Ed Landing, Gerd Geyer, Mark D. Schmitz, Thomas Wotte, Artem Kouchinsky

• The Cambrian is anomalous among geological systems as many reports divide it into three divisions of indeterminate rank. This use of “lower”, “middle”, and “upper” has been a convenient way to subdivide the Cambrian despite agreement it consists of four global series. Traditional divisions of the system into regional series (Lower, Middle, Upper) reflected local biotic developments not interprovincially correlatable with any precision. However, use of “lower”, “middle”, and “upper” is unsatisfactory. These adjectives lack standard definition,The Cambrian is anomalous among geological systems as many reports divide it into three divisions of indeterminate rank. This use of “lower”, “middle”, and “upper” has been a convenient way to subdivide the Cambrian despite agreement it consists of four global series. Traditional divisions of the system into regional series (Lower, Middle, Upper) reflected local biotic developments not interprovincially correlatable with any precision. However, use of “lower”, “middle”, and “upper” is unsatisfactory. These adjectives lack standard definition, evoke the regional series, and are misused. Notably, there is an almost 50 year use of three Cambrian subsystems and a 1997 proposal to divide the Avalonian and global Cambrian into four series and three subsystems. The global series allow proposal of three formal subsystems: a ca. 32.6 Ma Lower Cambrian Subsystem (Terreneuvian and Series 2/proposed Lenaldanian Series), a ca. 9.8 Ma Middle, and a ca. 10 Ma Upper Cambrian Subsystem (=Furongian Series). Designations as “Lower Cambrian Subsystem” or “global Lower Cambrian” distinguish the new units from such earlier units as “Lower Cambrian Series” and substitute for the de facto subsystem terms “lower”, “middle”, and “upper”. Cambrian subsystems are comparable to the Carboniferous’ Lower (Mississippian) and Upper (Pennsylvanian) Subsystems.…