Vörös A. szerk.: Fragmenta Mineralogica Et Palaentologica 14. 1989. (Budapest, 1989)
Summarizing the conclusions drawn from the subsidence curves it can be stated that: (1) The considerable difference between the southwestern and northeastern areas of the TCR is well visible in the subsidence history too: the subsidence was slow and gradual in the southwest, whereas in the northeast it began later ( 42 Ma B. P.) but was very rapid. (2) The demonstration of the slow and gradual subsidence of the southwestern Bakony area during the Lutetian and most of the Bartonian modifies the model presented by BÁLDI and BÁLDI- BEKE (1985). They suggested a rapid and great (about 1000 m) subsidence in the late Lutetian (44-45 Ma B. P.) (3) Global eustatic sea-level changes and local crustal subsidence controlled the course of the Middle Eocene transgression in the TCR, but the second factor was decisive. Looking at the revised version of the global eustatic curves (HAQ, HARDENBOL and VAIL 1987) (Fig. 2) a remarkable short-term sea level rise appears at the beginning of the Lutetian (4849 Ma B. P.). This rise of sea level might be a proper primary cause of the transgression recorded in the southwestern area of the TCR during the Nummu li tes laevigatus Zone (~ NP 14). From this time onwards, the crustal subsidence took over the control. The global curve shows a long-term sea-level fall of about 40 m until the end of the Middle Eocene, and yet the transgression proceeded in the whole TCR, and the basins reached more than 100 m depth. The subsidence of the basement (crust) might exceed 400 m. The rate of subsidence was not uniform throughout the TCR. Differences in thickness of sediments (e. g. between Cr-2 and Sv-1, Fig. 4 and 6) can be interpreted in terms of sedimentation on tilting blocks. On the other hand, true, deep transtensional ("pull-apart") basins did not develop during the Middle but only in the Late Eocene. REFERENCES BALLA, Z. (1981): Magyarország kréta- paleogén képződményeinek geodinamikai elemzése (Geodynamic analysis of Cretaceous-Paleogene formations of Hungary). - Ált. Földt. Szemle, J_6: 89- 180. BÁLDI, T. and BÁLDI-BEKE, M. (1985): The evolution of the Hungarian Paleogene basins.Acta geol. Hung., 28 (1-2): 5-28. BÁLDI-BEKE, M. (1984): A dunántúli paleogén képződmények nannoplanktonja (The nannoplankton of the Transdanubian Paleogene formations). - Geol. Hung., Ser. Pal., 43 : 1-307. DUDICH, E. and KOPEK, G. (1980): A Bakony és környéke eocén ősföldrajzának vázlata (Outlines of the Eocene paleogeography of the Bakony Mountains, Transdanubia, Hungary). - Földt. Közi., 110: 417-431. EHLMANN, A.J. (1978) : Glauconite. 364- 366. - In: FAIRBRIDGE, R.W. and BOURGEOIS, J. (Eds.): The encyclopedia of sedimentology . - Dowden, Hutchinson and Ross, Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania, 901 pp. HAQ, B.U., HARDENBOL, J. and VAIL, P.R. (1987) : Chronology of fluctuating sea levels since the Triassic. - Science, 235: 1 1 56- 1 167. HAYNES, J.R. (1981): Foraminifera. - MacMillan, London, 433 p. HORVÁTH-KOLLÁNYI, K. (1983): Ujabb korrelációs lehetőség a bakonyi és az ÉK-dunántuli terület eocénje között a Bakonyszentkirály Bszk-3.sz. fúrás plankton foraminiferái alapján (A new possibility for correlating the Eocene of the Bakony and NE Transdanubia in the light of planktonic foraminifera from borehole Bakonyszentkirály Bszk-3). Annual Rep. Hung. Geol. Inst. (1981): 295- 325. KECSKEMÉTI, T. (1982) : A Bakonyhegység nu mmuliteseinek rétegtana, paleobiogeográfiája, törzsfejlődési és fejlődéstörténeti vázlata [stratigraphy, paleobiogeography, phylogeny and evolution of the Nummulites of the Bakony Mountains]. - Unpubl. "thesis (in Hungarian), Budapest, 179 pp. KECSKEMÉTI, T. and VÖRÖS, A. (1975): Biostratigraphische und paläoökologische Untersuchungen einer transgressiven eocänen Schichtserie (Darvastó, Bakony-Gebirge). Fragm. Min. et Pal., 6: 63-93. KOPEK, G., DUDICH, E. and KECSKEMÉTI, T. (1971): L'éocene de la Montagne du Bakony.Ann. Inst. Geol. Publ. Hung., 54 4/1: 203-231.
