Cited by 18Paleontology and Stratigraphy of FossilsEvolution and Paleontology StudiesPaleontology and Evolutionary Biology

The Phanerozoic aftermath of the Cambrian information revolution: sensory and cognitive complexity in marine faunas

Open access
Hsieh, Shannon, Plotnick, Roy E., Bush, Andrew M.·2022·Paleobiology

Abstract

The Cambrian information revolution describes how biotically driven increases in signals, sensory abilities, behavioral interactions, and landscape spatial complexity drove a rapid increase in animal cognition concurrent with the Cambrian radiation. Here, we compare cognitive complexity in Cambrian and post-Cambrian marine ecosystems, documenting changes in animal cognition after the initial Cambrian increase. In a comparison of Cambrian and post-Cambrian Lagerstätten, we find no strong trend in the proportion of genera possessing two types of macroscopic sense organs (eyes and chemoreceptive organs such as antennae, feelers, or nostrils). There is also no trend in general nervous system complexity. These results suggest that sophisticated information processing was already common in early Phanerozoic ecosystems, comparable with behavioral evidence from the trace fossil record. Most taxa capable of complex information processing in Cambrian ecosystems were panarthropods, whereas mollusks and chordates made up larger proportions afterward. In both the Cambrian and the present day, ecological occupation of diverse habitat tiers and feeding modes is possible with even simple nervous systems, but ecological lifestyles requiring rapid, regular movement are almost exclusively associated within brain-bearing taxa, suggesting a connection with fast information-processing abilities and bodily responses. The overall rise in cognitive sophistication in the Cambrian was likely a unique event in the history of life, although some lineages subsequently developed more elaborate sensory systems and/or larger brains.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/pab.2021.46

Cites

162 of 162 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Muscles first emerged at the Cambrian explosion, allowing for faster and more vigorous movement, including larger organisms.

    “Along with many other physical and physiological innovations, muscles first emerged at this time, allowing for faster and more vigorous movement, including larger organisms [8,9].”

    From The social origins of consciousness (2025) · cites this paper as [8]

    The Introduction says macroscopic animals increased in size during the Cambrian, and the Conclusion says fast-moving life modes were present then. Neither passage says muscles first emerged in the Cambrian or that muscles enabled faster movement or larger organisms. No page numbers are available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 7

  1. Bassett, M. G., L. E. Popov and L. E. Holmer. 2004. The oldest- known metazoan parasite? Journal of Paleontology 78:1214-1216.
  2. Beesley, P. L., G. J. Ross, and C. J. Glasby. 2000. Polychaetes & allies: the southern synthesis. Fauna of Australia, Vol. 4. CSIRO Publish- ing, Canberra, ACT, Australia.
  3. Chadwick, G. H. 1930. Subdivisions of geologic time. Abstract. Geo- logical Society of America Bulletin 41:47-48.
  4. Hartshorne, C., and P. Weiss, eds. 1931. Collected papers of Charles Sanders Peirce, Vol. 1. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass.
  5. Martill, D. M., and J. D. Hudson. 1991. Fossils of the Oxford clay. Palaeontological Association.
  6. Rouse, G., and F. Pleijel. 2001. Polychaetes. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
  7. Seilacher, A., and F. Pflüger. 1994. From biomats to benthic agricul- ture: a biohistoric revolution. Pp. 97-105 in W. Krumbein, D. Paterson, and L. Stal., eds. Biostabilisation of sediments. Bib- liotheks und Informationssystem der Carl von Ossietzky Univer- sität Oldenburg (BIS), Oldenburg, Germany.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hsieh, S., Plotnick, R. E., & Bush, A. M.
Affiliations
  • University of Illinois Chicago (US)
  • University of Connecticut (US)
Corresponding author
Hsieh, Shannon
Venue
Paleobiology
Published
2022-01-28
Volume
48
Issue
3
Pages
397-419
ISSN
  • 0094-8373 (ISSN-L)
  • 1938-5331
OpenAlex
W4210422933
Cited by
18
References
162
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 1
FWCI
1.96
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Paleobiology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
Johns Hopkins University
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Paleontology › Paleontology and Stratigraphy of Fossils
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Paleontology › Evolution and Paleontology Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Paleontology › Paleontology and Evolutionary Biology
Keywords
Cambrian explosion, animal cognition, eye, chemoreception, brain evolution, panarthropods, Mollusca, Chordata, trace fossils, Phanerozoic evolution, marine invertebrates

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review