Recolonization strategies of early animals in the Avalon (Ediacaran 574–560 Ma) Nile P. Stephenson1,2 , Katie M. Delahooke3, Princess A. Buma-at1,2, Benjamin W. T. Rideout4, Nicole Barnes5, Charlotte Kenchington3, Andrea Manica1 and Emily G. Mitchell1,2 1Department of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, U.K. 2University Museum of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, U.K. 3Department of Earth Sciences, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, U.K. 4Independent, Canada 5Independent, U.K. Abstract The first geographically widespread metazoans form the Avalon assemblage (Ediacaran; 574– 560Ma). These early animals were regularly disturbed by sedimentation events such as ash flows and turbidites, leading to an apparent “resetting” of communities. However, it is not clear how biological legacies—remains or survivors of disturbance events—influenced community ecol- ogy in the Avalon. Here, we use spatial point process analysis on 19Avalon paleocommunities to test whether two forms of biological legacy (fragmentary remains of Fractofusus and survivor fronds) impacted the recolonization dynamics of Avalon paleocommunities. We found that densities of Fractofusus were increased around the Fractofusus fragments, suggesting that they helped to recolonize the post-disturbance substrate, potentially contributing to the Fractofusus dominance found in 8 of the 19 paleocommunities. However, we found no such effects for survivor fronds. Our results suggest that the evolution of height was for long-distance dispersal rather than local recolonization. In modern deep-sea environments, there is a trade-off between local and long-distance dispersal, and our work demonstrates that this differentiation of reproductive strategies had already developed in the early animals of the Avalon. Non-technical Summary Fossils from the Avalon (Ediacaran) represent some of the first animals in the fossil record. The Avalon fossil record is exceptional; these organisms are preserved as entire communities where they would have lived on the deep-sea floor. These early animals lived in regularly disturbed environments, where underwater sedimentation events killed entire communities. In post- disturbance environments, new organisms would have likely arrived via waterborne propagules that may have had to travel long distances. However, there could be a substantial advantage if some of these animals were able to leave biologicalmaterial (surviving organisms, reproductively active remains). Such strategies would allow for local recolonization, which could be faster and permit surviving organisms to become dominant in the post-disturbance community.We tested this possibility by investigating the ecological dynamics of fossil communities that contained fossilized evidence of such strategies: either fragmented remains that could be reproductively active, or exceptionally large specimens that may represent animals that survived a sedimenta- tion event. We found that fragmented specimens of Fractofusus were surrounded by high densities of much smaller complete Fractofusus specimens, indicating that fragmentary repro- duction in the aftermath of a disturbance event was a viable reproductive strategy for this taxon. Use of this strategy is particularly notable in Fractofusus, as it is one of the most dominant Avalon fossils, and ecological innovations such as the capacity to recolonize environments quickly may have led to this dominance. However, surviving individuals had no such associa- tions, indicating that the advantage to growing large may not have been to survive disturbance events. The trade-off between long-distance and local recolonization strategies is seen in extant environments, but our work demonstrates that such trade-offs were already present in some of the earliest animal communities. Introduction The first geographically widespread metazoans constitute the Avalon assemblage (574–560 million years ago) during the terminal Ediacaran (Liu et al. 2015; Dunn et al. 2021; Runnegar 2022; Mitchell and Pates 2025). Avalon paleocommunities were dominated by enigmatic rangeomorphs and arboreomorphs (Narbonne 2004; Brasier et al. 2012), alongside rare, more familiar crown-group cnidarians (Dunn et al. 2022) and putative sponges (Sperling et al. 2011; Paleobiology www.cambridge.org/pab Article Cite this article: Stephenson, N. P., K. M. Delahooke, P. A. Buma-at, B. W.T. Rideout, N. Barnes, C. Kenchington, A. Manica, and E. G. Mitchell (2026). Recolonization strategies of early animals in the Avalon (Ediacaran 574– 560 Ma). Paleobiology 52, 57–68. https://doi.org/10.1017/pab.2025.10074 Received: 16 February 2025 Revised: 21 August 2025 Accepted: 21 August 2025 Handling Editor: John Huntley Corresponding author: Nile P. Stephenson; Email: nps36@cam.ac.uk © The Author(s), 2025. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Paleontological Society. 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. https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1181-9452 https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6517-2231 https://doi.org/10.1017/pab.2025.10074 mailto:nps36@cam.ac.uk http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 Aragonés Suarez and Leys 2022). The Avalon paleocommunities are preserved in situ and near-census (O’Brien and King 2005) in Newfoundland, Canada, and Charnwood Forest, Leicestershire, UK (Benus 1988; Noble et al. 2015; Wood et al. 2003), in deep- water, slope environments adjacent to a volcanically active island arc system (Wood et al. 2003). Disturbance from sedimentation events (ash influx, turbidites) was likely to be a substantial and potentially regular cause of mortality for these early animal com- munities (Clapham et al. 2003; Wilby et al. 2015). Environmental disturbance has therefore been suggested to have substantially shaped the ecology and evolution of Avalon communities (Clapham et al. 2003; Wilby et al. 2015; Kenchington et al. 2018; Delahooke et al. 2024). Periodic pulse disturbances by intensive sedimentary events smothered entire Avalon communities, and so were typically lethal (Seilacher 1999; Clapham et al. 2003; Wilby et al. 2015), leaving behind barren substrate. For new communities to emerge, recolo- nization processes were required. These could be either a new primary succession, sourced via dispersal from outside the mapped area, that is, long distance from the metacommunity (Clapham et al. 2003; Mitchell et al. 2015; Boddy et al. 2022; Eden et al. 2022), or a secondary succession from local recolonization, whereby either biological remains or surviving organisms aid local recolonization —a “biological legacy” (Wilby et al. 2015). In modern sessile systems, surviving organisms often have a substantial impact on the post-disturbance community composition (Bače et al. 2015), ecosystem functions (Nyström and Folke 2001), and ecological dynamics (Wild et al. 2014). Usually, survivors represent the most common taxa in a given area (Wild et al. 2014), generating legacy effects that can determine the spatial ecology of the recolonizing community, where the secondary community is characterized either by clustering around suitable habitat near biological remains (e.g., logs and tree stumps) or by reproductive clusters around survivors (e.g., coral fragments) (Maldonado andUriz 1999; Okubo et al. 2007; Wild et al. 2014; Bače et al. 2015; Kim et al. 2022). Such legacies can sometimes effect succession trajectories and lead to alternative stable states (Jõgiste et al. 2017; Pérez-Hernández and Gavilán 2021). However, such ecological benefits of biological legacies for Avalon paleocommunities could be compounded by the relative slowness of recolonizing processes because of their deep-sea habitat, similar to the slowness of modern deep-sea reco- lonizing processes (Grassle 1977). Still, the temporal record of many Avalon taxa stretches over millions of years, demonstrating that the taxa could survive regular disturbances. Within Avalon paleocommunities, there are two possible exam- ples of specimens that could provide evidence of biological legacies. First, fragmented fossils of Fractofusus andersoni (Dunn et al. 2025; Fig. 1A) alongside complete, but much smaller F. andersoni fossils on the Brasier surface in Mistaken Point Ecological Reserve, New- foundland, Canada, could represent vegetative, reproductive frag- ments—perhaps generated by a disturbance event. Fragmented specimens of F. andersoni are truncated partway along the central axis, orthogonal to the biterminal directions of growth (Fig. 1B–F). Fragments could have been formed by physical damage from disturbance events, which could rip specimens (Dunn et al. 2025). Evidence of such damage is also seen in other rangeomorphs, such as Hyllaecullulus (Kenchington et al. 2018) and physical damage recorded in Dickinsonia specimens (Ivantsov et al. 2020). These fragments are distinct from incomplete preservation because of the observation of the continuation of a central axis found in both complete and incomplete specimens (Dunn et al. 2025: fig. 2G,H; Fig. 2G). Second, surviving individuals could be identified as an outlier(s) within their population size distribution in the post- disturbance community (Wilby et al. 2015) (Fig. 1B–F), because any individuals surviving the disturbance event would be older and therefore taller than individuals of the post-disturbance commu- nity. Such outlier individuals have been observed for Primocandle- abrum, Charnia, Hyllaecullulus, and Charniodiscus in North Quarry Bed B (henceforth Bed B) in Charnwood Forest (Wilby et al. 2015). The advantages of local reproduction following the survival of disturbance events could therefore provide an additional driver for the evolution of longer-distance dispersal (Mitchell and Kenchington 2018). Spatial point process analysis (SPPA) enables the inference of ecological processes from the underlying spatial patterns of fossil specimens, because for sessile organisms, such as Avalon taxa, there is only a limited set of possible processes behind observed spatial patterns. This limited set of processes means that by comparing the observed patterns with those produced by well-established models, we can determine the most likely underlying processes for any patterns found across plant, coral, fungi, and sessile fossil commu- nities (Velázquez et al. 2016; McFadden et al. 2019; Mitchell and Harris 2020). Therefore, these techniques can be used to investigate the potential influences of recolonization processes in Avalon paleocommunities, and have been applied in a variety of paleoeco- logical contexts, such as Ediacaran body fossils (Mitchell et al. 2015, 2019, 2020, 2025; Mitchell and Kenchington 2018; Boan et al. 2023, 2024; Delahooke et al. 2024), other benthic taxa (Dhungana and Mitchell 2021), and more recently, trace fossils both on bedding planes (Mitchell et al. 2020) and through SPPA of traces (Rojas et al. 2020, 2025).We hypothesize: (1) that F. andersoni fragments on the Brasier surface have a substantial positive effect on Fractofusus population structure (densities in proximity to fragments redolent of a reproductive mechanism); and (2) that the presence of outlier individuals has a substantial positive effect on community structure (relative abundances) and population spatial structure (higher densities in proximity to the outlier specimens), which we system- atically test using SPPA. Geological Setting Avalon Ediacaran macrofossils occur in the Conception and St. John’s groups in Newfoundland, Canada, and the Charnian Supergroup in Leicestershire, UK, specifically within thick silici- clastic–volcaniclastic units composed of fine-grained turbiditic facies. These successions represent deep-marine slope environmen- tal settings (O’Brien et al. 1983; Myrow 1995), and substantial volcaniclastic sediments in these units indicate ash input from nearby volcanic arcs (Wood et al. 2003). The paleocommunities in this study come from the Mistaken Point Ecological Reserve (MPER) (Benus 1988; Fig. 2), Bay Roberts and Spaniard’s Bay (Ichaso et al. 2007), and the Discovery Geopark (DG) in the Bonavista Peninsula (Hofmann et al. 2008). The MPER and DG successions were likely deposited in different deep-water basins within the Avalon Terrane (O’Brien and King 2005). The three key surfaces within this study are (1) The Brasier surface, (2) the E surface, and (3) Bed B. The Brasier surface (567.8 Ma; Fig. 2), which occurs within the lower Briscal Formation, consists of normally graded medium- to coarse-grained sandstones with a greenish hue due to their high tuffaceous content (Matthews et al. 2021). The E surface (565 Ma), within the Mistaken Point Formation, is characterized by medium-bedded siltstones depos- ited by strong turbidity flows, capped by fine-grained hemipelagic sediments containing coarse-grained crystal tuffs (Narbonne 2005). 58 Nile P. Stephenson et al. Bed B, Charnwood Forest, is within the Bradgate Formation, which consists of fine-grained sedimentary–volcaniclastic rocks deposited in deep-marine slope settings, well below the storm wave base, within a back-arc basin (Le Bas 1984; Pharaoh et al. 1987). The base of the Bradgate Formation is dated to 561.9 ± 0.9 Ma, so it provides a lower bound for the age of Bed B (Noble et al. 2015). Materials and Methods Material In this study, we assessed 19 bedding plane assemblages: “Yale” outcrops of the D and E surfaces at Mistaken Point; the Bristy Cove surface from MPER; and the St. Shott’s surface at Western Head, Newfoundland, Canada, from Mitchell et al. (2019); the Brasier surface; the Clapham’s Pigeon Cove (CPC) surface; the Shingle Head surface; the Lower Mistaken Point surface; the “Queens” outcrop of the G surface at Mistaken Point; and the Pizzeria surface fromMPER, using data from (Stephenson et al. 2024); the Bishop’s Cove surface and the Green Point surface from the Bay Roberts area in Newfoundland, Canada, from Stephenson et al. (2024); the H14 surface fromMitchell et al. (2019); the H5 surface from Delahooke et al. (2024); the H26 surface, the Capelin Gulch site, the Goldmine surface, and the H31 surface from Stephenson et al. (2024) all in the DG in Newfoundland, Canada; and Bed B from Charnwood Forest from Mitchell et al. (2019). The surfaces were mapped using a combination of methods (cf. Mitchell et al. 2019). All surfaces were LiDAR scanned using (FARO Focus, mean resolution up to 0.5 mm) (apart from the H31 surface, which was not scanned) and mapped using photogram- metry in Agisoft Metashape v. 1.7.5. Additional laser-line probe scans were used for the Pizzeria, Brasier, G, D, and E surfaces to a 0.050 mm resolution (Mitchell et al. 2019). To create the specimen maps, three-dimensional models created from photogrammetry Figure 1. A, Outlier Primocandelabrum sp. on Bed B. Scale bar, 2 cm. B–F, Fragment Fractofusus andersoni specimens from the Brasier surface. G–I, Complete F. andersoni on the Brasier surface. Dashed lines denote broken edges of specimens. Note continuation of central axis in G (as in Dunn et al. 2025: fig. 2G). Scale bars, 1 cm. Early animal recolonization strategies 59 were used to make orthomosaics (two-dimensional photomaps) from which two-dimensional vector maps containing information on the spatial position, disk length and width, stem and frond length and width, and species-level identification were made (cf. Stephenson et al. 2024: extended data table 3) in Inkscape v. 1.3. Fractofusus fragments were specifically noted within the Brasier surface dataset. A custom script (https://github.com/ nis38/NPS_dex.git in R v, 4.2.2 [R Core Team 2023] adapted from Delahooke et al. [2024]) was used to extract data from vector maps. All surface datasets (surface outlines, specimen sizes, specimen spatial positions) were retrodeformed by quantifying tectonic deformation through comparisons of the lengths and widths of holdfasts >10mm, with the assumption of original circularity using the constant areamethod (cf. Vixseboxse et al. 2021), apart from on the CPC surface, which did not have sufficient holdfasts (Clapham et al. 2003). The total dataset comprised 18,060 specimens from 43 morphotaxa (taxa listed in Supplementary Table S2 plus effaced fronds, disks, and Ivesheadiomorphs). Spatial Analysis of Fragments Univariate Analysis of Complete Fractofusus Specimens In this study, we investigated the population ecology of Fractofusus (whole and fragmented specimens) on the Brasier surface (Fig. 1B–F) bymeans of univariate and bivariate SPPA (Wiegand and Moloney 2014; Mitchell et al. 2019) to test that hypothesis that Fractofusus ander- soni fragments on the Brasier surface have a substantial positive effect on Fractofusus population structure. To compare the differ- ences in size between fragmented and complete Fractofusus spec- imens, we used aMann-WhitneyU-test (Mann andWhitney 1947). We used the pair correlation function (PCF) summary statistic to quantify how the density of points (here, fossils) at a given distance r from a given point change as a function of distance from that point (Illian et al. 2008; Wiegand and Moloney 2014). The simplest spatial pattern, complete spatial randomness (CSR), can be modeled as a homogenous Poisson process (Illian et al. 2008). CSR reflects no biotic or abiotic interactions at the spatial scales con- sidered (Illian et al. 2008; Velázquez et al. 2016). Where spatial patterns are not CSR, they can be aggregated (PCF > 1) or segre- gated (PCF < 1), and these patterns can be detected at a range of spatial scales and combinations of aggregations and segregations (Illian et al. 2008). Aggregation within a population can be caused by habitat associations, whereby organisms cluster within an area of preferable resources (cf. Shen et al. 2009), by dispersal-limited reproduction (cf. Mitchell et al. 2015; McFadden et al. 2019), or by both processes contemporaneously (Wiegand and Moloney 2014). Habitat-associated aggregation processes can be modeled by heterogenous Poisson (HP) processes (Wiegand and Moloney 2014), whereas reproductive aggregation can be modeled by Thomas cluster (TC) processes (Thomas 1949;Wiegand andMolo- ney 2014; Mitchell et al. 2015). Reproductive- and habitat- associated processes combined would thus be best modeled by Thomas clustering processes over a heterogenous background— inhomogenous Thomas clusters (ITC) (Illian et al. 2008). Random Labeling Analysis To understand whether complete Frac- tofusus specimens were clustered around fragments, a density map of the fragments using an Epanechnikov kernel (Wiegand and Moloney 2014) and a distance of 1.7 m was produced. A kernel of 1.7 m was used because this distance provided a balance between Figure 2. A, Stratigraphic map of Mistaken Point Ecological Reserve, Newfoundland, Canada (adapted from Matthews et al. 2021), with Brasier surface labeled. B, Brasier surface with complete (blue) and fragmented (red) Fractofusus andersoni specimens. 60 Nile P. Stephenson et al. https://github.com/nis38/NPS_dex.git https://github.com/nis38/NPS_dex.git https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.16921058 the locations of the fragments and the variation generated by them. This density map was used as a covariate in the HP and ITCmodels (Illian et al. 2008) in Programita (v. February 2014) (Wiegand 2014). CSR and HP models were fit using maximum-likelihood methods, and TC and ITC models were fit using minimum- contrast methods (Diggle and Gratton 1984; Baddeley 2015). To test whether a given PCF was best fit to any given theoretical model PCF, 9,999 Monte Carlo simulations were run for the theoretical process, and the simulation envelopes were chosen to be between the 5% highest and lowest values (Baddeley 2015). To investigate the differences in the spatial patterns between the whole versus fragmented Fractofusus specimens, we used random labeling analysis (RLA) (Getzin et al. 2006, 2008). RLAs are a type of SPPAwherein the positions of points remain the same, but the labels (here, fragmented vs. whole specimen) are randomly and repeatedly permuted (Jacquemyn et al. 2010; Raventós et al. 2010; Mitchell et al. 2018). As such, RLAs do not measure spatial segregation or aggre- gation and therefore do not test processes that resulted in the fossil’s location, but instead measure the differences in the spatial distribu- tions of the permuted labels (Getzin et al. 2008). To test whether fragments appeared in areas of high Fractofusus densities (high density dependence between fragments and whole specimens), we used the difference test, which detects where one type of pattern is in areas of high density of the joined point pattern (Wiegand and Moloney 2014); this test was used to detect density dependence of the fragments in the F. andersoni population on Brasier surface in Programita (v. November 2018) (Wiegand 2018). Diggle’s goodness-of-fit test (pd) was then used to quantitatively assess differences between the observed and simulated PCFs gen- erated by univariate SPPA and RLA. Diggle’s goodness-of-fit test provides a hypothesis test, with the alternative hypothesis being that the measured process (here, PCF of the fossil’s point pattern) departs from the modeled process over a specified, biologically relevant distance interval (e.g., 2–10 cm) (Diggle 2003). A high pd is interpreted to be a good model fit, alongside visual inspection of the simulation envelopes of the PCF plot, and a low pd is interpreted to be a bad model fit (Diggle 2003; Wiegand and Moloney 2014). Identifying Outliers and Impacts on Population and Community Ecology To test the hypothesis that the presence of outlier individ- uals has a substantial positive effect on community structure (relative abundances) and population spatial structure, we needed to first identify outliers. Rosner tests enable the quantitative iden- tification of multiple outliers from a distribution of data. Rosner tests produce a test statistic, R, Riþ1 = ∣xi��xi∣ si (1) where xi is the sample value, �xi is the sample mean and si is the standard deviation after the imost extreme observations have been removed. The hypothesis that there are k outliers is tested by comparing Rk to the critical value λk for a significance level α (here, α = 0.05) with outliers present where Rk > λk (Millard 2013). The larger the R value, the greater the outlier is from the rest of the distribution. We used Rosner tests from the EnvStats package (Millard 2013) in R on the height distribution of all abundant (n > 30) populations in our dataset to identify outliers of height distributions inferred to be potential survivors. We used height for all upright taxa, and one- third of the frond width for non-upright taxa Fractofusus and Hapsidophyllas as a proxy distance above the substrate (cf. Gehling and Narbonne 2007; Mitchell and Kenchington 2018). Statistically significant outliers were then assessed visually, and substantial outliers (>10 cm difference from the population mean height) were considered different enough to be survivors. Because, outliers are few individuals by definition, we had a low sample size with which to investigate their impact on population dynamics. We therefore noted whether outliers were representative of the most abundant taxa on a given surface. Kolmogorov- Smirnov (KS) tests (Kolmogorov 1933; Smirnov 1948) were used to test whether there were systematic changes in all population densities on a given surface with distance from each outlier with a heterogenous Poisson distribution compared to what was expected by random. KS tests were performed in the spatstat package in R (Baddeley 2015, 2024). Results We found fragments and outliers on 5 of 19 surfaces: fragments of Fractofusus andersoni on the Brasier surface, and outliers on the Brasier surface, Bed B, H26, Bishop’s Cove, and the E surface. Fragments We identified 407 complete F. andersoni specimens and 28 fragmen- ted specimens (Fig. 1B–I) on the Brasier surface (Fig. 2). We found that fragments had a significantly larger width than complete Fracto- fusus specimens (mean frond width: complete specimens = 1.05 cm, fragmented specimens = 3.40 cm; W = 1737, p < 0.001; Fig. 3). Figure 3. Differences in the width of fragments and complete specimens of Fractofusus andersoni on the Brasier surface. Asterisk denotes a statistically significant difference. Early animal recolonization strategies 61 Univariate Analysis of Complete Fractofusus Specimens Complete F. andersoni specimens on the Brasier surface were clustered in areas where fragment density was highest, indicated by a good fit to an ITC model (pd = 0.793, range = 0–20 cm; Fig. 4A), indicating reproductive clusters forming in high fragment-density areas. In comparison, a CSR model (pd < 0.001, range = 0–20 cm) indicating no biotic or abiotic effects, a TCmodel (pd < 0.001, range = 0–20 cm) indicating independence from the fragments, and an HP model (pd = 0.004, range = 0–20 cm) indicating no clustering within areas of high habitat preference all had poor fit. Random Labeling AnalysisWe found that fragments were in areas of high Fractofusus densities indicated by a deviation from CSR using RLA at small spatial scales (pd = 0.059, range = 2–10 cm; Fig. 4B). The RLA PCFs show us that the fragments and whole Fracto- fusus specimens on the Brasier surface are not alike, which suggests that the spatial patterns are unlikely to be caused by similar eco- logical processes (Fig. 4C). Survivors Eleven outlier specimens were identified from Rosner tests and subsequent visual assessment from seven populations across four surfaces (Table 1, Supplementary Table S1): three Charnia, two Primocandelabrum spp., and one Charniodiscus sp. specimen on Bed B; two “Taxon B” (an undescribed unifoliate rangeomorph frond) specimens on the Brasier surface; one Brad- gatia sp. on the Bishop’s Cove surface; and one Charniodiscus procerus specimen on the E surface (Fig. 5). An outsized Primo- candelabrum sp. specimen on H26 was also identified qualitatively, but the population on H26 was too small to apply subsequent quantitative analyses (Supplementary Table S1). All of these outlier specimens were therefore interpreted to be survivors from a dis- turbance event (cf. Wilby et al. 2015). We observed that in 9 of 11 cases, the survivors represented the most abundant taxa on their respective surfaces, except for “Taxon B,” which was second most abundant behind F. andersoni on the Brasier surface and Charnio- discus procerus on the E surface (Supplementary Table S2). Notably, across all seven populations, there was no apparent signal from the presence or absence of stems: Primocandelabrum and Charniodis- cus have stems and Charnia, Bradgatia, and “Taxon B” do not. All KS tests comparing a heterogenous Poisson-distributed intensity from each outlier to a random distribution were nonsig- nificant (i.e., p > 0.05) (Supplementary Table S3), indicating no association between outsize specimens (survivors) and conspecific population densities. Discussion After environmental disturbance, extant organisms use both local- (meter-scale) and long-distance (greater than kilometer-scale) dis- persal processes to recolonize environments (Wild et al. 2014; Brunner et al. 2022; Kim et al. 2022; Burt et al. 2024). We tested how two types of local recolonization processes—reproductively active fragments of Fractofusus and outsize (presumed surviving) individuals—influenced the post-disturbance communities in the Avalon. Our spatial analyses showed that fragments of Fractofusus on the Brasier surface showed a positive density-dependent corre- lation with smaller, complete Fractofusus fossils. The dominance of Fractofusus on this surface (77.1% relative abundance), coupled with our results, are consistent with the hypothesis that fragments were reproductively active on the Brasier surface and aided in recolonization and therefore influenced secondary community succession. From our results, we interpret that a disturbance event damaged a previous population of Fractofusus, leading to fragmen- tation of full specimens. These fragments then reproductively seeded the preserved population of Fractofusus on the Brasier surface. Our results provide evidence that fragmentary Figure 4. A, Pair correlation function (PCF) plot for inhomogenous Thomas cluster model for Fractofusus andersoni on the Brasier surface with the inhomogenous back- ground generated from the density of fragments. B, PCF plot for density-dependent random labeling of fragments of F. andersoni on the Brasier surface. PCF in blue, simulation envelope in gray. Excursions above the simulation envelope indicate more fragments are present in areas of higher Fractofusus densities at a given distance r. C, PCFs of complete (blue) and fragmented (yellow) F. andersoni specimens on the Brasier surface. Envelope generated from complete spatial randomness model of complete Fractofusus specimens. 62 Nile P. Stephenson et al. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.16921058 https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.16921058 https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.16921058 https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.16921058 reproduction is an effective recolonization mechanism (Fig. 6) and provide the first evidence supporting reproduction from fragments (as opposed to putative budding, waterborne propagules, or stolon from complete specimens) in early animals in the Avalon. We found that Fractofusus fragments on the Brasier surface were significantly wider than complete specimens (Fig. 4), indicating that fragments were adults in the previous community, and smaller, complete specimens represent a young, post-disturbance generation. It could be that only fragments of adults from the previous community are found on Brasier surface because the disturbance event that caused fragmentation also removed smaller individuals as a consequence of size-sorting processes. It is note- worthy that Fractofusus appears to be the most reproductively plastic Avalon taxon (waterborne [Darroch et al. 2013; Mitchell et al. 2015], stolon [Mitchell et al. 2015; Liu and Dunn 2020; Delahooke et al. 2024], and fragmentary reproduction described here), although detection of reproductive plasticity could be due to high abundance of Fractofusus enabling a higher likelihood of detection afforded by greater statistical power. Post-fragmentation reproductive methods are hard to disentangle; radii (2σ) of clusters from the ITCmodel on the Brasier surface were 6.9 cm, comparable to radii on other Avalon surfaces where reproductive Fractofusus clusters have been suggested to be stoloniferous (8.6 cm on D surface, 7.3 cm on E surface, and 5.7 cm on H14 [Mitchell et al. 2015; Supplementary Material]). We found no evidence of regrowth in any fragments (also noted in Dunn et al. [2025]) and no evidence of stolon rip-up structures. We do not know whether the fragmented specimens originated from within the mapped area or had been moved potentially large distances from outside the mapped area. The Brasier surface is an early-succession community (Stephenson et al. 2024), so because Avalon communities do not Figure 5. Height distributions of the outlier specimens (red arrowheads) identified by Rosner tests with >10 cm difference from the population’s mean height (black arrowheads). Cartoons represent taxa: A, yellow Charnia on Bed B; B, yellow Primocandelabrum on Bed B; C, pink Charniodiscus on Bed B; D, red “Taxon B” on Brasier surface; E, pink Charniodiscus procerus on E surface; F, orange Bradgatia sp. on Bishop’s Cove. Table 1. Populations with outliers identified by Rosner tests. Each Rosner statistic (R1, R2, and R3) represents the statistic for an outsized individual. Surface Taxon R1 R2 R3 Brasier “Taxon B” 6.78 4.25 Bed B Charnia masoni 5.50 6.70 3.38 Bed B Charniodiscus spp. 4.49 Bed B Primocandelabrum spp. 7.70 4.86 H26 Primocandelabrum sp. 3.52 Bishop’s Cove Bradgatia sp. 4.18 E surface Charniodiscus procerus 3.37 Early animal recolonization strategies 63 https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.16921058 Figure 6. Planar view schematic of the processes leading to secondary Fractofusus colonization on the Brasier surface. (1) Later-succession, pre-disturbance Fractofusus-dominated community; (2) a sedimentary disturbance; (3) fragmentary remains of Fractofusus (blue) generated from the pre-disturbance community settled onto the post-disturbance substrate; (4) the post-disturbance community later in the succession—secondary processes have led to the dominance of Fractofusus due to the ecological impacts of fragments, and other taxa (yellow and red frondomorphs) have arrived via long-distance dispersal but have lower abundances. Each panel is accompanied by the expected spatial pattern of organisms for each stage of the process; the colors of points correspond to the colors of the cartoons. Gray points indicate individuals killed by the sedimentation event depicted in stage 2. Purple substrate on stage 1 indicates substrate of the previous (not fossilized) Brasier surface community, whereas orange substrate on stages 3 and 4 indicates substrate of fossilized Brasier surface community deposited by a disturbance event (stage 2). 64 Nile P. Stephenson et al. undergo turnover during succession but instead accumulate diver- sity while maintaining similar community compositions, it is plau- sible that the Brasier community could have matured to look similar to later-stage Fractofusus andersoni–dominated communi- ties such as the Goldmine or H14 surfaces. On the D, E, and H14 surfaces—all dominated by Fractofusus, but later in succession than Brasier (Stephenson et al. 2024)—we observed Fractofusus frag- ments, but in much lower relative abundances (0.1%, 0.3%, and 0.3% on D, E, and H14 surfaces, respectively; Supplementary Table S2). Fragments on later-stage surfaces may indicate that fragmentation could have influenced the community ecology of these surfaces earlier in succession alongside presumed long-distance, waterborne propagule effects (Clapham et al. 2003; Mitchell et al. 2015; Eden et al. 2022) by contributing to Fractofusus dominance. It is possible (although not known) that these cryptic fragments could result in “fairy ring”–like patterns of F. andersoni, which could be areas where a fragment was present, but has since decayed—a qualitative pattern observed on the H14 surface (Supplementary Fig. S1). In contrast to the fragments, surviving fronds (those that were outliers in a population’s height distribution) had minimal impact on the spatial population ecology in the 11 instances in which they were found. However, we note that, as in Wilby et al. (2015), 9 of 11 outlier individuals were representative of one of the most common taxa where they were found (the exceptions being “Taxon B” on the Brasier surface, which was the second most abundant taxon [10.9% relative abundance], and Charniodiscus procerus on the E surface [2.9% relative abundance]). While not included in the mapped areas of our dataset, we are aware of at least two other instances of outlier individuals that do not repre- sent the most abundant taxon in the community: the holotype Pectinifrons specimen on Mistaken Point North (Bamforth et al. 2008: fig. 4) is much larger than all other specimens on the surface, which also have low abundance; and the large Frondophyllas grandis specimen on Lower Mistaken Point (Bamforth and Nar- bonne 2009: fig. 2.2), which is one of only three Frondophyllas specimens on the surface. Our results show that there is no significant benefit to survival of disturbances through increased height, suggesting that height may not have evolved to survive disturbance events. Our results show that outlier specimens are present in 5 of 19 communities, with outliers representing the most abundant taxa for 5 of 7 populations (on 3 out of 5 communities). The taxonomic identity of outliers results from a combination of random chance (which specimens get smothered, or not) and the relative abun- dances of the species (the greater the abundance, the more likely a single representative is to survive). The variation of taxonomic identity (Fig. 5) shows a lack of species-specific signal to survival. Therefore, the outliers were likely to be from the most abundant taxa within the pre-disturbance communities. The similarities between the taxonomic identification of the outliers with the most abundant taxa in the post-disturbance communities suggest that the sources for both pre- and post-disturbance colonizations were similar and, because our results (Supplementary Table S3) excluded local recolonization from the outlier individuals (i.e., there is no increased density around or downstream of the outliers of conspe- cifics), these results instead suggest that it is long-distance dispersal (i.e., from outside the mapped communities) that is seeding new communities. Our results instead reinforce the role of height in reproduction for upright Avalon taxa, as increased height increases dispersal distance, but not local survival (Gaylord et al. 2002; Mitchell and Kenchington 2018), and provide further evidence of the importance of long-distance dispersal processes to Avalon community ecology (Mitchell and Kenchington 2018; Mitchell et al. 2019, 2020). In terms of time averaging on Avalon surfaces, there are two scales of time averaging that concern the analyses presented here: (1) environmentally condensed time averaging, where individuals from multiple communities, potentially separated by substantial periods of time and possibly representing different environmental regimes, appear to be preserved together; and (2) within-habitat time averaging, where multiple individuals from different genera- tions, including dead individuals, are preserved together (Kidwell 1997). On the Avalon bedding planes, environmentally condensed time averaging is limited, because it is highly unlikely to occur with soft-bodied preservation (Butterfield 2003; Liu et al. 2011, 2012, 2015; Mitchell et al. 2025). However, within-habitat time averaging on Avalon bedding planes can be present either in the form of decaying remains (Liu et al. 2011) or as survivors seeding secondary successions (Wilby et al. 2015). The decaying remains of frondose taxa can be characterized into three different groups: (1) decayed such that the body form is no longer identifiable, as seen in Ivesheadiomorphs (Liu et al. 2011); (2) partially decayed specimens such that details are missing, but the gross morphology is still identifiable as a frond, or perhaps even to genus or species level (see treatment of effaced fronds in Stephenson et al. [2024]); and (3) recently dead, but with no signs of decay, so not distinguishable from specimens living at the time of burial (also see “Discussion” in Mitchell et al. [2025]). Ivesheadiomorphs are not thought to con- tribute to any time averaging, because they are identifiable due to their morphology (Liu et al. 2011; Mitchell and Butterfield 2018; Mitchell et al. 2025). The impacts of effaced frond taphomorphs on our Fractofusus population analyses are minimal, because Fracto- fusus are unlikely to be incorrectly identified as a taphomorph (e.g., an effaced frond) due to their unique branching pattern and biterminal morphology (Matthews et al. 2021; Stephenson et al. 2024). The suggestion that the Mistaken Point communities are time averaged, insomuch as the assemblages preserved include multiple communities each separated by death events superimposed atop one another (thus potentially environmentally condensed) with limited distinction between the preservation of the fossils (cf. Antcliffe et al. 2015), is inconsistent with the statistical identi- fication of reproductive clusters with nonrandom spatial patterns between different size classes (Mitchell et al. 2015, 2019, 2025), log-normal size distributions within populations (Darroch et al. 2013), consistent features in Thectardis and Charniodiscus (which were implied to be taphomorphs) across multiple bedding planes (Clapham et al. 2003; Mitchell et al. 2019, 2025; Stephenson et al. 2024), and sedimentological evidence that the Mistaken Point bedding planes represent true substrates and so capture in situ paleocommunities representative of original ecosystems (McMahon et al. 2025). The impact of long-distance dispersal and colonization has been found through the primary colonization of barren substrates by waterborne Fractofusus (Mitchell et al. 2015), with lasting effects through subsequent development, because species turnover, envi- ronmental filtering, and interspecific interactions throughout suc- cession are limited (Stephenson et al. 2024). Between-community (within-metacommunity) evidence of the importance of dispersal limitation is seen in the metacommunity structure of the Avalon, where species-poor communities are subsets of species-rich com- munities (Eden et al. 2022). In this structure, species-poor Early animal recolonization strategies 65 https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.16921058 https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.16921058 https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.16921058 communities correspond to species-specific characteristics, which is a pattern found where there is a large species pool, with long- dispersal patterns leading to different community compositions (Presley et al. 2010). However, once the substrate has been colo- nized, local reproductive processes (fragmentation and different stoloniferous strategies [Mitchell et al. 2015; Liu and Dunn 2020; Delahooke et al. 2024] and putative budding [Pasinetti andMcIlroy 2023]) appear to have strong impacts on subsequent community succession. The capacity of Avalon taxa to exhibit both long- distance (Darroch et al. 2013; Mitchell et al. 2015) and these local reproductive modes (Mitchell et al. 2015; Delahooke et al. 2024; our results), perhaps mediated by the intensity of environmental dis- turbance, could be key in dictating community composition. While true analogues to Avalon ecosystems are limited in the Phanerozoic (Butterfield 2011; Mitchell and Pates 2025), in extant, regularly disturbed ecosystems, biological legacies are important contributors to post-disturbance community ecology (Nyström and Folke 2001;Wild et al. 2014; Bače et al. 2015; Pérez-Hernández and Gavilán 2021). In many modern deep-sea environments, par- ticularly in isolated environments such as hydrothermal vents, long-distance dispersal is an important component of community structuring (Brunner et al. 2022). Similarly, patchy disturbance generated by sedimentation events (such as turbidites in the Ava- lon) is likely to have produced large-scale heterogeneity andmosaic effects (Bigham et al. 2021), with long-distance dispersal helping to populate these patches. Given a global distribution of taxa such as Charnia in the Ediacaran (Grazhdankin et al. 2008; Darroch et al. 2013; Boddy et al. 2022; Wu et al. 2024), and an Avalon metacom- munity structure wherein the diversity of individual sites represents subsets of the total diversity pool within limited environmental specialization (Eden et al. 2022), coupled with our results showing the importance of local colonization strategies, it is likely that similar long-distance adaptations were in place in the Avalon. Similar patterns of intense disturbance alongside dispersal limita- tions are seen in the Antarctic deep sea (Griffiths et al. 2023), where most sessile organisms are dispersal limited (Thatje 2012), shaping high beta diversity (Thrush et al. 2010). Disturbance in the form of ice scours provides the major form of ecological turnover (Thatje 2012) in the absence of widespread predation (Smith et al. 2017; Khan et al. 2024), so that the survival of disturbance and occupation of refugia is of substantial ecological importance (Potthoff et al. 2006; Barnes and Conlan 2007), thus similar to the frequently disturbed Avalon communities. Therefore, the importance of a combination of long-distance dispersal and local recolonization effects in the Avalon is strikingly similar to trade-offs in some modern deep-sea organisms, as alternative colonization strategies in the Avalon reflect a combination of disturbance responses alongside the influence of long-distance dispersal from the sur- rounding metacommunity. Acknowledgments. Funding was provided by a School of Biological Sciences Balfour Studentship (PFAG/076) to NPS; a Natural Environment Research Council C-CLEAR DTP studentship (LBAG/265.03.G10) to KMD; a Natural Environment Research Council C-CLEAR DTP studentship (NE/S007164/1, with project reference 2889755) to PAB; Leverhulme Trust Funding (ECF-2018- 542) and from the Isaac Newton Trust (INT18.08(h)) to CGK; a Natural Environment Research Council Standard Grant (NE/P002412/1) and an Inde- pendent Research Fellowship (NE/S014756/1) to EGM. The Parks and Natural Areas Division, Department of Environment and Conservation, Government of Newfoundland and Labrador, provided permits to conduct research within the Mistaken Point Ecological Reserve (MPER) in 2010, 2016–2019, and 2021– 2023. Readers are advised that access to MPER is by scientific research permit only. Fossil surfaces in the Bonavista Peninsula and Bay Roberts area are protected under Reg. 67/11, of the Historic Resources Act 2011 and their access is only allowed under permit from the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador. Fieldwork in the Discovery Geopark and the Bay Roberts area was conducted under permit from the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador. Bed B forms part of a designated Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), protected in law and administered by Natural England. Access to Bed B casts was facilitated by BGS and P. Wilby. We thank F. Dunn for helpful discussion. We thank E. Samson for everything she does to support us and our work. Author Contribution. This work was conceptualized by N.P.S. and E.G.M. Data collection was carried out by N.P.S., K.M.D., N.B., B.W.T.R., C.G.K., and E.G.M., and the data were processed by N.P.S., K.M.D., and E.G.M. Statistical analyses were conducted by N.P.S., K.M.D., and E.G.M. The original draft was written by N.P.S., P.A.B., A.M., and E.G.M., and all authors contributed to the review and editing of the final manuscript. Competing Interests. The authors declare no conflicts of interest. Data Availability Statement. Code to reproduce this research is available at: https://github.com/nis38/NPS_dex and https://github.com/nis38/Secondary_ Succession. Data are available at the Dryad digital repository at https://doi. org/10.5061/dryad.66t1g1kcx and the Zenodo digital repository at https://doi. org/10.5281/zenodo.16921058. Literature Cited Antcliffe, J. B.,A. D. Hancy, and M. D. Brasier. 2015. A new ecological model for the�565Ma Ediacaran Biota of Mistaken Point, Newfoundland. Precam- brian Research 268:227–242. Aragonés Suarez, P., and S. P. Leys. 2022. The sponge pump as amorphological character in the fossil record. Paleobiology 48:446–61. Bače, R.,M. Svoboda, P. Janda, R. C. Morrissey, J. Wild, J. L. Clear, V. Čada, D. C. Donato, and H. Y. H. Chen. 2015. Legacy of pre-disturbance spatial pattern determines early structural diversity following severe disturbance in montane spruce forests. PLoS ONE 10(9):e0139214. Baddeley, A. 2015. Spatial Point Patterns: Methodology andApplications with R. 1st ed. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Fla. Baddeley, A. 2024. Spatstat: spatial point pattern analysis, model-fitting, sim- ulation, tests, R package version 3.1-1. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package= spatstat. Bamforth, E. L., and G. M. Narbonne. 2009. New Ediacaran rangeomorphs from Mistaken Point, Newfoundland, Canada. Journal of Paleontology 83: 897–913. Bamforth, E. L., andG.M.Narbonne, andM.M.Anderson. 2008. Growth and ecology of a multi-branched Ediacaran rangeomorph from the Mistaken Point Assemblage, Newfoundland. Journal of Paleontology 82:763–777. Barnes, D. K. A, and K. E. Conlan. 2007. Disturbance, colonization and development of Antarctic benthic communities. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 362:11–38. Benus, A. P. 1988. Faunas and depositional environments of the Upper Pre- cambrian through Lower Cambrian southeastern Newfoundland. Proceed- ings of Trace Fossils, Small Shelly Fossils and the Precambrian-Cambrian Boundary 463:18–52. Bigham, K. T.,A. A. Rowden,D. Leduc, and D. A. Bowden. 2021. Review and syntheses: impacts of turbidity flows on deep-sea benthic communities. Biogeosciences 18:1893–1908. Boan, P. C., S. D. Evans, C. M. S. Hall, and M. L. Droser. 2023. Spatial distributions of Tribrachidium, Rugoconites, and Obamus from the Ediacara Member (Rawnsley Quartzite), South Australia. Paleobiology 49: 601–620. Boan, P. C., S. D. Evans, and M. L. Droser. 2024. And now for something completely random: spatial distribution of Dickinsonia on the Ediacaran seafloor. Global and Planetary Change 238:104467. Boddy, C. E., E. G.Mitchell,A.Merdith, and A. G. Liu. 2022. Palaeolatitudinal distribution of the Ediacaran macrobiota. Journal of the Geological Society 179:jgs2021–030. Brasier, M. D., J. B. Antcliffe, and A. G. Liu. 2012. The architecture of Ediacaran fronds. Palaeontology 55:1105–1124. 66 Nile P. Stephenson et al. https://github.com/nis38/NPS_dex https://github.com/nis38/Secondary_Succession https://github.com/nis38/Secondary_Succession https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.66t1g1kcx https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.66t1g1kcx https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.16921058 https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.16921058 https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=spatstat https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=spatstat Brunner, O., C. Chen, T. Giguère, S. Kawagucci, V. Tunnicliffe, H. K. Watanabe, and S. Mitarai. 2022. Species assemblage networks identify regional connectivity pathways among hydrothermal vents in the Northwest Pacific. Ecology and Evolution 12:e9612. Burt, A. J., N. Vogt-Vincent, H. Johnson, A. Sendell-Price, S. Kelly, S. M. Clegg, C. Head, et al. 2024. Integration of population genetics with ocean- ographic models reveals strong connectivity among coral reefs across Sey- chelles. Scientific Reports 14:4936. Butterfield, N. J. 2003. Exceptional fossil preservation and the Cambrian Explosion. Integrative and Comparative Biology 43:166–177. Butterfield, N. J. 2011. Animals and the invention of the Phanerozoic Earth system. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 26:81–87. Clapham,M. E.,GuyM.Narbonne, and James G.Gehling. 2003. Paleoecology of the oldest known animal communities: Ediacaran assemblages atMistaken Point, Newfoundland. Paleobiology 29:527–144. Darroch, S. A. F., Marc Laflamme, and Matthew E. Clapham. 2013. Popula- tion structure of the oldest known macroscopic communities fromMistaken Point, Newfoundland. Paleobiology 39:591–608. Delahooke, K. M., A. G. Liu, N. P. Stephenson, and E. G. Mitchell. 2024. “Conga lines” of Ediacaran fronds: insights into the reproductive biology of early metazoans. Royal Society Open Science 11:231601. Dhungana, A., and E. G. Mitchell. 2021. Facilitating corals in an early Silurian deep‐water assemblage. Palaeontology 64:359–370. Diggle, P. J. 2003. Statistical analysis of spatial and spatio-temporal point patterns. 1st ed. Monographs on Statistics and Applied Probability. CRC Press, New York. Diggle, P. J., and R. J. Gratton. 1984. Monte Carlo methods of inference for implicit statistical models. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society B 46: 193–212. Dunn, F. S., A. G. Liu, D. V. Grazhdankin, P. B. Vixseboxse, J. Flannery- Sutherland, E. Green, S. Harris, P. R. Wilby, and, P. C. J. Donoghue. 2021. The developmental biology of Charnia and the eumetazoan affinity of the Ediacaran rangeomorphs. Science Advances 7(30):eabe0291. Dunn, F. S., C. G. Kenchington, L. A. Parry, J. W. Clark, R. S. Kendall, and P. R. Wilby. 2022. A crown-group cnidarian from the Ediacaran of Charn- wood Forest, UK. Nature Ecology and Evolution 6:1095–104. Dunn, F. S., P. C. J. Donoghue, and A. G. Liu. 2025. Morphogenesis of Fractofusus andersoni and the nature of early animal development. Nature Communications 16:3439. Eden, R., A. Manica, and E. G. Mitchell. 2022. Metacommunity analyses show an increase in ecological specialisation throughout the Ediacaran period. PLoS Biology 20:e3001289. Gaylord, B., D. C. Reed, P. T. Raimondi, L. Washburn, and S. R. McLean. 2002. A physically basedmodel of macroalgal spore dispersal in the wave and current-dominated nearshore. Ecology 83:1239–1251. Gehling, J. G., andG.MNarbonne. 2007. Spindle-shaped Ediacara fossils from the Mistaken Point Assemblage, Avalon Zone, Newfoundland. Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences 44:367–387. Getzin, S., C. Dean, F. He, J. A. Trofymow, K. Wiegand, and T. Wiegand. 2006. Spatial patterns and competition of tree species in a Douglas‐fir chronosequence on Vancouver Island. Ecography 29:671–682. Getzin, S.,T.Wiegand,K.Wiegand, and F.He. 2008. Heterogeneity influences spatial patterns and demographics in forest stands. Journal of Ecology 96: 807–820. Grassle, J. F. 1977. Slow recolonisation of deep-sea sediment. Nature 5595: 618–819. Grazhdankin, D. V.,U. Balthasar,K. E. Nagovitsin, and B. B. Kochnev. 2008. Carbonate-hosted Avalon-type fossils in Arctic Siberia. Geology 36:803. Griffiths, H. J., R. J. Whittle, and E. G. Mitchell. 2023. Animal survival strategies in Neoproterozoic ice worlds. Global Change Biology 29:10–20. Hofmann, H. J., S. J. O’Brien, and A. F. King. 2008. Ediacaran biota on Bonavista Peninsula, Newfoundland, Canada. Journal of Paleontology 82:1–36. Ichaso, A. A., R. W. Dalrymple, and G. M. Narbonne. 2007. Paleoenviron- mental and basin analysis of the Late Neoproterozoic (Ediacaran) Upper Conception and St. John’s Groups, West Conception Bay, Newfoundland. Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences 44:25–41. Illian, J.,A. Penttinen,H. Stoyan, and D. Stoyan. 2008. Statistical analysis and modelling of spatial point patterns. 1st ed. Wiley, Hoboken, N.J. Ivantsov, A.,M.Zakrevskaya,A.Nagovitsyn,A.Krasnova, I. Bobrovskiy, and E. Luzhnaya (Serezhnikova). 2020. Intravital damage to the body of Dick- insonia (Metazoa of the Late Ediacaran). Journal of Paleontology 94: 1019–1033. Jacquemyn, H., P. Endels, O. Honnay, and T. Wiegand. 2010. Evaluating management interventions in small populations of a perennial herb Primula vulgaris using spatio-temporal analyses of point patterns. Journal of Applied Ecology 47:431–440. Jõgiste, K., H. Korjus, J. A. Stanturf, L. E. Freelich, E. Baders, J. Donis, A. Jansons, et al. 2017. Hemiboreal forest: natural disturbances and the impor- tance of ecosystem legacies to management. Ecosphere 8:e01706. Kenchington, C. G., F. S. Dunn, and P. R. Wilby. 2018. Modularity and overcompensatory growth in Ediacaran rangeomorphs demonstrate early adaptations for coping with environmental pressures. Current Biology 28: 3330–3336.e2. Khan, T.M.,H. J. Griffiths,R. J.Whittle,N. P. Stephenson,K.M.Delahooke, A. Purser, A. Manica, and E. G. Mitchell. 2024. Network analyses on photographic surveys reveal that invertebrate predators do not structure epibenthos in the deep (~2000m) Rocky Powell Basin, Weddell Sea, Antarc- tica. Frontiers in Marine Science 11:1408828. Kidwell, S.M. 1997. Time-averaging in the marine fossil record: overview of strategies and uncertainties. Geobios 30:977–995. Kim, S., C. Wild, and A. Tilstra. 2022. Effective asexual reproduction of a widespread soft coral: comparative assessment of four different fragmenta- tion methods. PeerJ 10:e12589. Kolmogorov, A. 1933. Sulla determinazione empirica di una legge di distrubu- zione. Giornale Dell’Istituto Italiano Degli Attuari 4:83–91. Le Bas, M. J. 1984. Geological evidence from Leicestershire on the crust of southern Britain. Transactions of the Leicester Literary and Philosophical Society 76:54–67. Liu, A. G., and F. S. Dunn. 2020. Filamentous connections between Ediacaran fronds. Current Biology 30:1322–1328.e3. Liu, A. G., D. Mcilroy, J. B. Antcliffe, and M. D. Brasier. 2011. Effaced preservation in the Ediacara biota and its implications for the early macro- fossil record. Palaeontology 54:607–630. Liu, A. G., D. Mcilroy, J. J. Matthews, and M. D. Brasier. 2012. A new assemblage of juvenile Ediacaran fFronds from the Drook Formation, New- foundland. Journal of the Geological Society 169:395–403. Liu, A. G., C. G. Kenchington, and E. G. Mitchell. 2015. Remarkable insights into the paleoecology of the Avalonian Ediacaran macrobiota. Gondwana Research 27:1355–1380. Maldonado,M., andM. J. Uriz. 1999. Sexual propagation by sponge fragments. Nature 398:476. Mann, H. B., andD. R.Whitney. 1947. On a test of whether one of two random variables is stochastically larger than the other. Annals of Mathematical Statistics 18:50–60. Matthews, J. J., A. G Liu, C. Yang, D. McIlroy, B. Levell, and D. J. Condon. 2021. A chronostratigraphic framework for the rise of the Ediacaran macro- biota: new constraints from Mistaken Point Ecological Reserve, Newfound- land. GSA Bulletin 133: 612–624. McFadden, I. R., M. K. Bartlett, T. Wiegand, B. L. Turner, L. Sack, R. Valencia, and N. J. B. Kraft. 2019. Disentangling the functional trait corre- lates of spatial aggregation in tropical forest trees. Ecology 100:e02591. McMahon,W. J.,A. G. Liu, Y. P. Veenma, P. B. Vixseboxse, and C. E. Boddy. 2025. Remarkable fossils on unremarkable bedding planes? The role of true substrates in the fossil record of the Ediacaran macrobiota. Geological Society of London Special Publication 556:SP556-2024–108. Millard, S. P. 2013.EnvStats: an R package for environmental statistics. Springer, Seattle, Wash. Mitchell, E. G., and N. J. Butterfield. 2018. Spatial analyses of Ediacaran communities at Mistaken Point. Paleobiology 44:40–57. Mitchell, E. G., and S. Harris. 2020. Mortality, population and community dynamics of the glass sponge dominated community “The Forest of the Weird” from the Ridge Seamount, Johnston Atoll, Pacific Ocean. Frontiers in Marine Science 7:565171. Mitchell, E. G., and C. G. Kenchington. 2018. The utility of height for the Ediacaran organisms of Mistaken Point. Nature Ecology and Evolution 2: 1218–1222. Early animal recolonization strategies 67 Mitchell, E. G., and S. Pates. 2025. From organisms to biodiversity: the ecology of the Ediacaran/Cambrian Transition. Paleobiology 51:150–173. Mitchell, E. G., C. G. Kenchington, A. G. Liu, J. J. Matthews, and N. J. Butterfield. 2015. Reconstructing the reproductive mode of an Ediacaran macro-organism. Nature 524:343–346. Mitchell, E. G.,C. G. Kenchington, S. Harris, and P. R.Wilby. 2018. Revealing rangeomorph species characters using spatial analyses. Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences 55:1262–1270. Mitchell, E. G., S. Harris, C. G. Kenchington, P. B. Vixseboxse, L. Roberts, C. Clark, A. Dennis, A. G. Liu, and P. R. Wilby. 2019. The importance of neutral over niche processes in structuring Ediacaran early animal commu- nities. Ecology Letters 22:2028–2038. Mitchell, E. G., N. Bobkov, N. Bykova, A. Dhungana, A. V. Kolesnikov, I. R. P. Hogarth, A. G. Liu, et al. 2020. The influence of environmental setting on the community ecology of Ediacaran organisms. Interface Focus 10:20190109. Mitchell, E. G., N. P. Stephenson, P. A. Buma-at, L. Roberts, S. Dennis, and C. G. Kenchington. 2025. Variation of population and community ecology over large spatial scales in Ediacaran early animal communities. Global and Planetary Change 251:104818. Myrow, P. 1995. Neoproterozoic rocks of the Newfoundland Avalon Zone. Precambrian Research 73(1–4):123–136. Narbonne, G. M. 2004. Modular construction of early Ediacaran complex life forms. Science 305:1141–1144. Narbonne, G.M. 2005. The Ediacara biota: Neoproterozoic origin of animals and their ecosystems. Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences 33:421–42. Noble, S. R.,D. J. Condon, J. N. Carney, P. R.Wilby,T. C. Pharaoh, and T. D. Ford. 2015. U-Pb geochronology and global context of the Charnian Super- group, UK: constraints on the age of key Ediacaran fossil assemblages. Geological Society of America Bulletin 127. Nyström, M., and C. Folke. 2001. Spatial resilience of coral reefs. Ecosystems 4: 406–417. O’Brien, S. J., and A. F. King. 2005. Late Neoproterozoic (Ediacaran) stratig- raphy of Avalon Zone sedimentary rocks, Bonavista Peninsula, Newfound- land. Current Research 5:101–113. O’Brien, S. J., R. J. Wardle, and A. F. King. 1983. The Avalon Zone: a Pan‐ African terrane in the Appalachian Orogen of Canada.Geological Journal 18: 195–222. Okubo, N., T. Motokawa, and M. Omori. 2007. When fragmented coral spawn? Effect of size and timing on survivorship and fecundity of fragmen- tation in Acropora formosa. Marine Biology 151:353–363. Pasinetti, G., and D. McIlroy. 2023. Palaeobiology and taphonomy of the rangeomorph Culmofrons plumosa. Palaeontology 66:e12671. Pérez-Hernández, J., and R. G. Gavilán. 2021. Impacts of land-use changes on vegetation and ecosystem functioning: old-field secondary succession. Plants 10:990. Pharaoh, T. C., P. C.Webb,R. S. Thorpe, and R. D. Beckinsale. 1987. Geochem- ical evidence for the tectonic setting of late Proterozoic volcanic suites in central England. Geological Society of London Special Publication 33:541–552. Potthoff, M.,K. Johst, and J. Gutt. 2006. How to survive as a pioneer species in the Antarctic benthos: minimum dispersal distance as a function of lifetime and disturbance. Polar Biology 29:543–551. Presley, S. J.,C. L.Higgins, andM.R.Willig. 2010. A comprehensive framework for the evaluation of metacommunity structure. Oikos 119:908–917. Raventós, J., T. Wiegand, and M. De Luis. 2010. Evidence for the spatial segregation hypothesis: a test with nine‐year survivorship data in a Mediter- ranean shrubland. Ecology 91:2110–2120. R Core Team. 2023. R: a language and environment for statistical computing, Version 4.2.2. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. http://www.R-project.org. Rojas, A., G. P. Dietl, M. Kowalewski, R. W. Portell, A. Hendy, and J. K. Blackburn. 2020. Spatial point pattern analysis of traces (SPPAT): an approach for visualizing and quantifying site-selectivity patterns of drilling predators. Paleobiology 46:259–271. Rojas, A., J.W.Huntley,M.Caffara, andD. Scarponi. 2025. Spatial patterns of trematode-induced pits on bivalve skeletons: challenges and prospects for research on parasite-host dynamics. bioRXiv. https://doi.org/10.1101/ 2025.03.13.643152. Runnegar, B. 2022. Following the logic behind biological interpretations of the Ediacaran biotas. Geological Magazine 159:1093–1117. Seilacher, A. 1999. Biomat-related lifestyles in the Precambrian. Palaios 14:86. Shen, G.,M. Yu, X.-S. Hu, X. Mi,H. Ren, I. F. Sun, and K. Ma. 2009. Species– area relationships explained by the joint effects of dispersal limitation and habitat heterogeneity. Ecology 90:3033–3041. Smirnov, N. 1948. Table for estimating the goodness of fit of empirical distri- butions. Annals of Mathematical Statistics 19:279–281. Smith, K. E.,R. B. Aronson,B. V. Steffel,M.O. Amsler, S. Thatje,H. Singh, J. Anderson, et al. 2017. Climate change and the threat of novel marine predators in Antarctica. Ecosphere 8:e02017. Sperling, E. A., K. J. Peterson, and M. Laflamme. 2011. Rangeomorphs, Thectardis (Porifera?) and dissolved organic carbon in the Ediacaran oceans: rangeomorphs, Thectardis and DOC. Geobiology 9:24–33. Stephenson, N. P., K. M. Delahooke, N. Barnes,B. W. T. Rideout, C. G. Kenchington, A. Manica, and E. G. Mitchell. 2024. Morphology shapes community dynamics in early animal ecosystems. Nature Ecology and Evo- lution 8:1238–1247. Thatje, S. 2012. Effects of capability for dispersal on the evolution of diversity in Antarctic benthos. Integrative and Comparative Biology 52:470–482. Thomas, M. 1949. A generalization of Poisson’s binomial limit for use in ecology. Biometrika 36:18–25. Thrush, S. F., J. E. Hewitt, V. J. Cummings, A. Norkko, and M. Chiantore. 2010. β-Diversity and species accumulation in Antarctic coastal benthos: influence of habitat, distance and productivity on ecological connectivity. PLoS ONE 5:e11899. Velázquez, E., I. Martínez, S. Getzin, K. A. Moloney, and T. Wiegand. 2016. An evaluation of the state of spatial point pattern analysis in ecology. Ecography 39:1042–1055. Vixseboxse, P. B., C. G. Kenchington, F. S. Dunn, and E. G. Mitchell. 2021. Orientations of Mistaken Point fronds indicate morphology impacted ability to survive turbulence. Frontiers in Earth Science 9:762824. Wiegand, T. 2014. Programita. V. February 2014. Wiegand, T. 2018. Programita. V. November 2018. https://programita.org/. Wiegand, T., and K. A. Moloney. 2014. Handbook of spatial point-pattern analysis in ecology, 1st ed. CRC Press, New York. Wilby, P.R., C.G. Kenchington, and R.L. Wilby. 2015. Role of low intensity environmental disturbance in structuring the earliest (Ediacaran) macro- benthic tiered communities. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoe- cology 434:14–27. Wild, J.,M.Kopecký,M. Svoboda, J. Zenáhlíková,M. Edwards‐Jonášová, and T.Herben. 2014. Spatial patterns withmemory: tree regeneration after stand‐ replacing disturbance in Picea abies mountain forests. Journal of Vegetation Science 25:1327–1340. Wood, D. A., R. W. Dalrymple, G. M. Narbonne, J. G. Gehling, and M. E. Clapham. 2003. Paleoenvironmental analysis of the late Neoproterozoic Mistaken Point and Trepassey Formations, southeastern Newfoundland. Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences 40:1375–1391. Wu, C., K. Pang, Z. Chen, X. Wang, C. Zhou, B. Wan, X. Yuan, and S. Xiao. 2024. The rangeomorph fossil Charnia from the Ediacaran Shibantan Biota in the Yangtze Gorges area, South China. Journal of Paleontology 98: 232–248. 68 Nile P. Stephenson et al. http://www.R-project.org https://doi.org/10.1101/2025.03.13.643152 https://doi.org/10.1101/2025.03.13.643152 https://programita.org/ Recolonization strategies of early animals in the Avalon (Ediacaran 574-560 Ma) Introduction Geological Setting Materials and Methods Material Spatial Analysis of Fragments Univariate Analysis of Complete Fractofusus Specimens Random Labeling Analysis Identifying Outliers and Impacts on Population and Community Ecology Results Fragments Univariate Analysis of Complete Fractofusus Specimens Random Labeling Analysis Survivors Discussion Acknowledgments Author Contribution Competing Interests Data Availability Statement Literature Cited