Competition and predation are regarded as important ecologicaland evolutionary factors. The importance of competition (Barnes& Kuklinski 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 importantin the Cambrian Revolution (Walker & Brett 2002), the Mid-Pal-aeozoic Revolution (the Palaeozoic precursor to MMR; Signor B Aronson 1991; McKinney 1995;Tomasovych 2008). Due to some doubts (Aberhan et al. 2006;Madin et al. 2006), alternate hypotheses that do not invokepredation as an evolutionary age nt have also been proposed (Cohen2005). Gould (2002) amongst ot hers found macro-evolutionaryprocesses as caused by biotic or abiotic factors separately oreven exclusively.Until recently, studies of predator–prey interactions havefocused mostly on groups such as molluscs, crinoids or brachio-pods, whereas the role of echinoids as prey has received littleinterest despite their potential importance (see Kowalewski N see also McNamara 1994). As aresult, the role of biotic interactions in the evolutionary historyof echinoids remains poorly known. Today, echinoids are preyfor many organisms, including fish, sea otters, crabs, asteroids,gastropods, birds and humans. The earliest record of predationon echinoids comes from the Upper Kimmeridgian (UpperJurassic), regurgitates found in lithographic limestones at Nusp-lingen, Germany (Baumeister et al. 2000). Other reports fromyounger strata are mostly based on drilling and bite/regenerationtraces on tests of irregular echinoids (Zinsmeister 1980; Thies1985; Nebelsick & Kowalewski 1999; Zlotnik & Ceranka 2005).Rare direct evidence for predation on fossil echinoids come alsofrom the echinoid remains preserved as gut content in the stom-achs of Jurassic vertebrates (reviewed in Kriwet 2001). Othersources of data for predation on echinoids such as bite marks orregeneration of spines remain unexplored. The only other evi-dence for the presence of echinoids in regurgitates originatesfrom the Middle Miocene of Austria. Kroh (2005, plate 82, fig. 3)identified spines of spatangoid echinoids as regurgitated materialamongst other fossil remains. These studies suggest more or lesscontinuous 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 Bajocian–Bathonian (Middle Jurassic) vertebrate (most probably fish)regurgitates from southern Poland. Our finds predate any previ-ous record by more than 20 myr. The aim of this paper is toelaborate this new find, to date only mentioned by Zaton et al.(2007), and to discuss its broader significance for the ecologyand evolution of echinoids. This provides a source of data for thereconstruction of food webs in the fossil record and is importantas 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).