Usper Ladinian-Lower Julian) I I VolsanoLastics,limestone with chert (Ladinian) I I Anisian Dolomite I I Werfen Formation (Lower Triassic) Fault (visible; covered; assumed)
«-• *
Normal geologic boundary
Figure 2: Geologic map of the studied area. The section with breccia is marked by bar.
characteristic. Various bivalves, gastropod Nat-iria costata Munster, ammonite (?Tirolites sp.] and ichnogenus Rhizocorallium were found. Oolitic limestone may contain numerous small gastropods.
In the upper part of the Werfen Formation, thin to medium bedded dolomite of dusty appearance predominates, gradually passing into medium-thick bedded or seemingly massive coarse dolomite. No attempt has been made to recover microfossils from the latter, and Anisian age is assumed solely on the basis of superposition.
The upper boundary of Anisian dolomite is nowhere preserved, so its continuation into younger units remains interpretative. One assumption is based on a road cut in the area of Medvedica, where an irregular palaeosurface is visible on top of stromatolitic dolomite. The palaeosurface is filled and covered with conglomerate/breccia consisting of dolomitic clasts and limonitic matrix. Poorly exposed greenish
Jurassic	1 1 1 1 1 1		laminated dolomite and micritic limestone
	1 1 1 1 1		
	/ / /	/ / /	
	/ / /	/ / /	
	/////,		
	faulted		
Nor.-Rhae.	/ /	/ / /	stromatolitic dolomite (Main Dolom ito)
	' / /	/ / /	
	/ / /	/ / /	
	/ / / / /		
	/ /	/ / /	
	' / /	/ / /	
Ladinian Carnian	///////		bauxite, red clastics, dolomite (Mohorje fm) breccia
			
			
			
			medium to thick bedded limestone with green algae (CDLF) conglomerate/breccia, tuffite, tuffaceous sandstone, micritic limestone with chert
	V t л		
	—i—1—i—1	1 , 1 ^^ i ,	
	v-ллvi-л		
Anisian	/ / / /bXV		medium-thick bedded or massive dolomite
	//////		
	//////		
	/ / /	' / / /	
	/////,		
Lower Triassic	у 's	'у / / / /	calcisiltite, marlstone, oolite (Werfen fm)
			
	O 1 0 1 0	1 0 1 O 1 0	
	1 o 1 o 1 o 1 o 1 o 1		
			
calcisiltite IhiP I marlstone
10	° о I oolitic limestone I /\ bedded dolomite
[EMM
УШУ cherty limestone
11	i 1 I micritic limestone
Figure 3: Schematic lithostratigraphic column for the Medvedica area (not in the scale). Note that the stratigraphic position of the breccia inside the Cassian Dolomite and Limestone Formation (CDLF) is only tentative.
tuffite, tuffaceous sandstone, conglomerates, breccias, and black micritic limestone with black chert and claystone partings follow. A si-licified ammonite has been found in Medvedica by B. Vičič in 2009, and questionably attributed to the genus Kellnerites (L. Krystyn, pers. com. by B. Vičič). According to the Paleobiology Database^, this genus ranges from Late Anisian to Early Ladinian. Thus, the dolomite below the unconformity is attributed to the upper part of Anisian dolomite, while the following volcano-clastic, clastic and limestone succession represents Lower Ladinian. The local emergence around Anisian-Ladinian boundary has been advocated before by Dozet and Godec[6] in the area of Bloke (southern Slovenia], but the age of the supposed unconformity is not supported by fossils.
massive dolomite |~l~-|-| massive limestone I po I boulder breccia I bx bx I bauxite I I sandstone
marly dolomite
Plate 1: 1 Poorly sorted boulder breccia. | 2 Red surface of brecciated dolomite. | 3 Leached-out thalli of dasycladaceans. | 4 Red and green mudstone (emersion level). | 5 Dolomite clast embedded in mudstone. | 6 Emersion on the upper side of calcarenite bed. | 7 Interchange of light and dark grey levels with Tubiphytes. | 8 Detail from Figure 7. | 9 Breccia with bauxite matrix (base of the Mohorje Formation?).
Plate 2: 1 Fine-grained breccia with reddish »haematitic«matrix. Thin section 207. | 2 Angularclasts with Tubiphytes-like micriproblematica. Thin section 207. | 3 Recrystallized wackestone passing into bioclastic grainstone. Breccia clast. Thin section 200C. | 4 Partly winnowed intraclastic-peloidal packstone. Breccia clast. Thin section 201. | 5 Winnowed bioclastic-peloidal packstone with dasycladaceans. Breccia clast. Thin section 202. | 6 Dasycladales. Breccia clast. Thin section 208B. | 7 Clasts of cementstone with cockades and Tubiphytes in partly dolomitized reddish »haematitic« matrix. Thin section 205. | 8 Tubiphytes-like fossils in peloidal grainstone. Note bladed spar encrusting grains and the corrosive cement (C) associated with reddish »haematitic« matrix. Thin section 205.
Plate 3: 1 Recrystallized winnowed bioclastic-peloidalpackstone. Thin section 199. | 2 Tubiphytes sp. Note the coarse internal network. Thin section 207. | 3 Tubiphytes or similar microproblematica. Thin section 211. | 4 Tubiphytes sp. Thin section 200A. | 5 Tubiphytes sp. Note the internal cavity and the branched habitus. Thin section 207. | 6 Tubiphytes sp. in clast. Note the internal cavity and the branched habitus. Thin section 207. | 7 Tubiphytes sp. Thin section 208A. | 8 Tubiphytes sp. Thin section 207.
Plate 4: 1 Endotebanella bicamerata Salaj in Salaj et al. Thin section 204. | 2 Endotebanella bicamerata Salaj in Salaj et al. Thin section 200C. | 3 Turriglomina mesotriasica (Koehn-Zaninetti). Thin section 208B. 14 Duotaxis sp. Thin section 200C. | 5 "Trochammina" jaunensis Brönnimann & Page. Thin section 209. | 6-7 Corrosion of matrix and clasts, followed by deposition of clear mosaic spar (S). Thin section 200B. | 8 Clear spar (S). Thin section 208A.
The next lithostratigraphic unit, the Cassian Dolomite and Limestone Formation (CDLF) covers large area, but its lower boundary is faulted. It consists of light gray medium to thick bedded micritic limestone, which frequently contains dasycladaceans and cockade textures. Equally large area is covered by seemingly massive, coarse, very porous white dolomite to the west and south of the studied area (see Buser[19]). The age of the CDLF is a matter of great controversies, fully explained by Celarc[10]. A Late La-dinian and Lower Carnian age is assumed after Pleničar and Premru[34], and Celarc[10]. Along a fresh forest road-cut, a succession of clast-supported boulder breccias, subordinate calcarenites, and green and red claystone is exposed. The breccias consist of up to 1.5 m large blocks of CDLF. The thickness of this succession is at least 15 m, with individual breccia beds at least 9.5 m thick. The breccia can be laterally followed for at least 100 m, and seems to continue with several tens of meters thick CDLF body. The breccia interval, which is here described in detail, was overlooked by previous researchers due to the previous lack of fresh road cut and a strongly karstified surface, which makes the low amount of matrix poorly visible. The CDLF is overlain by clastics of the Mohorje Formation sensu Dozet[4]. The Mohorje Formation in the surroundings of Medvedica comprises black and red coarse-grained quartz sandstone, red siltstone, black shale, dark brown siltstone, thin-bedded, brown, partly do-lomitized and bituminous limestone, red pebbly sandstone with pebbles of lithic grains and quartz, and red and white, cross-laminated lith-ic-tuffaceous sandstones. Red, rarely also gray, oolitic »bauxite« is common in the lower part of the formation (Pl. 1, Fig. 8). According to division by Dozet[4], these lithologies correspond to the Rupe Member from the middle part of the Mohorje Formation, so a notable stratigraphic gap between the top of the CDLF and the clas-tics is assumed. No fossils were recovered from the Mohorje Formation during our fieldwork. Julian (i.e., Julian 2)-Tuvalian age was given to formation by Dozet[4]. Transition to the Upper Tuvalian (?) to Norian-Rhaetian Main Dolomite is gradual, marked by medium-bedded dolomite with a decreasing amount of shale partings between beds upsection (see also[4, 8' 12]).
This transition, from the uppermost Selo at Rob Member of the Mohorje Formation (bedded dolomite with shale interlayers) to the Main Dolomite (bedded stromatolitic dolomite), is exposed along a steep foot-path east of the studied area, in the vicinity of Pijava Gorica. The Main Dolomite is distinguished from other dolomitic units by medium to thick bedding and the presence of stromatolites (see[35]). Finally, the youngest pre-Quarternary rocks belong to Lower Jurassic dolomite and bedded micritic, oolitic and bioclastic limestone, i.e. Predole beds sensu Dozet[4] (also Krka Lime-stone[36], and Podpeč Limestone[37-39]) .
Materials and methods
The succession of breccias was measured along a forest road at coordinates: 45° 54' 44" (lat.], 14° 37' 23" (lon.) and elevation 410 m above sea level. Due to several minor faults, the succession could not be reconstructed entirely. To avoid misinterpretation, we present the section in three segments, with no interpretation of succession (Fig. 4]. Fourteen thin sections of size 47 mm x 28 mm and one of size 76mmx51mm were made. Dunham[40] classification was followed in describing their texture, and semiquantitative comparison charts[41] used to estimate proportion of individual components.
Description of section
Coarse breccia
The predominant lithology of the measured segments is very poorly sorted coarse breccia, with limestone clasts ranging from less than 1 cm to over 2 m in size (Pl. 1, Figs. 1-2]. Bed thickness varies from a few tens of centimetres to over 9 m. Such thick layers may contain hardly discernible irregular internal surfaces. Clasts are very angular or may be subrounded. The amount of matrix is very low. Yellow or reddish »haematitic« matrix is knead among clasts (Pl. 2, Figs. 1, 7], which are in places in stylolitic contacts (stylo-breccia). In other cases, gray spar fills spaces between clasts. Dolomitization obscured a few layers to various degrees, but
Figure 4: Geological section of breccia succession.
composition of clasts can usually be readily observed in thin sections. No fossil remains were found in the matrix of the breccia. In the clasts, the following foraminifera were determined: Turriglomina mesotriasica (Koehn-Zaninetti), »Trochammina« jaunensis Brönnimann & Page, Diplotremina placklesiana Kristan-Tollmann, Tolypammina sp., Reophax sp., Endoteba/En-dotriada sp., Duotaxis sp., and Duostominidae (genus Krikoumbilica?).
Clast composition:
— Among clasts, bioclastic-peloidal wacke-stone, packstone to grainstone with Tu-biphytes remains is the most common type (Pl. 2, Figs. 2, 8). The matrix is partly winnowed away, and the interstices filled with blocky spar. Peloids and Tubiphytes are the
most common. Neomorphically altered mol-lusk shell fragments, echinoderms, foramin-ifera, green algae, ostracods and brachiopod fragments are subordinate. Thin encrustation by microbiallites is sometimes present.
—	In the cementstone, only Tubiphytes is recognizable. Specimens are oriented approximately in the same direction, separated by bladed spar. Rarely, peloidal packstone clings to Tubiphytes. Cementstone may interchange with bioclastic-peloidal wackestone to packstone with Tubiphytes in decimetre-thick layers (Pl. 1, Figs. 7-8).
—	Washed-out bioclastic-peloidal wackestone, packstone to grainstone with dasycladacean algae is the next common clast type (Pl. 2, Figs. 5-6). In the field some several centimetres long leached-out bundles of dasy-cladaceans are visible (Pl. 1, Fig. 3). Dasycladacean thalli are in places partly filled by peloidal packstone, and partly by brownish bladed spar. The intermediate space is filled with intraclastic-peloidal packstone. Tubiphytes is common, while benthic foraminifera and fragments of mollusc shells are subordinate. The matrix (%) is rattled by patches of vugs filled with spar and resembling birds' eyes texture.
—	The next group of clasts is represented by peloidal and intraclastic partly winnowed packstone to grainstone and fine-grained rudstone (Pl. 2, Figs. 3-4). These two textures may be present in the same clasts, separated by dark, dense, more micritic boundary 1-1.5 mm in thickness, or present individually. In packstone peloids predominate, but a significant proportion is probably of Tubiphytes origin. Around 10 % of grains belong to bioclasts other than Tubiphytes, such as echinoderms and rare mollusc fragments. In fine-grained breccia, intraclasts with micro-bialites, microproblematica (Tubiphytes), or plain micrite, and peloids predominate. Echinoderms, mollusc fragments and Tubiphytes are most notable of rare bioclasts. Dasycla-daceans and brachiopod shells are very rare. Few ooids were also noted. Clasts are bound by blocky spar cement. Clear, mosaic spar may also be present as the youngest cement, cutting through older constituents (Pl. 4, Figs. 6-8).
—	A special type of clasts is represented by interchanging bioclastic-peloidal wackestone to packstone, and microbialitic bindstone, forming laminated texture. The first type of laminae is similar to already described microfacies types: peloids and intraclasts with Tubiphytes predominate over other clasts (Tubiphytes, foraminifera, shell fragments, gastropods). Both types of lamina are rattled by vugs (30 % of total area], filled in lower part by calcisiltite and upwards by bioclas-tic-pelletal packstone, brownish bladed spar and mosaic spar.
—	Oncoid rudstone is the next clast type. Other grains besides microbialitic oncoids are Tubiphytes, echinoderms and shell fragments.
—	Coarse dolospar clasts represent completely dolomitized clasts of variable composition.
Packstone
Subordinate to its coarse-grained variety is packstone to fine-grained rudstone (Pl. 3, Fig. 1]. Bed thickness is from 5 cm to 35 cm. Internal bedding and lamination is sometimes present, where massive fine grained and inversely graded horizons interchange. Allochems are represented by peloids, intraclasts (mudstone, pelletal packstone, microbial-ites), Tubiphytes, mollusc fragments, foraminifera (Endotebanella bicamerata Salaj in Salaj et al.] (Pl. 4, Figs. 1-2], echinoderms, brachio-pod fragments, ostracods, and calcimicrobes. The partly washed-out matrix is recrystallized into microspar.
Fine-grained rudstone
In fine-grained rudstone, reddish »haemati-tic« matrix is squashed between allochems, or these may be in stylolite contact. Clear blocky spar cross-cuts clasts and matrix. Allochems are mostly intraclasts with microbialites, Tubiphytes, fuzzy peloids, and rare bioclasts (echi-noderms, rare and questionable sponges).
Calcitulite (mudstone)
Subordinate to other lithological types is dense, gray limestone with horizontal lamination. Bedding is thin, up to 10 cm in thickness.
Dolomite
Coarse dolomite completely replaces limestone in beds of 5-30 cm in thickness. The ghost texture sometimes points at the original breccia, or to horizontally laminated limestone, described above.
Red and green mudstone
Red and light green, up to 10 cm thick beds of mudstone are clearly visible in segments A and B (Pl. 1, Fig. 4). The lower bed boundary may be slightly irregular surface, but this might also be due to differential compaction or dissolution. At least one of these layers contains broken pieces of dolomite, reworked into mudstone (Pl. 1, Fig. 5]. The colour of mudstone may change laterally, but it is most often red. More subtle than discrete layers are reddish upper surfaces of other beds (Pl. 1, Fig. 6).
Platform characteristics
Despite its large areal extent[42], the composition of platform carbonates of the CDLF received little attention. Researchers mostly describe macroscopic aspect of dolomite and limestone, without much detailed sedimentological investigation. Platform carbonates are usually dolo-mitised, and the primary composition is thus strongly obscured. The majority of information regarding composition of Late Ladinian-Early Carnian platforms in the Dolomites area thus derives from the study of isolated, mostly gravity-displaced blocks (cipits) of the platform rim and slope, which were sealed from dolomitiz-ing fluids by the enclosing basinal marls[43-48]. Among these, blocks exhibiting boundstone facies received considerably more attention than other facies types, which might potentially give a better glimpse on the platform interior. In the platform-to-basin transect, Biddle[44] successively shows (from the interior towards basin) subtidal lagoon and dasycladacean meadows, intertidal sand shoals, algae dominated reef flat, organically bound submarine-cemented reef complex, fore reef breccias and muds, and finally a basin plain. Reijmer[49] lists a similar succession of depositional environments: in the inner platform area, dasycladaceans domi-
nate over calcimicrobes, peloids, foraminifera, and micrite lumps; the back reef area is characterized by algal-foraminiferal and sponge-coral patch reefs; the reef margin with abundant Tubiphytes, other microproblematica, peloids and »evinosponges«, and the transition to the upper slope with encrusting sponges, corals, peloids and diverse skeletal grains (including dasycladaceans, gastropods, and Tubiphytes) follow. Reijmer[49], however, focused his attention on composition of fine-grained slope/basin resediments, with grains of predominantly margin and slope origin. A more detailed analysis of the platform top itself is given by Seeling et al.[50] on the example of Concarena buildup. In the lagoon area, Seeling et al.[50] describe a regular alternation of peritidal carbonate cycles. Tubiphytes framestone and early marine cementation were found characteristic for transition from the lagoon to the back reef area. A monotonous cyclic sedimentation of subtidal, peritidal and supratidal carbonate was noted also by Trombetta[48] and Keim and Schlager[51]. Missoni et al.[52] recently investigated Wetterstein-type carbonate platform in Serbia. They could not recognize the platform top, but they do mention abundance of Tubiphytes in Ladinian to Lower Carnian platform carbonates. According to Bole[53] the Wetterstein Limestone and Dolomite of the Peca massive deposited in back-reef and reef setting. The former contains intraclastic-bioclastic, and intraclastic-bioclastic-peloidal wackestone and packstone, as well as limestone and dolomite with stromatolites. Among bioclasts, codiaceans are the most common, followed by bivalve fragments, foraminifera and echinoderms. The reef carbonate is built by corals, sponges and also microproblematica. Oncoids are present in almost all facies. In Ladinian-Carnian reef of Calabrian Apennines, Boni et al.[54] distinguished between the reefal boundstone facies with sphinctozoan sponges, biogenic crusts, Tubiphytes, other microproblematica and rare corals, the fore-reef debris rudstone facies, and the dasycladacean packstone-grainstone back-reef facies. According to Boni et al.[54], this reef association is similar to the Wetterstein limestone of the Northern Calcareous Alps. The importance of microproblematica at the Wetterstein platform edge was
also noted by Brandner and Resch[55], Flügel[56], Henrich[57], and Dullo and Lein[58]. Tubiphytes and other microproblematica, however, are associated with sphinctozoan sponges and corals, none of which were found in Medvedica. To finally summarise, for the time-equivalent platforms a cyclic peritidal sedimentation is characteristic for the innermost platform. No such clasts were found in the Medvedica breccia. The wackestone/packstone with dasycla-daceans microfacies type fits well into the inner platform/lagoon area, while the enrichment with Tubiphytes probably better corresponds to a slightly more outer position, closer to the reef margin in the Cassian Dolomite model. On-coid rudstone and more grainy varieties may be placed even slightly more towards higher-energy environment of the back-reef area. Taking the predominance of dasycladacean and Tubiphytes rich clasts into account, sedimentation is considered to take place in the transitional zone between the lagoon and the back-reef area or, alternatively, in the internally differentiated lagoon with swells.
Stratigraphic position and genesis of breccia
As already noted, the stratigraphic position of the breccia succession remains dubious due to coverage. The lower boundary is currently interpreted as fault-bound, while the succession seems to continue with the unbreciated CDLF (Fig. 2). The lithology itself gives little opportunity for a more precise determination of age, rather than on the basis of superposition. The only foraminifera found within the matrix in Medvedica is E. bicamerata, with stratigraphic range from Anisian[59] to Norian[60, 61] or even Rhaetian[62]. Endotebanella bicamerata is the usual element of Middle Triassic assemblages present within clasts[63], so the assemblage within breccia clasts is not markedly different (that is within stratigraphic resolution offered by foraminifera at the time), despite the fact that truncation of calcite veins at the edges of clasts suggests a complete lithification of limestone and their tectonic deformation prior to brecciation. Turriglomina mesotriasica,
restricted to Anisian and Ladinian[63], provides a pre-Carnian (at most Lower Julian] age of CDLF. Unfortunatelly, we did not try to determine dasycladaceans. The uppermost boundary of the entire CDLF is represented by clastics, variously named as Borovnica beds[11, 32, 64], Grosu-plje-Orle beds[23], Raibl beds[8, 9, 12, 65], Zaplaz For-mation[3], or as Mohorje Formation[4]. Bivalves found in the lower part of these beds include Lopha montiscaprilis (Klipstein] (Umbrostrea? montiscaprilis in Szente et al.[66]), indicative for the uppermost Julian[67]. The measured succession may thus be very conservatively placed between the uppermost Ladinian and the uppermost Julian.
Poor sorting, angularity of clasts, and small amount of matrix point at short transport of clasts. Green and red mudstone point at subaer-ial exposure. Mudstone seems to correspond to residual clay in Durn et al.[68]. The breccia can be thus interpreted as emersion breccia[69, 70], or as dissolution breccia accumulated on sub-aerially exposed surface[68]. The repeated occurrence of emersion levels (residual clay] on upper bedding planes, as well as rare intercalations of micritic and calcarenitic beds, however, point at oscillating, rather than a single drop of sea level, and the lack of bauxite deposits similarly discredit a longer-lasting emergence. Foraminifera, found in calcarenite, thus point at intervals of re-flooding of the surface. An example of megabreccia, formed concor-dantly on platform top, has been reported by Gianolla et al.[71]. According to Spence and Tucker[72], megabreccia may form on the platform-top during subaerial emergence due to the increase in stress on the sediment as the interstitial pore-water drains from the system. However, this example was set for the unlith-ified sediment, while clasts composing breccias in Medvedica show marks of complete lithification of limestone before brecciation. An explanation for this may be found in very early lithification of Ladinian - earliest Car-nian platform carbonates, largely governed by microbes[47, 50, 73, 74]. The third model for formation of megabreccias may be cliff erosion[75]. This model, however, requires tectonic activity, which would create steep relief.
The importance of emersion surfaces for correlations
Emergence horizons are a valuable marker as they allow precise subdivision and dating of similarly looking dolomitized platform carbonates which would otherwise prove to be impossible to distinguish^1, 76]. Moreover, as emergence often results from eustatic sea-level drop, it may become possible to correlate lithostrati-graphic units on at least regional scale[71]. Despite the lack of relative sea level curves in the northern External Dinarides, to which the Medvedica area belongs, we may resort to the sequence stratigraphy set for the Southern Alps area. According to Gianolla et al.[71] and De Zanche et al.[76], the time frame from Late Ladinian to end-of-Julian in the Southern Alps comprises four sequence stratigraphic cycles, with systems boundaries marked on the platforms by emersions. The Car1 depositional sequence (Late Langobardian to Early Julian] represents a time-frame for deposition of the Cassian Dolomite 1 platform carbonates. Its upper sequence boundary separates the Cassian Dolomite 1 from the Cassian Dolomite 2[76]. The next sequence, Car2, comprises the entire Cas-sian Dolomite 2 platform, ranging in age from Early Julian to the latest Julian. At the end of this sequence, the intraplatform basins were partly levelled-out due to a high export of carbonate from the platform. The following sequence, Car3, lasting until the Early Tuvalian, saw the final filling of the remaining intrabasinal space. During this time, shallow-water siliciclastic-carbonate sediments of the Dürrenstein Formation (sensu De Zanche et al.[76]) deposited. The lower system boundary is marked by erosion and carstification of the Cassian Dolomite 2 platform, while the upper one represents an erosional surface separating peritidal dolomite of the uppermost Dürrenstein Formation from the overlying clastics of the Raibl Formation (Car4) sensu De Zanche et al.[76]. Within the given time frame, the observed breccia level most likely correlates with the upper sequence boundary of the Car1 deposi-tional sequence. This interpretation would be supported by the overlying CDLF in the same tectonic block. In should be mentioned, how-
ever, that the changes in relative sea level depend not only on the eustasy, but are also under the influence of local tectonics[77]. Emergence of shallow platform may thus also result from the interplay of factors operating on a much more narrow area.
Towards the sequence stratigraphic framework
Breccias of similar composition to the one described in this paper, but located on top of the CDLF, were described by Dozet and Godec[5], Ramovš[8], Buser[9], Dozet[11, 23, 79], Pleničar[78], and Jelen[80]. Like the Medvedica breccia, these consist of angular, often very large clasts of CDLF in reddish matrix, but they differ in lacking intermediate autochthonous carbonates and are overlain by fine-grained clastics. They are often described as being positioned above the erosional surface on top of the CDLF and associated with bauxite, so they too represent emergence horizons (see[23]). Despite the lack of fossil evidence form the breccia matrix itself, they are considered as lowermost Julian 2 to
Tuvalian in age[5, 9].
In our opinion, this breccia on top of the CDLF marks the second and final emergence of the CDLF platform and correlates with the upper sequence boundary of the Car2 (the lower boundary of the Car3) depositional sequence of the uppermost Julian. Alternatively, it could be positioned at the lower sequence boundary of the Car4 depositional sequence[71, 76]. In the first case, the emergence lasted through the entire Car3 sequence, which is thus completely missing, through the lowstand systems tract of the Car4 depositional sequence, and perhaps also through part of its transgressive systems tract. This emergence phase is thus sufficiently long to allow for the formation of bauxite (see[13]). Alternatively, considering option of correlation with the lower boundary of the Car4 sequence, part of the older sequences may be eroded. However, the latter option does not allow for a time gap necessary for formation of bauxite, formation of which also requires humid and warm climate conditions[81], which became established soon or at the platform demise[82, 83].
Correlation of the emergence level on top of the CDLF platform in the northern External Dolomites with the Southern Alps is much more reliable as the Car1 sequence boundary, as it marks the sea-level drop of the second order, a regionally much more widespread event[84, 85]. For example, the cessation of platform growth and karstification in Julian is correlatable in the Northern Calcareous Alps, in the Carpathians and also in Serbia[52].
Concluding remarks
In the area of Medvedica (central Slovenia, External Dinarides), a succession of breccia beds separated by medium-thick limestone or dolomite and mudstone beds was investigated. Breccia consists of clasts belonging to Cassian Dolomite and Limestone Formation. Its lower boundary is presumably faulted, while it continues upwards into the Cassian Dolomite and Limestone Formation. Mudstone beds and weathered bed surfaces point at subaerial exposure. The breccia is thus interpreted as emersion breccia[69, 70], or as dissolution breccia accumulated on subaerially exposed sur-face[68]. The emergence of platform top is correlated with the upper sequence boundary of the Southern Alps' Car1 depositional sequence of Late Ladinian age[71, 76]. The emergence, however, could also result from local tectonics[77].
Acknowledgements
This study was financially supported by the Slovenian Research Agency (program number P1-0011). The authors are thankful to B. Celarc (Geological Survey of Slovenia) for the revision of the manuscript, and M. Štumergar (Geological Survey of Slovenia) for the preparation of thin sections.
References
[1] Dozet, S., Buser, S. (2009): Trias. V: Pleničar, M., Ogor-elec, B., Novak, M. (ur.): Geologija Slovenije. Ljubljana, Geološki zavod Slovenije 2009; str. 161-214.
[2]	Ogorelec, B. (2011): Mikrofacies mezozojskih karbonatnih kamnin Slovenije. Geologija, 54- suppl., str. 1-136.
[3]	Dozet, S. (2004b): Zaplaz Formation, Central Slovenia. RMZ - Materials and geoenvironment, 51,
str. 2175-2189.
[4]	Dozet, S. (2009a): Mohorje Formation, southern Slovenia. Geologija, 52, str. 11-20.
[5]	Dozet, S., Godec, M. (2009): Carnian bauxites at Muljava in central Slovenia. Materiali in tehnologije,
43,	str. 97-102.
[6]	Dozet, S., Godec, M. (2010): Middle Triassic dry-land phases in southern Slovenia. Materiali in tehnologije,
44,	str. 173-183.
[7]	Dozet, S., Kanduč, T., Markič, M. (2012): A contribution to petrology of dark grey to black interbeds within Upper Permian and Triassic carbonate rocks in the area between Ljubljana and Bloke, Central Slovenia. Geologija, 55, str. 77-92.
[8]	Ramovš, A. (1953): O stratigrafskih in tektonskih razmerah v Borovniški dolini in njeni okolici. Geologija, 1, str. 90-110.
[9]	Buser, S. (1965): Geološka zgradba južnega dela Ljubljanskega barja in njegovega obrobja. Geologija,
8,	str. 34-57.
[10]	Celarc, B. (2004): Problematika »cordevolskih« apnencev in dolomitov v slovenskih Južnih Alpah. Geologija, 47, str. 139-149.
[11]	Dozet, S. (2004a): O karnijskem oolitnem železna-tem boksitu Kopitovega griča ter o plasteh v njegovi talnini in krovnini. RMZ - Materials and geoenvironment, 51, str. 2191-2208.
[12]	Čar, J. (2010): Geološka zgradba idrijsko-cerkljanske-ga hribovja. Tolmač h Geološki karti idrijsko-cerkljan-skega hribovja med Stopnikom in Rovtami 1 : 25.000. Ljubljana, Geološki zavod Slovenije 2010; 127 str.
[13]	Celarc, B. (2008): Carnian bouxite horizon on the Kopitov grič near Borovnica (Slovenia) - is there a »forgotten« stratigraphic gap in its footwall? Geologija, 51, str. 147-152.
[14]	Lipold, M. V. (1858): Bericht über die geologische Aufnahme in Unter-Krain im Jahre 1857. Jahrbuch der kaiserlich-königlichen Geologischen Reichsanstalt,
9,	257-276.
[15]	Ramovš, A. (2001): Lipoldovo geološki raziskovanje in njegove rokopisne karte slovenskega ozemlja. Geologija, 44, str. 7-14.
[16]	Stache G. (1889): Die Liburnische Stufe und deren Grenz-Horizonte. Abhandlungen der Kaiserlich-Königlichen Geologischen Reichsanstalt, 13, str. 1-170.
[17]	Vetters, H. (1933): Geologische Karte von Radmannsdorf (Radovljica), 1:75.000. Wien, Geologische Reichsanstalt 1933.
[18]	Vetters, H. (1937): Erläuterungen zur Geologischen Karte von Österreich und seinen Nachbargebieten. Die Formationen und Gesteine der Ostalpen und Vorlande und der angrenzenden Teile der FränkischSchwäbischen Alp, des Böhmischen Massivs, der Karpathen und des Kaststes. Wien: Geologischen Bundesanstalt 1937, 351 str.
[19]	Buser, S. (1968): Osnovna geološka karta SFRJ. L 3378, Ribnica. Beograd: Zvezni geološki zavod 1968.
[20]	Buser, S. (1974): Tolmač lista Ribnica, L 33-76. Beograd: Zvezni geološki zavod 1974; 56 str.
[21]	Gospodarič, R. (1987): Speleogeološki podatki Taborske jame in njene okolice. Acta Carsologica, 16, str. 19-34.
[22]	Buser, S. (2006): Geološka zgradba širše okolice Županove jame. V: Viršek, D. (ur.): Županova jama, čudežni svet brez sonca. Grosuplje, Županova jama-turistično in okoljsko društvo Grosuplje 2006;
str. 39-42.
[23]	Dozet, S. (2002): Stratigrafski razvoj julske in tuval-ske podstopnje na območjih Oslice pri Muljavi. Geologija, 45, str. 353-358.
[24]	Dozet, S. (2003): Middle Liassic - Lower Malm stratigraphic gap in Suha krajina = stratigrafska vrzel srednji lias - spodnji malm na območju Suhe krajine. RMZ - Materials and geoenvironment, 50, str. 525-541.
[25]	Dozet, S., Kolar - Jurkovšek, T. (2007): Spodnjetrias-ne plasti na južnovzhodnem obrobju Ljubljanske kotline, osrednja Slovenija. RMZ - Materials and geoenvironment, 54, str. 361-386.
[26]	Dozet, S. (2009b): Lower Jurassic carbonate succession between Predole and Mlačevo, Central Slovenia. RMZ - Materials and geoenvironment, 56,
str. 164-193.
[27]	Placer, L. (1999): Contribution to the macrotectonic subdivision of the border region between Southern Alps and External Dinarides. Geologija, 41,
str. 223-255.
[28]	Placer, L. (2008): Principles of the tectonic subdivision of Slovenia. Geologija, 51, str. 205-217.
[29]	Haas, J., Kovacs, S., Krystyn, L., Lein, R. (1995): Significance of late Permian-Triassic facies zones in ter-rane reconstructions in the Alpine-North Pannonian domain. Tectonophysics, 242: str. 19-40.
[30]	Schmid, S. M., Bernoulli, D., Fügenschuh, B., Matenco, L., Schefer, S., Schuster, R., Tischler, M., Ustaszewski, K. (2008): The Alpine-Carpathian-Dinaric orogenic
system: correlation and evolution of tectonic units. Swiss Journal of Geosciences, 101, str. 139-183.
[31]	Buser, S. (1989): Development of the Dinaric and the Julian carbonate platforms and of the intermediate Slovenian Basin. Memorie della Società Geologica Italiana, 40, str. 313-320.
[32]	Buser, S. (1996): Geology of Western Slovenia and its paleogeographic evolution. V: Drobne, K., Goričan, Š., Kotnik, B. (ur.): International workshop Postojna '96: The role of impact processes and biological evolution of planet Earth. Ljubljana, ZRC SAZU 1996;
str. 111-123.
[33]	Fossilworks - Gateway to the Paleobiology Database[online]. Housed at Macquire University, obnovljeno in citirano dne 7.10.2014. Dostopno na svetovnem spletu: <http://www.fossilworks.com>.
[34]	Pleničar, M., Premru, U. (1977): Tolmač lista Novo mesto, L 33-79. Beograd, Zvezni geološki zavod 1977; 61 str.
[35]	Ogorelec, B., Rothe, P. (1993). Mikrofazies, Diagenese und Geochemie des Dachsteinkalkes und Hauptdolo-mits in Süd-West-Slowenien. Geologija, 35,
str. 81-181.
[36]	Dozet, S. (1993): Lofer cyclothems from the Lower Liassic Krka limestone. Rivista Italiana di Paleontologia e Stratigrafia, 99, str. 81-100.
[37]	Ramovš, A. (1961): Geološki izleti po Ljubljanski okolici. Ljubljana, Mladinska knjiga 1961; 230 str.
[38]	Buser, S. (1987): Naravni arhitektonsko-gradbeni kamni v Ljubljani. Geološki zbornik, 8, str. 61-67.
[39]	Ramovš, A. (2000): Podpeški in črni ter pisani lesno-brdski apnenec skozi čas. Ljubljana, Mineral 2000; 115 str.
[40]	Dunham, R. J. (1962): Classification of carbonate rocks according to depositional texture. V: Han, W. E. (ur.): Classification of carbonate rocks, A symposium. AAPG Memoires, str. 108-121.
[41]	Flugel, E. (2004): Microfacies of Carbonate Rocks. Berlin Heidelberg, Springer 2004; 976 str.
[42]	Buser, S. (2009): Geološka karta Slovenije 1:250.000. Ljubljana, Geološki zavod Slovenije, 2009.
[43]	Wendt, J., Fürsich, F. T. (1980): Facies analysis and palaeogeography of the Cassian Formation, Triassic, Southern Alps. Rivista Italiana di Paleontologia, 85, str. 1003-1028.
[44]	Biddle, K. T. (1981): The basinal Cipit boulders: indicators of Middle to Upper Triassic buildup margins, Dolomite Alps, Italy. Rivista Italiana di Paleontologia, 86, str. 779-794.
[45]	Russo, F., Neri, C., Mastandrea, A., Baracca, A. (1997): The mud mound nature of the Cassian platform
margins of the Dolomites. A case history: the Cipit boulders from Punta Grohmann (Sasso Piatto Massif, northern Italy). Facies, 36, str. 25-36.
[46]	Russo, F. (2005): Biofacies evolution of the Triassic platforms of the Dolomites, Italy. Annali dell'Universita degli Studi di Ferrara Museologia Scientifica e Naturalistica, vol. spec. 2005, str. 33-44.
[47]	Tosti, F., Guiso, A., Demasi, F., Mastandrea, A., Nacca-rato, A., Tagarelli, A., Russo, F. (2011): Microbialites as primary builders of the Ladinian-Carnian platforms in the Dolomites: biogeochemical characterization. Geo. Alp, 8, str. 156-162.
[48]	Trombetta, G. L. (2011): Facies analysis, geometry and architecture of a Carnian carbonate platform: the Settsass/Richthofen reef system (Dolomites, Southern Alps, northern Italy). Geo. Alp, 8, str. 56-75.
[49]	Reijmer, J. J. G. (1998): Compositional variations during phases of progradation and retrogradation of a Triassic carbonate platform (Picco di Vallandro/Dür-renstein, dolomites, Italy). Geologische Rundschau, 87, str. 436-448.
[50]	Seeling, M., Emmerich, A., Bechstädt, T., Zühlke, R. (2005): Accomodation/sedimentation and massive early marine cementation: Latemar vs. Concarena (Middle/Upper Triassic, Southern Alps). Sedimentary Geology, 175, str. 439-457.
[51]	Keim, L., Schlager, W. (1999): Automicrite facies on steep slopes (Triassic, Dolomites, Italy). Facies, 41, str. 15-26.
[52]	Missoni, S., Gawlick, H. J., Sudar, M., Jovanović, D., Lein, R. (2012): Onset and demise of the Wetterstein Carbonate Platform in the mélange areas of the Zlatibor Mountain (Sirogojno, SW Serbia). Facies, 58, str. 95-111.
[53]	Bole, B. (2002): Carbonate rocks of Mt. Peca, Slovenia. Geologija, 45, str. 59-69.
[54]	Boni, M., lannace, A., Torre, M. Zamparelli, V. (1994): The Ladinian-Carnian reef facies of Monte Caramolo (Calabria, Southern Italy). Facies, 30, str. 101-118.
[55]	Brandner, R., Resch, W. (1981): Reef development in the Middle Triassic Ladinian and Cordevolian of the Northern Limestone Alps near Innsbruck, Austria. SEPM Special Publication, 30, str. 203-231.
[56]	Flügel, E. (1981): Paleoecology and facies of Upper Triassic reefs in the Northern Calcareous Alps. SEPM Special Publication, 30, str. 291-359.
[57]	Henrich, R. (1982): Middle Triassic carbonate margin development: Hochstaufen-Zwieselmassif, northern Calcareous Alps, Germany. Facies, 6,
str. 85-105.
[58]	Dullo, W. C., Lein, R. (1982): Facies and environment of the Leckkogel Beds (Carnian; Alps). Facies, 6,
str. 25-36.
[59]	Pantić, S. (1970): Mikropaleontološke karakteristike trijaskog stuba antiklinale ždrela (istočna Srbija). Zavod za geološka i geofizička istraživanja Beograd, Vesnik (Geologija), Serija A, 28, str. 377-386.
[60]	Salaj, J., Borza, K., Samuel, O. (1983): Triassic foraminifers of the West Carpathians. Bratislava: Geologicky üstav Dionysa Stüra 1983; 213 str.
[61]	Trifonova, E. (1993): Taxonomy of Bulgarian Triassic foraminifera. II. Families Endothyriidae to Ophthal-midiidae. Geologica Balcanica, 23, str. 19-66.
[62]	Gale, L., Kolar - Jurkovšek, T., Šmuc, A., Rožič, B. (2012a): Integrated Rhaetian foraminiferal and conodont biostratigraphy from the Slovenian Basin, eastern Southern Alps. Swiss Journal of Geosciences, 105, str. 435-462.
[63]	Rettori, R. (1995): Foraminiferi del Trias inferiore e medio della Tetide: revisione tassonomica, stratigrafia ed interpretazione filogenetica. Geneve, Università de Geneve, Publications du Départmentde Géologie et Paléontologie, 18 (1995), str. 1-107.
[64]	Kovacs, S., Sudar, M., Gradinaru, E., Gawlick, H. J., Karamata, S., Haas, J., Péró, C., Gaetani, M., Mello, J., Polak, M., Aljinović, D., Ogorelec, B., Kolar -Jurkovšek, T., Jurkovšek, B., Buser, S. (2011): Triassic evolution of the tectonostratigraphic units of the Circum-Pannonian region. Jahrbuch der Geologischen Bundesanstalt, 151, str. 199-280.
[65]	Germovšek, C. (1955): O geoloških razmerah na prehodu Posavskih gub v Dolenjski kras med Stično in Šentrupertom. Geologija, 3, str. 116-135.
[66]	Szente, I., Lobitzer, H., Schlagintweit, F. (2010): A short note on the occurrence of the upper Triassic oyster Umbrostrea? montiscaprilis (Klipstein, 1843) (Mollusca: Bivalvia) in the Northern Alpine Raibl Beds of the Schafberg, Salzburg, Austria. Abhandlungen der geologischen Bundesanstalt, 65, str. 27-33.
[67]	Ruvinetti, R. (2004). Molluschi bentonici e brachio-podi nell'evoluzione paleoambientale e paleoclimatica del Carnico medio del Sudalpino orientale: doktorska disertacija. Ferrara: Università degli Studi di Ferrara 2004; 190 str.
[68]	Durn, G., Ottner, F., Mindszentz, A., Tišljar, J., Mileusnić, M. (2006): Clay mineralogy of bauxites and palaeosols in Istria formed during regional subaerial exposures of the Adriatic Carbonate Platform. V: Vlahovič, I., Tibljaš, D. Durn, G. (ur.):
3rd Mid-European Clay Conference, Opatija, Hrvatska, 18.- 23. 9. 2006: Field Trip Guidebook. Zagreb: University of Zagreb 2006; str. 3-30.
[69]	Tišljar, J., Vlahović, I., Velić, I., Sokač, B. (2002): Carbonate platform megafacies of the Jurassic and Cretaceous deposits of the Karst Dinarides. Geologia Croatica, 55, str. 139-170.
[70]	Husinec, A., Jelaska, V. (2006): Relative sea-level changes recorded on an isolated carbonate platform: Tithonian to Cenomanian succession, southern Croatia. Journal of Sedimentary Research, 76,
str. 1120-1136.
[71]	Gianolla, P., De Zanche, V., Mietto, P. (1998): Triassic sequence stratigraphy in the Southern Alps (Northern Italy): definition of sequences and basin evolution. V: De Graciansky, P. C., Hardenbol, J., Jacquin, T., Vail, P. R. (ur.): Mesozoic and Cenozoc Sequence Stratigraphy of European Basins. SEPM Special Publication, 60, str. 719-746.
[72]	Spence, G. H., Tucker, M. E. (1997): Genesis of limestone megabreccias and their significance in carbonate sequence stratigraphicc models: a review. Sedimentary Geology, 112, str. 163-193.
[73]	Russo, F., Mastandrea, C., Stefani, M., Neri, C. (2000): Carbonate facies dominated by syndepositional cements: a key component of Middle Triassic platforms. The Marmolada case history (Dolomites, Italy). Facies, 42, str. 211-226.
[74]	Blendinger, W. (2001): Triassic carbonate buildup flanks in the Dolomites, northern Italy: breccias, boulder fabric and the importance of early diagenesis. Sedimentology, 48, str. 919-933.
[75]	Kendall, C. G. St. C., Schlager, W. (1981): Carbonates and relative changes in sea level. Marine Geology, 44, str. 181-212.
[76]	De Zanche, V., Gianolla, P., Mietto, P., Siorpaes, C., Vail, P. R. (1993): Triassic sequence stratigraphy in the Dolomites (Italy). Memorie di Science Geologiche, 45, str. 1-27.
[77]	Emery, D. Myers, K. (1996): Sequence stratigraphy. Oxford & Northampton, Blackwell Science 1996; 297 str.
[78]	Pleničar, M. (1970): Tolmač lista Postojna, L 33-77. Beograd, Zvezni geološki zavod 1970; 62 str.
[79]	Dozet, S. (1979): Karnijske plasti južno in zahodno od Ljubljanskega barja. Geologija, 22, str. 55-70.
[80]	Jelen, B. (1990): Karnijska školjčna favna na Lesnem brdu in njen paleobiološki pomen. Geologija, 31-32, str. 11-127.
[81]	Gow, N. N., Lozej, G. P. (1993): Bauxite. Geoscience Canada, 20, str. 9-16.
[82]	Keim, L., Spötl, C., Brandner, R. (2006): The aftermath of the Carnian carbonate platform demise: a basinal perspective (Dolomites, Southern Alps). Sedimentology, 53, str. 361-386.
[83]	Breda, A., Preto, N., Roghi, G., Furin, S., Meneguolo, R., Ragazzi, E., Fedele, P., Gianolla, P. (2009): The Carnian Pluvial Event in the Tofane area (Cortina d'Ampezzo, Dolomites, Italy). Geo. Alp, 6, str. 80-115.
[84]	Gianolla, P., Jacquin, T. (1998): Triassic sequence stratigraphic framework of western European basins. V: De Graciansky, P. C., Hardenbol, J., Jacquin, T., Vail, P. R. (ur.): Mesozoic and Cenozoc Sequence Stratigraphy of European Basins. SEPM Special Publication, 60, str. 643-650.
[85]	Ogg, J. G. (2004): The Triassic period. V: Gradstein, F. M., Ogg, J. G., Smith, A. G. (ur.): A geologic time scale 2004. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press 2004, str. 271-306.