New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

This fossilized vomit is older than the dinosaurs

Vomit is gross—but 290-million-year-old vomit is a scientific marvel

A paleontological illustration showing a large lizard-like animal with a tall sail on its back appearing to vomit. Also pictured are two smaller reptiles, one bright blue and the other a greenish brown.

An artist’s rendering of Dimetrodon teutonis vomiting; two of the smaller reptilian animals found in the regurgitalite are depicted in the scene as well.

Sophie Fernandez

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Fossils are remarkable for their ability to viscerally connect us with long-lost life. The bulk of a Tyrannosaurus rex skull, the biting point of a shark tooth, the startling familiarity of a hominin footprint—and then there’s the charm inherent to any sample of regurgitalite, the paleontological term for fossilized vomit.

Okay, charm might be a stretch, but to the right scientist, the rare finds are “little treasures,” says Arnaud Rebillard, a Ph.D. candidate in paleontology at the Natural History Museum of Berlin. Consider the regurgitalite that’s the focus of research that Rebillard published on January 30 in Scientific Reports—the oldest known regurgitalite from a terrestrial ecosystem.

Found in 2021, the specimen comes from a 290-million-year-old German site called Bromacker. Over a century of excavation, paleontologists have glimpsed a valley full of conifers that were apparently teeming with vegetarians, says Amy Henrici, a retired Carnegie Museum of Natural History paleontology collection manager, who was not involved in the new research.


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.


Amid the loose fossils and remarkably preserved skeletons that characterize the site, the regurgitalite was uninspiring—until, that is, the fossil cleaning process and a computed tomography (CT) scan offered a clearer view. That process digitally extracted a cluster of 41 small bones that turned out to belong to three separate species: two small reptiles and a larger reptilelike animal.

A composite of three images. In the upper left is a photograph of the regurgitalite; in the bottom left is a rendering of the bones contained within it; on the right is a diagram pulling out those bones individually.

Image of the regurgitalite (upper left), a digital analysis showing the location of bones within the fossil (lower left), and an image showing those bones separated out (right).

Arnaud Rebillard

“This was clearly something that was eaten and then ejected from an animal,” Rebillard says. The next questions were obvious: Which end did the fossil hail from, and what kind of animal expelled it?

The most famous counterparts of regurgitalites are coprolites, or fossilized feces. (There are also gastrolites and cololites, which preserve a digestive tract’s contents in place in the stomach and intestines, respectively. Together these types of fossils are known as bromalites.) Distinguishing between coprolites and regurgitalites is “actually not super obvious all the time,” Rebillard says.

In this case, two pieces of evidence led Rebillard and his colleagues to conclude that the remnants had been vomited up: the leg bones of the largest prey animal remained connected to each other, suggesting that the limb had not traversed an entire digestive system. And the material directly surrounding the bones was low in phosphorus, which is plentiful in fossils that were once poop.

As to whose mess the scientists were pondering, there are two species known from the Bromacker site that would have been large enough to eat animals of the size found in the regurgitalite: Dimetrodon teutonis (a tiny member of a sail-backed group of animals that are often mistaken as dinosaurs) and Tambacarnifex unguifalcatus. Both contenders are synapsids, or members of a group that includes mammals and their extinct relatives, and would have measured around 20 to 30 inches long without their tail.

Whichever predator was involved, Henrici notes that the regurgitalite confirms that one of these animals snacked broadly on the smaller critters around it and could vomit up indigestible material, much as modern owls and Komodo dragons do today. For Rebillard, the fossil is also proof that all three prey species not only lived together in the same geologic time but also died together in the same week or even day.

Meghan Bartels is a science journalist based in New York City. She was previously a senior reporter at Scientific American. Before that she spent more than four years as a writer and editor at Space.com, as well as nearly a year as a science reporter at Newsweek, where she focused on space and Earth science. Her writing has also appeared in Audubon, Nautilus, Astronomy and Smithsonian, among other publications. She attended Georgetown University and earned a master’s degree in journalism at New York University’s Science, Health and Environmental Reporting Program.

More by Meghan Bartels

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