, Volume 99, Issue 6, pp 501–504 | Cite as

The oral cone of Anomalocaris is not a classic ‘‘peytoia’’

  • Allison C. Daley
  • Jan Bergström
Short Communication


The Cambro-Ordovician anomalocaridids are large ecdysozoans commonly regarded as ancestors of the arthropods and apex predators. Predation is indicated partly by the presence of an unusual “peytoia”-type oral cone, which is a tetraradial outer ring of 32 plates, four of which are enlarged and in perpendicular arrangement. This oral cone morphology was considered a highly consistent and defining characteristic of well-known Burgess Shale taxa. It is here shown that Anomalocaris has a different oral cone, with only three large plates and a variable number of smaller and medium plates. Its functional morphology suggests that suction, rather than biting, was used for food ingestion, and that anomalocaridids in general employed a range of different scavenging and predatory feeding strategies. Removing anomalocaridids from the position of highly specialized trilobite predators forces a reconsideration of the ecological structure of the earliest marine animal communities in the Cambrian.


Anomalocaridids Cambrian Oral cone Peytoia Predation Burgess Shale 



We thank G. Budd and J-B. Caron for discussions. Comments from G. Edgecombe, J. Esteve, B. Lieberman and an anonymous reviewer improved the manuscript. J. Dougherty provided access to specimens at GSC and D. Erwin, J. Thompson and M. Florence provided access to specimens at USNM. J-B. Caron and P. Fenton provided support at the ROM. X. Ma is thanked for the photography of USNM specimens. M. Stein provided photographs that led J.B. to this discovery. Burgess Shale specimens were collected with permission from Parks Canada Research (ROM, D. Collins, 1975 to 2000). Funding from the Swedish Research Council and the Palaeontological Association to A. C. D is gratefully acknowledged. This is Royal Ontario Museum Burgess Shale Research Project 39.


  1. Bergström J, Hou XG (2004) Arthropod origins. B Geosci 78:323–334Google Scholar
  2. Briggs DEG, Lieberman BS, Hendricks JR, Halgedahl SL, Jarrard RD (2008) Middle Cambrian arthropods from Utah. J Paleontol 82:238–254. doi: 10.1666/06-086.1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Budd GE (1996) The morphology of Opabinia regalis and the reconstruction of the arthropod stem-group. Lethaia 29:1–14. doi: 10.1111/j.1502-3931.1996.tb01831.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Budd GE (1998) Stem group arthropods from the Lower Cambrian Sirius Passet fauna of North Greenland. In: Fortey RA, Thomas RH (eds) Arthropod relationships. Systematics Association Special Volume, London, pp 125–138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chen JY, Ramsköld L, Zhou GQ (1994) Evidence for monophyly and arthropod affinity of Cambrian giant predators. Science 264:1304–1308. doi: 10.1126/science.264.5163.1304 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Collins D (1996) The “evolution” of Anomalocaris and its classification in the arthropod class Dinocarida (Nov.) and order Radiodonta (Nov.). J Paleontol 70:280–293Google Scholar
  7. Conway Morris S (1978) Laggania cambria Walcott: a composite fossil. J Paleontol 52:126–131Google Scholar
  8. Daley AC, Budd GE (2010) New anomalocaridid appendages from the Burgess Shale, Canada. Palaeontology 53:721–738. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-4983.2010.00955.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Daley AC, Budd GE, Caron J-B, Edgecombe GD, Collins D (2009) The Burgess Shale anomalocaridid Hurdia and its significance for early Euarthropod evolution. Science 323:1597–1600. doi: 10.1126/science.1169514 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Edgecombe GD (2010) Arthropod phylogeny: an overview from the perspectives of morphology, molecular data and the fossil record. Arthropod Struct Dev 39:74–87. doi: 10.1016/j.asd.2009.10.002 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hagadorn JW (2009) Taking a bite out of Anomalocaris. Walcott 2009—International Conference on the Cambrian Explosion, abstract volume, 33–34.Google Scholar
  12. Hagadorn JW (2010) Putting Anomalocaris on a soft-food diet? Geol Soc Am Abstr Prog 42:320Google Scholar
  13. Hou X, Bergström J, Ahlberg P (1995) Anomalocaris and other large animals in the Lower Cambrian Chengjiang fauna of southwest China. GFF 117:163–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hou X, Bergström J, Jie Y (2006) Distinguishing anomalocaridids from arthropods and priapulids. Geol J 41:259–269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lieberman BS (2003) A new soft-bodied fauna: the Pioche Formation of Nevada. J Paleont 77:674–690CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ma X, Hou X, Bergström J (2009) The morphology of Lulishania longicruris (Lower Cambrian, Chengjiang Lagerstätte, SW China) and the phylogenetic relationships within lobopodians. Arthropod Struct Dev 38:271–291PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Nedin C (1999) Anomalocaris predation on nonmineralized and mineralized trilobites. Geology 27:987–990CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Walcott CD (1911) Middle Cambrian holothurian and medusae. Smith Misc Coll 57:41–68Google Scholar
  19. Whiteaves JF (1892) Description of a new genus and species of Phyllocarid Crustacea from the Middle Cambrian of Mount Stephen. BC Can Rec Sci 5:205–208Google Scholar
  20. Whittington HB, Briggs DEG (1985) The largest Cambrian animal Anomalocaris, Burgess Shale, British Columbia. Philos T Roy Soc B 390:569–609CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PalaeontologyNatural History Museum, Cromwell RoadLondonUK
  2. 2.Department of Earth SciencesUniversity of BristolBristolUK
  3. 3.Department of PalaeozoologySwedish Museum of Natural HistoryStockholmSweden

Personalised recommendations