The Currently Earliest Angiosperm Fruit from the Jurassic of North America

Angiosperms are the single most important plant group in the current ecosystem. However, little is known about the origin and early evolution of angiosperms. Jurassic and earlier traces of angiosperms have been claimed multiple times from Europe and Asia, but reluctance to accept these records remains. To test the truthfulness of these claims, palaeobotanical records from continents other than Europe and Asia constitute a crucial test. Here I document a new angiosperm fruit, Dilcherifructus mexicana gen. et sp. nov, from the Middle Jurassic of Mexico. Its Jurassic age suggests that origin of angiosperms is much earlier than widely accepted, while its occurrence in the North America indicates that angiosperms were already widespread in the Jurassic, although they were still far away from their ecological radiation, which started in the Early Cretaceous.

A Jurassic flower bud from the Jurassic of China

Angiosperms may be distinguished from their gymnosperm peers by their flowers, and thus a flower is a good proxy of fossil angiosperms. However, flowers and their parts are usually too frail to be preserved in the fossil record. This makes the origin of angiosperms and their flowers the foci of controversy in botany. Eliminating such botanical controversies can only be achieved by studying related plant fossils. Applying routine SEM, LM, and MicroCT technologies, we document a fossil flower bud, Florigerminis jurassica gen. et sp. nov., from the Jurassic of Inner Mongolia, China. This fossil includes not only a leafy shoot but also physically connected fruit and flower bud. The developmentally interpolated existence of a blooming flower between the flower bud and mature fruit in Florigerminis suggests that angiosperm flowers were present in the Jurassic, in agreement with recent botanical progress. Florigerminis jurassica underscores the presence of angiosperms in the Jurassic and demands a re-thinking on angiosperm evolution.

Criterion is a touchstone in study of early angiosperms

Herendeen et al. set up a criterion identifying fossil angiosperms while they named five examples of fossil angiosperms in the same paper. Their normal-appearing operation, however, is fundamentally flawed: their exemplar fossil angiosperms did not honor their own criterion. This operation confused their proponents as well as other botanical researchers, hindering healthy progress in study on the origin of angiosperms. Herendeen et al. are obligated to give a plausible explanation for their perplexing operation. *Nature Plants has been informed of the problem in Herendeen et al. (2017). Nature Plants has refused to fix the problem due to reasons, according to the communication with Dr. Chris Surridge, an editor of Nature Plants.

Fossil data do not support a long pre-Cretaceous history of flowering plants

The origin of angiosperms is a classic macroevolutionary problem, because of their rapid rise in the Early Cretaceous fossil record, beginning about 139 Ma ago, and the conflict this creates with older crown-group ages based on molecular clock dating1. Silvestro et al.2 use a novel methodology to model past angiosperm diversity based on a Bayesian Brownian Bridge model of fossil finds assigned to extant families, concluding that a Cretaceous origin is vanishingly unlikely. However, their results strongly conflict with the known temporal distribution of angiosperm fossils, and, while we agree that statistical analysis aids interpretation of the fossil record, here we show the conclusions of Silvestro et al.2 are unsound.

An unexpected noncarpellate epigynous flower from the Jurassic of China

The origin of angiosperms has been a long-standing botanical debate. The great diversity of angiosperms in the Early Cretaceous makes the Jurassic a promising period in which to anticipate the origins of the angiosperms. Here, based on observations of 264 specimens of 198 individual flowers preserved on 34 slabs in various states and orientations, from the South Xiangshan Formation (Early Jurassic) of China, we describe a fossil flower, Nanjinganthus dendrostyla gen. et sp. nov.. The large number of specimens and various preservations allow for an evidence-based reconstruction of the flower. From the evidence of the combination of an invaginated receptacle and ovarian roof, we infer that the seeds of Nanjinganthus were completely enclosed. Evidence of an actinomorphic flower with a dendroid style, cup-form receptacle, and angiospermy, is consistent with Nanjinganthus being a bona fide angiosperm from the Jurassic, an inference that we hope will re-invigorate research into angiosperm origins.

Was Charles Darwin right in his explanation of the ‘abominable mystery’?

The site and time of origin of angiosperms are still debated. The co-occurrence of many of the early branching lineages of flowering plants in a region somewhere between Australia and the SW Pacific islands suggests a possible Gondwanan origin of angiosperms. The recent recognition of Zealandia, a 94% submerged continent in the east of Australia, could explain the discrepancy between molecular clocks and fossil records about the age of angiosperms, supporting the old Darwinian hypothesis of a “lost continent” to explain the “abominable mystery” regarding the origin and rapid radiation of flowering plants.

Was Charles Darwin right in his explanation of the ‘abominable mystery’?

The site and time of origin of angiosperms are still debated. The co-occurrence of many of the early branching lineages of flowering plants in a region somewhere between Australia and the SW Pacific islands suggests a possible Gondwanan origin of angiosperms. The recent recognition of Zealandia, a 94% submerged continent in the east of Australia, could explain the discrepancy between molecular clocks and fossil records about the age of angiosperms, supporting the old Darwinian hypothesis of a “lost continent” to explain the “abominable mystery” regarding the origin and rapid radiation of flowering plants.