Digging Up the Origins of Coevolution at the Bottom of the Precambrian Sea

Nearly 4 billion years of Earth’s history is encompassed by the Precambrian, a span of time stretching from the creation of the Earth to the Cambrian period, when complex animal ecosystems began to emerge and diversify(Windley 2019). The Neoproterozoic Era (1000–539 Ma) was the final era of the Precambrian, and a pivotal period for the evolution of life on Earth. Marine ecosystems underwent major restructuring as organisms became more diverse and ecosystems became more complex (Maloney et. al 2023). These changes may have created more opportunities for coevolution, in which interactions between organisms influence the evolutionary pressures faced by each lineage (Zhang et al. 2021).

For much of the Neoproterozoic, benthic sea floors were dominated by microbial communities that formed extensive mats, called matgrounds (Droser et al. 2026). Matgrounds supported microbial communities across steep chemical gradients, resulting in vertically structured benthic environments (Ding et al. 2019). An example of biota interaction with microbial mats can be seen in Figure 1. By the late Neoproterozoic (Ediacaran period, 635-539 Ma), these communities experienced change as organisms developed increasingly complex behaviours and body structures (Chen and Liu 2025). Fossil evidence suggests a period of evolutionary innovation coinciding with the diversification of Neoproterozoic biota (Muscente et al. 2019).

Figure 1. A scratch trace fossil associated with Kimberella quadrata, interpreted as traces produced while grazing on a microbial mat. These traces provide evidence of interactions between animals and matgrounds in the Ediacaran (Gehling et al. 2014).

This ecological shift occurred with the emergence of active sediment exploration. Fossilized burrows indicate that animals started burrowing into sediment in three dimensions (Chen and Liu 2025). This marked a change in how the seafloor environment functioned because this activity disturbed matgrounds and created new habitats within the sediment (Meek et al. 2023). This ecological restructuring represents the early stages of what is now recognized as the Cambrian Substrate Revolution, a major transition in the ecological structure of seafloors (Oji et al. 2018). Some trace fossils from the Ediacaran, like those from Namibia’s Nama Group (see Figure 2), provide evidence of bilaterian organisms capable of disturbing sediment. These organisms are described as “sediment bulldozers”, providing an early example of ecosystem engineering, in which organisms physically modify their environment in ways affecting other organisms (Buatois et al. 2018).

Figure 2. A trace fossil of Parapsammichnites pretzeliformis from the Urusis Formation in Namibia, an example of  “sediment bulldozers” responsible for sediment disruption and ecosystem engineering in the Ediacaran period (Buatois et al. 2018).

Burrowing likely disrupted or displaced organisms that relied on matgrounds for feeding, shifting the sea floor from relatively stable microbial mats to a more disturbed and heterogenous environment (Craffey et al. 2024). As mobile, burrowing animals became more prevalent alongside sessile suspension feeders, the interactions between these ecological ways of life likely became increasingly significant in shaping benthic communities (Bottjer et al. 2000). Bioturbation may have created new opportunities for niche differentiation and ecological diversification, while increased predation and competition for space may have put increased pressure on sessile organisms who were adapted to stable matgrounds (Gougeon et al. 2025). Although direct evidence for coevolutionary dynamics is limited, these interactions may have created conditions in which organisms could begin influencing the evolutionary pressures experienced by one another.

The Neoproterozoic–Cambrian transition marked a shift from mat-dominated seafloors to increasingly complex marine ecosystems (Babcock 2005). As burrowing, competition, and predation became more common, the way which organisms interacted with each other was altered (Chipman 2026). Although the fossil record does not directly demonstrate coevolution, The Cambrian Substrate Revolution may have created conditions for organisms to begin affecting each other’s evolutionary trajectories (Wang et al. 2026).

References

Babcock, Loren E. 2005. “Interpretation of Biological and Environmental Changes Across the Neoproterozoic–Cambrian Boundary: Developing a Refined Understanding of the Radiation and Preservational Record of Early Multicellular Organisms.” Interpretation of Biological and Environmental Changes across the Neoproterozoic-Cambrian Boundary 220 (1): 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.palaeo.2004.09.013.

Bottjer, David J., James W. Hagadorn, and Stephen Q. Dornbos. 2000. “The Cambrian Substrate Revolution.” CaltechAUTHORS, Geological Society of America, September. https://authors.library.caltech.edu/records/m5441-0kt16.

Buatois, Luis A, John Almond, M. Gabriela Mángano, Sören Jensen, and Gerard J. B. Germs. 2018. “Sediment Disturbance by Ediacaran Bulldozers and the Roots of the Cambrian Explosion.” Scientific Reports (England) 8 (1): 4514. PubMed Central. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-22859-9.

Chen, Zhe, and Yarong Liu. 2025. “Advent of Three-Dimensional Sediment Exploration Reveals Ediacaran-Cambrian Ecosystem Transition.” Science Advances 11 (44). https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.adx9449.

Chipman, Ariel D. 2026. “An Increase in Animal Diversity Was Facilitated by Ecologically‐Driven Brain Complexity Throughout the Cambrian.” BioEssays 48 (4). https://doi.org/10.1002/bies.70136.

Craffey, M, P. J. Wagner, David K Watkins, S. A. F. Darroch, and S. K. Lyons. 2024. “Co-Occurrence Structure of Late Ediacaran Communities and Influence of Emerging Ecosystem Engineers.” Proceedings. Biological Sciences (England) 291 (2036): 20242029. PubMed Central. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2024.2029.

Ding, Weiming, Lin Dong, Yuanlin Sun, et al. 2019. “Early Animal Evolution and Highly Oxygenated Seafloor Niches Hosted by Microbial Mats.” Scientific Reports 9 (1). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-49993-2.

Droser, Mary L., Rachel L. Surprenant, Heather K. McCandless, and Robert R. Gaines. 2026. “The Relationship Between Organic Matgrounds and Sedimentary Packaging: Examples From the Ediacaran and Early Cambrian.” Sedimentology 73 (4): 965–81. https://doi.org/10.1111/sed.70094.

Gehling, James, Bruce Runnegar, and Mary Droser. 2014. “Scratch Traces of Large Ediacara Bilaterian Animals.” Www.Ediacaran.Org. http://www.ediacaran.org/microbial-mats.html.

Gougeon, Romain, Luis A. Buatois, M. Gabriela Mángano, et al. 2025. “Environmental and Evolutionary Controls in Animal-Sediment Interactions at the Onset of the Cambrian Explosion.” Current Biology 35 (2): 249–64.e4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2024.11.028.

Maloney, Katie M., Dakota P. Maverick, James D. Schiffbauer, Galen P. Halverson, Shuhai Xiao, and Marc Laflamme. 2023. “Systematic Paleontology of Macroalgal Fossils From the Tonian Mackenzie Mountains Supergroup.” Journal of Paleontology 97 (2): 499–515. https://doi.org/10.1017/jpa.2023.4.

Meek, Dean M, Luis A Buatois, M. Gabriela Mángano, and Bruce M Eglington. 2023. “Increased Habitat Segregation at the Dawn of the Phanerozoic Revealed by Correspondence Analysis of Bioturbation.” Scientific Reports (England) 13 (1): 22328. PubMed Central. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-49716-8.

Muscente, A. D., Natalia V Bykova, Thomas H Boag, et al. 2019. “Ediacaran Biozones Identified With Network Analysis Provide Evidence for Pulsed Extinctions of Early Complex Life.” Nature Communications 10 (1). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-08837-3.

Oji, Tatsuo, Stephen Q. Dornbos, Keigo Yada, et al. 2018. “Penetrative Trace Fossils From the Late Ediacaran of Mongolia: Early Onset of the Agronomic Revolution.” R. Soc. Open Sci. 5 (2): 172250. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.172250.

Skovsted, Christian B, Glenn A Brock, Anna Lindström, John S Peel, John R Paterson, and Margaret K Fuller. 2007. “Early Cambrian Record of Failed Durophagy and Shell Repair in an Epibenthic Mollusc.” Biology Letters (England) 3 (3): 314–17. PubMed Central. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2007.0006.

Wang, Zekun, Yong Zhou, Yuyang Shan, and Aihua Yang. 2026. “An Exceptionally Preserved Cambrian Psammichnites Assemblage as a Window Into the Earliest Extensive Horizontal-Burrowing Ecosystem Engineers in Shallow Marine Environments.” Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 701 (November): 114123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.palaeo.2026.114123.

Windley, Brian Frederick. 2019. “Precambrian | Life, Climate, & Facts.” In Encyclopædia Britannica. April 15. https://www.britannica.com/science/Precambrian.

Zhang, Xingliang, Chao Chang, Linhao Cui, and Yuheng Qiao. 2021. “Ecosystem Reconstruction During the Cambrian Explosion.” Paleontological Research 25 (4). https://doi.org/10.2517/2021pr003.

Comments

5 Responses to “Digging Up the Origins of Coevolution at the Bottom of the Precambrian Sea”

  1. Avilash Thilagaselvan Avatar
    Avilash Thilagaselvan

    Hi Vaughn,

    This was a very well-done post and I definitely learned a lot about coevolution and aquatic proof to back up this theory. Some critiques that I have for you include adding new insights in your conclusion paragraph. I really appreciated how you reiterated your introduction and your body points. However, to show your application of these topics, you could try to include new insights about coevolution in today’s current events or scientific discovery. As well, I would encourage you to have a brief explanation of how niche differentiation actually occurred between burrowers and sessile organisms as it wasn’t really explicit in the post.

    All in all, this was an amazing article and I look forward to reading your final draft.

    Best,
    Avilash

  2. Afua Awuah Avatar
    Afua Awuah

    Hi Vaughn,

    This was a very well-written blog post! I found it very informative and easy to read. Here are some suggestions for improvement.
    – Consider getting a better image for your Figure 1 if at all possible. It seems to be a little fuzzy and blurry
    – Don’t forget to write your own comment! I’d love to see what inspired you to write about this topic and how integrated it is.

    Overall, this was a well-written and informative blog post.
    Happy editing,

    Afua

  3. Griffin Suk Avatar
    Griffin Suk

    Hello Vaughn,

    This was a very well-written blog post! I just have a few comments to keep in mind when editing for your final draft.

    – Make sure to include a comment explaining why you chose your subject and how this pertains to things you have learned in iSci.
    – I would suggest adding in some dates for when the Precambrian was at the start of your blog post. This would help to improve readability.
    – I also agree with Avilash that it would be helpful to include insight into how this knowledge can help to change/shape modern scientific ideas. That would help to elevate your post and make it applicable to the modern day.

    Overall, this was a well-written blog post! I look forward to reading the final draft.

    Take care,

    Griffin Suk

  4. Sayana Suthaharan Avatar
    Sayana Suthaharan

    Amazing job with your blog draft Vaughn. I just have a couple of suggestions (word-permitting) so that you can potentially improve your final draft!

    – My first suggestion would be to split up the opening sentence. Something like this: “Nearly 4 billion years of Earth’s history is encompassed by the Precambrian. This was a span of time stretching from the creation of the Earth to the Cambrian period, when complex animal ecosystems began to emerge and diversify(Windley 2019).

    – For my second suggestion, I would recommend changing P1S3 to “Marine ecosystems underwent major restructuring as organisms, resulting in more diverse and more complex ecosystems (Maloney et. al 2023).”

    – My last suggestion would include italicizing your figure captions

    Happy editing!
    Sayana 🙂

  5. Nathaniel Wang Avatar
    Nathaniel Wang

    Hi Vaughn,

    Great job on your post! I love evolution and this was a very fun read.
    – Some terms might be unfamiliar to a general reader, especially “bilaterian,” “sessile suspension feeders,” and “bioturbation.” Adding a short definition in parentheses the first time each one appears would make the post more accessible.
    – “Ma” is used for the date ranges but is never defined. Adding (million years ago) the first time would help.
    – Your Figure 1 source (Gehling et al. 2014) is a website. If possible, I’d suggest citing the original peer-reviewed paper describing the Kimberella scratch traces so the figure is backed by primary literature.

    Overall, a very informative and fun read. Happy editing!

Leave a Reply