New Issue: Science’s Impossible Questions. Read Now

Fossils Suggest Jellyfish Abounded in the Cambrian Seas

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Finding fossils of large-boned dinosaurs is hard enough, but imagine searching for fossilized jellyfish. Good specimens of such soft-tissue organisms are extremely rare. As a result, scientists have very little information about their role in early ecosystems. But a recent discovery of hundreds of jellyfish impressions on what were once the shores of an inland sea in central Wisconsin suggests that they occupied an important position on the food chain.

In a report appearing in the February issue of Geology, James W. Hagadorn of the California Institute of Technology and colleagues conclude that the fossilized jellyfish, which are similar in size to their modern descendants but much bigger than previously uncovered specimens from the same time, were some of the largest and most important predators during the Cambrian period. In other words, Hagadorn says, "we may have been inadvertently omitting a huge amount of information about all of the soft-bodied animals that were swimming around in the water column, munching on other organisms, but which were rarely fossilized."

The discovery represents one of only two jellyfish mass-strandings known from the fossil record. The authors hypothesize that either wind blew the jellyfish into shallower water or the creatures swam there in search of prey. In any case, the ebbing tide left them ashore. Analysis of the fossils shows that some of the jellyfish tried to keep moving, ingesting sediment in the process and essentially anchoring themselves to the floor. Several tidal cycles later, loose sediments had entombed them. Fortunately for scientists, not much seems to have disturbed their remains since then.

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe