[HN Gopher] Dinosaur Food: 100M year old foods we still eat toda...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Dinosaur Food: 100M year old foods we still eat today (2022)
        
       Author : simonebrunozzi
       Score  : 86 points
       Date   : 2026-02-19 15:30 UTC (7 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (borischerny.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (borischerny.com)
        
       | munificent wrote:
       | If you don't restrict the list to living things, then salt and
       | water are surely the oldest answers. :)
        
         | procaryote wrote:
         | Hydrogen ions are edible, although usually dissolved in water.
         | Hydrogen ions existed before oxygen or water
        
           | austinjp wrote:
           | Yep, I ensure I ingest a healthy amount of plain old-
           | fashioned protons. Surely among nature's most ancient foods.
        
         | siriaan wrote:
         | Don't forget dirt -
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geophagia#Humans
        
       | kleiba wrote:
       | Hands up who has ever eaten anything from that list!
        
         | mgh2 wrote:
         | Water caltrop nuts are common in Taiwan, very nutty and good
         | for meat soups.
        
         | ch4s3 wrote:
         | Lotus root is pretty common in Chinese and Japanese cuisine.
         | I've had it pickled and in a Sichuan dry pot. It's crunchy and
         | takes on flavors pretty well.
        
           | arunc wrote:
           | We use it in cuisines from India, particularly from Tamil
           | nadu, as well. Lotus root, seeds, the petals, pretty much
           | all.
        
         | droopyEyelids wrote:
         | Lotus root is pretty common. A crunchy tuber that keeps its
         | texture after cooking, bland taste, unique visual appeal. I
         | threw some in the last pot of bean chili my family made, and
         | the kids liked it.
        
         | embedding-shape wrote:
         | I think this might say more about your geographic location than
         | you think :)
         | 
         | People from other continents always surprise me with various
         | fruits they taken for granted their entire life, but I've never
         | heard about, and vice-versa.
        
           | SideburnsOfDoom wrote:
           | > I think this might say more about your geographic location
           | than you think
           | 
           | Clearly, for instance Welwitschia (1) listed. I think this
           | says a lot about location.
           | 
           | It's a fascinating plant, but it is an endangered species,
           | endemic to the Namib desert. And as far as I know, not that
           | commonly eaten.
           | 
           | 1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welwitschia
        
         | zdragnar wrote:
         | Fern fiddleheads aren't bad if you get them at the right time,
         | but I wouldn't go out of my way to eat them.
        
         | CGMthrowaway wrote:
         | Whoever smelled a ginkgo fruit and said "let's eat this" !
        
           | rbanffy wrote:
           | Our sense of smell also evolved in the past couple thousand
           | years. And the further back you go, the hungrier our ancestor
           | will be.
           | 
           | I need to get food at the market, not wait for it to fall
           | into a trap or fight it to death.
        
         | magneticnorth wrote:
         | Fiddleheads from ferns are available at farmer's markets in the
         | spring in my area, though not from the cinnamon fern
         | specifically.
         | 
         | I'm having trouble finding sources for other specific fern
         | species, though many ferns have been around for hundreds of
         | millions of years.
        
           | 2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote:
           | I used to get them at Whole Foods in Nashua, NH. They're
           | quite seasonal so I'd always grab some if I see em.
        
         | heathrow83829 wrote:
         | my wife and I regularly eat lotus root, it's quite delicious
         | and common in chinese cooking. the others not so much.
         | 
         | On a side note there are 1000s even 10s of thousand of edible
         | plant based species that grow on the earth. i don't know how
         | old they are though.
        
         | justincormack wrote:
         | Apparently monkey puzzle nuts are great, I keep meaning to find
         | some they do seem to seed around here sometimes but they are
         | hard to reach.
        
       | droopyEyelids wrote:
       | Seeing my neighbors gathering ginkgo nuts made me curious enough
       | to try them, and I waded right in without understanding the
       | risks! TLDR-- they're not a great food source. It's yet another
       | one of those cases where you have to wonder what "delicacy"
       | means.
       | 
       | The actual fruit (looks like a rotten plum, smells terrible) has
       | ginkgolic acids which cause contact dermatitis (think poison
       | ivy).
       | 
       | Then the nuts themselves contain Ginkgotoxin, which interferes
       | with your B6, screwing up your nervous system and causing
       | seizures. Cooking reduces but does not eliminate Ginkgotoxin.
       | 
       | I only ate one, and ate it raw. It was a delightful texture, but
       | tasted like chewing random plant matter. Like leaves from a tree.
       | Was maybe half a cubic centimeter of matter. Escaped any ill
       | effects.
       | 
       | According to my research, kids can have seizures from as few as
       | 10 nuts, which would probably be like 1.5 spoonfuls if you mashed
       | them up. The guidelines I found don't seem very scientific but
       | supposedly a kid can safely handle 3-5 nuts over the course of a
       | day, and an adult could handle 5-10. So it doesn't seem like
       | there is a good margin of safety.
       | 
       | Overall a real risk to health for an insignificant amount of food
       | that doesn't taste special. But a nice texture.
        
         | BigTTYGothGF wrote:
         | > contact dermatitis
         | 
         | Lots of food is like this, for example mangoes.
        
         | fellowniusmonk wrote:
         | I eat foods with long history of co-evolution and
         | domestication.
         | 
         | Barley and Yogurt, they are the dogs we domesticated from
         | wolves that changed us too.
         | 
         | Daily barley water is a life changer, I don't think our
         | digestive systems really function without a smidgen of daily
         | barley.
        
         | groos wrote:
         | In university, one year, our building started smelling like
         | there had been a sewage overflow. Pretty soon, everything
         | around started smelling like this - the stores, restaurants,
         | cinema, etc. in central campus was stinking. It was soon found
         | out that the decorative Ginko trees planted in the central part
         | of campus were fruiting (probably for the first time since
         | planting) and the fruit was getting crushed underfoot and
         | carried everywhere. The smell took a few weeks to go away.
        
         | avadodin wrote:
         | What's up with the ginkgo hate on this story?
         | 
         | The roasted or cooked nut of the ginkgo tastes good and is
         | filling. Not something to eat in volume anyways. You'd probably
         | quit before any toxicity.
         | 
         | The fruit looks appetizing and at most smells a little funky
         | when there are tons of them around a female tree.
         | 
         | I have always known it's inedible to humans so I have never
         | tried but it could taste like custard given its color.
         | Presumably whatever used to disperse it could eat it.
         | 
         | Other coniferous arils are tasty and sweet like yew for example
         | even though the nut is supposed to be very poisonous.
        
       | ge96 wrote:
       | People eat Horseshoe Crabs? No way, but their precious blood give
       | me
        
         | OJFord wrote:
         | 'eaten as a delicacy in some parts of Asia' according to
         | Wikipedia, but to be fair OP is only asserting _possibilities_
         | anyway (the criteria are 1) old enough to have been around for
         | dinosaurs to eat; 2) _edible_ by humans).
        
         | throwup238 wrote:
         | Technically they eat the roe. Horseshoe crabs have very little
         | meat and it's so tough as to be practically inedible.
        
       | irishcoffee wrote:
       | "We still eat today" vs. "Someone consumed this today" is
       | disingenuous at best.
        
       | notorandit wrote:
       | Meat
        
         | plaguna wrote:
         | Which one?
        
           | JohnMakin wrote:
           | Maybe pythons - some types of crocodile/alligators. But
           | that's very region specific.
        
             | rbanffy wrote:
             | Sharks as well.
        
           | icameron wrote:
           | Sturgeon. Maybe lamprey (I've never tried it)
        
             | Earw0rm wrote:
             | Molluscs? Snails have been around a very long time in one
             | form or another.
        
               | Earw0rm wrote:
               | Oysters and other bivalves too...
        
           | seszett wrote:
           | Catshark maybe, although I don't know if that species in
           | particular is old enough.
        
       | magneticnorth wrote:
       | This is an interesting way to think about plants and animals.
       | 
       | I'm finding it surprisingly hard to find sources for known age of
       | species - is that information collected somewhere? Or is it
       | something we often just don't know because of how sparse the
       | fossil record is?
       | 
       | Wondering because of trying to look up the age of fern species I
       | do eat (no cinnamon fern near me) and I can't find out.
        
         | throwup238 wrote:
         | _> I 'm finding it surprisingly hard to find sources for known
         | age of species - is that information collected somewhere? Or is
         | it something we often just don't know because of how sparse the
         | fossil record is?_
         | 
         | It depends on what you mean by the age of the species. You can
         | find the oldest known fossil occurrence at the Paleobiology
         | Database [1] and the divergence time from molecular phylogenies
         | via TimeTree [2].
         | 
         | [1] https://paleobiodb.org/
         | 
         | [2] https://timetree.org/
        
         | cogman10 wrote:
         | That's because when something becomes a new species is a
         | surprisingly difficult and contentious debate in biology.
         | 
         | That's simply due to the nature of evolution. It's nearly
         | impossible to look at one past generation of chicken to the
         | next to figure out when the ancestor was no longer a chicken.
         | Yet, go back far enough and you'll find T-Rexes in the mix.
         | 
         | Every generation is a new missing link. It's an extremely fuzzy
         | process.
        
           | b112 wrote:
           | Greg Bear and his fancy pants radio says otherwise.
        
           | usrnm wrote:
           | > Yet, go back far enough and you'll find T-Rexes in the mix
           | 
           | Afaik, T-Rex was never a direct ancestor of modern birds,
           | including chicken. T-Rex and birds are theropod dinosaurs,
           | but it was a very large and diverse group of animals.
        
             | thaumasiotes wrote:
             | But as soon as you've gone up from a chicken to the
             | ancestor of a T-Rex, you do indeed find that T-Rexes are in
             | the mix. They look different from what you'd normally think
             | of as a T-Rex, in the same way that they also look
             | different from what you'd normally think of as a chicken.
        
           | b00ty4breakfast wrote:
           | turns out evolution is analog
        
           | technothrasher wrote:
           | This is because "species" is a taxonomical category that we
           | invented, but that does not actually map cleanly to reality.
        
           | vardump wrote:
           | T-Rex nuggets. Mmmm...
        
         | andrewflnr wrote:
         | It's pretty tricky to find out, yeah. And new evidence is
         | coming in all the time. All the methods are either floors (a
         | fossil at X date proves a species existed then, but lack of
         | fossils found _yet_ might be inconclusive) or estimates (like
         | molecular clock techniques). Dating fossils themselves (or
         | rather the rocks they 're buried in) isn't always easy or
         | possible. For more out-of-the-way species, if anyone has
         | bothered trying to figure out the age it's likely buried in
         | scientific sources that are tricky for novices to find or
         | search, and maybe under debate.
        
           | psychoslave wrote:
           | That make wonder, how many fossils there might be at total on
           | earth, and with current trend, how much time would humanity
           | should continue to survive before those remaining will
           | approach zero, if fossil formation as a known rate.
        
             | throwup238 wrote:
             | _> how many fossils there might be at total on earth_
             | 
             | The number is both incalculable and vague - is a shark
             | tooth enough to count as a fossil? How about diatoms and
             | other microfossils?
             | 
             | Diatomaceous earth alone contains around 10^6-10^7
             | frustules (the shell of a diatom) _per gram_. If you count
             | them as fossils then the lower bound is 10^18 fossils _per
             | year_ just in diatomaceous earth production (the fossils
             | are ancient but we produce nearly a million tons a year in
             | diatomaceous earth).
        
               | hnlmorg wrote:
               | If you have a fossil, and break it in half, then do you
               | now have two fossils?
        
             | bubblewand wrote:
             | Immense numbers. Quarries destroy them by the (enormous)
             | truckload all the time, unexamined, god knows what cool
             | unknown stuff has been ground up. Entire kinds of rock are
             | basically _made of_ fossils, not even always the really
             | tiny kind (note: fossils can be microscopic!)
             | 
             | Then consider what's buried under the sea, totally
             | inaccessible. Or under the ice at the poles.
             | 
             | It's _a lot_ of fossils. And that 's without even getting
             | into questions like "what counts as a fossil for these
             | purposes?", just any halfway sensible answer is going to
             | leave you with an unfathomably big number, no need to even
             | dig (ha, ha) into the specifics.
             | 
             | The places scientists go to dig up fossils are mostly where
             | a particular stratum happens to exist (the crust gets
             | recycled, so much of the oldest stuff is simply gone in
             | most of the world) _and_ happens to be exposed near the
             | surface. Those same kinds of (for the more common strata,
             | anyway) exist all over the place, just buried too deep to
             | get at except, sometimes, during commercial excavation for
             | things like mining (and then most of it 's just gonna be
             | destroyed without a look).
        
       | 2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote:
       | No fiddle heads?
       | 
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiddlehead
        
       | smm11 wrote:
       | I take Gingo three times a week, and eat Horseshoe Crab a few
       | times a year.
        
       | neuroelectron wrote:
       | I thought avocados were where old food eaten by dinosaurs or at
       | least very large ancient rodents. I guess it doesn't meet the 100
       | million year old age mark.
        
         | andrewflnr wrote:
         | It was once thought that giant ground sloths were important for
         | spreading avocados, but that seems to have been a mistake.
         | Anyway, that was long after the dinosaurs. Flowering plants in
         | general were still pretty new by the time the dinosaurs died
         | out. I bet an actual dinosaur never saw an avocado. :)
         | 
         | Edit: transcript of a video about the sloth/avocado thing:
         | https://nerdfighteria.info/v/jpcBgYYFS8o
        
       | andrewflnr wrote:
       | Fun idea. At least one correction for the table: For wila/bryorii
       | fremonti's age of 250mya they cite the "geologic history" of...
       | moss. Wila is a lichen, which is primarily fungal with algal
       | symbiotes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bryoria_fremontii And
       | even given an edible moss, the fact that moss existed 250mya
       | would not imply that particular species existed "morphologically
       | unchanged". The "reindeer lichen" entry appears to have the same
       | issue.
        
       | kilpikaarna wrote:
       | Reindeer lichen is not a moss (Wiki link), or even a Plantae...
        
       | smoll wrote:
       | isn't Sago Palm (Cycas revoluta) highly toxic? i don't think it's
       | edible...
        
         | procaryote wrote:
         | It's a staple food in some cultures. It needs preprocessing,
         | but people have been doing that for a while
        
         | rbanffy wrote:
         | A lot of vegetables are toxic when raw, but safe after cooking.
         | My favorite among these is mandioca, when it's cooked and then
         | fried. Goes well with churrasco.
        
       | hnlmorg wrote:
       | I wonder if there are any fungi that would make that list?
        
       | trilogic wrote:
       | The theory of evolution didn't work on Horseshow crab? Darwin did
       | you read that. Maybe nasa should read it too :)
        
         | rbanffy wrote:
         | Evolution rarely escape local maxima.
        
       | whyenot wrote:
       | Gnetum genom does not have a good fossil record, as is the case
       | for many tropical species, but based on molecular clock data, the
       | genus dates to the late Cretaceous-Paleogene boundary (66 mya).
       | Gnetum is a really weird gymnosperm, not a flowering plant,
       | although it does produce fleshy "cones" (strobili). In Indonesia,
       | the seeds are smashed and deep fried to make crisps called
       | "emping".
       | 
       | https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.12705/642.12
        
       | rbanffy wrote:
       | Not sure the same crocodiles and sharks we have today were food
       | back than, but current ones are delicious.
        
       | zkmon wrote:
       | Avocado. I heard it was dinosaur food. Read an article somewhere
       | that says Avacdo trees think that dinosaurs are still around.
        
         | SAI_Peregrinus wrote:
         | Funnily enough they're toxic to all remaining dinosaurs.
        
         | SideburnsOfDoom wrote:
         | > Avocado. I heard it was dinosaur food.
         | 
         | Nope, and this is trivial to check. Source:
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avocado#Taxonomy_and_evolution
         | 
         | The proposed seed dispersers are now-extinct mammalian
         | megafauna. Much more recent than the dinosaurs - 10k to 100k
         | years ago.
        
           | tgbugs wrote:
           | A great related article on mammalian megafauna and plants.
           | https://www.americanforests.org/article/the-trees-that-
           | miss-...
        
       | golem14 wrote:
       | Aren't sea cucumbers 400M+ years old and common in Chinese
       | cuisine?
        
       | kazinator wrote:
       | Birds are dinosaurs, and we eat a lot of chicken.
        
         | gpt5 wrote:
         | True. And all land vertebrates are technically fish.
        
           | whyenot wrote:
           | They share a common ancestor with ancient fish, yes. Land
           | mammals also share a common ancestor with starfish. That
           | doesn't make them starfish.
        
             | eesmith wrote:
             | The "humans are fish" idea comes from cladistics.
             | 
             | "Fish", if taken as a monophyletic term, includes land
             | mammals because tetrapods are osteichthyans -- bony fish.
             | 
             | In common use, "fish" is, however a paraphyletic group
             | which excludes tetrapods but otherwise includes all other
             | osteichthyans.
             | 
             | Since starfishes don't include tetrapods, nor vice versa
             | (nor do they share biological features to be in a
             | polyphyletic grouping like "crabs"), the relevant common
             | term is "Animalia" -- "animal".
        
       | femto wrote:
       | Four of the eleven on the list are endangered (according to
       | Wikipedia), so if they are still being eaten, they won't be for
       | much longer.
        
       | einpoklum wrote:
       | The only thing I recongized from that list is the Lotus (and I
       | don't eat it, though I remember hearing that some do).
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2026-02-19 23:00 UTC)