P

recambrianR
ese
a rch34
5(202
0)1
057
21

The Ediacaran–Cambrian boundary: Evaluating stratigraphic completeness

and the Great Unconformity
Setareh Shahkaramia, Luis A. Buatoisa,⁎, M. Gabriela Mánganoa, James W. Hagadornb,
John Almondc
a Department of Geological Sciences, University of Saskatchewan, 114 Science Place Saskatoon, SK S7N 5E2, Canada
b Denver Museum of Nature and Science, 2001 Colorado Boulevard, Denver, CO 80205, USA
c Natura Viva cc, Cape Town 8001, South Africa

A R T I C L E I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Ediacaran– The Ediacaran–Cambrian transition was a time of marked biological and sedimentary changes, representing a
Cambrian boundarySequence significant evolutionary breakthrough in Earth’s history. Numerous explanations have been posited for these
stratigraphy dramatic changes. One view emphasizes an extensive period of widespread continental denudation during the
Sea-level changes
Neoproterozoic followed by extensive reworking of the basement during the early Cambrian, resulting in the
Macroevolution
formation of what is known as the “Great Unconformity”. Geologic events leading to the formation of this
Cambrian explosion
Great Unconformity unconformity have been hypothesized as an environmental trigger for the Cambrian explosion. H ere we review
seventeen key Ediacaran-Cambrian successions around the globe with a focus on their sedimentary facies and
sequence-stratigraphic architecture. Based on this information, we explore the relationship of the Ediacaran–
Cambrian boundary to this unconformity, underscoring a more nuanced scenario. We consider each section in a
chemostratigraphic and chronostratigraphic framework, and consider the hypothesized origin of this
unconformity at each locale—for example, whether it was eustatic in origin and therefore of global stratigraphic
significance or whether it resulted from local tectonics, implying marked inter-basin diachronism. Our sys-
tematic review shows that significant diachronism was involved in the generation of the Great Unconformity,
suggesting that the sea-level fall reflects overprint of local tectonics on pure eustasy. In most places, the Great
Unconformity is actually a composite sequence boundary resulting from successive eustatic episodes of sea-level
rise and fall overprinted by multiple tectonic events of subsidence and uplift. Thus this surface should not be
used for inter-basin correlations. Although the general proximity and common co-occurrence of the Ediacaran–
Cambrian boundary with a sequence boundary (SB) in places resulting in fluvial valley incision, has proved
challenging for biostratigraphic sampling, by mapping this unconformity and its associated facies, there are new
opportunities. In particular, paleontological work in terminal Ediacaran deposits located in inter fluve positions
may be promising because these areas may have preserved thick shallow-marine strata below the SB. Such strata
could hold additional clues to help fill in gaps in our understanding of the Ediacaran roots of the Cambrian
explosion.

1. Introduction
The Ediacaran–Cambrian boundary (541.0 ± 1.0 Ma; but see
Linnemann et al., 2019 for the proposal of a younger age of approxi-
mately 538.8 Ma) is one of the most important points of the geological
time scale because it encompasses a critical period in the history of life.
This boundary is defined by the first appearance of the ichnospecies
Treptichnus pedum (Brasier et al., 1994; Narbonne et al., 2012; Peng
et al., 2012; Buatois et al., 2013; Buatois, 2018), although further re-
finements suggest using a T. pedum zone, which includes other
ichnotaxa as well (Landing et al., 2013). This view has been subse-
quently challenged (Babcock et al., 2014), making detailed integrated
analysis of the boundary remarkably timely (see Buatois, 2018 for
discussion).
A series of studies have emphasized the importance of the so-called
“Great Unconformity”, which separates Precambrian from Cambrian
strata (Peters and Gaines, 2012; Keller et al., 2019; Wan et al., 2019).
Based on an extensive analysis of the expression of the Great Un-
conformity in North America, Peters and Gaines (2012) proposed that
an extended period of continental denudation during the

⁎ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: luis.buatois@usask.ca (L.A. Buatois).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.precamres.2020.105721
Received 30 October 2019; Received in revised form 16 March 2020; Accepted 30 March 2020
Av ailableon lin
e3 1M arch2 020
03 01 -9268/© 2020ElsevierB .V
.A llrig
h tsre
serv ed.
S. Shahkarami, et al.
Neoproterozoic followed by extensive physical reworking of soil, re-
golith and basement rocks during the first continental-scale Phaner-
ozoic marine transgression resulted in worldwide occurrence of this
surface. These authors suggested that the Great Unconformity might
“have been an environmental trigger for the evolution of biominer-
alization and the ‘Cambrian explosion’ of ecologic and taxonomic di-
versity following the Neoproterozoic emergence of animals” (Peters and
Gaines, 2012). Further work in North America has attributed the Great
Unconformity to heterogeneous Neoproterozoic glacial erosion of un-
precedented scale (Keller et al., 2019). Also, recent work has refined
our knowledge of this unconformity in other areas of the world, such as
the North China Craton (Wan et al., 2019).
Many explanations have been put forward to account for the dra-
matic changes that took place during the Ediacaran-Cambrian transi-
tion, including environmental, geochemical, and biotic factors
(Marshall, 2006; Squire et al., 2006; Budd, 2008; Maloof et al., 2010;
Erwin and Tweedt, 2012; Laflamme et al., 2013; Mángano and Buatois,
2014; Schiffbauer et al., 2016; Zhuravlev & Wood, 2018; Darroch et al.,
2018; Muscente et al., 2018; Linnemann et al., 2019; Wood et al., 2019;
Bowyer et al., 2020). Despite its importance, the precise location of the
Ediacaran–Cambrian boundary has been a highly contentious issue,
further complicating evaluation of the chronostratigraphic framework
of major evolutionary events (Buatois et al., 2013; Babcock et al., 2014;
Linnemann et al., 2019). The Great Unconformity is in many places a
diachronous surface that spans as much as 1.2 billion years, even within
the same basin (e.g., Karlstrom et al., 2003; 2018; Matthews et al.,
2017). Moreover, within the presumably well-defined “Cambrian”
epicratonic sheet sandstones that cap this unconformity, emerging
stratigraphic and geochronometric work is revealing that many of these
“Cambrian” sandstones to be, at least in part, Ediacaran (e.g., Sanford
and Arnott, 2010; Hagadorn et al., 2011), Furongian (“Late”) Cambrian
and Early Ordovician (e.g., Amato and Mack, 2012; Holm-Denoma
et al., 2016; Lowe and Arnott, 2016). Such records imply that up to 150
million years of time is represented by units previously thought to re-
present entirely Cambrian onlap. Thus, it has been challenging to de-
cipher the precise timing of the Cambrian portion of the Great Un-
conformity event.
In addition, there is robust sedimentologic and sequence-strati-
graphic evidence indicating that in many areas of the world a sea-level
fall took place around the Ediacaran-Cambrian transition (e.g. Saylor,
2003; Wilson et al., 2012). However, correlation of this erosional sur-
face from basin to basin and differentiation of the role of eustasy and
local tectonics as controlling factors on associated relative sea-level fall
have been equally challenging. All of these are key elements in our
understanding of the biologic and oceanographic changes surrounding
the Ediacaran–Cambrian transition.
The objectives of this paper are to (1) evaluate the precise position
of these large unconformities in key Ediacaran–Cambrian successions;
and (2) examine if these discontinuities were eustatic in origin, or if on
the contrary, some of them are the result of local tectonics, implying
marked inter-basin diachronism. These results are a starting point for
evaluating which strata might be used to test hypotheses about the links
between tectonics, eustasy, and biotic changes of the Ediacaran–
Cambrian transition.
2. The great unconformity and the Ediacaran–Cambrian boundary
In this section we summarize and assess seventeen key successions
(Fig. 1), focusing on sedimentary facies and sequence-stratigraphic ar-
chitecture in order to evaluate the precise stratigraphic location of the
Ediacaran–Cambrian boundary with respect to the sequence boundary
(SB). The best estimate of the Ediacaran–Cambrian boundary is in-
dicated in each section based on the latest available radiometric dating,
chemostratigraphic information, and biostratigraphic data. The tectonic
setting for each section is also assessed.
2
P
reca
m b
ria
nResea
rch3
45(2
020
)10
572
1
2.1. Southeast Newfoundland, Canada
The Chapel Island Formation at Fortune Head, Burin Peninsula of
southeastern Newfoundland was deposited in a transtensional basin
(Smith and Hiscott, 1984; Myrow and Hiscott, 1993; Landing, 1996,
2004). The base of the T. pedum zone, 2.4 m above the base of member
2, has been ratified as the Global Standard Stratotype-section and Point
(GSSP) for the Ediacaran–Cambrian boundary (Narbonne et al., 1987;
Landing, 1994) (Fig. 2). Recent carbon isotope studies show a positive
excursion of δ13 coincident with the Ediacaran–Cambrian boundary
(Hantsoo et al., 2018).
Subsequently, T. pedum was recorded 3.11 and 4.4 m below the
GSSP (Gehling et al., 2001). The uppermost part of member 1 in the
Fortune Head area contains red and green sandstone and shale de-
posited in tidal-flat and shallow subtidal environments, and grey to
black parallel-laminated sandstone and shale deposited in semi-re-
stricted low-energy environment (Myrow et al., 1988). The pro-
blematicum Harlaniella podolica is present in these deposits (Gehling
et al., 2001). The lowermost part of member 2 spanning the Ediacar- an–
Cambrian boundary consists primarily of very thin to thin-bedded gray-
green sandstone and siltstone deposited in a storm-influenced shallow-
marine environment, probably with some deltaic influence (Myrow et al.,
1988; Myrow and Hiscott, 1993). The problematicum Harlaniella
podolica occurs in the lowermost part of member 2 together with
Palaeopascichnus delicatus (Gehling et al., 2001). Recent ichnologic work
further supports the notion of significant evolutionary innovations
coincident with this transition (Laing et al., 2018) and subsequently
between the Fortunian and Cambrian Stage 2 (Gougeon et al., 2018).
The marine succession comprises both transgressive (TST) and high-
stand systems tract (HST) deposits, and passes upward into a red-bed
interval consisting of thin- to thick-bedded, massive and parallel-lami-
nated sandstone, siltstone, and shale with abundant syneresis and de-
siccation cracks formed in a fluvial environment (Myrow et al., 1988)
(Fig. 3a-g). This sharp basinward facies change suggests that the base of
the red-bed interval represents a SB resulting in the establishment of a
lowstand systems tract (LST) fluvial system dissecting the shelf (Fig. 2),
indicating a period of subaerial exposure later in the early Fortunian.
The depositional history of the Chapel Island Formation has been
considered as a transitional stage from deposition in tectonically active
fault-bounded basins related to strike-slip tectonics to a more quiet
tectonic condition (Smith and Hiscott, 1984; Myrow and Hiscott, 1993).
Many strike-slip basins form adjacent to uplifted blocks with pro-
nounced topographic relief, which leads to deposition of very coarse-
grained sedimentary facies along some basin margins and to abrupt
lateral facies changes. Local vertical movements of blocks result in lo-
calized unconformities (Christie-Blick and Biddle, 1985).
2.2. Northwest Canada
The Ediacaran–Cambrian succession of the Mackenzie Mountains,
northwest Canada records the break-up of Rodinia and the early evo-
lution of the passive continental margin of Laurentia (Fritz et al., 1991;
Levy and Christie-Blick, 1991; Yonkee et al., 2014; Moynihan et al.,
2019), and consists, in ascending order, of the Sheepbed, June beds,
Gametrail, Blueflower, and Risky formations (all in the upper Wind-
ermere Supergroup), and the overlying Ingta, Backbone Ranges, and
Vampire formations (Narbonne and Aitken, 1995; MacNaughton et al.,
2000; Turner et al., 2011). The Sheepbed Formation is a shale-domi-
nated unit deposited on a continental slope (Dalrymple and Narbonne,
1996; Carbone and Narbonne, 2014), and is unconformably overlain by
thin-bedded carbonate and siliciclastic strata of the June Beds Forma-
tion (Macdonald et al., 2013), which gradationally passes up into the
Gametrail Formation.
The Gametrail Formation consists of dolomitized, evenly-bedded
limestone, and is conformably overlain by the Blueflower Formation.
The Blueflower Formation consists of two members, a lower, carbonate
S. Shahkarami, et al.
Fig. 1. Paleogeographic map during the Ediacaran-Cambrian transition showing the locations of the studied sections (base map after Scotese, 2016).
dominated member and an upper, siliciclastic-dominated member
(MacNaughton et al., 2000), and contains simple trace fossils, such as
Archaeonassa, Gordia, Helminthopsis, Helminthoidichnites, Palaeophycus,
Planolites, and Torrowangea (Hofmann, 1981; Aitken, 1989; Narbonne
and Aitken, 1990; Carbone and Narbonne, 2014). A number of Edia- cara-
type body fossils have been documented from the June Beds and
Blueflower formations, including Annulatubus flexuosus, Aspidella sp.,
Charniodiscus sp., Ediacara sp., Eoporpita sp., Hiemalora sp., Inkrylovia
sp., Pteridinium sp., Sekwitubulus annularis, Sekwia excentrica, and
Windermeria sp. (Hofmann, 1981; Narbonne and Aitken, 1990;
Narbonne, 1994; Carbone and Narbonne, 2014; Carbone et al., 2015).
Macdonald et al. (2013) inferred an age somewhere between 553 and
541 Ma for the Blueflower Formation. The Risky Formation consists of
dolostone to sandy dolostone (MacNaughton et al., 2000), and lies
gradationally upon the Blueflower Formation and unconformably be-
neath siliciclastic and minor carbonate rocks of the Ingta, Backbone
Ranges, and Vampire formations (MacNaughton et al., 2000) (Fig. 4).
The Ingta Formation is dominated by green, purple, and red colored
shale with minor sandstone beds, and a limestone cap deposited in an
offshore to shelf environment (Aitken, 1989; Carbone and Narbonne,
2014). The Ingta Formation is overlain by the Backbone Ranges For-
mation consisting of two members, a lower member containing near-
shore siltstone and sandstone similar to those of the underlying Ingta
Formation, and an upper member, containing deposits encompassing
various shallow-marine to non-marine environments, including wave-
influenced braid-delta systems. The uppermost unit, the Vampire For-
mation, is dominated by siltstone and sandstone of wave-dominated
offshore and prodelta origin, and contains the lowest occurrence of
trilobite body fossils (MacNaughton and Narbonne, 1999).
The Ediacaran–Cambrian boundary in the Mackenzie Mountains
was recognized by the first occurrence of T. pedum in the upper interval
of the Ingta Formation (MacNaughton and Narbonne, 1999) (Fig. 4).
The proposed position for the boundary was supported by the first
occurrence of Cambrian-type small shelly fossil Protohertzina in carbo-
nate strata at the top of the Ingta Formation (Conway and Fritz, 1980;
Narbonne and Aitken, 1995), coupled with a pronounced negative
carbon isotopic excursion ∼−10‰ in the basal beds of the Ingta
Formation (Narbonne et al., 1994) (Fig. 4). However, Carbone and
3
P
reca
m b
ria
nResea
rch3
45(2
020
)10
572
1
Narbonne (2014) have subsequently reported examples of Treptichnus
cf. T. pedum, T. bifurcus, and other undetermined ichnospecies of
Treptichnus, arthropod tracks and trails, and other Cambrian-type trace
fossils, including possible U-shaped vertical burrows and Psammichnites
below the originally proposed Ediacaran–Cambrian boundary. The oc-
currence of these trace fossils suggests that the Ediacaran–Cambrian
boundary in NW Canada is tentatively placed within the lower interval
of the Ingta Formation at the abrupt incoming of ichnospecies of
Treptichnus, thereby co-occurring with or immediately overlying the
prominent negative carbon isotope excursion (Fig. 4). These authors
also suggested that the Ediacaran–Cambrian boundary might lie in the
prominent unconformity at the top of the underlying Risky Formation.
However, trace fossils, although present in these strata, are highly di-
minutive relative to trace fossils elsewhere in the Ingta Formation,
which may suggest either an Ediacaran age or a significant environ-
mental limiting factor (Carbone and Narbonne, 2014).
In short, the precise position of the Ediacaran–Cambrian boundary
in northwest Canada is still unclear. However, both proposed positions
for the boundary are between two major unconformities, one at the
base of the Ingta Formation and the other within the lower interval of
the Backbone Ranges Formation. Initially it was believed that the
terminal Ediacaran to basal Cambrian succession of the Mackenzie
Mountains was deposited on a passive margin, and therefore contains a
fairly sensitive record of eustatic sea-level changes (MacNaughton and
Narbonne, 1999). However, Macdonald et al. (2013) argued that major
facies changes (Aitken, 1989; Narbonne and Aitken, 1995) and large
overlapping unconformities within Ediacaran strata (MacNaughton
et al., 2000), coupled with the ∼570 Ma late Ediacaran syn-rift volca-
nics in the southeastern Canadian Cordillera (Colpron et al., 2002),
indicate a more complex tectonostratigraphic architecture and probably
a more nuanced subsidence history (see also Moynihan et al., 2019).
2.3. Death Valley, Eastern California, United States
The Ediacaran–Cambrian succession in Death Valley, southeastern
California, includes in ascending order, the Johnnie Formation, Stirling
Quartzite, Wood Canyon Formation, and the Zabriskie Quartzite. The
Johnnie Formation, Stirling Quartzite, and the lower member of the
S. Shahkarami, et al. P
reca
m b
ria
nResea
rch3
45(2
020
)10
572
1

Fig. 2. Generalized stratigraphy of the Ediacaran–Cambrian succession in the Chapel Island Formation, southeastern Newfoundland, Canada (GSSP) (modi fied from
Myrow et al., 1988). The presence of Treptichnus pedum below the GSSP Ediacaran–Cambrian boundary was recorded after the official decision was made (Gehling
et al., 2001).

Wood Canyon Formation represent early development of a passive
continental margin along the western margin of Laurentia (Link et al.,
1993; Fedo and Cooper, 2001), whereas the middle member of the
Wood Canyon Formation and younger strata are interpreted to re-
present a mature passive-margin phase of dominantly fluvial sedi-
mentation (Fedo and Cooper, 2001; Hogan et al., 2011; Muhlbauer
et al., 2017, 2020). The lower member of the Wood Canyon Formation
consists of siltstone and sandstone abruptly overlaying the LST deposit
of the underlying Stirling Quartzite (Fedo and Cooper, 2001) (Fig. 5).
The lower interval of the lower member consists of TST deposits,
whereas the rest were formed as part of a prograding HST (Hogan et al.,
2011). The LST deposit of the middle member comprises trough cross-

4
S. Shahkarami, et al.
Fig. 3. Sedimentary facies and stratal stacking patterns in the Chapel Island Formation of Burin Peninsula, Newfoundland; (a) Red bed interval; (b) Ripple cross
lamination; (c) Convolute lamination; (d) Convolute lamination; (e) Syneresis cracks; (f) Contact between the red-beds and overlying transgressive shoreface. TS is
transgressive surface. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
bedded, pebbly medium- to very coarse-grained feldespatic quartzite
and interbedded siltstone interpreted as braid-plain deposits (Fedo and
Cooper, 1990). Progradation of fluvial deposits of the middle member
of the Wood Canyon Formation over the shallow-water deposits of the
lower member at the onset of sea level fall has caused a minor amount
of incision at the contact between the lower and middle members
(Fig. 6a-d). The erosive base of this fluvial unit is regarded as a SB
(Fig. 5).
Radiometric age constraints are not available for these successions;
therefore, the exact position of the Ediacaran–Cambrian boundary is
unclear. The first occurrence of T. pedum suggests an approximate po-
sition of the boundary within the middle interval of the lower member
of the Wood Canyon Formation (Hagadorn and Waggoner, 2000)
(Fig. 5). This is also supported by the report of Ediacaran fossils in the
lower portion of the lower member of the Wood Canyon Formation and
the underlying Stirling Quartzite, including iconic representatives of
the Ediacara biota, such as Swartpuntia and erniettomorphs, as well as
Archaeichnium, Cloudina, Corumbella, Nimbia, Onuphionella, Gaojia-
shania, and Conotubus (Hagadorn and Waggoner, 2000; Smith et al.,
2016, 2017; Selly et al., 2020). This is consistent with information from
carbon isotope stratigraphy, which shows a negative excursion of
δ13Ccarb coincident with the first occurrence of T. pedum (Corsetti and
Hagadorn, 2000; Smith et al., 2016) and overlying trace-fossil assem-
blages (Mata et al., 2012).
The Ediacaran–Cambrian boundary in Death Valley is placed be-
tween two major unconformities, a major one at the top of the Stirling
Quartzite and another one at the base of the middle member of the
Wood Canyon Formation (Hogan et al., 2011). The SB at the base of the
5
P
reca
m b
ria
nResea
rch3
45(2
020
)10
572
1
middle member of the Wood Canyon Formation occurs above the
Ediacaran–Cambrian boundary, and lacks evidence for significant in-
cision. Given that the Ediacaran–Cambrian strata in Eastern California
represent deposition along a craton margin hinge zone, formed on a
thermally subsiding passive margin following late Neoproterozoic
rifting, Fedo and Cooper (2001) proposed that the main unconformities
in this section, including the one at the base and top of lower member of
the Wood Canyon Formation, were formed mostly by eustatic processes
that were possibly modified by the effects of differential subsidence
across the hinge zone (Fedo and Cooper, 2001; Hogan et al., 2011).
2.4. White Inyo Mountains and Esmeralda County, western Nevada, United
States
The Ediacaran-Cambrian in the White Inyo Mountains and
Esmeralda County of western Nevada is the distal equivalent of those
successions exposed in the Death Valley. The White Inyo Mountains and
Esmeralda County succession includes, from base to top, the Wyman
Formation, Reed Dolomite, Deep Spring Formation, Campito
Formation, Poleta Formation, and Harkless Formation (Nelson, 1962;
Stewart, 1970; Link et al., 1993; Smith et al., 2016) (Fig. 7). The Deep
Spring Formation is subdivided into the Dunfee, Esmeralda, and Gold
Point members (Corsetti and Kaufman, 1994; Ahn et al., 2012). As in
the case of the coeval successions in Death Valley, strata in Nevada
record deposition along a passive margin.
The Dunfee Member is dominated by dolomitic limestone with
subordinate siltstone, sandstone and quartzite. The Esmeralda Member
is dominated by sandstone, quartzite, and stromatolitic and oolitic
S. Shahkarami, et al.
Fig. 4. Generalized stratigraphy and carbon isotope chemostratigraphy of
Ediacaran–Cambrian succession in the Mackenzie Mountains, northwest
Canada (modified from Narbonne and Aitken, 1995; and MacNaughton and
Narbonne, 1999). R. Fm. is Risky Formation. See Fig. 2 for other symbols.
limestone with subordinate siltstone and shale. The Gold Point Member
comprises siltstone and quartzite (Albers and Stewart, 1972). The
Dunfee Member is thought to represent deposition in a mixed carbo-
nate-siliciclastic platform, including siliciclastic nearshore areas and
shallow subtidal carbonates (Gevirtzman and Mount, 1986). The
Dunfee Member is bracketed between two karsted surfaces representing
sequence boundaries (Smith et al., 2016). Therefore, this member
comprises a single depositional sequence. The Esmeralda Member
mainly represents deposition in siliciclastic shoreface settings and
possibly intertidal carbonate settings showing a series of well-devel-
oped parasequences that are stacked displaying an overall prograda-
tional trend (Smith et al., 2016). The Gold Point Member records
nearshore deposition, most likely representing the final phase of pro-
gradation.
The Reed Dolomite and the Dunfee Member contain a variety of
tubular fossils, such as Cloudina, Wutubus, Gaojiashania, and Conotubus,
the latter being also present in the lower interval of the Esmeralda
Member, indicating an Ediacaran age (Smith et al., 2016). The first
6
P
reca
m b
ria
nResea
rch3
45(2
020
)10
572
1
Fig. 5. Generalized stratigraphy and carbon isotope chemostratigraphy of
Ediacaran–Cambrian succession in Death Valley, California, United States
(modified from Corsetti and Kaufman, 2003; and Hogan et al., 2011). See Fig. 2
for symbols.
occurrence of T. pedum is in the upper interval of the Esmeralda
Member. As in the case of the Death Valley succession, the appearance
of T. pedum is coincident with a negative excursion of δ13Ccarb, in-
dicating the position of the Ediacaran-Cambrian boundary (Corsetti and
Hagadorn, 2000; Smith et al., 2016). In Esmeralda County, the first
occurrence of T. pedum seems to coincide with a flooding surface. Ar-
thropod trace fossils are known from the Gold Point Member, indicating
an early Cambrian age (Alpert, 1976).
2.5. Northwest Mexico
The Ediacaran–Cambrian succession of the Caborca terranes,
Sonora, northwest Mexico consists of the La Ciénega, Cerro Rajón, and
Puerto Blanco formations deposited in a rift-influenced setting along
the western margin of Laurentia (Anderson and Silver, 1981; Stewart
et al., 1984; Loyd et al., 2012; Barrón-Díaz et al., 2019a,b). The La
Ciénega Formation consists of four units (Stewart et al., 1984). Unit 1 is
dominated by dolostone, sandy dolostone, and minor basalt; it contains
the Ediacaran index fossil Cloudina (Grant, 1990; Hagadorn et al., 2008)
(Fig. 8). Unit 2 consists of dolostone and sandy dolostone, Unit 3 con-
tains interfingering siltstone, quartzite, dolostone and basalt, and Unit 4
comprises dolostone or intraclastic dolostone. An arthropod trace fossil
was reported from from Unit 3 (McMenamin, 1984), but this was later
reinterpreted as an inorganic structure (Sour-Tovar et al., 2007); tool
marks and bed parallel pseudofossils are common in interbedded
S. Shahkarami, et al.
clastics of this unit but bona fide trace fossils are thus far lacking
(Fig. 9).
The overlying Cerro Rajón Formation (formerly Unit 1 of the Puerto
Blanco Formation) consists of interfingering volcaniclastic sandstone
and conglomerate, basalt, tuff, quartzite, siltstone, and silty dolostone,
and contains abundant trace fossils (Stewart et al., 1984; McMenamin,
1984; Sour-Tovar et al., 2007; Barrón-Díaz et al., 2019a). Although the
lowest occurrence of T. pedum is ∼20 m above the base of this unit, tens
of meters of the basal trace-fossil-bearing part of this unit is in places
removed by local incision, and a Cambrian-aspect assemblage of ich-
nofossils, including Archaeonassa, Diplichnites, Gordia, Mono-
morphichnus, Palaeophycus, Planolites, and Treptichnus, occur in these
sub-incision strata (Sour-Tovar and Hagadorn, 2008; Barrón-Díaz et al.,
2019a). The Puerto Blanco Formation is subdivided into three units
(Stewart et al., 1984; Barrón-Díaz et al., 2019a). The lower unit (Unit 2)
is predominantly siltstone with minor quartzite and limestone. Trace
fossils are abundant in the siliciclastic strata, and carbonate lenses near
the base of the unit bear non-age-diagnostic brachiopods, such as
Obolella and Lingulella, and rare Fallotaspis zone trilobites including
Parafallotaspis (Hagadorn, 2011). Nevadella zone trilobites, such as
Nevadia, occur near the top of the unit (Hagadorn et al., 2016). The
middle unit (Unit 3) is dominated by archaeocyathan-bearing limestone
and siltstone, and Nevadella zone trilobites (Pope et al., 2012). The
upper unit (Unit 4) is dominantly interbedded limestone, dolostone,
quartzite, and siltstone, and contains Skolithos piperock, trilobite trace
fossils, and abundant biomineralized fossil coquinas that bear trilobites
of the Bonnia-Olenellus zone (Stewart et al., 1984; Pope et al., 2012;
Hernández-Barbosa and Sour-Tovar, 2018).
The contact between the La Ciénega and Cerro Rajón formations is
transitional. However, an erosional unconformity occurs within the
latter above the first occurrence of T. pedum-like trace fossils, and lo-
cally cuts out portions of the lowermost Cerro Rajón Formation (Fig. 8
and 9a-e). This erosional unconformity has been correlated with the
cratonal nonconformity at the top of the lower member of the Wood
Canyon Formation (Loyd et al., 2012), but other authors suggested that
the Sonoran contact may reflect local volcanic doming and uplift
7
P
reca
m b
ria
nResea
rch3
45(2
020
)10
572
1
Fig. 6. Sedimentary facies and stratal stacking pat-
terns in the lower and middle members of the Wood
Canyon Formation, California; (a) Basal part of the
middle member, with trough- and planar cross-
bedded sandstone in sharp contact overlying off-
shore hummocky cross-stratified sandstone and
shale of the lower member, Nopah Range,
California. Image: T. Prave; (b) Middle member, il-
lustrating fluvial facies capping and incising into the
lower member of the unit, Emigrant Pass, California;
(c) Basal part of the middle member, illustrating a
fluvial cross-bedded quartz pebble conglomerate in
sharp contact atop offshore shale of the lower
member, Kingston Range, California. Image: T.
Prave; (d) Cross-bedded quartz pebble conglomerate
and braided fluvial facies of the basal part of the
middle member, truncating the shallow marine
lower member, Chicago Pass, California. Image: F.
Corsetti.
(Hagadorn, 2009; Hogan et al., 2011).
The base of the Cambrian in Sonora, Mexico is defined based on the
first occurrence of T. pedum at the lower interval of the Cerro Rajón
Formation. However, underlying clastics can be continental in origin,
and Loyd et al. (2012) suggested that considering the environmental
range of T. pedum and the carbon isotope excursion correlation between
the lower member of the Wood Canyon Formation and the La Ciénega/
Cerro Rajón formations, the Ediacaran–Cambrian boundary could occur
lower in the section, coincident with the large negative carbon isotope
excursion within the upper interval of La Ciénega Formation. Indeed,
the magnitude and biostratigraphic position of the nadir of this carbon
isotopic excursion (over −7 per mil; Hagadorn, 2011; Loyd et al., 2012)
indicates it is the basal Cambrian carbon isotope excursion, or BACE
(Zhu et al., 2019). This excursion occurs in unit 3, ∼50 m below the top
of the La Ciénega Formation (Fig. 8).
The Ediacaran–Cambrian boundary interval in Sonora occurs below
the SB that extends to the base of the Cerro Rajón Formation. The
Sonoran succession reflects a depositional and paleogeographic history
similar to the Death Valley succession, with depocenters occurring
along the same margin (Stewart et al., 1984). The extent to which re-
gional versus widespread rift-related volcanism is occurring in the
Ediacaran-Cambrian portion of these successions is challenging to de-
cipher (Stewart, 1972; Stewart et al., 1990, 2002), despite rift-related
geochemical signatures of the basalts in the succession (Centeno-García
et al., 2002; Hagadorn and Holm-Denoma, 2016; Barrón-Díaz et al.,
2019b). The intercalation of rift-related mafic extrusive and intrusive
volcanics in the Sonoran succession, together with evidence for local
uplift and associated incision, suggests the margin was tectonically
active during the Ediacaran-Cambrian transition (Barrón-Díaz et al.,
2019a).
2.6. South Australia
The Ediacaran–Cambrian strata in Flinders Ranges, South Australia
comprise the Rawnsley Quartzite and Uratanna formations representing
deposition in a passive margin setting followed by a rifting event
S. Shahkarami, et al.
Fig. 7. Generalized stratigraphy and carbon isotope chemostratigraphy of
Ediacaran–Cambrian succession in White Inyo Mountains and Esmerald
County, Western Nevada, United States (modified from Smith et al., 2016). See
Fig. 2 for symbols.
(Powell et al., 1994). The Rawnsley Quartzite is subdivided into three
members, in ascending order, Chace Quartzite, Ediacara, and Upper
Rawnsley Quartzite (Gehling, 2000). The Ediacara Member contains
fossils of the classic Ediacara biota, and is interpreted as the distal part
of a shallowing-upward, prograding delta sequence (Goldring and
Curnow, 1967; Gehling and Rigby, 1996; Droser et al., 1999, 2006;
Gehling, 2000; Gehling and Droser, 2012; Tarhan et al., 2015; Coutts
et al., 2016) (Fig. 10). The Rawnsley Quartzite, above and below the
Ediacara Member, is unfossiliferous, and features barren, shoreface and
tidal sand-flat facies with distinctive petee lamination, the latter formed
by buckling and desiccation of cyanobacterial mats (Gehling, 1999;
Droser et al., 1999; Gehling, 2000; Gehling and Droser, 2012). The
overlying Uratanna Formation consists of massive, channel-filling
sandstone of fluvio-estuarine origin, followed by a single coarsening-
upward succession of monotonous, laminated siltstone that grades into
estuary mouth trace-fossil-bearing, thinly bedded sandstone beds, and
shoreface hummocky cross-stratified and cross-bedded sandstone
(Droser et al., 1999). The Uratanna Formation cuts down and forms
erosive channels into the underlying Rawnsley Quartzite (Daily, 1973;
8
P
reca
m b
ria
nResea
rch3
45(2
020
)10
572
1
Fig. 8. Generalized stratigraphy and carbon isotope chemostratigraphy of
Ediacaran–Cambrian succession in Sonora, northwest Mexico (modified from
Sour-Tovar et al., 2007; Loyd et al., 2012; and Barrón-Díaz et al., 2019a). See
Fig. 2 for symbols.
Zang et al., 2007), and passes up into the shallow marine, shoreface and
lagoonal Parachilna Formation (Gehling and Droser, 2012) (Fig. 11).
This erosive surface at the base of the Uratanna Formation is a SB as-
sociated with a marked basinward shift in the facies.
Treptichnus pedum first appears in sandy facies more than 200 m
above the base of the Uratanna Formation (Jensen et al., 1998)
(Fig. 10). Kullingia concentrica, sabelliditids, and Swartpuntia-like fronds
have been reported within or close to the beds containing T. pedum
(Jensen et al., 1998; Droser et al., 1999) (Fig. 10), which may indicate
the extension of Ediacara-type organisms into the Cambrian period
(Jensen et al., 1998; but for the origin of Kullingia, see Jensen et al.,
2002). Other trace fossils reported from the Uratanna Formation in-
clude Curvolithus isp., Hormosiroidea isp. (probably Saerichnites isp.),
Phycodes cf. palmatus, Phycodes coronatum, Rusophycus avalonensis, and
Taphrhelminthopsis circularis (now included in Psammichnites) (Jensen
et al., 1998; Droser et al., 1999). The base of the Cambrian succession is
considered to be at the basal unconformity that sits at top of the
Rawnsley Quartzite, 200 m below the first occurrence of T. pedum
(Daily, 1973; Zang et al., 2007; Gehling and Droser, 2012) (Fig. 10).
The delayed appearance of T. pedum could result from inhospitable
conditions, notably marked dilution of marine salinity, during deposi-
tion of the lower part of the Uratanna Formation, which took place
within the context of an estuary system; only the estuary mouth (the
upper interval of Uratanna Formation) may have experienced near-
marine salinity conditions in this area.
The proposed Ediacaran–Cambrian boundary in the Flinders Ranges
coincides with a major unconformity forming an incised valley at the
base of the Uratanna Formation. The same situation has been observed
in the Amadeus Basin, Central Australia, where the unconformity at the
base of Member III of the Arumbera Formation marks the Ediacaran–
Cambrian boundary. However, the lack of quantitative temporal
constraint on the position of the Ediacaran–Cambrian
S. Shahkarami, et al.
Fig. 10. Generalized stratigraphy of Ediacaran–Cambrian succession in Flinders
Ranges, South Australia (modified from Jensen et al., 1998; and Droser et al.,
1999). R. Q. Mbr. is Rawnsley Quartzite. See Fig. 2 for other symbols.
9
P
reca
m b
ria
nResea
rch3
45(2
020
)10
572
1
Fig. 9. Sedimentary facies and stratal
stacking patterns in the Puerto Blanco
Formation of Sonora, Mexico. (a–e) Boulder
conglomerate at the base of Unit 1 of the
Puerto Blanco Formation, shown at Cerro
Rajon, Sonora, incising cross-bedded sand-
stone near its base. Elsewhere it rests atop
or incises down into Unit 4 of the La
Ciénaga Formation.
boundary in Australia, together with discovery of Ediacara-type fossils
on two beds in the upper part of the Uratanna Formation put the precise
position of the Ediacaran–Cambrian boundary in question (Jensen
et al., 1998). The unconformity at the base of the Uratanna Formation is
interpreted to be of tectono-eustatic origin, most likely formed as the
consequence of Rodinia supercontinent breakup, either representing a
rift-drift transition or the onset of starved basin deposition (Powell
et al., 1994).
2.7. Central Australia
The Ediacaran–Cambrian strata of the intracratonic Amadeus Basin
in Central Australia comprise the shallow-marine to deltaic Arumbera
Formation, containing four informal subdivisions (Wells et al., 1967;
McIlroy et al., 1997) (Fig. 12). These four members, together with the
overlying Todd River Dolomite, make up two depositional sequences.
Sequence 1 (Members I and II) represents a large-scale coarsening-up-
ward cycle, with deposition as small-scale deltas prograding across the
underlying carbonate platform deposited as part of TST and HST. Se-
quence 2 (Members III and IV) is also a coarsening-upward cycle, but
was deposited in major deltaic complexes prograding as part of a LST
(Lindsay, 1987; Lindsay and Korsch, 1991; Lindsay and Gorter, 1993).
Members I and III consist of prodelta silty shale overlain by thinly in-
terbedded shale, siltstone, and fine-grained arkosic sandstone. The
sandstones become coarser-grained, increase in abundance and thick-
ness up-section, and were deposited in a delta-front environment, re-
flecting storm-flood events (Mapstone and McIlroy, 2006). Members II
and IV are massive cliff forming fine- to coarse-grained arkosic sand-
stone that formed on a delta plain with laterally restricted distributary
channels (Mapstone and McIlroy, 2006).
Ediacara-type fossils, including incomplete frond Rangea cf. ionga
and discoid Aspidella, were reported from members I, II, and the lower
interval of Member III (Glaessner, 1969; Mapstone and McIlroy, 2006),
suggesting an Ediacaran age for these units. The occurrence of Plagi-
ogmus arcuatus (=Psammichnites) and Treptichnus pedum, together with
probable arthropod trackways resembling Diplichnites, Rusophycus, and
Archaeonassa (Scolicia-like molluscan trails in the original publication)
in the upper units suggests a Cambrian age for the upper part of Ar-
umbera Sandstone (Glaessner, 1969). The first occurrence of small
shelly fossils has been reported within the lower part of Member IV,
about 2 m below the level of Plagiogmus arcuatus (Haines, 1991).
S. Shahkarami, et al.
Fig. 11. The incised valley at the contact between the Uratanna Formation and the underlying Rawnsley Quartzite.
Fig. 12. Generalized stratigraphy of Ediacaran–Cambrian succession of
Amadeus Basin, Central Australia (modified from Mapstone and McIlroy,
2006). See Fig. 2 for symbols.
Locally the Ediacaran–Cambrian boundary is hypothesized to co-
incide with a widespread seismic reflector at the contact between
members II and III (Lindsay, 1987, 1993; Lindsay and Gorter, 1993).
However, McIlroy et al. (1997) re-positioned the boundary based on
biostratigraphic data to the erosional unconformity, 12–25 m above the
base of Member III (Fig. 12).
The suggested Ediacaran–Cambrian boundary in the Amadeus Basin
is coincident with a major unconformity forming an incised valley at
the base of Member III. In the central part, the Petermann Orogeny
(∼550 Ma) is reflected in rocks of the Member III. This orogeny, which
was either synchronous with (Lindsay and Korsch, 1991) or slightly
older than (Shaw, 1991) the Neoproterozoic–Cambrian transition, may
10
P
reca
m b
ria
nResea
rch3
45(2
020
)10
572
1
have strongly influenced the architecture and subsequent Palaeozoic
evolution of the Amadeus Basin (Mapstone and McIlroy, 2006).
2.8. Southern Namibia
The Ediacaran–Cambrian succession in the Nama Group, Nama
Basin of southern Namibia, occurs in two sub-basins, Zaris (to the
north) and Witputs (to the south), separated by a topographic high
(Germs, 1995). The Nama Group comprises the Kuibis, Schwarzrand,
and Fish River subgroups (Saylor et al., 1995). In particular, the
Schwarzrand Subgroup comprises mixed shallow-marine, fluvial, sili-
ciclastic and carbonate rocks deposited in a foreland basin (Saylor,
2003; Wilson et al., 2012; Bowyer et al., 2020). The Schwarzrand
Subgroup is divided into three formations, in ascending order, the
Nudaus, Urusis, and Nomtsas formations (Fig. 13). The Nudaus For-
mation contains the Ediacaran body fossils Pteridinium and Rangea
(Grotzinger et al., 1995b; Narbonne et al., 1997). The overlying Urusis
Formation is divided into three members, Huns, Feldschuhhorn, and
Spitskopf members. The Urusis Formation contains abundant popula-
tions of the probable alga Vendotaenia (Cohen et al., 2009), calcified
metazoans associated with microbial reefs (Grotzinger et al., 1995a;
Penny et al., 2017; Wood et al., 2017), Ediacaran body fossils
(Narbonne et al., 1997; Darroch et al., 2015), and trace fossils (Jensen
and Runnegar, 2005; Buatois et al., 2018; Cribb et al., 2019). Treptinids
have been recorded in the Huns Member, albeit displaying lower level
of complexities than T. pedum (Jensen et al., 2000). Possible plug-
shaped burrows attributed to Conichnus have been recorded in the Huns
Member (Jensen and Runnegar, 2005) and in the middle, unnamed unit
of the Schwarzrand Subgroup in the northern area of the Zaris sub-basin
(Darroch et al., 2016). In particular, the uppermost member of the
Urusis Formation, the Spitskopf Member, consists of a succession of
shale and siltstone that grades upward into black, thin-bedded, lime
mudstone (Fig. 14a), containing the trace fossils Streptichnus narbonnei,
which is of comparable complexity to T. pedum (Jensen and Runnegar,
2005) and Parapsammichnites pretzeliformis, which is somewhat similar
to Psammichnites (Buatois et al., 2018). The lower part of the overlying
Nomtsas Formation represents the infill of a compound valley, re-
cording two distinct episodes of relative sea-level fall and infill, referred
to as Valley Fills 1 (VF1) and 2 (VF2), both bounded at their bases by
sequence boundaries (Saylor, 2003; Wilson et al., 2012) (Fig. 13). This
compound valley cuts at least 30 m deep into the Urusis Formation
(Fig. 14b, c). The basal and axial LST facies in both incised valleys
consist of conglomerate with carbonate pebbles, cobbles, and boulders
derived from the underlying Spitskopf Member (Fig. 14d, e).
The dominant TST facies in the valley-fill deposits are parallel-la-
minated shale, siltstone, and sandstone (Fig. 14f, g). Wilson et al.
(2012) interpreted these deposits to be deeper marine in origin,
therefore implying sedimentation within submarine canyons. However,
this is inconsistent with the fact that these deposits are incised into
shallow-marine deposits not into shelf-edge to slope facies, indicating
instead incision and infill of fluvio-estuarine valleys.
S. Shahkarami, et al.
Fig. 13. Generalized stratigraphy of Ediacaran–Cambrian succession in the
Nama Group, Southern Namibia (modified from Wilson et al., 2012; Wood
et al., 2015; and Linnemann et al., 2019). See Fig. 2 for symbols.
Treptichnus pedum first occurs within the fine-grained sandstone of
VF2 (Wilson et al., 2012) (Fig. 13). The first occurrence of T. pedum
within the Nomtsas Formation coupled with no record of pronounced
negative excursion of δ13Ccarb from this interval (Kaufman et al., 1991;
Grotzinger et al., 1995b; Jensen and Runnegar, 2005) has led to the
suggestion that the Ediacaran–Cambrian boundary is contained in the
unconformity at the base of the Nomtsas Formation (e.g., Germs, 1995;
Grotzinger et al., 1995b; Jensen and Runnegar, 2005) (Fig. 13). How-
ever, a U–Pb zircon date of 538.18 ± 1.24 Ma (Grotzinger et al.,
1995b) for an ash-bed at the base of the valley fill deposit and age
recalibration of a sample from a volcanic ash-bed within the Spitskopf
Member indicating a U–Pb zircon age of 540.61 ± 0.67 Ma (Grotzinger
al., 1995b) suggested that the Ediacaran–Cambrian boundary is placed
well below the valley incision (recalibration in Schmitz, 2012)
(Fig. 13). This has been confirmed by a recent high-resolution study
(Linnemann et al., 2019). Therefore, it is likely that the first appearance
of the trace-fossil T. pedum postdates the Ediacaran–Cambrian
boundary in southern Namibia. The study by Linnemann et al. (2019)
further constrains the Ediacaran–Cambrian to 538.6–538.8 Ma.
The Ediacaran–Cambrian boundary in the Nama Group rests below
11
P
reca
m b
ria
nResea
rch3
45(2
020
)10
572
1
the unconformity at the base of the Nomtsas Formation. The Nama
Group was deposited in a foreland basin, which developed as a per-
ipheral basin along the western margin of the Kalahari Craton (Gresse
and Germs, 1993). This foreland basin experienced flexural bulging
related to compressional tectonics in the flanking orogens throughout
its history. Gresse and Germs (1993) proposed that sedimentation of the
Nama Group is the depositional response to tectonism in the flanking
orogens, and it can therefore be assumed that these SBs were mostly
influenced by tectonism rather than eustasy. In this scenario, a relative
fall in sea level as a result of renewed tectonic loading, and depression
and retraction of flexural bulging toward the orogen led to the forma-
tion of a major SB at the base of the Nomtsas Formation in close vicinity
of the Ediacaran–Cambrian boundary.
2.9. South Africa
The Ediacaran–Cambrian succession of the Vanrhynsdorp Group,
South Africa was deposited in a foreland basin, and comprises the
Knersvlakte Subgroup, consisting of six formations, in ascending order,
Arondegas, Gannabos, Besonderheid, Kalk-Gat, Dolkraals, and
Astynskloof (Gresse, 1992) (Fig. 15). The basal Arondegas Formation,
grades from a residual arkose to turbiditic sandstone beds interfingering
with shelf and basinal shale of the Gannabos Formation (Germs et al.,
2009) (Fig. 16a–c). Horizontal trails, such as Helminthoidichnites tenuis,
associated with microbial mats and vendotaenids have been reported
from the Arondegas Formation (Almond et al., 2008).
The Gannabos Formation is unconformably overlain by the
Besonderheid Formation, which contains green shale, siltstone, sand-
stone, and conglomerate. The lower part of this unit records deposition
within an incised valley complex, cutting down into the underlying
Gannabos Formation (Fig. 16e, d). The basal strata of valley fill contain
coarse-grained fluvial-estuarine deposits (LST and TST) overlain by
finer-grained distal deltaic deposits (HST) (Buatois et al., 2013). Tide-
dominated shallow-marine deposits of the Kalk Gat Formation overlie
the Besonderheid Formation. Oldhamia geniculata co-occurring with
wrinkle structures has been reported from the Besonderheid Formation,
whereas Treptichnus pedum first appears in the overlying Kalk Gat
Formation (Gresse and Germs, 1993; Buatois et al., 2007, 2013; Almond
et al., 2008) (Fig. 15). Wave-dominated to tide-dominated shallow-
marine deposits of the Dolkraals Formation are gradually overlain by
supratidal to upper intertidal deposit of Astynskloof Formation.
The current consensus view regarding the stratigraphic position of
the Ediacaran–Cambrian boundary in the Vanrhynsdorp Group is to
regard the base of Besonderheid Formation, which contains the com-
plex ichnospecies Oldhamia geniculata, as marking the boundary
(Almond et al., 2008; Buatois et al., 2013) (Fig. 15). Similar to the
earliest Fortunian of South Australia and Namibia, the late occurrence
of Treptichnus pedum and the stratigraphic position of the Oldhamia
below the level of Treptichnus in the Vanrhynsdorp Group have been
explained by environmental constraints, in this case the relatively
deeper water of the Besonderheid Formation being detrimental for
colonization by the T. pedum producer (Buatois et al., 2013).
The Ediacaran–Cambrian boundary in the Vanrhynsgdorp Group
apparently coincides with a SB, although the paucity of biostratigraphic
data and the lack of radiometric data result in significant uncertainty.
As with the Nama Group, the Vanrhynsdorp Group was formed in a
peripheral foreland basin along the western margin of the Kalahari
Craton (Gresse and Germs, 1993). Sedimentation in this basin was
strongly controlled by tectonism, which may have been the underlying
mechanism in the generation of the SB at the base of the Besonderheid
Formation.
2.10. Southeastern Poland
The Ediacaran–Cambrian succession in the Lublin slope, south-
eastern Poland represents deposition in an active rift basin (Pacześna
S. Shahkarami, et al.
Fig. 15. Generalized stratigraphy of Ediacaran–Cambrian succession in
Vanrhynsdorp Group, South Africa (modified from Gresse, 1992; and Buatois
et al., 2007). See Fig. 2 for symbols.
12
P
reca
m b
ria
nResea
rch3
45(2
020
)10
572
1
Fig. 14. Sedimentary facies and stratal stacking
patterns in the Nama Group, Namibia. (a) Spitskop
Member limestone (upper limestone in figure),
Koedoelaagte farm, Namibia; (b) Contact between
the Huns Member (left) and the Nomtsas Formation
(right), Koedoelaagte farm, Namibia; (c) Nomtsas
Formation incision, Sonntagsbrunn, Namibia; (d)
Base of Nomtsas Formation, Koedoelaagtefarm,
Namibia; (e) Nomtsas Formation conglomerate,
Sonntagsbrunn, Namibia; (f-g) Marine deposits of
the Nomtsas Formation, Koedoelaagte farm,
Namibia.
and Poprawa, 2005). The Lublin Slope succession comprises the Polesie,
Sławatycze, Białopole (or Siemiatycze), Lublin, Włodawa, Mazowsze,
Kaplonosy, and Radzyn formations (Moczydłowska, 1991). The LST
deposits of the Sławatycze Formation consist of basalt, tuff, agglom-
erate, and conglomerate, unconformably overlying the feldspathic and
quartzitic continental sandstone of the Polesie Formation. The Sława-
tycze Formation has yielded a U–Pb zircon date of 551 ± 4 Ma
(Compston et al., 1995).
The erosive base of the Sławatycze Formation marks a major un-
conformity at the beginning of the Ediacaran (Pacześna and Poprawa,
2005) (Fig. 17). The Białopole Formation comprises quartzite inter-
calated with mudstone and shale, representing lagoonal to coastal-
marine facies of an embayment, with tidal-flat, channels, and shoreface
environments (Moczydłowska, 1991; Poprawa and Pacześna, 2002).
Characteristic marine cyanobacteria and vendotaenids occur in this
formation (Moczydłowska, 1991). The succeeding Lublin, Włodawa,
and Mazowsze formations consist of shallow-marine sandstone, silt-
stone, and shale, representing deposition as part of a TST to HST
(Pacześna and Poprawa, 2005). A rich and diverse acritarch assemblage
was recovered from the Mazowsze Formation together with the earliest
shelly fossils (Lendzion, 1983). The lowermost occurrence of Torro-
wangea rosei and Gordia isp. is in the Lublin Formation (Pacześna,
1986); these two ichnotaxa are known in Ediacaran strata (Mángano
and Buatois, 2014). The first occurrence of T. pedum and an increased
diversity of trace fossils are recorded at the base of the Mazowsze
Formation (Pacześna, 1986) (Fig. 17). The HST deposits of the Ma-
zowsze Formation are overlain by TST deposits of the Kaplonosy For-
mation; the contact between the two formations is marked by a co-
planar surface (amalgamated flooding surface and sequence boundary)
revealed by the presence of the Glossifungites Ichnofacies (Pacześna and
Poprawa, 2005) (Fig. 17). The base of Cambrian in the Lublin region is
defined within the uppermost part of the Włodawa Formation on the
basis of the stratigraphically lowest occurrence of a diagnostic early
Cambrian acritarch (Moczydłowska, 2008) (Fig. 17).
S. Shahkarami, et al.
A large negative carbon isotope excursion at the base of the
Mazowsze Formation (Fig. 17), that elsewhere in the world is taken as
approximating the Ediacaran–Cambrian boundary (Maloof et al.,
2010), further supports the proposed position for the Ediacaran–Cam-
brian boundary (Strauss et al., 1997). The Ediacaran–Cambrian
boundary has been convincingly correlated with successions elsewhere
on Baltica (Moczydłowska, 1991), with the Global Stratotype Section
and Point of the base of Cambrian in Newfoundland, and with succes-
sions elsewhere (Moczydłowska, 1999, 2002; Vidal et al., 1999;
Moczydłowska and Zang, 2006).
In the Lublin slope, the Ediacaran–Cambrian boundary interval is
positioned between two major unconformities, at the base of the
Sławatycze Formation and at the top of the Mazowsze Formation. The
SB at the base of the Sławatycze Formation indicates a period of relative
sea-level fall in the early Ediacaran, whereas the SB at the top of the
Kaplonosy Formation, which is marked by a co-planar surface, was
formed at the onset of transgression in the early Fortunian (Pacześna
and Poprawa, 2005). These authors suggested that a complex interplay
between tectonic and eustatic process were major controls on basin
evolution. Considering the significant role of local tectonics in the Lu-
blin region, it is most likely that the development of the basin was
mainly controlled by an Ediacaran (to earliest Cambrian) rifting event
and subsequent Cambrian to middle Ordovician post-thermal sub-
sidence (Pacześna and Poprawa, 2005).
2.11. Eastern Finnmark
The Ediacaran–Cambrian succession of the Vestertana Group,
eastern Finnmark, northern Norway consists of five formations, in as-
cending order, Smalfjord, Nyborg, Mortensnes, Stappogiedde
(=Stáhpogieddi), and Breivik (=Breidvika). The Smaltjord, Nyborg,
and Mortensnes formations were deposited in an extensional tectonic
setting (Røe, 2003), and contain Cryogenian–Ediacaran acritarchs of a
wide stratigraphic range (Gorokhov et al., 2001), whereas the other
units represent deposition in a foreland basin (Røe, 2003). Multicellular
eukaryotes have been recovered recently from the Nyborg Formation
(Agić et al., 2019). The two tillite-bearing formations (Smalfjord and
Mortensnes) are separated by interglacial turbiditic deposits of the
Nyborg Formation, and overlain by shoreface and offshore deposits of
the Stappogiedde Formation (Banks et al., 1971; Edwards, 1975, 1984;
Högström et al., 2013). A major unconformity between the Nyborg and
Mortensnes formations is signaled by both a microfossil assemblage and
a mappable erosional relief (Vidal, 1981; Edwards, 1984) (Fig. 18). The
Stappogiedde Formation is divided into three members, the Lillevatn,
13
P
reca
m b
ria
nResea
rch3
45(2
020
)10
572
1
Fig. 16. Sedimentary facies and stratal
stacking patterns in the Vanrhynsdorp
Group, South Africa. (a) Gannabos
Formation lower-offshore deposits; (b)
Gannabos Formation upper offshore de-
posits; (c) Gannabos Formation offshore-
transition deposits; (d) Besonderheid
Formation valley-fill deposits incised into
the Gannabos Formation; (e) Close-up of
Besonderheid Formation braided-channel
deposits filling incised valley.
Innerelv, and Manndraperelv members. The LST deposits of the Lille-
vatn Member consist of a mixed siltstone and sandstone lower unit and
a sandstone-dominated upper unit, which have been regarded as fluvial
in origin (Högström et al., 2013; McIlroy and Brasier, 2017). The TST
deposits of the Innerelv Member consist of stacked coarsening-upward
successions, ranging from parallel-laminated mudstone to sandstone,
recording deposition in a storm-influenced offshore (Banks, 1973;
Högström et al., 2013). The Manndraperelv Member comprises three
coarsening-upward successions, ranging from mudstone to sandstone,
representing offshore to shoreface deposition (Banks et al., 1971;
Högström et al., 2013; McIlroy and Brasier, 2017) as part of HST.
The Breivik Formation conformably overlies the Stappogiedde
Formation (Reading and Walker, 1966; Banks et al., 1971). This for-
mation is divided into two members; the Lower Breivik and Upper
Breivik. The Lower Breivik Member contains common sandstone in-
terbedded with mudstone, and is interpreted to have been deposited in
offshore to shoreface settings (Högström et al., 2013; McIlroy and
Brasier, 2017). The Upper Breivik Member is mudstone-dominated, and
is interpreted to have been deposited in an offshore to shelf setting
(Nielsen and Schovsbo, 2011; Högström et al., 2013). The base of a
sandstone unit near the top of the Lower Breivik Member represents a
regional unconformity (Nielsen and Schovsbo, 2011) (Fig. 18).
The trace fossil T. pedum was first reported 3 m above the base of the
Breivik Formation (Banks, 1970), which together with the presence of
the zone fossil Platysolenites antiquissimus from the top of the Lower
Breivik Member, suggest an early Cambrian age for the unit (Føyn and
Glaessner, 1979). More recently, Högström et al. (2013) and Jensen
et al. (2018a) have reported T. pedum 20 m and 30 m below the top of
the Manndraperelv Member, respectively, suggesting that the transition
between the Ediacaran and the Cambrian is most likely placed at the
upper part of the Manndraperelv Member (Fig. 18). Abundant Sabelli-
dites cambriensis occur close to the base of the Lower Breivik Member
(Högström et al., 2013). The presence of the problematicum Palaeo-
pascichnus from transitional beds between the Lillevannet and Indreelva
members and in the second cycle of the Manndrapselva Member pro-
vides further evidence of an Ediacaran age for these units (Jensen et al.,
2018b).
Similar to the Lublin slope, the Ediacaran–Cambrian strata of the
Vestertana Group of eastern Finnmark do not record subaerial exposure
at the exact timing of Ediacaran–Cambrian transition. The Ediacaran–
Cambrian boundary in this region is best located between two major
unconformities at the top of the Nyborg Formation and within the
Lower Breivik Member. The lower unconformity is placed at the base of
glacial deposits of the Mortensnes Formation hundreds of
S. Shahkarami, et al.
Fig. 17. Generalized stratigraphy and carbon isotope chemostratigraphy in
Lublin slope, southeastern Poland (modified from Strauss et al., 1997). See
Fig. 2 for symbols.
meters (∼550 m) below the Ediacaran–Cambrian boundary, where it
locally cuts down through the Nyborg Formation (Rice et al., 2011).
The Mortensnes Formation is believed to be equivalent to the Gaskiers
glaciation (the third Neoproterozoic glaciation) (Halverson et al., 2005;
Rice et al., 2011), recording a short-lived event at 580 Ma (Bowring
et al., 2003), suggesting that the Mortensnes unconformity is partly
attributable to glacio-eustasy (Halverson et al., 2005; Rice et al., 2011).
The upper SB corresponds to a regional subaerial unconformity marked
by a conspicuous 10-m-thick sandstone unit forming the top of the
Lower Breivik Member, ∼250 m above the Ediacaran–Cambrian
boundary (Nielsen and Schovsbo, 2011). These authors suggested that
the sandstone unit near the top of the Lower Member might reflect a
glacio-eustatic driven major forced regression event in the early For-
tunian. The lower Cambrian strata of eastern Finnmark were deposited
in a foreland basin associated with the Timanide orogeny, and were
therefore exposed to strong subsidence and uplift events and high
clastic supply, which may have overprinted the eustatic signals.
14
P
reca
m b
ria
nResea
rch3
45(2
020
)10
572
1
Fig. 18. Generalized stratigraphy of Ediacaran–Cambrian succession in Eastern
Finnmark, Northern Norway (modified from McIlroy and Logan, 1999; Nielsen
and Schovsbo, 2011; and Högström et al., 2013). See Fig. 2 for symbols.
2.12. Western Mongolia
The Ediacaran–Cambrian succession of the Zavkhan terrane, wes-
tern Mongolia comprises in ascending order, the Shuurgat (previously
referred to as the Ulaan Bulaagyn Member), Zuun-Arts, Bayangol,
Salaagol, and Khairkhan formations, and was interpreted to have been
deposited in a foreland basin (Macdonald et al., 2009). The basal
contact of the Zuun-Arts Formation is defined as a karst surface at the
top of the Shuurgat Formation (Bold et al., 2013) (Fig. 19). The car-
bonate rocks of the Zuun-Arts Formation are overlain by phosphatic
shale of the Bayangol Formation with carbonate nodules thought to
represent a transgressive succession followed by a thinly bedded lime-
stone (Petach, 2015). The uppermost interval of the Zuun-Arts Forma-
tion records the largest negative carbon isotope excursion (∼7‰) in
this section (Smith et al., 2015) (Fig. 19). The Bayangol Formation is
divided into four members, BG2, BG3, BG4, and BG5. This formation
hosts a rich assemblage of small shelly fossils and abundant trace fossils
referred to as Cochlichnus isp, Didymaulichnus miettensis, Helminthoida
S. Shahkarami, et al.
Fig. 19. Generalized stratigraphy and carbon isotope chemostratigraphy in Zavkhan terrane, western Mongolia (modified from Smith et al., 2015). See Fig. 2 for
symbols.
miocenica (probably Psammichnites isp.), Hormosiroidea isp. (probably
Saerichnites isp.), Monomorphichnus isp., Oldhamia radiata, Palaeophycus
tubularis, Treptichnus pedum, Planolites isp., Psammichnites isp. (Plagi-
ogmus isp. in original papers), Rusophycus avalonensis, Treptichnus bi-
furcus, Treptichnus triplex, and Zoophycos isp. (Goldring and Jensen,
1996; Smith et al., 2015). The small shelly fossils were originally
thought to first appear near the base of the Zuun-Arts Formation
(Brasier et al., 1996). However, Smith et al. (2015) suggested that the
first appearance of small shelly fossils occurs 200–300 m strati-
graphically higher at the base of Bayangol Formation (Fig. 19).
The flooding surface at the base of the BG2, which overlies the HST
deposit of the Zuun-Arts Formation, is overlain by transgressive phos-
phatic marine shale of BG2, thus denoting a SB, represented by a co-
planar surface (Fig. 19). The Ediacaran–Cambrian boundary was ori-
ginally defined based on the first occurrence of T. pedum at the contact
between BG3 and BG4 of the Bayangol Formation (Goldring and
Jensen, 1996) (Fig. 19). However, the first appearance of T. pedum in
the Zavkhan terrane contradicts other lines of evidence, including the
15
P
reca
m b
ria
nResea
rch3
45(2
020
)10
572
1
first occurrence of small shelly fossils (∼250 m below the first ap-
pearance of T. pedum) (Smith et al., 2015), and a report of early ar-
thropod trace fossils from the middle part of BG3, which suggest that
the Ediacaran–Cambrian boundary is actually much lower in the sec-
tion, probably at the base of the Bayangol Formation, above the large
negative excursion of δ13Ccarb in the Zuun-Arts Formation (Smith et al.,
2015) (Fig. 19).
Based on the available evidence, the Ediacaran–Cambrian boundary
in the Zavkhan terrane, western Mongolia, is most likely placed at the
base of the Bayangol Formation, coincident with a co-planar surface
marking the SB. The SB is overlain by transgressive phosphatic marine
shale of the Bayangol Formation, recording a large positive carbon
isotope excursion. Smith et al. (2015) applied the correlation between
positive carbon isotope excursions and occurrence of major SB in the
Bayangol Formation to suggest that the larger-scale transgressions as-
sociated with positive carbon isotope excursions, such as the one at the
base of the Bayangol Formation (coincide with positive carbon isotope
excursion B of Brasier et al., 1996), are products of local tectonism.
S. Shahkarami, et al. P
reca
m b
ria
nResea
rch3
45(2
020
)10
572
1

Given that Ediacaran to early Cambrian strata in the Zavkhan terrane pedum occurs within the upper interval of the Syhargalakh Formation,
were deposited in a foreland basin (Macdonald et al., 2009), tectoni- slightly below the lowermost occurrence of R. avalonensis, which is in
cally driven changes of sea level seem to be the most plausible scenario. the lower part of the Mattaia Formation (Rogov et al., 2015) (Fig. 20).
The base of Cambrian in Russia has been historically placed at the
beginning of the Tommotian Stage at the first appearance of small
2.13. Northeastern Siberia
skeletal fossils of the Nochoroicyathus sunnaginicus Assemblage zone in
the middle of the Mattaia Formation (Peng et al., 2012). The Nema-kit–
The Ediacaran–Cambrian succession in the Olenek Uplift, north-
Daldynian Stage of Siberia is characterized by the appearance of the first
eastern Siberia includes the Khorbusuonka and Kessyusa groups, both
skeletal fossils belonging to the Anabarites trisulcatus zone at or just
containing mixed siliciclastic and carbonate rocks. The carbonates re-
beneath the base of the Kessyusa Group (Knoll et al., 1995; Peng et al.,
present part of a passive-margin succession that developed along the
2012), which is consistent with the markedly negative carbon isotope
eastern margin of the Siberian craton during Neoproterozoic time.
excursion in the upper Turkut Formation (Knoll et al., 1995). The SB in
Traditionally the siliciclastic succession has been considered as re-
the Ediacaran–Cambrian succession of the Olenek Uplift is defined by a
cording an early Cambrian rift event (Pelechaty et al., 1996). However,
regionally extensive paleokarst unconformity at the base of the Sy-
a foreland basin setting has been proposed more recently (Grazhdankin
hargalakh Formation. Available evidence suggests that the Ediacar-an–
et al., 2020). The uppermost formation of the Khorbusuonka Group, the
Cambrian boundary in this section occurs near the top of the Sy-
Turkut Formation, consists of thickly laminated dolostone and minor
hargalakh Formation, approximately 20 m above the SB (Fig. 20).
thinly laminated limestone, overlain by dolomitic intraclast-ooid
grainstone and stromatolitic biostromes (Vishnevskaya et al., 2013). It
is interpreted to represent a HST shallowing from basinal to shallow 2.14. Northern Iran
ramp environments (Knoll et al., 1995; Pelechaty et al., 1996). The
overlying Kessyusa Group consists of siliciclastic and minor limestone, The Ediacaran–Cambrian succession of the Alborz Mountains, in
and is subdivided into the Syhargalakh, Mattaia, and Chuskuna for-
northern Iran comprises mixed siliciclastic–carbonate deposits of the
mations (Rogov et al., 2015; Nagovitsin et al., 2015). The boundary
Soltanieh Formation. The Soltanieh Formation was developed in the
between the Syhargalakh and Turkut formations is irregular and fills
Proto-Paleotethys passive margin of northwestern Gondwana (Alavi,
paleokarst caverns (Rogov et al., 2015). This paleokarst unconformity
1996). This formation consists of five members, from bottom to top: the
represents a SB (Fig. 20). A tuff breccia at the base of the Syhargalakh
Lower Dolomite, Lower Shale, Middle Dolomite, Upper Shale, and
Formation has yielded a U–Pb zircon date of 543.9 ± 0.24 Ma
Upper Dolomite members (Hamdi et al., 1989) (Figs. 21 and 22).
(Bowring et al., 1993). At the type section, the Lower Dolomite Member consists of dolo-
Tubular calcareous fossils tentatively assigned to Cambrotubulus mite to cherty dolomite and thin-bedded shale, the Lower Shale
decurvatus were recorded right above the base and below the top of the Member is dominated by black shale, the Middle Dolomite Member
Turkut Formation (Rogov et al., 2015; Markov et al., 2019), whereas
Cloudina is present near the top of the overlying Syhargalakh Formation
(Markov et al., 2019). The lowermost stratigraphic occurrence of T.

Fig. 20. Generalized stratigraphy of Ediacaran–Cambrian succession in Olenek

Uplift, northeastern Siberia (modified from Rogov et al., 2015; and Markov Fig. 21. Generalized stratigraphy of Ediacaran–Cambrian succession in Alborz
et al., 2019). Sy Fm. is Syhargalakh Formation, Mt Fm. is Mattaia Formation, Mountains, northern Iran (modified from Hamdi et al., 1989; and Shahkarami
and Ch Fm. is Chuskuna Formation. See Fig. 2 for other symbols. et al., 2017a,b). See Fig. 2 for symbols.

16
S. Shahkarami, et al.
Fig. 22. General view of the Soltanieh Formation of the Alborz Mountains,
northern Iran, showing subdivision into the Lower Dolomite Member (LDM),
Lower Shale Member (LSM), Middle Dolomite Member (MDM), Upper Shale
Member (USM), and Upper Dolomite Member (UDM).
comprises stromatolite-bearing dolomite and grey limestone, the Upper
Shale Member consists of grey-green shale to silty shale interbedded
with phosphatic limestone, and the Upper Dolomite Member is domi-
nated by stromatolites and cherty dolomite. The dolomite members
represent HST deposits accumulated in very shallow water (shallow
subtidal to supratidal), whereas the shale members were predominantly
deposited below storm wave base (i.e. shelf), and immediately above
the storm wave base (lower offshore) recording two main transgressive
episodes. Two SBs, marked by co-planar surfaces, occur at the tops of
the Lower and Middle Dolomite members (Shahkarami et al., 2017a)
(Fig. 21).
Treptichnus pedum occurs in the upper part of the Lower Shale
Member (CiabeGhodsi et al., 2006; Shahkarami et al., 2017a,b), and
Chuaria sp. has been recorded in the lower part of this member (Hamdi
et al., 1989), prompting placement of the Ediacaran–Cambrian
boundary within the Lower Shale Member. However, Shahkarami et al.
(2017b) suggested that the presence of the Anabarites trisulcatu- s–
Protohertzina anabarica zone in the upper interval of the Lower Do-
lomite Member and in the Lower Shale Member indicates that most, if
not the whole, Soltanieh Formation may be of early Cambrian age;
therefore placing the Ediacaran–Cambrian boundary either at the base
of the Soltanieh Formation or within the Lower Dolomite Member
(Fig. 21).
Given the paucity of reliable radiometric dates in the Alborz
Mountains succession, the exact position of Ediacaran–Cambrian
boundary remains unclear. However, the biostratigraphic data place the
boundary below the co-planar surface at the top of Lower Dolomite
Member. The Cambrian deposits of the Alborz Mountains are part of an
epicontinental platform basin related to a passive margin with slow
thermal subsidence (Alavi, 1996), formed on a low-angle, relatively low-
energy homoclinal carbonate ramp. Gradual facies transitions of the
Cambrian deposits of the Alborz Basin suggest that the role of tectonics
on the relative sea-level changes was minor (Bayet-Goll et al., 2014),
which makes the Ediacaran–Cambrian succession of Iran a sui- table
candidate for examining the eustatic signal of the Great Un- conformity.
2.15. Oman
The Neoproterozoic (Cryogenian-Ediacaran)-Cambrian succession
of Oman is included in the Huqf Supergroup, which not only is re-
presented by laterally continuous outcrops, but also has been identified
in the subsurface (Amthor et al., 2005; Bowring et al., 2007; Grotzinger
and Al-Rawahi, 2014). This supergroup is subdivided into three groups,
the Abu Mahara, Nafun and Ara groups (Bowring et al., 2007) (Fig. 23).
17
P
reca
m b
ria
nResea
rch3
45(2
020
)10
572
1
The internal subdivisions of these groups are variable according to the
area of study. In the Jabal Akhdar area, the Cryogenian Abu Mahara
Group consists of two intervals dominated by glacial diamictites
(Ghubrah and Fiq formations), separated by volcanogenic deposits
(Saqlah Member) (Bowring et al., 2007; Allen et al., 2011).
The Ediacaran Nafun Group consists of the Hadash, Masirah Bay,
Khufai, Shuram, and Buah formations. The Hadash Formation is a
limestone interval which represents the cap carbonate, constituting the
lowermost Ediacaran unit in the area (Leather et al., 2002). The
Masirah Bay Formation is dominated by shale and siltstone, and records
shelf deposition (Allen and Leather, 2006; Allen et al., 2011). The
Khufai Formation consists of a limestone-dominated unit comprising
carbonate mudstone, wackestone, packstone, grainstone, boundstone,
dolostone, evaporites, and minor sandstone, and recording deposition
in a carbonate ramp (Le Guerroue et al., 2006; Osburn et al., 2014). The
Shuram Formation consists of shale, mudstone, siltstone, sandstone,
ooidal grainstone, and edge-wise conglomerate, forming laterally ex-
tensive parasequences ranging from shelf to shoreface (Le Guerroue
et al., 2006). The Buah Formation comprises a carbonate-dominated
unit consisting of boundstone, carbonate mudstone, wackestone,
packstone, and grainstone, as well as minor sandstone and conglom-
erate, representing a carbonate ramp (Cozzi et al., 2004; Bowring et al.,
2007).
In the South Oman Salt Basin, the Ediacaran-Cambrian Ara Group is
divided into the Birba, “U”, Al Noor, and Dhahaban formations
(Schröder et al., 2003). Each of these units consists of dolostone, car-
bonate mudstone, boundstone and evaporites formed in a carbonate
ramp ranging from the outer zone to hypersaline lagoons and coastal
salinas (Conway Morris and Fritz, 1980; Schröder et al., 2003). Overall,
the Ara Group comprises six depositional sequences formed by a lower
evaporite unit and an upper carbonate unit (Schröder et al., 2003). The
lower evaporite unit is regarded as the LST, whereas the upper carbo-
nate unit is subdivided into a lower interval recording outer ramp de-
posits (TST), and an upper one representing outer to inner ramp de-
posits (HST).
The Ediacaran-Cambrian boundary has only been recognized in the
subsurface, and is present within depositional sequence 4 of the Ara
Group near or at the contact between its lower evaporite unit and its
upper carbonate unit (Amthor et al., 2003; Schröder et al., 2005). The
Ediacaran body fossils Cloudina and Namacalathus occur in the upper
limestone interval of depositional sequence 3 (Amthor et al., 2003). U-
Pb ages have been obtained from intercalated ash layers, indicating
542.9 Ma for a layer within the limestone unit of sequence 3 and 541.0
for another ash layer within the limestone unit of sequence 4 (Amthor
et al., 2003; Schröder et al., 2005; Bowring et al., 2007). The Ediacaran-
Cambrian boundary is coincident with a large-magnitude, but short-
lived negative excursion of δ13Ccarb (Amthor et al., 2003). Available
evidence suggests that the Ediacaran-Cambrian boundary is coincident
with a transgressive surface that marks the flooding of coastal hy-
persaline areas (Schröder et al., 2005).
The South Oman Salt Basin is regarded as a rift basin (Conway
Morris and Fritz, 1980). The depositional sequences of the Ara Group
are thought to record a response to rapid subsidence during renewed
tectonic activity and basin restriction (Conway Morris and Fritz, 1980;
Schröder et al., 2003). The formation of transgressive surfaces, such as
the one coinciding with the Ediacaran-Cambrian boundary, may have
been partially controlled by creation of accommodation space during
times of renewed subsidence.
2.16. Eastern Yunnan Province, South China
The Ediacaran–Cambrian succession in eastern Yunnan Province,
South China was deposited in a passive continental margin (Jiang et al.,
2012), and comprises in ascending order, the Baiyanshao, Xiaowai-
toushan (also known as Daibu) (Figs. 24 and 25a), Zhongyicun (also
known as Lower Phosphate, White Clay and Upper Phosphate
S. Shahkarami, et al.
Fig. 23. Generalized stratigraphy of the Huqf Supergroup of Oman. The illustrated portion of the Ara Group is based on subsurface data. The age-equivalent
volcaniclastic Fara Group is exposed in the Oman Mountains (modified from Schröder et al., 2003; Amthor et al., 2005; Bowring et al., 2007; and Grotzinger and Al -
Rawahi, 2014). See Fig. 2 for symbols.
members), and Dahai members (Qian et al., 2001b) (Fig. 25d).
The Baiyanshao, Xiaowaitoushan, and Dahai members are mainly
dolomite, whereas the Zhongyicun Member is dominantly phosphorite
and tuff (Zhu et al., 2009). A karst surface occurs at the contact between
the Xiaowaitoushan and Zhongyicun members (Zhu, 1997) (Fig. 24b,
c), representing a SB (Fig. 24). Treptichnus pedum has been reported
from the Meishucun section in the upper interval of the Zhongyicun
Member (middle interval of the Upper Phosphate Member) (Li, 1991)
and near the middle interval of the Zhongyicun Member (near the top of
the Lower Phosphate Member) (Zhu, 1997), whereas small shelly fossils
first occur considerably lower in the section (Fig. 24). Therefore, the
Ediacaran–Cambrian boundary has been defined by the first appearance
of the early Cambrian small shelly fossil Anabarites trisulcatus, recording
the presence of the Anabarites trisulcatus–Protohertzina anabarica zone
(Qian et al., 2001a, 2001b; Zhu et al., 1997), which coincides with the
base of the Zhongyicun Member (Zhu, 1997; Zhu et al., 2001; Qian
et al., 2001b) (Fig. 24).
Radiometric ages of 539.4 ± 2.9 Ma (Compston et al., 2008),
532.3 ± 0.7 Ma (Jiang et al., 2009), 536.3 ± 5.5 Ma (Chen et al.,
18
P
reca
m b
ria
nResea
rch3
45(2
020
)10
572
1
2009a,b), and 535.2 ± 1.7 Ma (Zhu et al., 2009) obtained from the
middle interval of the Zhongyicun Member, together with a report of a
negative carbon isotope excursion below the first appearance of small
shelly fossils (Brasier et al., 1990), support the proposed position of the
Ediacaran–Cambrian boundary. However, small shelly fossils have also
been recovered from the underlying Xiaowaitoushan Member (Zhang
Shishan, personal communication to LAB and MGM, 2015) (Fig. 24),
adding uncertainties to the position of the base of the Anabarites tri-
sulcatus–Protohertzina anabarica zone (Zhu, 1997) and, therefore, of the
Ediacaran–Cambrian boundary.
The most plausible position proposed for the Ediacaran–Cambrian
boundary in South China co-occurs with a karst unconformity at the
base of the Zhongyicun Member. Although the Ediacaran–Cambrian
succession of Eastern Yunnan was deposited in the passive margin of
Yangtze platform, the basin was crossed by several northeast southwest
trending syn-sedimentary faults, and it seems that the activity along
these faults controlled the development of sedimentary facies and
stratigraphic sequences during the Ediacaran–Cambrian transition
(Qian et al., 2001b).
S. Shahkarami, et al.
Fig. 24. Generalized stratigraphy of Ediacaran–Cambrian succession in Eastern
Yunnan, South China (modified from Qian et al., 2001b; and Zhu et al., 2009).
See Fig. 2 for symbols.
2.17. Yangtze Gorges, South China
The Ediacaran–Cambrian succession in the Yangtze Gorges area of
South China was deposited in a carbonate platform and associated slope
formed in a passive continental margin (Zhou and Xiao, 2007; Jiang
et al., 2011; Chen et al., 2013). The succession comprises, from base to
top, the Doushantuo, Dengying, and Yanjiahe formations (Chen et al.,
2013) (Fig. 26). The Doushantuo Formation comprises limestone, do-
lomite, shale and phosphorite formed in a lagoonal environment (Cao
et al., 1989; Xiao and Knoll, 1999). The Dengying Formation is sub-
divided into two members, the Shibantan and Baimatuo members, both
comprising limestone formed in a shallow-marine carbonate platform
with the former recording a subtidal setting and the latter peritidal
conditions (Cao et al., 1989; Chen et al., 2013; Cui et al., 2019). The
Yanjiahe Formation, currently divided into five informal units called
“Beds 1–5” (more properly Bedsets), consists of conglomerate, dolos-
tone, limestone, chert, and shale, representing deposition in a shallow-
marine carbonate platform (Junfeng et al., 2008).
The Doushantuo Formation contains an exceptionally preserved
biota consisting of globular microfossils interpreted as animal embryos,
acritarchs and algae, and is regarded as Ediacaran in age (Xiao and
Knoll, 1999; Chen et al., 2000, 2009a,b; Yin et al., 2007; Schiffbauer
et al., 2012). The Dengying Formation is host to trace fossils, algae and
a wide variety of tubular fossils, among other forms, all indicative of an
Ediacaran age (Zhao et al., 1988; Weber et al., 2007; Chen et al., 2013;
19
P
reca
m b
ria
nResea
rch3
45(2
020
)10
572
1
Meyer et al., 2014; Cai et al., 2015; Shen et al., 2017). The ages of both
the Doushantuo and Dengying formations are also supported by U-Pb
dating (e.g., Jiang et al., 2009). The Yanjiahe Formation contains ac-
ritarchs, algae, sponges and small shelly fossils, considered of early
Cambrian age (Junfeng et al., 2008; Guo et al., 2014; Chang et al.,
2017). Specifically, sponge spicules are present in the so-called Bed 1
(Chang et al., 2017), whereas small shelly fossils corresponding to the
Anabarites trisulcatus–Protohertzina anabarica zone occur in Bed 2, the
Purella antiqua zone in Bed 3, and the Aldanella yanjiaheensis zone in
Bed 5 (Guo et al., 2014). Accordingly, Beds 1–3 are regarded as For-
tunian in age and Bed 5 as Cambrian Age 2; Bed 4 is barren precluding
the placement of the Fortunian-Cambrian Stage 2 contact (Guo et al.,
2014). A negative excursion of δ13Ccarb has been recorded at the base of
the Yanjiahe Formation (Ishikawa et al., 2008). Accordingly, the
Ediacaran-Cambrian boundary in the Three Gorges area is placed co-
incident with the contact between the Dengying and Yanjiahe forma-
tions (Guo et al., 2014; Chang et al., 2017).
Establishing a sequence stratigraphic framework for the Three
Gorges area has been historically complicated (Jiang et al., 2011).
However, four depositional sequences have been recognized regionally
for the Ediacaran succession (Zhu et al., 2007). The SB of depositional
sequence 1 occurs at the base of the Doushantuo Formation, whereas
two other SBs were identified within this formation, one in the middle
part (depositional sequence 2) and the other one near the top (de-
positional sequence 3) (Zhu et al., 2007). The SB of depositional se-
quence 4 is present in the middle part of the Dengying Formation (Jiang
et al., 2011; Cui et al., 2019). Although the Cambrian succession has not
been explored in the same detail from a sequence stratigraphic per-
spective, a karstic surface has been identified at the top of depositional
sequence 4, in close proximity to the Ediacaran-Cambrian boundary
(Zhu et al., 2007; Cui et al., 2019).
3. Discussion
Our systematic review of key Ediacaran–Cambrian successions
worldwide shows that a sea-level fall took place close to the Ediacaran–
Cambrian transition at most localities. In southeastern Poland, northern
Norway, western United States, northwest Canada, and Oman, the
Ediacaran–Cambrian boundary occurs between two SBs. In southeastern
Newfoundland, northwest Mexico, southern Namibia, and Iran, the
Ediacaran–Cambrian boundary occurs just below a SB, whereas in
northeastern Siberia it is just above the SB. Finally, in South and Central
Australia, South Africa, western Mongolia, and South China, the
Ediacaran–Cambrian boundary seems to be coincident with a SB (Table
1). However, and given the uncertainties regarding the pre- cise position
of the boundary, it is clear that significant diachronism was involved,
arguing in favor of local factors (i.e., tectonics) over- printed on global
eustasy. Such basinward shifts of facies associated with stages of base-
level fall are not necessarily related to global changes in sea level, but
are often linked to a combination of eustasy and local tectonics (e.g.,
Christie-Blick et al., 1990; Christie-Blick and Driscoll, 1995). Tectonics is
commonly equated with basin subsidence and uplift. Each of these basins
is unique in terms of subsidence pat- terns; hence the stratigraphic
architecture and the nature of deposi- tional systems that fill the basin
are at least in part a reflection of the structural mechanisms controlling
the formation of the basin (Catuneanu, 2006). This consideration is
particularly important in tectonically active basins, such as grabens, rifts
or foreland systems, where stratigraphic cyclicity is commonly controlled
by cycles of sub- sidence and uplift triggered by various tectonic, flexural,
and isostatic mechanisms (Catuneanu, 2006). During the Ediacaran to
Cambrian transition, the impact of local tectonics may have been
magnified by large-scale paleogeographic changes and major plate
tectonic re- configurations (Bowring et al., 2003; Mitchell et al., 2011;
von Raumeret al., 2015).
Understanding the sequence-stratigraphic architecture of the
S. Shahkarami, et al.
Fig. 25. Sedimentary facies and stratal stacking patterns in Eastern Yunnan, South China. (a) Lower interval of the Xiaowaito ushan Member; (b) Contact of the
Xiaowaitoushan and Lower Phosphate members; (c) Close-up of contact between the Xiaowaitoushan and Lower Phosphate members; (d) Contact between of the
Upper Phosphate and Dahai members. See Fig. 2 for symbols.
Ediacaran–Cambrian boundary has implications that trascend the issue
of correlation, and affect our ability to test evolutionary hypotheses
using stratigraphic paleobiology approaches (Buatois et al., 2013).
Historically, the general proximity and common co-occurrence of the
Ediacaran–Cambrian boundary with a SB was thought to impair reliable
paleontologic sampling, owing to erosion, incomplete records implied
hiatuses and lack of adequate facies (Mount and McDonald, 1992).
However, the recognition of significant diachronism in this interval,
coupled with decades of scrutinizing these successions for erosional
remnants, body fossils, microfossils, trace fossils, and chemostrati-
graphic evidence have increasingly allowed incomplete successions to
provide insights into the Ediacaran–Cambrian transition. Also, the fact
that in many localities (e.g., Namibia) incision may have taken place
during the earliest Cambrian underscores the importance of detailed
sampling in strata below the SB with the aim of refining the location of
the Ediacaran–Cambrian transition. Specifically, exploring terminal
Ediacaran deposits located in interfluve positions (i.e., between incised
valleys) may be particularly rewarding because these settings may
preserve thick shallow-marine strata below the SB, which could have
been eroded along axial positions of the paleovalleys. Integration of
sequence-stratigraphic information with high-resolution age data is key
in evaluating competing models to explain the displacement of the
Ediacara biota by the Cambrian fauna, as has been recently illustrated
in Namibia (Linnemann et al., 2019). Thick siliciclastic or mixed car-
bonate-siliciclastic successions, such as those in Namibia, Iran, Oman,
western United States, Mackenzie Mountains, and Newfoundland are
particularly useful to map and delineate parasequences and
20
P
reca
m b
ria
nResea
rch3
45(2
020
)10
572
1
parasequence sets. In these sections, comparison of identical sedimen-
tary facies through time allows differentiation between environmental
and evolutionary factors for observed biotic changes (MacNaughton
and Narbonne, 1999; Shahkarami et al., 2017a). Additionally, some of
these sections represent conformable successions (e.g., Fortune Head),
displaying a more complete record of shallow-marine facies across the
Ediacaran–Cambrian transition. Thin carbonate successions, such as
those in South China, provide a high-resolution biostratigraphic record
(e.g., Guo et al., 2014), but are more limited to evaluate potential facies
controls due to stratigraphic condensation. In other cases, the occur-
rence of specific sedimentary facies and depositional conditions may
have been detrimental for the establishment of biotas during the
Ediacaran-Cambrian transition. For example, the recurrence of eva-
porites in the Oman succession indicates stressful conditions and may
be responsible for the paucity of fossils near the Ediacaran-Cambrian
boundary in that succession.
Our synthesis of seventeen widely separated Ediacaran–Cambrian
successions suggests that significant diachronism was involved in the
generation of the Great Unconformity. In most places, the Great
Unconformity is actually a composite sequence boundary recording
various eustatic episodes of sea-level rise and fall overprinted by mul-
tiple tectonic events of subsidence and uplift. Accordingly, the Great
Unconformity cannot be attributed to a single cause, but to a result of a
complex interplay and succession of factors. Even at the classic Tapeats
Sandstone exposures where this unconformity was defined, subsequent
stratigraphic work (Rose, 2006) and detrital zircon geochronology
(Karlstrom et al., 2018) is showing it to be a highly diachronous surface,
S. Shahkarami, et al. P
reca
m b
ria
nResea
rch3
45(2
020
)10
572
1

Fig. 26. Generalized stratigraphy of the Yangtze Gorges succession of Southern China (modified from Zhu et al., 2007; and Chen et al., 2013). See Fig. 2 for symbols.

with deposition often not commencing until Furongian (late Cambrian)
or younger time in some parts of the craton. In short, the formation of a
SB during the Ediacaran–Cambrian transition most likely reflects
overprint of local tectonics on pure eustasy, implying that the SB should
not be used for inter-basin correlations.
Traditionally the Ediacaran-Cambrian boundary has been seen as
separating rocks containing a biota of problematic affinities from an
overlying fauna dominated by representatives of almost all the main
animal body plans (Brasier et al., 1994; Landing, 1994; Narbonne et al.,
2012; Peng et al., 2012; Peters and Gaines, 2012; Landing et al., 2013;
Kaufman, 2018). More recently, the notion that these were two separate
worlds has been questioned, and instead, an overlapping series of
evolutionary radiations is increasingly hypothesized (Schiffbauer et al.,
2016; Zhu et al., 2017; Darroch et al., 2018; Wood et al., 2019). Ac-
cordingly, regardless of the major geochemical changes associated with
weathering and erosion during the formation of the Great Un-
conformity, the roots of the Cambrian explosion are in the terminal
Ediacaran, and predate the sea-level fall (Schiffbauer et al., 2016;
Buatois and Mángano, 2016; Zhu et al., 2017; Darroch et al., 2018;
Wood et al., 2019).

Table 1
Paleogeographic position, tectonic setting, and position of Ediacaran–Cambrian boundary with respect to the SB in the studied successions.

Position of the E–C boundary in relation to Section Paleogeographic position at the time of E–C Tectonic setting
SB

Below a SB Southeastern Newfoundland, Canada
Caborca terranes, northwest Mexico
Nama Group, southern Namibia
Northern Iran
Above a SB Olenek Uplift, northeast Siberia
In between two SB Mackenzie Mountains, Canada
Death Valley, Eastern California
White Inyo Mountains, western Nevada,
Lublin slope, southeastern Poland
Vestertana Group, Northern Norway
Huqf Supergroup, Oman
Coinciding with a SB Flinders Ranges, South Australia
Amadeus Basin, Central Australia
Vanrhynsdorp Group, South Africa
Zavkhan terrane, western Mongolia
Eastern Yunnan, South China
Yangtze Gorges, South China
Northwest margin of the Avalon terrane Transtensional
Southwestern Laurentia. Passive margin
Western margin of the Kalahari Craton Foreland basin
Northwestern margin of Gondwana Passive margin
Northern margin of Siberian craton Passive margin/Foreland basin
Western margin of Laurentia Passive margin
Southwestern Laurentia Passive margin
Southwestern Laurentia passive margin
South western Baltica Rift
Northwestern Margin of Baltica (Baltoscandian Extensional/foreland basin
margin)
Northwestern margin of Gondwana Rift
South eastern Australian continent Passive margin/Rift
Central Australian continent Intracratonic basin
Western margin of the Kalahari Craton Foreland basin
Zavkhan terrane/adjacent to Siberian craton Foreland basin
South China Craton (Yangtze Passive margin
South China Craton (Yangtze Passive margin

21
S. Shahkarami, et al. P
reca
m b
ria
nResea
rch3
45(2
020
)10
572
1

4. Conclusions

Potential diachronism of the so-called “Great Unconformity” is

evaluated based on the review of seventeen Ediacaran-Cambrian suc-
cessions around the globe, underscoring a more nuanced scenario.
Integration of chronostratigraphic, geochemical, and biostratigraphic
data suggests that significant diachronism was involved in the genera-
tion of the Great Unconformity due to overprint of local tectonics on
eustasy, therefore resulting in a composite sequence boundary. This fact
prevents using this SB for inter-basin correlations. The importance of
integrating multiple datasets within a sequence-stratigraphic, and
chemostratigraphic framework in the analysis of Ediacaran–Cambrian
successions is underscored. This approach is essential to differentiate
between evolutionary and environmental controls on the biota, to de-
sign sampling strategies, and to evaluate competing models to explain
the displacement of the Ediacara biota by the Cambrian evolutionary
fauna.

Declaration of Competing Interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial

interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influ-
ence the work reported in this paper.

Acknowledgments

Several colleagues shared their expertise during field trips in dif-

ferent Ediacaran-Cambrian sections, in particular Kristin Bergmann,
Jim Gehling, Gerard Germs, Xiaoya Ma, Paul Myrow, Guy Narbonne,
Tony Prave, Zhang Shishan, and Emmy Smith. We are also grateful to
Anthony Tankard and Marc Laflamme for valuable feedback during the
course of this study, Sören Jensen and Natalia Bykova for providing
valuable information on the successions in Finmak and Olenek Uplift,
respectively, and to Paul Link and an anonymous reviewer for their
highly useful comments. Fig. 1 was produced by Dean Meek. Financial
support was provided by Natural Sciences and Engineering Research
Council (NSERC) Discovery Grants 311727-08/15 and 311726-05/13
awarded to Mángano and Buatois, respectively. This study is part of the
thesis of S.S.

22