Malformed trilobite specimens present important insight into understanding how this extinct arthropod group recovered from developmental or moulting malfunctions, pathologies, and injuries. Previously documented examples of malformed trilobite specimens are often considered in isolation, with few studies reporting on multiple malformations in the same species. Here we report malformed specimens of the ellipsocephaloid trilobite Estaingia bilobata from the Emu Bay Shale Konservat-Lagerstätte (Cambrian Series 2, Stage 4) on Kangaroo Island, South Australia. Ten malformed specimens exhibiting injuries, pathologies, and a range of teratologies are documented. Furthermore, five examples of mangled exoskeletons are presented, indicative of predation on E. bilobata. Considering the position of malformed and normal specimens of E. bilobata in bivariate space, we demonstrate that the majority of malformed specimens cluster among the larger individuals. Such specimens may exemplify larger forms successfully escaping predation attempts, but could equally represent individuals exhibiting old injuries that were made during earlier (smaller) growth stages that have healed through subsequent moulting events. The available evidence from the Emu Bay Shale suggests that this small, extremely abundant trilobite likely played an important role in the structure of the local ecosystem, occupying a low trophic level and being preyed upon by multiple durophagous arthropods. Furthermore, the scarcity of malformed E. bilobata specimens demonstrates how rarely injuries, developmental malfunctions, and pathological infestations occurred within the species.

Malformed fossils present insight into how extinct forms responded to developmental, parasitic, and injury-related complications (Owen, 1985; Babcock, 1993; Klompmaker et al.2019; De Baets et al.2022). Such specimens have been particularly useful for understanding facets of extinct arthropod groups (Babcock, 2003), including chelicerates, crustaceans, and trilobites (Owen, 1985; Klompmaker et al.2013; Bicknell et al.2018,c, 2022,b; Mitov et al.2021; De Baets et al.2022). The most commonly documented malformed arthropod fossils are trilobites – a record that reflects their biomineralized exoskeleton (Babcock, 2003, 2007; Fatka et al.2015; Bicknell et al.2022 d). This exoskeleton increases the preservational potential of individuals, and, by extension, improves the possibility of identifying malformed specimens.

Trilobites with malformations are often documented as stand-alone records, with examples ranging from the Cambrian through to the Carboniferous (Owen, 1985; Babcock, 2007; Bicknell et al.2022,a). As such, few publications have presented a thorough record of malformations from the same deposit, especially considering the ratio of malformed individuals in the context of non-malformed specimens of the same species. However, over the last five years, there has been a transition to presenting detailed records of malformed specimens from the same deposit and contextualizing these specimens within a larger population (see Pates et al.2017; Bicknell et al.2019, 2022,a; Pates & Bicknell, 2019; Bicknell & Smith, 2022). To extend this line of enquiry, we considered Estaingia bilobata Pocock, 1964 from the Emu Bay Shale (Cambrian Series 2, Stage 4) of South Australia. This species is exceptionally abundant within the Emu Bay Shale Konservat-Lagerstätte, with the vast majority of specimens preserved as articulated exoskeletons (Paterson et al.2016; Holmes et al.2021,a, b; Bicknell et al.2022,a). The sheer abundance of specimens increases the likelihood of identifying malformed trilobites. Furthermore, injuries and pathologies are already known in other trilobites from the Emu Bay Shale and adjacent strata (Pocock, 1974; Conway Morris & Jenkins, 1985; Nedin, 1999; Paterson & Edgecombe, 2006; Holmes et al.2020; Bicknell et al.2022,a). Here we document specimens of E. bilobata that exhibit injuries, pathologies, and teratologies, as well as evidence of possible durophagy (Figs 15). Furthermore, given the detailed information available on E. bilobata ontogeny (Holmes et al.2021 a, b), we compare these specimens to a population of non-malformed individuals to illustrate at which size class malformed specimens occur, presenting unique insights into the palaeoecology of this abundant Emu Bay Shale trilobite.

Fig. 1.

Estaingia bilobata with L-, U- and W-shaped injuries. (a, b) SAMA P46113. U-shaped injury to right side of thorax. (a) Complete specimen. (b) Close-up of injury (white arrow). (c, d) SAMA P45360. L-shaped injury to right side of thorax. (c) Complete specimen. (d) L-shaped injury showing recovering pleural spines (white arrows). (e, f) SAMA P52886. W-shaped injury to left side of thorax. (e) Complete specimen. (f) Close-up of injury (white arrow).

Fig. 1.

Estaingia bilobata with L-, U- and W-shaped injuries. (a, b) SAMA P46113. U-shaped injury to right side of thorax. (a) Complete specimen. (b) Close-up of injury (white arrow). (c, d) SAMA P45360. L-shaped injury to right side of thorax. (c) Complete specimen. (d) L-shaped injury showing recovering pleural spines (white arrows). (e, f) SAMA P52886. W-shaped injury to left side of thorax. (e) Complete specimen. (f) Close-up of injury (white arrow).

Fig. 2.

Estaingia bilobata with cephalic and trunk injuries. (a, b) SAMA P46113. U-shaped injury to left side of pygidium. (a) Complete specimen. (b) Close-up of injury showing cicatrization (white arrow). (c, d) SAMA P52817. Stunted and rounded left genal spine. (c) Complete specimen. (d) Close-up of injury (white arrow). (e, f) SAMA P52892. Malformed and fused posterior thorax. (e) Complete specimen. (f) Close-up of injury.

Fig. 2.

Estaingia bilobata with cephalic and trunk injuries. (a, b) SAMA P46113. U-shaped injury to left side of pygidium. (a) Complete specimen. (b) Close-up of injury showing cicatrization (white arrow). (c, d) SAMA P52817. Stunted and rounded left genal spine. (c) Complete specimen. (d) Close-up of injury (white arrow). (e, f) SAMA P52892. Malformed and fused posterior thorax. (e) Complete specimen. (f) Close-up of injury.

Fig. 3.

Estaingia bilobata with two pathologies. (a, b) SAMA P59491. (a) Complete specimen. (b) Close-up of region with pathological neoplasms (white arrows).

Fig. 3.

Estaingia bilobata with two pathologies. (a, b) SAMA P59491. (a) Complete specimen. (b) Close-up of region with pathological neoplasms (white arrows).

Fig. 4.

Estaingia bilobata with teratologies. (a, b) SAMA P54957. Fusion of axial rings (T5 and T6) and pleurae, some of which bifurcate distally. (a) Complete specimen. (b) Close-up of pleural bifurcations (white arrows). (c, d) SAMA P59487. Partial fusion of distal pleural sections. (c) Complete specimen. (d) Close-up of teratology (white arrows). (e, f) SAMA P59490. Additional ‘half-segment’. (e) Complete specimen showing asymmetrical trunk. (f) Close-up of teratology (white arrow).

Fig. 4.

Estaingia bilobata with teratologies. (a, b) SAMA P54957. Fusion of axial rings (T5 and T6) and pleurae, some of which bifurcate distally. (a) Complete specimen. (b) Close-up of pleural bifurcations (white arrows). (c, d) SAMA P59487. Partial fusion of distal pleural sections. (c) Complete specimen. (d) Close-up of teratology (white arrows). (e, f) SAMA P59490. Additional ‘half-segment’. (e) Complete specimen showing asymmetrical trunk. (f) Close-up of teratology (white arrow).

Fig. 5.

Examples of mangled Estaingia bilobata exoskeletons. (a, b) SAMA P46939. Shredded soft-shelled individual. (a) Part. (b) Counterpart. (c) SAMA P54820. Individual with severely broken and partially missing trunk. (d) SAMA P47975. Partial soft-shelled exoskeleton with torn thorax. (e) SAMA P54276. Soft-shelled individual with broken and partially missing trunk. (f) SAMA P 52867. Severely crushed exoskeleton with folded cephalon.

Fig. 5.

Examples of mangled Estaingia bilobata exoskeletons. (a, b) SAMA P46939. Shredded soft-shelled individual. (a) Part. (b) Counterpart. (c) SAMA P54820. Individual with severely broken and partially missing trunk. (d) SAMA P47975. Partial soft-shelled exoskeleton with torn thorax. (e) SAMA P54276. Soft-shelled individual with broken and partially missing trunk. (f) SAMA P 52867. Severely crushed exoskeleton with folded cephalon.

The Emu Bay Shale forms part of the Kangaroo Island Group in the Stansbury Basin, which crops out on the north coast of Kangaroo Island (South Australia), and is interpreted as a nearshore delta complex (Gehling et al.2011; Jago et al.2021). The Emu Bay Shale is considered to be c. 512 Ma (Pararaia janeae Zone; Cambrian Series 2, Stage 4) in age (Bengtson et al.1990; Paterson & Jago, 2006; Paterson & Brock, 2007; Jago et al.2020), based primarily on the co-occurrence of the emuellid trilobite Balcoracania dailyi Pocock, 1970 and an associated radiometric date of 511.87 ± 0.14 Ma in the Billy Creek Formation of the Arrowie Basin (Paterson & Edgecombe, 2006; Paterson et al.2007; Betts et al.2018).

In the Big Gully area of Kangaroo Island, the Emu Bay Shale is 78 m thick at the shoreline and c. 61 m thick near Buck and Daily quarries, where the material considered here was sourced (c. 400 m inland; see García-Bellido et al. 2009 for a detailed locality map). Here, the formation commences with a thin (up to 2 m) interval of polymict conglomerate, the base of which is interpreted as a sequence boundary separating it from the underlying Marsden Sandstone. Above this, the conglomerate transitions sharply into a package of dark grey, laminated mudstone with siltstone and fine sandstone event beds that become thicker and more common towards the contact with the sandstones of the overlying Boxing Bay Formation (Gehling et al.2011). The mudstone interval of the lower Emu Bay Shale is interpreted as representing a relatively deep-water prodelta environment, and hosts the Konservat-Lagerstätte that contains a diverse biota (50+ species, mainly within the basal c. 15 m of the formation), with many taxa considered to have been transported from shallower settings upslope, or having settled out of the water column (Paterson et al.2016). Exceptions include certain trilobite species, particularly the extraordinarily abundant Estaingia bilobata (with up to 600 individuals per square metre; JRP, unpublished data), as well as the redlichioids Redlichia takooensis Lu, 1950 and R. rex Holmes, Paterson & García-Bellido, 2019 (Holmes et al.2020). Intact moult configurations of these species suggest that they lived in or close to the low-oxygen environment of the prodelta setting, although were likely subject to occasional ‘mass kill’ events resulting from fluctuations of the oxycline (Paterson et al.2016). The prevalence of dorsum-down trilobite specimens in the deposit (up to 90% for E. bilobata; Drage et al.2018) may indicate a physiological response to oxygen stress.

All Estaingia bilobata specimens housed in the South Australian Museum (Adelaide, South Australia) palaeontological collection (SAMA P) were examined for evidence of malformations. Identified specimens were photographed under normal (fibre optic) lighting conditions using a Canon EOS 5D digital camera with a Canon MP-E 65 mm 1–5× macro lens.

The linear measurement dataset published by Holmes et al. (2021 a) was used to determine where malformed Estaingia bilobata specimens were located in bivariate space compared to non-malformed specimens. The cephalic and trunk (thorax + pygidium) lengths in the dataset were used (Fig. 6a). Where possible, measurements from malformed specimens were added (Supplemental Information 1). Not all specimens documented here could be included due to partial preservation. Data were natural-log (ln) normalized and plotted. Data points were coded for malformation presence or absence.

Fig. 6.

Measurements of Estaingia bilobata and bivariate plot showing distributions of malformations. (a) Reconstruction of E. bilobata showing measurements used in (b). (b) Bivariate space of E. bilobata. Most malformed specimens cluster with the largest specimens. Data found in Supplemental Data 1. Data were natural log normalized for plotting. Abbreviations: cl: cephalic length; tr: trunk (thorax + pygidium) length.

Fig. 6.

Measurements of Estaingia bilobata and bivariate plot showing distributions of malformations. (a) Reconstruction of E. bilobata showing measurements used in (b). (b) Bivariate space of E. bilobata. Most malformed specimens cluster with the largest specimens. Data found in Supplemental Data 1. Data were natural log normalized for plotting. Abbreviations: cl: cephalic length; tr: trunk (thorax + pygidium) length.

Cicatrization

Exoskeletal thickening in a region where damage has occurred. This indicates an individual was alive and subsequently healed from the incurred injury (Rudkin, 1979, 1985; Babcock & Robison, 1989; Babcock, 1993, 2003).

Injury

Exoskeletal breakage through accidental injury, attack or moulting complications (sensu Bicknell et al.2022,a). Injuries are usually L-, U-, V-, or W-shaped indentations across the exoskeleton (Babcock, 1993; Bicknell & Pates, 2019; Bicknell et al.2022,a). They can also be expressed as the reduction and rounding of exoskeletal sections, or as a ‘single segment injury’ (Bicknell et al.2022,a, d). These features generally show cicatrization and/or segment repair and regeneration. Occasionally, injured exoskeletal areas recover abnormally, resulting in the fusion of exoskeletal sections and a lack of segment expression (Owen, 1985; Bicknell et al.2022,a). Injuries do not extend across the entire specimen – such breaks likely reflect post-mortem, taphonomic processes (Leighton, 2011).

Malformation

Evidence for injuries, teratologies, or pathologies (Owen, 1985).

Pathology

Malformed exoskeletal sections resulting from parasitic activity or infections. These structures are often expressed as circular to ovate swellings (Šnajdr, 1978; Owen, 1985; De Baets et al.2022).

Teratology

External expressions of developmental, embryological, or genetic malfunctions (Owen, 1985). These morphologies include addition or removal of nodes, segments, and spines, as well as abnormally developed morphologies (Owen, 1985; Bicknell & Smith, 2021).

Examination of Estaingia bilobata specimens uncovered several examples of injuries, pathologies, and teratologies. We also found evidence for possible durophagous predation or post-mortem scavenging in the form of mangled exoskeletons.

Injuries

Six injured Estaingia bilobata are identified. Most injuries are unilateral, show L-, U-, W-shaped morphologies (Figs. 1, 2; Table 1) and are located on the trunk, showing evidence for pleural spine regeneration and rounding (Fig. 1c, d) and cicatrization (Figs 1e, f, 2a, b). However, there is a single specimen with a highly deformed posterior trunk showing fused thoracic segments (Fig. 2e, f). There is only one specimen that displays a cephalic injury, represented by a broken genal spine that has partially regenerated (Fig. 2c, d).

Table 1.

Summary of injured Estaingia bilobata

Pathologies

Only one specimen shows evidence for pathological growths on the pygidium in the form of two ovate neoplasms (Fig. 3). Pathological growth on the right side of the pygidium is twice the size of the left neoplasm.

Teratologies

Three examples of teratologies are observed. The first shows abnormally developed posterior segments on the right side of the thorax, including the apparent fusion of certain axial rings (e.g. T5 and T6) and pleurae, some of which bifurcate distally (Fig. 4a, b). The second specimen displays very minor, partial fusion of distal sections of two anterior pleurae on the left side of the thorax (Fig. 4c, d). The third specimen has an additional ‘half-segment’ immediately behind T3 on the right side of the thorax. This additional segment begins at the sagittal line and rapidly expands to form the right half of an axial ring and a normal pleura (Fig. 4e, f). This has resulted in a highly asymmetrical trunk morphology, with the additional ‘half-segment’ also causing the posteriorly adjacent segment to bend.

Mangled exoskeletons

Five specimens with substantial exoskeletal breakage or ripping are noted (Fig. 5). The fully biomineralized specimens show extensive breakage over major exoskeletal regions (Fig. 5c, f). Specimens preserved in very low relief – interpreted as newly moulted, soft-shelled individuals (Drage & Daley, 2016) – appear shredded or torn (Fig. 5a, b, e) and, in one case, shows complete removal of the cephalon and posterior trunk regions (Fig. 5d).

Bivariate space

The distribution of malformed Estaingia bilobata in bivariate space illustrates a clear overall size pattern (Fig. 6). The majority of malformed individuals cluster among the largest holaspid stages (Fig. 6b). The exceptions are two smaller specimens that are separate from other malformed individuals. There is no marked distinction between where injured, pathological, and teratological specimens are located in shape space.

The specimens of Estaingia bilobata documented here show evidence for the three major groups of trilobite malformations (Owen, 1985). This is rare among Cambrian trilobites, as the vast majority of malformed specimens record injuries, with limited evidence for teratologies and pathologies (Bergström & Levi-Setti, 1978; Bicknell & Paterson, 2018; De Baets et al.2022). As such, E. bilobata presents a unique opportunity to study the palaeobiological significance of malformation types in one trilobite species from a single deposit.

The majority of observed Estaingia bilobata injuries (Figs. 1, 2a, b, e, f) are comparable to other documented examples of injured Cambrian trilobites (Rudkin, 1979; Babcock, 1993; Bicknell & Pates, 2020; Zong, 2021,a, b). Indeed, select E. bilobata injuries are very similar to those observed on the co-occurring Redlichia takooensis and R. rex that have been attributed to failed predation (Conway Morris & Jenkins, 1985; Bicknell et al.2022,a). It is highly likely that these injuries in E. bilobata also reflect failed predation. Evidence for cicatrization (Figs 1a, b, e, f, 2a, b) and regeneration (Fig. 1c, d) at injury sites indicates that these individuals survived and continued to moult after attacks. Other evidence for predation on, or post-mortem mastication of, E. bilobata is represented by the mangled exoskeletons (Fig. 5). Similar examples of R. takooensis have been interpreted as rare evidence of possible durophagy (e.g. Bicknell et al.2022,a, fig. 1C–E). Such evidence of durophagy, combined with examples of failed predation, further bolsters the idea that E. bilobata was a key prey item within the Emu Bay Shale biota. This smaller trilobite species likely occupied a relatively low trophic level within the ecosystem (Jago et al.2016), especially given its extreme abundance (>80% of individuals across all known species), and yet injured specimens of E. bilobata are exceedingly rare. Further, most injured specimens cluster among the larger individuals in bivariate space. This may suggest that only larger individuals were capable of escaping and recovering from attacks, preserving records of failed predation. Alternatively, these specimens may preserve evidence of older injuries that recovered through subsequent moulting events. In either case, this pattern indicates a possible record of survivorship bias within the trilobite fossil record.

One injured specimen of Estaingia bilobata shows a substantially disrupted posterior thorax (Fig. 2e, f). This malformation is comparable to rare specimens of other Cambrian trilobite species with highly disrupted and wrinkled pleurae adjacent to the injury (Conway Morris & Jenkins, 1985; Bicknell et al.2022,a). This condition is more commonly observed in the trunk of younger iso- and macropygous trilobites (Ormiston et al.1967; Šnajdr, 1981; Owen, 1985; Rudkin, 1985). Disruption of pleurae indicates that the individual may have been attacked during the soft-shelled stage (shortly after moulting), resulting in a highly deformed exoskeleton that became fixed in subsequent moults (Conway Morris & Jenkins, 1985; Rudkin, 1985).

Trilobite genal spine malformations are particularly rare (Owen, 1985). Most malformed genal spines are represented by disrupted borders (e.g. Chatterton, 1971; Cowie & McNamara, 1978; Owen, 1985; Babcock, 1993; Bicknell et al.2018,c), abnormal cephalic fringes (Owen, 1983), or bifurcating genal spines (Owen, 1985). Complete removal (Kay, 1937) and recovery (Sinclair, 1947; Hessin, 1988; Bicknell et al.2022,c) of genal spines is exceedingly rare, as reflected by the single Estaingia bilobata specimen documented here. The documentation of only one genal spine injury (Fig. 2c, d) is noteworthy. Given the constrained anatomical region, a predator would unlikely have limited an attack to the genal area. As such, we can exclude failed predation as the most plausible explanation. Instead, the injury could reflect a complication during moulting or mechanical (non-predatory) damage that resulted in spine breakage (Owen, 1983).

Teratological trilobite specimens with an additional ‘half-segment’ are almost completely unknown. To our knowledge, the only other example of an additional ‘half-segment’ within the thoracic region is a malformed Emuella polymera Pocock, 1970 that has multiple ‘half-segments’ (Pocock, 1974; Owen, 1985; Paterson & Edgecombe, 2006). One further record of this ‘half-segment’ condition is known from a Toxochasmops McNamara, 1979 pygidium from the Upper Ordovician (Katian) of Norway (Nielsen & Nielsen, 2017). These rare teratologies likely record damage to a generative zone and the resultant propagation of additional, unaligned segments (Pocock, 1974; Owen, 1985). It is noteworthy that two of the three examples represent early Cambrian forms, one of which (E. polymera) belongs to the family Emuellidae, which is characterized by unusually large numbers of trunk segments (Paterson & Edgecombe, 2006). Emuellids in particular may have been more prone to teratologies as they added new segments through euanamorphosis (Paterson & Edgecombe, 2006). These trilobites certainly had unusual patterns of trunk segment development compared with other forms (Holmes et al.2021,a). This may have increased the likelihood of developmental malformations, indicating possible evidence for increased developmental plasticity within Cambrian trilobites compared to younger forms (Webster, 2007). However, the rarity of these exceptional specimens suggests that these malfunctions seldom occurred.

Fused exoskeletal sections are rarely observed in thoracic pleurae (see Öpik, 1975, pl. 17), but more commonly recognized in pygidial regions (Strusz, 1980; Owen, 1985; Babcock, 1993; Nielsen & Nielsen, 2017; Bicknell & Smith, 2021). Such teratologies have been attributed to genetic malfunctions (Nielsen & Nielsen, 2017) and/or moulting complications producing a malformation that propagated in subsequent moults (Bicknell & Smith, 2021). As the teratological thoracic segments (Fig. 4c, d) lack any evidence of an injury, this rare malformation was likely caused by a developmental abnormality that impacted a limited exoskeletal region. This may record segments failing to separate or articulate correctly when they budded off from the pygidium.

The morphologies of exceptionally preserved appendages in two Emu Bay Shale arthropod species have been linked to durophagy, potentially on Estaingia bilobata. Firstly, the short, stout gnathobasic spines on the biramous appendages of the very large trilobite Redlichia rex (Fig. 7e, f) have been shown to be comparable with other known durophages, such as the Cambrian Burgess Shale arthropod Sidneyia inexpectans Walcott, 1911 and the extant horseshoe crab Limulus polyphemus (Linnaeus, 1758) (Botton, 1984; Bicknell et al.2018,a, b, 2021, 2022,a; Holmes et al.2020). This has permitted the linking of injuries identified on R. takooensis specimens with failed predation by the larger R. rex, and injuries to R. rex as possible instances of attempted cannibalism (Bicknell et al.2022,a). Individuals of R. rex (and potentially R. takooensis, although morphological details of the appendages are unknown) may have also consumed E. bilobata, as supported by centimetre-scale coprolites containing E. bilobata remains (Daley et al.2013, fig. 7E–H) that have been attributed to R. rex (Daley et al.2013; Bicknell et al.2022,a). The gnathobasic spines of the Emu Bay Shale chelicerate Wisangocaris barbarahardyae Jago et al., 2016 (Fig. 7c, d) show similar morphologies to those of R. rex and other known durophages, and were likely also adapted for crushing biomineralized material (Jago et al.2016). This is supported by the presence of shelly cololites in certain specimens of W. barbarahardyae, some containing fragments of E. bilobata (Fig. 7a, b; Jago et al. 2016, fig. 5c–g). Given the maximum reported size of W. barbarahardyae is c. 60 mm, this arthropod may have targeted and consumed E. bilobata meraspides. Juveniles of E. bilobata are abundant in the Lagerstätte interval and range from c. 1 to 5 mm in length (Holmes et al.2021 a, b). This is consistent with the size of E. bilobata pleurae preserved within a W. barbarahardyae cololite (Fig. 7b). The size range and sheer abundance of E. bilobata within the Emu Bay Shale suggest that this small trilobite occupied an important position within the lower trophic levels of the local ecosystem, and was an important prey item for multiple species of predator.

Fig. 7.

Examples of possible predators of Estaingia bilobata. (a–d) Wisangocaris barbarahardyae. (a, b) SAMA P55603a. Specimen showing shelly cololite containing E. bilobata fragments. (a) Near-complete specimen. (b) Close-up of cololite with sclerite fragments (white arrows). (c, d) SAMA P45629. Specimen showing series of gnathobases possibly used in durophagy of E. bilobata. (c) Near-complete specimen. (d) Close-up showing rows of gnathobasic spines. (e, f) SAMA P54942. Biramous appendage of Redlichia rex showing stout gnathobasic spines. (e) Complete specimen. (f) Close-up of stout gnathobasic spines.

Fig. 7.

Examples of possible predators of Estaingia bilobata. (a–d) Wisangocaris barbarahardyae. (a, b) SAMA P55603a. Specimen showing shelly cololite containing E. bilobata fragments. (a) Near-complete specimen. (b) Close-up of cololite with sclerite fragments (white arrows). (c, d) SAMA P45629. Specimen showing series of gnathobases possibly used in durophagy of E. bilobata. (c) Near-complete specimen. (d) Close-up showing rows of gnathobasic spines. (e, f) SAMA P54942. Biramous appendage of Redlichia rex showing stout gnathobasic spines. (e) Complete specimen. (f) Close-up of stout gnathobasic spines.

To view supplementary material for this article, please visit https://doi.org/10.1017/S0016756822001261

This research was funded by Australian Research Council grants (LP0774959, FT120100770 and DP200102005 to JRP and FT130101329 to DCGB), a National Geographic Society Research & Exploration grant (8991-11), a University of New England Postdoctoral Fellowship (to RDCB), a Karl Hirsch Memorial Grant (to RDCB), and a Royal Society of South Australia Research Grant (to RDCB). We thank Mary-Anne Binnie (SAMA) for access to, and help with collections. Finally, we thank Olev Vinn and an anonymous referee for their suggested changes to the manuscript.

1.
Babcock
LE
(
1993
)
Trilobite malformations and the fossil record of behavioral asymmetry
.
Journal of Paleontology
 
67
,
217
–29.
2.
Babcock
LE
(
2003
) Role of malformations in elucidating trilobite paleobiology: a historical synthesis. In
Fabulous Fossils – 300 Years of Worldwide Research on Trilobites
  (eds
DG
Mikulic
,
E
Landing
and
J
Kluessendorf
), pp.
3
19
.
New York
:
The University of State of New York
.
3.
Babcock
LE
(
2007
) Trilobites in Paleozoic predator-prey systems, and their role in reorganization of early Paleozoic ecosystems. In
Predator-Prey Interactions in the Fossil Record
  (eds
P
Kelley
,
M
Kowalewski
and
TA
Hansen
), pp.
55
92
.
New York
:
Springer
.
4.
Babcock
LE
and
Robison
RA
(
1989
)
Preferences of Palaeozoic predators
.
Nature
 
337
,
695
–6.
5.
Bengtson
S
,
Conway Morris
S
,
Cooper
BJ
,
Jell
PA
and
Runnegar
BN
(
1990
)
Early Cambrian fossils from South Australia
.
Memoirs of the Association of Australasian Palaeontologists
 
9
,
1
364
.
6.
Bergström
J
and
Levi-Setti
R
(
1978
)
Phenotypic variation in the Middle Cambrian trilobite Paradoxides davidis Salter at Manuels, SE Newfoundland
.
Geologica et Palaeontologica
 
12
,
1
40
.
7.
Betts
MJ
,
Paterson
JR
,
Jacquet
SM
,
Andrew
AS
,
Hall
PA
,
Jago
JB
,
Jagodzinski
EA
,
Preiss
WV
,
Crowley
JL
,
Brougham
T
,
Mathewson
CP
,
García-Bellido
DC
,
Topper
TP
,
Skovsted
CB
and
Brock
GA
(
2018
)
Early Cambrian chronostratigraphy and geochronology of South Australia
.
Earth-Science Reviews
 
185
,
498
543
.
8.
Bicknell
RDC
and
Smith
PM
(
2022
)
Examining abnormal Silurian trilobites from the Llandovery of Australia
.
PeerJ
 
10
,
e14308
.
9.
Bicknell
RDC
,
Holmes
JD
,
Edgecombe
GD
,
Losso
SR
,
Ortega-Hernández
J
,
Wroe
S
and
Paterson
JR
(
2021
)
Biomechanical analyses of Cambrian euarthropod limbs reveal their effectiveness in mastication and durophagy
.
Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences
 
288
,
20202075
.
10.
Bicknell
RDC
,
Holmes
JD
,
Pates
S
,
García-Bellido
DC
and
Paterson
JR
(
2022
a)
Cambrian carnage: trilobite predator-prey interactions in the Emu Bay Shale of South Australia
.
Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology
 
591
,
110877
.
11.
Bicknell
RDC
,
Ledogar
JA
,
Wroe
S
,
Gutzler
BC
,
Watson
WH
III
and
Paterson
JR
(
2018
a)
Computational biomechanical analyses demonstrate similar shell-crushing abilities in modern and ancient arthropods
.
Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences
 
285
,
20181935
.
12.
Bicknell
RDC
and
Paterson
JR
(
2018
)
Reappraising the early evidence of durophagy and drilling predation in the fossil record: implications for escalation and the Cambrian Explosion
.
Biological Reviews
 
93
,
754
–84.
13.
Bicknell
RDC
,
Paterson
JR
,
Caron
J-B
and
Skovsted
CB
(
2018
b)
The gnathobasic spine microstructure of recent and Silurian chelicerates and the Cambrian artiopodan Sidneyia: Functional and evolutionary implications
.
Arthropod Structure & Development
 
47
,
12
24
.
14.
Bicknell
RDC
,
Paterson
JR
and
Hopkins
MJ
(
2019
)
A trilobite cluster from the Silurian Rochester Shale of New York: predation patterns and possible defensive behavior
.
American Museum Novitates
 
39
,
1
16
.
15.
Bicknell
RDC
and
Pates
S
(
2019
)
Abnormal extant xiphosurids in the Yale Peabody Museum Invertebrate Zoology collection
.
Bulletin of the Peabody Museum of Natural History
 
60
,
41
53
.
16.
Bicknell
RDC
and
Pates
S
(
2020
)
Exploring abnormal Cambrian-aged trilobites in the Smithsonian collection
.
PeerJ
 
8
,
e8453
.
17.
Bicknell
RDC
,
Pates
S
and
Botton
ML
(
2018
c)
Abnormal xiphosurids, with possible application to Cambrian trilobites
.
Palaeontologia Electronica
 
21
,
1
17
.
18.
Bicknell
RDC
,
Pates
S
,
Kaiser
D
,
Zakrzewski
S
and
Botton
ML
(
2022
b) Applying records of extant and extinct horseshoe crab abnormalities to xiphosurid conservation. In
International Horseshoe Crab Conservation and Research Efforts: 2007–2020 – Conservation of Horseshoe Crabs Species Globally
  (eds
JT
Tanacredi
,
ML
Botton
,
PKS
Shin
,
Y
Iwasaki
,
SG
Cheung
,
KY
Kwan
and
JH
Mattei
), pp.
85
104
.
Cham
:
Springer
.
19.
Bicknell
RDC
and
Smith
PM
(
2021
)
Teratological trilobites from the Silurian (Wenlock and Ludlow) of Australia
.
The Science of Nature
 
108
,
25
.
20.
Bicknell
RDC
,
Smith
PM
,
Bruthansová
J
and
Holland
B
(
2022
c)
Malformed trilobites from the Ordovician and Devonian
.
PalZ
 
96
,
1
10
.
21.
Bicknell
RDC
,
Smith
PM
,
Howells
TF
and
Foster
JR
(
2022
d)
New records of injured Cambrian and Ordovician trilobites
.
Journal of Paleontology
 
96
,
921
–9.
22.
Botton
ML
(
1984
)
Diet and food preferences of the adult horseshoe crab Limulus polyphemus in Delaware Bay, New Jersey, USA
.
Marine Biology
 
81
,
199
207
.
23.
Chatterton
BDE
(
1971
)
Taxonomy and ontogeny of Siluro-Devonian trilobites from near Yass, New South Wales
.
Palaeontographica Abteilung A
 
137
,
1
108
.
24.
Conway Morris
S
and
Jenkins
RJF
(
1985
)
Healed injuries in early Cambrian trilobites from South Australia
.
Alcheringa
 
9
,
167
–77.
25.
Cowie
J
and
McNamara
KJ
(
1978
)
Olenellus (Trilobita) from the Lower Cambrian strata of north-west Scotland
.
Palaeontology
 
21
,
615
–34.
26.
Daley
AC
,
Paterson
JR
,
Edgecombe
GD
,
García-Bellido
DC
and
Jago
JB
(
2013
)
New anatomical information on Anomalocaris from the Cambrian Emu Bay Shale of South Australia and a reassessment of its inferred predatory habits
.
Palaeontology
 
56
,
971
–90.
27.
De Baets
K
,
Budil
P
,
Fatka
O
and
Geyer
G
(
2022
) Trilobites as hosts for parasites: from paleopathologies to etiologies. In
The Evolution and Fossil Record of Parasitism: Coevolution and Paleoparasitological Techniques
  (eds
K
De Baets
and
JW
Huntley
), pp.
173
201
.
Cham
:
Springer International Publishing
.
28.
Drage
HB
and
Daley
AC
(
2016
)
Recognising moulting behaviour in trilobites by examining morphology, development and preservation: comment on Błażejowski et al. 2015
.
BioEssays
 
38
,
981
–90.
29.
Drage
HB
,
Holmes
JD
,
García-Bellido
DC
and
Daley
AC
(
2018
)
An exceptional record of Cambrian trilobite moulting behaviour preserved in the Emu Bay Shale, South Australia
.
Lethaia
 
51
,
473
–92.
30.
Fatka
O
,
Budil
P
and
Grigar
L
(
2015
)
A unique case of healed injury in a Cambrian trilobite
.
Annales de Paléontologie
 
101
,
295
–99.
31.
García-Bellido
DC
,
Paterson
JR
,
Edgecombe
GD
,
Jago
JB
,
Gehling
JG
and
Lee
MSY
(
2009
)
The bivalved arthropods Isoxys and Tuzoia with soft-part preservation from the Lower Cambrian Emu Bay Shale Lagerstätte (Kangaroo Island, Australia)
.
Palaeontology
 
52
,
1221
–41.
32.
Gehling
JG
,
Jago
JB
,
Paterson
JR
,
García-Bellido
DC
and
Edgecombe
GD
(
2011
)
The geological context of the lower Cambrian (Series 2) Emu Bay Shale Lagerstätte and adjacent stratigraphic units, Kangaroo Island, South Australia
.
Australian Journal of Earth Sciences
 
58
,
243
–57.
33.
Hessin
WA
(
1988
)
Partial regeneration of a genal spine by the trilobite Ceraurus plattinensis
.
Lethaia
 
21
,
285
–88.
34.
Holmes
JD
,
Paterson
JR
and
García-Bellido
DC
(
2020
)
The trilobite Redlichia from the lower Cambrian Emu Bay Shale Konservat-Lagerstätte of South Australia: systematics, ontogeny and soft-part anatomy
.
Journal of Systematic Palaeontology
 
18
,
295
334
.
35.
Holmes
JD
,
Paterson
JR
and
García-Bellido
DC
(
2021
a)
Complex axial growth patterns in an early Cambrian trilobite from South Australia
.
Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences
 
288
,
20212131
.
36.
Holmes
JD
,
Paterson
JR
and
García-Bellido
DC
(
2021
b)
The post-embryonic ontogeny of the early Cambrian trilobite Estaingia bilobata from South Australia: trunk development and phylogenetic implications
.
Papers in Palaeontology
 
7
,
931
–50.
37.
Jago
JB
,
Bentley
CJ
,
Paterson
JR
,
Holmes
JD
,
Lin
TR
and
Sun
XW
(
2021
)
The stratigraphic significance of early Cambrian (Series 2, Stage 4) trilobites from the Smith Bay Shale near Freestone Creek, Kangaroo Island
.
Australian Journal of Earth Sciences
 
68
,
204
–12.
38.
Jago
JB
,
García-Bellido
DC
and
Gehling
JG
(
2016
)
An early Cambrian chelicerate from the Emu Bay Shale, South Australia
.
Palaeontology
 
59
,
549
–62.
39.
Jago
JB
,
Gehling
JG
,
Betts
MJ
,
Brock
GA
,
Dalgarno
CR
,
García-Bellido
DC
,
Haslett
PG
,
Jacquet
SM
,
Kruse
PD
and
Langsford
NR
(
2020
)
The Cambrian System in the Arrowie Basin, Flinders Ranges, South Australia
.
Australian Journal of Earth Sciences
 
67
,
923
–48.
40.
Kay
GM
(
1937
)
Stratigraphy of the Trenton group
.
Bulletin of the Geological Society of America
 
48
,
233
302
.
41.
Klompmaker
AA
,
Karasawa
H
,
Portell
RW
,
Fraaije
RHB
and
Ando
Y
(
2013
)
An overview of predation evidence found on fossil decapod crustaceans with new examples of drill holes attributed to gastropods and octopods
.
Palaios
 
28
,
599
613
.
42.
Klompmaker
AA
,
Kelley
PH
,
Chattopadhyay
D
,
Clements
JC
,
Huntley
JW
and
Kowalewski
M
(
2019
)
Predation in the marine fossil record: studies, data, recognition, environmental factors, and behavior
.
Earth-Science Reviews
 
194
,
472
520
.
43.
Leighton
LR
(
2011
) Analyzing predation from the dawn of the Phanerozoic. In
Quantifying the Evolution of Early Life
  (eds
M
Laflamme
,
JD
Schiffbauer
and
SQ
Dornbos
), pp.
73
109
.
Dordrecht
:
Springer
.
44.
Linnaeus
C
(
1758
)
Systema naturæ per regna tria naturæ, secundum classes, ordines, genera, species, cum characteribus, differentiis, synonymis, locis
 , 10th edn.
Holmiae
:
Laurentius Salvius
.
45.
Lu
Y
(
1950
)
On the genus Redlichia with description of its new species
.
Geological Review
 
15
,
157
–70 (in Chinese).
46.
McNamara
KJ
(
1979
)
Trilobites from the Coniston Limestone Group (Ashgill Series) of the Lake District, England
.
Palaeontology
 
22
,
53
92
.
47.
Mitov
PG
,
Dunlop
JA
and
Bartel
C
(
2021
)
A case of pedipalpal regeneration in a fossil harvestman (Arachnida: Opiliones)
.
Arachnologische Mitteilungen
 
61
,
65
–9.
48.
Nedin
C
(
1999
)
Anomalocaris predation on nonmineralized and mineralized trilobites
.
Geology
 
27
,
987
–90.
49.
Nielsen
ML
and
Nielsen
AT
(
2017
)
Two abnormal pygidia of the trilobite Toxochasmops from the Upper Ordovician of the Oslo Region, Norway
.
Bulletin of the Geological Society of Denmark
 
65
,
171
–75.
50.
Öpik
AA
(
1975
)
Templetonian and Ordian xystridurid trilobites of Australia
.
Bulletin of the Bureau of Mineral Resources, Geology & Geophysics
 
121
,
1
84
.
51.
Ormiston
AR
,
Logan
A
and
Fulton
RJ
(
1967
)
Lower and Middle Devonian trilobites of the Canadian Arctic islands
.
Bulletin of the Geological Survey of Canada
 
153
,
1
148
.
52.
Owen
AW
(
1983
)
Abnormal cephalic fringes in the Trinucleidae and Harpetidae (Trilobita)
.
Special Papers in Paleontology
 
30
,
241
–7.
53.
Owen
AW
(
1985
)
Trilobite abnormalities
.
Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh: Earth Sciences
 
76
,
255
–72.
54.
Paterson
JR
and
Brock
GA
(
2007
)
Early Cambrian trilobites from Angorichina, Flinders Ranges, South Australia, with a new assemblage from the Pararaia bunyerooensis Zone
.
Journal of Paleontology
 
81
,
116
–42.
55.
Paterson
JR
and
Edgecombe
GD
(
2006
)
The Early Cambrian trilobite family Emuellidae Pocock, 1970: systematic position and revision of Australian species
.
Journal of Paleontology
 
80
,
496
513
.
56.
Paterson
JR
,
García-Bellido
DC
,
Jago
JB
,
Gehling
JG
,
Lee
MSY
and
Edgecombe
GD
(
2016
)
The Emu Bay Shale Konservat-Lagerstätte: a view of Cambrian life from East Gondwana
.
Journal of the Geological Society
 
173
,
1
11
.
57.
Paterson
JR
and
Jago
JB
(
2006
)
New trilobites from the Lower Cambrian Emu Bay Shale Lagerstätte at Big Gully, Kangaroo Island, South Australia
.
Memoirs of the Association of Australasian Palaeontologists
 
32
,
43
57
.
58.
Paterson
JR
,
Jago
JB
,
Brock
GA
and
Gehling
JG
(
2007
)
Taphonomy and palaeoecology of the emuellid trilobite Balcoracania dailyi (early Cambrian, South Australia)
.
Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology
 
249
,
302
–21.
59.
Pates
S
and
Bicknell
RDC
(
2019
)
Elongated thoracic spines as potential predatory deterrents in olenelline trilobites from the lower Cambrian of Nevada
.
Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology
 
516
,
295
306
.
60.
Pates
S
,
Bicknell
RDC
,
Daley
AC
and
Zamora
S
(
2017
)
Quantitative analysis of repaired and unrepaired damage to trilobites from the Cambrian (Stage 4, Drumian) Iberian Chains, NE Spain
.
Palaios
 
32
,
750
–61.
61.
Pocock
KJ
(
1964
)
Estaingia, a new trilobite genus from the Lower Cambrian of South Australia
.
Palaeontology
 
7
,
458
–71.
62.
Pocock
KJ
(
1970
)
The Emuellidae, a new family of trilobites from the Lower Cambrian of South Australia
.
Palaeontology
 
13
,
522
–62.
63.
Pocock
KJ
(
1974
)
A unique case of teratology in trilobite segmentation
.
Lethaia
 
7
,
63
66
.
64.
Rudkin
DM
(
1979
)
Healed injuries in Ogygopsis klotzi (Trilobita) from the Middle Cambrian of British Columbia
.
Royal Ontario Museum, Life Sciences Occasional Paper
 
32
,
1
8
.
65.
Rudkin
DM
(
1985
)
Exoskeletal abnormalities in four trilobites
.
Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences
 
22
,
479
–83.
66.
Sinclair
GW
(
1947
)
Two examples of injury in Ordovician trilobites
.
American Journal of Science
 
245
,
250
–7.
67.
Šnajdr
M
(
1978
)
Pathological neoplasms in the fringe of Bohemoharpes (Trilobita)
.
Věstník Ústředního Ústavu Geologického
 
53
,
49
50
.
68.
Šnajdr
M
(
1981
)
Bohemian Proetidae with malformed exoskeletons (Trilobita)
.
Sborník Geologických Věd Paleontologie
 
24
,
37
61
.
69.
Strusz
DL
(
1980
)
The Encrinuridae and related trilobite families, with a description of Silurian species from southeastern Australia
.
Palaeontographica Abteilung A
 
168
,
1
68
.
70.
Walcott
CD
(
1911
)
Cambrian geology and paleontology, II. Middle Cambrian Merostomata.
Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections
 
57
,
17
40
.
71.
Webster
M
(
2007
)
A Cambrian peak in morphological variation within trilobite species
.
Science
 
317
,
499
502
.
72.
Zong
R-W
(
2021
a)
Abnormalities in early Paleozoic trilobites from central and eastern China
.
Palaeoworld
 
30
,
430
–3.
73.
Zong
R-W
(
2021
b)
Injuries and molting interference in a trilobite from the Cambrian (Furongian) of South China
.
PeerJ
 
9
,
e11201
.
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution and reproduction, provided the original article is properly cited.