Previous Article |
Table of Contents
| Next Article
* Nanjing Institute of Geology and Paleontology, Nanjing 210008, China; Divisions of § Biology and Contributed by Eric H. Davidson, January 28, 2000
Putative fossil embryos and larvae from the Precambrian
phosphorite rocks of the Doushantuo Formation in Southwest China have been examined in thin section by bright field and polarized light microscopy. Although we cannot completely exclude a nonbiological or
nonmetazoan origin, we identified what appear to be modern cnidarian
developmental stages, including both anthozoan planula larvae and
hydrozoan embryos. Most importantly, the sections contain a variety of
small ( The prediction that
stem-group and perhaps even crown-group bilaterians existed in
Neoproterozoic times, well before the Precambrian boundary, is
supported by many kinds of argument. The most general and important of
these arguments is that almost all major bilaterian clades already are
represented in the Lower Cambrian, in remarkably preserved deposits
such as the Chengjiang fossil lagerstätte (1). Fossil remains of
diverse bilaterian forms from the Lower Cambrian have been obtained
from many other regions of the globe as well (2-4). The latest
Precambrian also has yielded trace fossils of unmistakable bilaterian
origin (5-7). These remains indicate that major evolutionary
diversification of animals already had occurred by the onset of the
Cambrian, and, therefore, more remote ancestral forms must have been
alive earlier. Cladistic analyses, both morphological and molecular,
clearly indicate that the bilaterians are monophyletic, i.e., they
derive from a latest common ancestor that gave rise only to bilaterians
(see ref. 8). How deep in time were this common ancestor and its
offshoots, the common ancestors of the three great bilaterian clades
(ecdysozoans, lophotrochozoans, deuterostomes; refs. 8-10) is unknown.
Molecular phylogenies based on sequence comparisons of protein domains
shared by all bilaterians suggest that the time of divergence of these proteins may extend back to 600-1,200 million years (megaannuum; Ma)
ago (11-16). In addition, arguments based on regulatory evolution lead
to the proposition that microfaunal bilaterian stem groups must have
evolved through several stages of regulatory complexity during
Precambrian time (17, 18). But thus far, unequivocal paleontological
evidence of bilaterian forms has extended only to the final period of
the Neoproterozoic, a few million years before the Cambrian
"explosion" (5-7, 19, 20).
The Lower Cambrian strata of Southwest China overlie phosphate
deposits known as the Meishucun Formation (Fm), which contains small
shelly fossils mainly composed of mineralized spines and plates of
various types of animal (21, 22). The Late Precambrian is represented
by a thick sequence of carbonate deposits, the Dengying Fm. The top of
the Dengying Fm contains the tubular fossil Cloudina (19).
Below these fossils are frondose Ediacaran remains (23), the affinities
of which are enigmatic (24, 25). What has been missing is evidence of
animals belonging to the bilaterian lineage deeper in time, i.e., from
the Lower Dengying, or from earlier deposits anywhere in the world. One
such deposit is the phosphatic Doushantuo Fm, which underlies the
Dengying Fm in Southwest China. We report here a preliminary
exploration of embryonic and larval animal forms represented in samples
of Doushantuo phosphorites from one particular location.
The terminal Proterozoic follows the most recent phase of the
worldwide Varanger glaciation, and it extends to the
Precambrian/Cambrian boundary at 543 Ma (5, 30). In Hubei and Guizhou
provinces of China, the latest Varanger glaciation event is represented by the Nantuo tillites (31). The tillites are believed to have an age
of 610-590 Ma (32), and a U-Pb radiometric date suggests a greater age
for the underlying formation (33). The Doushantuo Fm lies immediately
above the Nantuo Fm, representing transgressive deposits that occurred
as the result of a rise in sea level because of the melting of
continental glaciers. The time gap between the end of the glaciation
and the beginning of transgressive deposition is of unknown length,
except that it is certainly younger than the 610- to 590-Ma-old Nantuo
tillites. The age of the Doushantuo Fm could be as old as 580 Ma (26),
and pending direct measurement, its age must fall within the
range 570 ± 20 Ma (27) [Saylor et al. (34) argue that
it is toward the younger end of this range]. It is important to
stress, however, that whatever the absolute time horizon
represented by the Doushantuo Fm, it is likely to precede the lowest
strata with which bilaterian remains have so far been associated (20).
The Doushantuo Fm is a marine deposit containing
phosphate-dolomite sequences. In Beidoushan, in the Weng'an district
of central Guizhou Province (Fig. 1), the
phosphate deposit is divided by an erosive surface into two units. The
fossils described here are from the base of the upper phosphate unit,
0.2-6 m in thickness. This high-resolution fossil bed is about 30%
phosphate, present as the mineral fluorapatite
[Ca5(PO4)3F].
Phosphatic beds within this deposit are grainstones composed of 1- to
5-mm phosphoclasts. These derive from a phosphatic surface that formed
on the sea floor, in the process recrystallizing existing surface
sediments. In addition to replacing carbonate sediments, soft tissues
of metazoan embryos, larvae, adults, and algae also appear to have been
mineralized (26-29). The phosphatized sediment crust was then broken
into small fragments by heavy current activity and then redeposited and
mixed in with adjacent lime muds. For current discussion of this
fossilization process, see ref. 28.
Special Feature
Research Article
Evolution
Precambrian animal diversity: Putative phosphatized embryos from
the Doushantuo Formation of China
,
,
,§,
,
,§
Geological
and Planetary Sciences, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena,
CA 91125; and ¶ Department of Life Sciences, National Tsing
Hua University, Hsinchu 300, Taiwan, China
![]()
Abstract
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Methods
Discussion
Conclusions
References
200 µm) structures that greatly resemble gastrula stage
embryos of modern bilaterian forms.
![]()
Introduction
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Methods
Discussion
Conclusions
References

View larger version (29K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 1.
Locality map and relative generalized stratigraphy of the
Doushantuo Fm. (A) Location of the Weng'an phosphorite
deposits in Guizhou Province, China. Outcrops of the Doushantuo Fm are
shown by the black areas. (B) Relative stratigraphy of
the Terminal Proterozoic and Cambrian. The Doushantuo Fm is older than
the late Neoproterozoic paleocommunity Zone III, which bears fossil
evidence of cnidarian as well as bilaterian forms. Sponges are clearly
present in Precambrian deposits (41, 42), including the Doushantuo
(26). Beneath the Doushantuo Fm is a layer of tillite, deposited during
the global glaciation, which is believed to have terminated about 590 Ma ago. On the left are interpolated absolute dates; the solid
horizontal lines represent divisions dated by U-Pb geochronology. Also
indicated are representative Cambrian lagerstätten. The dates
shown for the Cambrian are from Landing et al. (43, 44)
and Davidek et al. (45); the Precambrian/Cambrian
boundary date is from Bowring et al. (30) and Grotzinger
et al. (5). See text for discussion and references. The
fossils shown are, from top to bottom: Opabinia, a
middle Cambrian Burgess Shale arthropod; a Lower Cambrian olenellid
trilobite (left) and Haikouella lanceolata (46), an
early Cambrian chordate (right); a small shelly fossil of the Lower
Cambrian; Arkarua, a possible Precambrian echinoderm
(left) and a sea pen, Charniodiscus, from the later
Precambrian (right); a possible sponge embryo from the Precambrian
Doushantuo Fm (left), and a fossil embryo resembling a deuterostome
gastrula (right; for more details see Fig. 3A).
| |
Methods |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The samples included in the present study were collected from the Wusi and Baidoushan quarries of the Weng'an phosphate mine. Thin sections were prepared by grinding and were mounted on standard microscope slides for examination. Section thickness was 30-50 µm, allowing for some three-dimensional visualization at different planes of focus. About 2,000 sections have been examined, and over 4,000 digital images of embryos and larvae have been recorded. These images were obtained by transmitted light microscopy at ×100 or ×200 magnification, and many samples also were photographed. Selected samples were examined as well in a polarization microscope using cross-polarized light with a gypsum plate.
Apparent Fossil Embryos and Their Affinities with Modern Forms. Each of the forms we report in the following was encountered multiple times. The sections are heterogeneous: some are rich with apparent fossil embryos and/or microscopic sponges in various stages of development, whereas others are devoid of any specimens of interest. The object of this paper is to report the presence of diverse microscopic structures, which, at high resolution, resemble several modern forms of cnidarian larvae (Fig. 2); and most importantly, gastrula stage embryos that appear bilaterian in their morphological details (Fig. 3). We are aware that microscopic mineral inclusions of nonbiological origin can easily resemble biological forms, including embryos, and we cannot rigidly exclude the possibility that they are not fossils at all. However, we consider two kinds of evidence that point instead to a biogenic origin for these embryo-like structures: first and most important, the remarkable consistency of their morphology and dimensions as observed in multiple independent observations of each of the types that we describe; and second, their appearance under polarized light, which allows direct visualization of the crystal structure. Each individual crystal element, defined by the orientation of its axes with respect to the plane of polarization, is displayed in the polarization microscope images by a different color. As we summarize in Discussion, the results of the polarized and bright-field microscopy are consistent with the argument that the objects described in Figs. 2 and 3 are indeed fossilized embryos, which originally were composed of epithelial layers of cells surrounding internal cellular structures that arose by invagination.
|
|
Possible Cnidarian Gastrulae. Fig. 2A shows a form strikingly similar to an early anthozoan planula. The key characteristics, as illustrated in the drawing in Fig. 2B, are its elongate shape, in the fossil about 320 × 220 µm; its single cell-thick ectodermal wall, which can be seen clearly in the portion of the fossil at 9 o'clock, and the multipolar endodermal ingressions protruding into the blastocoel from a cell layer applied to the inner surface of the ectoderm. The double-layered structure is clearly evident in the fossil (at about 7-11 o'clock and at about 5 o'clock on its circumference). Fig. 2 C and D shows a fossil that displays a unique morphology found in some modern hydrozoan gastrula-stage embryos. These embryos consist essentially of a single cell-thick ectoderm and a thin-walled archenteron also composed of a single cell-thick epithelium (Fig. 2E). The polarized light image in Fig. 2D reveals the same features; therefore, the crystal elements of which the structural elements we interpret as ectodermal and archenteron walls are composed do not extend beyond the limits visible in white light (i.e., they are not merely color discontinuities in a solid mineral grain). The blastocoelar space and the lumen of the archenteron are amorphous, rather than crystalline, because they appear black in polarized light however the prisms are set. A pink mass at the bottom of the archenteron visible in polarized light appears to be an adventitious grain. A striking feature of this putative fossil embryo is that individual cells can be discerned in many regions of both the ectodermal and endodermal layers, and, in Fig. 2D (at about 3-4 o'clock on the perimeter), each cell can be seen to be a separate crystal of a different color from its neighbor. Elsewhere, contiguous cells are represented by crystals oriented in the same direction, perhaps reflecting the original apical-basal orientation of the cytoskeletons in the contiguous cells of the original epithelial wall. This interpretation is enhanced by the observation that the orientations of the crystals in the inner and outer layers in Fig. 2D are the same (arrows), as would have been the apical-basal orientation of these cell layers in life.
Possible Bilaterian Gastrulae. Fig. 3 shows a remarkable series of what appear to be fossil embryos that display specific characteristics of modern bilaterian gastrula-stage embryos, specifically those of many phyla of modern marine invertebrates. Note first that these are all rather small forms, typically 150-200 µm in diameter, similar to many echinoderm and hemichordate embryos, and to molluscan, polychaete, and a good many other lophotrochozoan embryos. The structures shown in Fig. 3 A-G resemble embryos of the echinoderm-hemichordate clade of the deuterostomes, as illustrated by the sea urchin example in Fig. 3H. They appear to consist of a single cell-thick ectodermal wall, the organization of which can be clearly seen in the polarized light images of Fig. 3 B-F; a large blastocoel; and an archenteron protruding into the blastocoel from one side, which is the location of the blastopore. A further and very particular characteristic is a bilateral endomesodermal outpocketing at the top of the archenteron. Endomesodermal outpockets appear to be present in the specimen shown in Fig. 3A, in which the archenteron bends toward one side of the ectoderm. In modern embryos of these kinds, the mouth forms from a columnar ectodermal region where the archenteron contacts the blastocoel wall. Some of these same features are evident in Fig. 3 C and D, which can be interpreted as an oblique section along the plane similar to that indicated by the arrowheads for the specimen shown in Fig. 3A. This plane passes through the tip of what appears to be the archenteron, from which two masses of cells can be seen emerging, adjacent to a thickened region of the blastocoel wall. Note that each of these cells contains a central discontinuity that is in the right position to represent its nucleus. A further example is shown in Fig. 3E, although in this specimen a large crystalline mass appearing pink in polarized light (Fig. 3F) partially occludes the putative archenteron. However, the single cell-thick wall of the archenteron-like structure can be seen in blue on one side, as can a few blue crystal elements within the blastocoel that could represent individual mesenchymal cells. What seems to be a large blastocoel is particularly evident in Fig. 3G. The apparent blastocoelar spaces in the fossil embryos shown in Fig. 3 A-G are either entirely amorphous, as in Fig. 3 C, D, and G, or are partially occupied with crystals that are separate from those of the cellular layers, as can be seen in Fig. 3 B and F. Fig. 3 I and J shows what could be different forms of fossil gastrulae. These display more of a spiralian character, illustrated by the drawings of polychaete embryos shown in Fig. 3K. Gastrula-stage embryos of many marine annelids, molluscs, and their allies are built of larger cells (i.e., at gastrula stage they are composed of fewer cells than are typical deuterostome gastrulae). The archenteron is generated by more or less yolk-filled blastomeres, which, after being surrounded by ectodermal cells, hollow out to form the lumen of the embryonic gut. A particular structural feature of such gastrulae are the bilateral bands of cells originating at one side of the base of the archenteron. These are the mesodermal germ bands. An early stage of germ band formation is illustrated in Fig. 3K, and a topologically similar morphological structure is evident in Fig. 3J. What appear to be large individual cells can be seen to constitute the ectodermal wall, as well as the archenteron, and between them, on the right, is an additional band of cells extending vertically across the blastocoel. The specimen in Fig. 3I is similar in its large and thick archenteron, but the outer wall is thinner than in Fig. 3J.
We want to stress that we make no claim that organisms we would recognize as polychaetes or echinoderms existed at the time the Doushantuo sediments were deposited. The comparisons with modern forms in Fig. 3 are intended only to show that the morphological characters of the fossil gastrulae are paralleled in detail by those of modern bilaterian gastrulae. Furthermore, to accommodate the diversity of the fossil gastrulae both deuterostome and spiralian models appear to be required.Similar Dimensions of Specimens of Each Morphological Form of Putative Microfossil. The internal and external dimensions of several examples, of the much larger number seen, of each of the morphotypes included in Figs. 2 and 3 were measured. A more extensive set of morphometric measurements will be forthcoming, but the data in Table 1 suffice to illustrate the point: considering the complexity of the mineralization process, the dimensional consistency of each type is fairly remarkable. For example, the fraction of the average external diameter constituted by the diameter of the archenteron in the three deuterostome embryo-like specimens is 27 ± 3%, and the thickness of both the apparent endodermal inner layer, and the average thickness of outer wall in all of the cniderian-like embryos, were always the same.
|
| |
Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The claim made in this paper is that organisms that produced embryos of bilaterian affinity, as well as clearly differentiated cnidarian forms, may have existed some millions of years earlier than indicated by any previous paleontological evidence. Thus, it is a first order of business to review the evidence that the objects displayed in Figs. 2-4 are likely to be fossil embryos, rather than microscopic spheroidal grains of nonbiological origin.
|
Qualitative Morphological Evidence of Authenticity. An essential feature of the fossils is their high morphological resolution. This might seem fantastic, had it not already been reported by Li et al. (26) in their observations of sponge embryos and by Xunlai and Hofmann (29) in studies of algal and fungal microfossils in sections prepared from the same location. Details of cell nuclei, spicules, fungal mycelia, and subcellular morphology, as well as cells of various sizes, can be seen in these works [sponge embryos similar in every respect to those described (26) were frequently encountered in the same slides that included the fossil embryos discussed here]. Thus, if the putative cnidarian and bilaterian fossils are authentic, their morphological features should be visible on the same fine scale, and indeed they are. Many very specific morphological characters of modern gastrula-stage cnidarian and bilaterian forms can be seen: The structures appear to be bounded by single cell-thick walls that enclose blastocoelar spaces of familiar dimension; the bilaterian-like forms display archenterons; and the cnidarian-like forms other typical endodermal morphologies. Each of the types we have categorized in Figs. 2 and 3 have been seen multiple times in the sections examined. Furthermore, as Table 1 illustrates, the dimensions of each type are always approximately the same. Constant morphology and constant dimension are the outputs of genetically controlled developmental systems and are thus a powerful index of biological origin.
It would have been suspicious had every embryo we encountered seemed to display affinity with some modern taxon. But such was not the case. Various forms that we saw cannot immediately be identified by similarity to modern models, and an example is shown in Fig. 4D; its affinities are problematic.Physical Evidence. The polarized and bright-field image pairs shown in Fig. 2 C and D and Fig. 3 C-H provide additional evidence. Although oncoids occur in these sections (although quite rarely, compared with fossil embryos), their concentric, often laminar structures appear quite different from those of the putative fossil embryos when viewed in polarized light. Examples of oncoids found in the sections we studied are shown in Fig. 4 A-C. Fig. 4 A and B illustrates an initial stage of concentric lamination around a phosphatic nucleus. These coated grains are dissimilar to one another in size, crystal structure, number of laminations, and lamination thickness. The main feature of the polarized and bright-field image pairs in Figs. 2 and 3 is that the morphology of the putative fossil embryos looks the same by either display. Therefore, the boundaries of the crystal domains detected in polarized light are also the morphological boundaries of the structures seen in the light microscope: the blastocoels are real, rather than simply discolored crystal boundaries; the apparent single cell-thick walls that bound the embryos are discontinuous with the external matrix in which they are embedded, as well as with the amorphous material in the blastocoelar spaces; the same can be said for the structures resembling archenterons, which are so important a diagnostic feature for the bilaterian embryos. Additional features visible in polarized light are noted above that demonstrate authenticity in unexpected specific ways. In Fig. 2D, for example, the orientations of the crystals in what look to be the endodermal and ectodermal cell layers of the embryo are in several places the same, as indicated by the similar colors (arrows). This similarity might be expected, because the apical-basal orientation of the cells of which this embryo was composed should have been the same in both layers. Perhaps the apical-basal orientation of some aspect of internal cytoarchitecture was reflected in the formation of the initial mineral substituent within these cells. In several of the images, individual contiguous cells appear to have been reconstituted as individual crystals, seen in polarized light in different colors, because their axes are noncoincident (Figs. 2F, 3D, and 4F). Throughout most of the polarized light images, large contiguous patches of cells constituting a given epithelial layer generally display the same crystal orientation. In Fig. 3 A and B, we can see that the original structure from which the fossil formed was soft, for its external wall is deformed by a hard grain against which it still lies (arrow).
Although the physical and biological evidence both support the authenticity of the fossil embryos, it remains formally possible that only some aspects of the fossils are biogenic (perhaps not even metazoan), whereas other features of their structures are nonbiogenic. However, we think the initial evidence presented here implies that embryos of diverse metazoan affinity were in fact present several tens of millions of years before the onset of the Cambrian. At the very least, it is clear that the Doushantuo microfossils must be considered a very important subject for further study.The Putative Bilaterian Embryos. In deuterostomes of the hemichordate/echinoderm clade, the large blastocoel surrounding the invaginated archenteron is devoid of all but a few mesenchymal cells, whereas in lophotrochozoan protostomes it is more or less filled with large gut cells. The outer wall of the embryo in both groups consists of a single cell-thick ectodermal epithelium. In typical modern echinoderm and hemichordate gastrulae, mesodermal outpocketings emerge from the anterior portion of the gut, whereas in lophotrochozoans the mesoderm arises as columns of cells emerging from bilateral cell masses at either side of the gut. By the time of mesoderm formation, bilateral organization is obvious in both groups. Fig. 3 B-H illustrate possible gastrula-stage embryos that appear clearly deuterostome in form; some of these embryos even display apparent mesodermal outpocketings (Fig. 3 A-D). The large blastocoel and the characteristic deuterostome archenterons are particularly clear in Fig. 3 A, C, and G. Fig. 3 I and J shows apparent fossil gastrulae that, in their large cells and relatively thick archenterons, instead appear spiralian. These assignments are of course tentative, but we note that, were it the case that these are indeed embryos of spiralian affinity, this would imply that crown-group bilaterians had already diversified (35) and that the stem groups lie much deeper in time. In any case, assuming that they are indeed real, the bilaterian nature of the fossil embryos in Fig. 3 is hard to doubt. The present report is to be considered an initial analysis, in that the actual diversity of bilaterian forms in the Doushantuo phosphorites can be established only by examination of later developmental stages, if they can be recovered. But on molecular and phylogenetic as well as paleontological bases, it is already likely that the bilaterians have an evolutionary history that long precedes the Ediacaran, let alone the Cambrian "explosion."
Indirect Development.
If the Precambrian embryonic organisms of bilaterian form
discussed here developed into organisms that we could recognize as
similar to adult bilaterian forms, they almost certainly did so
indirectly, using planktotrophic larval forms. This is a safe inference
from the small size and the morphology of these embryos, which resemble
those of indirectly developing deuterostomes (i.e., echinoderms or
hemichordates) or spiralians (e.g., the polychaete embryos of the
models in Fig. 3K). Most directly developing marine bilaterians use much larger eggs that are able to produce embryos consisting of relatively large numbers of cells without feeding. Many
lines of evidence show that for deuterostomes and lophotrochozoans maximal indirect development is primitive, and direct development is
derived (36-38). A palentological argument against this view has been
cited (39) based on some large eggs of Cambrian origin (40). However,
there is so far no evidence of embryos of bilaterian nature in the
Doushantuo phosphorites that are more than 250 µm in diameter, or
that have forms which support the possibility of direct development
[some frequently occurring,
500-µm cleavage-stage eggs in the
Doushantuo phosphorites (27) are probably of poriferan origin (ref. 26,
and our unpublished data)]. Thus, the earliest bilaterian-grade
embryos, of which there is only palentological evidence, either
produced small and simple creatures compared with modern adult
bilaterians, or produced adult bilaterian forms by indirect processes.
| |
Conclusions |
|---|
|
|
|---|
This study suggests that the evolutionary history of both cnidarian and bilaterian forms may extend many millions of years deeper in Precambrian time than previous direct evidence so far indicates. But this is only a beginning. Continued exploration of these high-resolution phosphorite deposits may revolutionize palentological insight into the evolutionary origins of animal forms.
| |
Acknowledgements |
|---|
We thank the many colleagues in the paleontology and evolution communities who have read, criticized, and thereby vastly improved drafts of this manuscript. This work was supported by the National Science Foundation, China, jointly with the National Department of Science and Technology of China; the National Science Council of Taiwan, China; the Fundamental Biology Research Program of the Life Sciences Division of NASA/Ames, Grant NAG2-1368; and the Norman Chandler Professorship at Caltech. J.W.H. was supported by Fellowships of the Division of Geological and Planetary Science of Caltech, and P.O. was supported by the Stowers Institute for Medical Research.
| |
Abbreviations |
|---|
Ma, Megaannuum (i.e., million years); Fm, Formation.
| |
Footnotes |
|---|
J.-Y.C. and P.O. contributed equally to this work.
To whom reprint requests should be addressed at:
Division of Biology 156-29, California Institute of Technology,
Pasadena, CA 91125. E-mail: davidson{at}mirsky.caltech.edu; or Nanjing
Institute of Geology and Paleontology, Nanjing 21008, China. E-mail:
chenjy{at}jlonline.com.
| |
References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| 1. | Chen, J.-Y. & Zhou, G.-Q. (1997) in The Cambrian Explosion and the Fossil Record (Bulletin of the National Museum of Natural Science), eds. Chen, J.-Y., Cheng, Y. N. & Iten, H. V. (National Museum of Natural History, Taichung), Vol. 10, pp. 11-105. |
| 2. | Bengtson, S., Conway Morris, S., Cooper, B. J., Jell, P. A. & Runnegar, B. N. (1990) Mem. Ass. Australas. Palaeontols. 9, 1-364. |
| 3. | Conway Morris, S. & Peel, J. S. (1990) Nature (London) 345, 802-805. |
| 4. | Landing, E., Narbonne, G. M., Myrow, P., Benus, A. P. & Anderson, M. M. (1988) in Trace Fossils, Small Shelly Fossils and the Precambrian/Cambrian Boundary, eds. Landing, E., Narbonne, G. M. & Myrow, P. (Bulletin of the New York State Museum Number 463, Albany, NY), pp. 18-58. |
| 5. |
Grotzinger, J. P., Bowring, S. A., Saylor, B. Z. & Kaufman, A. J.
(1995)
Science
270,
598-604 |
| 6. | Fedonkin, M. A. & Wagoner, B. M. (1997) Nature (London) 388, 868-871. |
| 7. | Fedonkin, M. A. (1994) in Early Life on Earth: Nobel Symposium No. 84, ed. Bengtson, S. (Columbia Univ. Press, New York), pp. 370-388. |
| 8. |
Adoutte, A.
(2000)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
97,
4453-4456 |
| 9. | Aguinaldo, A. M. A., Turbeville, J. M., Linford, L. S., Rivera, M. C., Garey, J. R., Raff, R. A. & Lake, J. A. (1997) Nature (London) 387, 489-493[CrossRef][Medline] . |
| 10. | Adoutte, A., Balavoine, G., Lartillot, N. & de Rosa, R. (1999) Trends Genet. 15, 104-108[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] . |
| 11. |
Wray, G. A., Levinton, J. S. & Shapiro, L. H.
(1996)
Science
274,
568-573 |
| 12. |
Ayala, F. J., Rzhetsky, A. & Ayala, F. J.
(1998)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
95,
606-611 |
| 13. | Gu, X. (1998) J. Mol. Evol. 47, 369-371[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] . |
| 14. |
Bromham, L., Rambaut, A., Fortey, R., Cooper, A. & Penny, D.
(1998)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
95,
12386-12389 |
| 15. | Lynch, M. (1999) Evolution (Lawrence, Kans.) 53, 319-325. |
| 16. | Wang, D. Y.-C., Kumar, S. & Hedges, S. B. (1999) Proc. R. Soc. London Ser. B 266, 163-171[Medline] . |
| 17. |
Davidson, E. H., Peterson, K. J. & Cameron, R. A.
(1995)
Science
270,
1319-1325 |
| 18. |
Peterson, K. J. & Davidson, E. H.
(2000)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
97,
4487-4492 |
| 19. |
Bengtson, S. & Yue, Z.
(1992)
Science
257,
367-369 |
| 20. | Gehling, J. G., Narbonne, G. M., Jensen, S. & Droser, M. L. (1999) Geol. Soc. Am. Abstr. Prog. 31, 362. |
| 21. | Qian, Y., Chen, M. & Chen, Y. (1979) Acta Paleont. Sinica 18, 207-232. |
| 22. | Xing, Y., Ding, Q., Luo, H., He, T. & Wang, Y. (1984) Chin. Acad. Geol. Sci. 7, 1-262. |
| 23. | Sun, W. (1986) Precamb. Res. 31, 361-375[CrossRef][ISI]. |
| 24. | Seilacher, A. (1989) Lethaia 22, 229-239. |
| 25. | Runnegar, B. (1995) N. Jb. Geol. Palont. Abh. 195, 303-318. |
| 26. |
Li, C.-W., Chen, J.-Y. & Hua, T.-E.
(1998)
Science
279,
879-882 |
| 27. | Xiao, S., Zhang, Y. & Knoll, A. H. (1998) Nature (London) 391, 553-558[CrossRef]. |
| 28. | Zhang, Y., Yin, L., Xiao, S. & Knoll, A. H. (1998) Paleont. Soc. Mem. 50, 1-52. |
| 29. | Xunlai, Y. & Hofmann, H. J. (1998) Alcheringa 22, 189-222[ISI]. |
| 30. |
Bowring, S. A., Grotzinger, J. P., Isachsen, C. E., Knoll, A. H., Pelechaty, S. M. & Kolosov, P.
(1993)
Science
261,
1293-1298 |
| 31. | Shields, G. (1999) Eclogae Geol. Helv. 92, 221-233. |
| 32. | Knoll, A. H. & Walter, M. R. (1992) Nature (London) 356, 673-678[CrossRef][Medline] . |
| 33. | Zhao, Z., Xing, Y., Ma, G. & Chen, Y. (1985) Biostratigraphy of the Yangtze Gorge Area, (1) Sinian (Geological Publishing House, Beijing). |
| 34. |
Saylor, B. Z., Kaufman, A. J., Grotzinger, J. P. & Urban, F.
(1998)
J. Sediment. Res.
68,
1223-1235 |
| 35. |
Valentine, J. W.
(1997)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
94,
8001-8005 |
| 36. | Peterson, K. J., Cameron, R. A. & Davidson, E. H. (1997) BioEssays 19, 623-631[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] . |
| 37. | Peterson, K. J., Cameron, R. A. & Davidson, E. H. (2000) Dev. Biol. 219, 1-17[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] . |
| 38. | Nielsen, C. (1998) Biol. Rev. Camb. Philos. Soc. 73, 125-155[CrossRef]. |
| 39. | Conway Morris, S. (1998) BioEssays 20, 676-682[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] . |
| 40. |
Bengtson, S. & Zhao, Y.
(1997)
Science
277,
1645-1648 |
| 41. |
Brasier, M., Green, O. & Shields, G.
(1997)
Geology
25,
303-306 |
| 42. | Gehling, J. G. & Rigby, J. K. (1996) J. Paleontol. 70, 185-195[Abstract]. |
| 43. | Landing, E., Bowring, S. A., Fortey, R. A. & Davidek, K. L. (1997) Can. J. Earth Sci. 34, 724-730. |
| 44. | Landing, E., Bowring, S. A., Davidek, K. L., Westrop, S. R., Geyer, G. & Heldmaier, W. (1998) Can. J. Earth Sci. 35, 329-338[CrossRef]. |
| 45. | Davidek, K., Landing, E., Bowring, S. A., Westrop, S. R., Rushton, A. W. A., Fortey, R. A. & Adrain, J. M. (1998) Geol. Mag. 135, 305-309[Abstract]. |
| 46. | Chen, J.-Y., Huang, D.-Y. & Li, C. W. (1999) Nature (London) 402, 518-522[CrossRef][ISI]. |
| 47. | Chevalier, J.-P. (1987) in Traité de Zoologie, ed. Grassé, P.-P. (Masson, Paris), pp. 403-764. |
| 48. | Campbell, R. D. (1974) in Reproduction of Marine Invertebrates, eds. Giese, A. C. & Pearse, J. S. (Academic, New York), Vol. 1, pp. 133-199. |
| 49. | Okazaki, K. (1975) in The Sea Urchin Embryo, ed. Czihak, G. (Springer, Berlin), pp. 177-232. |
| 50. | Anderson, D. T. (1973) Embryology and Phylogeny in Annelids and Arthropods (Pergamon, Oxford). |
This article has been cited by other articles in HighWire Press-hosted journals:
![]() |
C.-W. Li, J.-Y. Chen, J. H. Lipps, F. Gao, H.-M. Chi, and H.-J. Wu Ciliated protozoans from the Precambrian Doushantuo Formation, Wengan, South China Geological Society, London, Special Publications, January 1, 2007; 286(1): 151 - 156. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. J. Benton and P. C. J. Donoghue Paleontological Evidence to Date the Tree of Life Mol. Biol. Evol., January 1, 2007; 24(1): 26 - 53. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. W. Hagadorn, S. Xiao, P. C. J. Donoghue, S. Bengtson, N. J. Gostling, M. Pawlowska, E. C. Raff, R. A. Raff, F. R. Turner, Y. Chongyu, et al. Cellular and Subcellular Structure of Neoproterozoic Animal Embryos Science, October 13, 2006; 314(5797): 291 - 294. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J.-Y. Chen, D. J. Bottjer, E. H. Davidson, S. Q. Dornbos, X. Gao, Y.-H. Yang, C.-W. Li, G. Li, X.-Q. Wang, D.-C. Xian, et al. Phosphatized polar lobe-forming embryos from the precambrian of southwest china. Science, June 16, 2006; 312(5780): 1644 - 1646. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
E. C. Raff, J. T. Villinski, F. R. Turner, P. C. J. Donoghue, and R. A. Raff Experimental taphonomy shows the feasibility of fossil embryos PNAS, April 11, 2006; 103(15): 5846 - 5851. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. Q. DORNBOS, D. J. BOTTJER, J.-Y. CHEN, F. GAO, P. OLIVERI, and C.-W. LI Environmental Controls on the Taphonomy of Phosphatized Animals and Animal Embryos from the Neoproterozoic Doushantuo Formation, Southwest China Palaios, February 1, 2006; 21(1): 3 - 14. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. MARTIN, D. E.G. BRIGGS, and R. J. PARKES Decay and Mineralization of Invertebrate Eggs Palaios, December 1, 2005; 20(6): 562 - 572. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. E. Blair and S. B. Hedges Molecular Phylogeny and Divergence Times of Deuterostome Animals Mol. Biol. Evol., November 1, 2005; 22(11): 2275 - 2284. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
Z.-X. Luo Doushantuo Fossils: Life on the Eve of Animal Radiation Journal of Paleontology, September 1, 2005; 79(5): 1040 - 1042. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J.-Y. Chen, D. J. Bottjer, P. Oliveri, S. Q. Dornbos, F. Gao, S. Ruffins, H. Chi, C.-W. Li, and E. H. Davidson Small Bilaterian Fossils from 40 to 55 Million Years Before the Cambrian Science, July 9, 2004; 305(5681): 218 - 222. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J.-Y. Chen, D.-Y. Huang, Q.-Q. Peng, H.-M. Chi, X.-Q. Wang, and M. Feng The first tunicate from the Early Cambrian of South China PNAS, July 8, 2003; 100(14): 8314 - 8318. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
K. J. Peterson, B. Waggoner, and J. W. Hagadorn A Fungal Analog for Newfoundland Ediacaran Fossils? Integr. Comp. Biol., February 1, 2003; 43(1): 127 - 136. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. H. Erwin and E. H. Davidson The last common bilaterian ancestor Development, January 7, 2002; 129(13): 3021 - 3032. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. Xiao, X. Yuan, and A. H. Knoll Eumetazoan fossils in terminal Proterozoic phosphorites? PNAS, November 22, 2000; (2000) 250491697. [Abstract] [Full Text] |
||||
![]() |
C. S. Goodman and B. C. Coughlin Special Feature: The evolution of evo-devo biology PNAS, April 25, 2000; 97(9): 4424 - 4425. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
K. J. Peterson and E. H. Davidson Special Feature: Regulatory evolution and the origin of the bilaterians PNAS, April 25, 2000; 97(9): 4430 - 4433. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |