Image Gallery | Evolution

600-million-year-old seaweeds lived a short, fast life

Enlarge Photo by Zhe Chen MORE IMAGES

About 600 million years ago, when Earth was a little lonely (the Cambrian explosion of diverse life forms hadn't happened yet), the village of Lantian in central China was covered by an oxygenless ocean. The anoxic Lantian Basin would have been especially lonely, mostly unable to support large, complex, multicellular organisms that require oxygen for respiration.

But for brief periods, the water in the basin did hold oxygen, a team of U.S. and Chinese scientists now proposes in a paper published on February 16 in Nature. (Scientific American is part of Nature Publishing Group.) In those oxygenated flashes of time seaweeds and what may be algae or worms took hold. They died again when the oxygen dissipated, leaving behind more than 3,000 well-preserved fossils, such as this one preserving a three-centimeter-long seaweed. These are the oldest fossils of large seaweeds ever found, according to a prepared statement from the National Science Foundation, which partially funded the study. The excavating team identified 15 species of life recorded in the fossils.

—Francie Diep

X

7 Comments

Add Comment
View
  1. 1. jtdwyer 01:02 AM 2/26/11

    I understood that a simple form of algae had, billions of yers ago, over a period of billions of years, oxygenated not only the oceans but the atmosphere.

    As I understand, seaweed is nonspecific name for several types of algae, all of which employ photosynthesis, similarly to plants, to produce oxygen. Do algae for some reason also require oxygen?

    I'm sure these researchers are not mistaken about the conditions they have inferred about this ancient environment, but there seems to be a great deal of critical information that has been omitted from this brief report.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  2. 2. jtdwyer in reply to Siriusofdelf 04:36 PM 2/26/11

    Keep laughing, because there may be something that you don't know.

    The Wikipedia entry, "Atmosphere of Earth", section "Evolution of Earth's atmosphere" contains the following statement:
    "In the late Archaean eon an oxygen-containing atmosphere began to develop, apparently from photosynthesizing algae which have been found as stromatolite fossils from 2.7 billion years ago."

    As I understand, the early earth contained little oxygen. Photosynthesizing algae is credited with producing essentially all of the Earth's oxygen, over a period of perhaps a couple of billion years, both in the atmosphere and that which is bound through oxidation with other minerals within the Earth's surface. If this algae had reabsorbed all the oxygen it produced, as you erroneously asserted, there would have never been a net increase in oxygen levels.

    In any case, you should refrain from making ignorant, insulting remarks.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  3. 3. jtdwyer in reply to Siriusofdelf 04:38 PM 2/26/11

    BTW, the wikepedia reference can be found at:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmosphere_of_Earth#Evolution_of_Earth.27s_atmosphere

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  4. 4. engnER in reply to Siriusofdelf 02:41 PM 2/27/11

    Since you're gonna be a twat about it, plants absorb oxygen ALL the time, not just at night. They just happen to produce a lot more oxygen through photosynthesis, so their net impact on oxygen is positive during the day, negative at night.

    When everybody around you is an asshole, chances are, you are.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  5. 5. jtdwyer 06:38 PM 2/27/11

    Seems like there's plenty of opinions here, but if, prior to the "late Archaean eon" Earth was oxygen-free and some photosynthesizing algae oxygenated the Earth - it must not have required much if any oxygen, or it never could have gotten started.

    Some unreferenced sources indicating that 'plants absorb oxygen' is not really useful information, since those statements may be generally true without necessarily applying to the algae that originally oxygenated the Earth.

    The issue I tried to raise is that the article describes "an oxygenless ocean" that existed in central China 600 million years ago, about 2 billion years after after the Earth is supposed to have been generally oxygenated by algae.

    There seems to be some conflicting information from purportedly, at least, somewhat reliable sources, not to mention all of us ignorant, inadequate and insulting readers!

    Can the author and/or editors perhaps clarify?

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  6. 6. YetAnotherBob 09:31 PM 2/27/11

    The atmosphere oxygenation was done by blue green algae. Not actually algae, but bacteria. True algae are more efficient and much larger, but the bacteria do the job. I believe that the blue green algae are classed as Archea. I might be wrong on this. Ask a Biologist.

    These bacteria are also the major source of fixed nitrogen for plant life. There are thousands of them for each plant on the planet. And yes, they can live without oxygen.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  7. 7. JDahiya in reply to YetAnotherBob 09:32 AM 3/12/11

    YetAnotherBob, I understand that what we used to call 'blue green algae' in our youth is now reclassified and called 'cyanobacteria', so you are probably right.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
Leave this field empty

Add a Comment

You must sign in or register as a ScientificAmerican.com member to submit a comment.
Click one of the buttons below to register using an existing Social Account.

More from Scientific American

See what we're tweeting about

Scientific American Editors

More »

Free Newsletters


Get the best from Scientific American in your inbox

Solve Innovation Challenges

Powered By: Innocentive

  SA Digital

Latest from SA Blog Network

  SA Digital

Science Jobs of the Week

Email this Article

X
Scientific American Magazine

Subscribe Today

Save 66% off the cover price and get a free gift!

Learn More >>

X

Please Log In

Forgot: Password

X

Account Linking

Welcome, . Do you have an existing ScientificAmerican.com account?

Yes, please link my existing account with for quick, secure access.



Forgot Password?

No, I would like to create a new account with my profile information.

Create Account
X

Report Abuse

Are you sure?

X

Institutional Access

It has been identified that the institution you are trying to access this article from has institutional site license access to Scientific American on nature.com. To access this article in its entirety through site license access, click below.

Site license access
X

Error

X

Share this Article

X