Competition and predation are regarded as important ecologicaland evolutionary factors. The importance of competition (Barnes& Kuklinski 2003, 2004) and especially predation (see Kowalew-ski & Kelley 2002; Kelley et al. 2003 for comprehensive reviews)is clearly reflected in the ability of predators to regulate popula-tion densities and abundance of individuals. It controls faunaldistribution and structure, and functions as a causative mecha-nism of evolution due to adaptive (induced) responses in prey(e.g. spines, thicker shells, ornamentation, motile life style, infau-nalization). Bambach (2003) summarized that predators affectvirtually every major ecological and evolutionary aspect (Kelleyet al. 2003). This led Vermeij (1977, 1987) to recognize the esca-lation of predation as a driving force of the so-called ‘MesozoicMarine Revolution’ (MMR).

Other authors have concluded that predation is also important in the Cambrian Revolution (Walker & Brett 2002), the Mid-Paaeozoic Revolution (the Palaeozoic precursor to MMR; Signor & Brett 1984) and the Cenozoic Revolution (Walker & Brett 2002). Moreover, the evolutionary significance of biotic interactions is still debated (Kitchell 1990; Aronson 1991; McKinney 1995; Tomasovych 2008). Due to some doubts (Aberhan et al. 2006; Madin et al. 2006), alternate hypotheses that do not invoke predation as an evolutionary agent have also been proposed (Cohen 2005). Gould (2002) amongst others found macro-evolutionary processes as caused by biotic or abiotic factors separately or even exclusively.

Until recently, studies of predator–prey interactions have focused mostly on groups such as molluscs, crinoids or brachio pods, whereas the role of echinoids as prey has received little interest despite their potential importance (see Kowalewski & Nebelsick 2003 for a review; see also McNamara 1994). As a result, the role of biotic interactions in the evolutionary history of echinoids remains poorly known. Today, echinoids are prey for many organisms, including fish, sea otters, crabs, asteroids, gastropods, birds and humans. The earliest record of predation on echinoids comes from the Upper Kimmeridgian (Upper Jurassic), regurgitates found in lithographic limestones at Nusplingen, Germany (Baumeister et al. 2000). Other reports from younger strata are mostly based on drilling and bite/regeneration traces on tests of irregular echinoids (Zinsmeister 1980; Thies 1985; Nebelsick & Kowalewski 1999; Złotnik & Ceranka 2005). Rare direct evidence for predation on fossil echinoids come also from the echinoid remains preserved as gut content in the stomachs of Jurassic vertebrates (reviewed in Kriwet 2001). Other sources of data for predation on echinoids such as bite marks or regeneration of spines remain unexplored. The only other evidence for the presence of echinoids in regurgitates originates from the Middle Miocene of Austria. Kroh (2005, plate 82, fig. 3) identified spines of spatangoid echinoids as regurgitated material amongst other fossil remains. These studies suggest more or less continuous predation record on echinoids for the last 100 Ma; that is, since the Late Cretaceous to the present (cf. Kowalewski & Nebelsick 2003). However, according to pre-existing reports, echinoids were a target of predators for more than 150 Ma.

In this study we report cidaroid echinoid remains in BajocianBathonian (Middle Jurassic) vertebrate (most probably fish) regurgitates from southern Poland. Our finds predate any previous record by more than 20 myr. The aim of this paper is to elaborate this new find, to date only mentioned by Zaton et al. (2007), and to discuss its broader significance for the ecology and evolution of echinoids. This provides a source of data for the reconstruction of food webs in the fossil record and is important as evidence for the role of predation in echinoderm evolution, being currently increasingly reported (Baumiller & Gahn 2004; Baumiller et al. 2010; Sallan et al. 2011; Gorzelak et al. 2012).